Home | Contents | Search Iago Conspirators Timeline Junot
From: Jasper (almost typed "Charlie")
Date: 4/10/02
Time: 11:40:30 PM
Charlie,
The only person farther apart from me than O.J.'s detractors on the evidence (what it is, what it means, how much of it should be given what weigh and which portions of it should be ignored) is John Junot. Yet, there is little that we can find to disagree about in terms of Fuhrman's "dumb" stories.
Fuhrman's stories have one big asset. They cover A PREPONDERANCE of the evidence. Part of his great detective spiel is about knowing that you can never hope to tie up all of the loose ends, so he doesn't even bother with one or two of them as long as he can cover the big ones that most analysts miss.
Fuhrman's story about the thumps explains all of the evidence discovered at Rockingham by him and Roberts except for the socks and the knife box. Never mind its omission of Park spotting Kato before he spots O.J. and little things like that. It covers the stick on the parkway and the "extreme" parking angle of the Bronco. It explains the blood inside of the Bronco, the false blood trail going into the gate and two of the three blood drops crossing the threshold of the Rockingham gate. It covers the blood smear on the maid's bathroom switch, the clothes in O.J.'s washing machine and the sighting by Allan Park going into hid front door.
Take away Parks sighting of O.J. and his failure to notice the Bronco and Kato's illogical walk to check the thumps (three things that no one could have predicted or controlled) and the evidence matches a story that makes perfect sense. -Jasper