Sidebar: hearsay objection

📄 Sidebar: hearsay objection — Tuesday, March 21, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\21\SIDEBAR-HEARSAY-OBJECTION.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 42 of 167

◀ Jury instructions Preliminary matters ▶

Date: Tuesday, March 21, 1995 • Utterances: 15

Judge Ito held a sidebar to rule on a hearsay objection regarding statements attributed to Paula Barbieri. Clark argued that Paula's statements were not offered for their truth, and that OJ's own statements about his feelings were admissible as party admissions under Evidence Code 1220. Ito sustained the hearsay objection as to anything Paula said directly, but allowed testimony about OJ's own feelings and his ambivalence about bringing her to the recital.

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

# 2 THE COURT:

WE'VE OVER AT THE SIDEBAR. THE OBJECTION WAS HEARSAY. AND, MISS CLARK, THERE APPEARS TO BE A LOT OF EXTRANEOUS STUFF THERE.

# 3 MS. CLARK:

YES, YOUR HONOR. WITH RESPECT TO THE STATEMENTS THE DEFENDANT ATTRIBUTES TO PAULA, THAT IS THE STATEMENT THAT SHE WANTED TO GO TO THE RECITAL IN ORDER TO SHOW NICOLE THAT SHE WAS THE DEFENDANT'S GIRL, I KNOW THE OBJECTION IS HEARSAY. AND WITH RESPECT TO THAT, THE PEOPLE SIMPLY INDICATE THAT IT WOULD NOT BE -- IT'S NOT BEING ADMITTED FOR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER. NEVERTHELESS, THE PEOPLE SUBMIT IT ON THAT AND ARE ONLY ASKING TO ADMIT THE STATEMENTS THE DEFENDANT MAKES CONCERNING HIS OWN STATE OF MIND.

# 4 THE COURT:

MR. SHAPIRO.

# 5 MR. SHAPIRO:

YOUR HONOR, AS I SAID BEFORE, IT'S CLEARLY IRRELEVANT. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CASE AND HIS RELATIONSHIP TO PAULA CANNOT BE BROUGHT OUT THROUGH THIS WITNESS. IT'S ALL HEARSAY UPON HEARSAY, ESPECIALLY AS TO WHAT PAULA WANTED TO DO. IF THEY WANT TO CALL PAULA, THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO.

# 6 THE COURT:

MISS CLARK.

# 7 MS. CLARK:

WITH RESPECT TO PAULA'S STATEMENTS, PEOPLE SUBMIT IT. WITH RESPECT TO THE DEFENDANT'S STATEMENTS ABOUT HIS FEELINGS ABOUT PAULA, WE SUBMIT THAT IS CLEARLY RELEVANT AND ADMISSION UNDER 1220.

# 8 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION AS TO THE MULTIPLE HEARSAY, AS TO ANYTHING PAULA BARBIERI SAID, ALTHOUGH THE OBJECTION TO THE ADMISSION AS TO THE OTHER MATTER --

# 9 MR. COCHRAN:

ADMISSION?

# 10 THE COURT:

ADMISSION.

# 11 MR. SHAPIRO:

AS TO HIS FEELINGS FOR PAULA?

# 12 THE COURT:

NO, NO. HIS FEELINGS FOR PAULA, HIS AMBIVALENCE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO TAKE HER AND JUST WANTING TO KEEP IT A FAMILY AFFAIR.

KEY QUOTE

# 13 MR. DARDEN:

DOES THAT HURT YOU?

# 14 MR. COCHRAN:

I MEAN, IT WAS ALSO LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE WHEN IT CAME IN.

# 15 (AT 3:10 P.M., AN ADJOURNMENT WAS TAKEN UNTIL, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22, 9:00 A.M.)

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Marcia Clark

THE PEOPLE SIMPLY INDICATE THAT IT WOULD NOT BE -- IT'S NOT BEING ADMITTED FOR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER. NEVERTHELESS, THE PEOPLE SUBMIT IT ON THAT AND ARE ONLY ASKING TO ADMIT THE STATEMENTS THE DEFENDANT MAKES CONCERNING HIS OWN STATE OF MIND.

Clark pivots from a losing hearsay argument on Paula's statements to a stronger footing — OJ's own words about his state of mind, admissible as a party admission.

Robert Shapiro

IT'S ALL HEARSAY UPON HEARSAY, ESPECIALLY AS TO WHAT PAULA WANTED TO DO. IF THEY WANT TO CALL PAULA, THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO.

Shapiro correctly identifies the layered hearsay problem and pointedly notes the prosecution has the option to call Barbieri directly.

Lance A. Ito

HIS FEELINGS FOR PAULA, HIS AMBIVALENCE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO TAKE HER AND JUST WANTING TO KEEP IT A FAMILY AFFAIR.

Ito's ruling captures the core domestic-dynamics evidence the prosecution was pursuing — OJ's conflicted feelings on the night of the murders.

Christopher Darden

DOES THAT HURT YOU?

A rare moment of levity at sidebar, Darden needling Cochran about the ruling going (partially) against the defense.

Evidence (2)

Informal

Paula Barbieri's alleged statement that she wanted to attend Nicole's dance recital to show she was 'the defendant's girl'

discussed, excluded as hearsay

Informal

OJ Simpson's own statements about his feelings for Paula Barbieri and his ambivalence about bringing her to the recital

discussed, allowed as party admission under Evidence Code 1220

Notable Exchanges (2)

Lance A. Ito•Johnnie Cochran•Robert Shapiro

Cochran interjects to question the word 'admission' when Ito uses it in his ruling, prompting clarification; Shapiro follows up to pin down exactly what testimony is being allowed.

strategic

Christopher Darden•Johnnie Cochran

Darden asks Cochran 'Does that hurt you?' after Ito allows testimony about OJ's ambivalence regarding Paula.

light

Light Moments (1)

Christopher Darden

Darden needles Cochran with 'DOES THAT HURT YOU?' after the partial ruling against the defense.

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 5367 • 15 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103