Sidebar: hearsay objection

📄 Sidebar: hearsay objection — Thursday, July 13, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JUL\13\SIDEBAR-HEARSAY-OBJECTION.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 114 of 167

◀ Direct examination of Mark Partridge (part 1) Direct examination of Mark Partridge (part 2) ▶

Date: Thursday, July 13, 1995 • Utterances: 8

Cochran sought to introduce statements OJ Simpson made to a fellow passenger named Partridge on a plane, where Simpson said a 'close friend' had died, that he loved her, and that he was in shock — arguing they fell under the state-of-mind exception to hearsay. Clark countered that Evidence Code section 1250 does not apply absent a mental defense, called the statements self-serving hearsay, and took a pointed shot at the 'close friend' characterization given that Simpson's daughter Sidney had called Nicole 'Mommy' after a fight. Ito sustained the objection across the board.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

# 2 THE COURT:

All right. We're over at the sidebar. Where are we going with this?

# 3 MR. COCHRAN:

All I want to indicate, your Honor--let me just make an offer of proof if I can. Your Honor, what happened was--what I hope to elicit is that--okay. Okay. Mr. Partridge said something to the effect of: "Tough way to start a Monday. "Mr. Simpson said a friend or close friend was dead. He may have just--he may have said, `I just found out a close friend was dead.' "He told me it was his ex-wife, said he loved her, said he was in shock. `I don't know what to think.'" and I think this certainly comes in under these circumstances as state of mind of him when he makes this statement, exception to the hearsay rule. So that's why I wanted to make that initial offer of proof. I don't plan to go into lengthy--this conversation goes on for a very long time as Miss Clark knows. I think this initial statement however is an exception to the hearsay rule as many of the others would be, but I don't plan to elicit them.

# 4 MS. CLARK:

I thought we already litigated this. 1250 does not apply to this situation unless the Defense intends to switch their alibi to mental Defense. Then we can litigate state of mind. But this statement is self-serving hearsay, and with a statement like that, you can certainly understand why we have the hearsay rule. But there's nothing admissible and the 1250 proffered basis is completely uncalled for in this case. Of course, the fact that he says "Close friend," can we stipulate that's the best friend that Sidney referred to that Mommy was crying about having fought with earlier?

# 5 MR. COCHRAN:

I'm serious about this. So what I'm trying to indicate, your Honor, is, I think that, first of all, one doesn't have to have a--where one has an alibi Defense and where the Prosecution puts on all this evidence trying to show that Mr. Simpson is either faking or acting or something like that, this becomes very relevant and the state of mind. That's why it's appropriate. They've spent all this time with every witness he is acting again or faking or not meaning this. I mean that's what their whole theory is. These statements show part of what he's going through by the time he gets on the plane. He doesn't know this man from Adam. So my offer of proof, I should--I should be allowed to elicit this. And I don't plan to go into all the statements, but that this is entirely appropriate.

# 6 THE COURT:

All right. The objection will be sustained.

# 7 MR. COCHRAN:

For all this?

# 8 THE COURT:

Yep.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Johnnie Cochran

He told me it was his ex-wife, said he loved her, said he was in shock. 'I don't know what to think.'

Cochran's offer of proof — the substance of what Simpson told Partridge that he wanted the jury to hear, framing Simpson as genuinely grieving rather than acting.

Marcia Clark

This statement is self-serving hearsay, and with a statement like that, you can certainly understand why we have the hearsay rule.

Crisp articulation of why state-of-mind exceptions don't swallow the hearsay rule for self-interested declarations.

Marcia Clark

Of course, the fact that he says 'Close friend,' can we stipulate that's the best friend that Sidney referred to that Mommy was crying about having fought with earlier?

Clark uses the 'close friend' language against Simpson — if Nicole was just a 'close friend' on the plane, that undercuts the grief narrative and recalls prior domestic violence testimony.

Lance A. Ito

Yep.

Ito's one-word confirmation after Cochran asked 'For all this?' — a blunt, total exclusion of the proffered statements.

Evidence (1)

Informal

Simpson's conversation with fellow passenger Partridge on a plane, in which Simpson said a 'close friend' had died, identified her as his ex-wife, said he loved her, and said he was in shock

proffered by defense, excluded by court

Notable Exchanges (2)

Marcia Clark•Johnnie Cochran

Clark argued that § 1250 state-of-mind exception requires a mental defense that the defense hasn't raised; Cochran countered that the prosecution's own theory — that Simpson was 'faking' or 'acting' grief — opened the door to state-of-mind evidence.

strategic

Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

After the ruling, Cochran pushed back asking 'For all this?' — Ito confirmed with a flat 'Yep,' cutting off any partial admission.

deflating

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ O.J. Simpson

impeachment via prior statement

Clark highlighted that Simpson referred to Nicole as a 'close friend' rather than his ex-wife or the mother of his children, connecting it to Sidney's earlier testimony about Nicole crying after fighting with her 'best friend' — implying Simpson's language minimized Nicole even in supposed grief.

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 6838 • 8 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103