Evidence and discovery discussion

📄 Evidence and discovery discussion — Tuesday, February 7, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\7\EVIDENCE-AND-DISCOVERY-DISCUSS.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 14 of 167

◀ Afternoon recess Witness preparation ▶

Date: Tuesday, February 7, 1995 • Utterances: 91

Before the jury returned from recess, the prosecution moved to introduce two pieces of evidence: the blood-soaked envelope containing Ron Goldman's eyeglasses (People's 32), which the defense objected to as unduly prejudicial under Evidence Code 352, and a Mezzaluna restaurant bill and Nicole Brown's signed American Express receipt (People's 33) that had unexpectedly arrived that afternoon. The court ordered a 15-minute recess to allow both sides to examine the surprise documents and contact the custodian of records by phone before the next witness testified.

# 1 (JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)

# 2 (CHRISTINE M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)

# 3 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

# 4 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK AND MR. DARDEN. THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT. COUNSEL, ANYTHING WE NEED TO DISCUSS BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURORS TO JOIN US?

# 5 MS. CLARK:

YES, YOUR HONOR.

# 6 THE COURT:

WHAT IS THAT?

# 7 MR. COCHRAN:

CAN WE APPROACH FIRST AND TALK ABOUT THIS?

# 8 THE COURT:

SURE.

# 9 MS. CLARK:

I DON'T KNOW WHY WE NEED TO APPROACH. I WANT TO MARK THE ENVELOPE WITH THE GLASSES.

# 10 MR. COCHRAN:

I HADN'T SEEN IT. I JUST WANTED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE HER OPEN IT AND TAKE A LOOK. CAN WE APPROACH AND COME BACK OUT?

# 11 THE COURT:

SURE. WE DON'T NEED THE REPORTER?

# 12 MR. COCHRAN:

NOT AT THIS TIME.

# 13 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT.

# 14 (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)

# 15 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

# 16 MS. CLARK:

YOUR HONOR, THE PEOPLE HAVE -- WE HAVE TAKEN OUT THE GLASSES THAT WERE IN THE ENVELOPE THAT IS DEPICTED IN SOME OF THE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WAS GIVEN TO RON GOLDMAN -- THAT WAS GIVEN TO RON GOLDMAN BY KAREN CRAWFORD ON THE NIGHT OF JUNE 12TH. IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS YOU ARE UNABLE TO SEE THE GLASSES, YOU ARE UNABLE TO SEE THE HANDWRITING WHICH SHE PLACED ON THE ENVELOPE WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO ASK HER TO IDENTIFY AND THAT WILL HELP HER TO IDENTIFY THE FACT THAT THIS IS THE ENVELOPE THAT SHE PUT THE GLASSES IN AND THAT SHE GAVE TO RON GOLDMAN THAT NIGHT AND THIS IS THE ENVELOPE THAT IS DEPICTED IN THE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS. SO AS SOON AS WE GET A PLASTIC BAG IN WHICH TO ENCLOSE THESE -- THIS ITEM, I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT IT TO THE WITNESS.

# 17 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. MR. DARDEN, IS THERE SOMEBODY FROM YOUR LAB UPSTAIRS WHO IS BRINGING US SOME TYPE OF SEALABLE CONTAINER?

# 18 MR. DARDEN:

YES, YOUR HONOR.

# 19 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT.

# 20 MR. DARDEN:

IT WILL BE HERE SHORTLY.

# 21 THE COURT:

THANK YOU.

# 22 THE COURT:

MISS CLARK, HOW DO YOU PROPOSE WE DEAL WITH THE OTHER PROBLEM WITH THAT, ANY 352 OBJECTION TO THAT?

# 23 MS. CLARK:

I DON'T -- THIS IS EVIDENCE THAT WAS RECOVERED FROM THE CRIME SCENE, YOUR HONOR, THAT WAS SAMPLED BY THE CRIMINALIST, THAT IS KEY EVIDENCE IN TERMS OF RON GOLDMAN'S DEPARTURE FROM THE RESTAURANT AND THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH HE DEPARTED. AND CLEARLY THE PURPOSE --

# 24 THE COURT:

I UNDERSTAND THE RELEVANCE OF THE MATTER. I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE CONDITION, SINCE IT APPEARS TO BE BLOOD-SOAKED AND DIRT-SOAKED.

# 25 MS. CLARK:

IT IS INDEED, YOUR HONOR, BUT THERE IS NO WAY FOR THE JURY TO SEE FROM THE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS THE HANDWRITING OF THE WITNESS OR FOR THE WITNESS TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY THE ENVELOPE WITH CERTAINTY IN THE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS BECAUSE THE FRONT OF IT IS NOT SHOWN IN ANY OF THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS, NOR IS ONE ABLE TO SEE THE GLASSES ENCASED INSIDE THE ENVELOPE IN THESE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS. THERE IS SO MUCH HIDDEN BY THE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT THERE IS NO WAY THE JURY CAN GET ALL OF THE INFORMATION FROM IT OR THAT THE WITNESS CAN ADEQUATELY IDENTIFY IT.

# 26 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. WE OUGHT TO AT LEAST IDENTIFY THE BAG AND ITS CONTENTS AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER, WHICH I BELIEVE WOULD BE PEOPLE'S 32.

# 27 THE CLERK:

YES.

# 28 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 32 -- I TAKE IT YOU ARE OFFERING THIS?

# 29 MS. CLARK:

UH-HUH.

# 30 THE COURT:

THE SMALL LUNCH BAG, BROWN PAPER BAG, CONTENTS, WHICH APPEARS TO BE A WHITE ENVELOPE, BUSINESS SIZE, AND APPEARS TO BE CONTENTS OF -- CONTAINING A PAIR OF EYEGLASSES.

# 31 (PEO'S 32 FOR ID = BAG W/ENV W/GLASSES)

# 32 THE COURT:

MR. COCHRAN.

# 33 MR. COCHRAN:

YES, YOUR HONOR. I WANTED TO JUST FOR THE RECORD INDICATE WE HAVE SOME CONCERN, SOME 352 CONCERNS, AS THE COURT HAS EXPRESSED, WHERE THE PROBATIVE VALUE IS OUTWEIGHED BY THE PREJUDICIAL EFFECT OF THE ITEM. IT SEEMS TO ME, HAVING DISCUSSED IT AT SIDE BAR, WHAT COUNSEL WANTS TO SHOW, THAT IF THERE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS IN WHICH I IMAGINE THERE ARE, OF THIS OBJECT, IT WOULD BE EASIER TO DEAL WITH THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAN THE OBJECT. IT IS GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO BE HANDLED AT ANY POINT. COUNSEL HAS ON GLOVES. WE DON'T HAVE GLOVES ON. THE JURORS AREN'T GOING TO HAVE GLOVES AT SOME POINT. AND IT PRESENTS A NUMBER OF PROBLEMS, BUT QUITE SPECIFICALLY STATED, IT IS A 352 PROBLEM WHERE THE PREJUDICIAL EFFECT WILL BE OUTWEIGHED BY THE PROBATIVE VALUE. IF THERE ARE INITIALS OR WRITING ON IT, WE HAVE NO PROBLEM TO STIPULATING WHAT THE WRITING SAYS. WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH WHO MAY HAVE HANDLED THIS AND THE FACT THERE ARE GLASSES THEREIN. BUT IF IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO JUST INFLAME THE PASSIONS OF THE JURY, IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE UNDER 352 AND THAT IS OUR CONCERN AND WE ASK THE COURT TO DO WHAT IS MOST REASONABLE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. AND IF THERE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM AND SEE IF YOU CAN COMPARE THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS.

# 34 MS. CLARK:

COUNSEL HAS SEEN ALL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS NOW FOR SEVEN MONTHS AND KNOWS --

# 35 MR. COCHRAN:

THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION. I JUST WANT TO SEE -- IF THERE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS RELATING TO THIS I WANT TO SEE THEM NOW AT THIS POINT. THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF PHOTOGRAPHS.

# 36 MS. CLARK:

WE WILL BE DELIGHTED TO SHOW COUNSEL, BUT IT WILL BEAR OUT WHAT I HAVE INFORMED THE COURT OF, WHICH IS A VERY LIMITED VIEW, AND THE JURY IS ENTITLED TO SEE HOW THIS WITNESS CAN IDENTIFY THIS PARTICULAR CRIME SCENE ENVELOPE AS THE ONE THAT SHE PUT THE GLASSES INTO AND SHE CAN'T DO THAT UNTIL SHE SEES HER HANDWRITING.

# 37 THE COURT:

HOW ARE YOU ANTICIPATING PRESENTING THIS TO THE WITNESS? SHOWING IT TO HER IN A SEALED BAG? HOPEFULLY -- YOU ARE PLANNING ON USING THE ELMO OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT WITH IT?

# 38 MS. CLARK:

THE ELMO WITH RESPECT TO CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS, YES, I WOULD USE THAT, BUT I'M GOING TO ENCASE THIS ITEM IN A SEALED PLASTIC ENVELOPE SO THAT ANY HEALTH CONCERNS OR DANGERS THAT MIGHT -- THAT COUNSEL HAS RAISED WILL BE RESOLVED WITH THAT. ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO INFORM COUNSEL I'M GOING TO MARK AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER WITH THIS NEXT WITNESS, THE -- I JUST -- IT WAS JUST PLACED ON COUNSEL TABLE TODAY -- THE BILL SHOWING AN ITEMIZATION OF WHAT WAS ORDERED BY NICOLE AND HER PARTY ON THE NIGHT OF JUNE 12, 1994.

# 39 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. WE WILL MARK THAT AS PEOPLE'S 33, RESTAURANT BILL.

# 40 (PEO'S 33 FOR ID = MEZZALUNA RESTAURANT BILL)

# 41 MR. COCHRAN:

WE HAVEN'T SEEN THIS BEFORE.

# 42 MS. CLARK:

NEITHER HAVE I. IT WAS JUST BROUGHT TO ME AFTER THE LUNCH HOUR AFTER I WALKED INTO COURT.

# 43 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU HAND IT TO MRS. ROBERTSON AND SHE WILL MAKE TWO COPIES.

# 44 MR. SHAPIRO:

YOUR HONOR, CAN THE COURT MAKE INQUIRY WHERE THAT HAS BEEN ALL THIS TIME AND WHERE THIS JUST CAME FROM THIS MORNING?

# 45 THE COURT:

MISS CLARK?

# 46 MS. CLARK:

APPARENTLY THE RESTAURANT KEEPS A RECORD -- I DIDN'T KNOW THIS BECAUSE I DIDN'T ASK FOR IT AND I DIDN'T KNOW SUCH A THING EXISTED, AND I GUESS THEY ARE WATCHING -- PERHAPS SOMEONE KNOWS THAT COUNSEL HAS BEEN ASKING WHAT EVERYBODY ATE FOR DINNER AND THEY ARE TRYING TO HELP OUT. IF COUNSEL WANTS TO KNOW, NOW COUNSEL HAS A RECORD.

# 47 MR. SHAPIRO:

I WONDER IF THOSE WERE WITNESSES THAT ARE GOING TO BE CALLED AND ARE WATCHING THE TELEVISION IN VIOLATION OF THE COURT'S ORDER.

KEY QUOTE

# 48 MS. CLARK:

WELL, ALL OF THE WITNESSES THAT ARE GOING TO TESTIFY FROM THE MEZZALUNA HAVE TESTIFIED, OR THE ONE WHO HAS NOT YET TESTIFIED WHO IS IN COURT, SO IT COULDN'T BE ANYONE IN VIOLATION OF THE COURT ORDER. THEY WERE ALL HERE.

# 49 (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL AND THE DEFENDANT.)

# 50 MS. CLARK:

AND IF COUNSEL WANTS THE INFORMATION, INSTEAD OF JUST FINDING --

# 51 THE COURT:

DO WE HAVE ANY ABSOLUTELY CLEAR BAGS WITHOUT THE -- ARE THEY ALL WITH THAT --

# 52 MR. DARDEN:

ONLY THE BAGS THE BAG CAME WITH, YOUR HONOR.

# 53 THE COURT:

NO, NOT WHAT I HAD IN MIND.

# 54 (BRIEF PAUSE.)

# 55 THE COURT:

IS THERE WRITING ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT?

# 56 MS. CLARK:

THERE IS IN THE SENSE THAT THERE IS CRIMINALIST'S WRITING ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT WILL PROBABLY -- DO YOU WANT ME TO TURN IT AROUND?

# 57 THE COURT:

I'M JUST WONDERING HOW YOU ARE GOING TO PRESENT IT.

# 58 MS. CLARK:

RIGHT. WHAT WE NEED IS ACTUALLY A CLEAR -- PUT IT IN A CLEAR BAG.

# 59 THE COURT:

BECAUSE I'M RELUCTANT TO HAVE WITNESSES HANDLE THAT TYPE OF EVIDENCE.

# 60 MS. CLARK:

SURE. HOW ABOUT -- MAY I ASK THIS, YOUR HONOR, IF FOR TODAY I HAVE IT SEALED WITH THE WRITING SHOWING, SHOW THAT THE WITNESS CAN IDENTIFY IT, AND THAT WE TRANSFER IT INTO A COMPLETELY CLEAR BAG FOR SUBSEQUENT TESTIMONY, BECAUSE THIS CAN BE SEALED THIS WAY.

# 61 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL DO THAT.

# 62 (BRIEF PAUSE.)

# 63 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, ARE YOU TELLING US THAT THE -- THIS BILL FROM THE MEZZALUNA JUST SORT OF SHOWED UP THIS AFTERNOON?

# 64 MS. CLARK:

YES. I HAD ASKED THAT THE ORIGINAL TIME CARDS BE FORWARDED TO ME SO COULD I SHOW THEM TO COUNSEL BECAUSE WE HAD BEEN USING XEROX COPIES AND I WANTED COUNSEL TO BE ABLE TO ASCERTAIN THAT THE COPIES WERE ACCURATE AND TRUE COPIES OF THE ORIGINALS, AND ALONG WITH THAT CAME THE ITEM THAT I JUST INDICATED, AS WELL AS THIS WHITE RECEIPT, CREDIT CARD RECEIPT THAT IS SIGNED "NICOLE BROWN" FOR THE NIGHT OF JUNE THE 12TH. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THESE ITEMS HAD BEEN PRESERVED.

# 65 THE COURT:

AND DO THOSE ITEMS APPEAR TO BE ORIGINALS?

# 66 MS. CLARK:

THEY DO.

# 67 MR. COCHRAN:

THERE IS SOME WRITING --

# 68 MR. SHAPIRO:

THERE IS SOME WRITING. THE ONE THAT I HAVE, YOUR HONOR, SAYS "CASH."

# 69 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, WHY DON'T YOU TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXAMINE THOSE ITEMS, AND MRS. ROBERTSON NOW HAS A NEW SUPPLY OF GLOVES IF YOU NEED THEM, ANY COUNSEL.

# 70 MS. CLARK:

THERE IS -- THERE IS A CREDIT CARD RECEIPT HERE FROM AMERICAN EXPRESS FOR JUNE THE 12TH THAT IS SIGNED BY NICOLE BROWN. THE AMOUNT OF THE -- TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE CHECK WAS 179.95. THAT AMOUNT IS SHOWN ON THIS RECEIPT IN ADDITION TO A TIP THAT WAS ADDED FOR $34.00 WITH A TOTAL OF 213.95, SO THIS WAS PAID BY AMERICAN EXPRESS. AND I'M SURE THAT IF WE HAVE TIME TO SIT DOWN WITH THE NEXT WITNESS, WE CAN HAVE HER EXPLAIN.

# 71 THE COURT:

WELL, DO COUNSEL WANT TO TALK TO THE WITNESS WHO BROUGHT THESE IN BEFORE WE CALL HER?

# 72 MR. COCHRAN:

THE PROBLEM IS, YOUR HONOR, THIS SUDDENLY MATERIALIZES ON THEIR SIDE OF THE TABLE. WE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW ABOUT THIS. WE WANT TO TALK TO THE WITNESS.

# 73 MS. CLARK:

I AGREE.

# 74 MR. COCHRAN:

THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH REGARD TO THE TIME CARD. IT HAS BEEN ALTERED AND WE WANT THE DOCUMENTS THE WAY THEY WERE IN AT THAT TIME SO WE HAVE NO EDITORIALIZING. WE WANT TO ADDRESS THAT. WE WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO THE WITNESS IF WE CAN DO THAT.

# 75 MS. CLARK:

I DON'T KNOW WHAT COUNSEL IS TALKING ABOUT EDITORIALIZING. THE TIME CARD FOR RON GOLDMAN IS INTACT AS IT WAS WHEN HE SIGNED IT IN AND OUT. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE MANAGER AT THE TIME SIGNED OFF AND WROTE "DECEASED."

# 76 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. PUTTING THAT ASIDE, SINCE THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THAT, COUNSEL, DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO TAKING A BRIEF RECESS, ALLOWING COUNSEL TO SPEAK WITH THE CUSTODIAN WHO JUST -- OF RECORDS WHO JUST BROUGHT THESE ITEMS IN?

# 77 MS. CLARK:

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A CUSTODIAN OF RECORDS PRESENT. I'M JUST INFORMED THE CUSTODIAN OF RECORD IS LISA JO BARNES. THERE WAS -- THESE ITEMS WERE GIVEN TO US AT 1:00 P.M. I FIRST SAW THEM AT 1:30 WHEN I WALKED INTO COURT, AND I WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO HAVE COUNSEL SIT AND TALK TO HER. I WOULD LIKE TO AS WELL.

# 78 THE COURT:

IS SHE PRESENT?

# 79 MS. CLARK:

SHE IS NOT. SHE IS AT THE OFFICE. SHE CAN BE REACHED BY PHONE? SHE CAN BE REACHED BY PHONE.

# 80 THE COURT:

LET'S TAKE TEN MINUTES. WHY DON'T YOU CALL HER BY PHONE AND CHAT WITH HER AND SEE IF THERE IS ANY QUESTION AS TO THE AUTHENTICITY OR ANY OTHER FOUNDATION.

# 81 MR. SHAPIRO:

YOUR HONOR, THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THE COPY I RECEIVED INDICATES THERE WERE NINE GUESTS, THE DATE IS JUNE 13 AND THE TIME IS 7:04 A.M.

# 82 MS. CLARK:

THIS IS THE PROBLEM THAT WAS REFERRED TO EARLIER BY THE WITNESSES, THAT THE TIME STAMP ON THESE -- ON THESE NCR RECORDS IS INCORRECT. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE JUST HAD TESTIMONY ABOUT, IF COUNSEL WERE PAYING ATTENTION.

# 83 MR. SHAPIRO:

I THOUGHT THEY SAID THAT IT WAS A CHANGE BECAUSE OF DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME. USUALLY THAT IS ONE HOUR CALIFORNIA TIME.

# 84 MS. CLARK:

NO, NO, NO.

# 85 THE COURT:

COUNSEL --

# 86 MS. CLARK:

THERE WAS AN INDICATION THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED --

# 87 THE COURT:

COUNSEL, EXCUSE ME. LET'S NOT ARGUE ABOUT THAT. WE WILL TAKE A BRIEF RECESS. COUNSEL CAN CALL THIS WITNESS, EXAMINE THE RECORDS. IF THERE IS SOME -- I TAKE IT, MISS CLARK, YOU WANT TO OFFER THESE RECORDS WITH THE NEXT WITNESS?

# 88 MS. CLARK:

I THINK I DO, YOUR HONOR, IF I COULD HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK TO HER ABOUT IT. I'M SURE SHE COULD AUTHENTICATE AND EXPLAIN -- LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR THIS, BECAUSE SHE WORKS THERE AND IS FAMILIAR WITH THE WORKINGS OF THOSE MACHINES.

# 89 THE COURT:

OKAY. SO I TAKE IT YOU WOULD LIKE A FEW MOMENTS TO DO THAT?

# 90 MS. CLARK:

I SURE WOULD. I APPRECIATE THAT. PERHAPS MR. SHAPIRO CAN TAKE THIS TIME TO REVIEW THE RECORD AND SEE WHAT THE WITNESS HAS TESTIFIED TO.

# 91 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. 15.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Johnnie Cochran

IF IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO JUST INFLAME THE PASSIONS OF THE JURY, IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE UNDER 352 AND THAT IS OUR CONCERN.

Core defense objection to presenting the visibly blood-soaked envelope to the jury rather than relying on photographs.

Marcia Clark

I GUESS THEY ARE WATCHING -- PERHAPS SOMEONE KNOWS THAT COUNSEL HAS BEEN ASKING WHAT EVERYBODY ATE FOR DINNER AND THEY ARE TRYING TO HELP OUT.

Sardonic explanation for why the restaurant bill materialized mid-trial; prompted Shapiro to raise a witness-sequestration concern.

Marcia Clark

THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT THE MANAGER AT THE TIME SIGNED OFF AND WROTE 'DECEASED.'

Defuses Cochran's claim that Ron Goldman's time card was 'altered' — the only change was a notation of his death.

Robert Shapiro

I WONDER IF THOSE WERE WITNESSES THAT ARE GOING TO BE CALLED AND ARE WATCHING THE TELEVISION IN VIOLATION OF THE COURT'S ORDER.

Raised the possibility that Mezzaluna staff were violating the witness-sequestration order by watching the trial on TV.

Evidence (4)

People's 32

Brown paper bag containing a blood-soaked white business-size envelope encasing a pair of eyeglasses — the glasses Karen Crawford gave Ron Goldman on the night of June 12, 1994

Marked for identification; 352 objection raised; court approved presenting it sealed in a clear plastic bag

People's 33

Mezzaluna restaurant bill itemizing what Nicole Brown and her party ordered on the night of June 12, 1994

Marked for identification; surprise late disclosure — prosecution received it at 1:00 PM that day; recess taken to authenticate

Informal

American Express credit card receipt signed 'Nicole Brown' for $213.95 (bill of $179.95 plus $34.00 tip), dated June 12, 1994

Disclosed mid-session alongside People's 33; foundation to be laid by next witness

Informal

Ron Goldman's time card from Mezzaluna, with manager notation 'DECEASED'

Discussed; defense claimed it was 'altered'; prosecution explained the only change was the deceased notation

Notable Exchanges (3)

Johnnie Cochran•Marcia Clark

Cochran argued the blood-soaked envelope should be replaced by photographs to avoid inflaming the jury; Clark countered that photographs don't show the handwriting or glasses clearly enough for the witness to make a positive identification.

strategic

Robert Shapiro•Marcia Clark

Shapiro raised the possibility that Mezzaluna staff violated the sequestration order by watching the trial on TV and then voluntarily producing the bill; Clark responded that all Mezzaluna witnesses had already testified or were present in court, so no violation was possible.

pointed

Robert Shapiro•Marcia Clark

Shapiro flagged that the restaurant bill showed a date of June 13 and time of 7:04 A.M.; Clark argued this was the known NCR timestamp error that prior witnesses had already addressed; Shapiro pushed back on whether it was a daylight-saving issue.

heated

Light Moments (1)

Marcia Clark

Clark's dry remark that Mezzaluna staff must be watching TV and 'trying to help out' after counsel spent months asking what everyone ate for dinner.

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Mezzaluna restaurant records

Chain of custody / authenticity challenge

Defense challenged the late-surfacing restaurant bill and time card, questioning where documents had been for seven months and whether the time card had been altered.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 4660 • 91 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103