Dan Leonard cross-examined Sergeant Mark Day, a former Westec/LAPD officer who testified about responding to the 1985 domestic incident at Rockingham. Leonard attacked Day's credibility by pointing out that his testimony — that Nicole Brown Simpson came running out to meet him — appeared nowhere in either his November 1994 report to Detective Vannatter or the January 1995 DA investigator's interview report, both of which instead said she met him at the front door. Leonard also attempted, unsuccessfully, to establish that Day came forward because of Fuhrman-related scuttlebutt at the LAPD.
# 1 MR. LEONARD: Briefly.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. LEONARD:
# 6 Q: You never filled out -- strike that.
You filled out a report for the Los Angeles Police Department about this incident approximately 10 years later, correct, on November 8, 1994; is that right?
# 7 A: Yes, I did fill out a report.
# 8 Q: You were interviewed by Detective Vannatter; is that correct?
# 10 Q: This incident, the incident you just testified about.
# 11 A: Right. I spoke to Chris Darden about it.
# 12 Q: Do you recall being interviewed by Detective Vannatter?
# 14 Q: Do you recall sending a report to him?
# 16 Q: And in the report, were you trying to give an accurate and full description of what you observed 10 years earlier?
# 18 Q: Okay. Did you leave out anything on purpose in that report that you can think of now?
# 19 A: I gave the report basically just documenting that I was there at that time.
# 20 Q: So the purpose of the report to Vannatter was just to document that you were there?
# 21 A: That I had been there.
# 22 Q: But you weren't going to provide any detail in the report; is that your testimony?
# 23 A: Not a matter of not providing detail. I did provide some detail to the incident.
# 24 Q: You were trying to give Detective Vannatter and the prosecutor before the criminal case a full and complete picture of what you had observed 10 years before, correct?
# 26 Q: Okay. And that was the purpose of the report to Vannatter, correct?
# 28 Q: Okay.
Tell us, how did you -- how did -- you volunteered your -- the information you had at some point, correct, the information you had about this incident that occurred 10 years --
# 30 Q: -- ago?
And you volunteered that after you heard some scuttlebutt around the West Los Angeles Police Department, correct?
# 32 Q: Did you hear some information about Mark Fuhrman having been out at Rockingham in 1985? Did you hear any information about that, sir?
# 33 A: In the preliminary hearing, sir, yes.
# 34 Q: Okay. And you also heard information around the police, you were working narcotics at that time?
# 36 Q: And you heard some information to the effect that Mark Fuhrman wasn't believed about that?
# 37 MR. KELLY: Objection, hearsay.
# 38 THE COURT: Sustained.
# 39 MR. LEONARD: Goes to his state of mind, his bias, and why he's here today.
# 40 MR. KELLY: Same objection.
# 41 THE COURT: Sustained. You may inquire as to his bias.
# 42 MR. LEONARD: I'm trying to.
# 43 THE COURT: You're not going to do it by asking him about conversations he had with someone else.
# 44 MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, it goes to his state of mind. With all due respect --
# 45 THE COURT: Not unless you're going to produce the somebody else.
# 46 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) Did you have a conversation with Mark Fuhrman about this incident?
# 47 MR. KELLY: Objection, Your Honor.
# 48 THE COURT: Sustained.
# 49 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) Now, you testified hear today that when you responded to the residence, that Nicole Simpson came running out to you and she was upset, she was afraid, right, she said she was afraid; is that right?
# 51 Q: And so you didn't go to the front door -- she didn't meet you at the front door, correct?
# 53 Q: Okay. And if that was in your report of November 8, 1994, that would be incorrect, right, sir, that she met you at the front door?
# 54 A: In front of the front door?
# 55 Q: Yeah. She met you at the front door, that's incorrect?
# 56 A: No. She came out from the front door and met me just north of the front door, it's in the yard just north of the front door.
# 57 Q: Okay. So if the report says I was met at the front door by Nicole, that's not correct, is it, sir?
# 58 A: No, sir, it was not at the front door.
# 59 Q: Okay.
And also, if the report leaves out the fact that she came running over to you, that also makes it an inaccurate report, correct, sir?
# 60 MR. KELLY: Objection, argumentative.
# 61 THE COURT: Overruled.
# 62 A: Did -- I'm sorry, sir, could you repeat it.
# 63 Q: If the report does not say that Nicole Brown Simpson came running over to you as you testified here today, that makes this report inaccurate also, correct?
# 64 A: I wouldn't say it made it inaccurate, I'd say it's not as specific.
# 65 Q: Should have been in the report, right? That was an important fact wasn't it?
# 66 MR. KELLY: Objection, argumentative.
# 67 THE COURT: Sustained.
# 68 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) Should that fact have been in the report?
# 69 MR. KELLY: Same objection.
# 70 THE COURT: Overruled.
# 72 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) Can you answer it yes or no?
# 73 MR. KELLY: Objection. I believe he was getting ready to answer the question. He was interrupted by Mr. Leonard.
# 74 THE COURT: He may answer the question.
# 75 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) Can I get a yes or no. Should that have been in the report?
# 76 THE COURT: You may answer yes or no.
# 77 A: I don't know if that's where it belongs, sir, at that point.
# 78 Q: At that point, as of the 8 of -- of November of 1994, how long had you been a police officer, sir?
# 80 Q: And did you learn about reports and how important they are in the Academy?
# 81 MR. KELLY: Objection, irrelevant.
# 82 MR. LEONARD: Did you, sir?
# 83 THE COURT: Overruled?
# 85 Q: Did you learn about reports when you were a Westec security officer and sergeant?
# 87 Q: Did you learn that it was important to document as fairly and as accurately and as completely as you could the events that you observed in a particular incident? Did you learn that, sir?
# 89 Q: Okay. So when you just said you don't know whether it should have been in the report, you want to change that testimony now, sir?
# 90 A: The basis -- the basis for the report, sir, was to document the incident, and it was not -- and if my specificity of the report was lacking, it was not out of an intentional deletion of information that was important.
KEY QUOTE # 91 Q: Where have you ever stated on the record, on paper, that Nicole Simpson came running out to you, sir? Tell me where before today sitting on the stand?
# 92 A: That possibly would have been on the report I wrote for Westec many years ago.
# 93 Q: You're just guessing about that, aren't you?
# 94 A: I'm saying with that specificity because I wrote it immediately after the incident, sir.
# 95 Q: You're guessing that, aren't you, sir?
# 97 Q: You said possibly?
# 98 A: You're saying have I written that before this time?
# 99 Q: You were interviewed by Senior Investigator Thompson from the District Attorney's office about this incident on January 1, 1995, correct? Do you remember that?
# 100 A: I don't recall, sir.
# 101 Q: Do you remember being interviewed by someone other than Vannatter?
# 103 Q: After the Vannatter interview?
# 105 Q: Okay. Do you recall whether in that interview, you told Senior Investigator Thompson that Nicole Simpson came running out to you? Do you remember that, sir?
# 106 A: I don't recall what I -- what was stated in that interview.
# 107 Q: Would you like to look at it?
# 109 MR. LEONARD: May I approach?
# 110 THE COURT: You may.
# 111 (Witness reviews document.) # 112 Q: And look at this one while you're at it.
# 114 (Witness reviews documents) # 116 Q: Have you had a chance to review those two reports?
# 118 Q: When was the last time you reviewed those reports?
# 119 A: The one that I wrote I reviewed probably in January of '95. I'm going to guess. I don't know exactly, sir, when I was at Mr. Darden's office.
# 120 Q: And when you say the one that you wrote, are you referring to the Vannatter report?
# 122 Q: That's the report you wrote for Vannatter?
# 124 Q: Did you not bother to review those before you came and testified here today, sir?
# 126 Q: Didn't think that was necessary, did you?
# 127 A: I didn't have them available, sir.
# 130 Q: Did you ask the plaintiffs' attorneys for it?
# 131 A: Not specifically. I wasn't -- I didn't remember the Thompson report, sir.
# 132 Q: Okay. Do you agree with me that nowhere in either of those reports do you indicate that Nicole Brown Simpson came running out to you?
# 133 MR. KELLY: Well, I'd object to any answer being elicited regarding someone else's report, Your Honor. I don't mind him answering about his own reports, but he has no control over what someone else might report.
# 134 MR. KELLY: I'll lay a foundation.
# 136 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) With regard to the Vannatter report, the report that you prepared for Vannatter, there's nowhere indicated in that report that Nicole Brown Simpson came running out to you; isn't that right?
# 138 Q: In fact, it says she met you at the door. Doesn't it say that, sir?
# 140 Q: And with regard to the other report, that's a report of an interview that you gave to a senior investigator for the District Attorney's office, isn't that right, in January 1 of 1995 in preparation for your testimony at the trial, your potential testimony at the trial, correct?
# 142 Q: Okay. And you've seen that report before, right?
# 144 Q: And did you correct anything in that report, sir, when you saw it?
# 145 MR. KELLY: Objection as to someone else's report, Your Honor.
# 146 THE COURT: Sustained.
# 147 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) Did you review that report at some point, the report of January 1, 1995?
# 149 Q: And you reviewed it to make sure that it was accurate, correct, because it was -- it was purporting to -- to report what you said to the investigator, correct?
# 151 Q: And you never corrected it once, did you, sir?
# 152 A: I spoke with Mr. Darden about the incident. That's the best I can say.
# 153 Q: Did you correct anything that was indicated in the report that was reported by you to Senior Investigator Thompson, yes or no, sir?
# 155 Q: Okay. There's nothing in that report that indicates that Nicole Brown Simpson came running out to you as you testified on direct examination, correct?
# 157 Q: Were you trying to embellish the story a little bit before this jury, sir?
KEY QUOTE # 159 Q: Is that what you were trying to do?
# 161 Q: Didn't bother to look at reports before you came here and testified in front of this jury?
# 162 MR. KELLY: Objection, asked a answered.
# 163 MR. LEONARD: Withdrawn.
# 164 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) You kind of like a pinch-hitter today; isn't that right?
KEY QUOTE # 165 MR. KELLY: Objection.
# 166 THE COURT: Sustained.
# 167 Q: (BY MR. LEONARD) Did you testify at the criminal trial?
# 169 Q: Mark Fuhrman testified at the criminal trial with regard to this matter?
KEY QUOTE # 170 MR. PETROCELLI: You know, Your Honor --
# 171 THE COURT: Sustained. Jury to disregard.
# 172 MR. LEONARD: Nothing further.
# 173 MR. PETROCELLI: It's really out of --