WHERE DID YOU GO? WHY DON'T YOU APPROACH PLEASE, MISS CLARK, AND LET ME GIVE YOU ONE EXTRA COPY.

BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. ALL THE PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH COUNSEL. MR. DOUGLAS, YOU HAD ONE LAST COMMENT?

I HAD, YOUR HONOR -- I HAVE TWO. DURING THE BREAK, WE HAD OCCASION TO SPEAK WITH CATHY RANDA, WHO HAS BEEN MR. SIMPSON'S TRUSTED EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS. MISS RANDA WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE VERY CLEAR INSIGHT INTO THE KEEPING AND THE CREATING OF CALENDARS, WHICH ARE THE SUBJECT OF THIS EARLIER PROCEEDING TODAY. THE EVIDENCE IS, YOUR HONOR, AND I CAN OFFER AS AN OFFICER OF THE COURT THAT WE WILL PRESENT EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT MISS RANDA MAINTAINED TWO DUAL CALENDARS. THERE WAS ONE THAT SHE WOULD MAINTAIN FOR HER OWN WHERE THERE WOULD BE OCCASIONS THAT THERE WOULD BE WRITING THROUGH OR SCRIBBLING OR WRITING OVER, AND THERE WAS A SECOND THAT SHE WOULD MAINTAIN FOR MR. SIMPSON. AND HIS COPY, WHICH IS REFLECTED ON THE BOARDS THAT WE WERE TRYING TO OFFER, WAS THE CLEAN COPY. SHE DID NOT WANT TO BURDEN MR. SIMPSON WITH ALL OF THE SCRATCH-OUTS OR ANY OF THE CHANGES THAT IN FACT WOULD BE GOING ON IN HIS BUSY SCHEDULE. THEREFORE, YOUR HONOR, THERE ARE TWO ORIGINALS, EACH OF WHICH WE BELIEVE ARE ADMISSIBLE WE CAN OFFER AND TESTIFY TO THE EVENTS THAT MR. SIMPSON WAS ENGAGED IN OVER THE COURSE OF VERY RELEVANT PERIODS OF TIME. AS THE COURT IS AWARE, WE ARE TRYING TO REBUT CERTAIN ALLEGATIONS THAT THERE WAS AN OBSESSIVENESS, THAT THERE WAS A RISE IN TENSION OCCURRING IN THE WEEKS AND THE MONTHS PRIOR TO JUNE 12TH. WE HOPE THROUGH THE OFFERING OF THIS CALENDAR TO BE ABLE TO SUGGEST TO THE JURY THAT IN FACT MR. SIMPSON WAS A BUSY MAN, THAT HE WAS TRAVELING, THAT HE WAS DOING OTHER THINGS AND THAT HE IS NOT THE SORT OF ANIMAL THAT THE PEOPLE ARE ATTEMPTING TO PORTRAY. WE ARGUE, YOUR HONOR, THAT THIS CALENDAR WILL SATISFY ALL AUTHENTICATION AND FOUNDATIONAL EVIDENCE. AND IF IT OCCURS THAT WE ARE LEFT AT THE TIME OF MISS RANDA'S TESTIMONY WHERE SHE IS UNABLE TO PROPERLY AUTHENTICATE THIS CALENDAR, IT IS THE DEFENDANT WHO WILL SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES, IT IS THE DEFENDANT WHO WILL SUFFER THE SLINGS AND THE ARROWS OF THE JURY OR LOSE WHATEVER CREDIBILITY THERE MIGHT BE THROUGH THE OFFERING OF ANTICIPATED EVIDENCE THAT WILL NOT ULTIMATELY BE ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE. THAT'S THE FIRST POINT, YOUR HONOR. THE SECOND POINT, CURIOUSLY, I WAS THE VICTIM, IF YOU WILL, OF TREMENDOUS ANIMUS THIS MORNING THAT I'M SURE DID VIOLENCE TO MY GOOD NAME, TO MY MOTHER AND MY FAMILY ACROSS THE COUNTRY ABOUT HOW I WAS SANDBAGGING THE PROSECUTION THROUGH MY FAILURE TO PROVIDE COPIES OF EVERY BOARD OR EVERY GRAPHIC THAT WE HAD INTENDED TO INTRODUCE AT TRIAL. LO AND BEHOLD, I WAS GIVEN ABOUT FIVE MINUTES BEFORE NOON SOME BOARDS THAT ARE THE COROLLARY OF THE SANDBAGGING, IF YOU WILL. THERE ARE BOARDS THAT THE PEOPLE SEEK TO INTRODUCE, AND I WAS ABLE TO PERSUADE THEM AS TO THE WISDOM AGAINST SEEKING TO INTRODUCE AT LEAST TWO OR THREE OTHERS. BUT I HAVE FOUR, YOUR HONOR; AND THERE ARE OBJECTIONS THAT I LODGED AS TO THE FOUR. THE FIRST WOULD BE WHAT IS TITLED A CHRONOLOGY. AND, YOUR HONOR, THERE ARE ARGUMENTATIVE DESCRIPTIONS OF DIFFERENT EVENTS IN THIS CHRONOLOGY AND THERE ARE SOME EVENTS INCLUDED THAT THE COURT HAS RULED ARE INADMISSIBLE. AND FOR THESE REASONS, I THINK IT IS FAR MORE PREJUDICIAL THAN PROBATIVE THAT THIS BOARD BE ADMITTED. FOR EXAMPLE, IN 1986, THERE'S A REFERENCE TO THE VICTORIA BEACH INCIDENT. THAT IS AN INCIDENT THAT THE COURT HAS RULED IS NOT ADMISSIBLE.

NO. THAT'S NOT CORRECT. WHAT I RULED IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE LATE DISCLOSURE, IT CANNOT BE USED DURING THE COURSE OF OPENING STATEMENTS.

I STAND CORRECTED, YOUR HONOR. THEREFORE, IT SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BE USED ON THE BOARD IN OPENING STATEMENT.

MAY I INTERRUPT FOR ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? THESE BOARDS ARE NOT IN EXISTENCE YET. THEY ARE NOT HERE. I'M READY TO DO MY OPENING STATEMENT AS IT RELATES TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND THIS ISN'T EVEN AN ISSUE AT THIS POINT.

ALL RIGHT. THEN I WOULD SUGGEST IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE OFFERING THESE, MR. DARDEN, THAT WE NOT -- WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE OF GIVING THIS TO MR. DOUGLAS AT THIS POINT?

HE TOLD ME HE WAS GOING TO USE THEM IN HIS OPENING, YOUR HONOR.

ANY RESPONSE TO MR. DOUGLAS' COMMENTS REGARDING THE DUAL CALENDAR ISSUE, MR. DARDEN?

YES, YOUR HONOR. I THINK THE GRAND JURY TRANSCRIPT WILL SPEAK FOR ITSELF. IT WAS HERE A LITTLE WHILE AGO. I'LL HAVE IT BACK HERE TOMORROW MORNING. AS I RECALL, MISS RANDA TOLD THE GRAND JURY THAT SHE HAD THE ORIGINAL CALENDAR. SHE TURNED THAT OVER TO A LAWYER, AND THEN SHE MADE A SECOND COPY OR ATTEMPTED TO MAKE A SECOND COPY FROM THE FIRST. IT'S NOT A XEROX COPY. IT'S A HANDWRITTEN COPY. SO SHE OBTAINED ANOTHER CALENDAR BOOK. IN ADDITION, AS I RECALL, THERE'S ACTUALLY A THIRD CALENDAR WHICH IS TYPED AND WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THIS ONE, BUT WAS FOUND IN MR. COWLING'S BRONCO AS I RECALL AT THE END OF THE CHASE. SO THERE'S ACTUALLY THREE CALENDARS. AND THAT IS NOT THE ORIGINAL.

ALL RIGHT.

I DON'T THINK ANYMORE NEED BE SAID.

ALL RIGHT. THE OBJECTION WILL BE SUSTAINED. THERE'S TOO MUCH CONTROVERSY ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR CALENDAR FOR ME TO FEEL COMFORTABLE GOING FORWARD WITH IT IN ITS PRESENT STATE. ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, THEN NOW I'M GOING TO INVITE THE JURY FINALLY TO JOIN US TODAY FOR THE PURPOSES OF PREINSTRUCTING THEM AS WE HAD DISCUSSED EARLIER IN THE CASE. BEFORE I BEGIN THE PRE-INSTRUCTION, LET ME JUST MAKE A COMMENT TO COUNSEL.

I AM SORRY, YOUR HONOR.

COUNSEL, WE ARE ALL ACQUAINTED WITH EACH OTHER OVER MANY LONG YEARS. I KNOW THIS COURT HAS BEEN COLLEAGUES WITH A MAJORITY OF COUNSEL HERE AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER. I KNOW THAT MR. COCHRAN HAS PROBABLY SUPERVISED TWO-THIRDS OF THE LAWYERS IN THIS COURTROOM TODAY AT SOME POINT IN TIME.

YES, YOUR HONOR. I LEARNED THE ERROR OF MY WAYS A LONG TIME AGO.

COUNSEL, THIS IS A SERIOUS COMMENT IF YOU DON'T MIND. MY POINT IS THAT WE'RE ALL ACQUAINTED WITH EACH OTHER EITHER PERSONALLY OR BY REPUTATION. I THINK WE ALL KNOW AND RESPECT EACH OTHER ON THE BASIS OF OUR PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE AND PRIOR ACQUAINTANCESHIP. I EXPECT TO SEE A VERY HARD-FOUGHT BATTLE. IF TODAY'S PROCEEDING JUST TO GET TO THE OPENING STATEMENTS IS ANY INDICIA OF THAT, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE ONE OF THE HARDEST FOUGHT LEGAL BATTLES IN MY RECOLLECTION CERTAINLY. I ANTICIPATE THAT BOTH SIDES WILL SPEND A LOT OF TIME WALKING ON THE EDGE OF THE LEGAL ENVELOPE HERE, AND BELIEVE ME, I WILL DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO KEEP YOU FROM GOING OVER THAT EDGE. I EXPECT TO SEE A DEMONSTRATION OF ABSOLUTELY FABULOUS LAWYERING SKILLS, BUT I ALSO EXPECT TO SEE ABSOLUTE PROFESSIONALISM IN THIS ENDEAVOR. I WANT YOU ALL TO REMEMBER BEFORE WE START THIS CASE THAT YOUR CONDUCT HERE WILL HAVE AN IMPACT NOT ONLY UPON THE WELFARE OF YOUR RESPECTIVE CLIENTS, BUT UPON THE IMAGE OF OUR PROFESSION FOR MANY YEARS TO COME. THOSE WHO SAY THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM ITSELF IS ON TRIAL MAY BE CORRECT IN THAT OBSERVATION. IF YOU RECALL, WHEN WE STARTED THIS TRIAL, I INVITED EACH COUNSEL IN TO CHAMBERS TO CHAT WITH ME. I INDICATED TO YOU THAT I EXPECTED AT THE END OF THIS TRIAL, THAT WE WOULD ALL GO OUT AND HAVE DINNER TOGETHER ON ME AND THAT WE WOULD ALL BE PROFESSIONALS AND BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH EACH ACCORDINGLY, AND THAT INVITATION IS STILL OPEN AND I ANTICIPATE WILL STILL BE OPEN AT THE CLOSE OF THIS TRIAL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR.