Good afternoon, Detective Vannatter -- or good morning. Good mid morning. We haven't taken our afternoon break.
Detective Vannatter, with your experience as a Los Angeles police officer, are you one of the more senior detectives in your unit?
So between the two of you, you are the two most senior ranking people in homicide in the Los Angeles Police Department; isn't that correct?
Well, that's not always the case, Mr. Shapiro. A lot of times we handle any type of case. If there's an overload at one of the areas and they need help, we go pick up their cases too. So that's not totally true.
All right. But in general you told us if there is a serial murder, that would come to your special unit.
And if there was a high profile person who was involved in a murder, that would come to your unit.
What other types of things would come to your unit that would be categorized as special, not overflow?
Very, very involved cases that the homicide detectives at the divisional level don't have the proper time or manpower to investigate those type cases.
I don't know that we -- I don't believe that -- half of that statement is probably true. We probably have more time than the average detective. I don't believe we have any more resources than anybody on the department would have.
You were familiar with the time Mr. Simpson surrendered with Mr. Cowlings to the Los Angeles Police Department on Friday, were you not?
As the senior ranking detective in charge of this case, you oversee all aspects of this case, do you not?
We have a hand in all aspects of it. However, that situation that you're talking about there is a tactical field situation that is handled by field supervisors, not by detectives. That would have been handled by someone else.
Let me just ask you generally, in terms of your observations and in terms of your knowledge as to how the police department works. If it was reported that there were in excess of 100 police officers there, would you say that would be a fair reporting?
This is very, very important foundationally to show resources that are available in emergency -- an emergency situation, and resources that are available to this detective and resources that were used at the time that he was dealing with the situation on Rockingham.
The objection is sustained, Mr. Shapiro, as to the number of officers that were present at the Friday night incident.
I take it that you have special training to have the classification of being a special unit detective?
No, I -- no, I don't think that's necessarily true. I think that's based on a person's work history and experience.
And you wouldn't be in that important position if you didn't have the credentials, the experience, the knowledge and the background to have such an important detective job, would you?
And as such, you are familiar, are you not, with the procedures that are mandated by the Los Angeles Police Department for investigative techniques in homicide cases, are you not?
And is that something that is used to record in-depth the chronological record of the investigation in a homicide case? \ \
And is that something that is used to report in depth the chronological record of the investigation in a homicide case?
the chronological record is a record that is used as time permits to make a chronological entry on a log as to activities that have taken place in that investigation.
And doesn't that form require the reporting of the dates and times of the initial notification and of all investigative contacts and processes?
Again, it may state that; however, that record is used as time permits in an investigation to record functions and activities that have occurred in that investigation.
I believe my partners kept a chronological record on just regular paper. I don't think we have a chronological record in the case.
I think I just answered that. I believe my partner kept a chronological record on regular white paper instead of using the form because the form wasn't available when we first started the case; We didn't have it in our possession.
Do you want to make an offer of proof as to this chronological record as it relates to this motion?
Yes. We will show improper procedures were followed from the very beginning of this investigation until the time that detective Vannatter has testified; that proper forms and procedures as outlined by the Los Angeles police department have not been followed; that times, dates and records of events that should be recorded are not recorded. And, quite frankly, your Honor, this will go to the credibility of detective Vannatter and his testimony here today.
I fail to see how the use of a particular form or the use of a blank page in lieu of that form have anything to do with the propriety of the officers' conduct in searching the residence at 360 Rockingham. I'm sorry, your Honor. I just don't see the connection. The officers used what they could at the time that they could under a pressing need and an urgent situation. the issue is was the information required to be recorded on the chronological record recorded in some manner, not whether they used a form that was preprinted or not; and I'm sorry, your Honor, but I just can't see the relevance of this line of questioning to whether or not proper procedures were followed with respect to the decision to go over the wall and do a cursory search of the grounds.
With reference to the utilization of specific LAPD forms or procedures that don't present constitutional issues, i really don't see the relevance of whether every "I" was dotted and every "T" was crossed; However, with regard to whether there is impeaching information within or missing from some of these records, there could indeed be some relevance. I am just, I guess, going to have to hear on a question by question -- you make the appropriate objections, and I will make the appropriate rulings.
Detective Vannatter, are you familiar with something known as a homicide book or, in the vernacular, a murder book?
And by policy, there is to be a chronological record for each crime scene; is that correct?
Well, that was a separate investigation. We were not privy to what was going on in chicago.
We did, but we were not personally involved in that. We had no information at that time what was going on.
When you say you were not privy to it, the chicago police department didn't tell the LAPD what was going on in chicago?
Objection, your Honor. the witness should be allowed to explain his answer, especially because he is being questioned as an expert in his field.
I think he is trying to give an answer, But I don't think you are going to try to explain Mr. Shapiro's question.
We have a 2,000-mile separation. We have detectives with instructions to go to chicago and complete an investigation. While my partner and myself are working here in los angeles, we do not have a constant communication with the detectives back there; So I would say I was not fully aware of everything that was going on back there.
Would you say that this is under your jurisdiction as part of your investigation, or is this not part of your investigation?
And proper procedure for the Los Angeles police department to require a chronological record for that investigation? Yes or no?
Is there a chronological record for that investigation, or is that included in the seven pages?
I don't have those books. All I have is the investigation that has been going on in Los Angeles here.
You just said it would be proper for the Los Angeles police department to have a chronological record. My question is is there such a record. And if there is, would you show it to us, please.
Again, I am going to object. This is form over substance. We are still talking about whether forms were used and certain forms were filled out and who is keeping them. This has nothing to do with urgent conditions and whether to go over a wall or not go over a wall.
Let me state one thing, Mr. Shapiro. I recall at least at some point during this proceeding a large envelope being handed to you by Miss Clark and a statement by Miss Clark, "this relates to chicago." I don't recall exactly when that was, but it was during the course of this. And if there are discovery issues to take up, I am willing to do it if it is necessary; But I don't think it is necessary to do it in the course of this particular motion.
This is not a discovery proceeding, clearly. This is a proceeding to determine the truth of the testimony from the witness stand. What we want to establish is -- if there was a chronological record done, perhaps we haven't seen it; We would like to see it. If all they have is the seven pages, we would like to establish that because we believe through impeachment we will show that the testimony given from the witness stand is not true.
Well, Mr. Shapiro, the total chicago chronology, whether it exists or doesn't exist, I just don't see it is relevant to this particular proceeding.
Detective, regarding the seven-page chronology you have, that should, according to your policy, include the dates and times of all investigative contacts and processes; is that correct?
So you would expect to find in there what took place when you went to Rockingham; is that correct?
I know it could or couldn't be there. We all know that. the question is would looking at it, sir -- would you close the book, please.
Your Honor, again, same objection. This line of questioning is simply not relevant to a decision made under emergency conditions as to whether or not to go over a wall.
Probably not. You would probably find that under a section of the book that relates to ambulance information.
Would you expect to find notations that you notified communications that you were at another location?
After you go to a crime scene, if there are additional factors that are not included because of time constraints in the initial report, you do a follow-up report; is that correct?
A follow-up is done, in general terms, to attempt to explain what has happened. It is not a detailed description of the entire case.
An attempt to explain what has happened. Let me ask you this. Did you file an initial report outlining what you have testified here today in an official -- on an official LAPD form?
Same objection, your Honor. What does it matter whether it is filed on an official form or whether the information is contained on a blank piece of paper? the issue is what information and what decisions were made and why they were made. This line of questioning is going to minutia as to whether a form was used or whether a blank piece of paper was used. I don't see the relevance.
is the import of your question whether a specific form was made or whether, in fact, a report was prepared?
I don't know what you mean by "an initial report." There was an initial death report and crime report that was filed.
I am saying an initial report of you and the three other detectives' activities at Rockingham. Did you file an initial report?
Your Honor, objection. Objection. Irrelevant. Whether reports were filed at certain times and what forms were used, how can that be relevant as to whether or not an appropriate decision was made under the circumstances to go over a wall?
Mr. Shapiro, are you expecting to offer some sort of information from a report that is at odds with the testimony here?
That's the purpose of the report, isn't it -- what Vannatter did, what phillips did, what the four detectives did There? One person writes the report; is that correct?
If there were errors or omissions, as a detective, you would correct those with a supplemental report, would you not?
If there were errors. I don't know what you mean by "omissions." Again, that is just a general, overall report that gives a general outline of the investigation.
Are you satisfied with the content of the report as far as accuracy and veracity regarding what transpired at Rockingham?
Am I satisfied with it? I don't know what is contained in there regarding what occurred at Rockingham. I am satisfied my partner did a comprehensive report, yes.
I did read it; but, again, I haven't read it recently and I don't recall what is in the report.
In the report, in the third paragraph, it says upon arrival that you noticed a bronco and the vehicle was parked at an angle to the curb, with the rear end jutting out into the roadway.
the vehicle was parked on the roadway. Where it was parked was part of the roadway. the rear end was sticking farther out into the roadway than the front.
there were a lot of things occurring at that time. I didn't measure it, Mr. Shapiro. I don't know how far out it was as compared to the front end.
No. It just appeared that the vehicle was parked unusual, like it had been parked in haste. I wouldn't say that -- that was not the catalyst that caused me to go in.
if Detective Fuhrman said that was a very important aspect and caused him considerable consternation and led him, as one of the main ingredients, to go into the house, you would say he was wrong?
No, I don't. I might. I don't know. I could look in the book if you would like me to do that.
No. It would probably be under the "vehicle section" in there. I don't know. I could look and see.
Certainly. It would indicate on the vehicle report itself that the vehicle was removed at 1530 hours, 3:30 in the afternoon.
How many hours was it there from the time you made your initial observation until the time it was removed?
Oh, it would have been sometime between 5 and 5:30 in the morning until 3:30 in the afternoon.
Would that give you sufficient time to ask somebody to measure how far the rear of the car was out --
I take it from your experience as a senior detective, when the criminalist came out, you would want him to photograph the car.
Objection. The manner in which the investigation was conducted in terms of the collection of the evidence has no bearing on the decision made to go over the wall. Same objection. Irrelevant.
And you had him photograph it from a position where we could later review the angle of the car; is that correct?
Well, I am one of the co-investigators. You are placing more importance on me than I have, Mr. Shapiro. I wish I had that much importance.
Or did you just leave it up to the photographer to take some pictures, maybe take a picture of the tire, maybe take a picture of the gas tank?
And you have -- Thank you. And you have seen photographs of the bronco as they were taken by the criminalist?
Objection. Calls for speculation. Let the witness see the pictures counsel is referring to.
Any photographs. I asked him a Wide-open question: "In the hundreds of photographs that were taken, have you seen any photographs of the bronco at the scene at Rockingham?" He answered the question.
My question now is are those photographs accurate and do they depict -- any of these photographs depict what you observed when you arrived.
Again, objection. Counsel is attempting to ascertain, apparently, whether any of the photographs taken depict the angle at which the rear end was jutting out; and unless this witness is permitted to review all the photographs taken at this time, he is not going to be able to give an accurate answer. It is vague as to which photographs he is referring to. there are numerous.
Mr. Shapiro, I am not sure how many photographs we are referring to. there have been a number of photographs that have been utilized during the course of this proceeding. If you are limiting your question to those that have been marked, that have been shown and that the witness can take a look at, I think that is a fair question; But just asking a question like the one you are asking with regard to photographs when the court doesn't know what you are referring to, I think it is just overbroad.
the question is whether the witness does, your Honor; And my question to him is a simple one, whether any photographs were taken that accurately depict the vehicle at the time he arrived.
So I understand the question, were there photographs taken that accurately depict --
Thank you. Now, in the murder follow-up report, in paragraph 3, it says the following: "peering into the locked vehicle's rear window, detectives observed a package with a label indicating a return address to O.J. Simpson enterprises. A registration check of the vehicle revealed it to belong to hertz rental." is that correct? those would be the observations that were made?
then it says, "upon closer observation of the vehicle, detectives observed what appeared to be human blood near the handle on the driver's door"; is that correct?
I observed what I thought was blood. I thought it was human blood. If I can explain that.
KEY QUOTEI don't want you to. Maybe the people might want you to. I want you to answer the questions I ask.
Your Honor, this is unfair. He is being questioned as an expert. He is entitled to explain his answer.
He does, though, have to answer the questions that are asked of him, Miss Clark. You will have a chance to question the witness further if you feel some additional explanation is warranted.
And were you able to distinguish this from any other type of red stain, as being human blood?
I am saying -- my question was were you able to distinguish this from any other type of red stain?
What about at the bottom of the door? Did you see any brush marks of what you believed to be blood?
When you and the three other detectives went to Mr. O.J. Simpson's residence, did you inform the communications division of your intentions?
If somebody told you from Bundy to take Bundy to sunset, take sunset towards the beach to Rockingham and turn right on Rockingham and go two blocks, could you follow those directions?
Was all your work completed at the crime scene by the time you left to go to the Rockingham address?
How many officers were at the crime scene that were higher ranking than you at the time you left?
My lieutenant, john rogers, and, I believe, a lieutenant and captain from west Los Angeles division.
Would you check the chronological record done by your partner and see if they were there at the time you left.
Yes. This goes to credibility and impeachment. We are going to show that the four officers that were in charge of this crime scene left the crime scene within a very short period of time without properly preserving the crime scene, not to go to the Simpson residence because of an emergency but to go there because of the celebrity nature of Mr. Simpson.
Mr. Shapiro, the specific names of the higher ranking officers that were present at the crime scene, I don't see that that's relevant.
Would you check your chronological record to see if there were, in fact, three people higher ranking than you when you left the crime scene to go to Rockingham.
We informed him that we were going to go up there to make a notification in an attempt to make a disposition for the children and to secure that crime scene and maintain the security with the uniformed officers that were there and we would be back.
So it was now his job to secure the crime scene, and you were going to make your notification and find someplace for the children to go?
the crime scene was secured before I got there, hours before I ever got there; so it was under security the whole time.
I don't know. I think that would depend on the situation that you were in. I don't know. One. It could take ten if there were certain situations. I don't know.
In this particular situation, when you were going to O.J. Simpson's residence, how many detectives did you think were necessary to make the notification?
myself and my partner went up there, and we were accompanied by detective Fuhrman and detective Phillips.
I know that is the fact. My question is how many do you feel were necessary to go make the notification.
I don't think I ever even considered that. How many do I think is necessary to make a notification?
normally we go in pairs for a number of reasons. Number one, we have two people that are privy to the information plus for our own personal safety, we don't go places by ourselves. So a minimum of two. And the other two officers went with us, which is not unusual.
there were other detectives there who had been assigned to this case that had jobs that exceeded yours?
You know, I am getting a little tired myself. You had relieved the two West L.A. detectives?
they were assisting us. We assumed responsibility; however, they assisted us and they still continue to assist us to this day.
Does the Los Angeles police department have facilities or special people to deal with children in situations such as this?
the Los Angeles police department has a juvenile division; however, I don't believe they would be working that time of the morning.
Does it have people who are specially trained in dealing with children, to care for their whereabouts, in the event of the unfortunate death or murder of a parent or parents?
Again, they have juvenile officers that work nothing but juvenile. I would say they are probably very competent in handling juveniles. But at that time of the day, I don't believe they would be working.
I spoke to detective phillips, who told me they had been taken from the location to west Los Angeles division, where they were being cared for.
And did you ask him if they were being properly cared for or if there was any real immediate concern for them, or were you really more concerned with your criminal investigation and you pursued --
Well, I think -- being a father myself and being a grandfather, any time I deal with minor children and any kind of traumatic situation like this, I think they have to be attended to; and I had concern for those children because we are talking about a very traumatic thing to be taken out of your bed at midnight or 12:30 in the morning by the police in your home and removed from your home and taken to a police station. That is a very traumatic thing. And if it was my children or my grandchild, I would want whoever to be very, very interested in the welfare of that child.
And I take it, in that regard, you would attempt, after you couldn't reach Mr. Simpson, immediately to notify the grandparents, who are really the next of kin?
no. the grandparents are not the next of kin. the father is the next of kin, and I think that is who I was trying to notify.
I don't know. there's a lot of information in here. I don't know everything by heart that is in here.
For the record, the witness, when he said "in here," is referring to a binder that appears to be about 4 inches thick.
Let me ask you a question. If Mr. Goldman had been the sole victim of this case under the same circumstances, would the same investigation be taking place?
there was another vehicle parked on Ashford, And -- I don't recall the description of it, but there was another vehicle parked on Ashford.
Did you observe that vehicle to see whether there were any things that looked like red spots on it?
I believe the vehicle -- if I recall correctly, I believe the vehicle belonged to Mr. Kaelin.
Would you describe this -- we have heard testimony about it. Would you describe what it is that you -- a Sure. It is like a little square speaker box that has a button, and you press the button and you can hear the phone ringing inside the residence.
How many times did it ring, approximately? and this is not of great importance to be accurate, but does it just ring once or continue to ring with each press?
It rings -- you press the button, and it will ring -- and this is an estimate -- six to eight times and then stops ringing. You push the button, and it starts the cycle again.
I think we are arguing a point -- something was ringing inside. I didn't know whether it was a telephone or intercom system that rang to alert someone there was a person at the front gate. I heard ringing, Mr. Shapiro.
Does the Los Angeles police department have the capabilities in an emergency situation of getting home phone numbers of people who may have unlisted numbers?
Not necessarily. When you have a nonpublished number, you need to get -- normally you need a search warrant to get that information.
Did you take any steps to go through official Los Angeles police department channels to try to ascertain the home phone number of Mr. Simpson?
Yes. Detective phillips notified the West L.A. watch commander, who also contacted Westec Security.
Speaking of westec, when westec was out there, did you or your partners there ask the westec representatives if they were routinely notified when Mr. Simpson was gone from the house for a day or more?
Did it ever occur to you that even though Mr. Simpson might have a full-time maid, she might have a day or two off during the week?
People have days off. I never -- we were told there was a supposed to be a full-time live-in maid.
After there was no response from the attempts at the telephone and ringing the buzzer, did you try to use any type of amplified speakers or microphones to get the attention of Mr. Simpson?
How long after you were ringing the buzzer did you make the observation of the red blotch on the bronco?
I saw the bronco as I pulled in. I didn't ring the bell for the continuous time. I rang it some. Some of the other detectives rang it some.
I looked at the bronco when I first drove in; and then after ringing the bell a few times, I went around again and looked at the bronco. And that's when I observed the items in the back of the car.
It is something -- it is something that -- again, if I can explain the situation, we have an emergency situation. We are not able to stop --
I don't think he is objecting to the question. I think he is objecting to your answer. Detective, I believe the question was should the time of that discovery have been noted in --
I can't say "yes" or "no" to that. That depends on the circumstances you are in. If you are in a gun battle someplace, you don't have time to say, "hold on. Let me write this time down." If you have an emergency situation, you don't have time to break and say, "hold on a second. I need to record all of this." In this situation it was not recorded because I didn't feel at that point I could stop and start taking notes because things were happening too quick.
Did you hear any noise from inside the residence that caused you concern that somebody might be dying?
I heard no noise at all outside the ringing, and that caused me concern because I believed people could be there.
And your sole purpose at this time was to notify somebody of a death and to find the father of the children?
Isn't it your testimony the bell was ringing for 15 minutes and within the first 10 minutes you observed the blood?
I got to the location. We went to the Ashford side, parked the vehicle, got out, attempted to ring the bell. Telephone calls were made to westec security. they sent -- actually ended up sending two units to the location. A telephone call was made to the watch commander at the West L.A. division. And during all of this occurrence, detective Fuhrman came to me and said, "I think I see blood on the vehicle." And he walked me over there. This could have been -- this could have been ten minutes into it. It could have been 30 minutes into it. I couldn't tell you exactly.
No. I can't tell you exactly because all of this is occurring -- this is not a sequence of events, Mr. Shapiro. It is a group of things that are occurring at the same time.
RIGHT at the time the blood was spotted, you determined this to be an emergency situation? Yes or no?
Right at the time it was spotted -- I believe I was getting to that frame of mind prior to that because of the prior information I had, the fact I had left a very brutal scene that is very close to this location, the fact that one of the victims had a connection to Mr. Simpson. I think I was getting in that frame of mind before I ever saw the blood. I think seeing the blood was the trigger that caused me to make a decision to go over the fence.
What was the time of death of the decedents, to the best of your knowledge at the time you were at Rockingham?
the time of death? Well, I can only tell you that I was informed that -- I believe they were found, or discovered, at approximately 0010 hours, which would be ten after midnight. the time of death, I would have no idea.
It was sometime before but certainly not after -- a Obviously sometime before 0010 hours would be time of death, yes.
now, you went over there -- when you scaled the fence, you believed there may be hostages inside; is that correct?
No. Let's take them one by one. Was one of your set of circumstances your belief there could be hostages inside?
I can't answer that "yes" or "no." there could have been thousands of scenarios in that situation. The facts -- may I finish? The facts that led me up to going over the wall include a set of facts that led me to believe this was an emergency situation.
If I was totally aware of that, that would change the entire circumstances of the entry into that location. What you are talking about is you are taking a tactical field situation and equating it to an emergency field situation, which is two different sets of circumstances.
Did you believe the possibility of people in the residence or on the grounds bleeding to death?
Your Honor, before we go into another area, which may be more lengthy, perhaps this might be a good time. It is a few minutes early. May I suggest a break?
All right. Thank you, detective Vannatter. Please do not discuss your testimony with any other witness. May I see counsel in chambers, please. Recess until 1:30. (proceedings were had in chambers which were transcribed in volume 8-a, ordered sealed by the court.) (at 12:05 p.m., a recess was taken until 1:30 p.m.) THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF LOS ANGELES JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
Where in this report does it say you or anybody else observed the shovel? ... Where in this report does it say you or anyone else observed plastic?
I observed what I thought was blood. I thought it was human blood.
I don't know, sir. I have never had a maid.
We are going to show that the four officers that were in charge of this crime scene left the crime scene within a very short period of time without properly preserving the crime scene, not to go to the Simpson residence because of an emergency but to go there because of the celebrity nature of Mr. Simpson.
Who is in charge of this investigation? The Los Angeles police department, where I work.