📄 Motion: Rolf Rokahr deposition — Wednesday, December 11, 1996
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\DEC\11\MOTION-ROLF-ROKAHR-DEPOSITION.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 30 of 57

Motion: Rolf Rokahr deposition

Date: Wednesday, December 11, 1996 • Utterances: 47
Plaintiff's counsel (Gelblum) sought either a new deposition or permission to accept corrections from photographer Rolf Rokahr, whose testimony about when Mark Fuhrman's glove-pointing photo was taken could affect the timeline of Fuhrman's actions. Baker accused Gelblum of witness tampering by contacting Rokahr after discovery closed to change his testimony; Gelblum denied misconduct and argued the photos plainly show dawn breaking. Judge Fujisaki denied the motion as untimely, noting the deposition was taken in April and it was now December.
1 (The following proceedings were held in open court, outside the presence of the jury.)
2 THE COURT:

Okay. The Court has another motion filed by somebody.

3 THE CLERK:

No, that's tomorrow at 1:30.

4 THE COURT:

Oh, that's tomorrow?

5 THE CLERK:

Yeah.

Oh, wait. Sorry.

6 THE COURT:

As I was saying, the Court has another motion filed by -- by plaintiff with regards to request of plaintiff Goldman for permission to take deposition of Rolf D. Rokahr.

Actually, it's a motion in the alternative. The alternative is to take -- to take the deposition or to have the Court accept additional corrections to the deposition transcript.

Had a chance to look at it?

7 MR. BAKER:

I had a chance to look at it, and we've got more on that, Your Honor.

8 THE COURT:

Okay.

9 MR. BAKER:

As this Court is probably aware, Rolf Rokahr was a photographer. And he testified in the criminal trial, and he testified at his deposition in May, that Mark Fuhrman, pictures of him pointing at the glove, was taken at night.

That would have been, obviously, before Mark Fuhrman went to Rockingham.

He reiterated that testimony in his deposition in this case.

Then, Mr. Gelblum, after the deposition, contacts him -- discovery is totally cut off -- and talks to him and attempts to persuade him to change his testimony.

And he did this, and we have a recorded conversation with Rolf Rokahr's daughter relative to the actions of Mr. Gelblum. And he attempted to get him to change his testimony and to make the changes that he now seeks, after discovery has been closed, after that deposition has been signed.

And we think it's outrageous conduct. He had no right to contact this witness. He had no right to attempt to get him to change his testimony, to say that those photographs were taken at -- at a time other than was testified to by a witness, under penalty of perjury on two occasions.

I think it's outrageous. I think the whole motion's outrageous.

In fact, I think it ought to be referred to the State Bar of California.

10 MR. GELBLUM:

Your Honor, the only thing outrageous is Mr. Baker's outrageous and scurrilous allegations. I did not try to convince anybody to change any testimony.

If you want to look at the pictures, Your Honor, dawn is breaking long before those pictures were taken. It's obvious to anybody who looks at the pictures. Mr. Rokahr agrees, without any kind of persuasive attempt by me.

I sent him the pictures. I said, "What do you think?"

He agreed. He said yep.

His daughter was on the phone the entire time. His daughter's husband is there. They're there.

There's nothing wrong with -- I can't contact a witness? Where did that outrageous statement come from?

Everyone who looks at these pictures can agree that dawn is breaking.

That was never called to his attention during his previous testimony, during his deposition whatsoever.

It's real obvious what Mr. Baker wants to do, is hide the truth from the jury. The truth is in the pictures. Dawn has broken long before Mr. Fuhrman's picture is taken.

11 THE COURT:

Who was there at the deposition?

12 MR. GELBLUM:

Mr. Medvene.

13 THE COURT:

Why didn't he catch it?

14 MR. GELBLUM:

I don't know why he didn't do it.

It doesn't matter. What matters is the truth; what matters is the pictures show dawn breaking.

15 THE COURT:

What matters is the witness had the opportunity to look at the transcript and make corrections, and then sign it off.

16 MR. BAKER:

All that has been -- has been accomplished.

17 THE COURT:

I'm -- Excuse me. I thought I was talking.

18 MR. BAKER:

I'm sorry.

19 MR. GELBLUM:

I did not know until after I had these conversations with Mr. Rokahr that he had signed the deposition already, because he had sent the signature to Mr. -- to Art Walsh of the City Attorney's office.

Mr. Walsh didn't notify anybody until I inquired of these people a couple days ago, when it had been signed. They contacted Mr. Walsh and found out that it had.

20 THE COURT:

I think maybe your team ought to communicate with one another.

21 MR. PETROCELLI:

Well, no.

22 MR. GELBLUM:

Your Honor, the bottom line here --

23 THE COURT:

The bottom line is this: This is not a deposition that was taken yesterday. It was a deposition --

24 MR. GELBLUM:

Agreement; that's correct

25 THE COURT:

It was a deposition taken in April of this year, if I read the declaration correctly.

26 MR. GELBLUM:

That's correct.

27 THE COURT:

All this time you had --

28 MR. GELBLUM:

That's correct.

29 THE COURT:

Well --

30 MR. GELBLUM:

Your Honor --

31 THE COURT:

Too late.

32 MR. GELBLUM:

Your Honor, let the jury make up their minds what the truth is?

That is, they want to hide the truth from the jury. Let them see the pictures and then let them decide.

33 THE COURT:

You want to bring him down, bring him down.

34 MR. GELBLUM:

Your Honor, he's too ill to travel.

35 THE COURT:

I'm not going to, at this late stage, get involved in this.

36 MR. GELBLUM:

Your Honor, a witness is able to change and correct his deposition. He's making additional changes to his deposition.

37 THE COURT:

You had ample opportunity to prepare. April -- it is now December. The year is almost gone.

KEY QUOTE
38 MR. GELBLUM:

What's another --

39 THE COURT:

One trial is gone; one deposition is gone. And the year is almost gone.

40 MR. GELBLUM:

Your Honor, the way it -- he was originally contacted, Your Honor --

41 THE COURT:

Motion is denied.

42 MR. PETROCELLI:

Well, Your Honor, for the record, I want to say I think the comments of Mr. Baker were not warranted.

43 THE COURT:

I'm not concerned with Mr. Baker's comment.

44 MR. PETROCELLI:

This a public proceeding. I don't think he has any right making those comments and talking about referring matters to the State Bar.

Maybe we ought to talk about Mr. Taft, his colleague.

45 THE COURT:

Mr. Petrocelli, Mr. Baker, as you know, I'm not influenced by any of this personality interchange.

I've always wanted counsel to desist from that. I will continue to ask counsel to desist from that.

I made no complaints about whatever things you want to say about me. I could only make a record.

And I'm going to deny the motion because I think it's untimely. I think you had ample opportunity to make the effort to make the correction, and it's too late.

46 MR. GELBLUM:

I'll try to bring him down so the jury knows the truth, Your Honor.

47 MR. PETROCELLI:

Thank you.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Robert Baker
Then, Mr. Gelblum, after the deposition, contacts him -- discovery is totally cut off -- and talks to him and attempts to persuade him to change his testimony.
Core accusation that opposing counsel committed misconduct by contacting a signed-off witness after discovery closed.
Robert Baker
I think it's outrageous. I think the whole motion's outrageous. In fact, I think it ought to be referred to the State Bar of California.
Escalation to a bar referral threat — the most aggressive rhetorical move in the hearing.
Peter Gelblum
It's real obvious what Mr. Baker wants to do, is hide the truth from the jury. The truth is in the pictures. Dawn has broken long before Mr. Fuhrman's picture is taken.
Frames the dispute as defense suppressing photographic evidence about Fuhrman's timeline.
Hiroshi Fujisaki
You had ample opportunity to prepare. April -- it is now December. The year is almost gone.
Judge's pithy reasoning for denial — eight months elapsed with no action from plaintiffs.

Evidence (3)

Informal
Photographs of Mark Fuhrman pointing at the glove, disputed as showing nighttime vs. dawn
discussed — central to the motion
Informal
Deposition transcript of Rolf Rokahr (taken April 1996, signed)
discussed — plaintiffs sought corrections post-signing
Informal
Recorded conversation involving Rokahr's daughter regarding Gelblum's contact
referenced by Baker as evidence of misconduct

Notable Exchanges (3)

Robert BakerPeter Gelblum
Baker accuses Gelblum of improperly contacting Rokahr to change his testimony after discovery closed; Gelblum fires back calling Baker's allegations 'scurrilous' and insists he merely showed Rokahr the photos and asked what he thought.
heated
Hiroshi FujisakiPeter Gelblum
Judge presses Gelblum on why Medvene didn't catch the dawn issue at the deposition, and why it took until December to raise a problem from an April deposition. Gelblum keeps interrupting; Judge cuts him off with 'Too late.'
tense
Daniel PetrocelliHiroshi Fujisaki
After the motion is denied, Petrocelli attempts to put Baker's State Bar comment on the record and counter-threatens referral of 'Mr. Taft, his colleague.' Judge shuts both sides down, noting he is not influenced by personality exchanges.
strategic

Light Moments (1)

Hiroshi Fujisaki
Hearing opens with the clerk and judge confused about whether the motion was scheduled for today or tomorrow.

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Peter Gelblum
misconduct allegation / witness tampering accusation
Baker argues Gelblum contacted Rokahr after discovery closed and after the deposition was signed, and attempted to persuade him to change sworn testimony he had given twice under penalty of perjury; Baker cites a recorded conversation with Rokahr's daughter as evidence.

Objections

None recorded
Proceeding 8611 • 47 utterances
Civil Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 DEC 11, 1996 📄 Motion: Rolf Rokahr deposition
DEC 11, 1996 KRT DvH TD