Cross-examination of Detective Tom Lange (afternoon, part 4)

📄 Cross-examination of Detective Tom Lange (afternoon, part 4) — Wednesday, February 22, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\22\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-DETECTIVE.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 23 of 167

◀ Cross-examination of Detective Tom Lange (afternoon, part 3) Chain of custody ▶

Witness: Det. Tom Lange
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Wednesday, February 22, 1995 • Utterances: 195

Johnnie Cochran cross-examines Detective Tom Lange about the early morning visit to Rockingham, focusing on why Lange never personally spoke with Kato Kaelin, inconsistencies in Arnelle Simpson's early statements about OJ being in Chicago, and the failure to give in-person notification to Nicole Brown's family. Cochran ends by establishing that Simpson voluntarily gave a statement at Parker Center, implying cooperation inconsistent with guilt.

# 1 Q:

NOW, WITH REGARD TO YOUR GOING TO THIS LOCATION, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US YOUR GOING OVER THERE, YOUR PURPOSE THEN WAS TO ESTABLISH THIS RAPPORT WITH MR. SIMPSON, RIGHT, AMONG OTHER PURPOSES?

# 2 A:

THAT'S ONE REASON, YES.

# 3 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND THE OTHER TWO DETECTIVES, FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS, WERE GOING TO GO OVER THERE TO -- FOR PHILLIPS TO GIVE NOTIFICATION; IS THAT CORRECT? ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

# 4 A:

WELL, IF MR. SIMPSON WERE AT HOME, MYSELF OR DETECTIVE VANNATTER WOULD HAVE PROBABLY ACTUALLY GIVEN THE NOTIFICATION.

# 5 Q:

WELL THEN, WHY THEN WOULD YOU NEED FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS TO GO OVER THERE?

# 6 A:

BECAUSE IT WAS MY INTENT TO LEAVE BOTH DETECTIVES WITH MR. SIMPSON WHILE WE RETURNED TO THE CRIME SCENE TO COMPLETE OUR INVESTIGATION.

# 7 Q:

AND WAS THAT TO ESTABLISH MORE RAPPORT WITH HIM AND KIND OF GET HIS COOPERATION? IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE GOING TO DO?

# 8 A:

AS FAR AS MY CONTACT?

# 9 Q:

YES.

# 10 A:

ONE OF THE REASONS WAS TO GET HIM TO MEET US TO ESTABLISH SOME RAPPORT AND TO GET SOME KIND OF INITIAL STATEMENT, YES.

# 11 Q:

AND WERE YOU GOING TO QUESTION HIM ABOUT THESE PREVIOUS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATIONS THAT FUHRMAN HAD TOLD PHILLIPS ABOUT WHO THEN TOLD YOU ABOUT IT?

# 12 A:

NO. CERTAINLY NOT AT THAT TIME.

# 13 Q:

YOU WEREN'T GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT?

# 14 A:

THAT WOULD BE THE LAST THING I WOULD HAVE BROUGHT UP AT THAT TIME.

KEY QUOTE

# 15 Q:

BUT WHAT YOU WERE GOING TO DO IS TRY TO ESTABLISH THIS RAPPORT AND LEAVE THESE DETECTIVES THERE TO TRY TO ASSIST MR. SIMPSON, RIGHT?

# 16 A:

THAT WAS IN THE BACK OF MY MIND, YES.

# 17 Q:

ALL RIGHT. SO YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT YOU WENT OVER THERE AND HOW YOU ULTIMATELY GAINED ENTRANCE. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU HAD FUHRMAN CLIMB OVER THAT WALL; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 18 A:

YES.

# 19 Q:

AND YOU WENT INSIDE AND YOU'VE DESCRIBED FOR US HOW YOU ULTIMATELY ENDED UP AT KATO KAELIN'S RESIDENCE, RIGHT?

# 20 A:

YES.

# 21 Q:

AND YESTERDAY, WHEN ASKED BY MISS CLARK, YOU INDICATED THAT KATO KAELIN DID NOT TELL YOU THAT MR. SIMPSON HAD LEFT FOR CHICAGO THE NIGHT BEFORE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? DID YOU SO INDICATE?

# 22 A:

I MAY HAVE. I DON'T -- I DON'T RECALL THAT BEING PUT TO HIM AS A QUESTION. I DON'T RECALL THAT BEING SAID.

# 23 Q:

DO YOU RECALL THAT ARNELLE SIMPSON SAID TO YOU AND VANNATTER THAT HER FATHER WAS IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS AFTER LEAVING THE L.A. AREA LATE THE NIGHT BEFORE? DO YOU RECALL THAT?

# 24 A:

SHE MAY HAVE AFTER. INITIALLY SHE DIDN'T SAY THAT THOUGH.

# 25 Q:

WELL, LET ME SHOW YOU THIS REPORT AGAIN THAT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT. I THINK YOU STILL HAVE YOUR COPY THERE. LET'S LOOK DOWN -- LOOK AT DEFENDANT'S 1021. LOOK AT THE NEXT TO LAST PARAGRAPH. AND I WANT TO ASK YOU IF YOU WROTE THIS AND IF ARNELLE SIMPSON SAID THIS TO YOU. "DETECTIVES WERE ALSO INFORMED BY MISS SIMPSON THAT HER FATHER WAS IN CHICAGO, ILLINOIS AFTER LEAVING THE L.A. AREA LATE THE NIGHT BEFORE. MISS SIMPSON FURTHER STATED SHE HAD RETURNED HOME AT APPROXIMATELY 0100 HOURS --" THAT'S 1:00 O'CLOCK, RIGHT?

# 26 A:

1:00 A.M.

# 27 Q:

"-- AFTER ATTENDING THE MOVIES IN WESTWOOD." DID SHE TELL YOU THAT?

# 28 A:

THAT STATEMENT WAS MADE SUBSEQUENT TO OTHER STATEMENTS BY MISS SIMPSON, YES.

# 29 Q:

BUT DID SHE TELL YOU THAT?

# 30 A:

SHE DID SUBSEQUENT, YES.

# 31 Q:

IS YOUR ANSWER YES?

# 32 A:

YES.

# 33 Q:

OKAY. NOW, WITH REGARD TO KATO KAELIN, YOU OR YOUR BROTHER OFFICER WROTE A REPORT OF WHAT KATO KAELIN SAID THAT VERY MORNING WHEN YOU ALL TALKED TO HIM; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 34 A:

I DON'T RECALL WRITING ANY REPORT.

# 35 Q:

YOU DON'T? WELL, LET ME APPROACH.

# 36 MR. COCHRAN:

AND, COUNSEL, I'M REFERRING NOW TO DEFENDANT'S 1024 FOR IDENTIFICATION.

# 37 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: I WANT TO PLACE BEFORE YOU A REPORT DATED 6-13-94, 6:00 O'CLOCK HOURS, I PRESUME IN THE MORNING. IT INVOLVES A KAELIN --

# 38 MS. CLARK:

YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. OBJECTION. I WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH.

# 39 MR. COCHRAN:

THIS IS ONE OF THE EXHIBITS ALREADY MARKED.

# 40 MS. CLARK:

IT'S NOT HIS REPORT.

# 41 MR. COCHRAN:

IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT IT'S NOT HIS REPORT. I WANT TO ASK ABOUT THIS REPORT.

# 42 THE COURT:

AT THIS POINT, THE OBJECTION IS PREMATURE. PROCEED.

# 43 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: THIS REPORT -- I WANT TO SHOW YOU THIS REPORT HERE. SEE KAELIN -- BRIAN GERARD KAELIN? SEE THAT?

# 44 A:

YES.

# 45 Q:

3-9-59, RIGHT?

# 46 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 47 MS. CLARK:

YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. COUNSEL DOESN'T NEED TO READ IT INTO THE RECORD.

# 48 THE COURT:

JUST ASK HIM THE QUESTION IF HE WAS PERSONALLY PRESENT WHEN THIS STATEMENT WAS TAKEN.

# 49 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: WITH REGARD TO THIS STATEMENT, I WANT YOU TO READ THIS STATEMENT TO YOURSELF. I WANT YOU TO READ IT IN TOTAL. THEN I WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION OR TWO ABOUT IT IF I MIGHT.

# 50 A:

OKAY.

# 51 Q:

YOU READ THAT REPORT OVER?

# 52 A:

YES.

# 53 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND YOU RECOGNIZE THIS AS A LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT OF SOME KIND?

# 54 A:

IT APPEARS TO BE A PARTIAL STATEMENT.

# 55 Q:

UH-HUH. AND DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE HANDWRITING ON THIS REPORT?

# 56 A:

I THINK IT PERHAPS IS DETECTIVE VANNATTER'S.

# 57 Q:

AND YOU WORKED WITH HIM A LONG TIME. DOES IT LOOK LIKE HIS HANDWRITING TO YOU?

# 58 A:

IT APPEARS TO BE DETECTIVE VANNATTER'S.

# 59 Q:

AND YOU WERE PRESENT, WERE YOU NOT, WHEN VANNATTER SPOKE WITH KATO KAELIN, ISN'T THAT RIGHT, AT LEAST PART OF THE TIME?

# 60 A:

NO.

# 61 Q:

YOU WERE NEVER PRESENT WHEN VANNATTER WAS TALKING TO KATO KAELIN?

# 62 A:

NO. VANNATTER WAS IN THE REAR AT THE BAR AREA WITH KAELIN AND I WAS WITH ARNELLE IN THE KITCHEN AREA.

# 63 Q:

WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS. DIDN'T KATO KAELIN TELL YOU --

# 64 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

# 65 MR. COCHRAN:

I'M ASKING HIM SPECIFICALLY THIS QUESTION. I CAN ASK HIM THIS.

# 66 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED. HEARSAY.

# 67 MR. COCHRAN:

WHAT KATO KAELIN TOLD HIM?

# 68 THE COURT:

YES.

# 69 MR. COCHRAN:

I THINK WE NEED TO -- WELL, WE'LL DO IT OVER THE LUNCH HOUR. LET ME ASK --

# 70 THE COURT:

BUT THEN IT WON'T BE A LUNCH HOUR.

# 71 MR. COCHRAN:

WELL, THAT'S OKAY, YOUR HONOR. HIS LUNCH HOUR IS RUINED ALREADY ANYWAY. SO WE'LL RUIN EVERYBODY'S EXCEPT THE JUROR'S.

# 72 THE COURT:

IT DOESN'T HAVE TO RUIN MINE.

# 73 MR. COCHRAN:

WELL, JUDGE, WE ALL HAVE TO SUFFER TOGETHER, YOUR HONOR, IN THIS WHOLE THING.

# 74 THE COURT:

MR. COCHRAN, WE'RE ABOUT SEVEN MINUTES, SIX MINUTES TILL. DO YOU WANT TO EXCUSE THE JURY AT THIS POINT AND ARGUE THE POINT?

# 75 MR. COCHRAN:

NO. I WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED A LITTLE BIT LONGER. THIS WON'T TAKE LONG, YOUR HONOR, THIS PART OF IT.

# 76 THE COURT:

THANK YOU.

# 77 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR.

# 78 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: WHAT I WANT TO ASK YOU IS, YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH KATO KAELIN, DIDN'T YOU, OR YOU WERE PRESENT DURING THE CONVERSATION?

# 79 A:

I DON'T BELIEVE I DID.

# 80 Q:

WERE YOU PRESENT DURING A CONVERSATION WITH KATO KAELIN?

# 81 A:

NO. I WAS OUTSIDE THE ROOM WHEN FUHRMAN WAS INSIDE AND I RECALL OVERHEARING SOME THINGS BEFORE PROCEEDING DOWN TO ARNELLE SIMPSON'S ROOM.

# 82 Q:

WELL, IF YOU WERE LOOKING FOR O.J. SIMPSON TO ESTABLISH THIS RAPPORT AND COOPERATION WITH HIM AND YOU WERE THE CO-LEAD INVESTIGATOR, WOULDN'T IT HAVE BEEN IMPORTANT TO TALK TO ARNELLE SIMPSON AND KATO KAELIN THERE TO FIND OUT WHEN THEY LAST SAW O.J. SIMPSON?

# 83 A:

BE IMPORTANT TO TALK TO ANYONE THERE.

# 84 Q:

ALL RIGHT. WELL, DON'T YOU THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO ASK KATO KAELIN, "WHEN IS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW O.J. SIMPSON"? DID YOU WANT TO ASK THAT QUESTION?

# 85 A:

INITIALLY, I WOULD PROBABLY SAY NO BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW WHO HE WAS AND I DIDN'T TALK TO HIM IN ANY EVENT.

# 86 Q:

I SEE. BUT YOU WEREN'T -- AS AN INVESTIGATING OFFICER, YOU WEREN'T INTERESTED IN ALL IN WHAT HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO TELL YOU ABOUT WHEN HE LAST SAW HIM?

# 87 A:

IT'S CERTAINLY NOT A MATTER OF ME NOT BEING INTERESTED. OF COURSE I WOULD BE INTERESTED.

# 88 Q:

BUT YOU NEVER ASKED HIM THAT QUESTION, DID YOU?

# 89 A:

I DIDN'T SPEAK WITH THE MAN.

KEY QUOTE

# 90 Q:

ALL RIGHT. BUT YOU READ VANNATTER'S STATEMENT THAT WAS TAKEN ABOUT 6:00 O'CLOCK THAT MORNING, RIGHT?

# 91 MS. CLARK:

WELL, OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

# 92 MR. COCHRAN:

I'M ASKING --

# 93 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED.

# 94 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: I'M ASKING, HAVE YOU READ VANNATTER'S STATEMENT?

# 95 MS. CLARK:

IT'S A PARTIAL STATEMENT. MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY. IT'S A PARTIAL STATEMENT.

# 96 THE COURT:

OVERRULED. THAT PART IS OVERRULED. I'VE SUSTAINED THE OBJECTION THOUGH.

# 97 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU READ VANNATTER'S STATEMENT?

# 98 A:

I AM -- I'M AWARE OF THAT PARTIAL STATEMENT AND I DID NOT READ IT THAT MORNING, NO.

# 99 Q:

ALL RIGHT. HE NEVER TOLD YOU ABOUT WHAT KATO HAD TOLD HIM?

# 100 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT.

# 101 THE COURT:

WELL, HE CAN SAY YES OR NO TO THAT.

# 102 MR. COCHRAN:

HE CAN SAY YES OR NO.

# 103 DET. TOM LANGE:

I DON'T BELIEVE HE GOT INTO ANY DETAIL AT ALL.

# 104 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. SO THEN YOU DIDN'T TALK TO KAELIN, BUT YOU THEN WENT DOWN AND TALKED TO ARNELLE SIMPSON, RIGHT?

# 105 A:

WITH PHILLIPS, THAT'S CORRECT.

# 106 Q:

AND AT SOME POINT, BECAUSE WE SAW IN YOUR OWN STATEMENT, SHE TOLD YOU HER DAD WAS IN CHICAGO; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

# 107 A:

YES.

# 108 Q:

NOW, WHEN YOU WERE SEARCHING AROUND THAT HOUSE AND GOING ALL THROUGH THE HOUSE, DID YOU EVER GO UPSTAIRS AND LOOK IN MR. SIMPSON'S BEDROOM FOR HIM IF YOU WERE SO INTERESTED IN FINDING HIM?

# 109 A:

NO. BECAUSE MR. --

# 110 Q:

WELL NOW, CAN YOU ANSWER THAT YES OR NO, PLEASE?

# 111 A:

I NEVER WENT UPSTAIRS.

# 112 Q:

SO WHEN YOU WERE TRYING TO FIND OUT WHETHER O.J. SIMPSON WAS ON THE PREMISES OR NOT, YOU NEVER WENT UPSTAIRS TO HIS BEDROOM OR LOOKED IN THE UPSTAIRS PART OF THAT HOUSE, RIGHT?

# 113 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 114 Q:

AND YOU DESCRIBED FOR US YESTERDAY HOW PURSUANT TO LAPD POLICY, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO GIVE WHERE AT ALL POSSIBLE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE DEATH TO THE NEXT OF KIN; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 115 A:

PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OR NOTIFICATION?

# 116 Q:

YES.

# 117 A:

PERSONAL NOTIFICATION, YES.

# 118 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND IN A SITUATION -- SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, IN A SITUATION WHERE YOU ARE DIVORCED FROM SOMEONE, WHO IS THE NEXT OF KIN?

# 119 A:

WELL, IT WOULDN'T BE THE PERSON YOU WERE DIVORCED FROM.

# 120 Q:

RIGHT.

# 121 A:

NEXT OF KIN COULD BE ANYONE.

# 122 Q:

COULD BE MAYBE THEIR PARENTS. WOULD THAT BE CORRECT?

# 123 A:

IT COULD BE ANYONE WHO IS NEXT OF KIN.

# 124 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND YOU ASCERTAINED AT SOME POINT -- IN FACT, YOU KNEW WHEN YOU WERE TALKING TO PHILLIPS THAT MR. SIMPSON WAS DIVORCED FROM MRS. NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, DIDN'T YOU? YOU KNEW THAT, DIDN'T YOU?

# 125 A:

I BELIEVE HE SAID EITHER DIVORCED OR SEPARATED. I DON'T BELIEVE A DISTINCTION WAS MADE AT THAT TIME.

# 126 Q:

AND DO YOU KNOW IF WHETHER OR NOT COMMANDER BUSHEY KNEW THAT WHEN HE INSISTED ON GIVING O.J. SIMPSON THIS PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE, PERSONAL NOTICE?

# 127 A:

I HAVE NO IDEA.

# 128 Q:

BUT WHEN YOU GOT ON THE PHONE AND YOU CALLED MR. LOUIS BROWN'S HOUSE, YOU DIDN'T GIVE ANY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE -- NOTICE AT THAT POINT, DID YOU?

# 129 A:

PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE?

# 130 Q:

PERSONAL NOTICE.

# 131 A:

AS TO WHAT?

# 132 Q:

THE DEATH OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON. THAT WASN'T PERSONAL NOTICE, WAS IT?

# 133 A:

THAT WAS NOT IN PERSON, THAT'S CORRECT.

# 134 Q:

YOU COULD HAVE CONTACTED THE ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT OR WHATEVER THE LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT WAS, HAD ONE OF THOSE OFFICERS GO OVER TO THAT HOUSE IN PERSON AND MAKE NOTIFICATION. COULDN'T YOU HAVE DONE THAT?

# 135 A:

I COULD HAVE. IT WAS A JUDGMENT CALL AND I DIDN'T.

KEY QUOTE

# 136 Q:

YOU DIDN'T DO THAT, RIGHT?

# 137 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 138 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND WITH REGARD TO THE CONVERSATION WITH MR. SIMPSON, THAT CONVERSATION WAS CONDUCTED OVER -- IN A PHONE CALL WITH PHILLIPS; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 139 A:

YES.

# 140 Q:

AND IT WAS DURING THAT CONVERSATION THAT YOU DECIDED TO TELL ARNELLE WHAT HAD TAKEN PLACE, RIGHT?

# 141 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 142 Q:

AND YOU DESCRIBED FOR US YESTERDAY THAT SHE BECAME VERY, VERY UPSET; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 143 A:

YES.

# 144 Q:

AND YOU SAID IT WAS A PERIOD OF EXCITEMENT FOR EVERYONE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 145 A:

EVERYONE?

# 146 Q:

IT WAS A TIME FOR EXCITEMENT FOR EVERYONE AROUND THE HOUSE. WEREN'T YOU SOMEWHAT EXCITED?

# 147 A:

I DON'T RECALL BEING EXCITED, NO.

# 148 Q:

ALL RIGHT. WHO WAS EXCITED?

# 149 A:

ARNELLE SIMPSON.

# 150 Q:

SHE'S THE ONLY ONE THAT WAS EXCITED?

# 151 A:

I DON'T RECALL ANYONE ELSE BEING EXCITED.

# 152 Q:

DID YOU SEE PHILLIPS' TESTIMONY WHERE HE SAID IT WAS A PERIOD OF EXCITEMENT? DID PHILLIPS SEEM EXCITED TO YOU ALSO?

# 153 A:

NO.

# 154 Q:

SO ONLY ARNELLE WAS EXCITED INSIDE THE HOUSE THERE?

# 155 A:

IN MY OPINION, YES.

# 156 Q:

AND DID YOU CALL THE BROWN FAMILY DIRECTLY AFTER THE CONVERSATION WAS MADE TO MR. SIMPSON?

# 157 A:

I DON'T RECALL THE TIMING. I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PHONE BILLS. IT WAS AROUND THAT TIME.

# 158 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND YOU CAN LOOK AT SOME PHONE BILLS FOR US MAYBE OVER THE LUNCH HOUR? NOW, AT SOME POINT YESTERDAY, YOU TOLD US THAT YOU LEFT THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION BECAUSE YOU HAD TO GO DOWNTOWN SOMEWHERE. REMEMBER THAT?

# 159 A:

NO. I BELIEVE IT WAS TO GO BACK TO THE BUNDY LOCATION.

# 160 Q:

YEAH. WELL, I KNOW YOU WENT TO BUNDY. BUT AT SOME POINT, YOU LEFT BUNDY --

# 161 A:

YES.

# 162 Q:

-- TO GO DOWNTOWN, RIGHT?

# 163 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 164 Q:

WERE YOU AWARE THAT MR. SIMPSON HAD RETURNED TO TOWN?

# 165 A:

YES.

# 166 Q:

AND YOU WENT DOWNTOWN TO SEE MR. SIMPSON, DIDN'T YOU?

# 167 A:

YES.

# 168 Q:

DOWN AT PARKER CENTER HERE IN LOS ANGELES, RIGHT?

# 169 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 170 Q:

AND YOU AND VANNATTER WENT DOWN TO TALK TO MR. SIMPSON; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

# 171 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 172 Q:

YOU FOUND HIM TO BE VERY, VERY COOPERATIVE, DIDN'T YOU?

# 173 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR BEYOND THE SCOPE.

# 174 MR. COCHRAN:

I CAN MAKE HIM MY OWN WITNESS.

# 175 MS. CLARK:

COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING.

# 176 MR. COCHRAN:

SPEAKING OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

# 177 THE COURT:

NO. THOSE ARE STATEMENTS OF LEGAL BASES. SUSTAINED AT THIS POINT.

# 178 MR. COCHRAN:

I CAN MAKE HIM MY OWN WITNESS, YOUR HONOR. I CAN ASK HIM MY OWN QUESTIONS.

# 179 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED AT THIS POINT. IT'S 12:00 NOON STRAIGHT UP.

# 180 MR. COCHRAN:

LET ME ASK ONE MORE QUESTION.

# 181 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU WENT DOWNTOWN. YOU SAW O.J. SIMPSON AT PARKER CENTER, RIGHT?

# 182 A:

YES.

# 183 Q:

AND YOU FOUND HIM TO BE COOPERATIVE WITH YOU AT THE TIME YOU SAW HIM AT PARKER CENTER?

# 184 MS. CLARK:

SAME OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. ALL BEYOND THE SCOPE.

# 185 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION.

# 186 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 187 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU TOOK A STATEMENT --

# 188 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

# 189 THE COURT:

YOU CAN JUST SAY HE TOOK A STATEMENT FROM HIM. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE GOING TO END.

# 190 MR. COCHRAN:

I'LL GO BACK TO THE OTHER QUESTION.

# 191 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU TOOK A STATEMENT FROM HIM, RIGHT?

# 192 A:

YES.

# 193 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THERE'S WHERE WE END.

# 194 MR. COCHRAN:

THAT'S A GOOD POINT. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

# 195 THE COURT:

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE NOON HOUR. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU; DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU, DON'T PERFORM ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE AT 1:30. ALL RIGHT. LET'S CLEAR THE COURTROOM. I NEED TO DISCUSS A FEW MATTERS WITH COUNSEL. DETECTIVE LANGE, YOU CAN STEP DOWN. YOU ARE ORDERED TO RETURN AT 1:30. ACTUALLY, YOU CAN STAY HERE AND GO THROUGH YOUR BOOKS.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Tom Lange

THAT WOULD BE THE LAST THING I WOULD HAVE BROUGHT UP AT THAT TIME.

Lange admits he was deliberately avoiding the domestic violence history when approaching Simpson, undermining the idea that the Rockingham visit was purely investigative.

Tom Lange

I DIDN'T SPEAK WITH THE MAN.

Lange concedes he never spoke with Kato Kaelin during the initial Rockingham visit, a key gap Cochran uses to suggest sloppy investigative procedure.

Tom Lange

I COULD HAVE. IT WAS A JUDGMENT CALL AND I DIDN'T.

Lange acknowledges he could have sent local officers to notify Nicole's family in person but chose not to, undermining the stated rationale for the extraordinary personal visit to Simpson.

Johnnie Cochran

HIS LUNCH HOUR IS RUINED ALREADY ANYWAY. SO WE'LL RUIN EVERYBODY'S EXCEPT THE JUROR'S.

Comic relief moment revealing Cochran's rapport with the court and his ease under pressure.

Evidence (2)

Defendant's 1021

Lange's own investigative report containing the paragraph where Arnelle Simpson states her father was in Chicago after leaving LA late the night before

Used to impeach Lange's initial hedging about whether Arnelle provided that information

Defendant's 1024

Partial handwritten statement of Kato Kaelin interview, appearing to be in Vannatter's handwriting, dated 6-13-94 at 0600 hours

Introduced to probe Lange's knowledge of what Kaelin told investigators; hearsay objection sustained before substance could be elicited

Notable Exchanges (3)

Johnnie Cochran•Tom Lange

Cochran methodically establishes that Lange never personally spoke with Kato Kaelin, didn't go upstairs to search for Simpson, and didn't personally notify Nicole's family — building a pattern of investigative inconsistency around the stated purpose of the Rockingham visit.

strategic

Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

Cochran negotiates extra time before the lunch recess, joking that everyone's lunch is already ruined, prompting Ito to quip 'It doesn't have to ruin mine.' Cochran responds 'We all have to suffer together.'

light

Johnnie Cochran•Marcia Clark•Lance A. Ito

Clark repeatedly objects that questions about Simpson's cooperativeness at Parker Center are beyond the scope of direct; Cochran invokes his right to call Lange as his own witness. Ito first sustains, then overrules, allowing Cochran to establish that Simpson gave a statement voluntarily.

heated

Light Moments (2)

Johnnie Cochran

Cochran jokes that Lange's lunch hour is already ruined so everyone else's might as well be ruined too, except the jurors'. Ito responds that his lunch hour doesn't have to be ruined.

Johnnie Cochran

After Ito finally calls the noon recess, Cochran says 'That's a good point. Thank you, your honor' — implying he was satisfied with where the examination ended.

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Tom Lange

prior inconsistent statement / omission

Cochran uses Defendant's 1021 — Lange's own report — to show that Arnelle told detectives OJ was in Chicago from the outset, contradicting Lange's initial hedging that she said it only 'subsequently.'

⚔ Tom Lange

investigative incompetence / selective procedure

Cochran establishes that despite leading the investigation, Lange never personally spoke to Kato Kaelin, never went upstairs to search for Simpson, and did not arrange in-person notification for Nicole's family — contrasting with the elaborate justification given for the Rockingham visit.

Objections

8 objections (3 sustained, 4 overruled)

Proceeding 4942 • 195 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103