📄 Sidebar: motions — Tuesday, December 3, 1996
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\DEC\3\SIDEBAR-MOTIONS.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 24 of 57

Sidebar: motions

Date: Tuesday, December 3, 1996 • Utterances: 5
Petrocelli sought to call two witnesses — Jackie Cooper and Donna Estes — to testify about Simpson's emotional state during a Palm Springs weekend roughly two weeks before Nicole's murder, establishing that he was upset about the breakup and still in love with Nicole. Baker objected that the testimony didn't actually impeach Simpson's deposition answers. Judge Fujisaki overruled the objection, allowing the witnesses.
1 THE COURT:

Will the attorneys approach the bench.

2 (The following proceedings were held at the bench, with the reporter.)
3 (Pause for the Court to read document.)
4 MR. PETROCELLI:

Jackie Cooper, first, will testify that contrary to Simpson's testimony on the Palm Springs weekend, 12 days or two weeks before Nicole's murder, he told Cooper that Nicole had broken up with him, had ended the relationship; he was unhappy about it; and essentially talked on and on and on about Nicole that day.

And Donna Estes will testify that same day at dinner, Simpson told her that he had an argument with Paula earlier that day, Paula asked him do -- you still love Nicole, don't you; Simpson said yes, I do. And she left. And then went on to discuss Nicole further with Simpson.

All of this is not only relevant directly to our issue of motive, but also serves to impeach Simpson's testimony to the contrary. They're both -- each of them is about a five-to ten-minute witness, Your Honor.

MR. P. BAKER: Your Honor, Jackie, what he just said about Jackie Cooper doesn't impeach Mr. Simpson at all.

At page 10, the question was asked by Mr. Petrocelli: Do you still love Nicole? She asked you that, right? I don't recall this. And he said yes, I do; I always loved Nicole.

That doesn't impeach anything Mr. Cooper said.

Secondly, Mrs. Estes, in terms of -- in terms of Ms. Estes, at pages 7 and 8, Mr. Simpson said, and during the course of the conversation, I'm sure Nicole's name came up into that conversation.

What he told us doesn't impeach Mr. Simpson at all. It's prejudicial pursuant to 352. It misleads the jury, if that's impeachment, which it doesn't.

5 THE COURT:

Overruled.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Daniel Petrocelli
he told Cooper that Nicole had broken up with him, had ended the relationship; he was unhappy about it; and essentially talked on and on and on about Nicole that day.
Establishes the motive narrative — Simpson obsessing over Nicole shortly before her murder.
Daniel Petrocelli
Paula asked him do -- you still love Nicole, don't you; Simpson said yes, I do. And she left.
Simpson's own admission of continued love for Nicole, coming from Donna Estes's dinner testimony — directly undercuts his portrayal of having moved on.
P. Baker
What he told us doesn't impeach Mr. Simpson at all. It's prejudicial pursuant to 352. It misleads the jury, if that's impeachment, which it doesn't.
Baker's 352 argument — that the testimony's prejudicial value outweighs its probative value — is the core defense objection.

Notable Exchanges (1)

Daniel PetrocelliP. Baker
Petrocelli argued the Cooper and Estes testimony both establishes motive and impeaches Simpson's deposition; Baker countered by citing specific deposition pages to show Simpson's answers were consistent, not contradicted.
strategic

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ O.J. Simpson
prior inconsistent statement / extrinsic evidence
Petrocelli sought to use Cooper and Estes testimony to contradict Simpson's trial testimony about his emotional state and feelings toward Nicole during the Palm Springs weekend.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)
Proceeding 8440 • 5 utterances
Civil Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 DEC 3, 1996 📄 Sidebar: motions
DEC 3, 1996 KRT DvH TD