From: Jasper
Date: 1/7/01
Time: 3:34:42 PM
Jean,
Kato is innocent. He and Allan Park are the best witnesses O.J. have. Their stories of what happend from the time Kato said he heard the thumps to the time Kato asked O.J. if he had overslept give O.J. an airtight alibi. Kato's testimony proves that O.J. was in his house during the murders and the cut on his finger was so small that he didn't see it. It proves that O.J. made no attempt to hid the cut and that there was nothing extraordinary about his demeanor.
Marcia Clark kept trying to make Kato say that he saw O.J. wearing a dark blue sweatsuit (Iago page 563-565) but he would not do it.. The best he could do was guess. He said, "I don't know," "I believe" and "I'm not sure." His description of the thumps was of an artificial noise that could not have been made by someone falling against the house or banging into the air conditioner. He had plenty of time to think about it and no reason to tell a stupid story like that unless it were true. He did not say that O.J. was in any kind of mood before the killing that could be described as menacing. He did not testify to O.J. abusing Nicole. In Petrocelli's book, Kato comes off looking like O.J.'s accomplice, a man who lied for O.J. and cleaned up after him because he (Petrocelli) figured out O.J. could not have been the murderer if Kato were telling the truth. I figured that out a long time before he did. It's in Igao. --Jasper