📄 Sidebar: language in closing argument — Thursday, September 28, 1995
📅 Sep 28 — Day 163
🏛️ Marcia Clark⚖️ Lance A. Ito
closing_argumentjury
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\SEP\28\SIDEBAR-LANGUAGE-IN-CLOSING-AR.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 163 of 167

Sidebar: language in closing argument

Date: Thursday, September 28, 1995 • Utterances: 11
Clark objected during Scheck's closing argument that he used the phrase 'We also believe,' which would improperly suggest the defense team personally vouches for Simpson's innocence rather than arguing the evidence. Scheck disputed the characterization, insisting he said 'we believe the evidence shows,' which is permissible. Ito sided with Clark that Scheck's wording was improper but limited the response to a caution rather than a formal ruling.
1 THE COURT:

All right. Side bar, counsel.

2 (The following proceedings were held at the bench:)
3 THE COURT:

All right. We are over at the side bar. Miss Clark, I think your objection is that there was a comment by Mr. Scheck that "We also believe."

4 MS. CLARK:

Yes.

5 MR. SCHECK:

My comment was, and I want to be specific because I am very aware of these rules, we believe the evidence shows.

KEY QUOTE
6 MS. CLARK:

That is not what he said.

7 MR. SCHECK:

That is exactly what I said. I resent this interruption. I know the rules and she can go check the transcript.

8 MS. CLARK:

Read it back.

9 THE COURT:

That is not just what was said there, but just a caution.

10 MS. CLARK:

Your Honor, we think we represent a man--

11 THE COURT:

That is what he said. I cautioned him.

KEY QUOTE

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (3)

Barry Scheck
My comment was, and I want to be specific because I am very aware of these rules, we believe the evidence shows.
Scheck draws a critical distinction between personal belief (improper) and belief grounded in evidence (permissible) — the difference between advocacy and testimony.
Barry Scheck
I resent this interruption. I know the rules and she can go check the transcript.
Reveals the friction between Scheck and Clark and Scheck's confidence — or defensiveness — about his command of closing argument rules.
Lance A. Ito
That is what he said. I cautioned him.
Ito confirms Clark's objection was substantively correct but declines to impose any stronger remedy, effectively letting Scheck off with a warning.

Notable Exchanges (2)

Barry ScheckMarcia Clark
Scheck disputes Clark's characterization of his exact words, insisting she misquoted him; Clark demands a readback of the transcript.
heated
Lance A. ItoBarry Scheck
Ito confirms Scheck's phrasing was improper but resolves the matter with only a caution, declining to give Clark stronger relief.
procedural

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)
Proceeding 7869 • 11 utterances
Criminal Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 SEP 28, 1995 📄 Sidebar: language in closing a
SEP 28, 1995 KRT DvH TD