Cross-examination of Tom Lange (afternoon, part 9)

📄 Cross-examination of Tom Lange (afternoon, part 9) — Monday, March 6, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\6\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-TOM-LANGE.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 31 of 167

◀ Sidebar: annoying phone calls Sidebar: videotape evidence ▶

Witness: Det. Tom Lange
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Monday, March 6, 1995 • Utterances: 179

Johnnie Cochran cross-examines Detective Lange on the defense's alternative theory that drug connections — particularly Faye Resnick's presence at Nicole's home and her drug rehabilitation — were never meaningfully investigated. Cochran also probes the hair evidence on both gloves, the extent of Ron Goldman's wounds, the adequacy of the investigation into Goldman's background and possible enemies, and crime scene protocol. The session ends abruptly when Cochran attempts to introduce a video that the prosecution claims they have never seen.

# 1 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR.

# 2 Q:

NOW, WITH REGARD TO -- I ASKED YOU SOME QUESTIONS EARLIER ABOUT FAYE RESNICK. DO YOU KNOW WHERE FAYE RESNICK WAS ON THE DATE OF JUNE 3, 1994.

# 3 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

# 4 THE COURT:

SUSTAINED.

# 5 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION IN THIS CASE DID YOU EVER LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY THAT DRUGS WERE A FACTOR IN THESE KILLINGS?

# 6 A:

SUPERFICIALLY WE LOOKED AT THE POSSIBILITY OF DRUGS; HOWEVER --

KEY QUOTE

# 7 Q:

YOU HAVE ANSWERED THE QUESTION. YOU LOOKED AT THE POSSIBILITY OF DRUGS.

# 8 MS. CLARK:

COUNSEL --

# 9 MR. COCHRAN:

I ASKED HIM IF HE EVER LOOKED AT THE POSSIBILITY OF DRUGS AND HE ANSWERED THAT. HE SAID "YES, SUPERFICIALLY."

# 10 THE COURT:

ANSWER YES OR NO.

# 11 DET. TOM LANGE:

YES.

# 12 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU ANSWER, "YES, SUPERFICIALLY"?

# 13 A:

YES.

# 14 Q:

AND IN THAT CONNECTION DID YOU LOOK AT THE BACKGROUND OF FAYE RESNICK BETWEEN THE PERIOD OF JUNE 3RD, 1994, AND JUNE 12, 1994?

# 15 A:

NO.

# 16 Q:

WERE YOU AWARE THAT SHE HAD MOVED IN WITH NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AT SOME TIME --

# 17 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, IRRELEVANT.

# 18 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: -- AFTER JUNE 3RD OF 1994? ON OR AFTER JUNE 3RD, 1994, WERE YOU AWARE OF THAT?

# 19 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, IRRELEVANT.

# 20 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 21 DET. TOM LANGE:

I HAD HEARD THAT.

# 22 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. WERE YOU AWARE THAT ON OR ABOUT JUNE 8TH, 1994, SHE WAS PLACED IN A DRUG --

# 23 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, HEARSAY. OBJECTION, CALLS FOR SPECULATION.

# 24 MR. COCHRAN:

I AM ASKING IF HE BECAME AWARE, YOUR HONOR, IF I CAN FINISH THE QUESTION.

# 25 THE COURT:

ASSUMING FACTS THAT AREN'T IN EVIDENCE. SUSTAINED.

# 26 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU OF COURSE HAVE READ OR HEARD A TAPED STATEMENT TAKEN FROM FAYE RESNICK, HAVE YOU NOT?

# 27 A:

I DON'T BELIEVE I'VE HEARD THAT STATEMENT, NO.

# 28 Q:

HAVE YOU READ OR HEARD A STATEMENT TAKEN FROM CHRISTIAN -- DR. CHRISTIAN REICHARDT?

# 29 A:

I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

# 30 Q:

DO YOU KNOW WHERE FAYE RESNICK RESIDED AFTER JUNE 8TH, 1994?

# 31 A:

NO.

# 32 Q:

HAVE YOU TALKED WITH CORA FICHMAN IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR INVESTIGATION IN THIS CASE?

# 33 A:

I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY, NO.

# 34 Q:

BUT SHE IS ONE OF THE WITNESSES THAT YOU'VE HAD TALKED TO BY OTHER INVESTIGATORS?

# 35 A:

SHE WAS AN UNCOOPERATIVE WITNESS. WE ATTEMPTED TO SPEAK WITH HER SEVERAL TIMES, YES.

# 36 Q:

HAVE YOU SEEN A STATEMENT FROM HER UP TO THIS POINT?

# 37 A:

I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS A STATEMENT.

# 38 Q:

WELL, IN THIS SUPERFICIAL INVESTIGATION YOU DID REGARDING THE POSSIBILITY OF DRUGS, WHAT DID YOU DO?

# 39 A:

IN ANY MURDER THERE IS ALWAYS A POSSIBILITY OF DRUGS --

# 40 Q:

CAN YOU ANSWER MY QUESTION? WHAT DID YOU DO WITH REGARD TO YOUR SUPERFICIAL INVESTIGATION REGARDING DRUGS IN THIS CASE; NOT ANY MURDER?

# 41 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

# 42 THE COURT:

OVERRULED. GO AHEAD AND ANSWER THE QUESTION.

# 43 DET. TOM LANGE:

CONSIDERED THE POSSIBILITY THAT DRUGS MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED BY LOOKING FOR EVIDENCE OF DRUGS AT THE SCENE OR BECOMING AWARE OF ANY KNOWLEDGE THAT THE VICTIM MIGHT HAVE HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH DRUGS. THAT IS NORMALLY SOMETHING WE WOULD DO UNLESS WE HAD ANOTHER DIRECTION TO GO. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE WE HAD ANOTHER DIRECTION TO GO.

# 44 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: AND WITH REGARD TO GATHERING EVIDENCE, SIR, YOU HAVE TO GO OUT -- PART OF BEING AN INVESTIGATOR IS TO INVESTIGATE TO TRY TO TURN UP EVIDENCE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 45 A:

YES.

# 46 Q:

AND IF YOU KNEW THAT THERE WERE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD LIVED AT THIS RESIDENCE, WHO MIGHT HAVE SOME BEARING ON DRUGS, WOULD IT BE REASONABLE FOR YOU TO GO AND TALK TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS, YOU PERSONALLY, AS THE LEAD INVESTIGATOR?

# 47 A:

IF YOU HAD NO OTHER DIRECTION TO GO AND THAT WAS THE LOGICAL SEQUENCE OF EVENTS, YES.

# 48 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND ONCE YOU MAKE A DECISION THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE DIRECTION TO GO, THEN YOU DON'T GO AND LOOK AT ANYTHING ELSE IS THAT CORRECT, SIR?

KEY QUOTE

# 49 A:

NO, THAT IS NOT THE CASE AT ALL. IF THERE IS CERTAIN EVIDENCE POINTING IN ONE DIRECTION, YOU WOULD BE REMISS NOT TO FOLLOW UP ON IT.

# 50 Q:

ALL RIGHT.

# 51 A:

THAT IS THE SITUATION HERE.

# 52 Q:

DOESN'T THAT MEAN YOU ALSO SHOULD FOLLOW UP OTHER EVIDENCE ALSO?

# 53 A:

IF IT IS AVAILABLE. IF THERE IS OTHER EVIDENCE, WE CERTAINLY WOULD.

# 54 Q:

DID YOU FOLLOW UP IN THIS CASE THE OTHER EVIDENCE REGARDING DRUGS?

# 55 A:

THERE WAS NO OTHER EVIDENCE.

# 56 Q:

DID YOU TALK TO FAYE RESNICK PERSONALLY?

# 57 A:

I DID NOT.

# 58 Q:

DID VANNATTER TALK TO HER PERSONALLY?

# 59 A:

I BELIEVE HE INTERVIEWED HER, YES.

# 60 Q:

THAT IS A TAPED STATEMENT?

# 61 A:

I BELIEVE IT IS.

# 62 Q:

WILL HE BE TESTIFYING LATER ON THIS WEEK?

# 63 A:

I DON'T KNOW.

# 64 Q:

STILL YOUR PARTNER?

# 65 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 66 Q:

YOU HAVE TALKED TO HIM ABOUT HIS CONVERSATION WITH FAYE RESNICK, DID YOU NOT?

# 67 A:

BRIEFLY.

# 68 Q:

DID YOU TALK TO ANYONE ELSE IN YOUR SUPERFICIAL EXAMINATION OR INVESTIGATION REGARDING THE ASPECT OF DRUGS?

# 69 A:

NO.

# 70 Q:

IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION DOES THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT EVER USE DOGS FOR TRACKING OR MAINTAINING SCENTS IN ANY HOMICIDE CASE YOU KNOW ABOUT.

# 71 A:

I HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THAT.

# 72 Q:

HAVE YOU DONE THAT IN THE 20 PLUS YEARS YOU HAVE BEEN A HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR?

# 73 A:

I HAVE NEVER DONE IT AND NEVER HEARD OF IT.

# 74 Q:

RIGHT BEFORE WE BROKE TODAY AT LUNCH I WAS ASKING YOU ABOUT HAIRS ON THE GLOVES. DO YOU RECALL THAT?

# 75 A:

YES.

# 76 Q:

DO YOUR REPORTS INDICATE WHETHER OR NOT THERE WERE CAUCASIAN HAIRS ON THE GLOVE FOUND AT BUNDY?

# 77 A:

THE REPORT DOES INDICATE CAUCASIAN HAIR, YES.

# 78 Q:

ALL RIGHT. WERE THERE ANY CAUCASIAN HAIRS FOUND ON THE OTHER GLOVE THAT WAS FOUND?

# 79 A:

THAT IS MY INFORMATION, YES.

# 80 Q:

ON BOTH GLOVES?

# 81 A:

I BELIEVE SO.

# 82 Q:

CAUCASIAN HAIRS? WERE THERE NEGROID HAIRS FOUND ON EITHER/OR BOTH OF THOSE GLOVES, IF YOU RECALL?

# 83 A:

I DON'T RECALL.

# 84 Q:

FORGIVE ME IF I HAVE ASKED YOU THIS BEFORE. WITH REGARD TO THIS WALKWAY WHERE THE BODIES WERE FOUND, WHAT IS THE WIDTH OF THAT PARTICULAR WALKWAY?

# 85 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

# 86 Q:

IF YOU CAN TELL US?

# 87 A:

OFFHAND I BELIEVE IT IS THREE FEET 11 INCHES OR FOUR FEET.

# 88 Q:

RIGHT AT FOUR FEET?

# 89 A:

APPROXIMATELY FOUR FEET.

# 90 Q:

AND --

# 91 A:

I BELIEVE IT VARIES.

# 92 Q:

I'M SORRY?

# 93 A:

I BELIEVE IT VARIES A LITTLE BIT.

# 94 Q:

OKAY. BUT SOMEWHERE CLOSE TO FOUR FEET; IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?

# 95 A:

YES.

# 96 Q:

IF YOU RECALL, DID YOUR PARTNER, DETECTIVE VANNATTER, CHANGE CLOTHES AT ALL ON THE AFTERNOON OF JUNE 13, 1994?

# 97 A:

I DON'T RECALL HIM CHANGING CLOTHES.

# 98 Q:

YOU HAVE NO RECOLLECTION OF THAT?

# 99 A:

I DON'T THINK HE HAD ANY CLOTHES TO CHANGE INTO.

# 100 Q:

ALL RIGHT. WERE THE TWO OF YOU IN SEPARATE CARS WHEN YOU LEFT PARKER CENTER?

# 101 A:

YES.

# 102 Q:

YOU DROVE BACK TO ROCKINGHAM SEPARATELY?

# 103 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 104 Q:

THE VEHICLE THAT MR. KAELIN HAD PARKED AT THE CURB THERE AT ROCKINGHAM ON THE MORNING -- EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE 13, WAS THAT A NISSAN Z VEHICLE?

# 105 A:

I BELIEVE SO.

# 106 Q:

IN YOUR REPORT AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE, I THINK THERE IS A REFERENCE TO A DUMPSTER IN THE ALLEY. IS THAT DUMPSTER IN THE ALLEY -- DO YOU HAVE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF THAT, WHERE THAT WAS LOCATED?

# 107 A:

YEAH. I BELIEVE THERE ARE, YES.

# 108 Q:

AND WAS THAT ONE OF THE PLACES THAT WERE SEARCHED FOR EITHER BLOODY CLOTHES OR WEAPONS OR KNIVES OR THINGS OF THAT NATURE?

# 109 A:

YES.

# 110 Q:

AND I PRESUME YOU DIDN'T FIND ANYTHING IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CASE, RIGHT?

# 111 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 112 Q:

NOW, IN THAT CONNECTION, WITH REGARD TO KNIVES, YOU RECOVERED A NUMBER OF KNIVES THAT WERE TURNED INTO YOU IN CONNECTION WITH THE SEARCH OR SEARCHES DONE AFTER JUNE 13, 1994; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 113 A:

YES.

# 114 Q:

DID YOU PARTICIPATE IN PURCHASING A KNIFE YOURSELF?

# 115 A:

NO.

# 116 Q:

NOW, WITH REGARD TO MR. GOLDMAN, DID YOUR INVESTIGATION AT ANY POINT TURN UP THAT HE WAS A YOUNG MAN WHO WORKED OUT REGULARLY, WAS PHYSICALLY FIT?

# 117 A:

THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

# 118 Q:

AND THAT IN SOME OF THE CARDS THAT YOU FOUND IN HIS MATERIALS, YOU SAW THE CARD OF A PERSONAL TRAINER AND A GYM THAT HE MIGHT HAVE ATTENDED ALSO, DID YOU NOT?

# 119 A:

I BELIEVE THERE WAS ONE, YES.

# 120 Q:

AND WERE YOU ABLE TO ASCERTAIN HOW MANY WOUNDS, IF ANY, HE SUSTAINED AT THE TIME OF HIS DEMISE?

# 121 THE COURT:

KIND OF VAGUE, ISN'T IT, "WOUNDS"?

# 122 MR. COCHRAN:

CERTAINLY, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.

# 123 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: WERE YOU ABLE TO ASCERTAIN HOW MANY TIMES MR. GOLDMAN WAS STABBED DURING THE INCIDENT IN WHICH HE MET HIS DEATH?

# 124 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, HEARSAY.

# 125 THE COURT:

OVERRULED. WERE YOU PRESENT AT THE AUTOPSY?

# 126 DET. TOM LANGE:

YES, YOUR HONOR.

# 127 THE COURT:

NEXT QUESTION.

# 128 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: WERE YOU ABLE TO SO ASCERTAIN?

# 129 A:

IT SEEMS TO ME THERE WERE SEVEN OR EIGHT STAB WOUNDS.

# 130 Q:

SEVEN OR EIGHT. IS THAT THE TOTAL NUMBER?

# 131 A:

AS FAR AS STABBING WOUNDS, I BELIEVE SO.

# 132 Q:

WERE THERE OTHER WOUNDS?

# 133 A:

THERE WERE SLASHING WOUNDS, SUPERFICIAL CUTS.

# 134 Q:

ALL RIGHT. SO --

# 135 A:

I BELIEVE A CONTUSION.

# 136 Q:

STAB WOUND, SLASHING WOUNDS, CONTUSIONS?

# 137 A:

ABRASIONS, CONTUSIONS TO THE REAR OF THE HAND AND FINGERS.

# 138 Q:

ALTOGETHER HOW MANY WOUNDS WERE THERE, IF YOU KNOW, BASED UPON YOUR OBSERVATION OF THE AUTOPSY?

# 139 A:

AS TO EACH ABRASION AND CONTUSION?

# 140 Q:

YES, ALTOGETHER?

# 141 A:

I -- I WOULD HAVE NO IDEA. IF YOU WERE TO COUNT EACH ABRASION AND EACH CONTUSION ON EACH FINGER AND THE BACK OF THE HAND --

# 142 Q:

I UNDERSTAND.

# 143 A:

AS FAR AS FATAL WOUND, I BELIEVE THERE WERE SOMETHING LIKE FOUR FATAL WOUNDS.

KEY QUOTE

# 144 Q:

NOW, IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION IN THIS MATTER DID YOU AT ANY TIME EVER INVESTIGATE ANY RELATIONSHIPS MR. GOLDMAN MAY HAVE HAD TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT HE HAD ANY ENEMIES OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE?

# 145 A:

I SPOKE WITH A FORMER GIRLFRIEND AND THERE WERE OTHER INTERVIEWS BY OTHER DETECTIVES.

# 146 Q:

ALL RIGHT. LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU DID. WHEN DID YOU DO THAT?

# 147 A:

I DON'T RECALL THE SPECIFIC --

# 148 Q:

WELL, APPROXIMATELY WHEN DID YOU HAVE THIS INTERVIEW?

# 149 A:

THERE IS AN INTERVIEW ON FILE. AGAIN, I DON'T RECALL. IT WAS -- I DON'T KNOW.

# 150 Q:

ALL RIGHT. IS THAT THE ONLY INTERVIEW THAT YOU CONDUCTED, SIR, PERSONALLY?

# 151 A:

IN REGARDS TO A FORMER GIRLFRIEND, I BELIEVE, YES, THE ONLY ONE I CONDUCTED.

# 152 Q:

DID YOU TALK TO ANY OTHER FORMER FRIENDS OR PRESENT FRIENDS?

# 153 A:

PERSONALLY I DID NOT.

# 154 Q:

DID YOU HAVE OCCASION TO INVESTIGATE MR. GOLDMAN'S CONTACT WITH A BUSINESS CALLED DESIGN WRAP, W-R-A-P?

# 155 A:

I DID NOT.

# 156 Q:

DID ANYBODY UNDER YOUR DIRECTION DO THAT?

# 157 A:

I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK. I DON'T RECALL THAT.

# 158 Q:

AND WHERE WOULD YOU LOOK?

# 159 A:

MUCH OF THAT INVESTIGATION INITIALLY WAS CONDUCTED BY DETECTIVE TIPPIN AND CARR. PERHAPS IN THEIR LOG; PERHAPS IN THEIR BOOK.

# 160 Q:

ALL RIGHT. NOW, AT THE CRIME SCENE, AMONG OFFICERS AND PEOPLE WHO COME TO A CRIME SCENE, EATING AND DRINKING ARE NOT PERMITTED; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 161 A:

YES.

# 162 Q:

AND OFFICERS ARE TRAINED NOT TO EAT AND DRINK AT CRIME SCENES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 163 A:

IN THE SPECIFIC CRIME SCENE, CERTAINLY THAT'S CORRECT, YES.

# 164 Q:

AND YOU HAVE TESTIFIED IN THIS MATTER THAT AT LEAST -- EARLIER -- THAT IF YOU SAW SOMEONE DOING THAT, YOU WOULD JUMP ON THEM RIGHT AWAY, RIGHT?

# 165 A:

IF I SAW THEM, YES.

# 166 Q:

ALL RIGHT. IF YOU SAW EVEN ANYONE FROM THE CORONER'S OFFICE EATING OR DRINKING, YOU WOULD CURTAIL THIS ACTIVITY ALSO, WOULDN'T YOU?

# 167 A:

YES.

# 168 Q:

SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO HAVE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 169 A:

IF IT WERE OUTSIDE OF THE CRIME SCENE, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. IF IT WERE CERTAINLY NEAR EVIDENCE, CERTAINLY NEAR THE BODIES, YES.

# 170 Q:

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INSIDE THE CRIME SCENE.

# 171 A:

THAT'S MY SAME RESPONSE.

# 172 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND WITH REGARD TO SOMEONE SMOKING, YOU WOULDN'T ALLOW THAT EITHER, WOULD YOU?

# 173 A:

NOT AT THE CRIME SCENE.

# 174 Q:

THE CRIME SCENE. NOW, LAST WEEK WHEN I ASKED YOU, YOU WERE SHARING WITH US THAT YOU TOOK THESE SNEAKERS AND YOU PUT THEM IN THE TRUNK OF YOUR CAR AND TOOK THEM HOME. DO YOU RECALL THAT?

# 175 A:

YES.

# 176 MR. COCHRAN:

I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU A VIDEO AT THIS POINT NOW, IF I CAN, YOUR HONOR.

# 177 MS. CLARK:

EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. WE HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS.

KEY QUOTE

# 178 THE COURT:

WE HAVE SEEN THIS.

# 179 MR. COCHRAN:

COUNSEL, LET ME SEE YOU WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (5)

Witness (Detective Lange)

SUPERFICIALLY WE LOOKED AT THE POSSIBILITY OF DRUGS; HOWEVER --

Cochran immediately seizes on the word 'superficially' as an admission that the drug angle was never seriously pursued, using it repeatedly as a rhetorical bludgeon throughout the examination.

Witness (Detective Lange)

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE WE HAD ANOTHER DIRECTION TO GO.

Lange's defense of focusing exclusively on Simpson as a suspect — which Cochran reframes as tunnel vision that foreclosed other investigative avenues.

Examiner (Johnnie Cochran)

AND ONCE YOU MAKE A DECISION THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE DIRECTION TO GO, THEN YOU DON'T GO AND LOOK AT ANYTHING ELSE IS THAT CORRECT, SIR?

The core of the tunnel-vision attack — Cochran forces Lange to either defend a one-track investigation or concede the drug angle was inadequately explored.

Witness (Detective Lange)

AS FAR AS FATAL WOUND, I BELIEVE THERE WERE SOMETHING LIKE FOUR FATAL WOUNDS.

Establishes the severity of the assault on Goldman — seven or eight stab wounds plus slashing wounds, contusions, and abrasions — relevant to the defense's argument about the nature and number of perpetrators.

Marcia Clark

EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. WE HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS.

Clark's objection to Cochran's surprise video at the close of the session signals a brewing evidentiary dispute that cuts off the examination mid-stream.

Evidence (7)

Informal

Glove found at Bundy — report indicates Caucasian hairs present

discussed; Lange confirms Caucasian hairs on both gloves, cannot recall if Negroid hairs were found

Informal

Sneakers Detective Lange placed in trunk of his personal car and took home

referenced; established as prior testimony now being revisited, possible predicate for video

Informal

Unidentified video that Cochran attempts to introduce at the end of the session

introduction attempted; halted after Clark objects she has never seen it; sidebar called

Informal

Taped statement of Faye Resnick taken by Detective Vannatter

referenced; Lange says he has not heard the tape himself, only spoken briefly to Vannatter about it

Informal

Dumpster in alley near Bundy crime scene

discussed; searched for bloody clothes, weapons, knives — nothing found

Informal

Knives turned in following post-June 13 searches

acknowledged; Lange confirms he did not personally purchase a knife

+ 1 more

Notable Exchanges (4)

Johnnie Cochran•Detective Lange

Extended sequence pressing Lange on the 'superficial' drug investigation — Cochran refuses to let Lange explain the word, forcing yes/no answers, then hammering the phrase back at him repeatedly ('in that superficial investigation', 'in your superficial examination'). Lange eventually defends the tunnel vision by saying 'we had another direction to go.'

strategic/relentless

Johnnie Cochran•Detective Lange

Cochran methodically walks through everyone the LAPD did NOT personally speak to in the drug investigation: Faye Resnick (no), Dr. Christian Reichardt (no), Cora Fichman (uncooperative, no personal interview). Establishes by accumulation that the drug angle was never seriously pursued.

methodical/damaging

Judge Ito•Johnnie Cochran

After Cochran asks vaguely about 'wounds' Goldman sustained, Ito interjects 'Kind of vague, isn't it, wounds?' Cochran immediately thanks the judge and rephrases. Brief but notable for Ito's active management of examination quality.

mildly corrective/wry

Marcia Clark•Johnnie Cochran•Judge Ito

At the close of the session Cochran announces he wants to show a video. Clark objects that the prosecution has never seen it. Ito says the court has seen it. A sidebar with the court reporter is called, ending the transcript abruptly.

contentious/unresolved

Light Moments (1)

Judge Ito

Judge Ito drily notes Cochran's question about Goldman's 'wounds' is 'Kind of vague, isn't it?' — a gentle judicial correction that Cochran accepts with immediate thanks.

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Detective Lange

omission/tunnel vision

Cochran establishes that Lange personally interviewed almost no one connected to the drug angle — not Faye Resnick, not Dr. Reichardt, not Cora Fichman — and that the entire drug investigation amounted to Lange's own word: 'superficially.' The implication is that the LAPD decided on Simpson and stopped looking.

⚔ Detective Lange

prior testimony / evidence handling

Cochran re-raises the sneakers-in-the-trunk episode from prior sessions as a predicate for the unidentified video he attempts to introduce, suggesting visual evidence of improper evidence handling.

⚔ LAPD investigation generally

omission

Cochran extracts admissions that Goldman's personal relationships, potential enemies, and contact with a business called 'Design Wrap' were not personally investigated by Lange, and that tracking dogs — a standard tool in some jurisdictions — were never used or even considered.

Witness Demeanor

(NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE) — pause when asked the width of the walkway, suggesting Lange had to mentally retrieve the measurement

Lange repeatedly qualifies his answers with 'I believe' and 'I don't recall' on specifics about Goldman's autopsy and his own investigative steps, conveying either genuine uncertainty or caution under cross

Objections

6 objections (2 sustained, 3 overruled)

Proceeding 5176 • 179 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103