Video: Mark Fuhrman says killers like O.J. eat chicken at KFC
posted at 10:46 pm on November 16, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Oh lord. By way of set-up, I’m just going to reprint two e-mails that Randy of RightWinged sent me while the show was airing. Note the timestamps.
from randy
to Allah Pundit
date Nov 16, 2006 9:13 PM
subject Prediction: Race card to be pulled on Mark Fuhrman again?Fuhrman on H&C, talking about how murderers like OJ Simpson can wake up day after day, not being haunted by the murders they committed. He’s basically talking about the type of people they are, and said:
“I dealt with people like this for 20 years. They will get up every day, they will kill somebody, and go have some chicken at KFC. You will catch them eatin’ chicken and drinkin’ a beer…”
from randy
to Allah Pundit
date Nov 16, 2006 9:18 PM
subject FOLLOW-UP: Ha! Alan Colmes is already starting in on the KFC commentI knew it!
Alan Colmes thinks O.J. is innocent?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
That one statement right there blows your ‘police corruption’ theory to hell and back soothsayer. No one, NO ONE, in criminal investigations with one iota of forensics knowledge and a speck of foresight is going to place a drop of collected and preserved blood in an effort to frame the center-piece of the trial of the century… and not for one damn minute believe that blood wouldn’t be scrutinized to the hilt.
Pure hogwash and red herrings. If anyone ‘planted’ that drop of blood, it was someone on OJ’s team. Or it didn’t happen at all.
SilverStar830 on November 17, 2006 at 2:55 AM
Ready, folks? Watch out quickly I destroy this guy’s argument:
1.) DU – Bans conservatives
2.) Free Republic – Bans liberals
3.) Hot Air – Allows liberals
4.) Huffington Post – Allows conservatives, and even allows Greg “liberals are terrorists” Gutfeld to have his own blog
It’s amazing, it’s uncanny. It’s the 4-step program on how to quit conservatism. Get yourself a signed copy of Grebrook’s program on Amazon and tomorrow you could come back to reality TOO.
Grebrook on November 17, 2006 at 2:56 AM
Tucker Carlson has said repeatedly that he does’nt like or support Bush and that he (Carlson) is a libertarian, not Republican. And if you think Scarborough is a friend of the Republican party, then you haven’t watched his show for the past two years. As for the rest of your (grebrook) comment, i ditto what thedecider says.
Scot on November 17, 2006 at 2:56 AM
And for the love of Almighty God… do not quote and/or link to a “Communist revolutionary worker” website in a vain attempt to prove anything. You make yourself look foolish. You’d be better off using Wiki to prove OJ’s innocence.
SilverStar830 on November 17, 2006 at 2:58 AM
Wow, look what I started!
Okay, I’m not even going to get in to the “liberals on FNC” argument with Grebrook, but let me just say: Shep Smith. Before I move on.
Here’s the point folks, I agree (as I said earlier) that Alan is a much more respectable human being than 99% of liberals out there, which is sad considering how misguided he remains. With things like the New Black Panthers and Nation of Islam he often takes the “right” side, simply because you would literally have to be retarded to take their side.
That said, Alan lifted his skirt and showed us his liberal tonight. I, being an observer of liberals, wrote Allah because I thought that was a funny clip and I predicted liberal’s crying racism. Partly because it was on Fox so of course, but mainly because it was Fuhrman. But truth be told (as you can see from my first email) I didn’t think Colmes would be that stupid, I expected to hear murmurings tomorrow from Al Sharpton or some other equally ridiculous group or individual.
It became all the more funny that after the commercial break, Colmes launches in to the KFC comment = racist… Now I hesitate to call Colmes a racist because he is better than most of his breed, but let’s just say in normal circumstances I would call the liberal the racist in the scenario. Why? As someone stated earlier, it’s because it was in HIS mind that KFC invoked the image of black people. You can speculate as to whether that was were Fuhrman’s comment was rooted, but there’s nothing to support that he was referring to black people. Alan Colmes chose to bring race in to it, because apparently fried chicken makes him think of black people. So if anyone is the racist here (again, I hesitate to ust that term on him) it’s Colmes!
By the way, am I the only one who spots Soothsayers rants and immediately skips to the next post?
RightWinged on November 17, 2006 at 3:05 AM
Tucker Carlson has said repeatedly that he does’nt like or support Bush and that he (Carlson) is a libertarian, not Republican. And if you think Scarborough is a friend of the Republican party, then you haven’t watched his show for the past two years.
Grebrook on November 17, 2006 at 3:07 AM
Well, that last post didn’t work out too well. Damn quote buttons. How did I manage that one?
Grebrook on November 17, 2006 at 3:08 AM
“By the way, am I the only one who spots Soothsayers rants and immediately skips to the next post?”
Of course not; I assume we all do that. It’s nothing personal, it’s just…you know, look at ‘em.
Alex K on November 17, 2006 at 3:08 AM
My question is: Why KFC?
Are their birds that special?
Emmett J. on November 17, 2006 at 3:20 AM
Carl Childers killed Doyle Hargraves with a sharpened lawnmower blade; and after calling 911, sat down to eat busquits with mustard. Busquits part of a chicken dinner. Does this count as part of the pattern?
allie on November 17, 2006 at 3:21 AM
Very possibly, after all, he probably ate the chicken prior to doing the deed.
Emmett J. on November 17, 2006 at 3:23 AM
KFC again?
Emmett J. on November 17, 2006 at 3:24 AM
All of this was testified to in open court. Opinions were written about the varisous theories of how the EDTA could have gotten there contemporeanous with the events…Here’s a sample….
Read more here.http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~jweiss/laws131/unit3/simpson.htm
How one feels about a fact doesn’t stop it from being a fact. Check the court transcripts and get back to me. There were hearings that took days, about the issue of the EDTA and what experts would or would not be allowed to opine.
Soothsayer on November 17, 2006 at 3:26 AM
Grebrook- My point was that content of shows matters much more than the host. Liberals always say that MSNBC is “fair and balanced” because of Scarborough and Carlson, but the content of their shows is very critical of Bush and Republicans. I watch all three networks and Fox does the best job at giving both views.
Scot on November 17, 2006 at 3:30 AM
All this talk about liberals on FNC, and no one mentions Neil Gabler. That guy talks enough smack about O’Reilly to make Olbermann look reserved.
As for chicken, liberals and blacks, google the local university for their Black History Month menu. Based on my experiences cooking for the dorm brats at the U of WA while going to school, there was a lot of fried chicken and catfish served every February.
Liberals think that blacks eat fried chicken, and LAPD thinks that killers eat at KFC, so according to Libthink, LAPD thinks that killers are black because they eat chicken. The only thing missing is the jungle drum soundtrack.
Just be thankful that Fuhrman said KFC and not banana pudding…
rw on November 17, 2006 at 3:52 AM
Neil Gabler is a liberal? I always just thought he was a semi-retarded janitor who occassionally wandered on to the set of Fox News Watch.
By the way, I believe the rule is if you’re white, you can’t stereotype (which again, there is no evidence that was done by anyone but Colmes here), but if you’re a minority it is a free for all and considered comedy. You’d think Colmes was accusing Fuhrman of producing the first segment of that sketch.
RightWinged on November 17, 2006 at 4:19 AM
I think talking about blacks eating at KFC is a racial stereotype, not being racist. Correct me if I’m wrong… But is that what Fuhrman was doing? No, he was talking about murderers in general, probably based on real-life experiences. Colmes is such an asshat.
“Racism’s still alive, they just be concealin it” – Kanye West
I don’t think Kanye was rapping about liberals… who constantly see racism everywhere to tar their political opponents. Jungle drums!
Seixon on November 17, 2006 at 4:21 AM
RightWinged,
Just like his pro-Murtha ABSCAM argument: “But Murtha wasn’t indicted. He was an unindicted co-conspirator!”
Yes, he actually said that. Heh.
Pablo on November 17, 2006 at 4:22 AM
It’s amazing, how, if you try hard enough, you can talk yourself into believing just about anything. My God, people, do you really want to go all through this again? I for one, do not. We all saw what we saw and no minds will be changed by reliving this, My question to everyone: Do you feel that O.J Simpson had a fair trial? Do you think Mark Fuhrman perjured himself? Did the glove fit? It doesn’t matter what you think. The jury found him “not guilty” so fuggeddabouddit! Doesn’t matter what we think. Let Mr. Simpson go on about his life and some day, some way, he will surely be punished. Myself, I will leave that up to the Ultimate Judge and Jury. I, for one, am not going to let this sorry excuse for a human being turn me against the whole human race. God’s wisdom will without a doubt prevail against a smug, remorseless thug such as this.
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 4:32 AM
Boyo!! The joke would be on me if Orenthal Julius came up with the REAL KILLER, wouldn’t it?
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 4:44 AM
hillbillyjim, first let me say that I know you must be referring to those debating Simpson’s guilt here, which doesn’t include me and I find the whole thing annoying, when there are countless other cases to be equally concerned about, but we aren’t for some reason. The same reason the coverage of the Natalie Holloway case annoyed me.
That said. Simpson did it, that’s quite obvious. He wasn’t made to testify, etc. in the criminal case, but was in the civil case and LOST (aka was found guilty). If I were one of the family members of the two people he murdered, I’d be pissed.
But even setting that aside, you want people to let him “go on about his life”… Uh, incase you hadn’t noticed… the reason he’s in the news is because he wrote a hypothetical book on if he had killed them! HE created this, not people who have been waiting for something to grasp on to so that they could go after him.
RightWinged on November 17, 2006 at 4:58 AM
I will say this only once; hereby finishing my “Beginning Geekbooger”, 101 studies. This troll spouts “facts” and “stat’s” as if they were golden; they (the “facts & stat’s) seldom have any relationship with that old liberal “friend” : the TRUTH. Oops! I missed NancyPants’s memo–meant to say TRUTH TO POWER.
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 5:02 AM
I wonder how many black guys Fuhrman saw going to KFC after killin gsomeone versus white guys…
I mean, he only worked homicide in LA, there are no black murderers in LA, none that belong to gangs, none that eat chicken and drink 40s of malt liquor.
benrand on November 17, 2006 at 5:10 AM
No, Nancy, this does NOT mean you can say that. ….Not NOW for c… soon, Nancy, soon…..We’ll see……
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 5:11 AM
Same ol’ same ol’….
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 5:14 AM
Yes, RW. I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, the attention that this has created is exactly what this monster feeds on. I guess, in a small way, by commenting here, I am guilty of Feeding The O.J Troll. That is an unfortunate result of our connectivity that now exists in every facet of our lives. I just don’t see anything to gain in re-hashing this case, or re-re hashing or re-re-re—–ad nauseum.
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 5:22 AM
He was, after all, found “not guilty”, and if we’re gonna live under a set of laws, we have to respect that, whether or not we agree. I don’t like it either, RW, but it’s what we’ve got.
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 5:26 AM
P.S. I am still hoping against hope, that O.J. let something slip in his tell-nothing “hypotheticical” last gasp for glory, that he put something in the text that will leave him open to perjury charges, at least. One can hope.
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 5:38 AM
Tequila is for babies….if you want to really find out how your alcohol tolerance is doing,go drink some Soju.
This wonderful Korean concoction will leave you sleeping on train tracks.
quax1 on November 17, 2006 at 5:56 AM
Just to make sure that you don’t read me wrong, RightWinged, or anyone else. I TOTALLY disagree with the O.J. verdict. I do believe that we have to respect the jury’s finding; otherwise we have no system of laws. Sometimes our system isn’t perfect. The Simpson trial is one of those times. I still believe in our system; I don’t believe it will ever be perfect. That being said, I hope the bastard rots in hell.
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 6:03 AM
I couldnt agree more with that assesment, on my own thoughts,
perhaps in this case burning books wouldnt be such a terrible idea. I cant believe Fred Goldman hasnt had this vile scum exterminated yet.
Viper1 on November 17, 2006 at 6:04 AM
One last thought: Keep those great video clips coming, RightWinged! LMAO on the last two. Brilliant. Seriously.
hillbillyjim on November 17, 2006 at 6:26 AM
Hmm… KFC…
E L Frederick (Sniper One) on November 17, 2006 at 8:06 AM
Well, hope no more. One, Simpson did not testify, and two, even if he did perjury has a statute of limitations. The only good to be gotten from this is that any money made possibly may be recouped by the Goldman family and that it may aid behavorists. Ted Bundy did a similiar book.
EF on November 17, 2006 at 8:34 AM
I’m waiting for The Juice to put the knife he would have used to kill Nicole and Ronald, if he theoretically did it, on EBay. I wonder if he is going to have a Book signing. He could like put on the gloves that now fit ,after taking his arthritis medicine, to sign the books and write in red ink.
Fuhrman just needs to go away.
Drtuddle on November 17, 2006 at 8:43 AM
Mark Fuhrman is a thug and worse, an incompent detective. Alan Colmes is a moron. O J is….I don’t know a bad enough word for what he is. Imagine his children seeing this.
Don’t mess with me today, I’m in an especially foul mood.
honora on November 17, 2006 at 9:14 AM
I hope O.J.’s punishment is that his children figure out what he really is and never speak to him again. I want their contempt to be his private hell.
Then you must be in the northeast. Land of rain and wind.
Slublog on November 17, 2006 at 9:42 AM
O.J., the least you could have done was ACT like you’re innocent. How hard is THAT?
I love watching the first Naked Gun movie, because O.J. gets the crap beat out of him over and over, and the wheelchair at the ballpark scene near the end is the best.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 17, 2006 at 9:49 AM
Yes indeed. What a mess. And I am coming down with a cold. And I have to talk a trip to Brazil that I don’t want to take. Stupid business.
honora on November 17, 2006 at 10:12 AM
um. i do believe that was an un-”coded” racial comment.
jummy on November 17, 2006 at 10:32 AM
Man, all this talk of fried chicken is making me hungry. KFC sucks, though, I am going to a little soul food place downtown I think, best fried chicken ever.
B Moe on November 17, 2006 at 11:30 AM
Exactly. In my house, KFC is what we had when my mom didn’t want to cook, and we had it often (my brother and I weren’t easy to cook for).
I still eat KFC regularly.
But here’s the shocker………. I’m not black!
Fried chicked is definately a Southern thing, but it’s simply an incorrect stereotype to link it only to black people.
Alan’s outrage convinces me more and more that I won’t see a time where we get away from constantly discussing race.
OJ isn’t guilty because he’s black. He’s guilty because he killed two people in cold blood.
That’s it.
Whether or not he eats chicken… is that really the important topic?
Esthier on November 17, 2006 at 11:43 AM
You’re calling a drink a Korean drink? That’s not allowed. j/k
Esthier on November 17, 2006 at 11:45 AM
Not in civil court…
Esthier on November 17, 2006 at 11:46 AM
It would be a sacrifice, but you could allow one of us to go in your place.
Slublog on November 17, 2006 at 11:53 AM
Chicken and beer? Gee, no race comes to mind for me at all and if one did, that would be ME putting the inference together in my own head. The inference wouldn’t have been put there by the comment. Its in the eye of the beholder.
People are getting too race-phobic in certain races. Chicken and Thunderbird, chicken and tequila, chicken and fortune cookies, chicken and caviar, whats the differance? OJ had McDonalds anyway.
johnnyU on November 17, 2006 at 11:53 AM
Man, KFC sounds good about now. I would kill for some extra crispy! MMMMMM!!!
Woops…I mean, err…um…KFC is good. Me likey chicken.
robblefarian on November 17, 2006 at 12:05 PM
Here’s my take… Which network do I go to if I want to get the broadest range of opinions on a controversial issue? Fox News Channel.
There isn’t a single left-wing perspective of an issue that I will hear on CNN that I won’t hear on Fox. There is, however, quite a lot of conservative perspective on Fox that I won’t get on CNN.
Period. This is almost indisputable. All you have to do is watch the two for a few days and note which views are presented. People who watch CNN or MSNBC, for example, probably didn’t have a clue that the Valerie Plame fiasco was purely speculative and unsubstantiated. People who watch Fox at least heard it argued by the pundits on occasion. People who watch Chris Matthews certainly had no idea, and he is treated as a respectable news reporter. As long as that is the case, then any claims that Fox exhibits unprecedented bias are absurd.
DaveS on November 17, 2006 at 12:16 PM
Why would eating at KFC be rascist? Why would mentioning somene else eating at KFC be rascist? Why talk about this instead of talking about the real outrage: the fact that O.J. is on the air admitting to murder and not in jail.
Where is the footage of Furhman mentioning KFC in the same sentence with the names of other black people?
Why is it that everytime O.J. is in the news reveling in his crime, there is a group of people ready to point out Furhman’s rascism? Why can’t they just admit that they know O.J. did it and don’t want him to go to jail because he is famous and black? I guess the glove doesn’t fit as well if everyone who thinks O.J. is a murderer is actually a rascist.
Cary on November 17, 2006 at 12:18 PM
Hasn’t that been done to death for the last 12 years? What would be the point? What do you think can or should be done about it?
DaveS on November 17, 2006 at 12:21 PM
Gregor is right, the title is not factual.
Soothsayer is contemptible.
Colmes may be better than some, but that is not saying much. He was pathetic with Fuhrman.
And because one has utters language to which some object does not necessarily make one a racist. The words may have been semi appropriate for the individual being discussed. Of course one would have to be inebriated for us to know if he truly meant them based on the reasoning applied to others (i.e. Gibson). I prefer to judge a man by his actions and deeds.
MarkB on November 17, 2006 at 12:46 PM
Fox News basically censored any mention of the David Kuo “Bush makes fun of evangelicals” controversy heading into the final weeks of the election. They flat out kept it off the air. Not one word mentioned about it. Fox did not want it angering Christian conservatives anymore than they already were after Foley.
Grebrook on November 17, 2006 at 1:11 PM
I’ve seen Colmes has get snippy with Alan Keyes on more than one occasion, and he insulted that Malik Douchebag Shabbaz guy on last night’s H&C show too. Ergo, Alan is also a racist.
Teddy on November 17, 2006 at 1:32 PM
Soothsayer-
I read all of the comments preceding yours in this discussion and most of the comments following…
The discussion here seems to be about whether or not Fuhrman’s comment on H&C about killers killing people and then going to KFC is a racist comment.
Most people here tend to think it’s not since people of all races tend to eat at KFC.
I don’t believe there was any post prior to yours about whether or not Mark Furhman was a racist. So, your arguments about his personal racism actually have nothing to do with the discussion on the board about whether or not the Killers at KFC comment is racist.
Is the comment inherently racist in and of itself, I would argue no. Could you argue that Mark Fuhrman meant for it to be racist and therefore it was racist? I suppose you could. Then you could bring in all your evidence of his prior racism and we can all sit around and try to divine what he was thinking at the moment that he said it. I prefer not to waste my time on things of that nature.
JadeNYU on November 17, 2006 at 1:54 PM
“Mark Fuhrman is a thug and worse, an incompent detective.”
honora
I so disagree. Mark Fuhrman was a homicide detective with 20 years on the force, IN LA!! People, you have no idea what he has seen and has had to put up with and deal with every day on the job. I dare YOU to spend one day in his shoes and come out thinking and feeling the same way about the true thugs that are allowed to roam our streets thanks to our inadequate justice system and liberal ‘lets rewrite the laws of our land’ judges.
OJ had the best attorneys money could buy!! They used every trick of the trade to put doute in the minds of the jury and they did their job well.
The evidence was there to convict OJ but the jury chose to believe the ‘race card’ that was played and not the evidence presented. Cameras were allowed in that courtroom which allowed the media to put on the show for all to see.
There was no justice served in the courtroom, a guilty man was set free and we all know it.
“Alan Colmes is a moron.” This totally I agree with, but then I believe all bleeding heart liberals are. I also believe they will be the cause for our great nations implosion.
SWEt on November 17, 2006 at 2:31 PM
That answers nothing soothsayer. The blood was found and collected 3-days later… but who actually put it there? The police found it upon a routine subsequent check of the scene(s) 3-days after the murders… that doesn’t mean they put it there. It’s just as likely someone from OJ’s camp planted the drop of blood on his gate. There’s not one shred of evidence that the police or anyone from the prosecutorial side planted it, they simply found it. OJ’s camp planting it makes perfect sense.
Like I said… red herrings pal, red herrings.
SilverStar830 on November 17, 2006 at 3:00 PM
Really, so by “people like this” Furman meant Heismann trophy winners? Acquitted murderers? Ex-Buffalo Bills? Ford Bronco owners?
Fried chicken reference in this context by a man who is on tape repeatedly using the N word? Hmmm, call me cynical but this isn’t a real big leap to racism.
honora on November 17, 2006 at 3:36 PM
Can’t we all just get along?
RobertCSampson on November 17, 2006 at 3:42 PM
lol.. I’m just kidding.
RobertCSampson on November 17, 2006 at 3:44 PM
Honora – In the context in which he said it, “people like this” appears to mean “Violent multiple murderers”. This is confirmed when he goes on to say they will kill and then move on with their lives as if nothing happened. Whether or not the man is a racist (and, as I’ve said before, I do not know enough about this case or the man to make a judgment one way or another), in the context in which he was speaking it’s a stretch to claim his “people like this” was refering to black people as opposed to socio-pathic killers.
As for the fried chicken reference. As I said, the comment itself is not inherently racist. Imagine for a moment that the exact same thing was said by a black man (perhaps OJ himself in reference to “the real killer”). Would Colmes have made the immediate leap that the man was a racist and was referring specifically to black people? Honestly, I think that finding a comment such as this to be automatically racist is more an indication of the person who believes that “KFC” has to be code for “black” being racist than necessarily an indication that the person who said it believes KFC is code for black being a racist.
I personally have met plenty of black people out here in LA that are health nuts and wouldn’t touch KFC with a 10-foot poll. I’ve also met plenty that absolutely love fried chicken (although most prefer Popeyes or Roscos). In the midwest where I grew up, I knew plenty of white folks that liked KFC too. My parents personally enjoy KFC more than McDonalds. So, if I said something about people at KFC, my point of reference is two middle-aged white midwesterners getting some extra tasty crispy.
Now, as I said before, if you want to argue that when Mark Furhman said it, he was intending it as a racist remark – then you are more than welcome to bring in his past statements as evidence and argue as to what he was actually thinking when he said it. As I mentioned before – lacking any good mind-reading abilities of my own, I leave the job of divining people’s thoughts to others.
JadeNYU on November 17, 2006 at 4:09 PM
Ok, I see the difference. I in fact can read minds.
honora on November 17, 2006 at 4:11 PM
Exactly.
If by “people like this” he had simply meant black people, then what are you trying to imply, that he believes all black people will kill you then go eat chicken????
Does that really make any sense whatsoever?
In the context, it is very clear that he’s referring to murderers without a conscience, murderers who have no problem writing a book about what he did “not” do in order to make a few million.
Esthier on November 17, 2006 at 4:31 PM
Not even close…
brtex on November 17, 2006 at 6:05 PM
My post was an objection to Fox News and Sean Hannity in particular. They have elevated a MANIACE GENOCIDAL RACIST to the position of EXPERT FRIGGING COMMENTATOR! What part of that is beyond your grasp?!
Soothsayer on November 18, 2006 at 2:27 AM
So let me get this straight soothsayer, Mark Fuhrman who is white “says” things about a Black man that murdered his white wife and her white friend who is going to write a book about how he did it, and YOU in you infinite wisdom are screaming about “RACISTS”? No screaming about the racist he is, and how they(THE OTHER NEWS CHANNELS) are all raising him to new heights with this new book about how he did it? I don’t know, but I would think those murders are far more racists than WORDS, which by the way are still a constitutionally guarded RIGHT, even if you don’t like the words. Words/murder, words/murder.. .. oh. .that is right in your alternative universe words win the racist prize.
Do you not see a problem with this or your own ruddy off-kilter morality? Get Real and knock it off. Stupidity isn’t it’s own reward.
Noelie on November 18, 2006 at 10:18 AM
This tempest in a teapot reminds me of Robert Alton Harris, excuted in 1992 in San Quentin, who kidnapped two California teenagers in the parking lot of a fast-food restaurant. He drove to a remote canyon where he killed the two boys, then finished the hamburgers they’d been eating and drove off.
EF on November 18, 2006 at 10:24 AM
Additional info on the Harris case:
The boys then began walking up the hill. Suddenly, Daniel heard a shot. Turning around, he saw John Mayeski fall to the ground. Defendant had shot the boy in the back with the pistol. Defendant fired another shot into the boy’s head, then ran after Michael Baker. Finding the Baker boy crouching and screaming in the brush, defendant shot him four times. Defendant then went back to the fallen Mayeski boy and fired a shot point-blank into his head. Finally, defendant picked up the rifle dropped by Daniel and shot John Mayeski yet again. The brothers then left the murder scene and drove back to the house defendant shared in Mira Mesa. There defendant ate the remainder of the dead boys’ food and laughed at Daniel for not having the stomach to join him. While the brothers continued preparing for the bank robbery, defendant laughed and giggled about shooting the boys, saying he had blown Michael Baker’s arm off. Defendant also amused himself by imagining what it would be like to be a police officer and to report the boys’ deaths to their families. When Daniel noted there were fragments of flesh on defendant’s pistol, apparently from the point-blank shot fired into John Mayeski’s head, defendant laughed, commented he had really blown the boy’s brains out, and then flicked the bits of flesh into the street.
EF on November 18, 2006 at 10:28 AM
So if I think Furman is a racist, this means I am ok with OJ murdering his wife and her friend? Stupidity indeed.
honora on November 18, 2006 at 11:09 AM
You’re going to find traces of EDTA in everything. In the Simpson case, the prosecution expert said the amount was insignificant while the defense expert said the amount was. Big deal.
Recently, in the Kevin Cooper case, where the ahole escaped from prison and axed a family to death, the defense tried to make the same argument. After numerous hearings and expert testimony, U.S. District Court Judge Marilyn Huff stated EDTA testing was unreliable. She commented that only two courts in the country have allowed EDTA testing as evidence. One case is now under appeal because the results were called into question. The second case was the O.J. Simpson trial, in which neither the prosecution nor defense challenged the reliability. The judge went on to say: “It’s only been admitted in two cases, and I don’t think this court wants to use the standard of the O.J. Simpson case.”
CooperWatch
The above website has the briefs and rulings by the court.
1. There is no proof that evidence was planted in the Simpson case.
2. You have to be nuts to believe Simpson is not a murderer.
EF on November 18, 2006 at 11:09 AM
Can anyone remember the last time Colmes argued an issue on its mertits, rather than countering with moral equivalence or ad hominem attacks, like racist, sexist, homophobe…
He’s become unbearably boring.
petefrt on November 18, 2006 at 8:50 PM
Yeah, unrefutable truth does that to idiots.
Soothsayer on November 23, 2006 at 12:07 AM
You accused me of making it up. You said it didn’t happen. I provided documentation to show that not only did it happen but that it was never “beaten down” by the prosecution. Just because racists in the news media never let you know EXACTLY what was going on in the trial that might have redounded to O.J.’s benefit, doesn’t mean that the jury was similarly ignorant. Did you know that one of the cops not Vannater but his partner, the balding skinny one, actually TOOK O.J.’S BLOOD HOME? OVERNIGHT? No, I bet you didn’t know that either and probably don’t believe it now, but that doesn’t stop it from being historical. I said these things not because I believed O.J. to be innocent, I dont’, but my prejudice against him doesn’t come from him dating white women, or having killed one, my belief comes from facts that none of you are privvy to. Such as Nicoles affair with another famous Running back who was a good friend of O.J’s and what that did to him, etc. I said the things I said to show you how you were lied to by the media and to hopefully explain how a jury of reasonable people, privvy to facts that you had no knowledge of, could arrive at the conclusion that they did. There can be no doubt that the police tried to frame O.J. In my opinion they framed a guilty man, but most people, especially people for whom “Frames” are a melanin related hazard, might not give, lying, perjuring, evidence manufacturing, genocidal racist, police officers, the benefit of the doubt like most whites.
Soothsayer on November 23, 2006 at 12:18 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2