In Session: Sidebar  « Back to Blog Main
September 25, 2008

O.J. Simpson's former manager on and off the stand

Posted: 02:32 PM ET

NEW YORK - O.J. Simpson's former manager, Mike Gilbert, completed his testimony after testifying briefly about items of memorabilia linked to the armed robbery and kidnapping trial.

Mike Gilbert, Simpson's former manager, testified briefly on Thursday

Gilbert was on the stand for only about 20 minutes after the judge limited the scope of his testimony. He testified that Simpson had given him the items in question.

Simpson claims that Gilbert had stolen his belongings and thought he would meet Gilbert at the Palace hotel on the night of the confrontation and recover these items - including NFL game presentation balls, his Hall of Fame plaque, family photographs and a picture of him and former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover.

The judge did not allow testimony supporting the prosecution's contention that Simpson was attempting to hide memorabilia so he wouldn't have to hand it over to the Goldman estate as part of a $33.5 million dollar civil wrongful death judgment.

The judge also ruled that Gilbert was not to be questioned about his tell-all book in which Gilbert claims that Simpson confessed to killing his ex-wife. After the book came out, Simpson's attorney Yale Galanter said that none of Gilbert's claims are true and that Gilbert is "a delusional drug addict who needs money."

In Session continues its live coverage of the trial.

-Bob Regan, In Session senior executive producer

Filed under: Uncategorized


Share this on:
Georgia   September 25th, 2008 2:58 pm ET

Please tell me why OJ is able to sit there in direct view of the jury and have all of the facial expressions , head shaking and frowning. The jury Is , I am sure, watching every move he is making. He is trying to look so innocent like he has nothing to hide. Why can't the judge direct him to stay still ahd watch his facial emotions. I would think that the jury could form an opinion, if they are undecided, on OJ's facial and emotional direct.
Texarkaka. Texas

Kathie, Ontario. Canada   September 25th, 2008 3:38 pm ET

I guess for the same reason that Walter Alexander was allowed
to bring a Bible on the stand and read it while the lawyers were
at a sidebar with the judge and not admonished for it .
If he wasn't trying to influence the jury and give them a false
impression of what he is all about I'll eat my laptop.

mary   September 25th, 2008 3:58 pm ET

i was wondering if the d. a.'s can write a book after the trial is over .i watched the first trial and yes i think he did it but i also can see how the not guilty verdict was reached."i never heard of o.j. simpson before " and this trial in my opinion sounds like "i'll bring you down "o.j. trial

Deb   September 25th, 2008 4:00 pm ET

Let O.J. make all the faces he wants in that chair, if he is so outraged by the testamony then let him get up on the stand. I bet we won't hear a word from either defendent.

David   September 25th, 2008 4:09 pm ET

Hey OJ,
the juice is getting squeezed right out of you in front of all of America. If you cant do the time then dont do the crime. Boo hoo poor OJ.

Nick   September 25th, 2008 4:16 pm ET

What's wrong with a defendant expressing emotions?

Especially an innocent one that is caught up in a Modern version of the salem which trials?

What? Texarkakas don't like the United States Consitution?

Mexico, Iraq and several other countries are looking for new residents.

hint, hint....move!!!!

nancy p   September 25th, 2008 4:19 pm ET

i think it was a good idea that the judge did not allow question mr, gilbert about his book , it would have been predjucial to the prosecution,, if she allowed it in evidende,,, and it was a win for the defense that the goldmans lawyers were not allowed to testify,, this trial is about an alleged robbery ,, its not about the goldmans trying to get oj's memorabilia,,,,,, to kathie another blogger ,, i think your statement was kinda humorous about alexanders bible,, and you eating your laptop,, i agree what was he trying to do,,, show another side to himself,, a pimp is a pimp is a pimp,,,, no matter readin the bible or not,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, again this trial has a cast of chacters of which ive never seen viewing in session for the years ive been watching this,,,,,,,, its like a mickey mouse courtroom,,,,,,,like my cousin vinny,,,,,, all of these witnesses,, have criminal backgrounds,, well for the exception of the few,,,,,,,,,,,, oj oj oj please if you get a not guilty verdict ,, stay out of trouble if you can ,, and thats a huge if you can

angela   September 25th, 2008 4:31 pm ET

o.j. did that in the murder trial as well. they don't rebuff him b/c he is "famous" and will scream discrimination. i don't really think it will work this time though.

jim   September 25th, 2008 4:34 pm ET

But they made Walter Alexander put the Bible away...So I guess it is o.k. with you they put O.J. away.

nancy   September 25th, 2008 4:40 pm ET

it's oj he can do what he wants, remember he got away with murder. this idiot thinks he is invincible, little does he realize what goes around comes around. I am sure everyone realize's why did his attorney's accept an all white jury, well because if they convict him there is your race card....i am so over oj he is the biggest joke out there and the people that follow him are an even bigger joke. I would spit right in front of his feet if i was to ever come face to face with that idiot.

Duane   September 25th, 2008 4:59 pm ET

In response to Georgia:

A judge cannot direct a defendant's facial expressions–even if that defendant is OJ Simpson. Imagine if you were a defendant, and the person testifying was saying something you don't like, don't agree with, or think is a lie. Do you think you would "stay still" and not show your emotions?

Anyway, I seriously doubt that Simpson's facial expressions are going to have any influence on the jury's decision.

Annette   September 25th, 2008 5:14 pm ET

This trial is as much as of a joke as the murder trial for OJ was. His defense attorneys know exactly what their doing and will get him off scott free once again. How blind is the justice system to all the antics going on. Why dont they just turn him lose and give him a parade. He might be able to fool the judge and jury but he can not fool God and on his judgement day he will be sweating in his boots.

Richie-Rich from Brooklyn Pk,MN   September 25th, 2008 5:27 pm ET

This is really sad!... we're passing down foolish and mindness time,
to point a fringer at O.J Simpson. when we can see his man was set-up.
I'd want my things back aswell!! Sure we know the name
" O.J Simpson " ubet someone wants to make $50,000.dollars on the mans name. THIS IS FOOLISH BARK,BARK!!!

YA,DIG!
GET YA THINGS BACK!

Arnie   September 25th, 2008 5:46 pm ET

The flips so far have all corroborated the fact that guns were used. That will be all that is necessary to convict since it is incredulous that the defendants knew nothing about the guns (heat). Also there is the voice on the tape which supports a charge of "kidnapping". The defendant is heard saying "don't move" which, as I understand is an element of the crime of kidnapping.

chelsea   September 25th, 2008 5:56 pm ET

OJ thinks he is still the "star." Delusions of grandur and all that goes with it. The man thinks he is above the law and the law does not pertain to him. I hope that jury listens carefully and does not make their decision on the Defenses character bashing of witnesses who turned for Prosecution.

william   September 25th, 2008 6:01 pm ET

O.J. will more than likely be found guilty because he probably got away with murder before and no matter what the jurors said, they will be swayed by this fact alone. Hwe will be punished for a crime he probably did even though he might be innocent of these charges.

giacama   September 25th, 2008 6:14 pm ET

legally retrieve all of his assets, use his assets to pay all or part of his debts;GOLDMAN`S etc. and then bury him and his so called legacy , a better thought: before you bury the "savage" use a stilleto!

C.Jackson (California)   September 25th, 2008 7:10 pm ET

I like the Judge and I'm glad she takes control by staying with the issue and not allowing her court room to become a circus or free for all witch hunt.

Karen Egesdahl   September 25th, 2008 8:09 pm ET

I really am having a problem with this whole trial. Why, Why? OJ is lending his name once again giving fame and glory to yet another defense team. He will fly on this one too. Someone got to the defense witnessess, surprise, surprise and now they are going to turn the worm for OJ. Now I know how he can sit in the court room, yet again acting like he is so bored with the whole deal. I used to have faith in the justice system. Does the J in OJ actually stand for Justice?

Patricia   September 25th, 2008 8:25 pm ET

Please people! OJ is nothing more than a narcisstic pathological sociopath.

Enough of the media coverage; it's what he craves!

Linda Sharp   September 25th, 2008 9:47 pm ET

If OJ is convicted for this offense the justice system in America truly does not work. Whether I believe he is guilty of other crimes or not is not of importance, the same as it should be with the juriors and media. The the media convicts him on a daily basis, not one single day goes by the the past is not mentioned. Today is today, not yesterday, but the court system and media are determined to enter the past in some form. If this crime was as severe, and dangerous as the D.A. protrays it to be then there would have been no plea bargaining for anyone. It would be for the safety of everyone if they all were imprisoned. Itsn't it amazing the OJ is the only one they are interested in putting behind bars. If I were the judge I would have already declared a mistrial, and if I was on the jury I would have to hang it. I believe in justice, and attempt to believe in the justice system but this is totally bias. Rediculous.

gameover   September 25th, 2008 10:27 pm ET

For the most part, the witnesses have been consistant with what and how things happened. Let's see what the defendants have to say from the stand...what's that?...they're not going to defend themselves on the witness stand?...Oh...THAT answers a lot of questions about what the truth is vs. what some folks (starts with a K) would like to believe.

jon   September 25th, 2008 10:47 pm ET

I think riccio set all this up for the money and i also think that yale will get oj off three and o for oj now lets move on to anouther case.

lotusjani   September 26th, 2008 6:46 am ET

Why not just put an armor on O.J.? The judge can not order O.J. of his demeanor, maybe his attorneys but if the don't see fit to tell him, then let O.J. alone.
And Kathie, yes, bible or not, this man is a crook, a liar, a con man, and all those men are just a bunch of bandits trying to make fame and fortune on O.J.'s name. This was a set up big time by Riccio, and they all want to look innocent and made stupid pleas to get off the hook, but we can through all of them, and Nevada is trying to get O.J. on something that happened years ago. Justice is justice no matter for who.

Tracey   September 26th, 2008 9:14 am ET

Please- so many people trying to make a buck off of OJ – who – whether you agree or not was found not guilty of murder. He is entitled to a fair trial for this offence alone because that is the law. People need to put aside the last trial and see that maybe – just maybe – he was conned by Riccio- who gets off scott free.

Walter Fielding   September 26th, 2008 11:05 am ET

I understand the ruling why they were not allowed to ask Mike Gilbert how he got the items in the first place, but didn't the defense in their OPENING ARGUMENTS, tell the jury there was no link to the Goldman case? Since the DEFENSE brought it up and said there was no link, why can't the prosecution bring in a witness to refute that claim?

G. E. Smith   September 26th, 2008 1:35 pm ET

All these people crying set up and entrapment-scuse me while i hurl..Old saying, If ya lay down with dogs your gonna wake up with fleas. If O J quits hanging with thugs he wouldnt get 'set up' but where he's going is chock full of them. lol

wally gator   September 26th, 2008 1:50 pm ET

Why didn't Simpson go to the police in regards to his stolen items?

G. E. Smith   September 27th, 2008 5:22 pm ET

To Wally G

Because they tried but no police force including the fbi wanted to touch it because of the court seizure orders by the goldmans. They suggested if he really still owned what he was claiming he should get a lawyer and his own seizure order. Then you have the right to have a sherriff execute that order for you. OJ didnt do that he got thugs and guns and took it by force. Hence armed robbery and kidnapping for him.

Jim Evans   September 29th, 2008 11:10 am ET

Doesn't sound good for OJ after the witnesses testified.
I realize the defense attorneys are trying to make those
witnesses look like liars, but, it is hard to imagine that
they all would lie under oath and risk their plea agreements.

Ladont   September 29th, 2008 11:14 am ET

Linda Sharp, A hung jury or a mistrial will only result in OJ being retried (Without verdict, it's not double jeopardy) which might not be the worst thing as then OJ can beg his friends for even more money for his next trial.

I'm saving my money as the memorabelia is going to end up in the hands of Fred Goldman regardless of the outcome of the trial and there will be another great auction/

pj   September 29th, 2008 8:42 pm ET

The issues are, these men are criminal . These men are wasting tax payer money on bull sh-. They wanted to use his name for fame and money and set him up bothways.They all wanted money from him because they know that most people don't like him because they felted his killed his wife. Well there more to a story than what is said about O.J his wife ect. The FACT ARE WE DON'T KNOW HIM OR HIS WIFE There is no way this man get get a fair hearning. People in this world care nothing about the truth. If they hear something about you and believe you did even a hearing can't help than the system is wrong. How crazy is that

sundra   September 30th, 2008 9:03 pm ET

this judge have not been fear to OJ LAWYERS SHE HAVE GIVEN THE DA EVERTHING THAT THEY WANTED SHE HAVE TALKED DOWN TO OJ LAWYERS DURING THE CASE THE JURY HAVE SEEN HER DO THIS SHE WANT OJ IN JAIL LIKE THE DA MR GALANTER SHOULD OF CALLED A MISTRAIL MCCLINTON SAID THAT WALTER ALEXANDER SEEN HIM GETTING HIS GUN THEN ALEXANDER ASK HIM TO GIVE HIM A GUN TOO THIS CASE IS ABOUTGETTING OJ DURING THIS CASE THE DA HAVE CAME AFTER ONLY OJ I HOPE THE THE JURY CAN SEE WHAT THE DA DID THEY WANT OJ TO PAY FOR THAT OTHER CASE AND MIKE GILBERT IS A LIAR I HOPE MR. GALANTER CAN GET HIM HE IS ON THE DR PHI SHOW MAKING UP THINGS THIS IS ALBOUT MONEY SOME OF THE MEN THAT WAS INTHAT ROOM PUTS OJ IN FRONTOF MCCLINTON THESE MEN HAVE LIED I HOPE THE JURY CAN SEE THAT THEY SAID ALL OF THIS SO THEY WONT GO TO JAIL

Notaplaya   October 1st, 2008 2:05 pm ET

After listening to all so far, to me it all comes back to Ricccio trying to make money off O.J. and he made it. Con man and double-talker, and he's worried about his crediibility!! If it wasnt for him and his tape recorder, none of this would have happened.

Katrina Ehr   October 1st, 2008 2:19 pm ET

I cannot believe this defense attorney for Mr. Stewart. I'm a recent Law School graduate and it blows my mind that this defense attorney keeps asking leading questions of witnesses on direct, something that IS taught in Law School. He did not even know how to submit documents to be admitted into evidence, something I learned my FIRST week of trial skills class. It's making me sit here and shake my head, if you ask me, this guy needs to ask his Law School for his money back.

SONI JAMES   October 1st, 2008 3:56 pm ET

I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD GO TO JAIL CAUSE THEY PLAYED A
BIG PART IN THIS ACT O.J IS NOT THE ONLY ONE AND FOR YOU
PEOPLE THAT'S STILL MAD FROM THE OTHER CASE GET OVER IT.

I RESEPCT THE JUICE.

susan   October 1st, 2008 4:59 pm ET

i think oj was set up for people to make more money off of him i think rucchio is a scumbag and he knew what he was doing i think it is going to be a hung jury and if they do find oj guilty they should also find the rest of the men involved with this guilty also because every one of them were out t make a buck off of oj including mike gilbert with his tell all book and his tell all truth to the goldmans now after 14 years about where every thing is i am sure in 18 years of being oj manager he mademega bucks now his well is all drid up good luck oj

CJ Stewart   October 1st, 2008 5:17 pm ET

GALANTER IS PAYING EVERYBODY OFF.....PLUS HE IS DEFFENDING THE MURDERER FOR FREE......THIS WAY HE BECOMES FAMOUS AND GETS PAID 100 FOLD IN THE LONG RUN

Teresa Wallace   October 4th, 2008 2:23 pm ET

I completely thing this was entrapment and a setup. I do not like mr simpson, because I have high doubts about his older aquittal, However, this current trial and verdict was wrong! We have convicted felons who arranged this whole sell of his stolen property... we have "victims" who even said they should drop charges cuz they felt it was a setup... Mr Simpson didn't even have a weapon yet charged with armed robbery, and kidnapping? Pleaseeee. And what about how the video and audio recordings were so conveniently set up? And how in the world can they call the jury impartial? where did they find those ppl at lol I duno, he may need punished for previous events, but our justice system shouldn't allow this type of bogus framing of anyone! Good ole american justice hurrahhhh!

TW   October 6th, 2008 1:27 am ET

interesting... just read the 116-question document given to the jurors, and the very first one I read, juror # 100621058 contradicted themselves in the questions. One question asked if they listen to radio and they said "NO" ... then at the bottom, a question asked where they heard about this case from, and they said "The Radio" lmao what a sham

Leave Your Comment


 

Comments are moderated by CNN, in accordance with the CNN Comment Policy, and may not appear on this blog until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.


subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Sidebar takes you behind the scenes of the day's legal headlines with breaking news and in-depth analysis from In Session's anchors and correspondents.

Contact us
  • Questions or comments? E-mail
In Session Team
Jean Casarez
Correspondent
Jean Casarez
Beth Karas
Correspondent
Beth Karas
Mike Brooks
Law Enforcement Analyst
Mike Brooks
Midwin Charles
Legal Contributor
Midwin Charles
Sunny Hostin
Legal Contributor
Sunny Hostin
Powered by WordPress.com VIP