Question about the glove


I haven't seen episode 5 yet, so if you see where I'm going with this, and know that it will be explained to me in episode 5, please continue browsing other topics on this message board :)

So, I need the input from someone who either knows more about the trial than I do, or someone who noticed something I failed to see in the documentary.

In the middle of episode 4, when they were starting to tell the story of how Fuhrman might have planted the glove, I asked my girlfriend: "Wouldn't it have made him look really stupid if it had turned out that O.J had an alibi, and couldn't possibly have done it?" Then I thought, 'well maybe he somehow already knew O.J was unaccounted for.' After all, such a gaping hole in the story the defense was spinning would surely be exposed by the prosecution.

Then 10 minutes later, one of O.J's friends (don't remember his name), brought up the exact same paradox. So my question is: Did the prosecution completely fail to not bring attention to the fact that Fuhrman would've taken a ridiculous risk planting the glove without knowing the whereabouts of O.J, or is there some piece of information here that the documentary didn't give us?

I should also mention that I haven't seen episode 5 yet, so if everything is explained there, you may disregard this entire post.

reply

Yes. It was mentioned.

reply

When cops first went to OJ's place, they might have very much expected him to have an alibi.

If they suspected him of being responsible for the murders, they may very well have assumed that he'd have hired a hitman, and then deliberately ensured he had an alibi for the time of Nicole's death.

In any case, if the glove was indeed planted, then OJ having an alibi would not be a problem for cops. They could just say either (a) the killer was someone who knew OJ, and/or (b) the killer wanted to frame OJ.

If cops spent all their time worrying about how things would pan out in the future, they'd never plant evidence.


reply

The prosecution distanced itself from Mark Fuhrman and let him be ripped to shreds on tv, they didn't even bother to counteract the defense's accusations. Furthermore Marcia Clark went in front of a jury and said Furhman was the worst the LAPD had to offer. She lost the trial right then and there.

reply

I think the idea that the defense put forth was not simply that Fuhrman was a racist and he planted the glove because he wanted to accuse a wealthy, well respected black man of committing a crime against two white people. The idea goes all the way to the entire group of cops and forensic people who collected the evidence and the people who did the testing in the two separate labs. The idea is that they are all corrupt.

The idea is that every single person involved with the crime scene and the testing of the evidence, were also involved with attempting to set up OJ Simpson. That means that they were trying to suggest that someone took the blood that they got from OJ the next day and put it on the evidence. They are suggesting Furhman, like you said, took the glove from one crime scene to the other to discover it. That hair from the victims was placed in the car and the house and on the gloves. That blood was planted on OJ's car. Pretty much that all the evidence was planted because all the cops and forensic people as a group are corrupt and they were all working together to set up OJ Simpson because he is black even though a lot of them didn't know each other, hadn't worked together, and even though Furhman showed up after like ten people had been there and seen the glove.

That is all, of course, complete nonsense. Even if we take away the blood evidence. The fact that it was OJ's blood and Nicole and Ron's blood all over everywhere, on the glove, on the socks, in the house, in the car. Let's take it out. OJ's story changed in his interview with the police multiple times about what he was doing at the time and how he cut his hand. He had a deep cut on his left hand, right where the blood drops were located as they dripped when the person walked away. He owned gloves just like that. He owned shoes just like that. Someone saw a white van type car leaving the crime scene out of the back street. A woman saw OJ running a red light the night of the murders and it fits the timeline. Kato hearing someone run into the wall at the back of the house near where the glove was found on the night of the murders. The driver of the limo ringing the buzzer at OJ's house over and over again and him not answering. The driver going around the block and the bronco not being there and then it suddenly being there. The bronco being parked outside of the gate when OJ never did that. The driver seeing someone entering the front door after coming around from the side of the house. Then OJ answers his calls, saying he was asleep. The bag OJ wouldn't let anyone touch. The person who saw OJ stuffing something into a trash can at LAX. His reaction after he gets the call that Nicole is dead. He doesn't ask about his children. The suicide note. The Bronco chase. The bag full of disguises and a passport and a bunch of money. The history of abuse with OJ and Nicole. The multiple demostic calls to the police. Nicole being worried that OJ might kill her. It was him. Without the blood, it was him a hundred times over. The evidence is overwhelming to the extreme.

reply