Xref: world alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts:354 Newsgroups: alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts Path: world!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!myra From: myra@netcom.com (Myra Dinnerstein) Subject: Motion to Supress Message-ID: Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 1995 06:56:52 GMT Approved: myra@netcom.com Lines: 109 Sender: myra@netcom8.netcom.com SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Date: 7 September 1995 Department 103 Hon. Lance A. Ito, Judge Deirdre Robertson, Deputy Clerk People v. Orenthal James Simpson Case # BA097211 MOTION TO RECONSIDER 1538.5 The court has read, reviewed and considered the Defendant's Motion To Suppress Evidence Based On Newly Discovered Evidence and the attached Declaration of Gerald F. Uelmen, the Offer Of Proof Of Newly Discovered Evidence For Motion To Suppress, the People's Response To "Defendant's Motion To Suppress Evidence Based On Newly Discovered Evidence," the transcript of the preliminary hearing, the tapes and transcripts of the Fuhrman tapes (1), and heard the argument of counsel. The request to reconsider the matter on the basis of newly discovered evidence was granted. The motion is denied. PROCEDURAL HISTORY The defendant made a motion to suppress pursuant to Penal Code Section 1538.5 in the Municipal Court during the preliminary hearing before the Honorable Kathleen Kennedy-Powell. That motion was heard, considered and denied by the magistrate. The motion to suppress was renewed in the Superior Court pursuant to Penal Code Section 1538.5 (I). That renewed motion was denied. The defendant now seeks to re-litigate the motion to suppress pursuant to Penal Code Section 1538.5 (h) based upon a claim of newly discovered evidence, i.e., the Fuhrman tapes and transcripts, evidence which ". . . could not reasonably have been presented at the preliminary hearing . . ." DEFENDANT'S ARGUMENT The defendant argues that the court should consider the Fuhrman tapes and transcripts as a whole and seven excerpts in particular as the relate to 1) the decision to enter the Rockingham residence, 2) the decision to interrogate Kato Kaelin, and 3) the decision to search the south walkway area where the Rockingham glove was found. The defendant argues that Fuhrman's credibility has been severely damaged if not completely destroyed by the newly discovered tapes and transcripts. The defendant points to Fuhrman's stated willingness to testify to events not actually witnessed, to take action and then create justification later, a willingness to ignore the rules, a willingness to cover-up misconduct by himself or other police officers, possession of an instinctive ability to identify criminals and a bias against African Americans. PROSECUTION RESPONSE The prosecution responds that the record in its entirety supports the prior rulings by the magistrate and by this court, and that the magistrate's findings would not be affected by the newly discovered evidence. People v. Bishop (1993) 14 CA4th 203, 209-214. The prosecution notes that Fuhrman's status changed from an investigating officer to merely assisting the investigating officers, Vannatter and Lange from the Robbery/Homicide Division, sometime between 2:00 and 3:00 in the morning. The activities of the police from that point forward were at the direction of either Lange or Vannatter. The discovery of the blood drop on the driver's side door of the Bronco near the door handle was confirmed by the other officers at the Rockingham location and documented by photography at the scene. See prosecution trial exhibits 62-B (LAPD Photo Number 139) and 62-C (LAPD Photo Number 140). The entry onto the Rockingham grounds was justified by the need to notify the defendant of the death of this former wife, the need to arrange for the care of the two young children of victim Nicole Brown Simpson and the defendant, the concern raised by the finding of apparent blood on a vehicle parked at the south driveway to the residence, the inability to gain a response from any occupants by means of a doorbell/intercom system, the inability to gain a response by calling the telephone listed with the security alarm company, information that a maid was expected to be present (2) and the possibility that other victims might be present and in need of assistance. This decision was made by Lange and Vannatter. Fuhrman testified that he was motivated to inspect the area of the south walkway based upon the information received from Kato Kaelin in statements to other officers and in the course of testimony at the preliminary hearing and at trial, with the addition that he was concerned enough to begin to investigate the disturbance himself but was deterred by darkness of the area and the inability to find a flashlight with sufficient candlepower. The testimony of Fuhrman on the three points raised by the defendant is corroborated by the testimony of other witnesses. The motion is therefore denied. The clerk of the court is directed to immediately serve a copy of this order upon counsel for the parties by facsimile and upon their appearance in court. IT IS SO ORDERED (1) See the court's ruling dated 31 August 1995 entitled "Fuhrman Tapes." (2) This information later turned out to be erroneous. Although it was the preference of the defendant to have his maid present while he was away from his residence, the defendant gave the maid special permission to be away from the residence due to her family outing to a local amusement park.