Sidebar: photograph evidence objection

📄 Sidebar: photograph evidence objection — Thursday, July 7, 1994

Address:

C:\DEPT103\PRELIMINARY\1994\JUL\7\SIDEBAR-PHOTOGRAPH-EVIDENCE-OB.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 5 of 6

◀ Direct examination of Philip Vannatter (part 1) Direct examination of Philip Vannatter (part 2) ▶

Date: Thursday, July 7, 1994 • Lines: 10

In chambers, Robert Shapiro objected that displaying three photographs together on one board—one of Simpson taken on the 13th depicting his index finger and two depicting the gloves—was unduly prejudicial. Marcia Clark disputed that the collective display presented an appropriate legal objection at a preliminary hearing. Shapiro said he did not believe the court would be prejudiced, but reported information that photographers were transmitting the image worldwide to potential jurors. Kathleen Kennedy-Powell found that the hand-and-glove display differed in nature and type from crime-scene photographs addressed separately and overruled the objection.

# 1 THE COURT:

Sure. Bring the exhibit back. Mr. Reporter. (the following proceedings were Held in chambers: )

# 2 THE COURT:

All right. The record should reflect that we are in chambers, equivalent to side bar; We have Mr. Hodgman and Miss Clark, Mr. Uelmen and Mr. Shapiro, the court reporter and myself.

# 3 MR. SHAPIRO:

Yes, your Honor. We are going to object as being unduly prejudicial putting three photographs together that are not related. One is a photograph of Mr. Simpson taken on the 13th, of his index finger; and right next to it are the two gloves. I think the inference is more than clear and the prejudicial effect outweighs the probative value. Were the three photographs to be introduced individually, we have no objection to that; But to do it on this board is, to me, outrageous.

# 4 MS. CLARK:

Well, "outrageous" is hardly the term, but I would remind the court we don't have a jury; This is a preliminary hearing --

# 5 THE COURT:

I am well aware of that.

# 6 MS. CLARK:

-- Number one. And number two, if counsel has no objection to them individually, then he certainly cannot legally object to having them all together, collectively, on one board. It simply -- I don't think I have heard a legal objection that would appropriately be made at a preliminary hearing. I don't think the court is going to be unduly prejudiced by seeing three photographs in one spot as opposed to having them shown singly.

# 7 THE COURT:

I don't believe that the photos --

# 8 MR. SHAPIRO:

May I be heard just briefly? I don't believe the court is going to be prejudiced at all, but there is a group of photographers out there. My information is they are sending this transmission worldwide to potential members of this jury, if there ever should be a jury, and that by doing this, there is no other purpose than to unduly influence them by having this picture on the front page of some type of magazine.

# 9 THE COURT:

The court was very concerned with regard to photographs of the crime scene. We handled that in a way I thought was appropriate for both sides. I do not find that these particular photos depicted in the manner that they are depicted are the same nature and type as those other photos that we handled in another way. the mere fact that there is a picture of the hand and a picture of the gloves on one board I do not feel is of such a nature that we would prejudice the defendant's ability to get a fair trial should at some point he go to trial. So, therefore, your objection is overruled. Let's go back out.

# 10 MR. SHAPIRO:

Thank you. (the following proceedings were Held in open court:)

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Robert Shapiro

to do it on this board is, to me, outrageous.

Shapiro used emphatic language while arguing that the photographs' collective display was unduly prejudicial.

Robert Shapiro

My information is they are sending this transmission worldwide to potential members of this jury, if there ever should be a jury, and that by doing this, there is no other purpose than to unduly influence them by having this picture on the front page of some type of magazine.

Shapiro stated that his concern involved claimed media transmission of the image to potential jurors.

Marcia Clark

if counsel has no objection to them individually, then he certainly cannot legally object to having them all together, collectively, on one board.

Clark argued that Shapiro's lack of objection to individual presentation undermined his objection to the collective display.

Kathleen Kennedy-Powell

the mere fact that there is a picture of the hand and a picture of the gloves on one board I do not feel is of such a nature that we would prejudice the defendant's ability to get a fair trial

The court found that the combined display would not prejudice Simpson's ability to receive a fair trial.

Evidence (2)

Informal

Photograph of Simpson taken on the 13th, depicting his index finger

Shapiro challenged its collective display with the glove photographs as unduly prejudicial

Informal

Two photographs depicting the gloves

Shapiro challenged their collective display with the index-finger photograph as unduly prejudicial

Notable Exchanges (2)

Robert Shapiro•Marcia Clark

Shapiro called the collective display “outrageous”; Clark disputed that characterization and argued that he had not stated an appropriate legal objection at a preliminary hearing.

contentious

Robert Shapiro•Kathleen Kennedy-Powell

Shapiro said the court would not be prejudiced but raised claimed worldwide media transmission to potential jurors; the court then found that the display would not prejudice Simpson's ability to receive a fair trial and overruled the objection.

tense

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 8978 • 10 lines

Preliminary Trial

Department 103