Sidebar: testimony admissibility

📄 Sidebar: testimony admissibility — Wednesday, January 8, 1997

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1997\JAN\8\SIDEBAR-TESTIMONY-ADMISSIBILIT.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 37 of 57

◀ Cross-examination of Kato Kaelin Direct examination of Sgt. Merrin ▶

Examiner: Examiner
Date: Wednesday, January 8, 1997 • Utterances: 13

Defense counsel Leonard argues for the admission of testimony from Sergeant Merrin, who apparently received a tip call from a news reporter named 'Nicole' about a double murder — circumstantial evidence the defense claims is inconsistent with the prosecution's timeline and single-perpetrator theory. Judge Fujisaki allows the testimony after Leonard draws an effective analogy to the court's prior admission of Nancy Ney's hearsay statement under similar circumstances. Merrin is then sworn in and direct examination begins.

# 1 A:

So he's someone who has knowledge of a double murder being committed. That's completely inconsistent with their theory, No. 1, that only one person was involved and, No. 2, the time line, and I think it's highly relevant, Your Honor. I think there's no reason that we shouldn't be able to get into this at this point. Also, this was not -- this was not -- as far as we know, this witness was not followed up at all. This is before the jury. I think we have a right to corroborate what Sergeant Merrin has already -- excuse me, what Tippin has already testified to. I think it's relevant for the reasons I stated.

# 2 MR. MEDVENE:

Your Honor, if we -- they want to call a witness, I don't think the witness to call, Officer Merrin, is relevant. I think that's what they want to do, but I think that's irrelevant. They can't --

# 3 MR. LEONARD:

How could we? They didn't follow up on it.

# 4 MR. MEDVENE:

They can't show that the call from a news reporter, whether what -- whatever the news reporter was talking about had anything to do with this case. There's no indication it has anything to do with the murders of Goldman or Nicole Brown. They have to show under Your Honor's ruling some connection or --

KEY QUOTE

# 5 THE COURT:

What's the connection?

# 6 MR. LEONARD:

Your Honor, it's a circumstance. Just like -- Just like Nancy Ney. I mean, here we have a caller named Nicole. It's the same -- it's the same kind of evidence. Why should they be able to put in Nancy Ney's statement and we can't put this in. It's the same type, it's a circumstance; it's a circumstance that's inconsistent with their circumstantial case. I can't think of anything that would be more relevant. I mean, you allowed the Nancy Ney hearsay in. That was total hearsay, not connected other than by circumstance.

# 7 THE COURT:

Touche.

# 8

MR. LEONARD: Thank you. (The following proceedings were held in open court in the presence of the jury.) STEPHEN R. MERRIN, called as a witness on behalf of the Defendants, was duly sworn and testified as follows:

# 9 THE CLERK:

You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this court shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

# 10 THE WITNESS:

I do.

# 11 THE CLERK:

Please state and spell both your first and your last names for the record.

# 12 THE WITNESS:

Stephen R. Merrin. First name with a P-H, last name M-e-r-r-i-n. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY

# 13 Q:

Good morning. Is it Sergeant Merrin?

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

MR. LEONARD

You allowed the Nancy Ney hearsay in. That was total hearsay, not connected other than by circumstance.

Effective symmetry argument — Leonard turns the prosecution's own successful hearsay admission against them to justify Merrin's testimony.

THE COURT

Touche.

Fujisaki concedes Leonard's point with a single word, effectively ruling in the defense's favor.

MR. LEONARD

Here we have a caller named Nicole. It's the same — it's the same kind of evidence.

The crux of the defense argument: the Merrin call mirrors the Nancy Ney evidence the court already admitted.

MR. MEDVENE

They can't show that the call from a news reporter, whether what — whatever the news reporter was talking about had anything to do with this case.

Prosecution's relevance objection — arguing no foundation connecting the call to the Goldman/Brown murders.

Evidence (2)

Informal

Testimony of Sergeant Merrin regarding a tip call from a news reporter named 'Nicole' about a double murder

argued for admission, ultimately allowed

Informal

Nancy Ney hearsay statement, previously admitted by the court

referenced as precedent to justify Merrin testimony

Notable Exchanges (2)

MR. LEONARD•THE COURT

Leonard's Nancy Ney analogy lands cleanly — Fujisaki responds only with 'Touche,' ending the argument in the defense's favor.

strategic/decisive

MR. LEONARD•MR. MEDVENE

Leonard interjects 'How could we? They didn't follow up on it' — pointing out that any failure to establish connection was the prosecution's own investigative failure.

heated

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 8757 • 13 utterances

Civil Trial

Department 103