Department no. 103 Hon. Lance A. Ito, Judge
APPEARANCES: (Appearances as heretofore noted.)
(Janet M. Moxham, CSR no. 4855, official reporter.)
(Christine M. Olson, CSR no. 2378, official reporter.)
(The following proceedings were held in open court, out of the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. Mr. Simpson is again present before the Court with his counsel, Mr. Shapiro, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Neufeld, Mr. Blasier. The People ever represented by Miss Clark, Mr. Darden, Miss Kahn. The jury is not present. Counsel, anything we need to take up before we invite the jurors to join us?
MR. NEUFELD: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Neufeld.
MR. NEUFELD: Thank you. Your Honor, I just received a few moments ago an order signed by you regarding the sock drying experiment, presence of blood on sock interior discovery violations, and I think I need a little bit of clarification, your Honor. First of all, on page 2 of your order you referred to the glove drying experiment and I believe--
THE COURT: I'm sorry. Sock drying experiment.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. I understand, and please correct me if I am mistaken, is you are not precluding Professor MacDonell from testifying. What you are saying is that he cannot testify to the results of that experiment that he did at this time based on the information that you have. With regard to presence of blood on sock interior, you refer to the description given by Mr. Sims in part of the testimony but there is no reference to the other portions where he said that he saw a red/brown substance but it is powder coming from, you know, fibrils, as opposed to a transfer stain. My question is, even without referring to the presumptive testing, the expert who is the nation's leading authority in bloodstain interpretation is entitled to give his opinion, but are you saying that at this point he can't refer to the presumptive tests? You see, that is why I need some clarification.
THE COURT: He can say that there is a red something over there.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay.
THE COURT: He can't refer to the tests.
MR. NEUFELD: He can't refer to the presumptive tests until there is some kind of corroboration?
THE COURT: That's correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Umm--fine. And third is I would like to schedule--and you heard what the problem is about him leaving for Canada--can I schedule him for early next week, which would still give them ample opportunity?
THE COURT: All right. Because the scope of his testimony at this point is that in the interior of the sock there appears to be a red substance period.
MR. NEUFELD: And he will describe that red substance and what characteristics it has.
THE COURT: I assume.
MR. NEUFELD: Yeah. Also, as you know, you also received a copy of his July 15th report regarding the glove shrinkage experiment which was done on the Aris gloves that were--the same gloves in fact that Mr. Darden used in an experiment in this courtroom with Mr. Simpson--so he will be referring to that as well. And that is basically the testimony, as well as any just, you know, generalized blood splatter interpretation. But we want to schedule him, that is all, so the delay that you are allowing the People based on the totality of these circumstances is what? Can we call him Tuesday?
THE COURT: I don't know. It depends on what I hear from the People.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay.
MR. NEUFELD: You mean at this moment? Okay.
THE COURT: Miss Clark.
MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor. As we informed the Court earlier--as we informed the Court earlier with respect to the glove drying experiment, this is a motion that will be filed I believe today. I would be more apologetic about the late filing of these motions were it not for the fact that we just received the reports and had no idea that the--Mr. MacDonell was going to attempt to testify to matters contained therein, but that motion is forthcoming. With respect to the timing of his testimony, I still don't think we have an adequate offer of proof as to what the parameters of his testimony will be. His report, I believe now that counsel has said that he will testify to the appearance of what he says is a transfer on sock a and that he will also testify to generalized blood spatter interpretation. Well, there are no reports of any findings he made on any blood spatter at the crime scene in this case or at Rockingham, and if that is going to be the subject matter of his testimony, we need to have a 402 on that. Although counsel may characterize Mr. MacDonell as a leading authority in blood spatter interpretation, he, as the Court and I think the jury will see, is far from the most renown or the most revered, and I think that his conclusions will need to be reviewed by this Court under 402 before being submitted to the jury. So perhaps a more definite offer of proof needs to be made before the People can determine when they will be ready.
THE COURT: But the question posed by Mr. Neufeld is a matter of scheduling at this point, and if you want to challenge these matters, both on discovery bases and 402 bases, then we ought to set some time aside to do that. Mr. Neufeld's suggestion is perhaps Monday. How does that strike you?
MS. CLARK: Well, we have to file the motion on the glove. I think that will impact as well, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sounds to me like perhaps we ought to take up the 402 and 352 issues on the glove, since he will be the person testifying to this, the discovery issues and everything else all on Monday. How does that sound?
MS. CLARK: That sounds fair.
MR. NEUFELD: The only question is this: If we are about to embark on EDTA witnesses, and it is possible that both witnesses, Miss Clark may be able to assess as well, may go over to Monday in which case I would do it Tuesday. I'm just trying to be realistic here.
MS. CLARK: That is fine with me. Monday or Tuesday. I'm not wedded to that as long as everyone has time to get ready and get up to speed on all these issues, because they are substantial.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. CLARK: I have heard also, your Honor--well, I would request of counsel there are apparently other notes that Mr. MacDonell has made of his observations and experiments that we have never received. I'm not worried about the sock at this point, but I am concerned that there are reports concerning other observations or conclusions that he has made, notes and reports that counsel refers to, but we have never seen to this date. And so if there are any--are there any other notes or reports concerning the subject matter of his testimony or the subject matter for which he was contacted by the Defense to do experimentation or investigation, the People formally make another request that it be turned over.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Neufeld, any comment on that last request?
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor, I think we are well advised of what our obligations are in terms of discovery in this case and we will certainly comply with it and I believe we have complied with it with respect to Professor MacDonell. So we are saying Tuesday then I guess?
THE COURT: No, we are shooting for Monday.
MR. NEUFELD: We are shooting for Monday.
THE COURT: Shooting for Monday with the possibility we will dribble over until Tuesday.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Blasier.
MR. BLASIER: Good morning, your Honor.
THE COURT: Good morning.
MR. BLASIER: We intend to call Dr. Frederick Rieders as our first EDTA witness after the witness that is currently on the stand. I heard I think on the television last night that the Prosecution was going to make some sort of a motion to either preclude him or delay him. They haven't told me that. They have known I have been working on this issues. I think we need to decide that now. If we are going to make some sort of challenge to that, we would like to know that. We have two experts here from the east coast.
THE COURT: Well, let me ask you this: At this point, Mr. Cochran, how much more do you have with Mr. Ford?
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I would think that I don't have very much of Mr. Ford, your Honor. Perhaps no more than fifteen or twenty minutes with Mr. Ford.
THE COURT: All right. Miss Clark, how much do you have on Mr. Ford?
MS. CLARK: Brief. Mr. Darden is going to handle this witness I think.
MR. DARDEN: Thirty minutes.
THE COURT: All right. Miss Clark, what is the Prosecution's position on is it Dr. Rieders?
MR. BLASIER: Yes.
MS. CLARK: Your Honor, I just received notice of this change in developments late last night and I'm--I'm very--I'm really outraged at the manner in which this Defense has proceeded. It is a trial by ambush, according to the Defense, and let me just indicate to the Court procedurally what has transpired that leads me to this position. Dr. Rieders, we were informed would testify at some point, but it was at the end of a series of witnesses who have now been skipped over by counsel. Mr.--Dr. Rieders was added to the witness list, as best I can tell, formally on July 17th. That is this Monday. That is the same day we received his report. Now, the Court perhaps--I don't know if the Court has seen the report. I don't think that it has.
THE COURT: No.
MS. CLARK: It is a two-page report and yet the conclusions are very complex, they are very serious. If Dr. Rieders truly intends to testify to the positions he has adopted in that report, the cross-examination will have to be extensive and the preparation time needs to be a little more than two days before he is called.
And the Defense deliberately put him on the witness list--let me indicate to the Court, as of July 15th he wasn't even on the scheduled list of witnesses. As of July 18th, which is Tuesday, he was scheduled to testify after seven other witnesses that have now been jumped over. The Defense is deliberately attempting to force us into a position where we are unprepared to effectively cross-examine this witness. The People are requesting of the Court--this witness has had the reports of Agent Martz which is what he did. He didn't do any testing himself. He reviewed the report of testing conducted by Agent Martz and then issued a report of his opinion of those results. And those opinions are highly questionable and require vigorous cross-examination, because what the attempt is here is to mislead and confuse the jury to such a degree that they will oversimplify and falsify the true nature of the findings by Agent Martz. This witness did not do the testing to which he plans to testify. In fact, he cannot do that testing and never has, yet he purports to be able to interpret the results in a manner that will be highly inflammatory, also highly misleading.
If he is called to testify first from a substantive point of view, for the benefit of the jury, your Honor, the jury will be completely misled and confused. At which point if Agent Martz is ever--you know, the Defense cannot completely refuse to call Agent Martz because they have no foundation for the testimony of Dr. Rieders at all, but if they--if they delay in the calling of Agent Martz, the issue will become so confusing and so misleading to the jury that he may never be able to sort it out so they understand what really transpired and what the test results really mean. So there are--I have like a two-fold objection. One, for the benefit of the jury in terms of their understanding of the testimony. Two, for the benefit of the jury in terms of our ability to effectively confront and cross-examine the witness which we have been deprived of the opportunity of doing by a doctor who has refrained from writing a report until a day or two before he takes the witness stand, based on reports he received at the end of February. I cannot think of a reason why a doctor would review reports that are not that voluminous, thirty, forty pages, at the end of February, I'm sure drew conclusions at least by the end of March, and not write a report until three to four months later. I think it is scandalous what has occurred here. I think it is a very deliberate attempt to try this case by ambush and to prevent the People from adequately meeting this testimony.
THE COURT: What remedy are you seeking, Miss Clark?
MS. CLARK: Initially the People seek preclusion of his testimony completely and we object on the grounds, the discovery violation and the obvious subterfuge involved in turning over a report that had to have been ready to prepare months ago, two days before they intend to call him. Additionally, I remind the Court of the context in which this appears and that is that his name is added to the witness list only on Monday and deliberately put down below a bunch of--
THE COURT: Which witness list are we talking about?
MS. CLARK: The Defense calls us at 7:45 P.M. on July 18th to tell us that Dr. Rieders would testify after the following witnesses--
THE COURT: All right. Miss Clark, let me clarify my question. Dr. Rieders is a name--the name Dr. Rieders has been mentioned--
MS. CLARK: Yeah.
THE COURT: --a number of times throughout this trial--
MS. CLARK: Yeah.
THE COURT: --during the blood testimony, so it is--when was Dr. Rieders placed on the master Defense witness list?
MS. CLARK: In March.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. CLARK: Wait. He was--I'm sorry, your Honor. Let me take that back. Dr. Rieders was on the main list in October and he was added again in March, so yes, it is a name that is known to us, but a name without a report is virtually worthless. How do we know what he is going to address? In fact, I will tell the Court that it is very misleading because due to the fact that he does not perform and cannot perform effectively the kind of testing involved in EDTA detection, we were of the opinion that he would testify--we didn't know what he would testify to, but we certainly could not anticipate it would be EDTA since he is not an expert as far as the operation of the--the conducting of the testing in that particular area. Yeah, and then, umm--
THE COURT: So I should expect an initial competency challenge?
MS. CLARK: Oh, yes. Oh, yes. There is going to be substantial 402's that have to be conducted prior to his testimony. I was in the process of trying to prepare paperwork to that effect, and believing that I had ten witnesses to go before him, thought that there would be the opportunity to do so. I should also indicate to the Court that from a substantive point of view, as Miss Kahn points out, Agent Martz is necessary to lay the foundation for Dr. Rieders. This is not a situation like Dr. Lakshmanan and Dr. Golden, because the tests performed by Agent Martz, Dr. Rieders cannot perform, I believe never has performed, so--
THE COURT: Well, that is an interesting issue in and of itself, but let's get to the issue of how much--let's assume--let me ask you this. How much time do you need to effectively prepare to cross-examine Dr. Rieders?
MS. CLARK: Given the fact that I'm required to be in Court everyday on the other witnesses and I have other witnesses that I am scheduled to cross-examine--
THE COURT: Are you going to be cross-examining Dr. Rieders?
MS. CLARK: Probably.
THE COURT: Not Mr. Harmon or Mr. Clarke?
MS. CLARK: No, your Honor.
THE COURT: Thank you.
MS. CLARK: No.
THE COURT: Or Mr. Kelberg?
MS. CLARK: Or Mr. Kelberg.
THE COURT: All right.
MS. CLARK: I'm wearing out my welcome with Mr. Kelberg. I got to kind of save him up. And I might indicate, too, that Dr. Maltz has disappeared from the list, so I don't know--I need to know from counsel when he is going to appear, but that is another matter.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. CLARK: I would ask leave of the Court for two weeks or the end of the Defense case, whenever that is.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Blasier.
MR. BLASIER: Your Honor, this is a rather blatant and outrageous attempt of the Prosecution to try to control our order of proof. Let me state a little bit of chronology here. Dr. Rieders has been an issue in this case since the beginning of the year. We had a whole hearing with Mr. Harmon talking about his improper contacts with Dr. Rieders. They have known that he is--
THE COURT: Well, Mr. Blasier, let's cut to the chase. The issue is the turning over of a report two days before you are going to call him.
MR. BLASIER: The report was turned over on Monday. There is no legal requirement that Dr. Rieders even write a report. He did not perform any tests. All he did was analyze their data. I feel like I've had a guest come to my house unexpected, stay three weeks uninvited and then they start complaining about the food. We don't have to have a report from Dr. Rieders. We did one, given all the folderol that we have gone through about experts not having reports. The conclusions are exactly what they thought they were when Mr. Harmon described our flicker of hope. They know what the issues are. Agent Martz knows what the issues are. I met with him last week in Washington. He told me what he thought our experts were going to same. They aren't that far apart, quite frankly. Both experts are going to say their are indications of EDTA on the sock and on the back gate. Where they divert is in terms of whether you could quantify that. They have known about Dr. Rieders. They contacted me yesterday about talking to him. I said we could do that. We were kind of short on time at that point. They know what the issues are--
THE COURT: What is Dr. Rieders going to say about--about the levels?
MR. BLASIER: He is going to say that their method is not capable of quantifying, first of all, how much is actually there, but more importantly, how much should there be given the nature of the samples being exposed to the environment being stored for eight months, because the FBI didn't do any validation studies to demonstrate how much EDTA are you likely to lose given the manner in which this evidence was collected and preserved. So he is going to say that their method is inadequate to do that.
THE COURT: How are you going to lay a foundation for this?
MR. BLASIER: Dr. Rieders has been working with EDTA since 1950.
THE COURT: No. The fundamental foundation.
MR. BLASIER: Testifying to Agent Martz' reports? The Court advised us several times during the Prosecution's case that we can't control their order of proof. They decided to call all of their LAPD witnesses who did their testing after they called the people from Cellmark, after they called the people from DOJ. We objected to that. You properly told us not our decision, it is their decision, they can tie it up later. I'm assuming they are not going to argue that their own agent's test results are invalid. He didn't tell me that. He stands by his test results. That is all that Dr. Rieders is going to testify about. Dr. Lakshmanan never wrote a report. He testified not only before Dr. Golden, but in place of Dr. Golden. Collin Yamauchi was switched on their witness list until the end of the--until after Dr. Cotton and Gary Sims had testified.
THE COURT: You are not answering my question, Mr. Blasier. I sat through the whole trial so far. I know what has happened so far. You don't need to tell me. I just had a foundational question. How are you going to lay a foundation to have this guy testify to this stuff?
MR. BLASIER: I'm going to have him look at Agent Martz report and findings and have him testify about those. I can do it on a hypothetical basis and then I'm going to call Agent Martz to authenticate them.
THE COURT: Okay. All right. Just a question.
MR. BLASIER: Okay.
MS. CLARK: Your Honor, I think that we need to have assurance of counsel that Agent Martz will be called, because if not, we--
THE COURT: Well, then I'm sure you will call him.
MS. CLARK: Well, no. Then I will ask to strike all of Dr. Rieders' testimony, but the jury, having already heard about a bunch of confusing and unsupportable conclusions, may then be so confused I will be required to. That is a different story. I don't want to be put in that position and I think that counsel should be admonished that some very serious sanctions--
THE COURT: Miss Clark, I'm just raising the issue. I'm concerned about the foundation for this testimony. We'll see. That was an intellectual curiosity question.
MS. CLARK: All right.
THE COURT: All right. Now, Mr. Blasier does raise the point that we have been talking about Dr. Rieders and the issue of EDTA for a long time and we know what the issues are. I mean, it was apparent to me what the issues were.
MS. CLARK: Sure. You know in a general sense, yes. Did we know about EDTA? Yes, we did. Did we know for sure that Dr. Rieders was going to testify to that? No. That is why Mr. Harmon was attempting to find out why his name came up in that context in a circle of chemists I guess that were talking about it. And actually as far as I understood it, determined that he couldn't be called to testify because he doesn't do the testing. His lab is incapable. And so we thought he was basically there, as many of their witnesses are, as just fodder. Their witness list is fat and replete with witnesses that they will never call and never intend to call. I'm not actually accusing them of anything nefarious in that regard. I'm just saying that there are many like that and I assumed that Dr. Rieders was one of them because his lab doesn't do the testing. It is one thing to see, even if you assumed that we believed that he would be called, that there are issues here, but that doesn't mean that we understand what his conclusions will be and how the--
THE COURT: I haven't seen the report. Does the report say that yes, you can use this testing procedure to determine the presence of EDTA?
MS. CLARK: It doesn't say to the contrary. What Mr. Blasier has just represented to the Court is not contained in his report. That offer of proof is the first time I've heard that he intends to so testify. That is not in his report. In his report all he--all he states is basically that in his opinion the components that were identified in--in the--this gets very complicated, but this has to do with the detection of ions, a parent ion and then there are--there is a daughter spectrum of ions, and why there are no sons, I don't know, but anyway, it is daughter--daughter ions. In the testing of the evidence bloodstains, and in Agent Martz' own unpreserved blood, we find there is a parent and one daughter ion but not the full spectrum of daughter ions, meaning that it could be EDTA or any other compound about that same parent and daughter ion which there could be hundreds of, but that result cannot be confirmed to be EDTA unless you have the full daughter spectrum which does show up in the reference blood samples. That is the bottom line. Now, what Dr. Rieders does is say in my opinion you call it EDTA when you find one parent ion and one daughter ion even though you can't see the whole daughter spectrum. That is essentially what his report says. His report says nothing.
THE COURT: Sounds to me like you are ready.
MS. CLARK: I understand this, but I am not ready to cross-examine, your Honor, but believe me, I just read this report. We got--we got one court day to prepare on this? They have had months to prepare on all of ours. I mean, where is the fairness? It is ridiculous and a serious issue. This is a key focal issue in this case and the Defense drops it on us with one court day to prepare and then deliberately does this shell game with their order of witnesses to make sure we can't prepare. Yes, I have read about EDTA. Big deal. That doesn't mean I am ready to cross-examine a report that I have just received one court day. No one would require a lawyer to go forward on one court day on issues of such magnitude--well, maybe someone would, but on an issue of such complexity. It wouldn't be fair, it simply wouldn't, when the Court is aware that the Defense has had months to prepare for the smallest of our scientific witnesses, and I don't mean that in terms of length as much as in terms of simplicity or complexity of issues. This is very complex. But that is all his report says. It says nothing about the inadequacy of the testing procedures utilized by the FBI. It says nothing about the degradation of EDTA in samples are maintained or stored in certain ways. What Mr. Blasier just represented to the Court we have no notice of at all. I mean, this is worse than I imagined, far worse, because he intends to get up there and ambush us again and blind side us with all kinds of conclusions and opinions that are contained in no report for which we have no 402. What was the point of having a discovery statute under prop 115 if they come in and play this game again? And that is what they are doing.
THE COURT: Well, I think one of the products of this is likely to be a complete revision of 1054.
MS. CLARK: I would not be surprised. In fact, I intend to put my shoulder into the effort, if there is one, but I would indicate to the Court at very very least, if the testimony is not precluded, that the People be given ten days to prepare on this, and I don't think that is asking a whole lot when we know that the Defense has had months to prepare on the very smallest of scientific issues in the People's case. And all I really am just asking for the Court not to give the Defense the windfall benefit of their own tactics.
THE COURT: Mr. Blasier, what is Dr. Rieders' schedule?
MR. BLASIER: He is in town. I don't know.
THE COURT: His availability?
MR. BLASIER: I have not checked with him. He is available now.
THE COURT: Where is he from?
MR. BLASIER: Maryland or Philadelphia.
THE COURT: All right. Why don't you check with his schedule.
MR. BLASIER: Well, your Honor, may I respond?
THE COURT: All right.
MR. BLASIER: They know what these issues are. They know exactly what they are.
THE COURT: They do, but they just got the report. This is a key issue and it is a highly complex area and to drop a report a couple of days before you are going to cross-examine an expert, if the shoe were on the other foot, I would be peeling you off the ceiling right now.
MR. BLASIER: Lakshmanan was on for eight days. He didn't write anything down.
THE COURT: Counsel, counsel, that doesn't work. Find out his schedule. Let's have the jury.
(Brief pause.)
(The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. All right. Let the record reflect that we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good morning.
THE COURT: Mr. Willie Ford, would you resume the witness stand, please.
Willie Ford, the witness on the stand at the time of the evening adjournment, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
THE COURT: All right. Just sit back. Pull the microphone close to you, sir. All right. Good morning, Mr. Ford.
MR. FORD: Good morning.
THE COURT: Mr. Ford, you are reminded, sir, that you are still under oath. Mr. Cochran, you may continue with your direct examination.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you very kindly, your Honor.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. COCHRAN
MR. COCHRAN: Good morning, Mr. Ford.
MR. FORD: Good morning.
MR. COCHRAN: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good morning.
MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Ford, when we recessed yesterday we were talking about I believe having shown you the video of the upstairs bedroom of Mr. OJ Simpson that you never at any time while were up in that bedroom saw any socks at the foot of Mr. OJ Simpson's bed; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: And with regard to that, I would like to show you a photograph--put a photograph on the elmo, your Honor, People's exhibit no. 167. And I would like to approach the witness. I'm showing it to Mr. Darden. It is one of the experts.
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And I would like to show this to the witness. Mr. Ford, I want you to take a look at that photograph. And first of all, do you recognize that photograph as being Mr. Simpson's bedroom?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: And do you see those scraps or whatever they are on the bed there?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And do you see in that photograph what appears to be some socks at the foot of that bed?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And on the carpet; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And is it--strike that. Did you at any time ever see any socks at the foot of Mr. Simpson's bed when you were in that room at about 4:12 or 4:13 on June 13, 1994?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: So you never saw what is depicted in that photograph, right?
MR. FORD: Right.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you. Your Honor, I would like to--
THE COURT: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: --put it on the elmo and ask some other questions. Mr. Harris I think is getting the video also. (Brief pause.)
MR. COCHRAN: Now, Mr. Ford, sir, is that the photograph I just showed you?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: And the condition of the--that carpet with the socks thereon, it is your testimony that at no time while you were in that room did you ever see those socks on that carpet; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, can you pull the photograph back a little bit so we can show the--little more.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, with regard to those straps that are on the bed there, you did in fact see those in the video; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. So that we are clear, when you walked in that particular room, sir, you walked right across that carpet, did you not?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. COCHRAN: And because you took a shot that we--I'm going to have Mr. Harris pull up in a minute--you were at the foot of the bed shooting toward the headboard of that bed; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: And that was before, as I understand it, you went into the area that was described I think yesterday as a vanity or some kind of area where you--bureau or vanity; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. And then as I understand it, after you did the shot of the bedroom, you did this vanity area, you took some shots in the bathroom; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Simpson's closet, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And then that was--that ended your shooting of the interior of the house; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And then did you and Mr. Adkins leave shortly after that?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And do you have--have you referred to the log and determined what time you left the premises that day?
MR. FORD: Yes. Approximately 4:30.
MR. COCHRAN: You left at about 4:30 in the afternoon?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: You know that from checking the log; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. So as best we can tell you got there about 3:10, you did your work expeditiously and you left about 4:30; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And when you left, where did you go at that point, sir?
MR. FORD: Back to the Parker Center photo lab.
MR. COCHRAN: Went back downtown to your photo lab?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: With that particular video; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, when you got back, did you look at the video right away when you got back downtown on June 13th?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: When is the next time you looked at that video, the video that you shot on June 13th, 1994, sir?
MR. FORD: The first time I was called to testify a few months ago.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. That was--I'm not sure I have the date. I have a copy of the transcript. I'm not sure I have the date.
MR. DARDEN: March 31st.
MS. CLARK: March 31st.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you visit me at around March 31st; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: That was at a time that you testified at a hearing in this case?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: You saw the video prior to that particular hearing?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And so between June 13th and March 31st, 1995, you had not seen the video?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: In fact, you had never seen it; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: In other words, you did your job and took it back and who did you give it to when you got back to Parker Center?
MR. FORD: Detective Haro I think it was.
MR. COCHRAN: You gave to it Haro?
MR. FORD: I think so.
MR. COCHRAN: Haro was the detective who had given you these instructions about what to do inside the place there; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: In fact, Haro told you, did he not, to take pictures of even things on the wall, didn't he?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: You did that also, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: What he said essentially was to photograph everything inside of the house, including pictures on the wall?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, leading.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, what did Haro tell you?
MR. FORD: To videotape all of his effects that were out, including pictures on the wall.
MR. COCHRAN: And you tried to do that, didn't you, sir?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: That is what we see in the finished product of your particular work; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. Now, with regard to your testimony here today, you had occasion to meet with Mr. Christopher Darden on Monday of this week; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: That would have been on--today being July 20th--that would have been on a Monday, July 17th?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: And did you meet with Mr. Darden in this particular building?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And did you meet with him around one o'clock in the afternoon?
MR. FORD: I think so.
MR. COCHRAN: And who else was present, if anyone, during that meeting?
MR. FORD: Cheri Lewis.
MR. COCHRAN: This is the lady to my immediate right, Miss Cheri Lewis?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And the two of them were there?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Who else was present?
MR. FORD: I think there was another person by the name of David Wooden.
MR. COCHRAN: David Wooden, is that the young man who has been here--have you seen him in court these last couple days you have been here?
MR. FORD: Yes, I have.
MR. COCHRAN: He is someone that works on the Prosecution team?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. And who else was present?
MR. FORD: That is all I can recall right now.
MR. COCHRAN: So you met about one o'clock and how long did you meet? How long altogether did you meet starting at one o'clock on July 17th, 1995?
MR. FORD: It was just a few minutes. Most of that time was spent waiting in the office.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. You met--what time did you meet finally, if you recall?
MR. FORD: I think it was between the time court was out to lunch and the time that you had to come back in.
MR. COCHRAN: So you met over the lunch hour?
MR. FORD: Uh-huh.
MR. COCHRAN: You've got to answer out loud.
MR. FORD: Yes. I'm sorry, yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Met over the lunch hour?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Didn't you stay here until four o'clock that day?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Was Miss Lewis in court that day or did you stay and meet with her after Mr. Darden left?
MR. FORD: After that we didn't meet. I was just standing by to be called.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. So let me see. You came here at about one o'clock; is that right?
MR. FORD: Umm--
MR. COCHRAN: Tell me what time you came.
MR. FORD: I would say during the lunch hour. I think the meeting in the office was around about 1:00.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. And how long did that meeting last?
MR. FORD: About ten, fifteen minutes, I think. I would guess.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. And that was all you talked and that was when Mr. Darden was with Miss Lewis; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you meet with either Mr. Darden or Miss Lewis or any other member of the Prosecution team after that, after that meeting on Monday around the lunch hour?
MR. FORD: Just as they were coming back and forth from court while I'm standing by.
MR. COCHRAN: And what happened when they were coming back and forth from court? Did you talk about--
MR. FORD: Basically just say hi and we were sitting here watching television.
MR. COCHRAN: What were you watching on television?
MR. FORD: Basically the trial proceeding here.
MR. COCHRAN: You were watching the trial upstairs in the D.A.'s office?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: You know that witnesses are precluded from watching television in this case or watching this trial?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: That there is an order by his Honor Judge Ito for lay witnesses not to watch the trial? Are you aware of that?
MR. DARDEN: Objection to "Lay witness," your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: Are you aware of that?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: The District Attorney's office provided you with a television in the D.A.'s office for you to watch television on Monday?
MR. FORD: They didn't provide it especially for me, but it was there.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, I mean, there is a television in the room where you as a witness were being kept?
MR. FORD: This was not a room just for witnesses. It was just--
MR. COCHRAN: The room--I'm sorry. Go right on.
MR. FORD: Sitting in an office where there was a television.
MR. COCHRAN: There was an office with a television and was that television turned on?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And you sat there and you watched the television of these proceedings; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Anybody tell you that you were not supposed to watch television?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: Per the Judge's order?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Darden never told you that?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: Miss Lewis never told you that?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: So would I be correct in assuming that you watched television Monday afternoon from about the time you came at lunchtime until you left at about four o'clock?
MR. FORD: Basically that's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: And since no one from the Prosecution team told you that you weren't supposed to watch television you have watched the proceedings in this case at other occasions; isn't that correct?
MR. FORD: (No audible response.)
MR. COCHRAN: Isn't that right?
MR. FORD: In--in the Simpson case you mean?
MR. COCHRAN: Yeah, Simpson case, this case?
MR. FORD: Yes, I have.
MR. COCHRAN: In fact, over at the police department you work in SID, there are a lot of televisions on, aren't there?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: There aren't televisions on in the SID division?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: When have you watched television at other occasions? At home?
MR. FORD: We have a television set, but we don't watch the television of the trial as it is going on. There has only been times when we had our own people from SID that we would watch a little bit of that and that is it.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, if there has been testimony from others from SID that the television set is on when, let's say, Mr. Collin Yamauchi is on--
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor. That misstates the testimony.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: All right.
THE COURT: Let's move on. We have established this.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. I would like to, if the Court would allow me, to briefly approach.
THE COURT: No. Let's proceed.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. All right. Your Honor, just one other follow-up question?
THE COURT: Sure.
MR. COCHRAN: With regard to watching television in this case, you have watched it on occasions at work; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And you watch it on occasion at home also; is that correct?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: You haven't watched it at home; just only at work?
MR. FORD: Right.
MR. COCHRAN: Here in the D.A.'s office?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And when you were up in the D.A.'s office watching television on Monday, were--was there other witnesses in this office where you were?
MR. FORD: Umm, yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And what was the name of that witness or those witnesses?
MR. FORD: I don't know.
MR. COCHRAN: How many witnesses were in there with you?
MR. FORD: Umm, the one witness--when you say "Witness," these are people to be called?
MR. COCHRAN: Yes, sir, to be called?
MR. FORD: Dieter, a fellow photographer of mine.
MR. COCHRAN: Is that Rokahr?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Rokahr?
MR. FORD: Uh-huh.
MR. COCHRAN: Is was in there with you?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Was he watching also?
MR. FORD: Very briefly.
MR. COCHRAN: Same television you were watching?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: And sir, with regard to--you were here yesterday also; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Prior to being called yesterday in the afternoon were you in this same office upstairs?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Were you watching television again at that time?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Counsel, I think we have exhausted this area.
MR. COCHRAN: Very well, your Honor. I will move on.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. COCHRAN: All right.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, Mr. Ford, when you left the Rockingham address and it was about 4:30, you and Mr. Adkins left together; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you come in a particular vehicle and then you left together; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: Then you went back downtown?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And with regard to this video that you turned over to Detective Haro, did you give it to Haro on that same date, June 13th?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: When did you give it to Haro?
MR. FORD: The very next day.
MR. COCHRAN: That would be on June 14th?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Where did you see Detective Haro when you turned the tape over?
MR. FORD: Third floor Parker Center RHD.
MR. COCHRAN: And from the time you turned it over to him on the 14th, you never saw it again until March 31st; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: Then as I understand your testimony, on March 31st you then had occasion to review the tape prior to your coming to this courtroom to testify at a hearing; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: How many times did you watch the tape at that time?
MR. FORD: Once.
MR. COCHRAN: And after March 31st, when you viewed the tape, did you have occasion to view it again prior to your testimony here starting yesterday afternoon?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And when was that?
MR. FORD: Monday.
MR. COCHRAN: And that was during this time that you were up in Mr. Darden's office?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, when you were upstairs in the D.A.'s office were you in Mr. Darden's office?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: When you were watching television was that in Mr. Darden's office?
MR. FORD: I think so.
MR. COCHRAN: And so that is where the television set was; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. So you and Mr. Rokahr were in his office actually?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: Where were you?
MR. FORD: Mr. Rokahr--I only saw him in passing.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. Where was Mr. Rokahr watching television?
MR. FORD: He was in--I don't know whose office it was. It is one of the offices where the secretary is sitting.
MR. COCHRAN: But there was a television set there, hum--
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: --also? All right. So now when you then met with Mr. Darden and Miss Lewis, did you go through the entire video or just look at part of it or what?
MR. FORD: Just parts of it.
MR. COCHRAN: Okay. Tell us what parts of the video you looked at.
MR. FORD: Basically the same part that was just shown.
MR. COCHRAN: Just the parts involving the missing socks?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Objection to "Missing socks," your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: Let me rephrase it.
MR. COCHRAN: The part where you didn't see any socks?
MR. FORD: Exactly.
MR. COCHRAN: That was the only part you looked at?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Who played the tape for you at that time?
MR. FORD: Umm, I don't recall who was--I think it was Cheri Lewis operating the machine.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. And then.
MR. DARDEN: I didn't hear the last part of the answer.
MR. FORD: Operating the machine.
THE COURT: Operating the machine.
MR. COCHRAN: Miss Cheri Lewis was operating the machine? Is that what you said?
MR. FORD: I think so.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, as you watched this portion of the tape involving the socks that you didn't see there, was there some conversation with Mr. Darden at that point?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did Mr. Darden ask you whether or not you had ever seen the socks on that particular day?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Objection, hearsay.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, may I rephrase.
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Seek to rephrase it.
MR. COCHRAN: Was there ever any discussion with Mr. Darden where you were there of whether or not you saw any socks on the date of June 13th, 1994?
MR. DARDEN: Same objection.
MR. COCHRAN: You can answer that yes or no.
MR. DARDEN: Same objection.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: You can answer that.
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: That subject matter came up?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: And were you--in responding to any questions that were asked of you, were you honest and forthright in your responses?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Would I be correct in assuming that you have been honest and forthright in your responses here also?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: You have no ax to grind in this case, do you?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Now--may I have a second, your Honor, regarding the video?
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: Now, with regard to the testimony of others from the Special Investigations Division, LAPD, do you know Andrea Mazzola? Do you know who she is?
MR. FORD: (No audible response.)
MR. COCHRAN: Do you know who she is?
MR. FORD: Yes, I know who she is.
MR. COCHRAN: Do you know who Mr. Dennis Fung is?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: I think I asked you before briefly--this is foundational, your Honor--you had occasion--at least television sets were on when members of SID were testifying, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. With regard to the recovery of evidence in this case, are you aware of Andrea Mazzola's testimony?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor.
MR. COCHRAN: May I finish the question, your Honor?
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: May I finish the question, your Honor?
THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, do you know what Andrea Mazzola testified about as to the time that she and Dennis Fung picked these socks up?
MR. DARDEN: 352. It is his witness, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: Are you aware of the time that she testified under oath in this courtroom as to the time she picked these socks up on June 13th, 1994?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: You have not talked to her about it?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you see her testimony in that regard?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: I want to show you then a log in evidence here.
(Brief pause.)
MR. COCHRAN: May I have just a second, your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Mr. Cochran.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor.
(Brief pause.)
MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, there is an objection, 352 objection.
THE COURT: What exhibit is this?
MR. COCHRAN: This is exhibit 1051, your Honor. It is a log.
MR. DARDEN: I would object to counsel's further description of this item, your Honor.
MR. COCHRAN: This is an exhibit, your Honor. I can refer to what this is.
THE COURT: 1091?
MR. COCHRAN: 1091, your Honor, and I would like to approach the witness with this exhibit, if I may.
THE COURT: You may.
MR. COCHRAN: I want to approach.
MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, may we be heard? 352 as to this witness.
THE COURT: Side bar with the court reporter, please.
(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)
THE COURT: Let's see. 13.
MR. COCHRAN: Yes.
THE COURT: Navy blue.
MR. COCHRAN: The testimony is an offer of proof Mazzola testified, and Fung, that everything except for items 15 and 16 were picked up sequentially, sequentially in order. They wrote them down. The time was between 4:40--because they were picked up downstairs where the foyer is, 4:30, and then they went upstairs. They went upstairs together. And then item 14, your Honor, was picked up, the bloodstain, or something like that, in the bathroom, was picked up at 4:40. And it was between those times, I want to bring that out, and in fact I want to be able to show a video of Mazzola's testimony and also I can show you Fung's testimony. We have done this before. And I should be able to ask him whether or not--this is the issue of whether or not at this particular time, between 4:30 and 4:40--they have their testimony. They have already testified before the Court. This is nothing I'm making up. And this backs it up, because Peter Neufeld--I will show you the transcript. Peter Neufeld asked her sequentially--
THE COURT: No, I am with you. How are you going to ask this witness?
MR. COCHRAN: I'm going to ask him whether or not he was aware of this, that she also had testimony that between 4:30 and 4:40 these socks were picked up after he left. After he left, your Honor. I'm showing him the video if I have to.
THE COURT: I don't think that is a proper question.
MR. COCHRAN: Why is that not a proper question?
THE COURT: He has testified he hasn't talked to her, he hasn't discussed it with her and has no knowledge of what the testimony is.
MR. DARDEN: And this is not his log, okay, and so we are giving this witness someone else's log.
MR. COCHRAN: We have used these logs all the time. If he has seen this log--
THE COURT: But Johnnie, wait a minute. Ask this guy are you aware of this testimony and to play it is to say--all it is is argument. That what it is. It is not a proper question at this time.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, I respectfully disagree with that, your Honor. The Prosecution has done this all the time.
THE COURT: Like what?
MR. COCHRAN: Kelberg asked every witness, you know, what Dr. Lakshmanan said over here and so and so, but putting hypotheticals before the witness.
THE COURT: Those are expert witnesses. This guy is not testifying as an expert.
MR. COCHRAN: I think that this man says that they looked at TV, I think I should have a right, if he has ever seen the log--
THE COURT: You can ask him if he has seen it.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you. I want to ask you then, if he has seen the log, then I can ask him based upon this log he saw some other log at the time?
MR. DARDEN: I don't even think it is--I don't think Mr. Cochran is evenly acting in good faith to even show this witness a criminalist log. He is not a criminalist.
THE COURT: All right. I'm sustaining the initial objection that it is--what you are planning to do is argument at this point.
MR. COCHRAN: Right.
THE COURT: Because it is already in the record what Mazzola and Fung testified to. You can ask him if he has seen this log and knows.
MR. COCHRAN: Guidance from the Court. Can I ask this man if he is aware--can I ask him these questions? Are you aware that Andrea Mazzola testified under oath that these socks were picked up between 4:30 and 4:40 and information was kept on the log sequentially except items 15 and 16, you know?
THE COURT: You can ask him--you can ask him did you discuss this with Andrea Mazzola? Did you watch her testimony? Are you aware of her testimony? You can't lead into all the other things that she testified to without a foundation.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. And he can't add into that times and things like that.
MR. SHAPIRO: Can we have--may I confer for one second?
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: This possibility, your Honor. My learned colleague informs me that why can't we ask him to look at the testimony of Andrea Mazzola and ask him if she so testified would she be correct and would she be wrong? They have done this with other witnesses. If she testified and she picked these things up between 4:30 and 4:40 after he had left, after he had taken this video, would she be correct or would she be lying?
MR. DARDEN: No, we have not. In fact, there were some rare attempts, I think on both sides, to introduce testimony that way and each time the objections were sustained. I mean, come on, we all went to law school. We know this is improper, your Honor.
THE COURT: You can ask him if he is familiar with the log. You can ask him if he has discussed the testimony of Mazzola or if he is aware of her testimony, but without any other foundation I'm not going to let you go into any of this now.
(The following proceedings were held in open court:)
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, counsel. Proceed.
MR. COCHRAN: May I proceed? There is conversation going on, your Honor.
(Brief pause.)
MR. COCHRAN: Now, Mr. Ford, I want to approach you, and first of all, I want to show you a log and ask you if you have ever seen this log which is--
THE COURT: 1091.
MR. COCHRAN: --Defense 1091. Thank you, your Honor.
MR. COCHRAN: And place this before you and if you need some explanation regarding what that is, I will be glad to try and explain.
MR. FORD: No, I haven't seen this log.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. Did you ever at any time have occasion to watch any of the testimony of Andrea Mazzola when she testified here in court under oath regarding the times that she picked up certain items at Rockingham?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you ever at any time have occasion to talk with Andrea Mazzola regarding her testimony?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to her on the date of June 13th, 1994?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: You have not talked to her at all?
MR. FORD: Not at all.
MR. COCHRAN: With regard to Dennis Fung, have you had occasion to talk with Dennis Fung regarding times that he collected items at Rockingham on June 13th, 1994?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to Dennis Fung on June 13th, `94?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: And you talked to him while you were still out at the scene?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And with regard to the types of items that he picked up, allegedly picked up on that date, did you have occasion to talk to him about those items?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to Mr. Fung around the time you first got there or near the time that you were leaving?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: You can answer that yes or no.
MR. FORD: That is no.
MR. COCHRAN: You did not talk to him when you first got there?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to him near the time that you were leaving?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to him during the time that you were there?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: What part of the house were you in when you talked to him?
MR. FORD: Different parts of the house.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to him when you were downstairs then?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to him when you were upstairs?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: What time upstairs did you talk to him?
MR. FORD: I have no idea.
MR. COCHRAN: You have no idea what time it was?
MR. FORD: No. This was not a conversation.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, you talked to him but it was not a conversation?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you ask him any questions?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did he ask you any questions?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: The time when you talked to Mr. Fung or there was conversation with Mr. Fung, who else was present?
MR. FORD: I would say my boss and Detective Haro, they were in the vicinity.
MR. COCHRAN: In the vicinity?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: But you can give us no idea of the time?
MR. FORD: I couldn't tell you any exact time.
MR. COCHRAN: If you were to look at that video again can you tell us where you were in the house at the time you were talking to Mr. Fung?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, let me see if I can refresh your recollection.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. DARDEN: I'm going to object, your Honor, improper foundation to refresh his recollection.
THE COURT: Overruled.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. COCHRAN: I want you to take a look at this video and I'm going to ask you if you talked to Fung during any of these points, if I might. Did you talk to Detective Luper about items you had photographed?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: You didn't at all?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: Not that day or ever?
MR. FORD: Not ever.
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, we are referring to exhibit no. 1068, your Honor, Defense.
MR. COCHRAN: I think Mr. Harris has 1068 now.
(At 10:04 A.M., Defense exhibit 1068, a videotape, was played.)
MR. COCHRAN: I want to ask you some questions regarding this. Again, this is about 4:08 and you are going up the stairs; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, this conversation that--whatever you said to Mr. Fung or whatever he said to you, which would be hearsay, did it take place while you were on the stairs there going up?
MR. FORD: It might have.
MR. COCHRAN: You don't know now?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: All right.
(The videotape continues playing.)
MR. COCHRAN: There again you are shooting the photographs on the wall or the pictures on the wall; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Per the instructions. Did it take place in that room there?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: In the children's rooms?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: The answer was no?
MR. FORD: No.
(The videotape continues playing.)
MR. COCHRAN: Did it take place in that room there?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: That is about 4:09 P.M., right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
(The videotape continues playing.)
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to him in that room?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Who is that in the background of that photograph?
MR. FORD: Looks like Detective Haro and my boss, David Adkins.
MR. COCHRAN: Haro and Adkins?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Was Dennis Fung in any of these photographs?
MR. FORD: No.
(The videotape continues playing.)
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to him in that room?
MR. FORD: Not in that room. To my best recollection I would say it would be in that hallway just prior to this scene here.
MR. COCHRAN: Just prior to this scene?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: If we can back it up again and you tell us when.
MR. FORD: I was in the hallway.
MR. COCHRAN: I want you to look at the thing and try to show us where you were, sir.
MR. FORD: Where the pictures on the wall--about right there.
MR. COCHRAN: Right in this area?
MR. FORD: Uh-huh.
MR. COCHRAN: Let's stop it here. During this area right here, (Indicating)?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. Let's stop it. Stop it, Mr. Harris.
MR. COCHRAN: So it is your testimony that you believe that you had a conversation or there were some words spoken between you and Mr. Fung?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: At that location?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Do you have that written in any report anywhere?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you ever testify about that before?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: When is the first time you told anybody about that, this alleged conversation that took place in that hallway there at about 4:11 on June 13th?
MR. FORD: I haven't told anybody about it.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you talk to Mr. Darden about that on Monday when you were up here, or Tuesday?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: You never told anybody about that? We are hearing it for the first time; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. Who was present when you had this conversation or talk with Mr. Fung?
MR. FORD: I would say--
MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, can we remove the image?
MR. COCHRAN: I'm going to continue it on.
THE COURT: The record should reflect that Mr. Ford has testified at a point on the tape that is 3:11 P.M. proceed.
MR. COCHRAN: You can proceed.
MR. COCHRAN: Who else was present during this time at about 4:11 P.M. on June 13th?
MR. FORD: My boss, David Adkins, and Detective Haro was in the area.
MR. COCHRAN: Okay. When they are standing close by? However, were they aware--
MR. FORD: I have no idea. I'm looking through the view finder of the camera. All I know, they were upstairs with me.
MR. COCHRAN: You were actually focusing on what you were shooting; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: So you were not aware of where everybody was at that point; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Exactly.
MR. COCHRAN: When you continued on this particular photograph as you went into the bedroom--
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: --come to that in just a moment, Mr. Simpson's bedroom--
(The videotape continues playing.)
MR. FORD: I think there is another conversation at this point also.
MR. COCHRAN: You think there was some conversation or some words spoken?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: At about point here at about 4:12 here with Mr. Fung?
THE COURT: All right. This is what appears to be the first bathroom entering Mr. Simpson's bedroom suite.
MR. COCHRAN: Is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, may I have a moment?
(Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: Now, with regard to--this is Mr. Simpson's part of his bedroom suite; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you have any conversation with Mr. Fung during that time?
MR. FORD: No. Mr. Fung is gone at this time.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, at 4:13, whatever conversation you had, at the time that you were in that bedroom, it is your testimony that Dennis Fung was gone at that point?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you discuss with Mr. Fung or have you discussed with Mr. Fung as to the time he told this jury that he went upstairs on that date?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor.
MR. COCHRAN: I'm asking.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: Have you discussed that with him?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you ever see his testimony in that regard?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you ever review any log regarding the time he was upstairs?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, may we approach on one other matter?
THE COURT: All right. Without the reporter.
(A conference was held at the bench, not reported.)
(The following proceedings were held in open court:)
THE COURT: Madam reporter.
(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I asked Mr. Blasier to pull this up. I will read this for the record as an offer of proof. "Question by Mr. Goldberg: In this case I take it that the number in the photograph also corresponds to the number--to the item number that was eventually assigned; is that correct. "Answer: Yes. "Question: Approximately what time was item no. 12 collected?" Item no. 12, your Honor, is the blood spots in the foyer. "Answer: That was collected at approximately 4:30. "Question: All right. Now, after collecting item no. 12 did you go upstairs in the location? "Answer: Yes, I did. "Question: Do you recall what was the next item of evidence that you collected? "Answer: The next item was a pair of socks in the master bedroom." So your Honor, the testimony, so that it is clear--I didn't have Dennis Fung before. That Dennis Fung said he went upstairs after collecting the items downstairs. They collected the items downstairs in the foyer at 4:30 and so we know also from the log--
THE COURT: Uh-huh.
MR. COCHRAN: --that the spots or whatever in the bathroom were collected at 4:40. The socks were collected between 4:30 and 4:40. Take that along with the testimony of Mazzola things were logged sequentially at the time they happened, with the exception of the 15 and 16, the things that were outside, the tags or whatever--
THE COURT: Uh-huh.
MR. COCHRAN: --I have a good faith to ask him if Dennis Fung indicated he went upstairs and collected the socks after 4:30 would he be wrong or not telling the truth?
THE COURT: I will sustain the objection as being argumentative. That is argumentative, counsel. That is argument.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. While we are up here, on scheduling, I asked Bob to come up for two reasons because we don't want to have any delays in this case so can we shift gears. I'm almost finished. Can we shift gears now with regard to the witnesses? He has argued it so I will ask you to listen to him on scheduling so we can move forward on this case.
MR. BLASIER: Dr. Rieders has a medical--he has a heart problem. He was hospitalized recently. He has a medical appointment next Wednesday. He is leaving for Vienna the following Monday. He can come back this Monday. I will--I told Lisa Kahn, who I'm dealing with on this issue, that I would make him available to talk to her right now with Agent Martz. They will know what the issues are. They can prepare. They will have all the time until Monday to prepare and we will call him Monday and we will call Martz after.
MS. CLARK: That doesn't give us nearly enough time.
MR. BLASIER: Lisa Kahn told me last night that Miss Clark was very well aware of the issues, was really prepared on that.
MS. CLARK: That is the biggest bald face lie we have heard yet in this case. Miss Kahn cannot make that representation; it is not true.
THE COURT: Miss Clark.
MS. CLARK: I am not prepared for Dr. Rieders, your Honor.
THE COURT: I don't need the characterization as people lying and that sort of thing. I don't think that is appropriate. Let's see. Today is the 20th. If he has to leave on the--
MR. BLASIER: He has to leave on Tuesday to get back for his medical appointment on Wednesday.
THE COURT: And then he is leaving for where?
MR. BLASIER: Vienna the following Monday for a week, but we should be done by then.
MS. CLARK: I can't imagine how you guys are going to be done by then, given the number of witnesses.
MR. BLASIER: Well, that is what we want to do.
THE COURT: They may be short witnesses or no witnesses.
MS. CLARK: Yeah.
MS. CLARK: I would only ask that the Court require the testimony to come at the end of the case, whenever that is, and that would probably be when he will be back from Vienna.
MR. COCHRAN: Can I comment on that, your Honor? I don't think so. And the Court is aware--
THE COURT: Let's do this. Let's do this. Give me a copy of the report. I will look at it and see how complex it is and we will see--
MS. CLARK: The problem is--
MR. COCHRAN: Today?
THE COURT: Yes.
MS. CLARK: I should give the Court then also Agent Martz' reports because Dr. Rieders' report is short and it is obviously a lot less than he is prepared to testify to.
THE COURT: Give me both of these things and I will look at them over the noon hour.
MR. COCHRAN: The reason I'm bringing this up, we are trying not to run out of witnesses. Make sure Mulldorfer is here.
MR. DARDEN: These are your witnesses. You make sure they are here. I can't police them for you and make sure they don't watch TV I'm not accepting that responsibility.
MR. COCHRAN: Let me also bring up--
MR. DARDEN: So I'm going to please ask Mr.--
THE COURT: I'm sure that will come out on cross-examination.
MR. COCHRAN: That is the violation of your order up in their office.
THE COURT: This guy is on the line, whether or not he is one of the witnesses that is included here.
MR. COCHRAN: On the line, your Honor?
MS. CLARK: Let me remind counsel while we are here that Mr. Meraz admitted watching television. I'm going to ask for a jury admonition concerning his testimony and his credibility as a result of that, not to mention other witnesses that I know will be called.
THE COURT: Let's proceed. Let's proceed.
(The following proceedings were held in open court:)
MR. COCHRAN: May I have just a second, your Honor?
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: May I have just a second, your Honor?
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you very kindly, your Honor. I apologize to the Court.
MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Ford, with regard to this indication about seeing or talking to Dennis Fung at some point, that video camera you had had some kind of audio capacity, did it not?
MR. FORD: Yes, it did.
MR. COCHRAN: So--and the audio was on, was it not?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: You had it turned off?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And why did you have it turned off?
MR. FORD: I was told to turn it off.
MR. COCHRAN: Who told you to turn it off?
MR. FORD: I think it was Detective Harper.
MR. COCHRAN: Harper told you to turn it off?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: So then if Fung said to you and you said something to him, if the audio had been on we could pick that up, couldn't we?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: Before--you were told before you started shooting to turn that off?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Did you turn--did you keep it turned off during the entire time?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: And when you spoke with Mr. Darden and Ms. Lewis on Monday, did you talk to them about Dennis Fung appeared in that hallway at some point?
MR. DARDEN: Objection.
MR. COCHRAN: 4:12 or 4:13?
MR. DARDEN: This is hearsay, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: Did the subject matter of Dennis Fung being in the hallway of Mr. Simpson's house at about 4:12 or 4:13 come up in your conversation at any time with Mr. Darden or Miss Lewis, the subject matter?
MR. DARDEN: Same objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled. You can answer the question.
MR. FORD: I don't--
MR. COCHRAN: You never discussed it with them at all at any time?
MR. FORD: No, no.
MR. COCHRAN: Never prior to today; is that right?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. Do you have any other videotape of any of the proceedings that took place that day--
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: --with you today? You do not?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: Very well. I have nothing further at this point, your Honor. I would ask leave of the Court to approach at the appropriate time on another matter.
THE COURT: Mr. Darden.
MR. DARDEN: Thank you, your Honor.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN
MR. DARDEN: Good morning, sir.
MR. FORD: Good morning.
MR. DARDEN: You were called to testify in this case by Mr. Cochran; is that right?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: And the D.A.'s office assisted Mr. Cochran in getting you here to testify; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: You are a Defense witness, do you understand that, Mr. Ford?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Object. He is a witness by the Court, your Honor, not a Defense witness.
THE COURT: That is not true. Proceed.
MR. DARDEN: Do you understand, Mr. Ford, that it isn't my responsibility to tell you what to do or not to do?
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor.
THE COURT: Rephrase the question.
MR. DARDEN: Your only involvement in this case is the fact that you shot this video; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: You didn't go to Bundy, correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: You didn't see the bodies at Bundy?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: When you arrived at Rockingham you didn't collect any evidence, did you?
MR. FORD: That's right.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. You are not a criminalist, are you?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Dennis Fung isn't a personal friend of yours, is he?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Mazzola?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. DARDEN: All you did was go out to Rockingham and shoot this video?
MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of that question, your Honor, "All you did."
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: That is argumentative.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: Is that all you did, sir?
MR. FORD: That is all I did.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Now, you didn't go to Rockingham to videotape evidence, did you?
MR. FORD: This is correct.
MR. DARDEN: You didn't go to Rockingham to videotape the collection process, did you?
MR. FORD: That's right.
MR. DARDEN: You didn't go to Rockingham to videotape Fung, right?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Or Mazzola?
MR. FORD: That's right.
MR. DARDEN: Or the detectives?
MR. FORD: Right.
MR. DARDEN: You didn't go to Rockingham to record conversations, did you?
MR. FORD: That's right.
MR. DARDEN: Tell the jury, Mr. Ford, why did you go out to Rockingham that day?
MR. FORD: I was called by the request of the detectives at the Rockingham location to videotape all the personal effects of Mr. Simpson, just in case when they are getting ready to lock up--
MR. COCHRAN: Object to the--
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: --they are getting ready to lock up the location, just in case any of the items were reported missing, and the tape was never to be used as evidence; it was only a record to show what was there when LAPD finished their investigation, and to leave.
MR. DARDEN: When Mr. Cochran asked you if you were there to shoot anything and everything, that was true, correct?
MR. FORD: That was true.
MR. DARDEN: You were there to shoot valuables, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: You were there to document the way the house looked after LAPD completed a search; is that correct?
MR. COCHRAN: I object to the form of that question, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: Is that correct?
MR. COCHRAN: That assumes a fact not in evidence, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: And that is something you've told us?
THE COURT: Hold on.
MR. DARDEN: I'm sorry. I thought you said "Overruled."
THE COURT: I did. Proceed.
MR. DARDEN: And that is something you've told Mr. Cochran, isn't it?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: And Mr. Cochran asked you that when you were up here on the witness stand?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: You went there for administrative purposes only; is that correct?
MR. COCHRAN: Object. Conclusionary, your Honor. Calls for a conclusion.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. DARDEN: Well, you didn't go there to assist in any criminal investigation, did you?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Or in any criminal prosecution, right?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: You weren't there as an agent of the D.A.'s office were you, Mr. Ford?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Now, you told us a moment ago that you went there to videotape the property to show how it looked after LAPD completed a search?
MR. FORD: Exactly.
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object to the form of that question and move to strike.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: Is that what you did?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Did you videotape the property to show the way it looked after the search--
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor.
MR. DARDEN: --was completed?
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: After the search was completed, sir?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: In response to Mr. Cochran's questions, you told us about the instructions you were given; is that right?
MR. FORD: Repeat the question again.
MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of that question, your Honor, "Instructions given."
THE COURT: Overruled. That was the word used.
MR. DARDEN: In response to Mr. Cochran's questions you told us about the instructions you were given at the scene?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. You were instructed to only videotape a room after it had been searched; is that right?
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor. Calls for hearsay. Object to the form of the question.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: You were instructed to videotape a room only after it had been possessed by the criminalist, correct?
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor, to the form of that question.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: That was correct.
MR. DARDEN: And that is why we don't see socks in these photographers; isn't that correct, Mr. Ford?
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor. Object as hearsay.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: May we approach, your Honor?
THE COURT: No. Have a seat, counsel.
MR. FORD: That's correct, sir.
MR. DARDEN: You don't know what was in that room before you arrived that day, do you?
MR. COCHRAN: Calls for speculation, your Honor.
MR. FORD: That's right.
MR. DARDEN: You can't testify to what was inside or not inside that room prior to your entry into the room with that camera, right?
MR. COCHRAN: Speculation, your Honor. Calls for speculation.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: This is correct.
MR. DARDEN: Do you know someone named Mr. Wilson?
MR. FORD: Art Wilson. I mean Mike Wilson?
MR. DARDEN: Yes.
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: He is a photographer, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir, he is.
MR. DARDEN: He's a photographer just like you; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: He is a crime scene photographer?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: You saw Mr. Wilson at Rockingham that afternoon, didn't you?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: You saw him there with a camera, didn't you?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: You saw him there taking pictures?
MR. FORD: I didn't see him taking pictures but I saw him.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. You didn't see Mr. Wilson take any pictures at all that afternoon?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. DARDEN: So if Mr. Wilson took any pictures, then he took those pictures before you arrived?
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor, as speculation.
MR. DARDEN: Is that correct?
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. COCHRAN: Objection.
MR. DARDEN: Do you know why videotapes are made of locations in residences after they are searched?
THE COURT: I think we have already covered that.
MR. DARDEN: Okay.
MR. DARDEN: You told us this morning about your conversation with myself and Miss Lewis?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Did you also have a conversation with Mr. Cochran?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And did you have a conversation with Mr. Neufeld?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And you had a conversation with both of these men right here in the courtroom, didn't you?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: You were seated in the front row?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Mr. Neufeld was seated to your left?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Mr. Cochran was seated to your right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: They had you hemmed up in there in that front row; is that right?
MR. COCHRAN: Object to the question "Hemmed up," your Honor.
THE COURT: Rephrase.
MR. COCHRAN: Counsel knows that is improper.
THE COURT: The jury is to disregard that last question.
MR. DARDEN: In any event, you were seated between Mr. Cochran and Mr. Neufeld?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And you were watching the video we just saw here--
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: --in court? They were asking you questions, correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And you told Mr. Neufeld at that time, didn't you, that you only shot rooms after they were processed by the criminalist?
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor, that is hearsay.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: That is no secret, is it?
MR. FORD: No secret.
MR. DARDEN: Let's talk about the camera you used. That was an RCA video camera?
MR. FORD: Yes, it was.
MR. DARDEN: You don't own that camera, do you?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. DARDEN: In fact, that camera was requisitioned from property division at the LAPD; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: That was a camera that had been stolen or taken off a drug dealer or something?
MR. COCHRAN: Objection, leading and suggestive.
THE COURT: Cross. Rephrase.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. That wasn't a camera that had been purchased by the department, was it?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Okay.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
THE COURT: That says something about our budget, doesn't it?
MR. DARDEN: I'm sorry, were you going to break at 10:30?
THE COURT: I was hoping you were going to finish.
MR. DARDEN: Well, I'm going to finish about 11:00, I think, if I continue.
THE COURT: All right. We will take a recess. I want to see counsel at the side bar with the court reporter, please. All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our mid-morning recess. Please remember all my admonitions to you. And we will see you back here in about fifteen. Mr. Ford, you can step down, and we will see you pack here in about fifteen minutes. Let me see counsel at the side bar with the court reporter.
(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)
THE COURT: We are over at the side bar. Mr. Cochran, I want to apologize to you for appearing a little short with you. I think perhaps my tone was not appropriate in the last session. I am impatient today because this photographer testified to a very limited--we are spending a lot of time talking about this and I'm exasperated. My apologies for taking it out on you.
MR. COCHRAN: I accept the Court's apology.
THE COURT: Having said that, though, Mr. Darden, let's move this along. I think you've made the point that his instructions were to take it after the room had been cleared. That is the point.
MR. DARDEN: I just have to go into some timing issues.
THE COURT: I'm trying to get him to wind this up.
MR. COCHRAN: I accept your apology.
MR. DARDEN: Plus I needed a recess.
THE COURT: I did, too. That is the only reason we took it.
MR. DARDEN: Okay.
THE COURT: But let's--there is not a lot more.
MR. DARDEN: I got ten minutes with the guy.
MR. COCHRAN: I'm just trying to figure out now--I'm trying not to run out of witnesses. I'm not going to make a decision over the lunch hour on Rieders.
THE COURT: Johnnie, the bottom line, they are going to get, you know, time to prepare. That is what is going to happen. My concern is Rieders' schedule.
MR. COCHRAN: I'm trying to get some instructions to get some witnesses here.
MS. CLARK: We have one requested to bring in Detective Lange, Mulldorfer. You want Haro?
MS. CLARK: It is Harper that directed the video.
THE COURT: All right. We are going to go off record at this point. You guys argue about scheduling.
(Discussion held off the record.)
(Recess.)
(The following proceedings were held in open court, out of the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: Back on the record in the Simpson matter. Let's have the jury, please.
(Brief pause.)
(The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. The record should reflect that we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Ladies and gentlemen, when we concluded this morning just, before we took our break, it may have seemed to you that I was a little annoyed with the lawyers, and I want you to know that it is just an expression of my being in a bad mood today and the fact that I wanted to speed up the pace a little. And you should not consider that as my expression of any displeasure with the lawyers themselves and you should ignore any expressions of what appears to be judicial attitude on my part. All right. Mr. Cochran, Mr. Darden. All right. Mr. Ford is again on the witness stand. And Mr. Darden, you may conclude your cross-examination.
MR. DARDEN: Thank you, your Honor.
THE COURT: You are welcome.
MS. CLARK: Message received.
MR. DARDEN: Message received.
MR. DARDEN: When we left off you were telling us that--well, you didn't see any socks on the carpet, right?
MR. FORD: That's right.
MR. DARDEN: Now, in the videotape that you shot--well, strike that. Let me show you a copy of what has been marked as People's 167.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. DARDEN: That will be the photograph of the socks on the--
THE COURT: All right. This is People's 167.
MR. DARDEN: Socks on the carpet.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Now, if you will, Mr. Ford, can you help us--well, let's see if there is a way that we can sort of mark the spot in the photograph where these socks are located. Do you see the patterns on the rug there?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Can you see the arrow there?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: All right. It is not an arrow yet. Okay. Starting at the top of the rug, that would be the area closest to the fireplace, how many patterns down from the top of the rug are the socks located?
MR. FORD: Looks to me about the fifth pattern down, if you count the border.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. So the border is one.
MR. FORD: Uh-huh.
MR. DARDEN: Number two?
MR. FORD: Two.
MR. DARDEN: Three?
MR. FORD: Go one more. Three, four.
MR. DARDEN: Okay.
MR. FORD: Right there, (Indicating).
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Now, starting from the bottom of the photograph here, which would be to the left of the carpet as you face the fireplace, how many patterns to the right of that edge would you say the socks are located?
MR. FORD: Five.
MR. DARDEN: Starting with the border as one?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Okay.
MR. FORD: Three, four. Right there, (Indicating).
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Can we print this, your Honor, 167?
THE COURT: 167-A?
MR. DARDEN: Yes.
(Peo's 167-A for id = photograph)
MR. DARDEN: And now let's go back to the video you shot and let's go to the bedroom. While we wait for Mr. Fairtlough, you already told us that you don't own the camera that you used, right?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. And it does have a timer?
MR. FORD: Yes, it does.
MR. DARDEN: Were you paying any attention at all to the timer in the video camera?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Was time an issue for you that day?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. DARDEN: Did it matter to you at all whether the time in the view finder was correct or incorrect?
MR. FORD: No, it didn't.
MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of the question, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled. You can answer.
MR. FORD: No, it didn't. It didn't matter.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. So you have told us that the time is one hour off; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Let's take a look at the video for a moment.
THE COURT: All right. This is Defense exhibit 1068.
MR. DARDEN: 1068.
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Okay.
THE COURT: Starting at 3:13.
(At 11:00 A.M., Defense exhibit 1068, a videotape, was played.)
MR. DARDEN: So you are entering the bedroom, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
(The videotape continues playing.)
MR. DARDEN: Stop.
MR. DARDEN: Well, the tracking isn't real great on this system, but you have seen this video before; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Looking at the--at that shot, the shot of the rug and the edge of the bed, the one we just saw here--
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: --at 3:13, this shot does not include the portion of the rug that is closest to the bed and below the fifth pattern as you described it, correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. So if there was anything at all on that rug, you would not have picked it up in that video shot there, right.
MR. COCHRAN: I object to the form of that question.
THE COURT: Rephrase the question. Rephrase the question.
MR. DARDEN: You didn't pick up anything in this video shot below the second pattern; is that right?
MR. FORD: (No audible response.)
MR. DARDEN: I will ask Mr. Fairtlough to go back for you.
MR. FORD: It looks closer to the third pattern; that's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. The socks that we saw in 167-A, they were located around the fifth pattern; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. We will stop there.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. You were telling us about the time--the timing on the video camera and you said it is an hour off?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. But you don't know that for a fact, right?
MR. FORD: Not for a fact.
MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of the question, your Honor. Calls for speculation.
THE COURT: Rephrase the question.
MR. DARDEN: Well, when you were being asked questions by Mr. Cochran, you told us that someone told you the camera was an hour off, correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: So you were relying on that other person, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: In fact, you don't know if the camera is an hour off, right?
MR. COCHRAN: Calls for speculation, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: Correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: You don't know if the camera is an hour and five minutes off?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Because you never set the timer on this camera, did you?
MR. FORD: No, I didn't.
MR. DARDEN: Is it your job to set the timer on this camera?
MR. FORD: Only by request.
MR. DARDEN: Anybody make that request of you?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. DARDEN: Did anybody ask you to check the timer in the view finder to make sure it matched with the time on your watch?
MR. FORD: No, they didn't.
MR. DARDEN: Daylight savings time, that occurs around April, doesn't it?
MR. FORD: I believe so.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. We all adjust our watches, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Did anybody adjust that video camera in April around daylight savings time?
MR. FORD: I don't think so.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Do you know how to correct the time on that video camera?
MR. FORD: Yes, I do.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. But you didn't, did you?
MR. FORD: No, I didn't.
MR. DARDEN: That is because it wasn't important to you?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: And even though someone told you that the camera was off by an hour, have you ever attempted to determine whether or not the minutes depicted in the view finder were incorrect or correct?
MR. FORD: No. Just checking with the crime scene log, that is all.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. You have to rely on the crime scene log?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: You haven't even seen the crime scene log?
MR. FORD: Just a copy of it.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. You have seen a copy of it; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yeah, check-in list.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. So then that regard you are relying on what someone else wrote on the crime scene log?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Because you didn't write on the crime scene log?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: You didn't write the time on that log?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: An officer wrote the time on that log?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: When you arrived at the scene?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Actually it wasn't when you arrived at the scene; it was when you approached the gate at Rockingham, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. And if that officer's watch was off, then the time--
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor--that is speculation, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. DARDEN: In any event, the officer didn't ask you for the time before writing the time down on the crime scene log, did he?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: And so would it be fair to say that you cannot tell the jury how much or how far off the timing is on this video?
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object. It assumes a fact not in evidence.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: But you can tell the jury, however, that the timing is off?
MR. FORD: Yes, I can.
MR. DARDEN: Now, you did see Mr. Fung at some point upstairs; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: And you had a conversation with him?
MR. FORD: In passing, yes.
MR. DARDEN: There were words exchanged?
MR. FORD: Words exchanged.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Did you go into each and every room in that house?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: Did anyone ever tell you that you were prohibited from going into any room in the house?
MR. COCHRAN: Hearsay, your Honor. Calls for speculation.
THE COURT: Overruled. Goes to his instructions.
MR. FORD: That I was prohibited from going into any room?
MR. DARDEN: Yes.
MR. FORD: No, they didn't.
MR. DARDEN: Did anyone ever tell you that you could not watch any particular procedure being performed by any criminalist?
MR. FORD: No, they didn't.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. You told us that one of the detectives told you not to include any audio?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. DARDEN: Did you think that was unusual?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor. It is irrelevant and immaterial what he thought.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: No, it is not unusual.
MR. DARDEN: Why not?
MR. FORD: A lot of time they don't want any sound picked up in the background when we are videotaping.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. But you weren't there to videotape sound anyway; only things, correct.
MR. COCHRAN: Object. That is leading and suggestive, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: This is cross.
MR. COCHRAN: Suggestive.
MR. FORD: This is correct.
MR. DARDEN: Can I have one moment, your Honor? (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. DARDEN: Now, was there a point in time that you began to enter the master bedroom?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And at that time did you see Fung?
MR. FORD: No. I heard him.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Where was he?
MR. FORD: He was in the master bedroom.
MR. DARDEN: And did you enter the room at that time?
MR. FORD: No, I didn't.
MR. DARDEN: Did you ask him something at that time?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. DARDEN: Did he ask you something?
MR. FORD: Yes, he did.
MR. DARDEN: And did you respond verbally?
MR. COCHRAN: Hearsay, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: Did you respond verbally?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: You did what Mr. Fung asked you to do?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. COCHRAN: Assumes a fact not in evidence, that he asked him to do something.
THE COURT: Sustained. The answer is stricken. The jury is to disregard.
MR. DARDEN: Did Mr. Fung ask you to do something?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And you did that?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: Where did you go at that point?
MR. FORD: To the next bedroom.
MR. DARDEN: And that would be the bedrooms that Mr. Cochran as described as being the children's rooms?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And did you--and you videotaped those rooms?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: And did you see Mr. Fung again?
MR. FORD: He was passing back and forth going downstairs and coming back upstairs as I was videotaping, so I saw him in passing. It wasn't a stop and talk to one another.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Well, how about the point in time after you videotaped the first children's room, one of the children's rooms?
MR. FORD: When I--I think I was coming out of the first children's room doing the photographs on the wall in the hallway--
MR. COCHRAN: Object to any further statement, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled. He can finish the answer.
MR. FORD: And he saw a video light.
MR. COCHRAN: Object to this, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained. All right. Ask next question.
MR. DARDEN: Can I have a moment, your Honor?
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. DARDEN: Is there a light on the video camera?
MR. FORD: Yes, there is.
MR. DARDEN: And you were walking toward the master bedroom door; is that right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Did that light illuminate the doorway?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And was it at that time that Mr. Fung said something to you?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: That is when he asked you to do something?
MR. FORD: Yes. He says, "I'm not ready."
MR. COCHRAN: Just a moment, your Honor. Hearsay.
THE COURT: Hold on. Sustained.
MR. DARDEN: Okay.
MR. DARDEN: But he did ask you to do something?
MR. COCHRAN: Asked and answered.
MR. FORD: Yes, he did.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: What did you do after Mr. Fung asked you to do something?
MR. FORD: I went into the next bedroom.
MR. DARDEN: Did you do what Mr. Fung asked you to do?
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor. I object. Hearsay.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: What was the question again?
MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, can I--
THE COURT: Did you do what Mr. Fung asked you to do? Yes or no?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: There is an issue of subsequent conduct in response, your Honor.
THE COURT: Proceed.
MR. DARDEN: May I ask the question?
THE COURT: No. Proceed.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. DARDEN: Okay. After you did what Fung told you to do, which was--well, strike that. After you did what Fung told you to do, did you return to the bedroom?
MR. FORD: I returned to the hallway.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. By the way, was there anything unusual about--in your mind about what Mr. Fung asked you to do.
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor. Irrelevant and immaterial.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. FORD: No, there was nothing unusual.
MR. DARDEN: Nothing sinister about that?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. DARDEN: You returned to the bedroom?
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. DARDEN: You returned to the master bedroom after--
MR. FORD: I was going toward the master bedroom.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Did you have the video camera in your possession at that time?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: Did you see Mr. Fung at that time?
MR. FORD: I probably saw him pass by me before I turned the video camera back on.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Did you see him exit the master bedroom?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: By the way, did you see any brown paper bags in the house that afternoon?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: Did you see any in the master bedroom?
MR. FORD: I don't recall. I probably did, but I don't recall.
MR. DARDEN: Did you see Mr. Fung carrying any brown paper bags that afternoon?
MR. FORD: I did.
MR. DARDEN: Do you recall where he was?
MR. FORD: Not exactly. He was in the house.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. And so was it after you saw Mr. Fung exit the master bedroom that you went into the room to videotape?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Now, at that point in time did Mr. Fung do anything to stop you from going into the room to videotape?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. At this point in time--
MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of that question, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: Well, you told us that you saw Mr. Fung exit the room and go somewhere, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Then you went into the room and videotaped, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. At this particular point in time, did he do anything to stop you from going into the room?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Did you and he speak to each other as you entered the room to videotape at that point in time?
MR. FORD: Just in passing, yes.
MR. DARDEN: Did you see anyone in the house that day plant any evidence?
MR. FORD: Say that again.
MR. DARDEN: Did you see anybody plant any evidence?
MR. FORD: No, I didn't.
MR. DARDEN: Now, you are not a sworn police officer, are you?
MR. FORD: I'm not.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. And you live in this community, don't you?
MR. FORD: Yes, I do.
MR. DARDEN: You are under oath. You understand that?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: If you saw a police officer violating the law, planting evidence, doing anything wrong, anything wrong at all while inside that house, would you tell us?
MR. FORD: Yes, I would.
MR. DARDEN: You would tell Mr. Cochran, wouldn't you?
MR. FORD: Yes, I would.
MR. DARDEN: You would tell Judge Ito?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: The jury?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Did you see any police officer do anything wrong inside that house that day?
MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of the question.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: Conclusionary.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. DARDEN: Did you?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Did you see Mr. Fung do anything that you thought was inappropriate that day?
MR. FORD: No, I didn't.
MR. DARDEN: Now, you told us that you testified back on March 31st, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. And Mr. Cochran was here when you testified?
MR. FORD: Yes, he was.
MR. DARDEN: And Mr. Cochran asked you questions during that hearing?
MR. FORD: Yes, he did.
MR. DARDEN: When was the next time you spoke to Mr. Cochran, that is after March 31st, 1995?
MR. FORD: Umm, I think it was Tuesday.
MR. DARDEN: Tuesday of this week?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: When Mr. Cochran spoke to you he asked you questions, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Did you respond to all those questions?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. DARDEN: Were you honest with him?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Being honest with this jury?
MR. FORD: Yes, I am.
MR. DARDEN: Are you telling the truth?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: Did you ever see Dennis Fung gather or collect any evidence that day?
MR. FORD: Not gathering, no.
MR. DARDEN: Okay. And you weren't there to watch him do that, were you?
MR. FORD: No, I wasn't.
MR. DARDEN: Okay.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. DARDEN: When you were in my office the other day watching TV--in my office, right?
MR. FORD: I think that is your office. Patty--
MR. DARDEN: Okay. Are you talking about--you were with Patty Jo Fairbanks?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Patty Jo Fairbanks and you were watching TV, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Had you had any word or any order or any directive from Mr. Cochran at all that you should not watch TV?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. DARDEN: Now, you were in my office at some point, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, I was.
MR. DARDEN: And you watched some television, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: And when you watched television in my office you watched a portion of this video we just saw, right?
MR. FORD: Exactly.
MR. DARDEN: We didn't watch cartoons and other stuff?
MR. FORD: That's right.
MR. DARDEN: We didn't watch the trial, did we?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. DARDEN: During the time that you were watching the trial I take it you were watching me down here in court?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. DARDEN: I wasn't up there with you?
MR. FORD: Right.
MR. DARDEN: I couldn't stop you from watching TV at the time, could I?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Object, your Honor, axiomatic.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. DARDEN: Thank you. I'm sorry, did we mark this 167-A already.
THE COURT: Yes, 167-A.
MR. DARDEN: Thank you.
THE COURT: Mr. Cochran.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you very kindly, your Honor.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN
MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Ford, again sir, we won't keep you much longer and you will be able to go back to your duties. You were asked a series of questions by Mr. Darden and he showed you that video again and I want to ask you now to look right at this jury and tell them when you walked into that bedroom, OJ's bedroom at about 4:12 or 4:13 in the afternoon, did you see any socks on that carpet at the foot of the bed?
MR. FORD: No, I didn't.
MR. COCHRAN: You walked right over that carpet; isn't that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: And sir, we can put all the dots we want or arrows on that carpet and we can move five spots in or whatever, but you were there and you saw that carpet, didn't you?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. COCHRAN: And you didn't see any socks on there, did you?
MR. DARDEN: Objection. This is leading, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: You didn't see any socks, did you?
MR. FORD: No, I didn't.
MR. COCHRAN: You are telling us the truth; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: You know with regard to your role there, your role was important and that is why you are paid by the city of Los Angeles; isn't that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: What you went out there to do was for civil liability purposes; is that correct? You took some photographers of the exterior and interior of Mr. OJ Simpson's residence, right?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor. Objection to the photographs.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: Let me strike "Photographs." And you took a video of the exterior and interior of Mr. Simpson's residence; isn't that right, sir?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: How long have you been employed by the city of Los Angeles?
MR. FORD: 13 years.
MR. COCHRAN: And you planned to do this the rest of your working life, don't you?
MR. FORD: (No audible response.)
MR. COCHRAN: This job with the city of Los Angeles?
MR. FORD: Perhaps.
MR. COCHRAN: I mean, you like this job, don't you?
MR. FORD: It is a pretty exciting job, yes.
MR. COCHRAN: You don't want to lose this job, do you?
MR. FORD: No, I don't.
MR. COCHRAN: You did your job well on that day; isn't that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: And you are just here to tell us what you recall from that date; isn't that right, sir?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. Now let's go back for a moment. So we are clear that you never saw any socks on that carpet, you have described for us that you left the location by 1630 or 4:30 in the afternoon; is that correct.
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor.
MR. FORD: That's correct.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: And you have seen--I would like to approach, your Honor, and show him People's 158, the log--this--you have had occasion to see this log indicating the time that you left the location on that date, have you not?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Okay. Take a look and start with the 1630 and see "Ford" there.
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: That is the log you refer to and 1630 is 4:30 in the afternoon; isn't that right?
MR. FORD: Yes, it is.
MR. COCHRAN: And let's see if we can find when you arrived there. You got there--let's see if we can move up and find Ford again. You came with your boss?
MR. FORD: Right there, (Indicating).
MR. COCHRAN: And you are pointing to a place where it says 1510?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: It says you arrived at 1510 and left at 1630; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, that was logged and put down by some police officer; is that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: You don't think that police officer would make those times up, do you?
MR. FORD: No.
MR. COCHRAN: Just create those times out of whole cloth? You wrote down the time?
THE COURT: Sounds like argument to me.
MR. COCHRAN: Do you think so, your Honor? Let me see if I can phrase it another way.
MR. DARDEN: Can he come back over here and phrase it, your Honor?
MR. COCHRAN: I will just stay here.
MR. COCHRAN: With regard to these times on here, you have no reason to believe the officers weren't accurate at the time they wrote those times down; isn't that correct?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, leading, speculation.
THE COURT: Overruled, overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: You can answer that, yes.
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: They were accurate as far as you know, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Because in fact, Mr. Ford, you know that you got there about 10:10 because in looking through the view finder of this RCA camcorder, you know that you started shooting sometime shortly after 3:10, isn't--
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. What time did you start shooting with this RCA camcorder on that particular date, sir?
MR. FORD: Shortly after I checked in.
MR. COCHRAN: Shortly after 3:10, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: So specifically you weren't there--isn't it correct that there was a police officer assigned there at the gate to log people in at this crime scene? Isn't that right?
MR. FORD: This is correct.
THE COURT: All right. Counsel, forgive me, but it is a very simple issue that now we have asked Mr. Ford, by my count, ten times, were there any socks? And he has said ten times no and we established what time he got there, according to the log. He talked about the camcorder.
MR. COCHRAN: All right.
THE COURT: And Mr. Ford has told us that this is all the truth.
MR. COCHRAN: All right.
THE COURT: So since we've all heard it three or four times now, perhaps we could wind this up.
MR. COCHRAN: All right, your Honor. Certainly. I will try to do that. Let me ask a few more questions, if the Court pleases.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, Mr. Ford, with regard to your role there, though, you never saw any evidence collected that date; isn't that correct?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: That was not your job, right?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: You went to do your job and primarily your job was focusing on this view finder, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: By the way, with the RCA camcorder, with the Court's permission, when you looked through the view finder, you could see the time and date in there, couldn't you?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Is there a way, if you wanted, you could disconnect that?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Press a little button?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: You never did that?
MR. FORD: No, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Before the detective told you to cut off the sound, did you have the sound on?
MR. FORD: I think it was. It was connected.
MR. COCHRAN: And you had nothing to hide that day, did you?
MR. FORD: No, I didn't.
MR. COCHRAN: If you hadn't been told anything, you would have left the sound on, wouldn't you?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: And the sound would have picked up anybody coming and going or any voices, right?
MR. FORD: Right.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, you were asked some questions about talking with myself and Mr. Neufeld on Monday of this week. Do you recall that?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: We just asked you what had happened; isn't that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: And you responded and told us; is that right, sir?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, in the video you did video these blood drops in the foyer, did you not?
MR. FORD: Yes, I did.
MR. COCHRAN: You took pictures of that?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor. This is beyond the scope.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, may I be heard on that with regard to that?
THE COURT: It is beyond to scope.
MR. COCHRAN: May I ask one other question with regard to the question and it will become clear to the Court?
THE COURT: One other question.
MR. COCHRAN: Right.
THE COURT: One other question.
MR. COCHRAN: Well, you had indicated that you did not--you told us already you didn't really see any evidence collected, right? You told us that?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: You told us that you weren't focusing on any items that might be collected there that particular day, right?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: But you did in fact focus on and photograph some blood drops in the foyer area; isn't that correct?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. COCHRAN: Isn't that correct?
MR. FORD: That's correct.
MR. COCHRAN: And also downstairs you did not focus in the video on a glove that had been placed by some detective on a table downstairs?
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. COCHRAN: Well--
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. DARDEN: Motion to strike.
THE COURT: Assumes facts not in evidence.
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, may I show the video--may the Court indulge me a moment?
MR. DARDEN: Show a very limited portion.
THE COURT: Those two portions.
MR. COCHRAN: Sure. Thank you, your Honor.
MR. COCHRAN: Now, with regard to--
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
(At 11:40 A.M., Defense exhibit 1068, a videotape, was played.)
MR. COCHRAN: I will show two areas.
MR. COCHRAN: By the way--back that up. Back it up a little further. Back it up. Now stop.
THE COURT: All right. Starting at 2:32 on the tape which is 1068 appears to be the foyer, entry foyer.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. That is where you photographed the blood spots; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: I want to show you a person--move on a little forward at this point, Mr. Harris. Can you move on forward. There is a lady--stop right there. Do you know who that lady is?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Who is that lady?
MR. FORD: Marsalis.
MR. COCHRAN: Would that be Mazzola?
MR. FORD: Mazzola.
MR. COCHRAN: Or as Mr. Neufeld says, Mazzoler?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: But that is Miss Mazzola?
MR. FORD: Yes, it is.
MR. COCHRAN: Okay. Sir. All right. That was about 3:33, about an hour before you left there, right, at this point?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
(The videotape continues playing.)
MR. COCHRAN: He is going to point with the pointer, your Honor.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: While we are waiting with that, your Honor, let me ask another question to save some time. With regard to--Mr. Darden asked you some questions about this camera. We have already gone into the log and the Court didn't want us to do--and we know when you started shooting. And with regard to that, who was it who told you that the camera was an hour off and related back to daylight savings time?
MR. FORD: I don't know the person's name. It was a detective working on the case from RHD.
MR. COCHRAN: Detective working from where?
MR. FORD: RHD.
MR. COCHRAN: It was a police officer who told you that?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Told you it was one hour off, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: You believed that?
MR. FORD: Right.
MR. COCHRAN: That was consistent with everything else you saw there, right?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: Do you remember that detective's name at all?
MR. FORD: It might have been Haro. I don't know. I had gotten it secondhand through my boss.
MR. COCHRAN: You don't know who it was exactly?
MR. FORD: Not exactly. Just somebody from RHD.
MR. COCHRAN: Haro is the person you turned the tape back over to, right?
MR. FORD: I think so.
(Brief pause.)
MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I will ask a few more questions. He is still trying get to the glove part. I apologize for the delay.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. COCHRAN: May we approach on one question while we are doing that?
THE COURT: Sure.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you.
THE COURT: Without the reporter.
(A conference was held at the bench, not reported.)
(The following proceedings were held in open court:)
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Harris, do we have the part of the tape located?
MR. HARRIS: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Cochran.
MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor. Let me show you another portion of the tape. (The videotape continues playing.)
MR. COCHRAN: This is when you were downstairs in one of those rooms; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Excuse me. The tape is at 2:50 P.M.
MR. COCHRAN: All right. Thank you, your Honor.
MR. COCHRAN: That would be 3:50; is that right?
THE COURT: Well, no. The tape--let's say what the tape reflects.
MR. COCHRAN: I am asking him, your Honor. That was the next question.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Stop right there.
MR. COCHRAN: Can you see--can you zoom in on it? On that particular table there somebody has placed a glove on that table. Do you see that?
MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. COCHRAN: When you shot this particular shot at about, according to the tape, 2:50 on 6/13/94, you saw a glove there at that point; is that correct?
MR. FORD: Yes.
MR. COCHRAN: That glove hadn't been picked up or seized or anything, had it? It was just like that?
MR. FORD: Exactly.
MR. COCHRAN: Just shot it, right?
MR. FORD: Yes, sir.
MR. COCHRAN: Do you know whether or not that glove was seized and taken into police custody after that?
MR. FORD: No, I don't.
MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, objection.
MR. COCHRAN: I'm asking.