[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Jasper
Date: 6/12/01
Time: 10:19:53 AM
Remote Name: 136.1.1.101
Kari,
I'm the one who said there was no trail of blood from Bundy to Rockingham. I said that blood on Bundy that was supposed to be O.J.'s came from a large cut and the blood on Rockingham came from a small cut - exactly like the one O.J. descibed. I said that the small blood drops (Lee called them droplets) that Fung collected and the defense did not dispute show that O.J. did exactly (are you counting the "exactlys"?) what he said he did and the ones by the gate led out, not in.
I also said that the reasons the detectives gave for sending Fuhrman over the wall did not stand up becuase they were based on the idea that the parking angle of the Bronco was so extreme that it drew their attention. That cannot be true. Rosa Parks said the O.J. ALWAYS parked at that angle in that spont on Rockingam just ahead of the street number on the curb. There is a good reason for that and it is obvious when see the Bronco, the driveway and the turn the Bronco has to make to get around the acute angel formed by the driveway and the street. The parking angle was exactly 2-degrees, which is exactly what you would get if you drove the Bronco from Ashford around the circular drive and around the ACUTE angel to the street.
In other words, there was NOTHING suspicious about the Bronco and every reason to believe that it had come from inside the gate (the SLIGHT ANGLE) the last time it was driven. Therefore, the reason Vannatter and Lange gave for their interest in the Bronco was a demonstrable lie. The stick was the only legitimate reason to give the Bronco a second look. Fuhrman is the only one connectied to where the stick had to have come from (he said the he and Brad Roberts found the place south of Bundy where a pile of wood matched the stick.. I said that Fuhrman is the only one connected to the stick , both gloves, the blood on the Bronco door, the bleeding killer theory, PLUS size-12 shoes, toes that point straight ahead when he walks and connections to everyone necessiary to account for 100 % of the hard evidence against O.J.
I said that the stick and the Rockingham glove sit on timelines that run in opposite directions. You need a short timeline between the end of the killing and the thumps to account for the glove and a long timeline to account for the stick and the "clean up" at Rockingham.
John and I are in total disageement on the blood, the Bronco, the killer, my integrity and my ability to tell the difference between a logical inference and pure speculation. I have no idea how you could mistake anything I said with anything he said. If you can figure it out I would appreciate it if you'd let me know. This sort of thing happens to me all the time and I'd like to get a handle of why. --Jasper