This theory of the case was originally published to
Newsgroup: alt.fan.oj- simpson
in late October, 1995.

Second Publishing: 21 January 1996
Updated: 19 April 1996

The Double Verdict

We find the Defendant Guilty


Underlying assumptions, and criteria
Dictate that we cannot use any statement by Simpson, or Fuhrman
-- unless it is confirmed, or refuted, by an independent witness.


The key to this solution is, obviously, Fuhrman tampered with evidence by planting it on a guilty man. That still makes Fuhrman guilty of a capital crime.


Home


Note: All Transcript and Image Material used in this presentation is available on the WEB.
Most images have been edited to provide comparative visualization of relevant evidence points.

© 1995/96 William Lawrence Schreck Jr.
All rights reserved.

Return to 1900 block of Times Square Return to BHI's CapitolHill


Assumptions, and Criteria

In accordance with our published criteria; let us assume that, none of the witnesses were mistaken --- that each testified to the events on the night of Sunday, June 12th, and morning of Monday, June 13th, 1994 with complete candour.

Let us also assume that, when an individual can be shown to have lied, they did so out of a knowledge of guilt, or complicity in a crime. No individual can be held liable for what they might have said, had they been called. It is the obligation of the attorney to call a witness. No individual has an obligation to volunteer testimony. But once an individual has agreed to testify -- and has testified -- they do have an obligation to make themselves available until specifically released from that obligation by the Court.

Assertions by Attorneys


Obligations of Counsel

There will be those who are surprised, or upset, by this scenario appearing at this URL. I would remind them, and others, that these pages are targeted at Mark Fuhrman. And while the weight of evidence -- when viewed without bias -- points to Simson's innocence, establishing that is not the stated objective of these pages. When this page -- with it's honest and undistorted presentation of the testimony -- is viewed in the context of the same critera having been applied to all of the pages comprising The "Indite" Mark Fuhrman page, it should become self evident that those who have attacked our effort, have done so in defense of Fuhrman. For, if the basis of their attacks had been to establish Simpson's probable guilt, they would have composed an argument akin to that which apppears above.

Return to top