Cross-examination of Detective Stevens (2 of 2)

📄 Cross-examination of Detective Stevens (2 of 2) — Thursday, February 2, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\2\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-DETECTIVE.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 11 of 167

◀ Cross-examination of Detective Stevens Witness excused (2) ▶

Witness: Mike Stevens
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Thursday, February 2, 1995 • Utterances: 13

Darden attempts twice on redirect to get Investigator Stevens to characterize OJ Simpson's letters as a 'confession' rather than an 'apology.' Both attempts fail — Judge Ito first rules the investigator can't interpret letters he merely seized, then sustains Cochran's objection that recharacterizing them as a confession is argumentative. Darden quits after two swings.

# 1

REDIRECT EXAMINATION

# 2

BY MR. DARDEN:

# 3 Q:

INVESTIGATOR STEVENS, YOU DESCRIBED THE THREE LETTERS THAT WE DISPLAYED AS AN APOLOGY?

# 4 A:

YES.

# 5 Q:

WAS THERE ANYTHING IN THOSE LETTERS THAT MENTIONED ANYTHING ABOUT A MUTUAL WRESTLING MATCH?

# 6 MR. COCHRAN:

I OBJECT, YOUR HONOR. THE LETTERS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. THE JURORS HAVE SEEN THE LETTERS. IMPROPER REDIRECT.

# 7 THE COURT:

CORRECT. ALL THE INVESTIGATOR DID WAS SEIZE THE LETTERS. HE IS NOT THE INTERPRETER.

KEY QUOTE

# 8 MR. DARDEN:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

# 9 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: COULDN'T THE LETTERS BE CHARACTERIZED MORE AS A CONFESSION AS OPPOSED TO AN APOLOGY?

KEY QUOTE

# 10 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT. THIS IS ARGUMENTATIVE AND COUNSEL KNOWS IT.

# 11 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED. COUNSEL, THE LETTERS HAVE BEEN EXHIBITED IN THEIR ENTIRETY TO THE JURY. THEY CAN CHARACTERIZE IT AS THEY WISH.

KEY QUOTE

# 12 MR. COCHRAN:

MOVE TO STRIKE COUNSEL'S REMARK.

# 13 MR. DARDEN:

NOTHING FURTHER, YOUR HONOR.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (3)

Lance A. Ito

CORRECT. ALL THE INVESTIGATOR DID WAS SEIZE THE LETTERS. HE IS NOT THE INTERPRETER.

Cuts off the first line of questioning cleanly — Stevens has no standing to characterize documents he only collected.

Lance A. Ito

COUNSEL, THE LETTERS HAVE BEEN EXHIBITED IN THEIR ENTIRETY TO THE JURY. THEY CAN CHARACTERIZE IT AS THEY WISH.

The judge signals that the jury — not counsel or witness — will decide what the letters mean, deflating Darden's strategy.

Christopher Darden

COULDN'T THE LETTERS BE CHARACTERIZED MORE AS A CONFESSION AS OPPOSED TO AN APOLOGY?

The prosecution's core goal made explicit — to rebrand the letters from remorse to admission. Immediately shut down.

Evidence (1)

Informal

Three letters written by OJ Simpson, previously described by the witness as apologies

discussed, subject of characterization dispute

Notable Exchanges (2)

Christopher Darden•Lance A. Ito

Darden attempts two separate framings of the letters as confession; Ito sustains both objections and ends the line of questioning by leaving interpretation to the jury.

strategic, then deflating

Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

Cochran objects both times and additionally moves to strike Darden's remark after the second ruling.

assertive

Objections

2 objections (2 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 4612 • 13 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103