Cross-examination of Christian Reichardt (part 2)

📄 Cross-examination of Christian Reichardt (part 2) — Tuesday, August 22, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\AUG\22\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-CHRISTIAN.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 140 of 167

◀ Sidebar: credibility and hearsay Redirect examination of Christian Reichardt (part 1) ▶

Witness: Christian Reichardt
Examiner: Christopher Darden
Called by: Defense • Date: Tuesday, August 22, 1995 • Utterances: 389

Darden cross-examines Dr. Reichardt, OJ's friend and chiropractor, attacking his credibility on multiple fronts: a reported statement that Nicole and her friends 'got what they deserved,' a potential book deal, a joint business venture with OJ (a portable exercise device), and the lack of any documentary evidence corroborating the critical June 12th phone call. The proceeding is marked by a sharp sidebar confrontation over Darden's inflammatory question about whether Nicole deserved to have her throat cut, which Ito sustained but declined to admonish the jury over.

# 1 THE COURT:

All right. Thank you, counsel. Proceed.

# 2 (Brief pause.)

# 3 THE COURT:

I think Mr. Darden was asking the question regarding the changing of the mind.

# 4 MR. DARDEN:

Okay.

# 5 MR. DARDEN:

In fact, the Defendant and Nicole Brown, they had a number--they had an off and on relationship on a number of occasions; is that correct?

# 6 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 7 MR. DARDEN:

Sometimes she broke up with him?

# 8 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 9 MR. DARDEN:

Sometimes he broke up with her?

# 10 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah.

# 11 MR. DARDEN:

And it went like that for a couple of years, right?

# 12 DR. REICHARDT:

The last year and a half that I was privy to, correct.

# 13 MR. DARDEN:

The Defendant gave Nicole Brown an expensive gift for her birthday in nay of 1994; is that correct?

# 14 DR. REICHARDT:

Yes.

# 15 MR. DARDEN:

She returned that gift to him?

# 16 DR. REICHARDT:

Yes, she did.

# 17 MR. DARDEN:

He had given her some earrings on an earlier occasion; is that correct?

# 18 DR. REICHARDT:

I don't know.

# 19 MR. COCHRAN:

I object to this whole line of questioning. This is beyond the direct examination.

# 20 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 21 MR. COCHRAN:

Thank you.

# 22 MR. DARDEN:

Do you know what date it was, the date that Nicole Brown decided finally that she would no longer have a relationship with the Defendant?

# 23 MR. COCHRAN:

I would object to the form of that question. Assumes a fact not in evidence, your Honor.

# 24 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 25 MR. DARDEN:

You told us a few moments ago that Nicole Brown was also your friend; is that correct?

# 26 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 27 MR. DARDEN:

Is it your opinion, Dr. Reichardt, that Nicole Brown deserved to have had her throat cut?

KEY QUOTE

# 28 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor--

# 29 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 30 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor, just a moment.

# 31 THE COURT:

Sustained. It is not an appropriate question, Mr. Darden. Have a seat, Mr. Cochran. Not an appropriate question.

# 32 MR. DARDEN:

Can I be heard at side bar with discovery, your Honor?

# 33 THE COURT:

Discovery?

# 34 MS. CLARK:

Yes.

# 35 THE COURT:

It is not an appropriate question.

# 36 MR. DARDEN:

There was a 1054 submission to the court on that issue, as I recall.

# 37 MR. COCHRAN:

Speaking, your Honor.

# 38 THE COURT:

With the court reporter.

# 39 (The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

# 40 THE COURT:

Mr. Darden.

# 41 MR. COCHRAN:

May I say something?

# 42 THE COURT:

Where are we going--I am interested--Mr. Darden, you are the one pursuing this line of questioning. Where are we going with this?

# 43 MR. DARDEN:

My basis is a statement he made to Candace Garvey back in the first week of July, 1995.

# 44 THE COURT:

Which was?

# 45 MR. DARDEN:

Which was that they deserved that they got. Quote, "They got what they deserved."

# 46 MR. COCHRAN:

That is hearsay. Your Honor, that is--

# 47 MR. DARDEN:

The question is did he say that and if he says he didn't say that, then I will bring somebody in who will say that he did say that.

# 48 MR. COCHRAN:

Just watch the jury. I would like to be heard on this.

# 49 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

# 50 MR. DARDEN:

And I mean I mentioned earlier this morning that I would pursue his attitude, questions regarding his attitude toward these proceedings. These aren't questions I'm making up. This is the evidence and information that we have.

# 51 MR. COCHRAN:

May I respond, your Honor?

# 52 (Brief pause.)

# 53 MR. COCHRAN:

I haven't seen that, your Honor.

# 54 THE COURT:

Have you shown this to Mr. Cochran?

# 55 MR. DARDEN:

I am about to.

# 56 THE COURT:

All right. Before you start asking questions, I thought our agreement was you were going to show him.

# 57 MR. COCHRAN:

That was exactly the agreement, plus this is hearsay, I haven't even seen it. But hearing the question, it is totally improper and I would ask the jury to totally disregard.

# 58 THE COURT:

What is the context? That Reichardt said they got what they deserved because they were--

# 59 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor, this is--

# 60 MR. DARDEN:

Umm--

# 61 THE COURT:

Because they were out dancing all night all the time?

# 62 MR. DARDEN:

Yeah. I mean, Reichardt buys into the whole issue that they should all be home, I guess that includes Faye Resnick and Cora Fischman, and they are all dejected, all three of them, they are having problems with their women, they can't control them, they--their women apparently have no longer any interest in them, and--

# 63 MR. COCHRAN:

This is so preposterous, hearsay, totally improper. It is totally improper and I want the court to admonish the jury regarding this.

# 64 THE COURT:

All right. Mr. Darden, our agreement was before you launched into something that involved a report you would show counsel the report before you launched into the question. All right. This is a July 11th phone interview of Candace Garvey regarding Christian Reichardt and I'm referring specifically to paragraph 4, the relevant item, which says as follows: "During a conversation with Reichardt Garvey talked about what had happened to Nicole Simpson, Cora Fischman (Her affair with a grocery clerk) And Resnick (Being suicidal and believing that someone was after her). Reichardt's response was, quote, `they got what they deserved,' unquote. He stated he sounded very bitter. Reichardt also asked Garvey how she would feel being one of them, meaning one of the husbands or boyfriends. He said they were, quote, `going out to 4:00 in the morning and acting the way they did. They were all mothers,' unquote." All right. Mr. Cochran.

# 65 MR. COCHRAN:

I think that is--I mean, how he gets from that to the fact that she got what she deserved by getting her throat cut, that is highly improper. If he would come up here--he knew we would come up here. That is an improper question and I think the jury should be admonished regarding that. This is a hearsay statement alleged and he didn't even say that.

# 66 THE COURT:

Mr. Cochran, is that a 352 objection?

# 67 MR. COCHRAN:

Yes, I'm sorry.

# 68 MR. DARDEN:

I asked the witness if that was his opinion, that they deserved what they got. I did not introduce any hearsay. I did so in good faith. And you read the statement and I don't see why I shouldn't be allowed to ask this witness about his attitude toward this action.

# 69 THE COURT:

All right. At this point I think you have a good faith reason to ask the question, given this report, but I think it is subject to a 352 objection because I don't think it is probative of anything. I will sustain the objection.

# 70 MR. DARDEN:

Before you go, so I'm not being precluded about asking him about the book he was going to write?

# 71 THE COURT:

That is a different issue. Whether or not he has any financial motive in this case, that is an a different issue.

# 72 MR. COCHRAN:

Can we hear the question?

# 73 MR. DARDEN:

No.

# 74 THE COURT:

No. I just told that you that is a different issue and that is proper, if he has a financial interest, obviously.

# 75 MR. DARDEN:

You have indicated to the jury that the question was highly improper, or words to that effect. I take it you don't still feel that way?

# 76 THE COURT:

I feel that you had a good faith basis to ask it, but I'm sustaining the objection to it.

# 77 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. But would you admonish the jury?

# 78 MR. COCHRAN:

No.

# 79 THE COURT:

No, no. Let's go.

# 80 MR. DARDEN:

Very unfair.

# 81 (The following proceedings were held in open court:)

# 82 THE COURT:

All right. Thank you, counsel. Mr. Darden, you may continue.

# 83 MR. DARDEN:

Mr. Reichardt, Candace Garvey is a patient of yours; is that correct?

# 84 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 85 MR. DARDEN:

Was she someone you treated during the first week of July, 1994?

# 86 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor, I'm going to object to this question. Beyond the scope of direct examination. We didn't mention Candace Garvey at all.

# 87 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 88 MR. DARDEN:

Were you planning to somehow make some money off of this case, doctor?

# 89 DR. REICHARDT:

Nope.

# 90 MR. DARDEN:

You were planning to write a book, weren't you?

# 91 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct, a book on personal ethics.

# 92 MR. DARDEN:

You were planning to write a book about Nicole Brown?

# 93 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 94 MR. DARDEN:

You were planning to write a book about the Defendant and Nicole Brown?

# 95 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 96 MR. DARDEN:

You were planning to write a book about what you knew about the Defendant's relationship with Nicole Brown?

# 97 DR. REICHARDT:

Nope.

# 98 MR. DARDEN:

And you were planning to have a co-author on that book?

# 99 DR. REICHARDT:

Excuse me?

# 100 MR. DARDEN:

Were you planning to have a co-author on that book?

# 101 DR. REICHARDT:

Absolutely not.

# 102 MR. DARDEN:

Isn't it true that you told Candace Garvey that you--

# 103 MR. COCHRAN:

I will object to the form of this as hearsay.

# 104 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 105 MR. DARDEN:

Isn't it true that you told Candace Garvey that you were going to do a book, write a book regarding Nicole Brown?

# 106 DR. REICHARDT:

That is not correct.

# 107 MR. DARDEN:

Did you ever visit a lawyer, speak to a lawyer about writing a book?

# 108 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 109 MR. DARDEN:

The first time that you were interviewed by the Prosecution was what, June 23rd--I'm sorry, by LAPD was June 23rd, 1994?

# 110 DR. REICHARDT:

About a week and a half afterward.

# 111 MR. DARDEN:

Had you, prior to that, agreed with someone else that you would not speak to the police regarding any information you had regarding the Defendant and his relationship with Nicole Brown?

# 112 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question, your Honor.

# 113 THE COURT:

Overruled. Do you understand the question, doctor?

# 114 DR. REICHARDT:

Whether I--could you repeat the question?

# 115 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. Well, had you and some other person agreed that you would not speak to the LAPD or the Prosecution regarding any information you had regarding the Defendant?

# 116 DR. REICHARDT:

I had made agreement to not talk to the media but do whatever is required by the court.

# 117 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. So you had no agreement not to talk to the D.A.'s office?

# 118 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 119 MR. DARDEN:

You had no agreement not to talk to the LAPD?

# 120 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 121 MR. DARDEN:

But didn't you tell Candace Garvey both of those things, that you had an agreement with someone else that would you not speak to the police or the D.A.'s office?

# 122 MR. COCHRAN:

Hearsay.

# 123 THE COURT:

Overruled. 770 and 1235, counsel.

# 124 DR. REICHARDT:

I had an agreement to not talk to--

# 125 MR. DARDEN:

Can you please answer my question yes or no?

# 126 MR. COCHRAN:

He cut the witness off.

# 127 THE COURT:

Let him finish answering the question.

# 128 MR. DARDEN:

Please, sir.

# 129 DR. REICHARDT:

I had an agreement to not talk to the media.

# 130 MR. DARDEN:

So is the answer to my question no?

# 131 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I did not have a agreement to not talk to the LAPD.

# 132 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

# 133 MR. DARDEN:

Now, the conversation you had with the Defendant, the conversation you say you had the night of June 12th--

# 134 DR. REICHARDT:

Uh-huh.

# 135 MR. DARDEN:

Is that yes?

# 136 DR. REICHARDT:

Yes.

# 137 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. Do you have a phone record to indicate the time of that phone call?

# 138 DR. REICHARDT:

I don't have one. Mr. Simpson called me.

# 139 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. Do you have a phone bill that will indicate the time of that phone call?

# 140 DR. REICHARDT:

I don't think it would show up on my phone bill.

# 141 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. Do you have any record at all that will establish the time of that phone call?

# 142 DR. REICHARDT:

I'm sure it could be established if Mr. Simpson's phone records would be checked.

# 143 MR. DARDEN:

Well, have you seen any record that will establish the time of that phone call?

# 144 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I haven't.

# 145 MR. DARDEN:

Have you seen any record that will establish that that phone call ever took place?

# 146 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I haven't.

# 147 MR. DARDEN:

You say you were alone in your home when you received this telephone call?

# 148 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 149 MR. DARDEN:

And you say it was approximately nine o'clock?

# 150 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 151 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. You are not sure of the exact time?

# 152 DR. REICHARDT:

About nine o'clock.

# 153 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. It could be earlier; it could be later?

# 154 DR. REICHARDT:

Give or take a few minutes because I looked at the clock.

# 155 MR. DARDEN:

You also looked at the clock?

# 156 DR. REICHARDT:

Uh-huh.

# 157 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question as argumentative.

# 158 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 159 MR. DARDEN:

You were also the Defendant's chiropractor; is that correct?

# 160 DR. REICHARDT:

I have seen him as a friend, yeah; not a former business arrangement.

# 161 MR. DARDEN:

You have treated him?

# 162 DR. REICHARDT:

Yes.

# 163 MR. DARDEN:

For free?

# 164 DR. REICHARDT:

Absolutely.

# 165 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. Now, this telephone call you say you received from the Defendant about nine o'clock that Sunday night, how long did the call last?

# 166 DR. REICHARDT:

I would say approximately fifteen minutes.

# 167 MR. DARDEN:

Fifteen minutes?

# 168 DR. REICHARDT:

Uh-huh.

# 169 MR. DARDEN:

Is that what you told the LAPD when they interviewed you back on June 23rd?

# 170 DR. REICHARDT:

I believe so.

# 171 MR. DARDEN:

Have you seen your statement?

# 172 DR. REICHARDT:

Excuse me?

# 173 MR. DARDEN:

Have you seen your statement to the LAPD?

# 174 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I have not.

# 175 MR. DARDEN:

And so you received this call and he seemed jovial and relaxed, more relaxed, right?

# 176 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 177 MR. DARDEN:

Had you spoken to him the day before at all?

# 178 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I haven't.

# 179 MR. DARDEN:

How about the day before that?

# 180 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I haven't.

# 181 MR. DARDEN:

The day before that?

# 182 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I haven't.

# 183 MR. COCHRAN:

Objection your Honor.

# 184 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 185 MR. DARDEN:

Had you spoken to him at all during the seven days prior to Nicole Brown Simpson's murder?

# 186 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I hadn't.

# 187 MR. DARDEN:

How about during the two-week period prior to the murders had you spoken to the Defendant?

# 188 DR. REICHARDT:

I talked to him about ten days prior.

# 189 MR. DARDEN:

That was after the Defendant broke up with Nicole Brown?

# 190 DR. REICHARDT:

I think that was still at the time we were trying to figure out what to do.

# 191 MR. DARDEN:

And he seemed depressed and upset at that time?

# 192 DR. REICHARDT:

He seemed upset at the time and he was going to go out of town.

# 193 MR. DARDEN:

Now, given the fact that you didn't speak to the Defendant for another ten days, you can't tell us then what his demeanor was like during the ten-day period leading up to that phone call; is that correct?

# 194 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question. Speaks for itself.

# 195 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 196 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I cannot.

# 197 MR. DARDEN:

And you can't tell us what the Defendant's demeanor was after he hung up the telephone with you; is that correct?

# 198 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I cannot.

# 199 MR. DARDEN:

Can't tell us whether or not he was putting on an act or faking when he called you at approximately nine o'clock?

# 200 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question as argumentative.

# 201 THE COURT:

Rephrase the question.

# 202 MR. DARDEN:

You understand that the Defendant is an actor, correct?

# 203 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to that. Object.

# 204 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 205 MR. COCHRAN:

The form of that question.

# 206 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 207 DR. REICHARDT:

Yes, I do.

# 208 MR. DARDEN:

Has he had any formal training that you know of?

# 209 DR. REICHARDT:

Not that I know.

# 210 MR. DARDEN:

Have you ever discussed that issue with him?

# 211 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 212 MR. DARDEN:

Can you tell us whether or not he was acting or putting on an act when you spoke to him on the telephone?

# 213 DR. REICHARDT:

Can one ever?

# 214 MR. DARDEN:

Pardon?

# 215 DR. REICHARDT:

Can one ever? How would I know?

KEY QUOTE

# 216 MR. DARDEN:

Well, you know him.

# 217 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah. I mean to me he was not acting. Can I prove it?

# 218 MR. DARDEN:

To you he wasn't acting?

# 219 DR. REICHARDT:

Excuse me?

# 220 MR. DARDEN:

To you he wasn't acting?

# 221 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 222 MR. DARDEN:

So you can tell then?

# 223 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of the question.

# 224 THE COURT:

Argumentative. Rephrase the question.

# 225 MR. DARDEN:

Would you agree that a person, a perfect stranger here, didn't know the Defendant before, would have trouble telling if he was acting?

# 226 MR. COCHRAN:

Object. This is irrelevant and immaterial, your Honor.

# 227 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 228 MR. DARDEN:

You can't tell us whether or not the Defendant was cut at 9:15 or nine o'clock can you?

# 229 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question, your Honor. Beyond the scope.

# 230 THE COURT:

You didn't see him physically on that date, did you?

# 231 DR. REICHARDT:

No, I did not.

# 232 THE COURT:

That is the only testimony that is in the record, counsel.

# 233 MR. DARDEN:

The Defendant tell you what he was wearing at the time?

# 234 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 235 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question.

# 236 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 237 MR. DARDEN:

Tell you whether or not he had a pair of gloves with him at the time?

# 238 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor, your Honor.

# 239 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 240 MR. COCHRAN:

Overruled.

# 241 MR. DARDEN:

Now, you and the Defendant, you planned to go into business together; is that right?

# 242 DR. REICHARDT:

That is not right.

# 243 MR. DARDEN:

Well, you had--you had had a prototype of a certain exercise contraption made; is that correct?

# 244 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 245 MR. DARDEN:

And what was this contraption called or did it have a name?

# 246 DR. REICHARDT:

We hadn't given it a name yet. We were going to call it something like the exerciser or something like that.

# 247 MR. DARDEN:

Or port-a-gym or something like that?

# 248 DR. REICHARDT:

One of the names that we flew around.

# 249 MR. DARDEN:

When did you have that prototype made?

# 250 DR. REICHARDT:

That was in February of `94.

# 251 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. And you and the Defendant had discussed producing this item, hadn't you?

# 252 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question.

# 253 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 254 MR. COCHRAN:

Hearsay.

# 255 DR. REICHARDT:

If the video would be a success and that was a possibility.

# 256 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. So my question is you and the Defendant had discussed producing this particular item; is that correct?

# 257 DR. REICHARDT:

Possibly, yeah. We had possibly discussed possibly producing it. I don't know.

# 258 MR. DARDEN:

You possibly discussed something?

# 259 (No audible response.)

# 260 MR. DARDEN:

You had possibly discussed?

# 261 DR. REICHARDT:

No. We discussed possibly producing the item.

# 262 MR. DARDEN:

You discussed producing the item prior to your having the prototype made; is that right?

# 263 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah.

# 264 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. You did have the prototype made in February of `94; is that correct?

# 265 DR. REICHARDT:

Uh-huh, for the video.

# 266 MR. DARDEN:

Is that correct?

# 267 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 268 MR. DARDEN:

And you were going to include that exercise gadget or contraption with the video that you say that you and he were going to produce for playboy; is that correct?

# 269 DR. REICHARDT:

We weren't the ones making that decision; playboy would be the one making that decision.

# 270 MR. DARDEN:

You were going to off or suggest to playboy that they include your exercise gadget along with the video?

# 271 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 272 MR. DARDEN:

Now, I take it you weren't going to give this exerciser to playboy for free; is that correct?

# 273 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 274 MR. DARDEN:

You and the Defendant were going to manufacture these items, correct?

# 275 DR. REICHARDT:

If playboy would accept it, yeah.

# 276 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. You were going to sell them to playboy; is that correct?

# 277 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah.

# 278 MR. DARDEN:

Now, in may and June of 1994 you and the Defendant were planning to manufacture 100,000 units of this prototype; is that correct?

# 279 DR. REICHARDT:

Possibly, yeah, if it would be included in the video.

# 280 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. You were discussing the production of 100,000 of these units?

# 281 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah. Not the Defendant and I. Actually the person that helped me manufacture it, yes.

# 282 MR. DARDEN:

But you and the Defendant were discussing the production of these as well, correct?

# 283 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah, but not of a hundred thousand pieces.

# 284 MR. DARDEN:

The Defendant was going to kick in some money to the project?

# 285 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 286 MR. DARDEN:

You never discussed with the Defendant him putting up money?

# 287 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 288 MR. DARDEN:

For this project?

# 289 DR. REICHARDT:

No, no. I was going to put up money.

# 290 MR. DARDEN:

You were going to put up the money to produce 100,000 units?

# 291 DR. REICHARDT:

Yes.

# 292 MR. DARDEN:

And you had that kind of money?

# 293 MR. COCHRAN:

Objection, argumentative.

# 294 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 295 MR. DARDEN:

Did you have that kind of money, sir?

# 296 MR. COCHRAN:

Irrelevant and immaterial, your Honor.

# 297 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 298 DR. REICHARDT:

We wouldn't have made a--

# 299 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 300 DR. REICHARDT:

Okay.

# 301 MR. DARDEN:

Well, have you produced this item?

# 302 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 303 MR. DARDEN:

In fact, you were talking to someone about producing this item all the way up to the last week before Nicole Brown's murder; is that correct?

# 304 DR. REICHARDT:

Umm, probably, yeah.

# 305 MR. DARDEN:

You were speaking to someone about producing this item up until the Defendant's arrest, correct?

# 306 DR. REICHARDT:

I don't recall.

# 307 MR. DARDEN:

But close to that date?

# 308 DR. REICHARDT:

Probably.

# 309 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. But you haven't discussed it with that person since the Defendant's arrest, have you?

# 310 DR. REICHARDT:

I have thought about it, yeah.

# 311 MR. DARDEN:

You have thought about it?

# 312 DR. REICHARDT:

Absolutely.

# 313 MR. DARDEN:

But you haven't discussed it with the person who produced--

# 314 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 315 MR. DARDEN:

So the project is no longer viable, that is, without the Defendant; is that correct?

KEY QUOTE

# 316 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor, I object. This is beyond the scope of direct examination, your Honor.

# 317 THE COURT:

Overruled, but we are going--about at the end of it.

# 318 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. Okay.

# 319 MR. DARDEN:

When you spoke to the Defendant that night, he asked you about Nicole, didn't he?

# 320 DR. REICHARDT:

Actually, no.

# 321 MR. DARDEN:

The Defendant didn't ask you if you heard from Nicole?

# 322 MR. COCHRAN:

Objection, your Honor, hearsay.

# 323 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 324 MR. DARDEN:

Did the Defendant ask you during that telephone conversation if you had heard from Nicole?

# 325 DR. REICHARDT:

I don't believe so.

# 326 MR. DARDEN:

Let me show you a copy of a statement.

# 327 THE COURT:

Have you shown this to Mr. Cochran?

# 328 MR. COCHRAN:

Let me point out where he is, your Honor.

# 329 MR. DARDEN:

Mr. Cochran has a copy of it.

# 330 MR. COCHRAN:

Whereabouts is it?

# 331 THE COURT:

Mr. Darden, why don't you show--

# 332 MR. DARDEN:

Page 2, paragraph--

# 333 THE COURT:

Also Mr. Rubalcava needs to have a copy.

# 334 MR. RUBALCAVA:

Thank you, your Honor.

# 335 (Brief pause.)

# 336 THE COURT:

Counsel, why don't you step over to the podium here, confer with each other and then show Mr. Rubalcava, please.

# 337 THE COURT:

All right. Proceed.

# 338 MR. COCHRAN:

I haven't seen it either, your Honor.

# 339 (Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)

# 340 MR. DARDEN:

Let me show you a copy of a statement prepared by the LAPD, purportedly contains your comments to them on June 23rd, 1994. I would ask you to look at paragraph 2, page 2.

# 341 THE COURT:

The witness is nodding affirmatively.

# 342 DR. REICHARDT:

I'm sorry.

# 343 MR. DARDEN:

Does that refresh your recollection, sir?

# 344 DR. REICHARDT:

The focus of the conversation was not about Nicole, so I am--

# 345 MR. DARDEN:

Well, did the Defendant ask you during that phone conversation whether or not you had heard from Nicole Brown?

# 346 DR. REICHARDT:

I don't recall right now, but as it is there in the paper, probably did.

KEY QUOTE

# 347 MR. DARDEN:

But you don't recall now?

# 348 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 349 MR. DARDEN:

By the way, let me ask you to read this statement. Let me ask you if anywhere in the statement did you tell the LAPD that the conversation lasted fifteen minutes?

# 350 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question, your Honor. It doesn't indicate that. I object to the form of the question.

# 351 THE COURT:

Overruled. Overruled.

# 352 DR. REICHARDT:

And your question was? Could you repeat it again?

# 353 MR. DARDEN:

Does the statement indicate that you told the police that you spoke to the Defendant for fifteen minutes?

# 354 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor, I object to the form of that question.

# 355 DR. REICHARDT:

No.

# 356 MR. COCHRAN:

It doesn't say anything about it.

# 357 THE COURT:

Overruled. Overruled.

# 358 MR. DARDEN:

I object to the speaking objection.

# 359 MR. DARDEN:

Did you read the complete statement, by the way?

# 360 DR. REICHARDT:

Was I ever--did I ever read--I never received the statement.

# 361 MR. DARDEN:

My question is did you read this complete statement just now?

# 362 DR. REICHARDT:

I glanced over it, yeah.

# 363 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. Do you feel like you are familiar with what is contained therein? I mean, do you have a grasp of it?

# 364 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah.

# 365 MR. DARDEN:

Okay. Seems accurate to you?

# 366 DR. REICHARDT:

In order to be accurate, I would have to read it more in detail. I was just trying to see whether somewhere it said I talked to him for fifteen minutes.

# 367 MR. DARDEN:

After the Defendant and Nicole Brown broke up, did the Defendant tell you that he was concerned that she was seeing someone else?

# 368 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah.

# 369 MR. COCHRAN:

Object, your Honor. This is beyond the scope.

# 370 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 371 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah.

# 372 MR. DARDEN:

And this was during that time period in which he was upset and depressed; is that correct?

# 373 MR. COCHRAN:

Objection. Object to the form. Misstates the evidence.

# 374 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 375 MR. DARDEN:

Is that correct?

# 376 DR. REICHARDT:

I don't--could you repeat the question?

# 377 MR. DARDEN:

This is during that same time period in which the Defendant was both upset and depressed at having broken up with Nicole?

# 378 DR. REICHARDT:

Yeah.

# 379 MR. DARDEN:

And this was during the end of may; is that correct?

# 380 DR. REICHARDT:

That's correct.

# 381 MR. DARDEN:

At about the same time that she returned the jewelry to him, correct?

# 382 DR. REICHARDT:

I don't know exactly when she returned the jewelry to him.

# 383 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

# 384 MR. DARDEN:

Do you know what the Defendant did with the bracelet after Nicole Brown gave it to him?

# 385 MR. COCHRAN:

Object. Calls for speculation, your Honor.

# 386 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 387 DR. REICHARDT:

I have no idea.

# 388 MR. DARDEN:

That is all I have, your Honor.

# 389 THE COURT:

Mr. Cochran.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (5)

Christopher Darden

Is it your opinion, Dr. Reichardt, that Nicole Brown deserved to have had her throat cut?

The most incendiary question of the proceeding, immediately sustained by Ito. At sidebar it was grounded in a report that Reichardt had told Candace Garvey that Nicole and her friends 'got what they deserved' — but the court found it too prejudicial to allow.

Lance A. Ito

Reichardt's response was, quote, 'they got what they deserved,' unquote. He stated he sounded very bitter. Reichardt also asked Garvey how she would feel being one of them, meaning one of the husbands or boyfriends. He said they were, quote, 'going out to 4:00 in the morning and acting the way they did. They were all mothers,' unquote.

Ito reads the full Candace Garvey report into the sidebar record, establishing the factual basis for Darden's question and revealing Reichardt's apparent bitterness toward Nicole and her social circle.

Christian Reichardt

Can one ever? How would I know?

Reichardt's philosophical deflection when asked whether OJ was acting or faking during the June 12th phone call — an inadvertent admission that he cannot actually verify OJ's emotional state.

Christian Reichardt

I don't recall right now, but as it is there in the paper, probably did.

Reichardt concedes, when shown his LAPD statement, that OJ likely asked him if he'd heard from Nicole during the June 12th call — a detail he initially denied and that suggests OJ was seeking information about Nicole's whereabouts that night.

Christopher Darden

So the project is no longer viable, that is, without the Defendant; is that correct?

Darden's capstone on the financial motive line — establishing that Reichardt's business relationship with OJ gave him reason to want OJ acquitted.

Evidence (3)

Informal

LAPD statement from Reichardt's June 23, 1994 interview — used to impeach his recollection of call duration and whether OJ asked about Nicole

shown to witness to refresh recollection; reveals 15-minute call duration was not in original statement

Informal

July 11, 1995 LAPD phone interview report of Candace Garvey regarding Reichardt's 'they got what they deserved' statement

read into the record at sidebar by Ito; sustained on 352 grounds before jury

Informal

Prototype exercise device ('port-a-gym' or 'the exerciser') manufactured in February 1994 for a planned Playboy video venture with OJ

discussed to establish financial relationship and motive to favor OJ

Notable Exchanges (4)

Christopher Darden•Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

Extended sidebar over the 'throat cut' question. Darden reveals the Candace Garvey report; Cochran calls it hearsay and 'preposterous'; Ito finds good faith basis but sustains on 352 grounds. Darden calls it 'very unfair' when Ito declines to admonish the jury.

heated

Christopher Darden•Christian Reichardt

Darden presses Reichardt on whether OJ could have been acting during the June 12th call. Reichardt's response — 'Can one ever? How would I know?' — backfires as an admission of uncertainty, then he tries to walk it back.

revealing

Christopher Darden•Christian Reichardt

Darden systematically dismantles the June 12th phone call: no phone records, no corroborating witnesses, Reichardt was alone, duration not in his original statement, and OJ — an actor — could have been performing.

strategic

Christopher Darden•Christian Reichardt

Darden exposes the port-a-gym business venture — 100,000 units planned for a Playboy video deal — and gets Reichardt to admit the project is dead without OJ's freedom, establishing financial bias.

strategic

Light Moments (2)

Lance A. Ito

Ito, trying to understand the context of the 'they deserved it' statement at sidebar, asks: 'Because they were out dancing all night all the time?'

Christian Reichardt

Reichardt's evasive loop on discussing the business: 'Possibly, yeah. We had possibly discussed possibly producing it. I don't know.' Darden then flatly: 'You possibly discussed something?'

Credibility Attacks (5)

⚔ Christian Reichardt

prior inconsistent statement

Darden shows Reichardt his June 23, 1994 LAPD statement to challenge his claim the call lasted fifteen minutes (not mentioned in statement) and his denial that OJ asked about Nicole (statement suggests he did).

⚔ Christian Reichardt

bias / financial interest

Darden establishes that Reichardt and OJ had an active business venture (exercise device for Playboy) worth potentially 100,000 units, and that the project collapsed after OJ's arrest — giving Reichardt financial motivation to testify favorably.

⚔ Christian Reichardt

prior inconsistent statement / impeachment by third party

Darden attempts to use Candace Garvey's report that Reichardt said Nicole and her friends 'got what they deserved' and that he sounded 'very bitter' — establishing animus or at minimum a troubling attitude toward the victim. Sustained before the jury on 352 grounds.

⚔ Christian Reichardt

lack of corroboration

Darden systematically establishes that the exculpatory June 12th phone call from OJ has no phone records, no witnesses, and a duration claim absent from Reichardt's original police statement — leaving it as uncorroborated testimony from a biased friend.

⚔ Christian Reichardt

prior inconsistent conduct

Darden probes whether Reichardt had an agreement not to speak to police or the D.A., contrasting this with his stated agreement only to avoid media — suggesting coordinated defense-side witness management.

Witness Demeanor

Witness nods affirmatively (noted by Ito on record)

Witness gives no audible response at one point (noted in transcript)

Witness repeatedly asks for questions to be repeated, suggesting discomfort or stalling

Objections

28 objections (9 sustained, 16 overruled)

Proceeding 7396 • 389 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103