Cross-examination of John Meraz (part 5)

📄 Cross-examination of John Meraz (part 5) — Wednesday, July 19, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JUL\19\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-JOHN-MERA.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 118 of 167

◀ In chambers: blood splattering Cross-examination of John Meraz (part 6) ▶

Witness: John Meraz
Examiner: Marcia Clark
Called by: Defense • Date: Wednesday, July 19, 1995 • Utterances: 81

Marcia Clark resumed cross-examination of John Meraz, a Viertel's employee who had previously claimed he removed receipts from OJ Simpson's Bronco and returned them. Clark methodically cornered Meraz using his own signed written admission (People's 533), establishing that he signed the document only after the receipts were found to be missing and after being confronted with co-workers' statements. Clark then closed by revealing that Cochran and the defense had declined to pursue theft charges against Meraz, implying he was a protected and biased defense witness.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury:)

# 2 THE COURT:

All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. Let the record reflect that we've been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good afternoon.

# 3 THE COURT:

All right. Let's have Mr. Meraz resume the witness stand.

John Meraz, the witness on the stand at the time of the lunch recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:

# 4 THE COURT:

Mrs. Robertson, do we have a fresh cup of water? Mr. Meraz, would you come forward, please. All right. Mr. Meraz, good afternoon.

# 5 MR. MERAZ:

Good afternoon.

# 6 THE COURT:

Mr. Meraz, sir, you are reminded that you are still under oath. Miss Clark, you may conclude your cross-examination.

# 7 MS. CLARK:

Thank you, your Honor.

# 8 THE COURT:

You are welcome.

# 9 MS. CLARK:

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good afternoon.

CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MS. CLARK

# 10 MS. CLARK:

Mr. Meraz, we earlier discussed the fact--discussed the existence of a piece of paper in which you wrote down that you admitted to taking paper out of the Defendant's car and that you also indicated in that statement that you put them back in the car and you indicated you had no memory of writing such a document or signing it, correct?

# 11 MR. MERAZ:

Correct.

# 12 MS. CLARK:

I have here a document that has been given to counsel sometime ago.

# 13 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)

# 14 MR. HIRSCH:

Can I see it, please?

# 15 MS. CLARK:

I'd ask that this document be marked People's next in order. 533 is it?

# 16 THE COURT:

533.

# 17 (Peo's 533 for id = document)

# 18 MS. CLARK:

Let me show you first, Mr. Meraz, and ask you if you recognize the signature and the handwriting on this document.

# 19 MR. MERAZ:

I remember, yes.

# 20 MS. CLARK:

Is that your handwriting, sir?

# 21 MR. MERAZ:

Yes, it is.

# 22 MS. CLARK:

Is that your signature, sir?

# 23 MR. MERAZ:

Yes.

# 24 MS. CLARK:

Do you recognize the date of June the 17th, 1994 on this document?

# 25 MR. MERAZ:

Yes, I do.

# 26 MS. CLARK:

And this document was signed by you after you had been shown the signed statements of other employees who stated they saw you showing them the receipts; isn't that correct?

# 27 MR. COCHRAN:

Objection. Misstates the evidence. Asked and answered.

# 28 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 29 MR. MERAZ:

No, it's not true.

# 30 MS. CLARK:

It's not true that you wrote this out after you were shown the signed statements of other employees who said they saw you with the receipts you stole from Mr. Simpson's Bronco?

# 31 MR. COCHRAN:

Objection to the use of the word "Stole," your Honor.

# 32 THE COURT:

Sustained. Rephrase--

# 33 MS. CLARK:

Took from Mr. Simpson's Bronco without his permission?

# 34 MR. MERAZ:

It's not true.

# 35 MS. CLARK:

What is your testimony as to when you signed this document, sir?

# 36 MR. MERAZ:

I signed those documents--they asked me to sign a document on that recall. They asked me to sign it, state the fact that I had put the papers back in it, and that's what they wanted from me. It was after they showed me those--I signed those willingly that I had put those papers back.

# 37 MS. CLARK:

And it was before you were shown the signed statements of the other employees?

# 38 MR. COCHRAN:

That assumes a fact not in evidence. He didn't say he was shown the statements.

# 39 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 40 MR. MERAZ:

It was after the fact that they had talked to me and discussed everything with me they wanted me to write that.

# 41 MS. CLARK:

And was it after the fact that they confronted you with the fact that other employees had reported seeing you with the receipts you took from the Defendant's Bronco without his permission?

# 42 MR. MERAZ:

I signed that when everything was all done and they had talked to me. I had signed those, and they come up to me. And the reason I signed those papers was because of the fact that I had to clear myself up, and that's why I signed that.

# 43 MS. CLARK:

And, Mr. Meraz, you signed this after you went to the Bronco, looked in the side pocket and saw that there were no receipts there, correct?

# 44 MR. MERAZ:

That's correct.

# 45 MS. CLARK:

In fact, after everyone saw the receipts that you claim to have put back were not there, correct?

# 46 MR. COCHRAN:

I object to the form of "Everyone," your Honor. That's--

# 47 THE COURT:

Sustained. Sustained.

# 48 MS. CLARK:

Mr. Viertel and Mr. Jones were with you; isn't that right?

# 49 MR. MERAZ:

That's correct.

# 50 MS. CLARK:

And they also in your company looked at the side door pocket where you were looking and pointing to them, correct?

# 51 MR. MERAZ:

That's not correct. There was two of us, not three.

# 52 MS. CLARK:

Who was with you?

# 53 MR. MERAZ:

Bob Jones and myself.

# 54 MS. CLARK:

And you pointed to Bob Jones the area of the side pocket where you claimed to have put those receipts, correct?

# 55 MR. MERAZ:

Correct.

# 56 MS. CLARK:

And they were not there, correct?

# 57 MR. MERAZ:

Correct.

# 58 MS. CLARK:

And it was after that point that they confronted you with the statements of other employees at Viertel's who said they saw you with the receipts, correct?

# 59 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form "Confronted," your Honor. Vague.

# 60 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 61 MR. MERAZ:

That's not correct.

# 62 MS. CLARK:

So you--

# 63 THE COURT:

All right. I think we've established that point now.

# 64 MS. CLARK:

Okay. Then after you were confronted with these statements of other employees and after you went to the door of the Bronco and saw that the receipts you claim to have put back were not there, you signed this statement; is that correct?

# 65 MR. MERAZ:

Correct.

# 66 THE COURT:

All right. This is 533 on the elmo?

# 67 MS. CLARK:

Yes, your Honor.

# 68 MS. CLARK:

And it says: "I, John J. Meraz, took some paper out of OJ's car and put them back in the car on June 17th, 1994." Correct?

KEY QUOTE

# 69 MR. MERAZ:

Correct.

# 70 MS. CLARK:

Sir, is it your understanding that Mr. Cochran as of April of this year has expressed no interest in pursuing a prosecution against you for theft?

# 71 MR. MERAZ:

As far as I know, nobody has.

# 72 MS. CLARK:

And is it your belief that Mr. Cochran has declined to pursue any prosecution of you for theft?

# 73 MR. COCHRAN:

Object to the form of that question.

# 74 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 75 MR. MERAZ:

I was told that nobody was going to file charges.

# 76 MS. CLARK:

And were you also told that Mr. Cochran expressly declined to pursue the prosecution of you for theft?

KEY QUOTE

# 77 MR. COCHRAN:

That's hearsay, your Honor.

# 78 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 79 MR. MERAZ:

Again, I was told that they weren't going to file charges on me.

KEY QUOTE

# 80 MS. CLARK:

And when you say "They," you mean the Defense, Mr. Cochran?

# 81 MR. MERAZ:

Yes.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

John Meraz

I, John J. Meraz, took some paper out of OJ's car and put them back in the car on June 17th, 1994.

Clark reads Meraz's own signed statement aloud for the jury, forcing him to confirm its contents after earlier claiming no memory of the document.

John Meraz

The reason I signed those papers was because of the fact that I had to clear myself up, and that's why I signed that.

Meraz's explanation for signing reveals consciousness of guilt and contradicts the defense narrative that he voluntarily returned the papers.

John Meraz

I was told that they weren't going to file charges on me.

Establishes that Cochran's team protected Meraz from theft prosecution, suggesting his testimony was motivated by self-interest and loyalty to the defense.

Marcia Clark

And were you also told that Mr. Cochran expressly declined to pursue the prosecution of you for theft?

Clark's most damaging implication of the session — that Meraz was effectively shielded from criminal liability in exchange for his role as a defense witness.

Evidence (2)

People's 533

Handwritten and signed statement by John Meraz dated June 17, 1994, reading: 'I, John J. Meraz, took some paper out of OJ's car and put them back in the car on June 17th, 1994.'

Introduced, displayed on ELMO, read aloud, witness confirmed handwriting and signature

Informal

Signed statements from other Viertel's employees who reported seeing Meraz with receipts taken from the Bronco

Referenced to establish sequence of events leading to Meraz signing People's 533

Notable Exchanges (3)

Marcia Clark•John Meraz

Clark walked Meraz step by step through the timeline: he first claimed to have returned the receipts, then was shown they weren't there, then was confronted with co-workers' statements, and only then signed his written admission. Meraz resisted at each step but ultimately confirmed the damaging sequence.

strategic

Marcia Clark•John Meraz•Johnnie Cochran

Clark established that Cochran and the defense expressly declined to pursue theft charges against Meraz. Cochran objected on hearsay grounds but was overruled, and Meraz confirmed he was told no charges would be filed.

revealing

Lance A. Ito•Marcia Clark

After several rounds of Clark asking essentially the same question about the sequence of events, Ito intervened: 'All right. I think we've established that point now,' nudging Clark to move on.

procedural

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ John Meraz

Prior inconsistent statement

Clark used People's 533 — Meraz's own signed, handwritten admission — to contradict his earlier claim of having no memory of writing or signing such a document. Meraz ultimately confirmed the handwriting and signature were his.

⚔ John Meraz

Bias / improper motive

Clark established that Cochran's defense team had expressly declined to pursue theft charges against Meraz, implying he was testifying favorably to the defense in exchange for protection from prosecution.

⚔ John Meraz

Impeachment through timeline

Clark forced Meraz to admit that he signed his confession only after: (1) the receipts were confirmed missing from the location he claimed, and (2) he was confronted with statements from co-workers who saw him with the stolen items — undermining his claim that the signing was voluntary and innocent.

Objections

7 objections (2 sustained, 5 overruled)

Proceeding 6932 • 81 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103