From: charlie
Date: 05 Apr 2000
Time: 07:57:18
Remote Name: proxy-638.public.rwc.webtv.net
Chris, In the officer involved shootings in LA where it is obvious that the cop has shot an innocent or an unarmed person, the "fix" is in immediately. They delay the crime lab and coroner and begin to get the stories straight and the Supervisors even get into the act.
(Several descriptions of such things have been in the LA Times. One example, the man was in the basement of his apartment building when the cops came through and mistook him for the culprit they were chasing. He was killed, a gun was thrown down, and he had a false criminal record placed in the LAPD files. He was given a false criminal record as a drug dealer and more. He was made out like a big bad man. All of this was plastered all over the news and the headlines of the Times. Only recently, has this been discovered. It has been found out that he had NEVER been in trouble with the police. A completely innocent man. He was in the wrong place (the basement) when the cops went through.
In To Protect and To Serve and LA Secret Police books there are instances where cops have murdered (out and out murdered) and the most they get is a "retirement". The fact that they have murdered was hidden to save the LAPD the embarrassment.
I realize that this case is different than that but there is a history of the LAPD going along with the "official" story no matter what they know personally. And who is to say that everybody on the scene knew exactly what was going on.
I think much of what went on was done without the individual cops knowing the full story. They were following orders, doing what they usually do when ordered to do whatever. They are used (as evidenced by thousands of examples) to going along with the "official" story.
Chris, Rampart is showing us that many of these so-called cop shootings were out and out murder of a witness the cop wanted to get rid of. YET, they made it past the office investigation, the Internal Investigation, the Police Task Force, and the Grand Juries by Everybody lying about what happened. Then they get in a court of law and lie and get the suspect( if they survive the shooting) sentenced to 25 or more years in prison.
I feel some of these cops did not even know what they were covering up. They just went with the flow because it has been shown repeated that cops who do not get death threats, tires slashed, and more if they Don't go along or tell about misconduct by another cop.
When you put it all together (and I won't go into it all now) and see that the crime scene logs did not match testimony, things were moved (including Nic's Jeep early on), the cops for the first time in known history did not take any notes (except the possible culprit himself, MF).
In April of 94, MF got evidence by search warrant in a murder case (Hermann Gould) and instead of sending it to the lab, took it home and proceded to completely destroy it. In the week before the OJ trial began, this case was thrown OUT and dismissed because of Fuhrman's "tampering with the evidence" (possible exculpatory evidence). YET....YET....with all the PR around this trial this was NOT reported in the media. We only learned of Years later with an intensive search of stories by one of our participants.
So..at the time of the murders..and througout all the Prelim Hearings and and more...Fuhrman was under investigation for tampering with evidence--yet as far as the trial and surrounding media is concerned, we never heard a peep about it. And the DA's proceded as if MF was God's Gift to LAPD Detectives.
I have --from the very early days of the trial--and throughout---have maintained that this trial was an effort to Prosecute but NOT Convict OJ Simpson. A Show Trial.
A wrongful prosecution or conviction was---and still is an Huge Liability. OJS would have OWNED the state of CA in a lawsuit if this is or was found out. Hence, no conviction.
I maintain if the LAPD in the past had covered up for Killer Cops and let them quietly retire, what would they do when BIG BUCKS would be at stake if found out?
I learned long ago that when wrongdoing or a coverup is done, LOOK to what happens to the "players". ALL of the cops in the case (except Roberts) and a few others I have heard about but can't call their names ---ALL retired in a short while after the case. Also, the 2 main prosecutors retired ---and basically told that they would never be in a court trial ever again long before the case was over.
The "missing" phone records are in the "personal"possession of William Hodgeman. Huh? Excuse me? The very records that may show that second phone call that Judy Brown told the world about for months after the murder and then "dropped" any mention of it in her stipulation. Perhaps a 10:17-10:28 call that would show that the ENTIRE Prosecution case that they put on as the murder took place at a time that they KNEW Nicole was still alive, and was prosecutorial misconduct from the first day those records came in (June or July of 94). Or was a deliberate attempt to LOSE the case...knowing that Heistra and others would be brought forward by the defense.
I saw many many instances where I thought that the prosecution Deliberately screwed up things.
I have to ask myself why? To cover for OJ? Don't think so. To cover for the cop(s)? Yep, I think so.
And at this late date--the fact that Fuhrman's statements on the McKinney tapes read like a transcript of the Perez testimony about what went on in the Crash units. Fuhrman was in a Crash Unit in the 77th---what he told McKinney about.
MF should have been fired years before. Yet he wasn't. He had a 1/2 dozen major lawsuits go against him that the city of LA had to pay out due to his misconduct. One settlement was done in the middle of the OJ case to keep the results from the trial to go into the OJ case. In that suit, after shooting someone, he thew down a knife, stood over the guy and said, "Die "n" die."
YET, all we heard from the PD and DA was that Fuhrman was such a good detective, an upstanding guy, and a regular choir boy.
Someone influenced the press from reporting the dismissal of the Gould case just days before the OJ case due to evidence tampering (possibly destroying exculpatory evidence).
Sure we don't know all the facts. But we are finding out that much about Fuhrman was "hidden" from us and we have to wonder why.
We have to wonder WHY he gave a false alibi (btw, the ONLY cops to be ASKED for an alibi). We have to wonder WHY as years go on and a Tell ALL book is written he continues to Improve on his story and keeps coming up with More Evidence that he now claims he saw. He told Judge Crier on Fox News Network a couple of years ago that blood was ALL over the tub and sink. Judge Crier liked to have fallen out of her chair. MF claimed Clark saw it too. Crier suddenly realized that all was not "right" with Fuhrman instantly and her formerly very warm reception of Fuhrman turned cold as ice.
charlie