Redirect examination of Mike Farrell (part 2)

📄 Redirect examination of Mike Farrell (part 2) — Tuesday, January 31, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JAN\31\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-MIKE-F.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 9 of 167

◀ Sidebar: plea discussion Recross-examination of Mike Farrell ▶

Witness: Det. Mike Farrell
Examiner: Christopher Darden
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Tuesday, January 31, 1995 • Utterances: 100

Darden uses redirect to rehabilitate Det. Farrell's domestic violence investigation: explaining why DFARs weren't searched (impractical, non-computerized hand search of hundreds of logs), and eliciting OJ's own explanation for why he fled Rockingham on Jan 1, 1989. Darden then tries to lay foundation for Farrell to testify about battered woman's syndrome — establishing his training and experience — but ends without asking the substantive question after Farrell admits he has never testified as an expert.

# 1 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

# 2 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. DARDEN, YOU MAY CONTINUE.

# 3 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: YOU ALSO INDICATED THAT YOU HAD A PLEASANT TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH THE DEFENDANT, DETECTIVE?

# 4 A:

YES, I DID.

# 5 Q:

WELL, YOU WEREN'T ABOUT TO ARREST HIM AT THAT TIME, WERE YOU?

# 6 A:

NO.

# 7 Q:

DID YOU ASK HIM WHY HE FLED THE LOCATION ON JANUARY 1, '89?

# 8 A:

YES, I DID. HIS RESPONSE WAS THAT HE WAS UPSET THAT THE POLICE WERE OUT THERE AND WEREN'T HAPPY THAT THE POLICE WERE OUT THERE AND THAT HE DECIDED -- THAT'S WHEN HE DECIDED TO LEAVE.

# 9 Q:

AND YOU INDICATED TO MR. COCHRAN AND YOU TOLD MR. COCHRAN THAT YOU WERE ONLY SEARCHING FOR DOCUMENTED REPORTS.

# 10 A:

CORRECT.

# 11 Q:

CORRECT? YOU WERE SEARCHING FOR DOCUMENTED REPORTS IN YOUR SEARCH FOR OTHER SITUATIONS WHERE THE POLICE WENT TO ROCKINGHAM?

# 12 A:

YES.

# 13 Q:

NOW, THERE ARE OTHER TYPES OF REPORTS THAT OFFICERS FILL OUT; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 14 A:

YES, THERE ARE.

# 15 Q:

THEY HAVE LOGS; IS THAT RIGHT?

# 16 A:

DAILY FIELD ACTIVITIES REPORTS, THAT'S CORRECT.

# 17 Q:

AND WHAT TYPE OF INFORMATION WOULD A PATROL OFFICER INCLUDE ON A DAILY FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT?

# 18 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. I THINK WE NEED FURTHER FOUNDATION. THAT QUESTION IS VAGUE.

# 19 THE COURT:

NO. I THINK HE TESTIFIED THAT HE'S BEEN A PATROL OFFICER, WAS A TRAINING OFFICER. I THINK HE HAS SUFFICIENT FOUNDATION TO ANSWER WHAT THIS IS, SUFFICIENT EXPERIENCE.

# 20 DET. MIKE FARRELL:

THE REPORT ITSELF DOCUMENTS THE TIME THE RADIO CAR GETS THE CALL, ITS LOCATION, TYPE OF CALL AND WHEN THE CALL IS FINISHED AND WHAT THE OFFICER ACTUALLY DID AT THE LOCATION AND IT'S ALL DOCUMENTED IN THE OFFICER'S OWN WRITING.

# 21 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: AND THAT DAILY FIELD ACTIVITY REPORT IS A REPORT COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE REPORT FILLED OUT BY DETECTIVE EDWARDS; IS THAT RIGHT?

# 22 A:

THAT IS CORRECT

# 23 Q:

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DAILY FIELD ACTIVITY REPORTS AND THE REPORT FILLED OUT BY DETECTIVE EDWARDS?

# 24 A:

THE FOLLOW-UP REPORT FILLED BY DETECTIVE EDWARDS IS A CONTINUATION OF THE CRIME REPORT. THE DFAR'S THAT WE CALL IT, IS JUST A DAILY LOG OF ACTIVITIES THAT THE OFFICER DOES IN THE FIELD. IT'S NOT PART OF A CRIME REPORT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

# 25 Q:

ARE DFAR'S OR DAILY FIELD ACTIVITY REPORTS COMPUTERIZED?

# 26 A:

NOT THAT I KNOW.

# 27 Q:

WERE THEY COMPUTERIZED BACK IN 1989?

# 28 A:

I DON'T THINK SO. THEY WERE NOT.

# 29 Q:

HOW MANY OFFICERS WERE THERE ASSIGNED TO WEST L.A. DIVISION BACK ON JANUARY 1, '89?

# 30 A:

QUITE A FEW. AND THE EXACT NUMBER I DON'T KNOW. OVER A HUNDRED?

# 31 Q:

IS THAT 100 PER SHIFT OR 100 --

# 32 A:

I WISH IT WAS A HUNDRED PER SHIFT, BUT IT'S MAYBE ABOUT 30 OFFICERS PER SHIFT.

# 33 Q:

30 PATROL OFFICERS PER SHIFT?

# 34 A:

CORRECT.

# 35 Q:

AND EACH DAY, EACH PATROL OFFICER FILLS OUT A LOG?

# 36 A:

IF THEY ARE ASSIGNED BY THEMSELVES, YES. BUT MOST OFFICERS IN THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT ARE ASSIGNED "A" CARS, THAT'S TWO MEN TO EACH PATROL CAR.

# 37 THE COURT:

TWO OFFICERS.

# 38 DET. MIKE FARRELL:

TWO OFFICERS. I AM SORRY.

# 39 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: SO HAD YOU GONE BACK AND SEARCHED ALL THE DFAR'S FOR THE FIVE YEARS PRIOR TO 1989, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN QUITE A JOB, RIGHT?

# 40 A:

THAT IS CORRECT.

# 41 MR. COCHRAN:

OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION; LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.

# 42 THE COURT:

WELL, IT'S AN INNOCUOUS POINT.

# 43 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN QUITE A JOB, RIGHT?

# 44 A:

YES, IT WOULD HAVE.

# 45 Q:

AND YOU WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE DONE A HAND SEARCH?

# 46 A:

CORRECT.

# 47 Q:

YOU ALSO INDICATED THAT NICOLE BROWN ASKED THAT YOU NOT PROSECUTE THE CASE?

# 48 A:

YES.

# 49 Q:

YOU'VE HAD TRAINING IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, HAVEN'T YOU?

# 50 A:

YES, I HAVE.

# 51 Q:

THAT'S NOT UNCOMMON, IS IT, FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS TO ---

# 52 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT.

# 53 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED.

# 54 MR. DARDEN:

MAY I BE HEARD, YOUR HONOR?

# 55 THE COURT:

YES, AT SIDEBAR WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.

# 56 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

# 57 THE COURT:

MR. DARDEN, I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION AT THIS POINT PRELIMINARILY UNLESS YOU CAN GIVE ME A FOUNDATION THAT THIS GUY HAS ENOUGH EXPERIENCE TO TESTIFY AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN BATTERED WOMAN'S SYNDROME UNDER 13 -- WHAT IS IT? 1337. 1107.

# 58 MR. DARDEN:

MR. GORDON WILL RESPOND.

# 59 MR. GORDON:

YOUR HONOR, THE CROSS-EXAMINATION HAS RAISED A SPECIFIC MISCONCEPTION ABOUT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, BATTERED WOMAN'S SYNDROME, AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO EXPLORE UNDER MC ALPIN, A SITUATION ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THIS IN WHICH --

# 60 THE COURT:

I AGREE. BUT IF YOU HEARD WHAT I SAID, I THINK FOUNDATIONALLY YOU DON'T HAVE A WITNESS WHO'S QUALIFIED ON THE STAND TO TESTIFY TO THIS. I DON'T KNOW YET. MAYBE HE DOES.

# 61 MR. COCHRAN:

THIS ISN'T THE WITNESS FOR THAT, YOUR HONOR. I MEAN AT THIS POINT, YOU JUST TOLD US TO GO BACK OUT THERE, THAT WE WERE BEING GREEDY, WE GOT EVERYTHING WE NEEDED. JUDGE, THIS IS NOT THE WITNESS FOR THIS. HE CAN'T LAY THE FOUNDATION. THIS WITNESS WORKS AT WEST LOS ANGELES TRAFFIC RIGHT NOW. WE WANT THE PATROL OFFICER IN PERSON --

# 62 THE COURT:

LET'S SEE WHAT HE CAN TESTIFY TO. BUT IT MAY COME IN LATER. I DON'T KNOW.

# 63 MR. COCHRAN:

JUDGE --

# 64 MS. CLARK:

IS THAT A LEGAL OBJECTION, THEY'RE BEING GREEDY?

KEY QUOTE

# 65 THE COURT:

THAT'S A FORM OF 352. THAT'S A FORM OF 352. SINCE WE ALREADY GOT WHAT WE WERE GOING TO GET OUT OF THIS EVIDENCE, WE ARE WASTING TIME. THAT'S 352.

KEY QUOTE

# 66 MR. COCHRAN:

THAT IS GREEDY, 352, JUDGE.

# 67 THE COURT:

THAT'S WHAT IT IS. I'M JUST MAKING AN OBSERVATION. FROM WHAT I HEARD FROM THIS GUY, HE DOESN'T HAVE THE FOUNDATION TO TESTIFY TO THIS. I'M WILLING TO HEAR.

# 68 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

# 69 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. DARDEN, YOU MAY CONTINUE.

# 70 MR. DARDEN:

I'M SORRY. WAS THE OBJECTION SUSTAINED, YOUR HONOR?

# 71 THE COURT:

THE OBJECTION IS SUSTAINED PENDING A FOUNDATION.

# 72 Q:

BY MR. DARDEN: DETECTIVE FARRELL, WHAT TRAINING HAVE YOU HAD IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?

# 73 A:

BASIC ACADEMY TRAINING WHEN I FIRST CAME ON THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, ALSO IN-SERVICE TRAINING WITH THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

# 74 Q:

AND DID YOU TAKE A COURSE?

# 75 A:

YES, I DID.

# 76 Q:

HOW MANY HOURS --

# 77 A:

IT WAS A THREE-DAY IN-SERVICE TRAINING FOR ADVANCED FIELD OFFICERS, WHICH I BELIEVE TOTALED A 24-HOUR COURSE.

# 78 Q:

AND HAVE YOU RESPONDED TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CALLS IN THE PAST?

# 79 A:

YES, I HAVE.

# 80 Q:

MANY?

# 81 A:

QUITE A FEW, YES, SIR.

# 82 Q:

HOW MANY WOULD YOU SAY?

# 83 A:

SAY -- I COULD ONLY SAY HUNDREDS.

# 84 Q:

AND HAVE YOU BEEN THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES IN THE PAST?

# 85 A:

YES, I HAVE.

# 86 Q:

HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN THE PROSECUTION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES IN THE PAST?

# 87 A:

YES, I HAVE.

# 88 Q:

HAVE YOU READ LITERATURE HAVING TO DO WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?

# 89 A:

YES, I HAVE.

# 90 Q:

HAVE YOU READ LITERATURE HAVING TO DO WITH THE CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?

# 91 A:

YES, I HAVE.

# 92 Q:

HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?

# 93 A:

YES, I HAVE.

# 94 Q:

AND HAVE YOU WATCHED THEM TESTIFY?

# 95 A:

YES.

# 96 Q:

HAVE YOU SPOKEN TO OTHERS WHO ARE PROFESSIONALS AND WHO ARE EXPERTS IN THE AREA OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?

# 97 A:

YES, I HAVE.

# 98 Q:

AND HAVE YOU EVER TESTIFIED IN COURT AS AN EXPERT ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?

# 99 A:

I HAVE NEVER TESTIFIED AS AN EXPERT.

KEY QUOTE

# 100 MR. DARDEN:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. NOTHING FURTHER.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Detective Farrell

HE WAS UPSET THAT THE POLICE WERE OUT THERE AND WEREN'T HAPPY THAT THE POLICE WERE OUT THERE AND THAT HE DECIDED -- THAT'S WHEN HE DECIDED TO LEAVE.

OJ's own words, relayed through Farrell, explaining why he fled the scene of the 1989 domestic violence call — a notably thin justification.

Marcia Clark

IS THAT A LEGAL OBJECTION, THEY'RE BEING GREEDY?

Sardonic sidebar comment after Ito invoked Evidence Code 352 by calling the prosecution 'greedy' — rare levity from Clark.

Lance A. Ito

THAT'S A FORM OF 352. THAT'S A FORM OF 352. SINCE WE ALREADY GOT WHAT WE WERE GOING TO GET OUT OF THIS EVIDENCE, WE ARE WASTING TIME.

Ito explains his own shorthand — calling Darden 'greedy' was his colloquial version of a 352 ruling (undue consumption of time).

Detective Farrell

I HAVE NEVER TESTIFIED AS AN EXPERT.

The admission that ends Darden's redirect — after building extensive foundation, the witness undercuts himself and Darden immediately folds with 'Nothing further.'

Evidence (3)

Informal

Daily Field Activity Reports (DFARs) — non-computerized patrol officer logs distinct from formal crime reports

discussed to explain why Farrell's prior records search was limited to documented reports only

Informal

January 1, 1989 Rockingham incident — OJ's departure from the scene

discussed; Farrell relays OJ's explanation that he left because he was upset the police were there

Informal

Nicole Brown's request not to prosecute the 1989 case

referenced as setup for attempted domestic violence / battered woman's syndrome testimony

Notable Exchanges (2)

Lance A. Ito•Johnnie Cochran•Scott Gordon•Marcia Clark

Sidebar debate over whether Farrell can testify about battered woman's syndrome. Cochran argues he's the wrong witness entirely (now works traffic division); Gordon cites McAlpin; Ito says he'll hear the foundation; Clark gets in a dry one-liner about 'greedy' as a legal objection.

strategic, mildly contentious

Christopher Darden•Detective Farrell

Darden spends several exchanges building Farrell's domestic violence credentials — academy training, 24-hour in-service course, hundreds of DV calls, prosecutions, literature — only for Farrell to end it by admitting he's never testified as an expert.

deflating

Light Moments (3)

Lance A. Ito

Farrell says 'two men to each patrol car'; Ito immediately corrects 'TWO OFFICERS' and Farrell apologizes.

Marcia Clark

After Ito calls Darden's line of questioning 'greedy,' Clark deadpans 'IS THAT A LEGAL OBJECTION, THEY'RE BEING GREEDY?' Ito confirms it is — a form of 352.

Detective Farrell

Farrell, asked how many DV calls he's handled: 'SAY -- I COULD ONLY SAY HUNDREDS.'

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Detective Farrell

admission elicited on redirect

Darden's own foundation-building backfires: after establishing extensive domestic violence experience, Farrell admits he has never testified as an expert witness, collapsing the attempt to qualify him on battered woman's syndrome.

Objections

3 objections (1 sustained, 2 overruled)

Proceeding 4604 • 100 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103