Redirect examination of Brian Kato Kaelin (part 1)

📄 Redirect examination of Brian Kato Kaelin (part 1) — Thursday, March 23, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\23\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-BRIAN-.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 44 of 167

◀ Cross-examination of Brian Kato Kaelin (part 10) Sidebar: derogatory language ▶

Witness: Brian "Kato" Kaelin
Examiner: Marcia Clark
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Thursday, March 23, 1995 • Utterances: 280

Marcia Clark redirected Kato Kaelin to rehabilitate the prosecution's case on two fronts: first, establishing that Kaelin was preoccupied with the thumping sounds and made no effort to observe OJ's hands or body as he left for the airport; second, contradicting Shapiro's cross-examination suggestion that OJ was never upset about Nicole dating others by eliciting detailed accounts of two violent incidents — the October 1993 Gretna Green blowup (broken French doors, police called) and the Christmas 1993 argument over Nicole's ex at a party. Clark also pressed Kaelin on omissions in his grand jury testimony, suggesting he withheld details about the police being called and OJ's rage.

# 1

REDIRECT EXAMINATION

# 2

BY MS. CLARK:

# 3 Q:

WHY DON'T YOU JUST GO AHEAD AND READ A COUPLE MORE LINES THERE, MR. KAELIN. DID I ASK YOU THEN -- READ ALONG WITH ME. DID I ASK YOU THEN: "DID YOU -- AT THE POINT WHEN MR. SIMPSON WAS GETTING READY TO LEAVE FOR THE AIRPORT, DID YOU GET A CLOSE LOOK OF HIM IN THE LIGHT? "ANSWER: NO."

# 4 A:

NO.

# 5 Q:

YOUR ANSWER WAS NO; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 6 A:

NO. YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

# 7 Q:

AND THEN YOU SAID: "I MEAN IT WAS DARK OUTSIDE AND THE HOUSE WASN'T -- THE LIGHTS WERE PROBABLY NOT -- IT WASN'T LIT UP, THE HOUSE." DO YOU RECALL GIVING THAT ANSWER?

# 8 A:

YES.

# 9 Q:

IS THAT CORRECT?

# 10 A:

YES.

# 11 Q:

"QUESTION: AND YOU HAD CONTACT WITH HIM -- WOULD YOU CALL IT BRIEF OR WOULD YOU CALL IT LENGTHY AT THAT POINT?" AND YOUR ANSWER: "IT WAS RUSHED, YEAH." DO YOU RECALL GIVING THAT ANSWER?

# 12 A:

YES.

# 13 Q:

THEN I ASKED YOU: "DID YOU SPEND A LOT OF TIME TRYING TO OBSERVE HIM AT THAT POINT?"

AND YOUR ANSWER: "NO." YOU RECALL THAT BEING YOUR ANSWER?

# 14 A:

YES.

# 15 Q:

AND IS THAT CORRECT?

# 16 A:

YES.

# 17 Q:

AND DID YOU SPEND -- DID YOU MAKE ANY EFFORT TO OBSERVE THE DEFENDANT'S HANDS AS HE WAS GETTING READY TO LEAVE FOR THE AIRPORT IN THE LIMOUSINE?

# 18 A:

NO.

# 19 Q:

HOW MUCH TIME DID YOU SPEND WITH THE DEFENDANT FROM THE MOMENT YOU SAW HIM BY THE LIMOUSINE UNTIL HE LEFT FOR THE AIRPORT?

# 20 A:

BRIEF. FROM THE TIME THAT HE -- SAY THE QUESTION AGAIN?

# 21 Q:

FROM THE TIME YOU SAW HIM STANDING NEAR THE LIMOUSINE UNTIL THE TIME HE LEFT FOR THE AIRPORT, HOW MUCH TIME ELAPSED BETWEEN THOSE TWO POINTS?

# 22 A:

TOTAL, ABOUT FIVE MINUTES.

# 23 Q:

AND DURING THAT FIVE MINUTES, WHAT WAS ON YOUR MIND, FOREMOST ON YOUR MIND?

# 24 A:

THE NOISE THAT I HAD HEARD.

KEY QUOTE

# 25 Q:

WERE YOU MAKING ANY EFFORT TO CAREFULLY OBSERVE THE DEFENDANT'S HANDS?

# 26 A:

NO.

# 27 Q:

OR HIS FACE?

# 28 A:

NO.

# 29 Q:

OR HIS BODY?

# 30 A:

NO.

# 31 Q:

WERE YOU LOOKING AND WATCHING HIM?

# 32 A:

NO.

# 33 Q:

DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING THE BRONCO AT ANY TIME ON JUNE THE 12TH?

# 34 A:

NO.

# 35 Q:

WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE SPENT -- MADE ANY EFFORT TO OBSERVE?

# 36 A:

NO.

# 37 Q:

WAS THE BRONCO PRETTY MUCH A FIXTURE AT THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION?

# 38 A:

YES.

# 39 Q:

SOMETHING YOU SAW EVERY DAY?

# 40 A:

YES.

# 41 Q:

IF IT HAD BEEN PARKED -- I THINK YOU INDICATED EARLIER THAT IT WAS NORMALLY PARKED ON ASHFORD?

# 42 A:

YES.

# 43 Q:

AND HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?

# 44 A:

BECAUSE I WOULD ALWAYS PARK MY CAR ON ASHFORD AND I WOULD ALWAYS PARK IT BY THE BRONCO. SO NORMALLY BY CAR WOULD BE ON ASHFORD BY THE BRONCO.

# 45 Q:

AND DID YOU GO TO YOUR -- GOING TO YOUR CAR, WAS THAT A DAILY OCCURRENCE FOR YOU WHEN YOU LIVED ON ROCKINGHAM?

# 46 A:

YES.

# 47 Q:

SO IT WOULD BE A DAILY OCCURRENCE THAT YOU COULD OBSERVE THE BRONCO PARKED ON ASHFORD AS WELL?

# 48 A:

IF IT WAS THERE, YES.

# 49 Q:

AND SO YOU -- IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY, SIR, THAT YOU NORMALLY OBSERVED THE BRONCO PARKED ON ASHFORD?

# 50 A:

YES.

# 51 Q:

CAN YOU TELL US WHEN YOU SAW IT PARKED SOMEWHERE ELSE AND WHERE?

# 52 A:

IT COULD BE IN THE DRIVEWAY AND, UH --

# 53 Q:

WHEN WOULD IT BE IN THE DRIVEWAY?

# 54 MR. SHAPIRO:

YOUR HONOR, HAS HE FINISHED HIS ANSWER?

# 55 THE COURT:

I DON'T KNOW. HAVE YOU FINISHED YOUR ANSWER?

# 56 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

OH, UH, GIGI SOMETIMES, IF SHE WENT TO THE MARKET, IT WOULD BE IN THE DRIVEWAY, SHE WOULD BE READY TO TAKE IT. SO IT WAS IN THE DRIVEWAY ONCE AND I HAD TO HELP HER MOVE IT BECAUSE SHE WASN'T -- SHE COULDN'T DO IT AND -- BUT MOST OF THE TIME, IT WOULD BE ON ASHFORD.

# 57 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. SO YOU REMEMBER ONCE IT WAS IN THE DRIVEWAY WHEN GIGI WAS -- HAD TAKEN IT TO THE STORE?

# 58 A:

YEAH. I MEAN, IT WAS MORE THAN ONCE IN THE DRIVEWAY. A FEW TIMES, BUT THE PERCENTAGE WISE, MOSTLY ON ASHFORD.

# 59 Q:

AND WHAT PERCENTAGE IS THAT?

# 60 A:

85 TO 90 PERCENT USUALLY ON ASHFORD.

# 61 Q:

OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANY SPECIFIC RECOLLECTION OF WHEN YOU EVER SAW IT PARKED ON ROCKINGHAM OTHER THAN JUNE THE 13TH?

# 62 A:

I MEAN, I DON'T REMEMBER IT NOW. IT COULD HAVE BEEN, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER ON ROCKINGHAM.

# 63 Q:

NOW, YOU SPENT ABOUT A WEEK I THINK IT WAS YOUR TESTIMONY, YOU INDICATED YOU SPENT A WEEK WITH NICOLE IN ASPEN?

# 64 A:

YES.

# 65 Q:

AND THEN WAS IT THE FOLLOWING MONTH THAT YOU MET HER AT THE PARTY AT HER HOUSE ON GRETNA GREEN?

# 66 A:

YES.

# 67 Q:

I THINK YOU INDICATED TO MR. SHAPIRO ON CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT THE DEFENDANT WAS NEVER UPSET ABOUT NICOLE DATING OTHER MEN. DO YOU RECALL SAYING THAT?

# 68 A:

YES.

# 69 Q:

IS THAT WHAT YOU BELIEVE? IS THAT THE TRUTH, MR. KAELIN?

# 70 A:

HE NEVER LET ON THAT HE WAS UPSET ABOUT HER DATING.

# 71 Q:

OCTOBER 25TH, 1993, DO YOU RECALL COMING HOME TO THE GRETNA GREEN LOCATION AND SEEING THE DEFENDANT OUTSIDE THE HOUSE?

# 72 A:

YES.

# 73 Q:

AND DID YOU SEE HIS CAR PARKED OUT FRONT?

# 74 A:

YES.

# 75 Q:

WHICH CAR WAS THAT?

# 76 A:

THE BRONCO.

# 77 Q:

THE WHITE BRONCO?

# 78 A:

THE WHITE BRONCO.

# 79 Q:

AND WHERE WAS IT PARKED?

# 80 A:

IT WAS IN FRONT OF THE GRETNA GREEN DRIVEWAY AND THE FLASHERS WERE ON.

KEY QUOTE

# 81 Q:

WAS IT PARKED IN THE STREET?

# 82 A:

IT WAS IN THE STREET.

# 83 Q:

BLOCKING THE DRIVEWAY?

# 84 A:

YES. PART OF THE DRIVEWAY, YES.

# 85 Q:

WAS IT ALMOST -- WAS IT OUT IN THE STREET AS OPPOSED TO BEING NEXT TO THE CURB?

# 86 A:

YES.

# 87 Q:

SO THE BRONCO WAS PARKED OUT IN THE STREET BLOCKING THE DRIVEWAY WITH THE FLASHERS GOING WHEN YOU GOT THERE; IS THAT RIGHT?

# 88 A:

YES.

# 89 Q:

AND WHEN YOU GOT TO THE HOUSE, WHAT COULD YOU HEAR?

# 90 A:

UH, THERE WAS YELLING.

# 91 Q:

WHO WAS YELLING?

# 92 A:

O.J.

# 93 Q:

YELLING LOUD?

# 94 A:

YES.

# 95 Q:

AND WHO WAS HE YELLING AT?

# 96 A:

NICOLE.

# 97 Q:

AND WHERE WAS HE?

# 98 A:

UH, WELL, THERE WAS SOME MOVEMENT, BUT IT WAS AT -- THE BACK OF THE FRENCH DOORS. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE A PICTURE, BUT IT'S -- THE GUEST HOUSE AT GRETNA GREEN WAS BEHIND AND 15 FEET WOULD BE THE FRENCH DOORS TO THE DEN AREA.

# 99 Q:

UH-HUH.

# 100 A:

AND HE WAS YELLING FROM THERE.

# 101 Q:

SO HE WAS YELLING BEHIND THE HOUSE, BEHIND THE FRENCH DOORS?

# 102 A:

WELL, THE DOORS WERE OPEN. SO, YEAH. IT WAS -- YEAH. STEP IN AND THEN OUT.

# 103 Q:

THOSE DOORS WERE NOT JUST OPEN, WERE THEY, MR. KAELIN? THEY WERE BROKEN OPEN, WEREN'T THEY?

# 104 A:

YES.

# 105 Q:

THE LOCK WAS BROKEN, WASN'T IT?

# 106 A:

YES.

# 107 Q:

AND WHAT WAS THE DEFENDANT YELLING ABOUT?

# 108 A:

UH, THERE WAS AN ARGUMENT ABOUT PICTURES THAT WERE -- THAT WAS UP IN NICOLE'S HOUSE.

# 109 Q:

PICTURE OF A FORMER -- SOMEONE SHE USED TO DATE, ISN'T IT?

# 110 A:

SOMEONE SHE DATED.

# 111 Q:

AND THE DEFENDANT WAS VERY UPSET ABOUT SEEING THAT PICTURE IN HER PHOTO BOOK, WASN'T HE?

# 112 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION. LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.

# 113 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

# 114 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: WAS THE DEFENDANT ANGRY AND UPSET ABOUT SEEING THE PHOTOGRAPH OF SOMEONE SHE HAD BEEN DATING IN THAT BOOK?

# 115 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION. SHE'S ALREADY ESTABLISHED THAT.

# 116 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

# 117 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: WHAT WAS THE DEFENDANT UPSET ABOUT WITH REGARD TO THAT PHOTOGRAPH, MR. KAELIN?

# 118 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION. ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE.

# 119 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

# 120 MS. CLARK:

DIDN'T THE WITNESS JUST TESTIFY --

# 121 THE COURT:

HOW ABOUT WE START FROM THE BASIC, WHAT WAS HE UPSET ABOUT.

# 122 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: YOU INDICATED, SIR, THAT THERE WAS AN ARGUMENT ABOUT PICTURES, DIDN'T YOU?

# 123 A:

YES.

# 124 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND THAT WAS A PICTURE OF WHO?

# 125 A:

I -- I DON'T KNOW WHO THE PICTURE WAS, WHICH PERSON IT WAS EXACTLY.

# 126 Q:

IN GENERAL, WHO WAS IT? WHAT WAS IT?

# 127 A:

A GUY.

# 128 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION. OBJECTION. ASKED AND ANSWERED.

# 129 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 130 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: WHAT KIND OF GUY?

# 131 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION. VAGUE.

# 132 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 133 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

UMM, WHAT KIND OF GUY? CAN YOU --

# 134 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: WHAT DID THE DEFENDANT TELL YOU?

# 135 A:

OH, IT WAS A BOYFRIEND, FORMER BOYFRIEND.

# 136 Q:

OF NICOLE'S?

# 137 A:

YES.

# 138 Q:

AND HE -- WHY WAS HE UPSET? WHY DID HE TELL YOU HE WAS UPSET ABOUT SEEING THAT PHOTOGRAPH IN HER BOOK?

# 139 A:

BECAUSE I THOUGHT AT THAT TIME, THEY HAD A SEMI-COMMITMENT WHERE HIS PICTURES WERE DOWN OF GIRLS, THAT HER PICTURES SHOULD BE DOWN.

KEY QUOTE

# 140 Q:

IS THAT WHAT HE TOLD YOU?

# 141 A:

THAT'S WHAT THE ARGUMENT WAS.

# 142 Q:

UH-HUH. AND HOW ANGRY WAS HE THAT DAY, MR. KAELIN?

# 143 A:

ANGRY. HE WAS YELLING. THEY -- THE POLICE CAME.

# 144 Q:

UH-HUH. WOULD YOU SAY HE WAS VERY ANGRY?

# 145 A:

ANGRY ENOUGH FOR THE POLICE TO COME, YES. CAME.

KEY QUOTE

# 146 MS. CLARK:

ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.

# 147 THE COURT:

CERTAINLY.

# 148 (BRIEF PAUSE.)

# 149 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: AND THEN IN CHRISTMAS OF 1993, YOU RECALL THAT THERE WAS AN ARGUMENT THAT NIGHT ALSO?

# 150 A:

YES.

# 151 Q:

AND I BELIEVE YOU TESTIFIED ON CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT YOU WENT TO THE JENNER'S HOUSE FOR THAT PARTY WITH THE DEFENDANT AND NICOLE AND THEIR CHILDREN; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 152 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 153 Q:

AND THEN YOU TESTIFIED SHORTLY AFTER ARRIVING THERE, NICOLE SAID, "IT'S TIME TO GO"?

# 154 A:

YES.

# 155 Q:

BEFORE SHE SAID THAT, SIR, DID YOU SEE A GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME OF JOSEPH PERULLI ENTER THE HOUSE?

# 156 A:

I THINK HE WAS ALREADY IN THE HOUSE.

# 157 Q:

YES. BEFORE YOU LEFT.

# 158 A:

OH, YES, BEFORE WE LEFT.

# 159 Q:

AND WAS IT SHORTLY AFTER HE ENTERED THE HOUSE THAT NICOLE SAID, "IT'S TIME TO GO"?

# 160 A:

YES.

# 161 Q:

AND WHO IS JOSEPH PERULLI?

# 162 A:

UH, AN EX-BOYFRIEND.

# 163 Q:

OF NICOLE'S?

# 164 A:

OF NICOLE'S.

# 165 Q:

AND AFTER SHE SAID, "COME ON, LET'S GO," DID YOU ALL GO BACK IN THE CAR?

# 166 A:

YES.

# 167 Q:

AND ONCE YOU WERE ALL IN THE CAR, DID THE DEFENDANT SAY SOMETHING TO NICOLE?

# 168 A:

UMM, THERE WAS SOMETHING GOING ON, YES. THERE WAS AN ARGUMENT AND IT WAS I GUESS ABOUT HIM BEING THERE.

# 169 Q:

ABOUT JOSEPH PERULLI BEING THERE?

# 170 A:

JOSEPH -- JOSEPH -- I DON'T KNOW HIS LAST NAME, BUT THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IT. I DIDN'T KNOW HIS LAST NAME.

# 171 Q:

THE DEFENDANT, WAS HE ANGRY WITH NICOLE?

# 172 A:

YES.

# 173 Q:

WAS HE ANGRY ABOUT JOSEPH PERULLI BEING THERE?

# 174 A:

YES.

# 175 Q:

AND WHAT DID HE SAY TO HER?

# 176 A:

I DON'T KNOW THE DIALOGUE, BUT IT WAS LIKE -- I -- THAT HE WAS AT THE PARTY AND HE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN.

# 177 Q:

DID NICOLE INVITE HIM TO THE PARTY?

# 178 A:

I DON'T KNOW WHO INVITED HIM.

# 179 Q:

WHO GAVE THAT PARTY?

# 180 A:

UH, THE JENNER'S.

# 181 Q:

AND YOU INDICATED THAT THEY WERE ALSO TALKING ABOUT SOME FLOWERS THAT HAD BEEN DELIVERED FOR THE DEFENDANT?

# 182 A:

YEAH. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT STORY ON THE FLOWERS, BUT AN EX-GIRLFRIEND I THOUGHT DELIVERED FLOWERS TO O.J.

# 183 Q:

WERE THOSE FLOWERS FROM PAULA?

# 184 A:

I THINK SO.

# 185 Q:

SO WAS THE DEFENDANT YELLING AT NICOLE ON THE WAY HOME FROM THE PARTY?

# 186 MR. SHAPIRO:

LEADING, YOUR HONOR.

# 187 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

# 188 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: HOW WAS THE DEFENDANT BEHAVING WITH -- WITH NICOLE ON THE WAY HOME FROM THE PARTY?

# 189 A:

WELL, THERE WAS -- THERE WAS YELLING AND IT WAS -- IT WAS OFF BECAUSE THERE WERE CHILDREN BACK AND WE WERE IN BACK AND WE WERE SAYING, "IT'S CHRISTMAS EVE." SO IT KIND OF REFRAINED FROM THE YELLING IN THE CAR.

# 190 Q:

SO THEY TRIED TO KEEP IT DOWN IN THE CAR?

# 191 A:

YEAH. IT SUBSIDED.

# 192 Q:

AND THEN THEY WENT -- WHEN THEY GOT HOME -- AND WHEN THEY GOT HOME, THEY HAD DINNER?

# 193 A:

WE ALL HAD DINNER.

# 194 Q:

AND HOW WAS MR. SIMPSON AND NICOLE BEHAVING DURING THAT DINNER?

# 195 A:

WELL, THE FIGHTING WASN'T GOING ON. IT WAS QUIET. IT WAS -- IT WAS CHRISTMAS EVE, VERY QUIET.

# 196 Q:

DO YOU RECALL MAKING A STATEMENT TO THE EFFECT THAT THERE WAS NO TALKING TO THOSE TWO DURING THAT DINNER?

# 197 A:

THERE -- THERE WAS NO TALKING, RIGHT. IT WAS -- IT STARTED OUT THAT WAY AND I THINK AT THE VERY END, IT GOT BETTER, OF THE CHRISTMAS EVE WITH THE PRESENT OPENING.

# 198 Q:

FOR THE CHILDREN?

# 199 A:

YEAH. THERE WAS -- WE WERE SHOOTING A VIDEO AND --

# 200 Q:

WAS THE DEFENDANT SPEAKING TO NICOLE DURING THE DINNER?

# 201 A:

UH, NO.

# 202 Q:

WAS NICOLE SPEAKING TO THE DEFENDANT DURING THE DINNER?

# 203 A:

NO. I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

# 204 Q:

NOW, DURING THE GRAND JURY TESTIMONY THAT YOU GAVE IN THIS CASE -- COUNSEL, PAGE 52 -- DO YOU RECALL MY ASKING YOU WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD EVER OBSERVED THE DEFENDANT AND NICOLE HAVE A FIGHT OR AN ARGUMENT?

# 205 A:

YES.

# 206 Q:

AND DO YOU RECALL WHAT YOUR ANSWER WAS TO THAT QUESTION?

# 207 A:

UMM, CAN YOU SHOW ME?

# 208 Q:

FIRST I WANT TO ASK YOU.

# 209 A:

I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT --

# 210 Q:

DO YOU RECALL?

# 211 A:

-- THE -- THE -- THAT THERE WAS A 911 CALL.

# 212 Q:

DID YOU TELL ME AT THAT TIME THAT THERE WAS A 911 CALL?

# 213 A:

I BELIEVE SO.

# 214 Q:

I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU THE PAGE, MR. KAELIN, AND ASK YOU TO POINT OUT TO ME WHERE YOU SAID THERE WAS A 911 CALL.

# 215 MR. SHAPIRO:

WELL, YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO OBJECT. THIS IS NOT IMPEACHMENT. THE QUESTION WAS A COMPOUND QUESTION, ARGUE OR FIGHT.

# 216 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED. YOU WANT TO REPHRASE YOUR QUESTION?

# 217 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECALL MY ASKING YOU BEFORE THE GRAND JURY WHETHER YOU EVER SAW THE DEFENDANT AND NICOLE ARGUE OR FIGHT?

# 218 MR. SHAPIRO:

SAME OBJECTION.

# 219 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 220 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

I AM SORRY?

# 221 THE COURT:

YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.

# 222 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

DID I SEE THEM FIGHT.

# 223 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: NO. I'M ASKING YOU, DO YOU RECALL BEING ASKED THE QUESTION THAT'S SHOWN IN THAT TRANSCRIPT?

# 224 A:

YES. YES.

# 225 Q:

AND DO YOU SEE YOUR ANSWER IN THAT TRANSCRIPT?

# 226 A:

I SAW THAT THERE WAS ONE, RIGHT.

# 227 Q:

THAT THERE WAS ONE. AND WHERE IN THAT TRANSCRIPT DO YOU SEE THAT YOU TOLD ME THAT THERE WAS A 911 CALL AS A RESULT OF THAT ARGUMENT OR FIGHT?

# 228 MR. SHAPIRO:

I'M GOING TO OBJECT, YOUR HONOR. IT WASN'T ASKED.

# 229 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED.

# 230 MR. SHAPIRO:

MAY WE ASK THE JURY TO DISREGARD --

# 231 THE COURT:

NO. NO. THAT'S A SPEAKING OBJECTION, MR. SHAPIRO. PLEASE REFRAIN THEIR THAT. THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THAT COMMENT. MISS CLARK.

# 232 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: MR. KAELIN, DID YOU NOT JUST TELL ME THAT YOU RECALL TESTIFYING TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A 911 CALL BEFORE THE GRAND JURY?

# 233 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION. MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE.

# 234 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 235 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECALL TESTIFYING TO THAT JUST NOW, SIR?

# 236 A:

THAT THERE'S A 911 CALL?

# 237 Q:

I AM GOING TO READ YOUR ANSWER BACK TO YOU.

# 238 A:

OKAY.

# 239 THE COURT:

HIS ANSWER WAS, "I BELIEVE SO."

# 240 MS. CLARK:

THANK YOU.

# 241 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECALL -- NOW, DID YOU TELL ME IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION I'M GOING TO POSE TO YOU BEFORE THE GRAND JURY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAVE EVER SEEN DEFENDANT AND NICOLE ARGUE OR FIGHT?

# 242 A:

YES.

# 243 Q:

DO YOU RECALL TELLING -- DID YOU TELL ME THAT THERE WAS A 911 CALL AS A RESULT OF THAT FIGHT?

# 244 A:

UMM, IT DOESN'T SAY IT ON THERE.

# 245 Q:

DO YOU -- DID YOU TELL ME -- AND DID I ASK YOU ALSO BEFORE THE GRAND JURY, "DO YOU RECALL THE NATURE OF THE ARGUMENT OR JUST THAT IT WAS ONE"? AND DO YOU RECALL WHAT YOUR ANSWER WAS?

# 246 A:

THAT THERE WAS AN ARGUMENT?

# 247 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION WITH THIS ANSWER ON LINE 19?

# 248 A:

OH, THAT I SAID THAT IT WAS ONE?

# 249 Q:

THAT IT WAS ONE?

# 250 A:

RIGHT. AM I -- JUST SO I KNOW, THAT'S THE ONE I WAS TALKING ABOUT, WAS THE 911 I BELIEVE.

# 251 Q:

UH-HUH. BUT YOU DIDN'T SAY IT THERE?

# 252 A:

NO.

# 253 Q:

AND WHEN I ASKED YOU, "DO YOU RECALL THE NATURE OF THE ARGUMENT OR JUST THAT IT WAS ONE," YOU DID NOT TELL ME THAT YOU CAME HOME TO FIND THE DEFENDANT SCREAMING BEHIND THE HOUSE AND THAT THE POLICE WERE CALLED, DID YOU?

# 254 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. ARGUMENTATIVE.

# 255 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED.

# 256 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU GIVE ME ANY OF THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE POLICE BEING CALLED WHEN I ASKED YOU ABOUT THE NATURE OF THAT ARGUMENT?

# 257 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. TESTIMONY BEFORE A GRAND JURY, NOT TO MISS CLARK.

# 258 THE COURT:

OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.

# 259 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

PLEASE ASK IT AGAIN.

# 260 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU TELL THE GRAND JURY WHEN I ASKED YOU THE QUESTION ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE ARGUMENT, SIR, DID YOU TELL THE GRAND JURY THAT YOU HAD HEARD THE DEFENDANT SCREAMING BEHIND THE HOUSE AND THAT THE POLICE WERE CALLED?

# 261 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. HE WAS NEVER ASKED THAT QUESTION.

# 262 MS. CLARK:

HE WAS ASKED.

# 263 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 264 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

I DON'T -- I DON'T REMEMBER THAT.

# 265 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: YOU DON'T REMEMBER SAYING THAT?

# 266 A:

NO, BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE -- I WOULDN'T HAVE SAID THAT.

KEY QUOTE

# 267 Q:

AND DO YOU SEE THAT IN THE TRANSCRIPT HERE?

# 268 A:

YES.

# 269 Q:

WHERE YOU SAID THAT THE POLICE WERE CALLED?

# 270 A:

NO. IT DOESN'T SAY THAT IN THERE.

# 271 Q:

AND WHEN I ASKED YOU ABOUT THE NATURE OF THAT ARGUMENT, DID YOU RESPOND TO THAT QUESTION BEFORE THE GRAND JURY THAT O.J. CALLED NICOLE A BITCH?

# 272 A:

THAT I SAID THAT?

# 273 Q:

RIGHT?

# 274 A:

NO.

# 275 Q:

DID YOU EVER SAY THAT?

# 276 A:

NO.

# 277 Q:

DID YOU RESPOND --

# 278 MR. SHAPIRO:

OBJECTION.

# 279 Q:

BY MS. CLARK: -- CONCERNING THE NATURE --

# 280 THE COURT:

WAIT. LET ME SEE COUNSEL AT SIDEBAR WITH THE REPORTER, PLEASE.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (5)

Kato Kaelin

THE NOISE THAT I HAD HEARD.

Kaelin confirms his attention during OJ's departure was entirely on the thumping sounds — undermining any defense claim that he would have noticed OJ's demeanor, hands, or injuries.

Kato Kaelin

ANGRY ENOUGH FOR THE POLICE TO COME, YES. CAME.

Kaelin's understated confirmation that OJ's rage at Gretna Green on October 25, 1993 rose to the level of a police call — directly contradicting the defense's portrait of a non-jealous, even-tempered OJ.

Kato Kaelin

IT WAS IN FRONT OF THE GRETNA GREEN DRIVEWAY AND THE FLASHERS WERE ON.

Vivid detail placing OJ at Nicole's home in an agitated state — Bronco blocking the driveway, hazards flashing — before a screaming argument and broken lock.

Kato Kaelin

BECAUSE I THOUGHT AT THAT TIME, THEY HAD A SEMI-COMMITMENT WHERE HIS PICTURES WERE DOWN OF GIRLS, THAT HER PICTURES SHOULD BE DOWN.

Kaelin explains OJ's stated reason for fury over the photo — a possessive 'agreement' about not keeping pictures of exes — illustrating OJ's controlling behavior toward Nicole.

Kato Kaelin

NO, BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE -- I WOULDN'T HAVE SAID THAT.

Kaelin denies remembering that he told the grand jury about the police being called — Clark's impeachment attempt stalls as Kaelin hedges rather than affirm the omission.

Evidence (1)

Informal

Kato Kaelin's grand jury testimony transcript, used to impeach his current recollection about whether he disclosed details of the October 1993 incident (police being called, OJ screaming) before the grand jury

discussed, impeachment attempted

Notable Exchanges (3)

Marcia Clark•Kato Kaelin

Clark methodically walks Kaelin through his prior grand jury answer about whether he had seen OJ and Nicole fight, exposing that he gave a minimal answer and did not volunteer that police were called or that OJ was screaming behind a broken door — Kaelin deflects by saying he 'wouldn't have said that.'

strategic, evasive

Marcia Clark•Kato Kaelin

Clark directly challenges the defense's cross-examination claim that OJ was never upset about Nicole dating by eliciting the October 25, 1993 Gretna Green incident in full: Bronco blocking driveway with flashers, broken French doors, OJ screaming, police called.

revealing

Robert Shapiro•Lance A. Ito

Shapiro interrupts with a speaking objection about the grand jury impeachment and attempts to ask the jury to disregard the question — Ito shuts him down and admonishes him against speaking objections.

heated

Light Moments (2)

Kato Kaelin

Kaelin answers 'NO. YES, THAT'S CORRECT' — self-correcting in real time when asked if 'No' was his prior answer.

Kato Kaelin

When asked 'What kind of guy?' about the photo, Kaelin pauses and says 'What kind of guy? Can you --' before Clark rephrases to simply 'What did the defendant tell you?'

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Kato Kaelin

prior inconsistent statement / omission before grand jury

Clark confronts Kaelin with his grand jury testimony to show he gave a minimal answer about having seen OJ and Nicole fight — omitting the screaming, broken doors, and police call from October 1993. Kaelin denies remembering saying there was a 911 call in that context, and the transcript does not show he said it, partially neutralizing Clark's impeachment.

⚔ Kato Kaelin

prior inconsistent statement (cross vs. redirect)

Clark targets Shapiro's cross-examination success — Kaelin had agreed OJ 'never let on' he was upset about Nicole dating — by forcing Kaelin to describe two specific incidents of OJ's jealous rage, effectively impeaching the impression Shapiro had created.

Witness Demeanor

(BRIEF PAUSE.) — after Clark asks for a moment before returning to domestic violence incidents

Kaelin repeatedly hedges with 'I mean,' 'I don't know the exact story,' and 'I wouldn't have said that' — evasive but not defiant

Kaelin corrects himself mid-answer on multiple occasions, suggesting genuine uncertainty rather than deception

Objections

13 objections (6 sustained, 6 overruled)

Proceeding 5399 • 280 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103