Deposition of Simpson Shows Squabbling

O.J. Simpson’s marathon deposition in the wrongful death lawsuits filed against him by the families and estates of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Lyle Goldman apparently ended not with an evidentiary bang, but with the legal equivalent of whimpers from all sides.

The 507-page transcript of the eighth and ninth days--Feb. 26 and 27--in the former football star’s 10-day interrogation, obtained by The Times on Tuesday, appears to add only marginally to Simpson’s first sworn account of events surrounding the two murders. His testimony on the final day dealt with his finances, and it--along with supporting documents turned over to the plaintiffs--has been sealed by Santa Monica Superior Court Judge Alan B. Haber.

According to sources close to the plaintiffs, however, Simpson had little of substance to say about his financial status. Lawyers for the Goldman and Brown families hope to learn more when they depose Simpson’s longtime personal attorney, Leroy B. Taft, and his accountant, Marvin Goodfriend.

As he did throughout the process, according the documents, Simpson portrayed his murdered ex-wife as a physically abusive spouse on the verge of a “nervous breakdown” during the weeks before her death. For their part, lawyers Michael A. Brewer, who represents Goldman’s mother, and John Q. Kelly, the Brown family lawyer, pressed Simpson on contradictions between his deposition testimony and the statement he gave Los Angeles police detectives the day after the murders.

They met with limited success, and Simpson attributed at least some of the inconsistencies to his own confusion in the immediate aftermath of the killings.

Perhaps the most striking feature of the deposition’s waning days was the deterioration of relations between opposing lawyers. By the ninth day, their exchanges were, by turns, testy and sarcastic. In one instance, Simpson’s lead attorney, Robert C. Baker, admonished Kelly to stop asking what he called “stupid questions.” In another, Daniel M. Petrocelli, who represents Goldman’s father, demanded that Baker stop “making fun of me.”

Late in the day, when Kelly asked for a break, Baker responded, “No, let’s stay on. We are going to finish today, aren’t we?”

When Kelly refused to commit himself, Baker retorted: “Well, we are going to finish today. He is not coming back for any more liability testimony. I want everybody in this room to fully understand that. It is not going to happen.”

Kelly fired back, “Mr. Baker, that’s unacceptable. I am not limiting myself.”

“That’s too bad,” Baker snapped.

Simpson’s attorney had signaled impatience with the proceedings when the day began, and he announced his readiness for the record by quipping: “Bob Baker for O.J. Simpson, held hostage, day nine.”

Later that day, Baker, apparently watching the opposing lawyers swapping notes, interrupted Kelly’s interrogation to inform him that “Mr. Petrocelli wants you to ask a question.”

Kelly responded, “I’m sorry. I can’t read his handwriting. Can you?”

“Yes,” Baker answered, “I can read it upside-down. Do you want me to ask it?”

Simpson’s lawyer repeatedly objected when Kelly returned to questions that previously have been asked by Petrocelli, who interrogated the former football star for seven days. On several occasions when Kelly insisted that his questions had not been asked previously, Baker referred him to the precise pages in the proceedings’ transcript on which they were recorded.

During his portion of the interrogation, Brewer pressed Simpson at length over his tape-recorded interview with detectives Tom Lange and Philip L. Vannatter.

Asked if he could think of anything significant he might not have remembered during that conversation, Simpson said that was “a tough question to answer because I would have no idea what’s significant.”

Then Brewer asked, “How about your whereabouts at the time of the murders.”

Simpson responded, “I didn’t know what time the murders were.”

Brewer also questioned Simpson at length about what he told the detectives concerning a cut on the middle finger of his left hand.

Asked if he was guessing when he told the police he cut his finger before he flew to Chicago the night of the murders, Simpson responded: “No--yes, exactly. That’s exactly what I was doing,” because he had seen blood on his left pinkie though he had not seen a cut.

When Brewer pressed Simpson further on the point, the former football star responded: “I didn’t see any cuts, [but he did see] a drop of blood on my counter and a drop of blood on one of my fingers. I didn’t know where it came from. So not that I know of.”

Baker appeared to lay to rest doubts concerning his ability to control his client. When Brewer asked Simpson about one inaccurate statement he made to police, the lawyer also inquired as to whether Simpson wished to review the transcript.

Simpson replied: “No, I don’t need to.”

Baker interjected: “Yes, you do.”

“Yes, I do,” Simpson agreed. “Starting where?”