[ Contents | Search | Post | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Jasper
Date: 14 May 2000
Time: 13:14:20
No John, most people who think O.J. is innocent also think Fuhrman is innocent, because much of the evidence that fits O.J. also fits Fuhrman. Once they discover real flaws in that evidence they tend to discount all of it, or at least enough of it to make Fuhrman no more likely to have committed the murders than O.J. Some evidence planted against O.J. is so obvious that anyone honestly trying to make an OJ-Guilty scenario work will stumble over them and conclude one of three things:
1. The cops framed a guilty man after the fact. 2. The cops framed an innocent man after the fact. 3. Someone other than the cops framed O.J.
If you're the killer who wants to get in the media spotlight by association yourself with the discovery of that glove, how can you be sure that evidence of a frame-up won't surface? You can't. All you can do is plan for a scenario in which the evidence of a plant will be ignored and you will be the hero and also plan for a scenario in which the frame-up is discovered and you become the hero who discovers the person who did the framing. It's like setting an explosive charge. You always duel prime your charge so if one time-fuse doesn't burn down to the blasting cap to set it off the other one will. Fuhrman has a backup story for every move he makes and a backup for his backups when he can arrange them.
Most people who see just how obvious the plated glove was figure that Fuhrman must have planted it because they don't give him credit for being smart enough to do a better job. Others discount Fuhrman as the man who planted the glove because they figure he was too smart to plant evidence in so sloppy a way. Either way, he has his only real alibi for the killing-the Rockingham glove. He couldn't have done it if he found the glove on Bundy after he arrived on the scene as a detective and planted it on Rockingham to stay involved in the case (Steven Singular). He couldn't have planted the glove or committed the killing if his only association with it came as the result of following the trail of the real killer (J. Neil Schulman, John Junot). By getting his partner to plant the glove he wouldn't even have to lie if someone asked him if HE planted it. The trick, in any event, is to get people to decide on the spot that the glove makes Fuhrman an unlikely killer. All of your arguments concerning the glove show that you did just that.
Every serious researcher I know on the possibility of a frame-up eventually sees the necessity for the killer to be closely linked to O.J. and Nicole. But after getting a dozen or so e-mails and three or four posts from people who have put a considerable amount of work into showing how someone other than Fuhrman committed the killing and framed O.J. I saw a common pattern. They all stopped at the first person they come to who seemed to have the one or two requirements they were looking for and started adding facts, rumor and speculation that fit their suspect. That's where all questions of whether or not they had the right guy stopped and they started digging in their heels to defend their position.
People who haven't read Iago or The Smoking Gun accuse me of doing the same thing. If you've been reading The Smoking Gun as it developed you know better.
For some reason I have a bunch of broken links to older posts, if I can restore them you will see a post from one man who believed the killer was Ted Turner. Don't laugh, he makes a strong case. Another guy (J. Neil Schulman) sent me his whole book in PDF saying that the killer was Ron Shipp. He makes a strong case, too. Then there are the various drug hit theories and government hit theories, all of which make perfectly good sense if you ignore, play down or distort the evidence that refutes it. I am trying to make The Smoking Gun more accessible so that you can see how much of the Bundy killings and Fuhrman's stories about them come from television and the silver screen. The answer, in short is about 98 % of it. But you'll never see any of it if you zoom past at 98 lines per second-except, of course, those parts that appear to incriminated Kato or appear to have come out my head rather than Fuhrman's because of something you didn't read.
Please John, it's not too late. Slow down. Read carefully. Study the pictures. Use your analytical skills. Think about what we just learned concerning Frogmen. When I saw that you rejected my position on Fuhrman because you didn't have a clue what it was and never gave it a moment of thought, I knew that when you did, you'd be on my side. --Jasper