Bakers' Testimony on "that day"

At trial, Louise Baker initially testified that she did not know what the police officers told the Hes on January 28, 2001 because ď[w]e didnít hear the conversation with the police.Ē† (Louise Baker, p. 473).†When confronted with her sworn interrogatory response, she switched back. Mr. Siegel asked Mrs. Baker to read her own sworn statement made in 2002:

Q.†† All right, starting with Deputy Blankenship, would you read that into the record, please?

A.†† "Deputy Blankenship was called to the home of the Petitioners on January 31st, 2001 when Mr. He and Ms. Luo insisted on removing the Court's ward from the Petitioners' home for the day, refused to leave when they were told that this Court's ward was sick and could not leave; was also a witness to the emotional and volatile outburst of Mr. He and Ms. Luo, and instructed Mr. He and Ms. Lieu not to return to the home of the Petitioners."

Q. And do you see the part where it says, ďAnd instructed Mr. He and Ms. Luo not††† to return to the home of the petitioners?Ē

A. On that day.

Q. Well, do you say ďon that dayĒ?

A. I must have left a few words out.

Q. You just happen to leave that word out?

A. Absolutely.

***************************

††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† Q.†† And would you also agree with me that you wanted them not to return to your home not only that day but for all future days?

A.†† We would not ever have them back in our home after the way they acted. That was twice that our household was uprooted and upset, and they did it in front of the child, did not care that they were upsetting everybody.

Q.†† And so your solution to the problem was to call The Exchange Club shortly after the January 28th, 2001 incident. Is that right?

A.†† Absolutely.

Q.†† And what did you set up with The Exchange Club?

A.†† I didn't set up anything.

(Louise Baker, p. 477; emphasis added).

At trial, when Jerry Baker was asked about his interrogatory response in which he, too, indicated that the Hes were instructed not to return to the home of the Bakers, the following exchange occurred:

Q.†† And isn't it true that on January 28th, 2001, the police, in fact, did tell the Hes not to return to your home?

A.†† I think they said don't return to my home that day.

Q.†† Okay, well, Mr. Baker were you here just last night when we were cross-examining your wife, Ms. Baker, about that very same question?

A.†† Yes, sir.

Q.†† And do you recall that I asked her about her answer to Interrogatory No. 3?

A.†† Yes, sir.

Q.†† And do you recall that I even told her in your presence that your answer to Interrogatory No. 3 was identical to her answer to Interrogatory No. 3.Do you recall that?

A.Yes, sir.

Q.†† And do you recall that in your answer to Interrogatory No. 3, you indicated under oath that the Hes were told not to return to your home, period, without qualification?Do you recall that?

A.†† Recall what?

Q.†† Would you like me to show you your answer to Interrogatory No. 3?

A.†† You can just tell me.That's fine.

Q.†† That the Hes were told by the police not to return to your home after January 28th, 2001?

A.Is there a question there?What is the question?

(Whereupon, the last question was read by the reporter.)

BY MR. SIEGEL:

Q. Did the police or did the police not instruct the Hes -- did they tell the Hes not to return to your home on January 28th, 2001?

A.I think they said don't return that day.

Q.Well, what time was it, Mr. Baker, that they said that?

A.†† It was after the Hes had left.

***********************

Q. Can you tell me why you didnít qualify your answer to Interrogatory No. 3 by simply saying what youíre trying to say right now, which is the police only told the Hes not to come back that day?

A. How many interrogatories were there?

Q. Mr. Baker, I am not the one answering these questions.

A. The only thing I could think of is there were so many there that that word- - you know, the extra word slipped by. I mean, I apologize.

Q. Well, when you signed the interrogatories, were you not advised by your attorney that itís under oath?

A. I wasnít- - if I would have realized that - - and I should have- - I would have changed it, but I didnít realize it.

Q. Realized what?

A. If it says that they were told not to return to our home, then Iím mistaken.

Q.†† So you come in here today in court two years or so later telling us that you're mistaken?Is that how I understand your testimony -- three years later?

A.†† When was that done?

Q.†† Are you asking me when the interrogatory answers were done?

A.†† Yes, sir.

Q.†† Mr. Baker, it looks like you signed the interrogatories on March 22nd of 2002.So that sounds almost about three years ago, doesn't it?

A. Two years ago.

Q. Would you agree with me that your memory was probably better two years ago than it is right now about an incident that occurred back in 2001?

A. I would agree- - I would agree that my memory, for the most part, was better on some things two years ago, but not that.

Q. Oh, so somehow your memory about this particular event is better two years ago down the road? Is that what youíre trying to tell me here?

A. No, I think I remembered that then. Iím just saying that I screwed up and that it wasnít supposed to be- - there was supposed to be another word there. But if you want to take it for the other thing, itís there. So be it.

(Jerry Baker, pp. 879-881; emphasis added).


Home > Bakers' Testimony on "that day"
Login