All right. Back on the record in the simpson matter. Both parties are again present. The jury is not present. Counsel, what's the status of our proceedings?
If i may, your honor, make it clear, we are back. Judge reid indicated to us to come back. The court will recall, you invited us back because i had asked you earlier this morning or this afternoon to be prepared to tell our jury something so they don't think it's defense's fault we're having this problem. There is some confusion, your honor, because it's my understanding, it's judge bascue's understanding, judge reid's understanding that this was a partial matter where the court felt for appearance sake, you wanted a court to determine the materiality of the admissibility of the tapes, and further, whether or not there was any materiality to possible rebuttal of your wife, captain york. That's how the order was phrased at the outset. The prosecution now claims you're totally recused on this case, it's bye-bye forever. We resist that. That was not the understanding. That's not the way it was. And so we're back for two purposes, to have it clear about--we have a witness on the stand, no. 1. We have a jury that's been out all day brought by this motion they brought. We didn't bring this. And now they've tried to enlarge in scope what we talked about this morning. So this is what's happened, and we have had a lot of misrepresentations all over the place about red herrings and we resent them. There are no red herrings.
Okay. I know. I know it is. But we still resent. It's not a read herring. Judge, when you talk about perjury, that's not a red herring. So that's all i want to say on that. But that's why we're back. And judge, judge reid asked further--i told him that this afternoon, the original tapes were presented to your honor's clerk and that he can start on those along with the transcript as i understand it.
He asked me to provide our transcript that we're doing, which is i think verbatim--it's not finished--as soon as possible and he's going to start listening. He said he would hope that by friday--he's a little optimistic--that he might be able to get around to the narrow issues as he saw them. And he talked about what your order said. But if it's going to be further than that--see, judge, there's real problem. If there is some attempt by the people at recusal, then different things kick in. They have to agree. The judicial council makes the assignment and those sorts of things. So we need to hear from them where they are so they can tell you to your face what they want to do.
Yes. That's why i was surprised that mr. Cochran stood to address the court. I understood that the court had advised the people to come back and advise the court of their position, and i was prepared to do so. We've had extensive discussions upstairs, consulted with appellate attorneys and reviewed the case law as well. What i would like leave of the court to do--excuse me, your honor--is to present the court with our written position in the morning. We have to marshal the cases and the factual basis for it. It would appear based on consultation with everyone that the only road to take is to not to waive any matters in this court and to proceed with a complete recusal from this point forward. I would like the opportunity to brief this further.
This has been the subject of continual and ongoing discussion in the office, your honor, and i'm asking leave of the court for this evening to brief it out and to make sure of our position and to present it to the court tomorrow in a cogent fashion and to solidify the position of the people in this matter.
I would file it by 9:00 A.M. tomorrow morning. I intend to work tonight until it's done. But i wanted an opportunity to talk further with everyone before we adopt this course and it gets set in stone, and if we could have the time tonight to do it, i would appreciate it and present the court with the final position in writing.
May i be heard, your honor? You know what our position is, and i think we need a little more time than that. I mean, it's going to be very difficult. It's 20 minutes to 5:00 now, and to have--we don't know what they're going to do, what--how they may change their position over and over again. I think we need to be a little more certain about this and have perhaps tomorrow afternoon if we're going to do it because i don't know how we can get their brief--because we oppose this, what they're seeking to do.
Yes. But i think that from a standpoint of the time, i just think that it--it's 20 minutes to 5:00--that's unreasonable. Except they started on their brief last night. We didn't come here planning to recuse you. So that's a little different. She had a brief back in chambers this morning. You'll recall that. So what i'm saying is, we need at least until 1:30 tomorrow to marshal our forces together to resist what they're trying to do here. And i think that's reasonable.
Well, with the array of legal talent that you have, 1; 2, it's a relatively narrow issue--
The code section--they're only a handful of code sections that deal with this and the case law exists. It's there for both sides to find. It's easy to digest.
I understand that clearly, your honor. But we have--some people are not in los angeles who may be coming to los angeles. I'm just indicating to the court we need until 1:30 to adequately be able to brief this tomorrow morning.
The jury i'm about to bring out, tell them that we have a problem obviously since they've been sitting on ice all day. I will tell them that the problem is personal to me, has nothing to do with the parties at this point. I apologize to them profusely, tell them that stuff like this happens from time to time. I'll tell them about the corollary to murphy's law, and we'll excuse them for the evening.
Well, at 9:00 o'clock, i'm going to hear what the prosecution's position is, i'll hear the argument if it's necessary, i'll make a ruling and we'll proceed.
She'll be available? So, you know--if we're going to be ready to do that, then we should go with the assumption, that we should have miss kestler somewhere available?
Well, you should consider all the options. The options are, either we continue to proceed or, b, we go into hiatus for two weeks and you have a new judge. Those are the two options.
I'm sorry. On the issue of scheduling, miss kestler informs me she has doctors' appointments in the morning that are very important to her, it's important to her that she make those appointments.
She indicated to me all morning. Apparently there's more than one. At least, that's my understanding. She had anticipated that her testimony would have been completed well before today or tomorrow. She is--she is i believe upstairs and still in the building if the court wants to hear from her or--
Well, there are medical problems. Ask her if she can rearrange her appointments, all right, because this is a 6:00 o'clock day. So we still have plenty of sunlight left. All right. Let's have the jurors, please.
The prosecution now claims you're totally recused on this case, it's bye-bye forever. We resist that. That was not the understanding.
It would appear based on consultation with everyone that the only road to take is to not to waive any matters in this court and to proceed with a complete recusal from this point forward.
The options are, either we continue to proceed or, b, we go into hiatus for two weeks and you have a new judge. Those are the two options.
Counsel, i accept your misrepresentations of what her problems are.