|
REPORTER'S DAILY TRANSCRIPT SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SHARON RUFO, ET AL., N/A, PLAINTIFFS, VS. ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT NO. WEQ (REGINA D. CHAVEZ, OFFICIAL REPORTER) (The following proceedings were held in open court, outside the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: Somebody has a motion? MR. BLASIER: I have two brief motions I'd like to make. As the Court is aware, Lawrence Schiller has written a book that purports to contain a great deal of information provided to him by Robert Kardashian, who is one of Mr. Simpson's attorneys. Much of that material concerns privileged communications between various members of the defense team and Mr. Simpson. In November -- November 28 of 1995, Mr. Simpson wrote a letter to all members of the defense team, and the letter itself is privileged, but I've been authorized to read a short portion, which states: "I require that all information you have gained in the course of our professional relationship be held inviolate. Unless and until you receive express and written permission from me, any written authorization shall be limited to specific communications described in the authorization, shall not be construed as a broad or blanket authorization or waiver; therefore, it is essential that any draft manuscript be reviewed by me before it is shared with others, by others or . . ." perhaps "others." This was not complied with with respect to that particular book. My motion that the plaintiffs be precluded from asking questions about excluded material in this book, as Mr. Simpson does not waive, has not waived his attorney-client privilege. To do so -- To ask such questions in front of a jury would be improper, require him to assert privilege in front of the jury. My second motion is that they also be precluded from asking any questions about his not testifying at the criminal trial, as that is also privileged -- I think it's 913 of the Evidence Code -- would be improper to ask any questions or comment about that in front of a jury. MR. PETROCELLI: This motion is totally improper. We've heard nothing about it until just now, five minutes before Mr. Simpson is going to take the stand. I don't have a clue what information they're talking about, what they contend is privileged, what is not privileged, what has been previously disclosed, what has been disclosed, and public sources and depositions and statements by the defendant. I don't know how to deal with this, Your Honor. THE COURT: Well, you do know how to deal with that motion with regards to his exercise of his right from self-incrimination from the criminal trial. MR. PETROCELLI: No problem with that. THE COURT: That motion is granted. The rest of it is denied without prejudice. I don't see any basis on which I should grant a motion at this late stage. There was ample opportunity to exercise that privilege at the time the book was published. You should have had a motion at that time. MR. BLASIER: Mr. Simpson wasn't planning to testify at that time. He's now testifying. He's making the motion. We are not waiving the privilege. He should not be asked questions to assert it in front of a jury. THE COURT: He has testified at the time of deposition -- MR. BLASIER: No problem with anything he testified at deposition. We're talking about this material in the book he has not already testified to. THE COURT: As far as I'm concerned, he's already published it; I think he's waived it. MR. BLASIER: He didn't publish anything, Your Honor. THE COURT: He didn't bring any action to suppress it at that time. MR. BLASIER: That's being considered at this time. THE COURT: It's a little bit late. MR. BLASIER: No, it's not late. THE COURT: For the record, motion denied. MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, for clarification, the first motion that you did grant precluded me from asking Mr. Simpson -- or eliciting that he did not testify at the criminal trial? THE COURT: That's correct. MR. PETROCELLI: No problem. THE COURT: Okay. Bring in the jury. (The jurors resumed their respective seats.) (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: Morning. JURORS: Good morning, Your Honor. THE COURT: Plaintiff may proceed. MR. PETROCELLI: Thank you, Your Honor. Pursuant to California Evidence Code Section 776, we call to the stand, the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson. ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, called as a witness pursuant to California Evidence Code Section 776 by the Plaintiffs, was duly sworn and examined as follows: THE CLERK: You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this court shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? THE WITNESS: I do THE CLERK: Please be seated. And would you please state your name for the record. THE WITNESS: Orenthal James Simpson. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. PETROCELLI: Q. Mr. Simpson, you first met Nicole when she was 18 years old; is that true? A. That's correct. Q. She was a waitress, just having graduated from high school? A. A waitress, but I think she graduated when she was 16. Q. And you were a football player in the NFL at the time? A. That's correct. Q. Almost 30 years old, right? A. Twenty-nine. Q. And a month away from 30, right? A. Yes. Q. And you were married at the time to your then wife? A. Yes. Q. And two children? A. Yes. Q. And living together, right? A. Yes. Q. And when you met Nicole, you struck up, immediately, a romantic relationship with her, right? A. Immediately, yes. Q. And then in a short time, you got her a place to live, and the two of you began your relationship together, right? A. Yes. I helped her get a place to live, yes. Q. And then about 1980 or so, she moved into your Rockingham residence? A. I believe so, yes. Q. And by that time, you had left and divorced your first wife, right? A. Correct. Q. Now, you and Nicole lived together for about five years, until you married in February 1985, true? A. That's correct. Q. And in January 1992, Nicole told you she wanted to leave you, right? A. She wanted to separate, yes. Q. Okay. And the two of you then separated, correct? A. Yes. Q. And Nicole filed for divorce shortly thereafter, right? A. Yes. Q. And the divorce was final in October, October 15 of that year, correct? A. Yeah, about that time. Q. Okay. And the following year, 1993, the two of you attempted a period of reconciliation, right? A. Yes. Q. And that lasted about one year? A. I believe exactly one year. Q. And it ended in May 1994, true? A. Correct. Q. Weeks before her death on June 12, 1994, correct? A. Almost exactly a month. Q. And you were together, then, with Nicole about 17 years; is that right? A. Most of 17 years, yes. Q. And during that period of time, Mr. Simpson, there were some good time and bad times, right? A. Mostly good, yes. Q. And there were bad times, right? A. A few, yes. Q. More than a few, right? A. Well, like any long relationship, there was a few bad times, yes. Q. We're only talking about your relationship, sir, not other relationships. Okay? A. Yes. Q. And this was a passionate relationship at times, correct? MR. BAKER: Objection; relevance. THE COURT: Overruled. A. Yes. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) And it was a problem relationship for you throughout much of the time, true? A. Not true. Q. Did you not tell the Los Angeles police detectives who interviewed you on June 13, 1994, hours after Nicole's death, that you had always had problems with your relationship with Nicole; it was a problem relationship? A. Yes. We had problems in our relationship, but I don't think it was mostly a problem. Q. Did you not say that to the police detectives on June 13, 1994? Yes or no? A. Yes. Q. You said that, right? A. Yes. Q. And when you said "I have always had problems with her, you know, I, I, um, that -- that's our relationship, has been a problem relationship," that was true, correct? MR. BAKER: I'm going to object. I'm going to object to reading that transcript because that transcript is inaccurate. If he wants to play the tape, he can play the tape for the jury. MR. PETROCELLI: Object to the speaking objections. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. PETROCELLI: May I have the question read back? I'm going to repeat it. THE COURT: Leave out -- you know, I don't think it's necessary to put in all the "ums" and things. MR. PETROCELLI: I just wanted to be accurate, Your Honor, that's all. Mr. Baker, it's page 19. MR. BAKER: The transcript is inaccurate. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Did you not say to Detectives Lange and Vannatter, on June 13, 1994, concerning your relationship with Nicole, I always have problems with her; you know, that's -- our relationship has been a problem relationship. Did you say that? A. Yes. Q. And when you said that, that was true, correct? A. When I said it, yes. Q. Okay. And did you not also -- withdrawn. Was it also true that you had frequent hassles with Nicole. MR. BAKER: Vague as to time. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) In the course of your relationship with her, up to -- up to the time that the two of you split up? A. In the last few years, yes. Q. Did you not tell Lenore Walker that you always had had hassles with Nicole? A. I may have. Q. And did you not tell Lenore Walker, as if -- she can't stand when things are quiet and had to be -- and had to shake them up? A. Yes. Q. And Lenore Walker, by the way, is whom? A. I guess a psychologist. Q. And -- A. Who specializes in domestic discord. Q. And a person that you, your legal team retained in the course of the criminal trial, right? A. That's correct. MR. BAKER: I want to approach on this. THE COURT: You may. (The following proceedings were held at the bench, with the reporter.) MR. BAKER: I object to using anything from Lenore Walker. And the reason I object is, they designated Deitz and Dutton as these profilers, and the Court has ruled that Deitz and Dutton were not to be -- will not testify in this case. Lenore Walker was retained as an expert -- as a rebuttal expert for Deitz and Dutton, who are not going to now testify, and I object. When we had to disclose -- we had to disclose because of the expert designation, and that is the only reason that they got those notes. And I object to those notes because that's a conditional waiver. The conditional waiver has -- we're not going to call her 'cause Deitz and Dutton are going to be called. I object to them using any of the notes of Lenore Walker. MR. PETROCELLI: On the 2034, Your Honor, her deposition was taken in this action. The Code specifically provides whether or not she is called as a witness, that her deposition testimony can be used. I'm using it to directly impeach him. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. PETROCELLI: Thank you, Your Honor. (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Dr. Lenore Walker is a woman that worked with you in the course of the criminal case, and you spent many days talking with her about the nature of your relationship with Nicole, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Is it also true, sir, that in the course of your relationship with Nicole, that the two of you knew how to push each other's buttons? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And it's also true that, from time to time, the two of you got into very heated arguments that resulted in Nicole moving out for a day or two or a week at a time? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And there were incidents when pictures would be thrown and lamps would be broken, things like that, right? A. Yes. Q. And there were also physical altercations, true, Mr. Simpson? MR. BAKER: Vague as to time. All these questions are vague as to time, Your Honor. THE COURT: Time. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) I'm referring to the time when the two of you began a relationship in 1977, up until the time you stopped that relationship. MR. BAKER: It's over broad, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. A. Yes, we had a physical altercation. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Well, there was more than one physical altercation, true? A. I think you'd have to define that. There was one very physical altercation, and there were other times when they were not so physical. Q. What do you mean by "not so physical," Mr. Simpson? A. Well, Nicole hit me a few times, and I didn't consider that too physical. Q. So the ones that were not so physical are the times when you say Nicole hit you, true? A. Yes. And one time I grabbed her at a door and pushed her outside the door. That -- if you call that physical, that's physical, yes. Q. And how many times did Nicole hit you, as you say? A. Numerous times. Q. Okay. And how many times, Mr. Simpson, in the course of these physical alterations, did you hit Nicole? A. Never. Q. How many times did you strike Nicole? A. Never. Q. How many times did you slap Nicole? A. Never. Q. How many times did you kick her? A. Never. Q. How many times did you beat her, sir? A. Never. Q. And if Nicole said you hit her, she would be lying; is that true? MR. BAKER: I object. Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) If Nicole told people and wrote down in her diary that you hit her -- MR. BAKER: I object to this. MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me, Your Honor; I'm not finished with the question. MR. BAKER: That doesn't matter. THE COURT: I'll sustain it as to form. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You are aware that Nicole has told others that you hit her? MR. BAKER: I object to this, Your Honor. THE COURT: That's overruled. A. Yes. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) And you are aware that Nicole has written down in writings that you hit her, true? A. Yes. Q. And you are aware that her writings describe numerous incidents when you hit her, true? MR. BAKER: I object to this again. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. BAKER: I think we need to approach. THE COURT: No. MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor -- Please answer the question. THE COURT: Overruled. A. Yes. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) And your view is all that is false, true? A. True, yes. Q. Let's talk about 1989, okay? That was an angry, intense, physical confrontation, true? A. Correct. Q. You're what, at the time, six-two, 215 pounds? A. Yes. Q. Nicole, five-eight, 135 pounds? A. Yes. Q. And you hit her that day, didn't you, sir? A. No. Q. Did your hand make contact with her face at all to cause injuries on her face? Yes or no? A. I don't know. Q. Didn't you testify -- you remember testifying in this deposition, sir? A. Yes. Q. Remember I took your deposition over a number of days and Mr. Kelly, Mr. Brewer also asked you questions? A. Yes. Q. Let me read from that deposition. By the way, you understand and you understood then, you were under oath and subject to the same penalty of perjury, just as you are today? A. Yes. MR. PETROCELLI: Line -- page 1032, Mr. Baker, line 21. MR. BAKER: Line again? MR. PETROCELLI: Starting at 20, sir. MR. BAKER: To where? MR. PETROCELLI: 22. MR. BAKER: Okay. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) By me. (Reading:) "Q. You were in such a rage that you don't remember what you did; is that right? "A. I remember exactly what I did." Now, tell this jury exactly how you caused all those injuries on Nicole's face. A. Well, as I told you throughout the deposition, I don't know how exactly it happened, but I felt totally responsible for everything that happened at one point. Q. Mr. Simpson -- MR. BAKER: Let him answer the question. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) I'm not asking about your responsibility; I'm asking about your physical movements and actions. MR. BAKER: I move to let this witness answer the question. THE COURT: The answer was not responsive. Go ahead. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Please tell the jury exactly what you did to cause the injuries on Nicole's face. A. Well, as I explained to you, I don't know exactly how the injuries took place, so I can't really answer that question. If you want me to say what happened, I can tell you what happened. Q. You said in the deposition, you remember exactly what you did, true? A. And I also told you I don't know how the injuries got there. Q. You said you remembered exactly what you did, true? A. Correct. Not to cause the injuries; I didn't say that. Q. You caused all those injuries, did you not? A. I feel totally responsible for every injury she had then, yes. Q. Sir, I'm not asking you about your feelings of responsibility. Do you understand? A. Yes. Q. I'm asking you about what you did. You caused the injuries to her face, did you not? A. I feel responsible for every injury she had. MR. PETROCELLI: Move to strike as nonresponsive. THE COURT: Stricken. Jury is to disregard that answer. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Please answer the question. A. I don't know. Q. You don't know what? A. That I caused every injury. MR. PETROCELLI: Let's put some photos up. And I apologize to the jury for having to show those photos. Exhibit 3. (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 3 displayed on TV screen.) Q. You've seen those photos before, Mr. Simpson? A. Yes. Q. By the way, you say that some of the marks on -- on this photograph are caused by Nicole picking her face that night, true? A. No. I told you when she cleans her face. Q. That night? A. A lot of this redness would normally be there most nights, once she picked and cleaned her face. Q. You said in your deposition, sir, did you not, that that night she was picking at her blemishes, and that caused marks on her chin and on her cheek, true? A. No. I said normally what -- when she does pick her face, that those were marks that I'd normally see, yes. Q. Did you not say in your deposition that she did so that night, and that's why those marks appear on her face? Yes or no? A. I don't know -- MR. BAKER: That's been asked. THE COURT: Overruled. A. -- Exactly. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Excuse me? A. I'm not sure if that's what I said exactly. Q. Tell the jury right now, did Nicole cause any of those marks to herself that night by picking at her face? A. I don't know, but -- Q. You don't know? Yes, no, or you don't know; that's all? A. I don't know. Q. Okay. Let's talk about the injury to the lip, the split lip. How did she get that injury, sir? A. That looks more than what would normally be there. So at some point during the night, I assume that that happened, once our -- our -- our altercation began. Q. Well, what did you do to cause that injury? A. I wrestled her out of the room. And what happened when she was outside, I didn't see when she fell, but I feel responsible for all of that. Q. But you've said you "feel responsible for," a number of times. It's not necessary to keep saying it 'cause it's not responsive to my questions. MR. BAKER: I object to this. He can't give my client a speech. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Let's talk about what you did physically with your hand, your foot, whatever. Tell us how she got the cut on her lip, the split on her lip, that caused it to bleed that night? A. I don't know. Q. You don't know? A. No. Q. Okay. Tell us how she got the welt over the right eye. A. I don't know specifically how. Q. You did hit her there? A. No. Q. And it's your testimony, before this jury, that you never touched her face with your hand, true? A. I don't know, as I told you in the deposition, in wrestling her, maybe my hand hit -- hit or was on her face. I certainly didn't punch her or slap her. Q. You say your hand was on her face. Did you strike her at any time? A. As I told you, I had her in a head lock at one point, in trying to get her out of the door, so I would assume that my hand was somewhere around her -- her face. Q. When you say "head lock," you said in the deposition that you had her head in kind of a head lock to get her out of the room, true? A. At one point, yes. Q. Are you saying that that's when that injury to her eye occurred? A. I don't know when it occurred. But I'm assuming it occurred during the altercation or when she fell outside and -- Q. I would ask -- A. -- I was a cause of all of that. Q. I would ask that you not assume anything. Either tell us what happened or -- MR. BAKER: I would ask Mr. Petrocelli not to give my client legal advice. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) I just want to know what your recollection, sir, is; that's all. Just tell us what you remember. A. I don't -- I don't remember specifically when any single mark or injury came on her face, any of them. But I'm assuming they all happened during this altercation. Q. I Would ask that you not assume anything. Just tell us what you -- MR. BAKER: Again I as that Mr. Petrocelli -- THE COURT: Overruled. He may frame the question as he wishes. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Are you saying now that it's possible that you might have struck her with your hand, delivered a below to her right eye to cause that mark? Yes or no? A. No. Q. It's not possible? A. I did not punch her or slap her. That didn't happen. Q. Did you strike her with your hand? A. No. Q. Now, this thing about wrestling, your view is that Nicole started an argument that night about something that she was absolutely wrong about, true? A. Exactly, yes. Q. And she came into the bedroom and started hitting you, right? A. (No verbal response.) Q. Correct? A. Essentially, yes. Q. And you tried to remove her from the bedroom and initially succeeded in doing so and locked your door, true? A. Again, yes. Q. That's what you testified to? A. I testified I locked her out once. She got a key and got in. Q. The first time -- the first time, you got her out of the room? A. No, that's not correct. First time she went out, and I locked the door. Q. Okay. Did you -- was there any wrestling the first time? A. No. Q. Okay. And to your knowledge, no bruising or marks or injuries to her occurred during the time that you got her out of the room? A. I didn't get her out the first time. Q. The time she left the room? A. Yes. Q. You locked the door, right? A. Yes. Q. And then what happened is, Nicole got a key and opened the door, and you were sitting or lying on the bed, right? A. Yes. Q. And then you say Nicole started hitting you at that point, right? A. She jumped on me. Q. And then what you did was, to kind of try to just get her out of the room, right? A. That was my purpose, yes. Q. Okay. And you said Nicole is one of the most physically conditioned women you've ever known, right? A. Yes. Q. You said, at least that night, she was quite a match for you, right? A. It's tough -- it was tough to get her out of the room, yes. Q. So what you did is, you started to sort of try to, from behind her, put your arms around her and get her out of the room, right? A. I don't know if that's necessarily true. Q. At some point, you think, in the process of trying to get her out the 15 feet or so to the door so you could close your door, you got her in a head lock; is that right? A. I don't think that's necessarily true. Q. Is that a fair description? A. No. Q. Well, tell us, then. A. She jumped on me, on the bed, and with her knees and arms -- and then I kind of grabbed her and we kind of fell over on the floor. And then I was trying to get her -- to get her out of the door, and she was grabbing things and hitting. And eventually, I got her out of the door. Q. Okay. And when you said you grabbed her, you put your right hand into a fist -- A. Yes. Q. -- just now. Is that what you did that night when you grabbed her? A. Quite possibly when I grabbed her arm, quite possibly I did. Q. When you did -- now, you just put both hands in a fist. When you did it that night, did you punch her in the face with your hands? A. No. No. Q. Did you put your fingers and hands on her throat and leave marks on her throat, sir? A. I don't recall doing that at all, no. Q. You are aware she had marks on her throat, are you not? A. I'm aware that someone said she did, yes. Q. You believe that's false? A. I never saw them. And the next day, she showed me all her bruises. Q. She showed you everything the next day? A. She showed me something here, and this -- this was obvious to me. (Indicating to arm and head.) Q. You didn't see any marks on her throat? A. No. Q. No hand print or anything like that? A. No. Q. It's your testimony that you never touched her throat, right? A. I don't know. When you say "touched her throat," I was wrestling her; I could have touched her throat, yes. Q. And how could you have touched her throat? A. I don't know. Maybe -- I don't know. If you want to wrestle, you know -- I don't know. You know, it happens in a wrestling match. Q. Would you like to demonstrate to me, sir, how you had her head in a head lock with the Court's permission? MR. BAKER: I'm going to object to that, Your Honor. THE COURT: I don't think it's necessary. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) So you don't remember how these injuries occurred, true? A. I assume they occurred during this event, but I didn't see -- you know, when you're doing things, you don't see exactly, you know, when they happen. I just saw the next day or later on, to an extent that she had them, and I -- I felt I was responsible for them. Q. Well, one thing you are clear about, though, is that however these injuries occurred, it didn't result from your fist striking her or your hand striking her -- A. Yes. Q. -- and your hitting her in any way, true? A. True. Q. Now, once you got Nicole out of the room, you testified in your deposition, that was the end of the altercation. True? A. That's correct. Q. Now, you told a very different account of this incident, sir, to Dr. Lenore Walker, did you not? A. I don't believe so. Q. Did you not tell Dr. Walker that Nicole, after you had an argument in your room -- And by the way, this argument was over Nicole's belief that you were buying expensive earrings for another woman and were being unfaithful to her, true? A. I think it was over her misinterpreting what a girl named Kathryn, Marcus Allen's wife, said to her. Of course, she called Nicole the next day and explained it to Nicole. Q. Did you hear my question, Mr. Simpson? MR. PETROCELLI: Could you repeat it? You can answer it yes or no. (Reporter reads the record as follows:) "Q. Did you not tell Dr. Walker that -- MR. PETROCELLI: Next question. THE COURT REPORTER: I don't have that as the next question. MR. PETROCELLI: Let me reask it. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) This argument that you and Nicole had began when you -- and Nicole accused you of buying expensive earrings for another woman, true? A. That's not necessarily true. Q. Not necessarily true? A. No. She made -- she alluded to something and she never talked about what it was. Q. But the gist of it was that you had bought expensive earrings for a woman other than her, correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you told Dr. Walker that Nicole, in the course of this argument, broke an expensive lamp shade and ran out of the room, right? A. (No verbal response.) Q. Correct? A. Yeah, partially, yes. Q. And you told Dr. Walker that Nicole then went to the bathroom in the -- in the hallway, and that you locked her out of the bedroom, right? A. That's correct. Q. Then Nicole went downstairs and buzzed you up, but you ignored the buzz, true? A. That's not correct. Q. And then you went downstairs to the kitchen, sir, where Nicole was at that time, true? A. That's not correct. Q. And you got mad, you grabbed her from behind, and you dragged her out the front door, correct? A. That's not correct. Q. You told all of that to Dr. Walker, true? A. That's not correct. Q. And you saw Dr. Walker taking notes in the course of your conversations, true? A. That's -- I saw her doing that, yes. Q. Okay. And you weren't trying to mislead Dr. Walker, were you? A. No, I wasn't. Q. Now, it's also true that Nicole then ran to one of the guest rooms on your property, where your then housekeeper, Michelle, lived, correct? A. She ended up there. I don't know if she ran there. I didn't see them when she -- when she ran there. Q. You followed her to Michelle's room to continue the argument, true? A. I went out to Michelle's room, yes. Q. You had no reason to go out to Michelle's room if you were trying to simply quiet things down, did you, sir? A. I don't agree with that. Q. You could have stayed in your room, upstairs, after you succeeded in wrestling her out of the room, locked the door, and gone to sleep, true? A. Well, I could have stayed up there, yes. Q. And you did not do so, right? A. Correct. Q. And you went to Michelle's room, right? A. Correct. Q. And you pounded on the door and Michelle let you in, true? A. No. Q. And Nicole was dressed in sweat pants and a brassiere and nothing else at the time you entered Michelle's room, true? A. I believe so, yes. Q. And you told all of that to Dr. Walker, true? A. I believe so, yes. Q. And you told none of that to me in your deposition, true? A. I don't know. Q. You don't know? A. I don't know. I don't -- nine or eleven days, I don't know what we talked about. We talked about just about everything. Q. Well, we'll get into that. Now, when you entered Michelle's room, you began to scream and yell at Nicole, who was on the phone, calling the police. True? A. No. Q. And you told all of that to Dr. Walker correct? A. No. Q. And you got on the bed, with Nicole underneath you, and you grabbed her arms, punched her, and scratched her, correct? A. No. Q. She punched you and scratched you, correct? A. No, she -- Q. Yes or no? A. No. Q. You got on top of her on the bed, true? A. She jumped across the bed. Q. You pushed her onto the bed, sir, true? MR. BAKER: Let him finish his answer. THE COURT: Overruled. A. She got on the bed and was getting across the bed, and she was yelling at me, and she ended up leaving the room. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You remember exactly what you did that evening, as you said in your deposition, right? A. Upstairs, yes. Q. Oh, you don't remember exactly what you did downstairs that followed what, minutes later? A. I remember exactly what I did, but not exactly what she was doing. Q. So now you're saying that you do remember exactly what you did, not only upstairs, but downstairs, true? A. Mostly, yes. Q. Okay. So you didn't mean what you just said a second ago when you said, I remember exactly what I did upstairs? MR. BAKER: Argumentative. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Now, you're saying you remember exactly what you did upstairs and downstairs, true? A. For the most part yes. MR. BAKER: Argumentative. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Okay. Now, you would agree, sir, that you had a physical confrontation with Nicole on the bed, in Michelle's room, however it came about, and whoever was hitting whom, you would agree that that was a physical confrontation, was it not? A. I mean, in that we may have touched, yes, but it wasn't what happened upstairs. Q. What do you mean, "touched?" MR. BAKER: Judge, can we take that off the monitor? We're not asking questions about that. (Mr. Foster removed Exhibit 3 from the TV screen.) A. That when I walked toward -- to her, she yelled at me and kind of pushed the phone at me. And I was trying to tell her to stop and talk. And she jumped over onto the bed, got to the other side of the bed, said some things, started to the foot of the bed, and went out the door, where I think Michelle was. Q. Okay. So at no time, then, did you tell Dr. Lenore Walker that you were on top of Nicole on the bed, holding her down till she calmed down; she was punching and scratching you; you put her in a head lock; you let her go, and then she ran out? A. That was upstairs. Q. At no time did you tell that -- that that occurred downstairs, true? A. It did. Q. You would agree that you had some type of physical confrontation with Nicole in that bedroom downstairs? A. I wouldn't describe it as that, but we probably touched. But I wouldn't describe it as physical. Q. And your touching was what, trying to grab her? A. Yeah. She had kind of pushed the phone at me, and I was trying to make her be still. And she got on the bed, and got to the other side of the bed, said some things to me. And I think walked -- came to the end of the bedroom, where I guess Michelle was at the door, and they went out the door. Q. So Michelle observed all of this, didn't she? A. I don't know. Michelle was behind me and the door was open, so I'm assuming she was there. Q. She was right there in the room while you were engaged in a physical altercation with Nicole, true? A. I think she was standing right at the door and the door was open, so I can't say if she was actually in the room or standing outside of the room. Q. She was looking at what was happening, true? A. You'd have to ask Michelle. MR. BAKER: Objection. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) True? A. You'd have to ask Michelle. Q. You don't know? A. I don't know. Q. The police came out, right? A. Correct. Q. And you've heard the testimony that Nicole told the officers that you had punched her, and pulled her hair and so forth, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And those were true statements by Nicole, were they not? A. No. Q. And you saw -- By the way, the next day, Nicole had to go to the hospital, St. John's, right? A. Had to go? Q. Went. A. Yeah. I asked her to go to CNI. Q. I asked you if she went to the hospital. A. Yes. We asked her to go. Q. I didn't ask who asked her; I just asked you if she went. A. Okay. Okay. Q. Okay? A. Yes. Q. Did you go to the hospital, by the way, for any treatment? A. No. Nicole and I were trying to keep our distance. Q. Did you fall down in the mud and get all muddy and dirty that night? A. No. Q. Were you shaking with fear that night? A. No. Q. Were you injured that night? A. I mean, not really, not what I would call an injury. Q. Did you have marks all over your face? A. No. Q. Did you have bruises under your shoulders? A. No. Q. Now, you're aware Nicole told the doctor at the emergency treatment facility that you hit her face with your fist? A. No. Q. You're aware that that's in the medical record in evidence? MR. BAKER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. A. No. MR. BAKER: Move to strike the question and the answer. THE COURT: Stricken. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Let's go to the one of -- the other -- underneath the shoulders. MR. FOSTER: 9. MR. PETROCELLI: Exhibit 9. (Mr. Foster displayed Plaintiffs' Exhibit 9 on the TV screen.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Was this taken a couple days later, Mr. Simpson? A. I don't know. Q. Now, can you tell us how this severe bruising to the right shoulder occurred? A. Not exactly, no. Q. You don't know? A. I would assume during the course of us being upstairs, or I would assume more, then, maybe when she fell. Q. You did -- but you don't know? A. I don't know exactly. But I would assume when I was being physical with her, it took place. Q. Basically, you're -- when you described this incident, sir, you were at all times trying to restrain Nicole and bring peace to the situation? A. No. Q. You were trying to restrain her, right? A. I was trying to get her out of my room. Q. To stop the fight, right? A. I don't know if that was my thought at the time. My thought at the time was, I didn't want her in the room, and I physically attempted to get her out of the room. And I was wrong in doing that. Q. You physically attempted to get her out of the room because she wouldn't leave, right? A. Yes. Q. So, in your mind, you weren't battering her that night, were you? A. At the time, I would have said no but what I know now, I would have said yes. Q. But at that time, 1989, you weren't hitting her or striking her or battering her, true? A. At the time, I was. MR. BAKER: Argumentative. THE COURT: Overruled. A. (Continuing) At the time, I was being wrongly physical with her, and I physically tried to get her out of the room. And I've also said then and now I was wrong. Q. Mr. Simpson, based on what you testified to, saying you're wrong and you accept all this responsibility, what did you do wrong, sir? A. I physically tried to impose my will on Nicole, and I shouldn't have done it. Q. By trying to get her out of your room? A. Exactly. Q. As she was beating on you? A. No. She jumped on me. At that point, I reacted a way I shouldn't have reacted. Q. She's hitting you and striking you and throwing things, and you tried to get her out of the room, and for that you were wrong? Is that what you're saying? Yes or no? A. I was wrong for everything that led to this. I told the investigating officer and everybody I was totally wrong. Q. Would you answer the question? I just want you to answer my question. Your lawyer can ask you all the questions he wishes when it's his turn. Can you repeat my question? MR. BAKER: Move to strike the preamble. THE COURT: Overruled. Answer the question, please. THE WITNESS: What's the question? Q. We'll have it repeated, sir. (The reporter read the record as follows: "She's hitting you and striking you and throwing things, and you tried to get her out of the room, and for that you were wrong?") THE WITNESS: How I acted? Yes. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) The answer to the question is yes? A. Yes. Q. Thank you. Now, after this incident, sir, you wrote this letter to Nicole, did you not? A. Yes. Q. And you apologized profusely and repeatedly to her, true? A. Yes. Q. Okay. MR. PETROCELLI: Could you put on Exhibit 13. (Mr. Foster displayed Plaintiffs' Exhibit 13 on the TV screen.) MR. PETROCELLI: Could we have the board? Why don't you get the board. (The instrument herein referred to as Copy of a letter from O.J. Simpson to Nicole Brown Simpson was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 13.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Now, you wrote some letters because you regretted what you had done, true? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And this is one of the letters where you expressed how wrong you were for hurting Nicole, true? A. Correct. Q. You also said in this letter that you had gone crazy, you got crazy, true? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And when you said to Nicole in that letter that you got crazy, sir, you were not merely talking about defending yourself, were you? A. No. Q. You were not merely talking about trying to get her out of the room because she was hitting on you, true? That's not what you meant when you said you got crazy, true? A. I believe that's what it went to, yes. Q. What exhibit is this board? A. 13. Q. Excuse me? A. The letter, 13. Q. The letter is Exhibit 13? MR. BAKER: I object to the board. It's argumentative to highlight certain portions of it. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) When you said, sir, "thinking and trying to realize how I got so crazy, I had such emotional feeling towards you that were as high and as any I'd ever felt. Must be because of those feelings that I acted -- reacted so emotionally. When you said those things, you were apologizing to Nicole for hitting her, were you not? A. No, as I said, realizing. Q. Yes or no? A. No. Q. After this incident, you and Nicole had quite a difficult time for a while, true? Yes or no? A. I think you'd have to define "difficult" for me, please. Q. There was a serious problem in your marriage; and, in fact, you moved out for a while, true? A. Moved out? I'd -- I stayed at a friend's house for two nights. I didn't move any clothes out or anything, but I felt that it was, for us, to what reached a point where we got this physical with one another, that we should do something about it. Q. And you were very concerned, sir, about losing Nicole at that time, were you not? A. I was concerned about losing Nicole at any time, even though there was no indication that -- from either one of us that we would split, but -- Q. I'm just asking you about that time. Were you or were you not concerned about losing Nicole for what you did to her on January 1, 1989? Yes or no? A. Yeah. Yes, but -- Q. Okay. A. Yes. Q. Thank you. MR. PETROCELLI: Can we have Exhibit 15 on the board, Steve, for a second. The second page, just put it on the TV monitor. (The instrument herein referred to as Copy of letter from O.J. Simpson to Nicole Brown Simpson was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 15.) (Mr. Foster displayed Plaintiffs' Exhibit 15 on the TV screen.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You wrote to her, "I love you and losing you is the only thing that matters to me," right? A. Yes. Q. And you were very worried that you would lose Nicole at that point in your life, true? Yes or no? A. I was worried about losing Nicole at any time, even though -- Q. Mr. Simpson, we're not talking about any time; we're talking about when you wrote the letters, sir. A. I didn't want to lose Nicole at any time, including when I wrote this letter. MR. PETROCELLI: Move to strike as nonresponsive, Your Honor. THE COURT: Stricken. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Please answer the question. When you wrote that letter after this physical confrontation between Nicole and you, you were very concerned about losing her; yes or no? A. Yes. MR. PETROCELLI: And go to Exhibit 14. (The instrument herein referred to as a three-page letter to Nicole Brown Simpson was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 14.) (Mr. Foster displayed Plaintiffs' Exhibit 14 on the TV screen.) Q. And you tried to make some kind of amends to her, true? A. Yes. Q. Including financial, correct? A. I don't -- I couldn't characterize it as that, and I wouldn't totally characterize it as that, no. MR. PETROCELLI: Get ready on Exhibit 14. Take it off the screen, then. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Let -- let me give a little background here. You and Nicole got married in February 1985, and before you got married, you asked for and received a prenuptial agreement, right? A. Yes. Q. And that prenuptial agreement prevented your previously accumulated wealth from becoming community property of Nicole's and yours, true? A. Partially. Q. And you were worth a lot of money when you got married, right? A. Yes. Q. Under that agreement that you entered into prior to marriage, all the money you had acquired up to that time and all your properties and all your holdings would remain your own and not Nicole's? A. That's correct. Q. Now, when I say "worth a lot of money," by that we're talking millions and millions of dollars? A. I would imagine so. Q. Okay. So now, after this incident on January 1, 1989, you were so concerned about losing Nicole, and you were so concerned about what you had done, and you agreed to tear that prenuptial agreement up if you ever hit her again, true? A. Not when I made that offer, no. Q. You had your lawyer write up a document that said if I hit you again, I will tear up the prenuptial agreement, true? A. That's right. Q. And you did that in order to make sure that Nicole did not leave you at that time, true? A. Incorrect. Q. And you were also concerned, were you not, sir, about the damage that this incident might have to your public name, reputation, and image, true? A. I think I always would have had those concerns, yes. Q. And you were concerned about it at that time, right? A. I don't think that was a concern at that time. Q. Okay. Your image has always been important to you, sir, has it not? A. Who I am, yes. Q. And you also have been aware of your image, right? A. Yeah. I always know people like me, yes. Q. You wrote when you first began your football career back in the first book that you authored, "I have been praised, kidded and criticized about being image conscious, and I plead guilty to the charge," true? A. At that time, yes. Q. And you wrote that, quote: "I tried all the images." End of quote. True? A. I don't recall that, no. Q. It's in your book. A. I didn't write the book. Q. You approved the book, right? A. Yes. Q. You wouldn't allow anything in there about you to remain if it were false, would you? A. I think that's a certain license people take when they write books and -- Q. You tried -- A. -- that was the license that was taken. Q. You tried all the images, did you not? A. No. Q. And did you also write that the ghetto makes you want to hide from your real identity, from cops, from teachers, and even from yourself, and it forces you to build up false images humble, swaggering, casual, or tough in order to handle your enemies and impress your friends. That's what you wrote? A. No, I didn't write that. Q. And that's in your book, true? A. It's in my book, but I didn't write it. Q. Now you disavow that, right? A. I happen to believe a lot of that sentiment, but I didn't write that, no. Q. You agree with it? A. A lot of it, yes. Q. You agreed with it at the time and you agree with it now, true? A. In the ghetto, I agree that you have to at times hide behind a tough exterior. Yes, I do agree with that. Q. Mr. Simpson, you're not saying that you don't agree with what was put in the book under your name or about your -- all about you, first book ever written -- you're not saying that to this jury? A. In general, I okay'd the book. Q. Okay. A. A agree with a lot of the sentiment in the book, but I didn't write those exact words. Q. You didn't take any legal action to prevent this book from being publicly issued? A. No. Q. Or to take it off the market, did you? A. No. Q. Okay. And by the way, in that book, you also wrote, quote: "I think I lie pretty effectively," did you not? A. No. Q. You are aware that that quotation is attributed to you in your book, are you not? A. Now I am, yes. Q. "Now" means when? Right now, the first time? A. Yeah. Q. You never saw that before? A. Well, I think I read the galley of the book before it went to press in 1969, and I haven't read it since. Q. Page 57, quote: How can you tell me -- asked -- I'm referring to you -- quote: "I think I lie pretty effectively." End of quote. You don't accept that when you lie, you look so serious and intent on what you're saying, it gives you away. When you're saying something and you're laughing, that's the only time I can tell you're telling the truth, and you said I figured that it was something to keep in mind for my acting career, right? A. I don't know, I don't recall saying that, but -- Q. You are a pretty effective liar, are you not? MR. BAKER: Object, Your Honor, that's argumentative. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You lied to cover up the 1989 incident with Nicole, true? A. No. Q. You told Roy Firestone on a national television interview on ESPN the following: Quote: We were both guilty. No one was hurt, it was no big deal, and we both got on with our lives. End of quotes. You said that on television, did you not? A. Yes. Q. And that was absolutely false, true? A. I disagree with you on that. Q. Did Nicole get hurt? A. She had some bruises. Q. Are you minimizing her injuries now, sir? A. I'm not minimizing my action. But we got on with our lives. Q. I'm talking about your statement no one was hurt, that was -- A. Nicole -- Q. -- a false statement, true? A. Technically. Q. It was a lie? A. I disagree with you. Q. It was false? A. I disagree with you. Q. It was true? A. I disagree with what you're saying. Q. Was it true or false that no one was hurt? Answer my question. A. Nicole, yes, she was. Q. So Nicole was hurt, right? A. Yes. Q. And you did not tell the truth about it and you attempted to minimize the incident to cover up, true? A. It was a sport show, and yes, I most definitely on this sport show minimized what -- minimized what happened in my personal life, yes. But not to the police officers, I didn't minimize it. MR. PETROCELLI: Move to strike. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) We're talking about Roy Firestone, okay? A. Okay. Q. And in trying to minimize, you did so in order to try to protect your interest, correct? A. Protect my family first and foremost. Q. And protect you, true? A. I don't know if that's what I was thinking. I just thought it was an inappropriate question on a sport show and I didn't think it was the country's business what took place in my home. Q. So you were not trying to protect and hold up your good name and image, is that what you're telling the jury? A. I've also attempted to protect my family, my name and my image, of course, yes. Q. And you were trying to protect your family, your name and your image in answering those questions, right? A. Correct. Q. And in doing so you were also protecting yourself, correct? A. I'm a part of my family. My name and my family. Q. So you were also -- you don't have any problem with admitting you were trying to protect yourself, right? A. No. Q. You have no problem saying that, do you? A. You're correct. Q. Okay. And when you were trying to protect yourself, and it was necessary to lie, you lied, right? A. I think I may have minimized the situation, as you said, because I didn't think it was a proper forum to be asked that question on national TV. Q. You told another lie, too, you said it was no big deal, true? A. As far as the country was concerned, I thought it was no big deal. Q. Well, it was a big deal to you, wasn't it? A. Certainly was. Q. We'll go to that document. You offered Nicole, tearing up your prenup, that was worth millions of dollars, wasn't it? A. That's absolutely right. Q. It was a big deal to Nicole, right? A. I would think so. Q. And you said she just got some bruises; is that right? A. That's what she got. Q. Not a big deal, some bruises, right? A. To me and to Nicole it was a big deal. To America -- I didn't think it was any of their business. And to me it was no big deal for America to know what happened in my home. Q. Okay. So when you said it was no big deal and we both got on with our lives, what you were saying is it was no big deal to America, that's what you were saying, right? A. That's what I was implying to America, yes. Q. And Nicole was hurt, wasn't she, sir? A. Yes, emotionally she was hurt. Q. And physically? A. And physically she was bruised and hurt, yes. Q. You saw those injuries to her face, right? A. I saw those bruises, yes. Q. More than bruises -- MR. PETROCELLI: Good time? (Referring to break.) THE COURT: No, I would like you to move on. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) By the way, you offered Nicole that document in February, right? A. Yes. BY MR. PETROCELLI: Can we see that document. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) She didn't sign it until August, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So it took her some 8 months after the incident to agree to sign that document, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. MR. PETROCELLI: Put it on the Elmo. MR. GELBLUM: 813. (Exhibit 813 displayed on Elmo.) (The instrument herein described as a Document dated 2-3-89 was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 813.) MR. PETROCELLI: And can you move this up a little bit, right here. MR. GELBLUM: Done. MR. PETROCELLI: I'm sorry. (Counsel moves over.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You wrote her, if I ever willfully inflicted -- if I ever willfully inflict physical injury on you hereafter, I hereby agree that the prenuptial agreement between you and me shall be null and void, right? A. Yes. Q. And by the way, that's not your handwriting or your signature, you had your lawyer write that out for you, right? A. Yes. Q. And Nicole signed it 8 months later, correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. By the way, you know who Frank Olson is, right? A. Yes. Q. Frank Olson was one of your mentors in the commercial world, right? A. Yes. Q. He's the chairman of Hertz Corporation? A. Yes. Q. And you were Hertz's leading spokesman for many, many years going back to the 70's, right? A. That's correct. Q. And when the '89 incident occurred, you had a conversation with Mr. Olson a day or two later and put Nicole on the phone, correct? A. I don't know if was a day or two later. I certainly had -- Q. Couple days? A. -- certainly had a conversation with him after. Q. And you told Nicole -- you told Mr. Olson, sir, that Nicole broke a lamp, you saw what happened and you shoved or pushed her out of the door, the maid saw it, heard the noise, overreacted and called the police, and that was the extent of the incident? A. No, I think both Nicole and I talked to Mr. Olson and I think we possibly told him a little more than that, even though I don't think we went into any long detail about it. Q. You also told Mr. Olson that the only reason charges were being filed is because an assistant district attorney who was involved was president of some association dealing with domestic violence and they were using you as a scapegoat to highlight the problem, true? A. I still believe that, yes. Q. And that's what you told Mr. Olson, right? A. I think that was true. Q. That's what you told him, right? A. Yes. I know that's true, as a matter of fact. Q. By the way, you also told your good friend and business colleague back east in New York, Louis Mark, the same thing, right? A. I'm sure I -- after it became public, both Nicole and I spoke to both of those individuals. Q. And you told them basically there was -- it was a little shoving incident? A. I don't know what Nicole told them because she talked to them outside of my presence. Q. You told them just a little shoving incident, right? A. Yeah, I told them we had an altercation. Q. No, you didn't say altercation. You told him that you just shoved her out of the room when she broke a lamp, and this's all you said, right? A. I don't know -- I just told them that we had an altercation and there was a problem with LAPD from it, and I just felt that they were people that I was in business with and they should know once Nicole and I realized the media was going to write about it. Q. Bottom line, you didn't tell them the truth, right? A. Bottom line, I don't -- Q. Yes or no? A. I think I told them the truth. I didn't tell them in detail but I thought I was very honest with them. Q. Now, this wasn't the only time that there was a physical altercation in your relationship as you indicated, correct? A. Like this, yes, it was. Q. There was a time when you hit Nicole on the side, and she ran to the home of your very close friend in Los Angeles, a man named Wayne Hughes, right? A. No. Q. And she showed Mr. Hughes the bruises and Mr. Hughes came running to your house in his car looking for you and you were gone, true? A. I don't recall this at all. Q. You deny that? A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. I don't deny what Nicole and Wayne may have done. I don't recall it at all. Q. But you deny striking her and causing a bruise on her side? A. Yes. Q. Okay. There was another incident in the 80's when you and Nicole used to take your Chows to a veterinarian, right? A. Yes. Q. And -- MR. BAKER: I'll object on remoteness. THE COURT: When was this, Mr. Petrocelli? MR. PETROCELLI: It was in the early 80's, Your Honor. I don't think any of these are remote under People versus Zack. THE COURT: Okay. Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) And you had an altercation with Nicole in the parking lot when you slapped her in the face and knocked her glasses off to the ground, true? A. No. Q. And there was another incident in about 1986 or 1987 out near your place in Laguna out on Victoria? A. No. I don't have a place in Laguna. Q. You and Nicole frequented Laguna Beach from time to time? A. Yes, we lived there from time to time. Q. There was a time on the sand when you and she got into an argument and you slapped her and she fell down to her knees? A. Absolutely not. Q. Then there was an incident in the late 80's when you were up there, you were having an argument with Nicole in the back of the limousine and you struck her in the back of the limousine? A. Absolutely not. Q. Speaking of Wayne Hughes, didn't you tell Wayne Hughes after the 1989 incident you caught too much of a backhand in hitting Nicole? A. I don't believe so, no. Q. Now -- MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, this be a good time? THE COURT: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, don't talk about the case, don't form or express any opinions. 10 minutes. (Jurors resume their respective seats.) THE COURT: Proceed. MR. PETROCELLI: Thank you. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) In the fall of 1984, there was an incident in which you broke Nicole's windshield with a baseball bat. Do you recall that, sir? A. Yes. Q. And you and Nicole had had an argument, correct? A. Yes. Q. And Nicole was extremely upset and crying after you broke the base -- broke her windshield with the bat, right? A. Upset. Not crying, no. Q. And she then called the Westec folks and they came out to the incident, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you were in a state of rage and you took a baseball bat and you smashed her windshield, right? A. Absolutely not. Q. You testified at your deposition that all you did is you were bouncing the baseball bat against the tire, having an ordinary kind of conversation with Nicole, right? MR. BAKER: I object to this, Your Honor. If he's going to use the deposition he can use page and line numbers. MR. PETROCELLI: Not necessary. MR. BAKER: Not request my client to remember 11 days of deposition. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You testified at your deposition that all you were doing was sitting there talking to Nicole and you're taking the nub of the baseball bat, and just bouncing it against the rubber tire when a couple times it hit the hub cap. Do you remember that testimony? A. I remember that portion of it. Not quite how you characterize it. Q. And Nicole said to you, don't hit the car with the bat? A. No, she -- Q. Remember that? A. She moved my leg and looked at the hub cap and said, you're hitting the hub cap, you're going to pay for that. Q. Yeah, and then your response was, bam, I'll pay for that too, right? A. Yes. Q. Then, you remember testifying that she went in, she pressed a button for Westec, came back out and the two of you just finished talking, you both went in the house? A. Yes. Q. And nothing was the matter, and you were surprised to see Westec even show up, let alone the LA Police Department, correct? A. I think I was surprised to see LA Police Department. When Westec came, I don't know if that was a surprise, but I didn't expect it, I didn't know she had done that. Q. So you -- in your description of this incident, Nicole was not in fear of you at that point in time, correct? A. Definitely not. Q. It was no big deal, right? A. Well, I broke her windshield, but no big deal, no. Q. After the incident, your marriage came to an end a couple of years later, right? A. Three and a half years later, yes. Q. January 6, 1992, you and Nicole split up, right? A. Yes. She asked for a separation at that point. Q. And you were extremely unhappy about losing your wife then? A. Very much so, yes. Q. And you were hurt very badly, right? A. Yes. Q. And you, for several months in fact, tried to convince her to stay in the relationship, correct? A. Yes. Q. And then at some point, I guess May or so, you met a woman named Paula Barbieri and you began dating her and getting on with the rest of your life, right? A. I -- yeah, but I began getting along with the rest of my life after Nicole told me she had found a guy she was interested in. Q. Between January and May of 1992, which is the -- this was the period when you were attempting to resist a divorce, right? A. Correct. Q. And during that period of time, sir, you were going over to Nicole's -- withdrawn. By this time Nicole had moved out of Rockingham into a rented condominium on Gretna Green, right? A. In February, she found another place to move to. Q. 325 South Gretna Green? A. I believe so, yes. Q. She took your two children, Sydney and Justin, with her to live there, right? A. Yes. Q. And you would go over there from time to time uninvited, right? A. Yes. Yes, both ways, she'd come to my house, I'd go to her house. Q. We're only talking about you right now. You would go to her house uninvited? A. Yes. Q. And you would call Nicole's mother, Juditha, incessantly to talk about Nicole, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Virtually every day, numerous times a day, trying to talk about Nicole and getting your wife back, true? A. Often we didn't talk about Nicole but most of the time it was about Nicole, and Judy was -- she was like a shrink for me. I called her all the time. Okay. Q. And you also would call Nicole's house sitter, a woman named Giaconda Redfern, and talk to her about Nicole, right? A. I don't know who she is. Q. You would call Nicole's house sitter to find out where Nicole was, right? A. If I was out of town and I was calling like, for Nicole and the kids and they weren't around, I'd ask where they were. I don't know Giaconda Redfern. Q. You were checking up on her pretty frequently? A. No, I think -- Q. Yes or no? A. No. Q. Okay. Now, there came a time when in April of 1992, you went out to a restaurant called Trieste, right? A. Yes. Q. And you saw Nicole there with a man named Keith, right? A. I believe Keith was there. She was with about ten people. Q. This is the first time you had ever seen Nicole, in a restaurant, in the company of another man, not you, right? A. No. Q. And it was obvious to you that Nicole was with this person and not there with you, right? A. No, I had met Keith. And she went out with a bunch of her friends, and I assumed he was just a friend of hers like all the other people that were there. Q. You were not Nicole's date that night? A. No. Q. And you were not invited to be there with Nicole and the party, right? A. Or them with me and my party, no. Q. Now, after you left the restaurant that night, about 11 o'clock or so you went over to Nicole's condominium, uninvited and unannounced, true? A. Yes. Q. And as you walked up the path to the house, you looked through the window, and you saw Nicole engaged in a sexual act with this man, Keith, right? A. As I approached her front door, the window was there, and I saw her head, and I looked and saw that she was engaged with somebody. Q. And you watched long enough to see what was going on, right? A. I'd say ten seconds. I was a little stunned when I saw it, yes. Q. And that left an indelible impression in your mind, true, sir? A. I don't know what an indelible impression is. I was pretty stunned. Q. Lasting impression, right? A. I was pretty stunned. I mean it's not a picture that I carry around with me. Q. Something that was hard for you to forget, right, is that a fair statement? A. I sometimes still remember, yes. Q. Now, after that incident, you met this Paula, and the two of you, you and Paula that is, began a monogamous relationship of your own with her, right? A. Yes. Q. And by this time, you're pretty much over trying to talk Nicole into the relationship, right? A. Yes. Q. And your divorce was final in October of 1992, true? A. That's correct. Q. Okay. Now, there came a time I guess several months later, into early 1993, when Nicole started pursuing you again, true? A. Yes. Q. Or were you pursuing her? A. No, she was incessively (sic) pursuing me. Q. Excuse me? A. Incessively. Q. Incessantly? A. Yes. She'd show up where I -- wherever I was. She showed up at the golf course where I was, she followed me to Mexico, she made me cookies and occasionally -- she called my home and my office incessantly. Q. Kind of what you were doing to her between January and May of 1992, true? A. I think that's false. I don't think I showed up anyplace other than her home where she was. Q. Okay. A. Yeah. Q. Now, are you sure you were not pursuing her this time? A. No. I think everyone, including our family, knows it was her pursuing me. Q. You sure about that? A. I think everybody knows that. Q. I'm just asking if you're sure? A. I'm a thousand percent sure. Q. How many percent? A. A thousand percent sure. Q. Thank you. That answers my question. Now, Nicole was sending you letters and tapes and cookies and trying to get you back, right? A. Yes. MR. PETROCELLI: Can I see the letter, Steve. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) She wrote you a letter -- MR. PETROCELLI: 1161. Let me see it first. Just hand it to me, if you would please. (Mr. Foster complies.) (The instrument herein referred to as a five-page letter from Nicole Brown Simpson to O.J. Simpson was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 1161.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Now, by this time, we're into what, Mr. Simpson, March, April, 1993, thereabouts? A. Yes. Q. Divorce is final. You're in your life with Paula, right? A. Yes. Q. And there isn't any romantic involvement at all with Nicole, right? A. I hadn't even spoken to Nicole since two days after Christmas. I think I saw her for a minute on the 1st of February, and until she showed up at my house, I don't think I even had spoken a word to her other than maybe if I called and asked to speak to the kids. Q. And the basic interaction, if any, you had, had to do only with the children, right? A. Yes. I -- as a matter of fact, I know other than that one day I didn't even see Nicole for about two and a half, three months, and then I wasn't returning her calls when she would call to my office and stuff. Q. And then the pursuing started, right? A. I think it's a little confusing here. She was sending things over and calls and I wasn't responding. Q. Why were you not responding? A. Because I didn't want to deal with any of her problems. I told her if it was about the kids, just let me know. My housekeeper and my secretary told her. And I think I sent her a note or something that Nicole, I don't want to get into any of your problems. Because I had to deal with a lot of her problems and -- after we had -- after May of '92, and I tried to help her as best I can, but I was in my own relationship and I didn't want to deal with any of hers and I -- I just, you know, I just didn't want to deal with anything outside of the children. Q. Okay. And at some point you got a letter from her, right? A. Well, she showed up at my house one day, yes. MR. PETROCELLI: Was it 1161? MR. GELBLUM: Yes. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) The dear O.J. letter. You see that? A. Yes. Q. And at the end -- well, let me ask you this: First of all, this is a letter from Nicole to you, right? A. Yes. Q. And this is the letter that you received sometime in the spring of 1993? A. It appears to be, yes. Q. And this is Nicole's handwriting, right? A. It appears to be. Q. You don't have any doubt about that, right? A. It appears to be, yes. Q. You have any doubt? A. No. Q. Okay. At the end it says, I love you forever and always, Me, right? A. Yes. Q. And basically what she was saying to you is O.J., I want to come home, right? A. Well, she told -- the day she gave me the letter -- well, basically that's what the letter says, yes. Q. I want to come home, right? A. I don't know -- yes. Q. And as a result of these beseechings by Nicole, you decided to get back with her, right? A. No. Q. At some point you told Paula Barbieri that you were going to end your relationship with her and you were going to get back with Nicole, right? A. Roughly -- probably two months, possibly a little more after she showed up with this letter, yes. Q. Around Mothers Day, 1993, right? A. That's correct. Q. Then you left Paula for Nicole, right? A. Yes. Q. And you broke Paula's heart? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you and Nicole began what we -- what you called the reconciliation period, right? A. I gave her a year. I gave it a year. Q. You gave her a year? A. Yes. Q. Is that what you are saying? A. Yes, that's part of. Q. You gave her a year to do what, sir? A. I gave her -- I said I would give it a year. She had a concern at one point that if we argued, that I would just stop, and I said okay, I'll give it a year. I told her a few other things about one particular friend of hers I wouldn't socialize with and I don't -- and one or two other little things. Q. Before you said you'd give her a year. Was that a slip? A. No, that -- that's how I felt, I'll give it a year, I'll work as hard as I can for a year, and if it works in a year we'll remarry, if it didn't work in a year, it wouldn't work. Q. So from about March -- excuse me, May of 1993, for the next year -- A. Virtually to the day. Q. We'll talk about to the day. A. Yeah. Q. Let's just say to the year. A. Yes. Q. Roughly, okay? A. Yes. Q. You and Nicole had a monogamous relationship, right? A. I don't know how monogamous it was, no. Q. Was it monogamous on your part? A. When we were dating it was monogamous. You have to understand, I lived in New York, she lived here. I -- she never asked me what I was doing, I never asked her what she was doing. Q. The ground rules were you would date each other exclusively, not move in, and try to see if you could put your marriage back together, and if it worked within a year, then she would move back to Rockingham and the two of you would get remarried and be a family again, is that a fair description of the arrangement? MR. BAKER: Objection, compound. THE COURT: Overruled. A. I think the ground rules were we'd work together on the relationship. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Sir, could you answer my question, please? A. You asked a question -- you asked a lot of things that were in that question, sir. Q. Was that a fair -- A. Basically, basically, but I -- she went out when she wasn't with me and I went out when I wasn't with her, so... Q. Excuse me? A. Yes. Q. Was that a fair description of the arrangements you had? A. I think it was close. Q. Okay. Are you saying now that you did not have an arrangement with her where you would be exclusive to her. You would be monogamous to her during the period that you and she were attempting to reconcile? A. I think we wanted to be. But she wasn't and I wasn't, so -- Q. But you had an agreement with her that you would be, true? A. I don't think we talked about it. I don't think it was a specific conversation we had. I think when we said we'd work together, it may have been an implied thing there that we would be monogamous with one another, but I think it was pretty -- I think it was certainly implied when we -- when we sat and talked about it. Q. So the answer to my question is you did not have a verbal agreement with Nicole that the two of you would be exclusive -- exclusive; is that correct? A. I think it was implied, yes. Q. Did you tell her -- did she tell you we will not date other people in the time that we are attempting to reconcile? A. I don't recall -- Q. Yes or no? A. -- recall having that specific conversation, having -- saying that. I think it was certainly implied when we got back together. Q. You had no verbal conversation that you and she would do such a thing, correct? A. I believe it was implied when we said we're going to work to get back together again. Q. Are you saying it was said or not said? Can you just answer the question? A. I'm saying that I believe it was implied when we said we were going to work with one another to get back together. Q. Okay. A. I know neither one of us was monogamous during this period of time. Q. I'm not asking you that. I'm asking you what the deal was, okay. Now, you said the closest that you came and she came to expressing that deal is that you would work together, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And nothing more was said on the subject of dating other people, right? A. I think it was implied that we wouldn't date other people. Q. Nothing else was said, right? A. I believe it was implied. I don't remember the specific conversation but I believe it was certainly implied by both of us that we wouldn't date other people. Q. Now, that reconciliation period didn't go too well, did it? A. I would say it went -- with the exception of two or three months, mainly because I kind of felt I wanted out, I would say it went pretty good. It didn't work in the end. I thought it went pretty good. Q. The last six months of the year were not very good, were they? A. I would say January, February, March were great, and from March on, they weren't. Q. Okay. And you continued to have arguments with Nicole as you had throughout the course of your relationship, right? A. Yes, we had a few arguments, yes. Q. And a couple of things happened that year that upset you, right? A. Yes. Q. And one thing that happened in particular was that there was an article that came out in the National Enquirer in the fall of 1993 in which it was reported that you -- that you had begged Nicole to get back into the relationship, right? A. Yes. Q. And that really upset you? A. Yes, it certainly did. Q. And it upset you because it was false, right? A. Exactly. That's why it upset me. Q. She begged, you did not beg her? A. Exactly right. Q. You got upset with her because you thought Nicole was responsible for telling the reporters or her circle of friends told the reporters this falsehood, right? A. That one or two of her friends had, yes, because there were some things in there that I thought were a little on the money and I felt that the only reason the National Enquirer would have known it was if one of her friends had gone to it with it, and it really, really upset me. Q. It upset you because you didn't want to want America to think that you were begging another woman, correct? A. I didn't want an inaccurate thing to be written in the paper, and I didn't think it was right that one of her friends would go to a tabloid and make any characterizations about anything that was going on between Nicole and I. Q. You were a public figure at that time, right? A. Yes. Q. And you were very concerned about what the public thinks of you, true? A. In this instance I would say no. In this instance I was upset that someone who purported to be a friend of hers would take -- Q. Could you please answer my question yes or no. MR. BAKER: He's trying to answer the question. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) No, you're not answering. THE COURT: Overruled. He's answered. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Please answer the question. A. Would you reask it, please. Q. You were upset that the country was reading that you had begged a woman to -- to get back into the relationship? A. In this instance, no. Q. Okay. Now, in October of 1993, there was another very severe episode with Nicole, right? A. Yes. Q. You hesitated. Not sure that it was severe? A. Yes. It was severe. Severe -- I mean you -- it certainly wasn't severe in terms of '89, which I truly thought was severe. I didn't think the '93 incident was nearly -- in the realm of the '89 incident. Q. Now, the entire time that you were -- this is October 25, 1993? A. Yes. Q. The entire time that you were arguing with Nicole that night, there was another person there on the premises, right? A. I would say most of my argument when the other person was on the premises was me venting to him because Nicole was upstairs. Q. And that person is Kato Kaelin? A. Kato Kaelin. Q. Okay. Now, what happened that evening, sir? You were at Nicole's house, and you got into an argument with her because you saw a picture of this guy, Keith? A. That's absolutely wrong. I mean that became a part of the argument once it began. But that's absolutely wrong. Q. Excuse me. You can just answer yes or no. A. No. Q. You got into an argument with Nicole because you saw some photos that upset you, right? A. That became a part of the argument after the argument began. Q. Okay. A. Yes. Q. And you then left the condominium because you were upset, right? A. Not -- no, that's not correct. I think I left -- when I left there hadn't been an argument. I left because I didn't want to argue. Q. You were upset and you left, right? A. Yes. Q. And you were upset and you didn't want to get into an argument, correct? A. Yes. Q. And this is at night, right? A. Yes. Q. And you drove the short distance to Rockingham, right? A. That's correct. Q. And then you called Nicole, right? A. No, I called her back. She called me. I was on the phone, and I returned her call. Q. And the two of you argued on the phone now, right? A. Yes, on the -- I don't know if we argued. She made a point to me that I said I wouldn't -- I wouldn't leave if there was something to talk about, we would argue it out. So essentially it was her saying to me I wasn't doing what I said I would do. Q. And she hung up on you? A. She may have hung up, yes. Q. And you called her back and she hung up on you again? A. I don't think so. I may have called as I was coming over and her phone was -- either it was busy or off the hook. Q. And then at some point you called back, and the phone was busy, and you could not get through as though it had been put off the line, true? MR. BAKER: Objection. THE WITNESS: I don't think so. MR. BAKER: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. PETROCELLI: And -- THE COURT: Just a minute. Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Okay. At some point while you were dealing with Nicole you tried to call her and could not get through, you got a busy signal, true? A. Yes, I was -- yes. Q. And when you were unable to get through, you jumped in your car, your Bronco, your white Bronco, and you high-tailed it over to Nicole's; is that right? A. My knees were such that I couldn't jump anywhere. Q. Okay. A. I drove over because I thought she made a valid point, I shouldn't have left, I should have stayed and talked it out. Q. You got in your car and you went over to Nicole's, right? A. Yes. Q. And you parked the car not against the curb but sort of just in front of the house, right? A. In front of her car, yes. Q. And you left your lights on, right? A. Yes. Q. And you went inside and you kicked the door, true? A. Well, there was a lot that happened in between that and the portion that you're talking about, but essentially, eventually I kicked the door, yes. Q. You kicked the door to get inside right? A. Yes. Q. And you broke the door, right? A. Not the glass. It was a glass door. But I -- part of the door was -- had been previously cracked and when I -- as she closed it, I kicked it and I think a piece came off it, yes. Q. And fair to say that you were enraged when you kicked that door down, right? A. I was pretty upset, yes. Q. And fair to say that Nicole was extremely upset, right? A. She was pretty upset, yes. Q. And fair to say that Nicole expressed to you great fear, fear of you, correct? A. Not at all, not at any time that night did she express any fear to me. Q. You heard that 911 tape, sir, did you not? A. Yes. Q. You heard Nicole say he's going to beat the shit out of me -- A. Yes. Q. -- did you not? You understood that she was afraid of you when she said that? A. No, because she was not talking to me the way she was talking on the phone. And before she got off the phone, she came back down into the room that I was at, which indicated to me, even today, that she obviously wasn't afraid. If she thought I was doing something, she would have stayed in the room. Q. So you think she just lied to the 911 operator? A. Yes, I think -- I think she was trying to control -- Q. You just answered my question. A. Yes. Q. And you've heard this other tape that you called the surreptitious tape? A. Yes, I did. Q. And you heard Nicole being asked, are you afraid of him harming you? She said I got scared. Scared of him physically harming you? And she answered yes. You heard that, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you think that was a lie also, right? A. Well, I knew it was because she came into the room that I was in -- Q. Excuse me. Yes or no? A. I think that was a lie, yes. Q. And you heard on that tape Nicole say I got frightened tonight. When he gets this crazed, I get scared . . . hit me. He does not look like himself, he gets a very animal look in him, his veins pop out and his eyes get black. It was more precaution thank anything. I just always believed if it happened once more it would be the last time. You remember hearing Nicole say those things? A. No. I read that in your transcript. Q. You've read that before today, haven't you? A. Yes. Q. And it is true, sir, that Nicole expressed to you in the course of your relationship, her fear of you when you got mad and angry and enraged, true? A. Yes. Q. And it's true, sir, that when you did get mad and angry, that you would acquire a very animal like look, correct? A. Yeah -- I never -- I can never recall being mad and looking in a mirror. Q. Well, Nicole told you I'm afraid when you look like that, right? A. No, she told me when you get mad -- you really scare me when you get mad. She told me that actually the next day from this incident. Q. Oh, that was the first time she ever told you that, is that your testimony, sir? A. She may have said before that she hates it when I get mad, yes. Q. And you knew she was frightened that night? A. Not that night. I will debate forever that she was not frightened of me that night. Q. Debate with whom? A. With whoever wants to debate it. I don't think her actions, besides the phone call, said she was afraid, she came down into a room that I was in, after she told the police she was afraid. I was standing there. I can't imagine a person who would be afraid would come down into the room that the person's afraid of is in. Q. You think this is a debate, sir? A. Pardon me? Q. You think this is a debate? A. No. Q. Now, the police officers who showed up there that evening, the Los Angeles police officers, they told you that because of your celebrity status they wanted to keep this as small as possible, right? A. I believe one of the guys said that, yes. Q. They treated you fairly, didn't they? A. Other than surreptitiously taping me and using it for their personal use, outside of that, I thought it was, you know, how they handled it, then I thought they defused the situation, yes. Q. You weren't arrested, were you? A. No. Q. And by the way, in 1989 when the police came and confronted you ran, didn't you? A. No. Q. You took off, right? A. I left at a certain point and went to another friend's house, yes. Q. And you knew the police were waiting for you, right? A. No. Q. You thought they had gone? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So you didn't have any idea that the Police Department had told you that they wanted to take you in? A. They never told me that. Q. So you just felt you were free to go, right? A. No. I felt it was wise that I leave. I was advised by my daughter and the housekeeper, you know, you're -- you're -- O.J., you can't be getting into a fight with this phrase that they used to describe this detective -- Officer Edward, and I just left. Q. Now, when you left, sir, the police were still on your property, right? A. No, they were never as far as I know -- I think Mr. Edwards may have walked on originally. After that they were never on my property. Q. But what I mean by that they were still there waiting outside the gates, right? A. I don't know, I couldn't see on the Ashford side. Q. You couldn't see because they were on Ashford and you went out Rockingham, right? A. Yes, that's my exit from my property. Q. You can't see Ashford from Rockingham, correct? A. I couldn't see where they were. Q. All right. And they were right outside the Ashford gate, weren't they? A. They weren't where the gate was. But I have a wall on that side so if they were there, they would have been out of my vision, behind the wall. Q. And it was dark out, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. But you knew they were there when you left. A. I suspected they were there, yes. Q. And you knew Nicole was in the car, right? A. I assumed she was this -- the car, yes. Q. And by the way, you asked your loyal servant, Michelle, to go get Nicole out of the car? MR. BAKER: I object to that characterization. Q. Did you tell Michelle to go get Nicole out of the car and bring her in? A. I think Michelle did that on her own initiative. Q. You didn't have anything to do with that? A. I don't know. We were all there. Q. Did you tell Michelle to go get Nicole, get her out of police car, and get her inside, yes or no? A. I don't recall. Q. You don't recall? A. No. Q. You said you remember everything you did that night? A. Most things I do remember. Q. But you don't remember that? A. I don't remember specifically -- Q. Okay. A. -- what -- Q. Okay. A. -- were being said then, no. Q. Okay. Now, after this 1993 incident, you continued to see Nicole, correct, the October 1993 incident? A. Yes. Q. By the way, there was an incident the Christmas you went to the home of the -- the Jenners, right? A. Yes. Q. You went with? A. Christmas Eve. Q. Christmas Eve. You went with Nicole, your two children, and Kato Kaelin, right? A. Yes. Q. You drove over there and you went inside the Jenner home, right? A. Yes. Q. And then, at some point in time you saw this guy there named Joseph, who you believed Nicole had dated when you and she were separated, right? A. Yes. Q. And that upset you so much that you just got up and took off and the whole family left, correct? A. Absolutely wrong. Q. And there was a big argument in the car on the way home, true? A. No. There were some words between me and her that went for about a minute, and we went home and we had our Thanksgiving -- I mean Christmas meal, opened gifts, Nicole stayed with me that night, and everything was fine. Q. Seeing Joseph there upset you and causes you -- caused you to leave, correct? A. Not at all. Q. Now, let's turn to the 1994 time frame, sir. In March of -- end of March, Nicole and you went off to Cabo San Lucas, right? A. Yes. Q. And your children were there also? A. Yes. Q. And Nicole had some friend there and their children as well, right? A. Yes. Q. And your reconciliation now, is like 10 months in progress or so? A. Yes, approximately. Q. And as you said earlier, things were going pretty good in your mind, at this point in time, right? A. At this point in time, I think for the first time I felt that there was a chance this was going to work. Q. And you had a great time in Cabo with Nicole on April 1, 2 and 3 of 1994, true? A. A super time, yes. Q. And after that -- that short vacation, you came back to Los Angeles to get ready to go to Puerto Rico? A. No. I came back to work. I had to leave on Easter Sunday because I had to start the day -- the next day on the job, and Nicole and the rest of the people stayed in the house that I rented down there. Q. Well, you got to Puerto Rico sometime in early April, right? A. Yeah, eventually I went to Puerto Rico, yes. Q. This was to film your movie "Frogman," right? A. Yes. Q. And you said you started to work in Los Angeles initially on the movie? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, after the Cabo trip and while you were working on Frogman in LA, then in Puerto Rico, after this wonderful trip you had with Nicole, you're thinking things may work out for the first time, all of the sudden you got kind of a cold shoulder from Nicole, true? A. I don't -- I don't understand what you're saying. Q. You don't understand what I mean? A. No. Q. Didn't you start calling Nicole from Puerto Rico and you weren't getting your phone calls returned, sir? A. No. I called one day and she was great and I called the next day and she was weird, and I called the next day or she would call me and she was great and the next day she was strange. Q. So you thought Nicole was acting very erratically? A. Possibly more so than I'd ever known her to be in my life. Q. And you started calling up Nicole's friends, Cora Fischman, Ron Fischman, Faye Resnick, and saying what's wrong with Nicole, right? A. Yeah. I think -- I don't know if I talked to Cora because Nicole had -- had said that actually -- essentially that Cora was the cause of her erratic behavior. Q. Can you just stay with the answer -- A. No. Q. -- to my question? A. The answer would be no, not as you said it. Q. You started talking to Nicole's friends, and even Nicole's mom about why is Nicole not responding to you as she had been in Cabo; is that a fair statement, sir? A. No. I think you mischaracterized. Q. Please answer. A. No, you mischaracterized. Q. Please answer yes or no? A. No. Q. Thank you. And you were pretty upset that having thought things were going to work out now, things didn't look so good, right? A. I -- I wanted out, yes. Q. And you came back into Los Angeles filming Frogman in Puerto Rico around what May 1, thereabouts? A. Roughly. Q. Roughly? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you and Nicole were having sort of a difficult time the first week or so of May, right? A. I was, she wasn't. She had -- she had said she loved me, and she was sorry about the way she acted and she picked me up at the airport, but I, at that point, wanted out. Q. And you decided to go and visit the family on Mother's Day at the Brown house, correct? A. Well, I mean it was -- it was Mother's Day. That's where we were spending Mother's Day. Q. You worked very late and into the evening Friday, and you drove all the way down there? A. Yes. Q. And got in sort of the middle of the morning, right? A. I got in about 5:30, 6 in the morning. Q. And you and Nicole had a planned date to go out on Saturday night and Judy and Lou would take care of the children and so forth? A. That's correct. Q. And when you got to the house on Saturday you and Nicole had a place down there, right? A. Yeah, I had a place down there, yes. Q. And Nicole didn't want to go out, right? A. Well, she wanted to go out, she got dressed, but when she got to the door she went into something I've never seen, she started shaking and she -- her words was, look at me, I'm having a nervous breakdown. Q. And you got kind of angry at her, didn't you? A. I got -- Q. True? A. I think more concerned than angry. Q. Did you get angry, sir? A. I got more concerned than angry. Q. I didn't ask you about concerned. A. There was an element, yeah, I was. Q. There was? A. Yeah. Q. Some anger there? A. There was some anger there. Q. Okay. And the two of you argued, right? A. No, we did not argue. Q. And Nicole didn't want to go out, right? A. She said, look at me, how can I go out like this. Q. Isn't it true that you had a little altercation with her that night? A. No. Q. Got on the bed and sort of held her shoulders down? A. Absolutely not. Q. You deny that, don't you? A. No, when she was shaking, I was hugging her and said, Nicole, what's the matter? She couldn't explain what was wrong and why she was feeling the way she was feeling, she just couldn't explain it. Q. Ultimately you got out to dinner that night? A. Yes, yes, we did. Q. Then the next day, you had Mother's Day, correct, at the Browns? A. Yeah, it was pretty surprising because the next day everything was fine. Q. And after Mother's Day, you and Nicole continued to sort of try to make this thing work, right? A. Absolutely wrong. Q. You had nothing to do with her after Mother's Day, is that your testimony? A. That's not correct, but it's absolutely wrong that we continued to work on the relationship. It ended either that night -- I'm not sure, or the next night it ended, and I immediately -- immediately started publicly dating Paula again. Q. Now, it's your testimony, sir, that you broke off this relationship on May 10, correct? A. Yeah, I instigated it but when we sat and talked about it, we both agreed. Q. Okay. And it's not -- it's -- withdrawn. Isn't it true, sir, that Nicole ended this relationship with you on May 22, 1994, not May 10, not at your instigation but at her instigation; isn't that true? A. Absolutely wrong. Q. Isn't it true that on May 22 you went to Nicole's condominium that night on Bundy, correct? A. Yes. Q. And the two of you talked about your relationship, correct? A. Yeah, we talked about a lot of things, yes. Q. And you, on the 19th of May, you had just given Nicole an expensive birthday present three days earlier, correct? A. Expensive is a relative term, but, yeah, I gave her a couple presents. Q. Five or six grand, whatever, right? A. Yes. Q. Some kind of emerald bracelet? A. Yes. Q. And she took it, right? A. Yes. Q. And three days later on the 22 of May, three days after you gave her this expensive gift, Nicole returned it to you that night, right? A. Yes. Q. And you then asked for the earrings you had just gotten for her, right? A. I think the earrings -- I can't recall if I had talked about the earrings, but I hadn't just gotten them for her. I think that came up first. Q. You asked for the earrings back? A. I asked for the check back. Q. Okay. And just so the jury understands, you had bought Nicole and helped design some earrings a while ago and they were stolen and she got insurance money, right? A. She said they were stolen. Q. Okay. You think -- A. You want me to explain this? Q. Why don't you explain it. Go ahead, explain this. A. She -- when we got back together there were some earrings I had made for her previously, and she said she had lost them, they got stolen, it really hurt her that she lost them. So at a previous -- I don't recall if it was Valentine's Day or something like that, I went to a jeweler and had the earrings remade, and it took him a while to make them because a few times when they came back they weren't exactly the way we wanted them. Eventually he got them made. Unbeknownst to me, my office sent him (sic) a check. So when the insurance check came for the earrings, $10,000, my office gave the check to Nicole. So at this point -- I mean I paid an additional 9 or 10,000 for the earrings, I should have the insurance check. I should have one or the other. The insurance check -- and she said she had spent the money from the insurance check. Q. Okay. So you -- A. Okay. Q. So you said, hey, you can't have both of them, right? A. No, I said where's the check. She said I don't have the check, so here's the earrings. Q. So bottom line though, Mr. Simpson, May 22, 1994, you're at 875 South Bundy with Nicole and she returns the earrings, or you ask for them back, she returns the bracelet, and that was the official end of your reconciliation with her, true? A. That's absolutely wrong. Q. And if Nicole wrote in her diary -- in her notes that "we officially split up on that evening," you would say that that was false, correct? MR. BAKER: I'm going to object, Your Honor. There was supposed to have been a hearing relative to that. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You may answer. A. I think everyone who knew us then knew that that was false. Q. Well, I'm not asking about everyone? A. Well, it was false. It was absolutely false. I had started dating Paula the day after Mother's Day -- or two days after Mother's Day, with my kids, publicly. Q. What do you mean publicly? A. Publicly. We went to public places together, we were, you know, seen together, some of her friends saw us together holding hands. I mean it couldn't be any clearer than that. Q. Now, you were still publicly or otherwise dating Paula, let's say between Mother's Day and May 22, okay. Let's focus on that -- A. Yes. Q. -- time period. A. Yes. Q. You were still extremely confused and frustrated and upset that your relationship with Nicole was coming to an end -- MR. BAKER: Argumentative, compound. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. Correct, sir? A. I wasn't confused. Q. Were you -- A. Upset, but I was -- it was a disappointment that we couldn't make it work, but we were getting along so well. I thought it was for the best. Q. Now, were you upset that the relationship had ended yes or no? A. Yes, I think after a year and 17 years, I wish -- Q. You can answer just yes or no, sir? A. There was an element of being upset. Q. Just an element? A. Just an element, yes. Q. And were you frustrated that it had come to an end, yes or no? A. Absolutely not, no. I don't think it was a frustration. Yeah. I think there was an element that the relationship had ended after trying for a year, but I think among -- I was relieved and I think among everyone who knew me, no one heard me complain and I -- I just went on. I mean I was -- Q. So there was an element of being upset but no frustration; is that what you're saying, yes or no? A. Yes. I mean -- Q. Please answer the question yes or no. A. Sorta. I can't answer the question yes or no. Q. And you, in fact, were trying to win Nicole back during this two-week period? A. No. Q. Correct? A. Not at all. Q. Are you trying to say to this jury that after all this time together, you were able to, boom, cut the cord on May 10? MR. BAKER: Argumentative. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. BAKER: Argumentative. A. Possibly as cleanly as anything could possibly -- Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) So is this a yes? A. Emotionally it was cut, yes. Q. You did cut it, boom? A. Yes. Q. Just like that? A. Yes. Q. Over? A. Yeah. Q. Is that -- A. I mean I still cared about her, but yes, it was -- it was -- I had no problem with seeing Paula and it had been public and, yes. Q. And so as of May 10, you were able to emotionally, and otherwise, immediately cut the cord with Nicole; is that what you were saying? MR. BAKER: Your Honor, this is asked and answered. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Yes or no? MR. BAKER: Wait a minute. It's argumentative. I object to him saying yes or no after every question. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. BAKER: The witness can answer the question the way he sees fit. MR. PETROCELLI: No speaking objections. A. I can't answer that yes or no. I can't answer that yes or no. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Okay. A. I can't. Q. You can't. A. I immediately cut any effort to reconcile with Nicole. I was happy to move on, but I was still very, very much concerned about Nicole. Q. Were you able to cut it off right then and there, yes or no? A. Our relationship, yes. Cut off our relationship, yes. Q. And your emotional attachment? A. Emotionally I was still very -- you know, this is a woman I loved, okay, I have always loved her, when we were apart we always said we loved each other even when we weren't married. Q. The answer was you were not able to emotionally cut the cord on May 10; is that true? MR. BAKER: Objection, that's vague, ambiguous, to emotionally cut the cord? A. I still haven't -- THE COURT: Excuse me. Overruled. You may answer. A. I still haven't cut the cord with Marguerite emotionally and I've not been married to her for 20 years. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) I didn't ask about Marguerite. Can you answer that question? A. I would say I can't answer that question. Any answer I'd give would be misleading. Q. So there was -- you're not able to answer a straightforward question? A. I don't think it's a straightforward question. MR. BAKER: I object. Q. You cannot tell this jury one way or the other whether you cut or didn't cut off your emotional attachment to Nicole as of May 10. A. I could never cut off my emotional attachment to Nicole. Q. Okay. So then from May 10, until the end of Nicole's life, you still had an emotional attachment to Nicole, true? A. Until this day I have an emotional attachment to Nicole. Q. Thank you. Now, four days after Nicole's -- after Mother's Day on May 10, you with me? A. I'm sorry? Q. Four days after Mother's Day, May 14, you went off to New York, right? A. Yes, I -- that week I went to New York, yes. Q. And May 14 was Sydney's Holy Communion, right? A. Yes. Q. A big family event? A. Yes. Q. And you missed it, right? A. Yes. Q. And you had a big thing to attend that you couldn't get out of? A. That's right, everything humanly possible to get out of -- Q. In fact -- A. They couldn't let me out. Q. You tried? A. I did everything a person could possibly do in business to get out of it and couldn't. Q. And Nicole was extremely upset with you that you had missed that even though you had made every human effort to get out of it, right? A. She didn't show me that, you know, so I never saw her being upset with me for it. Q. She never told you she was upset about that? A. No. She asked me could I get out. When she told me about it, I was -- it was sort of late, I was committed to what I was doing. And then I called the people who were doing it, I called the chairman of the board of Hertz, I did everything I could do to get out of this, you know, important date that they had, and they -- they couldn't let me out of it. Q. Sir, it's your testimony to the jury that Nicole never expressed to you her feelings that she was upset you couldn't be there; is that correct? A. She had told me previously that she wished I could be there. And I told her the problems I was having getting out of the affairs. I said I wish you had told me earlier so that I could have made some preparations for this. Q. And she told you she was upset and wanted you to stay? A. She didn't say she was upset. She didn't use the word upset. Q. You've answered the question. A. Okay. Q. Now, when you went back east to New York, you played golf on May 16 with a man named Frank Olson who was the President of Hertz, right? A. Yeah, Chairman of Hertz. Q. And played in New Jersey, right? A. Yes. Q. With Frank and a couple of other people, right? A. Yes. Q. And at that time, you told Frank Olson that you were very upset about breaking up with Nicole, true? A. I don't believe so. Q. Okay. You told Frank Olson that you were thinking about moving to New York to get away from it all, true? A. I already had a place in New York. I think I said I was going to move to Florida to get away from it all, which had been my plan previously, and my plan at this point in time. Q. So at this point in time, with the relationship with Nicole having come to an end, you were ready to move back east to get away from it all, true? A. Yes. For a certain time I was going to move previously but I didn't move because Nicole, you know, wanted -- Q. Excuse me, sir, you don't have to -- A. Okay. Q. -- keep answering. A. I'm sorry. Q. It'll move along a lot quicker. Now, in fact, with Mr. Olson, you tried -- he kept trying to change the subject and you kept coming back to talking about Nicole, true? A. No. He kept talking about his problems with his wife. That's what we were talking. We were sharing problems with -- with our relationships. Q. So it's untrue? A. Yes, that's untrue. Q. Okay. After you came back from that Hertz trip, Nicole, around her birthday time, had taken ill, right? A. Yes. Q. Around middle of May, her birthday, May 19? A. I got back from the trip. Q. Is that true? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And Nicole was kind of bedridden, right? A. Yes. Q. And you helped out a couple days by bringing over scones and coffee and going to Rosti's and bringing Italian food over and those sorts of things, right? A. Yeah, I helped out. Q. Okay. A. I kind of tried to nurse her somewhat, yes. Q. And during this period of time, May 19, is when she had her birthday and you bought her an emerald bracelet and gave it to her, together with a cigarette lighter, correct? A. I gave it to her. I didn't buy it for her, but I gave it to her, yes. Q. Well, you bought this bracelet for her? A. No. Q. Did you not? A. No. Q. You told the LA Police detectives who interviewed you on June 13, that you bought it for her, didn't you? A. That's correct. Q. Okay. And certainly on June 13, only three weeks after May 19, that is a lot closer time than today, true? A. Yes. Q. And in fact, you told the detectives who interviewed you, Detectives Thomas Lange and Phil Vannatter, on June 13, that you kind of were in a bad spot because you had bought the bracelet for Nicole, given it to her, she returned it to you, and you gave it to Paula and told Paula you had bought it for her, true? A. That's true. Q. Okay. And now you're telling us that all that's false, right; yes or no? A. It is false. Q. Okay. A. It's partially true. But if you what me to explain it's a very simple explanation and I think you will understand if you give me the opportunity to explain. Q. I think I understand, sir. A. Okay. All right. Q. Now -- and by the way, your lawyers said something earlier in talking about the accuracy of this tape recorded interview. I just want to read from your deposition. Page 186, Mr. Baker. (Reading.) Question: Line 7, this is referring to the tape recorded interview that we had been discussing with the police? Answer: Yes. Question: During the time they talked to you in the room they recorded it, yes? Answer: During the time the recording was on, it appears to me that from what I can recall recorded everything that we talked about while the recording was on? Answer: Well, while the recording was on. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) So what you said in this statement you don't quarrel with? MR. BAKER: I object, Your Honor. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Correct? MR. BAKER: I object. Just a minute. MR. PETROCELLI: No speaking objections. MR. BAKER: I'm not listening to you as my lawyer. I can tell you that. MR. PETROCELLI: There isn't an objection. MR. BAKER: He's talking about a recorded statement not -- MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me. MR. BAKER: -- Not the transcript of that recorded statement. THE COURT: Excuse me. Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You've read the transcript of the interview that was recorded, right? A. Yes. Q. And what I just asked you about the bracelet was on the tape, and was on the transcript, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. MR. PETROCELLI: Now, if can I have the May 22 entry. MR. BAKER: Your Honor, I want to approach at this time. THE COURT: You may. (The following proceedings were held at the bench with reporter:) MR. BAKER: Before we were supposed to have any comments about the diaries we were supposed to have a 402 hearing. We've never had any 402 hearings about the diaries. He's already mentioned her writings without any 402 hearing whatsoever. I objected, you overruled it, I asked to approach, you declined my request. I again object to any of her writings until there's a 402 hearing which has never occurred nor been requested. MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me, Your Honor, this was ruled on. I'm looking for the transcript from the hearing. I marked pages this morning. In limine they -- they tried to keep out, all of these. The Court's statement, Your Honor, specifically ruled that Nicole's state of mind was relevant to the issue of motive, and said that if there's any particular pieces of evidence that needed to be reviewed on an individual basis for purposes of 352 you would take a look at it, okay. So you said in the hearing that -- MR. BAKER: Keep your voice down. MR. PETROCELLI: Sorry. State of mind issue is relevant. Mr. Baker opened that door wide open in his opening statement, talking about Nicole's state of mind, going on and on about Simpson's relationship, about how he was the confidante, about how it was Simpson who was breaking up with Nicole and not the other way around, and the -- The Nicole diaries are specifically relevant to prove the point of our case here. And she began making entries on May 22, and she made them through June 4 and she was dead days later, Your Honor. As you will see, we have officially split up on May 22, 1994. This is her handwriting. And he's been shown this, he authenticates this. He doesn't dispute certain facts, he only wants to put his characterization on it. If she's not available then her writings now speak for itself and the state of mind exception applies. MR. BAKER: It doesn't apply. This is pure hearsay. And we have to have, it seems to me, a total 402. He cherry-picks. Half of these things of her diaries don't even have the right dates on them. They talk about Mr. Simpson being in her house when he's in New York. And so the authenticity of these diary entries are definitely in issue. And for him to do this without the 402 hearing that you requested seems to me to be improper. Now, I object to it under hearsay grounds as well as the 402 grounds. MR. PETROCELLI: There was a motion in limine. (Referring to transcript.) MR. PETROCELLI: This is number 9 and it's number 10, okay. 19 back here. Okay. This is in reference to her out-of-court statements in police reports. (READING:) The state of mind of the victim is relevant to show the relationship with the defendant which would in turn support the plaintiffs' contention that defendant had a motive to commit the murder. Other statements may be admissible as spontaneous statements and others under the new statute. So you went state of mind spontaneous, and then statute. Then in another position not related to police statements, number 10, to preclude exactly this material reference to out-of-court statements concerning defendants' conduct in relationship with Nicole Brown Simpson, you ruled the statements have to be relevant to some issue in the case if the relationship between the defendant and Nicole Brown Simpson becomes an issue, and I assume it will. These statements may well become relevant, the Court will, depending on the statements, rule at the time that they are offered. So it's right -- MR. BAKER: It's the specific motion relative to hearsay, avoiding the specific motion relative -- MR. PETROCELLI: Here find it. I'm not trying to avoid anything. In any event this is a two-page -- two-page document that she began on May 22 and it directly bears on the relationship and her state of mind. And he's sitting there putting his spin on everything, and we're entitled to put this into evidence, Your Honor. (Court motions to the clerk) THE COURT: Court hails to clerk. THE COURT: Can you bring me the two black binders. THE CLERK: Yeah. MR. PETROCELLI: There's -- they don't dispute the authenticity of this handwriting. It's her handwriting. (Pause) MR. PETROCELLI: The critical issue here, Your Honor, is that there's a buildup of intense anger and hostility between the parties which we say proves the motive Mr. Simpson has denied, that -- THE COURT: Excuse me. (Pause) THE CLERK: There were three. You want the thick ones, right? THE COURT: Yeah. (The Clerk hands black binder notebooks to the Court.) (Pause for the Court to read document.) MR. PETROCELLI: You're talking about number 10, the motion I just referred to. MR. LEONARD: The diaries. MR. PETROCELLI: You didn't limit it to diaries. MR. GELBLUM: What are you looking for? MR. PETROCELLI: There they are. MR. GELBLUM: This one. (Indicating to minute orders.) THE COURT: What are you offering? MR. PETROCELLI: First bring this up here. (Indicating to document with Nicole Brown Simpson's writing.) THE COURT: And what else are you offering? MR. PETROCELLI: Basically the whole document. It's two pages. You want to take it out, Your Honor? (Counsel removes document from plastic covering.) (Court reviews documents.) MR. PETROCELLI: Under new hearsay statute applies to the 6 paragraph to 6, 3 -- MR. BAKER: Your Honor, they went up to Sacramento and Fred Goldman testified to get a statute passed, to get a statute passed for this. This doesn't meet the criteria for that statute and this is hearsay and it's inadmissible hearsay. Her state of mind isn't relative to this issue. THE COURT: I think it is. Overruled. (The following proceedings were held in open court in the presence of the jury.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) When we last broke we were talking about the -- being with Nicole on May 22, and getting the bracelet, and asking for the earrings back, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. Not asking for the earrings, she just gave the earrings back, yes. Q. For a little background, sir -- sir, on May 22 you hosted an event -- excuse me, I'm sorry. You hosted an event at your house for Justin's Sunshine School, right? A. Yes. Q. And the families of the children all came over to the house and Nicole was there, right? A. Yeah, Nicole showed up at some point. Q. And she still wasn't feeling all that well, right? A. I don't think so. Q. Now -- and she left to go back to Bundy, the child -- the children were still at the house with you, and the party was still going on, right, or the picnic, I should say? A. Yes. I think I asked her maybe she should go home and -- and, yes. Q. And then, after the picnic ended, you then took Sydney and Justin over to Bundy and had your conversation with Nicole, that we've discussed, in which the earrings and the emerald bracelet were given to you, correct? A. I believe so. I believe so. I -- I'm not sure if Sydney and Justin didn't spend the night with me, and I just went over to Nicole's, whether she called me that evening. Q. And when you left the house that night, there was absolutely no question that you and Nicole had discussed that this would be the official split and end to your relationship, correct? A. No, that's not correct. Q. Okay. MR. PETROCELLI: What's the exhibit number? MR. FOSTER: 735. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Let me show you notes Nicole made shortly before her death. (Refers to Exhibit 735.) (The instrument herein described as notes written by Nicole Brown Simpson were marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 735.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You recognize Nicole's handwriting, do you not, sir? A. Yes. Q. There's no doubt in your mind, right? A. You know, I honestly couldn't tell you I would recognize her handwriting, but -- Q. I showed -- A. I'm not doubting that this is her note. Q. I showed you the letter she wrote to you just a year earlier, you had no -- no trouble recognizing that letter, right? Same -- A. I think my attitude was pretty much the same. I assume it's Nicole's handwriting. Q. Okay. Sunday, May 22, I'm sorry. Can you folks see. JURORS: (Nod) Um-hum. MR. PETROCELLI: Thank you, Your Honor. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) (Reading.) Sunday, May 22, 1994, we've officially split. Q. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. And it said -- it goes on to talk about an arrangement that you and she then discussed for dealing with the children, right? A. I think we may have discussed that, yes. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) (Reading.) I told O.J. we're going back to every other weekend. I need the rest and O.J.'s gone so much he needs the alone time with them till he leaves again. He's been gone the last four weekends so I've asked if we can start with him this weekend of May 28. Q. Correct? A. I believe we did talk about something like that, yes. Q. Okay. A. I'm sorry, you're asking me is this what this says or if it comports with my memory? Q. It comports with your memory, right? A. Yes, except the first sentence, yes. Q. The first sentence does not, sir? A. No. I think Nicole may have accepted it then because of her actions that day, which, I guess you don't want to talk about. Maybe she just finally accepted it. Q. And you -- and you -- it's your testimony today before the jury, that there was no discussion that evening of you and Nicole officially splitting up? A. No, not at all. Q. Okay. MR. PETROCELLI: You can take that off. (Exhibit 735 removed from Elmo.) MR. PETROCELLI: Right after -- I'm going to get into another area. This may be a good place to break, if I have your permission. THE COURT: 1:30, ladies and gentlemen. Don't talk about the case, don't form or express any opinion. (At 11:53 A.M. a recess was taken until 1:30 P.M. of the same day.) SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT NO. WEQ (REGINA D. CHAVEZ, OFFICIAL REPORTER) (The jurors resumed their respective seats.) THE COURT: Can I see counsel at the bench. THE COURT REPORTER: With the reporter?: THE COURT: Yes. (The following proceedings were held at the bench, with the reporter.) THE COURT: The Court has a memorandum that's been filed. I don't see any motion filed, however. MR. BAKER: Well, the motion is to exclude the diaries and exclude the diaries that he's just gone into, any further excludes the diary of May 2, 1994 and June 3, 1994 under the points and authorities set forth therein. The fact that this is double hearsay that under the new Evidence Code Section 1370, there isn't a threat of physical violence, and under 352 the language contained herein is quite volatile, it has virtually no probative value. He can ask him anything he wants relative to the IRS, but the probative value of this relative to the prejudicial effect, in my opinion, far outweighs the prejudicial -- far outweighs the probative value, in addition to the hearsay upon hearsay, and they have not demonstrated that these statements were made to indicate trustworthiness under Evidence Code Section 1252. We don't know when they were made. I mean, I suppose you can say by innuendo they were made on the date that she says they were made. But Mr. Simpson will deny that any of this was ever said on June 3 and will deny that he has ever called her these kinds of names. So ... MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, we've been through this several times. The statements or admissions and they're -- the statements are admissions and they're also relevant to -- directly relevant to her state of mind. It's her handwriting. If he wants to deny them, fine. In addition, Mr. Baker directly argued in his opening statement on numerous occasions about Nicole's state of mind, indicating it was Simpson who broke up the relationship, indicating there's no anger, no hostility between the parties. Now, if he wanted to keep something like this out, he had to stay away from all those points, and he specifically referenced it over and over in his opening statement. MR. BAKER: I didn't reference -- MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me. MR. BAKER: I'm sorry. MR. PETROCELLI: Page references. And he said that Nicole Simpson was her confidante and is basically trying to convince the jury that there was no reason for a motive at all, nothing was happening between these parties that would suggest a motive. He affirmatively put that on in his opening statement. He directly made the state of mind of both parties relevant. And this goes exactly to showing what was happening in the relationship days before she was killed. THE COURT: The Court rules as follows: First, the Court rules that there is a constitutional issue raised as to 1370 of the Evidence Code in the memorandum. The Court finds that the statute is constitutional. Number 2, the Court will allow the use of those documents for the purposes of showing the decedent's state of mind. 3, with regards to any specific threats, unless counsel shows me a threat, insofar as a threat exception is concerned, I don't see how that would apply. MR. PETROCELLI: Well, she does say -- THE COURT: Threat of physical injury. MR. PETROCELLI: It's ambiguous. MR. BAKER: It is not ambiguous. What is coming in? THE COURT: Her state of mind is coming in. Her state of mind with regards to the relationship is coming in. Okay. (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury.) THE COURT: You may resume. MR. PETROCELLI: Thank you, Your Honor. ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, the witness on the stand at the time of the luncheon recess, having been previously duly sworn, was examined further as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. PETROCELLI: Q. After the evening at Nicole's apartment on May 22, 1994, three weeks before her murder, when the bracelet and the earrings were given to you, you sat down and composed a letter to Nicole in regard to an IRS issue, correct? A. At some point after, yes. Q. Now -- A. I didn't sit down and compose it; that's incorrect. Q. Dictated it? A. I told Cathy, after I met with my lawyer, to write something to the effect of -- Q. You -- but you did dictate the basic letter and gave it to Cathy, correct? A. Rather than just give Cathy instructions to write the letter herself, I gave the instruction to write -- I gave her some facts and asked her to write a letter, yes. Q. Let me read from your deposition, page 1242, line 3. "Q. That you dictated the initial draft? "A. I believe so, yes." Now, just to explain this IRS issue a bit, when you and Nicole got married, as part of the prenuptial agreement, you gave Nicole owned title to a rental unit in San Francisco, correct? A. Correct. Q. As part of the divorce in 1992, Nicole got to keep that rental unit; it was in her name. She got to keep it? A. You know, seven years previous, it was hers when I gave it to her. Q. And she kept it at the time, as well? A. Yes. Q. She didn't give it back, in other words? A. Correct. Q. Okay. And when Nicole moved out of Rockingham, she rented a condo on Gretna Green, right? A. Yes. Q. And then at the end of 1993, coming into January of 1994, Nicole purchased her own condominium at at 875 South Bundy? A. Correct. Q. And she sold the unit in San Francisco, the rental unit in San Francisco, to help pay for the condo at Bundy, right? A. Essentially, yes. Q. And she would have had to pay capital gains tax on the unit in San Francisco, unless it was rolled over into another rental unit on Bundy, correct? A. Yeah. I think she had a problem with that, yes. Q. It would have been a substantial capital gains liability, in the order of about $100,000 in taxes she would have had to pay if she could not roll -- roll it over into another rental unit on Bundy, right? A. No. I think when I -- I told her to find out. Q. But the order of magnitude was about 100 grand, right? A. When I asked her to find out, she was asking me to do something for her. I think she said it was 70. I said, well, find out and put it in a separate account. Q. If it was $100,000, that wouldn't surprise you? A. I didn't get into her business at that point. Q. All right. A. Yes. Q. And the problem is, though, Bundy would have had to have been a rental unit for her to not pay these capital gains, as opposed to her primary residence? A. I believe that was her problem, yes. Q. At the time, you and Nicole were going through your reconciliation period, right? A. Yes. Q. That there was talk of your -- excuse me -- of Nicole moving back into the home with you at Rockingham, if it turned out that things would turn out between you, right? A. Yes. She was attempting to move back on numerous occasions in that year. Q. So the idea was that, well, she would list Bundy as a rental unit and move into your place, and in a few months later, when everything was just right in your relationship, in the meantime, she would list Bundy as a rental unit, even though she was technically living there, right? A. The way you're saying it is, I believe, incorrect. Q. Well, she moved into Bundy in January of 1994 and didn't rent it out, right? A. That's correct. Q. She didn't pay capital gains taxes at that time? A. I didn't really know her business. Q. You knew she didn't pay the capital gains taxes? A. I knew that she asked me to -- to -- could she list -- actually, my housekeeper asked me -- well, if you want to know, I could explain. Q. She asked you if she could list Rockingham as her residence instead of Bundy, correct? A. After a few things that happened, that is correct. Q. And you agreed, right? A. Not necessarily, no. Q. Well, you knew, then, after this conversation with you, that she then listed on her checkbook and on all her mail, Bundy -- excuse me -- your house, 360 North Rockingham, as her official residence, right? A. After she had done some things that I directed her to do, yes. Q. Mr. Baker, I'm sure will get into all that -- A. Okay. Q. -- when it's his time. And you and Nicole, from the time she moved in, in January of 1994, until the time you split up in May of 1994, were having discussions about if she would move in and when she would move in, right? A. No. She tried to move in on two or three occasions. I -- I kind of nixed it and I -- Q. I'm asking you if you had conversations about it, that's all. A. I can't -- I can't characterize it, sir, as conversations, as I know on two specific occasions, she was attempting to move in and I said no, not until, you know, the time limit. Q. There was no definitive decision made that she would not be moving in? A. I think we both hoped she would, and if things worked out -- Q. I'm sorry. When you broke up in May of 1994, now, for the first time since she bought Bundy, it was official that she would not be moving back into Rockingham? A. Correct. Q. Now, she had this tax problem because Bundy -- your house was listed as her residence and Bundy was listed as a rental unit, right? A. I don't know know if that was a problem. MR. BAKER: Calls for speculation that she had a tax problem. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You knew she had a tax problem because Bundy was her residence, and yet, according to IRS records, your house was her residence? A. I didn't know what the IRS records were. I just knew that I would have a problem if she got caught doing what she was doing. Q. You knew she was listing your house as her residence? A. Yes. Q. Right And she had your permission to do that, right? A. Well, she did it before she got my permission; then she talked me into saying it's okay for a while. Q. Okay. And you went along with it? A. Yes. Q. After the two of you split up, you decided to write her a letter, telling her that she's going to have to change her address from Rockingham to Bundy, right? A. After -- after an incident with my housekeeper, yes. Q. And you knew that that could generate a substantial tax liability to Nicole, true? A. I didn't think so. I thought she'd just use somebody else's address. Q. You knew that she would have a problem on her hands, that she'd have to pay the money or find somebody else to use as her address, right? A. I don't think so. I think my understanding -- Q. Okay. A. -- was -- was that she would have had a year to do it. I just didn't think. If she got in trouble, I didn't want to be involved in it. Q. In any event, you wrote a letter that was somewhat harsh, this initial letter that you dictated, true? A. I didn't initially dictate it. I told Cathy, in substance, what I wanted her to write. Then I went to my lawyer, and I think -- and he helped me make it official -- more official, I guess. Q. Let me read from your deposition again at 1237. "Q. You dictated a letter" -- MR. BAKER: May we have a line, please? MR. PETROCELLI: 1. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) (READING:) "You dictated a letter for Cathy to type, correct?" "ANSWER: Yes." A. Yes. Q. That wasn't true, you dictated a letter for Cathy to type, true? A. Dictation -- I have a little problem with. I told Cathy in substance what to write. If you want to say I dictated, I didn't sit down and say write this in word for word. I gave her in substance what to write. Q. And you reviewed it and -- A. Took it to my lawyer. Q. You sent it to your lawyer? A. No; I walked into my lawyer's office and I had him read it. And I think he may have made some subtle changes. Q. And the initial draft you wrote was somewhat harsh, wasn't it, sir? A. I think he may have felt it was somewhat harsh. Q. Let me read from page 1239. MR. PETROCELLI: Line 1, Mr. Baker. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) "Q. What did that letter contain or say, in substance, that this final May 31 draft does not say? "A. I don't know. I thought it sounded somewhat harsh." A. Yes. Q. You thought it was a little strong? A. Yes. Q. So now, on the stand, under oath, you will admit that the letter you wrote initially was somewhat harsh, as you said in your deposition, true? MR. BAKER: Argumentative. A. I don't think that's a correct characterization. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) True, Mr. Simpson? A. No, it's not true. I think that the letter that Cathy wrote was harsh. Q. You answered the question. Thank you. A. Oh, I'm sorry. Q. Let me put up -- MR. PETROCELLI: What's this? 811. (The instrument herein referred to as Fax cover page dated 5/26/94 and attached letter was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 811.) Q. Your lawyer reviewed the letter and revised it for you, didn't he? A. I took it to him because I felt it was somewhat harsh, and he made it, I feel, a little more official sounding. Q. And he sent you a revised version of the letter on May 26, 1994, correct? A. I believe so. Q. And of course, all of this is just a few days from May 22, which is when the jewelry was returned, correct? A. Yes. MR. BAKER: That's irrelevant and argumentative, Your Honor. Q. Let's go to this. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. PETROCELLI: Could you make that a little bigger. Let me see the signature. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Do you recognize that handwriting? A. No, not really. Q. That's Skip Taft's? A. Yes. Q. He's been with you what, 25 years? A. At least. Q. At least. Business manager, lawyer, friend? A. Yes. Q. The letter says, sir, "made changes you wanted but did not get revengeful"? A. Yes. Q. "Okay to sign and mail. Skip." A. Yes. Q. So there was a concern between Mr. Taft and you that your initial letter was revengeful, correct? A. I think that was a concern from me. That's why I brought it to him, because I think, as Cathy wrote it, it sounded rather harsh. Q. This is Cathy's letter, now, not yours? Is that what you're telling this jury, that Cathy Randa, the secretary -- A. Um-hum. Q. -- wrote the letter that you, O.J. Simpson, had nothing to do with it? A. That's not -- I don't think that's been my testimony at all. I told Cathy, in substance, one day, write a letter to Nicole about changing her address and finding another way to do it. Just tell her that she can't use my address. I don't want her coming to my house, hassling my housekeeper anymore. And Cathy wrote the letter. And when the letter -- she faxed it to me -- it seemed very harsh to me. So then I took it to my lawyer and told Skip, "Skip, read this. Here's the problem. Let's make it a little more official." That's what he did. Q. And let's make it not so revengeful, too? A. Well, that may be his word. My word to him was "harsh." His word is "revengeful." But I didn't -- I thought the letter was rather harsh. Q. Now, in truth, Mr. Simpson, you were extremely unhappy and angry and there were feelings of revenge going on with you towards Nicole; true or untrue? A. Untrue. Q. And that is why your lawyer wrote back to you and said, I did not get revengeful? True or untrue? A. I think he did what I told -- instructed him to do. Q. True or untrue? A. Untrue. Q. Your lawyer, with this letter, sent you a revised draft of your initial draft which you cannot produce for us. Sir, you cannot produce the initial harsh draft, true? A. True. Q. Okay. Do you know where it is? A. No. Q. Okay. So let's go to the draft you received back from your good friend and colleague, Mr. Taft, May 31, 1994. MR. PETROCELLI: What's the exhibit number, Steve? MR. FOSTER: 811. MR. PETROCELLI: 811. MR. FOSTER: Page 2. MR. PETROCELLI: Okay. Can you move it to the left. (Indicating to TV screen.) Can you get the whole thing in view, Steve. Right there. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) (Reading:) "Dear Nicole: "On advice of legal counsel and because of the change in our circumstances, I am compelled to put you on written notice that you do not have my permission or authority to use my permanent home address at 360 North Rockingham Avenue, Los Angeles, California, 90049, as your residence or mailing address for any purpose, including but not limited to, information and tax returns filed with any taxing entity. "O.J. Simpson." Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. And the change in circumstances, Mr. Simpson, was the final and official breakup between Nicole and you, true? A. In substance, yes. Q. That had occurred shortly before this letter-writing effort began, true? A. In substance, yes. Q. Okay. Now, when you got that letter, you did not approve it, true? A. I'm sure I did; it got sent. Q. You sent a different version of it sir, did you not? A. You know, I don't really know. I don't. Q. Well, let's take a look. MR. PETROCELLI: This is exhibit what, Steve? MR. FOSTER: 17. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) 17. June 6, 1994, correct? That's six days before Nicole's murder. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. Via messenger. You know what that means? A. I think most of the stuff I sent Nicole was via messenger. Q. Hand-delivered? A. I think every note I sent her was via messenger. Q. This one, correct, was hand-delivered? A. I didn't deliver it. I'm sure Cathy used the messenger service we always use. MR. PETROCELLI: Can you put the document on so I can focus on the second and third paragraph, the first paragraph, the same -- stop right there (indicating to TV screen.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) That's your signature, right? A. Possibly Cathy signed it for me. Q. You authorized her to sign it for you? A. Yes. Q. Now, second paragraph: (Reading:) "Because of your mail and phone calls coming to my address, it may be interpreted that you are using my address as your primary residence, when, in fact, your primary residence is 875 South Bundy Drive, Los Angeles, California 90049." You see that? A. Yes. Q. And your purpose in including that paragraph was to make it absolutely clear that, in fact, your residence was not Nicole's primary residence, right? A. Absolutely. Q. Creating big problems for Nicole, correct? A. I don't think so, unless she got caught doing what she was doing; then I think it would have been a problem. Q. Last paragraph. MR. BAKER: Can you allow him to answer the question, Mr. Petrocelli -- MR. PETROCELLI: I'm sorry. MR. BAKER: -- and not talk over him please? Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Big problems for Nicole, that was my question. A. If she got caught, I knew it would be big problems for her. I didn't want it to be big problems for me. Q. Last paragraph. (Reading:) "I cannot take part in any course of action by you that might intentionally or unintentionally be misleading to the Internal Revenue Service or California Franchise Tax Board." Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. You really wanted to drive the point home there, correct? A. Yes. Q. And you wanted to put her on notice that she may be committing illegal violations of law, correct? A. Yes. Q. Misleading IRS, correct? A. Yes. Q. Something you would never do, correct? A. Yes. Q. And this is the mother of your children, correct? A. Yes. Q. And you knew that she had two choices: Pay the taxes or get out of the place and rent it, right? A. Yes. Q. And perhaps move back to you at Rockingham? A. Or she could have gotten somebody else to use the address. Q. And she could have come back to you, too, couldn't she? A. No, she couldn't. Q. This letter could have forced her hand to come back to you, true? A. That's absolutely false. She had the money to pay the taxes, cause I forced her early on, before I allowed her to use my address, to put her tax money in a separate account, talk to her tax person, so in case we didn't get back together, she'll have the money to pay the taxes if they came after her for her taxes. Q. Mr. Simpson, you knew this letter would frighten Nicole; you knew it would upset her; correct? A. That was not my intention. Q. But you knew it would have that effect? A. I think subconsciously I wanted her to pay her taxes so she wouldn't lose the house that my kids were in. Q. But you knew it would greatly upset her? A. I think my purpose -- Q. Can you answer that question yes or no? Did you know when you sent that letter to her threatening IRS action and all this -- A. That's not -- MR. BAKER: Wait. I object. THE WITNESS: -- that's not threatening IRS -- MR. BAKER: He hasn't threatened any IRS action. THE COURT: Excuse me. Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You knew when you sent that letter talking about misleading the IRS, that this would greatly upset her, true -- MR. BAKER: Calls for speculation. Q. -- or untrue? MR. BAKER: Calls for speculation on the part of this witness. THE COURT: Overruled. A. No, not the way you said it, no. Q. Okay. Now, the two of you had some very vile arguments about this issue prior to your sending the letter, true? A. That's absolutely wrong. Q. And you threatened her that you would be sending this letter, didn't you? A. No. Q. And on June 2, Thursday, you had a telephone call with Nicole and you hung -- excuse me -- she hung up on you on that call? A. No. Q. Right. When Nicole hangs up on you, you get angry and you want to retaliate, true? A. No. Q. Let me see the entry. MR. PETROCELLI: What exhibit? MR. FOSTER: 735. (The instrument herein referred to as Diary page of Nicole Brown Simpson dated June 3 was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 735.) MR. PETROCELLI: Put it up there. (Exhibit 735 displayed on TV screen.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) June 3, Friday, O.J. came to pick up kids at 8:30 p.m. They wanted to stay home because I let them organize sleep-overs. MR. BAKER: Is this a question or -- MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me. MR. BAKER: This is not a question. MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me. I'm reading the entry into the record and I'm going to ask him some questions about it. MR. BAKER: Then I don't think reading entries into the record and asking him questions about it -- THE COURT: Overruled. MR. BAKER: That's improper. THE COURT: Go ahead. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) (READING:) "June 3. O.J. came to pick up kids at 8:30 p.m. They wanted to stay home . . . at the last minute - thought daddy wasn't coming. Told O.J. I would drop them off first thing in the AM." Let's stop right there. Now, you did come over to Nicole's condo about 8:00, 8:30-ish on Friday, June 3, right? A. Yes. Q. And you went there to pick up the kids to take them home, for them to sleep at your house on Friday night and have them on Saturday, right? A. Yes. Q. You got there kind of on the late side, you think, unbeknownst to you, in the meantime, Nicole organized a sleep-over for the children, right? A. That's not true. Q. Well, when you got there, the kids were occupied with friends and you did not leave with the children, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And Nicole said she would bring them over the next day, right? A. Or I could pick them up the next day. Q. Or you can pick them up? A. Yeah. Q. So you went there and you left without the kids, right? A. Yes. Q. And then the following exchange occurred between you and Nicole. You said to her: lm20 "You hung up on me last night. You're going to pay for this, bitch." True? A. Absolutely false. Q. (READING:) "You're holding money from the IRS, you're going to jail, you fucking cunt." Did you say that? A. I have never used that phrase, ever, with anybody, in my life. Q. And you certainly didn't use it on this occasion? A. Absolutely not. Q. Nicole just made all this up? A. Absolutely. And this is not true. Q. "You think you can do any fucking thing. You've got it coming. I've already talked to my lawyers about this, bitch." Is that all untrue? A. Yes. Q. Now, you had talked to your lawyers about the IRS issue, as we have just seen, true? A. True. Q. "They'll get you for tax evasion, bitch. I'll see to it. You're not going to have a fucking dime left, bitch," et cetera. You said that, too, didn't you? A. Absolutely not. Q. And three days later, you hand-delivered the letter to Nicole, true? A. I think the next workday, Cathy may have sent it. Q. We're talking about you, not Cathy Randa. A. No. That's absolutely false. Q. You told Cathy to send that letter to Nicole that we just showed on the TV monitor, right? A. I told Cathy -- Q. Yes or no? A. A week, weeks earlier to send a letter. And I gather this was three days later, may have been Monday or Tuesday after the holiday, and she finally sent the letter. Q. So Cathy just happened to send it the very next Monday after you and Nicole have this fight on Friday. Total coincidence, is that what you're saying? A. I would have expected it to be sent on Thursday or Friday of that week, yes. Q. So you're saying the fact that this letter was sent on Monday, the 6th, by hand delivery, had absolutely nothing to do with a conversation you had with Nicole on Friday, June 3. Is that what you're telling this jury? A. Yes, that's what I'm telling this jury. Q. Okay. And you threatened Nicole with this IRS issue because you knew it was a way to retaliate against her because she was not doing what you wanted her to do? A. That's not true. Q. That's why you made the letter even tougher than your lawyer had advised, true? A. I don't know. I think even the second portion of the letter I did -- I did with my lawyer. Q. And you know that when Nicole got this letter, she was absolutely devastated; you know that, don't you? A. No, I hadn't seen her after she got this letter. Q. And by the way, June 4, 9 o'clock a.m., the next morning, do you see that entry? That's Saturday morning. Do you see that, sir? A. Yes. Q. "I drove the kids over to Rockingham. No one answered. No one was home to take the kids. So I took them over again at 1 p.m. They spent the night." Now, in the morning on Saturday, June 4, you were at your most favorite place, that is, Riviera Country Club, and you were playing golf, right? A. Um, a part of that is true, part of it is not true. Q. You tee off 6:00, 7 o'clock, get back after you do your lunch and your cards and all that, you're back by what 1, 2 o'clock? A. It depends. Q. And you weren't home at 9 O'clock in the morning on June 4, right? A. I would think not. It was a Saturday morning. Q. And the kids were then dropped off later at 1 o'clock p.m. and they spent the night with you Saturday, June 4, right? A. I believe so, yes. Q. In fact, you took them, with Paula, to a pediatric AIDS event Sunday, June 5? A. And some more people, yes. Q. Correct? A. Yes. Q. So, in other words, everything in these diary entries that we just showed you is true, except where Nicole reports what you said to her? A. Yes. Q. And all that's a pack of lies, right? A. Yes. MR. PETROCELLI: You can take it off. (Indicating to TV screen.) Q. The weekend before, Mr. Simpson, you went to Palm Springs with Paula Barbieri to attend a birthday party thrown by your good friend, Alan Austin, for his wife, Gail, right? A. I don't think that's why we went, but I think while we were there, Alan had a dinner. Q. Dinner party, right? A. Yes. Q. You were there? A. Yes. Q. Alan and Gail were there? A. Yes. Q. Skip Taft? A. Yes. Q. His wife was there? A. Yes. Q. A woman named Donna Estes was there? A. Yes. Q. And her boyfriend? A. Probably. Q. And you went there on Saturday, and Paula Barbieri joined you there, right, correct, Memorial Day weekend? A. I don't know. My memory is that Paula and I went together. Q. Let me see if I can refresh it a little bit. Paula came with you, drove separately, met you at LaQuinta, and you and she had an argument that Saturday that resulted in Paula leaving LaQuinta before the dinner, correct? A. Partially correct, partially not correct. We Went together. Q. And she left separately, right? A. Yes. Q. And you played golf that morning, right? A. Yes. Q. Played -- it was about 100 degrees, right? A. Who knows. Q. Then -- and you wanted to play a second round after the first round, right? A. I think what we did was, we got there at about 4:00 in the morning. I got up at 6:00, went and played golf. When I got back, Paula was pretty upset; she left. And I went back out and played with the guys again. Q. One of them was a fellow named Jackie Cooper, right? A. Yes. Q. Old friend of yours, and your boyhood friend, Al Cowlings, right? A. I don't believe -- say that again. Q. Mr. Cooper is a friend of yours and a friend of Al Cowlings, right? A. He's a tennis pro there at LaQuinta. Q. Paula was upset with you because you got up and wanted to play golf and didn't want to spend time with her, right? A. Yeah. I think she wanted to wake up with me. Q. And you guys had an argument, and she took off, right? A. I don't think we really had an argument. She just said she was leaving. Q. One of the things that happened in that argument with Paula is, she said to you, you know, you broke my heart a year ago and I came back to you when you said that it was over with Nicole, right? A. I don't recall this. Q. And she said to you, or she asked you, do you still love Nicole, correct? MR. BAKER: Objection. This is all hearsay. A. I don't recall this at this time. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I -- Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Do you still love Nicole? She asked you that, right? MR. BAKER: Objection. Hearsay. A. I don't recall this. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) And you said, yes, I do? A. I always loved Nicole. Q. And you told that to Paula on that day, right? A. If she would have asked me that day, as if she would have asked me in the year we were together, I would have said I always loved Nicole; I always loved Marguerite. Q. And that evening you went to dinner without Paula, right? A. Yeah, I believe so. Q. And you talked -- you're a big talker, aren't you? You like to talk, right? A. Yes. Q. And you talked a lot at dinner that night about Paula leaving and about Nicole, right? A. I don't think it was a lot at all. I think everybody talked about various things, and the subject of Paula and Nicole came up at one point, yes. Q. And you told the folks at the table that Paula left because she was upset, and you told them she asked you if you loved Nicole, and you said yes, and she split? A. Paula left because I got up to play golf. Q. Did you tell that to the folks that you ate dinner that night? A. Not the way you said it. Q. Did you? A. No. Q. Did you tell that to Donna Estes? Yes or no? A. I didn't have a private conversation with Donna Estes. Q. Did you tell it to Donna Estes at the dinner table? Yes or no? A. I never had a private conversation with Donna Estes. Q. Did you say it to her in her company, in her presence that evening? A. Not the way you said it. Q. Did you say it in some other way? A. Yeah. I think during the course of the conversation, Paula left. I think we knew during the day that Paula was upset. When we got back from golf, she was visibly upset. She decided to leave. And I think we spoke in general about not my relationship, everybody's relationship. And during the course of that conversation, I'm sure Nicole's name came into that conversation. Q. The truth of the matter is, you spoke all night about Nicole, didn't you? A. No, that's not the truth of the matter. Q. Now, around this same period of time, Memorial Day weekend, maybe the days before Memorial Day weekend, you had another argument with Nicole about a charity event at Cedars-Sinai Hospital and a Sports Spectacular event? A. Slightly. I can't say we had an argument. Nicole called me, yelling at me, slightly before -- I believe there -- this -- this was slightly before Memorial Day weekend. Q. That's what I thought. A. Yes. Q. Okay. Slightly before Memorial Day weekend? A. Yes. Q. Nicole called you and was yelling at you, saying you were trying to steal her friends away, right? A. Exactly. Q. And she got upset because you were going to go to this event with Paula and you were going to invite some of her friends, correct? A. That's not correct. Q. You were -- she was upset because her friends were invited to attend this event? A. Her friends asked to go to this event, so... Q. They were going to go with you, right? A. Yes. Q. And Nicole and you argued about that because you were taking her friends away, in her view? A. No, we didn't. She called, yelled, and hung up. Q. Hung up on you? A. Yes. Q. So is it fair to say, end of May, going into June 3 and June 6, things are not very good between Nicole and you? You guys are at each other, aren't you? A. I disagree with that. I was -- I was just opposite at her, cause I had gone back to what I had done the previous year; I was avoiding her. Q. Nicole was upset with you quite a bit during this time frame, wasn't she? Wasn't she, sir? A. Because I didn't talk to her during this time frame. I don't know what she was, because I was avoiding her. Q. Was she or wasn't she? That's what I want to know. A. I couldn't tell you, because I wouldn't talk to her after the hang-up. Q. Now, on June 6 -- In fact, the day you hand-delivered that letter that we just saw, you went over to Nicole's house to pick up Justin, didn't you? A. What day was June 6? Q. Monday. A. I'm not sure of that. Q. You went to get -- A. I know Justin was with me. Q. You went to get Chachi? A. Justin, I believe, was with me. I believe we went over to pick up -- Nicole had called and said something about the dogs were fighting, and so I went over to get the dog. Q. And when you went there, you saw Nicole on the balcony and she said nothing to you and you said nothing to her, true? A. Nothing, yeah, other than the dogs, something to that effect. Q. No conversation between the two of you, true? A. None. Yes. Q. The next day, June 7, Tuesday, you told your friend at Riviera, Alan Austin, that it was -- you announced to him it was over with Nicole for good, true? A. Not -- no, no, that's not right. Q. You told Mr. Austin on Tuesday, June 7, that it was finally over once and for all, true? A. No, I don't believe so. I think Alan knew a month ago, previous, it was over. But Alan, like her friends, at times, would also -- oh, you guys are going to get back together. And if Nicole came up that day, I probably just emphasized to him no, Alan, this is not happening. Q. And you flew back east that day, right? A. That's correct. Q. And in the evening, you called to speak to the kids, right, in Washington, D.C., I think? A. I know I normally do. I'm sure I did. Q. And there was no conversation between you and Nicole on the telephone, true? A. One of the nights Nicole asked me was I going to go -- to be back for the recital. Other than that, I don't believe there was any conversation between us. Q. So it's fair to say, during this week leading up to her murder, there is virtually zero communication between Nicole and you, true? A. Well, other than the dog and the kids, I -- Q. True? A. That's not necessarily true. There was zero conversation between Nicole and I on any subject outside of the kids. But I think we had a brief thing because of the dog. Q. Maybe a few words about kids and dogs; and other than that, zero? A. Of mine was -- that was what I was doing. Q. Is that true? A. That's true. Q. Okay. Now, you also missed on that Tuesday, June 7, Justin's graduation from the Sunshine School, right? A. I don't think it was Tuesday. I thought it was, like, Wednesday or Thursday. Q. You missed it, right? A. Yes. I didn't know about it, so it was -- essentially, I missed it. Q. Nicole expressed some upset at you for missing that event, as well, true? A. Not at all. She didn't even talk about it. Justin asked me when I called Thursday. Q. Now, around this period of time, you're back east, right? A. I'm working back east, yes. Q. Yeah. You're back there Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and you returned on Friday, June 10, right? A. That's correct. Q. Another letter, at your request, was sent out to Nicole, true? A. I don't believe so. Q. If Cathy Randa testified that she had that hand-delivered, would you accept that? A. Depending on the letter, but I really don't believe so. MR. PETROCELLI: Well, let's look at it. (The instrument herein referred to as a Letter dated June 8, 1994, from O.J. Simpson to Nicole Brown Simpson was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 812.) (Exhibit 812 displayed on TV screen.) Q. This is a letter dated June 8, 1994. (Reading:) "Dear Nicole: "To set the record straight, when Arnelle, Jason, or myself are at home to watch the kids, especially around the pool, they are welcome here at any time. I would love to have them 14 [sic] hours a day, as it is their home, too." A. I think that's 24. Q. 24 hours a day. Excuse me. "However, Gigi is not an emergency cook, baby-sitter or errand runner for you!" Exclamation point. "She is an employee of mine and I expect you to respect that now and in the future." A. Yes. Q. Pretty stern letter, isn't it? A. I don't know how you want to characterize it, but it was never sent. Q. So if Cathy Randa said it was, she would not be telling the truth? A. I -- she would not be telling the truth. This letter was never sent. Q. You dictated it, didn't you? A. I dictated it, possibly, around the time I was doing the IRS letter, but I purposely told Cathy not to send the letter unless Nicole continues to hassle Gigi while I was gone, so if when I returned from this trip, that Gigi told me Nicole had continued to hassle her, I would have sent the letter. Q. When you went back east on this trip, you were playing golf. I think it was in Virginia, right? A. Yeah. Yes. Q. And you flew to Connecticut and you had a meeting at the Forstner Corporation, the Swiss Army Knife company? A. Yes. Q. Then you took a limo down to Long Island to meet up with your good friend, Bobby Bender, right? A. Correct. Q. And played golf there on Thursday afternoon, and then went over to Bobby Bender's house, and with his wife, Robin, and their family, had dinner there? A. Correct. Q. And slept over, right? A. Yes. Q. Now, that night, you had conversations with Bobby Bender about the fact that your relationship with Nicole had broken up, right? A. Yeah. I'm sure it came up, yes. Q. And you told Mr. Bender that you were upset about it, right? A. Yeah. I was disappointed, probably more than upset, that we couldn't make it work. Q. You were depressed that night? A. No. Q. In fact, you were so depressed that Mr. Bender couldn't even get you out of the chair to play golf the next day? A. That wasn't about depression; that was about my knees and hands being swollen from flying and playing golf. I had to be helped even on the golf course the next day. It was not about being upset. Q. Couldn't have been about being upset or depressed about Nicole? A. No, it was about too much flying and too much golf, and my arthritis had kind of taken over. Q. Okay. You left -- well, the next morning, with all this arthritis -- By the way, you're playing golf, like, every single today? A. Hey, I've done it, and most of the guys will tell you that play with me, sometimes they have to help me down hills. I still get on the golf course. Q. Friday morning, you played golf in Long Island again? A. Yes. Q. Then you took a plane back to Los Angeles, right? A. That's right. Q. Picked up at the airport by Paula Barbieri, driven to Rockingham, had dinner, went to bed, Paula sleeping at your house that night, true? A. For a while. I think she may have left in the middle of the night. Q. You got up the next morning on Saturday, June 11, at about 6:00 a.m. and you went to play golf at Riviera, right? A. That's correct. Q. When you came back from golf, you spent the afternoon at Rockingham with Kato Kaelin, talking for a bit of time, correct? A. I believe so, yes. Q. And also, Ron Fischman man stopped by; you chatted with him for a while? A. Yes. Q. And you and Ron were commiserating about your failed relationships, right? A. I think -- yeah. I think that was possibly the tone of the conversation, about the girls. Q. And in the afternoon, you watched this Garp movie and pointed out this fellatio scene to Kato Kaelin, did you not? A. Yeah. Q. Huh? A. I -- that's always been one of my favorite scenes in the movie. Q. You pointed it out to him, and mentioned at the time when you saw Nicole having oral sex with this fellow Keith, right? A. I don't believe so, no. Q. That part you don't remember? A. I don't think I would have talked to Kato about that incident. Q. Now, by that time, you had heard that Nicole was out looking for a new condominium in Malibu, right? A. I didn't know that. Q. You found that out subsequently, didn't you? A. I found that out when I was in jail, yes. Q. That she was moving because of the IRS letter that you sent, right? A. That's not what I heard, the way I heard it, but.... Q. But she was moving, right? A. I believe so. I heard it from a friend of hers that said that she was trying to get away from the people she was hanging around. Q. Nothing to do with the IRS letter, just her friends? A. Marianna said Nicole had met with her Saturday. Q. You don't have to tell me that -- A. She wanted to get away from people she was hanging around. Q. Excuse me, Mr. Simpson. I didn't ask what she said to you. A. I thought you did. Q. Are you telling us, based on what you have heard and learned, that Nicole's decision to get a new place in Malibu had absolutely nothing to do with the position that you took on this IRS issue? A. I don't believe it did. Q. Thank you. Now, that night, Saturday, you went to a formal event with Paula Barbieri, right? A. Yes. Q. This was kind of a fancy party honoring the then first lady of Israel? A. I thought it was for a hospital in Israel, and the first lady was the -- was the host, I believe, yes. Q. Okay. And you went with Paula, right? A. Yes. Q. And by the way, when you played golf that day, you went back to Rockingham, you hung around Rockingham until it was time to go to the event, right? A. I believe I -- I know I tried to call Paula at some time in that period of time, but basically, that's correct. Q. And Paula lived on Wilshire Boulevard then, right? A. Yes. Q. She had an apartment there? A. Condominium. Q. Yeah. You picked Paula up and you went to this event, right? A. Yes. Q. And at this event, you and Paula talked about things like filling rooms of your house up with babies, right? A. That's not exactly correct. She was commenting on this house and we said -- and then she said something about how would you like to fill -- try to fill this house up with babies, yes. Q. So the two of you were kind of talking about having children, maybe getting married, filling the rooms up with babies. It was sort of a warm conversation, fair enough? A. We weren't talking about getting married at all. But, you know, it's just something that was said about trying to fill this house up with babies. But we certainly were in a very loving mood, yes. Q. And you left there in a loving mood, right? A. Yeah. For the most part, yes. Q. You dropped her off at her her condo on Wilshire and you did not spend the night with her, right? A. Yeah. I was a little tired. Q. You went back to Rockingham -- A. Yes. Q. -- and went to sleep. And the next morning, you got up around 6:00 a.m. and you went to Riviera to play golf, right? A. Yes. Q. Now, in fact, sir, you and Paula had a disagreement that evening, true? A. Absolutely not. Q. You had a disagreement with Paula Barbieri because she wanted to go to the recital and be there with you and be there when Nicole would be there, so that you would accept her in Nicole's presence for the first time; is that true? A. That's absolutely not true. Q. And you and she fought about the fact that she -- you would not let her go to the recital because you did not feel comfortable having her at the recital because Nicole would be there; is that true? A. That's absolutely not true. Q. Now, the next morning -- and you know this from reviewing your cell phone records, sir -- she left an eight-minute message on your voice mail, ending your relationship, right? A. She left a message. I found out later, I guess, when I was in jail, I believe, that she had left a message, yes. Q. Ending the relationship, right? A. No, doing exactly what she did in Palm Springs. Q. She told you she didn't want to have anything more to do with you anymore, right? A. I don't know. I never heard the message. Q. You sat in at Paula Barbieri's deposition -- I questioned her about this in this case -- did you not? A. Yes. Q. And you heard Ms. Barbieri testify that she sent you that message at 7:00 in the morning, telling you that it was over. Then she left town and did not tell you where she was going, right? A. Yes. I don't know if that's exactly what she said. Q. Close enough. A. I knew she was going to Arizona or Vegas, or she made words to that effect. Q. And she left you that message breaking up with you, sir, because you and she fought, fought about Nicole once again; true or untrue? A. I know absolutely, and I sat in that deposition, and she did not say that, absolutely. Q. Is that true or untrue, that -- A. That is -- Q. -- the two of you fought over Nicole that night? A. That is absolutely not what she said in her deposition. Q. I didn't ask you what you she said. A. I thought you were talking about her deposition. Q. I asked you if it was true or untrue. A. It's totally untrue. Q. The next morning on the golf course, sir -- you played golf with these guys for quite a long time, right? A. Yes. Q. Alan Austin? A. Yes. Q. Craig Baumgarten? A. Yes. Q. Bob Hoskins? A. Yes. Q. Michael Keori, who has since passed away? A. Yes. Q. You told Alan Austin and you told Craig Baumgarten that you and Paula, to use your words, had a "beef" the night before? A. Absolutely not. Q. And you told Paula that -- you told Alan Austin and you told Craig Baumgarten that Paula was pretty upset with you? A. Absolutely not. Q. And in fact, on the golf course that morning, you had a near physical confrontation with Craig Baumgarten, right? A. I disagree with that. Q. Did you or didn't you? A. Did not. Q. You exchanged words and almost came to blows, right? A. Didn't come near to blows. It was something that happens virtually every day on the golf course, somebody has an argument in my group. Q. Isn't it fair to say that you had never been that angry at him as you were for a few moments that morning? A. With Craig, I've been angry with him, but it was the first time that -- one of the few times that I had words -- normally I'd be that angry with Alan, also, not Craig. Q. But you were really angry with Craig that morning? A. Yes. I was angry with -- with -- with Craig on that hole, yes. Q. Now, you left. After you played golf that morning, you played some cards, right? A. Yes. Q. Left Riviera around 2:00 p.m.? A. I believe so. Q. And you drove to the golf course in your Bronco, right, sir? A. Yes. Q. The Bronco that you normally parked on Ashford, right? A. Yes. Q. Ashford, right near the mailbox, right? A. Not always, but I would say more than any other place, yes. Q. Normally, right? A. Yes. Q. And one of the reasons, by the way, is, it's closer from the mailbox to the front door than it is from Rockingham to the front door, right? A. That's correct. Q. And you don't need your key to get in because you can kind of jiggle that gate and get through, right? A. I think I had to punch it, so it wouldn't matter. Q. Wouldn't matter, you could just clip it? A. I believe so. Q. If you didn't have it, you could jiggle the gate and get in? A. Yes. Q. Now, when you left -- when you left Riviera, you made some phone calls from the Bronco, on the way home, actually. You were on your way to Paula's, right? A. I was attempting to make some phone calls, but it's pretty tough along that stretch on Sunset. Q. And then you made a couple cell phone calls to Paula and couldn't get through, right? A. Yes. Q. Then you got through and discovered that she was not there, right? A. At some point, yes. Q. And then you decided not to go there because she wasn't home, right? A. Yes. Q. Then you also called Nicole's condominium at 2:18 p.m., according to your cell phone records, right? A. That's correct. Q. And you spoke for four minutes, right? A. Not really. Q. And your cell phone records show 2:18 to 2:22. The call was four minutes. A. The call may have been four minutes. Q. And your lawyer, in opening statements, said that you -- MR. BAKER: I object to anything that -- THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You talked to Nicole about taking Justin off her hands because she was getting Sydney ready for her big recital, right? A. That was I think a second or third phase of the conversation. Q. And Nicole said no, that she did not want you to take Justin, true? A. I believe Erin was there or about to arrive. Dominique either was there -- somebody was about to arrive, Shauna or Erin or someone, they were playing or she was going to have them play. Q. So you didn't take Justin, right? A. No. Q. Okay. And you then drove home, right? A. Yes. Q. And kept calling Paula several times, right? A. I think I tried to right when I got home, maybe -- I think, yeah, I -- I think I may have when I hung up with Nicole. I think I may have tried her. I'm not sure if I tried her again until after I got back from the recital but I may have. But I -- I know I left a message on her machine, but I thought it was in the car right after I finished talking to Nicole, and I don't really think I tried her once I got home. Q. Now, you made these phone calls from your cell phone because your cell phone was in the Bronco, right? A. Because it was there when I was driving, and if she was home, I would have probably gone to her house for a little bit. Q. Okay. MR. PETROCELLI: This is a good place, Your Honor? THE COURT: Okay. 10 minutes, ladies and gentlemen. Don't talk about the case, don't form or express any opinions. (Recess.) (Jurors resume their respective seats.) MR. PETROCELLI: Thank you, Your Honor. Like to mark as the next exhibit in order -- what do we have? MR. FOSTER: 2216. THE CLERK: Correct. (The instrument herein described as document entitled Simpson telephone calls dated June 12, 1994 was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 2216.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Mr. Simpson, the first time you used your cell on that day was at 2:12 p.m., I'm talking about June 12, true? A. I would assume so. Q. You've seen these cell phone records before, haven't you? A. I looked at the paper that they were on. Q. Okay. And the 2:12 p.m. relates to a time when you were calling Ms. Barbieri upon leaving Riviera, right. A. Pardon me? Q. 2:12 p.m. represents the time that you tried contacting Paula after you left Riviera? A. I would imagine so. Q. You tried her first at her home number, which is a local number on Wilshire Boulevard, right? A. Yes. Q. Then you tried her right away at a cell phone number which was a 305 area code number in Florida, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you -- did you get through on either of these calls to leave a message? A. The first call may have gotten through, then cut out. I was on Sunset, as I said. Q. Then at 2:18 you made a 4-minute telephone call to Nicole's condominium, right? A. Yes. Q. In part with Nicole, right? A. Yes. Q. And then at 2:22 p.m. you again tried calling Paula both at the cellular -- both to her cellular phone, right? A. I would imagine so. Q. Then at 2:23? A. I left her a message. Q. You left her a message on her home phone here at Wilshire? A. Yes. Q. Then again tried the cell phone at 2:24? A. Yeah. I was still in the car. Q. You're pretty frantically interested in getting in touch with her, are you not? MR. BAKER: I object to the characterization. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Were you interested and eager to get in touch with her? A. I don't know about eager. I just would like to get a complete phone call to her. Q. Well, you had left a message earlier in the series of calls, had you not? A. I believe that's when -- where it says two minutes, possibly I was leaving a message and it must have cut out. That's probably why I tried again. Q. Okay. Now, you got home at around -- shortly after that 2:24 p.m. phone call, right? A. I would imagine so, yes. Q. You left your telephone at that point in the Bronco, right? A. Yes. Q. And you have one of those cell phones that you can switch between your cars, you have brackets in either car and you can put it in either car, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you went inside the house and kind of lounged around that afternoon, right? A. Yes. Q. Kato Kaelin came by? A. Yes. Q. And you invited him in? A. Yes, I saw him. Hey, Kato, what's going on. Q. And he introduced you to a woman named Tracy Adele? At least gave you her telephone number? A. Not really to -- Q. Told you about her? A. Started telling me that I should meet this girl, Tracy Adele. Q. Is this a model for Playboy? A. I didn't know her, so she may have purported that, yes. Q. Didn't you ask him to run out and buy the local -- I mean the most recent issue of Playboy magazine and -- to look at a picture of her in the centerfold? A. No. I think I may have asked him, do you have a picture of her. I certainly wouldn't say run out and get a Playboy. Q. He went out and got a Playboy and showed you a picture of her? A. I think he did. Q. Then you called that Tracy Adele at 2:49 p.m. on Sunday, June 12, right? A. That's not correct. I mean, that's not correct, how it happened. Q. Well, you called her at 2 -- A. She called me at -- since Kato called her and left a message. She called me I think long distance, and when she called me I said are you calling long distance? She said yes. I said are you in a hotel?" She said yes. Give me the number, I'll call you back so you won't get charged for the bill. Q. You called her and had a 20-minute phone conversation with her from your home phone at Rockingham? A. Yes. Q. That's another phone call you see reflected on the board? A. Yes. MR. PETROCELLI: What exhibit is that? MR. FOSTER: 2216. MR. PETROCELLI: 2216. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Now, after you spoke to Tracy Adele and chatted for a bit with Kato Kaelin, you dozed off for a while? A. I -- I may have, yes. I was watching something on TV and reading a book and I obviously -- yeah, I believe I did. Q. You were pretty tired by this point, right? A. I had been tired for the -- I had been doing a lot. I had been to five cities in five days. Yeah, I was jet-lagged and tired. Q. And now you were taking a redeye that night? A. Yes. Q. And you wanted to make sure that you could sleep on that "Red Eye," right? A. At this time I don't think I was really thinking about that, sleeping or not sleeping on the "Red Eye." Q. Certainly later on you were thinking of trying to stay awake so that you could sleep on the redeye? A. After we had gone for the burgers, yes, at that point it would have been too late to try to sleep. Q. Now, you got dressed to go to the recital, right? A. Yes. Q. Now, this is a recital that you knew was very important to Sydney, right? A. I would assume so, yes. Q. And you had to be in Chicago the very next morning for a golf tournament early in the morning, right? A. Yes. Q. And your friend in New York, Bobby Bender, tried to persuade you to stay in New York, play golf over the weekend and then just fly directly to Chicago so you wouldn't have to make a trip all the way back to LA and go all the way back to Chicago? A. Correct. Q. You said no, you better go back, right? A. I had missed her Communion and I didn't want to miss this also. Q. And you had missed Justin's graduation event as well, right? A. Yes. Q. And Nicole had expressed to you her unhappiness that you were missing these important occasions for your children, right? A. Before -- before the communion she had asked can you get out of this. Once she told me it was a communion, which was only four, five days previous, she said could I get out of the event that I was in, and that's when I started calling the Chairman of Hertz and everybody to see if they could get me out. The school thing, I don't think I was aware of until I was on the plane. Q. My question, Mr. Simpson, was at this point in time, in Long Island, on June 9, you knew that Nicole would be extremely unhappy with you if you were to miss Sydney's dance recital, true or untrue? A. What Nicole felt at that time was no concern of mine. Q. I didn't ask you if it was a concern? A. It was not something I considered. Q. Did you know and believe that she would be upset with you if you missed the dance recital? Can you please answer that question? A. It was absolutely nothing that I considered. Q. You knew she would be upset? A. I had -- it was not anything I considered. Q. So you didn't know? A. I didn't know. Q. Okay. Thank you. Now, at this dance recital, you -- you arrived in your Bentley, right? A. Yes. Q. And at this time your Bronco, your Ford Bronco is parked out on Ashford, right? A. Yes. Q. And your cell phone is in the Bronco, right? A. I believe so, yes. Q. And you drove to the Bentley -- to the dance recital and you parked and you went inside? A. Yes. Q. You got a seat, right? A. My son saw me come in me and said, mommy's got a seat for you, and I went and sat -- Q. You didn't -- A. Can I finish my answer, please. Q. I'm sorry. Please. A. And said, mommy has a seat for you. And I went and sat with the family. Q. Okay. Mommy has a seat for you? A. Yes. Q. Meaning Nicole, right? A. Yes. Q. So are you telling the jury that you and Nicole and the children all sat together as a happy family that night? A. I am telling the jury that the thing was standing-room only, and where Nicole had saved my seat was two seats from her with only two seats between us that was for the kids, and directly in front of me was her sister and Nicole -- I mean Cora Fischman, and directly in front of them was her mother, Ron Fischman, and her father. Q. By the way, when you came in, you didn't greet Nicole, did you? A. When I first came in, I actually had to go to Nicole and say, Nicole, you have the tickets? And she handed -- because we were supposed to meet outside, but because I was a few minutes late, they were already inside, holding the seats, and she -- because I talked to her about this previous, and so she got the ticket out of her purse and actually handed me more than one, but I wasn't with my other kids and I gave one back, gave it to the lady, came back around and sat in the seat two seats from her. Q. Did you and she embrace or kiss? A. No. Q. And other than exchanging tickets, there was no conversation between you, true? A. True. Q. And you went, and you sat down and began watching the recital and then at some point you saw that fathers had flowers for their children and you did not have any, so you decided to get up and drive to the local flower shop and get some flowers, right? A. Yeah. Much later this took place, and I -- Q. You were there for about an hour and a half, right? A. I don't know, I would say -- I think I fell asleep at one point. I think it was about an hour. Q. You went out and got the flowers and came back, right? A. Yeah. I noticed I had ten dances before her so I rushed and got some flowers. Q. Then when the recital was over, Nicole did not talk with you at all, right? A. No. Q. And in fact, she kind of gathered up the children and whisked them away rather quickly? A. Nicole disappeared, and her mother was running around kind of frantically saying where's Nicole, I thought we were going to dinner. I was talking to her father and Ron Fischman, and then at some point we saw Nicole's car come, and when we went to the car, they got in and left. Q. And again, you had no conversation with Nicole? A. No, she was in the car and I was out with her family. Q. In the meantime, Cora Fischman and/or Ron Fischman suggested that somebody take a picture of you and Sydney, right? A. Yes. MR. PETROCELLI: Can we put the picture up. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) That's another photograph, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. By this time Nicole's in her car? A. We didn't know where Nicole was at this time. This is directly after -- I think there was still some dances going on. I believe the parents, Mr. and Ms. Brown, were still in the -- inside. Nicole had gone. And I was out there with Ron and I think Cora, and Sydney was running around with her girlfriends and stuff, and -- and Ron said, come on, you guys, take a picture, and unfortunately, it was his last film, and he took the picture of us. Q. And Nicole was not around when this picture was taken? A. No. Q. There was no conversation between you and Nicole during this time, right? A. No. Q. Now, you see your left hand there, sir, you're not bleeding at all? A. No. Q. And you do not have any cuts on your finger at this time? A. I don't believe so, no. MR. PETROCELLI: Can you put up the next photograph. Exhibit what, Steve? THE COURT: Give us a number on that previous one. MR. FOSTER: 826, and 195 on the board -- screen. (Exhibits 826 and 195 displayed.) Q. Is that your left hand? A. I believe so. Q. No cuts at all on that left hand as of what, 6 p.m., 6:30 p.m. on June 12, right? A. That's correct. Q. It's also true at this point in time, 6:30 p.m., June 12, you had not seen a single blood drop come from your body that day, correct? A. Correct. MR. PETROCELLI: You can take the picture off. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Nicole's family had plans to go with Nicole and the children to have dinner, right? A. I really didn't know, other than what Judy was saying. Q. Did you know? A. What I -- what I knew was that Judy Brown was sort of in a panic because she thought, at one point, she said I guess we're not going, I thought we were going to dinner, I guess we're not going, where's Nicole. And that was my first real indication that they had a plan to go to dinner. Q. Well, in fact, sir, there had been plans made to go to dinner before this Sunday, on June 12, correct? A. The way Judy was -- Q. Did you know that? A. No, I didn't. Q. Before? A. No, I didn't. Q. Wasn't the original plan that everybody was going to go to Jackson's, where your son Jason worked as a chef, he could not get off work that night, and so the best thing would be to take everybody to Jackson's and the family, including you, would have dinner there? A. I didn't know that, no. Q. And isn't it true that Nicole canceled dinner at Jackson's on Saturday, June 11? A. This is the first that I've ever heard that, yes. Q. And if your son said that in his deposition, you wouldn't quarrel with that, would you? A. No. I know he never told me that. Q. Now, on Sunday, at any point in time, are you saying that you had no idea that the family was going to go out to dinner after the recital? A. No. I never -- I hadn't given it any thought so, no, I had no idea. Q. You hadn't been invited to any dinner? A. I hadn't talked to anybody about any dinner. Q. So in the 2:18 to 2:22 phone call, during the time -- for part of that time you spoke to Nicole, she did not, in that call, invite you to dinner, true? A. True. Q. And at no time during the recital did she invite you to dinner, right? A. That's true. Q. And nobody invited you to dinner that night? A. Judy Brown said something about going to dinner, and when Nicole drove up she turned to me and said words to the effect you're not going to dinner with us, are you? And I started laughing, I said, no, Judy. That's when you see Lou and I talking cause essentially that's what I was teasing Lou about, staying away from his daughter. Q. You were going to stay away from Nicole? A. Yeah, that I had gone pretty much back to him and I talked to Lou I was back with Paula. Q. You didn't -- you didn't go to dinner that night with the family? A. No, not at all. Q. And you left that recital alone, right? A. Yes. Q. And in fact, you tried to get your friend Ron Fischman to go to dinner with you, didn't you? A. No. I asked Ron what he was up to and he said -- Ron was having a real tough time. Q. Did you ask Fischman to go to dinner with you, yes or no? A. I asked him what was he doing and he said -- he was kind of -- kind of commiserated, something about having to have dinner with his, you know, not that it was bad with his family, but he and his wife was having some big, big problems. Q. And you said glad to be out of the mix, right? A. I told him I was glad to be out of the mix. Q. And then you drove home to Rockingham and got there a little before 7 p.m., right? A. Yes. Q. Now, when you got to Rockingham using your home phone you picked up a message from your cell phone voice mail system, true? A. No, I never picked up a message. Q. Now, you have this kind of system on your cell phone, sir, at the time I'm referring to of course, where if they call your cell phone and nobody answered it would go into a voice mail, and they could leave a message for you, right? A. That's correct. Q. And you could retrieve those messages, right? A. Yes. Q. And at 6:56 p.m. on June 12, after you got home to Rockingham, you called your message manager and you retrieved a message spanning five minutes? A. That's incorrect. Q. Correct? A. That's incorrect. Q. And the only message that had been left on that machine all day was one at about 7:00 a.m. in the morning from Paula Barbieri, right? A. Since I never picked up any messages, I don't know. Q. And if phone records indicate, sir, that that 6:56 call was placed from your home, would that refresh your recollection? A. No, it wouldn't, because I know at about that time, I was in my kitchen talking to Kato. Q. You -- at exactly 6:56 you can remember that specifically, can you? A. I believe I came back home, and I was trying to make these calls again, and Kato -- Kato came in and we were talking. Q. You recognize the phone number 476-4619? A. It may have been one of my numbers. Q. It was your number on June 12, 1994, true? A. It may have been one of my numbers. Q. Okay. I'd like to show you a document MR. PETROCELLI: Mark it as the next in order. MR. LAMBERT: 2217. THE CLERK: 2217. (The instrument herein described as O.J. Simpson's phone records was marked for identification as Defendants' Exhibit 2217 for identification.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Mine has got handwriting on it, but I'm going to show you mine cause it's easier, okay? A. Yes. Q. Okay. You see a reference to picking up your message at 6:56? A. I see numbers. Q. Now, your message manager started with a 999, correct? On the phone bills, that's what it showed? A. I sort of remember that, yes. Q. Okay. MR. BAKER: Can you tell us what this is supposed to be. MR. PETROCELLI: From the -- it was produced pursuant to subpoena from the phone company. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You see 18:56, sir, right there? A. Yes. Q. That's 6:56? A. Yes. Q. Okay. 476-4619? A. Yes. Q. Message 999. That's to your message manager? A. I believe 999 would have been numbers to my message manager. Q. So does that help you remember that at 6:56 p.m. from your home phone number 476-4619, you called and picked up a five-minute message? A. No, I didn't pick up any message. Q. The records than are incorrect? A. I don't know about the records. I know I was at home. I know I checked my home message machine. And I know Kato came in, and Kato and I was talking. Q. Well, let's talk about what you told the police detectives the next day. Now, by the way, in terms of this police statement, you spoke to Detectives Lange and Vannatter the next day at around 1:30 p.m., right? A. That's correct. Q. And that was hours after you had left Los Angeles to go to Chicago and come right back, right? A. Yes. Q. And by the way, sir, since that day on 6/13, 1994, you spent a lot of time learning the facts of your case, did you not? MR. BAKER: Objection, argumentative. THE COURT: Overruled. A. I paid attention to my case, yes. Q. And on 6/13, 1994, 1:30 p.m., talking to the police officers, that was the first time you were questioned about Nicole's murder, other than perhaps by your lawyers; isn't that true? A. Well, I took, to that degree, yes. I think the police officers, one of my subsequent calls that morning, asked me some questions. Q. But that was the first substantive interview that you had with anybody other than counsel, right? A. Well, you have to ask that question again. Q. 6/13, June 13? A. Yes. Q. On Monday at 1:30 p.m.? A. Yes. Q. About 15 hours after you left or -- excuse me. After -- about 12 to 15 hours after you left LA, that was the first time you spoke to anybody about the facts of the case in detail, other than your attorneys, perhaps? A. You're not just talking about the tape; you're talking just any time that day? Q. Correct. A. Yes. Q. Okay. And since that time, you have reviewed countless documents related to this case, have you not? A. I've read most of the reports, yes. Q. Lots of discovery materials, right? A. Most of the reports, yes. Q. You've listened to many, many, many witnesses testify in court, right? A. Yes, I was there every day. Q. And you know their testimony cold, don't you? A. Not necessarily. Some I may know better than others. Q. But you know it better than your lawyers do, don't you? MR. BAKER: I object to that question. (Laughter) THE COURT: You may answer if you know. MR. BAKER: Well, I think that calls for sheer speculation. And I am appalled -- I'm appalled that Mr. Petrocelli would ask that question. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You know the case inside out, right? A. I think I've read most of the stuff, and I'm certainly up on the case. Q. And you know that witnesses like Allan Park -- what witnesses like Allan Park have testified to? A. I was there the day he testified. I haven't read anything about him. Q. Can I have you -- A. Can I finish my answer? Q. Please, I'm sorry. A. I was there the day he testified, but I haven't read anything that -- or his testimony since then. Q. You're familiar with the times that he gave, you're familiar with times that he testified to, true? A. I know the only time I can recall is he said he got there about 20 after and -- Q. 20 after what? A. 10. And that somewhere around 10:50 or so he saw someone. Q. And you've talked to a lot of people about the facts of this case since June 12, 1994, true? MR. BAKER: Objection, vague, ambiguous, Your Honor. Also invades the attorney-client privilege? THE COURT: He doesn't ask about attorneys. Overruled. A. I don't get lots. Q. Well, by the time your deposition was taken in this case, January 1996 -- A. Yes. Q. -- you had learned a tremendous amount about the evidence in this case, true? A. I was at the trial every day. Q. So what I said is true? A. Yes, whatever I heard, you know, while I was, you know, while I was in the court. Q. You were familiar with things like cell phone calls and cell phone records, right? A. Yes, I -- Yes. Q. You were even familiar with things like hearsay laws, weren't you? A. Yes. Q. Learned all about that, didn't you. A. I don't know if I learned about it. I just heard it in court so much that I had, I guess, a layman's, you know, knowledge of it. Q. Okay. Well, let's go back to June 13, before you acquired all of this information. You told Detectives Vannatter and Lange that you did, in fact, pick up a message from Paula Barbieri, true? A. Yes. Q. You said, quote -- MR. PETROCELLI: Page 13, Mr. Baker. MR. BAKER: Um -- Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) (Reading.) "And then I checked my messages. She had left me a message that she wasn't there, that she had to leave town." Q. End of quote. And you made that statement, right? A. Yes. Q. And that statement was true when you made it, correct? A. Yes. Q. And you were at Ms. Barbieri's deposition, correct? A. Yes. Q. And you heard Ms. Barbieri testify that she left you -- excuse me -- you left her three messages acknowledging the message that she had left you earlier in the morning? A. I don't think that was what she said. Q. Did you hear that testimony? MR. BAKER: Objection? A. I didn't hear it the way you just said it. MR. BAKER: This is an improper way for him to get testimony into this case. MR. PETROCELLI: He was present, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) You heard her testify that you left her three messages -- at least three messages that day, correct? A. That day, yes. I thought you were talking about after a certain time. Q. And in the messages you said in substance, hey, what's wrong, last night we were talking about filling rooms with babies, what's wrong. You heard her testify to that, correct? A. In the last message at 10 something, yes. Q. And you left her that message because you had received her message by 6:56 p.m. telling you that the relationship was over, correct? A. That's incorrect. Q. Now, about a half an hour after that 6:56 p.m. call from Rockingham to your message manager, you made a call to a woman named Gretchen Stockdale, true? A. Yes. Q. And that call was made at 7:32 p.m., correct? A. Yes. Q. And in that call you left Ms. Stockdale a telephone message, right? A. Yes. Q. And in substance you said, hi, this is O.J., I'm unattached for the first time in my life, true? A. Or words to that effect, yes. Q. And the reason you left that message to Gretchen Stockdale that you were unattached for the first time in your life is because on that day you were unattached from Nicole and you were unattached from Paula Barbieri, true? A. That's incorrect. Q. And you had just found out from Paula that that relationship was over, and now you were without both women for the first time in your life, correct? MR. BAKER: Objection, without foundation. THE COURT: Overruled. A. That's incorrect. Q. And that's why you told Gretchen Stockdale you were unattached, right? A. That's incorrect. Q. Did you consider Paula an attachment at that time? A. I don't think Gretchen knew about Paula and I. Q. I didn't ask you if she knew about Paula. I asked you, did you consider yourself attached to Paula when you left Gretchen Stockdale a message at 7:32 saying you were unattached? A. I wasn't referring to Paula when I was talking to Gretchen. Q. So even though you were then involved in what you say was a serious romantic relationship with Paula Barbieri, you didn't regard that as any sort of attachment; isn't that true? MR. BAKER: He has not said that, Your Honor. Object, it's without foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLIO) You were involved in a serious relationship with Ms. Barbieri at that time, true? A. Paula and I were attempting to see if we could put our relationship back together. Q. She came out to your house and you had what, an interior decorator up to Nicole's bathroom or your bedroom, and talk about redecorating; isn't that true? A. That's not why she came there, no. She was at my house -- I was -- had an interior designer talking to me, and Paula came up, and Paula made a suggestion or two. Q. Well, the idea here was that you were going to try to put your relationship back together again with Paula now. A. Paula wasn't going to move into my house and decorate my house, no. Q. But the intent was to resume a serious relationship with her? A. Well, I hoped that we could get back together, yes. Q. And you still thought you were unattached, right? A. Well, I felt unattached with Nicole, of course, and that was the last conversation I had previously had with Gretchen. Q. You said unattached with Nicole, of course. What do you mean "of course"? A. That was the last conversation that I had had with Gretchen a few weeks previous, and I think she had left me a message at some point, and I was returning her call; had nothing to do, and I returned her call. Q. After you left that message to Gretchen, you then tried Paula again, did you not? A. Yes. Q. And you called from your Rockingham residence at 7:53 p.m., right? A. That's what it says, yes. Q. Then at 8:55 p.m. you made another call to your message manager to retrieve another message, did you not? A. I don't recall doing that at all. Q. Or to check your messages, correct? A. I don't believe that happened at all. Q. Then you called Paula Barbieri's home number two more times, right, 8:58 and 8:59, all on the June -- evening of June 12? A. Possibly, yes. I'm not sure of that. Q. Well, your phone records show that? A. Yeah, I -- but I may have. Q. What do you mean, you may have? A. I may have called, as you can see how close they are, sometimes you can start making a call and then somebody calls you or something is happening then, and then you -- then I tried to call right back. Q. Do you remember if that occurred? A. No. I just see that I wouldn't have called her one minute apart and not, obviously, listened to a message unless something had distracted me so I had to redial. Q. Now, during this time you're home alone and Kato Kaelin has left and gone out to his room or to a Jacuzzi, whatever, right? A. Yes. Q. And in the meantime, you had gotten a phone call from your housekeeper, Gigi, indicating that she wanted to stay down at Knott's Berry Farm, where it was the Philippino New Year, or something like that, and you gave her permission to take the night off, right? A. Yes. Q. So there was nobody home that evening except Kaelin, who lived in a separate guest house, right? A. Yeah. I assumed he was home, yes. Q. And he didn't have a key to your place, right? A. No. He had a key to the gate and to his room. Q. Let me go over something about your security system, sir, at the time. You had an alarm system in your house, right? A. Yes. Q. And you had a keypad outside the front door. And if your house was alarmed and you were entering the house, you would deactivate the alarm, from the keypad outside the front door, right? A. Yes. Q. That was the only place that you -- that you could use to deactivate the alarm from the outside, correct? A. If I put it on, that would be the only place, unless you came through the garage. Q. Okay. Now, there's a door in the back of the house that's on a delay, right? A. Yes. Q. So you can enter that -- you can enter that door without triggering the alarm, but you've got to go and you've got to deactivate the alarm inside the house, and you have, like, a period of so many seconds to do that, right? A. You have to say that again. That didn't sound right to me. Q. Isn't there a door in the back through which you can enter the house when the alarm is on, that will not immediately trigger the alarm? A. I don't believe so. Q. And there's a delay on that door, is there not? A. I don't believe that -- I mean, I have no knowledge that you can come through that door and it's delayed until you get to someplace. Q. Deactivate? A. Deactivate? I don't believe that's so, but I never tried it. Q. You heard the woman, Sue Silva, so testify at the other trial, did you not? A. For some reason, I don't believe that's what she testified to. Q. Now, the laundry room door's on the side of your house, right? A. Yes. Q. Now, there's no keypad on that door, true? A. There's no alarm keypad, no. Q. So, in other words, if the alarm is on in the house and you entered in the laundry-room door from the side of your house, the alarm would go off at Westec, right? A. Depends what side door you come in. Q. The laundry room? A. The laundry door, yes, the alarm would go off. Q. And there's no keypad on the outside? A. There's no alarm keypad, no. Q. Okay. And by the way, your garage has a door that goes out to the side, also, true? A. Yes. Q. And that's not a door that you -- that you use very much, right? A. Neither one of those doors did I use much, no. Q. In fact, that door was jammed with a chest and there was other stuff on top of that chest? A. That's incorrect. Q. There is a lot of stuff in front of that door, was there not, sir? A. There was some stuff inside, but it wouldn't have jammed the door because the door opens outward, not inward. Q. Jammed the doorway? A. It wouldn't have jammed you from opening the door fully, no. Q. There was stuff in front of that doorway, right? A. There was a lot of stuff in front of my garage. Q. In front of the doorway, including a chest, including things on top of the chest, true? A. There were things inside the door, but it wouldn't have jammed the door at all. Q. Well, we'll get to that and we'll show you some pictures a little later on. A. Okay. Q. Now, after you made these phone calls on the board there, and while Kato's in his room and you're alone in the house, you then called a fellow up named Christian Reichardt, right? A. Yes. Q. You called Christian, and Christian at that time was living with a woman named Faye Resnick, right? A. That's incorrect. Q. Or they were ending their relationship or something like that, right? A. Yes. Q. And you asked -- you asked Mr. Reichardt how Faye was, right? A. I asked him first how he was doing. Then I said how is Faye. Q. And he told you that Faye was in a treatment center, right? A. Well, I knew that from what Ron had told me at the recital. And -- and he started to -- he sort of explained what had happened. Q. Prior to her going to that treatment center -- that was a few days before she had gone into the treatment center? A. I believe so, yes. Q. And prior to that, she had been spending a few days at Nicole's house, right? A. That's correct. Q. And when you called up Christian Reichardt, you found out that she was still in the treatment center and not at Nicole's house, right? A. I think I knew that. At the recital -- Q. But it also came up in the telephone call, right? A. I can't recall specifically how -- what he said. I was more concerned about how he was doing, and I just asked him how is Faye. Q. Did it or did it not come up in the call? A. I don't know. Q. Okay. Then you told him you were taking a redeye that -- out that night later on, right? A. Yes. Q. And the last call you made during the time frame was one to Nicole's condominium, true? A. Yes. Q. About 9 o'clock p.m. you said? A. Yes. Q. And Nicole answered, right? A. Yes. Q. And you said to Nicole, let me speak to Sydney, true? A. I may have asked is Sydney asleep yet. Q. And the phone was put down and Sydney got on the phone, right? A. Yes. I think she was in Sydney's room. Q. And you congratulated Sydney on her dance performance, right? A. Partially, yes. Q. Even though you just congratulated her a few hours before? A. Actually, she came up, I said you were super. She took a picture, she ran off, so I didn't have time to talk to her. Q. Ran off because the cars were waiting to take her away? A. No, ran off because all the kids were running around. Q. And you told Sydney that maybe you guys might go to Knott's Berry Farm, or something like that, when you got back from out of town, right? A. She had asked previously about Knott's Berry Farm, and I told her I'd be back this coming weekend, and this would be the weekend I'd take them to Knott's Berry Farm. Q. And it is your testimony -- A. Or Sunday, I should say. Q. Excuse me. It is your testimony, sir, that there was absolutely nothing said between Nicole and you in that call at 9 o'clock p.m., June 12, 1994? A. Absolutely nothing. Q. Excuse me? A. Absolutely nothing, other than has Sydney gone to sleep yet. Q. Not even small talk? A. Not even small talk. Q. After you got off that call, sir, you went down to Kato Kaelin's room, true? A. I think I went upstairs. I believe I went upstairs. I'm not sure. Q. Within ten minutes, you were in Kaelin's room? A. I was outside of his room. Q. And you beckoned him to come outside, right? A. Yeah. Kind of leaned over him and kind of yelled or hit his door or something. Q. And you had, up in your room, decided you were going to go out and get something to eat, right? A. I think I decided that downstairs, you know, before I went and got my shoes or whatever I got. Q. Well, you were packing up there around 9 o'clock, right? A. Before -- before 9:00, yes; I was putting some things together. Q. You started packing earlier in the day, right? A. Yes, at time to time. Q. You were going away for one night, right? A. Yes. Q. But you were packing quite a bit that day, weren't you? A. I don't believe so. Q. Between 7:00 and 9:00, you were packing a little bit here, a little bit there, right? A. No. Between 7:00 and 9:00, I went up and decided what suit -- Do you want me to tell you what I did? Q. What were you packing during that time? A. I put some things together during that time, yes. Q. And around 9 o'clock, right before you went out to Kaelin's room, you noticed that you had a whole bunch of hundred-dollar bills, right? A. All I had -- I may have had a 50 -- no? All I had was four hundreds. Q. And you decided that you were going to need some change when you got to the airport to tip the sky cap, right? A. That, and I also knew that they don't take more than $20 -- or at least they say they don't take more than $20 at fast-food places. Q. Who's talking about fast-food places? I just asked you about the sky cap, sir. A. Yes. Q. So you knew that you were going to need some change, right? A. Yeah. I wanted to break a hundred. Q. So you went downstairs. And did you ask Kato Kaelin to break a hundred? A. I said -- yeah -- you got change for a hundred? Q. Did you expect him to have change for a hundred dollars? A. Kato's a grown man. I don't really know him that well. I think most grown men who work may have a hundred dollars. Q. He didn't have change for a hundred dollars? A. I think he told me he had -- he said no. I said, "How much do you have?" And I -- and I think he said he had $73. And if he had -- like, if he had $87, I would have just gave him $100, but I wasn't going to give him $100 for $73. Q. He gave you a $20 bill, right, sir? A. Yeah. I said, "Look, I need change for the sky cap and I'm going to get a burger." And he went in, came out, handed me 20, and said, "Do you mind if I go with you to get a burger?" Q. Now -- now, you didn't invite him along when you went down there, true? A. No. Q. He gave you the $20 bill and you took it? A. Yes. Q. And then he got off the phone? A. No, I didn't wait for him to get off the phone. He said, "Can I go with you," and I said "sure," and started in the house. And I assumed he went in and did whatever he did. Q. Let me stop you there. At no time did you tell Mr. Kaelin where you were going to eat, true? A. I said I was going to get a burger. Q. You never said anything about where, right? A. Correct. Q. And you didn't ask him where he wanted to go, right? A. I didn't care where he wanted to go. Q. And you then just walked into your house and then out to your automobile, right? A. Yeah. We went through the kitchen and out to the car. Q. Now, normally, you drive your Bronco, right? A. That's not correct. I drive both my cars. Q. Well, you told the police that the Bronco's the car you like to drive? A. Yeah. I would normally prefer to drive the Bronco, especially if I'm going to play golf or tootling around, yes. Q. Like going to a fast-food restaurant? A. I've done it many times. Q. You didn't take the Bronco this time, did you? A. I took the nearest car. Q. You told the police -- MR. LEONARD: Page? Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Page 13, starting at line 3: (Reading:) You got home in the -- in the Rolls -- in the Rolls? Answer: Yes. And then you got the Bronco? Answer: Bronco, because my phone was in the Bronco, okay -- Question: And -- excuse me? Answer: -- and because the Bronco -- the Bronco is what I drive. MR. BAKER: I'm going to object. This is out of context. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) (Reading:) Question: Yeah? Answer: Yes. MR. BAKER: Wait. I'm entitled to an objection, Mr. Petrocelli. MR. PETROCELLI: Wait till I finish my question. MR. BAKER: This is out of context. This has nothing to do with him going to get a burger in the Bronco. MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me. Let me read to you the following -- THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Mr. Simpson, did you not tell the police, I'd rather drive it than any other car? Yes or no? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And the Bronco is what you usually drive, right? A. I would say I drove them both probably equally, but the Bronco is what I like -- I do with my Suburban now -- I possibly tootle around with it more. Q. You didn't tell the police you drive them equally; you said, I'd rather drive it than any other car? A. I would rather drive my Suburban now than any other car. I probably drive both cars -- I do drive both cars. Q. You decided to take your Bentley to a fast-food store, right? A. I decided to drive the car that was closest when I walked out the door. I was a little stiff, as I'm sure Kato will tell you, and I just took the nearest car when I walked out of the front door. Q. And you went to McDonald's and you ordered some food, true? A. Yes. Q. And by the way, you didn't tell Kaelin you were going to McDonald's; you just drove there, right? A. This wasn't -- it wasn't -- I didn't have a date with Kato; I was going to get a burger. (Laughter) Q. I didn't ask you if you had a date. A. I didn't have a date with Kato. Q. Do you think this is funny? A. No. They laughed, not me. Q. Do you think this is to make jokes? A. No. MR. BAKER: I object to this, Your Honor. This is argumentative. THE COURT: Sustained. A. No, I don't think any of this is funny. I wish I was anywhere but here. Q. Thank you. A. Yes. Q. You didn't tell Mr. Kaelin you were going to McDonald's, right? A. I didn't. No, I did not. Q. Okay. And you went to McDonald's and you ordered your food, correct? A. Yes. Q. Mr. Kaelin paid, correct? A. It was very nice of him; yes. Q. Then you did not break any change at McDonald's? A. I didn't use the 20 he gave me, no. Q. And you didn't have any other change, any other hundreds to break, right? A. I had hundreds. Q. And you didn't break any other change there, right? A. I think the sign says nothing more than $20. Q. I didn't ask you what the sign said. Did you try to break any change? Yes or no? A. No, sir. Q. And then you got your food and you had a hamburger and some French fries? A. I don't recall ordering French fries. I thought I just had a hamburger. Q. Mr. Kaelin had his food in his lap and he didn't eat in the car, correct? A. I guess not. I didn't -- Q. You don't remember? A. I wasn't looking at Kato. Q. You don't know? A. We were talking, I was driving. Q. You don't know? A. I don't know. Q. And you ate your hamburger in the car, right? A. As I drove, yes. Q. And by the time you were home, you were finished, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And when you got back to Rockingham, you pulled, I take it, in the Ashford gate and pulled around into your space there, right? A. Well, I let him out, then I pulled it in the space, yes. Q. And Mr. Kaelin went off to his room, right? A. Yes. Q. And you didn't invite him inside to finish eating his food -- Kato, or anything like that, right? A. No. Q. And you testified at your deposition, sir, that as Kaelin walked away, you got out of your Bentley, and you bent down, and you started scooping up some lettuce. Do you recall that? A. Yes, whatever I had dropped. If you ever try to eat a Big Mac, a double, whatever it was, in a car, you drop lettuce and stuff. And so consequently, when I got up, I grabbed a few pieces. Q. And you did that with your hands, right? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you were using your hands in the car, right, to drive? A. Yes. Q. To eat your hamburger? A. Yes. Q. To scoop lettuce up? A. To pick up lettuce, yes. Q. And you closed the door to your car and left your Bentley around 9:35 p.m.? A. I would imagine so, yes. Q. We now know that because of Mr. Kaelin's records indicating he made a phone call at 9:37 p.m., yes? A. Yes. MR. BAKER: I object. I don't know if this is a question or speech. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. You've seen those records -- you've seen the records that Kato Kaelin was on the phone around 9:37 p.m.? A. Yes. Q. You knew you were back from McDonald's by then? A. Yes. Q. As of 9:37, 9:35 p.m. when you left that Bentley, sir, you did not bleed in the car, did you, in the Bentley? A. I don't believe so. Q. You didn't see any blood in that car, did you? A. Absolutely -- that's absolutely correct. Q. You have come to learn that there are tests for the presence of blood and that tests found there was no blood in that car, true? A. I don't know if I'm aware of that. Q. But you had no indication whatsoever, as of 9:35 p.m. on the evening of June 12, that you were bleeding, true? A. That's correct. Q. Now your car, at this time, was parked on Ashford, was it not? A. I don't believe so. Q. Okay. You told the police you normally park on Ashford, right? A. Yes. Q. And you testified in your deposition that you parked it on Rockingham sometime between 7 o'clock and 9 o'clock p.m.? A. That's correct. MR. BAKER: We talking about the Bronco now? Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Excuse me. You told the police you parked the Bronco someplace on -- at sometime between 7 o'clock and 9 o'clock p.m., you parked it on Rockingham, correct? A. That's correct. Q. But you couldn't remember between 7 or 9 o'clock p.m., a two-hour range, when you did so, correct? A. Yes. Well, I -- I could -- I couldn't remember. Yeah, I couldn't remember. It was somewhere in that period of time. Q. Did you not tell the police 8 o'clock, something, maybe 7, 8 o'clock -- 8 o'clock, 9 o'clock, I don't know, right in that area? A. From the time that I got back from the recital to when we went to get the burgers, somewhere in that -- in between there, I had got my golf clubs and stuff out of the Bronco. Q. It's your testimony that you took your Bronco from Ashford, where it had been parked since you played golf earlier in the day, right? A. Yes. Q. And drove it into the Ashford gate -- through the Ashford gate, into your property, in front of your front door, right? A. Yes. Q. And took out your golf club, right? A. Yes. Q. Golf clubs? A. Yes. Q. And then pulled your car around, right? A. I think I took it out -- I think I packed up my golf stuff and my travel bag, which was in my entry, and at -- I don't know if immediately I did, but at some point after I'd finished doing whatever was going on at that time, I pulled the Bronco out of the front of the house. Q. Now, your golf clubs were in the Bronco because you knew you were going to Chicago, and you took them from Riviera when you finished playing golf that day, right? A. Yes. Q. And your car was parked in the parking lot at Riviera, the Bronco, right? A. Sometimes I don't park in the parking lot, so it may have been parked, you know, on one of the parking circles. Q. You personally carried the golf clubs, however, from the country club where you were playing golf there, playing cards and so forth, all the way to your car, right? A. That's correct. Q. Carried them yourself, right? A. Yes. Q. And what about when it was time to get your golf clubs ready for your trip to Chicago, all you had to do was walk out to the car on Ashford, open up the car, take the clubs out, and walk right up to your front door and leave the car parked where it normally was, correct? A. I could have, yes. Q. You could have done that, right? A. I could have, yes. Q. And all it would have involved was just carrying your golf clubs a short distance from Ashford, right through the gate, right to the front door, right? A. Yes. Q. But you didn't do that, right? A. That's correct. Q. And what you testified to is, you took -- drove your car in, so you made a quick right, tight right turn into the Ashford drive, had to have the gate open all the way, rather than just a little way to let your car through, right? A. Yeah. I pushed the button. Q. Pushed the button, and gates have to open. You drive in, and then you take your clubs out? A. Yes. Q. Then you say you parked it on Rockingham, right? A. That's correct. Q. Now, you were going to be out of town, and normally, you would park your car where the mailbox is on Ashford, right? A. Yes; that's the normal spot that I would park it. MR. PETROCELLI: Can you give me the chart, Steve. MR. FOSTER: Which one? MR. PETROCELLI: Excuse me, Your Honor. Your Honor, are we breaking at 4:30 or 4:00? THE COURT: Excuse me? MR. PETROCELLI: Are we breaking at 4:30 or 4:00? THE COURT: I understood both sides wanted to break at 4:00. MR. PETROCELLI: I would like to, yes. THE COURT: All right. MR. PETROCELLI: This is Exhibit 116. (Exhibit 116 displayed.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) So here's the mailbox on Ashford, right, Mr. Simpson? THE COURT: You're hard to see through, Mr. Petrocelli. MR. PETROCELLI: Good point, Your Honor. Can you all see? JURORS: (Nod affirmatively.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) Can you see that? A. You want to use this? (Indicating to pointer.) Q. That's all right. Can you see it? So long as you can see. A. Yes. Q. Okay. You pulled your car in from Ashford and unloaded the golf clubs, right? A. Yes. Q. And then you -- a few minutes later, you pull the car out to park it, right, for the night? A. Yes. Q. And you're going to be gone one day? A. One, possibly two, but the plan was one. Q. Okay. And you could have pulled out of the Rockingham gate and parked at your normal spot on Ashford, right? A. Yes. Q. Then you would have just had to walk in by pushing the gate open, and go right to the front door of your house, right? A. Yes. Q. But you testified in your deposition that you didn't do that, correct? A. That's correct. Q. And instead, you said you pulled out of the Rockingham driveway and parked on Rockingham, right? A. Yes. Q. And you said you did so because you wanted to make sure your dog, Chachi, did not run outside, and you could easily keep an eye out on the dog if you pulled out of Rockingham, parked on Rockingham, got out of the car real fast, and gone back inside before that gate closes, true? A. Yes, I think that was my thought process. Q. And now, that gate opens and closes automatically, right? A. Yes. Q. So when you open the gate, it stays open for about what, 20, 30 seconds, and then closes, correct? A. Yes. Q. Now, your dog, Chachi, is a trained dog, right? A. No. Q. Your dog, Chachi, does not usually run outside when the gates open, true? A. Not now, but back then she did. Q. I'm talking about then. A. Yeah, she went out many times. I had complaints from the SPCA, if you want to check with the SPCA. Q. Your dog, when you leave the property every morning to go play golf -- and if you go out the Rockingham gate, the gates open frequently and the dog does not run out? A. Yeah. My habit is to, when I get in the car, to start the car, push the button for the gate to open, have the gate open, wait till I notice the gate hinges, before it starts closing, and drive out. That has always been my habit of driving out of the Rockingham gate. Q. Your dog, Chachi, another time was somewhat lame, correct? A. Not as much as she is now, but yes, she was. Q. And it is true that that dog rarely, rarely went outside the gates when they opened; isn't that true, Mr. Simpson? A. That's not true. Q. And your testimony is that you parked on Rockingham because you were concerned that the dog might run outside the property? A. Yeah. I thought if Chachi came out like she did later on when I came out, I -- if I had drove around the other way, I wouldn't have known it and she may have been out for a while. Q. So when you testified at your deposition at page -- where is it -- 962, at line 20, Chachi is a relatively trained dog -- A. Yeah. If I called her, she'd come. Q. That doesn't mean that if you don't call her she's going to run outside; is that what that means, sir? A. No. That means if I drove around this other side and she went out, and I didn't notice she went out, and I went in the house, she would have been out. Q. It's your testimony, when those gates open, and if you don't -- you're not there to call her, that dog's going out? A. She could. I mean -- Q. Could? A. Didn't -- as I told you, I had numerous complaints from my neighbors. And if you want to check with the SPCA, they had complained, and told me that the next time they found my dog out, they would take my dog. Q. You already told me. A. Well, check it. Q. SPCA. By the way, when you pulled out of the parking lot to -- out of your driveway to go to McDonald's, did you also wait to see if Chachi was going to run out then? A. Yes. What I did was, as I always did, I got in the car, I pushed the gate open, started the car, pulled up so Kato could get in, and by that time, the gate had hinged and I could drive right out. Q. Now, Mr. Simpson, after you got back from McDonald's at 9:35, the next time that you ran into Kato Kaelin was about 10:55 p.m.; is that true? A. I would guess so. Q. And about that time, you also encountered a limousine driver, true? A. I would think so. Q. Now, between 9:35 p.m. and 10:55 p.m. on Sunday, June 12, there is not a single living human being who you can identify that saw or spoke to you; is that true? A. That's absolutely true, unless somebody drove out and saw me when I was outside -- Q. Excuse me. Is that true, that there -- A. To my knowledge. Q. There's not a single living person that you know of who saw or spoke to you between 9:35 p.m. and 10:55 p.m.; is that true? A. I would believe that would be true. Q. You know of no such person, correct? A. I don't know of anyone who saw me from 7:30 to 9:00, either. Q. I didn't ask you about 7:30. 9:35 p.m. to 10:55 p.m. you don't know anybody who saw or spoke to you; is that true? A. No one was at my house. Unless they were driving by when I was in my yard -- Q. Sir, I'm not asking about -- A. No. Q. -- things that you don't know about. MR. BAKER: I think that's responsive. I think he ought to be able to finish his answer. MR. PETROCELLI: It's not responsive. THE COURT: Overruled. Answer the question. THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. MR. PETROCELLI: It was a very simple question. Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) 9:35 p.m. to 10:55 p.m., you cannot tell this jury the name of a single person, living person, that you saw or spoke to you in that time; is that correct? A. That's correct. Q. And the reason why you didn't get in that Bronco is because you used that Bronco to go to Nicole's condominium that evening, after you came back from McDonald's, true? A. That's not true. Q. You had gloves; you had a hat; you were wearing a dark sweat outfit, and you had a knife. And you went to Nicole Brown's condominium at 875 South Bundy, did you not, sir? A. That's absolutely not true. Q. And you confronted Nicole Brown Simpson and you killed her, didn't you? A. That is absolutely not true. Q. And you killed Ronald Goldman, sir, did you or did you not? A. That's absolutely not true. Q. And then you got in your Bronco and you drove back the very short distance to Rockingham, and you parked on Rockingham because you knew that there was a limousine waiting at Ashford for some time; true or untrue? A. That is absolutely not true. Q. And you got on your property, sir, and you bumped into the wall of the side of your house at 10:50, 10:51 p.m.; true or untrue? A. That's absolutely not true. Q. And you dropped one of your gloves there; you put other items in a bag, and you left that bag behind your Bentley to be picked up later; true or untrue, sir? A. That's absolutely untrue. Q. And you walked from the Bentley into your house at 10:55 p.m. and were seen by Allan Park; true? A. I believe when I came out, at one point, I thought whoever the limo driver was would have seen me, yes. Q. You were walking from the side of your house diagonally to the Bentley, so you would not be seen by the limo driver, and then you skipped into your house. Is that true or untrue, sir? A. That's absolutely not true. Q. And you dropped the bag right here? (Indicating to Exhibit 116.) Q. (BY MR. PETROCELLI) And you went inside at 10:55 p.m. Yes or no? A. No. Q. And you dropped a piece of blood near a cable in the back, near the wall, where you ran into the wall, correct? A. That's incorrect. Q. And you bled on that cable wire, didn't you, sir? A. That's incorrect. Q. And you bled on that air conditioner, didn't you, sir? A. That's incorrect. Q. And you bled all over that driveway and in your Bronco, didn't you, sir? A. That is absolutely incorrect. THE COURT: 8:30, Monday morning. Ladies and gentlemen, don't talk about the case, don't form or express any opinions, don't watch any news or read any news about this case. (At 4:00 P.M., an adjournment was taken until Monday, November 25, 1996, at 8:30 A.M.) |