Fuhrman Tapes and Racism

I think that there is certainly as much evidence to establish former LAPD Detective Mark Fuhrman’s racism as there is to convict O.J. Simpson of those two murders. However, I have yet to hear from the defense how Fuhrman, racist though he may be, got hold of one of 300 pairs of gloves sold exclusively at Bloomingdale’s in New York City within a limited time span several years ago, and which matches two pairs Simpson’s murdered ex-wife bought.

I wonder whether or not the defense ever intends to address this curious coincidence. If they don’t, even as I continue to admire their legal skills, I will seriously doubt their emotional protestations about this alleged frame-up.

Their glee over these tapes is unseemly to say the least.

ROBERT SILVER

Los Angeles

*

* It seems we have the makings of a mystery here. Defense attorney Johnnie Cochran says that Fuhrman lied on the witness stand and the tapes prove it. Former Police Chief Daryl Gates insists that Fuhrman lied on the tapes about the ’78 shooting/beating incident (Aug. 21) and Gates’ investigation proves it. And on the tapes, Fuhrman states that he lied to Gates’ investigators looking into the ’78 incident. The supreme irony is that while none of them can agree on the details, they are all in agreement on one salient detail, leading us to a single, obvious conclusion.

ANDREW YEATER

Los Angeles

*

* Judge Lance Ito once again threatened to pull the plug on the camera in the courtroom and said he was contemplating doing so (Aug. 23). He complained that the lawyers were “pandering to the camera.”

If the lawyers are “pandering to the camera” Judge Ito need look no further than his mirror to find the blame. Throughout this trial he has allowed the lawyers too much latitude in their courtroom behavior. He lost control of his courtroom and his recent efforts to regain control are too little too late.

The courtroom camera is the only thing informing the public what’s going on in the courtroom. The lawyers’ press conferences and appearances on talk shows are not informative. Media summaries and commentaries are sometimes inaccurate and/or misleading. Judge Ito should not blame the messenger for the message.

RYAL HAAKENSON

Covina

*

* It has now been shown that practically everyone in Los Angeles and beyond is either negligent, careless, incompetent, racist, or a liar. A few have even committed the crime of being overzealous. When is the Simpson trial going to get on track? Perhaps things will speed up when Simpson begins to run out of money.

MARGARET FINLEY

Banning

*

* Re Charles Lindner’s article (Opinion, Aug. 20), the incidence of cops who “regularly lie and cheat in the course of gaining convictions” is at least counterbalanced by defense attorneys who callously throw dung on the walls in desperate attempts to make something stick, whether they know their clients to be guilty or innocent.

It’s all part of our rhetoric--and money-oriented adversarial system. The “just win” philosophy. Granted, the prosecution also puts winning over justice, or the truth. And we, the taxpaying public, bear the cost. And the victims and their families pay the ultimate price while the attorneys play. There must be a better way.

HAL ROTHBERG

Encino

*

* Since the horrendous Rodney King beating, race relations have been rolled back by Cochran and the entire defense team in lock-step with their latest shenanigans over the Fuhrman tapes.

In an effort to win their client’s acquittal at any cost, these “officers of the court,” in my opinion, have thumbed their noses at the American system of justice with their borderline ethics. The police were supposedly Simpson’s friends prior to the crime. How on Earth did they all become his enemies?

And what happened to the real evidence in the case even if Fuhrman’s testimony is ruled inadmissible? Doesn’t it count?

ANITA C. SINGER

Laguna Hills

*

* The apparent revelations of numerous racial slurs and epithets contained on a screenwriter’s tapes of a Los Angeles detective’s dialogue about his job are chilling and deeply disturbing indeed.

But perhaps a far worse slur is the suggestion that a jury which is predominately African American could not look beyond the obvious prejudice of a single individual, albeit a significant part of the prosecutorial case, and decide judiciously and without converse prejudice on the weight of evidence alone as it pertains to the accused.

JOHN WEEKLEY

Dallas