Time table required by Bob August (Prosecutor)?
Buffalo_Bandit
Such as:
At 9:00 P.M. OJ is with Kato and they go out to eat.
AT ????? OJ takes a nap
At 10:4? OJ answers his door because the driver rang the bell.
If you could set it up something like this, that would be great.
You can then correct any mistakes that I made hera.
At 12:30 A.M. Arnelle arrives home
Who saw OJ in his Bronco?
Bob August
Buffalo_Bandit wrote:
I will take pity on you. Check out this web site.
http://www.geocities.com/bobaugust/timeline3.htm
BLP740
Shively never appeard during the Preliminary Hearings
*************************************************
JUNE 30, 1994 (DAY 1)
Michelle Kestler--LAPD Asst. Lab Director/Serology
Kestler actually testified at an evidentiary hearing before the preliminary
hearing started, in order to establish what evidence was gathered at the crime
scene and whether there was enough evidence to share with the defense. Kestler
was the first to establish the scope of forensic evidence against Simpson.
Allen Wattenberg--Owner of Ross Cutlery Store
Wattenberg testified that Simpson bought a 14-inch Stiletto knife from the
store, though Wattenberg had no receipt for the sale.
Jose Camacho--Employee of Ross Cutlery
It was Camacho who sold his story to a supermarket tabloid for $12,500. He
testified that he sold it to the highest bidder. He was paid following his
grand jury testimony. Camacho said he sold the knife to Simpson, who allegedly
bought it with a $100 bill.
John DeBello--Manager of Mezzaluna Restaurant
Mezzaluna was where Ronald Goldman worked for four months as a waiter. DeBello
testified that when he arrived for work on June 12, 1994, Nicole Simpson was
already dining there. Goldman punched out at 9:33 p.m., and DeBello spoke to
him for about 12 minutes afterward. DeBello said Goldman left the restaurant no
later than 9:50 p.m.
JULY 1, 1994 (DAY 2)
Karen Crawford--Bartender at Mezzaluna
Crawford worked the evening of June 12. She testified that Nicole Simpson was
with a party of ten and left between 8:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. Afterwards, a
woman in the party called the restaurant, saying she had left a pair of
prescription eyeglasses. Crawford testified she placed the glasses in an
envelope marked "Nicole Simpson." Nicole later called the bar and spoke to
Goldman, who took the glasses to Simpson when he left.
Stewart Tanner --Waiter/Bartender at Mezzaluna
Tanner was tending bar at Mezzaluna the night of June 12. He testified that he
saw Goldman and Nicole Simpson in the restaurant. On cross-examination, the
defense attempted to impeach Tanner with a statement he had given police, where
he said Goldman told him he was taking the glasses to Nicole. In court, Tanner
said he did not recall Goldman volunteering to take the glasses to her, but
noted that many people were talking at the same time when police were present.
Pablo Fenjves--Neighbor of Nicole Simpson
Fenjves testified that he was watching the 10 p.m. news on television the
evening of June 12 when he heard a dog barking at about 10:15 p.m. The dog was
still barking when he went to his bedroom at 11 p.m., and when he went to bed a
half-hour later. Fenjves looked out his window toward Nicole Simpson's condo,
but did not go outside.
Steven Schwab --Neighbor of Nicole Simpson
Schwab testified he walked his dog every night at 11:30 p.m. except for Sunday,
when he walked the dog earlier because he watched different television
programs. At about 10:55 p.m., he encountered a barking Akita with bloody paws
and legs. Schwab called police, who offered to call the Animal Control Board.
The defense attempted to impeach Schwab, who had initially told police he found
the dog at 11:15 p.m. Schwab testified that was an error, which he said he had
already reported to police. S
ukru Boztepe--Neighbor of Nicole Simpson
Boztepe testified at the preliminary hearing that he arrived home on June 12 at
11:40 p.m. and saw Schwab with the dog. Boztepe offered to take the Akita for
the evening. Afterwards, he and his wife took the dog for a walk, thinking it
might lead them to its home. The dog led them to Nicole Simpson's body. Boztepe
then called police from a neighbor's home.
Bettina Rasmussen--Neighbor of Nicole Simpson
Rasmussen is Sukru Boztepe's wife. At the preliminary hearing, she testified
that she briefly saw Nicole Simpson's body. Rasmussen also testified that the
walkway where Simpson's body lay was lit only by street lights.
JULY 5, 1994 (DAY 3)
NOTE: The final witness on this day, Det. Marc Fuhrman, was testifying in
connection with a motion by the defense to suppress evidence police obtained
during a search of O.J. Simpson's home the morning after the two killings.
Alan Park--Limousine Driver
Park drove O.J. Simpson to the airport for a flight to Chicago the night of
June 12. He testified that he arrived at 10:25 p.m., some 20 minutes early.
Park rang the buzzer/intercom at the gate and got no answer. There were few or
no lights on in the house. Soon after, Park said he spotted a black person
wearing dark clothes walk into the house and turn on some lights. He rang the
intercom again. This time Simpson answered. He explained that he had just
gotten out of the shower after oversleeping and would be down in a few minutes.
Simpson appeared five minutes later. Park testified nothing appeared unusual
about Simpson, who upon arriving at the airport took his black duffel bags with
him, rather than put them on a luggage cart.
Brian "Kato" Kaelin --Caretaker/guest of Simpson
A friend of Nicole Simpson, Kaelin had worked as a live-in babysitter of sorts
until he began living in one of the Simpsons' guest houses in exchange for
being a caretaker. Kaelin testified he spent a lot of time with O.J. Simpson on
the day of the killings. Simpson told Kaelin he was planning to go later that
day to see his daughter perform in a dance recital. In passing, Simpson said
his relationship with Nicole was over. At about 9 p.m. Simpson borrowed $20
from Kaelin for dinner and to tip the skycaps, as he only had $100 bills. The
two picked up food at McDonalds. Kaelin testified that while on the phone at
10:40 p.m. he heard loud thumps, went outside to investigate and found nothing.
He did not see Simpson again until he got into the limo to go to the airport.
Rachel Ferrara--Friend of Brian "Kato" Kaelin
Kaelin was talking on the telephone with Ferrara when he heard the thumps,
which Ferrara said scared Kaelin. Ferrara testified that Kaelin called her back
15 minutes later and told her he ran into Simpson while investigating the
noise. During this conversation, Kato's other line rang, and Ferrara said it
was Simpson asking him to set the house alarm.
Det. Marc Fuhrman--Los Angeles Police Department
Fuhrman testified that he arrived at the scene of the killings at 2:10 a.m. and
spotted a bloody heel print, plus a dark, stocking knit cap and a brown leather
glove near one of Ronald Goldman's feet. After the crime scene was secured,
Fuhrman and three other detectives drove to O.J. Simpson's house to inform him
that his wife was murdered. After ringing the intercom for 10 or 15 minutes,
the detectives later phoned Simpson's house and received no answer.
Fuhrman testified he then walked toward a white Ford Bronco parked outside
Simpson's home. He noticed it was parked in a strange way. With his flashlight
Fuhrman noticed what appeared to be blood on the driver's side door. Fuhrman
told the lead detective, Philip Vannatter, there was a "real problem," and
speculated that someone inside the house might be in danger. Fuhrman jumped the
wall and opened the electronic gate for the others. Police later found Kaelin
and Simpson's daughter Arnelle inside the bungalows in separate rooms. After
Kaelin related the story of the thumping, Fuhrman investigated and found a
bloody leather glove which matched the one found at the crime scene.
JULY 6, 1994 (DAY 4)
NOTE: All witnesses on this day gave testimony in connection with the motion to
suppress, which was decided at the end of the day in favor of the prosecution.
Det. Philip Vannatter--Los Angeles Police Department
Vannatter's testimony echoed much of Fuhrman's. In addition, he noted that
after waking Arnelle Simpson, she was surprised to find out her father was not
home. She took the detectives inside her father's house, where she called
Simpson's assistant to find out where he was. Vannatter said the detectives did
not search the house, aside from looking for the maid in her room. Vannatter,
like Fuhrman, justified the police jumping the fence for fear that someone else
was dead or injured inside. After Fuhrman found the glove and other detectives
spotted red stains on the driveway, Vannatter declared the house a crime scene
and went to get a search warrant.
On cross-examination, the defense attempted to show Vannatter was lying and
that concerns about an emergency were little more than an attempt to explain
away an illegal entry and search. Vannatter also testified that while he
believed there could be a hostage situation, he and his men did not enter
Simpson's house with guns drawn, nor were they wearing bulletproof vests or
call for backup.
Brian "Kato" Kaelin--Caretaker/guest of Simpson
Kaelin testified that after police awoke him they did not express concern about
a murder or suicide at the house.
Arnelle Simpson--O.J. Simpson's daughter
Simpson's daughter testified for the defense she told police that her father
was out of town. This contradicted Vannatter's testimony that she had expressed
surprise upon being told that her father was not home. Arnelle also testified
police did not talk of a murder or suicide.
Cathy Randa--O.J. Simpson's assistant
Randa, an employee of O.J. Simpson for 20 years, testified she received a call
from Arnelle asking the whereabouts of her father. Randa said the trip to
Chicago had been planned for two months.
Dennis Fung--Los Angeles Police Department Criminalist
Fung was called to the Simpson house at 5:30 a.m. on June 13 and arrived at
7:10 a.m., he testified. Fung gathered "red stain" evidence and the glove. Fung
said at least one stain on the Bronco tested positive for blood.
JULY 7, 1994 (DAY 5)
NOTE: Regular testimony in the preliminary hearing resumed on this day.
Det. Tom Lange--Los Angeles Police Department
Lange is with the robbery/homicide unit. Lange gave a detailed description of
the crime scene, including bloody droplets and footprints going away from the
bodies. Lange believed both came from the suspect. He also noted the button
inside Nicole Simpson's apartment to automatically open the outside gate was
broken. This testimony was apparently elicited to show Nicole had to manually
open the gate when a visitor came over.
Det. Philip Vannatter--Los Angeles Police Department
Vannatter returned to the stand and testified that he attended the autopsies of
both victims and obtained blood samples. He also had photographs taken of a cut
on O.J. Simpson's knuckle. Vannatter said he first saw Simpson when he was
handcuffed at his home after returning from Chicago. Vannatter drove him to the
police station and took a statement. On cross-examination, Vannatter said that
while he believed the murderer was wearing gloves and that the murderer took
the second glove to where it was found at Simpson's house, he conceded no
bloody footprints or droplets were located near the second glove.
Thano Peratis--Registered Nurse
Peratis testified at the preliminary hearing he took blood from Simpson and
bandaged his cut knuckle. Peratis said the small cut looked to be twelve to
twenty-four hours old and did not know what caused it.
Dennis Fong--Los Angeles Police Department Criminalist
Upon returning to the stand, Fong testified that sometimes tests results can be
wrong, but that he had never encountered any errors in some 10,000 tests which
he has conducted.
JULY 8, 1994 (DAY 6)
Gregory Matheson--Los Angeles Police Department Supervising Criminalist
Matheson testified how criminalists look at genetic markers in blood to match
blood to an individual. He noted that a blood droplet found at the murder scene
match's Simpson's blood. Matheson said only one in 200 people have blood that
matches the droplet found at the murder scene. Matheson conceded during defense
questioning that this meant 40,000 to 80,000 people in the Los Angeles area
alone have the same blood which matches the droplet.
Dr. Irwin Golden--Deputy Medical Examiner, L.A. County Coroner's Office
Golden performed the autopsies on both victims. At the preliminary hearing, he
testified Nicole Simpson's most serious injury was a cut across her neck which
severed her larynx, both corrated arteries, one jugular and one deep enough to
nick her spinal column. She suffered four other knife wounds to the neck, a
blow to the head and defensive wounds on her hands. Goldman was stabbed
multiple times to the head, neck and body. Golden said Goldman's defensive stab
wounds indicated he put up a fight. On cross-examination, Golden said both
victims died between 9 p.m. and midnight, but could not say who died first.
She appeard before the Grand Jury.
"the truth is not always popular, its always correct"
BLP
*opinions mine*
Bob August
BLP740 wrote:
Betty, help me out here, what are you talking about? Yes, Jill Shively appeared
before the Grand Jury, so what? What is your point? What do you think I fabricated?
bobaugust
BLP740
I copied this from a header that was supposedly from the Preliminary hearing.
Glad to have your cronology; that makes it easy.
BLP740
MR. HEIDSTRA: Around 10:40 or something.
MR. COCHRAN: About 10:40 P.M.?
MR. HEIDSTRA: Yeah.
*************************************************
Approximately 10:35: Robert Heidstra heard Nicole's dog barking.
Approximately 10:40: Heidstra heard Goldman arrive at Nicole's condo.
*************************************************
Where the hell did this come from??????
*************************************************
Approximately 10:45:
Manufactured evidence for Civil Trial.
*************************************************
Shively's testimony at Prelim.
2 Q. ON THE DATE OF JUNE 12, 1994, DO YOU RECALL
3 LEAVING YOUR HOUSE IN THE EVENING?
4 A. YES, I DO.
5 Q. WHAT TIME DID YOU LEAVE?
6 A. I LEFT MY HOUSE AT 10:45 P.M.
7 Q. ARE YOU CERTAIN OF THAT TIME?
8 A. YES, I AM.
9 Q. WHY ARE YOU SO CERTAIN?
10 A. BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO GET TO THE STORE TO
11 THAT CLOSED AT 11 AND I WANTED TO GET SOMETHING TO EAT.
12 Q. WHEN YOU LEFT YOUR HOUSE, DID YOU NOTICE
13 WHETHER THE TRAFFIC THAT NIGHT WAS LIGHT OR HEAVY?
14 A. IT WAS VERY LIGHT.
15 THERE WERE VERY FEW CARS OUT.
16 Q. DO YOU HAPPEN TO RECALL WHAT THE WEATHER WAS
17 LIKE THAT NIGHT?
18 A. IT WAS KIND OF -- IT WASN'T REAL HOT. IT WAS
19 KIND OF A COOL BREEZE.
20 Q. SO YOU WERE DRIVING FAIRLY QUICKLY?
21 A. AROUND 45; 40, 45.
22 Q. AND AS YOU WERE DRIVING, WHAT STREET WERE YOU
23 TAKING?
24 A. SAN VICENTE, EAST.
25 Q. YOU WERE GOING EASTBOUND ON SAN VICENTE?
26 A. RIGHT.
27 Q. DID YOUR TRAVELING TAKE YOU TO THE INTERSECTION
28 OF SAN VICENTE AND BUNDY?
152
1 A. YES, IT DID.
*************************************************
At this time OJ was supposedly at 875 S Bundy killing Goldman. Remember Nicole
was knocked out, he still had to cut her throat and be at Shively's corner by
10:45.
How stupid does one have to be to vouch for this impossible creation?
Q. And what time was it, sir, when you heard the dog barking like
crazy, and then made the decision to cut across the alleyway?
A. This must have been around 10:30, 10:35.
Bob August
BLP740 wrote:
Betty, let me help you out here, you are getting yourself all mixed up. The times
that all of these witnesses are testifying to are estimated times, not real or
exact times. What is important is the sequence of the events that happened. The
only time we know for sure are times that are supported by telephone records.
You seem to be confused about the time of about 10:40 when Heidstra heard Goldman
arrive and surprise Simpson. What exactly is confusing you?
You keep saying "Manufactured evidence for Civil Trial." What are you talking
about? Tell us please what do you think was "manufactured" for the civil trial.
And then you write,
"At this time OJ was supposedly at 875 S Bundy killing Goldman. Remember Nicole
was knocked out, he still had to cut her throat and be at Shively's corner by
10:45.
How stupid does one have to be to vouch for this impossible creation?"
I guess as stupid as your question. You refer to testimony where Shively said she
left her house at about 10:45. and then wonder how Simpson could be at the
intersection at 10:45. You are very confused again. If Simpson was at the
intersection of San Vicente and Bundy at 10:45 Shively would not have seen him. So
tell us how your reasoning and your question makes any sense.
But since I'm such a nice guy, I will explain it to you. Shively left her house
about 10:45. Simpson left Bundy about 10:45. they both arrived at the intersection
of San Vicente and Bundy at about the same time. That is when Shively saw Simpson.
Get it?
bobaugust
BLP740
and put forth a cogent misconception of what happened.
Not until hell freezes over will you convince me that the best truth as to what
happened came forth two years after the crime.
When all is said and done, "HE BE FREE"
LOL
Bob August
BLP740 wrote:
Betty, none of your reasons have anything to do with the actual evidence or the
crime. You use only excuses to keep yourself in denial of the truth.
"Too many documented facts on the web put forth a cogent misconception of what
happened"? I have no idea what that means or how it has anything to do with the
reality of these murders. What facts are you talking about? There is a lot of pure
bull crap and unsupported speculation on the web about this case, a lot of from
Wagner. None of those unsupported fantasies have any resemblance to the truth.
There are a lot of unsupported fantasy theories offered on this newsgroup. They
have all been shown to be false. All pro-j's have a misconception of what happened,
that is why those statements are not credible. The only way a reasonable person
decides if a statement is credible, is if it is supported. Supported by physical
evidence and witness testimony. A reasonable person use common sense to help
understand the facts. Pro-j's have no common sense.
I do not expect to convince you of anything Betty. You are not capable of being
convinced. The truth of the facts in this case did not take two years to come out.
The majority of the true facts came out before the civil trial, starting with the
Grand Jury Protocols. But it was at the civil trial that the whole story came
together. The reason is very simple. Simpson testified at the civil trial. We
finally heard his side of the story. And his side was nothing but a bunch of lies.
Simpson was impeached by many witnesses, including defense witnesses. Simpson was
impeached by telephone records. Simpson was impeached by photographs. Simpson lied
about almost everything he did between the hours of 9:40 and 11:15 the night of the
murders. All of the relevant physical evidence points to Simpson and only Simpson
as the killer. Simpson's lying words confirm it.
"HE BE FREE" for now, does not change the reality of what happened. Our hero is a
very lucky man, but no one knows how long his luck will hold. Maybe forever, maybe
not.
bobaugust
BLP740
form their own opinion, you waste your time picking and choosing and trying to
convince anyone of anything.
Most people have their own opinion and have not changed their minds since
10/3/95
The times overlap, the testimony changes and the questions remain.
MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR! to all
Bob August
BLP740 wrote:
Reasonable people who did not follow the Simpson case and then learn the true
facts all come to the conclusion that Simpson was the killer. Fanatics who are not
reasonable and have no common sense will never be able to comprehend or admit to
the truth of this crimem no matter how many times the facts are explained to them.
That is you Betty.
>
>
> The times overlap, the testimony changes and the questions remain.
Estimated times overlap. That is why estimated times are not real times. You
pro-j's use every excuse in the book to hold on to your denial. I have explained
to you before, many times, that it is not the estimated times that tell us what
happened the night of the murders, it is the sequence of events. Simpson was
moving very quickly that evening. He was speeding with his lights off to try and
get back home as fast as possible after committing the murders. There could have
been ten witnesses all lined up on the street watching him and everyone of those
witnesses could estimate a different time they thought they saw him. Some who may
have seen him earlier could estimate a later time than those who saw him after.
Estimated times only tell us the general time an event happened, not the exact
time.
To understand the real times involved, there has to be a real time to start with.
A real time is a time supported by telephone records, or in another example
television times. In the Simpson case the real time supported by telephone records
is when Allan Park saw Simpson enter his house. Park was on the phone at the time.
That time was shortly before 10:55. Now I know it's hard Betty, but you have to
work backwards from that time to figure out the approximate times the other events
happened.
The event that happened before Park saw Simpson, was that Kaelin heard noises on
his wall. The event before that is when Shively encountered Simpson at San Vicente
and Bundy. The event before that was when Heidstra saw Simpson's Bronco speeding
away from the crime scene. The event before that happened was when Heidstra head
Goldman arrive and encounter Simpson. The event before that was when Heidstra
first heard Nicole's dog barking. Do you you understand now?
Let me repeat it one more time, so that you don't make a response that tells us
you still can not comprehend this. It is not estimated times by different
witnesses that is important, it is the sequence of events that different witnesses
testified to that tell us what happened and when. Got it?
bobaugust
Buffalo_Bandit
I may look at it.
But we do need your timetable listed here in this newsgroup.
If I recall right, your information may not be all that good.
You should know I should take that into account.
BobAugust, how's your memory anyways for all the facts.
It should take you only 5 minutes or so to type up a timetable from what you know.
Buffalo_Bandit
> august fabrications;
>
> Shively never appeard during the Preliminary Hearings
> *************************************************
>
> JUNE 30, 1994 (DAY 1)
<BB> This time this is Day 1.
> Michelle Kestler--LAPD Asst. Lab Director/Serology
> Kestler actually testified at an evidentiary hearing before the preliminary
> hearing started, in order to establish what evidence was gathered at the crime
> scene and whether there was enough evidence to share with the defense. Kestler
> was the first to establish the scope of forensic evidence against Simpson.
> Allen Wattenberg--Owner of Ross Cutlery Store
> Wattenberg testified that Simpson bought a 14-inch Stiletto knife from the
> store, though Wattenberg had no receipt for the sale.
> Jose Camacho--Employee of Ross Cutlery
> It was Camacho who sold his story to a supermarket tabloid for $12,500. He
> testified that he sold it to the highest bidder. He was paid following his
> grand jury testimony. Camacho said he sold the knife to Simpson, who allegedly
> bought it with a $100 bill.
> John DeBello--Manager of Mezzaluna Restaurant
> Mezzaluna was where Ronald Goldman worked for four months as a waiter. DeBello
> testified that when he arrived for work on June 12, 1994, Nicole Simpson was
> already dining there. Goldman punched out at 9:33 p.m., and DeBello spoke to
> him for about 12 minutes afterward. DeBello said Goldman left the restaurant no
> later than 9:50 p.m.
> JULY 1, 1994 (DAY 2)
<BB> Day 2 and I see you too.
<BB> Day 6
<BB> Wasn't Day #1 June 30th, 1994 when you started.
<BB> You're just trying to confuse the issue I think
<B> Day 7
<BB> My, my, aren't you terrible with the days. Day 8
<BB> Day 9
> Gregory Matheson--Los Angeles Police Department Supervising Criminalist
> Matheson testified how criminalists look at genetic markers in blood to match
> blood to an individual. He noted that a blood droplet found at the murder scene
> match's Simpson's blood. Matheson said only one in 200 people have blood that
> matches the droplet found at the murder scene. Matheson conceded during defense
> questioning that this meant 40,000 to 80,000 people in the Los Angeles area
> alone have the same blood which matches the droplet.
> Dr. Irwin Golden--Deputy Medical Examiner, L.A. County Coroner's Office
> Golden performed the autopsies on both victims. At the preliminary hearing, he
> testified Nicole Simpson's most serious injury was a cut across her neck which
> severed her larynx, both corrated arteries, one jugular and one deep enough to
> nick her spinal column. She suffered four other knife wounds to the neck, a
> blow to the head and defensive wounds on her hands. Goldman was stabbed
> multiple times to the head, neck and body. Golden said Goldman's defensive stab
> wounds indicated he put up a fight. On cross-examination, Golden said both
> victims died between 9 p.m. and midnight, but could not say who died first.
>
>
> She appeard before the Grand Jury.
>
> "the truth is not always popular, its always correct"
>
> BLP
> *opinions mine*
Wouldn't you know it, I'm talking to another witch.
Buffalo_Bandit
You fabricating a story so you can say OJ committed those murders.
OJ is innocent.
Read the quasi-transcript
What you presented here in this newsgroup is unacceptable.
Buffalo_Bandit
Bark
What was it that the plaintiff heard from a witch across the street?
Maybe it's time.
Buffalo_Bandit
> Betty, let me help you out here, you are getting yourself all mixed up. The times
> that all of these witnesses are testifying to are estimated times, not real or
> exact times. What is important is the sequence of the events that happened. The
> only time we know for sure are times that are supported by telephone records.
>
> You seem to be confused about the time of about 10:40 when Heidstra heard Goldman
> arrive and surprise Simpson. What exactly is confusing you?
>
> You keep saying "Manufactured evidence for Civil Trial." What are you talking
> about? Tell us please what do you think was "manufactured" for the civil trial.
>
<BB> Manufactured Homes
<BB> John
<BB> SS
<BB> Your beliefs are yours.
> And then you write,
>
> "At this time OJ was supposedly at 875 S Bundy killing Goldman. Remember Nicole
<BB> What about what the driver saw?
> was knocked out, he still had to cut her throat and be at Shively's corner by
> 10:45.
> How stupid does one have to be to vouch for this impossible creation?"
>
> I guess as stupid as your question. You refer to testimony where Shively said she
> left her house at about 10:45. and then wonder how Simpson could be at the
> intersection at 10:45. You are very confused again. If Simpson was at the
> intersection of San Vicente and Bundy at 10:45 Shively would not have seen him. So
> tell us how your reasoning and your question makes any sense.
>
> But since I'm such a nice guy, I will explain it to you. Shively left her house
> about 10:45. Simpson left Bundy about 10:45. they both arrived at the intersection
> of San Vicente and Bundy at about the same time. That is when Shively saw Simpson.
> Get it?
>
> bobaugust
No.
Buffalo_Bandit
> >bobaugust, give it up, ther are too many documented facts on the web to try
<BB> John Griffin
> and put forth a cogent misconception of what happened.
>
> Not until hell freezes over will you convince me that the best truth as to what
> happened came forth two years after the crime.
>
> When all is said and done, "HE BE FREE"
<BB> Likely story
> LOL
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> "the truth is not always popular, its always correct"
>
> -> BLP
> *opinions mine*
Sign here.
kattail
>
<snip>
> "HE BE FREE" for now, does not change the reality of what happened. Our
hero is a
> very lucky man, but no one knows how long his luck will hold. Maybe
forever, maybe
> not.
If you read (and believe) the current issue of National Enquirer, it doesn't
look like it will hold out much longer. He's either gonna get nailed with
drug charges or he's gonna carry out one (or more) of the death threats he's
throwing around. As for his photos and his reported sexual escapades, I'm
feeling wooozy and can't write anymore. :(
kattail
Buffalo_Bandit
<BB> You're really funny
> > >> *************************************************
> > >> At this time OJ was supposedly at 875 S Bundy killing Goldman. Remember
> Nicole
> > >> was knocked out, he still had to cut her throat and be at Shively's corner
> by
> > >> 10:45.
> > >>
> > >> How stupid does one have to be to vouch for this impossible creation?
> > >>
> > >> Q. And what time was it, sir, when you heard the dog barking like
> > >> crazy, and then made the decision to cut across the alleyway?
> > >>
> > >> A. This must have been around 10:30, 10:35.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >bobaugust, give it up, ther are too many documented facts on the web to try
<BB> You are messed up like all the nazis/witches.
<BB> We can't let the nazis/witches rule the world.
> > and put forth a cogent misconception of what happened.
> >
> > Not until hell freezes over will you convince me that the best truth as to what
> > happened came forth two years after the crime.
> >
> > When all is said and done, "HE BE FREE"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Betty, none of your reasons have anything to do with the actual evidence or the
> crime. You use only excuses to keep yourself in denial of the truth.
>
> "Too many documented facts on the web put forth a cogent misconception of what
> happened"? I have no idea what that means or how it has anything to do with the
> reality of these murders. What facts are you talking about? There is a lot of pure
> bull crap and unsupported speculation on the web about this case, a lot of
<BB> Maybe (not) I'll check your shite.
from
> Wagner. None of those unsupported fantasies have any resemblance to the truth.
> There are a lot of unsupported fantasy theories offered on this newsgroup. They
> have all been shown to be false. All pro-j's have a misconception of what happened,
> that is why those statements are not credible. The only way a reasonable person
> decides if a statement is credible, is if it is supported. Supported by physical
> evidence and witness testimony. A reasonable person use common sense to help
<BB> Your evidence indicated a frame up.
> understand the facts. Pro-j's have no common sense.
>
<BB> To(o? Well, John Griffin) bad you don't.
> I do not expect to convince you of anything Betty. You are not capable of being
> convinced. The truth of the facts in this case did not take two years to come out.
> The majority of the true facts came out before the civil trial, starting with the
<BB> Read the quasi-transcript, cretin.
> Grand Jury Protocols. But it was at the civil trial that the whole story came
> together. The reason is very simple. Simpson testified at the civil trial. We
> finally heard his side of the story. And his side was nothing but a bunch of lies.
> Simpson was impeached by many witnesses, including defense witnesses. Simpson was
> impeached by telephone records. Simpson was impeached by photographs. Simpson lied
<BB> President????????????????????????????????????????????????John
> about almost everything he did between the hours of 9:40 and 11:15 the night of the
> murders. All of the relevant physical evidence points to Simpson and only Simpson
> as the killer. Simpson's lying words confirm it.
>
> "HE BE FREE" for now, does not change the reality of what happened. Our hero is a
> very lucky man, but no one knows how long his luck will hold. Maybe forever, maybe
> not.
>
> bobaugust
I think OJ should expect more trouble.
You spelled your name correct.
John Griffin
"Buffalo_Bullshit" <co...@bfn.org> wrote
> [ it doesn't matter what he wrote ]
I'll bet you ten bucks you can't go over Niagara Falls (without the usual
barrel) and live to tell about it. Try it tomorrow, okay?
BLP740
squashed. This truth is comparable to the discovery of America by Columbus.
>
>
>
>
"the truth is not always popular, its always correct"
BLP
*opinions mine*
BLP740
>
>> "HE BE FREE" for now, does not change the reality of what happened. Our
>hero is a
>> very lucky man, but no one knows how long his luck will hold. Maybe
>forever, maybe
>> not.
>
>If you read (and believe) the current issue of National Enquirer, it doesn't
>look like it will hold out much longer. He's either gonna get nailed with
>drug charges or he's gonna carry out one (or more) of the death threats he's
>throwing around. As for his photos and his reported sexual escapades, I'm
>feeling wooozy and can't write anymore. :(
>
>kattail
>
take another puff.
John Griffin
"BLP740" <blp...@aol.com740blp> wrote
> >
> >
> >> "HE BE FREE" for now, does not change the reality of what happened. Our
> >hero is a
> >> very lucky man, but no one knows how long his luck will hold. Maybe
> >forever, maybe
> >> not.
> >
> >If you read (and believe) the current issue of National Enquirer, it
doesn't
> >look like it will hold out much longer. He's either gonna get nailed
with
> >drug charges or he's gonna carry out one (or more) of the death threats
he's
> >throwing around. As for his photos and his reported sexual escapades,
I'm
> >feeling wooozy and can't write anymore. :(
> >
> >kattail
> >
> Believe what some of ehat you see and none of what you hear.
Anyone who swallows any ehat is a knucklehead.
That stuff will give you the collywobbles.
> take another puff.
That shit will cure them.
Tell us in advance what you'll say if you see a video of Simpson making a
drug deal. (Other than "He should run for mayor of Washington, D.C.") What
will you say if you see a video showing him selling satellite cards to
undercover cops?
Let's pretend we know these things couldn't happen, so it's a pure
hypothetical. "It won't happen" isn't a legitimate answer. If you're too
cowardly to answer, don't. Just say, either overtly or tacitly, "I'm too
cowardly to answer."
Keep in mind that if someone he threatened is found with a bruise inside her
skull, a few stab wounds, cuts on her hand, and her throat slashed, we
should all consider him innocent until the evidence says otherwise.
By the way, I bet you didn't know that Simpson now wears custom made shoes
with perfectly flat, featureless soles. I didn't either.
Bob August
BLP740 wrote:
No Betty, all of the witnesses contradicted Simpson, even defense witnesses.
Nothing was squashed. There is not one single shred of evidence that eliminates
Simpson from being the killer. Nothing. Everything points to him and only him. It
sounds to me like you still can not comprehend the difference between estimated
times and real times. What lame excuses you use to avoid the truth.
bobaugust
John Griffin
"BLP740" <blp...@aol.com740blp> wrote
This is great! This is very great! The dipso is now going to put on her
geography teacher hat.
The potential humor in that is scary. Yer a riat, ya ol fule.
So far, she says those islands aren't part of the Americas and O.J. "The
Real Killer" Simpson didn't do it. Batty Betty bats minus 1.000. Simpson's
guilt has been proven beyond all except imaginary doubt, and no one has
shown any evidence that Columbus wasn't among the people who have discovered
this part of the world in the last 40,000 years.
Buffalo_Bandit
<BB> Mother
<BB> Jim
Buffalo_Bandit
> >
> >
> >> "HE BE FREE" for now, does not change the reality of what happened. Our
> hero is a
> >> very lucky man, but no one knows how long his luck will hold. Maybe
> forever, maybe
> >> not.
> >
> >If you read (and believe) the current issue of National Enquirer, it doesn't
> >look like it will hold out much longer. He's either gonna get nailed with
> >drug charges or he's gonna carry out one (or more) of the death threats he's
> >throwing around. As for his photos and his reported sexual escapades, I'm
> >feeling wooozy and can't write anymore. :(
> >
> >kattail
> >
> >Believe what some of ehat you see and none of what you hear.
>
> take another puff.
Are you worried that you won't get your plant?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buffalo_Bandit
> > >It means the facts are on th WWW for all to see and make a determination and
> > form their own opinion, you waste your time picking and choosing and trying to
> > convince anyone of anything.
> >
> > Most people have their own opinion and have not changed their minds since
> > 10/3/95
OJ is innocent.
Read the quasi-Transcript
------------------------------------------------------------------------------>
> Reasonable people who did not follow the Simpson case and then learn the true
> facts all come to the conclusion that Simpson was the killer. Fanatics who are not
Your facts don't prove OJ is guilty.
> reasonable and have no common sense will never be able to comprehend or admit to
> the truth of this crimem no matter how many times the facts are explained to them.
> That is you Betty.
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > The times overlap, the testimony changes and the questions remain.
>
> Estimated times overlap. That is why estimated times are not real times. You
<BB> Jim
> pro-j's use every excuse in the book to hold on to your denial. I have explained
> to you before, many times, that it is not the estimated times that tell us what
> happened the night of the murders, it is the sequence of events. Simpson was
> moving very quickly that evening. He was speeding with his lights off to try and
<BB> Don't you wish?
> get back home as fast as possible after committing the murders. There could have
> been ten witnesses all lined up on the street watching him and everyone of those
<BB> Bob
> witnesses could estimate a different time they thought they saw him. Some who may
> have seen him earlier could estimate a later time than those who saw him after.
> Estimated times only tell us the general time an event happened, not the exact
> time.
>
> To understand the real times involved, there has to be a real time to start with.
> A real time is a time supported by telephone records, or in another example
^^^^^^^^^
<BB> process control
> television times. In the Simpson case the real time supported by telephone records
> is when Allan Park saw Simpson enter his house. Park was on the phone at the time.
<BB> Are you sure?
> That time was shortly before 10:55. Now I know it's hard Betty, but you have to
> work backwards from that time to figure out the approximate times the other events
> happened.
>
> The event that happened before Park saw Simpson, was that Kaelin heard noises on
<BB> Noises on his wall? What time?
> his wall. The event before that is when Shively encountered Simpson at San Vicente
> and Bundy. The event before that was when Heidstra saw Simpson's Bronco speeding
> away from the crime scene. The event before that happened was when Heidstra head
<BB> Need more detail.
> Goldman arrive and encounter Simpson. The event before that was when Heidstra
> first heard Nicole's dog barking. Do you you understand now?
<BB> You mean the real murderer. Does Jay Rosenthal know who it is?
>
> Let me repeat it one more time, so that you don't make a response that tells us
> you still can not comprehend this. It is not estimated times by different
> witnesses that is important, it is the sequence of events that different witnesses
> testified to that tell us what happened and when. Got it?
>
> bobaugust
By your signature you must realize your size.
Buffalo_Bandit
Judging by your evidence, OJ is innocent.
BLP740
big lie;
>Nothing was squashed. There is not one single shred of evidence that
>eliminates
>Simpson from being the killer. Nothing. Everything points to him and only
because the refused to collect anything that didn't fit into their TIMELINE,
anyone who said anything different were excluded on ignored.
>him. It
>sounds to me like you still can not comprehend the difference between
>estimated
>times and real times. What lame excuses you use to avoid the truth.
>
>bobaugust
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
"the truth is not always popular, its always correct"
BLP
*opinions mine*
kattail
"BLP740" <blp...@aol.com740blp> wrote in message
news:20011222010255...@mb-mr.aol.com...
> >
> >
> >> "HE BE FREE" for now, does not change the reality of what happened. Our
> >hero is a
> >> very lucky man, but no one knows how long his luck will hold. Maybe
> >forever, maybe
> >> not.
> >
> >If you read (and believe) the current issue of National Enquirer, it
doesn't
> >look like it will hold out much longer. He's either gonna get nailed
with
> >drug charges or he's gonna carry out one (or more) of the death threats
he's
> >throwing around. As for his photos and his reported sexual escapades,
I'm
> >feeling wooozy and can't write anymore. :(
> >
> >kattail
> >
> >Believe what some of ehat you see and none of what you hear.
>
> take another puff.
Betty, since you insist on starting your posts IN other people's messages, I
suppose that first line under my name must be yours. Were you trying to
say: Believe "some of what you see"....(that's the correct way it starts)?
The National Enquirer is NOT always wrong and I tend to believe THIS part of
the article:
Quote by Cathy Bellmore (oj's girlfriend's mother).......
"Christie told me she and O.J. do Ecstasy. She says, 'It's a love drug. It
makes sex better. O.J. and I do it all the time. O.J. gets on the phone
and calls up his friend Adrian Burke to order some Ecstasy. Then Adrian
comes over to O.J.'s house.'"
Adrian Burke is actually Andrew Anderson, 33, a massage parlor owner charged
with smuggling Ecstasy from Europe to South Florida.
"FBI and DEA agents first connected Simpson to the drug-smuggling ring when
a wiretap on Anderson's phone caught Simpson on tape ordering Ecstasy for
his girlfriends," an insider told The ENQUIRER.
"Federal agents started following Anderson and noted that he frequently
visited Simpson's house.
"That is what led to the search warrant at the Simpson home."
Simpson's attorney Yale Galanter claimed that "O.J.'s name came up on a tape
of someone else who is the focus of the investigation."
But a top law enforcement official confirmed to The ENQUIRER: "There are
surveillance pictures of O.J. with known drug dealers and he has been taped
talking to drug dealers on the phone about getting Ecstasy."
Galanter also denied that Simpson uses illegal drugs.
But the law enforcement official revealed: "During the raid on O.J.'s house,
agents found residue of marijuana in the house."
{note this, Betty:}
Galanter admitted that he knew of the raid at Simpson's house a day before
it occurred, but maintains he did not warn Simpson, which would have enabled
O.J. to get rid of any drugs in the house.
[end of quote from ENQUIRER article]
______________
If Galanter was your attorney, would you trust or believe him, Betty?
kattail <who quit smoking cigarets 27 years ago and has never smoked
anything else>
Robert H. Risch
>The National Enquirer is NOT always wrong and I tend to believe THIS part of
>the article:
Karen, please post the "confession" part.
RHR
kattail
"Robert H. Risch" <rhr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:saj92ugspg66tcl4s...@4ax.com...
OK, here it is: {quoted exactly from the National Enquirer]
And as the investigation continues, the worried mother of Simpson's longtime
girlfriend Christie Prody has come forward to reveal all the details behind
the gridiron great's sordid drugs-and-sex lifestyle -- and the confession he
blurted out in a jealous rage.
"I've always known my daughter is in danger from Simpson -- he is a
killer," Christie's mother Cathy Bellmore told The ENQUIRER in an exclusive
interview.
"And he got so angry with Christie when she surfaced after going on a
cocaine binge that he threatened her.
"When she returned to her apartment, it wasn't but a few minutes before
O.J. showed up, shaking with fury and clenching his fists. It was obvious
he'd been staking out her apartment.
"Christie told me his eyes were blazing as he shouted at her: 'I killed
Nicole and I can kill you too! So watch out! I got away with murder once
and I can do it again!'
"Then he went silent and sat down in a chair. But after 45 minutes he
flared up again, pounding his fists on the dining room table and screaming:
'I told you not to party with other people. You party only with me. You're
not going to be partying with anyone if you keep this up!'
"But Christie turns a blind eye -- even though he's said 'I killed
Nicole!' more than once.
"She's so far gone on drug bingeing I don't think she cares whether
Simpson is a killer or not. She says, 'So what if O.J. killed Nicole.
He'll never do it again.'"
A year ago Christie told The ENQUIRER she was convinced Simpson killed
his ex-wife Nicole and waiter Ron Goldman.
"But O.J. convinced her he was an innocent lamb once again and they
started seeing each other and getting more and more caught up in the drug
world together," Cathy disclosed.
"O.J. doesn't hold back that he killed Nicole and he threatens my
daughter too, but she doesn't know what to believe. She just can't come to
grips that O.J. is a killer.
"She thinks he says those horrible things when he is angry and he
doesn't mean it.
"On one occasion this summer, Christie told me, 'We were in a strip
club. We were coked out and O.J. started talking about Nicole.
"'He just sat there bleary-eyed, repeating her name over and over.
"'At first it seemed he was fondly remembering a woman he loved, but
then he started talking about how she was a two-timing bitch and his
squinting eyes went really cold. It sent chills up my spine.'"
_____________________
This reminds me of Chris Jacobs who killed an entire family years back in
Wisconsin. He was tried and found "Not Guilty". He has since "confessed"
several times to various girlfriends. Why not? Guys like him and simpson
can't be tried again. I wonder if they aren't bragging....
kattail
Robert H. Risch
>> Karen, please post the "confession" part.
>>
>> RHR
>
>OK, here it is: {quoted exactly from the National Enquirer]
Thanks, Karen. If I were an Enquirer editor, I'd make a deal with
Christine to have her find out where OJ dumped the knife and shoes and
what he was doing behind Kato's room. I'd break down and buy a copy
of the Enquirer if they did that.
RHR
BLP740
kattail
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 18:46:56 GMT, "kattail" <none@??.x> wrote:
>
> >> Karen, please post the "confession" part.
> >>
> >> RHR
> >
> >OK, here it is: {quoted exactly from the National Enquirer]
>
> Thanks, Karen.
You are welcome, bob <spelled backwards> :)
If I were an Enquirer editor, I'd make a deal with
> Christine to have her find out where OJ dumped the knife and shoes and
> what he was doing behind Kato's room. I'd break down and buy a copy
> of the Enquirer if they did that.
I agree.
It's verrry seldom I buy the Enquirer, nor even glance at it at the checkout
line. I had a weak moment in Walgreen's a couple days ago and tossed "oj's
confession" in my cart.
oj is old news to me...unless he confesses and tells things like you mention
above. My interest at present is in Gary Ridgway, our semi-local guy who is
the (or one of) Green River Killer. This is a far more interesting crime
than the basic "ex-husband with an explosive temper and no self-control who
went ballistic with jealousy and went for his ex-wife's HEAD". We had one
in Milwaukee who stabbed his wife in the face numerous times in TGIF parking
lot and claimed it was a passerby black guy. The profilers knew better. It
was Jesse Anderson, her husband, who was later killed in prison by the same
black guy who killed Jeffrey Dahmer. Had *his* head beat to a pulp. Kinda
got what he deserved.
kattail
Bob August
BLP740 wrote:
You believe the big lie Betty. Some of the more damning defense witnesses that
contradicted Simpson were Robert Heidstra, Michael Baden, Paula Barbieri, and
Lenore Walker. There are many, many more.
>
>
> >Nothing was squashed. There is not one single shred of evidence that
> >eliminates
> >Simpson from being the killer. Nothing. Everything points to him and only
>
> because the refused to collect anything that didn't fit into their TIMELINE,
> anyone who said anything different were excluded on ignored.
You continue to lie and deceive yourself. You have things backwards again. The
police collected everything they thought might even be possible evidence. Even
having things photographed, they seemed to have no bearing on this case. Then they
started testing and investigating everything. The time line was established from
the results of physical evidence testing, and the many witnesses who testified. No
one picked and chose evidence based on knowing it pointed to Simpson or not. As it
turned out, everything pointed to Simpson. Why is that Betty? Because Simpson was
the killer. If you knew half of what you claim you know about this case, you would
know that many more things collected turned out to be unrelated to the crime.
There was more things that turned out to be incriminating to Simpson that wasn't
even collected. The empty knife box in his bathroom. The dark colored sweat suit
in his washing machine. The bloody smear on the switch plate cover, The bloody
finger print on the rear gate. Your ridiculous backwards thinking is contradicted
by the facts.
bobaugust
Buffalo_Bandit
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 18:46:56 GMT, "kattail" <none@??.x> wrote:
>
> >> Karen, please post the "confession" part.
> >>
> >> RHR
> >
> >OK, here it is: {quoted exactly from the National Enquirer]
>
> Thanks, Karen. If I were an Enquirer editor, I'd make a deal with
^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<BB> Alleluah <BB> They're not interested
> Christine to have her find out where OJ dumped the knife and shoes and
<BB> I still think you should talk some more to Nicole's neighbors.
<BB> I think they might know more, like where the shoes ended up.
<BB> Did the nazis/witches decide yet whether or not the shoes will show up
<BB> again?
> what he was doing behind Kato's room. I'd break down and buy a copy
> of the Enquirer if they did that.
>
> RHR
OJ is innocent.
Read the quasi-transcript.
Buffalo_Bandit
Such as:
At ???? P.M. Arnelle's recital (correct me if I'm wrong.)
At 9:00 P.M. OJ is with Kato and they go out to eat out.
AT ????? OJ takes a nap. Maybe the witches wore him out.
AT ????? Maybe somebody takes OJ's bronco for a joy ride.
Did he buy it used?
Maybe someone is lying or mistaken, as well.
Who saw OJ in his Bronco?
At 10:4? OJ answers his door because the driver rang the bell.
Driver can't really ID OJ.
Did OJ step outside for a minute just before when the driver arrived?
AT 10:4? to 11:?? OJ goes to the airport
At 12:30 A.M. Arnelle never arrives at OJ's home.
Remember bobaugust, judging by the way you present your evidence, this table
is required to clarify your facts. Can you really do that?
I still don't know if OJ has a housekeeper for sure with the mind games that you
all play.
Remember, this table is a requirement now, if you really want to justify your
facts.
From what I tell, OJ is innocent.
Read the quasi-transcript. M. Dolores Denman knew who the killer was.
Janis72
>bobaugust, can you draw up a time table to show your evidence?
Sure he can.
>Such as:
>
>At ???? P.M. Arnelle's recital (correct me if I'm wrong.)
It wasn't Arnelle's recital. It was Sydney's, Simpson's youngest daughter.
Damn Fusel, you're more lost than I ever dreamed.
>At 9:00 P.M. OJ is with Kato and they go out to eat out.
>
>AT ????? OJ takes a nap. Maybe the witches wore him out.
They ate at McDonald's. Geeze, Simpson case 101. Simpson didn't take a nap
after eating, that's when he went on his killing spree. Witches? Fusel, come
back to earth.
>AT ????? Maybe somebody takes OJ's bronco for a joy ride.
Who? When? How?
> Did he buy it used?
He didn't own it, the Hertz company let him use it.
> Maybe someone is lying or mistaken, as well.
Simpson lies but isn't mistaken, he knows what he did.
> Who saw OJ in his Bronco?
>
When??
>At 10:4? OJ answers his door because the driver rang the bell.
Bullshit. He wasn't home at 10:04, the driver wasn't even there yet!
>AT 10:4? to 11:?? OJ goes to the airport
After 11:00. He didn't get home from his killing spree until very close to
11:00 when the limo driver saw him enter his home after the limo driver had
rang and rang for him, getting no answer.
>At 12:30 A.M. Arnelle never arrives at OJ's home.
Huh?
>Remember bobaugust, judging by the way you present your evidence, this table
>is required to clarify your facts. Can you really do that?
I'm sure he can, with the real facts, not your fantasies. I know you can read,
Fusel. Buy a book about this case, since you claim to be interested, and learn
the basic facts. You'd be amazed.
>I still don't know if OJ has a housekeeper for sure with the mind games that
>you
>all play.
He did at the time, I don't know if he does any more.
>From what I tell, OJ is innocent.
>Read the quasi-transcript. M. Dolores Denman knew who the killer was.
So, who was the "real killer" according to your fantasy-transcript? Sorry,
Fusel, when I try and determine what I believe about something, I use facts,
not delusions. Try it sometime, your whole outlook on life will change, I'm
sure. You poor ole' fella.
John Griffin
I like that idea. I wish she would trick him into talking into a recorder
and get him to describe the murders. It would be interesting to see how our
wild guesses stack up against his story of the actual events, and it would
be fun (and funny as hell) to see prien's reaction.
John Griffin
"BLP740" <blp...@aol.com740blp> wrote
in message news:20011222151109...@mb-fm.aol.com...
Okay, I was born here. I'll ask me.
I say thousands of people independently discovered the Americas, starting
long before any recorded discoveries, including those that you complaisantly
refer to by the absurd "Native" nonsense. When the Indians arrived, they
killed all the "natives," who had killed all the preceding "natives," who
had exterminated the generation of "natives" before them...etc.
There is no doubt that Columbus was one of those discoverers, so what's your
point here (other than to look stupid)? By the way, there would be no
surviving Indians if the Chinese, Arabs or the Zulus had started immigrating
to these continents at the time the Europeans did.
I bet you're going to have a hissy because I said Zulu instead of African
American.
Buffalo_Bandit
>
^
<BB> See above
> Okay, I was born here. I'll ask me.
^^^^^^^^^^^
<BB> John is talking to himself?
>
> I say thousands of people independently discovered the Americas, starting
^^^^^^^^^^
<BB> Norma, work
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<BB> Wants Plaintiff to build alcohol plant on his own.
> long before any recorded discoveries, including those that you complaisantly
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> refer to by the absurd "Native" nonsense. When the Indians arrived, they
> killed all the "natives," who had killed all the preceding "natives," who
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<BB> I don't have that power
> had exterminated the generation of "natives" before them...etc.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
<BB> Are you going to try and cut me off again?
>
> There is no doubt that Columbus was one of those discoverers, so what's your
^^^^^^^^
<BB> Norma
> point here (other than to look stupid)? By the way, there would be no
> surviving Indians if the Chinese, Arabs or the Zulus had started immigrating
> to these continents at the time the Europeans did.
> I bet you're going to have a hissy because I said Zulu instead of African
> American.
^^^^
<BB> Hooker Chemicals
Try and answer this posting and see what you get.
I think you're in the Buffalo area, Johnny Griffin.