July 1, 1987, Wednesday, PM cycle

SECTION: Domestic News

LENGTH: 629 words

DATELINE: LOS ANGELES

An AIDS victim accused of attempted murder after selling his blood was detained and released five times in recent months despite efforts by authorities to confine him to a mental health unit, investigators say.

"He was a time bomb just ready to explode," Detective Bill Pavelic of the police department's mental evaluation unit said Tuesday. "We're very disappointed he was not held. ... There's something drastically wrong here."

Joseph Edward Markowski, a 29-year-old drifter, was charged with attempted murder Monday by District Attorney Ira Reiner after police discovered he was carrying a receipt for a blood donation. Markowski pleaded innocent.

Markowski allegedly told authorities he sold his potentially deadly blood for $8 to $10 a pint and sold sex on the streets of West Hollywood months after he had been diagnosed as having AIDS.

"I know that AIDS can kill. But I was so hard up for money I didn't give a damn," Reiner quoted Markowski as telling authorities.

Activists of the Gay & Lesbian Community Services Center criticized Reiner's actions, saying Markowski should have been treated better by society.

"It's important to see this gentleman as a victim, a homeless person wandering the streets with no housing available," said Eric E. Rofes, executive director of the center, at a Tuesday news conference.

Neither county officials nor psychiatrists who treated Markowski would discuss the case or respond to police comments Tuesday.

According to Pavelic, Los Angeles police first discovered Markowski had acquired immune deficiency syndrome last Feb. 3, after detaining him for walking against traffic on Sunset Boulevard.

On May 3, officers responding to a call found Markowski "crying, breaking down emotionally and stating that he would kill himself," the detective said.

On both occasions, Pavelic said, Markowski was sent to the Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center psychiatric ward or another county facility, but he was quickly released each time.

"We said that he had AIDS, that he was highly irrational, that he donated blood to various agencies and that he possibly had hepatitis," Pavelic said.

The sheriff's department picked up Markowski twice for similar incidents and sent him to a county hospital, with the same result, Pavelic said. Sheriff's spokesman Sgt. Merlyn Poppleton refused to confirm the referrals, saying he was prohibited by law from discussing Markowski's record.

Last week, police were called to a West Hollywood bank where Markowski allegedly grabbed a security guard's gun and screamed "Kill me! Kill me! I have AIDS."

Markowski was referred to County-USC and again was released. However, police found a blood donation receipt, prompting the investigation leading to attempted murder charges.

Rofes and others who spoke at the news conference Tuesday said the charges ignore that Markowski was sick, homeless and in need of social services.

"Why do people with AIDS have to wait so long to get any governmental assistance?" asked Rofes. "Who is going to keep these people off the streets and keep them in food and clothing?"

AIDS is caused by a virus that attacks the body's immune system, leaving victims susceptible to a variety of infections and cancers. It is spread through blood and other body fluids.

The county Board of Supervisors proposed Tuesday that the county health department and district attorney be ordered to investigate plasma banks to determine if they received blood from Markowski.

The board also proposed a review of the operations of Plasma Productions Associates, which bought Markowski's blood, and similar plasma centers.

Officials of the companies have said a screening system and heat-treating process guarantee that the AIDS virus won't enter the blood supply.

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

March 01, 1995, Wednesday, Final Edition

Nell Henderson, Washington Post Staff Writer

SECTION: A SECTION; Pg. A03

LENGTH: 995 words

DATELINE: LOS ANGELES, Feb. 28

Prosecutors in the O.J. Simpson murder trial charged today that a key defense witness was carefully coached and manipulated into supporting Simpson's alibi for the night his ex-wife and her male friend were murdered.

They made the charge after listening to a tape of an interview with Rosa Maria Lopez, a Salvadoran maid who lived and worked next door to Simpson's estate. The existence of the tape was disclosed by a defense investigator, Bill Pavelic, late Monday, and set off a new round of protests by prosecutors over defense tactics in the trial.

"I find this unbelievable," said lead prosecutor Marcia Clark after listening to the tape, which was not made public. "She was handed a script and Mr. Pavelic got on the tape and spoke almost nonstop . . . getting her to affirm 'Yes, yes, yes, yes.' "

Testifying on Monday, Lopez had offered a potentially crucial corroboration for Simpson, describing how she saw his white Ford Bronco parked in front of his house about the time the murders were committed.

But today Clark told the court there were "many glaring inconsistencies" between the four versions of Lopez's account of her actions the night of the slayings before the court -- her testimony Monday, a written account of an interview with her in August, the newly disclosed interview and the tape of it.

Clark asked Judge Lance A. Ito to either halt Lopez's testimony completely, or give prosecutors until Friday to examine the different accounts to prepare for cross-examination, but he rejected both requests.

"We think she's entirely consistent," said Simpson's lead defense attorney Johnnie L. Cochran Jr.

Cochran has brought regular proceedings to a halt by attempting to introduce Lopez's testimony at this early stage in the trial because Lopez has said she wants to leave the country and return to El Salvador. The jury has not been present for her testimony, which is being videotaped to be shown to them later.

"I am very tired. I want to rest sir. I don't want any more questions," Lopez said today before agreeing to Ito's request that she return Thursday.

Lopez, appearing tired and distraught, complained to Ito "this is not my fault, to work close to Mr. Simpson. It's not my fault to have heard what I heard."

Ito apologized and said it was the fault of the defense, for turning the tape over at the last minute, and he ordered the defense to pay for her hotel accommodations.

Simpson has said he was home napping about 10:15 p.m. June 12, the time prosecutors contend he killed his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald L. Goldman. Prosecutors claim to have found the blood of the victims inside the Bronco, and believe Simpson drove the car to and from the murder scene, about two miles from his home.

Lopez, however, testified that she walked her employers' dog twice that evening, shortly after 8 p.m. and after 10 p.m., and both times saw the car parked in the same spot outside Simpson's house.

Initially, defense lawyers said they only had one statement from Lopez, given Aug. 19. But after repeated questioning by prosecutors, they first admitted that there was an earlier statement and then Pavelic acknowledged that there was a tape of the statement. Under California law, the defense is required to give prosecutors notes, tapes and statements from defense witnesses, to prepare for cross-examination.

Defense attorneys said Monday that the difference between the two statements is that the second dropped all mention of an acquaintence of Lopez's identified only as Sylvia. The attorneys said they had edited out Sylvia to protect her, because she is an illegal immigrant and Lopez feared involving her in the case.

Clark said then that defense attorneys hid Sylvia because she would not corroborate Lopez's statement, and would expose her as a liar. As the court prepared to recess Monday, prosecutors produced a woman identified as Sylvia Guerra, whom they plan to call to testify.

Lopez's two statements were not released to the news media, but portions were read by Cochran during a private meeting with Ito, according to a transcript of the meeting.

In the July 29 statement, Lopez said that sometime after 8:30 p.m., "her friend Sylvia came by and they had a cup of coffee" and Lopez drove Sylvia to her house nearby. She says that "when Sylvia observed Simpson's Bronco, she made a comment about the way it was parked. Miss Lopez stated that O.J. always parks his car that way."

According to prosecutors, Sylvia has said she does not know Lopez well and knows nothing about what occurred the night of the murders. Prosecutors initially interviewed Sylvia after picking up a tip that she had heard Lopez say she would sell her story to a tabloid for thousands of dollars. Sylvia denied the rumor.

Another difference between the two statements is in Lopez's recollection of the time "she heard a prowler walking near the residence." In the July statement, she places the prowler at 9:20 to 9:30 p.m.; in the August statement, that occurs between 8 and 8:30 p.m.

Cochran noted that the statements were written by the investigator, not by Lopez, and were not signed by her. The investigator also does not speak Spanish, Lopez's native language, and conducted the interviews in English, Cochran added.

Defense attorneys maintained that because they did not intend to call Sylvia as a witness, they were not obligated to turn over the statement that mentioned her. Ito disagreed, noting that Sylvia could corroborate or undermine Lopez's testimony, and ordered all the Lopez material be turned over to prosecutors.

"You realize what this is likely to do," Ito told defense lawyers in chambers, according to the transcript. "It's going to send the prosecution ballistic. . . ."

Ito said he plans to use Wednesday to meet with lawyers on a number of administrative issues, including the question of dismissing one juror, a 46-year old black, male courier.

LOAD-DATE: March 01, 1995

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

GRAPHIC: Photo, reuter, Rosa Lopez, who testified that she saw O.J. Simpson's Ford Bronco at his estate about the time slayings were committed, is to testify again Thursday.

March 02, 1995, Thursday

SHOW: EYE TO EYE WITH CONNIE CHUNG (9:00 PM ET) 

ANCHORS: CONNIE CHUNG

LENGTH: 977 words

CONNIE CHUNG, host:

In the O.J.  Simpson trial this week, an alibi witness took the stand and took some heat--a lot of it.  By this afternoon, her story, her credibility and a key part of the Simpson defense were all beginning to crumble.  It began Monday in videotaped testimony that the jury may not see for months.  Defense lawyer Johnnie Cochran posed a question to which he, and a lot of other people, already knew the answer.

O.J.  SIMPSON: ON TRIAL

(Footage from courtroom; questioning and answers for Rosa Lopez are translated throughout)

Mr.  JOHNNIE COCHRAN (Defense Attorney): And while you were out there, out on Rockingham, did you ever have occasion to see any cars parked?

Ms.  ROSA LOPEZ (Witness): There was a white car, a Bronco.

CHUNG: (Voiceover) With those words, Rosa Lopez, a housekeeper working next door to O.J.  Simpson's house, laid the groundwork for the defense's best hope to provide Simpson with an alibi.

Ms.  LOPEZ: Over here, right here.

(Footage of Bronco being towed; Simpson home; photo of Nicole Brown Simpson)

CHUNG: (Voiceover) Lopez testified that O.J.  Simpson's white Bronco was parked outside his home at the time the prosecution said the murders took place.

Mr.  CHRIS DARDEN (Prosecutor): You understand that today you are under oath?

Ms.  LOPEZ: Yes.

(Footage of courtroom)

CHUNG: (Voiceover) Today, with prosecutor Christopher Darden's cross-examination, began another sort of trial, a trial of Rosa Lopez's memory and ultimately her credibility.

Mr.  DARDEN: Well, what month was this?

Ms.  LOPEZ: I don't remember, sir.

Mr.  DARDEN: Do you have a hard time remembering dates?

Ms.  LOPEZ: No, sir.

CHUNG: (Voiceover) Darden fought to rip Lopez's story apart, suggesting that she was coached by Simpson team investigator Bill Pavelic.

Mr.  DARDEN: You would give times and he would give other times, correct?

Ms.  LOPEZ: If you say so, sir.

Mr.  DARDEN: But I'm asking you, ma'am.  Is that correct?

Ms.  LOPEZ: It is correct.

Mr.  DARDEN: Did Mr.  Pavelic tell you or mention to you first that you saw the Bronco at 10:15 or 10:20?

Ms.  LOPEZ: All I said was that it was after 10.

Mr.  DARDEN: And so you don't know how long after 10?

Ms.  LOPEZ: No, sir.

CHUNG: (Voiceover) Rosa Lopez's ability to account for time became the issue of the day.  CBS News consultant trial lawyer Gerald Lefcourt.

Mr.  GERALD LEFCOURT (Attorney): What's crucial and her whole purpose...

(Footage of Lopez)

Mr.  LEFCOURT: (Voiceover) ...is to put that Bronco there between 10 and 11:00.

And if she says that she saw it there and it was just sometime after 10 and she doesn't remember, well, then it could be quite a bit after 10 and something closer to 11, in which case her whole value as a witness really goes down the drain.

(Footage of Michael Knox)

Mr.  MICHAEL KNOX (Former Juror): I'm not supposed to say anything.  I've been...

Unidentified Reporter: What was it like being on...

Mr.  KNOX: ...ordered not to say anything.

CHUNG: (Voiceover) But the real shock this week may have come yesterday, words from Michael Knox, who was dismissed from the jury.  He gave reporters insight into what the jury may really be thinking.

Mr.  KNOX: ...because I think that the prosecution has laid a pretty strong case so far.

CHUNG: (Voiceover) The African-American male was replaced by a middle-aged white woman.

(Footage from courtroom)

Unidentified Woman: Juror number 353, please have a seat in seat number 12.

CHUNG: (Voiceover) Once again, the issue of race moved center stage in Judge Ito's courtroom.

Mr.  LEFCOURT: The truth is--is that people of color are more likely to question four white detectives when there are allegations of racism against one or more of them than would white people, and that is simply a reality in America.

Judge LANCE ITO (Los Angeles Superior Court): All right, Ms.  Lopez, could--would you take the witness stand again, please?

(Footage from courtroom)

CHUNG: (Voiceover) This afternoon, prosecutors resumed their attack.  Rosa Lopez was shown a news report in which she contradicted her story.

Ms.  LOPEZ: (From news story) I don't know what time.

Mr.  DARDEN: When you told a reporter that you heard voices, didn't you tell him that you didn't know what time it was that you heard the voice?

Mr.  LOPEZ: (Not translated) Si, senior.

CHUNG: (Voiceover) And when Darden wasn't attacking Lopez, he was taking on Johnnie Cochran, accusing him of coaching Lopez.

Mr.  COCHRAN: I would never, ever do anything like that.

CHUNG: (Voiceover) The judge and the prosecution accepted Cochran's explanation, that he was only signaling the court reporter.  But the prosecution kept it up, ultimately suggesting Lopez's story was for sale. She denied it.

Ms.  LOPEZ: No, sir.

CHUNG: There may be one more victim in the Simpson case: motherhood. Marcia Clark's estranged husband has filed for custody of the couple's two young sons.  He blames the Simpson trial for keeping Clark away from her children.  Clark, who says her children are more important than anything, recently asked for more financial support, citing increased child-care costs and the expense of having to dress for national television.

(Footage of Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller)

Announcer: (Voiceover) When we come back...

RUSS MITCHELL: Is it true that you actually wrote "Hound Dog" in eight minutes?

(Footage of record label; Leiber and Stoller)

Announcer: (Voiceover) ...their Elvis hit sold seven million copies.  Now Leiber and Stoller take the EYE TO EYE challenge.

MITCHELL: If I gave you eight to 10 minutes right now to write a song...

Mr.  JERRY LEIBER (Songwriter): All right.  Here we go.  One, two, shuffle, two, three, four--(singing) Baby, I like the way you look from your ankle to your knee...

LOAD-DATE: March 02, 1995, Thursday

LANGUAGE: English

TYPE: Profile

October 27, 2003, Monday

SOURCE: Modesto Bee

SECTION: DOMESTIC NEWS

LENGTH: 320 words

DATELINE: MODESTO, Calif.

For the defense:

Dr. Henry Lee

Forensic authority who has testified in more than 1,000 legal proceedings, including for the defense in the O.J. Simpson double-murder case. Also consulted in JonBenet Ramsey murder and President Kennedy's assassination.

Dr. Cyril Wecht

Nationally recognized forensic expert and coroner of Allegheny County, Pa., which includes Pittsburgh. Examined remains of Modesto's Chandra Levy.

Bill Pavelic

Private investigator and former veteran Los Angeles police detective. Previously worked on Simpson's defense team.

Gary Ermoian

Local private investigator retained when Modesto police began focusing on Scott Peterson. Authorities secretly monitored part of one of his calls to Peterson.

For the prosecution:

Steve Jacobson

Investigator with the Stanislaus County district attorney's office and former police officer. Supervised wiretaps on Peterson's phones.

Jon Buehler

Modesto police detective. Amber Frey, Peterson's girlfriend, reported to Buehler after telephone conversations with Peterson, which continued at least a month after Frey went public with their romance.

Craig Grogan

Modesto police detective and lead investigator in the Peterson case. Previously named in a federal lawsuit filed by the family of 11-year-old Alberto Sepulveda, who was killed by another officer during a 2000 raid.

Al Brocchini

Modesto police detective. Helped escort Peterson from San Diego to Modesto after his arrest in April. Defense lawyers say Brocchini mishandled a hair found in Peterson's boat.

James Brazelton

Stanislaus County district attorney since 1996 and a local prosecutor since 1985. Previously worked as a policeman and in private practice.

John Goold

Chief deputy district attorney since 1999 and former Bay Area policeman. Often serves as a spokesman for the Peterson prosecutors.

(Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service, http://www.shns.com.)

LOAD-DATE: October 29, 2003

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

March 3, 1995, Friday

SECTION: News Pg.  3

LENGTH: 569 words

O.J. Simpson's alibi witness admitted yesterday that the football great's investigator coaxed her to push up the time she allegedly saw his white Ford Bronco. Rosa Lopez, who worked next-door to Simpson's mansion, testified that she saw the vehicle parked by his estate just after 10 p.m. the night the superstar's former wife and her pal were slain.

Under a fierce cross-examination, the Salvadoran maid indicated that Simpson gumshoe Zvonko Bill Pavelic asked her during an interview to jack up the time to 10:15 to 10:20 p.m. the time prosecutors believe the murders occurred.

"All I said was that it was after 10," a nervous Lopez said through a translator.

"So you don't know how long after 10?" prosecutor Christopher Darden asked.

"No, sir."

Asked by Darden whether Pavelic "suggested" that she saw the vehicle between 10:15 and 10:20, Lopez replied: "If that's what he's saying, that's fine."

Darden then asked: "Did you give him times and sometimes he said other times?"

Lopez replied, "If you say so, sir. It is correct."

Her initial version could have given Simpson time to make the 2-mile, six-minute drive to where Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman were slain on June 12.

In opening statements, the defense told jurors Lopez had seen the vehicle at 10:15 that fateful night.

The grueling cross-examination which took place without the jury turned bitter as Darden accused defense attorney Johnnie Cochran of using hand signals to coach the Salvadoran maid on the stand.

Clad in a snazzy outfit bought for her by the defense, Lopez was caught in contradiction after contradiction, and replied, "I don't remember, sir," to dozens of seemingly simple questions.

At one point, she said she could not recall the date, time of day or even the season of her first meeting with Pavelic last summer.

But in her testimony on Monday, Lopez painstakingly described how when the clock struck 10, she leashed her employer's dog and put on water for tea before going outside and seeing O.J.'s Bronco.

Under cross-examination, she conceded that she stuck tea water in the microwave for 90 seconds and didn't drink it before leaving. That would place her outside closer to 10 p.m.

The 57-year-old immigrant whose threats to flee the United States spurred Judge Lance Ito to order her testimony taped for future use also admitted that she had filed for unemployment on Feb. 15 and had considered staying in this country.

"If I was given unemployment, sir, there was no reason for me to leave the country," said Lopez, who said she used her son's address on the form.

Darden, though, spent most of the day chipping at inconsistencies in the July 29 interview that Pavelic conducted with Lopez, in a written report based on that session and in a report based on an Aug. 18 meeting.

Under fierce questioning, Lopez revealed that O.J.'s assistant Cathy Randa contacted her, told her to meet her on a side street and then drove her to the football star's office to meet Pavelic.

She also denied spending seven hours Saturday in Cochran's office, only to admit doing so minutes later.

But she denied that they discussed the case.

"He just tells me to tell the truth, sir," she told Darden.

After saying she couldn't remember what she did on Sunday, she recalled going on a defense-sponsored shopping spree, buying two dresses and two pairs of shoes.

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

July 28, 1994 Thursday Final Edition

SOURCE: FROM SPECTATOR WIRE SERVICES

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. A10

LENGTH: 494 words

DATELINE: LOS ANGELES

OS ANGELES -- Encouraged by the promise of a huge reward or the chance to contribute to a historic investigation, 250,000 callers have flooded a newly created hotline with tips about the O.J. Simpson murder case, while similarly besieged police have designated a full-time "clue chaser" to run down the leads coming to them.

"It's beyond belief," Mr. Simpson's lead attorney, Robert Shapiro, said of the hotline deluge. He said calls have become "so overwhelming" that the operators have had to install a special back-up recording system to keep up with the crush.

Tipsters have included private investigators with clues based largely on news reports, amateur detectives with theories implicating other would-be suspects and people claiming to have witnessed the events surrounding the grisly murders of Nicole Brown Simpson, 35, and Ronald Lyle Goldman, 25, on June 12 outside her apartment in the Brentwood section of Los Angeles.

Although some of the tips are seemingly credible, many appear to be the products of overactive imaginations. One Maryland woman has called repeatedly to tell of dreams in which she sees another killer. To her frustration, Mr. Simpson's camp has not gotten back to her.

"We're hearing from every psycho and every crazy person," said Bill Pavelic, an investigative consultant working with the Simpson team.

"But if I get one call in a hundred that's a good lead, it's worth it."

Thin promise

Rising to that thin promise, investigators on both sides of the nationally publicized probe are painstakingly chasing down each of their leads, reluctant to pass up any information that could later prove important.

The pace of tips has convinced some Los Angeles Police Department officials that Mr. Simpson's camp may be fuelling the fires in part to occupy detectives who might otherwise be building a case against Mr. Simpson, 47.

Any tip that is not checked out could be used against the prosecution at trial. Mr. Simpson's camp already has made clear its intention to attack the thoroughness and competence of the investigation into their high-profile client.

"There's people that are giving us theories, there's psychics, that kind of thing," said Detective Dennis Payne of the police department's Robbery-Homicide Division.

With the stakes so high for both sides, police detectives and Simpson investigators are simultaneously pounding the pavement, occasionally running into one another at the crime scene and other locations.

According to sources in both camps, the most recent wave of tips has featured several from eager private investigators trying to ferret out new clues in the case.

While most of the tips -- founded and unfounded alike -- are about the principal players in the celebrated whodunnit, many come from people with a dizzying array of thoughts on other issues.

One Santa Barbara woman, for instance, hypothesized that a large dog might have carried a bloody glove to Mr. Simpson's home.

LOAD-DATE: October 13, 2002

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

TYPE: News

February 28, 1995, Tuesday, Home Edition 

BYLINE: By ANDREA FORD and JIM NEWTON, TIMES STAFF WRITERS

SECTION: Part A; Page 1; Column 2; Metro Desk

LENGTH: 2192 words

A Salvadoran housekeeper who has emerged as a central witness on behalf of murder defendant O.J. Simpson testified Monday that she saw Simpson's car in front of his house about the time prosecutors believe he was two miles away killing his ex-wife and her friend.

Rosa Lopez said she took her employer's dog for a walk shortly after 10 p.m. on June 12, the night that Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman were knifed to death in Brentwood. Simpson has pleaded not guilty to the crimes, which prosecutors believe were committed about 10:15 p.m.

Testifying without the jury present but with a videotape recorder capturing the event, Lopez described what she said she saw outside Simpson's Rockingham Avenue home on that cool June evening. Lopez said she glanced at a clock in her room and saw that it was 10 p.m. before she put on some water for tea, grabbed the dog's leash and headed outside. Johnnie L. Cochran Jr., Simpson's lead trial attorney, asked what she saw outside.

"Were you able to see any cars parked out there?" he asked.

"Yes," Lopez responded.

"What cars were you able to see, if any?" Cochran continued.

"The Bronco," Lopez answered.

Lopez's testimony is potentially of huge significance to Simpson, because it bolsters his alibi on the night of the killings. Simpson's lawyers have said their client was home chipping golf balls in his front yard and possibly napping during the period that prosecutors allege the crimes were committed.

With so much possibly at stake in the Lopez testimony, the two sides have fought furiously over her appearance. They debated how and when she would take the stand, and before she was allowed to testify Monday, another disagreement erupted over whether prosecutors had been provided with statements of hers in the possession of the defense team.

At first, defense lawyers said they had only one statement, given in August. Then, after being pressed by prosecutors, they admitted there was an earlier statement, taken July 29 but never shared with government lawyers. Then, at the end of the court day, defense investigator Bill Pavelic said he had tape-recorded the July 29 session, despite assurances earlier in the day by defense attorneys that Lopez had never given a taped statement. No tape ever has been provided to the prosecution.

Those revelations stoked an already intense debate over evidence-sharing. Even before learning that there might be a tape of Lopez describing her observations, Deputy Dist. Atty. Marcia Clark asked that defense lawyers be severely sanctioned for what she said was an "effort to sandbag the prosecution, to blindside us."

The revelation of a tape recording or notes of the July 29 session only redoubled the prosecution's complaints.

Smiling in disbelief and staring intently at the judge, Clark stood off to one side as Pavelic acknowledged that he might have notes and a tape recording of his July 29 interview with Lopez. Clark did not get a chance to respond to that admission, but Superior Court Judge Lance A. Ito promised her that there would be a chance to discuss that issue first thing today.

At a news conference after the court day ended, Clark said Pavelic's comments about the existence of the tape would strengthen the prosecution's request that the defense be punished for its behavior, an argument that the government lawyers plan to make in court today.

"That's going to make the request (for sanctions) even more strident," Clark said. "I think the judge will be even more upset."

Ito, who had been promised that all materials already had been shared with the prosecution, gruffly responded to the latest revelation.

"Tomorrow morning, I'm going to order you to come to court with those items," Ito said to Pavelic, a former Los Angeles Police Department detective who was brought into the Simpson case by attorney Robert L. Shapiro just two days after the murders and who has worked on it since.

"I shall do my best to get those items," Pavelic responded.

"No," Ito said. "Don't do your best. Have them here tomorrow."

"I shall have them here tomorrow," a chastened Pavelic answered.

Lopez, who struggled on the stand last week and was caught in several contradictions by prosecutors, appeared far more collected during her questioning Monday by Cochran. She smiled slightly as the questioning got under way, and was cooperative with Cochran as he politely elicited her account of her observations June 12.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Christopher A. Darden often objected during Lopez's testimony, and Ito often sustained the objections.

Simpson's lawyers have not produced anyone other than Lopez to bolster her account about spotting Simpson's car in the street that night, but if the jury believes her, it would strongly support Simpson's contention that he could not be the murderer.

But Lopez's credibility is certain to come under attack by prosecutors, who are expected to cross-examine her at length today. Before Monday's hearing began, Clark referred to Lopez as a liar, and during a session Friday, Darden aggressively ferreted out contradictions in Lopez's explanation regarding her alleged plans to leave the country.

By the time Friday's session had ended, even Ito, who rarely ventures opinions about witnesses, had noted that her testimony contained a number of contradictions.

Nevertheless, the judge had ruled that she would testify out of order, appearing before the jury this morning to tell her story so Simpson would not be denied her account in the event that she leaves for her native El Salvador and refuses to return if called to the stand during the defense case.

Ito arrived Monday expecting that the questioning would be conducted, but prosecutors lodged a last-minute objection, saying that calling her to the stand in the midst of their case would disrupt their presentation and deny them a fair trial. They filed a motion protesting the plan to have Lopez testify before the jury Monday, and they convinced Ito that he should employ the videotape technique instead.

Cochran was furious, asking Ito not to let himself be "snookered" by the prosecution. The lawyer accused Clark of saying Friday that she needed to care for her two young children that night -- and thus could not be present for proposed evening testimony by Lopez -- as a ruse to delay the housekeeper's appearance on the stand. An indignant Clark retorted that she was "offended as a woman, as a single parent, as a prosecutor and as an officer of the court."

Ito ruled in her favor, as he generally does when the defense and prosecution clash.

Defense attorneys fumed about Ito's change of mind, but some legal experts praised him.

"It's to his credit that he made a reasoned decision," said Gigi Gordon, a Santa Monica criminal defense lawyer, "rather than being worried about people criticizing him for changing his mind." As a result of that last-minute switch, Lopez's testimony was recorded on videotape -- to be used only if she flees to El Salvador. Defense attorneys were concerned that if a special examination were not held and she failed to return, they would forever lose her testimony.

That account's most obvious benefit for Simpson is Lopez's alleged 10:15 p.m. sighting of the car on the evening of June 12. But other elements of her testimony also are potentially valuable to the defense.

She said Monday, for instance, that she had seen Simpson's car about 8 p.m. and again the following morning, and that it appeared to be parked in the same, slightly haphazard way both times. That suggested that it was not moved between those times, again bolstering Simpson's contention that he did not drive to the murder scene in that vehicle, as prosecutors allege.

Moreover, Lopez said she heard voices on Simpson's property sometime around midnight. By then, Simpson was en route to Chicago. Defense attorneys have alleged that Simpson may have been framed for the murders, and the presence of unidentified people on his estate after he left might strengthen that argument.

Testifying Monday, Lopez said she heard Simpson's dog barking and crying shortly before 1 a.m. on June 13. That was about the same time she recalled hearing the voices, which she said she could hear for "a long time" that night.

But Lopez has not always given precisely the same version of what she saw and heard that night, according to prosecutors. Clark said that in the July 29 statement prepared by Pavelic, for instance, there is no mention of Lopez seeing Simpson's car outside his house about 10:15 p.m., arguably the single most important element of her account for Simpson. That is the report not given to prosecutors until Monday.

The information about Lopez spotting the car at that key time first surfaces in a report taken several weeks later, Clark said. That was the only report provided to the government team, which has repeatedly and sometimes successfully argued that defense attorneys are violating the law by not sharing information with their counterparts.

Carl Douglas, one of Simpson's defense lawyers, acknowledged that the defense had failed to turn over the earlier statement but said that he too was surprised to discover the report and stressed that defense lawyers had brought it to the court's attention.

"This was not intentional," Douglas said. "It was not willful."

The July 29 report was taken just one week after Cochran and Douglas joined the defense team, and Douglas suggested that part of the reason for the lapse might have been a breakdown in communications among the lawyers.

The second report also is notable for a piece of information that it does not include, lawyers on both sides said. Lopez allegedly told the defense investigator that another housekeeper, whom she named only as Sylvia, could back up her version of events, but that housekeeper's name does not appear in the later report.

Douglas said it had been omitted because Sylvia was in the country illegally and Lopez wanted to protect her. But Clark accused the defense of deleting her name because she would not corroborate Lopez's version of events. As the court day ended Monday, Darden introduced a witness named Sylvia Guerra and asked Ito to order her to appear in court today.

Ito did. Darden also asked that Lopez be directed not to contact Guerra overnight. Ito declined to make that order, but he did remind Lopez before she left the stand that she was not allowed to discuss her testimony with anyone other than her lawyers.

While the attorneys wrangled over Lopez's testimony, defense attorneys continued to lay the groundwork for one of their main lines of assault on the prosecution case: the anticipated testimony of Los Angeles Police Detective Mark Fuhrman, who could take the stand as early as this week.

Fuhrman was only assigned to the Simpson case briefly, but he testified during last summer's preliminary hearing that he found a bloody glove outside Simpson's estate. That glove is a potentially key piece of prosecution evidence: It matches one found at the murder scene, and DNA tests of blood on the glove suggest that the stains could have come from the two victims and the defendant.

In a motion filed Monday, Simpson's team sought access to LAPD records that might relate to Fuhrman. They want to know if Fuhrman made comments suggesting that he knew Nicole Simpson and if he ever possessed a swastika or other symbol that might suggest racism. They also want to see any Police Department files reflecting the LAPD's efforts to determine whether Fuhrman could have removed a bloody glove from the crime scene and taken it to Simpson's house.

Ito already has reviewed Fuhrman's Police Department records and ruled that nothing in them is relevant to the case. Before he did that, the LAPD had completed its interviews with police officers who were at the crime scene the night of the murders about whether Fuhrman could have planted evidence.

As The Times reported last fall, LAPD officials concluded that it would have been all but impossible for Fuhrman to have carried out such a deception.

The other allegations against Fuhrman -- that he possessed fascist paraphernalia and that he boasted of a relationship with Nicole Simpson -- long have been rumored and have been investigated by the defense and others. But so far, at least, no evidence has surfaced to support either allegation.

Robert Tourtelot, Fuhrman's lawyer, repeatedly has denied that his client is a racist and has said Fuhrman met Nicole Simpson only once, when the officer responded to a 1985 domestic-abuse call at Simpson's home.

The next time Fuhrman saw her, according to Tourtelot, was when he saw her body in the early morning of June 13, after he and other detectives were called to the murder scene.

Assuming she obeys Ito's order not to leave the country, Lopez will return to the witness stand today . Before court adjourned Monday, she told Ito that she had a ticket to fly to El Salvador this morning, but the judge ordered her not to leave, telling her that his clerk would coordinate the change in travel plans.

Times staff writer Henry Weinstein contributed to this article.

LOAD-DATE: March 1, 1995

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

GRAPHIC: Photo, COLOR, O.J. Simpson greets Brentwood neighbors in the courtroom where he is being tried for murder. ; Photo, COLOR, Rosa Lopez during testimony.  KEN LUBAS / Los Angeles Times

May 27, 1996, Monday, HOME FINAL EDITION

BYLINE: San Francisco Examiner

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 12A

LENGTH: 204 words

DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO

SAN FRANCISCO - OK, O.J. here's your chance.

So, you think whoever killed Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman is on the loose and may have ties to San Francisco.

Legendary San Francisco private eye Hal Lipset and five fellow gumshoes have an offer that may fit snug as a glove.  They'll prove you right or wrong - for free.

"I want to clear San Francisco's name," Mr. Lipset said, so the world will not think a brutal killer or killers lurk in the city.

Mr. Simpson's private investigator, Bill Pavelic, welcomed the offer Friday and said he will discuss it with Mr. Simpson, who was acquitted Oct. 3 of the crimes.

Mr. Simpson told Oxford University students May 14 that he has strong leads tying the suspect or suspects to his hometown.

Mr. Lipset called The Examiner to say that he and fellow sleuths want to crack the case a la Sam Spade, their literary hero.

"If you say somebody is following you, I'm going to find if they are," said Mr. Lipset.  "If I find you're not being followed, I'm going to refer you to a psychiatrist."

"If there are leads in San Francisco that somebody is not looking into, then I think they should be," Mr. Lipset said.

Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service.

LOAD-DATE: May 28, 1996

The Associated Press

October 5, 1994, Wednesday, PM cycle

BYLINE: By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP Special Correspondent

SECTION: Domestic News

LENGTH: 894 words

DATELINE: LOS ANGELES

 The judge in the O.J. Simpson case said today it was too late for defense attorneys to explore whether the lead detective lied about why police entered Simpson's estate without a warrant.

The ruling by Superior Court Judge Lance Ito was a serious blow to defense efforts to suppress evidence seized at Simpson's estate the day after the slayings.

Ito said the defense had a chance during the preliminary hearing this summer to find out if Detective Philip Vannatter lied when he said officers tried to call Simpson before entering his estate without a search warrant.

"I find that the burden of reasonable diligence (by the defense) has not been carried," Ito said.

The ruling increased the likelihood that some of the most important evidence in the case may be admitted at trial. The evidence includes a bloody glove found behind a guest house at Simpson's estate and blood drops on the driveway.

In another ruling against the defense, Ito upheld the testing of blood found on Simpson's driveway. The defense said the tests invaded Simpson's privacy and that police should have first obtained a search warrant.

Ito said the argument was "rather interesting and novel" but has "no support" in case law.

One issue Ito left unresolved was whether the defense knew during the preliminary hearing about allegations that another detective, Mark Fuhrman, had moved evidence in an unrelated case.

The prosecution contended the defense did know about this because one of the top defense investigators, Bill Pavelic, was also an investigator in the earlier case. But Ito put the matter aside for now because that a retrial is pending in the earlier case.

Simpson, 47, is being tried for the June 12 slayings of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. Jury selection started Sept. 26, but opening statements aren't expected until November.

Today's hearing was a continuation of an evidence hearing that started before trial began.

Attorney Gerald Uelmen said a transcript of communications between police and a security company the morning after the murders showed officers were at Simpson's front door - not outside the estate's gate - when they attempted to contact him.

During this summer's preliminary hearing, Vannatter said officers entered the estate without a warrant because they couldn't reach Simpson by phone and were concerned about his safety. The hearing judge relied on this testimony in ordering Simpson bound over for trial, Uelmen said.

"Detective Vannatter's testimony that they placed this call to the inside of the residence before they went over the wall was false," said Uelmen. "That call was made after they went over the wall, and after they went to the front door."

He called the preliminary hearing testimony "a well-orchestrated tissue of lies."

The prosecution argued that the transcript was unclear on just exactly where police were and that at any rate, the defense should have argued the issue during the preliminary hearing.

"They did nothing," said Deputy District Attorney Marcia Clark. "They had the opportunity and they failed to do so."

Clark also criticized the tone of the defense argument, saying the defense was making accusations of lying "very irresponsibly." A few minutes later, though, Clark denounced as a liar a woman who provided the defense with unflattering information about one of the detectives.

That prompted Ito to chastized both sides for saying people were lying without offering proof.

The defense today also objected to several searches of Simpson's Ford Bronco, contending the evidence could have been tainted by a burglary of the vehicle while it was parked at a police tow yard.

Uelmen said one of the items missing from the Bronco was a gasoline receipt bearing the signature of Ms. Simpson. Uelmen called this evidence "extremely exculpatory."

On Tuesday, Ito escalated his battle with the media by revoking a newspaper's trial seat pass as punishment for a leaked story. The Daily News of Los Angeles - the city's second-largest paper - published details of a jury questionnaire it obtained a day before it was officially made public.

The Daily News filed court papers objecting to the action as unconstitutional.

Ito has harshly criticized the media for using leaked information, but the action against the Daily News was the most severe so far. The passes are highly valued because so many reporters are covering the trial.

Ito will consider whether to impose a ban on cameras and microphones at a Nov. 7 hearing.

Other developments:

- Ito has ordered police and prosecutors to turn over volumes of documents and other items, according to court papers released Tuesday. The items include photographs of shoes worn by investigators at the murder scene - where bloody shoe prints were found - and reports by Detective Mark Fuhrman about responding to a domestic disturbance call at Simpson's home in 1985. The defense has been trying to portray Fuhrman - who found the bloody glove outside Simpson's mansion - as a racist who may have planted evidence.

- Simpson's defense team attacked the validity of glow-in-the-dark Luminol tests for blood in Simpson's Bronco. The motion released Tuesday argues that tests with the chemical are unreliable and unaccepted in the scientific community, and that its use has led to reversals in other cases.

LOAD-DATE: October 5, 1994

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

September 2, 1987, Wednesday, AM cycle

BYLINE: By LINDA DEUTSCH, Associated Press Writer

SECTION: Domestic News

LENGTH: 622 words

DATELINE: LOS ANGELES 

Two days before his arrest for selling his AIDS-tainted blood, Joseph Markowski told police: "I'm a prostitute and I sell blood for a living," a detective testified Wednesday.

Los Angeles police detective Bill Pavelic said Markowski, who is charged with attempted murder, gave that response when asked his occupation.

"He was extremely agitated, belligerent," said Pavelic. "He used scurrilous language. ... He repeatedly talked about the fact he had AIDS."

Markowski, 29, whose case is believed to be the first of its kind in the nation, has been charged with four counts of attempted murder for selling his blood and for having sex while knowing he had AIDS.

He also is charged with two counts of assault with great bodily injury and two counts of attempted poisoning for alleged acts of prostitution.

Municipal Court Judge Alban Niles is conducting a preliminary hearing to determine whether Markowski should stand trial.

Pavelic, who was assigned to the mental evaluation unit, said that even after Markowski told him he had been tested at County-USC Medical Center, he did not believe that the man had AIDS.

"I was still dumbfounded," Pavelic said of the June 23 conversation. "I didn't take it very seriously."

Even after officers found a receipt for a blood donation in Markowksi's personal effects, Pavelic said, "I still wasn't convinced I had, quote unquote, a crime."

He said he ordered Markowski held at County-USC Medical Center for 72 hours of psychiatric observation with instructions that the detective be called before Markowski's release. But the next day, he called and found Markowski had been released.

Pavelic's testimony about Markowski's arrest when he returned to a plasma center to sell blood brought into evidence statements which had been attributed to the defendant earlier by the district attorney's office.

The judge barred admission of more statements made by Markowski during the first encounter with Pavelic because he had not been advised of his legal rights at that time.

Markowski was first taken into custody June 23, after screaming "Kill me! Kill me! I have AIDS!" in a Hollywood bank while attempting to grab a security guard's gun.

Pavelic said Markowski told him he had been diagnosed as having the AIDS virus as early as 1985 and had lost 10 to 12 pounds in the week before his arrest.

"He was a homeless sort of person," said Pavelic. "He said he was broke and had a substance abuse and alcohol abuse problem. He basically described his life as being totally shattered."

In other testimony, Lawrence Roberts, a police department paramedic, testified he had contact with Markowski on May 28. He said Markowski announced that he had AIDS.

"Mr. Markowksi never said anything about taking affirmative steps to transmit the disease, did he?" asked defense attorney Guy O'Brien.

"No, he didn't," said the witness.

The prosecution is seeking to show that Markowski had the intent to transmit AIDS to others, a required element of the attempted murder charge.

At Wednesday's court session, a deputy escorting Markowski in and out of court wore plastic surgical gloves.

It is extremely rare for AIDS-infected blood to pass undetected through the blood screening process, according to the American Red Cross. Since a nationwide blood screening program was instituted in spring 1985, 24 million units of blood have been screened, according to a Red Cross spokesman.

Markowski, who pleaded not guilty at his arraignment on June 29, was ordered held on $1 million bail.

Acquired immunne deficiency syndrome, which destroys the body's ability to fight disease, is spread by a virus passed through blood and semen, but not through casual contact, medical authorities say.

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

November 25, 2003

I WAS TRYING TO HELP THIS BOY BUT NOW I FEEL GUILTY

BYLINE: Antonella Lazzeri in Los Angeles

LENGTH: 427 words

 Charity boss sent lad to Jacko

 A CHARITY boss who introduced Michael Jackson to the 12-year-old lad he is accused of repeatedly molesting said last night he is tortured by guilt.

 Jamie Masada, who runs a charity for sick children, was told by Gavin Arvizo's relatives that the boy had just weeks to live -and it was his dying wish to meet Jacko.

 Jamie said: "I got on the phone to arrange it but now I think, 'Was it a mistake?'

 "I was trying to help this boy but now I feel so guilty. When I heard about the charges my first thoughts were, 'Oh my God!'

 "I have felt bad ever since. I keep thinking, 'Is it really true or is it not true?' I just don't know." Jamie told how Gavin's concerned mum contacted him before the sex abuse allegations were made to say Jacko had asked her to sign some kind of agreement.

 He added: "She was worried because she didn't know what she was signing. It was around the time of the Martin Bashir documentary."

 The notorious programme showed Jacko cuddling Gavin -and admitting he had shared a bed with him.

 Jamie also denied claims that Gavin's family want a cash settlement, adding: "They are not after money. His mother is very religious and she just wants justice."

 Jacko's legal team have hired the man who dug up dirt on the main witnesses in the OJ Simpson murder trial to investigate the Arvizo family.

 Private eye Zvonko "Bill" Pavelic is said to be investigating the backgrounds of family members in a bid for information that might discredit them as witnesses.

 Drugs

 The news came as sources close to Jacko claimed Gavin's mum has previously threatened to sell her story unless the star hands over cash.

 Other employees of the singer claim they saw her high on drugs and in angry rows with Jacko.

 The singer is due to make his first court appearance on January 9. But yesterday a legal expert said it might take a year for a proper trial to start.

 Professor Carol Chase said the star's legal experts could delay the trial for months by claiming they needed time to prepare a case.

 When Jacko was accused of molesting 13-year-old Jordy Chandler a decade ago, the case was eventually dropped after a multi-million dollar deal with the lad's family.

 But a change in the law means Gavin would be forced to give evidence at court even if he had accepted a pay off.

 Meanwhile, Jacko has cancelled plans to attend a tribute concert at London's Dominion Theatre on December 14.

 The conditions of his Pounds 1.75million bail ban him from leaving America.

LOAD-DATE: November 26, 2003

LANGUAGE: English

PUB-TYPE: Newspaper

May 27, 1996, Monday, HOME FINAL EDITION

Investigators offer Simpson free help to find killer, exonerate San Francisco

BYLINE: San Francisco Examiner

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 12A

LENGTH: 204 words

DATELINE: SAN FRANCISCO

SAN FRANCISCO - OK, O.J. here's your chance.

So, you think whoever killed Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman is on the loose and may have ties to San Francisco.

Legendary San Francisco private eye Hal Lipset and five fellow gumshoes have an offer that may fit snug as a glove.  They'll prove you right or wrong - for free.

"I want to clear San Francisco's name," Mr. Lipset said, so the world will not think a brutal killer or killers lurk in the city.

Mr. Simpson's private investigator, Bill Pavelic, welcomed the offer Friday and said he will discuss it with Mr. Simpson, who was acquitted Oct. 3 of the crimes.

Mr. Simpson told Oxford University students May 14 that he has strong leads tying the suspect or suspects to his hometown.

Mr. Lipset called The Examiner to say that he and fellow sleuths want to crack the case a la Sam Spade, their literary hero.

"If you say somebody is following you, I'm going to find if they are," said Mr. Lipset.  "If I find you're not being followed, I'm going to refer you to a psychiatrist."

"If there are leads in San Francisco that somebody is not looking into, then I think they should be," Mr. Lipset said.

Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service.

LOAD-DATE: May 28, 1996

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

March 4, 1995 Saturday FIRST EDITION

Judge lowers boom on O.J. team; Ito fines 2 lawyers for lying

BYLINE: By HELEN KENNEDY

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 001

LENGTH: 783 words

O.J. Simpson's lawyers lied and willfully broke the law when they tried to hide damaging information, said Judge Lance A. Ito, who slapped the Dream Team yesterday with fines and various other punishments.

"This was, at the very least, a representation made with reckless disregard for the truth, if not a deliberate attempt to mislead    both the prosecution and the court," Ito wrote in a strongly-worded ruling.

When the jurors come back Monday, Ito - as part of the punishment - will tell them the defense lawyers broke the law and it is their fault the jurors have been cooped up in hotel rooms for the last 10 days.

Lead defense attorney Johnnie Cochran Jr. will have to pay a $ 950 fine, as will Carl Douglas, whom Ito has warned once before about violating the law of discovery by holding back information.

Misconduct fines under $ 1,000 do not get reported to the California Bar.

This is the second time the defense has been blasted by the judge for trying to put one over on the prosecution. The first was when Cochran surprised prosecutors with a raft of new witnesses in his opening statement.

The latest uproar stemmed from a July 29 interview conducted by defense investigator Zvonco "Bill" Pavelic with Rosa Lopez, Simpson's star alibi witness, who said she saw Simpson's Bronco parked at home at the time he was allegedly killing his ex-wife two miles away.

The interview produced a written statement and a tape recording, which contained different information. Neither was given to the prosecution.

Prosecutors charged that the defense hid the records because Lopez made easily-disprovable statements - notably that another Brentwood maid, Sylvia Guerra, was at her house June 12 and could back up her story.

Guerra has denied being there and said Lopez claimed Simpson's lawyers would pay her $ 5,000 to give Simpson an alibi.

When the defense belatedly produced the July 29 written statement last week - just before Lopez was to take the stand - prosecutors cried foul.

A stern Ito quizzed the defense team about any other records, but Cochran, Darden and Pavelic all heatedly denied any existed. Only after prosecutor Marcia Clark suggested Ito place Pavelic under oath, did he admit he had an audiotape.

Cochran and Darden claimed they never knew of the tape.

Cochran told reporters late yesterday: "I'm glad it's over. We'll pay and move on."

Ito also ruled that "when or if" Lopez' testimony is ever shown to the jury, he may allow prosecutors to tell the jury about the unethical defense tactics in their closing argument.

That's just one more reason for the defense to scrap Lopez's testimony altogether.

The slight Salvadoran maid finished testifying yesterday, but continued to be vague and confused about almost everything.

The defense did not ask the judge to order Lopez back, indicating they will not fight hard to have her testimony put before the jury.

Prosecutor Christopher Darden continued to demolish her testimony on cross-examination yesterday. But when Cochran got up to ask her more questions and try to mop up the mess, Lopez's answers actually became even more contradictory.

When Cochran - trying to elicite a "no" - asked Lopez if she had told a former employer that "O.J. Simpson is a great guy. I would testify to anything, anytime," Lopez responded: "Maybe I said that, I don't remember."

Cochran tried to tell the court that when Lopez said "I don't know," it meant "no" in her Salvadoran dialect.

But the Salvadoran consulate in Los Angeles released a statement saying that in no Salvadoran dialect do the words "I don't remember" substitute for "no."

Lopez also responded "no me recuerdo" when asked if she ever told Guerra she was being paid by Simpson's lawyers.

Later, she listened to a tape of Guerra saying that Lopez claimed she was being paid and that Guerra could also make $ 5,000 by pretending to have seen Simpson's Bronco.

"I never said that, sir," Lopez replied.

"Sylvia's lying?" Darden asked.

"100 percent, sir," Lopez said.

Though her estimate of when things happened changed almost every time she was asked a question, Lopez stuck adamantly to the core of her story: that she heard Simpson leave his home, that she heard scary footsteps in hard-soled shoes and that she later heard Simpson's voice and felt safer.

Because Lopez was unable to fix a time for these events, prosecutors may be able to argue that Lopez actually heard Simpson creeping back onto his own property after murdering his wife, and that the later conversation was Simpson talking to his limo driver.

Cochran has said Simpson was home chipping golf balls in his yard - but Lopez never mentioned seeing him do that.

LOAD-DATE: March 15, 1995

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

June 30, 1991, Sunday, Home Edition

detective rips into lapd's leadership;
law enforcement: outspoken Bill Pavelic accuses chief gates and others of obstruction of justice, cronyism and mismanagement. charges are made at a 'people's grand jury' held by activists.

BYLINE: By SCOTT HARRIS, TIMES STAFF WRITER

SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 1; Column 2; Metro Desk

LENGTH: 793 words

A veteran Los Angeles police detective delivered a scathing and unusual pub-lic condemnation of Police Chief Daryl F. Gates on Saturday at an unofficial tribunal examining law enforcement abuses, accusing Gates and other top police officials of obstruction of justice, cronyism and mismanagement.

Detective Bill Pavelic, a 17-year veteran who works in the Southwest Divi-sion, likened police leadership to a dictatorship during a 45-minute dialogue at a conference dubbed the "People's Grand Jury on Police Abuses" by activists critical of police abuses.
Under Gates, Bill Pavelic charged, the department's "management has become an or-ganization where managerial corruption, lying and covering up criminal miscon-duct has become the norm."

"Management's respect for cronyism," he added, "is proportional to their dis-respect for the principles of professionalism, including integrity and fair-ness."

The lambasting of Gates by one of his own detectives was received with cheers and a standing ovation by the partisan audience. Bill Pavelic, known among his fellow police officers and among prosecutors for his aggressive, outspoken manner, said it was the first time he has raised criticisms in a public forum.

The comments represented a new development in a political battle over the fu-ture of the Los Angeles Police Department triggered by the videotaped beating of motorist Rodney G. King. Gates, who has been chief since 1978, has steadfastly defended his management of the department.

Introduced as a detective "who has bucked the system," Bill Pavelic said he "was simply exercising my constitutional rights" in speaking out and later predicted that he would be disciplined for his actions.

Bill Pavelic accused Gates, former Assistant Chief William Rathburn -- now chief of the Dallas police -- and Southwest detectives commander Lt. Alan Kerstein of obstructing his investigation into an alleged "date rape" at the Alpha Tau Omega fraternity house at USC. The suspect maintained that the woman consented to in-tercourse.

The controversy concerned the relationship among Gates, Rathburn and promi-nent attorney John C. Argue Sr., a USC trustee whose son is a member of ATO. Po-lice say Argue's son was part of a group of fraternity brothers who walked through the room naked and carrying golf clubs while the alleged rape was taking place, an endeavor they nicknamed "just playing through."

By Pavelic's account, interference by Gates and Rathburn quashed efforts at prosecution. Bill Pavelic said he was reassigned from the sexual assault detail after leveling allegations of obstruction within the department. Gates, Rathburn and other officials have denied any wrongdoing.

Bill Pavelic portrayed the incident as the latest in a series of abuses, noting that he first made formal complaints accusing top brass of obstructing justice as far back as 1984. He also asserted that internal reports that reflect poorly on a detective unit's performance are covered up to protect the department's reputation.

Addressing a crowd that had already heard several hours of testimony and seen slides and videotapes depicting police violence, Bill Pavelic emphasized to the crowd that "many, many thousands" of officers he has encountered in his career he con-sidered "law-abiding, decent, honest, professional, hard-working, competent."

"I want you to know I took my oath very seriously," he said. "That oath did-n't mention Daryl Gates. It didn't mention (Dist. Atty.) Ira Reiner. It didn't mention (Mayor) Tom Bradley or anybody else.

"All it basically says is that we have to have reverence for the law," Bill Pavelic said.

The detective's statements came near the close of a daylong session at Mt. Vernon Junior High School that attracted hundreds of spectators.

Some activists portrayed their "grand jury" as an alternative to the Christo-pher Commission, which was formed to conduct a detailed review of Police Depart-ment practices after the King beating. Carol Watson, president of the Los Ange-les chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, said the purpose of the event was "to galvanize the community to do something about this problem."

In a morning session, more than than 200 people heard human rights activist Ramsey Clark, a former U.S. attorney general, emphasize the importance of prose-cuting police abuse cases.
Clark, who was a prominent critic of the Persian Gulf War, said in an inter-view that Gates is wrong in asserting that the King incident became a media sen-sation to fill a postwar news void.
"I frankly find it shameful that a chief of police would try to minimize this in human terms," Clark said. "What he's saying is . . . we wouldn't have cared about Rodney King. Well, God help us if that's true. God help anybody who sees that film and doesn't get upset."

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

GRAPHIC: Photo, Detective Bill Pavelic pauses during his talk to the conference.  ROBERT DURELL / Los Angeles Times

July 22, 1994, Friday , FINAL

SOURCE: P-I News Services

SECTION: NEWS                                LENGTH: MEDIUM: Pg. B1

LENGTH: 666 words

DATELINE: LOS ANGELES

 
A top investigator for O.J. Simpson has been portrayed in court papers as a bitter ex-cop with a vendetta against a former Los Angeles Police Department colleague assigned to the Simpson case.

Zvonko Bill Pavelic gave up a generous pension package when he quit the de-partment 18 months ago after nearly 20 years on the force. He contends he was forced out because he had complained about racism and corruption in the depart-ment.

"I was sick and tired of watching innocent people get framed, especially mem-bers of minority groups, and that includes African Americans and Mexicans," Pavelic told The Associated Press. "I was disturbed about officer-involved shootings, and how they covered up the incidents."

Bill Pavelic was hired to review the police investigation in the case, looking for mistakes, violations of LAPD policy and skeletons in investigators' closets.

Simpson, 47, is charged with murder in the June 12 stabbings of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson, 35, and Ron Goldman, 25. He faces arraignment today .

Court papers describe Pavelic as angry, bitter and paranoid.

"Bill Pavelic thought there was a big conspiracy among the supervisors at South-west Detectives and command staff officers of LAPD who were 'out to get him,' " prosecutors wrote in a case in which the defense was considering calling Bill Pavelic as a witness.
In recent days, the Simpson camp has leaked unflattering details about Detec-tive Mark Fuhrman, who testified at a preliminary hearing that he found a bloody glove at Simpson's estate.

The defense reportedly was going to argue that Fuhrman planted the glove.  However, an internal police investigation has concluded that scenario is virtu-ally impossible, police sources told the Los Angeles Times.

Many of Fuhrman's defenders suspect Bill Pavelic was responsible for revealing de-tails to the media of a 1983 lawsuit that portrays Fuhrman as racist and vio-lent.

A review of his personnel file suggests, however, that Bill Pavelic enjoyed a suc-cessful career. He strongly defended his reputation, pointing to 175 commenda-tions.

But his career apparently took a turn for the worse in his latter years, when he started openly criticizing command staff, including former Chief Daryl Gates.

Bill Pavelic retired in 1992 on a service-related disability pension of half pay, claiming his working conditions aggravated his health.

On Wednesday, the defense launched a toll-free tip line and a $500,000 reward for "the real killer."
Simpson's lead defense attorney, Robert Shapiro, said hot-line operators were receiving 100 calls a minute. Earlier, an AT&T operator had said technical dif-ficulties were blocking some calls.

"This is done totally outside our office. . . . This is totally O.J.'s thing," Shapiro said yesterday, adding that a message on the hot line had been changed to delete a referral to Shapiro's office for legal representation.

Meanwhile, officials said yesterday that a notebook detailing Nicole Simp-son's activities last winter was found in the car of O.J. Simpson's girlfriend and has been turned over to Los Angeles police.

Police in Newport Beach, 40 miles south of Los Angeles, said the notebook was recovered from Paula Barbieri's car Jan. 31 after the vehicle had been stolen and used in four armed robberies.

Newport Beach police spokesman Sgt. Andy Gonis said the notebook was handed over on July 12 to the lawyer of William Wasz, who stole the car, and was now in the hands of Los Angeles police.

Wasz's lawyer, John Stewart, told CNN that the notebook contained a detailed schedule of Nicole Simpson's movements.
"I found the contents very, very interesting as it relates to possible sce-narios relative to O.J. Simpson (and) . . . the ongoing prosecution of O.J.," he said.

TV coverage
ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC plan live coverage of O.J. Simpson's arraignment on murder charges today in Los Angeles. The court session also can be seen on Court TV. It is scheduled to begin at 10:30 a.m. PDT.

- The Associated Press
sdh/md

LOAD-DATE: November 24, 1998

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

April 9, 1993, Friday, Home Edition

denny pretrial action brings another delay;
COURT: JUDGE POSTPONES HEARING ON DEFENSE MOTION ALLEGING DISCRIMINATORY PROSECUTION. ATTORNEY CONTRASTS BEATING CHARGES TO THOSE IN KING CASE.

BYLINE: By EDWARD J. BOYER, TIMES STAFF WRITER

SECTION: Metro; Part B; Page 3; Column 5; Metro Desk

LENGTH: 535 words

A defense attorney wanted former Dist. Atty. Ira Reiner arrested. A prosecutor warned against opening a Pandora's box and creating a circus. And a lawyer for Sgt. Stacey C. Koon said he would advise his client to take the 5th Amendment.

So went the proceedings Thursday in a pretrial hearing for three men charged in the as-sault on trucker Reginald O. Denny. When all of the skirmishing was over, Superior Court Judge John W. Ouderkirk postponed for three weeks the hearing on a defense motion alleging discriminatory prosecution.

Attorney Edi M. O. Faal, who represents defendant Damian Monroe Williams, had subpoe-naed Reiner to ask him why the Denny defendants face more serious charges than those filed against the police officers who beat motorist Rodney G. King.

Noting that Reiner was not in the courtroom, Faal asked that the judge issue a bench war-rant for his arrest. Prosecutors pointed out that Reiner was in the building and called him on the telephone. Ouderkirk denied Faal's request and scheduled testimony from Reiner on May 28 when the hearing is scheduled to resume.

Prosecutors earlier had taken issue with Faal over the relevance of testimony from other witnesses he has subpoenaed -- former Dist. Atty. John K. Van de Kamp; former Los Angeles Police Detective Bill Pavelic; Deputy Dist. Atty. Terry White, who prosecuted the state case against the officers who beat King, and attorney Stephen Yagman, who has sued several law enforcement agencies for excessive force.

Faal also had subpoenaed Koon, one of four officers facing federal charges of violating King's civil rights. But Los Angeles Police Protective League General Counsel Enrique A. Her-nandez, who represented Koon at the hearing, said in court Thursday that he would advise the sergeant to exercise his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination if called to testify be-fore the federal case ends.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Lawrence C. Morrison, one of two prosecutors on the case, accused de-fense attorneys of opening a Pandora's box by creating a "parade of disgruntled police officers and civil rights attorneys" without first establishing the relevance of their testimony.

For his part, Faal said the prosecution does not want a public hearing on discriminatory prosecution because "they do not want some of the things that will be said disseminated" by the media.

Defense attorneys maintain that the defendants in the Denny beating are being charged more severely than the officers who beat King because the Denny defendants are black and the officers are white.

Attorney J. Patrick Maginnis, who represents defendant Antoine Miller, said Morrison and a Los Angeles police detective said Miller committed no violent acts against Denny. Yet Miller is charged with attempted murder.

Miller and Williams, both 20, and Henry Keith Watson, 28, face multiple felony charges arising from their alleged involvement in the attack on Denny as violence erupted last April 29 after the officers were acquitted on all but one charge in the King beating.

On Wednesday, Ouderkirk postponed their trial until mid-July. Miller, who originally balked at waiving his right to a speedy trial, agreed to the delay Thursday.

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

August 1, 1984, Wednesday, PM cycle

SECTION: Sports News

LENGTH: 159 words

DATELINE: LOS ANGELES

Quick action by a policeman may have prevented former International Olympic Committee President Lord Killanin from choking on food at an Olympics reception last week.

Killanin, who turned 70 Monday, "stood up, leaned over and grabbed the table cloth... It was evident he was choking and having great difficulty breathing," police Cmdr. William Booth said Tuesday.

Detective Bill Pavelic, 36, a 10-year veteran of the department assigned to dignitary protection, "struck him three to four sharp blows at the proper place on his back and it dislodged the food," Booth said.

"A few minutes later, Lord Killanin was all right," he said.

Pavelic received a letter of commendation Tuesday from Edgar Best, security chief for the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee, Booth said.

The incident occurred last Wednesday night at the First Interstate Foundation reception for the Olympics. Killanin did not require medical attention, Booth said.

Daily Journal Staff Writer

LOS ANGELES - The FBI is investigating allegations that celebrity sleuth Anthony Pellicano wiretapped prosecutors in a high-profile rape case against one of his clients, John Gordon Jones, according to sources familiar with the case.

Pellicano, who is serving a prison sentence on weapons charges, is also the target of a wide-ranging illegal-wiretapping probe by a federal grand jury.

As part of that investigation, sources said this week, federal agents are checking on whether Pellicano surreptitiously recorded the conversations of county prosecutors, including Karla Kerlin, the lead attorney on the Jones case.

Dubbed the "limousine rapist," Jones was charged in 1998 and 1999 with drugging women in Hollywood clubs, taking them home in his limousine and raping them. He was acquitted of numerous rape and kidnapping charges in 2001.

Pellicano's attorney, Donald Re, declined to comment in detail on the wiretap allegations.

Re said, however, that Assistant U.S. Attorney Dan Saunders, who prosecuted the weapons case against his client, said at a court hearing earlier this year that he believed Pellicano had wiretapped a deputy district attorney. Re said Saunders wouldn't say who that attorney was.

Thom Mrozek, spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles, declined comment.

Wednesday, District Attorney Steve Cooley issued a statement calling on federal authorities to disclose what they know about any wiretapping of prosecutors.

"The possibility that criminal investigations and prosecutions may have been compromised by defense teams through illegal wiretapping casts a shadow over Los Angeles County's criminal justice processes," Cooley said.

"It is time for straight talk by federal authorities on this troubling issues," he said.

Jones' criminal defense lawyers, who have included at varying times such veterans as Ronald Richards and Richard Sherman, have said they had no reason to believe any prosecutors were wiretapped.

Kerlin declined to comment because of pending litigation. Jones sued Kerlin, Cooley and other prosecutors for malicious prosecution following his acquittal.

Attorney Gregg Goldfarb said that, during Jones' criminal case, he became aware that the district attorney's office was concerned that prosecutors may have been the victims of "Pellicano's high technology."

Goldfarb of the Law Offices of Gregg J. Goldfarb won $5.4 million in civil judgments against Jones on behalf of an alleged rape victim.

"In the course of the criminal case, we were advised by police and the district attorney's office that there may have been some surreptitious behavior going on," Goldfarb said earlier this week.

After that, Goldfarb said, he stopped having important conversations on the phone with his client and co-counsel.

William Pavelic, an investigative consultant for Jones, said he didn't know whether Pellicano wiretapped prosecutors.

However, Pavelic said criminal defense attorney Daniel G. Davis, who represented Jones in 1999, asked the consultant to look into the background of Kerlin, a former Vegas showgirl.

Pavelic said by phone that Davis wanted him to find photographs of Kerlin, including nude pictures. Pavelic said that he thought it was a waste of time and not relevant to the case and that he refused to do the job.

Pellicano by this point was off the case, said Pavelic, who claims he refused to work for Jones until he got rid of Pellicano.

Davis did not return phone calls. Other sources familiar with the case said that Jones was angry with prosecutors for their handling of the case and that he requested the background checks himself.

Bradley Brunon, who assisted Davis in Jones' defense, said he didn't think that Davis or anyone else seriously considered researching prosecutors.

Though several attorneys knowledgeable with the Jones case doubt that Pellicano wiretapped prosecutors, many suspect he wiretapped Jones, his own client.

Barry Rothman, Jones' civil attorney, said that Pellicano surreptitiously wiretapped his client's home, recorded conversations relevant to the criminal case and exculpatory to Jones, but refused to release the tapes.

Rothman said this week that Jones will sue "Pellicano and others" for the alleged illegal wiretapping. Rothman declined to name other possible defendants.

"They were tapped without Mr. Jones' consent," Rothman said this week. "He was tapping his phones to control Mr. Jones."
Richard Sherman, who inherited the Jones defense in late 1999 from Daniel Davis, said he sought a court order to obtain wiretapped recordings from Jones' home. Sherman said memos he received from the previous defense team suggested that some telephone conversations were recorded. But a judge rejected his request.

In a February 2000 letter obtained by the Daily Journal, Sherman asked Pellicano for any recordings that the investigator may have had.

"Anthony, I have some very bad feelings about what went on in this case and have to get to the bottom of this mess," Sherman wrote.

Sherman said Pellicano declined to turn over any information.

THE CASE AGAINST OJ

REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE:

The vast majority believe O.J. Simpson did the murder he was tried and acquitted for. To explain why this is not only not so, but could not be so, I need to refresh the reader's memory about the TRUE evidence in this case....but NOT WHAT IS GENERALLY THOUGHT OF AS 'EVIDENCE'.

So I need to start with the things that really are NOT evidence in the case against O.J. Simpson, but which most people think are:

1. THE BRONCO "CHASE"

The image of O.J. Simpson being followed by a long line of police cars ranks with such images as the 9/11 attacks on the WTC and the Challenger Disaster as part of our shared American iconography. However, while this particular incident is frozen in our memories, it LOOK LIKE dozens of other high-speed chases we have seen, with the cops trying to capture crooks.

I believe -- and I believe most of you will agree with me -- that it is the image of the Bronco Chase, of OJ apparently running from the police, that has established his guilt in the American mind.

So, first, I need to do my best to dislodge this image and the belief in guilt that it brought.

FIRST, IT WAS NOT A 'CHASE'; IT WAS A 'FOLLOW'.

SECOND, IT WAS NOT EVEN AN ATTEMPTED ESCAPE. In fact, the whole time the 'chase' was broadcast, the Bronco was going North, AND IT WAS GOING NORTH WHEN IT WAS FIRST DISCOVERED.

What was REALLY happening? OJ was in the middle of a suicidal nervous breakdown. His best friend, A.C. Cowlings was successful in preventing this by 'humoring' him by attempting to take OJ to Nicole's grave. When this proved impossible, due to police staked out there, Cowling eventually persuaded OJ to go back to Rockingham. Cowlings' Bronco was then spotted by citizens who phoned the police.

Many people think that it was OJ at the wheel driving his own Bronco, and that the Bronco of the Bronco chase was the same Bronco used my the murderer. Not so.

2. JOHNNY COCHRAN PLAYS THE "RACE CARD" IN HIS SUMMATION TO THE JURY, resulting the the widespread belief that the jury "nullified" the evidence in an act of reverse racism.

The fact is, as I will show, is that the objective evidence acquits OJ so that the criminal trial jury's decision, FOR WHATEVER REASON, was the correct one

While there is, in fact, documentable arguments in the form of jury writings and interviews after the trial that Cochran's "race card' had no effect on the jury....if you are one who believes this myth, those statemnts will not change your mind, for you will only interpret them as self-serving justifications. I can only hope that presenting all that is humanluy knowable about the evidence will change your mind.

3. THE BLOOD DROP TRAIL 'TO THE LEFT' OF THE FOOTPRINTS AT THE MURDER SCENE, AND THE CUT ON OJ'S LEFT HAND.

The first three blood drops were here

and the last two were here.

[These are borrrowed from a site created by a Mr.Dick Wagner: Wagnerandson.com
(While there have been better Simpson Case websites in the past, this is by far the best one still in existence. I will have more to say about Dick later on, but do not want to digress.)

THESE ILLUSTRATIONS ARE FROM EVIDENCE ACTUALLY INTRODUCED IN THE CRIMINAL TRIAL, and known as the "Bodziak Diagram", after the FBI expert that created it. This illusitration is also reproduced in the Book "the Prosecution Responds" by Hank Goldberg

Note the REAL postion of the drops in relation to the footprints.

The two westernmost drops are too far away from where the prints faded out to be said to have any discernible spatial relationship to them at all.

The easternmost drop, the one nearest the bodies is off to one side of the fotprints. But....

It is not possible to tell if it "to the left" or "to the right" of the footprints because THERE ARE PRINTS GOING BOTH WAYS at that point. Bodziak testified to them, but did not include them in his diagram.

From Bodziak's June 19, 1995 cross-examination testimony by F. Lee Bailey:

MR. BAILEY: --and see what appears to be movement of someone both down at the gate, on the steps and then in a fairly straight line out to the west as if making good one's escape, did you notice something very odd about the pattern?

MR. BODZIAK: About the ones that I have labeled left or right?

MR. BAILEY: Yes.

MR. BODZIAK: There's two many of them.

MR. BAILEY: What do you mean by "Too many"?

MR. BODZIAK: Well, the person in those Bruno Magli shoes didn't just walk down the walkway once. They went back somehow and walked down again.

MR. BAILEY: All right. Now, why are your impressions generally going to the west? MR. BODZIAK: Because that's where the blood is and they're tracking the blood from east to west.

MR. BAILEY: Uh-huh. And what about the stop and turn? I want to point specifically to I believe it's L and m. [referring to diagram posted here]

MR. BODZIAK: Yes.

MR. BAILEY: These two here both facing directly into the house (Indicating).

MR. BODZIAK: Yes.

MR. BAILEY: You notice by the way that the left and right are on the wrong side?

MR. BODZIAK: Yes.

MR. BAILEY: And do you have any explanation as to how those were made?

MR. BODZIAK: I wouldn't purport to be able to reconstruct exactly what happened, but it appears likely that the person may have been standing over in that bush area where the tree was to get out of the line of sight perhaps and then came out of that area initially in the direction of the doorway and then proceeded back west again.

MR. BAILEY: All right. If the set of prints that leads up to L and M were made by the same shoes as L and M, we have a person who's turned 90 degrees and standing like this; do we not (Indicating)?

MR. BODZIAK: Not if they're two different sets of tracks. [emphasis added]

MR. BAILEY: Okay. So are you assuming that we have a right but no left and a left but no right standing next to one--each other and both facing south?

MR. BODZIAK: Well, I'm not assuming if that's what's there and I can't explain why that is happening.

MR. BAILEY: All right. If a person were exiting the scene with some alacrity--and by the way, you talked about gait and stride. There's nothing that gives us much help on the speeds in these prints, is there?

MR. BODZIAK: No, sir.

MR. BAILEY: Except that they seem close enough together as to suggest, if it's one set, no running, no leaping?

MR. BODZIAK: I--I think even if it's one or two sets, they're relatively close together for a person that's big enough to wear a size 12.

MR. BAILEY: All right. You have identified a Bruno Magli or Magli 46/size 12 shoe as the only prints, left and right, that you are able to single out, correct?

MR. BODZIAK: That's correct.

MR. BAILEY: And no other shoe of any manufacturer have you been able to pin to any of these impressions, true?

MR. BODZIAK: That's correct.

MR. BAILEY: So if there was more than one person running, it would appear that they were both wearing Bruno Magli 46; is that right?

MR. BODZIAK: Or one person went back--after they have worn the blood off their shoe, they went back to the front gate area, reobtained blood on their shoe through whatever activity or walking through the blood they were doing, and then exited that area again. So it could be the same person. In fact, it's very likely that it's the same person

ACTUALLY, NEITHER IS TRUE. Because now consider the position of the last two, middle two, drops in relation to the footprints they are closest to.

THEY ARE IN BETWEEN THEM.

What really happened, dear reader, is not that the police detected a blood drop trail to the left of the prints and so went looking for a man with a cut on his left hand. On the contrary, what happened is that they saw OJ had a cut on his left hand AND THEN decided to describe the blood trail as "to the left" of the prints.

I will soon show that THERE WAS NOT SPATIAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO BECAUSE THE FOOTPRINTS AND THE DROPS WERE LAID DOWN AT TWO DIFFERENT TIMES.

Though there were, indeed, five drops of blood that contained OJ's DNA at the Bundy murder scene, I will show that they had to have been planted

Among other things, this means that the cuts on OJ's left hand are irrelevent.

4. The gloves found at the Bundy murder scene and behind Kaelin's room at Rockingham.

diagram of Rockingham estate

What these gloves prove is that the killer, or at the very least an acccomplice to the killer, went from the murders to Rockingham that night.

(The only other explanation for the position of these two gloves given by anyone is that Fuhrman planted the Rockingham glove after picking it up at Bundy. I will be dealing with a number of other theories of the crime later on, including this one. Again, I do not wish to digress right now. However, I will say that all other theories of the crime but mine -- and this includes those of the prosecution and defense at the civil trial and the plaintiffs (especially Petrocelli) at the civil trial -- have people doing things that are physically impossible, adverse to their interests under the circumstances, contradictory, or all of the above.)

The evidence of the gloves greatly simplifies the solution to the crime, because it narrows the suspect pool to TWO. For there were TWO men at Rockingham that night. BOTH had believable motive for the murders; BOTH had access to the items of physical evidence used in the murders. (The gloves, the shoes, the knife, the sweatsuit, the knit cap, the Bronco, and samples of OJ's blood), and NEITHER has an alibi for the time of the murders.

Therefore, if you can clear the one, you can convict the other

OJ could not have produced the evidence as it was found on the morning of June 13, 1994, this evidence including Kaelin's three thumps. NO ONE has produced a theory of the crime which has OJ doing the murders and producing the thumps and dropping the glove behind Kaelin's room which does not transparently violate the laws of physics and/or common sense.

From Famous Crimes Revisited: from Sacco-Vanzetti to O.J. Simpson by Dr. Henry Lee and Dr. Jerry Labriola, Stong Books, Southington, Connecticut, 2001, Page 207”

“…1. How do you explain the Rockingham glove still being damp with blood at 6:00 [the next morning] if it had been dropped there at 10:45 on a dry night?…”

so consider this from Philip Vannatter's testimoney of March 16, 1995. He is being questioned by Darden:

Q WHEN YOU SAW THE GLOVE, DID YOU NOTICE WHETHER OR NOT IT APPEARED MOIST OR STICKY?
A WHEN I ILLUMINATED THE GLOVE, IT APPEARED TO HAVE BLOOD ON THE GLOVE OR WHAT LOOKED TO ME LIKE BLOOD AND IT DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE DRIED BLOOD WHERE IT WOULD BE FLAKY AND FALLING OFF. IT APPEARED THAT IT WAS MOIST.
Q AND THE BLOOD THAT YOU SAW BACK AT BUNDY JUST PRIOR TO YOUR DEPARTURE A FEW MINUTES BEFORE 5:00 IN THE MORNING --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- DID THAT BLOOD APPEAR TO BE DRY?
A NO.
MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. DARDEN: DID THE GLOVE APPEAR SHINY AT ALL?
A IT APPEARED TO BE -- IT APPEARED TO BE WET WITH SOMETHING, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT SHINY OR MOIST. IT APPEARED TO BE A LEATHER MAN'S GLOVE.

Now, exactly what other evidence is there against OJ?

Well, none. Unless you say that not having an alibi for the time of the murders is evidence

But, if you say THAT, then you must also consider that as evidence against Kaelin, for the fact is:

PART II: WHY KAELIN IS THE ONLY ONE WHO COULD HAVE DONE THE MURDERS

THE CASE AGAINST KAELIN

Brian Gerard ("Kato") Kaelin killed Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, and this can be proven from the existing evidence.

KAELIN HAS NO ALIBI FOR THE TIME OF THE MURDERS

Compare these excerpts from the official transcripts.

From Kaelin’s preliminary hearing testimony (criminal trial), July 5, 1994:

Q And what did you do after that?
A After that I was going to type up some letters, so I went to type up some letters but the typewriter wasn't working, so I made another phone call.
Q Who did you call?
A My friend, Rachael. [Rachel Ferrara]
Q And what time was it when you called her?
06 A I called her at about 10:10, around there.

Q ON JUNE THE 12TH OF 1994, DID YOU RECEIVE A CALL FROM KATO KAELIN?
A YES.
Q AT APPROXIMATELY WHAT TIME?
A APPROXIMATELY 10:20.

Q AND SO AFTER HE TOLD YOU IT WAS 10:30, AT SOME POINT AFTER THAT DID SOMETHING UNUSUAL OCCUR DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR CONVERSATION WITH HIM?
A YES.
Q WHAT WAS THAT?
A WELL, HE DESCRIBED IT AS AN EARTHQUAKE. UMM, HE SAID THERE WAS A BANG ON HIS WALL.
Q OKAY.
AND ABOUT HOW LONG AFTER YOU HAD ASKED THE TIME AND HE TOLD YOU IT WAS 10:30 DID HE DESCRIBE AN EARTHQUAKE OCCURRING?
A AFTER 10:30?
Q RIGHT. YOU ASKED HIM WHAT TIME IT WAS; HE SAID 10:30, CORRECT?
A RIGHT.
Q AT SOME POINT AFTER THAT HE DESCRIBED AN EARTHQUAKE OCCURRING?
A UH-HUH.
Q HOW LONG AFTER THAT TIME WHEN HE SAID IT WAS 10:30 DID HE DESCRIBE HEARING AN EARTHQUAKE?
A APPROXIMATELY TEN MINUTES.
[i.e.--around 10:40]
Q DID HE TALK TO YOU ABOUT GOING TO MC DONALD'S WITH MR. SIMPSON?
A YES.
Q DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR CONVERSATION DID YOU HAPPEN TOASK KATO KAELIN WHAT TIME IT WAS?
A YES.
Q AND HOW DO YOU HAPPEN TO RECALL THAT?
A BECAUSE WE WERE GOING TO GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING AND I ASKED HIM -- I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF IT WAS TOO LATE AND HE SAID -- I ASKED HIM WHAT TIME IT WAS AND HE SAID 10:30.

And this passage from the book, “Kato Kaelin: the Whole Truth” by Kaelin’s ghost-writer Marc Eliot, based on 17 hours of taped interviews: Page 90:

“…at 9:45 [Kaelin] decided to call back Tom…[O'Brien, a friend in San Diego]to complete the conversation ….Kato hung up….it was then ten o’clock when he sat down at the IBM Selectric…”

(Even Daniel Petrocelli admits that Kaelin had no alibi for 10:00 to 10:20 the night of the murders. I spoke to him during a book tour appearance in my area.)

NEXT EXHIBIT IN THE CASE AGAINST KAELIN:

KAELIN HAS COMMITTED PERJURY ABOUT WHAT HE DID ON THE MURDER NIGHT:

From Kaelin’s civil trial testimony of November 12, 1996:

Q. Okay. Were you looking at the clock and watch at all?
A. No.
Q. Then what happened?
A. Then I heard these three noises that were thumps, three loud thumps, and my picture moved in the...
… Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) When the noises occurred, did you look at a watch or a clock?
A. No.
…… Q. Okay. Now, when you got off the phone, did you look at a watch or a clock?
A. No.
Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Okay. Do you have an estimate of the time that you heard these noises?
A. In between the 10:40 to 10:50 hour.[Compare to criminal trial testimony above]
Q. Okay. Now, is that -- what do you base that on?
A. The phone calls.
[Kaelin is referring to the cell phone records of Alan Park that came out during the murder investigation.]
Q. All right. Did you at any time --
[Please note here that Kaelin actually anticipates Petrocelli's question. He could answer it before it was even asked because Petrocelli had fed him the questions well beforehand.]
A. I didn't, I never looked at a clock.
Q. I can't hear you.
[Sounds like a cheerleader, doesn't he?]
A. I didn't look at a clock.
Q. At any time?
A. No.

So, just exactly how did Mr. Kaelin know what time it was at 10:30 to tell Rachel Ferrara?

Even if you believe there is an innocent explanation for this discrepancy, at least you must now see that KAELIN IS THE ‘CLOCK’ FOR HIS OWN ALIBI. Which is to say, he really is his own alibi.

EXHIBIT THREE:

KAELIN DISPLAYED GUILTY KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE BRONCO BEING USED IN THE MURDERS WHEN HE LIED TO THE COPS ABOUT ‘EVER HAVING DRIVEN’ THE BRONCO.

From “Kato Kaelin: The whole Truth” Page 105:

“Detective Lange asked Kato if he’d ever driven O.J.’s Bronco. He said no.”

From Kaelin’s civil trial deposition of February 14, 1996:

Q: Now, where was the Bronco when you drove up to Gretna Green?
A: The Bronco was kind of parked in front of the driveway, blocking Gretna Green's driveway. The flashers I believe were on. And I think at some point I moved it, I think.
Q: To park it normally?
A: Yeah.

From Eliott, page 233:

“…On the rare occasions I found myself [Kaelin] at the Bundy residence, usually to deliver a package or pick up the kids for O.J.,…
”

The only two cars available to BGK for those errands on O.J.’s behalf would have been his own Datsun 380 zx and OJ’s Bronco. Which would you have chosen?
And, finally, from OJ’s 6/13/94 interview with Lange and Vanatter:

Vannatter: OK. We've impounded the Bronco. I don't know if you know that or not.

Simpson: No.

Vannatter: ...take a look at it. Other than you, who's the last person to drive it.

Simpson: Probably Gigi. When I'm out of town, I don't know who drives the car, maybe my daughter, maybe Kato.

Why mention Kaelin unless Kaelin had access to the Bronco and had driven it before?

Now, why would BGK have lied to the cops at that time and place? Because doing so would have made him a suspect. Also note, that, from the Eliot book account, BGK told this lie to the cops a good two minutes or so BEFORE he was ‘officially’ notified of the murders. According to BGK, he was thinking the cops were there to notify them of a plane crash. Why lie about driving the Bronco?

OJ could not have produced the evidence as it was found on the morning of June 13, 1994, this evidence including Kaelin's three thumps. NO ONE has produced a theory of the crime which has OJ doing the murders and producing the thumps and dropping the glove behind Kaelin's room which does not transparently violate the laws of physics and/or common sense.

From Famous Crimes Revisited: from Sacco-Vanzetti to O.J. Simpson by Dr. Henry Lee and Dr. Jerry Labriola, Stong Books, Southington, Connecticut, 2001, Page 207”

“…1. How do you explain the Rockingham glove still being damp with blood at 6:00 [the next morning] if it had been dropped there at 10:45 on a dry night?…”

Some have doubted that the glove was still wet.

so consider this from Philip Vannatter's testimoney of March 16, 1995. He is being questioned by Darden:

Q WHEN YOU SAW THE GLOVE, DID YOU NOTICE WHETHER OR NOT IT APPEARED MOIST OR STICKY?
A WHEN I ILLUMINATED THE GLOVE, IT APPEARED TO HAVE BLOOD ON THE GLOVE OR WHAT LOOKED TO ME LIKE BLOOD AND IT DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE DRIED BLOOD WHERE IT WOULD BE FLAKY AND FALLING OFF. IT APPEARED THAT IT WAS MOIST.
Q AND THE BLOOD THAT YOU SAW BACK AT BUNDY JUST PRIOR TO YOUR DEPARTURE A FEW MINUTES BEFORE 5:00 IN THE MORNING --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- DID THAT BLOOD APPEAR TO BE DRY?
A NO.
MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. DARDEN: DID THE GLOVE APPEAR SHINY AT ALL?
A IT APPEARED TO BE -- IT APPEARED TO BE WET WITH SOMETHING, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT SHINY OR MOIST. IT APPEARED TO BE A LEATHER MAN'S GLOVE.