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

APPEARANCES: (APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED.)

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

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

(PAGES 18308 THROUGH 18332, VOLUME 104A, TRANSCRIBED AND SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.)

(PAGES 18333 THROUGH 18340, VOLUME 105A, TRANSCRIBED AND SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.)

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

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. THE DEFENDANT IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK, MR. DARDEN, MISS LEWIS AND MR. GOLDBERG. THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT. COUNSEL, ANYTHING WE NEED TO PUT ON THE RECORD BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURORS TO REJOIN US?

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

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

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

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED. ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESUME THE WITNESS STAND.

MARK FUHRMAN, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.

THE COURT: WELCOME BACK. HOPE YOU ALL HAD A PLEASANT WEEKEND. ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN IS AGAIN ON THE WITNESS STAND. GOOD MORNING, DETECTIVE.

THE WITNESS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. AND MISS CLARK, YOU MAY RESUME WITH YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED)

BY MS. CLARK:

Q: LET'S SEE. I THINK WHERE WE LEFT OFF ON FRIDAY, SIR, YOU WERE SHOWING THE JURY THE SHOVEL AND THE PLASTIC AND THE WOOD, THE PIECE OF WOOD THAT YOU SAW NEAR THE BRONCO. DO YOU RECALL THAT?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: NOW, FIRST OF ALL, THE PLASTIC, YOU INDICATED -- WHERE DID YOU RECOVER THAT FROM?

A: THE --

Q: WHAT PART OF THE BRONCO? YOU DIDN'T RECOVER IT. WHERE DID YOU SEE IT?

A: I SAW IT IN THE RIGHT SIDE OR THE PASSENGER SIDE OF THE REAR CARGO AREA, ALONG THE SIDE OF THE VEHICLE CARGO AREA.

Q: AND THAT WAS -- WAS IT INSIDE SOMETHING?

A: IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS IN SOME SORT OF A POCKET.

Q: OKAY. YOU DID NOT RECOVER THAT ITEM?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: AND DID YOU RECOVER THE SHOVEL?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU RECOVER THE WOOD?

A: NO.

Q: THAT WAS LEFT FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO RECOVER?

A: YES, MA'AM.

Q: OKAY. NOW, THAT PLASTIC, DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW WHETHER IT BELONGS IN A BRONCO OR ANYTHING ABOUT IT?

A: WELL, NOW I DO.

Q: AND WHAT IS THAT?

A: IT IS THE SPARE TIRE BAG.

Q: OKAY.

A: IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN A TIRE IS OFF THE VEHICLE AND IT IS DIRTY, YOU PLACE IT IN THE BAG SO YOU CAN PLACE IT IN THE CARGO AREA.

Q: AND THAT IS STANDARD EQUIPMENT FOR A FORD BRONCO, IS IT?

A: I WAS TOLD IT WAS, YES.

Q: WHAT ABOUT THAT SHOVEL? STANDARD EQUIPMENT ALSO?

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

Q: NOW, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH MR. KAELIN IN WHICH HE INFORMED YOU ABOUT THE THUMPS ON THE WALL. DO YOU RECALL THAT?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT TIME DID HE SAY HE HEARD THOSE THUMPS?

A: 10:45 P.M.

Q: OKAY. YOU -- I THINK YOU HAD TESTIFIED EARLIER THAT YOU BROUGHT HIM INTO THE HOUSE WITH YOU AND PUT HIM IN THE BAR AREA?

A: YES, MA'AM.

Q: AND THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: THEN I WALKED TOWARDS THE FRONT DOOR AREA WHICH PASSES THE KITCHEN.

Q: AND THEN WHAT?

A: I SAW DETECTIVE VANNATTER IN THE KITCHEN. I TOLD DETECTIVE VANNATTER. I SAID SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT, "PHIL, TALK TO THIS GUY AT THE BAR."

Q: OKAY. DID YOU TELL HIM WHAT TO TALK ABOUT?

A: NO.

Q: AND THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I WALKED OUT THE FRONT DOOR OF THE RESIDENCE.

Q: OKAY. AND AT THAT MOMENT THAT YOU WALKED OUT THE FRONT DOOR, SIR, DID YOU KNOW WHERE MR. SIMPSON WAS?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHERE HE HAD GONE THE NIGHT BEFORE?

A: NO.

Q: OR IF HE HAD GONE ANYWHERE?

A: I HAD NO IDEA, MA'AM.

Q: OR WHEN HE WAS DUE TO RETURN?

A: NO.

Q: WHEN YOU LEFT -- WHEN YOU EXITED THE FRONT DOOR, WHERE DID YOU GO?

A: I WALKED OUT INTO THE DRIVEWAY AND I LOOKED TO MY LEFT TO SEE WHERE THE PROPERTY ENDED.

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

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. SIR, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STEP DOWN AND SHOW US THE ROUTE YOU TOOK WHEN YOU EXITED THE FRONT DOOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE DIAGRAM?

MS. CLARK: PEOPLE'S 66, I'M SORRY.

THE COURT: PEOPLE'S --

MS. CLARK: 66.

THE COURT: -- 66. THANK YOU.

THE WITNESS: I EXITED THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WHERE ON THIS CHART IT SAYS "ENTRANCE." I EXITED GOING WEST. I WALKED ONTO THE DRIVEWAY AND THEN LOOKED SOUTH.

Q: NOW, WHY DID YOU LOOK SOUTH?

A: WELL, FROM WHERE I HAD COME FROM IN KAELIN'S ROOM, THE WALL THAT HE HEARD THE CRASH OR THE THUMP WAS ON THE SOUTH WALL.

Q: UH-HUH. AND THEN WHERE DID YOU GO?

A: I WALKED DOWN TO THE DRIVEWAY AND I STARTED WALKING DOWN TOWARDS THE GARAGE. THE GARAGE COMES SOMEWHAT OUT FROM THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE. I WALKED AROUND THE GARAGE AND WENT DOWN TO THE SOUTHERN MOST PART OF THE PROPERTY AND THEN I LOOKED TO MY LEFT, WHICH WOULD BE EAST.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU LOOKED TO YOUR LEFT EASTWARD BECAUSE WHY?

A: THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE DIRECTION GOING BACK TOWARDS KAELIN'S ROOM.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: I SAW A PATHWAY. IT LOOKED VERY NARROW AND DARK AND THERE WAS A CYCLONE FENCE THAT RAN ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE WITH LOOKED LIKE PLANTS FROM THE RESIDENCE TO THE SOUTH THAT HAD OVERGROWN TOWARDS THE SIMPSON RESIDENCE.

Q: AND WERE THERE ANY GATES THERE?

A: I BELIEVE THERE WAS A GATE THAT WAS BROKEN AT SOME POINT IN HERE, (INDICATING). I BELIEVE IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN HERE, (INDICATING). I BELIEVE IT WAS LAID UP AGAINST SOME -- I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT DEBRIS WAS THERE. WHAT WAS THERE, BUT IT WAS THERE, YES.

Q: SO IT WAS NOT CLOSED, THE GATE?

A: NO.

Q: AND SO WHAT DID YOU DO? WHERE DID YOU GO?

A: WELL, I TOOK OUT MY FLASHLIGHT AND I STARTED WALKING DOWN THE PATH TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE RESIDENCE ARCHITECTURE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE KAELIN'S WALL MIGHT HAVE BEEN.

Q: NOW, WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE FROM THAT FIRST GATE AREA IN TERMS OF FARTHER DOWN THE WALKWAY? WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE?

A: WELL, I COULD SEE THERE WAS A LONG WALKWAY, BUT THIS WAS A LITTLE ELEVATED, SO I WAS LOOKING SOMEWHAT DOWNWARD. I SAW A LONG PATH, A LONG DARK PATH COVERED WITH LEAVES.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU EXPECT TO FIND?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW. I THOUGHT POSSIBILITY SOMEBODY HAD COLLAPSED BACK THERE.

Q: AND WHY -- WHY DID YOU THINK THAT?

A: BY KAELIN'S STATEMENT, IT WAS RATHER ODD THE THUMP ON THE WALL, NOTHING THAT FOLLOWED UP, PLUS WHAT I OBSERVED ON THE BRONCO THAT WAS PARKED ON ROCKINGHAM AND THE INABILITY TO RAISE ANYBODY IN THE RESIDENCE. THAT WAS OUR CONCERNS AT THAT POINT.

Q: OKAY. SO WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE FROM THE VANTAGE POINT OF THAT FIRST GATE AREA GOING DOWN? ANYTHING?

A: NOTHING REALLY.

Q: WAS IT -- CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE LIGHTING IN THAT AREA?

A: WELL, THE LIGHTING OUTSIDE -- IT WAS GETTING LIGHT OUTSIDE BUT IT WAS -- IT WAS EVEN WORSE LIGHTING BACK HERE, (INDICATING), VERY SHADED. THESE TREES OR SHRUBS CAUSE IT TO BE DARK -- DARK AND THEN THESE -- ALL THESE BUILDINGS WERE MUCH HIGHER THAN -- ABOUT THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE TREES AT SOME POINT, SOMETIMES HIGHER.

Q: OKAY. SO DID YOU NEED THE AID OF YOUR FLASHLIGHT IN ORDER TO SEE WHERE YOU WERE GOING?

A: NOT SO MUCH TO SEE WHERE I WAS WALKING, BUT MOSTLY JUST TO LOOK FOR ANYTHING THAT I MIGHT HAVE WALKED ON.

Q: UH-HUH.

A: IT WASN'T THAT POWERFUL, SO --

Q: THAT WAS THAT LITTLE FLASHLIGHT?

A: TWO DOUBLE A BATTERIES AND A SMALL MAG LIGHT.

Q: AND THEN YOU -- WHERE DID YOU GO AFTER YOU REACHED THAT FIRST GATE AREA?

A: I GOT TO THIS AREA AND I WAS KIND OF CONFUSED BY THIS INDENTATION AND I LOOKED IN THIS AREA, (INDICATING), BUT I COULDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT WOULD -- THAT WOULD REALLY INDICATE THAT THIS IS WHERE THE NOISE WAS FROM. I WALKED BACK OUT HERE, (INDICATING), IN THIS AREA. I BELIEVE THERE WAS ANOTHER GATE IN HERE SOMEWHERE, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS OPENED OR CLOSED.

MS. CLARK: FOR THE RECORD WHEN THE WITNESS SAID, "THIS AREA" HE WAS REFERRING TO THE -- BEHIND THE GARAGE AREA, THE ENTIRE AREA ON PEOPLE'S 66 THAT IS INDENTED THAT WOULD BE JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THE GARAGE AREA.

Q: AND THEN YOU RECALL A SECOND GATE?

A: I BELIEVE SO. IT WAS -- IT WAS ALSO OPENED.

Q: OKAY. NOT LOCKED?

A: NOT LOCKED, NO.

Q: AND DID YOU -- WERE YOU -- WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE WHEN YOU GOT TO THE SECOND GATE AREA IN TERMS OF FARTHER DOWN THE WALKWAY?

A: THEN I WAS -- AS I WAS FURTHER DOWN THE WALKWAY -- I HADN'T BEEN ABLE TO SEE ANYTHING FARTHER DOWN THE WALKWAY. I WAS LOOKING AT THIS ARCHITECTURE IN HERE, (INDICATING), WHERE IT IS BEGINNING TO COME BACK OUT ADJACENT TO THE PATH.

Q: OKAY. WHY DON'T YOU HAVE A SEAT.

A: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE ANOTHER BOARD. IT HAS BEEN SHOWN TO THE DEFENSE. I ASK THAT IT BE MARKED PEOPLE'S 116.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 116, NEXT IN ORDER, WHICH IS A CHART.

(PEO'S 116 FOR ID = CHART W/ PHOTOS)

THE COURT: CAN I ASK THE COURT T.V. PERSON TO GIVE ME A LOOK AT IT, PLEASE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. I GUESS YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO STEP DOWN AGAIN.

A: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)

Q: DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION, SIR, TO PEOPLE'S 116, THE PHOTOGRAPH LABELED A, TELL US WHAT IS DEPICTED IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH.

A: PHOTOGRAPH A IS THE FRONT OF THE GARAGE. THIS IS FACING DUE WEST. I WALKED ALONG THE PATH AND CAME OUT IN FRONT OF THE GARAGE AND WALKED TO THIS ENTRANCE RIGHT HERE AND LOOKED EAST DOWN THE PATH, (INDICATING).

MS. CLARK: FOR THE RECORD, WHEN THE WITNESS INDICATED "THIS ENTRANCE," HE IS POINTING TO THE AREA JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE GARAGE AS YOU FACE THE PHOTOGRAPH.

THE COURT: IT APPEARS TO BE THE SOUTH PORTION OF THE GARAGE.

MS. CLARK: THAT'S RIGHT. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: AND PHOTOGRAPH B?

A: PHOTOGRAPH B WOULD BE -- THIS IS THE AIR CONDITIONER THAT IS JUTTING OUT WITH THE BRACING. THIS WALL LINE HERE I BELIEVE IS THE BEGINNING OF THE BUILDING, THE BUNGALOWS WHERE I BELIEVE THE OUTSIDE OF KATO'S WALL, MAYBE THE OFFICE THAT IS JUST ADJACENT TO KATO'S WALL.

MS. CLARK: OKAY. BEFORE WE GET TO THOSE --

THE COURT: 1492, CAN YOU SEE EVERYTHING THERE FROM WHERE EVERYBODY IS STANDING? ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY IN THE JURY WHO CAN'T SEE, LET ME KNOW. THANK YOU.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, YOU SAID YOU PASSED THROUGH THE SECOND GATE AREA?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE WHEN YOU GOT TO THE AREA OF THE SECOND GATE?

A: WELL, I WAS LOOKING -- INITIALLY I WAS LOOKING UP TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE -- WHERE THE WALL WAS. I LOOKED UP. I SAW A SHEAR WALL THAT WENT UP QUITE A WAYS, LIKE FIFTEEN -- MAYBE AS HIGH AS TWENTY FEET, AND THE PITCH OF THE ROOF WENT DIRECTLY BACK IN TOWARDS THE POOL AREA. AND I RECALLED THAT FROM WHEN I WAS ON THE OTHER SIDE. AND I DETERMINED THAT THAT WAS PROBABLY KATO'S WALL.

Q: SO AS YOU WERE LOOKING THEN AT THE OUTSIDE OF THE RESIDENCE, YOU WERE TRYING TO FIND OUT -- YOU WERE TRYING TO DETERMINE WHAT WALL MATCHED UP WITH THE OUTSIDE OF KATO'S ROOM?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT TIME WAS IT, IF YOU RECALL, WHEN YOU EXITED THE HOUSE AND WENT DOWN THAT SOUTH PATHWAY?

A: 6:00, 6:10, 6:15.

Q: WERE YOU LOOKING AT YOUR WATCH WHEN YOU WENT OUT OF THE HOUSE?

A: NO. NO, MA'AM.

Q: YOU ARE ESTIMATING FOR US?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN AFTER YOU PASSED THROUGH THAT SECOND GATE AREA, YOU SAW THE WALL THAT APPEARED TO MATCH KATO'S WALL?

A: YES.

Q: THEN WHAT HAPPENED?

A: I CONTINUED WALKING DOWN THE PATH, AND WHEN I GOT APPROXIMATELY FIFTEEN OR TWENTY FEET AWAY, I SAW A DARK OBJECT AND I CONTINUED TO WALK FORWARD TOWARDS THAT OBJECT.

Q: COULD YOU TELL WHAT THAT DARK OBJECT WAS?

A: NO, NOT UNTIL I GOT VERY CLOSE.

Q: AND HOW CLOSE DID YOU GET BEFORE YOU COULD TELL WHAT IT WAS?

A: SEVERAL FEET, MAYBE THREE OR FOUR, I'M NOT SURE. AT SOME POINT I COULD TELL THAT IT WAS A GLOVE.

Q: AND WHEN YOU SAW THAT IT WAS A GLOVE -- FIRST OF ALL, WHERE DID YOU SEE IT IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE AIR CONDITIONER SHOWN IN PEOPLE'S B AND C?

A: HERE IS THE AIR CONDITIONER, (INDICATING).

Q: PEOPLE'S B.

A: AN I LOOKED DOWN AND THERE IS THE DARK OBJECT THAT I SAW, (INDICATING).

MS. CLARK: FOR THE RECORD, THE WITNESS IS POINTING TO WHAT LOOKS LIKE A SMALL DARK SPOT RIGHT NEXT -- ON THE GROUND NEAR THE AIR CONDITIONER IN PHOTOGRAPH B.

Q: AND IN PHOTOGRAPH C CAN YOU SEE IT?

A: I -- IT IS RATHER DARK, BUT I BELIEVE -- HERE IS THE AIR CONDITIONER BRACING AND THEN I BELIEVE THIS IS -- IT IS REALLY HARD TO SEE RIGHT IN HERE. THIS LOOKS LIKE THE OBJECT THAT I SAW, YES.

MS. CLARK: AND FOR THE RECORD, THE WITNESS HAS POINTED TO TWO PRICES OF WOOD STICKING OUT OF THE WALL IN THE TOP OF PHOTOGRAPH C WHEN HE REFERRED TO THE BRACING FOR THE AIR CONDITIONER AND A DARK SPOT UNDERNEATH ON THE GROUND.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK -- EXCUSE ME. MISS CLARK, DO YOU WISH TO MOVE THAT EXHIBIT DOWN MOMENTARILY SO THE JURORS ON THE OTHER END OF THE BOX CAN SEE THAT?

MS. CLARK: YES. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THAT IS A GOOD IDEA.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN. MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.

Q: IN PHOTOGRAPH D, SIR, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT YOU SEE THERE?

A: PHOTOGRAPH D IS A PICTURE OF WHAT NOW I IDENTIFIED AS A POSSIBLE GLOVE. THIS WAS -- THIS WAS PROBABLY ABOUT THE DISTANCE, MAYBE A LITTLE FARTHER BACK, THAT I COULD TELL IT WAS PROBABLY A GLOVE.

Q: AND WHEN YOU WERE ABLE TO TELL THAT IT WAS PROBABLY A GLOVE, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: WELL, I WALKED CLOSER TO LOOK AT IT.

Q: OKAY. HOW CLOSE DID YOU GET TO IT?

A: OH, I GOT PROBABLY AS CLOSE AS PHOTO F LOOKING DOWN AT IT.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT DID -- DID YOU JUST STAND AND LOOK DOWN AT IT? DID YOU TOUCH IT? WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I DIDN'T TOUCH IT. I LOOKED AT IT. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF IT WAS.

Q: GO AHEAD AND TAKE YOUR SEAT.

A: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)

MS. CLARK: CAN YOU PULL UP -- CAN YOU PULL UP F, PLEASE.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT NO. 116-F.

MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, IF WE ARE DONE WITH THIS EXHIBIT FOR THE MOMENT, MIGHT IT BE LOWERED? IT IS BLOCKING THE VIEW.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, ARE YOU GOING TO CONTINUE TO USE THIS?

MS. CLARK: YES. I'M GOING TO GO BACK AND FORTH.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: CAN YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE APPEARANCE OF THE GLOVE, SIR.

A: WELL, IT APPEARED TO BE -- IT DIDN'T MATCH THE TERRAIN. THERE IS LEAVES ALL OVER THE WALKWAY. IT WAS DIRTY IN THE AREA. IT WAS UNKEPT (SIC). THIS GLOVE DIDN'T HAVE ANY SIGNS OF DIRT OR LEAVES OR TWIGS ON IT. IT APPEARED A DARK LEATHER GLOVE. IT APPEARED TO BE SOMEWHAT MOIST OR STICKY. I DIDN'T TOUCH IT, BUT IT APPEARED THAT PARTS WERE STICKING TO OTHER PARTS OF THE GLOVE.

Q: AND YOU WERE DESCRIBING THE WALKWAY AREA. YOU INDICATED IT WAS KIND OF DIRTY WITH LEAVES. WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE ANY -- ANY FOOTPRINTS OR SHOEPRINTS OR DISTURBANCE IN THOSE LEAVES?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: CAN YOU DESCRIBE, WAS IT VERY THICKLY COVERED WITH LEAVES? WHAT DID IT LOOK LIKE?

A: WELL, MUCH AS THIS PICTURE DEPICTS IN THIS PHOTO, THAT WAS MUCH OF THE WAY THE WALKWAY LOOKED.

Q: OKAY. AND WHEN YOU LOOKED BACK, COULD YOU SEE WHERE YOU HAD JUST WALKED ON THE WALKWAY?

A: NO.

Q: SO AFTER YOU GOT UP TO THE GLOVE, YOU INDICATE YOU LOOKED DOWN AT IT. WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: WELL, AT THAT POINT I WAS SOMEWHAT ALARMED AT FINDING SOMETHING SUCH AS THIS, AND NOT KNOWING IF A SUSPECT OR A VICTIM HAD LEFT SOMETHING BACK THERE, SO I CONTINUED FARTHER EAST PASSED THE AIR CONDITIONER.

Q: OKAY. LET ME BACK UP ONE SECOND. COULD YOU TELL WHETHER THAT WAS A RIGHT OR LEFT-HANDED GLOVE WHEN YOU LOOKED AT IT AT THAT TIME?

A: IT APPEARED TO BE A RIGHT-HANDED GLOVE.

Q: OKAY. AND DID IT -- WAS IT -- WERE YOU -- WHAT SIGNIFICANCE DID YOU ATTACH TO IT WHEN YOU SAW IT, IF ANY?

A: WELL, IT LOOKED SIMILAR TO THE GLOVE ON THE BUNDY SCENE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU -- DID YOU IMMEDIATELY THINK IT WAS A MATCH? WHAT WAS YOUR STATE OF MIND ABOUT THAT?

A: OH, I DIDN'T KNOW AT THAT POINT. IT WAS A DARK-COLORED LEATHER GLOVE.

Q: OKAY. AND AFTER YOU SAW THAT GLOVE, DID YOU PICK IT UP?

A: NO.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I CONTINUED -- I WALKED AROUND IT. I CONTINUED EASTBOUND ON THE WALKWAY.

Q: DID ANYTHING DRAW YOUR ATTENTION AS YOU PASSED THE AREA OF THE GLOVE AND CONTINUED DOWN THE WALKWAY?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THAT?

A: I STARTED HITTING SPIDERWEBS OR COBWEBS IN MY FACE.

Q: HAD YOU HIT ANY SPIDERWEBS OR COBWEBS UP UNTIL THE TIME YOU SAW THE GLOVE?

A: NO.

Q: SO WHAT DID DO YOU NEXT? YOU CONTINUED DOWN THE WALKWAY?

A: YES, MA'AM.

Q: AND WHY?

A: WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW IF I HAD SOMEONE THAT HAD GONE ALL THE WAY DOWN THE WALKWAY, WHETHER IT BE A SUSPECT OR A VICTIM. I DIDN'T KNOW THEIR CONDITION AND AT THAT POINT I DIDN'T WANT TO TURN MY BACK ON ANYONE THAT MIGHT BE WATCHING ME.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU SEE?

A: I SAW NOTHING. I CONTINUED DOWN THE WALKWAY TO THE END OF THE BUILDING WHERE THERE WAS A LARGE -- LARGE AREA OF BUDDING PLANTS AND SHRUBBERY. I CONCLUDED THAT IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN WHERE GARDENERS START SMALL PLANTS.

Q: SO IS THAT THE -- WHERE IS THAT AREA LOCATED WITH RESPECT TO THE HOUSE AND THE WALKWAY?

A: IT WOULD BE IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.

Q: AT THE BACK OF THE HOUSE?

A: YES.

Q: SO YOU WENT ALL THE WAY BACK THERE?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID YOU THINK YOU WERE GOING TO FIND BACK THERE?

A: I WAS LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY THAT HAD COLLAPSED AND GONE BACK TO THAT AREA AND QUITE POSSIBLY WAS LYING THERE.

Q: EVEN THOUGH YOU FELT COBWEBS, SPIDERWEBS ON THE WAY BACK?

A: WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW -- I WASN'T CRAWLING SO I DIDN'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT TRANSPIRED THERE.

Q: WERE YOU WALKING STRAIGHT UP, STANDING UP?

A: PRETTY MUCH, YES.

Q: AS OPPOSED TO BEING BENT OVER?

A: I COULD HAVE BEEN BENT OVER AT SOME TIMES. SOME OF THE OVER HANGING LEAVES OR THE TREE -- I THINK SOME OF THE TIME THERE WAS BRANCHES IN THE WAY, SO I COULD HAVE BEEN LEANING OVER SOME OF THE TIME.

THE COURT: PERHAPS WE OUGHT TO KNOW HOW TALL THE DETECTIVE IS.

MS. CLARK: RIGHT.

Q: AND YOU FELT THE COBWEBS WHERE? ON YOUR FACE, ON YOUR SHOULDERS? CAN YOU TELL US?

A: YES, ON MY FACE AND -- INITIALLY ON MY FACE.

Q: OKAY.

A: I WENT UNDERNEATH THE AIR CONDITIONER.

Q: AND HOW TALL ARE YOU?

A: SIX FOOT THREE.

Q: OKAY. WHEN YOU GOT TO THE REAR OF THE LOCATION YOU SAW THAT AREA AND WAS THERE -- WAS IT LIKE A DIRT AREA BACK THERE?

A: SOMEWHAT. THERE WAS PLANTS AND THERE WAS WILD GRASS AND THERE WAS SOME SHRUBBERY AND THERE WAS SOME PLANTS THAT LOOKED LIKE THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF OR PLANTED THERE ON PURPOSE.

Q: DID YOU LOOK AROUND?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID -- OTHER THAN WHAT YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBED, DID YOU SEE ANYTHING ELSE?

A: I FOUND NO -- NO EVIDENCE OF ANYONE BEING THERE OR ANY EVIDENCE OF ANYBODY LEAVING SOMETHING IN THAT AREA, SO I LEFT.

Q: OKAY. AND WHERE DID YOU GO?

A: I WALKED BACK UP THE PATH WESTBOUND AND I WENT TO THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AND I LOCATED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU FIRST WENT BACK ON THAT WALKWAY, DID YOU KNOW WHETHER KATO HAD ALREADY GONE BACK THERE TO INVESTIGATE THE THUMPS ON THE WALL?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: AND YOU WALKED BACK OUT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN YOU WALKED BACK OUT, SIR, CAN YOU INDICATE WHAT AREA YOU STEPPED OUT, WHERE YOU STEPPED OUT OF THE WALKWAY? IS THERE A PHOTOGRAPH THAT SHOWS WHERE YOU CAME OUT ON PEOPLE'S 66?

A: I BELIEVE SO, YES. YES.

Q: WHICH ONE IS THAT?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET DOWN IF YOU DON'T NEED TO.

A: THAT WOULD BE PHOTO A.

Q: PHOTO A, THAT SAME ENTRANCE AREA THAT YOU INDICATED EARLIER, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO AT THAT TIME?

A: I WALKED NORTH OR BACK TOWARD THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AND I SAW DETECTIVE PHILLIPS IN FRONT OF THE -- THE KITCHEN T.V. ROOM AREA.

Q: AND WHAT WAS HE DOING IN FRONT OF THE KITCHEN T.V. AREA?

A: I JUST SAW HIM STANDING THERE. I DON'T KNOW HIS REASON FOR COMING OUT THERE OR WHAT HE WAS DOING. I JUST ASKED TO TALK TO HIM.

MS. CLARK: OKAY.

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

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER, 117, HAS BEEN SHOWN TO THE DEFENSE, A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE HOUSE.

THE COURT: PEOPLE'S 117.

(PEO'S 117 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: SHOWING YOU PEOPLE'S 117, SIR, YOU INDICATED JUST NOW THAT WHEN YOU CAME OUT FROM THE SOUTH PATHWAY THAT YOU WENT TOWARDS THE HOUSE WHERE YOU SAW DETECTIVE PHILLIPS?

A: YES, MA'AM.

Q: DO YOU SEE THE AREA IN PEOPLE'S 117 WHERE YOU SAW DETECTIVE PHILLIPS STANDING?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHERE IS THAT?

A: THERE IS A FIRST STORY WINDOW FACING THE CAMERA, ALMOST CENTER. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THAT PAVED AREA.

Q: CAN YOU DIRECT THE POINTER?

A: YES.

Q: YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SCREEN AND TELL ME IF YOU CAN SEE THE RED DOT?

A: UP.

Q: OKAY.

A: NOW, A BIG CIRCLE RIGHT IN THAT AREA, (INDICATING).

Q: RIGHT HERE?

A: RIGHT A LITTLE TO THE RIGHT WHERE THE WALKWAY IS THAT GOES TO THAT AREA. YES, RIGHT IN THAT AREA, (INDICATING).

Q: ALL RIGHT. WAS HE STANDING OUTSIDE, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT -- DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HIM?

A: SOMEWHAT. I JUST TOLD RON I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW HIM SOMETHING.

Q: DID YOU TELL HIM WHAT YOU WANTED TO SHOW HIM?

A: NO.

Q: WHY NOT?

A: I WANTED TO SEE HIS IMPRESSION. HE MADE SIMILAR OBSERVATIONS ON THE BUNDY SCENE THAT I HAD AND I WANTED TO SEE WHAT HE THOUGHT OF WHAT I HAD DISCOVERED ON THE PATHWAY.

Q: OKAY. WHAT DID YOU DO THEN?

A: I TOOK DETECTIVE PHILLIPS DOWN THAT PATHWAY AND SHOWED HIM.

Q: OKAY. AND WAS THAT -- DID YOU TAKE THE SAME ROUTE AS YOU HAD EARLIER?

A: I DIDN'T DELAY IN CERTAIN AREAS, BUT YES.

Q: SO THIS TIME YOU JUST WALKED STRAIGHT BACK?

THE COURT: YES.

Q: WHEN YOU SAY "DELAY IN CERTAIN AREAS," WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO?

A: WELL, THE INDENTATION ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, THERE WAS A LARGE AMOUNT OF AREA THERE THAT I WALKED INTO THAT AREA TO ORIENT MYSELF. I DIDN'T DO THAT THIS TIME.

Q: AND WHEN YOU TOOK DETECTIVE PHILLIPS OUT, HOW CLOSE DID YOU GET TO THE GLOVE?

A: WE STOOD JUST TO THE WEST OF IT KNEELING DOWN.

Q: YOU WERE KNEELING DOWN?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. WAS DETECTIVE PHILLIPS KNEELING DOWN?

A: I DON'T RECALL. I JUST KNELT DOWN. THAT IS A NARROW PATH. I JUST KNELT DOWN SO HE COULD ALSO OBSERVE AND POINTED.

Q: AND AFTER YOU SHOWED IT -- EXCUSE ME. DID DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TOUCH THE GLOVE?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU TOUCH THE GLOVE?

A: NO.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: WE RETURNED TO THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE, AND I'M NOT SURE IF I ENTERED THE RESIDENCE OR DETECTIVE PHILLIPS SENT DETECTIVE VANNATTER, BUT I BELIEVE I AT SOME POINT TALKED TO DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND LANGE AND I TOOK DETECTIVE VANNATTER BACK TO THE LOCATION.

Q: AND WHAT ROUTE DID YOU TAKE WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

A: THE SAME AS DETECTIVE PHILLIPS.

Q: AND HOW CLOSE DID YOU GET TO THE GLOVE WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

A: IT WAS SIMILAR. WE APPROACHED THE GLOVE JUST TO THE WEST OF IT, OBSERVED IT AND THEN TURNED AROUND AND WALKED BACK.

Q: AND DID YOU TOUCH THE GLOVE AT THAT TIME?

A: NO.

Q: DID DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

A: NO.

Q: AND AFTER YOU BOTH SAW THE GLOVE, WHERE DID YOU GO?

A: WE RETURNED TO THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE.

Q: OKAY. AND THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I BELIEVE WE ENTERED THE KITCHEN AREA AND CONTACTED DETECTIVE LANGE AND I BROUGHT HIM DOWN TO THE SAME LOCATION.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO WITH DETECTIVE LANGE?

A: THE SAME AS THE TWO OTHER DETECTIVES, LED HIM DOWN TO THE GLOVE, SHOWED HIM WHAT I HAD OBSERVED AND WE RETURNED.

Q: AND DID DETECTIVE LANGE TOUCH THE GLOVE?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU TOUCH THE GLOVE?

A: NO.

Q: WHEN YOU CAME BACK OUT WITH DETECTIVE LANGE, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: DETECTIVE LANGE AND VANNATTER WERE INVOLVED IN CONVERSATION AND I BELIEVE I STOOD AWAY FROM -- FROM THAT, SO I'M NOT EXACTLY POSITIVE WHAT -- WHAT THE CONVERSATION ENTAILED.

Q: OKAY. WHY DID YOU NOT INVOLVE YOURSELF IN THEIR CONVERSATION?

A: WELL, THIS WAS THEIR CRIME SCENE, SO THEY WERE DISCUSSING WHAT HAD BEEN FOUND, AND IF ANYTHING, WHAT IT MEANT.

Q: OKAY. NOW, AT SOME POINT DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ABOUT WHERE THE DEFENDANT WAS?

A: I DON'T RECALL. I LEARNED OF IT, YES, BUT I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHEN. I KNOW IT WAS AFTER I RETURNED WITH ALL THE DETECTIVES, BUT I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN.

Q: WHAT DO YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY "AFTER YOU RETURNED WITH ALL THE DETECTIVES"?

A: AFTER I CAME BACK FROM THE PATH AND NOTIFIED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, SOMETIME AFTER I SHOWED ALL THE DETECTIVES WHAT I HAD FOUND ON THE PATH, I LEARNED OF CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED WITH MR. SIMPSON.

Q: OKAY. SO AT THE TIME THAT YOU FOUND THE GLOVE, YOU STILL DID NOT KNOW WHERE HE WAS OR WHERE HE HAD GONE OR WHEN HE HAD GONE THERE?

A: NO.

Q: AND I SAY "HE," I'M REFERRING TO MR. SIMPSON.

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: SO IS IT YOUR CURRENT RECOLLECTION THEN, SIR, BASED ON WHAT YOU TELL US, THAT YOU LEARNED THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS IN -- WHERE THE DEFENDANT WAS AT SOME POINT AFTER ALL DETECTIVES WERE TAKEN BACK TO SEE THE GLOVE?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AFTER DETECTIVE LANGE AND DETECTIVE VANNATTER HAD THAT CONVERSATION, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: THEREABOUTS SOMETIME DETECTIVE VANNATTER TOLD DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND MYSELF TO GO BACK TO BUNDY TO LOOK AT THAT GLOVE THAT WE HAD SEEN ON BUNDY.

Q: AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE, SIR?

A: TO SEE IF THERE WAS A SIMILARITY, IF WE HAD A RIGHT AND A LEFT, SEE IF THE COLOR AND THE LEATHER AND THE LINING MATCHED.

Q: AND SO AFTER DETECTIVE VANNATTER ASKED YOU TO DO THAT, DID YOU?

A: YES. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND I LEFT THE ROCKINGHAM SCENE AND WENT BACK TO BUNDY.

Q: OKAY. IN THE SAME CAR YOU GUYS CAME IN EARLIER?

A: YES.

Q: YOU DROVE TOGETHER, DID YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT TIME WAS IT WHEN YOU WENT BACK TO BUNDY?

A: I BELIEVE ABOUT 7:00 IN THE MORNING, MAYBE A LITTLE LATER.

Q: AGAIN, WERE YOU LOOKING AT YOUR WATCH WHEN YOU LEFT ROCKINGHAM TO GO BACK TO BUNDY?

A: NO, I WASN'T.

Q: IS THAT AN APPROXIMATION, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN YOU WENT BACK TO BUNDY, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS INSTRUCTED ME TO GET A PHOTOGRAPHER. I DID. WE WALKED DOWN DOROTHY, ENTERED THE ALLEY AND CAME IN THROUGH THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE.

MS. CLARK: OKAY.

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

MS. CLARK: CAN WE CUT THE FEED?

THE COURT: ANYTIME I HEAR "BUNDY."

MS. CLARK: YEAH.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT NO. 55. 2, PLEASE.

MR. BAILEY: ARE WE THROUGH WITH THIS EXHIBIT, YOUR HONOR? IT IS KIND OF IN THE WAY.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK?

MS. CLARK: WE WILL BE SHORTLY.

Q: ALL RIGHT, SIR. WHEN DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ASKED YOU TO GO AND GET A PHOTOGRAPHER, DID YOU DO THAT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THAT?

A: TO PHOTOGRAPH THE GLOVE IN ITS ORIGINAL POSITION, AND IF I NEEDED TO MOVE IT TO INSPECT IT ANY FURTHER, WE COULD -- IN OTHER WORDS, PHOTO IT AS WE ORIGINALLY FOUND IT.

Q: AND WHO IS IN THE PHOTOGRAPH, SIR?

A: THAT IS VICTIM BROWN AND MYSELF.

Q: AND ARE YOU POINTING TO SOMETHING UNDERNEATH THAT BUSH?

A: YES, I AM.

Q: AND WHAT IS THAT?

A: IT IS THE GLOVE ON BUNDY.

Q: AND IS THAT THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU TOOK THE PHOTOGRAPHER OVER TO TAKE AT THE DIRECTION OF DETECTIVES VANNATTER AND PHILLIPS?

A: YES.

Q: AND ARE YOU DRESSED HERE -- YOU RECALL TESTIFYING EARLIER THAT YOU HAD TAKEN YOUR JACKET OFF AT SOME POINT WHEN YOU WERE AT BUNDY EARLIER?

A: YES.

Q: HAD YOU EVER PUT IT ON AGAIN BETWEEN THAT POINT AND THIS POINT HERE?

A: NO, I HAD NOT.

Q: SO AT THE TIME THAT YOU FOUND THE GLOVE AT ROCKINGHAM, WHAT WERE YOU WEARING?

A: I WAS WEARING EXACTLY WHAT IS IN THIS PHOTO; A WHITE SHIRT, TAN SLACKS, LOAFERS.

Q: I'M SORRY?

A: LOAFERS.

Q: LOAFERS?

A: LOAFERS, SHOES.

Q: DO YOU STILL HAVE THAT CLOTHING, SIR?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: THE SHIRT AND THE PANTS?

A: YES.

Q: SO ARE YOU STILL DRESSED IN THE SAME MANNER IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH BEING SHOWN TO THE JURY NOW AS YOU WERE WHEN YOU FOUND THE GLOVE AT ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES.

Q: AFTER THAT PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN, SIR, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: I RETURNED TO THE ROCKINGHAM ADDRESS.

Q: AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE DID YOU RETURN TO THE ROCKINGHAM ADDRESS?

A: TO INFORM THE DETECTIVES WHAT I SAW AT BUNDY.

Q: NOW, BEFORE YOU LEFT FOR ROCKINGHAM AGAIN, WHEN YOU WENT OVER TO THE GLOVE ON BUNDY, SIR, WHAT DID YOU DO -- YOU WERE ASKED -- I THINK YOU TESTIFIED EARLIER TO COMPARE IT TO THE ONE AT ROCKINGHAM TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT LOOKED THE SAME?

A: YES.

Q: AND A MATCH?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE OF THAT?

A: WELL, I HAD TO DETERMINE IF IT WAS A RIGHT OR A LEFT, AND I DID. IT WAS A LEFT-HANDED GLOVE.

Q: AT BUNDY?

A: YES. IT APPEARED TO BE THE SAME TEXTURE OF LEATHER, SAME COLOR.

Q: UH-HUH.

A: THE FABRIC, A MESH FABRIC, WAS THE LINING INSIDE, IT APPEARED TO BE THE SAME TEXTURE, DESIGN AND COLOR AS THE GLOVE ON ROCKINGHAM.

Q: DID YOU TOUCH THE GLOVE?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU MOVE IT?

A: YES.

Q: HOW DID YOU DO THAT?

A: WITH A PEN.

Q: WITH A PEN LIKE THE KIND YOU WRITE WITH?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU HAVE THE INK PART OUT?

A: NO.

Q: AND HOW -- WHAT DID YOU DO THAT FOR?

A: I JUST LIFTED IT AND TURNED IT SO I COULD TELL IF IT WAS A RIGHT OR A LEFT AND TO LOOK AT THE LINING.

Q: OKAY. AND WAS THERE SOMEONE ELSE PRESENT WHEN YOU DID THAT?

A: YES.

Q: WHO?

A: THE PHOTOGRAPHER. I BELIEVE HE WAS MR. ROKAHR.

Q: OKAY. AND HOW DID THAT ASSIST YOU IN DETERMINING WHETHER IT WAS A RIGHT OR A LEFT?

A: EXCUSE ME?

Q: HOW DID THAT HELP YOU, LIFTING IT WITH THE PEN, HOW DID THAT HELP YOU DETERMINE IF IT WAS A RIGHT OR A LEFT?

A: WELL, I WANTED TO SEE WHERE THE THUMB WAS.

Q: WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE WHERE THE THUMB WAS WITHOUT DOING THAT?

A: I MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE.

Q: AND WHY DID YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE? WHY WERE YOU GETTING THIS INFORMATION?

A: WELL, I WAS BEING DIRECTED TO DO THIS AND I FELT THERE WAS PROBABLY A VERY IMPORTANT REASON WHY AND I WANTED TO BE SURE.

Q: AND SO YOU WERE GOING TO REPORT BACK TO DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

A: YES.

Q: AND AFTER THAT WAS DONE, SIR, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU WENT BACK TO ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU GO BY YOURSELF?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: DID YOU ASK ANYONE TO FOLLOW YOU OR PROCEED THERE AS WELL?

A: YES.

Q: WHO WAS THAT?

A: THE PHOTOGRAPHER.

Q: AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE?

A: TO PHOTOGRAPH THE OTHER GLOVE AND FOR WHATEVER OTHER REASON DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND LANGE WANTED HIM AT ROCKINGHAM.

Q: NOW, AFTER YOU -- AFTER YOU LIFTED THE -- PUT YOUR PEN INSIDE TO LIFT THE GLOVE AT BUNDY, DID YOU REPLACE IT IN THE SAME LOCATION?

A: YES.

Q: AS IT WAS FOUND?

A: YES.

Q: YOU WENT TO ROCKINGHAM THEN AND YOU TOOK THE PHOTOGRAPHER?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THAT?

A: TO DOCUMENT THE POSITION OF THE GLOVE ON THE PATHWAY THAT I HAD DISCOVERED EARLIER.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO IN THAT REGARD WHEN YOU GOT TO ROCKINGHAM WITH THE PHOTOGRAPHER?

A: I BELIEVE I WAS INSTRUCTED TO SHOW HIM WHERE THE GLOVE WAS SO HE COULD PHOTOGRAPH IT, AND HE DID.

Q: DID YOU TAKE HIM DOWN THAT SOUTH PATHWAY?

A: YES.

Q: AND AGAIN, WHAT ROUTE DID YOU TAKE TO TAKE HIM DOWN THERE?

A: THE SAME AS THE OTHER THREE DETECTIVES; EASTBOUND ON THE PATH TO THE GLOVE, JUST WEST OF THE GLOVE, AND HE PHOTOGRAPHED IT.

Q: OKAY. AND SO DO THESE -- ARE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS -- ARE ANY OF THESE PHOTOGRAPHS THE ONES THAT WERE TAKEN AT YOUR DIRECTION WITH THE PHOTOGRAPHER AT ROCKINGHAM? AND WHEN I SAY "THESE," I'M REFERRING TO PEOPLE'S 116?

A: I'M NOT SURE -- I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAD ANY NUMBERS AT THAT TIME.

Q: UH-HUH. AND PHOTOGRAPH E, WHERE THERE IS NO NUMBER THEN, MIGHT THAT BE ONE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN AT YOUR DIRECTION BY MR. ROKAHR?

A: YES.

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

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. AFTER YOU -- AT THAT TIME DID YOU TOUCH THAT GLOVE?

A: NO.

Q: DID MR. ROKAHR TOUCH THAT GLOVE?

A: NO.

Q: AFTER HE TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: WE RETURNED TO THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE.

Q: OKAY. NOW, WHEN YOU POINTED THE GLOVE OUT TO MR. ROKAHR FOR THE PURPOSE OF TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS, DID YOU POINT OUT ASPECTS OF THE GLOVE THAT YOU WANTED HIM TO TAKE NOTE OF IN PHOTOGRAPHS?

A: NO. I BELIEVE I JUST WANTED PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE GLOVE. I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANYTHING WE COULD DEPICT THAT WE WOULD NEED PHOTOS OF FROM ANY ANGLE.

Q: YOU DESCRIBED EARLIER THAT THE -- THAT YOU NOTICED IT TO BE -- THE GLOVE TO BE MOIST AND STICKY. DO YOU RECALL THAT?

A: THAT IS THE WAY IT APPEARED, YES.

Q: DID YOU NOTICE WHETHER ANY FINGERS WERE STUCK TOGETHER?

A: I DO RECALL THAT THERE WAS ONE FINGER THAT WAS STUCK TO ONE PART OF THE GLOVE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: WE -- I TOOK THE PHOTOGRAPHER BACK OUT TO THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE AND I RE-ENTERED THE FRONT DOOR AREA THAT LED INTO THE KITCHEN.

Q: OKAY. AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE?

A: TO TELL THE DETECTIVES -- WELL, I HAD ALREADY PREVIOUSLY TOLD THEM WHAT I HAD FOUND, BUT THERE WAS A DISCUSSION GOING ON AND I CAME BACK THERE TO REJOIN THEM.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU WERE -- LET ME BACK UP FOR A SECOND. WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE GLOVE AT ROCKINGHAM, WERE YOU ABLE TO TELL WHETHER IT WAS RIGHT OR LEFT-HANDED?

A: THE GLOVE ON ROCKINGHAM WAS A RIGHT-HANDED GLOVE.

Q: AND THE PHOTOGRAPH OF IT SHOWN IN PEOPLE'S 116-E -- WELL, ACTUALLY D, E AND F, IS THAT -- DO THOSE DEPICT THE POSITION IN WHICH YOU ORIGINALLY FOUND IT?

A: YES.

Q: AND SO WERE YOU ABLE TO LOOK AT THE GLOVE AND SEE WHERE THE THUMB WAS LOCATED, WITHOUT LIFTING IT?

A: YES.

Q: WHO WAS INSIDE THE KITCHEN AREA WHEN YOU WENT INSIDE THE HOUSE AFTER HAVING THE GLOVE PHOTOGRAPHED?

A: DETECTIVE VANNATTER, DETECTIVE -- DETECTIVE VANNATTER FOR SURE. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS. THAT WAS ALL I BELIEVE I SAW WHEN I WALKED IN THERE.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS THEN AT THAT POINT AS TO WHAT YOU WERE TO DO?

A: WELL, AT THAT POINT DETECTIVE VANNATTER MADE A STATEMENT THAT WE ARE GOING TO HANDLE THE ROCKINGHAM ADDRESS AS A CRIME SCENE AND WE NEEDED TO SEAL IT OFF, SECURE IT.

Q: AND WHAT WERE YOU ASKED TO DO AT THAT POINT, IF ANYTHING?

A: TO MAKE SURE NO ONE WAS IN THE HOUSE. THERE WAS -- THERE WAS TWO CHILDREN IN THE HOUSE, A MAN THAT I LATER FOUND OUT WAS MR. COWLINGS, MISS ARNELLE SIMPSON WAS IN THE HOUSE. I THINK THAT WAS ALL. WE ASKED THEM THAT IF THEY COULD TAKE THE CHILDREN SOMEWHERE ELSE, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO LEAVE, THAT THERE WAS SOME INVESTIGATION THAT WAS GOING TO BE DONE AT THE HOUSE.

Q: AND WHERE WERE YOU?

A: AT THIS TIME?

Q: UH-HUH.

A: I BELIEVE I WALKED OUT INTO THE LIVING ROOM AREA. I THINK I TALKED TO MR. COWLINGS THERE. I BELIEVE MISS SIMPSON WAS SOMEWHERE IN THAT GENERAL VICINITY ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

Q: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DID YOU REMAIN AT ROCKINGHAM AT THAT TIME, SIR?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND WHAT WERE YOU DOING?

A: WAITING FOR A SEARCH WARRANT TO BE WRITTEN.

Q: AND WHO WAS THERE WITH YOU?

A: AT THAT POINT DETECTIVE VANNATTER WAS THERE MOMENTARILY, THEN HE LEFT. THERE WAS UNIFORMED OFFICERS WITH THE BRONCO AT THE FRONT OF THE ROCKINGHAM GATE, UNIFORMED OFFICERS TO THE FRONT OF ASHFORD. DETECTIVE ROBERTS AT SOME POINT REJOINED ME AT THAT LOCATION AND I DON'T -- THERE WAS SEVERAL DETECTIVES THAT ENDED UP THERE, AND I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY WHAT TIME.

Q: LET ME BACK UP FOR ONE MINUTE. YOU LEFT ROCKINGHAM TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE BUNDY GLOVE TO SEE IF IT MATCHED THE ONE YOU HAD FOUND AT ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES.

Q: WHEN YOU DID THAT, YOU WENT WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS I THINK YOU TESTIFIED?

A: YES.

Q: AT SOME POINT, WHEN YOU WERE BACK AT BUNDY TO COMPARE THAT GLOVE TO THE ROCKINGHAM GLOVE, DID YOU -- DO YOU RECALL SEEING DETECTIVE LANGE?

A: I CAN'T REMEMBER IF I SAW HIM AT THAT POINT.

Q: WHEN YOU RETURNED TO THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION, DO YOU RECALL WHETHER YOU SAW DETECTIVE LANGE THERE?

A: I CAN'T REMEMBER. I REMEMBER TALKING TO VANNATTER BECAUSE HE SAID WE WERE GOING TO SECURE THIS AND HANDLE IT LIKE A CRIME SCENE, AND THEN I STARTED TALKING TO MR. COWLINGS AND MISS SIMPSON.

Q: THEN DID YOU REMAIN AT ROCKINGHAM FOR THE BALANCE OF THE DAY?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WERE YOUR FUNCTIONS THERE?

A: TO MAKE SURE WE JUST KEPT THE LOCATION SECURE WAITING FOR A WARRANT TO BE SIGNED.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU WERE WITH THE UNIFORMED OFFICERS AND AT SOME POINT JOINED BY DETECTIVE ROBERTS?

A: YES, AND THERE WAS SEVERAL DETECTIVES AFTER THAT.

Q: AND AT SOME POINT IN THE AFTERNOON DO YOU RECALL MEETING ME?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: OKAY. AND THAT WAS AT ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES.

Q: WAS THAT THE FIRST TIME WE MET?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: DID YOU WALK ME THROUGH THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION TO SHOW WHERE YOU HAD FOUND THE GLOVE AND WHERE YOU HAD CONTACTED MR. KAELIN?

A: YES.

Q: HOW LONG DID YOU REMAIN AT ROCKINGHAM?

A: THAT DAY?

Q: YES.

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS WELL PAST 6:00 IN THE EVENING. I'M NOT POSITIVE ON THAT, BUT I KNOW IT WAS VERY LATE IN THE AFTERNOON AT THE EARLIEST.

Q: OKAY. DO YOU RECALL SEEING MEDIA ARRIVE AT THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION AT SOME POINT?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU RECALL APPROXIMATELY WHEN THAT WAS?

A: IT SEEMS THAT IT WAS RIGHT AROUND THE NOON HOUR, BUT I'M NOT POSITIVE.

Q: AND AT SOME POINT DID YOU PUT ON YOUR JACKET?

A: YES.

Q: WHEN WAS THAT?

A: WHEN THE MEDIA ARRIVED.

Q: AND WHY WAS THAT?

A: BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO.

Q: OKAY. IN CASE YOUR BOSS WAS WATCHING?

A: YES.

MS. CLARK: OKAY.

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

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, SIR. I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A BRIEF RECESS AT THIS POINT. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU. DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU. ALSO, DO NOT CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU. AND WE WILL RECONVENE IN ABOUT FIFTEEN MINUTES. ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU MAY STEP DOWN. YOU ARE ORDERED TO RETURN IN FIFTEEN MINUTES.

(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. ALL THE PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. COUNSEL, IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO TAKE UP BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURORS TO REJOIN US?

MS. CLARK: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: WELL, THIS IS A MOTION PRESENTED BY MR. BAILEY.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I -- WHAT I PROPOSE WE DO IS, WHY DON'T YOU TAKE A LOOK AT IT OVER THE NOON HOUR, AND WE'LL TAKE IT UP. I ACCEPT MR. BAILEY'S REPRESENTATION OFF THE RECORD THAT HE WILL NOT GO INTO THOSE AREAS TODAY.

MS. CLARK: BUT THAT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE PEOPLE'S CONCERN. IF THE COURT IS INCLINED TO RULE IN DEFENSE FAVOR, WHICH THE PEOPLE SEE NO REASON FOR THE COURT TO DO, THE PEOPLE -- WE HAVE READ THE MOTION AND THE REASONS THAT GENERATED THE MOTION AND WE SEE NO MERIT TO THE REQUEST.

NEVERTHELESS, IF THE COURT DOES IN -- DOES INTEND TO RULE IN THE DEFENDANT'S FAVOR WITH RESPECT TO THE PERIMETERS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION, THE PEOPLE ARE ENTITLED TO KNOW ABOUT THIS ONE BEFORE WE FINISH DIRECT BECAUSE THESE WERE ITEMS THAT THE PEOPLE RAISED IN THE PEOPLE'S MOTION. THE COURT ISSUED A RULING, AND BASED ON THAT, WE MADE A DECISION AS TO HOW WE WOULD PROCEED WITH DIRECT. IF THE COURT IS NOW GOING TO CHANGE THAT --

THE COURT: WELL, LET ME -- LET ME -- EXCUSE ME FOR INTERRUPTING YOU. DO YOU WANT TO LITIGATE IT NOW?

MS. CLARK: YES.

THE COURT: OKAY. I LEFT IT ON MY DESK. MISS ROBERTSON.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MR. BAILEY, DO YOU WISH TO BE HEARD?

MR. BAILEY: YES, YOUR HONOR. YOU WILL RECALL --

MS. LEWIS: YOUR HONOR, EXCUSE ME. IF WE COULD HAVE A MOMENT. I DON'T KNOW IF DEFENSE WANTED DETECTIVE FUHRMAN PRESENT.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, COULD WE ASK YOU TO STEP OUTSIDE, PLEASE? THANK YOU. (DETECTIVE FUHRMAN EXITS THE COURTROOM.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN HAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE COURTROOM. MR. BAILEY.

MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, WE HAVE VISITED THIS SUBJECT ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF THE MANDATE OF THE ANTHONY CASE DECIDED IN THIS DISTRICT. YOU HAD ISSUED A RULING BARRING CERTAIN EVIDENCE OF STATEMENTS MADE TO PSYCHIATRISTS, REPORTS OF PSYCHIATRISTS IN CONNECTION LITIGATION INSTITUTED BY MR. FUHRMAN IN THE EARLY 80'S CLAIMING A DISABILITY BECAUSE OF CERTAIN EXPERIENCES HE HAD HAD. AND AT THE TIME THAT YOU ISSUED THAT RULING, IT WAS REPRESENTED TO THE COURT THAT MR. FUHRMAN WOULD NOT BE A WITNESS TO THE 1985 INCIDENT INVOLVING THE MERCEDES BENZ WINDSHIELD AND THAT HE WOULD NOT BE INVOLVED IN THE 1989 INCIDENT WHICH IN FACT WENT TO COURT. NOW, THE PROSECUTION OPENED RIGHT UP WITH THAT. IN ADDITION, THIS IS A FIRST IN MY EXPERIENCE, THEY OPENED UP WITHOUT SPECIFYING THAT HE HAD BEEN SUBJECTED TO SOME KIND OF SPECIAL TRAINING SESSION THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MURDERS AT BUNDY OR THE EVIDENCE AT ROCKINGHAM. AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE QUESTION OF MR. FUHRMAN'S GLOBAL ATTITUDES TOWARD RACE SPECIFICALLY AND IN PARTICULAR COUPLES THAT ARE RACIALLY MIXED SUCH AS MR. SIMPSON AND NICOLE IS FAIR GAME FOR QUESTIONING IN AS MUCH AS HE IS VERY DEFINITIVELY A SUSPECT FOR HAVING CARRIED THAT GLOVE FROM BUNDY WHERE HE FOUND IT TO ROCKINGHAM WHERE HE DEPOSITED IT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE INTEND TO SHOW BY CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FAR STRONGER THAN THE PEOPLE WILL EVER OFFER AGAINST O.J. SIMPSON ON THE MURDERS. IF MOTIVE AND OPPORTUNITY ARE THE MEANS THAT THE PEOPLE USE TO PROVE THE GUILT OF THE DEFENDANT, WHICH THEY SAY THEY CAN DO, THAT IS A FAIR METHOD TO PROVE THE INNOCENCE OF THE DEFENDANT BY SHOWING THAT HE WAS FRAMED. THE OPPORTUNITY WILL BE PATENT IF IT IS NOT ALREADY ON THE RECORD BY THE TIME MR. FUHRMAN'S CROSS-EXAMINATION IS COMPLETE. THE MOTIVE, ONE THAT WOULD INCLINE A POLICE OFFICER TO DO SOMETHING THIS DRASTIC EVEN THOUGH HE HAD NO WAY OF KNOWING PRESUMABLY WHETHER OR NOT SIMPSON WAS IN TIMBUKTU AT THE TIME HE WAS AT ROCKINGHAM FIRST IS CERTAINLY VERY HIGHLY RELEVANT. IF IT IS EMBARRASSING, IT IS EMBARRASSMENT OF HIS OWN CREATION. HE IS THE ONE THAT CREATED THESE PSYCHIATRIC REPORTS AND CAUSED THEM TO BE FILED PUBLICLY HOPING TO GAIN AS A RESULT. INSOFAR AS THE ORIGINAL CONCERN THAT YOUR HONOR HAD AS TO REMOTENESS IS CONCERNED, I ASK YOUR HONOR TO LOOK AT THE RULINGS THAT WERE MADE WITH RESPECT TO SPOUSAL ABUSE AND THE TIME BRACKETS THAT THE PROSECUTION WAS PERMITTED TO COVER. OF SPECIAL SIGNIFICANCE IS THE FACT THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN'S OWN EXPERT OPINED IN THE REPORTS THAT YOU HAVE REVIEWED THAT HIS ANTI-RACIAL FEELINGS WERE INCURABLE AND THAT THERE WAS NO WAY THAT HE COULD CONTINUE TO BE AN EFFECTIVE POLICE OFFICER BECAUSE OF THAT. AND IF THAT CONDITION IS SHOWN TO EXIST, THEN IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE BURDEN OF GOING FORWARD MAY SHIFT TO THE WITNESS TO SHOW WHEN AND IF SUCH A CURE TOOK PLACE BECAUSE WE INTEND TO SHOW AN INCIDENT AFTER INCIDENT THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WAS WILLING TO VIOLATE THE LAW AND THE FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS STATUTE TO UNFAIRLY PROSECUTE BLACK MEN WHO HE FOUND IN THE COMPANY OF WHITE WOMEN AND THAT THIS PATTERN WAS CONSISTENT RIGHT UP UNTIL SHORTLY BEFORE THIS INCIDENT. BASED ON ALL OF THOSE FACTS, THE STARTING POINT -- AND WE'RE NOT SEEKING AT THIS POINT TO GO BACK TO HIS MARINE CORPS EXPERIENCES WHICH ARE OUT THERE, BUT THE STARTING POINT WHICH RELATE TO THOSE AND WHY HE WANTED TO GET OUT OF THE MARINE CORPS BECAUSE HE COULD NOT STAND THE DEFIANCE THAT MINORITY GROUPS WERE HANDING HIM WHEN HE GAVE THEM DIRECTION AND WHY HE WANTED TO GET OUT OF THE POLICE FORCE BECAUSE HE COULDN'T TAKE THE CONDUCT OF THE PEOPLE HE HAD TO DEAL WITH IS PART OF A TOTAL PERSONALITY PICTURE THAT THIS JURY IS ENTITLED TO EVALUATE BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO EVALUATE THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS OFFICER INCENSED THAT BEING KICKED OFF THE BIGGEST MURDER CASE IN THE HISTORY OF THIS STATE DECIDED TO KEEP HIMSELF IN IT BY BECOMING AN INDISPENSABLE WITNESS AS HE SURELY HAS DONE. THAT IS OUR PRESENTATION, AND IN THAT CONTEXT, I THINK WE'RE ENTITLED TO HAVE THE COURT RECONSIDER ITS EARLIER RULING THAT THE PSYCHIATRIC REPORTS ARE VERBOTEN. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: YES, YOUR HONOR. I DON'T REALLY THINK THE COURT NEEDS TO HEAR A LOT FROM THE PEOPLE. THE DEFENSE HAS REALLY NOT OFFERED YOU ANY REASON TO CHANGE THE EARLIER RULING THAT YOU'VE ISSUED. WHAT THEY'RE BASICALLY ARGUING TO THE COURT IS THAT THE FACT OF THE COURT'S PERMISSION FOR THE DEFENSE TO USE THE KATHLEEN BELL ALLEGATIONS, WHICH WE WILL DISPROVE, NEVER THE LESS, THE FACT THAT THE COURT ISSUED THAT RULING IS NOW BASICALLY BEING POSITED TO THE COURT AS AN EXCUSE TO GO BACK INTO THE VERY ITEMS THAT THE COURT RULED TO BE TOO REMOTE AND INADMISSIBLE. THE FACT THAT THE PEOPLE DECIDED TO AIR THOSE INCIDENTS THAT THE DEFENSE HAS BEEN THREATENING TO USE AGAINST DETECTIVE FUHRMAN BY WAVING THE NEWSWEEK ARTICLE BACK IN CHAMBERS ABOUT THE MOCK CROSS-EXAMINATION, BY THE DISCUSSIONS AND THE NIGHTLY PRESS CONFERENCES CONCERNING KATHLEEN BELL AND HER CREDIBILITY AND HOW THEY'RE GOING -- WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO PROVE VIA KATHLEEN BELL, THE PEOPLE DETERMINED AS A TACTICAL MATTER TO BASICALLY DO A PREEMPTIVE STRIKE AND AIR THOSE MATTERS FIRST ON DIRECT EXAMINATION. BUT THAT DOESN'T OPEN A DOOR ANY FURTHER THAN IT WAS ALREADY OPENED BY THE COURT'S RULING. THE COURT RULED THAT CERTAIN THINGS WOULD BE ADMISSIBLE. IT RULED THAT THE KATHLEEN BELL INCIDENT WAS ADMISSIBLE. IF IT WAS INCLINED TO -- IF YOU WERE INCLINED TO ALLOW THE '81 INCIDENT, YOU WOULD HAVE DONE SO. BUT THE MERE FACT THAT YOU ALLOWED THE DEFENSE TO GO INTO THE '85 INCIDENT AND THEN THE PEOPLE AIR IT ON DIRECT KNOWING THAT THE COURT IS GOING TO ALLOW THE DEFENSE TO DO SO ON CROSS-EXAMINATION DOESN'T OPEN THE DOOR ANY FURTHER THAN IT WAS TO BEGIN WITH.

YOU ISSUED A RULING. YOU SAID A CERTAIN INCIDENT WAS ADMISSIBLE AND THE DEFENSE COULD GO INTO IT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION. THE PEOPLE WERE AWARE OF THAT RULING, BUT THE PEOPLE WERE ALSO AWARE THAT THE COURT RULED THAT THE '81 INFORMATION COULD NOT BE AIRED. I DON'T SEE HOW THERE'S ANY DIFFERENT POSTURE NOW SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT WE DISCUSSED IT ON DIRECT EXAMINATION. AND THE COURT HAS NOT GIVEN NOTABLY ANY RELEVANT CASE AUTHORITY TO JUSTIFY THIS POSITION. IT'S SIMPLY COUNSEL'S BALD ASSERTION. WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THE DEFENSE HAS NEVER AND WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE EITHER THE OPPORTUNITY OR THE -- OR GIVE ANY KIND OF REAL OFFER OF PROOF TO THIS COURT THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN PLANTED ANYTHING, IT'S REALLY -- AND YET THEY GOT THE 1985 INCIDENT FOR -- AS RISK FOR THEIR CROSS-EXAMINATION MILL, I REALLY THINK THEY'VE GONE -- IT'S ALREADY BEYOND THE PALE. THEY HAVE -- THEY WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO GIVE THIS COURT AN OFFER OF PROOF. THEY HAVEN'T TO THIS DATE WHEN THE PEOPLE HAVE REQUESTED THAT THEY DO SO, GIVE US AN OFFER OF PROOF, SHOW US HOW YOU'RE GOING TO PROVE THAT THIS DETECTIVE PLANTED THIS EVIDENCE.

THEY HAVE NOT ONCE, NOT ONCE BEEN ABLE TO DO SO. THEY HAVE REFUSED TO DO SO, AND THE REASON THEY REFUSED TO DO SO IS THEY CAN NOT. THERE WILL NEVER BE SUCH EVIDENCE BECAUSE IT'S AN IMPOSSIBILITY. AND EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NO OPPORTUNITY AND IT'S A VIRTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY FOR THEM TO HAVE DONE WHAT THEY ALLEGE THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN HAS DONE, YET THEY GOT THE RULING FROM THE COURT, WHICH IS VERY GENEROUS, ALLOWING THE 1985 INCIDENT FOR IMPEACHMENT. TO NOW ARGUE THAT THAT VERY RULING WHICH THE PEOPLE ACTED UPON ALLOWS THEM TO GO FURTHER IS LUDICROUS, IS WITHOUT AUTHORITY AND WITHOUT LOGIC.

THE COURT: FORGIVE ME FOR INTERRUPTING YOU, MISS CLARK, BUT DON'T YOU THINK THAT A PRIOR RELATIONSHIP OR PRIOR MEETING BETWEEN THE INTERESTED PARTIES, NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, THE DEFENDANT AND A KEY PROSECUTION WITNESS -- YOU SAY THAT'S A GENEROUS RULING?

MS. CLARK: NO. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT. I WAS TALKING ABOUT THE KATHLEEN BELL INCIDENT.

THE COURT: WE'RE SPEAKING OF THE 1985 INCIDENT.

MS. CLARK: EXCUSE ME.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY. THE FACT THAT THE -- THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN RESPONDED TO THE '85 INCIDENT IS NOT -- WAS -- IT WAS NOT A SIGNIFICANT EVENT AT THE TIME; IN FACT, SO INSIGNIFICANT THAT IT WAS -- HE DID NOT GENERATE A REPORT. HE SIMPLY RESPONDED TO THE LOCATION, WAS CERTAINLY NOT THE ONLY OFFICER TO DO SO. AND WE WILL HEAR FROM THAT OTHER OFFICER LATER ON IN THE CASE WHO WAS ALSO PRESENT AT THE SCENE. BUT THAT IN AND OF ITSELF WAS OBVIOUSLY NOT A GREAT EVENT, YOU KNOW, AND IT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT HE EVEN REMEMBERED UNTIL REQUESTED TO REPORT ON A PRIOR INCIDENT BACK IN '89.

THE COURT: NO. I WAS JUST CONCERNED ABOUT YOUR CHARACTERIZATION OF THAT AS BEING A GENEROUS, QUOTE, UNQUOTE RULING. I THOUGHT I WAS PRETTY MUCH COMPELLED TO ALLOW THE JURY TO HEAR THAT THERE WAS SOME PRIOR CONTACT AMONGST THESE PARTIES.

MS. CLARK: THAT'S TRUE. I'M NOT ARGUING THAT. I WAS ARGUING THE KATHLEEN BELL INCIDENT, JUST THE BELL INCIDENT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MS. CLARK: THAT WAS THE ONLY ONE. AND --

THE COURT: BUT MR. BAILEY MAKES THE ARGUMENT THAT SINCE WE HAVE GONE IN AT SOME LENGTH THE '85 INCIDENT, THAT THEN THEY'RE ALLOWED TO GO INTO THE -- THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO INTO THE '81 ISSUES.

MS. CLARK: AND I UNDERSTAND. AND I THINK THE ARGUMENT HAS ABSOLUTELY NO MERIT. THERE'S NO CASE AUTHORITY TO JUSTIFY IT, THERE'S NO LOGIC TO JUSTIFY IT. THEY ARE IN NO DIFFERENT POSITION NOW THAN WHEN THE COURT RULED EARLIER. THE SAME INFORMATION WAS DEEMED ADMISSIBLE THEN AS IS NOW. THE COURT MADE A RULING SAYING THAT THE KATHLEEN BELL INCIDENT COULD COME IN. THE DEFENSE WAS AWARE THAT WE WERE GOING TO BE PROVING THE 1985 INCIDENT AND THE DEFENSE WAS VERY CLEAR IN ITS INDICATION THEY WERE GOING TO USE THE PRIOR CONTACT WITH MR. SIMPSON TO TRY AND PAINT A CERTAIN PICTURE OF DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND HIS ACTIVITIES IN THIS CASE --

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

MS. CLARK: -- WHICH, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS PART OF WHAT -- MAY HAVE BEEN PART OF WHY THE COURT ALLOWED THE KATHLEEN BELL EVIDENCE IN. SO THE COURT MADE ITS RULING BASED ON THE FACT OF THE PRIOR CONTACT AND THEN THE CONTENT OF THE KATHLEEN BELL ALLEGATIONS. BUT THE FACT THAT THE PEOPLE ELICITED THIS INFORMATION ON DIRECT PUTS THE DEFENSE IN NO DIFFERENT POSTURE. IT DOESN'T MAKE THE '81 INFORMATION ANY MORE RELEVANT THAN THE COURT EARLIER DEEMED IT. WHAT IS THE CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCE? THE COURT MADE A RULING ON WHAT IS ADMISSIBLE. THE PEOPLE ACTED UPON THE RULING. AND SO WHAT IS DIFFERENT? BASED ON THEIR ARGUMENT, YOUR HONOR, IF THEY BROUGHT OUT THE '85 INCIDENT AND THEY BROUGHT OUT KATHLEEN BELL, WHICH OBVIOUSLY THEY WERE GOING TO DO, THEY WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO STAND UP AND SAY TO THE COURT, WELL, NOW THAT WE'VE BROUGHT ALL THIS OUT, WE CAN BRING OUT THE '81 INCIDENT AS WELL. WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? SAME THING. I DON'T SEE THE CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCE. PERHAPS IF THE COURT DOES, IT COULD GIVE AN INDICATION. BUT OTHER THAN THEIR BALD ASSERTION THAT THEY GOT THIS MUCH AND SO THEREFORE, THEY GET THIS MUCH MORE, THERE'S NO LOGIC AND THERE IS NO CASE AUTHORITY TO SUPPORT THE REQUEST.

THE COURT: WELL, JUST SO WE ALL UNDERSTAND, THE BASIS FOR THE COURT'S RULING ON THE KATHLEEN BELL INCIDENT IS STATED IN THE COURTS'S WRITTEN RULING. HOWEVER, JUST SO WE'RE ALL OPERATING FROM THE SAME SHEET OF INFORMATION, IT'S BECAUSE OF THE ALLEGATION, ONE OF RACIAL BIAS AND, TWO, THE WILLINGNESS TO FABRICATE INFORMATION REGARDING INTER-RACIAL COUPLES.

MS. CLARK: RIGHT.

THE COURT: WHICH IS VERY SPECIFIC TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND SIMILARITY TO THIS CASE. SO I FELT COMPELLED TO ALLOW THAT FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION.

MS. CLARK: AND THE PEOPLE ACCEPT THE COURT'S RULING AND WE UNDERSTAND.

THE COURT: OKAY.

MS. CLARK: AND ALL I'M SAYING IS, BY VIRTUE OF THAT RULING, THE DEFENSE DOES NOT NOW GET TO GO AND SAY WELL, NOW THE DOOR IS OPEN WIDE. NO, THE COURT HAS ALREADY INDICATED HOW FAR THE DOOR IS OPEN AND IT DOESN'T GET OPEN ANY FURTHER BECAUSE BY VIRTUE OF ITS OWN RULING. IT'S KIND OF A WEIRD ILLOGICAL ARGUMENT. I CAN NOT -- THE PEOPLE FAIL TO SEE ANY MERIT IN IT WHATSOEVER AND OBVIOUSLY THERE'S NO CASE AUTHORITY TO SUPPORT IT. THE PEOPLE URGE THE COURT NOT TO EXTEND THE PERIMETERS ANY FURTHER.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MISS CLARK. MR. BAILEY, ANY RESPONSE?

MR. BAILEY: JUST THIS RESPONSE, YOUR HONOR. FIRST, YOU WILL RECALL THAT MISS CLARK WENT TO GREAT PAINS TO ELICIT FROM DETECTIVE FUHRMAN ALL OF THE THINGS HE COULD HAVE DONE TO MR. SIMPSON IN 1985, AS IF HE HAD THE RIGHT TO ARREST HIM, PAT HIM DOWN, INTERROGATE HIM, FOLLOW UP ON THE CASE TO SHOW A LACK OF ANIMUS.

NOW, THAT'S GRABBING THE BULL BY THE HORNS. THE WORD "PREEMPTIVE STRIKE" IN THE TRIAL OF CASES IS SPELLED W-A-I-V-E-R, AND THAT'S TRUE IN THIS CASE. FURTHERMORE, IN THE EXTRAORDINARY SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THE PROSECUTION FELT COMPELLED TO ACQUAINT THE JURY WITH THE FACT THAT THIS WITNESS REQUIRED SPECIAL TRAINING SO HE COULD CONTROL HIMSELF ON THE WITNESS STAND, WE'RE ENTITLED TO SHOW WHY THAT SPECIAL TRAINING WAS AND ALWAYS WILL BE NECESSARY IN HIS CASE. AND I THINK THEY HAVE OPENED THE DOOR WIDE. YOU CAN'T JUST CHANGE THE RULES BASED ON A COURT'S RULING WHICH REFLECTS OTHER BASES AND THEN SAY, BUT WE DON'T WANT TO PAY A PENALTY FOR THAT. THEY TOOK THE BIT AND I THINK THAT THE DEFENSE IS ENTITLED TO WALK THROUGH THE CAVERNOUS DOOR THAT THEY'VE OPENED.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. LET ME JUST ASK MISS CLARK ONE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION. IT'S YOUR POSITION THAT IF THE COURT WERE TO GRANT THIS WIDER RANGE OF INQUIRY, YOU WOULD WANT TO REOPEN, CORRECT?

MS. CLARK: YES.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. (BRIEF PAUSE.)

MR. BAILEY: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. MIGHT I ADD ONE THING?

THE COURT: ONLY AT THE RISK OF OPENING THE DOOR FOR MISS CLARK TO RESPOND.

MR. BAILEY: I REALIZE THAT THAT'S A SUBSTANTIAL RISK, BUT I LEFT OUT SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS EXTREMELY SIGNIFICANT; AND THAT IS THE PEOPLE DISPLAYING TO THE JURY THE BELL LETTER. THEY CHOSE TO DO THAT. THEY CHOSE TO PUT THOSE WORDS IN THE JURY BOX, AND I THINK THAT THAT OUGHT TO BE CONSIDERED AT LEAST BY THE COURT IN DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE IN CIRCUMSTANCES. THAT'S ALL.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO THAT LAST POINT, MISS CLARK?

MS. CLARK: I CAN'T SEE HOW THAT MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE AT ALL UNLESS IF THE COURT THINKS IT DOES, I WILL ADDRESS THE ISSUE. BUT --

THE COURT: NO. THIS IS YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE ME YOUR -- THE BENEFIT OF YOUR ENLIGHTENMENT.

MS. CLARK: I WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO DO SO, BUT ONLY IF REQUIRED TO DO SO. I DON'T NEED TO BURDEN THE COURT WITH MORE STATEMENTS. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING -- ANY MERIT IN THE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OF MR. BAILEY. I THINK THAT -- IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE. AND IF THE COURT THINKS IT DOES, I WILL ADDRESS THAT POINT. DOES THE COURT --

MR. BAILEY: I OBJECT TO THE COURT PREVIEWING ITS RULING SO MISS CLARK CAN DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT AN ARGUMENT IS NECESSARY.

THE COURT: NO. I THINK IT'S JUST A VERY CLEVER WAY TO ADDRESS THESE MATTERS. MISS CLARK, ACTUALLY THE OPTION IS, IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS IT, FINE. IF NOT, FINE.

MS. CLARK: I WOULD THEN JUST SIMPLY TELL THE COURT IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE. KATHLEEN BELL IS -- IT WAS AIRED THROUGH TESTIMONY, WHETHER IT'S WITH THE LETTER OR NOT.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THE COURT'S PREVIOUS RULING WILL STAND. LET'S PROCEED. ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE. AND, DEPUTY BROWNING, CAN I HAVE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN BACK, PLEASE.

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

THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE SEATED. LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN IS REAPPROACHING THE WITNESS STAND. GOOD MORNING AGAIN, DETECTIVE. YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH.

THE WITNESS: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY COMMENCE WITH YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. BAILEY:

Q: GOOD MORNING, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.

A: GOOD MORNING, MR. BAILEY.

Q: COULD YOU TELL US WHEN IT WAS THAT YOU WERE ENLIGHTENED AS TO THE FACT THAT THE PLASTIC YOU SAW IN MR. SIMPSON'S BRONCO COMES WITH THE CAR, WHEN YOU LEARNED THAT?

A: YES. I BELIEVE IT WAS SATURDAY.

Q: SATURDAY.

A: YES.

Q: SO THAT AFTER NINE MONTHS OF INVESTIGATION, YOU DISCOVERED ON SATURDAY THAT THIS IMPORTANT PIECE OF EVIDENCE WAS PERFECTLY INNOCUOUS; IS THAT RIGHT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. NOW, WHEN YOU FIRST SAW THE SHOVEL IN MR. SIMPSON'S BRONCO, DID YOU THINK THAT A SIGNIFICANT FIND?

A: I DON'T THINK "SIGNIFICANT" WAS THE WORD I WOULD USE.

Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE IN DIGGING, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE KIND OF SHOVEL USED TO DIG A HOLE AND THE KIND OF SHOVEL YOU MIGHT USE AS A SCOOPER FOR INSTANCE?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT KIND OF SHOVEL IS THIS?

A: WELL, THAT'S THE TYPE OF SHOVEL YOU USE TO MUCK A BARN.

Q: OR SCOOP OUT DOGGIE-DO MAYBE?

A: IT'S A LITTLE LARGE FOR THAT, BUT I THINK I SEE WHAT YOU MEAN.

Q: IT WOULD WORK, WOULDN'T IT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. NOW, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOUR COLLEAGUES, DETECTIVES VANNATTER AND LANGE, ON THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 1994 HAD A TOTAL OF SOME THREE HOURS IN THE COMPANY OF MR. SIMPSON, CORRECT? DID YOU LEARN THAT?

A: I HAD NEVER HEARD THAT TIME, NO.

Q: YOU KNOW THEY TALKED THOUGH?

A: YES, I UNDERSTAND.

Q: YOU KNOW THAT PART OF WHAT THEY EXCHANGED --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: -- WITH MR. SIMPSON WAS TAPED, DON'T YOU?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT, BEYOND THE SCOPE, HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE FACT THERE WAS -- THEY HAD A TAPED CONVERSATION IS A FACT. IT'S NOT CONTACT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: PART WAS TAPED, PART WAS NOT. WAS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THAT'S ASSUMING FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

MR. BAILEY: OKAY.

MS. CLARK: BEYOND THE SCOPE.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU KNOW IF A FORMAL STATEMENT WAS TAKEN AT SOME POINT ON THAT DAY, JUST YES OR NO?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. WOULD BE SPECULATION. THIS WITNESS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.

THE WITNESS: I CAN ONLY SAY THAT THROUGH OTHER SOURCES, I ASSUMED AND I HEARD, BUT I HAD NEVER SEEN ANYTHING OR HEARD ANYTHING.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YOU NEVER TALKED TO DETECTIVES VANNATTER AND LANGE ABOUT WHAT THE SUSPECT HAD SAID DURING THREE HOURS OF CONVERSATION?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: NEVER DID?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THAT. MR. BAILEY -- HOLD ON. BE CAREFUL, MR. BAILEY. PROCEED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU EVER LEARN IF MR. SIMPSON WAS EVER ASKED ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT A SHOVEL?

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. I AM GOING TO SUSTAIN THE COURT'S OWN OBJECTION. THAT'S HEARSAY.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU EVER ASK MR. SIMPSON ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT A SHOVEL?

A: I NEVER ASKED --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES HE EVER ASKED ANYTHING.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU?

A: I'VE NEVER ASKED MR. SIMPSON ANY QUESTIONS.

Q: OKAY. WOULD YOU SHARE WITH US, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, SOME OF YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND, HIGH SCHOOL, COLLEGE, THAT SORT OF THING?

A: I WENT TO PENINSULA HIGH SCHOOL. I DID NOT COMPLETE. I GOT A GED. I PROBABLY GOT --

Q: A GED IS?

A: GENERAL EDUCATION, EQUIVALENCY DIPLOMA.

Q: UH-HUH.

A: I ATTENDED ONE, TWO, THREE COMMUNITY COLLEGES I BELIEVE. I CURRENTLY HOLD APPROXIMATELY 47 UNITS OF COLLEGE.

Q: WHAT WOULD THAT BE IN YEARS?

A: CLOSE TO TWO YEARS.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU STUDY?

A: HISTORY, POLICE SCIENCE, ART.

Q: OKAY. AND HAVE YOU HAD ANY OTHER EDUCATION BEYOND THESE COMMUNITY COLLEGE EXPERIENCES?

A: ARE YOU SAYING FORMAL EDUCATION, SIR, THAT I SOUGHT OUT?

Q: WELL, TRAINING COURSES, ANYTHING THAT WOULD QUALIFY AS INSTRUCTION.

A: OH, YES. NUMEROUS -- NUMEROUS COURSES.

Q: DID YOU SERVE FOR A TIME IN THE MILITARY?

A: YES.

Q: WHEN?

A: 1970 TO '72, '73 TO '75.

Q: IN WHAT BRANCH?

A: MARINE CORPS.

Q: RESERVE?

A: NO. ACTIVE DUTY.

Q: WERE YOU A REGULAR OR RESERVE?

A: YES. REGULAR, SIR.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT RANK DID YOU ATTAIN?

A: E-5, SERGEANT.

Q: AND WHAT IF ANY EDUCATIONAL COURSES DID YOU TAKE IN THE MILITARY?

A: EXCEPT FOR YOUR BASIC M.O.S. TRAINING, I DON'T BELIEVE I ATTENDED ANY COURSES.

Q: OKAY. AND M.O.S. MEANS MILITARY OCCUPATIONAL SPECIALTY?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: WHAT WAS YOURS?

A: PRIMARY, MACHINE GUNNER, SECONDARY, MILITARY POLICEMAN.

Q: NOW, IN CONNECTION WITH THE MILITARY POLICE SPECIALTY, SOME TRAINING IS REQUIRED BEFORE YOU CAN HAVE THAT; IS THAT NOT TRUE?

A: WELL, NOT REALLY. IT'S MORE OF AN ON-THE-JOB-TRAINING TYPE. YOU START OFF AS A GATE SENTRY AND THEN YOU WORK FROM THERE. IF YOU HAVE AN APTITUDE, THEY'LL ELEVATE YOU.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHAT ROLE OF A MILITARY POLICEMAN DID YOU PLAY? WAS IT TANTAMOUNT TO BEING A PATROLMAN OR A GATE SENTRY OR WAS IT MORE LIKE A DETECTIVE?

A: WELL, IT STARTED OUT AS A GATE SENTRY AND THEN I WENT TO PATROL, AND AT SOME POINT, I WORKED WITH CID ON A COUPLE THINGS, BUT THEY WERE NOT --

Q: CID STANDS FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION DIVISION, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS; DOES IT NOT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT KINDS OF CASES DID YOU WORK ON WITH THEM?

A: ONLY ONE. I POSED AS A PRIVATE -- EXCUSE ME -- AWAITING TO GET OUT OF THE SERVICE WHERE THEY HAD A NARCOTICS PROBLEM, AND MY ROLE WAS JUST TO PLAY CARDS WITH THEM AND SEE IF I COULD ELICIT ANY INFORMATION ABOUT A HASHISH CONNECTION THAT THEY WERE SUSPECTED OF BEING INVOLVED IN.

Q: YOU WERE UNDERCOVER AT THE TIME?

A: WELL, SOMEWHAT.

Q: PLAYING A ROLE.

A: YES, I WAS PLAYING A ROLE.

Q: OKAY. AND WAS THAT YOUR ONLY NEXUS TO ANY MILITARY INVESTIGATIONS OF SUSPECTED CRIMES WHILE YOU WERE IN THE MARINE CORPS?

A: NO. I INVESTIGATED CRIMES AS A PATROLMAN.

Q: OKAY. EVER INVESTIGATE ANY HOMICIDE?

A: NO.

Q: EVER ATTEND ANY COURSES IN INVESTIGATION, HOW IT SHOULD BE ACCOMPLISHED?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: OKAY. WHEN YOU WERE DISCHARGED FROM THE MARINE CORPS, WHAT DID YOU NEXT DO?

A: I JOINED THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. HOW DID THAT COME ABOUT? CAN YOU TELL US?

A: I APPLIED FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND I WENT TO LOS ANGELES I BELIEVE THREE DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, TOOK THE REQUIRED TESTS AND I HAD AN ACADEMY DATE APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS, MAYBE A LITTLE LESS, MAYBE A LITTLE MORE TO WHEN I WAS -- WHEN I EXITED THE MARINE CORPS.

Q: I TAKE IT THAT YOU PASSED THE TEST?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND HOW LONG AFTER YOUR APPLICATION WERE YOU FORMALLY INDUCTED INTO THE POLICE ACADEMY?

A: I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY WHEN I APPLIED. I BELIEVE IT WAS IN 1975, BUT SHORTLY AFTER MY E.A.S. OR MY END OF ACTIVE SERVICE.

Q: I DON'T KNOW THAT ONE. YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN.

A: END OF ACTIVE SERVICE.

Q: THAT'S E.A.S. IS IT?

A: E.A.S. THEN I ENTERED THE ACADEMY ON AUGUST 4TH, 1975.

Q: THEN YOU HAD PLANNED TO BECOME A POLICE OFFICER BEFORE YOU WERE ACTUALLY DISCHARGED; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT, SIR. HOW LONG DOES THAT ACADEMY LAST?

A: I BELIEVE IT LASTED FIVE MONTHS AT THAT TIME. I BELIEVE I GRADUATED JUST BEFORE CHRISTMAS 1975.

Q: AND WHAT KINDS OF COURSES DID YOU TAKE THERE?

A: IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO, BUT YOUR BASIC -- SPLIT UP INTO THREE AREAS. YOU HAVE SHOOTING, PHYSICAL FITNESS AND THEN ACADEMICS, AND ACADEMICS, IT WENT FROM EVERYTHING TO TRAFFIC CITATIONS TO TACTICAL SITUATIONS TO YOUR INVESTIGATORY RESPONSIBILITIES ON CRIME SCENES TO TAKING CRIME REPORTS, ENGLISH.

Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU WENT TO THE ACADEMY WITH A VIEW TOWARD GRADUATING AND BECOMING A PATROLMAN?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: IS THERE A PROBATIONARY PERIOD DURING WHICH YOU CAN BE DISCHARGED WITHOUT ANY CAUSE AFTER YOU GRADUATE?

A: YES.

Q: HOW LONG IS THAT?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS SIX MONTHS THEN.

Q: OKAY. TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT YOU LEARNED IN THE TACTICAL END OF THINGS AT THE ACADEMY.

A: WELL, THAT WAS -- THAT WAS A LONG TIME AGO. OFFICER SAFETY WAS STRESSED QUITE --

Q: WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT. WHAT ARE THE PRINCIPLES OF OFFICER SAFETY THAT STICK IN YOUR MIND FROM THAT EXPERIENCE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. RELEVANCE, YOUR HONOR. WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE?

THE COURT: SOME LATITUDE HERE, MR. BAILEY.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. DO YOU REMEMBER ANY OF THE --

A: THE FOREMOST?

Q: -- PARTICULAR -- THE FOREMOST.

A: THE HANDS CAN KILL YOU, THE EYES CAN'T.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT ABOUT PROTECTING YOUR BACK?

A: OH, ABSOLUTELY.

Q: WHEN THERE IS DANGER, NORMALLY OFFICERS GO OUT IN PAIRS TO LOOK OUT AFTER ONE ANOTHER; DO THEY NOT?

A: THAT'S PREFERRED.

Q: AND WAS THAT NOT A PRINCIPLE THAT YOU HAD LEARNED IN FACT IN THE MARINE CORPS?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, DID YOU TAKE ANY OTHER COURSES COURTESY OF THE LAPD OR AT ITS REQUEST PRIOR TO THE TIME THAT YOU BECAME A DETECTIVE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: CAN YOU TELL ME JUST GENERALLY WHAT KINDS THEY WERE?

A: YES. DETECTIVE SCHOOL, HOMICIDE -- IT WAS A COMBINED DETECTIVE AND HOMICIDE SCHOOL AND THAT YEAR I BELIEVE IT WAS --

Q: THAT WAS FOR PURPOSES OF THE UPGRADE?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. WHEN DID YOU FIRST GO TO DETECTIVE AND HOMICIDE SCHOOL IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO LEARN.

A: THE FIRST TIME WAS IN 1983.

Q: AND DID YOU COMPLETE THAT COURSE?

A: YES.

Q: HOW LONG WAS IT?

A: THREE WEEKS.

Q: AND DID YOU LEARN CERTAIN ASPECTS OF DETECTION, PARTICULARLY WITH REFERENCE TO HOMICIDE CASES?

A: YES. IN A GENERAL BASIS, YES.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU HAVE COURSES IN THE FIREARMS -- FIREARMS IDENTIFICATION?

A: ARE YOU TALKING BALLISTICS OR THE FORENSICS?

Q: WELL, I'M TALKING ABOUT WHAT MOST PEOPLE INCORRECTLY CALL BALLISTICS, WHICH IS BULLETS PROJECTORY. I'M TALKING ABOUT FIREARMS IDENTIFICATION, WHICH MEANS MATCHING A WEAPON TO A PROJECTORY. DID YOU HAVE ANY COURSES IN THAT?

A: THE CLASS WOULD BE WHAT YOUR CRIMINALISTS COULD DO FOR YOU, NOT YOUR -- YOUR INVOLVEMENT.

Q: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DID YOU LEARN ANYTHING ABOUT FINGERPRINTS?

A: YES.

Q: FOOTPRINTS?

A: YES.

Q: BLOOD PATTERNS, SPATTERS?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. PROTECTION OF THE CRIME SCENE?

A: YES.

Q: PRESERVATION OF EVIDENCE?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU ALSO LEARN THAT DELAY AFTER DISCOVERY OF A CRIME IS GENERALLY THE ENEMY OF DETECTION?

A: I DON'T RECALL THAT, NO.

Q: YOU DON'T RECALL THAT LESSON?

A: NO.

Q: WELL, DID PEOPLE TELL YOU THAT -- FOR INSTANCE, WITH RESPECT TO HOMICIDE VICTIMS, THAT BODIES BEGIN TO DETERIORATE AFTER THEY'RE DEAD?

A: YES.

Q: CHANGES TAKE PLACE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. THAT INSECT AND PLANT LIFE MAY INFECT PORTIONS OF THE CRIME SCENE; DID YOU LEARN THAT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AS I UNDERSTOOD YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY, YOU ESTIMATE THAT AS A PATROLMAN AND DETECTIVE COMBINED, YOU'VE BEEN AT 150 TO 250 HOMICIDE SCENES; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND THAT AS LEAD DETECTIVE, ONCE YOU BECAME A DETECTIVE, YOU HAVE HAD FIVE INVESTIGATIONS WHERE HOMICIDE WAS THE CRIME?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND 10 MORE WHERE YOU WERE WITH ANOTHER DETECTIVE. IS THAT WHAT YOU MEANT TO CONVEY?

A: I THINK TOTAL WOULD BE TO PROBABLY FIVE MORE WHERE I WAS ACCOMPANIED AS A SECONDARY OR --

Q: SO THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS THAT YOU MAINTAINED THE LEAD OR FOR YOU AT LEAST THE 11TH HOMICIDE CASE?

A: YES, AS ONE OF THE --

Q: AS A DETECTIVE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND WAS THIS THE FIRST DOUBLE HOMICIDE?

A: OF THIS NATURE, YES.

Q: NOW, AT WHAT GRADE DID YOU BEGIN YOUR DETECTIVE WORK?

A: RANK, SIR? D-1 OR DETECTIVE 1.

Q: ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE IN FACT THREE GRADES OF DETECTIVES IN THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT?

A: YES, THERE IS.

Q: AND YOU AT THE TIME OF THIS INCIDENT HAD BECOME A DETECTIVE, SECOND RANK?

A: YES. DETECTIVE 2.

Q: AND DETECTIVES PHILLIPS, LANGE AND VANNATTER WERE ALL OF THE 3RD RANK AT THAT TIME; WERE THEY NOT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. WHEN YOU BECAME A DETECTIVE, DID YOU HAVE TO TAKE ANY ADDITIONAL COURSES IN INVESTIGATION AND PARTICULARLY HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION?

A: I DID ATTEND DETECTIVE SCHOOL ONCE MORE AND HOMICIDE SCHOOL.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED IN '83? WERE THERE NO OPENINGS OR YOU DIDN'T GET PROMOTED TO DETECTIVE AT THIS TIME?

A: I HADN'T TAKEN THE TEST, SIR.

Q: WHAT'S THAT?

A: I HADN'T TAKEN THE TEST.

Q: YOU TOOK THE COURSE IN '83 BUT DIDN'T TAKE THE TEST?

A: YES. THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: I SEE. WHY DID YOU NOT TAKE THE TEST IF YOU REMEMBER?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.

THE WITNESS: NO REASON. I HAD A FRIEND THAT SAID, "YOU WANT TO GO TO DETECTIVE SCHOOL," AND I SAID, "SURE."

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. SO YOU WERE KIND OF AUDITING RATHER THAN BEING ENROLLED. IS THAT YOUR POSTURE?

A: NO. I WAS LEARNING.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU GO TO PRECISELY THE SAME SCHOOL OR SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT ONE WHEN YOU FORMALLY TOOK THE DETECTIVE'S EXAM OR PRIOR THERETO?

A: WELL, I THINK THE SCHOOL CHANGED SOMEWHAT. THEY SPLIT HOMICIDE AND DETECTIVE SCHOOL.

Q: UH-HUH.

A: I FIRST ATTENDED DETECTIVE SCHOOL, WHICH WAS TWO WEEKS, AND THEN LATER I ATTENDED HOMICIDE SCHOOL, WHICH WAS ONE WEEK.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHAT YEAR WAS THAT, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: I BELIEVE DETECTIVE SCHOOL WAS 19 -- COULD HAVE BEEN '89. I'M THINKING MORE LIKE 1990, AND I BELIEVE HOMICIDE SCHOOL, 1991.

Q: DO YOU RECALL NOW THE SUBJECTS THAT WERE TAUGHT TO YOU IN THE 1991 HOMICIDE SCHOOL?

A: WELL, I DON'T REMEMBER THEM ALL, NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, LET'S REVIEW WHAT WE CAN. DID ANYONE TELL YOU AT THIS TIME THAT YOU SHOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT DELAYS IN THE INVESTIGATION IN HOMICIDE CASES?

A: I'VE NEVER HEARD ANYBODY PHRASE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE BODIES OF THE SCENE IN THAT WAY.

Q: WELL, YOU'VE HEARD IT NOW. ARE YOU SAYING THAT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME ANYBODY HAS EVER SUGGESTED TO YOU THAT THAT'S A PRINCIPLE?

A: WELL, THE WAY THAT THAT'S PHRASED, YES.

Q: OKAY. YOU TELL US THEN THAT IN YOUR JUDGMENT, THE LAPSE OF TIME IS IRRELEVANT TO THE SUCCESS OF A HOMICIDE CASE?

A: NO. NOT AT ALL.

Q: WELL, DID YOU LEARN ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS TO BODIES WHEN YOU WENT IN 1991?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DID YOU LEARN ABOUT TEMPERATURE LOSS?

A: YES.

Q: POST-MORTEM LIVIDITY?

A: YES.

Q: RIGOR MORTIS?

A: YES.

Q: STOMACH CONTENTS AND THEIR POSSIBLE DETERIORATION?

A: YES.

Q: CONTAMINATION BY INSECT AND PLANT MATERIAL?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT PEOPLE AT THE SCENE, PARTICULARLY IF IT'S CROWDED, MAY CONTAMINATE THE AREA?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: THOSE ARE THINGS THAT YOU WERE INSTRUCTED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU LEARN THE MANNER IN WHICH TIME OF DEATH CAN IN SOME CASES BE ASCERTAINED IN HOMICIDE CASES?

A: YES. THERE'S SEVERAL WAYS.

Q: AND WHAT FACTORS DID YOU LEARN ARE RELEVANT TO ESTABLISHING THE PERIMETERS OF THE TIME OF DEATH?

A: I DON'T THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT EXACTLY ASKED, SIR.

Q: NO DOCTOR CAN EVER SAY THIS VICTIM DIED AT 32 AND A HALF MINUTES PAST THE HOUR. IT'S NOT THAT PRECISE, IS IT? NO CORONER CAN SAY THAT, CAN THEY?

A: I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

Q: OKAY. SO NORMALLY, THE TIME IS BRACKETED BY THE CORONER, BETWEEN 9:00 AND 10:00, BETWEEN 9:00 AND 12:00, WHATEVER, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IS IT GENERALLY TRUE THAT THE LONGER IT TAKES TO GET TO AN AUTOPSY, THE BROADER THE RANGE OF THE CORONER'S OPINION?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. HOW WOULD HE KNOW? SPECULATION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MR. BAILEY: IF HE KNOWS.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I DON'T THINK I HAVE THE EXPERIENCE IN THIS FIELD TO REALLY ANSWER. I THINK EVERY SCENE WOULD BE UNIQUE TO ITSELF. SO I DON'T KNOW IF I COULD ANSWER THAT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IN HOW MANY HOMICIDE CASES THAT YOU HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN AS A DETECTIVE, WHICH I TAKE IT IS NOW 11, HAS TIME OF DEATH BEEN AN IMPORTANT QUESTION?

A: I COULDN'T SAY, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT NOT ALL OF THEM.

Q: NOT ALL OF THEM. HALF?

A: I COULDN'T SAY, SIR. I DON'T EVEN HAVE THE HOMICIDES AT THE FOREFRONT OF MY MEMORY RIGHT NOW.

Q: YOU DON'T HAVE ANY MEMORY OF THE OTHER 10 CASES?

A: WELL, I DO, BUT RIGHT NOW, I'M CONCENTRATING ON THIS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, WOULD YOU LIKE A MOMENT TO REFLECT ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD EVER HAD OCCASION IN THE PAST PRIOR TO THIS CASE TO WANT TO ASCERTAIN THE TIME OF DEATH OF THE VICTIMS?

A: YES. I CAN SAY YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION AT ALL OF HOW MANY DIFFERENT OCCASIONS THAT WAS A NECESSARY PART OF YOUR INVESTIGATION?

A: IF I COULD HAVE A MOMENT TO THINK.

Q: SURE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE WITNESS: I CAN THINK OF ONE THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. IT IS TRUE, IS IT NOT, THAT THE TIME OF DEATH CAN DEFINE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE POTENTIAL SUSPECTS IN A CASE?

A: I THINK IT WOULD BE USEFUL.

Q: AND IT CAN ALSO ELIMINATE PERSONS WHO MIGHT OTHERWISE BE SUSPECTS IN THE CASE; CAN IT NOT?

A: I'M SURE IT COULD, YES.

Q: NOW, IN THIS CASE, DO YOU REGARD THE TIME OF DEATH OF THE VICTIMS AS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR?

A: I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE CRIME SCENE ON THIS CASE.

Q: YOU DON'T. OKAY. WHEN YOU ENCOUNTERED MR. SIMPSON AND THE WOMAN YOU NOW KNOW TO BE NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON IN 1985, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT BECAUSE YOU PREFER BASKETBALL OVER FOOTBALL, BUT STILL LIKE FOOTBALL, YOU KNEW WHO HE WAS AS YOU WALKED UP?

A: AS I GOT CLOSE, I SAW WHO HE WAS, YES.

Q: HAD YOU EVER SEEN HER BEFORE?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU EVER SEE HER AGAIN UP TO THE TIME OF HER DEATH?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: WHEN YOU WERE AT THE SCENE, DID YOU HAVE ANY POWER TO PAT DOWN ANYBODY THERE? WOULD THAT HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATE POLICE CONDUCT?

A: WHICH SCENE IS THIS, SIR?

Q: '85, THE MERCEDES.

A: OH, I BELIEVE I COULD HAVE, YES.

Q: WELL, MR. SIMPSON DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING ON HIM OR IN HIS HANDS RESEMBLING A WEAPON, DID HE?

A: NO.

Q: NO. WHAT WOULD BE THE BASIS THAT YOU WOULD WALK ON A PERSON'S LAND AND PAT THEM DOWN? DO YOU HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO DO THAT?

A: AT SOME POINT YOU DO.

Q: AND DID YOU HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT TO ARREST HIM?

A: OH, NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: SO WHEN MISS CLARK ASKED YOU ON DIRECT EXAMINATION COULD YOU HAVE ARRESTED HIM, YOUR ANSWER WAS WHAT?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE I SAID I COULD HAVE ARRESTED HIM, NO.

Q: THANK YOU. IN 1989, HOW DID YOU LEARN THAT WHAT YOU HAD OBSERVED IN 1985 MIGHT BE OF INTEREST TO THE CITY SOLICITOR OR PROSECUTOR? HOW DID YOU FIRST LEARN ABOUT THAT?

A: WELL, THE ONE AND ONLY TIME I LEARNED, I WAS STANDING IN FRONT OF THE DESK OF DETECTIVE SERGEANT GLEN VARNER, WHO I WAS TALKING WITH EARLIER IN THE MORNING, HAVING A CUP OF COFFEE AND --

Q: CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT WHEN THIS HAPPENED?

A: I AM SORRY?

Q: CAN YOU RELATE THIS TO THE LETTER THAT YOU WROTE TO THE CITY SOLICITOR WHICH WE'VE ALREADY SEEN?

A: JUST PRIOR TO WRITING THE LETTER.

Q: OKAY. DETECTIVE VARNER SAID SOMETHING TO YOU AS --

A: NO. NO, HE DIDN'T, SIR.

Q: GO AHEAD.

A: DETECTIVE MIKE FARRELL CAME TO DETECTIVE SERGEANT VARNER, WHO WAS HIS DIRECT SUPERVISOR, AND DISCUSSED THE CASE, THE '89 CASE INVOLVING MR. AND MRS. SIMPSON.

Q: OKAY. AND DID YOU THEN VOLUNTEER THE FACT THAT YOU HAD ENCOUNTERED THEM FOUR YEARS PRIOR TO THAT?

A: NO, NOT AT THAT TIME.

Q: BUT AT SOME POINT, WERE YOU ASKED WHETHER OR NOT YOU COULD, IF REQUESTED TO DO SO, GIVE SOME TESTIMONY ABOUT THE 1985 INCIDENT?

A: NO. I OVERHEARD DETECTIVE FARRELL INFORMING DETECTIVE VARNER THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ANYBODY THAT HAD BEEN UP THERE THAT DIDN'T TAKE A REPORT TO WRITE A LETTER TO THE COURT.

Q: FINE. ALL RIGHT. NOW, YOU DID NOT MAKE A REPORT IN THAT CASE. AS I UNDERSTAND YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY, THAT'S BECAUSE YOU WERE DRIVING THE PATROL VEHICLE AND YOUR PARTNER WAS RIDING IN THE PASSENGER SEAT AND REPORTS WERE HIS RESPONSIBILITY; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: OKAY. YOU MEAN TO SAY THAT IF YOU HAD BEEN IN THE PASSENGER SEAT, YOU WOULD HAVE REPORTED SOMETHING TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT?

A: NO. THERE WAS NO REPORT TO BE TAKEN.

Q: THERE WASN'T ANY REASON TO MAKE A REPORT, WAS THERE, DETECTIVE?

A: NO, SIR. NO, SIR.

Q: BUT IN 1989, YOU FOUND THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS INTERESTED IN THAT INCIDENT OR ANY PRIOR INCIDENT BETWEEN MR. SIMPSON AND NICOLE, CORRECT?

A: THAT'S WHAT I HEARD, YES.

Q: AS A RESULT OF WHICH, YOU WROTE HIM A LETTER SAYING THAT BECAUSE OF THE CELEBRITY STATUS OF MR. O.J. SIMPSON, THE MATTER WAS INDELIBLY PRESSED INTO YOUR MEMORY, TRUE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: THE KIND OF THING YOU WON'T FORGET FOR AS LONG AS YOU LIVE; FAIR STATEMENT?

A: SEEING MR. SIMPSON, YES.

Q: YEAH. WELL, AND THE WHOLE EXPERIENCE, TO BE ON HIS PROPERTY.

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. AND HAD THE CASE GONE TO TRIAL INSTEAD OF BEING RESOLVED AS IT WAS, YOU WERE PREPARED TO GO AND TESTIFY TO ESSENTIALLY WHAT YOU PUT IN YOUR LETTER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I WASN'T TOLD THAT AND I DIDN'T ASSUME THAT, NO.

Q: WERE YOU PREPARED TO IF SOMEBODY HAD ASKED YOU TO?

A: OH, I THINK I WOULD HAVE -- OBVIOUSLY I WOULD HAVE RESPONDED TO A SUBPOENA.

Q: NOW, IN 1994, AT 1:05 A.M., WHILE YOU WERE SOUND ASLEEP, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, YOU RECEIVED A PHONE CALL FROM DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, CORRECT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: HAD YOU SEEN MR. O.J. SIMPSON PERSONALLY BETWEEN 1985 AND JUNE OF 1994?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: MR. PHILLIPS TOLD YOU THAT THERE WAS A DOUBLE HOMICIDE IN BRENTWOOD AND THAT ONE OF THE VICTIMS MIGHT WELL BE THE FORMER WIFE OF MR. O.J. SIMPSON; DID HE NOT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DID THAT BRING TO YOUR MIND YOUR PRIOR ASSOCIATION WITH THE SIMPSON'S IN 1985 AS AN INVESTIGATING PATROLMAN AND AS A POTENTIAL WITNESS IN 1989? DID YOU REMEMBER THOSE THINGS?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE I EVEN THOUGHT OF THAT MUCH AT THE TIME.

Q: SO I TAKE IT THAT THE INDELIBLE PRESS THAT WAS IN YOUR MIND IN 1989 HAD FADED TO A DEGREE?

A: NO, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT. I WAS GOING TO A HOMICIDE SCENE. I WAS MOSTLY THINKING ABOUT HOW WE WERE GOING TO HANDLE A DOUBLE HOMICIDE SCENE AND WHO WAS GETTING CALLED IN.

Q: HADN'T PHILLIPS EXPLAINED TO YOU THAT BASED ON THE INFORMATION HE HAD GOTTEN, THIS WAS A SPECIAL CASE BECAUSE OF ONE OF THE VICTIMS?

A: NO, HE NEVER VERBALIZED THAT.

Q: HAD YOU LEARNED FROM HIM DURING THAT CONVERSATION THAT THE COMMANDER WISHED TO HAVE MR. SIMPSON PERSONALLY NOTIFIED AS OPPOSED TO TELEPHONIC NOTIFICATION?

A: I BELIEVE I LEARNED THAT WHEN WE WERE EN ROUTE TO THE ROCKINGHAM ADDRESS.

Q: OKAY. NOW, FOLLOWING THE RECEIPT OF THIS PHONE CALL FROM DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, YOU AROSE, I TAKE IT SHOWERED AND CLEANED UP, ET CETERA, AND DROVE IN YOUR CAR TO THE WEST LOS ANGELES POLICE STATION, RIGHT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE YOU AT THAT HOUR OF THE MORNING, ASSUME TRAFFIC IS RATHER LIGHT, TO DRIVE IN FROM REDONDO BEACH?

A: IT'S FAIRLY QUICK. PROBABLY 20 TO 25 MINUTES.

THE COURT: LET ME SEE COUNSEL AT SIDEBAR WITHOUT THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.

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

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY PROCEED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO DRIVE INTO THE WEST LOS ANGELES POLICE STATION IN YOUR AUTOMOBILE?

A: 20, 25 MINUTES.

Q: DURING THE TIME THAT YOU WERE DRIVING TO THE WEST LOS ANGELES POLICE STATION, WERE YOU THINKING ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION THAT WAS ABOUT TO UNFOLD?

A: I WAS THINKING ABOUT, YES, THINGS THAT WERE --

Q: WERE YOU THINKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT IN ALL PROBABILITY, THERE MIGHT BE GREAT MEDIA ATTENTION TO THIS PARTICULAR HOMICIDE IF THE VICTIM WAS AS DESCRIBED?

A: I DIDN'T GIVE ANY THOUGHT TO THAT AT THAT TIME.

Q: DID YOU CONTEMPLATE IN ANY WAY THAT THE CRIME SCENE WOULD BE CRAWLING WITH NEWS MEDIA THE MINUTE THE DISCOVERY WAS MADE THAT THE VICTIM WAS MR. SIMPSON'S WIFE, IF IT WERE?

A: I DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THAT ON THE WAY IN, NO.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT THE POLICE STATION, YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS -- AND BY THE WAY, WHO GOT THERE FIRST, IF YOU REMEMBER?

A: I DON'T, SIR.

Q: WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT THE POLICE STATION, WHAT DID YOU FIRST DO?

A: WALKED TO THE WATCH COMMANDER'S OFFICE.

Q: WHAT TIME WAS THAT?

A: SHORTLY BEFORE 2:00.

Q: WATCH COMMANDER WASN'T PRESENT, WAS HE?

A: I DON'T RECALL, SIR.

Q: DO YOU KNOW SERGEANT DAVE ROSSI?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: DID YOU SEE HIM THERE IN THE POLICE STATION?

A: I DIDN'T SEE HIM THERE, NO.

Q: DID YOU LATER SEE HIM AT THE SCENE?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND HE WAS THERE WHEN YOU ARRIVED, WASN'T HE?

A: YES.

Q: YEAH. DID YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TAKE ONE OF THE AUTOMOBILES THAT BELONGS TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND WHAT KIND OF CAR IS THAT?

A: IT'S A DUAL PURPOSE, I BELIEVE AN '88 CHEVROLET FOUR-DOOR IMPALA.

Q: WELL, I WASN'T INTERESTED IN SO MUCH THE MAKE AND MODEL AS THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE TO WHICH IT'S ALLOCATED.

A: IT'S A CAR THAT'S ASSIGNED TO HOMICIDE UNIT. WE HAVE A HOMICIDE KIT IN THE TRUNK.

Q: NOW, MAY WE LEARN WHAT A HOMICIDE KIT CONSISTS OF? I ASSUME YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH THEM MORE THAN ONCE.

A: FROM THE BEGINNING?

Q: YES.

A: IN THE BOTTOM OF THE HOMICIDE KIT, YOU HAVE USUALLY COVERALLS, PLIERS, ROPES, GLOVES, SOMETIMES --

Q: WHAT KIND OF GLOVES?

A: -- HIGH-POWERED FLASHLIGHTS.

Q: WHAT KIND OF GLOVES, DETECTIVE?

A: YOU COULD HAVE LIKE WORK GLOVES THAT YOU WOULD USE TO MAYBE CLIMB DOWN A ROPE IF YOU WERE GOING INTO A RAVINE OR SOME INACCESSIBLE AREA YOU HAVE TO GET DOWN TO A SCENE.

Q: DO YOU ALSO HAVE RUBBER GLOVES?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: WE SAW -- WELL, DID YOU SEE DETECTIVE LANGE AT ANY TIME THAT DAY WITH SOME RUBBER GLOVES ON?

A: I DID NOT, NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. CONTINUE.

A: YOU WOULD HAVE RULERS, TAPE MEASURES, ANY NECESSARY REPORTS, PLASTIC BAGS, ENVELOPES, WRITING UTENSILS, GREASE PENCILS, RULERS, COMPASS.

Q: PLASTIC BAGS IN VARYING SIZES PERHAPS?

A: YES.

Q: INTENDED FOR THE COLLECTION OF EVIDENCE SHOULD ANY BE FOUND?

A: YES.

Q: ANYTHING ELSE OF SIGNIFICANCE OF A STANDARD LAPD HOMICIDE KIT?

A: THERE'S QUITE A -- THERE'S QUITE A FEW ITEMS, BUT I'M SURE I'VE LEAVING OUT SEVERAL, BUT --

Q: BUT THESE ARE ALL TOOLS THAT MIGHT BE USED AT THE SCENE OF A GIVEN HOMICIDE?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS DISCUSS WITHOUT GOING INTO THE CONVERSATION -- JUST YES OR NO -- THE POSSIBLE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PARTICULAR HOMICIDE AS IT MIGHT AFFECT THE PUBLIC AND THE MEDIA?

A: YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE MEDIA?

Q: YEAH.

A: I DON'T RECALL DISCUSSING THAT WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS.

Q: SO NO MENTION OF THAT WAS MADE AS YOU WERE MEETING AT THE WEST LOS ANGELES POLICE STATION AND WHILE YOU WERE GETTING INTO THE HOMICIDE-EQUIPPED VEHICLE.

A: NOT THAT I RECALL.

Q: AND WAS HE DRIVING?

A: YES, HE WAS.

Q: IT IS A VERY SHORT DISTANCE FROM THERE TO THE INTERSECTION OF BUNDY AND DOROTHY; IS IT NOT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND YOU AGREE THAT YOUR ARRIVAL TIME -- I ASSUME YOU DO BECAUSE OF YOUR OWN NOTES -- WAS 2:10 A.M.?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND THAT YOU AND PHILLIPS ARRIVED SIMULTANEOUSLY?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, YOU WERE THE FIRST DETECTIVE ON THE SCENE, YOU TWO?

A: YES. BOTH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND MYSELF.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, DID YOU LEARN THAT SERGEANT ROSSI HAD BEEN THERE SINCE EARLY ON, SOMETIME BEFORE YOU?

A: BEFORE I ARRIVED, YES.

Q: AND DID YOU KNOW HIM PERSONALLY PRIOR TO THIS INCIDENT?

A: JUST AS MUCH AS HE WAS THE WATCH COMMANDER, NOTHING PERSONAL.

Q: YOU DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HIS EXPERIENCE IN PRIOR HOMICIDE CASES?

A: NOTHING, SIR.

Q: DID YOU KNOW OFFICER RISKE PRIOR TO YOUR INTRODUCTION TO HIM IN CONNECTION WITH THIS INVESTIGATION?

A: ONLY AS MUCH AS KNOWING HIS NAME WAS RISKY AND WHO THAT NAME WAS ATTACHED TO.

Q: BUT YOU HADN'T WORKED WITH HIM BEFORE?

A: NO, I HADN'T.

Q: OKAY. NOW, I TAKE IT THAT WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT THE SCENE, YOU HAD QUITE A FEW QUESTIONS AS THE INITIAL DETECTIVE TAKING OVER THE CASE?

A: INITIALLY, I DIDN'T SAY HARDLY ANYTHING. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TOOK THE LEAD TALKING TO SERGEANT ROSSI.

Q: OKAY. NOW, CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME IDEA OF THE BREAK-UP IN RESPONSIBILITIES BETWEEN YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS? HAD YOU WORKED A PRIOR HOMICIDE TOGETHER?

A: YES.

Q: THERE ARE CERTAIN TASKS THAT HAVE TO BE LOOKED AFTER IMMEDIATELY AFTER YOU GET ON THE SCENE, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU FELLOWS DIVIDE UP THESE RESPONSIBILITIES OR DOES HE JUST TAKE CONTROL AND DIRECT YOU TO DO CERTAIN THINGS?

A: NO. THERE'S A WAY WE USUALLY WORK TOGETHER.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, DID YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS HAVE ANY CONVERSATION WHEREBY YOU ALLOCATED THE WORK TO BE DONE AT THIS PARTICULAR SCENE?

A: NO.

Q: WELL, WAS -- DO YOU KNOW IF IT WAS CONTEMPLATED THAT YOU WOULD WORK SIDE BY SIDE OR THAT YOU WOULD GO OFF IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS?

A: WELL, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS THE HOMICIDE COORDINATOR. SO HE WOULD NOT BE TAKING A LEAD ROLE. IT WOULD BE ONE OF THE OTHER DETECTIVES THAT HAD BEEN CALLED IN THAT HAD NOT YET ARRIVED.

Q: OKAY. NOW, WHAT OTHER DETECTIVES HAD BEEN CALLED IN THAT YOU LEARNED ABOUT WHEN YOU GOT THERE?

A: DETECTIVE ROBERTS AND DETECTIVE NOLAN.

Q: AND WHAT RANK DO THEY HOLD?

A: BOTH DETECTIVE 1.

Q: SO THAT YOU APART FROM DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WOULD BE THE SENIOR DETECTIVE ON-SITE?

A: YES.

Q: UNTIL SOMEONE ELSE ARRIVED, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU SAY THAT SINCE HE'S THE HOMICIDE COORDINATOR, I GATHER THE THRUST OF THAT IS THAT YOU HAD TO DO THE FOOTWORK SO TO SPEAK?

A: WELL, WORKING WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, HE USUALLY CONDUCTS MOST OF YOUR ADMINISTRATIVE NOTIFICATIONS.

Q: RIGHT.

A: HE COORDINATES AND HE ALLOWS THE DETECTIVES HANDLING THE CASE TO WORK THE CASE.

Q: WHICH IN THIS CASE WAS YOU, CORRECT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: YOU WERE TO DO THE DETECTING?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHAT DID YOU FIRST ADDRESS OF THE MANY THINGS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE LOOKED AT WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT THE SCENE?

A: I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CRIME SCENE OR --

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED WHENEVER A HOMICIDE OCCURS, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU KNEW THIS BOTH BY VIRTUE OF YOUR TRAINING, YOUR EXPERIENCES AS PATROLMAN AT 10 OTHER HOMICIDE INVESTIGATIONS, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IF THE VICTIMS AREN'T QUITE DEAD AS SOMETIMES IS THE CASE, THAT'S PRIORITY NUMBER ONE, TREATMENT AND ATTENTION OF THE VICTIMS, RIGHT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: YOU ELIMINATED THAT POSSIBILITY IN YOUR OWN MIND RATHER QUICKLY IN THIS CASE; DID YOU NOT?

A: OFFICER RISKE INFORMED US OF THE SITUATION.

Q: OKAY. THE PROTECTION OF OTHERS WHO MAY BE IN DANGER BECAUSE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES EVIDENT AT THE CRIME SCENE WOULD BE PROBABLY THE NEXT CONSIDERATION; WOULD IT NOT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: YOU KNEW THE CHILDREN HAD BEEN IN THE HOUSE AND HAD BEEN TAKEN TO THE SAFETY OF THE POLICE STATION?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU KNOW WHETHER THEY HAD BEEN ASKED AS TO WHERE OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS MIGHT BE?

A: I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANY QUESTIONS.

Q: DID YOU MAKE ANY EFFORT TO CONTACT THEM AND INQUIRE?

A: NOT AT THAT TIME.

Q: OKAY. PRESERVING THE INTEGRITY OF THE CRIME SCENE IS A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TASK; IS IT NOT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: YOU SAW THAT YELLOW TAPE HAD BEEN PUT UP?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT ELSE HAD BEEN DONE TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF THE CRIME SCENE BEFORE YOU TOOK OVER?

A: WHAT I SAW WAS, THE OFFICERS DID A VERY GOOD JOB IN SEALING OFF A VERY, VERY LARGE AREA CONSIDERING THAT THEIR ONLY KNOWLEDGE WAS THAT THE CRIME SCENE INVOLVED ONE ADDRESS OR ONE RESIDENCE. THEY SEALED OFF A VERY LARGE AREA AND HAD UNIFORMED PERSONNEL WITH THEIR VEHICLES AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS TO KEEP THAT AREA SECURE AND ANY UNAUTHORIZED PEOPLE FROM ENTERING.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHAT ABOUT THE NEED TO NOTIFY EXPERTS, CRIMINALISTS AND OTHERS TO COME TO THE SCENE WHILE THE EVIDENCE IS STILL FRESH? DID THAT CROSS YOUR MIND AT ALL THAT MORNING?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DID YOU DO ABOUT THAT?

A: I DIDN'T HAVE THE CASE LONG ENOUGH TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

Q: OKAY. WELL, DID YOU DEVELOP AN INTEREST SOON AFTER YOUR ARRIVAL AS TO THE TIME OF DEATH OF EACH OF THE VICTIMS?

A: NO.

Q: DID NOT?

A: NO.

Q: WHY WAS THAT?

A: I NEVER GOT TO THE POINT TO EVEN GIVE AN OPINION AS TO MODE OF DEATH AND I WOULD LEAVE THAT TO THE CORONER'S INVESTIGATOR.

Q: OKAY. WELL, YOU KNEW THAT THEY WERE DEAD BY A LITTLE AFTER MIDNIGHT, DIDN'T YOU, BASED ON THE INFORMATION YOU WERE GIVEN?

A: I BELIEVE OFFICER RISKE GAVE A GENERAL TIME, YES.

Q: YOU WERE WELL SATISFIED BY WHAT RISKE TOLD YOU AND WHAT YOU SAW WITH YOUR OWN EYES THAT NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WAS INDEED THE FEMALE VICTIM, WEREN'T YOU?

A: I HAD NO IDEA. I COULD NOT SEE HER FACE. I COULD NOT -- THERE WAS NO IDENTIFICATION. SO AT THAT TIME, I BELIEVE IT WAS ASSUMED, BUT NOT KNOWN.

Q: THERE WASN'T ANY QUESTION IN ANYBODY'S MIND AT 2:10 A.M. THAT NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WAS DEAD, WAS THERE?

A: I DON'T KNOW THAT, SIR.

Q: WELL, WAS THERE A QUESTION IN YOUR MIND? DID YOU REALLY WONDER WHO SHE WAS AT THAT POINT?

A: I DIDN'T JUMP TO ANY CONCLUSIONS ABOUT WHAT THAT SCENE OFFERED.

Q: MY QUESTION IS, DID YOU KNOW WHO SHE WAS OR WERE YOU WONDERING WHO SHE WAS?

A: I'D SAY WONDERING.

Q: OKAY. YOU COULDN'T SEE ENOUGH OF HER TO RECOGNIZE HER FROM YOUR PRIOR CONTACT?

A: I WOULDN'T HAVE RECOGNIZED HER, BUT IDENTIFICATION --

Q: YOU WOULDN'T HAVE?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: OKAY. YOU KNEW THAT THE PICTURES OF MR. SIMPSON WERE AROUND THE HOUSE?

A: I SAW ONE, YES.

Q: UH-HUH. AND DID YOU SEE A LIST OF PHONE NUMBERS ON THE KITCHEN WALL WHICH INCLUDED THAT OF O.J. SIMPSON?

A: NO, I DID NOT SEE THAT.

Q: DID YOU SEE A TELEPHONE WITH A SPEED DIALER?

A: I BELIEVE I SAW A TELEPHONE NEXT TO THE KITCHEN AREA, BUT I DIDN'T LOOK AT THE PHONE, NO.

Q: YOU DIDN'T EXAMINE IT AT ALL?

A: NO.

Q: DIDN'T NOTICE THAT IT HAD A SPEED DIALER AND AN ENTRY THAT SAID "DADDY"?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: OKAY. NOW, HAD YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS DISCUSSED AT THIS POINT THE MANNER IN WHICH MR. SIMPSON WOULD BE NOTIFIED?

A: NO, I WAS NOT PRIVILEGED TO THAT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHEN DID YOU FIRST LEARN WHAT SPECIAL STEPS WOULD BE TAKEN IN THIS CASE?

A: I AM SORRY?

Q: WHEN DID YOU FIRST LEARN THAT SPECIAL RULES HAD BEEN ISSUED BY THE BRASS IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AS TO HOW MR. SIMPSON WOULD BE NOTIFIED?

A: NEVER.

Q: YOU NEVER HEARD THAT?

A: NO.

Q: YOU'RE LEARNING TODAY THAT PHILLIPS WAS TOLD TO TELL HIM PERSONALLY RATHER THAN OVER THE TELEPHONE?

A: NO. I THOUGHT YOU MEANT SPECIAL, SPECIAL WAY THAT WE WERE GOING TO NOTIFY, BEST DESIRABLE IN ANY CASE. I ONLY LEARNED FROM DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WHILE WE WERE IN THE VEHICLE THAT WE WERE GOING UP TO THE ROCKINGHAM ADDRESS TO MAKE A NOTIFICATION.

Q: CAN YOU TELL ME WHEN THAT WAS?

A: WHEN WE GOT INTO THE VEHICLE TO LEAVE.

Q: TO GO TO ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: THAT WAS 5:00 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING OR THEREAFTER?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: WHAT'S YOUR BEST ESTIMATE?

A: ABOUT 5:00 O'CLOCK.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, I WONDER IF YOU COULD HELP US, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, AND JUST GIVE US YOUR BEST RECOLLECTION OF YOUR WHEREABOUTS AT VARIOUS TIMES THAT ARE RELEVANT TO YOUR EXPERIENCES THAT MORNING, PLEASE, IN VIEW OF THE DEFENSE. YOU RECEIVED A CALL FROM PHILLIPS AT 1:05?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: CAN YOU ESTIMATE AT WHAT POINT YOU WERE ACTUALLY ON THE ROAD AND HEADED TO THE STATION?

A: USUALLY TAKES ME MAYBE 15, 20 MINUTES TO GET READY.

Q: OKAY. SO SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 1:15 AND 1:25?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND I THINK YOU SAID AROUND 20 MINUTES TO DRIVE IN?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU ARRIVED THERE AROUND 1:50, 1:55?

A: SHORTLY BEFORE 2:00, YES.

Q: OKAY. AND HAVING ARRIVED AT THE CRIME SCENE AT 2:10, I WOULD ASSUME THAT YOU LEFT THE STATION ABOUT 2:05.

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, IF YOU CAN, PLEASE TRY TO TELL US WHAT YOU WERE DOING AT 2:15, FIVE MINUTES AFTER YOU ARRIVED AT THE CRIME SCENE.

A: I BELIEVE I WAS LISTENING TO EITHER SERGEANT ROSSI OR OFFICER RISKE EXPLAIN WHAT THEY HAD DISCOVERED.

Q: AND WHERE WERE YOU PHYSICALLY STANDING AS YOU LISTENED TO THIS INFORMATION?

A: INSIDE THE YELLOW TAPE BEHIND A POLICE VEHICLE PARKED IN THE ROADWAY.

Q: OKAY. HOW LONG DID YOU SPEND AT THAT LOCATION GETTING THIS INFORMATION BEFORE YOU MOVED TO SOMEWHERE ELSE?

A: A FEW MOMENTS. JUST LONG ENOUGH TO MAKE A FEW STATEMENTS ABOUT HOW THE BODIES WERE DISCOVERED.

Q: OKAY. WELL, A MOMENT DOESN'T HAVE A VERY CONCRETE DEFINITION. CAN YOU JUST GIVE US IN MINUTES?

A: COUPLE OF MINUTES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT BY 2:15, YOU WERE LEAVING THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE AND WALKING SOUTH ON DOROTHY?

A: I THINK THAT WOULD BE RATHER QUICK. WE TRIED TO APPROACH TO THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE, BUT THEN WE TURNED AROUND AND THEN WE WENT DOWN TOWARDS DOROTHY.

Q: WOULD IT BE MORE FAIR TO SAY BETWEEN 2:15 AND 2:25, YOU LEFT THE CRIME SCENE WHERE YOU, PHILLIPS AND RISKE HAD BEEN LOOKING AT THE BODIES AND WALKED BACK OUT TO THE SIDEWALK AND SOUTH ON DOROTHY?

A: I THINK THAT'S TOO MUCH. NO.

Q: TOO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND YOU SAID 2:15 WOULD BE TOO SOON. AND MY QUESTION NOW IS, WOULD IT BE BETWEEN 2:15 AND NO LATER THAN 2:25?

A: I WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH MAYBE NO LATER THAN 20 AFTER.

Q: OKAY. SO BY 2:20, YOU WERE ON THE MOVE. NOW, YOU'VE DESCRIBED HOW YOU WALKED THROUGH THE SHRUBBERY I BELIEVE YOU SAID FROM OFF THE PICTURE AS YOU WERE LOOKING AT A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SCENE AND COULD VIEW THE BODY OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, BUT DID NOT HAVE A VERY GOOD VIEW OF THE BODY OF THE OTHER VICTIM FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT. AM I CORRECTLY SUMMARIZING WHAT HAPPENED?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IN ORDER TO ATTAIN A BETTER PERSPECTIVE, YOU QUESTIONED RISKE, AS A RESULT OF WHICH YOU WALKED DOWN BUNDY TO DOROTHY AND AROUND -- UP THE ALLEY AND INTO THE SIMPSON HOME, CORRECT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND OUT THE FRONT DOOR WHICH YOU UNDERSTOOD WAS FOUND OPEN BY THE OFFICERS FIRST ON THE SCENE.

A: YES.

Q: CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE LIGHTING CONDITIONS THAT EXISTED AT THE MOMENT THAT YOU WALKED OUT THAT FRONT DOOR?

A: I BELIEVE THERE WAS LIGHT COMING FROM THE INSIDE OF THE RESIDENCE CASCADING DOWN ONTO THE WALKWAY.

Q: CASCADING DOWN?

A: YES.

Q: IS THAT SUGGESTING THAT THE NAKED EYE COULD SEE MOST OF THE DETAIL OF THE CRIME SCENE WITHOUT THE AID OF ARTIFICIAL ILLUMINATION BY VIRTUE OF THAT LIGHT?

A: NO. THERE WAS A LOT OF SHADOWING. THERE'S A LOT OF SHRUBBERY. IT WASN'T VERY GOOD LIGHT.

Q: WELL, DID YOU HAVE YOUR LITTLE FLASHLIGHT WITH YOU AT THAT TIME?

A: YES.

Q: THAT'S THE LITTLE -- IS IT A BLACK ONE?

A: YES.

Q: THAT HOLDS TWO DOUBLE A BATTERIES?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. CAN BE ADJUSTED EITHER FOR A SPOT OR A FLOOD?

A: YES.

Q: THEN PRIOR TO THE TIME THAT YOU WALKED AROUND TO THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE, THE ONLY PLACE YOU HAD BEEN IS WITH THE OTHERS IN THE SHRUBBERY AT THE GATEPOST AS YOU PUT IT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: TRUE?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AT WHAT TIME WOULD YOU SAY YOU ENTERED THE RESIDENCE ASSUMING THAT YOU LEFT AT 2:20 FROM THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE?

A: WITHIN A MINUTE.

Q: YOU WALKED THAT DISTANCE IN ONE MINUTE?

A: YES. JUST AROUND THE BLOCK.

Q: WELL, YOU'RE A FAIRLY TALL FELLOW. DO YOU KNOW THE RATE AT WHICH YOU NORMALLY WALK?

A: NO.

Q: THREE AND A HALF, FOUR MILES AN HOUR LIKE MOST PEOPLE?

A: I WOULD SUSPECT, YES.

Q: OKAY. DO YOU KNOW THE DISTANCE FROM THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE AROUND THE BACK WAY INTO THE HOUSE?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. WELL, THREE AND A HALF MILES AN HOUR IS 319 -- 309 FEET A MINUTE AND FOUR IS 352. DO YOU THINK THAT THE DISTANCE WAS LESS THAN THAT?

A: THAT SEEMS PRETTY ACCURATE, YOUR FIRST NUMBER.

Q: OKAY. SO YOU THINK IT WAS ABOUT 300 AND SOME ODD FEET THAT YOU TRAVERSED TO GET TO THE HOUSE?

A: THAT WOULD BE A GREAT ESTIMATION ON MY PART, BUT I THINK IT'S WORKABLE.

Q: OKAY. AND THAT'S ABOUT THE DISTANCE YOU COULD WALK IN A MINUTE, TRUE?

A: IF YOU SAY SO.

Q: WELL, YOU'RE THE WALKER. DO YOU SAY SO?

A: I WALK FAIRLY RAPIDLY, BUT --

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

Q: WHEN YOU ENTERED THE HOME, DID YOU GO DIRECTLY OUT THE FRONT DOOR TO VIEW THE BODIES ONCE AGAIN OR DID YOU AT THAT TIME BEGIN TO WALK AROUND AND MAKE OBSERVATIONS?

A: NO. I WAS LED BY OFFICER RISKE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. THE PURPOSE IN TAKING THAT ROUTE WAS TO GET BACK TO WHERE YOU HAD STARTED, BUT IN A DIFFERENT PLACE, RIGHT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND TO GET THERE WITHOUT WALKING THROUGH THE POOLING OF BLOOD THAT WAS AROUND THE AREA, THAT WAS YOUR PURPOSE, RIGHT?

A: YES. YES, SIR.

Q: HOW LONG WOULD YOU SAY YOU SPENT AT THE CRIME SCENE FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT UP ON THE STEPS I BELIEVE YOU TOLD US ON THAT OCCASION?

A: ONCE OFFICER RISKE BROUGHT US OUT INTO THE LANDING? JUST LONG ENOUGH TO POINT OUT A FEW ITEMS OF EVIDENCE, SHOW US THE FOOTPRINTS AND THEN WALK US BACK ALONG THE RIGHT SIDE OF THOSE SHOEPRINTS.

Q: OKAY. WELL, HOW LONG DO YOU THINK YOU SPENT THERE?

A: COUPLE MINUTES.

Q: MAYBE ONLY TWO?

A: TWO, THREE MINUTES.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU MADE THE OBSERVATIONS YOU DESCRIBED FOR US ON DIRECT EXAMINATION ABOUT MR. GOLDMAN, THE OTHER EVIDENCE THAT WAS LYING AROUND?

A: OFFICER RISKE WAS POINTING THEM OUT WITH HIS FLASHLIGHT.

Q: OKAY. THESE ARE THINGS HE HAD DISCOVERED AND HE WAS SHOWING THEM TO YOU. THESE WERE NOT THINGS THAT YOU WERE DISCOVERING AS A DETECTIVE, RIGHT?

A: I WAS LISTENING AND HE WAS POINTING THEM OUT, YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: BUT HE ALREADY KNEW THEY WERE THERE. YOU FELLOWS WEREN'T MAKING A DISCOVERY AT THAT POINT, WERE YOU?

A: NO. WE WERE QUIET LISTENING TO HIS -- HIS LEAD.

Q: AND HE TOLD YOU THAT HE HAD SEEN THEM THERE WHEN HE FIRST CAME ON THE SCENE A LITTLE AFTER MIDNIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, AFTER SPENDING TWO, THREE MINUTES THERE, WHERE DID YOU GO?

A: WE WALKED DOWN ALONG THE PATHWAY THAT'S ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE, LOOKED AT THE GATE.

Q: IS THIS WHERE YOU SAW THE BLOODY FOOTPRINTS?

A: THE BLOODY FOOTPRINTS WERE FROM THE LANDING WESTBOUND.

Q: RIGHT. NOW, YOU'VE DESCRIBED A PATH THAT GOES DOWN SOME STEPS, LEVELS OUT AND GOES UP SOME STEPS AND OUT THE BACK GATE, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: DID I UNDERSTAND YOU TO SAY THAT THE LAST BLOODY FOOTPRINT THAT YOU SAW THAT NIGHT WAS ON THE CONCRETE BEFORE YOU GO DOWN THE FIRST SET OF STEPS?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IS THAT CORRECT, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: WOULD YOU ASK THAT ONE MORE TIME?

Q: YEAH. HAVE IN MIND THAT STEPS GO UP, THERE'S A FLAT AREA GOING BY THE ENTRANCE TO THE HOME, STEPS GO DOWN, LEVELS OUT AGAIN, STEPS GO UP AND THEN YOU GO OUT THE BACK GATE. HAVE THAT SCENARIO IN MIND? DO YOU REMEMBER THAT NOW?

A: YEAH. YES, I DO.

Q: OKAY. IS IT CORRECT THAT THE BLOODY FOOTPRINTS THAT YOU SAW DID NOT EXTEND BEYOND THE FIRST FLAT LEVEL?

A: I DON'T RECALL THEY DID, NO.

Q: YOU HAVE REFERRED TO --

THE COURT REPORTER: I NEED TO CHANGE PAPER.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YOU HAVE REFERRED TO THE DEPRESSED AREA IN THE PAST AS A TROTH OF SOME SORT; HAVE YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, MY QUESTION IS, DID ANY FOOTPRINTS GO DOWN THE STEPS OR INTO THE TROTH THAT YOU SAW THAT NIGHT?

A: I DIDN'T SEE ANY.

Q: OKAY. HAVE YOU HAD SOME TRAINING IN FOOTPRINTS?

A: SHOEPRINTS OR FOOTPRINTS?

Q: SHOEPRINTS, FOOTPRINTS. HAVE YOU HAD SOME CLASSES, SOME ON-THE-JOB TRAINING OR ANYTHING THAT WOULD EDUCATE YOU AS TO THE KINDS OF FOOTPRINTS THAT CAN BE FOUND AT A CRIME SCENE AND HOW THEY CAN BE ISOLATED AND PRESERVED?

A: YES.

Q: YOU HAVE.

A: YES.

Q: CAN YOU TELL ME WHEN AND WHERE YOU OBTAINED THAT TRAINING?

A: IN DETECTIVE SCHOOL, HOMICIDE SCHOOL.

Q: THAT WAS A FORMAL CLASS WHERE SOMEBODY LECTURED TO YOU?

A: I THINK IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE CRIMINALIST'S ABILITY AT CONDUCTING SOME INVESTIGATIONS AT A SCENE.

Q: ONE OF THE THINGS CRIMINALISTS CAN DO?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A FOOTPRINT AND A FOOT IMPRINT?

A: I WOULD SAY ONE WOULD BE DIMENSIONAL, HAVE SOME CHARACTER OF WIDTH OR DEPTH AND HEIGHT.

Q: WIDTH OR DEPTH?

A: WIDTH, DEPTH AND HEIGHT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE IMPRINTED --

Q: YOU MEAN THREE-DIMENSIONAL --

A: THREE-DIMENSIONAL.

THE COURT: HOLD ON. MR. BAILEY, WOULD YOU ALLOW THE WITNESS TO FINISH THE ANSWER BEFORE YOU START THE NEXT QUESTION?

MR. BAILEY: YES. COMPLETE.

THE WITNESS: I WOULD SAY AN IMPRINT WOULD BE, YES, THREE-DIMENSIONAL.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IMPRINT IS THE KIND OF FOOTPRINT THAT YOU MIGHT FIND IN SOIL, SAND OR SNOW, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: A FOOTPRINT ON A HARD SURFACE WOULD BE TWO-DIMENSIONAL IF IT EXISTED; WOULD IT NOT?

A: YES.

Q: IT COULD BE OUTLINED IN BLOOD OR GREASE OR ANY SUBSTANCE THAT COULD BE SEEN, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: OR IT COULD BE LATENT; COULD IT NOT?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU KNOW WHAT A LATENT FOOTPRINT IS?

A: IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S NOT VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE.

Q: OKAY. SO THAT IF THERE WERE ANY LATENT FOOTPRINTS THAT WERE ON THAT WALKWAY THAT NIGHT, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT ONLY THE CRIMINALIST COULD LIKELY PICK UP, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: IN OTHER WORDS, IF THERE HAD BEEN TWO PEOPLE, ONE STEPPED IN BLOOD AND THE OTHER DIDN'T, THERE MIGHT BE SOME LATENT FOOTPRINTS AROUND TO BE DETECTED BY SOMEBODY PROPERLY TRAINED; FAIR STATEMENT?

A: I'M NOT SURE IF IT WOULD BE A FAIR STATEMENT.

Q: DON'T THINK SO?

A: I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AT THE QUESTION.

Q: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WELL, LET ME SEE IF I CAN CLARIFY IT SOMEWHAT.

A: THANK YOU.

Q: IF A LATENT FOOTPRINT, SHOEPRINT IS ONE THAT CANNOT BE SEEN WITH THE NAKED EYE BUT MUST NONETHELESS BE PROTECTED, YOU CAN ONLY PROTECT THE AREA WHERE IT MIGHT BE, CORRECT, NOT A SPECIFIC SPOT IN THAT AREA?

A: I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, YES, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND A CRIMINALIST MIGHT LATER COME ALONG AND EITHER WITH ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT OR OBLIQUE LIGHT FIND SOME SHOEPRINT IN THE DUST THAT YOU HADN'T BEEN ABLE TO SEE FOR LACK OF TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE, TRUE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND MY QUESTION IS WHETHER THE CRIME SCENE THAT YOU WERE WALKING ON AS YOU WENT BACK UP THAT WALKWAY WITH OFFICER RISKE WAS BEING PROTECTED IN THAT FASHION.

A: I BELIEVE THE WHOLE SCENE WAS BEING PROTECTED, YES.

Q: OKAY. BUT HOW DID YOU GET FROM THE FRONT TO THE BACK?

A: WELL, WE HAD TO GET THERE SOME WAY.

Q: AND SO YOU WALKED?

A: WE WALKED AT THE BEST PATH THAT WE COULD DETERMINE AT THAT TIME.

Q: BEING CAREFUL TO AVOID THE BLOODY FOOTPRINTS AND WHAT YOU THOUGHT MIGHT BE DROPS OF BLOOD?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, AFTER YOU ARRIVED AT THE BACK GATE, WHAT TIME WOULD YOU SAY IT WAS THEN AS YOU ARRIVED?

A: I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TIME LINE WOULD BE AT THAT POINT. IT WOULD PROBABLY TAKE US A COUPLE MORE MINUTES TO WALK BACK AND MAKE THE OBSERVATIONS ON THE GATE.

Q: JUST GIVE US YOUR BEST ESTIMATE WHAT TIME IT WAS WHEN YOU GOT TO THE BACK GATE.

A: I HAVE NO IDEA.

Q: WOULD IT BE BEFORE 2:30 OR AFTER?

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: 20 MINUTES INTO YOUR INVESTIGATION?

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: OKAY.

A: I WOULD PROBABLY SAY A LITTLE BEFORE.

Q: A LITTLE BEFORE?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID YOU NEXT DO?

A: WALKED OUT ONTO THE DRIVEWAY. OFFICER RISKE POINTED OUT BLOOD DROPS AND SOME CHANGE.

Q: YEAH.

A: THEN I REENTERED THE HOUSE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, BEFORE YOU REENTERED THE HOUSE, DID YOU OR HAD YOU BEGUN TO DEVELOP A PICTURE OF THIS CRIME SCENE AND TO HAVE SOME IDEAS AS TO WHAT MIGHT BE RELEVANT AND WHAT MIGHT NOT IN THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION YOU WERE ABOUT TO CONDUCT?

A: WELL, SOMEWHAT.

Q: DID YOU HAVE AN OVERVIEW?

A: A SLIGHT OVERVIEW.

Q: ALL RIGHT. RISKE HAD BEEN DOING HIS BEST PRIOR TO YOUR ARRIVAL TO DO THE THINGS HE HAD BEEN TRAINED TO DO, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT YOU WERE TRAINED TO DO WHEN YOU WERE A PATROLMAN AT HOMICIDE SCENES AS OPPOSED TO A DETECTIVE?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. HAD ANY CANVASSING OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD TAKEN PLACE THAT YOU KNOW OF?

A: I BELIEVE THERE HAD BEEN, YES.

Q: AND AS I RECALL FROM YOUR NOTES, YOU SAID THE RESIDENTS WOULDN'T OPEN THE DOOR. SO NOBODY LEARNED MUCH.

A: WELL, I THINK THAT WAS AN IMPRESSION OF OFFICER RISKE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS ACCURATE.

Q: BUT SOMEBODY TOLD YOU?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU INQUIRE ABOUT WHETHER THE CRIME SCENE HAD BEEN SEARCHED AND ITS SURROUND FOR ANY EVIDENCE OF WEAPONS, CLOTHING OR OTHER IMPLEMENTS OF CRIME?

A: NO.

Q: RISKE DIDN'T TELL YOU THAT THE AREA HAD BEEN LOOKED AT, GARBAGE CANS, DIPSEY-DUMPSTERS AND SO FORTH?

A: I DON'T RECALL HIM MAKING ANY COMMENT, NO.

Q: DO YOU RECALL DIRECTING ANYONE TO ACCOMPLISH THAT PURPOSE?

A: NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT WHEN THERE IS DELAY IN A HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION, NUMBER ONE, THE PERPETRATORS OR PERPETRATOR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, HAVE A CHANCE TO GET FURTHER AND FURTHER AWAY FROM THE SCENE, CORRECT?

A: WELL, I THINK THAT WOULD BE COMMON SENSE, YES.

Q: THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY PERHAPS TO PLANT EVIDENCE, TO MISLEAD THE DETECTIVES AS TIME GOES BY?

A: I COULDN'T ANSWER THAT, SIR.

Q: THEY HAVE TIME -- THIS IS NO PART OF YOUR TRAINING I TAKE IT?

A: PLANTING EVIDENCE? NO, IT ISN'T.

Q: AND THEY HAVE TIME TO STRUCTURE FALSE ALIBIS ALL DURING THIS PERIOD THAT THEY ARE NOT BEING APPREHENDED?

A: I WOULD PROBABLY AGREE WITH THAT.

Q: AND THEY ARE FREE TO KILL AGAIN, TRUE?

A: IF THAT'S THE CIRCUMSTANCE.

Q: WELL, IF THEY'RE NOT APPREHENDED, PRESUMABLY THEY HAVE THE SAME FREEDOM THAT PERMITTED THEM TO ACCOMPLISH THE GRISLY SCENE THAT YOU HAD JUST VIEWED, TRUE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE WITNESS: I CAN'T --

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I COULDN'T SPECULATE ON A CRIMINAL'S INTENT WHETHER HE KILLED ONCE OR A HUNDRED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WELL, IT SEEMED TO ME THAT A LITTLE LATER THAT DAY, YOU WERE SPECULATING PRETTY HEAVILY ON PEOPLE'S SAFETY AND INTENT; WERE YOU NOT? ABOUT 5:00 THAT MORNING, WHEN YOU WENT OVER THE WALK, WASN'T THAT BECAUSE OF A CONCERN FOR SAFETY?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: I'M SORRY. I CAN'T HEAR YOU, MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ARGUMENTATIVE.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SUSTAINED. PROCEED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. WHEN DID YOU GO INTO THE HOUSE AS BEST YOU CAN RECALL TO MAKE YOUR NOTES?

A: RIGHT AFTER OFFICER RISKE LED US PAST THE DRIVEWAY INTO THE ALLEYWAY.

Q: DID YOU GIVE ANY DIRECTION TO ANY OF THE OFFICERS AT THE SCENE PRIOR TO SITTING DOWN TO MAKE THE NOTES THAT WE'VE ALL VIEWED AS TO THINGS THEY OUGHT TO DO OR OUGHT NOT TO DO?

A: NO. I WAS SATISFIED WITH THE CRIME SCENE, THE SECURITY OF IT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, AS YOU UNDERSTOOD IT, WHEN YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WALKED UP TO THAT POST, WHAT WERE THE RULES ENFORCED ABOUT PEOPLE GOING TO THE CRIME SCENE, THE AREA WHERE YOU WERE STANDING?

A: I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE RULES.

Q: WHICH PEOPLE, IF ANY, WERE ALLOWED TO GO INSIDE THE YELLOW TAPE OF THOSE WHO WERE PRESENT WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT 2:10 A.M.?

A: I WOULD SAY AT THAT POINT, CONCERNED DETECTIVES AS FAR AS APPROACHING THE SCENE.

Q: JUST DETECTIVES?

A: AS FAR AS APPROACHING THE SCENE?

Q: RIGHT.

A: THAT WOULD BE MY ASSUMPTION AT THAT POINT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU ISSUE ANY ORDERS AS TO WHO COULD AND COULD NOT CROSS THAT TAPE?

A: NO.

Q: WHEN DID YOU FIRST REALIZE DETECTIVE ROBERTS HAD ARRIVED?

A: WHEN HE ENTERED THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE AND CAME INTO THE KITCHEN AREA.

Q: AND WHAT TIME WAS THAT?

A: SHORTLY BEFORE THIS CASE WAS RELIEVED FROM OUR RESPONSIBILITY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, YOU HAVE MENTIONED THAT EVENT A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS. CAN YOU TELL US, ACCORDING TO YOUR BEST RECOLLECTION, WHEN IT WAS THAT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS SAID, "ROBBERY-HOMICIDE IS TAKING OVER THIS CASE"?

A: WITHIN A HALF HOUR OR 40 MINUTES OF OUR ARRIVAL.

Q: WELL, WOULD THE FIGURE 38 MINUTES AFTER YOU ARRIVED SEEM TO BE ABOUT CORRECT?

A: I'VE NEVER READ THAT, BUT I AGREE WITH IT.

Q: OKAY. SO THAT IF YOU GOT THERE AT 2:10, THEN ABOUT 2:50 OR THEREABOUTS, YOU LEARNED THAT THIS CASE WAS NO LONGER YOURS TO LEAD, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU WERE IN THE PROCESS OF WRITING YOUR NOTES ABOUT 10 MINUTES OF 3:00 WHEN YOU GOT THIS INFORMATION AS I UNDERSTAND IT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND DID YOU CEASE WRITING YOUR NOTES AT THAT POINT BECAUSE YOU HAD BEEN RELIEVED OR BECAUSE YOU LEARNED YOU HAD BEEN RELIEVED?

A: I COMPLETED THE NOTES. WHEN DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TOLD ME THAT WE WERE RELIEVED OF THIS, I COMPLETED THE NOTES THAT I HAD STARTED.

Q: HOW MANY NOTES DID YOU WRITE AFTER YOU GOT THE INFORMATION?

A: OH, THERE WAS ONLY TWO OR THREE POINTS THAT I WANTED TO PUT ON THE NOTES THAT WERE OF CONCERN.

Q: BUT YOU DID THAT SUBSEQUENT?

A: I BELIEVE WHEN HE WAS STANDING RIGHT THERE.

Q: OKAY. NOW, ON ANOTHER SUBJECT JUST BRIEFLY, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU WERE INSTRUCTED BY SOMEONE LAST FALL TO WATCH THE LARRY KING SHOW?

A: NO. THAT WAS THIS YEAR.

Q: IS THAT NOT CORRECT?

A: THAT WAS THIS YEAR, SIR.

Q: LAST FALL? OH, NO, IT WAS THIS YEAR.

A: YES.

Q: I AM SORRY. WHEN WAS IT?

A: SOMETIME THIS YEAR, I THINK WITHIN THE LAST MONTH.

Q: AND WHY WERE YOU INSTRUCTED TO WATCH THAT SHOW, IF YOU KNOW?

A: THE D.A.'S OFFICE WANTED ME TO LOOK AT A MISS KATHLEEN BELL AND SEE IF I RECOGNIZED HER.

Q: OKAY. HAD YOU SEEN HER EARLIER ON ANY OTHER SHOW?

A: NO.

Q: YOU HAD NOT SEEN A SHOW CALLED DATELINE?

A: NO.

Q: YOU DID NOT SEE YOUR LAWYER ON THAT SHOW?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. DO YOU KNOW OF A MARINE RECRUITING STATION DOWN IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: HAD YOU BEEN THERE IN 1986?

A: I BELIEVE I WAS IN THE RECRUITING OFFICE TWO OR THREE TIMES ABOUT THAT TIME, YES.

Q: DID YOU IN FACT MAKE APPLICATION TO REENTER THE MARINE CORPS?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU FILL OUT ANY PAPERS AT ANY TIME DURING ANY OF YOUR VISITS DOWN THERE?

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

Q: DID YOU MEET A SERGEANT NAMED JOE FAUS?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AS A MARINE, IS THAT A SIGNIFICANT NAME TO YOU?

A: YES. I BELIEVE IT WAS EITHER HIS -- I BELIEVE IT WAS HIS GRANDFATHER WHO WAS A FAMOUS AVIATOR.

Q: THE GREATEST ACE THE MARINE CORPS HAS EVER PRODUCED; WAS HE NOT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: JOE FAUS OF NORTH DAKOTA?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: NOW, HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU MAKE THE ACQUAINTANCE OF MR. FAUS IN THAT STATION OR IN THE SAME GENERAL AREA?

A: TWO OR THREE.

Q: AND DID MR. FAUS EVER INTRODUCE YOU TO A BLOND LADY?

A: I DON'T RECALL BEING INTRODUCED, NO.

Q: WELL, WHEN YOU SAY YOU DON'T RECALL, DOES THAT MEAN IT MAY HAVE HAPPENED, BUT YOU CAN'T NOW DREDGE UP ANY RECOLLECTION OF THE EVENT OR YOU'RE PRETTY CERTAIN IT NEVER HAPPENED? WHICH DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?

A: WHAT I'M CERTAIN IS IS THAT I DIDN'T MEET KATHLEEN BELL AT THAT LOCATION.

Q: OKAY. NOW, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THAT, YOU ARE RELYING ON HER IMAGE BEING SHOWN ON A TELEVISION SHOW WHILE SHE WAS BEING INTERVIEWED, CORRECT?

A: THAT AND HER NAME.

Q: WELL, LET'S SEPARATE. YOU SAY YOU'RE SURE YOU NEVER MET A WOMAN NAMED KATHLEEN BELL?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: YOU HAVE TO ANSWER FOR THE RECORD.

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DID YOU EVER MEET A WOMAN THAT LOOKS LIKE THE LADY ON THE LARRY KING SHOW BY SOME OTHER NAME?

A: NO.

Q: IN LOOKING AT THAT FACE -- HOW LONG DID YOU WATCH THE SHOW THAT NIGHT?

A: ABOUT FIVE MINUTES.

Q: WAS THAT ENOUGH TO SATISFY YOU THAT YOU HAD NEVER SEEN THIS WOMAN BEFORE?

A: I DID NOT RECOGNIZE HER.

Q: THAT WASN'T MY QUESTION. WERE YOU SATISFIED AFTER FIVE MINUTES -- AND I TAKE IT YOU DISCONTINUED VIEWING THE SHOW -- THAT THE WOMAN BEING INTERVIEWED BY LARRY KING AND IDENTIFYING HERSELF AS KATHLEEN BELL WAS SOMEONE YOU HAD NEVER MET?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: OKAY. IS IT NOT TRUE THAT YOU WOULD HAVE RECOLLECTED SUCH A PERSON IF YOU HAD MET THEM UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES SHE DESCRIBED WITHOUT GOING INTO WHAT THEY WERE?

A: YES, I WOULD.

Q: THAT KIND OF THING WOULD IMPRESS YOUR MEMORY THE SAME WAY THE MEETING OF O.J. SIMPSON WOULD; WOULD IT NOT?

A: I DON'T THINK IN THE SAME WAY, BUT SIMILAR, YES.

Q: WELL, WHAT SHE WAS DISCUSSING WAS FAIRLY OUTRAGEOUS CONDUCT; IS IT NOT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. AND IF YOU HAD ENGAGED IN THAT CONDUCT WITH THE WOMAN WHOSE IMAGE YOU WERE LOOKING AT, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU WOULD SOON FORGET, IS IT?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY.

MR. BAILEY: CAN I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WOULD YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THIS PHOTOGRAPH OF A BLOND WOMAN AND TELL ME WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS THE PERSON THAT WAS BEING INTERVIEWED BY LARRY KING WHEN YOU WATCHED THE SHOW AT THE REQUEST OF THE PROSECUTION.

A: YES.

THE COURT: HAVE WE MARKED THAT, MR. BAILEY?

MR. BAILEY: YES. DEFENDANT'S NEXT IN ORDER.

THE COURT: 1053.

(DEFT'S 1053 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)

THE COURT: IS THAT A CUSTOM IN FLORIDA?

MR. BAILEY: PARDON ME, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: NEVER MIND. PROCEED. DEPUTY JEX, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO SHOOT THEM WHEN THEY DO THAT.

MR. BAILEY: I --

THE COURT: PROCEED.

MR. BAILEY: IF I MAY SAY SO, YOUR HONOR, THE CONFIGURATION IS ONE THAT I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH. SO IF I HAVE STEPPED IN THE WRONG AREA, I AM WELL ADVISED.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. PROCEED.

MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. MAY I EXHIBIT THE PHOTO?

THE COURT: YES.

MR. BAILEY: WOULD YOU PUT IT UP, PLEASE?

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, FOR THE RECORD, IS THIS THE SAME PHOTOGRAPH THAT I SHOWED YOU A MOMENT AGO AT THE WITNESS STAND?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND DO YOU HAVE NO RECOLLECTION OF JOE FAUS BEING IN YOUR COMPANY AND HERS IN THE RECRUITING STATION IN 1986 OR THEREABOUTS?

A: I DO NOT.

Q: OR AT ANY TIME IN YOUR LIFE?

A: I DO NOT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO THAT IF HE WERE TO SAY THAT HE DID IN FACT INTRODUCE THE TWO OF YOU, YOU SAY THAT CAN'T BE TRUE, TRUE?

A: IF HE SAID THAT, I DO NOT RECALL EVER MEETING THIS WOMAN IN THE RECRUITING STATION OR ANYWHERE ELSE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, I'M TRYING TO GET THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN A LACK OF RECOLLECTION, A FADED MEMORY AND AN ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY THAT YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS WOMAN BEFORE UNTIL YOU SAW HER ON TELEVISION. WHICH IS IT?

A: I DO NOT RECOGNIZE THIS WOMAN AS ANYBODY I HAVE EVER MET.

Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU TESTIFIED ON DIRECT EXAMINATION THAT NOT ONLY DID YOU NOT KNOW THIS WOMAN AND HAD NEVER MET HER, BUT YOU HAD NEVER SAID THE THINGS THAT WERE DISPLAYED ON THE ELMO IN HER LETTER, TRUE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IS IT FAIR TO SAY THERE CAN BE NO MISTAKE IN YOUR MIND ABOUT YOUR TESTIMONY IN THIS PARTICULAR?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, DO YOU KNOW A WOMAN NAMED ANDREA TERRY?

A: NO, I DO NOT.

Q: DID YOU EVER MEET A WOMAN STANDING SIX FEET ONE INCH NAMED ANDREA TERRY IN A BAR DOWN THERE WHERE YOU LIVE?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: IS THERE A BAR DOWN IN THAT AREA THAT YOU FREQUENT?

A: NO LONGER, BUT YES, THERE IS.

Q: BACK IN '85?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: WHAT WAS THE NAME OF IT?

A: HENNESSEY'S TAVERN.

Q: HENNESSEY'S TAVERN. NOW, ASK YOU WHETHER OR NOT ON AN OCCASION IN THE MIDDLE 80'S RELATED IN TIME TO YOUR GOING TO THE MARINE RECRUITING STATION FOR WHATEVER PURPOSE YOU MET WITH A WOMAN NAMED ANDREA TERRY AND KATHLEEN BELL, AN INDEPENDENT SECOND OCCASION.

A: NO.

Q: HAVE YOU BEEN SHOWN ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF ANDREA TERRY BY ANYONE?

A: NO, I HAVE NOT.

Q: DID YOU SPEND A LITTLE TIME DISCUSSING HER WITH THE PROSECUTION THIS WEEKEND?

A: IT WAS MENTIONED, BUT I SAID I DON'T KNOW THIS WOMAN.

Q: TELL ME ABOUT THE MENTION. WHERE WERE YOU AND WHO WERE YOU TALKING WITH?

A: IT WAS JUST ASKED -- EXCUSE ME? ON THE --

Q: WHERE WERE YOU AND WHO WERE YOU TALKING WITH WHEN THE SUBJECT CAME UP?

A: IN THIS BUILDING.

Q: TALKING TO MISS CLARK OR ONE OF HER ASSOCIATES?

A: YES.

Q: WAS THIS BEFORE OR AFTER YOU WENT AND FOUND OUT ABOUT THE STANDARD EQUIPMENT FOR THE BRONCO?

A: NO. THAT WAS AT MY RESIDENCE.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU DO THAT ON YOUR OWN OR DID SOMEONE ASK YOU TO DO IT?

A: NO. SOMEONE THAT KNEW SOMEBODY CALLED ME AND SAID THAT'S WHAT THAT BAG IS.

Q: BUT A LOT OF PHONE CALLS CAME IN ABOUT THAT, DIDN'T IT?

A: NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. ONE.

Q: OH, OKAY. IN ANY EVENT, WERE YOU ASKED WHETHER OR NOT A WOMAN NAMED ANDREA TERRY HAD EVER MET YOU IN HENNESSEY'S TAVERN WITH OR WITHOUT KATHLEEN BELL?

A: I NEVER HEARD THE LAST NAME, BUT THE FIRST NAME I DID HEAR.

Q: OKAY. DOES THE FIRST NAME MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU?

A: NO.

Q: ARE YOU AS SATISFIED THAT YOU DID NOT MEET KATHLEEN BELL WITH ANOTHER WOMAN IN HENNESSEY'S AS YOU ARE THAT YOU DID NOT MEET KATHLEEN BELL IN THE RECRUITING STATION?

A: YES.

Q: SO THAT IF ANDREA TERRY WERE TO TESTIFY THAT SHE WAS WITH YOU IN HENNESSEY'S TAVERN IN 1986 WITH KATHLEEN BELL AND HEARD REMARKS SUCH AS THE ONE WE'VE SEEN, YOU WOULD SAY THAT IS A FABRICATION, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: I DON'T KNOW WHY SHE'D DO IT, BUT YES, I WOULD.

Q: NO QUESTION ABOUT IT?

A: NO QUESTION ABOUT IT.

Q: HAVE YOU EVER DONE ANYTHING TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE TO HURT OR OTHERWISE OFFEND ANYONE IN THE BELL FAMILY, ASSUMING THAT THERE IS ONE?

A: I HAVE NO IDEA, SIR.

Q: EVER HAD ANY CONTACT WITH ANY RELATIVE OR POSSIBLE RELATIVE OF KATHLEEN BELL IN YOUR CAPACITY AS A POLICEMAN?

A: I WOULD HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT. THE NAME IS -- BELL DOES NOT RING A --

Q: THE NAME BELL DOESN'T RING A BELL. IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO SAY?

A: YES. YES.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT DOES THE NAME TERRY RING OR ANDREA?

A: NOTHING.

Q: OKAY. SO UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE STATEMENT OF MR. FAUS THAT HE MADE ONE INTRODUCTION OF MISS TERRY, THAT SHE WAS IN A MEETING WITH THE TWO OF YOU OR AN ENCOUNTER WOULD BOTH BE INCORRECT; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: WHAT WAS THE LAST OF THAT QUESTION, SIR?

Q: LET ME BREAK THEM UP. WE'VE ALREADY HEARD FROM YOU THAT MR. FAUS WOULD BE SERIOUSLY IN ERROR IF HE SAID HE INTRODUCED YOU TO THE WOMAN WHOSE PICTURE IS ON THE ELMO.

A: YES.

Q: IT NEVER HAPPENED, TRUE?

A: KATHLEEN BELL? NO.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU NEVER MET HER IN HENNESSEY'S TAVERN?

A: NO.

Q: ON ANY OCCASION OR UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES OR WITH ANY OTHER PERSON?

A: NO.

Q: AND YOU HAVE NO IMAGE IN MIND OF A TALL ATTRACTIVE WOMAN NAMED ANDREA WITH WHOM YOU TALKED IN HENNESSEY'S TAVERN IN 1986?

A: NONE AT ALL.

Q: NONE WHATSOEVER?

A: NO.

Q: NOW, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, ARE YOU AS SATISFIED WITH THE QUALITY OF THE TRUTH OF YOUR DENIAL OF KNOWING KATHLEEN BELL AS YOU ARE OF YOUR CLAIM THAT YOU FOUND THE RIGHT-HANDED GLOVE ON MR. SIMPSON'S PROPERTY? IS THE QUALITY OF THE TRUTH OF THOSE TWO STATEMENTS THE SAME OR IS ONE STRONGER THAN THE OTHER, IF YOU KNOW?

A: I DON'T UNDERSTAND ANY OF THAT.

Q: YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION?

A: NO.

Q: ARE YOU AS CERTAIN THAT YOU'VE NEVER MET KATHLEEN BELL ON ANY OCCASION AS YOU ARE THAT YOU IN FACT FOUND THE RIGHT-HAND LEATHER GLOVE WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING ON MR. SIMPSON'S PROPERTY?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY. THE TESTIMONY WAS, HE HAD NO MEMORY AS WITH RESPECT TO KATHLEEN BELL, NOT --

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, I CAN BARELY HEAR YOU. IS THAT --

MS. CLARK: I DON'T WANT TO --

THE COURT: OBJECTION, WHAT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. OVERRULED ON THAT GROUND. PROCEED.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. VAGUE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: CAN YOU TELL US WHY YOU WERE AT THE RECRUITING STATION AND ON WHAT DAY?

A: ON WHAT DAY I CAN NOT.

Q: HOW MANY OCCASIONS?

A: TWO OR THREE.

Q: AND WHAT WAS YOUR PURPOSE IN GOING THERE?

A: I ASKED SERGEANT FAUS IF THERE WAS ANY GOOD RESERVE UNITS THAT WERE -- IF THEY HAD ANY OPENINGS.

Q: AND HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU DO THAT?

A: WELL, I FOUND THAT THERE WASN'T REALLY ANY MOVEMENT IN THE RESERVE UNITS AT THAT TIME, BUT I ENJOYED TALKING TO SERGEANT FAUS. SO I RETURNED FOR A FEW OTHER TIMES.

Q: DID YOU MEET ANYONE ELSE WHILE YOU WERE THERE?

A: A MR. RORE OR SERGEANT RORE.

Q: SERGEANT RORE. RON RORE?

A: I BELIEVE. I DON'T REMEMBER HIS FIRST NAME.

Q: AND HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU MEET HIM?

A: I THINK HE WAS THERE EVERY TIME.

Q: AND DID YOU TALK WITH HIM ABOUT POSSIBLY ENROLLING IN A RESERVE UNIT?

A: NO. I THINK HE MIGHT HAVE OVERHEARD MY PURPOSE, BUT THAT WAS DROPPED FAIRLY QUICKLY.

Q: FAUS WAS THE MAIN SOURCE OF INFORMATION?

A: YES.

Q: AND HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU SEE SERGEANT RORE?

A: A COUPLE OF TIMES.

Q: DID YOU SEE A MARINE WHILE YOU WERE THERE ON ANY OF THESE OCCASIONS NAMED MAX CORDOVA?

A: I BELIEVE I SAW A MARINE THAT I LATER FOUND OUT WAS HIM. I DIDN'T REMEMBER HIS NAME.

Q: DID YOU SPEAK TO HIM AT ALL?

A: I REMEMBER HIM KIND OF IN THE BACKGROUND OF THE RECRUITING OFFICE DOING -- DOING SOME TASKS.

Q: DO YOU REMEMBER AN OCCASION WHEN HE POINTED OUT TO YOU SERGEANT RORE WHO WAS THEN COMING ACROSS THE STREET?

A: I DON'T REMEMBER THAT, NO.

Q: HAVE NO RECOLLECTION OF SUCH AN EVENT?

A: NO.

Q: HOW LONG WERE YOU IN THE COMPANY OF MAX CORDOVA? DO YOU KNOW HIS RANK BY THE WAY?

A: NO, I DON'T.

Q: OKAY. PFC, CORPORAL, SERGEANT?

A: I DON'T KNOW, SIR.

Q: WAS HE IN UNIFORM?

A: I BELIEVE SO, YES.

Q: WERE ALL OF THESE PEOPLE IN UNIFORM WHENEVER YOU SAW THEM ON THE THREE OCCASIONS THAT YOU WENT TO THE STATION?

A: YES.

Q: AND HOW LONG WOULD YOU STAY ON THE FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD OCCASIONS, IF YOU CAN TELL US INDIVIDUALLY?

A: LONG ENOUGH TO HAVE A CUP OF COFFEE. 15, 20 MINUTES.

Q: DID YOU EVER HAVE ANY CONVERSATION WITH ANY OF THESE THREE MEN OUTSIDE THE STATION?

A: I THINK ONE TIME, JOE FAUS WANTED TO LOOK AT MY CAR, MY TRUCK, AND WE WALKED OUT --

Q: OKAY. DID YOU TAKE HIM OUT TO LOOK AT IT?

A: I THINK I WAS LEAVING AT THAT TIME AND WE WENT OUT.

Q: AND DID YOU MEET ANY OTHER PEOPLE OUT IN THE PARKING LOT THAT YOU CAN REMEMBER?

A: NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU KNOW WHEN YOU WERE THERE IN 1986 THAT KATHLEEN BELL WORKED UPSTAIRS DIRECTLY OVER THE RECRUITING STATION IN A REAL ESTATE OFFICE?

A: I WAS TOLD THAT A FEMALE THAT CAME IN THERE AT ONE TIME WORKED IN THE CENTURY 21.

Q: UH-HUH. BUT THAT FEMALE YOU SAW -- DID YOU SEE A FEMALE?

A: YES, I SAW A FEMALE COME IN THERE AT ONE TIME.

Q: AND THAT WAS SOMEONE OTHER THAN MISS BELL?

A: I DON'T KNOW. I PAID -- I DIDN'T PAY MUCH ATTENTION TO WHOEVER CAME IN THERE.

Q: ARE YOU NOW SAYING, SIR, THAT IF YOU'VE EVER SEEN KATHLEEN BELL, THAT YOU DIDN'T RECOGNIZE HER, BUT SHE MAY HAVE WALKED THROUGH THAT PLACE WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE? IS THAT YOUR PRESENT POSTURE?

A: WELL, SHE COULD HAVE.

Q: SHE COULD HAVE?

A: SHE COULD HAVE WALKED IN.

Q: DESCRIBE THE WOMAN YOU DID SEE.

A: I COULDN'T.

Q: BLOND? BRUNETTE? REDHEAD?

A: I COULDN'T, SIR.

Q: TALL? SHORT? STOUT? SLIM?

A: I PAID ALMOST NO ATTENTION. I SAW A FEMALE WALK IN LIKE SHE KNEW PEOPLE IN THE OFFICE AND I CONTINUED MY CONVERSATION WITH MR. FAUS.

Q: WELL, WITHOUT THAT INFORMATION, HOW DID YOU KNOW IT WAS A FEMALE?

A: WELL, I COULD TELL IT WAS A FEMALE, SIR. BUT I DIDN'T PAY ANY --

Q: YOU LOOKED AT LEAST THAT CLOSE?

A: WELL, I COULD TELL SHE WAS A FEMALE.

Q: OKAY.

A: EXCUSE ME?

Q: AND YOU COULD TELL THAT MISS BELL WAS A FEMALE, CAN'T YOU?

A: YES.

Q: FROM SEEING HER ON LARRY KING. ARE YOU QUITE SURE THAT THEY ARE NOT ONE AND THE SAME, THE FEMALE YOU SAW AND THE WOMAN ON THE ELMO?

A: AM I SURE?

Q: YEAH. ARE YOU SURE?

A: I'M NOT SURE.

Q: YOU'RE NOT?

A: I JUST DO NOT KNOW MISS BELL.

Q: SO YOU MAY HAVE SEEN MISS BELL AND YOU'RE NOW UNABLE TO RECOLLECT THAT; IS THAT SO?

A: NO. I DIDN'T PAY ANY ATTENTION TO THE FEMALE THAT CAME INTO THE RECRUITING OFFICE.

Q: PLEASE LISTEN TO THE QUESTION. YOU MAY HAVE BEEN IN THE SAME ROOM WITH MISS BELL, BUT YOU DON'T NOW RECOGNIZE HER. IS THAT THE WAY YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ARGUMENTATIVE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. BAILEY: A GOOD BREAK TIME, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: IT IS. ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE MORNING SESSION. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU; DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, DO NOT ALLOW ANYBODY TO APPROACH YOU OR COMMUNICATE WITH YOU WITH REGARD TO THE CASE. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU ARE EXCUSED UNTIL 1:30.

THE WITNESS: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: WE'LL STAND IN RECESS, 1:30.

(AT 12:02 P.M., THE NOON RECESS WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:30 P.M. OF THE SAME DAY.)

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; MONDAY, MARCH 13, 1995 2:00 P.M.

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

APPEARANCES: (APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED.)

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

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

(PAGES 18478 THROUGH 18505, VOLUME 105A, TRANSCRIBED AND SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.)

(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. ALL THE PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

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

THE COURT: PLEASE BE SEATED. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WOULD YOU RESUME THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE.

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

THE COURT: GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL, THAT DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN IS ON THE WITNESS STAND ON CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAILEY. GOOD AFTERNOON, DETECTIVE.

THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY CONTINUE.

MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)

BY MR. BAILEY:

Q: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHEN WE ADJOURNED YOU WERE PONDERING THE POSSIBILITY THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE UNKNOWINGLY BUMPED INTO KATHLEEN BELL IN THE RECRUITING STATION. YOU HAD SEEN SOME FEMALE ABOUT WHOM YOU HAD NO RECOLLECTION WHATSOEVER. IS THAT A FAIR SUMMARY OF WHERE WE WERE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: NOW, OVER THE LUNCH HOUR HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO RUMINATE UPON THIS MATTER?

A: NO. I WOULD SAY IT IS THE SAME.

Q: YOUR STATE OF MIND STILL IS THAT IF YOU SAW KATHLEEN BELL AT ALL IT WAS IN SOME INSTANT WHERE YOU TOOK NO ACCOUNT WHATSOEVER OF HER APPEARANCE AND DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT YOU MET HER?

A: THAT WOULD BE CORRECT, SIR, YES.

Q: OKAY. ONE THING OF WHICH YOU ARE CERTAINLY SURE IS THAT YOU NEVER HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HER WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN OFFENSIVE TO ANYONE WITH RACIAL FEELINGS?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: OKAY. NOW, AS TO THE HENNESSEY'S TAVERN INCIDENT WITH KATHLEEN BELL AND ANDREA TERRY THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, YOU STILL SAY THAT YOU HAVE NO RECOLLECTION WHATSOEVER OF THAT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: BUT YOU HAVE SEEN MANY FEMALES IN HENNESSEY'S TAVERN, HAVE YOU NOT?

A: WELL, OF COURSE I WOULD SAY HALF THE PEOPLE IN THERE WOULD BE FEMALES.

Q: HALF OF THE PEOPLE THERE, YES. WHAT IS IT, KNOWN AS A SINGLE'S BAR?

A: NO, IT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD BAR.

Q: A WHAT?

A: IT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD BAR.

Q: A NEIGHBORHOOD BAR. OKAY. AND HAVING VIEWED THIS MORNING THE PHOTOGRAPH OF KATHLEEN BELL, YOU ARE QUITE CERTAIN THAT SHE WAS NEVER IN THERE, OR THAT IF SHE WAS, YOU DIDN'T SEE HER, CORRECT?

A: THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND ONE THING OF WHICH YOU ARE VERY CERTAIN IS THAT YOU HAD NO CONVERSATION WITH KATHLEEN BELL, WITH OR WITHOUT ANOTHER WOMAN, ABOUT MATTERS OFFENSIVE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE RACIALLY SENSITIVE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, IF WE MAY, LET'S RETURN TO THE CRIME SCENE.

YOU ARE MAKING NOTES WHEN AT AROUND 2:50 DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TELLS YOU YOU ARE OUT OF THE CASE, TRUE?

A: YES. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT TIME, BUT YES.

Q: HAD IT DAWNED ON YOU BY 2:50 A.M., DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, THAT THIS WAS A CASE OF SOME MAGNITUDE, THIS HOMICIDE?

A: I DON'T THINK I UNDERSTOOD EXACTLY WHAT WOULD TRANSPIRE WITH THIS CASE, NO.

Q: I'M GOING TO ASK YOU AGAIN, HAD IT DAWNED ON YOU THAT THIS WAS A HOMICIDE OF SOME MAGNITUDE?

A: ANY DOUBLE HOMICIDE, YES.

Q: FAR AND AWAY THE MOST IMPORTANT IN WHICH YOU HAD EVER BEEN INVOLVED FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE NEWS MEDIA, TRUE?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW THAT AT THAT TIME.

Q: DID YOU HAVE SOME OTHER CASE IN YOUR MIND THAT WAS AS IMPORTANT AS THE MURDER OF THE EX-WIFE OF O.J. SIMPSON THAT YOU HAD BEEN INVOLVED IN?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THE MEDIA WOULD PLAY THAT CASE UP.

Q: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN INVOLVED IN A MURDER CASE THAT ATTRACTED THE NATIONAL MEDIA IN YOUR CAREER PRIOR TO THIS ONE?

A: NO, NO.

Q: AND ARE YOU SAYING YOU GAVE THIS MATTER AND ITS DIMENSION NO THOUGHT AS YOU DROVE IN THAT MORNING?

A: NO. I WAS WORRIED ABOUT HOW I WAS GOING TO APPROACH A DOUBLE HOMICIDE.

Q: WELL, DID YOU THINK THAT YOU WERE A QUALIFIED PERSON TO INVESTIGATE A DOUBLE HOMICIDE OF THIS NATURE?

A: YES.

Q: YOU DIDN'T ASK FOR ANY HELP, DID YOU?

A: YES.

Q: YOU DID?

A: YES.

Q: OTHER DETECTIVES TO ASSIST YOU WHO WERE MORE EXPERIENCED?

A: WELL, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS THERE.

Q: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS ASSIGNED. HE IS THE ONE THAT CALLED YOU?

A: WELL, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEANT.

Q: YOU DIDN'T ASK PHILLIPS INTO THIS CASE, DID YOU?

A: NO, IT WAS THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

Q: THAT'S RIGHT. AND HAD IT NOT BEEN FROM AN ORDER FROM ON HIGH, YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN PERFECTLY CONTENT TO GO FORWARD AND TAKE CHARGE OF THIS INVESTIGATION AS THE FIELD MAN, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: WITH PHILLIPS AS THE HOMICIDE SUPERVISOR AND COORDINATOR, TRUE?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU FELT THAT YOUR EXPERIENCE WAS UP TO THE JOB THAT CONFRONTED YOU, TRUE?

A: YES.

Q: AND IT WAS NEVER YOUR INTENT TO ASK THE BIG BOYS FROM ROBBERY/HOMICIDE TO COME HELP YOU, WAS IT?

A: AT THAT TIME, NO.

Q: AT ANY TIME DID YOU SUGGEST WE BETTER GET LANGE AND VANNATTER IN HERE?

A: WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW LANGE AND VANNATTER.

Q: DID YOU EVER SUGGEST TO ANYONE WE BETTER GET SOME OF THE MORE EXPERIENCED GUYS FROM DOWNTOWN WHO HANDLE LOTS OF HOMICIDES?

A: I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE LATER IN THE DAY, YES.

Q: DID YOU EVER SUGGEST THAT TO ANYONE BEFORE YOU WERE TOLD YOU ARE OFF THE CASE?

A: NO.

Q: DID NOT. NOW, DID YOU EXPERIENCE ANY DISAPPOINTMENT WHATSOEVER WHEN PHILLIPS TOLD YOU YOU WERE BEING REMOVED FROM THIS MURDER CASE?

A: DID I SHOW ANY DISAPPOINTMENT?

Q: ANY DISAPPOINTMENT WHATSOEVER, DID YOU EXPERIENCE ANY?

A: WELL, I WAS DISAPPOINTED WE LOST THE CASE.

Q: SURE. DID IT GO A LITTLE FURTHER THAN THAT, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: NO, NOT AT ALL.

Q: WEREN'T YOU A LITTLE BIT ANGRY THAT YOU WERE BEING SHOVED OUT OF A MURDER IN YOUR OWN TERRITORY?

A: NO, NO.

Q: DIDN'T BOTHER YOU A BIT?

A: NONE.

Q: WEREN'T YOU A FELLOW THAT HAD SPENT A GOOD PART OF HIS CAREER WAITING FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE, QUOTE, THE BIG ARREST?

A: NO.

Q: DO YOU RECALL THOSE WORDS POPPING UP IN YOUR EVALUATIONS THAT YOU WANTED TO MAKE THE BIG ARREST?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: WHAT IS THE OBJECTION?

MS. CLARK: CAN WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: WHAT IS THE OBJECTION? WHAT IS THE LEGAL GROUNDS?

MS. CLARK: BEYOND THE SCOPE. IT IS ALSO -- WE HAVE TO APPROACH.

THE COURT: I'M SORRY, WHAT IS THE OBJECTION. BEYOND THE SCOPE? IS THAT IT?

MS. CLARK: YES.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU RECALL THAT?

A: WOULD YOU REPEAT WHAT YOU ASKED ME, PLEASE.

Q: YES. DO YOU RECALL IN YOUR EVALUATION AS AN OFFICER THE CRITICISM THAT YOU WERE TOO MUCH INTERESTED IN MAKING THE BIG ARREST?

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. HEARSAY.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. IN ANY EVENT, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US WHAT YOU WERE IN FACT FEELING WHEN YOU WERE TOLD YOU WERE OUT OF THE CASE AND OTHERS WOULD TAKE OVER?

A: I WAS DISAPPOINTED IN LOSING A CASE THAT LOOKED VERY INTERESTING AND VERY COMPLEX.

Q: OKAY. NOW, DID YOU DECIDE TO DO SOMETHING AS A RESULT OF THIS DISPLACEMENT?

A: NO.

Q: WELL, THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WERE PROTECTED TO A DEGREE STARTING AT 2:10 BY THE EXPERTISE OF YOU AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ON THE CRIME SCENE ATTEMPTING TO SOLVE THE HOMICIDE IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, I TAKE IT? IS THAT SO?

A: I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU ARE ASKING, SIR.

Q: WERE YOU ENTRUSTED WITH THE SUPERVISION, YOU AND PHILLIPS, OF THIS HOMICIDE AND ITS SOLUTION AND ITS CARE?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IS IT NOT ROUTINE THAT SOMEBODY BE IN CHARGE OF A HOMICIDE AFTER IT IS DISCOVERED?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. THERE WAS TO ONE TO TAKE OVER THAT RESPONSIBILITY UNTIL AFTER FOUR O'CLOCK, WAS THERE?

A: NO, THERE WASN'T, SIR.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO BETWEEN 2:50 A.M. AND 4:05 WHEN PHILIP VANNATTER SHOWED UP ON THE SCENE?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: WAITED FOR THEIR ARRIVAL ON THE STREET IN FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE.

Q: IN OTHER WORDS, THE WHOLE HOMICIDE SOLUTION PROCESS GROUND TO A HALT; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: AT THAT MOMENT WAITING FOR THEM, YES.

Q: IN OTHER WORDS, YOU WERE DISABLED TO TAKE ANY STEPS WHATSOEVER THAT YOU WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE TAKEN IF YOU WERE LEFT IN CHARGE FOR THAT HOUR AND TEN-MINUTE PERIOD? IS THAT THE RULE IN YOUR DEPARTMENT?

A: YES. I WAS RELIEVED OF THE CASE.

Q: OKAY. WERE YOU PROHIBITED FROM GIVING ANY DIRECTIONS OR TAKING ANY OF THE ROUTINE STEPS A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE MIGHT TAKE?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND WHO TOLD YOU THAT?

A: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS.

Q: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS. GIVE US HIS EXACT ORDER TO YOU THAT ACCOMPANIED THE NOTICE THAT YOU WERE OUT AND WHAT WAS THE ORDER?

A: "ROBBERY/HOMICIDE IS TAKING THE CASE."

Q: DID HE SAY, "MARK, DON'T DO ANY MORE WORK ON THIS CASE"?

A: NO. I UNDERSTOOD THAT.

Q: WELL, YOU UNDERSTOOD IT HOW?

A: I HAVE BEEN ON THE DEPARTMENT LONG ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS.

Q: HOW MANY TIMES IN THE PAST HAD YOU BEEN PUSHED ASIDE IN FAVOR OF OTHER MORE SENIOR DETECTIVES, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: OH, THAT HAPPENS QUITE FREQUENTLY IN THE CITY.

Q: OF THE TEN PRIOR HOMICIDES IN WHICH YOU PARTICIPATED AS A DETECTIVE, IN HOW MANY OF THOSE DID YOU GET PUSHED OUT SO OTHERS COULD TAKE OVER? DO YOU REMEMBER?

A: YES.

Q: HOW MANY?

A: PROBABLY THREE OR FOUR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHO TOOK OVER IN THOSE CASES?

A: ROBBERY/HOMICIDE.

Q: FROM DOWNTOWN?

A: YES.

Q: AND UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES, BIG CASE, THAT SORT OF THING?

A: OUT OF SCOPE OF OUR ABILITIES OR LOGISTICS, YES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS IN YOUR VIEW THIS CASE WAS NOT BEYOND THE SCOPE OF YOUR ABILITIES AND YOU WERE WILLING TO CONTINUE?

A: SIR, AT WHAT TIME ARE YOU ASKING ME TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION?

Q: PRIOR TO 2:50 WHEN YOU GOT THE NOTICE.

A: AT THAT TIME I FELT WE COULD PROBABLY HANDLE IT, YES.

Q: WAS THERE ANYTHING UNUSUAL OR BIZARRE ABOUT THESE MURDERS, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE VICTIMS WAS FORMERLY MARRIED TO A WELL-KNOWN AMERICAN ICON?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE SCENE AT THAT POINT, SO THAT WOULD BE HARD TO SAY.

Q: OKAY. WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE OBSERVATIONS YOU HAD MADE. WERE YOU SOMEWHERE TRAINED IN ANY OF THE COURSES YOU TOOK, OR ANY OF THE ON-THE-JOB TRAINING, TO RECOGNIZE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WOUND OF INCISION AND A GUNSHOT WOUND?

A: WELL, THEY WILL LOOK SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WERE YOU TAUGHT ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT HOW KNIFINGS ARE ACCOMPLISHED OR WHAT THEY DO TO THE BODY, DEPENDING ON WHERE THEY ARE ACCOMPLISHED?

A: I DON'T SPECIFICALLY REMEMBER THAT, NO.

Q: WHEN DID YOU FIRST LEARN THAT THE FEMALE VICTIM'S THROAT HAD BEEN CUT COMPLETELY?

A: IT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN SOMETIME IN THE AFTERNOON OF THE 13TH.

Q: AFTER THE CORONER GOT THERE?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID ANYTHING THAT YOU SAW, AS YOU STOOD LOOKING AT THE SCENE THAT WE HAVE VIEWED NOW TOO MANY TIMES OF THE BODY OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, SUGGEST THE USE OF FIREARMS?

A: THE -- NO, THERE WASN'T.

Q: NO. HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF A COLOMBIAN NECKLACE?

A: NO.

Q: YOU ARE HEARING THAT WORD FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY?

A: NO. I KNOW WHAT A COLOMBIAN NECKTIE IS.

Q: COLOMBIAN NECKTIE. WHAT IS A COLOMBIAN NECKTIE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: CUTTING SOMEBODY'S THROAT.

Q: DID YOU EVER HEAR IT CALLED A NECKLACE?

A: NO.

Q: THAT INCLUDES CUTTING THE THROAT SO SEVERELY THAT BOTH THE CAROTID ARTERIES ARE SEVERED, CORRECT?

A: I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT, BUT I JUST HEARD THE TERM.

Q: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY ARE SEVERED? DO YOU KNOW FROM YOUR TRAINING?

A: WELL, THE PERSON WILL BLEED PROFUSELY AND DIE.

Q: THE BLOOD PRESSURE DROPS TO ZERO AND DEATH OCCURS ALMOST IMMEDIATELY; ISN'T THAT SO?

A: I WOULD ASSUME SO.

Q: IF YOUR THROAT IS CUT THAT SEVERELY WHILE YOU ARE STANDING AND SOMEBODY IS HOLDING YOUR HEAD, YOU WOULD BE DEAD BEFORE YOU HIT THE GROUND, WOULDN'T YOU?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: IF YOU KNOW?

A: I WOULD HAVE TO SPECULATE. I COULDN'T TELL YOU THAT, SIR.

Q: YOU NEVER HAD THAT TRAINING?

A: IT WOULD BE QUICKLY.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU CONCERN YOURSELF, BEFORE YOU WERE OFF THE CASE, AS TO FROM THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU COULD SEE, WHICH VICTIM DIED FIRST?

A: I COULDN'T TELL ANY OF THAT FROM THE SCENE.

Q: DID YOU MAKE ANY OBSERVATIONS?

A: I MADE NO DETAILED OBSERVATIONS THAT WOULD GIVE THAT INFORMATION.

Q: DID YOU DEDUCE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, FROM THE QUANTITY OF THE BLOOD SURROUNDING THE BODY OF THE FEMALE VICTIM, THAT SHE HAD BLED VERY PROFUSELY?

A: YES. I WOULD CONCLUDE THAT.

Q: AND COULD WELL HAVE SUFFERED A MASSIVE INJURY TO THE CAROTID ARTERIES IN THE NECK?

A: I COULDN'T ASSUME THAT.

Q: YOU COULDN'T?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHERE ALL THAT BLOOD CAME FROM?

A: SOMEWHERE IN THE HEAD AREA, BUT I COULDN'T SEE HER FACE.

Q: BUT A MASSIVE INJURY OF SOME SORT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: ONE THAT PROBABLY PRODUCED DEATH VERY QUICKLY, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND PROBABLY SHE HAD NEVER MOVED FROM THE POINT AT WHICH SHE FELL, FROM THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU SAW? A FAIR DEDUCTION?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, DID YOU NOTICE THE BLOOD ON HER BACK IN DROPLETS?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: YOU NEVER SAW THAT?

A: NO.

Q: EITHER WHEN YOU WALKED UP TO THE GATEPOST WITH PHILLIPS OR WHEN YOU CAME BACK AROUND THE WALKWAY AND OUT THE FRONT DOOR AND LOOKED DOWN FROM THE STEPS? YOU NEVER NOTICED THE BLOOD SPECKS ON THE BACK OF THE FEMALE VICTIM?

A: NO, SIR, I DIDN'T.

Q: HAVE YOU TO THIS DAY SEEN THEM IN ANY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS YOU REVIEWED, INCLUDING THE ONES WE LOOKED AT IN COURT?

A: NO.

Q: WELL, IS IT PART OF YOUR TRAINING THAT YOU OBSERVE DETAILS OF THAT SORT WHEN YOU GO TO A HOMICIDE SCENE?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU MADE NO SUCH OBSERVATION?

A: NOT ON THE FIRST WALK THROUGH, NO.

Q: AS YOU SIT THERE TODAY, WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OF BLOOD DROPS ON THE BACK OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: I HAVE NEVER BEEN SHOWN ANY PHOTOS OF THOSE BLOOD DROPS.

Q: CAN YOU SAY WHETHER OR NOT THEY EVER EXISTED, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE?

A: TO MY KNOWLEDGE I CANNOT.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU WERE AT ONE TIME THE LEAD FIELD DETECTIVE ON THE SCENE, IS THAT WHAT WE ARE TO UNDERSTAND?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU HAD TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO VIEW THAT BODY CLOSE UP WITH THE BACK POINTED UP TOWARD THE SKY, CORRECT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND YOU DO NOT KNOW WHETHER THE BACK WAS CLEAN OR HAD SOME SUBSTANCE ON IT?

A: YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BLOOD DROPS?

Q: ANY SUBSTANCE? I DIDN'T ASK THAT, SIR.

A: BLOOD DROPS? NO, I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY SPECKS ON HER?

A: I DID NOT TAKE A CLOSE LOOK AT THE BACK, NO.

Q: ON EITHER OCCASION, THE VIEW FROM ABOVE OR THE VIEW OBLIQUELY?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. NOW, YOU HAVE TOLD US ALL OF THE PLACES THAT YOU WENT FROM THE TIME THAT YOU ARRIVED ON THE SCENE WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND MARCHED UP TO THE CRIME SCENE AND FOUND THAT YOU COULDN'T REALLY GET AT IT THAT WAY, TO GOING BACK AND WALKING THROUGH AND OUT THE WALKWAY INTO THE GARAGE AND UP INTO THE HOUSE. AND IT IS IN THE HOUSE WHILE YOU ARE WRITING NOTES THAT YOU GET THIS NOTICE, TRUE?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, UP TO THIS POINT, AND APART FROM WHAT DETECTIVE -- I'M SORRY -- OFFICER RISKE TOLD YOU, THAT YOU HAD DISCOVERED BEFORE YOU ARRIVED, HAD YOU DETECTED ANYTHING?

A: NO.

Q: NO. ALL YOU HAD DONE WAS TO OBSERVE THINGS THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN DISCOVERED BY OTHERS AND WERE POINTED OUT TO YOU, CORRECT?

A: EXCUSE ME. I WOULD LIKE TO CORRECT THAT.

Q: OKAY.

A: I SAW A PARTIAL FINGERPRINT ON THE BACK GATE AND I SAW TWO ADDITIONAL BLOOD DROPS ON THE GATE.

Q: OKAY. SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT YOU SAW PRESUMABLY FOR THE FIRST TIME AMONG YOURSELF AND YOUR COLLEAGUES?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU MADE DUE NOTE OF THOSE, DID YOU NOT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: HOW LONG WOULD YOU SAY YOU SPENT WRITING THESE NOTES?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: IN TOTO?

A: I STARTED WRITING THE NOTE AS WE WERE TALKING TO OFFICER RISKE. I MADE NOTATIONS DURING PAUSES. MAYBE TEN MINUTES.

Q: OKAY.

A: MAYBE A LITTLE LONGER.

Q: DID YOU WALK AROUND THE APARTMENT AND MAKE YOUR OBSERVATIONS THERE BEFORE -- I SHOULD SAY THE CONDOMINIUM -- BEFORE OR AFTER YOU MADE YOUR NOTES?

A: I MADE A FEW NOTATIONS, BUT I THINK PRETTY MUCH BEFORE.

Q: I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND YOUR ANSWER.

A: WELL, I --

Q: DID YOU DO SOME BEFORE AND SOME AFTER? ALL BEFORE OR ALL AFTER?

A: YES. I REMEMBER WRITING THE BEGINNING OF THE NOTES WHEN TALKING TO SERGEANT RISKE -- EXCUSE ME -- SERGEANT ROSSI AND OFFICER RISKE, AND THEN AS WE STARTED WALKING, I WASN'T WRITING NOTES AS WE WERE WALKING. IF WE PAUSED, I WOULD MAKE A NOTATION AND THEN I CAUGHT UP ON THE NOTES INSIDE.

Q: OKAY. SO YOU ARE MAKING LITTLE ROUGH NOTES AND THEN SAT DOWN AND WROTE THE THREE PAGES WE HAVE BEEN SHOWN?

A: NO. I WAS WRITING THE THREE PAGES. I JUST WASN'T ABLE TO STOP AND WRITE THEM.

Q: HAD YOU NOTICED A TELEPHONE IN THE KITCHEN?

A: YES.

Q: WERE YOU INTERESTED IN WHO IT WAS WHO HAD LAST SPOKEN WITH THE VICTIM, THE FEMALE VICTIM WHO LIVED ON THE PREMISES?

A: AT THAT EARLY IN THE INVESTIGATION IT HADN'T OCCURRED TO ME, NO.

Q: IT HADN'T OCCURRED TO YOU TO TRY TO GET IN TOUCH WITH WHOEVER WHO HAD LAST TALKED TO HER BEFORE HER DEATH?

A: NO.

Q: YOU KNEW OF COURSE THAT IF YOU WERE ABLE TO DO THAT, THAT WOULD ESTABLISH THE LAST MOMENT AT WHICH SHE WAS ALIVE, TRUE, OR COULD ESTABLISH?

A: I THINK THAT WOULD BE A POSSIBILITY.

Q: WELL, IF SOMEBODY WAS TALKING TO HER ON THE PHONE, THAT WOULD LEAD TO A FAIR INFERENCE THAT SHE WAS A LIVING PERSON, WOULDN'T IT?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: WOULDN'T IT?

A: IF I COULD IDENTIFY HER VOICE ON THE PHONE.

Q: JUST ASSUME THAT SOMEBODY WHO KNEW HER WAS TALKING TO HER ON THE PHONE, LIKE HER MOTHER, FOR INSTANCE, AT 9:44 P.M. IF YOU COULD HAVE LEARNED THAT, OFFICER FUHRMAN, THAT WOULD HELPED YOU IN SO FAR AS TIME OF DEATH; WOULD IT NOT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: BETWEEN 9:44 AND WHEN THE BODIES WERE DISCOVERED AT MIDNIGHT, TRUE?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, DID YOU THINK TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND PUNCH THE REDIAL BUTTON?

A: I WOULDN'T HAVE PICKED UP THE PHONE, SIR.

Q: DID YOU THINK TO DO THAT?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: WAS THERE ANY RULE OF YOUR DEPARTMENT THAT SAYS YOU COULDN'T DO THAT TO FIND OUT WHO SHE HAD LAST DIALED?

A: WELL, I WOULDN'T HAVE WANTED TO PICK UP THE PHONE BEFORE IT HAD BEEN PRINTED.

Q: WELL, WEREN'T YOU AWARE THAT RISKE HAD ALREADY BEEN USING IT TO CALL THE STATION?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: HE DIDN'T TELL YOU THAT?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU HAD NO INTEREST IN THE FACT THAT A SPEED DIAL MECHANISM MIGHT HAVE DIRECTLY CALLED THE PARENTS OF THE TWO CHILDREN OR THE FATHER OF THE TWO CHILDREN WHO HAD BEEN TAKEN AWAY?

A: AT THAT TIME, NO.

Q: DID NOT? OKAY. WERE YOU ENGAGED TO ANY DEGREE IN AN EFFORT TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHO MIGHT HAVE COMMITTED THESE HOMICIDES?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: WELL, WERE YOU TRAINED TO LOOK INITIALLY, WHEN A HOMICIDE OCCURS, STATISTICALLY WHO MIGHT THE PERPETRATORS LIKELY BE?

A: I DON'T KNOW, SIR.

Q: RELATIVES, FRIENDS, PEOPLE CLOSE IN, AS OPPOSED TO TOTAL STRANGERS? ISN'T THAT AN AREA WHERE YOU ALWAYS LOOK, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A RESIDENT, NO, THAT IS ALSO ONE OF THE VICTIMS.

Q: DIDN'T YOU KNOW THAT NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON LIVED IN THAT HOME?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WAS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AT THAT POINT.

Q: YOU KNEW IT WAS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AT 1:05 A.M. WHEN DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TOLD YOU THAT, DIDN'T YOU?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID HE TELL YOU THIS IS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, A VICTIM?

A: NO. HE SAID IT MIGHT BE. WE BELIEVE IT IS.

Q: DID YOU EVER TESTIFY ON A PRIOR OCCASION THAT HE TOLD YOU IT WAS, WITHOUT EQUIVOCATION?

A: COULD HAVE BEEN.

Q: YOU MIGHT HAVE TESTIFIED TO THAT AND IF YOU DID, YOU NOW SAY THAT WAS WRONG?

A: NO. I'M SAYING THAT NOBODY KNEW IT WAS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON. THEY ASSUMED IT WAS.

Q: WAS THERE EVER A POINT, PRIOR TO YOUR BEING RELIEVED, WHEN YOU TOOK IT TO BE THE FACT THAT THIS WAS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, THE VICTIM WHO LIVED IN THE HOUSE UPON WHOSE PREMISES THE BODIES WERE FOUND?

A: I PERSONALLY COULD NOT CONCLUDE THAT, NO.

Q: DID NOT CONCLUDE? YOU STILL THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE A PASSERBY?

A: NO. WE DID NOT KNOW THE WHEREABOUTS OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AND NOBODY HAD VERIFIED THAT.

Q: DID YOU KNOW WHO LIVED IN THE HOUSE?

A: NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON.

Q: DID YOU KNOW THAT THERE WERE CHILDREN IN THE HOUSE WITH NO MOTHER WHEN THE POLICE GOT THERE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: THAT DIDN'T LEAD YOU TO THE CONCLUSION THAT NICOLE WAS OUT ON THE WALKWAY?

A: I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THE CHILDREN WERE ASKED.

Q: DID YOU HAVE ANY INTEREST AT ALL IN THE IDENTITY OF THE MALE VICTIM?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO ABOUT TRYING TO LEARN THAT IDENTITY?

A: I COULD DO NOTHING.

Q: YOU COULD DO NOTHING. NOW, ARE YOU TALKING BEFORE 2:50 WHEN YOU HAD BEEN ON THE JOB FOR FORTY MINUTES OR AFTER?

A: EITHER.

Q: EITHER. WHY COULD YOU DO NOTHING PRIOR TO THE TIME YOU WERE RELIEVED?

A: PRIOR TO I COULDN'T APPROACH THE BODY AND LOOK FOR IDENTIFICATION, AND AFTERWARDS IT WAS NO LONGER MY CASE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU COULDN'T APPROACH THE BODIES? YOU MEAN YOU COULDN'T DISTURB THEM TO GO FOR A WALLET?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. COULD YOU HAVE ASKED NEIGHBORS TO VIEW THE BODIES AND SEE IF ANYONE RECOGNIZED THE VICTIM?

A: IF WE HAD A POLAROID.

Q: NO. COULD YOU HAVE ASKED NEIGHBORS TO COME AND LOOK?

A: I WOULD NOT HAVE ASKED NEIGHBORS TO ENTER A CRIME SCENE.

Q: YOU WOULDN'T HAVE DONE THAT?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: COULD YOU HAVE CHECKED CARS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE OFF CHANCE THAT THIS MALE VICTIM HAD DRIVEN TO THE SCENE, AS OPPOSED TO WALKING?

A: HAD I KEPT THE CASE I'M SURE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE.

Q: BUT AS OF 2:50 YOU HADN'T DONE THAT EITHER?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: FROM 2:50 TO 4:05, AS I UNDERSTAND YOUR TESTIMONY, YOU WENT TO THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY AND STOOD THERE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: FOR 65, 75 MINUTES YOU STOOD AT THE INTERSECTION WAITING FOR YOUR REPLACEMENT? IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND WHAT DID DETECTIVE PHILLIPS DO DURING THAT 75-MINUTE PERIOD?

A: STAND THERE AND WAIT WITH ME.

Q: THE TWO OF YOU FOR 75 MINUTES STOOD STOCK STILL OR DID YOU WANDER AROUND A BIT?

A: OH, WE COULD HAVE WANDERED A LITTLE BIT ON THE STREET, BUT PREDOMINANTLY STAYED IN THAT GENERAL AREA.

Q: DID YOU GO BACK TO THE CRIME SCENE?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU DO ANY MORE OBSERVATIONS?

A: AT ONE TIME I DID MAKE AN OBSERVATION FROM THE NORTH RESIDENCE.

Q: OH. I DON'T RECALL YOU MENTIONING THAT IN YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION. DID YOU?

A: I BELIEVE I DID, YES, SIR.

Q: YOU DID?

A: YES.

Q: WELL, TELL US ABOUT IT. WHAT DID YOU DO FROM THE NORTH RESIDENCE?

A: LIEUTENANT SPANGLER HAD WALKED TO THE NORTH RESIDENCE OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY AND LOOKED BETWEEN THE -- THE IRON FENCE THAT WAS ABOUT THREE OR FOUR FEET FROM THE FEET OR BUTTOCKS AREA OF THE MALE VICTIM, AND HE NOTICED A PORTION OF BARE SKIN AND HE SAID, "YOU CAN SEE SOME TYPE OF A WOUND THERE" AND HE DIRECTED ME TO GO OVER THERE AND I DID, AND I LOOKED AT IT, AND IT APPEARED TO BE A LACERATION OF SOME SORT.

Q: WHERE?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS ON HIS SIDE OR HIS BACK.

Q: UH-HUH. AND WHERE WERE YOU STANDING WHEN YOU OBSERVED THAT?

A: THERE IS A WALKWAY THAT GOES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE WHITE WROUGHT IRON FENCE THAT SEPARATES THOSE TWO RESIDENCES BETWEEN 875 AND THE ONE TO THE NORTH.

Q: WHOSE PROPERTY WERE YOU STANDING ON, AS YOU UNDERSTAND IT, WHEN YOU MADE THE OBSERVATION WITH LIEUTENANT SPANGLER?

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: DO YOU KNOW WHAT TIME IT WAS WHEN YOU MADE THAT OBSERVATION?

A: PROBABLY SOMEWHERE RIGHT AFTER 3:00, 3:30.

Q: LONG AFTER YOU WERE OFF THE CASE THEN?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL THEN DID YOU NOT SPEND THE ENTIRE TIME DOWN AT THE INTERSECTION WAITING FOR MESSERS. VANNATTER AND LANGE?

A: EXCEPT FOR THAT, NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. TELL ME HOW IT OCCURRED THAT LIEUTENANT SPANGLER TOOK YOU UP THERE AS A DETECTIVE NO LONGER ON THE CASE TO MAKE THIS OBSERVATION? DID HE COME TO YOU AT THE INTERSECTION?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHAT DID HE SAY?

A: WELL, HE JUST WENT UP TO VIEW THE SCENE FROM THE NORTH RESIDENCE, SO HE DIDN'T DISTURB IT.

Q: HOW LONG HAD HE BEEN THERE, IF YOU KNOW?

A: I DON'T KNOW, SIR.

Q: YOU DIDN'T SEE HIM ARRIVE?

A: I DON'T KNOW WHEN HE ARRIVED, NO.

Q: DID HE ARRIVE AFTER YOU OR BEFORE YOU?

A: AFTER.

Q: OKAY. BUT AS TO THE TIME, YOU DON'T KNOW?

A: I DO NOT.

Q: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. SO HE SAID SOMETHING TO YOU ABOUT A WOUND. DID HE INVITE YOU OR DIRECT YOU? HE WAS YOUR BOSS, WASN'T HE?

A: HE DIRECTED ME. HE SAID THAT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF A WOUND ON THE MALE VICTIM THAT IS VISIBLE.

Q: OKAY. SO YOU WALKED BACK UP BUNDY WHERE THE BLOODY PAW PRINTS WERE?

A: NO.

Q: WHERE DID YOU WALK?

A: I JUST WALKED UP THE STREET AND THEN ENTERED THE NORTH RESIDENCE.

Q: YOU STAYED OFF THE SIDEWALK?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: WALKED UP THE STREET?

A: YES.

Q: AND WALKED AROUND WHAT WE CALL THE FENCE AGAINST WHICH THE MALE VICTIM'S BODY WAS KIND OF CRUMBLED?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. AND HOW FAR INTO THE PROPERTY DID YOU GO? HOW MANY RUNGS OF THE FENCE WOULD YOU ESTIMATE, VERTICAL WISE?

A: WHERE THE MALE VICTIM WAS.

Q: OKAY. CAN YOU PLACE YOURSELF WITH RESPECT TO THE FENCE?

A: DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH OF THE FENCE WHERE THE VICTIM WAS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. HOW LONG DID YOU SPEND THERE?

A: FIVE SECONDS.

Q: HOW LONG WAS LIEUTENANT SPANGLER THERE, IF HE WAS?

A: HE WASN'T, BUT WHEN HE WALKED OVER THERE I THINK HE WAS JUST THERE FOR A FEW MOMENTS.

Q: WHEN YOU WALKED UP THE STREET, WAS HE WALKING BESIDE YOU?

A: I DON'T RECALL IF HE DID OR HE DIDN'T.

Q: DID HE COME WITH YOU TO THE LOCATION TO WHOSE VIEW HE HAD COMMENDED YOU?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE SO, NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU BELIEVE YOU WERE ALONE AT THAT POINT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU WALKED. DID YOU HAVE YOUR LITTLE FLASHLIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU USE IT?

A: YES.

Q: WERE THERE ANY OTHER LIGHTS BEING SHOWN ON THE AREA AT THAT TIME?

A: NO.

Q: WAS ANYBODY ELSE ON THE CRIME SCENE NEAR THE BODY INSIDE THE FENCE?

A: NO.

Q: WAS ANYBODY NEXT TO THE FENCE ON EITHER SIDE?

A: NO.

Q: WAS ANYBODY ACCOMPANYING YOU IN ANY WAY?

A: NO.

Q: FOR THAT VISIT?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: AND HOW CLOSE TO YOU WAS THE NEAREST DETECTIVE OR OFFICER, AS YOU REMEMBER?

A: ON THE STREET.

Q: ON THE STREET?

A: YES.

Q: SO THAT WOULD BE, WHAT, TWENTY FEET AT LEAST?

A: PROBABLY LONGER THAN THAT.

Q: MORE THAN THAT?

A: YES.

Q: YES. AND YOU THINK THAT YOU WERE THERE FOR ABOUT FIVE SECONDS?

A: JUST LONG ENOUGH TO LOOK AT THE WOUND.

Q: OKAY. AND THEN WHERE DID YOU GO?

A: I JUST WENT BACK TO THE STREET.

Q: AND?

A: I MADE A COMMENT TO LIEUTENANT SPANGLER, "IT LOOKS LIKE A LACERATION."

Q: OKAY. IS THAT ALL THAT YOU SAID?

A: THAT IS ALL THAT I SAID.

Q: DID YOU SAY ANYTHING ELSE?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: DID YOU THEN GO BACK TO THE INTERSECTION?

A: YES.

Q: YOU HAD BEEN GONE FROM THE INTERSECTION LESS THAN WHAT, THREE OR FOUR MINUTES?

A: I DON'T EVEN THINK THAT LONG, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU STAY THERE WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS UNTIL DETECTIVE VANNATTER ARRIVED AT ABOUT 4:05?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU TALK TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ABOUT THE CASE?

A: I DON'T RECALL TALKING ABOUT THE CASE, NO.

Q: DID YOU TALK TO HIM ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU FELLAS WERE NO LONGER ON THE CASE?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU TALK AT ALL OR DID YOU JUST STAND THERE FOR AN HOUR?

A: WELL, I TALKED, BUT I DON'T RECALL TALKING ABOUT THIS CASE.

Q: IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT ABSOLUTELY NO DETECTING WENT ON FROM 2:50 UNTIL 4:05, EXCEPT FOR YOUR LITTLE VISIT TO THE FENCE?

A: I WOULD SAY THAT IS ACCURATE.

Q: NOW, DID YOU TELL PHILLIPS THAT THIS LOOKED LIKE A KNIFE WOUND, THIS WOUND OR A SHARP INSTRUMENT?

A: I THINK THE TERM I USED WAS A LACERATION.

Q: ALL RIGHT. HOW ARE LACERATIONS INFLICTED, IN YOUR VOCABULARY, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: A STAB WOUND WOULD BE A TEAR WHERE A LACERATION WOULD BE AN INCISION.

Q: A TEAR INFLICTED HOW? BARE HAND?

A: DON'T KNOW.

Q: WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE LACERATION DO YOU HAVE ANY TRAINING TOWARD EXAMINING WOUNDS WITH A VIEW TOWARD DETERMINING HOW THEY WERE INFLICTED?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: YOU NEVER COVERED THAT IN ANY OF YOUR COURSES?

A: WELL, I SURELY COULDN'T FROM WHERE I WAS STANDING LOOKING AT A SMALL LACERATION IN THE DARK.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, YOU SAY A SMALL LACERATION. HOW BIG?

A: IT APPEARED TO BE ABOUT AN INCH, THREE QUARTERS TO AN INCH LONG.

Q: AN INCH AND YOU SAY A TEAR RATHER THAN A SLICE OR INCISION?

A: THAT WAS JUST MY IMPRESSION, SIR.

Q: DID YOU SEE A JAGGED EDGE WITH YOUR LITTLE FLASHLIGHT?

A: IT JUST APPEARED MORE TO BE A LACERATION THAN IT DID AN INCISION.

Q: AND THE DISTINCTION YOU DRAW IN USING THOSE TWO WORDS, LACERATION AND INCISION. IS ONE IS A TEAR AND THE OTHER IS A CUT; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: ONE IS -- ONE HAS CLEAR EDGES AND ONE DOES NOT.

Q: AND WHICH KIND WAS THIS?

A: IT JUST APPEARED THAT THE ENDS OF IT LOOKED SOMEWHAT TORN.

Q: YOU MEAN THE WOUND WAS TURNED IN UPON ITSELF?

A: NO. I THINK IT WAS A LITTLE PUFFY, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT.

Q: IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE A GUNSHOT WOUND BY A LONG SHOT, DID IT?

A: NOT TO ME.

Q: AND IT DIDN'T LOOK LIKE HE HAD BEEN BLUDGEONED, DID IT?

A: I COULDN'T MAKE THAT DETERMINATION, BUT I WOULD HAVE TO SAY NO.

Q: THAT PARTICULAR WOUND WAS NOT THE WORK OF A BLUDGEONING, WAS IT?

A: IT DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE, NO.

Q: AND YOU MENTIONED ALL THIS TO PHILLIPS?

A: I THINK I MENTIONED IT TO LIEUTENANT SPANGLER. PHILLIPS MIGHT HAVE OVERHEARD IT, BUT WE WERE ALL STANDING PRETTY MUCH IN THE SAME GENERAL AREA.

Q: NOW, IS THAT THE SUM TOTAL OF THE OBSERVATIONS YOU MADE ON THAT LITTLE EXCURSION? YOU SAW A KNIFE WOUND AND THAT IS IT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: NOTHING ELSE?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE SO, NO.

Q: HOW ABOUT A COUPLE OF GLOVES, DETECTIVE?

A: EXCUSE ME?

Q: DID YOU SEE A COUPLE OF GLOVES UP THERE?

A: NO. I SAW ONE GLOVE.

Q: YOU DIDN'T MENTION THAT A MINUTE AGO WHEN I ASKED YOU IF YOU HAD SEEN ANYTHING ELSE? YOU NOW SAY YOU SAW ONE GLOVE?

A: WELL, I ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE ONE GLOVE AND THE HAT.

Q: YOU HADN'T TALKED ABOUT THIS EXCURSION BEFORE, I DON'T BELIEVE, BUT I ASKED YOU IF YOU SAW ANYTHING OTHER THAN A LACERATION AND YOU SAID NO. DO YOU WANT TO CORRECT THAT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. AT WHAT TIME?

MR. BAILEY: THE ONLY VISIT HE MADE TO THE FENCE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT.

Q: DID YOU MAKE MORE THAN ONE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: MORE THAN ONE WHAT?

Q: TO THAT VANTAGE POINT TO VIEW GOLDMAN'S BODY. DID YOU MAKE MORE THAN THE ONE THAT YOU MADE AT THE BEHEST OF DETECTIVE SPANGLER?

A: NO.

Q: THAT IS THE SOLE OPPORTUNITY YOU HAD TO OBSERVE FROM THAT POINT ON THE NORTH PROPERTY, TRUE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: I ASKED YOU IF YOU SAW ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE LACERATION. I BELIEVE YOU SAID NO, DID YOU?

A: I THOUGHT YOU WERE SPEAKING ABOUT THE BODY.

Q: YOU DID?

A: YES.

Q: YOU THOUGHT MY QUESTION RESTRICTED YOU FROM MENTIONING ANYTHING NOT CONNECTED WITH THE VICTIM'S BODY; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: WELL, I HAD ALREADY TESTIFIED TO THE OTHER EVIDENCE I OBSERVED AND I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT NEW ITEMS THAT I HAD SEEN.

Q: WHEN DID YOU TESTIFY TO THAT?

A: THIS MORNING.

Q: OKAY. THIS MORNING?

A: WELL, EXCUSE ME.

Q: YOU DON'T MEAN THAT, DO YOU?

A: THE LAST DIRECT.

Q: LAST WEEK?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN?

A: THURSDAY OR FRIDAY, SIR.

Q: BUT YOU ARE SATISFIED THAT IN THE TRANSCRIPT OF YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY THERE IS MENTION OF THIS VIEW, THE LACERATION AND THE GLOVE AND THE FENCE ON THE NORTH PROPERTY? ARE YOU SATISFIED OF THAT?

A: WELL, I'M NOT SURE IF I TESTIFIED TO THAT OR NOT. I THINK WE WERE WORKING UP TO THAT. WE MIGHT HAVE. I MIGHT BE INCORRECT.

Q: WE WORKED UP TO IT?

A: IN OTHER WORDS, WE WERE CHRONOLOGICALLY GOING THROUGH THE CRIME SCENE.

Q: WELL, LOOK, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN. THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH THAT TESTIMONY, ISN'T THERE, THE TESTIMONY ABOUT THE VIEW THROUGH THE FENCE?

A: NO, THERE ISN'T.

Q: THERE IS A PROBLEM THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION, ISN'T THERE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: NO.

Q: WHEN DISCUSSING THIS EVENT IN THE PRELIMINARY HEARING AND TALKING ABOUT THE GLOVE, YOUR TONGUE SLIPPED AND YOU SAID "THEM," DIDN'T YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU HAVE EXAMINED THAT IN THE TRANSCRIPT, HAVEN'T YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU KNOW IT HAS BEEN PLAYED ON VIDEO TO THE JURY? THE WORD "THEM" IS CLEAR?

A: YES.

Q: THAT IS A SLIP OF THE TONGUE?

A: NO.

Q: IT WAS NOT? OKAY. NOW, WHEN DETECTIVE VANNATTER CAME, YOU ARE OFF THE CASE?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I WAITED FOR DIRECTION FROM DETECTIVE PHILLIPS.

Q: YOU DON'T SPEAK TO VANNATTER, ONLY THROUGH PHILLIPS?

A: WELL, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS IS MY BOSS.

Q: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

A: IF WE ARE GOING TO BE RELIEVED --

THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT. MR. BAILEY, LET HIM FINISH THE ANSWER.

MR. BAILEY: SORRY.

THE WITNESS: IF WE ARE GOING TO BE RELIEVED, I WILL BE RELIEVED BY DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AS FAR AS WHERE I'M GOING TO GO AT THAT POINT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. WAS THERE SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT YOU FELLAS, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN, SHOULD DO?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT WERE YOU DIRECTED TO DO?

A: OH, AT THAT TIME FROM DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

Q: YES.

A: I HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT WE WERE DIRECTED TO DO.

Q: WHAT DID YOU IN FACT DO?

A: AT SOME POINT WE LED DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND LANGE TO THE ROCKINGHAM ESTATE.

Q: YOU SAY AT SOME POINT. CAN YOU HELP US A LITTLE BETTER THAN THAT? WE ARE TALKING 4:05 NOW WHEN DETECTIVE LANGE ARRIVED?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: VANNATTER, I'M SORRY.

A: DO YOU WANT A TIME, WHAT TIME WE DID THAT?

Q: CAN YOU TELL US HOW LONG YOU STAYED AT BUNDY WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER BEFORE YOU WENT TO ROCKINGHAM?

A: DETECTIVE VANNATTER GOT THERE, AS YOU SAID, AT 4:05, DETECTIVE LANGE, 4:25, AND AT FIVE O'CLOCK WE LEFT FOR ROCKINGHAM.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHEN YOU WENT TO ROCKINGHAM, HOW WERE YOU PAIRED?

A: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND I WERE IN A VEHICLE; HE WAS DRIVING. LANGE AND VANNATTER WERE IN THEIR VEHICLE.

Q: DO YOU KNOW A PHOTOGRAPHER NAMED ROKAHR?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DID YOU SEE HIM ARRIVE ON THE SCENE AT 3:25 THAT DAY?

A: YES. I RECALL HE WAS THERE FAIRLY EARLY.

Q: WERE YOU -- DID YOU OBSERVE HIM TAKING ANY PHOTOGRAPHS?

A: YES. I THINK HE WAS TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS OF SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU GIVE HIM ANY DIRECTION WITH RESPECT TO PHOTOGRAPHS THAT NEEDED TO BE TAKEN?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU HAVE ANY CONVERSATION WITH HIM AT ALL?

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

Q: WHEN YOU LEFT FOR ROCKINGHAM DID HE GO WITH YOU?

A: NO.

Q: HE DID NOT?

A: NO.

Q: WAS THERE ANYONE WITH YOU, OTHER THAN THE FOUR DETECTIVES, INITIALLY?

A: NO.

Q: DID OTHERS COME AFTER YOU ARRIVED AND BEFORE YOU ENTERED THE PROPERTY?

A: I BELIEVE THERE WAS A UNIFORMED VEHICLE, POLICE VEHICLE, THAT ARRIVED JUST AS WE HAD ALREADY MADE ENTRY, AND THEY STAYED AT THE FRONT GATE.

Q: OKAY. AND WAS THIS DURING THE TIME WHEN YOU WERE LOOKING FOR WESTEC OR WAS THIS AFTER YOU FAILED TO GAIN ENTRANCE BY PUNCHING THE BUTTON ON THE INTERCOM?

A: YOU MEAN WHEN THE POLICE VEHICLE ARRIVED?

Q: NO, NO. WHEN THE CALLS WERE BEING MADE THROUGH ROSSI, I BELIEVE TO WESTEC BY PHILLIPS, DID THAT HAPPEN AFTER YOU HAD FAILED TO GAIN ENTRANCE IN THE ROUTINE WAY?

A: I BELIEVE YOU ARE ASKING -- COULD YOU ASK THAT QUESTION --

MR. BAILEY: WITHDRAW THE QUESTION.

Q: DID ANYONE PEER THROUGH THE GATE TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANYBODY INSIDE ON THE PREMISES, IF YOU CAN RECALL, ANY OF THE FOUR OF YOU?

A: YOU CAN JUST SEE RIGHT THROUGH THE GATE. YOU DIDN'T NEED TO PEER.

Q: DID ANYBODY GO UP AND TAKE A LOOK, IF YOU KNOW?

A: WE WERE STANDING IN FRONT OF THE GATE.

Q: ALL OF YOU?

A: YES.

Q: YOU HAD A FAIRLY SWEEPING VIEW OF THE INTERIOR OF THE WALLS?

A: YOU MEAN OF THE DRIVEWAY, SIR, LOOKING SOUTH.

Q: WERE YOU WEARING A SIDEARM THAT NIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU WITHDRAW IT AT ANY TIME?

A: NO.

Q: DURING THE ENTIRE NIGHT?

A: I COULD HAVE ON THE PATHWAY, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION IF I DID OR I DIDN'T.

Q: WELL, YOU HAVE NEVER, NEVER MENTIONED DRAWING YOUR SIDEARM UP TO THIS POINT IN PRIOR TESTIMONY, HAVE YOU?

A: NO.

Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION NOW, AS YOU SIT THERE, THAT YOU DREW A SIDEARM?

A: I CAN'T REMEMBER IF I DID OR I HAD MY HAND ON IT, BUT NO, I CAN'T.

Q: YOU JUST DON'T HAVE A MEMORY ABOUT THAT, TRUE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: OKAY. DID ANYBODY DIRECT YOU TO GO DOWN AND LOOK AT THE BRONCO?

A: NO.

Q: THAT WAS SOMETHING YOU DECIDED TO DO ON YOUR OWN?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND THAT IS A CAR THAT YOU HAD SEEN AS YOU DROVE BY IT APPROACHING ROCKINGHAM TRAVELING NORTH COMING UP FROM SUNSET?

A: YES.

Q: HAD YOU ANY REASON, AS YOU PASSED BY IT, TO ASSOCIATE IT WITH MR. SIMPSON?

A: NO.

Q: JUST BASED ON LOOKING AT IT?

A: NO.

Q: HAD YOU NOTICED THAT THERE WERE VEHICLES PARKED INSIDE THE SURROUNDS, THAT IS, INSIDE THE FENCE ENCLOSURE?

A: YES, I NOTICED VEHICLES INSIDE.

Q: HAD YOU BEEN ABLE TO IDENTIFY THEM IN THE LIGHT THAT WAS AVAILABLE AT THE TIME?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE LARGE LUXURY VEHICLE WAS, BUT I COULD TELL BY THE LINES OF THE ONE VEHICLE IT WAS A SAAB.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER THE LARGE VEHICLE LOOKED FOREIGN MADE?

A: YES, IT WAS FOREIGN MADE.

Q: IT LOOKED EXPENSIVE?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. WHEN YOU WALKED DOWN TO THE BRONCO, DID YOU ASK PERMISSION FROM LIEUTENANT VANNATTER BEFORE YOU DID THAT?

A: DETECTIVE VANNATTER? NO.

Q: I'M SORRY, DETECTIVE VANNATTER. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS?

A: NO.

Q: DETECTIVE LANGE?

A: NO.

Q: THIS WAS ON YOUR OWN INITIATIVE?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU WERE DETECTING AT THIS POINT, I TAKE IT?

A: I'M SORRY?

Q: YOU WERE DETECTING?

A: I WAS DETECTING.

Q: YOU HAD BEEN FROZEN IN YOUR FUNCTION BY THE NOTICE OF DISMISSAL BUT NOW YOU ARE BACK AGAIN DETECTING, TRUE?

A: NO. AT THAT POINT I WASN'T DETECTING; I WAS JUST WALKING.

Q: YOU WEREN'T JUST BEING NOSY, WERE YOU?

A: I DON'T THINK NOSY. I WAS WALKING AND I NOTICED SOMETHING ON THE BRONCO AND I CONTINUED WALKING TOWARDS IT.

Q: WELL, WAS THIS A WALK THAT YOU TOOK TO GET SOME EXERCISE AND JUST HAPPENED TO TAKE YOU BY THE BRONCO? IS THAT WHAT HAPPENED?

A: IT WASN'T A WALK FOR EXERCISE. I JUST WALKED DOWN TO THE CORNER AND LOOKED DOWN ROCKINGHAM, SAW THE BRONCO.

Q: WAS IT A WALK SPECIFICALLY TO INSPECT THE BRONCO FOR SOME PURPOSE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: NO.

Q: IT WASN'T?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT SIMPLY THAT YOU WERE IN ITS VICINITY AND DECIDED TO LOOK AROUND ONCE YOU GOT THERE?

A: I WAS WALKING DOWN TOWARD THE ROCKINGHAM GATE. AS I WALKED TOWARD THE BRONCO I NOTICED A FEW THINGS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHILE YOU WERE WALKING TOWARD THE ROCKINGHAM GATE, WERE YOU GOING TO TRY TO GET IN THAT GATE?

A: NO.

Q: HAD YOU EXAMINED IT TO SEE IF ACCESS WAS POSSIBLE?

A: I DON'T THINK ACCESS WAS ON MY MIND AT THAT POINT.

Q: HAD ANYBODY DIRECTED YOU TO CHECK OUT THE ROCKINGHAM GATE TO SEE IF YOU COULD GET IN?

A: NO, NO.

Q: AND AS YOU WALKED BY THE BRONCO, ON THE STREET SIDE, TOWARD THE CENTER OF THE STREET, HOW LIGHT WAS IT AT THAT POINT?

A: IT WAS GETTING LIGHT, BUT IT WASN'T COMPLETELY DAWN YET.

Q: CAN YOU HELP US AS TO WHAT TIME IT MAY HAVE BEEN WHEN YOU WALKED BY THE BRONCO, TIME OF DAY?

A: 5:20, 5:25.

Q: OKAY. AND DO YOU THINK THAT THE DAWN WAS BEGINNING TO COME, SOME NATURAL LIGHT WAS ON THE SCENE AT THE TIME?

A: MAYBE SOMEWHAT, YES.

Q: WELL, YOU WEREN'T ABLE TO SEE INTO THE BRONCO WITHOUT YOUR FLASHLIGHT YOU TOLD US?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: HAD YOU BEEN WANDERING DOWN THE STREET WITH THAT LITTLE BITTY FLASHLIGHT ON, JUST KIND OF POINTING OFF TO THE SIDE?

A: NO.

Q: DID SOMETHING CAUSE YOU TO STOP AND TURN YOUR FLASHLIGHT ON TO INSPECT THE BRONCO?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT WAS THAT?

A: A LITTLE SPECK ABOVE THE DOOR HANDLE ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE.

Q: IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAUGHT YOUR EYE OR SOMETHING THAT YOU DISCOVERED BY INSPECTION?

A: I THINK IT IS SOMETHING THAT CAUGHT MY EYE.

Q: AND AT THAT POINT YOU TURN ON YOUR FLASHLIGHT TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK?

A: YES, THEN I INSPECTED.

Q: OKAY. AND AFTER YOU SEE THAT, YOU LOOK FURTHER, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU SEE SOME ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE THAT YOU THINK MIGHT BE BLOOD?

A: YES.

Q: WOULD YOU DESCRIBE ONCE AGAIN WHAT IT WAS THAT YOU SAW AND WHERE YOU SAW IT; NOT THE ONE ABOVE THE DRIVER'S DOOR HANDLE, BUT ELSEWHERE?

A: IN THE DOORSILL OF THE DRIVER'S DOOR DIRECTLY BELOW THE DOOR, VISIBLE FROM THE OUTSIDE ON THE EDGE OF THE DOORSILL, THREE OR FOUR LITTLE MARKS, LITTLE LINES, TRANSLUCENT RED.

Q: AND TO WHOM, OTHER THAN THE DETECTIVES, DID YOU DIRECT ATTENTION AS TO THE THESE LITTLE MARKS?

A: WHO DID I SHOW THOSE MARKS TO?

Q: YEAH.

A: DENNIS FUNG, THE CRIMINALIST.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU RECOMMEND TO HIM THAT THEY WOULD BE WORTH PHOTOGRAPHING?

A: I MADE NO RECOMMENDATIONS.

Q: DID YOU EVER SEE A PHOTOGRAPHER AT ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES.

Q: WHO WAS THAT?

A: I SAW MR. ROKAHR THERE.

Q: WHEN?

A: HE CAME BACK UP WITH ME AFTER I RETURNED TO THE BUNDY SCENE.

Q: UH-HUH.

A: SO THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SOME TIME AFTER 7:30.

Q: DID YOU EVER SPEAK TO HIM ABOUT PHOTOGRAPHS?

A: NO.

Q: DO YOU KNOW IF THERE IS ANYWHERE TODAY A PHOTOGRAPH OF WHAT YOU SAY YOU SAW ON THE LOWER PART OF THE BRONCO BELOW THE DOOR?

A: I HAVE NOT SEEN A PHOTOGRAPH.

Q: OKAY. WAS THAT BRONCO LOCKED, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: I DID NOT TRY TO OPEN THE DOOR.

Q: EVER?

A: NO.

Q: NEVER TOUCHED THE DOOR HANDLE THAT WHOLE DAY, THE 13TH?

A: I DID NOT.

Q: OR ANY PART OF THE CAR?

A: I LAID THE BACK OF MY PALM ON THE HOOD OF THE CAR TO SEE IF THE VEHICLE WAS WARM, YES, SIR.

Q: TAKING ITS TEMPERATURE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: YES.

A: OTHER THAN THAT, NO.

Q: OKAY. WELL, YOU TOUCHED THE VEHICLE WHEN YOU CUPPED YOUR FLASHLIGHT IN ORDER TO SEE IN THROUGH THE TINTED WINDOW YOU HAVE DESCRIBED?

A: NO.

Q: YOU DIDN'T TOUCH IT?

A: NO.

Q: YOU SIMPLY CAME CLOSE?

A: I TRIED TO CUP THE LIGHT SO I COULD GET A VIEW INSIDE.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU THEN BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE OTHER DETECTIVES, AT LEAST I BELIEVE TOM LANGE, THE FACT THAT YOU HAD MADE THIS OBSERVATION?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU SHOW IT TO ANYONE ELSE?

A: DETECTIVE VANNATTER.

Q: UH-HUH.

A: AND DETECTIVE LANGE AND I BELIEVE DETECTIVE PHILLIPS CAME DOWN AT SOME POINT, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHEN.

Q: OKAY. THAT WAS AS A RESULT OF YOUR RETURNING TO THE ASHFORD GATE, MENTIONING WHAT YOU HAD SEEN AND THEN WALKING BACK WITH YOU TO THE BRONCO?

A: I'M NOT SURE I WALKED ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE ASHFORD GATE. I THINK I WALKED TO THE INTERSECTION OF ASHFORD AND ROCKINGHAM AND MOTIONED.

Q: OKAY. BUT THEN YOU WENT BACK WITH THEM?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: TO POINT OUT WITH YOUR FLASHLIGHT WHAT YOU THOUGHT YOU HAD SEEN?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU ALSO SHOW THEM THE INTERIOR WITH THE SHOVEL AND THE PLASTIC?

A: YES. I'M NOT SURE HOW WELL THEY SAW IT, BUT I SHOWED THEM TO THE BEST I COULD, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. OF WHAT SIGNIFICANCE DID YOU DRAW AT THAT TIME FROM THE PRESENCE OF THE SHOVEL AND THE BRONCO?

A: WELL, I DIDN'T KNOW. I HAD NO IDEA WHAT THAT SHOVEL MEANT.

Q: AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE PLASTIC MEANT?

A: NO.

Q: BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T KNOW THEN AND DIDN'T KNOW UNTIL SATURDAY THAT IT CAME WITH THE CAR, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S TRUE.

Q: OKAY. IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT IT WAS NOT AN IMPORTANT MATTER THAT WAS DISCUSSED BY YOU FELLAS, THE PRESENCE OF THE SHOVEL?

A: I DON'T KNOW IF IT COULD BE ON ITS OWN -- IT COULD BE IMPORTANT. COLLECTIVELY IT COULD HAVE SOME IMPACT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHOSE IDEA WAS IT TO GO TO ROCKINGHAM, IF YOU KNOW?

A: COMMANDER BUSHEY, I BELIEVE.

Q: OKAY. HOW WAS THAT CONVEYED TO YOU? YOU DIDN'T SPEAK TO THE COMMANDER, DID YOU?

A: NO, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS DID.

Q: OKAY. AND HOW DID YOU LEARN THAT YOU WERE GOING TO ROCKINGHAM?

A: I WAS TOLD WHEN I CAME BACK FROM TALKING TO OFFICER RISKE, "GET IN THE CAR."

Q: JUST SAID, "GET IN THE CAR"?

A: WELL, RON SAID, "LET'S GO," AND I HEARD DETECTIVE LANGE AND VANNATTER, I BELIEVE IT WAS DETECTIVE LANGE SAID, "RON, MARK, LET'S GO." RON SAID "LET'S GO." I GOT INTO THE CAR AND THEN HE TOLD ME WHEN WE GOT IN THE VEHICLE.

Q: WHAT DID HE TELL YOU?

A: HE SAID WE WERE GOING TO GO MAKE A NOTIFICATION, "TAKE US UP TO THE ROCKINGHAM HOUSE."

Q: HAD YOU TALKED TO ANYONE ON THE SCENE THAT NIGHT, ANYONE AT ALL, ABOUT YOUR PRIOR EXPERIENCES WITH MR. SIMPSON IN '85 OR '89, EITHER OR BOTH?

A: YES, THE '85 INCIDENT.

Q: TO WHOM DID YOU CONVEY THAT?

A: WHEN DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS ON THE PHONE, HE BROKE AWAY, IT APPEARED TO BE IN MID CONVERSATION, AND ASKED IF I KNEW HOW TO GET UP TO THE SIMPSON HOUSE ON ROCKINGHAM.

Q: BACK UP A MINUTE, IF WE COULD. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS IS NOW ON THE PHONE AT ABOUT FIVE O'CLOCK?

A: I THINK IT WAS A LITTLE BEFORE THAT.

Q: CELLULAR PHONE?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND SO SOMEONE IS DISCUSSING SOMETHING THAT CAUSES HIM TO ASK YOU IF YOU KNOW YOUR WAY TO ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID YOU TELL HIM AT THAT TIME? THAT YOU HAD BEEN THERE ONCE BEFORE?

A: I WAS THERE ON A FAMILY DISPUTE A LONG TIME AGO, AND YEAH, I PROBABLY COULD GET UP THERE.

Q: AND WHAT WERE YOU TOLD BY DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS THE PURPOSE IN THE TRIP TO ROCKINGHAM?

A: WELL, WHEN WE GOT IN THE VEHICLE HE TOLD ME IT WAS TO MAKE A NOTIFICATION.

Q: UH-HUH. NOW, WERE YOU LOOKING, AS YOU PROCEEDED WITH THE CASE -- I TAKE IT AT THIS POINT YOU WERE SORT OF BACK IN THE CASE? WAS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING?

A: NO.

Q: WELL, DID YOU KNOW THAT DETECTIVE VANNATTER SAID ON JULY 6TH THAT YOU WERE IN THE CASE ALWAYS UP TO AND INCLUDING THAT DAY?

A: WELL, I THINK IN MY MIND I KNOW DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND HE IS GOING TO RENDER ANY ASSISTANCE TO ROBBERY/HOMICIDE HE CAN UNTIL THEY WANT US RELIEVED, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I THOUGHT WE WERE DOING.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, WERE YOU ON ACTIVE DUTY, SO TO SPEAK?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PURPOSE WAS OF GOING TO ROCKINGHAM?

A: WHEN I GOT IN THE VEHICLE I DID, YES.

Q: YES. WAS IT TO LOOK FOR VICTIMS OR SUSPECTS OR ANYTHING OF THAT SORT?

A: NO. TO MY KNOWLEDGE IT WAS NOTIFICATION.

Q: ALL RIGHT. HAD ANYONE DETERMINED, AS OF THAT POINT, WHETHER MR. SIMPSON WAS IN TOWN?

A: NO.

Q: WAS THE FACT THAT HE TRAVELED A GREAT DEAL EVER DISCUSSED BY THE DETECTIVES BEFORE YOU WENT UP THERE?

A: I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT. I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING.

Q: OKAY. NOW, AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE TOLD US YOU BECAME SUFFICIENTLY CONCERNED THAT YOU AND YOUR COLLEAGUES DECIDED IT WAS NECESSARY TO FORCIBLY ENTER THE PREMISES BY CLIMBING OVER THE WALL, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THAT WAS BECAUSE OF SOME CONCERN ON YOUR PART THAT THERE MIGHT BE SUSPECTS OR VICTIMS ON THE PREMISES, SOMEBODY IN NEED OF HELP?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: IS THAT SO?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. YOU WENT TO THE FRONT DOOR AND COULDN'T RAISE ANYONE, CORRECT?

A: ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT AFTER WE ENTERED?

Q: YES, AFTER YOU ALL GOT INSIDE.

A: YES, SIR.

Q: THEN WALKED AROUND ON THE NORTH PATH TO WHAT TURNED OUT TO BE THE BUNGALOW ROOM BELONGING TO KATO KAELIN?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: WHEN THE OTHERS WENT TO TALK TO ARNELLE, YOU REMAINED BEHIND?

A: YES.

Q: WERE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT WHO KAELIN WAS?

A: YES.

Q: WERE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER HE HAD THE RIGHT TO BE THERE?

A: HE APPEARED THAT -- IT JUST APPEARED THAT HE HAD THE RIGHT TO BE THERE. I JUST DIDN'T KNOW WHO HE WAS.

Q: WELL, WAS HE A SUSPECT AT THAT POINT?

A: I DON'T THINK -- I THINK HE WAS NOT A SUSPECT, BUT WE DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HIM AT THAT POINT.

Q: OKAY. WHY DID YOU GIVE HIM A SOBRIETY TEST?

A: TO MAKE SURE HE WASN'T UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL.

Q: AND WHY WERE YOU CONCERNED ABOUT THAT?

A: HIS EYES WERE JUST REALLY BLOODSHOT AND GLASSY AND HE WAS ALL --

Q: BUT IF HE HAD BEEN UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. COULD THE WITNESS FINISH?

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. LET HIM FINISH.

MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY.

Q: GO AHEAD.

A: I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE HE WASN'T UNDER THE INFLUENCE.

Q: AND IF HE HAD BEEN, WHAT WERE YOU GOING TO DO THEN?

A: WELL, I DON'T KNOW, SIR. I PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE INTERVIEWED HIM RIGHT THEN OR MAYBE I WOULD HAVE TAKEN HIM INSIDE. I DON'T KNOW.

Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU LOOKED AROUND THE PREMISES?

A: YES.

Q: WHERE HE WAS?

A: YES.

Q: AND MEANWHILE THE OTHERS, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, HAD LEFT AND GONE INTO THE MAIN HOUSE?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE THEY WERE.

Q: WELL, THEY WEREN'T WITH ARNELLE ANY MORE WHEN YOU CAME OUT, WERE THEY?

A: WELL, WHEN I CAME OUT, I LOOKED TO MY RIGHT AND I DIDN'T SEE THEM, SO I LOOKED TO MY LEFT AND I SAW AN OPEN DOOR.

Q: UH-HUH. KATO WENT WITH YOU INTO THE MAIN HOUSE?

A: YES.

Q: AND AS YOU PASSED BY THE KITCHEN, YOU HAD ALREADY SEATED HIM IN THE BAR STOOL?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: AND YOU SAW PHILLIPS ON THE PHONE?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU KNOW HE WAS TALKING TO MR. SIMPSON?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW WHO HE WAS TALKING TO, SIR.

Q: DID YOU INQUIRE OF ANY OF THESE FELLOWS WHAT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS DOING?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU SEE DETECTIVE LANGE COMFORTING ARNELLE?

A: NO.

Q: WHAT DID YOU SEE HIM DOING? DID YOU SEE HIM IN THE ROOM?

A: I BELIEVE HE WAS IN THE ROOM, BUT I SAW DETECTIVE VANNATTER. THAT IS WHO I FOCUSED ON.

Q: DID YOU SEE ARNELLE IN THE ROOM, MR. SIMPSON'S DAUGHTER?

A: I BELIEVE THAT SHE WAS, BUT I'M NOT POSITIVE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, HAD YOU INTERROGATED KATO IN HIS ROOM ABOUT WHAT HE MIGHT KNOW THAT COULD HELP YOU WITH THE SOLUTION OF THIS CRIME?

A: I ASKED HIM A FEW QUESTIONS. THEY WEREN'T DIRECTLY CRIME SCENE QUESTIONS, NO.

Q: WELL, YOU HAD BEEN TRAINED TO INTERROGATE PEOPLE, HADN'T YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU ALSO HAD INTERROGATED MANY SUSPECTS IN YOUR CAREER, HAD YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: INTERROGATION IS AN IMPORTANT ART OF POLICE PROCEDURE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: WERE YOU QUESTIONING HIM WITH A VIEW TOWARD LEARNING SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT IN THE CASE?

A: COULD BE, YES.

Q: LOOKING FOR SOME LITTLE SLIP OF THE TONGUE HE MIGHT MAKE THAT COULD BE SIGNIFICANT?

A: I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR, SIR.

Q: YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR?

A: NO.

Q: BUT DID YOU QUESTION KATO FOR A TIME AND THEN YOU CAME OUT TO THE KITCHEN, SEATED HIM IN A BAR STOOL AND SAID TO DETECTIVE VANNATTER, "YOU OUGHT TO GO TALK TO HIM"?

A: YES.

Q: WHY DID YOU THINK THAT DETECTIVE VANNATTER, YOUR SUPERIOR, SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO GO TALK TO KATO KAELIN ON A BAR STOOL?

A: WELL, HE COULD TAKE THAT INTERVIEW AND PUT IT TO A FORMAL INTERVIEW ON PAPER WHERE --

Q: YOU COULDN'T DO THAT?

A: I COULDN'T AT THAT POINT UNLESS I'M DIRECTED TO BY DETECTIVE VANNATTER.

Q: OKAY. BUT INSTEAD YOU DIRECTED HIM, IT SOUNDS LIKE?

A: I DIDN'T DIRECT HIM. I JUST SAID, "YOU MIGHT WANT TO TALK TO THIS GUY AT THE BAR OR TALK TO THIS GUY AT THE BAR," SOMETHING ALONG THAT --

Q: WHAT WAS DETECTIVE LANGE DOING AT THIS POINT? WAS HE TIED UP DOING ANYTHING, IF YOU KNOW?

A: HE WASN'T IN THE FOREFRONT OF THE KITCHEN; DETECTIVE VANNATTER WAS. I SAW HIM FIRST.

Q: UH-HUH. NOW, YOU THEN WALKED OUT THE FRONT DOOR?

A: YES.

Q: YOU HAD NO DIRECTION FROM ANYONE TO DO THAT, DID YOU?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: THIS AGAIN WAS DETECTIVE FUHRMAN ON HIS OWN, WAS IT NOT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU HAD AN IDEA THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO CHECK OUT KATO'S CLAIM THAT SOME UNUSUAL NOISE HAD OCCURRED AT ABOUT A QUARTER OF 11:00 THAT NIGHT ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE WALL OF KATO KAELIN'S ROOM?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID KATO TELL YOU, BY THE WAY, THAT O.J. HAD LEFT FOR THE AIRPORT IN THE LIMO HE HAD SEEN WHEN HE CAME OUT THAT NIGHT AFTER HEARING THE NOISE AT AROUND 11:00 P.M.

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU EVER ASK HIM WHAT A LIMO WAS DOING THERE AT 11:00 P.M.

A: NO. I CUT HIS CONVERSATION OFF AND BROUGHT HIM INTO THE HOUSE.

Q: AS A MATTER OF FACT, YOU ASKED HIM IF HE HAD HEARD ANYTHING UNUSUAL AND THEN YOU CUT HIM OFF AND SAID, "WHO DRIVES THAT BRONCO," DIDN'T YOU?

A: I BELIEVE I DID.

Q: WHY DID YOU CUT HIM OFF?

A: I DON'T KNOW, SIR.

Q: YOU INTERRUPTED AN ANSWER TO GET A DIFFERENT ANSWER? WAS THIS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION, WHO DRIVES THAT BRONCO?

A: NO. HE ANSWERED THAT QUESTION.

Q: HUM?

A: HE ANSWERED THAT QUESTION.

Q: I KNOW THAT. IN ORDER TO GET THAT ANSWER YOU CUT HIM OFF FROM ANSWERING THE PREVIOUS QUESTION WHICH WAS DID SOMETHING UNUSUAL HAPPEN TONIGHT OR ANYTHING UNUSUAL. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. WHY WAS WHO DRIVES THE BRONCO SO IMPORTANT AS TO INTERRUPT A WITNESS?

A: I CAN'T GIVE YOU --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY. IT IS THE OPPOSITE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU ASKED NO QUESTIONS ABOUT HIM HAVING SEEN MR. SIMPSON THAT NIGHT OR AT ANY GIVEN TIME?

A: NO. HE HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY ASKED ABOUT IF HE KNEW MR. SIMPSON WAS IN THE HOUSE AND HE SAID HE DID NOT.

Q: NO, BUT THEN HE TOLD YOU, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THAT HE HAD BEEN AWAKENED OR HAD HIS ATTENTION DRAWN, AS HE WAS TALKING ON THE PHONE TO SOMEONE, BY A STRANGE NOISE, PICTURE THAT SHUTTERED, SOMETHING YOU SAY SOUNDED LIKE CRASHING INTO A WALL AND THAT HE THEN WENT OUTSIDE AND SAW A LIMOUSINE THERE AT ABOUT ELEVEN O'CLOCK? ISN'T THAT WHAT HE TOLD YOU?

A: SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT, YES.

Q: AND YOU DIDN'T ASK HIM WHY THE LIMOUSINE WAS THERE?

A: NO.

Q: AND YOU DIDN'T ASK HIM IF MR. SIMPSON HAD BEEN THE ONE USING THE LIMOUSINE?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: KATO KAELIN DIDN'T LOOK TO YOU LIKE A FELLOW WHO RODE AROUND IN LIMOUSINES, DID HE?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: DID HE?

A: IN THIS AREA OF LOS ANGELES, I DON'T THINK COULD YOU SAY THAT.

Q: DO YOU THINK MAYBE HE ORDERED THE LIMOUSINE AND SOMEHOW STAYED BEHIND; IS THAT IT?

A: I HAD NO IDEA, SIR.

Q: HE DIDN'T TELL YOU ANYTHING ABOUT USING IT, DID HE?

A: THE LIMOUSINE?

Q: YEAH.

A: NO, HE DIDN'T.

Q: NOW, WAS IT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCOVERING WHY THE LIMOUSINE WAS THERE THAT YOU ASKED VANNATTER TO TALK TO HIM?

A: NO. I WANTED VANNATTER TO TALK TO KATO ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT HE SAW AND HEARD.

Q: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WERE YOU NOT CONCERNED THAT ON THE PREMISES THERE MIGHT BE SUSPECTS THAT NIGHT, VIOLENT VICIOUS PEOPLE?

A: I THINK I WAS LEANING MORE TOWARD ANOTHER VICTIM THAN I WAS A SUSPECT.

Q: HAVE YOU NOT TESTIFIED THAT YOU WERE CONCERNED THAT THERE WERE SUSPECTS THERE THAT NIGHT?

A: I SAID VICTIMS. I PREFACED IT WITH VICTIMS, POSSIBLY OF SUSPECTS --

Q: HAD YOU NOT TESTIFIED THAT YOU WERE CONCERNED THAT THERE WERE SUSPECTS?

THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT. MR. BAILEY, HE WAS STILL ANSWERING THE QUESTION.

MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY.

THE WITNESS: I PREFACED THAT WITH MY FIRST CONCERN WAS VICTIMS, HOSTAGE, POSSIBLE SUSPECT, YES.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHAT DID YOU MEAN EARLIER TODAY WHEN YOU SAID I DIDN'T WANT MY BACK TURNED TO THE OTHER END OF THE ALLEY?

A: ONCE I FOUND A GLOVE, THAT PIVOTED TOWARDS MORE SUSPECT THAN VICTIM.

Q: NOW, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU WENT OUT THERE IN THE ALLEY WHERE YOU HAD NEVER BEEN BEFORE, DID YOU NOT?

A: WHAT ALLEY, SIR?

Q: ALONG THE CHAINLINK FENCE WHERE KATO SAID HE HEARD A NOISE?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: DID YOU NOT?

A: YES, I WENT ON THAT PATHWAY.

Q: YOU WALKED THERE BY YOURSELF, CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU WERE WEARING NO BULLET PROOF VEST, CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU HAD THREE DETECTIVES WHO WERE ARMED IN THE HOUSE AND DIDN'T TELL ANY OF THEM WHERE YOU WERE GOING, CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU DIDN'T ASK ANY OF THEM TO COME WITH YOU TO COVER FOR YOU, CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU HAD PREVIOUSLY STATED THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY THAT DANGEROUS PEOPLE WERE ON THE PREMISES, HAD YOU NOT?

A: I NEVER USED THOSE WORDS.

Q: WHEN YOU WENT BACK TO THE LOCATION WHERE KATO SAID HE HEARD THE NOISE, YOU WERE ABOUT 230 FEET FROM THE BRONCO, WEREN'T YOU?

A: I DON'T KNOW THE DISTANCE, SIR.

Q: YOU CAN WALK THAT IN A MINUTE, CAN'T YOU?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: 235 FEET?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: CAN YOU WALK THAT IN A MINUTE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU KNOW AT THAT TIME THERE WAS BLOOD IN THE BRONCO?

A: NO.

Q: HAVE YOU EVER TESTIFIED THAT THERE WAS BLOOD IN THE BRONCO?

A: I'M NOT SURE IF WE TESTIFIED TO THAT IN THE PRELIM OR NOT.

Q: DID YOU WIPE A GLOVE IN THE BRONCO, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: NO.

Q: YOU DID NOT?

A: NO.

Q: WHEN YOU WENT OUT TO WHERE THE GLOVE WAS EVENTUALLY POINTED OUT TO THE OTHER DETECTIVES, HOW LONG DID YOU SPEND THERE BEFORE YOU WENT BACK TO TALK TO THEM?

A: TEN, FIFTEEN MINUTES TOTALLY.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO FOR TEN TO FIFTEEN MINUTES ON THAT SCENE?

A: LOOKED FOR A VICTIM OR A SUSPECT.

Q: YOU LOOKED FOR A VICTIM OR SUSPECT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU DIDN'T DRAW YOUR GUN, CORRECT?

A: I TOLD YOU I DON'T KNOW, SIR.

Q: WELL, IF YOU HAD DRAWN YOUR WEAPON AND WERE AFRAID, YOU WOULD REMEMBER THAT, WOULDN'T YOU, DETECTIVE?

A: SIR, AFTER TWENTY YEARS YOU DRAW THAT WEAPON UNCONSCIOUSLY --

Q: DID YOU DRAW --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. CAN THE WITNESS BE ALLOWED TO FINISH HIS ANSWER?

MR. BAILEY: I THOUGHT HE HAD.

Q: DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING MORE TO ADD?

A: YES, I DO, SIR.

Q: OKAY. WHAT IS IT?

A: AFTER TWENTY YEARS YOU DRAW THAT WEAPON, YOU LAY IT DOWN TO THE SIDE OF YOUR LEG, YOU WALK, YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW YOU ARE DOING IT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU WALK BACK INTO AN AREA WHERE YOU KNEW NO ONE ELSE HAD BEEN BECAUSE THERE WERE COBWEBS THERE?

A: NO. I TESTIFIED I DIDN'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAD BEEN BACK THERE WALKING UPRIGHT. I DIDN'T KNOW IF SOMEBODY HAD CRAWLED.

Q: ARE YOU NOW SAYING THERE ARE NO COBWEBS DOWN LOW?

A: I DIDN'T GO DOWN LOW, SIR. I WAS UPRIGHT.

Q: YOU ONLY FELT THEM IN YOUR FACE?

A: YES.

Q: YOU DON'T RECALL WHETHER YOU HAD YOUR WEAPON AT THE READY OR WHETHER IT WAS HOLSTERED AT SOME OTHER PLACE?

A: IT WAS NOT AT THE READY.

Q: YOU KNOW THAT YOU WERE NOT EQUIPPED WITH ANY PROTECTIVE GEAR, CORRECT?

A: I WAS NOT.

Q: NOW, IF THAT GLOVE HAD BEEN THERE WHERE YOU SAY YOU FOUND IT, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN PLACED THERE BY SOMEONE INVOLVED IN THE HOMICIDE; ISN'T THAT CONCLUSION COMPELLED?

A: I WOULD ASSUME THAT, YES.

Q: THAT WOULD BE A VICIOUS KILLER OF SOME SORT, WOULD IT NOT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU HUNG AROUND FOR FIFTEEN MINUTES WITH NO BACK-UP AND NO VEST DOING SOMETHING; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: NO, IT ISN'T.

Q: HAD ANYONE, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, SEEN THAT GLOVE THERE BEFORE YOUR ARRIVAL?

A: NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU THINK IT IMPORTANT THAT IF THE GLOVE WERE IN THAT LOCATION, THE LIKELIHOOD WAS THAT SOMEONE HAD PLACED IT THERE WHO HAD BEEN AT BUNDY?

A: YES.

Q: AND THAT SOMEONE, IF IT WERE A HUMAN BEING, WOULD HAVE TO HAVE GOTTEN TO THE SPOT OR NEAR IT AND GOTTEN AWAY, TRUE?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU EXAMINE THE SHRUBBERY TO SEE IF ANYONE HAD COME OVER THAT FENCE THAT MIGHT HAVE CRASHED THE WALL OR DROPPED THE GLOVE?

A: THAT WAS PART OF THE PERIOD THAT I SPENT BACK THERE LOOKING FOR THOSE TYPE OF ITEMS, YES.

Q: DID YOU NOT SATISFY YOURSELF THAT THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO TWIG OR LEAF THAT WOULD HAVE PERMITTED AN ADULT TO COME OVER THAT FENCE AT OR NEAR THAT SPOT?

A: IT WAS PRETTY OVERGROWN. IT WOULD BE HARD TO TELL WHAT TRANSPIRED THERE.

Q: DID IT NOT SEEM LIKELY THAT WHOEVER PLACED THAT GLOVE THERE, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, HAD WALKED BACK OVER THE ALLEY OVER THE LEAVES?

THE COURT: EXCUSE ME. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS OR DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, OVER THE LEAVES?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEIR TRACKS MIGHT STILL HAVE BEEN THERE WHEN YOU MADE THAT DISCOVERY, CORRECT?

A: I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING, BUT THEY COULD HAVE BEEN.

Q: AND YOU COULD HAVE TAKEN THE DETECTIVE ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE FENCE AND SHOWN THE FLASHLIGHT THROUGH IT TO POINT OUT THE GLOVE, IF YOU HAD CHOSEN, COULD YOU NOT?

A: NO. I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY DIFFICULT.

Q: DID IT OCCUR TO YOU THAT THERE MIGHT BE FOOTPRINTS THERE IF IN FACT SOMEONE HAD PLACED THE GLOVE AND WALKED OUT THE ALLEY?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, "PLACED THE GLOVE."

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU THINK THAT WHOEVER HAD DROPPED THAT GLOVE MIGHT HAVE LEFT FOOTPRINTS?

A: I DID NOT SEE ANY EVIDENCE OF THAT, NO.

Q: FOOTPRINTS THAT WERE LATENT, NOT DISCERNIBLE? DID YOU THINK THAT THERE MIGHT BE FOOTPRINTS THERE THAT A CRIMINALIST COULD FIND THAT MIGHT SHED LIGHT ON HOW THE GLOVE GOT THERE.

MS. CLARK: SPECULATION, YOUR HONOR. OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. DID YOU CONSIDER THAT?

THE WITNESS: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: DID YOU CONSIDER THAT?

THE WITNESS: NOT AT THAT POINT, NO.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YOU DID NOT?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU THEN CAUSE EIGHTEEN PAIRS OF FEET TO TRAMPLE THAT AREA BEFORE ANY CRIMINALIST COULD GET TO IT?

A: EIGHTEEN PAIRS OF FEET?

Q: EIGHTEEN PAIRS OF FEET. TWO FUHRMAN, FOUR FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS, FOUR FUHRMAN AND VANNATTER, FOUR FUHRMAN AND LANGE AND FOUR FUHRMAN AND ROKAHR? DID YOU DO THAT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, CAN YOU TELL US WHY, WHEN YOU WERE TALKING WITH KATO KAELIN IN HIS ROOM, YOU ASKED HIM WHERE YOU COULD FIND THE KEYS TO THE BRONCO?

A: I NEVER ASKED HIM THAT.

Q: YOU ARE QUITE SURE?

A: I'M ABSOLUTELY SURE.

MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU. THREE O'CLOCK, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE AFTERNOON AT THIS TIME. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU. DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, DO NOT ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU REGARDING THE CASE. WE WILL STAND IN RECESS AS FAR AS THE JURY IS CONCERNED UNTIL 9:00 A.M. TOMORROW MORNING. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, GOOD EVENING. YOU ARE ORDERED TO BE -- ORDERED TO BE BACK HERE TOMORROW MORNING AT NINE O'CLOCK.

THE WITNESS: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE WILL STAND IN RECESS.

(AT 3:04 P.M. AN ADJOURNMENT WAS TAKEN UNTIL, TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 1995, 9:00 A.M.)

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

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

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
)
PLAINTIFF, )
)
) VS. ) NO. BA097211
)
ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, )
)
)
DEFENDANT. )

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

MONDAY, MARCH 13, 1995
VOLUME 105

PAGES 18341 THROUGH 18573, INCLUSIVE
(PAGES 18333 THROUGH 18340, INCLUSIVE, SEALED)
(PAGES 18478 THROUGH 18503, INCLUSIVE, SEALED)

APPEARANCES: (SEE PAGE 2)

JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR #4588
CHRISTINE M. OLSON, CSR #2378 OFFICIAL REPORTERS

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE PEOPLE: GIL GARCETTI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
BY: MARCIA R. CLARK, WILLIAM W.
HODGMAN, CHRISTOPHER A. DARDEN,
CHERI A. LEWIS, ROCKNE P. HARMON,
GEORGE W. CLARKE, SCOTT M. GORDON
LYDIA C. BODIN, HANK M. GOLDBERG,
ALAN YOCHELSON AND DARRELL S.
MAVIS, DEPUTIES
18-000 CRIMINAL COURTS BUILDING
210 WEST TEMPLE STREET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012

FOR THE DEFENDANT: ROBERT L. SHAPIRO, ESQUIRE
SARA L. CAPLAN, ESQUIRE
2121 AVENUE OF THE STARS
19TH FLOOR
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067

JOHNNIE L. COCHRAN, JR., ESQUIRE
BY: CARL E. DOUGLAS, ESQUIRE
SHAWN SNIDER CHAPMAN, ESQUIRE
4929 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
SUITE 1010
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90010

GERALD F. UELMEN, ESQUIRE
ROBERT KARDASHIAN, ESQUIRE
ALAN DERSHOWITZ, ESQUIRE
F. LEE BAILEY, ESQUIRE
BARRY SCHECK, ESQUIRE
ROBERT D. BLASIER, ESQUIRE

I N D E X

INDEX FOR VOLUME 105 PAGES 18341 - 18473

-----------------------------------------------------

DAY DATE SESSION PAGE VOL.

MONDAY MARCH 13, 1995 A.M. 18341 105
P.M. 18504 105

-----------------------------------------------------

LEGEND:

MS. CLARK - MC
MR. HODGMAN - H
MR. DARDEN D
MR. KAHN - K
MR. GOLDBERG - GB
MR. GORDON - G
MR. SHAPIRO - S
MR. COCHRAN - C
MR. DOUGLAS - CD
MR. BAILEY - B
MR. UELMEN - U
MR. SCHECK - BS
MR. NEUFELD - N

-----------------------------------------------------

CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES

PEOPLE'S
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.

FUHRMAN, MARK 105 (RESUMED) 18344MC 18401B
(RESUMED) 18506B

-------------------------------------------------------

ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES

PEOPLE'S
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.

FUHRMAN, MARK 105 (RESUMED) 18344MC 18401B
(RESUMED) 18506B

EXHIBITS

PEOPLE'S FOR IN EXHIBIT IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE
PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.

116 - POSTERBOARD WITH 18352 105
SIX PHOTOGRAPHS ENTITLED "GLOVE FOUND AT
THE REAR OF 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM"

116-A - PHOTOGRAPH OF 18352 105
DRIVEWAY AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM WITH TWO
BLACK VEHICLES

116-B - PHOTOGRAPH OF 18352 105
THE GROUND AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM (SIDE)

116-C - PHOTOGRAPH OF 18352 105
A CLOSE-UP OF THE GROUND AT 360 NORTH
ROCKINGHAM (SIDE)

116-D - PHOTOGRAPH OF 18352 105
THE GROUND, A BLACK GLOVE AND THE NO. 9
AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM (SIDE)

116-E - PHOTOGRAPH OF 18352 105
A CLOSE-UP OF A GLOVE ON THE GROUND AT 360
NORTH ROCKINGHAM (SIDE)

116-F - PHOTOGRAPH OF 18352 105
A CLOSE-UP OF THE GROUND, A BLACK GLOVE AND; THE NO. 9 AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM

117 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 18363 105
360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM

-------------------------------------------------------

DEFENSE FOR IN EXHIBIT IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE
PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.

1053 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 18464 105
KATHLEEN BELL

??