ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD. MISS CLARK, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE YOUR WITNESS TAKE ANOTHER SEAT, PLEASE.
YOUR HONOR, WITH REGARD TO THE NEXT WITNESS, WE WOULD LIKE AN OFFER OF PROOF, AND IF THAT WITNESS IS PRESENT, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT WITNESS STEP OUT AND WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN OFFER AS TO THAT WITNESS.
MY NEXT WITNESS, YOUR HONOR, IS KIM GOLDMAN. SHE WILL TESTIFY THAT SHE FOUND THE UNIFORM THAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 30 IN RON GOLDMAN'S APARTMENT HANGING OVER A DOOR INSIDE HIS APARTMENT ON JUNE THE 15TH WHEN SHE WENT TO COLLECT HIS THINGS.
YES. WITH REGARD TO THIS ITEM, YOUR HONOR, THE COURT WILL RECALL WE APPROACHED THE BENCH BEFORE. IT SEEMS THAT MISS CLARK WOULD LIKE TO SHOW THE CLOTHES TO EVERY WITNESS WHO COMES IN. THIS IS NOT A PARTICULAR MOMENT IN THIS CASE IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS. WE ARE WILLING TO STIPULATE MISS GOLDMAN -- WILL STIPULATE AS TO WHERE SHE FOUND THE PARTICULAR CLOTHING TO SAVE SOME TIME. EACH WITNESS TO BE SHOWN THE PANTS AND CLOTHES THAT HE WAS NOT WEARING LATER ON THAT EVENING, AND I THINK THAT IT'S A 352 PROBLEM AFTER A PERIOD OF TIME AND I JUST WANTED TO TRY TO SAVE SOME TIME IN THAT REGARD. IT MIGHT BE MORE PERSUASIVE TO CALL MISS GOLDMAN HAD SHE NOT SEEN FIT TO SHOW THESE CLOTHES TO MISS CRAWFORD AND THEN SHOWED THEM TO ANOTHER PERSON BEFORE THAT. SO IT WILL BE THREE TIMES TODAY WE'VE SEEN A WHITE SHIRT AND SOME BLACK PANTS. I THINK WE DO REACH A POINT WHERE THERE'S NO CHAIN OF CUSTODY AND NO ARGUMENT ON THIS PARTICULAR POINT. SO WHY THEN WOULD THEY CONTINUE SHOWING THEM? I COULD SPECULATE, BUT I DON'T THINK I NEED TO DO THAT, AND I WOULD ASK THE COURT TO ACCEPT OUR STIPULATION SO WE CAN MOVE ON.
YES. YES, YOUR HONOR. WHAT MR. COCHRAN WANTS TO DO IS STIPULATE AWAY ANYTHING THAT MIGHT PERSONALIZE THE CASE AND MAKE AN INDICATION THAT THERE IS A REAL PERSON, HUMAN BEING ASSOCIATED WITH THE NAME OF RON GOLDMAN.
I'M NOT CONCERNED WITH THAT ASPECT SO MUCH. MISS CLARK, WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF THIS PROFFER?
FIRST OF ALL, LET ME INDICATE TO THE COURT, I AM NOT GOING TO TAKE THE CLOTHING OUT OF THE BAG. THE WITNESS BROUGHT THE BAG IN. SHE CAN TELL US WHAT THE CONTENTS ARE AND WHERE SHE FOUND THEM. BUT THE OFFER OF PROOF IS TO INDICATE THAT HE DID GO HOME AND CHANGE CLOTHES, THAT THESE CLOTHES WERE FOUND OUT LOOSE, THAT HE CHANGED IN A HURRY AND THEY WERE FOUND HANGING OFF A DOOR BECAUSE HE WAS FOUND IN OTHER CLOTHING AT THE CRIME SCENE.
BECAUSE HE LEFT THE RESTAURANT AT TEN OF 10:00 AND IT IS THE PEOPLE'S CONTENTION THAT THE MURDERS OCCURRED ROUGHLY AROUND 10:15, 10:20. IT WILL INDICATE THAT THERE WAS NOT A LARGE AMOUNT OF TIME SPENT IN HIS APARTMENT BEFORE HE DEPARTED FOR BUNDY. SO IT GOES TO THE AMOUNT OF TIME AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THE CLOTHING WAS FOUND, CLOTHING FOUND IN DISARRAY AS OPPOSED TO NEATLY PLACED IN THE HAMPER. THIS KIND OF THING WOULD INDICATE --
WELL, YOU KNOW, PUT AWAY. THE CLOTHING WAS LEFT DRAPED OVER A DOOR, WHICH INDICATES THAT IT WAS DONE HURRIEDLY.
YOUR HONOR, THAT IS THE RANKEST FORM OF SPECULATION. IF THEY HAD DONE THEIR JOB INVESTIGATING THIS CASE, THEY WOULD HAVE PERHAPS DETERMINED WHETHER OR NOT MR. GOLDMAN HAD TAKEN TIME TO TAKE A SHOWER OR WHATEVER. THEY CAN'T SPECULATE AND TELL WHETHER THAT HAPPENED. WE KNOW THAT HE CHANGED CLOTHES AND THAT'S THE RELEVANT THING. IT'S ONLY NOW WE FIND OUT THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE TAKEN OUT OF THE BAG. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER IF SHE HADN'T TAKEN IT OUT OF THE BAG THOSE OTHER TWO TIMES. SHE WOULD HAVE SOUNDER GROUND TO STAND ON. SO THE PROFFER IS -- ALL I AM SAYING IS, WE'RE WILLING TO STIPULATE AS TO WHERE THEY WERE FOUND AND TO MOVE ON. EVERYTHING ELSE IS SPECULATIVE. AND NOW WE FIND THE CHANGE -- THE TIME OF DEATH IS STARTING TO MOVE BACKWARDS. WHEN THEY HAD THE OPENING STATEMENT, IT WAS 10:15. NOW IT'S 10:15 OR 10:20. WHEN WE FINISH, IT'S GOING TO BE 11:00 O'CLOCK. AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE GOING. AND SO IT SEEMS TO ME THIS IS ALL SPECULATION. WE SHOULD TRY THIS CASE BASED UPON THE EVIDENCE WITHOUT THE PROSECUTION WHINING AND MOANING AND LET'S JUST GET IT OVER WITH WITHOUT TAKING THINGS OUT OF BAGS WITH EVERY WITNESS. LET'S JUST TRY THIS CASE AND STOP, YOU KNOW, USING -- ENGAGING IN TRICKS AND LEGUME.
KEY QUOTEMISS CLARK, PLEASE. MISS CLARK, PLEASE, PLEASE. THANK YOU. MAYBE THAT OBJECTION WAS BETTER SUITED TO THE LAST TWO WITNESSES RATHER THAN THIS WITNESS. BUT IF THIS IS THE WITNESS --
-- IF THIS IS THE WITNESS WHO FOUND IT AND THE MANNER IN WHICH YOU FOUND IT AND TIMING IS AN ISSUE, IT IS RELEVANT, IT DOES HAVE PROBATIVE VALUE. BUT I TAKE IT THIS IS VERY SHORT.
YOUR HONOR, SHE'S NOT GOING TO TAKE THE CLOTHING OUT OF THE BAG IS THE REPRESENTATION, YOUR HONOR?
LET ME INDICATE FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR, IF I DIDN'T TAKE THE CLOTHING OUT OF THE BAG FOR THE OTHER WITNESSES TO SEE, THEY COULDN'T HAVE TESTIFIED AS TO WHETHER HE WORE THOSE CLOTHES THAT NIGHT.
WELL, ALL THEY COULD SAY IS, HE WORE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BLACK PANTS AND A WHITE SHIRT.
THIS IS MORE INTERESTING NOW. ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE WITNESS, DEPUTY BROWNING, AND LET'S HAVE THE JURY, DEPUTY MAGNERA.
(BRIEF PAUSE.) THE COURT: AND WHO IS YOUR WITNESS AFTER THIS?
THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE SEATED. ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE MAY CALL THEIR NEXT WITNESS.
THE OFFER OF PROOF IS TO INDICATE THAT HE DID GO HOME AND CHANGE CLOTHES, THAT THESE CLOTHES WERE FOUND OUT LOOSE, THAT HE CHANGED IN A HURRY AND THEY WERE FOUND HANGING OFF A DOOR BECAUSE HE WAS FOUND IN OTHER CLOTHING AT THE CRIME SCENE.
THAT IS THE RANKEST FORM OF SPECULATION. IF THEY HAD DONE THEIR JOB INVESTIGATING THIS CASE, THEY WOULD HAVE PERHAPS DETERMINED WHETHER OR NOT MR. GOLDMAN HAD TAKEN TIME TO TAKE A SHOWER OR WHATEVER.
NOW WE FIND THE CHANGE -- THE TIME OF DEATH IS STARTING TO MOVE BACKWARDS. WHEN THEY HAD THE OPENING STATEMENT, IT WAS 10:15. NOW IT'S 10:15 OR 10:20. WHEN WE FINISH, IT'S GOING TO BE 11:00 O'CLOCK.
LET'S JUST TRY THIS CASE AND STOP, YOU KNOW, USING -- ENGAGING IN TRICKS AND LEGUME.