Sidebar: Lenore Walker testimony admissibility

📄 Sidebar: Lenore Walker testimony admissibility — Friday, November 22, 1996

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\NOV\22\SIDEBAR-LENORE-WALKER-TESTIMON.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 21 of 57

◀ Direct examination of O.J. Simpson (part 1) Direct examination of O.J. Simpson (part 2) ▶

Date: Friday, November 22, 1996 • Utterances: 5

Defense attorney Robert Baker objected to plaintiffs' use of notes and testimony from Lenore Walker, a domestic violence expert who had been retained as a rebuttal witness against defense experts Deitz and Dutton. Baker argued that because Deitz and Dutton were ruled out as witnesses, Walker's retention — and any disclosure of her notes — was conditional and moot. Petrocelli countered that Walker's deposition was taken in this action and is usable for impeachment under California Code of Civil Procedure 2034 regardless of whether she testifies. Judge Fujisaki overruled the objection.

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

# 2 MR. BAKER:

I object to using anything from Lenore Walker. And the reason I object is, they designated Deitz and Dutton as these profilers, and the Court has ruled that Deitz and Dutton were not to be -- will not testify in this case.

Lenore Walker was retained as an expert -- as a rebuttal expert for Deitz and Dutton, who are not going to now testify, and I object.

When we had to disclose -- we had to disclose because of the expert designation, and that is the only reason that they got those notes. And I object to those notes because that's a conditional waiver. The conditional waiver has -- we're not going to call her 'cause Deitz and Dutton are going to be called. I object to them using any of the notes of Lenore Walker.

# 3 MR. PETROCELLI:

On the 2034, Your Honor, her deposition was taken in this action. The Code specifically provides whether or not she is called as a witness, that her deposition testimony can be used. I'm using it to directly impeach him.

# 4 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 5 MR. PETROCELLI:

Thank you, Your Honor.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Robert Baker

The conditional waiver has -- we're not going to call her 'cause Deitz and Dutton are going to be called. I object to them using any of the notes of Lenore Walker.

Baker's core argument: disclosure of Walker's notes was only made because of the expected Deitz/Dutton testimony, so using those notes now is improper.

Daniel Petrocelli

The Code specifically provides whether or not she is called as a witness, that her deposition testimony can be used. I'm using it to directly impeach him.

Petrocelli invokes CCP 2034 to establish independent grounds for using Walker's deposition regardless of witness status.

Hiroshi Fujisaki

Overruled.

Clean, immediate ruling — Fujisaki accepts the statutory argument without elaboration.

Evidence (1)

Informal

Notes and deposition testimony of Lenore Walker, retained as rebuttal expert to defense domestic violence profilers Deitz and Dutton

challenged by Baker; Petrocelli seeks to use for impeachment

Notable Exchanges (1)

Robert Baker•Daniel Petrocelli

Baker argues Walker's notes were disclosed conditionally and cannot be used now that Deitz/Dutton are excluded; Petrocelli counters with CCP 2034 statutory authority allowing deposition use for impeachment independent of witness call status.

strategic

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ OJ Simpson

prior inconsistent statement / expert impeachment

Petrocelli is using Walker's deposition to directly impeach Simpson, suggesting Walker's expert findings on domestic violence patterns are being deployed against him.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 8382 • 5 utterances

Civil Trial

Department 103