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.)

(PAGES 12369 THROUGH 12394, VOLUME 78A, TRANSCRIBED AND SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.)

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK AND MR. DARDEN. THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT. COUNSEL, JUST A COUPLE THINGS BEFORE WE BEGIN. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT I HAD RECEIVED FROM THE DEFENSE A 1335 MOTION WHICH WE WILL DEEM FILED AS OF TODAY, MRS. ROBERTSON. AND MR. COCHRAN, ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE RESUME WITH THE JURY?

MR. COCHRAN: YES, YOUR HONOR, IF I MIGHT APPROACH THE PODIUM. THE COURT I BELIEVE RECEIVED A COPY OF A LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO MY OFFICE LAST NIGHT FROM MARK PARTRIDGE, THE LAWYER WHO WAS ON THE PLANE FROM CHICAGO TO LOS ANGELES WHO SAT NEXT TO MR. SIMPSON. I WOULD LIKE, BECAUSE I THINK IT IS RELEVANT, TO READ THIS LETTER INTO THE RECORD, IF I MIGHT. THE LETTER, YOUR HONOR, IS DATED JANUARY 30, 1995, SENT TO THE LAW OFFICES OF JOHNNIE L. COCHRAN, JR.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, MAY I OBJECT? THE LETTER SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. COUNSEL CAN SIMPLY FILE IT WITH THE CLERK AND MAKE IT A PART OF THE RECORD.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MR. COCHRAN: "ATTENTION PAT MC KENNA," YOUR HONOR, ONE OF THE INVESTIGATORS. "DEAR PAT: I WAS SURPRISED TO LEARN TODAY THAT I AM ONE OF THE WITNESSES THE PROSECUTION CLAIMS WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY DISCLOSED. ON THE FRIDAY MR. SIMPSON WAS ARRESTED I CALLED THE LAPD TO IDENTIFY MYSELF AS THE PERSON WHO SAT NEXT TO HIM ON HIS RETURN FLIGHT FROM CHICAGO TO LOS ANGELES. I BELIEVE I SPOKE TO A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE. I WAS TOLD THEY KNEW WHO WAS ON THE FLIGHT AND WOULD GET TO ME LATER. HE DID NOT ASK FOR MY ADDRESS OR PHONE NUMBER. "ON OCTOBER 6, 1994, RICHARD CROTSLY," CROTSLY, "AN LAPD DETECTIVE, CALLED ME. HE SAID HE HAD RECEIVED A WITNESS STATEMENT ABOUT ME FROM THE DEFENSE. I TOLD HIM MY STORY. HE TOLD ME TO SEND MY NOTES. HE GAVE ME THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS: LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT ROBBERY/HOMICIDE DIVISION ROOM 321, 150 NORTH LOS ANGELES STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012. I SENT MY NOTES (THE SAME NOTES I SENT YOU) TO OFFICER CROTSLY IN EARLY DECEMBER, 1994. "THESE FACTS SEEM INCONSISTENT WITH MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROSECUTION'S CLAIMS ABOUT UNDISCLOSED WITNESSES OR WITNESS STATEMENTS. I THOUGHT I SHOULD BRING THIS TO YOUR ATTENTION IN CASE IT IS RELEVANT TO THE PROCEDURE IN THE CASE. "I ALSO WANT TO YOU KNOW THAT I AM SCHEDULED TO BEGIN A THREE- TO FOUR-WEEK TRIAL IN CHICAGO ON JUNE 5TH, 1995, AND WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE TO TESTIFY DURING THAT TIME. I AM AWAY FROM MY OFFICE UNTIL WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1ST, BUT CAN BE REACHED AT" AND HE GAVE HIS PHONE NUMBER, "SINCERELY, MARK PARTRIDGE." I WANTED TO READ THAT FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR.

MS. CLARK: FOR THE RECORD ALSO, YOUR HONOR, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY SUCH THING.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WELL, THE REAL ISSUE -- I THINK PERHAPS MR. PARTRIDGE MISUNDERSTANDS THE ISSUE. THE ISSUE WAS, WAS THE JULY, 1994, STATEMENT THAT HE GAVE TO THE DEFENSE TURNED OVER TO THE PROSECUTION. THAT IS THE ISSUE.

MR. COCHRAN: WE THINK IT WAS, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: YES.

MS. CLARK: CERTAINLY NOT BY THE DEFENSE, THOUGH.

MR. COCHRAN: WE THINK IT WAS.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, LET ME ASK YOU ONE OTHER QUESTION BEFORE WE START WITH THE JURY. DURING THE COURSE OF OUR DISCUSSION OF EXPERT WITNESSES NOW DESIGNATED BY THE DEFENSE, IF YOU RECALL, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT ONE OF OUR JURORS HAS AS ONE OF HER PHYSICIANS ONE OF THE DOCTORS THAT IS NOW ON THE DEFENSE WITNESS LIST.

MR. COCHRAN: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SO I WANT YOU TO CONTEMPLATE THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THAT AND WE WILL DISCUSS IT TOMORROW.

MS. CLARK: OKAY.

MR. COCHRAN: WE HAVE, YOUR HONOR. WE WILL BE READY TO DISCUSS THAT WITH YOUR HONOR TOMORROW.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. JUST SO THE GROUNDRULES ARE CLEAR, COUNSEL, I'M GOING TO ADVISE THE JURY THAT I HAVE ALLOWED THE PROSECUTION A BRIEF REOPENING OF THEIR OPENING STATEMENT TO DEAL WITH THREE SPECIFIC ISSUES, AND THAT THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE TIME LIMIT OF TEN MINUTES. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENT? ALL RIGHT. LET'S PROCEED. DEPUTY MAGNERA.

MR. COCHRAN: IS THE COURT GOING TO ADMONISH THE JURY REGARDING STATEMENTS OF COUNSEL?

THE COURT: YES, YES.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PLEASE BE SEATED.

MR. BAILEY: MIGHT WE APPROACH FOR A MINUTE, JUDGE?

THE COURT: WITH THE REPORTER, PLEASE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: WE ARE AT THE SIDE BAR. MR. BAILEY.

MR. BAILEY: I BELIEVE THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHERS WERE AGAIN PHOTOGRAPHING THE SCREENS OF THE COMPUTERS AND I WONDER IF YOU COULD DIRECT THEM NOT TO DO THAT.

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL. LET ME GIVE A DIRECTION TO THE STILL PHOTOGRAPHERS HERE IN THE COURTROOM. GENTLEMEN, YOU ARE NOT TO TAKE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF ANY OF THE COMPUTER SCREENS THAT ARE ON COUNSEL'S DESK OR IN THE BACK ROW HERE. UNDERSTOOD? MISS HAYSLETT, WOULD YOU MAKE SURE THAT ANY OTHER PHOTOGRAPHERS WHO COME INTO THE COURTROOM ARE SO ADVISED. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, GOOD MORNING.

THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.

THE COURT: THE COURT HAS GRANTED A PROSECUTION REQUEST TO REOPEN THEIR OPENING STATEMENT TO ADDRESS DEFENSE COUNSEL'S COMMENTS IN HIS OPENING STATEMENT REGARDING THREE WITNESSES WHO HAD NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN DISCLOSED OR WHOSE STATEMENTS HAD NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY DISCLOSED TO THE PROSECUTION BEFORE TRIAL, AS IS REQUIRED BY THE LAW. YOU ARE REMINDED, HOWEVER, THAT ANY STATEMENTS BY THE ATTORNEYS IN THIS CASE ARE NOT EVIDENCE AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED BY YOU AS SUCH. MISS CLARK, YOU HAVE TEN MINUTES.

OPENING STATEMENT (REOPENED)

BY MS. CLARK:

GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.

MS. CLARK: MR. COCHRAN MADE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT -- FIRST OF ALL, I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT A VIDEOTAPE THAT HAS OUTTAKES OF THE DEFENDANT MAKING AN EXERCISE VIDEO, AND MR. COCHRAN MADE SOME COMMENTS TO YOU ABOUT THE DEFENDANT'S ALLEGED ARTHRITIC CONDITION. ACCORDING TO HIM THE DEFENDANT'S ARTHRITIC CONDITION BECAME ACUTE SOMETIME AFTER HE HAD PLAYED GOLF AND AFTER HE HAD BEEN SWINGING THE GOLF CLUB ON THE EVENING OF JUNE THE 12TH AT 10:00 P.M. HE SAID AT THAT POINT, AFTER THAT, THE ARTHRITIC CONDITION BECAME ACUTE. MR. COCHRAN TOLD YOU THAT THE DEFENDANT'S PHYSICAL CAPABILITIES ARE VERY LIMITED AS A RESULT OF THAT CONDITION. THE PROSECUTION WILL SHOW YOU EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. WE WILL SHOW YOU OUTTAKES OF AN EXERCISE VIDEOTAPE WHICH WAS MADE BY THE DEFENDANT ONLY TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE MURDERS. WE WILL SHOW YOU A PORTION OF THAT VIDEOTAPE TO DEMONSTRATE JUST WHAT THE DEFENDANT'S PHYSICAL CAPABILITIES REALLY WERE ON THE EVENING OF JUNE THE 12TH, 1994.

IN IT YOU WILL SEE THE DEFENDANT, JUST TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE MURDERS, THAT HE WEIGHED 215 POUNDS, WHICH IS WHAT HE WEIGHED FIFTEEN YEARS AGO, THAT THE DEFENDANT PRIDED HIMSELF IN THAT TAPE ON BEING IN GOOD PHYSICAL CONDITION. YOU WILL SEE HIM DOING PUSH-UPS. YOU WILL SEE HIM LIFTING HIS ARMS OVERHEAD, YOU WILL SEE HIM STRETCHING, REACHING, THROWING JABS AND UPPERCUTS AND HE DOES THAT FOR SEVERAL MINUTES IN THIS TAPE. YOU WILL SEE HIM DOING TRUNK TWISTS. AND THIS TAPE TOOK HOURS TO MAKE AND THAT HE CAME BACK AFTER THAT DAY, WENT BACK THE NEXT DAY AND SPENT A LOT MORE TIME DOING THAT VERY SAME THING. WE ARE GOING TO SHOW YOU THAT TAPE DURING THE COURSE OF THIS TRIAL. SECOND OF ALL, COUNSEL MADE REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT -- TO A STATEMENT THAT HOWARD WEITZMAN, WHO WAS THEN THE DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY, WAS NOT PERMITTED TO BE PRESENT DURING THE INTERVIEW WITH THE POLICE OFFICERS ON JUNE THE 13TH. AND YOU WERE TOLD BY COUNSEL THAT THEY REFUSED, THE POLICE OFFICERS ACTUALLY REFUSED TO ALLOW MR. WEITZMAN TO REMAIN WITH THE DEFENDANT DURING THAT INTERVIEW. THAT IS COMPLETELY WRONG. AND IN FACT WHAT THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW IS THAT THE DETECTIVES ASKED MR. WEITZMAN TO STAY FOR THE INTERVIEW, BUT THAT HE DECLINED TO DO SO, STATING THAT HE WOULD PREFER TO GO OUT TO LUNCH AND THAT PRIOR TO THAT INTERVIEW HE HAD HAD APPROXIMATELY HALF AN HOUR ALONE WITH MR. SIMPSON TO TALK TO HIM, AFTER WHICH HE SAID, "GO AHEAD," WENT OUT TO LUNCH, AND THAT IS WHAT THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW. AND THAT WAS AFTER THE DETECTIVES INVITED HIM TO COME IN AND SIT DURING THE INTERVIEW WITH HIM. NOW, LASTLY, YOU HEARD MR. COCHRAN TALK TO YOU ABOUT A WITNESS NAMED MARY ANNE GERCHAS. NOW, HE TOLD YOU ABOUT THIS WITNESS, HE SAID IT WAS A VERY IMPORTANT WITNESS, HE DISCUSSED AT SOME LENGTH WHAT SHE WOULD TESTIFY TO, TELLING YOU THAT SHE CLAIMED TO HAVE SEEN FOUR MEN ON THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS, AT LEAST TWO OF WHOM WERE HISPANIC, AT LEAST ONE OR TWO OF WHOM WERE WEARING A KNIT CAP, THAT SHE STATED SHE SAW THEM POSSIBLY RUNNING FROM THE AREA OF NICOLE SIMPSON'S CONDO ON THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS. NOW, YOU WILL BE HEARING A LOT MORE ABOUT MISS GERCHAS DURING THE COURSE OF THIS TRIAL, BUT RIGHT NOW I AM JUST GOING TO ADDRESS A FEW POINTS THAT THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW THAT MR. COCHRAN DIDN'T TELL YOU ABOUT. FOR EXAMPLE, SHE SPOKE TO HER FRIEND SHEILA CARTER THE DAY AFTER THE MURDERS OF RON AND NICOLE. SHE TOLD HER FRIEND, SHEILA CARTER, THAT SHE WAS NOT EVEN AT BUNDY ON THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS. MARY ANNE GERCHAS HAD PLANNED TO GO AND LOOK FOR AN APARTMENT ON BRENTWOOD ON THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS ON JUNE THE 12TH. THE NEXT DAY SHE SPOKE TO SHEILA CARTER AND SAID SHE DID NOT GO TO BRENTWOOD ON THAT NIGHT AND SHE WAS GLAD BECAUSE THERE HAD BEEN MURDERS COMMITTED THERE THE NIGHT BEFORE. BUT MISS CARTER IS ALSO GOING TO TELL YOU SOMETHING ELSE. IN ADDITION TO THE FACT THAT SHE WILL TELL YOU THAT MISS GERCHAS TOLD HER SHE DID NOT GO TO BRENTWOOD ON THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS, SHE IS ALSO GOING TO TELL YOU SOMETHING VERY IMPORTANT ABOUT MISS GERCHAS' CREDIBILITY. SHE WILL TELL YOU ABOUT A STATEMENT WHICH PROVES THAT MISS GERCHAS IS ONE OF THESE PEOPLE WHO COMES OUT OF THE WOODWORK IN HIGH-PROFILE CASES SO THEY CAN GET INVOLVED. AND HERE IS WHAT MISS CARTER WILL TELL YOU: MISS GERCHAS WAS OBSESSED WITH THIS CASE AND SHE TALKED AS IF SHE KNEW THE DEFENDANT PERSONALLY. SHE SAID THAT MISS CARTER WOULD SEND HER TO THE STORE TO BUY EVERY ENQUIRER, EVERY STAR AND EVERY TABLOID PERTAINING TO THIS CASE, ANYTHING THAT TALKED ABOUT THE SIMPSON CASE. SHE WOULD READ IT ALL AND SHE WOULD SAVE IT AND TALK ABOUT THE CASE CONSTANTLY. BUT SHE SOMEHOW NEVER TOLD ANYONE THAT SHE HAD BEEN ON BUNDY ON THE NIGHT OF THE MURDERS UNTIL THE TIME THAT ROBERT SHAPIRO STARTED THE HOTLINE REQUESTING THAT ANYONE WITH INFORMATION COME FORWARD AND CALL THAT HOTLINE NUMBER. AND IT WAS RIGHT AROUND THAT TIME THAT HE PUT OUT THE HOTLINE NUMBER THAT MARY ANNE GERCHAS STARTED TO SAY, WELL, MAYBE I WAS DRIVING BY THAT AREA, MAYBE I DID SEE SOMETHING. MR. COCHRAN ACCUSED US OF NOT TELLING YOU ABOUT HER AND WE DIDN'T BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT HER. AND IF YOU BELIEVE HER, SHE ASKED THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS IF THEY WOULD TELL US ABOUT HER AND THEY SAID THEY WOULD. SHE SPOKE TO ROBERT SHAPIRO AND SHAPIRO'S PEOPLE TOLD HER NOT TO TALK TO ANYONE ABOUT HER STATEMENT, AND WHEN THEY FINISHED TAKING HER STATEMENT, THEY TOLD HER THEY WEREN'T GOING TO USE HER AS A WITNESS. THEY SPENT HOURS INTERVIEWING HER BACK ON JULY 10TH AND JULY 12 OF 1994 AND THEY NEVER TOLD US ABOUT HER. NOW THAT JURY INSTRUCTION COUNSEL SHOWED YOU ABOUT CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES APPLIES TO ALL WITNESSES, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW THAT MARY ANNE GERCHAS IS A KNOWN LIAR AND A SIMPSON CASE GROUPIE. THANK YOU FOR KEEPING AN OPEN MIND AND LISTENING TO ALL THE EVIDENCE.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES, PLEASE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: AT THE SIDE BAR, MR. COCHRAN.

MR. COCHRAN: I'M GOING TO OBJECT BECAUSE ALL KIND OF HEARSAY AND SHAPIRO AND SHAPIRO'S INVESTIGATOR SAID, PLUS MISS SHEILA CARTER. WE THE REPORTS, BUT IF THEY KNEW SO MUCH ABOUT THIS, THEY HAVEN'T GIVEN US ANYTHING REGARDING SHEILA CARTER, SO IT WORKS BOTH WAYS.

MS. CLARK: WELL, IT IS IMPEACHMENT.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I'VE GOT NO REPORTS ON SHEILA CARTER AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT HAS BEEN INTRODUCED.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE WILL TAKE UP THIS ISSUE LATER.

MR. COCHRAN: CAN I JUST SAY SOMETHING, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: SURE.

MR. COCHRAN: I THINK SHE GETS UP AND TALKS ABOUT HER AND ACCUSES OF ALL KIND OF STUFF. IF THAT IS A VIOLATION, YOUR HONOR, WE SHOULD DEAL WITH IT RIGHT NOW.

THE COURT: I THINK THIS IS A FOOTNOTE 11 PROBLEM, ISN'T IT?

MR. COCHRAN: WELL, MAYBE, BUT --

THE COURT: REFERRING TO FOOTNOTE 11 IN IZAZAGA.

MR. COCHRAN: YES, I THINK IT IS.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE WILL TAKE IT UP. YOUR OBJECTION IS NOTED.

MR. COCHRAN: WHILE WE ARE UP HERE, SO I CAN SAVE SOME MORE TIME, I WANT TO NOW LODGE MY OBJECTION TO -- I WANT TO PHRASE THIS AS APPROPRIATELY AS POSSIBLE. WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY ASKED THE PEOPLE FOR AN ONGOING OBJECTION TO ALL OF THIS TESTIMONY WHICH WE BELIEVE IS CHARACTER ASSASSINATION, DEALING WITH CHARACTER, DEALING WITH THE INCIDENTS OF 1989, 1993, ANYTHING DEALING WITH ANY DOMESTIC DISCORD ISSUE, O.J. SIMPSON AND HIS WIFE. AND I WANT TO NOW LODGE THE OBJECTION TO WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS GOING TO BE THE 1989 INCIDENT.

MR. DARDEN: (NODS HEAD UP AND DOWN.)

MR. COCHRAN: IS THIS GOING TO BE SUCH, AT LEAST FOR THIS FIRST INCIDENT, BECAUSE I WANT TO APPROACH THE BENCH.

THE COURT: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT WE HAVE A CONTINUING OBJECTION AND I WANT TO DO IT IN A TACTFUL MANNER.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL.

MR. COCHRAN: WILL THE COURT LODGE AND NOTE MY OBJECTION?

THE COURT: I NOTE YOUR OBJECTIONS.

MR. SHAPIRO: YOUR HONOR, ALSO MAY I ASK FOR A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. I WASN'T SURE WHEN MISS CLARK SAID THAT SHE SPOKE TO ROBERT SHAPIRO, WHETHER SHE WAS REFERRING TO MISS GERCHAS OR THIS OTHER LADY.

MS. CLARK: MISS GERCHAS. AND WHEN WE CALL MISS GERCHAS WE WILL ASK ABOUT IT AND I HAVE -- I HAVE BEEN VERY CAREFUL TO DISCUSS ONLY WHAT I BELIEVE THAT IS -- WOULD BE ADMISSIBLE IN EVIDENCE, EITHER THROUGH CROSS-EXAMINATION OR DIRECT OF THAT WITNESS.

THE COURT: WELL, WE CAN TAKE ALL OF THIS UP.

MR. SHAPIRO: I WILL TELL YOU AT THIS POINT IN TIME, I AM ABSOLUTELY AS CERTAIN AS I CAN BE THAT I HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS WOMAN IN MY LIFE.

MS. CLARK: GOES TO HER CREDIBILITY, COUNSEL. THAT IS WHAT I MEAN.

MR. COCHRAN: HOWARD WEITZMAN. SHE KNOWS WHAT HOWARD WEITZMAN IS GOING TO SAY ABOUT THIS. THE LAWYER IS GOING TO SAY HE GOES OFF TO LUNCH AND LEAVES HIS CLIENT?

MS. CLARK: GUESS WHAT? GUESS WHAT?

MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T BELIEVE IT.

MS. CLARK: BE REAL CAREFUL WHEN YOU SAY THAT.

MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T BELIEVE IT, UNLESS YOU GOT A TAPE.

THE COURT: WE WILL TAKE IT UP UNDER THE FOOTNOTE 11 ISSUES.

MR. BAILEY: HAVE YOU EXEMPTED ANY WITNESSES FROM THE RULE?

THE COURT: EXCLUSION RULE.

MR. COCHRAN: YEAH, THE FAMILY.

MR. BAILEY: NO, NO, PROFESSIONAL WITNESSES, POLICE.

THE COURT: OTHER THAN -- WELL, THERE IS A STANDARD EXCEPTION FOR THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS.

MR. BAILEY: I AM WONDERING IF OUR INVESTIGATOR CAN COME AND GO WITHOUT BEING EXCLUDED.

MR. COCHRAN: I THINK OUR --

MR. BAILEY: EITHER THAT, OR IF THEY INTEND TO STAY DURING TESTIMONY, I THINK WE OUGHT TO HAVE A RECIPROCAL RULING.

MR. COCHRAN: I WILL MAKE A MOTION, IF THE COURT PLEASES, PAT MC KENNA AND PAVELIC, IF THAT IS ALL RIGHT WITH THE COURT.

THE COURT: ANY COMMENTS?

MS. CLARK: YES. THERE IS NO RECIPROCAL ON THE PART OF THE DEFENSE TO HAVE AN INVESTIGATING OFFICER PRESENT, AND IF THEY DO, THEN I WILL BE CROSS-EXAMINING ON THAT SHOULD HE BE CALLED AS A WITNESS, TO THE FACT THAT HE WAS PRESENT AND LISTENED TO ALL OF THE TESTIMONY BEFORE HE TOOK THE WITNESS STAND.

MR. BAILEY: THE SAME.

MR. COCHRAN: JUST A MOMENT. THAT IS NOT FAIR. LANGE AND VANNATTER ARE SITTING HERE THE WHOLE TIME. WE TALK ABOUT EVERYTHING BEING RECIPROCAL AND LET'S START TO MAKE IT RECIPROCAL.

MR. DARDEN: CAN I INTERRUPT FOR A MOMENT AND STEP OUTSIDE AND SEE IF THE WITNESS IS OUTSIDE SO THERE WON'T BE AN INTERRUPTION?

THE COURT: PLEASE.

MS. CLARK: THERE IS A STATUTORY EXCEPTION FOR THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS IN THE CASE TO BE PRESENT. THAT IS DIFFERENT AND THAT IS FINE. THEY WANT TO HAVE HIM PRESENT, I'M JUST GIVING FAIR WARNING.

THE COURT: OKAY.

MS. CLARK: I INTEND TO CROSS-EXAMINE ON IT.

MR. COCHRAN: I DO --

MS. CLARK: I WOULD OBJECT AND I'M LODGING MY OBJECTION FOR THE RECORD.

THE COURT: KEEP YOUR VOICE DOWN.

MR. COCHRAN: WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S FAIR AND I THINK IT IS FAIR THAT WE SHOULD HAVE OUR INVESTIGATING OFFICERS.

THE COURT: THOSE TWO INVESTIGATORS?

MS. CLARK: ONE FURTHER CLARIFICATION, YOUR HONOR, ALONG THIS LINE. WE HAVE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE EXPERTS THAT WE WILL BE CALLING TO TESTIFY AND I ASK LEAVE OF THE COURT TO ALLOW THEM TO OBSERVE THE TESTIMONY OF THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WITNESSES.

THE COURT: YEAH. WE WILL TAKE THIS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, BUT I THINK BOTH SIDES CAN MAKE THAT REQUEST.

MS. CLARK: I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THEIRS ALSO.

MR. SHAPIRO: WE WILL BE IN AGREEMENT THAT ALL EXPERT WITNESSES --

MR. COCHRAN: I WILL AGREE WITH THAT, BUT I WOULD LIKE LENORE WALKER TO BE ABLE TO WATCH IT ON TELEVISION WHEREVER SHE IS.

THE COURT: I THOUGHT THAT WE DID THAT.

MS. CLARK: SURE.

MR. COCHRAN: I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR, YOUR HONOR. YOU CAN'T BE TOO CAREFUL, JUDGE, ABOUT THESE THINGS.

THE COURT: SURE, WE CAN, AND WE ARE GETTING A FRESH START TODAY.

MR. COCHRAN: WE ARE. SHE AND I AGREED WE ARE NOT ATTACKING EACH OTHER. SHE WON'T BE UP TODAY ANYWAY; IT WILL BE CHRIS.

MS. CLARK: THAT IS WHY YOU SAID THAT.

MR. COCHRAN: I KNOW.

MR. COCHRAN: THANKS, JUDGE. I WILL MAKE MY MOTION NOW FOR THE EXCLUSION OF WITNESSES.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. COCHRAN, YOU HAD A REQUEST.

MR. COCHRAN: YES, YOUR HONOR. AS WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY INDICATED TO THE COURT, WE WILL AT THIS TIME ASK LEAVE OF COURT TO EXCLUDE ALL WITNESSES, SAVE THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS LANGE AND VANNATTER, AND SAVE TWO INVESTIGATORS FROM THE DEFENSE, PAT MC KENNA AND BILL PAVELIC, AND ASK AND SAVE THE FAMILY, WITH THE EXCEPTIONS REGARDING THE FAMILY MEMBERS IN THIS MATTER. WE WOULD ASK THE COURT TO EXCLUDE ALL WITNESSES AND ADMONISH THOSE WITNESSES REGARDING DISCUSSING THEIR TESTIMONY AND ALSO REGARDING WATCHING TELEVISION OF THESE PROCEEDINGS WHICH WILL BE THE SAME THING AS DISCUSSING THEIR TESTIMONY.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PEOPLE?

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MS. CLARK: THE PEOPLE WOULD ASK THE COURT FOR THE SAME RULING WITH RESPECT TO ALL WITNESSES FOR BOTH SIDES.

MR. COCHRAN: I SAID ALL WITNESSES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SO ORDERED. THANK YOU, COUNSEL.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

(POTENTIAL WITNESSES EXCLUDED.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN, MISS CLARK, ARE YOU READY TO CALL YOUR FIRST WITNESS?

MS. CLARK: YES, WE ARE, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. CALL YOUR FIRST WITNESS, PLEASE, AND IF YOU WOULD -- MAYBE WE DON'T NEED ALL THREE CHAIRS AT THE PEOPLE'S SIDE THIS WEEK. PERHAPS WE COULD GET RID OF ONE OF THE CHAIRS AND GIVE YOU A LITTLE MORE WORKING ROOM OVER BY THE PODIUM.

MS. CLARK: YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. DARDEN: WHICH PODIUM WOULD YOU LIKE US TO USE OR DOES IT MATTER?

THE COURT: WELL, MY PREFERENCE AT THIS POINT IS YOUR PREFERENCE, MR. DARDEN. YOU ARE THE TRIAL LAWYER. BE MY GUEST. WHY DON'T YOU JUST MOVE IT OVER A COUPLE OF FEET, BECAUSE I WANT TO AVOID OUR OTHER PROBLEM IF WE CAN. THANK YOU.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY JEX, CAN YOU HELP MISS CLARK GET RID OF THIS CHAIR? THANK YOU. MR. DARDEN, WHY DON'T YOU JUST SLIDE THOSE CHAIRS OVER JUST A LITTLE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN, WHO IS YOUR FIRST WITNESS?

MS. CLARK: SHARYN GILBERT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MS. CLARK: AS SHE APPROACHES THE WITNESS STAND, YOUR HONOR, WE HAVE HERE A 911 AUDIOTAPE. WE WOULD LIKE TO MARK IT PEOPLE'S 1 FOR IDENTIFICATION.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 1 FOR IDENTIFICATION.

(PEO'S 1 FOR ID = 911 AUDIOTAPE)

PEOPLE'S CASE IN CHIEF

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS GILBERT, WOULD YOU STEP OVER HERE BY THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE, BY THE COURT REPORTER. MRS. ROBERTSON.

SHARYN GILBERT, CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE PEOPLE, WAS SWORN AND TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:

THE CLERK: PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU 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: I DO.

THE CLERK: PLEASE BE SEATED AND STATE AND SPELL YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAMES FOR THE RECORD.

THE WITNESS: MY FIRST NAME IS SHARYN, SPELLED S-H-A-R-Y-N. LAST NAME IS GILBERT, G-I-L-B-E-R-T.

THE COURT: MR. DARDEN.

MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. DARDEN:

Q: GOOD MORNING, MISS GILBERT.

A: GOOD MORNING.

Q: MISS GILBERT, WHO DO YOU WORK FOR?

A: LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT.

Q: AND WHAT IS YOUR JOB TITLE?

A: I'M A POLICE SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE.

Q: AND ARE YOU ALSO A 911 OPERATOR AND DISPATCHER?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND WERE YOU A 911 OPERATOR AND DISPATCHER ON JANUARY 1, 1989?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: AND WERE YOU ON DUTY BETWEEN 3:00 AND FOUR O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING ON THAT DATE?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: AND ON THAT DATE AND DURING THAT TIME PERIOD DID YOU RECEIVE A TELEPHONE CALL?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: NOW, WHERE WERE YOU PHYSICALLY LOCATED AT THAT TIME?

A: UMM, I BELIEVE I WAS SITTING ON CONSOLE 41. IT IS INDICATED ON MY -- THE CONSOLE THAT I WAS SITTING ON.

Q: OKAY. SO YOU ARE SITTING AT CONSOLE 41?

A: WHICH IS WHAT WE DETERMINE AS A PRIMARY POSITION AND PRIMARY IS 911.

Q: OKAY. NOW, IS CONSOLE 41 LOCATED IN A PRIVATE OFFICE?

A: NO, IT IS NOT.

Q: IS IT LOCATED IN A CUBICLE?

A: NO, WE DON'T SIT IN INDIVIDUAL CUBICLES. WE -- THERE ARE APPROXIMATELY FIVE CONSOLES SIDE-BY-SIDE ALL CONNECTED TOGETHER.

Q: I TAKE IT THAT THERE IS A TELEPHONE OF SOME KIND IN FRONT OF YOU?

A: UMM, EACH CONSOLE HAS ITS OWN TELEPHONE AND IT SETS TO THE LEFT OF EACH OPERATOR.

Q: AND ARE YOU PROVIDED WITH EARPHONES?

A: YES, WE HAVE HEADSETS, INDIVIDUAL HEADSETS.

Q: OKAY. AND ARE YOU ALSO PROVIDED WITH A KEYBOARD?

A: YES. WE HAVE TWO COMPUTER SCREENS AND A KEYBOARD FOR EACH CONSOLE.

Q: OKAY. IF YOU WILL, TAKE US THROUGH THE PROCESS AND PROCEDURE THAT OCCURS WHENEVER YOU RECEIVE A 911 TELEPHONE CALL.

A: OKAY.

Q: THE CALL COMES IN AND YOU ANSWER IT, CORRECT?

A: YES. UMM, WHEN YOU ARE PLUGGED IN, WE HAVE WHAT YOU CALL AN "IN" BUTTON THAT STAYS IN ALL THE TIME READY FOR A CALL TO -- WELL, YOU SAY DROP IN. AND WE HAVE AN INDICATOR ON THE PANEL TO THE LEFT THAT SHOWS THE ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER WHERE THIS CALL IS ORIGINATING FROM AND IT ALSO COMES IN ON MY COMPUTER SCREEN WHICH IS THE LEFT COMPUTER SCREEN CONSIDERED AS OUR STATUS SCREEN.

Q: OKAY. SO WHENEVER YOU RECEIVE A 911 CALL, A DISPLAY COMES UP ON THE CONSOLE THAT INDICATES THE ORIGIN OF THE TELEPHONE CALL?

A: YES.

Q: THE ADDRESS FROM WHICH THE TELEPHONE CALL ORIGINATED?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND THAT SAME INFORMATION COMES UP ON ANOTHER SCREEN?

A: COMES UP ON OUR STATUS SCREEN.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE HERE A SINGLE-PAGE DOCUMENT. IT APPEARS TO BE SOME FORM OF A 911 DISPATCH -- DISPATCHER'S LOG. I HAVE PROVIDED MR. COCHRAN WITH A COPY. MAY IT BE MARKED PEOPLE'S 2?

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 2 FOR IDENTIFICATION.

(PEO'S 2 FOR ID = 1-PG 911 DISPATCHER'S LOG)

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS GILBERT, SHOWING WHAT YOU HAS BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 2 FOR IDENTIFICATION, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT DOCUMENT?

A: YES, I DO.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, I ALSO HAVE A COPY OF THE DOCUMENT ON THE ELMO MACHINE. MAY WE PROJECT IT ON THE SCREEN, PLEASE?

THE COURT: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, JUST A MOMENT BEFORE WE DO THAT. MAY WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I LET YOU SEE MY COPY?

THE COURT: SURE.

MR. COCHRAN: THE OBJECTION HAS TO DO WITH -- I NEED A LITTLE FURTHER FOUNDATION BEFORE HE PUTS IT UP THERE AS TO WHAT COMES OUT HERE BECAUSE DARDEN TOLD US IN OPENING STATEMENT THAT THEY WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT SHE WOULD BE SAYING THE FEMALE WAS BEING SLAPPED AND HEAR SLAPPING AND IT SAYS "FEMALE BEING BEATEN," AND I'M NOT SURE HOW THIS COMES IN. SHE TYPES THAT IN, THAT IS HER INTERPRETATION? WE NEED MORE FOUNDATION AS TO WHAT THIS IS, HOW THIS GETS IN HERE, THAT SORT OF THING, BEFORE HE PUTS IT UP ON THE SCREEN. HE KIND OF SKIPPED A COUPLE OF STEPS IT SEEMED TO ME.

THE COURT: PROBABLY A COUPLE OF FOUNDATIONAL QUESTIONS.

MR. DARDEN: AS TO WHAT?

THE COURT: WHAT THE FORM IS, HOW IT IS FILLED OUT. ONCE WE ESTABLISH THAT, PROBABLY TWO QUESTIONS. ALL RIGHT. SUSTAINED.

MR. COCHRAN: I WILL OBJECT. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I PROCEED, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS GILBERT, WHAT IS --

THE COURT: HOLD ON. HOLD ON. TAKE IT DOWN.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT IS THE DOCUMENT MARKED PEOPLE'S 2 FOR IDENTIFICATION?

A: IT IS TERMED WHAT WE CALL AN INCIDENT FORMAT.

Q: HOW IS THAT FORM GENERATED?

A: ON MY SCREEN, WHICH IS THE SCREEN DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF ME, WE HAVE A FORMAT WHICH ALLOWS TO US CREATE AN INCIDENT BY THE COMPUTER BY INSERTING CERTAIN COMMANDS. AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A CORRECTION. IT SHOWS THAT I WAS ON CONSOLE 54. ON THE TOP LINE IT SHOWS THE TIME THAT I GOT THE CALL AND THE TOP -- THE TOP EXAMPLE HERE IS MY UPDATE, SO I NEED TO DROP DOWN TO THE BOTTOM. IT SHOWS -- THE TOP LINE SHOWS THE CALL CAME IN AT 3:58 AND IT HAS MY OPERATOR NUMBER. IT SHOWS THE CONSOLE THAT I WAS ON AND THE INCIDENT NUMBER CREATED.

Q: NOW, DOES THE -- DOES THE FORM ALSO PROVIDE A SPACE FOR YOU TO ADD COMMENTS?

A: YES, IT DOES.

Q: AND DID YOU ADD SOME COMMENTS TO THAT FORM IN THIS SITUATION?

A: YES, I DID. THAT -- THAT IS WHERE IT SHOWS IN --

MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: IT SHOWS AN UPDATE OF MY INCIDENT IN THE TOP EXAMPLE AND THAT WAS AFTER I ENTERED THE COMMENTS.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: OKAY. AND DID YOU ADD THOSE COMMENTS TO THIS FORM?

A: YES.

Q: AND THE COMMENTS THAT YOU ADDED TO THIS FORM, WERE THESE COMMENTS BASED ON YOUR PERCEPTION, YOUR HEARING?

A: YES, IT WAS.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

MR. DARDEN: ON THE SCREEN, LOOKING AT THE BOTTOM ONE-THIRD PORTION OF THE FORM, AND I'M GOING TO ASK MR. FAIRTLOUGH, CAN YOU ZOOM ME IN CLOSER?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, WITH REGARD TO THIS EXHIBIT, THIS EXHIBIT HAS UNDERLINING DIFFERENT ON IT THAN WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. HIGHLIGHTING, RATHER.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. SAME DOCUMENT.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: I'M SORRY, MISS GILBERT. WHAT TIME DID YOU SAY YOU RECEIVED THE TELEPHONE CALL?

A: 3:58.

Q: 3:58 IN THE MORNING?

A: YES.

Q: AND DOES THE INCIDENT REPORT INDICATE THE ORIGIN OF THE TELEPHONE CALL?

A: NO. IT JUST SHOWS -- I HAVE THE ABILITY TO UPDATE IT AND I HAVE THE ABILITY TO UPDATE THE INCIDENT TYPE WHEN I FIRST GOT THE CALL I HAD IT AS AN UNKNOWN TROUBLE.

Q: OKAY. OKAY. SO THE CALL CAME TO YOU, RIGHT?

A: RIGHT. IT WAS AN OPEN LINE.

Q: OKAY. COULD YOU HEAR ANYTHING OVER THE OPEN LINE?

A: NO. AT THE BEGINNING, NO.

Q: OKAY. DID THE LINE REMAIN OPEN?

A: YES, IT DID.

Q: AND WHILE THE LINE WAS OPENED, AT ANY POINT IN TIME COULD YOU HEAR ANYTHING?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT DID YOU HEAR?

A: AT FIRST I HEARD A FEMALE SCREAMING AND THAT IS WHEN I WENT BACK AND CHANGED MY INCIDENT TYPE FROM AN UNKNOWN TROUBLE TO A SCREAMING WOMAN.

Q: OKAY. AND DID YOU HEAR ANYTHING ELSE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT DID YOU HEAR?

A: I HEARD SOMEONE BEING HIT.

Q: YOU HEARD A NOISE THAT YOU ASSOCIATED WITH SOMEONE BEING HIT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THAT INFORMATION?

A: THAT IS WHEN I WENT BACK AND UPDATED IT TO -- IN THE FACT THAT I HEARD A FEMALE SCREAMING AND THEN I HEARD WHAT I THOUGHT WAS A SLAP. I WENT BACK AND UPDATED IT AS A FEMALE BEING BEATEN AT THE LOCATION, TO GIVE THE RESPONDING OFFICER AN INDICATION OF WHAT WAS GOING ON, THAT IT WAS NO LONGER AN UNKNOWN TROUBLE.

Q: IN FACT, YOU INDICATED THAT A FEMALE BEING BEATEN AT LOCATION COULD BE HEARD OVER THE TELEPHONE; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT WAS THE NEXT THING THAT YOU DID AFTER YOU UPDATED THE INCIDENT REPORT?

A: I BROUGHT UP THE NECESSARY FREQUENCIES TO BROADCAST IT BUREAU WIDE, AND FOR THE AIR UNIT, TO ASSIGN A UNIT.

Q: OKAY. AND DID YOU ASSIGN A UNIT?

A: AT THE TIME I DISPATCHED IT EITHER THERE WEREN'T ANY UNITS AVAILABLE OR I DID AN IMMEDIATE DISPATCH AND I JUST BROADCAST IT TO WEST L.A. UNITS.

Q: AND IS THERE SOMETHING CALLED A CALL PRIORITY OR A PRIORITY CODE IN TERMS OF DISPATCHING UNITS TO CERTAIN TYPES OF INCIDENTS?

A: YES, IT IS. IT IS INDICATED TO THE RIGHT -- FAR RIGHT YOU SEE A "C SLASH P" AND A "2 SLASH H," THAT MEANS CODE 2 HIGH, AND FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT MEANS A HOT SHOT, THAT MEANS IMMEDIATE RESPONSE.

Q: YOU MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO THAT THE TELEPHONE LINE WAS LEFT OPEN; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US HOW LONG THAT LINE WAS LEFT OPEN?

A: WELL, I ONLY CAN GO BY MY INCIDENT THAT I CREATED THAT THE CALL CAME IN AT 3:58 AND I UPDATED IT AT 4:01, SO I STAYED ON THE LINE AT LEAST THREE TO FOUR MINUTES.

Q: OKAY. SO THE LINE WAS OPEN THEN THREE TO FOUR MINUTES?

A: YES.

Q: AND THE SCREAMS THAT YOU HEARD, YOU SAY THAT THOSE SCREAMS WERE THE SCREAMS OF A WOMAN?

A: IT SOUNDED LIKE A FEMALE TO ME.

Q: IT DIDN'T SOUND LIKE A MAN?

A: NO.

Q: COULD YOU TELL WHO WAS BEING HIT OR STRUCK OR SLAPPED?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. HOW COULD SHE TELL THAT?

THE WITNESS: NO, I COULDN'T.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. SHE INDICATED SHE COULDN'T TELL. THE ANSWER WILL STAND.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: ARE 911 CALLS RECORDED BY THE LAPD?

A: YES, THEY ARE.

Q: AND HAVE YOU LISTENED TO THE 911 CALL YOU RECEIVED AT 3:58 IN THE MORNING ON JANUARY 1, 1989?

A: YES, I HAVE.

Q: AND WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU LISTENED TO THAT TAPE?

A: APPROXIMATELY A WEEK AND A HALF AGO.

Q: AND WHEN YOU LISTENED TO THE TAPE A WEEK AND A HALF AGO, COULD YOU HEAR SLAPS OR STRIKES?

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE, YOUR HONOR, AS CONCLUSIONARY IN FORM.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.

THE WITNESS: I COULD IN REMEMBERING THE CALL. I COULD DETERMINE AFTER THE FIRST SCREAM, THEN I HEARD SOMEONE BEING HIT.

MR. DARDEN: OKAY. THANK YOU. WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, YOUR HONOR, I WOULD LIKE TO PLAY THE 1989 911 TAPE.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE THAT IDENTIFIED AS AN EXHIBIT?

MR. DARDEN: YES. IT HAS BEEN MARKED PEOPLE'S 1.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

(AT 10:11 A.M. PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 1 FOR IDENTIFICATION, AN AUDIOTAPE, WAS PLAYED.)

THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, MR. DARDEN. WHY DON'T YOU STOP THAT AT THIS TIME.

(AT 10:12 A.M. THE PLAYING OF THE AUDIOTAPE ENDED.)

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: MISS GILBERT, IS THAT A TAPE-RECORDING OF THE TELEPHONE CALL YOU RECEIVED AT 3:58 A.M. ON JANUARY 1, 1989?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: AND THERE IS MORE TO THE TAPE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN YOU LISTENED TO THE TAPE LAST WEEK, DID YOU HEAR YOUR VOICE ON THE TAPE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: YOU TESTIFIED A MOMENT AGO THAT YOU DISPATCHED UNITS TO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. IS THAT ON THE TAPE?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: DID YOU INDICATE THAT YOU DISPATCHED UNITS TO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM, APARTMENT B?

A: YES, IT IS INDICATED ON THERE.

Q: OKAY. COULD YOU EXPLAIN TO US WHY YOU INCLUDED THE APARTMENT B IN THE RECORD?

A: WHEN I FIRST CREATED THE INCIDENT I HAD NOT ERASED MY SCREEN PRIOR -- FROM A PRIOR CALL THAT I DETERMINED NOT TO DISPATCH ON AND HAD NOT ERASED THE APARTMENT NUMBER OUT OF THE FIELD. WHEN I WENT BACK AND HIT "ENTER" ON THE COMPUTER, IT ERASED EVERYTHING BUT THE CORRECT LOCATION THAT CAME UP ON THE A AND I, ON THE TELEPHONE CONSOLE.

Q: OKAY. NOW, WE HEAR OTHER VOICES, MALE VOICES, AND APPARENTLY OTHER DISPATCHERS IN THIS TAPE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: THOSE OTHER VOICES, THOSE MALE VOICES, THOSE DISPATCHERS, WHERE IS THAT NOISE ORIGINATING FROM?

A: FROM PEOPLE SITTING BESIDE ME. THERE IS PEOPLE THAT SIT BEHIND ME. ALSO, I HAD BROUGHT UP THE FREQUENCY TO BROADCAST THE CALL AND YOU ARE HEARING THE OTHER DIVISIONS THAT WERE ON THE AIR BECAUSE IT WAS AN OPEN LINE. AS LONG AS I HAD NOT HIT MY TRANSMIT BUTTON, THEN YOU WILL HEAR ALL THAT.

Q: AND THE COMMENTS YOU TYPED ON TO THE INCIDENT REPORT MARKED PEOPLE'S 2 FOR IDENTIFICATION, WHERE YOU INDICATE THAT YOU COULD HEAR A FEMALE BEING BEATEN, AT WHAT POINT IN THIS PROCESS DID YOU TYPE THAT INFORMATION ON TO THE REPORT?

A: AFTER I -- AFTER I HAD MADE MY INCIDENT AND MADE IT A SCREAMING WOMAN, AND HEARING IS JUST -- YOU GET EXCITED, YOU HEAR ALL OF IT AT ONE TIME AND I WENT BACK AND TYPED IT IN AFTER THAT, AFTER I HAD CREATED THE INCIDENT.

Q: OKAY. THIS IS WHILE THE TELEPHONE LINE IS OPENED?

A: YES, I LEFT IT OPENED.

Q: SO IT IS DURING THE TELEPHONE CALL THEN THAT YOU TYPED IN THE COMMENT ABOUT YOUR HEARING A WOMAN BEING BEATEN?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. DID THE CALLER EVER SPEAK TO YOU DIRECTLY?

A: NO.

MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU. THAT IS ALL I HAVE.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN.

MR. COCHRAN: HE CAN LEAVE THAT UP, IF HE WOULD, THE ELMO.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. COCHRAN:

Q: GOOD MORNING, MISS GILBERT.

A: GOOD MORNING.

Q: I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS IF I MIGHT. THE DATE OF THIS INCIDENT WAS BACK IN 1989; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: THAT WAS JANUARY 1ST?

A: YES.

Q: WAS THAT JANUARY 1ST, 1989, AT ABOUT 3:58 IN THE MORNING SO THAT WOULD BE NEW YEAR'S DAY MORNING; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: NEW YEAR'S DAY MORNING, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AS I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU HAVE INDICATED TO US, YOU RECEIVED THIS CALL THROUGH THE OPEN LINE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU WERE SITTING AT YOUR CONSOLE AND BEING 911, YOU STARTED TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT CALL, TO LISTEN TO IT AND THEN YOU MADE SOME REACTION; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: NOW, FROM WHAT YOU TOLD MR. DARDEN, YOU NEVER HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ANY FEMALE AT THAT LOCATION AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND WHERE WE SEE "APARTMENT" UP THERE, THE -- TO THE RIGHT OF YOUR STATEMENT --

A: RIGHT.

Q: -- THAT WAS A MISTAKE BECAUSE YOUR PREVIOUS CALL HAD BEEN TO AN APARTMENT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOUR BEST RECOLLECTION IS THAT THIS CONVERSATION LASTED BETWEEN 3:58 AND ABOUT FOUR O'CLOCK OR 4:01?

A: THE OPEN LINE.

Q: OPEN LINE?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT YOU WERE ABLE TO HEAR, IN OTHER WORDS?

A: RIGHT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IN ORDER FOR YOU TO TRANSMIT AND TO GENERATE THE FORM THAT IS NOW UP ON THE SCREEN, YOU HAD TO TYPE SOMETHING, DID YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: AND AS WE LISTENED TO THAT TAPE, COULD WE HEAR YOU TYPING?

A: YES, YOU COULD.

Q: AND ARE YOU A PRETTY FAST TYPIST?

A: I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE.

Q: WELL, YOU HEARD YOUR -- THE TYPING IN THERE, DIDN'T YOU?

A: YES, RIGHT.

Q: AND SO THERE IS NO MISTAKING ABOUT IT, YOUR TYPING WAS NOT ANYBODY BEING STRUCK, WAS IT?

A: NO.

Q: AND SINCE YOU DIDN'T TALK TO ANYBODY, YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS BLOWS BEING PASSED BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE OR WHAT THE SITUATION WAS, DO YOU?

A: WHEN I TOOK THE CALL, WHEN IT CAME -- WHEN IT DROPPED IN AT THE VERY BEGINNING?

Q: YES, MA'AM.

A: AND THE WOMAN IS SCREAMING?

Q: YES, MA'AM.

A: THEN I HEARD THE HITS AT THE SAME TIME.

Q: BUT WHAT I'M ASKING YOU, YOU HADN'T TALKED TO ANYBODY SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE AT THAT LOCATION, DO YOU?

A: NO, I DO NOT.

Q: YOU HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT, DO YOU?

A: ONLY WHAT I HEARD. I HAVE TO CREATE AN INCIDENT ACCORDING TO WHAT I HEAR. EITHER WAY, I WAS SENDING THE POLICE AT THE BEGINNING AS AN UNKNOWN TROUBLE. SOMETHING WAS GOING ON AT THAT LOCATION THAT SOMEONE DIALED 911. OUR PROCEDURE IS ANYTIME YOU GET A CALL ON 911, WHETHER YOU HEAR ANYONE OR NOT, YOU HAVE TO SEND THE POLICE ON AN UNKNOWN TROUBLE.

Q: I UNDERSTAND. AND THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT. IT WAS UNKNOWN TROUBLE TO YOU, RIGHT?

A: IN THE BEGINNING.

Q: RIGHT. YOU ARE DOWNTOWN AT 150 NORTH LOS ANGELES; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IS HAPPENING ON -- BETWEEN ANY TWO OR THREE PARTIES AT THE LOCATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU HEAR CERTAIN THINGS; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: AND THEN BASED UPON WHAT YOU HEAR, YOU START TO TYPE INTO YOUR COMPUTER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: DID I ALSO HEAR A LOT OF STATIC ON THAT LINE?

A: THE STATIC THAT YOU HEARD WAS WHEN I BROUGHT UP THE FREQUENCY TO BROADCAST TO THE OTHER UNITS. THAT IS THE TRANSMISSIONS FROM THE COMPUTER TO THE RADIO, NOT FOR THE TELEPHONE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO THE STATIC WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GENERATED BY WHAT YOU DID IN BROADCASTING TO THE OTHER UNIT ON A POLICE FREQUENCY; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO WOULD DID HEAR STATIC, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: WE HEARD TYPING AND WE HEARD STATIC AND DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME YOU MENTIONED, I BELIEVE AT SOME POINT, THAT YOU BECAME EXCITED AS YOU HEARD THIS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THAT IS PART OF YOUR JOB, TO -- TO CREATE UNDER STRESS AND PRESSURE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: BECAUSE YOUR JOB IS TO TRY TO GET A UNIT OUT THERE AS FAST AS YOU CAN BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON, RIGHT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO AT THE TIME THIS CALL HAD ENDED OR BY THE TIME THIS CALL HAD ENDED, YOU HAD NOT TALKED WITH ANYBODY AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM, HAD YOU?

A: NO.

Q: YOU SUBSEQUENTLY DISPATCHED A VEHICLE THERE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I SENT IT TO THE DIVISION.

Q: TO THE DIVISION?

A: YES.

Q: BY "THE DIVISION" WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WEST LOS ANGELES DIVISION?

A: RIGHT.

Q: THEY IN TURN WOULD DISPATCH A UNIT?

A: I WOULD HAVE ASSIGNED A UNIT. LIKE I SAID, EITHER THERE WAS NOT ONE AVAILABLE OR I DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO ASSIGN A UNIT TO GO INTO WHAT WE CALL DISPATCH MODE, SO I BROADCAST IT TO ANY WEST L.A. UNIT, THEREFORE ANY UNIT THAT WAS AVAILABLE, THEY HEARD THAT CALL, THEY SHOULD TAKE IT.

Q: THEY COULD THEN RESPOND TO THAT CALL?

A: EXACTLY.

Q: THAT WAS PART OF THE STATIC THAT WE HEARD WHEN YOU WANTED TO MAKE THAT KIND OF BROADCAST OVER THE FREQUENCY; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: MR. DARDEN ASKED YOU A QUESTION WITH REFERENCE TO OTHER THINGS ON THE TAPE. THE OTHER THINGS ON THE REST OF THIS TAPE ARE UNRELATED TO THIS INCIDENT; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: IN OTHER WORDS, THESE ARE OTHER CALLS? YOU WERE STILL GETTING OTHER CALLS?

A: NO, I WAS NOT GETTING OTHER CALLS. THERE WERE OTHER PEOPLE AROUND ME THAT WERE TALKING TO THEIR CALLER AND COULD BE HEARD. MY MICROPHONE WILL PICK IT UP.

Q: SO THE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE ON THE TAPE WERE UNRELATED TO THIS INCIDENT?

A: EXACTLY.

Q: BUT RELATED TO OTHER INCIDENTS BEING HANDLED BY YOUR COLLEAGUES WHO WERE THERE?

A: RIGHT.

Q: AS I UNDERSTAND THIS ROOM AT THE PARKER CENTER, IT IS A SITUATION WHERE YOU CAN PICK UP WHAT YOUR COLLEAGUES ARE DOING AND I PRESUME THEY CAN PICK UP WHAT YOU ARE DOING; IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?

A: THAT'S RIGHT.

Q: AND SO ON THAT TAPE WE CAN HEAR, FOR INSTANCE, SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT A MALE BLACK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? IS THAT ONE OF YOUR COLLEAGUES?

A: THAT IS ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, AT SOME POINT YOU TYPE INTO AND YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT YOU TYPE INTO YOUR COMPUTER "FEMALE BEING BEATEN AT LOCATION COULD BE HEARD OVER THE PHONE," AND THAT WAS WHAT YOU CONCLUDED AFTER YOU HEARD THIS WOMAN SCREAMING; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER THERE WAS A MUTUAL FIGHT OR WHAT WAS GOING ON, DO YOU, AT THAT POINT?

A: NO, I DO NOT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU -- WHAT YOU WROTE DOWN WAS WHAT YOU CONCLUDED AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: WHAT I CONCLUDED THAT I HEARD.

Q: THAT WAS BACK IN JANUARY OF 1989, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU NEVER AT ANY TIME TALKED TO ANY OF THE PARTIES WHO WERE ACTUALLY AT THAT HOUSE?

A: NO.

MR. COCHRAN: JUST A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I HAVE JUST A MOMENT MORE, YOUR HONOR?

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL AND THE DEFENDANT.)

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR. NOTHING FURTHER FROM MISS GILBERT AT THIS POINT. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

THE COURT: MR. DARDEN.

MR. DARDEN: JUST A FEW QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: DON'T GO AWAY.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. DARDEN:

Q: MISS GILBERT, YOU CONCLUDED BACK ON JANUARY 1, 1989, THAT A WOMAN WAS BEING BEATEN AS YOU LISTENED IN ON THE TELEPHONE?

A: YES.

Q: AND SINCE -- YOU HAVE HEARD THAT TAPE AGAIN, THAT IS, SINCE 1989; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: HAVE YOUR CONCLUSIONS CHANGED?

A: NO, THEY HAVE NOT.

Q: MR. COCHRAN JUST ASKED YOU A MOMENT AGO IF THERE WAS INFORMATION OR OTHER INFORMATION ON THE TAPE THAT DID NOT RELATE TO THIS INCIDENT AND YOU SAID YES, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. BUT YOU CAN HEAR ON THE TAPE YOUR DISPATCH TO ANY WEST L.A. UNIT; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: THAT IS A LITTLE FURTHER ALONG ON THE TAPE?

A: RIGHT.

MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THE COURT: ANY RECROSS AS TO THAT?

MR. COCHRAN: YES. YES, JUST BRIEFLY, YOUR HONOR.

RECROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. COCHRAN:

Q: AND SO THAT IT IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR, MISS GILBERT, YOUR CONCLUSION ABOUT A PERSON BEING BEATEN WAS BASED UPON WHAT YOU HEARD AND YOU COULDN'T TELL WHO WAS STRIKING WHOM; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, MA'AM.

THE WITNESS: YOU ARE WELCOME.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS GILBERT, YOU MAY STEP DOWN. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MR. DARDEN: MAY SHE BE EXCUSED, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT TO GRAB THE NEXT WITNESS?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: MISS CLARK.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THE PROBLEM -- THE COURT CONFIGURATION -- WE ARE GOING TO BE PLEASANT TODAY ALL DAY. WHEN MISS CLARK GOES OVER AND TALKS TO THE INVESTIGATORS, YOU CAN TELL BY BODY LANGUAGE OF THE JUROR CLOSER TO HER IN RED, SHE IS TURNING, SHE IS TURNING LIKE THIS, IT IS SO CLOSE, WHATEVER MARCIA IS SAYING, IT IS A REAL PROBLEM, AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM DURING THIS TRIAL AND I WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT --

THE COURT: OKAY.

MR. COCHRAN: -- WHILE SHE WAS THERE BECAUSE YOU COULD SEE WHERE MARCIA WAS. I DIDN'T WANT HER BEND OVER, NO. 1, BUT NO. 2, IT POSES A REAL PROBLEM RIGHT THERE BECAUSE THEY WERE RIGHT THERE BY COUNSEL AND I THINK SOMEBODY -- SOMEBODY NEEDS TO BE MOVED OVER, BECAUSE IT IS EVEN HARD ON MARCIA.

THE COURT: WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT. THEY ARE RIGHT.

MR. SHAPIRO: THEY ARE SITTING IN THE JURY BOX.

MS. CLARK: JUST WANT TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THAT WHAT I DID WAS I WILL DEMONSTRATE, (INDICATING), LIKE THAT IN HIS EAR SO THAT NO ONE COULD HEAR, BUT WHAT WE CAN DO IS PASS FOLDED NOTES.

THE COURT: LET'S JUST SLIDE THEM OVER.

MS. CLARK: THAT'S GOOD. OKAY.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN, DO YOU WISH TO CALL YOUR NEXT WITNESS?

MR. DARDEN: YES, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU. THE PEOPLE CALL DETECTIVE EDWARDS, YOUR HONOR.

JOHN EDWARDS, CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE PEOPLE, WAS SWORN AND TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:

THE CLERK: PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU 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, I DO.

THE CLERK: PLEASE BE SEATED. PLEASE STATE AND SPELL YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAME FOR THE RECORD.

THE WITNESS: JOHN EDWARDS, E-D-W-A-R-D-S.

THE COURT: MR. DARDEN.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. DARDEN:

Q: GOOD MORNING, SIR.

A: GOOD MORNING.

Q: SIR, ON JANUARY 1, 1989, WERE YOU EMPLOYED BY THE LAPD?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: WHAT IS YOUR PRESENT RANK TODAY?

A: DETECTIVE, VAN NUYS HOMICIDE.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT WAS YOUR RANK AND ASSIGNMENT ON JANUARY 1, 1989?

A: TRAINING OFFICER FOR WEST L.A. PATROL.

Q: OKAY. SO YOU WERE A PATROL OFFICER?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: AT WEST L.A. DIVISION?

A: YES.

Q: DOES WEST L.A. DIVISION COVER BRENTWOOD?

A: YES, IT DOES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, DID YOU HAVE A PARTICULAR UNIT DESIGNATION ON JANUARY 1?

A: YES. I WAS 8 ADAM 69. I WAS ASSIGNED TO AN AREA AROUND CADILLAC AND LA CIENEGA.

Q: YOU SAY THAT YOU WERE A TRAINING OFFICER?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT IS A TRAINING OFFICER?

A: A TRAINING OFFICER TRAINS NEW RECRUITS OUT OF THE ACADEMY WHO ARE ASSIGNED TO THE FIELD IN THE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF POLICE WORK AND STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES OF POLICE DEPARTMENT.

Q: OKAY. AND WERE YOU ACCOMPANIED BY A ROOKIE TRAINEE?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: WHO WAS THAT?

A: PATRISHA MILEWSKI.

THE COURT: HOW DO YOU SPELL THAT?

THE WITNESS: M-I-L-W-I-S-K-I, I BELIEVE. I HAVE THE SPELLING, IF YOU NEED IT.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WERE ON YOU DUTY BETWEEN 3:00 AND 4:00 A.M. ON THAT DATE?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: WERE YOU IN UNIFORM?

A: YES.

Q: WAS YOUR PARTNER IN UNIFORM?

A: YES, SHE WAS.

Q: DID YOU HAVE A POLICE VEHICLE?

A: YES.

Q: WAS THAT A PLAIN CLOTHES VEHICLE?

A: IT WAS A BLACK AND WHITE PATROL CAR.

Q: SO YOU HAD "LAPD, TO PROTECT AND TO SERVE" AND ALL OF THAT ON THE DOORS?

A: YES, IT DID.

Q: ON THAT DATE, AROUND FOUR O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, DID YOU RECEIVE A RADIO CALL?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS AROUND 3:30 IN THE MORNING.

Q: OKAY. DO YOU KNOW THE EXACT TIME?

A: NOT REALLY, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS SOMEWHERE AROUND 3:30, 3:40, SOMEWHERE IN THERE.

Q: OKAY. BUT YOU DID RECEIVE A RADIO CALL?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THAT CALL?

A: IT WAS A 911 RADIO CALL AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM, WOMAN BEING BEATEN. THE OPERATOR COULD OVERHEAR IT, AND ACCORDING TO THE COMMENT, THE OPERATOR COULD OVERHEAR THE WOMAN BEING BEATEN ON THE PHONE.

Q: AND WHERE WERE YOU, IF YOU RECALL, WHEN YOU RECEIVED THAT RADIO CALL?

A: I WAS SOMEWHERE IN THE GENERAL AREA OF LA CIENEGA AND CADILLAC, ROBERTSON IN THERE, NEAR THE FREEWAY.

Q: AND DID YOU PROCEED TO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO GET THERE, IF YOU RECALL?

A: LESS THAN TEN MINUTES.

Q: OKAY. A MOMENT AGO YOU TESTIFIED THAT YOU HAD A SPECIFIC OR PARTICULAR UNIT DESIGNATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: WERE YOU ALSO ASSIGNED A PARTICULAR OR SPECIFIC PATROL AREA?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: WHAT WAS YOUR PATROL AREA?

A: IT WAS FROM BASICALLY VENICE BOULEVARD TO OLYMPIC AND BASICALLY ROBERTSON TO LA CIENEGA.

Q: SO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM THEN WAS OUT OF YOUR NORMAL PATROL AREA?

A: YES, QUITE A WAYS.

Q: HAD YOU EVER BEEN TO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM, THAT IS, PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 1989?

A: NO, I HAD NOT.

Q: HAD YOU EVER MET THE DEFENDANT HERE SEATED AT THE END OF COUNSEL TABLE?

A: NO, I HAD NOT.

Q: SO YOU AND YOUR PARTNER PROCEEDED TO THAT ADDRESS?

A: YES.

Q: TELL THE JURY WHAT HAPPENED NEXT.

A: WELL, WHEN I ARRIVED IN THE SUNSET/ROCKINGHAM AREA AND WENT INTO THE HILLS ON ROCKINGHAM, IT WAS -- IT WAS DARK, IT WAS MISTY, IT HAD BEEN RAINING EARLIER IN THE EVENING, AND AS I WENT BY THE FIRST PART OF THE ESTATE, I WAS NOT AWARE THAT THERE WAS A GATE ON ROCKINGHAM. I PASSED IT AND I ENDED UP ON THE NEXT GATE, WHICH I BELIEVE IS ON ASHFORD, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, AN ELECTRONIC GATE, AND I STOPPED MY BLACK AND WHITE PATROL CAR THERE AND NOTED THAT IT WAS A LOCKED SECURITY GATE WITH A LITTLE CALL BOX OUT FRONT WITH A BUTTON.

Q: DID YOU GET OUT OF THE CAR AT THAT TIME?

A: YES, I GOT OUT OF THE CAR AND PRESSED THE BUTTON AND WAITED FOR SOMEONE TO SPEAK TO ME AND A FEMALE CAME OVER THE SPEAKER, SAID SHE WAS THE HOUSEKEEPER, THAT HER NAME WAS MICHELLE, AND THAT SHE WANTED TO KNOW WHAT I WANTED. AND I SAID, WELL, I JUST RESPONDED THERE ON A 911 CALL, A WOMAN HAD BEEN BEATEN --

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, OBJECT. THIS IS HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE AND THE JURY ADMONISHED.

MR. DARDEN: TIMELY OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU ARE TO DISREGARD THE LAST STATEMENT REGARDING WHAT THE HOUSEKEEPER SAID. ALL RIGHT, MR. DARDEN.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT WAS YOUR RESPONSE TO THE HOUSEKEEPER?

A: I TOLD HER THAT I WAS THERE ON A 911 CALL, THAT A WOMAN HAD PLACED A 911 CALL AND SAID SHE WAS BEING BEATEN AND THE OPERATOR COULD HEAR HER BEING BEATEN OVER THE PHONE AND I NEEDED TO SEE AND TALK TO THE PERSON WHO MADE THAT CALL.

Q: OKAY. DID THE PERSON YOU SPOKE TO, MICHELLE, DID SHE ALLOW YOU ENTRY INTO THE COMPOUND OR ESTATE AT THAT POINT?

A: NO. ON THE CONTRARY, SHE SAID THAT THERE WAS NO PROBLEM THERE.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I TOLD HER I WAS NOT LEAVING UNTIL I SAW THE PERSON THAT MADE THE 911 CALL.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: THEN A WOMAN CAME RUNNING OUT OF THE BUSHES TO MY LEFT, ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY. SHE WAS A FEMALE CAUCASIAN, BLOND HAIR. SHE WAS WEARING A BRA ONLY AS AN UPPER GARMENT AND SHE HAD ON DARK -- I BELIEVE IT WAS A DARK LIGHTWEIGHT SWEATPANTS OR NIGHT PAJAMA BOTTOM AND SHE RAN ACROSS AND COLLAPSED ON THE SPEAKER -- THE IDENTICAL KIND OF A SPEAKER POST ON THE INSIDE OF THE GATE. SHE COLLAPSED ON IT AND STARTED YELLING, "HE'S GOING TO KILL ME, HE'S GOING TO KILL ME." THEN SHE PRESSED THE BUTTON WHICH ALLOWED THE GATE TO OPEN AND THEN SHE RAN OUT AGAIN YELLING "HE'S GOING TO KILL ME."

Q: DID YOU HAVE A FLASHLIGHT WITH YOU AT THAT TIME?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION? HOW DO YOU REACT WHEN YOU SAW THIS WOMAN RUN OUT OF THE DARKNESS IN HER BRA AND NIGHT CLOTHES?

A: WELL, SHE -- SHE SEEMED TO BE EXHAUSTED.

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE, YOUR HONOR, AS NONRESPONSIVE. WHAT WAS HIS REACTION?

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE JURY IS ORDERED TO DISREGARD THE LAST QUESTION AND ANSWER. MR. DARDEN, ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN, PLEASE.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT WAS YOUR RESPONSE WHEN YOU SAW THIS WOMAN RUNNING TOWARD YOU SCREAMING, "HE'S GOING TO KILL ME, HE'S GOING TO KILL ME"?

A: ILLUMINATED HER BRIEFLY WITH MY FLASHLIGHT AND THEN ILLUMINATED THE BUSHES AROUND HER OR NEAR HER AND AS MUCH OF THE HOUSE AS I COULD.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANYONE ELSE AT THAT TIME?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: WHAT WAS HER DEMEANOR AS SHE RAN TOWARD YOU SHOUTING, "HE'S GOING TO KILL ME, HE'S GOING TO KILL ME"?

A: SHE WAS HYSTERICAL.

Q: AND YOU SAY THAT SHE PUSHED THE BUTTON TO THE GATE?

A: WELL, SHE HAD PUSHED IT MORE THAN ONCE. SHE PUSHED IT THREE OR FOUR TIMES LIKE SHE WAS PANICKING. SEVERAL TIMES SHE KEPT PUSHING IT.

Q: DID THE GATE OPENED?

A: YES, IT OPENED, AND SHE RAN OUT TO ME. I DIDN'T ENTER.

Q: OKAY. WHAT HAPPENED WHEN SHE RAN OUT TO YOU?

A: SHE -- SHE CLUNG ON TO ME AND THEN MADE SEVERAL STATEMENTS TO ME AT THAT TIME.

Q: NOW, YOU SAY THAT SHE RAN TO YOU AND CLUNG TO YOU?

A: WELL, SHE COLLAPSED ON ME.

Q: SHE COLLAPSED ON YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WAS HER PHYSICAL DEMEANOR AND PHYSICAL APPEARANCE AT THAT TIME?

A: WELL, SHE -- SHE WAS WET. SHE WAS -- SHE WAS SHIVERING, SHE WAS COLD. I COULD -- I COULD FEEL HER -- HER BONES AND SHE WAS REAL COLD AND SHE WAS BEAT UP.

Q: AND AT SOME POINT DID YOU IDENTIFY THIS WOMAN?

A: YES.

Q: WHO WAS THIS WOMAN THAT YOU?

A: NICOLE SIMPSON.

Q: WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DID SHE SAY TO YOU AFTER SHE COLLAPSED?

A: SHE SAID, "HE'S GOING TO -- HE'S GOING TO KILL ME." I SAID "WELL, WHO IS GOING TO KILL YOU?" SHE SAID, "O.J."

Q: WHAT DID YOU SAY?

A: I SAID -- WELL, I WAS A LITTLE SURPRISED.

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. OFFICER, IF YOU WOULD JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION.

THE WITNESS: ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN.

THE WITNESS: I SAID, "O.J. WHO? DO YOU MEAN THE -- THE FOOTBALL PLAYER, O.J. THE FOOTBALL PLAYER?" AND SHE SAID, "YES, O.J. SIMPSON, THE FOOTBALL PLAYER."

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: A MOMENT AGO YOU SAID AS YOU SAW THIS WOMAN NICOLE SIMPSON RUNNING TOWARD YOU, THAT SHE SEEMED HYSTERICAL; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: WAS SHE STILL HYSTERICAL WHEN SHE CLUNG ON TO YOU?

A: YES.

Q: WAS SHE HYSTERICAL WHEN SHE TOLD YOU THAT IT WAS O.J. SIMPSON?

A: YES.

Q: HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU HEAR HER SHOUT, "HE'S GOING TO KILL ME, HE'S GOING TO KILL ME"?

A: UMM, FOUR OR FIVE TIMES.

Q: WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DID YOU SAY TO MISS SIMPSON AFTER SHE TOLD YOU THAT THE PERSON WHO WAS GOING TO KILL HER WAS O.J. SIMPSON?

A: WELL, AT THAT POINT I WAS A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY --

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE AS NONRESPONSIVE AGAIN, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. OFFICER, IF YOU WOULD LISTEN CAREFULLY TO THE QUESTION. ANSWER ONLY THE QUESTION THAT IS BEING ASKED OF YOU.

THE WITNESS: YES.

THE COURT: MR. DARDEN.

THE COURT: THANK YOU.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I ASK ANOTHER QUESTION, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT WERE YOUR CONCERNS AT THAT POINT, DETECTIVE?

A: THAT IF SOMEONE WAS GOING TO KILL HER, THE PERSON MAY HAVE A WEAPON AND MAY COME OUT AT ANY SECOND.

Q: DID YOU ASK MRS. SIMPSON ANYTHING AT THAT POINT?

A: YES. I ASKED HER IF HE HAD ANY WEAPONS AND SHE SAID YES.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR -- OBJECT TO THE RESPONSE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID SHE SAY WHAT KIND OF WEAPONS HE HAD?

A: SHE SAID HE HAD LOTS OF -- LOTS OF GUNS.

Q: YOU TESTIFIED A MOMENT AGO THAT YOU -- THAT YOU HAD IN YOUR HAND A FLASHLIGHT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU ILLUMINATE MRS. SIMPSON'S FACE AT ALL AT THAT TIME?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: NICOLE SIMPSON?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU NOTICE ANY INJURIES AT ALL ON HER FACE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT WERE THOSE INJURIES?

A: SHE HAD A CUT APPROXIMATELY ONE INCH, I BELIEVE, ON HER LEFT UPPER LIP. SHE HAD A SWOLLEN RIGHT FOREHEAD AND HER -- I BELIEVE HER LEFT EYE OR RIGHT EYE WAS STARTING TO BLACKEN, IT WAS SWOLLEN, AND SHE HAD SOME SORT OF AN IMPRINT OR SOME SORT OF A SWOLLEN MARK THAT YOU COULD SEE ON HER CHEEK. I BELIEVE THAT WAS ALSO ON THE RIGHT CHEEK. AND SHE HAD A HAND IMPRINT ON HER THROAT, ON THE LEFT SIDE OF HER THROAT.

Q: YOU SAW A HAND IMPRINT ON THE LEFT SIDE OF HER NECK?

A: JUST THE FINGERS MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.

MR. COCHRAN: THE QUESTION WAS ASKED AND ANSWERED. REPEATING THE SAME QUESTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE ANSWER WILL STAND.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU ASK OR POSE ANY QUESTION TO NICOLE BROWN AT THAT TIME?

A: YES. I ASKED HER WHAT HAPPENED TO HER FACE.

Q: AND WAS SHE STILL HYSTERICAL AT THAT POINT?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID SHE SAY?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THAT, YOUR HONOR. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: SHE SAID THAT O.J. HAD SLAPPED HER, HIT HER WITH HIS FIST AND KICKED HER AND PULLED HER -- I THINK PULLED HER BY THE HAIR.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT, DETECTIVE?

A: I HAD MY PARTNER PUT HER UNIFORM JACKET ON HER BECAUSE SHE WAS SHIVERING SO BAD, AND HAD HER PLACED IN THE RIGHT REAR SEAT OF OUR PATROL VEHICLE.

Q: AND WHERE WAS YOUR PARTNER AT THAT POINT IN TIME?

A: AFTER NICOLE WAS PLACED IN THE RIGHT REAR SEAT OF THE PATROL VEHICLE, MY PARTNER GOT IN THE RIGHT FRONT SEAT OF THE PATROL VEHICLE AND I TOLD HER TO START TAKING A CRIME REPORT AND SHE GOT THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REPORT, PUT IT ON A NOTEBOOK, AND AT THAT POINT NICOLE WAS REPEATING THINGS RAPIDLY.

Q: OKAY. NOW, YOU INDICATED EARLIER THAT THE GATE OPENED AFTER NICOLE HIT THE BUTTON FOUR OR FIVE TIMES?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: DID THE GATE CLOSE AFTER SHE EXITED THROUGH THE GATE?

A: YES, IT DID.

Q: DID YOU ENTER THE COMPOUND OR THE ESTATE AT THAT TIME?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: YOU REMAINED ON THE OUTSIDE?

A: YES.

Q: AND AS YOU PLACED NICOLE BROWN INTO THE POLICE VEHICLE, WAS SHE STILL HYSTERICAL?

A: OH, YES.

Q: WAS SHE STILL SHAKING?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID SHE SAY ANYTHING AT THAT TIME?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID SHE SAY ANYTHING AT THAT TIME, DETECTIVE?

A: YES. SHE MADE A SERIES OF SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS PRIOR TO US ATTEMPTING TO ASK HER ANY QUESTIONS.

Q: WHAT DID SHE SAY?

A: SHE SAID, "YOU GUYS NEVER DO ANYTHING" SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT, THAT "YOU NEVER DO ANYTHING ABOUT HIM. YOU COME OUT. YOU HAVE BEEN OUT HERE EIGHT TIMES. YOU NEVER DO ANYTHING ABOUT HIM." AND SHE SAYS, "I WANT HIM ARRESTED. I WANT MY KIDS BACK. I WANT TO GO IN THE HOUSE."

Q: HAD YOU BEEN OUT TO 360 ROCKINGHAM, NORTH ROCKINGHAM, EIGHT TIMES PRIOR?

MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: NO, I HAD ONLY BEEN IN THE DIVISION FOR --

MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED. HE ANSWERED THE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. HE SAID "NO."

THE COURT: OVERRULED. HE CAN ANSWER THAT WAY.

THE WITNESS: I HAD ONLY BEEN IN THAT DIVISION FOR A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AND I HAD NEVER BEEN ON THAT STREET.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AND DID YOU RESPOND TO NICOLE BROWN WHEN SHE SAID, "YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN OUT HERE EIGHT TIMES BEFORE AND YOU NEVER DO ANYTHING"?

A: NOT MUCH I COULD SAY ABOUT THAT, NO.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT, DETECTIVE?

A: I TOLD MY PARTNER TO HAND HER THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REPORT AND WE ASKED -- AND I ASKED HER IF SHE WOULD SIGN A CRIME REPORT AGAINST O.J. SIMPSON. SHE SAID "YES." SHE GRABBED THE NOTEBOOK FROM MY PARTNER AND THE PEN AND SHE SIGNED HER NAME ON THE DOCUMENT WITHOUT EVEN LOOKING, AND AS FAST AS SHE COULD.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: AND THEN I TURNED MY ATTENTION BACK TO THE GATE AS MY PARTNER WAS GETTING THE REST OF THE DETAILS FOR THE REPORT, AND I SAW MR. SIMPSON WALKING TOWARDS ME FROM THE HOUSE WEARING A BATHROBE.

Q: WHEN YOU SAY "MR. SIMPSON," YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE DEFENDANT SEATED HERE IN FRONT TODAY?

A: YES, O.J. SIMPSON, WEARING THE GRAY JACKET, SUIT JACKET.

THE COURT: INDICATING THE DEFENDANT. ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN, DO YOU HAVE MUCH MORE?

MR. DARDEN: YES.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A 15-MINUTE RECESS. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU. DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE OR ALLOW ANYBODY TO TALK TO YOU. THIS WILL BE A 15-MINUTE RECESS. AND I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO STEP BACK INTO THE JURY ROOM AND WE WILL RESUME AT ELEVEN O'CLOCK.

(THE JURY EXITS THE COURTROOM.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE, YOU CAN STEP DOWN.

THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.

(RECESS.)

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: BE SEATED, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY, PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK, MR. DARDEN. DETECTIVE JOHN EDWARDS IS ON THE WITNESS STAND. WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. GOOD MORNING, DETECTIVE EDWARDS. YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. DARDEN.

MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DETECTIVE EDWARDS, I BELIEVE WHEN WE LEFT OFF, YOU HAD JUST TOLD US THAT YOU TURNED YOUR ATTENTION BACK TOWARD THE GATE AND THAT IT WAS THEN THAT YOU SAW THE DEFENDANT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THE DEFENDANT WEARING WHEN YOU SAW HIM?

A: HE WAS WEARING AN OPEN BATHROBE WITH A PAIR OF SHORTS, UNDERWEAR AND NO SHOES.

Q: AND DID YOU STILL HAVE YOUR FLASHLIGHT IN YOUR HAND?

A: YES. I ILLUMINATED HIM WITH THE FLASHLIGHT AS HE APPROACHED ME.

Q: YOU SHINED IT IN HIS DIRECTION?

A: YES.

Q: COULD YOU SEE HIS FACE AT THAT TIME?

A: YES.

Q: YOU COULD SEE THE DEFENDANT'S FACE?

A: YES. IT WAS O.J. SIMPSON.

Q: WERE YOU STILL OUTSIDE THE GATE?

A: YES, I WAS OUTSIDE THE GATE.

Q: AND THE DEFENDANT, WHICH SIDE OF THE GATE WAS HE ON?

A: HE WAS ON THE -- INSIDE THE GATE ON THE DRIVEWAY.

Q: SO THE GATE WAS BETWEEN YOU AND THE DEFENDANT?

A: YES.

Q: IS THERE A WALL OR A FENCE AT ALL AROUND THIS COMPOUND OR ESTATE?

A: YES, THERE IS.

Q: AND HOW HIGH IS THE WALL AND THE FENCE?

A: I THINK IT'S ABOUT SIX FEET FROM MY REMEMBERING IT. IT'S ABOUT SIX FEET HIGH.

Q: AND WHEN YOU SAW THE DEFENDANT, HE WAS WALKING; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND IN WHAT DIRECTION?

A: HE WAS WALKING DIRECTLY TOWARDS ME AND THE GATE.

Q: NOW, WHERE WAS NICOLE BROWN IN PROXIMITY TO YOU?

A: AS I WAS FACING THE GATE, SHE WAS TO MY RIGHT IN THE PATROL CAR WHICH WAS BEHIND THE WALL.

Q: SO YOU WERE BETWEEN THE DEFENDANT AND NICOLE BROWN; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: WHEN YOU SHINED YOUR FLASHLIGHT IN THE DIRECTION OF THE DEFENDANT'S FACE, DID HE SEEM ANGRY AT ALL?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THAT. CALLS FOR CONCLUSION, SPECULATION.

THE COURT: IT'S A LEADING QUESTION. WHY DON'T YOU REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHEN YOU SHINED YOUR FLASHLIGHT IN THE DEFENDANT'S DIRECTION, WHAT IF ANYTHING DID YOU NOTICE ABOUT HIS FACE?

A: HE SEEMED FURIOUS.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT IS -- EVEN HE HAS TO LAUGH. I WOULD MOVE TO STRIKE THAT. EVEN COUNSEL HAS TO LAUGH ABOUT THIS. THE WITNESS IS TESTIFYING, NOT MR. DARDEN.

THE COURT: MR. DARDEN.

MR. DARDEN: WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT QUESTION? IS THAT A LEGAL OBJECTION?

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU SAW THE DEFENDANT'S FACE?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT WAS HIS DEMEANOR AT THAT TIME?

THE COURT: BETTER QUESTION.

MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: YOU ARE WELCOME.

THE WITNESS: HE SEEMED VERY FURIOUS.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID HE SAY ANYTHING AT THAT TIME?

A: NO. HE WAS STILL APPROACHING THE FENCE.

Q: AND HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE HIS PACE OR HIS GAIT OR HIS WALK AT THAT TIME?

A: IT WAS RAPID AND DELIBERATE.

Q: TOWARD YOU?

A: TOWARDS ME.

Q: WERE YOU CONCERNED FOR YOUR SAFETY AT THAT POINT?

MR. COCHRAN: LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE AGAIN, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I ILLUMINATED HIS HANDS AND HIS WAISTLINE AREA --

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE, NONRESPONSIVE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: -- FOR ANY POSSIBLE WEAPONS BECAUSE OF STATEMENTS MADE TO ME ABOUT HIM HAVING LOTS OF GUNS.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AND DID YOU NOTICE THE DEFENDANT CARRYING A GUN AT THAT TIME?

A: I COULD SEE NO WEAPONS IN HIS HANDS AND HIS WAISTBAND WAS CLEARLY VISIBLE AND I SAW NOTHING IN HIS WAISTBAND AREA.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT, DETECTIVE?

A: THE DEFENDANT APPROACHED DIRECTLY TO ME AT THE GATE WHERE HE WAS ON ONE SIDE AND I WAS ON THE OTHER. WE WERE IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. THEN HE PEERED TOWARDS THE BLACK AND WHITE POLICE VEHICLE AND HE STARTED MAKING SOME STATEMENTS.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU SAY THE DEFENDANT PEERED TOWARD THE BLACK AND WHITE POLICE VEHICLE, YOU ARE SAYING HE LOOKED TOWARD YOUR POLICE CAR?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHERE WAS NICOLE BROWN AT THAT TIME?

A: SHE WAS SEATED IN THE RIGHT REAR SEAT OF THE PATROL VEHICLE WITH THE DOOR CLOSED.

Q: AND WOULD THAT BE THE SIDE OF THE VEHICLE CLOSEST TO THE GATE?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU SAY THE DEFENDANT STARTED SAYING THINGS?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WAS HIS TONE OF VOICE AS HE SAID THOSE THINGS?

A: EXTREMELY ANGRY AND LOUD AND RAPID.

Q: WHAT DID THE DEFENDANT SAY AT THAT TIME?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: HE SAID, "I DON'T WANT THAT WOMAN IN MY BED ANYMORE. I GOT TWO OTHER WOMEN. I DON'T WANT THAT WOMAN IN MY BED ANYMORE."

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: NOW, DID HE SAY THIS OR DID HE SHOUT IT OR --

A: HE SHOUTED IT I BELIEVE TWICE AND HE POINTED AT HER -- WELL, HE POINTED AT MY PATROL VEHICLE WHILE HE WAS MAKING THE STATEMENT.

Q: DID YOU REALIZE AT THAT TIME THAT THE WOMAN IN THE PATROL CAR, NICOLE BROWN, WAS THE DEFENDANT'S WIFE?

A: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: HER NAME WAS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: AT THAT TIME, YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: MR. DARDEN.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: AND SO HE SHOUTED MORE THAN ONCE AT NICOLE?

A: YES.

Q: DID SHE RESPOND AT ALL?

A: SHE WAS -- I BELIEVE THE DOME LIGHT WAS ON IN THE PATROL VEHICLE AND SHE WAS TALKING TO MY PARTNER.

Q: OKAY. DID SHE APPEAR TO REACT AT ALL?

A: AT THAT POINT, I DIDN'T TURN AROUND AND LOOK BACK AT HER. I DID A SIDESTEP TO GET BETWEEN THE TWO OF THEM.

Q: DID YOU NOTE ANY REACTION AT ALL OR ANY RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANT'S STATEMENT THAT, "I DON'T WANT THAT WOMAN IN MY BED ANYMORE. I HAVE TWO WOMEN"?

A: FROM THE VICTIM?

Q: FROM NICOLE, YES.

A: NO, I DON'T BELIEVE I DID.

Q: AND WHEN YOU SAY "VICTIM", ARE YOU REFERRING TO NICOLE?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU RESPOND TO THE DEFENDANT AFTER HE MADE THESE STATEMENTS REPEATEDLY?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT DID YOU SAY TO HIM?

A: I TRIED TO MAKE EYE-TO-EYE CONTACT WITH HIM TO FOCUS HIM TO ME BECAUSE I WAS TALKING TO HIM, AND AFTER A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, I WAS ABLE TO GET HIM TO FOCUS ON ME AND --

Q: LET ME INTERRUPT YOU THERE. WHERE WAS THE DEFENDANT FOCUSED DURING THE MEANTIME?

A: ON THE REAR OF MY PATROL CAR.

Q: AND ONCE YOU WERE ABLE TO GET THE DEFENDANT TO FOCUS ON YOU, DID HIS DEMEANOR CHANGE AT ALL?

A: HE DID. HE SLOWED DOWN IN -- HIS TEMPERAMENT DROPPED DOWN ENOUGH TO WHERE I COULD TALK TO HIM.

Q: DID YOU AND HE HAVE A CONVERSATION AT THAT POINT?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT WAS THAT CONVERSATION?

A: I TOLD HIM THAT NICOLE HAD OBVIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES TO HER FACE AND THAT SHE SAID THAT HE HAD HIT HER AND I COULD SEE TRAUMA IN OPEN WOUNDS TO HER AND THAT SHE WANTED HIM ARRESTED AND I WAS GOING TO HAVE TO PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST FOR SPOUSAL BATTERY.

Q: NOW, YOU TESTIFIED A MOMENT AGO THAT HIS TEMPERAMENT HAD CHANGED?

A: IT HAD DROPPED ENOUGH TO WHERE HE WAS NOW LOOKING AT ME AND WE COULD -- IT APPEARED WE COULD COMMUNICATE.

Q: OKAY. AND DID HIS TEMPERAMENT AND DEMEANOR REMAIN THE SAME AS YOU TOLD HIM THAT NICOLE WANTED HIM ARRESTED FOR BEATING HER?

A: NO. IT FLARED UP BACK TO A VERY LOUD, FURIOUS, ANGRY MODE AGAIN.

Q: AND DID HE SAY ANYTHING AT THAT TIME?

A: HE SAID -- IF I REMEMBER, HE SAID, "I DIDN'T -- I DIDN'T HIT HER. I JUST -- I JUST PUSHED HER OUT OF THE BED," I BELIEVE.

Q: YOU DID WRITE A REPORT REGARDING THIS INCIDENT AT SOME POINT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND ARE YOU CERTAIN AS TO WHAT THE DEFENDANT SAID AT THAT POINT IN TIME?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU DESCRIBE THE DEFENDANT'S COMMENTS IN YOUR REPORT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION IF YOU WERE TO READ YOUR REPORT, THAT IS AS TO WHAT THE DEFENDANT SAID SPECIFICALLY AT THAT TIME?

A: YES.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

MR. DARDEN: I'LL SHOW THE PAGE TO COUNSEL. PAGE 3 OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

MR. DARDEN: MAY I APPROACH THE WITNESS, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: SHOWING YOU PAGE 3 OF A SUPPLEMENTAL POLICE REPORT, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT PAGE?

A: YES. THIS IS MY HANDWRITING, THE REPORT I FILLED OUT IN 1989.

Q: AND DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION TO PARAGRAPH 4, WOULD YOU READ THAT TO YOURSELF, PLEASE?

A: YES (WITNESS COMPLIES).

Q: HAVING READ THAT, IS YOUR RECOLLECTION REFRESHED, OFFICER?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID THE DEFENDANT SAY AT THAT POINT IN TIME; THAT IS AFTER YOU TOLD HIM THAT NICOLE WANTED HIM ARRESTED?

A: HE SAID, "I DIDN'T BEAT HER. JUST PUSHED HER OUT OF THE BED AND NOTHING MORE."

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: THEN I TRIED TO EXPLAIN TO HIM AGAIN THAT I WAS GOING TO HAVE TO PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST FOR BEATING HIS WIFE, AND THEN HE MADE A -- HE MADE ANOTHER STATEMENT TO ME.

Q: WAS HE STILL ANGRY?

A: OH, YES.

Q: AND THIS NEXT STATEMENT, THE ONE YOU'RE ABOUT TO DESCRIBE, DID HE SPEAK IN A NORMAL TONE OF VOICE?

A: NO. HE WAS EXTREMELY AGITATED, ANGRY AND HE WAS YELLING.

Q: AND WHEN HE SPOKE TO YOU THE NEXT TIME, WAS HE YELLING THEN?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID HE SHOUT OR YELL AT THAT POINT?

A: HE MADE -- I BELIEVE IT WAS BASICALLY TWO STATEMENTS. ONE WAS, "THIS IS --" I BELIEVE, "THIS IS A FAMILY MATTER. YOU'VE BEEN UP HERE EIGHT TIMES BEFORE AND NEVER DID ANY -- ANYTHING BEFORE," AND THERE WAS ANOTHER STATEMENT. I CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY THE PHRASE, BUT HE EMPHASIZED THAT ONE.

Q: WELL, DID YOU INCLUDE THAT PHRASE IN YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION TO SEE THE REPORT AGAIN?

A: YES. IT'S BEEN SIX YEARS. I'M AFRAID IT WOULD.

MR. DARDEN: PAGE 3.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I APPROACH? I'LL APPROACH WITH HIM.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, REFERRING THE WITNESS TO PAGE 3 OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT, PARAGRAPH 6.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DETECTIVE, LET ME HAND YOU PAGE 3 OF YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO READ PARAGRAPH 6 TO YOURSELF.

A: YES (WITNESS COMPLIES).

Q: HAVE YOU READ THE REPORT, DETECTIVE?

A: YES.

Q: IS YOUR RECOLLECTION NOW REFRESHED?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: BY THE WAY, IN YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT, DID YOU INCLUDE THIS PARTICULAR COMMENT IN QUOTATION MARKS?

A: I BELIEVE I DID.

Q: WHAT DID THE DEFENDANT SAY AT THAT TIME?

A: HE SAID, "YOU'VE BEEN OUT HERE EIGHT TIMES BEFORE AND NOW YOU'RE GOING TO ARREST ME FOR THIS?" AND I REMEMBER HE EMPHASIZED "THIS". THEN HE SAID, "THIS IS A FAMILY MATTER." I BELIEVE HE SAID, "THIS IS A FAMILY MATTER," AND NOTHING MORE.

Q: AND DID YOU RESPOND AT THAT TIME?

A: YES. I BELIEVE I TOLD HIM AT THAT POINT THAT HE WAS GOING TO HAVE TO GET DRESSED AND I WAS GOING -- I WOULD PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST AND HE WAS GOING TO HAVE TO GET DRESSED AND COME TO THE STATION WITH ME WHEN MY SUPERVISOR ARRIVED.

Q: WHEN YOU TOLD THE DEFENDANT THAT HE WAS GOING TO BE ARRESTED, WERE YOU STILL ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE GATE?

A: OH, YES.

Q: AND WAS HE STILL ON THE INSIDE OF THE GATE?

A: YES.

Q: AND HAD HE OPENED THE GATE OR ALLOWED YOU ONTO THE PROPERTY AT THAT POINT?

A: NO.

Q: HAD YOU ASKED PERMISSION TO GO ONTO THE PROPERTY AT THAT POINT?

A: NO.

Q: YOU TOLD HIM TO GO GET DRESSED?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU ASK TO ACCOMPANY HIM BACK INTO THE HOUSE AS HE GOT DRESSED?

A: NO.

Q: DID THE DEFENDANT RETURN TO THE HOUSE?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THE NEXT THING TO OCCUR? WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: THEN I TURNED AROUND TO SEE HOW THE REPORT WAS GOING WITH MY PARTNER AND NICOLE SIMPSON AND I REQUESTED MY SUPERVISOR TO RESPOND TO THE SCENE, AND THEN SUDDENLY I HEARD THE GATE OPEN AND I SAW SOMEBODY COME THROUGH THE GATE. IT WAS A FEMALE.

Q: COULD YOU DESCRIBE THIS WOMAN, PLEASE?

A: IT WAS EITHER A HISPANIC OR A FILIPINO LADY. I CAN'T REMEMBER, BUT SHE WENT DIRECTLY TO THE RIGHT REAR DOOR OF THE POLICE CAR.

Q: AND WHAT DID SHE DO WHEN SHE ARRIVED AT THE RIGHT REAR DOOR OF THE POLICE CAR?

A: SHE OPENED THE RIGHT REAR DOOR AND REACHED IN AND GRABBED NICOLE SIMPSON BY THE RIGHT ARM AND STARTED PULLING ON HER AND SAYING SOMETHING.

Q: WHAT DID SHE SAY?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. HEARSAY WHAT SHE SAID.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, CAN WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: SURE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: THIS IS ACTUALLY PRETTY GOOD. WE'VE ONLY HAD THREE SIDEBARS SO FAR.

MR. COCHRAN: WE'RE REALLY TRYING. WE'D LIKE TO TRY THIS CASE. IF I'M DOING PRETTY GOOD, MAYBE ON MONDAY, YOU'RE GOING TO LET US RETURN HAVING A LIFE.

THE COURT: MAYBE. OBJECTION IS HEARSAY. WE ARE AT SIDEBAR. MR. DARDEN.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, WE EXPECT, IF THE WITNESS IS ALLOWED TO ANSWER, WOULD TESTIFY THAT THE WOMAN SAID, "NICOLE, DON'T DO THIS. COME INSIDE NOW," AS SHE PULLED HER OUT OF THE VEHICLE. THIS IS AN EXCITED UTTERANCE. THESE ARE WORDS OF COMMAND. IT IS NOT NECESSARILY OFFERED FOR A HEARSAY PURPOSE, BUT TO EXPLAIN THE OFFICER'S CONDUCT AND HIS SUBSEQUENT CONDUCT TO FOLLOW.

MS. CLARK: IT'S NOT FOR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER ASSERTED.

MR. DARDEN: IT DOESN'T GO TO THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER ASSERTED.

MR. COCHRAN: IT'S HEARSAY. HE'S NOT GIVING YOU AN EXCEPTION. AND AGAIN, IT'S IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL, NOT OFFERED FOR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER ASSERTED. THEY CAN TESTIFY THAT MICHELLE WAS THERE OR WHATEVER, BUT THEY CAN'T GO INTO THAT STATEMENT. HOW CAN I CROSS-EXAMINE THAT?

THE COURT: AT THIS POINT, IT'S HEARSAY.

MR. DARDEN: IT'S NOT BEING OFFERED FOR THE TRUTH.

THE COURT: IS THIS MICHELLE ABUDRAHM?

MR. COCHRAN: YES.

MR. DARDEN: IT'S NOT BEING OFFERED FOR THE TRUTH.

THE COURT: THEN IT'S IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL. OBJECTION SUSTAINED.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE THE LAST QUESTION READ BACK?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY. MADAM REPORTER.

(THE QUESTION AND ANSWER WERE READ BY THE REPORTER.)

MR. DARDEN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: THE WOMAN CAME OUT OF THE GATE AND WENT TO THE PATROL CAR; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND YOU HEARD HER SAY SOMETHING?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND DID YOU RECOGNIZE THAT VOICE, THAT WOMAN'S VOICE AT THAT TIME?

A: YES.

Q: YOU HAD HEARD THE VOICE BEFORE?

A: YES. IT WAS THE WOMAN ON THE SPEAKER BOX THAT TOLD ME NOTHING WAS OCCURRING IN THE HOUSE.

Q: AND THIS WOMAN WAS PULLING ON NICOLE?

A: YES.

Q: DID SHE SPEAK WITH YOU PRIOR TO GOING OVER TO THE PATROL CAR AND GRABBING NICOLE AND PULLING ON HER?

A: NO, SHE DID NOT.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO AT THAT POINT?

A: I WENT OVER AND GRABBED HER, PULLED HER AWAY FROM THE CAR AND CLOSED THE DOOR AFTER I SAW AND HEARD WHAT SHE WAS DOING.

Q: DID YOU GIVE HER ANY COMMAND AT THAT TIME?

A: YES. I ADVISED HER OF 148 OF THE PENAL CODE, INTERFERING WITH A POLICE OFFICER'S INVESTIGATION, AND I TOLD HER TO LEAVE.

Q: AND DID SHE LEAVE?

A: YES, SHE DID.

Q: NOW, DURING THE TIME THAT THIS WOMAN WAS PULLING ON NICOLE TRYING TO PULL HER OUT OF THE POLICE VEHICLE --

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE THE LAST STATEMENT BE STRICKEN, CONCLUSION OF COUNSEL.

THE COURT: PULLING ON HER. REPHRASE IT.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY IT BE STRICKEN?

THE COURT: REPHRASE IT, PLEASE.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHERE WAS THE DEFENDANT DURING THE TIME THAT THIS WOMAN WAS PULLING ON NICOLE?

A: HE WAS INSIDE THE HOUSE.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT, DETECTIVE?

A: AFTER SHE WENT BACK INSIDE THE HOUSE, APPROXIMATELY TWO MINUTES PASSED AND O.J. SIMPSON CAME BACK OUT, NOW DRESSED.

Q: THE DEFENDANT CAME BACK OUTSIDE THE HOUSE DRESSED?

A: YES.

Q: AND WERE YOU STILL ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE GATE AND THE WALL?

A: YES.

Q: AND WAS HE STILL ON THE INSIDE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: DID THE DEFENDANT SAY ANYTHING AT THAT TIME?

A: YES. HE REAPPROACHED THE WALL -- THIS TIME, HE WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BRICK WALL ITSELF, THE BLOCK WALL, HE WASN'T NEAR THE GATE -- PEERED OVER THE WALL AND WE HAD A CONVERSATION AGAIN.

Q: WHAT IF ANYTHING DID THE DEFENDANT SAY AT THAT TIME?

A: HE SAID, "WHAT MAKES YOU SO SPECIAL? WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS? YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN OUT HERE EIGHT TIMES BEFORE AND NO ONE HAS EVER DONE ANYTHING LIKE THIS BEFORE," SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

Q: WHAT WAS YOUR RESPONSE?

A: I SAID I WAS GOING TO HAVE TO PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST AND THAT THE LAW REQUIRED ME TO PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST AND THERE WAS NO IF'S, AND'S OR BUT'S ABOUT IT.

Q: NOW, WHAT WAS THE DEFENDANT'S TONE OF VOICE, THAT IS DURING THIS PARTICULAR CONVERSATION?

A: WELL, AT THIS POINT, HE WASN'T QUITE YELLING AS MUCH, BUT HE WAS STILL VERY ANGRY AND HOSTILE.

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST STATEMENT.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MR. COCHRAN: TONE OF VOICE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: NOW, DID YOU TESTIFY EARLIER THAT YOU HAD ALREADY CONTACTED THE SUPERVISOR?

A: YES.

Q: HAD YOU ASKED THAT SUPERVISOR TO PROCEED TO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND WHY DID YOU ASK THAT A SUPERVISOR BE SENT TO THE LOCATION?

A: BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO HAVE TO SOMEHOW EITHER GET INSIDE THAT HOUSE OR THE GATED AREA OR WAS GOING TO HAVE TO CONVINCE THE DEFENDANT TO COME OUTSIDE TO MAKE THE ARREST, AND I WAS BY MYSELF AND MY PARTNER. WE HAD AN INJURED VICTIM WITH US AND I JUST NEEDED ANOTHER PERSON TO HELP US.

Q: AND AT SOME POINT, DID YOU SEE A SECOND POLICE CAR?

A: YES. SERGEANT VINGER PULLED UP IN A SECOND PATROL CAR.

Q: AND WHERE WAS THE DEFENDANT AT THAT TIME?

A: HE HAD BEEN ENGAGED IN A CONVERSATION WITH ME PEERING OVER THE WALL NEXT TO THE PATROL CAR.

Q: SO YOU SAW THE PATROL CAR ARRIVE?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU TURN YOUR ATTENTION AWAY FROM THE DEFENDANT AT ALL AT THAT TIME?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHERE DID YOU TURN YOUR ATTENTION?

A: I WALKED OVER TO EXPLAIN TO THE SUPERVISOR WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO.

Q: AND WHEN YOU DID THAT, WHEN YOU WALKED OVER TO THE SUPERVISOR, WAS THE DEFENDANT STILL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WALL?

A: NO. HE HAD WALKED AWAY FROM THE WALL.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: AS I WAS EXPLAINING TO THE SUPERVISOR WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED AND WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO, I SAW A BLUE BENTLEY START UP, THE LIGHTS START UP, TURNED ON AND IT WENT OUT A DRIVEWAY THAT I WAS NOT AWARE WAS THERE. IT WENT OUT A DRIVEWAY ONTO ROCKINGHAM OUT ANOTHER GATE SIMILAR TO THE ONE I HAD BEEN STANDING IN FRONT OF AND THE VEHICLE WENT SOUTHBOUND ON ROCKINGHAM.

Q: AND HOW FAST WAS THAT VEHICLE GOING AS IT LEFT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS AROUND 45 MILES A HOUR, SOMEWHERE IN THERE.

Q: WERE YOU AWARE THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS LEAVING?

A: I HAD NO IDEA THAT THERE WAS EVEN A GATE OVER THERE.

Q: SO YOU WERE SURPRISED TO SEE THE BENTLEY LEAVE THE PROPERTY?

A: YES, I WAS.

MR. COCHRAN: LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.

THE COURT: THE ANSWER WILL STAND.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: HOW MUCH TIME ELAPSED BETWEEN YOUR TELLING THE DEFENDANT THE LAST TIME THAT HE WAS GOING TO BE PLACED UNDER ARREST AND YOUR VIEWING OF THE BENTLEY AS IT LEFT THE ROCKINGHAM ADDRESS?

A: ABOUT A MINUTE AND A HALF.

Q: WERE YOU IN YOUR CAR OR OUTSIDE YOUR CAR WHEN THE BENTLEY LEFT THE PROPERTY?

A: BOTH THE SUPERVISOR AND MYSELF WERE OUTSIDE OF BOTH VEHICLES WHEN THIS HAPPENED.

Q: SO WHAT DID YOU DO AT THAT POINT?

A: WE BOTH REENTERED OUR VEHICLES AND PURSUED THE DEFENDANT'S BENTLEY.

Q: DID YOU CATCH HIM?

A: NO.

Q: HE GOT AWAY?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: DURING THAT PURSUIT, DID YOU EVER ACTIVATE THE RED LIGHTS ON YOUR PATROL CAR?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU ACTIVATE THE SIREN AT ALL?

A: NO.

Q: BY THE TIME YOU GOT INTO YOUR POLICE VEHICLE AND STARTED YOUR ENGINE, COULD YOU STILL SEE THE DEFENDANT?

A: NO.

Q: COULD YOU SILL SEE HIS VEHICLE?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU ARREST THE DEFENDANT THAT DAY OR THAT NIGHT OR THAT MORNING?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU EVER ARREST THE DEFENDANT?

A: PHYSICALLY? NO.

Q: WHERE WAS NICOLE; THAT IS WHERE WAS SHE DURING THE PURSUIT?

A: SHE WAS IN THE RIGHT REAR OF THE PATROL CAR WEARING MY PARTNER'S JACKET.

Q: NOW, I BELIEVE YOU TESTIFIED EARLIER THAT NICOLE SIGNED THE CRIME REPORT?

A: YES, SHE DID.

Q: AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF A VICTIM SIGNING A CRIME REPORT?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR, WITHOUT FURTHER FOUNDATION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF NICOLE HAVING SIGNED THE CRIME REPORT?

MR. COCHRAN: IT'S THE SAME QUESTION, SAME EXACT QUESTION.

MR. DARDEN: WHAT'S THE OBJECTION?

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. FOUNDATIONAL.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU HAVE A CRIME REPORT AT THE LOCATION?

A: YES.

Q: WAS THAT CRIME REPORT HANDED TO NICOLE?

A: YES.

Q: DID SHE SIGN IT?

A: YES, SHE DID.

Q: DID YOU SEE HER SIGN IT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU SEE HER SIGNATURE ON THE DOCUMENT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU RETAIN THAT DOCUMENT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT -- STRIKE THAT. WHY DID YOU HAVE HER SIGN THE CRIME REPORT?

A: WELL, IN OUR 273.5, YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE TO HAVE THE SIGNATURE, BUT WE -- THIS WAS HER -- WHATEVER HER STATEMENT WAS TO US WHEN SHE SIGNED THE REPORT, THIS IS BY LAW WHAT SHE IS REPRESENTING AS THE TRUTH.

Q: YOU MENTIONED 273.5.

A: YES.

Q: WHAT WERE YOU REFERRING TO?

A: DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, SPOUSAL BATTERY.

Q: PENAL CODE SECTION 273.5?

A: YES.

Q: YOU EARLIER TESTIFIED TO THE INJURIES THAT YOU SAW ON NICOLE'S FACE AND NECK, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU OFFER HER ANY MEDICAL TREATMENT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT DID YOU OFFER TO DO?

A: I OFFERED TO DRIVE HER TO AN EMERGENCY ROOM AND GET HER TREATED RIGHT THEN AND THERE.

Q: AND WHAT WAS HER RESPONSE?

A: SHE SAID SHE WANTED TO GO BACK TO THE HOUSE TO HER CHILDREN. SHE WANTED TO BE WITH HER CHILDREN.

Q: DID YOU ASK HER TO GO TO THE STATION?

A: I ASKED HER TO -- IF SHE WOULD GO -- IF I COULD DRIVE HER TO OUR PHOTO LAB DOWNTOWN AND TAKE PICTURES OF HER INJURIES.

Q: AND BY DOWNTOWN, DID YOU MEAN DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES, PARKER CENTER?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT DID SHE SAY?

A: SHE SAID NO, SHE WANTED TO GO HOME TO HER CHILDREN.

Q: DID YOU OFFER HER AN ALTERNATIVE; THAT IS TO HAVING HER GO DOWNTOWN TO TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS?

A: YES. I ASKED HER IF SHE WOULD GO TO WEST L.A. STATION AND HAVE POLAROID PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OF HER REAL QUICKLY.

Q: AND WHAT DID SHE SAY?

A: SHE AGREED TO THAT.

Q: HAD YOU TAKEN HER TO PARKER CENTER, WOULD YOU HAVE TAKEN POLAROID PHOTOGRAPHS OF HER?

A: NO. I WOULD HAVE HAD A PHOTOGRAPHER TAKE PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF HER INJURIES.

Q: AND WHY DID YOU WANT TO TAKE HER INITIALLY TO PARKER CENTER AS OPPOSED TO TAKING HER TO WEST L.A.?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THAT'S IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHY DID YOU WANT TO TAKE HER TO PARKER CENTER AS OPPOSED TO TAKING HER TO WEST L.A.?

A: BECAUSE I FELT HER INJURIES NEEDED TO BE DOCUMENTED PROPERLY ON FILM.

Q: YOU DIDN'T THINK A POLAROID PHOTO WOULD BE SUFFICIENT?

A: NO.

MR. COCHRAN: LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE ANSWER IS STRICKEN AS BEING LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALTHOUGH PERHAPS SELF-EVIDENT. I THINK THE JURY KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A POLAROID PHOTO AND A HARD FILM PHOTO.

MR. DARDEN: I AM SURE THEY DO.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU TAKE HER TO WEST L.A. STATION?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: DID YOU ATTEMPT TO PHOTOGRAPH HER INJURIES?

A: I PHOTOGRAPHED HER INJURIES MYSELF.

Q: AND WHAT KIND OF CAMERA DID YOU USE?

A: USED A POLAROID 600 I BELIEVE.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, I'M HOLDING IN MY HAND WHAT APPEARS TO BE THREE --

THE COURT: LET ME HAVE COUNSEL APPROACH WITHOUT THE REPORTER, PLEASE.

(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, DURING THE COURSE OF THE TRIAL, I NEED TO TALK TO THE ATTORNEYS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO VIEW CERTAIN EVIDENCE. PRIMARILY, SOMETIMES IT HAS TO DO WITH SCHEDULING, AND IT'S EASIER FOR THE SIX OR EIGHT OF US TO WALK OVER THERE AND TALK RATHER THAN HAVE ALL 22 OF YOU CONSTANTLY GOING BACK AND FORTH. SO PLEASE BE PATIENT WHILE WE'RE DOING THAT, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE. ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN. THANK YOU. IF I CAN HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SURE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE IN MY HAND WHAT APPEARS TO BE THREE POLAROID PHOTOGRAPHS. MAY THEY BE MARKED PEOPLE'S 3, 4 AND 5 FOR IDENTIFICATION?

THE COURT: THEY MAY.

(PEO'S 3 FOR ID = PHOTO/FRONT VIEW OF FACE OF NBS)

(PEO'S 4 FOR ID = PHOTO/SIDE VIEW OF FACE OF NBS) (PEO'S 5 FOR ID = PHOTO/SIDE VIEW OF NBS)

THE COURT: AND THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT COUNSEL HAVE SEEN THE PICTURES.

MR. COCHRAN: I HAVE SEEN THEM.

MR. DARDEN: MAY THE RECORD REFLECT AS WELL, YOUR HONOR, THAT I'VE INDICATED THE EXHIBIT NUMBERS IN THE BOTTOM CORNERS OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS ON THE REAR, ON THE REAR OF THE PHOTOGRAPH?

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: SHOWING YOU WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 3, 4 AND 5 FOR IDENTIFICATION, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS?

A: YES.

Q: ARE THESE THE PHOTOGRAPHS YOU TOOK ON THE MORNING OF JANUARY 1, 1989?

A: YES, THEY ARE.

Q: AND DO THEY FULLY AND FAIRLY AND COMPLETELY REPRESENT THE INJURIES YOU SAW THAT NIGHT?

A: NOT EVEN CLOSE.

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THAT, YOUR HONOR. OBJECTION. MAY WE APPROACH? I OBJECT TO THAT, ON THE RECORD TOO, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE HAVE THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS?

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: WHAT'S THE OBJECTION?

MR. COCHRAN: THE OBJECTION IS, HOW COULD HE SAY THAT? THESE PICTURES SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. THAT'S CONCLUSIONARY ON HIS PART. THESE PICTURES REFLECT WHAT HE TOOK.

THE COURT: RIGHT. WELL --

MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT TO HIS ANSWER AND MOVE TO STRIKE HIS ANSWER. THIS DOESN'T FAIRLY REFLECT THAT HE TOOK THIS PICTURE? THIS WAS THE SAME PICTURE.

THE COURT: WELL, I THINK, MR. COCHRAN, THE BASIS OF YOUR OBJECTION IS YOU DISAGREE WITH THE ANSWER. YOU WILL BE ABLE TO TALK TO HIM ABOUT THAT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION. OBJECTION OVERRULED.

MR. COCHRAN: IT ISN'T ACTUALLY MY OBJECTION THAT I DISAGREE WITH THE ANSWER. THANKS, JUDGE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THERE'S ONE QUESTION I HAD. IF THESE PICTURES DON'T REFLECT HOW SHE LOOKED, HOW CAN HE --

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU WILL ABLE TO DEAL WITH THAT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION.

MR. COCHRAN: I WILL. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD LIKE TO DISPLAY PEOPLE'S 3 FOR IDENTIFICATION ON THE ELMO IF WE MAY.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 3.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DETECTIVE, YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU A LASER POINTER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES, I DO.

THE COURT: AND BEING CAREFUL WHERE YOU POINT IT.

MR. DARDEN: IF IT PLEASE THE COURT, YOUR HONOR, CAN WE HAVE THE WITNESS STEP DOWN FROM THE WITNESS STAND --

THE COURT: YES.

MR. DARDEN: -- AND ASK HIM SOME QUESTIONS?

THE COURT: YES.

MR. DARDEN: BRING THE LASER POINTER WITH YOU. MR. FAIRTLOUGH.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: NOW, DETECTIVE, THESE ARE THE POLAROIDS YOU TOOK A LITTLE OVER SIX YEARS AGO; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT IS TRUE.

Q: YOU INDICATED EARLIER THAT THERE WAS A CUT ON HER LIP THAT YOU SAW?

A: YES. IT'S RIGHT THERE UNDERNEATH THE NOSE (INDICATING), APPEARED TO BE ABOUT ONE INCH IN LENGTH.

Q: AND YOU'VE POINTED THAT OUT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: WHAT OTHER INJURIES IF ANY DO YOU SEE DEPICTED IN THIS POLAROID PHOTOGRAPH?

A: THERE'S A BRUISE AND SWELLING HERE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CHEEK (INDICATING) AND THERE'S A PATTERN AND SWELLING -- THERE'S SOME SORT OF A PATTERN RIGHT HERE THAT I COULDN'T QUITE MAKE OUT AND I WANTED THAT PHOTOGRAPHED, AND HER EYE IS SWOLLEN AND THE OTHER EYE IS STARTING TO SWELL JUST A LITTLE BIT. THIS ONE IS GETTING BLACK AND BLUE, AND DOWN AROUND HER NECK, THIS IS RED AND THERE'S FINGERPRINT -- FINGER INDENTATIONS ON THIS PART OF HER NECK, LEFT SIDE OF HER NECK. NONE OF THAT SHOWS UP ON THE POLAROID VERY WELL. I BELIEVE THERE'S ALSO A CUT ON THE INSIDE OF HER LIP THAT CORRESPONDS WITH THAT CUT, BUT IT'S NOT --

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS POINT, MOVE TO STRIKE THAT. YOU CAN'T SEE THAT FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH.

THE COURT: HE'S TESTIFYING FROM HIS RECOLLECTION. YOU CAN COVER THAT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION. MR. DARDEN.

MR. DARDEN: PEOPLE'S 4, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DETECTIVE, THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THE POLAROID PHOTOGRAPHS YOU TOOK?

A: YES.

Q: IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES. THIS IS A DIFFERENT VIEW OF THE SAME VICTIM, DIFFERENT SHOT. IT'S THE CUT, THE SWOLLEN AND CONTUSION, BRUISE RIGHT HERE (INDICATING) AND THIS PATTERN IS STARTING TO LOOK A LITTLE BIT BETTER, BUT IT'S SWOLLEN AND RED. THERE'S A DEFINITE PATTERN TO IT AND THEN THIS -- THE BLACK AND BLUE MARKS HERE DON'T SHOW.

MR. DARDEN: PEOPLE'S 5, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: WHAT IS DEPICTED IN PEOPLE'S 5, DETECTIVE?

A: THIS IS THE FRONT OF WEST L.A. DESK WITH THE DESK OFFICER THERE, AND THIS IS NICOLE SIMPSON WEARING MY PARTNER'S FIELD JACKET (INDICATING). AND THESE ARE THE PANTS I WAS TRYING TO DESCRIBE, IS SORT OF A SWEATPANTS OR LIGHT PAJAMA BOTTOM, AND THIS MUDDY LEG IS FROM WHEN SHE HIT THE GROUND OUTSIDE WHEN SHE WAS THROWN OUT.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I MOVE TO STRIKE THAT, YOUR HONOR, MOVE TO STRIKE THAT.

THE COURT: THE LAST COMMENT, "THE MUDDY LEG IS WHEN SHE HIT THE GROUND OUTSIDE WHEN SHE WAS THROWN OUT," THAT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU ARE TO DISREGARD THAT AS THERE'S NO FOUNDATION FOR THAT ANSWER AT THIS POINT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DETECTIVE, PLEASE RETAKE THE STAND. DETECTIVE, YOU DID PREPARE A FOLLOW-UP OR SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT IN THIS MATTER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT IS CORRECT.

Q: AND DID YOU PREPARE THAT REPORT ON THE MORNING OF JANUARY 1, 1989?

A: NO. IT WAS ABOUT 30 DAYS LATER I BELIEVE.

Q: AND WHY DID YOU PREPARE A REPORT 30 DAYS AFTER THE INCIDENT?

A: THE CITY ATTORNEY OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES ASKED ME TO.

Q: AND DO YOU KNOW WHY HE ASKED YOU TO?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. DARDEN: I'M ASKING IF HE KNOWS.

MR. COCHRAN: IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: A PROSECUTOR FROM THE LOS ANGELES CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ASKED YOU TO PREPARE A SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT?

A: YES. I RECEIVED A HANDWRITTEN NOTE FROM THE PROSECUTOR.

MR. COCHRAN: HEARSAY.

THE COURT: NO, HE CAN EMBELLISH SLIGHTLY. MR. DARDEN.

MR. COCHRAN: HE ANSWERED THAT ALREADY.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: DETECTIVE, AFTER YOU LEFT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM WITH NICOLE, DID YOU EVER RETURN TO THE HOUSE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHEN?

A: RETURNED TWICE. I TOOK NICOLE HOME AFTER THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND THEN I HAD TO RETURN AGAIN.

Q: WHY DID YOU RETURN TO THE ADDRESS THAT THIRD TIME?

A: NICOLE HAD CALLED WEST L.A. STATION, SAID THAT O.J. SIMPSON HAD RETURNED. SO I DROVE BACK TO THE LOCATION.

Q: AND WHY DID YOU DRIVE BACK TO THE LOCATION?

A: TO TRY TO PLACE HIM UNDER ARREST FOR 273.5 OF THE PENAL CODE.

Q: SPOUSAL BATTERY?

A: YES.

Q: AND WAS HE THERE WHEN YOU RETURNED?

A: NO.

Q: THANK YOU.

MR. DARDEN: NOTHING FURTHER, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN:

Q: GOOD MORNING, SERGEANT EDWARDS.

A: IT'S DETECTIVE EDWARDS.

Q: DETECTIVE EDWARDS.

A: GOOD MORNING.

MR. COCHRAN: COULD YOU PUT THAT LAST PARAGRAPH BACK UP FOR A SECOND ON THE ELMO, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES. PEOPLE'S 5.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S SERGEANT OR DETECTIVE?

A: DETECTIVE.

Q: DETECTIVE EDWARDS? ALL RIGHT. I DON'T WANT TO CALL YOU BY THE WRONG NAME. DETECTIVE, ARE THESE THE BLACK SWEATPANTS THAT YOU TOLD US ABOUT WHEN YOU DESCRIBED THEM EARLIER?

THE COURT: I WILL SUSTAIN THE COURT'S OWN OBJECTION. THAT'S NOT WHAT HE TESTIFIED TO.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU INDICATE SHE WAS WEARING SOME DARK SWEATPANTS IN YOUR TESTIMONY EARLIER?

A: YES, I BELIEVE I DID.

Q: DO THOSE SWEATPANTS LOOK DARK TO YOU OR DO THEY LOOK WHITE?

A: THE RIGHT LEG LOOKS PRETTY DARK.

Q: I'M TALKING ABOUT THE COLOR, SIR, OF THE SWEATPANTS. LOOK AT THE COLOR OF THE LEFT LEG THERE. IS THAT WHITE?

A: IT'S WHITE PANTS.

Q: THOSE ARE WHITE PANTS; ARE THEY NOT?

A: EXCEPT FOR THE RIGHT LEG.

Q: WELL, ANYTHING ON THE RIGHT LEG IS NOT THE ORIGINAL COLOR, IS IT, SIR?

A: THAT'S WHY I WAS HAVING A HARD TIME WITH THE COLOR. I REMEMBERED SOMETHING DARK ABOUT THE PANTS.

Q: I SEE. WELL, WITH REGARD TO YOUR RECOLLECTION OF THESE EVENTS, DETECTIVE -- THIS TOOK PLACE SIX YEARS AGO; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT IS CORRECT.

Q: AND WHEN -- AFTER THAT, YOU WROTE THESE REPORTS. YOU WROTE THE FIRST REPORT, REPORTS CONTEMPORANEOUS WITH THE EVENT ON OR BEFORE JANUARY 1ST; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND I UNDERSTAND YOU WROTE ANOTHER REPORT ABOUT 30 DAYS THEREAFTER; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND HAVE YOU HAD OCCASION TO REVIEW THOSE REPORTS IN THE RECENT PAST?

A: YES.

Q: AND HOW LONG AGO DID YOU REVIEW THE REPORTS?

A: I BELIEVE LAST WEEK.

Q: BEFORE THAT, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU REVIEWED THESE REPORTS?

A: IT'S BEEN QUITE SOME TIME. MAYBE FOUR YEARS OR MORE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU AWARE THAT WITH REGARD TO THESE PROCEEDINGS, THAT MR. O.J. SIMPSON ENTERED A NO CONTEST PLEA AND RESOLVED THIS INCIDENT IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM? ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT?

MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I FOUND OUT ABOUT IT LAST YEAR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: YOUR ANSWER IS YES, YOU'RE AWARE OF IT?

A: YES.

Q: AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT HE THEREAFTER WROTE LETTERS OF APOLOGY TO HIS WIFE REGARDING THIS INCIDENT? ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT?

MR. DARDEN: SAME OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: THIS WITNESS' AWARENESS IS IRRELEVANT.

MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. I'LL ASK IT ANOTHER WAY, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN THIS CONNECTION, WITH REGARD TO THIS CASE YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, THAT NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WANTED TO DROP THE CHARGES AGAINST HER HUSBAND?

MR. DARDEN: SAME OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT?

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON THAT.

THE COURT: PLEASE, WITH THE COURT REPORTER.

MR. COCHRAN: CERTAINLY.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: HOW DO WE GET THIS IN, MR. COCHRAN, WITH THIS WITNESS?

MR. COCHRAN: WELL --

THE COURT: NO. I MEAN WITHOUT CALLING THE CITY ATTORNEY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

MR. DARDEN: I'LL CALL THE CITY ATTORNEY.

THE COURT: HOW DO YOU GET THIS IN WITH THIS GUY?

MR. COCHRAN: THIS GUY IS -- HERE'S WHY I THINK IT'S RELEVANT. THIS GUY GIVES US A LITANY OF STUFF, JUDGE, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, HE KNOWS AND REMEMBERS WORDS SAID AND HE TELLS US HOW NICOLE WANTS TO COME TO THE STATION AND EVERYTHING. I'M JUST ASKING IS HE AWARE -- AND I CAN REPHRASE IT -- THAT NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AFTER THIS SAID SHE WANTED TO DROP ALL THESE CHARGES. I'M JUST ASKING THE QUESTION. THAT'S WHAT SHE DID IN FACT, DROP THE CHARGES. SHE WISHED NOT TO PROSECUTE MR. SIMPSON. THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE APPARENTLY WENT AHEAD AND HOWARD WEITZMAN WORKED OUT A NO CONTEST PLEA. I THINK IT WOULD BE UNFAIR TO BE CUT OFF AFTER THEY'VE MADE ALL THIS HYPE OF THE TAPE. THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING.

MR. DARDEN: IT'S HEARSAY.

MR. COCHRAN: IT'S NOT HEARSAY.

MR. DARDEN: IT'S PURE UNADULTERATED HEARSAY. HE HEARD ABOUT IT LAST YEAR, OKAY. HOW CAN HE COME HERE AND -- I'LL CALL THE CITY ATTORNEY IF YOU WANT. YOU CAN TALK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. I'LL INTRODUCE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DOCKET OF HIS PLEA IF YOU --

MR. COCHRAN: I'M NOT GOING TO ASK HIM TO DO THAT. ALL I AM ASKING IS TO CROSS-EXAMINE THIS MAN.

THE COURT: WELL, YOU CAN CROSS-EXAMINE HIM, YES. BUT WHAT HIS AWARENESS IS OF WHAT THE VICTIM LATER DID IS IRRELEVANT TO HIS TESTIMONY HERE.

MR. COCHRAN: WELL, I THINK IT'S VERY RELEVANT, YOUR HONOR. IF SHE SAID SHE WANTED TO DROP THE CHARGES AND IF HE IS AWARE OF THAT, THAT'S VERY RELEVANT. AND HE'S BEEN ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT ALL THESE THINGS AND NOW I CAN'T BRING OUT --

THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, YOU CAN BRING IN THE CITY ATTORNEY OR OFFER IT. YOU CAN ASK FOUNDATIONAL QUESTIONS, WAS HE INVOLVED IN DISCUSSIONS REGARDING SETTLING THE CASE AND THAT SORT OF THING. YOU CAN ASK HIM THOSE FOUNDATIONAL QUESTIONS. IF THE ANSWER IS YES, HE'S AWARE OF THAT, THEN YOU CAN ASK. IF HE'S NOT AWARE OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS --

MR. COCHRAN: THEN I'LL PROCEED ON. THE OTHER THING I WANT TO DO WITH REGARD TO THIS WITNESS BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT THESE PICTURES, I WANT THE JURORS TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE PICTURES. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO HAVING THE JURORS BE ABLE TO SEE THEM?

THE COURT: NO. WE'LL HAND THEM OUT IF YOU WANT TO.

MR. COCHRAN: I'LL ASK TO DO THAT.

THE COURT: WE'LL TAKE 10 MINUTES TO PASS THEM AROUND.

MR. DARDEN: BEFORE WE DO THAT, COULD YOU ADMONISH COUNSEL TO STOP TESTIFYING, YOU KNOW, LET THE WITNESS TESTIFY?

THE COURT: NO. I CUT HIM OFF. WE ARE HERE AT THE SIDEBAR. I HAVE TOLD HIM UNLESS HE LAYS SOME FOUNDATION, HE DOESN'T GET TO GO INTO IT.

MR. DARDEN: I DON'T WANT TO JACK HIM UP HERE RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIS WIFE, WHOM I ALSO LOVE.

MR. COCHRAN: WHEN HE WAS TALKING ABOUT TESTIFYING, I THOUGHT HE WAS TESTIFYING ABOUT HIMSELF.

THE COURT: COME ON GUYS.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: THANK YOU. MR. COCHRAN.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I PROCEED, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, DETECTIVE EDWARDS, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON HAD GONE DOWN TO THE WEST LOS ANGELES STATION TO HAVE THESE POLAROID PICTURES TAKEN; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I DROVE HER THERE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU TOOK THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, DID YOU?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND WHEN YOU TOOK THESE PICTURES, YOU DID THE BEST YOU COULD TO TRY AND ACCURATELY DISPLAY HER INJURIES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: THIS WASN'T THE FIRST TIME YOU HAD TAKEN POLAROID PICTURES, WAS IT?

A: NO.

Q: AND WERE YOU EXPERIENCED AT DOING THAT AT THAT TIME?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU TOOK THESE PICTURES AT WEST LOS ANGELES STATION, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: HOW MANY PICTURES DID YOU TAKE ALL TOGETHER?

A: THREE.

Q: AND THE THREE THAT WE SEE HERE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO ASK THAT THE JURY BE ALLOWED TO SEE THESE PICTURES UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL AFTER I ASK A FEW MORE QUESTIONS, IF THE COURT PLEASES.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THESE PICTURES, IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY THESE PICTURES DON'T ACCURATELY REFLECT HOW SHE LOOKED?

A: THAT'S TRUE.

Q: LET ME SEE IF I UNDERSTAND THIS. YOU TOOK THE CAMERA, YOU FOCUSED ON HER AND YOU TOOK THREE SHOTS; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND THESE ARE THE THREE SHOTS THAT YOU TOOK; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU FIRST OF ALL MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 1 FOR IDENTIFICATION. PEOPLE'S 1 IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF --

THE COURT: PEOPLE'S 3, 4 AND 5.

MR. COCHRAN: SORRY. ON THE BACK -- IT SAYS 1 ON THE FRONT. SORRY.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 3 PURPORTS TO BE A PHOTOGRAPH OF A FEMALE. IS THAT A PHOTOGRAPH OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: YES.

MR. DARDEN: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. THAT'S PEOPLE'S 5.

MR. COCHRAN: FOR THE RECORD, 5. LOOKS LIKE A 3.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IS THAT A PHOTOGRAPH OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: DID YOU TAKE THAT PHOTOGRAPH?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU PEOPLE'S 4 FOR IDENTIFICATION. IS THIS A PHOTOGRAPH OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: DID YOU TAKE THAT PHOTOGRAPH?

A: YES.

Q: AND PEOPLE'S 3 FOR IDENTIFICATION, IS THAT A PHOTOGRAPH OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU TAKE THAT PHOTOGRAPH?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: NOW, DID YOU EVER GO TO COURT TO TESTIFY IN THIS MATTER, ANY CRIMINAL PROCEEDING THAT TOOK PLACE?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU EVER AT ANY TIME HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AS TO WHETHER OR NOT SHE WANTED TO PROCEED WITH THE CHARGES AGAINST HER HUSBAND?

A: NO.

Q: YOU DIDN'T TALK TO HER AFTER THIS?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: THE LAST TIME YOU TALKED TO NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WITH REFERENCE TO THIS INCIDENT WAS ON WHAT DAY?

A: JANUARY 1ST, 1989.

Q: AND WHAT TIME OF DAY WAS THAT?

A: WHEN I TOOK HER HOME. IT WAS AROUND 6:00 I BELIEVE.

Q: 6:00 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU HAD OCCASION, DID YOU NOT, TO GET VERY CLOSE TO NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON ON THIS NIGHT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: WELL, SHE GRABBED ME AND HUNG ON TO ME, YES.

MR. DARDEN: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. COULD COUNSEL DIRECT HIS EXAMINATION FROM THE PODIUM?

MR. COCHRAN: I AM, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. DARDEN: YOU GOT VERY CLOSE TO HER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU HAVE OCCASION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT SHE HAD BEEN DRINKING THAT PARTICULAR NIGHT?

A: I DIDN'T SMELL ANY SIGNIFICANT ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ON HER BREATH. I DON'T BELIEVE I DID.

Q: I'M NOT ASKING ABOUT SIGNIFICANT ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE. DID YOU SMELL ANY ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ON HER BREATH?

A: NOT ENOUGH THAT I WOULD BE ABLE TO DETECT. I DON'T REMEMBER.

Q: I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT ANSWER, NOT ENOUGH. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

A: WELL, I CAN'T REMEMBER SMELLING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ON HER BREATH.

Q: SO THE ANSWER IS, YOU DON'T KNOW ONE WAY OR THE OTHER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I JUST CAN'T REMEMBER SMELLING ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ON HER BREATH.

Q: THE ANSWER IS, YOU DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT, RIGHT?

A: OKAY. I DON'T KNOW.

Q: ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD LIKE AT THIS POINT, IF THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE TIME, TO SHOW THE PHOTOGRAPHS.

THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, IF YOU WOULD THEN HAND ALL THREE PHOTOGRAPHS TO JUROR NO. 1. ACTUALLY HAND IT TO OUR BAILIFF. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AS YOU LOOK AT THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WOULD YOU PASS IT TO YOUR RIGHT. ACTUALLY TO YOUR LEFT. SORRY ABOUT THAT. JUROR NO. 1, WOULD YOU PASS THE PHOTOGRAPHS, AS YOU LOOK AT IT, PASS IT TO YOUR LEFT. THAT WAY, EVERYONE WILL SEE IT QUICKER. BUT TAKE YOUR TIME. PLEASE TAKE AS MUCH TIME AS YOU FEEL YOU NEED. AS YOU LOOK AT THE PHOTOGRAPH, PASS THE INDIVIDUAL PHOTOGRAPH, PLEASE. WE'LL GET USED TO THE PROCEDURE. BUT PLEASE TAKE AS MUCH TIME AS YOU FEEL YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE PHOTOGRAPHS.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: I AM SORRY. LET'S JUST GO DOWN THE FRONT ROW, PLEASE, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AROUND TO THE CHEAP SEATS.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT ALL 22 OF OUR TRIAL JURORS AND ALTERNATES HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW PEOPLE'S 3, 4 AND 5. MR. COCHRAN.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY. JUST ONE OR TWO MORE QUESTIONS BEFORE WE TAKE A BREAK.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, DETECTIVE EDWARDS, AFTER YOU TOOK THESE PHOTOGRAPHS THE JURY HAS JUST NOW SEEN, YOU LOOKED AT THEM; DID YOU NOT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND YOU HAVE THE ABILITY IF THE PICTURES DIDN'T SHOW SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO SHOW, YOU COULD TAKE ANOTHER PICTURE; COULD YOU NOT?

A: NO.

Q: YOU COULDN'T TAKE ANY MORE PICTURES?

A: I WAS OUT OF FILM.

Q: YOU MEAN TO TELL US THAT THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT ONLY HAD THREE SHOTS ON A POLAROID ROLL ON JANUARY 1ST, 1989 AT THE WEST LOS ANGELES STATION?

A: WAS OUT OF FILM IN THAT CAMERA.

Q: DID YOU GET -- THE POLAROID CAMERA, AS I RECALL IT, YOU PUT ANOTHER ROLL IN THERE AFTER THAT FINISHES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: RIGHT. BUT SHE WANTED TO GO HOME.

Q: HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE YOU, SIR, TO TAKE ANOTHER ROLL, SLIDE ANOTHER CONTAINER INSIDE THAT CAMERA?

A: SHE WANTED TO GO HOME TO HER CHILDREN AND IT WASN'T MY OPTION. I HAD TO COMPLY WITH HER.

Q: SO YOU DIDN'T HAVE TIME TO TAKE ANY MORE PICTURES. IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE TELLING US?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU DID HAVE OTHER FILM AT THAT STATION?

A: I WOULD IMAGINE SOMEWHERE LOCKED UP IN THAT STATION, THERE WAS FILM.

Q: NOW, YOU DROVE HER BACK HOME; DID YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT STOPPED YOU FROM TAKING SOME PICTURES AT HER HOME WHEN SHE GOT BACK HOME WITH HER CHILDREN?

A: SHE WANTED -- I DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER FILM WITH ME. THAT PARTICULAR CAMERA WAS OUT OF FILM.

Q: WELL, THERE WAS OTHER FILM AT WEST LOS ANGELES STATION; ISN'T THAT CORRECT, SIR?

A: SHE WANTED TO LEAVE. SHE WANTED TO GO BACK TO HER CHILDREN.

Q: CAN YOU ANSWER MY QUESTION? WAS THERE OTHER FILM AT WEST LOS ANGELES STATION?

A: SOMEWHERE IN THAT STATION, I'M SURE THERE WAS OTHER FILM.

Q: AND YOU COULD HAVE GOTTEN THAT FILM; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: I COULD HAVE EVENTUALLY GOTTEN THE FILM, YES.

Q: YOU COULD HAVE PUT THAT FILM INSIDE THAT POLAROID CAMERA; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU COULD HAVE TAKEN THAT CAMERA BACK TO ROCKINGHAM, RIGHT?

A: I COULD HAVE.

Q: AND YOU COULD HAVE TAKEN THE PICTURES THAT YOU CLAIM YOU NOW WANT; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: IF I WOULD HAVE IGNORED HER REQUEST, I COULD HAVE DONE ALL THOSE THINGS, THAT'S TRUE.

Q: YOU DID NOT DO THAT, DID YOU?

A: NO. I COMPLIED WITH HER REQUEST TO GO TO HER CHILDREN.

Q: BUT YOU WERE A POLICE OFFICER OUT THERE, AND THE REASON YOU TAKE PICTURES IS SO YOU CAN PRESERVE HOW THE PERSON LOOKED FOR YEARS LATER; ISN'T THAT CORRECT, SIR?

A: EXACTLY.

Q: AND YOU DIDN'T DO THAT ACCORDING TO YOUR TESTIMONY ALTHOUGH WE HAVE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, RIGHT?

A: I DID IT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

MR. COCHRAN: CAN WE STOP AT THIS POINT? I'M NOT FINISHED WITH HIM YET.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE NOON HOUR. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU; DO NOT DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T PERFORM ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU. AND WE WILL RESUME BACK HERE AT 1:30. ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE EDWARDS, YOU ARE EXCUSED UNTIL 1:30. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR.

(AT 12:05 P.M., THE NOON RECESS WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:30 P.M. OF THE SAME DAY.)

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1995 1:32 P.M.

DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE

APPEARANCES: (APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED, MR. GORDON ALSO BEING PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE.)

(JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)

(CHRISTINE M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY, MR. COCHRAN. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK, MR. DARDEN, MR. GORDON. AND MR. COCHRAN, YOU SEEM TO BE STANDING AT THE PODIUM POISED TO SAY SOMETHING.

MR. COCHRAN: YES, YOUR HONOR. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE COURT TO GIVE THE JURY A LIMITING INSTRUCTION.

THE COURT: I HAD NEGLECTED TO REMIND THEM OF THAT.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU. WOULD THE COURT DO THAT BEFORE WE RESUME THIS AFTERNOON?

THE COURT: I WILL.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY.

THE COURT: ALSO, COUNSEL, I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROXIMITY OF OUR INVESTIGATING OFFICERS WITH THE ALTERNATE JURORS THERE, IF YOU COULD JUST ASK THEM TO SORT OF SCOOCH OVER SOME, AND WE CAN GET OUR ELMO OPERATOR AND EVERYBODY TO JUST SORT OF SCOOCH OVER JUST FOR APPEARANCES, I THINK IT LOOKS BETTER. ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: EVERYONE PLEASE HAVE A SEAT. ALL RIGHT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.

THE COURT: EARLIER IN OUR PROCEEDINGS I GAVE YOU INSTRUCTIONS THAT CERTAIN OF THE EVIDENCE THAT WOULD BE RECEIVED BY YOU WOULD BE RECEIVED FOR A LIMITED PURPOSE. THE TESTIMONY THAT YOU ARE HEARING REGARDING THIS 1989 INCIDENT IS ONE OF THOSE INCIDENTS THAT IS BEING RECEIVED FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE THAT I HAVE ALREADY INSTRUCTED YOU ON, AND YOU ARE TO MAKE NOTE THAT AS YOU LISTEN TO THIS EVIDENCE, IT IS FOR THAT LIMITED PURPOSE THAT I HAVE ALREADY INSTRUCTED YOU ON. ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE, EXCUSE ME, DETECTIVE EDWARDS, PLEASE.

JOHN EDWARDS, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE NOON RECESS, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, DETECTIVE.

THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON.

THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH.

THE WITNESS: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, DO YOU WISH TO CONTINUE YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION?

MR. COCHRAN: YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR.

CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)

BY MR. COCHRAN:

Q: GOOD AFTERNOON, DETECTIVE. WHEN WE BROKE AT LUNCH WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS POLAROID, AND I WANT YOU TO THINK BACK FOR US. THIS CAMERA THAT YOU HAD, DID YOU HAVE THAT CAMERA AT THE SCENE OF ROCKINGHAM BEFORE YOU WENT TO WEST LOS ANGELES?

A: NO, I GOT IT AT THE DESK.

Q: AT WEST LOS ANGELES STATION?

A: YES.

Q: YOU WERE ASSIGNED TO THAT STATION AT THAT TIME, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND THE TIME YOU GOT THAT CAMERA, HOW -- HOW MANY EXPOSURES OR HOW MANY -- WHAT WAS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FILM THAT YOU HAD IN THAT CAMERA AT THAT TIME?

A: I -- I DON'T KNOW. I SHOT IT UNTIL IT WAS EMPTY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, AND -- AND IN SHOOTING UNTIL IT WAS EMPTY, IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT YOU ONLY TOOK THREE SHOTS?

A: I BELIEVE I ONLY TOOK THREE.

Q: DO YOU RECALL TAKING A PHOTOGRAPH OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WHILE SHE WAS STILL IN THE POLICE CAR?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE I EVER DID THAT.

Q: YOU DON'T RECALL ANY SUCH PHOTOGRAPH BEING IN EXISTENCE?

A: I'M PRETTY SURE I DIDN'T DO THAT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE ANY RECORD THAT WOULD REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION ON THAT?

A: I DON'T THINK I TOOK A PICTURE OF HER IN THE CAR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, AT SOME POINT YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT A YOUNG LADY OR A LADY BY THE NAME OF MICHELLE CAME OUT TO THE POLICE CAR AND STARTED HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, AS I UNDERSTAND IT AT THAT TIME, MR. SIMPSON WAS NOT OUTSIDE, YOU COULD NOT SEE HIM AT THAT POINT?

A: HE WAS NOT OUTSIDE IN MY VIEW.

Q: YOU WERE STILL OUTSIDE THE GATE AT THIS POINT, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND THIS LADY MICHELLE, CAN YOU DESCRIBE HER FOR US, PLEASE?

A: I BELIEVE SHE HAD DARK HAIR, SHE WAS ABOUT 5-4, AND I THINK SHE WAS FILIPINO, BUT I'M NOT REALLY SURE.

Q: YOU BELIEVE SHE WAS FILIPINO?

A: I'M NOT SURE. I KNOW SHE HAD A LONG LAST NAME THAT I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS.

Q: WAS HER LAST NAME MICHELLE ABUDRAHM, A-B-U-D-R-A-H-M? DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION?

A: THAT MIGHT BE IT.

Q: DOES THAT SOUND ABOUT RIGHT TO YOU?

A: IT WAS "A" SOMETHING.

Q: DID SHE APPEAR TO SPEAK TO YOU WITH AN ACCENT?

A: SHE HAD AN ACCENT, YES, BUT SHE SPOKE ENGLISH.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU BELIEVE THAT SHE WAS FILIPINO, DID YOU?

A: WELL, NOT REALLY. I JUST CAN'T -- I DIDN'T ASK HER WHAT HER NATIONALITY WAS. IT WAS AT NIGHT AND I REALLY DON'T KNOW.

Q: WELL, NOW, YOU WERE OUT THERE OF COURSE IN RESPONSE TO THIS PHONE CALL. DID YOU OR YOUR PARTNER OR SERGEANT VINGER EVER INTERVIEW THIS MICHELLE ABUDRAHM?

A: JUST TO ADMONISH HER OF 148 OF THE PENAL CODE AND TELL HER TO LEAVE.

Q: LET'S GET BACK TO MY QUESTION NOW. WHEN YOU ADMONISHED HER, YOU TOLD HER TO LEAVE BECAUSE SHE WOULD BE INTERFERING, RIGHT?

A: THAT IS CORRECT.

Q: I'M ASKING YOU DID YOU INTERVIEW HER TO FIND OUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED, EITHER INSIDE OR OUTSIDE OF 360 ROCKINGHAM BEFORE YOU ARRIVED THERE?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: SO YOU DID NOT TAKE A STATEMENT AND AS FAR AS YOU KNOW NOT ONLY DID YOU NOT DO IT, BUT NEITHER DID YOUR BACK-UP SERGEANT OR YOUR TRAINEE PARTNER; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: NO, BECAUSE SHE WAS INSIDE THE GATE AFTER I TOLD HER TO LEAVE.

Q: YOUR ANSWER IS NO, YOU DIDN'T DO THAT?

A: NOBODY INTERVIEWED HER.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU -- WERE YOU AWARE THAT THERE WAS A SECOND WOMAN, ANOTHER WOMAN INSIDE THE HOUSE, A SO-CALLED NANNY?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: DID YOU EVER SEE ANOTHER WOMAN?

A: I DIDN'T SEE ANOTHER WOMAN, NO.

Q: YOU NEVER SAW HER OR TALKED WITH HER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT IS CORRECT.

Q: NOW, BY THE WAY, YOU SAID WOULD YOU SPELL FOR US THE NAME OF YOUR PARTNER. SPELL IT FOR US NOW, WILL YOU PLEASE.

A: YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T LOOK IT UP TO SEE WHAT IT IS, BUT IT IS M-I-L-W-E-S-K-W-I, I BELIEVE.

Q: M-I-L-W-E-S-K-W-I?

A: YEAH, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, FIRST NAME PATRISHA.

Q: THAT IS CLOSE? ALL RIGHT. DID THIS OFFICER MILEWSKI, OR WHATEVER WE HAVE THERE, DID SHE EVER HAVE OCCASION TO, AS A FEMALE OFFICER, LOOK AT MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S BODY FOR ANY OTHER BRUISES OR INJURIES AT SOME POINT?

MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, UNLESS THE WITNESS WAS PRESENT.

MR. COCHRAN: HE CAN ANSWER YES OR NO IF HE KNOWS.

MR. DARDEN: HEARSAY.

MR. COCHRAN: IT IS NOT HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. IF HE KNOWS.

THE WITNESS: I WAS NOT PRESENT DURING THAT.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. BUT YOU INSTRUCTED HER, DID YOU NOT, TO LOOK AT HER BODY, DID YOU NOT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT, I DID.

Q: OKAY. TELL US WHAT YOU ASKED HER TO DO.

A: I ASKED HER TO GO TAKE HER INTO THE WOMEN'S BATHROOM THAT IS LOCATED IN THE LOBBY OF WEST L.A. STATION AND SEE IF SHE HAD ANY BRUISES OR MARKS ON HER BACK.

Q: AND DID YOU THEN SEE YOUR PARTNER, FEMALE PARTNER, THEN GO ALONG WITH MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON INTO A BATHROOM AREA?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU WEREN'T IN THAT ROOM OBVIOUSLY, WERE YOU?

A: NO, I WAS NOT IN THAT ROOM.

Q: THEN THEY CAME BACK OUT AT SOME POINT; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AFTER THIS WAS ALL OVER YOU HAD OCCASION TO WRITE OUT A REPORT, DID YOU NOT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND IN THAT REPORT YOU TALKED WITH YOUR PARTNER AS TO HER OBSERVATIONS, DID YOU NOT?

A: WELL, MY PARTNER WROTE THE REPORT AND I ASSISTED HER WITH IT, YES.

Q: SO YOU HAD OCCASION TO SEE HER REPORT AND YOU HAD HER RESPONSE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT SHE SAW ANY BRUISES ON NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S BODY, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: IT IS TRUE, IN FACT SHE DID NOT SEE ANY BRUISES?

MR. DARDEN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THAT CALLS FOR HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THERE IS A REPORT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: IS SHE HERE TODAY IN THIS BUILDING, YOUR PARTNER?

A: NOT THAT I KNOW OF.

Q: YOU HAVEN'T SEEN HER?

A: NO.

Q: YOU STILL WORK WEST LOS ANGELES?

A: NO, VAN NUYS HOMICIDE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, DETECTIVE, SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, I BELIEVE YOU INDICATED TO MR. DARDEN THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU ARRIVED AT THE SCENE SOMETIME AFTER 3:30 OR THEREABOUTS, AND IF I WERE TO INDICATE TO YOU THAT THE CALL THAT CAME TO DOWNTOWN FOR THE 911 WAS AT 3:58, WOULD THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT YOU WERE THERE A LITTLE AFTER FOUR O'CLOCK?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: OR AT FOUR O'CLOCK; WOULD THAT BE CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU ALSO TOLD US THAT YOU HAD HEARD IN THE TRANSMISSION THAT THE WOMAN CALLING THE 911 HAD SAID SHE WAS BEING BEATEN. YOU HEARD THAT, DID YOU?

A: NO. IT APPEARED ON A VIDEO SCREEN IN OUR CAR.

Q: WELL, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT WHAT APPEARED ON THE VIDEO SCREEN WAS THAT IT WAS THE COMMENTS OF THE TRANSCRIBER, THE PERSON WHO WAS WORKING DOWN AT PARKER CENTER?

A: THAT'S CORRECT. THAT IS WHAT I TESTIFIED TO. THAT IS WHAT WE WERE GIVEN AS A RADIO CALL.

Q: YOU DIDN'T SAY EARLIER TODAY THAT IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE WOMAN WHO MADE THE CALL HAD SAID SHE WAS BEING BEATEN? DID YOU SAY THAT?

A: I CAN'T REMEMBER IF I SAID THAT OR NOT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. OKAY. WELL, AT ANY RATE, AS YOU THINK ABOUT IT NOW, AT NO TIME WERE YOU EVER TOLD BY ANYONE THAT NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON OR ANY LADY INSIDE THAT HOUSE EVER TOLD ANYONE THEY WERE BEING BEATEN THROUGH THE TRANSCRIBER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: AT THE TIME THAT I GOT THE RADIO CALL IT WAS JUST THAT A WOMAN WAS BEING BEATEN IN THE BACKGROUND.

Q: ALL RIGHT. THAT IS YOUR UNDERSTANDING, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: SO LET'S ASSUME THAT YOU ARRIVED THERE AT SOME TIME AFTER 3:58. KNOWING THAT INFORMATION, CAN YOU NOW TELL THE JURY OR THE COURT AND THE JURY WITH BETTER PRECISION AS TO WHAT TIME YOU ACTUALLY ARRIVED?

A: NO, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE I STARTED FROM AND HOW LONG IT TOOK ME TO GET THERE UNLESS I HAD THE ARRIVAL TIME ON THAT DOCUMENT THAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. JUST REFRESHING MY MIND, I THINK IT WAS UNDER TEN MINUTES, LIKE I TESTIFIED EARLIER.

Q: SO FROM WHATEVER TIME YOU GOT THE CALL, YOU THINK YOU GOT THERE FROM THE AREA YOU WERE NEAR LA CIENEGA OR WHATEVER, ABOUT TEN MINUTES?

A: I WOULD SAY IT WAS UNDER TEN MINUTES, BUT IT WAS AROUND THAT AREA.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S SAY THAT YOU WERE OUT THERE BY 4:15 A.M. AND THIS IS NEW YEAR'S DAY EARLY MORNING HOURS, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND HOW LONG WERE YOU THERE UNTIL YOU LEFT TO TAKE MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON DOWN TO THE WEST LOS ANGELES STATION TO HAVE THESE PICTURES TAKEN THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT?

A: PROBABLY SOMEWHERE AROUND EIGHT OR TEN MINUTES.

Q: SO IF YOU ARRIVED BY 4:15, WOULD YOU SAY BY 4:23, 4:25, YOU WOULD BE OUT OF THERE; IS THAT RI