The judge in the O.J. Simpson trial Thursday refused to throw out a bloody glove and other evidence, rejecting a defense effort launched after portions of racial epithet-laced interviews with detective Mark Fuhrman were made public.
Judge Lance Ito issued the ruling a day after Fuhrman pleaded the Fifth Amendment when asked whether he planted evidence. Ito said newly discovered tapes of interviews with Fuhrman didn't require reversal of an earlier decision that admitted evidence found by Fuhrman and other detectives who entered Simpson's estate without a warrant the day after two murders.The defense contended the tapes cast doubt on whether Fuhrman was telling the truth about his justification for the warrantless entry.
On the tapes, Fuhrman described how evidence can be manufactured to create probable cause, although he did not suggest that evidence in the Simpson case was fabricated.
Ito said Fuhrman's credibility remained intact.
"The testimony of Fuhrman . . . is corroborated by the testimony of other witnesses," Ito wrote in a two-page ruling. "The motion is therefore denied."
Also Thursday, the court released transcripts that detailed an angry clash between lead Simpson attorney Johnnie Cochran Jr. and Ito during private conversations Wednesday. During the talks, Cochran told Ito he resented his tone, and the judge accused Cochran of contempt.
The face-offs came in a sidebar discussion and a subsequent closed-door meeting in chambers and reflected the tension created after Cochran blasted the judge in a news conference for his order limiting admission of the racist Fuhrman tapes.
In one of the sidebar discussions, attorneys are discussing whether prosecutor Christopher Darden went too far when he asked a question that prompted Laura Hart McKinny, who conducted the interviews on the Fuhrman tapes, to talk about "cover-ups." The defense said that opened the door to several more questions.
But Darden countered: "If she returns after lunch, I will impeach her with her love letters to Mark Fuhrman." Darden offered no further explanation. Earlier, Darden had asked McKinny to describe her relationship with Fuhrman, and she said it was purely professional.
When Fuhrman entered the courtroom Wednesday, he looked thinner and a little more tired than he did when he testified in March. His voice was quieter, more subdued. Still, he walked Marine Corps-straight, shoulders back, head held high.
He took the witness stand, but this time there was a defense attorney at his side.
Then, for all the world to see - except jurors - Fuhrman was confronted with point-blank questions on the issue that has sent the murder trial spinning and left the city reeling.
"Detective Fuhrman," defense attorney Gerald Uelmen asked, "did you plant or manufacture any evidence in this case?"
Fuhrman paused. His attorney, Darryl Mounger, whispered something to him. Fuhrman finally replied: "I assert my Fifth Amendment privilege."
Fuhrman had to invoke the Fifth Amendment on all questions to avoid opening himself to wide-ranging questions, said University of California, Los Angeles law professor Peter Arenella. The amendment offers blanket protection against self-incrimination. Witnesses cannot invoke its shield on some questions and then answer others, Arenella said.