Cross-examination of Brian Kato Kaelin

📄 Cross-examination of Brian Kato Kaelin — Monday, March 27, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\27\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-BRIAN-KAT.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 45 of 167

◀ Administrative matters: cross-examination Redirect examination of Brian Kato Kaelin (part 2) ▶

Witness: Brian "Kato" Kaelin
Examiner: Robert Shapiro
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Monday, March 27, 1995 • Utterances: 39

Robert Shapiro cross-examines Kato Kaelin to establish that his knowledge of OJ Simpson missing scheduled child pickups came entirely from Nicole Simpson — not from direct personal observation — thereby arguing the testimony is inadmissible hearsay. Shapiro also lays foundation that OJ's work as a speaker and actor could explain schedule disruptions. The judge, unusually, poses his own questions to the witness to clarify the basis of Kaelin's knowledge.

# 1

CROSS-EXAMINATION

# 2

BY MR. SHAPIRO:

# 3 Q:

MR. KAELIN, YOU'RE AWARE OF THE TYPE OF WORK THAT MR. SIMPSON DID DURING THE PERIODS OF TIME THAT YOU WERE BOTH LIVING AT GRETNA GREEN AND AT ROCKINGHAM; WERE YOU NOT?

# 4 A:

YES.

# 5 Q:

AND YOU'RE AWARE THAT HE HAD SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS?

# 6 A:

YES.

# 7 Q:

AND MANY TIMES BEFORE VERY LARGE AUDIENCES?

# 8 A:

YES.

# 9 Q:

SOMETIMES 5,000 PEOPLE?

# 10 A:

A SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE.

# 11 Q:

AND YOU'RE ALSO AWARE THAT HE MAKES HIS MONEY AS AN ACTOR AND DOING COMMERCIALS?

# 12 A:

YES.

# 13 Q:

AND THAT THERE WOULD BE TIMES WHEN HE WOULD BE CALLED UNEXPECTEDLY TO EITHER REDO SOME ACTING OR TO TAKE PLACE IN AN ACTING JOB OR A COMMERCIAL?

# 14 A:

YES.

# 15 MS. CLARK:

YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. THIS IS ALL SPECULATION. NO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE THAT IT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE TIME HE DIDN'T PICK UP THE CHILDREN.

# 16 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 17 MS. CLARK:

IT'S IRRELEVANT.

# 18 THE COURT:

BUT WHY DON'T WE ASK THE PERTINENT QUESTION.

# 19 MR. SHAPIRO:

I'M DOING THIS AS BACKGROUND, YOUR HONOR.

# 20 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT.

# 21 Q:

BY MR. SHAPIRO: IN JUNE OF 1993, DO YOU HAVE ANY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE THAT O.J. SIMPSON DID NOT APPEAR TO PICK UP HIS CHILDREN AS SCHEDULED?

# 22 A:

CAN YOU --

# 23 Q:

DO YOU HAVE ANY PERSONAL -- DO YOU KNOW YOURSELF -- WITHOUT ANYBODY TELLING YOU, DO YOU HAVE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE THAT HE WAS SCHEDULED TO PICK UP HIS CHILDREN AND HE DID NOT IN JUNE OF 1993?

# 24 A:

WITHOUT ANYBODY TELLING ME?

KEY QUOTE

# 25 Q:

WITHOUT ANYBODY TELLING YOU.

# 26 A:

NO, I DON'T HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THAT.

# 27 Q:

DO YOU HAVE ANY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE ON THE ONE DAY DURING THE WEEK YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT O.J. SIMPSON WAS SUPPOSED TO PICK UP HIS CHILDREN AND DIDN'T? DO YOU HAVE ANY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THAT?

# 28 A:

NO.

# 29 Q:

THESE ARE THINGS THAT WERE TOLD TO YOU BY NICOLE?

# 30 A:

YES.

# 31 MR. SHAPIRO:

YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE HEARSAY AND WOULD NOT BE ADMISSIBLE ON THOSE GROUNDS ALONE. SO I DON'T SEE ANY NEED TO GO FURTHER.

KEY QUOTE

# 32 THE COURT:

LET ME ASK TWO OTHER QUESTIONS. MR. KAELIN, WITH REGARDS TO THESE TWO INCIDENTS THAT IT'S YOUR BELIEF THAT THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO PICK UP HIS CHILDREN, WERE YOU AWARE OF ANY OF THE SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES OR ANY EXPLANATION AS TO WHY MR. SIMPSON DIDN'T PICK UP THE KIDS?

# 33 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

WELL, I KNEW FROM NICOLE. IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN?

# 34 THE COURT:

YES.

# 35 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

SHE WOULD TELL ME -- SHE WOULD SAY, "O.J. WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE THE KIDS," OR -- OR THAT O.J. -- WAS FROM NICOLE THAT -- I DIDN'T KNOW HIS SCHEDULE, BUT SHE WOULD TELL ME. SHE WOULD SAY, "OH, HE'S SUPPOSED TO TAKE THEM TO DINNER," LIKE THAT, OR, "THIS WAS THE WEEKEND."

# 36 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT.

# 37 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

INCIDENTS, BUT IT NEVER --

# 38 THE COURT:

DID YOU EVER LEARN OF ANY EXPLANATION AS TO WHAT DETAINED OR WHY MR. SIMPSON DID NOT FULFILL THOSE OBLIGATIONS?

# 39 BRIAN "KATO" KAELIN:

I DIDN'T. I DIDN'T, ALTHOUGH I BELIEVE ONE OF THEM WAS FROM ACTING.

KEY QUOTE

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Brian Kato Kaelin

WITHOUT ANYBODY TELLING ME? NO, I DON'T HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THAT.

Kaelin admits he has zero independent knowledge of the missed pickups — everything he knows came from Nicole, which is the heart of Shapiro's hearsay attack.

Robert Shapiro

YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE HEARSAY AND WOULD NOT BE ADMISSIBLE ON THOSE GROUNDS ALONE. SO I DON'T SEE ANY NEED TO GO FURTHER.

Shapiro pivots from cross-examination to a legal argument, effectively asking the court to strike the missed-pickup testimony entirely once hearsay is established.

Brian Kato Kaelin

SHE WOULD SAY, 'O.J. WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE THE KIDS,' OR -- OR THAT O.J. -- WAS FROM NICOLE THAT -- I DIDN'T KNOW HIS SCHEDULE, BUT SHE WOULD TELL ME.

Kaelin confirms the chain of knowledge runs entirely through Nicole, not his own observation — reinforcing the hearsay problem for the prosecution.

Brian Kato Kaelin

I DIDN'T. I DIDN'T, ALTHOUGH I BELIEVE ONE OF THEM WAS FROM ACTING.

Kaelin ultimately concedes there may have been a legitimate explanation for at least one missed pickup, undermining the implication of willful neglect or control.

Notable Exchanges (2)

Lance A. Ito•Brian Kato Kaelin

The judge breaks from normal procedure and directly questions Kaelin about whether he ever learned any explanation for why OJ missed the pickups — Kaelin says he didn't, but thinks one involved acting.

clarifying

Robert Shapiro•Marcia Clark

Clark objects to Shapiro's background questions about OJ's career on relevance and speculation grounds; Ito overrules but nudges Shapiro to get to the point.

strategic

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Brian Kato Kaelin

lack of personal knowledge / hearsay foundation

Shapiro methodically establishes that Kaelin's testimony about OJ missing child pickups is entirely derived from what Nicole told him, not from direct observation — rendering it inadmissible hearsay and stripping it of evidentiary value.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 5425 • 39 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103