Back on the record in the Simpson matter. Mr. Simpson is again present before the Court with his counsel, Mr. Shapiro, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Blasier, Mr. Scheck. The People are represented by Miss Clark, Mr. Darden and Mr. Kelberg. The jury is not present. The record should reflect that we had a brief in chambers conference this morning to--the purpose of which was for counsel to alert the Court of certain issues that will be coming up shortly. Mr. Cochran, anything else? Mr. Clarke, anything else we need to discuss before we invite the jurors to join us?
Your Honor, in this matter first there are really two things and the one perhaps can wait, but the first thing I would like to call to your Honor's attention and to get a clarification, I think that your Honor's order of yesterday was greatly misunderstood by the so-called legal pundits and others and there was perhaps premature celebration by some and not I think understanding what the import of your Honor's ruling. We expect that ruling, your Honor, with regard to the discovery issues under that, but the Court will recall that in the course of Mr. Uelmen's argument, Professor Uelmen's argument, he had indicated that we felt that we had a right to call Mr. Bosco because certainly there had been a waiver of the shield law with regard to the article that was published in penthouse last year. And we had never intended to ask Mr. Bosco who his sources were, so I wanted to indicate to the Court and make sure that my understanding was correct, that we still plan on calling him after the testimony of Dr. Baden. We also plan, as you know, to call Michele Kestler. She will be on a number of issues, and we still also believe that Tracie Savage can be called from the standpoint. We cannot pierce the shield law perhaps at this point, but we think there is certainly relevant testimony with regard to the fact that she made this report, made two reports if the Court recalls, and the reports were in error, and the reports fit right into what we believe is a reasonable inference that can be drawn. So the point I just wanted to make that your order did not preclude us from calling those individuals and we still plan to do it next week. Now, I understand the People may still have some further objection, and that is fine, but I'm just putting everybody on notice that we plan to do that next week, your Honor.
I don't, your Honor. Other people told me about that. I tried not to do that and that is why I was amused last night when everybody told me everybody was making these statements.
I think, your Honor, we have a better understanding of what you meant and we had talked about this in chambers and did in fact want to put this on the record.
With regard to the North Carolina matter, I can address it now, or perhaps address it later in the morning, whatever your Honor's pleasure is. I can make a brief statement now if the Court will care.
Let's save that. Let's use our jury time, since we have already burned up a half hour.
I'm not going to spend anytime correcting the legal pundits. We understand what the Court's ruling was and I think that is all that is required. I had indicated to the Court earlier that we had filed motions concerning the admissibility of that testimony as an issue apart from the discovery matter.
That's right, your Honor. I just wanted to point out to the Court, because we have filed so many, that the briefs I'm referring to are trial briefs 8 and 12 that address the issue.
All right. Mrs. Robertson, would you have the law clerks pull 8 and 12. We will just get ready for that argument again somewhere, probably early next week, I suspect.
All right. All right. Anything else before I invite the jury to join us? All right. Deputy Magnera, let's have the jury, please.
I'm surprised you take your legal analysis from the pundits.
I don't depend on the pundits to tell me what it was I meant when I ruled.
We cannot pierce the shield law perhaps at this point, but we think there is certainly relevant testimony with regard to the fact that she made this report, made two reports if the Court recalls, and the reports were in error.