SHARON RUFO, Case No. Plaintiff, SC 031947;
-against-
C/W Case No. ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, et al., SC 036340;
Defendants. C/W Case No. SC 036876
FREDRIC GOLDMAN, an individual, and as personal representative of the Estate of Ronald Lyle Goldman, Deceased, et al., Plaintiffs,
-against-
ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, et al., Defendants.
LOUIS H. BROWN, as Executor and personal representative of the Estate of NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, Plaintiff,
-against-
ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, Defendant.
Continued videotaped deposition of FAYE RESNICK, taken by Plaintiff, pursuant to adjournment, at the offices of Gold Farrell & Marks, Esqs., 41 Madison Avenue, New York, New York, on February 12,1996 at 10:21 a.m., before Cary N. Bigelow, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York.
APPEARANCES:
MITCHELL, SILBERBERG & KNUPP
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Fredric Goldman, et al.
11377 West Olympic Boulevard, Sixth Floor
Los Angeles, California 90064-1683
BY: DANIEL M. PETROCELLI, ESQ., of Counsel
JOHN QUINLAN KELLY, ESQ.
Attorney for Plaintiff Estate of Brown
330 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10017-5090
HORNBERGER & CRISWELL
Attorneys for Plaintiff Sharon Rufo
444 South Flower Street, 31st Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
BY: MICHAEL A. BREWER, ESQ., of Counsel
BAILEY, FISHMAN & LEONARD
Attorneys for Defendant Orenthal James Simpson
66 Long Wharf Boston, Massachusetts 02110
BY: DANIEL LEONARD, ESQ.
GOLD, FARRELL & MARKS
Attorneys for the Witness Faye Resnick
41 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10010
BY: LEONARD M. MARKS, ESQ.
-and- MARK S. LAFAYETTE, ESQ., of Counsel
ALSO PRESENT: PAUL CYNAMON, Videographer
FAYE RESNICK, having been previously sworn, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. Today is February 12,1996. The time is 10:21 a.m. This is tape number 6 of the continued deposition of Faye Resnick.
CONTINUED EXAMINATION BY MR. LEONARD:
Q. Good morning, Ms. Resnick.
A. Good morning.
Q. In yesterday's testimony and testimony from the day before, have you told us every significant conversation that you had with O.J. Simpson regarding Nicole Brown Simpson?
MR. PETROCELLI: Objection.
MR. KELLY: Objection.
MR. PETROCELLI: Overbroad, lack of foundation. Requires the witness to recount each and every piece of testimony she has given over the last several days. I object on those grounds.
MR. KELLY: I agree.
Q. Can you answer the question?
MR. MARKS: I think those objections are appropriate. If you have a specific question about a particular conversation with her, there is no objection whatsoever.
MR. LEONARD: Are you instructing her not to answer?
MR. MARKS: I think the question is improper, but I am not instructing her not to answer any questions you ask about conversations that she had with O.J. Simpson.
MR. LEONARD: You are instructing her not to answer that question?
MR. MARKS: The form of the question. If you have any question you want to ask about conversations with O.J. Simpson, I have no objection whatsoever.
Q. Have you told us every significant conversation you have had with O.J. Simpson regarding Nicole Brown Simpson?
MR. PETROCELLI: Objection.
MR.KELLY: Objection. I think if you are going to ask her about conversations, can you ask her about specific times, places or dates or reference, any other conversation is just not -
MR. LEONARD: I will put in a time frame.
MR. PETROCELLI: I also have an objection, Mr. Leonard. No one has a clue what you mean by "significant." What does "significant" mean in this context?
Q. Have you told us about every conversation you had with O.J. Simpson regarding his relationship with Nicole Brown Simpson, let's say, for the last three months of Nicole's life?
MR. PETROCELLI: Same objections. I think it is highly -
MR. KELLY: That she can remember.
MR. LEONARD: That she can remember.
MR. PETROCELLI: I still think it is highly improper and I object. It lacks foundation, it is vague, ambiguous, it is overbroad.
MR. KELLY: Frankly, she would have to review her entire testimony again, now, and start thinking and try to remind herself or think if she has been asked about every one, and if not, I mean, she could take the day to try and review, decide -
Q. Can you answer the question?
MR. MARKS: Again, I don't mind you asking her any questions about conversations, but she had so many conversations that she's indicated with Mr. Simpson, that if there is a particular area, a particular type of conversation, a particular area you consider is significant you want to question her about, I have no objection.
MR. PETROCELLI: The question also lacks foundation.
Q. Other than the - let me start over again. Do you recall how many conversations you had with O.J. Simpson in May of 1994, regarding Nicole Brown?
A. No. I don't recall exactly how many conversations.
Q. You have a - as you have testified, you have a significant recollection of one conversation in particular you had with him where you say that he threatened to kill Nicole.
MR. PETROCELLI: I object on the ground that it mischaracterizes her testimony. She never said she had a significant recollection of one conversation in particular. She had a recollection of a number of conversations in response to specific questions. I object on that ground.
MR. MARKS: I have no objection if you want her to go answer the question about that conversation or - that's okay.
Q. Other than the conversation on, I think you testified somewhere, I think you said, on May 2nd, 1994, were there any other conversations that you recall where O.J. Simpson threatened to kill Nicole Brown Simpson, or he told you he was going to threaten her?
A. Not to my best recollection.
MR. KELLY: I would ask the witness once again just to answer yes or no to questions that ask for yes or no answers.
MR. MARKS: I think she wanted to complete her answer.
MR. PETROCELLI: I think she was in the middle of her answer.
Q. I thought the answer was no, not to your recollection.
A. Yes, although you are putting the date May 2nd and I said I believe it was May 2nd, it could have been May 3rd.
Q. Okay, whether it was May 2nd or May 3rd, you don't recall any other conversations with O.J. regarding that?
A. Not to my best recollection.
Q. I want to ask you a few questions about your background. You were born in - what was the year you were born?
A. 1957.
Q. And how many siblings do you have?
MR. MARKS: What's the relevance of this?
MR. LEONARD: Well, this is a discovery deposition.
MR. PETROCELLI: What is the pending question?
(Record read.)
MR. MARKS: I will let her answer that.
A. I have - I now have five siblings. My sister died three years ago. Four years ago.
DI Q. Can you just give me their names and ages, please?
THE WITNESS: I don't want them exposed to this.
MR. MARKS: The witness does not want her family exposed to this and we don't think this is relevant.
MR. KELLY: I will object as to relevancy.
MR. MARKS: I will object and instruct her not to answer. Your questions should focus on the period from July 1992, when she says that she became friendly with Nicole Brown Simpson and her conversations with Nicole and O.J. Simpson, from there all the way to the present. No problem.
MR. LEONARD: You are going to restrict me from asking her background questions? Is that right?
MR. MARKS: No. It depends on what the questions are.
MR. PETROCELLI: Can you state the reason why you need to know the names of her siblings?
MR. LEONARD: I think I have the right to probe the background of a witness.
MR. PETROCELLI: Why?
MR. LEONARD: Why not? This is a discovery deposition.
MR. PETROCELLI: It doesn't mean that there is no limit, Dan.
MR. LEONARD: I understand that. I didn't think that was such an onerous question.
Q. How many times have you been married?
A. Three times.
Q. Can you give me the dates of your marriages and names of your husbands?
A. Rick Barnett was my first husband, married on Labor Day, when I was 21 years old. Fadi Halabi was my the second husband. I was 21 years old when I married Rick Barnett.
Q. And how long was that marriage?
A. Eight months.
Q. And when was your next marriage?
A. To my second husband, Fadi Halabi, and that marriage was 1986 or 1987.
Q. So approximately one year - oh, I am sorry, that's when the -
MR. PETROCELLI: That's when she -
Q. And how long did that last, that marriage?
A. It lasted approximately one year.
Q. And the first name for Mr. Halabi?
MR. MARKS: You mean, spell it, in spelling?
MR. LEONARD: Yes.
A. F-a-d-i.
Q. And after that, you were married to -
A. To Paul Resnick.
Q. And the date of that marriage and when it ended?
A. That was 1987, I believe it was November 11th, I think. And that ended in 1991.
Q. Approximately when in 1991?
A. Excuse me, it could have been in 1988 that I was married to him. In '91, I am not sure exactly the date of the divorce.
Q. And you indicated that you were having a relationship with Christian Reichardt during the period that you knew Nicole; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. When did that start, that relationship?
A. It started in 1991.
Q. When did you break up with Mr. Reichardt?
A. I broke our engagement at the end of - the first time I broke up was the end of April and confirmed at the end of May.
Q. Now, you say you broke up the engagement?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Why did you do that?
MR. PETROCELLI: That's totally irrelevant.
MR. MARKS: I am going to object to that. You are talking about 1994?
MR. LEONARD: Yes. You are instructing her not to answer?
MR. PETROCELLI: It's irrelevant.
MR.MARKS: Yes. It's irrelevant.
MR. LEONARD: Okay.
Q. You broke up with him down at Cabo? Is that where that happened?
A. The first time, yes.
Q. Do you remember approximately when that was?
A. I broke up with him - actually, there were two Cabo trips. When I first - when we were all in Cabo San Lucas in April, I started telling him that this is not working and that I was considering calling off the engagement.
Q. That was in the April trip?
A. Mm-hmm.
Q. And then?
A. And then, when we went to Cabo again with my friends, I had given him back his engagement ring, told him that I could not continue to be his fiance.
Q. And that was in - when was that?
A. I have to say that, in this case, because we went, we didn't make travel plans or arrangements, I have to say that I'm not quite sure of the date of that.
Q. Did you indicate in your book Private Diary that that -
MR. LEONARD: Well, strike that.
Q. You indicated in your book Private Diary that you were, on May 27th, in that weekend, that you were in Los Angeles and you did some things with Nicole. Do you remember that?
A. Yes, I remember that.
Q. And then you created or someone created at your behest, one of the others, some corrections to the book?
A. Yes. There were corrections created.
Q. And in the corrections you indicated that, in fact, you were not in Los Angeles, but you were in Cabo that weekend?
A. As I said, that was the weekend that I was very unclear about. That was a time - I was unclear about that weekend.
Q. But the correction indicates that you were in Cabo that weekend, that is, the weekend of May 27th, right?
A. I would like to see the corrections -
MR. KELLY: Why don't you ask her, if you are making reference to something specific, let's mark it and refer to it.
(Defendant's Exhibit 80, Los Angeles County District Attorney Bureau of Investigation investigator's report, marked for identification, as of this date.)
MR. LEONARD: It's been marked as Exhihit number 80.
MR. MARKS: What is the page reference?
MR. LEONARD: It would be - it looks like there are some Bates stamps at the top. It would be page 25 - hold on just a second. It would be 2522, at about the middle of the page.
MR. MARKS: What page number is it?
MR. LEONARD: Page 187.
MR. MARKS: Okay, thank you.
Q. Have you had a chance to review that?
A. I need a minute, please.
Q. Okay.
A Yes, I have.
Q. Okay. Now, does that refresh your recollection as to whether you were at Cabo on the weekend of May 27?
A. It refreshes my recollection that obviously there was some question as to exactly where I was on that weekend and that's why there was an edited change in the first pass because I did not have any diaries with me.
Q. Do you now remember where you were that weekend?
A. To be quite honest with you, that weekend was when we went to Mexico with the Harouches. It is very unclear to me. As I said, I did not make travel plans, we went on their jet. It is very unclear to me.
Q. How did you go about making this correction? How did that happen?
A. That correction happened because that, it was - it actually said it was a very quiet weekend, but at the same time it said we went out dancing two nights. That's my best - that's what I was trying to correct.
Q. Okay. A. Because that was edited out - it was edited wrongly. I know the difference between a quiet weekend and going dancing two nights of the weekend, so that was the change that I was looking for. In editing of a book, I had no - I did not have the ability to be there, so there was a lot of edited versions that were not actually specified to me until afterwards.
Q. So you didn't have a chance to read the book before it was finally published?
A. No, I did not.
Q. So you haven't - is it fair to say you have no idea how that correction paragraph was created? You don't know?
A. No. That's not - I didn't say that.
Q. Did you have any input into that?
A. Yes. My input was that the difference was we did not spend a quiet weekend if we went dancing two nights. That was the point I was trying to make. Thank you.
Q. And from any source, do you have any knowledge as to how the information that's in the correction paragraph got there? Do you have any knowledge at all about that?
A. Please repeat the question.
Q. Yeah. Well, the correction paragraph says, in fact, that you were in Cabo that weekend, right? That's what it says, in essence.
A. I have indicated in the last questions that that particular Cabo trip I am very unclear about because I did not make the travel arrangements, so to be quite honest with you, without my diaries, I could not keep that in proper order.
Q. And you don't know who supplied this information for this last paragraph?
A. Everything came through my publisher.
Q. Everything came through your publisher? Was this one of the areas that you sought out any authentication from, and what else --
MR. KELLY: Objection. What area?
Q. This area about where you were that weekend, did you speak any assistance from anyone else to try to determine that?
A. Not that I can recall. I didn't think it was that significant.
Q . You testified yesterday that you were using cocaine, you say, from towards the end of May, I guess the last week in May until the point that you went into the rehab center, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you using cocaine two to three times a day during that period?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. You were using it two to three times a day every day, is that right?
MR. PETROCELLI: Every day?
A. I did not say that.
MR. PETROCELLI: During what period? Be real specific.
Q. During the period, let's say, from the last week of May until you went into the rehab center.
A. I did not say that I was using cocaine every single day for the last two weeks. Q. Were you using it occasionally two to three times a day?
A. That's -
MR. PETROCELLI: "Occasionally" meaning not every day?
Q. How many days did you use it, if you recall, two to three times?
A. I would say seven days.
Q. Were you using it two to three times a day on June 5th, if you know?
A. On June 5th, I couldn't say exactly what day I was using it and what day I wasn't.
Q. How about June 3rd? You don't know?
A. I have testified that I used, in the last two weeks of Nicole's life, not on a daily basis. I cannot continue to go further with that.
Q. You were using crack cocaine?
A. No, I was not.
Q. Do you remember telling Marcia Clark that you were using crack cocaine when she interviewed you? Do you remember that?
A. I never said that.
Q. Do you recall telling Marcia Clark - when she asked you this question: "Was it coke" -
MR. PETROCELLI: What page are you on?
MR. LEONARD: Page 41.
MR. MARKS: Give us an indication of what you are reading from.
MR. LEONARD: Page 41 of the transcript of the statement of Faye Resnick.
MR. MARKS: What is the date?
MR. LEONARD: October 20, 1994.
MR. PETROCELLI: When you say "the transcript," this was not a deposition, was it?
MR. LEONARD: No, it was a tape-recording.
MR. PETROCELLI: It was a -
MR. LEONARD: It is called Reporter's Transcript.
MR. PETROCELLI: Okay. Page 41, line what?
MR. LEONARD: Line 17.
Q. Starting at line 15: "And I was on drugs during this time, by the way, Marcia, to let you know." Do you see that?
MR. MARKS: What line -
MR. LEONARD: Line 15, page 41.
MR. MARKS: What is the question?
Q. Do you recall telling her that?
MR. MARKS: What was the question and what was the answer?
MR. LEONARD: Well, let's skip to the next question .
Q. "Was it coke?" Do you remember being asked that by Marcia Clark?
A. Yes.
Q. And your answer "Coke and valium"?
A. Yes.
Q. And do you recall being asked, at line 25, "Were you smoking crack," and your answer "Never"?
A. I -
Q. "I never"?
MR. LAFAYETTE: That's not what the transcript says.
MR. KELLY: In all fairness, we have to continue with what the transcript says.
MR. MARKS: Let the witness respond to your question.
A. Please let me respond.
Q. Go ahead.
A. It says "I never," and then it's unclear what's said after -
Q. Do you recall -
MR. MARKS: There are some dashes right after that, a word with the letter S before the dashes.
A. I have always said that I never smoked crack because I have been told crack is a combination of cocaine and heroin.
Q . You were smoking cocaine, though ?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. Okay. What form of cocaine were you smoking, if you know?
A. Just cocaine.
Q. And how did you do that? Explain that to me.
A. How did I smoke it?
Q. Yes.
A. I put it in a pipe and I inhaled it.
Q. Was the pipe something that you had already or did you get that at this time? In other words, did you already have it, a cocaine pipe towards the end of May, in your possession?
A. No. No. It's something that I purchased.
Q. Where did you get it, do you remember?
MR. PETROCELLI: He wants to know if you got it from a Colombian drug dealer.
A. At a store.
Q. Okay. And you were purchasing the cocaine from a friend of yours?
A. Yes.
Q. And would you purchase the cocaine on the days that you were using it or would you purchase an amount and then use it over a number of days? How did that work?
MR. LAFAYETTE: Excuse me, there seems to be a problem with the video.
MR. PETROCELLI: You need to put a sign on there to be quiet, because the sound is leaking through.
MR. MARKS: Would you please repeat the question?
Q. Would you buy a supply of cocaine that you were going to be using over a number of days or would you buy the cocaine each day on the day that you were going to use it?
A. I will wait for the sound. Typically, I would buy the amount that I would use for that day.
Q. And this was from a Mr. [Name Deleted], did you say?
A. Yes.
Q. And you would go to his house and purchase it? You purchased it at his house? Is that where you purchased it?
MR. KELLY: I don't think that's what she testified.
Q. Where did you purchase it?
A. From my friend.
Q. And where did you go to purchase it?
THE WITNESS: May I talk with you for a second on this?
MR. MARKS: May we take a short break?
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 10:46 and we are going off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 10:48 and we are back on the record.
MR. LEONARD: I am sorry, I didn't hear the-
MR. KELLY: Are you finished, Mr. Leonard?
MR. LEONARD: I thought you were going to read the question back. That's why I was hesitating.
MR. MARKS: That's all right.
Q. Where did you purchase the cocaine? Where did you go to purchase it?
A. I went to my friend's house.
Q. And that's the only place you purchased cocaine during that time period?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you purchase cocaine on the week of Nicole's death?
MR. PETROCELLI: Give her a date.
Q. Did you purchase cocaine on June 5th or June 6th?
MR. PETROCELLI: Sunday or Monday.
MR. KELLY: If you recall.
A. My - to my best recollection, I wasn't keeping track of the days I was purchasing, so that's very difhcult to answer.
Q. Did you purchase any cocaine within the week prior to Nicole's death?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And did you use cocaine during that week?
A. At times during that week, I did.
Q. Were you using Valium at that time as well?
A. Yes. I had used Valium at times during that week.
Q. You wrote not just The Private Diary, but you also wrote another book, the Shattered In the Eye of the Storm; is that correct?
A. Yes. I did. I co-wrote it with Jeanne V. Bell.
Q . During what period did you write Shattered?
A. Shattered was written during the entire time that I was watching this trial unfold, while I was working with domestic violence victims.
Q. Where were you working with domestic violence victims?
A. Out of my home through correspondence, also at the mission, in downtown LA, the Anne Douglas center.
Q. I am sorry, what's that called?
A. The Anne Douglas Center.
Q. When you say out of your home with correspondence, what do you mean by that?
A. When the Private Diary was released, I started receiving thousands of letters from women and men. Many of the letters were women who were in relationships similar to Nicole and O.J.'s and they were asking for help to try to get out of their relationships, so I was corresponding with them, I was finding shelters for them, I was trying to help them because I had felt I could not help Nicole.
Q. And what were you doing at the center that you described?
A. I was listening to their stories, I was giving them advice, I was going - when the homeless people came off the streets and - shedding some light and shedding some hope for them.
Q. How often -
MR. LEONARD: Strike that.
Q. When did you begin your work at the center and do you still work there now from time to time?
A. I started working - pardon me. I started working with the Anne Douglas mission four years ago and I continued that as soon as I was able to come back from Vermont and after I had established myself and set up my computer.
Q. How often, let's say, in the last - well, from the time you got back to Vermont from the - until the end of the trial, how often on a weekly basis would you work at the Anne Douglas Center?
A. I can't say how often. I worked with them weekly and if it wasn't over the phone, it was me going to the mission or going to their graduations. I worked with the women at my home also. They would attend, they would come to my home. That would be very - I couldn't answer that question exactly. There was too many times for me to be able to answer that.
Q . So you can't give an estimate as to how often you were there on a weekly basis?
A. No. I didn't keep track of that. That wasn't my purpose.
Q. Prior to Nicole's death, how often - let's say, in the year prior to Nicole's death, how often were you working at the Anne Douglas Center?
A. I would like to make something clear. I wasn't working at, for the Anne Douglas Center, I was working with the Anne Douglas Center. I was working as a volunteer. Whenever I was asked before that, I would come in. I would go in and -- there were many times I was there in the last four years.
Q. In the one-year period prior to Nicole's death, can you give me an estimate of how many times you were actually there working at that center?
A. Approximately six, seven times during a six-month period, I would say. They would know better than I.
Q. In the one-year period prior to Nicole's death, were you involved in any other charity or social work?
A Yes, I was.
Q. Can you tell me what that was?
MR. PETROCELLI: Before Nicole's death?
MR. LEONARD: Yes, the one-year period.
A. There were a few charities I was involved with. I have always worked for educational charities due to the fact that our particular - my daughter's particular school district was under financial difficulties, we were in the process of going bankrupt, her school district, so over the past seven years, I have donated hours upon hours upon hours to try to raise funds for the school district and to - to answer the question more specific, in the last year of Nicole's life, I had worked on charities for the school, I had worked through - at the mission and I had also worked on my - I had a friend, Joan Copeland's political campaign; she is running for an office, running for a seat on the board of education, for the board of education, pardon me of Beverly Hills.
Q. When you say you worked at the mission are you referring to the Anne Douglas Center?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall any of the - when you say charities for the school, do you recall any of the - those are events; is that what you are talking about?
A. Events. Some of them were events.
Q. Okay.
A. But mainly I was working as a fundraiser, and in whatever capacity they needed. Whether it be volunteering at the school, I was a room mother; I was an art person, I used to go in and help in the office many times, it was a commitment I made. Those are a few of the things that I, that I was working on.
Q. Can you think of any other?
A. I can think of many other. I think that's probably enough.
Q. Well, can you tell me what the others are?
A. Is that - is that necessary to go into all of those?
MR. MARKS: Please give him your recollection.
Q. We are talking about the one-year period before Nicole's death; I want you to keep that in mind.
A. The one-year period. I think that was it. I think.
Q. You can't recall of the many others -
MR. PETROCELLI: I think she -
MR. MARKS: She said over a seven-year period, and you asked in a one-year period.
MR. PETROCELLI: All you are required to do, Ms. Resnick, is to give us your best recollection as it comes to you now.
THE WITNESS: All right.
Q. You were - were you working in, let's say, in this one-year period prior to Nicole's death, were you working on a daily basis in Christian's office?
A. I had worked on a - that's quite difficult to answer. I worked pretty much three, four, five times a week, depending upon how much I was needed.
Q . And what were your duties there?
A. He considered me his office manager. I was doing his billing. I was working with the staff. I redecorated his office. I worked on his IBM computer doing his - anything that was really necessary that he asked of me, I worked, I did for him.
Q. And being more specific, in the last three months before Nicole's death, can you give me an estimate of how often you worked at Christian's office, on a weekly basis?
A. That's very difficult to answer. During this time Christian and I were in the process of ending our relationship, so we were fighting constantly over issues that we had had. Although I was trying very much to work it out with him. So it - that would be a very hard question to answer, for me.
Q. Was one of the issues you were fighting over your drug use?
A. No, that's not one of the issues we were fighting over.
Q. That was not an issue you fought over with Christian?
MR. KELLY: Can you put this in a time frame?
Q. Let's say in the three months prior to Nicole's death.
A. Christian always assumed whenever I fought with him, that I was using drugs. He always blamed me, accused me; he was just like O.J. in that way.
MR. BREWER: Can you repeat the answer?
(Record read.)
Q. You are saying he would wrongly accuse you of using drugs?
A. Yes, he would.
Q. Getting back to the second book, Shattered, did you - did you dictate to transcribers, as you did with the first book, Private Diary?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And over what period of time did you do that, the actual dictation?
A. Well, Shattered was - there was actually two books, the Shattered was originally a domestic violence book alone, which is what I contracted for. I started writing Shattered and dictating from the different research that I had done over a period of six, seven months. And then between - and then Jeanne, my co-writer, Jeanne V. Bell, and I, I went to her home in Washington, D.C.
Q. And when was that?
A. It was sometime late of last year. I believe it was around August or something like that. I didn't really keep a record of that.
Q. And how long did you spend with her writing, working on the book?
A. I spent with Jeanne, working on certain aspects of the book, six days, I believe.
Q. Which aspects were those?
A. Well there, were a lot of different - you know, we were trying to combine the domestic violence with watching, watching the lines of the trial, watching the insanity of the trial. That was the basic aspects, domestic violence and the insanity over the last two years.
Q. And you were also relating - and ultimately in the book you did relate some facts relating to Nicole and O.J.'s relationship'?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Did you utilize any materials to do that, to relate those facts in the book; in other words, any tapes or anything else, any other written materials?
A. Can you be more specific, please?
Q . Yes. When you were relating facts in Shattered, about Nicole and O.J.'s relationship when you were in the process of writing that, did you utilize any materials to do that, any written materials?
A. I need to - I need for you to be more clear in this. I, for some reason, can't understand what you are saying and I would like to be able to answer your question properly.
Q. Did you - did you look, for instance, at the drafts of the earlier book, Private Diary?
A. No, I did not. The drafts were destroyed.
Q. They were?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know who destroyed them?
A.Yes, I do.
Q. Who did?
A. The last day that the private diaries, that - the last day of it, we were being inundated by press and they were - we were nervous that they were going to steal the manuscript, so all traces of it were destroyed so that the press didn't - my publisher's concern was that they would have it in the media before the book came out.
Q. And what about the - what about the tapes of the transcription; what happened to them? Were they destroyed as well?
A. To my knowledge. I'm not quite sure. You need to talk with - I'm not quite sure where these tapes are.
Q. When was the last time you saw them?
A. On the last day, when they were destroying everything.
Q. You saw the tapes when they were destroying everything?
A. No. I saw the tapes on the last day, the day that they were destroying everything else.
Q. And where were the tapes when you saw them?
A. They were in a candy dish.
Q. Where?
A. In my publisher's house.
Q. Were the other materials there that were going to be destroyed, were they in the same area?
A. The materials were all over the - his country home. We had utilized the entire - the gym, we had utilized his bedroom, we had utilized the living room, the den, we had utilized my bedroom, we had utilized every single room, and it all had to be gone through before the press, because we were leaving. It all had to be gone through and my publisher insisted that every piece of information be protected, destroyed, whatever. That's -
Q. How many drafts were there, do you remember?
A No, I do not.
Q. With regard to Shattered, how many drafts were there?
A. There are so many writings that - I mean, I had written Shattered, and that was in a year period of time, a year and a half period of time, and there were so many drafts and redrafts and, you know, files, and I couldn't answer that properly, I'm sorry.
Q. Do those drafts and redrafts, do they still exist?
A. That would - the drafts would have to be with my - you would have to ask that question to my publisher and -
Q. You don't know?
A. No, I do not.
Q. And how about the tapes of the transcription, do you know if they still exist, for Shattered?
A. No, I do not. That's not my concern.
Q . When you wrote Shattered, were you trying to make sure that everything in there was as accurate as possible?
A. Of course. I was trying to be as accurate as possible.
Q. Did you do anything in particular to make sure the facts were accurate in there?
MR. PETROCELLI: I object to the question on the ground there is a hidden assumption that there is something special that needs to be done. She provided the information based on her experiences and her recollection and I don't know what the question is intended to suggest.
MR. LEONARD: I wasn't trying to suggest anything.
MR. PETROCELLI: Well, it suggests something, and I object on that basis.
Q. Can you answer the question?
MR. MARKS: Can you just clarify the question, a bit?
Q. Did you attempt to authenticate facts in Shattered, as you did with The Private Diary?
A. I didn't feel it necessary. I used the letters, I used some of the letters that I had received there in the back of the book. Those, I definitely used as materials. I didn't feel that Shattered was a book that needed authenticating. It was public knowledge what had gone on and we were all very aware of the insane time and I used the information on the domestic violence as far as the facts, the details of how many women and how many victims, you know, call the police and all of the different information I received from the Library of Congress. Yes, those were all used. Those were all something that were absolutely correct.
Q. Were you careful in both of these books not to exaggerate anything that you had observed or heard?
MR. KELLY: Objection to the form of the question, both careful and - what was the second -
MR. PETROCELLI: Exaggerate.
MR. KELLY: Exaggerate. If we can have clarification as to what he means by those words.
Q. Do you understand what I mean?
A. What I think you are trying to imply is that I exaggerated or had the intention of doing so. I did not try to exaggerate. I did not think that I would be a witness. I wanted to tell the story as honestly as possible. I did have a co-writer, so there was two different viewpoints in that area.
Q. Okay. Did -
A. Excuse me.
Q. I am sorry, did you complete your question - or your answer?
A. I would just like to take a break.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:11. We are going off the record.
(Recess taken.)
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is l 1 :25. We are back on the record.
BY MR. LEONARD:
Q. Ms. Resnick, when we broke, I was asking you about whether you were - whether you were attempting to avoid exaggerating when you wrote these books.
A. I believe I answered that question.
Q. You said something in your answer about, there was a co-writer?
A. Yes.
Q. If you were describing a fact in the book about Nicole's relationship with O.J. or something that O.J. told you or something you observed, you had the last say about that, as far as what actually occurred in the book, as between you and the co-writer? Is that fair to say?
A. That's - I did not have editing rights on Shattered at all.
Q. You had no editing right on Shattered?
A. I had no editing right on Shattered or The Private Diary.
Q. Is there anything - okay. In the process of writing the book, did you and your co - in both books, did you and your co-writers sometimes discuss the particular events that you were describing, that you saw or witnessed, saw or heard?
A. Yes, we did.
Q. And was there ever a time that there was any disagreement about your description?
A. Pardon me?
Q. Was there any occasion where there was any disagreement about what you saw or what you heard, between you and your co-writer?
MR. PETROCELLI: Which book?
MR. LEONARD: In either book.
A. I would - to answer that question, they couldn't disagree; they weren't there. Although at first, when we were writing The Private Diary, as my co-writer was overwhelmed by the information, by the - so he asked me a lot of questions because it was an awful lot of information that I had disseminated to him.
Q. So he would ask questions in an effort to clarify the things you were telling him?
A. Right.
Q. Including things about what you say that you heard O.J. Simpson tell you, right?
A. I don't think there was any question about that.
Q. Okay. And how about anything that you observed O.J. Simpson doing? Was there ever a question about that?
A. Well, he continued to ask me if, exactly the nature of the conversations and I - that's my best answer. I am sorry, a little - it's a little confusing to me.
Q. And were you - at the end, when you saw the final product, let's say, The Private Diary, were you satisfied that the descriptions of the events in there were accurate, what you saw and what you heard?
A. In the end there were, as I said, 10,000 words that were edited out of The Private Diary, so there were some editing - and also Shattered - there were some editing discrepancies that I was not able to correct. But I believe the - I believe that it portrayed the situation in a very - it portrayed it as it was to - you know, with the fact that we only had six weeks to write it, and due to the editing and, you know, there was - it was the best that it could be for six weeks, I can say that.
Q. You felt that it was accurate?
A. I felt that there were some areas that I - editing areas that were inaccurate but I felt that it told the story fairly clearly.
Q. Have you had a chance to review Exhibit 80?
A. What is Exhibit 80?
Q. I am sorry, it's sitting in front of you.
A. I reviewed, in particular, the last question you asked me.
Q. How was Exhibit 80 created, do you know?
A. Yes, I do. Exhibit 80 had started when I - after The Private Diary came out, I said to my publisher that there were some editing errors and he said that there would not be the possibility of making big changes, due to printing and publishing standards. But that I could get a few points in and it would be taken care of, and it was created because I was trying - because I was trying very much to clear up anything that I could within the realm of not really changing anything, as that was a printing problem.
Q. Did you dictate this, Exhibit 80?
A. No. Exhibit 80, I believe, was from my original writings on my computer, and I think that it was gone over by a member of Dove to try to make sure that it could fit, to make the changes.
Q. Is it fair to say Exhibit 80 contains the corrections that you thought should be made in Private Diary?
MR. PETROCELLI: The entire book?
MR. LEONARD: Yeah.
A. I don't think that's fair to say, no, I don't.
Q. Were there other corrections that you had identified that are not contained in this?
A. There were a lot of corrections that I would like to - there was a lot of additions that I would like because due to the editing of the book that I was not able to do. I wanted to edit the book entirely, but that was not a possibility, so there were minor aspects, minor points that I was told that I could change.
Q . Can you think of any of the other major -
MR. LEONARD: Well, strike that.
Q. Can you think of any of the other corrections that you would have wanted to make but couldn't make here?
A. I would like to have edited a lot of things out of the book and used a lot of other things. I mean, I wanted to show Nicole as the person she was and I wanted to show O.J. as the person he was. There was a time factor and if you are saying, if I am pleased with The Private Diary; is that what you are asking me?
Q. No. I was asking if you can recall any of the other corrections that aren't contained in this. If you can't, you can't.
A. There's a lot of corrections that I would like to - and additions that I would like to have made, and to recall all of them would be very difficult.
Q. Let me ask you this: Why did you include in The Private Diary the intimate scene involving you and Nicole?
MR. KELLY: Objection. Relevance.
MR. MARKS: I don't see what the relevance this is to anything.
MR. LEONARD: I will withdraw that question.
Q. Let me put it to you this way: In summary, you took whatever steps you could to make sure that the book was accurate, The Private Diary, correct?
A. Pardon me?
Q . You took whatever steps you felt you could to make sure that The Private Diary was accurate, what you were portraying in there, what you saw and what you heard?
A. I wanted to recount to the best of my ability exactly what occurred. That was my intention, yes.
Q. And the same with regard to Shattered?
A. Yes.
Q. And you were trying to avoid exaggeration?
A. Yes.
Q. And you were trying to avoid misstating anything?
A. Yes.
Q. I want to ask you some questions about some events that you testified to yesterday. I will try and be as brief as possible. You testified yesterday that, with regard to this incident that you say happened at Toscana, when Alessandro came in -
A. Yes.
Q. You testified as to something that O.J. said, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And you testified that O.J. said "I'm going to beat the shit out of him," at some point, right?
A. I don't know if I used the word "shit."
MR. PETROCELLI: I am sorry, what's the pending question? I fazed out for a second. Actually, Mr. Kelly whispered something to me. I don't want to incriminate him.
MR. LEONARD: I will strike the question.
MR. PETROCELLI: Start all over again.
Q. You did testify that in that conversation Mr. Simpson said words to the effect "I want to beat him up"?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, in your book, in Private Diary, you described that conversation, right?
A Yes, I did.
Q. You also said yesterday, in testifying, that Alessandro - that O.J. said that he had threatened Alessandro before?
A. Yes.
Q. He said that in the same conversation, right?
A. Yes.
Q. He said it virtually right after he said, I'm going to beat him up?
A. Yes.
Q. You described the same conversation in Private Diary; isn't that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And in Private Diary, you do not include the statement by Mr. Simpson you said he made that he had beaten - or that he had threatened Alessandro before. That's not in there, is it?
A. I don't believe that I reviewed that.
Q. Okay. If you could look at page -
MR. MARKS: I am sure we could say that the book will speak for itself. I mean -
MR. PETROCELLI: I also object to these questions because there is some assumption that all of the information that she testified to in this deposition should be included in the book. She was not subjected to examination in preparing her book as she was when I examined her. Her memory was not probed and jogged in the same way as when I examined her.
MR. LEONARD: I appreciate that.
MR. PETROCELLI: And I object to your attempt to somehow argue with her that the information should be the same in both places.
MR. LEONARD: I am not arguing with her. I am just asking her questions. I understand your objection.
MR. PETROCELLI: In any event, I am making that objection to this line of questions. I am not going to repeat it, okay?
MR. LEONARD: Thank you.
Q. If you would look at page 107, paragraph 1, of Private Diary. Actually, it starts over at the bottom of page 106.
MR. PETROCELLI: We all have our books out.
MR. LEONARD: Okay.
Q. Do you see where it starts "I put my hand on O.J.'s arm"?
A. Yes.
Q. And said "O.J., whatever you do, please don't create a scene"?
A. Yes.
Q. Correct? I can't - next paragraph: "I can't help it, Faye, he said, barely under control, can you believe this man coming in here, knowing we're in here?" And that's what you are saying O.J. said, right?
A. And then I say "I'm going to get up and beat the shit out of him. I'm going to."
Q. And then you interrupted him and you said "No, you're not." That's how you describe that in the book, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. This does not contain any statement about O.J. that he had threatened Alessandro before; is that right?
MR. PETROCELLI: I am going to object because the book speaks for itself. It is purely argumentative. There is nothing in this passage that indicates that that was the full extent of the conversation. She pulled out -
MR. LEONARD: You can testify for the witness as much as you want but -
MR. PETROCELLI: No, she pulled out certain pieces of the conversation that were relevant to the point she was trying to make.
MR. LEONARD: How do you know that? How do you know that?
MR. PETROCELLI: You are trying to pretend this is supposed to be her dispositive recounting of the conversation. This is a royal waste of time, Mr. Leonard, okay? The book speaks for itself. If it is not in there, it's not in there. You can make your argument to the jury. You are arguing with the witness right now.
MR. LEONARD: I'm not arguing.
Q. Is that contained in there?
A. Please repeat the entire question.
Q. Is there anything in the exchange as you describe on page 106 and 107 about O.J. saying that he had threatened Alessandro before?
MR. KELLY: Same objection.
MR. PETROCELLI: This is really a waste of time.
MR. MARKS: You may answer the question .
A. Let me explain briefly exactly the pressures that -
Q. Can you answer the question for me?
MR. KELLY: I object to that. We are talking about a 250-page book, we are talking about a two-year period. To go over any omission in the book, that does not make sense, okay?
MR. PETROCELLI: It's not in there.
A. It's just not in the book.
Q. And why is that not in there?
A. I - there's a lot of things that are not in the book. I have told you that over and over.
Q. Do you recall why in particular you did not put this in the book, this statement?
MR. PETROCELLI: Some particular recollection as to that statement?
MR. LEONARD: Yes.
Q. Do you remember why you didn't do that?
A. I didn't believe that every single statement - if I was to write every single statement of O.J. Simpson down, that would be the Bible. I'm sorry.
Q. Did you think that statement was important?
A. I thought the most important thing was the relationship, the disintegration of the human being. I thought the importance of the book was not about every single statement that was made. I was trying to give an overview.
Q. You testified yesterday that when you were in Cabo, you described some type of incident that occurred where O.J. talked about The Frogman, the fact that he was The Frogman. Do you remember that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Did you describe that in the book?
A. Yes, I did.
MR. PETROCELLI: What page, Mr. Leonard?
Q. Yesterday you -
MR. LEONARD: 144.
Q. Yesterday you testified that Nicole -
A. 144?
Q. Yeah, it's at page 144. Yesterday you testified that when O.J. made this statement about Frogman, that Nicole responded and said, I'm afraid. Is that right?
A. I recall what I said yesterday, that she said, I don't think that's funny, to O.J.
Q. And then she said, I'm afraid, right?
A. And then she told me, I'm afraid, in a different conversation. I believe that was my recollection.
Q. Okay. That's what you recall testifying to yesterday?
A. Yes.
Q. You testified yesterday that O.J. made innumerable calls, I think that's what you adopted from Mr. Petrocelli's questions.
MR. KELLY: Objection.
MR. PETROCELLI: Adopted? What does that mean? She answered truthfully.
Q. Did you testify yesterday that O.J. made innumerable phone calls to you for a period from October of 1993 until April of 1994?
MR. PETROCELLI: Well, beyond April.
Q. Or beyond that?
A. I testified that O.J. Simpson called me a lot, yes, I did.
Q. Was there any period of time, let's say, from October until April, that those calls became less frequent?
MR. PETROCELLI: You are -
MR. KELLY: I will object to the form of the question because I don't think she testified in terms of numbers. I think her testimony was something that they seemed to be nonstop day and night, in terms of context, of conversation, not numbers of times. I don't think that's a fair question .
MR. MARKS: Could you -
Q. Was O.J. calling you constantly during that period? Let me put it to you that way.
A. O.J. would call me typically when Nicole wasn't responding to what he wanted. That's when he would call me the most.
Q. Okay. And he would call you whether he was in town or out of town?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall how many times, roughly, that he called you - when he was living in New York during that period?
MR. KELLY: Can we have a time frame?
MR. LEONARD: Yes. October of 1993 to April of 1994.
A. I cannot recall exactly or even approximate how many times he called, to be quite honest with you.
Q. Do you think he called you a lot?
A. I'm sorry. I can only say that I wasn't keeping track of every single phone call that O.J. Simpson made. That would be impossible.
Q. So you - you are unable to give us any estimate of that? I am talking about the period that O.J. would have been in New York, which was roughly the football season, during that time period. You can't give us any estimate?
A. I can't estimate how many times he called me, no, I wasn't keeping track.
MR. PETROCELLI: Between Octoberof '93 to January of '94?
MR. LEONARD: Yeah, that's a good period.
A. I think it would be unrealistic to even try and recall something that is like that.
Q. Do you have a memory that he was calling you frequently during that time period? Let me ask you that.
MR. PETROCELLI: This is football season now.
MR. KELLY: This is the October '93, January of '94 -
MR. PETROCELLI: Yes, ending with the Super Bowl in Atlanta.
A. What is "frequently"?
Q. Say, more than once a week.
A. I really can't recall how many times. I'm sorry, really, I can't.
MR. PETROCELLI: You don't have to be apologetic for that. Just try your best.
Q. You testified yesterday that your best recollection was that there were two phone calls that O.J. made to you from Puerto Rico. Do you remember that?
A. Yes.
Q. In The Private Diary, at page 162, you describe getting calls day in and day out during that time period, and that's at page 162.
MR. MARKS: I am sorry, what time period are we?
MR. LEONARD: When O.J. was in Puerto Rico.
MR. PETROCELLI: Well, her testimony was that those two calls stood out in her mind, if you recall.
MR. LEONARD: That was not her testimony. That was not her testimony.
MR. PETROCELLI: This is argumentative. That is exactly why this is improper. But what is your question?
A. Where are - give me exactly where it is.
Q. On page 162, at the bottom. The last paragraph, it's not a complete paragraph. The first sentence. Were you - let me ask you this question: Were you describing the time period there that O.J. was in Puerto Rico?
A. This - this is very vague. It looks as I described that O.J. was calling Nicole. First of all, if you will look at the top of the page, during those two weeks, he was trying - pardon me. The next day O.J. phoned me again, started right away -
MR. KELLY: If I can make a suggestion, since we seem to be taking up the context, if we are going to address pages, I would like Ms. Resnick to just take a moment to read those two pages so she is clear what she is talking about because-
MR. LEONARD: Fine.
Q. First of all, read those pages, 161 and 162, and then I have a couple of questions for you. Maybe you should read 163, too.
A. Why did you want me to read 161?
Q. I want to make sure that I get a foundation for my question. I want to make sure that you have been able to read this so I can ask you some general questions.
A. I see. I see.
MR. MARKS: Okay?
THE WITNESS: I didn't finish this part. I am sorry.
MR. MARKS: Is there a particular question you would like to ask?
MR. LEONARD: Yeah.
Q. You were describing, in this particular portion of the book, a time period when O.J. was in Puerto Rico; is that correct?
A. Yes. And it goes on to - actually, at this part of the book I am describing right as we come back. It's mid-April 1994, and this is back at home, I swung into the Beverly Hills young matron routine, charity work, and it goes to the time where he was calling me - in fact, it describes two particular phone calls, which I recall, and from what I can see here - should you ask me the question -
Q. Yes. I think I better ask you the questions.
A. Okay.
Q. Is it true that O.J. was phoning you day in and day out, while he was in Puerto Rico?
A. It looks to me that this is a problem also, because if you will look at the very top, it says "I have been calling her every day." And then it says, "as O.J. phoned me day in and day out." I think that's a mistake on the editor's part, because my best recollection is I received two phone calls from O.J. and I had written about the content of those phone calls in this chapter.
Q. So that was the editor's fault, then?
A. That would be an editing problem.
Q. And that's not something you suggested should be in the book? Is that your testimony?
A. I can only say I gave the information and, you know, how it was arranged and we also - and we also - Brett Shaves was 24 years old one day and then a little later on he was 29 years old, so there were some editing problems, yes.
Q. Do you have a memory of ever discussing this, this issue, with anyone?
MR. MARKS: This issue being this particular line that she -
MR. LEONARD: This particular line, yes.
MR. KELLY: Regarding editors or anybody in the world?
MR. LEONARD: No. Let's say editors, before the book was published.
MR. MARKS: Do you recall?
A. This particular incident?
Q. This particular line, "as O.J. phoned me day in and day out."
A. I don't know if there is - I don't recall if I did or not. I didn't think it was very significant.
Q. But it is - it is incorrect, O.J. wasn't calling you day in and day out?
MR. PETROCELLI: From Puerto Rico?
MR. LEONARD: From Puerto Rico.
A. From Puerto Rico, I said he called me twice. That's the best of my recollection.
Q. At - excuse me. When you testified yesterday you said that you and Nicole ran into Ron Goldman at the - at Roxbury? Is that a disco or something like that, a dance club?
A. Yes. It's a restaurant and there's also a dance club there.
Q. Did you testify -
MR. LEONARD: Strike that.
Q. Do you recall when that happened?
A. It was between the time that we came back from Mexico and the time of her death. It was within the time frame, it was very brief that I had even known them, so it was in the latter part of her life.
Q. Was it the - let me see if I can refresh your recollection. Was it the weekend that you describe where you are going from - that you are - went out to a couple of different clubs with Nicole? Do you remember describing that in the book?
A. I described that we had gone out to a couple of different clubs, restaurants and clubs, I believe was my description. And that would have been whatever weekend that was, that would have been one of the nights.
Q. You didn't put in the book that you guys ran into Ron Goldman, when you described that weekend in the book; isn't that right?
A. It didn't end up in the book. That's all I can say.
Q. Do you recall telling - that that was something that you told to the transcriber?
A. I do believe I did.
Q. You do. Do you have any idea why that didn't end up in the book?
MR. KELLY: Objection. I think she testified several times she had no editorial control over either of these books.
A. I'm sorry.
Q. You testified yesterday that you were at - I think it was the second time that you had met Ron Goldman, you were at Starbucks with Nicole and Ron and a couple of his friends were there?
A. Mm-hmm.
Q. And O.J. came in and he said, That's my wife, and he asked to talk to Nicole, or he said, Come with me, something like that, to Nicole, and they walked outside?
A. Yes.
Q. You, in the book, at - and I am talking in Private Diary, on page 185, you describe an occasion when you were at Starbucks with Ron and with Nicole and with Ron's friends. Do you recall that?
A. I'd like to see that.
Q. Sure. It's at page 1885.
MR. KELLY: You should buy this book, Faye.
THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
Q. Do you see that in the second paragraph? Actually, it is the first full paragraph on page 185.
A. Mm-hmm.
MR. MARKS: Is there a particular question ?
MR. LEONARD: I just wanted to be sure she had read it.
Q. Is that the particular occasion - are you describing there in the book the particular time that you and Nicole were at Starbucks with Ron Goldman and O.J. came in?
A. In this particular passage, I read that we had been stalked by - I write that we had been stalked by O.J. and how I was nervous. That's what, how it begins. I do believe this is where I actually met Ron because I pointed him out, his name was Ron Goldman, the first time I saw him. That was not the time that O.J. Simpson came and did his little routine.
MR. MARKS: I just want to indicate that the witness is quoting parts of that page, 185. I am sorry, page - yes, 185.
Q. You met Ron for the first time at Starbucks?
A. Yes.
Q. There is no question about that, in your mind?
A. There's no question.
Q . Yesterday you testified that, I think it was the day that you went to stay at Kathy's house-
A. Yes. Q. - and I don't recall what day it was but it was - was it, probably the Monday, Monday June 6th, is that when you went to Kathy's?
A. I believe it was the 6th and the 7th.
Q. You testified that Nicole discovered a key or keys and her remote that was missing?
A. Yes.
Q. You testified that both you and Nicole went down to the kitchen.
A. Yes.
Q. And Nicole looked in a drawer, and both the remote and the keys were missing. Do you remember testifying to that?
A. Yes.
Q. Describe the layout of that kitchen. How is that - it's downstairs. What does that mean?
A. What do you mean, what does that mean?
Q. Were there three levels to the townhouse?
A. Yes.
Q. Was that the first level?
A. It was the first level of the townhouse, yes.
Q. At the time that this happened, were you in the room with Nicole?
A. I was -
Q. At the time that she discovered, that she looked in the drawer.
A. I was in the kitchen with Nicole.
Q. Okay. And where was the drawer?
A. The drawer was, there was a big island, the refrigerator was here, the sinks were here, the entry was here, and as you walked through the entry from the front door, the island would be here and her set of drawers with all of the crystal and all this over on top, and it was underneath, the set of drawers.
Q. Did you see her open the drawer?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. And she opened a drawer, a single drawer, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And what did she - what happened then? Did she just say, I can't find the keys?
A. She said that the keys were not there, that O.J. Simpson must have taken them when he was there last week.
Q. And did she say that the remote was missing?
A. Yes, she did.
Q. As soon as she opened the drawer, or at least as soon as she looked in the drawer?
A. To the best of my recollection, yes.
Q. Did you - did Nicole search anywhere else for the remote?
A. Yes, she did. She looked through the house.
Q. Did you help her search?
A. I was right around - right with her as she was looking. I didn't want to start going through her personal belongings, but I was searching with her.
Q. Did anybody else help her search?
A. I believe Elvie, her housekeeper, did.
Q. Did five people help her in her search?
A. Actually, there was. She had told the story to Cynthia Shahian. Cynthia had helped her look for the keys also, to my knowledge, from what Cynthia says. She had asked Kris Jenner, she had told Kris Jenner about it. There was Elvie, there was - and I am not sure if she talked to Cora about it, to be honest with you, and I would have assumed -
MR. KELLY: Objection. Don't assume anything, Ms. Resnick, please.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
Q. Do you recall writing in Shattered, at page 181 -
MR. PETROCELLI: Shattered?
MR. LEONARD: Yes.
Q. If you look at the - it's actually the top of 180, it begins "she told." Do you see that? It's about six, seven lines down. If you could read those two sentences.
A. It says that -
MR. MARKS: You don't want her to read it out loud?
Q. You can read it to yourself.
A. Okay. Yes.
Q. Did you mean to suggest in those two sentences, when you said "all of us," that five, five different friends searched for the remote, searched for the keys?
MR. KELLY: Objection again. She had no editorial control over the book. She didn't write these statements herself. I think we have gone through this many times now. If you want to ask her a question directly about that incident, but she had no control over the words as they appeared in the book.
Q. Can you answer the question?
A. I - to answer the question properly, if you count the people that were told about this, there was Elvie, Nicole looked for her keys, Kris Jenner looked for her keys and Cici Shahian looked for her keys, if that answers your question.
Q. You say that - if you go back to the bottom of page 179 if you look at, starting at the very last paragraph, "Wanting to give," if you could read that, please, over until about line 5 of the next page.
MR. KELLY: Now, once again, I am going to make the same objection and recommendation at the same time that when we are addressing a particular page or sentences that the witness take a minute and look at the page on either side of it and get the context.
MR. LEONARD: Sure. That's absolutely appropriate.
Q. Have you had a chance to read that?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, the passage I identified, that describes a situation where Nicole came rushing back into the room, right?
A. That's what it describes.
Q. Is that the way it happened?
A. I believe there is an editing problem in that. I believe that's a problem with editing.
Q. So that's incorrect in the book?
A. The - what Nicole did was Nicole opened the drawer, realized that the keys were not there and the remote was not there. And then we searched through the house.
Q. So also the statement in here that -
MR. KELLY: You know, Mr. Leonard, once again for the last time, and I will say it once again, too. This book was not written by her, it was not subject to cross-examination, she had no editorial control whatsoever over what appeared in the book. For you to ask her about the truth or veracity of certain lines that appear in there, does not make sense at this time. I think you should ask her questions directly regarding her recollection and not the book at all, because she had no control over what went in there. If you want to question her about incidences, I think you should question her about incidences, dates or times or places.
Q. This passage also describes Nicole as not discovering that the remote was missing until after she had discovered that the keys were missing and she went someplace else. Is that right?
MR. MARKS: Is what right?
Q. That describes what this passage says?
A. It looks - it looks like it's describing it that way. I think it's fairly insignificant and I have not had time to go through and re-edit at this time. I will make changes in Shattered, but it just recently came out and that would be one of the changes that will be made.
Q. You testified yesterday about a telephone conversation you had with Nicole at approximately 9:00 p.m. on June 12th.
A. Yes.
Q. And you said that - you described - you were asked to describe what Nicole said to you. Do you remember that?
MR. MARKS: Is there a specific question about her that you would like to ask her?
MR. LEONARD: I'm getting to it.
Q. And you said in your testimony, when you were asked to describe that, that she told O.J. that she didn't want to be around him, or words to that effect. Do you remember that? That she didn't want him around. Do you remember that? This is a discussion that she had with O.J. at the recital.
A. Yes.
Q. In the book, when you describe that, you - and that's Private Diary, at page 225 - and you can take a look at that -
MR. PETROCELLI: It starts at page 221.
MR. LEONARD: Okay.
MR. PETROCELLI: It's actually a whole chapter. It's called "The Last Phone Call, June 12, 1994." What is your question so maybe she can look for that particular passage.
Q. Did you, when you described - in the book, you say that Nicole told you, in that conversation, that she told O.J. to fuck off.
MR. PETROCELLI: At the recital?
MR. LEONARD: Right.
A. Yes.
Q. And that's what you say in the book?
MR. PETROCELLI: You are holding up Shattered.
MR. LEONARD: That's what you say in the book, right?
MR. PETROCELLI: You are really confusing the witness.
MR. MARKS: Everyone is laughing because you held up the wrong book. What is your specific question?
Q. Did you say that in the book?
MR. MARKS: Well, the book speaks for itself. Do you want to ask her what the conversation was about that?
Q. When you described the conversation yesterday, you didn't say that Nicole had told O.J. to fuck off?
A. No, I did not say she had told him to fuck off.
Q. Did she tell you that?
A Yes, she did.
Q. And yesterday you said that -
A. I used different wording.
Q. Yesterday you said that Nicole did not tell you where this conversation took place. Do you remember that?
A. I remember yesterday being very confused, at times, by you. You were back and forth with a lot of different things and it was very difficult for me to focus on what the questions were that you were asking me.
Q. Do you remember me asking you if Nicole told you where this conversation with O.J. took place, and your answer was no? Do you remember that?
A. My answer was no, that I don't remember where -
Q. No -
MR. PETROCELLI: Let her finish.
A. The conversation, where the last phone call took place?
Q. No. Do you remember me asking you yesterday -
MR. PETROCELLI: This is not a memory -
MR. MARKS: Why don't you ask her the question you would like to ask or repeat the question, whatever you would like.
Q. Did Nicole, in that last conversation, tell you where the discussion took place?
MR. KELLY: Between -
Q. Between O.J. and her at the recital?
MR. PETROCELLI: At the recital.
A. She said it was at the recital. She said that her family was around. I mean, that was - I mean, the importance, that I felt.
Q. Did she tell you that her family was with her when this happened?
MR. PETROCELLI: You mean, right there listening to the conversation?
MR. LEONARD: Yeah.
A. She said that her family was around, that her family was there at the recital, is what she said. She had also sat with her family.
Q. She didn't tell you exactly where the discussion took place, then, with O.J.?
MR. PETROCELLI: You mean -
MR. KELLY: Objection. Asked and answered.
MR. PETROCELLI: I think the problem here, Mr. Leonard, is what you mean by "exactly where." I mean, at the recital, a particular place, do you want to know where at the recital?
Q. Where at the recital? She didn't tell you that?
A. I don't think that's what I was focusing on.
MR. KELLY: Yes or no, if you could, Ms. Resnick.
A. Yesterday, when I was asked that question. Nicole had told me what was said at the recital, and that's the important information.
Q. You testified, I think, at the very beginning of today's session, that you recalled only one occasion where O.J. said to you that he would kill Nicole. Do you remember that?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. You say in Shattered, at page 4, that O.J. on several occasions - you say, "On several occasions, O.J. had told me hewould kill Nicole." That's what it says at page 4.
MR. MARKS: Let's just have a moment so the witness can look at the reference.
MR. PETROCELLI: Mr. Leonard, you picked up the wrong book again. That's why I was confused. Page 4. Where is that, Mr. Leonard?
MR. LEONARD: It's the first full paragraph.
MR. MARKS: All right. Do you have a question ?
Q. Did O.J. tell you on several occasions that he would kill Nicole?
A. No. I believe that that is an editing problem. I stated exactly in The Private Diary when he did say that he would kill her, and I said "several times he said," and I think this is "several occasions."
Q. So that's just another editing mistake?
A. Yes. I am sure it must be.
Q. On page 68 -
MR. KELLY: Of -
MR. LEONARD: Shattered.
Q. If you can look at the first full paragraph. If you could read that, please, to yourself.
MR . PETROCELLI: What page, Mr. Leonard ?
MR. LEONARD: 68.
MR. PETROCELLI: What -
MR. LEONARD: First full paragraph.
A. I see it.
Q. In that paragraph, you say, or the book says, excuse me, "And in the weeks before the murders, he called me many times saying he was going to kill her." And the book refers to O.J. there, right?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that another editing mistake?
A. Absolutely.
Q. Do you have any idea how that occurred?
A. Oh, yes. There were five different editors on that, on Shattered, alone.
Q. You just think that one of them chose to put that in there, is that what -
MR. KELLY: Objection.
MR. PETROCELLI: She answered your question. That's why we don't try cases with books, Mr. Leonard.
Q. How much money did you make from Private Diary?
MR. MARKS: Starting in 1994?
MR. PETROCELLI: How much money did she receive
Q. In total, how much have you received to date?
MR. MARKS: 1994.
A. In 1994, I received $60,000 from Private Diary. In 1995, from the same source, my tax statements, tax returns, $100,000 from The Private Diary.
Q. And the $60,000, was that - did you get an advance for Private Diary?
A. That was partial payment of the advance. The advance was not given in advance.
Q. So that, your testimony is that you have made a total of $160,000?
MR. MARKS: Through the end of 1995, yes .
MR. PETROCELLI: Through 1995, for Private Diary.
MR. LEONARD: Okay.
Q. Do you have any idea how much you have made this year from Private Diary?
A. So far, I believe, to the best of my records, $18,000 and $15,000 from the - this is the combination of The Private Diary and Shattered, by the way.
MR. PETROCELLI: For what?
MR. KELLY: Can we go back again?
MR. PETROCELLI: For what numbers, all these numbers?
THE WITNESS: All these numbers. I know it doesn't -
MR. PETROCELLI: Well, Shattered didn't exist in 1994, so that's just for Private Diary.
Q. Did you get an advance for Shattered?
A. I got a partial advance for Shattered. I was just paid the entire amount of the advance right before I left, actually.
MR. PETROCELLI: Can you clear this all up, Mr. Leonard?
MR. KELLY: Ask her each year, each book, what she has received.
Q. How much did you receive for Private Diary in 1994, including any advances?
A. My tax returns - I mean, it's a little difficult because my tax returns say $60,000 in '94, and they say $100,000 in '95, and part of that was Shattered, was part of the advance.
MR. MARKS: In '95?
THE WITNESS: Yes. Part of that was the advance for Shattered.
Q. Let me just cut to the quick. Is it fair to say to say that you have made a total of, to date, of $160,000 on both books, right? Plus -
A. No, there is in addition -
Q. Plus $18,000?
A. Yeah, it's fair to say that that would be - I mean, there's things that I am sure are missing, but that's a fair assessment of what I have made.
MR. PETROCELLI: Can I ask a question, too, here?
MR. LEONARD: You can get to it.
MR. PETROCELLI: I just want to clear this up now while it is in the record.
MR. LEONARD: Go ahead.
MR. PETROCELLI: Just to be sure we are all on the same page here. Thank you very much, Mr. Leonard. In 1994, the only book which was relieved and from which you received any income was Private Diary; is that right?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
MR. PETROCELLI: And the total amount of money that you received was $60,000, right?
THE WITNESS: That's what my tax returns say, yes.
MR. PETROCELLI: And in 1995, the total amount of money that you received for both Private Diary and Shattered was $100,000, according to your tax returns, right?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
MR. PETROCELLI: And in 1996, what is the total amount of money that you have received, to date, for both books?
THE WITNESS: I am the worst bookkeeper in the world.
MR. KELLY: Approximately.
THE WITNESS: I would think that the $18,000 and the $15,000 figure is -
MR. PETROCELLI: Is it 18 plus 15 for a total of $32.,000 for both books?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
MR. PETROCELLI: Okay.
THE WITNESS: I mean, that's very close.
MR.PETROCELLI: Okay. So if you add all these figures up, then, for all of your books, both of them, for the three years, the total amount of money that you have received is $193,000, approximately?
THE WITNESS: Approximately, that's correct.
MR. PETROCELLI: Thank you, Mr. Leonard.
BY MR. LEONARD:
Q. Do you anticipate earning more money on these books in the future?
MR. MARKS: How can she know that?
MR. LEONARD: Shattered was just released when?
THE WITNESS: Shattered was just released last week.
MR. LEONARD: No further questions.
MR. PETROCELLI: I have some redirect.
MR. KELLY: Can we take a break to -
MR. MARKS: No, I don't want to take a break. I want to finish this so everybody can go somewhere, forward. I am glad Mr. Leonard has asked all the questions that he wanted and you have the same opportunity, and let's move this forward, and let this witness, who has volunteered to testify for both sides, leave.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: May we go off the record for a moment?
FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. PETROCELLI:
Q. Ms. Resnick, you have heard reports in the media of Johnnie Cochran getting over $4 million for a book. You heard that?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. And Marcia Clark getting over $4 million for a book?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. And you have heard records reports in the media for Chris Darden getting over a million dollars for a book?
A. Yes.
Q. And Robert Shapiro getting over a million dollars for a book?
A. Yes.
Q. And have you also heard reports that you have received millions of dollars for your books?
A. Countless.
Q. You have heard countless reports that you have received many millions of dollars?
A. Yes.
Q. And, to date, you have received, for both books, about $193,000; is that right?
A. Approximately, yes.
Q. Covering a couple of years?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, while we are on the subject of these books, Mr. Leonard was asking you a lot of questions about information that is not in the books. Do you recall his line of questioning?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, why don't you tell us, set the record straight on this. What was the purpose of your writing a Private Diary?
A. My friend was killed brutally, slaughtered, and her friend. I was very nervous for my life because I had been told of this before it happened, by O.J. I was nervous that I had too much information against him and I thought he would kill me for that information, which I had told at Exodus all of the counselors this. I was told that I would not be able to testify because I had been in treatment. These murders were being blamed on me. And I didn't know how to cope. I did not know how to cope with all of the circumstances. It was too much. I wanted the information to get out to the public just in case anything happened to me. I wanted other women to know what had happened to Nicole, and I was afraid that I would not be able to make it on the stand and get that message out.
Q. Ms. Resnick, whose story were you trying to tell in the book?
A. Nicole's story.
Q. Were you - was it your intention, in writing Private Diary to marshal all of the evidence that existed against O.J. Simpson?
MR. LEONARD: Object to the leading.
Q. Was that your intention?
A. No, that was not my intention.
Q. Was it your - did you attempt, in writing Private Diary, to recount every single conversation you ever had with O.J. Simpson?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Did you attempt, in writing private diaries - Private Diary, excuse me - to recount every single act of O.J. Simpson that you ever observed?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Was it your intention, in writing Private Diary, to mount and make a case against O.J. Simpson? Was that your intent?
A. No, it was not.
Q. Did you work with a criminal lawyer in writing Private Diary?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Did you work with a lawyer in order to determine what facts would be probative to prove Mr. Simpson's guilt?
MR. LEONARD: Objection to the form.
A. No, of course not.
Q. Did you read any legal materials on the elements of first degree murder, in writing your book?
A. Of course not.
Q. Were you trying to come up with facts that would make a case against O.J. Simpson?
A. No.
Q. You saw the criminal trial, you said, in response to Mr. Leonard's question, while you were writing Shattered?
A. Much of it.
Q. Is it your belief that Nicole's story was told in that trial?
MR. LEONARD: Objection.
A. No, it was not.
Q. When you watched that trial, did you see all of the incidents of domestic violence between O.J. Simpson and Nicole that you had learned about from the call?
A. No, I did not.
Q. The manuscripts that you initially participated in writing contained more or less information than appears in the book?
A. Much more information.
Q. Significantly more information?
A. 10,000 words.
Q. Excuse me?
A. 10,000 words.
Q. So there's 10,000 words of information that originally you participated in creating that are not in your book?
A. Yes.
Q. And you have said you did not have any control over editing or the final print of the book; is that right?
A. I did not have any control. That was my biggest nightmare.
Q. Is that part of the contract that you had with the publisher?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And in the contract for both Shattered and private diaries, there were - in both -
MR.PETROCELLI: Withdrawn.
Q. In respect of both books, Private Diary and Shattered, according to the contract with your publisher, you did not have any control over the final product? Is that what you're saying?
A. I'm saying I did not have any control over any editing rights.
Q. Any editing rights?
A. I did not have any editing rights at all-
Q. In both of the books?
A. - in either of the books.
Q. Let me ask you a question about these phone calls in the football season, '93 to '94 terminating in the January Super Bowl, okay? Was that a period of time that O.J. Simpson and Nicole were involved in their reconciliation?
A. They were getting - yes.
Q. And to your knowledge, your recollection, is that generally one of the better periods of time in their year-long attempted reconciliation?
MR. LEONARD: Object to the leading.
Q. Was it?
A. During that time they were, they were happy with each other.
Q. And is it the case you heard less frequently from O.J. Simpson when things were going good with Nicole?
A. Yes.
MR. LEONARD: Objection. Leading.
A. Yes.
MR. MARKS: May we conclude this? Do you have much more?
MR. PETROCELLI: I am looking.
Q. Christian Reichardt - excuse me, you broke off the relationship with Christian Reichardt?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Was he happy or unhappy about that?
A. Extremely unhappy.
MR. PETROCELLI: I have -
MR. KELLY: Well, if you have something-
MR. PETROCELLI: Hold on.
Q. Were there times when you observed O.J. Simpson when he was acting - when he had a good and positive relationshipwith Nicole?
A. Yes, there were.
Q. And how did O.J. Simpson behave towards Nicole when you observed things were going well between them?
A. O.J. could be one of the most charming men I have ever met. He was at times fun-loving and gentle. That's the O.J. that I first met and that I became friends with.
Q. Did you ever see him act playfully?
A. At times, yeah. Yeah.
Q. Like a little boy, almost?
A. Sometimes.
Q. And give a lot of attention to Nicole?
A. Oh, yes. Sometimes he was very attentive.
Q. He could be a lot of fun?
MR. LEONARD: Object to the leading.
Q. Could he?
A. Yes, yes.
MR. PETROCELLI: Why don't we stop for a tape break. I will see if I have anything more by consulting with my colleagues, okay?
MR. MARKS: Yes. I would like to conclude this as soon as we can. Everybody has had their questions, so -
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:32. This will be the end -
MR. MARKS: Let's put in the new video and see if we can get this concluded.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:32 and this is the end of tape number 6 of the deposition.
(Recess taken.)
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:50, and we are back on tape number 6.
MR. PETROCELLI: I have no further questions, Ms. Resnick, and other counsel have indicated they also have no further questions. We would all like to thank you very much for making yourself available to testify. In terms of a stipulation, we have agreed off the record to the following stipulation: That the original deposition transcript will be sent to Mr. Marks on behalf of Ms. Resnick, that on Mr. Marks' receipt, the witness will have 30 days within which to review and sign the deposition transcript. It can be signed under penalty of perjury. And if we do not get a signed transcript back within 30 days after your receipt, Mr. Marks, the deposition can be used in the civil case for all purposes in the form transcribed as though signed.
MR. MARKS: That's fine. Who should I send it to?
MR. PETROCELLI: You can send it to me. Thank you very much, Ms. Resnick.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:51 . This is the end of tape number 6 in the deposition of Faye Resnick. Thank you. (Time noted: 12:51 p.m.)
FAYE RESNICK
Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of, 1996.
(Notary Public) My Commission Expires:
CERTIFICATE STATE OF NEW YORK ss. COUNTY OF NEW YORK
I, CARY N. BIGELOW, a Shorthand Reporter and a Notary Public within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that the foregoing continued deposition of Faye Resnick was taken before me on the 12th day of February, 1996; That the said witness was previously sworn and that the said testimony was taken stenographically by me and then transcribed. I further certify that I am not related by blood or marriage to any of the parties to this action nor interested directly or indirectly in the matter in controversy; nor am I in the employ of any of the counsel in this action.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 13th day of February, 1996.
CARY N. BIGELOW February 12, 1996