All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present, including counsel Kent Spaulding. The court has acted upon the application pro hac vice and approved that. Good afternoon, counsel.
All right. Over the--during the brief recess, counsel had the opportunity to informally discuss scheduling matters and based upon the Brady issue that the court still needs to deal with this afternoon. Mr. Cochran.
One thing, your Honor, on the Brady matter. I had indicated to the court that with regard to Brady, Messers. Scheck and Shapiro along with Miss Shawn Snider Chapman will be down at 4 o'clock. They're in the process of interviewing witnesses. They did indicate to me that there may be--they may not be ready to proceed completely today on that and may ask to start that tomorrow morning, and I told them to come by 4 o'clock so they could let the court know that. That's the only holdup, what we talked about earlier.
Your Honor, may I take this opportunity very briefly just to mention something that I neglected--it's my fault--I neglected to mention to the court earlier?
No, I don't think so, Miss Lewis. We've--you've filed your points and authorities. I've heard rather extensive argument--
Well, there was a supplemental memorandum filed by the Defense yesterday afternoon after they had already filed their two other memos in the same thing that I did not pay careful attention to. So I--just briefly for the record, please. Please. I can see your--we have time. We are waiting for Mr. Mounger. Very quickly. Very quickly. It might help the court in its ruling.
Okay. Offer of proof of newly discovered evidence for motion to suppress, the first--they have three things. Very briefly, your Honor. The first thing is that they say the decision to make entry by climbing the wall. Detective Fuhrman was the D2. We know that the others out there were all D3's.
I'm sure. It was their decision. The second offer had to do with Mark Fuhrman searching Kato's room, but that--their cross-examination of Mark Fuhrman would add nothing to the--Mark Fuhrman's credibility on that because Kato testified at the preliminary hearing during the motion to suppress and testified to the thumps--
Yes. And also indicating the thumps on the wall. So that makes Detective Fuhrman's testimony that Kato told him he heard thumps on the wall--I mean, there's no credibility issue there whatsoever. And the third one was that, given the statements that Kato made to Detective Fuhrman, which we know were made, that was obviously why Detective Fuhrman went behind the walkway. So how is the Defense going to hurt his credibility in terms of why he went to the walkway when we know Kato testified during the preliminary hearing as to those three thumps behind there. That's all I wanted to say, your Honor. I just wanted to point out that their intended cross-examination would not shed light on the issues they list in their supplemental brief.
All right. Thank you, counsel. Mr. Uelmen, do you feel compelled to respond to that?
All right. We've been rejoined now by counsel Darryl Mounger who represents Mark Fuhrman. Good afternoon again, counsel.
Your Honor, over the break, I talked to Mr. Fuhrman, and it is our position that because I am walking into this trial after eight months, I am unfamiliar with all of the testimony. I have been handling my own cases and not followed this trial intimately. I have come into this court asking for the McKinny tapes and a copy of the transcripts so that I might review them with my client, although I have reviewed most of them. I have tried to correlate that information and interview my client, and I'm unable to put it in the context which it deserves. Based upon this court's July 31st--I'm sorry--August 31st ruling and the words specifically I believe on page 5, on the information I do know and the information especially I do not know, I have advised Mr. Fuhrman that he should not answer any questions before this court. Therefore, it is my understanding that he will assert his 5th amendment privilege if asked any questions.
All right. Mr. Uelmen, for the purposes of the record, will you accept that representation?
No, your Honor. We believe it's necessary for him to assert the privilege from the witness stand in response to a question.
KEY QUOTEAll right. Since there's an unwillingness to accept and stipulate to that, it will be necessary for Mr. Fuhrman to resume the witness stand for the purpose of this motion and to assert the privilege.
All right. All right. Then, Mr. Uelmen, Miss Lewis, I've indicated to you off the record that I need to--in order to rule on the motion to suppress, renewed motion to suppress, I need to review the preliminary hearing transcript, which I have not had the opportunity to do since earlier--much earlier in the trial. So I'll need to do that. So I don't think you should anticipate a ruling this afternoon on that motion.
Your Honor, I'm informed by Mr. Scheck and Miss Shawn Snider Chapman that they're in the process of interviewing witnesses, that they will take the rest of the day to try and do that. They cannot finish they think until tomorrow morning in that regard. They're asking that we come back tomorrow at 10 o'clock, and they will be ready to proceed with the Brady motion. They're going to have these witnesses brought down shortly with Mr. Shapiro I believe along with Mr. Yochelson to ask that they be ordered back. They'll finish today and then ordered back for tomorrow morning. That's my understanding from what Mr. Scheck has indicated, and we can start again at 8:30 tomorrow morning after they finish today.
Yeah. 8:30. They want--they want--they're going to try to finish interviewing the witnesses this afternoon. In case they can't, they want to resume the interviewing tomorrow morning at 8:30. And they somehow manage--
How about we finish the interviews tonight and start tomorrow morning at our regular 9 o'clock?
I'm sure they're going to try to do that, your Honor. But out of an abundance of caution, their thought was--there are a number of witnesses--they would perhaps need until 10:00, to have the witnesses ordered back tomorrow for 8:30. I think that was the plan. They are trying, your Honor. We had them go do that this afternoon.
I know that officer--Detective Maxwell was going to leave by 4 o'clock today to try to pick up a child from school. So I don't know that we'll be able to interview him this evening. Mr. Yochelson will be down with the rest of the witnesses, and we'll try to interview whomever we can this afternoon.
Your Honor, so the record is clear, the Defense has had six months to talk to these people. They interviewed Lucienne Coleman in April.
They interviewed Miss Coleman in April. That means that as of this date, we have more than four months that they have had to talk to these witnesses, and now we need extra time at the 11th hour for them to interview witnesses they've had access to, opportunity to talk to ad nauseam for more than four months and in some instances six months?
KEY QUOTEWhich is why I'm inclined to resume tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock, at our regular time. There are other motions we do need to conclude however at this point in time.
And can we get a representation on the record as to what other witnesses the Defense intends to call other than the Brady witnesses, quote, unquote, and I use the term loosely that they intend to call before the jury?
How would that be? Assume the court grants it, what further witnesses would they need to call.
I don't know. I don't ask. Mr. Cochran, who else do you have after--since we've finished Mr. Hodge and the court's ruling, we're finished with Miss McKinny.
Part of it is, your Honor, that there are two witnesses as the court is aware that I mentioned, Mr. Vettraino and Mr. Goulston, who are upstairs--I presume they're going to be talked to. I haven't gotten a report on those two at this point. We would also like, so we don't have any downtime--I've indicated this to counsel earlier--to know who their first rebuttal witnesses are so we can prepare for those. In other words, so we don't have downtime on that also.
All right. So your representation is Goulston and Vettraino based upon the interviews that you conduct this afternoon.
Thank you, your Honor. We're going to need the rebuttal witnesses also, your Honor.
I have advised Mr. Fuhrman that he should not answer any questions before this court. Therefore, it is my understanding that he will assert his 5th amendment privilege if asked any questions.
No, your Honor. We believe it's necessary for him to assert the privilege from the witness stand in response to a question.
They interviewed Miss Coleman in April. That means that as of this date, we have more than four months that they have had to talk to these witnesses, and now we need extra time at the 11th hour for them to interview witnesses they've had access to, opportunity to talk to ad nauseam for more than four months and in some instances six months?
So how is the Defense going to hurt his credibility in terms of why he went to the walkway when we know Kato testified during the preliminary hearing as to those three thumps behind there.