This page grows out of an e-mail exchange I had with Chris Springer, author of If O.J. Didn't... and Solving the Simpson Murder Mystery. Charlie, who did research for his last book and posted regularly on the Iago Discussion Board, put us in touch. His idea was to do something simple to get around the tendency of most people to balk at reading thick books like ours. The simplest thing I could think of was to use animations that could be studied and independently checked for accuracy.
Key elements of the case used against O.J. Simpson can be set in motion and thereby tested against the physical limitations of time and space and the logical consequences of any scenario you can imagine. To get the most out of the animations you should read the relevant text, check everything you don't think is correct against the transcripts and play with the buttons where available to pose questions and answer them. You will find that some questions that have been subject to debate can be answered definitively just by checking the clock and noting how fast or slow the symbols representing people would have to move to "cheat the clock." For more details on specific items of controversy see High Points. If a video clip does not start automatically in 60 seconds, hit F5.
Size and Stride Parked Cars Blood Drops & Blood Trails Over the Wall Rockingham Hookup
Dog Walkers 1989 Incident Marcia's Story Fuhrman's Story Two Witnesses Kato's Walk
Police Squad! (1982 TV series) opening sequence features a Lincoln and a Frank D. The Smoking Gun 2
Jack the Ripper from chapter 1 of The Smoking Gun: Mark Fuhrman's Movie Guide to Assassination
Jack the Ripper '88 clip, 1st victim — throat wound, cap, brown leather gloves, pennies, "Murder in..."
Jack the Ripper '88 clip, 2nd victim — photograph, pointing finger, "...carefully arranged" items.
were designed as analytical tools for sifting through conflicting testimony and getting a clear picture of who and what was where at a given time and what was possible, probable and certain in those circumstances. They are taken from drawings of the Bundy and Rockingham crime scenes, videos, photos, depositions, criminal and civil trial testimony, books and interviews of the people involved.
This source data includes the rare combination of Size and Stride shoe impressions shared by O.J.Simpson and Mark Fuhrman as they walked including the straight ahead orientation of their toes as their feet impacted the ground. These are, in combination, extremely rare characteristics of a pigeon-toed man 6' tall or taller. O.J. is 6' 2", Fuhrman is 6' 3'. Both are pigeon-toed. Both wear size-12 shoes. This particular animation is meant only to show that the shoeprints made by O.J. and Fuhrman wearing the same shoes and walking normally are interchangeable. This is true of no other principle in the case. Wherever possible and pertinent in other animations, time (usually represented by a clock), space, objects, angles and motion are drawn to scale.
None of the critical drawings in the O.J. criminal or civil trials were correctly configured or proportioned, thus giving a false impression of what was possible in all scenarios of O.J.'s guilt. You can see why this matters in Parked Cars with the Bronco’s 2-degree angle. Keep in mind that these are not the technical drawings used to do the engineering studies (any competent engineer can do them). The animation is simply a visual representation of the events reverse engineered to determine whether or not the positions of the vehicles as they were photographed on the morning of June 13 match the testimony of Kato and O.J., the people who said they last drove them or rode in them on June 12. The position in which Kato's Nissan and O.J.'s Bentley and Bronco were found on June 13 is a good indicator of how they got there.
Kato and O.J. both liked to park in the same spot on Ashford where O.J. claimed his Bronco was parked before he parked it on Rockingham. The fact that Kato parked his Nissan where the police found it therefore lends credence to the contention that the Bronco on Rockingham began its final journey on the 12th from the opposite side of the driveway on Ashford where it was parked when Kato got home. The only question is whether O.J. later that night turned left to murder two people on Bundy and return from there heading north to park it the way the prosecution claimed he did, or whether he turned right from the driveway when he said he did to park it on Rockingham.
The width of the driveway, the angle of the driveway to the street and the exact position of the Bronco tell you that it got there from the driveway. Duplicating that precise parking position from driving north on Rockingham is virtually impossible without marking it first and getting outside help in hitting the marks. It requires a precise distance from the curb for the front and rear tire and a theoretical intersection point and a thorough understanding of why a one degree deviation either way would be inconsistent with a story about driving the Bronco from the driveway. The only way to pull into that spot at that angle without turning the steering wheel a precise number of degrees right then left at variable points in space and time (speed) is to drive all the way in along that 2-degree angle starting 100 yards away starting at a precise distance from the curb.
Draftsmen, engineers and professional scale model makers use theoretical intersections to plot angles and draw curves from point to point. A 2-degree angle combined with the distance from the curb corner and the Bronco wheel base are exactly what you get when you drive the Bronco from the driveway around the acute angle to the street -- no complex calculations and coordinated maneuvers involved. . This turn creates a very small zone of compatibility with O.J.'s story. Getting the Bronco in that zone would be like landing an airplane on the deck of aircraft carrier, a task that requires expert knowledge and consummate skill. Additionally, the driver would have to park it with the intention of telling the driveway story to explain how it got there. Nobody in the O.J. case had the time or expertise to set the Bronco up just that way or to know why it matters. O.J. still doesn’t know.
Tiny drops of blood in the overhead views of Blood Drops and Blood Trails are shown thousands of times larger than they were to make their location easy for you to see. Their actual size is consistent with O.J. bleeding from a small cut and not consistent with the large blood drops identified as O.J.'s on Bundy. The FBI did not test the Bundy blood droops identified as O.J.'s for the blood preservative EDTA used to store blood taken directly from O.J. body after the murders and stored in the LAPD lab's purple-top test tubes. The absence of EDTA in the Rockingham blood drops (as opposed to the numerous blood drops that were not collected on the Rockingham driveway) are therefore exculpatory. Dennis Fung photographed the blood drop behind the Bentley and the one near the curb behind the Bronco but did not collect them. http://www.wagnerandson.com/oj/b_drops.htm
These blood drops are consistent with everything O.J. said he did after Allan Park pulled his limo inside of the gate. 
Marcia Clark showed a photo of a driveway blood drop near the edge of the lawn that gives a dramatic first impression of of blood dripping from O.J.'s left hand as he went into his front door. However, it was out of place for either a scenario of O.J. coming from the Bronco or from behind the garage. Marcia used it instead when questioning Allan Park ostensibly as a point of reference for where Park said he saw O.J. pick up the travel bag that she claimed was missing. The Blood Trails animation cannot show this blood drop because it was not collected for evidence (no DNA or EDTA information) and it did not follow any path of travel that matches any blood trail scenario. It was just there without a splatter or direction pattern.
Paths of travel reflect the tendency of everyone to move as closely as possible in straight lines from point to point veering only to avoid obstacles or approach distractions. You can therefore see why it is most likely that O.J. left two of the blood drops straddling the Rockingham gate line when he left the gate to walk the dog a little after 10:00 p.m. and he left the third drop after the limo entered the Ashford gates. It is impossible to make that triangular three-drop grouping of blood drops in one pass as two of them have to connect in a straight line.
The blood drop nearest the Bentley could have been deposited coming or going between the Bronco and the house depending on the exact location of the Bentley and the limo. These vehicle locations could be off in the animations by eight inches for the Bentley and two feet for the limo. There are enough photos of the Bronco, the street and the driveway to plot its distance from the theoretical intersection to within two inches and from the curb to the tires to within a half inch. (See also Fact-Fiction-Theory- #3 Blood Trails).
The clock gives you a close approximation of the time intervals pegged to recorded times on phone records where specific events took place. Movement in space requires synchronization of time. You can therefore judge where people have to be relative to each other when one or more of them are in motion allowing for all variations of pace just by seeing how fast they would have to move for their testimony to add up. The clock allows you to work backward from the recorded time that Park first saw Kato to the time Kato must have left his bungalow and forward to the time it took Kato to reach the garage. Dan Petrocelli walked off the distance between Kato's bungalow and the spot on the north path where Park first saw Kato and timed it. The time he got (30 seconds) is identical to the time shown in the Kato's Walk animation.
Kato Kaelin's testimony about when he saw Allan Park and O.J. Simpson adds up. Furthermore, it's consistent from the grand jury to the
civil trial. Allan Park's testimony shifts a bit each time to be more consistent with Marcia Clark's interpretation of what he saw and when he saw it. His first grand jury statement on June 21 of seeing O.J. “just seconds” after he saw Kato adds up because it could mean anywhere between two and fifty nine seconds. Fifteen or twenty seconds agrees with O.J.'s and Kato's testimony of when they first saw Park. This liberal interpretation of "seconds" is compatible with Park perceiving an extremely short amount of elapsed time relative to the half hour he waited to see any sign of life on the estate It also agrees with Park's testimony in the criminal trial about his phone conversation with Dale St. John except that Marcia inserted something into his grand jury testimony that guided his recall to a strict impression of elapsed seconds relative to something that meant nothing to him on June 12.
In Kato's Walk you'll see what adding "just seconds" does to the interval between Park's first sighting of Kato and when he first saw O.J. A fifteen or twenty seconds interval confirms O.J.'s story of coming from the house, dropping off some bags and going right back in. Two or three seconds creates a conflict between the testimony of Park and Kato -- two witnesses to the same event. View Kato's Walk and Two Witness alternately to see how they compare in different views.
If, on the other hand, Park's last view of Kato before he saw O.J. was when Kato neared the far corner of the garage, the interval between sightings could have been as little as three or four seconds. It would also explain how he could judge the height and weight difference between Kato and O.J. while he was still outside the gate. He would have seen both of them in approximately the same place and simply not recalled seeing Kato because his only importance to Park at the time was establishing the fact that someone was home. That fact was established when Park first saw him on the north path.
The two cars in Kato's Walk driving up and down Rockingham are shown only to indicate traffic. Rockingham, like Bundy, was a major thoroughfare so some Rockingham traffic was normal. Any proposed scenario of what happened on the night of June 12, 1994 must take this fact into account.
Two Witnesses shows what the scene looked like from Allan Park's memory and point of view outside of the gate as well as from Kato's memory and point of view (without the playhouse where Kato's picture appears in the animation). You will see that Park's view was obscured by the bars of the gates but Kato's was not. If Park saw O.J. "almost immediately" after he saw Kato on the north path, it would have been impossible for Kato not to have seen O.J. before Park saw either of them. In each of Park's appearance on the witness stand, O.J. appears out of nowhere on his walkway leading to his front door and walks inside without stopping to open the door. He could have done that only if the door was open. When Kato walked past the door on his way to the south path it was closed. An open door agrees with O.J.'s story of coming out of that door to drop off some bags.
By the same token, much has been made of Park not seeing O.J. come out of the house as O.J. claims he did although Park did not recall seeing Kato go to the south path, either. Yet, his own testimony confirms that he could not have seen Kato standing in the same place before he opened the gates. He said that after he saw O.J. enter the house he got out of the limo and talked to O.J. in his house on the speaker phone. He got back into the vehicle and waited for 30 seconds or more for the gates to open. O.J. did not buzz him in; Kato did. Park only recalls Kato standing where he first saw him stop and wave at him before he opened the gates. That means he did not see where Kato came from although he had a straight ahead view of Kato coming toward him. And that means he was either in no position to see Kato or in no frame of mind to recall seeing him although he testified that he did.
Adding the ivy covered gate posts and wall to the animation clearly demonstrates how Park's testimony was influenced by what he was expected to say on the witness stand about seeing O.J. enter his house from the south path behind the garage. In the preliminary hearing he said that the couldn't see past the bend in the driveway cattycorner to the front edged of the garage because the area was too dark. In fact, his view of that area was blocked by the right gate post and the wall. However, anyone walking toward him from there would have been visible. If he could see the edge of the garage, he could see the width of a man's body in front of it all the way to the fence.
What Park didn't hear while he was looking for O.J. is as telling as what he saw and didn't see, as demonstrated by Donald Freed. His "clock" sound study prompted me to do my "clock" motion study. Neither the prosecution nor the defense did either.
Marcia played up the darkness in Park's testimony to explain why he didn't see O.J. until he was on the lit walkway to the front door to his house. The amount of light, which came mostly from the lamps on the entrance to the main door, was therefore not the issue. It was Park's reliability as a witness to things unrelated to his reason for being at the estate -- to take O.J. to the airport. The fact that he was looking at the breakfast nook directly between the edge of the garage and the walkway means that he could not have missed seeing O.J. before he saw Kato any more than Kato could have if O.J. had come from that direction. Even if Park was momentarily distracted, as he said he was before he saw Kato, he would have seen O.J. first.
http://walraven.org/simpson/mar28.html
Q: And as you spoke to Dale St. John on the telephone, were you looking at the driveway area?
A: Most of the time, yeah. I might have looked at the dashboard or something here or there.
The length of Kato's hair in Two Witnesses reflects the way he wore it on the night of the murders. It is also an illustration of how easily Allan Park's memory of details he thought he witnessed on June 12, 1994 were influenced by what he saw or heard later. He testified in the preliminary hearing that Kato had had medium length hair. When he testified in the criminal trial on March 28, 1995 he said that the "white male" he saw on June 12 had shoulder-length hair. That's how Kato wore his hair in March, 1995.
You should also note that Park could not have gauged the 4" difference in O.J.'s height relative to Kato's from where they were when he first saw them nearly 15' apart. From Park's perspective, Kato, who was closest to him, would have appeared to be much taller than O.J. Only when Park, Kato and O.J. were in about the same place on the intersection of the driveway and the walkway separated by a few seconds or when they were all inside the estate standing next to each other on the driveway could Park have made a reasonable estimate of how tall they were. His testimony on this crucial point is therefore concrete evidence that he retrofitted at least some of what he said he saw when he said he saw it to conform to what he learned after the events he testified to.
The O.J. murder trial jury picked up on this flaw in Park's memory when they asked for a portion of his testimony to be read back to them. He said that he saw two cars on O.J.'s driveway. The only car he could have seen while he as at Rockingham was the Bentley. Arnelle didn't return in her SAAB until long after he had departed. Park could have seen the Bentley and the SAAB on the driveway only in the photos that Marcia Clark showed him in her office several days later.
With Assistant D.A. Marcia Clark's questioning of Allan Park you get a practical lesson in why it is objectionable for attorneys to 
ask witnesses leading questions. In the grand jury Park repeats "seconds" when she asks him for the second time when he saw O.J. relative to when he saw Kato. This time Marcia Clark immediately suggests, "Almost simultaneous?" Park then changes the interval from "seconds" to, "Almost, if not simultaneously" and repeats it in the criminal trial. The "almost simultaneous" sighting that Marcia injected into Park's testimony leaves no way to fit in the sequence of events he described to the grand jury, in the preliminary hearing and in the criminal trial.
http://walraven.org/simpson/gj_pt2.html
A. AT THAT POINT, I SAW SOMEBODY. I SAW TWO PEOPLE
Q. TELL US, WHO DID YOU SEE FIRST?
A. FIRST, I SAW THE WHITE MALE.
Q. YOU SAW A MALE WHITE?
A. YES.
Q. WHERE WAS HE?
A. HE CAME FROM THE BACK YARD AREA, FROM THIS AREA UP TO THE DRIVEWAY
.
....... Q. CAN YOU DESCRIBE HIM?
A. BLOND HAIR, SHOULDER-LENGTH HAIR, 5-10, 160 POUNDS, JEANS, T-SHIRT, AND HE HAD A FLASHLIGHT. AT THAT POINT -- AT THAT POINT, HE JUST STOOD THERE AND GAVE ME A SIGNAL THAT HE SAW ME. HE WAVED TO ME AND JUST SECONDS AFTER THAT, I SAW A BLACK MALE, 6 FOOT 1, 100 AND -- 200 POUNDS ...
Later in Park's 1994 Grand Jury testimony...
Q. WHEN, IN RELATION TO SEEING THE MALE WHITE COME OUT FROM THE ASHFORD SIDE OF THE HOUSE, DID YOU SEE THIS MALE BLACK WALKING DOWN THE DRIVEWAY?
A. AS IN TIME?
Q. YES.
A. SECONDS.
Q. ALMOST SIMULTANEOUS?
A. ALMOST, IF NOT SIMULTANEOUSLY.
1995 Criminal Trial: ttp://walraven.org/simpson/mar28.html
Q (Marcia Clark): OKAY. AND HOW -- IN RELATIONSHIP TO WHEN YOU SAW KATO KAELIN, WHEN DID YOU FIRST SEE THIS PERSON?
A: IT WAS JUST -- IT WAS ALMOST SIMULTANEOUSLY. IT WAS SECONDS AFTER I SAW HIM.
Within seconds after Kato waved to Park, he was past the walkway on his way to the path behind the garage where he would not have seen O.J. where Park saw him. He would not have seen O.J. at all -- and he testified that he didn't. The only places where his testimony conflict with Park's are in intervals of time, the intervals where Park was paying attention to him and when he wasn't. It's the word "simultaneously" that Marcia put into his mouth that changes everything. But as you will see in Marcia's Story 1 and 2 there is no way of interpreting seconds the way she did without creating an irreconcilable conflict between Park's testimony and Kato's.
Park said he saw Kato on the north path. Kato stopped, waved at him and "looked toward the driveway area". Meanwhile, Park was having a conversation with his boss Dale St. John, which Park said lasted "10 to 30 seconds" after he saw O.J. This testimony comes from the way Marcia phrased the question after she put Kato and O.J. together in time. She was then able to ask him how long he talked to his boss after he saw O.J. enter the house. But that could not have been what happened. When Park said, "You know, somebody is home," he was clearly talking about Kato, not O.J. It is also clear that he was talking about O.J. at the end of the call when St. John said, "Take him to the airport. I'll see you tomorrow."
Maria's story is that Park saw O.J. coming from the south path after making the thumps on Kato's wall and dropping the bloody glove. There are many ways to interpret that story. All of those interpretations fit within two extremes of "seconds" and none of them fit all of Park's Marcia-assisted testimony.
Marcia's Story 1 shows what happens when you factor in the content of the call after Park first saw Kato. It becomes obvious in visual terms that if Park had seen O.J. within two or three seconds after he saw Kato, Kato would have also seen O.J. within two or three seconds of when Park said he did. But if Kato did not see O.J. then, which Marcia never argued he did, they would have crossed paths later on the driveway somewhere between the northwest entrance of the house and the south path.
Marcia's Story 2 shows the opposite extreme. This is what happens if you make Park's sighting of Kato and O.J. "almost simultaneous" with O.J. coming from the south path.
Any variation of motion between Marcia's Story 1 and 2 gives you the same result. O.J. and Kato would have seen each other. According to Park's first statement of seeing O.J. and Kato, seconds apart, Kato gave no indication of seeing O.J., if the interval between Park saying, "You know, somebody is home" and his boss saying, "Take him to the airport. I'll see you tomorrow," they didn't. Their intervening conversation could have been longer or shorter than twenty seconds, depending on what else was said that Park didn't recall. Between ten and twenty seconds puts Kato where Park might have last seen him before he saw O.J. if he was looking toward the garage, which he was, but not where he first saw him. He wasn't even sure the person he saw going into the house was a man or woman until Detectives Tippin and Carr told him on June 15 that he saw O.J.
Marcia told Park that he saw O.J. coming from the south path after dropping a bloody glove behind Kato's bungalow. The idea of O.J. dropping the glove on the south path then trying to sneak into his front door doesn't add up. He would have had to go past the south path entrance to his house through the empty maid's room to do it. Then he would have had to go past the kitchen entrance near the two big trees. In this scenario the blood drops on the driveway make no sense at all.
Fuhrman's Story takes some of the absurdities out of Marcia's story but look at what you get with it...
Rockingham layout copied from http://www.wagnerandson.com/oj/rocklay.htm
(visual representations the testimony given by Steven Schwab and Robert Heidstra)
Dog Walkers 1 gives you the dog walking time and rout that Steven Schwab and Robert Heidstra took routinely.
Dog Walkers 2 gives you the time and route that Schwab and Heidstra took on the evening of the murders with Schwab leaving five minutes later than usual and Heidstra leaving 15 minutes later. The last spotlight on Heidstra (at 10:46) is where he said he was when he saw the light-colored vehicle on Dorothy turn right onto Bundy. Note where both men would have been if they had followed their usual routines and the killings were planned to begin around 10:30. To execute a plan to kill Ron and Nicole with a minimum of risk to the active killer, the timing of those dog waking routines had to be taken into account.
There also had to be a spot on Bundy Drive where a lookout could see anyone coming from the north or the south without being observed in connection with what what was going to happen in Nicole's courtyard. A location that matches these requirements does exist on the Bundy-Gorham curve. To see what a lookout posted there would have seen click on views 4 and 15 just south of the inside curve. The patrol car driven by Benjamin Jones, the police officer from the Pacific Division that Schwab flagged down between Dorothy and the Bundy-Gorham curve, is not shown in the animation. Neither is the dog Kato's unusual behavior or Jones' reappearance north of the curve after Schwab met the strolling couple a second time on Bundy (11:00) south of the curve. For an explanation of these omissions click here. Not enough interest was shown in the animation to warrant an update. To read the relevant testimony by Schwab click here (search "Did you encounter").
One all-important thing overlooked in Officer John Edwards’ report of the 1989 New Years Day “beating incident” is the sequence
of events. He heard someone in the 9-1-1 room mention a black man while the operator he was talking to, Sharyn Gilbert, told him that she heard a woman being beaten. He was therefore acting on the assumption that a black man was beating a woman. Gilbert actually heard the line open followed by three minutes of silence. Then she heard a woman scream, a slap and a grunt. The line went dead. The 911 procedure Gilbert followed required her to make an “incident” report before anyone could be dispatched to the scene. The incident she heard sounded like a woman being beaten so that’s what she called it and that’s what she told Edwards she heard. The comment about a black man involved an unrelated emergency in another part of greater Los Angeles. Edwards didn’t know that. He arrived at 360 North Rockingham expecting to find a situation where a black man had beaten a woman or was still at it.
It was a real emergency for John Edwards and he responded accordingly in his LAPD uniform driving his LAPD black and white squad car. He passed the Rockingham gate before he realized he was at the estate and turned onto Ashford. He parked in front of the driveway because he thought the gates opened out, went to the intercom box and pressed the button. You can see what happened next according to the sequence of events testified to by Edwards in the 1989 Incident animation. Keep in mind that the animation time is compressed into one minute. The actual time between Edward’s arrival and Nicole’s appearance was probably longer, with more words being exchanged between Edwards and Michelle. If Nicole called 9-1-1, ask yourself why she didn't go to Edwards in his LAPD uniform with the black and white squad car in her line of sight as soon as he got out of the car.
Everyone assumed that Nicole called 911 when O.J. was beating her or she feared that he was going to. However, the caller didn’t give a name or say why she was calling. No one said anything for three minutes. Nobody knows who screamed, who got slapped or who hung up the phone. The injuries on Nicole’s face, arm and neck are not entirely consistent with Nicole’s story of taking a beating from O.J. They are entirely consistent with O.J.’s story of wrestling her out of the bedroom and Nicole getting into a scratching, slapping, punching, hair-pulling fight with Michelle – and hiding from the police.
If Michelle made the call, the following sequence of events make sense: Michelle calls 9-1-1 fearful that the younger, bigger, stronger Nicole is going to attack her. She doesn’t give her name or say what is happening because nothing has happened yet. She is fearful of being beaten if she doesn’t call for help and fearful of losing her job if she does or if she even gives her name. She doesn’t want to get O.J. involved with the police so she just keeps the line open and hopes that Nicole doesn’t get into her bungalow.
Nicole does get in. Michelle screams. Nicole slaps her, sees the phone off the hook and hangs up. The women fight. The fight continues outside where Nicole falls and gets her white pants muddy from the recent rain. Nicole is drunk so Michelle gets the better of her. Michelle tells her that she called the cops. Nicole is now worried that she did and that she could be arrested and do some serious time for assault.
This is where the 1989 Incident animation begins. Looking at the event from overhead it’s easy to see that Nicole was not hiding from O.J. She was in sight of the house where O.J. was but out of site of Edwards and his partner in the patrol car. She stayed quiet and concealed until Edwards told Michelle what he expected to see. Then he saw her hiding in the bushes. If she was afraid of being arrested she now had a way out and a way of getting O.J. at the same time.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sequence also tells you which of the stories told by Phillips, Lange, Vannatter and Fuhrman of the events leading to
Fuhrman going Over the Wall at Rockingham and discovering the bloody glove has to be true. Up to the point that Fuhrman discovers the red speck on the Bronco their stories agree. But once Fuhrman goes over the wall to let the other detectives into the estate, the correct line of travel to the bungalow that Michelle lived in until Gigi replaced her in April tells you who did what to get Fuhrman one-on-one with Kato. Like all of the key events that led to Fuhrman going over the wall, this one was orchestrated by Fuhrman. A close study of this animation (you have to use the buttons) will tell you that Lange and Vannatter had to have it right with Phillips first (no dispute), Lange second (no dispute), Fuhrman third (he said he was last) and Vannatter pulling up the rear.
The detectives could testy truthfully only to the things they were paying attention to. Given what they were told by the Westec sergeant about Michelle, where he had to tell them where to find her points the first two detective in line (Phillips and Lange) directly to the last bungalow. Fuhrman's place in line is critical. When you put him and Vannatter in motion Vannatter's testimony about paying attention to the back door of the main house when he heard Phillips pounding on Kato's door jumps out as the only place he could have been to match Lange's testimony as well as Fuhrman's and Phillips'.
All
Lange testified that Fuhrman stopped Phillips (if Phillips stopped, Lange had to stop) by calling to him and telling him that he thought he saw someone inside the first bungalow (Kato's). Lange was therefore in the best place to know if this is what happened and to recall it specifically because Fuhrman did not call him, the closet man to the third man in line. He could not have confused Fuhrman with Vannatter. If Vannatter was where he said he was, he was in the worst place to know what happened at that time between Fuhrman and Phillips. He could and did skip over Lange's testimony about Fuhrman drawing Phillips to Kato's bungalow and testify that he saw and heard Phillips pounding on the door. If, as Phillips and Fuhrman testified, Phillips saw Kato first because he was checking out the buildings systematically, he would have stopped first at the back door of the main house. He didn't. Vannatter did.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Uniformed cops stationed by the Rockingham gates are not shown everywhere they went and when they went there because their movements cannot be plotted. Fuhrman's partner Brad Roberts cannot be shown because nobody can show where he was.
The Rockingham hookup animation shows what the sequence of events were according to the available videos and testimony of Detective Vannatter and Officer Thompson. A video shot of O.J. with his traveling bag still hanging from his shoulder in the playhouse area means that Roberts could only have taken the bag there before O.J. was handcuffed. --Jasper