Defense Seeks to Bar 911 Calls From Simpson Trial

O.J. Simpson’s defense team on Monday moved to block jurors in his upcoming civil trial from hearing evidence about the darker side of his “intimate and sometimes dramatic” relationship with his murdered ex-wife, Nicole--including the 911 call in which she screamed that he was “going nuts.”

Lead defense attorney Robert C. Baker, dismissing the issue as irrelevant and prejudicial, asked the judge to bar all references to stalking, battering, spousal abuse and what he called “domestic discord” once the trial begins Sept. 17.

Baker said jurors should never hear about Nicole Brown Simpson’s distraught statements that she feared her husband would kill her, which she made to police after an altercation on New Year’s Eve 1989 left her bruised and scratched. Baker also urged the judge to keep out of evidence the two frenzied 911 calls Nicole Simpson made less than eight months before her death as O.J. Simpson banged on her door and hollered obscenities.

“The introduction of such incidents will encourage the jury to focus on one minor area of the defendant’s relationship with his wife,” Baker wrote, “and to automatically assume that the defendant, as a result, was capable of the . . . murders in this case.”

Simpson was acquitted last year on charges of killing his ex-wife and Ronald Lyle Goldman in a nighttime knife attack in 1994. Goldman’s parents and Nicole Brown Simpson’s estate have since filed suit in civil court, seeking to hold the ex-football star responsible for the murders despite the “not guilty” verdicts.

Among his 15 motions, most aimed at keeping the plaintiffs’ most provocative evidence out of the civil trial, Baker asked the judge to make sure jurors do not hear allegations of O.J. Simpson’s infidelity or drug use. Such testimony “may be of interest for the tabloid media” but are “totally irrelevant and remote” from the murders, he argued.

Lawyers representing Fred Goldman filed 18 motions of their own, in an equally vigorous attempt to shape the trial their way, but those documents were not available for review late Monday. Superior Court Judge Hiroshi Fujisaki will hear oral arguments and issue rulings on the motions during the first two days of the trial.

Baker’s stack of motions carried a strong sense of deja vu: In the criminal trial, the defense team also tried to block much of the domestic violence evidence. In both cases, the lawyers used the same argument--that testimony about Simpson breaking a car windshield or kicking in a door during fights with Nicole prejudiced jurors against him without proving anything about the murders.

Superior Court Judge Lance A. Ito, however, gave the prosecution in the criminal case considerable freedom to argue that Simpson’s rages toward Nicole indicated an obsessive, controlling and violent relationship that slowly built up to a vengeful murder.

Southwestern University law professor Robert Pugsley predicted that plaintiffs in the civil trial would be granted a similar opportunity to showcase domestic violence evidence, despite the defense’s opposition.

“I think this case is going to be more about the relationships and motivations” behind the killings than about the DNA blood evidence, Pugsley said. “I think the judge will give them leeway.”

A bill that has passed both houses of the state Legislature could make it even easier for the plaintiffs to get information about the couple’s tumultuous relationship before the jury.

The bill would allow some hearsay evidence into domestic violence cases, including statements to police officers and diary entries like the ones Nicole Simpson jotted about physical and verbal abuse she suffered during her marriage. The bill’s author, Assemblyman Bernie Richter (R-Chico), said the bill “absolutely applies” to the Simpson civil case and will take effect as soon as Gov. Pete Wilson signs it.

Still, veteran civil litigator Gary Ottoson said he thought the defense has a chance at excluding some of the more inflammatory testimony about Simpson’s temper.

Ottoson said the tape of the more emotional 911 call seemed particularly too prejudicial to let jurors hear, since “in effect you’re letting her [Nicole Simpson] testify without being there for cross-examination,” he said. “You can verify that it’s her voice, but you can’t verify that what she’s saying [about Simpson’s behavior and demeanor] is occurring.”

In addition, because Simpson did not harm Nicole during that incident, Ottoson said, the tape proved little about his propensity to murder. “If you believe everything on it,” he said, “what does it prove? [Only] that she’s scared.”

In other motions filed Monday, the defense asked the judge to bar expert witnesses on hair and fibers from using the word “match.” Fibers found on crime scene evidence had the same microscopic characteristics as fibers from the carpet of Simpson’s Ford Bronco, and hairs at the crime scene were similar to Simpson’s.

The defense also requested a jury tour of both the murder scene and Simpson’s Brentwood house. The only plaintiff motions available Monday came from Nicole Brown Simpson’s estate.

Attorney John Q. Kelly asked the judge to preclude all evidence about members of the Brown family selling photos or stories after the murders--a clear reference to disclosures that Dominique Brown peddled topless photos of her slain older sister to the National Enquirer.

Kelly is also seeking to keep out testimony about O.J. Simpson’s financial support of the Brown family and the Nicole Brown Simpson Charitable Foundation.