WITH REGARD -- I WANTED TO COME UP FOR TWO REASONS. WITH REGARD TO CORA FISCHMAN, AS AN OFFER OF PROOF, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK HIM WHETHER OR NOT IN CONNECTION WITH HIS EXAMINATION OR HIS INVESTIGATION REGARDING DRUG-RELATED HOMICIDES, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN RELEVANT TO HIM TO HEAR A STATEMENT FROM ONE OF NICOLE BROWN'S FRIEND, ONE OF NICOLE SIMPSON'S CLOSE FRIENDS THAT, "IF O.J. IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS CRIME, WE'RE ALL IN TROUBLE," SOMEBODY WHO RAN AROUND WITH HER, VERY CLOSE TO HER. AS AN OFFER OF PROOF, I THINK THE EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE THAT'S WHAT CORA FISCHMAN AND SEVERAL OTHER LADIES HAD SAID AS EARLY AS THE 13TH. SO I WANT TO ASK ABOUT CORA FISCHMAN, WHAT HE KNOWS ABOUT HER AND ESTABLISH SHE IS A FRIEND. IF THE COURT IS RULING THAT IT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE AND I CAN'T DO IT, I WANT TO FIND OUT NOW -- ASK LEAVE TO MAKE HIM MY WITNESS TO FIND OUT NOW IF WE COULD.

WHY DOES HE HAVE TO DO IT IN THE PEOPLE'S CASE AND NOT IN THE DEFENSE'S CASE? MR. COCHRAN WILL HAVE AMPLE OPPORTUNITY TO CALL EVERY WITNESS HE WANTS TO CALL IN HIS CASE. THE PROBLEM WE'RE HAVING HERE IS, WHY WE ARE ON THE EIGHTH DAY OF EXAMINATION OF THIS DETECTIVE IS IS THAT MR. COCHRAN IS ATTEMPTING TO USE DETECTIVE LANGE FAR BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THE PEOPLE'S CASE TO ESTABLISH THINGS THAT ARE HEARSAY, SPECULATION, INNUENDO AND BRING IN STATEMENTS OF ALL THE WITNESSES THAT HE WANTS TO CALL. MR. COCHRAN HAS TO PROVE HIS OWN CASE AND HE HAS TO PROVE IT IN HIS OWN WAY THROUGH HIS OWN WITNESSES AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, BUT NOT BY CROSS-EXAMINING MY WITNESS. HE'S GOING FAR BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THINGS WE DID IN DIRECT. THE RULES OF COURT EXIST FOR A REASON. MR. COCHRAN WANTS TO TALK ABOUT EVERY WITNESS IN MY CASE IN CHIEF. I THINK HE SHOULD FOLLOW THE RULES OF EVIDENCE AND CALL HIS WITNESSES AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME.

IT EXCEEDS THE SCOPE.

IF I CAN'T DO IT WITH THIS WITNESS, THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.