Day 14, 2 of 3, 49:08
JSS: Mr. Martinez.
JM: Ma'am, one of the things that you told us as it applies to the text messages was that it was Mr. Nurmi who told you the time difference, right?
MF: Who indicated...
KN: Wait a minute, this mischaracterizes her testimony, it was the State's witness who provided that testimony.
JSS: Overruled
JM: Didn't you tell us that it was Mr. Nurmi that told you?
MF: It's, Mr. Nurmi had communicated...
KN: I'm gonna object, uh... move, uh. May we approach?
JSS: You may approach.
*sidebar*
JM: Ma'am isn't it true that it was Mr. Nurmi who told you about the time difference? Right?
MF: He's gonna want a yes or no answer to that your honor, and I can't give it to him. That is going to mischaracter-a-zize uh my response. But I would like to answer the question if you'll allow me.
JM: Ma'am, would you testify that you were sitting there, maybe 10 or 15 minutes ago, that it was Mr. Nurmi who gave you the information about the time? Yes or no?
MF: Same response, your honor.
JSS: Alright—
JM: You're saying you have problems with your memory? You can't remember saying that—in this courtroom—about the time difference? Yes or no?
KN: Objection, asked and answered. He's badgering the witness.
JSS: Overruled. You may answer.
MF: Your honor I'm sorry I can't answer either a yes or no, he again is mischaracterizing my response. I would like to respond if I may, if you'll allow me.
JM: No. I want to ask you about what you said in this courtroom earlier, and isn't it true that you said, in this courtroom earlier, with regard to the text messages, that that information, in terms of the time, that information was provided to you by Mr. Nurmi?
KN: I'll need to object again, this is the same question over and over, and over and over again.
JSS: Sustained.
JM: And ma'am, with regard to your testimony here in response to the question from the jury, you also indicated that you based your opinion partly on what was provided by the State to Mr. Nurmi and was then provided to you. Do you remember saying that?
MF: Your honor, that's not a yes or no answer and it misrepresents my response.
JSS: Alright.
JM: Go ahead, then, tell me what you said then, about that? About how the State provided—and specifically, whether it was your information, that the State provided the information—to the defense?
MF: In general, if the prosecuting attorneys get, uh, first landed on the case and get information and give that information to the defense attorney. So when I said that I got most of my information from the defense, that is true. Did it all come from the State? I don't think I said it all came from the State, but I said by and large they
JM: And in fact, with regard to the documents that said "work product" in them, that came from the defense, didn't it?
KN: Objection, this is beyond the scope of any of the juror questions.
JSS: Sustained.
JM: Well ma'am you were telling us of all the information that you were given to review in this case, to form your opinion, didn't you tell us about that?
KN: Objection, this is be-yond the scope of the juror's questions.
JSS: Overruled.
MF: Your honor, that's not a yes or no answer. That would misrepresent my testimony.
JM: How does it misrepresent your testimony, ma'am?
MF: It misrepresents the testimony, Mr. Martinez, because unfortunately my experience here with you has been that you've distorted what I've said.
JM: Obj—
MF: I'd like to finish my answer first!
JM: Judge, objection...
KN: She should be allowed— he asked her how and why, and see if she can answer
JSS: Okay, approach. Please.
JM: Ma'am, as it applies—
KN: I'm going to ask that she be allowed to answer—
JSS: Hold on. Court reporter.
KN: Oh.
JM: As it applies to your opinion, and the documents you based your opinion on, how did the State ever misrepresent—
JW: (Loudly sloshes court water and ice into her cup which is evidently sitting on top of the microphone at the DT's table)
JM: to YOU what documents were ever turned over to the defense?
KN: I'm going to object that mischaracterizes her testimony, yet again, and we also have the issue that she has not been allowed to answer the previous question.
JSS: Mr. Martinez?
JM: She's not going to answer my question.
JSS: Alright. Overruled. You may answer.
KN: What? Alright, well, I'm going to object just on the grounds that it misrepresents her testimony. She didn't say any of this.
JSS: Overruled. You may answer.
MF: (Mumbles) I'll just say what I said, I didn't say any of the things that you're stating so far.
JM: I did not hear you.
MF: (Yells) I DID NOT SAY THE THINGS that you're stating that I stated so far.
JM: You did indicate, you started to say something about misrepresentation by the State. My question to you is, what about the turning over of documents to the defense by the State, and the documents that you considered, how did the State misrepresent that?
KN: Objection, it mischaracterizes her testimony. She didn't even make that comment.
JSS: Overruled, you may answer.
MF: I didn't make that comment. I didn't make that statement and again, this is what I'm talking about in terms of misrepresenting what I stated. (Gesturing and leaning toward the jury) You need to trust your experts and attorneys and!
JM: Objection, the witness... (MF keeps talking over Juan's objection.)
JSS: Sus-tained! Next question.
--
It goes on and on like this. Her answer is a non-answer, every last time.
There is a nice highlight later where KN asks to approach and JSS says NO and he stops about halfway to the bench in total shock.
--
KN: Objection, asked and answered, badgering
MF: So you...
JSS: Overruled, you may answer
MF: So again this is another example of what I'm talking about in terms of misrepresenting. Um, I didn't say that, (gestures and leans toward jury) what you folks are hearing, you heard what I have to say. I am confused about the sequencing and what was asked and answered. Because when she was first interviewed it was by the first defense counsel team. Um, and, in, other interviews subsequent to that. I don't remember. I'm sorry. I wish I did. Truly. I wish I did. But I don't remember.
JM: The first interview—
KN: May we approach, your honor?
JSS: No.
JM: —by the first defense counsel team: what do you remember about Miss Reid saying about Mr. Alexander and whether or not he had sex with other women?
MF: (silence)
MF: My answer's not going to change, folks. Sorry.
JM: I'm sorry, I didn't hear what you said.
MF: (loudly) I said my answer is not going to change, that I had difficulty remembering exactly the sequence of A, B, and C. You can continue asking that, in the badgering way that your asking, I'm not sure that's going to make me remember more. Perhaps that's your style. All right. But I've already answered that on more. Than one. Occasion. I'm sorry.
JM: You answered it for defense counsel. I want you to answer it for me. My question is: what do you remember, from that first interview, about Miss Reid saying about Mr. Alexander and whether or not he had sex with other women?
KN: Objection, mischaracterizes her testimony and her answers to my questions. And again, it's asked and answered.
JSS: Overruled, you may answer.
MF: I feel like I can't, your honor, I feel like I've already answered.
JSS: All right.
