Live Trial Coverage - CA v. Simpson - Day 161 - Part 1
GREGG JARRETT: We're just moments away from the verdict in the O.J. Simpson murder trial. If he is convicted, and it's a big if, here are the possible sentences. If found guilty of two counts of first degree murder then the sentence is life in prison without the possibility of parole. If Simpson is found guilty of one count of first degree murder and one count of second degree murder, then his life his sentence is life in prison without the possibility of parole. If he is found guilty of two counts of second degree murder, he can receive 15 years to life in prison with the time running either consecutively or concurrently. But as we say, it is a big if.
Let's go out to Los Angeles. Fred Graham is taking over our coverage in Los Angeles. Fred, out to you.
FRED GRAHAM: And we want to remind you that the scheduled sentencing time, that hearing in which the sentence will be revealed ah, the verdict will be revealed, rather than the sentence, is just few minutes away. We do have time to touch base across the street at the criminal court building where Kristin Jeannette-Meyers is standing by.
KRISTIN JEANNETTEMEYERS: Yes, Fred, as a matter of fact, I am standing here with the nephew of O.J. Simpson. His name is Benny Baker, Jr. [interviewing] You're the son of Shirley Baker, who is O.J.'s sister, and you have been here at court on a number of occasions with you mother, who's been here everyday. Share with us the thoughts and feelings of your family in these moments before the verdict is going to be read.
BENNY BAKER, Jr., O.J.'s Nephew: Well, we're cautiously optimistic. They jury came back rather suddenly, so it caught us all by surprise. We're cautiously optimistic and it's a sad situation for the Brown and the Goldman family and I don't think there are any winners here, no matter what the outcome is today because O.J. has already lost and all of our families have lost, so we're hoping we can salvage the rest of his life.
KRISTIN JEANNETTEMEYERS: Do you feel any anger toward the Goldmans or the Browns because of the position that they have taken in this case? What is your relationship between your family and the Brown's?
BENNY BAKER, Jr.: Having never experienced a tragic death in my family like that I can only imagine what they feel like and what they go through. So, I can't harbor any animosity or hard feelings toward them. I'm just glad it's not one of my siblings or child of mine.
KRISTIN JEANNETTEMEYERS: But do you understand why they and why a lot of Americans, according to the polls, believe that O.J. Simpson is responsible for these killings?
BENNY BAKER, Jr.: I don't understand why the fact I don't understand the fact that he has not been presumed innocent until proven guilty.
KRISTIN JEANNETTEMEYERS: All right, I'm going to have to let it go at that because I'm told by Fred, we need to go back to you. They may be starting in the courtroom.
FRED GRAHAM: All right. We've been told that the media and others are being allowed to file into the courtroom and take their places. We probably do have a few moments. O.J. Simpson has not yet been brought into the courtroom. Judge Ito, who always comes last has not taken his place. It's a familiar scenario and as you know then there may be a few moments and then the jury will be called for. One issue I want to talk with our guests about, Art Danner Listen, I don't know, you might still be pretty nervous if you're on either side of this case because someone may have changed their mind on that jury.
ART DANNER, Prosecuting Attorney: Anytime you are involved with any kind of a trial you want to take the verdict as soon as you can because I've been involved with cases when they polled the jurors where jurors have changed their minds. And here the overnight stay, you never know. And so, from the standpoint of the trial lawyers, they wish the took the verdict yesterday.
FRED GRAHAM: Tim, how about that from the defense side.
TIMOTHY CHANDLER, Deputy Public Defender, San Diego CO, CA: Well, from the defense side usually if there's a change of heart it's usually in your direction. So, it might be more likely that you might not want to rush and take it because if it's a conviction it's more likely you might have reservations about it than if it's an acquittal, there tends to be something that people feel more strongly about sometimes.
FRED GRAHAM: I'm going to ask Rikki something here. Rikki, do you have any feelings at all about what Kristin reported earlier, that was if there was a celebration of sorts among the jurors last night?
RIKKI KLIEMAN, Correspondent: Well, I think, Fred, we have to look at the celebration of the jurors being from what you talked about earlier and that is the difficulty of being sequestered for nine months. That these jurors, regardless of their verdict, must feel an enormous sense of relief that this is over. But the conventional wisdom would say that if they're celebrating the logic is that their celebrating a guilty verdict because there might be something thought unseemly about a celebration when you were going to say that you were going to go back to the community and see what were the feelings of the people around you.
FRED GRAHAM: Either one of you two gentlemen have any sense of what might possibly be done about this sequestration problem in these long, high-visibility cases? Art?
ART DANNER: Well, I'll tell you, it's very rare that it happens and in California I we've experienced all kinds of cases and they we just rarely do it. And this was, of course, an unusual case and it had everything in the world in it to say, hey, maybe you should sequester jurors. But I think it's made a definite impact and I would suspect that from here on out we're going to see a lot, a lot of work on trying to get rid of the issue of sequestration.
FRED GRAHAM: You know, in the Oklahoma bombing case, the judge has told the competing lawyers he will not sequester those jurors and he said, you all figure out how to do it. But now, Tim, I don't know any way to do it, do you? In a highly publicized case?
TIMOTHY CHANDLER: No, I mean, I think you gotta sequester jurors. We live in an age where there's the tabloid TV, there's lots and lots of media. They're going to go look through the jurors's garbage, they're going to find them, you're never even going to get to a verdict. In most cases the jurors are going to be disqualified by the activity of some of the lower level media outlets. And so I think you've got to worry about their conduct which will contravene The demand for a story will contravene the interests of justice.
FRED GRAHAM: Well, now, Rikki if you were one of those defense lawyers and the judge has said, look, you just figure out a way, what way is there?
RIKKI KLIEMAN: Well, in terms of sequestration, Fred, you know I am a big opponent of sequestration. I think it is bad. I think it's bad for the psychological health of the jurors. I think the pressure is too great for them and I think it's bad for the system. But since that's my personal feeling
FRED GRAHAM: Pardon me, I'm going to have to interrupt you because Judge Lance Ito has taken his place. We go live into the courtroom.
Judge LANCE ITO: All right, back on the record in the Simpson matter. Mr. Simpson is again present before the court with his counsel, Mr. Shapiro, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Kardashian, Mr. Bailey, Mr. Blasier. The People are represented by Ms. Clark, Mr. Darden, and Mr. Hodgman. The jury is not present. Good morning, counsel.
All right, the record should reflect that earlier this morning, at nine o'clock, the court met informally with counsel here in the courtroom because there were too many lawyers to go into chambers this morning for the purposes of discussing notifications to the jurors regarding their rights of privacy and the interest of the news media to interview them or speak to them, following the delivery of the verdict in court here today. The court distributed to the parties copies of the questionnaire that has been distributed to the jurors, and also the notice to them regarding confidentiality under 237 of the code of civil procedure, and those two questionnaires have been returned by the jurors. They have uniformly indicated their desire that their public excuse me their private information remain confidential. They have also indicated to the court unanimously a desire not to speak to the attorneys after the conclusion of the trial and not to speak with the news media, either.
All right, counsel, is there anything else we need to take up before I invite the jurors to join us? All right, Deputy Trauer, let's have the jurors, please.
FRED GRAHAM: And we've heard the judge say that the jurors unanimously do not want to speak to the media. What does that say to you?
RIKKI KLIEMAN: Well, I think that it said to all three of us, as we both as all three of us echoed the thought that it sounds that it might be a guilty verdict. That is, they don't want to talk to the lawyers; they don't want to talk to the media. They want to go home. But we've been wrong before, Fred, with predictions that have no basis in fact.
FRED GRAHAM: What's the problem? There's a problem if they're not willing to speak to the lawyers either. You learn a lot that way, don't you Art?
ART DANNER: You do. Many times in talking to the jurors you find out where the strengths and weaknesses were and it helps you in other cases, or if, of course, if it's ever a retrial. So, I mean, there's just a lot to be learned there. So, you lose a lot in that respect.
FRED GRAHAM: Tim? What do you think? Do you learn from that?
TIMOTHY CHANDLER: Well, you certainly learn from that but I think what you learn from this is that the jury is fed up with the parties. I think that's what it means here.
FRED GRAHAM: You know, of course, we don't know the outcome, but from the standpoint of the media, particularly if there is an acquittal in this case, it's very important to speak to some jurors. And I think for the good of the public if there is an acquittal in this case. Now, Rikki, it seems to me the public is going to want to know and really they have the right to know, if there's an acquittal and, to a certain extent, if he's found guilty.
RIKKI KLIEMAN: Well, I think the public does want to know. I'm not so sure they have a right to know because the jurors do have their privacy.
FRED GRAHAM: I'm told we need to go back into the courtroom. The panel of jurors is in place.
Judge LANCE ITO: And the record should reflect that we have now been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel and our alternates. Good morning again, ladies and gentlemen. All right, Mrs. Robertson, do you have the envelope with the sealed verdicts in those, please?
Mrs. ROBERTSON, Court Clerk: Yes, Your Honor.
Judge LANCE ITO: All right, would you give those to Deputy Trauer? And would you return those to our foreperson, jury number one? All right, madam foreperson, would you please open the envelope and check the condition of the verdict forms? All right, madam foreperson, you've had the opportunity to review the verdict forms?
MADAM FOREPERSON: Yes.
Judge LANCE ITO: Are they the same forms that you signed and are they in order?
MADAM FOREPERSON: Yes, they are.
Judge LANCE ITO: All right, would you hand those, please, to Deputy Trauer? And you have signed and dated those verdict forms, indicating the jury's verdict?
MADAM FOREPERSON: Yes.
Judge LANCE ITO: All right, thank you. All right, ladies and gentlemen, and the jury, I'm going to ask that you carefully listen to the verdicts as they are being read by the clerk, Mrs. Robertson, as after the verdicts have been read, you will be asked if these are your verdicts, and I would caution the audience during the course of the reading of these verdicts to remain calm, and if there is any disruption during the reading of the verdicts, the bailiffs will have the obligation to remove any persons disrupting these proceedings. All right, Mrs. Robertson? All right, Mr. Simpson, would you please stand and face the jury? Mrs. Robertson?
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, in the matter of the People of the State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson, case number BA097211, we the jury in the above entitled action find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of the crime of murder in violation of penal code section 187a, a felony, upon Nicole Brown Simpson, a human being, as charged in count one of the information. Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, in the matter of the People of the State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson, we the jury, in the above entitled action, find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of the crime of murder, in violation of penal code section 187a, a felony, upon Ronald Lyle Goldman, a human being, as charged in count two of the information. We, the jury, in the above entitled action, further find the special circumstance that the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, has in this case been convicted of at least one crime of murder of the first degree and one or more crimes of murder of the first or second degree to be not true. Signed, this second day of October, 1995. Jury 230. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is this your verdict, say so you one, so say you all?
JURY: Yes.
Judge LANCE ITO: All right, counsel, Mr. Simpson, would you be seated, please? Let's have it quiet in the courtroom, please. All right, Mrs. Robertson, would you please poll the jurors?
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number one, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER ONE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number two, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER TWO: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number three, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER THREE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number four, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER FOUR: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number five, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER FIVE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number six, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER SIX: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number seven, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER SEVEN: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number eight, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER EIGHT: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number nine, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER NINE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number ten, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER TEN: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number 11, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER ELEVEN: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number 12, as to count one, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER TWELVE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number one, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER ONE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number two, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER TWO: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number three, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER THREE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number four, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER FOUR: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number five, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER FIVE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number six, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER SIX: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number seven, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER SEVEN: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number eight, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER EIGHT: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number nine, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER NINE: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number ten, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER TEN: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number eleven, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER ELEVEN: Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTSON: Juror number twelve, as to count two, is this your verdict?
JUROR NUMBER TWELVE: Yes.
Judge LANCE ITO: All right, the clerk is directed to record the verdicts as read. The parties agree to waive reading of the verdicts as recorded. Mr. Cochran, do you waive the reading of the verdict as recorded?
JOHNNIE COCHRAN, Simpson Attorney: Yes, we do, Your Honor.
Judge LANCE ITO: Ms. Clark?
MARCIA CLARK, Prosecutor: Yes, Your Honor.
Judge LANCE ITO: Thank you. All right, ladies and gentlemen, I want to, as this time, take this opportunity to publicly thank you for the service that you've given to us. The burdens that we've placed upon you were enormous, and I, of course, can't begin to express the debt that we owe to you for the time, the patience, and exertion that you've given to us during the course of this case. I will have the opportunity to meet with you privately later and I'll give you my private comments when we have a chance to meet.
I want to caution you at this time that there is, as you know, intense media interest in this case. The news media will probably seek you out at your home or at your place of business, and I would implore that the news media act responsibly to avoid harassing you or identifying you without your consent or otherwise causing you concern. Whether you wish to cooperate with the news media is, of course, entirely up to you. However, I must warn you to expect the worst as far as that is concerned. We want to I know I share with you in expressing our thanks to the bailiffs from the sheriff's department, to our court reporters, Ms. Foxom [sp] and Ms. Olsen [sp], to the research attorney, John Byrne, who's assisted us, our Pepperdine law clerks, Mr. Gallivan [sp] and Ms. Carswell [sp], our media liaison, Jerry Ann Hayslett [sp] and her staff, and of course, the jury commissioner, Gloria Gomez and her staff. All right, counsel is there anything we need to take up before we excuse the jurors? Mr. Cochran?
JOHNNIE COCHRAN: Your Honor, can we approach just a second?
FRED GRAHAM: And as you can see the attorneys have moved to the bench and we are now looking at the Goldman family, Fred Goldman you see there. There were some tears within the family there, the victims, when the verdict was read. I want to ask Tim Chandler, you're a defense lawyer, is O.J. Simpson about to walk right out of there or are there formalities here?
TIMOTHY CHANDLER: Well
Judge LANCE ITO: All right, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I am now going to excuse you from further service on this case. As you know, this does absolve you from your vows of silence. You may take with you your jury notebooks, as you have requested, and we'll be chatting with you shortly. All right, thank you very much, and I'll see you all later.
Everybody have a seat please. All right, Miss Clark, Mr. Cochran, anything else we need to take up?
JOHNNIE COCHRAN, Simpson Defense Attorney: Your Honor, we'd like to thank the court. You've been [inaudible] throughout, Your Honor. Thank you very, very kindly, sir.
Judge LANCE ITO: Miss Clark?
MARCIA CLARK, Prosecuting Attorney: Thank you.
Judge LANCE ITO: All right. The defendant, having been acquitted of both charges, he is ordered transported to an appropriate sheriff's facility and released forthwith. All right, we'll stand in recess.
1st BAILIFF: Please clear the courtroom.
FRED GRAHAM: And the stunning outcome. It would have been stunning either way it went. It certainly was stunning as it was. The obvious elation on the face of O.J. Simpson. He immediately embraced his lead counsel, Johnnie Cochran. The things that we saw in the courtroom were what you would expect shocked, dismayed visages on the side of the prosecution and obvious elation on the side of the defense. Rikki Klieman, we've been here now for nine months following this. Now that you've seen the outcome, aside from the fact that it came so swiftly, what's your reaction?
RIKKI KLIEMAN: Well, I think that my reaction [hesitates and gathers her breath] My reaction is that
FRED GRAHAM: I've never seen you almost speechless, Rikki.
RIKKI KLIEMAN: Well, I'm looking at my hands and they are as soaking wet as if it had been a verdict that I was on either side. And I think it comes from the emotional content, perhaps, of a background of being a trial lawyer. These moments are never easy, no matter how they go. And as we were sitting out here as soon as that verdict came in, whoever transported that news to the people outside in front of the courthouse, you could hear the cheers, the screaming and yelling, the support of O.J. Simpson. And once again, I think it's interesting to see how wrong how often the analysts are including many of us, which is the fact that because of the Alan Park readback so many of us thought about the fact that he was such a good witness for the prosecution. And what I found interesting, criminal defense lawyer friends of mine with whom I had dinner last night from the greater Los Angeles area the considering wisdom of all the media seemed to be that it looked like a ``guilty'' verdict. But they held fast and they said, no, a fast verdict with all of this evidence could only mean a ``not guilty.''
And when you had asked earlier about the jurors celebrating and I think what I said and got twisted in my saying is that it would have been unseemly for jurors to celebrate if they had convicted someone of first degree murder and he was going to go to jail, to prison, for the rest of his life. So, that the reaction of their celebration may have been release from their sequestration, but certainly the fact that they felt that they had done justice and were returning someone to the community and his family.
One interesting thought I had before you canvass the rest of us, is the look in the courtroom at the emotion of Robert Kardashian. Of all of the lawyers on the defense side the one who expressed his emotion most openly and of course, we know that Robert Kardashian was not only a lawyer in this case,he's a very close friend of Mr. Simpson's. And many of these lawyers have said privately to me lawyers who I've known for years as colleagues, who represented O.J. Simpson that they 100 percent believe that he was not guilty, just like he said at his arraignment.
FRED GRAHAM: All right. Now, of course, we've been out here for nine months or for the majority of that time. Gregg Jarrett was out here anchoring the coverage. Gregg is not standing by in New York and Gregg, I'd be very interested in what your reaction is to all of this.
GREGG JARRETT: Well, Fred, I have to say I'm not surprised and maybe that is due in large part to my background. I grew up not far from that courthouse. I tried some cases in Los Angeles. I watched my father try cases in the old criminal courts building which is now camp O.J. and one thing I learned throughout the many years is that downtown jurors are different. They view life and people and police in a very different way than other people do which is not necessarily negative; perhaps they have a better grasp of reality and truth and justice than anybody else. It's not for me to say and nobody else to say. They have decided this case, I think, on their view of the evidence in light of their own personal experiences. This was, in the end, a police case. And they just didn't trust the police. The defense gave them a reason, perhaps, to be skeptical of police, to doubt the trust and credibility of one particular police officer which may have tainted them all.
FRED GRAHAM: Well, obviously, the prosecution was visibly devastated when we glimpsed them in the courtroom. Dan Abrams has been covering the prosecution side of this case and he's standing by now over at the courthouse.
DAN ABRAMS: Well, Fred, I was just inside the courtroom and I can tell you that the only sounds that you could hear in that courtroom were people sobbing on both sides of the isle. You heard Arnelle Simpson and Jason Simpson sobbing loudly before the verdict was rendered and after it was rendered as well. They were embracing tightly. Of course, the entire Goldman family, all five of them, the Patty, the stepmother of Ron Goldman in addition to Fred Goldman, the father, and Kim Goldman, the sister, and Patty's two children were all sobbing loudly. In the front row you saw a number of members of the media crying. Two of the jurors appeared to be crying. Juror number three, a white woman sitting in the first row's nose had become red. Her eyes were red as well. And juror number seven, a woman who I have seen in that courtroom cry in one instance before, appeared to be crying as well, as they heard the Goldman's sobbing inside that courtroom. As soon as the verdict was rendered, the Goldman's walked out and you heard Fred Goldman mutter under his breath, ``Murderer.'' And then the Brown's followed the Goldman's out of that courtroom after immediately the verdict had been rendered. Philip Vannatter, one of the lead detectives was staring at the jury immediately after the verdict, almost trans-like, for about 15 or 20 seconds after the verdict had been read. O.J. Simpson, as he was walking out of the courtroom was turning around and appeared to be sneering at the prosecution and people at the other end of the table. I mean, Fred, I could go on and on. This was an incredibly emotional moment inside that courtroom because all you could hear were cries and sobs. Eunice Simpson, the mother of O.J. Simpson, crying as well, tears in her eyes, wiping away tears with tissues. You had the entire family Goldman family there, the entire Brown family there, the entire Simpson family there. That took up about all of the seats inside that courtroom.
Before the verdict was rendered, you know, there was complete silence, except for a few sobs coming from Arnelle and Jason Simpson. O.J. Simpson entered the courtroom and smiled at his family, the way he does at every other occasion, as if this were no different. But you could tell, once O.J. Simpson stood up, that there was a different look on his face. This was clearly a different day.
Security was beefed up inside that courtroom significantly. There was a court officer on both sides of that jury box. Usually only on one side. There were about eight members of the prosecution's investigators standing as we walked inside that courtroom, all examining who was walking to the courtroom. All the attorneys looked very nervous as the proceedings began. You could Marcia Clark and Chris Darden were talking to one another quietly as was Robert Shapiro, Robert Kardashian and Johnnie Cochran. Before O.J. Simpson walked out Johnnie Cochran lead the procession; Robert Kardashian right behind him and Robert Shapiro looking surprisingly grim, with O.J. Simpson then following him. This is, of course, before the verdict was rendered. And so, Fred, all I can say is that when you see this many journalists crying inside a courtroom there is something very powerful going on.
FRED GRAHAM: Dan Abrams, I know you want to do some reporting over there and so we'll release you for now. Of course, we'll be coming back to you periodically as our coverage continues throughout the day.
One of the things that Judge Lance Ito did is something that we don't see that often in a case in which a defendant is acquitted. Quite often that defendant simply walks right out the door, goes right out the front door of the courthouse and goes home. Now, this is done in different ways in different courtrooms, but it may have been done in a different way, possibly, by Judge Lance Ito because of the fact Judge Ito, although O.J. Simpson has been acquitted and found not guilty, Judge Ito had him transported back to a facility, apparently where he's been held, to be released from there. And perhaps one factor in that procedure is the fact that there is a large crowd predominantly, apparently, of supporters of O.J. Simpson and earlier when they heard what the verdict was a cry and a shout of triumph went up you see it now and you hear it this is in front of the courthouse. It may well have been that Judge Lance Ito did not want to send O.J. Simpson down in that for reasons that are fairly apparent, that it might have been a situation that might have gotten out of control.
I do want to ask I was asking Tim Chandler before, Tim is there any standard operating procedure here? Did Judge Ito do something unusual here?
TIMOTHY CHANDLER: Not particularly unusual because of what I think the circumstances were. Typically, a defendant, once he's been acquitted, has a right to walk out of the courtroom and I think the law allows that. I had a defendant acquitted, the judge ordered him released, he walked out of the courtroom with me and went down later to take care of his business. However, in this case, as you we heard reported earlier, there were some arrangements being made on behalf of O.J. Simpson and perhaps that's what was being done because we didn't even hear the lawyers say, we want him to go out with us. We just heard a sidebar and then the judge says, take him somewhere and release him.
FRED GRAHAM: Art, you're a prosecutor; you're in the brotherhood of prosecutors here. First of all, give us your reaction, if you feel like it, but also I'd be interested What do you think it's going to do to Gil Garcetti, who is the district attorney here and may catch a lot of heat over the way this has worked out.
ART DANNER: I think, first, being a prosecutor and sitting there and taking this kind of verdict, it's probably the depths of dejection from the standpoint of the job that you felt that you did. And I think they had done a very good job with the evidence. They had a lot of evidence. But they had to know that the Fuhrman issue was a real wildcard in the entire deck and, of course, at this point they're probably convinced that the rest of that information about Fuhrman somehow probably got to that jury. So, from their standpoint they're now There are all kinds of things going through their mind, but it's the worst kind of feeling when you believe you've done your best and you believe the evidence shows absolutely that the defendant was guilty.
[The preceding text has been professionally transcribed. However, although the text has been checked against an audio track, in order to meet rigid distribution and transmission deadlines, it may not have been proofread against tape.]
Copyright (c) 1995 Cable News Network, Inc.
The preceding text has been professionally transcribed. However, although the text has been checked against an audio track, in order to meet rigid distribution and transmission deadlines, it has not yet been proofread against videotape.
