Scheduling discussion

📄 Scheduling discussion — Wednesday, November 20, 1996

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\NOV\20\SCHEDULING-DISCUSSION.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 19 of 57

◀ Direct examination of Allan Park (part 1) Direct examination of Allan Park (part 2) ▶

Date: Wednesday, November 20, 1996 • Utterances: 15

Petrocelli updates the court on witness scheduling, requesting to call OJ Simpson on Friday with other witnesses to follow him rather than precede him. He also seeks reconsideration of a ruling striking testimony related to a witness's conduct, but the judge upholds the exclusion under Evidence Code 352.

# 1 MR. PETROCELLI:

Your Honor, two things.

First, on scheduling, looks like we're going to finish Mr. Park this afternoon, unless there's another long cross-examination.

And then our next witness is Mr. Bodziak from the FBI. And I think we'll finish him today, also. If not, we may leak over a little bit into the morning. And we'd like to begin with Mr. Simpson on Friday, with the Court's permission.

# 2 THE COURT:

So what happened to all the witnesses you were going to call after him?

# 3 MR. PETROCELLI:

They would follow Mr. Simpson. Not before -- they would not precede him. And their testimony would make far more sense after Mr. Simpson. So we would ask -- and the defense also has no objection to this, either.

# 4 MR. BAKER:

Well, I --

# 5 MR. PETROCELLI:

Don't sand-bag me, Mr. Baker.

KEY QUOTE

# 6 MR. BAKER:

All right, all right.

# 7 MR. LEONARD:

You owe me one.

# 8 THE COURT:

All right.

# 9 MR. PETROCELLI:

Secondly, Your Honor on the testimony that you struck, I believe that it shows his conduct, in not leaving and waiting there for a longer period of time, and why he had to wait. And I wasn't clear on the basis of the Court's ruling, it not being offered for the truth; it's being offered to the conduct of this particular witness.

# 10 THE COURT:

I think the portion that's objected to is that portion where Dale tells this witness what Mr. Simpson does with regards to the upstairs and the TV room and the lights on.

# 11 MR. PETROCELLI:

Well, I would submit it goes not for the truth of that, but why he shouldn't leave and why there was indications that he wasn't home.

# 12 THE COURT:

Well, under 352, I will exclude it.

# 13 MR. PETROCELLI:

Okay. We'll have to call Mr. St. John.

# 14 THE COURT:

Okay.

# 15 MR. PETROCELLI:

Okay.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Daniel Petrocelli

Don't sand-bag me, Mr. Baker.

Petrocelli preemptively calls out Baker after Baker starts to object to the witness order agreement, revealing the adversarial dynamic even on procedural matters.

Dan Leonard

You owe me one.

Suggests Leonard (defense) quietly facilitated Baker's agreement not to object, hinting at internal defense team dynamics.

Daniel Petrocelli

And their testimony would make far more sense after Mr. Simpson.

Reveals plaintiff's strategic reasoning for calling Simpson early — other witnesses are intended to contextualize or respond to his testimony.

Notable Exchanges (2)

Daniel Petrocelli•Robert Baker

Baker begins to object to the witness order arrangement, then backs down after Petrocelli warns him not to 'sand-bag' him.

tense-but-brief

Daniel Petrocelli•Hiroshi Fujisaki

Petrocelli argues that stricken testimony about a witness's conduct (related to Dale's statements about Simpson's whereabouts) was not offered for the truth but to explain the witness's behavior; Fujisaki upholds the exclusion under 352.

strategic

Light Moments (2)

Robert Baker

Baker starts to object, Petrocelli snaps 'Don't sand-bag me,' Baker immediately backs down saying 'All right, all right' — a small comedic capitulation.

Dan Leonard

Leonard quips 'You owe me one' after Baker stands down, suggesting he had already secured Baker's cooperation.

Objections

None recorded

Proceeding 8352 • 15 utterances

Civil Trial

Department 103