ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. THE DEFENDANT IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK AND MR. DARDEN. THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT. COUNSEL, IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO CHAT ABOUT BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURORS TO REJOIN US FOR THE CONCLUSION OF THE DIRECT EXAMINATION?
YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD ASK TO APPROACH THE BENCH FOR AN OFFER OF PROOF OF GOOD FAITH ON THE PART OF THE PEOPLE FOR IMPEACHMENT IN TWO AREAS THAT THEY HAVE ALLUDED TO.
ONE, SOMETHING THAT TOOK PLACE AT BURGER KING, AND TWO, STATEMENTS SUPPOSEDLY MADE BY KATO KAELIN TO GRANT CRAMER. I HAVE THE DISCOVERY THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED US WITH REGARDING GRANT CRAMER AND IT DOESN'T COME ANYWHERE NEAR THE SUGGESTIONS THAT MISS CLARK WAS GIVING TO THE WITNESS YESTERDAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF MR. SHAPIRO KNOWS HOW TO READ, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE REPORT AND READ TO IT HIM. MR. CRAMER SAID PRECISELY WHAT I SAID TO THE WITNESS. IT IS QUOTED IN THE POLICE REPORT. AND WHAT MORE OFFER OF GOOD FAITH DO YOU NEED THAN THE ACTUAL STATEMENT OF THE WITNESS? THE WITNESS STATED TO THE POLICE THAT KATO KAELIN TOLD HIM WHEN HE WENT TO ROCKINGHAM, AFTER --
KEY QUOTEEXCUSE ME. PERHAPS WE OUGHT TO ASK MR. KAELIN TO STEP OUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT SPECIFICS.
YES, YOUR HONOR. FIRST OF ALL, WITH RESPECT TO THE BURGER KING, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS ANY ATTEMPT AT IMPEACHMENT. I ASKED HIM WHETHER HE WAS SURE HE WENT TO MC DONALD'S AND WHICH ONE AND I DON'T THINK THERE WAS -- THERE WAS NO ATTEMPT TO IMPEACH HIM ON THAT. AND MR. SHAPIRO IS VERY WELL AWARE OF THE REPORTS.
RIGHT, BUT I DID NOT ALLUDE TO ANY PRIOR WITNESS STATEMENTS OR ANYONE WHO SAID DIFFERENTLY. THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN SAYING "DID YOU TELL SOMEONE ELSE THE FOLLOWING." WITH RESPECT TO GRANT CRAMER, MR. SHAPIRO IS IN POSSESSION OF THESE REPORTS. IT STATES IN THE REPORT, I'M QUOTING RIGHT NOW AT PAGE 906 OF THE DISCOVERY, THIS IS GRANT CRAMER'S STATEMENT, THAT: "WHEN KATO WENT BACK TO -- KATO WENT TO ROCKINGHAM AFTER HAVING BEEN INTERVIEWED BY THE POLICE, HE WENT TO SEE GRANT CRAMER AND THEN HE WENT TO ROCKINGHAM AT THE DEFENSE REQUEST AND STAYED AT ROCKINGHAM UNTIL ABOUT MIDNIGHT OR 1:00 A.M. AND THEN HE CAME BACK TO GRANT CRAMER'S HOUSE, AND WHEN HE DID HE TOLD GRANT CRAMER THE FOLLOWING, THAT O.J.'S FAMILY AND FRIENDS WERE AT THE RESIDENCE ALONG WITH SOME OTHER ATTORNEYS, WHICH INCLUDED WEITZMAN, KATO SAID THAT O.J. HAD HUGGED HIM TELLING HIM 'THANK GOD YOU WERE HERE AND YOU CAN SAY I WAS AT HOME WHEN THIS THING HAPPENED.' "CRAMER SAID KATO SPENT THE NIGHT AT HIS APARTMENT AND LEFT THE NEXT DAY. KATO SPENT THE REST OF THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS AT SIMPSON'S RESIDENCE. DURING ONE OF THOSE DAYS KATO CALLED CRAMER ON THE PHONE AND SPOKE VERY COVERTLY. KATO SOUNDED VERY EXCITED ON THE TELEPHONE AND SAID HE COULD NOT TALK. KATO TOLD CRAMER 'JUST BE CAREFUL.' CRAMER REPLIED, 'WHY? IS MY LIFE IN DANGER?' KATO ABRUPTLY SAID, 'NO, I DIDN'T SAY THAT.'"
EXACTLY WHAT I -- WELL, THERE IS MORE TO IT, BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I CROSS-EXAMINED KATO --
WHY DON'T WE FINISH. THERE IS MORE THERE, YOUR HONOR, BECAUSE OUR POINT IS THAT I BELIEVE MISS CLARK TRIED TO INSINUATE --
WELL, NO. THERE IS NOTHING ON THAT. IT GOES ON: "THEN KATO ARRIVED AT CRAMER'S RESIDENCE ON FRIDAY MORNING, JUNE 17, AND CRAMER RELUCTANTLY ALLOWED HIM INSIDE AND IT WAS THE SAME DAY THAT DETECTIVES CARR AND TIPPIN SERVED HIM WITH A GRAND JURY SUBPOENA." THERE IS NOTHING MORE ABOUT THE EVENTS AT ROCKINGHAM. THAT IS ALL.
IS THAT A GOOD FAITH OFFER OF PROOF OR WHAT? I MEAN, THE WITNESS SAID EXACTLY WHAT I CONFRONTED OUR WITNESS WITH AND MR. SHAPIRO HAS THIS REPORT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF GAME HE IS PLAYING NOW. LET'S CALL THE JURY, YOUR HONOR.
YOUR HONOR, MY RECOLLECTION OF THE QUESTIONS YESTERDAY WERE THAT THEY WENT INTO THE DEMEANOR OF MR. SIMPSON AND WHAT KATO KAELIN TOLD GRANT CRAMER ABOUT MR. SIMPSON'S DEMEANOR AND HOW OUT OF SORTS IT WAS. AND I HAVE TO THIS DATE NOT RECEIVED ANY OTHER REPORTS THAN THE SIMPLE PARAGRAPH THAT MISS CLARK HAS READ TO YOUR HONOR, AND I WOULD STILL URGE THE COURT TO MAKE AN INQUIRY OF MISS CLARK AS TO WHERE THE REPORTS ARE THAT TALK ABOUT KATO KAELIN TALKING TO GRANT CRAMER ABOUT DEMEANOR.
MAINLY 906. CRAMER IS TALKING ABOUT KATO'S RECOUNTING OF O.J.'S DEMEANOR AT THE TIME AFTER THE LIMO HAD ARRIVED. "KATO TOLD CRAMER THAT HE OBSERVED O.J. TO BE FRAZZLED AND OUT OF BREATH," QUOTE-UNQUOTE, "AND DID NOT LOOK LIKE THAT HE HAD JUST AWAKED FROM SLEEP AT THE TIME THE LIMO DRIVER ARRIVED." I THINK THAT IS WHAT I ASKED HIM.
OKAY. WAS THERE ANOTHER QUESTION, TO MY RECOLLECTION, CONCERNING MR. SIMPSON'S DEMEANOR AFTER THE RECITAL?
YES, THERE WAS, AND THAT IS PURSUANT TO ANONYMOUS -- TWO, ACTUALLY -- ON TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS, ANONYMOUS TIPS THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED -- NO, ONE ANONYMOUS; ONE NOT. ONE FROM EITHER AN EX-GIRLFRIEND OR THE EX-WIFE OF KATO KAELIN ON TELEVISION SAYING THAT HE DESCRIBED THE DEFENDANT'S DEMEANOR AFTER THE RECITAL AS BEING FURIOUS, ANGRY, YELLING AND SHOUTING. WE RECEIVED A BACK-UP TO THAT YESTERDAY, ANOTHER TIP IN WHICH KATO HAD ALLEGEDLY TOLD THAT WITNESS AS WELL THAT AFTER THE RECITAL HE WAS FURIOUS, YELLING AND SCREAMING AND SHOUTING ABOUT NICOLE.
ALL RIGHT. WHEN DID YOU RECEIVE THIS INFORMATION REGARDING THE EX-WIFE OR EX-GIRLFRIEND?
OKAY. THAT WAS JUST -- THAT WAS ON TELEVISION. THAT WAS A NEWS REPORT, A NEWS INTERVIEW, AND THAT WAS -- I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN. I THINK IT WAS MAYBE TWO, THREE WEEKS AGO. I DON'T HAVE A REPORT ON IT. IT WAS ON TELEVISION.
YES, YOUR HONOR. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW IN CALIFORNIA IS THAT GOOD FAITH REQUIRES SOMETHING MORE THAN TABLOID TELEVISION OR TABLOID NEWSPAPERS TO BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS ON CROSS-EXAMINATION IN THE WAY THAT THEY WERE ASKED YESTERDAY, AND AT A VERY MINIMUM A FOLLOW-UP, KNOWING THAT THIS WITNESS WAS A KEY WITNESS AND HAD BEEN PROBABLY -- NOT PROBABLY -- WAS THE FIRST WITNESS INTERVIEWED IN THIS CASE IN JUNE OF 1994, THAT COMING TO COURT NOW TEN MONTHS LATER AND SAYING WE STILL HAVEN'T FOLLOWED UP ON OTHER REPORTS, KNOWING FROM THAT DAY HE GAVE THEM THE NAME OF GRANT CRAMER AND SAID HE HAD BEEN WITH GRANT CRAMER. CLEARLY I THINK THE COURT SHOULD FIND THERE WAS BAD FAITH AND THAT THE JURY SHOULD BE ADMONISHED THAT QUESTIONS WERE ASKED IN BAD FAITH AND THAT THERE WAS NO BASIS IN FACT FOR ASKING THEM.
KEY QUOTEEXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT SHOULD BE AWARE THAT MR. KAELIN DID NOT VOLUNTEER TO US THAT HE WENT TO GRANT CRAMER'S HOUSE. THAT IS FALSE. WE FOUND THAT OUT INDEPENDENTLY AND THERE HAS BEEN NO BAD FAITH HERE, I THINK THAT IS OBVIOUS. THE WITNESS INTERVIEW THAT I TALKED ABOUT, THE FACT THAT SOMEONE SAYS IT ON TELEVISION, THIS IS NOT A REPORT OR CHARACTERIZING WHAT THERE WOMAN SAID. THIS IS THE WOMAN HERSELF ON TELEVISION SAYING IT, SO THAT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS SAYING IT WHO HAS BEEN VIEWED PROBABLY NATIONALLY SAYING WHAT I HAVE REPRESENTED TO MR. KAELIN. IF HE CHOOSES NOT TO ADMIT THAT HE SAID THAT, THAT IS HIS CHOICE, BUT IT CERTAINLY IS A GOOD FAITH SHOWING. IT IS NOT REQUIRED THAT I HAVE STATEMENTS UNDER OATH AND MR. SHAPIRO IS VERY WELL AWARE OF THAT. HE IS SIMPLY TRYING TO PROTECT HIS WITNESS. THIS WOMAN DID STATE PERSONALLY ON TELEVISION WHAT I CONFRONTED MR. KAELIN WITH. FURTHERMORE, WITH RESPECT TO THE STATEMENT ABOUT GRANT CRAMER --
I HAVE -- WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO LOCATE THAT. EVER SINCE I HEARD ABOUT IT WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO LOCATE THE TAPE. PEOPLE HAVE CALLED ME WHO -- WHO HAVE SEEN IT AND TOLD ME ABOUT IT, SO I MEAN, I'M NOT --
I BELIEVE IT WAS CHANNEL 7 AND THAT IS WHERE IT HAS BEEN DIFFICULT TO LOCATE. THREE PEOPLE CALLED ME TO SAY THAT SEEN THIS WOMAN TALKING ON TELEVISION. IT WAS 7:00 OR 7:30 SHOWING DURING THE WEEK ABOUT THE STATEMENT THAT KAELIN HAD MADE TO HER CONCERNING THE DEFENDANT'S DEMEANOR, AND WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO LOCATE THE FOOTAGE, AS WELL AS THE PERSON, AND DETECTIVE VANNATTER CAN ACTUALLY TESTIFY TO THE FACT THAT I HAVE REQUESTED HIM TO LOCATE THIS PERSON, BECAUSE I DID, IMMEDIATELY UPON HEARING THAT, BUT CERTAINLY I HAVE ENOUGH FOR A GOOD FAITH SHOWING TO ASK MR. KAELIN ABOUT THIS AND CONFRONT HIM WITH IT. IF HE ADMITS IT, THEN FINE. IF HE DOESN'T, THE WITNESS WILL BE PRODUCED.
THE COURT IS AWARE OF THE FACT THAT WE ARE PREPARED TO BACK IT UP AND MR. KAELIN DID NOT VOLUNTEER HIS CONVERSATIONS WITH GRANT CRAMER. HE NEVER VOLUNTEERED THE NAME. WE FOUND THAT OUT ON OUR OWN.
YOUR HONOR, MAY I REFER THE COURT MOST RESPECTFULLY TO PAGE 348 OF THE MURDER BOOK, THE FIRST REPORT THAT WAS FILED, AND THAT WAS THE REPORT OF OFFICER TIPPIN AND CARR REGARDING GRANT CRAMER -- REGARDING KATO KAELIN. AND THE FIRST LINE OF THAT REPORT ON PAGE 2 IS "FRIEND AND BUSINESS PARTNER, GRANT CRAMER," AND IT GIVES HIS NUMBER.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COUNSEL, I FIND THE OFFER OF PROOF TO BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE EXAMINATION OF THIS WITNESS. I WILL OVERRULE THE OBJECTION AT THIS TIME. LET'S HAVE THE JURY.
I DON'T KNOW IF MR. SHAPIRO KNOWS HOW TO READ, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE REPORT AND READ TO IT HIM.
KATO TOLD CRAMER THAT O.J. HAD HUGGED HIM TELLING HIM 'THANK GOD YOU WERE HERE AND YOU CAN SAY I WAS AT HOME WHEN THIS THING HAPPENED.'
MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW IN CALIFORNIA IS THAT GOOD FAITH REQUIRES SOMETHING MORE THAN TABLOID TELEVISION OR TABLOID NEWSPAPERS TO BE ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS ON CROSS-EXAMINATION.
THREE PEOPLE CALLED ME TO SAY THAT SEEN THIS WOMAN TALKING ON TELEVISION. IT WAS 7:00 OR 7:30 SHOWING DURING THE WEEK ABOUT THE STATEMENT THAT KAELIN HAD MADE TO HER CONCERNING THE DEFENDANT'S DEMEANOR.
COUNSEL, I FIND THE OFFER OF PROOF TO BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE EXAMINATION OF THIS WITNESS. I WILL OVERRULE THE OBJECTION AT THIS TIME.