📄 Remaining witnesses and case scope — Tuesday, September 12, 1995
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\SEP\12\REMAINING-WITNESSES-AND-CASE-S.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 152 of 167

Remaining witnesses and case scope

Date: Tuesday, September 12, 1995 • Utterances: 20
A late-session administrative discussion in which Cochran pressed the prosecution to reveal which witnesses remained before they could realistically rest, exposing that Clark's optimistic Thursday finish was implausible given the names she listed. Cochran also made a formal motion to modify jury sequestration, arguing the jury had been confined for nearly nine months, far beyond what they were promised during voir dire.
1 THE COURT:

All right.

2 MR. COCHRAN:

The last issue for today, your Honor, may deal with the scope of rebuttal regarding certain lay witnesses and where we're going in this case.

3 THE COURT:

We do have the June 17th issue still open.

4 MR. COCHRAN:

Yes, we do, and perhaps we can take that up tomorrow. What I'm concerned about, your Honor, Miss Clark indicated today that the People might rest on Thursday. If that be the case, we'd like to know which other witnesses they have pared down. You directed Messers. Douglas and I think Fairtlough instead of Mr. Darden to get together. They have taken some witnesses off their list, but we still have a list that would be roughly 56 people less the few who have been called. We need to know who they are going to call in order to get down to this--to finish this case by Thursday. We are entitled to those list of names. We'd like to have those now. There may be another issue regarding the 6-17 events and the issue regarding Dr. Dutton I guess. That will be coming up next week. So I'd like to have that at this point because if they pare other people down, if they're not calling other people, we need to know now so we can get this case over with. We want to resume our case. We have witnesses out of state and one in particular we're going to be asking the court probably either tomorrow afternoon or Thursday morning to help us bring back and another--a new witness to bring out here. So we want to do that as soon as possible so there's no delay for next week. So may we have that, your Honor, some indication what witnesses have been pared off, who is coming up next, what witnesses they're going to call to finish the case by Thursday, within three days? We are entitled to it.

5 THE COURT:

I assume they are going to offer at this point a modified Peratis video, that they're going to offer Mr. Deedrick as to fabric impression; is that correct, Miss Clark?

6 MS. CLARK:

Yes, your Honor.

7 MR. COCHRAN:

Wouldn't it be easier to hear it from them?

8 THE COURT:

No. Those are the issues we just finished discussing. So those are pretty obvious; wouldn't you say?

9 MR. COCHRAN:

Yes, they are. Yes, we knew about those. I'm trying to find out who else they have.

10 THE COURT:

And we are concluded with the glove people. So what does that leave us with, Miss Clark?

11 MS. CLARK:

That leaves us with Bill Bodziak. We have to litigate the Bronco fiber issue.

12 THE COURT:

Uh-huh.

13 MS. CLARK:

That's--I'd indicate to the court that would be--that's very brief. If that's admissible, the Bronco fiber witnesses are three in number, 15 minutes each. I'll be asking the court--also, the Ackards, Lawrence and Nancy Ackard, Christian Anders, George Field, Don Thompson, Dr. Dutton, right--that depends on the motion--Gretchen Stockdale, and that is a matter I have to take up. That brings me to a letter I have to take up.

14 MR. COCHRAN:

Is that all?

15 THE COURT:

That's about three day's worth.

16 MR. COCHRAN:

But obviously, then they're clearly not going to finish on Wednesday. That's a pipe dream. How can we finish Wednesday? That's preposterous. It's optimistic. More than optimistic. That's preposterous. Your Honor, the issue is, you know, I think we should be realistic because that brings me to the last motion I would at least have the court think about. I told you earlier this morning that I--I think on behalf of the Defense and behalf of Mr. Simpson, we hereby would ask this court to modify the sequestration of this jury.

The court will recall that approximately I guess now 10 days ago, we met in chambers regarding a juror who should remain nameless, and the court made representations based on what we told your Honor that you expected this case to be to the jury by the middle of September on or about September 15th. We're not going to make September 15th clearly. We'll be lucky to finish this case next week unless there's some paring down. And so I think it's unfair I think from the standpoint of all of our credibilities--during voir dire, we told this jury they'd get the case in April as I recall. And so it seems to me that we've reached a point where this jury should no longer be made to suffer. Our client's had to suffer and we hope to alleviate this situation very soon, but these jurors were brought in from the outside, and it seems to me the court should seek to modify the sequestration. And this court is very, very innovated and I believe this to be an appropriate time to set up some kind of procedure where these jurors can go home at night, meet someplace in the morning. It's unfair to keep them here it seems to me past what we've told them would be required. We're going to lose some jurors as you're aware and the People--at first, we thought they might have understood this. But when we see this list, they say this is just three days, they still don't understand it's going to be well into next week, and the problem is going to be aggravated. So I make this motion most seriously. You can still have the ramification of sequestration. And you'll recall that when picking this jury, you told these jurors not to watch television, not to do certain things, and by and large, they complied with the order. These people have been here almost nine months and I think they would do this. I think they would welcome it and it would take a lot of pressure off of them. We can finish this case. We still should finish it as soon as possible. It will be a lot fairer for these people if the court will consider doing it. We've all thought about this and we all have--Defense agrees this would be the appropriate thing for us to do. Otherwise--we do not--Defense doesn't want a mistrial, but we're going to move in that direction if we don't sort of spend every few moments apologizing, and I don't think you'd like to do that. You made a nice joke yesterday. Nobody laughed. Nobody laughed. There may have been a couple police snickers, but nobody laughed.

17 THE COURT:

I met three smiles from the regulars.

KEY QUOTE
18 MR. COCHRAN:

Well, your Honor, smiles, your Honor, well, that's a far cry from the laughter that we used to get. You met that also. So I'm just saying, it seems to be time to do that. We've thought about it and would ask your Honor to consider doing that. We would also like--if this is three days' worth of witnesses, that means Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. Then we need to know the witnesses after that. Also, with regard to these witnesses, we need an offer of proof with regard to who these witnesses are, what they're going to be testifying about. And Don Thompson already testified for us. He is the officer who handcuffed Mr. Simpson within 30 seconds of his arrival back on his property. He's already been called. So we need to know what they're going to be saying as soon as possible to keep from delaying further, your Honor.

19 THE COURT:

Why don't you consult--have Mr. Douglas consult with Mr. Darden, get the offers of proof as to the names that Miss Clark has just given to us rather than take up the court's time at this point. I'm sure that those two gentlemen can work it out between themselves as to who's who.

20 MR. COCHRAN:

Because there are some people where there are no reports at all, your Honor. Thank you, your Honor.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Johnnie Cochran
That's preposterous. It's optimistic. More than optimistic. That's preposterous.
Cochran's blunt rejection of the prosecution's claim they could finish by Wednesday, after Clark listed enough witnesses to fill three more days.
Johnnie Cochran
You made a nice joke yesterday. Nobody laughed. Nobody laughed. There may have been a couple police snickers, but nobody laughed.
Cochran's pointed observation about jury morale — using Ito's failed humor to underscore that the sequestered jury was exhausted and dispirited.
Lance A. Ito
I met three smiles from the regulars.
Ito's dry self-deprecating reply — a rare moment of candid levity from the bench.
Johnnie Cochran
These people have been here almost nine months and I think they would do this. I think they would welcome it and it would take a lot of pressure off of them.
The core of Cochran's sequestration modification argument — framing it as a fairness issue for the jury, not a defense tactic.

Evidence (3)

Informal
Modified Peratis video
identified as upcoming prosecution offering
Informal
Deedrick fabric impression testimony
identified as upcoming prosecution witness
Informal
Bronco fiber evidence
flagged as still requiring litigation before admission; three witnesses, 15 minutes each

Notable Exchanges (3)

Johnnie CochranMarcia ClarkLance A. Ito
Cochran demanded the prosecution's pared-down witness list. Ito began listing obvious upcoming witnesses himself; Cochran noted they already knew those and wanted the full remaining roster. Clark then enumerated: Bodziak, Bronco fiber witnesses, Ackards, Christian Anders, George Field, Don Thompson, Dr. Dutton, Gretchen Stockdale.
strategic
Johnnie CochranLance A. Ito
Cochran made a formal motion to modify jury sequestration, citing broken timeline promises from voir dire (April delivery), the ongoing juror attrition risk, and a juror chambers meeting Ito had held ~10 days prior where September 15th was promised as a target. Ito did not rule but took it under consideration.
advocacy
Johnnie CochranLance A. Ito
Cochran's remark that no one laughed at Ito's previous day's joke prompted Ito's self-aware reply about 'three smiles from the regulars' — a brief moment of genuine humor between bench and counsel.
light

Light Moments (1)

Johnnie Cochran / Lance A. Ito
Cochran told Ito that his joke from the prior day got zero laughs — 'maybe a couple police snickers' — and Ito replied he had counted three smiles from courtroom regulars.

Objections

None recorded
Proceeding 7608 • 20 utterances
Criminal Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 SEP 12, 1995 📄 Remaining witnesses and case s
SEP 12, 1995 KRT DvH TD