[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Jasper
T1: [email protected]
Category 3: Category 1
Date: 06 Mar 1999
Time: 22:49:04
Remote Name: dyn1-tnt12-86.detroit.mi.ameritech.net
Welcome aboard John,
Brilliant analysis. I never got as far as you did with tracking down the possibilities of O.J.'s own blood being planted at Bundy by the killer. I have to confess that I may have been suckered into thinking that it could not have been done if I hadn't stumbled across a way the killer could have gotten around the problem altogether and known in advance that he'd be able to. Someone stole a lens from the lab, a lens from Juditha Brown's glasses that had a bloody finger print on it (testimony of Dr. Henry Lee/police photos). The lens was never found and the people responsible for security (Michelle Kestler and Greg Matheson) could not account for what happened to it. That means the lab was not secure. That means anything was possible. Your findings would suggest that whether or not there was a sample switch, O.J.'s blood could have shown up anywhere at any time without him being there.
One of the biggest frustrations with the blood and trace evidence is the inconsistency where there should be none in "authoritative" sources. When you go to one source (the media or some best-selling books) you get O.J.'s blood drops on Bundy next to the bloody shoeprints without the blood preservative from the test tubes. When you go to another authoritative source, you get blood drops that were not tested for the preservative. Only when you jump through a lot of hoops--unless you luck up on the right one early on-do you find that the answer is number 2, the blood was not tested for EDTA. The blood on the back gate that was tested for EDTA came up positive. You'll find that in the criminal trial transcripts. You'll also find a fight for defense access to samples of the blood drops identified as O.J.'s. The defense lost. Ito ruled that the prosecution's claim that there wasn't enough to share with them was good enough for him.
Thanks for letting us borrow your brain for a little while. I don't know which of us is right about how the blood evidence was planted against O.J., but the fact that there is more than one way it could have been done is enough to make the point. I would, however, ask you to consider the fact that the killer could not have known that O.J. would cut himself that night unless he figured out a way to cut him without O.J. knowing about it. I would also ask you to consider the placement of those drops and their lack of direction in your evaluation of whether the killer planned to plant them in advance or improvised, as the situation demanded (see Chapter 30: BLOOD TRAIL). You don't have to agree with me on this. Just thought you'd be interested.
Jasper