Simpson Custody Appealed

A lawyer for O.J. Simpson’s former in-laws told an appeals court Friday that the Orange County judge who granted Simpson custody of his two younger children should have considered civil evidence against the football Hall-of-Famer.

Simpson was acquitted of the 1994 murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, but a civil jury later found him responsible for the deaths of his ex-wife and her friend.

Civil trial evidence that Simpson slashed the victims to death should have been considered at the 1996 custody hearing, said Kimberly Knill, an attorney representing Louis and Juditha Brown of Dana Point, parents of Nicole and grandparents of Sydney, 12, and Justin, 10.

Orange County Judge Nancy Wieben Stock had declined to consider that evidence on grounds that it was submitted too late, Knill said in arguments before the 4th District Court of Appeal. She told justices Friday that the lower court should have conducted an inquiry into Simpson’s “moral fitness,” especially after the civil finding against him.

The justices also heard a passionate argument from Marjorie G. Fuller, an attorney representing the children, that Sydney and Justin want to remain with their father, who was awarded full custody of them in December 1996. The Browns are appealing that decision.

“Justin wanted to write a letter to you,” Fuller said. “It said, ‘I love my dad. I want to stay with him.’ ”

Simpson’s daughter, Sydney, expressed similar emotions, Fuller told the court.

Fuller said the children told her they do not wish to move and that, while they love their grandparents, they want to stay with their father.

“He was a very good dad, and he did care and nurture the children,” Fuller said, adding that Stock had ruled that returning the Simpson children to their grandparents’ home would be detrimental to them.

Fuller said there have been cases in which parents actually were convicted of murder but did not lose their right to custody of their children. She cited a San Diego case in which a man convicted of manslaughter won the right of custody of his children.

Presiding Justice David G. Sills voiced concern about how further wrangling over custody would affect the children, given that the procedure likely would take months, if not years.

“The children will have this uncertainty hanging over their heads for all that time,” Sills said.

The justices also asked pointed questions about why no social service agency ever evaluated Simpson’s fitness to care for the children. And they took issue with the decision of an Orange County presiding judge to reassign the custody case to a different judge without apparent legal authority to do so.

“This is the first time I’ve ever seen a presiding judge transfer a case in midstream,” said Sills, adding that he found it “highly bothersome.”

On the same issue, Justice Thomas F. Crosby Jr. said he believed that “there might have been a violation of the state constitution” if the transfer took place without proper authorization.

The justices made no ruling Friday and gave no indication when their decision would come.