In yesterday's testimony and testimony from the day before, have you told us every significant conversation that you had with O.J. Simpson regarding Nicole Brown Simpson?
Overbroad, lack of foundation. Requires the witness to recount each and every piece of testimony she has given over the last several days. I object on those grounds.
I think those objections are appropriate. If you have a specific question about a particular conversation with her, there is no objection whatsoever.
I think the question is improper, but I am not instructing her not to answer any questions you ask about conversations that she had with O.J. Simpson.
The form of the question. If you have any question you want to ask about conversations with O.J. Simpson, I have no objection whatsoever.
Have you told us every significant conversation you have had with O.J. Simpson regarding Nicole Brown Simpson?
Objection. I think if you are going to ask her about conversations, can you ask her about specific times, places or dates or reference, any other conversation is just not -
I also have an objection, Mr. Leonard. No one has a clue what you mean by "significant." What does "significant" mean in this context?
Have you told us about every conversation you had with O.J. Simpson regarding his relationship with Nicole Brown Simpson, let's say, for the last three months of Nicole's life?
I still think it is highly improper and I object. It lacks foundation, it is vague, ambiguous, it is overbroad.
Frankly, she would have to review her entire testimony again, now, and start thinking and try to remind herself or think if she has been asked about every one, and if not, I mean, she could take the day to try and review, decide -
Again, I don't mind you asking her any questions about conversations, but she had so many conversations that she's indicated with Mr. Simpson, that if there is a particular area, a particular type of conversation, a particular area you consider is significant you want to question her about, I have no objection.
Other than the - let me start over again. Do you recall how many conversations you had with O.J. Simpson in May of 1994, regarding Nicole Brown?
You have a - as you have testified, you have a significant recollection of one conversation in particular you had with him where you say that he threatened to kill Nicole.
I object on the ground that it mischaracterizes her testimony. She never said she had a significant recollection of one conversation in particular. She had a recollection of a number of conversations in response to specific questions. I object on that ground.
I have no objection if you want her to go answer the question about that conversation or - that's okay.
Other than the conversation on, I think you testified somewhere, I think you said, on May 2nd, 1994, were there any other conversations that you recall where O.J. Simpson threatened to kill Nicole Brown Simpson, or he told you he was going to threaten her?
I would ask the witness once again just to answer yes or no to questions that ask for yes or no answers.
Yes, although you are putting the date May 2nd and I said I believe it was May 2nd, it could have been May 3rd.
Okay, whether it was May 2nd or May 3rd, you don't recall any other conversations with O.J. regarding that?
I want to ask you a few questions about your background. You were born in - what was the year you were born?
I have - I now have five siblings. My sister died three years ago. Four years ago.
DI Q. Can you just give me their names and ages, please?
The witness does not want her family exposed to this and we don't think this is relevant.
I will object and instruct her not to answer. Your questions should focus on the period from July 1992, when she says that she became friendly with Nicole Brown Simpson and her conversations with Nicole and O.J. Simpson, from there all the way to the present. No problem.
Rick Barnett was my first husband, married on Labor Day, when I was 21 years old. Fadi Halabi was my the second husband. I was 21 years old when I married Rick Barnett.
Excuse me, it could have been in 1988 that I was married to him. In '91, I am not sure exactly the date of the divorce.
And you indicated that you were having a relationship with Christian Reichardt during the period that you knew Nicole; is that right?
I broke our engagement at the end of - the first time I broke up was the end of April and confirmed at the end of May.
I broke up with him - actually, there were two Cabo trips. When I first - when we were all in Cabo San Lucas in April, I started telling him that this is not working and that I was considering calling off the engagement.
And then, when we went to Cabo again with my friends, I had given him back his engagement ring, told him that I could not continue to be his fiance.
I have to say that, in this case, because we went, we didn't make travel plans or arrangements, I have to say that I'm not quite sure of the date of that.
You indicated in your book Private Diary that you were, on May 27th, in that weekend, that you were in Los Angeles and you did some things with Nicole. Do you remember that?
And then you created or someone created at your behest, one of the others, some corrections to the book?
And in the corrections you indicated that, in fact, you were not in Los Angeles, but you were in Cabo that weekend?
As I said, that was the weekend that I was very unclear about. That was a time - I was unclear about that weekend.
But the correction indicates that you were in Cabo that weekend, that is, the weekend of May 27th, right?
Why don't you ask her, if you are making reference to something specific, let's mark it and refer to it.
It would be - it looks like there are some Bates stamps at the top. It would be page 25 - hold on just a second. It would be 2522, at about the middle of the page.
Okay. Now, does that refresh your recollection as to whether you were at Cabo on the weekend of May 27?
It refreshes my recollection that obviously there was some question as to exactly where I was on that weekend and that's why there was an edited change in the first pass because I did not have any diaries with me.
To be quite honest with you, that weekend was when we went to Mexico with the Harouches. It is very unclear to me. As I said, I did not make travel plans, we went on their jet. It is very unclear to me.
That correction happened because that, it was - it actually said it was a very quiet weekend, but at the same time it said we went out dancing two nights. That's my best - that's what I was trying to correct.
Okay. A. Because that was edited out - it was edited wrongly. I know the difference between a quiet weekend and going dancing two nights of the weekend, so that was the change that I was looking for. In editing of a book, I had no - I did not have the ability to be there, so there was a lot of edited versions that were not actually specified to me until afterwards.
So you haven't - is it fair to say you have no idea how that correction paragraph was created? You don't know?
Yes. My input was that the difference was we did not spend a quiet weekend if we went dancing two nights. That was the point I was trying to make. Thank you.
And from any source, do you have any knowledge as to how the information that's in the correction paragraph got there? Do you have any knowledge at all about that?
Yeah. Well, the correction paragraph says, in fact, that you were in Cabo that weekend, right? That's what it says, in essence.
I have indicated in the last questions that that particular Cabo trip I am very unclear about because I did not make the travel arrangements, so to be quite honest with you, without my diaries, I could not keep that in proper order.
Everything came through your publisher? Was this one of the areas that you sought out any authentication from, and what else --
This area about where you were that weekend, did you speak any assistance from anyone else to try to determine that?
Not that I can recall. I didn't think it was that significant.
Q . You testified yesterday that you were using cocaine, you say, from towards the end of May, I guess the last week in May until the point that you went into the rehab center, right?
During the period, let's say, from the last week of May until you went into the rehab center.
I did not say that I was using cocaine every single day for the last two weeks. Q. Were you using it occasionally two to three times a day?
I have testified that I used, in the last two weeks of Nicole's life, not on a daily basis. I cannot continue to go further with that.
Do you remember telling Marcia Clark that you were using crack cocaine when she interviewed you? Do you remember that?
Starting at line 15: "And I was on drugs during this time, by the way, Marcia, to let you know." Do you see that?
And do you recall being asked, at line 25, "Were you smoking crack," and your answer "Never"?
There are some dashes right after that, a word with the letter S before the dashes.
I have always said that I never smoked crack because I have been told crack is a combination of cocaine and heroin.
Q . You were smoking cocaine, though ?
KEY QUOTEWas the pipe something that you had already or did you get that at this time? In other words, did you already have it, a cocaine pipe towards the end of May, in your possession?
And would you purchase the cocaine on the days that you were using it or would you purchase an amount and then use it over a number of days? How did that work?
You need to put a sign on there to be quiet, because the sound is leaking through.
Would you buy a supply of cocaine that you were going to be using over a number of days or would you buy the cocaine each day on the day that you were going to use it?
I will wait for the sound. Typically, I would buy the amount that I would use for that day.
And you would go to his house and purchase it? You purchased it at his house? Is that where you purchased it?
May we take a short break?
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 10:46 and we are going off the record.
My - to my best recollection, I wasn't keeping track of the days I was purchasing, so that's very difhcult to answer.
You wrote not just The Private Diary, but you also wrote another book, the Shattered In the Eye of the Storm; is that correct?
Yes. I did. I co-wrote it with Jeanne V. Bell.
Q . During what period did you write Shattered?
Shattered was written during the entire time that I was watching this trial unfold, while I was working with domestic violence victims.
Out of my home through correspondence, also at the mission, in downtown LA, the Anne Douglas center.
When the Private Diary was released, I started receiving thousands of letters from women and men. Many of the letters were women who were in relationships similar to Nicole and O.J.'s and they were asking for help to try to get out of their relationships, so I was corresponding with them, I was finding shelters for them, I was trying to help them because I had felt I could not help Nicole.
I was listening to their stories, I was giving them advice, I was going - when the homeless people came off the streets and - shedding some light and shedding some hope for them.
When did you begin your work at the center and do you still work there now from time to time?
I started working - pardon me. I started working with the Anne Douglas mission four years ago and I continued that as soon as I was able to come back from Vermont and after I had established myself and set up my computer.
How often, let's say, in the last - well, from the time you got back to Vermont from the - until the end of the trial, how often on a weekly basis would you work at the Anne Douglas Center?
I can't say how often. I worked with them weekly and if it wasn't over the phone, it was me going to the mission or going to their graduations. I worked with the women at my home also. They would attend, they would come to my home. That would be very - I couldn't answer that question exactly. There was too many times for me to be able to answer that.
Q . So you can't give an estimate as to how often you were there on a weekly basis?
Prior to Nicole's death, how often - let's say, in the year prior to Nicole's death, how often were you working at the Anne Douglas Center?
I would like to make something clear. I wasn't working at, for the Anne Douglas Center, I was working with the Anne Douglas Center. I was working as a volunteer. Whenever I was asked before that, I would come in. I would go in and -- there were many times I was there in the last four years.
In the one-year period prior to Nicole's death, can you give me an estimate of how many times you were actually there working at that center?
Approximately six, seven times during a six-month period, I would say. They would know better than I.
In the one-year period prior to Nicole's death, were you involved in any other charity or social work?
A Yes, I was.
There were a few charities I was involved with. I have always worked for educational charities due to the fact that our particular - my daughter's particular school district was under financial difficulties, we were in the process of going bankrupt, her school district, so over the past seven years, I have donated hours upon hours upon hours to try to raise funds for the school district and to - to answer the question more specific, in the last year of Nicole's life, I had worked on charities for the school, I had worked through - at the mission and I had also worked on my - I had a friend, Joan Copeland's political campaign; she is running for an office, running for a seat on the board of education, for the board of education, pardon me of Beverly Hills.
Do you recall any of the - when you say charities for the school, do you recall any of the - those are events; is that what you are talking about?
But mainly I was working as a fundraiser, and in whatever capacity they needed. Whether it be volunteering at the school, I was a room mother; I was an art person, I used to go in and help in the office many times, it was a commitment I made. Those are a few of the things that I, that I was working on.
We are talking about the one-year period before Nicole's death; I want you to keep that in mind.
All you are required to do, Ms. Resnick, is to give us your best recollection as it comes to you now.
You were - were you working in, let's say, in this one-year period prior to Nicole's death, were you working on a daily basis in Christian's office?
I had worked on a - that's quite difficult to answer. I worked pretty much three, four, five times a week, depending upon how much I was needed.
Q . And what were your duties there?
He considered me his office manager. I was doing his billing. I was working with the staff. I redecorated his office. I worked on his IBM computer doing his - anything that was really necessary that he asked of me, I worked, I did for him.
And being more specific, in the last three months before Nicole's death, can you give me an estimate of how often you worked at Christian's office, on a weekly basis?
That's very difficult to answer. During this time Christian and I were in the process of ending our relationship, so we were fighting constantly over issues that we had had. Although I was trying very much to work it out with him. So it - that would be a very hard question to answer, for me.
Christian always assumed whenever I fought with him, that I was using drugs. He always blamed me, accused me; he was just like O.J. in that way.
KEY QUOTEGetting back to the second book, Shattered, did you - did you dictate to transcribers, as you did with the first book, Private Diary?
Well, Shattered was - there was actually two books, the Shattered was originally a domestic violence book alone, which is what I contracted for. I started writing Shattered and dictating from the different research that I had done over a period of six, seven months. And then between - and then Jeanne, my co-writer, Jeanne V. Bell, and I, I went to her home in Washington, D.C.
It was sometime late of last year. I believe it was around August or something like that. I didn't really keep a record of that.
Well there, were a lot of different - you know, we were trying to combine the domestic violence with watching, watching the lines of the trial, watching the insanity of the trial. That was the basic aspects, domestic violence and the insanity over the last two years.
And you were also relating - and ultimately in the book you did relate some facts relating to Nicole and O.J.'s relationship'?
Did you utilize any materials to do that, to relate those facts in the book; in other words, any tapes or anything else, any other written materials?
Can you be more specific, please?
Q . Yes. When you were relating facts in Shattered, about Nicole and O.J.'s relationship when you were in the process of writing that, did you utilize any materials to do that, any written materials?
I need to - I need for you to be more clear in this. I, for some reason, can't understand what you are saying and I would like to be able to answer your question properly.
The last day that the private diaries, that - the last day of it, we were being inundated by press and they were - we were nervous that they were going to steal the manuscript, so all traces of it were destroyed so that the press didn't - my publisher's concern was that they would have it in the media before the book came out.
And what about the - what about the tapes of the transcription; what happened to them? Were they destroyed as well?
To my knowledge. I'm not quite sure. You need to talk with - I'm not quite sure where these tapes are.
Were the other materials there that were going to be destroyed, were they in the same area?
The materials were all over the - his country home. We had utilized the entire - the gym, we had utilized his bedroom, we had utilized the living room, the den, we had utilized my bedroom, we had utilized every single room, and it all had to be gone through before the press, because we were leaving. It all had to be gone through and my publisher insisted that every piece of information be protected, destroyed, whatever. That's -
There are so many writings that - I mean, I had written Shattered, and that was in a year period of time, a year and a half period of time, and there were so many drafts and redrafts and, you know, files, and I couldn't answer that properly, I'm sorry.
That would - the drafts would have to be with my - you would have to ask that question to my publisher and -
And how about the tapes of the transcription, do you know if they still exist, for Shattered?
No, I do not. That's not my concern.
Q . When you wrote Shattered, were you trying to make sure that everything in there was as accurate as possible?
I object to the question on the ground there is a hidden assumption that there is something special that needs to be done. She provided the information based on her experiences and her recollection and I don't know what the question is intended to suggest.
I didn't feel it necessary. I used the letters, I used some of the letters that I had received there in the back of the book. Those, I definitely used as materials. I didn't feel that Shattered was a book that needed authenticating. It was public knowledge what had gone on and we were all very aware of the insane time and I used the information on the domestic violence as far as the facts, the details of how many women and how many victims, you know, call the police and all of the different information I received from the Library of Congress. Yes, those were all used. Those were all something that were absolutely correct.
Were you careful in both of these books not to exaggerate anything that you had observed or heard?
What I think you are trying to imply is that I exaggerated or had the intention of doing so. I did not try to exaggerate. I did not think that I would be a witness. I wanted to tell the story as honestly as possible. I did have a co-writer, so there was two different viewpoints in that area.
I would just like to take a break.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:11. We are going off the record.
Ms. Resnick, when we broke, I was asking you about whether you were - whether you were attempting to avoid exaggerating when you wrote these books.
If you were describing a fact in the book about Nicole's relationship with O.J. or something that O.J. told you or something you observed, you had the last say about that, as far as what actually occurred in the book, as between you and the co-writer? Is that fair to say?
Is there anything - okay. In the process of writing the book, did you and your co - in both books, did you and your co-writers sometimes discuss the particular events that you were describing, that you saw or witnessed, saw or heard?
Was there any occasion where there was any disagreement about what you saw or what you heard, between you and your co-writer?
I would - to answer that question, they couldn't disagree; they weren't there. Although at first, when we were writing The Private Diary, as my co-writer was overwhelmed by the information, by the - so he asked me a lot of questions because it was an awful lot of information that I had disseminated to him.
Okay. And how about anything that you observed O.J. Simpson doing? Was there ever a question about that?
Well, he continued to ask me if, exactly the nature of the conversations and I - that's my best answer. I am sorry, a little - it's a little confusing to me.
And were you - at the end, when you saw the final product, let's say, The Private Diary, were you satisfied that the descriptions of the events in there were accurate, what you saw and what you heard?
In the end there were, as I said, 10,000 words that were edited out of The Private Diary, so there were some editing - and also Shattered - there were some editing discrepancies that I was not able to correct. But I believe the - I believe that it portrayed the situation in a very - it portrayed it as it was to - you know, with the fact that we only had six weeks to write it, and due to the editing and, you know, there was - it was the best that it could be for six weeks, I can say that.
I felt that there were some areas that I - editing areas that were inaccurate but I felt that it told the story fairly clearly.
Yes, I do. Exhibit 80 had started when I - after The Private Diary came out, I said to my publisher that there were some editing errors and he said that there would not be the possibility of making big changes, due to printing and publishing standards. But that I could get a few points in and it would be taken care of, and it was created because I was trying - because I was trying very much to clear up anything that I could within the realm of not really changing anything, as that was a printing problem.
No. Exhibit 80, I believe, was from my original writings on my computer, and I think that it was gone over by a member of Dove to try to make sure that it could fit, to make the changes.
Is it fair to say Exhibit 80 contains the corrections that you thought should be made in Private Diary?
There were a lot of corrections that I would like to - there was a lot of additions that I would like because due to the editing of the book that I was not able to do. I wanted to edit the book entirely, but that was not a possibility, so there were minor aspects, minor points that I was told that I could change.
Q . Can you think of any of the other major -
Can you think of any of the other corrections that you would have wanted to make but couldn't make here?
I would like to have edited a lot of things out of the book and used a lot of other things. I mean, I wanted to show Nicole as the person she was and I wanted to show O.J. as the person he was. There was a time factor and if you are saying, if I am pleased with The Private Diary; is that what you are asking me?
No. I was asking if you can recall any of the other corrections that aren't contained in this. If you can't, you can't.
There's a lot of corrections that I would like to - and additions that I would like to have made, and to recall all of them would be very difficult.
Let me ask you this: Why did you include in The Private Diary the intimate scene involving you and Nicole?
Let me put it to you this way: In summary, you took whatever steps you could to make sure that the book was accurate, The Private Diary, correct?
Pardon me?
Q . You took whatever steps you felt you could to make sure that The Private Diary was accurate, what you were portraying in there, what you saw and what you heard?
I wanted to recount to the best of my ability exactly what occurred. That was my intention, yes.
I want to ask you some questions about some events that you testified to yesterday. I will try and be as brief as possible. You testified yesterday that, with regard to this incident that you say happened at Toscana, when Alessandro came in -
And you testified that O.J. said "I'm going to beat the shit out of him," at some point, right?
I am sorry, what's the pending question? I fazed out for a second. Actually, Mr. Kelly whispered something to me. I don't want to incriminate him.
You did testify that in that conversation Mr. Simpson said words to the effect "I want to beat him up"?
You also said yesterday, in testifying, that Alessandro - that O.J. said that he had threatened Alessandro before?
And in Private Diary, you do not include the statement by Mr. Simpson you said he made that he had beaten - or that he had threatened Alessandro before. That's not in there, is it?
I also object to these questions because there is some assumption that all of the information that she testified to in this deposition should be included in the book. She was not subjected to examination in preparing her book as she was when I examined her. Her memory was not probed and jogged in the same way as when I examined her.
And I object to your attempt to somehow argue with her that the information should be the same in both places.
I am not arguing with her. I am just asking her questions. I understand your objection.
In any event, I am making that objection to this line of questions. I am not going to repeat it, okay?
If you would look at page 107, paragraph 1, of Private Diary. Actually, it starts over at the bottom of page 106.
Correct? I can't - next paragraph: "I can't help it, Faye, he said, barely under control, can you believe this man coming in here, knowing we're in here?" And that's what you are saying O.J. said, right?
And then you interrupted him and you said "No, you're not." That's how you describe that in the book, correct?
This does not contain any statement about O.J. that he had threatened Alessandro before; is that right?
I am going to object because the book speaks for itself. It is purely argumentative. There is nothing in this passage that indicates that that was the full extent of the conversation. She pulled out -
No, she pulled out certain pieces of the conversation that were relevant to the point she was trying to make.
You are trying to pretend this is supposed to be her dispositive recounting of the conversation. This is a royal waste of time, Mr. Leonard, okay? The book speaks for itself. If it is not in there, it's not in there. You can make your argument to the jury. You are arguing with the witness right now.
Is there anything in the exchange as you describe on page 106 and 107 about O.J. saying that he had threatened Alessandro before?
I object to that. We are talking about a 250-page book, we are talking about a two-year period. To go over any omission in the book, that does not make sense, okay?
I didn't believe that every single statement - if I was to write every single statement of O.J. Simpson down, that would be the Bible. I'm sorry.
KEY QUOTEI thought the most important thing was the relationship, the disintegration of the human being. I thought the importance of the book was not about every single statement that was made. I was trying to give an overview.
You testified yesterday that when you were in Cabo, you described some type of incident that occurred where O.J. talked about The Frogman, the fact that he was The Frogman. Do you remember that?
Yeah, it's at page 144. Yesterday you testified that when O.J. made this statement about Frogman, that Nicole responded and said, I'm afraid. Is that right?
And then she told me, I'm afraid, in a different conversation. I believe that was my recollection.
You testified yesterday that O.J. made innumerable calls, I think that's what you adopted from Mr. Petrocelli's questions.
Did you testify yesterday that O.J. made innumerable phone calls to you for a period from October of 1993 until April of 1994?
Was there any period of time, let's say, from October until April, that those calls became less frequent?
I will object to the form of the question because I don't think she testified in terms of numbers. I think her testimony was something that they seemed to be nonstop day and night, in terms of context, of conversation, not numbers of times. I don't think that's a fair question .
O.J. would call me typically when Nicole wasn't responding to what he wanted. That's when he would call me the most.
Do you recall how many times, roughly, that he called you - when he was living in New York during that period?
I cannot recall exactly or even approximate how many times he called, to be quite honest with you.
I'm sorry. I can only say that I wasn't keeping track of every single phone call that O.J. Simpson made. That would be impossible.
So you - you are unable to give us any estimate of that? I am talking about the period that O.J. would have been in New York, which was roughly the football season, during that time period. You can't give us any estimate?
Do you have a memory that he was calling you frequently during that time period? Let me ask you that.
You testified yesterday that your best recollection was that there were two phone calls that O.J. made to you from Puerto Rico. Do you remember that?
In The Private Diary, at page 162, you describe getting calls day in and day out during that time period, and that's at page 162.
Well, her testimony was that those two calls stood out in her mind, if you recall.
This is argumentative. That is exactly why this is improper. But what is your question?
On page 162, at the bottom. The last paragraph, it's not a complete paragraph. The first sentence. Were you - let me ask you this question: Were you describing the time period there that O.J. was in Puerto Rico?
This - this is very vague. It looks as I described that O.J. was calling Nicole. First of all, if you will look at the top of the page, during those two weeks, he was trying - pardon me. The next day O.J. phoned me again, started right away -
If I can make a suggestion, since we seem to be taking up the context, if we are going to address pages, I would like Ms. Resnick to just take a moment to read those two pages so she is clear what she is talking about because-
First of all, read those pages, 161 and 162, and then I have a couple of questions for you. Maybe you should read 163, too.
I want to make sure that I get a foundation for my question. I want to make sure that you have been able to read this so I can ask you some general questions.
You were describing, in this particular portion of the book, a time period when O.J. was in Puerto Rico; is that correct?
Yes. And it goes on to - actually, at this part of the book I am describing right as we come back. It's mid-April 1994, and this is back at home, I swung into the Beverly Hills young matron routine, charity work, and it goes to the time where he was calling me - in fact, it describes two particular phone calls, which I recall, and from what I can see here - should you ask me the question -
It looks to me that this is a problem also, because if you will look at the very top, it says "I have been calling her every day." And then it says, "as O.J. phoned me day in and day out." I think that's a mistake on the editor's part, because my best recollection is I received two phone calls from O.J. and I had written about the content of those phone calls in this chapter.
I can only say I gave the information and, you know, how it was arranged and we also - and we also - Brett Shaves was 24 years old one day and then a little later on he was 29 years old, so there were some editing problems, yes.
I don't know if there is - I don't recall if I did or not. I didn't think it was very significant.
At - excuse me. When you testified yesterday you said that you and Nicole ran into Ron Goldman at the - at Roxbury? Is that a disco or something like that, a dance club?
It was between the time that we came back from Mexico and the time of her death. It was within the time frame, it was very brief that I had even known them, so it was in the latter part of her life.
Was it the - let me see if I can refresh your recollection. Was it the weekend that you describe where you are going from - that you are - went out to a couple of different clubs with Nicole? Do you remember describing that in the book?
I described that we had gone out to a couple of different clubs, restaurants and clubs, I believe was my description. And that would have been whatever weekend that was, that would have been one of the nights.
You didn't put in the book that you guys ran into Ron Goldman, when you described that weekend in the book; isn't that right?
Objection. I think she testified several times she had no editorial control over either of these books.
You testified yesterday that you were at - I think it was the second time that you had met Ron Goldman, you were at Starbucks with Nicole and Ron and a couple of his friends were there?
And O.J. came in and he said, That's my wife, and he asked to talk to Nicole, or he said, Come with me, something like that, to Nicole, and they walked outside?
You, in the book, at - and I am talking in Private Diary, on page 185, you describe an occasion when you were at Starbucks with Ron and with Nicole and with Ron's friends. Do you recall that?
Do you see that in the second paragraph? Actually, it is the first full paragraph on page 185.
Is that the particular occasion - are you describing there in the book the particular time that you and Nicole were at Starbucks with Ron Goldman and O.J. came in?
In this particular passage, I read that we had been stalked by - I write that we had been stalked by O.J. and how I was nervous. That's what, how it begins. I do believe this is where I actually met Ron because I pointed him out, his name was Ron Goldman, the first time I saw him. That was not the time that O.J. Simpson came and did his little routine.
I just want to indicate that the witness is quoting parts of that page, 185. I am sorry, page - yes, 185.
There's no question.
Q . Yesterday you testified that, I think it was the day that you went to stay at Kathy's house-
Yes. Q. - and I don't recall what day it was but it was - was it, probably the Monday, Monday June 6th, is that when you went to Kathy's?
And Nicole looked in a drawer, and both the remote and the keys were missing. Do you remember testifying to that?
The drawer was, there was a big island, the refrigerator was here, the sinks were here, the entry was here, and as you walked through the entry from the front door, the island would be here and her set of drawers with all of the crystal and all this over on top, and it was underneath, the set of drawers.
She said that the keys were not there, that O.J. Simpson must have taken them when he was there last week.
I was right around - right with her as she was looking. I didn't want to start going through her personal belongings, but I was searching with her.
Actually, there was. She had told the story to Cynthia Shahian. Cynthia had helped her look for the keys also, to my knowledge, from what Cynthia says. She had asked Kris Jenner, she had told Kris Jenner about it. There was Elvie, there was - and I am not sure if she talked to Cora about it, to be honest with you, and I would have assumed -
If you look at the - it's actually the top of 180, it begins "she told." Do you see that? It's about six, seven lines down. If you could read those two sentences.
Did you mean to suggest in those two sentences, when you said "all of us," that five, five different friends searched for the remote, searched for the keys?
Objection again. She had no editorial control over the book. She didn't write these statements herself. I think we have gone through this many times now. If you want to ask her a question directly about that incident, but she had no control over the words as they appeared in the book.
I - to answer the question properly, if you count the people that were told about this, there was Elvie, Nicole looked for her keys, Kris Jenner looked for her keys and Cici Shahian looked for her keys, if that answers your question.
You say that - if you go back to the bottom of page 179 if you look at, starting at the very last paragraph, "Wanting to give," if you could read that, please, over until about line 5 of the next page.
Now, once again, I am going to make the same objection and recommendation at the same time that when we are addressing a particular page or sentences that the witness take a minute and look at the page on either side of it and get the context.
Now, the passage I identified, that describes a situation where Nicole came rushing back into the room, right?
The - what Nicole did was Nicole opened the drawer, realized that the keys were not there and the remote was not there. And then we searched through the house.
You know, Mr. Leonard, once again for the last time, and I will say it once again, too. This book was not written by her, it was not subject to cross-examination, she had no editorial control whatsoever over what appeared in the book. For you to ask her about the truth or veracity of certain lines that appear in there, does not make sense at this time. I think you should ask her questions directly regarding her recollection and not the book at all, because she had no control over what went in there. If you want to question her about incidences, I think you should question her about incidences, dates or times or places.
This passage also describes Nicole as not discovering that the remote was missing until after she had discovered that the keys were missing and she went someplace else. Is that right?
It looks - it looks like it's describing it that way. I think it's fairly insignificant and I have not had time to go through and re-edit at this time. I will make changes in Shattered, but it just recently came out and that would be one of the changes that will be made.
You testified yesterday about a telephone conversation you had with Nicole at approximately 9:00 p.m. on June 12th.
And you said that - you described - you were asked to describe what Nicole said to you. Do you remember that?
And you said in your testimony, when you were asked to describe that, that she told O.J. that she didn't want to be around him, or words to that effect. Do you remember that? That she didn't want him around. Do you remember that? This is a discussion that she had with O.J. at the recital.
In the book, when you describe that, you - and that's Private Diary, at page 225 - and you can take a look at that -
It's actually a whole chapter. It's called "The Last Phone Call, June 12, 1994." What is your question so maybe she can look for that particular passage.
Did you, when you described - in the book, you say that Nicole told you, in that conversation, that she told O.J. to fuck off.
Everyone is laughing because you held up the wrong book. What is your specific question?
Well, the book speaks for itself. Do you want to ask her what the conversation was about that?
When you described the conversation yesterday, you didn't say that Nicole had told O.J. to fuck off?
Yesterday you said that Nicole did not tell you where this conversation took place. Do you remember that?
I remember yesterday being very confused, at times, by you. You were back and forth with a lot of different things and it was very difficult for me to focus on what the questions were that you were asking me.
Do you remember me asking you if Nicole told you where this conversation with O.J. took place, and your answer was no? Do you remember that?
Why don't you ask her the question you would like to ask or repeat the question, whatever you would like.
She said it was at the recital. She said that her family was around. I mean, that was - I mean, the importance, that I felt.
She said that her family was around, that her family was there at the recital, is what she said. She had also sat with her family.
I think the problem here, Mr. Leonard, is what you mean by "exactly where." I mean, at the recital, a particular place, do you want to know where at the recital?
Yesterday, when I was asked that question. Nicole had told me what was said at the recital, and that's the important information.
You testified, I think, at the very beginning of today's session, that you recalled only one occasion where O.J. said to you that he would kill Nicole. Do you remember that?
You say in Shattered, at page 4, that O.J. on several occasions - you say, "On several occasions, O.J. had told me hewould kill Nicole." That's what it says at page 4.
Mr. Leonard, you picked up the wrong book again. That's why I was confused. Page 4. Where is that, Mr. Leonard?
No. I believe that that is an editing problem. I stated exactly in The Private Diary when he did say that he would kill her, and I said "several times he said," and I think this is "several occasions."
If you can look at the first full paragraph. If you could read that, please, to yourself.
MR . PETROCELLI: What page, Mr. Leonard ?
In that paragraph, you say, or the book says, excuse me, "And in the weeks before the murders, he called me many times saying he was going to kill her." And the book refers to O.J. there, right?
She answered your question. That's why we don't try cases with books, Mr. Leonard.
In 1994, I received $60,000 from Private Diary. In 1995, from the same source, my tax statements, tax returns, $100,000 from The Private Diary.
So far, I believe, to the best of my records, $18,000 and $15,000 from the - this is the combination of The Private Diary and Shattered, by the way.
I got a partial advance for Shattered. I was just paid the entire amount of the advance right before I left, actually.
My tax returns - I mean, it's a little difficult because my tax returns say $60,000 in '94, and they say $100,000 in '95, and part of that was Shattered, was part of the advance.
Let me just cut to the quick. Is it fair to say to say that you have made a total of, to date, of $160,000 on both books, right? Plus -
Yeah, it's fair to say that that would be - I mean, there's things that I am sure are missing, but that's a fair assessment of what I have made.
Just to be sure we are all on the same page here. Thank you very much, Mr. Leonard. In 1994, the only book which was relieved and from which you received any income was Private Diary; is that right?
And in 1995, the total amount of money that you received for both Private Diary and Shattered was $100,000, according to your tax returns, right?
And in 1996, what is the total amount of money that you have received, to date, for both books?
Okay. So if you add all these figures up, then, for all of your books, both of them, for the three years, the total amount of money that you have received is $193,000, approximately?
No, I don't want to take a break. I want to finish this so everybody can go somewhere, forward. I am glad Mr. Leonard has asked all the questions that he wanted and you have the same opportunity, and let's move this forward, and let this witness, who has volunteered to testify for both sides, leave.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: May we go off the record for a moment?
FURTHER EXAMINATION
I didn't believe that every single statement - if I was to write every single statement of O.J. Simpson down, that would be the Bible. I'm sorry.
Christian always assumed whenever I fought with him, that I was using drugs. He always blamed me, accused me; he was just like O.J. in that way.
I have always said that I never smoked crack because I have been told crack is a combination of cocaine and heroin.
He wants to know if you got it from a Colombian drug dealer.
I wanted to show Nicole as the person she was and I wanted to show O.J. as the person he was. There was a time factor and if you are saying, if I am pleased with The Private Diary; is that what you are asking me?