📄 Evidentiary hearing: videotape admissibility — Thursday, February 9, 1995
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\9\EVIDENTIARY-HEARING-VIDEOTAPE-.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 16 of 167

Evidentiary hearing: videotape admissibility

Date: Thursday, February 9, 1995 • Utterances: 92
Judge Ito held an in-chambers hearing to rule on the admissibility of a videotape (on laser disk) showing multiple people — including Detectives Lange and Vannatter — at the Bundy crime scene. Cochran argued the video proved the crime scene was mishandled and overcrowded, while Clark countered that the tape was edited, lacked timestamp context, and was therefore misleading and prejudicial under Evidence Code 352. Ito sustained the objection as to the full videotape but allowed Cochran to ask Officer Riske about a single still photograph of a uniformed officer walking through the scene.
1 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
2 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THERE IS AN EVIDENTIARY ISSUE I NEED TO RESOLVE AND I'M GOING TO NEED TO WATCH A VIDEOTAPE OUT OF YOUR PRESENCE. OBVIOUSLY ALL OF THE GIZMOS ARE HERE. SO WHY DON'T YOU STEP BACK INTO THE JURY ROOM AND HOPEFULLY THIS WILL JUST TAKE A FEW MOMENTS.

3 (AT 2:45 P.M. THE JURY WAS EXCUSED AND THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THEIR PRESENCE:)
4 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED.

5 MR. COCHRAN:

I WOULD LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY AT THIS POINT -- THE VIDEO IS ON A LASER DISK, YOUR HONOR. WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY DEALT WITH THIS BEFORE. COUNSEL HAVE SEEN IT. I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW IT TO THE COURT AGAIN AT THIS POINT.

6 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. AT THIS POINT YOUR PURPOSE OF SHOWING THE VIDEOTAPE IS TO ASK OFFICER RISKE IF HE RECOGNIZES THE OFFICERS?

7 MR. COCHRAN:

ANY OF THE OFFICERS THEREON, YOUR HONOR.

8 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT.

9 MR. COCHRAN:

I THINK PERHAPS HE SHOULD STEP OUT WHILE WE ARE DOING THIS, YOUR HONOR.

10 THE COURT:

OFFICER RISKE, WHY DON'T YOU STEP OUTSIDE AND DON'T TALK TO ANYBODY WHILE YOU ARE OUT THERE.

11 THE WITNESS:

YES, SIR.

12 THE COURT:

ALSO, IF THERE IS A T.V. MONITOR OUT THERE, DON'T WATCH THE MONITOR.

13 (OFFICER RISKE EXITS THE COURTROOM.)
14 MR. DARDEN:

YOUR HONOR, THERE IS THE ADDITIONAL ISSUE OF THE DISCOVERY OF THIS VIDEO. WE HAVE NEVER BEEN PROVIDED A COPY OF THIS VIDEO.

15 THE COURT:

LET'S SEE IT FIRST. YOU MAY NOT HAVE AN OBJECTION TO IT ONCE YOU HAVE SEEN IT.

16 MR. COCHRAN:

THEY HAVE SEEN IT BEFORE.

17 THE COURT:

HOW LONG IS THIS EXCERPT?

18 MR. COCHRAN:

NOT VERY LONG. WE ALL SAT HERE BEFORE AND WATCHED THIS.

19 THE COURT:

NOT VERY LONG DOESN'T TELL ME VERY MUCH.

20 MR. COCHRAN:

SIX, SEVEN MINUTES.

21 MS. CLARK:

THIS IS THE SAME VIDEOTAPE THEY TRIED TO DO BEFORE WITH THE SAME PROBLEM.

22 THE COURT:

I DON'T KNOW THAT YET.

23 MS. CLARK:

OKAY.

24 (AT 2:53 P.M. A VIDEOTAPE WAS PLAYED.)
25 MR. COCHRAN:

THAT WAS DETECTIVE LANGE, YOUR HONOR.

26 (BRIEF PAUSE.)
27 MR. COCHRAN:

CORONER, VANNATTER, YOUR HONOR, PHILLIPS, ROGERS.

28 MR. COCHRAN:

THOSE LAST THREE ARE IN SEQUENCE, YOUR HONOR. WILL YOU DO THOSE AGAIN.

29 (THE VIDEOTAPE WAS REPLAYED.)
30 MS. CLARK:

CAN I ASK DEFENSE TO RUN THOSE LAST THREE AGAIN.

31 (THE VIDEOTAPE WAS REPLAYED.)
32 MS. CLARK:

BACK UP TO THE LAST ONE.

33 (THE VIDEOTAPE WAS REPLAYED.)
34 MS. CLARK:

NEXT FRAME AGAIN, PLEASE.

35 (THE VIDEOTAPE WAS REPLAYED.)
36 MS. CLARK:

THAT IS NOT EVEN THE SAME PERSON.

37 MR. COCHRAN:

MAY I BE HEARD, YOUR HONOR?

38 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. DOES THAT COMPLETE THE --

39 MR. COCHRAN:

YES.

40 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. MR. COCHRAN.

41 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, IN THIS SUPPOSEDLY SEARCH FOR TRUTH COUNSEL MAKES A GREAT -- GOES TO PAINS OVER AND OVER AGAIN TALKING ABOUT HOW THIS CRIME SCENE IS PROTECTED. WE ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE, YOUR HONOR, IN ONE OF THESE PHOTOGRAPHS THERE ARE NINE OR TEN PEOPLE IN THIS LITTLE TINY AREA, YOUR HONOR, THAT THEY GOT IN THERE. WE CAN IDENTIFY A LOT OF THOSE PEOPLE FROM THE CORONER'S OFFICE. WE KNOW WHAT TIME THEY GOT THERE, SHORTLY AFTER EIGHT O'CLOCK OR EIGHT O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING ON THE 13TH. WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO SHOW HERE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE EVERYTHING THEIR WAY WHERE THEY COULD SHOW THAT EVERYBODY WALKED AROUND AND DID ALL THESE THINGS, BUT THAT IS NOT THE TRUTH. AND WHY WOULD THEY WANT TO MISLEAD THE JURY? AND THE FACTS ARE WE WILL BE ABLE TO ESTABLISH IT. AND I SHOULD BE ABLE TO ASK THIS OFFICER WHETHER OR NOT HE REPRESENTS -- WHETHER OR NOT HE RECOGNIZES LANGE, WHETHER OR NOT HE RECOGNIZES VANNATTER, WHETHER OR NOT HE RECOGNIZES ROGERS AND ANY NUMBER OF OTHER OFFICERS THAT HE MAY RECOGNIZE WHO WERE WALKING THROUGH THAT SCENE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA. AND WE KNOW THAT THE BODIES ARE NOT MOVED UNTIL THE CORONER GETS THERE AND THEY ARE THERE AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, SO I THINK THE VIDEO IS VERY HELPFUL. WITH REGARD TO THE OFFICER, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THESE SEEM TO BE SEQUENTIAL OF A PERSON WALKING RIGHT IN THE CRIME SCENE, AND I THINK WE WILL BE ABLE TO ESTABLISH THAT AT SOME POINT THEY HOSE THIS AREA DOWN WHEN THEY DIDN'T NEED IT ANY MORE AND THIS OFFICER IS WALKING RIGHT THROUGH THERE AND IT IS JUST AS THOUGH THE DETECTIVES ARE WALKING THROUGH THERE. THERE MAY BE A SHEET OR WHATEVER DOWN, BUT YOU CAN SEE ON SOME OF THESE VIDEOS, JUDGE, SOME PEOPLE ARE WEARING GLOVES, SOME PEOPLE AREN'T. SOME PEOPLE HAVE BOOTIES ON THEIR SHOES, SOME PEOPLE DON'T. BUT THERE ARE EIGHT OR NINE PEOPLE CROWDED IN THIS LITTLE AREA AND THAT IS QUITE CONTRARY TO WHAT MISS CLARK HAS TRIED TO TELL THIS JURY AND THAT IS NOT THE TRUTH.

42 THE COURT:

MISS CLARK.

43 (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)
44 MS. CLARK:

NO, THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS THAT THIS CRIME SCENE WAS HANDLED APPROPRIATELY. MR. COCHRAN WOULD LIKE TO SHOW PHOTOGRAPHS OUT OF CONTEXT, OUT OF TIME AND OUT OF SEQUENCE, AND IN ONE CASE EVEN TRYING TO MISREPRESENT THAT THREE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE OF ONE PERSON. AND THE MORE CLOSELY WE LOOKED, THE MORE WE REALIZE IT IS NOT EVEN THE SAME PERSON IN THOSE THREE PHOTOGRAPHS. TRYING TO MISLEAD AND CONFUSE THIS JURY. AND ALL WE ARE ASKING FOR IS FAIRNESS HERE. WE WANT THE JURY TO GET THE TRUTH AND WE WANT IT TO BE UNTWISTED AND UNDISTORTED BY COUNSEL IN AN EFFORT TO TWIST THEIR MINDS. WE WANT THEM TO GET THE TRUTH. IF THE JURY CONCLUDES THAT THE CRIME SCENE WAS NOT PROPERLY HANDLED, SO BE IT, BUT AT LEAST I WANT THEM TO MAKE THAT CONCLUSION BASED ON WHAT THE TRUTH IS, WHAT THE EVIDENCE REALLY IS, NOT JUST SOME DISTORTED TWISTED VERSION OF IT THAT COUNSEL WANT TO GIVE THEM. TAKING THESE PHOTOGRAPHS OUT OF TIME CONTEXT IS A REAL PROBLEM. AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO RELEASE EVERY CRIME SCENE AND NOT JUST THIS ONE. IT DOESN'T GET PRESERVED FOR ALL ETERNITY. WHAT HAPPENS, AS THE COURT IS VERY FAMILIAR WITH, IS THAT THEY GO IN, THEY TAKE THE PHOTOGRAPHS, THEY COLLECT THE EVIDENCE AND AT SOME POINT WE HAVE TO CLEAN UP THE PLACE AND MOVE ON. NOW, THIS CRIME SCENE WAS WASHED DOWN, BUT NOT UNTIL A FEW DAYS AFTERWARDS, AS FAR AS I RECALL, AND IT WAS WASHED DOWN BY THE FAMILY. PRIOR TO THAT TIME, THOUGH, ON THE 13TH, EVERYTHING WAS COLLECTED AND PRESERVED AT SOME POINT, AFTER WHICH PEOPLE DID -- PEOPLE WERE, I'M SURE, WALKING ON IT, BUT AT THAT POINT IT NO LONGER MATTERED. THE EVIDENCE WAS COLLECTED AND IT WAS PHOTOGRAPHED AND IT WAS DIAGRAMED. EVERYTHING WAS DONE. AND WHEN THAT IS ALL DONE, THEN YES, PEOPLE WILL WALK THROUGH A CRIME SCENE. EVENTUALLY THEY HAVE TO, OTHERWISE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE SECTIONS OF THIS ENTIRE CITY WHERE NO ONE CAN WALK FOR ALL ETERNITY BECAUSE IT WAS A CRIME SCENE. MY GOD, MOST DOWNTOWN OF L.A. WOULD BE UNTOUCHABLE. SO THERE IS JUST NO WAY THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY USE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS FOR ANY PROBATIVE VALUE UNLESS WE ESTABLISH WHAT THE TIME WAS. IF THE TIME IS DEMONSTRATED TO BE AT A POINT IN TIME WHEN THIS OFFICER INDICATES IT WAS CAREFULLY CORDONED OFF AND UNIFORMS WERE ALLOWED IN, WHEN ORDINARILY VERY, VERY FEW ARE, THEN THAT IS ONE THING, OR AT A TIME WHEN HE IS SAYING WE ARE ALL WALKING UP THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PATHWAY IN THE SHRUBBERY TO AVOID THE BLOOD IN THE WALKWAY AND THE TIME SHOWS THAT THIS OCCURRED WHEN HE CLAIMS IT COULDN'T HAVE, THAT IS IMPEACHING. BUT AT THIS POINT IT IS NOT IMPEACHING; IT IS DISTORTING, CONFUSING AND MISLEADING AND THAT IS ALL IT IS. AND UNDER 352 THE COURT HAS AN OBLIGATION TO MAKE SURE THE JURY IS NOT SO MISLED. I SHOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THE COUNTER THAT THE COURT SEES ON THE TAPE THAT THEY PLAYED FOR YOU IS NOT EVEN THE COUNTER FROM THE VIDEO. IT IS A COUNTER FROM THE LASER DISK THAT COUNSEL HAS WHICH IS IRRELEVANT TO EVERYTHING IN THIS CASE. COUNSEL KNOWS THE REAL TIME. HE KNOWS IT, YOUR HONOR, AND HE IS DELIBERATELY HIDING IT FROM THIS COURT AND HE WANTS TO HIDE IT FROM THIS JURY AS WELL SO THAT THEY WILL BE MISLEAD AND CONFUSED, AND THAT IS THE PROBLEM. I DON'T CARE IF THE JURY SEES THIS VIDEOTAPE. IF IT IS PUT IN THE CORRECT TIME FRAME, THEN THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO SEE IT. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THIS IS A CUT UP, CHOPPED UP VERSION OF SOMETHING COUNSEL HAS CONVENIENTLY DELETED THAT DOESN'T SUPPORT HIS ARGUMENT AND HAS DELETED THE TIME THAT WOULD GIVE ANY PROBATIVE VALUE OR EVEN ANY IMPEACHING VALUE. SO AT THIS POINT WE HAVE NO INSIGHT. THERE IS NO PROBATIVE VALUE. WE HAVE ONLY THE PREJUDICIAL VALUE OF MISLEADING AND CONFUSING THIS JURY. AND UNLESS COUNSEL CAN ESTABLISH THE ACCURATE TIME WHEN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN, WHEN THE VIDEO CLIPS WERE TAKEN, IT SHOULD NEVER BE SHOWN TO THE JURY THIS WAY.

45 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, MAY I --

46 MS. CLARK:

MAY I HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?

47 THE COURT:

SURE.

48 (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
49 (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)
50 MS. CLARK:

TWO MORE ISSUES, YOUR HONOR. WE HAVE NEVER BEEN GIVEN A COPY OF THIS TAPE, ALTHOUGH COUNSEL PROMISED IT TO US, WHAT, A MONTH AGO. WE SHOULD HAVE HAD IT AND WE SHOULD HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT. AND THIS IS ANOTHER DISCOVERY ISSUE. THEY HAVE HAD IT OBVIOUSLY FOR QUITE SOMETIME. THE COURT ORDERED THEM TO GIVE IT TO US AND WE STILL DON'T HAVE IT. WE NEED TO KNOW WHAT KIND OF EDITING MACHINE THEY USED.

51 THE COURT:

OH, WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW THAT.

52 MS. CLARK:

WE NEED TO KNOW IT. THE COURT MAY NOT BE INTERESTED, BUT THE PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW.

53 THE COURT:

NO, WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW THAT.

54 MS. CLARK:

BUT IN ANY CASE, YOUR HONOR, IT IS ALSO THIS OFFICER'S TESTIMONY THAT HE LEFT AT 7:15, AND FROM THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, THE NATURE OF THE SUNLIGHT SHOWN WE CAN SEE IT IS MUCH LATER THAN THAT, SO WE NEED THE REAL TIME. WE NEED THE REAL TIME OR ELSE IT IS NOT EVEN IMPEACHING, IT IS ONLY CONFUSING AND MISLEADING AND VERY PREJUDICIAL. THERE IS NO PROBATIVE VALUE.

55 MR. COCHRAN:

MAY I RESPOND, YOUR HONOR?

56 THE COURT:

BRIEFLY.

57 MR. COCHRAN:

COUNSEL TALKS ALL THIS STUFF ABOUT WANTING THE TRUTH AND THEY ARE ALWAYS WANTING TO HIDE THE TRUTH.

58 THE COURT:

KNOWING THE COURT REPORTER HAS NOW FOUR MINUTES LEFT OF PAPER.

KEY QUOTE
59 MR. COCHRAN:

THEY ALWAYS WANT TO HIDE THE TRUTH, YOUR HONOR. WE HAVE MR. JOHN WHITNEY WHO HELPED TO PUT THIS ON THE LASER DISK AND THAT IS A LASER DISK AND COUNSEL IS MORE THAN AWARE OF IT. WE WILL GIVE THEM A COPY OF OUR LASER DISK, YOUR HONOR, IF THEY WANT TO. THIS IS PREPOSTEROUS FOR HER TO STAND UP AND MAKE THIS ARGUMENT TODAY. RIGHT THINKING PEOPLE IN THIS COURTROOM AND OUTSIDE -- YOU CAN SEE THESE PEOPLE STEPPING OVER THE BODY, YOUR HONOR. LANGE IS STEPPING OVER THE BODIES. THE BODIES HAVE NOT BEEN MOVED. AND SHE HAS THE TEMERITY, THE UNMITIGATED GALL TO TALK ABOUT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS CRIME SCENE. THE PEOPLE ARE GATHERED AROUND THERE AND THEY WANT TO GIVE YOU A PICTURE TODAY THEY TIPTOED AROUND AND NEVER TOUCHED ANYTHING. THAT IS PREPOSTEROUS, YOUR HONOR. ULTIMATELY THEY CAN HAVE ALL THE THEORIES THEY WANT, BUT AS I SAID BEFORE, THEY ARE GOING TO BE KILLED BY THE FACTS. AND I WOULD LIKE, YOUR HONOR, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, TO ADDRESS MR. WHITNEY ABOUT THIS. THIS ISN'T ANYTHING WE MADE UP. THESE ARE THE SAME VIDEOS THEY HAVE SEEN NOW FOR THE LAST TWO OR THREE WEEKS. THEY ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO OUR VIDEO, YOUR HONOR. WE CAN LAY A FOUNDATION FOR THIS. WE CAN IDENTIFY THESE PEOPLE IN THAT VIDEO AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO SHOW THAT TO THIS JURY. I MEAN, THIS IS WHAT CROSS-EXAMINATION IS. WE WILL BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY DID NOT HANDLE THIS SCENE APPROPRIATELY, YOUR HONOR. WE CAN CLOCK IN THE VIDEO -- WORRY ABOUT CLOCKING IN THE NUMBER. MR. WHITNEY, WOULD YOU ADDRESS THE COURT. HE HAS KNOWLEDGE, IF THE COURT WOULD ALLOW ME TO ASK HIM ABOUT THE TIMING ON THE VIDEO ALSO.

60 THE COURT:

THE COUNTER THAT IS GOING ON ON THE LASER, THAT REALLY DOESN'T CONCERN ME.

61 MR. COCHRAN:

OKAY. I KNOW WHAT COUNTERS ARE ON LASER DISCS. I MEAN, THAT IS NOT A MYSTERY.

62 (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
63 MR. COCHRAN:

MR. DOUGLAS ADVISED WE HAVE GIVEN THEM THE TAPES ALSO, YOUR HONOR.

64 THE COURT:

WE HAVE GIVEN THEM THE TAPES?

65 MR. DOUGLAS:

YES, YOUR HONOR. WE GAVE THEM THE FIRST TAPE ON THE MONDAY IT WAS DISCUSSED. WE GAVE THEM THE SECOND TAPE LAST WEEK. I PUT IT ON THE RECORD.

66 MR. COCHRAN:

HE DID.

67 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME, AND I WANT TO EMPHASIZE AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION UNDER 352 AND UNDER FOUNDATIONAL BASES FOR THESE REASONS, AND LISTEN CAREFULLY, COUNSEL: ONE, YOUR OFFER WAS THAT YOU WANTED THIS OFFICER TO LOOK AT SOME OF THESE ITEMS AND IDENTIFY WHO THESE POLICE OFFICERS WERE. THERE IS NO DISPUTE AS TO WHO THESE PEOPLE ARE. WE ALL KNOW WHO THEY ARE. IT IS NOT A DISPUTED ISSUE. SO TO WASTE THE COURT'S TIME TO LOOK AT A VIDEOTAPE AND SAY THIS IS DETECTIVE VANNATTER, THIS IS DETECTIVE LANGE, THAT IS A WASTE OF THE COURT'S TIME BECAUSE THAT IS NOT A FACT IN DISPUTE. THE ISSUE IS WHO HAD ACCESS TO THE CRIME SCENE AND WHEN. WITHOUT ESTABLISHING WHEN THOSE VIDEOTAPES WERE TAKEN, IT IS MISLEADING TO THE JURY, UNLESS YOU'VE GOT SOMEBODY WHO CAN SAY IN RELATIVELY ABSOLUTE TERMS WHEN THOSE VIDEOTAPES WERE TAKEN.

THIS WITNESS CANNOT TESTIFY TO THOSE THINGS BECAUSE HE TESTIFIED HE WAS IN A CAR IN THE BACK ALLEY UNTIL HE LEFT THE CRIME SCENE. THAT WAS HIS ASSIGNMENT. THERE ARE CERTAINLY OTHER WITNESSES WHO WERE AT THE FRONT WHO CAN TESTIFY TO THESE THINGS. THIS IS THE WRONG WITNESS AND THIS IS THE WRONG TIME TO BRING UP THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.

68 MR. COCHRAN:

WE STARTED OUT, YOUR HONOR, WITH US TALKING ABOUT THE UNIFORMED OFFICER, AND MAY I JUST ADDRESS THAT FOR A MOMENT? TALK ABOUT MISLEADING. WHERE WE HAVE THEM GOING TO ALL THIS TROUBLE TO SHOW ALL THESE THINGS, I THINK I SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO ASK HIM IF YOU RECOGNIZE THAT OFFICER WALKING RIGHT THROUGH THE SCENE.

69 THE COURT:

THAT ONE PHOTOGRAPH? THAT ONE PHOTOGRAPH?

70 MR. COCHRAN:

YES.

71 THE COURT:

THAT WE HAVE OF THE BACK OF THE OFFICER?

72 MR. COCHRAN:

YES.

73 THE COURT:

THAT ONE PHOTOGRAPH I'M GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO ASK HIM IF HE RECOGNIZES THE PERSON.

74 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU.

75 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THE OTHER STUFF -- THAT IS A FACTUAL DISPUTE AS TO WHO THIS IS. WE MAY NEVER RESOLVE IT.

76 MR. COCHRAN:

I WANT TO ASK HIM AND THERE WILL BE LANGE AND VANNATTER.

77 THE COURT:

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE POINT I'M MAKING?

78 MR. COCHRAN:

I HEARD YOU LOUDLY AND CLEARLY AND I AM READY TO PROCEED.

79 THE COURT:

BUT THAT VIDEOTAPE IS NOT COMING IN UNLESS AND UNTIL SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SAYS I SHOT THAT VIDEOTAPE AND THIS IS THE DATE AND TIME WHEN I TOOK IT, BECAUSE THE TIMING IS CRITICAL HERE, BUT THIS IS NOT THE GUY TO ARGUE WITH IT ABOUT --

KEY QUOTE
80 MR. COCHRAN:

I AGREE.

81 THE COURT:

-- OVER IT.

82 MR. COCHRAN:

ALL RIGHT. MAY WE PROCEED, YOUR HONOR?

83 MS. CLARK:

MAY I ASK, WITH RESPECT TO THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT COUNSEL IS GOING TO SHOW TO THE WITNESS, UNTIL WE ESTABLISH A TIME FRAME FOR THAT PICTURE, MAY I ASK THAT IT NOT BE SHOWN TO THE JURY?

84 MR. COCHRAN:

YOU JUST RULED ON THAT.

85 THE COURT:

NO. I'M GOING TO LET HIM SHOW THAT, BUT YOU CAN ON CROSS-EXAMINATION ASK HIM IS THERE ANY IDEA AND WE WILL TELL THE JURY, I'M SURE THROUGH YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION, THAT WE HAVE NO IDEA WHEN THAT IT WAS TAKEN. IT COULD HAVE BEEN THE NEXT DAY, IT COULD HAVE BEEN THREE DAYS LATER.

86 MS. CLARK:

BUT EVEN IF HE CAN IDENTIFY THE OFFICER, HOW DOES THAT HELP TO TIME THE PICTURE?

87 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, YOU HAVE RULED ON THIS. MAY WE PROCEED?

88 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE.

89 (BRIEF PAUSE.)
90 THE COURT:

CAN WE HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE. CAN WE HAVE YOUR WITNESS BROUGHT BACK INTO THE COURTROOM SO WE CAN GET STARTED.

91 (BRIEF PAUSE.)
92 THE COURT:

OFFICER RISKE, WOULD YOU RESUME THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (5)

Johnnie Cochran
LANGE IS STEPPING OVER THE BODIES. THE BODIES HAVE NOT BEEN MOVED. AND SHE HAS THE TEMERITY, THE UNMITIGATED GALL TO TALK ABOUT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS CRIME SCENE.
Cochran's most charged attack, asserting the video directly contradicts the prosecution's narrative that the crime scene was carefully protected.
Marcia Clark
COUNSEL KNOWS THE REAL TIME. HE KNOWS IT, YOUR HONOR, AND HE IS DELIBERATELY HIDING IT FROM THIS COURT AND HE WANTS TO HIDE IT FROM THIS JURY AS WELL SO THAT THEY WILL BE MISLED AND CONFUSED.
Clark's sharpest accusation — that Cochran intentionally stripped the timestamp from the laser disk to obscure when the footage was actually shot.
Lance A. Ito
BUT THAT VIDEOTAPE IS NOT COMING IN UNLESS AND UNTIL SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SAYS I SHOT THAT VIDEOTAPE AND THIS IS THE DATE AND TIME WHEN I TOOK IT, BECAUSE THE TIMING IS CRITICAL HERE.
Ito's definitive ruling: the tape is conditionally excluded for lack of foundation — timing, not identity, is the real evidentiary issue.
Lance A. Ito
KNOWING THE COURT REPORTER HAS NOW FOUR MINUTES LEFT OF PAPER.
Rare moment of dry humor from Ito cutting off Cochran mid-argument, signaling impatience with the length of counsel's speeches.
Johnnie Cochran
ULTIMATELY THEY CAN HAVE ALL THE THEORIES THEY WANT, BUT AS I SAID BEFORE, THEY ARE GOING TO BE KILLED BY THE FACTS.
Classic Cochran rhetorical confidence — the defense's posture that the video evidence is dispositive regardless of prosecution spin.

Evidence (1)

Informal
Laser disk videotape showing multiple individuals — including Detectives Lange, Vannatter, Phillips, Rogers, and a coroner — at the Bundy crime scene
played in chambers, ultimately excluded pending proper time foundation; single still photograph of uniformed officer allowed

Notable Exchanges (3)

Marcia ClarkJohnnie Cochran
Extended argument over whether the videotape's missing timestamp made it inherently misleading. Clark accused Cochran of deliberately deleting time data; Cochran accused Clark of hiding the truth about crime scene contamination. Both sides invoked 'truth' repeatedly while accusing the other of distortion.
heated
Lance A. ItoMarcia Clark
Clark insisted the prosecution needed to know what editing machine defense used; Ito flatly shut her down twice: 'No, we don't need to know that.'
terse
Lance A. ItoJohnnie Cochran
After Ito excluded the full videotape, Cochran negotiated down to a single photograph of an unidentified uniformed officer, which the judge allowed. Cochran immediately pivoted to also wanting Lange and Vannatter identified, testing the ruling's limits.
strategic

Light Moments (2)

Lance A. Ito
Ito interrupted Cochran's response by noting the court reporter had 'four minutes left of paper,' a dry signal to wrap it up.
Johnnie Cochran
Cochran dismissed Clark's concern about the laser disk counter: 'I know what counters are on laser discs. I mean, that is not a mystery.'

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ LAPD (Lange, Vannatter, unnamed uniformed officers)
videotape impeachment
Cochran sought to use the videotape to show numerous officers — some without gloves or booties — crowding the crime scene and stepping over bodies, directly contradicting Clark's representation that the scene was carefully controlled.
⚔ Johnnie Cochran
accusation of intentional evidence manipulation
Clark accused Cochran of deliberately editing out the timestamp from the laser disk version of the tape to prevent the court and jury from establishing when the footage was shot, calling it an intentional effort to mislead.

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)
Proceeding 4801 • 92 utterances
Criminal Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 FEB 9, 1995 📄 Evidentiary hearing: videotape
FEB 9, 1995 KRT DvH TD