JW
2015-03-24 03:08:44 UTC
Bobaugust was unaware of the following sock evidence. It's remarkable that someone with a website claimed to be about the case, could be so drastically unfamiliar with the evidence.
KNBC TV reporter Tracie Savage proudly broadcast the DNA results of blood on OJ's socks. But . . . the socks hadn't been DNA tested yet. In fact, the socks had not even been sent to Cellmark Labs in Maryland yet for testing! Savage obtained these miraculous time-traveling DNA results before DNA testing, from an LAPD captain she was "involved" with. The captain knew whose blood was on the socks, because the blood was intentionally placed there after the evidence collection. This allowed him to whisper the DNA results to Savage, like magic, prior to DNA testing.
The beauty of this piece of evidence is that it is proof of framing, and it can't be taken back or refuted. You can't retract Savage's TV broadcast, it already aired in 1994. This is a fact. This was a major blow up in the preliminary hearing, in which Savage was subpoenaed to testify and was threatened by Ito to reveal her sources. This is more than evidence, it is proof, that the sock blood was planted. The defense should have chased this fact like mad dogs. Please see "A Problem of Evidence" by Stephen Singular.
More evidence that the sock blood was planted: Four criminalists examined the socks after they were collected. Here are their findings:
Fung: No blood
Yamauchi: No blood
Matheson: No blood
Baden: No blood
Yet, after these examinations, a massive dollup of blood the size of a half dollar was found on the socks. It's impossible that one, let alone four, criminalists missed this huge amount of blood. See "A Problem of Evidence" by Joseph Bosco.
Since this blood was not on the socks when the four criminalists examined them, then it was placed there after these examinations. You might think the LAPD Crime Lab would have to be broken into in order to accomplish this.
Yes! The LAPD Crime Lab WAS broken into overnight, in the early days after the evidence collection. This was also part of the preliminary hearing. (This break-in ties in with Dr. Henry Lee's "something wrong" regarding blood swatches, more clear evidence of planting.)
Because people's lives hang by a thread over the integrity of such evidence, including evidence in death penalty cases (making such evidence the determiner of life or death), the crime lab is sacrosanct. Once the seal is broken, which it was, all evidence therein is suspect, because it has all become susceptible to planting and contamination.
You would not be happy if a lab holding evidence against you, was broken into, yet the judge found no harm/no foul and proceeded with trial with that evidence against you! You would be especially angry if you were innocent of what you were accused of, and could be executed or exonerated based on the evidence in the lab, the lab which was broken into. You would explode with indignation.
The blood on the socks is proof of framing. It's gorgeous in its simplicity. Tracie Savage proved this for you in her 1994 TV broadcast, and Fung, Yamauchi, Matheson and Baden further supported the truth of what her broadcast revealed. Savage and her police captain unwittingly, accidentally, did a great service for the truth, by announcing worldwide the DNA results, before DNA testing had even started.
Bobaugust should have known this. This massive error and knowledge gap demonstrates the caliber of his "findings," which you can now question aggressively as you read his "timeline" and other fanciful claims.
KNBC TV reporter Tracie Savage proudly broadcast the DNA results of blood on OJ's socks. But . . . the socks hadn't been DNA tested yet. In fact, the socks had not even been sent to Cellmark Labs in Maryland yet for testing! Savage obtained these miraculous time-traveling DNA results before DNA testing, from an LAPD captain she was "involved" with. The captain knew whose blood was on the socks, because the blood was intentionally placed there after the evidence collection. This allowed him to whisper the DNA results to Savage, like magic, prior to DNA testing.
The beauty of this piece of evidence is that it is proof of framing, and it can't be taken back or refuted. You can't retract Savage's TV broadcast, it already aired in 1994. This is a fact. This was a major blow up in the preliminary hearing, in which Savage was subpoenaed to testify and was threatened by Ito to reveal her sources. This is more than evidence, it is proof, that the sock blood was planted. The defense should have chased this fact like mad dogs. Please see "A Problem of Evidence" by Stephen Singular.
More evidence that the sock blood was planted: Four criminalists examined the socks after they were collected. Here are their findings:
Fung: No blood
Yamauchi: No blood
Matheson: No blood
Baden: No blood
Yet, after these examinations, a massive dollup of blood the size of a half dollar was found on the socks. It's impossible that one, let alone four, criminalists missed this huge amount of blood. See "A Problem of Evidence" by Joseph Bosco.
Since this blood was not on the socks when the four criminalists examined them, then it was placed there after these examinations. You might think the LAPD Crime Lab would have to be broken into in order to accomplish this.
Yes! The LAPD Crime Lab WAS broken into overnight, in the early days after the evidence collection. This was also part of the preliminary hearing. (This break-in ties in with Dr. Henry Lee's "something wrong" regarding blood swatches, more clear evidence of planting.)
Because people's lives hang by a thread over the integrity of such evidence, including evidence in death penalty cases (making such evidence the determiner of life or death), the crime lab is sacrosanct. Once the seal is broken, which it was, all evidence therein is suspect, because it has all become susceptible to planting and contamination.
You would not be happy if a lab holding evidence against you, was broken into, yet the judge found no harm/no foul and proceeded with trial with that evidence against you! You would be especially angry if you were innocent of what you were accused of, and could be executed or exonerated based on the evidence in the lab, the lab which was broken into. You would explode with indignation.
The blood on the socks is proof of framing. It's gorgeous in its simplicity. Tracie Savage proved this for you in her 1994 TV broadcast, and Fung, Yamauchi, Matheson and Baden further supported the truth of what her broadcast revealed. Savage and her police captain unwittingly, accidentally, did a great service for the truth, by announcing worldwide the DNA results, before DNA testing had even started.
Bobaugust should have known this. This massive error and knowledge gap demonstrates the caliber of his "findings," which you can now question aggressively as you read his "timeline" and other fanciful claims.