Redirect examination of Richard Rubin (part 3)

📄 Redirect examination of Richard Rubin (part 3) — Wednesday, November 6, 1996

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\NOV\6\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-RICHAR.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 10 of 57

◀ Jury instruction and recess Redirect examination of Richard Rubin ▶

Witness: Richard Rubin
Examiner: John Kelly
Called by: Plaintiff • Date: Wednesday, November 6, 1996 • Utterances: 72

Baker cross-examines glove expert Richard Rubin, focusing on a July 1995 letter Rubin wrote to the DA's office suggesting investigative tips and expressing hope to attend 'the victory party.' Baker uses the letter to portray Rubin as a prosecution partisan rather than a neutral expert, and closes by attempting — unsuccessfully, amid sustained objections — to suggest Rubin coordinated testimony with plaintiffs' counsel Kelly during a break.

# 1 Q:

Good afternoon, sir.

# 2 A:

Good afternoon. Good afternoon.

# 3 Q:

Did you tell me --

What -- did you get paid for your testimony in the District Attorney -- From the DA's office in the criminal trial, sir?

# 4 MR. KELLY:

Objection. Irrelevant.

# 5 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 6 RICHARD RUBIN:

Not to this point.

# 7 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Did you bill them, let me ask you that?

# 8 A:

I filled out the form. I was never paid.

# 9 (Laughter.)

# 10 Q:

You mean our tax dollars aren't being spent wisely?

Now, how much are you billing the plaintiffs' in this case?

# 11 A:

I am not billing them anything.

# 12 Q:

You're not charging anything?

# 13 A:

No.

# 14 Q:

And you became kind of enamored with the fact that you were testifying in the criminal trial and wanted to keep some memorabilia from that trial.

# 15 A:

I don't believe I become enamored.

# 16 Q:

Well, you suggested ways for the prosecution to get additional evidence to convict my client, Mr. Simpson, did you not?

# 17 MR. KELLY:

Objection. Hearsay, irrelevant, speculative, argumentative.

# 18 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 19 MR. BAKER:

All known grounds.

# 20 RICHARD RUBIN:

Excuse me?

# 21 THE COURT:

You may answer.

# 22 RICHARD RUBIN:

They asked me how they could find as much information as possible regarding the gloves and what else was there regarding the gloves.

# 23 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) All right. So they asked you, regarding the gloves, and you told them about -- this would be a new exhibit. This is your correspondence of July 6, 1995, Mr. Rubin, is it not, sir?

# 24 MR. GELBLUM:

We'll mark the document 2147 and the videotape as 2146.

# 25 (The instrument herein referred to Court TV videotape of glove demonstration dated June 14, 1995 was marked for identification as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 2146.)

# 26 (The instrument herein referred to as correspondence from Richard Rubin dated July 6, 1995 was marked for identification as Defendant's Exhibit No. 2147.)

# 27 RICHARD RUBIN:

I'm familiar with this.

# 28 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Okay.

Now, this letter is July 6 of '95, right?

# 29 A:

That's correct.

# 30 Q:

And that was before, of course, the defense had ever even started putting on a defense in the case, right?

# 31 A:

That's correct.

# 32 Q:

And you say you're telling the D.A. there in your letter (reading):

As a point of reference, have all of the mens coats/jackets been checked in the pockets in New York apartment and LA residence for a second pair. It is highly probable that Mrs. Simpson bought one black, one brown."

That's what you were telling -- giving advise to the district attorney's office to do, correct?

# 33 A:

That was actually in response to a question that was asked to me.

# 34 Q:

I see. Was the next paragraph in response to a question that was asked of you (reading):

"... If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at any time. Please, thank everyone for their hospitality during my visit. Maybe I can make it to the victory party!" Exclamation point.

# 35 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Was that in response to a question, Mr. Rubin?

# 36 A:

Actually the first two sentences are probably the end of every letter I've dictated in my business career, but the last comment was being gest.

# 37 Q:

Gest about the victory party. You figured you did a pretty good job for them and you were going to have a victory party as result of your testimony in the case; isn't that true, sir?

# 38 A:

Actually, I didn't think I did a very good job.

KEY QUOTE

# 39 Q:

I see. So you were just kidding around about the victory party for the prosecution; is that right, sir?

# 40 A:

As I said before I --

# 41 Q:

Is that right?

# 42 A:

It was in gest.

# 43 Q:

Were you just kidding around?

# 44 A:

Yes.

# 45 Q:

And then you said, just kidding around.

(Reading):

"At your convenience, could you obtain business cards from all the members of your staff as I want to make one and only one place or piece for my office as memorabilia of my experience. Please include Mr. Hodgman and Mrs. Clark."

Were you kidding around with that, sir?

# 46 A:

No, I was not.

# 47 Q:

Okay. You wanted all that. Did you ask for the cards of all the lawyers representing all of the plaintiffs in this case?

# 48 A:

They actually gave me their cards.

# 49 Q:

You want mine?

# 50 A:

If you like to give it to me, I'll take it.

# 51 Q:

I don't think so.

# 52 (Laughter.)

# 53 Q:

Now, relative to -- relative to the -- this morning, we took about a 20 minute break and you were asked by the lawyers, specifically Mr. Kelly, about the videotape with Mr. Simpson's and him trying on the glove that didn't fit, right?

# 54 MR. PETROCELLI:

Objection.

# 55 MR. KELLY:

Objection. Argumentative, foundation, speculative, assumes facts not in evidence.

# 56 THE COURT:

I'll sustain the objection.

# 57 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) You asked -- Strike that.

You told Mr. Kelly that you could convince this jury, did you not, that the gloves would have fit Mr. Simpson in the criminal trial if you were allowed to go on the stand today in this case, true?

# 58 MR. PETROCELLI:

Objection. There's no good faith basis to that question at all.

# 59 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 60 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) For 15 minutes, you were huddled right here at this podium with Mr. Kelly, talking about the videotape of Mr. Simpson trying on the gloves in the criminal trial, were you not, sir?

# 61 MR. KELLY:

Objection, Your Honor.

# 62 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 63 RICHARD RUBIN:

No, we were not.

# 64 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) You were here talking to Mr. Kelly how long about the videotape of Mr. Simpson trying on the gloves in the criminal trial?

# 65 A:

Mr. Baker was not even aware that the tape would be shown when I arrived here.

# 66 Q:

I'm not talking about when you arrived here, sir. I was talking about before, just immediately before you went on the witness stand, you talked about the -- Mr. Kelly told you the judge ruled that tape could be played and talked about the tape being played of Mr. Simpson trying on the gloves, did you not, sir?

# 67 A:

No, we did -- did not.

# 68 Q:

Never touched on that at all?

# 69 A:

Not today.

# 70 Q:

When did you touch on it?

# 71 A:

It was mentioned when I first arrived that the tape might eventually get shown.

KEY QUOTE

# 72 Q:

And so you went over the fact that you could, in your mind -- Strike that. I have nothing further.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Richard Rubin

Maybe I can make it to the victory party!

Baker's central impeachment point: Rubin's own words show he was rooting for a prosecution conviction, undermining his credibility as an objective expert.

Richard Rubin

Actually, I didn't think I did a very good job.

Unexpected admission that undercuts Baker's framing that Rubin was proud of his prosecution work — a subtle deflection of the bias attack.

Robert Baker

You want mine?

Baker's sardonic response to Rubin saying he'd accept Baker's business card — one of the few light exchanges that revealed Baker's contempt for the witness.

Richard Rubin

It was mentioned when I first arrived that the tape might eventually get shown.

Rubin's careful parsing — denying discussion 'today' while admitting earlier contact — left an ambiguous impression about pre-testimony coordination.

Evidence (2)

Defendant's Exhibit 2147

Correspondence from Richard Rubin to the DA's office dated July 6, 1995, containing investigative suggestions about finding a second pair of gloves and closing with 'Maybe I can make it to the victory party!'

introduced and read aloud by Baker to impeach witness bias

Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2146

Court TV videotape of glove demonstration dated June 14, 1995 (Simpson trying on gloves in criminal trial)

marked for identification; referenced in questioning about break-time coordination with Kelly

Notable Exchanges (3)

Robert Baker•Richard Rubin

Baker reads the 'victory party' line from Rubin's letter and hammers whether it was a joke. Rubin insists it was 'in gest'; Baker presses the inconsistency that the memorabilia request in the same letter was not a joke.

strategic

Robert Baker•Richard Rubin

Baker offers his own business card to Rubin, who says he'd take it; Baker declines. The courtroom laughs.

contemptuous/light

Robert Baker•Richard Rubin

Baker accuses Rubin of huddling with Kelly before testimony to discuss how Rubin could convince the jury the gloves fit. Rubin denies it; Baker's questions are largely sustained as lacking good faith basis.

heated

Light Moments (2)

Robert Baker

Rubin says he filled out billing forms for the DA but was never paid; Baker quips 'You mean our tax dollars aren't being spent wisely?'

Robert Baker

Baker offers Rubin his business card after Rubin says he'd accept one, then immediately says 'I don't think so.' Laughter follows.

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Richard Rubin

prior inconsistent statement / bias via party admission

Baker introduced Rubin's own July 1995 letter to the DA suggesting investigative leads and expressing hope to attend 'the victory party,' arguing Rubin was a prosecution partisan masquerading as a neutral expert.

⚔ Richard Rubin

suggestion of improper pre-testimony coordination

Baker alleged Rubin discussed with plaintiffs' counsel Kelly — immediately before testifying — how to convince the jury the gloves would have fit Simpson. Rubin denied any such discussion that day; two objections were sustained cutting off this line.

Witness Demeanor

(Laughter.) — after Baker's tax dollars quip

(Laughter.) — after Baker declines to give Rubin his business card

Objections

5 objections (2 sustained, 3 overruled)

Proceeding 8183 • 72 utterances • Plaintiff witness

Civil Trial

Department 103