July 1, 2017
September 30, 2017



I’ll start by saying I actually met O.J. once.  It was far from a formal introduction and he wouldn’t know my name.  It was a meeting of circumstance.  Sometime in 1991, we shared an elevator in West L.A. and had an 11 floor chat.  I found him to be openly friendly and upbeat.  So, when his trial for murder dominated news coverage for several months, I watched like a best friend.

Here, I will state, he may have committed both murders.

Here, I will state my reasons for reasonable doubt.  First, in sworn testimonies, both LAPD Detectives Mark Fehrman and Philip Vannatter testified that O.J. Simpson was not a suspect when they crossed over the wall onto O.J.s estate on Rockingham at dawn.  Their testimony was that they were concerned for the safety of O.J.s family.

Safety from whom?

As an author, I read a lot of information on police procedures but one not need be an expert here.  I’ll ask my readers one question:  In any murder, who automatically becomes the prime suspect?  You are correct.  It is always the spouse.  If it happens to be a divorced or separated spouse, multiply the suspicion by ten.

Here’s more stuff:  I read articles claiming Mark Fuhrman, while a patrol officer in the ‘80s, answered more than one domestic disturbance call at the Simpson estate.  According to these articles, Fuhrman dated Nicole a few times during one of the Simpson Family separation periods.

Here’s what I think may have happened:  When Fuhrman and Vannatter arrived at the murder scene on Bundy, both detectives immediately jumped to the conclusion that O.J. had committed the murders.  They convinced the first reporting officers and proceeded to gather evidence.  They then went to the Simpson residence on Rockingham, a property well known to Fuhrman, and planted the glove in the back yard and blood on the front driveway and a drop of blood on the outside the Bronco parked on the street.  No blood was found inside the Bronco (odd).  They returned to Bundy, gathered their team, went back to Rockingham at dawn and crossed the wall to arrest Simpson but Simpson had already left for Chicago.

During the trial, Fuhrman also testified that he hadn’t found the bloody glove behind Nicole’s condo until after they’d discovered the glove in the backyard at Rockingham in early daylight.  I’ve seen a nighttime (flash) photo of Mark Fuhrman holding up a glove in the front yard of Nicole’s condo on Bundy.

The prosecution proved that Simpson had purchased a knife of the type used in the murders.  They claimed Simpson’s blood found at the scene, on the socks, on the bloody gloves, on the Bronco and on the driveway, had come from a self inflicted wound on Simpson’s finger.  No knife holes were found on the gloves where the blade would have needed to penetrate the glove in order to wound Simpson.  Also, the knife found in Simpson’s dresser showed no evidence of anybody’s blood and still had factory oil on the blade.  It had not been cleaned in any way.  Simpson claims to have cut himself in his Chicago hotel room.  Also, the ticket agent and flight attendants all testified to not noticing any cuts on Simpson’s fingers or hands.

Fuhrman also testified that he wasn’t a racist and hadn’t used the “n…” word for more than ten years.  The jury left the courtroom for further questioning by the defense team, where they played tapes of Fuhrman using the “n…” word multiple times during an interview taped by a screenwriter within the previous fewer than ten years.  When asked about this, Fuhrman pled the Fifth Amendment against self incrimination.  When asked if he or officer Vannatter had planted evidence at the Simpson residence, he again pled the Fifth.  When later officially charged with perjury, Fuhrman pled, “No contest.”

The bloody socks found in Simpson’s bedroom had blood stains from Nicole, Goldman and Simpson.  Testimony from experts found this evidence to be planted, as it would be impossible for the evidential blood stains to occur if the socks had been worn at the time.  The stains matched, side to side.  Thus, the ankle could not have been inside the sock.  The blood on both gloves also had blood from Nicole, Goldman and Simpson.  These blood stains contained anti-coagulant, further evidence of having been planted.  The blood sample taken from Simpson was missing 1.5cm in volume, more than enough to have been used to plant evidence while in the lab.

Much was made of the Bruno Magli shoes.  According to prosecutors, footsteps at the scene indicated a very rare style of Bruno Magli shoes had been worn by the murderer.  When this style was not found at the Simpson residence, they showed several other pairs of Simpson’s Bruno Magli shoes, claiming these were rarely worn by anybody but the very rich.  Two things here:  First, if the murderer wore coveralls and a knit cap, aren’t Bruno Magli shoes an odd fashion statement?  Second, I’m not at all wealthy and I have a pair of Bruno Magli shoes since before the murders.  I prefer Bally.

Perhaps O.J. feared a guilty finding from the jury or perhaps he’s guilty as hell.  Either way, the Bronco ride with his fellow USC alumnus, Sam Cunningham, was a huge mistake.  The disguise might have been to conceal his identity from Orange County Police or from Mexican border agents.  Who knows?  Who cares?  The $10,000.00 cash may have been to execute his escape.  If so, it’s not enough.  Or, as O.J. stated, it might have been for his mother, who he claimed he’d been going to visit.  The gun was a big mistake, no matter how you look at it.

The Bronco ride convinced many Americans that O.J. Simpson had committed the murder of two people.  Take away the Bronco ride, I don’t see a civil lawsuit for $33 million.  I see an O.J. Simpson free and clear, no 9 year imprisonment for armed robbery in Vegas.  Without the Bronco ride, he might still be a working Hollywood actor.  He might not have gone into the Vegas hotel with armed security guards at all.

Again, I’m not saying O.J. Simpson is innocent of committing a double murder.  What I’m saying is this:  If I were on the jury, I would have had reasonable doubt as to his guilt.  I would have voted “Not guilty,” knowing I might be turning a murderer loose.  There is no doubt that perjury was committed and little doubt that evidence was planted.

The prosecutor and police blew this case apart.  The Bronco ride was the factor that convinced the public of his guilt.  This case will be long remembered, as it should be.


Pertinent facts for this blog were researched through Wikipedia.

Comments are closed.