From: Jasper
Date: 9/15/00
Time: 12:29:43 PM
John,
The first thing you have to do is slow down and read what I wrote - and what YOU wrote. GiGi normally stayed at the house on the weekends when O.J. when out of town. That was a pattern that any plan to fame O.J. had to take into account. As you, yourself, said GiGi didn't even know she wasn't gong to be there. Therefore, IF the plan was to create the artificial-sounding thumps on the side of the house to give O.J. something to look shaken about in time for the limo driver to witness it and to give Fuhrman an excuse to go there, the plan would have revolved around GiGi. There was no reason to EXPECT Kato to be there, and therefore no sense in planning the thumps around him. It seems to me that your confusion on this point (your confusion about my point) his a product of your unshakable determination to prove that Kato did the killing and lied about the thumps. If that's going to be your start point and your end point BEFORE you read anything I write (which it always is) what's the point of reading any of it?
If you had a clue what my position is (not a theory) you'd know that it doesn't require an "army" of conspirators unless you consider five people an army. My position is simply this: Either O.J. did it or he didn't. If he did the evidence should be conclusive given the sheer volume of it. But it isn't. Therefore somebody else is most likely the killer. If so, that other person must be able to account for all of the evidence that appears to fit O.J. plus all of the evidence that doesn't fit O.J. He had to have the appearance of an airtight alibi and thee key helpers with special qualifications that "just happen" to match Brad Roberts, Ron Shipp, Faye Resnick and Denise Brown.
I know that there is no point in going further because you can't even see any evidence of guilt that doesn't point to Kato. That's what the prosecutors did with O.J. and what J. Niel Schulman did with Ron Shipp. You can do the same thing with Jason Simpson, Robert Kardashien, Al Cowlings or a thief in a robbery-gone-bad, if you like. You can do it with hit men from a Columbian drug cartel, the CIA, the DEA, the LAPD or the Mafia. The killer and Mark Fuhrman together (if you don't think they are one and the same) left plenty of evidence behind to make a convincing case against any of the above. Pick one. I guarantee that you will find enough evidence to support a terrific theory - if you ignore the evidence that doesn't as you have with Kaito.--Jasper