Telephone Evidence

[pearyb]

A haunting question has gone unanswered to me, "Was there ever evidence relating to the Denise Brown phone records"?

[socaldiva]

IIRC Denise Brown lived at her parent's home at the time of the murders & I doubt that she had a mobile phone in those days. What records specifically are you referring to?

[pearyb]

I had read a few years ago that O.J. wanted to sue AT&T for damages as their failure to produce phone records of Denise Brown. It was in a small article in the L.A. Times. The company evidently wasn't forced to release as Denise refused to release the records. I don't think it went anywhere as I never heard any more about it.

[weezer]

I had read a few years ago that O.J. wanted to sue AT&T for damages as their failure to produce phone records of Denise Brown. It was in a small article in the L.A. Times. The company evidently wasn't forced to release as Denise refused to release the records. I don't think it went anywhere as I never heard any more about it.

I don't believe you have the facts right. IIRC, the phone records for the Browns were part of the criminal trial evidence -- much of it stipulated to by both sides. I don't know what Denise would have to do with it.

[weezer]

I did find this:

NATIONAL DESK
National News Briefs; Simpson Sues Company Over Telephone Records
O J Simpson sues GTE Corp, holding company refuses to turn over phone records he holds show he could not have killed Nicole Brown Simpson
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/o_j_simpson/index.html?offset=60&

[weezer]

and this:

O.J. Back in Court
FRIDAY SEPTEMBER 25, 1998 12:00 AM EDT

By Stephen M. Silverman


A Los Angeles judge has dismissed O.J. Simpson's lawsuit to seek telephone records that he says would clear him of the charge of killing his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman. "I think your lawsuit here borders on being frivolous," U.S. District Judge Dean Pregerson told Simpson's lawyer, Doug McCann, on Monday. Simpson claimed that the records would show that Nicole called her mother at 11 p.m. on June 12, 1994, the night she and Goldman were killed outside her Brentwood condo. According to testimony in Simpson's criminal trial, the call was made at 9:37 p.m. O.J. was already in an airport limo by 11, headed for a flight to Chicago.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,26334,617717,00.html

[jotun]

I had read a few years ago that O.J. wanted to sue AT&T for damages as their failure to produce phone records of Denise Brown. It was in a small article in the L.A. Times. The company evidently wasn't forced to release as Denise refused to release the records. I don't think it went anywhere as I never heard any more about it.

pearyb

Think you might find what you are looking for on this site by the man behind the phone records:
Dr.Johnson M.D. There is a book also.
www.ojcoverup.com

IMO

jotun

[martin II]

JOTUN

wonder if the judge would have ruled the same if the prosecution requested the records for their case.

I have always wondered what the big deal was for not allowing the records to come out. If oj was wrong it would then be known that he was wrong.
If he had been right, boy what a mess.imo
martin II

[pearyb]

It would seem difficult to sue over evidence which didn't exist. Trying to taint the community with reasonable doubt after an acquittal doesn't seem too bright. Therefore I would say another of evidentuary error that further upsets the case.

[martin II]

It would seem difficult to sue over evidence which didn't exist. Trying to taint the community with reasonable doubt after an acquittal doesn't seem too bright. Therefore I would say another of evidentuary error that further upsets the case.

Pearyb

I think it was a poster BIG BEN that posted a lot on this subject on one of the oj threads. That may be helpful to you.
MARTIN ii

[Big Ben]

It would seem difficult to sue over evidence which didn't exist. Trying to taint the community with reasonable doubt after an acquittal doesn't seem too bright. Therefore I would say another of evidentuary error that further upsets the case.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZfbCRZvoyo

The above YouTube link may help to answer some of your questions, Pearyb or it may befuddle you even more. However the phone records are still concealed as a result of the last judge Larry Feidler's ruling. U.S. Judge Pregerson was simply posturing re: "frivolous action" he told Doug McCann to go back and make the State Court replace the records, before it would become "ripe" for Federal Court.

[tazzybaby]

I wonder why they didn't persue this during the trial? And, how can they try and say this is true when it couldn't be? The dog was found before the so-called call was "suppose" to have happened.

Smoke and mirrors, people. That's why the judge called it frivilous.

[Big Ben]

I wonder why they didn't persue this during the trial? And, how can they try and say this is true when it couldn't be? The dog was found before the so-called call was "suppose" to have happened.

Tazzy,
FYI, "the dog", Nicole's Akita, was initially stated to be found at 11:15 PM in an early morning statement of 06/13/94 by Steven Schwab. OJ would have been in the back seat of the LAX bound limousine. Schwab later received an epiphany that the time was closer to 10:45 PM rather than 11:15 PM.

I think it was around the same time that Lou Brown received his epiphany, on 06/20/94, that Nicole was not talking to mom at 11:00 PM but more like 9:30 -10:00PM.

Juditha has never cited officially when she had an epiphany, therefore her initial remarks to Shapiro and defense investigators has been unchanged that she was talking to Nicole at approximately 11:00 PM.

This information was known well before the trial ever started and if it were not concealed there never would have been a "trial of the century". The continuous recantations associated with "time" is, I speculate, what is going to make this ordeal unravel.

Caution: Don't say "it couldn't be" when it comes to government officials and media misrepresenting the facts. The last 4 years of the Bush Administration should give you or anyone else pause to say "it just couldn't be".

Neither you nor the jury, in either trial, has been given access to the actual telephone records and thus, this makes Johnnie Cochran's remarks even more bizarre,( in the YouTube link) when making a prejudical argument about denying the jury the bloody photos, he inadvertently implies that the telephone records could prejudice the jury, if shown to them.



Smoke and mirrors, people. That's why the judge called it frivilous.[/QUOTE]

Taz, the only thing that you can say for sure is that certain Cal. officials decided to have a one of a kind, historically unique, show trial.

The federal judge's remark of "bordering on frivolous" was for public consumption and gave the defendant (GTE) Attys something rather than nothing at all. They were asking $30K under FRCP, Rule 11, for Simpson filing what they alleged to be a frivolous action, the judge didn't grant their motion.

[tazzybaby]

Hi Big Ben,

Schwab said that he found the dog at 10:55 because of the show he was watching. And, the dogs had already been barking. All Schwab did was become more accurate. He had already phoned the police to tell them that before testifying. What evidence do you have or know of that makes you believe that he would lie?

The defense accepted the phone records. They understood. The phone records that the defense didn't want in were OJ's (cell). And, they didn't come in. OJ made many, many calls on his way home from Chicago from what I've heard.

I don't have access to the records but the defense did. Why didn't they produce them when TRYING to "impeach" Schwab? Because they would not have succeeded at creating a "smoke and mirrors" type of doubt if they introduced the truth.

And, I'm sure the Brown's were extremely upset when they gave their statements. Very understandable if they weren't sure or needed to clarify. The records introduced showed the actual time of the call.

I don't automatically take whatever the police or media say as gospel. But, I also don't take everything that OJ says as gospel either. The defense accepted the records at the time and that means that there is NO REASON to dispute them. Both sides accepted them.

Taz, the only thing that you can say for sure is that certain Cal. officials decided to have a one of a kind, historically unique, show trial.

The federal judge's remark of "bordering on frivolous" was for public consumption and gave the defendant (GTE) Attys something rather than nothing at all. They were asking $30K under FRCP, Rule 11, for Simpson filing what they alleged to be a frivolous action, the judge didn't grant their motion.

The only thing I can say for sure is that OJ had a cut and was bleeding before he left on the same night that two people were murdered and he is a proven liar. His blood was found at the crime scene and at his home mixed with the victims blood. The insinuations that LE framed him are only that. The same logic that you use to insinuate that he is innocent is the same logic you should use when looking at LE's actions.

You don't know that the judge's remarks was for public consumption. That's your opinion. My opinion is backed up by what the judge said on the record that it was bordering on frivilous.

Why isn't OJ shouting this at the top of his lungs? Each time he gives an interview he should be saying this. Someone...please look at the phone records, they will clear me?

[martin II]

Hi Big Ben,

Schwab said that he found the dog at 10:55 because of the show he was watching. And, the dogs had already been barking. All Schwab did was become more accurate. He had already phoned the police to tell them that before testifying. What evidence do you have or know of that makes you believe that he would lie?

The defense accepted the phone records. They understood. The phone records that the defense didn't want in were OJ's (cell). And, they didn't come in. OJ made many, many calls on his way home from Chicago from what I've heard.

I don't have access to the records but the defense did. Why didn't they produce them when TRYING to "impeach" Schwab? Because they would not have succeeded at creating a "smoke and mirrors" type of doubt if they introduced the truth.

And, I'm sure the Brown's were extremely upset when they gave their statements. Very understandable if they weren't sure or needed to clarify. The records introduced showed the actual time of the call.

I don't automatically take whatever the police or media say as gospel. But, I also don't take everything that OJ says as gospel either. The defense accepted the records at the time and that means that there is NO REASON to dispute them. Both sides accepted them.

Taz, the only thing that you can say for sure is that certain Cal. officials decided to have a one of a kind, historically unique, show trial.

The federal judge's remark of "bordering on frivolous" was for public consumption and gave the defendant (GTE) Attys something rather than nothing at all. They were asking $30K under FRCP, Rule 11, for Simpson filing what they alleged to be a frivolous action, the judge didn't grant their motion.

The only thing I can say for sure is that OJ had a cut and was bleeding before he left on the same night that two people were murdered and he is a proven liar. His blood was found at the crime scene and at his home mixed with the victims blood. The insinuations that LE framed him are only that. The same logic that you use to insinuate that he is innocent is the same logic you should use when looking at LE's actions.

You don't know that the judge's remarks was for public consumption. That's your opinion. My opinion is backed up by what the judge said on the record that it was bordering on frivilous.

Why isn't OJ shouting this at the top of his lungs? Each time he gives an interview he should be saying this. Someone...please look at the phone records, they will clear me?


tazzy hi
the phone records of GTE were never released to anyone. is that correct?
I don't know the answer.
martin II

[tazzybaby]

tazzy hi
the phone records of GTE were never released to anyone. is that correct?
I don't know the answer.
martin II

Martin,

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

Yes, they were released.

[martin II]

tazzy hi
the original poster asked about Denise's phone records.
martin II

[Big Ben]

Hi Big Ben,

Schwab said that he found the dog at 10:55 because of the show he was watching. And, the dogs had already been barking. All Schwab did was become more accurate. He had already phoned the police to tell them that before testifying. What evidence do you have or know of that makes you believe that he would lie?

The problem is that we have approximately 10 conflicting remarks by key individuals associated with this case that are recantations of original statements re: time. All I'm saying is that it is a strange coincidence that all these people seem to have similiar epiphanies regarding what they first stated relative to time.

The defense accepted the phone records. They understood. The phone records that the defense didn't want in were OJ's (cell). And, they didn't come in. OJ made many, many calls on his way home from Chicago from what I've heard.

Taz, as an outside member of an independent investigation we have the privilege of holding not only the prosecution but the defense culpable for malfeasance too.

Also,we're only concerned with EX. 35 "The Juditha Brown Phone Records"

I don't automatically take whatever the police or media say as gospel. But, I also don't take everything that OJ says as gospel either. The defense accepted the records at the time and that means that there is NO REASON to dispute them. Both sides accepted them.

Taz, we at OMIG disagree, only the jury (trier of fact) has the right to determine and/or accept after examination evidence that is, according to the Uniform Rules of Evidence and the Federal Rules of Evidence, in dispute, or requires authentication, etc. not lawyers behind closed doors.

However, Cal. Law, BAJI 1.02, allows lawyers in California to stipulate to facts which are not universal. The sun rises in the east, the sun sets in the west is considered a universal fact,the Juditha Brown telephone call between mother and daughter Nicole is not. When Shapiro offered 10:17 PM as the initial time for stipulation on 07/08/94 in Judge Powell's chambers the time issue again was placed in contradiction and dispute.

It is a violation of the English common law rules that certainly govern all civil trials in the U.S. under the 7th Amend. U.S. Const. that all crucial evidence must be examined by the "trier of fact"; the jury.

You don't know that the judge's remarks was for public consumption. That's your opinion. My opinion is backed up by what the judge said on the record that it was bordering on frivilous.'s

It's true, Taz, that it is my opinion, judges have to each lunch with all of these people, he doesn't need to make enemies downtown. However, as I indicated, the only thing that had OMIG/Simpson's atty, D. McCann, inmidated was O'Melveny & Myers P.A.'s prior demand that the court issue a penalty for Federal Rule 11 sanction of $30K be awarded by the court.

It almost derailed attorney McCann out of fear until doc's legal advisor explained to McCann that the "frivolous charge " by O'Melveny & Myers was, as you say, "smoke and mirrors" and that the legal action was a "declaratory judgment" action and that anyone, including Simpson, has the right to ask the court to issue a declaratory judgment determining the constitutionality of a plaintiff's charges.

A Declaratory Judment request is purposesly submitted with the intent of preventing costly legal actions. Judge Pregerson could certainly have been more damaging, therefore, "bordering frivoulous" is like shooting the squirrel's fluffy tail, for me at least. It certainly didn't injure anyone, and now you are made aware of an issue that was previously concealed from you.

Why isn't OJ shouting this at the top of his lungs? Each time he gives an interview he should be saying this. Someone...please look at the phone records, they will clear me?

Taz, I don't know why OJ does so many backwards things, I hesitate to speculate, he's not a stupid man. However I've always felt that whatever his reasons for distancing himself from OMIG, and whoever he's been involved with in the past could be related to fatal consequences for his young children if he were to continue. Again I'm simply doing something that I hesitate to do, speculate. However, even though we hadn't interviewed him in 3 years OJ did acknowledge Dr. Johnson's pursuit of the phone records in his 2004 NBC interview with Katie Couric.

[Big Ben]

Martin,

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

Yes, they were released.

Taz, I can tell you right now that the document that is displayed by Wagner on his website, purporting to be the Juditha Brown Phone Records, has some very serious problems. We laughed when Gloria Alred showed them on FOX News while trying to pull a fast one, and covering up vital irregularities. In fact I have the first copy that Brown faxed over to our office, right here. It's got serious problems, Taz!

No Taz, as we told Lou Brown, we would like for the records to come from the GTE/Verizon archive dept. in San Angelo, TX where the hard disk had been previously removed by GTE (California).

This record came after Brown badgered Hodgman for 6 weeks. We offered to receive them but had cautioned Brown initially that we could not and would not accept them as being the certified documents purported to be the Juditha Brown Phone Records that Hodgman had surrepticiously removed by ex parte court order from Simpson's file.

Till this day, we still firmly believe that GTE as an unbiased 3rd party should provide those records by ordering and punching a computer key in San Angelo, TX.

Again, you should explore the depths of your own mind if you are prepared to accept someone else's call that justice has been served because they say so, without calling for a complete examination of all crucial evidence in a legal matter as profound as this "the trial of the century".

[tazzybaby]

Hi Big Ben,

First, I want to say thank you for disagreeing with me in a very civil way. I know that we (many posters) have went round and round with this issue several times on this board. I get what you are saying. I see the things you are talking about. But, I've come to a different conclusion than you. That's okay. I actually wish you luck on retaining the records that could lay this issue to rest one way or the other. I know that you see deceiving actions in them not providing these records (I do not) and that's one reason why I wish this issue could be layed to rest.

I would like to ask though, if you are an outside member of an independent investigation what is your drive? Did someone hire you? Did you take it upon yourself?

[Big Ben]

Hi Big Ben,

First, I want to say thank you for disagreeing with me in a very civil way. I know that we (many posters) have went round and round with this issue several times on this board. I get what you are saying. I see the things you are talking about. But, I've come to a different conclusion than you........

The truth must come forward, Tazzy. If "In God We Trust" is to have any real meaning for the American people then the insitutional rules that were the foundational blocks of this nation must not be violated, usurped, nor abrogated, by any man, regardless of race, creed or color. Patience is a never ending virtue when dealing with what appears to be a cooperative between unscrupulous officers of the court and national media.

I would like to ask though, if you are an outside member of an independent investigation what is your drive? Did someone hire you? Did you take it upon yourself?

I was called into California and compensated by Dr. Johnson and his staff, who know how I've conducted prior research/investigative matters. You can not do an investigation unless you are willing to examine all participants. That is what I believed then and now, and that is why I remain loyal to his organization, OMIG.

Though Dr. Johnson's revelations of the knife exit wounds, and travel time discrepancies, were extremely compelling by themselves, the fact that Doc's people in California had not done a criminal background check on Ron Goldman, nor asked the court for a copy of the phone records, didn't make sense to me. So I was compelled by a determination not to accept continued mediocrity regarding crucial evidence as an excuse for Simpson's guilt or a pretext to OMIG making unfounded allegations.

Once I felt the backlash of public officials determined to denigrate and intentionally deny access, I told Doc he doesn't have to pay another dime. Exposure of such mediocrity, of public servants relative to public records in our U.S. justice system, will be and has been compensation enough for me. I would simply encourage you to demand a full accounting of the evidence no matter how you emotionally feel about the subject.

[pearyb]

I always like the one where Johnnie Cochran has got the hat on and says some thing like, "I am O.J. Simpson, and I've got a big head, I am still O.J. Simpson, I just happen to have a hat on". Once you've been a victim of the criminal justice system you realize that just because a prosecutor says something, this does not make it so. Mark F. has already answered questions about his racism and planting evidence. And he answered those questions for money. I think Mark F. brought disgrace to one of the best law enforcement agencies in the world. The case brought the world to the doorstep of just what the politics of crime can do, and enlightened the way for better crime scene investiagtion.Hi Big Ben,

Schwab said that he found the dog at 10:55 because of the show he was watching. And, the dogs had already been barking. All Schwab did was become more accurate. He had already phoned the police to tell them that before testifying. What evidence do you have or know of that makes you believe that he would lie?

The defense accepted the phone records. They understood. The phone records that the defense didn't want in were OJ's (cell). And, they didn't come in. OJ made many, many calls on his way home from Chicago from what I've heard.

I don't have access to the records but the defense did. Why didn't they produce them when TRYING to "impeach" Schwab? Because they would not have succeeded at creating a "smoke and mirrors" type of doubt if they introduced the truth.

And, I'm sure the Brown's were extremely upset when they gave their statements. Very understandable if they weren't sure or needed to clarify. The records introduced showed the actual time of the call.

I don't automatically take whatever the police or media say as gospel. But, I also don't take everything that OJ says as gospel either. The defense accepted the records at the time and that means that there is NO REASON to dispute them. Both sides accepted them.

Taz, the only thing that you can say for sure is that certain Cal. officials decided to have a one of a kind, historically unique, show trial.

The federal judge's remark of "bordering on frivolous" was for public consumption and gave the defendant (GTE) Attys something rather than nothing at all. They were asking $30K under FRCP, Rule 11, for Simpson filing what they alleged to be a frivolous action, the judge didn't grant their motion.

The only thing I can say for sure is that OJ had a cut and was bleeding before he left on the same night that two people were murdered and he is a proven liar. His blood was found at the crime scene and at his home mixed with the victims blood. The insinuations that LE framed him are only that. The same logic that you use to insinuate that he is innocent is the same logic you should use when looking at LE's actions.

You don't know that the judge's remarks was for public consumption. That's your opinion. My opinion is backed up by what the judge said on the record that it was bordering on frivilous.

Why isn't OJ shouting this at the top of his lungs? Each time he gives an interview he should be saying this. Someone...please look at the phone records, they will clear me?

[Big Ben]

I think Mark F. brought disgrace to one of the best law enforcement agencies in the world. The case brought the world to the doorstep of just what the politics of crime can do, and enlightened the way for better crime scene investiagtion.

Mark F. was so far down on the totem pole of this conspiracy that he is hardly worthy of mention except for the fact that he uttered racial epitaths and was at the location of where the Bloody glove was found.

Why not ask, "Who is the grand dragon or mighty wizard that could sanction this chirade going forward, with all of its serious flaws and irregularities.

1.) The time discrepancy and hidden phone records.

2.) The original M.E. citing of exit wounds indication two distinctive types of knives used, the killer of Nicole more than likely left handed.

3.) The FBI agent Bodziak that fails to mention that the shoe sole on the Bruno Magli is found on 19 other shoe brands world wide.

And in reference to Simpson's "big Head", and other remarks about his "big hands", both of which we know to be the case. Does it make sense that his feet would not be categorized as big also. Never the less, the shoe prints in the crime photos indicate shoes that fit neatly inside of an 11 and one half inch square side walk tile at 875 So. Bundy. That's rather small, certainly not befitting of a man of Simpson's proportions.

[bobaugust]

Mark F. was so far down on the totem pole of this conspiracy that he is hardly worthy of mention except for the fact that he uttered racial epitaths and was at the location of where the Bloody glove was found.

Why not ask, "Who is the grand dragon or mighty wizard that could sanction this chirade going forward, with all of its serious flaws and irregularities.

1.) The time discrepancy and hidden phone records.

2.) The original M.E. citing of exit wounds indication two distinctive types of knives used, the killer of Nicole more than likely left handed.

3.) The FBI agent Bodziak that fails to mention that the shoe sole on the Bruno Magli is found on 19 other shoe brands world wide.

And in reference to Simpson's "big Head", and other remarks about his "big hands", both of which we know to be the case. Does it make sense that his feet would not be categorized as big also. Never the less, the shoe prints in the crime photos indicate shoes that fit neatly inside of an 11 and one half inch square side walk tile at 875 So. Bundy. That's rather small, certainly not befitting of a man of Simpson's proportions.

Big Ben, there was no time discrepancy, only a mistaken estimate from a grieving mother whose daughter had just been viciously killed that was later corrected. The telephone records were not hidden they were presented in court and given to Simpson's defense. An enlarged photocopy of the portion of the telephone records documenting the time telephone calls were made on the day and night of the murders was used in a prosecution exhibit.

Dr. Golden, Dr. Lakshmanan, Dr. Baden, and Dr. Spitz all testified that one knife could have caused all the wounds on both victims. No one ever opined that the killer was left handed.

The fact that other shoes around the world may have used Silga soles doesn't change the fact that over 30 authenticated photographs taken by two different photographers nine months before the murders show Simpson wearing shoes that had the exact Silga sole that left the shoe prints at Bundy.

The shoe prints at Bundy were made by size 12 shoes, the same size Simpson wore. The fact is that there were many partial shoe prints found on the walkway at Bundy. The size of the pattern and the heel made in the bloody shoe prints were used to determine the size of the shoe that made the partial shoe prints.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Bobaugust, you will continue to be perpetually in the dark because you have not performed any independent discovery of your own. You are simply regirgitating false facts based upon lies that have been given to individuals like you to disseminate. You do this eagerly, for what purpose one can only speculate, though I know that you know that their chirade is sinking fast. Remember, I last referred to you as the man with his finger in the dike, attempting to hold back the truth.

The time descrepancy is becoming more valid everyday. We now know that the I-405 was under heavy construction for 15 miles, courtesy of documents from supportive CalTrans employees, where the Browns had to travel. We know that given those conditions their journey, as stated by your own favorites, Lang and Vannatter, was at least a one and a half to two hour journey the night of 06/12/94. Therefore anytime that the Browns would have left the Brentwood, Mezzaluna Restaurant, would have gotten them home well beyond their alleged 9:37PM phone call time back to the restaurant.

Those phone records that you so majestically tout, are equally ridiculous, anyone would question the image distortion of the time in question, font differences, amongst other sordid irregularities. Those records came, not from an unbiased 3rd party, GTE, but from an unscrupulous scoundrel who secretly removed them from Simpson's file under a cloak of deceit, Wm. Hodgman.

30 photos, Hogwash! Those photos showed up not during the time of the FBIs testimony during the criminal trial but a year and a half after the criminal trial had ended. The highly questionable photos just conveniently appeared, I presume, at a time necessary to hide the intentional malfeasance of that particular FBI agent, the fabricator, William Bodziack. Since he knew of the 19 different shoe brands that the U2887 Silga sole was on, imagine the impact that it would have had had he mentioned it in the criminal trial, as he should have. His failure to do so, further undermines the credibility of the so called Bruno Magli photographs with Simpson.

Your other comments are simply too weak for me to desire rendering a response, Bob.

[bobaugust]

Bobaugust, you will continue to be perpetually in the dark because you have not performed any independent discovery of your own. You are simply regirgitating false facts based upon lies that have been given to individuals like you to disseminate. You do this eagerly, for what purpose one can only speculate, though I know that you know that their chirade is sinking fast. Remember, I last referred to you as the man with his finger in the dike, attempting to hold back the truth.

The time descrepancy is becoming more valid everyday. We now know that the I-405 was under heavy construction for 15 miles, courtesy of documents from supportive CalTrans employees, where the Browns had to travel. We know that given those conditions their journey, as stated by your own favorites, Lang and Vannatter, was at least a one and a half to two hour journey the night of 06/12/94. Therefore anytime that the Browns would have left the Brentwood, Mezzaluna Restaurant, would have gotten them home well beyond their alleged 9:37PM phone call time back to the restaurant.

Those phone records that you so majestically tout, are equally ridiculous, anyone would question the image distortion of the time in question, font differences, amongst other sordid irregularities. Those records came, not from an unbiased 3rd party, GTE, but from an unscrupulous scoundrel who secretly removed them from Simpson's file under a cloak of deceit, Wm. Hodgman.

30 photos, Hogwash! Those photos showed up not during the time of the FBIs testimony during the criminal trial but a year and a half after the criminal trial had ended. The highly questionable photos just conveniently appeared, I presume, at a time necessary to hide the intentional malfeasance of that particular FBI agent, the fabricator, William Bodziack. Since he knew of the 19 different shoe brands that the U2887 Silga sole was on, imagine the impact that it would have had had he mentioned it in the criminal trial, as he should have. His failure to do so, further undermines the credibility of the so called Bruno Magli photographs with Simpson.

Your other comments are simply too weak for me to desire rendering a response, Bob.

Big Ben, the evidence presented in this case tell us what happened. You may have conducted a so called independent investigation but what you found does not change the reality of what happened that night.

Juditha Brown testified that when they left the restaurant after dinner she realized her eyeglasses were missing. She said she didn't think she had them in the restaurant with her so they looked in their Jeep put they didn't find them. She testified that by that time is was 8:30 P.M. and she was concerned about the small children with them getting to bed so they started their drive home to Orange County. Juditha testified that when they got home she called the Mezzaluna Restaurant to ask if they had seen her eyeglasses.

Karen Crawford testified in the grand jury on June 21, 1994 that she received that call from Juditha Brown between 9:30 and 9:45 and found the eyeglasses saw them in the street where the Brown's Jeep had been parked. Crawford told Juditha she would hold the eyeglasses for pick up and put them in an envelope writing Nicole's name on the envelope

Juditha Brown testified that after she spoke with Karen Crawford she called Nicole and told her about her conversation with Crawford. Nicole then called the restaurant, spoke with Crawford and then spoke with her friend Ron Goldman, a waiter at the restaurant. Crawford testified that she received Nicole's call about five minutes after speaking with Juditha Brown. Crawford testified she gave the envelope containing the eyeglasses to Ron. Crawford and other employees testified Ron left the restaurant about ten minutes to ten.

Based on the testimony of Robert Heidstra, Ron arrived at Bundy shortly after 10:30 that night. When the police arrived at Bundy they saw the envelope with Juditha Brown's eyeglasses in it near Ron's Body.

There have been many people who have duplicated the drive the Brown's made from the Mezzaluna Restaurant to their home on a Sunday night and found that it could be done in the time the Brown's said they did it in even with time to spare.

The Brown's telephone records were obtained from GTE on July 4. 1994, brought to court and given to Simpson's attorneys. The telephone records documented the actual time of the telephone calls Juditha Brown made that night. They document her call to the Mezzaluna Restaurant as 9::37 P.M. and Juditha Brown's call to Nicole as 9::40 P.M. In the criminal trial both Robert Shapiro and Johnnie Cochran made and agreed to stipulations regarding the telephone records saying they were accurate and depicted the time the call came into the restaurant. 9:37 P.M.

That's the documented evidence in this case whether or not you want to believe it or not. Your claim about image distortion relates to the prosecution exhibit showing an enlarged photocopy of the portion of the Brown's telephone bill showing the calls made on June 12. The distortions are normal when something is blown up to many times it's size. Any printed document that looks perfectly normal in it's original size will show distortions the more it is enlarged. There are always tiny discrepancies in the type and spacing in any printed document that that can't be seen in it's normal size but become apparent the more the document is enlarged.

The over thirty authenticated photographs did not surface until December 1996 when one of the plaintiffs attorneys, John Kelly, following a lead flew from New York to Buffalo and met with the Buffalo Bill's information director, Denny Lynch who put him in touch with a photographer named E.J. Flammer, who put him in touch with his son, E.J. Flammer Jr. who had shown him the pictures. Flammer had taken over thirty photographs of Simpson posing with members of the Monday Morning Quarterback Club as well as Bill Munson and Denny Lynch from the Buffalo Bills at a Buffalo Bills football game on September 26, 1993. The Monday Morning Quarterback Club had hired Flammer to take the photographs that day because they were honoring Simpson on the anniversary of his record run. Flammer's father was the president of the club. All of the photographs Flammer took of Simpson show him wearing the same clothing and the same shoes that the Scull photograph taken the same day showed. One of Flammer's photographs was published in a monthly publication of the Buffalo Bills Report in November 1993.

As to my other comments about the bloody shoe prints I understand why you have no desire to respond since you measured a partial shoe print shown in a photograph and then claimed it was too small for Simpson to have made. You should be embarrassed.

bobaugust

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Big Ben, the evidence presented in this case tell us what happened. You may have conducted a so called independent investigation but what you found does not change the reality of what happened that night.


I agree. IIRC $19 million dollars was spent in the criminal trial & a good amount was spent in the civil trial, yet someone here thinks they have better resources to conduct an independent investigation? That's funny.

[martin II]

Big Ben, the evidence presented in this case tell us what happened. You may have conducted a so called independent investigation but what you found does not change the reality of what happened that night.

Juditha Brown testified that when they left the restaurant after dinner she realized her eyeglasses were missing. She said she didn't think she had them in the restaurant with her so they looked in their Jeep put they didn't find them. She testified that by that time is was 8:30 P.M. and she was concerned about the small children with them getting to bed so they started their drive home to Orange County. Juditha testified that when they got home she called the Mezzaluna Restaurant to ask if they had seen her eyeglasses.

Karen Crawford testified in the grand jury on June 21, 1994 that she received that call from Juditha Brown between 9:30 and 9:45 and found the eyeglasses saw them in the street where the Brown's Jeep had been parked. Crawford told Juditha she would hold the eyeglasses for pick up and put them in an envelope writing Nicole's name on the envelope

Juditha Brown testified that after she spoke with Karen Crawford she called Nicole and told her about her conversation with Crawford. Nicole then called the restaurant, spoke with Crawford and then spoke with her friend Ron Goldman, a waiter at the restaurant. Crawford testified that she received Nicole's call about five minutes after speaking with Juditha Brown. Crawford testified she gave the envelope containing the eyeglasses to Ron. Crawford and other employees testified Ron left the restaurant about ten minutes to ten.

Based on the testimony of Robert Heidstra, Ron arrived at Bundy shortly after 10:30 that night. When the police arrived at Bundy they saw the envelope with Juditha Brown's eyeglasses in it near Ron's Body.

There have been many people who have duplicated the drive the Brown's made from the Mezzaluna Restaurant to their home on a Sunday night and found that it could be done in the time the Brown's said they did it in even with time to spare.

The Brown's telephone records were obtained from GTE on July 4. 1994, brought to court and given to Simpson's attorneys. The telephone records documented the actual time of the telephone calls Juditha Brown made that night. They document her call to the Mezzaluna Restaurant as 9::37 P.M. and Juditha Brown's call to Nicole as 9::40 P.M. In the criminal trial both Robert Shapiro and Johnnie Cochran made and agreed to stipulations regarding the telephone records saying they were accurate and depicted the time the call came into the restaurant. 9:37 P.M.

That's the documented evidence in this case whether or not you want to believe it or not. Your claim about image distortion relates to the prosecution exhibit showing an enlarged photocopy of the portion of the Brown's telephone bill showing the calls made on June 12. The distortions are normal when something is blown up to many times it's size. Any printed document that looks perfectly normal in it's original size will show distortions the more it is enlarged. There are always tiny discrepancies in the type and spacing in any printed document that that can't be seen in it's normal size but become apparent the more the document is enlarged.

The over thirty authenticated photographs did not surface until December 1996 when one of the plaintiffs attorneys, John Kelly, following a lead flew from New York to Buffalo and met with the Buffalo Bill's information director, Denny Lynch who put him in touch with a photographer named E.J. Flammer, who put him in touch with his son, E.J. Flammer Jr. who had shown him the pictures. Flammer had taken over thirty photographs of Simpson posing with members of the Monday Morning Quarterback Club as well as Bill Munson and Denny Lynch from the Buffalo Bills at a Buffalo Bills football game on September 26, 1993. The Monday Morning Quarterback Club had hired Flammer to take the photographs that day because they were honoring Simpson on the anniversary of his record run. Flammer's father was the president of the club. All of the photographs Flammer took of Simpson show him wearing the same clothing and the same shoes that the Scull photograph taken the same day showed. One of Flammer's photographs was published in a monthly publication of the Buffalo Bills Report in November 1993.

As to my other comments about the bloody shoe prints I understand why you have no desire to respond since you measured a partial shoe print shown in a photograph and then claimed it was too small for Simpson to have made. You should be embarrassed.

bobaugust


bob
heidstra's testimony indicated that someone Maby ron. arrived at bundy at 10: 40 not some time not some time shortly after 10;30 pm


martin II

[socaldiva]

bob
heidstra's testimony indicated that someone Maby ron. arrived at bundy at 10: 40 not some time not some time shortly after 10;30 pm


martin II

Heidra's testmony did not indicate that Ron or anyone else arrived at Bundy at 10:40 IIRC. I believe you are wrong about this.

[Big Ben]

Big Ben, the evidence presented in this case tell us what happened. You may have conducted a so called independent investigation but what you found does not change the reality of what happened that night.

(CLOWNISH REMARK):THERE IS NOTHING "SO CALLED" REGARDING THE INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION THAT DR. HENRY S. JOHNSON AND OUR O.M.I.G. INVESTIGATIVE GROUP CONDUCTED, BOB. YOU ARE NOT THE FINAL ARBITOR TO DECIDE WHAT OUR INVESTIGATION WILL OR WILL NOT CHANGE. YOU APPEAR TO BE A COUNTER INTELLIGENCE FACTOR. I'VE KNOWN YOUR POSITION FOR APPROX. 10 YEARS NOW, BUT I SINCERELY BELIEVE THAT SUCH OUTDATED THOUGHTS AS YOURS ARE SINKING IN LIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE THAT (OMIG) AND OTHERS ARE REVEALING REGARDING THE HIDDEN TRUTHS OF THIS CASE.

Juditha Brown testified that by that time is was 8:30 P.M. and she was concerned about the small children with them getting to bed so they started their drive home to Orange County.

(UNACCEPTABLE AND DUBIOUS RESPONSE):STRANGE THAT JUDITHA DIDN'T GIVE THIS TESTIMONY ANYTIME DURING THE CRIMINAL TRIAL, EVEN THOUGH SHE COULD WALK, AND TALK (WITH THE MEDIA), AND WAS OFTEN IN THE COURTROOM DURING SIMPSON'S CRIMINAL TRIAL. VERY SUSPICIOUS!
THE INITIAL TESTIMONY IN THE POLICE REPORT GIVEN BY THE MEZZALUNA MNGR. WAS THAT THEY DEPARTED AT 9:00 PM ON 06/13/94. EVEN DURING TRIAL THE WAITRESS TIA GAVIN PEGGED THE DEPARTURE AT APPROX. 8:45 PM. JUDITHA'S TESTIMONY OCCURRED 15 MONTHS AFTER THE CRIMINAL TRIAL ENDED AND WAS DURING EARLY DECEMBER 1996 IN THE CIVIL TRIAL. PLENTY OF TIME TO GET HER STORY STRUCTURED, I'D SAY! BOB YOU LIKE TO DISMISS INITIAL CONTRADICTORY REMARKS, I DON'T AND WILL NOT. THIS IS WHY ALL EVIDENCE THAT O.M.I.G. ASKS FOR SHOULD BE PRODUCED.

Karen Crawford testified in the grand jury on June 21, 1994 that she received that call from Juditha Brown between 9:30 and 9:45 and found the eyeglasses saw them in the street where the Brown's Jeep had been parked. Crawford told Juditha she would hold the eyeglasses for pick up and put them in an envelope writing Nicole's name on the envelope.......

(HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE):CRAWFORD'S NERVOUS AND SEEMINGLY FORCED TESTIMONY RAISE QUESTIONS OF THE ISSUE OF THE VORACITY OF HER REMARKS. IT IS HIGHLY DOUBTFUL AS WELL THAT ALL OF THE PROCEDURES AND/OR PHYSICAL ACTIONS THAT WERE REQUIRED DURING THE EXPLORATION AND/OR SEARCH FOR THE EYE GLASSES BY CRAWFORD COULD HAVE OCCURRED DURING THE THREE MINUTE INTERVAL BETWEEN 9:37 PM AND 9:40 PM AS SHOWN ON THE EXHIBIT 35 POSTERBOARD., WHICH ALSO INCLUDED THE INITIAL CONVERSATION WITH JUDITHA, THE CONFIRMING CONVERSATION WITH JUDITHA, JUDITHA'S CALL TO NICOLE, AND NICOLE'S RETURN CALL TO THE RESTAURANT BY 9:40 PM. HIGHLY DOUBTFUL!

Based on the testimony of Robert Heidstra, Ron arrived at Bundy shortly after 10:30 that night. When the police arrived at Bundy they saw the envelope with Juditha Brown's eyeglasses in it near Ron's Body.

(HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE): GIVEN ALL OF THE CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE DISCOVERED BY O.M.I.G. IT IS PROBABLE THAT RON'S DEPARTURE FROM THE RESTAURANT WAS AFTER 10:33 PM IN ACCORDANCE WITH TIA GAVIN'S FIRST STATEMENT THAT THE MEZZALUNA TIME CLOCKS HAD NOT BEEN ADJUSTED FOR DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME. THIS ASSERTION IS MADE MORE PLAUSIBLE DUE TO THE FACT THAT MANAGEMENT DID NOT BOTHER TO CHANGE OTHER IMPORTANT TIME DEVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE RESTAURANT.

There have been many people who have duplicated the drive the Brown's made from the Mezzaluna Restaurant to their home on a Sunday night and found that it could be done in the time the Brown's said they did it in even with time to spare.

(UNACCEPTABLE RESPONSE):ALL SUCH DRIVES OCCURRED AFTER SIMPSON ALLOWED O.M.I.G TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY TO PURSUE THE ACQUISITION OF THE BROWN TELEPHONE RECORDS IN 1999. THE CONDITIONS OF THE ALLEGED DRIVES DID NOT DUPLICATE THE DRIVING CONDITIONS OF 06/12/94. BY THAT TIME THE LANES HAD BEEN INCREASED ON THE I-405 AND ALL HEAVY CONSTRUCTION TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LANES, THAT SLOWED SPEEDS DOWN TO AS LOW AS 29 MPH THROUGH A 15 MILE STRETCH, HAD ENDED.

In the criminal trial both Robert Shapiro and Johnnie Cochran made and agreed to stipulations regarding the telephone records saying they were accurate and depicted the time the call came into the restaurant. 9:37 P.M.

(UNDOCUMENTED AND CONTRADICTED RESPONSE):YOU'VE NEVER SEEN THE ACTUAL RECORDS, THEY WERE NEVER EXPOSED IN COURT, AND NEITHER HAS THE JURY OR ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC. YOUR ASSERTIONS ARE CONTRADICTED BY THE FACTS THAT ROBERT SHAPIRO INITIALLY OFFERED TO STIPULATE TO 10:17 PM AS THE TIME TO WHEN THE INITIAL PHONE CALL CAME INTO THE RESTAURANT IN JUDGE K.K. POWELL'S COURT CHAMBERS ON JULY 8, 1994. SHE SEALED THE RECORD. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE IN THE CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS DEPT. FOR THE L.A. SUPERIOR COURT THAT THE JUDITHA BROWN PHONE RECORDS WERE EVER DELIVERED TO THEM. JOHNNIE COCHRAN SLIPPED AND IMPLIED THAT THE TELEPHONE RECORDS HAD BEEN INTENTIONALLY KEPT FROM THE JURY BECAUSE THEY COULD PREJUDICE THE JURY ON JULY 6, 1995. HIS INADVERTENT FAUX PAS MAY HAVE CAUSED HIS UNTIMELY DEATH.

Your claim about image distortion related to the prosecution exhibit showing an enlarged photocopy of the portion of the Brown's telephone bill showing the calls made on June 12. The distortions are normal .......

(UNACCEPTABLE RESPONSE): ABSURD! THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST CRUCIAL PIECES OF POTENTIALLY EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE. YOUR RESPONSE IS TOTALLY ABSURD! UNACCEPTABLE FROM AN INVESTIGATORS VIEWPOINT. THAT IS WHY O.M.I.G. TOLD BROWN THAT WE WANTED A COPY OF THE RECORDS TO COME DIRECTLY FROM THE GTE ARCHIVES IN SAN ANGELO, TX. YOU MAKE MY FINGERS TIRED WITH YOUR ABSURD COMMENTARY, BOB!

The over thirty authenticated photographs did not surface until December 1996 when one of the plaintiffs attorneys, John Kelly, following a lead flew from New York to Buffalo and met with the Buffalo Bill's information director,

(UNACCEPTABLE RESPONSE):THOSE PHOTOS WERE NOT MADE AVAILABLE A YEAR AND A HALF EARLIER DURING THE MOST CELEBRATED TRIAL IN HISTORY;TOTALLY UNBELIEVABLE. THE FACT THAT THE SO CALLED TRUE PHOTOS TRAVELED HALF WAY AROUND THE WORLD BEFORE MYSTERIOUSLY COMING BACK TO THE U.S.; MAKE THEM SUSPECT. THE FACT THAT THEY WERE, IN MY OPINION, THOROUGHLY DISCREDITED BY A PHOTO EXPERT (THE ONLY ONE, MIND YOU, TO PASS ALL TEST QUESTIONS AS A JFK PHOTO EXPERT) WAS ENOUGH FOR ME. THE BENEFIT OF THE PHOTOS WAS, IN MY OPINION, NECESSARY TO SAVE THE FBI FROM TOTAL DISCREDITATION WHEN IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT FBI AGENT BODZIACK FAILED TO TELL THE JURY/TELEVISION VIEWERS THAT THE U2887 SILGA SOLE WAS FOUND ON 19 OTHER SHOE BRANDS AROUND THE WORLD.

As to my other comments about the bloody shoe prints I understand why you have no desire to respond since you measured a partial shoe print shown in a photograph and then claimed it was too small for Simpson to have made. You should be embarrassed.bobaugust

(IN REPLY TO YOUR RESPONSE): OUR MEASUREMENTS PROMPTED O.M.I.G. TO ACQUIRE U2887 SIZE 46 SOLES FROM SILGA IN 2002 AND THEY ARE 3/4 INCHES SHORTER THAN SIMPSON'S FOOT. FBI AGENT BODZIACK MISREPRESENTED THE TRUTH ABOUT A NONSENSICAL "SIZE 12" SHOE KNOWING THAT THERE IS NO STANDARD "SIZE 12", VARIANCES EXIST ALL OVER THE WORLD FOR SO CALLED "SIZE 12" SHOES, EVEN BETWEEN ENGLISH SPEAKING COUNTRIES AS U.S. AND GREAT BRITAIN. HE KNEW THAT SIMPSON'S FOOT WAS MUCH LONGER THAN THE SHOES THAT MADE THE PRINTS AT 875 SO. BUNDY DRIVE AND WE HAVE TOLD YOU THAT BEFORE. NO EMBARASSMENT, I'M SIMPLY ATTEMPTING TO LIMIT FOOLISH COMMENTARY.

[martin II]

Heidstra testified that he was standing east of nicoles condo at 10:40 when he heard hey hey hey and a gate slam. Many believe that it was ron that yelled and slamed the gate at this time.If true then it was ron that arrived at the gate at 10:40 pm on 6/12/. If not then someone else yelled and slammed the gate.
imo
martin II

[Big Ben]

Heidstra testified that he was standing east of nicoles condo at 10:40 when he heard hey hey hey and a gate slam. Many believe that it was ron that yelled and slamed the gate at this time.If true then it was ron that arrived at the gate at 10:40 pm on 6/12/. If not then someone else yelled and slammed the gate.
imo martin II

We just don't know! I highly doubt it, being a proponent of the time clock being not adjusted for daylight savings at the Mezzaluna, which would have had Ron's punch out at 10:33 PM and his leaving closer to 10:50 PM instead of 9:33 PM and 9:50 PM, which is the standard line. 10:50 PM would be more in line with the time it would have taken the Brown family to travel down the I-405 on the night of 06/12/94 and would make the approx. 11:00 PM phone conversation initially stated by Nicole's father, Lou, to the 06/13/94 coroner's investigator and Nicole's mother, Juditha's, initial statement to defense investigators about an 11:00 PM phone conversation with daughter Nicole more plausible.

What and who Heidra allegedly heard, we simply don't know. It could have been a continuation of the alleged argument that dog walker, Thomas Lange (no relationship to the detective) claimed that he witnessed about that time between a woman who looked like Nicole and two men at the front gate of 875 So. Bundy and caused him to divert his walk from the immediate path of the argument, where the woman was crying, he said. Suspiciously, they never let him testify. Nicole, it is known, had been dating some very dubious characters after her divorce. One fellow she was allegedly dating, a contractor who had worked on a painting crew for her condo, turned out to be a confidential informant for federal and L.A. narcotics officers, turns out that he was also a serial killer, on death row in Florida, for killing 3 women in 3 states within 3 weeks time.

[weezer]

wow -- talk about needing to take meds! :eek:

[tv]

Scary...very scary. This doesn't deserve a response. :seeya:

[martin II]

Scary...very scary. This doesn't deserve a response. :seeya:

tvdinner
if the state paid $19 million to investigate the case i can understand oj when he said he could not afford a investigation to find the murder.

imo
martin II

[socaldiva]

tvdinner
if the state paid $19 million to investigate the case i can understand oj when he said he could not afford a investigation to find the murder.

imo
martin II

It looks like you are confused. The state didn't spend $19 million. IIRC $19 million was the TOTAL spent by the state & the defense team. $10 million by Orenthal & $9 million by the state.

[socaldiva]

*snip*
What difference does the dollar amount make if you never intended to reveal the facts but simply slant them in the direction that you wanted the case to go.


$10 million dollars of that amount was spent by the defense. Are you saying that they "never intended to reveal the facts but simply slant them in the direction that you wanted the case to go"?

As for the balance of your post, I think most reasonable people here can judge who/what is absurd, hateful, without common sense reasoning.

Perhaps you should hop on a chartered jet & get your findings to Orenthal A.S.AP. I'm sure he would be eternally grateful that you've proved his innocence with your findings. Perhaps he'll include it in his next interview or book. :tongue:

[martin II]

:eek: skullduggery? donkeys? dike pluggers? Oh my. . . . .

wonder why orenthal didn't use the opportunity of his book to give some of this information to the public rather than saying "I Did It" imo

WEEZER
maby because he wanted to tell his love story of 17 years with Nicole so you would have the opportunity to read it if you baught the book. His book was 'IF IDID IT" BUT it may be that you will change his words right?

IMO
MARTIN ii

[tv]

:eek: skullduggery? donkeys? dike pluggers? Oh my. . . . .

wonder why orenthal didn't use the opportunity of his book to give some of this information to the public rather than saying "I Did It" imoExcellent point! I don't have a problem with someone stating their opinion but it's been my experience that when someone starts name calling they don't really have a valid argument.

[socaldiva]

Excellent point! I don't have a problem with someone stating their opinion but it's been my experience that when someone starts name calling they don't really have a valid argument.

I'm beginning to wonder if Orenthal has borrowed a dictionary & has learned to use the Internet :D Who else would be that venomous? :shrug: How does he profess to know how old I am & that I have high blood pressure? I'm not old & my blood pressure is on the low side. I guess his crystal ball needs a tune-up. lol.

[Big Ben]

:eek: skullduggery? donkeys? dike pluggers? Oh my. . . . .

wonder why orenthal didn't use the opportunity of his book to give some of this information to the public rather than saying "I Did It" imo

Believe me, Weezer, when I thought it was worthwhile I argued with the fool about what you are now proposing, to the point of tension. But maybe in the end he's right. Playing the baffoon to a bunch of haters will probably be much more profitable then trying to regain any reasonable level of creditibility.

I'm surprised that Orenthal talked about implicating more than one assailant in his storybook. Doc Johnson should sue him, because that fool Simpson didn't have a clue. It was Doc who showed him the direction of the knife wounds in the autopsy report indicating a single edge knife wielded by a left handed person was used on Nicole. It was Doc that interpreted the findings of the original medical examiner, Dr. Golden, who clearly identified the tapered exit wounds consistent with a dagger stuck 23+or- times into Ron Goldman's face and neck by a right handed person.

However, unfortunately I believe that Simpson has chosen to play the baffon for people like you, for pecuniary gain. You know, kind of like the clown at the fair grounds that sits over a tub of water, taunting the fools that are angry enough to pay money to throw balls that hopefully dump him into the tub of water.

Do you see yourself, anywhere in there, Weezer? Nevertheless, let me reiterate, my cause is not to exonerate or convict Simpson. Same thing I've told him, I'm telling you. If the malfeasance that we have uncovered can be perpetrated against an individual of fortune and fame, like Simpson, then the little guy doesn't have a chance. We cannot and will not allow that!

[Big Ben]

Excellent point! I don't have a problem with someone stating their opinion but it's been my experience that when someone starts name calling they don't really have a valid argument.

REALLY!I hope that you're not a gambler.

[martin II]

Believe me, Weezer, when I thought it was worthwhile I argued with the fool about what you are now proposing, to the point of tension. But maybe in the end he's right. Playing the baffoon to a bunch of haters will probably be much more profitable then trying to regain any reasonable level of creditibility.

I'm surprised that Orenthal talked about implicating more than one assailant in his storybook. Doc Johnson should sue him, because that fool Simpson didn't have a clue. It was Doc who showed him the direction of the knife wounds in the autopsy report indicating a single edge knife wielded by a left handed person was used on Nicole. It was Doc that interpreted the findings of the original medical examiner, Dr. Golden, who clearly identified the tapered exit wounds consistent with a dagger stuck 23+or- times into Ron Goldman's face and neck by a right handed person.

However, unfortunately I believe that Simpson has chosen to play the baffon for people like you, for pecuniary gain. You know, kind of like the clown at the fair grounds that sits over a tub of water, taunting the fools that are angry enough to pay money to throw balls that hopefully dump him into the tub of water.

Do you see yourself, anywhere in there, Weezer? Nevertheless, let me reiterate, my cause is not to exonerate or convict Simpson. Same thing I've told him, I'm telling you. If the malfeasance that we have uncovered can be perpetrated against an individual of fortune and fame, like Simpson, then the little guy doesn't have a chance. We cannot and will not allow that!

BIG BEN

It appears to me that OJ and the publisher realized in the planning stages of that book that there are those that you refer to so skillfully in your post.
Some that are consummed by hate to the point of illness if there is no target.
I think they understood their target buyer quite well.imo
martin II

[bobaugust]

(IN REPLY TO YOUR RESPONSE): OUR MEASUREMENTS PROMPTED O.M.I.G. TO ACQUIRE U2887 SIZE 46 SOLES FROM SILGA IN 2002 AND THEY ARE 3/4 INCHES SHORTER THAN SIMPSON'S FOOT. FBI AGENT BODZIACK MISREPRESENTED THE TRUTH ABOUT A NONSENSICAL "SIZE 12" SHOE KNOWING THAT THERE IS NO STANDARD "SIZE 12", VARIANCES EXIST ALL OVER THE WORLD FOR SO CALLED "SIZE 12" SHOES, EVEN BETWEEN ENGLISH SPEAKING COUNTRIES AS U.S. AND GREAT BRITAIN. HE KNEW THAT SIMPSON'S FOOT WAS MUCH LONGER THAN THE SHOES THAT MADE THE PRINTS AT 875 SO. BUNDY DRIVE AND WE HAVE TOLD YOU THAT BEFORE. NO EMBARASSMENT, I'M SIMPLY ATTEMPTING TO LIMIT FOOLISH COMMENTARY.

Big Ben, your arguments are the same as they were eight or nine months ago on this discussion group when they were all shown be false or fantasy. About the only thing you haven't repeated is your reference to Robert Shapiro's book that Juditha Brown told him she had talked to Nicole shortly before 11:00 that night. You evidently dropped that when I pointed out to you that Shapiro wrote that it turned out Juditha was mistaken.

The Search for Justice, Robert Shapiro
"Much later, it turned out that Juditha was mistaken. We were confident that the phone records would verify her version, but when we saw them during the preliminary hearing, they indicated that the call had actually been made at about 9:45 PM., not 10:45. So she was off by an hour. But it would be a while before I knew that."

You say that Tia Gavin pegged the Brown's departure at approximately 8:45. Gavin said, "Between 8:30 and 9:00, 8:45ish." Only an estimated time range not a specific time, not a real time. Neither Tia Gavin or any or the other employees at the restaurant looked at a clock or were concerned with the specific time the Brown's left the restaurant. Juditha Brown tells us the time they left because she was concerned about the kids bedtime and did note the time they started their drive home, 8:30.

I see you're still making the false claim that the time clock was not set for daylight savings time. Tia Gavin testified that when she was interviewed about this there was confusion of whether they were talking about the time on the NCR machine or the time on the time clock. When Tia Gavin testified she explained that the time on the NCR machine that prints the guest checks was not correct, not the time clock. She testified the time on the time clock was accurate. John De Bello testified he had changed the time on the time clock when it was daylight savings time, and it was within a minute or so of accurate time on June 12.

The fact is that Karen Crawford testified about a week and half after the murders that she spoke with Juditha Brown and Nicole on the telephone between 9:30 to 9:45 and found Juditha Brown's eyeglasses. She estimated this time before the Brown's telephone records were obtained. The telephone records document the time of Juditha's call as 9:37. Your claim that Karen Crawford could not have searched and found the eyeglasses in three minutes is your claim and yours alone. The fact is the time elapsed could very well have over three and a half minutes. Crawford testified she first asked the busboys if they had found any eyeglasses and then she looked outside where she remembered seeing the Brown's get out of their car. She found the eyeglasses in the street near the gutter and told Juditha she found them. Crawford testified that about five minutes later she received another phone call and recognized Nicole's voice.

Karen Crawford testified that she gave the envelope with the eyeglasses to Ron Goldman and Ron left the restaurant at ten minutes to ten. Stuart Tanner who had plans to meet Ron after work testified he talked to Ron when Ron was leaving the restaurant at roughly a quarter to 10:00, 10 minutes to 10:00.

The Brown's made their drive home on a Sunday night when traffic was not heavy. It seems your independent investigation never bothered to actually duplicate that drive on a Sunday evening as others have done and documented nor did your independent investigation ever talk to anyone knowledgeable about photocopy enlargements to learn about the reality of distortions that occur when a printed document is enlarged to many times it's original size.

The reality of how and when the Flammer photographs came to be known was explained by Petrocelli. These negatives and photographs didn't travel anywhere let alone out of the country. You're confusing them with the Scull photographs. The over thirty Flammer photographs confirmed the authenticity of the Scull photographs by showing Simpson wearing the same clothing and same shoes as he was shown wearing in the Scull photographs The fact that one of the Flammer photographs was published in the Buffalo Bills report seven months before the murders confirmed their authenticity.

At the beginning of his investigation Bodziak was sent a Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoe, size 12 that was entered into evidence. What is questionable are your claims that you measured the same size Silga sole that was used exclusively on Bruno Magli Lorenzo style size 12 shoes. The fact that you measured a partial shoe print in a photo to make your false claim tells us you have little credibility compared to the real expert Bodziak who used sole patterns and heel patterns to conclusively determine that the size of the shoes that left the bloody shoe prints were American size 12, European size 46. In addition he visited the Silga factory in Italy and brought back a pair of European size 46 soles that were graded with an American size 12. On the side of these soles that were being used when Bodziak was there was written size 12 and the number "46." Bodziak also did a direct comparison between Simpson's size 12 Reeboks with Bruno Magli size 12 shoes and found their linear dimensions as well as their internal measurements were identical.

bobaugust

[weezer]

Believe me, Weezer, when I thought it was worthwhile I argued with the fool about what you are now proposing, to the point of tension. But maybe in the end he's right. Playing the baffoon to a bunch of haters will probably be much more profitable then trying to regain any reasonable level of creditibility.

I'm surprised that Orenthal talked about implicating more than one assailant in his storybook. Doc Johnson should sue him, because that fool Simpson didn't have a clue. It was Doc who showed him the direction of the knife wounds in the autopsy report indicating a single edge knife wielded by a left handed person was used on Nicole. It was Doc that interpreted the findings of the original medical examiner, Dr. Golden, who clearly identified the tapered exit wounds consistent with a dagger stuck 23+or- times into Ron Goldman's face and neck by a right handed person.

However, unfortunately I believe that Simpson has chosen to play the baffon for people like you, for pecuniary gain. You know, kind of like the clown at the fair grounds that sits over a tub of water, taunting the fools that are angry enough to pay money to throw balls that hopefully dump him into the tub of water.

Do you see yourself, anywhere in there, Weezer? Nevertheless, let me reiterate, my cause is not to exonerate or convict Simpson. Same thing I've told him, I'm telling you. If the malfeasance that we have uncovered can be perpetrated against an individual of fortune and fame, like Simpson, then the little guy doesn't have a chance. We cannot and will not allow that!

oh my! all that information and orenthal didn't use any of it. you don't suppose he knows there's nothing to it, do you? since HE was the one that murdered Nicole and Ron -- seems to me he'd be in a much better position to say. Just a thought.

[martin II]

oh my! all that information and orenthal didn't use any of it. you don't suppose he knows there's nothing to it, do you? since HE was the one that murdered Nicole and Ron -- seems to me he'd be in a much better position to say. Just a thought.

weezer

Again you see, not many are concerned with what you think the contents of the book should have been.I guess they may owe you an apology in your mind. On the other hand oj gave his best estimate when he said the solution or answer lies in the world of Faye Resnick and for sure he was not going to
spend the remainder of his fortune for some investigaiton that the prosecution has said they are not interested in receiving.
It is my opinion that if a person were to confess with some proof, the DA would refuse to review it.

And i must remind you that i would think that oj looks at it as if it is all over as he was declared not guilty.

martin II

martin II

[socaldiva]

*snip*

And i must remind you that i would think that oj looks at it as if it is all over as he was declared not guilty.



Then why does he continue to give interviews trying to redeem his public image?

[Big Ben]

Big Ben, your arguments are the same as they were eight or nine months ago on this discussion group....bobaugust

Bob, you're absolutely right as far as your above remark, and that is why I am not going to attempt to address your flawed conclusions any longer regarding your skillful, however, decrepit rebuttals. My feelings can be best summed up by this analogy, if one says something to me when he is drunk I'm not going to dismiss the remark automatically for lack of voracity. You appear all to comfortable at explaining away what I consider to be serious potentially exculpatory issues regarding time, over and over again, as simply minor faux pas. We; no can do!

By the way, we've made the journey between Brentwood and Monarch Bay/Dana Point on several occasions. We never came in under one hour twenty five minutes. All mapquest directional time charts, all AAA direction and time charts came in at 1hr. 25 min.-1hr. 38 min. for 1998 when we first discovered the irregularity in the travel time issue.

CalTrans employees provided to us in year 2000, heretofore, unknown highway conditions for the year of 1994 when the Browns traveled the I-405. It appears that the I-405 was under extremely heavy constuction for '93-'98 for the HOV lanes for 15 miles reducing traffic speeds to approx. 30 mph through that zone, with similiar traffic volumes that the Browns would have experienced on the night of 06/12/94.

This information came to us well after those infamous alt.fan.oj debates that you used to engage in with pro-Js in '96-'98. You should have been doing your homework and compiling objective evidence, trying to get to the truth, instead of promulgating hate, as you were doing online even back then. Truthfully, I think that this may be an assigned task for you, and if so, you're not so bad, just another worthwhile challenge, that's all.


At the beginning of his investigation Bodziak was sent a Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoe, size 12 that was entered into evidence. What is questionable are your claims that you measured the same size Silga sole that was used exclusively on Bruno Magli Lorenzo style size 12 shoes. The fact that you measured a partial shoe print in a photo to make your false claim tells us you have little credibility compared to the real expert Bodziak who used sole patterns and heel patterns to conclusively determine that the size of the shoes that left the bloody shoe prints were American size 12, European size 46. In addition he visited the Silga factory in Italy and brought back a pair of European size 46 soles that were graded with an American size 12. On the side of these soles that were being used when Bodziak was there was written size 12 and the number "46." Bodziak also did a direct comparison between Simpson's size 12 Reeboks with Bruno Magli size 12 shoes and found their linear dimensions as well as their internal measurements were identical.

At the end of our examination of Bodziack's representations or misrepresentations, if you will, we also contacted the Silga Gomma shoe sole manufacturers, and paid $125.00 for them to ship U2887 shoe soles to our offices here in the U.S. You can see one of the investigators measuring one on a white sheet of paper and placing it in blood then again placing it between the measured lines on the paper. Bob, if you'd like to purchase a copy, I could acquire a copy of the documentary "Serpents Rising" and you could see the U2887 demonstration. The audience is shocked because the research investigator shows them against a size 10 shoe and the U2887 shoe sole has the same measurement, 12 and 1/4 inches. Simpson's foot measures 12 and 3/4 inches. Also, the name Bruno Magli, couldn't appear in the blood for the FBI to know 18 months before he acquired the so called "legitimate" photos you tout so energetically. He knew that Silga had sold the same U2887 shoe soles to a company that provided them to 19 different shoe brands around the world. It makes Bodziack look even more suspicious towards shading the evidence since he knew that this was a fact. Moreso, because two previous FBI agents had been dismissed for shading/slanting the evidence in favor of prosecutors across the country. Remember, former FBI agent Whitehead was scheduled to testify to this type of shady ongoings by FBI agents prior to settling a civil case against his former FBI employer.

[Big Ben]

oh my! all that information and orenthal didn't use any of it. you don't suppose he knows there's nothing to it, do you? since HE was the one that murdered Nicole and Ron -- seems to me he'd be in a much better position to say. Just a thought.

I've never seen anything as insidious as your blind hatred, [Your Quote]"HE was the one that murdered Nicole and Ron". I'd have to return to scenes of Mississippi, Arkansas, and Alabama in the early '60s to recollect the type of venomous attitude that you display.

I'm here to show you objective evidence to critique then you come on like this, wow! Last night I was feeling somewhat of a shame of myself for expressing the derogatory names I assigned to you. However, after seeing your non-thinking, non-objective, spewing of venom. I don't feel so ashamed of myself today, Weezer!

You still appear to be to frightened to divulge your inner conclusion as to what you thought Johnnie Cochran meant when he said, on July 06, 1995, "We're not going to show them (the jury) the telephone bills or whatever".

Why do you think he said that, Weezer?

[weezer]

I've never seen anything as insidious as your blind hatred, [Your Quote]"HE was the one that murdered Nicole and Ron". I'd have to return to scenes of Mississippi, Arkansas, and Alabama in the early '60s to recollect the type of venomous attitude that you display.

I'm here to show you objective evidence to critique then you come on like this, wow! Last night I was feeling somewhat of a shame of myself for expressing the derogatory names I assigned to you. However, after seeing your non-thinking, non-objective, spewing of venom. I don't feel so ashamed of myself today, Weezer!

You still appear to be to frightened to divulge your inner conclusion as to what you thought Johnnie Cochran meant when he said, on July 06, 1995, "We're not going to show them (the jury) the telephone bills or whatever".

Why do you think he said that, Weezer?

you've got me all wrong -- I don't have blind hatred -- I have a firm belief that orenthal james simpson murdered two human beings: Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

I'm not frightened nor do I have inner conclusions as to what cochran meant. Who knows? Who cares? You guys are the ones that believe he led the 'dream team' -- not me. I believe him to be on the same level as his client. imo

[bobaugust]

Bob, you're absolutely right as far as your above remark, and that is why I am not going to attempt to address your flawed conclusions any longer regarding your skillful, however, decrepit rebuttals. My feelings can be best summed up by this analogy, if one says something to me when he is drunk I'm not going to dismiss the remark automatically for lack of voracity. You appear all to comfortable at explaining away what I consider to be serious potentially exculpatory issues regarding time, over and over again, as simply minor faux pas. We; no can do!

By the way, we've made the journey between Brentwood and Monarch Bay/Dana Point on several occasions. We never came in under one hour twenty five minutes. All mapquest directional time charts, all AAA direction and time charts came in at 1hr. 25 min.-1hr. 38 min. for 1998 when we first discovered the irregularity in the travel time issue.

CalTrans employees provided to us in year 2000, heretofore, unknown highway conditions for the year of 1994 when the Browns traveled the I-405. It appears that the I-405 was under extremely heavy constuction for '93-'98 for the HOV lanes for 15 miles reducing traffic speeds to approx. 30 mph through that zone, with similiar traffic volumes that the Browns would have experienced on the night of 06/12/94.

This information came to us well after those infamous alt.fan.oj debates that you used to engage in with pro-Js in '96-'98. You should have been doing your homework and compiling objective evidence, trying to get to the truth, instead of promulgating hate, as you were doing online even back then. Truthfully, I think that this may be an assigned task for you, and if so, you're not so bad, just another worthwhile challenge, that's all.

At the end of our examination of Bodziack's representations or misrepresentations, if you will, we also contacted the Silga Gomma shoe sole manufacturers, and paid $125.00 for them to ship U2887 shoe soles to our offices here in the U.S. You can see one of the investigators measuring one on a white sheet of paper and placing it in blood then again placing it between the measured lines on the paper. Bob, if you'd like to purchase a copy, I could acquire a copy of the documentary "Serpents Rising" and you could see the U2887 demonstration. The audience is shocked because the research investigator shows them against a size 10 shoe and the U2887 shoe sole has the same measurement, 12 and 1/4 inches. Simpson's foot measures 12 and 3/4 inches. Also, the name Bruno Magli, couldn't appear in the blood for the FBI to know 18 months before he acquired the so called "legitimate" photos you tout so energetically. He knew that Silga had sold the same U2887 shoe soles to a company that provided them to 19 different shoe brands around the world. It makes Bodziack look even more suspicious towards shading the evidence since he knew that this was a fact. Moreso, because two previous FBI agents had been dismissed for shading/slanting the evidence in favor of prosecutors across the country. Remember, former FBI agent Whitehead was scheduled to testify to this type of shady ongoings by FBI agents prior to settling a civil case against his former FBI employer.

Big Ben, I don't doubt that there was construction on parts of the highway the Brown's traveled to get back home. But this was a Sunday night and whatever Mapquest or Cal Tans employees said or suggested does not mean that was what happened on that Sunday night to every car that traveled there. You have no idea how fast the Browns drove at different times on their trip home. What we do know is the fact that Juditha Brown called the Mezzaluna Restaurant when she got home and that time is not only documented as 9:37, the person she talked to testified that was the time she talked to Juditha Brown, and Simpson's attorneys who examined the Brown's telephone records agreed that was the time of that telephone call.

I'm sorry but you're the one using deceitful tactics to try and deceive, like taking testimony out of context, not me. Your feelings about this are not supported by the reality of all the testimony. Everyone in this case understood that Juditha Brown was innocently mistaken when she said they arrived home from the restaurant an hour later than they actually did. You either believe all the testimony by other witnesses who were involved in this situation and documented times of the telephone calls Juditha made that was the evidence in this case or you believe as you do that there was a giant conspiracy including all of Simpson's attorneys from both trials and all the witnesses lied.

Bodziak started his investigation not knowing what kind of shoes left the bloody shoe prints at Bundy. Bodziak testified that in looking at the detail in the shoe impressions in photographs taken at Bundy he observed there were certain features about that shoe that strongly suggested it was high end, an expensive Italian brand shoe. He said he looked through his reference material and identified 75 to 80 manufacturers and importers of high end Italian shoes as well as some south American shoes or Brazilian shoes. He prepared a composite sketch and three photographs of heel impressions from the Bundy scene along with a letter and contacted those manufactures to see if they recognized the origin of that particular design. He said he received a reply from a Bruno Magli Uma Shoe Store in New Jersey and they sent him two shoes that were left over from the 1991 and 1992 Bruno Magli distribution. They were both right shoes, one was size 9 and a half and one was a size 12.

He also sent and inquiry to eight international laboratories which he knew had computerized reference collections such as the FBI and sent them pictures of the sole of the shoe as well as pictures from the crime scene and asked them if they could identify the brand name or manufacturer of this shoe. Seven responded and said they did not have that shoe in their collection. "The eighth one, the national police agency in Tokyo, Japan, responded and advised that they had a shoe that they had obtained from a merchant of this design that was distributed in Europe and was made in Italy." Bodziak also explained how the markings on the sole of the shoe had the name "Bruno Magli", "Made in Italy," and in the top corner the word "Silga" that helped him determine who the manufacturer was of the Bruno Magli shoe.

I have no idea where you got the size of Simpson's foot but the fact is that Simpson gave the police a pair of his size 12 Reeboks that he said he had worn the day of the murders and Bodziak was able to to do a direct comparison of those shoes to the size 12 Bruno Magli shoe and found that not only did they measure the same on the outside they virtually measured the same internally. I would say that's far more credible than the method you are referring to about measuring the sole and placing it in blood. The fact is that it's not the measurement of the overall size of partial bloody shoe prints that determine the size of the sole and shoe that made them it's the measurement of the characteristics of the sole and the size of the heel print that conclusively determined the size of the soles and the size of the shoes. That's the difference between an investigation by a top respected world renown expert, Bodziak and your attempts and meaningless conclusions.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

you've got me all wrong -- I don't have blind hatred -- I have a firm belief that orenthal james simpson murdered two human beings: Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman.

I'm not frightened nor do I have inner conclusions as to what cochran meant. Who knows? Who cares? You guys are the ones that believe he led the 'dream team' -- not me. I believe him to be on the same level as his client. imo

Do you think I use the term blind hatred loosely, Weezer? Look at yourself, "nor do I have any conclusions as to what Cochran meant. Who knows? Who cares?" Why wouldn't you want to know, or want to care about the meaning of his remark?

It was in the context of attempting to argue that the prejudicial impact of showing the bloody murder photos to the jury outweighed the probative value of showing them to the jury. In California it's called a 352 Argument.

An objective individual, interested in examining the objectivity of such a remark, in light of the debate regarding the possibility that Simpson was on a flight to Chicago while his wife was alive talking on the phone to her mother, would ask:

How would showing the phone records to the jurors prejudice the jury?

But you become appalled at me for saying that the phone records were never presented to the jury, and are missing from his criminal file courtesy of one of his prosecutors, and that there are statements on the record that indicate that there were remarks about time consistent with the normal 1 hr. 30 min. drivetime it takes to commute between Brentwood and Dana Point. And that the phone records need to be produced by GTE.

You appear to have some type of resentment because I would question the voracity of officers of the court and/or government officials on both sides who have presented contradictory information and/or evidence. I know that you are not naiive enough to believe that government officials would not lie to you, right, Weezer?

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE=bobaugust;8937529]Big Ben, You have no idea how fast the Browns drove at different times on their trip home.

I do know this! If the Browns lived 70 mi. from the Mezzaluna they would have to ideally travel at a rate of speed of 70 MPH all the way to get there in an hour. I know the traffic volumes for the 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM on 06/12/94were equivalent to volumes at other dates and times of that same week that reduced the traffic speeds to an average of 30 MPH through the 15 mi. construction zone. And I know this! That for each mile that they traveled at 30 MPH they would have to travel 40MPH + 70MPH or 110 MPH for an equivalent number of miles in order to reach home in an hour to make that alleged 9:37 PM phone call. Why would anyone drive an SUV at such reckless rates of speed down the most congestedly rated highway system in the U.S. with two enfants and two senior citizens in the car? It doesn't make sense, Bob.

Everyone in this case understood that Juditha Brown was innocently mistaken when she said they arrived home from the restaurant an hour later than they actually did.

and when her husband Lou Brown made the same mistake earlier also changing the time of the phone call from 11:00PM back to approx. 9:30PM

and Schwab when he changed his initial statement of the citing of the Akita from 11:15PM back to 10:45PM

and Faye Resnick when she changed her initial statement on Maury Povich's show from talking with Nicole at 10:45PM back to, (Maury: You mean 9:45 don't you, Faye?) Oh yeah, I meant 9:45PM."

and Robert Shapiro's changing his initially offered stipulation from 10:17 PM as the time of the Juditha Brown phone call to Mezzaluna to 9:37 PM.

Come on Bob, you can't even express your beliefs with a straight face upon knowing all of these changes, and you do know about them.

Bodziak testified that in looking at the detail in the shoe impressions in photographs taken at Bundy he observed there were certain features about that shoe that strongly suggested it was high end, an expensive Italian brand shoe.

At least Bodziak got one out of two correct. Those soles were Italian made alright. However, Bodziak knew and failed to tell the viewing audience or the jury that he would later reveal in his text book that the Italian shoe sole manufacturer of the U2887 shoe sole sold them to another company who provided them to 19 different worldwide shoe brands. I have no doubt about the impact that such a revelation would have had on the jury at that time.
The revelation of alleged Simpson/Bruno Magli photos was produced, in my opinion, to keep the FBI from facing further embarrassment from this clod. They appeared to promptly dismiss Bodziak after the Simpson trial was over.

"The national police agency in Tokyo, Japan, responded and advised that they had a shoe that they had obtained from a merchant of this design that was distributed in Europe and was made in Italy." Bodziak also explained how the markings on the sole of the shoe had the name "Bruno Magli", "Made in Italy," and in the top corner the word "Silga" that helped him determine who the manufacturer was of the Bruno Magli shoe.

Again, I think that you are putting yeast into your own story because I disticntly remember Bodziak stating that the brand of the shoe embedded in the u2887 shoe sole provided by the Tokyo Police Dept. said LORD in the brand name locale and not Bruno Magli.


I have no idea where you got the size of Simpson's foot but the fact is that Simpson gave the police a pair of his size 12 Reeboks that he said he had worn the day of the murders and Bodziak was able to to do a direct comparison of those shoes to the size 12 Bruno Magli shoe......

You have no way of knowing if the shoe Simpson gave the police was a size 12, nor do you have any proof that the LAPD gave Bodziak a pair of Simpson's shoes. Bodziak testified that he was not allowed to go to Simpson's home and examine and/or retrieve shoes. He was simply given a pair of size 12 tennis shoes and told to test them. I consider that to be very poor investigative work for a member of the most preeminent investiative agency in this country. Maybe shoddiness or malfeasance had something to do with Bodziak's early retirement at age 46.

I asked the retired nurse that Simpson embraced as his Southern California surrogate mother while incarcerated to measure his foot in 2002 and get back to us. She did and said that his foot measured 12 and 3/4 inches.

[bobaugust]

Big Ben, I don't agree with your conclusions since Dick Wagner and others documented the drive and made the trip in a little over one hour.
Time to Drive the 405 Freeway
http://www.wagnerandson.com/oj/405.htm

You list different mistakes made by difference people and there are reasonable explanations for each mistake.

Claudine Ratcliffe wrote that Lou Brown had told her that his wife had talked to their daughter about her missing eyeglasses at 11:00. Lou Brown was mistaken. Juditha talked to Nicole immediately after speaking with Karen Crawford and Nicole then called the restaurant and spoke with Ron Goldman. Ron Goldman left the restaurant shortly after that before 10:00. That's what the witnesses testified to and that's what the telephone records document.

"The decedent 94-05136 was last known to be alive at 2300 Hrs. speaking to her mother on the telephone. Her mother left her eyeglasses at a restaurant that evening and the decedent reportedly advised her mother that she would ask if an employee could bring them to her residence."
Claudine Ratcliffe

Steven Schwab testified that the police woke him up early in morning, 5:00 A.M. and told him about the murders. Schwab said he was confused, scared, disoriented and was not clear in the times he gave them. When he was asked about what time he found the dog the first time he mentioned was 11:30 and then said no it must have been around 11:00. After the interview he went back to bed and when he woke up later that morning he remembered more clearly what the sequence of events were. He realized his statement was wrong and called the police telling them he had given an inaccurate statement. That was on June 13. When Schwab was walking home with the Akita following him he had flagged down a police car and told them about finding the dog. In the criminal trial that officer came forward when he heard about the incident testified to by Schwab, realizing it was him. He had made a police report that night documenting what and when Schwab testified happened.

What ever Faye Resnick may have said on television is irrelevant since she was not involved in any of these incidents.

Robert Shapiro was simply mistaken when he offered a stipulation regarding the time of 10.17. Clark told him she would agree to that stipulation if that is what the telephone records said. Shapiro never brought it up again.

You say you read about Silga selling the sole they made exclusively for Bruno Magli to other companies in Bodziak's book yet you continue to disparage Bodziak for not revealing it to the jury. Do you know if Bodziak even knew about that at the time he testified? And what difference would it make anyway since it doesn't change the fact that Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes sold in this country were exclusively manufactured with Silga soles. The same exact kind of soles that made the bloody shoe prints. It wasn't until the civil trial that Simpson was shown wearing those shoes.

Simpson's Reebok's were listed on Fung's property report. Item #16 "Shoes, Athletic, 'Reebok, white - recovered from Det. Lange at 830 1-14-94"

February 21, 1995 Lange
Q NOW, AT SOME POINT, SIR, DID YOU RETURN TO THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION LATER THAT DAY?
A YES.
Q WHEN WAS THAT?
A I BELIEVE THAT WAS APPROXIMATELY 5:15 P.M.
Q AND WHEN YOU DID SO, SIR, DID YOU ENTER THE DEFENDANT'S RESIDENCE?
A YES.
Q WHY WAS THAT?
A IT WAS PURSUANT TO A SEARCH WARRANT.
Q DID YOU RECOVER SOMETHING FROM THE LOCATION YOURSELF?
A YES.
Q WHAT WAS THAT?
A A PAIR OF REEBOK TENNIS SHOES OR ATHLETIC SHOES.
Q AND WHERE WAS THAT -- WHERE DID YOU RECOVER THEM FROM?
A IN THE WALK-IN CLOSET OFF OF THE MASTER BEDROOM ON THE SECOND LEVEL.

January 25, 1996 Simpson
Q: The shoes that you showed Lange were what shoes?
A: Reeboks.
Q: The ones you had worn McDonald's?
A: Yes.

November 20, 1996 Bodziak
Q. Did you have an opportunity to compare a pair of shoes that belonged to Mr. Simpson and the Bruno Magli size 12?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. I place before you what's been marked 404, and represent that as a matter of record these are a pair of Reebok shoes, belonging to Mr. Simpson, that he gave to Detective Lange.
(The instrument herein described as Mr. Simpson's Reebok shoes was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 404.)
Q. And I ask you if you compared those shoes with the size 12 Bruno Magli that's contained in Exhibit 395?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And how did you compare that?
A. Do you have 395?
Q. Yes, sir.
A. Oh, sorry, here it is.
Q. That's okay.
A. Yes. I compared the Reebok shoes, left and right Reebok shoes, with the Exhibit 395 Bruno Magli. The Bruno Magli, as I have described, or will describe, these soles are compression molded, they're known as a cup sole, they're sort of like a cup, if you poured water into them, and they're attached to the bottom of the shoe by literally placing the lasted shoe, the completed upper to them, and through glue and stitching they're applied. The Reebok is a similar construction. It's also a cup sole. It's known as a half cup sole because the toe area -- the middle which is just flat, but the toe area and heel area are cupped. They have variations of this known as cup half cup, three-quarter cup, so forth. So the general construction is compression molded cup sole construction. So even though the Reebok is an athletic sole, its manner of manufacture makes it a comparable shoe to compare with the Bruno Magli. And I made a comparison of the external sole dimensions -- linear dimensions, and the internal measurement of the shoes, and found that they were virtually identical; that the Bruno Magli shoe and the Reeboks, if you place them one over another, you can line up their soles from heel to toe, left to right, and they fit as well as you could possibly expect.
Q. You're saying Mr. Simpson's shoe was identical to the size 12 Bruno Magli?
A. It's the same size internally. It reads a size 12, U.S. size 12, as well as the European 46, size 12 Bruno Magli, and it's physical dimensions and characteristics for comparability are the same, yes.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Bob, I will grant you a point that Lang may have given Bodziak a pair of Simpson's Reebok tennis shoes. Simpson told his sister, who we asked, that most of the shoes that he wore in his closet were size 13. The fact that Lang may or may not have given Bodziak a pair of size 12 Reebok tennis shoes does not assure that Simpson's foot was the size of the shoe prints found at Bundy. As I reiterate, the U2887 shoe sole is only 12 and a 1/4 in., Simpson's foot is at least 12 and 3/4 inches.

Size 13+ certainly would be consistent with the size he seemed to be wearing at the time I saw him with Doc Johnson, his hands, swallow; his head, gargantuan; and his feet are extremely large. His shoes were much longer than the full bloody shoeprint images found in the photos of the 11 and 1/2 inch sidewalk tiles found at the murder site.

And his shoes were longer than the 12 and 1/4 inch U2887 Silga soles. As I said before, the documentary "Serpents Rising" has an investigator directly comparing the length of the U2887 shoe sole to a brand new shoe that says size 10, whose length was 12 and 1/4 inches.

Your inncocent dismissal of all of the time flaws is simply absurd, that's my only comment. We must, and I want you to back me on this, Bob:

Demand a copy of the Brown phone records from GTE/Verizon!

Your comment asking whether Bodziak knew that Silga had sold the shoe soles to other companies: Bodziak displayed the U2887 shoe soles that he received from the Tokyo Police authorities and the sole had LORD imbedded in the sole, not Bruno Magli. He acknowledged on the stand that Silga had sold them to LORD shoe company. It turns out that they had sold more to LORD than they sold to Bruno Magli, it is implied.

You are ridiculous if you think that sharing the fact that U2887 Silga shoe soles placed on 19 other shoe brands with the jury would not have had a significant negative impact for the prosecution's case.

As for Wagner and associates, the comparisom of there drives 5 years after the I-405 construction project had ended, is simply irrelevant.

Comparing their drive time after the I-405 had been upgraded with more lanes, including the HOV lane, is absurd, when comparing it to drivetimes during a time when a highway is under heavy construction. You know this, Bob. Don't belabour the discussion with non-sensical viewpoints. If you doubt the voracity of my assertion regarding the heavy highway construction contact CalTrans in California, I'm sure that they would confirm that information for you. But please desist with these retarded insistences regarding Wagner and his associates drive after 1998.

[bobaugust]

Bob, I will grant you a point that Lang may have given Bodziak a pair of Simpson's Reebok tennis shoes. Simpson told his sister, who we asked, that most of the shoes that he wore in his closet were size 13. The fact that Lang may or may not have given Bodziak a pair of size 12 Reebok tennis shoes does not assure that Simpson's foot was the size of the shoe prints found at Bundy. As I reiterate, the U2887 shoe sole is only 12 and a 1/4 in., Simpson's foot is at least 12 and 3/4 inches.

Size 13+ certainly would be consistent with the size he seemed to be wearing at the time I saw him with Doc Johnson, his hands, swallow; his head, gargantuan; and his feet are extremely large. His shoes were much longer than the full bloody shoeprint images found in the photos of the 11 and 1/2 inch sidewalk tiles found at the murder site.

And his shoes were longer than the 12 and 1/4 inch U2887 Silga soles. As I said before, the documentary "Serpents Rising" has an investigator directly comparing the length of the U2887 shoe sole to a brand new shoe that says size 10, whose length was 12 and 1/4 inches.

Your inncocent dismissal of all of the time flaws is simply absurd, that's my only comment. We must, and I want you to back me on this, Bob:

Demand a copy of the Brown phone records from GTE/Verizon!

Your comment asking whether Bodziak knew that Silga had sold the shoe soles to other companies: Bodziak displayed the U2887 shoe soles that he received from the Tokyo Police authorities and the sole had LORD imbedded in the sole, not Bruno Magli. He acknowledged on the stand that Silga had sold them to LORD shoe company. It turns out that they had sold more to LORD than they sold to Bruno Magli, it is implied.

You are ridiculous if you think that sharing the fact that U2887 Silga shoe soles placed on 19 other shoe brands with the jury would not have had a significant negative impact for the prosecution's case.

As for Wagner and associates, the comparisom of there drives 5 years after the I-405 construction project had ended, is simply irrelevant.

Comparing their drive time after the I-405 had been upgraded with more lanes, including the HOV lane, is absurd, when comparing it to drivetimes during a time when a highway is under heavy construction. You know this, Bob. Don't belabour the discussion with non-sensical viewpoints. If you doubt the voracity of my assertion regarding the heavy highway construction contact CalTrans in California, I'm sure that they would confirm that information for you. But please desist with these retarded insistences regarding Wagner and his associates drive after 1998.

Ben Big, you claim the fact that Wagner made his drive some years after the murders means that somehow invalidates his conclusions yet you rely on some foot measurements someone supposedly took of Simpson's foot years after the murders. You rely on a sample sole that was sent to you years after the soles that made the prints were manufactured. You rely on second hand information about the size shoes Simpson had in his closet. You rely on the measurements of partial shoe prints shown in photographs.

When I informed you about the reality of the over thirty authenticated Flammer photographs you respond that they were discredited by the defense photo expert when in fact is that so called expert, Groden, never examined the Flammer photographs or negatives. He only examined the Scull photograph and the photograph he examined wasn't a photograph at all. Groden examined a photocopy of the Scull photograph he had made at Kinko's and the distortions he saw were explained point by point by a real photographic expert, Richards who proved Groden's opinion had no credibility.

I'm sorry Big Ben, but nothing you have argued changes the reality that Simpson was at Bundy the night of the murders. Nothing you have argued changes the realty that when Simpson left Bundy that night he left behind his blood, his knit cap, one of his gloves, his bloody shoe prints, and two dead victims. Based on the kind of information you use to make your arguments if the Brown's telephone records are released and are the same as what they were when they were originally obtained you would just dream up another excuse to not believe them.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Ben Big, you claim the fact that Wagner made his drive some years after the murders means that somehow invalidates his conclusions .....bobaugust

It certainly does invalidate his conclusions if he fails to include the data and the factors that were innumerated regarding the heavy construction on the I-405 the night of 06/12/94, which you can substantiate, Bob, with CalTrans.

yet you rely on some foot measurements someone supposedly took of Simpson's foot years after the murders. You rely on a sample sole that was sent to you years after the soles that made the prints were manufactured.

You're not implying in your latter remark that Silga changed the U2887 mold to favor us, are you Bob? As far as your former remark, aren't you doing the same with what Bodziak supposedly measured.

I can tell you it's hard to explain away, not one, but many foot print photos of the 875 So. Bundy side walk that indicate the shoes fit neatly inside an 11 and 1/2 in. sq. side walk tile.

You rely on second hand information about the size shoes Simpson had in his closet. You rely on the measurements of partial shoe prints shown in photographs.

His closest sister asking him is closer than your second hand "alleged" shoe size, and how he, Bodziak, came by them. Usually, if the FBI is called in, they don't rely on other people to set parameters for their investigation. But I know, its hard for you to think otherwise. Might mess up your Harry Potter imagination, hunh! and no we did not rely on partial shoe prints.


Groden, never examined the Flammer photographs or negatives. He only examined the Scull photograph.....Groden's opinion had no credibility.e

bob, you are not in a good position to argue about the photos, all of that was done beind close doors during the civil trial. Groden's credentials were exemplary for the U.S. government to appoint him to study the Kennedy photos, he received the highest score. So your attempt to denigrate and/or sully his credentials is totally unsatisfactory.

Based on the kind of information you use to make your arguments nothing you have argued changes the reality that Simpson was at Bundy the night of the murders.

Oh, I'm certain that many would disagree with you on that, Bob. Our YouTube correspondences show us that it is having a great effect on former believers in Simpson's guilt. I just think that you are trying to do your job, but unfortunately the doubt that we've created has made your vessel unworthy, better abandone it before you sink even further.

if the Brown's telephone records are released and are the same as what they were when they were originally obtained you would just dream up another excuse to not believe them.

Certainly if they come through biased parties with unclean hands we would again launch a protest as we did with that madness Hodgman finally turned over to Brown. "If" that's a big word that you're speaking. Based upon what we continue to unravel, I highly doubt that they will come forth in any form of civilized, above board, manner as we've in the past encouraged Simpson to respectfully request. Perpetrators, with much more than face to lose, than you, will continue to obstruct such a request for acquisition. And who knows, in the name of National Security, they may just have to go along with them.

By the way, Lou Brown was not initially opposed to Simpson receiving the phone records when we first asked ,however, after the hidden authorities talked to him, he returned sounding like a frightened man and subsequently provided from Hodgman that non-certified madness that you often point to for your own validity as being the veritable Brown records.

[bobaugust]

It certainly does invalidate his conclusions if he fails to include the data and the factors that were innumerated regarding the heavy construction on the I-405 the night of 06/12/94, which you can substantiate, Bob, with CalTrans.

yet you rely on some foot measurements someone supposedly took of Simpson's foot years after the murders. You rely on a sample sole that was sent to you years after the soles that made the prints were manufactured.

You're not implying in your latter remark that Silga changed the U2887 mold to favor us, are you Bob? As far as your former remark, aren't you doing the same with what Bodziak supposedly measured.

I can tell you it's hard to explain away, not one, but many foot print photos of the 875 So. Bundy side walk that indicate the shoes fit neatly inside an 11 and 1/2 in. sq. side walk tile.

You rely on second hand information about the size shoes Simpson had in his closet. You rely on the measurements of partial shoe prints shown in photographs.

His closest sister asking him is closer than your second hand "alleged" shoe size, and how he, Bodziak, came by them. Usually, if the FBI is called in, they don't rely on other people to set parameters for their investigation. But I know, its hard for you to think otherwise. Might mess up your Harry Potter imagination, hunh! and no we did not rely on partial shoe prints.


Groden, never examined the Flammer photographs or negatives. He only examined the Scull photograph.....Groden's opinion had no credibility.e

bob, you are not in a good position to argue about the photos, all of that was done beind close doors during the civil trial. Groden's credentials were exemplary for the U.S. government to appoint him to study the Kennedy photos, he received the highest score. So your attempt to denigrate and/or sully his credentials is totally unsatisfactory.

Based on the kind of information you use to make your arguments nothing you have argued changes the reality that Simpson was at Bundy the night of the murders.

Oh, I'm certain that many would disagree with you on that, Bob. Our YouTube correspondences show us that it is having a great effect on former believers in Simpson's guilt. I just think that you are trying to do your job, but unfortunately the doubt that we've created has made your vessel unworthy, better abandone it before you sink even further.

if the Brown's telephone records are released and are the same as what they were when they were originally obtained you would just dream up another excuse to not believe them.

Certainly if they come through biased parties with unclean hands we would again launch a protest as we did with that madness Hodgman finally turned over to Brown. "If" that's a big word that you're speaking. Based upon what we continue to unravel, I highly doubt that they will come forth in any form of civilized, above board, manner as we've in the past encouraged Simpson to respectfully request. Perpetrators, with much more than face to lose, than you, will continue to obstruct such a request for acquisition. And who knows, in the name of National Security, they may just have to go along with them.

By the way, Lou Brown was not initially opposed to Simpson receiving the phone records when we first asked ,however, after the hidden authorities talked to him, he returned sounding like a frightened man and subsequently provided from Hodgman that non-certified madness that you often point to for your own validity as being the veritable Brown records.

Big Ben, I still find it unbelievable that you think that by measuring the length of a partial shoe print you think you can determine the size shoe that made that print when the real expert used several factors including both the sole pattern and the heel pattern as well as the construction of of the shoe to make his determination. Bodziak explained that it's not the sole that determines the shoe size it's the upper and how the uppers are glued to the molded soles. Bodziak visited both factories, the factory that made the soles and the factory that made the upper of Bruno Magli shoes and glued those uppers to the molded soles.

June 19, 1996
MR. GOLDBERG: Sir, showing you 381 for identification, can you remove the contents of the package and tell us what you are doing.
MR. BODZIAK: (Witness complies.) Exhibit 381 is the pair of lasts which were used to make the shoes that I observed being made at the Silga and 4C factory. The outsole size that I observed being used at that time was the size--European size 46 sole, and these lasts are--even though they are made in Europe, are graded with an American size 12, and the reason for that is the American grading system for shoes takes into account more measurements and variations than the European lasting system which normally shoes in Europe are only available perhaps in one width, maybe two widths. So because these are quality shoes, they are very expensive shoes that are made with leather, to have or to be produced with a high quality, they use the American grading system and American lasts. On the side of one of these lasts was written when I observed it in the factory, in addition to size 12, was written the number "46."
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. Can you place one of those lasts perhaps in the size 46 outsole just so that we can see how they compare.
MR. BODZIAK: Yes, sir. (Witness complies.)
MR. GOLDBERG: All right. Now, based upon all of the information that you had from your visit to Italy from the lasts and the soles and the photographs of the Bundy crime scene location, were you able to form an opinion regarding the size of the shoe--the size of the shoes that caused the shoeprints at Bundy location?
MR. BODZIAK: Yes, I was.
MR. GOLDBERG: What is that opinion?
MR. BODZIAK: That size was an American size 12 with the European size 46 sole attached to it.

The fact is that Groden had very little credentials and most of his experience was with motion picture film. His opinions regarding the Scull photograph were completely contradicted by the plaintiffs expert point by point. When the over 30 authenticated Flammer photographs and negatives were brought to court impeaching Simpson and proving the Scull photograph was not fake "Groden had plenty of time to examine them and return to the stand to say they were not authentic. Instead he returned to Dealey Plaza. The defense did not call anyone else to challenge the photos. They wouldn't go near them. The photos just sat there in the courtroom."

The fact is that the over thirty authenticated photographs taken by two different photographers of Simpson at the same football game all show Simpson wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes with Silga soles. The same exact kind of soles that left the bloody shoe prints at Bundy. All the collected relevant physical evidence as well as the hair and fiber evidence all points to only three people being at Bundy the night of the murders, the two victims and the killer, Orenthal James Simpson.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Big Ben, I still find it unbelievable that you think that by measuring the length of a partial shoe print you think you can determine the size shoe that made that print........bobaugust

First of all, bob, those are your words not mine. Don't go to far off the deep end promoting an assumption that has no basis in fact. I've certainly never highlighted how we initially became suspicious of the"expert's" findings, other than to say that it was mysterious to see full shoe prints fitting inside a measured setting of 11 and 1/2 in. side walk tiles. Because we recognized that they were bloody shoe prints, we also recognized the need to secure a pair of the actual product. I can certainly affirm that we followed up by contacting the Italian shoe sole manufacturer, Silga Gomma, and paying for actual U2887 size 46 shoe soles to be sent to our offices here in America.

You can see the demonstration of the shoe prints in the
documentary "Serpents Rising".

I can say to you, in hindsight, that if our investigators were called to rebutt the FBI presentation I would gamble that testimony from our investigators indicating that the shoe soles were much smaller than Simpson's measured foot would have been quite compelling. Also showing that the BM logo would not have shown up in blood and therefore was impossible to determine which of the 19 shoe brands carrying the U2887 sole made the shoe print would have been equally compelling.


The fact is that Groden had very little credentials and most of his experience was with motion picture film......

Bob, though you have much more expertise than I in this unstudied area, by me at least, Groden's testimony takes on greater credibility given the now revealed irregularities created by government testimony. I believe that there was testimony at the time that the shoe photo negatives had traveled beyond the U.S. and into a European nation that specializes in advanced photo alteration. Then there was Groden's denunciation of the authenticity of these photos. I agree, that with Groden's testimony alone, the plaintiffs case looks more formidable.

Researching past documents and transcripts gives me the opinion that the civil trial defense attorneys knew the fix was in and knew how the script was to play out and simply failed to exert any serious energy. After reviewing depositions and court transcripts I'm not as impressed, as the media makes one believe, with the plaintiff counsels presentation of their case.

However, we now know of the heretofore cited information above, and the FBI failure to share this information, probably because it would do damage to the prosecution's case. That type of conduct automatically disqualifies a sworn officer of the court from having any further credibility in many eyes, simply because he has no justification in shading the evidence. He, FBI agent Bodziak, is supposed be, as we try to be, a neutral participant. But just like his two peers from the FBI, dismissed for the same type of misconduct, he now brings suspicion on his testimony, and potential scandal on the motives of the FBI.


The fact is that the over thirty authenticated photographs taken by two different photographers of Simpson at the same football game all show Simpson wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes with Silga soles. .

This is now in question, unfortunately! And appears to have turned up not when they should have but 18 months after the FBI agent Bodziak's testimony. Their appearance now seems orchestrated to cover up FBI special agent, Bodiak's, malfeasance.

[Kate Sachel]

WEEZER
maby because he wanted to tell his love story of 17 years with Nicole so you would have the opportunity to read it if you baught the book. His book was 'IF IDID IT" BUT it may be that you will change his words right?

IMO
MARTIN ii

Except for the fact that it wasn't a love story; it was a story outlining all of the flaws and issues that he believed Nicole had and included a chapter on killing her.

Kate

[weezer]

Except for the fact that it wasn't a love story; it was a story outlining all of the flaws and issues that he believed Nicole had and included a chapter on killing her.

Kate

excellent! :beer:

[bobaugust]

First of all, bob, those are your words not mine. Don't go to far off the deep end promoting an assumption that has no basis in fact. I've certainly never highlighted how we initially became suspicious of the"expert's" findings, other than to say that it was mysterious to see full shoe prints fitting inside a measured setting of 11 and 1/2 in. side walk tiles. Because we recognized that they were bloody shoe prints, we also recognized the need to secure a pair of the actual product. I can certainly affirm that we followed up by contacting the Italian shoe sole manufacturer, Silga Gomma, and paying for actual U2887 size 46 shoe soles to be sent to our offices here in America.

You can see the demonstration of the shoe prints in the
documentary "Serpents Rising".

I can say to you, in hindsight, that if our investigators were called to rebutt the FBI presentation I would gamble that testimony from our investigators indicating that the shoe soles were much smaller than Simpson's measured foot would have been quite compelling. Also showing that the BM logo would not have shown up in blood and therefore was impossible to determine which of the 19 shoe brands carrying the U2887 sole made the shoe print would have been equally compelling.


The fact is that Groden had very little credentials and most of his experience was with motion picture film......

Bob, though you have much more expertise than I in this unstudied area, by me at least, Groden's testimony takes on greater credibility given the now revealed irregularities created by government testimony. I believe that there was testimony at the time that the shoe photo negatives had traveled beyond the U.S. and into a European nation that specializes in advanced photo alteration. Then there was Groden's denunciation of the authenticity of these photos. I agree, that with Groden's testimony alone, the plaintiffs case looks more formidable.

Researching past documents and transcripts gives me the opinion that the civil trial defense attorneys knew the fix was in and knew how the script was to play out and simply failed to exert any serious energy. After reviewing depositions and court transcripts I'm not as impressed, as the media makes one believe, with the plaintiff counsels presentation of their case.

However, we now know of the heretofore cited information above, and the FBI failure to share this information, probably because it would do damage to the prosecution's case. That type of conduct automatically disqualifies a sworn officer of the court from having any further credibility in many eyes, simply because he has no justification in shading the evidence. He, FBI agent Bodziak, is supposed be, as we try to be, a neutral participant. But just like his two peers from the FBI, dismissed for the same type of misconduct, he now brings suspicion on his testimony, and potential scandal on the motives of the FBI.


The fact is that the over thirty authenticated photographs taken by two different photographers of Simpson at the same football game all show Simpson wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes with Silga soles. .

This is now in question, unfortunately! And appears to have turned up not when they should have but 18 months after the FBI agent Bodziak's testimony. Their appearance now seems orchestrated to cover up FBI special agent, Bodiak's, malfeasance.

Big Ben, Bodziak determined the size of the shoes based on the pattern and the heel imprints and he conclusively determined the bloody shoe prints were made by shoes that were an American size 12 with a European size 46 sole attached to it. Simpson gave a pair of his Reeboks to the police that he said he had been wearing the night of the murders. Those Reeboks were size 12 and when Bodziak compared them to size 12 Bruno Magli shoes measuring them internally and externally he found that they were virtually identical.

The fact is that over thirty authenticated photographs taken by two different photographers at the same football game nine months before the murders show Simpson wearing shoes with the exact kind of soles that are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy. The fact is that one of those photographs was published in a monthly publication seven months before the murders.

The fact is that witness testimony and telephone records document that Juditha Brown called the Mezzaluna Restaurant at 9:37 P.M. the night of the murders and then called Nicole at 9:40 P.M. The fact is that was the last time Juditha Brown ever spoke with Nicole. The fact is that all of Simpson's attorneys in both trials never disputed this evidence then or now.

No one spoke with Nicole at 11:00 P.M. on June 12, 1994 because Nicole was not alive at 11:00 P.M. Both Ron and Nicole were killed shortly after 10:30 P.M. on June 12, 1994. The reality is that all the relevant collected physical evidence including hair and fiber evidence in this case points to Simpson and only Simpson as the killer. None of it points to anyone else. None of it eliminates Simpson.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Big Ben, Bodziak determined the size of the shoes based on the pattern and the heel imprints and he conclusively determined the bloody shoe prints were made by shoes that were an American size 12 with a European size 46 sole attached to it.bobaugust

Bodziak never measured Simpson's foot, OMIG did, and found that Simpson's 12 and 3/4 inch foot is an unlikely candidate for fitting into the 12 and 1/4 inch U2887 size 46 Silga shoe soles, and an unlikely candidate to fit the shoe prints found within the 11 and 1/2 inch side walk tiles at 875 South Bundy. Bodziak apparently was flim flamming you, Bob, and the public with a bunch of misrepresentations regarding "size 12" shoes, whose dimensions widely differ around the shoe world. No one bothered to compare the actual dimensions of Simpson's foot, we now believe we know why.

Bodziak's total examination is based upon hearsay evidence given to him by apparently dishonest members of the now Federally scrutinized LAPD department. Again, it is unusual for the FBI not to conduct their own independent investigation based on independently acquired evidence.

The fact is that over thirty authenticated photographs taken by two different photographers at the same football game nine months before the murders show Simpson wearing shoes with the exact kind of soles that are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy.

All photographs and testimony in the civil trial, that failed to show up at the criminal trial, must be looked at with great suspicion, Bob, because of the harsh criminal penalties that are potentially incurred under California law, if allegors involve themselves in fraudulent prosectution of defendants charged with committing capitol murder. Those photos were vigorously challenged, however, during the civil trial.

The fact is, that the U2887 shoe sole that made that bloody shoeprint was not as rare as initially promulgated by the shady FBI agent. The fact is, thousands of other shoes could have made those same prints in addition to BM, yet neither the jury nor the public was apprised of this by the FBI agent Bodziak, again it was OMIG that exposed this fact.

The fact is that witness testimony and telephone records document that Juditha Brown called the Mezzaluna Restaurant at 9:37 P.M. the night of the murders and then called Nicole at 9:40 P.M. The fact is that was the last time Juditha Brown ever spoke with Nicole.

Asked and Answered! The issue is in great dispute now due to new revelations regarding initial statements of Brown departure and arrival by OMIG investigators.

The fact is that all of Simpson's attorneys in both trials never disputed this evidence then or now.

Issue previously addressed, and we contend to be irrelevant. Once Simpson signed independent contract with Dr. Johnson's OMIG group, every one principally involved in the Simpson matter became fair game for investigation..

No one spoke with Nicole at 11:00 P.M. on June 12, 1994 because Nicole was not alive at 11:00 P.M. Both Ron and Nicole were killed shortly after 10:30 P.M. on June 12, 1994.

Asked and previously Answered! That assertion is again strongly contradicted by the new evidence which OMIG has produced, regarding Cochran's statements to the contrary, and the Heavy Highway construction conditions of the I-405 freeway, intentionally not revealed to the jury and the public.

[bobaugust]

Bodziak never measured Simpson's foot, OMIG did, and found that Simpson's 12 and 3/4 inch foot is an unlikely candidate for fitting into the 12 and 1/4 inch U2887 size 46 Silga shoe soles, and an unlikely candidate to fit the shoe prints found within the 11 and 1/2 inch side walk tiles at 875 South Bundy. Bodziak apparently was flim flamming you, Bob, and the public with a bunch of misrepresentations regarding "size 12" shoes, whose dimensions widely differ around the shoe world. No one bothered to compare the actual dimensions of Simpson's foot, we now believe we know why.

Bodziak's total examination is based upon hearsay evidence given to him by apparently dishonest members of the now Federally scrutinized LAPD department. Again, it is unusual for the FBI not to conduct their own independent investigation based on independently acquired evidence.

The fact is that over thirty authenticated photographs taken by two different photographers at the same football game nine months before the murders show Simpson wearing shoes with the exact kind of soles that are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy.

All photographs and testimony in the civil trial, that failed to show up at the criminal trial, must be looked at with great suspicion, Bob, because of the harsh criminal penalties that are potentially incurred under California law, if allegors involve themselves in fraudulent prosectution of defendants charged with committing capitol murder. Those photos were vigorously challenged, however, during the civil trial.

The fact is, that the U2887 shoe sole that made that bloody shoeprint was not as rare as initially promulgated by the shady FBI agent. The fact is, thousands of other shoes could have made those same prints in addition to BM, yet neither the jury nor the public was apprised of this by the FBI agent Bodziak, again it was OMIG that exposed this fact.

The fact is that witness testimony and telephone records document that Juditha Brown called the Mezzaluna Restaurant at 9:37 P.M. the night of the murders and then called Nicole at 9:40 P.M. The fact is that was the last time Juditha Brown ever spoke with Nicole.

Asked and Answered! The issue is in great dispute now due to new revelations regarding initial statements of Brown departure and arrival by OMIG investigators.

The fact is that all of Simpson's attorneys in both trials never disputed this evidence then or now.

Issue previously addressed, and we contend to be irrelevant. Once Simpson signed independent contract with Dr. Johnson's OMIG group, every one principally involved in the Simpson matter became fair game for investigation..

No one spoke with Nicole at 11:00 P.M. on June 12, 1994 because Nicole was not alive at 11:00 P.M. Both Ron and Nicole were killed shortly after 10:30 P.M. on June 12, 1994.

Asked and previously Answered! That assertion is again strongly contradicted by the new evidence which OMIG has produced, regarding Cochran's statements to the contrary, and the Heavy Highway construction conditions of the I-405 freeway, intentionally not revealed to the jury and the public.

Big Ben, Bodziak didn't have to measure Simpson's foot, he only needed a pair of shoes Simpson had recently worn. Dr. Huizenga conducted a complete physical on Simpson days after the murders. If there was ever a question about the size of Simpson's feet being too big to have made the shoe prints at Bundy, Simpson's attorneys would have documented it. The fact is that Simpson suffers from rheumatoid arthritis and when he doesn't take his medication joints in his hands and his feet can swell. Some people even claim that Simpson may have intentionally discontinued his medication before the glove demonstration in the criminal trial. Your second hand information about the size of Simpson's feet years after the murders does not contradict the fact that Simpson wore the same size shoes that left the shoe prints at Bundy at the time of the murders.

The over thirty Flammer photographs were never vigorously challenged at all in the civil trial. When the Judge so ordered, the plaintiffs produced copies of the photos for everyone involved; they produced Flammer's sworn affidavit of authentication. They were totally prepared. Simpson's attorney Daniel Leonard shouted to the courtroom, "This is a total sandbag!" Judge Fujisaki looked at him and shook his head, 'That's usually what impeachment amounts to, Counsel."

When Flammer testified he gave the names of the individuals who were posing with Simpson, committee members of the Monday Morning Quarterback Club who were chosen to help promote and to organize the dinner celebration honoring Simpson as well as Bill Munson and Dennis Lynch from the Buffalo Bills. Flammer testified that the next day he took the rolls of film to a professional lab, Nova Photo and six 5 by 7 color prints were made and distributed to Dennis Lynch for a memento from that day. Flammer testified he submitted an invoice dated October 17, 1993 to the Buffalo Bills for those six prints and the bill was paid. Flammer produced the check stub from the Buffalo Bills that paid that invoice dated 11/23/93. Flammer testified he developed a black and white print in his darkroom of one of the prints and submitted it to the editor of the monthly publication the Buffalo Bills Report and it appeared in the paper the next month, November 1993. A copy of that publication showing the photograph of Simpson wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes was entered into evidence. Flammer testified that the negatives where then put in a three ring binder and stored in his basement where they stayed until the end of December 1996.

Bodziak didn't flimflam anyone. I'm sorry to say that you're the one Big Ben, doing the flimflamming. Bodziak's testimony wasn't hearsay. All the relevant samples he was testifying about were entered into evidence. The Flammer photographs and negatives were authenticated and Simpson's defense had all the information they needed to check out everything Flammer said. But they never did, they understood that Flammer was telling the truth and his photographs were not fake. The only person who was lying when confronted with these thirty photographs was their client, the killer Orenthal James Simpson.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Unfortunately, Bob, we did not have access to the examination of the shoe photos, therefore I'm not in position to present a strong enough rebuttal to your assertions. Had Simpson stated that he owned a pair of Bruno Maglis it would have denigrated their importance had the jury been informed by the FBI agent or the defense team about the hidden truth, that the shoe sole was not found on a rare pair of expensive shoes but on 19 other brands and thousands of pairs of various shoes. This concealed fact, I'm certain, as it subsequently has, would have placed serious doubt in the mind of the jurors.

That is the ongoing problem with this case, concealed evidence and redacted initial statements in extremely crucial areas. It leaves a stinch of fraud and malfeasance to so many of us, Bob.

[bobaugust]

Unfortunately, Bob, we did not have access to the examination of the shoe photos, therefore I'm not in position to present a strong enough rebuttal to your assertions. Had Simpson stated that he owned a pair of Bruno Maglis it would have denigrated their importance had the jury been informed by the FBI agent or the defense team about the hidden truth, that the shoe sole was not found on a rare pair of expensive shoes but on 19 other brands and thousands of pairs of various shoes. This concealed fact, I'm certain, as it subsequently has, would have placed serious doubt in the mind of the jurors.

That is the ongoing problem with this case, concealed evidence and redacted initial statements in extremely crucial areas. It leaves a stinch of fraud and malfeasance to so many of us, Bob.

Big Ben, all the civil trial transcripts are available including Flammer's testimony. I disagree with your comment as to what you think the civil trial jury would have believed if Simpson had told the truth about wearing Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes since it doesn't change the fact that those shoes have the kind of soles that are consistent with making the bloody shoe prints at Bundy. The bloody shoe prints wasn't the only incriminating evidence that pointed to Simpson. And Simpson's denials that he was wearing those shoes nine months before the murders wasn't the only lie Simpson told the jury denying the undeniable. The reality is that every single piece of the relevant collected physical evidence in this case including hair and fiber evidence all points to Simpson and only Simpson as the killer. None of it points to anyone else. None of it or anything else eliminates Simpson.

Mistakes made by witnesses in this case are not unusual. People make mistakes, and initial comments they make trying to recall details regarding some event that was of no special significance to them at the time may not be as accurate as when they have more time to to think about it or when they become aware of something that helps them to remember more specific details. The reality is that even when many people witness the same exact event, there will be different versions and discrepancies between what they say they saw. That's an inherent problem with direct evidence. It's not what they disagree on, it's what they do agree on and what is supported by other evidence that allows us to understand what actually happened.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Again, I'm at a disadvantage in the shoe photo argument with you because we simply do not examine an issue based upon the trial transcripts alone, which is the basis of your belief in their alleged honesty. The transcripts, for us, have more often than not been simply the beginning of examining the contradictions and misrepresentations of this case.

I would disagree with you again regarding the 19 different shoe brands with the same Bruno Magli soles. In 2002, the San Francisco Chronicle wrote about the issue of the 19 different shoe brands to which the U2887 shoe soles had been provided, based upon OMIG evidence included in a Simpson Federal Appeal of California misrepresentations to the U.S. District Court. Simpson's failure to answer a 10 day show cause order, allowed all issues that were provided to die quietly. We shared our dissatisfaction with Simpson about his choices, regarding these matters, encouraged by his non-productive, non-optimistic handlers.

I think that you would do much better with Simpson, in making these type of arguments, than with me or other OMIG investigators, we've uncovered too much malfeasance to be lightly dismissed as simple mistakes, bob.

[bobaugust]

Again, I'm at a disadvantage in the shoe photo argument with you because we simply do not examine an issue based upon the trial transcripts alone, which is the basis of your belief in their alleged honesty. The transcripts, for us, have more often than not been simply the beginning of examining the contradictions and misrepresentations of this case.

I would disagree with you again regarding the 19 different shoe brands with the same Bruno Magli soles. In 2002, the San Francisco Chronicle wrote about the issue of the 19 different shoe brands to which the U2887 shoe soles had been provided, based upon OMIG evidence included in a Simpson Federal Appeal of California misrepresentations to the U.S. District Court. Simpson's failure to answer a 10 day show cause order, allowed all issues that were provided to die quietly. We shared our dissatisfaction with Simpson about his choices, regarding these matters, encouraged by his non-productive, non-optimistic handlers.

I think that you would do much better with Simpson, in making these type of arguments, than with me or other OMIG investigators, we've uncovered too much malfeasance to be lightly dismissed as simple mistakes, bob.

Big Ben, you're at a disadvantage because your arguments are all contradicted by the facts and the evidence in this case. Bodziak never claimed that Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes were the only shoes manufactured that could have left those prints. But the fact is that Simpson owned the same size and kind of shoes that left the bloody shoe prints at Bundy as well as leaving a partial bloody shoe print on his Bronco carpet. The fact is that all the blood, hair, and fiber evidence found in this case came from only three people, the two victims and Simpson proving Simpson was the killer. Simpson's story changes, fabrications, and outright lies he told under oath confirmed his guilt.

What is O.M.I.G.?

bobaugust

[pearyb]

Do we really know for certain what is in the book? I think this case is so interesting. Even if you think he did it, you also have to reserve something for the possibility that he didn't. Myself, having been wrongfully prosecuted, the post trial period is a period filled with fear and confusion. Even if you win. Trying to sue the telephone co. in 98 is typical for anger at the system. One of the reasons he wrote the book was to get back at the system. It seems that this behavior is created to upset people. Get back at the system for prosecuting him, and very possibly, framing him. I probably would not think like this if I hadn't gone through the justice system. I am not sure where they get off after calling it the justice system, but I can tell you what they do isn't about justice. Its about money and politics.

Believe me, Weezer, when I thought it was
worthwhile I argued with the fool about what you are now proposing, to the point of tension. But maybe in the end he's right. Playing the baffoon to a bunch of haters will probably be much more profitable then trying to regain any reasonable level of creditibility.

I'm surprised that Orenthal talked about implicating more than one assailant in his storybook. Doc Johnson should sue him, because that fool Simpson didn't have a clue. It was Doc who showed him the direction of the knife wounds in the autopsy report indicating a single edge knife wielded by a left handed person was used on Nicole. It was Doc that interpreted the findings of the original medical examiner, Dr. Golden, who clearly identified the tapered exit wounds consistent with a dagger stuck 23+or- times into Ron Goldman's face and neck by a right handed person.

However, unfortunately I believe that Simpson has chosen to play the baffon for people like you, for pecuniary gain. You know, kind of like the clown at the fair grounds that sits over a tub of water, taunting the fools that are angry enough to pay money to throw balls that hopefully dump him into the tub of water.

Do you see yourself, anywhere in there, Weezer? Nevertheless, let me reiterate, my cause is not to exonerate or convict Simpson. Same thing I've told him, I'm telling you. If the malfeasance that we have uncovered can be perpetrated against an individual of fortune and fame, like Simpson, then the little guy doesn't have a chance. We cannot and will not allow that!

[Big Ben]

Big Ben,

A. What is O.M.I.G.?

B. Bodziak never claimed that Bruno Magli Lorenzo style shoes were the only shoes manufactured that could have left those prints.

C. The fact is that all the blood, hair, and fiber evidence found in this case came from only three people, the two victims and Simpson proving Simpson was the killer.
bobaugust

1. Bob, FYI, OMIG stands for Ocean Medical Investigative Group. It was established in 1996 initially by Dr. Henry S. Johnson, MD, after his review of the irregularities found in L.A. County Deputy Medical Examiner, Dr. Irwin Golden's, autopsy report on Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman versus the medically controversial trial testimony of Dr. Sathyvaraswaran Lakshmanan, L.A. County's Chief Medical Examiner. It ultimately became a well organized group of approx. 10 professional and non-professional individuals committed to acquiring and examining the contradictory evidence associated with the trial, People of the state of California v. Orenthal James Simpson.

Bob, this case appears to be one intended to drive the public into a controlable frenzy from day one, possibly as an experiment or an exercise in the control of mass hysteria for whatever useful untold purposes.

2. In the case of FBI special agent Bodziak, intentional exclusion equals concealment/suppression of evidence, Bob, a potential felonious act. You would think that subsequent to two of his FBI peers being dismissed from testifying during the trial for their unethical conduct of slanting evidence in favor of prosecutors, he would take special precaution not to caste aspersion upon himself and this preeminent investigative agency, but he did. Your excuse for him, is an indication of the level of absurdity that you will go to defend the perpetual levels of misconduct promulgated by these sworn officers of the court, in this case.

His failure to disclose thousands of other shoes, under 19 different brand names, carrying the same U2887 shoe sole as Bruno Magli, continues to leave a big noticeable lump under the rug, Bob, no matter how much you continue to sweep.


3. The police detectives, Vanatter and Lang, taking blood from Simpson and carrying it to the murder site, (where they could have planted all of the miniscule drops that were found, in the car, on the gate, etc.)

4.As far as hair is concerned, it is misleading for you to imply that it could only be Simpson's hair, science had not reached that level at the time of the trial. It could have been the hair of millions of Black men, and considering the above malfeasance of Vannatter and Lang, as well as the male nurse's sorry explanation for the missing blood in the vial containing Simpson's blood, you can understand one's suspicion. However, I'm certain that you will promote what you assume to be a rational explanation for, again, this type of professional misconduct.

But this is how you operate, Bob, and yet you've criticized me for stressing that virtually all of the crucial time testimony from multiple prosecution witnesses has been changed. Your protest of it as being a non-issue is falling more and more on deaf ears. You might be able to silence OMIGs insistence upon the telephone time irregularities if you aimply called for GTEs replacement of the record directly from their archive, yet you'd rather argue in favor of a ridiculous and highly questionable Brown travel time.

5. Therefore, all I can conclude, Bob, is that you simply like arguing; you have no interest at getting at the truth relative to the so called "Trial of the Century".

[bobaugust]

1. Bob, FYI, OMIG stands for Ocean Medical Investigative Group. It was established in 1996 initially by Dr. Henry S. Johnson, MD, after his review of the irregularities found in L.A. County Deputy Medical Examiner, Dr. Irwin Golden's, autopsy report on Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman versus the medically controversial trial testimony of Dr. Sathyvaraswaran Lakshmanan, L.A. County's Chief Medical Examiner. It ultimately became a well organized group of approx. 10 professional and non-professional individuals committed to acquiring and examining the contradictory evidence associated with the trial, People of the state of California v. Orenthal James Simpson.

Bob, this case appears to be one intended to drive the public into a controlable frenzy from day one, possibly as an experiment or an exercise in the control of mass hysteria for whatever useful untold purposes.

2. In the case of FBI special agent Bodziak, intentional exclusion equals concealment/suppression of evidence, Bob, a potential felonious act. You would think that subsequent to two of his FBI peers being dismissed from testifying during the trial for their unethical conduct of slanting evidence in favor of prosecutors, he would take special precaution not to caste aspersion upon himself and this preeminent investigative agency, but he did. Your excuse for him, is an indication of the level of absurdity that you will go to defend the perpetual levels of misconduct promulgated by these sworn officers of the court, in this case.

His failure to disclose thousands of other shoes, under 19 different brand names, carrying the same U2887 shoe sole as Bruno Magli, continues to leave a big noticeable lump under the rug, Bob, no matter how much you continue to sweep.


3. The police detectives, Vanatter and Lang, taking blood from Simpson and carrying it to the murder site, (where they could have planted all of the miniscule drops that were found, in the car, on the gate, etc.)

4.As far as hair is concerned, it is misleading for you to imply that it could only be Simpson's hair, science had not reached that level at the time of the trial. It could have been the hair of millions of Black men, and considering the above malfeasance of Vannatter and Lang, as well as the male nurse's sorry explanation for the missing blood in the vial containing Simpson's blood, you can understand one's suspicion. However, I'm certain that you will promote what you assume to be a rational explanation for, again, this type of professional misconduct.

But this is how you operate, Bob, and yet you've criticized me for stressing that virtually all of the crucial time testimony from multiple prosecution witnesses has been changed. Your protest of it as being a non-issue is falling more and more on deaf ears. You might be able to silence OMIGs insistence upon the telephone time irregularities if you aimply called for GTEs replacement of the record directly from their archive, yet you'd rather argue in favor of a ridiculous and highly questionable Brown travel time.

5. Therefore, all I can conclude, Bob, is that you simply like arguing; you have no interest at getting at the truth relative to the so called "Trial of the Century".

Big Ben, yes I will continue to post the rational reasonable explanations for mistakes that were made and corrected by witnesses in this case while you continue to make irrational arguments based only those mistakes.

The fact is that 12 hairs found on the knit cap at Bundy when compared to Simpson's hairs on a split image microscope were found to be a mirror image match to Simpson's hairs. Considering the fact that an unusual x-shaped fiber consistent with coming from Simpson's Bronco carpet was also found on the knit cap and that Simpson's fresh blood was found at Bundy leaves little doubt that the knit cap was Simpson's.

Your claim that Vannatter and Lange carried Simpson's blood to the murder scene is completely untrue. If this is an example of the kind of conclusions that came from this OMIG investigation then it clearly shows how little knowledge these so called investigators had regarding the facts and evidence in the Simpson case. A flawed investigation resulting in false conclusions. Garbage in garbage out.

The crucial time testimony is not the different estimated times made by witnesses. Estimated times do not tell us when something happened only approximately when it happened. Estimated times that are supported by telephone records are the only reliable real times that document when an event happened. The order events happened in that night make up the time line of these murders. Based on all the information that became known after the criminal trial and confirmed by Simpson's lying testimony there is no doubt that Simpson and only Simpson killed both Ron and Nicole. That's the simple truth of these murders.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Big Ben,.............................................. ........ Estimated times that are supported by telephone records are the only reliable real times that document when an event happened.

bobaugust

The above statement I would tend to truly agree with you on, bob, except that those records were Never given to the jury, Were Sealed behind closed doors because of initial disagreement, Never were registered with the custodian of records as "telephone records" but rather "Posterboard Entitled Juditha Brown Phone Records" and were, off the record, finally Removed surrepticiously by a prosecutor in 1998 from Simpson's criminal file, with a closed door, ex parte court order, possibly never to be seen again. Even the judge, John Reid, that granted the ex parte court order has further suspicion cast over him for other irregularities associated with this case.

As far as your other babel and non-sensical conclusions, they are no more than pure POPPYCOCK! which I'm sure that you are well aware.

[bobaugust]

The above statement I would tend to truly agree with you on, bob, except that those records were Never given to the jury, Were Sealed behind closed doors because of initial disagreement, Never were registered with the custodian of records as "telephone records" but rather "Posterboard Entitled Juditha Brown Phone Records" and were, off the record, finally Removed surrepticiously by a prosecutor in 1998 from Simpson's criminal file, with a closed door, ex parte court order, possibly never to be seen again. Even the judge, John Reid, that granted the ex parte court order has further suspicion cast over him for other irregularities associated with this case.

As far as your other babel and non-sensical conclusions, they are no more than pure POPPYCOCK! which I'm sure that you are well aware.

Big Ben, "Poppycock?" That's funny. What I am aware of is that you're false claims of evidence planting only show how misinformed and uninformed you are about about the facts and evidence in this case. Every claim Simpson's attorneys made that evidence was planted was proven to be a false claim.

The Brown's original GTE telephone records were brought to court and given to Simpson's attorneys in the preliminary hearing on July 6, 1994. At that time Simpson's attorneys agreed that information shown on the telephone records that was not relevant be redacted. Later in the criminal trial the prosecution exhibit that included an enlarged photocopy of the Brown's telephone records showing the relevant calls Juditha Brown made the day and night of the murders was then stipulated to as being correct two different times; by Robert Shapiro and by Johnnie Cochran. Simpson's defense attorneys in both trials agreed that Juditha Brown called the Mezzaluna Restaurant from her home at 9:37 P.M. and then called Nicole at 9:40 P.M. and that was the last time Juditha Brown ever spoke with Nicole.

That's reality, not the fantasy you want to so desperately believed.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Big Ben,

The Brown's original GTE telephone records were brought to court and given to Simpson's attorneys in the preliminary hearing on July 6, 1994. At that time Simpson's attorneys agreed that information shown on the telephone records that was not relevant be redacted. bobaugust

bob, it is you that have your facts wrong, and particularly your year wrong. I think that you are mentally struggling to remember July 06, 1995 relative to redactions. No records, to my recollection, were discussed on July 06, 1994, if so you'll have to show it to me. As I recollect from my own research the dates are as follows:

1.) 06/30/94-first day of preliminary hearing, a manilla envelope and white envelope carrying the letters GTE purported to be the Brown telephone records were asked to be open by Marcia Clark. Nothing was determined in open court that day.

2.) 0n 07/08/94-eigth day of the preliminary hearing, while in Judge Kathleen K. Powell's chambers, Robert Shapiro offered to stipulate to the initial time of the Juditha Brown phone call back to Mezzaluna at 10:17 PM. Marcia Clark refused to accept the time stipulation based upon her lack of remembrance relative to what the telephone records stated. Shapiro reminded Clark that it was she who gave those records to him on 06/30/94 in open court.

3.) We have replayed Shapiro and Cochran's reactions over and over again based upon the initial stipulation in February and the final stipulation in July of 1995. Both men displayed unusual character on their respective occasions, Shapiro's stipulation on Feb. 07, 1995 was virtually inaudible, Cochran, as previously stated, on July 06, 1995, directly compares the release of the phone records to the jury as having a prejudicial impact equal to that of the bloody murder photographs prior to accepting the stipulation.

Your proclivity to violate the Uniform Rules of Evidence and the Federal Rules of Evidence never ceases to amaze me. Both codes require that such evidence that is in conflict, or is contradictory, or requires authentication, must be examined exclusively by the "trier of fact"/the jury. The issue of the phone records will perenially be a clouded fact. However, I'm not impressed by the slick shinanigans of the California judge, prosecutors, or defense lawyers who, like you, do not want an actual certified copy of those records from GTE to show up. Popular concensus tends to lean towards their production in order to soothe the dissention in the court of public opinion, but keep your finger in the dike anyway.

[bobaugust]

Big Ben, lets try this again.

1.) The preliminary did start on June 30, 1994 The prosecution obtained the Brown's telephone records on July 4, 1994.

2.) On July 8, 1994 in chambers Shapiro did offer a stipulation regarding a telephone call he thought Juditha Brown made at 10:17 P.M. He was mistaken. The stipulation was never made because that time was not on the telephone records. Shapiro never said he received the telephone records on June 30, 1994. Did you just make that up?

July 8, 1994
MR. SHAPIRO: We're going to ask for a stipulation regarding the phone records that were presented in open court from the phone call from Mrs. Brown to Nicole, which I believe was at 10:17.
THE COURT: And is there -- is there going to be a problem with that?
MS. CLARK: If that's what the records say, there will be no problem with that. But which record?
MR. SHAPIRO: Phone records from the telephone company that you gave us.
MS. CLARK: I'm going to have to locate it. I'll locate it and make sure.

3.) Criminal Trial stipulations

February 7, 1995 Simpson Criminal Trial
MS. CLARK: THIS IS ANOTHER BOARD, YOUR HONOR, THAT HAS BEEN SHOWN TO COUNSEL.
I WOULD ASK THAT IT BE MARKED PEOPLE'S 39 -- 35.
THE COURT: 35.
MS. CLARK: 35.
(PEO'S 35 FOR ID = BOARD/JUDITHA BRN PHONE RCDS)

MS. CLARK: IT IS ENTITLED "JUDITHA BROWN PHONE RECORD, JUNE 12, 1994."
MR. SHAPIRO: YOUR HONOR, IN THE INTERESTS OF SAVING TIME, SINCE I DON'T THINK THIS
WITNESS CAN AUTHENTICATE THOSE PHONE RECORDS, FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS WITNESS' TESTIMONY,
WE WOULD STIPULATE THAT THE RECORDS ARE ACCURATE AND DEPICT THE TIME THAT THE CALL CAME
INTO THE RESTAURANT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. IS THAT STIPULATION AGREEABLE TO THE PEOPLE?
MS. CLARK: YES, THAT STIPULATION IS AGREEABLE.
THANK YOU.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I TOLD YOU DURING THE COURSE OF OUR INSTRUCTIONS THAT WHAT THE ATTORNEYS SAY DURING THE COURSE OF THE TRIAL IS NOT EVIDENCE; HOWEVER, IN A SITUATION WHERE THE ATTORNEYS STIPULATE AND AGREE TO A CERTAIN FACT, YOU ARE TO ACCEPT THAT AS EVIDENCE IN THE CASE.
ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK.
MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.
Q DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE PHONE NUMBER ON THE FIRST LINE THERE WHERE IT SAYS "JUNE THE 12TH, 9:37 P.M., WEST LOS ANGELES" AND THEN THERE IS A PHONE NUMBER, "310 447-8667"?
A YES, I DO.
Q AND WHAT PHONE NUMBER IS THAT?
A THAT IS THE PHONE NUMBER TO MEZZALUNA.
Q AND THE TIME THAT YOU RECEIVED THAT CALL, THE 9:37, DOES THAT SEEM TO BE ACCURATE, BASED ON YOUR MEMORY?
A YEAH, IT DOES.
*

July 6, 1995
MS. CLARK: The second would be stipulation concerning the admissibility of telephone records. These concern the phone bills for the home telephone of the Defendant and for Juditha Brown.
THE COURT: All right. This will be subject to our agreement that if at a subsequent time there are phone numbers that are not relevant to the case, those will be redacted.
MS. CLARK: Right. And even days--dates. At this time, it seems apparent that at least June 12th and 13th are relevant, but it may be that that's all that's relevant and the rest can be stricken. So neither side waives the opportunity to object on grounds of relevancy later on.
MR. COCHRAN: That is correct. That's my understanding, your Honor. Both sides reserve that right to object on relevancy and the fact that we want to maintain the privacy of these numbers if at all possible, and further, there are other people who may have made these phone calls other than the parties involved.
*

July 6, 1995
MS. CLARK: Yes. The first stipulation is concerning the testimony of Juditha Brown concerning--the Court's I think familiar with the subject matter.
THE COURT: Yes.
MS. CLARK: The second would be stipulation concerning the admissibility of telephone records. These concern the phone bills for the home telephone of the Defendant and for Juditha Brown.

MS. CLARK: First stipulation, counsel, with respect to the testimony of Juditha Brown: May it be stipulated that Juditha Brown was called as a witness, duly sworn and testified as follows: She's the mother of Nicole Brown Simpson, the decedent and named victim in count 1 of this action; on June the 12th, 1994, she attended a dance recital where her granddaughter, Sidney Simpson, performed; thereafter, she accompanied her daughter Nicole, granddaughter Sidney and other family members to the Mezzaluna restaurant for a post-recital celebration; upon arriving, she inadvertently dropped the pair of eyeglasses marked as part of the exhibit designated as People's
exhibit 32, which were intact prior to that point, outside the restaurant; at approximately 9:37 P.M. on June the 12th, 1994, Juditha Brown telephoned the Mezzaluna restaurant and spoke to an employee named Karen Crawford, who has testified previously in this case; Miss Brown asked Miss Crawford to locate the eyeglasses and hold them for pick-up at a later time by Nicole Brown Simpson; Miss Crawford located the eyeglasses and agreed to set them aside for Nicole Brown Simpson; this conversation lasted approximately two minutes; at approximately 940 P.M., Juditha Brown telephoned her daughter, Nicole Brown Simpson, reaching her at her daughter's residence located at 875 south Bundy drive in the city of Los Angeles; Juditha Brown conversed with Nicole Brown Simpson for approximately 2 minutes; Nicole Brown Simpson stated that she would arrange for the retrieval of Juditha Brown's eyeglasses; this was the last time that Juditha Brown spoke to her daughter, Nicole Brown Simpson? It is further stipulated that Juditha Brown examined the eyeglasses contained in the exhibit marked People's 32 and testified these were the eyeglasses that she left at the Mezzaluna restaurant on June the 12th, 1994 and were the subject of her conversations with Karen Crawford and Nicole Brown Simpson. It is further stipulated that Juditha Brown testified that she was familiar with the handwriting of her daughter, Nicole Brown Simpson, and Juditha Brown testified that she examined the Bloomingdales Department store charge card receipt marked as People's exhibit 372-A and 372-B and that the signature "Nicole Brown" on those documents appeared to have been written by her daughter, Nicole Brown Simpson. Counsel, may it be so stipulated?
MR. COCHRAN: So stipulated, your Honor.
MS. CLARK: And does the Court receive the stipulation, your Honor?
THE COURT: Thank you, counsel. The Court will receive and accept the stipulation. And ladies and gentlemen, as I indicated to you previously, a stipulation is an agreement between the parties as to the facts of the case. Miss
Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor. Secondly, counsel, may it be stipulated that the following telephone records, which include records that have been marked as exhibits in this case, were prepared in normal and regular course of business at or around the time of the information contained within the records and that the records accurately reflect the information contained therein? That is for the following records: One, the Defendant Orenthal James Simpson, his complete GTE telephone Bill dated June the 25th, 1994 for telephone number--I'd like not to read that out loud at this time.
THE COURT: We'll agree that it is the Defendant's--was the Defendant's phone number.
MR. COCHRAN: I would so stipulate, that that was his phone number.
MS. CLARK: Thank you, counsel. And, two, Juditha Brown's complete GTE telephone Bill dated July 4th, 1994, again, for the telephone number that is stated in the stipulation the jurors will see, but may it be stipulated that was her phone number as of that date?
MR. COCHRAN: So stipulated, yes.
THE COURT: All right. That stipulation is accepted by the Court.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Big Ben, was it possible that on June 30 Clark had possession of the Brown's telephone bills dated July 4, 1994? Maybe, but based on what you saw on tape you don't really know for a fact what Clark handed Shapiro, do you? Clark may very well have handed Shapiro Simpson's telephone records dated June 25, 1994 at that time.

It wasn't necessary to show the jury the actual telephone records since Simpson's attorneys saw them and were given the opportunity to check out their authenticity.

Facts stipulated to by both the prosecution and the defense are evidence. Judge Ito explained this to the jury.
bobaugust

bob,
You make my initial point in the exchange of GTE documents during the preliminary hearing's first day 06/30/94, between prosecutor M. Clark and Def. atty R. Shapiro. Whether it was slight of hand or not, the media ran with it on all networks as being the Juditha Brown phone records that supported the prosecution's allegations of time. As the media pundits spun their propaganda into the minds of the public, the minds of people like yourself, they postured that those concealed documents could only have supported the prosecution's contention regarding the time of the initial telephone call to the Mezzaluna or why else would they present them at court.

Here's the problem,bob: The telephone records do not constitute a universal fact, i.e. "The sun rises in the East and sets in the West". A universal fact is allowed that type of stipulation. What you have here is an issue that was disputed at the time that Lou Brown went back a week later to the coroner's office and changed the time of that crucial 11:00 PM telephone call. Crucial, because it pegged the time for which Simpson either could or could not have participated in the murder.

At that point the evidence was considered crucial, contradictory, in dispute, in need of authentication. Any or all of these elements are what obligate evidence to be examined by the "trier of fact"/the jury, exclusively, under the Federal Rules of Evidence and Uniform Rules of Evidence. California decided to maintain an uncivilized archaic system that can be manipulated by beguiling attorneys for their personal pecuniary gain. This is probably the reason that they turned down a 1953 invitation to participate in the National conference that created the URE (Uniform Rules of Evidence) between 1953-1965.

I don't need to address anything else other than to say that the precedent of prosecutors and defense attorneys mutually agreeing to trespass into the domain of the "trier of law"/the judge or the "trier of fact"/the jury did not historically begin with the Simpson trial.

[bobaugust]

bob,
You make my initial point in the exchange of GTE documents during the preliminary hearing's first day 06/30/94, between prosecutor M. Clark and Def. atty R. Shapiro. Whether it was slight of hand or not, the media ran with it on all networks as being the Juditha Brown phone records that supported the prosecution's allegations of time. As the media pundits spun their propaganda into the minds of the public, the minds of people like yourself, they postured that those concealed documents could only have supported the prosecution's contention regarding the time of the initial telephone call to the Mezzaluna or why else would they present them at court.

Here's the problem,bob: The telephone records do not constitute a universal fact, i.e. "The sun rises in the East and sets in the West". A universal fact is allowed that type of stipulation. What you have here is an issue that was disputed at the time that Lou Brown went back a week later to the coroner's office and changed the time of that crucial 11:00 PM telephone call. Crucial, because it pegged the time for which Simpson either could or could not have participated in the murder.

At that point the evidence was considered crucial, contradictory, in dispute, in need of authentication. Any or all of these elements are what obligate evidence to be examined by the "trier of fact"/the jury, exclusively, under the Federal Rules of Evidence and Uniform Rules of Evidence. California decided to maintain an uncivilized archaic system that can be manipulated by beguiling attorneys for their personal pecuniary gain. This is probably the reason that they turned down a 1953 invitation to participate in the National conference that created the URE (Uniform Rules of Evidence) between 1953-1965.

I don't need to address anything else other than to say that the precedent of prosecutors and defense attorneys mutually agreeing to trespass into the domain of the "trier of law"/the judge or the "trier of fact"/the jury did not historically begin with the Simpson trial.

Big Ben, I would say the media has influenced your speculation about this not mine. I never even saw or heard any the reports that you are referring. to. I never paid much attention to media reports. I watched the televised proceedings and formed my own opinions.

The mistaken time estimate by the Browns was never made an issue by Simpson's attorneys after they saw the telephone records for themselves. Did you not read that it Shapiro's book? If there was any question as to the time of the telephone calls shown on the GTE telephone records then I have no doubt that Simpson's defense would have jumped on it immediately, but they didn't because they understood the reality of what happened based on the witnesses who testified and the authentic telephone records that documented and supported the witness testimony.

Your accusation that there was something wrong because the jury never saw the Brown's actual telephone records, only the prosecution exhibit, is contradicted by the fact that the jury never saw any of the actual telephone records from any witness, only prosecution exhibits. A stipulation is a legitimate method used in all trials when opposing parties agree to certain facts, and therefore do not have to argue those facts in court. Your arguments are contradicted by the reality that none of Simpson's attorneys from either trial agree with your arguments or support your claims.

bobaugust

[William Anthony]

. I watched the televised proceedings and formed my own opinions.

bobaugust

Did you walk out of the room when cross was conducted of the prosecution witnesses and when direct was conduct of the defense witnesses?

[martin II]

Did you walk out of the room when cross was conducted of the prosecution witnesses and when direct was conduct of the defense witnesses?

william
i believe it is possible that bob may have in fact left the room during cross by the defense some times.
other wise he would have heard the prosecution glove expert witness first say the goves would shrink 10-15 % for some moisture etc when asked by the prosecution.then on cross when asked if 3 cc of liquid put on the gloves would make then shrink he said NO.

martin II

[socaldiva]

*snip*
i believe it is possible that bob may have in fact left the room during cross by the defense some times.


Based on some of the postings here, I believe some may have watched the trial with the mute button engaged, with their eyes closed. whilst wearing a Simpson jersey. :D

[Big Ben]

Big Ben, I would say the media has influenced your speculation about this not mine. I never even saw or heard any the reports that you are referring to.
bobaugust

Well bob, you must not have owned a television set on the first day of the preliminary hearings, or you would not have failed to miss what I shared with you.

The mistaken time estimate by the Browns was never made an issue by Simpson's attorneys after they saw the telephone records for themselves.

That presumption, bob, is irrelevant. We know now that the contradictions surrounding the Brown's time created an issue that should have been rectified and certified by only the "trier of fact"/the jury. It is never too late to right a wrong or to expose a charlatan, bob.

If there was any question as to the time of the telephone calls shown on the GTE telephone records then I have no doubt that Simpson's defense would have jumped on it immediately,...

Not necessarily, brother bob, regarding whether they would have jumped or not. The fact is, Johnnie Cochran's statement on intentionally not showing the jury the phone records because of their prejudicial impact defies your presumption. Go back to your transcripts of 07/06/95.

A stipulation is a legitimate method used in all trials when opposing parties agree to certain facts, and therefore do not have to argue those facts in court.

I'm quite aware of what a stipulation is, bob. However, suppose they had stipulated to the fact that the sky is falling because they came to the same conclusions by way of Chicken Little, should the jury be obligated to accept that agreement as well.

What you have apparently failed to grasp and/or study is the history regarding lawyers who willfully stipulate to erroneous facts. I would recommend the chapter on stipulations in the preeminent author Wigamore's Treatisise on Evidence.


Your arguments are contradicted by the reality that none of Simpson's attorneys from either trial agree with your arguments or support your claims.


My argument has never been challenged by Simpson's attorneys, regarding the telephone records. The story behind why they haven't is book worthy in its own right. Marcia Clark attempted a feable denunciation on one of Geraldo's old shows, on CNBC, she stumbled so badly it took Petrocelli to attempt to revive her from her awkward response.

[bobaugust]

My argument has never been challenged by Simpson's attorneys, regarding the telephone records. The story behind why they haven't is book worthy in its own right. Marcia Clark attempted a feable denunciation on one of Geraldo's old shows, on CNBC, she stumbled so badly it took Petrocelli to attempt to revive her from her awkward response.

Not one of Simpson attorneys in either trial has ever supported your claims regarding the Brown's telephone records. You can dream up all the excuses you want but it doesn't change the fact that they all understood that the Brown's telephone records were authentic and correctly documented the times Juditha Brown called the Mezzaluna Restaurant, supporting Karen Crawford's testimony, and then called Nicole speaking to her for the very last time before she was killed.

The Brown's telephone records were handled the same way in the criminal trial as all the other telephone records were handled. Photocopied to show the relevant times, then put onto exhibits that were entered into evidence and shown to the jury.

You're claim of an 11:00 telephone call from Juditha Brown to Nicole has no basis in fact and is contradicted by all the relevant collected physical evidence and witness testimony that tells us Nicole was killed well before 11:00. Your claim is false.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

Not one of Simpson attorneys in either trial has ever supported your claims regarding the Brown's telephone records.

You're claim of an 11:00 telephone call from Juditha Brown to Nicole has no basis in fact and is contradicted by all the relevant collected physical evidence and witness testimony that tells us Nicole was killed well before 11:00. Your claim is false.

bobaugust

You appear to be the one that is experiencing a dream or more possibly a nightmare, brother bob.

Since my boss, Dr. Henry S. Johnson & staff, introduced the irregularities associated with the matter of these phone records into the national news, more evidence has come forward that the Browns did not make the journey home in the improbable time parameters created by departure testimony and the now infamous Exhibit 35, "Posterboard entitled Juditha Brown Phone Records", has come to light.

The controversies surrounding the voracity of an 11:00 PM phone call cannot be easily explained away, notwithstanding your feable past attempts to do say. The issue continues to gain momentum, bob, and won't be cleared up until everyone is prepared to come clean and white paper the matter.

I further disagree with you in as much as Johnnie Cochran's inadvertent remark about intentionally withholding the Brown telephone records from the jury is more indicting, in light of the confrontational challenge to these alleged phone records.

[bobaugust]

You appear to be the one that is experiencing a dream or more possibly a nightmare, brother bob.

Since my boss, Dr. Henry S. Johnson & staff, introduced the irregularities associated with the matter of these phone records into the national news, more evidence has come forward that the Browns did not make the journey home in the improbable time parameters created by departure testimony and the now infamous Exhibit 35, "Posterboard entitled Juditha Brown Phone Records", has come to light.

The controversies surrounding the voracity of an 11:00 PM phone call cannot be easily explained away, notwithstanding your feable past attempts to do say. The issue continues to gain momentum, bob, and won't be cleared up until everyone is prepared to come clean and white paper the matter.

I further disagree with you in as much as Johnnie Cochran's inadvertent remark about intentionally withholding the Brown telephone records from the jury is more indicting, in light of the confrontational challenge to these alleged phone records.

Your boss and staff came up with a law suit that was ruled to be frivolous. If anyone who is familiar with the facts in this case actually reads what was claimed in that law suit they would see that not only was it based only on an obvious mistaken time estimate that was corrected it contained errors regarding other times it referred to. The prosecution exhibit 35 included an enlarged photocopy of the Brown's telephone bill showing the relevant documented time Juditha Brown called the Mezzaluna Restaurant and then called Nicole. Those times supported Karen Crawford's estimated times she testified to receiving Juditha and Nicole's calls.

As to what you think Johnnie Cochran meant you are wrong. You took Cochran's comments completely out of context and put your own completely distorted interpretation on it. I clearly brought that to your attention nine months ago when we first discussed this.

11/7/06
Big Ben, I disagree with your conclusion. You keep taking what Cochran said out of context. If you really want to understand why Cochran said what he said you have to put things in context. You have to read what was going on at that time, what was said before and what was said after.

The prosecution was wrapping up their case offering three stipulations.

The first stipulation was regarding Juditha Brown's testimony covering everything Juditha Brown testified to including her 9:37 PM call to the restaurant and her 9:40 PM call to Nicole

Cochran had no problem with that.

The second stipulation was regarding the admissibility of telephone records of the phone bills of the home telephone of Simpson and Juditha Brown.

Cochran had no problem with that as long as both sides agreed that phone numbers that weren't relevant to the case would be redacted.

The third stipulation was regarding photographs of the two victims.

Cochran wanted to talk about those saying they were so graphic that the "prejudicial effect far outweighs any probative value." In that discussion is when Cochran spoke the passage you include on your Serpents Rising tape. Cochran didn't want anything shown to the jury at this point let alone photographs of the victims. He wanted the prosecution to rest their case so the defense could start theirs.

He used the telephone records as an example that nothing should be shown to the jury AT THIS POINT. Cochran said, "I also would object further--I don't think the jury needs to see these again. They've seen these photographs before. I see no reason for that at this point. We're not going to show them any of the other exhibits at this point and we didn't show them there're not going to show them anything with regard to the telephone bills or whatever. So I think at this point of the case, we're now wrapping the case up, we expect the People to rest, and so I would submit it."

There was a compromise made. Judge Ito ruled that the photographs could be shown to the jury but only for five seconds.

Ito than asked Cochran if he discussed these stipulations about to be made, with Simpson.

THE COURT: All right. Let's get back to serious matters, counsel. My understanding is that you've discussed these stipulations with your client and they're acceptable to him, Mr. Cochran.
MR. COCHRAN: Yes, your Honor. I have discussed them with Mr. Simpson and it's--he understands these stipulations and it's agreeable to him at this point, and he appreciates that we will be reserving his rights under the stipulation regarding the phone records until a later time.

Cochran told the court Simpson understood them and agreed to them "and he appreciates that we will be reserving his rights under the stipulation regarding the phone records UNTIL A LATER TIME.

The jury was brought back in and Clark then made her stipulations.

The first was regarding Juditha Brown's testimony. Clark outlined everything Juditha testified to. The order that the events happened and the times they happened covering the dance recital, the dinner, her missing eyeglasses, her 9:37 PM call to the restaurant, Crawford finding the eyeglasses, Juditha's call to Nicole at 9:40 PM, the fact that was the last time she spoke with Nicole, as well as her identification of the eyeglasses that were found at Bundy, and the identification of Nicole's signature on the Bloomingdales charge card receipt

Cochran so stipulated

The second stipulation was regarding the telephone records for Simpson and Juditha Brown's GTE telephone bills. Clark used the standard wording that authenticated those bills as the telephone records that "accurately reflect the information contained therein."

Cochran so stipulated

The third stipulation was regarding the the photographs of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Brown's bodies as they were found.

Cochran so stipulated.

THE COURT: All right. Stipulations will be received by the Court. Counsel, thank you very much. All right. Is there anything further from the People?
MS. CLARK: At this time, subject to the receipt of the People's exhibits into evidence, the People rest.

bobaugust

[Big Ben]

1. Johnnie Cochran: "We're not going to show them any of the other exhibits at this point and we didn't show them there're not going to show them anything with regard to the telephone bills or whatever".

2.Your boss and staff came up with a law suit that was ruled to be frivolous.
bobaugust


1. Roberto, since you quoted what Cochran said above, his above remark was given in the midst of a prejudicial versus probative argument. Again, you attempt to mislead. His remark taken within the context of the 352 argument is clearly a plea for a quid pro quo exchange.

In paraphrasing: We agreed to not show the jury the telephone records because of their prejudicial impact on the jury, respect our sacrifice and not show the jury these bloody photos of two murdered victims, his wife and her friend, because showing them would certainly prejudice the jury.

This is how many people would construe what Cochran was trying to say, but keep trying anyway, bob. Is your finger getting tired trying to hold back the flood yet?


2. Roberto, you are misconstruing the actual words and actions of the U.S. Judge. If the suit was frivolous, the judge would have stated that the case was frivolous, and would have entertained the issuance of sanctions that defendant lawyers called for. The adverse party, the GTE lawyers, were asking for several thousand ($30K) dollars in sanctions for, Simpson, and his lawyer, Doug McCann, filing a frivolous lawsuit. However, what you are attempting to hoodwink the readers into believing is that the case was dismissed because it was frivolous and that is simply not true and furthermore misleading.

The judge actually dismissed the case because he felt that Simpson had not exhausted all of his remedies in the state court, and said he should go back.

Simpson returned to the superior court, only to be denied by the shenanigans of Judge (Larry) Feidler, the present judge in the Phil Spector trial.

You clearly are not in tuned with the diplomacy of judges in either court system in the State of California nor were you in court, nor do you know explicitly what the judge said. bobaugust, you are simply doing what you do best and that is regurgitating typically hand-me down, third party, non-sense, and misinformation.

[limakey]

I have a different take on the phone records in this case. The Browns were not the most important phone records. It appears to me that Nicole's phone records for that night, Dr. Ameli's and Faye's were more important.

IMO, I think it is possible that Simpson may have told his lawyers to back off the phone records. It is clear to me that Simpson may have thought by pushing certin subjects, it would only lead back to his younger children. Sydney heard her mother on the phone that night---if Simpson isn't the killer, then the killers know that there is an ear witness.

Also, I think Faye's former boyfriend made a significant statement, I can't remember if it was in his depo, but he said that he requested both the defense and the DA's to check out Faye's cell phone records--neither side did and that bothered him. He couldn't understand why. I would like to know what Nicole's cell phone records showed. I think even local calls are recorded on those records---as well as Faye's.

[socaldiva]

*snip*
Also, I think Faye's former boyfriend made a significant statement, I can't remember if it was in his depo, but he said that he requested both the defense and the DA's to check out Faye's cell phone records--neither side did and that bothered him. He couldn't understand why. I would like to know what Nicole's cell phone records showed. I think even local calls are recorded on those records---as well as Faye's.

IIRC Faye was in rehab at the time of the murders. Were mobile phones taken to rehab in that era? I don't know. As for Nicole's phone, LE and/or attorneys probably checked those out. I doubt there was much as she was in the house for the hours preceeding the murders & I doubt she used her mobile phone inside the house. Those phones were very different than today's version & weren't used as much. JMO

[limakey]

S-Diva,

It appears to me that each rehab facility may have its own rules regarding such items. You may be right about the cell phone records, they have been checked out, however, we will probably never know what they showed or didn't show. I think it is very fair to say that on certain issues, all sides agreed to stay away from certin items of evidence. Apparently that is not unsual in cases.

However, I will forever wonder why Dr. Ameli was not ever used or taken seriously, since she talked to Nicole, a Nicole who was very scared and sure Simpson was coming for her that night. That, IMO, would have been very significant to the DA's. However, I can see where the DA's may have wanted to keep that door closed.

[Big Ben]

[QUOTE=limakey;8954110]"The Browns were not the most important phone records." QUOTE]

limakey, I must disagree with you in regard to the Brown phone records. I believe that they are the most important piece of evidence relative to the Simpson trial because the time of 11:00 PM would have been exculpatory and exonerated OJ as the prosecution's assailant killer of the deceased victims in this case.

They go directly to the point of what both Browns initially told coroner and defense investigators, that Mrs. Brown spoke to her daughter the night she was murdered at 11:00 PM.

They were the only phone records out of seven on record, that were never recorded by the Exhibit Department Custodian of Records, at intake, as phone records. They were officially noted as, Ex. 35 "Posterboard Entitled Juditha Brown Phone Records", further hinting at a cover up.

They were, to my knowledge, the only phone records that came into the trial by stipulation (verbal agreement of the attorneys) in court.

They were the only phone records that caused controversey in the closed chambers of Judge Kathleen K. Powell, July 08, 1994, during the preliminary hearing, when Marcia Clark initially deferred accepting Robert Shapiro's initial offer to stipulate to 10:17 PM.

They were the only phone records to be sealed from public scrutiny when Judge Powell sealed the transcripts of the 07/08/94 proceeding until the time was mutually agreed upon. Seven months later, on 02/07/05, during the trial, it was ultimately determined by stipulation to be the improbable and now highly debatable 9:37 PM.

They, as all exhibits in the Simpson case, were removed from the courthouse with a single party/closed door court order requested by Deputy D.A. Wm Hodgman in April of 1998. Strangely, all of the evidence in the OJ simpson trial is assumedly now sitting in Hodgman's garage or somewhere. Go Figure!!!

But don't worry, my friend, bobaugust, will give us a plausible excuse for all of this!

However, I do believe that one thing stated by Faye Resnick is quite important. She initially stated publicly, while being interviewed in 1994 by Maury Povich that she clled Nicole from the rehab house at approximately 15 minutes before 11:00 PM the night Nicole was murdered. Maury, knowing the significance of her remark then said, "10:45! you mean 9:45 PM don't you?" then Faye said, "Oh, Yes! I meant 9:45 PM".

She became just one of many who changed their initial statements about time in proximity to the crucial time of 11:00 PM the night of June 12, 1994.