Posts: 1,059
Threads: 77
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2008
I should add that after a local lecture, I personally talked to
OJ attorney Alan Dershowitz and told him my theory that
Jason was the killer. He appeared startled. Pausing and choosing
his words carefully, he said only "WELL, HE WAS THE ONLY
SUSPECT WITHOUT AN ALIBI."
If you have time, watch Bill Dear's video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...946122795#
Jack
Posts: 1,059
Threads: 77
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2008
I would also ask Jim whether he has read JASON'S DIARY,
which Dear obtained from a storage locker where Jason
had stashed it an abandoned it for unpaid rent. If not, then
Jim is not familiar with ALL the evidence.
Jack
Posts: 1,141
Threads: 86
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Dec 2009
The only suspect without an alibi EXCEPT FOR O.J., of course. And
bear in mind the evidence I have cited remains part of the evidence,
which is going to be difficult to overcome, no matter what else this
guy has come up with. The video runs two hours, so I will take a
look when I have time--which might even be this weekend. And if
he also studied Lee Oswald, what did he come up with about him?
Jack White Wrote:I should add that after a local lecture, I personally talked to
OJ attorney Alan Dershowitz and told him my theory that
Jason was the killer. He appeared startled. Pausing and choosing
his words carefully, he said only "WELL, HE WAS THE ONLY
SUSPECT WITHOUT AN ALIBI."
If you have time, watch Bill Dear's video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...946122795#
Jack
Posts: 1,059
Threads: 77
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2008
James H. Fetzer Wrote:The only suspect without an alibi EXCEPT FOR O.J., of course. And
bear in mind the evidence I have cited remains part of the evidence,
which is going to be difficult to overcome, no matter what else this
guy has come up with. The video runs two hours, so I will take a
look when I have time--which might even be this weekend. And if
he also studied Lee Oswald, what did he come up with about him?
Jack White Wrote:I should add that after a local lecture, I personally talked to
OJ attorney Alan Dershowitz and told him my theory that
Jason was the killer. He appeared startled. Pausing and choosing
his words carefully, he said only "WELL, HE WAS THE ONLY
SUSPECT WITHOUT AN ALIBI."
If you have time, watch Bill Dear's video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...946122795#
Jack
The video runs only 80 minutes. It has extensive new evidence,
including the murder weapon. You really ought to look at it to
understand the case. Dear hopes that Jason sues him, because
he could then depose him.
Dear could likely solve the LHO affair, given the same 12 years
he pursued Jason. Coincidentally, 12 years is the same length of
time Armstrong took to nail down the LHO story.
Thanks for considering this.
Jack
Posts: 1,059
Threads: 77
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2008
I urge all to watch Bill Dear's video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...946122795#
...to see how an investigation ought to be conducted.
I would like to hear comments from those who watch.
Jack
Posts: 2,221
Threads: 334
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Oct 2008
Jack,
I watched it.Dear comes up with some pretty darn good evidence that Jason was the murderer.I would say that he should have been the lead suspect.It's hard to imagine why he wasn't.He does speculate on some things though in his recreation of the plot..I'll also say that I didn't watch the OJ trial,so I don't know all the details of that circus.
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.â€
Buckminster Fuller
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
Jack White:
Thanks for that. The evidence is pretty damning and the watchcap is usually good enough for a grand jury.
Points:
The cap had to be covered in Jason's DNA. This begs the question whether the Los Angeles District Attorney's office is denying a re-opening of the case because of its complicity in hiding evidence? A criminal conflict of interest.
It struck me that Jason could have spoken to OJ before he drove over to Nicole's and gotten worked-up by OJ.
The medical examiner Lee mumbles something about other hairs besides OJ's being found at the scene. (Gee, I wonder if they were Jason's?)
Jason, being enraged and having snapped from whatever confrontation happened with Nicole, could have had Ron Goldman walk into view. It could be it suddenly dawned on Jason that Goldman's little rendezvous with Nicole was the reason why she canceled the family get-together at Jackson's. This would account for killing rage.
Perhaps Jason didn't track any blood because it hadn't spread out when he was there.
There's interesting ethical questions here. A (most-likely) innocent man sits in jail right now on shamefully trumped-up charges.
My first instinct when this happened was OJ was set-up by blackmailers. I wasn't too far off.
Posts: 5,374
Threads: 149
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2010
I remember clear as day from 1994 that there was a "mystery witness" who said they saw a dark hispanic man running from the walkway. The general consensus was this was another case of blame it on a black man scapegoating and was met with a "yeah, sure, nice try." But now that I think of it Jason could easily be seen as a dark-skinned hispanic.
That mystery witness obviously saw Jason. This case is a good example of public bias. But, on the other hand, it is also a good example of jurisprudence. In the end the jury made the correct decision.
Posts: 1,141
Threads: 86
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Dec 2009
03-11-2010, 07:19 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-11-2010, 01:50 AM by James H. Fetzer.)
As I have posted before, I am going to watch this video presentation of the evidence that Jack finds convincing about Jason. At the point in time, having squandered a sabbatical on watching the trial and the discussions on Geraldo's show, I have been impressed by the blood at the scene, in the Bronco, leading up to OJ's house and in his shower drain. None of that was ever refuted. And OJ had a hair-trigger temper, was obsessed with Nicole, paranoid about her having a relationship with anyone else, and was probably high on meth. If Jason was there, he was accompanying OJ, who might have used him as a lookout just in case anyone came up to the condo. Jason might have had no idea that OJ could actually kill them. OJ had the physical strength and the visceral hatred to have performed a slaughter of this magnitude. I will be stunned if the same were true of Jason. I will watch the video, but it's going to take a lot to convince me. And even if Jason was there, OJ would obviously have still been complicit in the crime.
Posts: 2,221
Threads: 334
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Oct 2008
Quote: OJ had the physical strength and the visceral hatred to have performed a slaughter of this magnitude. I will be stunned if the same were true of Jason.
Prepare to be stunned James.
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.â€
Buckminster Fuller
|