(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN.
PLEASE BE SEATED. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE
HAVE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.
THE COURT: MY APOLOGIES TO YOU
FOR THE DELAY IN GETTING
STARTED. WE HAD A NUMBER OF ISSUES THAT WE HAD TO TAKE UP AT
THE
BEGINNING OF THE COURT DAY AND WE ARE JUST GETTING AROUND NOW TO
THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE.
I'M SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEMS AND DIFFICULTIES
THAT WE ALWAYS HAVE.
PRESENT IN THE COURTROOM IS DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESUME THE
WITNESS STAND.
MARK FUHRMAN,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT,
RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN IS PRESENT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAILEY.
GOOD MORNING AGAIN, DETECTIVE.
THE WITNESS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN,
YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE
STILL UNDER OATH.
MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY RESUME WITH YOUR
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. BAILEY:
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW WITH YOU
THE STEPS YOU HAVE TAKEN TO PREPARE YOURSELF FOR TESTIMONY IN
THIS CASE.
WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME FOLLOWING THE PRELIMINARY
HEARING THAT YOU MET WITH ONE OF THE PROSECUTORS, THOSE AT THE
TABLE AND THOSE NOT AT THE TABLE, THAT YOU KNOW TO BE CONNECTED
WITH THIS CASE, TO DISCUSS THE CASE AND/OR YOUR TESTIMONY?
A ARE YOU SAYING
POST-PRELIM, SIR?
Q POST-PRELIMINARY
HEARING.
A PROBABLY WITHIN
THE LAST MONTH, MONTH AND A HALF.
Q DO I UNDERSTAND
THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO CONTACT
BETWEEN YOU AND ANY OF THE PROSECUTORS IN THIS CASE UP UNTIL
1995?
A WE HAVEN'T
TALKED ABOUT THIS TESTIMONY, NO.
Q ABOUT THIS
CASE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN? YOU ARE VERY
MUCH A PART OF THIS CASE, AREN'T YOU?
A YES, SIR.
Q YEAH.
AND YOU CAUSED THAT BY FINDING AN IMPORTANT
PIECE OF EVIDENCE, DIDN'T YOU?
A YES, SIR.
Q YOU KNEW FULL
WELL THAT ONCE YOU CAME UP WITH A PIECE
OF EVIDENCE OF THAT SORT THERE WASN'T ANYBODY THAT COULD GET YOU
OUT OF THIS CASE BECAUSE YOU ARE AN ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL WITNESS,
RIGHT?
DID YOU KNOW THAT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: WHAT IS THE OBJECTION?
MS. CLARK: WITHDRAWN.
THE COURT: WITHDRAWN. THANK
YOU.
THE OBJECTION WAS WITHDRAWN.
THE WITNESS: SIR, THE WAY YOU
PHRASED THAT, "GET ME OUT OF
THIS CASE"? I WASN'T TRYING TO GET OUT OF THIS CASE.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
SOMEBODY WAS TRYING TO GET YOU OUT.
YOU TOLD US THAT IN SOME DETAIL YESTERDAY. YOU WERE OUT YOU
THOUGHT?
A OH, YOU MEAN
THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CASE?
Q YEAH.
A YES, SIR.
Q YOU THOUGHT
YOU WERE OFF THE CASE AS A DETECTIVE.
WHEN YOU STOOD FOR AN HOUR AT THE INTERSECTION OF
DOROTHY AND BUNDY, YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE THROUGH, DIDN'T YOU?
A I'M STILL
A DETECTIVE, SIR, BUT AS FAR AS BEING THE
LEAD INVESTIGATOR, YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q YOU THOUGHT
YOU WERE OFF THE CASE? ISN'T THAT WHAT
YOU TOLD US YESTERDAY?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
BUT WHEN YOU TURNED OUT TO FIND THIS GLOVE OVER AT
ROCKINGHAM, YOU KNEW THAT YOU WOULD BE ON THE CASE AS LONG AS IT
LASTED, DIDN'T YOU?
A NO.
Q YOU DIDN'T
KNOW THAT THE GLOVE COULD NOT BE PUT IN
EVIDENCE IN A CRIMINAL CASE WITHOUT THE PERSON WHO FOUND IT
SAYING UNDER OATH WHERE HE FOUND IT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN
EVIDENCE, CALLS FOR AN INCORRECT LEGAL CONCLUSION AND
SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU WOULD BE AN
ESSENTIAL WITNESS IF YOU WERE THE FIRST TO FIND AN IMPORTANT
PIECE OF EVIDENCE?
A WELL, I COULDN'T
MAKE THAT DETERMINATION AT THAT
TIME, SIR. I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE IMPLICATION OF THE GLOVE
WAS.
Q YOU TOLD US
THE MINUTE YOU SAW IT YOU THOUGHT IT
LOOKED LIKE THE ONE ON BUNDY, DIDN'T YOU, SIR?
A YES, SIR,
I THOUGHT IT LOOKED LIKE.
Q YOU ARE A
TRAINED DETECTIVE?
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, COUNSEL,
FROM YESTERDAY, BOTH OF
YOU, LET HIM FINISH ANSWERING THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU BEGIN TO
ASK ANOTHER ONE.
MR. BAILEY, LET HIM FINISH THE ANSWER. YOU ARE
DRIVING THE COURT REPORTER NUTS.
MR. BAILEY: THAT WE CERTAINLY
DON'T WANT TO DO.
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, HAD YOU FINISHED THE ANSWER YOU
WERE GIVING?
A I'M NOT SURE.
IF YOU WOULD REPEAT THE QUESTION, I
WILL GIVE YOU ANOTHER ANSWER.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU TELL US YESTERDAY THAT WHEN YOU SPOTTED THIS
GLOVE, AS YOU CLAIM, THAT YOU RECOGNIZED IT AS ONE THAT LOOKED
SIMILAR TO THE ONE ON BUNDY?
A YES.
Q AND THAT YOU
KNEW THAT THE ONE ON BUNDY, I BELIEVE
YOU SAID, WAS A LEFT-HANDED GLOVE OR BELIEVED IT TO BE, DID YOU
NOT?
A NO.
Q DID NOT?
YOU NOTICED THAT THIS APPEARED TO BE A
RIGHT-HANDED GLOVE?
A YES.
Q AND THE REASON
THAT YOU HAD THREE DETECTIVES IN THREE
SEPARATE TRIPS TRAMPLE BACK ALONG THAT PATH WAS BECAUSE YOU
WANTED TO POINT OUT TO THEM THE FACT THAT THIS GLOVE LOOKED LIKE
A MATCH FOR THE ONE THEY HAD SEEN OVER AT THE CRIME SCENE ON
BUNDY; ISN'T THAT TRUE?
A NOT ENTIRELY.
I JUST WANTED TO SHOW THEM THE
EVIDENCE THAT I THOUGHT I FOUND.
Q DIDN'T YOU
SAY TO THEM, "IN MY VIEW THIS LOOKS
SIMILAR," OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT?
A I BELIEVE
I SAID THAT TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, BUT I
DON'T BELIEVE I WENT INTO THAT DETAIL WITH THE OTHER TWO
DETECTIVES, NO.
Q DID YOU SAY
ANYTHING WHEN YOU TOOK MR. VANNATTER BACK
THERE? ANYTHING AT ALL?
A I'M NOT SURE
EXACTLY WHAT I WOULD HAVE SAID. I
BELIEVE DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TALKED TO VANNATTER AND LANGE. THEY
JOINED ME AND I TOOK THEM BACK THE PATH.
Q I DIDN'T
ASK YOU THAT, SIR.
WHAT I ASKED YOU WAS WHETHER OR NOT DURING THE TRIP
YOU HAVE DESCRIBED, TRIP NO. 2, ACTUALLY NO. 3, IF YOU COUNT YOUR
OWN, DID DETECTIVE PHILIP VANNATTER, THE BOSS IN THIS CASE, DID
YOU SHARE WITH HIM YOUR OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE GLOVE OR DID YOU
JUST REMAIN SILENT?
A I COULD HAVE
SHARED THOSE OBSERVATIONS, YES. I DON'T
RECALL SPECIFICALLY.
Q YOU RECALL
PHILLIPS BUT YOU DON'T RECALL DETECTIVE
VANNATTER; IS THAT RIGHT?
A INITIALLY
I JUST REMEMBER TALKING TO PHILLIPS.
Q LET'S GO TO
DETECTIVE LANGE.
YOU THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO BRING THE
THIRD MEMBER OF THE FOUR-MAN TEAM BACK TO LOOK, DIDN'T YOU?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND DID YOU TELL DETECTIVE LANGE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT
THE RELEVANCE OF THAT GLOVE TO YOUR INVESTIGATION?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
I TALKED ABOUT RELEVANCE.
Q WELL, WITHOUT
USING THE WORD "RELEVANCE," JUST POLICE
TALK, DID YOU SAY "THIS LOOKS IMPORTANT, TOM"?
A NO.
Q WHAT DID YOU
SAY?
A I SAID, "IT
LOOKS LIKE IT COULD BE SIMILAR TO THE ONE
ON BUNDY."
Q YOU HAVE TOLD
US A NUMBER OF TIMES THAT ONE OF THE
THINGS YOU NOTICED ABOUT THE GLOVE WAS THAT IT WAS MOIST AND
STICKY, CORRECT?
A YES, YES.
Q AND DID YOU
POINT THAT OUT TO
DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, THAT NOT ONLY DID IT LOOK LIKE THE GLOVE FROM
BUNDY, BUT THAT IT APPEARED TO HAVE A SUBSTANCE ON IT MAKING IT
STICKY WHICH COULD WELL HAVE BEEN BLOOD?
A I'M NOT SURE
IF I DID OR IF I DIDN'T.
Q BUT IT HAD
BEEN THROUGH YOUR MIND, HADN'T IT?
A YES.
Q AND THE STICKY
PART I TAKE IT YOU OBSERVED WHEN YOU
TOOK THAT LITTLE TINY FLASHLIGHT OF YOURS AND SHINED IT ON THE
GLOVE AND SAW SOMETHING OF A SHINY NATURE, AS OPPOSED TO A CAKED
OR DRY SURFACE?
A IT APPEARED
THAT IT HAD SOMEWHAT OF A GLEAN OR A
GLISTEN TO IT.
Q OKAY.
NOW, MY QUESTION IS DID YOU BRING THAT TO THE
ATTENTION OF DETECTIVE PHILLIPS?
A I COULD HAVE.
Q DID YOU BRING
IT TO THE ATTENTION OF DETECTIVE LANGE?
A I COULD HAVE.
Q DID YOU BRING
IT TO THE ATTENTION OF DETECTIVE
VANNATTER?
A I COULD HAVE.
Q YOU DON'T
HAVE A MEMORY OF ANY OF THOSE CONVERSATIONS
AS WE SIT HERE?
A I DON'T HAVE
A MEMORY OF A SPECIFIC COMMENT THAT I
MADE TO ANY OF THOSE DETECTIVES WHEN WE WERE STANDING BY THE
GLOVE.
Q WERE YOU MORE
INTERESTED IN SHOWING EACH DETECTIVE
INDIVIDUALLY THE GLOVE OR MORE INTERESTED IN TRAMPLING UP THE
PATHWAY?
A WELL, OBVIOUSLY
I WAS INTERESTED IN SHOWING EACH
DETECTIVE SEPARATELY AND GET A SEPARATE POINT OF VIEW OF WHAT
THEY WERE VIEWING, AS I DID.
Q IS IT YOUR
PRACTICE, WHEN SOMETHING IS DISCOVERED, TO
PROHIBIT DETECTIVES, EXCEPT ONE AT A TIME, TO SEE YOUR DISCOVERY?
IS THAT THE WAY YOU USUALLY OPERATE?
A AT A CRIME
SCENE YOU WOULD WANT TO BRING IN AS FEW
PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE INTO AN AREA.
Q AS FEW PEOPLE
AS POSSIBLE. EIGHTEEN SETS OF FEET IS
A FEW PEOPLE?
A WELL, IF WE
DID IT ALL AT THE SAME TIME IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN EVEN WORSE.
Q IT WOULD?
A YES.
Q WOULDN'T YOU
THINK THE FIRST FOUR TRIPS WOULD BE
ENOUGH TO BLOT OUT ANY FOOTPRINTS OF THE PERPETRATOR, IF ANY
THERE WERE?
A I DIDN'T SEE
EVIDENCE OF ANY FOOTPRINTS.
Q YOU WOULDN'T
SEE ANY FOOTPRINTS IN LEAVES, WOULD YOU,
DETECTIVE? YOU KNOW THAT TAKES AN EXPERT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DO YOU HAVE SOME TRAINING ABOUT WHAT
CRIMINALISTS DO?
A YES, SIR.
Q DID YOU TELL
US YESTERDAY YOU HAD TAKEN A COURSE
WHEREIN FOOTPRINTS OF VARIOUS KINDS WERE DISCUSSED?
A THERE WAS
NOT A SPECIFIC COURSE, BUT YES, IT WAS
MENTIONED.
Q I SAID YOU
TOOK A COURSE WHEREIN FOOTPRINTS WERE
DISCUSSED? IS THAT TRUE?
A NOT JUST FOOTPRINTS,
SIR. THAT WAS PART OF A --
Q I DIDN'T SAY
JUST FOOTPRINTS.
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME. LET
HIM FINISH.
MR. BAILEY: OH, OKAY.
THE WITNESS: IT WAS PART OF A
COURSE OR A SCHOOL.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
I UNDERSTAND THAT. IT WAS A COURSE
WHEREIN FOOTPRINTS WERE DISCUSSED, WAS IT NOT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU LEARN ABOUT LATENT FOOTPRINTS IN
THAT COURSE?
A IT COULD HAVE
BEEN MENTIONED.
Q AND WHAT IS
A LATENT FOOTPRINT? WOULD YOU EXPLAIN TO
THE COURT AND JURY YOUR UNDERSTANDING?
A IT IS A PRINT
THAT IS NOT VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE.
Q HOW CAN IT
BE VIEWED BY AN EXPERT, IF YOU WERE
TAUGHT, SO THAT IT BECOMES PERCEIVABLE?
A I'M SURE THERE
IS SOME TYPE OF A CHEMICAL PROCESS,
OBLIQUE LIGHTING, QUITE POSSIBLY MAYBE SOME TYPE OF INFRARED, OR
AS I SAID, CHEMICAL PROCESS, BUT I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN THAT AREA.
Q NOW, WHEN
YOU FIRST SAW WHAT YOU CLAIM WAS A BROWN
OBJECT LAYING ON THE GROUND, AS YOU APPROACHED IT AND YOU NOTICED
THAT IT WAS A GLOVE, PERHAPS A MATCH OF THE ONE YOU HAD SEEN AT
BUNDY, DID YOU STOP AND THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU SHOULD NEXT DO?
A YES.
Q DID IT --
DID YOU THEN EXAMINE, BY THE WAY, THE
SHRUBBERY OVER THE CHAINLINK FENCE WHERE SOMEONE COULD
CONCEIVABLY HAVE CLIMBED OVER?
A I DIDN'T --
I DIDN'T FOCUS MY ATTENTION TO THE
SHRUBBERY AT THAT TIME, NO.
Q DID YOU INSPECT
IT TO SEE WHETHER IT WAS DAMAGED IN
ANY WAY CONSISTENT WITH INTRUSION?
A THAT WHOLE
AREA WAS OVERGROWN AND DIRTY. THAT WOULD
BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO MAKE THAT CONCLUSION.
Q DID YOU LOOK
FOR BROKEN TWIGS OR LEAVES THAT WERE
DAMAGED IN THE SHRUBBERY ABOVE THE CHAINLINK FENCE AT THE SITUS
WHERE THE GLOVE WAS SEEN?
A I DID NOT
LOOK, BUT I DID NOT SEE ANY OF THAT.
Q SO YOU DIDN'T
HAVE AT THAT POINT ANY INTEREST IN
WHETHER OR NOT SOMEONE HAD DROPPED THE GLOVE COMING OVER THE
FENCE?
A MY INTEREST
AT THAT POINT WAS WHO LEFT THE GLOVE AND
WHAT CONDITION THEY WERE IN.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S ANALYZE THAT.
YOU SAID "WHAT CONDITION THEY WERE IN." WHAT DO YOU
MEAN BY THAT?
A WELL, THERE
APPEARED TO BE SOMETHING ON THE GLOVE
THAT COULD BE BLOOD.
Q THAT'S RIGHT.
WHICH COULD WELL HAVE GOTTEN THERE IF
THE KILLER HAD WORN IT WHILE SLAUGHTERING NICOLE BROWN AND RONALD
GOLDMAN, CORRECT?
A POSSIBLY.
Q WELL, DID
YOU THINK OF THAT,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A I THOUGHT
OF A LOT OF THINGS AT THAT TIME.
Q DID YOU THINK
OF THAT?
A THAT ALONG
WITH OTHERS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WELL, LET'S TAKE THEM ONE AT A TIME.
YOU CONSIDERED THAT THIS GLOVE COULD
HAVE BEEN USED IN THOSE SLAYINGS AND THAT WAS OF SIGNIFICANCE,
CORRECT?
A COULD HAVE,
YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU DECIDE TO INQUIRE FURTHER AS A DETECTIVE TO
TRY TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE AS TO WHAT IT WAS AND HOW IT GOT THERE?
A AT THAT POINT
I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR A PERSON THAT
LEFT IT.
Q OKAY.
NOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PERSON THAT LEFT IT.
I'M SURE THAT AS YOU STOOD THERE LOOKING AT AN
INSTRUMENTALITY OF A BRUTAL MURDER WHOSE SCENE YOU HAD JUST
VISITED A SHORT TIME BEFORE YOU BEGAN TO THINK ABOUT THE NATURE
OF THE PERSON THAT MIGHT HAVE HAD CONTROL AND CUSTODY OF THAT
GLOVE, CORRECT?
A NO.
Q YOU DIDN'T?
A NO.
Q WELL, DID
YOU THINK A VICTIM, SOME VICTIM YOU HADN'T
DISCOVERED, MIGHT HAVE TAKEN A GLOVE FROM THE SCENE OF THE CRIME
AND DEPOSITED IT ON O.J. SIMPSON'S PROPERTY?
A SIR, I HAD
NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANYTHING AT THAT POINT.
Q DID YOU THINK
THAT?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU THINK THAT POSSIBLY SOMEONE WHO HAD BEEN
INVOLVED AS A KILLER MIGHT HAVE DEPOSITED THAT GLOVE WITTINGLY OR
UNWITTINGLY ON MR. SIMPSON'S PROPERTY?
A I DID NOT
THINK OF ANY OF THESE THINGS AT THAT TIME.
Q YOU DIDN'T
THINK OF ANY OF THESE THINGS?
A NO.
Q DID YOU THINK
THAT POSSIBLY WHOEVER PUT THAT GLOVE
THERE, IF IT WAS PUT THERE, WAS SOMEBODY DANGEROUS?
A POSSIBLY.
Q WHAT TRAINING
DO YOU HAVE ABOUT WHAT TO DO WHEN YOU
SENSE DANGER? WHAT IS YOUR FIRST OBLIGATION?
A I DON'T THINK
I UNDERSTAND THAT.
Q YOU DON'T?
A NO.
Q THE SAFETY
OF THE OFFICER, I BELIEVE YOU SAID
YESTERDAY, IS A PARAMOUNT CONSIDERATION IN POLICE WORK?
A IF YOU PHRASE
IT LIKE THAT, MY OWN SAFETY, CORRECT.
Q ALL
RIGHT.
NOW, WHAT THOUGHTS WERE YOU HAVING ABOUT YOUR SAFETY
WHEN YOU WERE LOOKING AT WHAT YOU THOUGHT MIGHT HAVE BEEN DROPPED
BY A KILLER?
A AT THAT TIME
I WAS THINKING THAT WHO IS WATCHING ME
AT THIS TIME.
Q AHA.
DID YOU HAVE ANY CONCERN AT ALL THAT YOU MIGHT
BE ATTACKED?
A POSSIBLY.
Q YOU ARE A
POLICE OFFICER STANDING THERE WITH HIS
WEAPON STICKING OUT FOR ALL TO SEE, WEREN'T YOU?
A YES.
Q ON YOUR HIP?
A YES.
Q THAT WOULD
REPRESENT IN YOUR VIEW SOME KIND OF THREAT
TO SOMEBODY WITH BLOOD ON HIS HANDS, WOULDN'T IT?
A YES.
Q YOU HAD NO
REASON TO THINK THAT WHOEVER WAS
RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT GLOVE WAS WOUNDED, DID YOU?
A YES, I DID.
Q DID YOU SEE
ANY BLOOD LEADING TO OR FROM THE GLOVE IN
ANY DIRECTION, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A NO.
Q WELL, IF THEY
WERE WOUNDED, DID YOU THINK THEY HAD
BEEN TO A DOCTOR AND GOT FIXED UP?
A I COULDN'T
SPECULATE ON THAT, SIR.
Q WELL, WHY
DID YOU THINK THEY WERE WOUNDED? YOU TELL
ME?
A SOMEONE LEAVING
THE SCENE AT BUNDY WAS BLEEDING FROM
THE LEFT SIDE OF THEIR BODY.
Q YOU ARE SURE
OF THAT?
A I'M NOT SURE,
BUT AT THAT TIME THAT WAS A CONCLUSION
THAT WE HAD MADE.
Q A CONCLUSION
THAT YOU HAD MADE.
DID YOU EVER STUDY ANYTHING ABOUT BLOOD, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A (NO AUDIBLE
RESPONSE.)
Q BLOOD AND
BLOOD SPATTER, WAS THAT PART OF YOUR COURSE
BEFORE YOU BECAME A DETECTIVE?
A BRIEFLY, YES.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU LEARN SOMETHING ABOUT READING BLOOD SPOTS TO
DETERMINE THEIR ORIGIN?
A THEIR ORIGIN,
SIR?
Q YES.
A IN OTHER WORDS,
HOW THEY --
Q HOW THEY GOT
THERE?
A IN A GENERAL
SENSE, YES.
Q FIRST THING
YOU LEARNED IS THAT A SPOT WHICH IS ROUND
HAS BEEN DROPPED FROM SOME OBJECT OR PERSON THAT IS NOT IN
MOTION, DID YOU NOT?
A THAT WOULD
BE CORRECT.
Q AND WHEN A
SPOT IS DROPPED BY SOMEONE WHO IS BLEEDING
AND MOVING, IT LEAVES A DIFFERENT SHAPE ON A HARD SURFACE, SUCH
AS THE CONCRETE OF THAT WALKWAY, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND THE SPOTS
THAT YOU SAW ON THE ONES THAT WERE
PHOTOGRAPHED FOR THIS CASE WERE ROUND, WEREN'T THEY?
A THEY APPEARED
TO BE ROUND, YES.
Q YES.
AND SO IF THIS WAS ASSOCIATED WITH A KILLER,
WHAT YOU WERE RECONSTRUCTING AND DETECTING IN YOUR OWN MIND WAS
SOMEONE LEAVING THE SCENE OF A VERY BLOODY DOUBLE ASSASSINATION
AND PERIODICALLY STOPPING AND DRIPPING AS HE WENT?
IS THAT WHAT YOU THOUGHT?
A NO.
Q WELL, YOU
KNEW THAT THEY WEREN'T DROPPED BY ANYONE
WHO WAS RUNNING, JUST FROM THE SHAPE, DIDN'T YOU?
A I'M NOT AN
EXPERT IN THAT FIELD, SO I DIDN'T KNOW
EXACTLY WHAT TRANSPIRED ON THAT WALKWAY.
Q YOU JUST HAD
SUCH TRAINING YOU TOLD
US --.
A I DIDN'T SAY
--
Q SORRY.
I HADN'T FINISHED THE QUESTION.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR --
THE COURT: WAIT.
MR. BAILEY: MAY I FINISH THE QUESTION?
THE WITNESS: ABSOLUTELY, SIR.
Q BY MR.
BAILEY: I BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU HAD ENOUGH
TRAINING TO RECOGNIZE THAT A ROUND SPOT WAS NOT MADE BY SOMETHING
IN MOTION? DIDN'T YOU SAY THAT?
A NO.
Q OH, YOU DIDN'T?
A NO.
I SAID A ROUND SPOT WAS CONSISTENT WITH SOMEONE
THAT IS NOT IN MOTION, BUT I NEVER VIEWED THOSE DROPS TO ANY MORE
EXTENT THAN TO SAY THAT THEY WERE ROUND. I NEVER WENT BACK AND
INSPECTED THEM.
Q I UNDERSTAND.
YOU WERE A DETECTIVE IN THIS CASE AND THE FIRST ONE
ON THE SCENE TO DO ANY REAL DETECTING, WEREN'T YOU?
A YES.
Q THESE WERE
POINTED OUT TO YOU BY A PATROLMAN NAMED
RISKE, RIGHT?
A YES, SIR.
Q WELL, DID
HE TAKE HIS RATHER POWERFUL FLASHLIGHT AND
STOP AT EACH DROP AND ILLUMINATE IT SO THAT YOU COULD VIEW IT?
A WE DID NOT
STOP AT EVERY DROP, NO.
Q DID YOU JUST
RUN BY AND CATCH THEM ON THE FLY? HOW
DID YOU VIEW THEM?
A HE IS EXPLAINING
THE SCENE. HE IS WALKING US THROUGH
THE SCENE. WE DID NOT STOP AND INSPECT EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE
FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME EVERY TIME.
Q LET'S BACK
UP THEN.
DO YOU NOW WISH TO SAY THAT YOU DON'T KNOW, AS OF
THAT EVENING, DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER THEY WERE ROUND OR OTHERWISE?
A I'M NOT SAYING
THAT, SIR.
I'M SAYING THEY APPEARED ROUND, BUT I AM NOT AN
EXPERT TO DETERMINE HOW OR AT WHAT HEIGHT OR AT WHAT SPEED THE
PERSON IS MOVING. I CAN'T TESTIFY TO THAT.
Q I THOUGHT
YOU SAID THAT YOU LEARNED IN SCHOOL THAT
ROUND IS IN CONSISTENT WITH MOTION PERIOD. IS THAT WHAT YOU
MEANT TO SAY?
A NO, IT ISN'T
WHAT I MEANT TO SAY.
Q OKAY.
DO YOU KNOW OR WERE YOU EVER SHOWN WHAT A BLOOD DROP
LOOKS LIKE IF IT HAS BEEN DROPPED TO A HARD SURFACE BY SOMEONE
MOVING?
A YES.
Q AND DO YOU
KNOW THAT THE FASTER A PERSON IS MOVING
THE MORE ELONGATED THE SHAPE OF THE DROP AS IT COMES TO REST?
A YES, IT WOULD
BE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, DID YOU HAVE ANY WAY TO KNOW HOW LONG THOSE
DROPS HAD BEEN ON THAT WALKWAY? THAT IS, ANY AGING IN THAT WAY?
A NO.
Q NO.
OKAY.
NOW, COMING BACK, IF WE WILL, IF WE MAY, TO BUNDY,
WAS IT NOT REALLY YOUR IDEA TO SCALE THE WALL AND GO INTO MR.
SIMPSON'S HOUSE, PREMISES?
A DETECTIVE
VANNATTER MADE A STATEMENT THAT WE SHOULD
GO IN AND HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO IT AND I SAID, "WELL, I WILL GO
OVER THE WALL."
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, IN FACT, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU
WENT TO DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND URGED UPON HIM THAT THIS WAS AN
EMERGENCY SITUATION, THAT ACTION HAD TO BE TAKEN IMMEDIATELY,
THAT THERE MIGHT BE VICTIMS BLEEDING TO DEATH INSIDE THE
PREMISES, AND YOU FELT SOMETHING HAD TO BE DONE RIGHT NOW?
ISN'T THAT WHAT HAPPENED?
A NO.
THAT WAS A CONVERSATION BETWEEN VANNATTER,
MYSELF, AND BOTH OF US EXPERIENCED THE SAME CONCERNS.
Q DID YOU SAY
TO HIM "IN MY VIEW THIS IS AN EMERGENCY
AND WE NEED TO ACT NOW"?
A YES.
Q DID YOU NOT
SAY THAT TO HIM BEFORE HE MADE ANY SUCH
STATEMENT TO YOU?
A HE WAS MAKING
SIMILAR STATEMENTS TO ME AT THE SAME
TIME IN THIS CONVERSATION.
Q AND DID YOU
VOLUNTEER TO BE THE ONE THAT HURDLED THE
WALL?
A YES.
Q ALL
RIGHT. DID YOU REALIZE, WHEN YOU HURDLED THAT
WALL, THAT THERE MIGHT SOME DAY BE A LEGAL CHALLENGE TO THE
PROPRIETY OF YOUR ACTIONS?
A NO.
Q DID YOU REALIZE,
WHEN YOU HURDLED THE WALL, THAT YOU
WERE INEXORABLY A PART OF THIS CASE FOR AS LONG AS IT MIGHT LAST?
A I DON'T THINK
I WAS THINKING ANY OF THOSE THINGS,
SIR.
Q IT DIDN'T
OCCUR TO YOU?
A NO.
Q HAD YOU RUN
ANY NUMBERS OF CARS OUT ON THE STREET,
OTHER THAN THE BRONCO, OR HAD THEY BEEN RUN BY SOMEONE TO YOUR
KNOWLEDGE?
A I MIGHT HAVE
RUN THE VEHICLE THAT WAS JUST EAST OF
THE ASHFORD GATE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
A IT MIGHT HAVE
BEEN A FOREIGN -- A FOREIGN CAR. IT
MIGHT HAVE BEEN A 280 OR A CELICA. I'M NOT SURE WHICH IT WAS.
Q OKAY.
JAPANESE CAR OF SOME KIND?
A I THINK SO.
Q WHAT DO YOU
REMEMBER ABOUT IT?
A I THINK IT
WAS DARK-COLORED AND QUITE CLUTTERED IN
THE INTERIOR, AND I SOMEWHAT REMEMBER -- I THINK IT WAS
REGISTERED SOMEWHERE IN WEST HOLLYWOOD OR HOLLYWOOD.
Q AND
WHEN YOU RAN IT THROUGH THE COMPUTER, DID IT
DISGORGE A NAME AS THE REGISTERED OWNER?
A I DON'T RECALL
THAT.
Q DO YOU REMEMBER
HEARING THE NAME
BRIAN KAELIN BEFORE YOU EVER WENT OVER THE WALL?
A NO.
I DON'T RECALL THAT, NO.
Q OKAY.
WHEN YOU WENT OVER THE WALL, AND LET THE OTHER
OFFICERS IN, YOU PROCEEDED ULTIMATELY TO KATO KAELIN'S ROOM,
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q DID YOU HEAR
ANY OF THE OTHER DETECTIVES INQUIRE OF
MR. KAELIN IF HE HAD SEEN MR. SIMPSON THAT EVENING?
A I'M NOT SURE
IF IT WAS CONVERSATION TO THAT EFFECT.
MORE LIKE "DO YOU KNOW IF MR. SIMPSON IS IN THE HOUSE OR THE MAIN
HOUSE?"
Q OKAY.
BUT YOU DID NOT HEAR ANY QUESTION ABOUT THE
WHEREABOUTS OF MR. SIMPSON AS MR. KAELIN MIGHT BE ABLE TO ATTEST
TO IT DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHEN THE OTHERS WENT TO ARNELLE'S ROOM AT KATO'S
SUGGESTION, I TAKE IT, YOU STAYED BEHIND?
A YES.
Q HAD ANYBODY
DIRECTED YOU TO STAY AND QUESTION KAELIN?
A NO.
Q THIS IS SOMETHING
YOU DECIDED TO DO ON YOUR OWN; IS
IT NOT?
A YES.
Q DID YOU GO
TO THE LEAD DETECTIVE, OR ANY OF THEM,
SINCE THEY WERE ALL YOUR SUPERIOR, AND ASK PERMISSION TO
INTERROGATE KATO KAELIN?
A NO.
Q DID YOU ASK
PERMISSION WITH ANY OF THEM TO TEST HIM
FOR SOBRIETY OR DRUG USE?
A NO.
Q DID YOU ASK
PERMISSION OF ANY OF THEM TO SEARCH HIS
PREMISES?
A NO, SIR.
Q NOW, WHEN
YOU BEGAN TO TALK TO KAELIN, YOU SAID YOU
DIDN'T KNOW WHO HE WAS?
A NO.
Q DO YOU REPRESENT
THAT YOU DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT IT
WAS HIS CAR PARKED OUTSIDE THE ASHFORD GATE?
A NO, I DID
NOT KNOW THAT.
Q DID YOU EVER
QUESTION HIM ABOUT WHETHER HE HAD AN
AUTOMOBILE NEARBY?
A I DID NOT,
NO.
Q DID YOU VIEW
HIM AS A SUSPECT?
A HE DIDN'T
APPEAR TO BE SO MUCH A SUSPECT, BUT THEN
AGAIN, I DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT HIS FUNCTION WAS AT THE HOUSE.
Q DID YOU ASK
HIM WHAT CLOTHES HE HAD WORN THAT NIGHT?
A YES.
Q DID HE SHOW
YOU?
A YES.
Q DID YOU INSPECT
THEM LOOKING FOR SIGNS THAT MIGHT IN
SOME WAY TIE HIM TO THE HOMICIDES?
A I LOOKED AT
HIS CLOTHES AND HIS SHOES, YES.
Q OKAY.
YOU TURNED HIS SHOES OVER TO LOOK AT THE SOLES TO SEE
IF THERE WAS ANY BLOOD ON OR IN BETWEEN THE RIDGES OF THE SOLES,
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q WHAT WAS THE
PURPOSE IN DOING THAT, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A TO SEE IF
THERE WAS ANY BLOOD ON THE SOLES.
Q OKAY.
NOW, IN INTERROGATING KAELIN WERE YOU WATCHING HIM
CAREFULLY TO SEE IF HE DID ANYTHING UNUSUAL OR MADE ANY LITTLE
SLIPS IN HIS TALKS WITH YOU THAT MIGHT CAPTURE YOUR INTEREST?
A WELL, MR.
KAELIN IS MR. KAELIN, AND I DIDN'T KNOW
THAT THEN, BUT HE IS RATHER DIFFERENT WHEN HE TALKS.
Q
I'M SURE THAT IS INTERESTING.
WOULD YOU TRY TO ANSWER NOW THE QUESTION I PUT TO
YOU.
A I WAS TRYING
TO. THE SPECIFIC QUESTION, SIR, ONCE
AGAIN?
Q THE SPECIFIC
QUESTION WAS WHILE YOU QUESTIONED MR.
KAELIN, OR SPOKE TO HIM, WERE YOU OBSERVING HIM FOR THE PURPOSE
OF PICKING UP ANY OF THE LITTLE SIGNALS THAT INTERROGATORS LOOK
FOR; NERVOUSNESS, CONTRADICTION, SLIPS OF THE TONGUE, THAT SORT
OF THING?
A NOT CONSCIOUSLY,
NO.
Q BY THE WAY,
HAD YOU FELT THE HOOD OF THE KAELIN
AUTOMOBILE, WHAT TURNS OUT TO BE THE KAELIN AUTOMOBILE, AS YOU
DID THE BRONCO?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SO.
Q YOU WEREN'T
CONCERNED ABOUT THE RECENT HISTORY OF
THAT VEHICLE, I TAKE IT?
A WELL, I DIDN'T
FIND ANYTHING ON THAT VEHICLE OR
ANYTHING AROUND THAT VEHICLE THAT WAS REALLY VERY SUSPICIOUS.
Q AND YOU WEREN'T
CONCERNED WHETHER IT HAD BEEN
RECENTLY DRIVEN, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS PARKED VERY CLOSE TO MR.
SIMPSON'S PREMISES; ISN'T THAT SO?
A NO.
Q NOW, IN QUESTIONING
MR. KAELIN THERE WAS IN YOUR MIND
A VERY URGENT MATTER TO WHICH YOU NEEDED AN ANSWER, WAS THERE
NOT?
A WHICH QUESTION
WAS THAT?
Q THERE WAS
SOMETHING YOU REALLY WANTED TO KNOW WHEN
YOU WENT INTO HIS ROOM; ISN'T THAT TRUE?
A NO.
Q WELL, ONE
OF THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS A DETECTIVE
CAN ASK A WITNESS OR POTENTIAL WITNESS IS DID YOU NOTICE
SOMETHING UNUSUAL, CORRECT?
A I DON'T THINK
THAT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT. IT IS A
PRETTY GENERAL STATEMENT, SIR.
Q I SAID ONE
OF THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTIONS A
DETECTIVE CAN ASK OF A POTENTIAL WITNESS IS HAVING NOTICED
ANYTHING EXTRAORDINARY OR UNUSUAL; ISN'T THAT SO?
A EXTRAORDINARY
I WOULD AGREE WITH.
Q OKAY.
NOW, AND YOU PUT THAT QUESTION TO MR. KAELIN, DIDN'T
YOU?
A YES.
Q BUT THERE
WAS ANOTHER ISSUE SO IMPORTANT THAT YOU HAD
TO CUT HIM OFF AND PUT ANOTHER QUESTION BEFORE HE COULD RESPOND,
TRUE?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
THAT IS THE SITUATION.
Q WELL, DO YOU
NORMALLY ASK SOMEBODY A QUESTION AND
THEN BEFORE THEY HAVE A FAIR CHANCE TO ANSWER YOU CUT THEM OFF
WITH ANOTHER ONE?
MS. CLARK: SOMEBODY DOES.
THE WITNESS: MR. KAELIN
WASN'T EXACTLY QUICKLY RESPONDING
TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS, AND THAT IS TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION
WHY I PROBABLY CAME UP WITH ANOTHER QUESTION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
I NOW UNDERSTAND THAT THE REASON KATO
GOT QUESTION 2 BEFORE HE ANSWERED QUESTION 1 WAS THAT HE WAS SLOW
ON THE DRAW; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q WHEN DID YOU
FIRST TELL SOMEBODY THAT, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A I WAS NEVER
ASKED THAT.
Q YOU NEVER
WERE?
A NO, SIR.
Q WELL, YOU
VOLUNTEERED THAT YOU CUT KATO OFF IN PRIOR
TESTIMONY, DIDN'T YOU?
A YES, SIR.
Q YOU DIDN'T
SAY ANYTHING ABOUT HIM BEING SLOW TO
RESPOND THEN, DID YOU?
A NO.
Q IS THAT SOMETHING
YOU RECENTLY REMEMBERED?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IS IT SOMETHING YOU SIMPLY LEFT OUT?
A NO, IT IS
SOMETHING I WASN'T ASKED.
Q WAS THERE
ANY OTHER REASON TO INTERJECT QUESTION 2
ABOUT THE BRONCO?
A IT WAS A QUESTION
THAT WE WANTED ANSWERED. I THINK
IT WAS IMPORTANT TO KNOW IF MR. SIMPSON WAS HOME.
Q WELL, IT WAS
IMPORTANT TO YOU, WASN'T IT?
A IT WAS IMPORTANT
TO ALL OF US.
Q HAD YOU BEEN
DIRECTED BY ANYBODY TO MAKE THAT INQUIRY
OF KATO KAELIN?
A NO.
Q SO I TAKE
IT NOW AT THIS POINT, HAVING BEEN TO THE
BRONCO AND HURDLED THE WALL AND INTERROGATING KAELIN, YOU VIEWED
YOURSELF AS A DETECTIVE VERY MUCH IN THE CASE?
A WELL, I'M
ALWAYS A DETECTIVE, YES.
Q IN THE SIMPSON
CASE?
A (NO AUDIBLE
RESPONSE.)
Q IS THAT YOUR
PERCEPTION OF YOURSELF?
A YES.
I WAS ASKED TO ASSIST THOSE DETECTIVES, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, MR. KAELIN TOLD YOU THAT THAT CAR NORMALLY WAS
DRIVEN BY MR. SIMPSON, CORRECT?
A YES.
I BELIEVE HE SAID IT WAS O.J.'S VEHICLE.
Q AND YOU ASKED
WHETHER HE HAD DRIVEN IT THAT NIGHT?
A I BELIEVE
I DID, YES.
Q AND MR. KAELIN
RESPONDED HE THOUGHT SO, BUT HE WASN'T
SURE?
A (NO AUDIBLE
RESPONSE.)
Q CORRECT?
A I BELIEVE
SO, YES.
Q THEN YOU GOT
BACK TO THE QUESTION OF -- ABOUT UNUSUAL
OCCURRENCES, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND THE WORD
YOU USED IN SPEAKING WITH KATO WAS
"UNUSUAL," WASN'T IT?
A YES.
Q AND NOW THAT
HE FINALLY DID GET A CHANCE TO ANSWER,
WHAT DID HE SAY?
A HE SAID AT
ABOUT 10:45 HE HEARD A CRASHING ON HIS
WALL AND HE THOUGHT THERE WAS GOING TO BE AN EARTHQUAKE. HIS
PICTURE SHOOK. AND THEN HE CONTINUED TO SAY THAT HE WENT OUT
TO
INVESTIGATE IT AND HE SAW A LIMO AT THE GATE.
Q WELL, HE NEVER
SUGGESTED TO YOU THAT HE WENT BACK
ALONG THE WALL BETWEEN THE WALL AND THE FENCE TO THE AREA OF THE
NOISE, DID HE?
A NO, SIR.
Q DID HE TELL
YOU HE STARTED TO DO THAT BEFORE MR.
SIMPSON LEFT FOR THE AIRPORT, BUT BECAUSE THE DOG WOULDN'T GO
WITH HIM HE WAS AFRAID AND CANCELLED THE INVESTIGATION? DID HE
MENTION THAT TO YOU?
A NO.
Q YOU DIDN'T
KNOW THAT AT THE TIME?
A DIDN'T KNOW
AT ANY TIME.
Q OKAY.
YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS HIS TESTIMONY IN THE
PRELIMINARY HEARING?
A NO, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU DISCUSS WITH KATO WHETHER OR NOT HE HAD EVER
HEARD SOUNDS LIKE THAT BEFORE?
A NO.
Q DID YOU DISCUSS
WITH HIM POSSIBLE CAUSES OF SUCH A
SOUND?
A NO.
Q DID YOU ASK
HIM TO RELATE IT TO ANY OTHER EXPERIENCE
SO THAT YOU MIGHT BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT COULD OR COULD NOT HAVE
CAUSED THAT DISTURBANCE?
A NO, SIR.
Q DID YOU THEN
AND THERE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, DECIDE ON
YOUR OWN TO GO OUT AND INVESTIGATE THE SOURCE OF THAT SOUND?
A I DECIDED
TO GO OUT AND TRY TO ORIENT MYSELF WITH THE
PROPERTY AND SEE WHERE THAT SOUND COULD HAVE COME FROM, YES.
Q DID YOU DECIDE
THAT YOU WOULD GO TO THE PROBABLE
SOURCE AS DESCRIBED BY MR. KAELIN BY RELATING IT TO AN AIR
CONDITIONER THAT PLAINLY STUCK THROUGH THE WALL?
A I THINK WHEN
I WENT TO THE SOUTH BORDER AND I SAW THE
PATH, I WALKED DOWN THE PATH AS A CONTINUATION OF DISCOVERING
WHERE THAT SOUND OF THAT WALL WAS LOCATED.
Q WE ARE STILL
BACK IN KATO'S ROOM.
I'M ASKING WHETHER OR NOT BEFORE YOU EVER LEFT THAT
ROOM YOU MADE A DECISION THAT YOU WOULD GO INVESTIGATE THE SOURCE
OF THE SOUND?
A I BELIEVE
WHEN I WALKED -- WHEN I WALKED HIM INTO THE
HOUSE AND I WALKED THROUGH THE HOUSE, WHEN I TOLD PHIL, "WHY
DON'T YOU TALK TO THIS GUY AT THE BAR," I THINK I HAD DECIDED TO
GO OUT AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHERE THAT SOUND CAME FROM ON THE
OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE WALL, YES.
Q AM I TO UNDERSTAND
THAT THIS WAS A DECISION MADE
WHILE WALKING?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
WHEN YOU LEFT THE ROOM YOU HADN'T MADE THE
DECISION?
A I DON'T KNOW
EXACTLY WHEN IT HAPPENED, BUT I WOULD --
TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION WOULD BE WHEN I WAS WALKING INTO
THE HOUSE, YES.
Q BY THE TIME
THAT YOU GOT TO THE HOUSE YOU HAD MADE
THE DECISION, CORRECT?
A I DIDN'T REALLY
-- I CAN'T REALLY RECOLLECT EXACTLY
AT WHAT STEP I DID, BUT I WAS WALKING HIM IN, ASKED HIM TO SIT
DOWN.
AND AS I WALKED OUT, I WALKED OUT TO TRY TO FIGURE
OUT WHERE THAT SOUND WOULD HAVE COME FROM ON THE OTHER SIDE OF
THE WALL.
SO DURING THAT PERIOD BETWEEN -- BETWEEN KAELIN'S
ROOM AND THE FRONT DOOR OF THE RESIDENCE OR TELLING VANNATTER IF
HE WOULD TALK TO THE MAN AT THE BAR, BETWEEN THAT PERIOD I DID.
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, IS IT NOT TRUE THAT AS YOU DECIDED
TO WALK OUT TO THE SOURCE OF THE NOISE YOU DECIDED TO GO ALONE?
A I WAS ALREADY
ALONE, SIR.
Q WELL, YOU
WERE WITH KAELIN WHO COULD HAVE TAKEN YOU
OUT THERE, I SUPPOSE, COULD HE NOT?
A I'M SURE HE
COULD HAVE.
Q YOU WERE WITH
DETECTIVE VANNATTER, THE LEAD, WITH
WHOM YOU NEVER DISCUSSED YOUR PLANS, CORRECT?
A NO, I WASN'T
WITH HIM. I YELLED TO HIM. HE WAS IN
THE KITCHEN.
Q YOU WERE IN
THE SAME BUILDING WITH HIM, WERE YOU NOT?
A YES.
Q YOU WERE THE
GENTLEMAN THAT HAD TO STAND AT DOROTHY
AND BUNDY FOR AN HOUR FOR LACK OF INSTRUCTION, ARE YOU NOT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU DECIDED,
WITHOUT CONFIDING IN ANYBODY, TO GO
ALONE BEHIND THAT BUILDING, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q DID IT OCCUR
TO YOU THAT MR. KAELIN MIGHT BE ABLE TO
ASSIST YOU IN POINTING OUT THE EXACT SOURCE OF THE NOISE AS HE
RECONSTRUCTED IT?
A (NO AUDIBLE
RESPONSE.)
Q DID YOU THINK
OF THAT?
A NO.
Q NEVER THOUGHT
OF IT?
A NO.
Q DID IT OCCUR
TO YOU THAT THERE MIGHT BE DANGER
LURKING OUT THERE IN THE DARKNESS IN THE VICINITY OF THE SOUTH
WALL?
A AT THAT TIME?
Q YES.
A NO.
Q THAT THOUGHT
NEVER CROSSED YOUR MIND?
A IT WASN'T
PRESENT. IT WASN'T FOREMOST IN MY MIND,
NO.
Q HAD IT UP
TO THAT POINT CROSSED YOUR MIND THAT THERE
MIGHT BE WHAT YOU CALL A SUSPECT IN THE VICINITY, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A THERE WAS
A POSSIBILITY, BUT IT SEEMED VERY REMOTE.
Q HOW DID YOU
DISCARD THAT POSSIBILITY AT THE TIME YOU
DECIDED TO MAKE THIS SOLO INVESTIGATION?
A I DIDN'T DISCARD
IT; IT JUST WASN'T FOREMOST IN MY
MIND.
Q YOU ARE TELLING
ME AS A POLICE OFFICER THAT HAVING
ONCE BEEN APPREHENSIVE ABOUT POSSIBLE PHYSICAL HARM TO YOURSELF,
YOU WERE ABLE TO TURN THAT ASIDE?
A (NO AUDIBLE
RESPONSE.)
Q IS THAT CORRECT?
A I DON'T UNDERSTAND
ABOUT THE PHYSICAL HARM, SIR.
Q WHAT CAUSED
YOUR CONCERN TO DISSIPATE, IF ANYTHING,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, ABOUT YOUR SAFETY?
A I STILL DON'T
UNDERSTAND, SIR.
Q YOU DON'T
UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION?
A NO.
AT WHAT POINT?
Q DO YOU UNDERSTAND
THAT AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO
CLIMBING THE WALL YOU EXPRESSED THE NOTION THAT THERE MIGHT BE
SUSPECTS AROUND?
DO YOU KNOW THAT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SUSPECTS ON THE PREMISES MEANS IN THIS CASE SOMEONE
WHO MIGHT BE CONNECTED WITH A DOUBLE MURDER, DOESN'T IT?
A YES.
Q THAT PERSON
SHOULD ALWAYS BE CONSIDERED BY ANY
INTELLIGENT OFFICER TO BE POTENTIALLY ARMED AND DANGEROUS; IS
THAT NOT SO?
A YES.
Q DID YOU GIVE
CONSIDERATION TO THE POSSIBLE EXISTENCE
OUT THERE IN THE SIMPSON SHADOWS OF SOMEONE WHO WAS ARMED AND
DANGEROUS?
A AT THAT POINT
IT WAS SOMEWHAT REMOTE, SINCE WE HAD
ALREADY ENTERED THE HOUSE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, HAVING ENTERED THE HOUSE SHIELDED YOU FROM ANY
DANGER BY THE SOUTH WALL? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE TELLING US?
A OF COURSE
NOT.
Q YOU UNDERSTOOD
SOMETHING UNUSUAL HAD TAKEN PLACE OUT
THERE, CORRECT?
A NO.
THAT WAS KATO'S DESCRIPTION, SOMETHING UNUSUAL.
THAT WAS WHAT HE DESCRIBED.
Q WELL, YOU
THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO GO RIGHT
OUT THERE, DIDN'T YOU?
A I THOUGHT
IT SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU NORMALLY ORDER PHIL VANNATTER AROUND?
A NO.
Q DID YOU IN
THIS CASE?
A NO.
Q DID YOU INSTRUCT
KATO KAELIN TO SIT ON A BAR STOOL?
A YES.
Q WHY DID YOU
INSTRUCT HIM TO DO THAT IN A HOUSE WHERE
YOU WERE THE GUEST AND HE WAS THE RESIDENT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES
FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR.
BAILEY: HAD YOU LEARNED BY THAT TIME THAT HE
LIVED IN THAT BUNGALOW?
A I THINK, YES,
I CONCLUDED THAT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WELL, WHY WOULD YOU INSTRUCT HIM TO SIT ON A BAR
STOOL?
A BECAUSE I
WANTED HIM TO SIT THERE.
Q WHY DID YOU
WANT HIM TO SIT THERE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A SO DETECTIVE
VANNATTER OR ANOTHER DETECTIVE COULD
TALK TO HIM.
Q THAT WOULD
TAKE CARE OF TWO OF THEM, WOULDN'T IT?
A TWO OF WHO?
Q IF YOU INSTRUCT
VANNATTER TO GO AND TALK TO KAELIN,
THAT TIES UP TWO OF THE FOUR PEOPLE THAT WERE WITH YOU IN THE
HOUSE, OR THE FIVE, DOESN'T IT, HAVING A CONVERSATION?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DO YOU UNDERSTAND MY QUESTION?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, THAT
EVERYBODY HAS GOT TO BE SOMEPLACE?
A I AGREE.
Q AND THAT ONE
PERSON CAN'T BE IN TWO PLACES?
A AGREED.
Q SO THAT IF
YOU CAUSED TWO PEOPLE TO JOIN TOGETHER IN
A CONVERSATION AT A SPECIFIC PLACE, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THEY WILL
BE AT ANY OTHER PLACE UNTIL THE CONVERSATION IS OVER?
A I WOULD AGREE
WITH THAT.
Q OKAY.
NOW, I WILL ASK YOU ONE MORE TIME.
DID YOU USE WORDS OF INSTRUCTION TO PHIL VANNATTER
TELLING HIM, WITHOUT SUGGESTING ANY SUBJECT MATTER, GO TALK TO
KAELIN?
A NOT IN THAT
MANNER, BUT YES, I DID.
Q ALL RIGHT.
YOU HAD ALREADY FORMULATED A PLAN THAT YOU WERE GOING
TO LOOK OUT BEHIND THE BUILDING IN THE DARKNESS FOR SOMETHING,
CORRECT?
A NO.
Q YOU HAD NOT?
A I DIDN'T EVEN
KNOW IF THAT WAS ACCESSIBLE FROM THE
FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE.
Q DIDN'T YOU
TELL US THAT AS YOU WALKED FROM THE
BUNGALOW TO THE HOUSE YOU HAD MADE A DECISION THAT YOU WOULD GO
LOOK AT THE SOURCE OF THE NOISE?
A I WASN'T EVEN
--
Q I'M SORRY,
DID YOU SAY THAT?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
WELL, THEN AT THE TIME YOU SAID, "PHIL, GO TALK TO
MR. KAELIN," YOU WERE ON YOUR WAY, WEREN'T YOU?
A YES.
Q YOU DIDN'T
HESITATE AT ALL? ONCE THAT UTTERANCE WAS
OUT OF YOUR MOUTH YOU KEPT RIGHT ON MOVING?
A YES.
Q YOU SAW PHILLIPS
ON THE TELEPHONE?
A YES, I BELIEVE
SO.
Q AND DID YOU
SEE DETECTIVE LANGE?
A I DON'T RECALL
IF I SAW HIM.
Q WAS HE IN
THE PROXIMITY OF ARNELLE SIMPSON APPARENTLY
ENGAGED IN CONVERSATION OF SOME SORT?
A HE COULD HAVE
BEEN.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THAT IS FIVE PEOPLE IN THE HOUSE,
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AFTER YOU
LEAVE? ALL ENGAGED IN DOING SOMETHING,
RIGHT?
A YES.
Q NOW, TAKE
US BACK, IF YOU WILL, TO YOUR INITIAL
TRAINING ABOUT THE BUDDY SYSTEM, BOTH MILITARY AND POLICE.
DID YOU NOT SAY THAT IT IS AXIOMATIC THAT YOU DON'T
GO IN ALONE IF DANGER COULD POSSIBLY BE PRESENT?
A WELL, CONSIDERING
CERTAIN SITUATIONS, THAT WOULD BE
DESIRABLE, YES.
Q LET'S LOOK
AT THIS SITUATION.
YOU WERE INVESTIGATING, WHAT YOU HAVE CALLED FROM
YOUR OWN TESTIMONY, AN EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT HOMICIDE, WEREN'T
YOU?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
PROBABLY THE MOST SERIOUS THAT YOU HAD
ENCOUNTERED AMONG THE ELEVEN ON WHICH YOU HAD WORKED? IS THAT
A
FAIR STATEMENT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
YOU HAD SEEN EVIDENCE THAT SOMEBODY, EITHER PSYCHOTIC
OR PSYCHOPATHIC, HAD BRUTALIZED TWO HUMAN BODIES WITH SOMETHING,
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU KNEW
THAT THAT SOMEONE COULD BE UNPREDICTABLE
AND DEADLY IF YOU WERE TO ENCOUNTER THEM, CORRECT?
A I DON'T THINK
WE KNEW ANYTHING ABOUT THE KILLER AT
THAT TIME, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT THEY WOULD BE DANGEROUS,
CONSIDERING THE SCENE.
Q WOULDN'T YOU
DRAW AN INFERENCE THAT SOMEBODY CAPABLE
OF THAT KIND OF MURDER MIGHT NOT HESITATE TO TAKE YOU DOWN?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
SO AS YOU LEAVE THE BUILDING YOU LEFT THREE GUNS
BEHIND, DIDN'T YOU?
A THREE DETECTIVES,
YES.
Q THREE DETECTIVES,
EACH OF WHOM WAS CARRYING THE SAME
SIDEARM THAT YOU ARE WEARING TODAY, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q THAT IS A
GLOCK AUTOMATIC PISTOL, IS IT?
A NO.
Q WHAT IS IT?
A I BELIEVE
ALL THREE OF THOSE DETECTIVES, ONE WAS
CARRYING A TWO-INCH .38 MODEL 36, ONE WAS CARRYING A SMITH AND
WESSON STAINLESS STEEL, AND DETECTIVE VANNATTER, I DON'T RECALL
WHAT HE WAS CARRYING. I WAS CARRYING A BERETTA.
Q ALL AUTOMATIC?
A YES.
Q EACH CAPABLE
OF FIRING SEVERAL SHOTS IN QUICK
SUCCESSION?
A YES.
Q NOW, HAD YOU
THOUGHT ABOUT ASKING ONE OF THOSE
FELLOWS TO GO WITH YOU, MAYBE SOMEONE WHO HAD A GROWN-UP
FLASHLIGHT?
A NO.
Q YOU NEVER
CONSIDERED THAT FOR A MOMENT?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, I WILL ASK YOU ONCE AGAIN: WAS IT NOT YOUR
PURPOSE TO BE IN THE AREA ALONG THE SOUTH WALL ALONE?
A NO, IT WASN'T.
Q IT JUST WORKED
OUT THAT WAY? IS THAT IT?
A I DIDN'T EVEN
KNOW THE SOUTH WALL WAS ACCESSIBLE.
Q NO.
IT JUST WORKED OUT THAT YOU LEFT THE HOUSE AND
MADE YOUR INVESTIGATION FOR FIFTEEN MINUTES OR MORE ALONE?
A THAT IS HOW
IT WORKED OUT.
Q THAT IS HOW
IT WORKED OUT.
YOU NOW WALK BACK THE PATHWAY TOWARD WHAT YOU THINK
WILL BE THE WALL WITH THE AIR CONDITIONER, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AT THAT POINT
YOU ARE SOLELY EXPECTING TO INQUIRE
INTO POSSIBLE SOURCES OF SOMETHING THAT THUMPED THE WALL AND MADE
A PICTURE SHAKE?
A THERE WAS
A POSSIBILITY, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU PROCEED SLOWLY AND WITH SOME CAUTION INTO
THIS AREA?
A YES.
Q HOW FAR AHEAD
OF YOU WOULD THIS LITTLE TEENY
FLASHLIGHT ILLUMINATE THE WAY?
A FIVE, SIX
FEET.
Q OKAY.
BUT IT WAS BRIGHT ENOUGH TO ALERT ANYONE IN THAT
DARKNESS THAT SOMEBODY WAS COMING CARRYING A LIGHT, WASN'T IT?
A YES, IT WOULD.
Q YOU COULD
SEE IT FROM QUITE A DISTANCE IF IT WERE
POINTED AT YOU?
A YES.
Q SO YOU PROCEED
ALONG THE WALKWAY PAUSING TO LOOK AT
THE STRUCTURE, WHAT YOU CALLED INDENTATIONS?
A YES.
Q AND YOU COME
UPON A GLOVE?
A EVENTUALLY,
YES.
Q YOU TOLD US
THAT YOU LEARNED IN SCHOOL THAT
FOOTPRINTS NOT VISIBLE TO YOU MIGHT BE RAISED BY A CRIMINALIST,
TRUE?
A THAT IS POSSIBLE,
YES.
Q WHEN YOU SAW
THE GLOVE DID IT OCCUR TO YOU THAT THERE
COULD BE IN THAT AREA, EITHER WHERE YOU HAD JUST GONE OR IN THE
OTHER DIRECTION, SOME FOOTPRINTS THAT COULD HELP IDENTIFY THE
PERSON WHO MAY HAVE DROPPED IT THERE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR.
HONOR, THIS IS ASKED AND
ANSWERED.
THE COURT: WE HAVE.
MR. BAILEY: WELL, I WOULD LIKE
TO PURSUE IT; FOUNDATIONAL.
THE COURT: BRIEFLY. BRIEFLY.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID IT OCCUR TO YOU?
A THAT WASN'T
ON MY MIND AT THAT TIME, NO.
Q DID IT OCCUR
TO YOU THAT IF YOU WALKED BACK AND FORTH
YOU MIGHT DAMAGE ANY EXISTING FOOTPRINT EVIDENCE IN THE LEAVES?
MS. CLARK: ASKED AND ANSWERED,
YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. WE
HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS. THIS IS
THE THIRD TIME WE HAVE BEEN ON IT.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
I ASKED YOU YESTERDAY WHETHER OR NOT
YOU COULD HAVE, HAD YOU CHOSEN TO DO SO, TAKEN THE DETECTIVES
ALONGSIDE THE CHAINLINK FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE AND SHOWN THEM
THE GLOVE BY SHINING YOUR LIGHT THROUGH IT.
COULD YOU HAVE DONE THAT?
MS. CLARK: AGAIN, ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE WITNESS: I DON'T THINK WE
COULD HAVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. GO
AHEAD AND ANSWER THE QUESTION.
SORRY.
THE WITNESS: I DON'T THINK ANY
-- ANY OF THE DETECTIVES,
INCLUDING MYSELF, COULD SEE IT THAT WELL FROM THAT LOCATION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU MAKE ANY EFFORT TO DO THAT
BEFORE WALKING OVER THE FOOT PATH?
A NO.
Q DID YOU EVER
GO DOWN THE CHAINLINK FENCE ON ITS SOUTH
SIDE?
A ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF THAT RESIDENCE, YES.
Q NO, OF THE
FENCE SO THAT YOU COULD LOOK BACK THROUGH
IT TO THE SIMPSON PROPERTY?
A YES.
Q YOU DID?
A YES.
Q WHEN DID YOU
DO THAT? THIS IS OFF THE SIMPSON
PROPERTY I'M TALKING ABOUT NOW.
A YES, SIR.
Q YOU DID WALK
DOWN TO THE LITTLE
GARAGE THAT IS THE HOME KNOW KNOWN TO BE OCCUPIED
BY MISS LOPEZ?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
HOW FAR DOWN DID YOU GO?
A I WENT DOWN
ALONG THE CHAINLINK FENCE, ALONG THE
WHOLE SOUTH BORDER OF THE SIMPSON RESIDENCE AND THAT RESIDENCE TO
THEIR NORTH BORDER, WHICH WOULD BE THE SAME PROPERTY LINE.
I WALKED TO THE BACKYARD. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING OR
ANY EXPOSED AREAS. AND I WALKED BACK TOWARDS THE CYCLONE FENCE
BY THE BUILDING.
Q WHEN WAS THIS?
A AFTER I RETURNED
FROM BUNDY.
Q THIS IS IN
DAYLIGHT?
A YES.
Q BUT DID YOU
EVER DO THAT PRIOR TO RUNNING THE
DETECTIVES DOWN THE PATH TO LOOK AT THE GLOVE?
A NO.
Q DID
YOU NOTICE THAT WHEN YOU SAW THE GLOVE THERE WAS
AN OBJECT EQUIDISTANT FROM THE FENCE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE
FENCE THAT WAS VERY PLAINLY VISIBLE THROUGH IT?
A YES.
Q SO THAT PRESUMABLY
IF YOU HAD CHOSEN TO DO IT YOU
COULD HAVE HAD THE DETECTIVE LOOK THROUGH THE FENCE AND HAD THE
SAME VANTAGE POINTS WITH RESPECT TO THE GLOVE, COULDN'T YOU?
A NO.
Q COULD NOT?
A NO.
Q WHAT IS THE
DIFFERENCE?
A IT WAS VERY
OVERGROWN, VERY DIRTY. THE LEAVES WERE
VERY THICK IN THE FLOWER BED AREA ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE.
IT WAS VERY HARD TO EVEN GET IN THERE.
I PERSONALLY TRIED TO GET INTO THAT AREA AND IT WAS
VERY DIFFICULT, VERY DIRTY.
Q COULD YOU
DO THAT?
A NOT BY CHOICE.
Q YOU MEAN IT
WAS INCONVENIENT?
A NO, IT WAS
UNNECESSARY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IN ANY EVENT, YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE GLOVE AND
ASSOCIATING IT WITH THE KILLER AND NO ONE ELSE, CORRECT?
A I DIDN'T
KNOW THAT, BUT I THINK I WAS LEANING
TOWARDS THAT, YES.
Q WELL, YOU
CERTAINLY DIDN'T THINK A VICTIM HAD
TRAIPSED OVER THERE AND DROPPED THAT GLOVE THERE, DID YOU?
A I DON'T KNOW,
SIR.
Q DID YOU EVER
FOR ONE MINUTE,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHILE LOOKING AT THAT GLOVE, THINK, GEE, SOME
VICTIM MAY HAVE DROPPED THIS HERE?
A I DIDN'T KNOW
ANYTHING THAT THE EVIDENCE --
Q I ASKED YOU
WHETHER OR NOT YOU THOUGHT FOR EVEN AN
INSTANT THAT THAT MIGHT BE THE PRODUCT OF A VICTIM'S TRAVELS?
A I CAN'T SAY
A HUNDRED PERCENT THAT IT WOULD BE A
SUSPECT, SO THERE IS A SMALL PERCENTAGE THAT I SAID IT IS A
POSSIBILITY.
Q WELL, WHAT
IS THE RATIO? 99 TO 1?
A I WOULD PROBABLY
LEAN 75/25 WITH A SUSPECT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, YOU THEN PROCEEDED DOWN A DARKENED AREA WHICH
YOU NOW SAY HAD COBWEBS AT LEAST AT THE UPPER SECTION?
A YES.
Q WHEN YOU ORIGINALLY
DESCRIBED THIS VENTURE, YOU
DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE COBWEBS BEING ONLY AT THE UPPER
PART OF THE WALL, DID YOU?
A I THINK THAT
IS THE ONLY PLACE I FELT THEM, SO I
WOULDN'T HAVE GONE INTO ANYTHING LOWER.
Q THAT WASN'T
MY QUESTION.
MY QUESTION WAS, WHEN YOU EARLIER DESCRIBED THIS IN
JULY, YOU DIDN'T MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT THE LOCATION OF THE
COBWEBS, OTHER THAN BEING EAST OF THE POINT WHERE THE GLOVE WAS,
CORRECT?
A I THINK THAT'S
CORRECT, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WOULD YOU REVIEW WITH US, PLEASE, WHAT YOU DID
FOR THE FIFTEEN MINUTES -- NOW SEVEN AFTER 11:00 -- FOR THE
FIFTEEN MINUTES THAT YOU STAYED OUT THERE ALONE AFTER YOUR
DISCOVERY AND BEFORE YOU SOUGHT TO BRING IT TO THE ATTENTION OF
ANYONE?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
I'M SURE A LOT HAPPENED IN FIFTEEN MINUTES AND I
WOULD LIKE YOU TO DESCRIBE EVERY DETAIL, IF YOU CAN.
A I WALKED SLOWLY
DOWN THE PATHWAY GOING EAST TO THAT
POTTING OR THAT LARGE PLANT AREA THAT IS PROBABLY 25-FOOT SQUARE.
Q HOW LONG DID
THAT TAKE?
A THAT WAS PROBABLY
SEVERAL MINUTES BACK THERE BECAUSE
IT IS VERY OVERGROWN. I TRIED TO SEE FROM THE EAST PROPERTY,
IF
THERE WAS A FENCE. IT WAS VERY OVERGROWN. I'M NOT SURE
IF IT
WAS BUSHES OR IVY. I LOOKED IN THAT AREA, LOOKED FOR ANY
EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING THAT HAD BEEN DROPPED OR ANY BLOOD EVIDENCE.
Q WHERE DID
YOU LOOK?
A ON THE GROUND,
ON THE WALLS, THE PLANTS. I RETURNED
BACK WESTBOUND ON THE PATH.
Q WAIT JUST
A MINUTE. HOW MUCH OF YOUR FIFTEEN MINUTES
WAS SPENT BACK IN THE SMALL YARD THAT YOU VIEWED AS A SITUS FOR
POTTING PLANTS?
A SEVERAL MINUTES,
PROBABLY MORE THAN FIVE.
Q SEVERAL MOMENTS
HAS NO REAL DEFINITIVE MEANING.
COULD YOU PLEASE USE MINUTES OR SECONDS AND MINUTES TO DESCRIBE
EACH STEP THAT YOU TOOK.
HOW MANY MINUTES WERE YOU PRESENT ON THE FAR SIDE OR
EAST SIDE BETWEEN THE ALLEYWAY BETWEEN THE FENCE AND THE
BUILDING?
A TALKING ABOUT
THE PATHWAY, SIR?
Q YOU HAVE WALKED
HOW MANY FEET FROM THE GLOVE TO THE
END OF THE BUILDING?
A 75.
Q WELL, IF THE
NORMAL WALKING RATE IS 350 FEET A
MINUTE, WHAT WOULD YOU THINK YOUR RATE WAS AT THAT TIME THAT IT
TOOK YOU SEVERAL MINUTES TO GO 75 FEET?
A I DIDN'T TESTIFY
TO THAT, SIR.
Q I THINK YOU
JUST SAID IT TOOK SEVERAL MINUTES TO GET
TO THE END OF THE BUILDING A FEW MOMENTS AGO, DID YOU NOT?
A NO, I DID
NOT.
Q TELL ME NOW
HOW LONG DID IT TAKE?
A I JUST WALKED
TO THE END OF THE BUILDING AND I SPENT
SEVERAL MINUTES BACK IN THAT AREA.
Q OKAY.
A AT THE END
OF THE BUNGALOWS.
Q ONCE AGAIN,
WOULD YOU TRY TO HELP US AVOID THE USE OF
THE WORD "SEVERAL" WHICH CAN MEAN SEVERAL THINGS TO DIFFERENT
PEOPLE.
HOW MANY MINUTES WAS IT FROM THE DEPARTURE OF THE
GLOVE FROM THE TIME YOU LEFT THE SMALL YARD AT THE BACK OF THE
BUILDING?
A FIVE MINUTES.
Q YOU SPENT
FIVE MINUTE THERE LOOKING AROUND WITH YOUR
FLASHLIGHT?
A APPROXIMATELY.
Q YOU LOOKED
ON THE WALL, THE GROUND, YOU LOOKED FOR
BLOOD AND WHAT ELSE?
A ANYTHING THAT
LOOKED OUT OF PLACE OR SOMETHING THAT
DIDN'T BELONG.
Q WELL, IF THE
GLOVE WAS DROPPED BY THE KILLER, WHY
WERE YOU BACK AT THE WALL LOOKING FOR BLOOD?
A FIRST I WAS
LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY THAT MIGHT HAVE
COLLAPSED OR LEFT THE GLOVE, BUT I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING OBVIOUS IN
THAT AREA.
Q
OKAY.
FIVE MINUTES IS ABOUT WHAT IT TOOK TO INVESTIGATE
THAT LITTLE YARD?
A APPROXIMATELY.
Q OKAY.
WHAT DID YOU NEXT DO?
A WALKED BACK
WESTBOUND ON THE PATH.
Q TO WHERE?
A TO THE AIR
CONDITIONER. I LOOKED AROUND THAT AREA.
Q HOW LONG DID
YOU SPEND LOOKING AROUND THE AREA OF THE
AIR CONDITIONER?
A I WOULD SAY
A COUPLE MINUTES, BUT I HAD TO BRING IT
DOWN TO MINUTES, TWO OR THREE MINUTES.
Q TWO OR THREE
MINUTES. TELL US WHAT YOU DID DURING
THAT PERIOD TO INSPECT THE AIR CONDITIONER AND IT SURROUNDINGS?
WHAT DID YOU LOOK AT?
A I LOOKED AT
THE AIR CONDITIONER TO SEE IF THERE WAS
ANYTHING DISTURBED, ANY BLOOD, ANYTHING LEFT THERE.
I SHINED MY LIGHT ON THE BLUE PAPER OBJECT ON THE
OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE. I LOOKED IN THAT AREA. I STEPPED
PAST
THAT AREA AND THEN WENT AROUND WHERE THE INDENTATION WAS FARTHER
WEST.
Q UH-HUH.
AND HOW LONG DID YOU SPEND THERE?
A PROBABLY MORE
TIME THAN I DID BACK IN THE AREA WITH
--
Q IN MINUTES?
A (NO AUDIBLE
RESPONSE.)
Q IN MINUTES,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A I'M TRYING
TO EXPLAIN, SIR. PROBABLY MORE IN THAT
AREA THAN IN THE POTTING AREA, SO I WOULD PROBABLY SAY IN EXCESS
OF FIVE MINUTES, MAYBE AS MANY AS SEVEN OR EIGHT MINUTES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHAT DID YOU DO BETWEEN FIVE AND SEVEN MINUTES BY THE
INDENTATION AREA, AS YOU CALL IT, TO COMPLETE YOUR INVESTIGATION?
A WELL, I BELIEVE
THERE IS AN ELECTRICAL BOX THERE AND
THERE SEEMS TO BE -- I THINK THERE IS AN ENTRY TO THE UNDERNEATH
OF THE HOUSE. I OPENED THAT. I TRIED TO LOOK IN THERE.
IT WAS
VERY DIFFICULT WITH MY FLASHLIGHT. IT WASN'T VERY POWERFUL.
I DECIDED NOT TO GO ANY FURTHER. I DIDN'T SEE ANY
EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING AT THE ENTRY. THE VOLTAGE BOX, I LOOKED IN
THAT. I LOOKED INTO THAT AREA FOR ANY TYPE OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
AND I SAW NONE, SO I RETURNED TO THE HOUSE.
Q WHY WERE YOU
LOOKING IN THE VOLTAGE BOX AT THAT
POINT?
A I DON'T KNOW,
SIR. I WAS LOOKING FOR ANY AREA THAT
COULD HAVE HOUSED SOMETHING OR SOMEBODY.
Q THE VOLTAGE
BOX, YOU THOUGHT THERE MIGHT BE SOMEBODY
IN IT?
A IT WAS
A VERY LARGE VOLTAGE BOX. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT
WAS --
Q THAT IS WHY
YOU OPENED IT?
A YES.
Q NOBODY THERE?
A NO.
Q DID YOU TRY
TO GO INTO THE DOOR THAT IS ACCESSIBLE
FROM THE FOOT PATH?
A WHICH DOOR
IS THAT?
Q ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF THE HOUSE. DID YOU NOTICE A
DOOR THERE IN YOUR 15-MINUTE INVESTIGATION?
A I NOTICED
ONE ON THE GARAGE.
Q DID YOU NOTICE
ANY DOOR THAT WOULD LEAD INTO THE
HOUSE?
A I DON'T RECALL
IF THERE WAS ONE THERE, NO.
Q DID YOU TRY
THE DOOR THAT YOU DID SEE TO SEE IF IT
WOULD OPEN?
A NO.
Q YOU WEREN'T
INTERESTED IN WHETHER THE PERSON WHO
DROPPED THE GLOVE MIGHT HAVE USED THAT DOOR FOR EGRESS?
A I JUST DIDN'T
TRY THE DOOR. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE
DOOR ON THE GARAGE. I DON'T RECALL THE OTHER DOOR.
Q OKAY.
BUT YOU DID SPEND, BY YOUR OWN ESTIMATE, FIFTEEN
MINUTES LOOKING AROUND BEFORE NOTIFYING YOUR SUPERIORS OF WHAT
COULD BE A VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE, TRUE?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, IT IS APPARENT, FROM THE WAY YOU HAVE DESCRIBED
YOUR ACTIONS BACK THERE, THAT YOU HAD NOT THE SLIGHTEST CONCERN
FOR YOUR OWN SAFETY; IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?
A NO.
Q WELL, YOU
DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO PROTECT IT, DID YOU?
A YES.
Q WHAT?
A I'M CAPABLE
OF PROTECTING MYSELF. ONCE I WAS
COMMITTED I REALLY HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO GO FORWARD.
Q YOU DIDN'T
HAVE THE OPTION, HAVING DISCOVERED WHAT
COULD WELL HAVE BEEN THE DEPOSIT, WITTINGLY OR OTHERWISE, OF A
DANGEROUS KILLER, TO GO BACK AND GET SOME HELP?
THAT OPTION WASN'T THERE?
A THE OPTION
WAS THERE.
Q WHY DID YOU
DECIDE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, THAT THERE WAS
NO NEED TO GO GET ONE OF THE GUNS THAT WAS IN THE HOUSE TO
ACCOMPANY YOU?
A I DON'T THINK
IT WAS A NEED. I THINK IT WAS A
JUDGMENT CALL AT THAT TIME.
Q IT WAS
A JUDGMENT CALL, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, BASED ON
THE FACT THAT YOU WELL KNEW THERE WAS NO CAUSE FOR CONCERN; ISN'T
THAT SO?
A NO, THAT IS
NOT SO.
Q DO YOU ORDINARILY
CONDUCT INVESTIGATIONS OF WHAT
COULD BE A DANGEROUS NATURE IN THIS FASHION?
A SOMETIMES.
Q AND YOU DO
NOT PARTAKE OF THE ASSISTANCE OF YOUR MORE
EXPERIENCED COLLEAGUES WHEN THEY ARE AVAILABLE, CORRECT?
A IF THEY ARE
IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE, OF COURSE I WOULD.
Q WELL, IMMEDIATELY
AVAILABLE. WOULD YOU SAY WITHIN
THIRTY SECONDS' TIME SATISFIES YOUR DEFINITION OF IMMEDIACY?
A AT THAT TIME,
NO.
Q COULD YOU
NOT HAVE GONE FROM THAT GLOVE TO THE FRONT
DOOR OR THE KITCHEN IN LESS THAN A MINUTE, VERY, VERY EASILY THAT
NIGHT, IF YOU HAD CHOSEN TO DO SO?
A YES, I COULD
HAVE.
Q OKAY.
THE DECISION NOT TO DO SO WAS YOURS, WAS IT NOT?
A YES, IT WAS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU DO ANYTHING ELSE DURING THAT 15-MINUTE PERIOD
THAT YOU HAVE NOT YET DESCRIBED TO US?
A NO.
Q IN THE STUDIES
OF BLOOD THAT YOU HAD IN THE SCHOOL
WHERE YOU LEARNED ABOUT THE ROUND DROPS, DID YOU LEARN ANY OF THE
OTHER PROPERTIES OF BLOOD THAT MIGHT BE OF INTEREST TO A
DETECTIVE, PARTICULARLY ONE IN HOMICIDE CASES?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
THE SPECIFICS YOU ARE ASKING. I
DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE ASKING, SIR.
Q WHAT HAPPENS
TO BLOOD WHEN IT LEAVES THE BODY AND IS
ON SOME SURFACE AND IS EXPOSED TO AIR?
A I WOULD ASSUME
THAT IT WOULD COAGULATE.
Q AND THEN?
A DRY.
Q THE MOISTURE
THAT IS PART OF THE BLOOD EVAPORATES IN
TIME, DOES IT NOT?
A YES.
Q WHAT DID YOU
LEARN, IF ANYTHING, ABOUT THE RATE AT
WHICH BLOOD DRIES AT SIXTY DEGREES FAHRENHEIT, AS IT WAS THAT
NIGHT, BY YOUR OWN STATEMENT?
A I DON'T RECALL
ANYTHING IN THAT AREA.
Q DID YOU EVER
LEARN ANY PARAMETERS OR FACTS ABOUT THE
DRYING OF BLOOD?
A NOT THAT I
RECALL, NO.
Q WOULD YOU
NOT AGREE, FROM YOUR OWN HUMAN EXPERIENCE,
QUITE APART FROM WHAT YOU LEARNED IN DETECTIVE SCHOOL, THAT THE
LONGER THE BLOOD IS EXPOSED, THE MORE LIKELY IT IS THAT IT WILL
BE DRIED?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHEN YOU FIRST SAW THE GLOVE,
DID YOU ASSOCIATE IT WITH THE NOISE THAT KATO HAD HEARD OR SAID
THAT HE HEARD AT 10:45 P.M.?
A I BELIEVE
WITH THE LOCATION OF THE AIR CONDITIONER, I
THOUGHT YES.
Q DID YOU THINK
THAT THAT NOISE MIGHT SOMEHOW HAVE BEEN
TIED IN WITH THE EVENT THAT CAUSED THAT GLOVE TO BE THERE?
A I THOUGHT
IT COULD HAVE BEEN, YES.
Q PERHAPS SOMEONE
WAS BACK THERE UNFAMILIAR WITH THE
AREA AND BUMPED INTO THE WALL AND DROPPED THE GLOVE?
A THAT WOULD
BE ONE CONCLUSION, YES.
Q WELL, DID
YOU THINK ABOUT THAT?
A I BELIEVE
THAT SOMEONE OBVIOUSLY HAD LEFT IT THERE.
Q DID YOU THINK
THAT THAT MIGHT BE A PERSON BUMPING THE
WALL WHO DROPPED THE GLOVE?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO THAT YOU THEN HAD A POSSIBLE TIME PIN OF THE EVENT
ITSELF? IF THE NOISE AND THE DEPOSIT OF THE GLOVE OCCURRED
TOGETHER, THEN THIS HAD BEEN THERE SINCE QUARTER OF 11:00, HADN'T
IT?
A YES, SIR.
Q YOU WERE THERE
AT 6:15, WEREN'T YOU?
A APPROXIMATELY,
YES.
Q THAT IS SEVEN
AND A HALF HOURS, ISN'T IT?
A YES.
Q THAT IS ENOUGH
FOR BLOOD TO DRY, ISN'T IT?
A UNDER CERTAIN
CONDITIONS, YES, I'M SURE IT WOULD BE.
Q UNLESS IT
IS ENCASED IN PLASTIC OR RUBBER AND
EVAPORATION IS STOPPED, WOULDN'T YOU AGREE?
A NO.
Q DIDN'T IT
SEEM STRANGE TO YOU THAT AFTER SEVEN AND A
HALF HOURS THAT GLOVE STILL SHOWED MOIST STICKY BLOOD, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A NO.
I KNEW NOTHING AT THAT TIME WHEN IT WAS
DEPOSITED OR LEFT THERE.
Q YOU DIDN'T?
A NO.
Q IS THIS THE
FIRST TIME TODAY THAT ANYONE HAS BROUGHT
TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT APPARENT ANOMALY?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE
AND CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
IS IT THE FIRST TIME TODAY THAT YOU HAVE THOUGHT
ABOUT THE WET BLOOD ON THE GLOVE WHEN YOU SAW IT AT 6:15?
THE COURT: THAT ASSUMES FACTS
NOT IN EVIDENCE. THAT IS
NOT THE TESTIMONY.
MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY?
THE COURT: THAT WASN'T THE TESTIMONY.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WHEN DID YOU FIND THE GLOVE?
A THE GLOVE
ON ROCKINGHAM?
Q YES.
A AT APPROXIMATELY
SOMETIME BETWEEN 6:05, 6:10, 6:15.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, IS TODAY THE FIRST TIME THAT ANYONE HAS BROUGHT
TO YOUR ATTENTION POSSIBLE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PRESENCE OF MOIST
OR STICKY BLOOD ON THE GLOVE AT THAT TIME ON THAT DAY?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
NO ONE HAS EVER DISCUSSED THIS WITH YOU BEFORE, I
TAKE IT?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU KNOW, BY THE WAY, WHEN YOU WERE BACK THERE
DURING YOUR 15-MINUTE INVESTIGATION, THAT YOU APPARENTLY MISSED A
DOOR THAT GOES INTO THE LAUNDRY ROOM OF THE HOUSE?
A NO.
Q ARE YOU LEARNING
FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY THAT SUCH A
DOOR EXISTED THAT MORNING?
A I HAVE SEEN
SCHEMATICS THAT I BELIEVE THERE IS A DOOR
SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE GARAGE AND THE AIR CONDITIONER, BUT I DID
NOT REMEMBER SEEING IT AT THAT TIME.
Q OKAY.
IN OTHER WORDS, AS YOU MADE YOUR INQUIRY OF THE
INDENTATIONS, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A DOOR THERE THAT YOU NEVER
SAW?
A POSSIBLY,
YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT THE FIVE TO SEVEN-MINUTE
INQUIRY THAT YOU MADE IN THAT AREA, INCLUDING AN ELECTRICAL BOX,
WAS SOMEWHAT CURSORY, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A ABSOLUTELY,
SIR.
Q OKAY.
HAD YOU -- BY THE WAY, DID YOU SEE ANY STEPS BACK
THERE LEADING SOMEWHERE?
A ON THE PATH,
SIR?
Q ADJACENT TO
IT?
A THERE MIGHT
HAVE BEEN TWO STEPS BY THE GARAGE DOOR.
Q ANYWHERE ELSE?
A I DON'T RECALL.
Q DO YOU KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE STEPS THAT LEAD
UP TO THE LAUNDRY ROOM DOOR?
A I CAN'T EVEN
REMEMBER VISUALIZING THE DOOR, SO I
COULDN'T TELL YOU.
Q IF THERE WERE,
IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT IN YOUR FIVE TO
SEVEN-MINUTE INQUIRY IN THAT AREA, YOU NEVER NOTICED THEM?
A THAT WOULD
BE FAIR TO SAY.
Q OKAY.
NOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT AT NO TIME THAT NIGHT
DID YOU INQUIRE AS TO THE WHEREABOUTS OF MR. SIMPSON DURING THE
PRECEDING SIX OR EIGHT HOURS?
A WELL, I HAD
HEARD, BUT I DIDN'T DO MUCH INQUIRING,
NO.
Q YOU NEVER
INQUIRED OF KATO?
A I'M SORRY?
Q YOU NEVER
INQUIRED OF KATO?
A THAT MORNING
OR THAT AFTERNOON?
Q NO, THAT MORNING?
A I NEVER TALKED
TO MR. KAELIN EVER AGAIN.
Q NO, I'M TALKING
ABOUT THE TIME THAT YOU WERE IN HIS
BUNGALOW QUESTIONING HIM? YOU NEVER PUT THE QUESTION TO HIM
ABOUT MR. SIMPSON?
A I'M SORRY,
I DON'T UNDERSTAND. MR. SIMPSON WHAT?
Q DID YOU EVER
ASK KATO IF HE KNEW WHERE MR. SIMPSON
HAD BEEN THE PRIOR EVENING?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SO, NO.
Q OKAY.
AND WHEN HE TOLD YOU ABOUT SEEING A LIMO, DID YOU
INFER OR INQUIRE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS TO TAKE MR.
SIMPSON SOMEWHERE?
A NO, I DIDN'T.
Q DID YOU LEARN
AT SOME POINT THAT MR. PHILLIPS,
DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, HAD REACHED HIM BY TELEPHONE IN CHICAGO?
A YES, LATER
IN THE MORNING I DID.
Q WHEN WAS THAT?
A LATER IN THE
MORNING, MAYBE AN HOUR LATER, A HALF
HOUR.
Q DID YOU LEARN
FROM OTHER WITNESSES IN THE COURSE OF
THE DAY THAT HE HAD LEFT THE PROPERTY AT AROUND 11:00 TO GO TO
THE AIRPORT?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
I HEARD A TIMELINE THAT DAY ABOUT
WHEN HE LEFT.
DETECTIVE VANNATTER WAS AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY AND
DETECTIVE LANGE WAS ON BUNDY, SO I DIDN'T TALK TO ANYONE EXCEPT
FOR PHILLIPS.
HE MIGHT HAVE MENTIONED WHEN HIS FLIGHT LEFT, BUT
THAT IS ABOUT IT.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
YOUR HONOR, I HAVE PREPARED, FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF
COUNSEL AND THE COURT AND THE PARTIES, NINE COPIES OF THE
TESTIMONY OF THIS WITNESS AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING AND I WOULD
LIKE PERMISSION TO HAVE THEM PASSED OUT SO THAT WE CAN ALL FOLLOW
THE NEXT PHASE OF THE CROSS-EXAMINATION.
MAY THAT BE DONE?
THE COURT: YES.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL AND
THE DEFENDANT.)
MR. BAILEY: WAS A COPY GIVEN TO
THE WITNESS AND THE COURT?
THE COURT: I HAVE ONE.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
BY THE WAY, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, BEFORE
WE TURN TO THIS EARLIER INSTANCE OF TESTIMONY, TWO MATTERS THAT I
OVERLOOKED.
ONE WAS DID YOU EVER GO TO THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE
SIMPSON HOME LOOKING FOR BLEEDING OR OTHERWISE TROUBLED VICTIMS?
A NO.
Q DID ANY OF
YOUR TEAM, THE FOUR DETECTIVES, TO YOUR
KNOWLEDGE, GO AND INSPECT THE BALANCE OF THE HOUSE?
A I DO NOT KNOW.
Q WAS IT NOT
YOU WHO SAID TO DETECTIVE VANNATTER, "WE
HAVE AN EMERGENCY HERE. THERE MAY BE PEOPLE BLEEDING TO DEATH
INSIDE"?
A YES.
Q ALL
RIGHT.
AND ONCE YOU GOT INSIDE, YOU DIDN'T GO TO SEE WHO
MIGHT BE BLEEDING TO DEATH ON THE SECOND FLOOR; IS THAT RIGHT?
A I DIDN'T MAKE
ENTRY AT THAT TIME.
Q OKAY.
YESTERDAY YOU RELATED SOME BLOOD STAINS THAT YOU SAW
AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DOOR OF THE BRONCO.
MY UNDERSTANDING WAS IT WAS ON THE SILL?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND YOU CLAIM
THAT THESE MARKS, BRUSH MARKS I THINK
YOU DESCRIBED THEM AS, WERE VISIBLE WITH THE DOOR CLOSED?
A YES.
Q IT IS YOUR
POSITION THAT IN YOUR PRESENCE AT LEAST
THE BRONCO WAS NEVER OPENED OR ANY OF ITS DOORS OR WINDOWS WHILE
YOU WERE THERE?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU NEVER SAW ANYONE ELSE DO IT?
A NO, I DID
NOT.
Q DID YOU AT
SOME POINT GET TO SHOW CRIMINALIST FUNG
THE LOCATION OF THE BRUSH MARKS YOU HAVE DESCRIBED?
A YES, I DID.
Q COULD YOU
TELL THE COURT AND JURY WHEN THAT OCCURRED
AND WHO WAS PRESENT?
A DENNIS
FUNG I BELIEVE ARRIVED AT THE ROCKINGHAM
ESTATE 7:30, EIGHT O'CLOCK, SOMEWHERE AROUND THAT AREA.
IT WAS THEN THAT I SHOWED HIM THE ITEMS ON THE
BRONCO.
Q YOU HAD COME
BACK FROM BUNDY?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU TAKE HIM OUT INDIVIDUALLY TO THE BRONCO,
POINT THEM OUT?
A YES, I DID.
Q WAS THE DOOR
OPENED ON THIS OCCASION BY EITHER OF
YOU?
A NO.
Q AND YOU NEVER
SAW THAT DOOR OPENED TO THIS DAY, HAVE
YOU?
A NO, I DID
NOT.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, A PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN THIS CASE TOOK PLACE EARLY IN JULY, DID IT NOT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND YOU TESTIFIED
BOTH ON JULY 5TH AND JULY 6TH, IN
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS BY MS. CLARK AND DEAN UELMEN FOR THE
DEFENSE?
A YES.
Q SEVERAL DIRECT
AND SEVERAL CROSS-EXAMINATIONS.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WERE YOU
TRYING AT THAT TIME, TO THE VERY BEST
YOUR ABILITY, TO BE ACCURATE IN EACH OF YOUR VARIOUS UTTERANCES?
A YES, I WAS.
Q OKAY.
NOW, COULD YOU TURN, PLEASE, TO PAGE 41 OF THE
TRANSCRIPT THAT HAS BEEN PLACED IN FRONT OF YOU.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q I ASK YOU
TO LOOK AT LINE 14.
YOU WERE ASKED BY MISS CLARK THE NATURE OF A CERTAIN
CONVERSATION WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER WHILE YOU WERE STILL
WITHOUT THE PREMISES, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND YOUR ANSWER
WAS:
"I TOLD DETECTIVE VANNATTER, I SAID 'WE GOT A
REAL -- WE GOT AN EMERGENCY, WE GOT A PROBLEM -- WE GOT -- WE
DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE PEOPLE INSIDE THAT ARE IN DANGER, DYING,
BLEEDING TO DEATH. WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. I DON'T CARE WHOSE
HOUSE THIS IS. WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING. WE DON'T KNOW IF
WE
HAVE A MURDER, SUICIDE, A KIDNAPPING, ANOTHER VICTIM,' AND PHIL
AGREED AND WE TOOK OUR OPINIONS TO DETECTIVE LANGE AND PHILLIPS
AND DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITIES."
DO YOU RECALL THAT TESTIMONY?
A YES, SIR.
Q DOES THAT
ACCURATELY DESCRIBE THE SEQUENCE IN WHICH
YOU DETECTIVES BECAME CONCERNED OR AT LEAST EXPRESSED YOUR
CONCERN ABOUT POSSIBLE VICTIMS INSIDE?
A SOMEWHAT.
Q SO THAT THIS
IDEA WAS INITIATED BY DETECTIVE MARK
FUHRMAN, WAS IT NOT?
A NO.
THIS WAS A CONVERSATION BETWEEN VANNATTER AND
MYSELF AND THAT IS A COLLECTIVE CONVERSATION.
Q THIS IS COLLECTIVE?
A YES.
THOSE ARE MY FEELINGS ABSENT OF THE
CONVERSATION -- THE RECIPROCAL OF DETECTIVE VANNATTER.
Q I SEE.
WELL, NOW DO YOU SEE ANYTHING, BEGINNING AT
LINE 15, ABOUT VANNATTER SPEAKING TO YOU?
A NO, SIR.
Q OKAY.
DO YOU SEE THAT MOST OF WHAT I HAVE JUST RECITED IS
IN QUOTES AND THUS ATTRIBUTED BY THE COURT REPORTER TO YOU
TALKING ABOUT YOURSELF?
DO YOU NOTICE THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
NOW, IS IT NOT THE FACT THAT THE FIRST ONE TO SUGGEST
AN EMERGENCY AND THE NEED TO DO SOMETHING RIGHT NOW WAS YOU?
A I DON'T KNOW
IF IT WAS ME THAT FIRST SUGGESTED IT.
VANNATTER AND I WERE BOTH TALKING ABOUT IT. I DON'T KNOW HOW
IT
CAME DOWN EXACTLY TO THAT POINT.
Q OKAY.
AFTER AUTHORITY HAD BEEN OBTAINED FROM THE NECESSARY
BRASS -- I THINK COMMANDER BUSHEY WAS IT?
A YES, SIR.
Q -- TO GO IN
WITHOUT A WARRANT --
A COMMANDER
BUSHEY HAD NO SAY IN THAT, SIR.
Q OH, HE DIDN'T?
A NO.
Q VANNATTER
DIDN'T CHECK WITH ANYONE?
A NO.
Q HE MADE THE
DECISION?
A HE MADE THE
DECISION.
Q OKAY.
WHEN HE DECIDED THAT YOU WERE RIGHT AND IT WAS
NECESSARY TO GO IN, HOW WERE YOU ELECTED TO GO OVER THE WALL?
MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION.
THAT MISSTATES THE
TESTIMONY, "DECIDED THAT HE WAS RIGHT."
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HOW WERE YOU ELECTED TO BE THE ONE TO
GO OVER THE WALL?
A PHIL MADE
A STATEMENT THAT, "WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO
GO IN. HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO IT?" AND I SAID, "WELL, I
WILL GO
OVER THE WALL."
Q ALL RIGHT.
YOU VOLUNTEERED TO DO THAT IN RESPONSE TO HIS QUERY
HOW CAN WE ACCOMPLISH IT, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
ON PAGE 46, LINE 15, WHEN YOU WERE WITH KATO KAELIN
IN HIS ROOM, YOU SAY THAT YOU STAYED BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHO
MR. KAELIN WAS AND:
"I WASN'T SURE IF HE WAS EVEN SUPPOSED TO BE
THERE. I STAYED WITH HIM AND ENGAGED HIM IN A CONVERSATION ABOUT
WHO HE WAS AND WHAT HE WAS DOING THERE AND A FEW OTHER THINGS."
MY QUESTION IS, IS THAT ACCURATE?
A I BELIEVE
SO, YES.
Q DID YOU DETERMINE
THAT KATO KAELIN, FROM TALKING TO
HIM, WAS A PROPER PERSON TO BE IN THAT HOUSE AT THAT TIME?
A I DON'T --
I NEVER SAW ANY IDENTIFICATION AS FAR AS
AN ADDRESS. HE MIGHT HAVE SAID HE LIVES THERE OR HE STAYS THERE.
Q OKAY.
WOULD YOU TURN TO PAGE 48, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q IT IS THE
LATTER PART OF A LONG ANSWER WHICH GOES
ALMOST TWO FULL PAGES.
I'M INTERESTED IN ONLY A FEW LINES. I WILL READ THE
WHOLE QUESTION AND ANSWER IF YOU PREFER.
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO DO THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
THE ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS:
"DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HIM," MEANING
KATO KAELIN, "AT THAT TIME," 47 LINE 12.
"ANSWER: YES. SIMULTANEOUS WITH -- I WAS
WALKING -- I WALKED TO THE BATHROOM WHICH I COULDN'T SEE INTO
FROM WHERE I WAS STANDING AT THE DOORWAY. I WALKED IN JUST TO
MAKE SURE NOBODY WAS IN THERE AND I OPENED UP THE CLOSETS TO MAKE
SURE NO ONE WAS STANDING IN THE CLOSETS. I ENGAGED HIM IN
CONVERSATION WHILE I WAS DOING THAT. I NOTICED A PILE OF CLOTHES
TO THE -- IF YOU WERE LYING IN THE BED, IT WOULD BE THE RIGHT
SIDE, NEXT TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE BED AND A PAIR OF SHOES.
I
ASKED HIM IF THOSE WERE THE CLOTHES HE WORE AND HE SAID 'LAST
NIGHT' AND HE SAID 'YES' AND I SAID, 'MIND IF I LOOK AT THEM?'
HE SAID, 'NO.' I PICKED UP THE SHOES. I LOOKED AT
THE SOLES.
I PICKED UP THE CLOTHES AND I LOOKED AT THE CLOTHES. THERE
DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE ANYTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT THEM. I PUT THEM BACK
WHERE THEY WERE AND I WAS STILL TALKING TO MR. KAELIN. I ASKED
HIM IF THERE IS ANYTHING UNUSUAL THAT HAPPENED THAT NIGHT BEFORE
HE ANSWERED -- BEFORE I LET HIM ANSWER, I ASKED, 'WHO DRIVES THE
BRONCO?' HE SAYS, 'WELL, THAT'S O.J.'S.' I SAID, 'IS THAT
ALL?
IS THAT THE ONLY PERSON THAT DRIVES IT?' AND HE GOES, 'YEAH.'
I
ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYTHING UNUSUAL THAT HAPPENED THE PREVIOUS
NIGHT. HE SAID, 'WELL, ABOUT QUARTER TO 11:00 I HEARD SOME
CRASHING ON MY WALL AND I THOUGHT THERE WAS GOING TO BE AN
EARTHQUAKE, BUT THAT WAS ONLY NOISE, JUST ONE TIME AND MY PICTURE
SHOOK,' AND HE POINTED TO A PICTURE WHICH WAS JUST TO THE WEST OF
HIS BED WHICH WOULD BE THE FAR RIGHT OF HIS ROOM LOOKING INTO HIS
ROOM FROM THE DOORWAY. THEN HE SAID, 'I WENT OUTSIDE TO SEE WHAT
WAS GOING ON AND I SAW A LIMO AT THE GATE.'"
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. OBJECTION.
THAT MISSTATES THE
TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU REREAD
IT.
MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY.
"I WENT OUTSIDE TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE
NOISE AND I SAW A LIMO AT THE GATE.' AT THAT POINT I INTERRUPTED
HIM AND I TOOK HIM INTO THE HOUSE WHERE NOW MR. SIMPSON'S
DAUGHTER AND THE THREE DETECTIVES HAD ALREADY ENTERED THE REAR
OF THE RESIDENCE AND THE DOOR WAS OPENED."
Q DID YOU GIVE
THAT ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION ON YOUR
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CLARK ON JULY 5TH?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO THAT IN FACT WHEN YOU INTERRUPTED MR. KAELIN,
AFTER ASKING HIM ABOUT UNUSUAL EVENTS, YOU PUT TWO QUESTIONS, NO.
1, WHOSE BRONCO IS IT, AND NO. 2, IS HE THE ONLY ONE THAT DRIVES
IT, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q WHY WAS IT
IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT THEN, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A WELL, THERE
WAS BLOOD ON THE VEHICLE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, I SUGGESTED TO YOU SOME TIME AGO THAT YOU
DIRECTED DETECTIVE VANNATTER TO GO IN AND INTERROGATE KAELIN AND
YOU HAD SOME DOUBTS ABOUT THAT?
A DOUBTS OF
MY PRESENCE OF MIND, NO, NONE AT ALL.
Q DOUBTS ABOUT
WHETHER YOU WOULD GIVE AN ORDER TO A MAN
AS SUPERIOR TO YOU AS THE LEAD DETECTIVE IN THIS CASE?
A I DID NOT
GIVE HIM ANY ORDER.
Q WELL, WHEN
YOU DESCRIBED BRINGING KAELIN INTO THE
HOUSE MISS CLARK ASKED:
"WHERE DID YOU PUT HIM?"
AND YOU SAID:
"THERE'S A BAR INSIDE THAT LOOKS LIKE
A RECREATION ROOM, A
BILLIARD ROOM, AND JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THAT, AS YOU ARE ENTERING
THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE, THERE IS FOUR OR FIVE BARSTOOLS. I
SAID, 'WHY DON'T YOU JUST SIT HERE FOR A SECOND. ONE OF THE
DETECTIVES IS GOING TO TALK FOR A FEW MINUTES. JUST SIT HERE AND
RELAX.' I CONTINUED TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AND RIGHT
BY THE KITCHEN I SAW DETECTIVE VANNATTER, AND I TOLD HIM, I SAYS,
'TALK TO THE MAN THAT WAS IN THE BUNGALOW. HE IS SEATED AT THE
BAR.' AND I CONTINUED OUT THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE."
NOW, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU HAD BEEN TALKING WITH MR.
KAELIN BEFORE YOU DECIDED TO GO OUTSIDE THE BUILDING, HAD YOU
NOT?
A YES.
Q WHY DID YOU
FIND IT NECESSARY THAT ANOTHER DETECTIVE
TAKE UP THE INTERROGATION?
A I DIDN'T THINK
IT NECESSARY.
Q WHY DID YOU
DIRECT DETECTIVE VANNATTER TO DO IT?
A I WAS GOING
TO INVESTIGATE WHERE THE NOISE CAME FROM.
Q WHY DIDN'T
YOU TELL HIM THE SUBJECT MATTER ABOUT
WHICH HE OUGHT TO BE CONCERNED, IF HE WAS GOING TO INTERROGATE A
WITNESS?
A NO REASON.
I WANTED TO GO INVESTIGATE THE NOISE TO
SEE IF WE COULD EVEN GET TO THAT SOUTH WALL.
Q WHY DID YOU
NOT TELL HIM THAT YOU WERE GOING TO GO
INVESTIGATE A NOISE AND HE SHOULD FINISH THE INTERROGATION?
A NO REASON.
Q NO REASON?
OKAY.
ON THAT SAME PAGE.
RIGHT AFTER YOU SAID ON LINE 18:
"AND I CONTINUED OUT THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE,"
MISS CLARK SAID:
"WHY?" AND YOUR RESPONSE WAS:
"WELL, I WAS -- FROM THE STATEMENT HE MADE, THE
CRASHING SOUND AND THE TIME THAT HE HEARD IT, COMBINED WITH THE
BLOOD IN THE BRONCO, THE WAY I WAS FEELING IS THERE IS A
POSSIBILITY THERE COULD BE ANOTHER VICTIM, A SUSPECT THAT HAD
COLLAPSED OR ESCAPED VIA THAT ROUTE IN THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF THE
HOUSE."
DO YOU READ THE ANSWER IN FRONT OF YOU?
A I DO, SIR.
Q DO YOU AGREE
THAT I HAVE CITED IT CORRECTLY AS IT
APPEARS IN THE TRANSCRIPT?
A YES.
Q HOW DID YOU
KNOW AT THAT JUNCTURE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN,
THAT THERE WAS OR WOULD BE BLOOD IN THE BRONCO?
A I DIDN'T.
Q WHY DID YOU
USE THE WORD "IN"?
A I'M NOT SURE
I DID.
Q IS THIS THE
FIRST TIME IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOUR
ATTENTION THAT YOU USED THE WORD "IN"?
A IT IS THE
FIRST TIME YOU HAVE READ IT, BUT I NEVER
USED THE WORD "IN" AS FAR AS SAYING THERE WAS BLOOD IN THE
BRONCO.
Q YOU DIDN'T
USE THE WORD "IN"?
A I'M NOT SURE,
SIR, BUT I DID NOT SEE ANY BLOOD IN THE
BRONCO.
Q YOU USED THE
WORD "IN" THE BRONCO AND IT WAS
UNINTENTIONAL, MIGHT THAT BE, SIR, A SLIP OF THE TONGUE?
A NO, IT MIGHT
NOT.
Q IT MIGHT NOT.
UNLESS IT WAS A SLIP OF THE TONGUE AND
IF YOU IN FACT SAID IT, YOU HAVE NO EXPLANATION WHATSOEVER FOR
THAT MISTAKE? IS THAT THE WAY YOU WISH TO LEAVE IT?
A NO.
I WISH TO LEAVE IT TO SAY THAT THERE WAS NO
BLOOD THAT I OBSERVED INSIDE THE BRONCO PRIOR TO GOING INTO THE
RESIDENCE THAT MORNING.
Q MY QUESTION
WAS, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, IF YOU DID IN
FACT SAY THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAD YOU DISTURBED AT THAT
POINT WAS BLOOD IN THE BRONCO AND IT WASN'T A SLIP OF THE TONGUE,
WHY WOULD YOU HAVE USED THAT WORD?
A I DIDN'T SEE
ANY BLOOD IN THE BRONCO, SIR.
Q WHY WOULD
YOU HAVE USED THE WORD "IN," DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, PLEASE?
A I TOLD YOU
I'M NOT SURE I DID.
Q WELL, THERE
IS A VIDEOTAPE OF YOUR TESTIMONY. HAVE
YOU REVIEWED THAT RECENTLY?
A NO, NEVER
HAVE.
Q DO YOU THINK
THAT WOULD HELP TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR
NOT THE COURT REPORTER MADE THIS MISTAKE OR YOU DID?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
WE WILL GET TO THAT.
ON PAGE 54, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, UNDER
CROSS-EXAMINATION -- I'M SORRY -- TOWARD THE END OF YOUR DIRECT
EXAMINATION BY MISS CLARK AND AFTER SAYING THAT YOU NOTICED THE
GLOVE AND IDENTIFYING IT IN A PHOTO MARKED FOR THAT HEARING AS D,
I WILL ASK YOU WHETHER OR NOT YOU ASKED THESE QUESTIONS AND GAVE
THESE ANSWERS:
"BY MISS CLARK: WHEN YOU SAW THAT GLOVE, DID IT
HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU?
"ANSWER: YES. IT LOOKED VERY SIMILAR TO THE
GLOVE THAT I OBSERVED ON BUNDY HOURS BEFORE.
"QUESTION: AND BASED ON THAT OBSERVATION, SIR,
WHAT DID YOU DO?
"ANSWER: I LOOKED AT IT A LITTLE CLOSER. I
NOTED THAT IT DID NOT MATCH THE TERRAIN."
WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THAT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, THERE IS
-- THAT IS ONLY PART OF THE
ANSWER. WE REQUEST THAT IT BE READ IN ITS ENTIRETY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT. WE WILL COME BACK TO
THAT, DETECTIVE.
"AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS A LOT OF DIRT AND
LEAVES. THIS GLOVE WAS NOT DIRTY IN THE LEAST. IT LOOKED
A
LITTLE STICKY AND MOIST. TWO FINGERS WERE STUCK TO THE GLOVE.
IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS STUCK THERE WITH SOME TYPE OF LIQUID. I
DIDN'T TOUCH IT. I WENT PAST THE AIR CONDITIONING DUCT THAT YOU
CAN SEE IN PHOTO A AND AS SOON AS I WENT PAST THAT AIR
CONDITIONING DUCT LOOKING FOR THE PERSON THAT MIGHT HAVE DROPPED
THE GLOVE, THINKING THAT THEY WERE FARTHER DOWN THE WALKWAY, I
RAN INTO SPIDERWEBS IMMEDIATELY."
DO YOU RECALL GIVING THAT ANSWER?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO I TAKE IT IT IS TRUE THAT YOUR FIRST STEP AFTER
SEEING THE GLOVE WAS TO GO LOOK FOR THE PERSON WHO DROPPED IT?
A YES.
Q THAT IS WHAT
YOU ARE SAYING HERE?
A YES.
Q AND YOU EXPECTED
THAT THE PERSON WHO DROPPED IT WOULD
BE A KILLER?
A I DIDN'T KNOW
THAT. AS WE BROUGHT UP BEFORE, IT WAS
--
Q WHAT DID YOU
EXPECT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, ASKED AND
ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. BUT
LET HIM FINISH HIS ANSWER
BEFORE YOU ASK HIM THE NEXT QUESTION, MR. BAILEY.
MR. BAILEY: YES, YOUR HONOR.
Q WHAT DID YOU
EXPECT TO FIND IN THE NATURE OF THE
PERSON WHO HAD DROPPED THE GLOVE?
A I HAD NO IDEA,
SIR.
Q AND THAT DIDN'T
CAUSE YOU ANY APPREHENSION FOR YOUR
SAFETY?
A YES, IT DID.
Q WELL, DID
YOU TAKE ANY PRECAUTIONS?
A YES.
Q WHAT DID YOU
DO?
A I MOVED FORWARD
INSTEAD OF BACKWARD.
Q YOU MOVED
FORWARD IN THE DIRECTION OF DANGER, INSTEAD
OF BACKWARD AWAY FROM THE DIRECTION OF DANGER WHICH WAS A
PRECAUTION AS YOU VIEWED IT?
A YES.
GIVING SOMEONE MY BACK WOULD BE FAR MORE
HAZARDOUS THAN FACING A THREAT STRAIGHT ON.
Q I'M SORRY.
I THINK YOU SAID THAT AS YOU PROCEEDED
PAST THE AIR CONDITIONING DUCT, THAT IS EAST WHERE YOU HADN'T
BEEN, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q YOU DID THAT
LOOKING FOR THE PERSON THAT MIGHT HAVE
DROPPED THE GLOVE?
A (NO AUDIBLE
RESPONSE.)
Q YOU SAID THAT,
DIDN'T YOU?
A YES.
Q WELL, IF THAT
IS THE CASE, THEN THE DANGER WAS IN
FRONT OF YOU AND YOUR BACK WAS PERFECTLY SAFE, WASN'T IT?
A IF I TURNED
AROUND AND WENT BACK WEST IT WOULDN'T BE
SAFE, SIR.
Q OH, IT WAS
SAFER IN YOUR VIEW TO FORGE ON AND MAYBE
ENCOUNTER A KILLER THAN IT WAS TO GET OUT OF THERE; IS THAT
RIGHT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q OKAY.
WHEN YOU ENCOUNTERED THE SPIDERWEBS DID IT OCCUR TO
YOU THAT WHOEVER DROPPED THAT GLOVE HAD COME THE WAY YOU HAD COME
AND HAD GONE BACK OUT THE SAME WAY?
A IT WAS POSSIBLE,
BUT I DIDN'T KNOW THE CONDITION THAT
THEY WERE IN WHEN THEY LEFT THAT GLOVE.
Q I'M NOT TALKING
ABOUT ANY CONDITION OF THE PERSON.
IF THERE ARE SPIDERWEBS ACROSS A PASSAGEWAY, THE ODDS ARE FAIRLY
GOOD THAT NO ONE HAS RUN THROUGH THIS RECENTLY, TRUE?
A RUN, YES;
CRAWLED, UNKNOWN.
Q OR WALKED.
DID YOU SEE ANY MARK ON THE GROUND
INDICATING A HUMAN WAS CRAWLING THERE?
A I SAW NO MARKS
ON THE PATH.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, ASSUMES
FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MS. CLARK: THAT IT COULD BE SEEN.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
NOW, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, IN
CROSS-EXAMINATION MR. UELMEN DIRECTED SOME QUESTIONS TO YOU ABOUT
YOUR ACTIVITIES AT BUNDY AND YOU DESCRIBED, AS YOU DID FOR US --
PAGE 64 AT THE TOP -- THAT:
"HAVING BEEN UNABLE TO SEE THE BODIES FROM YOUR
ORIGINAL POSITION TO A SATISFACTORY DEGREE, RISKE TOOK YOU AROUND
DOROTHY UP THE ALLEY AND IN THROUGH THE HOUSE SO YOU COULD COME
OUT THE FRONT DOOR AND HAVE A BETTER VANTAGE POINT AT THE TOP OF
THE STEPS WITHOUT WALKING THROUGH THE BLOOD," CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND AT THE TOP OF PAGE 64 YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT,
AREN'T YOU?
A YES, I AM.
Q OKAY.
"QUESTION: HOW FAR WOULD YOU SAY YOU WERE FROM
WHERE THE BODIES WERE LOCATED?
"ANSWER: I WAS DIRECTLY ABOVE THE FEMALE VICTIM
WHICH WAS PROBABLY THREE FEET. THE MALE VICTIM WOULD HAVE BEEN
TEN FEET, TWELVE FEET.
"QUESTION: ALL RIGHT. AND FROM THAT VANTAGE
POINT YOU FIRST OBSERVED THE GLOVE THAT YOU TOLD US ABOUT?
"ANSWER: NOT FIRST, NO.
"QUESTION: WHEN DID YOU FIRST OBSERVE IT?
"ANSWER: WE HAD FLASHLIGHTS. WE WERE LOOKING AT
THE FEMALE VICTIM. WE LOOKED AT THE MALE VICTIM. I NOTICED
THE
GLOVE WHEN I WALKED AROUND TO THE -- AFTER I EXITED THE RESIDENCE
THE FIRST TIME AND WALKED AROUND TO THE SIDE OR THE NORTH SIDE,
NORTH PERIMETER OF BUNDY OF 875 BUNDY, THERE IS AN IRON FENCE AND
THROUGH THAT IRON FENCE YOU CAN GET VERY CLOSE TO THE MALE
VICTIM, AND LOOKING THERE I COULD SEE THEM AT HIS FEET."
DID YOU USE THE WORD "THEM" IN YOUR ANSWER ON JULY
5TH?
A YES, SIR.
YES, SIR.
Q AND WAS THE
LAST ITEM TO WHICH "THEM" COULD HAVE
APPLIED IN YOUR NARRATIVE THE WORD "GLOVE"?
A SINGULAR,
YES.
Q I'M SIMPLY
ASKING WHETHER GLOVE, LINE 14, WAS THE
ITEM YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT JUST PRIOR TO SAYING "I SAW THEM AT
HIS FEET"?
A "THEM," I
WAS REFERRING TO THE KNIT CAP, THE GLOVE.
Q SHOW ME ANYWHERE
ON THAT PAGE WHERE THE KNIT CAP IS
MENTIONED? CAN YOU?
A THAT PAGE,
NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU SEE ANYTHING ON THE PRIOR PAGE, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, ABOUT THE KNIT CAP?
A DO YOU WANT
ME TO LOOK AT THAT PRIOR PAGE?
Q SURE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION
WITHOUT LOOKING AT IT. 63.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
I DO NOT.
Q PAGE 65, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN.
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, MR. BAILEY.
MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY.
THE COURT: THE COURT REPORTER
NEEDS TO CHANGE HER PAPER.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: MR. BAILEY.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
PAGE 65, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, LINE 8:
"DOES THAT PHOTO," REFERRING TO A PHOTO
"ACCURATELY DEPICT THE GLOVE AT THE LOCATION WHERE YOU SAW IT?
"TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, YES.
"QUESTION: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU DIDN'T ACTUALLY
PICK UP THE GLOVE TO EXAMINE IT, DID YOU?
"ANSWER: NOT AT THAT TIME, NO."
DID YOU GIVE THAT ANSWER?
A YES.
Q AT WHAT TIME
DID YOU PICK UP THE GLOVE?
A I DIDN'T.
I TURNED THE GLOVE OVER WITH A PEN WHEN I
RETURNED TO THE BUNDY SCENE AFTER BEING AT ROCKINGHAM.
Q AND THAT IS
WHAT YOU MEANT WHEN YOU SAID, "DIDN'T
PICK UP THE GLOVE AT THAT TIME"? YOU HAD IN MIND TURNING IT OVER
WITH A PEN?
A I BELIEVE
THAT WAS MR. UELMEN'S WORDS AND THE
QUESTION. I DIDN'T USE THE WORD "PICK UP."
Q BUT THE QUESTION
WAS PUT TO YOU, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.
HE SAID:
"AND YOU DIDN'T ACTUALLY PICK THE GLOVE UP TO
EXAMINE IT, DID YOU?"
AND YOUR ANSWER WAS:
"NOT AT THAT TIME, NO."
DO YOU SEE ANYTHING IN THAT ANSWER THAT REFERS TO
TURNING IT OVER WITH A PEN AT ANY TIME.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS
IS ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NOT ON THAT PAGE,
NO.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU SEE ANOTHER PAGE WHERE YOU
INDICATED THAT THAT IS WHAT YOU MEANT BY LATER PICKING UP THE
GLOVE?
A NO, SIR.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, HE WASN'T
ASKED. THIS IS
ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. SPEAKING
OBJECTION, COUNSEL.
MS. CLARK: SORRY.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
YESTERDAY, AND POSSIBLY LAST WEEK,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU INDICATED SOME UNCERTAINTY AS TO WHEN YOU
WERE NOTIFIED THAT ONE OF THE VICTIMS WAS IN FACT THE EX-WIFE OF
O.J. SIMPSON.
DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q YOU SAID YOU
COULDN'T QUITE BE SURE WHEN YOU THOUGHT
THAT THAT WAS THE FACT?
A THAT THE FEMALE
VICTIM WAS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?
Q YES.
A YES, SIR,
I REMEMBER.
Q AS YOU SIT
THERE TODAY, WHAT IS YOUR BEST
RECOLLECTION AS TO WHEN YOU DECIDED OR YOUR SUPERIORS DECIDED
THAT THIS WAS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON? WHAT TIME OF DAY?
A I WOULD SAY
ON JUNE 13TH SOMETIME BUT I DON'T
RECOLLECT WHEN.
Q ONE, TWO,
THREE HOURS AFTER YOU GOT THERE?
A I HAVE NO
IDEA, SIR.
Q IS IT FAIR
TO INFER THAT YOU WENT TO NOTIFY MR.
SIMPSON THAT HIS WIFE WAS DEAD A LITTLE AFTER 5:00, THAT YOU
THOUGHT SHE WAS IN FACT DEAD, HIS EX-WIFE?
A I DIDN'T GO
THERE AT MY DIRECTION, SO I BELIEVE IT
WAS ASSUMED AND I BELIEVE THEY WERE GOING THERE TO FIND OUT
ANYTHING ABOUT HER OR MAKE A NOTIFICATION.
Q PAGE 31, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q QUESTION BY
MISS CLARK AT LINE 4.
"WERE YOU AWARE" -- LINE 5 --
"WERE YOU AWARE OF WHO ONE OF THE -- AT LEAST THE
FEMALE VICTIM WAS AT THAT TIME?
"ANSWER: I WAS NOTIFIED THAT -- WHEN I WAS
NOTIFIED AT MY RESIDENCE AT 1:05 I WAS TOLD THAT ONE OF THE
VICTIMS WAS THE EX-WIFE OF O.J. SIMPSON.
"DID YOU RELAY THAT INFORMATION TO DETECTIVE
VANNATTER?
"ANSWER: IT WAS RELAYED, YES."
NOW, AFTER YOU WERE TOLD AT 1:05 THAT NICOLE BROWN
SIMPSON WAS DEAD, DID YOU CONTINUE TO DOUBT IT?
A WE HAD NO
INDICATION ABSOLUTELY THAT THAT WAS THE
FEMALE VICTIM.
Q DID YOU CHALLENGE
MR. PHILLIPS IN ANY WAY WHEN HE
TOLD YOU SHE WAS DEAD?
A THERE WAS
NO CHALLENGE INVOLVED, SIR.
Q DID YOU QUESTION
HIS ASSERTION AS TO HER IDENTITY?
A NO.
Q DID YOU EVER
QUESTION HIM?
A I DON'T THINK
I WOULD HAVE JUMPED TO THE CONCLUSION
EARLY INTO THE INVESTIGATION.
Q YOU WOULDN'T
HAVE JUMPED TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE
IDENTITY OF THE VICTIM, EVEN THOUGH A DETECTIVE WHO WAS YOUR BOSS
TOLD YOU WHAT IT WAS?
A I DIDN'T QUESTION
IT.
Q OKAY.
FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, WHAT EFFORTS, IF YOU KNOW,
WERE MADE TO DETERMINE MR. GOLDMAN'S IDENTITY SO THAT HIS NEXT OF
KIN COULD BE NOTIFIED?
A I HAVE NO
KNOWLEDGE OF ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
Q YOU WERE NOT
INVOLVED IN THAT EFFORT?
A NO, SIR.
Q DID YOU HAVE
ANYTHING TO DO WITH NOTICE TO THE BROWN
FAMILY --
A NO, SIR.
Q -- ABOUT THEIR
DAUGHTER?
WHEN DID YOU TELL US YESTERDAY THAT YOU LEARNED WHERE
YOU WERE GOING ON THE TRIP TO ROCKINGHAM? WAS IT WHEN YOU WERE
IN THE CAR WITH PHILLIPS THAT HE TOLD YOU?
A THERE WAS
SOME CONVERSATION IF I KNEW THE WAY UP
THERE.
Q WITH WHOM?
A I'M SORRY?
Q PHILLIPS?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
BUT WERE YOU ALREADY IN THE CAR?
A WHEN WE KNEW
THE PURPOSE? YES.
Q OKAY.
WELL, WERE YOU IN THE CAR WHEN YOU KNEW WHERE YOU
WERE GOING?
A I THINK IT
WAS SOMEWHAT SIMULTANEOUS WITH GETTING
BACK TO THE FRONT OF THE LOCATION AND TALKING TO DETECTIVE
PHILLIPS, VANNATTER AND LANGE DIRECTING US TO TAKE US UP THERE,
OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.
I GOT IN THE CAR WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND IT WAS
DISCUSSED THEN.
Q HAD YOU DISCLOSED
TO EITHER -- ANY OF THE THREE
DETECTIVES, AS OF THE POINT YOU LEFT FOR ROCKINGHAM, YOUR PRIOR
INVOLVEMENT WITH THE SIMPSONS?
A YES.
Q TO WHOM DID
YOU DESCRIBE IT AND WHEN?
A DETECTIVE
PHILLIPS.
Q WHEN?
A DETECTIVE
PHILLIPS ASKED ME IF I KNEW HOW TO GET TO
THE SIMPSON HOUSE OR THE ROCKINGHAM HOUSE.
Q THAT WAS AT
5:00 IN THE MORNING OR AFTER?
A I THINK IT
WAS A LITTLE BEFORE THAT.
Q THAT YOU ACTUALLY
LEFT FOR ROCKINGHAM, BEFORE 5:00?
A NO.
WE LEFT AT 5:00. YOU ARE ASKING ME WHAT TIME
THE CONVERSATION TOOK PLACE.
Q OH.
SLIGHTLY BEFORE 5:00 YOU HAD DISCLOSED TO HIM
YOU HAD PRIOR INVOLVEMENT?
A I SAID I HAD
BEEN ON A RADIO CALL THERE A LONG TIME
AGO.
Q UP TO THAT
POINT YOU SAID NOTHING ABOUT THAT PRIOR
INVOLVEMENT?
A NO.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY. MAY WE
APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: SURE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD
AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE
ARE OVER AT THE SIDE BAR.
MR. BAILEY.
MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE
THE TAPE FROM THE
PRELIMINARY HEARING RELATIVE TO "IN" THE BRONCO AND I HAVE MADE A
COPY FOR THE PROSECUTION.
DO YOU REQUIRE THAT WE EXHIBIT IT TO THEM AND GIVE
THEM A CHANCE TO OBJECT BEFORE IT IS SHOWN?
THE COURT: I BELIEVE SO, JUST
AS A MATTER OF COURTESY.
MR. BAILEY: I AM HAPPY TO DO THAT.
THE COURT: WE WILL TAKE A BREAK
RIGHT NOW. I'M GOING TO
ASK COUNSEL TO REMAIN AND WE WILL TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND MAKE SURE
EVERYTHING IS THERE AND WE WILL START UP AT 1:30.
MR. COCHRAN: ARE WE GOING TO DO
ANYTHING ELSE WITH THE
JURORS THIS AFTERNOON?
THE COURT: WITH THE JURORS?
MR. COCHRAN: ANY JURY STUFF THIS
AFTERNOON? GIVE US THE
TIME FOR THE NEXT APPOINTMENT.
THE COURT: TOMORROW MORNING.
I JUST FIGURE WE WILL TAKE A
COUPLE --
MR. BAILEY: SO WE ARE LOOKING
AT AN HOUR AND HALF OF TRIAL
TIME THIS AFTERNOON?
THE COURT: BOY, I HOPE SO.
MR. BAILEY: HUM?
THE COURT: I HOPE SO. WE
WILL TAKE OUR RECESS THEN AT
THIS POINT, BUT DON'T LEAVE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THERE IS SOMETHING I NEED TO
LOOK AT BEFORE WE PROCEED ANY FURTHER, AND GIVEN THE HOUR, I'M
GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE LUNCH HOUR JUST A LITTLE BIT
EARLY.
PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU. DON'T DISCUSS
THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE
CASE, DON'T CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN
SUBMITTED TO YOU, DO NOT ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU
WITH REGARD TO THE CASE.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU ARE ORDERED TO STEP DOWN. YOU
ARE ORDERED TO COME BACK AT 1:30.
AND COUNSEL, LET ME ASK YOU TO REMAIN SO THAT WE CAN
TAKE A LOOK AT THIS.
ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.
WE NEED TO CLEAR THE COURTROOM FOR THE JURY, PLEASE.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THE JURY HAS WITHDRAWN FROM
THE COURTROOM.
AND MR. HARRIS, DO YOU WANT TO SHOW US THE CLIP.
LET ME ASK DETECTIVE FUHRMAN TO STEP OUT OF THE
COURTROOM.
(DETECTIVE FUHRMAN EXITS THE
COURTROOM.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN HAS WITHDRAWN
FROM THE COURTROOM.
MR. HARRIS, MAY WE SEE THIS VIDEOTAPE, PLEASE.
MR. HARRIS: YES, YOUR HONOR.
(AT 11:59 A.M. A VIDEOTAPE WAS
PLAYED.)
MS. LEWIS: CAN WE TURN UP THE
SOUND?
(THE VIDEOTAPE CONTINUED PLAYING.)
THE COURT: MR. HARRIS, IS
THAT IT?
MR. HARRIS: WELL, THERE IS MORE,
BUT THAT
IS --
MR. BAILEY: WE PASSED THE SPOT.
MR. HARRIS: YOUR HONOR --
THE COURT: THAT IS IT. ALL
RIGHT.
WE WILL BE IN RECESS UNTIL WILL 1:30.
(AT 12:01 P.M. THE NOON RECESS
WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:30 P.M. OF
THE SAME DAY.)
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 1995
1:35 P.M.
DEPARTMENT NO. 103
HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
(APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED.)
(JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.) (CHRISTINE
M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNSEL.
BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. ALL
PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT.
COUNSEL, ANYTHING WE NEED TO TAKE UP BEFORE WE INVITE
THE JURORS TO REJOIN US?
ALL RIGHT.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED.
ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
WELCOME BACK.
ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE
RESUME THE WITNESS STAND.
ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT WE'VE ALL BEEN
JOINED BY OUR JURY PANEL. DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN IS STILL ON
THE
WITNESS STAND UNDER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAILEY.
GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.
THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED YOU
ARE STILL UNDER OATH.
MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY CONTINUE.
CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. BAILEY:
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, IN THE COURSE OF YOUR CAREER AS A
PATROLMAN AND MORE RECENTLY AS A DETECTIVE, HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD
YOU SAY YOU HAVE QUESTIONED WITH RESPECT TO CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATIONS?
A IN THE HUNDREDS,
SIR.
Q HUNDREDS.
A IF NOT MORE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND HAS IT BEEN YOUR EXPERIENCE THAT WHEN YOU ARE
QUESTIONING SOMEBODY THAT IS NOT BEING TOTALLY CANDID WITH YOU,
THEIR VERSION OF EVENTS MAY CHANGE FROM TELLING TO TELLING? IS
THAT YOUR EXPERIENCE?
A ARE YOU SAYING
IF THEY'RE NOT CANDID AND I KNOW THAT,
THEN I CAN EXPECT --
Q NO.
DO YOU LEARN THAT BECAUSE THEY TELL YOU ONE
THING ONE TIME AND DESCRIBE IT QUITE DIFFERENTLY ANOTHER TIME?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT'S
VAGUE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I BELIEVE IT WOULD
DEPEND ON THE TIME AND
WHEN YOU QUESTION THEM, THE SPACE -- THE SPACE BETWEEN THOSE
EVENTS.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
COULD BE A SIGN OF FABRICATING,
COULDN'T IT?
A POSSIBLY.
Q A PERSON WHO
DOESN'T HAVE A REAL IMAGE IN THEIR MIND,
BUT IS DESCRIBING SOMETHING THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN, RIGHT?
A I COULDN'T
SPECULATE ON THAT, NO.
Q THAT WOULD
BE SPECULATION?
A YES.
Q NOW, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, IF YOU WOULD RETURN TO THE
TRANSCRIPT AND IF YOU WOULD LOOK AT PAGE 21 OF JULY 6, WHICH IS
TOWARD THE END, THE THIRD DIRECT EXAMINATION.
A WHAT PAGE,
SIR?
Q 21, THE SECOND
DAY.
A SECOND DAY.
Q IN RESPONSE
TO A QUESTION THAT BEGAN ON 20TH LINE,
24:
"ALL RIGHT. WITH RESPECT TO FINDING
THE GLOVE, AFTER YOU
FOUND THE GLOVE, WHAT DID YOU DO? YOU SAW THE GLOVE ON THE WALK.
THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?"
YOU ANSWERED:
"I CONTINUED EASTBOUND ON THE PATH THAT
WENT TO THE REAR OF
THE PROPERTY AND I SPENT I'M NOT GOING TO SAY A CONSIDERABLE
AMOUNT OF TIME, I'M GOING TO SAY ABOUT 15 MINUTES LOOKING FOR A
PERSON THAT COULD HAVE LEFT THAT GLOVE THERE WHICH INDICATED
SOMEBODY WAS INJURED. I LOOKED IN ALL THE PLACES I BELIEVED A
HUMAN COULD SECRET HIMSELF OR COLLAPSE IN THAT AREA AND THEN I
RETURNED TO THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE."
AND I ASSUME THE WORD "SECRET" WAS MEANT TO MEAN
"SECRETE".
A YES.
Q NOW, HERE
YOU SAID THAT THE APPEARANCE OF THE GLOVE
CONVINCED YOU THAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR AN INJURED PERSON AND NOT
A KILLER. WOULD YOU TELL US WHY THAT'S SO?
A WELL, IT COULD
BE ONE AND THE SAME.
Q COULD BE ONE
AND THE SAME?
A YES.
Q WELL, IS THAT
WHAT YOU MEANT WHEN YOU SAID "SOMEONE
WHO WAS INJURED, EITHER A KILLER OR A VICTIM"?
A COULD BE EITHER
ONE.
Q OKAY.
AND WHY WERE YOU LOOKING FOR SOMEONE THAT WAS INJURED
BASED ON A GLOVE WITH A STICKY SUBSTANCE ON IT? WHAT WAS THE
CLUE TO THE INJURY?
A WELL, THERE
WAS BLOOD EVIDENCE ON THE BRONCO.
Q OKAY.
SO YOU THOUGHT THAT MIGHT HAVE COME FROM A PERSON WHO
WAS DRIVING THE BRONCO WITH AN INJURY?
A POSSIBLY.
Q YOU HAD BEEN
TOLD THAT THE ONLY ONE THAT USED THE
BRONCO, ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN TESTIMONY, WAS MR. SIMPSON.
A YES.
Q YOU KNEW,
DID YOU NOT, THAT MR. SIMPSON LEFT TOWN AT
11:00 O'CLOCK OR VERY CLOSE THERETO?
A NO, I DIDN'T.
Q YOU KNEW THAT
IF THE GLOVE WAS CONNECTED WITH THE
THUMP, IT HAD BEEN OUT THERE FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU WERE LOOKING FOR PLACES WHERE A HUMAN BEING
COULD SECRETE HIMSELF?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO I TAKE IT FROM YOUR READING OF THIS ANSWER, YOU'RE
LOOKING FOR A KILLER WHO WAS INJURED WHO IS HIDING AND MAY HAVE
COLLAPSED.
A OR A VICTIM.
Q OR A VICTIM.
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND THIS IS THE SEARCH THAT TOOK YOU THE 15 MINUTES?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
NOW, THERE WAS SOME QUESTION IN YOUR MIND EARLIER
TODAY AS TO WHETHER YOU HAD TOLD DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND LANGE
ABOUT YOUR THOUGHTS WHEN YOU TOOK THEM DOWN TO SEE THE GLOVE.
DO
YOU RECALL THAT?
A I RECALL THE
QUESTION, YES.
Q AND YOU WERE
UNSURE AS TO WHETHER YOU HAD SAID
ANYTHING TO THEM WHEN YOU WERE DOWN AT THE SCENE OF THE GLOVE?
A YEAH.
I DON'T RECALL IF I DID, NO.
Q WOULD YOU
LOOK AT PAGE 22, NEXT ONE OVER, LINE 20?
"SO THEN AFTER TAKING DETECTIVE PHILLIPS
DOWN TO THAT AREA
AND DESCRIBING EVERYTHING THAT YOU SAW, WHO DID YOU TAKE NEXT?
"DETECTIVE VANNATTER.
"AND DID YOU DO THE SAME THING WITH
HIM?
"YES. EXACTLY THE SAME THING."
DOES THAT TELL YOU THAT YOU IN FACT GAVE VANNATTER
ALL OF THE DETAIL YOU HAD JUST GIVEN PHILLIPS?
A NO.
I DON'T THINK VERBAL, I'M -- I WOULD --
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT'S
INCOMPLETE. 356. NEXT
QUESTION AND ANSWER.
MR. BAILEY: WE'LL, I'M JUST ASKING
A QUESTION ABOUT THIS
ONE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SUSTAINED.
MR. BAILEY: PARDON ME?
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
YOU NEED TO ASK HIM THE FULL QUESTION AND ANSWER OF
THAT FULL COLLOQUY THERE. RELATES TO THE SAME THING.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
"SO EACH TIME YOU WENT, YOU TOOK THE DETECTIVE
ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WHERE THE GLOVE WAS AND BROUGHT THEM ALL THE
WAY BACK?
"YES.
"AND THEN DID THE SAME WITH DETECTIVE
LANGE?
"YES.
"DID YOU TAKE ANY OF THE DETECTIVES
ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE
AREA BEHIND ARNELLE'S ROOM THAT YOU DESCRIBED GOING TO YOURSELF
EARLIER?
"I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I DESCRIBED
TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS,
I'M ALMOST POSITIVE I DID, THE BOTH OTHER DETECTIVES I SCOOTED
UNDER THE AIR CONDITIONER."
NOW BACK TO MY QUESTION.
WHEN YOU SAID EXACTLY THE SAME TO VANNATTER AS TO
PHILLIPS, DID YOU MEAN THAT YOU SAID THE SAME THINGS TO HIM?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. OBJECTION.
COUNSEL IS STILL UNDER
356 CUTTING IT OFF.
THE COURT: WAIT. 356, CORRECT?
MS. CLARK: 356.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: WOULD YOU ASK THAT
QUESTION AGAIN, PLEASE?
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
YES.
WHEN YOU USE THE WORD "EXACTLY" TO EXPLAIN YOUR TOUR
WITH VANNATTER, DID THAT MEAN IT WAS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS THE
TOUR WITH PHILLIPS?
THE COURT: COMPLETE CONVERSATION.
THE WITNESS: I'M NOT SURE I WOULD
HAVE MEANT THE VERBIAGE,
BUT DESCRIBING WHERE I WALKED, WHAT I SAW, WHAT I SENSED, YES.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
OKAY.
IN OTHER WORDS, YOU MAY HAVE SAID ESSENTIALLY THE
SAME THING WITHOUT USING EXACTLY THE SAME WORDS?
A NO.
I DIDN'T SAY THAT.
Q IS THAT WHAT
YOU MEANT?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHAT DOES "EXACTLY" MEAN TO YOU, DETECTIVE?
A THAT I DON'T
REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT THE CONVERSATION
WAS. IT SEEMED TO BE MORE LENGTHY WITH RON PHILLIPS. I'M
NOT
SURE ABOUT THE OTHER TWO DETECTIVES.
Q OKAY.
SO THAT WHEN YOU SAID, "DID YOU DO THE SAME THING
WITH VANNATTER EXACTLY," THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU MEANT?
A YES.
I LED THEM DOWN TO THE GLOVE AND SHOWED THEM
THE GLOVE.
Q AFTER TAKING
THE DETECTIVES TO VIEW THIS GLOVE, YOU
WENT OUT TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND YOU JUST STOOD THERE,
CORRECT?
A FOR A FEW
MOMENTS, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WAS IT AT THAT POINT THAT DETECTIVE VANNATTER
ANNOUNCED THAT THIS WAS NOW A CRIME SCENE OR WAS IT LATER IN THE
DAY AS YOU'VE TOLD US EARLIER?
A I THINK THERE
WAS DISCUSSION AT THAT POINT, BUT AT
ABOUT THAT TIME, WE WERE SENT BACK TO BUNDY, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS
AND MYSELF.
Q WELL, DID
VANNATTER SAY, "WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO
HANDLE THIS LIKE A CRIME SCENE," WITHIN MINUTES OF SEEING THE
GLOVE THAT YOU HAD POINTED OUT?
A YES.
BUT I THINK THAT'S DIFFERENT THAN "THIS IS NOW
A CRIME SCENE."
Q OH, I SEE.
HE WAS SPECULATING ABOUT A FUTURE
DECISION HE THOUGHT HE MIGHT MAKE. WAS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
WHAT WAS YOUR CONDITION AFTER YOU HAD TAKEN THE
DETECTIVES BACK TO VIEW THE GLOVE AND WHEN YOU WERE STANDING IN
FRONT OF THE BUILDING? WAS ANYTHING UNUSUAL GOING ON WITH
RESPECT TO YOU?
A I THINK THERE
WAS SOMEWHAT OF AN ADRENALIN RUSH THAT
I EXPERIENCED WHEN I WAS IN THE REAR AND I BELIEVE WHEN I WAS IN
FRONT OF THE HOUSE, I STARTED REALIZING THAT THIS COULD HAVE BEEN
A MATCH TO THE GLOVE ON BUNDY.
Q WHEN YOU CAME
OUT AFTER TAKING ALL THREE DETECTIVES
DOWN THERE AND TELLING THEM IT WAS A MATCH, YOU SUDDENLY REALIZED
THAT IT COULD BE A MATCH?
A I DIDN'T TELL
THEM IT WAS A MATCH. I GOT THEIR
OPINION AND WHEN THEY HAD THE SAME OPINION --
Q DIDN'T YOU
DISCUSS WITH EACH DETECTIVE IN TURN THE
FACT THAT THIS GLOVE LOOKED LIKE A MATCH ON BUNDY?
A I'M SURE DETECTIVE
PHILLIPS. I'M NOT SURE ON
VANNATTER AND LANGE.
Q OKAY.
AND WHY DO YOU TELL US THAT YOU ARE NOW AFTER THESE
TOURS ARE OVER SUDDENLY REALIZING THAT THERE MAY BE A CONNECTION
AND THUS EXPERIENCING A RUSH OF ADRENALIN?
A NO.
I WAS COMING DOWN FROM THE ADRENALIN.
Q WHEN DID THIS
RUSH START?
A WHEN I WAS
GOING EAST ON THE PATH.
Q OKAY.
ON LINE 7 OF 24, SEE IF YOU RECALL THIS QUESTION AND
THIS ANSWER, IF YOU'D FOLLOW ME, PLEASE.
"DO YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY WHAT TIME
THAT WAS WHEN YOU
HEARD THAT
DISCUSSION," REFERRING TO THE CRIME SCENE.
"ANSWER: NO. AFTER THAT, I CAME OUT FRONT. TO
BE HONEST WITH YOU, I WAS A LITTLE TAKEN BACK BY WHAT HAD
TRANSPIRED. WE DIDN'T ENTER WITH ANY INTENTION OF FINDING
ANYTHING THERE AND I JUST KIND OF STOOD OUT THERE AND I WAS
REALLY KIND OF COLLECTING MY THOUGHTS.
"WHEN I FOUND THE GLOVE BACK THERE IN
THIS PATHWAY, I WILL
HAVE TO -- I HAVE TO ADMIT TO YOU THAT THE ADRENALIN STARTED
PUMPING BECAUSE I REALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON. AND NO
MATTER IF I FOUND A VICTIM OR A SUSPECT, I STILL HAD SOME TIME OF
VERY SERIOUS SITUATION AT THAT TIME AND I THINK I WAS COMING DOWN
FROM THAT A LITTLE BIT.
"QUESTION: WHEN YOU SAY, QUOTE,
THE ADRENALIN --"
ANSWER -- I MEAN,
"UNQUOTE, YOU MEAN FROM SEEING THE CRIME SCENE?
"ANSWER: NO.
"QUESTION: FROM SEEING THE GLOVE?
"ANSWER: WHEN I FOUND THE GLOVE
AND ACTUALLY REALIZED
THIS GLOVE WAS VERY CLOSE IN DESCRIPTION AND COLOR TO THE GLOVE
AT THE CRIME SCENE, MY HEART STARTED POUNDING AND I REALIZED WHAT
I HAD PROBABLY FOUND. WHEN THAT GETS GOING AND YOU NEVER GET
A
CHANCE TO RUN IT OFF OR GET RID OF IT, YOU GET KIND OF A
DOWNTIME. AND I THINK I WAS COLLECTING MY NOT COMPOSURE, BUT
MY
THOUGHTS A LITTLE BIT UP FRONT.
"QUESTION: SO WHILE YOU WERE COLLECTING
YOUR THOUGHTS AND
RELAXING AFTER YOUR DISCOVERY, YOU HEARD A DISCUSSION GOING ON
INSIDE THE HOUSE?
"ANSWER: YES. I WALKED INTO
THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE,
AND IN THE KITCHEN, DETECTIVE LANGE AND VANNATTER WERE DISCUSSING
WHAT HAD BEEN FOUND. I BELIEVE DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS IN THERE
ALSO, AND THEY WERE DISCUSSING, QUOTE, WE REALLY HAVE GOT ANOTHER
CRIME SCENE HERE, UNQUOTE, AND A SEARCH WARRANT WAS BROUGHT UP.
QUOTE, WE HAVE TO GET A SEARCH WARRANT, UNQUOTE. DETECTIVE
VANNATTER SAID THAT AND I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TIME THAT WAS."
HAVE I READ YOUR RATHER LENGTHY ANSWER CORRECTLY?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
NOW, YOU SAID, "WHEN I FOUND THE GLOVE AND ACTUALLY
REALIZED THIS GLOVE WAS VERY CLOSE IN DESCRIPTION AND COLOR TO
THE GLOVE AT THE CRIME SCENE." CAN YOU TELL US WHEN THAT POINT
WAS WITHIN THIS PERIOD?
A I TESTIFIED
BEFORE SEVERAL TIMES THAT WHEN I SAW THE
GLOVE, IT LOOKED VERY SIMILAR TO THE GLOVE ON BUNDY.
Q THE CONNECTION
WAS IMMEDIATE IN YOUR MIND?
A YES.
Q IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT CONNECTION
THAT IT LOOKED VERY SIMILAR, YES.
Q OKAY.
NOW, ON PAGE 26, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, LINE 16:
"QUESTION: RIGHT. NOW, WITH
RESPECT TO THE EXCITEMENT
THAT YOU FELT IN ENCOUNTERING THE GLOVE, YOU REALIZED IMMEDIATELY
THIS MAY HAVE BROKEN THE CASE?
"ANSWER: I DON'T THINK IT WAS
EXCITEMENT. I WAS CAUGHT ON
A TWO-FOOT PATH IN A -- POORLY LIT WITH A LITTLE TINY FLASHLIGHT
BY MYSELF WITH NO VEST, AND I MUST ADMIT THAT I THINK THE ONLY
REASON THAT I PROCEEDED IS, I FELT MORE THAT I MIGHT HAVE A
VICTIM THAN A SUSPECT. I DON'T KNOW WHY I THOUGHT THAT.
"LIKE I SAID, I DID NOT BELIEVE THE CIRCUMSTANCES
WOULD UNFOLD AS THEY DID WHEN I LED THESE DETECTIVES UP TO
ROCKINGHAM. I CONTINUED PROBABLY HOPING THAT I COULD FIND SOME
ANSWER FOR THIS GLOVE OR SOMEBODY THAT HAD BEEN INJURED OR
SOMETHING, BUT IT WAS MORE ALERT THAN EXCITEMENT."
DID YOU GIVE THAT ANSWER?
A YES, I DID.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO YOU DESCRIBED THAT YOU WERE CAUGHT ON A TINY
TWO-FOOT PATH ALL ALONE WITH A LITTLE TINY FLASHLIGHT AND NO VEST
BY WHICH YOU MEANT A BULLETPROOF VEST, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q WOULD YOU
EXPLAIN TO THIS COURT HOW IT WAS THAT YOU
WERE CAUGHT THERE?
A I'M SURE I
-- I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE --
Q YOU DON'T
UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION?
A NO, SIR.
Q I'M USING
YOUR WORDS.
"I WAS CAUGHT ON A TWO-FOOT PATH IN
A POORLY LIT WITH A
LITTLE TINY FLASHLIGHT BY MYSELF WITH NO VEST, AND I MUST ADMIT
THE ONLY REASON I PROCEEDED IS, I FELT MORE THAT I MIGHT HAVE HAD
A VICTIM THAN A SUSPECT."
NOW, WERE YOU CAUGHT OR COULD YOU HAVE LEFT
IMMEDIATELY THE WAY YOU CAME IN?
A WELL, I WAS
COMMITTED TO THAT POINT.
Q COMMITTED
HOW?
A BECAUSE I
WAS THERE.
Q YOU HAD NOBODY
WITH YOU.
A I WAS COMMITTED
BY MY PRESENCE.
Q YOU DIDN'T
HAVE ANYONE WITH YOU, DID YOU?
A NO.
Q YOU WEREN'T
WEARING A VEST YOU'VE SAID.
A YES.
Q YOUR FLASHLIGHT
WAS RATHER INADEQUATE FOR THE TASK,
RIGHT?
A IT WAS NOT
THE BEST IT COULD BE, NO.
Q BUT YOU COMFORTED
YOURSELF THAT YOU COULD PROCEED
DESPITE THESE DEFICIENCIES BECAUSE YOU THOUGHT YOU WOULD FIND A
VICTIM RATHER THAN A SUSPECT?
A I WAS CONCERNED
WITH THAT, YES.
Q TELL THE COURT
IF YOU CAN WHY THE PRESENCE OF THE
OTHER MURDER GLOVE FROM BUNDY MADE YOU THINK THAT YOU WERE ABOUT
TO ENCOUNTER A VICTIM, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.
A BECAUSE I
DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO BELIEVE THAT THERE
WAS A SUSPECT THERE OTHER THAN THE BLOODY GLOVE.
Q YOU REALIZE
THAT YOU HAVE TOLD US EARLIER --
A YES.
Q -- TESTIFIED
UNDER OATH EARLIER --
A YES.
Q -- THAT THE
BLOODY GLOVE MADE YOU THINK YOU WOULD
FIND A SUSPECT?
A OR A VICTIM.
Q BUT BY FAR,
THE MORE LIKELY A SUSPECT YOU SAID; DID
YOU NOT?
A YES.
Q BUT HERE,
YOU'VE SAID ON YOUR OATH THAT THE ONLY
REASON YOU PROCEEDED UNARMED AND ALONE OR AT LEAST WITHOUT A VEST
AND ALONE WAS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T EXPECT TO FIND A SUSPECT. YOU
SAID THAT, DIDN'T YOU?
A YES, I DID.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. NOW,
THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU DID NOT THINK
THAT YOU WOULD BE IN DANGER IF YOU PROCEEDED EASTBOUND THROUGH
THE COBWEBBY PATH BECAUSE WHOEVER YOU WOULD FIND WOULD BE HURT
AND NOT DANGEROUS?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
THAT THERE WAS NO FEELING OF DANGER,
NO.
Q BUT YOU DID
SAY, "I MUST ADMIT, I THINK THE ONLY
REASON I PROCEEDED IS, I FELT MORE THAT I MIGHT HAVE HAD A VICTIM
THAN A SUSPECT"?
A MAYBE THAT
WAS A HOPE.
Q YOU NOW SAY
THAT WAS A HOPE AND NOT A THOUGHT?
A NO.
I'M SAYING MAYBE THAT WAS A HOPE, A PRESENCE OF
MIND THEN AND AT THE PRELIM.
Q YOU RECALL
THAT YESTERDAY WE TALKED ABOUT YOUR VISIT
TO THE -- WHAT WE HAVE CALLED THE FENCE THAT IS ON THE BORDER
OF
THE TWO PROPERTIES 873 AND 875?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
YOU CALLED IT I BELIEVE THE NORTH BORDER?
A THE NORTH
BORDER OF THE RESIDENCE TO THE SOUTH, YES.
Q OKAY.
WHEN YOU DESCRIBED THIS EXPERIENCE YESTERDAY, YOU
TOLD US THAT YOU WERE STANDING, HAVING BEEN RELIEVED, WAITING FOR
YOUR REPLACEMENT AT THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY,
CORRECT?
A WE'RE TALKING
AT THE BUNDY LOCATION NOW?
Q YES.
A OH YES, SIR.
THE NORTH RESIDENCE FROM BUNDY.
Q LIEUTENANT
SPANGLER, YOUR ULTIMATE BOSS IN THE BUREAU
OF DETECTIVES, CAME AND BROUGHT YOU UP TO THE FENCE WHERE
GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS CRUMPLED?
A YES.
Q WITHOUT GOING
THROUGH THE TAPE OR UNDER IT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q THERE WAS
NO TAPE BEYOND THAT END OF THE FENCE, WAS
THERE?
A NO.
THAT RESIDENCE WAS NOT TAPED OFF IN THE FRONT.
Q YOU WERE ABLE
TO WALK IN A LITTLE WALKWAY NEXT TO THE
DIVIDING LINE?
A YES.
Q BUT OUTSIDE
THE FENCE?
A YES.
Q AND THERE,
LIEUTENANT SPANGLER, HAVING INVITED YOU TO
TAKE A LOOK, YOU EXAMINED GOLDMAN'S BODY AND FOUND A LACERATION.
A THAT WAS OBSERVED
BY LIEUTENANT SPANGLER.
Q BUT YOU SAW
IT TOO?
A OH, YES, SIR.
Q AND YOU THOUGHT
IT WAS A TEAR?
A I USED THE
WORD "LACERATION."
Q AND WHEN I
ASKED YOU TO DESCRIBE IT FURTHER, DID YOU
NOT SAY IT WAS TORN?
A NO.
I SAID LACERATION IS TEARING, IT'S NOT AN
INCISION.
Q OKAY.
IN ANY EVENT, WHEN I ASKED YOU IF THERE WAS ANYTHING
ELSE THAT YOU SAW AT THAT POINT, YOU SAID NO, DIDN'T YOU?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
NOW, ON JULY 5TH AT PAGE 64, WHICH WE HAVE REVIEWED,
WHEN YOU DESCRIBE THE SAME INCIDENT, THERE IS NO MENTION
WHATSOEVER OF YOUR HAVING BEEN RELIEVED, IS THERE? PAGE 64,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.
A YOU'RE GOING
TO HAVE TO GIVE ME A LINE, SIR.
Q OKAY.
STARTING AT THE TOP, JUST READING TO YOURSELF SO THAT
YOU CAN LOCATE YOURSELF AS YOU DID THIS MORNING, ON THE STEPS
LOOKING DOWN AT THE FEMALE VICTIM AND NOT BEING ABLE TO CLEARLY
SEE THE MALE VICTIM.
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q OKAY.
YOU SAID THEN, LINE 14 -- 12:
"WE HAD FLASHLIGHTS. WE WERE LOOKING
AT THE FEMALE VICTIM.
WE LOOKED AT THE MALE VICTIM."
YOU'RE STILL ON THE STEPS, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q YOU SAID:
"I NOTICED THE GLOVE WHEN I WALKED AROUND
TO THE -- AFTER I
EXITED THE RESIDENCE THE FIRST TIME AND WALKED AROUND TO THE SIDE
ON THE NORTH SIDE, NORTH PERIMETER OF 875 BUNDY. THERE'S AN IRON
FENCE, AND THROUGH THAT IRON FENCE, YOU CAN GET A VERY CLOSE LOOK
AT THE MALE VICTIM."
THE COURT: NO. READ IT AGAIN.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
"CAN GET VERY CLOSE TO THE MALE
VICTIM."
I'M SORRY.
THE COURT: READ THE WHOLE SENTENCE
AGAIN.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
"AND LOOKING THERE, I COULD SEE THEM
DOWN THERE AT HIS FEET."
YOU READ THAT EARLIER?
THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT, WAIT.
READ IT AGAIN.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
OKAY.
"THERE'S AN IRON FENCE, AND THROUGH THAT IRON
FENCE, YOU CAN GET VERY CLOSE TO THE MALE VICTIM. AND LOOKING
THERE, I COULD SEE THEM DOWN AT HIS FEET."
WE READ THAT EARLIER; DO YOU RECALL?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, THERE'S
NOTHING IN THERE ABOUT YOUR HAVING BEEN
RELIEVED, IS THERE?
A ABOUT BEING
RELIEVED?
Q YEAH.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: OBJECTION WHAT?
VAGUE? SUSTAINED.
MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HAD YOU BEEN RELIEVED WHEN THIS
HAPPENED?
THE COURT: THE QUESTION IS NOT
HERE, COUNSEL.
MR. BAILEY: PARDON ME, YOUR PARDON?
THE COURT: THE QUESTION IS NOT
HERE. IT'S WHAT DID YOU
OBSERVE THERE. IT'S NOT WHO --
MR. BAILEY: I'M PUTTING ANOTHER
QUESTION TO HIM; HAD HE
BEEN RELIEVED BEFORE HE MADE THIS EXCURSION.
THAT'S NOT IN THE TRANSCRIPT. I'M ASKING HIS MEMORY.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
OKAY.
DID YOU TELL US YESTERDAY YOU WENT HERE AT THE
REQUEST OF AND WITH LIEUTENANT SPANGLER?
A YES.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING
IN THIS DESCRIPTION ABOUT
LIEUTENANT SPANGLER?
A IT WASN'T
ASKED, SIR.
Q DID YOU TELL
US YESTERDAY ABOUT A LACERATION?
A YES.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING
IN THIS DESCRIPTION ABOUT A
LACERATION?
A THAT ALSO
WASN'T ASKED.
Q WELL, THIS
IS A PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT YOU
VOLUNTEERED. IT WASN'T IN RESPONSE TO ANY QUESTION, WAS IT,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WAS THE QUESTION WHICH WAS PUT TO YOU
THAT TRIGGERED THIS WHOLE ANSWER, "WHEN DID YOU FIRST OBSERVE
IT," MEANING THE GLOVE?
A YES.
Q AND THAT GAVE
RISE TO YOUR STATEMENT ABOUT WHAT YOU
SAW FROM THE STEPS AND YOUR TOUR UP TO THE NORTHERN PART OF THE
RESIDENCE AND LOOKING THROUGH THE FENCE, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WHEN YOU GAVE THIS TESTIMONY, HAD YOU FORGOTTEN
ABOUT THE LACERATION?
A NO.
Q HAD YOU FORGOTTEN
ABOUT LIEUTENANT SPANGLER?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
ONCE MORE THEN, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WE ASKED YOU TO
LOOK AT PAGE 49 THIS MORNING BECAUSE OF A WORD THAT APPEARS ON
LINE 23 OF THAT PAGE RELATING TO "BLOOD IN THE BRONCO."
A YES.
Q AND YOU AGREE
THAT THAT'S WHAT THE PAGE SAYS?
A I AGREE, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT YOUR FEELING WAS THAT THE REPORTER MADE A
MISTAKE?
A I DIDN'T SAY
THAT. I JUST DID NOT MEAN "IN THE
BRONCO."
Q PARDON ME?
WHAT WAS YOUR ANSWER?
A COULD YOU
ASK -- ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN, SIR?
Q YOU SAID THE
REPORTER DIDN'T MAKE A MISTAKE, BUT THE
WORD IS THERE SOMEHOW?
A I DON'T KNOW.
I JUST KNOW WHAT I MEANT WHEN I
TESTIFIED.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO THAT IF YOU IN FACT USED THE WORD "IN," YOU
MISSPOKE YOURSELF?
A YES.
MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT.
CAN WE PLAY THAT PORTION OF THE TAPE, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
MR. HARRIS.
(AT 1:58 P.M., A VIDEOTAPE
WAS PLAYED.)
(AT 1:58 P.M., THE PLAYING
OF THE VIDEOTAPE ENDED.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR MEMORY IN ANY
WAY AS TO WHAT YOU SAID ON JULY 3RD?
MS. CLARK: CAN WE HAVE THE REST
OF THE ANSWER?
MR. BAILEY: GO AHEAD AND PLACE
THE REST OF IT, MR. HARRIS.
(AT 1:59 P.M., A VIDEOTAPE
WAS PLAYED.)
(AT 1:59 P.M., THE PLAYING
OF THE VIDEOTAPE ENDED.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION?
A ABSOLUTELY,
SIR.
Q OKAY.
AND WHAT DO YOU NOW SAY YOU SAID?
A "IN."
Q "IN."
A YES.
Q OKAY.
THANK YOU.
NOW, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, DO YOU HAVE A FINANCIAL
INTEREST IN THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE?
A I DO?
Q DO YOU?
A NO, I DON'T.
Q HAVE YOU NOT
BROUGHT CLAIMS THAT YOU INTEND TO
PROSECUTE WHEN THIS CASE IS CONCLUDED FOR MONEY?
A CIVIL SUITS?
Q UH-HUH.
A ABSOLUTELY,
SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU KNOW A LAWYER WHOSE NAME IS TOURTELOT,
SOMETHING LIKE THAT, TOURTELOT?
A YES, SIR.
YES.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD
ASK TO APPROACH ON THIS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WITH
THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD
AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: WE'RE OVER HERE AT
THE SIDEBAR.
MISS CLARK, YOU ASKED TO APPROACH.
MS. CLARK: YES.
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHERE THIS IS GOING.
A WITNESS OR ANY CITIZEN HAS A RIGHT TO FILE CIVIL
LAWSUITS WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN DAMAGED IN SOME WAY.
MR. BAILEY IS OPENING THE DOOR NOW TO AN EXPLANATION
FROM DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AS TO ALL OF THE PEOPLE THAT HE HAS SUED
AND EXACTLY WHY -- OR HIS LAWYER HAS SUED AND WHY THEY ARE BEING
SUED, AND THAT HAS NO CONNECTION WITH THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE
WHATSOEVER.
SO MY OBJECTION WOULD BE, IRRELEVANT AND POTENTIALLY
PRIVILEGED MATTERS MAY BE GONE INTO, AT WHICH POINT THIS WITNESS
WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO TESTIFY TO PRIVILEGED MATTERS AND -- MAY I
HAVE ONE MOMENT?
THE COURT: SURE.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MS. CLARK: AND I THINK IT'S
IRRELEVANT UNDER 352.
AS I STATED EARLIER, THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE WOULD
NOT AFFECT THE VALIDITY OF ANY CIVIL SUIT HE MAY HAVE.
FOR EXAMPLE, THE JURY MAY HANG, AND YET, KATHLEEN
BELL'S CREDIBILITY MAY BE FOUND TO BE ABSOLUTELY NIL AND HER
ALLEGATIONS MALICIOUS AND VINDICTIVE. THERE IS NO CONNECTION
TO
THE OUTCOME OF THE CASE.
NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BRING IT ON REDIRECT, HAVE
HIM EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHO AND WHY HE IS SUING. BUT THAT HAS NO
CONNECTION TO THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE.
THE COURT: YOU DON'T THINK THAT
SOMEBODY FILING LAWSUITS
OVER THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE HAS ANY BEARING ON BIAS OR
INTEREST?
MS. CLARK: NO, BECAUSE THE OUTCOME
OF THIS CASE HAS
NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LAWSUITS THAT ARE BEING REFERRED TO.
THE COURT: MR. BAILEY, WHAT KIND
OF LAWSUITS ARE WE
TALKING ABOUT HERE?
MR. BAILEY: HE BROUGHT CLAIMS
FOR DEFAMATION AGAINST
SHAPIRO I BELIEVE AND NOW JOHNNIE COCHRAN SAYING HE WOULD BRING
THE SUITS IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS CASE IS OVER BECAUSE HE DOESN'T
WANT TO INTERFERE WITH THE HANDLING OF THIS CASE; I.E., DOESN'T
WANT HIS CLIENT DEPOSED. BUT FUHRMAN HAS ALREADY SAID HE
BROUGHT CLAIMS, HE INTENDS TO PURSUE THEM.
CERTAINLY IF THIS JURY COMES BACK AND FINDS HIM TO BE
A LIAR, THAT COULD AFFECT HIS DEFAMATION DAMAGES PRETTY SEVERELY.
MS. CLARK: I DON'T KNOW ABOUT
THAT. THE JURY IS NOT GOING
TO MAKE A FINDING THAT HE'S A LIAR, MR. BAILEY. THEY MAKE A
FINDING OF GUILT OR INNOCENCE AS TO YOUR CLIENT, NOT AS TO THIS
DETECTIVE.
THE COURT: UH-HUH.
MS. CLARK: SO THAT OUTCOME HAS
NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS
LAWSUIT, NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, NO CLAIMS HAVE BEEN
FILED, AND THE VERY STATEMENT MADE BY MR. BAILEY WOULD INDICATE
THAT'S THE CASE, NO CLAIMS HAVE BEEN FILED.
THE COURT: I THOUGHT HE JUST INDICATED
THAT THEY HAD BEEN.
MS. CLARK: NO. HE DOESN'T
KNOW. IT'S HIS LAWYER WHO'S
DOING IT. THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH ASKING THE CLIENT. I'M
SURE
THEY DISCUSSED THE MATTER.
BUT AS TO WHETHER THE CLAIMS HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN
FILED, DOES COUNSEL KNOW? DOES COUNSEL HAVE AN OFFER OF PROOF
FOR THIS COURT?
MR. BAILEY: I JUST TOLD
THE COURT WHAT THE LAWYER DID,
HAVING FUHRMAN DEPOSED AS SOON AS THE CASE IS OVER. HE'S SUING
FOR DEFAMATION. HE'S TALKED ABOUT IT IN JEFFREY TOOBIN'S
ARTICLE. HE'S VERY SPECIFIC.
THE COURT: OKAY.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, AS I UNDERSTAND
IT, IT WASN'T MR.
COCHRAN THAT WAS REFERRED TO. IT WAS MR. SHAPIRO.
MR. COCHRAN: THERE'S OTHER LAWYERS
ALSO. HE PUT US ALL ON
NOTICE. IT'S NOT ONLY SHAPIRO. I WASN'T INVOLVED IN THE
CASE
THEN. HE PUT US ALL, THE WHOLE DEFENSE TEAM. HE'S BEEN
ON EVERY
T.V. PROGRAM SAYING HE'S GOING TO SUE.
MS. CLARK: BUT NOTHING'S BEEN
FILED. EVEN THE LETTER
COUNSEL HAS INDICATES, "WE WILL WAIT UNTIL THE CASE IS
CONCLUDED."
MR. COCHRAN: DOESN'T MATTER.
MS. CLARK: AT WHICH POINT MAY
NEVER BE FILED EITHER.
THIS IS NOT FAIR, YOU KNOW.
MR. COCHRAN: IT'S FAIR.
IT GOES TO BIAS AND INTEREST.
HE'S INDICATED HE'S GOING TO SUE ON EVERY TELEVISION PROGRAM.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, THE PEOPLE
OBJECT UNDER 352. THERE
HAS BEEN NO CLAIM FILED.
I ASK THAT THE QUESTION AND ANSWER THAT HAS BEEN
ELICITED THUS FAR BE STRICKEN. THIS WITNESS DOES NOT KNOW WHAT
HIS ATTORNEY HAS OR HAS NOT DONE.
HE'S ALREADY INDICATED AT THE CONCLUSION OF THIS
CASE, THEY INTEND TO FILE LAWSUITS. THAT MAY OR MAY NOT EVER
OCCUR AND THE OUTCOME OF THIS CASE CERTAINLY HAS NO BEARING ON
WHETHER OR NOT DEFAMATION SUITS WILL BE FOUND MERITORIOUS OR NOT.
MR. SHAPIRO: IT CERTAINLY DOES.
MS. CLARK: UNDER 352.
THE COURT: I'M GOING TO OVERRULE
THE OBJECTION.
BUT, MR. BAILEY, YOU CAN ONLY GO INTO THE TYPES OF
ACTIONS THAT ARE CONTEMPLATED WITHOUT FURTHER EXPLANATION AS TO
WHAT THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY'RE ABOUT.
MR. BAILEY: YES.
THE COURT: ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
MS. CLARK: WHO'S BEING SUED?
THE COURT: YES.
MS. CLARK: HE CAN GO INTO WHO'S
BEING SUED. THEN HE
SHOULDN'T --
THE COURT: WAIT, COUNSEL.
MS. CLARK: IF HE CAN GO INTO WHO'S
BEING SUED, THEN THIS
IS PUTTING --
THE COURT: MISS CLARK, DO YOU
HONESTLY -- EXCUSE ME.
DO THE PEOPLE HONESTLY TAKE THE POSITION THAT
SOMEBODY WHO IS REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL WHO HAS WRITTEN LETTERS TO
TARGET SEVERAL LAWYERS THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE SUING DOESN'T
HAVE ANY BEARING ON SOMEBODY'S CREDIBILITY AS THEY TESTIFY IN A
LAWSUIT THAT'S RELATED TO IT? I MEAN, IS THAT YOUR POSITION?
I MEAN I'M RESTRICTING MR. BAILEY. WE'RE NOT GOING
TO TRY THAT LAWSUIT HERE.
MR. BAILEY: NO.
THE COURT: BUT THE FACT HE IS
GOING TO MAKE CLAIMS AGAINST
CERTAIN PEOPLE CONNECTED WITH THIS CASE, THAT'S RELEVANT TO
CREDIBILITY, BIAS, INTEREST, MOTIVE.
MR. DARDEN: CAN I INTERJECT SOMETHING?
THE COURT: I AM SORRY. SOMETHING
ELSE?
MR. DARDEN: ACTUALLY SINCE MR.
COCHRAN GOT TO SPEAK ON THE
MATTER?
MY CONCERN IS, IF THE JURY LEARNS HE'S SUING MR.
COCHRAN, THE LEAD ATTORNEY ON THE CASE, THAT ADDS A WHOLE NEW
DIMENSION TO THIS CASE AND THE JURY COULD -- THAT COULD VERY WELL
AFFECT THEIR ASSESSMENT OF THIS WITNESS' CREDIBILITY.
THE COURT: IT CERTAINLY DOES.
IT CERTAINLY DOES ADD NEW
DIMENSION TO THE CASE. I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT AT ALL.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
PROCEED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, FOR WHAT PURPOSE
DID YOU RETAIN YOUR LAWYER, ROBERT TOURTELOT?
A BECAUSE I
WAS DEFAMED IN THE MEDIA FOR PLANTING
EVIDENCE IN A CAPITAL CRIME.
Q SOME MAGAZINE
OR OTHER?
A MAGAZINE,
RADIO, T.V., PERSONAL ATTACKS.
Q NOW, DID YOU
AUTHORIZE YOUR ATTORNEY TO SEND A LETTER
TO CERTAIN OF MR. SIMPSON'S COUNSEL THREATENING A LAWSUIT FOR
DEFAMATION WHEN THIS CASE ENDS?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU REVIEW ANY SUCH LETTERS BEFORE THEY WENT?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SO. I RECEIVED COPIES, BUT I DID NOT
REVIEW THEM AND APPROVE THEM, NO.
Q AND YOU WERE
COMPLAINING THAT YOU HAD BEEN ACCUSED AS
A RESULT OF CONDUCT FOR WHICH YOU THOUGHT THEY WERE RESPONSIBLE
OF PLANTING EVIDENCE IN A CAPITAL CASE; IS THAT RIGHT?
A THE
FIRST PART OF THAT QUESTION I DON'T THINK I
UNDERSTAND IT.
Q YOU WERE COMPLAINING,
AS YOU JUST TOLD US, THAT YOU
WERE BEING ACCUSED IN THE MEDIA PARTLY DUE TO THEIR
RESPONSIBILITY, THESE LAWYERS --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- OF PLANTING
EVIDENCE IN A CAPITAL CASE?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
AND THAT IS A VERY SERIOUS CRIME, ISN'T IT?
A YES.
Q BOTH STATE
AND FEDERAL?
A YES.
Q YEAH.
OKAY.
NOW, WHEN THIS LAWSUIT IS OVER, YOU HAVE AN INTENT TO
BEGIN A DEFAMATION LAWSUIT OF A CIVIL NATURE AGAINST MR. SHAPIRO
AND MR. COCHRAN, CORRECT?
A I BELIEVE
SO, YES.
Q AND TO ASK
A JURY FOR MONEY DAMAGES FOR THE DAMAGE TO
YOUR REPUTATION FOR BEING ACCUSED OF PLANTING THE GLOVE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: WHAT'S THE OBJECTION?
MS. CLARK: EXCEEDS THE COURT'S
RULING.
THE COURT: NO. IT'S
THE NATURE OF THE LAWSUIT, COUNSEL.
OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
IS THAT NOT YOUR INTENT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
NOW, IN ADDITION TO THAT, HAVE YOU SOUGHT TO OBTAIN
MONEY IN ANY OTHER FASHION DUE TO YOUR CONNECTION IN THIS CASE?
A NO.
Q DID YOU AUTHORIZE
MR. TOURTELOT TO SEND A LETTER TO
VARIOUS POLICE DEPARTMENTS ASKING FOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO MARK
FUHRMAN?
A I BELIEVE
HE STARTED A DEFENSE FUND, YES.
Q WELL, THE
LETTER WHICH WENT TO POLICE SAID, "MARK
FUHRMAN NEEDS HELP," DIDN'T IT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
OBJECTION. THIS IS
OUTSIDE THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
THAT'S WHAT IT SAID, ISN'T IT?
A I BELIEVE
SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT, YES.
Q ONE OF THE
PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE LETTER SAID YOU
NEEDED HELP WAS TO PAY BOB TOURTELOT $100,000 FOR ADVISING YOU,
WASN'T IT?
A I DON'T RECALL
ANY PART OF THAT A LETTER.
Q HAVE YOU EVER
SEEN IT?
A I DON'T
BELIEVE I'VE SEEN ANYTHING THAT SAYS THAT.
Q HAS IT EVER
BEEN READ TO YOU?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SO. I DON'T RECALL $100,000 TO
ADVISE ME.
Q WELL, $100,000
FOR FEES. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT PART?
A NO, I DON'T,
SIR.
Q DO YOU REMEMBER
ANY AMOUNT THAT WAS SUGGESTED IN THE
LETTER OF SOLICITATION TO HELP MARK FUHRMAN?
A NO, BUT IF
I COULD SEE THE LETTER. I WOULD LIKE TO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WE'LL DIG IT OUT FOR YOU.
LET'S TURN IF WE MAY, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, TO THE
PREPARATION THAT WENT INTO YOUR APPEARANCE HERE LAST THURSDAY.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
CAN WE SEE THE LETTER?
MR. BAILEY: WELL, I'M ASKING COUNSEL
TO DIG IT OUT. IF WE
DON'T HAVE IT TODAY, WE'LL HAVE IT IN THE MORNING.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
PROCEED.
MS. CLARK: MOTION TO STRIKE.
THE COURT: DENIED.
Q BY MR.
BAILEY: I WOULD LIKE TO TURN, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, TO PREPARATION.
I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT YOU HAD NOT SEEN ANY OF THE
PROSECUTORS OR THEIR ASSISTANTS HELPING THEM WITH THIS CASE UNTIL
1995.
A I DID NOT
COME DOWN TO THIS BUILDING FOR THAT PURPOSE
UNTIL THIS YEAR, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q THAT WAS NOT
MY QUESTION.
MY QUESTION WAS, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU SPENT TIME
WITH ANY OF THE PROSECUTORS IN THIS CASE RELATING TO YOUR
TESTIMONY?
A JUST IN 1995.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AT NO TIME IN ALL OF 1994 DID YOU SIT DOWN WITH ANY
OF THE PROSECUTORS AND TALK ABOUT WHAT TESTIMONY YOU WOULD GIVE?
A BEFORE THE
PRELIM I BELIEVE, MARCIA CLARK AND BILL
HODGMAN SAT DOWN WITH ME. THEY ASKED WHAT HAPPENED. I TOLD
THEM.
Q AFTER THE
PRELIM.
A NO.
NOT AFTER THE PRELIM.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU GET A TRANSCRIPT OF YOUR TESTIMONY AT THE
PRELIM, THE ONE THAT YOU ARE SEEING IN FRONT OF YOU AT THIS
MOMENT?
A YES, SIR.
Q WHEN DID YOU
FIRST GET THAT?
A I BELIEVE
THAT WAS IN 1994.
Q OKAY.
AND CAN YOU TELL ME WHEN?
A NO.
Q WELL, WAS
IT CLOSE TO THE END OF THE PRELIM OR CLOSE
TO THE END OF THE YEAR OR SOMEWHERE IN-BETWEEN?
A I'D PROBABLY
SAY SOMEWHERE IN-BETWEEN.
Q SEPTEMBER?
A I DON'T KNOW,
SIR. SOMEWHERE IN-BETWEEN. COULD
POSSIBLY, YES.
Q DID YOU READ
IN THE PAPER THIS SUMMER THAT THIS TRIAL
WAS SCHEDULED TO BEGIN ON SEPTEMBER 19TH?
A I DON'T RECALL,
NO.
Q YOU DIDN'T
PAY ATTENTION TO THE SIMPSON CASE IN THE
NEWSPAPER?
A I DON'T --
I DON'T READ THE NEWSPAPER.
Q DON'T READ
THE NEWSPAPER. WATCH T.V.?
A ABOUT THIS
CASE?
Q UH-HUH.
A NOT MUCH,
SIR.
Q LISTEN TO
THE RADIO?
A YES.
Q ABOUT THIS
CASE.
A ABOUT THIS
CASE? IT'S KIND OF HARD TO AVOID IT.
Q OKAY.
NOW, THAT BEING THE CASE, MAY WE ASSUME THAT YOU KNEW
THAT THE TRIAL DATE HAD BEEN FIXED BY LAW 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE
OF ARRAIGNMENT WHICH WAS SEPTEMBER 19TH?
A I DON'T HAVE
ANY PERSONAL RECOLLECTION OF THAT, BUT
I'LL AGREE WITH IT.
Q DID YOU FEEL
ANY NEED TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS
TO THE STORY YOU HAD TOLD AT THE PRELIM DURING THE SUMMER OF 1994
AND AFTER THE PRELIM?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU -- DO YOU HAVE A RECOLLECTION
OF READING YOUR TESTIMONY PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 19TH?
A NO, I DON'T
RECALL, SIR.
Q HAVE YOU VIEWED
THE VIDEOTAPE OF THE MARK FUHRMAN
TESTIMONY OF JULY 5TH AND 6TH OF 1994 AT ANY TIME?
A AT NO TIME.
Q AND OTHER
THAN THE SNIPPET THAT WE JUST LOOKED AT A
FEW MOMENTS AGO, YOU HAVE SEEN NO VIDEOTAPES?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
HOW ABOUT THE OTHER WITNESSES WHO TESTIFIED AT THE
PRELIM? HAVE YOU READ ANY OF THEIR TESTIMONY?
A NONE.
Q HAVE YOU WATCHED
ANY VIDEOTAPES AS TO WHAT THEY SAID?
A NO.
Q WERE YOU WATCHING
AT THE TIME THAT THEY WERE
TESTIFYING?
A NO.
Q NONE OF THEM?
A NO, SIR.
Q AT ANY TIME?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
HOW MANY TIMES WOULD YOU SAY YOU HAVE READ THAT
TRANSCRIPT THAT'S BEFORE YOU?
A MY TRANSCRIPT,
I PROBABLY READ THROUGH ONCE WHEN I
RECEIVED IT AND THEN CERTAIN AREAS BACK AND FORTH A FEW TIMES.
I'D SAY TWO, THREE TIMES.
Q HOW MANY TIMES
HAVE YOU BEEN THROUGH IT PAGE BY PAGE
WITH ONE OR MORE OF THE PROSECUTORS?
A THROUGH MY
TRANSCRIPT?
Q UH-HUH.
A NEVER.
Q NEVER.
HAVE YOU DISCUSSED THE CONTENTS OF YOUR TESTIMONY AT
THE PRELIM WITH ANY OF THE PROSECUTORS?
A YES, SIR.
Q HOW MANY TIMES
DID YOU DO THAT?
A WITH THE CONTENTS
OF WHAT WAS TESTIFIED TO AT THE
PRELIM WITHOUT THE TRANSCRIPT, PROBABLY TWICE.
Q WITH WHOM?
A MARCIA CLARK
AND CHRIS DARDEN.
Q WERE THEY
BOTH PRESENT ON EACH OF THESE OCCASIONS?
A NO.
IT WAS SEPARATE.
Q ONCE WITH
ONE, ONCE WITH THE OTHER?
A YES, SIR.
Q WAS THERE
SOME QUESTION AT THAT TIME AS TO WHO WAS
GOING TO HANDLE YOU AS A WITNESS?
MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: IRRELEVANT.
MS. CLARK: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED, ALTHOUGH
I DON'T NEED IT FROM THREE
LAWYERS AT THE SAME TIME.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HOW MANY TOTAL TIMES HAVE YOU MET
WITH EITHER MR. DARDEN, MISS CLARK OR ANYONE ELSE IN THE
PROSECUTION TEAM IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR TESTIMONY?
A SEVEN OR EIGHT
TIMES.
Q SEVEN
OR EIGHT. BEGINNING WHEN AND ENDING WHEN?
A IT WOULD BE
VARIOUS TIMES THIS YEAR, PROBABLY MOSTLY
WITHIN THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF.
Q OKAY.
AND WHEN WOULD YOU DO THAT? IN THE EVENING OR ON THE
WEEKEND?
A OH, IT WAS
-- SOMETIMES IT WAS IN THE LATE AFTERNOON
OR EVENING AND IT MIGHT BE IN THE WEEKEND.
Q WERE ALL OF
THOSE MEETINGS IN THIS BUILDING?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND WERE THEY ALL IN THE OFFICES OF THE PROSECUTORS?
A NOT ALWAYS
IN THE OFFICE, NO.
Q WHERE ELSE
DID YOU MEET?
A WE MET ONCE
IN THE GRAND JURY ROOM.
Q WAS THAT TO
SIMULATE THE ENVIRONMENT OF A COURTROOM?
A I'M NOT SURE
IF IT WAS THAT OR JUST THE AVAILABILITY
OF A FORUM TYPE SETTING.
Q HOW MANY TIMES
HAVE YOU TESTIFIED IN COURT SINCE YOU
BECAME A POLICE OFFICER?
A COUPLE HUNDRED
TIMES I'M SURE.
Q HUNDREDS?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU EVER TESTIFY AS A MILITARY POLICEMAN BEFORE A
COURT-MARTIAL?
A YES.
Q HOW MANY TIMES?
A TWICE I BELIEVE.
Q WOULD YOU
SAY THAT YOU ARE A FAIRLY EXPERIENCED
WITNESS?
A I THINK I'VE
TESTIFIED NUMEROUS TIMES. YES, SIR.
Q HOW MANY OF
THE CASES IN WHICH YOU'VE TESTIFIED HAVE
DEALT WITH HOMICIDE? WHETHER YOU WERE A PATROLMAN OR DETECTIVE
IS IRRELEVANT. JUST THE SUBJECT MATTER.
A DOZENS.
Q DOZENS?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
IN HOW MANY OF THOSE CASES WERE YOU GIVEN PREPARATORY
ASSISTANCE PRIOR TO YOUR TESTIMONY IN A GRAND JURY ROOM, IF YOU
CAN REMEMBER?
A NEVER IN A
GRAND JURY ROOM.
Q THIS WAS A
FIRST?
A YES.
Q WAS IT EXPLAINED
TO YOU WHY THE OFFICES WHICH HAD
BEEN AVAILABLE ON THE OTHER OCCASIONS WERE NOT AVAILABLE THAT
COMPELLED YOU TO GO INTO THE GRAND JURY ROOM?
A IT WAS NOT
EXPLAINED, NO.
Q WHERE DID
YOU SIT WHILE YOU WERE DISCUSSING YOUR
TESTIMONY?
A I BELIEVE
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE WITNESS CHAIR TO
THE RIGHT OF THE FOREMAN.
Q YOU WERE SITTING
IN THE WITNESS CHAIR?
A YES.
Q MIGHT WE SAY
THAT THAT WAS PRACTICING?
A YES.
Q YOU'VE NEVER
BEFORE PREPARED TO TESTIFY FOR A CASE BY
GOING IN A COURTROOM AND SITTING IN THE WITNESS CHAIR, HAVE YOU?
A I DON'T RECALL
DOING THAT, NO.
Q BUT AS YOU
TOLD US AT THE VERY OUTSET OF YOUR
TESTIMONY, THIS, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, IS A SPECIAL CASE; IS IT NOT?
A I THINK IT
WAS AN IMPORTANT CASE. THE WORD "SPECIAL
CASE," I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT.
Q DIDN'T YOU
SAY THAT PEOPLE WERE MORE CONCERNED WITH
THINGS OTHER THAN THE EVIDENCE, THAN THEY WERE WITH THE EVIDENCE
AND THAT SET IT APART FROM THE OTHER CASES OR WORDS TO THAT
EFFECT?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AS A RESULT OF THAT, WE LEARNED YOU HAD SOME SPECIAL
SESSIONS WITH SOME PROSECUTORS I TAKE IT OTHER THAN MISS CLARK
AND MR. DARDEN?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE PRESENT IN THE
GRAND JURY?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT,
YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: SEVEN, EIGHT.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
SEVEN?
A SEVEN OR EIGHT.
Q HOW MANY WERE
LAWYERS, IF YOU KNOW?
A FOUR -- FOUR
OR FIVE.
Q HOW MANY QUESTIONED
YOU?
A THERE WAS
A LOT OF DISCUSSION GOING ON BETWEEN THEM.
Q HOW MANY QUESTIONED
YOU, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A WELL, I'M
TRYING TO GET TO THAT, SIR.
Q OKAY.
A TWO, MAYBE
THREE.
Q DO YOU REMEMBER
WHO THEY WERE?
A YES.
Q WHO WERE THEY?
A MR. DARDEN,
MR. WHITE.
Q MR. WHITE.
COULD YOU HELP US WITH THAT ONE?
A TERRY WHITE.
Q TERRY WHITE.
A AND I BELIEVE
MR. YOCHELSON.
Q NOW, THESE
QUESTIONS -- HOW LONG DID EACH ONE SPEND
WITH YOU? CAN YOU HELP US WITH THAT?
A WELL, IT WAS
VERY BRIEF. THERE WOULD BE A QUESTION
OR A COMMENT AND THAT WOULD BE IT.
Q WAS THERE
ANY RECORD MADE OF THIS EXPERIENCE SUCH AS
TAPE, AUDIOTAPE, COURT REPORTER, NOTES, IF YOU KNOW?
A I KNOW, AND
THERE WASN'T.
Q OKAY.
WAS A SCRIPT PREPARED TO ASSIST YOU IN DELIVERING
YOUR TESTIMONY?
A NO.
Q HAVE YOU SEEN
ANY SCRIPT IN THIS CASE?
A A SCRIPT?
Q YES.
Q AND A.
A I'VE SEEN
QUESTIONS THAT WE -- THAT MIGHT BE ASKED,
BUT I DON'T HAVE THOSE, NO.
Q WITH WHOM
DID YOU REVIEW LISTS OF QUESTIONS THAT
MIGHT BE ASKED?
A I DIDN'T REVIEW
THOSE WITH ANYONE. THERE'S QUESTIONS
THAT WERE ASKED AND THEY WERE WRITTEN DOWN, BUT I DON'T HAVE A
COPY OF THOSE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT AT SOME TIME PRIOR TO COMING TO THIS COURTROOM,
DID YOU SEE A WRITTEN LIST OF QUESTIONS THAT YOU ANTICIPATED
WOULD BE ASKED?
A NO.
Q HAVE YOU EVER
SEEN A WRITTEN LIST OF QUESTIONS THAT
PERTAINS TO YOUR TESTIMONY?
A I'VE SEEN
QUESTIONS THAT PEOPLE WERE TAKING NOTES OF,
BUT AS FAR AS A LIST THAT, "THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ASK YOU,"
NO.
Q WHAT DID YOU
MEAN A MOMENT AGO WHEN YOU SAID YOU'VE
SEEN A LIST OF QUESTIONS?
A WELL, PEOPLE
ARE READING QUESTIONS OR TALKING OR
DISCUSSING IN FRONT OF ME OR WITH ME.
Q ARE YOU LOOKING
AT QUESTIONS WRITTEN ON A PIECE OF
PAPER AT THIS TIME?
A NO.
Q OR ASSUMING
THAT THEY'RE WRITTEN ON PAPER BECAUSE
SOMEBODY IS READING?
A WELL, I CAN
SEE THAT THERE'S WRITING AND THEY'RE
MAKING NOTATIONS IN WRITING.
Q OKAY.
NOW, WHEN YOU WERE EXAMINED BY THE THREE LAWYERS YOU
HAVE NAMED, WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THEIR QUESTIONS?
A CROSS-EXAMINATION.
Q THESE WERE
LEADING QUESTIONS AND SUGGESTIVE
QUESTIONS?
A I DON'T THINK
I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT, SIR.
Q A LEADING
QUESTION IS A QUESTION THAT SUGGESTS THE
ANSWER; FOR INSTANCE, YOU ARE MARK FUHRMAN, NOT WHAT IS YOUR
NAME. UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE?
A NO.
I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE, BUT NO, THERE WEREN'T.
Q WERE ANY OF
THE QUESTIONS ABUSIVE?
A I DON'T KNOW
-- I --
Q INSULTING?
A NO.
Q NASTY?
A NO.
Q WHAT WERE
YOU TOLD WAS THE PURPOSE OF THIS EXERCISE?
A TO PREPARE
ME FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION.
Q OKAY.
AND WHAT WERE YOU TO GUARD AGAINST IN
CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT THIS PREPARATION WOULD FACILITATE?
A I DON'T THINK
I WAS TOLD --
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE,
YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WERE THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE BEING
PUT TO YOU AS SIMULATED CROSS-EXAMINATION IN YOUR MIND AN ATTEMPT
TO ASSIST IN PREPARING YOU TO WITHSTAND A REAL CROSS-EXAMINATION?
A NO. I
THINK THERE ARE AREAS AND QUESTIONS THAT HAVE
PROBABLY NEVER BEEN ASKED MOST DETECTIVES OR POLICEMEN.
Q CAN YOU GIVE
ME AN EXAMPLE?
A NO, I CAN'T.
Q CAN YOU THINK
OF ANY LANGUAGE THAT WAS USED IN THOSE
QUESTIONS THAT SOME MIGHT FIND OFFENSIVE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A NO.
Q NONE?
A NO.
Q CAN YOU REMEMBER
EVEN ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT THESE
THREE LAWYERS PUT TO YOU?
A NO, I DO NOT,
SIR.
Q NOT A SINGLE
ONE?
A NO.
Q MAY WE THEN
ASSUME THAT YOU DID NOT PROFIT BY THE
EXPERIENCE OF PREPARATION FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION?
A I DON'T THINK
IT WAS VERY PRODUCTIVE, NO.
Q WAS THERE
ANY EFFORT ON YOUR PART TO REACH CERTAIN
GOALS AS A RESULT OF THIS TRAINING SESSION?
A I DON'T UNDERSTAND
THAT QUESTION, SIR.
Q DID YOU START
UP BEFORE THE LAWYERS STARTED IN ON YOU
WITH THEIR QUESTIONS WITH AN OBJECTIVE IN MIND, SOMETHING YOU
WANTED TO ACHIEVE THAT WOULD MAKE YOU A BETTER WITNESS?
A NO.
Q DID NOT?
A NO.
Q DID THEY DESCRIBE
FOR YOU ANY OBJECTIVE THAT THEY HAD
IN MIND THAT YOU SHOULD REACH IN ORDER TO BE A BETTER WITNESS?
A I DON'T RECALL
THEY DID, NO.
Q WHEN DID THIS
TAKE PLACE?
A A FEW WEEKS
AGO.
Q WHAT DAY OF
THE WEEK?
A I WANT TO
SAY IT WAS A SATURDAY OR A SUNDAY.
Q THE WEEKEND
WAS IT?
A YES.
I'D PROBABLY GO ON SUNDAY.
Q AND WHO WERE
THE PEOPLE THERE THAT YOU HAVE NOT
NAMED, IF YOU KNOW?
A I DON'T KNOW
A LOT OF THE PEOPLE BY NAME.
Q CAN YOU CLASSIFY
THEM?
A WELL, I KNOW
-- THE ONES I DO KNOW BY NAME WAS MR.
YOCHELSON, MR. DARDEN, MISS LEWIS, MR. WHITE, MR. YOCHELSON.
Q YOU NAMED
HIM.
A YES.
I'M JUST GOING THROUGH ALL -- I'M GOING THROUGH
ALL OF THEM.
Q OKAY.
A MR. RUNYON.
AND I DON'T KNOW THE NAMES OF A LOT OF
THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE OR THE REST OF THE PEOPLE.
Q SO WERE THEY
DETECTIVES OR LAWYERS, IF YOU KNOW?
A I -- I'M NOT
SURE. I DIDN'T KNOW THE STATUS OF SOME
OF THE PEOPLE.
Q WERE THEY
PARTICIPATING IN DISCUSSION?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
THEY WERE, NO.
Q WERE THEY
SUGGESTING QUESTIONS, IF YOU REMEMBER?
A NO.
THEY APPEARED TO BE OBSERVERS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, THIS IS A ONE AND ONLY IN
YOUR EXPERIENCE AS A WITNESS, ISN'T IT?
A EXCUSE ME,
SIR?
Q THIS GRAND
JURY ADVENTURE WHERE YOU WERE GIVEN TRIAL
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THREE DIFFERENT LAWYERS, THAT'S THE ONLY
TIME IN YOUR CAREER THAT'S EVER HAPPENED, ISN'T IT?
A YES.
Q DID THEY TELL
YOU THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY WERE
TRYING TO PREVENT FROM HAPPENING IN YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION?
A NO.
Q HAS THAT EVER
BEEN DISCUSSED?
A PREVENT?
NO.
Q WELL, WE WERE
TOLD RIGHT AT THE OUTSET OF YOUR
TESTIMONY THAT YOU HAD HAD THIS SPECIAL TRAINING. IS THERE
ANYTHING MORE THAT YOU CAN TELL US ABOUT WHAT YOU DID OR WHAT
THEY DID?
A THEY WERE
DISCUSSING A LOT OF THINGS BETWEEN
THEMSELVES AND IT LASTED 20 OR 30 MINUTES AND IT WASN'T VERY
PRODUCTIVE. I DIDN'T GET MUCH OUT OF IT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WAS ANY OF IT DESIGNED TO HELP YOU KEEP YOUR TEMPER,
IF YOU KNOW?
IT WAS NOT?
A NO.
Q ANY OF IT
DESIGNED TO HELP YOU TO AVOID THE USE OF
CERTAIN LANGUAGE, IF YOU KNOW?
A NO.
Q WAS NOT?
A NO.
Q IT SOUNDS
AS IF YOU REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT
THE PURPOSE WAS. IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?
A NO.
IT WAS FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION, BUT IT WAS VERY
CASUAL. I WAS EATING A SUBMARINE SANDWICH AT THE SAME TIME THE
DISCUSSIONS WERE GOING ON.
Q I TAKE IT
THIS WAS LESS THAN BLISTERING, THIS
CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT PERMITTED YOU TO MUNCH AWAY ON A
SUBMARINE?
A YES.
AS I SAID, IT WAS DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE
ATTORNEYS AND --
Q SOUNDED MORE
LIKE A LUNCHEON.
THE COURT: MR. BAILEY, YOU REALLY
DO NEED TO LET HIM
FINISH THE QUESTION.
MR. BAILEY: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: AND THE ANSWER.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
CAN YOU TELL ME, JUST YES OR NO, WERE
ANY RACIAL SLURS USED IN THAT EXPERIENCE THAT DAY?
A NO, THERE
WEREN'T.
Q NOT A SINGLE
ONE?
A NO.
Q DIDN'T HEAR
ONE SPOKEN ALL DAY IN THE ROOM?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
CAN YOU THEN RELATE THIS GRAND JURY ROOM SESSION TO
WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO US AT THE OUTSET OF YOUR
DIRECT EXAMINATION?
A I THINK THE
ATTORNEYS WERE CONCERNED WITH
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF MYSELF AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION AND SOMEWHAT
A MEETING OF MINDS IN HOPING THAT WE COULD PREPARE ME FOR
CROSS-EXAMINATION. I DON'T THINK IT ACHIEVED THOSE GOALS.
Q BUT YOU SAID,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, THAT YOUR CONCERNS
HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CRIME SCENE OR THE MURDER; THEY WERE
SOMETHING ELSE.
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHAT WERE THE CONCERNS, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A WELL,
THERE'S BEEN NUMEROUS MOTIONS TO BRING IN
IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE INTO THIS TRIAL.
Q IRRELEVANT
EVIDENCE.
A YES, SIR.
Q SUCH AS?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SORRY. I WAS
TRYING TO COMMUNICATE WITH MY
CLERK THERE. HOLD ON.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WHAT IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE WAS GOING TO
BE BROUGHT INTO THE TRIAL THAT YOU WERE PREPARING FOR?
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION.
COUNSEL --
THE COURT: APPROACH THE SIDEBAR,
PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD
AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: IT'S UNBELIEVABLE WE
HAVE 20,000 PAGES OF
TRANSCRIPT ALREADY.
MR. BAILEY: COUNTER DOESN'T HAVE
SIX DIGITS.
MS. CLARK: IS THE COURT LOOKING
FOR SOMETHING?
THE COURT: GO AHEAD.
MR. DARDEN: CAN I HANDLE IT?
MS. CLARK: CAN I LET MR. DARDEN
HANDLE THIS?
MR. DARDEN: OBVIOUSLY --
MR. BAILEY: I OBJECT. I
OBJECT. ONE LAWYER --
MR. DARDEN: I AM THE ONE.
MR. BAILEY: -- ONE WITNESS.
I DON'T THINK SO.
THE COURT: MISS CLARK, YOUR WITNESS.
MS. CLARK: NO. THE PROBLEM
IS, I DIDN'T DO THIS MOCK
CROSS-EXAMINATION. I WASN'T THERE.
THE COURT: NO. THE QUESTION
WAS, DID YOU DISCUSS ANYTHING
THAT YOU FELT WAS IRRELEVANT OR DEAL WITH ANYTHING IRRELEVANT.
MS. CLARK: THAT WAS NOT THE QUESTION.
THE COURT: WHAT'S THE QUESTION?
MS. CLARK: THE QUESTION WAS POSED,
WHAT WAS THE MOCK
CROSS-EXAMINATION INTENDED TO HANDLE AND WHY WAS THERE SOME
SPECIAL NEED SEEN TO DO THE --
THE COURT: LET ME GO GET THE QUESTION.
MS. CLARK: THAT WAS THE GIST OF
IT. THAT'S NOT --
THE COURT: THE QUESTION WAS, WHAT
IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE THAT
WAS GOING TO BE BROUGHT INTO THE TRIAL WERE YOU PREPARING FOR.
MS. CLARK: NO. NOT THAT
WAS GOING TO BE BROUGHT INTO THE
TRIAL. THAT COULD HAVE.
THE COURT: THAT WAS THE QUESTION.
MR. DARDEN: THAT'S WHY WE OBJECT.
IF I CAN EXPLAIN IT.
CAN I CONFER?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MS. CLARK: THAT IS MY OBJECTION.
THEY WANT HIM TO SIT THERE AND PUT OUT. NO, I DID GET
IT RIGHT. I GOT IT RIGHT. THEY WANT TO -- THE QUESTION
ASKS HIM
TO DISCUSS WHAT THE COURT HAS ALREADY DEEMED TO BE IRRELEVANT.
THAT'S ASKING HIM TO BRING IN WHAT THE COURT HAS EXCLUDED.
MR. BAILEY: NO. IF YOUR
HONOR PLEASES, THE TRANSCRIPT
WILL SHOW THAT I INQUIRED OF HIM, BASED ON WHAT HE OFFERED THE
JURY AT THE OUTSET AS THE SPECIAL SESSION TO ADDRESS THE SPECIAL
PROBLEM, WHAT NEXUS THERE WAS BETWEEN HIS PROBLEM AND THE
SESSION, AND HE SAID, "I HAD READ IN COURT PAPERS EFFORTS TO
BRING IN IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE ABOUT ME," AND MY INQUIRY IS WHAT
IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE DOES HE MEAN.
MS. CLARK: AND THAT'S --
MR. BAILEY: THEY'VE OPENED THIS
DOOR, JUDGE. THIS IS FAIR
GAME.
MS. CLARK: WE DIDN'T OPEN THE
DOOR, YOUR HONOR. WE
ADDRESSED THE SUBJECT MATTER OF CROSS-EXAMINATION, WHICH COUNSEL
IS NOW LOOKING TO OPEN THE DOOR ON THROUGH HIS OWN
CROSS-EXAMINATION, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED.
TO ASK THE WITNESS NOW TO DISCUSS WHAT THE COURT HAS
DEEMED TO BE IRRELEVANT IS TO FLAUNT THE COURT'S RULING. BY
ASKING THE WITNESS TO DISGORGE WHAT WE HAVE BEEN LITIGATING IN
COURT, THAT CAN'T BE PROPER.
HOW CAN THAT BE A PROPER QUESTION AND HOW CAN THE
SUBJECT MATTER OF -- HOW CAN THAT QUESTION POSSIBLY BE ADMISSIBLE
WHEN THE COURT HAS DEEMED IT TO BE IRRELEVANT AND ADMISSIBLE?
THE COURT: BUT DON'T WE HAVE A
PROBLEM HERE, THAT IF HE'S
BEEN PREPARED AS A WITNESS -- I MEAN ISN'T THAT A RELEVANT AREA
OF CROSS-EXAMINATION, OF WHAT THINGS HE'S BEEN PREPARED ON?
MS. CLARK: YES AND NOT -- NO.
BECAUSE WE DID NOT HAVE THE
BENEFIT OF ALL POSSIBLE RULINGS THAT WERE GOING TO BE GONE INTO
BY THE COURT.
THIS IS REALLY NASTY STUFF, YOU KNOW, AND COUNSEL
KNOWS IT. THE FACT THAT WE PREPARE A WITNESS FOR
CROSS-EXAMINATION, I HAVE NOT OBJECTED TO THEIR CROSS-EXAMINATION
ON IT. THAT'S FAIR.
WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS, YOUR HONOR, BEFORE WE
HANDLED ALL OF THE COURT'S RULINGS ON WHAT WOULD BE ADMISSIBLE
AND WHAT WOULD NOT, WE HAD TO PREPARE WITH THIS WITNESS AS TO
WHAT HE WOULD SAY IN RESPONSE TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS
THAT ARE NOW NOT EVEN ASKABLE BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE IS NOT
ADMISSIBLE, AND NOW YOU ARE GOING TO PERMIT HIM TO ASK, DISGORGE
--
THE COURT: NO. I RECOGNIZE
THERE'S SOME DANGERS HERE.
THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS THAT YOU ASKED THE QUESTION, WHY -- "CAN
YOU TELL US WHY YOU FEEL NERVOUS AND RELUCTANT?"
I MEAN THIS IS ON YOUR THIRD QUESTION, AND THEN HE
GOES ON TO TELL US ABOUT THESE OTHER THINGS. I WAS REAL UNHAPPY
WITH THAT QUESTION AND ANSWER BECAUSE OF WHAT IT OPENS UP.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, IT DOESN'T
OPEN UP THE DOOR TO
ALLOW HIM TO TESTIFY --
THE COURT: SURE, IT DOES.
MS. CLARK: -- WHAT THE COURT DEEMED
INADMISSIBLE.
THE COURT: BUT I'M WORRIED ABOUT
WHAT'S GOING TO COME UP.
I'M GOING TO TOSS THE JURY BACK AND LET YOU ASK THE
QUESTION, AND LET'S SEE WHAT COMES OUT.
MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN,
I NEED TO EXAMINE
SOMETHING OUT OF YOUR PRESENCE. THIS WILL TAKE ABOUT FIVE OR
10
MINUTES.
I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO STEP BACK IN THE JURY ROOM,
PLEASE, AND WE'LL BUZZ YOU OUT. JUST LONG ENOUGH FOR A COMFORT
BREAK THERE.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, STAY THERE. DON'T GO AWAY.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: LET THE RECORD REFLECT
THAT THE JURY HAS
WITHDRAWN FROM THE COURTROOM. ALL PARTIES ARE PRESENT.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN IS STILL ON THE STAND.
MR. BAILEY, THE QUESTION YOU ASKED WAS WHAT
IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE WAS GOING TO BE BROUGHT INTO THE TRIAL THAT
YOU WERE PREPARING FOR; IS THAT CORRECT?
MR. BAILEY: YES. AND MAY
I RESPECTFULLY POINT OUT, YOUR
HONOR, THAT THAT QUESTION WAS TRIGGERED BY THE WITNESS' PRIOR
ANSWER THAT THE PREPARATION WAS CONNECTED WITH IRRELEVANT
MATERIAL THAT HE HEARD OFFERED IN COURT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. COURTS
ARE ALWAYS LEERY OF THINGS
THAT ARE IRRELEVANT.
MR. BAILEY: WHEN DECIDED BY WITNESSES
THAT THEY ARE
IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET'S SEE WHAT THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION IS GOING
TO BE.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHAT EVENT DID YOU
HAVE IN MIND WHEN YOU SPOKE OF IRRELEVANT OCCURRENCES THAT YOU
FEARED MIGHT BE BROUGHT INTO COURT?
A KATHLEEN BELL.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU SAY THAT THAT'S IRRELEVANT?
A YES.
Q EVEN THOUGH
YOU KNEW THAT THE JUDGE RULED THAT IT
COULD BE RELEVANT; DID YOU NOT?
MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION.
THAT WAS NOT --
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
NO. I'M JUST -- MR. BAILEY, I'M NOT INTERESTED IN
THIS OTHER BUSINESS. I'M INTERESTED IN WHAT IRRELEVANT INSTANCE
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. THE REST OF IT WILL COME LATER.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID THIS FEAR STRIKE YOU BEFORE OR
AFTER YOU READ ABOUT CERTAIN RULINGS BY THE COURT?
THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT. MR.
BAILEY, THE ONLY THING I'M
INTERESTED IN IS, WHAT IRRELEVANT -- WHAT ITEMS, WHAT ISSUES,
WHAT EVENTS DETECTIVE FUHRMAN THOUGHT WERE IRRELEVANT THAT HE WAS
PREPARED FOR.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION AS FRAMED BY THE
COURT?
A YES, SIR.
Q CAN YOU ANSWER?
A YES.
STILL KATHLEEN BELL.
Q HAD
YOU ANY CONCERN ABOUT ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS
UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF IRRELEVANT THAT MIGHT FIND THEIR WAY TO THE
TRIAL?
A NO.
THE COURT: OKAY. THAT'S
WHAT I WAS AFRAID, THAT WE WERE
GOING TO GET SOMETHING BEYOND KATHLEEN BELL. APPARENTLY NOT.
THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT WE'RE FAMILIAR WITH, THE JURY IS FAMILIAR
WITH.
ANYTHING ELSE?
I TOLD THE JURY I WOULD GIVE THEM ENOUGH OF A COMFORT
BREAK.
DEPUTY, WHY DON'T YOU CHECK AND SEE IF THEY'RE READY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE DEPUTY: YOUR HONOR, THEY NEED
A FEW MORE MINUTES.
THE COURT: OKAY.
GO AHEAD AND TAKE A STRETCH IF YOU LIKE.
ALL RIGHT.
LET'S KEEP IT QUIET IN THE COURTROOM. WE'RE GOING TO
AWAIT THE JURY'S AVAILABILITY. BUT GO AHEAD AND STAND AND
STRETCH IF YOU LIKE.
JUDGE GODFREY, WELCOME. I SEE WE HAVE SISTERS IN
CRIME WITH US.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: LET'S HAVE THE JURORS,
PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE
MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY CONTINUE.
MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHEN YOU SAID
EARLIER THAT YOU WERE CONCERNED ABOUT MATTERS THAT YOU VIEWED AS
IRRELEVANT, WOULD YOU TELL THE COURT SPECIFICALLY WHICH PERSON
YOU HAD IN MIND, WHICH INCIDENT?
A YES.
KATHLEEN BELL.
Q OKAY.
NOW, ARE YOU TELLING US THEN AND DID YOU KNOW PRIOR
TO THIS TRIAL ANY OTHER CLAIMS THAT WERE MADE AGAINST YOU OF A
TYPE SIMILAR TO KATHLEEN BELL PRIOR TO TAKING THE WITNESS STAND?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: WHAT'S THE OBJECTION?
MS. CLARK: HEARSAY, IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION YES OR NO.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
JUST YES OR NO IS ALL I WANT.
A YES.
Q YOU DID.
OKAY.
BUT WAS KATHLEEN BELL THE FOCUS OF YOUR CONCERN?
A YES.
Q AND WERE THE
QUESTIONS THAT WERE PUT TO YOU BY TWO
PROSECUTORS FOCUSED ON THE KATHLEEN BELL PROBLEM?
A YES, I BELIEVE
SO.
Q TWO OF THESE
PROSECUTORS PROSECUTED RODNEY KING,
DIDN'T THEY?
A I DID NOT
KNOW THAT UNTIL I WAS TOLD.
Q YOU DID NOT
KNOW THAT?
THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT, WAIT.
LET HIM FINISH THE ANSWER,
MR. BAILEY.
MR. BAILEY: SORRY, YOUR HONOR.
THE WITNESS: I HAD KNOWN THAT
TERRY WHITE WAS, BUT I
DIDN'T RECOGNIZE MR. YOCHELSON'S NAME.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
IN ANY EVENT, THAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE EXERCISE,
THE BELL PROBLEM, AND YOU DID NOT FEEL THAT IT WAS PRODUCTIVE,
CORRECT?
A I DIDN'T FEEL
THAT IT WAS REALLY A USEFUL EXERCISE,
NO.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR OBJECTIVE WAS IN
DOING THIS; IS THAT RIGHT?
A WELL, I ASSUMED
IT WAS PREPARATION.
Q PREPARATION
FOR WHAT?
A CROSS-EXAMINATION,
SIR.
Q ABOUT KATHLEEN
BELL?
A YES.
Q ABOUT CERTAIN
LANGUAGE THAT SOME FIND OFFENSIVE?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THAT THEN IS WHAT LED TO THIS
TRIPARTITE SIMULATED CROSS-EXAMINATION, CORRECT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. CALLS
FOR FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
IT'S SPECULATION AS WELL.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
THREE-LAWYER CROSS-EXAMINATION IN THE
GRAND JURY ROOM, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q DO YOU RECALL
ON THURSDAY WHEN YOU TOOK THE STAND
THAT ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AT THE OUTSET OF YOUR TESTIMONY, MISS
CLARK DISPLAYED FOR YOU A PART OF A COPY OF A LETTER THAT HAD
BEEN SENT BY KATHLEEN BELL TO JOHNNIE COCHRAN SOMETIME IN 1994?
A YES, I DO.
Q HAD
YOU EVER LOOKED AT THE ENTIRE LETTER RATHER THAN
JUST THAT PART?
A NO, SIR.
Q HAD YOU EVER
SEEN THAT LETTER BEFORE YOU CAME INTO
THIS COURTROOM?
A NO.
Q HAD YOU EVER
REVIEWED ITS CONTENTS WITH ANYONE BEFORE
YOU CAME INTO THIS COURTROOM?
A NO.
Q DID YOU HAVE
ANY IDEA THAT MISS CLARK WAS GOING TO
BEGIN YOUR TESTIMONY BY THROWING THE BELL LETTER UP ON THE
SCREEN?
A I KNEW THE
CONTENTS, BUT I HAD NEVER READ THE LETTER.
Q NO.
DID YOU HAVE ANY IDEA THAT YOUR TESTIMONY WOULD
BEGIN BY PUTTING THE ACCUSATIONS OF KATHLEEN BELL UP ON THE
SCREEN?
A NO, I DIDN'T.
Q WAS THAT A
SURPRISE TO YOU WHEN SHE DID THAT?
A THE LETTER,
YES.
Q WAS IT A SURPRISE
TO YOU WHEN SHE DEVELOPED IN YOUR
TESTIMONY THAT YOU HAD HAD SOME PRACTICE SESSIONS SOMEWHERE?
A THAT WASN'T
A SURPRISE, BUT I DIDN'T KNOW HOW IT
WOULD BE PHRASED.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
NOW, YOUR HONOR, I HAVE 102, PEOPLE'S 102 I GUESS IT
IS.
JUST START AT THE TOP OF THE ELMO, MR. HARRIS.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
AND TELL ME --
MR. BAILEY: RIGHT AT THE TOP OF
THE LETTER. TOP OF THE
LETTER.
THE COURT: WHAT ARE THESE ITEMS
THAT ARE ON THERE, MR.
HARRIS?
MR. HARRIS: REDACTED COPY OF TELEPHONE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR VOICED
CONCERN ABOUT A CERTAIN
SUBJECT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
RIGHT AT THE TOP THERE, BEGINS, "DEAR MR. COCHRAN."
ALL RIGHT.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU HAVE
NEVER HELD IN YOUR HAND A PIECE OF PAPER ON WHICH THESE WORDS ARE
WRITTEN. YOU'VE ONLY DISCUSSED IT.
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOW,
YOU'LL NOTICE IN THE SECOND PHOTOGRAPH IT SAYS
THAT THE AUTHOR GLANCED UP AT THE TELEVISION AND WAS QUITE
SHOCKED TO SEE "THAT OFFICER FUHRMAN WAS A MAN THAT I HAD THE
MISFORTUNE OF MEETING."
YOU WERE ON TELEVISION PRIOR TO THIS SUMMER IN
CONNECTION WITH THIS CASE; WERE YOU NOT?
A YES.
Q AND YOUR TESTIMONY
AS A WITNESS YOU LEARNED WAS QUITE
WIDELY WATCHED IN THIS STATE AND OTHERS; DID YOU NOT?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
YOU NOTICE THAT THE AUTHOR SAYS THAT SHE HAS LEFT A
MESSAGE ON MR. COCHRAN'S ANSWERING SERVICE?
A YES.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
NEXT PARAGRAPH, MR. HARRIS.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
BETWEEN 1985 AND 1986, SHE SAYS SHE
WORKED AS A REAL ESTATE AGENT IN REDONDO BEACH FOR CENTURY 21,
BOB MAHER REALTY, NOW OUT OF BUSINESS.
NUMBER ONE, WHEN YOU WERE AT THE RECRUITING STATION,
DID YOU BECOME ACQUAINTED WITH A CENTURY 21 REAL ESTATE OFFICE
LOCATED APPROXIMATE TO THE RECRUITING STATION?
A DID I BECOME
--
Q FAMILIAR WITH
THE FACT THAT THERE WAS SUCH AN OFFICE?
A I THINK THERE
WAS ONE ON THE SECOND FLOOR, YES.
Q DID YOU HAVE
TO GO THROUGH THE OFFICE TO GET TO IT OR
WAS THERE SEPARATE STAIRS?
A I DON'T REMEMBER
THAT AT ALL.
Q WAS THERE
A COFFEE SHOP CLOSE BY TO THESE TWO
OFFICES?
A A COPY SHOP
IN THAT SMALL SHOPPING AREA?
Q YEAH.
A NOT THAT I
REMEMBER, NO.
Q YOU DON'T.
OKAY.
DID YOU EVER DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IN 1985 AND -6
A KATHLEEN BELL HAD BEEN EMPLOYED AT THE OFFICE DESCRIBED IN THE
LETTER?
A CONFIRMED
THAT SHE HAD BEEN EMPLOYED THERE?
Q YEAH.
A I NEVER KNEW
A KATHLEEN BELL, BUT NO.
Q NO.
DID YOU EVER MAKE INQUIRY AFTER YOU LEARNED OF
THIS LETTER TO FIND OUT WHETHER THERE WAS A KATHLEEN BELL
EMPLOYED AS SHE SAYS AT THAT TIME, AT THE CENTURY 21 OFFICE?
A I DID NOT.
Q DID YOU CAUSE
YOUR LAWYER, MR. TOURTELOT, TO DO THAT?
A NO, I DIDN'T.
Q AND DID YOU
CAUSE YOUR INVESTIGATOR MR. PELLI-CANO TO
DO THAT?
A NO.
THE COURT: COUNSEL, YOU KNOW THAT
-- IT'S PELICANO. YOU
KNOW HOW IT'S --
MR. BAILEY: PELICANO?
THE COURT: WE ALL KNOW HOW IT'S
PRONOUNCED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU CAUSE HIM TO DO THAT?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
TO THIS DAY, DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THAT PART OF
THE CLAIM IS TRUTHFUL; THAT SHE WORKED AT CENTURY 21 IN '85 AND
'86?
A YES.
I KNOW THAT SHE DOES OR DID. I AM SORRY.
Q DID YOU KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT SHE WAS KNOWN TO THE
MARINES THAT YOU MET WHEN YOU WENT TO THE RECRUITING STATION ON
SEVERAL OCCASIONS?
A THEN OR NOW?
Q DO YOU NOW
KNOW?
A YES.
Q AND THE FACT
IS, SHE WAS KNOWN TO THEM, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION.
THAT'S HEARSAY. NO PERSONAL
KNOWLEDGE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
AND YOU SAY ON ONE OCCASION, A WOMAN
WHOSE DESCRIPTION YOU CAN NOT DREDGE UP IN ANY DETAIL MAY HAVE
BEEN IN THE OFFICE AND YOU'RE UNABLE TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT THAT
WAS OR WAS NOT KATHLEEN BELL; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NEXT PARAGRAPH. AT THE TOP, PLEASE.
IN 1985 OR '86, WERE YOU A POLICE OFFICER IN
WESTWOOD?
A I WORKED THE
FOOT BEAT, YES, IN WESTWOOD, YES.
Q SO THAT IF
SHE HEARD YOU SAY THAT, THAT WAS THE
TRUTH, CORRECT?
MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION.
THAT'S COMPOUND AND
SPECULATION AND HEARSAY.
THE COURT: SPECULATION.
SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
WERE YOU A PERSON WHO WHILE IN THE MARINE CORPS HAD
BEEN IN SOME KIND OF SPECIAL DIVISION?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU SERVE IN VIETNAM AT ALL?
A NOT IN COUNTRY,
NO.
Q NOT IN COUNTRY.
A I WAS ON A
SHIP.
Q OKAY.
IT WAS CALLED BEING STATIONED IN VIETNAM, RIGHT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU SAY WHILE IN THE RECRUITING STATION AT ANY
TIME DURING THOSE YEARS THAT WHEN YOU SEE A NIGGER DRIVING WITH A
WHITE WOMAN, YOU PULL THEM OVER?
A NO.
Q DO YOU RECALL
ANYONE ASKING YOU IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE A
REASON TO PULL THEM OVER, WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
A I DON'T RECALL
ANYBODY EVER ASKING ME THAT QUESTION,
SIR.
Q DID YOU EVER
MAKE A STATEMENT THAT IF YOU NEEDED A
REASON, YOU WOULD FIND ONE?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
NEXT PARAGRAPH.
DID YOU SAY AT ANY TIME IN THAT RECRUITING STATION IN
THE PRESENCE OF ANY FEMALE INCLUDING KATHLEEN BELL THAT YOU'D
LIKE NOTHING MORE THAN TO SEE ALL NIGGERS GATHERED TOGETHER AND
KILLED?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
ARE YOU AWARE, BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, OF ANY COMPLAINT
THAT WAS BROUGHT TO THE LAPD BY THIS INDIVIDUAL?
A I'M NOT AWARE
OF ANY INVESTIGATION, NO.
Q OKAY.
BUT YOU ARE AWARE THAT SHE HAS APPEARED ON PUBLIC
TELEVISION AND MADE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME CLAIMS, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q HAVE YOU STARTED
ANY LAWSUITS AGAINST HER?
A NO.
Q HAVE YOU BROUGHT
CLAIM AGAINST HER FOR DEFAMATION?
A NO.
Q I SEE.
ALL RIGHT.
NOW, YOU TOLD US YESTERDAY THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW, AS I
UNDERSTAND IT, AN ANDREA TERRY.
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q CAN YOU RECALL
AT ANY TIME A BLOND WOMAN SUGGESTING
THAT SHE HAD AN ATTRACTIVE BUT TALL FRIEND?
A NO.
Q DO YOU RECALL
AT ANY TIME IN THE PRESENCE OF JOE FOSS
BEING ASKED BY A WOMAN IF YOU WERE INTERESTED IN A DATE?
A NO.
Q NEVER HAPPENED
THAT YOU CAN RECALL?
A NO.
Q IS IT
THE KIND OF THING THAT YOU WOULD REMEMBER IF
IT HAD OCCURRED, BEING ASKED FOR A DATE IN THE PRESENCE OF JOE
FOSS?
A I THINK IN
THE PRESENCE OF ANYBODY, IF I WAS
INTERESTED IN A WOMAN OR IT WENT FARTHER THAN THAT, I THINK I
WOULD PROBABLY REMEMBER IT.
Q LET'S ASSUME
YOU WEREN'T INTERESTED, SAID "HEY,
YOU'RE NOT MY TYPE," BRUSHED HER OFF. WOULD YOU REMEMBER BEING
INVITED ON A DATE IF IT HAD HAPPENED?
A I WOULD SAY
NOT.
Q OKAY.
WOULD YOU REMEMBER, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, IF YOU HAD
USED THE LANGUAGE THAT WE HAVE JUST REVIEWED?
A YES.
Q THAT IS IMPORTANT
ENOUGH LANGUAGE TO YOU SO THAT IT
WOULD IMPRESS ITSELF ON YOUR MEMORY AS DID THE MEETING WITH THE
SIMPSON'S IN '85; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
YOU TOLD US YESTERDAY THAT YOU DO GO INTO HENNESSEY'S
TAVERN?
A YES, SIR.
Q YOU DO NOT
HAVE A RECOLLECTION OF THE NAME ANDREA
TERRY BEING THERE?
MS. CLARK: CAN WE TAKE THIS OFF
THE SCREEN?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WE'RE ON ANDREA TERRY NOW?
MR. BAILEY: YES.
THE COURT: MR. HARRIS.
MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
YOU DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME ANDREA
TERRY, A WOMAN OVER SIX FEET HIGH OR A WOMAN IN THE COMPANY OF
SOMEONE YOU NOW KNOW TO BE KATHLEEN BELL?
A NO, I DO NOT.
Q DID YOU HAVE
A CONVERSATION IN '85 AND '86 IN
HENNESSEY'S TAVERN WITH A TALL WOMAN WHEREIN YOU SAID THAT BLACK
MEN WHO HAVE WHITE WOMEN IN THEIR COMPANY ARE VIOLATING AN ACT OF
NATURE?
A NO.
Q AND THAT YOU
WOULD ARREST THEM WHENEVER YOU SAW THAT
OCCUR?
A NO.
Q THAT DID NOT
OCCUR AT ANY TIME?
A NO.
Q AND IS THAT
THE KIND OF LANGUAGE OR EXPRESSION,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, THAT YOU WOULD REMEMBER CLEARLY IF THOSE
STATEMENTS HAD BEEN MADE?
A YES.
Q SO AS OF THE
MOMENT, YOU WOULD SAY THAT IF EITHER
KATHLEEN BELL OR ANDREA TERRY CLAIMS THAT YOU MADE THOSE
STATEMENTS, THAT WOULD NECESSARILY BE FALSE?
A YES.
Q AND THAT IF
JOE FOSS, THE MARINE, SAYS THAT HE IN
FACT INTRODUCED YOU TO KATHLEEN BELL OUTSIDE THE RECRUITING
STATION AS SHE EMERGED FROM THE COFFEE SHOP AND THAT THE TWO OF
YOU TALKED ABOUT A DATE, THAT WOULD NECESSARILY BE FALSE?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. BAILEY: MAY I HAVE JUST A
MINUTE, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. BAILEY: I'M LOOKING, YOUR
HONOR, FOR A DOCUMENT WE
WERE DISCUSSING THAT YOU SENT FOR SOMETIME AGO OF AN IN CAMERA
NATURE. IF YOU HAVE IT ON THE BENCH -- I CAN'T LOCATE MINE.
MAYBE WE COULD APPROACH. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT IT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WHY DON'T YOU APPROACH WITHOUT THE COURT REPORTER,
PLEASE.
MR. BAILEY: WAIT A MINUTE.
I'M SORRY. I HAVE IT.
OKAY. QUESTION ANSWERED.
MAY WE APPROACH THE BENCH?
THE COURT: YES, WITH THE COURT
REPORTER, PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD
AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: WE'RE OVER AT THE SIDEBAR.
MR. BAILEY.
MR. BAILEY: MY UNDERSTANDING OF
YOUR RULING EARLIER TODAY,
YOUR HONOR, BEFORE I CAN GO INTO QUESTIONS ABOUT MAX CORDOBA, THE
PROSECUTION IS ENTITLED TO GET IN TOUCH WITH HIM, ALL RIGHT, AND
THE SAME AS TO ALWYN MARTIN.
I WOULD ASK, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BIFURCATE THIS
EXAMINATION, THAT WE ADJOURN FOR THE DAY AND SEE IF THEY CAN
ACCOMPLISH THAT BY MORNING SO THAT WE CAN CONCLUDE WITH DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN. IF THEY CAN'T, I GUESS WE HAVE NO CHOICE.
THE COURT: IT'S FIVE MINUTES TO.
WE'LL BREAK AT THIS
POINT. IF YOU CAN ACCOMPLISH IT, FINE. IF NOT, WE'LL SEE
WHERE
WE ARE. WE MIGHT HAVE TO BIFURCATE THIS.
MR. BAILEY: I PREFER NOT TO.
THE COURT: I PREFER NOT TO AS
WELL, BUT THEY ARE ENTITLED
TO, AS I INDICATED, LOOK INTO THIS.
ANY OTHER COMMENT?
MS. CLARK: NO.
MR. DARDEN: HOW LATE AND HOW LONG
AM I SUPPOSED TO WORK ON
THIS? ALL NIGHT OR --
MR. BAILEY: BE LIKE THE DEFENSE,
GO TO MIDNIGHT.
MS. CLARK: SURE YOU DO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WHAT ELSE DO WE HAVE -- EXCUSE ME, MR. COCHRAN, MISS
CLARK. WHAT ELSE DO WE HAVE THIS AFTERNOON? ARE WE GOING
TO
HANDLE THAT DISPUTE OVER HANDWRITING AND RECORDS AND BLAH, BLAH,
BLAH?
MR. COCHRAN: WHAT DISPUTE?
THE COURT: ANY TIME I SEE SCHECK
AND NEUFELD, I GET
NERVOUS.
MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T KNOW ABOUT
THAT.
CAN WE FIND OUT WHILE WE ARE HERE WHAT'S THE ORDER OF
WITNESSES AFTER WE FINISH FUHRMAN, FINALLY FINISH FUHRMAN?
MS. CLARK: WE WILL BE CALLING
LIEUTENANT SPANGLER AND THEN
WE WILL BE CALLING --
MR. DARDEN: WHILE YOU ARE DOING
THAT, CAN I GET THE MOST
RECENT PHONE NUMBERS AND ADDRESSES FOR CARDOBA AND MARTIN BEFORE
I LEAVE?
MR. BAILEY: TELL PAT TO GIVE THEM
TO YOU.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. COCHRAN: SPANGLER?
MS. CLARK: CAMERAMAN, SPANGLER
TOO, THEN VANNATTER.
MR. COCHRAN: WHO ELSE AFTER THAT?
MS. CLARK: PROBABLY KATO.
MR. COCHRAN: THEN FIFTH ON THE
LIST WOULD BE PARK?
MS. CLARK: NO. I HAVE TO
TALK TO YOU, FIND OUT WHO YOU
WANT TO STIPULATE TO IN THE FORM OF PHONE RECORDS, PHONE RECORD
PEOPLE. THEN PARK.
MR. COCHRAN: PROBABLY NOT UNTIL
NEXT WEEK.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE ATTORNEY.)
MR. COCHRAN: NOT THIS WEEK?
MARCIA, NOT THIS WEEK?
MS. CLARK: NO. WE WON'T
GET THAT FAR.
MR. COCHRAN: TALK ABOUT --
MR. DARDEN: BEFORE WE CAN --
MS. CLARK: WHO'S TAKING VANNATTER?
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, COUNSEL.
COUNSEL --
MR. COCHRAN: I CAN'T TELL YOU.
THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU GUYS
TALK ABOUT THAT PART OF IT
LATER.
ANYTHING ELSE WE WANT TO PUT ON THE RECORD?
MR. BAILEY: I THINK MR. SCHECK
AND MR. NEUFELD ARE HERE IN
A SEMINAR MODE AND NOT AN ATTACK MODE.
MR. DARDEN: BEFORE YOU GO,
BEFORE YOU GO, YOU KNOW,
VANNATTER IS COMING UP IN THE ROTATION, BUT HE MAY HAVE TO LEAVE
DUE TO A FAMILY EMERGENCY AND GO OUT OF STATE. SO IT COULD CAUSE
A DELAY IF IT HAPPENS AT THE LAST MINUTE.
MR. BAILEY: WE CAN CALL ANOTHER
WITNESS. WE DON'T HAVE TO
SIT AROUND AND WAIT FOR VANNATTER.
MR. DARDEN: DEPENDS. DEPENDS
ON WHEN IT IS. IF I GET A
CALL THURSDAY NIGHT SAYING HE'S LEAVING NOW, THAT MAY CALL FOR
DELAY ON FRIDAY. I JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW.
MR. BAILEY: BEING FOREWARNED,
WE SHOULD HAVE A SURPRISE
WITNESS. WHY COOL OUR HEELS?
MS. CLARK: OBVIOUSLY, WE'LL DO
OUR BEST.
MR. DARDEN: IT'S NOT IN THE BOOK,
MR. BAILEY.
THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS
FOR THE AFTERNOON AT THIS TIME.
PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU; DON'T DISCUSS
THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE
CASE, DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU REGARDING THE
CASE, DO NOT CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN
FINALLY SUBMITTED TO YOU.
AND WE'LL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 9:00 O'CLOCK TOMORROW
MORNING.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU ARE ORDERED TO RETURN TOMORROW
MORNING, 9:00 O'CLOCK. THANK YOU, SIR.
ALL RIGHT. YOU MAY STEP DOWN.
ALL RIGHT. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS.
[some proceedings omitted]
[March 15, 1995; some initial proceedings omitted]
(THE FOLLOWING
PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
BE SEATED, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE
NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
GOOD MORNING TO YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.
THE COURT: MY APOLOGIES TO YOU
AGAIN FOR THE DELAY
IN GETTING STARTED THIS MORNING. THERE WERE A NUMBER OF
ISSUES THAT I HAD TO DEAL WITH THIS MORNING SO FAR, PERHAPS
TWENTY DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT WE'VE HAD TO ADDRESS AND I'VE
HAD TO MAKE RULINGS ON OR MAKE DETERMINATIONS AND DISCUSS
THINGS, AND AS LUCK WOULD HAVE IT, IT JUST TAKES A LONG
TIME, SOME OF THESE THINGS.
AND I JUST WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT WHILE YOU ARE
BACK THERE, I AM AWARE THAT YOU ARE BACK IN THAT SMALL
LITTLE ROOM AND IT IS NOT THE MOST COMFORTABLE PLACE IN THE
WORLD AND I DO HAVE IN THE BACK OF MY MIND CONSTANTLY THE
PRESSURE KNOWING THAT YOU ARE BACK THERE, BUT THERE ARE
JUST SOME THINGS THAT I HAVE TO DETERMINE OUT OF YOUR
PRESENCE AND THEY GOT LONGER THAN I THOUGHT THEY WOULD
TODAY.
ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE
RESUME THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE.
MARK FUHRMAN,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING
ADJOURNMENT, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS
FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE
MARK FUHRMAN IS
BACK ON THE WITNESS STAND UNDERGOING CROSS-EXAMINATION BY
MR. BAILEY.
GOOD MORNING, DETECTIVE.
THE WITNESS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED YOU
ARE STILL UNDER
OATH.
THE WITNESS: YES.
THE COURT: MR. BAILEY. YOU
MAY RESUME.
MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. BAILEY:
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, YESTERDAY YOU TOLD US ABOUT
A CERTAIN TIME THAT YOU WERE IN THE GRAND JURY ROOM WITH
OTHER LAWYERS WHOM YOU NAMED.
HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO RECALL THE IDENTITIES OF
ANY OF THE OTHER PEOPLE THAT YOU WERE UNABLE TO NAME
YESTERDAY WHO WERE PRESENT DURING THIS EXERCISE?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
I TAKE IT YOU HAVE MADE NO INQUIRY AS TO
WHO THEY WERE THEN?
A NO, I HAVEN'T.
Q IS THIS THE
ONLY TIME THAT YOU WERE QUESTIONED
IN A MODIFIED COURT SETTING, SO TO SPEAK?
A YES, SIR.
Q HOW MANY OTHER
CONVERSATIONS DID YOU HAVE THIS
YEAR, I TAKE IT THEY ARE ALL THIS YEAR, WITH MR. DARDEN,
MISS CLARK, MISS LEWIS OR OTHER PROSECUTORS ABOUT THE
FORTHCOMING TESTIMONY?
A SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS.
I WOULD HAVE A
DIFFICULT TIME ON NUMBERS.
Q WE HAVE THE
SAME DIFFICULTY WITH THE WORD
"SEVERAL," OKAY? IF YOU COULD USE NUMBERS IT WOULD BE MUCH
MORE HELPFUL TO US.
WERE YOU ENGAGED IN AT LEAST TEN DIFFERENT
VISITS WITH THE PROSECUTION IN PREPARATION FOR THIS CASE,
INCLUDING THE ONE IN THE GRAND JURY?
A I THINK THAT
WOULD BE THE HIGH NUMBER. I DON'T
THINK IT WOULD BE THAT MANY. I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE
WITH MAYBE EIGHT.
Q EIGHT YOU
THINK WOULD BE MORE ACCURATE?
A YES.
Q AND DOES THAT
INCLUDE THIS SESSION THAT YOU
DESCRIBED?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
NOW, THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE SESSION WITH THE
THREE LAWYERS WAS THE KATHLEEN BELL PROBLEM YOU TOLD US?
A YES.
Q AND THAT WAS
THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THIS SIMULATED
CROSS-EXAMINATION?
A TO THE BEST
OF MY KNOWLEDGE, YES.
Q OKAY.
DO YOU HAVE ANY UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THE
QUESTIONING THAT WAS DONE TO YOU WAS TO ALLEVIATE YOUR
CONCERN OVER REMARKS YOU SAY YOU NEVER MADE?
WHAT WAS THE PLAN? CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO US?
A NO, I CAN'T.
Q YOU CAN'T?
A NO.
Q WELL, WERE
YOU TOLD WHY YOU WERE BEING BROUGHT
INTO THAT ROOM?
A TO BE CONFRONTED
WITH CROSS-EXAMINATION TYPE
QUESTIONS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT I'M SURE IT WAS MORE EXPLICIT THAN THAT,
WASN'T IT?
A CONCERNING
KATHLEEN BELL.
Q CONCERNING
KATHLEEN BELL?
A YES.
Q WERE YOU TOLD
WHAT IT WOULD DO OR NOT DO WHEN
QUESTIONS WERE PUT TO YOU?
A NO.
Q DID ANY OF
THE QUESTIONS CONTAIN THE NAME
"KATHLEEN BELL"?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SO. I'M NOT SURE ON THAT, BUT
I DON'T BELIEVE -- I DON'T BELIEVE IT DID, NO.
Q DID IT CONTAIN
THE NAME OF ANY OTHER LIVING
PERSON RELATED TO THIS CASE?
A NO, NOT THAT
I REMEMBER, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
HOW MANY TOTAL QUESTIONS DO YOU SAY WERE PUT TO
YOU TO ADDRESS THE KATHLEEN BELL PROBLEM?
A NOT VERY MUCH.
IT WOULD BE HARD TO ESTIMATE.
IT WOULD BE ALSO LESS THAN TEN, I'M SURE.
Q LESS THAN
TEN?
A YES.
Q THREE LAWYERS
ASKED YOU A TOTAL OF TEN
QUESTIONS?
A THERE WAS
A LOT OF DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE
LAWYERS; IT JUST WASN'T QUESTIONING.
Q MY QUESTION
WAS DO YOU REPRESENT TO THE COURT
AND JURY THAT THREE LAWYERS ASKED YOU A TOTAL OF TEN
QUESTIONS?
A YES.
Q IN THIS SESSION?
A YES.
Q THAT WOULD
BE THREE AND A FRACTION PER LAWYER?
A YES.
Q DO YOU KNOW
ANY LAWYER ON THIS EARTH WHO IS
CAPABLE OF ASKING ONLY THREE QUESTIONS?
A NOT CURRENTLY.
Q TOUCHE.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, HOW WAS IT POSSIBLE FOR
THESE PEOPLE TO PREPARE YOU TO CONFRONT THE BELL PROBLEM,
WHOEVER BROUGHT IT TO YOUR ATTENTION, MYSELF OR ANOTHER
LAWYER, WITHOUT USING THE WORDS THAT YOU WERE CLAIMED TO
HAVE USED IN HER PRESENCE?
HOW DID THAT DO THAT?
A I READ SOME
ALLEGATIONS, I BELIEVE IT WAS ON A
DECLARATION.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU A DOCUMENT FILED
IN THIS COURT SIGNED BY KATHLEEN BELL ALLEGING THE CONDUCT
THAT WE DISCUSSED BEFORE THE CLOSE OF COURT YESTERDAY?
A SIR, ARE YOU
TALKING ABOUT --
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
ASSUMES FACT NOT IN
EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT
WHAT I VIEWED ON
THE --
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
YES.
A THAT LETTER
IN FRONT OF ME?
Q YES.
A I DID NOT
HAVE --
Q NO, NO.
I'M TALKING ABOUT A DECLARATION THAT
WAS FILED IN COURT BY KATHLEEN BELL AS AN OFFER OF PROOF?
A ON THAT DAY?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES
FACTS NOT IN
EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. NOTHING
WAS FILED BY KATHLEEN
BELL IN THIS COURT.
MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY, NOT BY
KATHLEEN BELL.
Q IN HER BEHALF
AS TO WHAT SHE WOULD SAY?
A IN FRONT OF
ME THAT DAY, SIR?
Q YES.
A NO.
Q WHAT PAPER
WERE YOU LOOKING AT THAT WAS THE
BASIS OF THE QUESTIONS? CAN YOU TELL US?
A I WAS LOOKING
AT NO PAPER.
Q I THOUGHT
SOMETHING WAS READ TO YOU OR THAT YOU
READ THAT YOU CALLED A DECLARATION. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT
YOU MEANT BY THAT?
A I HAD READ
IT PREVIOUSLY. I DON'T KNOW WHEN.
Q WERE YOU FAMILIAR
WITH ITS CONTENTS?
A I READ IT
ONCE, YES.
Q WERE YOU FAMILIAR
WITH THE LANGUAGE ATTRIBUTED
TO YOU BY MS. BELL IN THAT DECLARATION?
A YES.
Q WAS ANY OF
THAT LANGUAGE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF
THE QUESTIONS PUT TO YOU BY COUNSEL?
A THEY DID NOT
USE THAT LANGUAGE, NO.
Q WELL, WHAT
LANGUAGE DID THEY USE INSTEAD TO
HELP YOU WITH THE BELL PROBLEM?
A THEY USED
THE TERM RACIAL SLURS.
Q OKAY.
WELL, NOW DO YOU HAVE ANY MEMORY OF EVEN ONE OF
THESE TEN QUESTIONS?
A NO.
Q NOT A SINGLE
ONE?
A NO, SIR.
Q AND THIS HAPPENED
WHEN, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A I BELIEVE
IT WAS TWO OR THREE WEEKS AGO.
Q TWO OR THREE
WEEKS AGO?
A YES.
Q WELL, NOW
YOU HAVE BEEN EXHIBITING A STARTLING
MEMORY FOR DETAIL OF A CRIME THAT WAS EIGHT MONTHS AGO,
HAVE YOU NOT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID ANY OF THE QUESTIONS
REQUIRE YOU TO SAY WHETHER OR NOT LANGUAGE OF THAT SORT WAS
A PART OF YOUR VOCABULARY?
A I MIGHT HAVE
OFFERED THAT.
Q AH.
TELL US, PLEASE, WHAT IT WAS YOU OFFERED
THESE LAWYERS IN THAT ROOM ABOUT YOUR VOCABULARY, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, OBJECTION.
IRRELEVANT.
WITHDRAWN.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WOULD YOU ANSWER?
A YES.
THAT I DON'T USE ANY TYPE OF LANGUAGE TO
DESCRIBE PEOPLE OF ANY RACE SUCH AS WHAT IS ALLEGED BY
KATHLEEN BELL.
Q AND YOU NEVER
HAVE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
IS THAT RIGHT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THAT
QUESTION IS IRRELEVANT.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU SAY TO THE LAWYERS WHO
WERE TRYING TO PREPARE YOU FOR THE BELL PROBLEM THAT YOU
NEVER, NEVER USE THAT LANGUAGE?
MS. CLARK: SAME OBJECTION.
THE WITNESS: I WASN'T ASKED, SIR.
MR. BAILEY: WITHDRAWN.
I WILL BE MORE SPECIFIC.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU TELL THE LAWYERS IN
THAT ROOM THAT YOU NEVER USED THE WORD "NIGGER"?
MS. CLARK: SAME OBJECTION, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IT WAS NEVER ASKED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
I'M ASKING, DO YOU?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: THAT IS VAGUE.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DO YOU USE THE WORD "NIGGER" IN
DESCRIBING PEOPLE?
MS. CLARK: SAME OBJECTION.
THE COURT: PRESENTLY?
MR. BAILEY: YES.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO, SIR.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HAVE YOU USED THAT WORD IN THE
PAST TEN YEARS?
A NOT THAT I
RECALL, NO.
Q YOU MEAN IF
YOU CALLED SOMEONE A NIGGER YOU
HAVE FORGOTTEN IT?
A I'M NOT SURE
I CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION THE WAY
YOU PHRASED IT, SIR.
Q YOU HAVE DIFFICULTY
UNDERSTANDING THE QUESTION?
A YES.
Q I WILL REPHRASE
IT.
I WANT YOU TO ASSUME THAT PERHAPS AT SOME TIME,
SINCE 1985 OR 6, YOU ADDRESSED A MEMBER OF THE AFRICAN
AMERICAN RACE AS A NIGGER. IS IT POSSIBLE THAT YOU HAVE
FORGOTTEN THAT ACT ON YOUR PART?
A NO, IT IS
NOT POSSIBLE.
Q ARE YOU THEREFORE
SAYING THAT YOU HAVE NOT USED
THAT WORD IN THE PAST TEN YEARS, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A YES, THAT
IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
Q AND YOU SAY
UNDER OATH THAT YOU HAVE NOT
ADDRESSED ANY BLACK PERSON AS A NIGGER OR SPOKEN ABOUT
BLACK PEOPLE AS NIGGERS IN THE PAST TEN YEARS, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A THAT'S WHAT
I'M SAYING, SIR.
Q SO THAT ANYONE
WHO COMES TO THIS COURT AND
QUOTES YOU AS USING THAT WORD IN DEALING WITH AFRICAN
AMERICANS WOULD BE A LIAR, WOULD THEY NOT, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A YES, THEY
WOULD.
Q ALL OF THEM,
CORRECT?
A ALL OF THEM.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
Q DID YOU HAVE
ANY OTHER TRAINING SESSIONS OF
THIS SORT?
A I'M SORRY,
SIR?
Q DID
YOU HAVE ANY OTHER TRAINING SESSIONS OF
THIS SORT?
A NO.
Q DID YOU HAVE
OTHER SESSIONS WHEREIN THE WORD
"NIGGER" WAS USED BETWEEN YOU AND COUNSEL?
A NO.
Q NEVER?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, I'M SHOWING YOU WHAT I
BELIEVE TO BE A REPLICA OF A FLASHLIGHT YOU DESCRIBED AS
HAVING CARRIED THAT NIGHT, AND I WONDER IF YOU COULD TELL
ME WHETHER OR NOT IT IS SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR OR APPEARS TO
BE?
A YES, IT IS
EXACTLY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
MR. BAILEY: DO YOU WISH IT TO
BE MARKED?
MS. CLARK: DO YOU WANT TO MARK
IT AS A DEFENSE
EXHIBIT?
MR. BAILEY: I DON'T CARE.
MS. CLARK: WHATEVER YOU LIKE.
MR. BAILEY: MAY THIS JUST BE MARKED
FOR
IDENTIFICATION, YOUR HONOR, IN CASE IT IS USED LATER ON?
THE COURT: 1055.
(DEFT'S 1055
FOR ID = MAG LIGHT)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
I REALIZE IT IS LIGHT IN HERE,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, BUT WOULD YOU CHECK THAT AND SEE WHETHER
OR NOT BY ROTATING THE HEAD OF THE LIGHT NEAR THE BULB IT
TURNS ON AND OFF AND ALSO CHANGES ITS PROJECTION?
CAN YOU JUST POINT AT A DARK CORNER UNDER THE
WITNESS STAND.
A YES, IT DOES.
Q DOES IT APPEAR
TO FUNCTION ABOUT THE SAME WAY?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WOULD YOU NARROW THE LIGHT TO A
SPOT.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q OKAY.
WOULD YOU SHINE IT ON THE SCREEN.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WOULD THAT LIGHT IN DARKNESS, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, ENABLE YOU TO SEE FOR A DISTANCE OF TEN TO FIFTEEN
FEET, DO YOU THINK, TO SEE AN OBJECT?
A I CAN SEE
THE OBJECT AT THAT DISTANCE WITHOUT
A LIGHT. WITH THE LIGHT, YES, IT WOULD AID ME GREATLY.
Q NO, IN TOTAL
DARKNESS?
A I WASN'T IN
TOTAL DARKNESS.
Q I UNDERSTAND,
BUT I DON'T THINK YOU KNOW YET
WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, WHICH PLACE IN TIME, OR HAVE YOU
ASSUMED THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT YOUR VISIT TO THE NORTH
FENCE?
A NO, I'M NOT
ASSUMING THAT.
Q ASSUME IT.
A ASSUMED.
Q YES.
NOW, MY QUESTION IS WHEN YOU WERE AT THE NORTH
FENCE AND YOU SAW THE GLOVE THAT YOU REFERRED TO PERHAPS
MISTAKENLY AS "THEM" IN YOUR PRELIMINARY HEARING --
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE
THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
YOU SAW ONE GLOVE THERE, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q DID YOU LOOK
AROUND THE AREA AT ALL IN ANY WAY?
A WHAT AREA
IS THIS, SIR?
Q THE AREA NEAR
THE FENCE. THE GLOVE WAS ALMOST
AT THE FENCE, WAS IT NOT?
A NO,
IT WASN'T. IT WASN'T EVEN CLOSE TO THE
FENCE, SIR.
Q WHAT WAS IT
CLOSE TO?
A IT WAS CLOSE
TO THE SIDEWALK.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT WASN'T THERE SOME RAILINGS
NEARBY NEAR GOLDMAN'S BODY?
A YES, BY MR.
GOLDMAN'S BODY BUT NOT BY THE GLOVE
AND THE HAT.
Q DO YOU RECALL
SAYING THAT LEAVES WERE CASCADING
DOWN OVER THE GLOVE MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO SEE?
A YES.
THERE WAS A PLANT THAT HAD LEAVES THAT
WENT UP AND THEN FELL DOWN, A BROAD LEAVE PLANT, AND YET
COVERED PORTIONS OF IT STILL VISIBLE, BUT IT WAS CLEARLY
VISIBLE FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE NORTH FENCE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
COULD YOU SEE THAT WITHOUT THE AID
OF THE FLASHLIGHT?
A YOU COULD
SEE THE OBJECTS BUT NOT AS WELL AS
YOU COULD WITH THE FLASHLIGHT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IF YOU HAD SHINED THAT FLASHLIGHT ON THAT
GLOVE, THE LEFT-HAND GLOVE, WOULD IT HAVE ILLUMINATED IT
BETTER THAN THE AMBIENT LIGHT WAS DOING?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, WOULD
YOU DESCRIBE THE TERRAIN IMMEDIATELY
AROUND THE CRIME SCENE, AND I WISH YOU TO ELIMINATE THE
SIDEWALK WHICH IS A CONCRETE OR TERRAZZO INLAY?
A ARE YOU TALKING
ABOUT --
Q YES.
WHAT DO YOU HAVE? DO YOU HAVE GRASS, DO
YOU HAVE PLANTS, DO YOU HAVE SHRUBS?
A AROUND MR.
GOLDMAN?
Q NO, AROUND
THE AREA CLOSED OFF BY THE FENCE,
THE FENCE BEING THE ONE AGAINST WHICH HIS BODY WAS KIND OF
PROPPED?
A THAT IS MR.
GOLDMAN.
Q YES.
A DIRT, LARGE
TREE BY I THINK THE -- BY HIS HIP,
BUTTOCKS AREA. LARGE MEANING THREE OR FOUR INCHES IN TRUNK
DIAMETER.
Q WERE THERE
ANY OTHER -- WAS THERE ANY OTHER
PLANT LIFE GROWING IN THAT AREA?
A THERE WAS
PLANT LIFE, BUT I DON'T RECALL
EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS.
Q WAS IT SIMILAR
TO THE PLANT THAT WAS PARTIALLY
COVERING THE GLOVE AND THE CAP THAT WE HAVE SEEN IN SEVERAL
PICTURES?
A I DON'T RECALL,
SIR.
Q DID IT STAND
ABOUT THAT HIGH FROM THE GROUND,
(INDICATING)?
THE COURT: INDICATING ABOUT TEN,
TWELVE INCHES.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ABOUT EIGHT, TEN INCHES OR MORE
FROM THE GROUND?
A WHICH PLANT
ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
Q I'M TALKING
ABOUT PLANTS GROWING OUTSIDE THE
FENCE ENCLOSURE WHERE THE CRIME OCCURRED.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, VAGUE.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ADJACENT TO IT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, VAGUE.
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN
EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I CAN'T REMEMBER
ALL THE SMALL PLANTS
IN THE AREA, NO, SIR.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
OKAY.
WELL, CAN YOU TELL ME WHETHER OR NOT
IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THAT FENCE, AND IN THE GENERAL
VICINITY WHERE THE CAP, GLOVE AND GOLDMAN WERE LOCATED,
THERE WERE PLANTS SUFFICIENTLY HIGH TO CONCEAL ANOTHER
OBJECT THE SIZE OF THE GLOVE THAT HAD BEEN LYING THERE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
IS VAGUE, CONFUSING,
COMPOUND.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I COULDN'T SPECULATE
ON THAT, SIR.
MS. CLARK: SPECULATION.
MR. BAILEY: MAY I HAVE A MOMENT,
YOUR HONOR?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR.
BAILEY: WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT THE SCENE
THAT NIGHT -- AND I AM LOOKING FOR SOMETHING SO WE WILL
COME BACK TO THIS AND PERHAPS GIVE YOU SOME HELP ON YOUR
RECOLLECTION --
A YES.
Q -- WHEN YOU
ARRIVED AT THE SCENE THIS NIGHT,
WERE YOU WEARING A COAT, A JACKET OF SOME SORT?
A WHEN I FIRST
ARRIVED AT THE SCENE, YES.
Q CAN YOU DESCRIBE
IT?
A A BLUE BLAZER.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU WERE WEARING THE TROUSERS AND SHIRT
THAT WE SEE YOU IN WITH YOUR WEAPON IN THE PICTURE POINTING
AT THE LEFT-HANDED GLOVE?
A YES, TAN SLACKS.
Q OKAY.
NOW, AT SOME POINT DID YOU WALK BACK TO
YOUR VEHICLE AND TAKE OFF YOUR BLAZER AND HANG IT OR LAY IT
IN THE VEHICLE SOMEWHERE?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
CAN YOU TELL THE COURT AND JURY ABOUT WHAT TIME
OF DAY THAT HAPPENED, BEARING IN MIND THAT YOU ARRIVED AT
ABOUT 2:10?
A IT WOULD BE
AFTER I WAS RELIEVED FROM THE CASE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THAT WOULD BE CLOSE TO THREE
O'CLOCK?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND THAT IS
WHEN YOU WALKED BACK TO THE VEHICLE
AND LEFT THE JACKET AND STOOD WAITING FOR YOUR RELIEF?
A YES, SIR.
Q CORRECT?
A YES.
MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT.
DEFENDANT'S NEXT IN ORDER, IF IT PLEASE THE
COURT.
THE COURT: 1056. 1056.
(DEFT'S 1056
FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, I'M GOING TO
SHOW YOU WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION AS
DEFENDANT'S 1056 WHICH IS A PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU MAY
RECOGNIZE.
WOULD YOU LOOK AT THE MONITOR AND TELL ME
WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS A SCENE THAT YOU HAVE VIEWED BEFORE?
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q DOES THAT
DEPICT THE ENTRANCE TO 875 BUNDY WITH
NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S BODY LYING IN THE REAR?
A YES, IT IS,
SIR.
MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, I ASSUME
THE FEED IS OFF.
I SHOULD HAVE REMINDED THE COURT.
THE COURT: MR. HARRIS WARNED ME.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DOES THAT HELP YOU TO RECALL THE NATURE OF
THE SHRUBBERY WHICH WAS TO THE NORTH OF THE ENTRANCE
WALKWAY AT 875 BUNDY ON THAT EVENING?
A IT DIDN'T
APPEAR THAT WAY FROM THE FENCE, NO.
Q WELL, DID
YOU EVER STAND IN THIS VANTAGE POINT
ON THE SIDEWALK ON BUNDY LOOKING WEST?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
WHEN YOU FIRST ARRIVED THERE, I BELIEVE IN A
SIMILAR PHOTOGRAPH, YOU EXPLAINED THAT YOU AND DETECTIVE
PHILLIPS, TOGETHER WITH OFFICER RISKE, APPROACHED THE
GATEPOST WHICH WE SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH BY GOING THROUGH
THE SHRUBBERY OFF TO THE LEFT OF THE PHOTO AND THEN
ENTERING THE AREA SHOWN BY THE PHOTO AND WALKING UP TO THE
GATEPOST?
A YES, SIR.
Q CORRECT?
A YES.
Q THAT WOULD
HAVE GIVEN YOU AMPLE OPPORTUNITY, I
TAKE IT, TO VIEW THE SHRUBBERY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE
WALK FROM A DISTANCE OF A COUPLE OF FEET, DID IT NOT?
A NOT REALLY,
SIR.
Q ALL
RIGHT.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS YOU ARE AT THE GATEPOST.
CAN YOU PUT AN ARROW ON THAT, PLEASE, JUST TO
MAKE DOUBLY CERTAIN THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME
THING.
WHEN YOU REFERRED EARLIER IN YOUR DIRECT
TESTIMONY, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, TO THE GATEPOST BEYOND WHICH
YOU COULD NOT GO WITHOUT RISKING THE CONTAMINATION OF
EVIDENCE, IS THIS THE APPROXIMATE AREA THAT YOU MEANT?
A YEAH.
A LITTLE MORE TO THE RIGHT, SIR, IS
WHERE OFFICER RISKE WAS. IN THAT AREA, YES, (INDICATING).
Q OKAY.
FROM THERE DID YOU HAVE A VIEW ACROSS THE
WALKWAY AT THE SHRUBBERY THAT WE SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH?
A IN THE PHOTOGRAPH,
YES, SIR. THIS SHRUBBERY,
YES.
Q WELL, ARE
YOU SUGGESTING THAT THIS SHRUBBERY IS
DIFFERENT THAN THE SHRUBBERY THAT EXISTED ON THE MORNING OF
JUNE 13TH?
A NO.
IF I COULD SEE A PICTURE FROM THE NORTH
RESIDENCE LOOKING TOWARD MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY IN A SOUTHERLY
DIRECTION, IT WOULD BE EASIER TO EXPLAIN.
Q WE ARE GOING
TO TRY AND LOCATE ONE, BUT FOR
PURPOSES OF YOUR PRESENT EXAMINATION CAN YOU TELL ME
WHETHER OR NOT, FROM THE POSITION YOU WERE STANDING, IF YOU
LOOK ACROSS THE WALKWAY IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION, YOU COULD
JUDGE THE HEIGHT OF THE SHRUBBERY THAT WE SEE IN THE PHOTO?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WAS THE
SHRUBBERY THAT WE SEE IN THE PHOTO
SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME AS WHAT YOU SAW WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT
2:10 A.M.?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WOULD
YOU AGREE THAT THAT SHRUBBERY IS
FULLY CAPABLE OF HIDING SMALL OBJECTS THAT MIGHT BE DROPPED
INTO IT?
A YES, SIR.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, VAGUE, WHICH
--
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. BAILEY: MAY I APPROACH THE
WITNESS, YOUR HONOR?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, BEFORE
DISPLAYING IT, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO LOOK AT THIS PHOTOGRAPH
AND TELL ME, IF YOU CAN, WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS TAKEN
LOOKING IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION FROM THE WALKWAY AT THE
BASE OF THE STAIRS IN THE APPROXIMATE POSITION WHERE NICOLE
BROWN SIMPSON'S BODY WAS AFTER THE BODIES HAD BEEN REMOVED?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
THE AREA TO WHICH I WAS ATTEMPTING TO DIRECT
YOUR ATTENTION IS ON THE RIGHT OR EAST SIDE OF THAT FENCE.
NOW, IN LOOKING AT THAT PHOTO, DOES THAT
REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHETHER THE GLOVE AND THE
CAP WERE FOUND CLOSE TO THE FENCE?
A YES, SIR.
YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS FENCE
THAT RUNS NORTH/SOUTH?
Q THAT'S CORRECT.
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU RECOGNIZE THIS AS BEING THE AREA WHERE
DETECTIVE -- I MEAN WHERE MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS FOUND WHEN
YOU WERE THERE?
A YES.
THIS WAS THE AREA I WAS REFERRING TO AS
SOMEWHAT CLEARED OUT.
MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT.
MAY THIS BE MARKED --
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S
10 -- EXCUSE ME --
1057.
MR. BAILEY: 1057, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: 1057.
(DEFT'S 1057
FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
MR. BAILEY: MAY IT BE DISPLAYED,
YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR.
HARRIS, I DON'T THINK WE
NEED THE ARROW ON THAT.
MR. BAILEY: I WOULD LIKE THE ARROW,
YOUR HONOR, SO THAT I CAN POINT SOMETHING OUT TO THE
WITNESS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WE ARE NOW
LOOKING NORTH INSIDE THE CRIME SCENE AREA AFTER THE REMOVAL
OF THE BODIES, OR AT LEAST THE BODY OF MR. GOLDMAN,
CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
I WAS -- OH, WOULD YOU POINT OUT IN THAT PHOTO,
AND I WILL ASK MR. HARRIS TO PUT AN ARROW ON IT WHEN YOU
DO, THE AREA WHERE THE LEFT-HAND GLOVE AND CAP WERE FOUND.
A YES, SIR.
MS. CLARK: WHAT HAPPENED?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE WITNESS: THAT IS THE AREA
RIGHT THERE,
(INDICATING).
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
SO THAT IS FAIRLY CLOSE TO THE
FENCE, AS I SUGGESTED, BUT YOU HAD IN MIND A DIFFERENT
FENCE WHEN YOU SAID IT WAS NOT?
A YES, SIR.
I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE NORTH FENCE.
Q THE NORTH
FENCE?
A YES.
Q WE ARE TALKING
NOW ABOUT THE EAST FENCE?
A YES.
Q WHAT I WAS
TRYING TO LEARN IS THIS:
NO. 1, WOULD THE SPOT OF YOUR FLASHLIGHT IN THE
AMBIENT LIGHT CONDITIONS COMING FROM THE
HOUSE -- I GUESS YOU FELLAS HADN'T ARTIFICIALLY LIGHTED
ANYTHING WHEN YOU WERE THERE WITH SPOTS AND FLOODS, WERE
YOU?
A NO, SIR.
Q YOU WERE OPERATING
WITH FLASHLIGHTS AND
WHATEVER LIGHT COULD BE GAINED FROM THE OPEN DOOR OF THE
HOUSE?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WOULD THE LITTLE FLASHLIGHT THAT YOU HAVE BEEN
HANDLING BEEN CAPABLE OF ILLUMINATING THE AREA IMMEDIATELY
OUTSIDE THE EAST WALL OF THAT FENCE WHICH IS ON OUR RIGHT
AS WE LOOK AT THE PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY. THANK
YOU. TAKE IT DOWN.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, WE NEGLECTED
TO PRINT 1056
WITH THE ARROW WHERE MR. HARRIS PUT IT NEXT TO THE -- I'M
SORRY.
MR. HARRIS IS AHEAD OF ME. IT IS PRINTED.
YES. MAY THAT BE 1056-A, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES. 1056-A.
(DEFT'S 1056-A
FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
MR. BAILEY: AND THE OTHER ONE
WOULD BE 1057-A.
THE COURT: YES. HARD COPY
OF EACH.
(DEFT'S 1057-A
FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
MR. BAILEY: MAY I HAVE A MOMENT?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, AS BEST YOU
CAN, FROM YOUR RECOLLECTION, COULD YOU GO THROUGH THE
MEETINGS THAT YOU HAD WITH PROSECUTORS SINCE JANUARY 1 AND
SIMPLY TELL US WHO WAS PRESENT AND HOW LONG THEY TOOK?
A I HAVE MET
WITH MR. DARDEN.
Q START WITH
THE FIRST ONE YOU CAN RECALL. DO YOU
HAVE ANY DATE IN MIND AS TO WHEN THIS FIRST MEETING WITH
MR. DARDEN MIGHT HAVE TAKEN PLACE?
A I BELIEVE
I PROBABLY MET WITH MISS LEWIS BEFORE
MR. DARDEN.
Q MISS LEWIS?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND COULD YOU TELL US WHEN THAT OCCURRED?
A NO.
SOME TIME THIS YEAR.
Q WITHIN THE
PAST WEEK?
A WELL, I HAVE
SEEN HER FREQUENTLY BECAUSE SHE IS
IN THE D.A.'S OFFICE, BUT NOT ALL OF THE CONTACTS WERE
TALKING ABOUT ANYTHING TO DO WITH TESTIMONY.
Q WAS ANY ONE
LAWYER AT EACH OF THE MEETINGS
WHERE TESTIMONY OR THE CASE, EITHER ONE, WAS DISCUSSED?
A NO.
Q THE FIRST
MEETING THAT YOU HAD WITH MISS LEWIS,
WHEN WOULD YOU ESTIMATE THAT IT TOOK PLACE? IN JANUARY,
FEBRUARY OR MARCH?
A I'M NOT SURE,
SIR.
Q YOU CAN'T
TELL US WHETHER IT WAS MORE THAN
THREE WEEKS AGO OR LESS?
A WELL, I HAVE
TALKED TO HER SEVERAL TIMES OVER
SEVERAL MONTHS.
Q I APPRECIATE
THAT, BUT I WOULD ASK THAT YOU USE
YOUR BEST MEMORY TO INFORM US OF WHEN YOU FIRST MET WITH
MISS LEWIS ABOUT THIS CASE, TESTIMONY OR OTHERWISE, AND HOW
LONG THAT MEETING WAS?
A I'M NOT SURE.
AS FAR AS MOTIONS, IT COULD HAVE
BEEN -- I MET HER LAST YEAR OR TALKED TO HER ON THE PHONE,
BUT I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY.
Q DID YOU OR
DIDN'T YOU MEET WITH THE PROSECUTION
LAST YEAR ABOUT THE CASE AFTER THE PRELIMINARY HEARING?
A I DID NOT.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
IS ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DID NOT.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WELL, WHAT DID YOU MEAN WHEN
YOU SAID I MAY HAVE MET HER LAST YEAR OVER THE PHONE OR
OTHERWISE ABOUT SOME MOTIONS?
A WELL, I MIGHT
HAVE BEEN ASKED ABOUT SOMETHING
THAT IS NO LONGER PART OF THIS TRIAL OR A MOTION THAT --
I GET PHONE CALLS, SIR. I DON'T WRITE THEM DOWN, I DON'T
LOG THEM IN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO TELL YOU.
Q YOU ARE A
DETECTIVE WHO DOESN'T ALWAYS TAKE
NOTES?
A I DON'T TAKE
NOTES ABOUT PHONE CALLS OR THAT IS
ALL I WOULD DO.
Q OKAY.
WELL, HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU SPEAK WITH THE
PROSECUTION ON THE PHONE, AS OPPOSED TO PERSONALLY, ABOUT
THIS CASE, STARTING IN 1994, IF YOU CAN?
A I HAVE TALKED
ON THE PHONE WITH THE PROSECUTORS
ABOUT WHEN TO -- WE COULD GET TOGETHER OR MEET AND THAT IS
-- THAT IS KIND OF DIFFICULT BECAUSE OF THE SCHEDULING.
Q ALL THAT ASIDE,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHEN DID YOU
TALK WITH A PROSECUTOR ABOUT A MOTION IN 1994?
A SIR, I DON'T
HAVE A DAY CALENDAR.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, THAT IS
IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DON'T HAVE A DAY
CALENDAR I WRITE
THOSE MEMOS IN.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
I UNDERSTAND. BUT YOU HAVE A
MEMORY. YOU REMEMBER THIS CRIME OCCURRED IN JUNE OF '94,
CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q TELL US AS
BEST YOU CAN WHAT WAS THE MOTION
THAT YOU WERE DISCUSSING ON THE PHONE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
IS IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: SIR, THERE HAS BEEN
SO MANY THINGS
GOING ON I COULDN'T TELL YOU WHEN I TALKED TO SOME PEOPLE
ABOUT --
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DIDN'T ASK YOU THAT. WHAT WAS
THE NATURE OF MOTION THAT REQUIRED THAT YOU BE CONSULTED IF
YOU KNOW?
A I DON'T, SIR.
Q WAS IT A MOTION
ABOUT KATHLEEN BELL?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: I HAVE TALKED TO
--
THE COURT: YOU CAN ANSWER THE
QUESTION.
THE WITNESS: I HAVE TALKED TO
MISS LEWIS ABOUT
KATHLEEN BELL'S MOTION, YES.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT. WAS THAT IN 1994
WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED OR FILED?
A IT COULD HAVE
BEEN.
Q DID YOU TALK
ON JANUARY 3RD WHEN IT WAS ARGUED,
OR THEREABOUTS?
A I DON'T RECALL
THE DATE, NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WERE YOU IN THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE IN THE
MONTH OF JANUARY?
A I BELIEVE
SO, YES.
Q ON WHAT OCCASIONS,
AND START WITH THE FIRST
ONE, PLEASE.
A SIR, I CANNOT
REMEMBER A DATE. I COULDN'T GIVE
YOU A TIME.
Q YOU KEPT NO
RECORD WHATSOEVER OF YOUR VISITS?
A WHY WOULD
I DO THAT?
Q WERE YOU ON
DUTY?
A YES.
Q DID YOU HAVE
TO ACCOUNT TO SOMEONE AS TO WHERE
YOU WERE GOING AND WHY?
A NO.
WHEN THE D.A.'S OFFICE WANTS TO TALK TO A
DETECTIVE, THEY OBVIOUSLY WILL TALK TO HIM. THERE IS NOBODY
THAT WOULD NEED TO GIVE ME PERMISSION. I JUST SAY I'M
GOING TO THE D.A.'S OFFICE.
Q WHO WOULD
YOU TELL? SOMEONE HAD TO KNOW WHERE
YOU WERE, DIDN'T THEY?
A YES, SIR.
Q WELL, WHO
IS YOUR BOSS?
A RON PHILLIPS
IS.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU TELL DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ON THOSE
OCCASIONS WHEN YOU WERE COMING DOWNTOWN TO WORK ON THIS
CASE WHERE YOU WERE GOING?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND DO YOU KNOW IF ANY RECORDS OF ANY KIND ARE
KEPT ABOUT THESE VISITS?
A NOT TO MY
KNOWLEDGE.
Q WELL, ARE
THE PROSECUTORS KEEPING ANY RECORD OF
YOUR VISIT THAT YOU KNOW OF?
A I DON'T KNOW,
SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, IF YOU HAD A MEETING WITH MISS LEWIS IN
JANUARY, YOU ARE NOT CERTAIN OF THAT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q YOU JUST DON'T
HAVE ANY MEMORY OF MEETING THIS
WOMAN IN JANUARY, THE ONE SEATED AT THE TABLE HERE TO MY
FAR RIGHT?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, THAT MISSTATES
THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE
THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
OKAY. TRY AGAIN.
DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT SEE MISS LEWIS IN
JANUARY IN THIS BUILDING?
A I WOULD SAY
I COULD HAVE, BUT I COULDN'T TELL
YOU EXACTLY WHEN, SO I CAN'T SAY FOR SURE.
Q IS SHE THE
FIRST LAWYER THAT YOU MET AND TALKED
TO?
A AFTER THE
PRELIM?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, VAGUE.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
IN 1995. LEAVE '94 ALONE FOR
NOW.
A I DON'T KNOW
IF SHE IS THE FIRST, SIR.
Q YOU DON'T
KNOW?
A NO.
Q DOES ANYONE
ELSE COME TO MIND AS BEING THE
PERSON WHO STARTED OFF THIS WHOLE SERIES OF INTERVIEWS?
A NO.
Q WAS IT MR.
DARDEN?
A NO.
Q WAS IT MISS
CLARK?
A NO.
Q ANY OTHER
LAWYERS NOT SEATED HERE TODAY THAT
YOU HAVE WORKED WITH ON THIS CASE?
A NO.
Q MR. HODGMAN?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
SO JANUARY THEN I TAKE IT IS A BLANK?
A NO.
Q MAY WE NOW
TURN TO FEBRUARY.
DO YOU HAVE ANY MEMORY OF COMING TO THIS
BUILDING IN FEBRUARY AND MEETING WITH SOMEONE?
A YES.
Q WHEN WAS THE
FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY THAT YOU
CAN RECALL, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A I CAN'T.
Q HUM?
A I CAN'T REMEMBER
WHEN IN FEBRUARY.
Q I'M NOT ASKING
FOR DATE AND A MINUTE. CAN YOU
SAY EARLY, MIDDLE LATE, GIVE US ANY HELP AT ALL?
A I WOULD SAY
IT WOULD BE FAIR TO SAY PROBABLY
EARLY PART OF FEBRUARY AND THE LATTER PART.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHO WAS PRESENT AT THE MEETING, THE
FIRST ONE?
A I HAVE TALKED
TO MR. DARDEN, I HAVE TALKED TO
MISS CLARK, I HAVE TALKED TO MISS LEWIS.
Q DOES THAT
MEAN YOU CANNOT REMEMBER WHO WAS
PRESENT AT THE FIRST MEETING?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND THAT WAS
EARLY IN FEBRUARY YOU THINK?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
WHEN WAS THE ONE AFTER THAT?
A I'M NOT SURE,
SIR.
Q EARLY, MIDDLE
OR LATE? CAN YOU HELP US AT
LEAST THAT MUCH AS TO MEETING NO. 2 IN FEBRUARY, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A SOME TIME
IN THE LATTER PART OF FEBRUARY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO YOU HAD A MEETING IN THE EARLY PART OF
FEBRUARY BEING THE FIRST ONE OF THAT MONTH, AND YOU DON'T
REMEMBER WHO WAS AT THAT MEETING, CORRECT?
A NO.
Q AND THEN YOU
HAD A MEETING AT THE LATTER PART
OF FEBRUARY WITH WHOM, IF YOU RECALL?
A I HAVE
TALKED TO ALL THESE PROSECUTORS THAT
ARE SEATED BEFORE ME.
Q ALL AT ONCE?
A NO.
THEY WORK A TEAM. I COULD TALK TO ONE, I
COULD SEE ANOTHER ONE THE NEXT DAY OR THE NEXT HOUR.
Q WELL, LET'S
TRY AND APPROACH IT ANOTHER WAY.
OF THE THREE PROSECUTORS FACING YOU, WITH WHOM
DID YOU SPEND THE MOST TIME TALKING ABOUT THE CASE?
A PROBABLY MISS
CLARK.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHEN IS THE FIRST TIME YOU CAN REMEMBER SEEING
MISS CLARK IN A MEETING THAT YOU ATTENDED IN THIS BUILDING
IN FEBRUARY?
A I BELIEVE
-- I BELIEVE IN THE LATTER PART OF
FEBRUARY.
Q OKAY.
DO YOU REMEMBER HOW LONG THE MEETING
WAS?
A I DIDN'T --
WE DIDN'T HAVE MANY MEETINGS OR
DISCUSSIONS THAT LASTED MUCH LONGER THAN AN HOUR ONCE WE
GOT STARTED.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU REMEMBER THE DAY OF THE WEEK THAT THE
MEETING OCCURRED?
A NO, I DON'T.
Q DO YOU
HAVE ANY MEMORY OF THE TIME OF DAY THAT
THE MEETING OCCURRED?
A IT WOULD BE
AFTER COURT OR MAYBE AN AFTERNOON
ON A WEEKEND, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER THAT PERIOD OF TIME OR
DAY OF WEEK WITH THE PERSON.
Q YOU CAN'T
REMEMBER?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
WHEN WAS THE NEXT FEBRUARY MEETING YOU HAD
AFTER NO. 2 LATE IN THE MONTH WITH MISS CLARK?
A SIR, I DON'T
KNOW.
Q DON'T KNOW?
A NO.
Q WELL, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, WHEN I ASKED YOU IF
YOU HAD TEN MEETINGS AND YOU SAID EIGHT WOULD BE MORE LIKE
IT, WHERE DID YOU GET THAT NUMBER?
A I JUST FELT
TEN WAS TOO MANY. IT JUST FELT
LIKE I WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH EIGHT.
Q DID YOU PICK
EIGHT OUT OF THE AIR OR DO YOU
REMEMBER HAVING APPROXIMATELY EIGHT MEETINGS WITH
PROSECUTORS?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS
IS ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU HAVE A MEMORY, WHEN YOU
GAVE US THAT ANSWER, OF ABOUT EIGHT MEETINGS WITH
PROSECUTORS?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS
IS ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THAT FELT LIKE A
COMFORTABLE NUMBER,
YES.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT. WHY DID IT FEEL
COMFORTABLE?
A BECAUSE IT
WAS MORE THAN FIVE AND LESS THAN
TEN.
Q SO FAR YOU
HAVE DESCRIBED TWO.
WERE THERE ANY MORE MEETINGS IN FEBRUARY OTHER
THAN THE TWO THAT YOU HAVE DESCRIBED THAT YOU CAN RECALL
NOW, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A I CAN'T RECALL
THE SPECIFICS. I DIDN'T TAKE
NOTE OF THESE. MANY TIMES IT WAS INCONVENIENT AND SOMETIME
WE GOT NOTHING ACCOMPLISHED BECAUSE OF SCHEDULING AND
THINGS GOING ON WITH PEOPLE'S PERSONAL LIVES.
SOMETIMES THEY WERE NOT MUCH OF MEETINGS AT ALL
BECAUSE OF PEOPLE'S LIVES.
Q AND WERE THERE
SOMETIMES WHEN DISAGREEMENTS
PREVENTED ANYTHING FROM BEING ACCOMPLISHED?
A I DON'T RECALL
THAT.
Q DON'T RECALL
HAVING ANY DISAGREEMENT?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, HOW ABOUT MARCH? DO YOU RECALL SOME
MEETINGS IN MARCH?
A WE HAVE MET,
YES, IN MARCH.
Q THE
FIRST ONE IN MARCH THAT YOU CAN RECALL?
AND I ASSUME THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE EARLY OR MIDDLE?
A YES, EARLY
IN MARCH.
Q OKAY.
ANY IDEA WHAT DATE?
A I BELIEVE
IT WAS ON A -- I DON'T KNOW THE DATE.
IT WOULD BE ON A WEEKEND.
Q A WEEKEND
IN MARCH?
A YES.
Q WOULD THAT
BE THE FIRST WEEKEND IN MARCH IF IT
WAS EARLY IN MARCH?
A IT COULD HAVE
BEEN.
Q WAS IT DOWN
HERE?
A YES.
Q DO YOU RECALL
A SATURDAY OR A SUNDAY?
A I BELIEVE
IT WAS A SATURDAY.
Q AND WHO WAS
PRESENT?
A MISS CLARK.
Q HOW LONG DID
YOU TALK?
A ABOUT AN HOUR,
HOUR AND A HALF.
Q WAS ANYONE
ELSE PRESENT DURING THAT HOUR TO
HOUR AND A HALF?
A PEOPLE CAME
IN AND GAVE HER MESSAGES OR PAPERS
THAT I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT SHE WAS RECEIVING AND THEN THEY
LEFT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT WERE ANY OF THE OTHER LAWYERS SEATED AT
THIS TABLE OR OTHER LAWYERS WORKING ON THIS CASE OUTSIDE
THE COURTROOM PRESENT DURING THIS HOUR TO HOUR AND A HALF?
A PERIODICALLY
AN ATTORNEY WOULD COME IN AND GIVE
HER SOMETHING. SOMETIMES THEY WOULD STAY FOR A MOMENT,
THEN THEY WOULD LEAVE.
Q WELL, LET
ME NARROW IT A LITTLE BIT, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN.
DURING THIS HOUR TO HOUR AND A HALF, DID ANY
LAWYER CONNECTED TO THIS CASE COME IN AND PARTICIPATE IN
WHAT YOU AND MISS CLARK WERE DOING?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO THAT YOU TALKED TOGETHER FOR
SIXTY TO NINETY MINUTES?
A YES.
Q ABOUT THE
CASE?
A YES, SIR.
Q NONE OF THESE
PEOPLE HAVE EVER HAD
CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU ABOUT OTHER MATTERS, HAVE THEY?
A WHAT ARE OTHER
MATTERS? VAGUE.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
OTHER THAN THE CASE?
MS. CLARK: VAGUE. OBJECTION,
YOUR HONOR, VAGUE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MS. CLARK: AND IRRELEVANT, BUT
--
THE COURT: YOU CAN ANSWER THE
QUESTION.
THE WITNESS: I DON'T UNDERSTAND
THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR.
BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. LET ME REPHRASE
IT.
YOU HAVE TOLD US THAT YOU SPENT A NUMBER OF
HOURS TALKING WITH THESE PEOPLE, AMONG OTHERS, ABOUT THE
CASE?
A YES.
Q YOU DON'T
SOCIALIZE WITH ANY OF THESE LAWYERS,
DO YOU?
A NO.
Q YOU HAVEN'T
SEEN THEM OUTSIDE THE WORK
ENVIRONMENT, HAVE YOU?
A NO.
Q AND YOU DON'T
HAVE ANY OTHER CASES GOING WITH
THEM AT THE MOMENT, DO YOU?
A NO, SIR.
Q OKAY.
SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT ALL OF THE
DISCUSSIONS YOU HAVE HAD WITH THESE PEOPLE IN 1995 HAVE
BEEN ABOUT THE CASE?
A NO.
Q IT IS NOT?
A NO.
Q WHAT OTHER
THINGS WERE TALKED ABOUT?
A CHRIS DARDEN
AND I TALKED ABOUT BASKETBALL.
Q OKAY.
A MISS LEWIS
TALKS ABOUT SCUBA DIVING.
Q ALL
RIGHT.
WERE THESE DOMINANT THEMES OR JUST SMALL TALK
AS PART OF THE OVERALL CONVERSATION?
A JUST CONVERSATION.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT THE MAIN PURPOSE I TAKE IT OF EACH
ENCOUNTER, EVEN THOUGH THERE MAY HAVE BEEN OTHER SUBJECTS
TOUCHED UPON, WAS THE CASE, PEOPLE AGAINST SIMPSON?
A YES.
Q AND YOUR ROLE
IN THAT CASE?
A YES.
Q NOW, THE TOTAL
NUMBER OF MEETINGS IN MARCH THAT
YOU CAN RECALL, EXCLUDING THE GRAND JURY SESSION?
A TWO OR THREE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THE FIRST WAS WITH MISS CLARK FOR
SIXTY TO NINETY MINUTES.
WHEN WAS THE ONE THAT YOU MEANT WHEN YOU SAID
TWO?
A I BELIEVE
THAT WAS DURING THE WEEKDAY AFTER
COURT WITH MISS CLARK.
Q AND WHEN WAS
THAT?
A I BELIEVE
THE FOLLOWING WEEK.
Q SO IF YOU
MET ON A SATURDAY, THEN SOME DAY
DURING THE FOLLOWING WEEK AFTER COURT HAD ADJOURNED? I
TAKE IT IT WAS LATE IN THE DAY?
A I BELIEVE
SO, SIR.
Q AND HOW LONG
DID THAT SESSION LAST?
A I RECALL IT
WAS ABOUT AN HOUR.
Q OKAY.
AND WERE ANY OTHER LAWYERS INVOLVED TO THE
EXTENT OF PARTICIPATING IN THAT CONVERSATION THAT YOU WERE
HAVING?
A I THINK PERIODICALLY
MISS LEWIS CAME IN AND
OUT.
Q DID SHE STAY
LONG ENOUGH TO POSITION HERSELF IN
THE CONVERSATION OR JUST DROP SOMETHING AND TAKE OFF?
A WELL, A LOT
OF TIME WHEN ANOTHER PERSON COMES
INTO THE ROOM, MISS CLARK WILL STOP, TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS
OR WAIT UNTIL THEY LEAVE AND THEN WE CONTINUE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
MY QUESTION TO YOU WAS WAS MISS LEWIS ASSISTING
MISS CLARK IN SOME WAY WITH THE PREPARATION OF THIS CASE OR
SIMPLY COMING IN AND OUT ON OTHER MATTERS OTHER THAN THE
FUHRMAN TESTIMONY?
A NO, NO.
MISS CLARK DEALT WITH ME DIRECTLY.
Q AND YOU SAID
TWO OR THREE. IF THERE WAS A
THIRD, WHAT IS YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO THAT?
A CLOSE TO THE
BEGINNING OF MY TESTIMONY OR CLOSE
TO THAT WEEK.
Q YOUR TESTIMONY
BEGAN I BELIEVE LAST THURSDAY.
A YES, SIR.
Q SO HOW LONG
PRIOR TO THAT WAS YOUR MEETING WITH
MISS CLARK, IF IT OCCURRED? AND I AM NOW LOOKING FOR A
THIRD ONE?
A YES.
THAT WAS VERY BRIEF.
Q HOW LONG PRIOR
TO THE ONSET OF YOUR TESTIMONY
DID IT OCCUR?
A TWO, THREE
DAYS.
Q NOT THE DAY
BEFORE?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SO, NO.
Q YOU WEREN'T
IN THE BUILDING THE DAY BEFORE?
A I WAS IN THE
BUILDING THE DAY BEFORE, YES.
Q WHAT WERE
YOU DOING?
A WAITING TO
TESTIFY.
Q NOT TALKING
WITH ANYONE?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
WAS YOUR LAWYER WITH YOU AT THE TIME?
A NO.
HE WAS WATCHING THE T.V. AND I WAS NOT.
Q NOW, HAVE
YOU SPENT ANY TIME WITH HIM, WITHOUT
GOING INTO ANYTHING THAT WAS SAID, PREPARING FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY IN THIS CASE?
A PREPARING
FOR DIRECT TESTIMONY IN THIS CASE?
Q NO,
PREPARING FOR THE CROSS-EXAMINATION YOU
ASSUMED WOULD FOLLOW HARD ON THE HEELS OF DIRECT?
A I THINK I
HAVE GOTTEN SOME GENERAL ADVICE, MUCH
THE SAME AS I HAVE GOTTEN FROM MOST THE PEOPLE I KNOW.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU HAVE BEEN URGED TO REMAIN CALM,
HAVE YOU NOT?
THE COURT: I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN
THE COURT'S OWN
OBJECTION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PREVIOUS --
MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY, I MEAN
TO EXCLUDE MR.
TOURTELOT FROM ANY QUESTION THAT HAS SUBSTANCE OF A
CONVERSATION IN IT.
I DO NOT ASK TO GO INTO ANYTHING HE SAID TO
YOU.
Q BUT YOU MENTIONED
THAT YOU HAD ADVICE FROM A
LOT OF PEOPLE AND WHAT I MEANT TO ASK YOU WAS DID A LOT OF
PEOPLE SAY IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO REMAIN CALM?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
NO.
WERE ANY DOCUMENTS, BOOKS OR OTHER MATERIALS
GIVEN TO YOU OR EXHIBITED TO YOU AT ANY OF THESE SESSIONS
TO ASSIST YOU IN YOUR ROLE AS A WITNESS IN THIS CASE?
A NO.
Q YOU
HAVE READ NO BOOKS ON HOW TO BE A GOOD
WITNESS?
A WHO.
Q NONE ON CROSS-EXAMINATION?
A NONE.
Q HAVE YOU WATCHED
ANY FILMS OR TAPES THAT RELATE
TO THAT SUBJECT?
A NONE.
Q AND HAVE YOU
DISCUSSED YOUR POSITION WITH
FELLOW OFFICERS AND SOUGHT THEIR ADVICE AS TO HOW TO BE AN
EFFECTIVE WITNESS?
A NO.
Q NOW, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, IS IT NOT FAIR TO SAY
THAT IN YOUR 19-YEAR CAREER THIS IS BY FAR THE MOST
IMPORTANT CASE IN WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN INVOLVED?
A YES.
Q IS IT NOT
ALSO TRUE THAT YOU REALIZE NOW, AS
YOU DID BACK ON JUNE 13, THAT THE RIGHT HAND LEATHER GLOVE
WHICH YOU CLAIM TO HAVE FOUND ON ROCKINGHAM COULD BE A VERY
SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND ARE YOU
AWARE OF THE FACT THAT YOUR
TESTIMONY, AS IT PERTAINS TO THAT EVIDENCE, MAY BE VERY,
VERY IMPORTANT TO THIS COURT?
A YES.
Q DID YOU ANTICIPATE,
BASED ON WHAT YOU HAD BEEN
TOLD, THAT SOME SORT OF ATTACK MIGHT BE VISITED UPON YOU
WITH RESPECT TO ALLEGED RACIAL SLURS?
A NO.
Q WAS IT A SURPRISE
TO YOU WHEN THOSE QUESTIONS
WERE PUT BY MARCIA CLARK AT THE VERY OUTSET OF YOUR
TESTIMONY TO GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO DENY THE ALLEGATIONS
BEFORE I HAVE TALKED TO YOU?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. OBJECTION,
YOUR HONOR.
THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE AND
SPECULATION AS TO --
MR. BAILEY: WITHDRAW THE QUESTION.
Q DO YOU RECALL
THAT WHEN YOU TOOK THE STAND YOU
EXPLAINED TO THE JURY AND TO THE COURT THAT YOU HAD HAD
SOME SPECIAL SESSIONS BECAUSE OF A PROBLEM NOT RELATED TO
THE FACTS OF THE CASE?
MS. CLARK: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MS. CLARK: THE QUESTION IS --
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU RECALL MISS CLARK THEN CAUSED TO BE
DISPLAYED TO YOU PARTS OF A LETTER ALLEGEDLY WRITTEN BY
KATHLEEN BELL TO JOHNNIE COCHRAN AND INVITED YOU TO EXAMINE
THE TEXT OF THAT LETTER?
DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q
OKAY.
HAD YOU DISCUSSED THE FACT THAT THIS WAS GOING
TO HAPPEN BEFORE YOU EVER CAME INTO THE COURTROOM?
A YES.
THAT LETTER, YES.
Q THIS WAS NO
SURPRISE TO YOU, WAS IT?
A NO, SIR.
Q AND WERE YOU
NOT ADVISED THAT THE EFFORT IN
DOING SO WAS TO STEAL THE THUNDER FROM THE INEVITABLE
CROSS-EXAMINATION?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THAT IS
SPECULATION, IT IS IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WAS IT EXPLAINED TO YOU THAT
THIS WAS AN EFFORT TO DIFFUSE THE IMPACT OF ANY ACCUSATIONS
THAT MIGHT LATER BE MADE AGAINST YOU?
MS. CLARK: SAME OBJECTION.
SAME OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WHY -- IF THERE WAS AN
EXPLANATION, WAS IT EXPLAINED TO YOU THAT THIS METHOD OF
INTRODUCING YOUR TESTIMONY WAS TO BE USED IN THIS CASE?
A IT WASN'T
EXPLAINED TO ME, NO.
Q WELL, IN OTHER
WORDS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOU
WERE SIMPLY TOLD HERE IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, HERE IS THE ORDER IN WHICH THINGS WILL HAPPEN WHEN
YOU HIT THE WITNESS STAND, AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO TELL YOU
WHY?
A I AM NOT THE
PROSECUTOR, SIR.
Q I KNOW THAT
YOU ARE NOT THE PROSECUTOR; YOU ARE
THE WITNESS.
A THAT WAS --
Q DID YOU HAVE
ANY COMPREHENSION AS TO WHY THIS
TACT WAS TAKEN BY THE PROSECUTION?
A YES.
Q DID YOU UNDERSTAND
THAT IT RELATED TO POSSIBLE
EXPERIENCES YOU MIGHT HAVE ON CROSS-EXAMINATION?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
WHAT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING AS TO WHY THIS
LETTER WAS SURFACED AT THE OUTSET OF YOUR TESTIMONY.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, THAT IS
IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: I THINK HIS FRAME OF
MIND IS IRRELEVANT.
OVERRULED.
MS. CLARK: AS TO THE REASON FOR
THE MANNER IN WHICH
I UNDERSTAND HIM --
MR. COCHRAN: SPEAKING OBJECTION.
THE COURT: NO. I HAVE RULED,
COUNSEL. IT IS
RELEVANT, HIS FRAME OF MIND.
OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
GIVE US YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF
WHY THIS WAS DONE IN THIS CASE.
A BECAUSE THAT
IS WHY MISS CLARK -- THE WAY SHE
WANTED TO LITIGATE THIS CASE.
Q OKAY.
AND BEYOND THAT, YOU HAD NO COMPREHENSION AS TO
WHY IT WAS DONE; IS THAT RIGHT?
A NO.
Q DID YOU NOT
TESTIFY AT THE VERY OUTSET OF YOUR
TESTIMONY THAT YOU HAD BEEN SUBJECTED, SINCE THE
PRELIMINARY HEARING, TO A BARRAGE OF PERSONAL ATTACKS WHICH
MADE YOU NERVOUS AS YOU FIRST SAT DOWN ON THE STAND?
MS. CLARK: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU TELL US SOMETHING ABOUT
YOUR EXPERIENCES JULY 6TH OR A LITTLE LATER, PERHAPS AROUND
THE 14TH, THAT WAS UNUSUAL?
A NO.
Q DID YOU TELL
US ANYTHING ABOUT PROBLEMS YOU HAD
HAD THAT WERE SPECIFIC TO THIS CASE AND NO OTHER AND DID
NOT RELATE TO THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE?
A YES.
Q WHAT DID YOU
MEAN TO CONVEY WHEN YOU TOLD THAT
TO THIS JURY? WHAT WERE YOU THINKING OF WHEN YOU TALKED
ABOUT THESE PROBLEMS?
A BEING ACCUSED
OF COMMITTING A FELONY IN A
CAPITAL CRIME.
Q OKAY.
WAS THAT THE ONLY ACCUSATION THAT WAS TROUBLING
YOU AS YOU TOOK THE WITNESS STAND?
A THAT IS THE
ONLY ONE I CARE ABOUT, YES.
Q THE OTHER
ONES, THE ACCUSATIONS THAT YOU USED
RACIAL EPITHETS, YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT AT ALL; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A I DIDN'T SAY
THEM. I DON'T CARE ABOUT THEM.
Q YOU DON'T
CARE ABOUT THEM?
A I DIDN'T SAY
THEM, SIR.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. MISSTATES
THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: THE WITNESS ANSWERED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU READ, WITHOUT SPECIFYING THE
PUBLICATION, IN ONE OF THE MEDIA COVERING THIS CASE, A
PRINTED ARTICLE, THAT DISCLOSED OR PURPORTED TO DISCLOSE
THAT YOU WERE UNDERGOING SOME HEAVY TRAINING IN THE D.A.'S
OFFICE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR,
HEARSAY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE
THE QUESTION.
MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
Q DID YOU LEARN
FROM ANY SOURCE THAT IT WAS
CLAIMED THAT YOU WERE UNDERGOING SOME TRAINING SESSIONS IN
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WITH SEVERAL LAWYERS?
A I WAS TOLD
THAT.
Q OKAY.
DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN YOU WERE FIRST TOLD THAT?
A I BELIEVE
WHEN THAT NEWSWEEK ARTICLE CAME OUT.
Q NEWSWEEK.
YOU READ IT?
A NO.
Q NO.
WHO DESCRIBED IT TO YOU?
A MISS CLARK.
Q DID SHE READ
IT TO YOU?
A MISS LEWIS.
YES.
Q READ YOU THE
TEXT?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
WAS THERE ANY TALK -- THIS, BY THE WAY,
OCCURRED AFTER THE GRAND JURY EXPERIENCE, DID IT NOT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
WAS THERE ANY TALK, DURING THE PERIOD WHEN SHE
WAS READING THIS TO YOU, ABOUT A LEAK?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, MISSTATES
THE TESTIMONY. HE
JUST TESTIFIED HE DID NOT -- NOBODY READ IT TO HIM.
THE COURT: WAIT.
MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY, I MAY HAVE
MISHEARD YOU.
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR.
BAILEY: MISS CLARK READ YOU THE
NEWSWEEK ARTICLE OR A PORTION OF IT?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SHE READ IT, NO.
Q WHAT DID SHE
SAY TO YOU THAT NEWSWEEK WAS
TALKING ABOUT?
A SHE PULLED
OUT EXCERPTS OF THE ARTICLE.
Q WELL, WHERE
WERE THE TWO OF YOU?
A SITTING IN
HER OFFICE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, DOES THIS HELP YOU WITH ONE OF THE
MEETINGS, THE RECOLLECTION OF THE NEWSWEEK ARTICLE IN
MARCH?
A HELP ME WITH
THE RECOLLECTION?
Q WE WERE TRYING
EARLIER, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, TO
PIN DOWN AS BEST WE COULD THE TIMES THAT YOU HAD MET WITH
PROSECUTORS IN THE MONTH OF MARCH TO GET READY FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY.
A YES.
Q AT WHICH OF
THE POSSIBLE THREE MEETINGS THAT
YOU HAVE SOME RECOLLECTION OF DID THE NEWSWEEK ARTICLE
SURFACE?
A I DON'T REMEMBER
WHICH ONE IT WAS, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WELL, DO YOU REMEMBER THE DATE ON WHICH YOU DID
THE GRAND JURY THING?
A NO.
Q DO YOU REMEMBER
THE DAY OF THE WEEK?
A SUNDAY.
Q SUNDAY?
A I BELIEVE
SO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
HOW LONG AFTER THAT DID MISS CLARK INFORM YOU
THAT NEWSWEEK HAD DESCRIBED THE EVENT?
A I DON'T REMEMBER
THAT.
Q A DAY OR MORE?
A I DON'T REMEMBER,
SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT WHEN MISS CLARK INFORMED
YOU ABOUT THE NEWSWEEK PIECE IT WAS AFTER THE GRAND JURY
EXERCISE HAD TAKEN PLACE?
A THAT WOULD
BE FAIR TO SAY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WERE YOU PRESENT IN HER OFFICE WHEN YOU
LEARNED ABOUT THIS OR ON THE PHONE?
A I'M NOT SURE
ON THAT. I COULD HAVE BEEN IN HER
OFFICE.
Q YOU DON'T
RECALL WHETHER OR NOT YOU WERE ON A
TELEPHONE OR FACING MISS CLARK WHEN YOU LEARNED THAT YOUR
GRAND JURY TRAINING HAD BEEN PUBLISHED IN THE MEDIA?
A I DON'T REMEMBER,
SIR.
MS. CLARK: OBJECT TO "GRAND JURY
TRAINING," YOUR
HONOR. ARGUMENTATIVE AND MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HOW TO YOU DESCRIBE THAT?
THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HOW DO YOU DESCRIBE THE SESSION
IN THE GRAND JURY ROOM?
A CASE PREPARATION.
Q CASE PREPARATION?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WOULD YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE IF I DESCRIBE IT
HENCEFORTH AS GRAND JURY ROOM CASE PREPARATION TO IDENTIFY
THAT INCIDENT?
A YES, SIR.
Q IS THAT ACCEPTABLE
TO YOU?
A IT IS ACCEPTABLE.
Q THANK YOU.
YOU HAVE TOLD US THAT THE LEARNING ABOUT THE
NEWSWEEK ARTICLE CAME AFTER THE GRAND JURY PREPARATION AND
I'M ASKING YOU WHETHER IT WAS DAYS OR WEEKS AFTERWARDS THAT
MISS CLARK BROUGHT IT TO YOUR ATTENTION?
A THE WAY YOU
CHARACTERIZE THAT DAY OR WEEK --
DAYS OR WEEKS, I WOULD HAVE TO SAY DAYS.
Q SOME DAYS?
A YES.
Q DO YOU HAVE
ANY IDEA HOW MANY?
A NO.
Q NOW, DO YOU
REMEMBER -- DO YOU KNOW WHEN
NEWSWEEK COMES OUT AND WHEN IT IS GENERALLY DISTRIBUTED IN
THIS AREA?
A I BELIEVE
IT IS SUNDAY OR MONDAY.
Q WELL, IF YOU
CONNECTED SUNDAY NIGHT ON THE
NEWSSTAND SOMETIMES MONDAY, IS THAT YOUR EXPERIENCE?
A I DON'T GO
TO THE NEWSSTAND AND BUY IT, SO --
Q DO YOU READ
NEWSWEEK?
A SOMETIMES,
BUT NOT USUALLY.
Q ASSUMING THAT
SOMETIME ON THE MONDAY AFTER --
SOMETIME AFTER THE GRAND JURY PREPARATION, NEWSWEEK CAME
OUT, DID -- WAS MISS CLARK THE FIRST ONE TO BRING TO YOUR
ATTENTION THE CONTENT OF THE ARTICLE?
A I'M NOT SURE.
I BELIEVE SO.
Q MR. TOURTELOT
DIDN'T CALL YOU UP AND TELL YOU
WHAT WAS BEING PUBLISHED?
THE COURT: I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN
THE COURT'S OWN
OBJECTION TO THAT QUESTION, COUNSEL.
MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT.
Q DID MR. PELLICANO
--
THE COURT: SAME OBJECTION, INVESTIGATOR
EMPLOYED BY
AN ATTORNEY.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
Q LET ME PUT
IT THIS WAY:
DID ANYONE, OTHER THAN YOUR LAWYERS IN PRIVATE
CONVERSATION AND PRIOR TO MISS CLARK BRING TO YOUR
ATTENTION THE EXISTENCE OF THIS ARTICLE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
WHAT IS THE
RELEVANCE?
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
WHEN YOU WALKED INTO HER OFFICE AND SHE TOLD
YOU ABOUT THE ARTICLE, WAS SHE HOLDING THE MAGAZINE, IF YOU
REMEMBER?
A I DON'T.
Q DO YOU REMEMBER
WHAT SHE SAID THAT ENLIGHTENED
YOU AS TO WHAT HAD HAPPENED IN THE MAGAZINE?
A NO, SIR.
Q DID YOU AT
SOME POINT DURING THE CONVERSATION
COME TO UNDERSTAND THAT NEWSWEEK WAS DESCRIBING MORE OR
LESS THE GRAND JURY CASE PREPARATION THAT YOU HAD
EXPERIENCED?
A I BELIEVE
THAT WAS THE DESCRIPTION I ASSUMED,
YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WERE YOU QUESTIONED AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU
HAD TOLD ANYONE ABOUT THAT IN THE MEDIA?
A NO.
Q WAS THERE
ANY CONVERSATION BETWEEN YOU, MISS
CLARK AND POSSIBLY OTHERS ON THAT DAY ABOUT HOW THE MEDIA
HAD GOTTEN AHOLD OF IT?
A I THINK --
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT,
YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR.
BAILEY: OKAY.
SUBSEQUENT TO THIS CONVERSATION WITH MISS CLARK
DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HER OR ANY OF THE
PROSECUTORS ABOUT BRINGING OUT THE GRAND JURY PREPARATION
SESSION EARLY IN YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
WE DID, NO.
Q WELL, I SAID
"SUBSEQUENT" NOW. THAT MEANS UP
TO TODAY.
YOU HADN'T -- YOU HAD AN EXPERIENCE WITH MISS
CLARK IN THE OFFICE IN THE OFFICE WHERE YOU LEARNED ABOUT
NEWSWEEK?
A YES.
Q YOU TOLD US
THAT YOU WERE NOT SURPRISED WHEN
SHE DEVELOPED EARLY IN YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION THAT YOU HAD
UNDERGONE A PRACTICED CROSS-EXAMINATION WITH SOME LAWYERS.
IF YOU ARE NOT SURPRISED, AT SOME POINT I TAKE
IT YOU WERE INFORMED THAT THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
WERE YOU INFORMED THAT THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN
SOMETIME AFTER THE NEWSWEEK ARTICLE CAME OUT AND YOU TWO
DISCUSSED IT?
A NO.
I THINK MISS CLARK TOLD ME THAT SHE WAS
GOING TO BRING THAT UP ON DIRECT AND THAT WAS AS FAR AS IT
WENT.
Q WHEN DID SHE
TELL YOU THAT?
A RIGHT BEFORE
I TESTIFIED.
Q JUST BEFORE
YOU TESTIFIED?
A THE DAY BEFORE,
MAYBE DAY AND A HALF.
Q ALL RIGHT.
PRIOR TO THAT YOU HAD NEVER HEARD OF THAT PLAN,
HAD YOU? ISN'T THAT TRUE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES
FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE
AND IT ALSO --
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, CAN WE
APPROACH?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WITH
THE COURT REPORTER,
PLEASE.
MR. BAILEY: I WILL WITHDRAW THE
QUESTION.
THE COURT: EASIER.
MS. CLARK: OKAY.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
YOU JUST SAID THAT MISS CLARK
EXPLAINED TO YOU A DAY OR TWO BEFORE YOUR TESTIMONY THAT
SHE WOULD ELICIT FROM YOU THE FACT THAT YOU HAD THAT
PRACTICED CROSS-EXAMINATION, CORRECT?
A I DON'T KNOW
IF IT WAS EXACTLY THOSE WORDS, BUT
YES.
Q TO THAT EFFECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q WAS THIS A
DAY OR TWO BEFORE YOUR TESTIMONY,
THE FIRST TIME THAT THIS IDEA OF BRINGING THIS OUT WAS
CONVEYED TO YOU?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT AT NO TIME AFTER THE EXPERIENCE TOOK PLACE,
AND PRIOR TO THE PUBLICATION OF THE NEWSWEEK ARTICLE, WERE
YOU TOLD THAT ANY SUCH DISCLOSURE WOULD BE MADE; ISN'T THAT
SO, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THAT IS EXACTLY
THE POINT. I WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WITH
THE COURT REPORTER,
PLEASE.
MR. BAILEY: I DO NOT WITHDRAW
THIS TIME.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE
ARE OVER AT THE SIDE BAR.
MISS CLARK, WHAT IS THE OBJECTION?
MS. CLARK: THE OBJECTION IS THAT
MISLEADS THE JURY
INTO BELIEVING THAT THERE WAS ANY PREPARATION AT THAT TIME
IN TERMS OF WHAT WE WERE REALLY GOING TO QUESTION THE
WITNESS ABOUT OR HOW WE WERE GOING TO STRUCTURE DIRECT.
THERE WAS NONE. THAT DIDN'T OCCUR UNTIL AFTER
THAT, WAY AFTER THAT, SO THAT THERE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ANY
STRATEGIZING, THERE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ANY PLANNING THE
INFERENCE THAT MR. BAILEY IS SEEKING TO DRAW IS HAD THE
NEWSWEEK ARTICLE NOT COME OUT WE WOULD NOT HAVE EXPOSED THE
FACT THAT WE HAD PREPARED THE CASE WITH THE WITNESS AND
QUESTIONED HIM ABOUT THESE THINGS.
AND THAT IS NOT A FAIR INFERENCE BECAUSE WE
HADN'T PREPARED FOR WHAT WE WERE GOING TO ASK YET. THAT
WAS -- THAT WAS WHAT PART OF THE GRAND JURY SESSION WAS
ABOUT.
THE COURT: UH-HUH.
MS. CLARK: IT IS AN UNFAIR INFERENCE
BEING LEFT WITH
THIS JURY.
THE COURT: WHAT IS THE LEGAL BASIS?
MS. CLARK: MISLEADING UNDER
352. IT WILL CONFUSE
THE JURY. IT WILL MISLEAD THE JURY. THIS IS DECEPTIVE.
YOU KNOW, IT ALSO GOES TO WORK PRODUCT, YOUR HONOR. YOU
KNOW, HOW WE PLAN AND WHEN WE PLAN AND STRATEGIZE THE
QUESTIONING OF A WITNESS IS A MATTER -- IT'S A SUBJECT
MATTER OF WORK PRODUCT THAT THE COURT IS PERMITTING COUNSEL
TO GO INTO.
THIS WITNESS DOESN'T KNOW THE NICETIES OF THIS,
BUT THIS IS A MATTER OF WHEN WE REALLY SAT DOWN TO FIGURE
OUT WHAT WE WERE TO GO ASK ABOUT, IN WHAT ORDER, HOW HIS
DIRECT EXAMINATION WAS GOING TO BE STRUCTURED, SO AT THE
POINT IN TIME THAT COUNSEL IS REFERRING TO THAT HADN'T
OCCURRED YET.
I DIDN'T EVEN REALLY BEGUN -- I AM TRYING TO
THINK WHEN I REALLY STRUCTURED THE MATTER OF QUESTIONING.
IT WAS PRETTY LATE -- IT WAS PRETTY LATE. I DIDN'T EVEN
BEGIN IT I THINK UNTIL A WEEK BEFORE HE TOOK THE STAND.
HE WOULDN'T KNOW THAT. HE DOESN'T KNOW. WE SIT
AND WE REVIEW FACTS AND WE TALK ABOUT WHAT HE REMEMBERS,
YOU KNOW, AND I ASK HIM TO REVIEW HIS PRELIM TESTIMONY AND
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN, THE WAY PEOPLE WOULD ORDINARILY
PREPARE A WITNESS.
BUT I DID NOT ACTUALLY SAY "WE ARE GOING TO DO
THIS" ACTUALLY UNTIL - I'M TRYING TO THINK WHEN I DID.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHEN I DID IT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MS. CLARK: THE WHOLE AREA IS IRRELEVANT,
YOUR HONOR,
AND WHAT COUNSEL IS TRYING TO ELICIT FROM THIS WITNESS, BY
WAY OF INFERENCE, THIS WITNESS CAN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT AND WE
ARE TALKING AS WELL ABOUT WORK PRODUCT.
THE COURT: ARE YOU TAKING THE
POSITION THAT
PREPARING WITNESSES TO TESTIFY IS IRRELEVANT?
MS. CLARK: NO, NO, I'M NOT.
I'M TAKING THE POSITION
THAT ASKING THIS WITNESS TO SPECULATE OR TO TRY TO DRAW THE
INFERENCE FROM THIS WITNESS THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE DIVULGED
THE GRAND JURY EXAMINATION BUT FOR THE NEWSWEEK ARTICLE IS
UNFAIR AND MISLEADING TO THE JURY BECAUSE HE DOESN'T KNOW
WHAT WE WERE PLANNING TO DO BEFORE, AFTER OR DURING.
THE COURT: MR. BAILEY.
MR. BAILEY: I'M NOT ASKING HIM
TO DRAW ANY
INFERENCE. I'M ASKING HIM IF A PLAN WAS EVER MADE KNOWN TO
HIM BETWEEN THE EVENTS AND THE PUBLICATION, AND I THINK
THAT IS A SIMPLE HISTORICAL FACT, BUT WHAT ARGUMENT IS MADE
OF IT IS SOMETHING YOUR HONOR MAY TO RULE ON LATER.
I THINK IT A FAIR QUESTION UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THE OBJECTION IS OVERRULED,
ASSUMING THE QUESTION IS REASKED IN THAT PARAMETER, WHETHER
OR NOT IT PRECEDED.
MR. BAILEY: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU, COUNSEL.
AND MR. BAILEY, THIS WILL BE THE LAST QUESTION
BEFORE THE NOON BREAK.
MR. BAILEY: YES, YOUR HONOR.
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, BETWEEN THE TIME THAT YOU
DID GRAND JURY CASE PREPARATION ON THE WEEKEND AND THE TIME
THAT MS. CLARK BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION THE CONTENTS OF
THE NEWSWEEK ARTICLE DESCRIBING THAT EVENT, DID ANY
PROSECUTOR TELL YOU, BETWEEN THOSE TWO EVENTS, WE ARE GOING
TO BRING THE PREPARATION SESSION OUT EARLY IN YOUR
TESTIMONY?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE WITNESS: NO.
MR. BAILEY: I DIDN'T HEAR THE
ANSWER.
THE COURT: WAIT. THERE IS
AN OBJECTION.
MS. CLARK: UNDER 352, MISLEADING.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR
RECESS FOR THE MORNING SESSION.
PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITIONS. DO YOU DON'T
DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS
ABOUT THE CASE, ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU OR
PERFORM ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN
SUBMITTED TO YOU.
WE WILL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU ARE EXCUSED UNTIL 1:30.
THE WITNESS: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(AT 12:00 P.M. THE NOON RECESS
WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:30 P.M. OF
THE SAME DAY.)
[some proceedings omitted]
ALL RIGHT.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE
JURORS, PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: BE SEATED, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN.
ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WOULD YOU RESUME
THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE.
ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE'VE NOW BEEN
REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL, THAT
DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN IS AGAIN ON THE WITNESS STAND
UNDERGOING CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAILEY.
MARK FUHRMAN,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE LUNCH
ADJOURNMENT, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS
FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: GOOD AFTERNOON, DETECTIVE.
THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED YOU
ARE STILL UNDER
OATH.
MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY CONTINUE.
MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. BAILEY:
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, YESTERDAY, WHEN YOU WERE
QUIZZED ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THE HOMICIDE KIT IN THE
VEHICLE THAT YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS PICKED UP, ONE OF
THE ITEMS THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT WAS CARRIED IN THESE KITS
WAS PLASTIC BAGS?
A YES, SIR.
Q WERE THERE
ANY OF ROUGHLY THIS TYPE OF
COMMERCIAL ZIPLOC SANDWICH BAG SIZE AND TYPE OF PLASTIC IN
THE HOMICIDE KIT (INDICATING)?
A NO, WE DON'T
HAVE ANY ZIPLOC BAGS.
Q YOU DON'T?
A NO.
WE HAVE A -- I'M SORRY.
Q TELL ME WHAT
YOU DO HAVE.
A A JAIL BAG,
WHAT YOU PUT A -- AN ARRESTEE'S
PROPERTY IN. THEN IT'S HEAT SEALED WITH A HEAT SEAL THAT'S
KEPT IN THE JAIL.
Q OKAY.
AND I BELIEVE YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT
DIFFERENT SIZE BAGS; IS THAT TRUE?
A WELL, THE
JAIL BAGS ARE ONE SIZE THAT I KNOW IS
IN THERE AND THEN YOU MIGHT HAVE VERY SMALL ONES USED FOR
NARCOTICS.
Q OKAY.
THE COURT: LET THE RECORD REFLECT
WHAT MR. BAILEY
HAS SHOWN TO THE WITNESS IS A SANDWICH SIZE ZIPLOC BAG.
MR. BAILEY: ROUGHLY SIX BY SEVEN
AND A HALF INCHES,
YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
ALL RIGHT.
IN OTHER WORDS, PLASTIC BAGS OF VARIOUS SIZES
ARE AVAILABLE FOR THE COLLECTION OF EVIDENCE?
A TWO THAT COMES
TO MY IMMEDIATE MEMORY, YES.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU MENTIONED ALSO THAT RUBBER GLOVES ARE
AVAILABLE?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
NOW, ONCE AGAIN, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, HAVE YOU
ATTEMPTED TO FIND OUT THE IDENTITIES OF THE PEOPLE YOU WERE
UNABLE TO NAME WHO WERE IN THE GRAND JURY CASE PREPARATION
EXERCISE?
A NO.
Q DOES THE NAME
MELISSA BECKER MEAN ANYTHING TO
YOU?
A NONE AT ALL.
Q DO YOU REMEMBER
ANY LAW STUDENTS BEING PRESENT
DURING THAT TIME, ANYONE IDENTIFIED TO YOU AS A LAW
STUDENT?
A I DO NOT KNOW
ANY OF THE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM.
Q SORRY.
MELISSA DECKER.
A NO.
I STILL DON'T.
Q AND YOU DON'T
KNOW WHETHER ANY OF THE PEOPLE IN
THE ROOM WERE LAW STUDENTS?
A I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THEIR STATUS WAS, NO.
Q OKAY.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THIS ROOM OTHER THAN THE
LAWYERS SEATED AT COUNSEL TABLE WHO WERE PRESENT DURING
THAT EXERCISE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES
FACTS NOT IN
EVIDENCE. MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MS. CLARK: ASSUMES --
THE COURT: I AM SORRY.
I STAND CORRECTED.
SUSTAINED. IT DOES.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
YES.
DO YOU SEE ANYONE IN THE COURTROOM WHO WAS
PRESENT THAT DAY OTHER THAN THESE LAWYERS?
MS. CLARK: SAME OBJECTION, YOUR
HONOR.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION OVER IN
THIS AREA, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, MAY I HAVE
-- SAME OBJECTION.
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
ASSUMES THAT ALL OF US WERE PRESENT.
THE COURT: NO. THAT'S NOT
MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE
QUESTION. OTHER THAN THESE LAWYERS.
MS. CLARK: OTHER THAN -- AND ASSUMES
THESE LAWYERS
WERE PRESENT.
THE COURT: OTHER THAN THESE LAWYERS
HERE IN THE
COURTROOM IS THE WAY --
WHY DON'T YOU REPHRASE THE QUESTION SO IT'S
CRYSTAL CLEAR.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
YOU TOLD US MR. DARDEN AND MISS
LEWIS WERE PRESENT?
A YES.
Q MR. CLARKE
WAS NOT -- MISS CLARK WAS NOT I TAKE
IT?
A SHE WAS NOT.
Q ALL
RIGHT.
DO YOU SEE ANYONE OTHER THAN THE LAWYERS, ONE,
TWO, WHITE AND ONE OTHER THAT YOU NAMED, ASSISTANT DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS IN THIS COURTROOM WHO WAS PRESENT DURING THAT
SESSION?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SO.
Q LOOKING IN
THE AUDIENCE, YOU DON'T RECOGNIZE
ANYONE WHO WAS PRESENT?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
YOU MENTIONED MR. RUNYON. WHAT DOES HE DO?
A I BELIEVE
I SEEM -- ASSISTING MR. DARDEN.
Q HAVE YOU HAD
ANY CONTACTS WITH OR INTERVIEWS
WITH, SINCE THE FIRST OF JANUARY, ANY PSYCHOLOGISTS?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. RELEVANCE.
PRIVILEGE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
IN CONNECTION WITH THE
TESTIMONY.
A NO.
Q NONE AT ALL?
A NO.
Q HAVE YOU RECEIVED
ANY COUNSELING FROM ANYONE
OTHER THAN LAWYERS WITH RESPECT TO YOUR TESTIMONY?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DOES THE NAME, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, DON VINCENT MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU?
A DON VINCENT
I BELIEVE IS A CITY ATTORNEY.
Q DO YOU KNOW
ANY OTHER DON VINCENT OR KNOW OF?
A NO, SIR.
Q HOW ABOUT
MARK GOLDSTEIN? DOES THAT NAME MEAN
ANYTHING TO YOU?
A THE NAME GOLDSTEIN
DOES NOT, NO.
Q HAVE YOU HAD
ANY CONTACT WITH ANYONE BY EITHER
OF THOSE NAMES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CASE SINCE THE FIRST
OF THE YEAR?
A NOT TO MY
KNOWLEDGE, NO.
Q OKAY.
THANK YOU.
NOW, IN YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY, YOU EXPLAINED TO
US THAT AT THE REQUEST OF DETECTIVE VANNATTER I BELIEVE IT
WAS, YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WENT BACK TO BUNDY TO
REVIEW THE LEFT-HAND GLOVE THAT YOU HAD SEEN THERE?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND THE PURPOSE
OF THAT WAS FOR YOU TOGETHER TO
MAKE A JUDGMENT OF SOME SORTS AS TO THE PROBABILITY THAT
THE TWO GLOVES WERE RELATED, THE RIGHT HAND AT ROCKINGHAM,
THE LEFT HAND AT BUNDY?
A YES, AND TO
SEE IF THEY WERE SIMILAR.
Q OKAY.
AND IN CONNECTION WITH THAT EFFORT, I BELIEVE
YOU SAID THAT YOU TOOK A PENCIL AND PICKED UP -- OR PEN AND
PICKED UP THE GLOVE TO SEE WHAT THE LINING LOOKED LIKE?
A YES.
LIFTED IT UP, YES.
Q CAN YOU EXPLAIN
TO ME IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL
-- AND YOU CAN SHOW US IF YOU WISH WITH THIS GLOVE -- HOW
YOU PICKED IT UP; IN OTHER WORDS, WHERE THE PENCIL WAS PUT?
A I DIDN'T PICK
IT UP, SIR.
Q WELL, DID
YOU LIFT IT AT ALL OR JUST LIFT ONE
SIDE?
A JUST LIFTED
IT, YES.
Q OKAY.
AND HOW FAR DID YOU LIFT IT?
A COUPLE INCHES.
Q AND DID YOU
SHINE YOUR LITTLE LIGHT ON IT OR
WAS IT LIGHT ENOUGH THAT YOU DIDN'T NEED TO BY THE TIME YOU
GOT BACK TO BUNDY?
A I WAS LOOKING
PREDOMINATELY IF IT WAS A RIGHT
OR LEFT AND THE LINING, THE COLOR OF THE LEATHER.
Q AND YOU FOUND
THAT THEY WERE SIMILAR?
A YES.
Q AND THEN YOU
WENT BACK AND MADE YOUR REPORT?
A YES.
Q NOW, YOU REMAINED
AT ROCKINGHAM FOR SOME TIME
AFTER THAT; DID YOU NOT?
A YES, SIR.
Q DO YOU KNOW
A WITNESS IN THIS CASE NAMED RON
SHIPP?
A YES.
Q DID HE TALK
TO YOU ON THE PHONE THAT MORNING?
A HE DID.
Q OKAY.
AND PRIOR TO TALKING TO RON SHIPP, DID YOU MAKE
AN EFFORT TO FIND OUT WHETHER ANYONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
HAD HEARD ANYTHING UNUSUAL THAT NIGHT?
A NO.
Q DID YOU GO
QUESTION ANYONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD?
A NO.
Q DID YOU GO
TO ANY HOME IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD?
A YES.
Q WHOSE HOME?
A THE HOUSE
TO THE NORTH THAT I KNOW NOW IS THE
SALINGER RESIDENCE.
Q AND DID YOU
ENCOUNTER SOMEONE THERE THAT YOU
WERE ABLE TO TALK TO?
A BRIEFLY, YES.
Q AND WAS THAT
ROSA LOPEZ?
A I HAVE NO
IDEA.
Q YOU DIDN'T
GET HER NAME?
A NO.
Q YOU DIDN'T
WRITE IT DOWN?
A NO.
Q DID YOU ASK
HER IF SHE HEARD ANYTHING UNUSUAL?
JUST YES OR NO.
A NO.
Q WHAT DID YOU
ASK HER, IF YOU REMEMBER?
A IF I COULD
LOOK DOWN THE NORTH BORDER OF THE
RESIDENCE, SOMETHING HAPPENED NEXT DOOR AND I JUST WANTED
TO LOOK AND SEE IF THERE WAS ANYTHING ON THEIR SIDE OF THE
PROPERTY. THEY SAID NO PROBLEM.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DID YOU MAKE ANY INQUIRY AS TO WHERE HER
BEDROOM WAS, IF SHE HAD ONE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SIMPSON
HOUSE?
A ABSOLUTELY
NONE, SIR.
Q DID YOU MAKE
ANY INQUIRY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT
SHE HAD SEEN ANYTHING THAT NIGHT OVER AT THE SIMPSON HOUSE?
A NO, I DIDN'T.
Q DID YOU INQUIRE
AS TO WHETHER OR NOT SHE HAD
HEARD ANYTHING THAT NIGHT AT THE SIMPSON HOUSE?
A NO.
Q BY THIS
TIME IN YOUR INVESTIGATION, HAVING IN
MIND THE BLOOD THAT YOU DISCOVERED ON THE BRONCO AND THE
GLOVE THAT YOU DISCOVERED IN THE ALLEYWAY, HAD MR. SIMPSON
BECOME A SUSPECT IN YOUR MIND AS A DETECTIVE?
A I THINK THERE
WAS A REMOTE POSSIBILITY, BUT
NOTHING WAS SOLID, NO.
Q A REMOTE POSSIBILITY?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
WELL, WERE YOU PRESENT WHEN HE ARRIVED FROM
CHICAGO AND THEY SLAPPED HANDCUFFS ON HIM?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WELL, WHEN YOU SLAP HANDCUFFS
ON SOMEONE, YOU TAKE THEM INTO CUSTODY, DON'T YOU?
A NOT ALWAYS,
NO.
Q OH, YOU HAVE
THE RIGHT TO HANDCUFF A CITIZEN
WITHOUT A CRIMINAL CHARGE?
A THERE ARE
INSTANCES YOU COULD, YES.
Q HAVE YOU DONE
THAT IN THE PAST, HANDCUFFED
PEOPLE AGAINST WHOM THERE WAS NO CHARGE?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THIS IS
IRRELEVANT, BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THERE'S TIMES
WHEN PEOPLE PICK PEOPLE
OUT AS SUSPECTS AND YOU LATER IDENTIFY THAT THEY WERE NOT
THE SUSPECT AND YOU WOULD RELEASE THEM.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
BUT THAT WASN'T THE CASE HERE,
WAS IT?
A I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THE CASE -- AS FAR AS HE WAS
HANDCUFFED, I DID NOT ORDER THAT.
Q WITHOUT GOING
INTO THE DETAILS, HAD YOU HAD
CONVERSATION WITH THE OTHER DETECTIVES AS TO WHETHER OR NOT
ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON WAS A SUSPECT IN THE DOUBLE HOMICIDE
ON BUNDY?
A NO.
Q THAT HAD NOT
EVER BEEN DISCUSSED PRIOR TO YOUR
GOING TO THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q HAD IT EVER
PASSED YOUR MIND, HOWEVER REMOTELY,
THAT THAT MIGHT BE THE CASE?
A NOT KNOWING
HIS WHEREABOUTS THE NIGHT BEFORE,
I FELT IT WAS EXTREMELY REMOTE.
Q NOT KNOWING
HIS WHEREABOUTS.
A I KNEW HE
WAS IN CHICAGO.
Q WELL, YOU
ALSO KNEW HE DIDN'T LEAVE UNTIL
11:00, RIGHT?
A I DIDN'T KNOW
THAT, NO.
Q YOU DIDN'T
THINK THE LIMOUSINE WAS THERE TO
PICK UP ANYONE ELSE AT 11:00 O'CLOCK, DID YOU?
A I DIDN'T KNOW
ABOUT THE LIMOUSINE OTHER THAN
WHAT KATO INITIALLY TOLD ME.
Q HOW MUCH MORE
DO YOU NEED TO KNOW? HE SAW A
LIMOUSINE AT 11:00 O'CLOCK.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. MISSTATES
THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. BAILEY: WITHDRAW THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID THAT SEEM SIGNIFICANT TO
YOU WITH RESPECT TO THE WHEREABOUTS OF THE RATHER FAMOUS
OWNER OF THE HOUSE THAT THERE WAS A LIMOUSINE THERE AT
11:00 O'CLOCK?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID KATO KAELIN TELL YOU THAT
HE SAW A LIMOUSINE THERE AT 11:00 O'CLOCK WHEN HE WENT
OUTSIDE AFTER HE HEARD THE NOISE?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
NOW, MY QUESTION IS, DID THAT IN ANY WAY RELATE
TO THE POSSIBLE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF MR. SIMPSON AT ABOUT
THAT TIME AT HIS HOME?
A I HAD NO IDEA.
Q DID YOU THINK
MAYBE THE LIMOUSINE WAS BRINGING
HIM BACK FROM SOMEWHERE?
A I DID NOT
GIVE IT ANY THOUGHT.
Q BUT YOU KNEW
HE HAD GONE TO CHICAGO, DIDN'T
YOU?
A YES.
I HAD BEEN TOLD THAT BY THEN.
Q YOU KNEW THAT
DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TALKED TO HIM
IN CHICAGO, DIDN'T YOU?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. VAGUE
AS TO TIME. WHEN.
THE WITNESS: YES.
MR. BAILEY: THE NEXT MORNING.
THE COURT: WELL, I TAKE IT WE'RE
STILL IN THE
CONTEXT OF WHEN DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WENT NEXT DOOR TO THE
SALINGER'S.
MR. BAILEY: I'M TRYING TO FIND
OUT WHAT HE THEN
KNEW.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
OKAY.
YOU KNEW THAT HE REACHED HIM IN CHICAGO BY
TELEPHONE, DIDN'T YOU?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS SATISFIED THAT THE
RECIPIENT OF THE CALL WAS IN FACT IN CHICAGO, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO AT SOME POINT, HE HAD TRAVELED TO CHICAGO.
DID THAT OCCUR TO YOU?
A OF COURSE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID A QUESTION ARISE IN YOUR MIND AS TO WHEN HE
MIGHT HAVE TRAVELED TO CHICAGO?
A IT DID NOT.
Q WELL, DID
IT OCCUR TO YOU IF HE HAD TRAVELED TO
CHICAGO BEFORE THE ICE CREAM WAS PURCHASED, AT WHICH POINT
THE VICTIM NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WAS VERY MUCH ALIVE, THAT
HE WOULD BE ELIMINATED AS A SUSPECT INSOFAR AS DIRECT
PARTICIPATION IN THE HOMICIDE WAS CONCERNED?
A I NEVER GAVE
ANY OF THAT --
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. COMPOUND.
THE COURT: I'M SORRY. MISS
CLARK?
MS. CLARK: COMPOUND, YOUR HONOR,
COMPLEX.
THE COURT: CALLS FOR A CONCLUSION
AS WELL.
SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WERE YOU, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN,
DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR STAY FROM 2:10 A.M. UNTIL YOU
TALKED TO SHIPP LET'S SAY AROUND 10:00 -- IS THAT CORRECT;
10:00 O'CLOCK?
A I DON'T RECALL
WHAT TIME HE CALLED.
Q MID MORNING?
A I BELIEVE
SO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WERE YOU ENGAGED IN YOUR PROFESSION AS A
DETECTIVE OF THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT?
A AT THE TIME
I TALKED TO MR. SHIPP?
Q NO, SIR.
FROM 2:10 A.M. WHEN YOU ARRIVED ON
THE SCENE UNTIL AT LEAST MID MORNING ON THE 13TH, WERE YOU
ENGAGED IN YOUR PROFESSION AS A POLICE OFFICER?
A YES, SIR.
Q WERE YOU BEING
PAID TO CARRY OUT THE FUNCTION
OF A DETECTIVE DURING THAT PERIOD?
A YES.
Q WERE YOU GIVING
THAT YOUR BEST EFFORT DURING
THAT PERIOD?
A I WAS BEING
DIRECTED. YES.
Q YOU WERE BEING
DIRECTED?
A YES.
Q YOU WEREN'T
DIRECTED TO THE BRONCO, WERE YOU?
A NO.
Q YOU WEREN'T
DIRECTED TO THE SOUTH BORDER OF THE
SIMPSON PROPERTY, WERE YOU?
A YES.
Q BY WHOM?
A MR. KAELIN.
Q MR. KAELIN
ORDERED YOU TO GO OUT AND LOOK FOR
WHERE THE NOISE CAME FROM, DETECTIVE?
A NO.
HE DIRECTED ME BY HIS STATEMENT.
Q DOES HE HAVE
THE POWER TO DIRECT ANY DETECTIVE
IN THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A DIRECTION
IN THE LOGICAL THING TO DO WOULD BE
ONE AND THE SAME.
Q THEY'RE ONE
AND THE SAME?
A YES.
Q DO YOU
WANT TO LEAVE IT THAT KATO KAELIN
DIRECTED YOU TO GO OUT AND LOOK FOR THE NOISE OR ITS
SOURCE?
A BY HIS STATEMENT,
ABSOLUTELY.
Q OKAY.
YOU HAD NO CHOICE BUT TO DO THAT WITHOUT
TELLING ANYBODY, CORRECT?
A I HAD A CHOICE.
THAT WAS A LOGICAL THING TO
DO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S CONTINUE.
WHEN YOU LEARNED THAT MR. SIMPSON WAS IN
CHICAGO, DID IT OCCUR TO YOU THAT THE PRESENCE OF THE
LIMOUSINE MIGHT BE OF SOME SIGNIFICANCE?
A I DID NOT
GIVE THE LIMOUSINE ANY THOUGHT AFTER
THAT.
Q DID YOU GIVE
ANY THOUGHT TO THE POSSIBILITY
THAT MR. SIMPSON WAS OR WAS NOT IN BRENTWOOD BETWEEN 9:00
AND MIDNIGHT?
A NO.
Q THAT NEVER
CROSSED YOUR MIND?
A WELL, IT WAS
OUT OF MY REALM OF RESPONSIBILITY
AT THAT TIME.
Q WELL, YOU
CLAIM THAT YOU FOUND AN
INSTRUMENTALITY OF MURDER THAT TURNS OUT TO BE ON HIS
PROPERTY. DID THAT GIVE YOU ANY CAUSE TO SUSPECT MR.
SIMPSON?
A KNOWING HE
WAS IN CHICAGO, I THINK IT WOULD BE
QUITE THE OPPOSITE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, YOU ATTACH SOME SIGNIFICANCE, AS I
UNDERSTAND IT, TO THE BRONCO INITIALLY AGAINST THE
POSSIBILITY THAT PEOPLE INSIDE WOULD BE INJURED, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
YOU HAD ASCERTAINED BY QUESTIONING KATO KAELIN
THAT ONLY O.J. SIMPSON DROVE THE BRONCO, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU HAD
NOTICED A SHOVEL AND SOME PLASTIC
WHICH YOU DID NOT THEN UNDERSTAND IN THE BACK OF THE
BRONCO, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU HAVE BEFORE CITED THIS SET OF
CIRCUMSTANCES AS BEING RELEVANT TO THE PRESSING NEED TO GO
OVER THE FENCE ONTO THE PROPERTY, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WERE THEY ALSO RELEVANT TO THE POSSIBILITY THAT
MR. SIMPSON SHOULD BE LOOKED AT AS A SUSPECT ON THE 13TH OF
JUNE?
A NOT AT THE
TIME AS YOU ARE DESCRIBING THESE,
NO.
Q OKAY.
WHEN YOU LEARNED THAT HE WAS THE ONLY DRIVER OF
THE SUSPECT -- OF THE BRONCO ACCORDING TO MR. KAELIN, WERE
YOU INTERESTED TO KNOW WHETHER THE BRONCO MIGHT HAVE LEFT
THE PREMISES THAT NIGHT DURING THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE
MURDER MAY HAVE OCCURRED?
A THAT WOULD
HAVE BEEN HELPFUL, YES.
Q IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN HELPFUL. ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WHEN YOU SPOKE TO MISS LOPEZ TO GET
PERMISSION TO GO BACK ALONG THE BORDERLINE AND WHEREVER IT
WAS THAT YOU WANTED TO GO ON THE SALINGER'S PROPERTY, DID
YOU ASK HER ANY QUESTIONS WHATSOEVER ABOUT THE BRONCO?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
OR ANY QUESTIONS WHATSOEVER ABOUT THE DOINGS AT
THE SIMPSON PLACE THE NIGHT BEFORE?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU THEN GO AND MAKE AN INQUIRY OR
INVESTIGATION OF THE TERRAIN TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE
SALINGER PROPERTY ALONG THE FENCE?
A YES.
YES, SIR.
Q BY THE WAY,
DID YOU EVER IDENTIFY YOURSELF TO
ROSA LOPEZ?
A YES, SIR.
Q AS DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU TAKE ANY NOTES WHEN YOU TALKED TO HER?
A NO.
Q OR MAKE ANY
LATER ON OF THE CONVERSATION?
A NO.
Q AND DID YOU
EVER SAY TO HER THAT YOU WOULD HAVE
SOME OTHER OFFICERS GET IN TOUCH WITH HER?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO AS FAR AS YOU WERE CONCERNED, THERE WAS NO
POINT IN YOU OR ANYONE ELSE QUESTIONING ROSA LOPEZ?
A THERE WAS
NOTHING SHE INDICATED THAT SHOULD BE
INTERVIEWED FOR, NO.
Q WELL, YOU
NEVER ASKED HER A QUESTION. HOW COULD
SHE INDICATE ANYTHING?
A AS FAR AS
I'M CONCERNED.
Q DO YOU DETERMINE
WITHOUT ASKING QUESTIONS
WHETHER WITNESSES HAVE INFORMATION?
A NO, SIR.
YOU MISSTATED I -- I WOULDN'T HAVE
INTERVIEWED HER.
Q YOU WOULD
NOT HAVE INTERVIEWED HER?
A NO.
Q AS THE DETECTIVE,
YOU DON'T INTERVIEW
WITNESSES?
A IT WAS
NO LONGER MY CASE. DETECTIVE LANGE AND
VANNATTER WILL DICTATE WHAT INTERVIEWS AND WHEN.
Q DID YOU EVER
CONSULT WITH THEM AND SAY, "I
WOULD LIKE THIS TIME TO ASK YOUR DIRECTION. SHOULD I TALK
WITH THIS LADY NEXT DOOR"?
A NO.
DETECTIVE LANGE WAS ON THE BUNDY CRIME
SCENE AND DETECTIVE VANNATTER WAS WRITING A SEARCH WARRANT.
Q YOU COULDN'T
INTERRUPT HIM WRITING A SEARCH
WARRANT TO SEE IF IT WAS OKAY TO TALK TO THE NEXT-DOOR
NEIGHBOR'S MAID?
A I DIDN'T THINK
IT IMPORTANT.
Q DIDN'T THINK
IT IMPORTANT.
DID YOU CAUSE HER TO ASK HER GARDENER SOME
QUESTIONS?
A EXCUSE ME?
Q DID YOU CAUSE
ROSA LOPEZ TO ASK HER GARDENER
SOME QUESTIONS?
A NOT AT ALL.
Q WERE YOU LOOKING
FOR POSSIBLE SHARP OBJECTS
WHEN YOU WERE ON THE SALINGER PROPERTY?
A I WAS LOOKING
FOR ANYTHING THAT LOOKED LIKE IT
WAS UNUSUAL OR SOMETHING THAT WAS OBVIOUS.
Q WAS ONE OF
THE UNUSUAL THINGS YOU WERE LOOKING
FOR, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, A SHARP OBJECT?
A I DIDN'T
KNOW AT THAT TIME THE CAUSE OF DEATH
AT BUNDY, SO I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR
PRECISELY.
Q CAN YOU ANSWER
THE QUESTION? WERE YOU LOOKING
OR WERE YOU NOT LOOKING FOR A SHARP OBJECT?
A I CAN'T ANSWER
THAT AS A YES OR NO, SIR.
Q SO YOU DON'T
KNOW IF YOU HAD SEEN A KNIFE,
WHETHER YOU WOULD HAVE PICKED IT UP OR PHOTOGRAPHED IT OR
EVEN NOTED IT?
A I WASN'T SPECIFICALLY
LOOKING FOR A KNIFE. IF
I WOULD HAVE FOUND ONE, I WOULD HAVE SEIZED IT, YES, OR
KEPT IT THERE FOR A PHOTOGRAPHER AND A CRIMINALIST TO
RECOVER, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHAT ELSE WERE YOU LOOKING FOR? IF IT WASN'T
KNIVES, WHAT WERE YOU HOPING TO FIND?
A I DON'T KNOW,
SIR. ANYTHING THAT LOOKED LIKE
IT WAS OUT OF PLACE OR POSSIBLE EVIDENCE, I COULD GO BACK
TO THE SALINGER RESIDENCE AND ASK IF IT WAS THEIRS.
Q REGARDING
CLOTHING?
A ANYTHING OF
THAT NATURE, YES.
Q HAD YOU SEEN
ENOUGH OF THE CRIME SCENE TO
ASSUME WHOEVER HAD PERPETRATED THE MURDERS PROBABLY HAD
BLOOD ON THEM AS THE GLOVES DID?
A YES.
Q ALL
RIGHT.
WERE YOU INTERESTED IN FINDING WHETHER OR NOT
THERE WAS ANY BLOODY CLOTHING NEARBY THE SIMPSON RESIDENCE?
A I DON'T THINK
I WAS SPECIFICALLY LOOKING FOR
JUST THAT. BUT AS I SAID.
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, WHEN I ASK YOU WERE YOU
LOOKING FOR SOMETHING, THAT DOES NOT MEAN TO THE EXCLUSION
OF ALL OTHER ITEMS. I SIMPLY WANT TO KNOW IF THAT WAS ON
THE LIST OF THINGS THAT MIGHT HAVE INTERESTED YOU IF YOU
HAD SEEN IT.
A THERE WAS
NO LIST.
Q THERE WAS
NO LIST.
A NO.
Q OKAY.
DO YOU KNOW HOW YOU WERE GOING TO DECIDE
WHETHER SOMETHING WAS SIGNIFICANT IF IT WALKED UP AND HIT
YOU IN THE FACE?
A WELL, IF IT
DIDN'T BELONG IN THE SALINGER
RESIDENCE AND IT CAME FROM THE SIMPSON RESIDENCE, IT COULD
BE POSSIBLY CONSTRUED AS SOMETHING INVOLVED WITH --
ANYTHING TO DO WITH BUNDY OR ROCKINGHAM, AND I WOULD SIMPLY
ASK THE SALINGER'S.
Q MY QUESTION
TO YOU WAS SIMPLY, INCLUDED AMONG
THOSE KINDS OF ITEMS, WOULD BLOODY CLOTHES HAVE BEEN AN
ITEM?
A YES.
Q ALL
RIGHT.
DID YOU FIND ANY?
A NO.
Q DID YOU FIND
ANY SHARP INSTRUMENTS?
A NO, SIR.
Q WAS THE GARDENER
WORKING THAT MONDAY MORNING?
A I SAW A GARDENER
SOMETIME THAT MORNING, BUT I'M
NOT SURE IF IT WAS IN FRONT OF SALINGER'S RESIDENCE OR ON
THE STREET.
Q YOU NEVER
SAW THE SALINGER'S THERE, DID YOU?
A I DON'T --
NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
Q THE ONLY PERSON
YOU SPOKE TO AT THE FRONT DOOR
WAS RATHER SHORT, HISPANIC, UPPER MIDDLE-AGED, CORRECT?
A NO, BECAUSE
I BELIEVE THERE WAS A SECURITY DOOR
WITH SOME TYPE OF A MESH WHERE I CAN'T SEE IN, AND THAT
PERSON OPENED THE INTERIOR DOOR AND SPOKE THROUGH THAT.
Q IF THE PERSON
WHO SPOKE TO YOU THAT MORNING
PRESENTED THEMSELVES IN THIS COURTROOM NOW AND DIDN'T SAY
ANYTHING, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THEM?
A NO.
Q WAS THE ACCENT
ACCOMPANYING THE VOICE WHICH HAD
NO IMAGE AT THAT POINT SPANISH OR HISPANIC?
A I DON'T
RECALL THAT THERE WAS A HEAVY ACCENT,
NO.
Q DO YOU RECALL
ANY ACCENT THAT WOULD TEND TO
IDENTIFY THE SPEAKER AS SOMEONE BORN IN ANOTHER COUNTRY?
A IT'S A POSSIBILITY,
BUT I DON'T RECALL IT.
Q OKAY.
AND WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME YOU EVER SPOKE TO
ANYBODY ABOUT THIS ENCOUNTER WITH THE PERSON AT THE
SALINGER'S?
A I BELIEVE
WHEN ROSA LOPEZ CAME FORWARD AS A
WITNESS.
Q WELL, YOU
MEAN WHEN SHE WAS FIRST LISTED BY THE
DEFENSE A LONG TIME AGO OR RECENTLY?
A I'M NOT SURE
ON THAT, SIR. I DON'T KNOW WHEN
SHE WAS LISTED AND I DON'T KNOW WHEN SHE TESTIFIED EXACTLY.
SO I WOULD PROBABLY SAY SOMETIME IN BETWEEN THERE.
Q DID YOU EVER
LEARN AS A RESULT OF ANY HEARINGS
BEFORE THIS COURT, WITHOUT GOING INTO WHAT WAS SAID, THAT
IT WAS ALLEGED THAT YOU HAD TALKED WITH MISS LOPEZ THE
MORNING OF THE INVESTIGATION, THE FIRST MORNING?
A YES, I HEARD
THAT.
Q AND DO YOU
REMEMBER WHEN YOU FIRST LEARNED
THAT?
A NO.
Q HAVE YOU EVER
MADE ANY EFFORT SINCE THAT TIME
TO GET A LOOK AT MISS LOPEZ TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT OR LISTEN
TO MISS LOPEZ TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT YOU COULD RECOGNIZE
THAT PERSON AS THE ONE YOU MAY HAVE TALKED TO ON THE
MORNING OF THE 13TH?
A YES.
I SAW HER ON THE NEWS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND DID YOU LISTEN TO HER?
A YES.
Q DID THAT HELP
YOU IN ANY WAY AS TO WHETHER OR
NOT THIS IS THE PERSON YOU QUESTIONED ON THE MORNING OF THE
13TH?
A WELL, SHE
WAS SPEAKING SPANISH. SO NO.
Q YOU DID NOT
HEAR HER SPEAK ENGLISH?
A NO, SIR.
Q DID NOT HEAR
HER HERE ON THE WITNESS STAND
TESTIFYING?
A NO.
I SAW A CLIP ON THE NEWS I BELIEVE IT WAS
OF HER TESTIMONY.
Q OKAY.
ALL RIGHT.
AND TO THIS DAY -- BY THE WAY, DO YOU KNOW WHAT
IF ANY PORTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND THE SIMPSON HOME
WAS SEARCHED FOR THESE ITEMS OF EVIDENCE THAT YOU AND I
HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING SUCH AS WEAPONS AND CLOTHING?
A NO, SIR.
Q YOU
NEVER PARTICIPATED IN, GAVE ANY DIRECTION
TO OTHER OFFICERS ABOUT OR OTHERWISE INVOLVED YOURSELF IN
A SEARCH FOR ITEMS OF EVIDENCE OF THIS SORT?
A I WAS THERE
DURING THE SEARCH WARRANT AND I
ASSISTED IN THE CLOSET OF MR. SIMPSON'S BEDROOM AND SOME OF
THE EXTERIOR PORTIONS, BUT THAT'S IT.
Q WHO WAS THE
FIRST PERSON, IF YOU KNOW, BY THE
WAY EVER TO GO UP TO MR. SIMPSON'S BEDROOM AFTER YOU
ENTERED THE PREMISES?
A I DON'T KNOW,
SIR.
Q WHAT TIME
DID YOU GO THERE FIRST?
A INSIDE THE
RESIDENCE?
Q YES.
A WITH MR. KAELIN.
Q HOW GREAT
AN AREA, IF YOU KNOW, AROUND BUNDY
WAS SEARCHED FOR BLOODY CLOTHING, OTHER ACCOUTREMENTS MIGHT
HAVE BEEN WORN OR USED BY THE MURDERER INCLUDING A WEAPON?
A I HAVE NO
KNOWLEDGE OF THAT, SIR.
Q DIDN'T OFFICER
RISKE TELL YOU WHERE HE HAD
CAUSED PEOPLE TO LOOK FOR ITEMS OF THAT SORT?
A I DON'T RECALL
THAT, NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU CONTINUE WORKING ON THIS CASE AFTER
JUNE 13TH?
A I BELIEVE
I WAS ASKED TO DO A FEW THINGS, YES.
Q DID YOU KNOW
THAT DETECTIVE VANNATTER SAID ON
JUNE 6TH IN HIS SWORN TESTIMONY THAT YOU WERE STILL VERY
MUCH A PART OF THE CASE AS A DETECTIVE?
A OH, I THINK
THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE TIME THAT
THEY ASKED US TO DO CERTAIN THINGS, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND WHEN DID YOU LAST DO ANY WORK ON THIS CASE,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, OTHER THAN TO PREPARE YOURSELF AS A
WITNESS?
A IT WOULD HAVE
BEEN LAST YEAR, SIR. MAYBE --
Q I UNDERSTAND.
I UNDERSTAND.
A MAYBE A MONTH,
MONTH AFTER THE CRIME.
Q YOU THINK
YOU MAY HAVE CONTINUED THROUGH JULY
TO WORK ON THE CASE?
A YES.
THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN SOME THINGS I DID,
YES.
Q AND SOME PART
OF AUGUST, YOU MAY HAVE WORKED ON
THE CASE?
A I'M NOT SURE,
SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WELL, ASSUMING THAT JURY SELECTION OR
PROCEEDINGS POINTED TOWARDS JURY SELECTION BEGAN SEPTEMBER
19TH OF 1994, DID YOU DO ANY WORK ON THE CASE AFTER THAT?
A I CAN'T REMEMBER,
SIR.
Q YOU DON'T
KNOW WHETHER YOU HAD DONE ANYTHING ON
THE CASE SINCE THIS PROCEEDING BEGAN?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
I HAVE, NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU RECEIVE AN INSTRUCTION
OF SOME SORT, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, TO ABSTAIN FROM VIEWING
THESE PROCEEDINGS?
A YES.
Q AND HAVE YOU
FOLLOWED THAT INSTRUCTION?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, OVER
THE LUNCH HOUR, DID YOU HAVE ANY
CHANCE TO REFLECT OR HAVE YOUR MEMORY ASSISTED BY ANY OF
THE MINIONS FOR THE PROSECUTION AS TO THE SESSIONS THAT
OCCURRED BEFORE THE TRIAL, YOUR PART OF THIS TRIAL AND
SINCE THE FIRST OF THE YEAR?
A NO.
Q WOULD YOU
SAY, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, THAT IN
ADDITION TO THIS BEING THE LARGEST CASE IN WHICH YOU'VE
EVER BEEN INVOLVED, THIS IS PERHAPS THE MOST IMPORTANT
TESTIMONY IN WHICH YOU'VE EVER BEEN INVOLVED?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. VAGUE,
IMPORTANT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HAVE YOU NOT BEEN VERY
CONCERNED SINCE JANUARY 1 AND BEYOND WITH THE EXPERIENCE OF
TESTIFYING IN THIS CASE?
A I BELIEVE
I WAS CONCERNED WITH THE ALLEGATIONS
THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT FORTH AGAINST ME.
Q YES.
A YES.
Q YOU WERE CONCERNED
WITH SOMETHING HAPPENING
WHICH HAS NOW HAPPENED, CORRECT?
MS. CLARK: NO. OBJECTION.
ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. BAILEY: WITHDRAWN.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HAVING THAT IN MIND, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, WERE YOU ANXIOUS THAT YOU DELIVER A GOOD
PERFORMANCE ON THE WITNESS STAND?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MS. CLARK: VAGUE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I'M ALWAYS CONCERNED
WITH THAT IN EVERY
CASE.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
IN THIS CASE MORE THAN OTHERS,
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?
A I'M TESTIFYING
JUST LIKE I DO IN ANY OTHER
CASE.
Q UH-HUH.
AND HAVE YOU EVER IN ANY OTHER CASE FACED
ACCUSATIONS SUCH AS YOU EXPECTED IN THIS CASE?
MS. CLARK: WELL, YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR.
BAILEY: HAVE YOU EVER IN ANY OTHER
CASE HAD THE BENEFIT --
MS. CLARK: ASK TO APPROACH.
MR. BAILEY: MAY I FINISH THE QUESTION?
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
HAVE YOU EVER IN ANY OTHER CASE
HAD THE BENEFIT OF A GRAND JURY CASE PREPARATION SESSION
SUCH AS YOU HAD HERE?
THE COURT: OVERRULED. DENIED.
YOU CAN ANSWER THE
QUESTION.
THE WITNESS: NO.
THE COURT: I THOUGHT WE ALREADY
ASKED THAT ONCE
BEFORE.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
MS. CLARK: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
OKAY.
NOW, HAVING IN MIND ALL OF THAT, YOU MAINTAIN
THAT YOU HAVE ALMOST NO RECOLLECTION OF THE SESSIONS
INTENDED TO PREPARE YOU FOR THIS TESTIMONY?
A THAT'S CORRECT,
SIR.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT
MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. BAILEY: HAVE WE SOLVED THE
EARLIER PROBLEM YOUR
HONOR DESCRIBED AT THE --
THE COURT: NOTHING HAS BEEN SUBMITTED
TO ME.
MR. BAILEY: I UNDERSTOOD IT WAS
COMING FORTHWITH.
HAVE WE LEARNED THE STATUS OF THAT PERHAPS?
THE COURT: MISS LEWIS?
MS. LEWIS: I'LL CHECK ON
IT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MS. LEWIS: IF I COULD JUST APPROACH
OFF THE RECORD.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE
BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL AND THE
DEFENDANT.)
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. BAILEY, CAN WE USE THE TIME PROFITABLY?
MR. BAILEY: WELL, I DIDN'T WANT
TO INTERRUPT THE
CONFERENCE OF MY COLLEAGUES, BUT I WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO
DO THAT, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, AS I RECALL,
IN YOUR INITIAL ARRIVAL AT THE ASHFORD GATE AND IN THE
DEVELOPMENTS THAT OCCURRED THEREAFTER INCLUDING THE
OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE BRONCO, YOU WERE CONCERNED THAT
SOMEBODY MIGHT BE BLEEDING TO DEATH, INCLUDING O.J. SIMPSON
INSIDE HIS HOUSE, CORRECT?
A I SAID SOMEBODY.
I DIDN'T USE THE WORD "O.J.
SIMPSON."
Q NO, NO.
A YES, SIR.
Q I'M
ADDING IT.
WASN'T HE ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT COULD HAVE
BEEN BLEEDING TO DEATH IN THE O.J. SIMPSON HOUSE?
A YES, SIR.
Q WHEN YOU GOT
INTO THAT HOUSE FINALLY AND
STARTED TALKING TO PEOPLE, DID YOU EVER ASK ANYONE WHERE
O.J. WAS?
A NO.
MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT.
[cross examination ends for the day]
[March 16, 1995; some initial matters omitted]
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
PLEASE BE SEATED.
ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WOULD YOU RESUME THE
WITNESS STAND, PLEASE.
MARK FUHRMAN,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT,
RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: LET THE RECORD REFLECT
THAT THE JURY HAS NOW
JOINED US, ALL OF OUR MEMBERS.
THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN IS AGAIN ON THE WITNESS STAND
UNDER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAILEY.
GOOD MORNING, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.
THE WITNESS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: DETECTIVE, YOU ARE
REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER
OATH.
MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY CONCLUDE YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION.
MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. BAILEY:
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, DO YOU RECALL YESTERDAY WHEN I
INDICATED A CERTAIN AREA OF THE AUDIENCE AND ASKED YOU IF YOU SAW
ANYONE THERE THAT YOU KNEW.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND DID YOU
SEE ANYONE THAT YOU KNEW?
A THAT I KNEW?
Q YESTERDAY?
A I KNOW PEOPLE,
YES, IN THE AUDIENCE.
YESTERDAY?
Q SOMEONE THAT
WAS CONNECTED WITH THE PREPARATION OF
YOUR TESTIMONY?
A NO.
I DIDN'T RECALL, NO.
Q DID YOU SEE
ANYONE WHEN YOU LOOKED OUT YESTERDAY, NOT
HERE TODAY, WHO IS CONNECTED WITH THE PREPARATION OF YOUR
TESTIMONY?
A NO, SIR.
Q YOU DID NOT?
A NO.
Q DO YOU KNOW
A DR. MARK GOLDSTON?
MS. CLARK: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: THAT IS A DIFFERENT
NAME THAN I HEARD
YESTERDAY.
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, COUNSEL.
OBJECTIONS?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, ASKED AND
ANSWERED.
THE COURT: ITEM 4.
MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY. OBJECTION.
THE COURT: I HEARD A DIFFERENT
NAME. OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I KNOW A MARK.
I DON'T RECALL A MR.
GOLDSTEIN.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
GOLDSTON AS I GET IT?
A I STILL DON'T,
SIR.
Q WHO IS MARK?
A I BELIEVE
HE IS A DOCTOR.
Q PSYCHIATRIST,
IS HE?
A UMM, I'M NOT
SURE IF HE IS A PSYCHOLOGIST OR A
PSYCHIATRIST.
Q OKAY.
UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE YOU SEEN HIM?
A I HAVE SEEN
HIM IN THE D.A.'S OFFICE.
Q WAS HE PRESENT
DURING THE GRAND JURY SESSION?
A NO.
I DON'T RECALL HIM BEING THERE, NO.
Q HAS HE TALKED
WITH YOU AT ALL ABOUT BEING A WITNESS?
A NO.
Q YOU HAVE NEVER
HAD ANY CONVERSATION WITH HIM?
A YES.
Q WHAT HAVE
YOU TALKED ABOUT?
A WE DIDN'T
TALK. HE JUST SAID YOU ARE DOING A GOOD
JOB, KEEP IT UP.
Q DID YOU TALK
TO HIM BEFORE YOU TESTIFIED?
A NO, NOT AT
ALL.
Q AND HE HAS
HAD NO CONVERSATION WITH YOU AT ALL ABOUT
THE MANNER OF YOUR TESTIMONY, EXCEPT SOME WORDS OF ENCOURAGEMENT
AFTER THE FACT?
IS THAT THE WAY YOU LEAVE IT?
A YES, SIR.
Q DID YOU RECOGNIZE
HIM WHEN I POINTED TO HIM YESTERDAY
SITTING NEXT TO --
THE COURT: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN
EVIDENCE.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DID YOU SEE ME POINT YESTERDAY IN
THIS DIRECTION, (INDICATING)?
A I BELIEVE
YOU POINTED, YES, SIR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
INDICATING THE BACK ROW OF THE SEATS RESERVED FOR
COUNSEL AND THE AUDIENCE.
MR. BAILEY: WELL, USING MR. MC
GINNIS AS
A LANDMINE, I BELIEVE THE MAN SITTING NEXT TO
MR. JOE MC GINNIS, THAT IS WHERE I WAS POINTING.
MR. MC GINNIS IS THE GENTLEMAN WITH HIS HAND UP, THE
TALL GENTLEMAN WITH THE GRAY HAIR.
THE WITNESS: YES, SIR.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
WAS MARK GOLDSTON SITTING THERE WHEN
I ASKED YOU THE QUESTION?
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DID NOT NOTICE
HIM, NO.
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
YOU DIDN'T NOTICE HIM?
A NO.
Q HOW MANY TIMES
HAVE YOU SEEN THIS MAN, DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
A FOUR OR FIVE
TIMES.
Q OKAY.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, HOW DID YOU CALL IN THE LICENSE
PLATE OF THE VEHICLE THAT TURNED OUT TO BE KAELIN'S ON THE
MORNING OF THE 13TH?
A POLICE RADIO.
Q IS THAT CALLED
A ROVER?
A YES, SIR.
Q IS THAT SOMETHING
YOU CARRY ON YOUR BELT?
A NO.
YOU COULD, BUT IN PLAIN CLOTHES IT IS VERY
DIFFICULT, SO YOU USUALLY JUST TAKE IT OUT OF THE CAR AND HOLD
IT.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU HAVE IT WITH YOU THAT MORNING?
A AT DIFFERENT
TIMES I DID, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU HAVE IT WITH YOU WHEN YOU WERE IN TALKING TO
KATO IN HIS BUNGALOW?
A I DON'T BELIEVE
SO, NO.
Q DID YOU HAVE
IT WITH YOU WHEN YOU WERE OUT TO LOOK
FOR THE SOURCE OF THE NOISE?
A NO.
Q DID
YOU HAVE ANY COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT WITH YOU
AT THAT TIME?
A NO.
MR. BAILEY: OKAY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. BAILEY:
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, IS THERE A POLICE
RADIO CODE WHERE CERTAIN WORDS ARE USED TO INDICATE LETTERS OF
THE ALPHABET AS THERE IS IN AVIATION IN THE MILITARY, FOR
INSTANCE?
A YES, SIR.
Q WHAT IS THE
POLICE WORD FOR "N"?
A NORA.
Q "V"?
A VICTOR.
Q "N"?
A NORA.
Q "H"?
A HENRY.
Q "I"?
A PUT ME ON
THE SPOT. IT IS IDAHO IN THE MILITARY.
I'M HAVING A --
IDA.
Q OKAY.
DOES "NVN" HAVE A MEANING TO YOU?
A NO, SIR.
Q DO YOU USE
THAT ON THE RADIO AT ALL?
A NO, SIR.
Q I MEAN THE
PHONETIC LETTERS, NORA, ET CETERA?
A OH, THE PHONETICS,
IF I'M RUNNING A LICENSE PLATE,
SUCH AS THAT?
Q NO, NO.
YOU SAID "V" WAS REPRESENTED BY?
A VICTOR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU EVER USE THE TERM NORA VICTOR NORA WHEN
TALKING TO OTHER OFFICERS ON THE RADIO?
A WHY WOULD
I DO THAT?
Q DO YOU EVER
USE THE TERM NORA VICTOR NORA TALKING TO
OFFICERS ON THE RADIO?
A NO, SIR.
MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.
MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. THANK
YOU.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE, YOUR HONOR, UNTIL THE OTHER
MATTERS ARE SETTLED.
THE COURT: REDIRECT. MISS
CLARK.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. DARDEN: CAN WE HAVE ONE MOMENT,
YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MS. CLARK:
Q DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN, I'M GOING TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION
TO YOUR STATE OF MIND AND KNOWLEDGE AT THE TIME YOU STEPPED OUT
THE FRONT DOOR AT ROCKINGHAM, AND BY THAT I MEAN AFTER YOU PLACED
KATO KAELIN AT THE BAR AND THEN WALKED OUT THE FRONT DOOR TO GO
OUT TO THE SOUTH PATHWAY.
AT THAT TIME, SIR, THE FIRST TIME YOU WALKED OUT TO
THE SOUTH PATHWAY AT 360 SOUTH ROCKINGHAM, DID YOU KNOW THE TIME
OF DEATH FOR RON GOLDMAN AND NICOLE BROWN?
A NO, MA'AM.
Q DID YOU KNOW
WHETHER MR. SIMPSON HAD AN ALIBI FOR THE
TIME OF THEIR MURDERS?
A NO.
Q DID YOU KNOW
WHETHER THERE WERE ANY EYEWITNESSES TO
THEIR MURDERS?
A NO.
Q DID YOU KNOW
WHETHER ANYONE HAD HEARD VOICES OR ANY
SOUNDS OR ANY WORDS SPOKEN AT THE CRIME SCENE AT THE TIME OF
THEIR MURDERS?
A NO, MA'AM.
Q DID YOU KNOW
WHETHER KATO HAD ALREADY GONE UP THE
SOUTH WALKWAY BEFORE YOU GOT THERE?
A NO.
Q DID YOU KNOW
WHETHER ANY FIBERS FROM THE BRONCO WOULD
BE FOUND ON THAT GLOVE THAT YOU ULTIMATELY FOUND AT ROCKINGHAM?
A NO.
Q AND DID YOU
KNOW THE CAUSE OF DEATH?
A NO.
MS. CLARK: I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.
THE COURT: MR. BAILEY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. BAILEY: NOTHING, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, I'M GOING TO RELEASE YOU FROM
FURTHER TESTIMONY TODAY; HOWEVER, YOU ARE STILL SUBJECT TO
RECALL.
YOU ARE ORDERED NOT TO DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH
ANYBODY EXCEPT YOUR OWN ATTORNEY AND THE ATTORNEYS FROM BOTH
SIDES OR THEIR INVESTIGATORS.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ORDER, SIR?
THE WITNESS: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. YOU ARE EXCUSED, SIR.
THE COURT: MISS CLARK -- I'M SORRY.
MS. CLARK: MAY WE HAVE 72 HOURS
ON CALL FOR DETECTIVE
FUHRMAN?
THE COURT: HOW ABOUT 48?
MS. CLARK: HE IS FAR AWAY.
MS. LEWIS: DETECTIVE, WAIT A SECOND.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE,
PART OF THE COURT'S
ORDER IS YOU AGREE TO RETURN WITHIN 72 HOURS OF BEING NOTIFIED.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ORDER?
THE WITNESS: YES, YOUR HONOR.
MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: AND YOU WILL GIVE THE
COURT PLENTY OF NOTICE.
MS. CLARK: YES, SIR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. NEXT
WITNESS.