Motion: Fuhrman tape recordings

📄 Motion: Fuhrman tape recordings — Tuesday, March 28, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\28\MOTION-FUHRMAN-TAPE-RECORDINGS.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 46 of 167

◀ Adjournment Re-redirect examination of Kato Kaelin ▶

Date: Tuesday, March 28, 1995 • Utterances: 28

Defense attorney Carl Douglas raises a procedural matter regarding the Pitchess motion on Detective Mark Fuhrman, specifically requesting access to audio tape recordings of witness interviews referenced in redacted documents the defense had reviewed. The prosecution (Clark and Lewis) express surprise, stating they have never received the tapes, leading to a brief clarification from the judge that both sides received summary documents but not the full recordings. The court resolves to contact Mr. Walsh to determine if the tapes are available, with a third Pitchess hearing as a fallback if their production is contested.

# 1 (JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)

# 2 (CHRISTINE M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)

# 3 (PAGES 20410 THROUGH 20424, VOLUME 115A, TRANSCRIBED AND SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.)

# 4 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

# 5 THE COURT:

BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. THE DEFENDANT IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. BAILEY, MR. DOUGLAS. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK AND MR. DARDEN. THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT. COUNSEL, IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO DISCUSSION BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURY?

# 6 MR. DOUGLAS:

YES, YOUR HONOR, I HAVE ONE MATTER.

# 7 THE COURT:

GOOD MORNING.

# 8 MR. DOUGLAS:

WHEN WE VISITED THE ISSUE OF THE PITCHESS MOTION, THE AMENDED PITCHESS MOTION ON DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN, THE REQUEST INCLUDED NOT ONLY STATEMENTS, BUT WHETHER THERE WERE ANY AUDIO CASSETTES, VIDEO CASSETTE RECORDINGS, ET CETERA, OF ANY STATEMENTS THAT MIGHT BE RELEVANT TO ANY OF THE ISSUES THAT THE COURT DID FIND VALUE IN HOLDING AN IN CAMERA HEARING. I HAVE HAD AN OCCASION, YOUR HONOR, AND MY STAFF AS WELL, TO REVIEW A REDACTED DOCUMENT THAT INCLUDED WITNESS STATEMENTS FROM DIFFERENT DISTRICT ATTORNEY NOTES AND IT NOTED IN THAT STATEMENT THAT THE INTERVIEWS WITH THOSE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS WERE IN FACT TAPE-RECORDED. I ASK, YOUR HONOR, THAT WE BE ALLOWED TO RECEIVE AND TO REVIEW COPIES OF THE TAPE-RECORDINGS THAT ARE REFERENCED IN THIS DOCUMENT. IF THE COURT PRELIMINARILY WISHES TO FIRST HAVE THE TAPE-RECORDINGS REDACTED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT WHICH WAS TURNED OVER, WE WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION; HOWEVER, WE DO THINK THAT WE ARE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE ALSO COPIES OF THE AUDIO CASSETTE TAPES AND I WOULD LIKE TO OBVIATE THE FILING OF A NEW MOTION SIMPLY ASKING FOR THAT AND THAT IS WHY I BRING IT TO THE COURT'S ATTENTION IN THIS FASHION.

# 9 THE COURT:

LET ME DIRECT THE CLERK TO CONTACT MR. WALSH AND ASK HIM TO MAKE THOSE AVAILABLE. ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE?

# 10 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT.

# 11 MR. DARDEN:

YOUR HONOR, BEFORE WE DO THAT, CAN WE HAVE MR. WALSH COME OVER AND INDICATE ON THE RECORD THERE IS AN INTERNAL AFFAIRS INVESTIGATION? THERE ARE CERTAIN PRIVACY RIGHTS THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WOULD HAVE.

# 12 THE COURT:

THESE ARE TAPE-RECORDINGS OF STATEMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISCLOSED TO BOTH SIDES.

# 13 MS. CLARK:

WE DON'T HAVE THEM.

# 14 MS. LEWIS:

WE DON'T HAVE THEM.

# 15 MS. CLARK:

WE DON'T HAVE THEM.

# 16 THE COURT:

YOU HAVE THE STATEMENTS.

# 17 MS. CLARK:

NO, I DO NOT. I HAVE NEVER SEEN THEM.

# 18 THE COURT:

NO. YOU HAVE ALL RECEIVED -- BOTH SIDES HAVE RECEIVED DOCUMENTS OF THESE.

# 19 MS. CLARK:

WE HAVE -- NEVER HAVE -- I HAVE NEVER RECEIVED THEM, YOUR HONOR, AND I DID ASK ABOUT THEM.

# 20 THE COURT:

BOTH SIDES WERE PROVIDED COPIES, COUNSEL, ALSO WITH THE ORDER THAT THEY NOT BE PHOTOCOPIED.

# 21 MS. CLARK:

I THINK THAT MAY BE PART OF THE PROBLEM. I HAVE IN MY POSSESSION SOME LITTLE NOTES. THEY ARE NOT FULL STATEMENTS, HOWEVER.

# 22 THE COURT:

NO, THEY ARE NOT.

# 23 MS. CLARK:

OH, OKAY.

# 24 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. SO YOU HAVE THE GIST OF WHAT IS THERE CONCERNING DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.

# 25 MS. CLARK:

I THINK THAT THE QUESTION IS WHETHER A TAPE-RECORDING MADE BY IA IS DISCOVERABLE. WE DON'T HAVE THAT TAPE.

# 26 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE WILL ALSO ASK MR. WALSH IF IT IS AVAILABLE. IF THEY WANT TO CONTEST IT, WE WILL OBVIOUSLY HAVE A THIRD PITCHESS HEARING.

KEY QUOTE

# 27 MR. DOUGLAS:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

# 28 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Carl Douglas

I HAVE HAD AN OCCASION, YOUR HONOR, AND MY STAFF AS WELL, TO REVIEW A REDACTED DOCUMENT THAT INCLUDED WITNESS STATEMENTS FROM DIFFERENT DISTRICT ATTORNEY NOTES AND IT NOTED IN THAT STATEMENT THAT THE INTERVIEWS WITH THOSE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS WERE IN FACT TAPE-RECORDED.

Douglas reveals the defense discovered through document review that DA interviews were tape-recorded — a detail not previously surfaced in Pitchess proceedings.

Marcia Clark

NO, I DO NOT. I HAVE NEVER SEEN THEM, YOUR HONOR, AND I DID ASK ABOUT THEM.

Clark's repeated insistence that she never received the materials suggests a potential discovery gap — the prosecution may have been kept out of the loop on internal affairs recordings.

Lance A. Ito

ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE WILL ALSO ASK MR. WALSH IF IT IS AVAILABLE. IF THEY WANT TO CONTEST IT, WE WILL OBVIOUSLY HAVE A THIRD PITCHESS HEARING.

The court signals willingness to compel production but defers to a formal process, leaving the door open for further Fuhrman-related discovery fights.

Evidence (2)

Informal

Audio cassette tape recordings of witness interviews conducted by district attorneys, referenced in redacted Pitchess motion documents related to Detective Mark Fuhrman

requested by defense; existence confirmed by court; prosecution states they do not possess them

Informal

Redacted documents containing witness statements and DA notes provided to both sides under order not to be photocopied

discussed; court clarifies these are summaries, not full statements

Notable Exchanges (2)

Marcia Clark•Lance A. Ito

Clark repeatedly denies having received the materials; the court clarifies both sides received redacted summaries with a no-photocopying restriction, which Clark acknowledges may be 'part of the problem' — she has only 'some little notes.'

clarifying

Christopher Darden•Lance A. Ito

Darden attempts to slow the process by raising Fuhrman's privacy rights under an internal affairs investigation, but the court shuts it down by noting the statements have already been disclosed to both sides.

strategic

Objections

None recorded

Proceeding 5449 • 28 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103