YOUR HONOR, RIGHT NOW, WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, WE WOULD LIKE TO SHOW A VIDEO OF MR. O.J. SIMPSON AT THE PAUL REVERE SCHOOL JUST LEAVING THE RECITAL FOR PURPOSES OF IMPEACHMENT.
ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, GIVEN THE HOUR, I'M GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS AS FAR AS THE JURY IS CONCERNED. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU; DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO TALK TO YOU OR OTHERWISE CONTACT YOU. AND WE WILL SEE YOU BACK HERE AT 1:30. AND, MISS BROWN, YOU CAN STEP DOWN. PLEASE DON'T DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH ANYBODY ELSE. YOU ARE ORDERED TO BE BACK HERE AT 1:30, ALL RIGHT, AND YOU CAN STEP DOWN. WE'LL NEED TO CLEAR THE COURTROOM. I WANT TO SEE THIS TAPE BEFORE WE BREAK.
ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT THE JURY HAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE COURTROOM. MR. SHAPIRO, YOU HAVE A VIDEOTAPE THAT YOU WISH TO PLAY AS IMPEACHMENT OF THIS WITNESS?
YES, I DO, YOUR HONOR. IT DIRECTLY GOES TO HER CHARACTERIZATION OF FACIAL EXPRESSIONS AND THE DEMEANOR THAT SHE TESTIFIED TO REGARDING O.J. SIMPSON UPON LEAVING THE CONCERT.
YES, I THINK SO. THIS MAY BE A DIFFERENT TAPE. THIS IS DARDEN'S TAPE. IT MAY CHANGE.
WE HAVE ANOTHER PART, YOUR HONOR, THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SHOW. I MISSED PART OF IT. I DIDN'T SEE THE BEGINNING OF IT. YES, THAT IS OUR PRESENTATION, YOUR HONOR.
AS AN OFFER OF PROOF, I SHOULD INDICATE TO THE COURT THIS VIDEO WAS TAKEN BY MR. SCOTT KENNEDY, INVESTIGATOR, WHO SENT A COPY TO THE PROSECUTION BACK LAST JULY. WE NEVER GOT A COPY UNTIL LAST WEEK. YOU WILL SEE DENISE BROWN KISS MR. SIMPSON, SEE MR. SIMPSON KISS JUDITHA BROWN AND YOU'LL SEE AT THE END MR. BROWN LAUGHING AND TALKING WITH MR. LEWIS BROWN. AND THE OTHER GENTLEMAN IN THE KIND OF RED SWEATER, THAT'S RON FISCHMAN, WHICH HE'S SMILING AND TALKING TO HIM. A VEHICLE DROVE UP, CHEROKEE VEHICLE DROVE UP. THAT WAS WE UNDERSTAND MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S VEHICLE. AND ALSO, THAT'S JUSTIN WHO JUMPS IN HIS ARMS. SO THAT WAS TAKEN AFTER THE CONCERT.
YOUR HONOR, MY VIEW OF THE VIDEOTAPE IS THAT IT'S NOT IMPEACHING AT ALL. HE APPEARS RATHER TENSE IN MY VIEW AND HIS SMILE SEEMS FORCED. BUT ASIDE FOR THAT, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS WITNESS IS THE APPROPRIATE WITNESS TO TESTIFY WHILE THE VIDEOTAPE IS PLAYED. I THINK IT WILL PROVE RELEVANT. I DON'T NECESSARILY BELIEVE IT'S RELEVANT AT THIS POINT. I ALSO THINK THAT WHAT MISS BROWN MIGHT CONSIDER A QUIET DEMEANOR ON THE PART OF THE DEFENDANT IS RELATIVE AND -- BUT I'M NOT GOING TO, YOU KNOW -- I'M NOT GOING TO WAGE WAR OVER THE PLAYING OF THE TAPE. IF THE COURT'S INCLINED TO PLAY IT, PLAY IT. WE'RE ALL SEARCHING FOR THE TRUTH HERE, RIGHT?
WELL, THE COURT IS NOT THE ONE WHO IS GOING TO PLAY OR NOT PLAY IT. THE DEFENSE WANTS TO PLAY IT.
BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO AND MR. COCHRAN, MR. BAILEY. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK, MR. DARDEN, MR. GORDON. THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT. MR. SHAPIRO, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE A BETTER COPY OF THE VIDEOTAPE THAT YOU WANT THE COURT TO PREVIEW BEFORE IT IS USED?
IF THE COURT PLEASES, I THINK IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE CLEARER. IT IS HARD TO TELL BECAUSE THE EQUIPMENT WE HAVE SHOWN IT ON IS DIFFERENT THAN THE COURT'S EQUIPMENT, BUT WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, WE WOULD LIKE TO RUN IT QUICKLY TO GET THE COURT'S APPROVAL.
ALL RIGHT. AFTER WE HAVE RUN THAT, LET'S RUN THE FIRESTONE INTERVIEW THAT THE PROSECUTION WANTS TO RUN AND WE WILL HEAR MOTIONS ON THAT.
YOUR HONOR, EXCUSE ME. WE HAVE A WITNESS IN THE COURTROOM ON THE STAND. MAY SHE BE EXCUSED?
THIS HAPPENS TO BE OUR OWN COPY. WE THOUGHT IT WAS CLEARER. OBVIOUSLY IT IS THE SAME COPY.
ALL RIGHT. I DIDN'T NOTICE ANY REAL DIFFERENCE IN CLARITY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S SEE THE FIRESTONE TAPE. MY RECOLLECTION FROM OUR RECORD IS THAT THE PROSECUTION HAS WITHDRAWN THEIR OBJECTION.
YES, YOUR HONOR. PERHAPS WE SHOULD HAVE AN OFFER OF PROOF REGARDING THIS, BUT I CAN ANTICIPATE THEIR OFFER OF PROOF AND ADDRESS IT IN WHATEVER ORDER YOUR HONOR WANTS TO PROCEED. I HAVE A 352 RELEVANCE OBJECTION TO THIS. FIRST OF ALL, IN TALKING WITH THE INDIVIDUALS FROM THAT SHOW, THIS IS A TAPE APPARENTLY MADE IN APRIL OF 1989, WHICH DOESN'T SAY THAT. IT WAS APRIL OF '89, ABOUT MAYBE THREE MONTHS AFTER MR. SIMPSON HAD ENTERED A NO CONTEST PLEA. AND EVERYBODY KEEPS TALKING ABOUT THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH. WHY DON'T WE JUST SHOW THE CERTIFIED COPY TO THE JURORS, THAT MR. SIMPSON TOOK RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE JANUARY 1ST, 1989, INCIDENT, WENT THROUGH COUNSELING, PAID HIS DEBT TO SOCIETY AND WE HAVE NOW SPENT THE FIRST WEEK OF THIS TRIAL TALKING MUCH ABOUT THAT, AND I THINK AT SOME POINT IT BECOMES CLEARLY A 352 INCIDENT. NOW, IF THEY ARE TRYING TO SHOW THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF AN APRIL, 1989 SHOW, WHEN MR. SIMPSON IS A GUEST ON ROY FIRESTONE'S CLOSE-UP SHOW, HIS RESPONSE TO WHAT HE ALREADY HAD DONE, BY THIS TIME HE HAS ENTERED THE PLEA, HE IS ON PROBATION, JUDGE, AND THAT IS HARDLY THE SETTING WHICH ONE WOULD WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS SPOUSAL ABUSE SITUATION INVOLVING ONE'S WIFE. AND YOU SAW THE RESPONSE, SO I THINK THIS IS IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL. I THINK THE REAL FACTS OF THIS WOULD BE THE CERTIFIED PLEA, WHICH WE WILL BE GLAD TO GET FOR THE COURT AND PRESENT TO THE JURORS OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT CASE. THAT CASE WAS RESOLVED EXCEPT HE HAD TO SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE PROBATION, WHICH HE DID, AND SO I WOULD OBJECT TO THE SHOWING OF THE TAPE. I THINK THAT IT CERTAINLY IS 352. IT DOESN'T REALLY ADD ANYTHING OR HELP US, PARTICULARLY. IF THEY HAVE A SPECIFIC OFFER OF PROOF THAT CAN CHANGE OUR MIND, THEN THAT IS ONE THING, BUT THE RECORD -- THE WAY THE RECORD STANDS NOW, I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE THAT, YOUR HONOR.
WELL, YOUR HONOR, I DON'T THINK THE LAW REQUIRES US TO CHANGE MR. COCHRAN'S MIND BEFORE WE CAN ADMIT RELEVANT EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE. OBVIOUSLY MR. SIMPSON MINIMIZED HIS CONDUCT -- HIS CONDUCT ON JANUARY 1, 1989. HIS STATEMENT TO ROY FIRESTONE IN FACT IS MORE THAN JUST MINIMIZING THE INCIDENT; IT IS AN OUTRIGHT, WELL, UNTRUTH.
AS FOR MR. SIMPSON TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS ACTIONS, HE PLED NO CONTEST. HE NEVER SAID, "I'M GUILTY, I DID IT." HE PLED NO CONTEST. HE SAID I WON'T FIGHT THE CHARGES ANY MORE. HE NEVER ADMITTED IT. HE NEVER ADMITTED BEATING HIS WIFE IN PUBLIC, THOUGH HE DID ADMIT THAT IN THE LETTERS TO NICOLE, THE PRIVATE LETTERS TO NICOLE AND SO HIS STATEMENT TO ROY FIRESTONE IS A PRIOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENT AS WELL.
YEAH, SUBSEQUENT. IN ADDITION TO THAT, I THINK THE VIDEOTAPE BECOMES EVEN MORE RELEVANT GIVEN MR. SHAPIRO'S REQUEST THAT WE PLAY THE VIDEOTAPE OF THE RECITAL OR OF THE EVENTS AFTER THE RECITAL. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT VIDEOTAPE, THE ONE FROM THE RECITAL, AND COMPARE IT TO THE FIRESTONE VIDEO, MR. SIMPSON DOESN'T SEEM REAL HAPPY ON JUNE 12, 1994. AND I THINK THAT PERHAPS WE SHOULD ALLOW MISS BROWN TO LOOK AT BOTH VIDEOS AND COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE DEFENDANT'S DEMEANOR, AND OF COURSE WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE 1989 VIDEO WAS FILMED FIVE YEARS PRIOR, BUT I THINK THAT ONLY ENHANCES THE RELEVANCY OF THAT VIDEO.
YOUR HONOR, THAT IS ABSOLUTELY GRABBING AT STRAWS. THAT SHOW IS NOT 60 MINUTES. THAT WAS ROY FIRESTONE ESPN SPORTS AND NOW WE ARE TO BE TOLD TO LOOK AT IT TO CHARACTERIZE HIS HAPPINESS ON TWO OCCASIONS? THAT IS FOR THE JURY TO DETERMINE AND I THINK THE JURY WILL CLEARLY BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT. AS MR. DARDEN SAID IN HIS OPENING STATEMENT HE WAS IN A DARK AND UGLY MOOD. YOU SAW WHAT DARK AND UGLY MOOD HE WAS IN. I THINK THAT IS WHY THEY DON'T WANT THIS THING SHOWN, PARTICULARLY. THE OTHER THING, O.J. SIMPSON WAS SHOWN IN 1989, ABOUT THREE MONTHS AFTER HE ENTERED THE PLEA, AND NOBODY RAN AROUND WORRYING WHEN SPIRO AGNEW ENTERED A NO CONTEST ME. THE JUDGE TELLS YOU, AS YOU KNOW, YOUR HONOR, THAT A NO CONTEST PLEA IS TANTAMOUNT TO A GUILTY PLEA, SO HE ACCEPTS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT AND HE DID IT. SO I MEAN, ALL THE REST OF THIS IS FOLDEROL THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THIS TIME WHEN THE MAN HAS PAID HIS DEBT TO SOCIETY. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A MURDER CASE, AND IN FACT IT IS CHARACTER ASSASSINATION. AND ALL THESE OTHER ATTEMPTS TO BRING THESE INCIDENTS IN HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING AND WE SHOULD GET ON WITH THIS CASE, YOUR HONOR, AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE AND WE OBJECT.
AND I WANT TO AGAIN REITERATE THIS IS A SPORTS SHOW IN WHICH HE RESPONDS AND TALKS ABOUT IT. ANOTHER THING HE TALKS ABOUT, A CONSISTENT STATEMENT. HE IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT HE SAID TO THE DETECTIVES ON THAT NIGHT, THAT THEY HAD A WRESTLING MATCH AT SOME POINT. BUT HE ACCEPTED RESPONSIBILITY. HE WROTE THE LETTERS TO HIS WIFE. WHAT HE SAID TO HIS WIFE IS WHAT IS IMPORTANT; NOT WHAT HE SAID ON TELEVISION TO ROY FIRESTONE AND THE CHARACTERIZATION OF IT AND WHAT HE DID IN COURT WAS IMPORTANT BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE IT CAME AND THAT IS WHERE IT COUNTED, SO --
MR. COCHRAN, BEFORE YOU SURRENDER THE PODIUM THERE, LET ME ASK YOU ONE OTHER QUESTION, HOWEVER, AS TO THE FOUNDATIONAL ISSUES AS TO THE FIRESTONE TAPE. DO YOU LODGE ANY OBJECTION NOW THAT YOU'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH THE PRODUCER OR WHOEVER IT WAS, THE REPRESENTATIVE?
NO, I DON'T LODGE ANY OBJECTION BASED UPON FOUNDATION EXCEPT TO SAY THIS IS A SPORTS SHOW, YOUR HONOR, WHERE HE IS A GUEST ON THE SPORTS SHOW.
THE REST OF THE SHOW -- LET ME JUST SAY THIS TO YOU: THE SHOWS ARE 24 MINUTES AND THIRTY SECONDS. THEY HAVE TAKEN FOUR MINUTES OUT OF CONTEXT. AND YOU KNOW WHAT, JUDGE? IF THEY ARE SO INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH, WHY DON'T THEY SHOW THE ENTIRE TAPE WHEN O.J. SIMPSON, WHO IS THERE AS A SPORTS STAR, IS TALKING ABOUT SPORTS MATTERS AND THEN HE IS HIT WITH THIS QUESTION ABOUT THE THING WITH HIS WIFE. NOW, WOULDN'T THAT BE RELEVANT IF WE ARE GOING TO DO THE WHOLE THING? AND I HAVE NO FOUNDATIONAL ISSUE SPECIFICALLY, BUT EXCEPT IT IS TAKEN AGAIN OUT OF CONTEXT. IT IS A SPORTS SHOW. ROY FIRESTONE IS NOT MIKE WALLACE. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT, YOUR HONOR? THAT IS RHETORICAL. I THINK YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER IT, SO I THINK THAT MAKES THE POINT, SO WHY DON'T WE SHOW THE ENTIRE --
NO, I WON'T DO THAT TO YOUR HONOR, BUT I THINK CLEARLY THE COURT UNDERSTANDS MY POSITION IN THIS MATTER. IT IS FOUR MINUTES OUT OF 24 MINUTES AND THIRTY SECONDS.
WELL, WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASK YOU, MR. COCHRAN, IF AT SOME POINT IN TIME THIS TAPE BECOMES RELEVANT OR IT IS USABLE FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE, DO YOU HAVE ANY -- LODGE ANY OBJECTION TO ITS AUTHENTICITY?
NO, I WOULDN'T LODGE AN OBJECTION TO THE AUTHENTICITY, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE ENTIRE TAPE BECAUSE IT IS TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT. I DON'T KNOW -- MY ORIGINAL ARGUMENT WAS THAT SOMETIMES THESE PROGRAMS ARE TAPED, THEY ARE CUT, THAT SORT OF THING. I WAS TOLD IT IS ON REEL TIME AND I ACCEPT THAT, BUT I WAS TOLD ALSO THERE IS A LOT OF OTHER DISCUSSION. THE FACT THAT MR. DARDEN SEEKS TO JUST SHOW THIS PART, I THINK WE ARE ENTITLED TO SEE THE WHOLE THING.
IT HAS NOT BEEN OFFERED TO ME AND I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT. WITH REGARD TO OUR TAPE, YOU ARE SEEING THE WHOLE THING. WE ARE NOT CUTTING AND PASTING.
LET'S DO THIS THEN, COUNSEL: LET'S ALLOW THE DEFENSE TO SEE THE ENTIRE TAPE BEFORE THE COURT ISSUES ANY RULING REGARDING THIS EXCERPT.
MR. COCHRAN ALWAYS STANDS BEFORE THE COURT AND TELLS THE WHOLE WORLD HOW HE IS INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH, AND EVERY TIME HE IS CONFRONTED WITH IT HE RUNS AWAY FROM IT.
KEY QUOTEMR. COCHRAN IS AWARE THAT THERE IS NO OTHER DISCUSSION ON THAT VIDEOTAPE RELATING TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. I MEAN, THE JURY DOESN'T NEED TO HEAR HOW MANY YARDS MR. SIMPSON RAN FOR IN 1973. WE ALL KNOW THAT ALREADY. THERE IS NOTHING ELSE ON THE TAPE THAT IS RELEVANT. WE WOULD LIKE TO PUT THE TAPE ON, PERHAPS WITH MISS BROWN, AND MOVE ALONG WITH OUR CASE.
WELL, I THINK MISS BROWN CAN COMPARE AND CONTRAST THE DEFENDANT'S DEMEANOR BETWEEN THE JUNE 12TH INCIDENT AND THE 1989 INCIDENT.
ALL RIGHT. LET'S PROCEED WITH MISS BROWN AND I WILL ALLOW MR. COCHRAN THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THE FULL VIDEOTAPE.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED. ALL RIGHT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. MISS BROWN, WOULD YOU RESUME THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE.
DENISE BROWN, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE NOON RECESS, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
ROY FIRESTONE IS NOT MIKE WALLACE. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT, YOUR HONOR? THAT IS RHETORICAL.
YOU REALLY WANT TO GET ME IN TROUBLE.
MR. COCHRAN ALWAYS STANDS BEFORE THE COURT AND TELLS THE WHOLE WORLD HOW HE IS INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH, AND EVERY TIME HE IS CONFRONTED WITH IT HE RUNS AWAY FROM IT.
ISN'T THAT WHAT, ORANGES AND APRICOTS?
ALL THE REST OF THIS IS FOLDEROL THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THIS TIME WHEN THE MAN HAS PAID HIS DEBT TO SOCIETY.