Ladies and gentlemen, the Court at this time will give you specific instructions regarding the plaintiffs' examination of Mr. Simpson which was just completed concerning lie detectors.
I want you to listen very closely.
All communications between an attorney and his client are absolutely privileged.
This means that such communications cannot be used by anyone for any purpose except with the permission of the client.
Mr. Simpson cannot be asked any questions about any communications with his attorneys. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Mr. Simpson consented to the publication of any of his communications with his attorney.
You will recall, Mr. Simpson's attorney, Mr. Baker, in his opening statement to you, spoke on the subject of a lie-detector test. By this opening statement, Mr. Simpson opened the subject of lie detectors to examination by the plaintiff. This, however, did not open the subject of any communication on this matter between Mr. Simpson and his attorneys, or persons acting for the attorneys for any purpose.
In this trial, Mr. Petrocelli questioned Mr. Simpson whether he took a lie-detector test, any score and meaning thereof. I instruct you that his questions do not and cannot establish that Mr. Simpson took a die lie-detector test, a score and meaning thereof. Statements of counsel, that is, the statements or questions of Mr. Petrocelli, are not evidence and may not be considered by you for any purpose. The references or statements regarding a lie-detector test and Mr. Petrocelli's questions are not evidence unless they were adopted by Mr. Simpson in his answers. A question by itself is not evidence. You may consider questions only to the extent the content of the questions are adopted by the answer. Mr. Simpson's answer to the question of whether he took a lie-detector test was that he was given an explanation of how the test worked and that he did not take the test.
There is no other evidence before you that Mr. Simpson took a lie-detector test, and the plaintiff is bound by Mr. Simpson's response.
Likewise, when Mr. Petrocelli asked Mr. Simpson whether he knew what the score on the test was, whether it was a minus 22, or whether it indicated extreme deception, these were questions by an attorney and do not constitute evidence. Mr. Simpson denied any test score or any knowledge of what test scores meant, and there is no evidence before you of any test score or what a score means. There was only Mr. Petrocelli's questions which were not adopted by an answer. Plaintiff is bound by Mr. Simpson's response.
Therefore, there is no evidence before you that Mr. Simpson took a lie-detector test, no evidence about any score on such a test, nor any evidence of what any score means. You must totally disregard the questions about taking lie-detector tests, test scores and their meanings, and treat the subject as though you had never heard of it.
Do all of the jurors understand these instructions?
All communications between an attorney and his client are absolutely privileged. This means that such communications cannot be used by anyone for any purpose except with the permission of the client.
when Mr. Petrocelli asked Mr. Simpson whether he knew what the score on the test was, whether it was a minus 22, or whether it indicated extreme deception, these were questions by an attorney and do not constitute evidence.
You must totally disregard the questions about taking lie-detector tests, test scores and their meanings, and treat the subject as though you had never heard of it.
Mr. Simpson's answer to the question of whether he took a lie-detector test was that he was given an explanation of how the test worked and that he did not take the test.