We're over at the sidebar. Mr. Darden, what's up? What are you going to do with this?
Nothing, your Honor. What we're going to do with it, it's obvious that in preparation for the jury view, this witness changed the photographs around in the house. In fact, they changed the photographs between the time that Cheri Lewis visited the day before and the actual jury viewing. In addition, so that Mr. Cochran knows where we're going, I want to ask her about the changes that were made to the house days after the murder. I believe some pictures were changed then. It's our understanding that on the night of the murders, Nicole's pictures were on the wall leading up the stairway and other parts of the house, but that after the murders, they changed them, they put Paula Barbieri's in. And if you want a good faith offer of proof, Miss Clark is here. She visited the house on June 13th. And so she can--
Put her up there. I want to get her up there. This is beyond the scope. It's irrelevant and immaterial to what happened. This is 352, your Honor. Counsel is grabbing at straws, and I think the Court can see that this is appropriately sustained, and they want to bring some offspring or something--how would Miss Clark know what is there before June 12th? So--your Honor, this is preposterous. This is beyond the scope.
I thought even the Court concluded during the jury view that there had been changes.
Wait. When I say wait, everything stops. All right. One person at a time. Mr. Cochran.
Your Honor, first of all, the Court concluded that furthermore, with regard to the jury view, you recall, you said to the jurors don't look at any of the pictures, they're irrelevant and immaterial. Then some of the jurors looked at the pictures. Anybody who supposedly looked at the pictures is no longer here, as I have in mind Mr. Gene Knox, who they started arguing about that day in the yard. Remember?
Knox or whatever his name was. Michael Knox. This is irrelevant and immaterial, your Honor, absolutely, and I would ask the Court under 352 to move on. We've got a couple other witnesses we would like to resolve.
It does go to her bias, but this way exceeds the scope. If you want to recall her during your rebuttal, you're entitled to do that. But at this point, it's way beyond.
But we may want to talk to her out of the presence because it's--that's a pretty volatile issue, as to changing the location, at whose instruction.
It's our understanding that on the night of the murders, Nicole's pictures were on the wall leading up the stairway and other parts of the house, but that after the murders, they changed them, they put Paula Barbieri's in.
Are we going to get to cross-examine Marcia Clark?
That's pretty volatile. But we may want to talk to her out of the presence because it's — that's a pretty volatile issue, as to changing the location, at whose instruction.
Counsel is grabbing at straws, and I think the Court can see that this is appropriately sustained, and they want to bring some offspring or something.