|
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 TH |