Cross-examination of Philip Vannatter (part 2)

📄 Cross-examination of Philip Vannatter (part 2) — Tuesday, September 19, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\SEP\19\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-PHILIP-VA.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 157 of 167

◀ Sidebar: code of silence objection Redirect examination of Philip Vannatter ▶

Witness: Det. Philip Vannatter
Examiner: Brian Kelberg
Called by: Defense • Date: Tuesday, September 19, 1995 • Utterances: 71

Prosecutor Kelberg conducts redirect examination of Detective Vannatter, rehabilitating him on two fronts: first, explaining his casual smoking-deck contact with mob informant Larry Fiato as harmless bullshitting between men from unrelated cases, not improper communication about the Simpson case. Second, and more forcefully, Kelberg has Vannatter emphatically reassert that O.J. Simpson was not a suspect when detectives went to Rockingham — that his sole purpose was a death notification and to care for two minor children.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held in open court:)

# 2 THE COURT:

All right. Thank you, counsel. Proceed.

# 3 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

# 4 MR. KELBERG:

Thank you, your Honor. Detective Vannatter, just to set the scene correctly, the case that Mr. Lange was going out to talk with Mr. Davidson and the Fiato brothers about was not a case for which you were one of the investigating officers; is that correct?

# 5 DET. VANNATTER:

That's correct.

# 6 MR. KELBERG:

And Detective Lange had had a partner at the time of that particular incident by the name of Mac McLean; is that correct?

# 7 DET. VANNATTER:

Well, no, I don't think that is correct. I think that was way before he started working with Detective McLean. I believe his partner at the time--and I believe the case is a 1982 case--I believe his partner was a detective by the name of Souza when he actually first got the case.

# 8 MR. KELBERG:

And subsequently did you find that he was working with Detective McLean on the case?

# 9 DET. VANNATTER:

Yes.

# 10 MR. KELBERG:

Then you became his partner; is that correct?

# 11 DET. VANNATTER:

That's correct, yes.

# 12 MR. KELBERG:

Now, in the course of being here for the Simpson case in January and February was the case for which the Fiato brothers were witnesses also going on in the same building?

# 13 DET. VANNATTER:

That's correct, yes.

# 14 MR. KELBERG:

And our offices are, among other places, on the 18th floor of this building?

# 15 DET. VANNATTER:

Yes, sir.

# 16 MR. KELBERG:

And from your experiences has it been common to see witnesses from a lot of different cases wandering around in common areas?

# 17 DET. VANNATTER:

Many, many people are up there, yes.

# 18 MR. KELBERG:

And because of the code regulations, smoking is not permitted inside the building; is that correct?

# 19 DET. VANNATTER:

That's correct.

# 20 MR. KELBERG:

So if people want to smoke, from whatever case they may be coming to the building for the purpose of being witness, they have got to go to designated areas; is that correct?

# 21 DET. VANNATTER:

They have got to go to the outside, yes, that's correct.

# 22 MR. KELBERG:

Would it be accurate to say that that is where you and Larry Fiato would spend some time smoking cigarettes?

# 23 DET. VANNATTER:

That's correct, yes.

# 24 MR. KELBERG:

Now, going back to the--just the initial finding at Bundy, would it be accurate to say that you saw no evidence which in your 25 years of experience led you to believe Nicole Brown Simpson was the victim of a rape?

# 25 DET. VANNATTER:

It--

# 26 MR. SHAPIRO:

Objection, beyond the scope.

# 27 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 28 DET. VANNATTER:

I didn't even know what her cause of death was at that point. All I knew was the two victims appeared to have massive injuries. I didn't even know what the cause of death was. How could I make a determination on anything?

# 29 MR. KELBERG:

Did you see any evidence that indicated to you there was a robbery?

# 30 DET. VANNATTER:

Nothing--again--again, I had a very brief walk-through by Ron Phillips who pointed out certain items of evidence.

# 31 MR. SHAPIRO:

Your Honor, I'm going to object. This is nonresponsive and irrelevant.

# 32 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 33 DET. VANNATTER:

And I couldn't at that point answer that question because I didn't know what had occurred there.

# 34 MR. KELBERG:

Did you see any evidence that caused you to believe there had been a burglary?

# 35 DET. VANNATTER:

The front door of the residence was standing open. That was a possibility. I didn't see any ransacking. But again, I only got a real brief walk-through.

# 36 MR. KELBERG:

Now, in your experience have you found that where women who have been either the wives or ex-wives--been in a relationship with a man, either a married relationship or a living relationship, that when such a woman is killed that statistically the killer is most commonly associated with the husband, the ex-husband or the live-in?

# 37 MR. SHAPIRO:

Objection. May we approach?

# 38 THE COURT:

No. Only one person makes objections and I'm hearing too much noise over here. The objection is sustained. Rephrase the question.

# 39 MR. KELBERG:

Detective Vannatter, in your experience--may I have a moment, your Honor?

# 40 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

# 41 MR. KELBERG:

Detective Vannatter, bottom line, if you thought Mr. Simpson was a suspect when you first are going from Bundy to Rockingham, no. 1, would you have told that to this jury?

# 42 MR. SHAPIRO:

Objection.

# 43 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 44 DET. VANNATTER:

You bet I would have.

KEY QUOTE

# 45 MR. KELBERG:

Would you have told it to the Judge at the preliminary hearing?

# 46 DET. VANNATTER:

Yes, sir. You bet I would have.

KEY QUOTE

# 47 MR. KELBERG:

Would you have told it to the grand jury?

# 48 DET. VANNATTER:

I would have told it to anybody that asked me.

# 49 MR. KELBERG:

Is there any reason in your mind why you would not have said that if that is in fact how you honestly felt at that particular time?

# 50 MR. SHAPIRO:

Objection, self-serving.

# 51 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 52 DET. VANNATTER:

That is not a true statement. I wouldn't say something like that. The truth of the matter is Mr. Simpson was not a suspect. I went there to make a death notification and a disposition of two minor children. That was my purpose for going to that location.

KEY QUOTE

# 53 MR. KELBERG:

And wouldn't you agree, sir, that it would have been very easy for you to say if you wanted to, that Mr. Suspect--Mr. Simpson of course was a suspect, if you wanted to?

# 54 MR. SHAPIRO:

Objection.

# 55 THE COURT:

Sustained. Speculation.

# 56 MR. KELBERG:

May I have one more moment?

# 57 THE COURT:

Certainly.

# 58 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

# 59 MR. KELBERG:

Detective Vannatter, when you were with the Fiatos, Detective Lange and Mr. Davidson, did you joke around with these people?

# 60 DET. VANNATTER:

Yes.

# 61 MR. KELBERG:

If somebody characterized it as a bunch of guys bullshitting at times, would that be an accurate characterization of what took place at times during that hotel visit?

KEY QUOTE

# 62 MR. SHAPIRO:

Objection, hearsay.

# 63 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 64 DET. VANNATTER:

That was mainly my contact with the Fiatos, would be characterized as that, yes.

# 65 MR. KELBERG:

Would the same apply to any conversations that you may have had with Larry Fiato on a smoking deck while you were here for the Simpson case and he was here for whatever case he was a witness?

# 66 DET. VANNATTER:

Absolutely. I had no business with him whatsoever.

KEY QUOTE

# 67 MR. KELBERG:

Did you ever speak seriously to Larry Fiato about the Simpson case?

# 68 DET. VANNATTER:

Absolutely not.

# 69 MR. KELBERG:

Is there any reason why you would speak seriously about the Simpson case to a witness on another case?

# 70 DET. VANNATTER:

No, no. Again, I don't talk to anybody about the particulars of my murder cases.

# 71 MR. KELBERG:

I have nothing further, your Honor.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Det. Philip Vannatter

You bet I would have.

Emphatic repeated denial that he would have concealed Simpson's suspect status — delivered three times in succession about telling the jury, the preliminary hearing judge, and the grand jury.

Det. Philip Vannatter

That is not a true statement. I wouldn't say something like that. The truth of the matter is Mr. Simpson was not a suspect. I went there to make a death notification and a disposition of two minor children. That was my purpose for going to that location.

Core rehabilitation of Vannatter's credibility on the most damaging allegation against him — that he lied about Simpson's suspect status to avoid getting a search warrant.

Det. Philip Vannatter

Absolutely. I had no business with him whatsoever.

Flatly denies any substantive conversation with Larry Fiato about the Simpson case, countering the implication that he boasted about the case to a mob witness.

Brian Kelberg

If somebody characterized it as a bunch of guys bullshitting at times, would that be an accurate characterization of what took place at times during that hotel visit?

Prosecution's framing of the Fiato hotel contact as casual male banter rather than improper disclosure — Vannatter agrees.

Evidence (2)

Informal

Open front door at Bundy — noted as possible burglary indicator but no ransacking observed

discussed

Informal

Bundy crime scene walk-through — Vannatter's limited initial observations of the two victims

discussed

Notable Exchanges (3)

Brian Kelberg•Det. Philip Vannatter

Kelberg asks three consecutive questions — would you have told the jury, the judge at prelim, the grand jury — each met with 'You bet I would have' or equivalent, building rhythmic emphasis on Vannatter's claimed transparency.

strategic

Robert Shapiro•Lance A. Ito

Shapiro requests a sidebar on Kelberg's statistical domestic-homicide question; Ito refuses the sidebar, sustains on rephrase grounds, and also publicly chides the defense table for excessive noise.

procedural

Brian Kelberg•Det. Philip Vannatter

Kelberg walks Vannatter through the casual smoking-deck relationship with Larry Fiato — same building, different cases, code-mandated outdoor smoking — normalizing the contact as coincidental and inconsequential.

strategic

Light Moments (1)

Brian Kelberg

Kelberg asks whether the hotel interaction with the Fiatos could be characterized as 'a bunch of guys bullshitting' — an unusually colloquial phrase for courtroom redirect that Vannatter readily agrees with.

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Det. Philip Vannatter

rehabilitation after prior impeachment

Kelberg uses redirect to counter the defense's earlier implication (via the Fiato brothers' testimony) that Vannatter improperly disclosed case details and/or that Simpson was always a suspect — Vannatter denies both flatly and repeatedly.

Objections

7 objections (2 sustained, 5 overruled)

Proceeding 7760 • 71 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103