Sidebar: Red Onion incident

📄 Sidebar: Red Onion incident — Friday, February 3, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\3\SIDEBAR-RED-ONION-INCIDENT.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 12 of 167

◀ Direct examination of Denise Brown (part 2) Direct examination of Denise Brown (part 3) ▶

Date: Friday, February 3, 1995 • Utterances: 11

During testimony about OJ and Nicole's early relationship, Shapiro objected to Darden's questions about an incident at the Red Onion (circa 1977). At sidebar, Judge Ito ruled the testimony fell outside his prior domestic violence ruling and sustained the objection. Shapiro then pressed for a public admonition of Darden, arguing this was the third witness where Darden had elicited improper testimony — Darden denied the prior incidents were litigated, and Ito cut off the argument with 'I've ruled.'

# 1 MR. SHAPIRO:

YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO OBJECT ON GROUNDS OF RELEVANCE.

# 2 THE COURT:

LET ME SEE COUNSEL AT THE SIDEBAR, PLEASE.

# 3 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

# 4 THE COURT:

WE ARE OVER AT SIDEBAR. MR. DARDEN, I THOUGHT WE WERE JUST GOING TO DO A FEW MORE FOUNDATIONAL THINGS, NOT INCIDENTS, AND MY RULING ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DOESN'T INCLUDE ANYTHING IN THIS ERA. WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?

# 5 MR. DARDEN:

I'M NOT ABOUT TO ALLEGE OR SOLICIT ANY TESTIMONY THAT THE DEFENDANT BEAT NICOLE IN 1977, YOUR HONOR. I'M JUST TRYING TO DEFINE AND EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THEIR RELATIONSHIP, HOW IT DEVELOPED OVER THE YEARS. I MEAN WHAT'S WRONG WITH THAT? I MEAN, WE'RE TRYING TO SHOW THEIR RELATIONSHIP OVER THE YEARS, THAT ISSUE. I'M NOT ABOUT TO SOLICIT ANY TESTIMONY REGARDING ANY PHYSICAL ABUSE OR ANY THREATS OF PHYSICAL ABUSE. I AM SIMPLY TRYING TO MAP OUT THE RELATIONSHIP, SORT OF DRAW A PICTURE FOR THE JURY OF THE DEFENDANT, HIS MOOD AND HIS ATTITUDE AND PERSONALITY. THESE ARE THINGS WE THINK ARE RELEVANT.

# 6 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THE PROBLEM IS, WE'VE ALREADY LITIGATED THE ISSUE OF WHAT INCIDENTS OF PAST CONDUCT THAT WERE GOING TO BE ALLOWED, AND THIS WAS NOT ONE OF THEM THAT WAS LITIGATED. AND AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN THE DEFENSE OBJECTION. I AM GOING TO ADMONISH THE JURY TO DISREGARD THE LAST ANSWER.

# 7 MR. SHAPIRO:

YOUR HONOR, THERE'S ALSO A MOTION TO STRIKE AND WE WOULD REQUEST AN ADMONITION.

# 8 THE COURT:

THAT'S WHAT I JUST SAID.

# 9 MR. SHAPIRO:

NO. ADDITIONAL -- I AM SORRY. I HEARD YOU. ADDITIONAL ADMONITION TO MR. DARDEN ON THE RECORD IN FRONT OF THE JURY SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS DONE TO THE DEFENSE; THAT MR. DARDEN NOW HAS GOT THE THIRD WITNESS ON WHERE HE EITHER IS FEIGNING THAT HE'S NEVER TALKED TO THESE PEOPLE AND HAS NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO SAY OR THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY DIRECTED THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE LIMITATIONS ON THEIR TESTIMONY AS THE COURT HAS ORDERED. AND I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR YOUR HONOR TO SAY TO THE JURY MR. DARDEN VIOLATED A COURT RULING WHEN WE HAD PREVIOUSLY LITIGATED THESE MATTERS THAT WERE OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY IN THE SAME WAY THAT YOU DID TO US.

# 10 MR. DARDEN:

IS THIS A MATTER THAT WAS LITIGATED BEFORE THE COURT? I DON'T THINK SO. AND IS THIS A MATTER THAT I WAS ORDERED NOT TO BRING UP IN FRONT OF THIS JURY OR PRESENT EVIDENCE ON? WRONG. YOU MUST BE THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE THEN, MR. SHAPIRO.

# 11 THE COURT:

I'VE RULED.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Lance A. Ito

MY RULING ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DOESN'T INCLUDE ANYTHING IN THIS ERA. WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?

Ito signals frustration that Darden is pushing boundaries he thought were already settled, framing this as a violation of prior rulings.

Robert Shapiro

MR. DARDEN NOW HAS GOT THE THIRD WITNESS ON WHERE HE EITHER IS FEIGNING THAT HE'S NEVER TALKED TO THESE PEOPLE AND HAS NO IDEA WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO SAY OR THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY DIRECTED THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE LIMITATIONS ON THEIR TESTIMONY.

Shapiro accuses Darden of a pattern of misconduct — either bad faith or failure to prep witnesses — and demands symmetric treatment to what defense received.

Christopher Darden

YOU MUST BE THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE THEN, MR. SHAPIRO.

Darden dismisses Shapiro's accusation with thinly veiled contempt, denying this testimony was ever covered by a prior court order.

Lance A. Ito

I'VE RULED.

Two-word shutdown ending the sidebar — Ito refuses to engage further with the sparring between counsel.

Notable Exchanges (2)

Robert Shapiro•Christopher Darden

Shapiro demanded a public admonition of Darden before the jury, arguing this was the third instance of Darden eliciting improper testimony from unprepared witnesses. Darden denied the prior incidents were subject to court order and told Shapiro he must be 'thinking about something else.'

heated

Lance A. Ito•Christopher Darden

Ito challenged Darden directly on why he was pursuing testimony outside the agreed scope of prior domestic violence incidents, questioning whether Darden was violating the court's prior rulings.

stern

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Christopher Darden

pattern of conduct / implied bad faith

Shapiro argued Darden had now done this with three witnesses — either pretending not to know what they'd say or failing to instruct them on testimony limits — and sought a formal on-the-record admonition mirroring what defense had received.

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 4670 • 11 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103