COUNSEL, BACK ON THE RECORD, PLEASE. LET'S HAVE IT QUIET IN THE COURTROOM, PLEASE. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT. COUNSEL, I WANT TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION TWO MATTERS. FIRST OF ALL, NOW THAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE A JURY IMPANELED AND HEARING THE CASE, I URGE COUNSEL NOT TO USE THE REST ROOM FACILITIES IN THE JURY ROOM BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING IN THERE AT THE SAME TIME, WHICH IS NOT APPROPRIATE. THE SECOND MATTER IS MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT. IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION OVER THE RECESS THAT A TELEVISION FEED WAS SENT OUT OF THIS COURTROOM WHICH INCLUDED A VIEW OF OUR ALTERNATE JURORS, WHICH IS A DIRECT VIOLATION OF RULE 980. AND I HAVE NOW CUT THE VIDEO FEED GOING OUT OF THE COURTROOM. THAT IS A DIRECT VIOLATION OF 980 AND I'M GOING TO TERMINATE THE TELEVISION COVERAGE AS A RESULT OF THAT.
I MIGHT ADD, THE VIDEO SIGNAL WENT OUT, THE PERSON OPERATING THE DELAY DEVICE DID NOT CUT THE VIDEO FEED AFTER THAT WENT OUT AND IT WAS BROADCAST TO THE PUBLIC. SO BOTH THE CAMERA OPERATOR MADE AN ERROR AND THE PERSON ON THE DELAY BOX MADE AN ERROR, AND I INDICATED TO ALL PARTIES THAT IF THIS WOULD OCCUR, THEN I WOULD TERMINATE THE TELEVISION COVERAGE.
YOUR HONOR, WE SHARE THE COURT'S CONCERN AND ESPECIALLY VIOLATING SOMETHING AS BASIC AS SHOWING THE JURORS, WHICH THE COURT HAS OVEREMPHASIZED TIME AND TIME AGAIN.
AND WE ARE EQUALLY CONCERNED AND DO NOT WISH TO ADDRESS THAT ISSUE ANY FURTHER. HOWEVER, WE ARE REPRESENTING A MAN WHOSE LIFE IS AT STAKE IN THIS TRIAL AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW THAT HE IS WRONGLY CHARGED. AND, THEREFORE, HIS LIFE AFTER THIS TRIAL IN THE WORLD OF PUBLIC OPINION IS ALSO AT STAKE. AND IN FAIRNESS TO MR. SIMPSON, TO HIS MOTHER, HIS SISTERS, HIS CHILDREN, WHO ARE HERE, HIS FRIENDS AND SUPPORTERS WORLDWIDE, I THINK IT WOULD BE TREMENDOUSLY UNFAIR TO HAVE THE WORLD SEE THE OPENING STATEMENTS OF THE PROSECUTION AND NOT SEE THE OPENING STATEMENTS ON BEHALF OF MR. SIMPSON. SO WE WILL NOT OBJECT TO THE COURT TERMINATING THE TELEVISION COVERAGE AS THE COURT HAS INDICATED, BUT WE WOULD SINCERELY ASK YOUR HONOR TO RECONSIDER BECAUSE OF THE EFFECT THIS WILL HAVE ON MR. SIMPSON, ON THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE AND ON HIS LIFE AFTER THIS CASE AND IF IN FACT HE IS RENDERED INNOCENT OF THESE CHARGES. AND ON BEHALF OF MR. SIMPSON AND HIS FAMILY, WE ASK YOUR HONOR, PLEASE, TO AIR OUR OPENING STATEMENT ALSO. AFTER THAT, WE WILL SHARE THE COURT'S VIEW OF THE ISSUE.
WELL, YOUR HONOR, THE IMPORTANT PEOPLE TO HEAR FROM BOTH SIDES IS THE JURY. THEY'RE THE ONES THAT MATTER HERE. THE DEFENDANT WILL HAVE HIS OPENING STATEMENT HEARD BY THE PEOPLE WHO WILL VOTE ON THE ISSUE OF GUILT OR INNOCENCE, AND THAT IS WHAT COUNTS. THE RADIO IS ALLOWED TO I UNDERSTAND BROADCAST IT; IS THAT CORRECT? THE AUDIO FEED IS NOT TURNED ON; IS THAT -- THAT'S A QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO -- I'M ASKING. WE HAVE PRINT MEDIA HERE. WE HAVE REPORTERS HERE, ALL OF WHOM WILL BE ABLE TO PRINT IN A WORD-BY-WORD BASIS EVERYTHING THAT IS SAID BY COUNSEL. BUT WE ARE NOT PLAYING TO THE WORLD HERE, YOUR HONOR. WE'RE PLAYING TO THE JURY. THE JURY IS THE ONE THAT HAS TO HEAR EVERYTHING, AND THEY WILL WHETHER THE COURT CUTS THE FEED OR NOT. BUT WE DO -- THE PRESS IS PRESENT IN FULL FORCE AND THEY WILL BE HERE TO REPORT EVERYTHING THAT'S SAID.
WELL, OBVIOUSLY THIS IS AN UNUSUAL SITUATION. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER COURT THAT'S BEEN PLACED IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE WITH THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF DILEMMA. I CAN'T BEGIN TO TELL YOU MY CONCERN AND MY DISAPPOINTMENT WITH THE ELECTRONIC NEWS MEDIA FOR THEIR INABILITY TO FOLLOW A VERY FUNDAMENTAL AND BASIC RULE. AND BEFORE MR. SHAPIRO RAISED THE CONCERN THAT MR. SIMPSON HAS, THERE'S A FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION OF FAIRNESS TOO AS FAR AS HIS REPUTATION IS CONCERNED. I'M VERY COGNIZANT OF HIS INTEREST IN PRESERVING AS MUCH AS HE CAN OF HIS REPUTATION UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. THIS IS A VERY UNUSUAL SITUATION I FIND MYSELF IN. ON THE ONE HAND, I'VE MADE IT VERY CLEAR TO THE NEWS MEDIA THAT IF THERE'S A VIOLATION OF RULE 980, THAT THEY WOULD LOSE THEIR PRIVILEGE IN THIS COURTROOM. THEY HAVE DEMONSTRATED AN INABILITY TO COMPLY WITH THE COURT'S ORDER. SO MY INCLINATION IS TO TERMINATE ALL TELEVISION COVERAGE AT THIS POINT.
NO. I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ISSUES ARE. I DON'T THINK EMBELLISHING ON ANY OF THIS IS GOING TO HELP ME ON THIS DECISION. ON THE ONE HAND, I HAVE MY CREDIBILITY AS A JUDGE AT STAKE. BUT I TOLD THEM THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN IF THEY VIOLATED MY ORDER. I ALSO HAVE TO BALANCE FAIRNESS TO YOUR CLIENT CERTAINLY IN MAKING A DECISION. OUR FRIENDS IN THE NEWS MEDIA, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. LET'S TAKE A RECESS. IN FACT, I'M GOING TO TAKE A RECESS FOR THE REST OF THE DAY. THIS IS UNBELIEVABLE. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS. I WANT KELLI SAGER HERE AT 8:30.
I CAN'T BEGIN TO TELL YOU MY CONCERN AND MY DISAPPOINTMENT WITH THE ELECTRONIC NEWS MEDIA FOR THEIR INABILITY TO FOLLOW A VERY FUNDAMENTAL AND BASIC RULE.
WE ARE REPRESENTING A MAN WHOSE LIFE IS AT STAKE IN THIS TRIAL... HIS LIFE AFTER THIS TRIAL IN THE WORLD OF PUBLIC OPINION IS ALSO AT STAKE.
WE ARE NOT PLAYING TO THE WORLD HERE, YOUR HONOR. WE'RE PLAYING TO THE JURY.
THIS IS UNBELIEVABLE. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS. I WANT KELLI SAGER HERE AT 8:30.