Sidebar: exhibit admission

📄 Sidebar: exhibit admission — Wednesday, November 20, 1996

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\NOV\20\SIDEBAR-EXHIBIT-ADMISSION.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 19 of 57

◀ Cross-examination of Allan Park (part 1) Redirect examination of Allan Park (part 2) ▶

Date: Wednesday, November 20, 1996 • Utterances: 18

Petrocelli sought to rehabilitate limo driver Allan Park's testimony using a prior consistent statement (a recorded interview transcript from two days after the murders) after Baker had impeached Park's credibility. Baker objected that the statement was actually inconsistent, not consistent. Judge Fujisaki allowed Petrocelli to read the transcript aloud but declined to admit the document itself into evidence without proper foundation.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held at the bench with the reporter.)

# 2 THE COURT:

Go ahead.

# 3 MR. PETROCELLI:

The three topics you -- the three topics on which you sought, to impeach Mr. Park I will rehabilitate with prior consistent statements are where you saw Mr. Simpson, page 2.

# 4 MR. BAKER:

Okay, if it's where you say I saw --

# 5 MR. PETROCELLI:

Let me finish.

# 6 MR. BAKER:

I apologize.

# 7 MR. PETROCELLI:

Mr. Simpson, also at page 4 and 5, dark clothing -- on the subject of clothing and also the issue of the bag, all of which he said two days after the event in question.

# 8 MR. BAKER:

Well Your Honor, first of all, it said he saw something cross the driveway and go into the house. That isn't an inconsistent -- that's an inconsistent statement; that's not a prior consistent statement.

So under 1237 or 36 whatever it is, you can't accomplish that.

# 9 MR. PETROCELLI:

Your client is taking the position he came out the door and only went as far as benches.

You're going to argue to the jury that he was at no time out of the driveway.

Mr. Park's testimony establishes otherwise. He is out.

You sought to impeach his credibility and ability to perceive, and I'm rehabilitating him.

KEY QUOTE

# 10 THE COURT:

Okay. In terms of rehabilitation, you can read it. I'm not going to allow that into evidence, the document into evidence.

# 11 MR. PETROCELLI:

Okay.

# 12 MR. BAKER:

So then don't put it up, please.

# 13 MR. PETROCELLI:

Why can't I put it up?

# 14 THE COURT:

Because you don't have any foundation for it.

You want to lay foundation for it, you can offer it.

KEY QUOTE

# 15 MR. PETROCELLI:

He just said he was tape-recorded, and this is a transcript of it.

I can show it to him; he can read it; and he can verify this is a transcript of his interview.

# 16 THE COURT:

Well, that's still not going to permit the entire interview to come in.

# 17 MR. PETROCELLI:

Well, I'll just read it, then okay? I won't put it up.

# 18 THE COURT:

All right.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Daniel Petrocelli

Your client is taking the position he came out the door and only went as far as benches. You're going to argue to the jury that he was at no time out of the driveway. Mr. Park's testimony establishes otherwise.

Frames why Park's prior consistent statement matters — it supports the prosecution's timeline that Simpson was outside and visible before the limo left

Robert Baker

it said he saw something cross the driveway and go into the house. That isn't an inconsistent -- that's an inconsistent statement; that's not a prior consistent statement.

Baker argues the statement actually hurts rather than helps Petrocelli, undermining the rehabilitation theory

Hiroshi Fujisaki

Because you don't have any foundation for it. You want to lay foundation for it, you can offer it.

Judge enforces evidentiary foundation requirements, limiting how the transcript can be used

Evidence (1)

Informal

Transcript of Allan Park's tape-recorded interview conducted two days after the murders, covering topics of where he saw Simpson, dark clothing, and a bag

discussed; judge allows it to be read aloud but denies admission of document into evidence

Notable Exchanges (2)

Daniel Petrocelli•Robert Baker

Petrocelli cut Baker off mid-sentence to finish his argument; Baker apologized and yielded, then challenged the legal basis for rehabilitation under Evidence Code 1237

tense but controlled

Daniel Petrocelli•Hiroshi Fujisaki

Petrocelli argued the tape recording and transcript were self-authenticating via Park's own acknowledgment; Fujisaki rejected full admission but allowed Petrocelli to read the relevant portions aloud

strategic

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Allan Park

prior inconsistent statement

Baker had impeached Park's trial testimony on three topics: where he observed Simpson, Park's description of dark clothing, and the bag; Petrocelli sought to rehabilitate with the earlier recorded interview

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 8358 • 18 utterances

Civil Trial

Department 103