Sidebar: evidence collection

📄 Sidebar: evidence collection — Thursday, July 20, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JUL\20\SIDEBAR-EVIDENCE-COLLECTION.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 119 of 167

◀ Redirect examination of Adalberto Luper (part 2) Redirect examination of Adalberto Luper (part 3) ▶

Date: Thursday, July 20, 1995 • Utterances: 16

Cochran approaches sidebar to ask permission to question a witness about inconsistencies in Dennis Fung's testimony — specifically that Fung claimed he didn't go upstairs until 4:30, yet video evidence suggests items were collected around 4:12-4:13, before Willie Ford departed. Judge Ito rules the line of questioning hearsay and argumentative, sustaining Darden's objection, but permits Cochran to ask the witness whether he was aware of Fung's log or testimony.

# 1 THE COURT:

All right. With the court reporter.

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

# 3 MR. COCHRAN:

I want to ask--

# 4 THE COURT:

Hold on. We're over at sidebar. Mr. Cochran.

# 5 MR. COCHRAN:

I wanted to approach before I went into this. I want to ask him is he aware that Dennis Fung testified he never went upstairs until 4:30 and that the items were not collected until after Willie Ford left.

# 6 THE COURT:

That's hearsay, isn't it?

# 7 MR. COCHRAN:

It's hearsay. But if he was there, he is aware of it. I can ask at this time--I think this is impeachment at this point.

# 8 THE COURT:

It's not an inconsistent statement.

# 9 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor, as I understand it, if Willie Ford left at 4:30 and Dennis Fung didn't collect these things until 4:35 or 4:40--your Honor, the video indicates they were collected about 4:12 or 4:13. That's inconsistent, your Honor, Ford and Mazzola especially when they say things were collected sequentially. We showed this on the record this morning.

# 10 THE COURT:

Mr. Darden.

# 11 MR. DARDEN:

It's argumentative. It was argumentative this morning and it's argumentative now, Judge. This guy isn't keeping Dennis Fung's log and certainly isn't here to vouch for Dennis Fung.

# 12 MR. COCHRAN:

I want to ask him whether or not he saw Fung--whether or not--Dennis Fung testified. I'm not making this up. This is a search for truth, Judge.

# 13 THE COURT:

Counsel, this is for argument. It's also hearsay. Objection sustained.

# 14 MR. COCHRAN:

Can I inquire as to whether or not he's seen the log or saw Dennis Fung's testimony, that he saw his testimony?

# 15 THE COURT:

If he saw his testimony or if he saw his log, if he is aware of what his log is, but that's--

# 16 MR. COCHRAN:

Okay. I'll ask that.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (3)

Johnnie Cochran

the video indicates they were collected about 4:12 or 4:13. That's inconsistent, your Honor, Ford and Mazzola especially when they say things were collected sequentially.

Cochran crystallizes the core timeline discrepancy — physical video evidence vs. Fung's sworn testimony — as grounds for impeachment.

Christopher Darden

This guy isn't keeping Dennis Fung's log and certainly isn't here to vouch for Dennis Fung.

Darden's objection draws a clean line: the current witness cannot be asked to authenticate or account for another witness's conduct.

Johnnie Cochran

This is a search for truth, Judge.

Cochran's rhetorical pivot — framing the evidentiary dispute in moral terms after being boxed in legally.

Evidence (2)

Informal

Video footage showing evidence collection at approximately 4:12-4:13

discussed as basis for timeline inconsistency argument

Informal

Dennis Fung's collection log

Cochran seeks to ask witness if he is aware of it; court conditionally permits this narrower inquiry

Notable Exchanges (2)

Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

Cochran argues the timing discrepancy (4:12 video vs. 4:30 Fung testimony) constitutes impeachment material; Ito disagrees, ruling it is not an inconsistent statement by the current witness and sustains the objection.

strategic

Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

After losing the broader objection, Cochran immediately narrows his request — asking only whether the witness saw Fung's testimony or log. Ito conditionally allows this.

procedural

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Dennis Fung

prior inconsistent statement (indirect) — video evidence vs. sworn testimony on collection timing

Cochran attempts to surface Fung's claim that he didn't go upstairs until 4:30 against video showing collection at ~4:12, framing it as proof items were not collected in the documented sequential order. The attack is deflected here on hearsay grounds.

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 6985 • 16 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103