Your Honor, the next sentence in the statement, and this is in quotes is that--well, it indicates that the witness told Patricia Baret, "I know it was O.J., it had to be him." And that is going to be the next question.
Object to that. First of all, I object to the foundation. I can tell you he is going to deny that because I spoke to him during the recess, but more importantly than that, without a further foundation, the answer that--there is no testimony he ever heard O.J. talk ever before. He indicates he saw him one other time at his property when he was next door to the Salingers and there was no indication he ever heard him talk or whatever. And while we are up here, you should probably look at the statement all the way through because there is a statement about Mr. Darden. Are you going to elicit that, too?
Well, I'm going to ask him. I will lay the foundation, if necessary, but this is his opinion. This is opinion and he has already stated that opinion publicly. I just didn't want to run into a buzz saw.
Yes, you should be wise to stay away from the buzz saw today and everyday. The problem is, the way it is couched, "I know it was O.J. it had to be him" doesn't say "I'm positive" or "I know it is him because I saw him or because I heard him," so I might sustain a 352 objection. You can try to lay a foundation here, but I have a feeling it is speculation.
KEY QUOTEYou have to understand that I am a man and I feel strongly about racial issues.
KEY QUOTEOkay. I want to tell you how I feel. Judge, while we are up here, can we finally get an offer of proof of where he's going to go, because there is also some other statement attached here to that that I think may ultimately be relevant, and I want to show you one thing to save some time. The statement of this man field, first of all, there is no where in any of these statements anything about a bumper, the color of the chrome bumper, anything. I haven't seen anything about that or about tinted windshields, so there is nothing in any statements that I have now been given. In addition to that, read this part. Want to read this into the record. He asked some questions about making money. Here is what Heidstra supposedly told Mr. Field. "Heidstra stated that he was going to make a lot of money because the People of the District Attorney's office said so. Stated he would make enough money to purchase a Rolls Royce." Now, at the preliminary hearing there was testimony--Patty Jo Fairbanks had indicated to the witness Camacho, "Make a lot of money"--and some of these things you are going to find on redirect--sold stories to Current Affair and to Hard Copy, so they are making money. This guy hasn't. And so I am just asking you, I want to go into that, which becomes very relevant.
I have no objection, because I'm going to go into, as you can see from the other statement, this guy apparently just wants to testify. He don't care who he testifies for. And so I'm going to go into that.
I agree. If somebody mentioned making money from the D.A.'s office, you can go into that. Okay. Thank you.
Yes, you should be wise to stay away from the buzz saw today and everyday.
I don't like either of you guys today.
You have to understand that I am a man and I feel strongly about racial issues.
Heidstra stated that he was going to make a lot of money because the People of the District Attorney's office said so. Stated he would make enough money to purchase a Rolls Royce.