Marcia Clark confirmed the children -- Justin and Sydney Simpson -- were interviewed by officers upon their arrival at police headquarters
| "Eight-year-old Sydney Simpson was being held at the police station after the bodies had been discovered. She asked to make a phone call and dialed her home number. The answering machine picked up and Sydney left a message: "Mommy, please call me back. I want to know what happened last night. Why did we have to go to the police station? Please answer Mommy. Please answer, Mommy. Please answer, Mommy. Please answer. Bye." |
| Several weeks after the murders, I finally received a report I'd been requesting from Officer Joan Vasquez. She'd been assigned to escort the Simpson children out back through the gargae, never allowing them close to the crime scene.
Officer Vasquez reported that as the children sat in back of the cruiser, Sydney whimpered, "Where's my mommy?...I'm just tired and I want mommy." Sydney and Justin stayed at the West L.A. station for almost five hopurs! Officer Vasquez, clearly a kind soul, tried to distract them... Sydney knew something was terribly wrong. At one point, she turned to her brother and said, "Justin, you know something happened to Mommy, or she would have come for us by now." "Why didn't Dad just come for us? Justin asked her. |
| Here Clark tells us a great deal more than she intended. We know the name of the officer who was the source for the other reports, and that there was a extremely detailed writen report on what the children said. We know how detailed, because is quoting statements made by the children three to eight hours PRIOR to her entering the case. Effectively, Marcia Clark has affirmed the accuracy of prior reports quoting the children. |
- Her father, O.J. Simpson -- is in Chicago.
- Her mother was had been on the phone, crying and fighting with her best friend -- a designation which includes Cora and Faye.
- She had heard a voice outside say, "Hey Hey Hey" in association having been awakened by her mother's scream.
Eight-year-old Sydney Simpson was being held at the police station after the bodies had been discovered. She asked to make a phone call and dialed her home number. The answering machine picked up and Sydney left a message: "Mommy, please call me back. I want to know what happened last night. Why did we have to go to the police station? Please answer Mommy. Please answer, Mommy. Please answer, Mommy. Please answer. Bye."
| They found all of the basic evidence at Bundy when they surveyed the scene.
They found the blood drops, they found the shoe prints, of course the victim's bodies, blood on the back gate, which they saw and wrote in their notes, and they found one glove.
And they found all this evidence and then they -- and the knit cap, too, by the way. They found all this evidence while Mark Fuhrman is sleeping. Fuhrman is sleeping when all the evidence in the case is found at Bundy. Now, Mr. Baker told you earlier today, Mark Fuhrman found all the evidence in the case. That's just false. What trial has he been attending? Mark Fuhrman didn't find any of the evidence in this case except the glove at Rockingham. He found nothing at Bundy. Nothing. |
| Based on Daniel Petrocelli's assertion to the Criminal Trial Jury, it follows that -- from this point on -- nothing of incriminating value can be associated with the Bundy location. Therefore, those readers who subscribe to the validity of the civil case are invited to disregard all evidence not specifically contained in the report submitted by Officer Riske. |
| Petrocelli accurately imforms the jury of those things iobserved by the patrolmen who discovered the bodies. However, his technique is called a "lawyer's lie". "THE LAWYER's LIE" is a technique for misrepresenting facts, while stating them accurately. It is imployed by Attorneys during their jury presentations, and by "expert witnesses" called to advocate a position. Most recently, the FBI> has been called to task for "slanting" their testimony to favor the prosecution -- "slanting" is milder form of "lawyer's lie". |
| What Daniel Petrocelli wanted the jury to forget: The patrolman were not charged with detecting evidence. Their job was to enter and secure a murder location. As part of that responsibility, they were obligated to note, and avoid disturbing, any evidence in their line of travel. Their function was to identify a line of travel which would be the least distructive to possible evidence. They DID NOT have the responsibility of noting ALL evidence. They certainly had no responsibility -- nor did they attempt to, seek out evidence which was not in the areas they traversed. Daniel Petrocelli is asking the jury to apply the same logic which Clark applied -- if it wasn't seen, it wasn't there. |
| Two years ago (1995) I posed a question on the internet which created a six month long firestorm of discussion across all the OJ FORUMS & NEWSGROUPS. A simple question: "Where was the Bronco?" Given the factual evidence, this question has become an intergral part of my pages and discussions. I've yet to receive an answer which does not require accepting that Simpson would intentionally and consistantly incriminate himself. As you read these pages, you will come to realize, neither prosecution, nor plaintiff, could establish the presence of the Bronco at Rockingham during Arnelle's absence. |
| The Bronco witnesses -- Kaelin, Cale, Park -- have one element in common, they never saw the Bronco. Most important, they failed to see it at all those times when we know exactly where OJ Simpson was. Additionally, Park tells us that Arnelle's SAAB was in the driveway -- behind the Bentley. |
| I'll invoke Daniel Petrocelli's rhetorical question -- Is everyone a lair, except Simpson? With regard to the Bronco, and Arnelle's SAAB, to believe these witnesses, you must also believe Simpson DID NOT have access to the Bronco. Otherwise, you must argue that Simpson intentionally incriminates himself, by claiming the bronco was there when the evidence says it was being used by Arnelle. |
| LAWYER'S LIE: Phrase things so jury bias can displace consideration of the facts. Phrase the presentation so the jury believes the evidence supports the opposite of what logic and consistancy demand. |
| It did not seem logical to me that Fuhrman would try to frame OJ Simpson....Did Fuhrman even have the OPPORTUNITY to move evidence? I had asked the LAPD for a list of all the officers who'd arrived at Bundy BEFORE Mark. There were sixteen of them. Only four had gotten beyond the perimeter to see the evidence near the bodies. Officer Robert Riske, first officer on the scene. Lieutenant Frank Spangler, one of the highest officers supervising the scene. Sergeant David Rossi, in charge of the patrol offocers. And Detective Ron Phillips, Fuhrman's supervisor who arrived at precisely the same time Mark did. |
| What Marcia Clark excludes from her narative, but which appears in the testimony: Only Officer Riske and his partner entered into the cage area where the bodies, glove, envelope, pager and other evidence were located. The only other people to enter the cage area were the paramedics, at 12:45, who determined both Nicole and Ron were dead. Futhermore, neither of these officers attempted to make any detailed examination of the area. In addition, Clark specifically excludes -- and excluded from testimony -- the paramedic who declared the victim's dead. |
| FUHRMAN: "Oh, not -- I mean, that is probably the least that he did. Brad Roberts found as much crucial evidence that morning as I did, and I think we have to really understand this. He and I both saw the bloody fingerprint on the gate." | |
| NOTE: At the Criminal Trial, neither Riske, nor Fuhrman, mentioned the existance of Detective Brad Roberts on this walk through. It would seem that Fuhrman and Roberts might have made a seperate walk through. | |
| JOHN KELLY, Attorney for Nicole Brown's Estate {Larry King Live, 10 February 1997}: "I think it had to be the shoe photos. No doubt about it. I mean, that was more important than fingerprints at that point. Those were the shoe prints there. And I came up with 30 photos of him in the shoes right at the end of the trial." | |
| Kelly later informed a caller that the shoe photos "only became available on December 30, 1996, when we went into the last couple weeks of the trial. They had never even been developed before that." NOTE just how specific the wording is. The film hadn't been developed. There is an exposed roll of 35mm film in a canister which had yet to be developed -- yet the specific shoe details are known. | |
| Kelly goes on to relate how he got a call from Buffalo, New York, Attorney Michael O'Connor, who "had heard rumors that there were these additional photos that had been taken the same day as the Skull photo..." Kelly is also informed, by David Lynch, that Flammer, "He's got a whole roll of film showing Simpson in these shoes." Finally Kelly informs the viewers, "I talked to Flammer (ph) that same day, he developed the negatives, there were 30 photos." | |
| Isn't it interesting? The roll has yet to be developed -- Kelly was quite specific, he arrived " that same day, {Flammer} developed the negatives," -- yet the specific contents of the film were known. |
| Fuhrman would later claim to have found a bloody fingerprint on the bacxk gate at Bundy, as well as an empty Swiss army knife box on the edge of the tub in O. J. Simpson's master bedroom. It's worth noting here that during our tour of Rockingham, he did not once mention either the print or knife box to me. (Later we found a line concerning the print in his notes, but by the time those reached my desk, the Bundy scene had long since been washed down.) |
When dealing with self-serving statements from lawyers, one must expect them to invoke the LAWYER'S LIE.
Consider, if the fingerprint is on the gate lock -- four feet plus over ground level -- and it is washed away... Why was blood still on the lower portion of the gate THREE WEEKS LATER? As any rational person knows, any water which had washed away blood from the upper portion of the gate would, most certainly, have been deposited on the lower portion. Thereafter, it would have been washed away along with any blood which had been on the lower section. |
| CLARK (Larry King Live, 13 may 1997):
There was a fingerprint -- a bloody fingerprint on the gate. Well, I don't know {what happened to it}. Because, you know, by the time I saw the notes it was weeks down the line, weeks and weeks down the line. That fingerprint was way gone. That fingerprint was probably gone the day after he saw it, because those things don't stick around with moisture and dew in the air and stuff like that. But he didn't tell Lange about it. He just handed over his notes. They didn't read the notes. |
This is a significant statement on two level.
|
| How important does Clark believe the DNA evidence is? The testimony at both the Criminal Trial, and from the plaintiff witness at the Civil Trial, establish the Bundy blood associated with Simpson contained EDTA. So what does Clark suggest? |
| CLARK (Larry King Live, 13 may 1997): When you look at it -- even it you strip away the DNA, and say, OK, that was contested, forget about it. We are left with enough to convict him ten times over. |
| If you follow her suggestion, her assertion, what is left are the contents of these pages -- and the Rockingham Glove discovered by Detective Mark Fuhrman. |
Fuhrman & Roberts walk-through complete -- Roberts goes out front to join Phillips.
| 2:58 A.M. notation in Administrative Log kept at Detective Headquarters downtown, "O.J Simpson" was the "suspect" ia a "double homicide at 875 South Bundy." |
Detectives from Robbery Homicide are contacted.
Senior Detective Phillip Vannatter {left} gets his call. Vannatter's partner, Tom Frederick Lange {right} is also contacted.
| Shortly before 3:00 AM, Los Angeles Police Department homicide detectives Tom Lange and Phil Vannatter are awakened at their homes, one call right after the other, from their supervisor, Lieutenant John Rogers. |
| Knowledge, evaded at the trial, is also revealed in the book: "During the brief conversations, Rogers tells both detectives that one of the victims might be the wife of football legend O.J. Simpson." |
[about 3:00 AM] Ofc. Riske sees Rokahr in back alley.
Fuhrman says Rokahr arrived at 3:25 {Mar 13th testimony}.
Rokahr begins to take overall photographs Location shots.
15 FUHRMAN: ... Once I was no longer part of the primary
16 investigative team, I was at the direction of Vannatter and
17 Lange; and they pretty much dictated the investigative path
18 we were going to take. And that's why I gave them my notes
19 and just followed their direction for the remainder of the
20 time.
Did Vannatter later instruct Fuhrman -- to investigate Bronco? -- to investigate noise?
Did Vannatter order Fuhrman to escort Rokahr?
What happened at Rockingham?
| FUHRMAN: Well, you know, I think the first thing they should do is read the notes. That's standard operating procedure when you're given notes to a crime scene is read them. Even, you know, I go through their testimony, and I read how -- you know, your initial walk-through with another detective that has already been there, so you don't step on any evidence, so you know the evidence that has already been found. That's exactly what my notes were for. I wrote those notes to prioritize observations and go back and view those items and isolate them and recover them. |
grip, Louis Vitton bag and suit.
He leaves the golfbag with the driver, to be delivered to the golf course later that morning.
** Only Nicole's Blood is on the walkway.
=== Blood on rear gate ===
13 VANNATTER: Well, my concern was, again, we were within five
14 minutes of a very, very brutal murder scene. I knew the
15 scene was connected with Mr. Simpson because it was -- his
16 ex-wife and children were there.
{4:30-5:00} Sukru Boztepe leaves West LA Police Station.
| During the trial, Cochran failed to produce the sequence number for the photograph of Fuhrman lifting the bushes. We made direct request to Simpson and Neufeld for this data -- they decllined. For these reasons, it is our belief sequence number would clear Fuhrman of having been inside the enclosure prior to 5:00 AM. Simpson's people were informed of this conclusion and have accepted it as accurate. |
| FUHRMAN: Well, I think it's a feral ground for conspiracy. You're living in a city that's conspiracy ridden. You know, by saying that I did this to stay in the case -- I mean, the case was already taken from me. I was planing to go to breakfast with Ron Phillips and Brad Roberts when we were relieved. I didn't plan to go to Rockingham. I didn't suggest it. It was told to me go find directions or do you know how to get there. I wouldn't and actually had to asked. |
