[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Junot
Date: 7/18/03
Time: 7:50:16 PM
Remote Name: 198.49.222.20
Jasper wrote: [snip] In Iago, I reluctantly conclude that there had to be five conspirators for all of the evidence to fit the timeline from the moment Robert Heidstra heard the Akita bark to the point where he saw the SUV ('10:33-35 to 10:45-47)...."
Heidstra's testimony is highly dubious. he testified that he heard (1) two men's voices that he could not idetnify, (2) a slamming gate that he could not identify, and saw (3) an suv-like vehicle that he could not identify with a driver he could not see, that drove the WRONG DIRECTION from Bundy to go to Rockingham.
Out of this various people have said that Heistra testified to the murderer and Ron Goldman arguing, and OJ driving from the murder scene in his Bronco.
As I've said more than once, this is something like as if Heidstra testifying to having seen strange light in the sky and people later saying that he saw the Martians beginning to invade.
So, to start with, relying on Heidstra's testimony AT ALL tends to bring all the rest of the theory in question.
[snip]
"Please keep in mind that I did not pick my suspects and then look for the evidence that fit them. I did not decide that Fuhrman was the killer and then look for ways to prove it. I did not settle for the first piece of evidence that seemed to support my hypothesis..."
At this point, Jaser admits to having a 'hyposthesis' to start with.
"...and then keep piling it on. I began with the idea that the killings and the framing could have been carried out by one person. I looked at the evidence of one killer and found it..."
he looked "at" the evidence, or "for' the evidence?
"Then I drew a profile of the killer..."
Jasper has no more qualification of 'profile' a criminal suspect than the man in the Moon. Even the pofessional 'profilers' admit to their limitations. it's really educated guesswork. But where is Japser's education in murderers?
[snip]
"...Additionally, the more I learned about Fuhrman the more he fit the killer's profile and the more I had to question his alibi. Then I discovered he didn't have a real alibi. He had two phony ones for different timelines. One of those alibis fit the evidence for a killing time between 10:00 and 10:30. The other false alibi fit the evidence for a killing time between 10:30 and 10:45. The killer needed an alibi for both timelines and both alibis had to be false."
I wish I could understand that paragraph.
"The only way to prove a theory is to try to disprove it. In the process of trying to eliminate Fuhrman and Shipp I ran across "a mountain of evidence" that incriminated both of them as well as Brad Roberts, Faye Resnick and Denise Brown. For the killing and frame-up to work in a way consistent with the evidence they required:
"An active killer over six feet tall with influential contacts in the LAPD, a size-12 shoe, expertise in homicide investigation procedures,..."
As I've said on my web page and will be saying later in my criticism of Iago, the evidenc that was planted was BADLY AND OBVIUSLY planted, and an expert in homicide evicence -- as Fuhrman was -- would not have done such a bad job of the planting.
"...military-style kills and ambush tactics,..."
There is no reason to believe that the assaults took such a high level of skill. Non experts kill people with knives all the time.
"..a base of operations south of Bundy, a light-colored SUV, a high IQ, a history of violence, a strong compulsion to be in the spotlight (Mark Fuhrman).
"A lookout on Bundy with expertise in covert surveillance, a smaller foot and a "slightly deeper" voice than the killer. Someone to plant the stick, the glove and the blood on Rockingham and to confirm Fuhrman's early timeline -- the only timeline that matches all of evidence found on Rockingham (Brad Roberts).
"A "friend" of Nicole with free access to the Bundy condo to steal the knit cap, Nicole's gate key and garage door opener, to set up the meeting at the prescribed time and place and to call Nicole at the ideal time to see if Ron was on schedule. Someone to paint the picture of O.J. as a threat to Nicole's life (Faye Resnick)."
Okay, here's where the real trouble begins.
FAYE RESNICK WAS A DRUG ADDICT. What Japser says throughout this whole section is that five people got together to commit a murder and frame someone else for it. This is the most dangerou crime one could possibly commit, and carries the greatest punishment. And yet, one of the conspirators is a drug addict.
Friends, I wouldn't conspire to commit jaywalking with Faye Resnick.
Can you image putting your life into the hands of Fay Resnick? For the rest of your life wondering if she will get stoned and spill her guts, or barga you away for a lighter sentence when she is caught for some other felony later in life?
Not to mention, Faye Resnick and the murder target were friends; Nicole was Faye's benefactor. And yet she gets into a conspiracy to kil her?
And what would she get from it? What was in it for her? What did Fuhrman say to her to persuade her? And what could he have said to others to persuade them to join him?
"A lookout on Rockingham to monitor O.J.'s movements and phone calls, to make sure that O.J. didn't do anything between 10:00 (false timeline to give the real killer an alibi) and 10:45 (when the limo driver was expected to show up) that would give the killer an alibi. Someone with expertise in covert surveillance, who knew the layout of O.J.'s property well and someone who would make the thumps to give Fuhrman an excuse to check behind Kato 's bungalow for the matching bloody glove. It had to be someone who knew O.J. and the killer well (Ron Shipp)."
Now, Jasper gives as Furhman's motivation a rabid racist hatred of OJ. His 'Furhman' is, in essence, a lyncher.
Now, in the picutres of Ron Ship I've seen, he is an African-American and it's been my experience that, with the exception of Michael Jackson, this does not change.
OJ was also Shipp's benefactor -- he let Shipp come and play tennnis with friends at Rockingham, and lent Ship the prestige of his celebrity. And it's obvious that Shipp must have known Nicole at leat slightly.
And yet, here is this Black man conspiring with the rabid Nazi racit Fuhrman to murder someone he hardly knows and pin it on a benefactor.
What could Fuhrman have said to or offered Shipp to get him to do this? Why would Fuhrman even take the risk that shipp would refuse him when first offered the chance to be part of the conspiracy and turn around and blow the whistle o him?
"...An operative at Sydney's recital with a cell phone to pass on to the killer what kind of clothes O.J. was wearing and give credible testimony that O.J. was wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzos. Someone who could pass for Nicole to plant the "battered wife" photos and diary in Nicole's safety deposit box (Denise Brown). You will note that all but one of these people were spouse-abuse witnesses against O.J. and all of them are linked to each other through Mark Fuhrman and Ron Shipp...."
Now Jasper posits that Nicole's OWN SISTER allies herself with a drug addict, a Nazi racist and a Blck man she barely knows to kill her and fram Simpson.
Now, you must consider that up till the murders, OJ Simpson were the Brown's meal ticket (see Bosco's book). I've heard of sibling rivalry, friends, but this takes the cake!
Also, what's in it for Denise? The loss of her sister. The loss of the family mealticket. The risk of life imprisonment?
[snip]
More later. But just this should be enough to reject Jasper's theory out-of-hand.