Recross-examination of Mark Fuhrman

📄 Recross-examination of Mark Fuhrman — Wednesday, July 6, 1994

Address:

C:\DEPT103\PRELIMINARY\1994\JUL\6\RECROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-MARK-FU.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 4 of 6

◀ Redirect examination of Mark Fuhrman (part 1) Redirect examination of Mark Fuhrman (part 2) ▶

Witness: Det. Mark Fuhrman
Examiner: Gerald Uelmen
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Wednesday, July 6, 1994 • Utterances: 24

Uelmen conducts a brief but pointed recross focused on two things: Fuhrman's emotional state when he found the Rockingham glove, and the timeline of when he reported it to lead detective Vannatter. Fuhrman concedes that Vannatter — the detective in charge — did not learn about the glove until approximately 30 minutes after Fuhrman discovered it, having first taken Phillips back to view it himself.

# 1 THE COURT:

Mr. Uelmen.

# 2

RECROSS-EXAMINATION

# 3

BY MR. UELMEN:

# 4 Q:

Detective Fuhrman, who was in charge at the Rockingham scene? Which of the four detectives?

# 5 A:

Detective Vannatter.

# 6 Q:

And like yourself, detective phillips had been relieved of further responsibility in the case?

# 7 A:

Well, at that time it was actually three detectives that responded to the Bundy scene: myself, detective Phillips and detective Roberts. He got there after us; And he was interviewing witnesses, I believe the witnesses that saw the dog. He had gone to West L.A. station. So while we were there at the scene, we were all relieved.

# 8 Q:

all right. Now, with respect to the excitement you felt at encountering the glove, you realized immediately that this may have broken the case?

# 9 A:

I don't think it was excitement. I was caught on a 2-foot path in a -- poorly lit, with a little tiny flashlight, by myself, with no vest; And I must admit that I think the only reason I proceeded is I felt more that I might have had a victim than a suspect. I don't know why I thought that. Like I said, I did not believe the circumstances would unfold as they did when I led these detectives up to Rockingham. I continued, probably hoping that I could find some answer for this glove or somebody that had been injured or something; but it was more alert than excitement.

# 10 Q:

And the first person to whom you reported finding the glove was detective phillips; is that correct?

# 11 A:

Yes. He was in front of the residence. He was the first person I saw. And I said, "ron, come here. I got to talk to you."

KEY QUOTE

# 12 Q:

And you took detective phillips back to see the glove before you even informed detective Vannatter that the glove had been found?

# 13 A:

Yes.

# 14 Q:

So Vannatter learned about the glove -- what? -- About a half-hour after you found it?

# 15 A:

No. I think it would be within 15 minutes, give or take.

# 16 Q:

You indicated you spent 15 minutes after you saw the glove searching this area behind the house?

# 17 A:

I thought you meant after I talked to detective phillips. Yes. I did do that and then came and talked to detective phillips.

# 18 Q:

And then came and talked to detectives phillips and took him back?

# 19 A:

Right.

# 20 Q:

That took about another 15 minutes?

# 21 A:

Ten or fifteen.

# 22 Q:

So detective Vannatter learned about the glove the first time a half-hour after you discovered it?

# 23 A:

That could be very close to the time, yes.

KEY QUOTE

# 24 MR. UELMEN:

Thank you. Nothing further.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (3)

Fuhrman

I was caught on a 2-foot path in a -- poorly lit, with a little tiny flashlight, by myself, with no vest; And I must admit that I think the only reason I proceeded is I felt more that I might have had a victim than a suspect.

Fuhrman reframes his motivation for proceeding alone at Rockingham as concern for a victim, not pursuit of a suspect — a key distinction for the defense theory that he planted or manipulated evidence.

Fuhrman

He was in front of the residence. He was the first person I saw. And I said, 'ron, come here. I got to talk to you.'

Fuhrman confirms he took Phillips to see the glove before informing Vannatter, the detective in charge — establishing a 30-minute gap in the chain of notification.

Fuhrman

That could be very close to the time, yes.

Fuhrman concedes Uelmen's arithmetic: Vannatter, the lead detective, didn't know about the most critical piece of evidence for roughly half an hour.

Evidence (1)

Informal

The glove found at Rockingham behind the house

discussed — timeline of discovery and reporting challenged

Notable Exchanges (2)

Uelmen•Fuhrman

Uelmen methodically walks Fuhrman through the timeline: 15 minutes searching after seeing the glove, then 10-15 minutes with Phillips, totaling roughly 30 minutes before Vannatter was informed. Fuhrman concedes each step.

strategic

Uelmen•Fuhrman

Uelmen challenges the word 'excitement' from prior testimony; Fuhrman corrects it to 'alert' and offers an extended explanation of his physical vulnerability on the path.

revealing

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Fuhrman

prior inconsistent statement / timeline pinning

Uelmen establishes that Fuhrman used the word 'excitement' previously, then gets Fuhrman to walk back that characterization. More critically, he locks in a ~30-minute window where Fuhrman and Phillips had knowledge of the Rockingham glove before the lead detective Vannatter was informed, raising implicit questions about what occurred during that time.

Objections

None recorded

Proceeding 8967 • 24 utterances • Prosecution witness

Preliminary Trial

Department 103