Maddogg’s Real Truth Guest Writer, OMIG Investigator, Ricardo Valdez
OJ and Nicole Simpson, Ron Goldman, LA DA Gil Garcetti, Deputy DA Marcia Clark, and Deputy DA Bill Hodgman
Something came back to remind us this week when our chairman, Dr. Henry S. Johnson was invited to speak on OJ Simpson’s upcoming parole on ABC this past week and was abruptly cut off. Of course ABC prefaced Dr. Johnson as being a friend of OJ Simpson rather than what he was before meeting Simpson, the founder and chairman of the Ocean Medical Investigative Group, which was created to examine irregularities that Dr. Johnson and other doctors found in the medical testimony of how the two victims Ron Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson were killed.
After ABC’s abrupt pulling of the plug on Thursday, we went back into our archives to re-examine when L.A. County Deputy D.A. Lucianne Coleman began receiving a line of complaints in the internal complaints department she managed. Coleman began doing her required due diligence regarding the matter which was not outside complaints but internal complaints coming from members of the Los Angeles Police Department in July of 1994, just one month after the murders of Ronald Goldman and OJ Simpson’s ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson.
Her mission, as the complaints officer for internal affairs within the D.A.’s office, was to determine the validity of official allegations of Mark Fuhrman wearing Nazi paraphernalia in the West Side Division precinct and planting swastikas on the lockers of other officers he didn’t like for their marital choices of women outside of “their race”.
The now famous retired and financially well healed Simpson prosecutor, Marcia Clark, and others Coleman alleged in a deposition attempted to blunt that investigation by putting pressure on her to stand down. At the time Fuhrman was key to the Simpson case since it was he who allegedly discovered the most crucial piece of evidence that tied Simpson to the murders, the bloody glove found at Simpson’s sprawling Rockingham residence in Los Angele’s wealthy Brentwood.
Former L.A.P.D. Detective Mark Fuhrman and Marcia Clark on the witness stand in the OJ Simpson criminal trial before being caught committing perjury.
However, Coleman’s pursuit of this investigation wasn’t just about the activities of Fuhrman alone it was about other officers as well in higher command positions alleged to be neo-Nazi fascist sympathizers protecting the actions of corrupt, racist, and brutal police officers like Fuhrman. This would be articulated in real time by August of 1994, less than two months after the murders and soon after in 1994 submitted to the publisher of Dove Books, Michael Viner as a preceding manuscript for a book entitled LEGACY OF DECEPTION by noted true crime author Stephen Singular. He was approached in Denver, Colorado reportedly by an LAPD insider with close connections to the malfeasance that took place to frame OJ Simpson, particularly as it related to Fuhrman planting that glove on his property. He contacted Singular as a result of reading a prior book written by Singular entitled TALKED TO DEATH. That book chronicled the neo-Nazis who came down from their headquarters in Northwest Idaho to execute a Jewish talk show host named Alan Berg.
The purpose of him making the long trek to Denver was a futile attempt to make the public aware by using Singular to inform first the defense team of the dangers emerging within the LAPD of a cabal of neo-Nazi sympathizers moving into areas of government in Los Angeles as opposed to the public perception of hooligans on the outside.
This insider explained to Singular that they had thoroughly infiltrated the LAPD and had become a threat to employing their fascist authority against the democratic freedoms that people enjoyed in the Los Angeles metropolitan area, especially against people of color. Michael Viner, now deceased was a wealthy Jewish president and founder of the popular Dove Book Publishing house. However, according to Singular, his book LEGACY OF DECEPTION would be delayed a year and almost permanently sacked until after the Simpson trial in late 1995 when he flew to L.A. and confronted Viner . Viner now wanted to scrap the book because according to Singular he believed OJ Simpson to be guilty of murder. He would ultimately capitulate and publish LEGACY.
I was struck by the irony of Marcia Clark’s actions in her to attempt to thwart the neo-Nazi investigation of Coleman in 1994 since Clark is a Jewish woman herself who undoubtedly understands history and the dangers of allowing such fascist leanings to gain power and control inside governmental agencies.
However, I was reminded again of that same attempt by Clark in 1994 to censor and protect a false narrative when ABC’s Dan Abrams was calling out Dr. Henry Johnson this week on the ABC network’s GOOD MORNING AMERICA. Abrams accused Dr. Johnson of acting as he alleged “disrespectfully” for challenging the false narrative that has been promoted for the last 20 years regarding the OJ Simpson trial as being what Dr. Johnson alleged a complete fraud. Johnson should know something since he has been the chairman of the Ocean Medical Investigative Group, also known as OMIG, for the last 21 years. It is a group he jointly founded after examining contradictions in the autopsy reports on Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman in the fall of 1996, the organization has gone on to uncover several items of malfeasance beyond the autopsy reports in the Simpson case that lead to the conclusion that Simpson was targeted and framed. Some of the malfeasance even involved questionable actions of members of his own defense team.
Abrams incendiary response was that he had done his due diligence by following what was presented as evidence in the subsequent civil trial against Simpson that began in the fall of 1996 and that Dr. Johnson’s allegations of fraud were “Disrespectful”. We must assume that Abrams presumably meant disrespect for the integrity of the trials, or at least in his opinion, the civil trial. However, anyone with any common sense as an investigator realizes that assuming the veracity of evidence after it has been presented is not the same as independently examining evidence outside the control of what authorities are presenting, especially members of the Los Angeles justice system. This is particularly the case when there are glaring contradictions in such presented evidence as in the Simpson case where there are many. As a lawyer and so called investigative journalist Abrams should know better to simply accept what has been plopped on his platter as veritable evidence before springing into action to denigrate another investigator. The whole Los Angeles justice system would later come under federal scrutiny for planting evidence on thousands of innocent men in the Rampart’s Police Precinct Scandal in 1998. Thousands were falsely charged and obligated to accept lengthy plea deals of 8-10 years in prison to avoid the possibility of remaining in prison for as long as 30 years as in the instance of a young Latino male, Michael Ovando. The conduct was so insidious that it would peak the interest of movie producers to make a movie highlighting the corrupt police practices entitled TRAINING DAYS starring Denzel Washington.
However, this has become the state of journalism in America where you have such characters like that of Dan Abrams, Geraldo Rivera, Howard Stern and Harvey Levin who have turned a respectable profession into tabloid buffoonery for pecuniary gain. The Simpson case appears to be clearly the embarkation point where journalists became comfortable with lackadaisical reporting. Without any major criticism, they allowed pundits to elevate tabloid rags like the National Enquirer to a standing of credibility more than the preeminent news establishments such as the New York Times, Washington Post, and Chicago Tribune. Now we are fully immersed in electronic tabloids delivering the daily news like Harvey Levin’s TMZ program that is all over the place on television channels. Not only do they deliver the gossipy tabloid celebrity news they pretend to pass themselves off as presenting more in-depth knowledge of serious news events. In the matter of the Simpson case, Levin once intervened for about 6 minutes with a long dissertation about the truth regardng his experience with Nazi activity on the LA police force. Then he topped it off with stating that Fuhrman’s involvement or the Nazi activity itself had nothing to do with the Simpson case, in which he adamantly concluded Simpson committed murder. Here again, Levin has done no real due diligence in the Simpson case but has only accepted what he’s been told. So, this adulterated madness is what people absorb and are left to walk away with because Harvey Levin of TMZ told them it was so.
Instead of maintaining their integrity they all sold their souls and began wallowing in the mud of hearsay and innuendo as it related to the Simpson case while pandering for advertising revenue. If you want to say that we should understand the laws of economics, and its principles of supply and demand, I will concede to that argument as long as you realize that you can’t have it both ways. Either you are going to maintain integrity or you’re going to sacrifice to engage in becoming a commercial whore for pecuniary gain. Now the representative journalists of the establishment news organizations bristle when an animated character like Donald Trump chides them for presenting “fake news”. Trump’s gut shot may hurt but it’s true and we can trace the fall from grace back to the Simpson trial 22 years ago. That is when one can visualize the readiness to accept contradictory evidence and information from sworn court officers in the Simpson case as being true. Now it has come back to haunt the industry with Trump-like accusations so a Dan Abrams is made to look like a fool jumping to defend Simpson evidence when he knows he’s done no due diligence. He thus creates a further spectacle when attacking a black medical doctor who along with his organization has deliberately done their homework. Abrams hence has caused curiosity to emerge in an area that others want to remain concealed regarding their false narrative of the ‘TRIAL OF THE CENTURY’.
Before Dr. Johnson could offer a rebuttal to Abrams’ reproach producers were in the doctor’s ear telling him senior producers wanted him off the air and they were pulling the plug. This is an attempt to control the message in America which is a major plunge by fascist censors. Though they may continue to run from the truth they cannot hide from the truth that individuals as sworn officers of the court in Los Angeles used people like you, Dan Abrams, in conjunction with the electronic media industry to become an unwitting participant, at least initially, in the framing of OJ Simpson for power, position, and pecuniary gain. When you people plan to regain your dignity and integrity to cease and desist in continuing to promulgate such a catastrophically socially destructive lie call us at OMIG since we’re not going anywhere. WWW.SERPENTSRISING.COM
3 thoughts on “CONTINUED CENSORSHIP BY AMERICA’S NEO-FASCISTS IN THE OJ SIMPSON CASE”
Thanks for your post. I think they are all committed to this lie–they built their careers on this case and they are never going to admit to all of the corruption and dirty dealing that went on.
What about Oprah?? Has she ever had Dr. Henry Johnson or TH Johnson on her show (back in the day when she had a tv show)? I kind of feel like she had Furhman on. She has a whole television station, so you would think she could have the Johnsons on or Stephen Singular.
I have but one question-How could the LAPD have planted blood evidence inside Simpson’s Bronco and house if he was on a plane to Chicago when they arrived at his estate? This conspiracy theory is akin to 9-11 “Truthers” who have made a great deal of money by twisting the evidence that does exist and all for the purpose of deflecting blame from the guilty. For Simpson to have been framed would require the tacit corruption and silence of DOZENS of people, most of whom had NO REASON to “frame” anyone. Vincent Bugliosi laid much of this out in his book Outrage.
I have but one question-
Sounds like you have four or five.
1.) How could the LAPD have planted blood evidence inside Simpson’s Bronco
The police could have easily planted blood evidence inside Simpson’s Bronco because of the poor security provisions that existed at Viertel’s tow yard, the OPG for the LAPD, (Official Police Garage). Because the vehicle was not kept in a locked secured area but simply out in the open until the police commission since detective Kelly Mulfdorfer over there two months after the murders took place to reprimand them for their lack of securing this vital evidence. By that time in August of 1994, the auction car buyer William Blazini has entered the car stating he was looking for the highly touted blood but saw none, the inside police impound tow truck driver, John Meraz, who was charged with burglary for stealing documents belonging to Simpson from the car and rummaging through it also stated that he did not see any blood when he entered the vehicle. Detective Kelly Muldorfer was ordered to go to Viertels to provide a report to the Police Commission regarding any damage to the Bronco evidence, and instruct the OPG managers that the vehicle must be placed in a secured location within the impound lot. She testified that she and climbed into the car as well and said that she did not see any blood either. Neither did the initial tow truck driver who picked the vehicle up in front of Simpson’s Rockingham resident, Bernie Doroux, see any blood in the vehicle when looking inside the window. So, when you control the evidence and you are the police you control the time of when corrupt actors within your department can engage in corrupt acts. Certainly, it does not take rocket science intelligence to understand that.
2.) (Plant blood) in his house if he was on a plane to Chicago when they arrived at his estate?
Once again, my response is ditto, when you control the evidence and the crime scene and you are the police you control the time of when corrupt actors within your department can engage in corrupt acts of malfeasance. This is why an anonymous LAPD insider who sought out a true crime author a thousand miles away in Denver, CO, named Stephen Singular, 7 months before the trial would begin Aug 1, 1994, to carry information only to the defense team, told him that none of the blood was to be trusted as well as what evidence would be found with the glove alleged by him to be planted by Det. Mark Fuhrman on Simpson’s Rockingham estate. That individual told Singular to convey to the Defense team that the blood collected should be tested for contamination by what would later be identified as an anti-clotting preservative compound called EDTA, and for certain to test blood swatches collected and identified as swatch number 47, 48, and blood found on socks in the Simpson Rockingham bedroom be tested for contamination with EDTA. Singular was admonished not to take it to the DA because the anonymous LAPD insider considered the whole LA justice system to be utterly corrupt. This information did reach the DA’s office, inadvertently by a publisher that Singular later sought out named Michael Viner in Oct. 1994 who would violate their Non-Disclosure Agreement for Singular’s book regarding the corruption in the Simpson case, entitled LEGACY OF DECEPTION and go there with his own attorney and tell the DA’s office what was being alleged about the contaminated blood. This allegedly would reach the ears of deputy DA Chris Darden, Nov. 1, 1994, two months before the trial started. Darden would not display the same level of emotional concern publicly as he did while crying at the microphone in Oct. 1995 and demeaning the jury for their decision to acquit Simpson at the end of the trial. Instead, he allegedly went to Marcia Clark in 1994 and demanded that she retract the assignment given to him to manage both detective Fuhrman and Vannatter who Darden stated he considered to be liars. However, Chris would dedicate 4 pages to Stephen Singular, in his NY Times best seller book, IN CONTEMPT, but other than saying that Singular provided the defense with their best case he does not clarify. It would be another detective on loan to the LADA’s office from northern California’s Oakland DA’s office named Rockne Harmon. In an attempt, in our opinion, to protect his own ass if Clark, Garcetti, Darden and all were engaged in obstruction of justice he wanted to be certain not to get caught up in their shenanigans. So, Harmon contacted the FBI and told them in a letter that he wanted them to refute that there was any EDTA contamination whatsoever in the blood samples, of which samples from swatch 47 was sent, along with a sample cutting from Simpson’s sock with Nicole’s blood found on the bedroom floor. The agent who was the unit chief within the FBI Laboratory, who later would testify in the Simpson trial named Roger Martz, would write a reply letter back to Deputy DA Rock Harmon proclaiming that he had found no contamination whatsoever of EDTA in the blood samples sent to the FBI lab, in a letter dated March 01, 1995. However, Martz would later be accused by subordinate peers within the FBI laboratory of absconding with their conclusions and changing them to align with the LADA’s charges against Simpson. Those FBI agents and scientists would approach another FBI agent, Frederic Whitehurst, whose career had been diminished by his FBI superiors for reporting such corrupt conduct of FBI agents lying, absconding and changing test results on evidence, to the Office of the Inspector General. They told him they wanted him to file the complaint with the Inspector General charging FBI agent Roger Martz with lying under oath and committing perjury in the OJ Simpson trial regarding the results of the tested blood samples sent to the FBI laboratory in Washington DC. They still wanted to maintain their jobs within the FBI and did not want their careers destroyed as it had destroyed his. It is important because the FBI has purveyed a perception of integrity that has great influence as to what the public thinks about a case. There’s only one piece of evidence that ties Simpson to the murder case, and that is the glove found on his Rockingham estate if there were no glove there would be no case against Simpson.
3.) This conspiracy theory is akin to 9-11 “Truthers” who have made a great deal of money by twisting the evidence that does exist and all for the purpose of deflecting blame from the guilty.
That is simply feeble-minded logic provided by someone who has done no due diligence in examining the evidence in this case, and is simply begging for the privilege of presumption that the public should automatically accept what the police have told the public as true regarding the evidence. That, in my opinion, is nothing more than an extension of a perceived privilege of white supremacy that is prevalent throughout our society. However, we do not grant anyone the privilege of presumption regardless of what their status or station is within this society.
4.) For Simpson to have been framed would require the tacit corruption and silence of DOZENS of people, most of whom had NO REASON to “frame” anyone.
Now that is truly a feeble minded assumption given the history of the department in question, the LAPD. I would encourage you to go back and review the Rampart Scandal in early 2000 that came about when one police officer of the LAPD, Raphael Perez decided to talk, (the character that Denzel Washington’s character was modeled after in the movie TRAINING DAY). Perez got caught stealing 8 pounds of cocaine out of the LAPD evidence room and was facing 20 years in prison. He began to talk to save himself, and gave up a trough of information regarding over 2,500 innocent men who had been framed by members of the LAPD’s CRASH Unit and other unit officers engaged in drug trafficking all of whom including in higher command positions remained silent. These innocent men were sentenced to between 8 and 32 years in state prisons, and when this was revealed were being met by attorneys prepared to sue the state of California for billions of dollars. The legislators scurried off to Sacramento to pass emergency legislation to limit the liability to which the State of California could be exposed because of this ‘tacit corruption” and “silence of more than “DOZENS of people”. These sworn officers of the court often frame innocent people at both the state and federal levels to aggrandize their own personal careers and convenientlty close cases. The former FBI agents talking to us at OMIG (Ocean Medical Investigative Group) regarding this Simpson matter, provided the names of several men that other agents who testified knew were innocent and yet provided fraudulent evidence to assist state prosecutors in framing these men, i.e. like Santae Triblle, and Elmer Daniels, as well as an Elmer we think Cochran may have used knowledge of the malfeasance in the Simpson case he may have held over the head of Los Angeles justice officials, in order to free a innocent client of his framed almost 29 years earlier by the LADA’s office in conjunction with the FBI’s COINTELPRO. Cochran was embarrassed and allowed his ego and arrogance to get the best of him after his client, Elmer “Geronimo” Pratt told him what the government was going to do in convicting him. Even though the FBI had him on tape 400 miles away from the murders they withheld the video images of him under surveillence to secure a conviction against a man who would become known as the longest political prisoner after the release of South Africa’s Nelson Madella. So, again, in my opinion, your assumptions are naïve and rooted in a one sided belief in allowing people that are not entitled, to the privilege of presumption, and I have already opined what this type of mindset is rooted in.
5.) Vincent Bugliosi laid much of this out in his book Outrage.
I read years ago before he died where Bugliosi was looked at as being an egotistical lime-light seeking clown by peers in his own LADA’s office. He bothered to examine no evidence in this Simpson case but simply opined by offering his sanctimonious assumptions. You would at least have to do examine the irregularities in the evidence in a case before opening your mouth. You and others begin riding Bugliosi’s jock and citing his omnipotent proclamations only because he was noted for being associated with another high profile case, the Manson case, but that case has nothing to do with the irregularities associated with evidence in the Simpson case.