Cross-examination of Philip Vannatter (part 3)

📄 Cross-examination of Philip Vannatter (part 3) — Monday, March 20, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\20\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-PHILIP-VA.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 41 of 167

◀ Administrative matters: exhibits Sidebar: evidence objections ▶

Witness: Det. Philip Vannatter
Examiner: Robert Shapiro
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Monday, March 20, 1995 • Utterances: 136

Robert Shapiro cross-examines Detective Vannatter about the geographic and institutional scope of the investigation — agencies consulted, states visited, labs engaged, and officers involved. The examination culminates in Vannatter confirming that despite exhaustive resources, no murder weapon was ever found. A sidebar is called when Shapiro asks about knives found at the Rockingham address.

# 1 THE COURT:

THANK YOU. PLEASE BE SEATED. DETECTIVE VANNATTER, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESUME THE WITNESS STAND. GOOD MORNING AGAIN, DETECTIVE VANNATTER. YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH, SIR.

# 2 DET. PHILIP VANNATTER:

YES, SIR.

# 3 THE COURT:

MR. SHAPIRO, YOU MAY CONTINUE.

# 4 MR. SHAPIRO:

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD MORNING AGAIN, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

# 5 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: YOU WERE TELLING US THAT YOU WERE IN CONNECTICUT?

# 6 A:

YES.

# 7 Q:

AND IN WASHINGTON D.C.?

# 8 A:

YES.

# 9 Q:

HAVE YOU BEEN OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES ON THIS CASE?

# 10 A:

NO, SIR.

# 11 Q:

HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT BEEN OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES IN THIS CASE?

# 12 A:

I BELIEVE THEY WERE OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES ON A COMPANION CASE, NOT THIS CASE.

# 13 Q:

HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT BEEN TO ANY OTHER STATES THAN THE STATES THAT YOU HAVE MENTIONED?

# 14 MR. DARDEN:

OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT AND VAGUE.

# 15 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 16 DET. PHILIP VANNATTER:

YES. THERE WAS ONE OTHER STATE THAT I -- THAT SLIPPED MY MIND. IOWA. I WAS IN IOWA.

# 17 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: YOU WERE IN IOWA?

# 18 A:

YES, SIR.

# 19 Q:

AND WHAT ABOUT OTHER MEMBERS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT? HAVE THEY BEEN TO ANY OTHER STATES THAT WE HAVEN'T MENTIONED?

# 20 A:

NONE COME TO MIND RIGHT NOW.

# 21 Q:

ANYBODY FROM YOUR DEPARTMENT VISIT CHICAGO, ILLINOIS?

# 22 A:

YES.

# 23 Q:

I DON'T KNOW IF WE MENTIONED THAT OR NOT. YOU DID NOT?

# 24 A:

NO, I DID NOT.

# 25 Q:

BUT PEOPLE WENT AT YOUR DIRECTION?

# 26 A:

YES.

# 27 Q:

AND HOW MANY OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES HAVE YOU WORKED WITH IN THE COURSE OF THIS INVESTIGATION? JUST TELL US WHICH ONES THEY ARE RATHER THAN GIVE US A NUMBER, PLEASE.

# 28 A:

FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT, FAIRFIELD, IOWA, THE FBI.

# 29 Q:

WHEN YOU SAY FAIRFIELD, CONNECTICUT, THAT'S THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR --

# 30 A:

POLICE DEPARTMENT, YES. POLICE DEPARTMENT IN BOTH CITIES. THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, A LOT OF ORANGE COUNTY AGENCIES ON THE 17TH, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

# 31 Q:

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR THE UNITED STATES OR FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA?

# 32 A:

UNITED STATES AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AND I -- I -- I JUST CAN'T CALL TO MIND ANY MORE AT THIS POINT.

# 33 Q:

CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT?

# 34 A:

YES.

# 35 Q:

FLORIDA POLICE DEPARTMENT?

# 36 A:

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS ON THIS CASE OR THE COMPANION CASE THAT THEY WORKED WITH THE DEPARTMENT DOWN THERE.

# 37 Q:

BUT RELATED TO -- AT LEAST RELATED TO THE --

# 38 A:

RELATED, YES.

# 39 Q:

-- RELATED TO SOME ASPECTS OF THIS CASE?

# 40 THE COURT:

EXCUSE, ME GENTLEMEN. YOU ARE BOTH OLD PROS. YOU'RE DRIVING THE COURT REPORTER NUTS. LET HIM FINISH THE QUESTION, LET HIM FINISH THE ANSWER.

# 41 DET. PHILIP VANNATTER:

I APOLOGIZE, YOUR HONOR.

# 42 MR. SHAPIRO:

I APOLOGIZE, YOUR HONOR.

# 43 THE COURT:

PROCEED.

# 44 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: IN ADDITION TO DEALING WITH -- WELL, WHAT DID YOU DO AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR THE UNITED STATES? WHAT ROLE DID THEY PLAY IN THIS CASE?

# 45 A:

THEY HELPED ME AND MY PARTNER IN A POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION THAT WE DID.

KEY QUOTE

# 46 Q:

OF WHOM?

# 47 MR. DARDEN:

OBJECTION.

# 48 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED.

# 49 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: AND WHEN YOU WENT TO CONNECTICUT, WAS ONE OF THE PURPOSES THERE TO INTERVIEW ONE OF MR. SIMPSON'S WITNESSES, MR. FICHMAN, DR. FICHMAN?

# 50 A:

I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THAT. TO INTERVIEW DR. FICHMAN?

# 51 Q:

YES.

# 52 A:

NO, SIR.

# 53 Q:

WAS HE INTERVIEWED IN CONNECTICUT?

# 54 A:

NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

# 55 Q:

HAVE YOU OR PEOPLE AT YOUR DIRECTION INTERVIEWED WITNESSES FOR MR. O.J. SIMPSON?

# 56 MR. DARDEN:

OBJECTION. IT'S VAGUE.

# 57 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED.

# 58 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: INTERVIEWED PEOPLE WHO WERE ON THE -- STRIKE THAT. WHAT LABORATORIES HAVE BEEN ENGAGED TO ANALYZE POTENTIAL EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE?

# 59 A:

CELLMARK LABORATORIES.

# 60 Q:

WHERE'S THAT?

# 61 A:

IN MARYLAND.

# 62 Q:

THAT'S A PRIVATE LABORATORY?

# 63 A:

YES. THE FBI, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.

# 64 Q:

WHERE?

# 65 A:

WASHINGTON D.C. AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

# 66 Q:

WHAT ABOUT THE LOS ANGELES -- LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT ALSO ANALYZE EVIDENCE?

# 67 A:

YES.

# 68 Q:

ARE THERE ALSO OTHER LABORATORIES THAT HAVE BEEN CONSULTED REGARDING THIS CASE AND EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE?

# 69 A:

NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF, NO.

# 70 Q:

AND HOW MANY OTHER CASES HAVE YOU ENGAGED THREE OUTSIDE LABORATORIES TO AID IN ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE?

# 71 MR. DARDEN:

OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT.

# 72 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: YOU PERSONALLY.

# 73 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 74 DET. PHILIP VANNATTER:

I HAVEN'T PERSONALLY DONE ANY.

# 75 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: IN HOW MANY OTHER CASES HAVE YOU PERSONALLY ENGAGED THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES TO AID IN YOUR INVESTIGATION?

# 76 A:

PROBABLY -- PROBABLY QUITE A FEW.

# 77 Q:

PROBABLY OR CERTAINLY?

# 78 A:

WELL, OVER THE -- OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE WORKED WITH FEDERAL AGENCIES A LOT ON CASES. I COULDN'T GIVE YOU AN EXACT NUMBER.

# 79 Q:

MY QUESTION IS, PARTICULARLY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ON HOW MANY OCCASIONS HAVE YOU PERSONALLY -- YOU PERSONALLY CONTACTED THEM FOR AN INVESTIGATION YOU WERE THE LEAD INVESTIGATOR ON?

# 80 A:

WELL, I DIDN'T PERSONALLY CONTACT THEM THIS TIME.

# 81 Q:

WOULD YOU SAY THAT'S A RARE OCCURRENCE?

# 82 A:

NO, I WOULD NOT SAY IT'S A RARE OCCURRENCE. I'VE WORKED WITH A LOT OF AGENCIES OVER THE YEARS.

# 83 Q:

HOW MANY POLICE OFFICERS FROM THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN ENGAGED AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER IN SOME ASPECT OF THIS CASE?

# 84 A:

UNIFORM OR DETECTIVE?

# 85 Q:

ACROSS THE BOARD. UNIFORM, DETECTIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE.

# 86 THE COURT:

DO YOU WANT TO INCLUDE ALL THE OFFICERS ON OUR JURY TOUR?

KEY QUOTE

# 87 MR. SHAPIRO:

I'M SORRY?

# 88 THE COURT:

DO YOU WANT TO INCLUDE ALL THE OFFICERS ON OUR JURY TOUR?

KEY QUOTE

# 89 MR. SHAPIRO:

NO, YOUR HONOR. NO. EXCLUDING THE OFFICERS ON THE JURY TOUR. THOSE ARE THE ONES THE COURT ENGAGED I BELIEVE.

# 90 THE COURT:

A LITTLE OF THIS, A LITTLE OF THAT.

# 91 DET. PHILIP VANNATTER:

YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE COLLATERAL ISSUES THAT'S GONE ON WITH THIS CASE AS FAR AS TRAFFIC CONTROL AND THINGS LIKE THAT, I WOULD HAVE NO IDEA. I DON'T KNOW. I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW.

# 92 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: GIVE US A GENERAL ESTIMATION OF HOW MANY OFFICERS HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS CASE TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE. YOU'VE GOT ALL YOUR RECORDS HERE. YOU COULD CHECK IT IF YOU WANTED TO I TAKE IT.

# 93 MR. DARDEN:

INVOLVED IN, IT'S VAGUE.

# 94 THE COURT:

I THINK HE'S DESCRIBED IT.

# 95 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, DON'T YOU? THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE INVESTIGATION --

# 96 A:

OH, I -- I WOULD SAY --

# 97 Q:

-- THAT GOT YOU TO THE POINT YOU ARE IN COURT HERE.

# 98 A:

OH, I WOULD SAY PROBABLY -- PROBABLY 15 TO 20.

# 99 Q:

15 TO 20?

# 100 A:

YEAH.

# 101 Q:

AND HOW MANY OFFICERS WERE ENGAGED IN THE SEARCH OF THE BRENTWOOD AREA LOOKING FOR EITHER GROSS EVIDENCE OR TRACE EVIDENCE?

# 102 A:

WHEN?

# 103 Q:

ANY TIME DURING THIS CASE, FROM JUNE 13TH TO 10:00 O'CLOCK THIS MORNING.

# 104 A:

HOW MANY OFFICERS WERE INVOLVED IN THE SEARCH OF THE BRENTWOOD AREA. WELL, WE HAD A GROUP OF RECRUIT OFFICERS DO A WALK FROM BUNDY TO ROCKINGHAM. I BELIEVE THERE WERE PROBABLY 30 OFFICERS MAYBE, RECRUIT OFFICERS.

# 105 Q:

WELL, THAT'S ON TOP OF THE 20 THAT YOU JUST MENTIONED?

# 106 A:

WELL, THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT INVOLVED IN ALL STAGES. THESE ARE --

# 107 Q:

NO, NO. I -- NO. LET ME MAKE MY POINT CLEAR.

# 108 MR. DARDEN:

MAY THE WITNESS BE ALLOWED TO FINISH HIS ANSWER?

# 109 THE COURT:

LET HIM FINISH HIS ANSWER.

# 110 MR. SHAPIRO:

I'M SORRY. I APOLOGIZE TO YOU, SIR.

# 111 DET. PHILIP VANNATTER:

THAT'S QUITE ALL RIGHT, MR. SHAPIRO. THERE'S A LOT OF COLLATERAL ISSUES THAT'S HAPPENED WHERE WE'VE USED OFFICERS FROM OTHER DIVISIONS OR REQUESTED HELP AT DIFFERENT TIMES, AND THEY WOULD BE INVOLVED FOR ONE ASPECT AND THAT WOULD END THE -- THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN IT.

# 112 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: THAT'S MY QUESTION. INVOLVED FOR ANY ASPECT WHATSOEVER FROM JUNE 13TH, 1994 TO THIS MORNING. HOW MANY MEMBERS OF THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN ANY ASPECT OF THIS CASE?

# 113 A:

I THINK I ANSWERED THAT BEFORE. I DON'T KNOW.

# 114 Q:

CAN YOU GIVE US AN ESTIMATE?

# 115 A:

I COULDN'T EVEN GIVE YOU A GOOD ESTIMATE. I DON'T KNOW.

# 116 Q:

WOULD IT EXCEED A HUNDRED?

# 117 A:

THAT'S POSSIBLE. THAT'S POSSIBLE. I DON'T KNOW.

# 118 Q:

WOULD YOU SAY IN YOUR CAREER, THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED CASES THAT HAS EVER BEEN DONE BY THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT?

# 119 MR. DARDEN:

352 OBJECTION.

# 120 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 121 DET. PHILIP VANNATTER:

NO, I WOULDN'T SAY THAT. I WOULD SAY IT RANKS UP THERE WITH A LOT OF CASES. A LOT OF CASES HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED.

KEY QUOTE

# 122 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WANTED DONE IN THIS CASE THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE BECAUSE OF LACK OF RESOURCES OR MANPOWER?

# 123 A:

NO.

# 124 Q:

IS THERE ANY AGENCY IN THE UNITED STATES THAT YOU WOULD LIKE ASSISTANCE FOR IN THIS CASE THAT HAS REFUSED TO GIVE YOU ASSISTANCE?

# 125 A:

NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

# 126 Q:

IS THERE ANY AGENCY IN THE WORLD THAT YOU WOULD SEEK ASSISTANCE FROM WHO HASN'T GIVEN YOU ASSISTANCE?

# 127 A:

NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

# 128 Q:

HAVE YOU CONDUCTED THE MOST THOROUGH SEARCH THAT YOU COULD AS A PROFESSIONAL TO LOOK FOR THE MURDER WEAPON IN THIS CASE?

# 129 A:

YES.

# 130 Q:

HAVE YOU FOUND IT?

# 131 A:

NO, I HAVE NOT.

# 132 Q:

HAVE YOU FOUND ANY WEAPONS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE INJURIES ON EITHER NICOLE SIMPSON OR RONALD GOLDMAN?

# 133 A:

NO, I HAVE NOT.

# 134 Q:

HAVE YOU FOUND ANY KNIVES IN THE AREA OF THE ROCKINGHAM ADDRESS?

# 135 MR. DARDEN:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. MAY WE APPROACH FOR A MOMENT?

# 136 THE COURT:

YES, WITH THE COURT REPORTER.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Phil Vannatter

THEY HELPED ME AND MY PARTNER IN A POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION THAT WE DID.

Reveals that a polygraph was administered during the investigation; Darden's immediate objection was sustained before Shapiro could establish who was tested — suggesting the answer could be damaging.

Phil Vannatter

NO, I HAVE NOT.

Vannatter confirms no murder weapon was found and no weapons consistent with the victims' injuries were recovered — a key defense point about an incomplete investigation.

Phil Vannatter

NO, I WOULDN'T SAY THAT. I WOULD SAY IT RANKS UP THERE WITH A LOT OF CASES.

Vannatter deflects Shapiro's attempt to get him to call this the most thoroughly investigated case in LAPD history, which would have set up a 'and you still found no weapon' argument.

Lance A. Ito

DO YOU WANT TO INCLUDE ALL THE OFFICERS ON OUR JURY TOUR?

Rare moment of judicial levity from Ito mid-testimony, briefly breaking the procedural rhythm.

Evidence (3)

Informal

Murder weapon — no knife or weapon consistent with victim injuries ever recovered

absence established on cross

Informal

Polygraph examination conducted with DOJ assistance

mentioned by Vannatter; subject's identity blocked by sustained objection

Informal

Knives at the Rockingham address

question initiated; sidebar called before answer

Notable Exchanges (4)

Robert Shapiro•Phil Vannatter

Shapiro methodically establishes the enormous scope of the investigation — multiple states, multiple agencies (FBI, DOJ, Cellmark, LAPD, Chicago PD, Florida), potentially 100+ officers — building toward the implicit argument that all this effort still failed to find a murder weapon.

strategic

Robert Shapiro•Phil Vannatter•Christopher Darden

Vannatter inadvertently reveals a polygraph examination was conducted with DOJ assistance; Darden's objection cuts off the follow-up before the subject's identity is disclosed.

revealing

Robert Shapiro•Phil Vannatter

Shapiro asks whether any weapons consistent with the victims' injuries were found at Rockingham, and Vannatter confirms none were — closing a clean rhetorical loop on the missing murder weapon.

devastating

Lance A. Ito•Robert Shapiro•Phil Vannatter

Both Shapiro and Vannatter repeatedly interrupt each other; Ito admonishes them as 'old pros' who are driving the court reporter 'nuts.' Both apologize.

light

Light Moments (2)

Lance A. Ito

Ito interjects mid-question to ask whether Shapiro wants to count all the officers on the jury tour, then quips 'A little of this, a little of that' when Shapiro clarifies.

Lance A. Ito

Ito calls Shapiro and Vannatter 'old pros' who are driving the court reporter nuts after they repeatedly talk over each other.

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Phil Vannatter

scope and resource challenge

Shapiro establishes that the investigation was extraordinarily well-resourced — multiple outside labs, federal agencies, 100+ officers, multi-state travel — and then confirms no murder weapon was ever found, implying the failure to find one reflects the investigation's conclusions rather than its limitations.

⚔ Phil Vannatter

polygraph revelation

Shapiro surfaces that a polygraph was conducted with DOJ assistance, raising questions about who was tested and what the results showed, though Darden's sustained objection prevented the subject's identity from being revealed.

Objections

7 objections (2 sustained, 4 overruled)

Proceeding 5329 • 136 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103