Signs Point to a Fierce Civil Trial for Simpson

So you thought the lawyers in O.J. Simpson’s murder trial were aggressive?

Brace yourself.

Simpson is due to return to the courtroom Sept. 9 to fend off a civil lawsuit accusing him of killing his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. Already, attorneys contesting the case have filed thousands of pages of dueling documents--generating more paperwork in the past few months than prosecutors and defenders did during the entire criminal trial.

The legal motions bristle with barbs, as the attorneys rip into one another’s arguments as “unintelligible,” “patently untenable,” “mind-boggling in their frivolousness” and more.

Amid all that animosity, the papers set forth provocative demands for information.

Lawyers on both sides are asking a judge to force key witnesses to answer more questions under oath. The victims’ lawyers have gone after Simpson’s friends, including lawyer Robert Kardashian and football buddy Al Cowlings. And the defense has moved to squeeze information from the outspoken sisters of the murder victims--Kim Goldman and Denise and Dominique Brown.

But the main target of the paper onslaught is O.J. Simpson. He has been slapped with several phonebook-thick motions from the victims’ families demanding that he respond to 480 oral queries, turn over scores of pieces of potential evidence, vouch for the authenticity of more than 500 items and answer a lengthy written questionnaire.

So far, his lawyers have refused, calling the requests absurd. In one letter filed with the court last week, Simpson attorney Robert C. Baker rebuffed a request to smooth the way for admitting certain pieces of evidence: “Certainly, I do not know what trial school you went to,” he wrote to a lawyer for Goldman. “Perhaps none. . . . I have no intention of helping you put on your case.”

With the dispute in a deadlock, it will be up to a judge to sort out which questions are justifiable and which are outrageous.

Should Simpson have to admit that Goldman’s blood was found in his Bronco?

Should he be forced to confess if he committed adultery?

Should he be required to turn over all his dark sweatsuits?

Superior Court Judge Alan B. Haber will decide these disputes and others in a hearing scheduled for June 25.

*

It’s standard operating procedure in civil cases, where the fiercest battles generally take place before trial, in the all-important information-gathering phase known as “discovery.”

The California Code of Civil Procedure insists that lawyers for the plaintiffs and the defense share all information before trial, so there will be no surprises and no grandstanding.

Although the reciprocal discovery process may be designed to promote civility, it often sours into an all-out war between lawyers desperate to cling to any advantage, while ferociously clawing to expose their foes’ strategies.

“What’s ironic is that the rules are supposed to effect a speedy and inexpensive resolution of the case, but discovery often takes on a life of its own, especially when the parties are well-financed,” Southwestern University law professor Myrna Raeder said. “There is so much power in the process itself. Parties can ask for anything.”

So ask they do.

Civil lawyers have three powerful tools with which to dig out facts: They can grill witnesses under oath in a formal deposition. They can submit questions, known as interrogatories, for a witness to answer in writing after consulting an attorney. And they can list “requests for admission”--statements that witnesses must either admit or deny. If they opt to deny, the witnesses generally have to answer a follow-up interrogatory explaining their reasoning.

Relying on interrogatories and requests for admission to augment his 10-day deposition of O.J. Simpson, attorney Daniel M. Petrocelli, who represents the Goldman family, said he is determined to flush out any solid evidence that defense lawyers have to exonerate their client.

One interrogatory asks Simpson if he contends that his ex-wife’s murder “was in any way related to Faye Resnick,” the friend and admitted former cocaine user who stayed at Nicole Brown Simpson’s house in the weeks before the killings. Others probe whether Simpson contends that various pieces of evidence, such as the bloody glove found at his estate, were planted. If so, Petrocelli wants to know why--what facts or witnesses Simpson can produce to back up his theory that he was framed.

*

So far, Simpson’s defense has largely brushed off the interrogatories. His lawyers call Petrocelli’s questions and requests for evidence “vague, ambiguous, unintelligible, overbroad, burdensome, harassing and oppressive.” Plus, they say, the queries invade Simpson’s privacy and intrude on his right to prepare a defense in confidential consultations with his lawyers.

Petrocelli counters that he is perfectly justified in seeking information. After all, he argues, that’s the point of liberal pretrial discovery rules. In a fat legal motion, he has asked a judge to uphold his questions and force the other side to answer.

“The Code of Civil Procedure has specific mechanisms designed to ferret out the other side’s contentions,” Petrocelli said in an interview. “We can specifically require the defendant to admit or deny all the key facts in the case. If he chooses to deny them, then we can require him to provide all the proof to substantiate his position.”

In practice, legal experts say interrogatories rarely produce the kind of detailed, pointed information Petrocelli covets. Even if a judge does order Simpson to answer all 340 written questions, his team can come up with the kind of lawyer-speak that fuzzes more than it clarifies. And Simpson might be able to deflect some of the tough questions by claiming that the information is privileged or private.

Along with his interrogatories, Petrocelli has filed more than 1,000 requests for admission.

*

They include demands for Simpson to acknowledge the validity of specific DNA tests; to confirm that he has been photographed wearing Aris Leather Light gloves--the brand found at the murder scene. And to agree that the fatal attack lasted less than 20 minutes and was committed by an enraged killer who had a close relationship with Nicole Simpson.

Defense attorneys have already declined to answer most of the requests for admission, arguing that they are irrelevant, unclear, invade their client’s privacy or require expertise that Simpson does not possess.

Despite the defense team’s objections, legal experts said Petrocelli’s slew of questions could prove of strategic value.

If a litigant refuses to admit to a fact that is later proved true in court, he may be ordered to pay the opposing attorney for the cost of litigating that point. Thus, if Petrocelli could prove the value of DNA testing after O.J. Simpson denied it, he could pass the bill for his work to the defense team. Judges are often reluctant to make the losing side pay up, but some analysts said the gambit would be worth a try.

Even if the plaintiffs recoup no money and glean no insights from their exhaustive requests, at least they have the satisfaction of tying up the defense team for hours on end and draining Simpson’s financial resources at the rate of at least $195 an hour.

“Petrocelli doesn’t have a lot to lose by flying at them with all these missiles . . . keeping their little toes busy between now and September,” Southwestern University law professor Robert A. Pugsley said.

Indeed, along with the demands for more answers from Simpson, Petrocelli has tried to put judicial pressure on Kardashian and Cowlings to speak about events and conversations during the five days between the murders and Simpson’s arrest.

In his deposition, Cowlings asserted his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination, refusing to answer questions such as: “Between June 13th and 17th, 1994, did Mr. Simpson ever tell you where he had disposed of clothes, Bruno Magli shoes and a knife the night of June 12th, 1994?” Petrocelli has asked the judge to compel Cowlings to answer such questions.

*

Simpson’s lawyers have responded with their own assault on the plaintiffs. They have filed motions asking the judge to force Denise Brown to tell them whether she has profited from her sister’s death and whether she ever saw Nicole Simpson use drugs. They are also demanding that Kim Goldman explain how her family is paying its legal bills.

Signaling how contentious this case has become, lawyers on both sides are asking the judge to force their opponents to pay for the time they spent responding to frivolous demands.

The bitter discovery war signals to some analysts that the civil trial will be fought every bit as ferociously as the criminal case. A further clue: The paperwork for the civil case so far has crammed full 15 fat binders in the courthouse--compared with just 11 for the entire criminal trial.

“This is a down-payment demonstration to the other side about how intent they are going to be in pursuing what they want,” Pugsley said. “It’s an indication that what they can expect is a bruising, 15-round heavyweight battle.”