[Welcome] | [ Discussions | TOC | Search | Post | Reply ]
Category: Category 0
From: Miss Marple
Date: 11/8/02
Time: 2:50:51 PM
Remote Name: 164.77.154.181
So many versions have circulated on how the 911 tape came to be released to the press. Everybody was blaming everybody else. The City Attorney's Office had the tapes and they were released at a very convenient time when Clark was about to loose the grand jury, which made me believe that she or the DA's office had something to do with it.
Clark wrote about when she first heard the 93 tape on the radio: "I knew that there had been police reports on the New Year's Eve of 1989 and the door-kicking incident of 1993. Both had been triggered by Nicole's calls to 911. But I was under the impression that audiotapes of those calls had been destroyed in a routine recycling procedure. My impression was wrong. It turns out that the city attorney's office, which prosecuted the '93 case, had kept its own copies of the tapes." (I assume the "93 case" is a typo)
Why would they keep the '93 tape at all? There wasn't even charges laid after that incident. And what reason could there be for keeping the '89 tape on file for some four/five years?
Clark was probably right, there must be some system of recycling. I can't imagine that all 911 calls are kept on file for years. So why were those tapes saved and by whom?
I've been trying to connect the dots to get fuhrman's face in that picture (I admit, I do that). Then I read a paragraph in fuhrman's book, Pg. 79: "Midday on June 17, I was having lunch in the San Fernando Valley with John Wright, a city attorney. John had defended me in a case involving a suspect, Joseph Britton, who was shot during a robbery. During the trial, John and I became good friends..."
So now we have a lawyer, working at the city attorney's office, a good friend of fuhrman's since 1987. Could our master manipulator have gotten access to the tapes, or somehow have influenced someone to keep them on file?
Anybody know anything more about this?
Miss Marple