[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Kari
Date: 3/16/03
Time: 1:42:29 AM
Remote Name: 66.82.9.43
At the risk of contempt from others I will say this, I have no theory to hold on to. I know punctuation and disinformation can make things seem different then they are. I believe this is all Jasper was saying. The thing with the Bronco and how it was parked gave Furhman a reason to walk over to it and find the tiny smug of blood and use it to climb the wall. However, it also hid something. The way the transcript of interrogation came out the first time it made it seem as if O.J. was saying he backed the Bronco out of one side and parked it askew at Rockingham gate. Well, this was not true, he drove it through and parked it askew. It was the only way to make it park in that position. Therefore when O.J. originally states he parked it there after cleaning it out around eight the reason for going over the wall also proves that O.J. was telling the truth about why the Bronco was parked like that. There is probably more, but the point I believe is that the way Mark Furhman writes things or phrases them has this double meaning. Because people want to hear negative about O.J. from the beginning this is what they hear. They didn't put the interrogation into evidence because it would show O.J.'s innocence. This may not be what Jasper is speaking about, but it is what I saw from your conversation. Wouldn't it be great if we might discuss all of this case without real theories in place so that we can see the forest despite the trees? So many people believe they know the truth. I think we need to take a step back. We need to think about what was going on in 1994. We have Charlie Sheen and his then girlfriend Vicki Lynn Soft Porn Star who was trying to break into real movies. There is more to this story but I haven't got all the facts yet and don't want to say more. We have Hiedi Fleiss case with rich powerful men terrified her client book might become public. We have friends of Nicole's who worked for Hiedi and perhaps Nicole herself. I have to wonder if the real mystery is that perhaps when a murder happens and if they can rope a celebrity into it, they do. Of course you have to realize that there are a few who seem to be untouchable by law enforcement. It would be wonderful if all of us with our own reasons for not just being here but also each of us have our own talents. I have a long term memory that makes it worth reading some of my horribly written posts. I am also a problem solver from the mythical abstract realm. No offense Jasper. I see the big picture. Just like a really hard puzzle taking several people to complete, a bit of give and take by all of us on what we all think about this case might come in useful. We know the police lied about stuff, moved vehicles, lied about time, so we need to at least come up with a reasonable time line which doesn't break the laws of physics. The transcripts are useful only for certain witness's and to see where the lies are. Like when it was shown that had the one guy gone out to look in his mailbox when he said he did he would have seen the dog walker who found the dog. I think that was it, but usually once I brag about my memory I make a mistake. The animations helped a lot to show lies. Perhaps if we can get a visable time line, fix them up with the animations, and also get Charlie to post the list we had years ago of how many people had reason to kill both Nicole and Ron. I wouldn't be surprised if several views of this case don't just mesh into the finished puzzle. BTW-everyone needs to go to AFOJS and read John Junot's posts about us. Just for all of our own goods. I couldn't stomach much more than a few sentences but I believe others don't get as hurt as I do. For everyone's sake, please go read it.