OJ Simpson preliminary hearing, day 2.

Today’s excerpts are in three parts, instead of five. they do have a side bar right away, which is transcribed, so we’ll need the transcript.
Here’s the longer video.
Here’s the first excerpt
Transcript for July 1st, 1994.
06 THE COURT: Good morning.
07 MR. SHAPIRO: GOOD MORNING, your Honor.
08 MR. UELMAN: good morning, your Honor.
09 THE COURT: We’re again on the record in the case
10 of People versus Simpson. The defendant is present with
11 counsel. The people are represented.
12 Call your next witness, please.
13 MR. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, we have a motion we’d
14 like the make at this time.
15 THE COURT: Okay.
16 MR. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, we’d ask the court to
17 consider striking the testimony of Mr. Camacho, as being a
18 witness that has been presented by the District Attorney,
19 who the District Attorney does not believe.
20 The Los Angeles Times, in their lead story
21 this morning —
22 MR. HODGMAN: Your Honor, I’m going to object at
23 this time.
24 I would ask for an offer of proof, and I would
25 ask to be able to approach. Because I don’t want anything
26 unfair, improper or prejudicial to get into the record.
27 I’m not sure what Mr. Shapiro is going to
28 read, but we’re dealing with a media source.
0003
01 One of the things that miss Clark and I have
02 enjoyed thus far about this proceeding, is the ability to
03 present evidence in court, in a lawyer-like fashion.
04 So, your Honor, if we may, may we approach, so
05 we can discuss this in a more professional manner?
06 THE COURT: I mean aren’t — let’s have the walkie
07 talkies off.
08 Anything that we’re going to talk about is
09 going to be recorded. Are you asking for, like a sidebar
10 on this?
11 MR. HODGMAN: Yes.
12 THE COURT: I’ll see the lawyers in chambers first,
13 with the reporter.
14 MR. HODGMAN: Thank you, your Honor.
0004
01 (IN CHAMBERS)
02
03 THE COURT: All right. The record should reflect
04 that we’re in chambers, that MISS Clark and Mr. Hodgman are
05 present. Mr. UELMEN and Mr. SHAPIRO are present.
06 MR. SHAPIRO: YES, YOUR HONOR.
07 THE COURT: By the way, I haven’t read the paper.
08 MR. SHAPIRO: I just GLANCED at it.
09 THE lead story is written by senior times
10 writer Jim Newton and Andrea FORD. And it quotes miss
11 Clark as follows: “PROSECUTOR MARCIA Clark said after the
12 hearing, that, quote, ‘PATTY,'” END QUOTE, “is Patty Joe
13 FAIRBANKS,” comma, “senior secretary in the special trials
14 division.” period.
15 MS. CLARK: I did not tell her that.
16 MR. SHAPIRO: “CLARK –”
17 THE COURT: just a minute, let him finish.
18 MR. SHAPIRO: “Clark,” comma, “however, denied that
19 FAIRBANKS gave Camacho approval to talk.” period. Quote,
20 “I was there,” comma, end QUOTE, “Clark said.” Period.
21 Quote, “I can tell you that she did not tell him that he
22 could talk to the press.” period. “I can guarantee you
23 that 200 percent,”comma, “absolutely.” end QUOTE.
24 MR. HODGMAN: Your Honor, my concern is simply
25 this, and I’m sure my concern is shared by the court.
26 We’re trying, under difficult circumstances for all of us,
27 to preserve THE Integrity of these proceedings.
28 It is very difficult to ensure fairness for
0005
01 all parties, under this intense media SCRUTINY. I think
02 you know the testimony of Mr. CAMACHO, GAVE us some idea of
03 the type of pressure that all sorts of people are under in
04 this matter.
05 With regard to this particular article, first
06 of all, Mr. Camacho, as a matter of record yesterday, on
07 REDIRECT, stated that HE WAS less than certain about
08 whatever directions A Patty gave to him.
09 Secondly, miss Clark can ATTEST to the factual
10 nature of whatever she — whatever she said yesterday, and
11 I think a record should be made of that.
12 And, finally, I just don’t THINK this is fair,
13 to be doing this in a court of law. The credibility is a
14 matter for the court to decide.
15 THE COURT: You know, I mean, I don’t know that you
16 finished your motion, because there was a request that we
17 come back here. And basically, I guess you’re going to ask
18 me to strike Mr. CAMACHO’S testimony as what? Some kind of
19 a sanction? Because you’re saying that miss Clark
20 disbelieves his part of the testimony, where he claimed
21 that Patty OSTENSIBLY gave him some kind of authority to
22 speak to the press?
23 MR. SHAPIRO: First, I’d like to ask for a
24 hearing. At that hearing, I would LIKE to have Jim Newton
25 testify as to whether or not this quote was given by
26 miss Clark.
27 If this QUOTE was given, because I certainly
28 agree, that people can be misquoted, jim Newton, in my
0006
01 experience, is a very, very careful reporter, and takes
02 copious notes. And generally READS quotes back to people,
03 especially on very, very important areas.
04 So, first, I’d like to establish whether or
05 not Mr. Newton can substantiate this was said by
06 miss Clark. If that can be Substantiated, then I would ask
07 the court to consider striking the testimony, both as
08 sanctions or, in the alternative, based on the fact that
09 the people are not fulfilling their duty of fair play and
10 FUNDAMENTAL justice in presenting credible witnesses.
11 They are in a position where if Mr. Newton is
12 correct, and this quote attributed to miss Clark is
13 correct, that they are calling their witness a liar.
14 MS. CLARK: Your Honor, may have I address that?
15 THE COURT: Yes.
16 MS. CLARK: Number one, I did not speak to Jim
17 Newton, I spoke to Andrea FORD.
18 I’d like to see the article, please, if I may,
19 counsel. I’d like to see the entire quote.
20 Number one, I think that is inaccurate, in
21 that I was not the one who told them who Patty was.
22 Someone in our media relations department did that. So,
23 that’s inaccurate.
24 Number two, what concerns me is that this has
25 almost no bearing on the credibility of the witness. And
26 to the extent that I have indicated that he did — what
27 patty did or did not say, Has to do with what the witness
28 understood.
0007
01 A lot of us can be ascribed to
02 misunderstanding by a witness, who we were able to observe
03 in court. English is not his first language. He was
04 considerably rattled at the time he was testifying. I
05 think that was visible to the court.
06 The idea concerning credibility of any witness
07 is something that is solely for the court to determine.
08 And whether or not this aspect of his testimony is critical
09 to the balance of his testimony, is something for the court
10 to determine, also.
11 But our disagreement as to the instructions
12 PATTY Joe gave this witness, has nothing to do with the
13 credibility of his testimony concerning the sale of the
14 knife, which is the key to his testimony. That’s what he
15 was here appearing about.
16 Now, whether or not he was given permission,
17 he said he was instructed by Patty Joe to go to the media,
18 and that was the question posed to me, “did Patty Joe tell
19 him to go and talk to press?” And my answer was, “NO, she
20 did not.”
21 And he never testified to that, either. He
22 testified that she said, I believe — and we can have it
23 read back — that he could do what he wanted, that whatever
24 he wanted to do, it was up to him.
25 THE COURT: I thought that he more said that they
26 couldn’t do anything to stop him.
27 MS. CLARK: Right. It could not be prevented.
28 THE COURT: Something to that effect.
0008
01 MS. CLARK: That is exactly — if I could look at
02 what the balance of my quote was, I know what I said, I do
03 not know whether it was completely reported. I know what I
04 said.
05 And if I may be allowed to — no, they did not
06 complete the statement I gave to Andrea FORD.
07 I told Andrea FORD that she said exactly that,
08 she said that he — no, this is not accurately quoted here,
09 she did not — okay. I can tell you that she did not tell
10 him that he could talk to the press. I can guarantee you
11 that 200 percent, absolutely. So, that is correct. The
12 balance of my statement was that she told him she could not
13 prevent him, but that she urged him not to. And that was
14 what the instructions were.
15 However, I don’t see why this should be the
16 basis of a motion to strike his testimony. We aren’t
17 indicating disbelief. And whatever my belief is concerning
18 this witness, about the instructions given to him by PATTY
19 Joe, has no bearing on the Court’s duty to determine his
20 credibility.
21 THE COURT: I just feel that we’re not going to get
22 anywhere with this, Mr. SHAPIRO. What miss Clark did or
23 did not say to the press, with regard to this particular
24 witness, I just don’t see that that somehow is going to
25 rise to some kind of a level, even if it’s the worse case
26 scenario, of supposedly what the version of what she said
27 was, that somehow they should be sanctioned, or that Mr.
28 camacho’s testimony should be stricken.
0009
01 I mean the credibility of his testimony is in
02 Question, based upon everything he said, and the
03 motivations involved. and, you know, the demeanor and
04 manner, and so forth, as they would be with any witness.
05 And I just don’t see that the D.A. making some
06 comment, and her comment, even as it’s reported, isn’t that
07 I believe he’s lying. The comment is that that’s not the
08 way it happened.
09 But Mr. Camacho may have his own recollection,
10 and may be very honest in his belief as to his own
11 recollection of what happened.
12 Even so, I don’t think that it rises to some
13 kind of a level that somehow Mr. Simpson is being denied of
14 due process, or there’s been misconduct engaged in by the
15 prosecution, to justify the court striking his testimony.
16 And it is, indeed, my call as to credibility.
17 And I, quite frankly, don’t care what the paper says about
18 the witnesses, and I don’t care what miss Clark says about
19 how the witnesses did, or what Mr. Hodgman says, or what
20 you or Mr. UELMEN, or anyone else says about how they did.
21 Ultimately, I’m going to have to decide.
22 MR. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, may I address the issue
23 of due process?
24 THE COURT: Yes.
25 MR. SHAPIRO: Thank you. This incident, in and of
26 itself, is something that I would clearly agree with the
27 court’s position on, and it would not be raised if this was
28 something isolated. But we have several other events
0010
01 leading up to this incident.
02 Last weekend, we had the 911 tapes being
03 released. We had the District Attorney of Los Angeles
04 stating that he had no knowledge of them being released,
05 that they were released by the city attorney.
06 We had the chief of police of Los Angeles,
07 Willie Williams, on television, saying that is not the
08 case, that he talked directly to a member of the
09 prosecution team in the D.A.’S office, told him about it,
10 and they authorized him to release the tapes.
11 Now, we have the position of the D.A. saying
12 that the foreperson of a grand jury telling somebody under
13 penalty of contempt, “do not discuss this with anyone.”
14 and a representative of the District Attorney’s Office
15 says, “do what you want. You can talk to whoever you
16 want.” Coupled with the strong positions that the
17 prosecutors have taken in this case publicly, that
18 Mr. Simpson is guilty, that Mr. simpson is likely to
19 confess, and that Mr. Simpson is the sole killer, at some
20 point in time, we have a vested interest by the prosecutor
21 in gaining a conviction.
22 And at some point in time, if we have things
23 that are released, that are inadmissible or questionably
24 admissible, and we continue to have comments to the press
25 that are prejudicial, and we continue to have the District
26 Attorney’s office either have some credibility problems as
27 to whether or not they allowed prejudicial material to be
28 released, or, in this case, did not do everything to
0011
01 dissuade a witness from publicly discussing this with the
02 press, under order by the foreperson of the grand jury, I
03 think we’re running into due process problems.
04 I think it’s something that the court should
05 seriously look at.
06 THE COURT: Well, one of the things, hopefully,
07 that this preliminary hearing is affording to both sides,
08 is the opportunity to have the evidence come out in a court
09 with everyone present. And anyone who’s interested, and
10 apparently a lot of people are, can watch and hear it and
11 see it.
12 And, I mean, I think that does a lot to
13 counteract all of these unnamed sources, or all this stuff
14 that’s been coming out about this case since it began, and
15 printed in the paper, on news reports and — I mean I think
16 and I hope, that this is, in fact, contributing to the
17 fairness of the proceedings with regard to Mr. Simpson,
18 and perhaps restoring some confidence, and the confidence
19 of the lawyers in the system, that this is where the guilt
20 or innocence is going to be determined.
21 And, you know, dealing with the media,
22 obviously, is a difficult issue for everyone. But I don’t
23 think that every time that there’s some kind of a report,
24 and some kind of a quotation, that I’m in a position to do
25 something. I mean, the 911 tapes release is a whole other
26 issue, and I don’t think I have any jurisdiction, anything
27 I can do with that, whatsoever.
28 I don’t think that miss Clark’s statement is
0012
01 tantamount to saying that she thinks Mr. Camacho is a liar.
02 She has her own version of apparently the instructions,
03 and — but I just don’t see where that implicates the due
04 process. I mean everybody had a chance to see Mr. Camacho
05 and draw their own conclusions.
06 MR. SHAPIRO: I just wanted to make the record.
07 second matter.
08 MS. CLARK: in That case, I think I should
09 indicate, if we’re making records, that Mr. Shapiro has not
10 accurately reflected many of the events he is attempting to
11 depict for the court. Especially considering the 911
12 tape. There is another side to that, I don’t want to take
13 up the court’s time with it, because I agree, it’s not
14 something that has any part of this hearing. Unless the
15 court wants me to air that side, and the court is shaking
16 its head no.
17 THE COURT: No.
18 MS. CLARK: I will not.
19 Let me just indicate, then, for the record,
20 that I do object to his rendition of the events that
21 transpired prior to this preliminary hearing. So, I’ll
22 leave it at that, and put off further comment until any
23 time the court thinks it —
24 MR. SHAPIRO: We filed it under affidavit, that I
25 have filed under penalty of perjury, we filed a declaration
26 under penalty of perjury, re-alleging the specific events.
27 if i misspoke, I was trying to summarize, in generalities,
28 of what took place prior to this.
0013
01 THE COURT: I really don’t want us to lose the
02 focus of the purpose of this preliminary hearing, and I
03 think this is kind of a side issue, that really doesn’t —
04 we’re not progressing, either side, by, you know, dealing
05 with the sort of individual personal attacks from one
06 lawyer to the other, the suggestions or innuendo that
07 someone’s not being forthright.
08 I would like to see if that could be avoided,
09 and we can just professionally carry on with putting on
10 this particular case.
11 MR. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, one other matter I called
12 to Mr. Hodgman’s attention to last night, that we had two
13 taped interviews of two witnesses, that were on
14 microcassette disk, and that we were going to transfer them
15 last night to cassette disk.
16 We did not have the equipment to do that,
17 we’re working on that today, and hopefully, I’ll have that
18 by noon to give to Mr. Hodgman.
19 MS. CLARK: In view of that, those witnesses will
20 not be called until we have the tapes in hand, and have had
21 an opportunity to hear them.
22 This is a very late date to turn over a tape
23 of an interview, that was conducted certainly way before
24 this preliminary hearing began. And I will have to change
25 the witness order, and call the remaining civilian
26 witnesses in lieu of those two.
27 THE COURT: All right. So, you think by noon
28 you’re going to have that, and you’re going to be able to
0014
01 turn this over to miss Clark?
02 MR. SHAPIRO: Yes. Each tape is approximately a
03 half hour.
04 THE COURT: And these are interviews of witnesses
05 that were listed on the prosecution’s witness list?
06 MR. SHAPIRO: they’re interviews of a man referred
07 to as Kato, who lives in the guest house at the Simpson
08 house. And a man referred to as Mr. Allen, who was the
09 limousine driver.
10 THE COURT: All right. In light of that, are you
11 going to have sufficient witnesses to fill today?
12 MS. CLARK: I may. I don’t know how long cross
13 will be, once again, but I think I may, and I would
14 certainly attempt to do so.
15 THE COURT: All right. Then let’s go out there and
16 go to work.
17 MR. SHAPIRO: Thank you, Judge.
18 MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.
Thankfully the court took a break right at the end of the first excerpt, so instead of a gap, we have the sound of tape running for about a minute and some seconds.
Here is the second excerpt. This is a longer excerpt, so there shouldn’t be any gaps. When I said there shouldn’t be any gaps, I did not mean by the magistrate! The magistrate did interrupt the proceedings, and read a court order into the record. No wonder why we don’t have any original motions, yeah, thank Judge ITO, because he originally sealed them. Although he later unsealed some.
Sukru Boztepe’s testimony is cut at a pivitol point, it is necessary to insert a few lines from the transcript here.
08 A Dog was just in front of me, and I had to
09 stop, too. I turned right, and looked exact the same —
10 same direction that dog was looking.
11 Q And what did you see?
12 A I seen a body.
13 Q Can you describe it?
14 A It was woman, laying down horizontally, all
15 the way to the path, face turned to me, and on the right
16 side.
17 Q So, her face was facing out to the street?
18 A Yes.
19 Q The area where you saw her, was it well lit?
20 A It wasn’t.
21 Q It was not?
22 A It was not.
this is the third excerpt.
OK so now I need us to look at the longer video for a second, the last five minutes, in which they discuss scheduling, is on this longer video, let’s turn the slider to 2:03:09.
We did not get to see what happened in chambers this time, because it was sealed. Well, shouldn’t we unseal that 30 years later? I mean, even I’ve moved once in about 10 years or so!
Transcript for June 30th, 1994