Do you think you know much about the O.J. Simpson case?
Well, then, do you know that:
1. Contrary to widespread belief, KAELIN HAS NO ALIBI FOR THE TIME OF THE MURDERS.
2. Kaelin had his own secret entrance into O.J.'s main house? This entrance was NOT on the house alarm system, even though O.J. himself wrongly thought it was.
This meant that whever Kaelin was alone at Rockingham, he had free access to all of O.J.'s property, including his clothes closets, his personal papers (including such things as his rolodex and telephone books), and his garbage.
3. Kaelin HAD HIS OWN EXTENSION LINE OF THE ROCKINGHAM SYTEM, so that not only did he have the ability to "tap" O.J.'s telephone, he had the ability to make calls from the Rockingham system which would be recorded by the phone company's computer as coming from O.J.
4. That Kaelin knew when anyone rang at the Ashford gate -- such as the limo driver picking up OJ, and the police detectives arrived at Rockingham just after the murders -- because all the phones at Rockingham rang when someone did so.
5. That the ONLY believable explanation for the "thumps" Kaelin reported IS THAT KAELIN MADE THEM UP. This is because no one can, or has so far, offered an explanation that fits the surrounding evidence, or made sense in terms of what a real person would do. Actually, the thumps did not happen because they could not have happened. They violate the laws of physics.
6. There is not the slightest shadow of a doubt that the five bloods drops with OJ's DNA in them were planted.
Contrary to popular myth THEY DID NOT LINE UP WITH THE FOOTPRINTS, they were dropped from less than two feet high, from a stationary source, and contained less than 1% of the DNA one would expect to find in drops of that type.
7. Kaelin lied about having driven the Bronco at a time when his only possible motive for doing so was to throw the police off his trail.
None of what you have just read is "guessing" or "speculative". Every single thing I you just read IS BACKED UP BY INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE.
AND THE EVIDENCE -- AND THE SOURCE FOR IT -- ARE REPRODUCED AND LISTED BELOW.
Generally speaking, public belief about the Simspon/Goldman murders is EITHER that OJ did it (and probably had help to get rid of some of the evidence)OR that there was a police conspiracy to frame OJ, and the the rue murderer is either unknown and unknowable or connected to the police conspiracy.
[The only two exception I know of to theses two beliefs are Dick Wagner and myself.]
Both beliefs are wrong because they are derived from mythical "evidence".
The first -- held predominatly by the White community -- is derived from witnessing the Bronco chase and Johnny Cochran's "playing the race card" in his summation to the criminal trial jury. That latter, in turn, lead to the myth that the criminal trial jury, in an acto of reverse-racism, "nullified" the evidence and consciously let a guilty man go free.
The second myth -- held predominantly by the Black community -- is derived primarily from the sensational tapes of Fuhrman repeatedly using the word "nigger" after declaring that he hadn't used the word for over ten years.
Now, BOTH myths have one thing in common: in trying to create a theory of the crime DERIVED FROM either myth, people have created theories that have the hypothetical perpetrators doing things that are impossible, inconsistent with the true evidence, opposed to their interests under the cimcumstances of the time theorized, or all of the above.
This is what you getwhen you try to force what you want to be true into what is.
However, whne you learn all that is humanly possible to be true about the evidence. The truth "pops out". Specifically:
1. The glove at Rockingham and its mate at Bundy prove beyond al doubt that the murderer went from Bundy to Rockingham that night. There were only two men at Rockingham that night.
2. The only explanation for Kaelin'g thumps is that Kaelin made them up.
3. The blood drops at Bundy with OJ's DNA in them were obviously planted. It's just that they were not planted by the police.
4. Kaelin has no alibi for the time of the murders. The one he apparently has is but an illusion.
5. OJ could not have created the evidence in the pattern it was discovered the morning after the murders.
6. In fact, only Kaelin could have created the evidence in the pattern it was found. He did so in the manner I describe below.
Fuhrman deserves a pardon.
Kaelin deserves life in prison.
What follow is evidence and arguments derived from that evidence that supports the statements you've just read. Indeed, I believe I prove them beyond reasonable doubt.
Wherever evidence is presented, the source material is reproduced and citation is given so that it can be viewed in context.
The vast majority believe O.J. Simpson did the murder he was tried and acquitted for. To explain why this is not only not so, but could not be so, I need to refresh the reader's memory about the TRUE evidence in this case....but NOT WHAT IS GENERALLY THOUGHT OF AS 'EVIDENCE'.
So I need to start with the things that really are NOT evidence in the case against O.J. Simpson, but which most people think are:
1. THE BRONCO "CHASE"
The image of O.J. Simpson being followed by a long line of police cars ranks with such images as the 9/11 attacks on the WTC and the Challenger Disaster as part of our shared American iconography. However, while this particular incident is frozen in our memories, it LOOK LIKE dozens of other high-speed chases we have seen, with the cops trying to capture crooks.
I believe -- and I believe most of you will agree with me -- that it is the image of the Bronco Chase, of OJ apparently running from the police, that has established his guilt in the American mind.
So, first, I need to do my best to dislodge this image and the belief in guilt that it brought.
FIRST, IT WAS NOT A 'CHASE'; IT WAS A 'FOLLOW'.
SECOND, IT WAS NOT EVEN AN ATTEMPTED ESCAPE. In fact, the whole time the 'chase' was broadcast, the Bronco was going North, AND IT WAS GOING NORTH WHEN IT WAS FIRST DISCOVERED.
What was REALLY happening? OJ was in the middle of a suicidal nervous breakdown. His best friend, A.C. Cowlings was successful in preventing this by 'humoring' him by attempting to take OJ to Nicole's grave. When this proved impossible, due to police staked out there, Cowling eventually persuaded OJ to go back to Rockingham. Cowlings' Bronco was then spotted by citizens who phoned the police.
Many people think that it was OJ at the wheel driving his own Bronco, and that the Bronco of the Bronco chase was the same Bronco used my the murderer. Not so.
2. JOHNNY COCHRAN PLAYS THE "RACE CARD" IN HIS SUMMATION TO THE JURY, resulting the the widespread belief that the jury "nullified" the evidence in an act of reverse racism.
The fact is, as I will show, is that the objective evidence acquits OJ so that the criminal trial jury's decision, FOR WHATEVER REASON, was the correct one
While there is, in fact, documentable arguments in the form of jury writings and interviews after the trial that Cochran's "race card' had no effect on the jury....if you are one who believes this myth, those statemnts will not change your mind, for you will only interpret them as self-serving justifications. I can only hope that presenting all that is humanluy knowable about the evidence will change your mind.
3. THE BLOOD DROP TRAIL 'TO THE LEFT' OF THE FOOTPRINTS AT THE MURDER SCENE, AND THE CUT ON OJ'S LEFT HAND.
THESE ILLUSTRATIONS ARE FROM EVIDENCE ACTUALLY INTRODUCED IN THE CRIMINAL TRIAL, and known as the "Bodziak Diagram", after the FBI expert that created it. This illusitration is also reproduced in the Book "the Prosecution Responds" by Hank Goldberg
Note the REAL postion of the drops in relation to the footprints.
The two westernmost drops are too far away from where the prints faded out to be said to have any discernible spatial relationship to them at all.
The easternmost drop, the one nearest the bodies is off to one side of the fotprints. But....
It is not possible to tell if it "to the left" or "to the right" of the footprints because THERE ARE PRINTS GOING BOTH WAYS at that point. Bodziak testified to them, but did not include them in his diagram.
From Bodziak's June 19, 1995 cross-examination testimony by F. Lee Bailey:
ACTUALLY, NEITHER IS TRUE. Because now consider the position of the last two, middle two, drops in relation to the footprints they are closest to.
THEY ARE IN BETWEEN THEM.
What really happened, dear reader, is not that the police detected a blood drop trail to the left of the prints and so went looking for a man with a cut on his left hand. On the contrary, what happened is that they saw OJ had a cut on his left hand AND THEN decided to describe the blood trail as "to the left" of the prints.
I will soon show that THERE WAS NOT SPATIAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO BECAUSE THE FOOTPRINTS AND THE DROPS WERE LAID DOWN AT TWO DIFFERENT TIMES.
Though there were, indeed, five drops of blood that contained OJ's DNA at the Bundy murder scene, I will show that they had to have been planted
Among other things, this means that the cuts on OJ's left hand are irrelevent.
4. The gloves found at the Bundy murder scene and behind Kaelin's room at Rockingham.
What these gloves prove is that the killer, or at the very least an acccomplice to the killer, went from the murders to Rockingham that night.
(The only other explanation for the position of these two gloves given by anyone is that Fuhrman planted the Rockingham glove after picking it up at Bundy. I will be dealing with a number of other theories of the crime later on, including this one. Again, I do not wish to digress right now. However, I will say that all other theories of the crime but mine -- and this includes those of the prosecution and defense at the civil trial and the plaintiffs (especially Petrocelli) at the civil trial -- have people doing things that are physically impossible, adverse to their interests under the circumstances, contradictory, or all of the above.)
The evidence of the gloves greatly simplifies the solution to the crime, because it narrows the suspect pool to TWO. For there were TWO men at Rockingham that night. BOTH had believable motive for the murders; BOTH had access to the items of physical evidence used in the murders. (The gloves, the shoes, the knife, the sweatsuit, the knit cap, the Bronco, and samples of OJ's blood), and NEITHER has an alibi for the time of the murders.
OJ could not have produced the evidence as it was
found on the morning of
June 13, 1994, this evidence including Kaelin's
three thumps. NO ONE has
produced a theory of the crime which has OJ doing
the murders and producing
the thumps and dropping the glove behind Kaelin's
room which does not
transparently violate the laws of physics and/or
common sense.
From Famous Crimes Revisited: from Sacco-Vanzetti to O.J. Simpson by Dr. Henry Lee and Dr. Jerry Labriola, Stong Books, Southington, Connecticut, 2001, Page 207”
so consider this from Philip Vannatter's testimoney of March 16, 1995. He is being questioned by Darden:
Well, none. Unless you say that not having an alibi for the time of the murders is evidence
But, if you say THAT, then you must also consider that as evidence against Kaelin, for the fact is:
Brian Gerard ("Kato") Kaelin killed Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, and this can be proven from the existing evidence.
Compare these excerpts from the official transcripts.
From Kaelin’s preliminary hearing testimony (criminal trial), July 5, 1994:
Q AND SO AFTER HE TOLD YOU IT WAS 10:30, AT SOME POINT AFTER THAT DID SOMETHING UNUSUAL OCCUR DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR CONVERSATION WITH HIM?
A YES.
Q WHAT WAS THAT?
A WELL, HE DESCRIBED IT AS AN EARTHQUAKE. UMM, HE SAID THERE WAS A BANG ON HIS WALL.
Q OKAY.
AND ABOUT HOW LONG AFTER YOU HAD ASKED THE TIME AND HE TOLD YOU IT WAS 10:30 DID HE DESCRIBE AN EARTHQUAKE OCCURRING?
A AFTER 10:30?
Q RIGHT. YOU ASKED HIM WHAT TIME IT WAS; HE SAID 10:30, CORRECT?
A RIGHT.
Q AT SOME POINT AFTER THAT HE DESCRIBED AN EARTHQUAKE OCCURRING?
A UH-HUH.
Q HOW LONG AFTER THAT TIME WHEN HE SAID IT WAS 10:30 DID HE DESCRIBE HEARING AN EARTHQUAKE?
A APPROXIMATELY TEN MINUTES.
[i.e.--around 10:40]
Q DID HE TALK TO YOU ABOUT GOING TO MC DONALD'S WITH MR. SIMPSON?
A YES.
Q DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR CONVERSATION DID YOU HAPPEN TOASK KATO KAELIN WHAT TIME IT WAS?
A YES.
Q AND HOW DO YOU HAPPEN TO RECALL THAT?
A BECAUSE WE WERE GOING TO GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING AND I ASKED HIM -- I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF IT WAS TOO LATE AND HE SAID -- I ASKED HIM WHAT TIME IT WAS AND HE SAID 10:30.
And this passage from the book, “Kato Kaelin: the Whole Truth” by Kaelin’s ghost-writer Marc Eliot, based on 17 hours of taped interviews:
Page 90:
“…at 9:45 [Kaelin] decided to call back Tom…[O'Brien, a friend in San Diego]to complete the conversation ….Kato hung up….it was then ten o’clock when he sat down at the IBM Selectric…”
(Even Daniel Petrocelli admits that Kaelin had no alibi for 10:00 to 10:20 the night of the murders. I spoke to him during a book tour appearance in my area.)
NEXT EXHIBIT IN THE CASE AGAINST KAELIN:
KAELIN HAS COMMITTED PERJURY ABOUT WHAT HE DID ON THE MURDER NIGHT:
From Kaelin’s civil trial testimony of November 12, 1996:
Q. Okay. Were you looking at the clock and
watch at all?
A. No.
Q. Then what happened?
A. Then I heard these three noises that were
thumps, three loud thumps, and my picture moved in
the...
…
Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) When the noises
occurred, did you look at a watch or a clock?
A. No.
……
Q. Okay. Now, when you got off the phone,
did you look at a watch or a clock?
A. No.
Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Okay. Do you have
an estimate of the time that you heard these noises?
A. In between the 10:40 to 10:50 hour.[Compare to criminal trial testimony above]
Q. Okay. Now, is that -- what do you base
that on?
A. The phone calls.
[Kaelin is referring to the cell phone records of Alan Park that came out during the murder investigation.]
Q. All right. Did you at any time --
[Please note here that Kaelin actually anticipates Petrocelli's question. He could answer it before it was even asked because Petrocelli had fed him the questions well beforehand.]
A. I didn't, I never looked at a clock.
Q. I can't hear you.
[Sounds like a cheerleader, doesn't he?]
A. I didn't look at a clock.
Q. At any time?
A. No.
So, just exactly how did Mr. Kaelin know what time it was at 10:30 to tell Rachel Ferrara?
Even if you believe there is an innocent explanation for this discrepancy, at least you must now see that KAELIN IS THE ‘CLOCK’ FOR HIS OWN ALIBI. Which is to say, he really is his own alibi.
EXHIBIT THREE:
KAELIN DISPLAYED GUILTY KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE BRONCO BEING USED IN THE MURDERS WHEN HE LIED TO THE COPS ABOUT ‘EVER HAVING DRIVEN’ THE BRONCO.
From “Kato Kaelin: The whole Truth” Page 105:
“Detective Lange asked Kato if he’d ever driven O.J.’s Bronco. He said no.”
From Kaelin’s civil trial deposition of February 14, 1996:
Q: Now, where was the Bronco when you drove up to Gretna Green?
A: The Bronco was kind of parked in front of the driveway, blocking Gretna Green's driveway. The flashers I believe were on. And I think at some point I moved it, I think.
Q: To park it normally?
A: Yeah.
From Eliott, page 233:
“…On the rare occasions I found myself [Kaelin] at the Bundy residence, usually to deliver a package or pick up the kids for O.J.,…
”
The only two cars available to BGK for those errands on O.J.’s behalf would have been his own Datsun 380 zx and OJ’s Bronco. Which would you have chosen?
And, finally, from OJ’s 6/13/94 interview with Lange and Vanatter:
Vannatter: OK. We've impounded the Bronco. I don't know if you know that or not.
Simpson: No.
Vannatter: ...take a look at it. Other than you, who's the last person to drive it.
Simpson: Probably Gigi. When I'm out of town, I don't know who drives the car, maybe my daughter, maybe Kato.
Why mention Kaelin unless Kaelin had access to the Bronco and had driven it before?
Now, why would BGK have lied to the cops at that time and place? Because doing so would have made him a suspect. Also note, that, from the Eliot book account, BGK told this lie to the cops a good two minutes or so BEFORE he was ‘officially’ notified of the murders. According to BGK, he was thinking the cops were there to notify them of a plane crash. Why lie about driving the Bronco?
OJ could not have produced the evidence as it was
found on the morning of
June 13, 1994, this evidence including Kaelin's
three thumps. NO ONE has
produced a theory of the crime which has OJ doing
the murders and producing
the thumps and dropping the glove behind Kaelin's
room which does not
transparently violate the laws of physics and/or
common sense.
From Famous Crimes Revisited: from Sacco-Vanzetti to O.J. Simpson by Dr. Henry Lee and Dr. Jerry Labriola, Stong Books, Southington, Connecticut, 2001, Page 207”
“…1. How do you explain the Rockingham glove still being damp with blood at 6:00 [the next morning] if it had been dropped there at 10:45 on a dry night?…”
Some have doubted that the glove was still wet.
so consider this from Philip Vannatter's testimoney of March 16, 1995. He is being questioned by Darden:
Q WHEN YOU SAW THE GLOVE, DID YOU NOTICE WHETHER OR NOT IT APPEARED MOIST OR STICKY?
A WHEN I ILLUMINATED THE GLOVE, IT APPEARED TO HAVE BLOOD ON THE GLOVE OR WHAT LOOKED TO ME LIKE BLOOD AND IT DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE DRIED BLOOD WHERE IT WOULD BE FLAKY AND FALLING OFF. IT APPEARED THAT IT WAS MOIST.
Q AND THE BLOOD THAT YOU SAW BACK AT BUNDY JUST PRIOR TO YOUR DEPARTURE A FEW MINUTES BEFORE 5:00 IN THE MORNING --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- DID THAT BLOOD APPEAR TO BE DRY?
A NO.
MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. DARDEN: DID THE GLOVE APPEAR SHINY AT ALL?
A IT APPEARED TO BE -- IT APPEARED TO BE WET WITH SOMETHING, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT SHINY OR MOIST. IT APPEARED TO BE A LEATHER MAN'S GLOVE.
"AMERICAN tRAGEDY"Page 116:
“…Far more important, the doctors were genuinely perplexed by the Rockingham glove. Michael Baden had never worked a case where the primary evidence was so conveniently laid out. Neither had the other forensic specialists. Their collective experience straddled thousands of homicides. …..bill Pavelic was the first to say it: ’How often do you see a case where something so obvious as a glove is taken from one place to another?’….”
KAELIN HAD SECRET ACCESS TO ALL OF O.J.'S HOME AND THE PROPERTY AND DOCUMENTS INSIDE IT
When he was alone at Rockingham -- which was almost
certainly several times
during the six months he lived them -- Kaelin had
unfettered access to OJ's
property. His quarters had a door that connected to
the inside of the main
house.
From: "I'm Not Dancing Anymore" by Terri Baker, O.J.'s niece:
Page 43:
“.. The last thing [Nicole] remodeled was the backyard. She had an architect come in and expand the guest room into a little complex with three guest rooms, all connected, and designed to look like an extension of the house…The guest house nearest the house, where Kato later lived [emphasis added], was attached directly to the house with a door that could be locked from inside the house….”
The partly obscured far door was Kaelin's 'own, private' door to the main house and everything OJ owned.
This door was not on the alarm system, as is
proved by this testimony of Sue Silva, of Westec Security, March 30, 1995 (Darden questioning):
Q: OKAY. BEFORE I ASK YOU WHERE THEY ARE, LET ME ASK YOU THIS. DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION TO THE MAID'S QUARTERS AND KAELIN'S ROOM IN THE LOWER PORTION OF THE DIAGRAM THERE, ARE THERE ANY SECURITY SENSORS OR ENTRY PANELS LOCATED IN ANY OF THOSE ROOMS?
A: NO. THERE IS -- WE AT ONE TIME BELIEVED THAT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF A SENSOR. BUT WHEN -- THE DAY I WAS OUT AT THE PROPERTY, THE SENSOR WAS NOT CONNECTED TO THE STAIR ROOM OR THE ROOMS FROM KATO'S ROOM TO THE BILLIARD ROOM, BUT THERE IS NO ON AND OFF KEYPAD OF ANY TYPE TO DEACTIVATE THE ALARM SYSTEM WITH THE SAME TYPE OF KEYPADS THAT ARE INSTALLED AT ANY ONE OF THESE FOUR LOCATIONS.
Q: OKAY. SO IN OTHER WORDS THEN, THERE IS NO -- THERE ARE NO SECURITY SENSORS ANYWHERE FROM THE OFFICE HERE TO THE MAID'S ROOM? [Darden is referring to the "office" that was the second room in kaelin's quarters]
A: THAT'S CORRECT.
However, OJ was unaware of the true condition and thought that door was on the alarm system. From his January 46, 1996 depostion:
Q: And how would Kaelin deal with the setting of the alarm if he's going in and out of the house on weekends?
A: As I told you before, he wasn't supposed to be going in and out of the house on weekends.
Q: What if he went in and out of his guest room, and the alarm were activated on the property, and nobody else was home, like your housekeeper, would the alarm be going on and off when Kaelin's entering his guest room?
A: No.
Q: Why is that?
A: Because, as I told you, his exterior door to his guest room is not on the alarm.
Q: Just the interior door?
A: Yes.
Moreover, Kaelin
must have known this
because Sydney and Justin once broke into Kaelin's
quarters through that
door. While it is unclear if it was locked or not,
if it was, the lock was
simple enough for small children to defeat.
From Kaelin's deposition of February 14, 1996:
A: Can I ask a question, Dan? [Kaelin was addressing Daniel Petrocelli]
Q: Sure.
A: There was a time when Sydney and Justin came by where they were in my room, and he had come through the office area to my room.
Q: That's an internal door?
A: Yeah. But he was in my room that time. I don't want to--
Q: So the only other time he had ever been near your room is when he came through the interior office door to get the kids.
A: Yeah. The kids were with--you know, hanging out with me, and he came by the room.
It was one of only two
time OJ went to Kaelin's room when Kaelin lived
there, the other time being
on the murder night to borrow some money.
This means Kaelin had access to OJ's clothes and
shoes, perhaps his rolodex
and other phone logs, his laundry, and his garbage.
This is, I say, how
Kaelin obtained the objects -- the shoes, the knife,
the gloves, the socks,
samples of OJ's dried blood -- needed to frame OJ.
Page 137:
[Darden and Clark questioning Kaelin in their office before the Grand Jury session]:
[Clark]:”What is next to your room?”
[Kaelin]:“Arnelle’s room.”
“No, no. Isn’t there a pool room?”
“Oh, yes.”
“How big is it? Can you get into it from your room?”
“No.” [Kaelin lies at this point]
“It’s separate, right?”
“Yes.”
“Is there a way to get behind it?” [It’s unclear exactly what Clark was trying to ask in this question],BR>
“No.”
“Are there things in it like glove, things like that?”
“I don’t know.”
“would there be a wooden stick in there?”
“Where?”
“The pool room.”
…………
“Did you ever go in that room?”
“No.”
“You’ve never been in that room before?”
“Maybe I opened the door once. [emphasis added]. I know it’s there, I know it’s a pool room………”
II. Kaelin had the ability to tap into
OJ's phone conversations, and to have made phone calls that phone company computer records would 'perceive' as coming from OJ.
Except for Kaelin's personal phone (and Arnelle's personal phone), all the phones
at Rockingham were
extensions of one number, and it was possible to
listen in on other phones
conversations.
Terri Baker, "I'm Not Dancing Anymore", Page 53:
“….Uncle O.J. and I were alone at Rockingham. Late that evening Uncle O.J. buzzed down to the maid’s room where I as staying on the intercom to ask me for a favor. He wanted me to call some restaurant in Westwood and ask for a certain waitress. I was supposed to say, ‘Hi, is so-and-so there?’ When she came on the phone, I’d say , ‘Could you please hold a second? O.J. Simpson would like to talk to you.’ I buzzed Uncle O.J. to take the call and he did…”
From "Kato Kaelin, The Whole Truth" by Marc Eliot:
Page 72: “Kato loved to answer, always with a funny quip and a disguised voice. “Hi,” he’d say, putting on an exaggerated effeminate voice ,....O.J. loved it, often listening in on the extension…” See also page 90.
All these phones rang when someone
rang at the Ashford gate,
More on the phones at Rockingham from OJ's deposition of January 23, 1996:
Q: Would there have been any other way that Kato could have opened that gate on Rockford?
A: I believe so.
MR. BAKER: On Rockford?
MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me. On Ashford.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
?
BY MR. PETROCELLI:
Q: What are the other options that Kato had to do that?
A: He could have picked up the phone and pushed whatever number to let him in.
Q: Any telephone in the house?
A: Yes.
Q: He had access to the phones in the house?
A: In his room.
Q: Even in his room he could operate the gate?
A: You know, once he got in that room, I never went in that room to see what his phone setup was, but before he got in that room I know you could have, yes.
Q: You don't recall if you changed it or not?
A: I didn't do anything.
Q: And in Arnelle's room--she also lived there. Right?
A: Yes.
Q: On June 12th. Correct?
A: Yes.
Q: And she had the same ability on her telephone to press the button and have the gate open. Right?
[In other words, Arnelle's phone -- in the room next to Kaelin's -- rang when Park buzzed at Ashford, and, from OJ's answer here, it appears possible that Kaelin had TWO phones in his room -- on from the Rockingham system, and his own personal phone. If that was the case, Kaelin could have been "bugging" OJ, beause the phones were extensions of each other.]
A: Yes.
and could have been used to let the person in. There
were at least two phone
extensions at the guest house, and it is recorded
that Kaelin could hear the
phones ring in the main house. This means he know
when someone rang at the
Ashford gate.
Allan Park rang at the Ashford gate at 10:40.
Kaelin, according to his
original testimony, heard the three thumps AND
REPORTED THEM TO FERRARA at
10:40.
Page 98-99:
“Kato then called Rachel back…talked to her until about 1:30 [a.m.]… After awhile he heard the clacking of high heels on the walkway and figured it was Arnelle….He tried to sleep…He kept tossing and turning all night….he recalled, ‘I kept hearing O.J.’s phone ringing…When it was really quiet in my room I could hear the soft high brr of O.J.’s phone from the main house. It seemed to ring a thousand times…’”
On the blood drops at Bundy:
"AMERICAN TRAGEDY" Page 178 – 179:
“…Lee shows blowups of the Bundy blood drops. ‘The drops are too neat,’ he says. ‘Too perfect. Much too similar.” That kind of drop comes only from blood falling down straight, Lee explains. Someone would have to be standing still for blood to drip from him in that pattern…”
Page 227:
“…Dr. Lee also reminds them that blood drops leading to the back gate [of Bundy] look to him as if the blood fell from someone standing still. Further, the blood is so degraded that it lacks enough DNA for RFLP testing…”
Page 286:
“…Scheck…told Blasier of odd DNA difference in the Bundy blood drops, trailing east to west toward the back gate. The drop nearest the bodies, he said, contained 33.6 nanograms of DNA. Moving west, the next drop had barely 5 nanograms, the drop after that 1.8. The fourth drop had 12.1 nanograms. And the final one, just before the gate, has 31.6. …
“….’Henry Lee says that a single drop of blood should contain about fourteen hundred nanograms,’ Scheck explained. “ We have stunning proof that a severe bacterial degradation took place in these samples. The blood was collected twelve hours after the murders. How did they lose ninety percent of their DNA in twelve hours? How can one drop have thirty-three nanograms, another barely two? If they fell at the time of the murders, they should be about equal. And Lee tells us that these drops don’t have enough tails to come from a man walking away in a hurry. Their shape suggests the blood was dropped from somebody almost standing still….”
Part III:
Before presenting the solution to the crime, I must first say that, in order to accept it, the reader must grant me only two things "on faith" because there is no way, at the present time, to prove them beyond reasonable doubt. I am also assuming that the reader is already somewhat familiar with the case and the evidence and will know what I'm talking about. These two things are:
A. JILL SHIVELY WAS A LIAR, AND HER RUN-IN WITH "OJ" NEVER HAPPENED. I have concluded that OJ never once left his home from 9:35 till 11:15 on the murder night for ANY reason. Therefore, he was not in a near-accident with his Bronco at San Vicente and Bundy at around 10:40.
Jill Shively's testimony is one of the few things that every case theoretician MUST explain somehow. Now, if one believes Shively, he/she has to go to rather extreme measures to fit this alleged incident in with all the other timeline evidence. [This is especially true for Dick Wagner, who I will deal with in detail in another section.]
B. IT IS POSSIBLE TO PLANT SOMEONE ELSE'S DNA BY GETTING SOMETHING THAT PERSON HAS BLED INTO, DILUTING THE CLOT, AND DRIPPING THE DILUTED CLOT ONTO THE REQUIRED SURFACE.
Later on I will give you my 'recipe' for making what I call 'pseudoblood'.
I have already managed to establish that you can not tell the difference between dried real blood and dried 'pseudoblood' with the naked eye. I have NOT established that microscopic or laboratory analysis would show such psedoblood to be similar with the five drops with OJ's DNA in them found at the Bundy murder scene, because I do not have the personal resources to have such rather sophisticated research done.
WHAT ROBERT HEIDSTRA HEARD REALLY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MURDERS. There is reasonable grounds for both doubting the accuracy of his timing and that what he heard was the murders in progress. {Dick Wagner has a section about Heidstra on his web site and have proven beyond reasonable doubt that Heidstra was mistaken in where he was when he heard a gate clanging, and two men talking (not "arguing", by the way).]
Heidstra was a defence witness in the criminal trial, but a plaintiff (i.e. against OJ) in the civil trial. This is because Heidstra seems to establish that the murders happened several minutes after 10:30. In the criminal trial, the prosecution's theory was that the murders took place at 10:15 or so, and the defense would argue that it was ridiculous to hang around over fifteen minutes after murdering two people, or that, if the murders had happened at 10:35 or 10:40, then "OJ" would not have had the time to get back to Rockingham and do the things he would have had to have done, mainly, making Kaelin's thumps.
In the civil trial, however, Petrocelli manipulated Kaelin into moving the time of the thumps up to 10:50 from his original testimony of 10:40. Doing so gave Petrocelli's hypothetical "OJ" the extra ten minutes to be the murderer that Heidstra heard and still get home Rockingham.
In actual fact, Heidstra arrived at the point in the alley where he heard the dog barking and the gate clanging several minutes after the murders were done and the murderer had left.
In a videtaped interview on the E! channel, Heidstra showed the interviewer the spot where he heard the sounds. He was clearly astanding by a utility pole. Dick Wagner visited the spot, walked to the front of the house and discovered that the utility pole was NOT, as Heidstra believed "directly across from" Nicole's condo, but was, rather, directly across from the next house north.
By then analyzing and recreating the movemement of Louis Karpf, the resident of the condo directly across from Heidstra's listening spot, Wagner discovered that Karpf's movements dovetailed precisely with Heidstra's, and that the gate slamming that Heidstra heard was Karpf retreating from Nicole's Akita, which was running free and in an excited state.
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED ON THE NIGHT OF JUNE 12, 1994.
What I am about to describe is THE (no "maybe") solution to the Simpson/Goldman murders. It is a description of what you would see if you had a time machine and a video camera. While any given event in my timeline has a plus-or-minus "fudge" factor of five minutes, this means that if you want to put one event five minutes later than I have, then you must put another event five minutes earlier to compensate.
KAELIN'S MOTIVE:
Since I am the ONLY current theoretician on this case who is NOT a conspiracy theorist (i.e., Kaelin acted alone, except that he used Rachel Ferrara as a pawn to establish his alibi), strictly speaking I don't even have to provide a motive. Individuals kill other individuals all the time for reasons that are incomprehensible to others.
[It is different for a conspiracy. In a conspiracy it it is more than one person who must have a motive, and since a motive that is understandable to two or more people will almost certainly be understandable to others, it is necessary to show a motive for all the conspirators.]
Nevertheless, it is handy to have one; people are more easily persuaded to accept a theory if you provide one.
Well, Kaelin had such a motive. In fact, he had exactly the same motive that is often attributed to OJ -- hatred and resentment resulting from a domestic relationship gone bad. The domestic relation of OJ to Nicole was a focus of the prosecution and plaintiffs in the two trials; what everyone has forgotten, however, is that KAELIN ALSO HAD A DOMESTIC RELATIONSHIP WITH NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON.
Consider:
From Kato Kaelin: The Whole Truth by Marc Eliot, Harper Paperbacks, New York, 1995:
Page 61: He [Kaelin] had grown a bit weary of the constant friendship that had defined his life with Nicole. Especially after a confrontation in her kitchen when she openly declared her love for him at a time she was having an affair with L.A. Raider and O.J. Simpson protégé Marcus Allen.
Page 198:
“As the year past, Kato became an increasingly important figure in Nicole's life. She'd often knock on his guesthouse bedroom when she'd come in from a night out, no matter how late the hour, to find out if he was asleep. If he wasn't, or if she could wake him, she'd insist he come over to her place to talk. Kato never refused her, no matter how tired he was. He'd splash some cold water on his face, throw some clothes on, and join her.
Remember, Kaelin was dependent on Nicole (as he was later on OJ) and was powerless to refuse.
If being consistently awakened and forced to listen to someone emotionally dumping on you isn't enough to arouse a murderous hatred, I'd like to know what is.
Page 209:
I don't know how to tell you this, she repeated [Nicole to Kaelin],"But I'm falling in love with you..."
Or, to put it another way, Nicole was cockteasing him and jerking him around.
THE TIMELINE/SCENARIO:
June -- December 1993: Kaelin lives in Nicole's guesthouse at Gretna Green, and goes into debt with her for his rent. She consistently uses and abuses him. Kaelin, on the other hand, needs her not only for his rent, but as an entree to OJ, a major celebrity, he hopes to use as a "foot in the door" for his movie career.
January -- March, 1994: Kaelin escapes to OJ's guest house -- a much better deal. Among other things, OJ never keeps him awake at night. On the other hand, OJ still treats him as a toy or houseboy on occasion, and does little for his movie career.
March, 1994: Kaelin meets Rachel Ferra and discovers that she is really "ditzy" about time.
While I am no more a mind reader than anyone else, I find it reasonable to believe that Kaelin had developed revenge fantasies in the previous months he was in the Brown/Simpson households, probably to the point of fantasizing murder. With the discovery of Ferrara, he realizes he has the ability to fake an alibi.
April, 1994:
OJ is out of town more than he is at home this month, which means that on weekends, when the housekeeper has her day off and Arnelle is out, he is alone at Rockingham.
Using his "secret" entrance of the rear door from the back room of his quarters, Kaelin steals OJ's Bruno-Maglis shoes (almost certainly tossed into an out-of-the-way corner or a closet and not likely to be missed), the knit hat (from the laundry room and holding some of OJ's hairs), and eventually the Swiss Army knife and black sweatsuit. He also obtains OJ's private phone numbers from OJ's papers, and the old gloves and blood-stained items OJ had bled into from the household garbage.
June 12, 1994:
Morning: Kaelin happens on the information that OJ and the Bundy household are going to Sydney's school recital that afternoon. Kaelin realizes that this means the Bundy condo will be empty for several hours that afternoon.
Early afternoon: He goes to Bundy, enters using either a stolen or copied key, or just climbs over the rear gate, and plants the five blood drops with OJ's DNA in them. This is done by moistening the blood clots in the stained material and squeezing it out onto the walk. This is why the drops looked like they had been dropped from a stationary source less than two feet above the walk --THEY HAD BEEN. It's also why they were so degraded: they had been plucked from the garbage and then diluted.
[It's important to remember here that, right up to the moment he attacks Nicole later that night, Kaelin has the ability to cancel his plans without anyone ever knowing the difference. Should anyone find the blood spots before the murders, they would simply ignore them or wash them away. They certainly wouldn't conclude that someone was planning a murder and frame up. Kaelin later says he spent this time playing a 'pick-up' game of basketball with strangers in Santa Monica.]
Early evening: Kaelin discovers that Michelle willl not be coming in that night as she usually does. Perhaps he finds this out by listening in on OJ's phone; perhaps OJ gives him the information while making small talk. At any rate, before 10:00 Kaelin knows Michelle won't be there. This is the very last ingredient he needs to set his plot in motion.
9:10 -- 9:35 p.m.: OJ goes to Kaelin's room to advise him about the Jacuzzi and to borrow money. He mentions in passing that he is going out for something to eat, but doesn't say where. Kaelin, who is on the phone long distance with a friend, realizes that OJ could be seen or talk to any number of people while he's out. He quickly invites himself along with OJ and hangs up on his friend. Kaelin really is not hungry; he just needs to keep track of OJ.
Fortunately for Kaelin, they go through a drive through at a McDonald's and aren't seen by anyone else. Knowing OJ only has hundreds, which might be remembered by the McD clerk, Kaelin pays with a $20. Kaelin concludes his plan is still viable.
9:35 - 10:00 p.m. They get back to Rockingham. OJ goes to his bedroom and prepares for his plane trip. Kaelin goes back to his room and re-calls his friend in San Diego till 10:00, knowing that the phone record will show the time. During this time he puts a blue-black sweatsuit on over his street clothes, then the Bruno-Maglis.
[He had obtained this suit at a videotaping session with OJ some weeks before. OJ had handed him the suit and asked him to return it to the property director while changing after the taping session and then forgotten about it. Kaelin kept it instead. Since OJ is much bigger and bulkier than Kaelin, the suit fits over his street clothes.]
10:00 -- 10:03 Kaelin hangs up on his friend and sneaks out of his room and to the north side of the main house. From there, he can see OJ chipping golf balls. Then OJ goes out the Rockingham gate to his Bronco, where he makes a 10:03 call to Paula Barbieri. Kaelin has followed him in the darkness and OJ has not seen him. Chachi the dog has followed OJ out the gate, and OJ walks it down Rockingham to Ashford and comes in through the Ashford gate, into the garage, into the house, and up to his bedroom. Kaelin, watching from the area by the Rockingham gate, now knows, from having watched OJ's routine and asking innocuous questions, that OJ has now isolated himself for the next hour or so until the limo comes.
10:05 -- 10:10 Using a stolen or copied ignition key, Kaelin drives the Bronco to the Bundy alley behind Nicole's condo.
10:10 -- 10:15: Again using a stolen or copied key, or simply climbing over, Kaelin enters the property through the back gate. He creeps up to the front door, listening and watching to see if the children are still awake or if Nicole has unexpected company, but he concludes she is alone. [As I said, Kaelin is still in a position to back out. Even if he happens to be spotted at that point, it would be embarrassing but not particularly suspicious.]
10:15 -- 10:20: (The murder sequence) On some pretext or another, Kaelin gets Nicole to come out on the front porch. She is NOT glad to see him (OJ has reported that she was extremely hostile to Kaelin in the weeks just before the murders.) She tries to get him to leave by the front gate, the closest. He manipulates her to the top of the stairs, between him and the front gate.
He then kicks her in the chest, Karate style, forcing her to fall backwards. She strikes the top of her head on the upright of the stair banister, which knocks her unconscious. She rolls to the bottom in roughly the position she is later found murdered. Kaelin descends and pulls the knife to finish her. Then....
Kaelin hears Goldman arrive and enter through the back gate. But now it is too late to back out. Even is she is not seriously hurt, he'll go to jail for assault and OJ will throw him out. Besides, he's psyched up to kill now.
Goldman arrives on the center gate above the front stairs and sees Nicole on the ground and Kaelin standing by her head, but has no reason to believe the he has attacked her, just that she fell. [ In a previous draft I included the statement: "He yells, 'Hey! Hey! Hey!' , starts down and slams the gate behind him. Kaelin says excitedly words to the effect:'Nicole just fell down the stairs! Help me carry her inside!' The Akita dog also starts barking around now." Thanks to Dick Wagner's recent research, I now no longer believe what Heidstra heard had anything to do with the murders.
Kaelin says words to the effect: "You take her under the arms; I'll take her legs. We'll put her on the living room couch." At any rate, he suckers Goldman into turning his back to him.
Kaelin attacks. He muffles Goldman with his left hand while making the first two cuts into Goldman's right lung. This robs Goldman of breath needed to scream for the last few seconds of the fight.
Struggling, Goldman manages to turn and face Kaelin. Kaelin stabs furiously -- he is fighting for his life as much as Goldman is. Goldman gets the cuts on his hands. Then Kaelin gets "lucky" with the stab to the abdominal aorta, which renders Goldman unconscious in a matter of seconds and dead within a minute. Kaelin then stands over him and makes testing stabs to his face to make sure he's dead.
I believe -- speculate -- that Goldman also injured kaelin, perhaps with a nosebleed, or caused him to cut himself.
Then he finishes Nicole. Perhaps he waits until there is a blood pool big enough to step into -- after all, the whole point of stealing the shoes was to leave footprints; maybe he stays around to look at what as in the envelope.
Perhaps he was actually wearing the gloves, and maybe he wasn't. In any case, at this point he throws the left hand glove and the knit cap on the ground and soaks the right hand glove in Nicole's blood and puts it in a plastic baggie. Then he starts to leave.
But the damn dog keeps following him, barking and jumping. About the middle of the path, the dog knocks him off balance and Kaelin decides to get rid of it. He grabs it by its collar, drags it to the front gate, puts it out, but the gate does not lock. It does stay closed long enough for him to make his escape to the back alley; a little bit later, the dog manages to paw the gate open, sniff around the bodies, and then leaves to be later found by neighbors.
This explains the inconsistencies in the footprint path.
10:20 -- 10:30: Kaelin arrives back at Rockingham. It is unclear whether he arrives before or after Park in the limo. At any rate, Park just missed seeing him come back by a few minutes, and was at the Ashford gate. There were a couple of ways Kaelin could have gotten back to his room. He could have, for example, run around the block and entered through the tennis court gate. Or hopped over the wall by the Rockingham gate and gone in by the maid's entrance (having unlocked it earlier).
But he is back in his room before 10:30.
His first phone call to to Steve Merrin at the West L.A. police station. This is a "back number", not 911, and is not mechanically recorded, so its exact time is uncertain, except that it was between 10:00 and 10:30. Kaelin disguises his voice as a woman's and says he is a reporter from Channel Four. Actually, he is seeing how close the cops are on his trail, and discovers that they have not even started looking yet.
Then he calls Rachel Ferrara to phoney-up his alibi.
10:40: Two things happen. First, Allan Park rings at the Ashford gate. This sets off all the phones on the Rockingham system, and Kaelin hears them. Kaelin, of course, knows that it's the limo driver because he has seen OJ's leaving routine dozens of times.
Second, he tells Ferrara about the "thumps".
The next thirty-five minutes are well documented in court testimony and depostions.
Eventually, Kaelin gets off the phone to Ferrara.
The next things he does were thing he did NOT plan to do.
He is afraid that, in the fight with Goldman, he may have bled onto some of the key pieces of evidence he had wanted to plant: the shoes, knife, and sweats. If he has read anything about forensics, or seen it on tv or movies, he knows there is no way to get all the blood traces from a knife or shoes. But he still wants to plant the sweats if he can, so he decides to launder them. However, he knows Arnelle could come back any time and wuld certainly take note of him doing laundry at that weird hour of night, so he keeps a lookout on the front driveway.
As he fears, he sees her drive in before he can finish the laundry. So he turns off the machine and dashes back to his room. She goes straight to her room (he reports hearing her walk by). When he is certain she is asleep, he sneaks out and gets rid of the knife and boots. Perhaps he stashes it in his car; perhaps he takes a drive to the ocean.
He then goes back to his room to wait. He does not sleep. Fuhrman finds him so "out of it" that he test Kaelin for drugs. There is no wonder, though, why Kaelin was so spaced out the next morning.
About 5:30 a.m., June 13, 1994: The four detectives arrive at Rockingham and ring at the Ashford gate. As with Park the night before, Kaelin hears this and knows exactly what's going on -- after all, who ELSE might be ringing at 5:30 a.m.?
This is when he plants the right hand glove. He goes out his "secret passage" one last time with the glove, exits through the maid's door, walks as far as the small gate at the west end of the guest house and tosses the glove to where Fuhrman "finds" it about an hour later, after having been directed there by Kaelin's 'thumps' story. He comes back the same way and pretends to be asleep.
Part II
OTHER THEORIES
FUHRMAN DID IT/OTHER POLICE CONSPIRACIES.
Rather than go into detail explaining and criticizing the Fuhrman/police conspiracy theories, I will just refer you to a book:
"O.J. Unmasked" by M.L. Rantala.
She totally trashes all such theories, and I consider it a waste of time to reproduce her work. You can find this book in most large city's library system, or buy it at Amazon.com.
Unfortunately she makes a mistake in her implicit assumption that there were only two possible solutions to the crime: that offered by the defense, and that OJ was guilty. That there might be others simply did not occur to her.
I would also add one other defense of Mark Fuhrman:
After 20 years as a detective, Mark Furhman was an expert at what TRUE evidence looked like on a crime scene. He was, let's say, something like an engraver at the U.S. Bureau of Engraving is an expert on what American money looks like.
Now, try to imagine that such an engraver decided to counterfeit money, and proceeds to put Lincoln's portrait on a $20 bill. Moreover, when he goes to pass the bill, he says to the sales clerk, "Hey! Look! There's Lincoln's picture on that $20 bill!"
Doesn't sound very likely, does it? And yet this is exactly what those who say Fuhrman planted the glove say he did!
For the facts are not only was the Rockingham glove planted (as was the Bundy glove -- a point often missed), but that it was INEPTLY planted, so obviously so that forensic experts and private detectives immediately commented on it. (See below).
Had Fuhrman indeed planted the Rockingham glove, he would have done some simple things like kicking dirt and insects onto the glove, and mussing up the leaf layer.
But more likely, he would have planted that glove in the Bronco. I will argue later on that, when you accuse someone of lying, you must explain why he/she didn't use other lies that were available to him. The spot behind Kaelin's room was a totally illogical place for the glove to begin with. The best place for the glove would have been under the Bronco's driver's seat. Every single "Fuhrman-did-it" theory has him also smearing the front seat with the glove to plant blood stains there.
Much as has been said about Fuhrman's racism. I, personally, think it has been exaggerated -- something like OJ's alleged wife abuse. But, in any case, it's irrelevant. Even if it should turn out that he was secretly the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan at the time, all that would make him is the Grand Dragon that DIDN'T PLANT ANY EVIDENCE IN THE O.J. SIMPSON CASE.
THE CLARK/FUHRMAN/PETROCELLI/ROBERT AUGUST THEORIES, OR "OJ ON THE SOUTH PATH" THEORIES.
Any theoretical solution to the "OJ Murders" MUST explain Kaelin's 'thumps' and, relatedly, the location and condition of the right-hand Rockingham glove as Fuhrman found it the morning after the murders.
As I explained in my own solution given above, the explanation for the thumps/glove is that THE THUMPS NEVER HAPPENED AND KAELIN PLANTED THE ROCKINGHAM GLOVE. Furthermore, THIS IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR THE THUMPS AND THE POSITION AND CONDITION OF THE GLOVE. I will now set out a number of theories (known as 'No-J theories') that have as a central element the assertion that OJ was responsible for the thumps, and dropped the glove accidentally while colliding with Kaelin's air conditioner.
All are variations on Clark's theory of the crime at the criminal trial, which is: arriving back at Rockingham after committing the murders, OJ sees the limosuine, early, waiting at the Ashford gate (see the diagram of the estate provided above for clarification)and quickly pulled into the parking space just north of the Rockingham gate (thus acounting for the alleged 'odd angle' of its parking).
Now, my first criticism: print out a copy of the Rockingham diagram on Wagner's site (or from Fuhrman's book. That diagram is reprinted in a number of places). With a ruler, draw a straight line from the east corner of the ashford gate to the south corner of the Rockingham gate and extend into the street. Draw a similar line from the west corner of the Ashford gate to the north corner of the Rockingham gate and extend it into the street.
This gap between the two lines on Rockingham defines where the Bronco driver would have been able to see the Ashford gate. Now go back to Wagner's site and the section "What Did Allan Park See" and you will see that the limo's headlights were pointed AWAY from the Rockingham gate.
Also, under the 'rules' of the theory, 'OJ' is driving as fast as he can and is not expecting the limo to even be there yet. (It had arrived 20 minutes earlier than usual because this was Park's first assignment with a celebrity and he wanted to be damn sure he was on time.) I'd say a speed of 30mph is reasonable.
You can do the arithmetic and come to my conclusion yourself: "OJ" WOULD NOT HAVE HAD TIME TO SEE THE LIMO AND STOP AND PARK WHERE IT WAS FOUND THE NEXT DAY.
(Now, the reason it was parked the way it was was because OJ had earlier pulled it out of the Rockingham gate and make a sharp turn to park it by the curve. Then Kaelin eparked it in exactly that same position so as to cover up the fact that it had been driven.)
Next: These "south path" theories have two prmimary variations. Either:
A. "OJ" climbs over the wall/opens the gate and sneaks down the utterly dark driveway unseen by the limo driver and, in a panic, in a hurry, and not wanting to be seen by the limo driver, RUNS as fast as he can (in the ptich dark) down the south pathway where he runs into Kaelin's airconditioner (thus explaining the "thumps") and dropping the glove. Or:
B. He runs to the property of his next door neighbor to the south (named Salinger, who employ Rosa Lopez as their maid.), runs along the property line fence, reaches a point opposite Kaelin's room, climbs the fence, loses his balance and falls (thumps, glove.)
Then both variations overlap by asserting that "OJ", stunned and still in a panic, walks/runs west back to the driveway and to his front door, where, despite all his efforts to stay concealed, he is spotted by Allan Park.
FUHRMAN VARIATION: He has "OJ", on his way back west on the path, dodging into the maid's entrance and bandaging his finger. Why Fuhrman has is "OJ" do this is hard to imagine, except that Fuhrman found a bandage wrapper on the Salinger side of the fence the morning after the murders, and, instead of just shrugging it off, feels compelled to included it in his theory of the crime. (He does much the same thing with a broken fence picket he found in front of the Bronco.
Fuhrman's variation is total bullshit, and I suspect that Fuhrman himself knows this better than anyone else, and that he put this whole chapter in his book ("Muder in Brentwood") at the insistence of his editor or publisher.
For the fact is, once you got inside the maid's entrance YOU WERE INSIDE THE MAIN HOUSE. A short hallway leads from the maid's quarters to the rest of the house. That is to say, once "OJ" got in there, he had no reason to go to the front door to get in.
WHY THE 'OVER-THE SALINGER'S FENCE' HYPOTHESIS COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED:
Consider the following expert statements:
Dr. Henry Lee, from Famous Crimes Revisited: from Sacco-Vanzetti to O.J. Simpson by Dr. Henry Lee and Dr. Jerry Labriola, Stong Books, Southington, Connecticut, 2001, , Page 239:
. Simpson allegedly jumped the fence near the guesthouse in his haste to return home and, at the same time, avoid being detected by limousine driver Allan Park, who was out front. The fence is very high [actually about four feet on the Rockingham side, about five feet tall on the neighbor's side] and is covered by a large number of vines and other vegetation. B>Why was there no damage to such vegetation?... [emphasis added]
Same book, Page 149:
I [Dr. Lee] look at that place behind the Rockingham house where the glove is found. Common sense tells you the glove belongs to Mr. Simpson. I look at the fence. Vegetation is growing there. Nothing disturbs it. Common sense tell you nobody climbed over that fence. [emphasis added]
From Mark Fuhrman's testimony of March 14, 1995:
Q DID YOU NOTICE THAT WHEN YOU SAW THE GLOVE THERE WAS AN OBJECT
EQUIDISTANT
FROM THE FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE THAT WAS VERY PLAINLY
VISIBLE
THROUGH IT?
A YES.
Q SO THAT PRESUMABLY IF YOU HAD CHOSEN TO DO IT YOU COULD HAVE HAD THE
DETECTIVE LOOK THROUGH THE FENCE AND HAD THE SAME VANTAGE POINTS WITH
RESPECT TO THE GLOVE, COULDN'T YOU?
A NO.
Q COULD NOT?
A NO.
Q WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?
A IT WAS VERY OVERGROWN, VERY DIRTY. THE LEAVES WERE VERY THICK IN THE
FLOWER BED AREA ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE. IT WAS VERY HARD TO
EVEN GET
IN THERE.
I PERSONALLY TRIED TO GET INTO THAT AREA AND IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT,
VERY
DIRTY.
I also want to urge you to read "Over the Salinger's Fence" on Dick Wagner's site.
Since it is impossible for anyone to have gone over the south border fence that night, this leaves the other 'south path hypothesis": that 'OJ' went down the his own driveway, dodged into the south path next to the garage, ran down it to Kaelin's air conditioner and rammed into it in the dark, thereby triggering the thumps and dropping the glove.
While more plausible, upon examination we can see that this version of OJ-guilty is no more possible than the 'over-the-fence' version.
ABOUT THE THUMPS:
From "Kato Kaelin: the whole Truth" by Marc Eliot:
Page 91:
At about 10:40 Kate heard the now-famous noises, a series of three bumps
A question related to that is how Kaelin's "three thumps" happened. I will show that they DID NOT HAPPEN BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED, and therefore, that Kaelin made them up. There is, in fact, no corroborating evidence that these thumps took place at all.
The thumps could not have happened in the way Kaelin
consistently described
them. The thumps and moving of the picture would
have required objects and
forces so large and powerful as to have left behind
some kind of evidence
still detectable the next morning. No such evidence
was found.
From American Tragedy: The Uncensored Story of the Simpson Defense by Lawrence Schiller and James Willwerth, Random House, New York, 1996
Page 115:
“On Sunday Afternoon, June 26th [1994], Shapiro, Kardashian, Pavelic and Drs. Baden and Lee played sleuth during their official visit to Rockingham. Kato Kaelin was someone they thought long and hard about.
Kato, after all, hand volunteered the strange story about crashes and thumps in the night that made the picture on his wall shake. Would police have searched the back alley if he hadn't said that?
And who, after all, was this strange man living rent-free on Simpson's estate? He looked unstable. They knew he handsome kind of relationship with Nicole. Was he her lover?
Equally important, Kardashian told them about the path through the tennis court gate to neighbor Eric Watts's backyard. O.J. wouldn't come around to this side of the house, Kardashian explained. When it's dark, O.J. gets scared. He would never climb the fence. He had an easier route.
Inside Kato's apartment, they banged hard on the wall. The picture didn't move. Kardashian led half the team to the back walkway. He and others rammed into the wall like football players. Again, the picture stayed motionless.
Only one other theoretician (Dick Wagner, who also believes OJ, while having been at Bundy, did not commit the murders)tries to deal with this passage and its implications. All the rest simply ignore it and resort to the impossible "OJ rammed into the air conditioner" story ala Marcia Clark.
Now, when I used the word "impossible" in the last paragraph, I meant this is exactly the same way as "A perpetual motion machine is impossible." THIS EXPLANATION FOR KAELIN'S THUMPS VIOLATES THE LAWS OF PHYSICS.
For one of the laws of physics is: "The angle of reflection equals the angle of inflection." That is, if you draw a perpedicular line to a flat surface through the point where an object bounced off that surface (and this applies to light beams as well as tennis balls -- it applie to everything) You will INVARIABLY find (in the absence of some outside force acting on the object)that the angle between the perpendicular line and the incoming path line of the object exactly equals the angle between that perpendicular line and the outgoing path line of the object.
So, what would REALLY have happened of "OJ" (or anyone else) had rammed into the side of the air conditioner? There are only two possibilities. EITHER that person would have bounced straight back a couple of feet and ended up standing, dazed, in front of the air conditioner, OR, more likely, he would have ended up flat on his back with the lower half of his body under the air conditioner.
Now, either way, all this would explain would be ONE thumps. Kaelin consistently described the sounds he heard as three equally spaced, equally timed thumps, (see the videotape of the preliminary hearing and the passage from his civil trial testimony above), AND a moving picture AND at first mistaking it for an earthquake.
I wish I had the space and time to reproduce some of the explanation and some of the replies to my observation I have received or read in the internet group devoted to this case 'alt.fan.oj-simpson'. But I need to report one or two just to illustrate what lengths people will go in tying logic into pretzels in order to preserve OJ-guilty scnenarios.
One of the most infamous is derived from a school of theories that maintains that maybe the thumps had nothing to do with the murders after all. The most infamous one was the '30 pound cat' theory -- that a very heavy stray cat jumped on Kaelin's air conditioner.
Another, more rational, suggested that the thumps were caused by a "water hammer". I had to mull that one over for awhile.
Now, the primary trouble with all these suggestions of an 'independent cause' of the thumps is that, for any of these explanations to be correct, IT WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE BEEN THE FIRST TIME ANY OF THESE 'INDEPENDENT CAUSES' CAUSED THUMPS. Because, if it wasn't, then Kaelin or OJ would have known what they were. If it had been a water hammer, OJ long ago would have said something like, " You mean the plumbing is acting up again? I thought I'd had that fixed."
So we can safely exclude all the 'independent cause for the thumps' explanations.
One correspondent, responding directly to me, suggested that, in his state of panic, OJ resorted to broken-filed running as he did when pursued on the football field, and hit the air conditioner from a 45 degree angle. Now, the 'only' trouble with that is that the spot where the airconditioner is is four feet wide, and it is just as impossible to do broken-field running in a space four feet wide as it it to bounce off a flat surfact at a 45 degree angle after hitting it at a 90 degree angle. I have been astounded about what people would publish without so much as ten seconds of self-criticism or checking.
OTHER EVIDENCE REFUTING THE OJ-GUILTY THEORIES.
After the alleged collision with the air conditioner/roll over against the guestroom wall, both the "over the fence" and "OJ runs east on the path" overlap. All except Fuhrman (noted above) then maintain that "OJ" ran west and back out of the path, up the driveway, and to the front door, where Allan Park saw him at the mechanically (telephone records) time of 11:55. This description of "OJ"s actions totally ignore five significant pieces of evidence:
1. THE UNDISTURBED LEAF LAYER UNDER THE ROCKINGHAM GLOVE. This is documented by both testimony of the detectives AND crime scene photos of the glove as it was found, before it was ever touched.
You would think that it would be obvious that anyone this undisturbed quality of the leaf layer would immediately refute any assertion that someone had fallen on that layer hours before (on a windless night)
And yet this point is simply disregarded as if it didn't exist, in spite of the testimony and photos.
2. THE TWO CLOSED GATES.
Kaelin has consitently testified, and told his ghost writer, Marc Eliott, that two gates on the south pth at Rockingham were CLOSED at 11:00 when he he says went part of the way down the south path the check out the thumps.
One of these gates was the westernmost gate near the front of the garage; it was broken off its hinges so that it had to be lifted and shifted to open and shut it. the other was at the west end of the guest house.
It is ironic that Kaelin was the only source of this information, for this piece of testimony ALONE is enough to negate all the 'Guilty-OJ-running-on-the-south-path" theories.
For what this means -- though it was a point too subtle to occur to Kaelin at the time -- is that NO ONE COULD HAVE BEEN ON THE SOUTH PATH THAT NIGHT, and especially not some fugitive murderer running in a panic and knocking himself senseles on an air conditioner.
For the only way they could have been closed is that someone who had just been down the path had closed them behind him.
Now, the guest house gate is in pitch dark. This means that "OJ" would have had to have stopped, turned around and groped in the pitch dark, found the gate by touch and closed it. With the westmost gate by the garage, he would had had to do much the same, except he would first have to find itwhere it was laying and precisely put it on it's hinges without being able to see them.
Does that sound like a man in a hurry to you? A man in a panic to get inside his house without being seen? A man who had just ben stunned by colliding with an air conditioner at a full run?
DIDN'T HAPPEN. Kaelin found them closed because they had been closed for a long time.
3. THE DRIVEWAY BLOOD TRAIL, AND THE "MAGIC FINGER CUT"
Animations about the blood spots on Bundy, by Jasper Garrison
These animations come with their own explanations and show the various version of the infamous "blood trail" at Rockingham. Marcia Clark and other OJ theorists would have you believe that this is the last part of a "blood trail" starting at the murder scene at Bundy. Now the trouble is:
Notice that the blood drops follow the driveway from the Bronco/Rockingham gate to the front door. THERE WERE NO BLOOD DROPS ON THE SOUTH PATH.
From Philip Vanatter's criminal trial testimony of March 21, 1995. Please note as you read, what this testimony also says about the allegations that "OJ" went over the fence and/or rammed into the air conditioner:
: BY MR. SHAPIRO: IS IT -- IS IT -- DID -- IS IT YOUR OPINION THAT THE PERSON WHO DID THE KILLING WAS BLEEDING AT THE TIME HE CAME OR SHE CAME TO ROCKINGHAM?
A: YES.
Q: I TAKE IT THEN THERE WAS A THOROUGH SEARCH FOR BLOOD FROM THE AREA OF ROCKINGHAM -- FROM ROCKINGHAM TO THE AREA WHERE THE GLOVE WAS FOUND?
A: YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q: HOW MUCH BLOOD WAS FOUND THERE?
A: NONE. NONE THAT I AM AWARE OF.
Q: I TAKE IT A THOROUGH SEARCH WAS DONE OF THE ADJACENT PROPERTY FOR BLOOD; IS THAT CORRECT?
A: THE AREA WAS SEARCHED, YES.
Q: FOR BLOOD?
A: WELL, SEARCHED FOR ANY TYPE OF EVIDENCE.
Q: WAS IT SEARCHED FOR BLOOD?
A: YES, SIR, THAT WOULD INCLUDE ANY TYPE OF EVIDENCE.
Q: HOW MUCH BLOOD WAS FOUND THERE?
A: NONE.
Q: I TAKE IT A THOROUGH SEARCH OF THE FENCE WAS UNDERTAKEN IF SOMEBODY CLIMBED THE FENCE FOR BLOOD?
A: YES.
Q: HOW MUCH BLOOD WAS FOUND THERE?
A: NONE.
Q: I TAKE IT A THOROUGH SEARCH WAS DONE OF THE WALLS?
A: THAT'S CORRECT, YES.
Q: HOW MUCH BLOOD WAS FOUND THERE?
A: NONE.
Now, you wuld be astounded at some of the, frankly, kneeslapping explanations for why THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT OJ (OR ANYONE ELSE, EXCEPT KAELIN) WENT DOWN THE SOUTH PATH THAT NIGHT.
Most notable -- perhps 'infamous' is a better word -- is Bob August, who simply ignores the fact that no blood was found by literally saying "Blood drops were there, but the police just didn't find it." similar to his assertion that the foliage would show no sign of a large man passing through it, in spite of the fact that the most expereienced forensic scientist in the world went looking for it, and, not finding it, made mention of it.
He also asserts that "OJ"s finger would simply stopped bleeding when he went onto the path and started bleeding again at the exact point where it stopped, so as to create an illusion of an unbroken trail of blood from the Rockingham gate to the front door.
The truth? OJ cut himself on something in the Bronco earlier in the night and bled from his car to his front door earlier in the evening.
Others (Fuhrman, Wagner) have suggested that "OJ" avoided bleeding on the south path by (Fuhrman) putting his left hand in his pants, or (Dick Wagner) putting it in his mouth.
Okay, dear reader, let's see YOU run blind with your left hand in your pocket, or in your mouth, and se how fast you can run.
Moreover, let's see you manhandle a broken gate WITH ONE HAND and balance it on broken hinges so that it stays upright. And, oh yes, don't forget to do it in the pitch dark. Can't do it, you say? Well, that's what Mark Fuhrman and Dick Wagner say OJ Simpson did.
4. THE TWO AVAILABLE DOORS.
Even those who hold to the "guilty-OJ-On-the South Path" theories do not dispute the existence of two doors along the south path -- one a side door to the garage and the other the 'maid's entrance' referred to by Fuhrman -- but then proceed to indulge in the usual logic-pretzeling to fit the 'wicked-stepsister's-foot'of their theories into the 'glass slipper' of the facts. To wit:
To explain why "OJ" didn't use the side door of the garage, they claim that objects sere stacked inside the garage blocking the door.
Trouble is, that door opened OUTWARD, so that nothing on the inside would block its opening. Moreover, the actual testimony and documentation for the objects behind the door is extremely dubious; it is unclear whether those objects were behind the door on the murder night or were put there later. Moreover, even the documented objects in front of the door were not large or heavy enough to block a man who was physically capable of what "OJ" had supposedly done earlier that night; they would have been more of a 'speed bump' than a barricade.
Some of the explanations for why "OJ" didn't use the maid's entrance actually make sense. One is, that it was locked from the inside with a slide-bolt, which, at least, was possible. Another is that it was locked by the regular lock and "OJ" had forgotten his key.
Those who hold to that aspect of the theory want you to believe that (1) "OJ" was a very rare individual in that he didn't keep his own house key -- which was a master key to all the locks at Rockingham -- on the same ring with his car key (and other personal keys), such that he forgot the house master key while still having his Bronco key, and (2) he nevertheless remembered , or was lucky enough to forget, to leave the front door UNLOCKED.
What they miss in saying that latter is that, if such was indeed the case, "OJ" HAD NO REASON TO BE GOING BACK ON THE SOUTH PATH IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE WAS NO WAY FOR HIM TO GET IN THE HOUSE, ANYWAY.
One reply to that rather obvious objection is that "OJ" was headed to the back patio door, which he had ALSO conveniently forgotten to lock.(The OJ-guilty crowd would have us believe in not only "OJ"s magic finger cut, but his highly convenient forgetting to lock certain doors.)
The answer to THAT is : Okay, then why didn't he just CONTINUE around the guest house and go in the back? (We know that no one did because Fuhrman made a special point to note that the spider webs in back of the guest house were still intact the next morning.) It was easy enough to get past the airconditioner and down the rest of the path and around the guest house. (Fuhrman did exactly this the next morning and reported no great effort in doing so.)
And so we see that every single variation of the "Guilty-OJ-on-the-south-path" or "Over-the-fence" fails to describe or explain the creation of the evidence or testimony about it in such a way as to be a believable or even possible solution to the case.
5. THE RELATIVELY CLEANNESS AND WET CONDITION OF THE GLOVE.
This point has already been dealt with Vannatter testimony cited above. But I want to add a few other things from what Fuhrman wrote in his book "Murder in Brentwood".
He, like Vannatter, noted the wet and glistening appearance of the glove, and the undisturbed leaf layer beneath it. But Fuhrman also notes that there was no dust, dropped leaves, OR INSECTS.
Those who cling to "south path" theories in the very jaws of common sense and evidence often explain the wetness and glistening of the blood on the glove by saying it had been sitting out in cool, damp air all night and so had not dried.
There is no way to conclusively refute this argument. One would need to have hour-by-hour temperature and humidity readings from a spot within a few hundred yards of Rockingham that night, and then put a blood soaked leather glove into a chamber where these conditions could be recreated.
Unfortunately no such nearby weather observations were made; the nearest such weather observation station was Santa Monica Community College, and the distance between SMCC and Rockingham is such that there could have been significant differences in atmospheric conditions.
However, Fuhrman's observation about there not being any insects on the glove is of utmost importance, for it means -- and what Fuhrman is 'actually' saying -- is that THAT GLOVE HAD NOT BEEN SITTING ON THE GROUND VERY LONG, AND CERTAINLY NOT FOR EIGHT OR NINE HOURS. For it is simply not possible for a blood-soaked item to sit unprotected on the ground in Brentwood on a summer night without attract a whole bunch of insects to it.
BOB AUGUST VARIATION:
In all fairness, the best thing to do is let BA speak for himself:
This is a link to his site.
However, I can save you a little bit of time.
All OJ case theoreticians have to explain what is usually called "the missing evidence": the Bruno-Maglis shoes, the knife, and the 'blue/black sweats'.
I explain it by noting that Kaelin had ample time from about 1:30 a.m. that night to 5:30 the next morning to dispose of it.
Another fact of evidence was the presence of wet laundry in the washing machine, in spite of the testimony by Arnelle and Gigi the maid that neither of them had done laundry that weekend and Gigi testified that there was no laundry in the machine on Friday when she left.
I explain it by suggesting that Kaelin did the laundry for reasons of his own, but was caught short by Arnelle getting home before he could finish it.
The standard way for those who believe OJ is guilty to get around these problems is to theorize an accomplice. Just as "patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel", I have found that inventing an accomplice is the last refuge of an OJ case groupie stuck with an embarrassing fact.
Petrocelli, at least as August describes him, says that "OJ" had an accomplice BEFORE the fact of them crime, so that this accomplice was also a co-conspirator and the murders were planned.
But there is one simple question that simply explodes all such 'co-conspirator' theories, to wit: IF HE HAD AN ACCOMPLICE BEFORE THE FACT, WHY WOULDN'T HE HAVE USED THAT PERSON AS AN ALIBI WITNESS? This rather simple and obvious objection seems to never occur to those who, in desperation to 'convict' OJ, come up with these lame-ass theories; it certainly never occurred to Petrocelli.
Bob August: Arnelle as accomplice after the fact.(?)
Petrocelli never specifically named an accomplice -- possible because he was afraid, being famous and at least modestly rich, of being sued for libel.
August, being an obscure person, and probably not rich enough to go after in court, specifically names Arnelle Simpson as the one who cleaned up after her father.
He maintains that "OJ" phoned her cell phone from the airport gate, at about the same time he called Kaelin, told her of the bloody material and instructed her to launder some of it and dispose of all of it so that it would never be found.
Okay: first, consider how this alleged second phone call from the airport gate (there is do dispute about his call to Kaelin to give him the code and turn on the burglar alarm) is in opposition to the first.
That is, by calling Kaelin to turn on the alarm, he was putting an unnecessary obstacle in the path of Arnelle, who he wanted to enter the house later. Sure, Arnelle knew the code herself and could get past the alarm -- but why even bother with it? And a few minutes of thought would have allowed "OJ" to notice that, by calling Kaelin and giving him the code, he risked putting a 'glitch' in his alibi if Kaelin should turn on the alarm, only to have Arnelle turn it off and forget to turn it on again.
Which is what August says happened!
Mr. August says Arnelle received her father's call from the airport about 11:30. After what must have been one of the weirdest calls of her life (How often has someone called YOU and asked you to clean up anything in the middle of the night?) she then stayed out till
12:30 or 1:00. (According to Kaelin, in Eliott's book, she came home even later than that.), went to her room, stayed in it until 4:00 a.m., then came out, went to the front door, turned off the alarm, and went in and -- while leaving the lights off -- picked up the later-to-be-missing evidence and proceeded to launder the bloody seat suit. For some reason or another she then manages to get rid of the knife and shoes, but forgets the sweat suit in the washing machine.
Now, dear reader, if you are going to believe that, I have this little bridge in Brooklyn I want you to look at; I can get you a great deal on it.....
First, why in the hell wait till 4:00 a.m. to start the coverup task? Because her father told her to? And why the hell would he do THAT? The cops could have discovered the bodies at any second and be over to Rockingham minutes later. You've just banged into an airconditioner a few minutes before in a total panic, and yet you are going NOW to tell your daughter/accomplice to go ahead, complete her date, go home, and WAIT THREE HOURS before doing the cleanup?
Moreover, you are going to order her to do a load of laundry before throwing the stuff away?
Knowing full well that Kaelin was in his room within earshot of the washing machine?
Look, friends, I have had just a few friends I loved enough that, if they asked me to take bloody items out of their house in the middle of the night and throw them away, I would have done it.
But there is no GODdamned way, no FUCKING way I would ever stop and launder some of the stuff before doing so, especially if I knew there was someone else in the house.
Now, if YOU would, or if you would believe ANYONE would do that, then I want you to stop reading my webpage right now, and get the hell off it. Because only the most stupid and intellectually blind 10% of the human race could ever believe such total fucking bullshit. I don't want you on my side even if I've persuaded you, because you would only be an embarrasment to me.
I count Bob August as part of that 10%. In fact, since he was the one that came up with this totally bizarre and impossible idea in the first place, I would have to put him the the most stupid and blind 1%.
On top of those already disgusting qualities, Bob August is also one of the most arrogant, self-righteous, and self-deluded individuals to have ever been born. In fact, if arrogance, self-righteousness and self-delusion were college courses, Bob August would be a tenured professor in all of them.
Forgive me for this off-topic rant. If you knew this son-of-a-bitch for a few months you'd see where I'm coming from.
Did Arnelle Simpson"lie"?
No, but her testimony was mistaken. There can simply be no doubt that Arnelle, the four detectives, and Kaelin entered the main house for the first time that morning by going through the rear patio door, rather than the front door, and that the burglar alarm was not set at the time.
However, in order for a false statement to be a "lie" there must be a conscious effort to deceive others.
Among other things, this means when you accuse someone of lying, you are duty-bound to explain such things as that person's motive for lying, what other lies could he/she have told instead of the one alleged in order to accomplish his/her deception, and how much did the supposed liar try to conceal his/her lie.
The accusation against Arnelle fails on two of the three points. Accepting, for sake of argument, that Arnelle was her father's accomplice, then she would have had a motive. However, if she was attempting to conceal the fact that she'd been in the house on the murder night, and subsequently forgot to turn the alarm back on, she had a much more "accessible" set of lies to use: To wit, she got hungry in the middle of the night and went into the kitchen for a snack, or invented some other bit of personal business.
More importantly, however, is the fact that -- if you grant that Arnelle WAS lying -- then she knew there were five people close at hand that would quickly contradict her,
So, then, what is the logical reason for the discrepancy between her testimony and that of the detectives and Kaelin? Simple human failing. Arnelle had been living at Rockingham for years. In that time, she went from her room and into the main house through the front door hundreds of times, and she entered the main house through the rear patio door hundreds of times. She had just been rousted out of bed after about five hours sleep and been confronted by plainclothes detectives wanting to know where her father was. In other words, she was under great stress (minutes later she collapsed in hysteria when told of the murders). She simply misremembered and confused a past time when she went in through the front door with the day after the murders when she, in fact, entered through the patio door.
So, why didn't the alarm go off?
How about: BECAUSE KAELIN NEVER TURNED IT ON, DUMMY; HE JUST LIED AND SAID HE DID. You have to remember that the ONLY evidence that Kaelin turned on the alarm is Kaelin's own word.
Dick Wagner: "OJ" was there, but didn't do it/Kaelin helped in cover up/the Jill Shively incident.
I count Dick Wagner among my friends, and we have corresponded publicly and privately with him for a few years now, though we have never met. He knows what I think about his website and his theory. So, though some of the things I am about to say about his research will sound harsh; Dick has already heard them a thousand times
I once said to Dick: "Knowing that a man who has done your kind of research has come up with your theory is like finding out that Einstein believed in Santa Claus."
As with August, the best source for what a person says is the person himself. I have already provided a number of links to his site above.
Dick has the advantage of living in the LA area and so has easy access to such things and the murder scene neighborhoods and the records at the LA county courthouse. He also own a modest-sized piece of property of his own and so can do experiments such as splashing red latex paint ("blood") around and throwing a cap onto an agapanthus plant again and again until it dies.
He has the disadvantage of also having access to Jill Shively.
If you read his website extensively, it may not even occur to you that what you are reading is NOT (at least not exactly) his theory of how OJ did or didn't do the murders.
No, rather his site is really dedicated to another purpose: explaining how the murders happened AND how "OJ" got to San Vicente and Bundy and was seen by Jill Shively.
Dick's own research leads him to believe that Ron Goldman arrived at Bundy at about 10:09. (Actually one of his failings is that he thinks he can recreate events down to a margin of six seconds (one tenth of a minute) I read his research methodology and agree with him; this also meshes with the first of the dog barking and Marcia Clark's timeline of the murders. (I believe Vannater did just about the same thing Dick did in retracing Goldman's steps and came to the same conclusion, but I don't feel like trying to chase down the place I read it)--
On June 14, 2002, Dick published a revised version of his theory and psted it on his web site and copied that to the newsgroup alt.fan.oj-simpson. The original version of the webpage your reading contained a summation of Dick's theory. But it is both quicker and more honest to let him speak for himself:
DICK WAGNER'S THEORY OF THE CRIME IN HIS OWN WORDS
You may want to flip back and forth between that page and this as you read Wagner.
First, did you see that part about "OJ" stopping at his office? That particular part of his theory is entirely new. He put it in because he has done an almost 'microscopic' analysis of the timelines of several of the Bundy area witnesses and discovered that he couldn't get Shively's time of the incident into any of them. And that is in spite of the fact that he recently talked to Shively and got her to alter her own time estimate of the near-accident.
Second, sometimes the only thing you can say to someone is : REAL PEOPLE DON'T DO THINGS THAT WAY, DAMN IT!!!
Dick always disregards this criticism by saying words to the effect of: "Well, maybe that's not the way YOU would do it or I would do it, but it might be the way PROFESSIONAL HITMEN would do it."
Third, as you can see, DW's theory is yet another version of the "OJ on the south path" school of theories which I have already thoroughly trashed.
Fourth, as with all the rest of the OJ theorists (except me), he invents an accomplice to get out of a tight spot.
This time, it's Kaelin that Dick taps.
Now, if things had indeed happened the way Dick says, then:
1. Kaelin would have known the source of the thumps.
2. He would have known that "OJ" had been involved in something he wanted to conceil, meaning something illegal, though not necessarily murder. Further, by agreeing to do what "OJ" asks, he should know that he is making himself liable for criminal charges of his own.
BUT:
3. He nevertheless tells Fuhrman about the thumps the next morning. And:
4. Instead of coming clean and purging himself of liability for murder, he chooses to keep his secret.
Now, dear reader, would YOU do something like that? Do you know anyone who would do that for you? Do you really believe Kaelin would have, and did?
I will spend no more time on Dick Wagner's theory.
THE CIVIL TRIAL:
Of all the myths connected to the Simpson/Goldman murders, perhaps the most ironic are the ones about the criminal and civil trials. The myth of the criminal trial was that it was a reverse-racist "rush to judgment" by a jury that nullified the evidence, or simply disregarded it, and voted its verdict not based on the evidence but to "score points against Whitey".
The civil trial, on the other hand, is commonly pictured as nonbiased jurors taking their time to examine and understand the evidence.
These are ironic because the evidence is that there has been a "role reversal" of the truth in these myths.
That is, it was the CRIMINAL trial which had the best-informed members, deciding the truth without bias or racism, and that it was the CIVIL jury that was the subject and willing participant in a racist railroading of an innocent man, who were fed totally fabricated and invalid evidence, who accepted and believed such ...total bullshit...uncritically, and who acted on impure motives to, in effect, legally lynch O.J.
I will present just three pieces of evidence to back up the above statement, though I could easily present more.
TOTALLY BULLSHIT EVIDENCE WAS ADMITTED AGAINST OJ.
This was done and was possible because, first, California state judges -- as opposed to the Federal bence -- are elected to office. What this meant in the social context of the civil trial is that since (White) public opinion demanded the destruction of OJ, no judge at ANY level of the judiciary could make a decision favorable to OJ without being voted off the bench.
Fujiyama, the civil trial judge, had it even better: this was his last case. He retired immediately afterward. He didn't even risk the small humiliation of being overturned. He was, therefore, perfectly free to make the most outrageous errors against OJ without the slightest fear of so much as a professional rebuke.
Consider now some of the evidence Fujiyama allowed into the case against OJ.
See Boziak's testimony for yourself
Now, this is one textbook classis case of junk "science" being touted by a so-called "expert" to bamboozle a jury.
For one thing, Bodziak's legal -- if not personally felt -- hostility to OJ is beyond all doubt. Thee are few better reasons to doubt a "scientist's" objectivity than knowing that he was a key witness for the losing side in a criminal trial.
Here's what Bodziak REALLY said:
1. This was not a standardized scientific test; I made it up ad hoc just for the pictures in this case.
2. It was never subject to peer review or peer reproduction.
3. It was not "double-blinded", that is, Bodziak knew what shoes he was looking at and what results he wanted to come up with.
4. Can anyone honestly believe that there was the slightest chance that Bodziak would NOT conclude that the shoes OJ wore in the pictures were Bruno-Maglis?
Now, in criminal trials, where there is a higher standard for test of this type; in California such a test would require a "Kelly-Frye" hearing. BODZIAK'S TEST WOULD NOT HAVE PASSED SUCH A HEARING.
Oh, yes, the civil trial standard is lower. However, this is what is known as a "technicality" -- the favorite target of those who condemn OJ's criminal trial verdict. It was up to a judge who was tranparently biased (not excluding jurors who had openly admitted bias is proof of that)and beyond accountability to decide whether to admit that testimony or not. Surprisingly enough, he allowed it.
Now consider the testimony of Nancy Ney, a telephone counselor for Sojourn House, a shelter and source of advice and help for battered women.
Read Ney's testimony for yourself.
(You will probably want to use the "find on page" feature of the "edit" menu to get to Ney's testimony quickly.)
Now, here we have someone testifying about two week old memories about an anonymous phone call, with notes made retroactively (after being exposed to the media barrage) so as to somehow prove not only the state of mind of this "Nicole" but the state of mind of her unnamed husband! You might as well admit the testimony of a psychic who claimed to have had a seance with Nicole!
Deena Mullen, "Juror #5"
Ms. Mullen was on the civil trial jury. After it's conclusion, she made a deal with HBO to produce and star in her autobiographical one act play.
Five minutes before the conclusion of the play she quotes herself talking to another juror and says Ron Goldman died looking at a young woman who had her head cut off.
While Nicole was NOT decapitated, I consider that part of her statement allowable dramatic license.
No, what is astounding about that statment is that it reveals that Mullen didn't understand the evidence. What's more, she is describing a time just shortly before the jury arrives at it's verdict. Nowehere in this passage does she mention that any of her fellow jurors corrected her mistake or even made mention of it.
And the mistake?
Well, if there is one thing we can know for certain about the crime it's that GOLDMAN DIED BEFORE NICOLE'S THROAT WAS CUT.
That's because there were none of Goldman's bootprints in the blood pool, and none of Nicole's blood on his boot soles. There is also no doubt that Roldman had put up a fierce, though brief struglle. If Nicole's throat had been cut before Goldman died, then one side effect of Goldman's fight would have been to splatter small droplets all over the murder scene, and no such small droplets were found.
And yet here we have a person who had been listening to the evidence for months and deliberating with fellow jurors even longer making a goof that would have caused her to fluck "OJ 101". And the fact that there was no apparent reation from any other juror does not speak well for the rest of the panel.
TWO CORRUPTED PIECES OF EVIDENCE: THE SOCKS AND THE BACK GATE BLOOD
I conclude with comments about two "loose ends": OJ and Nicole's blood on the socks and OJ's blood on the back gate found some three weeks after the rest of the blood evidence.
While there is no evidence that anyone connected with the LAPD planted evidence prior to OJ's arrest and indictment (though Kaelin did.), I can not help but to conclude the these two items were.
Shirley Baker specifically mentions seeing Rolf Brown -- a distant Brown cousin -- hose down the Bundy crime scene after the cops released it. She also mentions that the back gate was covered with fingerprint powder.
Considering that this later collected blood was in plain sight, I regard it as inconceivable that Rolf Brown missed it.
And isn't it rather suspicious that the cops missed it in the first go-round?
But, more importntly, THERE WAS NO 'CHAIN OF CUSTODY' for this blood. In those three weeks between the original inspection and the collection of the back gate blood, thousand of looky-loos were around that property.
ITO ERRED IN LETTING THAT BLOOD INTO EVIDENCE.
Exactly the same can be said about the bloody socks said to have been collected from OJ's bedroom.
Never mind objections as to the EDTA content and the fact that they are not shown in a police video when they should have been.
It is, rather, the Traci Savage leak -- where the results of DNA tests were revealed before the tests were even known -- that makes this evidence too corrupt to be admissible.
Finally, if you want to use the socks and the belated back gate blood as evidence against OJ, all I can do is challenge you to come up with your own timline/scenario of the crime whcih explains how those items of evendence were incidentally created and placed the way they were found.
