Random Discussions On The Case

[martin II]

Martin,

I don't think Vanatter was there when they entered the house. Arnelle has always testified that only two officers came to her door. One was with Kato and one was by the Patio or something like that.

It is possible that VA did jump on the tail end of the group and Arnelle may not have noticed. However, she had nothing to gain about how many detectives followed her into the house. Clark in the prelim hearing backs up every she says. The detectives constant use of the front door as their main entrance.

If you read VA's grand jury testimony, you can see just how vague he is. He does not ever committ himself to being with the group at that time.

IMO, Ito had to know that Vanatter and the other detectives were lying about this because he had to wonder how is it that VA said he was where he was and still wrote lies on the search warrant?

The only explaination for the lies of Vanatter is that he was not with the group so he has no idea what Arnelle said and that he was not there when Arnelle called Cathy Randa.

However, as you know, I have always posted they knew where Simpson was, they knew when he left and they knew that he did not get rid of any evidence at his house or at the airport.

I also believe MF and RP did go over to Rockingham long before the official time given and quite frankly, they were ordered to as well as had every legal right to do so.

Once they started lying, that is when it became an illegal search, IMO.

When the detectives woke Arnell up they asked her to let them in the house.. She got her keys and walked to the front door with some cops. I think it was vannatter, lang and Phillip.They left MF with Kato at Katos room.
Kato could not have been with Arnell when she and the others entered the house.Kato and MF were still at Katos room talking.That is the testimony.

[martin II]

William and Martin,

OJ's defense team did a records search. His team of investigators went out and pounded the pavement and were able to track down witnesses, etc. Of course, many of these witnesses wanted nothing to do the trial but Pat McKenna was clear. He set up Simpson with little things to see if he was lying. He wanted to know if Simpson made phone calls back to LA because he felt that if Simpson would have been making at least 1 phone call to find out how far the police were behind him.

They found nothing.

Thanks and i am sure nothing got pass B Pavalic.

[martin II]

In the minds of some there had to be one of they couldn't say negative things about the beautiful Ms. Arnelle. Wait!! Wasn't there a post made that the beautiful Ms. Arnelle washed the magical sweatsuit without a call from her father, thinking her father had been involved in something. and when she found out that Ms. NBS and Mr. RG had been so brutally murdered and, thinking her father guilty, she kept silent. I guess no evidence is needed to support negative suppositions in some cases.

If one has no proof one one just make stuff up and hope it is not noticed. imo

[William Anthony]

If one has no proof one one just make stuff up and hope it is not noticed. imo

How many times have we heard that the police had no reason to lie? If one wants to call another a liar, then invent a reason for the person to lie and it makes no difference when, in so doing, you accuse the person of being involved in a crime. This, IMHO, is wrong.

[martin II]

Mr. August,

As the leader of G Nation, you arguments and your theories are based on the lies that have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

To continue to post your twisted version of events and accusing an innocent woman of being an accomplice to murder is wrong. Your fantasies are based on nothing but lies.

When confronted with proof of these lies, you continue to slander a beautiful young woman that you don't even know. You have no idea what type of person Arnelle is and you are making an assumption that she would agree to be involved in the murders, before they happened or after they happened.

There was nothing in Arnelle's demeanor that she was involved and she was complimented by the very same detectives you said she was pulling one over on them.

You need to regroup and start thinking of reason why the cops had to lie and why they had to change things. You will have much better luck and you will sleep better, IMO.


GI

You have made a very informed and logical suggestion. Hopefully it will be taken and the attacks on this woman will stop.imo

[martin II]

How many times have we heard that the police had no reason to lie? If one wants to call another a liar, then invent a reason for the person to lie and it makes no difference when, in so doing, you accuse the person of being involved in a crime. This, IMHO, is wrong.

Whats sad is that it does not seem to matter who is attacked as long as it is
someone from oj Simpsons family.imo

[William Anthony]

Whats sad is that it does not seem to matter who is attacked as long as it is
someone from oj Simpsons family.imo

I don't think it stops with family members, as there have been some comments about AC's alleged involvement and the Reverend Grier has been implicated as telling a lie for Simpson.

[William Anthony]

The benefit of continuing education cannot be over emphasized.

http://www.answers.com/topic/best-evidence-rule

"In some U.S. states, like California, the best evidence rule has been expressly repealed by statute (meaning that an original is no longer mandatory), and has been replaced by the "secondary evidence rule."[1] This means, for example, that the testimony of an insurance agent can constitute adequate evidence of the content of a long-lost insurance policy.[2]"

While the beautiful Ms. Arnelle was not asked about the panties, it seems that the maid's testimony was sufficient under the "secondary evidence rule."

[tv]

Cochran seemed to believe they were Arnelle’s panties, don’t you? Or maybe you do believe Mr. Simpson wore panties around the house.

July 20, 1995 Gigi Guarin

MR. COCHRAN: I saw some panties in and around the washing machine. Mr. Simpson never wore any panties around that house, did he?
MS. GUARIN: No.
MR. COCHRAN: And you know that those clothes and that hamper, that was Arnelle's clothes; isn't that correct?
MS. GUARIN: Yes, they are.
MR. COCHRAN: And Arnelle would wash her clothes inside the house there; isn't that correct?
MS. GUARIN: Yes.

bobaugust

:beer:

[martin II]

:beer:

From the post 'THOSE CLOTHES IN THAT HAMPER WERE ARNELLS CLOTHES"
ANSWER YES.
Then all the clothes in that hamper were Arnells including what some think was a sweat suit.:cool:

[Its just me]

After talking to oj on the phone twice,Arnell went to her room to get dressed. kato and mf were at katos room. When she came out of her room going back to the house, kato and mf were at katos door.Arnell went back to the house and kato and mf were not inside. Arnell left to go get the kids and mf brought kato into the house and placed him on the stool.

So katos testimony that he entered the house with Arnell,vannatter,lang and phillips was absolutely not true. He was at his room with mf when arnell and the others first entered the front door of the house.
So why did kato lie.


I've just finished reading Kato's depo for the civil trial along with other things. Kato stated he went into the house by the back door right after Arnell and the detectives. I can't remember if he said MF was behind him but I'm thinking Kato said he was. Kato also mentioned Arnell having keys. Kato said he was inside the house on the bar stool when he heard Arnell in the kitchen area screaming...she had been told about the murder and Kato was told right after that. What ever/where ever Kato did or went after that doesn't change the fact that Kato said he was sitting on the bar stool when Arnell learned Nicole had been murdered. IMHOO Kato is a little goofy and has a hard time expressing what he wants to say but IMHOO OJ's attorney Baker (?) didn't rattle him in the deposition for the civil trial.

Did Arnell go get dressed before she learned Nicole had been murdered.???

Kato stated when he got back to his room from McDonalds he made a long distance call to a friend....by reading MC's opening statement in the criminal trial it appears there are phone records that shows this call was made at 9:37. Kato stated he last saw OJ before going to his room to make the long distance call.

Kato stated as he was being lead out of the house to wait for LE to take him to the station for more questioning he saw blood drops in the foyer as he left the kitchen to go out the front entrance and he saw one drop the size of a nickel outside the front door.

I read Jason's deposition and it literally broke my heart. I've been thru real life trauma and I sensed the trauma he experienced in his statements.

[Its just me]

I don't think it stops with family members, as there have been some comments about AC's alleged involvement and the Reverend Grier has been implicated as telling a lie for Simpson.

I don't think that Simpson would have worn them but I am not to sure about the long-haired male house guest, Kato.


:shrug:

[Its just me]

Just a FWIW....In reading I came across the den area being called the living room.....It may have been a combination "living room - den area" and right now I'm thinking it was Jason but it could have been one of the attorney's. Was kind of funny when I read "living room". OH Well it's at the link TV or Weezer provided for testimony and depo etc for both cases if anyone wants to refresh their memory on things. Good reading but it takes a lot of time.

[tv]

I've just finished reading Kato's depo for the civil trial along with other things. Kato stated he went into the house by the back door right after Arnell and the detectives. I can't remember if he said MF was behind him but I'm thinking Kato said he was. Kato also mentioned Arnell having keys. Kato said he was inside the house on the bar stool when he heard Arnell in the kitchen area screaming...she had been told about the murder and Kato was told right after that. What ever/where ever Kato did or went after that doesn't change the fact that Kato said he was sitting on the bar stool when Arnell learned Nicole had been murdered. IMHOO Kato is a little goofy and has a hard time expressing what he wants to say but IMHOO OJ's attorney Baker (?) didn't rattle him in the deposition for the civil trial.

Did Arnell go get dressed before she learned Nicole had been murdered.???

Kato stated when he got back to his room from McDonalds he made a long distance call to a friend....by reading MC's opening statement in the criminal trial it appears there are phone records that shows this call was made at 9:37. Kato stated he last saw OJ before going to his room to make the long distance call.

Kato stated as he was being lead out of the house to wait for LE to take him to the station for more questioning he saw blood drops in the foyer as he left the kitchen to go out the front entrance and he saw one drop the size of a nickel outside the front door.

I read Jason's deposition and it literally broke my heart. I've been thru real life trauma and I sensed the trauma he experienced in his statements.


Hi IJM, it's obvious when you read the testimony that all the detectives and Kato entered the back door. I'm perplexed at the posters that say otherwise.:shrug:

Jason's testimony just broke my heart too. It's obvious he was in a lot of pain but still felt a great deal of loyalty to his father. One thing that stood out for me was that he was surprised at the things about Nicole that he didn't know when she was with his father.

[William Anthony]

:shrug:

There have been many posts about Simpson's homosexual father and questioning Simpson wearing the panties, FYI. I think if it is fair to speculate that Simpson wore the panties, it is likewise fair to speculate that they could have been worn by the male resident with long hair, don't you? My reminder that there was more than one male in the home that could have worn the panties has come long after many post about Simpson and/or his father.

[William Anthony]

Hi IJM, it's obvious when you read the testimony that all the detectives and Kato entered the back door. I'm perplexed at the posters that say otherwise.:shrug:

Jason's testimony just broke my heart too. It's obvious he was in a lot of pain but still felt a great deal of loyalty to his father. One thing that stood out for me was that he was surprised at the things about Nicole that he didn't know when she was with his father.

As usual there are more ways than one to look at something. It is obvious that Phillips has them entering the front door, as the beautiful Ms. Arnelle testified, as Phillips testified to the unmentionable room.

Some may see Jason's interest in Ms. NBS as an infatuation with a woman that had divorced his father.

[William Anthony]

I've just finished reading Kato's depo for the civil trial along with other things. Kato stated he went into the house by the back door right after Arnell and the detectives. I can't remember if he said MF was behind him but I'm thinking Kato said he was. Kato also mentioned Arnell having keys. Kato said he was inside the house on the bar stool when he heard Arnell in the kitchen area screaming...she had been told about the murder and Kato was told right after that. What ever/where ever Kato did or went after that doesn't change the fact that Kato said he was sitting on the bar stool when Arnell learned Nicole had been murdered. IMHOO Kato is a little goofy and has a hard time expressing what he wants to say but IMHOO OJ's attorney Baker (?) didn't rattle him in the deposition for the civil trial.

Did Arnell go get dressed before she learned Nicole had been murdered.???

Kato stated when he got back to his room from McDonalds he made a long distance call to a friend....by reading MC's opening statement in the criminal trial it appears there are phone records that shows this call was made at 9:37. Kato stated he last saw OJ before going to his room to make the long distance call.

Kato stated as he was being lead out of the house to wait for LE to take him to the station for more questioning he saw blood drops in the foyer as he left the kitchen to go out the front entrance and he saw one drop the size of a nickel outside the front door.

I read Jason's deposition and it literally broke my heart. I've been thru real life trauma and I sensed the trauma he experienced in his statements.


This is from Kato's 2/14 deposition.

"Q: Did you follow them while they were going in?

A: All of us walked in, right. I followed them. "

That clearly contradicts MF's testimony.

[martin II]

Just a FWIW....In reading I came across the den area being called the living room.....It may have been a combination "living room - den area" and right now I'm thinking it was Jason but it could have been one of the attorney's. Was kind of funny when I read "living room". OH Well it's at the link TV or Weezer provided for testimony and depo etc for both cases if anyone wants to refresh their memory on things. Good reading but it takes a lot of time.

According to the house layout of the east side of the house the living room is top north. The family room is in the east middle and the bar is further west of the s door.
kato and some detectives gave different names to some rooms at different times.

There is no den area listed in the house layout.
The house layout has been posted here at least twice.imo

[martin II]

I've just finished reading Kato's depo for the civil trial along with other things. Kato stated he went into the house by the back door right after Arnell and the detectives. Kato did not enter the house behind ARNELL AND THE OTHERS BECAUSE HE WAS STILL AT HIS ROOM TALKING TO MF. TESTIMONY PROVES THAT. I can't remember if he said MF was behind him but I'm thinking Kato said he was. After Arnell dressed and was going back to the house, Kato and MF were still near Katos room talking so he did not walk into the house with Arnell and the others.Kato also mentioned Arnell having keys. Kato said he was inside the house on the bar stool when he heard Arnell in the kitchen area screaming..Not true.she had been told about the murder and Kato was told right after that. What ever/where ever Kato did or went after that doesn't change the fact that Kato said he was sitting on the bar stool when Arnell learned Nicole had been murdered. Nope IMHOO Kato is a little goofy and has a hard time expressing what he wants to say but IMHOO OJ's attorney Baker (?) didn't rattle him in the deposition for the civil trial.

Did Arnell go get dressed before she learned Nicole had been murdered.???NO. AFTER LANG TOLD HER AND SHE HAD TALKED TO OJ I THINK TWICE IN THE TV ROOM SHE WENT TO GET DRESSED AND AGAIHN KATO WAS AT HIS ROOM TALKING TO MF. HE HAD NOT ENTERED THE HOUSE YET

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Kato stated when he got back to his room from McDonalds he made a long distance call to a friend....by reading MC's opening statement in the criminal trial it appears there are phone records that shows this call was made at 9:37. Kato stated he last saw OJ before going to his room to make the long distance call. [B]kATO AND OJ ARRIVED FROM THE BURGER PLACE AT 9:35PM -9:40 PM. HE WALKED AROUND THE HOUSE TO HIS ROOM WITH HIS SANDWICH. NOT SURE WHAT TIME HE MADE HIS FIRST CALL.

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]Kato stated as he was being lead out of the house to wait for LE to take him to the station for more questioning he saw blood drops in the foyer as he left the kitchen to go out the front entrance and he saw one drop the size of a nickel outside the front door. [B]i DON'T REMEMBER THAT BUT MABY HE SAY THAT.

I read Jason's deposition and it literally broke my heart. I've been thru real life trauma and I sensed the trauma he experienced in his statements. [B] I THOUGHT J asons testimony was straight forward especially when questioned by Petro. He blew Petros goofy idea that oj could have jumped the fense from the sallangers fence out of the water.


MartinII

[martin II]

Hi IJM, it's obvious when you read the testimony that all the detectives and Kato entered the back door. I'm perplexed at the posters that say otherwise.:shrug:

Jason's testimony just broke my heart too. It's obvious he was in a lot of pain but still felt a great deal of loyalty to his father. One thing that stood out for me was that he was surprised at the things about Nicole that he didn't know when she was with his father.

If you ignore the detectives and Arnells testimony you would be correct.

[weezer]

Just a FWIW....In reading I came across the den area being called the living room.....It may have been a combination "living room - den area" and right now I'm thinking it was Jason but it could have been one of the attorney's. Was kind of funny when I read "living room". OH Well it's at the link TV or Weezer provided for testimony and depo etc for both cases if anyone wants to refresh their memory on things. Good reading but it takes a lot of time.

I've always assumed that the folks who don't understand the living room/den/family room issue have either never lived or do not live in a home with more than the one room -- their living room. What I don't understand is what the issue is over the french doors. . . .one poster says the only french doors were in the living room but we know that that is incorrect because even arnelle describes the french doors leading out of the house to the pool. the french doors that were right next to the unlocked door she led LE through when they were making notification.

[weezer]

I've just finished reading Kato's depo for the civil trial along with other things. Kato stated he went into the house by the back door right after Arnell and the detectives. I can't remember if he said MF was behind him but I'm thinking Kato said he was. Kato also mentioned Arnell having keys. Kato said he was inside the house on the bar stool when he heard Arnell in the kitchen area screaming...she had been told about the murder and Kato was told right after that. What ever/where ever Kato did or went after that doesn't change the fact that Kato said he was sitting on the bar stool when Arnell learned Nicole had been murdered. IMHOO Kato is a little goofy and has a hard time expressing what he wants to say but IMHOO OJ's attorney Baker (?) didn't rattle him in the deposition for the civil trial.

Did Arnell go get dressed before she learned Nicole had been murdered.???

Kato stated when he got back to his room from McDonalds he made a long distance call to a friend....by reading MC's opening statement in the criminal trial it appears there are phone records that shows this call was made at 9:37. Kato stated he last saw OJ before going to his room to make the long distance call.

Kato stated as he was being lead out of the house to wait for LE to take him to the station for more questioning he saw blood drops in the foyer as he left the kitchen to go out the front entrance and he saw one drop the size of a nickel outside the front door.

I read Jason's deposition and it literally broke my heart. I've been thru real life trauma and I sensed the trauma he experienced in his statements.


arnelle testied that she spoke to her dad two times while she was in the main house and again when she went to get dressed.

I've too felt awful for Jason -- he seems like a decent guy that was truly hurt by Nicole's death. I think it was orenthal (during his las vegas shenanigan appearance) that said he had his own family now. I hope that is true and I hope he is happy.

did you read any of arnelle's deposition? I get the sense that she isn't like her brother.

[William Anthony]

After some investigation William Dear wrote a work of Fiction in which he opined that Jason was the killer. Let's hope that, if Dear is correct, that the beautiful Ms. Arnelle is not like her brother.:);):cool:

[Kate Sachel]

Kate,

I have to disagree with your second paragraph. It is rather upsetting that it appears not only completely understandable but also completely acceptable for police and the other members of the department to turn in a sub-par performance because no one thinks anyone is going to notice. Or that they won't get caught. Our prisions are filled with people who didn't they would get caught ---- and this is just for the average guy.

Officer Riske knew enough not to use his radio to call this in because not only did he believe that Simpson was involved in the murders but he he knew the media was going to be all over this.

Mark Fuhrman knew this was going to be a high profile case and he knew that this case was going to be watched closely.

In regards to his notes, I tend to agree with you about them. However, here tis the problem. Either MF had completely lied in them or Vanatter and Company are painting him as at the very least, a detective who got things so wrong or MF's notes are the truth and Lange and VA are lying about them.

It is an either/or. IMO.

I have read MF's book as well as VA and Lange's. I find it interesting that MF does not slam the defense, only when it refers to him, however, he said the defense had and made a good case because of Lange and VA's job performance.

Lange and VA say the defense just made up their case as they went along. That they "created controversary". No, the defense didn't create this, the LAPD and the SID department did. IMO.

I don't believe that my second paragraph indicated any such thing. However, initial notations of a crime scene are what they are and are not meant to be accurate and full accounts of the scenario. Fuhrman's arrogance is what leads me to believe that he would not deliberately notate things that he knew were completely incorrect.

My point regarding the scrutiny of the police work is made to point out that I'm sure he didn't realize that anything he notated that was not completely accurate would be so highly scrutinized, much like you are doing right now. You assume something sinister about initial notations because not all of them were, in the end, representative of the actual evidence that was collected later on.

Kate

[martin II]

I've always assumed that the folks who don't understand the living room/den/family room issue have either never lived or do not live in a home with more than the one room -- their living room. What I don't understand is what the issue is over the french doors. . . .one poster says the only french doors were in the living room but we know that that is incorrect because even arnelle describes the french doors leading out of the house to the pool. the french doors that were right next to the unlocked door she led LE through when they were making notification.

Your post is not correct.
There was only one room with french doors and that was at the east end of the living room which is the morth most room on the east side of the house located near the east Ashford side of the house.I think everyone posting here
has lived in a multiple room house. But the house layout shows where the rooms were located if one can read a house layout. Arnell was correct. The living room french doors DO LEAD TO THE POOL.

so you are wrong. MF testified that when he brought Kato from his room, he walked down/up a few steps and there was one door at the extreme south end of the house and the door was open and he brought katon in that door walked west over to the bar area and put Kato on a stool. That south door was on the opposite end of the house from the french door room.That door was open because Arnell had opened it from the inside to go to her room to get dressed. When she was dressed she was going back to the house and she saw MF and KATO NEAR kATOS ROOM. She and ac left to get the kids and MF then brought kato in the house.
Remember PHILLIPS also said he was in the room where the french doors were so that had to be the living room.
Based on you comment about where the french doors were it is obvious you too are confused about the layout of the rooms even though the layout has been posted twice by posters.:cool:

[William Anthony]

From Jason's own mouth

May 8th

"Q: Did you love Nicole?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Were you close to her?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Was she like a second mother to you?

A: I wouldn't say second mother, no. "

[martin II]

Mf made one set of notes of his obersavations at Bundy which he gave to Vannater. These notes included ideas about the dog could have bit someone
location of the glove,hat blood etc.ETC. although he missed some blood.
There is no testimony referring to MF notes other than the ones he gave to vannatter when vannatter and lang took over as lead detectives.IMO:cool:

[martin II]

Kate,

Is there any other information that confirms that Terri and parents did go to Bundy right after the murders?

I find it hard to believe that her parents would have gone to Bundy at all. I mean what would be the purpose of their visit? They already knew the Browns believed OJ murdered their daughter-sister.

I just don't see the point of them going to Bundy. I know they loved Nicole and she was a member of their family for 17 years but why would they go over there and even risk running into the Browns or worse, the LAPD?

LIMAKEY

Terry the one that wanted to write a book did go to bundy some days after the murders to collect info for her book. She took the position that oj may have been guilty and got a licking for her mouth. It was the day that Lou was ashing down the yard/house.There is no proof that ojs family did not consider Nicole a family member. As a matter of face terry went to bundy twice and did what she called some investigations until Lou Brown kicked her off the property as his friend was washing all remainding evidence from the murder scene.imo:cool:

[William Anthony]

May 8, 1996

"Q: Did you see Nicole at any day -- at any time on June 12?

A: No. "

I think I remember hearing that Dear wrote Jason visited her on that date. If anyone has read the book and remembers, can they please be so kind as to tell me?

[weezer]

the post was only from 2008! wonder what took so long to answer? :eek::tongue:

[weezer]

tvdinner and it's just me --

I've PM'd you with the link to arnelle's deposition taking during the hassle over the book.

[martin II]

It would seem to me that a person, who says that three rooms are one, is a person that lived in a one or two room dwelling and the testimony of the three detectives and Ms. Arnelle is that the beautiful Ms. Arnelle unlocked the door. I think Simpson lived in a small mansion, if that is not an oxymoron.

There were 16 rooms on the first floor of ojs house. So it may be that the detectives suffered multiple room shock or became dizzy from the multiple rooms. But they were all seasoned detectives and m ust have been in large houses before so i see no reason for them to give different testimony at different times or become confused as there were only two large room on the side of the house in question. Living and family.

[William Anthony]

Haste makes waste (not a williamism). Taking one's time avoids a rush to judgment (a Williamism).:);):cool:

[martin II]

May 8, 1996

"Q: Did you see Nicole at any day -- at any time on June 12?

A: No. "

I think I remember hearing that Dear wrote Jason visited her on that date. If anyone has read the book and remembers, can they please be so kind as to tell me?

According to Dear Nicole had told Jason that she would bring the family to his resturant for dinner after the recital. Jason had his resturant staff make special preperations for the affair as he was bragging,with staff, that his family with the kids would have dinner at his resturant.

Some time on 6/12 just before the recital nicoile talked to him and cancelled his place for after recital dinner. Because he was off his meds.Deprocoat sp. He became outraged which Dear presented proof that Jason often became when he either took his meds and coke or no meds and coke . I don't remember which. Highly embarrassed jason went to nicoles house after the dinner at Rons resturant and confronted Nicole at her front door ,He asked her why she had 'DONE THAT TO HIM" she gave him some tough talk and slammed the door in his face. More outraged he went to his car pulled out his chef knives,returned to the front door, nicole opened the door angry that he had returned, gave him another tounge lashing and he in a fit of great anger attacked her.
Dear said that initially Jasons girl friend gave Jason a alibi but later changed it to say she was not with Jason at the time of the murders.

This is from Dears book and i have posted from memory when i read the book last year.I can look at it again if there are specific questions.imo:cool:

Dear did a extremely detail investigation of Jasons long term mental heath problems over a period of just over a year. He was able to get all of Jasons private and hospital medical records.He also got his hands on Nicoles OJS and Jason private sessions.He also claims that that therapist destroyed the session records and moved to texas right after the murders. imo

The book is kind of a slow read as Dear included every possible detail in his research on Jason.

[William Anthony]

According to Dear Nicole had told Jason that she would bring the family to his resturant for dinner after the recital. Jason had his resturant staff make special preperations for the affair as he was bragging,with staff, that his family with the kids would have dinner at his resturant.

Some time on 6/12 nicoile talked to him anc cancelled his place. Because he was off his meds.Deprocoat sp. He became outraged which Dear presented proof that Jason often became when he either took his meds and coke or no meds and coke . I don't remember which. Highly embarrassed jason went to nicoles house after the dinner at Rons resturant and confronted Nicole at her front door ,He asked her why she had 'DONE THAT TO HIM" she gave him some tough talk anhd slammed the door in his face. More outraged he went to his car pulled out his chef knives,returned to the front door, nicole opened the door angry that he had returned, gave him another tounge lashing and he in a fit of great anger attacked her.
Dear said that initially Jasons girl friend gave Jason a alibi but later changed it to say she was not with Jason at the time of the murders.

This is from Dears book and i have posted from memory when i read the book last year.I can look at it again if there are specific questions.imo:cool:

Dear did a extremely detail investigation of Jasons long term mental heath problems over a period of just over a year. He was able to get all of Jasons private and hospital medical records.He also got his hands on Nicoles OJS and Jason private sessions.He also claims that that therapist destroyed the session records and moved to texas right after the murders. imo

Thanks. I just thought I had heard that Dear claimed Jason had visited Ms. NBS earlier on the day of the murders. It's not a big deal and when I was trying to find something on this I came across one link that said Dear found jason's diary and a knife. I found a link that claimed Jason was murdered in 2006 and another that said he was alive in 2008.:shrug:

[martin II]

As usual there are more ways than one to look at something. It is obvious that Phillips has them entering the front door, as the beautiful Ms. Arnelle testified, as Phillips testified to the unmentionable room.

Some may see Jason's interest in Ms. NBS as an infatuation with a woman that had divorced his father.

Jason had much love for Nicole and visited he frequently to see her and the kids at GG and Bundy. Dear did say that on a visit to nicoles he was very surprised that she had beefed up so much and did not look as lady like as before and told her so.He may have used other words.I did not get the impression that he had a infactuation with her. It seems that the divoice did not change his feeling for her, Same with Arnell and ojs sisters.

[William Anthony]

Jason had much love for Nicole and visited he frequently to see her and the kids at GG and Bundy. Dear did say that on a visit to nicoles he was very surprised that she had beefed up so much and did not look as lady like as before and told her so.He may have used other words.I did not get the impression that he had a infactuation with her. It seems that the divoice did not change his feeling for her, Same with Arnell and ojs sisters.

He testified he did not love her as a second mother.

May 8, 1996

"Q: Yeah. Describe her to me.

A: I don't know. Nicole changed. I mean, in high school I remember her one way, and when I grew up I remember her another way. When she was married, I remember her one way and --

Q: When did Nicole change?

A: She went through a lot of changes. I mean, I've known her for 17 years.

Q: Can you describe the changes that she went through?

MR. LEONARD: I am going to object as vague and overbroad, but go ahead.

THE WITNESS: She -- sorry. She went from being at one point a young, fun-loving person to being a beautiful mother. You know, I mean, when you want to explain --

BY MR. PETROCELLI:

Q: A young, fun-loving --

A: Whatever, going out, you know, and single --

Q: Young, fun-loving person going out was when you -- she was living with you at Rockingham, and before she had the children. Right?

A: Before she got married to my dad, when she was married and they would do couples things and stuff like that, and then when she got married, and then another stage when they got divorced.

Q: And what changes did you see in her when she got divorced?

A: Maturity.

Q: She became more mature?

A: She always was becoming a little bit more mature. You know what I'm saying? She was off on her own. I've never seen her alone before, you know, living in a house. I never really got to see what it would be like for her to have a place of her own, what everything, you know, she would like. Do you understand what I'm saying? Go to her house and look and, you know, see all the things that, you know, she liked -- "

I think he visited her frequently and she was alone on Gretna Green. To me he seems almost pleased at the divorce and I see some interest that may have be over the limit and when you couple that with being rejected as to the cooking and finding her with someone else, if that is what happened, then Dear's theory becomes plausible. It was as if he saw the divorce as a finality, which it may or may not have been had she lived as some couples divorce and remarry.:shrug:

[tv]

the post was only from 2008! wonder what took so long to answer? :eek::tongue:

Good grief! :eek: What is the point?

[tv]

tvdinner and it's just me --

I've PM'd you with the link to arnelle's deposition taking during the hassle over the book.

Thanks weezer! By the way, I'm still reeling from the idea that because Jason didn't think of Nicole as a second mother he killed her. Talk about bashing a family member...:no:

[martin II]

Thanks. I just thought I had heard that Dear claimed Jason had visited Ms. NBS earlier on the day of the murders. It's not a big deal and when I was trying to find something on this I came across one link that said Dear found jason's diary and a knife. I found a link that claimed Jason was murdered in 2006 and another that said he was alive in 2008.:shrug:

The last i heard he was a chef at a miami resturant. At some time he had attanded cooking school in la i think.Dear only said he went to her bundy house after the recital and nicole was home on the night of 6/12. Jason,according to Dear was at his resturant during the day making mass preperation for nicoles family and the kids. Dear did have jasons diary i think. jason had a set of regular chef knifes. Dear says after the killings jason call oj from bundy and told him he had killed them at bundy and oj ran to bundy. some how the shoe prints were made by Jason. Dear says oj told jason to go clean up his knife and go home and don't talk to anyone. Jason went to the resturant,cleaned his knifes. :cool:

[martin II]

Thanks weezer! By the way, I'm still reeling from the idea that because Jason didn't think of Nicole as a second mother he killed her. Talk about bashing a family member...:no:

Dears reason for Jason killing nicole has been posted.

[William Anthony]

The last i heard he was a chef at a miami resturant. At some time he had attanded cooking school in la i think.Dear only said he went to her bundy house after the recital and nicole was home on the night of 6/12. Jason,according to Dear was at his resturant during the day making mass preperation for nicoles family and the kids. Dear did have jasons diary i think. jason had a set of regular chef knifes. Dear says after the killings jason call oj from bundy and told him he had killed them at bundy and oj ran to bundy. some how the shoe prints were made by Jason. Dear says oj told jason to go clean up his knife and go home and don't talk to anyone. Jason went to the resturant,cleaned his knifes. :cool:

Thanks and i guess that going over after the recital is what they were talking about and I may have misunderstood and thought they meant earlier than that. Thanks for sharing more information on Dear's theory and the information he acquired. I pointed to Jason's testimony to show that they type of love he had for her was not that of a second mother and I have never said that he killed her but that theory was set forth by Dear and that testimony was Jason's. Whether I agree or not with Dear, I will defend his right to say it.

[William Anthony]

Dears reason for Jason killing nicole has been posted.

Interesting, IMHO, that one family member can be accused of a crime without any evidence to support it but when someone did an investigation and concluded that another family member was the murderer it is called bashing.

[GreenIce]

There WAS a reason for them to lie.
the washing machine lie.

Martin,

Don't forget the Fuhrman rule----that had to lie for the Fuhrman Rule.

[GreenIce]

Cochran seemed to believe they were Arnelle’s panties, don’t you? Or maybe you do believe Mr. Simpson wore panties around the house.

July 20, 1995 Gigi Guarin

MR. COCHRAN: I saw some panties in and around the washing machine. Mr. Simpson never wore any panties around that house, did he?
MS. GUARIN: No.
MR. COCHRAN: And you know that those clothes and that hamper, that was Arnelle's clothes; isn't that correct?
MS. GUARIN: Yes, they are.
MR. COCHRAN: And Arnelle would wash her clothes inside the house there; isn't that correct?
MS. GUARIN: Yes.

bobaugust

Mr. August,

I am confused, are you saying that Arnelle was wearing the panties and because she is an accomplice, she took them off and tossed them in with the sweat suit? Is that your theory?

Or is it that Simpson was wearing the panties and all the other clothes in the washing machine underneath his sweat suit and he just stripped off everything, tossed them in the washing machine and waited 4 or 5 hours to call Arnelle?

I am really confused here. Talk about fantasies---I think the G outdid himself here. IMO.

[GreenIce]

When the detectives woke Arnell up they asked her to let them in the house.. She got her keys and walked to the front door with some cops. I think it was vannatter, lang and Phillip.They left MF with Kato at Katos room.
Kato could not have been with Arnell when she and the others entered the house.Kato and MF were still at Katos room talking.That is the testimony.

Martin,

If you read her testimony, she has always been consistent that there were only two cops at her door and that one was with Kato and one was by the patio. It is very possible that Arnelle did not see VA fall in behind the other two, however, if you read his testimony in the grand jury, he is not clear on where he was. He was asked several times and he never is clear.

[GreenIce]

Thanks and i am sure nothing got pass B Pavalic.

Martin,

I am not really impressed with Pavalic. This came from Pat McKenna. He had contacts within the Chicago PD and other contacts as well.

[William Anthony]

Mr. August,

I am confused, are you saying that Arnelle was wearing the panties and because she is an accomplice, she took them off and tossed them in with the sweat suit? Is that your theory?

Or is it that Simpson was wearing the panties and all the other clothes in the washing machine underneath his sweat suit and he just stripped off everything, tossed them in the washing machine and waited 4 or 5 hours to call Arnelle?

I am really confused here. Talk about fantasies---I think the G outdid himself here. IMO.

The machine ghost was busy again, IMHO. Dr. Terry Lee would have "made a convincing argument, to explain why the items were not there.":)

[tv]

tvdinner and it's just me --

I've PM'd you with the link to arnelle's deposition taking during the hassle over the book.

I'm a few sentences into the depo and already Arnelle is saying she doesn't remember Fred Goldman suing OJ Simpson and doesn't remember being deposed in that case? :eek: Does she have some kind of organic brain problem or is something else wrong? It's hard to believe anything she says after a claim like that.

[martin II]

Thanks and i guess that going over after the recital is what they were talking about and I may have misunderstood and thought they meant earlier than that. Thanks for sharing more information on Dear's theory and the information he acquired. I pointed to Jason's testimony to show that they type of love he had for her was not that of a second mother and I have never said that he killed her but that theory was set forth by Dear and that testimony was Jason's. Whether I agree or not with Dear, I will defend his right to say it.

There were a few issues that i needed from dear that i did not get. But he did a excellant job of investigating nicole,jasons and ojs group theraphy sessions which was a big surprise and how he was able to get all of jasons mental health records from hospitals and the meds his doctors had him on.

[martin II]

I'm a few sentences into the depo and already Arnelle is saying she doesn't remember Fred Goldman suing OJ Simpson and doesn't remember being deposed in that case? :eek: Does she have some kind of organic brain problem or is something else wrong? It's hard to believe anything she says after a claim like that.

Note

Arnell simpson is a member of the simpson family. if you are suggesting that she had some kind of orgamic brain problem even in a question i dissagree and ask that you post a link to some medical records to support why you asked such a question. imo:cool:

[Hipcheck]

According to Dear Nicole had told Jason that she would bring the family to his resturant for dinner after the recital. Jason had his resturant staff make special preperations for the affair as he was bragging,with staff, that his family with the kids would have dinner at his resturant.

Some time on 6/12 just before the recital nicoile talked to him and cancelled his place for after recital dinner. Because he was off his meds.Deprocoat sp. He became outraged which Dear presented proof that Jason often became when he either took his meds and coke or no meds and coke . I don't remember which. Highly embarrassed jason went to nicoles house after the dinner at Rons resturant and confronted Nicole at her front door ,He asked her why she had 'DONE THAT TO HIM" she gave him some tough talk and slammed the door in his face. More outraged he went to his car pulled out his chef knives,returned to the front door, nicole opened the door angry that he had returned, gave him another tounge lashing and he in a fit of great anger attacked her.
Dear said that initially Jasons girl friend gave Jason a alibi but later changed it to say she was not with Jason at the time of the murders.

This is from Dears book and i have posted from memory when i read the book last year.I can look at it again if there are specific questions.imo:cool:

Dear did a extremely detail investigation of Jasons long term mental heath problems over a period of just over a year. He was able to get all of Jasons private and hospital medical records.He also got his hands on Nicoles OJS and Jason private sessions.He also claims that that therapist destroyed the session records and moved to texas right after the murders. imo

The book is kind of a slow read as Dear included every possible detail in his research on Jason.

This Dear soud like a nute case.

First of all why would Jason need to make special arraingments for such a small party?

How does Dear manage to get Jason's medical records? I don't believe he was able to do that.

How does Dear know about the conversation Nicole had with Jason just before he kills her? Why is he the only one who knows this?

How does Dear know that Jason called O.J. from Bundy telling him that he killed Nicole and Ron? Why is he the only one who knows this?

I don't believe a word from that nut.

[martin II]

Martin,

I am not really impressed with Pavalic. This came from Pat McKenna. He had contacts within the Chicago PD and other contacts as well.

Pavalic was excellant on the history of mf and had good connections in the lapd but PAT McKENNA was top shelf.

[William Anthony]

I'm a few sentences into the depo and already Arnelle is saying she doesn't remember Fred Goldman suing OJ Simpson and doesn't remember being deposed in that case? :eek: Does she have some kind of organic brain problem or is something else wrong? It's hard to believe anything she says after a claim like that.

I think that it was a trying event and the brutal slaying of a beautiful young woman, whom she had known for several years and had developed a relationship, came flooding back into her mind when she was being deposed and it is not uncommon for the mind to try to block out unpleasant experiences as a coping mechanism, IMHO. I would not automatically jump to a conclusion that someone had a brain problem but rather that they were experiencing a rather common human phenomena when it comes to such a traumatic experience surrounding the brutal death of a young and beautiful woman.

[martin II]

This Dear soud like a nute case.

First of all why would Jason need to make special arraingments for such a small party?

How does Dear manage to get Jason's medical records? I don't believe he was able to do that.

How does Dear know about the conversation Nicole had with Jason just before he kills her? Why is he the only one who knows this?

How does Dear know that Jason called O.J. from Bundy telling him that he killed Nicole and Ron? Why is he the only one who knows this?

I don't believe a word from that nut.

You should read his book since you have so many questions. That sounds like a logical way to get the answers you request.

[William Anthony]

This Dear soud like a nute case.

First of all why would Jason need to make special arraingments for such a small party?

How does Dear manage to get Jason's medical records? I don't believe he was able to do that.

How does Dear know about the conversation Nicole had with Jason just before he kills her? Why is he the only one who knows this?

How does Dear know that Jason called O.J. from Bundy telling him that he killed Nicole and Ron? Why is he the only one who knows this?

I don't believe a word from that nut.

Believe it or not, it is what it is and it maybe a work of fiction equal to that of, if not superior to, MF's, Petrocelli's, VB's, MC's, CD's, OJS's and others.

[martin II]

I think that it was a trying event and the brutal slaying of a beautiful young woman, whom she had known for several years and had developed a relationship, came flooding back into her mind when she was being deposed and it is not uncommon for the mind to try to block out unpleasant experiences as a coping mechanism, IMHO. I would not automatically jump to a conclusion that someone had a brain problem but rather that they were experiencing a rather common human phenomena when it comes to such a traumatic experience surrounding the brutal death of a young and beautiful woman.

Great.

maby she made a simple mistake upon hear gred goldmans name.But to say she had a brain problem is going too far. So Arnell a simpson family member has gone from a conspirator in a murder case to a person with some kind of brain malfunction and nothing has been posted to support either claim. imo

[tv]

Great.

maby she made a simple mistake upon hear gred goldmans name.But to say she had a brain problem is going too far. So Arnell a simpson family member has gone from a conspirator in a murder case to a person with some kind of brain malfunction and nothing has been posted to support either claim. imo

I make it a policy not to respond to your nonsense but you've outdone yourself this time. I didn't say she had a brain problem -- I was asking if she did. A young woman that can't remember her father being sued for wrongful death and being deposed in that case? Give me a break.

If you're so distressed at what I'm asking then report the post. :shrug:

[weezer]

". . .No stranger to self-promotion, veteran private investigator William C. Dear takes his theory about the Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman murders (already detailed in a self-published 2000 tome) to the screen in "The Overlooked Suspect: O.J. Is Guilty but Not of Murder." Beyond the subject itself, docu's tabloid-TV style and Dear's unctuous, informercial-host-like presence will make this an unappetizing prospect to most. But curiosity seekers and those still fascinated by the case may find his thesis provocative. Pic had its theatrical premiere Feb. 29 at San Francisco's Roxie Cinema, though doubtless primary exposure will be on DVD.

Dear and helmer Phil Smith compile archival footage, interviews with experts and peripheral figures (though none of the major figures in the case agreed to participate), crude re-enactments and a whole lot of Dear talking to the camera, saying things like, "Intuitively, I have the ability to enter the mind of a killer."

In a nutshell, Dear's theory is that O.J. Simpson didn't commit the 1994 murders as many believe, but rather covered up the guilt of his eldest son, Jason, whose troubled history is cited to suggest he committed the deed in an impulsive rage. Latter had an airtight alibi, according to the Los Angeles Police Department, but Dear pokes holes in that. Much of his evidence is highly speculative, though he does present some disturbing finds (notably a diary and a knife) in a box bought off a salvage auctioneer after Jason Simpson failed to pay his storage-facility rent.

Dear re-enacts his own combing through Jason's garbage, as well as his purported sneaking onto Nicole Brown Simpson's cordoned-off property just after the murders. We get many glimpses of the grisly original crime scene. But the nadir is a tasteless dramatization of the killings as Dear believes they happened.

Tech aspects are low-end cable-grade, with music predictably cheesy and melodramatic. But since this is more an argument than a movie, those interested enough to watch probably won't mind. Convinced viewers are urged to petition authorities for a new trial.

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117936350.html?categoryid=31&cs=1

anyone hear "Twilight Zone" music here? ;)

[martin II]

This Dear soud like a nute case.

First of all why would Jason need to make special arraingments for such a small party?

How does Dear manage to get Jason's medical records? I don't believe he was able to do that.

How does Dear know about the conversation Nicole had with Jason just before he kills her? Why is he the only one who knows this?

How does Dear know that Jason called O.J. from Bundy telling him that he killed Nicole and Ron? Why is he the only one who knows this?

I don't believe a word from that nut.


How do you know that Darden was not fired by the lapd das office. You never posted proof of what you said was a fact.

[William Anthony]

Great.

maby she made a simple mistake upon hear gred goldmans name.But to say she had a brain problem is going too far. So Arnell a simpson family member has gone from a conspirator in a murder case to a person with some kind of brain malfunction and nothing has been posted to support either claim. imo

Luckily, I have the link but I can't cut and paste the question and answer. To me it shows Ms. Arnelle's high degree of intelligence. She was asked if she could recall when Fred Goldman sued her father. She responded that she could not remember. Very astute and intelligent on her part as she was asked a date by the question and she did not try to guess. The question should have been asked, IMHO, do you recall that at some point in time Fred Goldman sued your father.:);):cool: On page 8 as a follow up Ms. Arnelle was asked if she remembered it as being around 1997?, smile.

[tv]

". . .No stranger to self-promotion, veteran private investigator William C. Dear takes his theory about the Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman murders (already detailed in a self-published 2000 tome) to the screen in "The Overlooked Suspect: O.J. Is Guilty but Not of Murder." Beyond the subject itself, docu's tabloid-TV style and Dear's unctuous, informercial-host-like presence will make this an unappetizing prospect to most. But curiosity seekers and those still fascinated by the case may find his thesis provocative. Pic had its theatrical premiere Feb. 29 at San Francisco's Roxie Cinema, though doubtless primary exposure will be on DVD.

Dear and helmer Phil Smith compile archival footage, interviews with experts and peripheral figures (though none of the major figures in the case agreed to participate), crude re-enactments and a whole lot of Dear talking to the camera, saying things like, "Intuitively, I have the ability to enter the mind of a killer."

In a nutshell, Dear's theory is that O.J. Simpson didn't commit the 1994 murders as many believe, but rather covered up the guilt of his eldest son, Jason, whose troubled history is cited to suggest he committed the deed in an impulsive rage. Latter had an airtight alibi, according to the Los Angeles Police Department, but Dear pokes holes in that. Much of his evidence is highly speculative, though he does present some disturbing finds (notably a diary and a knife) in a box bought off a salvage auctioneer after Jason Simpson failed to pay his storage-facility rent.

Dear re-enacts his own combing through Jason's garbage, as well as his purported sneaking onto Nicole Brown Simpson's cordoned-off property just after the murders. We get many glimpses of the grisly original crime scene. But the nadir is a tasteless dramatization of the killings as Dear believes they happened.

Tech aspects are low-end cable-grade, with music predictably cheesy and melodramatic. But since this is more an argument than a movie, those interested enough to watch probably won't mind. Convinced viewers are urged to petition authorities for a new trial.

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117936350.html?categoryid=31&cs=1

anyone hear "Twilight Zone" music here? ;)

Oh, yeah. Most definitely. :biggrin:

[William Anthony]

". . .No stranger to self-promotion, veteran private investigator William C. Dear takes his theory about the Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman murders (already detailed in a self-published 2000 tome) to the screen in "The Overlooked Suspect: O.J. Is Guilty but Not of Murder." Beyond the subject itself, docu's tabloid-TV style and Dear's unctuous, informercial-host-like presence will make this an unappetizing prospect to most. But curiosity seekers and those still fascinated by the case may find his thesis provocative. Pic had its theatrical premiere Feb. 29 at San Francisco's Roxie Cinema, though doubtless primary exposure will be on DVD.

Dear and helmer Phil Smith compile archival footage, interviews with experts and peripheral figures (though none of the major figures in the case agreed to participate), crude re-enactments and a whole lot of Dear talking to the camera, saying things like, "Intuitively, I have the ability to enter the mind of a killer."

In a nutshell, Dear's theory is that O.J. Simpson didn't commit the 1994 murders as many believe, but rather covered up the guilt of his eldest son, Jason, whose troubled history is cited to suggest he committed the deed in an impulsive rage. Latter had an airtight alibi, according to the Los Angeles Police Department, but Dear pokes holes in that. Much of his evidence is highly speculative, though he does present some disturbing finds (notably a diary and a knife) in a box bought off a salvage auctioneer after Jason Simpson failed to pay his storage-facility rent.

Dear re-enacts his own combing through Jason's garbage, as well as his purported sneaking onto Nicole Brown Simpson's cordoned-off property just after the murders. We get many glimpses of the grisly original crime scene. But the nadir is a tasteless dramatization of the killings as Dear believes they happened.

Tech aspects are low-end cable-grade, with music predictably cheesy and melodramatic. But since this is more an argument than a movie, those interested enough to watch probably won't mind. Convinced viewers are urged to petition authorities for a new trial.

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117936350.html?categoryid=31&cs=1

anyone hear "Twilight Zone" music here? ;)

I guess there will be those that hate the movie but love the book and some, who just don't like anything other than Simpson is guilty. :)

[martin II]

I make it a policy not to respond to your nonsense but you've outdone yourself this time. I didn't say she had a brain problem -- I was asking if she did. A young woman that can't remember her father being sued for wrongful death and being deposed in that case? Give me a break.

If you're so distressed at what I'm asking then report the post. :shrug:

When vannatter could not remember if he had a cup of coffee or not in his office with Ojs blood on his desk did that answer cause you to ask if he had some kind of brain problem? When Phillips testified to being in different rooms at different times did that cause to wonder if he had some kind of brain problem?

Or do you only ask open questions on the thread about a witnesses having a brain problem when it is Arnell Simpson a simpson family member. imo

Was her inability to remember the answer to a question cause for you to ask if she had some kind of brain problem. I hope you were not in some way suggesting that she did have such a problem. Right?

[tv]

When vannatter could not remember if he had a cup of coffee or not in his office with Ojs blood on his desk did that answer cause you to ask if he had some kind of brain problem? When Phillips testified to being in different rooms at different times did that cause to wonder if he had some kind of brain problem?

Or do you only ask open questions on the thread about a witnesses having a brain problem when it is Arnell Simpson a simpson family member. imo

Was her inability to remember the answer to a question cause for you to ask if she had some kind of brain problem. I hope you were not in some way suggesting that she did have such a problem. Right?

I told you what I was asking and have no intention of getting into a long discussion on any subject.

[Its just me]

Thanks weezer! By the way, I'm still reeling from the idea that because Jason didn't think of Nicole as a second mother he killed her. Talk about bashing a family member...:no:

Hey, I would say way more step children would think as Jason than don't....especially the ones that really love and honor their real mother. You respect and honor that Mom so much there just is NOT a second mom. Period. My Dad's mom lived with us my entire life growing up....I loved my granny and my mother equally but it was also different.... I never ever said Granny was a second Mom because that simply took away from my Mom.

I agree that Jason expressed a great deal of loyalty to his Dad. That was clear when they were questioning him about the 25,000 he got from Star or somewhere for family photos. I'm not sure who else got the same amount but I'm thinking Arnelle. I can actually understand his point.... that he was as entitled as anyone else to make a buck. (simple version of what he said)

I have not followed Jason's history but I gathered by reading his depo he has somewhat been a troubled person. "To me" he seemed to be very independent and wanted to be his own self made self. I hope that made sense. LOL He made if perfectly clear that Arnelle may have been sleeping in the room but it "was" his room. Arnelle's room was the one Kato was using.

What I got from the depo was that Jason loved Nicole, Sydney, and Justin very much and he had watched Nicole grow up and become independent from OJ. It appeared he found out Nicole had a lot of the same taste in music and decor as he did.

The part that really broke my heart was they told him he had to speak louder at one point when he was taking about the time right after the murders...He said he couldn't talk loud about something like that. And it was also touching when he was describing the wild goose chase AC took OJ on....and how he was praying and Arnelle was praying. These kids didn't know what their dad was going to do. And then I read OJ so called suicide letter....He addressed all his buds but didn't write one word to his kids....it's only nature for them to love him but I really don't see how.

I've only read a little of OJ's depo and he tells of the 10 thousand dollars he had on him when he left with AC for the ride along....OJ said he told AC to give it to Arnelle and Jason.....Jason was asked about this and said he never got any money.

I have NO doubt that Jason was very disappointed about them not going to eat at the restaurant where he worked but that is not a motive for murder and to my knowledge there no physical or circumstantial evidence linking Jason to the murders except a vivid imagination which is not the case with his Dad OJ. I would have to read back but I am not under the impression that Jason had already cooked any food or anything except make reservations.

Most of my reading on the depositions has been very sad but I almost fell out of my chair laughing when Kato described OJ gobbling up his McDonald’s hamburger. Kato’s deposition was very interesting…..he told things OJ said before and after the recital. I’m a firm believer of what is in ones head comes flying out their mouth…..OJ was upset about a lot of things….one being he was kept away from Sydney. Unless I read something that will change my mind I am more convinced than ever that OJ killed Nicole and Ron.

[martin II]

Luckily, I have the link but I can't cut and paste the question and answer. To me it shows Ms. Arnelle's high degree of intelligence. She was asked if she could recall when Fred Goldman sued her father. She responded that she could not remember. Very astute and intelligent on her part as she was asked a date by the question and she did not try to guess. The question should have been asked, IMHO, do you recall that at some point in time Fred Goldman sued your father.:);):cool: On page 8 as a follow up Ms. Arnelle was asked if she remembered it as being around 1997?, smile.


Then her answer could have reflected her thought that f goldmans legal actions against her father was of no interest to her and she had wipped all referance of him out of her memory.imo:cool:
It was really a silly question.

[William Anthony]

I make it a policy not to respond to your nonsense but you've outdone yourself this time. I didn't say she had a brain problem -- I was asking if she did. A young woman that can't remember her father being sued for wrongful death and being deposed in that case? Give me a break.

If you're so distressed at what I'm asking then report the post. :shrug:

The answer given by Ms. Arnelle was taken out of context, which prompted you to ask a question as to her mental state. I think it only fitting that I provide the link for the entire board so that they can read for themselves and they will see that Ms. Arnelle did not say she could not remember Mr. Goldman suing her father but that she could not remember when and since the case was finished in 1996, IIRC, the deposition was in regard to the judgment if the 1997 date is correct. You see we all have memory failures and that does not mean we all have organic brain disease. Ms. Arnelle testified in the socio political production on January 14, 1997. Therefore, her deposition for that socio political production, if there was one, had to most likely take place in 1996. Unless he was calling testifying in the trial as being a deposition, which would throw anyone off, IMHO. Smile

http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/Arnell_Simpson_Deposition_061307.pdf

[Its just me]

Oh, yeah. Most definitely. :biggrin:

Some things that people will stoop to do for a dollar needs to be a crime. This is one of those things.

[William Anthony]

Then her answer could have reflected her thought that f goldmans legal actions against her father was of no interest to her and she had wipped all referance of him out of her memory.imo:cool:
It was really a silly question.

I think she was showing a high degree of intelligence by listening carefully and answering the question presented to her and, unlike the claim, she was not asked if she remembered Mr. Goldman suing her father but when.

[William Anthony]

Some things that people will stoop to do for a dollar needs to be a crime. This is one of those things.

I agree about making criminal to what some will stoop and feel that way about Petrocelli's, VB's and MF's books.

[martin II]

Hey, I would say way more step children would think as Jason than don't....especially the ones that really love and honor their real mother. You respect and honor that Mom so much there just is NOT a second mom. Period. My Dad's mom lived with us my entire life growing up....I loved my granny and my mother equally but it was also different.... I never ever said Granny was a second Mom because that simply took away from my Mom.

I agree that Jason expressed a great deal of loyalty to his Dad. That was clear when they were questioning him about the 25,000 he got from Star or somewhere for family photos. I'm not sure who else got the same amount but I'm thinking Arnelle. I can actually understand his point.... that he was as entitled as anyone else to make a buck. (simple version of what he said)

I have not followed Jason's history but I gathered by reading his depo he has somewhat been a troubled person. "To me" he seemed to be very independent and wanted to be his own self made self. I hope that made sense. LOL He made if perfectly clear that Arnelle may have been sleeping in the room but it "was" his room. Arnelle's room was the one Kato was using.

What I got from the depo was that Jason loved Nicole, Sydney, and Justin very much and he had watched Nicole grow up and become independent from OJ. It appeared he found out Nicole had a lot of the same taste in music and decor as he did.

The part that really broke my heart was they told him he had to speak louder at one point when he was taking about the time right after the murders...He said he couldn't talk loud about something like that. And it was also touching when he was describing the wild goose chase AC took OJ on....and how he was praying and Arnelle was praying. These kids didn't know what their dad was going to do. And then I read OJ so called suicide letter....He addressed all his buds but didn't write one word to his kids....it's only nature for them to love him but I really don't see how.

I've only read a little of OJ's depo and he tells of the 10 thousand dollars he had on him when he left with AC for the ride along....OJ said he told AC to give it to Arnelle and Jason.....Jason was asked about this and said he never got any money.

I have NO doubt that Jason was very disappointed about them not going to eat at the restaurant where he worked but that is not a motive for murder and to my knowledge there no physical or circumstantial evidence linking Jason to the murders except a vivid imagination which is not the case with his Dad OJ. I would have to read back but I am not under the impression that Jason had already cooked any food or anything except make reservations.

Most of my reading on the depositions has been very sad but I almost fell out of my chair laughing when Kato described OJ gobbling up his McDonald’s hamburger. Kato’s deposition was very interesting…..he told things OJ said before and after the recital. I’m a firm believer of what is in ones head comes flying out their mouth…..OJ was upset about a lot of things….one being he was kept away from Sydney. Unless I read something that will change my mind I am more convinced than ever that OJ killed Nicole and Ron.

The $10,000 may have gone to the Browns as that is the monthly amount oj paid them monthly to care for his kids the 9mo he was in jail.
The browns also make a good bit of cash selling nicoles private items. Her sisters also cashed in by selling nicoles pictures and other personal stuff. Nothing was off limits.imo

[martin II]

Some things that people will stoop to do for a dollar needs to be a crime. This is one of those things.

I think most of the books written on the case fall into that catagory.

[tv]

When vannatter could not remember if he had a cup of coffee or not in his office with Ojs blood on his desk did that answer cause you to ask if he had some kind of brain problem? When Phillips testified to being in different rooms at different times did that cause to wonder if he had some kind of brain problem?

Or do you only ask open questions on the thread about a witnesses having a brain problem when it is Arnell Simpson a simpson family member. imo

Was her inability to remember the answer to a question cause for you to ask if she had some kind of brain problem. I hope you were not in some way suggesting that she did have such a problem. Right?

Correction: I told you what I was asking and have no intention of getting into a long discussion with you on any subject.

[tv]

Some things that people will stoop to do for a dollar needs to be a crime. This is one of those things.

Anyone can come up with any wild theory and cash in on it. Really shameful.

[martin II]

I think she was showing a high degree of intelligence by listening carefully and answering the question presented to her and, unlike the claim, she was not asked if she remembered Mr. Goldman suing her father but when.

Some time petro dosen't know why he ask some questions.

[William Anthony]

Hey, I would say way more step children would think as Jason than don't....especially the ones that really love and honor their real mother. You respect and honor that Mom so much there just is NOT a second mom. Period. My Dad's mom lived with us my entire life growing up....I loved my granny and my mother equally but it was also different.... I never ever said Granny was a second Mom because that simply took away from my Mom.

I agree that Jason expressed a great deal of loyalty to his Dad. That was clear when they were questioning him about the 25,000 he got from Star or somewhere for family photos. I'm not sure who else got the same amount but I'm thinking Arnelle. I can actually understand his point.... that he was as entitled as anyone else to make a buck. (simple version of what he said)

I have not followed Jason's history but I gathered by reading his depo he has somewhat been a troubled person. "To me" he seemed to be very independent and wanted to be his own self made self. I hope that made sense. LOL He made if perfectly clear that Arnelle may have been sleeping in the room but it "was" his room. Arnelle's room was the one Kato was using.

What I got from the depo was that Jason loved Nicole, Sydney, and Justin very much and he had watched Nicole grow up and become independent from OJ. It appeared he found out Nicole had a lot of the same taste in music and decor as he did.

The part that really broke my heart was they told him he had to speak louder at one point when he was taking about the time right after the murders...He said he couldn't talk loud about something like that. And it was also touching when he was describing the wild goose chase AC took OJ on....and how he was praying and Arnelle was praying. These kids didn't know what their dad was going to do. And then I read OJ so called suicide letter....He addressed all his buds but didn't write one word to his kids....it's only nature for them to love him but I really don't see how.

I've only read a little of OJ's depo and he tells of the 10 thousand dollars he had on him when he left with AC for the ride along....OJ said he told AC to give it to Arnelle and Jason.....Jason was asked about this and said he never got any money.

I have NO doubt that Jason was very disappointed about them not going to eat at the restaurant where he worked but that is not a motive for murder and to my knowledge there no physical or circumstantial evidence linking Jason to the murders except a vivid imagination which is not the case with his Dad OJ. I would have to read back but I am not under the impression that Jason had already cooked any food or anything except make reservations.

Most of my reading on the depositions has been very sad but I almost fell out of my chair laughing when Kato described OJ gobbling up his McDonald’s hamburger. Kato’s deposition was very interesting…..he told things OJ said before and after the recital. I’m a firm believer of what is in ones head comes flying out their mouth…..OJ was upset about a lot of things….one being he was kept away from Sydney. Unless I read something that will change my mind I am more convinced than ever that OJ killed Nicole and Ron.

I believe that you could read a confession from someone else and that would not change your mind that Simpson did it. The testimony is what it is and Jason said he loved the beautiful Ms. NBS and not as a second mother. I can't speak for others but when I was in the dating scene I would look at what type of music a woman liked in an effort to see whether or not I could put up with it in the event of a long relationship. I did not care what type of music those that I would not have a relationship enjoyed as I would not be spending any great deal of time around them. I have had female friends but our contacts were brief as I was looking for females with whom I could have more than a friendship. This is just me but most of the men I have talked to about this feel the same way. I just find the testimony and Dear's theory interesting. I am not saying that Jason is the murderer but based on the flimsiness of the evidence the prosecution presented I am considering others that could be the murderer.

[William Anthony]

Anyone can come up with any wild theory and cash in on it. Really shameful.

Yes, like Ms. Arnelle washed a sweatsuit and became an accessory after the fact when her father allegedly killed the beautiful Ms. NBS. That is really shameful. :);):cool:

[William Anthony]

Some time petro dosen't know why he ask some questions.

The questions were asked by Paul Battista on June 13, 2007, some ten years after the socio political production.

[weezer]

Anyone can come up with any wild theory and cash in on it. Really shameful.

I was waiting for the sequel when his would explain how Jason bled orenthal's blood, planted orenthal's hair, fiber, hat, glove, etc. ;)

[weezer]

Correction: I told you what I was asking and have no intention of getting into a long discussion with you on any subject.

I believe that acorn didn't fall from the tree. ;)

[tv]

I was waiting for the sequel when his would explain how Jason bled orenthal's blood, planted orenthal's hair, fiber, hat, glove, etc. ;)

Oh, you mean he never explains those things? I'm shocked. :eek:

[William Anthony]

I was waiting for the sequel when his would explain how Jason bled orenthal's blood, planted orenthal's hair, fiber, hat, glove, etc. ;)

I think that was explained during the criminal trial when the evidence was that EDTA results were a thousand times higher than found in unpreserved human blood, the gloves that did not fit, no dandruff in the hair, no blood or disturbance behind kato's quarters where the glove was allegedly found, there was missing blood, the magical socks, contamination and cross contamination, envelopes missing initials, perjury, MF saying that he saw them and blood in the bronco combined with the means opportunity and motivation to plant evidence and, if there is something I missed, I will add it.

[William Anthony]

Then her answer could have reflected her thought that f goldmans legal actions against her father was of no interest to her and she had wipped all referance of him out of her memory.imo:cool:
It was really a silly question.

I think that when things are taken out of context they give a mistaken impression. Additionally, I can see where you could mistake Battista for Petrocelli.:);):cool:

[weezer]

Oh, you mean he never explains those things? I'm shocked. :eek:

nope -- in fact, I'm beginning to wonder if he wasn't feeding answers to the criminal jurors since some of the same nonsense was said by them. :eek:

[William Anthony]

nope -- in fact, I'm beginning to wonder if he wasn't feeding answers to the criminal jurors since some of the same nonsense was said by them. :eek:

Just means they were paying attention as they took the oath to do and not persuaded by the nonsense the prosecution tried to sell and tried to sell in an unintelligible manner, according to the jurors.

[tv]

nope -- in fact, I'm beginning to wonder if he wasn't feeding answers to the criminal jurors since some of the same nonsense was said by them. :eek:

Lol, I hadn't thought of that. Good point.

[William Anthony]

Lol, I hadn't thought of that. Good point.

They certainly weren't listening to EDTA that proved Martz was dead at the time he conducted the test or evidence that wasn't there to show that Simpson was guilty. :);):cool:

[weezer]

Lol, I hadn't thought of that. Good point.

dear's theory was so believable that he couldn't find anyone to publish his book so he had to do it himself. I knew someone that did that with a cookbook. :D

[Its just me]

The answer given by Ms. Arnelle was taken out of context, which prompted you to ask a question as to her mental state. I think it only fitting that I provide the link for the entire board so that they can read for themselves and they will see that Ms. Arnelle did not say she could not remember Mr. Goldman suing her father but that she could not remember when and since the case was finished in 1996, IIRC, the deposition was in regard to the judgment if the 1997 date is correct. You see we all have memory failures and that does not mean we all have organic brain disease. Ms. Arnelle testified in the socio political production on January 14, 1997. Therefore, her deposition for that socio political production, if there was one, had to most likely take place in 1996. Unless he was calling testifying in the trial as being a deposition, which would throw anyone off, IMHO. Smile

http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/Arnell_Simpson_Deposition_061307.pdf

This is LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., where IMHOO Arnell had a wake up call that LBA was in trouble. Arnelle sure didn't know much about what was going on....where she was smart enough to know or not. Lorraine Brook Associates, Inc was some set up....or I should say some get up that developed teeth and bit Arnelle and OJ in the tail. Thanks for the link...interesting read.

[martin II]

This is LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., where IMHOO Arnell had a wake up call that LBA was in trouble. Arnelle sure didn't know much about what was going on....where she was smart enough to know or not. Lorraine Brook Associates, Inc was some set up....or I should say some get up that developed teeth and bit Arnelle and OJ in the tail. Thanks for the link...interesting read.

ijm
The judge gave fred LBS property. Fred hired a 4th class NY publisher that promptly made a deal with book retailers pr people and his lawyers for a small printing (about 29,000) books. After the publisher,freds lawyers and the retailers took their cut fred was left with .17 per book out of $24.00 retail. On Oprah national tv program when he proudly gave the details of his cut of .17 per book deal, Oprah told him and the world "that was a bad book deal" Mean time Oj Simpson had aready been paid over $1,000,000 for writing his part of the book and the ghost writer received $100,000 for the murder chapter. Althought the judge favored fred over LBA and maby was trying to get some payback, in the end it was the simpson family that took the money home and fred was left abused by his own lawyers and the others.

It does not seem that Oj nor Arnell was bitten by anything.
Some may call that some form of Karma.

[weezer]

This is LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., where IMHOO Arnell had a wake up call that LBA was in trouble. Arnelle sure didn't know much about what was going on....where she was smart enough to know or not. Lorraine Brook Associates, Inc was some set up....or I should say some get up that developed teeth and bit Arnelle and OJ in the tail. Thanks for the link...interesting read.

I still laugh when I think about arnelle waiting to get her 'share' of the profits! daddy went shopping and she got squat! LOL

[tv]

I still laugh when I think about arnelle waiting to get her 'share' of the profits! daddy went shopping and she got squat! LOL

Did you notice she said Sydney and Justice didn't want to talk about it at first? I think her reason was because they were teenagers. Riiiight. ;)

[tv]

dear's theory was so believable that he couldn't find anyone to publish his book so he had to do it himself. I knew someone that did that with a cookbook. :D

Aren't those self-published books called "vanity books"?

[weezer]

Aren't those self-published books called "vanity books"?

ha -- I don't know what anyone else calls them -- but that would be a perfect moniker.

[weezer]

Aren't those self-published books called "vanity books"?

and then there was his 'theatre' performance that no one showed up for. :punch:

[tv]

I still laugh when I think about arnelle waiting to get her 'share' of the profits! daddy went shopping and she got squat! LOL

I don't believe 'Raffles' got a piece of the pie either but I haven't finished reading yet.

[tv]

and then there was his 'theatre' performance that no one showed up for. :punch:

All that effort to destroy one young man when all the evidence points to OJ Simpson. Crazy.

[martin II]

The defense called 54 witnesses the prosecution 72./The defense presented 369 exhibits the prosdecution 488. The trial lasted 9MO.

The trial was not about who some thought a victim was personally and it was not about who Oj was personally. It was not about abuse as the jury informed everyone. Oj was not charged with abuse. Some that think they knew nicole felt some strange obilgation to support the victim and claim they knew the accused was guilty.
Then there are others that know very little of the testimony and exhibits presented in the actual trial based on their post but know oj was guilty. Some started out knowing oj was guilty and ended up in the same place without knowlkedge of testimony or exhibits or how they played out in the court room. The trial was not about marijuana,stalking.irs letter, nicoles hot letter to oj or the letter where she begged him to take her back. It was simply a murder trial. A big one because oj a celebrity was the accused.
The prosecution charged oj and proceeded to try to prove their case. Based on the best legal observers of the case and most importantly based on the jury the not guilty verdict was the only verdict that jury could have rendered and meet the requirement of the law. It is my opinion that those two groups knew more and understood the case better than anyone.imo:cool:

I See nothing gained by some of the low level personal attacks and rank gossip posted directed at simpson and his family members by some posters here. It amounts to nothing more than youthful noise. imo.

[Its just me]

ijm
The judge gave fred LBS property. Fred hired a 4th class NY publisher that promptly made a deal with book retailers pr people and his lawyers for a small printing (about 29,000) books. After the publisher,freds lawyers and the retailers took their cut fred was left with .17 per book out of $24.00 retail. On Oprah national tv program when he proudly gave the details of his cut of .17 per book deal, Oprah told him and the world "that was a bad book deal" Mean time Oj Simpson had aready been paid over $1,000,000 for writing his part of the book and the ghost writer received $100,000 for the murder chapter. Althought the judge favored fred over LBA and maby was trying to get some payback, in the end it was the simpson family that took the money home and fred was left abused by his own lawyers and the others.

It does not seem that Oj nor Arnell was bitten by anything.
Some may call that some form of Karma.


Martin some things money can't buy.....A good Name is one of them but to some that doesn't seem to matter.
Think about it and read where the money OJ got went....to pay back mortgages on his house that he lost to my understanding and to what OJ owed the IRS. The truth is Arnelle didn't get squat but a disappointment. :shrug:

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf
The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that
there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice. The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose, deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.


ETA: this is the link that shows where the money OJ got went. http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/Arne...ion_061307.pdf

ETA: I personally think Mr. Goldman's deal proves what he has said all along.....this was not about money.

[Its just me]

All that effort to destroy one young man when all the evidence points to OJ Simpson. Crazy.

Amen and Amen.

[Its just me]

The defense called 54 witnesses the prosecution 72./The defense presented 369 exhibits the prosdecution 488. The trial lasted 9MO.

The trial was not about who some thought a victim was personally and it was not about who Oj was personally. It was not about abuse as the jury informed everyone. Oj was not charged with abuse. Some that think they knew nicole felt some strange obilgation to support the victim and claim they knew the accused was guilty.
Then there are others that know very little of the testimony and exhibits presented in the actual trial based on their post but know oj was guilty. Some started out knowing oj was guilty and ended up in the same place without knowlkedge of testimony or exhibits or how they played out in the court room. The trial was not about marijuana,stalking.irs letter, nicoles hot letter to oj or the letter where she begged him to take her back. It was simply a murder trial. A big one because oj a celebrity was the accused.
The prosecution charged oj and proceeded to try to prove their case. Based on the best legal observers of the case and most importantly based on the jury the not guilty verdict was the only verdict that jury could have rendered and meet the requirement of the law. It is my opinion that those two groups knew more and understood the case better than anyone.imo:cool:

I See nothing gained by some of the low level personal attacks and rank gossip posted directed at simpson and his family members by some posters here. It amounts to nothing more than youthful noise. imo.

Just because it's your opinion doesn't mean it's right. NOT an opinion but a fact. :cool:

[tv]

Just because it's your opinion doesn't mean it's right. NOT an opinion but a fact. :cool:

Agreed, IJM. In addition to that there are some people on here that don't understand what an 'attack' is. Discussing the evidence and concluding someone is lying based on that evidence is not an attack. Hotwater has been very clear about this. It's amazing to me that the same people that don't like what is said about Arnelle will openly lay the blame for the murders on Jason.

As far as the jury understanding the case better than anyone -- that is laughable. They didn't know the main components of the prosecution's case. I don't call that 'knowing more and understanding more' than anyone else. Someone needs to tell them that there was blood on the Rockingham glove, that Mazzola's and Simpson's blood didn't match and that it's not true that the killer's blood at the scene was too degraded to read.

[GreenIce]

I believe that you could read a confession from someone else and that would not change your mind that Simpson did it. The testimony is what it is and Jason said he loved the beautiful Ms. NBS and not as a second mother. I can't speak for others but when I was in the dating scene I would look at what type of music a woman liked in an effort to see whether or not I could put up with it in the event of a long relationship. I did not care what type of music those that I would not have a relationship enjoyed as I would not be spending any great deal of time around them. I have had female friends but our contacts were brief as I was looking for females with whom I could have more than a friendship. This is just me but most of the men I have talked to about this feel the same way. I just find the testimony and Dear's theory interesting. I am not saying that Jason is the murderer but based on the flimsiness of the evidence the prosecution presented I am considering others that could be the murderer.

William,

I have to disagree with you. IMO, Jason already had a mother he loved, he did not feel the need to look at Nicole as a mother figure. It is also very possible that he blamed Nicole for breaking up his parents' marriage. IMO, it appears to me that Jason looked at Nicole as more of a sister then a mother.

I was impressed with Mr. Dear's book, however, that does not mean I agree with his findings about Jason. IMO, I dont' think Simpson ever would have covered for Jason if he honestly thought that Jason did it.

I also think the timeline works against Mr. Dear.

[GreenIce]

Martin some things money can't buy.....A good Name is one of them but to some that doesn't seem to matter.
Think about it and read where the money OJ got went....to pay back mortgages on his house that he lost to my understanding and to what OJ owed the IRS. The truth is Arnelle didn't get squat but a disappointment. :shrug:

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf
The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that
there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice. The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose, deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.


ETA: this is the link that shows where the money OJ got went. http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/Arne...ion_061307.pdf

ETA: I personally think Mr. Goldman's deal proves what he has said all along.....this was not about money.

IJM,

Mr. Goldman and his daughter have always said it is about the money, but that does not mean greed. They have said several times they wanted to hurt him where they knew it was going to hurt him, and that was in his wallet as well as their constant pursuit of it. They have made it clear, they will hound him until the day Simpson dies.

I have no problem with this. I don't know what I would have done in this situation.

[tv]

Martin some things money can't buy.....A good Name is one of them but to some that doesn't seem to matter.
Think about it and read where the money OJ got went....to pay back mortgages on his house that he lost to my understanding and to what OJ owed the IRS. The truth is Arnelle didn't get squat but a disappointment. :shrug:

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf
The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that
there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice. The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose, deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.


ETA: this is the link that shows where the money OJ got went. http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/Arne...ion_061307.pdf

ETA: I personally think Mr. Goldman's deal proves what he has said all along.....this was not about money.

Thanks for the links. I agree about Mr.Goldman. If money was his motivator he would have negotiated a better deal. His only goal was to keep the profits out of OJ Simpson's hands. The way I understand it, Mr. Goldman had to market the book or it would revert back to Simpson. Did you notice in Arnelle's depo that she said she didn't even consider talking to the Browns or the Goldmans about the book before going forward with it? Very cold, imo.

[GreenIce]

[QUOTE=Its just me;9224745]

The part that really broke my heart was they told him he had to speak louder at one point when he was taking about the time right after the murders...He said he couldn't talk loud about something like that. And it was also touching when he was describing the wild goose chase AC took OJ on....and how he was praying and Arnelle was praying. These kids didn't know what their dad was going to do. And then I read OJ so called suicide letter....He addressed all his buds but didn't write one word to his kids....it's only nature for them to love him but I really don't see how.

IJM,

Simpson wrote his children letters and I believe other family members.

What he had to say to his children in a letter were private and did not belong in the suicide letter.

That was another reason why the letter was not introduced by the DA's, you introduce one of them, you have to introduce all of them or you open the door to them.

The DA's wanted nothing to do with the letters, with the Bronco chase or the phone calls made during the Bronco chase.

OJ explained why he gave the money to AC and what it was for. Once OJ surrendered to the police, he would again have access or be able to give money to them. There was no need for AC to give them the money.

[William Anthony]

dear's theory was so believable that he couldn't find anyone to publish his book so he had to do it himself. I knew someone that did that with a cookbook. :D

People laughed when Galileo said the earth was round. It is the height of arrogance, IMHO, to disrespect another or his/her opinions.

[William Anthony]

This is LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., where IMHOO Arnell had a wake up call that LBA was in trouble. Arnelle sure didn't know much about what was going on....where she was smart enough to know or not. Lorraine Brook Associates, Inc was some set up....or I should say some get up that developed teeth and bit Arnelle and OJ in the tail. Thanks for the link...interesting read.

Yes, trusting and caring souls are often taken advantage of and Ms. Arnelle was honest and intelligent enough to admit that she did not know much about business. I don't know how it bit them in the tail as the ruling probably saved them money in regard to the book sales and Mr. Goldman now owes Simpson over $6,000 (IIRC, $6,075). Seems like their is no discrimination as to who gets bit in the tail. Don't you agree? You are welcome as I wanted things placed in their proper context.:);):cool:

[William Anthony]

I still laugh when I think about arnelle waiting to get her 'share' of the profits! daddy went shopping and she got squat! LOL

IMHO, the righteous belief is that those, who suffer here on earth and are unjustly prosecuted and persecuted, will get their reward in heaven.

[William Anthony]

All that effort to destroy one young man when all the evidence points to OJ Simpson. Crazy.

If one is unwilling to consider the evidence that another turned up and the weakness of the evidence that allegedly points to Simpson and the new scientifc testing about the EDTA showing that Martz's results indicated planting/manipulation, then that is what is crazy to me.

[William Anthony]

Agreed, IJM. In addition to that there are some people on here that don't understand what an 'attack' is. Discussing the evidence and concluding someone is lying based on that evidence is not an attack. Hotwater has been very clear about this. It's amazing to me that the same people that don't like what is said about Arnelle will openly lay the blame for the murders on Jason.

As far as the jury understanding the case better than anyone -- that is laughable. They didn't know the main components of the prosecution's case. I don't call that 'knowing more and understanding more' than anyone else. Someone needs to tell them that there was blood on the Rockingham glove, that Mazzola's and Simpson's blood didn't match and that it's not true that the killer's blood at the scene was too degraded to read.

The way I understood the moderator's instructions was it wasn't bashing to say that in the poster's opinion (which, I agree with IJM is not fact) someone lied. However, to conclude and to state that conclusion as a fact that someone lied is an attack, according to my understanding, as people can see the same set of things and reach different conclusions, as evidenced by your feelings about the criminal jury. However, to speak of them in a negative manner because they disagree with your opinion is disrespectful, IMHO. I failed to see a post by a poster on this board that openly blamed Jason. Can you supply it, please?

The jury gives weight and credibility to the evidence and the party offering the evidence should make the evidence clear and believable. While I respect you opinion on what you think is clear, please allow others to express their opinion that it is muddy, without being disrespected? Thanks.

[GreenIce]

If one is unwilling to consider the evidence that another turned up and the weakness of the evidence that allegedly points to Simpson and the new scientifc testing about the EDTA showing that Martz's results indicated planting/manipulation, then that is what is crazy to me.

William,

Lange, Vanatter and MF all talk about the evidence that Marcia Clark didn't use. It kind of makes you wonder if the evidence she did use was the best she had!

MF said in his book that MC did not to use any evidence that was not perfect. Did he not know about the magic blood of OJ Simpson?

Dr. Lee also has made the comment several times that alot of evidence was not used by either side. However, he did said the defense has nothing to prove. IMO, it is fair to say that we do not know all the evidence on this case.

We know the evidence that has serious credibility problems and we know of the evidence was "lost" and/or not collected. We know the evidence that was not tested or so they say, such as a dark clothes and the keys that Ron was carrying that night.

It really makes you wonder, doesn't?

[William Anthony]

William,

I have to disagree with you. IMO, Jason already had a mother he loved, he did not feel the need to look at Nicole as a mother figure. It is also very possible that he blamed Nicole for breaking up his parents' marriage. IMO, it appears to me that Jason looked at Nicole as more of a sister then a mother.

I was impressed with Mr. Dear's book, however, that does not mean I agree with his findings about Jason. IMO, I dont' think Simpson ever would have covered for Jason if he honestly thought that Jason did it.

I also think the timeline works against Mr. Dear.

GreenIce,

I was only speaking from my personal dealings and from the testimony. The follow up question should have been, "In what manner, if not as second mother, did you love the beautiful Ms. NBS?". However, that question was not asked and the Q & A then turned to music. It is from that personal experience that allowed me to draw the reasonable inference that Jason may have loved her in a manner more like an infatuation. It is alright for us to disagree. I have not read Dear's book but I am aware of his conclusion. I have not formed an opinion of the book or the conclusion. IIRC, this whole thing started when a poster remarked about bashing Jason and I pointed out that Dear had investigated and came up with evidence to support his conclusion but their has been no evidence to support that Ms. Arnelle was engaged in any criminal conduct in regard to the murders. Discussions on this board seem to take on a life of their own, which is alright as I enjoy discussing things with civil and respectful posters.

[William Anthony]

Thanks for the links. I agree about Mr.Goldman. If money was his motivator he would have negotiated a better deal. His only goal was to keep the profits out of OJ Simpson's hands. The way I understand it, Mr. Goldman had to market the book or it would revert back to Simpson. Did you notice in Arnelle's depo that she said she didn't even consider talking to the Browns or the Goldmans about the book before going forward with it? Very cold, imo.

Under what theory did Ms. Arnelle have a duty to discuss with the Browns or the Goldmans, who thought her father was guilty of murder, any plans she had but, on second thought, they may have been interested in buying stock in LBA so that the could share in the profits, but I don't know if LBA sold stock publicly. Do you think that Darden, Clark, VB, MF discussed publishing their books with the Goldmans and Browns prior to their respective publications and did you think that cold of them?

[William Anthony]

William,

Lange, Vanatter and MF all talk about the evidence that Marcia Clark didn't use. It kind of makes you wonder if the evidence she did use was the best she had!

MF said in his book that MC did not to use any evidence that was not perfect. Did he not know about the magic blood of OJ Simpson?

Dr. Lee also has made the comment several times that alot of evidence was not used by either side. However, he did said the defense has nothing to prove. IMO, it is fair to say that we do not know all the evidence on this case.

We know the evidence that has serious credibility problems and we know of the evidence was "lost" and/or not collected. We know the evidence that was not tested or so they say, such as a dark clothes and the keys that Ron was carrying that night.

It really makes you wonder, doesn't?

GreenIce,

I have no idea why they would claim evidence was there and not collected. The credibility problems were exposed magnificently by the defense. What I wonder is why the prosecution did not drop the charges in the beginning instead of causing that unnecessary trauma to the Simpson, Brown and Goldman families and does the prosecution and LE feel somewhat responsible for the events that have taken place over the last 15 years.

[William Anthony]

GreenIce,

I was only speaking from my personal dealings and from the testimony. The follow up question should have been, "In what manner, if not as second mother, did you love the beautiful Ms. NBS?". However, that question was not asked and the Q & A then turned to music. It is from that personal experience that allowed me to draw the reasonable inference that Jason may have loved her in a manner more like an infatuation. It is alright for us to disagree. I have not read Dear's book but I am aware of his conclusion. I have not formed an opinion of the book or the conclusion. IIRC, this whole thing started when a poster remarked about bashing Jason and I pointed out that Dear had investigated and came up with evidence to support his conclusion but their has been no evidence to support that Ms. Arnelle was engaged in any criminal conduct in regard to the murders. Discussions on this board seem to take on a life of their own, which is alright as I enjoy discussing things with civil and respectful posters.

Correction-and I pointed out that Dear had investigated and came up with evidence to support his conclusion but there has been no evidence to support that Ms. Arnelle was engaged in any criminal conduct in regard to the murders.

[bobaugust]

cLARKE ALSO SAID THE CLOTHES WERE IN THE HAMPER. NO ONE IN YOUR POST SAID ARNELL WASHED THOSE UNDERWEARONE. NOW DID THEY?

I have no idea what you are claiming since your comments don’t make any sense.

[bobaugust]

There is plenty of testimony that when Arnell,vannatter,lang and phillips entered the house MF held Kato in/at his room questioning him about whether he was high,gave him some quick test and Kato talked to him about the noise he had heard. The others were already in the house. So he lied or he was confused by the questions. He did come in the back door that Arnell opened from the inside BUT IT WAS MUCH LATER AFTER THE OTHERS HAD ENTERED AND MF BROUGHT HIM IN.

Your claim is false, contradicted by Kaelin, Fuhrman, and Vannatter’s preliminary hearing testimony and by their criminal trial testimony.

[bobaugust]

Ah, but there was a reason for them to lie. That reason was to try to implicate someone in washing a bloody sweatsuit that mysteriously disappeared after they were there to collect evidence. Therefore, IMHO, they lied. :);):cool:

The fact is that when the three detectives said Arnelle unlocked the back door before she opened it, it didn’t implicate anyone. The fact that the back door was unlocked when Arnelle opened it to let the detectives into the house, does implicate someone. Because the detectives mistakenly thought Arnelle unlocked it before she opened it they never realized what it meant that the back door was already unlocked. Nor did they realize what it meant that the house alarm did not come on when Arnelle opened the back door. And they never implicated anyone in washing the freshly washed sweat suit found in Simpson’s washing machine.

Your reason why you think they lied doesn’t make any sense and is wrong. They did not lie, they were mistaken. And the fact is Arnelle Simpson implicated herself with her lying testimony.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Where is the link or is just because you think you say something that it is the truth? How many times have I shown things you have said to be incorrect, remember?

There is no link, the proof is on everyone’s land line telephone bill. Do you have a land line telephone?

[bobaugust]

We need no go back and post everything and did not make a claim that Ms. Arnelle had a cell phone. You used the term "logical supposition", which I quoted to say that Ms. Arnelle would have had a cell phone. Here is the definition of supposition, which negates the idea that a claim was made.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/supposition

You were are the one that claims that a phone call was made by Simpson to the beautiful Ms. Arnelle at 4:00am but do not have any evidence to support that, which I would term rank speculation, and you further speculate that, because there is no evidence in the form of phone records to support your claim, then there is no evidence that the beautiful Ms. Arnelle did not have a cell phone. I ask you to support your claim that there is no evidence the beautiful Ms. Arnelle had a cell phone by indicating something in the record that LE searched for the alleged 4:00am phone call and couldn't find it, because it was made to a land line from a payphone and no records were kept and that a search revealed that the beautiful Ms. Arnelle did not have a cell phone.

The fact is that there is no evidence that Arnelle Simpson had a cell phone in June 1994 so if you wish to keep repeating that she did then it is your obligation to support it.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

Have you ever heard of the best evidence rule? The beautiful Ms. Arnelle was on the stand but she was not asked if the panties belonged to her.

The video was shown to Gigi who testified after Arnelle did. Do you think Cochran should have recalled Arnelle and asked her if the panties were hers even though he knew they were hers?

[bobaugust]

The bottom line is in court when the video zoomed in on all the back doors knobs that was proof that Ms Arnell did not unlock that s back door from the outside to let anyone in.

That fact that the door could only be locked or unlocked from the inside tells us the door was already unlocked when Arnelle opened it.

[bobaugust]

If you follow someone, then you see someone in front of you whether they are off to the left or right. You can't follow that which you do not see.:);):cool:

Fuhrman never testified that he and Kaelin followed Arnelle and the detectives into house because he never saw Arnelle and the detectives enter the house, Kaelin did. When Fuhrman looked at the back of the house Arnelle and the three detectives had already entered the house so all he saw was that the back door was open.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

According to you, the detectives saw a wet sweatsuit, Simpson was a suspect due to the blood and the bloody glove found on his property, they were collecting item of clothing, so they did not have the sense to send a subpoena to Chicago asking for the records of all payphone long distance phone calls made to Los Angeles in the AM hours on June 13th, 1994 and it took Petrocelli to realize what that LE did not have that much sense, correct?:);):cool:

I said a freshly washed dark colored sweat suit. Darden said wet laundry. I never claimed that Lange, Vannatter, or Phillips saw the freshly washed dark colored sweat suit. At the time the freshly washed laundry was found in Simpson’s washing machine none of the detectives in this case knew Simpson had been wearing a dark colored sweat suit the previous night about an hour before the murders were committed. I don’t believe that the detectives or the prosecutors realized why Arnelle lied about what door she opened or what it meant that the back door was unlocked or what it meant that the house alarm was not on so they never followed the logical inference that Simpson had called Arnelle to help him, by washing his sweat suit.

bobaugust

[bobaugust]

BOB

One cannot continue to ignore the fact backed by testimony that Kato and MF were in Katos room as Mf was questioning him and asking him about where and when he heard the noise when the others entered the house and be believed. imo

Kato Kaelin’s testimony clearly contradicts what you claim.

[bobaugust]

So why didn't MF collect the sweats.? He was looking to collect everything else.If he saw then i am sure he would have collected them.What excuse do you have for him not collecting them?

None of the detectives who were conducting the search of Simpson’s house, including Fuhrman, knew that Simpson was wearing a dark colored sweat suit the previous night about an hour before the murders.

bobaugust

[William Anthony]

The fact is that when the three detectives said Arnelle unlocked the back door before she opened it, it didn’t implicate anyone. The fact that the back door was unlocked when Arnelle opened it to let the detectives into the house, does implicate someone. Because the detectives mistakenly thought Arnelle unlocked it before she opened it they never realized what it meant that the back door was already unlocked. Nor did they realize what it meant that the house alarm did not come on when Arnelle opened the back door. And they never implicated anyone in washing the freshly washed sweat suit found in Simpson’s washing machine.

Your reason why you think they lied doesn’t make any sense and is wrong. They did not lie, they were mistaken. And the fact is Arnelle Simpson implicated herself with her lying testimony.

bobaugust

IMHO, they lied about the back door when they knew there was a video showing some dark clothing on or in the washing machine. You say the detectives "mistakenly thought", "they never realized", "nor did they realize" and I say they were not mistaken, the realized and IMHO they testilied

[William Anthony]

The video was shown to Gigi who testified after Arnelle did. Do you think Cochran should have recalled Arnelle and asked her if the panties were hers even though he knew they were hers?

No, I think the prosecution should have met its burden of proof by recalling Ms. Arnelle and asking that question. However, I guess it wasn't necessary, since California has the secondary evidence rule.

[William Anthony]

There is no link, the proof is on everyone’s land line telephone bill. Do you have a land line telephone?

Oh, what a tangled web you weave... but step into my parlor...The original statement was whether or not there were "phone records" and I reminded you there was a difference between phone records and phone bills. You now want to say "telephone bill". With all due respect, the answer to your question is none of your business.

[William Anthony]

The fact is that there is no evidence that Arnelle Simpson had a cell phone in June 1994 so if you wish to keep repeating that she did then it is your obligation to support it.

bobaugust

I have never said that Ms.Arnelle had a cell phone but I did point out that she may have based on a "logical supposition", a term you use and allowed yourself. The bottom line, be it cellular or land, is that there is no evidence to support you so-claimed logical supposition that Simpson called Ms. Arnelle and asked her to do anything.:);):cool:

[William Anthony]

Fuhrman never testified that he and Kaelin followed Arnelle and the detectives into house because he never saw Arnelle and the detectives enter the house, Kaelin did. When Fuhrman looked at the back of the house Arnelle and the three detectives had already entered the house so all he saw was that the back door was open.

bobaugust

Exactly, Kato contradicted MF. Do you believe that MF was walking with his eyes closed or looking around for some place to say he found evidence when Kato testified to this,

"Q: Did you follow them while they were going in?

A: All of us walked in, right. I followed them. ", ?

"All of us walked in while they were going in", the testimony is what it is.

[William Anthony]

I said a freshly washed dark colored sweat suit. Darden said wet laundry. I never claimed that Lange, Vannatter, or Phillips saw the freshly washed dark colored sweat suit. At the time the freshly washed laundry was found in Simpson’s washing machine none of the detectives in this case knew Simpson had been wearing a dark colored sweat suit the previous night about an hour before the murders were committed. I don’t believe that the detectives or the prosecutors realized why Arnelle lied about what door she opened or what it meant that the back door was unlocked or what it meant that the house alarm was not on so they never followed the logical inference that Simpson had called Arnelle to help him, by washing his sweat suit.

bobaugust

Is this a long way of saying yes to my question, "it took Petrocelli to realize what that LE did not have that much sense, correct"?

[Its just me]

Kato Kaelin’s testimony clearly contradicts what you claim.
In Kato depo he said MF was in his room and the others were right outside the room and they had knocked on Arnelle's door which is just a few feet from Kato's room. Kato said it took several knockings on the door to get Arnelle up.. IMHOO Kato gave a good detailed explanation on what was happening. According to Kato they all went in the back door to the left with Arnelle and the other detectives going first and I believe he was next with MF behind him....IIRC Kato and MF were in Kato's room when Arnelle walked by going to the door.
Kato was sitting on the bar stool when Arnelle found out that Nicole had been murdered. That had to be before she got dressed to go get the children…there simply was no reason to get the children before she heard they were still at the house with their Mom lying outside almost decapitated. ETA: Arnelle did not know at that time how Nicole had died.

The thing is if Arnelle will help Simpson set up a fraudulent business to intentionally commit fraud and deceive for money I have NO Doubt she would lie for his Life. Just that simple IMHOO

I've posted the links to Arnelle being questioned about the business LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., and to the quote of what the courts had to say about the business.

[Its just me]

Yes, trusting and caring souls are often taken advantage of and Ms. Arnelle was honest and intelligent enough to admit that she did not know much about business. I don't know how it bit them in the tail as the ruling probably saved them money in regard to the book sales and Mr. Goldman now owes Simpson over $6,000 (IIRC, $6,075). Seems like their is no discrimination as to who gets bit in the tail. Don't you agree? You are welcome as I wanted things placed in their proper context.:);):cool:

Lets just put it this way.....I believe Arnelle "was/is" smarter than even you are giving her credit.....IMHOO Arnelle was smart enough to know exactly what was going on.

LOL If Simpson does owe Mr. Goldman over 6,000....I've got a sneaky Simpson was told to take it off the tab. :shrug:

[William Anthony]

In Kato depo he said MF was in his room and the others were right outside the room and they had knocked on Arnelle's door which is just a few feet from Kato's room. Kato said it took several knockings on the door to get Arnelle up.. IMHOO Kato gave a good detailed explanation on what was happening. According to Kato they all went in the back door to the left with Arnelle and the other detectives going first and I believe he was next with MF behind him....IIRC Kato and MF were in Kato's room when Arnelle walked by going to the door.
Kato was sitting on the bar stool when Arnelle found out that Nicole had been murdered. That had to be before she got dressed to go get the children…there simply was no reason to get the children before she heard they were still at the house with their Mom lying outside almost decapitated.

The thing is if Arnelle will help Simpson set up a fraudulent business to intentionally commit fraud and deceive for money I have NO Doubt she would lie for his Life. Just that simple IMHOO

I've posted the links to Arnelle being questioned about the business LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, INC., and to the quote of what the courts had to say about the business.

Link please to any input Ms. Arnelle had in the formation or incorporation of LBA, as opposed to trusting her lawyer. I see you qualified you statement with a big "If", so never mind the link.

[William Anthony]

Lets just put it this way.....I believe Arnelle "was/is" smarter than even you are giving her credit.....IMHOO Arnelle was smart enough to know exactly what was going on.

LOL If Simpson does owe Mr. Goldman over 6,000....I've got a sneaky Simpson was told to take it off the tab. :shrug:

You have the debtor and creditor turned upside down. I believe Ms. Arnelle is very intelligent and intelligent and honest enough to admit those things about which she is not knowledgeable. To me it shows a very high degree of intelligence to say I don't know.

[Its just me]

Link please to any input Ms. Arnelle had in the formation or incorporation of LBA, as opposed to trusting her lawyer. I see you qualified you statement with a big "If", so never mind the link.

William Arnelle clearly states what input she had in the formation of the business/corp. She even claims it was her idea. I don't think you are giving Arnelle enough IQ credit. IMHOO.

[William Anthony]

According to Kato they all went in the back door to the left with Arnelle and the other detectives going first and I believe he was next with MF behind him....


"Q: Did you follow them while they were going in?

A: All of us walked in, right. I followed them. ", ?

"All of us walked in while they were going in", the testimony is what it is. They were all very close together by Kato's testimony since they followed them while they were going in, not after they had gone in and, consequently, MF should have seen them but, in any event, he contradicted MF.

[Its just me]

You have the debtor and creditor turned upside down. I believe Ms. Arnelle is very intelligent and intelligent and honest enough to admit those things about which she is not knowledgeable. To me it shows a very high degree of intelligence to say I don't know.

I agree she was smart enough to say I don't know. I believe what she admitted knowing about shows she knew way more than what she claimed to know. IMHOO of course. Any how the court determined the business was a fraud and I believe if Arnelle was all so innocent that would not have been the case. LOL and I'm not interesting in retrying the case before the CL supreme court. As far as I'm concerned the courts decision stands. You have your opinion of Miss Simpson and I have mine and I doubt a new trial here at CL will change either opinion.

[William Anthony]

William Arnelle clearly states what input she had in the formation of the business/corp. She even claims it was her idea. I don't think you are giving Arnelle enough IQ credit. IMHOO.

I did not say the business was not her idea. I asked, "Link please to any input Ms. Arnelle had in the formation or incorporation of LBA, as opposed to trusting her lawyer." I have never formed a business but have had some business law classes and I am aware of the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws.

[Its just me]

"Q: Did you follow them while they were going in?

A: All of us walked in, right. I followed them. ", ?

"All of us walked in while they were going in", the testimony is what it is. They were all very close together by Kato's testimony since they followed them while they were going in, not after they had gone in and, consequently, MF should have seen them but, in any event, he contradicted MF.

I disagree. Neither of us know but this all could have been with in seconds and IMHOO it was. Kato went out the door of his room first....he saw them enter the back door...MF was behind Kato and the other folks were just simply already in the house when MF first stuck his head out the door of Kato's room. IMHOO but I'm not hunting a bad booger in the word game.

[William Anthony]

I agree she was smart enough to say I don't know. I believe what she admitted knowing about shows she knew way more than what she claimed to know. IMHOO of course. Any how the court determined the business was a fraud and I believe if Arnelle was all so innocent that would not have been the case. LOL and I'm not interesting in retrying the case before the CL supreme court. As far as I'm concerned the courts decision stands. You have your opinion of Miss Simpson and I have mine and I doubt a new trial here at CL will change either opinion.

Thank you for showing the civility and intelligence to refer to Ms. Arnelle as Miss. Of course, the bankruptcy decision stands and I share your displeasure in wanting to re-litigate the case. Again, while Ms. Arnelle may not be innocent, she certainly may be not guilty. :)

[tv]

I agree she was smart enough to say I don't know. I believe what she admitted knowing about shows she knew way more than what she claimed to know. IMHOO of course. Any how the court determined the business was a fraud and I believe if Arnelle was all so innocent that would not have been the case. LOL and I'm not interesting in retrying the case before the CL supreme court. As far as I'm concerned the courts decision stands. You have your opinion of Miss Simpson and I have mine and I doubt a new trial here at CL will change either opinion.

The court determined that the business was a fraud set up simply to allow Simpson to receive money that would otherwise have to go to Fred Goldman. Nothing will change that legal determination. Imo, Arnelle Simpson is crazy like a fox and that clueless demeanor she puts on is just that -- put on.

[William Anthony]

I disagree. Neither of us know but this all could have been with in seconds and IMHOO it was. Kato went out the door of his room first....he saw them enter the back door...MF was behind Kato and the other folks were just simply already in the house when MF first stuck his head out the door of Kato's room. IMHOO but I'm not hunting a bad booger in the word game.

Ah, another astute post on your part where you say, "Neither of us know..." That plays a significant part when those want to try/accuse Ms. Arnelle for a crime. In so doing, the jury instruction would be the same as that in her father's trial, when two reasonable inferences can be drawn...you must accept the one that points toward innocence. Kato said they followed them while they were going in and he did not say after they went in. The testimony is what it is.

[William Anthony]

The court determined that the business was a fraud set up simply to allow Simpson to receive money that would otherwise have to go to Fred Goldman. Nothing will change that legal determination. Imo, Arnelle Simpson is crazy like a fox and that clueless demeanor she puts on is just that -- put on.

Did the court say that Ms. Arnelle set it up?

[Its just me]

I did not say the business was not her idea. I asked, "Link please to any input Ms. Arnelle had in the formation or incorporation of LBA, as opposed to trusting her lawyer." I have never formed a business but have had some business law classes and I am aware of the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws.

Well I have formed a business and helped run one for 41 years and I've learned everything is not always cut and dried in a book. The fact is Arnelle claims to have gotten this book idea and went to a lawyer (who had also done work for OJ) to set up a corporation. In the link I provided for Arnelle being questioned it's clear Arnelle concern was to set up the corporation in a way to protect any proceeds coming into the corp....that had to be the book deal because that was why the corp was formed. Arnelle testimony proves she knew money was going out on OJ's behalf. It's all there in the link I provided if you would read it all with an open mind.

[William Anthony]

Well I have formed a business and helped run one for 41 years and I've learned everything is not always cut and dried in a book. The fact is Arnelle claims to have gotten this book idea and went to a lawyer (who had also done work for OJ) to set up a corporation. In the link I provided for Arnelle being questioned it's clear Arnelle concern was to set up the corporation in a way to protect any proceeds coming into the corp....that had to be the book deal because that was why the corp was formed. Arnelle testimony proves she knew money was going out on OJ's behalf. It's all there in the link I provided if you would read it all with an open mind.

I think that it does not take a modicum of business sense to tell a lawyer that I desire to have my business proceeds protected to the nth degree and that I want to incur as little personal liability as possible. Those are just general statements that have nothing to do with the actual manner in which the business is structured. We seem to be broaching a path of re-litigating Ms. Arnelle's involvement. :);)

[William Anthony]

Thank you for showing the civility and intelligence to refer to Ms. Arnelle as Miss. Of course, the bankruptcy decision stands and I share your displeasure in wanting to re-litigate the case. Again, while Ms. Arnelle may not be innocent, she certainly may be not guilty. :)

Correction-Thank you for showing the civility and the respect to refer to Ms. Arnelle as Miss. I did not want anyone to claim that I was saying those, who do not use Ms. lacked intelligence.

[martin II]

Fuhrman never testified that he and Kaelin followed Arnelle and the detectives into house because he never saw Arnelle and the detectives enter the house, Kaelin did. When Fuhrman looked at the back of the house Arnelle and the three detectives had already entered the house so all he saw was that the back door was open.

bobaugust

Kato saw no such thing, he was at his room

[Its just me]

I think that it does not take a modicum of business sense to tell a lawyer that I desire to have my business proceeds protected to the nth degree and that I want to incur as little personal liability as possible. Those are just general statements that have nothing to do with the actual manner in which the business is structured. We seem to be broaching a path of re-litigating Ms. Arnelle's involvement. :);)

Yep and I have no interest of re-litigating Miss Simpson's involvement in a business/corporation get up that was determined by the courts to be created for the purpose of fraud and deceiving. Its simply a "is what it is" thing...plus its that 3rd quarter time of the year for me to turn in some some reports to my Great Great Uncle Sam who apprears to be suffering from Alzheimer's disease or something similar and equally as bad. :shrug::seeya:

[martin II]

Well I have formed a business and helped run one for 41 years and I've learned everything is not always cut and dried in a book. The fact is Arnelle claims to have gotten this book idea and went to a lawyer (who had also done work for OJ) to set up a corporation. In the link I provided for Arnelle being questioned it's clear Arnelle concern was to set up the corporation in a way to protect any proceeds coming into the corp....that had to be the book deal because that was why the corp was formed. Arnelle testimony proves she knew money was going out on OJ's behalf. It's all there in the link I provided if you would read it all with an open mind.

LBA was a legal corporation approved by the sec of state of Florida. There was actually nothing leagally wrong with oj serving as a consultant and being paid for services performed. He had a legal right to work and be paid.

LBS lawyer set the company up and received approval. LBA had no legal obligation to fred. The HC contract legally gave LBA right to the manuscript when the book was canceled by them.

A fair disposition would have been for LBA to publish the book, receive revenue, pay oj for services and fred could attatch income paid to oj.

The judge understanding the public pressure and his own desire to assist fred
made a finding that LBA was illegal which was in conflict with the State of florida and the HC legal contract giving the rights to no one but LBA.

Correction the printing of the book was 129,000 copies not 29,000.
However as i have posted the judges decision resulted in helping everyone but fred. Karma.

In the end the simpson family was not displeased with the financial outcome but fred was.Again karma.

[William Anthony]

Yep and I have no interest of re-litigating Miss Simpson's involvement in a business/corporation get up that was determined by the courts to be created for the purpose of fraud and deceiving. Its simply a "is what it is" thing...plus its that 3rd quarter time of the year for me to turn in some some reports to my Great Great Uncle Sam who apprears to be suffering from Alzheimer's disease or something similar and equally as bad. :shrug::seeya:

You believe Ms. Arnelle had more involvement than she let on and I believe she was telling the truth, absent anything showing she wasn't.

[Its just me]

LBA was a legal corporation approved by the sec of state of Florida. There was actually nothing leagally wrong with oj serving as a consultant and being paid for services performed. He had a legal right to work and be paid.

LBS lawyer set the company up and received approval. LBA had no legal obligation to fred. The HC contract legally gave LBA right to the manuscript when the book was canceled by them.

A fair disposition would have been for LBA to publish the book, receive revenue, pay oj for services and fred could attatch income paid to oj.

The judge understanding the public pressure and his own desire to assist fred
made a finding that LBA was illegal which was in conflict with the State of florida and the HC legal contract giving the rights to no one but LBA.

Correction the printing of the book was 129,000 copies not 29,000.
However as i have posted the judges decision resulted in helping everyone but fred. Karma.

In the end the simpson family was not displeased with the financial outcome but fred was.Again karma.

Martin....At the time the moron Madoff (spell) set up his little (big) get up to commit fraud and deceive it was an A ok thing also. It's what is done after the set up that matters. The state of Florida had NO way of knowing what was going to transpire within the corporation. Soooo simple. IMHOO and no amount of opinions to try and justify what transpired will not change the courts decision. IMHOO the "planned" get up back fired and bit the simpsons in the tail. Miss Simpson did not get rich as she had hoped.

[martin II]

I think that it does not take a modicum of business sense to tell a lawyer that I desire to have my business proceeds protected to the nth degree and that I want to incur as little personal liability as possible. Those are just general statements that have nothing to do with the actual manner in which the business is structured. We seem to be broaching a path of re-litigating Ms. Arnelle's involvement. :);)

Bottom line is LBA was awarded the manuscript legally by the HC contract. LBA was a corporation approved bY THE SEC OF STATE OF FLORIDA. LBA had no legal responsibility to fred.The judge made a wrong decision to give LBA assets to a party, fred that had no legal right to receive them. The judge just made a personal decision to help fred by declaring LBA a fraud.This was against the STATE OF FLORIDA and the HC CONTRACT.IMO

[tv]

Martin....At the time the moron Madoff (spell) set up his little (big) get up to commit fraud and deceive it was an A ok thing also. It's what is done after the set up that matters. The state of Florida had NO way of knowing what was going to transpire within the corporation. Soooo simple. IMHOO and no amount of opinions to try and justify what transpired will not change the courts decision. IMHOO the "planned" get up back fired and bit the simpsons in the tail.

It bit them hard as it well should have. I have step-siblings and half-siblings in my family and I can't wrap my mind around the idea of actually approaching them to write a book about how one parent killed the other just so I could pocket some money. Imo, if Simpson had been convicted or admitted he did it then a serious book could have been written about that (how it affected the family etc) but to write a book where the victims (Nicole in particular) are demeaned and then brutal murders described just for the shock value of the lurid details is disgusting. I wonder how Arnelle would have felt had it been her mother that had her throat slashed and then was denigrated repeatedly in front of the entire world? Mind boggling.

I always have to shake my head at the people that say the book is a "love story."

[William Anthony]

It bit them hard as it well should have. I have step-siblings and half-siblings in my family and I can't wrap my mind around the idea of actually approaching them to write a book about how one parent killed the other just so I could pocket some money. Imo, if Simpson had been convicted or admitted he did it then a serious book could have been written about that (how it affected the family etc) but to write a book where the victims (Nicole in particular) are demeaned and then brutal murders described just for the shock value of the lurid details is disgusting. I wonder how Arnelle would have felt had it been her mother that had her throat slashed and then was denigrated repeatedly in front of the entire world? Mind boggling.

I always have to shake my head at the people that say the book is a "love story."

The idea of the book was discussed with all the children and an agreement was reached to do the book, according to the information that is known. I see that you want to say what Simpson should have said but there does not seem to be anyone that you can report this to that will uphold you, based on the first amendment rights.

[martin II]

Martin....At the time the moron Madoff (spell) set up his little (big) get up to commit fraud and deceive it was an A ok thing also. It's what is done after the set up that matters. The state of Florida had NO way of knowing what was going to transpire within the corporation. Soooo simple. IMHOO and no amount of opinions to try and justify what transpired will not change the courts decision. IMHOO the "planned" get up back fired and bit the simpsons in the tail. Miss Simpson did not get rich as she had hoped.

Lba was the legal owner of the transcript by the HC CONTRACT. NO FRAUD THERE.They had a legal right to pay oj for services. Fred had a legal right to go after ojs income from LBA based on the judgement. The problem was LBA
had no legal debt obligation to Fred. He was a stranger to the LBA rights and the operation of their business. Obviously the judge in his efforts to assist fred just declared the HC Contract and LBA a fraud. This was a personal decision by the judge.

As i have said oj received a little over $1,000,000 for his efforts and he said he used the money to protect his childrens legacy. You don't know if Arnell ot how the other children benefited or not now do you.We do know that the judges decision to give fred the largest share of the PROJECTED profits and
NBS estate and the legal creditors a much smaller part shows that the judge was out to assist only fred. In the end it was the simpsons that received the most from the total transaction.KARMA.

If your company had no financial obligations to me and i laid claim to your companies assets because i had a judgement against a employee of your company and the judge gave me your companies assets, you would be in the appeals court immediately.Yelling it was unfair. imo

[Its just me]

It bit them hard as it well should have. I have step-siblings and half-siblings in my family and I can't wrap my mind around the idea of actually approaching them to write a book about how one parent killed the other just so I could pocket some money. Imo, if Simpson had been convicted or admitted he did it then a serious book could have been written about that (how it affected the family etc) but to write a book where the victims (Nicole in particular) are demeaned and then brutal murders described just for the shock value of the lurid details is disgusting. I wonder how Arnelle would have felt had it been her mother that had her throat slashed and then was denigrated repeatedly in front of the entire world? Mind boggling.

I always have to shake my head at the people that say the book is a "love story."

I totally agree.

If the book is a "love story" it is a story that points directly to the love of self and money and far from any love or respect for Nicole or her children.

[martin II]

Martin....At the time the moron Madoff (spell) set up his little (big) get up to commit fraud and deceive it was an A ok thing also. It's what is done after the set up that matters. The state of Florida had NO way of knowing what was going to transpire within the corporation. Soooo simple. IMHOO and no amount of opinions to try and justify what transpired will not change the courts decision. IMHOO the "planned" get up back fired and bit the simpsons in the tail. Miss Simpson did not get rich as she had hoped.

LBA did nothing even close to Madoff so i have no idea as to why you try to compare the two. Unless you are confused about what Madoff did.

[martin II]

I totally agree.

If the book is a "love story" it is a story that points directly to the love of self and money and far from any love or respect for Nicole or her children.

Did you read "if i did it" by oj?

[Its just me]

Lba was the legal owner of the transcript by the HC CONTRACT. NO FRAUD THERE.They had a legal right to pay oj for services. Fred had a legal right to go after ojs income from LBA based on the judgement. The problem was LBA
had no legal debt obligation to Fred. He was a stranger to the LBA rights and the operation of their business. Obviously the judge in his efforts to assist fred just declared the HC Contract and LBA a fraud. This was a personal decision by the judge.

As i have said oj received a little over $1,000,000 for his efforts and he said he used the money to protect his childrens legacy. You don't know if Arnell ot how the other children benefited or not now do you.We do know that the judges decision to give fred the largest share of the PROJECTED profits and
NBS estate and the legal creditors a much smaller part shows that the judge was out to assist only fred. In the end it was the simpsons that received the most from the total transaction.KARMA.

If your company had no financial obligations to me and i laid claim to your companies assets because i had a judgement against a employee of your company and the judge gave me your companies assets, you would be in the appeals court immediately.Yelling it was unfair. imo

I don't care what you claim OJ said about using the money to protect the children’s legacy. FWIW...there is proof in the oven that OJ is not beyond telling a lie. There were checks written to pay OJ's mortgage on his house and for money he owed the IRS and one 20 thousand cash transaction. IIRC

As for you last paragraph and the rest of your post for that matter....it's clear your degree is not in Business 101 and you can’t compare apples to oranges.

[Its just me]

LBA did nothing even close to Madoff so i have no idea as to why you try to compare the two. Unless you are confused about what Madoff did.


Same thing except on a smaller scale....the last time I checked fraud and deception is fraud and deception no matter how little or how big.

[Its just me]

Did you read "if i did it" by oj?

Yep or I should say enough of it to form an opinion when I consider the whole picture.

[Its just me]

Who represented the minor childen. OJ....well it's pretty clear how he was thinking. IMHOO

[tv]

I don't care what you claim OJ said about using the money to protect the children’s legacy. FWIW...there is proof in the oven that OJ is not beyond telling a lie. There were checks written to pay OJ's mortgage on his house and for money he owed the IRS and one 20 thousand cash transaction. IIRC

As for you last paragraph and the rest of your post for that matter....it's clear your degree is not in Business 101 and you can’t compare apples to oranges.

OJ Simpson's legacy to Nicole's children should have been to honor the memory of their mother. That's a legacy that money can't buy. The truth is that he's the only one that benefited from the 'legacy'.

[Its just me]

Who represented the minor childen. OJ....well it's pretty clear how he was thinking. IMHOO

OOPs I beleive a post disappeared. :shrug: May be I'm seeing things.

[William Anthony]

I totally agree.

If the book is a "love story" it is a story that points directly to the love of self and money and far from any love or respect for Nicole or her children.

And, if that is true, it goes to prove what, exactly?

[William Anthony]

OOPs I beleive a post disappeared. :shrug: May be I'm seeing things.

It was a duplicate.

[William Anthony]

OJ Simpson's legacy to Nicole's children should have been to honor the memory of their mother. That's a legacy that money can't buy. The truth is that he's the only one that benefited from the 'legacy'.

In the event that Simpson may win on appeal, are you bidding to become his personal agent?:);):cool:

[Its just me]

OJ Simpson's legacy to Nicole's children should have been to honor the memory of their mother. That's a legacy that money can't buy. The truth is that he's the only one that benefited from the 'legacy'.

I know. The sad thing IMHOO is you can't honor the dead if there was no honor during life. With what is known about OJ's and Nicole's relationship I see little or no honor toward Nicole. Nicole was no more than a throphy to show.....his negative comments when she was pregnant with his children is enough for me to form this opinion but I actually use a wider scope.

[Its just me]

And, if that is true, it goes to prove what, exactly?


That is wasn't a love story showing love, respect or honor toward Nicole and her children or that OJ and Arnelle loved their self and money more. IMHOO but a strong one.

[William Anthony]

I know. The sad thing IMHOO is you can't honor the dead if there was no honor during life. With what is known about OJ's and Nicole's relationship I see little or no honor toward Nicole. Nicole was no more than a throphy to show.....his negative comments when she was pregnant with his children is enough for me to form this opinion but I actually use a wider scope.

None of us has walked a mile in another shoes and no one ever knows for sure what goes on behind closed doors. From all accounts they had a loving, caring relationship and Simpson provided for the beautiful Ms. NBS but there was a turning point and the relationship went downhill. What precipitated the decline in the relationship I do not believe will ever be known. People involved in declining relationships often act like vengeful children. This seems to be what happened here. While I believe one should not speak ill of the dead, it has been demonstrated that is not the case by some posters on this board. I guess Simpson may have shared this belief with those posters.

[William Anthony]

That is wasn't a love story showing love, respect or honor toward Nicole and her children or that OJ and Arnelle loved their self and money more. IMHOO but a strong one.

Did Sydney, Jason and Justin show respect for their mother, the beautiful Ms. NBS, or did they love self and money more, since they all agreed, according to the information?

[Its just me]

None of us has walked a mile in another shoes and no one ever knows for sure what goes on behind closed doors. From all accounts they had a loving, caring relationship and Simpson provided for the beautiful Ms. NBS but there was a turning point and the relationship went downhill. What precipitated the decline in the relationship I do not believe will ever be known. People involved in declining relationships often act like vengeful children. This seems to be what happened here. While I believe one should not speak ill of the dead, it has been demonstrated that is not the case by some posters on this board. I guess Simpson may have shared this belief with those posters.

Nicole became pregnant much earlier than the last few years of their stormy relationship. The difference in OJ and members of this board if any have shown disrespect toward the dead is.....Nicole was OJ's former wife and the mother of his children and they were Arnelle half brother and sister and their mother. IMHOO A "Mother" is the most valuable thing a person will ever have outside of spiritual things. If there were no love, respect or honor to be directed at Nicole it should have been for the children....they are innocent victims.

[Its just me]

Did Sydney, Jason and Justin show respect for their mother, the beautiful Ms. NBS, or did they love self and money more, since they all agreed, according to the information?

Unless I'm confussed on Sydney and Justin's ages I beleive they were too young to have much input or have a good understanding about anything. Jason touched on the book issue in his depostion but I don't remember enough to have an opinion of how much he was actually involved. I believe he said he did agree to the book at some point.

[martin II]

I don't care what you claim OJ said about using the money to protect the children’s legacy. FWIW...there is proof in the oven that OJ is not beyond telling a lie. There were checks written to pay OJ's mortgage on his house and for money he owed the IRS and one 20 thousand cash transaction. IIRC

As for you last paragraph and the rest of your post for that matter....it's clear your degree is not in Business 101 and you can’t compare apples to oranges.

You do seem to make a lot of personal comments. The issue is not me. the issue is the judges decision. I doubt you are the only person on this thread that has business experience. Even though you seem to believe so.


Again you make assumptions. I have three export companies currently under my direction for years and we have no legal problems.

The issue that you have not addressed is how could the judge properly void a legal HC contract because he thought oj should not be a employees of LBA. LBA had no legal obligation to fred.
imo

[Its just me]

You do seem to make a lot of personal comments. The issue is not me. the issue is the judges decision. I doubt you are the only person on this thread that has business experience. Even though you seem to believe so.


Again you make assumptions. I have three export companies currently under my direction for years and we have no legal problems.

The issue that you have not addressed is how could the judge properly void a legal HC contract because he thought oj should not be a employees of LBA. LBA had no legal obligation to fred.
imo

LOL I believe it's about tit for tat with each of us and our personal comments. but that's just my opinion. ;)

Apparantly the courts didn't have the same opinion as you. Martin it goes much deeper than OJ being an employee. FWIW I seriously doubt the corporation paid their part of any Social Security and Medicare tax or withheld the same plus Federal and State taxes on income OJ received from the corporation which is a must do when an employee is paid wages. OJ being an employee don't hold water.....just more fraud and deception that didn't work.

ETA: the checks were made out to the IRS and to the company holding the mortage on OJ's house. Not to OJ as wages.

[Its just me]

You are confused. What is the legal age for a individual to receive stock positions in a legal company. WTH are you talking about now.

Apparently you just don't understand that we are talking about the children respecting and honoring their mother. What does WTH stand for in your personal vocabulary.

[martin II]

Who represented the minor childen. OJ....well it's pretty clear how he was thinking. IMHOO

Again oj position as a employee/consultant of lba had nothing to do with the children receiving legal stock in LBA. If you believe it did explain how?

[martin II]

Apparently you just don't understand that we are talking about the children respecting and honoring their mother. What does WTH stand for in your personal vocabulary.

You as a outsider have no information on the childrens feelings for their mother. There is no information that they didn't have deep feelings for their mother. To suggest that they didn't because they received stock in Lba is nonsense.Only your personal opinions in your efforts to bash the simpson family.

If you are the business expert here please explain how the HC contract was voided because oj was a employee/consultant to LBA and please give the legal basis.

[Its just me]

Again oj position as a employee/consultant of lba had nothing to do with the children receiving legal stock in LBA. If you believe it did explain how?

OH Martin, I just don't believe I can....in a form you would understand. The issue is not the children in the deception and fraud....The issue was OJ and the reason the corp. was formed.

[William Anthony]

Unless I'm confussed on Sydney and Justin's ages I beleive they were too young to have much input or have a good understanding about anything. Jason touched on the book issue in his depostion but I don't remember enough to have an opinion of how much he was actually involved. I believe he said he did agree to the book at some point.

Ms. Arnelle testified that she talked to the children and the all agreed. Mr. Goldman attributed agreement of all the children to Simpson talking with them. IIRC, Simpson wrote the book in 2006, 12 years after the murders. All the children were near adulthood and some adults.

[Its just me]

You as a outsider have no information on the childrens feelings for their mother. There is no information that they didn't have deep feelings for their mother. To suggest that they didn't because they received stock in Lba is nonsense.Only your personal opinions in your efforts to bash the simpson family.

If you are the business expert here please explain how the HC contract was voided because oj was a employee/consultant to LBA and please give the legal basis.

Martin I'm sorry but I think you have things very confused. I say the children's Mother was the most valuable thing they every came in contact with outside spiritual things. My posts stand for their self. Until you get a grip and clear understanding on things I've posted you are on ignore..it's not worth my time.

[William Anthony]

LOL I believe it's about tit for tat with each of us and our personal comments. but that's just my opinion. ;)

Apparantly the courts didn't have the same opinion as you. Martin it goes much deeper than OJ being an employee. FWIW I seriously doubt the corporation paid their part of any Social Security and Medicare tax or withheld the same plus Federal and State taxes on income OJ received from the corporation which is a must do when an employee is paid wages. OJ being an employee don't hold water.....just more fraud and deception that didn't work.

ETA: the checks were made out to the IRS and to the company holding the mortage on OJ's house. Not to OJ as wages.

Was Simpson an employee or an Independent contractor hired to provide a product?

[tv]

Apparently you just don't understand that we are talking about the children respecting and honoring their mother. What does WTH stand for in your personal vocabulary.

I would like to have known exactly what Arnelle said to the children to get them to agree. Her testimony was that they didn't want to talk about it at first...her excuse is that they were teenagers -- an excuse I'm not buying. We don't know if she mentioned it casually or badgered them into it. They were under the influence of negative feelings and comments about their mother for 12 years up to that point. If they were conflicted or confused about their feelings for her or whether it was appropriate to go forward with the book it would be understandable to me. They should have been able to look to their father and elder sister for guidance on this matter instead of Simpson and Arnelle being the ones to initiate such a deal with the devil. By the way, all my opinion. :)

[weezer]

OH Martin, I just don't believe I can....in a form you would understand. The issue is not the children in the deception and fraud....The issue was OJ and the reason the corp. was formed.

my opinion of the children had a shift after I learned they signed off on the deal and expected to make money from it. after reading arnelle's depo, she quite obviously hounded them until they gave in. do you think they understand now that between daddy and arnelle, there wasn't going to be any money for them?

wonder why orenthal's grown children from his first marriage thought they should be entitled to profits from a book written by their dad describing the horrific murder of their step-mother?

[William Anthony]

OH Martin, I just don't believe I can....in a form you would understand. The issue is not the children in the deception and fraud....The issue was OJ and the reason the corp. was formed.

I do believe that I understand what your are trying to say. However, the issue is not the reason or why the corp. was formed but how and how it operated.

[Its just me]

Ms. Arnelle testified that she talked to the children and the all agreed. Mr. Goldman attributed agreement of all the children to Simpson talking with them. IIRC, Simpson wrote the book in 2006, 12 years after the murders. All the children were near adulthood and some adults.

I base my opinion of raising my own children and being involved with them and other children and very young adults making business and personal decisions relating to business. I personally don't consider the small Simpson children to be an acception of the general rule that minor children and very young adults lack the knowledge and understanding to make decisions like in this case as well as other kinds. It appears I'm not wrong....Arnelle did not use sound judgement and she is the oldest. IMHOO

[tv]

my opinion of the children had a shift after I learned they signed off on the deal and expected to make money from it. after reading arnelle's depo, she quite obviously hounded them until they gave in. do you think they understand now that between daddy and arnelle, there wasn't going to be any money for them?

wonder why orenthal's grown children from his first marriage thought they should be entitled to profits from a book written by their dad describing the horrific murder of their step-mother?

Exactly. As I've said before maybe Arnelle would like her father to write a story about her mother being brutally murdered and then share the proceeds with her siblings. I also think she was insistent to get them to sign and that's why she said they didn't want to talk about it at first. Chilling.

[martin II]

LOL I believe it's about tit for tat with each of us and our personal comments. but that's just my opinion. ;)

Apparantly the courts didn't have the same opinion as you. Martin it goes much deeper than OJ being an employee. FWIW I seriously doubt the corporation paid their part of any Social Security and Medicare tax or withheld the same plus Federal and State taxes on income OJ received from the corporation which is a must do when an employee is paid wages. OJ being an employee don't hold water.....just more fraud and deception that didn't work.

ETA: the checks were made out to the IRS and to the company holding the mortage on OJ's house. Not to OJ as wages.

You are making up stuff again.
LBA, because it was a new company had not been in existance long enough to encure any State or federal tax obligatioons.OJ was a private consultant to LBA and would have received a 1090 from LBA to pay his taxes when due.

941 taxes are due on a quarterly bases for employees such as Arnell and others.

At any rate whatever taxes you THINK were due were not a part of the courts decision.

You have made a lot of comments not directed to the decision. Under what legal basis was the HC contract voided. That contract was approved in the state of ny and fred was not a party to it. waiting.

[martin II]

I base my opinion of raising my own children and being involved with them and other children and very young adults making business and personal decisions relating to business. I personally don't consider the small Simpson children to be an acception of the general rule that minor children and very young adults lack the knowledge and understanding to make decisions like in this case as well as other kinds. It appears I'm not wrong....Arnelle did not use sound judgement and she is the oldest. IMHOO

Your personal experience with your children has no impact of the legality of ojs children receiving stock in LBA. you must understand that.imo

[Its just me]

I do believe that I understand what your are trying to say. However, the issue is not the reason or why the corp. was formed but how and how it operated.


What every you want to think....this is what the court said.


http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com...e%20Motion.pdf
The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that
there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice. The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose, deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.

[tv]

What every you want to think....this is what the court said.


http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com...e%20Motion.pdf
The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that
there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice. The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose, deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.

Looks like 'reason' and 'why' to me.

[William Anthony]

I base my opinion of raising my own children and being involved with them and other children and very young adults making business and personal decisions relating to business. I personally don't consider the small Simpson children to be an acception of the general rule that minor children and very young adults lack the knowledge and understanding to make decisions like in this case as well as other kinds. It appears I'm not wrong....Arnelle did not use sound judgement and she is the oldest. IMHOO

Why when there are questions brought up some try to change everything around. This was your comment, "That is wasn't a love story showing love, respect or honor toward Nicole and her children or that OJ and Arnelle loved their self and money more. IMHOO but a strong one." I then asked you about the other family members who agreed that Simpson should write the book. I never said whether the judgment was good or bad but asked you, which you have never answered but tried to make excuses for, "Did Sydney, Jason and Justin show respect for their mother, the beautiful Ms. NBS, or did they love self and money more, since they all agreed, according to the information?". However, in a true lawyer fashion, let me ask you this, do you belief that all Simpson family members involved showed bad judgment in deciding to have the book created?

[martin II]

I do believe that I understand what your are trying to say. However, the issue is not the reason or why the corp. was formed but how and how it operated.

Nothing illegal with oj being a private consultant for lba. Nothing illegal about the HC contract being awarded to LBA. What was wrong was the judges decision to award LBA assets to FRED a individual that LBA had no financial obligatioons to only because the only way to assist fred was to just claim LBA was a fraud for setting up business.
It is my belief if oj had had the money or desire to appeal he would have had a good chance to win.But he had already made over $1,000,000 and used the money as he saw fit. He just decided to move on. The whole thief of LBA
assets didn't help fred as intended.IMO

All the personal comments about ojs children had nothing to do with the case.

[martin II]

Looks like 'reason' and 'why' to me.

So according to the decision LBA had no right to set up a corporation in Florida. The judge didn't like the idea that LBA had a legal right to operate
and the fact that fred had no legal right to LBA assets so he used his power to force his personal opinion on the case that LBA was a fraud for setting up to do their legal business all to asssist fred.
Actuall LBAS lawyer set the situation up correctly and smartly. They forced fred to go after ojs income from LBA. The judge did not want fred to have to do that because of lack of previous succdess. so he just stole LBA assets and illegally gave them to fred.imo

[Its just me]

Why when there are questions brought up some try to change everything around. This was your comment, "That is wasn't a love story showing love, respect or honor toward Nicole and her children or that OJ and Arnelle loved their self and money more. IMHOO but a strong one." I then asked you about the other family members who agreed that Simpson should write the book. I never said whether the judgment was good or bad but asked you, which you have never answered but tried to make excuses for, "Did Sydney, Jason and Justin show respect for their mother, the beautiful Ms. NBS, or did they love self and money more, since they all agreed, according to the information?". However, in a true lawyer fashion, let me ask you this, do you belief that all Simpson family members involved showed bad judgment in deciding to have the book created?

OH Dear...I do beleive there is a lack of communication here....or something.

My opinion is OJ showed lack of love, respect and honor toward Nicole and then their children because he is responsible for what is in the book about his children's mother. Arnelle failed to show the same because she claims the book idea was all hers and she claims she formed the corporation that would receive the proceeds from the book sales with the help of an attorney. I said I can't form an opinion if Jason showed respect, love or honor or not and I honestly can't. I don't even consider Nicole's children lacking or showing love, honor and respect for their mother because first I believe they had much of all three and they were not old enough to make a sound business decision about something so close to them personally. …when and if they actually made a decision it was ok for a book to be written and published about their mother. Hope I’m clear....if not I'm afraid I can't be of any more help.

[William Anthony]

What every you want to think....this is what the court said.


http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com...e%20Motion.pdf
The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that
there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice. The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose, deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.

I see where the wording is confusing. The act of incorporation does not include a why or reason. It was the accomplished incorporation or how it operated after successful/accomplished incorporation which allowed the judge to say it perpetrated a fraud and deception. Your link is not working in order for me to take a look at it and see if it was taken out of context but from what I do see of the link it looks to be to the motion and not to the judge's order, although it may be the court's wording and if you would provide a working link, then maybe I could make certain that things aren't taken out of context. your post does state that the court finds. The court is speaking as to how the corporation was formed and functioned and in so doing it perpetrated a fraud, IMHO.

[martin II]

Was Simpson an employee or an Independent contractor hired to provide a product?

LBA can legally issue OJ a 1090 at the end of the year and not be responsible for quartely 941 tax.

The business expert is confused and just making up stuff. LBA PRECEIVED tax obligations were nonexistant and not mentioned in the case as a factor in the decision.

[William Anthony]

OH Dear...I do beleive there is a lack of communication here....or something.

My opinion is OJ showed lack of love, respect and honor toward Nicole and then their children because he is responsible for what is in the book about his children's mother. Arnelle failed to show the same because she claims the book idea was all hers and she claims she formed the corporation that would receive the proceeds from the book sales with the help of an attorney. I said I can't form an opinion if Jason showed respect, love or honor or not and I honestly can't. I don't even consider Nicole's children lacking or showing love, honor and respect for their mother because first I believe they had much of all three and they were not old enough to make a sound business decision about something so close to them personally. …when and if they actually made a decision it was ok for a book to be written and published about their mother. Hope I’m clear....if not I'm afraid I can't be of any more help.

I don't think you can be any clearer. Despite the fact that Jason was grown and Justin and Sydney near grown and they all agreed to have Simpson write and publish the book ands share in the profits (according to the information known), these are the only two you feel this way about, "OJ and Arnelle loved their self and money more."

[William Anthony]

LBA can legally issue OJ a 1090 at the end of the year and not be responsible for quartely 941 tax.

The business expert is confused and just making up stuff. LBA PRECEIVED tax obligations were nonexistant and not mentioned in the case as a factor in the decision.

Do you have a link to the bankruptcy decision?

[tv]

OH Dear...I do beleive there is a lack of communication here....or something.

My opinion is OJ showed lack of love, respect and honor toward Nicole and then their children because he is responsible for what is in the book about his children's mother. Arnelle failed to show the same because she claims the book idea was all hers and she claims she formed the corporation that would receive the proceeds from the book sales with the help of an attorney. I said I can't form an opinion if Jason showed respect, love or honor or not and I honestly can't. I don't even consider Nicole's children lacking or showing love, honor and respect for their mother because first I believe they had much of all three and they were not old enough to make a sound business decision about something so close to them personally. …when and if they actually made a decision it was ok for a book to be written and published about their mother. Hope I’m clear....if not I'm afraid I can't be of any more help.
IJM, this is the thing -- it's okay with OJers to trash Nicole and Ron (accusing them of being drug users and dealers and Nicole of being a party girl and husband abuser), it's okay to blame Jason for killing Ron and Nicole and it's okay to hold Sydney and Justin fully responsible in the decision to write the book. In the NG world what is NOT okay is to criticize OJ Simpson or Arnelle Simpson in any way, shape or form -- in their world view the criminal trial verdict was just, the civil trial was a socio-political production, the judge 'stole' the book away from LBA for Fred Goldman and Judge Judy Glass violated Simpson's rights in the Vegas trial. The pattern here is that Simpson and his daughter Arnelle are incapable of making a bad decision, lying or committing criminal acts. Truly amazing.

[martin II]

I see where the wording is confusing. The act of incorporation does not include a why or reason. It was the accomplished incorporation or how it operated after successful/accomplished incorporation which allowed the judge to say it perpetrated a fraud and deception. Your link is not working in order for me to take a look at it and see if it was taken out of context but from what I do see of the link it looks to be to the motion and not to the judge's order, although it may be the court's wording and if you would provide a working link, then maybe I could make certain that things aren't taken out of context. your post does state that the court finds. The court is speaking as to how the corporation was formed and functioned and in so doing it perpetrated a fraud, IMHO.


Wth does this mean.


deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.

LBA was set up to take advantage of the HC contract had given them. LBA was set up as a result of HC notice that they would be named owner of the manuscript in case the book was not published.

LBA set up and waited the outcome of HC actions. They should not have been pounished because they were a new company waiting on business.There are thousands of companies that set up with no business in hand.

What is the unfair advantage. Unfair advantage to who. LBS operation was a unfair advantage against who. The manuscript transfer was between HC and LBA. fred was not a legal party to that.

The judges bias is clear in the above statement. He didn't like the idea that fred had no legal right to LBA assets.

IJM
Maby you can explain how LBA setting up gave them a
deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment. UNLAWFULL ADVANTAGE OVER WHO.

As the owner of the manuscript why would LBA not have a right to do business because oj was a consultant?

[William Anthony]

IJM, this is the thing -- it's okay with OJers to trash Nicole and Ron (accusing them of being drug users and dealers and Nicole of being a party girl and husband abuser), it's okay to blame Jason for killing Ron and Nicole and it's okay to hold Sydney and Justin fully responsible in the decision to write the book. In the NG world what is NOT okay is to criticize OJ Simpson or Arnelle Simpson in any way, shape or form -- in their world view the criminal trial verdict was just, the civil trial was a socio-political production, the judge 'stole' the book away from LBA for Fred Goldman and Judge Judy Glass violated Simpson's rights in the Vegas trial. The pattern here is that Simpson and his daughter Arnelle are incapable of making a bad decision, lying or committing criminal acts. Truly amazing.

Again, I think things have been taken out of context. Simpson, his daughter, his sister, his lawyer, his father, a minister and his friend have all been repeatedly, IMHO, bashed. I did not engage in victim bashing but came close recently. I have not seen one post blaming Jason for killing anyone but I have seen several post claiming Ms. Arnelle engaged in criminal activity. I have no problem with any of the verdicts rendered in these case, although I firmly believe that, because the judge in the civil trial said, "Basically, this is a civil murder trial" and, based on his subsequent rulings, the civil trial was a socio political production but that the jurors reached the correct verdict due to the evidence they were allowed to hear. However, MF told an irrelevant lie, LE only made human errors and mistakes, even though one magistrate said they played fast and lose with the truth and a judge said they showed a reckless disregard for the truth, it is truly amazing that some here feel they have the right to decide, who should be trashed and who should not, and I do believe that is the result of a sense of entitlement.

[William Anthony]

Wth does this mean.


deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.

LBA was set up to take advantage of the HC contract had given them. LBA was set up as a result of HC notice that they would be named owner of the manuscript in case the book was not published.

LBA set up and waited the outcome of HC actions. They should not have been pounished because they were a new company waiting on business.There are thousands of companies that set up with no business in hand.

What is the unfair advantage. Unfair advantage to who. LBS operation was a unfair advantage against who. The manuscript transfer was between HC and LBA. fred was not a legal party to that.

The judges bias is clear in the above statement. He didn't like the idea that fred had no legal right to LBA assets.

IJM
Maby you can explain how LBA setting up gave them a
deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment. UNLAWFULL ADVANTAGE OVER WHO.

As the owner of the manuscript why would LBA not have a right to do business because oj was a consultant?

I hope IJM has not left and can supply us with a link that works to the bankruptcy decision and that goes for anyone. I noticed that Ms. Arnelle was deposed in Florida and the link apparently is for Georgia. In which states was LBA incorporated or had their primary residence?

[martin II]

juror comment
White juror

Aschenbach, in an ABC telephone interview last week, tearfully explained why she changed her original guilty vote.

Lead detective Philip Vannatter "made misstatements" on the witness stand, she said. Former detective Mark Fuhrman, discredited as a lying racist, cast too much doubt on the most prized evidence - a bloody glove found on Simpson's estate.

"I thought it was possible it was planted," Aschenbach said. "And most of the evidence was DNA evidence and that's what was so shaky."

[martin II]

IJM
See the ages of the children and tell me if they were too youngton receive stock in LBA.

Simpson got the green light from his two children by Brown - Justin, 18, and Sydney, 21 - to do the book, his lawyer said yesterday.

"The children were entirely behind the project," said Simpson lawyer Yale Galanter.

[weezer]

Exactly. As I've said before maybe Arnelle would like her father to write a story about her mother being brutally murdered and then share the proceeds with her siblings. I also think she was insistent to get them to sign and that's why she said they didn't want to talk about it at first. Chilling.

are you kidding me? she did a smack down on daddy just over her mom having to work at walmart. . . :punch:

[weezer]

IJM, this is the thing -- it's okay with OJers to trash Nicole and Ron (accusing them of being drug users and dealers and Nicole of being a party girl and husband abuser), it's okay to blame Jason for killing Ron and Nicole and it's okay to hold Sydney and Justin fully responsible in the decision to write the book. In the NG world what is NOT okay is to criticize OJ Simpson or Arnelle Simpson in any way, shape or form -- in their world view the criminal trial verdict was just, the civil trial was a socio-political production, the judge 'stole' the book away from LBA for Fred Goldman and Judge Judy Glass violated Simpson's rights in the Vegas trial. The pattern here is that Simpson and his daughter Arnelle are incapable of making a bad decision, lying or committing criminal acts. Truly amazing.

:beer::beer:

[weezer]

OH Dear...I do beleive there is a lack of communication here....or something.

My opinion is OJ showed lack of love, respect and honor toward Nicole and then their children because he is responsible for what is in the book about his children's mother. Arnelle failed to show the same because she claims the book idea was all hers and she claims she formed the corporation that would receive the proceeds from the book sales with the help of an attorney. I said I can't form an opinion if Jason showed respect, love or honor or not and I honestly can't. I don't even consider Nicole's children lacking or showing love, honor and respect for their mother because first I believe they had much of all three and they were not old enough to make a sound business decision about something so close to them personally. …when and if they actually made a decision it was ok for a book to be written and published about their mother. Hope I’m clear....if not I'm afraid I can't be of any more help.

Excellent! :beer:

[William Anthony]

are you kidding me? she did a smack down on daddy just over her mom having to work at walmart. . . :punch:

Didn't take much to change their minds. :);):cool:

[William Anthony]

Excellent! :beer:

Excellent to bash Simpson and Ms. Arnelle but give the others a pass. I thought this would be a response in line with Simpson and Ms. Arnelle bashing.

[martin II]

I hope IJM has not left and can supply us with a link that works to the bankruptcy decision and that goes for anyone. I noticed that Ms. Arnelle was deposed in Florida and the link apparently is for Georgia. In which states was LBA incorporated or had their primary residence?

LBA WAS INCORPORATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA WITH CORPORATE OFFICES IN Florida.

[martin II]

IJM, this is the thing -- it's okay with OJers to trash Nicole and Ron (accusing them of being drug users and dealers and Nicole of being a party girl and husband abuser), it's okay to blame Jason for killing Ron and Nicole and it's okay to hold Sydney and Justin fully responsible in the decision to write the book. In the NG world what is NOT okay is to criticize OJ Simpson or Arnelle Simpson in any way, shape or form -- in their world view the criminal trial verdict was just, the civil trial was a socio-political production, the judge 'stole' the book away from LBA for Fred Goldman and Judge Judy Glass violated Simpson's rights in the Vegas trial. The pattern here is that Simpson and his daughter Arnelle are incapable of making a bad decision, lying or committing criminal acts. Truly amazing.

What criminal act has Arnell been accused of and convicted of?

[William Anthony]

LBA WAS INCORPORATED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA WITH CORPORATE OFFICES IN Florida.

I wonder why the bankruptcy action was filed in Georgia.

[William Anthony]

Again, I think things have been taken out of context. Simpson, his daughter, his sister, his lawyer, his father, a minister and his friend have all been repeatedly, IMHO, bashed. I did not engage in victim bashing but came close recently. I have not seen one post blaming Jason for killing anyone but I have seen several post claiming Ms. Arnelle engaged in criminal activity. I have no problem with any of the verdicts rendered in these case, although I firmly believe that, because the judge in the civil trial said, "Basically, this is a civil murder trial" and, based on his subsequent rulings, the civil trial was a socio political production but that the jurors reached the correct verdict due to the evidence they were allowed to hear. However, MF told an irrelevant lie, LE only made human errors and mistakes, even though one magistrate said they played fast and lose with the truth and a judge said they showed a reckless disregard for the truth, it is truly amazing that some here feel they have the right to decide, who should be trashed and who should not, and I do believe that is the result of a sense of entitlement.

Addition-the criminal jurors suffered the bitter slings and arrows.

[Its just me]

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
www.flsb.uscourts.gov
In re:
LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, Case No. 07-12641-BKC-AJC
INC., Chapter 7
Debtor.
________________________________/
TRUSTEE DILLWORTH’S EMERGENCY MOTION (I) TO ENFORCE
THE AUTOMATIC STAY; (II) FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY TMZ.COM SHOULD NOT BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT FOR VIOLATION OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY; (III) COMPEL THE PERSON WITH MOST KNOWLEDGE AT TMZ.COM TO APPEAR AND
TESTIFY AT A 2004 EXAMINATION; AND (IV) COMPEL
COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER OF THIS COURT1
Trustee Dillworth is seeking an Emergency Hearing on this Motion in order to prevent any further dissipation of estate assets than what has already occurred through the unauthorized publishing of the manuscript of IF I DID IT.
-----------------

Snip from page 4 of 9 pages of the same document as above.

6. On June 15, 2007, this Court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the Debtor’s objection to the claim filed by the Goldman family. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court overruled the objection and found that the Goldman claim was valid claim against the estate. Furthermore, the Court stated:

The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice. The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose, deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.

7. The outcome of the hearing on June 15, 2007 was widely reported by news agencies and on the Internet.

8. In an amazing and disappointing coincidence, on June 19, 2007, it came to the attention of Trustee Dillworth that the website www.tmz.com (the “TMZ Website”) published the Manuscript through a direct web link on the TMZ Website.2

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf

If the link doesn't work the next best thing I can do is copy/paste all 9 pages. I haven't used my google search which is available to most computers to see if there is an answer to how TMZ got the copy of the Manuscript but the following is on page 5 of the same doc. Interesting.

10. Undersigned counsel has repeatedly attempted to make contact with Debtor’s counsel in order to effectuate the turnover of the Manuscript. Generally, the Debtor’s counsel informed the undersigned that the Debtor no longer was in possession of the Manuscript in any form. At a hearing before this Court on June 15, 2007 (the “Hearing”), Leonardo DaVinci Starke, I, Esq (“Mr. Starke”) delivered to undersigned counsel a sealed envelope containing an outline of the Manuscript (the “Outline”). The Outline was provided to Trustee Dillworth through the discovery process, and differs substantially from the Manuscript that was posted on the TMZ Website.
753516-1
Case 07-12641-AJC Document 132 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 5 of 9

[martin II]

What every you want to think....this is what the court said.


http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com...e%20Motion.pdf
The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that
there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice. The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose, deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.

The link does not work.
why are you posting a GEORGIA LINK

[William Anthony]

Martin,

I found a link that somewhat discussed Lorraine Brooke Association, Inc. but it is from Peter Heaven, a Goldman attorney and is so obviously biased and incorrect that I don't want to share the link. However some of the biased excerpts need to be posted and I cannot believe a lawyer said this.

"In Pursuit of a Civil Judgment: A Few Words from One of the Lawyers

The Lord helps those who help themselves, and the Law is no different. More than a decade ago, the Law gave Fredric Goldman a $19 million wrongful-death civil judgment for the loss of his 25-year-old son, Ron Goldman. That civil judgment reflected a jury’s conclusion, by clear and convincing evidence, that Ron was murdered. The bulk of that judgment, more than $12 million, was punitive. The jury determined that the murderer was guilty and needed to be punished. '

The civil judgment reflected a jury's conclusion that Simpson was liable for Mr. RG's wrongful death by a preponderance of the evidence. The civil action could not conclude by any standard that Mr. RG was murdered. The civil jury could not conclude guilt.

[Its just me]

Didn't take much to change their minds. :);):cool:

IMHOO Dollar $$$$ signs can do amazing things.

[martin II]

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
www.flsb.uscourts.gov
In re:
LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, Case No. 07-12641-BKC-AJC
INC., Chapter 7
Debtor.
________________________________/
TRUSTEE DILLWORTH’S EMERGENCY MOTION (I) TO ENFORCE
THE AUTOMATIC STAY; (II) FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY TMZ.COM SHOULD NOT BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT FOR VIOLATION OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY; (III) COMPEL THE PERSON WITH MOST KNOWLEDGE AT TMZ.COM TO APPEAR AND
TESTIFY AT A 2004 EXAMINATION; AND (IV) COMPEL
COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER OF THIS COURT1
Trustee Dillworth is seeking an Emergency Hearing on this Motion in order to prevent any further dissipation of estate assets than what has already occurred through the unauthorized publishing of the manuscript of IF I DID IT.
-----------------

Snip from page 4 of 9 pages of the same document as above.

6. On June 15, 2007, this Court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the Debtor’s objection to the claim filed by the Goldman family. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court overruled the objection and found that the Goldman claim was valid claim against the estate.WHAT ESTATE IS HE SPEAKING ABOUT. Furthermore, the Court stated:

The Court finds and determines that it is appropriate to conclude that there is a lack of separate existence between Lorraine Brooke and Simpson, and that this must be determined and found, as a matter of law, to prevent fraud and an injustice.TO PREVENT FRAUD AGAINST WHO? The incorporation of Lorraine Brooke Associates was clearly accomplished to perpetrate a fraud, a deception without any legitimate business purpose,LBA HAD A LEGITIMATE BUSINESS REASON TO EXIST ACCORDED THEM BY THE HC CONTRACT? IMO deliberately practiced in order to secure an unfair or an unlawful benefit or accomplishment.THE FACT THAT OJ WAS A CONSULTANT TO LBA MEANS THAT LBA BROKE SOME LAW I GUESS.

7. The outcome of the hearing on June 15, 2007 was widely reported by news agencies and on the Internet.

8. In an amazing and disappointing coincidence, on June 19, 2007, it came to the attention of Trustee Dillworth that the website www.tmz.com (the “TMZ Website”) published the Manuscript through a direct web link on the TMZ Website.2

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf

If the link don't work....the next best thing I can do is copy and past all 9 pages.

hOW DOES THE GEORGIA LINK IMPACT ON THE FLORIDA CASE?

I am wondering if LBA had hired another person as a consultant would the judge have ruled differently.

[Its just me]

The link does not work.
why are you posting a GEORGIA LINK

WTH is wrong with you. Try the one I just posted in Post # 18219..It's easy to find it's just above your post I'm quoting. I tried that link and it does work. Surely if you read what I posted it clearly shows the case is in Florida. Us Georgia folks just have a way of keeping up with those Florida folks. :cool:

[Its just me]

hOW DOES THE GEORGIA LINK IMPACT ON THE FLORIDA CASE?

I am wondering if LBA had hired another person as a consultant would the judge have ruled differently.

Again wth is wrong with you: :read: Did you not see this. OHHHHHH HELP WILLIAM
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
www.flsb.uscourts.gov
In re:
LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, Case No. 07-12641-BKC-AJC
INC., Chapter 7
Debtor.

[tv]

are you kidding me? she did a smack down on daddy just over her mom having to work at walmart. . . :punch:

She sure did. She's incensed that her mother has to work at Walmart but it's okay to make money off of Nicole's slaughter...I swear, you have to laugh. In this instance, I agree with her daddy. He and Marguerite are divorced and she has remarried. What's wrong with working at Walmart? It's an honest way to earn a living. :shrug:

[Its just me]

Just a FWIW in case Hotwater comes along....I did not start the WTH thing. Martin did.

[martin II]

IMHOO Dollar $$$$ signs can do amazing things.



"The sale of the rights opens the door to the eventual publication of the book, which Fred Goldman says he and his daughter, Kim, face with “mixed emotions.” Before HarperCollins pulled the plug on “If I Did It,” Goldman, 66, and his attorneys repeatedly said they wanted to stop Simpson from profiting but also to prevent publication. But Goldman now says his thinking has changed.
Goldman’s decision angered the Browns, who have adamantly opposed the book’s publication. On Monday, Denise Brown and her family issued a strongly worded statement criticizing the potential publication. “The Goldmans' sudden reversal of positions to justify the auction of these rights and subsequent publication and [their assertion] that ‘the book’ is Simpson’s confession [reveals] their true motive, which is to collect money,” the Brown family statement read. “Everybody knows Simpson did it; we don't need his written confession.” Calling the strategy “an overzealous pursuit to collect on the judgment,” the family encouraged people to “speak out against this auction.”

The Goldmans and their legal team plan to promote the auction vigorously. This week, attorneys set up a website, ojsimpsonbookrights.blogspot.com, which features O.J.'s old book contract and the judge's order authorizing the auction. In addition, they are sending direct mail solicitations to 1,600 literary agents, publishing houses and movie companies"

[martin II]

Again wth is wrong with you: :read: Did you not see this. OHHHHHH HELP WILLIAM
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
MIAMI DIVISION
www.flsb.uscourts.gov
In re:
LORRAINE BROOKE ASSOCIATES, Case No. 07-12641-BKC-AJC
INC., Chapter 7
Debtor.

No i saw a georgia bankrup link that did not open.

[Its just me]

She sure did. She's incensed that her mother has to work at Walmart but it's okay to make money off of Nicole's slaughter...I swear, you have to laugh. In this instance, I agree with her daddy. He and Marguerite are divorced and she has remarried. What's wrong with working at Walmart? It's an honest way to earn a living. :shrug:

In this instance, I agree with her daddy.

I have to agree with him also and certainly about working at Walmart is an honest way to earn a living.

[William Anthony]

IMHOO Dollar $$$$ signs can do amazing things.

For the love of money.

[Its just me]

No i saw a georgia bankrup link that did not open.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Would the link below be it. Its the same one I posted in my post # 18219...Just a few posts above and the very same one I told you about "again" just a post or two below that one. LOL Martin it is no more or no less that a Georgiabankruptcy "blog" web site furnishing information on the Florida case. Look at the link really good....do you see "blog".com right after georgiabankruptcy. OH Lord help us all.

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf

[William Anthony]

WTH is wrong with you. Try the one I just posted in Post # 18219..It's easy to find it's just above your post I'm quoting. I tried that link and it does work. Surely if you read what I posted it clearly shows the case is in Florida. Us Georgia folks just have a way of keeping up with those Florida folks. :cool:

Your original post was to a Georgia link that did not work. I may be able to find what I need from your Florida link.

[William Anthony]

She sure did. She's incensed that her mother has to work at Walmart but it's okay to make money off of Nicole's slaughter...I swear, you have to laugh. In this instance, I agree with her daddy. He and Marguerite are divorced and she has remarried. What's wrong with working at Walmart? It's an honest way to earn a living. :shrug:

Perhaps, she thought her mother should be able to lay around and drink all day, like it seems Simpson's girlfriend did.

[Its just me]

For the love of money.

Yep.....and in the wide few of things most of it is vanity.

[martin II]

WTH is wrong with you. Try the one I just posted in Post # 18219..It's easy to find it's just above your post I'm quoting. I tried that link and it does work. Surely if you read what I posted it clearly shows the case is in Florida. Us Georgia folks just have a way of keeping up with those Florida folks. :cool:

I am still trying to create some legal basis as to how FG got to be entitled to LBA assets since LBA had no financial obligations to HIM . Based on the decision LBA had no legal right to incorporate in Florida to take advantage of the business the HC contract awarded them.imo

[tv]

Perhaps, she thought her mother should be able to lay around and drink all day, like it seems Simpson's girlfriend did.

Marguerite has a drinking problem? I had no idea. :shrug:

[William Anthony]

In this instance, I agree with her daddy.

I have to agree with him also and certainly about working at Walmart is an honest way to earn a living.

Welcome to Walmart.

[William Anthony]

Marguerite has a drinking problem? I had no idea. :shrug:

No Marguerite was his wife. His girlfriend got hit twice trying to cross the expressway.

[Its just me]

Your original post was to a Georgia link that did not work. I may be able to find what I need from your Florida link.

I know I've just recently posted it twice and both work for me. :shrug:

Here it is again and will show exactly what I posted plus more.

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf

[martin II]

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Would the link below be it. Its the same one I posted in my post # 18219...Just a few posts above and the very same one I told you about "again" just a post or two below that one. LOL Martin it is no more or no less that a Georgiabankruptcy "blog" web site furnishing information on the Florida case. Look at the link really good....do you see "blog".com right after georgiabankruptcy. OH Lord help us all.

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf

thanks
i have that doc.

[Its just me]

Welcome to Walmart.

I "looooove" Walmart. Not necessarily all their over time and part time policies for their employees but I do shop Walmart cause I live in the sticks. :cool: but that's pretty cool.

[Its just me]

thanks
i have that doc.


You are Welcome

[martin II]

TMZ and about a few hundred sites gave the manuscript away free on the net. it was not possible to control this free give away.

Many thought the legal stealing of ojs book for the benefit of FG was wrong
and decided to do as much damage to freds efforts to profit from ojs book as possible. Obviously they had some success as the free copies were given away all over the globe.

Does anyone have the judges final decision of on the case?

[tv]

No Marguerite was his wife. His girlfriend got hit twice trying to cross the expressway.

You're the one that said Arnelle wanted her mother to be able to lie around all day and drink. Maybe I got the wrong impression from what you said but it seemed to me you were alluding to Marguerite having a drinking problem.

[William Anthony]

I know I've just recently posted it twice and both work for me. :shrug:

Here it is again and will show exactly what I posted plus more.

http://www.georgiabankruptcyblog.com/LB%20Trustee%20Motion.pdf

I found it through the Florida link and read it very quickly. Although the wording you provided is in there, what that wording addresses is not why LBA was incorporated but the fact that, after it was incorporated the Simpson letter created a contract between HC and Simpson and there was a lack of separation between LBA and Simpson. The court determined by the law and by the fact of how the LBA operated in relationship to the book that it was for lack of a better term Simpson's right arm. I don't like the word surrogate.

[William Anthony]

You're the one that said Arnelle wanted her mother to be able to lie around all day and drink. Maybe I got the wrong impression from what you said but it seemed to me you were alluding to Marguerite having a drinking problem.

You really do take things I say out of context, as this is what I said

" Originally Posted by William Anthony View Post
Perhaps, she thought her mother should be able to lay around and drink all day, like it seems Simpson's girlfriend did."

You were the one that praised Marguerite's Walmart job. As you see I said should be able to, meaning she was not capable of laying around and drinking all day as was the girlfriend, who was safe, it seems, as long as she did lay around and not get behind the wheel of a car drunk driving and I am thankful she never had a bad accident involving others.

[William Anthony]

I "looooove" Walmart. Not necessarily all their over time and part time policies for their employees but I do shop Walmart cause I live in the sticks. :cool: but that's pretty cool.

I live in the city but I drove my wife to Walmarts so much my friends would call and ask if I was at Wally World.:)

[Its just me]

TMZ and about a few hundred sites gave the manuscript away free on the net. it was not possible to control this free give away.

Many thought the legal stealing of ojs book for the benefit of FG was wrong
and decided to do as much damage to freds efforts to profit from ojs book as possible. Obviously they had some success as the free copies were given away all over the globe.

Does anyone have the judges final decision of on the case?

Just because it was done does not make it legal. The document I provided was pretty clear about that. We each choose what we participate in....legal stuff or non legal stuff and IMHOO these kinds of decisions shows what kind of a person we are and I believe plays a major part in our daily lives. Krama comes to mind.

IMHOO it's impossible to legally steal anything. FG to my knowledge followed the ruling of the courts starting with the civil trial. He had lost a son and the courts found OJ was liable.....sadly OJ couldn't replace his son so the courts awarded Mr. Goldman money and the book OJ wrote telling about killing the person who was killed along with Mr. Goldman's son. As always MHOO

[William Anthony]

This is some sage advice from the link that I said was biased.

"It is difficult to defend such a system of justice, but I do defend it. I am one of the many lawyers who have tried to help Fred and Kim pursue their civil judgment. I am also a resident of Los Angeles. I have lived here since 1991, when I began my studies at the UCLA School of Law. My tenure in Los Angeles spans the years before the murders and the years after, including both trials, criminal and civil. Many members of the legal community, here and elsewhere, have been touched or impacted by this case. There are those who see it is a terrible mark on our legal system. I do not. I respect and accept the many careful determinations and sincere efforts which judges and jurors have devoted to this matter, and, above all else, I adhere to them."

I disagree with the rulings in the socio political production but I must accept, respect and adhere to them.