Redirect examination of John Edwards (part 1)

📄 Redirect examination of John Edwards (part 1) — Tuesday, January 31, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JAN\31\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-JOHN-E.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 9 of 167

◀ Cross-examination of John Edwards (part 4) Sidebar: redirect examination ▶

Witness: Det. John Edwards
Examiner: Christopher Darden
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Tuesday, January 31, 1995 • Utterances: 35

Darden redirects Detective Edwards to hammer home that only Nicole Brown Simpson had visible injuries — scratches, bruises on both sides of her body — while OJ Simpson showed none. The examination ends on a cliffhanger as Edwards begins to describe a separate conversation with Nicole about why the argument occurred, cut off mid-answer.

# 1 THE COURT:

MR. DARDEN.

# 2

REDIRECT EXAMINATION

# 3

BY MR. DARDEN:

# 4 Q:

DETECTIVE EDWARDS, YOU TESTIFIED THAT YOU SAW SCRATCHES AND BRUISES ON NICOLE BROWN; IS THAT RIGHT?

# 5 A:

YES, I DID.

# 6 Q:

YOU DIDN'T SEE ANY SCRATCHES ON THE DEFENDANT?

# 7 MR. COCHRAN:

LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE AND IMPROPER REDIRECT EXAMINATION. I DIDN'T GO INTO THAT.

# 8 MR. DARDEN:

YES, HE DID.

# 9 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 10 MR. COCHRAN:

IMPROPER REDIRECT EXAMINATION.

# 11 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 12 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU SEE ANY SCRATCHES ON THE DEFENDANT?

# 13 A:

NO, I DID NOT.

# 14 Q:

DID YOU SEE ANY BRUISES ON THE DEFENDANT?

# 15 A:

NO, I DID NOT.

# 16 Q:

DID YOU SEE A HANDPRINT AROUND HIS NECK?

# 17 A:

NO.

# 18 Q:

THE ONLY PERSON YOU SAW WITH SCRATCHES AND BRUISES AND SCRATCHES WAS NICOLE BROWN?

# 19 MR. COCHRAN:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

# 20 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED. IT IS LEADING AND ARGUMENTATIVE AND SUGGESTIVE. CALM DOWN, GENTLEMEN.

# 21 MR. DARDEN:

I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT?

# 22 THE COURT:

CALM DOWN, GENTLEMEN. THE ISSUE WAS WHETHER OR NOT YOU SAW ANY INJURIES ON THE DEFENDANT. THAT WAS A YES OR NO.

KEY QUOTE

# 23 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: DID YOU ONLY SEE INJURIES ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF NICOLE BROWN'S BODY?

# 24 A:

NO. IT WAS ON THE LEFT SIDE ALSO.

KEY QUOTE

# 25 Q:

YOU DESCRIBED A MOMENT AGO A PORTION OF THE CONVERSATION YOU HAD WITH NICOLE BROWN AT THE STATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 26 A:

THAT'S TRUE.

# 27 Q:

DID YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION WITH HER?

# 28 A:

YES.

# 29 Q:

WHAT WAS THAT ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION?

# 30 MR. COCHRAN:

OBJECT AS HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

# 31 THE COURT:

WHAT AND WHERE. FOUNDATION. WHAT AND WHERE.

# 32 MR. DARDEN:

AT WEST LOS ANGELES STATION.

# 33 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. OVERRULED.

# 34 DET. JOHN EDWARDS:

HAD TO DO WITH WHY THE ARGUMENT OCCURRED.

KEY QUOTE

# 35 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: SHE TOLD YOU WHY THE ARGUMENT OCCURRED?

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Detective Edwards

NO, I DID NOT.

Flat denial that OJ had any scratches or bruises — Darden's core point on redirect

Detective Edwards

NO. IT WAS ON THE LEFT SIDE ALSO.

Corrects any impression left on cross that injuries were limited to one side, expanding the picture of Nicole's harm

Lance A. Ito

CALM DOWN, GENTLEMEN.

Rare public rebuke of both attorneys, reflecting rising tension in the courtroom

Detective Edwards

HAD TO DO WITH WHY THE ARGUMENT OCCURRED.

Opens a new line of testimony about Nicole's explanation — transcript cuts off before the substance is revealed

Evidence (2)

Informal

Scratches and bruises on Nicole Brown Simpson's body (both left and right sides)

discussed

Informal

Conversation with Nicole Brown at West Los Angeles Station regarding why the argument occurred

introduced, cut off mid-answer

Notable Exchanges (2)

Christopher Darden•Lance A. Ito

After Ito sustains an objection and tells the lawyers to 'calm down,' Darden responds 'I'm sorry, what was that?' — a subtly defiant reaction that prompted Ito to repeat himself and clarify the allowable scope.

tense

Johnnie Cochran•Christopher Darden•Lance A. Ito

Cochran objects twice in quick succession on redirect scope; Ito overrules both, then sustains a third on the argumentative cumulative question.

procedural friction

Objections

4 objections (1 sustained, 3 overruled)

Proceeding 4575 • 35 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103