Sidebar: identification documents

📄 Sidebar: identification documents — Thursday, March 2, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\2\SIDEBAR-IDENTIFICATION-DOCUMEN.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 29 of 167

◀ Cross-examination of Rosa Maria Lopez (part 11) Recess ▶

Date: Thursday, March 2, 1995 • Utterances: 33

Judge Ito called counsel to sidebar after testimony revealed a witness had a different birthdate on her driver's license than stated elsewhere — a discrepancy of seven years. The judge flagged this as a potential perjury issue (driver's license applications are signed under penalty of perjury), and the witness's own attorney (Hamburger) objected strenuously that the prosecution had not disclosed the DMV records beforehand. A recess was granted so the witness could consult with counsel and potentially invoke the Fifth Amendment.

# 1 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

# 2 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE OVER AT THE SIDEBAR. COUNSEL, THE REASON I ASKED COUNSEL TO APPROACH SIDEBAR IS THAT DRIVER'S LICENSE APPLICATIONS TO MY RECOLLECTION ARE SIGNED UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. SO WE MAY HAVE JUST HEARD AN ADMISSION OF A VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE SECTION 118. AND THE VEHICLE CODE SECTION, IT REQUIRES THESE THINGS BE DONE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. SO I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED AT THIS POINT.

# 3 MR. DARDEN:

WELL, IF SHE HAS A DRIVER'S LICENSE WITH A DIFFERENT DOB, THEN YOU ARE RIGHT; SUCH THINGS ARE SIGNED UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY.

# 4 MR. COCHRAN:

WE DON'T HAVE ANY DOCUMENT TO THAT EFFECT. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS.

# 5 THE COURT:

I'M JUST TELLING YOU, I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE I ASSUME THAT MR. DARDEN IS ASKING THIS QUESTION IN GOOD FAITH, HAVING PROBABLY RUN A DMV, PROBABLY HAVING RUN A CII, PROBABLY HAVING RUN THE NORMAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION. AND IF THE DMV HAS A LICENSE ISSUED WITH A DIFFERENT DOB, THAT WOULD CAUSE ME TO BELIEVE THAT PERHAPS SHE FILLED OUT A DECLARATION FOR THE DRIVER'S LICENSE, WHICH IS AN APPLICATION MADE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, AND MAY HAVE LIED ABOUT HER BIRTH DATE. IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE NORMALLY PROSECUTE A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE FOR, BUT I'M JUST SAYING, IT'S HAPPENED BEFORE, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S A DIFFERENT NAME. I'M JUST RAISING THE ISSUE SINCE SHE HAS --

# 6 MS. HAMBURGER:

DOES SHE HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENSE IN A DIFFERENT NAME?

# 7 MR. DARDEN:

NO, NOT IN A DIFFERENT NAME. JUST HAS A DIFFERENT BIRTHDATE.

# 8 MS. HAMBURGER:

HAS A DIFFERENT BIRTH YEAR I BELIEVE.

# 9 MR. COCHRAN:

WHAT ARE THE DATES, YOUR HONOR?

# 10 THE COURT:

WHAT'S THE DATES?

# 11 MR. DARDEN:

SINCE I DON'T KNOW THE DATE ON THE APPLICATION, IT'S SEVEN YEARS DIFFERENT.

# 12 THE COURT:

OKAY.

# 13 MR. COCHRAN:

WHAT ARE THE DATES I AM TRYING TO FIND OUT.

# 14 THE COURT:

IT'S ON THE UNEMPLOYMENT APPLICATION. IT'S A DIFFERENCE BY SEVEN YEARS. OKAY. I'M JUST RAISING THE ISSUE THAT THERE'S A POSSIBILITY OF SOME PROBLEMS THERE. THAT'S ALL I AM DOING.

# 15 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, OFFER OF PROOF? YOUR HONOR, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THOSE DOCUMENTS.

# 16 THE COURT:

I AM ASSUMING MR. DARDEN HAS -- IS HOLDING THE COMPUTER READ-OUT RIGHT HERE.

# 17 MR. COCHRAN:

WE DON'T HAVE IT, YOUR HONOR. I'M SAYING WE DON'T HAVE IT.

# 18 MS. CLARK:

NOW YOU DO.

# 19 MS. HAMBURGER:

WELL, IN THAT CASE, SINCE NOW WE DO, YOU HONOR, AND WE HAVEN'T HAD BEFORE, I WOULD LODGE AN OBJECTION ON THAT PART.

# 20 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. DO YOU WANT TO CONSULT WITH YOUR CLIENT?

# 21 MS. HAMBURGER:

BESIDES THAT, I WOULD LIKE A RECESS TO CONSULT WITH MY CLIENT AND MR. JONES.

# 22 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. WE'LL TAKE A BRIEF RECESS. HOLD ON. LET ME GO BACK IN OPEN COURT, AND WE'LL TAKE A BRIEF RECESS. WHY DON'T YOU STAY THERE.

# 23 MS. HAMBURGER:

I WOULD STRENUOUSLY OBJECT NOT HAVING THAT INFORMATION FURNISHED BEFORE, YOUR HONOR.

KEY QUOTE

# 24 THE COURT:

NOTED. WHICH IS WHY WE STOPPED AS SOON AS I HEARD IT.

# 25 MS. CLARK:

THIS IS IMPEACHMENT. SHE HAS THE OPTION TO TAKE THE FIFTH OR NOT.

KEY QUOTE

# 26 MR. COCHRAN:

ALSO, YOUR HONOR, WITH REGARD TO -- YOUR HONOR, ONLY ONE PERSON.

# 27 THE COURT:

WELL, HOLD ON. WHAT I DID IS, WHEN I SAW THE POTENTIAL, WE STOPPED.

# 28 MS. HAMBURGER:

THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP, COUNSELOR, BUT I'M GOING TO TAKE THAT --

# 29 THE COURT:

WE WILL TAKE A RECESS.

# 30 MR. COCHRAN:

I THINK THE COURT INTERPRETERS CAN EXPLAIN THOSE NAMES. I DON'T THINK THOSE ARE FALSE NAMES. I THINK THERE'S AN EXPLANATION.

# 31 THE COURT:

COUNSEL, THERE'S A LOT OF EXPLANATIONS THAT I AM AWARE OF, WORKING IN THIS COURTHOUSE FOR --

# 32 MR. COCHRAN:

I'M NOT SURE EVERYONE IS AWARE OF THAT.

# 33 THE COURT:

THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN EXPLAIN OR YOU CAN ASK ON REDIRECT. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE NAME. I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE OTHER PROBLEMS, MINOR AS IT MAY BE. STAY THERE.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Lance A. Ito

WE MAY HAVE JUST HEARD AN ADMISSION OF A VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE SECTION 118.

The judge himself identifies potential perjury exposure for the witness mid-testimony, which is what triggers the entire sidebar.

Marcia Clark

NOW YOU DO.

Terse, pointed response to Cochran's complaint that the defense lacked the DMV documents — Clark hands them over in the moment.

Marcia Clark

THIS IS IMPEACHMENT. SHE HAS THE OPTION TO TAKE THE FIFTH OR NOT.

Clark frames the prosecution's use of the discrepancy as legitimate impeachment, while acknowledging the witness's Fifth Amendment rights.

Ms. Hamburger

I WOULD STRENUOUSLY OBJECT NOT HAVING THAT INFORMATION FURNISHED BEFORE, YOUR HONOR.

Defense counsel for the witness raises a Brady/discovery complaint — the DMV printout should have been disclosed prior to cross-examination.

Evidence (2)

Informal

DMV computer printout showing witness's driver's license with a birthdate seven years different from what she provided elsewhere

disclosed mid-sidebar by prosecution to defense

Informal

Unemployment application containing the witness's stated date of birth

referenced as the document showing the discrepancy

Notable Exchanges (3)

Johnnie Cochran•Marcia Clark

Cochran complains the defense doesn't have the DMV documents; Clark immediately hands them over with 'NOW YOU DO.' — a sharp, dismissive response.

adversarial

Lance A. Ito•Johnnie Cochran

Cochran suggests name discrepancies have innocent cultural/linguistic explanations; Ito agrees on the name issue but clarifies he is concerned about the birthdate, not the name.

measured

Ms. Hamburger•Lance A. Ito

The witness's own attorney lodges a discovery objection and requests a recess to consult with her client about potential Fifth Amendment exposure; the judge grants it.

protective/strategic

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ unidentified witness

prior inconsistent statement / false document

Darden confronts the witness with a DMV record showing her driver's license lists a birthdate seven years different from what she provided on an unemployment application, raising potential perjury exposure under Vehicle Code and Penal Code Section 118.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 5101 • 33 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103