Happy Marine Lee Harvey Oswald  Framed: America's Patsy Tradition  "Confessed" Martin Luther King, Jr. assassin James Earl Ray  
 
 Visitor count-
173 
 
News/Articles
 
President Kennedy Assassination
 
Martin Luther King, Jr. Assassination
 
Robert Kennedy Assassination
 
The Lindbergh Kidnapping Hoax
 
Lindbergh Kidnapping/Murder
 
911
 
Oklahoma City Bombing
 
 
Waco Branch Davidian Massacre
 
TWA Flight 800 Crash
 
Ruby Ridge
 
Prseident Reagan moments before being shot.
 
Reagan Attempted Assassination
 
Columbine Shootings
 
Attack On USS Liberty
 
American Vote Fraud
 
BCCI Scandal
 
George HW Bush and son George W. at ceremony opening Zapata oil rig in 1957
 
Bush Family History
 
CIA  & Drugs
 
CIA & Torture
 
Election Fraud?
 
Enron
 
Staged Terrorism?
 
Gary Webb Murdered?
 
Iran Contra
 
Iraq War Lies
 
Jonestown Massacre
 
KAL007 Shootdown
 
Niger Uranium Documents
 
Paul Wellstone Plane Crash
 
Pearl Harbor
 
Scott Peterson Trial
 
The Train Deaths
 
Vince Foster "suicide"
 
Whitewater Scandal
 
JFK, Jr. Plane Crash
 
Princess Diana Death
 
John Lennon Assassination
 
Chemtrails
 
Is Osama Bin Laden dead?
 
Osama Bin Laden
 
Poem For America
 
Iraq Sanctions
 
Michael Skakel
 
Sam Sheppard

 

 “Solving the Simpson Murder Mystery”

OJ Simpson              Detective Maek Fuhrman

       

      CONTENTS:

       NOTICE..........................................................................VII

      Clarifying a matter of “speech”.........................................X

       

      Chapters

      1 Only In America.........................11

      2 “Cockroaches”............................27

      3 A “Legal Lynching” – And The Bill Of Rights......35

      4 The Media...............................61

      5 “The First” And “The Fifth”............65

      6 Experts And Amateurs...................69

      7 Why O.J. Lost The Civil Trial..........79

      8 The Book.................................97

      9 Distortions And Lies, Right Off The .....99

      10 No Motive...............................115

      11 A “Mountain Of Evidence”..............129

      12 The Contradictory Evidence.............133

      13 The Glove Evidence......................147

      14 Detective Mark Fuhrman.................165

      15 “The Fuhrman Tapes”....................173

      16 A Conspiracy.............................201

      17 Rogue Cops...............................209

      18 Mark Fuhrman’s Motives.................215

      19 Mark Fuhrman’s “Alibi”..................219

      20 Mark Fuhrman’s Failed Polygraph Test....245

      21 Did The Prosecutors Know................253

      22 Christopher Darden And His Book........271

      23 The Time Of Death.......................281

      24 The “Execution” of Nicole................289

      25 Questions Unanswered.....................299

      26 The “Execution” of Ron...................305

      27 More, Irrefutable Proof Of O.J.’s Innocence....313

      28 “Ugly Ass Shoes”..........................361

      29 Nicole’s Watch And More Suspicious Evidence....367

      30 Medical Examiner – Bought And Paid......403

      31 What About “The Mountain Of Evidence”?........415

      32 Other Theories – Other Suspects...........419

      33 Framing O.J. – “Setting Up” The Investigators....429

      34 The “Thumps” On Kato’s Wall...............453

      35 Completing The “Set-Up”....................469

      36 More Discrepancies...........................479

      37 The “Point Of No Return”...................487

      38 Detective Philip Vannatter...................493

      39 The “Trail Of Blood”........................499

      40 O.J.’s Blood Vial And The EDTA...........517

      41 The Police Nurse............................549

      42 The Perfect “Decoy”........................555

      43 The Handcuffing Of O.J...................559

      44 The Rest Of The Evidence..................571

      45 A Jig-Saw Puzzle...........................615

      46 “The Thief And The Prosecutor”...........623

      47 Dr. Ameli – Nicole – Fuhrman – Lange.....631

      48 “Kato” – The Dog...........................641

      49 Allan Park – Rosa Lopez – Mark Fuhrma...645

      50 O.J.’s Statement To The Police...........653

      51 A Question Of Trust.......................675

      52 A “Politically Correct” Conspiracy..........687

      53 Verifying Our Theory.......................703

      54 Some Closing Thoughts......................717

 

 To the readers of the following “sample chapter” from my book,

“Solving the Simpson Murder Mystery”:

 

What I express on the following pages are not proven facts, but only my theory or my opinion.

Any person mentioned on the following pages as having committed a crime or an act of professional or moral misconduct, should be considered innocent of any such crime or any such act of professional or moral misconduct until proven guilty of same in a court of law, or until he or she confesses to same.

 

I selected the following sample chapter from my book of 54 chapters and 736 pages, because when taken out of context, this chapter still demonstrates, in my opinion, that there was something fundamentally wrong with the entire case against O.J. Simpson. But equally important, this chapter touches on another “problem,” namely that by the time they went to trial, both the investigators and the prosecutors, probably, knew that O.J. was innocent and that a police officer – most likely Detective Mark Fuhrman – was the murderer.

The best way to briefly introduce you to this theory, is to refer to the inside and outside rear cover of my book. [Quote]:

 O.J. did not kill Nicole and Ron!

When properly scrutinized, not a single piece of evidence implicates O.J.

Police investigators lied and covered up! Evidence was mishandled and contaminated! Evidence disappeared! Evidence was fabricated!

No eyewitnesses – fingerprints – murder weapon – bloody clothes – or bloody shoes! No motive! And not enough time!

The “M.O.” didn’t fit! The gloves didn’t fit! And how could O.J. have killed two strong, healthy people simultaneously, with a knife, without any of them screaming for help?

Against such astounding facts and contradictions, how can anyone claim that O.J. killed Nicole and Ron?

The LAPD did not solve this murder case. This book does!

A central part of the murderers’ plot was not just to frame O.J., but to “set up” the investigators to complete the framing – with evidence the murderers did not have access to. That nailed O.J. But it also nailed the investigators – so they could never, later, pursue the real killers.

By the time Detective Vannatter realized he was “set up” – it was too late! He had to continue pursuing O.J. – not to solve a murder case, at this point, but – to cover himself! The LAPD’s “code of silence” which protected Vannatter and his colleagues – also protected the murderers!

This theory is supported by overwhelming, new (and suppressed) evidence – much of it uncovered after the two trials.

“Solving the Simpson Murder Mystery” – does what the title suggests. Logically and convincingly this book demonstrates how all the evidence – also the blood and the Bruno Magli shoes – point to the same person – and he is not O.J.! [End of quote]

 

It is my contention that Mark Fuhrman was directly involved in the murders of Nicole and Ron. But Fuhrman set up the investigators, Vannatter in particular, so cleverly, that by the time Vannatter realized that O.J. was innocent, Vannatter could not admit it and pursue the real killer(s), without exposing the blood evidence fabrication he had already orchestrated. Vannatter could be facing 20 years in prison for evidence fabrication.

Eventually, also the prosecutors were informed about this situation. And they all decided to sacrifice O.J. and cover for Detective Fuhrman – not out of sympathy with Fuhrman, by any means, but in order to protect themselves and cover up, perhaps the greatest scandal in our nation’s jurisprudence and to avoid, possibly, the worst riot since the Civil War!

Now, you know my overall theory about the Simpson case: Fuhrman was directly involved in the killings and had “set up” both O.J. and the investigators. Detective Vannatter had swallowed Fuhrman’s “bait” and, irreversibly, fabricated false blood evidence against O.J. Eventually the prosecutors knew it, too. From then on, they all decided to sacrifice the African-American “wife beater,” O.J. Simpson, rather than their own and their colleagues’ careers and futures.

Realizing, also, that the truth about the Simpson case would totally destroy whatever little credibility and respect the LAPD had left, and almost certainly ignite another riot that would make the Rodney King riot seem like a high school football skirmish in comparison, Prosecutor Marcia Clark, Detective Vannatter, and their colleagues found plenty of reasons to justify their despicable actions!

Following this introduction, the up-coming sample chapter – although taken out of context – may be more easily understood. However, don’t form your opinion about the Simpson case based on this chapter alone! There is overwhelming evidence – much of it never before publicized – to support my theory. More specifically, my theory is corroborated by 54 chapters and some seven hundred pages full of evidence. Also included are 12 original illustrations depicting how Nicole and Ron were murdered – not according to the prosecution’s absurd theory, but according to what the evidence tells us!

If you want to know the truth about the Simpson case – not the misinformation, the desinformation and the cover-ups the investigators and the prosecutors present us with in their books – then, instead, read my book, “Solving the Simpson Murder Mystery”!

Christopher Springer

 


 CHAPTER 19

 Mark Fuhrman’s "Alibi"

 

 At the time of the criminal trial, Detective Mark Fuhrman was never required to provide an alibi for the night of the murders, because he was never a murder suspect.

According to Fuhrman himself, however, he attended a "Protective League" seminar at the La Quinta resort near Palm Desert, CA, because he was a delegate in the Protective League. Palm Desert is about a 2 1/2 hours drive from Detective Fuhrman’s former home in Thousand Oaks, Los Angeles, and a bit shorter distance from Brentwood, where both Nicole and O.J. lived. Brentwood, again, is about 15 minutes from Fuhrman’s L.A. home.

Let me quote a passage from Detective Fuhrman’s direct testimony during the criminal trial. Prosecutor Marcia Clark questioned Fuhrman about the night of the murders [the "highlighting" is done by me].

 

Ms. Clark: On the evening of June 12, 1994, at approximately 8:00 pm, where were you?

Fuhrman: At approximately 8:00 pm, I was in – east of Palm Desert, in La Quinta Resort, at a Protective League seminar.

Ms. Clark: Was that a police officers’ function, Sir?

Fuhrman: Yes. I am a delegate in the Protective League – or was at that time.

Ms. Clark: Okay. And what time did you leave?

Fuhrman: I believe I left somewhere around 8:00 o’clock, just as the barbecue was starting.

Ms. Clark: And you left – when you left, you drove where?

Fuhrman: I drove to my home.

Ms. Clark: Remember what time you got home, Sir?

Fuhrman: About – about 10:30.

Ms. Clark: And was anyone home when you got there?

Fuhrman: My wife.

Ms. Clark: What time did you go to bed?

Fuhrman: I believe about 11:00, maybe a little later.

Ms. Clark: Did you receive a call at some point that night?

Fuhrman: Yes, I did.

Ms. Clark: After you went to bed?

Fuhrman: Excuse me? – Yes I did.

Ms. Clark: And what time did you get that call?

Fuhrman: At 1:05 in the morning.

Ms. Clark: Did it wake you up?

Fuhrman: Yes.

Ms. Clark: And what were you told in that call?

Fuhrman: I was told by my supervisor, the homicide coordinator, Detective Ron Phillips, that we had a double homicide, and it was at 875 South Bundy, and that I would meet him at the station, and we would get a vehicle with a homicide kit and go out to the scene from there.

Ms. Clark: Were you told anything about the identity of either victim?

Fuhrman: Yes. Detective Phillips said that the female victim might be the ex-wife of O.J. Simpson.[End of Quote].

Fuhrman, allegedly, came home about 10:30 pm, went to bed a
little after 11:00 pm, and was awakened, about 1:05 am, by a call from his supervisor, Detective Ronald Phillips. Together they drove to the murder scene at Bundy.

That is Fuhrman’s alibi. As a matter of fact, as Fuhrman’s "alibi" appears, it is not much different from O.J.’s – except for Fuhrman’s wife possibly supporting his alibi – should that ever become necessary!

After Detective Phillips had called Fuhrman, they agreed to meet at a police station in West Los Angeles, where they picked up a police car with a homicide kit. Eventually they arrived at Bundy about 2:10 am.

There are several things that bother me regarding Detective Mark Fuhrman’s alibi.

As close as I recall it, Detective Phillips testified that before Fuhrman left for the seminar that weekend, he had said (in essence):

 

If something comes up Sunday night, then don’t call me until after one o’clock, because I won’t be home until then!

 

Detective Phillips complied, so although the watch commander, Sgt. David Rossi was notified about the murders at 11:50 pm

– nobody called Detective Fuhrman until 1:05 am.

At 12:10 am, Sgt. Rossi called Sgt. Robert Riski, who was in a patrol car. Sgt. Riske drove to the murder scene where he arrived at about 12:17.

According to Detective Phillips, Sgt. Rossi did not call him until 12:55 am. Allegedly, Phillips, in turn, called someone else first, and then Detective Fuhrman at 1:05 am.

None of this makes any sense to me. I doubt that this is what happened at all. In the case of a double homicide, of course, time is essential. The police stand a much better chance of catching the killer if they can get to the murder scene immediately. For all they know, the murderer could have lost his ID at the murder scene, or an eyewitness could perhaps identify the murderer.

Sgt. Rossi, and Detective Phillips couldn’t know what they would find at the murder scene. Perhaps the murderer was on his way to the Mexican border or to the airport, already! Besides, what could be more important that night than a double homicide?

Of course, the watch commander, can get dispatched through to Sgt. Riske’s patrol car immediately. Sgt. Riske should have been on his way to Bundy within one minute.

Yet, Sgt. Rossi, allegedly, did not call anyone who could respond to the murder scene, for 20 minutes. Do you believe that!

Next problem: Detective Phillips, the homicide coordinator on stand by duty that night, should be notified immediately – also within a minute or two, or perhaps three, at the most! Yet, according to Detective Phillips, he was not notified until 12:55 am – one hour and five minutes after Sgt. Rossi was notified of the murders! What is going on here?

Phillips then, knowing that Detective Fuhrman would not be home until after 1:00 am, called some other detectives first. Then, at 1:05 am, he called Fuhrman at home.

By the time of the criminal trial, I think both the investigators, the prosecutors and the rest of the DA’s office knew that Fuhrman was the murderer. I shall soon pick Fuhrman’s alibi apart, and justify that Prosecutor Marcia Clark knew that Fuhrman was committing perjury with respect to the alibi Ms. Clark helped him concoct during his testimony.

Somehow, the first priority was to protect Detective Fuhrman! They all knew he was the murderer, but they could not allow the scandal to become public. Hence, to explain why Detective Phillips, allegedly, did not call Fuhrman until 1:05am, I think the LAPD on orders from the prosecutors, "fixed" the telephone records to make it appear that Sgt. Rossi – rather than Phillips or Fuhrman – was the one who messed up and didn’t call Phillips or Fuhrman until one full hour after Rossi was notified about the murders.

There are some indications that "something" went on during those first 65 minutes. The prosecutors blacked out several phone calls on the official phone records. Did Sgt. Rossi, or Detective Phillips call Fuhrman much earlier, but learn that he was not home?

After eventually calling Fuhrman at home, Detective Phillips called another number. Phillips himself said he just dialed the "wrong number." Yet, the prosecution would never release that "wrong number." Why not?

Could it be that Phillips called Fuhrman at home before 1:05 am, but nobody answered, because Fuhrman was out, disposing of the murder clothes and shoes – or planting evidence at Rockingham? So then Phillips had to call Fuhrman on his mobil phone?

Of course by the time we got around to the trial, the investigators and the prosecutors had to hide the fact that Fuhrman was not at home on the night of the murders. So the prosecution blacked out phone calls that could expose this?

Considering that Fuhrman, allegedly, came home about 10:30 pm, the murders were reported at 11:50 pm, and the first police officers arrived at Bundy at 12:17 am – I find it strange that Fuhrman didn’t call his supervisor, Detective Phillips – as well as his watch commander, Sgt. Rossi – as soon as he got home, to inform them that he got home earlier than expected, and was back on stand-by duty.

Did Fuhrman want to emphasize that he would be out of town until after 1:00 am, because he actually had decided to murder Nicole at 10:30 pm and fabricate a false alibi?

Did Fuhrman instruct his supervisor not to call him until after 1:00 am, because he didn’t want anyone to call him and find out that he wasn’t home until, say 11:40 pm – although he allegedly left the seminar at La Quinta around 8:00 pm?

Did detective Fuhrman "anticipate" that "something" would come up that night, and which he eventually would have to investigate? Or did Fuhrman, perhaps, know that something would come up?

 Did Fuhrman know that he was going to kill Nicole that night? Is that why he didn’t want to be called at home before one o’clock?

 Suppose Fuhrman is the murderer! He wanted to establish a false alibi (in case he should ever become a suspect) – if necessary using his wife’s testimony that he came home at 10:30 – while he in fact were out murdering Nicole and Ron, and trying to plant one of the murder gloves on O.J.’s property, or getting rid of his bloody shoes, clothes, and knife – and didn’t come home until, say 11:40 pm.

Again, suppose Fuhrman is the murderer. What if the bodies of Nicole and Ron had been discovered by a neighbor – just minutes after the murders – say about 11:00 pm? If so, normally, the police would have been alerted, someone would have called the homicide coordinator, Detective Phillips, and Phillips would have called Fuhrman at 11:05, while Fuhrman, perhaps, was still on his way home from O.J.’s Rockingham estate [where he tried to plant the glove] or from some other place where he had dumped the clothes, the shoes, and the knife!

Someone had to answer the phone, so Mrs. Fuhrman would pick it up. Phillips would ask for Fuhrman, and Mrs. Fuhrman would have to inform Phillips that her husband wasn’t home from La Quinta yet!

However, the other seminar participants would later testify to when Fuhrman left the seminar. So Fuhrman should have been home before 10:30 even! Fuhrman’s alibi goes down the drain!

 However, if no one calls Fuhrman, and Mrs. Fuhrman agrees to back up Fuhrman’s alibi, Fuhrman can claim that he got home at 10:30 pm – even if he didn’t come home until 11:40!

 

It doesn’t make sense that Fuhrman should tell Phillips – and perhaps Sgt. Rossi – not to call him at all, until after 1:00 am.

And it doesn’t make sense, either, that his instruction to Phillips and Rossi, about not calling him, was so "strict" that neither of them even tried to call Fuhrman, just to check if Fuhrman, perhaps, might have gotten home earlier than expected!

Let’s assume, hypothetically, that something very important came up – like someone detonating a bomb – and causing multiple casualties – in an apartment building in Fuhrman’s police district, or perhaps even in the police station itself – at, say about 11:55 pm!

 

What’s wrong with Phillips – or Sgt. Rossi – calling Fuhrman, say about midnight, just in case Fuhrman happened to walk in the door exactly at that time?

Or why couldn’t Phillips – or Rossi – have called at 12:05 am, just to leave a message with Mrs. Fuhrman, that Fuhrman should call Phillips – or the watch commander – as soon as he got home from La Quinta? That way Fuhrman wouldn’t have to be woken up again at 1:05 am, either!

 

Detective Phillips, the homicide coordinator, or Sgt. Rossi,
the watch commander – or both of them – were sitting on their "behinds"
– waiting for 75 minutes – before any of them even tried to give Detective Fuhrman a call! If we can believe them.

What if Fuhrman had gotten "indisposed" at La Quinta, so that someone would have had to substitute for him? Things like that happen, you know. If so – because Rossi or Phillips did not even try to call Fuhrman – the police would have wasted more than an hour of valuable investigation time!

 

Fuhrman’s and Phillips’ "story" doesn’t make sense – not by a long shot! There is something wrong with Detective Fuhrman’s so-called "alibi" (– and you shall soon learn what it is)!

Do you see? There is something "fishy" about Fuhrman’s instruction to Phillips (and perhaps, also to Sgt. Rossi):

 

If something comes up tonight, then don’t call me until after 1:00 am, because I won’t be home until then!

 

And there is something just as "fishy" about the fact that Detective Phillips – and Sgt. Rossi – did not even try to call Fuhrman before 1:05 am – just to check if he, perhaps, had come home earlier than expected! After all, they had a celebrity double homicide on their hands!

 

Allow me to gloat – just a little! Back in 1995, I did not know what alibi Detective Fuhrman, eventually, would come up with during his direct testimony in the criminal trial – or if he would even come up with an alibi. He was, after all, not a murder suspect, so he did not need to present an alibi if no one questioned him about it. I was too busy the day Fuhrman testified, so I did not even watch his testimony. I totally missed it – something that will become evident when you read my quote below.

However, I felt, so certain about my theory of Detective Mark Fuhrman being directly involved in the murders of Nicole and Ron, that I wrote, already then, in my first book, titled "If O.J. Didn’t ..." (Chapter 15, "Framing O.J."; page 95). Quote:

 

"Regardless of what alibi Fuhrman may come up with, he was out prior to one o’clock on the night of the murders. What time he left his home, where he went, what he did, and who saw him during that night, ought to be subject to scrutiny, just as O.J.’s alibi was.

Alibis may be manufactured! So even if Detective Fuhrman arguably spoke in front of 1,500 people at an out-of-state churchgoers’ convention, between 10:30 and 11:00 o’clock on the night of June 12, 1994, his alibi ought to be checked and rechecked, together with whoever supported it." [End of quote].

 

As you have just learned – although there was no need for him to do it – Fuhrman did present an alibi during his direct testimony for Prosecutor Marcia Clark, March 10, 1995.

Substitute "1,500 people at an out-of state churchgoers’ convention" (as I prophesized in my first book) with "a couple of hundred people at an out-of-town police officers’ convention" (at La Quinta) – and I predicted Mark Fuhrman’s actions – or his false alibi, rather – almost as if I were psychic! That will become evident once you read on.

 

There is more, regarding Fuhrman’s alibi. First of all, if it took Fuhrman from 8:00 to 10:30 pm to drive from La Quinta to his home in Los Angeles, and assuming he was driving at the legal speed limit, 55 mi/hr in 1994, he could have been at Bundy as early as 9:30 pm, if he had put a portable flashing red light on the roof of his car and gone 90 mi/hr instead!

90 mi/hr is not fast at all for a police car with a flashing red light. Many ordinary motorists, even, go 90 mi/hr on the same interstates today.

Regardless of when he actually got home, Fuhrman could have had plenty of time to murder Nicole and Ron around 10:30 pm. He could even have had time to stop by Nicole’s home around 9:30-10:00 pm to make sure she was home, and that she would be alone later that night!

One more thing. Isn’t it "convenient" that the only person who
could corroborate, or destroy, Fuhrman’s alibi, was
Mrs. Fuhrman – who could never be subpoenaed to testify against her husband, if she refused to?!

Nothing wrong said about Mrs. Fuhrman. I never met her, and know nothing about her. I am just philosophizing at this point.

It takes a special kind of woman to be married to a man like Fuhrman. Go back to your "book mark" (if you left one), where I discussed "The Fuhrman Tapes"!

Here is a man who uses the foulest of language – despises women in general – is the Grand Marshal of MAW ( Men Against Women) – is a racist – advocates genocide – hates interracial couples – is a brutal sadist – didn’t hesitate to grab a young girl by her hair – put a gun to her head – called her a bitch – threatened to kill her – and threw her down the stairs, just because she happened to live in the same building as four suspects! And he is a neo-Nazi who celebrates Hitler’s birthday as a holiday!

I would guess that Fuhrman’s wife either shares her husband’s Nazi philosophies, his hatred for blacks and for interracial couples, and that she loves him very much – or that she is totally dominated by her husband, to the point where she dares not oppose him or have an opinion of her own. Accordingly, I don’t rule out the possibility that Fuhrman’s wife would be willing to support a false alibi for her husband – if necessary.

 Let’s go back to the seminar! It didn’t make sense that Fuhrman,
as a
delegate, left before the rest of the participants. Furthermore, it was a weekend seminar. So for two days they had discussed all the "boring stuff." Then – according to Fuhrman – about 8:00 pm on Sunday night, the "serious" part of the seminar was over. It was time to relax, socialize, have some fun, and get something good to eat from the barbecue.

But what did Fuhrman do? He said – if we can believe him:

 

The heck with hamburgers and chicken legs! I am out of here!

 

Then he jumped in his car, and headed for Los Angeles! Did that make sense? Of course not! But now listen to this!

Fuhrman used the barbecue as a "time clock" for when – and an excuse for why – he left the seminar at 8:00 pm, in time to reach Los Angeles and his home at 10:30 pm.

 However, the "barbecue" was not on Sunday – as Fuhrman testified to! It was on Saturday!

Furthermore, on the night of the murders – when Detective Fuhrman allegedly left the seminar to drive to Los Angeles at 8:00 pm – there was not, even, any seminar!

Steven Worth, co-author – with Carl Jaspers – of the book, "Blood Oath" [Rainbow Books, Inc.; Highland City, FL] have researched Fuhrman’s so-called "alibi" for the time of the murders. According to Mr. Worth, three participants at that seminar have confirmed that the itinerary for the seminar on Saturday, June 11, and Sunday, June 12, was as follows.

 

Saturday June 11: The seminar lasted till 3-4:00 pm. Then there was an afternoon break. At seven o’clock in the evening there was a reception at the tennis court, and at eight o’clock in the evening there was a barbecue dinner.

Sunday June 12: The seminar had a morning session from 8:00 am, till 11:00 am – which marked the end of the seminar. The paricipants at the seminar checked out from the hotel before noon. There was no seminar – and certainly no barbecue – Sunday evening!

 

– Why did Fuhrman lie about the barbecue?

– Did Fuhrman "move" the barbecue to Sunday, in order to make it more "edible" that he left La Quinta at 8:00 pm on the night of the murders?

– Did Fuhrman lie about the barbecue to cover up the fact that he wasn’t in La Quinta at all on the evening of the murders?

 

Could Fuhrman have confused the two seminar days – Saturday and Sunday? Did he perhaps drive home after the barbecue on Saturday night – and just get his days mixed up during his testimony, thinking that the barbecue was on Sunday.

No chance! First of all, if he had any doubts, he should have checked with the organizers of the seminar, to make sure he was telling the truth during his sworn testimony. And if he didn’t think of doing that, Prosecutor Clark should have thought about it when she prepared Fuhrman for his testimony!

Besides, if Fuhrman drove home after the barbecue (on Saturday) he must have planned to get up again at 4:30 am on Sunday, to drive back for the morning session of the seminar on Sunday!

Fuhrman may – perceivably – have forgotten that the barbecue was on Saturday instead of Sunday. But he would not have forgotten it, if he drove home Saturday night, requiring him to get up at 4:30 am Sunday morning – to drive back to La Quinta for the Sunday morning session from 8-11:00 am.

By the way it sounds correct that the seminar ended after the morning session at 11:00 am on Sunday. That is normal for such weekend seminars. It gives the delegates time to check out before noon, so they don’t have to pay for an extra night at the hotel.

 

It is hard to prove today, about three years after the murders,
whether Furman’s
"alternative" alibi holds up or not. But I can say this:

 

In my opinion, Fuhrman has less of an alibi than O.J.! Besides, Fuhrman lied about his alibi in court!

 

I shall return to Fuhrman’s busted alibi later in this chapter. But first, it is time to say something about Prosecutor Marcia Clark.

I have earlier claimed that both the investigators and the prosecutors knew that O.J. was innocent, and that Mark Fuhrman, most likely, is the killer. However – for various reasons – they had to cover it up. My allegation will be corroborated later. But here is an "aperitif."

As a prosecutor, sometimes, you don’t know what to expect from a hostile witness. But "the first rule in the book," for a prosecutor about to examine his or her own witness, is that you prepare your own witness – so that you never risk asking a question you don’t know the answer to.

Indisputably, Prosecutor Clark must have gone over her questions with Detective Fuhrman in advance. The questions and answers clearly indicated that she had.

With all the suspect "baggage" Fuhrman carried at that time – being accused of having planted the Rockingham glove and the blood in the Bronco, being accused of racism and of having used the "N-word," etc. – Prosecutor Clark must have checked out Fuhrman’s information about the seminar.

Imagine the scandal, if Fuhrman, for instance, hypothetically, had lied about even being at the seminar, to cover up that he were having an affair – and that had surfaced later!

Obviously, Prosecutor Marcia Clark must have checked out Fuhrman’s answers. Hence, the prosecutor must have known that Detective Fuhrman lied! All it took for Prosecutor Clark to establish that, was a phone call to someone in the "Protective League." As I said then, and will repeat on several occasions in my book:

 

At the time of the trial, the prosecution knew that O.J. was innocent – and that Fuhrman was lying about almost everything. They must have known!

However – forget for a while the fact that Fuhrman was lying! Far more interesting is the question: Why was Fuhrman lying?

 

Remember, at that time, Fuhrman was only suspected of having planted the Rockingham glove behind O.J.’s house, at 6:15 am! He certainly didn’t need a false alibi for the time of the murders, around 10:35-10:45 pm (and perhaps, for a subsequent trip to Rockingham, in an effort to plant the glove, and then home, by around 11:15 pm) – to prove that he didn’t plant the glove behind O.J.’s house eight hours later!

Fuhrman only needed a false alibi for 10:30-11:15 pm – if he actually is the killer, and he didn’t want anyone, to even begin, to suspect him!

Let us, therefore, continue to scrutinize Detective Fuhrman’s alibi, as well as public statements he and his wife have made.

On "Rivera Live," sometime after the preliminary hearings in 1994, someone accused Detective Fuhrman of having planted the Rockingham glove behind O.J.’s house. I didn’t watch that particular program, but one of my sources have informed me that Mrs. Fuhrman, subsequently, called up Geraldo Rivera. Mr. Rivera, at that time, actually answered his phone, personally!

According to my source, Geraldo recounted the conversation on his program the next day. Allegedly, Mrs. Fuhrman sounded very nervous and had said (in essence):

 

Mark [Fuhrman] could not have planted the Rockingham glove behind O.J. Simpson’s house – because he was in bed with me at the time of the murders!

 

Think about that for a second! First of all, the murders took place at 10:35-10:40 pm. According to Detective Fuhrman’s sworn testimony (to Prosecutor Clark), Fuhrman got home at 10:30 pm and did not go to bed until "about 11:00 pm – maybe a little later"!

 

So Mark Fuhrman could not have been in bed with his wife at the time of the murders – if Fuhrman is telling the truth! Either Mr. Fuhrman, or Mrs. Fuhrman, was lying!

 

That is the first problem! But now it gets more serious! Fuhrman was never accused of having planted the glove about the time of the murders. Fuhrman was being accused of having planted the glove about 6:15 am – when he said he "found" it. That is almost eight hours after the murders!

So, what did Mrs. Fuhrman mean when she called up Geraldo Rivera and said [in essence]:

 

Mark [Fuhrman] could not have planted the Rockingham glove behind O.J. Simpson’s house – because he was in bed with me at the time of the murders!?

 

My observant readers have, of course, understood that Mrs.
Fuhrman, who is the only one to corroborate her husband’s
"10:30 alibi" – was lying to protect her husband! Mark Fuhrman was not in bed with Mrs. Fuhrman at the time of the murders – as Mrs. Fuhrman claimed.

Of course, Mrs. Fuhrman was trying to protect her husband from the accusation that he planted the Rockingham glove behind O.J.’s house. But the protection "alibi" she gave her husband did not cover the time when Mark Fuhrman was accused of having planted that glove?

Detective Fuhrman was being accused of having planted the glove around 6:15 am – while Mrs. Fuhrman tried to cover for him by saying that he was in bed with her at 10:35 pm. And even that was an obvious lie – according to Fuhrman’s own sworn direct testimony to Marcia Clark! What is going on here?

 

I think I know what is going on! Mrs. Fuhrman knew that her
husband murdered Nicole and Ron!
And she knew that her husband planted the glove behind O.J.’s house, in order to frame O.J.!

Mrs. Fuhrman was afraid of losing her husband, should he be exposed! So she tried to protect him by giving him a false alibi.

However, Mrs. Fuhrman didn’t know all the details – only that the murders were committed around 10:35-10:45 pm and that her husband planted the glove behind O.J.’s house, shortly thereafter.

She didn’t know – at that time – that her husband did not plant the glove at 10:40-10:42 – when Kato heard the three loud, heavy "thumps" on his wall – but that her husband returned to Rockingham the following morning, together with the investigators – and planted the glove then!

Mrs. Fuhrman thought that her husband committed the murders at around 10:30-10:40 pm, and that he planted the glove shortly thereafter. So when Detective Fuhrman was being accused of having brought the second glove from Bundy to Rockingham, and planted it behind O.J.’s house – Mrs. Fuhrman panicked!

That’s when she called up Geraldo Rivera personally, and – apparently very nervously – claimed that her husband could not have brought the glove from Bundy and planted it behind O.J.’s house, ". . . because he was in bed with me at the time of the murders"!

Obviously, that was a lie! Shortly, I shall prove that Mrs. Fuhrman not only lied about the exact time she and her husband, allegedly, were in bed together, but that her statement wasn’t even close to the truth! Mark Fuhrman – if we can believe him, at all – didn’t come home until 11:15-11:30 that night, at the earliest! [But bear with me on that!]

 

Normally I wouldn’t have accused Mrs. Fuhrman of lying,
or of knowing about the murders. But her statement is obviously false. She made her statement to protect her husband with a false alibi.
Later, Mark Fuhrman changed his story in a way that made Mrs. Fuhrman’s statement even more incorrect.

Hence, if I am wrong about this, then Mr. and Mrs. Fuhrman should blame themselves. Let me, anyway, remind my readers that I am just expressing my opinions and theories in this book. It is impossible to know, for sure, all the facts. I have to speculate to try to make some sense out of all the strange things that happened in this case.

What am I leading up to here? Well, a mysterious phone call was made by a woman, to an LAPD dispatcher, at around 10:30 to 10:45 pm on the night of the murders. The woman identified herself as calling from Channel 4 News. Investigations revealed that no one from Channel 4 made that call!

That is not strange – obviously the woman didn’t want to disclose her identity – so she was not from Channel 4. What is strange, however, is that the woman asked if the police were "sitting on two dead bodies in West L.A."!

 

Wow! This phone call occurred, in other words, just before, or at the exact same time as the murders took place at Bundy! And the bodies of Nicole and Ron were not to be discovered for another hour and a quarter, approximately!

 

My readers didn’t know about this? Well, if so, the reason is probably that this mysterious phone call has confused everyone who learned about it, to such an extent that they simply refuse to speculate over it. When people try to explain this – they get a "headache"! Who made that call? Nicole, only, was the intended target – Ron just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. So how did the caller know that two people were being murdered – or just about to be murdered – in West L.A.? Was a woman involved in the murders.

My readers’ guesses are as good as mine, I am sure. But there has to be an explanation! Here is what I think!

Remember what I suggested earlier? Mrs. Fuhrman knew that her husband and some accomplices, were out to murder Nicole that night. It seems logical to conclude that, from Mrs. Fuhrman’s own phone call to Mr. Rivera, during which call, she gives her husband a false alibi for the time of the murders – when he doesn’t, yet, need one!

Mrs. Fuhrman was not directly involved. She had just picked up bits and pieces. But her husband had informed her that she had to cover for him, by supporting his false alibi.

Mrs. Fuhrman had heard the names of both Nicole and O.J. mentioned. But she didn’t know, at that time, that only Nicole was to be killed, while O.J., instead, was to be framed for the murder.

 

Mrs. Fuhrman thought both Nicole and O.J. were to be murdered.

 

Mrs. Fuhrman either shared her husband’s racist attitudes and loved her husband enough to go along with him, and protect him – or she feared her husband strongly enough that she dared not oppose him or expose him.

Mrs. Fuhrman knew the murders were to take place around 10:30 pm, because that is the time she had been told by her husband to confirm that he came home!

So, here was Mrs. Fuhrman, sitting at home, alone, anxiously and nervously awaiting her husband’s arrival! The time was 10:25.

"Have they done it yet?" she wondered. Of course, she was worried that something might have gone wrong. Perhaps her husband had been arrested. Perhaps he would be convicted and sentenced to death!

Mrs. Fuhrman jumped a little at the sound of the clock on the wall, as it struck 10:30 pm. A little later the clock showed 10:35. Anxiously, Mrs. Fuhrman looked at the door. The clock showed 10:37.

If the bodies had been discovered – but her husband was not yet back – it could mean that something had gone wrong, and that he had been arrested. However, if the bodies had not yet been discovered, her husband might be "just around the corner."

Mrs. Fuhrman could not stand the uncertainty any longer. She had to know! Determined, she picked up the phone and called a local LAPD station in West L.A.

She could not introduce herself as "Mrs. Fuhrman," of course! But at the same time, she had to give the dispatcher a plausible reason for her strange inquiry. So, introducing herself as a news reporter from Channel 4, she asked if the police were

 

"sitting on two dead bodies in west L.A."

 

The dispatcher denied that. Mrs. Fuhrman hung up. Now she could relax a bit. Nothing had gone wrong – so far, at least!

 

Too far out!? Possibly! But if you think so, why don’t you try to come up with a better explanation, as to why a woman, wrongfully identifying herself as calling from Cannel 4 News, could call up the LAPD in West Los Andgeles, at the exact time when Nicole and Ron were being murdered – but their bodies had not yet been discovered, and ask if the police were "sitting on two dead bodies in west L.A."!

 

However, this was just a digression. Since this phone call is, perhaps, the greatest unsolved mystery of this entire murder case, I thought I should try to put my spin on it.

In conjunction with Mrs. Fuhrman’s attempts to give her husband an obviously false alibi for that exact time – the time of the murders – I don’t think my theory about the mysterious phone call is so far fetched, after all! It is, at least, better than anything else I have heard suggested, so far!

 

Back to what we do know! Do you think you have heard it all,
now? Think again! Here come Fuhrman’s real problems:

Shortly after the murders, I was the only person who had put all the pieces together in this murder mystery, and explained how all the pieces of the puzzle fit my theory of Fuhrman being the murderer (in my first book).

No one else believed that at first. But gradually, more and more people started to take my theory seriously – in particular those who supported O.J. and believed in his innocence. By the end of 1996 several independent private investigators were looking into the theory that Fuhrman actually murdered Nicole and Ron.

While Fuhrman had been cocky before – he suddenly became nervous. His book, which he promptly decided to write, was a clear example of "damage control"! He started to appear on countless TV and radio talk shows, trying to rehabilitate himself, and explain away the few mistakes he had made – and which I had discovered. He appeared confident. But that is how he appeared, also when he perjured himself during the criminal trial.

I had understood how Fuhrman could have aborted a first attempt to plant the glove at O.J.’s house – falling against the wall – and instead planted the glove the following morning. Or, perhaps the thumps on Kato’s wall were deliberately caused by an accomplice. Perhaps an accomplice thumped the wall, just to make it appear that O.J. lost the glove before he left for Chicago. Perhaps Fuhrman’s plan, all along, was to plant the glove the following morning, when he arrived to investigate the murders.

Hence, to me, the thumps on Kato’s wall at around 10:40-10:42 pm did not represent the time when the glove was planted. I explained that in my first book, "If O.J. Didn’t ..."

 

Fuhrman could have had one accomplice at Rockingham, thumping on the wall with a baseball bat – over the fence from inside the neighbor’s property – as soon as Fuhrman called him on a cellular phone and said that Nicole was killed.

Another accomplice could have substituted for Fuhrman some place far away, using Fuhrman’s credit card to give Fuhrman a false alibi. Meanwhile, Fuhrman himself could have committed the murder of Nicole (and Ron). The plan was for Fuhrman to plant the glove the following morning, but make people believe it was lost by O.J. shortly after the murders.

 

As more and more private investigators read my book (I assume) and seriously started to look into my early theory, Fuhrman grew increasingly more nervous. By the time his book surfaced, he could feel private investigators clawing at his heels.

One key point in this murder mystery is that the thumps on Kato’s wall were caused by the murderer (or one of his accomplices) – but that was not the time when the glove was planted! Fuhrman planted the glove the next morning.

However, Fuhrman could not have found the Rockingham glove at Bundy, when he came there to investigate the murders at 2:10 am. If Fuhrman planted the glove behind O.J.’s house around 6:15 am – then he must have brought the glove with him to Bundy, and on to Rockingham that morning. And if he brought the glove with him to Bundy at 2:10 am – then he is the killer!

So, around the end of February 1997, Fuhrman was seen and heard on radio and TV talk shows, almost every day, calling everyones attention to the "thumps" on Kato’s wall at around 10:40- 10:42 pm, and suggesting strongly, that those thumps were caused by the murderer – O.J. – depositing or losing the Rockingham glove behind his house, before leaving for Chicago. Are you still with me? O.K.

Today, Fuhrman has to get people away from the notion that he planted the glove at 6:15 am, because that makes him part of the murder plot. Instead, today, Fuhrman must convince people that the glove was deposited around 10:42 pm. Fuhrman suddenly needed a better alibi for the time of the murders. Yes? But didn’t he have an alibi? No!

As long as people only suspected Fuhrman of having planted the glove at 6:15 am the morning after the murders, Fuhrman was not too concerned about his alibi for the actual time of the murders. As long as his wife corroborated that he came home at 10:30 pm, that was O.K.

However, by February 1997, Mark Fuhrman sensed the heat was building. Several investigators had long since found out that he lied about the barbecue, that there was not even a seminar on the evening of the murders, that his wife had lied about him being in bed with her at the time of the murders, etc., etc. Investigators began realizing that Fuhrman, probably, was the murderer.

So Fuhrman began emphasizing that the glove must tie in with the thumps on Kato’s wall. At first, I didn’t understand why he was pushing that issue so vehemently. But then, in February, 1997 on the "O’Reilly Hour" (Fox TV), Fuhrman "shot himself in the foot" – because he had to, sooner or later!

[I have to rely on one of my sources, since I didn’t watch the program]. When challenged about the Rockingham glove, Fuhrman again emphasized that the glove must have been deposited – by the murderer – in connection with the thumps on Kato’s wall. Then he finally said it! [In essence]:

 

I know where I was at 10:40 pm! I was pumping gas in Pomona! [40-50 minutes from Bundy!]. But O.J. cannot tell us where he was – because he was behind his house, where he lost the murder glove!

 

My immediate response to my "source" as we were talking on the phone, was that Fuhrman must sense his "La Quinta/barbecue alibi" was falling apart and that private investigators were on to him. He needed a better alibi for the time of the murders. But he could not indicate that he considered himself a murder suspect in need of an alibi – so he could not come right out and present it. He had to introduce his new alibi indirectly, pretending he was simply attacking O.J.’s alibi, instead.

As soon as my "source" informed me about Fuhrman’s new "pumping gas in Pomona alibi," I told her that Fuhrman’s objective, probably, was not simply to attack O.J.’s alibi – as he pretended – but to introduce his own Pomona alibi, indirectly. Hence, he must have a way of corroborating this new alibi, which he so cleverly tried to introduce.

"Most likely," I told my source, "Fuhrman must have in his possession a credit card receipt from Pomona, showing both the date, June 12, 1994, and the time, approximately 10:40 pm! I think he will tell us that himself – not yet, but shortly"!

Right on! Some time later (February 28, 1997), on "Talk Back Live" (CNN), Fuhrman, again, repeated the same statement in the context of attacking O.J.’s alibi!

Apparently, Fuhrman was just accusing O.J. of not having an alibi for the time when the thumps on Kato’s wall occurred – which, according to Fuhrman, coincided with the Rockingham glove being lost (by O.J.).

Then – "casually," in the same sentence – he added, that he himself, for instance, knew exactly where he was at that time, because he had used his "Gold American Express" credit card to pump gas in Pomona, at the time Kato heard the thumps on his wall!

Today, apparently, Fuhrman wants us to believe that he can prove that he stopped for gas in Pomona, on his way from La Quinta to his home, on the night of the murders.

But this is where things are starting to fall apart for Fuhrman. If Fuhrman was pumping gas in Pomona at 10:40 – he could not have been home until 11:15 -11:30 pm!

If so, not only did he lie under oath in his direct testimony for Prosecutor Clark, when he said he got home around 10:30 pm. His wife must also have lied when she said that Fuhrman was in bed with her at the time of the murders!

Fuhrman was clever, too, though – or tried to be! He did not want to mention directly that he had a "credit card alibi" for the time of the murders. So he didn’t bring this up until the end of February, 1997. Furthermore – when he eventually brought up his "Pomona alibi" – he introduced it through the "back door" – by using it, indirectly, to attack O.J. in connection with the glove behind O.J.’s house.

 

Why didn’t Fuhrman come forward with his c/c receipt from Pomona during his testimony in the criminal trial? Why did he instead lie about getting home at 10:30 pm and going to bed at a little past 11:00 pm?

 

Because no one asked him about it! Fuhrman was not a murder suspect at that time. After the murders he didn’t want to volunteer the information about pumping gas in Pomona at 10:45. He didn’t want to "explain" that he had a "credit card alibi" for the time of the murders – as long as no one accused him of being the murderer.

The "trick" about letting someone else use your credit card at an automated credit card machine, like a gas pump, is as old as such gas pumps! Therefore, this is not an "alibi" you bring up yourself! You just keep it – in case someone else asks you:

 

"Where were you at 10:30 on the night of the murders?"!

 

Everyone speculated about Fuhrman having planted the Rockingham glove – at 6:15 am. But no one could explain how he could have done it – because there were already seventeen officers at Bundy when Fuhrman arrived there to investigate, around 2:10 am, and neither of them had seen a second murder glove.

Had Fuhrman come forward and said: "By the way, I have a credit card receipt showing that I was in Pomona, pumping gas – when Nicole and Ron were killed [. . . so I could not have murdered them!]" then, someone might have asked: "Why the heck is he telling us that?" Someone might have figured out that a guy pumping gas in Pomona – using Fuhrman’s credit card – didn’t mean that Fuhrman himself was in Pomona at 10:40!

The next conclusion would not be far behind – namely that if someone used Fuhrman’s credit card, to give Fuhrman a false alibi for the time of the murders, then Fuhrman might actually be the killer. If so, that could explain how he could have planted the Rockingham glove – why the blood on that glove was still wet when he showed it to Detective Vannatter, eight hours after the murders, etc., etc.

This was exactly what I pointed out in my first book, "If O.J. Didn’t ..." (chapter 17, "More Pieces That Fit The Puzzle," page 107). [Discussing Fuhrman’s perjury regarding his use of the N-word]. Quote:

 

So why did he lie? What was he so afraid of?

Obviously, Detective Fuhrman was afraid that admitting to having used racial slurs, might have opened up a Pandora’s box to his true character, and possibly given someone the idea that he not only planted the glove because he was a racist and wanted to harm O.J. – but that he actually murdered Nicole and Ron, and framed O.J. for the murders.

It seems obvious that Fuhrman planted the glove! That does not mean that Fuhrman found the second glove at Bundy when he arrived between 2 and 3 o’clock in the morning. He could have had it all along, because he might actually have murdered Nicole and Ron! [End of quote].

 

Suddenly the entire murder plot could have started to unravel. Therefore, during his testimony, Fuhrman said nothing about pumping gas in Pomona and, hence, that his only alibi for the time of the murders, was a credit card receipt someone else could have provided.

It was safer – and less conspicuous – to "move" the La Quinta barbecue from Saturday to Sunday, and just – casually – mention that he drove straight home from La Quinta, got home at 10:30 – and have his wife corroborate his alibi.

Since he couldn’t use his "Pomona alibi," Fuhrman had to state that he came home, at least, a little before the murders took place. However, towards the end of 1996, Fuhrman sensed that private investigators were on to him. He sensed that the La Quinta story was unravelling. By late February, 1997, he needed a better alibi for his timeline, than simply the non-existing barbecue in La Quinta – and his, obviously, "lying" wife!

So, out of necessity, he dug out the old credit card receipt from Pomona, which one of his accomplices had actually provided on the night of the murders – as an alibi for Fuhrman – in case Fuhrman should become an immediate murder suspect after he "found" the Rockingham glove, back in 1994!

Sure enough, Fuhrman’s new "pumping gas in Pomona" alibi directly contradicted his sworn testimony in the criminal trial. Actually, this exposed a new case of perjury by Fuhrman, which no one was aware of until now. So why would Fuhrman risk that?

Well, it wasn’t really an added risk. Just as I predicted and suggested in "If O.J. Didn’t ...," Fuhrman’s "alibi" about the Protective League seminar was false. Investigators had taken my advice and revealed that. It was just a matter of time, before that "secret" would explode in Fuhrman’s face. So he had to think further ahead, and introduce his new "Pomona alibi" before his "La Quinta barbecue alibi" got publicly busted.

Was Mark Fuhrman’s "perfect murder" plot beginning to fall apart around the winter of 1997?

Is this why Fuhrman first told Larry King, cockily, on February 26, that he would be willing to debate "anyone" on "Larry King Live" – but later changed his mind when he heard that his opponent would be Pat McKenna [one of O.J.’s private investigators]?

No question about it – Fuhrman’s alibi for the time of the murder is not trustworthy. It is "manufactured"! Even more suspect, however, is the fact that Fuhrman has been pushing a manufactured alibi in the first place.

 

Why should Fuhrman have to manufacture a false alibi for the time of the murders – if he is not the murderer?