From: Jasper
Date: December 05, 2005
Time: 04:59 AM
Suzie, …I wanted to reply to you as soon as I saw your excellent post. I also wanted to see if I could solve my Reply button malfunction before I did it. Problem identified (if not yet solved). Turns out that we couldn’t fix Mario’s Reply problem because it wasn’t on our side. It was with the anti-virus protection on his computer – a better version of the one I was running. When I upgraded mine my Reply button stopped working. Didn’t figure out the cause-and-effect until a few hours ago. We thought that Mario’s computer had been hacked. Smartfellows Press had been hacked, our ready access to Jack Walraven’s transcripts was cut off, but the timing of Mario’s Reply problem was a coincidence. ……..The reason I’ve said as much about this as I have is that the dynamics of the situation touches on key items in your post. I addressed Fred Goldman in other posts. ……..You talked about the impossible number of coincidences that you thought were necessary to explain all of the evidence against O.J. I, too, have limited tolerance for “coincidence.” However, I have experienced too many real ones to have suspicions about them in themselves or in quantity. I look for clusters of “coincidence” with shape, direction and evidence of a guiding hand at each occurrence. With O.J., the sheer number of “coincidence” explanations was, as you noted, unreasonable. They were also too random to be contrived. Some of them were physically impossible to contrive. Some of them were accepted as being presented and discredited when they were never presented or because O.J.’s explanations seemed absurd. Most people stopped right there. ……… Your point-by-point summary of the case is very close to how I would have summed it up before the anomalies in the blood evidence began to surface – in “coincidence” clusters with shape direction and evidence of a guiding hand. You saw one explanation for the quantity of evidence against O.J (it must mean what it appears to mean) and one reasonable explanation for O.J.’s ridiculous stories (he must have lied). ………. For O.J. to have been framed, a multitude of actions that seemed impossible had to be easy. They were easy. Someone else with something to gain had to match the rare combination of shoe size and stride of the Bundy killer. Someone else with those specific qualifications did. Blood from O.J.’s reference vial had to be missing. It was missing. His blood on the Rockingham glove would have contained EDTA. It did. ………..Against all odds, O.J.’s cut finger story matched the evidence – large blood drops on Bundy, small ones on Rockingham. No EDTA in blood drops on Rockingham. Given the broken chain of custody from collection to testing, there is no way to know whose blood was collected on Bundy. It didn’t have to be O.J.’s. The “coincidences” needed to explain the blood anomalies alone were many, and increased in complexity to a point where the explanations and the evidence parted company. The guiding hand needed for increasingly simpler explanations was present at every crucial turn. It was the hand of the man who proposed the bleeding killer theory, pointed to one bloody glove and found another. The OJI’s on this board saw what you saw because we are as observant and intelligent as you are. But we didn’t stop there. You did. –Jasper