< Previous Page
It was Galanter’s decision not to have Simpson testify, Grasso said.
Under questioning from H. Leon Simon, attorney for the state, Grasso acknowledged the trial judge, Jackie Glass, specifically asked Simpson if he wanted to testify and he said no.
"Mr. Galanter told him, ‘This is the way it’s going to be,’" Grasso said, adding he would have put him on the stand.
He said Simpson’s confidence in Galanter was born of the acquittal he gained for Simpson in a road rage case in Florida five years after his 1995 acquittal on murder charges in the stabbing deaths of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman.
Galanter is now the focus of Simpson’s motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel and conflict of interest. He has declined to comment until he takes the stand Friday.
There are questions of money, too. Grasso accused Galanter of lining his own pockets while telling him they were "operating on a shoestring" and couldn’t afford to hire expert witnesses. Simpson’s business attorney, Leroy "Skip" Taft, testified by phone Tuesday that he kept getting big bills from Galanter but no explanation of what costs were eating up hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Witness after witness spoke of a proposed plea bargain that Galanter turned down on Simpson’s behalf but no one was sure the defendant knew about it.
There were rumors that Galanter gave his blessings to Simpson’s plan to show up at the hotel room and reclaim his memorabilia, which two dealers were trying to peddle.
Retired Clark County District Attorney David Roger, who prosecuted Simpson, was asked whether investigators determined if Galanter helped Simpson plan the hotel room confrontation.
"He said he did not advise Mr. Simpson to commit armed robbery," Roger said.
"And he said he wasn’t there?" asked Simpson attorney Ozzie Fumo.
"Yes," Roger replied.
Others have testified that Galanter was in Las Vegas and had dinner with Simpson the night before.
The other prosecutor, Chris Owens, testified about discovering phone calls between the two but hiding that fact from the judge. He identified at least 10 calls in the days preceding and on Sept. 13, 2007.
Both prosecutors described an agreement with the Simpson defense that was read to the jury saying there were no calls.
"So you stipulated to events that weren’t true?" Fumo asked Owens.
"It was in the form of a legal construct," Owens replied and said the judge encouraged it because she didn’t want to confuse the jury with another issue.
This is Simpson’s last chance under state law to prove that he was wrongly convicted. A federal court appeal is still possible.
Copyright 2013 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.