Recross-examination of Rachel Ferrara

📄 Recross-examination of Rachel Ferrara — Tuesday, March 28, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\28\RECROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-RACHEL-.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 46 of 167

◀ Court directive Redirect examination of Rachel Ferrara (part 2) ▶

Witness: Rachel Ferrara
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Tuesday, March 28, 1995 • Utterances: 8

In a very brief recross, Cochran pressed Ferrara on whether someone in the courtroom had advised her not to speak with Kato Kaelin. When attorney Paul Sigelman jumped up to assert privilege, Cochran immediately turned it against him, noting that Sigelman had effectively identified himself as the one who gave the advice. The witness pushed back, saying Cochran's characterization was not accurate.

# 1

RECROSS-EXAMINATION

# 2

BY MR. COCHRAN:

# 3 Q:

WAS THERE SOMEONE IN THIS COURTROOM WHO TOLD YOU NOT TO SEE MR. KATO KAELIN?

# 4 A:

HUM, YES. WELL, IT WAS NOT -- NOT DON'T SEE HIM, BUT YOU PROBABLY SHOULD NOT TALK TO HIM.

KEY QUOTE

# 5 Q:

ALL RIGHT. THAT WAS SOME ADVICE THAT YOU RECEIVED?

# 6 MR. SIGELMAN:

YOUR HONOR, I RAISE THE PRIVILEGE AGAIN. PAUL SIGELMAN. IT CALLS FOR COMMUNICATIONS.

# 7 MR. COCHRAN:

I JUST ASKED SOMEONE IN THE COURTROOM, SO NOW WE KNOW WHO IT IS.

KEY QUOTE

# 8 RACHEL FERRARA:

WELL, THAT IS NOT TRUE, THOUGH.

FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION

KEY QUOTE

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (3)

Johnnie Cochran

I JUST ASKED SOMEONE IN THE COURTROOM, SO NOW WE KNOW WHO IT IS.

Cochran exploits Sigelman's privilege objection to imply that by raising it, Sigelman revealed himself as the person who told Ferrara not to speak with Kaelin — a sharp rhetorical trap.

Ferrara (witness)

HUM, YES. WELL, IT WAS NOT -- NOT DON'T SEE HIM, BUT YOU PROBABLY SHOULD NOT TALK TO HIM.

Ferrara acknowledges receiving advice to avoid talking to Kaelin, a notable admission about witness coordination or coaching.

Ferrara (witness)

WELL, THAT IS NOT TRUE, THOUGH.

Ferrara disputes Cochran's framing even as the proceeding ends, suggesting the exchange was incomplete.

Notable Exchanges (1)

Johnnie Cochran•Paul Sigelman

Sigelman raised privilege to block questioning about who advised Ferrara not to talk to Kaelin. Cochran immediately turned the objection into evidence, arguing that Sigelman's intervention identified him as the source of the advice.

strategic

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Ferrara

bias / witness coaching

Cochran elicited that Ferrara had been advised by an attorney present in the courtroom not to speak with Kato Kaelin, implying improper witness management or coordination.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 5465 • 8 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103