📄 In-chambers discussion — Tuesday, February 7, 1995
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\7\IN-CHAMBERS-DISCUSSION.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 14 of 167

In-chambers discussion

Date: Tuesday, February 7, 1995 • Utterances: 56
Defense attorney Johnnie Cochran objected to prosecutor Marcia Clark wearing a small angel lapel pin similar to one worn by victim's sister Denise Brown, arguing it violated Judge Ito's prior order against wearing supportive badges. Clark fired back that the pin was a minor, tasteful symbol compared to Cochran's own courtroom conduct and press conferences. Ito ruled the pin inappropriate for counsel to wear and ordered its removal, then closed by ordering several witnesses to return the next morning.
1 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
2 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THE JURY HAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE COURTROOM. BACK ON THE RECORD. MR. COCHRAN, YOU HAD A COMMENT YOU WANTED TO MAKE?

3 MR. COCHRAN:

YES. YES, YOUR HONOR, I DO. AND I WOULD LIKE TO JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR, THAT TODAY, MISS CLARK --

4 MR. DARDEN:

I'M SORRY. SHOULD THE PUBLIC BE ALLOWED BACK IN FOR THIS?

5 THE COURT:

YEAH.

6 MR. COCHRAN:

IS THIS FOR THE PUBLIC OR FOR YOU?

7 MR. DARDEN:

EVERYTHING YOU DO IS FOR THE PUBLIC, MY BROTHER.

KEY QUOTE
8 MR. COCHRAN:

I'M NOT YOUR BROTHER.

9 (BRIEF PAUSE.)
10 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. MR. COCHRAN, YOU HAD SOME COMMENT YOU WANTED TO MAKE TO THE COURT?

11 MR. COCHRAN:

YES. JUST IN PASSING IN THE NATURE OF THE LAST COMMENT FOR THE DAY, YOUR HONOR. MISS CLARK IS WEARING A -- SOME JEWELRY TODAY WHICH LOOKS VERY, VERY SIMILAR TO THE JEWELRY WORN BY OR THE PIN WORN BY MISS DENISE BROWN. SHE HAD TWO OF THEM ON THE OTHER DAY. AND I THINK THAT IT'S INAPPROPRIATE FOR COUNSEL TO BE WEARING THE SAME THING AS THE WITNESSES. I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE AND I CALL IT TO YOUR HONOR'S ATTENTION. AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE A RECORD. I THINK IT IS INAPPROPRIATE GIVEN THE FACT -- CERTAINLY MISS BROWN CAN WEAR WHATEVER SHE WANTS TO WEAR. BUT FOR COUNSEL TO COME INTO THE COURTROOM WEARING IT, I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE AND WOULD SO INDICATE.

12 THE COURT:

JUST FOR THE RECORD, YOU MADE YOUR OBJECTION WHEN WE WERE AT A SIDEBAR CONFERENCE THIS AFTERNOON WITHOUT THE COURT REPORTER, CORRECT?

13 MR. COCHRAN:

THAT IS CORRECT. SO I WANTED TO INDICATE --

14 THE COURT:

ABOUT AN HOUR AGO.

15 MR. COCHRAN:

THAT IS CORRECT.

16 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE?

17 MR. COCHRAN:

SHE TAKE IT OFF AND NOT WEAR IT ANYMORE. I DON'T THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. I THINK YOU SAID -- YOU MADE IT CLEAR NOT TO WEAR ANY BADGES OR BUTTONS OR ANYTHING OF ANY SUPPORT. HOW WOULD IT LOOK IF I CAME TO COURT AND I WORE A BIG NO. 32 AND WALKED AROUND HERE IN FRONT OF THIS JURY? I WOULDN'T DO THAT. IT'S JUST LIKE THAT. SHE'S WEARING THIS THE DAY AFTER MISS DENISE BROWN GETS ON THE STAND. AND THEY MADE SOME MOTION ABOUT SOME EARRING, THIS ANGEL, AND SHE HAD TWO ANGELS ON HER SHOULDER. I DON'T THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE. THAT'S ALL I CAN SAY ABOUT THAT.

18 THE COURT:

MISS CLARK?

19 MS. CLARK:

ANY HUMAN EMOTION --

20 THE COURT:

DO YOU WANT TO DESCRIBE THE ITEM IN QUESTION FIRST SO THE RECORD IS CLEAR?

21 MS. CLARK:

YES, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU. IT'S ABOUT MAYBE THREE-QUARTERS OF AN INCH BIG. IT'S A VERY SMALL LITTLE ANGEL.

22 THE COURT:

ANGEL -- GOLD ANGEL WITH WINGS.

23 MS. CLARK:

ANGEL WITH WINGS WITH ARMS OUTSTRETCHED, TOO SMALL FOR ANY DETAIL TO BE SEEN BY THE JURY CERTAINLY. I AM REALLY SHOCKED AT COUNSEL'S DENUNCIATION OF NOTHING MORE THAN HUMAN EMOTION AND SYMPATHY. IF SYMPATHY IS SO SHOCKING TO COUNSEL, THEN I WONDER WHY HE GOES OUT AND SPEAKS OF SYMPATHY IN SUCH GLORIOUS TONES WHEN HE'S INTERVIEWED BY THE PRESS EVERY DAY ON THE STEPS OF THE COURTHOUSE. IF MR. -- OBVIOUSLY WHAT MR. COCHRAN'S THINKING IS THAT WHAT'S SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE ISN'T SAUCE FOR THE GANDER. THIS IS VERY SMALL. MR. COCHRAN WEARS PINS EVERY DAY THAT ARE CLEARLY VISIBLE TO THE JURY. NOT ONLY THAT, BUT WITH ALL THE CONSTANT BARRAGE OF PUBLICITY THAT HE ENGAGES IN SYMPATHETIC TO HIS CLIENT, SYMPATHETIC TO HIS WITNESSES, DENOUNCING THE PEOPLE'S CASE AND THE PEOPLE'S WITNESSES AND THE VICTIMS IN THIS INSIDIOUS WAY, I THINK IT'S VERY INAPPROPRIATE FOR HIM OF ALL PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD TO THIS COURT AND COMPLAIN ABOUT SOMETHING AS MINOR AS SHOWING SUPPORT FOR THE VICTIMS IN A SYMBOL-LIKE WAY THAT IS NOT PROCLAIMING LIKE WEARING THE NO. 32. IT'S A VERY SMALL SHOW OF SUPPORT THAT IS VERY TASTEFUL, VERY UNDERSTATED AND NOTHING CLEARLY AS PREJUDICIAL AS THE REMARKS HE MAKES CONSTANTLY TO THE PRESS AND THE PRESS CONFERENCES HE TRIES TO HOLD IN COURT AS WELL AS OUTSIDE OF THE COURT. I THINK THAT IF ANYONE SHOULD COME FORWARD AND MAKE THIS ARGUMENT, IT SHOULD BE ONE WITH CLEAN HANDS, AND WE DON'T HAVE ONE ON THAT SIDE OF COUNSEL TABLE. SO I WOULD STRONGLY URGE THE COURT TO DENY THIS RIDICULOUS MOTION AND REQUEST TO SUPPRESS ANY SYMPATHY OR HUMAN EMOTION THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE GIVEN TO THE SIDE OF THE VICTIMS WHO AFTER ALL, ARE TWO YOUNG PEOPLE WHO WERE BRUTALLY MURDERED.

24 MR. COCHRAN:

ABSOLUTELY, YOUR HONOR. AND I JOIN IN SYMPATHY FOR THE VICTIMS. BUT YOUR HONOR SAID WE WERE NOT TO WEAR BUTTONS, BADGES OR WHATEVER. NEXT DAY, SHE SHOWS UP WITH IT. NOW, OUR JURY IS SEQUESTERED. ANY STATEMENTS WE ARE MAKING WHEN WE LEAVE THIS COURTROOM OUR JURORS NEVER SEE. BUT PARADING, WALKING BACK AND FORTH SHOWING CLOTHES 200 TIMES TODAY WITH THAT ANGEL --

25 THE COURT:

MR. COCHRAN, THOSE KINDS OF ARGUMENTS ABOUT, "HE DID THIS AND SHE DID THAT," AND POINTING FINGERS BACK AND FORTH AND ALL THE OTHER TRANSGRESSIONS, REAL OR IMAGINARY, DON'T REALLY PERSUADE ME ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. THE ISSUE IS, THE LAPEL PIN THAT MISS CLARK HAS, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S IDENTIFIABLE WITH ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER.

26 MR. COCHRAN:

IT IS.

27 THE COURT:

MS. CLARK CONCEDES IT IS SHE SAYS AN EXPRESSION OF SUPPORT. SO ISN'T REALLY THE ISSUE THAT PIN AND NOT ABOUT ALL THESE OTHER THINGS?

28 MR. COCHRAN:

YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT. AS THE COURT SAID, IT HAS BEEN A LONG DAY AND I APPRECIATE THE COURT'S FOCUS BACK ON THIS ISSUE. THE ISSUE IS YOUR ORDER TO ALL OF US TO COMPLY WITH, AND SHE IS VIOLATING THAT ORDER. SHE CAN ENGAGE IN ALL THE SELF-SERVING RHETORIC SHE WANTS TO. THE ISSUE IS, YOU ORDERED US NOT TO DO THAT. AND SHE CAN BE SUPPORTIVE AND I WANT HER TO BE SUPPORTIVE AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PEOPLE. SHE REPRESENTS ALL OF US. SO THAT'S FINE. SHE CAN DO HER JOB. SHE'S A FINE LAWYER. BUT SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO WEAR THIS PIN BECAUSE IT'S INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE YOU TOLD US NOT TO DO IT. THAT'S THE ISSUE PURE AND SIMPLE. SO I ASK YOU TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY SYMPATHY TOWARDS THE VICTIMS. IT'S YOUR ORDER AND IT WAS ENTIRELY APPROPRIATELY MADE. WHAT HAPPENS IN THE COURTROOM IS VERY APPROPRIATE. NOT OUTSIDE. OUR JURY CAN SEE THIS AS OPPOSED TO ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS OUTSIDE THE COURTROOM. THAT'S WHY THEY ARE SEQUESTERED.

29 MS. CLARK:

YOUR HONOR, IF THIS WAS A BADGE OR BUTTON WITH THE PICTURES OF THE VICTIMS ON IT, I COULD UNDERSTAND COUNSEL'S CONCERN. BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT ANYTHING BUT A SYMBOL. I'M SURE THAT THE JURORS DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT IT MEANS. IT IS SOMETHING THAT IS KNOWN WITHIN THE FAMILIES. IT MAY BE INDEED KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC NOW. BUT AS MR. COCHRAN SAID, THE JURY IS SEQUESTERED. IT IS A SYMBOLIC GESTURE, BUT NOT BEYOND BEING PALATABLE TO THE JURY. IT'S VERY SMALL. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IN THE JURY CAN TELL IT'S AN ANGEL FROM THE DISTANCE THEY ARE AT FROM ME. AND I THINK THE COURT CAN REST ASSURED THAT THERE IS NO PREJUDICE THAT'S INURING TO THE DEFENDANT AS A RESULT OF THIS. AND I EVEN FIND COUNSEL'S CONCERN IN THIS REGARD REMARKABLE, SOME LITTLE PIN THAT THE JURY CAN BARELY SEE ME WEAR HAS GOT HIM ALL EXCITED TODAY. I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, ESPECIALLY IN VIEW OF THE CONDUCT OF COUNSEL. IF THERE'S BEEN ANYTHING INAPPROPRIATE IN THIS CASE, IT'S THE CONDUCT OF COUNSEL BEFORE THIS JURY AND THE KIND OF SPEAKING OBJECTIONS WE ARE CONSTANTLY GETTING AND PRESS CONFERENCES COUNSEL IS ALWAYS TRYING TO HOLD WHEREVER HE GOES. SO I REALLY -- EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR.

30 (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)
31 MS. CLARK:

AND AS MY LEARNED COCOUNSEL POINTS OUT ACCURATELY, MR. COCHRAN IS ALWAYS COMING TO COURT WEARING A CROSS, YOU KNOW. I MEAN THESE ARE ALL SYMBOLS AND GESTURES. HIS IS EVEN MORE EXPLICIT. YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OFF PINS, LET'S ALL TAKE OFF PINS.

32 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, WHAT I'M WEARING TODAY --

33 THE COURT:

NO. MR. COCHRAN, YOU HAVE A WIDE ASSORTMENT OF LAPEL PINS.

34 MR. COCHRAN:

MY PINS ARE NOT IDENTIFIED WITH O.J. SIMPSON, YOUR HONOR. AND AGAIN, YOUR HONOR, I WOULD POINT OUT AS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT, SHE'S DOING WHAT YOU TOLD US NOT TO DO, AND WHAT SHE FAILS TO UNDERSTAND IS, SHE'S WEARING THIS IN COURT WHERE THE JURORS CAN SEE IT. AND IF YOU RECALL, SHE TRIED TO ELICIT TESTIMONY FROM MISS DENISE BROWN ABOUT THE EARRING, WEARING THE ONE EARRING WHERE WE STOPPED THAT. SHE TRIED TO ELICIT TESTIMONY WHY SHE WAS WEARING THIS JEWELRY. WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO OUR CLIENT TO BRING THIS UP AND I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR IT ANY FURTHER. AND SHE MAKES THESE LONG SPEECHES, BUT THE FACT REMAINS, SHE HAS IT ON AND SHE SHOULDN'T HAVE IT ON AND WE ASK YOU TO ASK HER TO REMOVE IT.

35 MS. CLARK:

LET ME EXPLAIN ONE THING TO THE COURT. COUNSEL IS MAKING A MISREPRESENTATION TO THE COURT. WE WERE ASKING MISS BROWN TO TESTIFY TO THE FACT THAT NICOLE WORE MIX-MATCHED EARRINGS, ONE DANGLING ONE, ONE STUD, NOT AN ANGEL AT ALL. COUNSEL GETS ALL EXCITED AND GETS WORRIED, YOU KNOW, ABOUT THE FACT OF THAT JEWELRY. COUNSEL STILL HAS IT WRONG. ALL WE WANTED FROM DENISE WAS TO TESTIFY THAT SHE WORE MIX-MATCHED EARRINGS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY FOUND, ONE DANGLING, ONE STUD, ON NICOLE. THAT'S ALL. AND COUNSEL WAS SO WORRIED ABOUT THIS JEWELRY COMING OUT BEFORE THEY EVEN KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION MIGHT BE. BUT THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, WE WERE NOT GOING TO ELICIT ANY TESTIMONY ABOUT AN ANGEL, REST ASSURED OF THAT. WE WERE GOING TO ELICIT ONLY THE TESTIMONY I'VE INDICATED. AND IT WAS THE APPROPRIATE THING TO DO GIVEN COUNSEL'S INSISTENCE ON TRYING TO PORTRAY THIS AS A ROBBERY OR BURGLARY MURDER, AND THAT'S ALL WE WERE TRYING TO DO.

36 THE COURT:

TO MY RECOLLECTION, WE'VE ONLY HAD ONE MEMBER OF THE BROWN FAMILY TESTIFY THUS FAR, CORRECT?

37 MS. CLARK:

THAT'S CORRECT.

38 THE COURT:

I SEE YOU HAVE A SIMILAR, ALTHOUGH NOT IDENTICAL PIECE OF JEWELRY THAT DENISE BROWN HAD.

39 MS. CLARK:

RIGHT.

40 THE COURT:

I DON'T RECALL IF THE GOLDMAN FAMILY WEARS THE SAME JEWELRY. I DID NOT NOTICE ANYTHING ON KIMBERLY GOLDMAN.

41 MS. CLARK:

NO. I DIDN'T EITHER.

42 THE COURT:

ALTHOUGH, TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH, JEWELRY IS NOT MY FORTE AS SOMEBODY WHO WEARS PLASTIC WATCHES. I MEAN THIS IS NOT SOMETHING I PAY ATTENTION TO. MISS CLARK, MY CONCERN THOUGH IS YOUR CONCESSION THAT IT IS A SHOW OF SUPPORT. AND IF EITHER FAMILY IS WEARING THESE AS SOME SYMBOL, THEN -- AND IF IT IS POSSIBLE FOR THE JURY TO IDENTIFY IT AS SUCH, THEN IT'S PROBABLY NOT APPROPRIATE. AND IF THE FAMILY MEMBERS ARE GOING TO FURTHER TESTIFY AND WEAR THESE THINGS IN COURT -- I AGREE WITH YOU, THEY ARE VERY SUBTLE, VERY SMALL. BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR COUNSEL TO WEAR ONE OF THESE. ALL RIGHT.

43 MS. CLARK:

THEN, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHO'S WEARING IT ANYMORE, YOUR HONOR. IF WE COULD ASK THE COURT TO DEFER ITS RULING UNTIL WE SEE WHAT THE FAMILY LOOKS LIKE IN THE MORNING.

44 THE COURT:

COUNSEL, I'VE TOLD YOU I FEEL IT'S INAPPROPRIATE. I PLAN ON DOING ANOTHER LEXIS SEARCH ON THESE TYPES OF THINGS, BUT I THINK IN THE MORNING, I'M GOING TO REAFFIRM THE RULING.

45 MS. CLARK:

OKAY.

46 THE COURT:

THANK YOU, COUNSEL.

47 (BRIEF PAUSE.)
48 THE COURT:

MISS CLARK, YOU HAD WITNESSES YOU WANTED ORDERED BACK?

49 MS. CLARK:

YES, YOUR HONOR.

50 THE COURT:

WHO IS THAT?

51 MS. CLARK:

EVA STEIN, LOUIS KARPF, K-A-R-P-F, SUKRU BOZTEPE, STEVEN SCHWAB.

52 THE COURT:

EACH OF YOU ARE ORDERED TO RETURN TO THIS COURTHOUSE TOMORROW MORNING, 8:30 A.M. REPORT TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY. DO YOU EACH UNDERSTAND THAT ORDER?

53 (THE WITNESSES NODDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.)
54 THE COURT:

ALL NODDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. MISS BOZTEPE, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. LET ME SEE COUNSEL WITHOUT THE REPORTER.

55 (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)
56 (AT 4:55 P.M., AN ADJOURNMENT WAS TAKEN UNTIL, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1995, 9:00 A.M.)

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (5)

Christopher Darden
EVERYTHING YOU DO IS FOR THE PUBLIC, MY BROTHER.
Cochran's sharp retort — 'I'M NOT YOUR BROTHER' — captures the raw personal animosity between the two sides before the substantive argument even begins.
Johnnie Cochran
HOW WOULD IT LOOK IF I CAME TO COURT AND I WORE A BIG NO. 32 AND WALKED AROUND HERE IN FRONT OF THIS JURY? I WOULDN'T DO THAT. IT'S JUST LIKE THAT.
Cochran's analogy — OJ's jersey number — frames the pin as overt jury influence, establishing the defense's core argument.
Marcia Clark
IF ANYONE SHOULD COME FORWARD AND MAKE THIS ARGUMENT, IT SHOULD BE ONE WITH CLEAN HANDS, AND WE DON'T HAVE ONE ON THAT SIDE OF COUNSEL TABLE.
Clark's most pointed counterattack, accusing Cochran of hypocrisy given his own constant press activity and speaking objections before the jury.
Lance A. Ito
JEWELRY IS NOT MY FORTE AS SOMEBODY WHO WEARS PLASTIC WATCHES. I MEAN THIS IS NOT SOMETHING I PAY ATTENTION TO.
A rare light moment from a characteristically no-nonsense judge, before he nonetheless ruled against Clark.
Lance A. Ito
I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR COUNSEL TO WEAR ONE OF THESE.
The bottom-line ruling: regardless of the pin's size or subtlety, counsel wearing a symbol of support crosses the line.

Evidence (2)

Informal
Small gold angel-with-wings lapel pin worn by Marcia Clark, similar to pins worn by Denise Brown
discussed — Ito rules it inappropriate for counsel to wear
Informal
Nicole Brown's mismatched earrings (one dangling, one stud) found at the crime scene
referenced by Clark to clarify that the blocked Denise Brown earring testimony was about Nicole's jewelry habit, not angel pins

Notable Exchanges (3)

Johnnie CochranChristopher Darden
Darden called Cochran 'my brother' sarcastically; Cochran snapped 'I'M NOT YOUR BROTHER' — a flash of genuine personal hostility before the main argument began.
heated
Johnnie CochranMarcia Clark
Extended back-and-forth in which Cochran argued Clark violated a court order while Clark accused Cochran of hypocrisy via press conferences and speaking objections. Ito had to redirect both attorneys back to the actual legal issue.
heated
Marcia ClarkLance A. Ito
Clark asked the court to defer its ruling until morning to see what jewelry the victim's family would wear; Ito declined, saying he would reaffirm his ruling after a Lexis search.
strategic

Light Moments (1)

Lance A. Ito
Judge Ito admitted he had not noticed the Goldman family's jewelry because 'jewelry is not my forte as somebody who wears plastic watches.'

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Marcia Clark
conduct challenge
Cochran argued Clark was violating a direct court order by wearing the angel pin the day after Denise Brown testified, and that she had also attempted to elicit prejudicial jewelry testimony from Brown before being stopped.
⚔ Johnnie Cochran
hypocrisy / tu quoque
Clark countered that Cochran wears lapel pins and a cross daily, holds press conferences outside the courthouse, and delivers 'speaking objections' before the jury — making him the wrong person to complain about symbolic influence.

Witness Demeanor

(THE WITNESSES NODDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.)

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)
Proceeding 4724 • 56 utterances
Criminal Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 FEB 7, 1995 📄 In-chambers discussion
FEB 7, 1995 KRT DvH TD