Recross-examination of Ronald Phillips

📄 Recross-examination of Ronald Phillips — Friday, February 17, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\17\RECROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-RONALD-.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 21 of 167

◀ Redirect examination of Ronald Phillips (part 2) Redirect examination of Ronald Phillips (part 3) ▶

Witness: Det. Ronald Phillips
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Friday, February 17, 1995 • Utterances: 200

Cochran conducted a focused recross of Detective Phillips, targeting three main areas: the shoe photography process (no logs, no size verification, shoes worn continuously before photographing), the delayed coroner notification and what Phillips volunteered about OJ Simpson's connection to the victims, and the Chicago phone call in which Simpson was described as genuinely upset and voluntarily offered to return to LA. Cochran also briefly explored Phillips' and Fuhrman's shared moonlighting job and probed whether criminalist Andrea Mazzola was present at the scene.

# 1 THE COURT:

MR. COCHRAN.

# 2 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

# 3

RECROSS-EXAMINATION

# 4

BY MR. COCHRAN:

# 5 Q:

DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, WITH REGARD TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SHOES THAT WE SAW OF THE VARIOUS DETECTIVES, WERE YOUR SHOES ALSO PHOTOGRAPHED?

# 6 A:

NO.

# 7 Q:

AND WERE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN'S SHOES PHOTOGRAPHED?

# 8 A:

NO.

# 9 Q:

WERE PHILLIPS' OR VANNATTER'S SHOES PHOTOGRAPHED?

# 10 A:

NO.

# 11 Q:

AND I BELIEVE I ASKED YOU THIS, BUT WERE -- DID YOU HAVE THE SHOE SIZES OF ANY OF THESE OFFICERS AT ALL?

# 12 A:

NO, SIR.

# 13 Q:

AND THESE SHOES WERE PHOTOGRAPHED AT WEST L.A. STATION?

# 14 A:

YES. IT WAS DONE IN AN INTERVIEW ROOM IN WEST L.A. STATION AND MOST OF THEM WERE DONE WITH THE OFFICER WEARING THE SHOE AND JUST PUTTING HIS FOOT ONTO A TABLE.

# 15 Q:

DO YOU HAVE A LOG INDICATING WHAT DAYS THOSE SHOES WERE PHOTOGRAPHED ON?

# 16 A:

NO. AS I SAID, IT OCCURRED OVER SEVERAL DAYS, THREE OR FOUR DAYS, BECAUSE THE OFFICERS HAVE DAYS OFF AND THERE WAS SEVERAL OFFICERS TO DO. SO I JUST PUT A LIST DOWN IN THE WATCH COMMANDER'S OFFICE THAT, "WHEN YOU COME TO WORK, COME SEE DETECTIVE PHILLIPS."

# 17 Q:

IS IT TRUE MOST OFFICERS HAVE AT LEAST TWO PAIRS OF SHOES?

# 18 A:

I HAVE NO IDEA.

# 19 Q:

HOW MANY -- YOU DIDN'T WEAR UNIFORMS VERY MUCH BACK THEN, BUT WHEN YOU LAST WORE A UNIFORM, DID YOU HAVE MORE THAN TWO PAIRS OF DEPARTMENT-ISSUED SHOES?

# 20 A:

NO. I'VE ONLY HAD ONE PAIR OF UNIFORM SHOES AT A TIME.

# 21 Q:

ALL RIGHT. IF ONE OF THE OFFICERS TESTIFIED HERE, FOR INSTANCE, RISKE TESTIFIED HE HAD TWO PAIRS OF SHOES, DID THE MEMO GIVEN TO THE OFFICERS SAY, "TAKE A PICTURE OF THE SHOES YOU WERE WEARING ON JUNE 12TH OR JUNE 13TH?"

# 22 A:

I ASKED EVERY OFFICER THAT CAME UP IF THEY HAD THE SHOES ON THAT THEY WORE ON JUNE 12TH TO JUNE 13TH, AND I BELIEVE EVERY ONE OF THEM HAD THE SHOES ON.

# 23 Q:

BUT THESE OFFICERS HAD CONTINUED -- AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, HAD CONTINUED TO WEAR THESE SHOES FOR WHATEVER PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE THEY TOOK THE PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH WE SAW; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 24 A:

YES, SIR.

# 25 Q:

IN OTHER WORDS, THEY WEREN'T ALL TAKEN THE SAME DAY. SOME WERE TAKEN WITHIN A WEEK; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 26 A:

OVER A PERIOD OF THREE, FOUR DAYS, FIVE DAYS MAYBE EVEN.

# 27 Q:

NOW, YOU SAID THAT -- IN RESPONSE TO ONE OF MISS CLARK'S QUESTIONS, THAT IT'S UNUSUAL TO HAVE A DOUBLE HOMICIDE IN THE BRENTWOOD AREA; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 28 A:

I THINK IT IS, YES.

# 29 Q:

AND IN THE TIME YOU'VE BEEN OUT THERE WORKING IN HOMICIDE, YOU'VE HAD OBVIOUSLY A NUMBER OF HOMICIDES OUT IN THAT AREA ALSO; HAVE YOU NOT?

# 30 A:

YES.

# 31 Q:

AND YOU'VE HAD SOME DOUBLE HOMICIDES OUT THERE ALSO; HAVE YOU NOT?

# 32 A:

I DON'T RECALL -- WELL, WE'VE HAD MURDER SUICIDES WHERE ONE PERSON KILLS SOMEBODY AND THEN KILLS HIMSELF, AND THAT WOULD BE A MURDER SUICIDE, BUT THAT'S --

# 33 Q:

YOU'VE HAD CASES WHERE YOU HAVE TWO BODIES AND YOU HAD TO INVESTIGATE, MAKE A DETERMINATION, RIGHT?

# 34 A:

YEAH. MURDER SUICIDE.

# 35 Q:

THAT WOULD BE TWO BODIES, RIGHT?

# 36 A:

YES, SIR. THAT WOULD NOT BE A DOUBLE HOMICIDE.

# 37 Q:

IN THAT CONNECTION, WHEN YOU TALKED TO THE CORONER'S OFFICE, THERE'S NOTHING THAT PROHIBITED YOU FROM SAYING, "WE HAVE A DOUBLE HOMICIDE. I'M GOING TO CALL YOU BACK LATER. ALL I WANT TO DO IS GET SOME NUMBERS AND GIVE YOU THE FIRST CALL." YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO SAY, " THERE WAS A DOUBLE HOMICIDE IN BRENTWOOD AND INVOLVES O.J. SIMPSON," DID YOU?

# 38 A:

WELL, THEY ASKED ME WHAT I HAD. I TOLD THEM I HAD A DOUBLE HOMICIDE. I WOULD HAVE TOLD THEM -- IF I DIDN'T HAVE A DOUBLE HOMICIDE, I WOULD HAVE TOLD THEM I HAD A MURDER SUICIDE.

# 39 Q:

BUT THE POINT I WAS ASKING YOU THERE IS, THERE ARE NO REQUIREMENTS IN YOUR REGULATIONS TO SAY THAT YOU HAD A DOUBLE HOMICIDE INVOLVING O.J. SIMPSON'S EX-WIFE, WAS THERE?

# 40 A:

THERE IS NOTHING.

# 41 Q:

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU VOLUNTEERED; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 42 A:

YES, IT IS.

# 43 Q:

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME BY SAYING THAT TENDED TO EXACERBATE THE INTEREST IN THIS CASE, AT LEAST ON BEHALF OF MR. WILLIS, WHO YOU SHARED THIS INFORMATION WITH?

# 44 A:

WELL, IT WAS A TWO-EDGED SWORD. IT WOULD COME BACK TO HAUNT ME EITHER WAY.

KEY QUOTE

# 45 Q:

ALL RIGHT. BUT WE DON'T KNOW HOW IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IF YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TOLD HIM, DO WE?

# 46 A:

NO, I DON'T.

# 47 Q:

BECAUSE YOU TOLD HIM, DIDN'T YOU?

# 48 A:

YES, I DID.

# 49 Q:

ALL RIGHT. NOW, ON THIS JOB THAT THESE OFFICERS WORKED IN WEST LOS ANGELES -- I'M NOT GOING TO ASK YOU THE JOB -- BUT THIS WAS A MOONLIGHTING JOB A NUMBER OF OFFICERS WORKED ON IN WEST LOS ANGELES; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 50 A:

NO.

# 51 Q:

WELL, SOME OFFICERS WORKED ON.

# 52 A:

JUST MARK FUHRMAN AND MYSELF I BELIEVE WERE THE ONLY ONES FROM WEST LOS ANGELES THAT WORKED UP THERE.

# 53 Q:

WERE THERE OTHER OFFICERS THAT WORKED UP THERE ALSO?

# 54 A:

YES.

# 55 Q:

OTHER LAPD OFFICERS I BELIEVE?

# 56 A:

I BELIEVE THEY'RE LAPD, I BELIEVE THEY'RE LASO, I BELIEVE THERE'S SOME RETIRED FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS ALSO.

# 57 Q:

HOW DID YOU FIND OUT ABOUT THAT JOB?

# 58 A:

THROUGH A MUTUAL FRIEND.

# 59 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND THEN YOU WENT -- DID YOU GO FIRST OR DID DETECTIVE FUHRMAN GO FIRST?

# 60 A:

I BELIEVE -- I BELIEVE THAT THE INDIVIDUAL WHO GOT US THE JOB TOOK OVER A SITUATION THAT ALREADY EXISTED, AND IT WAS SEVERAL OF US ALL HIRED AT THE SAME TIME, MAYBE 10 OR 15 OF US ALL HIRED AT THE SAME TIME THE SAME NIGHT AS FAR AS GOING TO AN ORIENTATION, AND THEN WE STARTED OUR SHIFTS. SO I THINK WE ALL STARTED AT THE SAME TIME, AND I'M NOT POSITIVE MARK FUHRMAN WAS IN THAT INITIAL GROUP, BUT HE PROBABLY COULD HAVE BEEN.

# 61 Q:

IF HE WAS NOT IN THE INITIAL GROUP, DID YOU TELL HIM ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR POSITION?

# 62 A:

NO. HE ALSO KNOWS THE SAME INDIVIDUAL.

# 63 Q:

ALL RIGHT. SO YOU BOTH KNEW ABOUT IT AND YOU BOTH STARTED WORKING ON THIS JOB AND YOU WORKED FOR APPROXIMATELY A YEAR ON THAT JOB AT LEAST, RIGHT?

# 64 A:

YES.

# 65 Q:

ALL RIGHT. NOW, IT'S TRUE, IS IT NOT, SIR, THAT PURSUANT TO THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT HOMICIDE MANUAL, EVIDENCE SHOULD BE BOOKED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD EVIDENCE BE RETAINED BY A PARTICULAR DETECTIVE IN THE COURSE OF THAT INVESTIGATION? ISN'T THAT TRUE?

# 66 A:

WELL, I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT. EACH DETECTIVE HANDLES HIS OWN CASES HIS OWN WAY.

# 67 Q:

WELL, YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO -- AND AS AN EXPERIENCED LAPD DETECTIVE, YOU WOULDN'T CARRY EVIDENCE HOME, WOULD YOU, THAT YOU PICKED UP AT A SCENE?

# 68 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION.

# 69 THE COURT:

EXCEEDS THE SCOPE. EXCEEDS THE SCOPE OF REDIRECT.

# 70 MR. COCHRAN:

I WOULD ASK THE COURT TO ALLOW ME THAT ONE QUESTION. CAN I ASK THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR? COUNSEL OPENED IT WITH REGARDS TO THE SHOES.

# 71 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. BEYOND THE SCOPE.

# 72 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED.

# 73 MR. COCHRAN:

ALL RIGHT.

# 74 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, WITH REGARD TO -- YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT SPECIAL ORDER NUMBER 21. AND AGAIN, YOU'VE NEVER HAD OCCASION TO SPEAK WITH CHIEF WILLIE WILLIAMS ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR ORDER, HAVE YOU?

# 75 A:

NO, I HAVE NOT.

# 76 Q:

AND THE BACKGROUND OR HIS REASON FOR ISSUING IT, HAVE YOU?

# 77 A:

NO, I HAVE NOT.

# 78 Q:

AND IN THAT ORDER IN SEVERAL PLACES, IT TALKS ABOUT THE CORONER BEING IMMEDIATELY NOTIFIED; DOES IT NOT?

# 79 A:

YES.

# 80 Q:

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT FOR A CORONER TO ARRIVE AT A SCENE NINE HOURS AFTER THE DISCOVERY OF BODIES, THAT THAT IS NOT IMMEDIATE UNDER ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION?

# 81 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. THAT'S ARGUMENTATIVE, YOUR HONOR.

# 82 THE COURT:

OVERRULED. HE CAN ANSWER.

# 83 DET. RONALD PHILLIPS:

IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT LED UP TO THAT, SIR. EACH HOMICIDE CASE HAS ITS OWN SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH DICTATE TIME, DICTATE WHAT WE DO AND HOW THINGS ARE DONE. EACH CASE IS A STORY OF ITS OWN.

# 84 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

# 85 A:

THEY'RE NOT ALL THE SAME.

# 86 Q:

I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT DO YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT NINE HOURS IS NOT IMMEDIATE? WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

# 87 A:

NINE HOURS IS NOT IMMEDIATE AS FAR AS TAKING THE BODIES AWAY FROM A CRIME SCENE, NO.

KEY QUOTE

# 88 Q:

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU HAVE NO RECOLLECTION AT ALL OF WHETHER OR NOT THE ICE CREAM IN THIS CUP YOU SAW ON THAT BANISTER WAS VANILLA OR STRAWBERRY OR CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIE DOUGH, DO YOU?

# 89 A:

I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT ICE CREAM WAS, SIR.

# 90 Q:

AND YOU NEVER SAW A PICTURE OF IT, HAVE YOU?

# 91 A:

NO, SIR.

# 92 Q:

NOW, WITH REGARD TO -- JUST A QUESTION OR TWO REGARDING DEFENDANT'S 1027. IN DEFENDANT'S 1027, YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO SEE IN DEFENDANT'S 1027 WHERE THAT YELLOW TAPE IS, CAN YOU?

# 93 A:

NO, SIR.

# 94 Q:

AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WERE YOU ABLE TO IDENTIFY THIS PERSON DEPICTED -- AND, DETECTIVE, YOU CAN STEP DOWN IF YOU CAN -- IDENTIFY THAT LADY? THERE APPEARS TO A LADY THERE IN THE FOREGROUND IN THE WHITE BLOUSE OR SHIRT ON.

# 95 A:

I DO NOT KNOW WHO THAT PERSON IS.

# 96 Q:

DO YOU KNOW THE NAME OF AN LAPD TRAINEE CRIMINALIST BY THE NAME OF MAZZOLA, M-A-Z-Z-O-L-A?

# 97 A:

I DON'T BELIEVE I EVER MET THAT PERSON, SIR.

# 98 Q:

DID YOU SEE A FEMALE BY THE NAME OF MAZZOLA AT THAT SCENE THAT MORNING WITH FUNG?

# 99 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. HE JUST SAID HE NEVER HEARD OF THAT PERSON.

# 100 MR. COCHRAN:

I AM ASKING IF HE SAW A FEMALE.

# 101 THE COURT:

YOU SAID BY THE NAME OF MAZZOLA.

# 102 MR. COCHRAN:

STRIKE THE NAME OF MAZZOLA.

# 103 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU SEE A FEMALE ACCOMPANYING FUNG AT THE SCENE THAT MORNING EITHER AT ROCKINGHAM OR AT BUNDY?

# 104 A:

NO.

# 105 Q:

NOW, LESS WE GIVE CORONERS A BAD NAME, THE CORONER'S OFFICE IS NOT JUST A BODY REMOVAL SERVICE FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, ARE THEY?

# 106 A:

NO, THEY'RE NOT.

# 107 Q:

IN FACT, THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CORONER HAS AN INDEPENDENT OBLIGATION TO CONDUCT THEIR OWN INVESTIGATION REGARDING THE TIME OF DEATH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 108 A:

YES, SIR.

# 109 Q:

AND WE ARE DEALING WITH SPECIALLY-TRAINED INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE AN EXPERTISE IN SEEKING TO DETERMINE THE TIME OF DEATH WITH REGARD TO BODIES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 110 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. BEYOND THE SCOPE.

# 111 MR. COCHRAN:

SHE OPENED IT, YOUR HONOR.

# 112 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 113 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: IS THAT CORRECT?

# 114 A:

YES.

# 115 Q:

AND THE CORONER'S OFFICE -- IN YOUR 28 YEARS, YOU KNOW THAT THE CORONER'S OFFICE CAN ASSIST IN DETERMINING THE TIME OF DEATH AND GENERALLY THE CORONERS DO COME TO COURT AND TESTIFY; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 116 A:

YES.

# 117 Q:

THEY ALSO ASSIST IN DETERMINING THE CAUSE OF DEATH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 118 A:

YES.

# 119 Q:

THEY ALSO ASSIST IN DETERMINING THE TYPE OF WEAPONS, A NUMBER OF WEAPONS USED IN A PARTICULAR INCIDENT; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 120 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. WAY BEYOND THE SCOPE.

# 121 MR. COCHRAN:

JUST A FEW MORE QUESTIONS.

# 122 THE COURT:

I'M GOING TO ALLOW A LITTLE LEEWAY HERE.

# 123 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

# 124 DET. RONALD PHILLIPS:

YES.

# 125 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: AND IN THE COURSE OF THEIR INVESTIGATION, THEY CAN ALSO ASSIST IN THE IDENTITY OF PERPETRATORS ON OCCASION; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 126 A:

THEY CAN HELP TO ASSIST IN THAT, YES.

# 127 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND IN ADDITION TO THE CORONER'S OFFICE, THE CRIMINALIST ALSO PLAYS A VITAL ROLE IN RETRIEVING EVIDENCE QUICKLY BEFORE IT STARTS TO BREAK DOWN OR DEGRADE OR BECOME IN ANY WAY AFFECTED BY THE ELEMENTS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 128 A:

I'M NOT A CRIMINALIST, SIR.

# 129 Q:

BUT YOU'VE USED CRIMINALISTS THROUGHOUT YOUR CAREER; HAVE YOU NOT?

# 130 A:

YES.

# 131 Q:

AND YOU KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT TO GET THE CRIMINALIST OUT THERE EARLY TO COLLECT THE EVIDENCE; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

# 132 A:

GET THE CRIMINALIST OUT THERE TO COLLECT THE EVIDENCE. THAT'S THE REASON WE BRING THEM OUT, YES.

# 133 Q:

AND THAT'S WHAT PRESUMABLY FUNG IS DOING THERE IN DEFENDANT'S 1027; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 134 A:

I WOULD ASSUME THAT'S WHAT HE'S DOING.

# 135 Q:

AND WITH REGARD TO 1027 AND THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS -- YOU'RE NOT AN EXPERT IN PHOTOGRAPHS, ARE YOU?

# 136 A:

NO, SIR.

# 137 Q:

AND WHEN YOU WERE BEING ASKED ALL THOSE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHERE PEOPLE WERE STANDING, YOU WERE JUST GIVING US YOUR BEST ESTIMATE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 138 A:

YES.

# 139 Q:

FINAL ANALYSIS, THAT PICTURE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF?

# 140 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. ARGUMENTATIVE.

# 141 MR. COCHRAN:

SHE'S PROBABLY CORRECT, YOUR HONOR. I'LL WITHDRAW IT.

# 142 THE COURT:

THANK YOU.

# 143 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: BUT OUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS YOURS REGARDING THAT PHOTOGRAPH WHERE PEOPLE WERE STANDING --

# 144 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION.

# 145 THE COURT:

ARGUMENTATIVE AS WELL.

# 146 MR. COCHRAN:

ALL RIGHT, YOUR HONOR.

# 147 THE COURT:

MAYBE WE'LL HAVE ONE OF OUR EXPERTS FROM THE BACK ROW TELL US WHAT THAT IS.

KEY QUOTE

# 148 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU GENERALLY WANT THE CRIMINALIST ON THE SCENE QUICKLY TO ENSURE THAT NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN MOVED; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 149 A:

YOU WANT THE CRIMINALIST ON THE SCENE AS SOON AS YOU'RE READY FOR THEM TO CONDUCT WHATEVER THE JOB IS YOU ARE ASKING THEM TO DO.

# 150 Q:

AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, RIGHT?

# 151 A:

AS SOON AS YOU WANT THEM OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

# 152 Q:

IN THIS CASE, THE CRIMINALIST CAME AFTER THE CORONERS CAME, RIGHT?

# 153 A:

AS I PREVIOUSLY STATED HERE, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE CRIMINALISTS CAME.

# 154 THE COURT:

WE'RE BEYOND THE SCOPE.

# 155 MR. COCHRAN:

YOU MAY BE RIGHT, YOUR HONOR, IN THAT REGARD.

# 156 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, LASTLY, WITH REGARD TO THE PHONE CONVERSATION TO MR. SIMPSON IN CHICAGO, THAT WAS THE REASON WHY YOU WENT OVER TO HIS HOUSE; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 157 A:

YES.

# 158 Q:

THIS WAS A PHONE CONVERSATION OF NO MORE THAN ONE MINUTE; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 159 A:

I DIDN'T GO THERE TO MAKE A PHONE CONVERSATION. I WENT THERE TO MAKE A NOTIFICATION, YES.

# 160 Q:

TO HIM, RIGHT?

# 161 A:

YES.

# 162 Q:

AND IN THE COURSE OF THIS, YOU'VE DESCRIBED FOR US THAT MR. SIMPSON SAID TO YOU, "WHAT DO YOU MEAN SHE WAS KILLED." DO YOU RECALL THAT?

# 163 A:

YES.

# 164 Q:

AND IN THE COURSE OF THAT, YOU'VE DESCRIBED FOR US THAT MR. SIMPSON WAS VERY UPSET; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 165 A:

YES.

# 166 Q:

SO YOU HAD TO TRY AS BEST YOU COULD TO TRY AND CALM HIM DOWN AND GET HIM BACK TO WHERE HE WAS WHERE HE COULD BE COHERENT ON THE PHONE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 167 A:

SO WE COULD CONTINUE A CONVERSATION, YES.

# 168 Q:

BECAUSE YOU WERE TRYING TO GIVE HIM INFORMATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 169 A:

YES.

# 170 Q:

AND YOU'RE NOT SURE AS YOU SIT HERE NOW AT WHAT POINT YOU ACTUALLY MENTIONED THE KIDS OR HIS CHILDREN; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 171 A:

WHEN WE GOT HIM BACK ON -- WHEN I GOT HIM BACK ON TRACK AND TOLD HIM THAT I NEEDED TO TALK TO HIM AND TO CALM DOWN, THAT'S WHEN I TOLD HIM, I SAID, "WE HAVE YOUR KIDS AT THE POLICE STATION."

# 172 Q:

AFTER YOU GOT HIM TO CALM DOWN SO YOU COULD MAKE YOUR STATEMENT, HE THEN SAID, "WHAT ABOUT MY KIDS? WHY ARE THEY AT A POLICE STATION;" ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 173 A:

THAT IS CORRECT.

# 174 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. ASKED AND ANSWERED.

# 175 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 176 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: HE RESPONDED TO WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE CHILDREN; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 177 A:

HE ASKED ME WHY WE HAD HIS CHILDREN AT THE POLICE STATION.

# 178 Q:

AND IT WAS SHORTLY AFTER THAT, WAS IT NOT, THAT HE THEN ASKED TO SPEAK TO HIS DAUGHTER AND ARRANGEMENTS WERE MADE TO PICK UP THOSE CHILDREN; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 179 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 180 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. ASKED AND ANSWERED.

# 181 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 182 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: AND YOU NEVER ASKED HIM TO COME BACK TO LOS ANGELES. HE VOLUNTEERED TO COME BACK ON HIS OWN?

# 183 A:

HE TOLD ME HE WAS COMING BACK ON HIS OWN, YES.

KEY QUOTE

# 184 Q:

AND YOU DESCRIBED FOR US I THINK GRAPHICALLY THIS WAS A SHORT CONVERSATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 185 A:

YES.

# 186 Q:

AND EVERYBODY WAS VERY EXCITED; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 187 A:

WELL, YEAH, I THINK SO.

# 188 Q:

AND YOU WERE EXCITED?

# 189 A:

I THINK SO.

# 190 Q:

MR. SIMPSON WAS EXCITED?

# 191 A:

I THINK SO.

# 192 Q:

ARNELLE WAS EXCITED?

# 193 A:

YES.

# 194 MS. CLARK:

WELL, OBJECTION. MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE. ARNELLE WAS NOT PART OF THE CONVERSATION.

# 195 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 196 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: ARNELLE WAS EXCITED?

# 197 A:

WELL, I COULD TELL SHE WAS UPSET OR EXCITED WHEN SHE WAS TALKING TO DEPUTY LANGE.

# 198 Q:

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU WILL NOT BE UPSET IF I DON'T ASK YOU ANY MORE QUESTIONS?

# 199 A:

NO, SIR.

# 200 MR. COCHRAN:

OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU. I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Ronald Phillips

WELL, IT WAS A TWO-EDGED SWORD. IT WOULD COME BACK TO HAUNT ME EITHER WAY.

Phillips admits he volunteered OJ Simpson's name to the coroner's office dispatcher — an acknowledgment that he knew it would generate heightened attention regardless of outcome.

Ronald Phillips

NINE HOURS IS NOT IMMEDIATE AS FAR AS TAKING THE BODIES AWAY FROM A CRIME SCENE, NO.

Phillips concedes that the coroner's nine-hour delay contradicts the 'immediate notification' language of Special Order 21, undercutting the prosecution's claim that procedures were followed.

Ronald Phillips

HE TOLD ME HE WAS COMING BACK ON HIS OWN, YES.

Cochran elicits that Simpson was never asked to return — he volunteered, supporting the defense narrative of a non-guilty, cooperative client.

Lance A. Ito

MAYBE WE'LL HAVE ONE OF OUR EXPERTS FROM THE BACK ROW TELL US WHAT THAT IS.

A rare moment of judicial levity, poking fun at the parade of experts in the courtroom after Cochran's argumentative photograph questions were struck.

Evidence (3)

Defendant's 1027

Photograph showing criminalist Dennis Fung at the crime scene, with an unidentified woman in the foreground (later suggested to be trainee Andrea Mazzola)

discussed, challenged on ability to identify persons and their locations

Informal

Shoe photographs taken of various detectives at West LA Station over several days, showing shoes worn on June 12-13

discussed — Cochran challenged the lack of a log, no size verification, and continuous wear before photographing

Informal

LAPD Special Order No. 21 (Chief Willie Williams), requiring immediate coroner notification

discussed — Cochran used it to pin Phillips on the nine-hour coroner delay

Notable Exchanges (4)

Johnnie Cochran•Ronald Phillips

Cochran methodically established that Phillips voluntarily disclosed OJ Simpson's connection to the victims when calling the coroner — not required by any regulation — and that this 'exacerbated interest' in the case.

strategic

Johnnie Cochran•Ronald Phillips

Cochran established that Phillips and Fuhrman shared a moonlighting security job in West LA through a mutual friend, suggesting a closer personal connection between the two detectives than previously implied.

revealing

Johnnie Cochran•Ronald Phillips

Cochran walked Phillips through the Chicago phone call beat by beat, establishing Simpson's emotional distress, that Simpson asked about his children unprompted after being calmed, and that Simpson volunteered to return to LA without being asked.

strategic

Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

After two argumentative photograph questions were struck, Cochran graciously withdrew and Ito made a joking remark about the courtroom experts. Cochran moved on without complaint.

light

Light Moments (2)

Lance A. Ito

After sustained objections to Cochran's argumentative questions about a photograph, Judge Ito quipped: 'Maybe we'll have one of our experts from the back row tell us what that is.'

Johnnie Cochran

Cochran ended the examination by asking Phillips: 'You will not be upset if I don't ask you any more questions?' Phillips replied: 'No, sir.'

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Ronald Phillips

omission / lack of documentation

Cochran established that the shoe photography process had no log of dates, no verification of shoe sizes, and that officers continued wearing the shoes for days before photographing — undermining the evidentiary value of the photos.

⚔ Ronald Phillips

voluntary disclosure inconsistent with professional neutrality

Cochran got Phillips to admit he volunteered OJ Simpson's name to the coroner dispatcher without any regulatory requirement to do so, implying Phillips prejudged or sensationalized the case early.

⚔ LAPD investigation generally

policy noncompliance

Phillips conceded that a nine-hour coroner delay is not 'immediate' under any definition, contradicting Special Order 21's plain language.

Objections

11 objections (2 sustained, 5 overruled)

Proceeding 4890 • 200 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103