Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballMan
I would have a reasonable doubt on Furhman's evidence but not on the whole case.
You would still need to show that it's possible that Furhman was able to have others assist him .
If he was the only person working on the case i would agree with a not guilty verdict by reasonable doubt.
Furhman would have had me thinking of whether his evidence was legit but I would still have to weighbitcagainst everything else.
Two things could both be true at the same time.
OJ was a murderer and Furhman was racist.
It could still be possible
|
You do know that Philip Vannatter took the blood from the crime scene to OJ's house, rather than "booking" it into evidence, right? He claimed that he wanted to book all the evidence together at the same time, which not only has nothing to do with proper procedure…but then he didn't actually book the evidence for a further
three days. More than enough time for him and Fuhrman (and whomever else) to work their "investigative magic".
Indeed, the whole search of OJ's house was bogus. Fuhrman and co. busted down the gate when OJ didn't answer (for the excellent reason that he was on the plane to Chicago at the time) and did all their planting, er, "searching" without a warrant. They justified this by saying they feared for OJ‘s safety, which is a laugh. As if the spouse isn't automatically the prime suspect. As if Fuhrman hadn't personally responded to a domestic violence call between OJ and Nicole a few years before.
Honestly, a better judge than Ito would have tossed all the "evidence" from OJ's house pre-trial. And then dismissed the charges before jeopardy had attached, so the DA could build a real case.
The LAPD, ladies and gents! Your tax dollars at work! (Mine literally, as I have mentioned.)