General Case Discussion: OLD THREAD

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


or ONE key on a ring.

This confusion happens when people use books by people with agendas to try to understand what the truth is.

martin II Don't be silly. Even Wagner (your reference in all things Orenthal) was not able to conclude on the number of keys/sets of keys and he wrote about them before any of the books that came out after the trial. Would you please, for goodness sakes, do some research BEFORE posting.

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by martin II


so that makes six.

what about Denise, You think she had one?

i wonder if the painter that painted her house had one?
martin II

I've never heard one way or the other whether Denise had a key, but I am assuming not because I believe that when the Brown's arrived to clean out Bundy that they had to be let in by someone else.

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


so that makes six.

what about Denise, You think she had one?

i wonder if the painter that painted her house had one?
martin II But Orenthal wasn't suppose to have any -- guess that's the bottom line.

[martin II]

fbg

Wagner states that the last time oj was at Bundy was on 6/4 6/5/ and he did not go inside the condo.

That faye had moved in on 6/3 and that the keys were found to be missing on 6/5

martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg

Wagner states that the last time oj was at Bundy was on 6/4 6/5/ and he did not go inside the condo.

That faye had moved in on 6/3 and that the keys were found to be missing on 6/5

martin II Not sure I'm following you. The fact is he had Nicole's house keys on him and she had told family and friends that her house keys were missing and she was afraid he had them.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
But Orenthal wasn't suppose to have any -- guess that's the bottom line.

FBG
What reliable person said that nicole thought that oj had stolen the keys. faye?

how do we now that nicole had not given oj a key previously when they were more kissy kissy?

If oj had used that key to enter the back gate to kill nicole do you honestly think that he would keep the key in his posession? you think he tossed the shoes and knife someplace why save the key and give it to lapd when he surrendered.
martin II

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by martin II
why save the key and give it to lapd when he surrendered.
martin II He didn't give LE the key -- LOL -- it was in his bag of goodies. You know, the disguise, the passport, the money, the change of underwear.

[weepy willa]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg
wagner

So, on June 17th Simpson had a key that would open Nicole's gates and one presumes that he also had that key on the 12th, since one can only think of the most bizarre ways in which he would have acquired it between the 12th and the 17th. (According to Petrocelli, Simpson himself (sort of) claimed that he got it from Cowlings, who had helped Lou Brown clean out the condo after the murders. That is, I think an example of a bizarre explanation.) If he executed a deliberate plan to murder Nicole on the night of the 12th, I can not imagine that he would not have used the key, and entered her property by unlocking and walking through the back gate.

On the other hand, if as I believe, Simpson was lured to the Bundy location by an unexpected but urgent phone call at 10:20 on the night of the 12th, he would have gone without any pre-planning. He would have grabbed what he thought he needed and flown. If the key was already in his pocket when he arrived at Bundy -- and if he realized he had it -- he would
have used it.

But, the details of the missing key story are weird. The tale on pps 210 and 211 of Lange and Vannatter's book and footnote #106 say: According to her housekeeper, Nicole kept her keys -- house keys and car keys -- on a peg in the kitchen, and found them missing from there on the 4th or 5th. (Simpson's last visit that we know of, and at which time he did not enter the house, was on the 5th. Resnick started living there on the 3rd, although this is misstated in L&V.) Those keys were apparently still missing on the night of the 8th when Nicole searched Faye's purse at the intervention session on Mulholland. Juditha Brown (according to L&V) says that Nicole told her "an extra set of two keys" was missing. This is somewhat different than the set of all of Nicole's personal keys. Then Vannatter and Lange tell us that what they found in the recovered items from the Bronco after the low speed chase was "a second set of two keys," which is similar to the description given by Juditha Brown, and different from the description given by Nicole's housekeeper ("keys on a peg in the kitchen.") Petrocelli's description (p. 537) is slightly different, the police recovered "[the key, singular] on its Smokey the Bear key ring, in his bag.) Finally, in her book, Resnick tells a somewhat different story yet (from a drug hazed recollection, I am sure) that there were four keys to the condo; she accounts for three of them, and says that the spare was kept in the drawer of a front hall table, and that was missing when Nicole wanted to give it to her during her stay.

I do not go through all of this detail to claim that anybody is lying or there is any doubt that Simpson had the key, but only to show that I have an understandable reason for being confused on just what key disappeared, and when. I know this does not matter to most people, ("He had the key, who cares where it came from?")
hope this helps
martin II

What urgent phone call? The police called O.J.in Chicago to tell him Nicole was dead. What lured O.J. to Nicole's was the fact he was doing his usual spying on her ,and Ron walked up the walkway. When people visit their ex's do they usually have a knife on them?

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by nettathirty



WOW!

Yes indeed, "WOW" is exactly what came to mind when I read your original response to my post.

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



WOW! Yes, I was impressed too. She sounds like a pretty smart lady doesn't she?

[martin II]

Originally posted by Kate Sachel


Not a logical argument. The exact same type of confusion happens when people with agendas who don't want the truth to be known testify in depositions under oath with no regard for the law, but rather only self serving ideals.

sounds like Mazolla Fung and Paratis to name a few.

martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snip* You crack me up -- you ask me for a link to something I quoted and then print the article and say to me, "hope this helps."

after i asked for the link i look and found it. thanks anyway
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by martin II


after i asked for the link i look and found it. thanks anyway
martin II

fbg
i said i hope it helps because what you posted was not wagners final opinion on oj entering the bundy property by the back gate.

i felt a addition to your post of wagner was needed. otherwise you would be giving false reports of his position.
martin II

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by martin II


sounds like Mazolla Fung and Paratis to name a few.

martin II

And also Al Cowlings, OJ Simpson, Christian Reichardt ...

and the list goes on.

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by nettathirty



socal (spin) diva

You are spinning his words, you know what he meant and what you are trying to imply are two different thing!

btw: How was the wedding, glad you made it home safely!

There is no spinning, which you can clearly see if you go back to his post.

He blatantly told me that I would not understand because it is a "black thing". Please stop making excuses.

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Kay:

I'm probably way off on this, but because I'm black, OJ, your X and his family are black.. I would have to assume the similarity ends right about there (we're all black)!

With that being said, how in the "hail" would I know what their rationale is, or tolerance level should be! I get so sick and tired of all black people being represented by 1 black person! If you want to know what the majority opinion is, ask the majority!

Me personally and for my family we have ZERO TOLERANCE!

netta

I think that anyone that uses the n work should be corrected on the spot if there is a fair, unbiased pearson in hearing distance.

I know it is not accepted by anyone in my family or people that we know.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
i said i hope it helps because what you posted was not wagners final opinion on oj entering the bundy property by the back gate.

i felt a addition to your post of wagner was needed. otherwise you would be giving false reports of his position.
martin II Was that your interpretation of his statement? Hmmm

[martin II]

Originally posted by Kate Sachel


And also Al Cowlings, OJ Simpson, Christian Reichardt ...

and the list goes on.

FUNG, Mazzola and Paratis lied about the evidence that was suppose to have supported the DNA. that is why the jury did not believe them. that is what caused reasonable doubt.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
i said i hope it helps because what you posted was not wagners final opinion on oj entering the bundy property by the back gate.

i felt a addition to your post of wagner was needed. otherwise you would be giving false reports of his position.
martin II Are you goofy or what? What part of this did I misinform on? "If he executed a deliberate plan to murder Nicole on the night of the 12th, I can not imagine that he would not have used the key, and entered her property by unlocking and walking through the back gate.

On the other hand, if as I believe, Simpson was lured to the Bundy location by an unexpected but urgent phone call at 10:20 on the night of the 12th, he would have gone without any pre-planning. He would have grabbed what he thought he needed and flown. If the key was already in his pocket when he arrived at Bundy -- and if he realized he had it -- he would
have used it."

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Was that your interpretation of his statement? Hmmm
wagner
On the other hand, if as I believe, Simpson was lured to the Bundy location by an unexpected but urgent phone call at 10:20 on the night of the 12th, he would have gone without any pre-planning. He would have grabbed what he thought he needed and flown. If the key was already in his pocket when he arrived at Bundy -- and if he realized he had it -- he would
have used it.
martin

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


FUNG, Mazzola and Paratis lied about the evidence that was suppose to have supported the DNA. that is why the jury did not believe them. that is what caused reasonable doubt.
martin II Oh please -- the jury said they didn't consider the DNA evidence. They didn't understand it so they took the low road and didn't consider it.

[martin II]

Originally posted by Kate Sachel


There is no spinning, which you can clearly see if you go back to his post.

He blatantly told me that I would not understand because it is a "black thing". Please stop making excuses.

kate

i gave you 2-3 suggestions as to what the juror that gave the fist could have meant. you rejected my suggestion of hi (and i guess the others) as laughable.
so tell me what you think or know what he meant?
martinII

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Oh please -- the jury said they didn't consider the DNA evidence. They didn't understand it so they took the low road and didn't consider it.
fbg
maby you need to read some of THEIR books to understand their positions instead of media one liners.
martin II

[martin II]

fbg

some posters here have posted that oj did not even have the keys to the rockingham gate when he was supposed to have left rockingham and that is the reason they belive he had to jump over the neighbors fense to get on his property. but you belive he carried nicoles key on himself all the time.

do you now know who many keys there were and who had them?
marinII

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Oh please -- the jury said they didn't consider the DNA evidence. They didn't understand it so they took the low road and didn't consider it.

The "JURY" said no such thing.
MARTIN II

[martin II]

fbg

wagner
"If the key was already in his pocket when he arrived at Bundy -- and if he realized he had it -- he would
have used it. "

now you can show me that oj had the key in his pocket when he went to bundy.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg

some posters here have posted that oj did not even have the keys to the rockingham gate when he was supposed to have left rockingham and that is the reason they belive he had to jump over the neighbors fense to get on his property. but you belive he carried nicoles key on himself all the time.

do you now know who many keys there were and who had them?
marinII I don't know any poster who thinks Orenthal jumped his fence because he didn't have the gate key with him -- where in the world do you come up with this stuff? I believe most thinking people understand that he didn't open the Rockingham gate because it would have been heard by the limo driver.

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


The "JURY" said no such thing.
MARTIN II Yep, they did.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I don't know any poster who thinks Orenthal jumped his fence because he didn't have the gate key with him -- where in the world do you come up with this stuff? I believe most thinking people understand that he didn't open the Rockingham gate because it would have been heard by the limo driver.

fbg

ask bob if he thinks oj had the rockingham gate key when he arrived.

1. in order to enter the rockingham gate one only had to open it
a foot or two manually.
2. so why would oj go over the the neighbors property and back
to the fense to jum over it.
that is what makes no sense.


A Park did not hear anything as he was in the limo when it is thought that the bronco arrived at the rockingham gate so who would have heard the gate IF it had been opened all the way.
MARTIN II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Oh please -- the jury said they didn't consider the DNA evidence. They didn't understand it so they took the low road and didn't consider it.

fbg

i think that the jury sat through 9 months of testimony about dna and other evidence. heard all the testimony.Direct and cross. looked into the eyes of witnesses and made a decision on who they belived and who they did not.
As far as the deliberating time by the jury:

as a writer said

"The pregnacy was long over due, the delivery was short"
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I would think the problem with the keys and the removed locks would be establishing that those were the locks from Nicole's condo. I can see it now, "LE planted that lock to make Orenthal look guilty." Oy-vay!

Here we are back to common sense again! My house keys open my front AND back doors. Not a very far stretch for bobaugust to make the same assumption.

fbg
do you believe that locks for a front door would be the same type lock that would be used on a outside iron gate?

ps
the idea of having one key to fit ALL doors to the house, front and back gate and the garage does not seem like good idea. imo
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty




Both trial transcripts have very differing subject matter!

m clarke got really pissed at Kato because he forgot and became confused about what she had coached him to say on the stand.imo
martin II

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by 2L8 4A D8


Good question GG. I also would like to know if she was sleeping over, why did her parents come and pick her up and take her home? Just curious!

Hi 2l8

thats another good question....from what I have read,
this little girl was suppose to sleep over, but something happened & she went home ...

however I am just curious if OJ called b4 she left or after?

please let me know if u hear anything....

Thanks GoatGirl
:seeya:

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by socaldiva


IIRC, there was a change in plans. The friend did not come over that night.

Socal,

sorry I posted b4 I saw your reply.

I thought that little girl was with them when they went dinner & ice cream, & that she went back to Bundy where her father picked her up?

is that not correct?

Thank GoatGril
:seeya:

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by socaldiva


No problem. My recollection is that she didn't come over at all that evening, but I could be wrong.

BTW, my local news just announced that Denise Brown has new revelations about her Sisters murder. I wonder what that is about?

Hi Socal

I could be wrong as well :)

is there some sort of special that Denise will be on to discuss this?
if so please share.....

I have a recent video clip of Nicoles grave, the family arranged a huge cross made out of flowers over her resting spot, it was really pretty.

PM me if anyone wants the link:)

GoatGirl

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Wonder who else had keys? Orenthal wasn't suppose to have any keys to her home -- If one of the sets was the missing keys (and it was proven to be by the key chain), then where did the other set come from?

hello ...

I could be wrong, but you guys got me thinking....

my understanding there were 4 sets of keys...

Nicole had one.

Cora had one.

Faye got one.

and the missing set....


GoatGirl

:seeya:

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by socaldiva


I think it's just going to be a small portion of the upcoming news. I will try & catch it & post. Hopefully it's something we haven't already heard a hundred times.


Hi Socal

that would be great if you can keep us updated!

Thanks :)

GoatGirl

[goatgirl]

~~RIP~~

Nicole & Ron

:rose:

GoatGirl

[martin II]

Originally posted by goatgirl


hello ...

I could be wrong, but you guys got me thinking....

my understanding there were 4 sets of keys...

Nicole had one.

Cora had one.

Faye got one.

and the missing set....


GoatGirl

:seeya:

goat girl

oj had one.

i think you are correct when you say faye GOT one.

martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
bob
furhman could have just told the truth. if he was disposed to do so. these excuses in his book are for reading and enjoyment by people like you that have a need to believe him. imo
martin II


martin, no Fuhrman's explanations of exactly what happened are to inform people of the facts. People like you who don't understand what happened or why only spewing the defense's distortions and lies are the ones who should be reading what Fuhrman wrote.

But then again you've never let the truth, the facts, or the reality of the evidence ever change your fanatic false opinions before so I doubt it they will now.

bobaugust

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by martin II


goat girl

oj had one.

i think you are correct when you say faye GOT one.

martin II


Hi Martin....

Faye talks about the keys in her book, she would have had a set since she was staying at the Bundy condo......

if OJ had a set, I am not sure how & why he would?

Goatgirl
:seeya:

[martin II]

Originally posted by goatgirl



Hi Martin....

Faye talks about the keys in her book, she would have had a set since she was staying at the Bundy condo......

if OJ had a set, I am not sure how & why he would?

Goatgirl
:seeya:

goat girl

it is reported that nicole searched fayes purse/room at the rehab for her keys and did not find them. dosent' mean she did not take them.
martin II

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by socaldiva
Looks like it was a false alarm. Denise was speaking today as it is 12 yrs to the day since the murders. She said that about a week ago she let go of her hatred of OJ & it feels great. Then she said that she thinks the timing of his Juice reality show is timed to take the focus away from Nicole (I don't buy that one) & she will do everything in her power to keep the focus on Nicole. It sounds to me as though she hasn't let go of much of anything :shrug:


Thanks Socal,

well I am sure she has alot of pain losing her sister like that, I am sure its hard to let go....

Thanks again for the update :)

Goatgirl

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by martin II


goat girl

it is reported that nicole searched fayes purse/room at the rehab for her keys and did not find them. dosent' mean she did not take them.
martin II

Hi martin

sorry I am not sure what you mean? are you saying that Nicole may have found the keys & took them?

thanks GoatGirl

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


or ONE key on a ring.

This confusion happens when people use books by people with agendas to try to understand what the truth is.

martin II


martin II, you are the one who is continuously confused. Maybe that comes from the fact that you use Dick Wagner's fantasies to argue points that even contradict your own supposed beliefs.

People who read books written by the key players understand the difference between an authors opinion and testimony. We also understand that a lot of unknown facts that never came out in the trials or the depositions were revealed. To dismiss them because they were written in a book because they contradict your fantasy beliefs is just another excuse by you to deny the truth of these murders.

Your problem is that you don't use anything to understand the truth of these murders except the fabrications, false accusations, and distortions the criminal defense offered. It's no wonder why your opinions are so screwed up.

bobaugust

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by socaldiva
Looks like it was a false alarm. Denise was speaking today as it is 12 yrs to the day since the murders. She said that about a week ago she let go of her hatred of OJ & it feels great. Then she said that she thinks the timing of his Juice reality show is timed to take the focus away from Nicole (I don't buy that one) & she will do everything in her power to keep the focus on Nicole. It sounds to me as though she hasn't let go of much of anything :shrug:

Hi Socal,


I did a search & came across these links, for anyone that wants to read the story:

http://www.insideedition.com/ourstories/inside_stories/story.aspx?storyid=241

imo I find it a tad strange that no one talked to the children yet about the murders ....

Goatgirl


:seeya:

[jotun]

O.J. IS INNOCENT!!!!!!!
Of this I am 99
% sure. No one can be 100% sure.Except the 2 victims
the 2-4 KILLERS and O.J.

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I remembered it but could never make a connect as to why he would have two sets on him. Nicole reported one set missing but nothing was said about where the second set could have come from. Wouldn't that be interesting to find out?

Could the second set have been duplicates that OJ had made so that he could slip the missing set of keys back to Nicole? Unfortunately, however, this never happened.

JMO and MOO!!

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


FUNG, Mazzola and Paratis lied about the evidence that was suppose to have supported the DNA. that is why the jury did not believe them. that is what caused reasonable doubt.
martin II



martin II, no Fung, Mazzola, and Peratis never lied. They were mistaken. That's not lying.

You evidently don't know what a lie is. These witnesses were sometimes mistaken and then corrected their mistakes. That's not lying.

On the other hand you continually make false accusations and post wrong and misinformation even repeating your false information after you've been corrected.. Since you never admit that you are mistaken or even correct your mistakes that makes what you say far more of a lie than anything any of these witness ever said.

The only one who thinks that's reasonable doubt is you, using it as another lame excuse to deny the truth.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg

ask bob if he thinks oj had the rockingham gate key when he arrived.

1. in order to enter the rockingham gate one only had to open it
a foot or two manually.
2. so why would oj go over the the neighbors property and back
to the fense to jum over it.
that is what makes no sense.


A Park did not hear anything as he was in the limo when it is thought that the bronco arrived at the rockingham gate so who would have heard the gate IF it had been opened all the way.
MARTIN II



martin II, you're wrong.

Park may have been in the Bronco when Simpson got back from Rockingham but Simpson didn't know that, nor did Simpson know when Park would have gotten out of the limo to ring the buzzer.

If Simpson had his master key on him, and there is no evidence that he did, and used it to open the Rockingham gate it would have activated the gate to automatically swing open all of the way, stay open for about 30 seconds and then automatically close.

Simpson would be taking the chance that the limo driver would have two opportunities to hear that gate. When it opened and when it closed. He was smart enough not to take that chance so he found another way to enter his property. Scaling his fence at it's lowest point. Behind the guest house.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty


MartinII

Now you have gone and done it, making the g's use common sense!



nettathirty, that's not common sense, that's stupidity.

Simpson didn't know if or when Allan Park was in his limo, or if and when Park was outside the limo, or if and when Park was ringing the gate buzzer. Simpson didn't even know who was driving the limo.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty




Both trial transcripts have very differing subject matter!


nettathirty, you're confused and wrong.

Kato Kaelin testified consistently to the same facts in the civil trial that he testified to previously. You seem to be confused because Kaelin testified in more detail than he previously did becuase he was asked more specific questions by attorneys than he was asked before.

A witness does not volunteer information. A witness answers questions. If Kaelin had been asked the same questions in the criminal trial that he was asked in the civil trial he would have given the same answers.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by goatgirl


Hi martin

sorry I am not sure what you mean? are you saying that Nicole may have found the keys & took them?

thanks GoatGirl
goat girl

no. It means that nicole did not find them in fayes possessions. but that does not mean that fay did not take them as nicole suspected. it just means that nicole, when she look did not find them in fayes things.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by goatgirl


hello ...

I could be wrong, but you guys got me thinking....

my understanding there were 4 sets of keys...

Nicole had one.

Cora had one.

Faye got one.

and the missing set....


GoatGirl

:seeya: Faye didn't have one and Nicole looked through Faye's purse during the intervention searching for the missing set.

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by martin II


kate

i gave you 2-3 suggestions as to what the juror that gave the fist could have meant. you rejected my suggestion of hi (and i guess the others) as laughable.
so tell me what you think or know what he meant?
martinII

I have advised you countless times that I have no way of "knowing" what he meant, but yes I can give you my best speculation.

From everything I have researched, and people I have spoken with, no matter what form of the "Black Power" fist you give the general meaning behind it is "Black Unity".

"Black Unity" is what I believe the juror was trying to convey. What I don't know, and will never know unless he were to advise, is whether or not he meant it in a positive way or a way that spoke of something deeper involving a thought process that shouldn't be part of our justice system.

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by nettathirty




Both trial transcripts have very differing subject matter!

Let us not forget OJ's plethora of lies.

Somehow those that choose to believe he is innocent love to rage on against the individuals for the prosecution whom they claim lied about this and that, all the while ignoring that the man who was proven to have lied the most is OJ Simpson himself.

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Kay:

I'm probably way off on this, but because I'm black, OJ, your X and his family are black.. I would have to assume the similarity ends right about there (we're all black)!

With that being said, how in the "hail" would I know what their rationale is, or tolerance level should be! I get so sick and tired of all black people being represented by 1 black person! If you want to know what the majority opinion is, ask the majority!

Me personally and for my family we have ZERO TOLERANCE!

This is the most frustrating part of reading your posts.

Honest to goodness, you take no heed to the fact that "martinII" loves to speak out on behalf of black people, claiming in several posts recently how this and that is a "black thing", but when Kay speaks out to share her experience with her ex and how he, his friends, and family use the "N" word you explode and act as though some type of cardinal sin has been committed.

Your family has a "zero tolernace" for the word. So what? Kay's point is that not all black people do. You accuse her of lumping them all together when the gist of her point was to show how they in fct are not all lumped together.

I know many black people that use the "N" word freely with one another and I know many who find it a disgrace no matter what the format.

I don't think this is a case of "majority rules".

[Kate Sachel]

There has been discussion over whether or not OJ actually fulfilled his sentence for his 1989 beating of Nicole, and I decided to research the issue a little further.

Here is what I found;

OJ was ordered to perform 120 hours of community service through the Voluntary Action Bureau. He never bothered to report to the Voluntary Action Bureau which generally assigns individuals to trash clean up or cleaning bedpans at hospitals. Rather, he chose his own community service in organizing a fundraiser at the swank Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Laguna where he and Nicole owned a vacation home.

When back in court Judge Schoenberg was displeased with OJ's apparent disregard for his sentencing. When OJ tried to explain what he had done, the Judge interrupted him and stated "I understand that you are used to talking to people that are interested in what results you have achieved but I am not interested. I am interested only in the hours you put in and the actual work that you did". The Judge expressed concern that in organizing this fundraiser Simpson had merely been doing "business as usual" rather than real community service work.

The Judge then suggested that OJ be required to so a more conventional form of community service just like any other individual who is sentenced, but OJ stated that he couldn't because he was moving to New York. The Judge then inquired as to what would happen with the weekly counseling that OJ was ordered to undergo as part of his sentence. The Judge ended up agreeing to allow OJ's counseling to occur over the telephone. It is not clear if that was ever completed.

This is why I laugh over the idea that anyone in law enforcement was out to get him. He was treated with nothing but deference in the above matter, and in every other scenario that I'm aware of.

He was allowed to come up with his form of community service, he was allowed to be counseled through a private psychologist rather than the customary group counseling sessions for batterers that every other individual is required to attend, he was allowed to have his counseling done over the telephone.

No wonder this man thinks he can get away with anything. Everyone in society has always allowed him to believe that he can.

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg

wagner
"If the key was already in his pocket when he arrived at Bundy -- and if he realized he had it -- he would
have used it. "

now you can show me that oj had the key in his pocket when he went to bundy.
martin II You're quoting wagner and asking me to supply support for his statements? Please. :lol:

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


I doubt they used their own ideas or words for the book(s). They weren't very smart you know. I was thinking coloring books maybe?

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg

ask bob if he thinks oj had the rockingham gate key when he arrived.

1. in order to enter the rockingham gate one only had to open it
a foot or two manually.
2. so why would oj go over the the neighbors property and back
to the fense to jum over it.
that is what makes no sense.


A Park did not hear anything as he was in the limo when it is thought that the bronco arrived at the rockingham gate so who would have heard the gate IF it had been opened all the way.
MARTIN II IIRC, the gate was hydraulic and altough it could be opened manually it could not be opened partially.

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty


MartinII

Now you have gone and done it, making the g's use common sense! You two are funny. The fact that Park did not hear the gate supports the scenario that Orenthal jumped the fence -- right where Kato heard the noise and right where the glove was found.

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Socaldiva,

How many of the prosecution witnesses gave VERY differing accounts, not any of the defense did that! Orenthal did.

[martin II]

bob
do you agree that the rockingham gate could be opened manually
1-2 feet to allow a person to pass?
martin II

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by goatgirl


Hi 2l8

thats another good question....from what I have read,
this little girl was suppose to sleep over, but something happened & she went home ...

however I am just curious if OJ called b4 she left or after?

please let me know if u hear anything....

Thanks GoatGirl
:seeya:

She did come over and spend the night. Rachel Berman is the little girls name.

"Now, you've heard, and I don't disagree with the representations that
were made by Mr. Petrocelli relative to what was happening over at 875
south Bundy. Except at 9:00 around 9:15, a Mr. Robert Berman came to
pick up Rachel Berman.

You recall I said Rachel Berman was Sydney's friend and apparently
plans had changed. Instead of spending the night at 875, she was going
home and she was picked up by her father. Her father talked to Nicole
for about 15 minutes."



"You can see how incessantly he's trying to get in touch with
Paula. By the way, at 8:55 -- can you put that up -- he called his
message machine again, retrieved a phone call from Paula. 8:55. Can
you show the numbers? Not only 6:56, but 8:55, two times. God knows
what went through his mind when he hung up on that phone call. Then
he calls Nicole immediately, he said, at 9 o'clock. We don't see
phone calls from him to Nicole because we don't have local phone
call records. We don't know how many times he called her. We don't
know how long they spoke. The only thing we have, ladies and
gentlemen, the only thing we have to tell us what contact he had
with her is him. Nothing else, just his words. So what does he say
about the 9 o'clock phone call? Oh, he just called to congratulate
Sydney and say let's go to Knott's Berry Farm. He said he had
absolutely no conversation with Nicole at all, no argument, nothing.
In fact, they didn't talk, he said. He said, can I speak to Sydney,
is she asleep, or words to that effect. Sydney takes the phone. And
he hangs up after he speaks to his daughter and that's the end of
the call. That's what he says. There's nobody here to contradict
that."

both of these are from ... http://walraven.org/simpson/simpson.html

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg

i think that the jury sat through 9 months of testimony about dna and other evidence. heard all the testimony.Direct and cross. looked into the eyes of witnesses and made a decision on who they belived and who they did not.
As far as the deliberating time by the jury:

as a writer said

"The pregnacy was long over due, the delivery was short"
martin II I wasn't upset by the amount of time it took the jury to deliberate. It was obvious from their statements after the trial that they were incapable of deliberating anything harder than a menu. They ignored all of the evidence at Bundy -- even though one drop of Orenthal's blood was something like 1 in 70 million that it belonged to him. They ignored hair, cap, glove, footprints and fibers. They ignored the evidence of long term, continuing and escalating domestic abuse. In other words, they didn't consider the evidence of the crime. They could not see past the color of the defendant. They were an unedcated and biased group that did a terrible disservice to Nicole, Ron and their families as well as the justice system.

[tazzybaby]

It seems that after talking to Sydney he goes to McDonalds. He seemed quiet and in thought around Kato. I believe that he would have went straight to Nicole's had Kato not came with him. Did Nicole decide that Rachel couldn't spend the night after that phone call? Or had she already decided that she was going home?

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
do you believe that locks for a front door would be the same type lock that would be used on a outside iron gate?

ps
the idea of having one key to fit ALL doors to the house, front and back gate and the garage does not seem like good idea. imo
martin II If all were deadbolts -- yes, I do believe the same key would fit all. In fact, it would make sense.

I assume you do not live in a house. I've never been in a house that has different keys for the different doors to get in.

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


goat girl

it is reported that nicole searched fayes purse/room at the rehab for her keys and did not find them. dosent' mean she did not take them.
martin II Nicole searched faye's purse (not her room at the rehab) and it was during the intervention. Geez! :punch:

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II

goat girl

no. It means that nicole did not find them in fayes possessions. but that does not mean that fay did not take them as nicole suspected. it just means that nicole, when she look did not find them in fayes things.
martin II All of this to say that the missing keys were found in Orenthal's get-away bag along with his passport, money, disguise and change of underwear. Oh, yeah, I almost forgot the prescription under someone else's mother's name. :D

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Thanks Goatgirl. I don't understand not talking about it either. Heck, I'd be the last person to bring it up if I was Orenthal. :D

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by bobaugust
If Simpson had his master key on him, and there is no evidence that he did, and used it to open the Rockingham gate it would have activated the gate to automatically swing open all of the way, stay open for about 30 seconds and then automatically close. The blood drops going down the center of the drive prove that he did not and could not have gone through the gate with it partially opened.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by socaldiva
It sounds to me as though she hasn't let go of much of anything :shrug: I'm sure it's a very hard thing to let go of. Especially with the murderer continuing to show up in the news doing such stupid things. Besides, I'm still pizzed at the boy who dumped me in junior high! :D

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II

goat girl

no. It means that nicole did not find them in fayes possessions. but that does not mean that fay did not take them as nicole suspected. it just means that nicole, when she look did not find them in fayes things. martin II Orenthal stole them.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by tazzybaby
She did come over and spend the night. Rachel Berman is the little girls name. Thank you.

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by martin II


The "JURY" said no such thing.
MARTIN II

Yes, in fact one of them did. One of the woman jurors said that she didn't understand the DNA but didn't feel it was important.

I posted a link to this sometime back.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by tazzybaby
It seems that after talking to Sydney he goes to McDonalds. He seemed quiet and in thought around Kato. Except for when he was ranting and raving about how Nicole was dressed at the recital. And then there was the part where he had Kato call the girl from the naked pictures and tried to hit on her -- I guess someone could interpret that as Orenthal being quiet and reflective. :D

[weezer]

excerpt from John Kelly opening statement:

On June 7, you're also going to hear that Nicole realized that the keys to her condominium were missing, that Mr. Simpson had been there the day before, and on June 7, the keys that she kept in her kitchen to give access to the property and her home
were missing; she couldn't find them. You'll hear that a search was conducted of the entire house, under furniture, everywhere, and Nicole was telling everybody of her panic because the keys to her condominium were missing.

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


I wonder why he was in the house. I rememer hearing that she was sick around that time & he was tending to her (well that was his pretense, anyway. I know that wasn't he real motive for being there), but I don't recall how close the time frame was to the murder. I'm going to go do my research on it but I believe (IIRC) that he went by the house to work on Justin's electronic game.

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Like Orenthal is an electronics wizard

I was just looking in Toobin's book & couldn't find anything :mad: I think I remember the timeline from Orenthal's civil deposition. Maybe -- :confused:

[weezer]

Excerpt from Bob Baker's opening statement in civil trial:

"And O.J. agreed, as I suggested just before the break to a trial, at reconciliation and that trial had limitations on it. It had conditions on it. The conditions would last one year. And after
one year, if it worked out, she could move back into the house and they would be remarried. But as I suggested he did not want his children uprooted, moved into the house and then possibly moved out of the house."

Is it just me or does it seem 'odd' that he would be concerned about the kids moving back to their own home?

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Thanks for the info Tazzy. I did recall there was a change of plans, but didn't remember that Syndey's friend was over at all that evening. Thanks for clearing it up.

Your Welcome!

:seeya:

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Excerpt from Bob Baker's opening statement in civil trial:

"And O.J. agreed, as I suggested just before the break to a trial, at reconciliation and that trial had limitations on it. It had conditions on it. The conditions would last one year. And after
one year, if it worked out, she could move back into the house and they would be remarried. But as I suggested he did not want his children uprooted, moved into the house and then possibly moved out of the house."

Is it just me or does it seem 'odd' that he would be concerned about the kids moving back to their own home?

Hi Fbg,

What seems odd to me is that he would say that he didn't want them uprooted but then turn around and turn her in to the IRS so she would have no choice but to move. So, I guess it depends on what he wants as to whether he's concerned about the children being uprooted. What a great dad.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by tazzybaby
What seems odd to me is that he would say that he didn't want them uprooted but then turn around and turn her in to the IRS so she would have no choice but to move. All part of his controlling, raging personality. He sent the threat of the IRS letter and then the letter telling her she couldn't use his housekeeper to help with the kids. I always thought the letter about babysitting the kids was kind of crappy since he was gone most of the time and was at best an absentee dad.

[weezer]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I'm going to go do my research on it but I believe (IIRC) that he went by the house to work on Justin's electronic game. Ok, found in Orenthal's civil deposition where he talks about being at Bundy on the 7-8 to pick up the dog chachi and the dog kato got out and he had to chase the dog and bring it back to the yard, and Faye was there babbling and . . . . .

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Ok, thanks for looking. I wonder why he went in the house if he was just there to pick up the dog..... He says he didn't go in the house -- just was out in the yard. Thought he saw Nicole inside the front door but they didn't speak to each other. I think Petrocelli/Kelly were trying to get him to commit to the last time he was on the property because they were asking him about whether or not he was bleeding, etc.

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


But I wonder how he managed to get the keys that day?? Maybe it wasn't that day?

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


But I wonder how he managed to get the keys that day?? Okay -- looks like he was there two days before that also: Q: And when was the time before that occasion when you were last
at the Bundy property?

A: In the Bundy--in Bundy?

Q: Yes. On the property or in the house.

A: June 4th.

[weezer]

Excerpt from Orenthal's civil deposition regarding dates he was at Bundy before the murders:

Q: What happened on June 4 that caused you to be on the
property?

A: I had to look at my son's Nintendo setup.

Q: That was in the house?

A: Yeah. Q: And how did you access the property on that
occasion?

A: I came. I blew the horn. Justin was with me. I blew the horn,
Nicole opened the garage, and we came up through the garage,
went to his room looked at his setup and went back down the stairs
and went back out the garage and left

[weezer]

More excerpt from Orenthal's civil deposition:

Q: Did you converse with Nicole that occasion?

A: On the 4th, no.

Q: Was she there?

A: Yeah.

Q: Did you see her?

A: No.

So, they weren't talking on the 4th either.

[weezer]

The 4th was probably the day he took the keys. Excerpts from his deposition:

Q: How do you know she was home?

A: Jason--Justin ran in her room, and she was in bed and they were
talking, and you have to go by the door of her room, and I heard
them talking as I went to his room. You have to walk by her room
to get to his room.

Q: Justin came with you?

A: Yes.

Q: And then he left with you?

A: Yes.

Q: Was there anybody else home with Nicole?

A: Not that I know of.

[martin II]

fbg
you may want to review this:

1. The Rockingham gate made very little noise when opened fully.
2. The rockingham gate could be opened using the PHYSICAL
MODE without a key, for a person to pass through.

simpson released the spring on the lock latch, pushed the gate
open the gate enough to pass through and then pushed it
back.

simpson never walked around to the Salingers property
and jumped over any fense.

martin II

http://www.wagnerandson.com/oj/gaterock.htm

Simpson is talking constantly during his traverses through the gate, and so it is possible to evaluate the sound made by the gate. In no case does it interfere with Simpson's talking, and generally it is not even noticeable, unless one deliberately listens for it. When Simpson opens the gate upon going out there might have been a slight whisper, as though the gate was brushing against some of the foliage by the edge of the gate.

After lecturing from the street, Simpson returns to the gate, which now appears to be securely closed, and opens it -- again without a key -- in Figure 21 [RGATE4.JPG]. This time there appears to be a slight click or rattle, but one could not hear that sound from the garage, I am sure, and it certainly could not be heard from the front porch where Park and Kato were during the time the limo was being loaded.

Simpson's statement that he seldom locked his gates before the crime needs some qualification. The gates were apparently locked on Rockingham on the morning after the crime, and the fact caused the police to send Fuhrman over the wall to open the gate from the inside and admit the others. It is possible that Simpson meant that in his pre-crime routine he usually left the gates open during the daytime, but locked them at night. Or, maybe he left the gates locked when he was out of town (as he also had the special precaution of having Gigi stay at the house overnight when he was away). However, once the gate was unlocked (or perhaps simply opened from the inside) it could be freely entered until locked again. We know this because Fuhrman tells us in his book that cops were easily going through that gate all of Monday morning.

RELEVANCE: It has been asserted in discussions in AFOJS that the only mode of operation for the gate was the powered mode in which a motor and hydraulic system in a box beside the driveway opened the gate upon an electric command. This command could be generated at the box, by a key from the outside on the gate pilaster, or by buttons on the intercom panels in the house. In any event, it was further asserted that the operation of the powered mode would have been loud enough that Park would have heard it from the Ashford gate while he was waiting for someone to let him in if Simpson came home through the Rockingham gate at 10:45, and it was also alleged that Simpson could not have (as he asserts) "gone out to his Bronco briefly" at about 11:10 while Kato and Park were near the front porch. It was argued than any such operation of the gate would have been heard.

It has also been asserted that Simpson made the trip to Bundy without his house keys, and so -- with the Rockingham gate locked when he left -- he would not be able to get back in. The simple observation of the tape show that all of these ideas are false. There was a physical method of using the gate whereby it was essentially silent, and it could be opened without a key.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by martin II
fbg
you may want to review this: Are you kidding me? You want me to take as truth Orenthal operating and talking about the gates at Rockingham months after the night of the murders?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
bob
do you agree that the rockingham gate could be opened manually
1-2 feet to allow a person to pass?
martin II



martin II, yes the gate could be put in a manual mode, but not with a key from the outside the gate.

When Wagner learned about this he changed his scenario suggesting Simpson anticipated some kind of problem before he left Rockingham and turned the Rockingham gate off putting it in a manual mode so that he could silently open it when he returned.

The fact is that Simpson's blood drops just outside and just inside the Rockingham gate prove Simpson didn't do that just as they prove Simpson didn't enter that gate by activating it electrically. If the gate was in the manual mode it didn't change the way gate opened, from one side. Simpson would only have had to open the gate enough to walk through on the left side of his driveway. He would not have been in any position to drip blood on the center of his driveway.

That fact destroyed Wagner's fantasy so he made up some ridiculous story that after Simpson entered his estate he went to the center of the driveway and stood and supposedly listened to see if he was somehow being seen or heard entering. Just more unrealistic fantasy from Wagner who would created his own explanations no matter how stupid, dumb, or unlikely so he could keep his failed scenario beliefs going. Sort of like you and your many excuses you use to deny the truth.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snip* All part of his controlling, raging personality. He sent the threat of the IRS letter and then the letter telling her she couldn't use his housekeeper to help with the kids. I always thought the letter about babysitting the kids was kind of crappy since he was gone most of the time and was at best an absentee dad.

weezer

Some men and women have work requirements that afford them millions of dollars to support the accepted lifestyle of their families.

Often times this requires a great deal of traveling by either party.

it seems to me that oj was deeply involved in his children's life and his work schedule (travel) gave them and nicole a secure financial lifestyle.
so how does he get to be called a absentee dad??

MARTIN II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


weezer

Some men and women have work requirements that afford them millions of dollars to support the accepted lifestyle of their families.

Often times this requires a great deal of traveling by either party.

it seems to me that oj was deeply involved in his children's life and his work schedule (travel) gave them and nicole a secure financial lifestyle.
so how does he get to be called a absentee dad??

MARTIN II Family and friends called him an absentee dad. When exactly did you think he was around? He traveled for Hertz, he traveled for the movies, he played golf everyday of his life, and he dated (didn't Paula spend the night with him on that Friday?) The fact that he mssed Sydney's first communion sums up his involvement in his children. MOO

[martin II]

bob

I can understand why you have this negative thing for Wagner considering that he gave you and some of your theories a few (DUST UPS) on his web site about the oj trial.

Too bad he is not still around to respond to some of your hits on him personally and his work.
martin II

[weezer]

So he knew the keys opened the front gate and door but doesn't mention the back gate.

Q: What were they keys to?

A: Her car, her house, whatever.

Q: Which keys would you use to access what locks on what doors?

A: As far as I knew, it was one key that accessed the gate and the front door.

Q: Same key?

A: As far as I knew, yes.

Q: Worked for both the gate and the front door?

A: Yes.

Q: Which gate are you referring to?

A: In the front of the house.

Q: And that's a key that you can specifically recall using to enter
the front gate and the front door?

A: And the exit also, yeah.

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
bob

I can understand why you have this negative thing for Wagner considering that he gave you and some of your theories a few (DUST UPS) on his web site about the oj trial.

Too bad he is not still around to respond to some of your hits on him personally and his work.
martin II This is uncalled for. The theories that wagner came up with have been proven wrong with the passage of time and discovery of more evidence and facts to the crime and case. Besides, when facts/evidence were pointed out to him as contradicting his theories, he'd change his scenario to accommodate the new found facts BUT he only made broader strokes which makes him sound like a whacko.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
bob

I can understand why you have this negative thing for Wagner considering that he gave you and some of your theories a few (DUST UPS) on his web site about the oj trial.

Too bad he is not still around to respond to some of your hits on him personally and his work.
martin II


martin II, yes it is too bad Dick is still not around.

I would think that by this time he would have had to change his scenario so many times that he either would have faced the reality that it failed or that it would have been obvious to even someone like you that it made no sense.

And if Dick was still around maybe he would have had the opportunity to go back to his articles and correct the many mistakes he made in his references to what he wrote I said. Dick was always so busy changing his scenario as he went along he never took the time to correct the errors that you are now reading and believing. Dick attributed things to me that I never said, sort of like you do.

It's funny who you quote him so much despite the fact that his fantasies contradict your beliefs.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snip* Are you kidding me? You want me to take as truth Orenthal operating and talking about the gates at Rockingham months after the night of the murders?

no i would not expect you to.

i would expect some posters that are open minded enough to review what you THINK about the gate opening and compare it to the experiement wagner carried out. and then decide what they belive.

But the fact of the matter is you don't know what the he** you are talking about as it relates to the rockingham gate.

The sad part for you is that you think you know.

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Do you think he is talking about the back gate here? or is he talking about needing the key to exit out of the front gate? I did the same thing when I first read it but he goes on to say exit out the same way you would come in -- front door and front gate. He NEVER mentions the back gate. In fact, when he talks about coming in the back of the condo, he talks about coming in through the garage.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
So he knew the keys opened the front gate and door but doesn't mention the back gate.

Q: What were they keys to?

A: Her car, her house, whatever.

Q: Which keys would you use to access what locks on what doors?

A: As far as I knew, it was one key that accessed the gate and the front door.

Q: Same key?

A: As far as I knew, yes.

Q: Worked for both the gate and the front door?

A: Yes.

Q: Which gate are you referring to?

A: In the front of the house.

Q: And that's a key that you can specifically recall using to enter
the front gate and the front door?

A: And the exit also, yeah.


fbgweezer, good job.

But who is testifying and what's the date of the testimony.

bobaugust

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by martin II
i would expect some posters that are open minded enough to review what you THINK about the gate opening and compare it to the experiement wagner carried out. and then decide what they belive. wagner didn't carry out an experiment -- he watched Orenthal's video for goodness sake. :punch:

[weezer]

Originally posted by bobaugust



fbgweezer, good job.

But who is testifying and what's the date of the testimony.

bobaugust Videotaped deposition of ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, taken on behalf of the plaintiffs, at 11377 West Olympic Boulevard, 10th Floor, Los Angeles, California, commencing at 9:40 a.m., on Monday, January 22, 1996, before David S. Coleman, CSR #4613, pursuant to Court Order.

http://www.courttv.com/archive/casefiles/simpson/documents/depositions/oj02.html

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snip* wagner didn't carry out an experiment -- he watched Orenthal's video for goodness sake. :punch:


fbgweezer, that's right.

There is no evidence that when the key was used outside the gate it could be used to put the gate in the manual mode.

September 23, 1996 Simpson

Q: Okay. And you closed the door?
A: Yes.
Q: And how did you get back into the property?
A: I think--I'm not sure. I'm not sure of this, but I think the gate had closed, and I used my key to open it, the gate.
Q: There is a key on the outside of the gate?
A: Yes.
Q: When you key it, the gate automatically opens again?
A: Yes.
Q: When that gate automatically opens at Rockingham, then when you press the button on the inside, let's say, does it then close after a certain amount of time?
A: Yes.
Q: What is that interval of time?
A: I don't know.
Q: Roughly.
A: 30, 40 seconds.
Q: It opens, it stays open for 30, 40 seconds and then closes?
A: Yes.

September 23, 1996

Q: The--Do you ever keep that gate on manual when you leave the
property?
A: It's not been my habit to, no.
Q: Have you ever done that?
A: I might have in my life, yes, but I don't recall when, other
than when we shot the video.
Q: Was the gate used to your knowledge in a manual mode on June 12?
A: I don't believe so. no.
Q: Are you sure about that?
A: I'm pretty sure about that, yes.
Q: You recall all of your trips out the Rockingham gate and in the
Rockingham gate, and do you think any of them occurred when the gate
was on manual mode?
A: No.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by Kate Sachel


Yes, in fact one of them did. One of the woman jurors said that she didn't understand the DNA but didn't feel it was important.

I posted a link to this sometime back.

KATE

One comment attributed to A juror member is not THE JURY.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


KATE

One comment attributed to A juror member is not THE JURY.
martin II One juror is the jury. The jury is considered one. When she spoke, she spoke for the jury. When the black power salute was given, it was given for the jury.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snip* wagner didn't carry out an experiment -- he watched Orenthal's video for goodness sake. :punch:

he watched what oj did on the tape and saw what happened in the manual mode with the gate. a key was not required to open it
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


he watched what oj did on the tape and saw what happened in the manual mode with the gate. a key was not required to open it
martin II Be careful that you don't fall into the same trap wagner did -- trying to adjust the theory to fit the evidence.

Did you read bobaugust's response to the gate question? He posted Orenthal's testimony:

Q: Was the gate used to your knowledge in a manual mode on June 12?
A: I don't believe so. no.
Q: Are you sure about that?
A: I'm pretty sure about that, yes.
Q: You recall all of your trips out the Rockingham gate and in the
Rockingham gate, and do you think any of them occurred when the gate
was on manual mode?
A: No.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
One juror is the jury. The jury is considered one. When she spoke, she spoke for the jury. When the black power salute was given, it was given for the jury.

you may think so.
jurors have different opinions about trial issues all the time and they express them AFTER the trial. look at that mj jury.they found him not guilty for different reasons.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by Kate Sachel


For me, one key opens the front, back, and garage door to my home.

there are two reasons why some people have different locks on the front, side or back doors of their homes.
1. if a key is lost you have to replace all the locks or cylinders.
2. If a bugular gets one key. he can take his pick as to which
entrance he may want to use to gain entrance.

martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


there are two reasons why some people have different locks on the front, side or back doors of their homes.
1. if a key is lost you have to replace all the locks or cylinders.
2. If a bugular gets one key. he can take his pick as to which
entrance he may want to use to gain entrance.

martin II How many different keys unlock your home?

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Family and friends called him an absentee dad. When exactly did you think he was around? He traveled for Hertz, he traveled for the movies, he played golf everyday of his life, and he dated (didn't Paula spend the night with him on that Friday?) The fact that he mssed Sydney's first communion sums up his involvement in his children. MOO

fbg

sounds like a man working very hard to support his family.

you sure can draw broad conclusions from media tit bits you pick up.

so i am sure you know all of his activities because you made all his appointments for him. in your mind.imo
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva
I'm not quoting that word, but that was rich. He really needs spell check :lol: I swear I NEVER picked up anything like that. :o

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by martin II
sounds like a man working very hard to support his family.
so i am sure you know all of his activities because you made all his appointments for him. in your mind.imo Sounds more like a man who thought he was the center of the universe. Isn't it funny that he had to spend all that time away from his family to support them but once he was found liable for the deaths and ordered to pay, all of a sudden he doesn't need to work?

I know his activities because I've read his testimony. You should try it. Maybe you'd quit disputing his stories. :D

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
How many different keys unlock your home?

FBG
Are you a bugular??

The one in mississippi has 4 door openings. 4 different locks and keys.
martin II

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Kate:

The poster made it perfectly clear, that it is more common among blacks to use the word.. You can try all you like to defend the statement, but you cannot, it's written. You might want to (re) R-E-A-D her post before you start defending what you think she might have meant!

Netta,

Here is Kay's post:

"My ex and current good friend Derrick, who is black, uses the "N" word constantly in his interaction with his friends and relatives. According to them, there is a derogatory manner in which to use it, and a manner that is acceptable. Quite frankly, I find it ludicrous. Either it's okay or it's not ... shouldn't matter when or how it's said."

It says nothing about it being "more common" as you state it does.

I will sit back now and wait for you to eat crow.

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


FBG
Are you a bugular??

The one in mississippi has 4 door openings. 4 different locks and keys.
martin II Must be a four-plex? :D

Thought you were in New York?

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



The Bundy Keys:

For those of us who believe OJ is the source of the evidence at Bundy: (shoe print - blood drops).. For the guilty, who believe OJ is the killer and managed to get rid of some evidence: (knife - shoe - clothing)..

Why would OJ keep those keys on his person for 5 days after the murder, all during the slow speed chase and his arrest?

He deposed on the shoes, but not the keys!
He deposed on the knife, but not the keys! (according 2 the G's)
He deposed on the clothing, but not the keys! "

netta
fbg just thought she would bring up the subject of some keys. oj having that key means nothing at all.
martinII

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Must be a four-plex? :D

Thought you were in New York?

one floor only.

who told you i was in new york?? have you seen me there?
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
netta
fbg just thought she would bring up the subject of some keys. oj having that key means nothing at all.martinII :punch: Of course it doesn't. Just like his blood, footprints, hair, cap, gloves and fibers at the murder scene don't "mean nothing."

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



9 Blacks
2 White
1 Hispanic

Are you sure, that was representative of all the jurors? Must have been because whenever you tell me to get over the verdict, you say the 'jury' spoke.

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



9 Blacks
2 White
1 Hispanic

Are you sure, that was representative of all the jurors?
nette
one of the white women believed furhman planted the glove.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by Kayleighjo


Does "narcissist" come to mind when you think of Simpson? :beer:

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by martin II
one floor only. LOL

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Must have been because whenever you tell me to get over the verdict, you say the 'jury' spoke.

that would be about the verdict results
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


What the hey is a bugular?:confused: I'm guessing it's one of those people that stop and pick up those "you know what" bits! :D

[weezer]

Originally posted by Kayleighjo


I think netta is AC and martin is OJ. :eek: LOL

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by nettathirty
MF lost that case for the prosecution, not because he was a racist. But because he was liar! MF didn't lose the prosecution case.

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Socaldiva, gimmeabreak

You never add anything, agreeing with every G on this board does not make you informed, pathetic maybe, confused probably, a joke most definately!

How about angry and VERY, VERY LONELY.
MARTIN ii

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



The Bundy Keys:


Why would OJ keep those keys on his person for 5 days after the murder, all during the slow speed chase and his arrest?




nettathirty, you will have to ask Simpson that question since he's the only one who knows the answer.

The facts are the facts.

Evidence Dismissed,
"Before Lange left the Brown's home, Juditha also tells him that Nicole had complained less than two weeks before the murders that an extra set of two keys to her house was missing . Each key fits both Nicole's front door and front gate. Nicole believed that Simpson has stolen them.

Within days after Lange's interview with the Brown family, while examining the times on the official property report seized from Cowlings Bronco on the night of Simpson's arrest, Lange and Vannatter focus on a second set of two keys found in Simpson's possession at the time of his arrest.

The two detectives open their official investigation of the extra set of keys shortly after Lange's June 22 interview with the Browns. Earlier, Lou Brown had told Lange that on Friday, June 17, he had changed the locks on her condominium and discarded the old locks and keys. Consequently, the old locks no longer exist, so the keys Simpson had cannot be checked.

However Lange and Vannatter obtain Nicole Brown's original key from Cora Fischman, one of Nicole's neighbors, who kept an extra set in case of an emergency. Using this key, Lange and Vannatter have a lock constructed which that key will fit.

Then, the detectives take the two keys in Simpson's possession and insert them in the newly constructed lock.

Both keys fit the lock perfectly. In fact, they are identical keys that would have fit all of the residential doors at Nicole Brown's home, as well as her front gate.

In other words Simpson had two identical keys to Nicole's front gate and front door in his possession at the time of his arrest. To Lange and Vannatter, this is even more damning evidence against Simpson."

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


netta
fbg just thought she would bring up the subject of some keys. oj having that key means nothing at all.
martinII


martin II, Nicole was missing a set of two keys that opened her front door and gate. She believed Simpson took them.

At the time of his arrest Simpson had in his possession a set of two keys that opened Nicole's front door and gate.

Simpson denied the had those keys testifying that they had probably been given to Cowlings by Lou Brown. Cowlings testified that never happened, that he never saw or ever had any of Nicole's keys.

Nicole was correct, Simpson had taken her keys and then he lied to cover it up, just like he lied to cover up the fact that he was at Bundy and killed both Ron and Nicole.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty




fbg,

He was charged with perjury, right! By all accounts at that point in the trial, the case should have been considered a mistrial! Any other judge, but Ito would have ended the trial at that point. I bet you cannot think of another case in American Justice, where the detective lied on the stand, and was found out!


nettathirty, the case should have been considered a mistrial when Ito changed his ruling and allowed the defense to ask Fuhrman questions about saying the N-word.

It was irrelevant and had absolutely nothing to do with Simpson's guilt or innocence. It was only used by the defense to fabricate false, unsupported, unproved, accusations of evidence planting to inflame and deceive the jury into ignoring the fact that all of the relevant physical evidence pointed to Simpson and only Simpson as the killer.

bobaugust

[goatgirl]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by tazzybaby
[B]

She did come over and spend the night. Rachel Berman is the little girls name.

"Now, you've heard, and I don't disagree with the representations that
were made by Mr. Petrocelli relative to what was happening over at 875
south Bundy. Except at 9:00 around 9:15, a Mr. Robert Berman came to pick up Rachel Berman.

*snip 4 space*

Thanks Tazzy, that was a great link!

looks like Robert Berman was the last person to see Nicole alive!

I dont ever recall hearing anything from him about Nicoles state of mind.... was she mad, sad, scared....?

it seems odd that the sleep over ended as well....

Thanks again
Goatgirl


:)

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Mr August

This makes OJ look even more guilty! He's got the keys, the passport, disguise, cash and a gun!

He was in the company of ALL his attorneys, and a doctor prior to the slow speed chase. I can't help but wonder, if they knew of these items in his possession! Why, would he knowingly have these things, that would support the claim of guilt against him!


It does not fit!



nettathirty, Simpson was under a huge amount of stress at the time.

It all became so overwhelming for him he actually considered committing suicide. Under those conditions he didn't think of covering up every little thing that later incriminated him.

As to anyone else knowing what he carried with him, I doubt if he told anyone. The only things some people knew about were his gun and his money.

The only thing this doesn't fit are your fantasy beliefs.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty


Mr August,

Does it sound like his lawyers prepared him for this question. Does it sound like the lawyers in the Criminal Trial prepared OJ for this question.

This points to OJs guilt! OJ gets rid of the shoes, and knife (if you believe he's the killer) yet he's carrying the keys to the home of his murdered ex wife, that he's being charged with her murder..

Dr Lee, says "something wrong"


nettathirty, Simpson gave those answers in response to questions during his deposition. No lawyers could prepare him for this. No one but Simpson knew those answers.

Your Dr. Lee saying "something wrong" is irrelevant.

Dr. Lee made that statement about one specific piece of evidence where some swathes of blood didn't dry the same as other swathes of blood. Hank Goldberg produced literature including experiments that explained based on how the swatches were put into test tubes to dry would account for why some remained wet and others dried.

Since than uninformed posters like yourself falsely apply Dr. Lee's words to anything and everything they don't understand.

The fact is that Simpson kept Nicole's keys. The fact that he discarded his shoes and knife and kept his sweat suit mean nothing except that's what he did. All killers make judgments about what evidence they destroy or hide or keep. Simpson kept the keys he took from Nicole. Only he can tell you why he either forgot to get rid of them or didn't even think about it.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty


Mr August,

The audio tape made it relevant, the disability claim made it relevant!


nettathirty, no it didn't.

Nothing Fuhrman said or did in the past had anything to do with Simpson's guilt or innocence.

The defense made unsupported, unproved claims of evidence planing and used race as a supposed motive for their false claims to inflame the jury and give them excuses to ignore the evidence that proved Simpson guilty. It was all bull crap but it worked on the jury.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Mr August

The issue of planting evidence on Non-white suspects and harrassing interracial couples, came from the tape!



nettathirty, the tape was fiction not reality.

The evidence was reality and the reality is that there wasn't any evidence planted in this case case. Not by Mark Fuhrman, not by anyone.

To believe Mark Fuhrman planted evidence without one single shred of evidence to support that claim except some tape he made creating a fictional screen play is as stupid as believing in aliens from outer space because you saw a movie about them. Period.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty




My theory is, OJ wanted to be found with those keys and his attorneys knew the implications. Maybe with the keys and the other items they were hoping to get a mistrial because they couldn't find a jury who hadn't heard about the case!


imo jmho moo


nettathirty, Simpson wanted to be found with those keys yet he denied he ever had them.

Simpson's attorneys knew the implications so much they never even talked about them.

That's funny. What are you smoking?

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Pay attention please, when the tapes were played in front of the jury and the allegation of racism came up. Nobody explained what the tapes represented not MF, Clark or Darden., during the Criminal Trial.

You said the screenwriter explained the tapes were fiction. I said she felt MF was a racist, and that is why she turned the tapes over to JC. Which contradicts your idea that she said the tapes were fictional..


nettathirty, you're wrong. McKinny consistently testified that the tapes were for a fictional screenplay. McKinny never testified she thought Fuhrman was a rac-st.

The defense found McKinny in North Carolina before the prosecutors did and went after her with a subpoena. The judge in North Carolina barely hid his contempt for the defense race strategy and denied the subpoena on the grounds that McKinny's tapes didn't constitute material evidence.

The defense appealed, the subpoena was granted and the tapes along with McKinny were on their way to California. It would be two weeks before the prosecution got the tapes to make their own transcripts.

Clark wrote what McKinny told the prosecutors.
"The racial epithets, she insisted, were used, "in the context of developing a story...It wasn't a biography of Mr. Fuhrman's life." She went on to say that these sessions gave her "information about ideas and feelings that some people might have about African Americans. I don't know that it reflects his feelings about African Americans."


August 29, 1995
MR. DARDEN: Okay. And after learning of Mark Fuhrman's testimony you did not contact the Defense, nor did you contact the D.A.'s office; is that right?
MS. MCKINNY: That is accurate.
MR. DARDEN: You didn't come forward with these tapes and the information you had?
MS. MCKINNY: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: And you didn't come forward immediately or within a few days of your learning of his testimony? Well, why didn't you come forward immediately?
MS. MCKINNY: The information on the tapes and the testimony on the tapes I felt does not directly exonerate Mr. Simpson and therefore I didn't have a responsibility to come forth with the information, and there are other people on the tapes and I wanted to protect their confidentiality and interviews they had given to me.

***
MR. DARDEN: Another reason that you didn't come forward immediately is because it was your view that there was nothing in those tapes that suggested to you that Mark Fuhrman planted evidence in this case; is that correct?
MS. MCKINNY: There was nothing to me that made me feel that Officer Fuhrman could have planted evidence in this particular case, no.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Pay attention please, when the tapes were played in front of the jury and the allegation of racism came up. Nobody explained what the tapes represented not MF, Clark or Darden., during the Criminal Trial.

You said the screenwriter explained the tapes were fiction. I said she felt MF was a racist, and that is why she turned the tapes over to JC. Which contradicts your idea that she said the tapes were fictional..

NETTA
That is the issue. If she thought the tapes were ONLY fictional, why call jc and give them to him to prove m.f. R*****.

martin II

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by nettathirty
He was charged with perjury, right! By all accounts at that point in the trial, the case should have been considered a mistrial! Any other judge, but Ito would have ended the trial at that point. I bet you cannot think of another case in American Justice, where the detective lied on the stand, and was found out! The truth of the matter is that without proof of misconduct past or present of Mark Fuhrman, no other judge would have allowed this farce into the trial. I don't need to look at any other case -- we are discussing the Simpson case. There has been no evidence WHATSOEVER that Mark Fuhrman did anything that jeopardized his actions in this case.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by nettathirty
This makes OJ look even more guilty! He's got the keys, the passport, disguise, cash and a gun!

. . . I can't help but wonder, if they knew of these items in his possession! Why, would he knowingly have these things, that would support the claim of guilt against him! If anyone even looked at what he was carrying around, I would assume they thought the keys were Orenthal's -- wouldn't you?

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Socaldiva, gimmeabreak

You never add anything, agreeing with every G on this board does not make you informed, pathetic maybe, confused probably, a joke most definately! Not true. socal is very informed on the case and brings much to the discussion.

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



It takes 2 to bicker! And that would be you and martin. There is no reason for you to attack anyone. Let's discuss the points of the case and leave out the crap.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by nettathirty
This points to OJs guilt! OJ gets rid of the shoes, and knife (if you believe he's the killer) yet he's carrying the keys to the home of his murdered ex wife, that he's being charged with her murder..

Dr Lee, says "something wrong" Why do you find it so odd that he would have kept the keys? For all we know, he might have thought he could put them back or he stuck them in his pocket/bag and forgot about them. Until it was discovered that Nicole had indeed been searching for her missing house keys, there was no reason for anyone to identify those keys in Orenthal's possession as belonging to the Bundy condo.

IIRC, Dr Lee said, "Sumting wong"

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty


Mr August,

The audio tape made it relevant, the disability claim made it relevant! Not without proof that there was ANY misconduct in the Simpson case. The judge disallowed evidence/testimony regarding the domestic abuse because of the timeline -- if for no other reason, Ito should have ruled on MF's statements the same.

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Mr August

The issue of planting evidence on Non-white suspects and harrassing interracial couples, came from the tape! But it did not happen in this case. What part of this do you not understand? The defense -- try as they might -- could not provide one shred of proof (before, during and after the trial), that MF did ANYTHING wrong in this case.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by goatgirl
[BI dont ever recall hearing anything from him about Nicoles state of mind.... was she mad, sad, scared....?[/B] I've never seen anything about any statements from Berman. Anyone else find anything?

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snip* I've never seen anything about any statements from Berman. Anyone else find anything?

I've been unable to locate anything regarding any statements from Berman, he seems quite elusive and I would think that a statement from him would have some type of relevant insight.

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty


Are you sure, because when the tapes content was discovered NOBODY ever said it wasn't real! It was obvious when she listed her occupation as a screenwriter.

[Kate Sachel]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
It was obvious when she listed her occupation as a screenwriter.

It was even more obvious when she testified that the tapes were for a fictional story.

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by bobaugust
As to anyone else knowing what he carried with him, I doubt if he told anyone. The only things some people knew about were his gun and his money. And if they weren't going to take the gun away from him -- knowing he was suicidal -- what makes you think they were concerned with a set of keys that they may not have even known about or knew the significance of?

[weezer]

*Snipped*QUOTE]Originally posted by nettathirty
The reality is he had possession of the keys, and Nicole hadn't given them to him. OJs attorneys job is to try and explain away the incriminating evidence, and to prepare their client on how to answer questions from the prosecution! OJ was ill-prepared when asked about the keys, and that's not fantasy, it is a reality! [/QUOTE] Not sure what you are trying to say here. How would Orenthal's know the significance of the keys or that the police knew the significance of the keys? Orenthal was interviewed by the police and asked about the keys and he lied.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


NETTA
That is the issue. If she thought the tapes were ONLY fictional, why call jc and give them to him to prove m.f. R*****.

martin II


martin II, more false information.

Laura Hart McKinny never called Cochran to give him the tapes. The defense learned about the tapes from their investigators and then went after McKinny.

bobaugust

[weezer]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, more false information.

Laura Hart McKinny never called Cochran to give him the tapes. The defense learned about the tapes from their investigators and then went after McKinny.

bobaugust bob, have you seen anything regarding robert berman being interviewed by LE, testifying in front of the grand jury or being deposed by anyone?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
bob, have you seen anything regarding robert berman being interviewed by LE, testifying in front of the grand jury or being deposed by anyone?


fbgweezer, no I don't know any information regarding Robert Berman.

bobaugust

[weezer]

Originally posted by bobaugust



fbgweezer, no I don't know any information regarding Robert Berman.

bobaugust Someone else brought up the little girl that didn't spend the night and I started wondering if the little girl and/or her dad had been interviewed about that night. I'm sure they must have been -- at least the dad - and I find it odd that there's nothing documenting his statements.

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Someone else brought up the little girl that didn't spend the night and I started wondering if the little girl and/or her dad had been interviewed about that night. I'm sure they must have been -- at least the dad - and I find it odd that there's nothing documenting his statements.


fbgweezer, if they were interviewed it simply could have been that there was nothing of any relevance they knew and wanted to be be kept out of publicity surrounding this case.

bobaugust

[weezer]

Originally posted by bobaugust



fbgweezer, if they were interviewed it simply could have been that there was nothing of any relevance they knew and wanted to be be kept out of publicity surrounding this case.

bobaugust Oh, I agree and I wasn't trying to make anything sinister out of it. Just thought it was one more facet of that night that could help complete the picture. Does LE know why the overnight plans were changed? Did the dad notice anything untoward about Nicole? etc....... We've heard everything and anything that has dealt with this case -- including Ron Shipp in the hot tub with some dirty blonde woman and what Orenthal ate at the McDonalds -- I'm just wondering why nothing on Berman's statement(s).

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


Yes, it was Tazzy that posted the link relative to Berman picking up his daughter Rachel between 9:00 & 9:15 that evening, which would have been right around the time of Simpson's call to Bundy IIRC.

Perhaps like Bob said, there just wasn't anything relevant. Maybe the father didn't even enter the condo to retrieve his daughter, he might have just sat outside & honked for her. Just a guess. the only statement I found said that the dad picked the little girl up and stayed for approximately 15 minutes.

[weezer]

Of course, this is the defense talking:

"Now, you've heard, and I don't disagree with the representations that were made by Mr. Petrocelli relative to what was happening over at 875 south Bundy. Except at 9:00 around 9:15, a Mr. Robert Berman came to pick up Rachel Berman. You recall I said Rachel Berman was Sydney's friend and apparently plans had changed. Instead of spending the night at 875, she was going home and she was picked up by her father. Her father talked to Nicole for about 15 minutes. She wasn't afraid. She wasn't upset. She wasn't depressed or distressed. He picked up his daughter, left."

I'd like to read the statement and compare to Mr. Baker's interpretation.

[2L8 4A D8]

Originally posted by tazzybaby

Hi Fbg,

What seems odd to me is that he would say that he didn't want them uprooted but then turn around and turn her in to the IRS so she would have no choice but to move. So, I guess it depends on what he wants as to whether he's concerned about the children being uprooted. What a great dad.

Hi Tazzy! So good to see you posting. Thank you for your info on Sydney's little friend. It seems to me that OJ has mastered (among other things) the ability to speak out of both sides of his mouth!

JMO and MOO!!

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
the only statement I found said that the dad picked the little girl up and stayed for approximately 15 minutes.

fbg
is it more accurate to say the girl only stayed at nicoles 15 minutes. not the father.
martin II

[martin II]

WHAT WE HAVE CONFIDENCE IN: Nicole and the kids went to Ben & Jerry's ice cream parlor about 8:30 and probably arrived home (3 blocks away) shortly before 9:00 o'clock. At about 9:00 Simpson called and spoke briefly to Sydney. Shortly after 9:00 Robert Berman came to take his daughter, Rachel -- a friend of Sydney's who had planned to sleep over -- home after a change of plan. Berman stayed for about 15 minutes. Somewhere between 9:00 and 9:30 Faye Resnick called Nicole on the phone and had a conversation that she says lasted 25 minutes. Insofar as this conflicts with other times in the condo, Faye may be exaggerating the duration of the call somewhat. Nicole got a call from her mother about 9:40 and talked for a couple of minutes; during that call Nicole said she would pick up her mother's lost glasses the following day. Something happened in the next three minutes that caused Nicole to call the Mezzaluna restaurant and ask to speak to Ron Goldman.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
is it more accurate to say the girl only stayed at nicoles 15 minutes. not the father.
martin II Why would you say that? The sentence is talking about the dad coming to pick his daughter up and states, ". . . Berman stayed for about 15 minutes."

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
is it more accurate to say the girl only stayed at nicoles 15 minutes. not the father.
martin II The little girl had been at the recital and had gone to dinner with sydney and then back to Bundy. How do you get 15 minutes out of that?

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II
Nicole got a call from her mother about 9:40 and talked for a couple of minutes; during that call Nicole said she would pick up her mother's lost glasses the following day. Something happened in the next three minutes that caused Nicole to call the Mezzaluna restaurant and ask to speak to Ron Goldman.
martin II


martin II, after Nicole spoke with her mother and learned that the eyeglasses were being held for her, she called the Mezzaluna Restaurant and spoke with Ron Goldman ,

What three minutes are you talking about?

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by bobaugust



martin II, after Nicole spoke with her mother and learned that the eyeglasses were being held for her, she called the Mezzaluna Restaurant and spoke with Ron Goldman ,

What three minutes are you talking about?

bobaugust

bob

this post was from a cnn page not me
i didn' give the link sorry
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
The little girl had been at the recital and had gone to dinner with sydney and then back to Bundy. How do you get 15 minutes out of that?

the father either talked to nicole for 15 minutes by phone or came to her condo and talked to her for 15 minutes. there are different reports of what happened.
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


the father either talked to nicole for 15 minutes by phone or came to her condo and talked to her for 15 minutes. there are different reports of what happened.
martin II


martin II, what reports are you talking about?

bobaugust

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by bobaugust



fbgweezer, if they were interviewed it simply could have been that there was nothing of any relevance they knew and wanted to be be kept out of publicity surrounding this case.

bobaugust

Hi Bob

I can understand your point, but imo if you were the last person to see someone alive, you would have some very important details to add about the persons state of mind...

imo-I find that odd...

GoatGirl


:seeya:

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by martin II


the father either talked to nicole for 15 minutes by phone or came to her condo and talked to her for 15 minutes. there are different reports of what happened.
martin II

ummm this made me think, maybe when Tom Lange saw Nicole outside talking to someone in a car/truck it was the father & daughter leaving Bundy?

just a thought!

GoatGirl

[jotun]

Martin--fbgweezer wants you to quit disputing O.J.'s stories.She knows they are true.And do you know how she knows? [Just like Enron Petroselli and Bob August] Because O.J.SAYS SO!!!!!
Now that's funny He's called a liar until they like what he says.

[goatgirl]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Goatgirl

Why didn't either the defense or prosecution call this guy, Tom Lange?

Hi Netta

I don't know why :shrug: ....but I wish they did!

I don't like unanswered questions, it drive me nuts!

Goat Girl
:)

[weezer]

Thank you Freshwater.

[martin II]

Originally posted by Freshwater
Good Morning All,

The OJ thread is open once again for your discussion.

Please remember no personal attacks against other posters. I know this case is very emotionally charged but again I ask that you remember the board rules.

Let's follow them and be polite so this thread can stay open. Also are you all interested in openning a forum on this subject. If so please PM me and give me a list of sub topic discussoin you would like to see in OJ case forum.

If there is interest and posters follow the rules I will open a forum. Let me know. Again thanks to all who do follow the rules and I apologize that you were inconvenienced by the thread closing for the night.

FH20

moderator

thanks for your help.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by goatgirl


ummm this made me think, maybe when Tom Lange saw Nicole outside talking to someone in a car/truck it was the father & daughter leaving Bundy?

just a thought!

GoatGirl

goat girl

that is a great observation.

If MR Robert berman came to nicoles shortly after 9pm and spent about 15 minutes inside her condo, I am asuming that he called her to tell her he was comming, unless he arrived without a call.

However he would be the one that had first hand information about who was in the condo at that time.

i will have to look for the time Tom Lang (the neighbor) saw nicole
at the car in front of her condo.
martin II

[Wukong]

Hey All,

I've been awol for a while and am just catching up. GG, you have made a great observation concerning Tom Lange and the girls father picking her up. I think this may be an explanation if the times line up. This could also be why he was never called as a witness?

Wukong

[weezer]

Originally posted by Wukong
Hey All,

I've been awol for a while and am just catching up. GG, you have made a great observation concerning Tom Lange and the girls father picking her up. I think this may be an explanation if the times line up. This could also be why he was never called as a witness?

Wukong This is fromwagner's site:

" BOSCO TALKS TO LANGE: In October, my friend, Rose, and I had coffee with Simpson case author Joseph Bosco in Brentwood. He is a fascinating man and knows much more about the Simpson case than he has published. Among that, he has interviewed Nicole's neighbor (different than the police detective of the same name), Tom Lange. The popularly circulated story among Simpson case junkies is that Lange was out walking his dog between 10:00 and 10:15 and going up Bundy saw Nicole in a white robe on the sidewalk in front of her condo embracing a black man; there was a white Bronco at the curb. Many wild stories have been advanced to explain this observation, but I have just dismissed the report as unreliable. Bosco told us what Lange actually saw.

This man was walking northbound on Nicole's side of Bundy in the block south of her condo. When he reached the southwest corner of Bundy and Dorothy -- the corner of Storfer's house -- he looked ahead and saw some people. According to Bosco, Lange put the time at 10:05 (four minutes before my computations and re-creations show that Goldman arrived on the scene, and the murders commenced). Lange did not specifically identify Nicole, but a "blond woman." His distance from these people is great enough (more than 150 feet) that he could not be certain whether the woman was wearing a "white robe" or a "white coat." Lange had worked for Ford Motor Company, knew their products well, and what he actually identified was not "a Bronco," but a "Ford vehicle" (presumably not an automobile). It could have been a van, such as the Windstar. Also, Lange saw three other men, arrayed some yards around the couple, "as a security detail," one on the near side of the sidewalk, one on the far side, and one in the street. Upon seeing this, Lange was too intimidated to continue, and turned west on Dorothy to take his dog in that originally unplanned direction."

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by fbgweezer
Lange did not specifically identify Nicole, but a "blond woman." His distance from these people is great enough (more than 150 feet) that he could not be certain whether the woman was wearing a "white robe" or a "white coat." Since Nicole was found wearing the same clothes she had on from the recital, wouldn't it make sense that this wasn't her?

[martin II]

wukong

if true why were all these people in front of nicoles condo 10-15 minutes before it is thought that murders happened?
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snip* Since Nicole was found wearing the same clothes she had on from the recital, wouldn't it make sense that this wasn't her?

fbg

maby she, nicole, threw on a white robe. if it was not nicole in front of the condo, then who were these people that it is reported lang saw.?
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
wukong

if true why were all these people in front of nicoles condo 10-15 minutes before it is thought that murders happened?
martin II Maybe they weren't there?

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg

maby she, nicole, threw on a white robe. if it was not nicole in front of the condo, then who were these people that it is reported lang saw.?
martin II Do you really find that plausible?

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Maybe they weren't there?

fbg

so tom lang made it all up??

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Do you really find that plausible?

that nicole would throw on a robe to go outside for a minute or two? yes.

It is reported that tom lang said he was at the corner of Bundy and Dorothy sometime at about 10:05 and saw these people in front of nicoles condo, is there any reason why he should not be believed.?
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


that nicole would throw on a robe to go outside for a minute or two? yes.

It is reported that tom lang said he was at the corner of Bundy and Dorothy sometime at about 10:05 and saw these people in front of nicoles condo, is there any reason why he should not be believed.?
martin II Is there any evidence that Nicole had a robe on over her clothes? Any fiber evidence that could not be accounted for? A discarded robe found in or out of the house?

It was "reported" by Lange himself! Is there a reason why he should be believed? His statement is not substantiated by any other evidence or witness.:punch:

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Is there any evidence that Nicole had a robe on over her clothes? Any fiber evidence that could not be accounted for? A discarded robe found in or out of the house?

It was "reported" by Lange himself! Is there a reason why he should be believed? His statement is not substantiated by any other evidence or witness.:punch:

fbg

we do not know if a inventory of all the clothing found in nicoles condo was done, so i don't know if she had a white robe or not do you?

on the other hand some belive that the couple that walked past nicoles condo at about 10:30 and did not hear or see anything should be belived. Why not tom lang?
martin II

[weezer]

*Snip* Originally posted by martin II
. . .so i don't know if she had a white robe or not do you?

on the other hand some belive that the couple that walked past nicoles condo at about 10:30 and did not hear or see anything should be belived. Why not tom lang? I don't know if she had a white robe nor do you know if she did so we can call this one a draw -- neither of us know whether or not Nicole owned a white robe.

As far as whether or not we believe the couple walking by her condo later -- their observations were corroborated by other witnesses.

[weezer]

Originally posted by socaldiva


She was found murdered in the same dress she wore to the recital. If she wore that dress out in public, it doesn't make any sense to me that she would feel like she needs to put on a robe to cover it to go outside. Man, could I go conspiracy on this scenario. Maybe Lange saw Orenthal and AC in the bronco out in front of Nicole's. Maybe Nicole put the white robe on so Orenthal wouldn't guess that she was expecting anyone over. Maybe Orenthal guessed she was up to something and he and AC hid around the corner and waited to see who was going to show up. Maybe Orenthal and AC followed Ron to the gate and attacked them. How's that?

One problem - there's absolutely not one shred of evidence that proves this could have even remotely happened.

[martin II]

fbg

so did lang make his observations up.?

remember MR tallarino testified that he was doing a slow rollerblade down the sidewalk in front if nicoles condo at about 8:45 and he saw a man with slick black hair hiding in the grass in front of nicoles condo.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg

so did lang make his observations up.?

remember MR tallarino testified that he was doing a slow rollerblade down the sidewalk in front if nicoles condo at about 8:45 and he saw a man with slick black hair hiding in the grass in front of nicoles condo.
martin II :lol: They're everywhere. They're everywhere.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
*Snip* I don't know if she had a white robe nor do you know if she did so we can call this one a draw -- neither of us know whether or not Nicole owned a white robe.

As far as whether or not we believe the couple walking by her condo later -- their observations were corroborated by other witnesses. fbg

who corroborated the couples story that no dead bodies were in the front yard at 1:30/ NO ONE.
MARTIN ii

[martin II]

FBG

Did lang just make up a lie about his obervations??

martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
fbg

who corroborated the couples story that no dead bodies were in the front yard at 1:30/ NO ONE.
MARTIN ii Where did you get the 1:30?

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II
FBG

Did lang just make up a lie about his obervations??

martin II Unfortunately, since we have corroborated evidence that what he says he saw could not have been there and in fact have evidence directly contradicting his statement, I have to conclude that either Mr. Lange was confused (I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt) about what night he may have seen this or he did lie.

[weezer]

Found this synopsis of LE Tom Lange's Grand Jury testimony where he talks about Nicole's feet being under the fence. Martin, I know this was one of the subjects you were interested in.

". He testified that the walkway that leads down to the sidewalk and the bodies of the victims, that it appeared to be a slight sloping downward towards the sidewalk in an easterly direction. He was asked on whether NBS foot on whether it was wedged under the gate or was there a fair amount of room. He replied just above the ankles appeared to be wedged --or he continued to say that both ankles were beneath the gate. It probably got that way possibly, after a struggle when she was attempting to move--that it was conjecture. But that there is no indication to think that a suspect would have done that. In other words he pointed out in a photograph that above the right ankle and above the left ankle are beneath the fenced gate. That it was just the way she might have fallen and moved after she was stabbed. But that there was nothing to indicate that she was forcibly jammed underneath the gate. He pointed out that there was nothing to indicate that the gate was dragged along her legs in any manner in any manner. And that at the autopsy there were no scrape marks that might have indicated that the gate was pushed along her ankle or moved. The reason why is that the gate her ankles are beneath is a stationary gate. The moveable gate is at the right side. "
http://web2.iadfw.net/marjo/lange.htm

[weezer]

LE Tom Lange discussing the front gate: "This defect was observed the morning of the crime scene investigation and during subsequent visits to the crime scene. So as of the morning of June 13th, Detective Lange found the release button on the inside of the Bundy residence to be inoperable; that is he found the button would not open the gate. Based on his own observations, Lange testified that he was able to manually unlatch the gate if someone went down to it and unlatched it from the inside. He also said that the inner knob of the gate was a smooth knob. The outer knob, towards the street, is keyed. So he said from the inside you could open it by the knob, but that one would have to, if they were opening it from the inside, reach over the gate and undo the latch on the outside as well. "

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Where did you get the 1:30?

10:30

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Unfortunately, since we have corroborated evidence that what he says he saw could not have been there and in fact have evidence directly contradicting his statement, I have to conclude that either Mr. Lange was confused (I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt) about what night he may have seen this or he did lie.

fbg

now that is really funny. i expected that exact response from you.

ps who's post were deleted from the thread??
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
LE Tom Lange discussing the front gate: "This defect was observed the morning of the crime scene investigation and during subsequent visits to the crime scene. So as of the morning of June 13th, Detective Lange found the release button on the inside of the Bundy residence to be inoperable; that is he found the button would not open the gate. Based on his own observations, Lange testified that he was able to manually unlatch the gate if someone went down to it and unlatched it from the inside. He also said that the inner knob of the gate was a smooth knob. The outer knob, towards the street, is keyed. So he said from the inside you could open it by the knob, but that one would have to, if they were opening it from the inside, reach over the gate and undo the latch on the outside as well. "

absolutely crap.

what is to keep anyone from sticking their hand through that gate and operating it inside or out, That is another lang lie.
and you seem to be falling for it.
hahaha
martin II

[martin II]

netta
between 8;45 and about 10:02 it is reported that therer were no less than three people/groups right in front of nicoles condo on 6/12
martin II

[weezer]

More testimony from Lange but this one describes the back gate also.

"Lange was asked to describe the path that a person would take after going up the stairs, and towards the back alley. He said there were three or four steps leading, above where Miss Nicole Brown was located, to a porch area; and then he believed that there were two more steps up another area towards the front door, which would be off to one's left if you were walking in a westerly direction. This pathway continued in a westerly direction to the point where there was a small gate. One would then go through the latch gate and then descend several steps to a lower area, where the housekeeper's quarters would probably be located, and then would proceed along that area to a point where there are some more steps going up, to another level area; and one would eventually reach a locking gate similar to the front gate, which was located at the northwest corner of that property.

This particular gate had a dead-bolt lock, again, accessible from the inside and not the outside."

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Unfortunately, since we have corroborated evidence that what he says he saw could not have been there and in fact have evidence directly contradicting his statement, I have to conclude that either Mr. Lange was confused (I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt) about what night he may have seen this or he did lie.

tom lang( the neighbor) had no dog in that fight. absolutely no reason to lie.

The problem with some gs is that you immediately cast aside as a lie anything that forces a reasonable person to think a second time and consider other options. it is called by some THINK OUT OF THE BOX.
MARTIN II

[martin II]

Originally posted by goatgirl


ummm this made me think, maybe when Tom Lange saw Nicole outside talking to someone in a car/truck it was the father & daughter leaving Bundy?

just a thought!

GoatGirl

goat girl
another small point
Mr Lang worked for Ford Motor Co and knew their products well.
he said the car he saw was not a bronco more like a van or winstar.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


absolutely crap.

what is to keep anyone from sticking their hand through that gate and operating it inside or out, That is another lang lie.
and you seem to be falling for it.
hahaha
martin II Why would he lie about this?

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
More testimony from Lange but this one describes the back gate also.

"Lange was asked to describe the path that a person would take after going up the stairs, and towards the back alley. He said there were three or four steps leading, above where Miss Nicole Brown was located, to a porch area; and then he believed that there were two more steps up another area towards the front door, which would be off to one's left if you were walking in a westerly direction. This pathway continued in a westerly direction to the point where there was a small gate. One would then go through the latch gate and then descend several steps to a lower area, where the housekeeper's quarters would probably be located, and then would proceed along that area to a point where there are some more steps going up, to another level area; and one would eventually reach a locking gate similar to the front gate, which was located at the northwest corner of that property.

This particular gate had a dead-bolt lock, again, accessible from the inside and not the outside."

comming from det lang i can toss this over into the very suspect catagory.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Why would he lie about this?

it is like the lie he told about arnell not walking him into the front of the house. same liar just a different lie.
martin II

[martin II]

fbg

whos post got deleted from the thread??

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


tom lang( the neighbor) had no dog in that fight. absolutely no reason to lie.

The problem with some gs is that you immediately cast aside as a lie anything that forces a reasonable person to think a second time and consider other options. it is called by some THINK OUT OF THE BOX.
MARTIN II Rather than THINK OUT OF THE BOX, I'd prefer to examine the evidence, compare it for corroborating evidence, and then consider the resonableness of the statement.

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


it is like the lie he told about arnell not walking him into the front of the house. same liar just a different lie.
martin II Why do you say stuff like this? Arnelle was contradicted by 4 people -- none who had a reason to lie abot a door they knew nothing about. I can believe Arnelle lied about the door because she lied about her laundry and laundry basket being int he house. See how that works?

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


comming from det lang i can toss this over into the very suspect catagory.
martin II Of all the people in this mess, Detective Tom Lange was probably the most admirable.

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by Wukong
Hey All,

I've been awol for a while and am just catching up. GG, you have made a great observation concerning Tom Lange and the girls father picking her up. I think this may be an explanation if the times line up. This could also be why he was never called as a witness?

Wukong


Wukong,

The neighbor according to the E! story, said the blonde woman was standing near a van, and talking to the passenger and not the driver. In the E! story, Lange (neighbor) went on to say the passenger was African American, which was speculated to be Marcus Allen!

Tom Lange the neighbor made more observations according to the E! story. Two men, 1 white about 6'1 200plus was standing alone the sidewalk with a smaller man (ethnic descent) who was crouched in a threatening position. Lange decided to pass going down Bundy, and detoured up Dorothy!


my theory

Lange (NBS neighbor) not Heidstra (NBS neighbor) was more accurate and believable!

imo moo jhmo

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Rather than THINK OUT OF THE BOX, I'd prefer to examine the evidence, compare it for corroborating evidence, and then consider the resonableness of the statement.

fbg

for what it it worth.
one has to have some method of evaluating the evidence first.
especially evidence put on by people working in Gil Garcettis office.
MARTIN ii

[tazzybaby]

Dont' forget the two ladies who also saw OJ in his bronco in the area of the crime scene. That was also on "E".

:D

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Wukong,

The neighbor according to the E! story, said the blonde woman was standing near a van, and talking to the passenger and not the driver. In the E! story, Lange (neighbor) went on to say the passenger was African American, which was speculated to be Marcus Allen!

Tom Lange the neighbor made more observations according to the E! story. Two men, 1 white about 6'1 200plus was standing alone the sidewalk with a smaller man (ethnic descent) who was crouched in a threatening position. Lange decided to pass going down Bundy, and detoured up Dorothy!


my theory

Lange (NBS neighbor) not Heidstra (NBS neighbor) was more accurate and believable!

imo moo jhmo

NETTA
Don't forget the slow skateboarder that saw a man crouched in the grass in front of nicoiles condo sometime around 8;45.
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
This is fromwagner's site:

This man was walking northbound on Nicole's side of Bundy in the block south of her condo. When he reached the southwest corner of Bundy and Dorothy -- the corner of Storfer's house -- he looked ahead and saw some people. According to Bosco, Lange put the time at 10:05 (four minutes before my computations and re-creations show that Goldman arrived on the scene, and the murders commenced). Lange did not specifically identify Nicole, but a "blond woman." His distance from these people is great enough (more than 150 feet) that he could not be certain whether the woman was wearing a "white robe" or a "white coat." Lange had worked for Ford Motor Company, knew their products well, and what he actually identified was not "a Bronco," but a "Ford vehicle" (presumably not an automobile). It could have been a van, such as the Windstar. Also, Lange saw three other men, arrayed some yards around the couple, "as a security detail," one on the near side of the sidewalk, one on the far side, and one in the street. Upon seeing this, Lange was too intimidated to continue, and turned west on Dorothy to take his dog in that originally unplanned direction."


fbgweezer, Bosco never wrote anything about this in his book.

In the first version Wagner refers to, the version he dismisses as unreliable, story is that it is Nicole in a white robe in front of her condo. In the version Bosco told him he didn't say these people were in front of Nicole's condo, only in the general area.

This was great fodder for Wagner's imagination in creating his fantasy theory.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by tazzybaby
Dont' forget the two ladies who also saw OJ in his bronco in the area of the crime scene. That was also on "E".

:D


hi tazzy

look at the skate boarder 8:45--

then the man that came to pick up his daughter about 9: 20--9:30

the people tom lang ( the neighbor) saw in front of the condo.10;05

the front of that condo was quite busy that night.

martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by bobaugust



fbgweezer, Bosco never wrote anything about this in his book.

In the first version Wagner refers to, the version he dismisses as unreliable, story is that it is Nicole in a white robe in front of her condo. In the version Bosco told him he didn't say these people were in front of Nicole's condo, only in the general area.

This was great fodder for Wagner's imagination in creating his fantasy theory.

bobaugust I discounted the sighting by Lange when he said she had on a white robe/coat. It makes no sense that she would have undressed, put on a white robe, gone outside, redressed in clothing she'd had on for hours. The fact that she was found in the same dress that she'd last been seen wearing tells me that the sighting did not happen.

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by tazzybaby
Dont' forget the two ladies who also saw OJ in his bronco in the area of the crime scene. That was also on "E".

:D


Tazzy,

What 2 ladies?

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II



hi tazzy

look at the skate boarder 8:45--

then the man that came to pick up his daughter about 9: 20--9:30

the people tom lang ( the neighbor) saw in front of the condo.10;05

the front of that condo was quite busy that night.

martin II Don't forget the double murder and it makes it a real busy place.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Don't forget the double murder and it makes it a real busy place.


fbg
i was referring to all the activity in front of the condo before the murders.

you never did answer my question about the thread.

martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


tom lang( the neighbor) had no dog in that fight. absolutely no reason to lie.

The problem with some gs is that you immediately cast aside as a lie anything that forces a reasonable person to think a second time and consider other options. it is called by some THINK OUT OF THE BOX.
MARTIN II



martin II, no it's you who immediately casts aside testimony by police officers that that either you don't understand or that contradicts what you want to believe by calling them liars.

That seems to be your version of thinking outside the box. The box of reality.

If this information by Tom Lange had any possible relevance to these murders it would have been investigated by the police and at the very least brought up by the defense. This story is simply unreliable hearsay that has been the source of rumors and distortions.

bobaugust

[martin II]

lang said he was standing at bundy and dorothy right down the street from nicoles condo on the same side of the street.
martin II

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by martin II



hi tazzy

look at the skate boarder 8:45--

then the man that came to pick up his daughter about 9: 20--9:30

the people tom lang ( the neighbor) saw in front of the condo.10;05

the front of that condo was quite busy that night.

martin II

Hi Martin,

If any of these people were truly credible then I believe the defense would have used them. I believe that they would have been very important to OJ. They should have some clues to help him in his quest to find the real killers. He should have mentioned them way more.

No, the man came to pick up his daughter around 9:00-9:10. This was in the link that I provided. Where did you get the 9:20-9:30 time?

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
I discounted the sighting by Lange when he said she had on a white robe/coat. It makes no sense that she would have undressed, put on a white robe, gone outside, redressed in clothing she'd had on for hours. The fact that she was found in the same dress that she'd last been seen wearing tells me that the sighting did not happen.

fbg
'that is what i mean. you look for any excuse to toss any issue that requires you to think out of the box.
martin II

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II



fbg
i was referring to all the activity in front of the condo before the murders.

you never did answer my question about the thread.

martin II So was I.

[tazzybaby]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Tazzy,

What 2 ladies?

Hi Netta,

There was a lady and her mother in Nicole's neighborhood that saw him there right around 10:00. You know, the time when he was "not" driving around using his cell phone. I have the story at home. I can't remember all the specifics and don't want to misquote.

I'll try to remember (lol) to get the specifics and let you know.

:seeya:

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


fbg
'that is what i mean. you look for any excuse to toss any issue that requires you to think out of the box.
martin II Don't be silly. I simply refuse to follow the rabbit trails is all. When you provide your version(s) of what happened that night, provide corroborating evidence/testimony. Not fantasy. Not "if this or that had happened." Using facts, evidence, testimony back up your theories.

[martin II]

Originally posted by tazzybaby


Hi Martin,

If any of these people were truly credible then I believe the defense would have used them. I believe that they would have been very important to OJ. They should have some clues to help him in his quest to find the real killers. He should have mentioned them way more.

No, the man came to pick up his daughter around 9:00-9:10. This was in the link that I provided. Where did you get the 9:20-9:30 time?

tazzy

if he came at 9;10 and stayed 15 minutes what time do you think he he would have been leaving from in front of the condo?
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by martin II


it is like the lie he told about arnell not walking him into the front of the house. same liar just a different lie.
martin II


martin II, more false accusations from you.

When you call people liars who have testified to facts that contradict what you want to believe and have never been found to be lying, it makes you the liar, not them.

bobaugust

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer



I discounted the sighting by Lange when he said she had on a white robe/coat.


Really! What if she ran her bath water, the door bell rings and she slips her robe on over her clothing!

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Really! What if she ran her bath water, the door bell rings and she slips her robe on over her clothing! Why would she have done that? She'd been out all evening in that dress, she had on her underclothes, why put one on?

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by tazzybaby


Hi Netta,

There was a lady and her mother in Nicole's neighborhood that saw him there right around 10:00. You know, the time when he was "not" driving around using his cell phone. I have the story at home. I can't remember all the specifics and don't want to misquote.

I'll try to remember (lol) to get the specifics and let you know.

:seeya:


Tazzybaby,

This changes everything, very interesting please don't forget !

[weezer]

Originally posted by martin II


tazzy

if he came at 9;10 and stayed 15 minutes what time do you think he he would have been leaving from in front of the condo?
martin II the time was estimated to be 9 - 910.....why are you so insistent that it be 910 or after?

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Why would she have done that? She'd been out all evening in that dress, she had on her underclothes, why put one on?

maby she went outside to pick up a "package" and needed a garment with a pocket.
martin II

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
the time was estimated to be 9 - 910.....why are you so insistent that it be 910 or after?

oj called at 9pm

it is said that shortly after 9 the man came... so tell me what time it i was when he arrived and left.
martin II

[bobaugust]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Wukong,

The neighbor according to the E! story, said the blonde woman was standing near a van, and talking to the passenger and not the driver. In the E! story, Lange (neighbor) went on to say the passenger was African American, which was speculated to be Marcus Allen!

Tom Lange the neighbor made more observations according to the E! story. Two men, 1 white about 6'1 200plus was standing alone the sidewalk with a smaller man (ethnic descent) who was crouched in a threatening position. Lange decided to pass going down Bundy, and detoured up Dorothy!


my theory

Lange (NBS neighbor) not Heidstra (NBS neighbor) was more accurate and believable!

imo moo jhmo



nettathirty, what neighbor Lange supposedly saw, and I say supposedly because he never testified under oath for either the prosecution or the defense, has nothing to do with what Heidstra saw and heard that night.

Even if you believe this story of what Lange said he saw it has no relevance to what we know happened later.

You can believe who or what you want but it's very telling as to how you think when you believe uncorroborated stories and rumors over sworn testimony.

bobaugust

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
the time was estimated to be 9 - 910.....why are you so insistent that it be 910 or after?

oj called at 9pm

it is said that shortly after 9 the man came... so tell me what time it i was when he arrived and left.
martin II

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Why would she have done that? She'd been out all evening in that dress, she had on her underclothes, why put one on?


Nicole is getting ready to take her bath, she's probably taking off her dress when the doorbell rings.. It's Berman to pick up his daughter, Nicole slips back into the dress and grabs her robe to go down stairs! She probably wasn't thinking how it looked, as much as she wanted to be clothe infront of the kid and the kids father!

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Nicole is getting ready to take her bath, she's probably taking off her dress when the doorbell rings.. It's Berman to pick up his daughter, Nicole slips back into the dress and grabs her robe to go down stairs! She probably wasn't thinking how it looked, as much as she wanted to be clothe infront of the kid and the kids father! Still doesn't make sense. Why slip your dress AND a robe on to answer the door?

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by bobaugust

*Snipped*

You can believe who or what you want but it's very telling as to how you think when you believe uncorroborated stories and rumors over sworn testimony.

bobaugust


Mr August, hold ur horses!

MF lied under oath after swearing to tell the truth. You like to believe witnesses who's version of that night, does not support your fantasy, "got it wrong or was mistaking". Yet when testimony supports your fantasy, then it's the gospel! I would wait before putting all my earnings into witness testimony, as you have said before, it's possible they could be mistaken!

[martin II]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Nicole is getting ready to take her bath, she's probably taking off her dress when the doorbell rings.. It's Berman to pick up his daughter, Nicole slips back into the dress and grabs her robe to go down stairs! She probably wasn't thinking how it looked, as much as she wanted to be clothe infront of the kid and the kids father!

she sat there in that get up for about 15 minutes.this must have been during the time faye called. what time did Juditha call nicole
and what time did nicole speak to ron.
martin II

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Still doesn't make sense. Why slip your dress AND a robe on to answer the door?


fbg,

LA at night is kinda breezey, even in the summer! If Berman and Nicole are the persons Lange (neighbor) saw, Nicole slipped the robe on to keep warm outside!

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



Mr August, hold ur horses!

MF lied under oath after swearing to tell the truth. You like to believe witnesses who's version of that night, does not support your fantasy, "got it wrong or was mistaking". Yet when testimony supports your fantasy, then it's the gospel! I would wait before putting all my earnings into witness testimony, as you have said before, it's possible they could be mistaken! And MF was shown to be lying (using sworn testimony and evidence) -- the only dispute regarding him is whether he should have been questioned about his use of the 'n' word. Here's my take on this: I don't believe sightings, conversations, etc., have to be word for word. But if you and I both see a horse and martin sees a hog, then we're asked what color was the horse and you say black and I say dark, chances are what we saw was a horse and martin did not see a hog.

[martin II]

Originally posted by fbgweezer
Still doesn't make sense. Why slip your dress AND a robe on to answer the door?

fbg

you may be thinking about what YOU would do under those circumstances. she was not just answering the door. she had to go out to the gate to let Mr Berman in.remember.
martin II

[nettathirty]

Originally posted by socaldiva


The question should never have been allowed in & it was immaterial to the case at hand.


That might be true, but this has nothing to do with why I posted it to Mr August! I simply said, just because someone is sworn to tell the truth, doesn't mean that happens all the time. I used MF as a reference to drive my point home.

Keep in mind, I believe MF lied for the purpose of assuring OJ an aquittal. However, other witnesses may have just been mistaken, and not lying. Which is something Mr August likes to say when the witness testimony contradicts Mr August's fantasies about the Bundy murders!

[weezer]

Originally posted by nettathirty



fbg,

LA at night is kinda breezey, even in the summer! If Berman and Nicole are the persons Lange (neighbor) saw, Nicole slipped the robe on to keep warm outside! This is the same night that Orenthal was complaining about it being so hot. You're grasping! LOL