Cross-examination of Lu Ellen Robertson

📄 Cross-examination of Lu Ellen Robertson — Wednesday, June 21, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JUN\21\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-LU-ELLEN-.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 100 of 167

◀ Direct examination of Lu Ellen Robertson Phone number stipulations ▶

Witness: LuEllen Robertson
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Wednesday, June 21, 1995 • Utterances: 106

Cochran cross-examined phone records analyst Lu Ellen Robertson about OJ Simpson's cellular call history on June 12th. He established that all four calls to the 305 number were incomplete (unreachable), that the single call to Nicole Brown Simpson's number at 2:18 PM lasted only 3 minutes 9 seconds, and that incomplete calls could result from dropped connections or unanswered calls. The cross was brief and largely technical, aimed at minimizing the incriminating implications of the phone records.

# 1 MR. COCHRAN:

If I could just have a second.

# 2 (Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

# 3 MR. COCHRAN:

I just have a few questions, your Honor.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN

# 4 MR. COCHRAN:

Good morning, Miss Robertson. How are you?

# 5 MS. ROBERTSON:

Good morning or good afternoon.

# 6 MR. COCHRAN:

I guess it is afternoon. With regard to these records that you've gone through with Miss Clark, let's take, for instance, the incomplete phone call on June 12th at about 2:13 P.M. in the afternoon.

# 7 MS. ROBERTSON:

Okay.

# 8 MR. COCHRAN:

If one--first of all, in calling the (305) 582-6952 number, that number, you could call that particular number, and the person who has that 305 number, if it's a portable phone, could be in California, is that correct, or anyplace in the United States; isn't that right?

# 9 MS. ROBERTSON:

They could be.

# 10 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. So the question would be as to whether or not the 305 number was a portable phone. Is that a correct statement?

# 11 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 12 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Now, with regard to shifting to the two phone calls that were in rapid succession at about 2:22 that are both labeled incomplete on the People's exhibit here for identification, if the number (305) 582-6952 were called for approximately one minute, in that instance, it would have been possible to--person in a vehicle to make that call, for the phone to disconnect--perhaps you went into an area where there were no cells or whatever--and if you lost contact, turn around and call right back again; isn't that correct?

# 13 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 14 MR. COCHRAN:

In fact, in the--if you have a car phone, you know that's a matter that happens very frequently, doesn't it?

# 15 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 16 MR. COCHRAN:

That you'll be driving along, you'll have a number, for some reason, because the cells or something happens, you'll lose contact with the person you're trying to call or whatever. You have to then dial back; isn't that correct?

# 17 MS. ROBERTSON:

That's considered a dropped call.

KEY QUOTE

# 18 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. And so--and that--that would also show in here as an incomplete; would it not?

# 19 MS. ROBERTSON:

Actually, it would show up as a completed call, but it would have a star next to it that showed that it was dropped.

# 20 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. But--

# 21 MS. CLARK:

I'm sorry. I didn't hear that.

# 22 THE COURT:

Dropped.

# 23 MR. COCHRAN:

Dropped.

# 24 MR. COCHRAN:

But as an incomplete call, if you were making a call to the 305 number?

# 25 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 26 MR. COCHRAN:

And as you got through the call and all of a sudden you lost contact and you then dialed it again, that would be consistent with the two incompletes if you weren't able to complete the call, is that correct, if you made them in succession?

# 27 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 28 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. And in fact, on this particular date, you alluded to the fact there were I think you said four calls made to the 305 number?

# 29 MS. ROBERTSON:

In total, yes.

# 30 MR. COCHRAN:

All tolled? And each of those 305 calls were all incomplete; is that correct?

# 31 MS. ROBERTSON:

That's correct.

# 32 MR. COCHRAN:

And that meant that the caller was not able to reach whoever the person was at the 305 number; is that correct?

# 33 MS. ROBERTSON:

That's correct.

# 34 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. With regard to the call at 2:18, that was a completed call; is that correct?

# 35 MS. ROBERTSON:

That's correct.

# 36 MR. COCHRAN:

And on the record here, it shows that call lasted approximately 4 minutes. And what was your--what was the exact time of that call from your records?

# 37 MS. ROBERTSON:

3 minutes and 9 seconds.

# 38 MR. COCHRAN:

And again, you just rounded it up, on the bill you rounded it up to like 4 minutes?

# 39 MS. ROBERTSON:

That's what our billing system does, yes.

# 40 MR. COCHRAN:

Okay. And that was a completed call?

# 41 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 42 MR. COCHRAN:

At 2:18?

# 43 MS. ROBERTSON:

Correct.

# 44 MR. COCHRAN:

And you don't have or don't show any other calls to the number 826-0403 and area code 310 after 2:18 P.M. in the afternoon on June 12th, do you?

# 45 MS. ROBERTSON:

No, sir.

# 46 MR. COCHRAN:

That's the only call you--your records reveal on that day; is that correct?

# 47 MS. ROBERTSON:

Correct.

# 48 MR. COCHRAN:

And you're aware that number was registered to Miss Nicole Brown Simpson on that date?

# 49 MS. ROBERTSON:

I am now.

# 50 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. You are now--you're aware of it today, right?

# 51 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 52 MR. COCHRAN:

And you show no other calls--

# 53 MS. CLARK:

Stipulate.

# 54 MR. COCHRAN:

And you show no other calls to that location that day, do you?

# 55 MS. ROBERTSON:

No, I do not.

# 56 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. And then lastly, ma'am, with regard to the two calls at 10:03, on the People's chart here, it's shown that these calls both occurred at about 10:03. Is that what your records show?

# 57 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes, sir.

# 58 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. And that would indicate to you these calls were made again in succession; is that correct?

# 59 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 60 MR. COCHRAN:

And with regard to the first call, the one to the 470-3468 number, was that a completed call?

# 61 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 62 MR. COCHRAN:

Was that a message left or did the parties talk or what happened? Do you know?

# 63 MS. ROBERTSON:

There's no way of indicating that here.

# 64 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. So there was some kind of completed call?

# 65 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 66 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Some thing picked up that phone; is that correct?

# 67 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 68 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. What if that 305 phone--what if the 310 number had some kind of answering machine. Would that show as a completed call?

# 69 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 70 MR. COCHRAN:

So if you dialed that, that would show as a completed call even though it's 1 minute; is that correct?

# 71 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 72 MR. COCHRAN:

And just so we're clear, how long was the 6-12 10:03 call to west Los Angeles that your records show 1 minute? How long was that call?

# 73 MS. ROBERTSON:

33 seconds.

# 74 MR. COCHRAN:

And then there was a call right after that to the 305 location, and that was--you have that marked incomplete.

# 75 MS. ROBERTSON:

Correct.

# 76 MR. COCHRAN:

And how long was that?

# 77 MS. ROBERTSON:

23 seconds.

# 78 MR. COCHRAN:

So there was a--only a 10-minute difference between the so-called completed call and the incomplete call?

# 79 MS. CLARK:

Your Honor, misstates the testimony.

# 80 MR. COCHRAN:

Strike that. Counsel is correct.

# 81 MR. COCHRAN:

There's only a 10-second difference between the so-called completed call and the incomplete call?

# 82 MS. ROBERTSON:

That's--that's about right plus or minus a couple seconds.

# 83 MR. COCHRAN:

One was 33 seconds, one was 23 seconds?

# 84 MS. ROBERTSON:

Yes.

# 85 MR. COCHRAN:

All right.

# 86 MR. COCHRAN:

May I have just one last second?

# 87 (Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

# 88 MR. COCHRAN:

So with regard--

# 89 MR. COCHRAN:

Just one or two last questions.

# 90 MR. COCHRAN:

So that I'm clear if I might, with regard to the 10:03 call on 6-12 to the 310 number, the bill that you see there in the 33-second actual time, would that be consistent with the call being placed to an answering machine and the caller completed a message or whatever to that answer machine?

# 91 MS. ROBERTSON:

It could be.

# 92 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. And then the later call, the call directly after that which is marked incomplete to the 305 exchange, would that be consistent to--with a call that was not complete? Is that correct?

# 93 MS. ROBERTSON:

Not complete, yes.

# 94 MR. COCHRAN:

And if that 305 number was a portable number, that person could be in Las Vegas or Los Angeles or anyplace; is that correct?

# 95 MS. ROBERTSON:

They could be anywhere.

KEY QUOTE

# 96 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. You can't tell that from your records?

# 97 MS. ROBERTSON:

We cannot.

# 98 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, you mentioned something about a manufacturer and telling where calls were made from. Do you have those records with you? You don't have those records, do you?

# 99 THE COURT:

I think she testified that the manufacturer could tell what kind of phone it is.

# 100 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Is the Court correct?

# 101 MS. ROBERTSON:

That's my understanding.

# 102 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. And you don't have any records from any manufacturers?

# 103 MS. ROBERTSON:

No, sir.

# 104 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Thank you very kindly. Thank you, your Honor.

# 105 MS. CLARK:

No further questions.

# 106 THE COURT:

All right. Miss Robertson, thank you very much. You are now excused. All right. Next witness.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

LuEllen Robertson

They could be anywhere.

Cochran's key point — the 305 number could have been in Florida, Las Vegas, or anywhere, undermining any geographic inference from the calls.

LuEllen Robertson

That's considered a dropped call.

Robertson introduces the distinction between an 'incomplete' call and a 'dropped call,' slightly complicating Cochran's narrative but he pivots smoothly.

LuEllen Robertson

It could be.

Robertson concedes the 33-second completed call at 10:03 PM could have been a message left on an answering machine — softening the significance of the completed call to Nicole's number.

Evidence (1)

People's exhibit (chart)

Phone records chart showing cellular calls made on June 12th, including times, durations, and completion status

discussed

Notable Exchanges (2)

Johnnie Cochran•Marcia Clark

Clark objects that Cochran misstated '10-minute difference' for '10-second difference'; Cochran immediately concedes and self-corrects.

procedural

Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito

Judge Ito clarifies the earlier testimony about manufacturers identifying phone type, correcting Cochran's characterization of what Robertson had said.

procedural

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 6475 • 106 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103