Xref: world alt.fan.oj-simpson:50839 alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts:253 Newsgroups: alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts,alt.fan.oj-simpson Path: world!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!myra From: myra@netcom.com (Myra Dinnerstein) Subject: SIDEBARS - July 20, 1995 Message-ID: Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 1995 02:47:45 GMT Approved: myra@netcom.com Lines: 508 Sender: myra@netcom12.netcom.com Sidebars from July 20, 1995 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) THE COURT: LET'S SEE. 13. MR. COCHRAN: YES. THE COURT: NAVY BLUE. MR. COCHRAN: THE TESTIMONY IS AN OFFER OF PROOF MAZZOLA TESTIFIED, AND FUNG, THAT EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR ITEMS 15 AND 16 WERE PICKED UP SEQUENTIALLY, SEQUENTIALLY IN ORDER. THEY WROTE THEM DOWN. THE TIME WAS BETWEEN 4:40 -- BECAUSE THEY WERE PICKED UP DOWNSTAIRS WHERE THE FOYER IS, 4:30, AND THEN THEY WENT UPSTAIRS. THEY WENT UPSTAIRS TOGETHER. AND THEN ITEM 14, YOUR HONOR, WAS PICKED UP, THE BLOODSTAIN, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IN THE BATHROOM, WAS PICKED UP AT 4:40. AND IT WAS BETWEEN THOSE TIMES, I WANT TO BRING THAT OUT, AND IN FACT I WANT TO BE ABLE TO SHOW A VIDEO OF MAZZOLA'S TESTIMONY AND ALSO I CAN SHOW YOU FUNG'S TESTIMONY. WE HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE. AND I SHOULD BE ABLE TO ASK HIM WHETHER OR NOT -- THIS IS THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, BETWEEN 4:30 AND 4:40 -- THEY HAVE THEIR TESTIMONY. THEY HAVE ALREADY TESTIFIED BEFORE THE COURT. THIS IS NOTHING I'M MAKING UP. AND THIS BACKS IT UP, BECAUSE PETER NEUFELD -- I WILL SHOW YOU THE TRANSCRIPT. PETER NEUFELD ASKED HER SEQUENTIALLY -- THE COURT: NO, I AM WITH YOU. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO ASK THIS WITNESS? MR. COCHRAN: I'M GOING TO ASK HIM WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS AWARE OF THIS, THAT SHE ALSO HAD TESTIMONY THAT BETWEEN 4:30 AND 4:40 THESE SOCKS WERE PICKED UP AFTER HE LEFT. AFTER HE LEFT, YOUR HONOR. I'M SHOWING HIM THE VIDEO IF I HAVE TO. THE COURT: I DON'T THINK THAT IS A PROPER QUESTION. MR. COCHRAN: WHY IS THAT NOT A PROPER QUESTION? THE COURT: HE HAS TESTIFIED HE HASN'T TALKED TO HER, HE HASN'T DISCUSSED IT WITH HER AND HAS NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THE TESTIMONY IS. MR. DARDEN: AND THIS IS NOT HIS LOG, OKAY, AND SO WE ARE GIVING THIS WITNESS SOMEONE ELSE'S LOG. MR. COCHRAN: WE HAVE USED THESE LOGS ALL THE TIME. IF HE HAS SEEN THIS LOG -- THE COURT: BUT JOHNNIE, WAIT A MINUTE. ASK THIS GUY ARE YOU AWARE OF THIS TESTIMONY AND TO PLAY IT IS TO SAY -- ALL IT IS IS ARGUMENT. THAT WHAT IT IS. IT IS NOT A PROPER QUESTION AT THIS TIME. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THAT, YOUR HONOR. THE PROSECUTION HAS DONE THIS ALL THE TIME. THE COURT: LIKE WHAT? MR. COCHRAN: KELBERG ASKED EVERY WITNESS, YOU KNOW, WHAT DR. LAKSHMANAN SAID OVER HERE AND SO AND SO, BUT PUTTING HYPOTHETICALS BEFORE THE WITNESS. THE COURT: THOSE ARE EXPERT WITNESSES. THIS GUY IS NOT TESTIFYING AS AN EXPERT. MR. COCHRAN: I THINK THAT THIS MAN SAYS THAT THEY LOOKED AT T.V., I THINK I SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT, IF HE HAS EVER SEEN THE LOG -- THE COURT: YOU CAN ASK HIM IF HE HAS SEEN IT. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU. I WANT TO ASK YOU THEN, IF HE HAS SEEN THE LOG, THEN I CAN ASK HIM BASED UPON THIS LOG HE SAW SOME OTHER LOG AT THE TIME? MR. DARDEN: I DON'T EVEN THINK IT IS -- I DON'T THINK MR. COCHRAN IS EVENLY ACTING IN GOOD FAITH TO EVEN SHOW THIS WITNESS A CRIMINALIST LOG. HE IS NOT A CRIMINALIST. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I'M SUSTAINING THE INITIAL OBJECTION THAT IT IS -- WHAT YOU ARE PLANNING TO DO IS ARGUMENT AT THIS POINT. MR. COCHRAN: RIGHT. THE COURT: BECAUSE IT IS ALREADY IN THE RECORD WHAT MAZZOLA AND FUNG TESTIFIED TO. YOU CAN ASK HIM IF HE HAS SEEN THIS LOG AND KNOWS. MR. COCHRAN: GUIDANCE FROM THE COURT. CAN I ASK THIS MAN IF HE IS AWARE -- CAN I ASK HIM THESE QUESTIONS? ARE YOU AWARE THAT ANDREA MAZZOLA TESTIFIED UNDER OATH THAT THESE SOCKS WERE PICKED UP BETWEEN 4:30 AND 4:40 AND INFORMATION WAS KEPT ON THE LOG SEQUENTIALLY EXCEPT ITEMS 15 AND 16, YOU KNOW? THE COURT: YOU CAN ASK HIM -- YOU CAN ASK HIM DID YOU DISCUSS THIS WITH ANDREA MAZZOLA? DID YOU WATCH HER TESTIMONY? ARE YOU AWARE OF HER TESTIMONY? YOU CAN'T LEAD INTO ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT SHE TESTIFIED TO WITHOUT A FOUNDATION. MR. DARDEN: OKAY. AND HE CAN'T ADD INTO THAT TIMES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. MR. SHAPIRO: CAN WE HAVE -- MAY I CONFER FOR ONE SECOND? (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MR. COCHRAN: THIS POSSIBILITY, YOUR HONOR. MY LEARNED COLLEAGUE INFORMS ME THAT WHY CAN'T WE ASK HIM TO LOOK AT THE TESTIMONY OF ANDREA MAZZOLA AND ASK HIM IF SHE SO TESTIFIED WOULD SHE BE CORRECT AND WOULD SHE BE WRONG? THEY HAVE DONE THIS WITH OTHER WITNESSES. IF SHE TESTIFIED AND SHE PICKED THESE THINGS UP BETWEEN 4:30 AND 4:40 AFTER HE HAD LEFT, AFTER HE HAD TAKEN THIS VIDEO, WOULD SHE BE CORRECT OR WOULD SHE BE LYING? MR. DARDEN: NO, WE HAVE NOT. IN FACT, THERE WERE SOME RARE ATTEMPTS, I THINK ON BOTH SIDES, TO INTRODUCE TESTIMONY THAT WAY AND EACH TIME THE OBJECTIONS WERE SUSTAINED. I MEAN, COME ON, WE ALL WENT TO LAW SCHOOL. WE KNOW THIS IS IMPROPER, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: YOU CAN ASK HIM IF HE IS FAMILIAR WITH THE LOG. YOU CAN ASK HIM IF HE HAS DISCUSSED THE TESTIMONY OF MAZZOLA OR IF HE IS AWARE OF HER TESTIMONY, BUT WITHOUT ANY OTHER FOUNDATION I'M NOT GOING TO LET YOU GO INTO ANY OF THIS NOW. **** (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I ASKED MR. BLASIER TO PULL THIS UP. I WILL READ THIS FOR THE RECORD AS AN OFFER OF PROOF. "QUESTION BY MR. GOLDBERG: IN THIS CASE I TAKE IT THAT THE NUMBER IN THE PHOTOGRAPH ALSO CORRESPONDS TO THE NUMBER -- TO THE ITEM NUMBER THAT WAS EVENTUALLY ASSIGNED; IS THAT CORRECT. "ANSWER: YES. "QUESTION: APPROXIMATELY WHAT TIME WAS ITEM NO. 12 COLLECTED?" ITEM NO. 12, YOUR HONOR, IS THE BLOOD SPOTS IN THE FOYER. "ANSWER: THAT WAS COLLECTED AT APPROXIMATELY 4:30. "QUESTION: ALL RIGHT. NOW, AFTER COLLECTING ITEM NO. 12 DID YOU GO UPSTAIRS IN THE LOCATION? "ANSWER: YES, I DID. "QUESTION: DO YOU RECALL WHAT WAS THE NEXT ITEM OF EVIDENCE THAT YOU COLLECTED? "ANSWER: THE NEXT ITEM WAS A PAIR OF SOCKS IN THE MASTER BEDROOM." SO YOUR HONOR, THE TESTIMONY, SO THAT IT IS CLEAR -- I DIDN'T HAVE DENNIS FUNG BEFORE. THAT DENNIS FUNG SAID HE WENT UPSTAIRS AFTER COLLECTING THE ITEMS DOWNSTAIRS. THEY COLLECTED THE ITEMS DOWNSTAIRS IN THE FOYER AT 4:30 AND SO WE KNOW ALSO FROM THE LOG -- THE COURT: UH-HUH. MR. COCHRAN: -- THAT THE SPOTS OR WHATEVER IN THE BATHROOM WERE COLLECTED AT 4:40. THE SOCKS WERE COLLECTED BETWEEN 4:30 AND 4:40. TAKE THAT ALONG WITH THE TESTIMONY OF MAZZOLA THINGS WERE LOGGED SEQUENTIALLY AT THE TIME THEY HAPPENED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE 15 AND 16, THE THINGS THAT WERE OUTSIDE, THE TAGS OR WHATEVER -- THE COURT: UH-HUH. MR. COCHRAN: -- I HAVE A GOOD FAITH TO ASK HIM IF DENNIS FUNG INDICATED HE WENT UPSTAIRS AND COLLECTED THE SOCKS AFTER 4:30 WOULD HE BE WRONG OR NOT TELLING THE TRUTH? THE COURT: I WILL SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION AS BEING ARGUMENTATIVE. THAT IS ARGUMENTATIVE, COUNSEL. THAT IS ARGUMENT. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. WHILE WE ARE UP HERE, ON SCHEDULING, I ASKED BOB TO COME UP FOR TWO REASONS BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANY DELAYS IN THIS CASE SO CAN WE SHIFT GEARS. I'M ALMOST FINISHED. CAN WE SHIFT GEARS NOW WITH REGARD TO THE WITNESSES? HE HAS ARGUED IT SO I WILL ASK YOU TO LISTEN TO HIM ON SCHEDULING SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD ON THIS CASE. MR. BLASIER: DR. RIEDERS HAS A MEDICAL -- HE HAS A HEART PROBLEM. HE WAS HOSPITALIZED RECENTLY. HE HAS A MEDICAL APPOINTMENT NEXT WEDNESDAY. HE IS LEAVING FOR VIENNA THE FOLLOWING MONDAY. HE CAN COME BACK THIS MONDAY. I WILL -- I TOLD LISA KAHN, WHO I'M DEALING WITH ON THIS ISSUE, THAT I WOULD MAKE HIM AVAILABLE TO TALK TO HER RIGHT NOW WITH AGENT MARTZ. THEY WILL KNOW WHAT THE ISSUES ARE. THEY CAN PREPARE. THEY WILL HAVE ALL THE TIME UNTIL MONDAY TO PREPARE AND WE WILL CALL HIM MONDAY AND WE WILL CALL MARTZ AFTER. MS. CLARK: THAT DOESN'T GIVE US NEARLY ENOUGH TIME. MR. BLASIER: LISA KAHN TOLD ME LAST NIGHT THAT MISS CLARK WAS VERY WELL AWARE OF THE ISSUES, WAS REALLY PREPARED ON THAT. MS. CLARK: THAT IS THE BIGGEST BALD FACE LIE WE HAVE HEARD YET IN THIS CASE. MISS KAHN CANNOT MAKE THAT REPRESENTATION; IT IS NOT TRUE. THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: I AM NOT PREPARED FOR DR. RIEDERS, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: I DON'T NEED THE CHARACTERIZATION AS PEOPLE LYING AND THAT SORT OF THING. I DON'T THINK THAT IS APPROPRIATE. LET'S SEE. TODAY IS THE 20TH. IF HE HAS TO LEAVE ON THE -- MR. BLASIER: HE HAS TO LEAVE ON TUESDAY TO GET BACK FOR HIS MEDICAL APPOINTMENT ON WEDNESDAY. THE COURT: AND THEN HE IS LEAVING FOR WHERE? MR. BLASIER: VIENNA THE FOLLOWING MONDAY FOR A WEEK, BUT WE SHOULD BE DONE BY THEN. MS. CLARK: I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO BE DONE BY THEN, GIVEN THE NUMBER OF WITNESSES. MR. BLASIER: WELL, THAT IS WHAT WE WANT TO DO. THE COURT: THEY MAY BE SHORT WITNESSES OR NO WITNESSES. MS. CLARK: YEAH. MS. CLARK: I WOULD ONLY ASK THAT THE COURT REQUIRE THE TESTIMONY TO COME AT THE END OF THE CASE, WHENEVER THAT IS, AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE WHEN HE WILL BE BACK FROM VIENNA. MR. COCHRAN: CAN I COMMENT ON THAT, YOUR HONOR? I DON'T THINK SO. AND THE COURT IS AWARE -- THE COURT: LET'S DO THIS. LET'S DO THIS. GIVE ME A COPY OF THE REPORT. I WILL LOOK AT IT AND SEE HOW COMPLEX IT IS AND WE WILL SEE -- MS. CLARK: THE PROBLEM IS -- MR. COCHRAN: TODAY? THE COURT: YES. MS. CLARK: I SHOULD GIVE THE COURT THEN ALSO AGENT MARTZ' REPORTS BECAUSE DR. RIEDERS' REPORT IS SHORT AND IT IS OBVIOUSLY A LOT LESS THAN HE IS PREPARED TO TESTIFY TO. THE COURT: GIVE ME BOTH OF THESE THINGS AND I WILL LOOK AT THEM OVER THE NOON HOUR. MR. COCHRAN: THE REASON I'M BRINGING THIS UP, WE ARE TRYING NOT TO RUN OUT OF WITNESSES. MAKE SURE MULLDORFER IS HERE. MR. DARDEN: THESE ARE YOUR WITNESSES. YOU MAKE SURE THEY ARE HERE. I CAN'T POLICE THEM FOR YOU AND MAKE SURE THEY DON'T WATCH T.V. I'M NOT ACCEPTING THAT RESPONSIBILITY. MR. COCHRAN: LET ME ALSO BRING UP -- MR. DARDEN: SO I'M GOING TO PLEASE ASK MR. -- THE COURT: I'M SURE THAT WILL COME OUT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION. MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS THE VIOLATION OF YOUR ORDER UP IN THEIR OFFICE. THE COURT: THIS GUY IS ON THE LINE, WHETHER OR NOT HE IS ONE OF THE WITNESSES THAT IS INCLUDED HERE. MR. COCHRAN: ON THE LINE, YOUR HONOR? MS. CLARK: LET ME REMIND COUNSEL WHILE WE ARE HERE THAT MR. MERAZ ADMITTED WATCHING TELEVISION. I'M GOING TO ASK FOR A JURY ADMONITION CONCERNING HIS TESTIMONY AND HIS CREDIBILITY AS A RESULT OF THAT, NOT TO MENTION OTHER WITNESSES THAT I KNOW WILL BE CALLED. THE COURT: LET'S PROCEED. LET'S PROCEED. **** (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) THE COURT: WE ARE OVER AT THE SIDE BAR. MR. COCHRAN, I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO YOU FOR APPEARING A LITTLE SHORT WITH YOU. I THINK PERHAPS MY TONE WAS NOT APPROPRIATE IN THE LAST SESSION. I AM IMPATIENT TODAY BECAUSE THIS PHOTOGRAPHER TESTIFIED TO A VERY LIMITED -- WE ARE SPENDING A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THIS AND I'M EXASPERATED. MY APOLOGIES FOR TAKING IT OUT ON YOU. MR. COCHRAN: I ACCEPT THE COURT'S APOLOGY. THE COURT: HAVING SAID THAT, THOUGH, MR. DARDEN, LET'S MOVE THIS ALONG. I THINK YOU'VE MADE THE POINT THAT HIS INSTRUCTIONS WERE TO TAKE IT AFTER THE ROOM HAD BEEN CLEARED. THAT IS THE POINT. MR. DARDEN: I JUST HAVE TO GO INTO SOME TIMING ISSUES. THE COURT: I'M TRYING TO GET HIM TO WIND THIS UP. MR. COCHRAN: I ACCEPT YOUR APOLOGY. MR. DARDEN: PLUS I NEEDED A RECESS. THE COURT: I DID, TOO. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON WE TOOK IT. MR. DARDEN: OKAY. THE COURT: BUT LET'S -- THERE IS NOT A LOT MORE. MR. DARDEN: I GOT TEN MINUTES WITH THE GUY. MR. COCHRAN: I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT NOW -- I'M TRYING NOT TO RUN OUT OF WITNESSES. I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A DECISION OVER THE LUNCH HOUR ON RIEDERS. THE COURT: JOHNNIE, THE BOTTOM LINE, THEY ARE GOING TO GET, YOU KNOW, TIME TO PREPARE. THAT IS WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN. MY CONCERN IS RIEDERS' SCHEDULE. MR. COCHRAN: I'M TRYING TO GET SOME INSTRUCTIONS TO GET SOME WITNESSES HERE. MS. CLARK: WE HAVE ONE REQUESTED TO BRING IN DETECTIVE LANGE, MULLDORFER. YOU WANT HARO? MS. CLARK: IT IS HARPER THAT DIRECTED THE VIDEO. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO GO OFF RECORD AT THIS POINT. YOU GUYS ARGUE ABOUT SCHEDULING. **** (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) THE COURT: WE ARE OVER AT SIDEBAR. MR. COCHRAN: JUDGE, I JUST WANT TO ASK -- I PROMISED TO APPROACH THE BENCH. I WANT TO ASK HER -- AS AN OFFER OF PROOF, SHE WILL INDICATE SHE WAS AT KNOTTS BERRY FARM WITH HER FAMILY HAVING A GOOD TIME. SHE CALLED MR. SIMPSON AND ASKED COULD SHE CONTINUE TO STAY OUT. THERE WAS A SHOW SHE WANTED TO SEE. SHE KNEW HE WAS GOING TO LEAVE TOWN BEFORE SHE WOULD COME HOME. MR. SIMPSON TOLD HER, "NO, IT'S NOT NECESSARY. YOU CAN ENJOY THE SHOW, ENJOY YOUR FAMILY." THAT'S IT. STATE OF MIND EXCEPTION. I WANT TO ELICIT THAT, BUT WANTED TO ASK HER -- THE COURT: NO. WHAT YOU CAN ASK IS: "WHAT WAS YOUR PURPOSE IN CALLING?" "TO GET PERMISSION TO STAY LATER AT KNOTTS BERRY FARM. "THANK YOU. "WAS THAT YOUR PURPOSE? "YES. "AND DID YOU STAY LATER? "YES, I DID." MR. DARDEN: OF COURSE, IT'S NOT GOING TO COME OUT THAT WAY. IT'S NOT A VERY ARTFULLY PHRASED QUESTION, JUDGE. THAT QUESTION LIKE -- THAT LEAVES THE DOOR OPEN FOR ALL KINDS OF STUFF. THE COURT: I DON'T KNOW WHY WE ASKED ALL THESE QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW NEAT HE IS BECAUSE YOU'RE JUST GOING TO ARGUE, WELL, THIS WAS AN UNUSUAL DAY. SO YOU'RE RIGHT. MR. COCHRAN: THEY CAN ARGUE ANY WAY THEY WANT TO. THE COURT: IT CUTS BOTH WAYS. MR. COCHRAN: SO IT DOES. THE COURT: BUT WE ALL KNOW THAT GIGI WASN'T THERE THAT NIGHT. OKAY. SO THIS IS -- IF SHE'S AT KNOTTS BERRY FARM HAVING A GOOD TIME, WELL, GOOD FOR HER. MR. DARDEN: I JUST DON'T WANT TO HEAR MR. SIMPSON'S COMMENTS. THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN. MR. COCHRAN: WHILE WE ARE HERE, MAY I ASK ABOUT ANOTHER AREA? I FOUND OUT -- BY THE WAY, ANOTHER SUBJECT. BARRY SCHECK IS GOING TO CALL MULLDORFER NEXT. I UNDERSTAND WE ARE ALSO GOING TO HAVE LUPER. THERE WILL BE LIKE ONE QUESTION. BUT WE CAN'T GET HARO. WE CAN'T GET HARO. WE TOLD YOU THAT BEFORE. HERE'S MY OFFER OF PROOF. AFTER JUNE 12TH, THAT ON JUNE 28TH -- HERE'S WHAT I WOULD SEEK TO ELICIT. SHE WAS HOME ON JUNE 28TH. SHE WAS WORKING AT THE HOUSE. THE POLICE CAME TO THE GATE, WANTED TO COME IN. OF COURSE, SHE KNEW THEY HAD A SEARCH WARRANT. THEY DO NOT FREQUENTLY GET A SEARCH WARRANT AT ALL. FURTHER, THEY ASKED HER TO LEAVE THE HOUSE. THEN THEY TOLD HER, OKAY -- SHE SAID, "I CAN'T LEAVE." THEN THEY ALLOWED HER TO REMAIN IN THE KITCHEN AREA AND THEN THEY ASKED HER TO PLAY THIS VIDEO, FROGMAN VIDEO FOR THEM. 10, 12 OFFICERS AND DETECTIVES WERE SITTING AROUND IN THE FAMILY ROOM, BAR AREA WATCHING THE T.V. SCREEN. THE REASON SHE HAD TO DO THIS WAS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO TURN IT ON. AND THE COURT WILL RECALL SHE'S TESTIFIED ABOUT THAT BEFORE. SHE HAD SEEN A PREVIEW OF THIS VIDEO BEFORE. SHE WENT TO THE KITCHEN WHERE SHE WAS INSTRUCTED TO GO. I JUST WANT TO BRING THAT OUT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT AGAIN TO SHOW THE ACTION OF THESE OFFICERS. I THINK IT'S PROBATIVE ON A NUMBER OF LEVELS AND I THINK ALSO, THE OFFICERS WILL DENY SOME OF THOSE -- THEY WILL DENY DOING THIS. SO I'M ASKING LEAVE OF THE COURT TO ELICIT JUST THOSE QUESTIONS. THAT'S THE AREA I AM GOING TO GO INTO. MR. DARDEN: WELL, YOU KNOW, I STRENUOUSLY OBJECT TO THAT. YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE TRIED TO DO IN THIS CASE, WE'VE CUT OUR CASE BACK. WE'RE TRYING TO END IT. THE COURT: WELL, MR. DARDEN, WHAT IS YOUR SPECIFIC OBJECTION? MR. DARDEN: IT'S IRRELEVANT. MR. COCHRAN: I THINK IT'S VERY RELEVANT. I THINK THESE OFFICERS INDICATED -- IT GOES TO THE STATE OF MIND OF THESE OFFICERS LIKE HARO. IT GOES TO SHOW EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED HERE, YOUR HONOR. THEY INDICATED THAT THEY DIDN'T DO THIS. WE THINK THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THEY DID. WE HAVE A LEGITIMATE ISSUE HERE. THIS WILL TAKE ME THREE OR FOUR QUESTIONS, ARTFULLY PHRASED QUESTIONS. I THINK IT'S PROBATIVE. THEY TALK ABOUT CUTTING THEIR CASE BACK. YOUR HONOR, WE'VE BEEN UP ONLY A WEEK AND A HALF. THEY WERE SIX MONTHS. AND I EXPECT -- I'M TELLING YOU, I'M GOING TO FINISH IN ANOTHER WEEK AND A HALF. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN: CAN I JUST ADD ONE LAST THING? THIS IS COLLATERAL IMPEACHMENT. THAT'S ALL IT IS. AND IT'S JUNE 28TH, AND THEY COLLECTED, YOU KNOW, BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE AND EVERYTHING TWO WEEKS BEFORE, JUDGE. BUT WE'VE GOT TO -- THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT IT'S A VERY TANGENTIAL ISSUE. I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY NOT RELEVANT TO THE DIRECT ISSUES HERE. I AGREE IT IS COLLATERAL IMPEACHMENT. UNDER 352, I'LL SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION TO THAT AREA OF INQUIRY ON JUNE 28TH. ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO. **** (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) THE COURT: WE'RE OVER AT THE SIDEBAR. MR. DARDEN, WHAT'S UP? WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH THIS? MR. DARDEN: NOTHING, YOUR HONOR. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH IT, IT'S OBVIOUS THAT IN PREPARATION FOR THE JURY VIEW, THIS WITNESS CHANGED THE PHOTOGRAPHS AROUND IN THE HOUSE. IN FACT, THEY CHANGED THE PHOTOGRAPHS BETWEEN THE TIME THAT CHERI LEWIS VISITED THE DAY BEFORE AND THE ACTUAL JURY VIEWING. IN ADDITION, SO THAT MR. COCHRAN KNOWS WHERE WE'RE GOING, I WANT TO ASK HER ABOUT THE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE TO THE HOUSE DAYS AFTER THE MURDER. I BELIEVE SOME PICTURES WERE CHANGED THEN. IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT ON THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS, NICOLE'S PICTURES WERE ON THE WALL LEADING UP THE STAIRWAY AND OTHER PARTS OF THE HOUSE, BUT THAT AFTER THE MURDERS, THEY CHANGED THEM, THEY PUT PAULA BARBIERI'S IN. AND IF YOU WANT A GOOD FAITH OFFER OF PROOF, MISS CLARK IS HERE. SHE VISITED THE HOUSE ON JUNE 13TH. AND SO SHE CAN -- THE COURT: ARE WE GOING TO GET TO CROSS-EXAMINE MARCIA CLARK? MR. COCHRAN: PUT HER UP THERE. I WANT TO GET HER UP THERE. THIS IS BEYOND THE SCOPE. IT'S IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL TO WHAT HAPPENED. THIS IS 352, YOUR HONOR. COUNSEL IS GRABBING AT STRAWS, AND I THINK THE COURT CAN SEE THAT THIS IS APPROPRIATELY SUSTAINED, AND THEY WANT TO BRING SOME OFFSPRING OR SOMETHING -- HOW WOULD MISS CLARK KNOW WHAT IS THERE BEFORE JUNE 12TH? SO -- YOUR HONOR, THIS IS PREPOSTEROUS. THIS IS BEYOND THE SCOPE. MR. DARDEN: I THOUGHT EVEN THE COURT CONCLUDED DURING THE JURY VIEW THAT THERE HAD BEEN CHANGES. MR. COCHRAN: NO. THE COURT SAID -- THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. ONLY ONE OF US GETS TO TALK. WAIT, WAIT. MR. DARDEN: I'M ONLY TALKING TO YOU. THE COURT: WAIT. WHEN I SAY WAIT, EVERYTHING STOPS. ALL RIGHT. ONE PERSON AT A TIME. MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, FIRST OF ALL, THE COURT CONCLUDED THAT FURTHERMORE, WITH REGARD TO THE JURY VIEW, YOU RECALL, YOU SAID TO THE JURORS DON'T LOOK AT ANY OF THE PICTURES, THEY'RE IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL. THEN SOME OF THE JURORS LOOKED AT THE PICTURES. ANYBODY WHO SUPPOSEDLY LOOKED AT THE PICTURES IS NO LONGER HERE, AS I HAVE IN MIND MR. GENE KNOX, WHO THEY STARTED ARGUING ABOUT THAT DAY IN THE YARD. REMEMBER? THE COURT: UH-HUH. MR. COCHRAN: KNOX OR WHATEVER HIS NAME WAS. MICHAEL KNOX. THIS IS IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL, YOUR HONOR, ABSOLUTELY, AND I WOULD ASK THE COURT UNDER 352 TO MOVE ON. WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OTHER WITNESSES WE WOULD LIKE TO RESOLVE. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN: IT GOES TO HER BIAS, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: IT DOES GO TO HER BIAS, BUT THIS WAY EXCEEDS THE SCOPE. IF YOU WANT TO RECALL HER DURING YOUR REBUTTAL, YOU'RE ENTITLED TO DO THAT. BUT AT THIS POINT, IT'S WAY BEYOND. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: BUT WE MAY WANT TO TALK TO HER OUT OF THE PRESENCE BECAUSE IT'S -- THAT'S A PRETTY VOLATILE ISSUE, AS TO CHANGING THE LOCATION, AT WHOSE INSTRUCTION. MR. COCHRAN: THEY HAVE NO -- THE COURT: THAT'S PRETTY VOLATILE. MR. DARDEN: WE'LL LET MISS LEWIS HANDLE THAT WHEN WE TAKE THE BREAK. THE COURT: I'LL SUSTAIN A SCOPE OBJECTION AT THIS POINT. LET'S GO. **** (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) MR. COCHRAN: I WANT TO ASK -- THE COURT: HOLD ON. WE'RE OVER AT SIDEBAR. MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: I WANTED TO APPROACH BEFORE I WENT INTO THIS. I WANT TO ASK HIM IS HE AWARE THAT DENNIS FUNG TESTIFIED HE NEVER WENT UPSTAIRS UNTIL 4:30 AND THAT THE ITEMS WERE NOT COLLECTED UNTIL AFTER WILLIE FORD LEFT. THE COURT: THAT'S HEARSAY, ISN'T IT? MR. COCHRAN: IT'S HEARSAY. BUT IF HE WAS THERE, HE IS AWARE OF IT. I CAN ASK AT THIS TIME -- I THINK THIS IS IMPEACHMENT AT THIS POINT. THE COURT: IT'S NOT AN INCONSISTENT STATEMENT. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IF WILLIE FORD LEFT AT 4:30 AND DENNIS FUNG DIDN'T COLLECT THESE THINGS UNTIL 4:35 OR 4:40 -- YOUR HONOR, THE VIDEO INDICATES THEY WERE COLLECTED ABOUT 4:12 OR 4:13. THAT'S INCONSISTENT, YOUR HONOR, FORD AND MAZZOLA ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY SAY THINGS WERE COLLECTED SEQUENTIALLY. WE SHOWED THIS ON THE RECORD THIS MORNING. THE COURT: MR. DARDEN. MR. DARDEN: IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE. IT WAS ARGUMENTATIVE THIS MORNING AND IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE NOW, JUDGE. THIS GUY ISN'T KEEPING DENNIS FUNG'S LOG AND CERTAINLY ISN'T HERE TO VOUCH FOR DENNIS FUNG. MR. COCHRAN: I WANT TO ASK HIM WHETHER OR NOT HE SAW FUNG -- WHETHER OR NOT -- DENNIS FUNG TESTIFIED. I'M NOT MAKING THIS UP. THIS IS A SEARCH FOR TRUTH, JUDGE. THE COURT: COUNSEL, THIS IS FOR ARGUMENT. IT'S ALSO HEARSAY. OBJECTION SUSTAINED. MR. COCHRAN: CAN I INQUIRE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT HE'S SEEN THE LOG OR SAW DENNIS FUNG'S TESTIMONY, THAT HE SAW HIS TESTIMONY? THE COURT: IF HE SAW HIS TESTIMONY OR IF HE SAW HIS LOG, IF HE IS AWARE OF WHAT HIS LOG IS, BUT THAT'S -- MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. I'LL ASK THAT.