Posted on 09/20/2012 2:47:07 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Unless you were born after 1996, you know Kato Kaelin. In the Year of Our Lord 1994, Kato Kaelin was famous. Hot. Headlines. Front page. In everyone’s mouth. On everybody’s lips. TV, radio, newspapers. Kindergarten kids crayonned his name. More mentions of Kato and lawyer Kardashian than today’s mentions of Kanye and Kardashian’s kid Kim.
He was a star of O.J. Simpson’s trial for killing his wife, Nicole. At their house that night, he saw, he heard. He knew who, what and where. The prosecution labeled Kaelin a hostile witness. Unemployed, a freeloader, did he tell the truth then? The world smelled O.J.’s guilt. Simpson went free.
Ask Kaelin today, this very minute, if O.J. — currently jailed in Vegas on a separate charge — killed his wife, and I repeat his exact words:
“The statute of limitations has now passed . . . so I can now say . . . yes, he did it.”
Why didn’t he come forward and tell the truth? Ask why he let O.J. Simpson get away with murder, and I repeat his exact words:
“I was too scared. I was terrified.”
Time and his moment have passed. Dearly Beloved, we are gathered here together in memoriam of Kato Kaelin’s dead career. He says: “People hated me. I’ve been spat upon. They threw gum in my coffee.”
Little bit of a personality, little bit of a talk-show host and guest, little bit of a D-list actor in Z-minus movies, little bit on game shows, poker tournaments, reality things that didn’t make it. He’s now starting a Web site to answer questions, chat personalities, maybe do a book.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Yes, let's get real.
Fuhrman committed a FELONY to avoid embarassment and to avoid challenges to his credibility.
Yet you want to believe that he would not commit felonies to advance his career or to curry favor with a prosecutor?
Furthermore, it is not the place of a witness to pick and choose which questions he will answer truthfully and which he will not. He took a legally binding oath and then violated it. If he wasn't a racist whose motives could be questioned by a jury, then he had a duty to explain the situation to the jury.
If you don't believe that Fuhrman ruined his life because of his perjury, then that reflects on you. In my book, he is trash.
I noted you evaded the legitimate questions.
No surprise here.
Yes, absolutely! In any trial, any time.
The blood found on the gate had ‘trace’ amounts of EDTA in it. As alluded to earlier, EDTA can come from a variety of sources. Any blood from a sample vile would have massive amounts of EDTA in it. By proportion alone, there is absolutely NO way the blood on the gate could have come from the sample vile.
Simple science that was bungled by the prosecution, and ignored by a racist jury.
Simple science that was bungled by the prosecution,
Indeed. On this and the shrunken glove.
and ignored by a racist jury.
They can't decide based on what the prosecution failed to tell them, racist or not.
Anyway, justice was not served that day.
Fuhrman was CONVICTED of perjury. What "legitimate" question is there?
Yet again, you evaded the legitimate questions above.
See the tag line below.
Of course, the innocent upstanding citizen OJ, is still in the joint where he should be.
Ya just knew anyone who'd do what Simpson did to two innocent people, wouldn't be able to stay clean and would eventually end up in prison.
Isn't that a hoot!
_________________________________________________________
Mike Gilbert, a memorabilia dealer and former agent and friend of Simpson, wrote a book titled How I Helped O.J. Get Away with Murder: The Shocking Inside Story of Violence, Loyalty, Regret and Remorse He states that Simpson had smoked marijuana and taken a sleeping pill and was drinking beer when he allegedly confided, at his Brentwood home weeks after his trial, what happened the night of June 12, 1994. According to Gilbert, Simpson said, "If she hadn't opened that door with a knife in her hand...she'd still be alive.
All this talk about credibility, where's you're boy OJ now?
Would you be kind enough to re-state such "legitimate questions"?
I reject categorically that there is any legitimate question regarding whether Fuhrman is scum; he is. My confidence that Fuhrman would perjure himself in a prosecution of ME is unshakeable.
I am also convinced that Fuhrman's illegal, immoral, and unethical behavior was part of the injustice which allowed O.J. to be acquitted.
Are you referring to his use of the n word, years prior to the trial? Could you be specific?
No, I am referring to Fuhrman's perjury regarding his use of the n word.
The judge made a determination that Fuhrman's potential racial biases were material to the case. Fuhrman was obligated to answer truthfully but he outright lied.
It was Fuhrman who testified to finding a glove on O.J.s property after entering the property without a warrant. This was a key piece of evidence and Fuhrman's credibility was necessary for acceptance of this evidence. Fuhrman's credibility was also key for accepting the justification for the warrantless search.
It would have been bad enough for the prosecution to deal with Fuhrman's use of racial epithets and other references. It was extremely damaging to have to deal with Fuhrman's having lied under oath. No jury should have to consider as truthful the testimony of somebody who has lied to their faces.
Fuhrman's proven bias was certainly immoral and unethical. His perjury was immoral, unethical, and ILLEGAL.
I am referring to Fuhrman's perjury regarding his use of the n word.
That's what I suspected.
Amazing the defense had to go after Fuhrman regarding a word he used years before OJ brutally murdered two innocent people. But it gave them that racial edge and an excuse to run with, as they had little else.
BTW, even those drooling in cups understood the judge was a complete idiot with zero credibility.
Given the fact the judges wife's involvement with Fuhrman, with even audio tapes produced with Fuhrman ridiculing the judge's wife. In fact the judges wife was Fuhrman's previous supervisor. And he didn't step down? How about those ethics and credibility on the judges part?
The judge clearly should have stepped down from the case. But this was his moment in the sun, the biggest case on the planet at the time.
Those paying attention saw this trial for what it was, a disgusting circus and travesty of justice.
And you keep bring up "credibility" issues?
IMO, the defense and the judge had zip credibility and should have never been allowed near a court room.
Judge Ito's proven bias and conflict regarding his own wife's involvement was certainly unethical, and the judge failing to step down from the trial was truly immoral.
In the end, OJ's credibility was so bad, and guilt so clear, he wound up in prison anyway, as he couldn't hold back his criminal, violent behavior.
You speaking of credibly regarding Fuhrman lying about using the n word *years* before OJ murdered the two innocents, is really laughable.
My disgust with Fuhrman in no way constitutes an opinion that O.J. was innocent or that the prosecution or court were competent to face a well-funded and competent defense.
I am capable of condemning Fuhrman's criminality without claiming that the O.J. trial constituted justice. Fuhrman was DEFINITELY part of the circus which resulted in letting O.J. off. Fuhrman is deserving of no sympathy whatever. He and all other perjurious law enforcement officers belong behind bars.
There is no way that I am going to adopt the opinion that perjury by key officers in an important legal case does not justify a mistrial and criminal charges against the officer.
Fuhrman wasn't running the trail.
You might be surprised, but Judge Ito was the manager and ring leader of that circus.
When it was revealed the judges wife was involved with Fuhrman and was in fact his previous *supervisor*, the circus should have ended immediately, and the judge should have stepped down from the trial on the spot!
Yes Fuhrman lied about using the n word years before these murders and the trail ever occurred. Big deal.
In fact in the interest of justice, considering the seriousness of the charges and consideringt the victims, and their families, this n word crap should have never been allowed into the courtroom. The judge should have taken control, forcing the players to focus strictly on the evidence pertaining to THIS case, not about some word one of the players said years before all this. It was pure evil, gang raping justice.
It was so disgusting, even the defense and the jury knew OJ was guilty as sin. Just look at the faces of the defense and the murderer when the verdicts were read.
You speak of credibility? Judge Ito allowed the trial to cartwheel completely out of control, instead of demanding the trial focus strictly on the evidence, which really mattered. Judge Ito became the self made ring leader of the circus he himself created all by himself.
The Judge Ito trial was a judicial joke, a sham, and an utter disgrace to the dead victims and their families.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.