OJ Was Innocent |
Posted by
pancho
(Moderator)
- Wednesday, June 18 2008, 21:33:22 (CEST) from *** - *** Non-Profit Organizations - Linux - Mozilla Website: Website title: |
I always believed he was. But such is the pervasive racism in White America and, where Blacks are concerned, maybe in Brown, Red and Yellow America too, that in spite of the verdict in the case and the public record, most of America sniggers at the mention of his name in connection with that trial. The outspoken, and more pervasive silent, conviction is that he was let off through some lawyerly tricks, or flaws in our legal system in favor of the defense or, most perniciously, because some Blacks were on the jury and therefore were pre-disposed in his favor, ignoring “mountains” of evidence which clearly established his guilt. No wonder whites self-righteously want to bury the term “nigger” and all it represented and still does; because they want to forge, and have it forgotten, just what they did to Afro-Americans so they can go ON doing as much of the same as they can get away with. We’re supposed to forget, not only the word “nigger”, but all that it implies, most of which survives to still infect America and blight young people’s lives with the residue of its slaving past and Jim Crow brutalities plus decades of neglect which still persist. In the same way they deny and don’t want discussed what they did to Jews…how Christians murdered over six million of them JUST for their religion. No one wants to hear “that crap” any longer. It was with delight, therefore, that I recently read a book by Johnny Cochran, OJ’s lead lawyer, about his life and especially about the Simpson trial. The prosecution case was always weak. It was only because the prosecution’s case is heard first and this one took six months to get through before the defense presented its own, that the public was led to believe the evidence presented by the DA was “solid”. Far from it. In fact the evidence, what there was of it, was deliberately tainted and planted. It’s all there in the trial record, no conjecture, no “liberal” nonsense. The prosecution case depended almost entirely on Mark Fuhrman, a most disreputable and dishonest Nazi-loving cop who just happened to be at the center of every major development, even though he was not officially on the case. Fuhrman found the glove, Fuhrman hopped the fence, without a warrant (“oh THAT silly old thing you liberals love to hide behind”). He didn’t bother to get a warrant because there was NO reason, based on evidence at the scene, that OJ had anything to do with the murders. Just a “hunch”, a hunch he strove to turn into certainty by planting evidence and lying under oath. The list of slipshod detective work, when there was any, is too long to place here. But a few significant points need to be mentioned. 1.The bloody socks, discovered two weeks after the murder, do not appear on a police video taken the night of the murder. And when they do, they are found to contain a smear of OJ,s blood. Two months later some of his blood is found on a fence at Nicole’s residence. And seven-tenths of one drop of blood is found in the Bronco, which was mishandled from the start by police, as was the blood sample OJ willingly gave to the police. As a sidebar; if OJ was guilty he hardly would have cooperated with the police, without his lawyer present and against the advice of his lawyer when he finally appeared. A guilty person will, from the start, try to place as much distance between himself and the police interrogators as he can. On the contrary OJ flew back as soon as he was told and did everything police asked of him without invoking his right to have his lawyer present or even conferring with one ahead of time. 2.This blood sample took a curious path to the crime lab, a few steps down the hall at police headquarters from where it was drawn from OJ. Rather than check the 9 cc vial of blood, into the lab down the hall, as police procedures require, Detective Vanatter, who first had cuffs put on OJ, put it in his pocket and drove 25 miles towards Nicole’s residence. He kept the vial for three hours and when he finally turned it in, 1.5 cc’s of blood were missing. This is all in the trial record. Not only that, but the blood found on the glove, on the socks and on the fence and in the Bronco all contained the preservative EDTA, plus much higher concentrations of DNA than one would normally find, according to several labs who did the testing, after it was determined that the police lab had “slipped up”. Never mind the levels of DNA, but where did the missing blood go? And where did the preservative come from? We don’t carry it around in our bloodstreams. It’s only added to keep blood from coagulating so labs can test it. And, to settle the point, how was it that the glove was still wet with blood seven hours after the murder, when all blood experts testified that blood dries in a couple hours, especially if left outdoors. 3Mark Furman was a disgrace, as a human bean and a police officer. A colleague, who married a Jew, returned from his honeymoon to find anti-semitic slurs painted into his vandalized locker. Suspecting Fuhrman, (who wore Nazi pins under his lapel while on duty, as his superiors testified), the man had his locker dusted for prints. Sure enough, they found Fuhrman’s and he confessed. He also was overheard bragging that he’d had an affair with Nicole Simpson. This and other comments he made to fellow officers alerted some in the DA’s office who warned Marcia Clark and Chris Darden not to put him on the stand. But Fuhrman was THE case. Without his testimony there was nothing. No blood on OJ, none on the white carpets in his home or under his nails…no bloody clothes or knife and no bruises which would have resulted from the struggle prosecutors said took place. And no motive since they’d been divorced for some time and each seeing other people…plus which murdering his children’s mother in such a brutal and lengthy process, while they slept nearby, was completely out of character, for anyone. There was never any reason given for why OJ would have suddenly snapped, that night. Instead we were to infer, from his past behavior with women and Nicole in particular, which no one defends, that he MUST have murdered her, and her friend. 4Cochran was confident that the jury didn’t believe Fuhrman. But, to cinch their doubts, a tape recording was found in which Furhman was heard to use the word “nigger” several times, even though he’d denied ever using such a word, under oath. More than that, he bragged on the tape of the number of times he and other officers had planted evidence and the number of suspects they’d killed, murdered outright, while claiming they escaped or hanged themselves. What is curious about the tape is that Judge Ito refused to allow the jury to hear all of it. Only two instances where Fuhrman can be heard using “nigger” were allowed into evidence. But they were enough. This was all the jury was allowed to hear, after which they placed no confidence in anything else the man swore to. But there was more on the tape that would doom the prosecutions case even more. 5What really damned Fuhrman and turned even the prosecution against him, where once he had been their pet, was the day he was called back to the stand to be asked only one question. At this point one marvels at the self-control of Cochran who all his life, as a Black and a lawyer defending victims of police brutality and cover-ups, showed when he assigned F. Lee Bailey to examine Fuhrman. Cochran writes how with every fiber of his being he wished to be the one to finally nail one of the many disreputable policemen who’d frustrated his every attempt to get justice for clients by lying on the witness stand. But he thought it would be more effective if a white lawyer took Fuhrman apart. The day Fuhrman slinked back to the stand, he knew. Chris Darden, one of the two lead prosecutors wouldn’t even enter the courtroom and Marcia Clark, the lead prosecutor, kept her head bowed and never made eye-contact with the disgraced officer, who’d been the darling of LA for months. When Fuhrman took the stand, Bailey asked him only one question and I believe Fuhrman and the prosecutors knew what it would be. I think Judge Ito, to spare the Los Angeles police department and the DA’s office any further embarrassment had decided in private that this question could be put to Fuhrman, and I think Fuhrman was warned and prepared, by the DA, with the only answer he could give. Fuhrman had been told ahead of time to discourage him from the temptation of lying again…and if he had, I believe Judge Ito would have allowed the tape into evidence which not only would have damned Fuhrman and trashed the prosecution which, by then, the prosecutors themselves knew was totally destroyed…but Ito didn’t want testimony that would go on to impeach Fuhrman, not because he cared for Fuhrman, quite the opposite, but because this would smear the rest of the police department, casting doubt, as it well should have and did, on so many other cases were the public was left with only a policeman’s sworn testimony as evidence. Fuhrman was warned to fall on his sword, by taking the Fifth Amendment, rather than spin more lies, with the possible inducement that no charges of perjury would be brought against him and he could finally retire from the police department, as he’d tried to do years earlier, pleading “medical infirmity”, which was denied him but was probably the most honest statement he ever made. Truly, this police officer was unfit for duty. That single question, which went to the core of the supposedly air-tight case against OJ was: have you ever planted evidence? As he knew he would, Fuhrman hid behind the Fifth Amendment’s right against self-incrimination…as do all guilty people who don’t wish to actually come out and say “I did it”. That was all. It was that was needed and Fuhrman left the courtroom and the police force to settle somewhere in the company of fellow Nazis who believe with all their hearts that they are protecting America from the stupid rule of law which gives equality and dignity to all, but especially those people. There’s more, much more that points to OJ’s innocence, but it’s not important and easily available to anyone who wants to check. The police had decided OJ was the one from the first minute they knew who was murdered. A large segment of the LA police force also see themselves as defenders of white America who especially seek to bring down Blacks and others, who they feel have gotten above their station. Cochran himself, when he was made number three in the DA’s office, serving for three years specifically to root out police misconduct, was stopped by police officers, with his two young children in the back seat of his Rolls Royce. Ordered out of the car at gunpoint, in broad daylight, Cochran knew what could easily happen and offered no resistance. One police officer, poking his head in the back seat where Cochran’s children sat crying, pointed his gun in their faces while he rummaged through Cochran’s wallet, which he’d been forced to leave on the front seat. When the wallet flipped open, revealing a gold badge with Cochran’s name and the number “3”, indicating his rank, the officer nearly fainted. Cochran called their supervisor to the spot and filed a formal complaint. The police officers had pulled him over just because he was a Black man driving an expensive car. That alone angered them and even though he’d broken no law, they would harass another “uppity nigger” just to let him know that even a Rolls didn’t change the fact that you ARE a nigger and always will be one! Even if no one is supposed to say the word any longer. But how else was Cochran treated? He certainly wasn’t treated as a citizen. What excuse, in their hearts and in the hearts of the majority of white Americans, could justify wuch treatment? Would “African” justify it? “Kneeegrow”? How about , “Colored”….Black? No. None of them satisfies, none of them hits the nail on the head, none of them describes exactly the kind of person, the category of American the police, among others, can still treat in such a manner…nothing will do but Nigger! Which was never the Africans name for himself, but branded into his soul and that of his children by white America. And they want it to STAY there as it provides the impetus, the self-righteous fervor of Mark Fuhrmans everywhere who keep their engines of hatred fully stoked…even if the door now has to be shut…but the fire still burns the more so because it’s hidden from view, not mentioned, not “cool”. It’s sad, to say the least, to think how OJ’s life was ruined, like those of countless Black Americans, by racism. The majority of the country, if not the world, believes he was guilty and only slick lawyering got him off…and because he had enough money. Which just shows you what Blacks will do once they get money; buy their way out of crimes….and allowing Blacks to serve on juries is the other, unstated “error” which good solid white folk have allowed due to “liberal” complaints…because with an all-white jury they believe OJ would have gone to prison for the rest of his life. He lost his wealth, reputation, children, who lost their mother and must live with the shame white America heaped on an innocent man, their father. No one says he was a saint, or even a very nice person…but that doesn’t make a person a murderer. Now he’s fallen so low as to be hanging around with the kinds of dregs who use him and he uses, who’ve teamed up to frame him, along with his own carelessness…so maybe now white America can FINALLY see this beautiful, arrogant, supremely talented athlete in jail…where they believe to this day he always belonged. One last comment. In discussing the commonly held notion that there are too many “loopholes” in the form of Constitutional guarantees of due process and that our society would be vastly improved if we streamlined the legal justice system to take out all those who are “clearly” guilty…Cochran says that while you and I can be certain we will never commit serious crimes, we can’t be sure we will never be CHARGED with serious crimes…and that if we are, we’ll appreciate, maybe too late, just why our Founders wrote them into our Constitution. It bears keeping in mind. --------------------- |
The full topic:
|
*** |