Fuhrman Joins Defense–Again

Sitting in the Fox press box tomorrow with broadcasters covering O.J. Simpson’s parole hearing will be former LAPD detective, discredited lead Simpson-murders investigator, expert perjurer and N-word user Mark Fuhrman.

Even though Fuhrman testified for the prosecution in O.J. Simpson’s 1995 trial in which he was accused of murdering Nicole Brown, Ronald Goldman, he turned out to be the defense team’s star witness.

Some might argue, but I believe that Fuhrman, along with Deputy D.A. Christopher Darden’s bone-headed Simpson-glove demonstration, were pivotal points that pretty much guaranteed Simpson’s acquittal.

So it will be interesting to see/hear what kind of analysis, which is what he’s purported going  to do, he comes up with.

Frankly, I’m mystified. What’s to analyze about a parole hearing? How the board members arrived at their decision to either grant or deny parole? Simpson’s body language, facial gestures as he makes his request/listens to the board members’ decision.

ESPN is also covering the hearing live and other networks will also jump on this train.

I don’t recall such a proceeding every being covered by the news media like this. I think, to coin a cliche, this is uncharted territory.

Summer sale on Anatomy of a Trial: Public Loss, Lessons Learned from The People vs. O.J. Simpson @ Anatomy of a Trial: Public Loss, Lessons Learned from The People vs. O.J. Simpson — $7.99 (includes shipping with Prime). Or get a signed copy directly from the author — $7.99 plus shipping @ http://anatomyofatrial.com/contact/.

 

 

Three Motions, But Nobody’s Out

Twenty years ago yesterday — sorry folks, I must have been having too much fun to post this yesterday — I wrote the following haiku:

995 motion.

1538.5, too.

Sequestration bid.

O. J. Simpson’s defense team filed two motions; one to dismiss the charges and trial and one to have Simpson’s belongings returned to him or two suppress certain  evidence the prosecution might try to introduce at trial. The prosecution also submitted a motion. It was to sequester the jury.

We know that at least one of the defense motions was denied as evinced by the trial that ended more than a year after this motion was filed.

Although Simpson trial judge didn’t make a decision until months later, he did, in fact, sequester the jury, resulting in jurors living for more than nine-months in a hotel, pretty much cut off from everything that comprises normal daily life.