Cross-examination of Cynthia Shahian

📄 Cross-examination of Cynthia Shahian — Monday, February 6, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\6\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-CYNTHIA-S.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 13 of 167

◀ Jury reading Redirect examination of Cynthia Shahian ▶

Witness: Cynthia Shahian
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Monday, February 6, 1995 • Utterances: 31

Cochran briefly cross-examined Cynthia Shahian about a letter displayed on the board, establishing that it was written 'on advice of legal counsel,' was copied to Simpson's long-time business lawyer Leroy B. Taft and CPA Marvin Goodfriend, and contained a passage indicating Simpson would not take any action misleading to the IRS or California Franchise Tax Board. The entire cross took only a few minutes and ended with Cochran having nothing further.

# 1

CROSS-EXAMINATION

# 2

BY MR. COCHRAN:

# 3 Q:

GOOD AFTERNOON, MISS SHAHIAN.

# 4 A:

AFTERNOON.

# 5 Q:

WITH REGARD TO THIS LETTER, THE LETTER THAT'S NOW ON THE BOARD, DID YOU READ THE LETTER THAT DAY OR HAVE YOU READ IT SINCE THAT TIME?

# 6 A:

I READ IT THAT MORNING, YES.

# 7 Q:

AND HAVE YOU READ IT SINCE THAT TIME ALSO?

# 8 A:

JUST HERE, YES.

# 9 Q:

YOU READ IT HERE?

# 10 A:

YES.

# 11 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND IT STARTS OFF THERE IN THE FIRST SENTENCE THERE, "ON ADVISE OF LEGAL COUNSEL --"

# 12 MR. DARDEN:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THE LETTER SPEAKS FOR ITSELF.

# 13 MR. COCHRAN:

I HAD A QUESTION I WAS ABOUT TO ASK ABOUT IF I CAN BE PERMITTED TO.

# 14 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 15 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

# 16 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: "ON ADVICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL," THEN IT GOES ON TO MAKE A STATEMENT. WERE YOU AWARE THAT LEROY B. TAFT, THE PERSON THAT IS CC'D ON THIS LETTER, ESQUIRE, WAS MR. SIMPSON'S BUSINESS LAWYER BACK IN JUNE OF 1994?

KEY QUOTE

# 17 A:

YES, I WAS.

# 18 Q:

AND YOU WERE AWARE HE HAD BEEN HIS BUSINESS LAWYER FOR SOME 20 PLUS YEARS BEFORE THAT TIME?

# 19 A:

YES, I KNEW THAT.

# 20 Q:

AND MISS SHAHIAN, WERE YOU ALSO AWARE THAT MARVIN GOODFRIEND WAS HIS CPA BACK AT THAT TIME AND HAD BEEN FOR SOME TIME BEFORE THAT DATE?

# 21 A:

NO, I DID NOT KNOW WHO HIS CPA WAS.

# 22 Q:

YOU DID NOT KNOW THAT?

# 23 A:

NO.

# 24 Q:

BOTH THOSE PERSONS, LEROY B. TAFT, ESQUIRE, AND MARVIN GOODFRIEND ARE AT THE BOTTOM AS HAVING BEEN CC'D?

# 25 A:

I DO REMEMBER.

# 26 Q:

IS THAT CORRECT?

# 27 A:

YES.

# 28 Q:

AND DO YOU RECALL THE THIRD PARAGRAPH WHEREIN THERE'S AN INDICATION THAT MR. SIMPSON CANNOT TAKE PART IN ANY COURSE OF ACTION THAT MIGHT INTENTIONALLY OR UNINTENTIONALLY BE MISLEADING TO THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE OR THE CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD? DO YOU RECALL READING THAT AT SOME POINT ON THAT DATE; YES OR NO?

KEY QUOTE

# 29 A:

YES.

# 30 Q:

THANK YOU.

# 31 MR. COCHRAN:

I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (2)

Johnnie Cochran

DO YOU RECALL THE THIRD PARAGRAPH WHEREIN THERE'S AN INDICATION THAT MR. SIMPSON CANNOT TAKE PART IN ANY COURSE OF ACTION THAT MIGHT INTENTIONALLY OR UNINTENTIONALLY BE MISLEADING TO THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE OR THE CALIFORNIA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD?

Cochran highlights the letter's explicit disavowal of any intent to deceive tax authorities, presumably to counter whatever the prosecution used the letter to establish on direct.

Johnnie Cochran

ON ADVICE OF LEGAL COUNSEL

Cochran opens by emphasizing this phrase from the letter, signaling that whatever the letter contains was done under attorney guidance — a key framing device.

Evidence (1)

Informal

A letter displayed on a board, written on advice of legal counsel, CC'd to Leroy B. Taft (Simpson's business lawyer of 20+ years) and Marvin Goodfriend (Simpson's CPA), containing a passage about not misleading the IRS or California Franchise Tax Board

discussed, specific passages highlighted

Notable Exchanges (1)

Christopher Darden•Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

Darden objected that 'the letter speaks for itself' as Cochran began reading from it; Cochran pushed back that he had a question to ask; Ito overruled.

procedural

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 4751 • 31 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103