|
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1995 9:10 A.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:) MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE APPROACH? (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I NEED THE COURT REPORTER IN CHAMBERS, PLEASE. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD IN CHAMBERS, TRANSCRIBED AND SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.) (PAGES 16124 THROUGH 16138, VOLUME 94A, TRANSCRIBED AND SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY. I DON'T SEE MR. COCHRAN. MR. DOUGLAS: WE CAN PROCEED THOUGH, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MR. DARDEN, MISS LEWIS, MR. GORDON. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE TWO MATTERS ON THE CALENDAR THIS MORNING. FIRST WE HAVE A MOTION BY THE PROSECUTION ASKING FOR THE COURT TO DIRECT OR TO ALLOW A 402 HEARING REGARDING ANY IMPEACHMENT EVIDENCE THAT WILL BE PRESENTED WITH REGARD TO WITNESS MARK FUHRMAN. WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THAT MOTION ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE? MS. LEWIS: I WILL, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, MISS LEWIS. MS. LEWIS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. YOUR HONOR, BACK IN JANUARY THE COURT RULED ON THE PEOPLE'S MOTION IN LIMINE WITH REGARD TO THREE ALLEGED INCIDENTS IN DETECTIVE FUHRMAN'S PAST. OF THOSE THREE INCIDENTS THE COURT EXCLUDED TWO AND RULED THAT THE DEFENSE COULD INDEED CROSS-EXAMINE WITH REGARD TO THE KATHLEEN BELL ALLEGATIONS. THE COURT, IT WAS MY IMPRESSION, BASED ON BOTH YOUR WRITTEN RULING AS WELL AS YOUR COMMENTS, YOUR HONOR, THAT YOU WERE RULING IN THAT REGARD BASED ON SEVERAL THINGS: ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT SEEMED TO WEIGH PREDOMINANTLY IS THAT THERE WERE SOME CIRCUMSTANCES OF DETECTIVE FUHRMAN'S INVOLVEMENT OR CONTACT, I SHOULD SAY, WITH THE DEFENDANT AND THE VICTIM IN THIS CASE, WHICH SEEMED TO CAUSE THE COURT TO FEEL THAT THAT WAS RELEVANT. I WANT TO JUST BRIEFLY ADDRESS THAT, BECAUSE I DID NOT DO SO BEFORE AND I DID NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY BEFORE NOW. FIRST, THE COURT NOTED THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHEN HE WAS A PATROL OFFICER, DID RESPOND TO THE SCENE OF A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE TWO BACK IN 1985. THE COURT ALSO NOTED THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN CHRONICLED THAT VISIT IN '89, WHEN CALLED UPON TO DO SO BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND THE COURT FURTHER NOTED THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN RESPONDED TO THE SCENE OF THE HOMICIDE THAT HAPPENED ON JUNE 12 WITH REGARD TO THE SAME VICTIM. I WANT TO MAKE THE POINT, YOUR HONOR, THAT IT IS NOT UNUSUAL. IN FACT, IT IS HIGHLY COMMON FOR PATROL OFFICERS WITHIN THIS CITY IN EACH AREA TO RESPOND ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS TO THE SAME LOCATION FOR REPEAT INCIDENTS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BETWEEN THE SAME COUPLE, SO THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS AT ALL UNUSUAL. IN FACT, IT IS MORE THE USUAL. AND I KNOW THE COURT HAS SEEN CASES -- I HAVE CERTAINLY HANDLED CASES WHERE THE OFFICERS HAD TOLD ME THAT THIS WAS NOT THE FIRST TIME THEY RESPONDED TO THAT PARTICULAR SCENE. IN ADDITION, YOUR HONOR, THE FACT THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN RESPONDED AS A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE IN 1994 IS NOT OF ANY MOMENT EITHER WHEN ONE CONSIDERS THAT THE HOMICIDE UNIT AT WEST L.A. CONSISTS OF ONLY FOUR HOMICIDE DETECTIVES, ALL OF WHOM RESPOND TO EVERY HOMICIDE. THERE WERE ONLY 14 TOTAL HOMICIDES IN WEST L.A. DIVISION LAST YEAR, SO THAT THERE IS NOT THE GREATER AMOUNT OF DETECTIVES AS IS PRESENT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY. SO THE FACT THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN RESPONDED TO THE HOMICIDE SCENE IS OF NO MOMENT BECAUSE EVERYONE WHO WORKED HOMICIDE, EVERY DETECTIVE RESPONDED TO THAT SCENE LAST JUNE. THE OTHER POINT I WANT TO MAKE, YOUR HONOR, IN ADDITION TO MAKING THE POINT THAT IT IS VERY COMMON FOR OFFICERS TO RESPOND TO THE SAME SCENE ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, IS THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN DID NOT ACT AFFIRMATIVELY IN ANY OF THOSE CONTACTS, EITHER OF THOSE TWO CONTACTS, OR IN THE REQUEST FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. IN 1985 HE WAS RESPONDING TO A RADIO CALL. IN 1989 HE WAS RESPONDING TO A REQUEST BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND IN -- ONLY WITH REGARD TO THE 1985 INCIDENT, THAT WASN'T EVEN A CONTACT BETWEEN THE DEFENDANT AND THE VICTIM. AND IN 1994 HE WAS RESPONDING TO A SUPERVISOR'S CALL, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, TO GO OUT TO THE SCENE. SO WE DON'T HAVE A SITUATION WHERE -- AND EVEN IF WE HAD A SITUATION WHERE -- THAT I AM ABOUT TO DESCRIBE IN A MOMENT, IT WOULD BE COMMENDABLE, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT HERE. WE DON'T HAVE THE SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE PATROL OFFICERS WHO ARE AWARE OF A PARTICULAR HOUSEHOLD HAVING THIS KIND OF PROBLEM AND GO ON THEIR OWN VOLITION TO TRY AND KEEP THINGS CALM TO PREVENT FUTURE VIOLENCE. SO IN THIS INSTANCE WE HAVE THOSE COUPLE OF CURSORY CONTACTS OR THE ONE IN 1985 WHICH WAS RATHER CURSORY, THE 1989 WHICH WAS NOT EVEN A CONTACT, AND THEN THE 1994. AND THE PROBATIVE VALUE AND RELEVANCE OF THOSE PUT TOGETHER IS SIMPLY VERY, VERY SLIGHT. NOW, AGAINST THAT BACKDROP, YOUR HONOR, THE PEOPLE ARE MOVING BY THIS MOTION, IT IS OUR ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE A VEHICLE TO THE COURT FOR THE COURT TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF THIS TRIAL. WE ARE ASKING THAT THE PEOPLE BE ALLOWED AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND, TO BE HEARD IN A 402 HEARING BEFORE WHOEVER IS GOING TO BE CROSS-EXAMINING DETECTIVE FUHRMAN COMES OUT WITH RACIALLY BLASPHEMOUS TYPES OF ALLEGATIONS. THE -- NOW, IT IS TRUE, YOUR HONOR, THAT AS THE COURT I'M SURE HAS PROBABLY INSTRUCTED THIS JURY, THOUGH I HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET, QUESTIONS ASKED BY LAWYERS ARE NOT EVIDENCE AND THE JURORS ARE SUPPOSED TO DISREGARD ANY QUESTIONS ASKED BY A LAWYER WHEN THE OBJECTION TO THAT QUESTION IS SUSTAINED. BUT IN THIS SITUATION, YOUR HONOR, WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE VAST MAJORITY OF TYPES OF QUESTIONS WHICH ARE ASKED OF A WITNESS. WE ARE NOT -- THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE QUESTIONS ARE SIMPLY QUESTIONS THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE TESTIMONY OF THAT WITNESS OR OTHER WITNESSES OR OF EVIDENCE IN THE CASE. THEY ARE NOT QUESTIONS WHICH CARRY WITH THEM AN ASSUMPTION THAT JURORS ARE LIKELY TO TAKE PERSONALLY OR HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR JURORS TO BE PERSONALLY HIGHLY OFFENDED BY. AND THAT IS WHAT MAKES THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF QUESTIONING PARTICULARLY VOLATILE AND EMOTIONAL. NOW, IT DOES NOT MEAN BECAUSE JURORS HEAR THIS KIND OF QUESTIONING THAT THEY ARE GOING TO GO OFF THE DEEP END. IT DOES MEAN THAT THEY WILL HAVE PLANTED A CLOUD AND A BITTER TASTE IN THEIR MOUTH WITH REGARD TO THIS WITNESS, BECAUSE FRANKLY, THE ALLEGATION OF RACISM IS ONE OF THE MOST ABHORRENT THINGS THAT ANYONE CAN SAY ABOUT SOMEONE AND IT WILL CAUSE THESE JURORS TO REMEMBER THIS AND WILL CLOUD THEIR PERCEPTION OF THIS WITNESS. AND ALL WE ARE BASICALLY ASKING FOR IS FOR AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE COURT TO DECIDE, NOT THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY, BUT FOR THE COURT TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT AN AREA IS APPROPRIATE TO GO INTO. THE COURT: HOW WOULD YOU PROPOSE TO DO THAT? MS. LEWIS: WELL, THE MOST REASONED AND ORDERLY METHOD OF DOING THAT WOULD BE TO HAVE THE DEFENSE DISCLOSE WHAT IT IS THEY PLAN TO CROSS-EXAMINE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN ABOUT, WHAT INCIDENTS. I'M SURE THEY KNOW. THE COURT: AT WHAT POINT? MS. LEWIS: WELL, WE COULD DO THAT SOON. WE COULD SET THAT FOR A SPECIAL HEARING WELL IN ADVANCE OF DETECTIVE FUHRMAN'S TESTIMONY AND THAT WOULD BE THE MOST ORDERLY AND EXPEDITIOUS MANNER OF DOING IT. IT ALLOWS THE COURT, AS WELL AS COUNSEL, AN OPPORTUNITY TO REFLECT AND THINK IT OVER. THE COURT: DOESN'T THAT ALSO ROB THE DEFENSE OF A TACTICAL ADVANTAGE OF SURPRISE DURING CROSS-EXAMINATION? MS. LEWIS: YOUR HONOR -- (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE COURT: WHICH IS ONE OF THE FUN PARTS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION. MS. LEWIS: WELL, MISS CLARK MAKES THE EXCELLENT POINT THAT IT IS ONLY WITH RESPECT TO RACIAL ALLEGATIONS THAT WE ARE MAKING THIS REQUEST AND IT IS IN THE EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE WHERE THIS POLICE OFFICER HAS BEEN CASTIGATED IN THE PRESS AS BEING A RACIST. AND MUCH OF THAT OCCURRED, SOME OF THAT OCCURRED WELL BEFORE THIS JURY WAS SEQUESTERED. WE ARE IN A HIGHLY EXTRAORDINARILY UNUSUAL SITUATION WITH REGARD TO THE ALLEGATIONS BROUGHT AGAINST THIS POLICE OFFICER, GIVEN THE NOTORIETY OF THIS CASE AND THE WAY THAT THE ALLEGATIONS HAVE BEEN CONTINUED TO BE SET FORTH AND SPAWNED BY THE DEFENSE AND THE MEDIA. SO WE ARE IN A VERY UNIQUE SITUATION WITH REGARD TO THESE PARTICULAR TYPES OF ALLEGATIONS AGAINST DETECTIVE FUHRMAN. CERTAINLY IF THEY HAVE OTHER IMPEACHMENT AVAILABLE TO THEM, THERE IS NO REASON WHY THEY CAN'T BE HANDLED IN THE NORMAL MANNER THAT WE ARE ALL ACCUSTOMED TO HERE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, BUT THERE HAS TO BE SOME ORDERLY NECESSITY IMPOSED UPON THIS TRIAL, YOUR HONOR, IN THAT REGARD. THE COURT'S RULINGS WITH REGARD TO DETECTIVE FUHRMAN ARE GOING TO BE WATCHED BY THE WORLD BECAUSE THE WORLD IS GOING TO BE WATCHING HIS TESTIMONY. AND YOUR RULINGS, YOUR HONOR, ARE GOING TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT UPON THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF HOW WITNESSES ARE TREATED IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. I WANT TO MAKE SURE, YOUR HONOR, THAT YOUR HONOR HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS TRIAL DOESN'T CONTINUE TO GO FORTH IN A MANNER THAT REFLECTS INTEGRITY AND A SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH AND NOT SOME KIND OF GAMESMANSHIP OR CHARACTER ASSASSINATION ON THE PART OF THE DEFENSE FOR THE WITNESSES WHO TESTIFY. THE COURT: MISS LEWIS, LET ME ASK YOU THIS: LET'S ASSUME THAT I VIEW YOUR REQUEST AS BEING EXTRAORDINARY TO HAVE A 402 HEARING REGARDING IMPEACHMENT EVIDENCE SO FAR IN ADVANCE. WHAT OTHER VEHICLE WOULD YOU RECOMMEND TO THE COURT, ASSUMING THAT I FEEL THAT A SPECIAL HEARING FOR THAT PURPOSE IS NOT APPROPRIATE AT THIS POINT? MS. LEWIS: YOUR HONOR, CERTAINLY THE COURT COULD ORDER COUNSEL TO APPROACH OUTSIDE OF THE JURY'S PRESENCE, IF IT IS DURING THE EXAMINATION, OR IT COULD BE RIGHT BEFORE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN TESTIFIES AT ALL, BUT AT THE LATEST POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY IF THE COURT IS CONCERNED IN THAT REGARD. CERTAINLY TO APPROACH BEFORE ACTUALLY ASKING THE QUESTION, THAT -- THE COURT: BUT UNDER MOST -- UNDER THE NORMAL DISCOVERY ISN'T IT REQUIRED THAT THE DEFENSE PROVIDE YOU, AT THE TIME OF CROSS-EXAMINATION, WITH ANY REPORTS OR STATEMENTS THAT THEY INTEND ON CROSS-EXAMINING ON? ISN'T THAT REQUIRED UNDER THE LAWS OF DISCOVERY? MS. LEWIS: YES. AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE COURT -- THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SO ARE YOU THEN PUT ON NOTICE AS TO WHAT IT IS THE DEFENSE IS GOING TO CROSS-EXAMINE ON? MS. LEWIS: YOUR HONOR, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW IS THAT ONE HAS TO HAVE A GOOD FAITH BELIEF THAT FACTS EXIST PRIOR TO CROSS-EXAMINING SOMEONE ABOUT IT. THAT CAN BE DONE WITHOUT ACTUALLY HAVING A REPORT IN HAND, SO I DON'T FEEL AT ALL CONFIDENT THAT WE WILL RECEIVE REPORTS THAT REFLECT EVERYTHING THAT THE DEFENSE INTENDS TO CROSS-EXAMINE ABOUT. THE COURT: UH-HUH. MS. LEWIS: IN ADDITION, IT IS OUR POSITION, HAVING STUDIED THE LITTLE LAW AVAILABLE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA UNDER PROP 115, THAT IMPEACHING STATEMENTS OF THE WITNESS, PER SE, ARE NOT NECESSARILY DISCOVERABLE. THERE SEEMS TO BE, IF YOU LOOK AT IZIAGA IN COMBINATION WITH THE CODE ITSELF, THERE SEEMS TO BE AND DISTINCTION BETWEEN IMPEACHING STATEMENTS OF A WITNESS HIM OR HERSELF AND REBUTTAL WITNESSES THAT WOULD BE CALLED TO IMPEACH. IN ADDITION, YOUR HONOR, THE COURT IS APPARENTLY TREATING THIS AS A DISCOVERY ISSUE AND I DON'T THINK IT CAN BE TREATED AS SUCH. THAT MAY BE ONE ASPECT TO IT, BUT OUR CONCERN IS REALLY UNDER 352 OF THE EVIDENCE CODE AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS WITH THIS MOTION AND THAT IS WHAT WE WANT THE COURT -- HOW WE WANT THE COURT TO ADDRESS IT IN ANY SUBSEQUENT RULINGS, IF THE COURT IS INCLINED TO DO AS WE ARE ASKING OF IT. MAY I CONTINUE FOR A MOMENT? THE COURT: PLEASE. MS. LEWIS: YOUR HONOR, I DO WANT TO POINT OUT AN ADDITIONAL CASE. I DID CITE A LOT OF LAW OF COURSE IN OUR BRIEF HAVING TO DO WITH COLLATERAL IMPEACHMENT, AND AMONG OTHER THINGS THIS IS AN AREA OF COLLATERAL IMPEACHMENT. THIS DOES NOT DIRECTLY IMPEACH THE OFFICER'S OBSERVATIONS OR TESTIMONY. IT IS ONLY BY WAY OF A CIRCUITOUS ROUTE IN TERMS OF CREDIBILITY AND THE COURT DOES HAVE BROAD DISCRETION AND WIDE LATITUDE IN CURTAILING THIS TYPE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION WITHOUT ANY VIOLATION TO THE DEFENDANT'S CONFRONTATION RIGHTS. ONE OF THE ADDITIONAL CASES THAT I PROVIDED THE COURT WITH WAS THE SCHILLING CASE TOWARD THE END OF OUR BRIEF AND THAT WAS A SECOND DISTRICT CASE WHICH MADE REFERENCE TO THE ANTHONY P. CASE INDICATING THAT WHILE THERE IS A CERTAIN LATITUDE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION OF A WITNESS, THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CONFRONT AND CROSS-EXAMINE ADVERSE WITNESSES DOES NOT INCLUDE THE RIGHT TO ASK WHOLLY SPECULATIVE QUESTIONS UNGROUNDED IN FACTUAL PREDICATE, EVEN WHEN POSED IN THE QUEST TO DISCREDIT A WITNESS. THAT IS WHAT THE COURT SCHILLING COURT HELD AND IT PREVENTED IN THAT CASE THE DEFENSE FROM PURSUING A LINE OF QUESTIONING HAVING TO DO WITH THE MOTIVE OF A WITNESS TO HAVE COMMITTED THE CRIME ITSELF. THE ALLEGATION FROM THE DEFENSE THERE WAS THAT THE WITNESS ACTUALLY COMMITTED THE KILLING OR KILLED THE VICTIM WHO HAPPENED TO BE THE WITNESS' GIRLFRIEND AND NOT THE DEFENDANT, SO THE DEFENSE THOUGHT THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO PURSUE A LINE OF QUESTIONING TALKING ABOUT THAT MOTIVE. THE TRIAL COURT SAID, NO, IT WAS SHEAR SPECULATION BECAUSE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF THAT SO THEY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO PURSUE THAT LINE OF QUESTIONING, AND THE COURT OF APPEAL HEARTILY AGREED. AND HERE, YOUR HONOR, WE STILL HAVE THE SITUATION, AND IT IS NOT JUST THE WAY THE PEOPLE HAVE FRAMED IT, BUT IT IS IN REALITY THE SITUATION THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN MOVED ANY EVIDENCE OR PLANTED ANY EVIDENCE, PLANTED THE GLOVE AT ROCKINGHAM. THE DEFENSE STILL HAS NOT PRESENTED ANY EVIDENCE IN THAT REGARD. AND WHILE THE COURT HAS LOOKED AT THIS AFTER THAT AS MORE OF A CREDIBILITY ISSUE, THAT IS STILL AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION UNDER 352 IN ASSESSING THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF ALLOWING CROSS-EXAMINATION ON THE AREA OF RACE, BECAUSE ITS PROBATIVE VALUE IS FURTHER DIMINISHED AND WEAKENED BY THE FACT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE SUPPORTING THE DEFENSE'S UNDERLYING THEORY. I JUST WANT TO REITERATE AGAIN, YOUR HONOR, THE UNIQUE AND UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE. I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE HAD THESE TYPES OF ALLEGATIONS AGAINST A POLICE OFFICER WHO HAS RECOVERED IMPORTANT EVIDENCE IN A DOUBLE MURDER THAT IS BEING REPORTED ON WORLDWIDE BY THE PRESS. IT IS SIMPLY A UNIQUE SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN PARTICULAR, IT IS CLEAR TO ME THAT THERE WILL NOT BE A VIOLATION OF THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO CONFRONT AND CROSS-EXAMINE THE WITNESSES WERE THE COURT TO ALLOW AN OPPORTUNITY EVEN AT SIDE BAR DURING TESTIMONY AT THE VERY LATEST, BUT EVEN AN OPPORTUNITY SOONER THAN THAT IN A 402, TO DETERMINE WHAT THE COURT FEELS IS APPROPRIATE SO THAT WE DON'T MAKE, FRANKLY, A CIRCUS OUT OF THIS TRIAL BY WAY OF THE DETECTIVE OF DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND SO THAT THIS TRIAL CAN FOCUS ON WHAT IT SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON AND THAT IS THE ASCERTAINMENT OF TRUTH. THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. BAILEY. MR. BAILEY: IF IT PLEASE THE COURT, I THINK THIS IS A REVISITATION OF THE RATHER CLEAR RULING YOU MADE WHEN YOU SAID THE ANTHONY P. CASE IS CONTROLLING AS MANDATED BY ALASKA V. DAVIS IF THE ISSUE OF BIAS CROSS-EXAMINATION LICENSE IS BROAD. AND THIS IS NOT A UNIQUE CASE, NOR IS THIS DETECTIVE THE FIRST ONE THAT MAY BE IN A POSITION TO BE ACCUSED OF THAT. HOWEVER, AND TO CUT TO THE QUICK OF THIS MATTER, SHORT OF GIVING THE PROSECUTION AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTERRUPT THE CROSS-EXAMINATION OR PREVIEW WHAT IT CAN THEN WARN ITS WITNESS ABOUT AND HE WON'T BE SURPRISED AS LONG THE INFORMATION USED IS TRUTHFUL BECAUSE HE WILL HAVE BEEN PRIVY TO IT WHETHER COUNSEL KNOWS ABOUT IT OR NOT, IS ANOTHER QUESTION. I PROPOSE THE FOLLOWING: IT IS I THINK ENDEMIC TO THE CONDUCT OF A LAWSUIT THAT NOT ONLY IS THE JUDGE INTERESTED WHEN THE WORLD IS WATCHING OR WHEN ONLY A FEW PEOPLE ARE WATCHING IN SEEING THAT JUSTICE IS CARRIED OUT AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL ATTAINMENT, BUT ALSO RESPONSIBLE COUNSEL HAVE AN OBLIGATION NOT ONLY TO THE PROFESSION AND THE COURT, BUT TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE, NOT TO RECKLESSLY ASK QUESTIONS OR UNFAIRLY PAINT OR TAINT A WITNESS WITH UNDESERVED ACCUSATIONS. TO ASSIST THE COURT IN THE HANDLING OF THIS DELICATE MATTER WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE, I CONCEDE THAT IT IS. I PROPOSE THAT THE DEFENSE PROVIDE YOU IN CAMERA UNDER SEAL, NOT TO BE GIVEN TO EITHER THE PRESS OR THE PROSECUTION, BUT TO ASSIST YOU IN MAKING RULINGS FROM TIME TO TIME AS THEY MAY BE NECESSARY ON CROSS-EXAMINATION, NO. 1, THE AREAS OF INTENDED INQUIRY, AND NO. 2, THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE WHICH IS EITHER UNDER SUBPOENA OR REASONABLY EXPECTED TO BE PRODUCED IN THE COURSE OF THE DEFENSE CASE IN THE EVENT THERE IS A DENIAL. IF THERE IS NOT A DENIAL, THEN THE NEED FOR CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE EVAPORATES. IF THERE IS A DENIAL, I WAS TAUGHT FORTY YEARS AGO THAT YOU DON'T ASK A QUESTION UNLESS YOU HAVE THE EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP IN CASE YOU GET A DENIAL FROM THE WITNESS, AND I THINK THAT IS THE RULE. AND ORDINARILY THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT. THE REMEDY WOULD BE IF COUNSEL OVERSTEPPED THAT LINE, WHOEVER DOES THIS CROSS-EXAMINATION, TO DISCIPLINE THE LAWYER; HOWEVER, YOU CAN'T UNRING THE BELL. AND IN ORDER TO SPEED UP AND PERMIT A REASONABLE PACE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION, IT SEEMS TO ME ONE COULD HARDLY BE MORE FAIR THAN TO GIVE THE COURT A HELPFUL PREVIEW AND HAVE IT STOP RIGHT THERE. WHETHER THE PROSECUTION LATER GETS ITS HAND ON THE DOCUMENT I THINK WOULD BE A SHOWING OF MANIFEST NECESSITY PERHAPS, BUT WE WILL BE PREPARED TO CALL THE WITNESSES WHO WILL TESTIFY TO THOSE THINGS WHICH FORM THE BASIS OF THE QUESTIONS. AND I THINK UNDER ALASKA V. DAVIS AND ITS PROGENY WE CAN BE ASKED NO MORE. THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MISS LEWIS. MS. LEWIS: YOUR HONOR, THE EVIDENCE IS STILL SUBJECT TO 352 EVALUATION BY THE COURT AND THE PEOPLE SHOULD STILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD UNDER 352. THAT IS OUR GREAT CONCERN HERE, IS THE UNDUE PREJUDICE THAT IS LIKELY TO ARISE FROM PLANTING -- GIVEN THE SCANT, IF ANY, PROBATIVE VALUE FROM PLANTING THE IDEAS IN THE JUROR'S MIND WHEN THEY ASK QUESTIONS. I THINK THE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE PRESENT AND TO BE HEARD BY THE COURT WITHOUT HAVING THE COURT UNILATERALLY ASSESS BASED ON DEFENSE REPRESENTATIONS, AND I DO -- ALTHOUGH A MOMENT AGO I REITERATED THIS IS NOT A DISCOVERY HEARING, I DO WANT TO REINFORCE WHAT THE COURT MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO, AND THAT IS THAT SINCE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN IS ON OUR WITNESS LIST AND IS OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE CALLED AS A WITNESS, IF THERE ARE INDEED REBUTTAL STATEMENTS FROM OTHER WITNESSES WHOM THE DEFENSE INTENDS TO CROSS-EXAMINE ABOUT, WE DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO THOSE STATEMENTS. IT IS ONLY STATEMENTS MADE BY THE DETECTIVE HIMSELF THAT ARE DIRECTLY IMPEACHING IN THAT SENSE THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO, BUT THIS IS NOT A SITUATION WHERE THE DEFENSE HAS INTERVIEWED DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, COME UP WITH IMPEACHING STATEMENTS, AND AGAIN CAN HOLD ONTO THAT INFORMATION. THIS IS A SITUATION APPARENTLY, BY WHAT MR. BAILEY HAS SAID, WHERE THEY HAVE GLEANED ADDITIONAL WITNESSES, ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PERHAPS -- I CAN'T TELL FROM WHAT HE SAID, FRANKLY -- BUT IT IS CERTAINLY A SITUATION WHERE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE THE PEOPLE SHOULD BE -- THE PEOPLE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE HEARD. YOUR HONOR, I JUST DO WANT TO REPEAT AGAIN THAT THIS IS A VERY VOLATILE SUBJECT. THIS WHOLE TRIAL HAS BEEN A VERY VOLATILE, SO TO SPEAK, IN THE SENSE OF BEING SO WORLD WATCHED. EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON IN TRIAL IS SCRUTINIZED. THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW THE DEFENSE TO MAKE RACIAL ACCUSATIONS AGAINST A WHITE POLICE OFFICER IN FRONT OF A PREDOMINANTLY BLACK JURY WITHOUT HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD, BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT COME FORTH WITH ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS POLICE OFFICER DID ANYTHING, ANYTHING WRONG IN THIS CASE. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. BAILEY, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS BRIEFLY THE DISCOVERY ISSUE? MR. BAILEY: A STATEMENT WAS GIVEN BY ONE WITNESS. THAT HAS BEEN TURNED OVER. ANOTHER WITNESS APPEARED ON THE TELEVISION SHOW AND WE HAVE NOTHING MORE AND NO PERSONAL CONTACT WITH THE WITNESS, ONLY THROUGH COUNSEL. THERE IS NOTHING TO TURN OVER THERE. THERE ARE NO OTHER STATEMENTS THAT I KNOW OF. WHAT I SUGGESTED TO YOU WAS A PROFFER FROM COUNSEL AS OFFICERS OF THE COURT AS TO WHAT COULD BE PROVIDED IN THE WAY OF TESTIMONY IF THERE IS A DENIAL. VERY FRANKLY, IN SOME CASES THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE A DENIAL IN MY VIEW; THERE ARE TOO MANY SUPPORTING RECORDS. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MS. LEWIS: YOUR HONOR, I'M -- I'M SORRY. I SHOULD HAVE MADE MENTION OF THE FACT THAT THE DEFENSE HAS ALREADY INDEED DISCLOSED THE STATEMENT OF ONE WITNESS, SO IT CERTAINLY COULD BE HANDLED IN A 402. THEY HAVE ALREADY ABANDONED SOME ELEMENT OF SURPRISE, SO THE COURT COULD CERTAINLY RULE ON THAT WITNESS' STATEMENT PRIOR TO CROSS-EXAMINATION AFTER AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARD TO IT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE COURT WILL ACCEPT THE FILING UNDER SEAL EX PARTY FROM THE DEFENSE REGARDING ITS PROFFER REGARDING CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DETECTIVE FUHRMAN. I'M GOING TO ASK COUNSEL TO ADVISE THE COURT WHEN WE ARE ABOUT TO GET TO THOSE ISSUES IN CROSS-EXAMINATION SO THAT I AM ALERTED TO THAT, AND IF NECESSARY, WE WILL HAVE A SIDE BAR DISCUSSION WITH ALL COUNSEL TO DISCUSS WHAT IS ABOUT TO TRANSPIRE. THAT WILL BE THE ORDER. THANK YOU. MS. LEWIS: YOUR HONOR, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, THE COURT WILL BE REVIEWING THE MATERIAL IN ADVANCE SO THAT HE WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO DIGEST IT? THE COURT: I'M ASKING MR. BAILEY TO ADVISE AND ALERT THE COURT THAT WE ARE GOING TO GET INTO THOSE ISSUES. MS. LEWIS: THANK YOU. SO WE WILL HAVE A SIDE BAR? THE COURT: WE WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS IT, YES -- MS. LEWIS: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE COURT: -- AS IT OCCURS. IT MAY NOT OCCUR, DEPENDING ON HOW THE CASE TRANSPIRES. ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON TO THE 1335. MR. JONES, DO YOU WANT TO JOIN US, PLEASE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. JONES: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. MRS. LOPEZ IS PRESENT AND AVAILABLE AS A WITNESS. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. JONES: WE DO ASK THE ASSISTANCE OF AN INTERPRETER. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I HAVE MISS DORIS WEITZ PRESENT WHO IS A CERTIFIED SPANISH INTERPRETER. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR CLIENT IS FROM THE COUNTRY OF EL SALVADOR; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. JONES: THAT IS CORRECT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET ME HAVE MISS WEITZ SPEAK WITH HER BRIEFLY. AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SIXTY MAJOR DIALECTS WITHIN THE SPANISH LANGUAGE AND I WOULD LIKE HER TO BECOME ACQUAINTED WITH THAT. MR. JONES: WE HAVE DONE THAT, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: I WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED THEN. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, BEFORE WE DO, I BELIEVE THE COURT HAS A COPY OF A KMEX TELEVISION INTERVIEW. THE COURT: THAT WAS PROVIDED TO THE COURT, YES. MR. DARDEN: WAS THAT TRANSCRIBED? THE COURT: NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO. MR. COCHRAN: WE HAVE NEVER RECEIVED THAT, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE THE REPORTER HERE TODAY, HOWEVER; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. DARDEN: THAT'S CORRECT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I THINK THE PROPONENT OF THE 1335 SHOULD SPEAK FIRST IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION. MR. COCHRAN: FIRST OF ALL, YOUR HONOR, WE HAVE NEVER RECEIVED THE -- THE COURT: MR. JONES, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A SEAT, FEEL FREE. THANK YOU. MR. COCHRAN: WE HAVE NEVER RECEIVED SUCH INTERVIEW AND WE WOULD LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THAT IF IT IS IN THE NATURE OF IMPEACHMENT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS FOR. AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, IT WAS NOT AN INTERVIEW OF MISS ROSA LOPEZ. IT MAY BE AN INTERVIEW OF THE REPORTER WHO ALLEGEDLY TALKED TO MISS LOPEZ. I HAVE NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT. I THINK WE WOULD BE ENTITLED WITH THAT. SECONDLY, MISS LOPEZ IS PRESENT AND WE WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED. I WOULD LIKE TO INDICATE TO THE COURT, AS I MENTIONED TO THE COURT JUST BRIEFLY YESTERDAY AFTERNOON, BECAUSE OF THE MEDIA HARASSMENT AND THE PROBLEMS VISITED UPON MISS LOPEZ, SHE NO LONGER LIVES EVEN IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. SHE DID NOT ARRIVE BACK INTO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA UNTIL AFTER 1:30 THIS MORNING. WE ARRANGED TO PICK HER UP AND TO BRING HER HERE TODAY. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SHE WILL BE, AFTER LEAVING -- AFTER CONCLUDING TESTIMONY, IF SHE IS SO ALLOWED, SHE WILL BE RETURNING TO THE OTHER STATE AND WILL PICK UP HER BELONGINGS AND WILL BE LEAVING FOR EL SALVADOR TOMORROW AS WE SO INDICATED TO THE COURT. THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP BECAUSE OF THE GREAT AMOUNT OF HARASSMENT SHE HAS SUFFERED SINCE THIS HAPPENED. IT HAS CAUSED A GREAT PROBLEM WITH HER FAMILY. I THINK MR. BAILEY INDICATED TO THE COURT BEFORE THAT SHE HAS HAD ONE SON WHO DIED IN EL SALVADOR. SHE HAS HAD -- HER FAMILY HAS HAD A HISTORY OF PROBLEMS WITH THEIR HEART, AND THEY ARE ALL UNDER GREAT STRESS AND PRESSURE AND THEY ARE ALL QUITE FRIGHTENED BY THIS WHOLE PROCEDURE. HER DAUGHTER HAS BASICALLY STOPPED TALKING WITH HER AND THE GRANDCHILDREN BY VIRTUE OF HER WILLINGNESS TO COME BACK AND DO THIS. SHE CAME BACK ON HER OWN LAST NIGHT, BUT AS I INDICATED, WANTS TO LEAVE IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER. SO THIS IS CERTAINLY A SITUATION WHERE IN THE INTERESTS OF MR. SIMPSON'S FAIR TRIAL WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROCEED TO PRESERVE THIS LADY'S TESTIMONY. SHE WILL BE, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, BE IN EL SALVADOR AFTER TOMORROW. SHE NO LONGER LIVES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AND THERE HAS BEEN GREAT HARASSMENT, AND IF YOU HAVE SEEN THE TELEVISION YOU HAVE SEEN THE NUMBER OF REPORTERS AND OTHERS CAMPED OUT IN FRONT OF HER HOUSE, ALL OF WHICH THINGS ARE ON VIDEO. AND WE ARE READY TO PROCEED. I WOULD ASK ONLY THAT I BE ALLOWED TO SEE THE VIDEO THAT COUNSEL WAS REFERRING TO AND I WOULD ASK ALSO THAT ANY POTENTIAL WITNESSES, OTHER WITNESSES, SHOULD BE OUT OF THE COURTROOM BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT -- THAT STANDING ORDER. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. BUT I THINK WE HAVE A PRELIMINARY FACT TO DETERMINE AT THIS POINT, DON'T WE? MR. COCHRAN: YES, YES. I HAVE GIVEN YOU SOME IDEA ABOUT IT, BUT YES, YES, WE DO. THAT IS WHAT I WAS ADDRESSING, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: LET ME HEAR FROM MR. DARDEN THE PEOPLE'S POSITION. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, ALL ALONG WE HAVE BEEN CONCERNED THAT DEFENSE WAS SEEKING TO ELICIT THIS WITNESS' TESTIMONY OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY SO THAT THEY CAN TEST IT AND EVALUATE AND ASSET ITS VALUE AND THEN PERHAPS PRESENT IT TO THE JURY AT A LATER TIME KNOWING ALL THE WHILE THAT WHEN THE DEFENSE PREPARES TO PUT ON ITS CASE THAT MISS LOPEZ WILL ACTUALLY BE AVAILABLE AND HERE IN THE COUNTRY. I DON'T THINK THAT THE DECLARATION THAT HAS BEEN FILED SO FAR IS SUFFICIENT TO CAUSE THE COURT TO HOLD A 1335 HEARING, AND WE HAVE MISS LOPEZ HERE, SO PERHAPS WE SHOULD DIRECT SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS TO HER, BUT I WILL NOTE THIS, AND POINT THIS OUT TO THE COURT, IF I MAY: THE DECLARATION SIGNED BY MISS LOPEZ DATED FEBRUARY 17TH AND FILED IN THE LAST ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN AN ORDER PURSUANT TO 1335 SIGNED BY MISS LOPEZ, AND IN THAT DECLARATION SHE INDICATES THAT SHE FEARS FOR HER PERSONAL SAFETY AND THE SAFETY OF HER FAMILY AND SHE INDICATES AS WELL THAT SHE HAS DECIDED TO RETURN TO EL SALVADOR ON SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1995. NOW, THIS DECLARATION WAS OBVIOUSLY PREPARED FOR MISS LOPEZ IN THE PRESENCE OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS, ONE OR MORE OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS SEATED HERE IN COURT, I WOULD IMAGINE. AND WHAT IS ODD ABOUT THIS DECLARATION IS JUST THAT FEW HOURS BEFORE, BEFORE THE DECLARATION WAS SIGNED, MISS LOPEZ SPOKE WITH A REPORTER FROM KMEX FOR TWO HOURS, FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO HOURS, AND DURING THAT TWO-HOUR CONVERSATION SHE TOLD THAT REPORTER THAT SHE DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE THE AREA, THAT SHE HAD NO DESIRE TO RETURN TO EL SALVADOR THAT SHE INTENDED TO REMAIN HERE. AND IN FACT MISS LOPEZ WAS FILLING OUT UNEMPLOYMENT FORMS DURING THAT CONVERSATION JUST A FEW HOURS BEFORE, YOUR HONOR, AND MISS LOPEZ ALSO TOLD THAT REPORTER THAT SHE DID NOT TRUST HER ATTORNEY, WHOEVER THAT ATTORNEY MIGHT BE, AND I'M NOT POINTING FINGERS, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW, BUT SHE ALSO TOLD THAT REPORTER THAT WHENEVER SHE WOULD ASK THE LAWYERS SOMETHING OR A QUESTION SHE WOULD GET AN ANSWER LIKE "YOU CAN GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR." AND SO I AM CONCERNED, YOUR HONOR, AND I THINK RIGHTFULLY SO, THAT THERE IS AN ATTEMPT HERE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE COURT AND THE PROSECUTION AND THAT PERHAPS THE DEFENSE IS USING 1335 AS SOME TYPE OF SUBTERFUGE TO ELICIT TESTIMONY OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY SO THAT THEY CAN EVALUATE IT AND TEST IT. I THINK THE COURT SHOULD BE SKEPTICAL OF THE DEFENSE POSITION ON THIS ISSUE AND I THINK WE SHOULD TAKE THE MATTER UP WITH MISS LOPEZ. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. COCHRAN: MAY I RESPOND, YOUR HONOR, BRIEFLY? THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND, YOUR HONOR. AS I INDICATED, I HAVE NOT BEEN PRIVY TO THE STATEMENT FROM THE REPORTER FROM CHANNEL 34, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF DISTRESSED AND DISTRESSING PHONE CALLS FROM MISS ROSA LOPEZ WHO COULD NOT GO OUTSIDE OF HER DAUGHTER'S HOUSE, AND APPARENTLY THIS REPORTER CAME INSIDE AND TALKED TO HER. I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY, SINCE EARLY THIS MORNING, TO TALK TO MISS LOPEZ ABOUT THAT. SHE HAS FEAR OF HER PERSONAL SAFETY. SHE WILL INDICATE THAT TO YOU. SHE HAS FEAR OF HER FAMILY. HER FAMILY HAS BEEN MADE DYSFUNCTIONAL BY ALL THIS. SHE HAS LOST HER JOB. HE IS RIGHT, SHE PROBABLY WAS TRYING TO GET UNEMPLOYMENT BECAUSE SHE LOST HER JOB WITH THE SALINGERS BY VIRTUE OF ALL OF THE HARASSMENT THAT HAS COME HER WAY. THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, FORGIVE ME FOR INTERRUPTING YOU. I THINK AT THIS POINT WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO HEAR FROM MISS LOPEZ. THE ONLY LOGISTICAL CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT IT APPEARS THAT MR. DARDEN IS GOING TO CROSS-EXAMINE HER -- MR. COCHRAN: YES. THE COURT: -- ON THE BASIS OF ANY STATEMENTS MADE TO THE KMEX REPORTER. UNFORTUNATELY, MY RECOLLECTION OF MY DISCUSSIONS WITH MR. DARDEN EARLIER THIS WEEK IS THAT THIS TWO-HOUR INTERVIEW IS TAPE-RECORDED IN SPANISH, WHICH MAKES VIEWING OF IT AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS BEING SAID A LITTLE DIFFICULT; IS THAT CORRECT, MR. DARDEN? MR. DARDEN: IT IS NOT -- IT IS NOT AN INTERVIEW. MISS LOPEZ DOES NOT APPEAR ON CAMERA. THE REPORTER INTERVIEWED HER FOR TWO HOURS AND THEN THE REPORTER CAME ON CAMERA AND RECITED WHAT MISS LOPEZ SAID. THE REPORTER IS RIGHT HERE IN COURT, COUNSEL. MR. COCHRAN: HEARSAY. THE COURT: WAIT A MINUTE. MR. DARDEN: THAT IS IMPEACHMENT. MR. COCHRAN: HEARSAY. THE COURT: MR. DARDEN, IS THE STATEMENT BY THE REPORTER ON THIS TAPE IN ENGLISH OR SPANISH? MR. DARDEN: SPANISH. THE COURT: OKAY. MR. DARDEN: I DO HAVE A ROUGH TRANSCRIPT OF THAT -- A TRANSCRIPT IN ENGLISH OF THAT PORTION OF THE -- THE COURT: HOW LONG IS THE TRANSCRIPT? MR. DARDEN: A PAGE. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU MAKE THAT AVAILABLE TO MR. COCHRAN, AND MR. COCHRAN, HAVE YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY -- WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE REPORTER FROM KMEX 34? MR. DARDEN: SHE IS HERE IN COURT. STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE. MS. VILLAPANDO: ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO, V-I-L-L-A-P-A-N-D-O. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MR. COCHRAN, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST WE DO THEN IS TAKE A BRIEF MOMENT, ALLOW YOU TO REVIEW THE NOTES THAT MR. DARDEN HAS REGARDING THE INTERVIEW, ALLOW YOU TO INTERVIEW MISS VILLAPANDO HERE SO YOU ARE AT LEAST AWARE OF THE PARAMETERS OF THE CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT WILL TAKE PLACE. MR. COCHRAN: SURE. I APPRECIATE THAT, YOUR HONOR. IS THERE AN INTERPRETER THAT WILL ASSIST ME WITH THAT? I COULD USE MY SPANISH, BUT IT MAY TAKE LONGER THAN YOU HAVE, SO DO WE HAVE AN INTERPRETER? THE COURT: I THINK MISS VILLAPANDO SPEAKS EXCELLENT ENGLISH. MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS FINE. I WILL READ THIS AND IF WE CAN HAVE A BRIEF RECESS TO DO THAT. THE COURT: WE WILL TAKE A BRIEF RECESS. LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU ARE AVAILABLE. AND ALSO, MISS WEITZ, REMAIN IN THE COURTROOM, PLEASE. THE INTERPRETER: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. (RECESS.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:) THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL, PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED; ALSO PRESENT, ROSA LOPEZ WITH COUNSEL, MR. JONES; ALSO PRESENT, DORIS WEITZ, OUR CERTIFIED SPANISH INTERPRETER. MR. COCHRAN, HAVE YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE VIDEOTAPE OF MISS VILLAPANDO'S COMMENTS ON KMEX? MR. COCHRAN: YES, I HAVE, YOUR HONOR. I HAVE REVIEWED THE VIDEOTAPE, WHICH IS IN SPANISH, AND I HAD THE EXCELLENT ASSISTANCE OF AN INTERPRETER WHO SPOKE AS RAPIDLY AS THEY DID AND SHARED WITH ME WHAT THEY WERE SAYING IN THE VIDEOTAPE, AND I'VE ALSO BEEN PROVIDED NOW WITH A ONE-PAGE STATEMENT FROM I GUESS MISS ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO, WHICH I'VE ALSO READ AND DISCUSSED WITH MISS LOPEZ. WE ARE READY TO PROCEED AND WOULD ASK LEAVE OF THE COURT TO PROCEED AT THIS TIME. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. CALL YOUR FIRST WITNESS. MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. THANK YOU. MY FIRST AND ONLY WITNESS TODAY I HOPE, YOUR HONOR, WILL BE MISS ROSA LOPEZ. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS LOPEZ, WOULD YOU COME FORWARD. ROSA MARIA LOPEZ, CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE DEFENDANT, WAS SWORN AND TESTIFIED THROUGH THE SPANISH INTERPRETER, AS FOLLOWS: THE CLERK: PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND TO BE SWORN. YOU DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU MAY GIVE IN THE CAUSE NOW PENDING BEFORE THIS COURT SHALL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? THE WITNESS: YES. THE CLERK: PLEASE HAVE A SEAT IN THE WITNESS STAND AND STATE SPELL YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAMES FOR THE RECORD. THE WITNESS: R-O-S-A M-A-R-I-A L-O-P-E-Z, LOPEZ. THE CLERK: THANK YOU. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THE PRESENCE OF DORIS WEITZ, WHO IS OUR CERTIFIED SPANISH INTERPRETER, WHOSE OATH IS ON FILE. MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: MAY I PROCEED, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: YOU MAY. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU. MAYBE WE SHOULD MOVE THE MICROPHONE UP. MAY I APPROACH? THE COURT: YES. THAT SHOULD DO IT. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: GOOD MORNING, MISS LOPEZ. A: GOOD MORNING. Q: MISS LOPEZ, WHAT IS YOUR OCCUPATION? A: A HOUSEKEEPER, DOMESTIC WORK. Q: AND ARE YOU PRESENTLY EMPLOYED? A: NO. Q: AND HOW LONG AGO DID YOU LEAVE YOUR LAST JOB? A: I LEFT IT ON FEBRUARY 7TH. SORRY. 10TH. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND HOW LONG HAD YOU WORKED AT THAT JOB, MA'AM? A: THREE YEARS. Q: AND WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE FAMILY THAT YOU WORKED FOR? A: SALINGER. Q: AND DO YOU KNOW THE ADDRESS WHERE THE SALINGER'S LIVE? A: 348 NORTH ROCKINGHAM. Q: AND WHEN YOU -- DID YOU LIVE IN OR LIVE AT THAT LOCATION ON OCCASION DURING THE PAST THREE YEARS WHILE YOU WORKED FOR THE SALINGER'S? A: I LIVED FOR FIVE DAYS A WEEK. Q: IN THE SALINGER'S HOME? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST THREE YEARS, DID YOU BECOME ACQUAINTED WITH A GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME OF MR. O.J. SIMPSON? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. ISN'T THE ISSUE HERE WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE GOING TO HOLD A 1335? THE COURT: THAT'S CORRECT. WE ARE AT THE PRELIMINARY STAGE AT THIS POINT. MR. COCHRAN: SORRY, YOUR HONOR. I'LL WITHDRAW THAT LAST QUESTION. THE COURT: OBJECTION SUSTAINED. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW -- MR. DARDEN: FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS NOT THEN PART OF THE ACTUAL TESTIMONY? MR. COCHRAN: WELL, THIS IS PRELIMINARY. THE COURT: THIS IS PRELIMINARY TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A 1335. MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU. THE COURT: THIS IS THE EVIDENTIARY HEARING THAT'S AUTHORIZED UNDER 1336. PROCEED. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: MISS LOPEZ, DO YOU PRESENTLY RESIDE IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA? A: YES. Q: AND FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS, WHERE HAVE YOU -- STRIKE THAT. FOR THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS, HAVE YOU LIVED OUTSIDE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA? A: YES. Q: AND WITHOUT TELLING US WHAT STATE YOU RESIDE IN, DID YOU RETURN TO CALIFORNIA EARLIER THIS MORNING AT SOME TIME? A: AT 1:30 IN THE MORNING. Q: YOU FLEW TO LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT? A: YES. Q: AND WHY WERE YOU LIVING IN ANOTHER STATE OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS? A: BECAUSE THE REPORTERS WON'T LEAVE ME ALONE. I'M TIRED OF LOOKING AT THEM. THEY HAVE BEEN HARASSING ME. Q: NOW, SINCE THE TIME THAT YOU WERE MENTIONED AS A POTENTIAL WITNESS IN THIS CASE, HAS THERE BEEN A CHANGE IN YOUR LIFE? A: YES. Q: AND WOULD YOU TELL THE COURT HOW YOUR LIFE HAS CHANGED SINCE THAT TIME? A: BECAUSE I CAN'T GO OUT, NOT EVEN TO GO TO THE LAUNDRY OR ANYWHERE BECAUSE WHEREVER I GO, PEOPLE ARE POINTING AT ME. Q: DID THIS CAUSE SOME PROBLEMS WITH YOUR EMPLOYER? A: YES. Q: HAS IT CAUSED ANY PROBLEMS WITH YOUR PARTICULAR FAMILY? A: WITH EVERYBODY. Q: ALL RIGHT. SPECIFICALLY WITH REGARD TO YOUR DAUGHTER, CAN YOU INDICATE TO THE COURT WHAT IF ANY PROBLEMS YOU'VE SUFFERED BY VIRTUE OF YOUR BEING A WITNESS IN THIS CASE? A: I HAD TO LEAVE HER HOUSE. Q: AND WHY DID YOU HAVE TO LEAVE HER HOUSE? A: BECAUSE SHE TOLD ME THAT IF I CAME TO TESTIFY, THAT SHE DIDN'T WANT ME IN HER HOME. Q: AND THAT MADE YOU SAD? A: VERY MUCH. Q: AND DOES YOUR DAUGHTER HAVE SOME CHILDREN ALSO, YOUR GRANDCHILDREN? A: I HAVE TWO GRANDDAUGHTERS WHO I ADORE. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, MAY WE GET SOME KLEENIX FOR MISS LOPEZ? THE WITNESS: THANK YOU. MR. COCHRAN: TAKE A MOMENT, MISS LOPEZ. THE WITNESS: I'M FINE (IN ENGLISH). Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU -- WERE YOU LIVING AT YOUR DAUGHTER'S HOME PRIOR TO YOUR LEAVING TO GO TO ANOTHER STATE? A: YES. Q: AND BECAUSE OF YOUR WILLINGNESS TO TESTIFY, YOU HAD TO LEAVE THAT LOCATION? A: YES. Q: NOW, WHAT IS YOUR NATIVE COUNTRY? A: EL SALVADOR. Q: DO YOU HAVE A HOME IN EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY PRESENT PLANS TO RETURN TO EL SALVADOR? A: I WOULD LIKE TO GO TOMORROW. Q: BACK TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: AND WHY DO YOU WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR? A: BECAUSE I HAVE A BUSINESS THERE WITH MY HOUSE. I HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THE HOUSE THAT MY SON LEFT ME, AND I HAVE MY SON BURIED IN SOMEBODY ELSE'S BURIAL PLACE AND I WANT TO PUT HIM INTO THE BURIAL PLACE THAT I HAVE BOUGHT FOR HIM. Q: AND DO YOU PLAN TO LEAVE FOR EL SALVADOR TOMORROW? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU PLAN TO COME BACK TO LOS ANGELES? A: NO. NOT FOR A LONG TIME. Q: AND WHY IS THAT? A: BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE RECOGNIZED BY PEOPLE ANYWHERE. Q: AND WITH REGARD TO YOUR DESIRE TO GO TO EL SALVADOR, IS THAT YOUR PARTICULAR WISH? A: YES. Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY FAMILY MEMBERS IN EL SALVADOR ALSO? A: YES. I HAVE A SISTER AND SHE'S SICK. SHE SUFFERS FROM HER BLOOD PRESSURE AND TENSION, AND WITH THIS NEWS THERE, SHE'S NOT WELL. Q: ALL RIGHT. IS THAT ONE OF THE REASONS ALSO THAT YOU RETURN TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. BECAUSE OF ALL THAT, YES. Q: HAS YOUR FAMILY HAD A HISTORY OF HEART PROBLEMS? A: YES. MY MOTHER ALSO DIED FROM HER HEART. Q: SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IF YOU ARE PERMITTED TO TESTIFY BY JUDGE ITO TODAY, AFTER COURT, DO YOU PLAN TO RETURN WHERE YOU WERE LAST NIGHT? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION. LEADING. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, PRELIMINARY. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION. MR. COCHRAN: LET ME REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IF JUDGE ITO ALLOWS YOU TO TESTIFY TODAY, WILL YOU CATCH A PLANE AFTER COURT THIS AFTERNOON? MR. DARDEN: STILL LEADING, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WHAT WILL YOU DO AFTER COURT? A: I WILL GO BACK. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND THEN TOMORROW, WHAT DO YOU PLAN TO DO? THE INTERPRETER: AND THEN TOMORROW, COUNSEL? Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND THEN TOMORROW, WHERE WILL YOU GO TOMORROW? A: I WILL GO TO EL SALVADOR. Q: HOW -- WILL YOU FLY TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: HAVE YOU PURCHASED YOUR TICKET YET? A: NO. I ONLY HAVE A RESERVATION. Q: AND WHAT -- HOW MUCH IS THE FARE, IF YOU KNOW, FROM LOS ANGELES TO EL SALVADOR? IS IT ONE WAY? A: ONLY ONE WAY (IN ENGLISH). Q: ALL RIGHT. THE COURT: MISS LOPEZ, IF YOU WOULD, SINCE WE ARE USING THE SPANISH INTERPRETER, IF YOU WOULD JUST LISTEN CAREFULLY TO THE QUESTION AS POSED TO YOU BY THE INTERPRETER AND ANSWER IN SPANISH, WHICH I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE MORE COMFORTABLE IN, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE. THANK YOU. THE WITNESS: THANK YOU. THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. YOU INDICATED YOU WERE GOING TO PURCHASE A ONE-WAY TICKET? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: MAY I HAVE JUST A SECOND, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.) Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DO YOU HAVE THE FUNDS TO PURCHASE THIS TICKET TO GO TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES, SIR. Q: WITH REGARD TO YOUR CLOTHES AND YOUR BELONGINGS, ARE THEY PACKED AT SOME LOCATION ALREADY? A: THEY'VE BEEN PACKED FOR A MONTH ALREADY. Q: YOU'VE PLANNED TO GO TO EL SALVADOR FOR QUITE A WHILE? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND FOR THE SAME REASONS YOU TOLD JUDGE ITO EARLIER? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: VERY WELL, YOUR HONOR. I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT. IF THE COURT WANTS ME TO QUERY FURTHER AT THIS POINT, I WILL DO THAT. THE COURT: AT THIS POINT, NO. MR. DARDEN. MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (BRIEF PAUSE.) CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN: Q: GOOD MORNING, MISS LOPEZ. A: GOOD MORNING, SIR. Q: MISS LOPEZ, YOU JUST INDICATED THAT YOU'VE HAD YOUR BAGS PACKED FOR A MONTH; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: YOU'VE BEEN PLANNING TO GO TO EL SALVADOR FOR A MONTH? A: YES. Q: OKAY. BUT YOU HAVEN'T PURCHASED A TICKET YET, CORRECT? A: NO. Q: OKAY. YOU DON'T HAVE A TICKET? A: NO, SIR. Q: AND YOU JUST MADE THE RESERVATION, DIDN'T YOU? A: YES. Q: YOU MADE THAT TODAY? A: YES. Q: PRIOR TO COMING TO COURT THIS MORNING? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND WERE YOU TOLD TO MAKE A RESERVATION? A: WHAT'S THAT? Q: DID SOMEONE TELL YOU TO MAKE A RESERVATION? A: NO, SIR. I DECIDED TO DO IT. Q: OKAY. YOU DECIDED TO DO IT TODAY THOUGH? A: YES, SIR. Q: OKAY. AND YOU DECIDED TO DO IT TODAY SO THAT YOU COULD TELL THE JUDGE THAT YOU WERE GOING TO LEAVE TOMORROW; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION, PLEASE. MR. DARDEN: THIS IS CROSS-EXAMINATION. THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND. MR. COCHRAN: ARGUMENTATIVE. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU PURCHASE A TICKET TODAY SO THAT YOU COULD TELL THE JUDGE THAT YOU WERE PLANNING TO LEAVE TOMORROW? A: NO. Q: OKAY. YOU PURCHASED A TICKET BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN PLANNING ALL ALONG TO GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR; IS THAT RIGHT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. COUNSEL IS MISSTATING THE TESTIMONY. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: SHE HAS NOT PURCHASED A TICKET. THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU RESERVED A PLANE TICKET SO THAT YOU COULD GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: HAVE YOU BEEN WANTING TO RETURN TO EL SALVADOR, TO THE PLACE WHERE YOUR SON IS BURIED? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND YOU'VE BEEN WANTING TO DO THAT FOR SEVERAL MONTHS; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AND YOU HAVE BEEN TRYING TO AVOID THE PRESS THE PAST MONTH AS WELL; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND THAT'S ANOTHER REASON THAT YOU WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND BECAUSE OF FAMILY MEDICAL PROBLEMS? A: YES, SIR. Q: OKAY. AND YOU'VE BEEN WANTING TO GO BACK TO SALVADOR FOR ALL THESE REASONS FOR MONTHS, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: YEARS EVEN. FOR YEARS; IS THAT RIGHT? A: NO. NOT DURING YEARS. Q: WELL, YOU SIGNED A DECLARATION ON FEBRUARY -- MR. DARDEN: EXCUSE ME. (BRIEF PAUSE.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, YOU SIGNED A DECLARATION ON FEBRUARY 17TH, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. DID YOU READ THAT DECLARATION BEFORE YOU SIGNED IT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. YOU READ ENGLISH, DON'T YOU? A: NO. Q: LET ME SHOW YOU A DECLARATION. MR. DARDEN: I DON'T HAVE A CLEAN COPY, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, MY PHOTOCOPY MACHINE HAS DIED. I HAVE THE COPY THAT IS ATTACHED TO THE DUPLICATE MOTION THAT'S FILED. DO YOU WANT TO USE THAT IF IT'S NOT MARKED UP? MR. COCHRAN: MIGHT I APPROACH ALSO? THE COURT: MR. DARDEN. MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. MAY IT BE MARKED PEOPLE'S 1 FOR PURPOSES OF THIS HEARING? THE COURT: I HAVE ONE THAT'S NOT MARKED. (PEO'S 1 FOR ID = DEC. OF ROSA LOPEZ) THE COURT: MRS. ROBERTSON, CAN I HAVE THE ORIGINAL FOR THE COURT FILE? HOLD ON A SECOND SO WE'RE ALL WORKING FROM THE SAME DOCUMENT HERE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL. PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, SHOWING YOU A TWO-PAGE DOCUMENT ENTITLED, "DECLARATION OF ROSA LOPEZ," IS THAT YOUR SIGNATURE? A: YES, SIR. Q: THANK YOU. AND IN WHAT NAME DID YOU SIGN THIS DECLARATION? A: WHAT'S THAT? Q: WHAT IS THE NAME WRITTEN THERE? CAN YOU READ IT? A: ROSA MARIA LOPEZ. Q: YOU READ THAT DOCUMENT PRIOR TO SIGNING IT; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THE GIRL READ IT TO ME, THE SECRETARY. Q: AND YOU ALSO WATCHED A TELEVISION PROGRAM FROM KMEX, IS THAT CORRECT, THE NEWSCAST? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND YOU HEARD WHAT THE REPORTER SAID DURING THAT NEWSCAST, DIDN'T YOU? A: YES. Q: AND YOU SPOKE TO HER ON FEBRUARY 17, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND YOU'VE SEEN THAT SAME REPORT HERE IN COURT TODAY, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND THAT WOULD BE ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO? A: YES, SIR. Q: OKAY. YOU SPOKE TO HER FOR TWO HOURS, DIDN'T YOU? A: NOT TWO HOURS. Q: HOW LONG DID YOU SPEAK TO HER? A: MAYBE 25 MINUTES OR 30. Q: OKAY. WELL, DURING THAT 25- OR 30-MINUTE PERIOD, YOU TOLD HER THAT YOU DID NOT WANT TO GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR, DIDN'T YOU? A: I NEVER TOLD HER I DIDN'T WANT TO GO BACK. THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, MR. DARDEN. EXCUSE ME, MR. DARDEN. I THINK MISS VILLAPANDO IS STILL HERE IN THE COURTROOM. MR. COCHRAN: MAY SHE STEP OUT? THE COURT: MISS VILLAPANDO, WOULD YOU STEP OUT OF THE COURTROOM, PLEASE. THANK YOU. (MISS VILLAPANDO COMPLIES.) THE COURT: MR. DARDEN, PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: OKAY. YOU TOLD HER THAT YOU WERE -- THAT YOU WANTED TO STAY IN THE UNITED STATES, DIDN'T YOU? PLEASE ANSWER YES OR NO. A: THAT I WANTED TO GO AND COME BACK. MR. COCHRAN: THE WITNESS SHOULD BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THE ANSWER. THE COURT: CORRECT. YOU CAN EXPLORE FURTHER, MR. DARDEN. IT'S CROSS-EXAMINATION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DIDN'T YOU TELL HER THAT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR? A: WHY NOT? THAT'S MY COUNTRY. I LOVE IT VERY MUCH. Q: WELL, ARE YOU A U.S. CITIZEN? A: NO. I'M A LEGAL RESIDENT. Q: OKAY. AND YOU'VE BEEN HERE 27 YEARS, CORRECT? A: I CAME IN '69. YOU FIGURE IT OUT. Q: OKAY. WHY DON'T YOU TELL ME, HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN HERE. A: LET'S SAY 34 YEARS. Q: OKAY. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU WERE IN EL SALVADOR? A: IN DECEMBER. Q: AND WHEN WAS THE TIME BEFORE THAT? A: NO, I HAVEN'T BEEN ANYMORE. Q: JUST ONE TIME IN 27 YEARS? A: NO. NO, SIR. I GO EVERY YEAR, SOMETIMES TWICE A YEAR (IN ENGLISH). Q: OKAY. AND YOU'VE NEVER STAYED -- MS. CLARK: MAY THE RECORD REFLECT SHE'S STATING THAT IN ENGLISH? THE COURT: I KNOW. THE COURT REPORTER: YOUR HONOR, I CAN'T TAKE EVERYBODY. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU SAY YOU GO THERE ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR? A: YES, SIR. Q: OKAY. AND YOU'VE NEVER STAYED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: ONE TIME I STAYED FOR EIGHT MONTHS. Q: OKAY. BUT YOU ALWAYS COME BACK, DON'T YOU? A: I ALWAYS COME BACK, YES. Q: OKAY. AND YOU ALSO TOLD MISS VILLAPANDO THAT YOU WERE WILLING TO TESTIFY, DIDN'T YOU? A: YES. Q: YOU TOLD HER THAT YOU WOULD COME TO COURT AND TELL THE TRUTH, DIDN'T YOU? A: YES, SIR. Q: OKAY. AND IF THE COURT SENDS YOU A PLANE TICKET IN EL SALVADOR, YOU'LL COME BACK AND TESTIFY, WON'T YOU? MR. COCHRAN: ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE, THAT THE COURT IS GOING TO SEND HER A PLANE TICKET. THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. THE WITNESS: I DON'T THINK OF COMING BACK VERY SOON, SIR. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU TOLD ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO THAT YOUR TESTIMONY HAD TO BE RECORDED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: DID SOMEONE TELL YOU THAT YOU COULD HAVE YOUR TESTIMONY RECORDED? A: NO. Q: WELL, HOW DID YOU FIND OUT THAT YOU COULD HAVE IT RECORDED? A: I SAID THAT I DIDN'T WANT TO COME TO COURT BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT TO BE AMONG SO MANY CAMERAS, THAT I WANTED TO RECORD IT, YES. Q: BY THE WAY, YOUR PLANE TICKET, UNDER WHAT NAME IS IT BOOKED UNDER? A: ROSA MARIA LOPEZ. Q: WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE AIRLINE? A: IT'S TACA. Q: COULD YOU REPEAT THAT AND SPELL IT, PLEASE? A: TACA, T-A-C-A, TACA INTERNATIONAL. Q: AND THAT ONE-WAY TICKET IS GOING TO COST YOU HOW MUCH MONEY? A: THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-SEVEN. Q: OKAY. NOW, YOU HAD NO PLANS TO GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR ON FEBRUARY 17, CORRECT? A: NO. Q: OKAY. AND SO YOUR DESIRE OR YOUR DECISION TO GO BACK IS SOMETHING THAT HAS OCCURRED IN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS; IS THAT RIGHT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. THAT'S ARGUMENTATIVE. THAT'S NOT WHAT SHE TESTIFIED TO. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NO. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: OKAY. WELL, YOU JUST SAID YOU HAD NO PLANS TO GO BACK ON FEBRUARY 17, RIGHT? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT'S NOT WHAT SHE SAID. THAT'S ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. THE WITNESS: I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK SOON. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: OKAY. ON FEBRUARY 17, YOU SAID THAT YOU DID NOT WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S NOT WHAT SHE SAID. THAT'S NOT WHAT THE CROSS-EXAMINATION WAS, YOUR HONOR. THAT'S WRONG. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DIDN'T TELL HER THAT I DIDN'T WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: BUT YOU HAD NO PLANS TO LEAVE WHEN YOU TALKED TO ROSA MARIA; IS THAT CORRECT? A: MY BAGS ARE READY AND I SHOWED THEM TO HER. Q: ANSWER THE QUESTION, PLEASE. MR. COCHRAN: SHE ANSWERED THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: OKAY. YOU HAD NO PLANS TO LEAVE ON FEBRUARY 17? A: YES, SIR. Q: BUT YOU CHANGED YOUR MIND AFTER YOU SPOKE TO MR. MC KENNA; IS THAT RIGHT? MR. COCHRAN: THAT QUESTION IS VAGUE. THE WITNESS: I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION. HE'S CHANGING THE QUESTION NOW. THE COURT: SHE SAID, "I DON'T UNDERSTAND." NEXT QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WELL, AFTER YOU TOLD ROSA MARIA YOU DIDN'T WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR, YOU SPOKE TO A MR. MC KENNA; IS THAT RIGHT? A: YES. Q: MR. MC KENNA IS ONE OF MR. SHAPIRO'S INVESTIGATORS? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND IS HE IN THE COURTROOM NOW? MR. DARDEN: MAY HE BE EXCUSED, YOUR HONOR? THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S HERE. THE COURT: LET'S HAVE MR. MC KENNA STEP OUT OF THE COURTROOM. THE WITNESS: THERE HE IS. (MR. MC KENNA COMPLIES.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MR. MC KENNA AND SOMEONE ELSE CAME TO THE HOUSE YOU WERE STAYING IN, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT IS THAT PERSON'S NAME? A: IRMA. Q: AND WHO WAS IRMA? (IRMA STEPS OUT OF THE COURTROOM.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT IS IRMA'S LAST NAME? A: I DON'T KNOW HER LAST NAME. Q: OKAY. DOES SHE WORK FOR YOU? A: NO. Q: IS SHE A RELATIVE OR FRIEND? A: NO. SHE WORKS FOR THEM. Q: AND WHO IS THEM? A: THE LAWYERS. Q: THE LAWYERS ON THAT SIDE OF THE TABLE? A: YES. Q: WELL, AFTER YOU SPOKE TO ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO -- THE COURT: I THINK IT'S ANNA MARIA VILLAPANDO, ISN'T IT? MS. CLARK: I AM SORRY? MR. COCHRAN: IT'S ROSA. THEY'RE BOTH ROSA MARIA. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AFTER YOU SPOKE TO ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO, MR. MC KENNA AND IRMA CAME TO PICK YOU UP; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. NOW, HOW WAS IT THAT MR. MC KENNA AND IRMA FOUND YOU, IF YOU KNOW? A: I CALLED THEM. Q: AND YOU ASKED THEM TO COME AND GET YOU? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND THEY TOOK YOU TO THEIR OFFICE? A: YES. Q: AND THEY INTERVIEWED YOU? A: YES. Q: AND THAT IS WHEN YOU SIGNED THIS DECLARATION IN FRONT OF YOU; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME YOU EVER TOLD ANYONE THAT YOU WANTED TO GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR WITHIN A WEEK; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT, YOUR HONOR, TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NO. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU HADN'T TOLD THIS TO MR. MC KENNA BEFORE, HAD YOU? MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I HAD ALREADY TOLD MY LAWYER THAT I WANTED TO GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR MANY TIMES. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHO IS YOUR LAWYER? A: CARL JONES. Q: AND HOW DID MR. JONES BECOME YOUR LAWYER? A: I TOLD MR. JOHNNIE THAT I NEEDED HIM TO RECOMMEND A LAWYER FOR ME, FOR MYSELF (IN ENGLISH). Q: OKAY. AND HE GOT MR. JONES FOR YOU? A: HE RECOMMENDED HIM TO ME. Q: OKAY. AND HAVE YOU BEEN PAYING MR. JONES? A: I HAVE MADE A SETTLEMENT WITH HIM THAT I WILL PAY HIM. Q: OKAY. NOW, YOU'RE NOT WORKING NOW; IS THAT CORRECT? A: NO. Q: OKAY. AND YOU'RE LEAVING THE COUNTRY? A: YES. Q: AND ARE YOU GOING TO PAY MR. JONES BEFORE YOU LEAVE? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THAT'S IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL. IS HE A COLLECTING AGENCY FOR MR. JONES? THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: ALSO ATTORNEY-CLIENT, YOUR HONOR. MR. DARDEN: YOU ARE NOT HER ATTORNEY, MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, I OBJECT FOR MR. JONES, BUT I'LL SIT DOWN. THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ARE YOU GOING TO PAY MR. JONES BEFORE YOU LEAVE THE COUNTRY? A: WHEN THE CASE IS OVER. Q: IS THAT THE ARRANGEMENT YOU HAVE, THAT YOU'LL PAY WHEN THE CASE IS OVER? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT TO ANY QUESTIONS ALONG THESE LINES. THAT'S ATTORNEY-CLIENT. HE DOESN'T HAVE A RIGHT TO ASK THAT. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: IS THAT THE ARRANGEMENT YOU HAVE? A: YES. (BRIEF PAUSE.) THE COURT: COUNSEL, YOU DON'T HAVE THE COURT'S PERMISSION TO BE ON THE PHONE RIGHT NOW. MS. LEWIS: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR. I DIDN'T ASK -- THE COURT: IF I CAN HEAR IT, IT'S TOO LOUD. MR. DARDEN. MR. DARDEN: IF I CAN HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (BRIEF PAUSE.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, THE HARASSMENT THAT YOU HAVE SUFFERED, IT HAS ONLY BEEN HARASSMENT BY THE PRESS; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. I MEAN, THE D.A.'S OFFICE AND THE LAPD HAVE NOT HARASSED YOU; IS THAT CORRECT? A: NO. Q: NOW, YOU INDICATED THAT YOUR DAUGHTER TOLD YOU TO LEAVE HER HOUSE IF YOU CAME HERE TO TESTIFY; IS THAT CORRECT? A: BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T LIKE TO SEE SO MANY PEOPLE AND SO MANY CAMERAS ON TOP OF THE HOUSE. Q: DID YOU DISCUSS WITH YOUR DAUGHTER THE INFORMATION YOU SAY YOU HAVE REGARDING THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THIS QUESTION. THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS HEARING. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NO. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU'VE NEVER TOLD HER? A: NO. Q: THE INTERVIEW ON KMEX THAT YOU SAW HERE ON TELEVISION TODAY, HAVE YOU SEEN THAT SAME NEWS FOOTAGE BEFORE? A: I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN. Q: OKAY. WELL, YOU WATCH -- YOU WATCHED MISS VILLAPANDO ON THE NEWS A FEW MOMENTS AGO, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THAT FOOTAGE BEFORE? A: YES. Q: OKAY. MISS LOPEZ, WE JUST CALLED THE AIRLINE. THEY DON'T SHOW A RESERVATION FOR YOU. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO THE COURT WHY IT IS THAT YOU JUST TOLD US YOU HAVE A RESERVATION? A: BECAUSE I AM GOING TO RESERVE IT, SIR. AS SOON AS I LEAVE HERE, I WILL BUY MY TICKET AND I WILL LEAVE. IF YOU WANT TO, THE CAMERAS CAN FOLLOW ME. Q: SO YOU HAVE NOT MADE A RESERVATION? A: BUT I WILL MAKE IT AS SOON AS I LEAVE HERE. Q: OKAY. YOU HAVE NOT MADE A -- A: I CAN'T CALL AT 1:00 IN THE MORNING BECAUSE THE AIRLINES ARE CLOSED AT THAT TIME. I HAVE TO WAIT. Q: YOU JUST TOLD US THAT YOU ALREADY MADE A RESERVATION. A: BUT I WILL MAKE THE RESERVATION, SIR, AND I WILL LEAVE, THAT IS FOR SURE, TODAY. Q: OKAY. SO WHEN YOU TOLD US YOU ALREADY MADE A RESERVATION, YOU WERE LYING? A: NO. BECAUSE I WILL MAKE IT, SIR. Q: YOU TOLD US YOU MADE A RESERVATION PRIOR TO COMING TO COURT THIS MORNING, MISS LOPEZ. MR. COCHRAN: ARGUMENTATIVE, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, CAN YOU INSTRUCT THE WITNESS JUST TO ANSWER THE QUESTION? THE WITNESS: BECAUSE I HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO CALL -- THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. MR. DARDEN: MAY I REASK THE QUESTION? THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. RESTATE YOUR QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, DIDN'T YOU TELL US THAT YOU MADE THE RESERVATION PRIOR TO YOUR COMING TO COURT TODAY? YES OR NO? A: NO. Q: YOU DIDN'T JUST TELL US THAT? A: YES, I TOLD YOU (IN ENGLISH). Q: BUT YOU KNEW WHEN YOU TOLD US THAT THAT YOU HAD NOT MADE A RESERVATION, CORRECT? YES OR NO? CORRECT? A: CORRECT. Q: YOU LIED TO US, DIDN'T YOU? YES OR NO? A: BECAUSE -- THE COURT: SHE CAN EXPLAIN. YOU CAN EXPLAIN. THE WITNESS: BECAUSE THE AGENCIES ARE CLOSED. THEY OPEN AT 10:00 IN THE MORNING, AND I WAS BROUGHT HERE VERY EARLY, SIR. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS TO LEAVE LOS ANGELES AT ALL, DO YOU? A: OF COURSE, SIR. MY BAGS ARE PACKED. EVERYTHING IS READY (IN ENGLISH). Q: WELL, WHEN YOU LEFT THE SALINGER'S, YOU TOLD THEM THAT YOU WERE HEADED FOR EL SALVADOR, DIDN'T YOU? MR. DARDEN: COULD SHE BE INSTRUCTED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION YES OR NO? THE COURT: HOLD ON. THE WITNESS: I TOLD THEM I WAS GOING FOR TWO WEEKS. THE COURT: SHE CAN EXPLAIN HER ANSWER. THE WITNESS: I ASKED THEM TO GIVE ME A TWO-WEEK VACATION, AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHEN YOU LEFT THE SALINGER'S, YOU TOLD THEM THAT YOU WERE LEAVING AND GOING DIRECTLY TO EL SALVADOR, DIDN'T YOU? YES OR NO? A: YES, BECAUSE I HAD THOUGHT OF GOING THAT WEEK. Q: OKAY. BUT YOU DIDN'T GO, DID YOU? YES OR NO? A: BECAUSE MY DAUGHTER ASKED ME TO STAY WITH MY GRANDDAUGHTER. MR. DARDEN: SHE CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION YES OR NO. MR. COCHRAN: HE DOESN'T SPEAK SPANISH. MR. DARDEN: NO POLICE OFFICER HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO EXPLAIN THEIR ANSWERS IN THESE PROCEEDINGS. THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. AND MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: SORRY. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU TELL THE SALINGER'S THAT YOU WERE GOING TO LEAVE AND GO TO EL SALVADOR? THE WITNESS: YES, SIR. THE COURT: NEXT QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AND YOU DIDN'T GO, DID YOU? SI OR NO? A: NO. Q: OKAY. AND YOU HAD NOT MADE A RESERVATION TO GO? A: NO. Q: OKAY. ARE YOU BEING PAID TO TESTIFY? A: NO, SIR, AND I DON'T WANT TO BE PAID BY ANYBODY. Q: WELL, YOU DISCUSSED THE MONEY WITH THE ENQUIRER, DIDN'T YOU? A: I HAVE NEVER TALKED TO THE ENQUIRER, SIR. Q: YOU DISCUSSED MONEY WITH THE STAR? A: I HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT MONEY WITH ANYBODY, SIR. Q: OKAY. DID YOU TALK TO REPORTERS FROM THE STAR? A: NO. Q: OKAY. AND DID YOU TALK TO A REPORTER FROM THE ENQUIRER? A: I DON'T KNOW REPORTERS FROM THE ENQUIRER. Q: DID YOU EVER MEET A REPORTER FROM THE ENQUIRER? A: I DON'T KNOW WHO THEY ARE. Q: DID YOU EVER MEET A REPORTER FROM THE ENQUIRER? MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. THAT'S VAGUE. HOW DO YOU TELL A REPORTER FROM THE ENQUIRER? DO THEY LOOK DIFFERENT? MAYBE THEY DO, BUT -- THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S A VAGUE QUESTION. IT'S NOT FAIR. THE COURT: ANYBODY WHO IDENTIFIED THEMSELVES AS BEING FROM THE ENQUIRER. YOU CAN REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU EVER MEET SOMEONE WHO GAVE YOU A BUSINESS CARD AND SAID TO YOU, "I AM WITH THE ENQUIRER"? A: NO. I DON'T REMEMBER TAKING A CARD. Q: LET ME ASK YOU AGAIN SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR. HAVE YOU EVER SPOKEN TO SOMEONE -- MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS POINT -- Q: BY MR. DARDEN: -- FROM THE ENQUIRER? MR. COCHRAN: -- IT'S OUTSIDE THE SCOPE; IS IT NOT? THE COURT: OVERRULED. NO. IT GOES TO CREDIBILITY. AS YOU KNOW, THERE'S A WIDE RANGE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION REGARDING CREDIBILITY. MR. COCHRAN: I HOPE YOU ALL REMEMBER THAT NEXT WEEK, STARTING MONDAY. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: HAVE YOU EVER SPOKEN TO SOMEONE FROM THE ENQUIRER? MR. COCHRAN: IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED. MR. DARDEN: IT HAS? THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW WHO -- A LOT OF REPORTERS CAME AND I DON'T KNOW WHO'S FROM 7 OR WHO'S FROM 4. A LOT OF REPORTERS CAME. I DON'T KNOW WHO CAME AND WHO LEFT. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: THE AIRLINE THAT YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, NOT ONLY DID YOU NOT MAKE RESERVATIONS, BUT YOU DIDN'T CALL THEM EITHER, DID YOU? A: SIR, I CAN'T CALL THEM AT 6:00 IN THE MORNING BECAUSE THEIR OFFICES ARE CLOSED. Q: ARE YOU AWARE, MISS LOPEZ, THAT THE AIRLINE TAKES RESERVATIONS BY PHONE 24 HOURS, AROUND THE CLOCK? A: BECAUSE I DON'T CALL THE AIRPORT. I CALL THE AGENCIES, SIR. Q: AND YOU FLY TO EL SALVADOR WHAT, ONCE, TWICE A YEAR, AND HAVE DONE SO FOR 27 YEARS? MR. COCHRAN: IS HE TESTIFYING, YOUR HONOR, OR IS THAT A QUESTION? Q: BY MR. DARDEN: IS THAT CORRECT? THE COURT: OVERRULED. THAT'S A QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: WHEN YOU SPOKE TO ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO, YOU WERE FILLING OUT UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FORMS; IS THAT CORRECT? A: I WASN'T FILLING THEM OUT. I WAS GIVEN THE APPLICATIONS, BUT I HAVEN'T FILLED THEM OUT, SIR. Q: WERE YOU WRITING ON THE APPLICATIONS WHEN YOU FIRST MET WITH ROSA MARIA ON FEBRUARY 17? A: WHAT IS THAT? Q: OKAY. WELL, WHEN YOU MET WITH ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO ON FEBRUARY 17, YOU WERE FILLING OUT THE APPLICATION; IS THAT CORRECT? A: I WASN'T FILLING THEM OUT. I SAID TO HER, "LOOK, I WANT TO GO TO THIS EMPLOYMENT," AND I SHOWED HER THE PAPERS, BUT I WAS NOT FILLING THEM OUT, SIR. Q: YOU TOLD HER YOU WANTED TO FILE FOR UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE TO LIVE IN CALIFORNIA TO RECEIVE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE IN CALIFORNIA, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: CORRECT? A: BUT BECAUSE I WANT TO LEAVE, THAT IS WHY I HAVE NOT TAKEN THEM IN, SIR. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? Q: OH, I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING, MISS LOPEZ. MR. COCHRAN: THOSE COMMENTS BY COUNSEL, HE'S NOT TESTIFYING. OBJECT TO THAT. THE COURT: THAT'S TRUE. THAT'S TRUE. BUT THERE'S NO JURY. SO I'M GOING TO LET THAT ONE SLIDE. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, THEY'LL PICK UP BAD HABITS. IF YOU ALLOW THEM TO DO IT TODAY, THEY'LL TRY IT NEXT WEEK. THE COURT: THAT'S TRUE. THAT'S TRUE. MR. DARDEN: NOT EVERY SITUATION, MR. COCHRAN, DESERVES COMMENT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN, THANK YOU. WHY DON'T YOU PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AND SO THAT IS CLEAR, YOU HAVE NOT MADE RESERVATIONS? A: NO. Q: YOU HAVE NOT MADE RESERVATIONS AT ALL DURING THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 1995? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED SEVERAL TIMES. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: CORRECT? THE COURT: THAT'S CORRECT. MR. COCHRAN: ON CROSS. THE WITNESS: LET ME ANSWER. SIR, YOU CAN NOT MAKE A RESERVATION UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO PAY FOR THE TICKET IMMEDIATELY. YOU CAN NOT RESERVE IT. THE AGENCY HOLDS THE TICKET ONLY FOR 24 HOURS, SIR. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT AGENCY IS THIS? A: PAN AMERICANA. Q: WHERE IS THAT LOCATED? A: THEY'RE ALL OVER THE WORLD, SIR. Q: HAVE YOU EVER PURCHASED A TICKET DIRECTLY FROM THE AIRLINE? A: NO. Q: WHERE IS THE PAN AMERICANA TICKET OFFICE THAT YOU NORMALLY USE? A: I GO TO WHERE IT'S CLOSER TO ME, SIR. Q: OKAY. WHERE DO YOU USUALLY GO? A: ON SAN FERNANDO ROAD. Q: WHAT CITY? A: IN LOS ANGELES. Q: AND WHEN YOU LIED TO US ABOUT HAVING MADE RESERVATIONS -- MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. IT'S BEEN COVERED. ASKED AND ANSWERED. THE COURT: LET ME HEAR THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU DO THAT BECAUSE YOU WANTED US TO BELIEVE THAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY ABOUT TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT. WHAT MR. DARDEN BELIEVES IS NOT RELEVANT. IT'S WHAT THE COURT BELIEVES. OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION AS ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: I'VE HEARD THE QUESTION AND ANSWER ABOUT THAT. SO IT'S REDUNDANT AT THIS POINT. MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU HAVE FAMILY HERE IN LOS ANGELES; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: BOTH YOUR TWO CHILDREN LIVE HERE? A: I HAVE A DAUGHTER AND A SON AND MY TWO GRANDDAUGHTERS. Q: OKAY. AND THEY ALL LIVE HERE IN LOS ANGELES? A: YES. Q: YOU MENTIONED EARLIER THAT YOU WOULD STAY AT THE SALINGER'S FIVE DAYS DURING THE WEEK; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: SO DID YOU MAINTAIN A RESIDENCE SOMEWHERE ELSE? A: AT MY DAUGHTER'S. Q: AND WHEN YOU LEFT THE SALINGER'S, YOU WEREN'T FIRED, WERE YOU? A: I WASN'T TOLD DIRECTLY, BUT I RECOGNIZE THAT I WASN'T WANTED THERE ANYMORE. Q: IS THAT WHAT YOU TOLD -- IS THAT WHAT MARTA SALINGER TOLD YOU, THAT YOU WEREN'T WELCOME THERE ANYMORE? A: YES. SHE TOLD ME -- MRS. CLARK, YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT SHE TOLD ME? SHE TOLD ME, IF YOU GO -- MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, MOTION TO STRIKE, YOUR HONOR. THERE'S NO -- THE WITNESS: -- FOR TWO WEEKS, I'LL GET A NEW HOUSEKEEPER. THE COURT: MISS LOPEZ, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASE LISTEN TO THE ATTORNEY'S QUESTION. THE WITNESS: WELL, SHE'S LOOKING AT ME IN A BAD WAY. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ARE YOU AWARE THIS TRIAL IS BEING BROADCAST IN EL SALVADOR? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, HOW IS THAT RELEVANT? OBJECT TO THAT. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WELL, HAVE YOU SEEN EL SALVADOREAN OFFICIALS ON TELEVISION -- MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT. IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: -- TALKING ABOUT YOU? THE COURT: OVERRULED. COUNSEL, SHE TESTIFIED THAT ONE OF THE REASONS SHE WAS -- WANTED TO LEAVE WAS THAT SHE WAS -- ALL THE PRESS COVERAGE, SHE WANTED TO GO WHERE PEOPLE WEREN'T GOING TO LOOK AT HER. IF IT'S GETTING WORLD-WIDE COVERAGE, THAT MAY BE A PROBLEM IN EL SALVADOR. OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: I DOUBT IT. WELL, OKAY, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU SEE EL SALVADOREAN OFFICIALS ON TELEVISION TALKING ABOUT YOU? A: NO. NOT HERE. Q: WELL, HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO YOUR FAMILY IN EL SALVADOR? A: I HAVEN'T SPOKEN WITH THEM. Q: WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SPOKE TO YOUR SISTER IN EL SALVADOR? A: I DON'T REMEMBER. Q: THIS YEAR? A: YES. Q: THIS WEEK? A: NO. Q: LAST WEEK? A: NO. Q: MONTH OF FEBRUARY? A: I DON'T KNOW WHEN. MR. COCHRAN: SHE SAID SHE DIDN'T KNOW, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: BUT YOU INDICATED TO US A LITTLE WHILE AGO THAT SHE WAS EXTREMELY ILL; IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT CORRECT; YES OR NO? A: I HAVEN'T TALKED WITH HER -- MR. COCHRAN: JUST A MOMENT. SHE CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. THE COURT: I -- LET HER ANSWER THE QUESTION. I'LL HEAR THE QUESTION. IF I HAVE TO STRIKE IT, I'LL STRIKE IT. LET'S SEE WHAT THE -- THE WITNESS: I HAVEN'T TALKED TO HER. MY OTHER RELATIVES HAVE. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: OKAY. BUT YOUR SISTER IS EXTREMELY ILL, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND YOU HAVEN'T TALKED TO HER FOR WEEKS? A: NO. Q: HAVE YOU OR HAVE YOU NOT SPOKEN TO YOUR SISTER IN THE PAST FOUR WEEKS? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. ASKED AND ANSWERED. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO YOUR SISTER IN THE PAST FOUR WEEKS? A: NO. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: IF I CAN JUST CLARIFY ONE POINT WITH YOU, MISS LOPEZ. DESPITE THE FACT THAT YOU'VE HAD YOUR BAGS PACKED AN ENTIRE MONTH, YOU HAVE NOT YET CONTACTED AN AIRLINE -- MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED, EVEN BY THIS -- Q: BY MR. DARDEN: -- OR TRAVEL AGENT? THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED. COMPOUND. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: CORRECT? A: YES. Q: YOU WERE IN ANOTHER STATE YESTERDAY? A: UH-HUH. Q: WHAT STATE? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT, YOUR HONOR. OBJECT. SHE HAS ENOUGH PROBLEMS -- THE COURT: IT'S NOT RELEVANT. ANOTHER STATE, THAT'S WHAT I NEED TO KNOW. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT AIRLINE DID YOU FLY IN ON? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THAT, YOUR HONOR. I DON'T KNOW -- THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, CAN SHE WRITE IT DOWN, GIVE IT TO YOU -- THE COURT: THERE ARE SO MANY AIRLINES THAT FLY SO MANY PLACES. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH? MAY WE APPROACH? MAY WE APPROACH? MR. DARDEN: WE DON'T NEED TO APPROACH. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH REGARDING THAT. THE COURT: THERE ARE SO MANY AIRLINES -- MR. COCHRAN: THERE ARE SO MANY AIRLINES WITH REGARD TO THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH IF I MIGHT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) THE COURT: WE'RE AT THE SIDEBAR. WHY ARE WE HERE? MR. COCHRAN: SOUTHWEST ONLY GOES TO SOME -- CERTAIN STATES. SOUTHWEST ONLY FLIES OVER ARIZONA AND MEXICO AND SOME AREAS -- SHE'S GOING BACK ON THE SAME AIRLINE. THERE WERE REPORTERS IN THE HOTEL THIS MORNING. THE COURT: OKAY. OKAY. MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T MIND -- THE COURT: HE KNOWS -- MR. DARDEN: EVERYONE KNOWS THE AIRLINE ALREADY, KNOWS WHAT HOTEL SHE IS IN, BUT I CAN'T KNOW? AND I THINK I HAVE A RIGHT ALSO TO KNOW WHERE SHE'S BEEN -- THE COURT: MR. DARDEN, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. THE ISSUE IS -- THE AIRLINE IS NOT REALLY RELEVANT. NOW THAT I KNOW -- AND, YOU KNOW, I AM THE ONE THAT HAS TO MAKE THE DECISION. NOBODY ELSE. SO I KNOW IT'S SOUTHWEST. WE'LL STIPULATE IT'S SOUTHWEST FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS. SO LET'S PROCEED. (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. DARDEN, YOU MAY PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, DID SOMEONE PAY FOR YOUR PLANE TICKET TO LOS ANGELES YESTERDAY? A: YES. Q: WHO PAID FOR IT? A: MY NIECE. Q: WHAT'S HER NAME? A: JOSEFINA. Q: WHAT'S HER LAST NAME? A: RODRIGUEZ. Q: AND HOW DO YOU SPELL THE FIRST NAME? A: I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SPELL IT. JOSEFINA. Q: COULD YOU TRY AND SPELL IT FOR ME, PLEASE? I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT GREATLY. A: THEN I HAVE TO DO IT LETTER BY LETTER AND IT'S A VERY LONG NAME. THE COURT: IS IT SPELLED THE NORMAL WAY? THE WITNESS: UH-HUH. YES, SIR. MR. DARDEN: THERE'S A NORMAL WAY? THE COURT: YES. JOSEFINA IN SPANISH? CERTAINLY. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU TOLD US THAT YOU WERE TERRIFIED OF THE PRESS, CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: UH, YOU SPOKE TO SOME OF THE REPORTERS HERE IN THE COURTROOM THIS MORNING, DIDN'T YOU? A: NO. Q: DIDN'T YOU SPEAK TO A REPORTER FROM COURT T.V. THIS MORNING? A: NO. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU SPEAK TO KRISTIN JEANNETTE MEYERS FROM COURT T.V. THIS MORNING? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. IS SPEAKING SAYING HELLO? THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW HIM. IF THEY SAY HELLO TO ME, THEY SAY HI, I SAY HI. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WELL, DID YOU SPEAK TO A FEMALE WOMAN REPORTER THIS MORNING? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, HOW WOULD SHE KNOW SHE'S A REPORTER? THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU? A: I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE REPORTERS OR WHAT. THEY TELL ME HI, I SAY HI. Q: WELL, DID YOU TELL SOMEONE THIS MORNING, A WOMAN, QUOTE, "I LOVE YOU ON T.V.," UNQUOTE? A: YES. BECAUSE I SEE HER ON T.V. Q: DO YOU SEE THAT PERSON HERE TODAY? A: I DON'T SEE HER RIGHT NOW. Q: YOU WEREN'T TERRIFIED OF THAT T.V. REPORTER, WERE YOU? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NO, BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T HAVE A CAMERA IN FRONT OF MY FACE. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO NEED ABOUT FIVE MINUTES TO GATHER SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. THE COURT: YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU CAN CROSS-EXAMINE ON AT THIS POINT? MR. DARDEN: NO, I DON'T THINK SO. MR. COCHRAN: MAY I HAVE REDIRECT? THE COURT: ANY OBJECTION TO THAT, MR. DARDEN? (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. DARDEN: CAN I HAVE ONE MOMENT? (BRIEF PAUSE.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: THE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FORMS THAT YOU HAD, WHO GAVE YOU THOSE FORMS? A: I WENT TO UNEMPLOYMENT. Q: DID YOU SEE AN UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COUNSELOR? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, HOW IS THAT RELEVANT WITH REGARD TO THIS? THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: YES. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AND DID THAT COUNSELOR TELL YOU THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OBTAINING UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE? A: YES. Q: AND HE TOLD YOU THAT YOU HAD TO REMAIN IN THE STATE, CORRECT? A: I WASN'T TOLD THAT. I DIDN'T ASK IT. Q: DID YOU LOOK AT THE BLANK UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FORM? A: I STILL HAVEN'T READ THEM, SIR. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, WHAT TIME DID YOU PLAN TO ADJOURN THIS MORNING? THE COURT: THAT WAS SOMETHING I WAS GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT BECAUSE IT'S OBVIOUS WE'RE NOT GOING TO FINISH THIS MORNING. SO WE MAY -- LOOKS LIKE WE ARE GOING TO BE IN SESSION THIS AFTERNOON, BUT LET ME TALK TO COUNSEL ABOUT SCHEDULING. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) THE COURT: SORRY FOR THE DELAY, MISS LOPEZ. THE WITNESS: I WANT TO LEAVE, SIR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN, YOU HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION? MR. DARDEN: TWO MORE, IF I MAY, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION TO THE YOUNG LADY NEAR THE COURTROOM DOORS, IS THAT THE WOMAN THAT YOU SPOKE TO THIS MORNING AND SAID, "I LOVE YOU ON T.V."? A: YES, BECAUSE I WATCH HER ON T.V. Q: OKAY. SHE WAS WALKING PAST YOU AT THE TIME? A: YES. Q: AND YOU PULLED ON HER SKIRT AND STOPPED HER? A: NO. NO. I DIDN'T TOUCH THAT LADY. I ONLY TOLD HER, "YOU LOOK VERY PRETTY ON T.V." Q: SO YOU DIDN'T STOP HER SO THAT YOU COULD SPEAK TO HER? A: NO, I DIDN'T STOP HER. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE WITNESS: I TOLD HER -- THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. CAN WE HAVE THE YOUNG LADY IDENTIFY HERSELF, PLEASE, FOR THE RECORD. MS. MEYERS: KRISTIN JEANNETTE MEYERS OF COURT T.V. THE COURT: THANK YOU. MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, THIS HEARING HAS OBVIOUSLY TAKEN ON DIMENSIONS THAT GO FAR BEYOND WHAT WE THOUGHT IT WOULD. THE COURT HAD ORIGINALLY INTENDED ON BEING -- GOING DARK AT 1:40 -- EXCUSE ME -- 11:40 TODAY. IT'S CLEAR TO ME WE'RE NOT GOING TO FINISH THIS MORNING. SO WE WILL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 1:45 AND CONCLUDE THE HEARING THIS AFTERNOON. MR. JONES, ARE YOU AVAILABLE 1:45? MR. JONES: I BELIEVE SO, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS LOPEZ, THE LAWYERS STILL HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS. I'M GOING TO TRY TO CONCLUDE THIS HEARING TODAY. I AM GOING TO ORDER YOU TO COME BACK THIS AFTERNOON AT 1:45. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE ORDER, MA'AM? THE WITNESS: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. THE COURT: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, WOULD YOU ORDER MISS VILLAPANDO TO RETURN AT -- THE COURT: SHE'S OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM. MR. DARDEN: HER ATTORNEY IS PRESENT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, ARE YOU HERE ON BEHALF OF MISS VILLAPANDO AND KMEX? MR. BARAY: RIGHT HERE, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ARE YOU HERE ON BEHALF OF KMEX AND MISS VILLAPANDO? MR. BARAY: YES. THE COURT: DO YOU ACCEPT THE COURT'S ORDER DIRECTING HER TO RETURN AT 1:45 -- MR. BARAY: WE WILL. THE COURT: -- ON HER BEHALF? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNSEL. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS. (AT 11:45 A.M., THE NOON RECESS WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:45 P.M. OF THE SAME DAY.) LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1995 2:06 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 COURT: ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MR. DARDEN, MISS LEWIS. MS. LEWIS: WE ARE EXPECTING MISS CLARK, YOUR HONOR. MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE HAVE A SECOND, YOUR HONOR? (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE PROCEED, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS LOPEZ, WOULD YOU COME FORWARD AGAIN, PLEASE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) ROSA LOPEZ, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE NOON RECESS, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS: THE COURT: MISS LOPEZ, WOULD YOU PLEASE RETAKE THE STAND. IF YOU WOULD JUST PULL THE MICROPHONE CLOSE TO YOU, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MISS LOPEZ. THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR. THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. DARDEN, YOU MAY RESUME YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION. MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. DARDEN: Q: MISS LOPEZ, ON THOSE OCCASIONS WHEN YOU VISITED EL SALVADOR, DID YOU WATCH TELEVISION? A: YES. Q: AND SO ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN EL SALVADOR YOU CAN PICK UP KTLA, CHANNEL 5, OUT OF LOS ANGELES? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT IS A QUANTUM LEAP BETWEEN WATCHING TELEVISION AND PICKING UP CHANNEL 5. THAT ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE, DOESN'T IT NOT? THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DON'T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT CHANNEL THEY WORK OVER THERE. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: OKAY. YOU DO RECALL THAT IN EL SALVADOR YOU CAN PICK UP LOS ANGELES TELEVISION STATIONS, CORRECT? A: I HAVEN'T SEEN IT FROM HERE. I HAVE SEEN THE STATIONS THAT ARE THERE. Q: OKAY. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH A NEWSPAPER CALLED THE LA PRINZA GRAPHICA? A: YES. Q: OKAY. THAT IS THE LARGEST DAILY CIRCULATED NEWSPAPER IN SAN SALVADOR, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: ARE YOU AWARE THAT THEY HAVE RUN NUMEROUS ARTICLES ABOUT YOU, INCLUDING YOUR PICTURE? A: YES. Q: YOU ARE WELL-KNOWN IN EL SALVADOR? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION, CONCLUSION. IT IS ALSO BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS PARTICULAR HEARING, I WOULD THINK. THE COURT: NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BUT REPHRASE THE QUESTION, MR. DARDEN. IT IS NOT BEYOND THE SCOPE, BUT WHY DON'T YOU REPHRASE IT. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN EL SALVADOR THAT YOU ARE WELL-KNOWN? A: WELL, I THINK THAT THEY DO ON MY RANCH, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY DO IN THE CAPITAL. Q: ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH T.V. STATIONS 2, 4, 6 AND 12 IN EL SALVADOR? A: IT IS THAT WHEN I GO OVER THERE I DON'T WATCH THAT MUCH T.V. I'M ALREADY BORED OF WATCHING T.V. HERE. Q: ARE YOU AWARE THAT THEY ARE WATCHING YOU RIGHT NOW IN EL SALVADOR? MR. COCHRAN: HOW IS THAT RELEVANT, YOUR HONOR? THE QUESTION I THOUGHT WAS WHETHER SHE IS GOING TO EL SALVADOR, NOT WHETHER THEY ARE WATCHING T.V. DOWN THERE WHICH CALLS FOR SPECULATION, DOESN'T IT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. SHE HAS INDICATED ONE OF HER FEARS IS THAT SHE IS WELL-KNOWN HERE. MR. COCHRAN: YES. THE COURT: IF SHE IS WELL-KNOWN THERE, THEN SEE MAY HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM THERE. MR. COCHRAN: I WON'T ARGUE. YOU WILL LET ME ADDRESS THIS AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: ABSOLUTELY. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: MR. DARDEN. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE REPORTERS AT THOSE T.V. STATIONS IN SAN SALVADOR ARE WATCHING YOU TESTIFY HERE? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. THE COURT: IT DOES. MR. COCHRAN: HOW WOULD SHE KNOW THAT? MR. DARDEN: WAS THAT SUSTAINED? THE COURT: YES, IT DOES ASSUME A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ARE YOU AWARE IN SAN SALVADOR YOU CAN GET CNN INTERNATIONAL? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, ALSO ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. SHE SAYS SHE IS GOING TO EL SALVADOR. WE ARE NOW TALKING ABOUT SAN SALVADOR. THE COURT: SAN SALVADOR IS THE CAPITAL. MR. COCHRAN: WHO SAID SHE IS GOING THERE? NO EVIDENCE. ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. THERE IS MORE THAN ONE CITY I THINK IN EL SALVADOR. THE COURT: FOUNDATIONAL OBJECTION? MR. COCHRAN: YES. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, WHEN THE PLANES LAND IN EL SALVADOR, IT WILL LAND IN THE CAPITAL, SAN SALVADOR; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: THANK YOU. NOW, ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN SAN SALVADOR THAT YOU CAN GET CNN INTERNATIONAL ON THE TELEVISION? MR. COCHRAN: STILL FOUNDATIONAL, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT? BUT YOUR SISTER HAS TOLD YOU THAT SHE HAS WATCHED NEWS REPORTS ABOUT YOU ON TELEVISION; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS HEARSAY. THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION IS HEARSAY. THE COURT: GOES TO HER STATE OF MIND. OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. COCHRAN: JUST A MOMENT. JUST A MOMENT. THE COURT: HOLD ON. I'M SUSTAINING THE OBJECTION THAT IT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE TO LAY A FOUNDATION FOR. I AM OVERRULING THE OBJECTION THAT IT IS HEARSAY. GOES TO STATE OF MIND. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU SPEAK TO YOUR SISTER DURING THE MONTH OF JANUARY? A: YES. Q: DID YOU DISCUSS THE NEWS COVERAGE OF YOU? A: NO, SIR. WE DON'T TALK ABOUT THOSE THINGS. Q: HAVE YOU TOLD YOUR SISTER WHY YOU ARE RETURNING TO EL SALVADOR? THE INTERPRETER: HAVE YOU TOLD YOUR SISTER? Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU TELL YOUR SISTER WHY YOU ARE RETURNING TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: DID YOU TELL HER THAT YOU WERE RETURNING TO AVOID HARASSMENT FROM THE PRESS? A: I TOLD HER THAT I WAS GOING TO GO MOVE MY SON TO ANOTHER GRAVE BECAUSE I NEEDED TO DO THAT THIS YEAR. Q: DID YOU TELL YOUR SISTER THAT YOU WERE RETURNING TO EL SALVADOR TO AVOID THE PRESS? A: NO. Q: YOU INDICATED THIS MORNING THAT YOU TOLD YOUR LAWYER MANY TIMES THAT YOU INTENDED TO RETURN TO EL SALVADOR, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: DO YOU RECALL WHEN THE FIRST TIME WAS THAT YOU TOLD HIM THIS? A: I DON'T REMEMBER. Q: WAS IT IN DECEMBER? A: I DON'T REMEMBER. Q: CAN YOU GIVE US AN APPROXIMATE? MR. COCHRAN: IF THE WITNESS SAYS I DON'T REMEMBER, YOUR HONOR, TWICE, I THINK THAT HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED. THE COURT: SHE HAS ALREADY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT SHE HAS TOLD THAT. WHY DON'T WE MOVE ON. MR. DARDEN: CAN I ASK IF SHE TOLD HIM IN 1994? THE COURT: SURE. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU TELL HIM THIS IN 1994 OR 1995? A: IN '95. Q: OKAY. ARE YOU AWARE THAT YOUR LAWYER, MR. JONES, APPEARED OR TELEVISION ON FEBRUARY 2ND AND STATED THAT YOU HAD NOT TOLD HIM THAT YOU INTENDED TO RETURN TO EL SALVADOR? MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THIS QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THIS QUESTION IS IMPROPER, ARE YOU AWARE THAT YOUR LAWYER APPEARED ON TELEVISION. IT IS HEARSAY. THE QUESTION IS VAGUE, UNINTELLIGIBLE, AMBIGUOUS AND ALSO HEARSAY. THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ARE YOU AWARE -- THE COURT: YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. ARE YOU AWARE YOUR ATTORNEY SAID THAT? MR. COCHRAN: ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: YES. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: HAD YOU TOLD HIM BY FEBRUARY 2ND, THAT IS, THAT YOU WERE LEAVING THE COUNTRY? A: NO, I HADN'T TOLD HIM. Q: WHEN DID YOU FIRST TELL HIM? A: I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN I TOLD HIM. Q: OKAY. WELL, YOU KNOW THAT YOU TOLD HIM SOMETIME AFTER FEBRUARY 2ND, CORRECT? A: IT IS THAT I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT DAY OR WHAT TIME I TOLD HIM. I DON'T REMEMBER. Q: YOU TOLD US THIS MORNING THAT YOU HAVE NEVER SPOKEN TO ANYONE FROM THE STAR; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: ARE YOU ACQUAINTED WITH TONY FROST? A: NO. Q: YOU HAVE NEVER MET TONY FROST? A: NO. MR. COCHRAN: TONY FROST? SHE MAY NOT KNOW A PERSON BY THAT NAME. MAYBE SHE TALKED TO HIM AND DOES NOT KNOW HIS NAME. THAT IS AN UNFAIR QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU HAD FOUR FACE-TO-FACE INTERVIEWS WITH TONY FROST OF THE STAR? A: I DON'T KNOW WHO TONY FROST IS. A LOT OF REPORTERS CAME TO MY JOB AND THEY WOULD ASK ME THINGS AND I WOULD SAY "I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING, I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING." Q: HOW MANY REPORTERS DISCUSSED PAYING YOU FOR YOUR STORY? A: (IN ENGLISH) I DON'T KNOW. (THROUGH THE INTERPRETER) I DON'T KNOW. NOBODY HAS TOLD ME THAT I'M GOING TO GET PAID. Q: OKAY. WELL, DID ANYONE DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY WITH YOU THAT YOU WOULD GET PAID FOR TELLING YOUR STORY? A: NO. Q: WHERE DID YOU GO WHEN WE BROKE FOR LUNCH? A: TO THE CAFETERIA. Q: WHO DID YOU GO THERE WITH? A: WITH PATTY. Q: DO YOU SEE PATTY HERE IN THE COURTROOM NOW? A: NO. Q: AND -- A: I DON'T SEE HIM. Q: DOES PATTY HAVE A LAST NAME? A: MECHANIC. Q: DID YOU MEET ANYONE ELSE IN THE CAFETERIA? A: THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE THERE. Q: OKAY. WHO DID YOU SPEAK WITH IN THE CAFETERIA? MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT. THIS IS IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DIDN'T SPEAK WITH ANYBODY. EVERYBODY SPEAKS AMONG THEMSELVES. I DIDN'T. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU DIDN'T SPEAK TO MR. COCHRAN IN THE CAFETERIA? A: YES, HE ALSO COMES TO CHAT WITH HIM. Q: OKAY. WELL, DIDN'T YOU HAVE A HEATED CONVERSATION WITH MR. COCHRAN IN THE CAFETERIA? MR. COCHRAN: HEATED? HEATED? I OBJECT TO THAT. THAT ABSOLUTELY DIDN'T HAPPEN AND I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION AS ARGUMENTATIVE. I NEVER HAD A HEATED CONVERSATION. THAT IS ARGUMENTATIVE. MR. DARDEN: MR. COCHRAN CAN TESTIFY LATER IF HE LIKES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU REPHRASE THE QUESTION. CONVERSATION FIRST AND THEN DESCRIBE THE TENOR AND DEMEANOR OF THE CONVERSATION. MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: OKAY. WHEN YOU SPOKE TO MR. COCHRAN IN THE CAFETERIA DID HE APPEAR UPSET AT ALL? A: NO. Q: DID HE RAISE HIS VOICE? A: NO. Q: DID HE TELL YOU THAT YOU WERE MESSING UP ON THE WITNESS STAND? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT IS ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS. MAY WE APPROACH THE BENCH? MAY WE APPROACH THE BENCH, YOUR HONOR, ON THIS? MAY WE APPROACH THE BENCH? THE COURT: I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO. I THINK HE IS ENTITLED TO ASK THAT QUESTION. MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE PRESENT WHO ARE HERE. THE COURT: IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TRUE. MR. COCHRAN: IT IS NOT TRUE. THE COURT: MR. DARDEN. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WAS MR. COCHRAN ANIMATED AT ALL DURING THE CONVERSATION THAT YOU HAD WITH HIM? THE COURT: REMEMBER WE ARE USING AN INTERPRETER. THE WITNESS: NO. THE COURT: MADAM INTERPRETER, HOW IS "ANIMATED" TRANSLATED IN SPANISH? THE INTERPRETER: NOT VERY CLEARLY, YOUR HONOR. MR. DARDEN: SINCE I DON'T SPEAK SPANISH, YOUR HONOR -- THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. USING AN INTERPRETER WITH A WITNESS IS AN ART. MR. DARDEN: THE "ART" WORD AGAIN, HUM? MS. CLARK: OH, NO, NOT THAT ONE. THE COURT: I'M JUST FAMILIAR, THAT PARTICULAR VERB IN SPANISH IS VERY DIFFICULT -- NEVER MIND. FORGET I MENTIONED IT. PROCEED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID MR. COCHRAN TELL YOU WHAT TO SAY ON THE WITNESS STAND? A: NO. Q: OKAY. HOW ABOUT MR. MC KENNA, DID HE TELL YOU WHAT TO SAY ON THE WITNESS STAND? A: NO, SIR. Q: DID YOU DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH MR. MC KENNA? A: NO. Q: DID YOU TELL HIM WHAT HAPPENED HERE IN COURT THIS MORNING? A: NO. Q: DID MR. MC KENNA TELL YOU NOT TO TELL US THAT YOU SPOKE TO HIM DURING THE LUNCH HOUR? A: NO, SIR. HE HASN'T MENTIONED YOU. Q: NOT ME, OKAY? THE INTERPRETER: YOU ALL. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT. IS THAT A QUESTION? Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID HE TELL YOU NOT TO TELL US THAT YOU TALKED TO HIM ABOUT YOUR TESTIMONY? MR. COCHRAN: THAT HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED. IT IS VAGUE. WHO IS "US"? THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NO. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: BY THE WAY, YOU UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING I'M SAYING TO YOU IN ENGLISH, DON'T YOU? A: I'M NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO YOU BECAUSE I HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THE LADY HERE SO THAT I CAN UNDERSTAND. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHEN YOU SPOKE TO MR. COCHRAN THIS MORNING, DID YOU SPEAK TO HIM IN ENGLISH? A: NO. Q: YOU WEREN'T SITTING BACK THERE ON THAT BACK BENCH SPEAKING TO MR. COCHRAN IN ENGLISH? A: YES. Q: SO YOU DID SPEAK TO MR. COCHRAN IN ENGLISH, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: AT WHAT POINT IN TIME, YOUR HONOR? THE QUESTION IS VAGUE BECAUSE I SPOKE TO HER SEVERAL TIMES. THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU REPHRASE THE QUESTION. I THOUGHT IT WAS THIS MORNING, THOUGH, ON THE BACK BENCH. I THOUGHT THAT WAS PRETTY SPECIFIC. MR. COCHRAN: I HAVE TALKED TO HER MORE THAN ONE TIME. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DIDN'T YOU SPEAK TO MR. COCHRAN IN ENGLISH THIS MORNING WHILE THE TWO OF YOU SAT ON THAT BACK BENCH HERE IN THIS COURTROOM? A: WE DID TALK, YES. Q: AND IN FACT YOU DO SPEAK ENGLISH? A: I SAY I DON'T BECAUSE I DON'T SPEAK IT WELL. Q: OKAY. WELL, WHEN YOU SPOKE TO THE SALINGERS, YOU SPOKE TO THEM IN ENGLISH, CORRECT? A: WE WOULD FIGHT BECAUSE THEY WOULD TELL ME TO SPEAK IN ENGLISH AND I WOULD SAY NO. Q: WELL, HAVE YOU FOUND -- WELL, STRIKE THAT. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID THEY SPEAK TO YOU IN ENGLISH? A: SHE DID; HE DIDN'T. Q: AND YOU UNDERSTOOD THEM? A: SOMETIMES I DIDN'T AND I WOULD ASK THE MAN BECAUSE I WOULDN'T UNDERSTAND HER. Q: WHEN YOU SPOKE TO MR. COCHRAN DURING THE LUNCH HOUR WAS HE FURIOUS AT ALL? A: NO. Q: YOU HAVE WATCHED SOME OF THESE PROCEEDINGS ON COURT T.V.; IS THAT CORRECT? A: WHEN I HAVE TIME. Q: OKAY. AND DO THEY BROADCAST, THAT IS COURT T.V., IN SPANISH? A: I ALMOST DON'T WATCH IT IN SPANISH, BUT SOMETIMES I LIKE TO. Q: OKAY. SO THEY DO BROADCAST IN SPANISH; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. DID YOU WATCH THE PRELIMINARY HEARING ON COURT T.V.? A: NOT ALL THE TIME BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE THE TIME. Q: OKAY. BUT YOU WATCHED SOME OF THE PRELIMINARY HEARING ON COURT T.V.? A: A LITTLE BIT. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: IN ENGLISH OR IN SPANISH? A: IN SPANISH. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WAS THAT ON COURT T.V.? A: NO, CHANNEL 34. Q: OKAY. SO WHEN YOU WATCH THESE PROCEEDINGS ON TELEVISION IN ENGLISH, YOU WATCHED COURT T.V., CORRECT? A: WHEN I WAS AT WORK, YES, BECAUSE I WOULD GET CABLE. Q: THE FEE OR PAY AGREEMENT YOU HAVE WITH YOUR LAWYER, IS IT IN WRITING? A: NO. MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MR. DARDEN: IN THE AFFIDAVIT YOU SIGNED ON FEBRUARY 17, 1995, YOU INDICATED AT LINE 20 AND 21 THAT YOU WERE FORCED TO QUIT YOUR JOB; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: BUT NO ONE FORCED YOU TO QUIT YOUR JOB, DID THEY? A: THE LADY DIDN'T TELL ME SO DIRECTLY, BUT SHE DIDN'T WANT ME ANY MORE. Q: DIDN'T MRS. SALINGER TELL YOU THAT YOU WERE WELCOME TO STAY? A: NO, SIR. Q: DIDN'T SHE TELL YOU THAT SHE WOULD -- STRIKE THAT. DIDN'T SHE TELL YOU THAT YOU WERE A GOOD EMPLOYEE? A: NO, SIR. Q: SHE TOLD YOU THAT SHE WAS GOING TO FIRE YOU? A: SHE TOLD ME THIS WAY -- DO YOU WANT ME TO EXPLAIN IT TO YOU? Q: GO RIGHT AHEAD. A: SHE SAID TO ME, "IF YOU DON'T COME BACK IN A WEEK I WILL LOOK FOR A HOUSEKEEPER AND IF YOU WANT REFERENCES, I WILL GIVE THEM TO YOU." THEN SHE WAS FIRING ME, RIGHT? Q: MRS. SALINGER TOLD YOU THAT IF YOU CAME BACK IN A WEEK YOU COULD HAVE YOUR JOB BACK? A: YES. Q: AND SHE TOLD YOU THAT SHE WOULD GIVE YOU REFERENCES FOR A NEW JOB? A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) Q: IF YOU WANTED THEM? A: YES. Q: WELL, ISN'T IT TRUE, MISS LOPEZ, THAT YOU QUIT YOUR JOB? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: YES, BECAUSE THE TELEVISION CAMERAS WOULD NOT LEAVE US ALONE EVERYDAY AND THE LADY WAS ALREADY FED UP. SHE DIDN'T LIKE IT. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: OKAY. WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THESE TELEVISION CAMERAS. DID THESE TELEVISION CAMERAS WALK UP -- RATHER, DID THE CAMERA REPORTERS WALK UP TO THE FRONT DOOR AND KNOCK AT THE DOOR? A: THEY WOULD COME TO THE DOOR AND THEY WOULD GO INSIDE IF I ALLOWED THEM TO. Q: BUT ONLY IF YOU ALLOWED THEM TO, CORRECT? A: BECAUSE I WOULD CLOSE THE DOOR. THEY WOULD COME WITH THEIR CAMERAS TO THE FRONT. CHANNEL 34 FOLLOWED ME ALL THE WAY TO THE DOOR UNTIL I CLOSED IT. Q: OKAY. WHEN WAS THAT? A: THE DAY AFTER MY PICTURE CAME OUT ON T.V. Q: OKAY. THAT WOULD BE JANUARY 26TH? A: I THINK. I DON'T KNOW WHAT DATE IT WAS. Q: OKAY. IS THERE A FENCE AROUND THE PROPERTY? A: BUT THEY KEEP THE GATE OPENED. Q: OKAY. SO THE GATE CAN CLOSE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. THE GATE CAN BE LOCKED, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND IF YOU LOCK THE GATE, THEN THE REPORTERS CAN'T COME ONTO THE PROPERTY, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: BUT YOU DIDN'T BOTHER TO LOCK THE GATE, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: JUST A MOMENT. I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. IT IS NOT HER HOUSE. IT IS THE SALINGER'S HOUSE. THE COURT: THE WEIGHT OF THE ANSWER IS FOR ME TO DETERMINE. THAT HAS ALREADY OCCURRED TO ME. MR. COCHRAN: I WANTED TO REMIND YOU, JUDGE. THE COURT: I SAW THE HOUSE AND I HAVE SEEN THE FENCE AND THE GATE. MR. COCHRAN: HE SHOULDN'T ASK THESE QUESTIONS. MR. DARDEN: THE GATE WAS LOCKED WHEN WE WERE THERE, COUNSEL. THE COURT: THE SECOND TIME, YES. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: BUT YOU DIDN'T BOTHER TO LOCK THE GATE, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. MR. DARDEN: CAN SHE ANSWER THE QUESTION YES OR NO, PLEASE? THE WITNESS: THE GATE ISN'T MINE AND THE LADY DOESN'T LIKE ME TO LOCK IT. THE COURT: THE ANSWER WILL STAND. COUNSEL, WHETHER OR NOT THE GATE OPENS OR CLOSES IS NOT REAL IMPORTANT TO THE DECISION THAT I HAVE TO MAKE. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU TOLD US THAT YOU FLEW INTO LAX AT 1:30 THIS MORNING; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. MR. DARDEN: DID WE STIPULATE TO THE NAME OF THE AIRLINE ON THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: YES, WE DID. THE WITNESS: 1:20. I DON'T KNOW THE TIME EXACTLY. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, WE CHECKED WITH THIS AIRLINE AND THEY INDICATED THAT THEIR LAST FLIGHT ARRIVED AT 11:30 AND THAT THE CREWS ALL LEFT BY 12:30, SO PERHAPS WE SHOULD GET SOME CONFIRMATION FROM THE WITNESS AS TO WHAT THE NAME OF THE AIRLINE IS, AS OPPOSED TO THE STIPULATION WE HAVE ENTERED INTO ALREADY. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE CAN DO THAT AT THE SIDE BAR BECAUSE APPARENTLY THEY WERE MET BY SOMEBODY. WHY DON'T YOU FIND OUT. GIVE ME THE FLIGHT NUMBER, ET CETERA, SO WE CAN CONFIRM THAT. WHY DON'T YOU MOVE ON, MR. DARDEN. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? I AM ALMOST DONE. THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD LIKE TO INQUIRE OF THE WITNESS FURTHER REGARDING THE FEE ARRANGEMENT SHE HAS WITH MR. JONES AND I WOULD LIKE TO CONFER WITH MR. JONES BEFORE I PROCEED, IF I MAY. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT IN MC KENNA IS HERE AS WELL. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN MR. DARDEN AND MR. JONES.) MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I KNOW WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. MAY WE APPROACH? THE COURT: LET MR. DARDEN FINISH HIS CONVERSATION WITH MR. JONES. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, DEFENSE COUNSEL AND MR. JONES.) MR. COCHRAN: I THINK WE SHOULD APPROACH. THE COURT: LET'S TAKE ONE THING AT A TIME. (BRIEF PAUSE.) (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, MAY I APPROACH WITH THE NAME OF THE AIRLINE JUST GIVEN TO ME BY MR. COCHRAN ON A PIECE OF PAPER? THE COURT: YES. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, IS THIS THE NAME OF THE AIRLINE YOU FLEW IN ON? A: YEAH. Q: YOU DID NOT FLY IN ON SOUTHWEST AIRLINES? A: NO. Q: OKAY. YOU CAME FROM OUT OF STATE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND YOU CAME AT THE REQUEST OF SOMEONE, CORRECT? A: BECAUSE I FELT A DUTY TO -- MR. DARDEN: CAN WE HAVE A YES OR NO ANSWER, YOUR HONOR? THE WITNESS: -- TO COME TO TESTIFY TODAY. MR. DARDEN: MOTION TO STRIKE, YOUR HONOR. NONRESPONSIVE. THE COURT: IT WILL STAND. MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS NOT NONRESPONSIVE, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: SOMEONE ASKED YOU TO COME HERE TODAY AND TESTIFY, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: WHO ASKED YOU TO DO THAT? A: MR. JONES. Q: OKAY. AND YOU SAY YOU DID THAT OUT OF A DUTY YOU BELIEVE YOU HAVE; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, JUST A MOMENT. I THINK SHE SAID MR. JOHNNIE. THE COURT: THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT I HEARD. MR. COCHRAN: SHE SAID MR. JOHNNIE. THE COURT: LET'S CLARIFY WITH THE INTERPRETER. THE INTERPRETER: JOHNNIE, SORRY. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: THE GENTLEMAN SEATED RIGHT HERE, (INDICATING)? A: (IN ENGLISH) YES. Q: THIS ONE? A: (IN ENGLISH) YES. Q: MR. DOUGLAS? A: (IN ENGLISH) YES. MR. DARDEN: FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR -- I HOPE WE HAVE AN I.D. ISSUE IN THIS CASE. THE COURT: GREAT STRAIGHT LINE. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT DID MR. DOUGLAS SAY TO YOU WHEN HE ASKED YOU TO RETURN? A: I FIRST TALKED TO MY LAWYER AND I TOLD MY LAWYER THAT I WAS AWAY AND HE SAID TO ME "YOU HAVE TO COME BECAUSE WE NEED YOU TOMORROW." I SAID TO HIM, "DON'T WORRY, I WILL BE THERE." Q: WHAT IF YOUR ATTORNEY TELLS YOU -- MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. WHAT IS THIS, LIKE MAKE BELIEVE? THAT IS AN IMPROPER QUESTION. THE COURT: I HAVEN'T HEARD THE QUESTION YET. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: SO WHEN YOUR ATTORNEY ASKED YOU TO COME, YOU JUST CAME; IS THAT CORRECT? A: (IN ENGLISH) YES. Q: OUT OF A SENSE OF DUTY? A: (IN ENGLISH) YES. Q: OKAY. AND DO YOU STILL FEEL A DUTY TO TESTIFY IN THIS CASE? A: YES. Q: AND IF CALLED AGAIN TO COME AND TESTIFY, WILL YOU COME AND TESTIFY? A: NO, I WON'T COME ANY MORE. Q: OKAY. SO YOU FEEL YOU NO LONGER HAVE ANY DUTY TO COME AND TESTIFY, CORRECT? A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) MR. COCHRAN: ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: (IN ENGLISH) I DON'T KNOW. (THROUGH THE INTERPRETER) I DON'T KNOW. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU EVER DISCUSS RECEIVING MONEY FROM -- FOR YOUR STORY WITH ANYONE? A: NO, SIR. Q: NO ONE OFFERED YOU $5,000? A: NO, SIR. Q: YOU NEVER ASKED ANYONE FOR $5,000? A: NO. Q: YOU ARE ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS BEFORE THE INTERPRETER CAN INTERPRET? MR. COCHRAN: IS THAT A QUESTION? THE COURT: MR. DARDEN, WHETHER OR NOT SHE UNDERSTANDS OR DOESN'T UNDERSTAND ENGLISH, I TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT SHE HAS BEEN IN THIS COUNTRY FOR OVER TWENTY YEARS. MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THAT IS ALL I HAVE NOR NOW, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, ANY REDIRECT? MR. COCHRAN: YES, YOUR HONOR, I DO. THANK YOU VERY KINDLY. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: GOOD AFTERNOON, MISS LOPEZ. A: GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR. Q: AND WHAT DO YOU REFER TO ME AS? A: HOW DO WHAT? Q: WHAT DO YOU CALL ME? A: JOHNNIE. Q: OKAY. YES. AND IN THAT CONNECTION WAS THERE -- WHEN DID YOU LEAVE LOS ANGELES TO GO TO THIS OTHER STATE? A: WHEN DID I LEAVE? Q: YES, TO GO TO THE OTHER STATE? A: I LEFT WEDNESDAY MORNING. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND DID YOU TALK TO YOUR LAWYER BEFORE YOU LEFT TO GO TO THIS OTHER STATE? A: NO, I DIDN'T CALL HIM. Q: AND SO THE RECORD IS CLEAR, WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT YOUR LAWYER, I'M REFERRING TO MR. CARL JONES. ALL RIGHT? A: YES. Q: AND BEFORE YOU LEFT ON WEDNESDAY MR. JONES HAD ADVISED YOU YOU HAD TO BE IN COURT TODAY ON FRIDAY; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, THAT IS LEADING. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: (IN ENGLISH) YES. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND YESTERDAY DID YOU MAKE A CALL TO MR. JONES AND TELL HIM WHERE YOU WERE? A: YES. Q: AND AFTER YOU TALKED TO MR. JONES DID YOU HAVE OCCASION TO TALK TO MY LAW OFFICE ABOUT WHERE YOU WERE? A: YES. Q: AND THEREAFTER WERE RESERVATIONS MADE FOR YOU TO FLY BACK TO LOS ANGELES IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS SO YOU COULD BE HERE THIS MORNING? A: YES. Q: AND IN THAT CONNECTION THE FLIGHT THAT YOU CAME ON ARRIVED ABOUT 1:25 OR 1:30 IN THE MORNING? A: YES. Q: AND YOU WERE PICKED UP AT THE AIRPORT BY THE GENTLEMAN WHO WAS IN HERE THAT YOU CALL PATTY, OVER IN THE CORNER, MR. MC KENNA? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT TIME DID YOU GO TO BED THIS MORNING? A: AT 2:15, 2:20. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHAT TIME DID YOU WAKE UP THIS MORNING? A: AT 5:00 IN THE MORNING. Q: AND WHAT TIME DID YOU ARRANGE TO MEET AT MY LAW OFFICE SOMETIME EARLY THIS MORNING? A: AT 6:00 IN THE MORNING, 7:30. Q: AND SO WHAT -- YOU ARRIVED IN LOS ANGELES AT 1:30, YOU WENT TO BED ABOUT -- SHORTLY AFTER 2:15; IS THAT RIGHT? A: YES. Q: YOU WERE UP BY 5:00? A: YES. Q: AND -- MR. DARDEN: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. MR. COCHRAN: I AM NOT CLEAR WHAT TIME IT WAS. MR. DARDEN: IS MR. MC KENNA STILL IN THIS COURTROOM? THE COURT: YES, HE IS. MR. MC KENNA WHY DON'T YOU STEP OUT. (MR. MC KENNA EXITS THE COURTROOM.) Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WHAT TIME DID YOU ARRIVE AT THE LAW OFFICE, IF YOU RECALL? A: I DIDN'T NOTICE. MR. DARDEN: AND IS IRMA IN THE COURTROOM AS WELL, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: YES, SHE IS. (POTENTIAL WITNESS EXITS THE COURTROOM.) THE COURT: MR. JONES WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE, TOO. PROCEED. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: AND YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH US THIS MORNING BEFORE COMING TO COURT; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, YES. Q: NOW, MISS LOPEZ, DO YOU PLAN TO RETURN TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: AND -- A: TOMORROW. Q: AND IN RESPONSE TO MR. DARDEN'S QUESTIONS THIS MORNING, THERE -- THE AGENCY THAT YOU DEAL WITH IS CALLED PAN AMERICANA TRAVEL SERVICE; IS THAT RIGHT, SYSTEM? A: YES. Q: AND I DID NOT HAVE LUNCH WITH YOU TODAY, DID I? A: NO, NO, SIR. Q: I CAME DOWN WHILE WAITING FOR THE CAR TO SPEAK TO YOU BRIEFLY AT LUNCHTIME? MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, MR. COCHRAN IS TESTIFYING. MR. COCHRAN: LET ME ASK YOU ANOTHER QUESTION. THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU SEE ME BRIEFLY AT LUNCH BEFORE I LEFT? MR. DARDEN: STILL LEADING. THE COURT: FOUNDATIONAL AT THIS POINT. MR. COCHRAN: FOUNDATIONAL. HE BROUGHT IT OUT. Q: DID WE EVER HAVE ANY KIND OF AN ARGUMENT AT ALL? A: NO. Q: DID WE TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU PLAN TO GO TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: DID YOU GIVE ME THE NAME OF YOUR TRAVEL AGENT? MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS ALL LEADING. ALL LEADING. MR. COCHRAN: LET ME ASK THIS -- THE COURT: IT IS. MR. COCHRAN: LET ME REPHRASE IT. THE COURT: PLEASE. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID WE HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE NAME OF YOUR TRAVEL AGENT? A: YES. Q: WHILE I WAS THERE WAS A PHONE CALL MADE TO THE TRAVEL AGENT TO TRY TO REACH HER? MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS LEADING. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. COCHRAN: I'M ASKING WHETHER THERE WAS A PHONE CALL MADE TO THE TRAVEL AGENT. IT IS NOT LEADING. THE COURT: COUNSEL, WHETHER OR NOT IT IS LEADING OR NOT AT THIS POINT, LET'S GET TO THE POINT. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. Q: WAS THE PHONE CALL MADE TO THE TRAVEL AGENT? A: YES. Q: AND IS HER NAME ZULEMA IIDA? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THIS WITNESS HAS ANY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE. THE COURT: THAT'S CORRECT. THIS IS INCREDIBLY LEADING, MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: YES, ABSOLUTELY. MR. DARDEN: THERE IS A MOTION -- MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, IF I COULD JUST -- I AM STILL ASKING THESE QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR. THERE IS AN OFFER OF PROOF. MAY I CONTINUE? THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU ARE GOING. MR. DARDEN: OFFER OF PROOF. THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE GOING WITH THIS SO WE HAVE ESTABLISHED WHO THE TRAVEL AGENT IS. LET'S PROCEED. MR. COCHRAN: I WAS TRYING -- IF I COULD ESTABLISH IT. MAY I DO THAT? THE COURT: I THOUGHT SHE SAID THAT WAS WHO IT WAS. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ZULEMA IIDA, I-I-D-A, IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND WERE ARRANGEMENTS MADE FOR MS. ZULEMA IIDA TO COME TO COURT THIS AFTERNOON? MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS ALL LEADING? THE WITNESS: YES. MR. DARDEN: ALL HEARSAY. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU SEE -- MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, THERE IS AN OBJECTION, LEADING AND HEARSAY AND MOTION TO STRIKE. THE COURT: OVERRULED AT THIS POINT. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU SEE MISS ZULEMA IIDA OUT IN THE HALLWAY? THE COURT: COUNSEL, I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU SOMETHING. THE ISSUE IS, IS THIS PERSON LEAVING? IS THERE A BONA FIDE REASON FOR THAT PERSON TO LEAVE? NOBODY HAS BOTHERED TO DISCUSS ON PAGE 1 OF HER AFFIDAVIT ON PARAGRAPH 7, LINE 23, IT SAYS, "I HAVE FEAR FOR MY PERSONAL SAFETY AS WELL AS THE SAFETY OF MY FAMILY IF I REMAIN IN THIS COUNTRY." NOBODY HAS BOTHERED TO ASK THAT QUESTION. THAT SEEMS TO ME TO BE A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. WHETHER OR NOT SHE HAS GOT A TRAVEL AGENT OR WHETHER OR NOT THAT TRAVEL AGENT IS GOING TO COME HERE IS NOT REAL INTERESTING TO ME. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, THE WITNESS HAS INDICATED ALREADY THAT SHE WANTS TO LEAVE BECAUSE HALF HARASSMENT FROM THE PRESS. THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND. MR. DARDEN: SHE GAVE NO OTHER REASON. I THINK THAT EXCLUDES -- THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND. MR. COCHRAN: IF THE COURT WOULD ALLOW ME ONE MOMENT. I APPRECIATE THE COURT'S UNDERSTANDING AND ANTICIPATING WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO. THE REASON WHY THE TRAVEL AGENT IS HERE, IT BEARS UPON QUESTIONS ASKED BY MR. DARDEN, YOUR HONOR, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS LADY HAS MADE SOME RESERVATIONS TO TO GO TO EL SALVADOR THIS MONTH AND I EXPECT TO INTRODUCE AS TESTIMONY, SO -- THE COURT: LET'S PROCEED. MR. COCHRAN: -- IF THE COURT WOULD ALLOW ME, I THINK THE COURT WILL UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO GET AT. THE COURT: LET'S PROCEED. MR. COCHRAN: MAY I APPROACH? THE COURT: YES. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: IT IS AN AWFUL LONG HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A HEARING. MR. COCHRAN: I THINK SO, YOUR HONOR, BUT THEY TOOK UP TWO-THIRDS OF THE HEARING, YOUR HONOR. I WILL POINT THAT OUT. MR. DARDEN: WELL, SHE MADE A MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION ON THE WITNESS STAND. THE COURT: MR. DARDEN, THANK YOU. LET'S PROCEED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE DECLARATION THAT YOU SIGNED ON FEBRUARY 17, 1995, DO YOU REMEMBER THAT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND WAS THIS DECLARATION READ TO YOU IN SPANISH BEFORE YOU SIGNED IT? A: YES. Q: AND WHO READ THIS DECLARATION TO YOU BEFORE YOU SIGNED IT? A: IRMA. Q: IS THAT THE LADY WHO LEFT A FEW MOMENTS AGO? A: YES. Q: AND YOU ARE AWARE THAT IRMA SPEAKS SPANISH; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: ARE THE FACTS CONTAINED IN THIS DECLARATION TRUE AND CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AT THE TIME THIS DECLARATION WAS PREPARED WAS YOUR LAWYER, MR. CARL JONES, PRESENT? A: YES. Q: I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A QUESTION OR TWO ABOUT THE DECLARATION IF I MIGHT. A: YES. Q: IN PARAGRAPH 7 I WANT YOU TO READ THIS, FIRST OF ALL, TO YOURSELF AND THEN I WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT IT. A: YOU READ TO IT ME, PLEASE. MR. DARDEN: I'M GOING TO OBJECT TO HAVING THE WITNESS READ THE DECLARATION BEFORE COUNSEL POSES THE QUESTION. IS HE GIVING TO IT HER TO REFRESH HER RECOLLECTION? MR. COCHRAN: IT IS A DECLARATION AND THE DECLARATION SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. THE COURT: YES, IT IS HER DECLARATION. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN YOU READ IT TO YOURSELF? A: I CAN'T SEE BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE MY GLASSES. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. MAY I READ TO IT HER, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: YES. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IN PARAGRAPH 7 YOU INDICATE: "I HAVE A FEAR FOR MY PERSONAL SAFETY, AS WELL AS THE SAFETY OF MY FAMILY. IF I REMAIN IN THIS COUNTRY." I WANT -- A: IT'S TRUE. Q: IS THAT TRUE? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHY DO YOU HAVE A FEAR FOR YOUR PERSONAL SAFETY, AS WELL AS THE SAFETY OF YOUR FAMILY IF YOU REMAIN IN THIS COUNTRY? A: BECAUSE EVERYBODY ALREADY KNOWS ME. WHEREVER I GO PEOPLE LOOK AT ME AND POINT AT ME AND SAY, "SEE, THAT'S THE WOMAN THAT IS IN MR. SIMPSON'S CASE" AND I'M AFRAID. Q: YOU ARE AFRAID FOR YOUR PERSONAL SAFETY? A: YES. Q: WHEN YOU WENT DOWN TO -- WAS THERE A TIME YOU WENT DOWN TO THE UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE? A: YES. Q: AND SPOKE WITH AN UNEMPLOYMENT COUNSELOR? A: YES. Q: AND DID THIS UNEMPLOYMENT COUNSELOR SAY SOMETHING TO YOU? A: A SECURITY. Q: ALL RIGHT. THIS SECURITY PERSON, DID THAT PERSON RECOGNIZE YOU? A: YES. Q: WHAT DID THAT PERSON SAY TO YOU? A: IT WAS A BLACK GUY. HE SAID TO ME "YOU ARE MR. SIMPSON'S HOUSEKEEPER." I SAID "NO." Q: DID THAT CONCERN YOU ALSO? A: YES, VERY MUCH. I WON'T GO BACK THERE. Q: WHAT ABOUT THE SAFETY OF YOUR FAMILY? A: I AM VERY SCARED FOR MY CHILDREN, TOO. Q: HAVE YOUR -- HAS YOUR DAUGHTER OR YOUR SON EXPRESSED ANY CONCERNS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT YOU ARE RECOGNIZED EVERYWHERE? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, HEARSAY. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, YOUR HONOR, HOW WOULD WE GET AT THE SAFETY OF THE FAMILY FOR THIS HEARING? I'M TRYING TO ELICIT WHAT HER CONCERNS ARE. PART OF THE DECLARATION. THE COURT: CONCERNS ARE WHAT IS IN HER MIND. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, I'M ASKING WHAT -- I'M ASKING WHAT -- THE COURT: YOU ARE SAYING THAT THERE IS A STATE OF MIND EXCEPTION THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO GET TO? MR. COCHRAN: YES, THERE IS. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: BASED UPON YOUR CONVERSATION WITH YOUR CHILDREN, WHAT IS YOUR BELIEF REGARDING YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT THEIR SAFETY AND THE SAFETY OF YOUR GRANDCHILDREN? A: I'M VERY SCARED AND MY DAUGHTER IS ALSO VERY SCARED, UH-HUH. Q: HAS THAT BEEN ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT YOU HAVE HAD WITH YOUR DAUGHTER? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION. THAT IS LEADING. THE WITNESS: YES. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND WHAT HAS YOUR DAUGHTER SAID TO YOU ABOUT THAT? MR. DARDEN: HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: STATE OF MIND. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WHAT HAS YOUR DAUGHTER SAID TO YOU ABOUT THAT? A: THAT THEY COULD EVEN KILL HER OR STEAL HER CHILDREN FROM HER. Q: AND WHEN SHE SAID "THEY," DO YOU KNOW WHO SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT? A: YES. Q: WHO? A: THE PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE. Q: WHEN YOU TALKED TO YOUR DAUGHTER AND YOUR SON, IS THIS A MATTER THAT YOU ARE VERY SERIOUS ABOUT? A: YES. Q: WHEN YOU LEFT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ON WEDNESDAY, WHY DID YOU LEAVE? A: BECAUSE LIKE THAT, THEN THE CAMERA PEOPLE AND THE REPORTERS WON'T SEE ME ANY MORE AND I CAN TELL THEM THAT I AM NO LONGER THERE, THAT I AM GONE. Q: ARE YOU CONCERNED THAT YOU HAVE BECOME SO WELL-KNOWN THAT ANYBODY ON THE STREET -- MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, LEADING. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WHAT IS YOUR CONCERN ABOUT YOUR PICTURE BEING ON TELEVISION? A: THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS ME, THAT WHEREVER I GO, WHETHER IT IS TO THE LAUNDRY, EVERYBODY LOOK AT ME. THEY ARE POINTING AT ME AND THEY ARE ASKING ME ABOUT O.J.'S CASE. Q: NOW, CONTINUING ON WITH THE DECLARATION, YOU SAY: "I WANT TO TESTIFY TRUTHFULLY, BUT I CANNOT STAND THE STRESS"; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: "I AM A PRISONER TRAPPED IN MY OWN HOME. I CANNOT GO OUTSIDE." A: (IN ENGLISH) IT'S TRUE. Q: "I CANNOT VISIT MY RELATIVES IN LOS ANGELES FOR FEAR THAT THEY, TOO, WILL BE HARASSED." MR. DARDEN: IS THIS A QUESTION, YOUR HONOR? THIS IS LEADING. THE COURT: IS THERE A QUESTION? MR. COCHRAN: YES, THERE IS A QUESTION, IF YOU DON'T MIND. THE WITNESS: YES. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THE QUESTION IS, IS THAT TRUE? MR. DARDEN: IT IS LEADING. THE COURT: WELL, COUNSEL, I HAVE ALREADY READ THE DECLARATION. I KNOW WHAT IT SAYS. MR. COCHRAN: SHE SAID SHE COULDN'T READ IT, YOUR HONOR. THAT IS THE REASON I WAS DOING IT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER, DO YOU KNOW ANYBODY BY THE NAME OF TONY FROST? A: NO. THE COURT: I THOUGHT HE WAS WITH THE STAR. MR. COCHRAN: THEY ARE ALL THE SAME. Q: BY THE STAR, DO YOU KNOW ANYBODY BY THE NAME OF TONY FROST? A: NO. Q: THAT YOU CAN IDENTIFY? A: NO. Q: NOW, PRESENTLY -- YOU HAVE NO SOURCE OF INCOME PRESENTLY; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. DARDEN: THIS IS LEADING, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. ACTUALLY, NO. THE WITNESS: NO. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. I FORGOT HE WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE FOR A MOMENT THERE. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION. MR. COCHRAN: CERTAINLY, YOUR HONOR. Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY SOURCE OF INCOME PRESENTLY? MR. DARDEN: ALSO IRRELEVANT, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: NO. OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NO. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: HAS ANYBODY OFFERED YOU $5,000 OR ONE DOLLAR FOR YOUR TESTIMONY IN THIS CASE? A: NO. Q: DO YOU WANT ANY MONEY FOR TESTIFYING? A: NO, SIR. Q: DO YOU WANT ANY MONEY TO BE BROUGHT DOWN HERE AND HARASSED? A: NO. Q: DO YOU WANT TO BE LEFT ALONE? A: YES. Q: WHEN YOU FINISH COURT TODAY ARE YOU GOING BACK TO THIS OTHER STATE? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND DO YOU STILL PLAN TO LEAVE TO GO TO EL SALVADOR TOMORROW? A: YES, SIR. Q: NOW, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS BY THE OTHER LADY FROM CHANNEL 34. DO YOU RECALL THAT? A: YES. Q: I WANT TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. HOW LONG DID THE CONVERSATION LAST BETWEEN YOU AND THE LADY FROM CHANNEL 34 ON LAST FRIDAY, THE 17TH? A: ABOUT 25 MINUTES OR 30, I THINK. Q: AT ANY TIME DURING THAT CONVERSATION DID YOU EVER TELL HER THAT YOUR LAWYER HAD SUGGESTED THAT YOU SHOULD -- THAT YOU CAN GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR? A: NO. I TOLD HER -- I ASKED MY LAWYER IF I COULD LEAVE AND HE SAID YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, IN THE COURSE OF THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE LADY FROM CHANNEL 34 DID SHE EVER MENTION THE SUBJECT OF LAWYERS? A: SHE SAID TO ME THAT ALL OF YOU WERE NOT HELPING ME, THAT YOU WERE USING ME, THAT WHY DIDN'T I CALL MR. JOHN, THAT THEY COULD GIVE ME A LAWYER FROM THE STATION WHO SPOKE MY LANGUAGE AND TO HELP ME. Q: AND WHEN SHE ASKED AND MADE THIS OFFER OF A LAWYER FROM THE STATION, WHAT DID YOU SAY, IF ANYTHING? A: I SAID NO, THAT I HAD -- THAT I WAS GOING TO CALL MY LAWYER. Q: AND DID YOU CALL YOUR LAWYER AFTER THAT? A: YES. Q: AND YOU NEVER APPEARED ON CAMERA WITH THIS LADY, DID YOU? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, LEADING. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, WHO IS TRYING THE CASE? IS THIS -- MR. DARDEN: WE BOTH ARE, YOUR HONOR. MS. CLARK: RIGHT. THE COURT: ONE LAWYER AT A TIME, THOUGH. MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS OKAY. I CAN HANDLE BOTH OF THEM, THAT'S ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN: I'M SURE YOU CAN, MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, WITH REGARD TO -- WELL, STRIKE THAT. Q: DID YOU EVER TELL THIS LADY, THE REPORTER, THAT YOU FELT ABANDONED BY THE DEFENSE LAWYERS BECAUSE THEY HADN'T CONTACTED YOU? A: NO. Q: AND DID THIS LADY SUGGEST THAT YOU CALL YOUR LAWYERS OR DID YOU CALL YOUR LAWYERS ON YOUR OWN? A: I CALLED THEM. Q: NOW, IN RESPONSE TO A COUPLE OF MR. DARDEN'S QUESTIONS, IN THE LAST -- IN 1994, IF YOU RECALL, HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR, IF YOU WENT BACK TO EL SALVADOR? A: I WENT IN DECEMBER. Q: AND WHEN YOU WENT IN DECEMBER, DID YOU USE A PARTICULAR TRAVEL AGENT? A: YES. Q: AND WHICH TRAVEL AGENT WAS THAT? A: PAN AMERICANA. Q: IS THAT THE ONE ON SAN FERNANDO ROAD THAT YOU TOLD MR. DARDEN ABOUT? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT TRAVEL AGENT DID YOU USE AT THAT TIME? A: THAT SAME GIRL. Q: ZULEMA? A: YES. Q: NOW, IF YOU RECALL, DID YOU MAKE SOME RESERVATIONS TO GO TO EL SALVADOR EARLIER THIS MONTH, THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY? MR. DARDEN: IT IS LEADING, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: YES. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND DID YOU MAKE RESERVATIONS ON A ONE-WAY TICKET? A: I DON'T REMEMBER. Q: ALL RIGHT. BUT YOU WEREN'T ABLE TO USE THOSE RESERVATIONS, WERE YOU? A: NO. Q: AND WHY WEREN'T YOU ABLE TO USE THEM? A: BECAUSE MY DAUGHTER NEEDED ME. Q: SHE WAS OUT OF TOWN PART OF THE TIME? A: SHE WAS WORKING IN NEW YORK. Q: WHEN DID YOUR DAUGHTER RETURN BACK TO THE LOS ANGELES AREA AFTER WORKING IN NEW YORK? A: SHE CAME ON TUESDAY NIGHT. Q: AND WHEN YOUR DAUGHTER WAS AWAY IN NEW YORK, WHO WAS LOOKING AFTER YOUR GRANDCHILDREN? A: I WAS. Q: AND ONCE YOUR DAUGHTER RETURNED FROM NEW YORK, DID YOUR DAUGHTER START LOOKING AFTER HER OWN CHILDREN? A: YES. Q: AND WHEN WAS IT THAT YOU LEFT TO GO TO THIS OTHER STATE? A: I LEFT WEDNESDAY, WEDNESDAY MORNING. Q: AND THE AIRLINE THAT YOU TAKE TO EL SALVADOR IS -- WHICH AIRLINE IS IT? A: TACA. Q: NOW, YOU MENTIONED THAT JOSEFINA RODRIGUEZ -- IS THAT YOUR NIECE? A: YES. Q: AND WITH REGARD TO YOUR FLYING BACK HERE TO LOS ANGELES LAST NIGHT, DID YOU CALL MY OFFICE AND TELL THEM WHERE YOU WERE? A: YES. Q: AND WAS A TICKET THEN SENT TO YOU? A: YES. Q: AND IS YOUR NIECE SUPPOSED TO REIMBURSE US FOR THAT TICKET? A: YES. Q: NOW, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU SAW IT, BUT DID YOU SEE THE VIDEO OF KRISTIN JEANNETTE MEYERS FROM COURT T.V.? A: YES. Q: DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING THAT IN COURT? A: YES. Q: WHEN YOU WERE TALKING TO HER AND SHE WALKED PAST YOU AND YOU WERE SITTING THERE WITH YOUR LAWYER, WAS SHE HARASSING YOU IN ANY WAY? A: NO. Q: DID SHE HAVE A CAMERA IN HER HAND? A: NO, I DIDN'T SEE THAT. Q: YOU REACHED OUT AND TOLD HER THAT YOU ENJOYED HER ON COURT T.V.? A: YES, THAT SHE LOOKS PRETTY. Q: DID YOU CONSIDER HER TO BE LIKE THE PEOPLE WHO FOLLOWED YOU AT YOUR HOME AND AT WORK? A: NO. Q: YOUR LAWYER IS SITTING RIGHT BY YOU WHEN YOU TALKED TO HER? A: YES. Q: AND ALSO AT LUNCHTIME TODAY WHO WAS SITTING AT THE TABLE WITH YOU AT THE TIME WE HAD OUR BRIEF CONVERSATION, YOU AND I? A: PATTY MC KENNA AND IRMA. Q: DID YOU SEE THIS MAN HERE, (INDICATING)? A: YEAH. MR. COCHRAN: FOR THE RECORD, MR. HOWARD HARRIS. THE WITNESS: YEAH. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU SEE A MAN WALKING WITH ME? DID YOU SEE A MAN WALKING WITH ME WHO APPEARED TO BE -- STRIKE THAT. MR. DARDEN: I WAS GOING TO OBJECT. MR. COCHRAN: YOU DON'T HAVE TO OBJECT. Q: DID YOU SEE A MAN WALK IN WITH ME WHEN HE CAME IN? MR. DARDEN: LEADING. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN YOU ANSWER THAT? A: YES. Q: DID THAT PERSON STAND THERE AND KEEP PEOPLE AWAY FROM ME? MR. DARDEN: THAT IS LEADING. MR. COCHRAN: THAT PROBABLY IS. Q: WHAT DID YOU SEE THAT PERSON DO WHILE I WAS STANDING THERE TALKING TO YOU? A: I DON'T REMEMBER. I DIDN'T REALLY PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT HE WAS DOING. Q: AND WHEN I LEFT FROM WHERE YOU WERE -- MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE, YOUR HONOR, THAT HE LEFT. THE COURT: WELL, HE IS HERE SO HE OBVIOUSLY LEFT. MR. COCHRAN: I AM STILL DOWNSTAIRS, MR. DARDEN. MAY I PROCEED, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: PLEASE. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WHEN I LEFT DID YOU SEE THAT MAN LEAVE WITH ME? A: I DIDN'T PAY ATTENTION BECAUSE I WAS TALKING TO IRMA. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHEN YOU WERE SITTING WITH YOUR LAWYER THIS MORNING IN COURT, MR. JONES, DID YOU FEEL SAFE? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, IRRELEVANT. THE WITNESS: YES. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: MR. DARDEN ASKED YOU SOME QUESTIONS THIS MORNING ABOUT WHEN YOU TALKED TO YOUR SISTER. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT? A: YES. Q: AND HAS YOUR SISTER CALLED TO ONE OF YOUR RELATIVES HERE IN LOS ANGELES AT ANY TIME IN THE RECENT PAST? A: NO. SHE CALLED AT THE PLACE WHERE I AM NOW. Q: ALL RIGHT. HAS SHE TALKED TO YOUR NIECE OR ANY OF YOUR OTHER RELATIVES RECENTLY? A: SHE TALKED TO MY NIECE. Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU HAVEN'T TALKED TO HER PERSONALLY? A: NO. Q: AND WHEN YOU LEAVE ON THIS FLIGHT TOMORROW NIGHT FOR EL SALVADOR, WHAT TIME WILL YOU -- WHAT TIME WILL YOU ARRIVE IN EL SALVADOR? MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, YOUR HONOR, ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE AND IT IS LEADING. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. DARDEN: THERE HAS BEEN NO INDICATION THAT SHE IS LEAVING FOR EL SALVADOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: TOMORROW NIGHT? A: I WILL ARRIVE AT 8:00 IN THE MORNING. THE PLANE COMES IN AT 7:45 IN THE MORNING. Q: WHAT TIME DO YOU LEAVE HERE, LOS ANGELES? A: THE PLANE LEAVES AT 11:00. Q: AND THAT IS ON TACA; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: LASTLY, WITH REGARD TO THE SALINGERS, WHEN MRS. SALINGER TOLD YOU THAT IF YOU STAYED LONGER THAN TWO WEEKS AWAY SHE WOULD HIRE ANOTHER HOUSEKEEPER, DID THAT MEAN TO YOU THAT PERHAPS SHE NO LONGER WANTED YOU? A: YES. MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, CALLS FOR SPECULATION. MOTION TO STRIKE. THE COURT: IT IS ALSO LEADING. SUSTAINED. BUT THE ANSWER IS ALREADY THERE. MR. DARDEN: CAN WE STRIKE THAT ANSWER, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN. MR. COCHRAN: CERTAINLY, YOUR HONOR. Q: WHAT DID YOU TAKE MISS SALINGER TO MEAN WHEN SHE TOLD YOU IF YOU STAYED LONGER THAN TWO WEEKS -- IF YOU STAYED LONGER THAN ONE WEEK, SHE WOULD LOOK FOR ANOTHER HOUSEKEEPER? A: THAT SHE DIDN'T WANT ME ANY MORE. Q: THAT IS WHEN YOU THEN LEFT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND YOU HAVE NO OTHER JOB, DO YOU? A: NO. Q: YOU MENTIONED TO MR. DARDEN THAT YOU CAME BACK FROM THIS OTHER STATE BECAUSE YOU FELT A DUTY OR OBLIGATION TO COME AND TESTIFY; IS THAT RIGHT? A: YES. I DIDN'T WANT THE JUDGE TO LOOK BAD BEFORE EVERYBODY SAYING THAT I WAS A LIAR AND THAT I DIDN'T COME WHEN I WAS TOLD TO. Q: YOU HAD BEEN TOLD YOU WERE DUE HERE FRIDAY MORNING? A: YES. Q: IS THAT WHY YOU CAME BACK? A: YES. Q: AND DO YOU WANT TO TESTIFY TRUTHFULLY HERE TODAY? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND MR. SIMPSON IS NOT A FRIEND OF YOURS, IS HE? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, THAT IS -- THE WITNESS: NO. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: HE LIVED NEXT DOOR TO WHERE YOU LIVED? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ANY RECROSS? RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN: Q: MISS LOPEZ, YOU ARE GOING TO FLY OUT OF HERE AND TO ANOTHER STATE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: HOW ARE YOU GOING TO LEAVE FROM LAX TOMORROW NIGHT IF YOU ARE IN ANOTHER STATE? A: I WILL COME BACK AGAIN TOMORROW. Q: WITHOUT TELLING ME WHERE AND WHICH STATE YOU ARE HEADED TODAY, CAN YOU TELL ME WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE GOING TO THAT STATE TO GAMBLE? TO GAMBLE? MR. COCHRAN: I CAN STIPULATE, NO, SHE IS NOT. THE COURT: WELL -- THE WITNESS: I DON'T EVEN HAVE MONEY TO EAT, SIR. (IN ENGLISH) I NOT EAT ALL DAY. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU DON'T HAVE MONEY TO EAT? A: NO, SIR, BECAUSE I ONLY HAVE ENOUGH FOR THE TICKET AND I WANT TO SAVE IT FOR MY AIRPLANE TICKET. Q: DO YOU EXPECT TO PAY MR. JONES HIS LEGAL FEES AT SOME POINT? MR. COCHRAN: JUST A MOMENT. THIS IS IMPROPER RECROSS-EXAMINATION AND I NEVER WENT INTO THAT. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SHE HAS ALREADY TESTIFIED WHEN SHE WAS GOING TO DO THAT. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU TOLD US THAT MR. COCHRAN SENT YOU A PLANE TICKET; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. THIS MORNING YOU TOLD US THAT YOUR NIECE PURCHASED YOUR PLANE TICKET; ISN'T THAT TRUE? ISN'T THAT WHAT YOU TOLD US THIS MORNING? A: BECAUSE SHE IS GOING TO PAY ME. MR. COCHRAN: CAN SHE ANSWER THE QUESTION? MR. DARDEN: CAN WE HAVE A YES OR NO ANSWER? THE COURT: IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A YES OR NO. SHE CAN EXPLAIN THAT ANSWER. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THIS MORNING YOU TOLD US THAT YOUR NIECE PURCHASED YOUR PLANE TICKET? A: YES. Q: OKAY. BUT NOW YOU ARE TELLING US THAT MR. COCHRAN PURCHASED YOUR PLANE TICKET, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT. THAT IS NOT WHAT SHE IS SAYING, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: CORRECT? A: BECAUSE SHE HAS TO PAY IT BACK. THE MAN HAS TO BE PAID. IF YOU LEND ME A DOLLAR, I HAVE TO PAY YOU BACK. Q: MR. COCHRAN HAS PAID FOR YOUR PLANE TICKET, CORRECT? A: I DON'T KNOW WHO PAID IT FOR ME. Q: OKAY. SOMEONE WORKING FOR -- A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) Q: WELL, YOUR NIECE HASN'T PAID FOR IT, CORRECT? CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND YOU SAY THAT YOU ARE TERRIFIED FOR YOUR FAMILY; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: BUT YOUR FAMILY HASN'T MADE PLANS TO GO TO EL SALVADOR, HAVE THEY? A: BECAUSE MY DAUGHTER IS A NORTH AMERICAN CITIZEN. SHE HAS NO BUSINESS IN EL SALVADOR. Q: CAN WE HAVE A YES OR NO ANSWER? (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. DARDEN: MOTION TO STRIKE, YOUR HONOR, AS NONRESPONSIVE. MR. COCHRAN: SHE RESPONDED. THE COURT: I'M SORRY. IT WILL STAND. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: BUT YOUR DAUGHTER HAS NOT MADE PLANS TO GO TO EL SALVADOR, CORRECT? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: YOU TOLD US THAT YOU TALKED TO ROSA MARIA VILLAPANDO FOR 25 TO 35 MINUTES, CORRECT? A: YEAH. Q: AND THAT IS YOUR ESTIMATE, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. YOU WEREN'T WATCHING THE CLOCK AS YOU TALKED TO HER, CORRECT? A: NO. Q: OKAY. SO IT COULD HAVE BEEN LONGER THAN 25 TO 35 MINUTES, CORRECT? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: OKAY. IT COULD HAVE BEEN AN HOUR, CORRECT? A: I DON'T THINK SO. Q: OKAY. BUT YOU DON'T KNOW, DO YOU? MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED. SHE HAS GIVEN HER BEST ESTIMATE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AND YOU DON'T KNOW BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T WEARING A WATCH, CORRECT? A: NO. Q: WERE YOU WEARING A WATCH? A: NO. Q: OKAY. YOU NEVER WEAR A WATCH, DO YOU? A: WHEN I WANT TO. Q: OKAY. YOU RARELY EVER WEAR A WATCH, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: WHEN I GO OUT. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU'VE BEEN VIDEOTAPED BY SEVERAL NEWS CREWS OUT IN FRONT OF THE SALINGER'S RESIDENCE, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: THIS IS IMPROPER RECROSS EXAMINATION? A: I DIDN'T NOT GO INTO THAT. IT IS IMPROPER RECROSS. HE HAS COVERED THAT, YOUR HONOR. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, SHE IS OUT -- THE COURT: I'M SORRY? MR. DARDEN: IF SHE IS OUT IN FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AND SHE ISN'T WEARING A WATCH, WHAT IS IMPROPER ABOUT THAT? MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS IMPROPER. THE COURT: BEYOND THE SCOPE. MR. DARDEN: WHAT IS IMPROPER ABOUT IT? MR. COCHRAN: BEYOND THE SCOPE. MR. DARDEN: COUNSEL ASKED ABOUT TIME. THE COURT: I KNOW WHERE YOU ARE GOING WITH THIS. NO, IT IS BEYOND THE SCOPE. MR. DARDEN: OKAY. Q: YOU ALSO TOLD US THIS AFTERNOON THAT YOU ASKED YOUR LAWYER IF YOU COULD LEAVE AND HE SAID YES, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: WAS THAT MR. JONES OR WAS THAT MR. JOHNNIE? A: MR. JOHN. MR. COCHRAN: SHE SAID JONES. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: HE SAID IT WAS OKAY TO LEAVE TOWN? A: YES. Q: HE SAID IT WAS OKAY TO GO TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: DID HE SAY IT WAS OKAY TO STAY THERE AS LONG AS YOU LIKED? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND DID HE SAY IT WOULD BE GOOD IF YOU STAYED THERE AS LONG AS YOU LIKED? A: NO. Q: SOMEONE CALLED A TRAVEL AGENT THIS AFTERNOON FOR YOU? A: YES. Q: WHO CALLED THE TRAVEL AGENT? A: PATTY. Q: WHO IS PATTY? A: HE WENT OUTSIDE. PATTY MC KENNA. Q: MR. MC KENNA CALLED A TRAVEL AGENT FOR YOU? A: YEAH. Q: HE HELPED YOU GET YOUR PLANE TICKET? A: WE HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT A PLANE TICKET. Q: HE MADE RESERVATIONS FOR YOU? A: I TALK TO THE GIRL. I TOLD HER THAT I WANT TO RESERVE MY TICKET FOR TOMORROW. Q: OKAY. THAT WAS AFTER MR. MC KENNA CALLED HER FOR YOU, CORRECT? A: YEAH. Q: DID MR. MC KENNA OFFER TO PAY FOR YOUR PLANE TICKET? A: NO, SIR. Q: YOU ALSO TOLD US THIS AFTERNOON THAT YOU MADE A RESERVATION EARLIER THIS MONTH TO GO TO EL SALVADOR, CORRECT? A: YEAH. Q: AND THAT IS A DIRECT CONTRADICTION TO WHAT YOU TOLD US THIS MORNING, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. MAY I SEE WHAT HE SAID? (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. DARDEN: THE WITNESS HAS ANSWERED YES. MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. IT WAS ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: NOT -- MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE ALSO. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE INTERPRETER: CAN YOU ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN? MR. DARDEN: WE HAVE THE ANSWER. THE COURT: I DON'T BELIEVE SO. MR. DARDEN: I SEE. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE COURT: ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN. I DON'T HAVE IT IN THE RECORD. MR. DARDEN: OKAY. Q: THIS AFTERNOON YOU TESTIFIED THAT YOU ACTUALLY MADE A RESERVATION EARLIER THIS MONTH, CORRECT? A: YEAH. Q: OKAY. BUT THAT CONTRADICTS WHAT YOU TOLD US THIS MORNING, DOESN'T IT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, "CONTRADICTS." THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS FOR THE COURT TO DETERMINE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DOESN'T IT? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, ALSO ARGUMENTATIVE BECAUSE SHE WAS NOT ASKED WHETHER SHE MADE A RESERVATION EARLIER THIS MONTH. MR. DARDEN: SHE WAS ASKED IF SHE HAD MADE -- THE COURT: YES, YES, IT IS, AND SHE HAS ADMITTED THAT IT IS CONTRADICTORY. ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, WE NEED TO TAKE A BRIEF RECESS FOR BOTH THE COURT REPORTER AND THE INTERPRETER. WE WILL STAND IN RECESS FOR 15. ALL RIGHT. MISS LOPEZ, YOU MAY STEP DOWN. THE WITNESS: THANK YOU. (RECESS.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:) THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. THE DEFENDANT IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH HIS COUNSEL, PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED. MISS LOPEZ, WOULD YOU COME FORWARD, PLEASE. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, MAY THE WITNESSES EXCLUDED PREVIOUSLY PLEASE LEAVE THE COURTROOM? THE COURT: YES, THEY ARE. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THE PRESENCE OF OUR CERTIFIED SPANISH INTERPRETER, DORIS WEITZ. GOOD AFTERNOON, MISS LOPEZ. THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR. THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. DARDEN, YOU MAY CONCLUDE YOUR RECROSS-EXAMINATION. MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ, ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN EL SALVADOR TODAY, THAT THERE ARE MANY, MANY BILLBOARDS THAT SAY, "IF YOU SEE ROSA LOPEZ, CALL THIS NUMBER"? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. I DON'T THINK MR. DARDEN HAS BEEN TO EL SALVADOR OVER THE LUNCH HOUR. THE COURT: WHAT'S YOUR OFFER OF PROOF ON THAT, MR. DARDEN, ASKING THAT QUESTION? MR. DARDEN: PARDON? THE COURT: WHAT'S YOUR OFFER OF PROOF IN ASKING THAT QUESTION? MR. DARDEN: A MEMBER OF THE PRESS JUST GAVE US THAT INFORMATION, YOUR HONOR. MR. COCHRAN: THE PRESS SHOULD BE OBJECTIVE, YOUR HONOR, AND I DON'T THINK -- MR. DARDEN: IF IT'S TRUE, IT'S SUBJECTIVE. MR. COCHRAN: I MEAN, ARE THEY SWORN? THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH A QUESTION LIKE THAT. MR. DARDEN: ARE YOU SWORN? I'M ASKING -- THE COURT: I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN -- MR. DARDEN: SHE SPEAKS TO PEOPLE IN EL SALVADOR. MAYBE SHE KNOWS THAT. THE COURT: WELL, SHE'S INDICATED SO FAR THAT SHE HASN'T TALKED TO ANYBODY IN EL SALVADOR IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS. MR. DARDEN: LATELY. LATELY. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION. THIS DOESN'T HELP ME A LOT. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ALL RIGHT. YOU TOLD US THIS MORNING THAT -- STRIKE THAT. YOU MENTIONED TO US A LITTLE WHILE AGO THAT A SECURITY GUARD AT THE UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE FRIGHTENED YOU IN SOME MANNER? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT WAS IT ABOUT THE SECURITY GUARD THAT FRIGHTENED YOU? A: IT'S NOT THAT IT SCARES ME. IT'S JUST THAT I DON'T LIKE BEING TOLD SOMETHING THAT I'M NOT. WHY DOES HE TELL ME THAT I'M MR. SIMPSON'S HOUSEKEEPER? Q: WELL, NO ONE HAS THREATENED TO BEAT YOU UP OR ANYTHING, CORRECT? A: NO. MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S NOT PART OF FEAR, YOUR HONOR. I DON'T THINK SHE HAS TO BE THREATENED TO BE BEATEN UP TO BE AFRAID. THE COURT: OVERRULED. WELL, SHE SAID SHE IS IN FEAR OF HER PERSONAL SAFETY ACCORDING TO THE DECLARATION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ALL RIGHT. NO ONE HAS THREATENED TO BEAT YOU UP, CORRECT? A: NOT ME. Q: AND YOU SAY THAT YOUR DAUGHTER TOLD YOU SOMETHING ABOUT THE PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE? A: NOT ABOUT YOU, BUT THAT SHE DOESN'T LIKE IT. SHE'S AFRAID. Q: WELL, SHE TOLD YOU THAT YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE, CORRECT? CORRECT? A: YEAH. Q: WELL, WHO ARE THE PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: ARE THEY BLACK PEOPLE? A: NO. I DON'T KNOW. SHE DIDN'T SPECIFY. Q: SO NO ONE HAS THREATENED YOU WITH ANY PHYSICAL HARM, CORRECT? CORRECT? A: BUT MANY OF MY FRIENDS TELL ME TO BE VERY CAREFUL BECAUSE THIS CASE IS VERY DIFFICULT AND THAT I COULD EVEN BE KILLED. Q: BUT NO ONE HAS THREATENED YOU WITH PHYSICAL HARM, CORRECT? A: NO. Q: WHEN YOU SPOKE TO YOUR LAWYER, DID HE TELL YOU THAT YOU COULD TESTIFY ON TAPE? A: YES. Q: AND DID HE TELL YOU THAT YOU COULD DO THAT AND NOT BE REQUIRED TO TESTIFY IN OPEN COURT? A: YES. Q: AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT YOU WOULD RATHER DO, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. YOU WOULD RATHER TESTIFY ON TAPE RATHER THAN HAVE TO TESTIFY IN FRONT OF ALL OF THESE PEOPLE, CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: ALL OF WHAT PEOPLE? THEY'RE ALL HERE. OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. VAGUE AND UNCERTAIN, INDEFINITE, AMBIGUOUS, UNINTELLIGIBLE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? THE WITNESS: NO. THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WELL, WHEN YOU TESTIFY ON TAPE, IF YOU KNOW, WHO ELSE WILL BE PRESENT? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WILL ONLY BE YOU AND THE JUDGE AND THE LAWYERS? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: WHY WOULD YOU RATHER TESTIFY ON TAPE? A: I'VE WANTED TO. BUT NOW EVERYBODY IS LOOKING AT ME HERE. SO WHY SHOULD I LEAVE? Q: MY POINT EXACTLY. MR. DARDEN: NOTHING FURTHER. MR. COCHRAN: A COUPLE QUESTIONS ON REDIRECT. MR. DARDEN: DO YOU HAVE REDIRECT? MR. COCHRAN: SIT DOWN. FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: WITH REGARD TO YOUR STATEMENT WHY YOU SHOULD LEAVE, DO YOU STILL WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES, SIR, AND I'M LEAVING NOW. I'M LEAVING TOMORROW. Q: AND DO YOU HAVE A PLACE TO STAY IN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, A PLACE WHERE YOU CAN SPEND THE NIGHT EVEN? A: NO, SIR. Q: WHEN YOUR DAUGHTER CAME BACK ON TUESDAY NIGHT FROM NEW YORK -- REMEMBER YOU TESTIFIED ABOUT THAT, WHEN SHE CAME BACK TUESDAY FROM NEW YORK, YOUR DAUGHTER? A: YES. Q: THE TWO OF YOU HAD AN ARGUMENT AT THAT POINT; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. DARDEN: LEADING, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. DID THE TWO OF YOU HAVE AN ARGUMENT THAT NIGHT? MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION. LEADING. MR. COCHRAN: NOW, THAT'S NOT LEADING, COUNSEL. THE WITNESS: YES. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND AFTER THAT, DID YOU HAVE ANYPLACE TO STAY IN LOS ANGELES AFTER TUESDAY NIGHT? A: NO. I SLEPT ON THE STREET. Q: AND IN WHAT DID YOU SLEEP IN? A: IN THE CAR. Q: AND AFTER -- TONIGHT IN LOS ANGELES, DO YOU HAVE ANYPLACE YOU CAN GO AND SLEEP TONIGHT? A: NO. Q: IS THAT WHY YOU'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THAT OTHER STATE TONIGHT? A: YES. Q: ALL THE WHILE YOU ARE WORKING AT THE SALINGER'S, WHEN YOU WEREN'T AT WORK AT THE SALINGER'S, WHERE DID YOU LIVE? A: WITH MY DAUGHTER. Q: AND YOUR DISPUTE AND ARGUMENT WITH YOUR DAUGHTER IS OVER WHAT? A: BECAUSE OF THIS CASE, COMING TO TESTIFY. Q: AND BECAUSE OF THIS CASE, YOU HAVE NO PLACE TO STAY; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: NOW, WHEN YOU TALKED TO MR. JONES ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU COULD GO TO EL SALVADOR, TELL US WHAT, IF ANYTHING, YOU ASKED MR. JONES ABOUT GOING TO EL SALVADOR. A: I ASKED HIM IF I COULD GO TO EL SALVADOR BECAUSE I HAVE A LOT OF PRESSURE BECAUSE OF THIS CASE, AND HE SAID TO ME, "YOU CAN GO WHEREVER YOU WANT TO. YOU ARE NOT A PRISONER IN THIS COUNTRY," BUT AFTER I TESTIFIED HERE. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IS THAT WHY YOU CAME BACK HERE VOLUNTARILY TODAY, BECAUSE YOU PROMISED YOUR LAWYER YOU WOULD COME BACK TO APPEAR BEFORE JUDGE ITO? A: YES. Q: AND, MA'AM, IF WE DON'T FINISH THESE PROCEEDINGS TODAY AND YOU HAD TO COME BACK ON MONDAY, DO YOU HAVE ANYPLACE TO STAY THIS WEEKEND? A: NO. AND I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK HERE ON MONDAY. Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU WANT TO COME BACK IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS TO TESTIFY IN THIS CASE? A: NO, SIR. I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK HERE. Q: AND WHY IS THAT? A: BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK HERE WHERE EVERYBODY KNOWS ME, EVERYBODY LOOKS AT ME. I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK TO TESTIFY. I SAID THAT I WOULD COME TODAY AND I CAME TODAY, BUT I DON'T WANT TO TESTIFY AGAIN. Q: AND ARE YOU STILL AFRAID FOR YOUR PERSONAL SAFETY? A: YES, SIR. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. MR. DARDEN: JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: A COUPLE. FURTHER RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN: Q: MISS LOPEZ, YOU HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR JUDGE ITO, DON'T YOU? A: YES. Q: IF HE PROVIDES YOU WITH A PLANE TICKET AND A HOTEL ROOM AND IF HE ORDERS YOU TO RETURN FROM EL SALVADOR TO TESTIFY, WILL YOU RETURN? A: I LIKE YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR, BUT I WON'T COME BACK. I WILL GO TO ANOTHER COUNTRY, SIR. AND I RESPECT YOU VERY MUCH. THE COURT: THANK YOU, MISS LOPEZ. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOUR LAWYER TELL YOU TO TELL THE JUDGE THAT YOU WILL NOT COME BACK? MR. COCHRAN: NO. I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NO. Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU UNDERSTAND MR. COCHRAN'S OBJECTION? A: NO. THE COURT: THANK YOU. MR. DARDEN: THAT'S ALL. THE COURT: MISS LOPEZ, WHEN YOU GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR, WHERE WILL YOU STAY? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, JUST A MOMENT. CAN WE HAVE THAT QUESTION -- THE WITNESS: I HAVE MY HOME IN EL SALVADOR. MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T KNOW WHAT SHE'S GOING TO SAY. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SECURITY WITH REGARD TO HER RESPONSE TO THAT, IF THE COURT PLEASES. SHE CAN ANSWER IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COURT'S -- THE COURT: LET ME REPHRASE THE QUESTION. DO YOU HAVE A PLACE TO STAY WHEN YOU GO TO EL SALVADOR? THE WITNESS: I HAVE MY HOME THERE. THE COURT: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MISS LOPEZ. I'M GOING TO EXCUSE YOU FROM THE WITNESS STAND AT THIS TIME. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO WAIT OUTSIDE IN THE HALLWAY. AND, MR. COCHRAN -- I AM SORRY. MR. JONES, WOULD YOU SIT WITH HER OUT IN THE HALLWAY, PLEASE? MR. JONES: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: THANK YOU. MR. DARDEN: MAY WE APPROACH FOR A FEW MOMENTS? IS THERE ANY BENEFIT TO BE DERIVED FROM APPROACHING AND DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE OR SHOULD WE JUST CONTINUE? MR. COCHRAN: I'M WILLING TO APPROACH. I HAVE ONE OTHER WITNESS I WANT TO CALL. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) THE COURT: COUNSEL, THANK YOU. MR. COCHRAN, YOUR NEXT WITNESS. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. WE WOULD NEXT LIKE TO CALL AS OUR NEXT WITNESS TO THE WITNESS STAND ZULEMA IIDA. MR. DARDEN: FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR, JUST A FEW MOMENTS AGO, WHEN HER NAME WAS MENTIONED, THAT'S THE FIRST TIME THE PEOPLE WERE APPRISED SHE WOULD TESTIFY IN THIS HEARING. WE RECEIVED NO DISCOVERY. MR. COCHRAN: I HAVE NO DISCOVERY. MR. DARDEN: WE RECEIVED VERY LITTLE INFORMATION IN TERMS OF WHAT THIS WITNESS IS EXPECTED TO TESTIFY TO. SO I OBJECT TO COUNSEL CALLING HER AT THIS TIME. THE COURT: NOTED. OVERRULED. ALL RIGHT. MA'AM, WOULD YOU STEP OVER HERE, STAND OVER HERE BY THE PROJECTOR HERE, FACE THE COURT CLERK AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. ZULEMA IIDA, CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE DEFENDANT, WAS SWORN AND TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS: THE CLERK: YOU DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU MAY GIVE IN THE CAUSE NOW PENDING BEFORE THIS COURT SHALL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? THE WITNESS: YES. THE CLERK: PLEASE HAVE A SEAT IN THE WITNESS STAND AND STATE AND SPELL YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAMES FOR THE RECORD. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MA'AM. WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE AND SPELL YOUR NAME. THE WITNESS: SPELL MY NAME? THE COURT: STATE AND SPELL YOUR NAME, PLEASE. THE WITNESS: OKAY. MY NAME IS ZULEMA, AND IT'S SPELLED Z-U-L-E-M-A. THE COURT: AND WHAT IS YOUR LAST NAME? THE WITNESS: MY LAST NAME IS IIDA, I-I-D-A. THE COURT: THANK YOU, MA'AM. MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: MISS IIDA, WHEN IS THE FIRST TIME WE EVER MET? A: TODAY RIGHT BY THE DOOR. Q: A SHORT TIME AGO IN THE HALLWAY THERE? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT IS YOUR OCCUPATION, MA'AM? A: I AM A TRAVEL AGENT. Q: AND BY WHOM ARE YOU EMPLOYED? A: PAN AMERICANA TRAVEL SYSTEM. Q: AND WHERE IS YOUR OFFICE? WHERE WAS IT LOCATED? A: THE ADDRESS? Q: YES, MA'AM. A: IT'S 6344 SAN FERNANDO ROAD IN THE CITY OF GLENDALE. Q: AND DID YOU SEE THE LADY WHO JUST WENT OUT IN THE HALL JUST BEFORE YOU CAME IN WHOSE NAME IS ROSA LOPEZ, ROSA MARIA LOPEZ? DO YOU KNOW HER? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND HOW DO YOU KNOW ROSA LOPEZ? A: BECAUSE SHE BUYS TICKETS FROM ME TO GO TO EL SALVADOR. Q: AND OVER WHAT PERIOD OF TIME HAVE YOU COME TO KNOW ROSA LOPEZ, IF YOU CAN TELL US? A: FOR ALMOST A YEAR. ABOUT A YEAR. Q: AND DO YOU RECALL THAT SHE HAS PURCHASED MORE THAN ONE TICKET TO EL SALVADOR FROM YOU? A: YES. Q: AND IS THAT THROUGH PAN AMERICANA TRAVEL SYSTEM? A: YES. Q: HOW LONG HAVE YOU WORKED AT THAT TRAVEL SYSTEM? A: THAT SPECIFIC LOCATION, FOR ONE YEAR. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND BEFORE THAT, DID YOU WORK FOR SOME OTHER LOCATION FOR THE SAME COMPANY? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, ON THE OTHER TIME OR TIMES THAT MISS LOPEZ HAS PURCHASED TICKETS, DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT COUNTRY SHE WAS GOING TO? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT COUNTRY WAS THAT? A: EL SALVADOR. Q: AND DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT AIRLINE SHE FLEW ON? A: TACA OR UNITED. Q: ALL RIGHT. IN THAT CONNECTION, IF YOU RECALL, DID YOU HAVE OCCASION TO MAKE ANY RESERVATIONS FOR MISS ROSA LOPEZ AT ANY TIME DURING THE FIRST PART OF FEBRUARY TO GO TO EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: AND WHEN WAS THAT? WHEN DID YOU MAKE THOSE OBSERVATIONS, IF YOU RECALL? A: IT WAS ABOUT BEGINNING OF FEBRUARY THAT SHE WANTED TO LEAVE ON 15 OF FEBRUARY JUST ONE WAY. Q: 15TH OF FEBRUARY? A: YES. Q: AND THAT WAS A WEDNESDAY. AND DID YOU MAKE ANY RESERVATIONS FOR HER? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT AIRLINE THOSE WERE MADE ON? A: NOT EXACTLY, BUT I THINK TACA OR UNITED. Q: AND OBVIOUSLY SHE DIDN'T GO ON FEBRUARY 15TH; IS THAT CORRECT? A: NO. Q: THOSE RESERVATIONS EXPIRED? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU RECEIVED A CALL OVER THE LUNCH HOUR FROM A MR. PAT MC KENNA, DID YOU, TODAY? A: YES. Q: AND WERE YOU ASKED TO COME DOWN TO COURT THIS AFTERNOON? A: YES. Q: AT MY REQUEST, HAVE YOU HAD OCCASION TO CHECK TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A FLIGHT TO EL SALVADOR TOMORROW NIGHT LEAVING LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AT 11:00 O'CLOCK P.M.? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT AIRLINE IS THAT ON? A: UNITED. Q: AND WHAT -- IS THERE ALSO A TACA FLIGHT? A: YES. Q: THERE ARE TWO FLIGHTS, ONE TACA, ONE UNITED? A: THERE'S SEVERAL. Q: OKAY. SEVERAL FLIGHTS? A: UH-HUH. Q: AND IS THERE A NONSTOP FLIGHT TOMORROW NIGHT? A: I BELIEVE THIS FLIGHT SHE -- IT'S NONSTOP THAT LEAVES TOMORROW NIGHT. Q: AND IF -- IS THAT FLIGHT -- AND AT MY REQUEST, DID YOU CHECK TO SEE IF THERE WAS A NONSTOP FLIGHT AVAILABLE TO EL SALVADOR LEAVING LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT TOMORROW NIGHT, THAT THERE ARE TICKETS AVAILABLE OR SEATS AVAILABLE? A: YES, THERE ARE. Q: ON THE OTHER OCCASION THAT OR OCCASIONS THAT YOU RECALL MISS LOPEZ TRAVELING WITH YOUR AGENCY, DO YOU RECALL HOW SHE PAID FOR HER FARE? A: YES. Q: AND HOW DID SHE? A: CASH. Q: AND WITH REGARD TO FLYING ON EITHER TACA OR UNITED, ARE YOU ABLE TO PAY FOR THE TICKETS THE SAME DAY YOU LEAVE IF SEATS ARE AVAILABLE? A: YES. Q: AND IF YOU CAN TELL US THE APPROXIMATE FARE ONE WAY TO EL SALVADOR FROM LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. A: ABOUT 317. Q: ALL RIGHT. A: IT VARIES. Q: IT VARIES. IT'S 300 PLUS; IS THAT CORRECT? A: CORRECT. Q: AND THAT IF ONE HAD THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY AND THERE ARE SEATS AVAILABLE TOMORROW NIGHT -- A: YES. Q: -- ON THAT FLIGHT -- A: YES. Q: -- WHAT TIME WOULD THAT FLIGHT ARRIVE IN EL SALVADOR, IF YOU KNOW? A: 6:00 A.M. 6:10 A.M. Q: VERY WELL. AND YOU CAME DOWN PER OUR REQUEST WITHOUT SUBPOENA; IS THAT CORRECT? A: CORRECT. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY. THE COURT: MR. DARDEN. MR. DARDEN: MAY WE HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. DARDEN: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. WE NEED TO TAKE A COUPLE MOMENTS, YOUR HONOR. MS. CLARK: OUR COMPUTER WENT DOWN. WE'RE TRYING TO REMEMBER, TRYING TO BRING BACK WHAT -- MR. COCHRAN: I COULDN'T HEAR. THE COURT: COUNSEL ARE INDICATING THAT THE REAL TIME COMPUTER ON THEIR DESK HAS FROZEN. THE COURT REPORTERS INDICATE THAT AFTER THE TRIPOD FELL ON THIS COURT REPORTER'S MACHINE, THAT IT'S BEEN FREEZING. MR. DARDEN: THEIR'S IS WORKING, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. THE TESTIMONY WAS RATHER BRIEF THOUGH. MR. COCHRAN: WHAT DID THEY DO BEFORE THEY HAD THE REAL TIME? DON'T THEY TAKE NOTES? THE COURT: WE'RE HAVING A SLIGHT TECHNICAL PROBLEM HERE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. CLARK: Q: HOW LONG HAVE BEEN WORKING AT THAT TRAVEL AGENCY? A: ONE YEAR. Q: ONE YEAR? A: YES. Q: AND DURING THAT YEAR, YOU'VE LEARNED TO BOOK FLIGHTS ON -- TO SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT AIRLINES DO YOU BOOK FLIGHTS TO SALVADOR WITH? A: UNITED, TACA, VIA TAICA, LATZA. THOSE ARE THE MOST THAT I USE. Q: AND SALVADOR HAS SOME PRETTY POPULAR DESTINATION PLACE? YOU BOOK A LOT OF FLIGHTS TO SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY RECORDS OF THE RESERVATIONS YOU MADE FOR ROSA LOPEZ ON FEBRUARY 15TH? A: NO, BECAUSE WE CHANGED THE SAME RESERVATION. Q: SO YOU DON'T HAVE ANY PAPERWORK TO SHOW THAT YOU MADE THAT RESERVATION ON FEBRUARY 15TH; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: AND ORDINARILY WHEN YOU MAKE RESERVATIONS FOR A FLIGHT TO SALVADOR, YOU FILL OUT SOME KIND OF TICKET FORM, DON'T YOU? MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T THINK SO, YOUR HONOR. WELL -- THE WITNESS: YES AND NO BECAUSE WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU JUST GO STRAIGHT TO THE COMPUTER AND YOU JUST FILL IN ALL THE INFORMATION DIRECTLY TO THE COMPUTER. Q: BY MS. CLARK: RIGHT. AND YOU TYPE IT RIGHT INTO THE COMPUTER AND THAT GOES STRAIGHT TO THE AIRLINE, DOESN'T IT? A: CORRECT. Q: OKAY. SO YOU WOULD HAVE DONE THAT FOR ROSA LOPEZ ON FEBRUARY 15TH; WOULDN'T YOU? A: YES. Q: SO YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO PULL UP SOMETHING, SOME RECORD. IF YOU WANTED TO PRINT OUT THE ACTIVITY THAT YOU DID FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, THAT PRINTOUT SHOULD SHOW A RESERVATION THAT YOU MADE FOR ROSA LOPEZ ON FEBRUARY 15TH, ISN'T IT? A: NOT IF YOU CANCEL IT OR IF YOU MAKE CHANGES TO THE RESERVATION. Q: OKAY. IF YOU CANCELED IT, THEN WOULDN'T YOU HAVE SOME RECORD OF THE FACT IT WAS CANCELED, THAT THE RESERVATION WAS MADE AND CANCELED? A: I DON'T THINK SO. Q: HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU BOOKED FLIGHTS FOR ROSA LOPEZ IN THE PAST YEAR TO SALVADOR? A: TO BE HONEST, I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER, BUT PROBABLY TWO OR THREE. Q: OKAY. AND WHEN DID YOU BOOK THOSE? A: ONE THAT I REMEMBER WAS IN NOVEMBER. Q: OKAY. AND WHEN IN NOVEMBER? A: THE DATE, MIDDLE OF NOVEMBER. Q: YOU DON'T REMEMBER THE DATE? A: NO. Q: AND DID SHE GO ON THAT -- DID SHE ACTUALLY GO TO SALVADOR ON THAT OCCASION? A: YES, BECAUSE SHE HAD THE TICKET. Q: AND WHAT AIRLINE DID SHE FLY ON? A: AT THAT TIME, WAS I BELIEVE TACA OR UNITED. Q: AND SHE CAME BACK AFTER THAT, AND DID SHE FLY AGAIN? A: AFTER SHE CAME BACK, NO. Q: DID SHE GO EARLIER IN THE YEAR? A: WHAT I REMEMBER, NO. Q: SO SHE ONLY -- FROM THE TIME THAT YOU'VE BEEN WORKING AT THAT AGENCY DURING THE YEAR OF '94, SHE WENT ONCE, AND SHE WENT IN NOVEMBER; IS THAT RIGHT? A: YES. Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY -- LET ME ASK YOU THIS. IN THIS MONTH, IN THIS MONTH OF FEBRUARY, HOW MANY RESERVATIONS HAVE YOU MADE IN GENERAL TO EL SALVADOR? A: FOR ROSA? Q: NO. IN GENERAL. A: IN GENERAL. UMM, IT'S HARD TO SAY. OVER A THOUSAND. Q: OVER A THOUSAND? A: YES. Q: OVER A THOUSAND. DO YOU REMEMBER THE NAMES OF ALL THE PEOPLE YOU BOOKED THOSE TO? A: JUST FEW. Q: OKAY. HOW IS IT YOU REMEMBER ROSA LOPEZ? A: BECAUSE SHE CALLS ME ON THE PHONE AND SHE ALWAYS CALLS ME TO FIND OUT HOW THE PRICE IS AND SHE WANT TO COME AND GET THE TICKET WHEN THE PRICE IS DOWN. Q: WHEN DID YOU FIRST GET THE CALL TO COME TO COURT TODAY? A: THIS MORNING AT ABOUT 12:00. Q: AND WHO CALLED YOU? A: PAT, PAT I GUESS HIS NAME. Q: PAT, PAT MC KENNA? A: YES, I THINK SO. Q: AND DID HE TELL YOU THAT HE WANTED YOU TO COME IN AND TESTIFY THAT YOU BOOKED ROSA LOPEZ A FLIGHT ON FEBRUARY 15TH? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION, MA'AM? THE WITNESS: WOULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? MS. CLARK: I AM SORRY? THE COURT: WOULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? MS. CLARK: YES. I CAN'T. I CAN'T. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID MR. MC KENNA TELL YOU THAT HE WANTED YOU TO COME IN AND TESTIFY THAT ROSA LOPEZ BOOKED A FLIGHT TO EL SALVADOR WITH YOU ON FEBRUARY 15TH? MR. COCHRAN: ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. THE WITNESS: NO, I DON'T THINK SO. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: WELL, WHAT DID HE TELL YOU? A: HE TOLD ME THAT HE WANTED ME TO COME TO COURT AND HE ASKED ME QUESTIONS ABOUT HER, THAT WHEN SHE WAS LEAVING AND -- Q: WHAT DID HE ASK YOU? A: HE ASKED ME WHAT AIRLINE SHE WAS LEAVING, AT WHAT TIME. Q: DID HE ASK IF YOU REMEMBERED THAT SHE HAD BOOKED A FLIGHT WITH YOU EARLIER THIS MONTH? A: YES. SHE -- I THINK SO, HE ASKED ME. Q: IS THAT WHAT HE ASKED YOU? A: YES. Q: AND DID HE ALSO ASK YOU WHETHER YOU REMEMBERED CANCELING THAT RESERVATION? A: YES. WHEN ROSA CALLED, WE MADE A RESERVA -- WE USUALLY MAKE RESERVATIONS AND THE PASSENGER CHANGES HER MIND. IN THIS CASE, LIKE IN ROSA, SHE CHANGED HER MIND FOR THE 15TH OF FEBRUARY. THEN WE BOOK ROUND-TRIP RESERVATION. Q: AND WHO TOLD YOU THE DATE WAS FEBRUARY 15TH? A: ROSA. Q: ROSA, SHE TOLD YOU? A: YEAH. Q: WHEN DID SHE TELL YOU THAT? TODAY? A: TODAY, AND ALSO WHEN SHE CALLED. IT WAS I THINK BEGINNING OF FEBRUARY. Q: WHEN DID YOU TALK TO ROSA TODAY? A: WHAT TIME? YOU MEAN WHAT TIME? Q: YES. WHAT TIME? A: IT WAS ABOUT NOONTIME. MS. CLARK: ONE MOMENT, PLEASE. COULD WE HAVE THE LAST ANSWER READ BACK? I'M SORRY. THE COURT: CERTAINLY. MADAM REPORTER. (THE ANSWER WAS READ BY THE REPORTER.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND YOU SPOKE TO ROSA LOPEZ ON THE TELEPHONE? A: YES. Q: AND AFTER THAT, DID YOU SPEAK TO MR. MC KENNA? A: YOU MEAN PAT? Q: YES. A: YES. Q: SO FIRST YOU SPOKE TO ROSA LOPEZ; IS THAT RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: AND THEN YOU SPOKE TO PAT MC KENNA; IS THAT RIGHT? A: YES. Q: WHEN ROSA TALKED TO YOU, DID SHE TELL YOU THAT SHE WANTED YOU TO COME IN AND TESTIFY THAT SHE HAD BOOKED A FLIGHT EARLIER THIS MONTH FOR SALVADOR? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. THE WITNESS: WELL, SHE'S ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT HER FLIGHTS, AND I BELIEVE SHE DID. Q: BY MS. CLARK: WELL, BUT WHEN SHE TALKED TO YOU TODAY, DID SHE ASK YOU TO COME TO COURT AND TESTIFY THAT YOU BOOKED A FLIGHT FOR HER TO SALVADOR EARLIER THIS MONTH? A: YES. Q: AND DID SHE TELL YOU WHAT DATE SHE WANTED YOU TO TESTIFY TO? A: WELL, WHEN SHE CALLED, SHE TOLD ME SHE WANTED TO LEAVE ON THE 15TH OF FEBRUARY. Q: NO. I'M TALKING ABOUT YOUR CONVERSATION WITH HER TODAY. A: OH, TODAY. YEAH, SHE REMIND ME ABOUT THAT. Q: SHE REMINDED YOU? A: YES. Q: SHE TOLD YOU TO SAY IT WAS ON FEBRUARY 15TH WHEN YOU CAME TO COURT; IS THAT RIGHT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. MS. CLARK: OBJECT -- YOUR HONOR -- MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR -- MR. COCHRAN: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY. THE COURT: OVERRULED. WHY DON'T YOU RESTATE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND DID SHE TELL YOU TO SAY IT WAS ON FEBRUARY 15TH THAT YOU BOOKED THE FLIGHT FOR HER? A: YEAH. SHE REMIND ME, YEAH. Q: SHE TOLD YOU TO COME IN AND TELL THAT TO THE COURT; IS THAT RIGHT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT. THAT'S NOT WHAT SHE SAID. SHE SAID SHE REMINDED HER, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. COUNSEL, I HEARD THE TESTIMONY. LET'S FINISH THIS. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU HEAR -- A: YEAH, SHE REMIND ME. Q: OKAY. BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT ON YOUR OWN? A: NOT REALLY. NO. Q: NOW, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU HAVE ACTUALLY BOOKED A FLIGHT TO EL SALVADOR FOR ROSA LOPEZ DUE TO LEAVE ON MARCH 15TH AND TO RETURN ON MARCH THE 20TH? A: YES. Q: AND WITH WHICH AIRLINE IS THAT? A: UNITED. Q: UNITED. CAN YOU TELL US HOW MUCH THAT TICKET IS? A: AT THIS MOMENT, IT'S ABOUT $452 INCLUDING TAXES. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE COURT: IS THAT ROUND TRIP? THE WITNESS: THAT'S A ROUND TRIP. THE COURT: GOOD DEAL. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: I AM SORRY. WHAT WAS THAT AMOUNT AGAIN? A: $452. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. THAT'S A ROUND-TRIP FARE? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT'S THE ONE-WAY FARE? A: ABOUT 300, 320 OR 315 INCLUDING TAXES. Q: UH-HUH. AND DID YOU TELL -- DID YOU TELL MR. COCHRAN ABOUT THIS ROUND-TRIP TICKET YOU BOOKED FOR ROSA LOPEZ IN MARCH TO AND FROM EL SALVADOR? A: YES. Q: YOU TOLD HIM ABOUT THAT, DID YOU? A: YES. Q: AND WHEN DID YOU TELL HIM ABOUT THAT? A: TODAY. Q: TODAY WHEN YOU TALKED TO HIM AT NOON? A: YES. Q: OKAY. NOW, HAS THAT TICKET BEEN PAID FOR, THAT ROUND-TRIP TICKET? A: NO. Q: DO YOU HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE PAID FOR WITHIN 24 HOURS OF THE RESERVATION? A: YES, TO KEEP THE FARE. Q: UH-HUH. A: THE PRICE OF THE FARE. Q: TO KEEP THE PRICE OF THE FARE. BUT THE RESERVATION STILL STANDS; ISN'T THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: SO AS OF NOW, ROSA LOPEZ IS SCHEDULED TO FLY OUT TO EL SALVADOR ON MARCH THE 15TH AND RETURN ON MARCH THE 20TH TO LOS ANGELES; ISN'T THAT RIGHT? A: AS OF RIGHT NOW, SHE -- WE MADE A CHANGE. SHE'S LEAVING TOMORROW NIGHT, ONE-WAY TICKET. Q: AND WHEN DID THAT CHANGE OCCUR? A: TODAY. Q: WHAT TIME TODAY? A: AROUND NOONTIME, RIGHT AFTER -- AFTER I TALKED TO HER. Q: AFTER SHE CALLED YOU AND ASKED YOU TO COME TO COURT? A: YES. Q: AND THAT WAS AFTER NOON? A: YES, WHEN I TALKED TO HER. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER. THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: YES. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: MISS IIDA, THE RESERVATIONS THAT YOU REFERRED TO THAT WERE FOR MARCH, MARCH -- WHATEVER DATE IT WAS IN MARCH, WHEN WERE THOSE RESERVATIONS MADE? A: WOULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION? Q: THE RESERVATIONS THAT YOU WERE JUST TALKING TO MISS CLARK ABOUT THAT YOU SAID WERE MADE LIKE IN MARCH THAT WAS A ROUND TRIP FOR 400 AND PLUS DOLLARS -- A: YES. Q: -- DO YOU KNOW WHEN THOSE RESERVATIONS WERE MADE? A: 21ST OF FEBRUARY. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND THEN WITH REGARD TO THAT, THE RESERVATIONS THAT WERE MADE AT THE FIRST OF FEBRUARY -- A: YES. Q: -- WHEN WAS THAT? THAT WAS A ROUND-TRIP TICKET OR A ONE-WAY TICKET? A: THE FIRST TIME WE MADE THE RESERVATION WAS A ONE-WAY TICKET. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND MISS CLARK ASKED YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOUR MEMORY WAS REMINDED OR REFRESHED BY ROSA LOPEZ. DO YOU RECALL THAT YOU ACTUALLY MADE THOSE RESERVATIONS FOR THE FIRST OF FEBRUARY? A: I RECALL. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHAT'S YOUR BEST RECOLLECTION OF THE DATE THAT MISS LOPEZ WAS SUPPOSED TO LEAVE TO GO FROM LAX TO EL SALVADOR? A: WELL, 15 OF FEBRUARY. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND THEN SHE DID NOT TAKE THAT TRIP OBVIOUSLY; IS THAT CORRECT? A: CORRECT. Q: AND THEN WITH REGARD TO THE RESERVATIONS THAT SHE ASKED YOU ABOUT IN MARCH, MARCH -- WHAT WAS THE DATE? DO YOU RECALL? A: MARCH -- I'M SORRY. WHAT IS THAT? Q: WHAT WAS THE DATE IN MARCH? A: WHEN SHE WANTS TO LEAVE? Q: YES. A: I BELIEVE IT'S 13 OF MARCH. Q: AND DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THAT TICKET HAS EVER BEEN PAID FOR? A: THOSE TICKETS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID FOR. Q: THEY HAVE NOT BEEN PAID FOR? A: NO. Q: AND THEY WERE MADE ON FEBRUARY 21ST? A: THEY WERE MADE ON FEBRUARY 21ST. Q: AND IF YOU DON'T PAY FOR THEM WITHIN 24 HOURS, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE TICKETS OR THE RESERVATIONS? A: THE RESERVATION REMAINS THERE AND THE PRICE MAY GO UP OR MAY GO DOWN. Q: ALL RIGHT. THE ONLY WAY YOU RESERVE THE ACTUAL FARE IS, YOU PAY FOR IT WITHIN 24 HOURS -- A: 24 HOURS. Q: -- OF THE DATE THAT YOU MAKE THE RESERVATION; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND THE 21ST OF FEBRUARY WAS LAST TUESDAY; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. I THINK SO. Q: NOW, YOU INDICATED IN RESPONSE TO MISS CLARK'S QUESTIONS THAT MISS LOPEZ HAS ASKED YOU AND SHE NOW HAS RESERVATIONS ON A FLIGHT LEAVING HERE TOMORROW NIGHT? A: CORRECT. Q: AND WHAT'S THAT FARE? A: ONE-WAY FARE FOR TOMORROW NIGHT WILL BE 297 AND 14, ABOUT -- ABOUT $320, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. Q: $320? A: YES. Q: AND WHEN DOES THAT HAVE TO BE PAID FOR BY? A: 24 HOURS OR TOMORROW. Q: ALL RIGHT. SO IT WAS MADE TODAY. SO YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR IT EITHER WITHIN 24 HOURS OR BEFORE THE FLIGHT? A: TOMORROW. BEFORE THE FLIGHT. Q: ALL RIGHT. THE OTHER RESERVATIONS FOR LATER IN MARCH, SHE WOULD HAVE TO -- SHE'LL TAKE WHATEVER SHE CAN GET IF SHE TRIES TO USE THOSE LATER, IS THAT CORRECT, IF SHE HASN'T PAID FOR THEM NOW? A: SAY THAT AGAIN? Q: SURE. WITH REGARD TO THAT, SHE'S NOT PAID FOR THOSE TICKETS; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND SO THE RESERVATIONS WILL STILL STAND, BUT THERE ARE NO TICKETS; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: THAT WAS MADE ON FEBRUARY 21ST? A: THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND THAT WAS MADE AFTER THE RESERVATIONS YOU TESTIFIED ABOUT THAT WERE MADE IN THE FIRST PART OF FEBRUARY; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OR FEBRUARY 15TH? A: SOMETIME BEGINNING OF FEBRUARY. Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU KNOW OF ANYTHING THAT UNUSUAL HAPPENED IN ROSA LOPEZ' LIFE ON FEBRUARY 21ST? DID SHE TALK TO YOU ABOUT THAT AT ALL? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. MR. COCHRAN: SHE CAN ANSWER THAT. THE COURT: HEARSAY. MR. COCHRAN: ANYTHING UNUSUAL, THAT'S HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: "DID SHE TELL YOU ANYTHING?" MR. COCHRAN: SHE CAN ANSWER THAT YES OR NO. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. WHAT'S THE RELEVANCE? MR. COCHRAN: I CAN LINK IT UP. MS. CLARK: HEARSAY. MR. COCHRAN: MAY I PROCEED? THE COURT: ASK THE QUESTION, BUT I'M SUSPICIOUS. MR. COCHRAN: DON'T BE SUSPICIOUS. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU -- DID ROSA LOPEZ TELL YOU ANYTHING AT ALL WHEN SHE MADE THE RESERVATIONS ON FEBRUARY 21ST, IF YOU RECALL? A: NO. Q: ALL RIGHT. WERE THOSE RESERVATIONS MADE THROUGH YOU? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY KINDLY. NOTHING FURTHER. THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: YES. VERY BRIEFLY. RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. CLARK: Q: WHAT TIME IN THE MORNING DOES YOUR AGENCY OPEN? A: 9:00 IN THE MORNING. Q: AS OF 9:00 THIS MORNING -- A: YES. Q: -- THE RESERVATIONS YOU HAD FOR ROSA LOPEZ WERE A ROUND-TRIP TICKET TO EL SALVADOR AND TO RETURN TO LOS ANGELES IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: WERE YOU WATCHING THESE PROCEEDINGS IN COURT THIS MORNING? A: NO. Q: YOU DIDN'T? DO YOU HAVE A TELEVISION SET IN YOUR AGENCY? A: NO. Q: WERE YOU LISTENING TO IT ON THE RADIO? A: NO. MS. CLARK: I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER. FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: THE TICKETS FROM FEBRUARY 21ST FOR MARCH WERE NEVER PAID FOR; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASKED AND ANSWERED. ASKED AND ANSWERED. THE COURT: HOLD ON. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IN THE PAST -- IN THE PAST, WHEN ROSA LOPEZ -- HAS SHE MADE RESERVATIONS IN THE PAST AND THEY'VE ALSO NOT BEEN PAID FOR -- MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: -- AND THEN BY THE TIME THE FLIGHT -- THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. THE WITNESS: WHAT'S THE QUESTION? Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IN THE PAST, HAS ROSA LOPEZ MADE OTHER RESERVATIONS OTHER THAN THE ONE IN FEBRUARY, THE EARLY PART OF FEBRUARY FOR FEBRUARY 15TH IN WHICH SHE DID NOT TAKE THAT PARTICULAR FLIGHT? A: YOU MEAN SHE MADE A RESERVATION. Q: AND DIDN'T GO. A: AND DIDN'T GO, YES. Q: THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST? A: IT HAPPENED IN THE PAST. Q: ALL RIGHT. A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY. THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: NOTHING FURTHER, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: MISS IIDA, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING. YOU ARE NOW EXCUSED. MR. COCHRAN, ANYTHING ELSE ON BEHALF OF THE MOVING PARTY? MR. COCHRAN: I HAVE NO OTHER WITNESSES AT THIS POINT, YOUR HONOR, NOT AT THIS POINT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ON BEHALF OF THE PROPONENTS? MR. DARDEN: CAN WE APPROACH WITHOUT THE REPORTER FOR A MOMENT? THE COURT: SURE. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE COURT: MR. DARDEN. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, THE PEOPLE WILL OFFER NO WITNESSES. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I'LL HEAR ARGUMENT FROM THE PROPONENT. MR. COCHRAN: YES, YOUR HONOR, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT HAS HEARD THE TESTIMONY AND AS USUAL, HAS BEEN PATIENT WITH REGARD TO THE EVIDENCE THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED. THE COURT HAS FOR ITS CONSIDERATION MISS ROSA LOPEZ, ROSA MARIA LOPEZ, A LADY WHO HAS RELEVANT TESTIMONY TO GIVE IN THIS CASE. SHE'S AN IMPORTANT WITNESS FOR THE DEFENSE AND I THINK BY ALL ACCOUNTS, THAT'S WHY BOTH SIDES ARE FIGHTING IT SEEMS SO VIGOROUSLY. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT THE PROPONENTS HAVE MET THEIR BURDEN WITH REGARD TO SHOWING THAT THERE'S A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD THAT SHE'S GOING TO LEAVE THIS JURISDICTION. THE EVIDENCE TO ME SEEMS TO BE CLEAR, YOUR HONOR. MISS LOPEZ IS A WOMAN WHOSE FACE HAS BEEN BROADCAST EVEN THROUGH COUNSEL'S EXAMINATION LITERALLY AROUND THE WORLD BY VIRTUE OF THE GREAT INTEREST IN THIS CASE. I SUPPOSE THAT THE INDIVIDUALS WHO FRAMED 1335 PROBABLY DIDN'T HAVE THIS CASE IN MIND AS DID I THINK ANYBODY COULD HAVE HAD THIS CASE IN MIND. HERE IS A LADY WHO IS A HOUSEKEEPER WHO HAS NO OTHER MEANS OF SUPPORT, WHOSE FAMILY HAS BEEN TORN ASUNDER BY THE FACT THAT SHE WITNESSED SOMETHING THAT WILL BEAR ON MR. SIMPSON'S INNOCENCE. AND THAT MAY NOT BE FAIR TO HER, BUT SHE HAS ACTED IT SEEMS TO ME OUT OF A SENSE OF DUTY. SHE'S HAD A LAWYER, MR. JONES, WHO'S ADVISED HER THROUGHOUT. AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE COURT HAS TO LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT'S HAPPENED TO THIS LADY. SHE HAD A JOB OF SOME THREE YEARS WITH THE SALINGER'S. SHE DOESN'T HAVE THAT JOB ANYMORE. SHE ISN'T A WEALTHY LADY, YOUR HONOR, WHERE YOU WORK FOR THREE YEARS WITH A FAMILY WHO BY AND LARGE WAS PRETTY HAPPY WITH HER. BUT I WOULD SUSPECT AND I THINK IT'S REASONABLE THAT WHEN THIS CASE COMES INTO YOUR LIFE, THINGS HAPPEN AND THINGS CHANGE. WE'VE ALL SEEN WHAT THIS HAS DONE TO OUR LIVES AND TO WITNESSES' LIVES, WHICH IS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT. THE SALINGER'S SHE SAYS HAVE NOT BEEN HAPPY WITH THE FACT THEY HAVE COME ABOUT. THE FACT THAT MR. DARDEN BRINGS OUT, THERE'S A GATE OUT THERE HAS -- OF NO CONSEQUENCE. SHE'S THE HOUSEKEEPER. THE FACT THAT GATE MAY BE CLOSED ON ONE DAY, IT DOESN'T MEAN THE PRESS -- SHE'S NOT BEEN A VIRTUAL PRISONER IN HER HOME ON OCCASION. SHE WORKS OUT THERE PERHAPS FIVE DAYS A WEEK. BUT WHEN THIS CASE STARTED, SHE HAD A SON AND A DAUGHTER, YOUR HONOR. THE FAMILY WASN'T TORN ASUNDER. AND SHE GOES HOME TO HER DAUGHTER'S HOUSE, THE PROBLEMS HAVE STARTED. THE DAUGHTER SAYS THAT, "YOU BROUGHT THE PRESS TO US." THE WHOLE FACT THAT WE HAVE THIS TAPE FROM CHANNEL 34 IS BECAUSE THE PRESS FOUND THIS LADY. THE COURT READ THIS STATEMENT MR. DARDEN GAVE US. THEY SAID WE -- IN THE COMMUNITY, WE FOUND HER. THIS LADY WANTED ANONYMITY. THAT'S ALL SHE'S EVER ASKED FOR. SHE DIDN'T ASK TO BE THRUST IN THIS SPOTLIGHT, AND IT'S OUTRAGEOUS THAT SHE'S BEEN TREATED LIKE SOME KIND OF CRIMINAL WHEN SHE IS A WITNESS IN THIS CASE. IT'S OUTRAGEOUS. AND SO WHAT HAPPENED IS THAT SHE'S OUT MINDING HER OWN BUSINESS LAST FRIDAY. SHE IS APPARENTLY ACCOSTED. SHE HAS A CONVERSATION WITH A LADY. SHE THEN CALLS HER LAWYERS. A DECLARATION IS DONE. AND I WENT THROUGH THE -- CERTAINLY THE KEY PORTIONS OF THAT DECLARATION AND SPECIFICALLY PARAGRAPH 7. IT IS NOT REQUIRED THAT SHE BELIEVES THAT SOMEBODY'S GOING TO WALK UP AND OR SOMEBODY THREATENS HER WITH PHYSICAL VIOLENCE. SHE SAYS SHE'S AFRAID. SHE'S AFRAID FOR HER LIFE, SHE'S AFRAID FOR THE SAFETY OF HER FAMILY, THAT HER DAUGHTER TOLD HER, "IF YOU GO AND TESTIFY IN THAT CASE, I'M NOT GOING TO BE YOUR DAUGHTER ANYMORE AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE YOUR GRANDCHILDREN ANYMORE." AND HER DAUGHTER APPARENTLY MEANT IT BECAUSE WHEN HER DAUGHTER CAME BACK FROM WORKING IN NEW YORK ON TUESDAY, YOUR HONOR, ROSA LOPEZ WAS THROWN OUT. ROSA LOPEZ SPENT THE NIGHT IN HER CAR ON TUESDAY NIGHT. ON WEDNESDAY, SHE LEFT THE STATE. AND TO HER EVERLASTING CREDIT, DESPITE WHAT THE PEOPLE THINK, THIS LADY CALLED ON HER OWN YESTERDAY TO MR. JONES IN THE AFTERNOON. THE COURT'S AWARE OF THAT BECAUSE WHEN I GOT A CALL AT 5:00 O'CLOCK AND MADE ARRANGEMENTS TO BRING HER BACK HERE TODAY, SHE'S BACK. SHE WAS IN ANOTHER STATE. SHE HAS NO PLACE TO LIVE HERE. SHE DOESN'T HAVE HER DAUGHTER ANYMORE. HER FAMILY HAS BEEN TORN ASUNDER. AND NOW WE'RE BEING TOLD THAT "WELL, GEE, IF YOU GO TO EL SALVADOR, THEY'LL KNOW ABOUT YOU THERE," BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE REASONS. YOU KNOW, IF THIS IS A CASE ABOUT THE SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH, WHY NOT LET HER TESTIFY? WHY NOT -- WHY SHOULD HER LIFE BE RUINED. SOME OF US HAVE TO BE HERE EVERY DAY BECAUSE THIS IS OUR JOB. BUT SHE IS AN UNWITTING AND UNWILLING PARTICIPANT. AND IT SEEMS TO ME WHERE THIS COURT HAS DISCRETION AND WISDOM AND JUDGMENT, THIS IS THE KIND OF CALL THAT WE ASK YOU TO MAKE. THIS IS A WITNESS, AND THE MESSAGE WE SEND TO ALL THESE WITNESSES WILL SET THE STANDARD OF HOW PEOPLE SHOULD BE TREATED AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO BECOME INVOLVED IN THE SYSTEM. ROSA LOPEZ' TESTIMONY WILL RISE AND FALL ON WHAT SHE HAS TO SAY ON THE CRITICAL EVENTS OF JUNE 12TH, 1994. THE PEOPLE SEEM TO WANT TO FIGHT THAT. THEY SEEM TO BE VERY AFRAID OF WHAT SHE MAY SAY AT THAT TIME. SHE'S A WITNESS. AND ON MR. SIMPSON'S BEHALF, WE HAVE TO BRING THIS MOTION, IF A WITNESS SAYS TO US, IN HER DECLARATION SAYS, "I AM GOING TO EL SALVADOR AND I'M NOT COMING BACK." AND IT SEEMED TO ME THAT PERHAPS THE MOST RELEVANT TESTIMONY WAS A COUPLE OF MR. DARDEN'S VERY KEY QUESTIONS AT THE END WHEN HE ASKED, "DO YOU HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR JUDGE ITO," SHE SAID, "YES, I DO. I LIKE HIM VERY MUCH, BUT I'M NOT COMING BACK BECAUSE I'VE HAD IT." AND, JUDGE, IF YOU PUT YOURSELF IN HER PLACE, WHO WOULD WANT TO COME BACK AND BE SUBJECTED TO ALL KINDS OF QUESTIONS AND WHEN ALL YOU COME IN AND SAY IS, "LOOK, I AM AFRAID FOR MY SAFETY"? WHO AMONG US CAN SAY SHE'S NOT TELLING THE TRUTH? NONE OF US CAN DO THAT. SHE SAYS, "I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CASE EXCEPT I AM A WITNESS AND I'M AFRAID FOR MY SAFETY. I WANT TO GO BACK TO MY HOMELAND WHERE I HAVE A HOME. I DON'T HAVE A HOME IN LOS ANGELES. I DON'T WANT TO REVEAL TO YOU WHERE I HAD TO GO THE OTHER DAY, WHEN I FLEW BACK HERE TODAY, AND I WANT TO GO BACK TO THAT PLACE. MY BAGS ARE PACKED FOR OVER A MONTH," SHE SAYS. AND THEN WE BRING IN A TRAVEL AGENT WHO SHE'S DEALT WITH. I THINK IT'S OF NO MOMENT SHE HAS A RESERVATION IN MARCH OR WHATEVER. THE TRAVEL AGENT SAYS SHE MADE A RESERVATION FOR FEBRUARY 15TH SHE COULDN'T KEEP. WE KNOW THAT HER DAUGHTER WAS OUT OF TOWN. WHEN HER DAUGHTER CAME BACK, THE SPLIT OCCURRED, AND NOW SHE WANTS TO GO. BUT IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, IT'S ROSA LOPEZ WHO THIS COURT HAS TO BELIEVE. IF SHE SAYS, "I'M NOT COMING BACK, I'M LEAVING," I THINK YOU CAN BELIEVE THAT. HERE'S A WOMAN WHO DIDN'T HAVE TO COME BACK TODAY. THAT'S THE POINT. THEY CAN NEVER GET OVER THIS POINT. WE DID NOT KNOW WHERE SHE WAS UNTIL SHE CALLED MR. JONES YESTERDAY AFTERNOON AFTER THE SPLIT WITH HER DAUGHTER. SHE CAME BACK ON HER OWN AND SAID, "I WILL COME, I WILL TESTIFY. I WANT TO RESOLVE IT TODAY." BUT AGAIN, JUDGE, IS IT HER FAULT THAT EVERYTHING IN THIS CASE TAKES MUCH LONGER THAN WE ANTICIPATE? SO DO WE SAY TO ROSA LOPEZ, "OKAY. YOU'RE A GOOD CITIZEN. YOU FELT A DUTY AND CAME BACK. NOW I'M GOING TO MAKE YOU STAY HERE UNTIL MONDAY OR TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY." SHE DOESN'T WANT TO DO THAT AND THAT'S NOT FAIR. SO I WOULD ASK THE COURT TO GRANT THIS MOTION. AND I ASKED HER AND DARDEN ASKED HER AND SHE SAID NOT ONLY DOES SHE DOESN'T WANT TO COME BACK ON MONDAY, SHE DOESN'T WANT TO COME BACK IN THREE MONTHS. THE COURT'S AWARE OF THE LAW. IF WE LOSE HER, SHE'S A RELEVANT AND IMPORTANT WITNESS IN THIS CASE IN THE SEARCH FOR JUSTICE. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN AFFORD TO LOSE HER UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, I DON'T THINK THIS COURT CAN LOCK HER UP. THIS IS A VOLUNTARY WITNESS WHO CAME BACK HERE ON HER OWN WITH THE UNDERSTANDING, SHE SAID, "I WANT TO GET THIS OVER WITH ONE DAY AND GET ON WITH MY LIFE." AND SHE HAS A RIGHT. SHE IS A FREE CITIZEN, THAT SHE SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO WHERE SHE WANTS TO GO UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. SHE'S MADE HER CLAIM. AND I TRUST THE COURT WILL BELIEVE WHAT SHE'S HAD TO SAY, THAT SHE'S IN FEAR. AND I THINK THE COURT CAN READ AND LOOK AT THIS WOMAN. YOU SAW HER TEARFUL TESTIMONY WITH REGARDS TO WHAT SHE HAD TO SAY. THIS WOMAN IS AFRAID. SHE DOESN'T WANT TO BE HERE. SHE DOESN'T WANT HER PICTURE PLASTERED ALL OVER THE PLACE. SHE HAD A DIFFERENT CONCEPTION OF WHAT IT MEANT TO HAVE YOUR TESTIMONY TAKEN AND SHE THOUGHT I THOUGHT I BELIEVE THAT IT WAS THE JUDGES, THE LAWYERS AND WHATEVER. BUT EVEN WHEN SHE GOT HERE TODAY AND SAW THAT, THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A CAMERA HERE, SHE STILL SAID, "I'M WILLING TO TRY AND TESTIFY, BUT I WANT TO TESTIFY TODAY. I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO COME BACK IN THE FUTURE. I WANT TO SAY WHAT I HAVE TO SAY AND GET IT OVER WITH." SHE SAYS SHE'S UNDER GREAT STRESS. AND ALSO, I POINT OUT TO THE COURT, THE TESTIMONY UNREBUTTED IS THAT THERE'S BEEN HEART -- THERE'S A PROBLEM OF -- A HISTORY OF HEART AILMENTS WITH THIS FAMILY. SHE HAS EVERY REASON TO WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR. THAT'S HER HOME, THE ONLY HOME SHE HAS IN THE WORLD, YOUR HONOR. SHE'S LOST HER JOB. SHE HAS NO MONEY. SHE HAS NO PLACE TO STAY. SHE HAS A SON WHO'S ENTOMBED IN A TEMPORARY GRAVE. I MEAN WHAT MORE DO WE WANT? SHE HAS A SISTER WHO IS ILL. NOW, WHO AMONG THE PROSECUTION CAN BE SO HEARTLESS TO STAND UP HERE AND SAY, "WELL, LET'S MAKE HER COME BACK." MAYBE THERE'S ONE OR TWO, BUT WE'LL SEE. BUT AT ANY RATE, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IN THIS SITUATION, THIS LADY HAS MADE HER CASE, YOUR HONOR, AND SHE -- WE SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO HAVE A CONDITIONAL EXAMINATION. I DO NOT THINK THAT SHE WILL BE SEEN AGAIN AND I DON'T KNOW WHO COULD BLAME HER UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES. AND THE ALTERNATIVE IS FOR THIS COURT TO HOLD HER AGAINST HER WILL. WHERE IS SHE GOING TO STAY? HER DAUGHTER WON'T TAKE HER IN BECAUSE OF THIS CASE. HER DAUGHTER FEELS THAT THERE'S FEAR. NOW, YOU MAY BELIEVE THAT THE DAUGHTER'S FEAR IS UNREASONABLE. BUT IF SOMEBODY BELIEVES THAT, YOUR HONOR, YOU CAN'T TALK THEM INTO THAT. WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES. AND I THINK THE PROPONENT HAS MET THEIR BURDEN AND I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK THE COURT TO MAKE A DECISION TO ALLOW US TO PRESERVE HER TESTIMONY. AND KEEP THIS IN MIND, YOUR HONOR. WHAT WE DO WITH REGARD TO ROSA LOPEZ, IT SAYS SOMETHING TO ALL THE WITNESSES WHO WOULD OTHERWISE COME FORWARD IN ANY CASE IN AMERICA. IT SAYS THEY ARE GOING TO BE TREATED WITH SOME KIND OF DIGNITY, THEY'RE GOING TO BE TREATED FAIRLY, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE TREATED AS THOUGH THEY LIED ABOUT EVERY LITTLE THING. WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS THEY WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GET AWAY FROM THIS CASE, I DON'T KNOW HOW UNREASONABLE THAT IS, AND THEY WANT TO GIVE THEIR TESTIMONY AND NOT HAVE TO COME BACK DOWN HERE TO AGAIN AND BE SUBJECTED TO THIS. THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, WOULD YOU ADDRESS THE -- WHAT APPEARS TO THE COURT TO BE SEVERAL CONTRADICTIONS IN THE RECORD AS FAR AS MISS LOPEZ IS CONCERNED? FOR EXAMPLE, THE DECLARATION THAT SHE HAS BEEN HARASSED BY THE NEWS MEDIA AND THAT IT IS THIS HARASSMENT THAT IS THE MAJOR COMPONENT OF HER DESIRE TO LEAVE THE UNITED STATES. YET, SHE VOLUNTARILY CONSENTS TO AN INTERVIEW WITH MISS VILLAPANDO, SHE INDICATES AN INTEREST IN THE VARIOUS TELEVISION COVERAGES, THAT SHE RECOGNIZES SOME OF THE TELEVISION REPORTERS HERE. AND I HAVE TO TELL YOU, I DON'T KNOW WHO THAT WOMAN WAS. I DON'T WATCH COURT T.V. I DON'T HAVE CABLE T.V. I HAVE NO IDEA WHO THAT PERSON WAS. SHE KNOWS WHO IT IS. THAT SHE SAW THAT AS A PERSONALITY, SOMEBODY THAT SHE LIKED AND ENJOYED, IT SHOWS TO ME AN INTEREST IN THE PRESS AND NOT A FEAR OF THE PRESS. THE CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS THAT SHE HAS MADE ABOUT WHEN SHE IS GOING TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY, THE STATEMENT MADE BY CARL JONES THAT ON -- AS EARLY AS LAST WEEK, THAT SHE WAS NOT -- HE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE THAT HIS CLIENT WAS GOING TO BE LEAVING THE COUNTRY OR THAT SHE HAD EXPRESSED ANYTHING LIKE THAT; THE CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS TO THE SALINGER'S THAT SHE WAS GOING TO IMMEDIATELY LEAVE TO GO TO EL SALVADOR, WHICH SHE DID NOT DO; THE CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS THAT SHE MADE TODAY REGARDING WHEN SHE MADE THE RESERVATIONS TO LEAVE, THE FACT SHE DID NOT DISCLOSE THE RESERVATIONS IN MARCH, THE FACT SHE DENIED HAVING ANY OTHER ARRANGEMENTS. I MEAN THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CONTRADICTIONS IN WHAT SHE HAS SAID, AND THAT CONCERNS ME ABOUT THE CREDIBILITY OF HER STATEMENT THAT SHE NOW INTENDS TO GO TODAY NO MATTER WHAT. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. LET ME ADDRESS THOSE, PLEASE. THANK YOU. WITH REGARD TO THE PRESS, FIRST OF ALL -- THE COURT: I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY THREE OR FOUR MORE. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, FEEL FREE TO -- THE COURT: JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. WHATEVER NUMBER YOU WANT TO BRING, I'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. FIRST OF ALL, I THINK EVEN YOUR HONOR HAS FRIENDS IN THE PRESS, PEOPLE THAT YOU TRUST. THE COURT: NO. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, YOU DID AT ONE POINT, YOUR HONOR. LET ME POINT THIS OUT. YOU CAN TRUST -- I'M NOT TRYING TO HURT THE GUY, BUT ALL OF US HAVE PEOPLE THAT WE MAY RESPECT OR ADMIRE IN THE PRESS AT ONE TIME OR OTHER. EVEN WISE PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES REGARDING THE PRESS. AS I UNDERSTOOD -- AND WE SAW THE TAPE. LET'S JUST TAKE THAT INCIDENT. AND THEN I WANT TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE OF WHERE IT SHOULD BE. SHE'S SITTING ON THE BENCH BACK THERE WITH HER LAWYER. SHE FEELS SAFE. KRISTIN JEANNETTE MEYERS WALKS PAST. SHE RECOGNIZES HER AND SAYS SOMETHING LIKE, "YOU'RE PRETTY. I'VE SEEN YOU ON TELEVISION," SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THIS LADY -- I THINK THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU HATE ALL THE PRESS. KRISTIN MEYERS DID NOT HAVE A CAMERA RUNNING AFTER HER ASKING HER A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS. SHE WAS WALKING PAST. MISS LOPEZ INSTITUTED THAT. DOES THAT MEAN SHE DOESN'T WANT TO GO TO EL SALVADOR? DOES THAT MEAN SHE DOESN'T HAVE A FEAR OF WHAT THE PRESS HAS DONE TO HER LIFE? I THINK NOT, YOUR HONOR. I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT FOR WHAT IT IS, THAT WAS ONE PERSON SHE RECOGNIZED WITH HER LAWYER SITTING HOPEFULLY IN THE SANCTITY AND SOME SAFETY IN THIS PARTICULAR COURTROOM, WHEN SHE SAYS, "YOU'RE A PRETTY LADY ON TELEVISION. I RECOGNIZE YOU." NOW, THE FACT THAT SOME OF US MAY NOT SEE COURT TV OR KNOW WHO KRISTIN JEANNETTE MEYERS WAS, SHE RECOGNIZED HER. IN RESPONSE TO MR. DARDEN'S QUESTION, SHE SAID SHE HAD SEEN SOME PORTION OF THE PRELIMINARY HEARING. BUT I DON'T SEE ANY CONTRADICTION BETWEEN THAT AND THE FACT THAT SHE IS TERRIFIED OR CONCERNED ABOUT THE PRESS AND WHAT THE PRESS HAS DONE TO HER LIFE AND WHAT THE PRESS HAS DONE TO HER DAUGHTER AND WHAT THE DAUGHTER THINKS THE PRESS IS GOING TO DO. I MEAN, JUDGE, YOU PERHAPS -- AND WE HAVE BECOME USED TO THE PRESS OUTSIDE YOUR DOORS ALL THE TIME. BUT FOR REGULAR PEOPLE WHO HAVE THEIR REGULAR LIVES, THEY DON'T LIKE THAT. THEY LIKE TO GO AND WHEN THEY PLEASE, AND WHEN IT BRINGS PROBLEMS IN THE FAMILY, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO LET'S JUST TAKE THAT. AND I THINK THAT'S AN ANSWER WITH REGARD TO THAT. NOW, SECONDLY, YOU ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT MR. JONES' STATEMENT. MR. JONES, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, TALKED TO HER AS OFTEN AS HE COULD IN TALKING TO HER. AND AT ONE POINT -- AND I HAVE NEVER HEARD ANY TESTIMONY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT HE SAID THAT OR NOT. BUT LET'S ASSUME THAT THAT WAS -- AT SOME POINT IN FEBRUARY, HE SAID HE DIDN'T KNOW. THE COURT: WELL, IF YOU RECALL, SHE ACKNOWLEDGED UNDER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN THAT SHE HAD HEARD MR. JONES SAY ON THE 17TH THAT HE HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH HER AND HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANY PLANS TO LEAVE. THAT'S THE STATE OF THE RECORD AS I RECOLLECT. MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. THAT'S FINE. WE DID NOT -- WHAT I MEANT, WE DIDN'T CALL MR. JONES ON THIS ISSUE OR WE'D BE HERE ALL DAY. THE COURT: THAT WAS ACKNOWLEDGMENT BY THE CLIENT AND HE'S SPEAKING FOR THE CLIENT. MR. COCHRAN: RIGHT. IN THAT CONNECTION -- AND THE COURT WILL RECALL, THERE HAD BEEN SOME EARLIER DECLARATIONS IN THIS REGARD. ON THE 17TH OF FEBRUARY, BECAUSE THIS ADDRESSES THAT ISSUE, THERE'S A DECLARATION PREPARED BY MR. JONES IN TALKING WITH HIS CLIENT WITH A SPANISH INTERPRETER THERE WHERE SHE SPELLS OUT THIS FEAR. THE 17TH WAS APPARENTLY A PRETTY FRIGHTENING DAY BY ALL ACCOUNTS FOR HER. SHE HAD HIDDEN OUT AGAIN, JUDGE. SHE HAD LOST THE JOB NOW WITH THE SALINGER'S. AND KEEP THAT IN MIND. I MEAN, LOSING A JOB, I MEAN, DOES THAT MEAN ANYTHING TO ANY OF US? THAT SHE'S LOST HER LIVELIHOOD. SHE'S LOST THE JOB. SHE'S AT HOME AT HER DAUGHTER'S HOUSE. HER DAUGHTER IS SAYING, "YOU GET INVOLVED IN THIS CASE AND YOU'RE OUT OF HERE." CHANNEL 34 SAYS THEY GO OUT AND THEY DO A COMMUNITY SERVICE, THEY FIND HER. AND THEN ALL THESE CAMERAS AND THEN EVERYTHING SHOW UP. THERE IS NO INTERVIEW AS SUCH. AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, MISS VILLAPANDO GAINED HER CONFIDENCE OR WHATEVER AND CAME INSIDE THE HOUSE AND THEN TRIED TO TALK TO HER. SHE THEN WENT ON CAMERA. ROSA LOPEZ DID NOT GO ON CAMERA. MISS VILLAPANDO THEN TALKED TO HER AND MADE THIS STATEMENT. BUT -- AND SOME MEMBERS OF THE PRESS ARE PERHAPS NICER THAN OTHERS. BUT THERE'S NO INTERVIEW BY ROSA LOPEZ. AND AGAIN, SHE'S NEVER SAID, "I HATE ALL MEMBERS OF THE PRESS." WHAT SHE SAYS, "I HATE WHAT THE PRESS HAS DONE TO ME AND MY FAMILY." THERE'S SOME NICE PEOPLE OUT THERE, YOUR HONOR. AND I LOOK BACK AND I SEE SOME OF THE NICE ONES. AND -- BUT COLLECTIVELY, IT'S WHAT THEY BECOME WHEN THEY WANT TO GET A STORY. AND ROSA LOPEZ IS A HOT STORY. SO THAT WITH REGARD TO THAT, I SEE -- I SEE THAT OF NO PARTICULAR MOMENT OR CONSEQUENCE. NOW, WITH REGARD TO ROSA LOPEZ AS A WITNESS ON THE STAND, THE COURT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO OBSERVE HER. AND CERTAINLY, YOU HAVE IN MIND HER TESTIMONY. THIS LADY SAID SHE HAD MADE RESERVATIONS THROUGH THIS COMPANY -- THE COURT: PAN AMERICANA. MR. COCHRAN: -- PAN AMERICANA. I HEARD THAT AND I WENT AND CHECKED IT AND SHE GAVE -- AND ACTUALLY SHE WAS RIGHT. SHE HAD SAID AT ONE POINT IN MR. DARDEN'S EXAMINATION THAT SHE HAD MADE SOME RESERVATIONS AND IN FACT SHE HADN'T MADE THOSE RESERVATIONS. BUT FROM THE 17TH, WHEN SHE MADE THAT DECLARATION, SHE'S ALWAYS BEEN CLEAR, "I AM LEAVING BY TOMORROW." AND THE REASON WHY I THOUGHT ZULEMA IIDA WAS IMPORTANT WAS, JUDGE, AGAIN, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT ROSA LOPEZ AND LOOK AT HER HISTORY. SOME PEOPLE, JUDGE, ARE NOT FREQUENT FLYERS. THEY DON'T GO AND BUY THEIR TICKETS A MONTH IN ADVANCE AND STICK BY IT. SOME PEOPLE TRY TO GET THE BEST RATES. SOME PEOPLE IT SEEMS TO ME, ACCORDING TO MISS IIDA, MAKE RESERVATIONS AND NOT ALWAYS COMPLY WITH THEM. SOME PEOPLE, WHEN FLIGHTS ARE AVAILABLE AND THEY SAY THEY'RE GOING TO GO, THEY DO IT AND DO IT THAT DAY. NOW, WE KNOW FROM MISS IIDA SHE NOW HAS RESERVATIONS TO THAT EFFECT. SHE WAS OUT OF TOWN UNTIL 1:30 THIS MORNING, YOUR HONOR. SHE SLEPT FOR NO MORE THAN TWO AND A HALF HOURS, THEN MET WITH LAWYERS AND HAS BEEN HERE SINCE BEFORE 9:00 O'CLOCK THIS MORNING. SO THE COURT HAS TO VIEW THE TOTALITY OF HER TESTIMONY WITH REGARD TO WHETHER OR NOT SHE IS IMPEACHED ON ANY POINT OR WHATEVER. THE COURT SAW THE THINGS THAT SHE HAD TO SAY. THE PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING WAS NOT TO TEAR INTO ROSA LOPEZ DAY AS THE COURT UNDERSTANDS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING WAS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT HER TESTIMONY SHOULD BE PRESERVED BASED UPON WHAT SHE HAS TO SAY. AND I KEEP COMING BACK TO THE POINT, SHE IS THE ONE THAT ONE HAS TO LISTEN TO. NOT THE D.A.'S, NOT THE OTHER WITNESS. SHE IS THE ONE, WHEN SHE SAYS TO YOU, "I LIKE YOU, I RESPECT YOU, BUT I'M NOT COMING BACK HERE. I WANT TO GET OUT OF HERE." DARDEN ASKED HER SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS, WELL, WHAT IF THE D.A.'S OFFICE OR WHAT IF THE JUDGE OUT OF HIS BUDGET PAYS FOR HER, TO PUT HER UP. THAT'S AN ADMISSION, JUDGE. THIS LADY HAS NO PLACE TO STAY. SHE HAS NO PLACE TO GO BY VIRTUE OF THIS CASE. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO TAR AND FEATHER HER? AND I JUST -- I -- IT FRIGHTENS, IT SHOCKS ME TO THINK OF THE MESSAGE WE WANT TO SEND AROUND AMERICA TO WITNESSES. THIS INNOCENT LADY WHO COMES IN HERE AND WANTS TO GO TO EL SALVADOR TO REBURY HER SON, TO LOOK AFTER HER SICK SISTER, TO GO TO THE ONLY PLACE SHE HAS A HOME, TO GO TO HER HOMELAND WHERE SHE IS FRANCHISED, WHEN SHE'S BEEN THROWN OUT OF HER DAUGHTER'S HOME, AND COME HERE ON HER OWN FROM ANOTHER STATE, I THINK SHE DESERVES A LOT MORE CREDIT THAN IT SEEMS TO ME SHE'S BEEN GIVEN. IF THE COURT WILL REMIND ME OF THE OTHER ISSUE -- I PERHAPS DIDN'T GET IT -- I'LL BE GLAD TO RESPOND TO IT. THE COURT: WELL, JUST THE VARIOUS CONTRADICTIONS THAT SHE HAD CONCEDED. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, I DON'T KNOW THAT SHE CONCEALED ALL THESE CONTRADICTIONS, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: CONCEDED. SHE CONCEDED ALL THE CONTRADICTIONS. MR. COCHRAN: OH, I'M SORRY. CONCEDED. I THINK WITH REGARD -- JUDGE, THERE'S A JURY INSTRUCTION WHICH TALKS ABOUT INNOCENT MISRECOLLECTION OF WITNESSES. I WANT YOU TO COMPARE THESE -- THESE MISREPRESENTATIONS OR ANY CONCEALMENTS OR ANY CONCEDING, THINGS SHE'S CONCEDED WITH THE FACT THIS LADY STANDS BEFORE YOU AND TELLS YOU, "I DON'T WANT TO COME BACK. I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE. I CAME HERE VOLUNTARILY TODAY." NOW, WHO CAN QUARREL WITH THAT? THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT SHE DID. THEY ASKED ALL THESE THINGS ABOUT SOMEBODY FROM THE STAR WHOSE NAME HAS SURFACED IN OTHER INVESTIGATIONS. HOW CREDIBLE IS THAT? IF SHE WANTED TO MAKE MONEY IN THIS CASE, SHE HAS NO JOB, SHE HAS NO PLACE TO STAY, SHE SPENT ONE NIGHT THIS WEEK IN A CAR. IF A STAR REPORTER OFFERED HER $5,000, WITH THE TESTIMONY SHE HAS TO GIVE OF THIS EXPLOSIVE NATURE, DON'T YOU THINK SHE WOULD TAKE THAT? THIS IS AN HONORABLE WOMAN. SHE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE MALIGNED. SHE DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE TREATED THIS WAY. IF THEY COULD COME IN AND SHOW SHE WAS GOING TO GET SOME MONEY FOR THIS, THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE AGAIN. BUT THAT'S PREPOSTEROUS, TO ASK HER A QUESTION ABOUT BILLBOARDS IN HER COUNTRY. AND THE FACT THAT WE HAVE CNN AROUND THE WORLD IS OF NO MOMENT. WHAT THEY DON'T SEEM TO REALIZE, BECAUSE THEY HAVE HOMES, IS SHE HAS A PLACE TO GO TO THERE. SHE DOESN'T HAVE A PLACE TO GO TO HERE. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING FOR HER. SO IT'S EASY TO BEAT UP ON SOMEBODY IN COURT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING ELSE AGAIN TO HAVE SOME COMPASSION FOR PEOPLE AND THEN -- EXCUSE ME. IT'S EASY TO BEAT UP ON SOMEONE IN COURT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING ELSE AGAIN TO HAVE SOME COMPASSION FOR ONE'S FELLOW MAN AND ESPECIALLY SOMEBODY WHO'S NOT REALLY A PARTY. WE'RE ALL LOCKED TOGETHER IN THIS CASE UNTIL THE END. BUT ROSA LOPEZ IS CERTAINLY MORE TRANSITORY THAN THIS. AND WHETHER OR NOT -- AND ALL WE ARE ASKING IS GIVEN EVERYTHING, YOU CONSIDER THIS LIKE ALL THE WITNESSES. JUDGE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU THINK ABOUT WITNESSES WHO ARE -- WHO HAVE BEEN IMPEACHED IN THIS CASE, IF I STARTED TOTALLING UP WITNESSES, SOME OF THEM WOULDN'T EVEN COME BACK IN HERE. THIS LADY IS AN HONORABLE LADY WHO HAS NOTHING TO GAIN OR WHATEVER EXCEPT SHE WANTS TO GO ON WITH HER LIFE. THAT'S ALL SHE SAID TO YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY DOUBT ABOUT IT, YOU LOOK HER IN THE EYE AND ASK HER THAT. AND SHE'S TOLD YOU THAT. SHE'S TOLD DARDEN THAT. I'M ASKING YOU TO ALLOW HER TO GIVE HER TESTIMONY. AND I UNDERSTAND THE TIME CRUNCH. BUT I ALSO UNDERSTAND -- IN ADDITION TO BEING A LAWYER, I WANT TO BE A HUMAN BEING ABOUT THIS, ABOUT WHAT THIS LADY DID. AND I KNOW WHEN I SPOKE TO YOU LAST NIGHT AT 5:00 O'CLOCK, AT THAT TIME, I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE SHE WAS. AND WHEN I FOUND OUT WHERE SHE WAS, I INDICATED TO YOU I WAS GOING TO GET HER BACK HERE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, AND YOU INDICATED TO ME TO CALL THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND I FOLLOWED -- AND I CALLED DARDEN AND TOLD HIM THAT NIGHT. SO THERE'S AN HONORABLE QUALITY ABOUT THIS LADY AND I HOPE THAT HAS SHONE THROUGH IN HER TESTIMONY. AND I ASK THE COURT TO CONSIDER IT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE GLAD TO TRY TO ADDRESS THEM. THE COURT: THANK YOU, MR. COCHRAN. MR. DARDEN. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, AS I SAT HERE LISTENING TO MR. COCHRAN, I WONDERED, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME ROSA LOPEZ? THEY ARE -- SORRY? DID YOU SAY SOMETHING? MR. COCHRAN MUST HAVE HAD A HARD TIME KEEPING A STRAIGHT FACE AS HE ARGUED THE CREDIBILITY OF ROSA LOPEZ. THE ISSUE AT THIS POINT ISN'T WHETHER WE SHOULD HOLD A 1335 OR CONDITIONAL EXAMINATION. THE ISSUE IS WHY SHOULD WE HOLD A CONDITIONAL EXAMINATION. ROSA LOPEZ HAS TAKEN THE WITNESS STAND. SHE TOOK THE OATH. SHE PROMISED TO TELL THE TRUTH AND SHE DID THE EXACT OPPOSITE. SHE TOLD US THAT SHE MADE RESERVATIONS TO LEAVE. WE CALLED AND CHECKED. WE FOUND OUT THAT SHE HADN'T, AND WHEN WE CONFRONTED HER WITH IT, SHE ADMITTED THAT SHE HAD LIED. SHE TOLD US THAT SHE WAS GOING TO MAKE RESERVATIONS. I'M NOT SURE THAT SHE HAS OR THAT SHE DID TODAY. SHE TOLD US THAT SHE HADN'T MADE RESERVATIONS TO LEAVE AT SOME OTHER TIME. BUT NOW WE FIND OUT THAT ON FEBRUARY 21ST, THAT SHE BOOKED A ROUND-TRIP TICKET TO EL SALVADOR. AND WHAT'S IMPORTANT ABOUT THE FEBRUARY 21 DATE, YOUR HONOR, IS THAT FOUR DAYS BEFORE ON FEBRUARY 17TH, SHE SIGNED A DECLARATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY SAYING SHE WAS LEAVING AND SHE WASN'T COMING BACK SAYING SHE FEARED FOR HER LIFE. YOU TELL ME, WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? TALKING ABOUT CONTRADICTIONS, THERE ARE CONTRADICTIONS HERE, CONTRADICTIONS MADE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. YOU CAN'T BELIEVE ANYTHING ROSA LOPEZ SAYS I THINK AT THIS POINT. THE COURT: WAS IT THE DECLARATION ON THE 17TH THAT SAYS THAT SHE'S LEAVING? BECAUSE I THOUGHT THAT WAS ONE THAT DID NOT SAY SHE WAS LEAVING. LET ME JUST DOUBLE-CHECK. MR. DARDEN: THE FEBRUARY 17TH DECLARATION -- THE COURT: I STAND CORRECTED. I STAND CORRECTED. THERE WERE OTHER DECLARATIONS THAT DID NOT SAY THAT. MR. DARDEN: THE FEBRUARY 17TH DECLARATION SAYS, "I HAVE DECIDED TO RETURN TO MY NATIVE EL SALVADOR ON FEBRUARY 25." THAT'S FEBRUARY 17. ON FEBRUARY 21, SHE MAKES A ROUND-TRIP RESERVATION FOR A ROUND-TRIP TICKET FOR MARCH. OKAY. WE WOULD CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE ROSA LOPEZ TESTIFY IN FRONT OF THE JURY. AND IF WHAT WE'VE SEEN TODAY IS A SNEAK PREVIEW OF THE DEFENSE IN THIS CASE, THEN OBVIOUSLY WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO IT, IF MISS LOPEZ MAKES THESE CLAIMS AND ALLEGATIONS ABOUT BRONCOS AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND ALL THESE OTHER THINGS, AND THEY ARE IMPORTANT THINGS, EVEN IF HER ACCOUNT IS UNTRUE, BUT THEY ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT A JURY OUGHT TO HEAR, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE COMPLETE AND TOTAL LACK OF CREDIBILITY THAT ROSA LOPEZ HAS. THEY HAVEN'T PROVEN THAT SHE'S ABOUT TO LEAVE. WHAT WE FOUND OUT ABOUT ROSA LOPEZ IS THAT HER ACCOUNTS, HER VIEWS, HER POSITIONS AND HER TESTIMONY CHANGES WITH THE WIND, YOUR HONOR. IT CHANGES WITH THE SECONDS. IT CHANGES WITH TIME, AND SHE WILL CHANGE AND MODIFY THAT TESTIMONY AND HER VIEW AND HER POSITION AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT DEPENDENT UPON WHO ASKS -- IS ASKING THE QUESTIONS. THERE IS NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE IN THIS RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT SHE IS ABOUT TO LEAVE THIS JURISDICTION. IN FACT, THE MOST CREDIBLE EVIDENCE IN THIS RECORD IS THAT SHE IS GOING TO PURCHASE A ROUND-TRIP TICKET IN MARCH OF 1995. I WOULD ASK THAT THE COURT TAKE NOTE OF HER COOPERATION WITH THE DEFENSE IN THIS CASE. SHE TOLD MISS VILLAPANDO THAT SHE CALLED HER ATTORNEY ON MANY, MANY OCCASIONS. EVEN WHEN THEY DIDN'T RETURN HER CALL, SHE STILL CALLED. MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S OUTSIDE THE EVIDENCE, YOUR HONOR. MR. DARDEN: AND WHEN SHE LEFT THE STATE, SHE CALLED TO TELL THEM WHERE SHE WAS AND TO TELL THEM THAT SHE WOULD BE HERE. SHE BOOKED A ROUND-TRIP TICKET FOR MARCH. SHE'LL COME BACK. SHE SAYS THAT SHE FEELS AS IF SHE HAS A DUTY TO TELL THE TRUTH AND TO ASSIST THIS DEFENDANT. ROSA LOPEZ WILL BE BACK. AND I'LL TELL YOU, YOUR HONOR, IF YOU DON'T HOLD A CONDITIONAL EXAMINATION TODAY, SHE PROBABLY WON'T LEAVE THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES. SHE PROBABLY WON'T EVEN VISIT THE TICKET AGENCY OR THE TRAVEL AGENCY. THERE IS NOTHING, NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE, NO CREDIBLE TESTIMONY IN THIS RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT SHE IS ABOUT TO LEAVE AND THE MOTION OUGHT TO BE DENIED. THERE ARE MANY, MANY CONTRADICTIONS IN THE RECORD THAT I COULD SPEAK ON WHICH MY CLERKS FROM SOUTHWESTERN LAW SCHOOL WERE CAREFUL TO PLOT OUT FOR ME SO THAT I COULD ARGUE THOSE POINT TO THE COURT. BUT I SENSE THE COURT IS AWARE OF THOSE CONTRADICTIONS. HOW CAN THE COURT ACCEPT THIS WITNESS' TESTIMONY? HOW CAN THE COURT FIND HER CREDIBLE? HOW CAN WE POSSIBLY BELIEVE THAT SHE IS GOING TO DO WHAT SHE SAYS? EVEN AS WE STAND BEFORE THE COURT NOW AND ARGUE THIS ISSUE, I SUSPECT THAT IN THE MEDIA RIGHT NOW, THAT THEY HAVE UNCOVERED OTHER CONTRADICTIONS IN THE TESTIMONY THAT SHE HAS GIVEN TODAY. THE DEFENSE HAS FAILED TO CARRY THE BURDEN, TO CARRY THE DAY ON THIS ISSUE, YOUR HONOR. AND WE DIDN'T BEAT UP ON HER. WE DIDN'T TREAT HER LIKE THEY TREATED OUR WITNESSES. WE DIDN'T TREAT HER LIKE THEY TREATED RON SHIPP OR WE DIDN'T ASK HER ABOUT HER DRINKING PROBLEMS OR OTHER PERSONAL BUSINESS, OKAY. WE TREATED HER IN A DIGNIFIED MANNER. THIS IS A COURT OF LAW. MR. SIMPSON'S FREEDOM IS AT STAKE, THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL AND THE PUBLIC SAFETY IS AT STAKE. GIVEN THE INFORMATION SHE CLAIMS TO HAVE AND GIVEN THEIR COMPLETE FAILURE, COMPLETE FAILURE TO SUSTAIN THEIR BURDEN UNDER 1335 AND 1336, THE COURT OUGHT TO DENY THE MOTION. MISS LOPEZ IS ON HER OWN AS SHE SHOULD BE. I AM SURE THAT SHE WILL RETURN TO HER DAUGHTER'S HOUSE. I DOUBT THAT SHE EVER SLEPT ON THE STREET OR DID ANY OF THAT AT ALL. WE KNOW WHERE SHE'S BEEN AND SHE'S PROBABLY BEEN PLAYING THE SLOT MACHINES AND HAVING A GOOD TIME. AND I'VE INDICATED TO MR. COCHRAN THAT IF THE D.A.'S OFFICE CAN ASSIST IN ANY REASONABLE MANNER IN HELPING THEM TO KEEP THEIR WITNESS OR TO STAY IN CONTACT WITH THEIR WITNESS, THEN WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT BECAUSE THIS IS A SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH. AND WE THINK WE KNOW WHAT THE TRUTH IS AND WE THINK THE JURY IS GOING TO FIND THE TRUTH AT THE END OF THIS. AND WE WANT TO HELP, WE WANT TO HELP THE DEFENSE, BUT NOT THIS WAY. IT'S UNFAIR. IT'S WRONG. THE COURT: MR. DARDEN, LET ME ASK YOU TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LEDGER, HAVING NOTED THE CONTRADICTIONS, THE RECORD ALSO INDICATES THAT SHE WAS IN FACT OUT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA UNTIL THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF TODAY, THAT SHE VOLUNTARILY RETURNED, WHICH SHOWS HER GOOD FAITH. AND THE INFORMATION THAT I RECEIVED, THAT WE STIPULATED TO IN A SIDEBAR WAS, SHE WAS IN FACT OUTSIDE OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. MR. DARDEN: I THINK WE -- THE COURT: SO DON'T I HAVE -- I'M SORRY. DON'T I HAVE TO ALSO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT SHE DID VOLUNTARILY COME BACK, SHE WAS BEYOND THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT AND SHOULDN'T I TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION IN EVALUATING THE TRUTHFULNESS OF HER STATEMENT THAT SHE'S GOING TO LEAVE? QUESTION NUMBER ONE. QUESTION NUMBER TWO IS, DO YOU WANT TO ROLL THE DICE? SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, I ACCEPT YOUR ARGUMENT THAT BASED UPON MY ANALYSIS OF THE CREDIBILITY OF THE TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES HERE, THAT THERE HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT THE WITNESS IS ABOUT TO LEAVE THE STATE AS IS REQUIRED UNDER 1337, SUB (4). LET'S ASSUME THAT I ACCEPT THAT ARGUMENT AND DENY THE HEARING. WE GO FORWARD AND SHE DOES IN FACT LEAVE THE JURISDICTION AND GOES TO A PLACE WHERE SHE IS BEYOND SERVICE OF THE INTERSTATE COMPACT ON WITNESSES. LET'S ASSUME THAT THE WORSE HAPPENS AS FAR AS MR. SIMPSON IS CONCERNED AND HE IS FOUND GUILTY OF SOME FELONY SERIOUS CRIME. THEN WE HAVE AN APPELLATE ISSUE ON THE ABUSE OF THIS -- THE ABUSE OF DISCRETION BY THIS COURT FAILING TO GRANT A 1335, WHEN THE ONLY DOWNSIDE IS THAT IF SHE IS UNAVAILABLE UNDER TWO -- WE HAVE TO HAVE A 240 HEARING SOMEWHERE FURTHER DOWN THE LINE TO SEE IF SHE'S STILL IN FACT UNAVAILABLE AT THE TIME THAT THE DEFENSE CASE GOES ON. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, IF ANYTHING, THE COURT SHOULD CONSIDER HER RETURN TO THIS JURISDICTION TO TESTIFY TODAY AS PROOF POSITIVE OF HER WILLINGNESS TO ASSIST THE DEFENSE IN ANY MANNER THAT SHE CAN. AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY ABOUT ALL THAT IT'S WORTH. AND AS FAR AS ROLLING THE DICE IS CONCERNED, YOUR HONOR, WE BELIEVE THAT THE RECORD SUPPORTS A FINDING THAT THEY HAVE FAILED TO CARRY THEIR BURDEN. THE COURT DOES HAVE DISCRETION. THERE ARE MANY, MANY CONTRADICTIONS AND INCONSISTENCIES IN THE TESTIMONY OF MISS LOPEZ AND MISS LOPEZ' TESTIMONY AS OPPOSED TO THE SECOND WITNESS. AND THIS TESTIMONY, ALL OF THIS TESTIMONY WE BELIEVE WILL SUPPORT THE COURT'S FINDING THAT A CONDITIONAL EXAMINATION IS INAPPROPRIATE UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. WE DON'T SEE IT AS AN ISSUE OF ROLLING THE DICE OR NOT. IT'S NOT A ROLL THE DICE ISSUE. WE FOUGHT HARD ON THIS ISSUE BECAUSE WE BELIEVED THIS PERSON TO BE -- YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T WANT TO OFFEND ANYONE THIS AFTERNOON, BUT WE DID NOT BELIEVE SHE WAS A CREDIBLE INDIVIDUAL. WE FELT THAT THE JURY OUGHT TO HEAR HER TESTIFY. THAT IS, IF THEY REALLY WANT TO TAKE HER TESTIMONY. THAT IS AS OPPOSED TO CREATING AN APPELLATE ISSUE IN THIS CASE. AT ANY EVENT, YOUR HONOR, THE RECORD WE THINK FULLY SUPPORTS THE COURT'S FINDING, IF THE COURT IS INCLINED TO SO FIND, THAT A CONDITIONAL EXAMINATION IS NOT NECESSARY UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. I DON'T THINK THAT ROSA LOPEZ WILL MISS OUT ON TESTIFYING AGAIN IN THESE PROCEEDINGS IN FRONT OF THE WHOLE WORLD. I THINK SHE'LL BE BACK. I THINK IF MR. JONES ASKED HER TO COME BACK OR IF MR. SIMPSON SHOULD ASK HER TO COME BACK, I THINK SHE WILL. I'M SURE SHE WILL. I'M NOT SURE THEY'RE GOING TO WANT HER TO COME BACK. BUT I THINK IF THEY ASK, THAT SHE WILL. AND ONCE AGAIN, THE PEOPLE ARE PREPARED TO OFFER SOME ASSISTANCE TO THE DEFENSE IN TERMS OF BRINGING HER BACK IF THEY REALLY -- THE COURT: AND THE PEOPLE MAINTAIN THEIR POSITION AT THIS TIME THAT THEY WILL NOT ALLOW OR THEY OBJECT TO CALLING ROSA LOPEZ OUT OF ORDER SO THAT SHE CAN TESTIFY IN FRONT OF THE JURY? MR. DARDEN: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR. I DIDN'T HEAR THE BEGINNING OF IT. THE COURT: DO YOU MAINTAIN YOUR POSITION YOU WILL OBJECT TO CALLING HER OUT OF ORDER? MR. DARDEN: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. COCHRAN: JUST BRIEFLY, YOUR HONOR. IF THE PROSECUTION IS SO CONFIDENT THAT ROSA LOPEZ IS NOT A CREDIBLE WITNESS, THEN LET ME REITERATE OUR OFFER THAT WE MADE EARLIER THAT WE WERE JUST ASKING ABOUT. IF THEY'RE SO CONVINCED, LET US CALL HER IN HERE AND ASK HER, JUDGE, IF WE CAN PUT HER ON THE STAND MONDAY MORNING AND SHE LEAVE MONDAY NIGHT. LET HER TESTIFY BEFORE THIS JURY ON MONDAY SINCE THEY THINK -- THEY'RE SO PROUD OF WHAT THEY CAN SHOW. LET HER TESTIFY. THEY WANT TO SEARCH FOR TRUTH, LET THEM DO IT. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT, YOUR HONOR, BECAUSE I ASKED THEM THAT BEFORE. AND I THINK IT'S REALLY THE HEIGHT OF ARROGANCE AND REALLY UNFAIR. MR. DARDEN KNOWS THAT SHE WAS NOT IN LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. HER FLIGHT WENT THROUGH THERE. SHE COULDN'T GET A THROUGH FLIGHT. THAT'S WHY SHE FLEW LAST NIGHT TILL 1:30. AND HOW DISINGENUOUS IS IT FOR A LAWYER TO STAND UP HERE AND TALK ABOUT SLOT MACHINES WHEN THE ONLY FLIGHT SHE COULD GET WAS THROUGH LAS VEGAS TO GET TO L.A. THAT'S PREPOSTEROUS. THE COURT: WELL, MR. COCHRAN, THAT ARGUMENT DOESN'T CARRY ANY WEIGHT BECAUSE -- MR. COCHRAN: WELL, IT MAY NOT. BUT, YOU KNOW, IT OFFENDS ME, BECAUSE IT SHOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED, YOUR HONOR. SO I HAVE TO -- I FEEL DUTY-BOUND TO SAY THAT. PLEASE ALLOW ME THAT. NOW, HAVING SAID THAT, LET ME GET BACK TO THE ISSUES. YOU PUT YOUR FINGER ON IT DIRECTLY. THE PROSECUTION IN THEIR ZEST TO WIN, THEIR OBSESSION TO WIN, THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT ROLLING ANY DICE IN THIS CASE. THEY ARE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THAT. YOU ARE THE JUDGE AND YOU'RE THE ONE WHO HAS TO BE WISE. IT'S YOUR DISCRETION THAT'S AT STAKE. WHAT WE ARE SAYING TO YOU, YOU SAW THIS WITNESS WHO CAME BACK ON HER OWN. SHE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT. SHE DOESN'T WANT TO TESTIFY. SHE DIDN'T GET ANYTHING OUT OF THIS. IF SHE DOESN'T COME BACK -- IF SHE DOES WHAT SHE SAYS SHE'S GOING TO DO -- AND I FIND HER CREDIBLE ON THAT. SHE SAID SHE WOULD COME BACK TODAY. SHE DID THAT. SHE SAID SHE'S NOT COMING BACK AFTER TODAY, AND I BELIEVE THAT. YOU HEARD THOSE PARTICULAR QUESTIONS WHICH WERE THE MOST IMPORTANT ONES HERE TODAY EVEN THOUGH SHE HAD RESPECT FOR YOU, BECAUSE OF WHAT IT'S DONE TO HER LIFE. AND, YOU KNOW, FOR THEM TO SAY THAT SHE DIDN'T SLEEP ON THE STREETS, THAT IS THE EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE, THAT'S WHAT SHE TESTIFIED ABOUT. AND WE KNOW SHE THEN LEFT THIS JURISDICTION. AND THE WHOLE EVIDENCE IS, SHE'S HAD THIS PROBLEM WITH HER FAMILY. IT JUST SEEMS TO ME TO DEFY CREDULITY AND BE THE HEIGHT OF INSENSITIVITY FOR THEM TO TALK ABOUT THIS. THEY TALK ABOUT THIS -- THIS IS A WITNESS, A WITNESS. SHE'S NOT A PARTY TO THIS CASE. SHE SHOULD BE TREATED WITH SOME AMOUNT OF DIGNITY, AND I THINK THE COURT IS DOING THAT IN LOOKING AT ALL THE FACTS IN THE CASE. WHEN YOU DO THAT, I THINK WE HAVE MADE OUR BURDEN. IF YOU LOOK AT ANY CASE WHERE A WITNESS HAS BEEN AWAY, CAME BACK ON THEIR OWN WITH NO PLACE TO STAY AND SAYS, "I'M NOT GOING TO BE HERE AFTERWARDS," AND YOU HAVE A MAN CHARGED WITH THE MOST SERIOUS OF OFFENSES, WHAT MORE CAN WE DO UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAN TO MAKE THE PRESENTATION WE'VE MADE. SHE'S HERE BECAUSE WE MADE ARRANGEMENTS TO GET HER BACK AND BECAUSE SHE CALLED US. NOT BECAUSE THEY DID ANYTHING. IF THEY REALLY DON'T THINK SHE'S CREDIBLE, LET HER COME BEFORE THE JURY. OTHERWISE, LET US HAVE OUR 1335 AND LET'S RESOLVE THIS MATTER AND MOVE ON, YOUR HONOR. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, WHEN THE COURT OF APPEALS TAKES A LOOK AT THIS RECORD, THEY'LL LOOK AT THE RECORD AS IT STOOD TODAY AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT MAY HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE. BUT AS THE RECORD STANDS TODAY, HOW CAN YOU FIND HER CREDIBLE? HOW CAN WE POSSIBLY BELIEVE THAT SHE IS ABOUT TO LEAVE? SHE HAS LAWYERS TELLING HER "HEY, IT'S OKAY. IT'S OKAY TO GO BACK TO EL SALVADOR." THE COURT: WELL, THE THING THAT TROUBLES ME THE MOST, MR. DARDEN, IS THE FACT THAT SHE WAS IN FACT OUT OF THE STATE TODAY. MR. DARDEN: THAT'S WHAT -- THAT'S WHAT MR. COCHRAN HAS TOLD US, YES. AND SHE'S BACK. PEOPLE COME AND GO ALL THE TIME, YOUR HONOR. SHE HAS COME AND GONE FROM HERE TO EL SALVADOR WHAT, 27 -- SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 27 AND 50 OCCASIONS. WE COULD CALL DOWN TO EL SALVADOR. SHE CAN'T HIDE FROM THE MEDIA. AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM OUR CONVERSATIONS TODAY -- MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S BEYOND THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: THIS IS ARGUMENT, COUNSEL. MR. DARDEN: -- THEY'RE A LOT MORE RUTHLESS, OKAY. THAT IS, THE MEDIA IS A LOT MORE RUTHLESS DOWN THERE THAN THEY ARE HERE IS I UNDERSTAND. THERE ARE BILLBOARDS DOWN THERE THAT SAY, "IF YOU SEE ROSA LOPEZ, CALL THIS NUMBER." WE LEARNED TODAY, YOUR HONOR -- MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS BEYOND THE EVIDENCE. THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING. THE COURT: WELL, MR. COCHRAN, IT'S INTERESTING. I'LL HEAR IT. I CAN MAKE THE DISTINCTION. MR. DARDEN: THERE WAS A ROSA LOPEZ SIGHTING IN SAN SALVADOR A SHORT TIME AGO. THE COURT: I'M NOT SURPRISED ABOUT THAT. MR. DARDEN: OKAY, AND THEY HOUNDED AND FOLLOWED THIS WOMAN FOR QUITE SOME TIME UNTIL THEY FINALLY REALIZED THAT SHE WAS NOT THIS ROSA LOPEZ. THE REPORTERS OUR OFFICE SPOKE TO TODAY SAID THEY ARE WAITING. THEY ARE WAITING FOR HER TO LAND. SHE'S BIG, MAYBE BIGGER THAN YOU, JUDGE. I DON'T KNOW. BUT SHE CAN'T RUN FROM THE PRESS AND NONE OF US CAN. BUT THE RECORD STILL IS CLEAR. THERE IS NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD, NO CREDIBLE PROOF THAT SHE IS ABOUT TO LEAVE. WE CAN'T BELIEVE ANYTHING SHE SAYS. SHE CONTRADICTS HERSELF. I MEAN, THERE'S INHERENT CONFLICTS IN HER OWN TESTIMONY, YOUR HONOR. AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO BEAT ON HER OR BADGER HER TO BRING THESE CONFLICTS OUT. SHE CONFLICTS HERSELF. THE COURT: UH-HUH. MR. DARDEN: WHAT ELSE CAN WE DO? WE HAVE A RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL. THE COURT: IT IS A CONTRADICTORY RECORD. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. MR. DARDEN: SO -- AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE COURT CERTAINLY HAS DISCRETION GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES AND WE DON'T SEE IT AS AN ISSUE OF ROLLING THE DICE. WE'RE IN IT FOR THE LONG HAUL AND WE THINK THAT THE COURT -- THAT SHOULD THE COURT DENY THIS MOTION, THAT THE COURT WILL BE STANDING ON SOUND LEGAL GROUNDS. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. COCHRAN: THE LAST THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, YOUR HONOR, IS, WE DON'T SEE THIS AS ANYTHING FUNNY AT ALL. THE FACT THAT MAYBE PRESS OR HE MADE SOME CALL DOWN TO EL SALVADOR AND SENDING MESSAGES LIKE THAT I THINK ARE VERY, VERY UNFORTUNATE IF EVERYBODY AROUND THE WORLD IS WATCHING THIS. HOW WE CONDUCT OURSELVES SEEMS TO BE IMPORTANT, AND WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THIS PARTICULAR WITNESS. THIS LADY BELIEVES HER LIFE IS IN JEOPARDY. AND WHAT WE DO HAS A LOT TO DO WITH THAT. THE COURT: COUNSEL, THE ISSUE GOES BACK TO 1335, SUB (4), CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: THAT'S THE ISSUE. MR. COCHRAN: YES. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: WELL, THIS IS AN INTERESTING SITUATION. THIS IS AN ABUSE OF DISCRETION STANDARD THAT I HAVE TO APPLY HERE IN FINDING WHETHER OR NOT A CONDITIONAL EXAMINATION IS NECESSARY OR REQUIRED UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. WE HAVE A WITNESS WHO ON THE POSITIVE SIDE OF THE LEDGER WAS IN FACT AND I BELIEVE WAS IN FACT OUT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA UNTIL THE EARLY MORNING HOURS THIS MORNING, WAS IN FACT OUT OF THE STATE. SHE DID IN FACT RETURN AND COOPERATIVELY AFTER THE REQUEST BY HER ATTORNEY, MR. JONES, AND BY THE DEFENSE COUNSEL HERE, SHE HAS STATED UNEQUIVOCALLY TO THE COURT TODAY THAT SHE INTENDS ON LEAVING TOMORROW. ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LEDGER, WE HAVE THE FACT THAT SHE -- THE REASON THAT SHE HAS GIVEN THE PRESS HARASSMENT IS CONTRADICTED BY HER COOPERATION WITH KMEX, CHANNEL 34, SPEAKING TO THEIR REPORTER, VILLAPANDO AND HER FRIENDLINESS WITH THE COURT T.V. PERSONNEL THAT SEEMS TO CONTRADICT HER FEAR OF HARASSMENT BY THE PRESS. ALSO, SHE HAS INDICATED IN HER DECLARATION DATED ON THE 17TH OF FEBRUARY THAT SHE IS LEAVING ON THE 25TH WHEN IN FACT SHE HAD RESERVATIONS FOR MID MARCH TO RETURN ON A ROUND-TRIP TICKET AS WELL. SO THE ISSUE IS WHETHER OR NOT HER CLAIM -- THE COURT DEEMS CREDIBLE HER CLAIM THAT SHE IS GOING TO LEAVE THE JURISDICTION AND NOT RETURN ANYTIME DURING THE COURSE OF THIS TRIAL AND WILL NOT VOLUNTARILY RETURN AND IN FACT SHE IS GOING TO GO TO A JURISDICTION WHERE SECURING HER ATTENDANCE HERE IN CALIFORNIA WILL BE DIFFICULT, IF NOT LEGALLY IMPOSSIBLE. I HAVE TO BALANCE ALSO THE MATERIALITY OF THE PROFFERED TESTIMONY, WHICH IS THAT SHE OBSERVED -- MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE ALLEGATIONS IS THAT SHE OBSERVED MR. SIMPSON'S BRONCO PARKED AT HIS RESIDENCE AT A TIME THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROSECUTION THEORY OF THE CASE. BALANCING THE MATERIALITY OF THAT PROFFERED TESTIMONY WITH THE FACTORS THAT I'VE DISCUSSED HERE, THE CAUTIOUS RESOLUTION OF THIS IS TO GRANT THE MOTION FOR A 1335. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: WE'LL TAKE A 10-MINUTE RECESS AND THEN WE'LL COMMENCE THE HEARING. (RECESS.) THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED. MR. COCHRAN, ARE YOU READY TO PROCEED? MR. COCHRAN: YES, I AM READY TO PROCEED. MR. DARDEN: CAN WE APPROACH FIRST, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: SURE. MR. DARDEN: WITHOUT THE REPORTER. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. STAFF, THE PARTIES HAVE ASKED FOR A FEW MOMENTS TO RECONSIDER STRATEGIC DECISIONS, SO WE WILL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL THE PROSECUTORS RETURN, HOPEFULLY IN ABOUT TWENTY MINUTES. LET ME ASK THE INTERPRETERS NOT TO LEAVE. THE INTERPRETER: NOT TO LEAVE? THE COURT: YOU MAY GET A SNACK OR SOMETHING, BUT NOT TO LEAVE. (RECESS.) (AT 5:49 P.M. THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD. ALL PARTIES ARE PRESENT. MISS CLARK, YOU INDICATED YOU WISHED TO BE HEARD? MS. CLARK: I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COURT HAS ORDERED THE JURY OUT. THE COURT: THAT'S CORRECT. MS. CLARK: AND I HAVE INFORMED THE COURT THAT I CANNOT BE PRESENT TONIGHT BECAUSE I DO HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF MY CHILDREN AND I DON'T HAVE ANYONE WHO CAN DO THAT FOR ME. AND I DO NOT WANT PROCEEDINGS TO GO BEFORE A JURY WHEN I CAN'T BE HERE. WHEN WE SPOKE ABOUT THE OPTION OF HAVING THESE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE A JURY, WE WERE OF THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT WOULD BE ON MONDAY, AND WE DID NOT KNOW THAT THE COURT WAS GOING TO CALL THE JURY TONIGHT. I CAN'T BE HERE, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: NOT POSSIBLE FOR MR. DARDEN OR MR. YOCHELSON OR MR. HODGMAN TO CONDUCT THIS? MS. CLARK: IT ISN'T A MATTER OF IT IS NOT POSSIBLE, YES. MR. DARDEN WILL BE ABLE TO CONDUCT THIS, YOUR HONOR, BUT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT WITNESS AND IT IS IMPORTANT THAT I BE HERE. WE COLLABORATE, MR. DARDEN AND I, ON EVERYTHING, WHETHER I AM PRESENTING THE WITNESS OR HE IS, AND I'M SURE THE COURT HAS ALREADY SEEN EVIDENCE OF THAT. AND I HAD NO IDEA THE COURT WAS GOING TO ORDER THE JURY IN FOR TONIGHT. THERE WAS NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT YOU WERE GOING TO DO THAT. YOU DIDN'T EVEN TELL US. THIS WAS A LAST MINUTE THING. THE COURT: I TOLD YOU AS SOON AS I DECIDED THAT THE OPTION OF CONDUCTING A 1335 THAT IS VIDEOTAPED AND TAKING A WITNESS OUT OF ORDER IN FRONT OF THE JURY, OF THOSE TWO OPTIONS I LIKE TAKING THE WITNESS OUT OF ORDER MUCH BETTER THAN VIDEOTAPING THEM. MS. CLARK: AND OBVIOUSLY THE COURT HAS DISCRETION TO DO THAT. I'M NOT ARGUING WITH THE COURT'S AUTHORITY TO DO THAT, BUT, YOUR HONOR, I CAN'T BE HERE, AND IF THE COURT HAD INFORMED ME -- THE COURT: MISS CLARK, NO. MISS CLARK, I'M SORRY, I APOLOGIZE TO YOU. I HAD FORGOTTEN THAT PROBLEM, AND THAT IS MY FAULT FOR HAVING FORGOTTEN ABOUT THAT. WHAT IS YOUR TIME PRESSURE AT THE IMMEDIATE MOMENT? MS. CLARK: AT THE IMMEDIATE MOMENT I HAVE TO LEAVE. I CAN BE -- I WON'T BE ABLE TO GET BACK UNTIL 8:30 OR 9:00. THE COURT: THIS EVENING? MS. CLARK: RIGHT. I CAN COME IN TOMORROW. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. JONES, WOULD YOU ASK MISS LOPEZ TO JOIN US, PLEASE. MISS WEITZ. THE INTERPRETER: YES, YOUR HONOR. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE BE HEARD AT SOME POINT? THE COURT: I'M SORRY? MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE BE HEARD AT SOME POINT? THE COURT: SURE. MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: YES. I AM SENSITIVE TO THE CHILD CARE NEEDS OF COUNSEL, MISS CLARK, YOUR HONOR, BUT THE COURT HAS MADE YOUR DECISION. THAT IS WHY WE HAVE A NUMBER OF LAWYERS ON EACH TEAM. THERE WILL BE VARIOUS PARTS OF THIS CASE WHERE LAWYERS WILL NOT BE PRESENT. THIS IS MR. DARDEN'S WITNESS. I CAN UNDERSTAND THIS ARGUMENT, IT WOULD BE MORE COMPELLING IF THIS WAS NOT MR. DARDEN'S WITNESS, BUT AS THE COURT HAS SEEN, MR. DARDEN IS ABSOLUTELY CAPABLE OF CONDUCTING THIS EXAMINATION. HE HAS MISS CHERI LEWIS, HE HAS MR. YOCHELSON AND HE HAS ANY NUMBER OF OTHER D.A.'S UPSTAIRS WHO CAN ASSIST. AS WITH EVERYTHING ELSE, AND I WANT TO BE SENSITIVE ABOUT THIS, THIS IS A BALANCING PROCESS. WE HAVE A LADY WHO DOES NOT WANT TO COME BACK, AND THE COURT HAS MADE A FINDING, AFTER TODAY, AND IT IS A DIFFICULT PROBLEM. YOU CAN MAKE YOUR QUERY, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD IN THIS REGARD. MISS CLARK CAN BE HERE FOR THE PART THAT SHE CAN OR COME BACK. AND YOU MADE THE DECISION. WE SHOULD MOVE AHEAD. IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE 20 JURORS COMING, AND ALL THE REST OF US IN, IN A SITUATION WHEN THIS IS MR. DARDEN'S WITNESS, IT SEEMS TO ME WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROCEED AHEAD. THIS IS AN EXTRAORDINARY SITUATION AND I THINK YOU MADE THE RIGHT DECISION AND I THINK THAT WE SHOULD GO FORWARD, AND WHEN MISS CLARK CAN REJOIN US, THEN SO BE IT, BUT IT IS DARDEN'S WITNESS. THE COURT: WELL, THE DIFFICULTY, THOUGH, MR. COCHRAN, IS THAT MISS CLARK HAS BEEN AND CONTINUES TO BE THE LEAD PROSECUTOR, AND GIVEN YOUR ROLE IN THIS CASE, WERE YOU TO BE ABSENT FOR A PART OR BE REQUIRED TO BE AWAY, I WOULD CALL A RECESS FOR YOU AS WELL. MR. COCHRAN: I UNDERSTAND. THE COURT: AND YOU KNOW, WE HAVE MADE ADJUSTMENTS FOR MISS CLARK'S CHILD CARE REQUIREMENTS AND THAT IS SOMETHING THE COURT IS MORE THAN WILLING TO DO, AND I FORGOT -- I JUST PLAIN FORGOT. MR. COCHRAN: I STARTED OFF BY SAYING I'M SENSITIVE TO THAT, BUT AS THE COURT -- MS. CLARK: NOT REAL SENSITIVE. MR. COCHRAN: BUT DARDEN STILL IS GOING TO DO THE WITNESSES. THERE IS DIRECT EXAMINATION BEFORE DARDEN GETS A CHANCE. MR. DARDEN, BUT I WAS JUST TRYING TO -- IF COULD I JUST HAVE A SECOND? THE COURT: SURE. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MR. DARDEN: MISS LOPEZ IS SUPPOSED TO BE ONE OF THEIR MOST CRITICAL WITNESSES, YOUR HONOR, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY -- THE COURT: WELL, I'M TOLD THE JURORS ARE HERE. THE BAILIFF: CLOSE. THE COURT: OKAY. YOU SEE, I'VE REALLY BEEN HIDING THEM SOMEWHERE IN THE COURTHOUSE. MR. COCHRAN: IN THE BUILDING. YOU WERE GOING TO INQUIRE OF MISS LOPEZ. I WILL HAVE SOMETHING MORE TO SAY AFTER THAT. THE COURT: YES. MR. JONES. MR. JONES: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: GOOD AFTERNOON -- EXCUSE ME. GOOD EVENING, SIR, AND MADAM INTERPRETER, WOULD YOU INTERPRET THE COURT'S COMMENTS FOR MISS LOPEZ. MR. JONES, I HAVE MADE A FINDING THAT YOUR CLIENT IS A MATERIAL WITNESS AND IT WAS MY INTENTION, IN FACT I HAVE ORDERED THE JURY BROUGHT OVER, BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO EXERCISE THE COURT'S DISCRETION, ALTER THE ORDER OF PROOF, ALLOW THE DEFENSE TO CALL MISS LOPEZ AS A WITNESS OUT OF ORDER, AND TESTIFY IN FRONT OF THE JURY. AND I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT THE JURY IS -- HALF OF IT IS PROBABLY HERE AT THIS POINT AND DEPUTY BROWNING CONFIRMS THAT. I HAD COMPLETELY FORGOTTEN ABOUT MISS CLARK'S CHILD CARE OBLIGATIONS, AND I HAVE DEEP ADMIRATION FOR HER AS A SINGLE PARENT AND UNDERSTANDING THE OBLIGATIONS OF A THREE-YEAR OLD AND A FIVE-YEAR OLD AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS BEYOND MY CONTROL AT THIS POINT. SHE IS THE LEAD PROSECUTOR AND SHE IS ENTITLED TO BE HERE WHEN WE EXAMINE THIS WITNESS BEFORE THE JURY. HAVING MADE A FINDING THAT -- AND IT WAS MY INTENTION TO START RIGHT NOW WITH THE JURY AND GO UNTIL WE FINISH, AND THE JURORS HAVE NOT BEEN IN SESSION TODAY SO THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN FRESH AND WE COULD HAVE GONE UNTIL MIDNIGHT. AND MY STAFF IS READY TO STAY UNTIL MIDNIGHT, BUT I HAVE TO DRIVE HALF OF THE STAFF HOME TONIGHT BECAUSE THEY ARE MISSING TRAINS, SO WE PLAN TO DO THIS. UNFORTUNATELY, AND THAT IS HAVING MADE THE FINDING THAT YOUR CLIENT IS LIKELY TO LEAVE, I AM NOW IN A POSITION THAT HAVING DETERMINED THAT SHE IS A MATERIAL WITNESS, HAVING TAKEN AS CREDIBLE HER TESTIMONY THAT SHE IS GOING TO LEAVE, I AM IN A SITUATION WHERE I HAVE TO EITHER IMPOSE A MATERIAL WITNESS BOND ON HER UNDER 1332 OR INCARCERATE HER IF I CANNOT GET HER TO PROMISE ME THAT SHE WILL OBEY MY COURT ORDER TO RETURN ON MONDAY. SO WE ARE SORT OF IN A DILEMMA AT THIS POINT. WOULD YOU TAKE A MOMENT, I KNOW YOU HAVE TALKED TO YOUR CLIENT ABOUT IT ALREADY, BUT WE ARE IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT -- SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT SITUATION AT THIS POINT. MR. JONES: YOUR HONOR, I UNDERSTAND AND I WILL TAKE THE TIME; HOWEVER, WE HAVE DISCUSSED IT AT LENGTH. I HAVE DISCUSSED WITH HER THE VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES AND I HAVE, EVEN IN ANTICIPATION OF THE PEOPLE'S AND I ASSUME IT IS THE PEOPLE'S REQUEST THAT SOME BOND BE SET, BUT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT AS WELL. SHE DOES NOT WANT TO BE LOCKED UP. THE COURT: BELIEVE ME, MR. JONES, THE LAST THING IN THE WORLD I WANT TO DO IS DO THAT. MR. JONES: YOUR HONOR, WHAT I WOULD ASK IS PERMISSION OF THE COURT TO LET MRS. LOPEZ ADDRESS YOU. I SIMPLY CANNOT DO IT WITH THE EMOTIONS THAT SHE EXPRESSES TO ME. SHE IS VERY UPSET. THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND. MR. JONES: MAY SHE ADDRESS? THE COURT: I WANT TO ALLOW HER -- I HAVE ACCEPTED HER TESTIMONY TO ME THAT SHE IS GOING TO LEAVE. I HAVE ACCEPTED THAT AS TRUE. AND I HAVE ALSO ACCEPTED THAT SHE IS A MATERIAL WITNESS AND SHOULD TESTIFY BEFORE THE JURY AND THE JURY IS AVAILABLE. I HAVE A LOGISTICAL PROBLEM THAT ONE OF THE LAWYERS CANNOT BE HERE WHO IS ENTITLED AND SHOULD BE HERE FOR MISS LOPEZ. AND MISS LOPEZ, I APOLOGIZE TO YOU, BUT I HAVE MADE THE FINDING THAT I BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO RETURN TO EL SALVADOR. MS. JONES: MAY SHE ADDRESS THE COURT, PLEASE? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. MR. JONES: I ALSO AM SYMPATHETIC TO THE CHILD CARE PROBLEMS OF A SINGLE PARENT; HOWEVER, I WOULD INDICATE TO THE COURT THAT CONSISTENTLY IT HAS BEEN MR. DARDEN WHO HAS CONTACTED ME WITH RESPECT TO OR MESSAGES ON HIS BEHALF INDICATING HE IS THE ONE WHO WANTS TO INTERVIEW HER, AND WE ARE HERE AT THIS LATE HOUR, IN MY OPINION, SIMPLY BECAUSE MR. DARDEN HAS WASTED THE AFTERNOON WITH QUESTIONS THAT I THINK HAVE TO DO WITH MY ATTORNEY FEES AND MY FEE ARRANGEMENTS. AND WE SET THIS ON A FRIDAY. THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT WE CAN GET OUT OF HERE AT FOUR O'CLOCK, AND I JUST THINK IF WE HAVE TO BALANCE THE EQUITIES HERE, ON THE ONE HAND HAVING MR. DARDEN WHO WANTED TO INTERVIEW HER WHO TOOK THE AFTERNOON WHO REQUESTED THE FRIDAY SETTING, AND AGAINST MRS. LOPEZ BEING LOCKED UP, I THINK THE EQUITIES FALL ON HER SIDE. THE COURT: WELL, SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE LOCKED UP IF SHE WILL PROMISE ME SHE WILL COME BACK ON MONDAY. MR. JONES: MAY SHE ADDRESS THE COURT? THE COURT: AND I WILL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO HAVE HER HOUSED OVER THE WEEKEND. MISS LOPEZ, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WISH TO SAY? THE WITNESS: THAT I WANTED TO LEAVE. I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE ANY LONGER. ALL THESE REPORTERS HAVE DESTROYED MY LIFE. I CAN'T GO OUT ANYWHERE. I AM SO AFRAID OF SO MANY THINGS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY. I PROMISED TO COME TODAY BECAUSE I WAS PROMISED THAT THIS WAS GOING TO FINISH TODAY AND THEN I COULD GO TO EL SALVADOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS LOPEZ, UNFORTUNATELY IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE WE ARE GOING TO FINISH TODAY, AND I HAVE THE FEELING, UNFORTUNATELY, THAT YOUR SITUATION WILL NOT LIKELY IMPROVE WHEN YOU RETURN TO EL SALVADOR. BUT I HAVE TO BALANCE THE FACT THAT YOU ARE AN IMPORTANT WITNESS FOR MR. SIMPSON AND THAT THE PROSECUTION IS ENTITLED TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS IN FRONT OF THE JURY. THE WITNESS: I AM VERY GRATEFUL TO YOU AND ALSO TO THE JURY, THAT THEY ARE HERE SO LATE BECAUSE OF MY FAULT, BUT I WISH WITH MY HEART THAT I COULD GO TOMORROW BACK TO MY COUNTRY. THE COURT: MISS LOPEZ, THE PLANES FLY, AS YOU KNOW, TO EL SALVADOR ON A REGULAR BASIS. I WILL START YOUR CASE, YOUR TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF THE JURY, THE FIRST THING WE DO WITH THE JURY MONDAY AT NINE O'CLOCK. THE WITNESS: I WILL DO IT FOR YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU PROMISE ME THAT YOU WILL OBEY MY ORDER TO RETURN? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR -- THE WITNESS: YES. MR. COCHRAN: MAY I MAKE ONE SUGGESTION, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: SURE. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, MAY I MAKE ONE SUGGESTION? THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN. MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, MAY I BE EXCUSED? THE COURT: YES. MR. COCHRAN: JUST BEFORE, I DID CHECK MAYBE -- THAT RELATES TO MISS CLARK JUST ONE SECOND, IF SHE CAN. WOULD THE COURT CONSIDER -- I THINK MISS CLARK MENTIONED THIS EARLIER. WOULD THE COURT CONSIDER A MAJOR FINDING, AN UNUSUAL SATURDAY MORNING SESSION WHERE YOU CAN TRY TO CONCLUDE THIS? MISS CLARK CAN DO IT, WE CAN ALL DO IT, AND IT WOULD STILL ALLOW MISS LOPEZ TO MAKE THAT ELEVEN O'CLOCK FLIGHT TOMORROW NIGHT AND WOULD THE COURT CONSIDER THAT? I THINK EVERYBODY CAN DO IT AND IT WOULD GET US BACK ON TRACK FOR MONDAY MORNING. WE ARE ON OUR NEW SCHEDULE MONDAY AND IF THE COURT HAS MADE THIS FINDING, IT BETTER BALANCES WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. IT GIVES HER A CHANCE TO LEAVE TOMORROW NIGHT AND WE CAN FINISH THIS THING IN ONE DAY. THE JURORS WILL BE HERE ANYWAY TOMORROW AND I THINK MISS CLARK CAN DO IT. THAT SEEMS TO BE FAIRER. THE COURT: WE HAVE SCHEDULED OTHER THINGS FOR THE JURORS TOMORROW. MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, PLANES DO GO TO EL SALVADOR DAILY. TWICE, AS A MATTER OF FACT. MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS NOT THE POINT. THE COURT: FRANKLY, COUNSEL, WE NEED TO HAVE A WEEKEND IN BETWEEN. MONDAY MORNING, NINE O'CLOCK. THE OTHER MATTER THAT WE SCHEDULED AT NINE O'CLOCK WE WILL PUT OFF TO ANOTHER DAY. MADAM CLERK, WILL YOU CONTACT DEPUTY DOWNS AND TELL THEM TUESDAY. MR. COCHRAN: WOULD THE COURT MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR HER TO HAVE A PLACE TO STAY? THE COURT: YES. WE WILL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THAT. MISS LOPEZ, I AM GOING TO ORDER YOU TO RETURN MONDAY MORNING AT NINE O'CLOCK. I WILL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR YOUR HOUSING. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? THE WITNESS: AND I DON'T WANT ANY REPORTERS AT THE HOTEL WHERE JOHNNIE TAKES ME TO. I DON'T WANT ANY REPORTERS. THE COURT: I WILL DO MY BEST TO ASSURE THAT. THE WITNESS: I WILL DO MY BEST FOR YOU. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MISS LOPEZ. THE WITNESS: THANK YOU. THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU HAVE A SEAT AND WE WILL TALK WITH YOU AND YOUR ATTORNEY IN A MOMENT. ALL RIGHT. THEN IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE TO PUT ON THE RECORD -- MR. COCHRAN: WELL, JUST A MOMENT. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. WHAT DO YOU SUGGEST I DO WITH OUR JURORS SINCE I HAVE THEM ALL IN THE BACK ROOM NOW? TELL THEM SOMETHING? MR. COCHRAN: BRING THEM OUT AND SAY HELLO TO THEM. THE COURT: ACTUALLY, I THINK I WILL, BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN -- MS. LEWIS: THEY ARE GOING TO NOTICE MISS CLARK'S ABSENCE, YOUR HONOR. MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T THINK THAT IS GOING TO BE A MAJOR PROBLEM. MS. LEWIS: I DON'T WANT TO BLAME SOMETHING ON HER IMPLICITLY AND WONDERING WHY THEY ARE HERE. MR. COCHRAN: PLEASE BRING THEM OUT AND THANK THEM FOR COMING IN, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: I'M GOING TO TELL THEM THAT THERE WAS AND UNUSUAL SITUATION AND THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY WE WERE GOING TO CALL A WITNESS OUT OF ORDER, WE HAD SOME DIFFICULTY IN DOING THAT, SORRY FOR THE INCONVENIENCE. WE WILL SEE THEM MONDAY. MR. DARDEN: CAN WE TELL THEM THAT IT IS NOT OUR FAULT. THE COURT: I WILL TELL THEM SCHEDULING PROBLEMS BEYOND OUR CONTROL. (BRIEF PAUSE.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:) THE COURT: AHA, NOT AS WELL GROOMED TODAY. CAUGHT YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE BEEN JOINED BY PEOPLE WHO LOOK LIKE OUR JURY. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LET ME, FIRST OF ALL, WELCOME YOU BACK TO COURT. AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS RATHER LATE ON A FRIDAY AND WE ARE STILL WORKING. WE HAVE BEEN IN SESSION ALL DAY TODAY AND I MADE A DECISION ABOUT AN HOUR AGO THAT THERE WAS AN UNUSUAL SITUATION WHERE I WAS GOING TO CALL A WITNESS OUT OF ORDER AND PRESENT THAT WITNESS TO YOU THIS EVENING. AFTER I MADE THAT DECISION, ANOTHER PROBLEM CAME UP THAT INDICATED THAT WE COULD NOT GO FORWARD WITH THAT TESTIMONY THIS EVENING. I WAS PLANNING ON GOING UNTIL MIDNIGHT TONIGHT WITH THIS WITNESS, IF NECESSARY, BECAUSE OF THE SITUATION THAT AROSE. THINGS HAVE CHANGED AND SUDDENLY WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO THAT, BUT THAT IS WHY YOU WERE BROUGHT OVER AND THAT WAS MY INTENTION, SO I APOLOGIZE TO YOU FOR EMBARRASSING YOU LIKE THIS AND BRINGING YOU OVER, BECAUSE NOW SOMETHING HAS CHANGED AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO QUIT AND START AGAIN FRESH MONDAY MORNING AT NINE O'CLOCK. BUT I THOUGHT I SHOULD AT LEAST TELL YOU WHY YOU WERE ROUSTED OUT FROM YOUR LOCATION, BROUGHT OVER HERE AND TOLD THAT WE WERE GOING TO PROCEED. I DIDN'T MEAN TO EMBARRASS YOU AND I APPRECIATE YOUR GOOD HUMOR WITH ALL OF THIS AND BEARING WITH US. THIS IS GOING TO BE AN UNUSUAL TRIAL AND THINGS LIKE THIS ARE GOING TO HAPPEN, I'M SURE, AGAIN. I SEE SOME NODS. YOU KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT EASY FOR ALL OF US. I KNOW THAT YOU ARE ALL IMPRESSED TO SEE ALL OF US HERE STILL WORKING AT TEN MINUTES AFTER 6:00 ON A FRIDAY, BUT FROM THE SMILES I CAN SEE I HAVEN'T ANTAGONIZED TOO MANY OF YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL SEE YOU AGAIN. REMEMBER MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU, THOUGH. DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, AND DO NOT ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU REGARDING THE CASE. THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT I WILL NEED TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT ON MONDAY, BUT I WILL SEE YOU MONDAY. ALL RIGHT. HAVE A NICE WEEKEND. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE IN RECESS. NINE O'CLOCK. (AT 6:12 P.M. AN ADJOURNMENT WAS TAKEN UNTIL, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1995, 9:00 A.M.) SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 1995
PAGES 16123 THROUGH 16269, INCLUSIVE APPEARANCES: (SEE PAGE 2)
JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR #4588 APPEARANCES:
FOR THE PEOPLE: GIL GARCETTI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
FOR THE DEFENDANT: ROBERT L. SHAPIRO, ESQUIRE
JOHNNIE L. COCHRAN, JR., ESQUIRE
GERALD F. UELMEN, ESQUIRE ALSO PRESENT: CARL JONES, ESQUIRE I N D E X INDEX FOR VOLUME 94 PAGES 16123 - 16369 ----------------------------------------------------- DAY DATE SESSION PAGE VOL.
FRIDAY FEBRUARY 24, 1995 A.M. 16123 94 PROCEEDINGS
MOTION BY PROSECUTION SEEKING 402 16139 94 MOTION RE 1335 CONDITIONAL EXAMINATION 16157 94 LEGEND:
MS. CLARK - MC ----------------------------------------------------- CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
DEFENSE (1335)
LOPEZ, ROSA 16168C 16177D 94
IIDA, ZULEMA 16291C 16297MC 16308C 16313MC 94 ----------------------------------------------------- ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
DEFENSE (1335)
IIDA, ZULEMA 16291C 16297MC 16308C 16313MC 94
LOPEZ, ROSA 16168C 16177D 94 EXHIBITS
PEOPLE'S (1335) FOR IN
1 - DECLARATION OF 16181 94 16181 94 ??
|