First, I'm not sure of your age but the OJ Simpson trial was broadcast on live TV, CNN. So the court room was my living room.
Second, It's a fact ( according to his own testimony) that Det Vanatter had control of OJ's blood, he took a vial of this blood to OJ's house in an unsealed envelope. Some of the blood went missing. The sample of OJ's blood collected at the scene was tested to see who's blood it was. When they tested the blood they confirmed it was OJ's but they also found it contained ETDA in it. This is a preservative added to blood in the vial. There is only one place it could have come from and that's the blood the police had in their possession.
Third, I am only speaking of the evidence that came out on trial. What did come out was Mark Fuhrman's tapes and his friend's testimony on Fuhrman's racist beliefs. Probably some of the most racist language you'll hear. He talks about doing all sorts of things to N****s. He was later convicted for perjury for lying under oath at the OJ trial.
In his own testimony Fuhrman was asked if he had ever planted evidence on a suspect. He plead the 5th because he did not want to incriminate him self.
As far as being a huge conspiracy and the whole LA police department knowing that's not how things work. Why would it be a huge setup? A cop has your blood, he leaves a few drops at a location and later discovers it. The blood he leaves has a preservative in it that could not be natural. It could be 1 or 2 cops, it would never 100's of ppl.
If you think police don't plant evidence on ppl (especially blacks) in the US then you are much too naive and inexperienced in life to have this conversation. The world is a big place, not every city is like the Kits neighborhood in Vancouver. Back then it was common for police to plant a bit of evidence on a black man in the US.
If the police thought OJ was guilty they wouldn't mind going the extra mile to close the deal.
1) I am well aware that the trial was shown on television, didn’t miss a day of it. I have also read many of the books that were published about the investigation, the trial and the aftermath.
2) Because of 1), I am well aware of how the blood evidence was presented in court. Cross contamination in the lab ring any bells?
3) Because of 1), I am well aware of the whole Mark Fuhrman fiasco – he should just have said he’d used the N-word to begin with and that would have been the end of it. Referring to an ethnicity/race with a slur does not automatically mean you’d set them up to take the fall for a double murder.
4) The set up would have had to go on long after any alleged planting of blood evidence with more people in the loop. Impossible for that many people to keep it under wraps this long.
5) You have not presented any evidence, even a smidge, that any of the people investigating this crime would have a reason to set up OJ Simpson. They were well aware of whose home they were at….did they stand around at the crime scene and formulate this great plan “Ohhhh, it’s OJ Simpson’s ex-wife, let’s set him up” then drive over to his home, scale the fence and plant evidence? Yeah, see how ridiculous and stupid that sounds? Please…….
6) OJ Simpson was not just ‘any’ black man…….there’s a huge risk in trying to set up someone as well known as him….a set up that could have fallen apart at any point during the investigation and trial…….which begs the question…….once again……what could possibly be the reason a bunch of cops would have to set up OJ Simpson? You’re the one who said they did so what was the motive?
Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 20 November 2012 - 10:42 PM.