From:
Date: 13 Sep 2010
Time: 09:46:36 AM
MARY BLEVINS-COX Bar No. 415777 18 Gesford Court, S.E. Washington, DC 20003 202-543-7104 (Phone) 202-543-1454 (Facsimile) Attorney for Petitioner ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANGELO DIVISION In re ) Civil Action File No.: ) ) ) ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, ) PETITION FOR THE ) PERPETUATION OF ) TESTIMONY AND Petitioner ) PRODUCTION OF ) DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO ) RULE 27 F.R.C.P. ) Now comes the above listed Petitioner and shows the Court the following: Petitioner Orenthal James Simpson (hereinafter “Simpson”) is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, State of California. Petitioner is a prospective plaintiff in an action intended to be commenced in a Court of the United States. The Petitioner is presently unable to bring an action or cause it to be brought at this time due to Petitioner being a defendant in two separate cases still pending within the Courts of the State of California. Due to the impending expiration of time, Petitioner seeks to invoke the power and authority of this Court to protect the integrity of certain information under the control of General Telephone and Electric (hereinafter “GTE”) from destruction. GTE is a national telecommunications corporation whose legal compliance department is located at P.O. Box 1001, MC TXD01613, San Angelo, TX 76902-1001, 888-483-2600 The Court should take judicial notice of Case Numbers: BA 097211,SC 036340, SC 031947, SC 036876, A 714254, G 021264, Superior Court, State of California. Petitioner Simpson, through and by his counsel, hereby petitions the Court, pursuant to Rule 27 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter “F.R.C.P.”) for the perpetuation of testimony, by requesting that deposition be allowed and a subpoena duces tecum be issued pursuant to a court order compelling GTE of San Angelo, Texas to produce the telephone statements for all telephone lines that terminated at the premises of Louis and Juditha Brown (hereinafter known collectively as “Browns”) of Dana Pointe, Orange County, California, for the date of June 12, 1994 between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and midnight for inspection pursuant to Rule 34 of the F.R.C.P. The Petitioner respectfully applies for a court order to be served upon the Custodian of Records and/or Ms. Janie Pierce, at GTE Legal Compliance, P.O. Box 1001, Mail Code TXD01613, San Angelo, Texas 76902-1001, to immediately avail themselves for deposition and to protect, preserve, and produce for inspection all telephone statements belonging to the Browns for June 12, 1994; as well as to protect, preserve, and produce for inspection all telephone statements from GTE, to include, but not limited to, electronic data gathering vault, microfiche, and other data collecting records or hand gathered data, subpoenaed by either the prosecution or the defense, in Petitioner’s criminal trial: People of the State of California versus Orenthal James Simpson - Case No. BA 097211 and also referenced in civil trial Case No. SC 036340. The Petitioner’s application is being made to determine the exact time Juditha Brown (hereinafter “Juditha”), mother of Nicole Brown Simpson (hereinafter “Nicole”), last spoke with her daughter prior to Nicole’s death. The determination of the time of their last phone conversation is essential to the complete exoneration of Simpson. A telephone conversation was testified to in both criminal and civil trials, but an official copy of the phone statement was never introduced into evidence. This telephone statement is the most crucial, relevant exculpatory piece of evidence that goes to the fact that Nicole was alive at 11:00 p.m., June 12, 1994, as Simpson departed for Los Angeles International Airport (hereinafter “LAX”) via limousine, supporting his claim of innocence. Petitioner has attempted, with due diligence, to acquire said telephone statements from his criminal and civil attorneys, who have been unable to produce them. The civil courts, furthermore, are not in possession of these statements; and lastly, all exhibits in the custody of the Los Angeles County Superior Court Department of Exhibits have been removed based upon an order for permanent release signed by Superior Court Judge John Reid. Petitioner is justifiably concerned at this time that the telephone records in question will be destroyed by GTE as a matter of standard procedure related to time limitations involved with the process of archiving and/or record keeping within the telecommunications industry. Petitioner Simpson has attempted in good faith to acquire said telephone statements by serving GTE with a subpoena duces tecum in February of 1999 (P-Ex. 1: “Subpoena Duces Tecum and Service - Feb. 15, 1999”). Said telephone statements are now believed by Petitioner to be public record due to the fact that the Browns’ phone statement was subpoenaed by the Los Angeles County Prosecutor’s Office in June of 1994. The GTE Custodian of Records in San Angelo, Texas has informed Petitioner, via legal counsel, that release of said statements would require a court order, in conjunction with the aforementioned subpoena duces tecum, pursuant to the California Public Utility Law § 2891 et seq. The following issues, based upon time, become the crucial justification as to why the Petitioner’s request for perpetuation of testimony should be granted: People’s Exhibit #35 during the Petitioner’s criminal trial, and Exhibit #26 during the subsequent civil trial, both entitled “Juditha Brown’s Phone Record - June 12, 1994”, show that Juditha called the Brentwood Restaurant, Mezzaluna (hereinafter “Mezzaluna”), from her home in Dana Pointe at 9:37 p.m. Although People’s Exhibit #35 was stipulated to by Simpson’s attorney, Robert Shapiro (hereinafter “Shapiro”) in the criminal trial, and Exhibit #26 was stipulated to by Simpson’s attorney, Dan Leonard (hereinafter “Leonard”) in the civil trial, the subpoenaed copy of the official phone statement was never entered into evidence, nor did it ever receive an exhibit number. Based on the testimony of several witnesses at Mezzaluna, the Browns left the restaurant between 8:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. (P-Ex. 2: “Chart of Witnesses and Testimony to the Time the Browns Left Mezzaluna Restaurant”). It would have been uniquely impossible for the Browns to have driven the equivalent of a 90 mile journey down the congested San Diego (405) freeway, or any other Southern California highway going from Brentwood to Dana Pointe, that Sunday evening in June, arriving home in less than ONE (1) hour prior to Juditha calling back to Mezzaluna at 9:37 p.m., as Deputy District Attorney Marcia Clark (hereinafter “Clark”) introduced in the criminal trial (P-Ex. 3: “Criminal Trial Testimony of Karen Crawford - Feb. 7, 1995”) and Attorney Daniel Petrocelli (hereinafter “Petrocelli”) introduced in the civil trial (P-Ex. 4: “Civil Trial Testimony of Karen Crawford - Oct. 25, 1996”). There exists a discrepancy between the time that Clark and Petrocelli stated Juditha made the phone calls back to Brentwood from her home in Dana Pointe, and the time it would take the Browns to drive from Brentwood to Dana Pointe, in order for Juditha to make said calls. This has a direct bearing on Simpson’s Appeal of the Santa Monica verdict, and his children’s custody trial. Petitioner’s assertions of the time inconsistencies created by People’s Exhibit #35 in the criminal trial and Civil Exhibit #26 have been confirmed by interviews with the California Highway Patrol, the California Department of Transportation (“CALTRANS”), and the Automobile Association of America (“AAA”). Those interviews substantiate the drive time from Brentwood to Dana Pointe is between an hour and a half and two hours, almost twice the duration inexplicably submitted by officers of the court. On June 13, 1994, the morning following the murders, Louis Brown (hereinafter “Louis”), stated to Claudine Ratcliffe (hereinafter “Ratcliffe”), Field Investigator for the Los Angeles County Department of the Coroner, that his wife, Juditha, spoke with his daughter, Nicole, by phone at about 11:00 p.m. (P-Ex. 5: “Los Angeles County Department of the Coroner, Claudine Ratcliffe’s Field Investigative Report - June 13, 1994”). This more closely approximates the travel time from Brentwood, ten miles north of LAX Airport, south through Los Angeles and Orange Counties, to Dana Pointe, near the border of San Diego County. On June 20, 1994, one week after the murders, and three days after Petitioner was arrested, Louis went to the Los Angeles County Forensic Sciences Building and changed his initial statement regarding the time Nicole and her mother spoke by phone from 11:00 p.m. back to about 9:30 p.m. (P-Ex. 6: “Los Angeles County Department of the Coroner, Amended Field Investigative Report - Re: Changes to Louis Brown Statement -June 20, 1994”). During the preliminary hearing, the official Coroner’s Field Investigative Report (See P-Ex. 5) was objected to as hearsay by Deputy District Attorney William Hodgman (hereinafter “Hodgman”), and thereafter sustained by Judge Kathleen Kennedy-Powell (hereinafter “Judge Powell”) (P-Ex. 7: “Preliminary Hearing Testimony of Dr. Irwin Golden - July 8, 1994”). Telephone statements were subpoenaed from GTE and “ceremoniously” acknowledged in open court by Clark and Judge Powell (P-Ex. 8: “Preliminary Hearing Transcript of June 30, 1994 and Minute Orders of June 30, 1994”). The statements were opened by Clark on national television, in the presence of Court Reporter, Sarah Caplan. Clark then returned them to the Clerk of the Court. The subpoenaed copy of the phone statement was subsequently suppressed and never entered into evidence in neither the preliminary hearing, the criminal, civil, nor three (3) appellate trials of Simpson. A week later, in Judge Powell’s chambers, Shapiro offered to stipulate that 10:17 p.m. was the actual time Juditha made the phone calls back to Brentwood the night Nicole was murdered, based upon a copy of the phone statements provided to Shapiro by Clark and Judge Powell (P-Ex. 9: “Preliminary Hearing Discussion in Judge Powell’s Chambers: Certified Transcript of Arnella Sims, Court Reporter - July 8, 1994”). Seven months later, in February 1995, during the criminal trial, Shapiro stipulated to a completely different time of 9:37 p.m. as the time Juditha supposedly made the phone calls back to Brentwood (See P-Ex. 3), and Leonard inadvertently made the same stipulation during the civil trial (See P-Ex. 4). The GTE telephone statements subpoenaed by the People of the State of California, and filed by the Court on June 30, 1994, have disappeared from the twentythree volumes of Simpson’s criminal files (P-Ex. 10: “Letter from Custodian of Files for Los Angeles County Superior Court, Regarding General Telephone and Electric (“GTE”) Phone Records - Dec. 29, 1998”) and Prosecuting Attorney Hodgman has since removed all of the exhibits in the custody of Los Angeles County Superior Court Exhibit Department, including the telephone statements for which Petitioner is requesting this court order (P-Ex. 11: “Letter from Custodian of Exhibits for Los Angeles County Superior Court Regarding William Hodgman Removing Exhibits - January 19, 1999”). Based upon Clark’s and Petrocelli’s exhibits, as well as sworn testimony, their implication that the Brown family drove from Brentwood to Dana Pointe in a Jeep sports utility vehicle, maintaining an average rate of speed exceeding 100 MPH for nearly 90 miles is preposterous. The manufacturers of such vehicles, with their narrow chassis, have issued cautions regarding instability at speeds far less than what has been calculated for the Brown family. The assumption that the family of six, including two small children, would be exceeding those cautionary velocities at such excessive speeds is unrealistic. The conclusion drawn by Petitioner is that the Brown family reached their home at a time much later than the 9:37 p.m. submitted on Clark’s Exhibit #35 and Petrocelli’s Exhibit #26. The actual time of the phone call between Juditha and Nicole, recorded on the official phone statement, will verify that the exhibits entered in the criminal and civil trials were fraudulent and would prove Nicole and Ronald Lyle Goldman (hereinafter “Ron”) were alive after 11:00 p.m. while Simpson was arriving at LAX airport via limousine. Notwithstanding, in the Civil Trial (#SC 036340) and 2nd Appellate Court (#SC 031947) Henry S. Johnson, MD (hereinafter “Dr. Johnson”), an independent medical expert, attempted to present, as a disinterested party, an Amicus Curiae Brief based on the autopsy reports, regarding the fact that there were at least two assailants who murdered Nicole (L.A. County Autopsy #94-05136) and Ron (L.A. County Autopsy #94-05135), using two distinguishably different knives. The autopsy reports clearly indicate the more lethal assailant was left-handed. The Amicus Curiae Brief details irrefutable evidence, which most probably would have resulted in an innocent verdict for Simpson in the civil trial. Dr. Johnson’s Amicus Curiae Brief was denied. A Petition to the 2nd Appellate Court to Reconsider the Amicus Curiae Brief addressed the time discrepancy issue, but has been disregarded (P-Ex. 12: “Appellate Order for Denial and Petition to Reconsider the Amicus Curiae Brief of Henry S. Johnson, MD - July 16, 1998”). Furthermore, of all the phone numbers which were listed in the Exhibit Department log book for the Simpson criminal trial (#BA 097211) none of the phone numbers match those on People’s Exhibit #35 introduced by Clark, nor Exhibit #26 introduced by Petrocelli (P-Ex. 13: “GTE Telephone Numbers Given Los Angeles County Superior Court Exhibit Department ID Numbers for Case No. BA 097211”). In addition, the GTE phone numbers listed in the Exhibit Department log book only show calls made from Los Angeles (310 area code) telephone exchanges, although Juditha Brown testified that she made the calls on her home phone in Dana Pointe, Orange County, which is in a (714) area code (P-Ex. 14: “Civil Trial Testimony of Juditha Brown - Dec. 6, 1996”). The actions of the adverse parties toward the Petitioner were knowingly unwarranted and have resulted in violation of his Constitutional and Civil Rights. The Petitioner is a defendant in two separate matters in the state courts of California: one, an appeal of a $34 million civil judgment against Petitioner, the other, a trial involving the custody of his two minor children. (Due to their status within the state courts of California, Petitioner is unable to bring this action to a Court of the United States at this time.) The Petitioner expects to be a plaintiff in regard to any future action in the United States District Court whose subject matter will, in all probability, include obstruction of justice; a conspiracy to obstruct justice; violations of Petitioner’s Civil Rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and 42 U.S.C. § 1985; violations of Petitioner’s federally protected guarantees under the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments; willful and malicious defamation of character; wrongful prosecution; selective, vindictive prosecution; gross malfeasance of officers of the court in the State of California; and willful suppression of evidence. The Petitioner is confident that if such contemplated action is filed, this Court would have proper jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337 and 1343. The Petitioner firmly believes that this matter would be cognizable in any Court of the United States. The Petitioner expects to name GTE and Does #1-1000 and Roes #1-1000 as adverse parties: General Telephone and Electric Corporation, a.k.a. GTE Legal Compliance Department / Custodian of Records P.O. Box 1001, MC TXD01613 San Angelo, TX 76902-1001 County of Los Angeles 500 W. Temple Street, Room 383 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Daniel M. Petrocelli, Esq. Mitchell, Silberberg & Knupp, Inc. 11377 West Olympic Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90064 Wherefore, Petitioner has no other recourse than to turn to this Court as a last resort to producing these important telephone statements for Petitioner’s examination. The Petitioner respectfully asks of this Court to issue an order compelling Ms. Janie Pierce or the Custodian of Records for GTE Corporation’s Legal Compliance Department to avail themselves immediately for deposition and the protection, preservation, and production for inspection all telephone statements of the Browns for the date of June 12, 1994 between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and midnight; and to protect, preserve, and produce for inspection all other GTE statements subpoenaed by either the prosecution or defense in regard to the case of the People of the State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson, Case Number BA 097211, and cited in Civil Case Number SC 036340 for the purpose of perpetuating their testimony. Dated: Dated: By: By: Douglas E. McCann Mary Blevins-Cox Attorney for Petitioner Attorney for Petitioner Bar No. 119928 Bar No. 415777 13450 Maxella Ave., Suite 225 18 Gesford Court, S.E. Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 Washington, DC 20003 All correspondence c/o: All correspondence c/o: Ocean Medicolegal Investigations Ocean Medicolegal Investigations 13517 Hawthorne Boulevard 13517 Hawthorne Boulevard Hawthorne, CA 90250 Hawthorne, CA 90250 Phone: 310-644-2600/Fax: 310-644-3702 Phone: 310-644-2600/Fax: 310-644-3702 I verify, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at on . Dated: By: Attorney for Petitioner Table of Exhibits P-Ex. 1: “Subpoena Duces Tecum and Service - February 15, 1999” P-Ex. 2: “Chart of Witnesses and Testimony to the Time the Browns Left Mezzaluna Restaurant” P-Ex. 3: “Criminal Trial Testimony of Karen Crawford - Feb. 7, 1995 - Case No. BA 097211” P-Ex. 4: “Civil Trial Testimony of Karen Crawford - Oct. 25, 1996 - Case No. SC 036340” P-Ex. 5: “Los Angeles County Department of the Coroner, Claudine Ratcliffe’s Field Investigative Report - June 13, 1994” P-Ex. 6: “Los Angeles County Department of the Coroner, Amended Field Investigative Report - Re: Changes to Louis Brown Statement - June 20, 1994” P-Ex. 7: “Preliminary Hearing Testimony of Dr. Irwin Golden - July 8, 1994 - Case No. BA 097211” P-Ex. 8: “Preliminary Hearing Transcript of June 30, 1994 and Minute Orders of June 30, 1994” P-Ex. 9: “Preliminary Hearing Discussion in Judge Powell’s Chambers: Certified Transcript of Arnella Sims, Court Reporter - July 8, 1994” P-Ex. 10: “Letter from Custodian of Files for Los Angeles County Superior Court, Regarding General Telephone and Telegraph (“GTE”) Phone Records - December 29, 1998” P-Ex. 11: “Letter from Custodian of Exhibits for Los Angeles County Superior Court, Regarding William Hodgman Removing Exhibits - January 19, 1999” P-Ex. 12: “Appellate Order for Denial and Petition to Reconsider the Amicus Curiae Brief of Henry S. Johnson, MD - July 16, 1998” P-Ex. 13: “GTE Telephone Numbers Assigned Los Angeles County Superior Court Exhibit Department ID Numbers for Case No. BA 097211” P-Ex. 14: “Civil Trial Testimony of Juditha Brown - December 6, 1996 - Case No. SC 036340”<<