Xref: world alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts:73
Newsgroups: alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts
Path: world!uunet!EU.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!myra
From:
[email protected] (Myra Dinnerstein)
Subject: TRANSCRIPT - 4/27/95 - 285k
Message-ID: <
[email protected]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 01:35:39 GMT
Approved:
[email protected]
Lines: 6626
Sender:
[email protected]
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1995
9:30 A.M.
DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
(APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED.)
(JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.) (CHRISTINE
M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL.
BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER.
MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH
HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. BLASIER, MR. SCHECK,
MR. NEUFELD, PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY MR. GOLDBERG AND MR. DARDEN.
GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL.
MR. SHAPIRO: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
MR. COCHRAN: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
MR. NEUFELD: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
MR. SCHECK: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
MR. BLASIER: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
MR. GOLDBERG: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
MR. DARDEN: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WE HAVE THE ITEMS OF EVIDENCE PRESENT FROM THE LAPD;
IS THAT CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THREE CONTROL BINDLES
ON ITEM 7, 12 AND 49, WHICH I ADVISED COUNSEL OF.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
AND, MR. NEUFELD, YOU WANTED TO INSPECT THOSE ITEMS
AND, MR. GOLDBERG, YOU WANTED THAT DONE ON THE RECORD; IS THAT
CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET'S PROCEED.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, HE HAS INSPECTED THE ITEMS, BUT HE
WOULD LIKE TO OPEN THEM. SOME OF THEM ARE SEALED.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
HOW MANY OF THOSE ITEMS DO YOU NEED TO SEE, TO OPEN
TO SEE?
MR. NEUFELD: I JUST WANTED TO OPEN THE COIN ENVELOPES.
BUT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE 16 OR SO ITEMS.
THE COURT: HOW MANY?
MR. NEUFELD: ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN,
EIGHT, NINE, TEN, ELEVEN, TWELVE, THIRTEEN, FOURTEEN, SEVENTEEN,
TWENTY-THREE ITEMS.
THE COURT: HAVEN'T YOU ALREADY BEEN GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY
TO DO THIS PREVIOUSLY?
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR -- OH, NO. THAT'S NOT THE POINT
HERE. THE POINT IS, BEFORE I ACTUALLY DISPLAY THEM TO THE
WITNESS, I JUST WANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE THESE ARE THE
SAME ONES THAT I'VE SEEN IN THE PAST. THAT CAN TAKE LITERALLY
SEVEN OR EIGHT MINUTES TO DO. I WAS HERE AT 8:30 FOR THAT
PURPOSE, AS YOU KNOW, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: UH-HUH.
MR. NEUFELD: I CAN DO IT DURING A VERY BRIEF RECESS
BETWEEN THE END OF THEIR RECROSS -- END OF THEIR REDIRECT AND MY
CROSS. I JUST NEED THOSE SEVEN MINUTES THOUGH BEFORE I ACTUALLY
SHOW THEM TO THE WITNESS, I'VE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THEM
MYSELF TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE THE SAME.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, WOULD YOU APPROACH, PLEASE.
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: LET ME GIVE YOU MY SCISSORS.
YOU'VE GOT 10 MINUTES.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THE COURT: WE'LL DO IT ON THE RECORD.
DO YOU NEED GLOVES FOR THESE THINGS?
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M GOING TO HAVE MISS MAZZOLA DO IT IF I
MAY, AND SHE HAS GLOVES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING THAT WE DON'T HAVE
ANY SEALS TO RESEAL THE ITEMS, WHICH WE WOULD LIKE TO DO AFTER
THEY'RE REOPENED BECAUSE THEY ARE ANALYZED EVIDENCE. MISS
MAZZOLA JUST BROUGHT IT TO MY ATTENTION.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MRS. ROBERTSON, DO YOU HAVE EVIDENCE SEALS SO WE CAN
RESEAL EACH OF THESE ITEMS AFTER THEY'VE BEEN OPENED?
THE CLERK: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU SUPERVISE THAT PROCESS
THEN OVER THERE, PLEASE.
ALL RIGHT. MR. GOLDBERG, MR. DARDEN, CAN I ASK YOU
TO CLEAR A FEW ITEMS OFF YOUR COUNSEL TABLE THERE, PUT THEM OVER
HERE ON THE BAR OVER BY THE JURY RAIL SO I CAN OBSERVE WHAT'S
GOING ON AS WELL. AND LET'S DO THIS AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS WE CAN.
MR. GOLDBERG: I WILL.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET'S GET STARTED.
MR. GOLDBERG: TRY TO TAKE THEM OUT TO THE BEST OF YOUR
ABILITY IN NUMERICAL ORDER.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MISS MAZZOLA HAS RESUMED -- EXCUSE ME -- REMOVED THE
CONTENTS OF A 9 BY 12 MANILA ENVELOPE. THERE APPEAR TO BE
NUMEROUS COIN ENVELOPES.
ALL RIGHT. WHICH ONE DO YOU HAVE THERE, MISS
MAZZOLA?
THE WITNESS: IT'S ITEM 8.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ITEM 8. THERE APPEAR TO BE TWO
COIN ENVELOPES. THEY APPEAR TO BE WHAT, STAPLED TOGETHER?
THE WITNESS: STAPLED TOGETHER.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. YOU'VE REMOVED TWO BINDLES.
MR. HARMON, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO STAND OUT OF THE
WELL, PLEASE.
MRS. ROBERTSON, LET ME ASK YOU TO RESEAL THESE ITEMS.
THE CLERK: YES.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 11.
THE COURT: AGAIN, TWO COIN ENVELOPES THAT APPEAR TO BE
STAPLED TOGETHER.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, JUST TO TELL YOU, IF YOU WANT,
SINCE THEY HAVE ABOUT 40 MINUTES OF REDIRECT, I CAN START ON THE
RECROSS BEFORE I GET TO THIS ISSUE IF YOU WANT TO DO THIS DURING
THE RECESS IF YOU PREFER.
THE COURT: WELL, LET'S DO IT NOW.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WHICH ITEM IS THIS?
THE WITNESS: THIS IS STILL 11.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
TWO BINDLES.
MR. GOLDBERG: FOR THE RECORD, THEY ARE IN A SEALED
CONDITION, THE BINDLES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
THE WITNESS: NUMBER 12.
THE COURT: ALSO APPEARS TO BE TWO COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED
TOGETHER.
EXCUSE ME, COUNSEL.
MR. NEUFELD: I AM SORRY. JUST GETTING MY COFFEE.
THE COURT: THAT'S THREE TIMES NOW.
DEPUTY JEX.
APPEARS TO BE ONE BINDLE.
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS BINDLE JUST HAS -- DOES THAT JUST HAVE
A 12 ON IT? IS THAT A 12? WHAT IS THAT?
THE WITNESS: 12.
MR. GOLDBERG: IT DOESN'T HAVE A 12-C?
THE WITNESS: THIS IS PROPERTY ITEM 42.
THE COURT: APPEARS TO BE A SINGLE COIN ENVELOPE. APPEARS
TO CONTAIN TWO PAPER BINDLES.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 43.
MR. GOLDBERG: TWO PAPER BINDLES CAME OUT OF THAT ITEM,
YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: NOTED.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 44.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
A SINGLE COIN ENVELOPE.
MR. GOLDBERG: AGAIN, TWO PAPER BINDLES.
THE COURT: NOTED.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 45.
THE COURT: APPEAR TO BE TWO COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED
TOGETHER.
ALL RIGHT. TWO PAPER BINDLES.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 46.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 46.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, WOULD YOU MAKE PREPARATIONS TO RESUME
AGAIN AT 1:00 O'CLOCK INSTEAD OF 1:30?
ALL RIGHT. ITEM 46. WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THAT, MISS
MAZZOLA?
THE WITNESS: APPEARS TO BE A MENU FROM A THAI-CHINESE
RESTAURANT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. FOLDED.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 14.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SINGLE COIN ENVELOPE.
MR. GOLDBERG: TWO ENVELOPES. I MEAN TWO BINDLES AGAIN.
THE COURT: NOTED. SINGLE COIN ENVELOPE.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 47.
THE COURT: APPEARS TO BE THREE COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED
TOGETHER.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND ALSO FOR THE RECORD SO FAR, ALL THE COIN
ENVELOPES FROM WHICH THE BINDLES CAME WERE SEALED.
THE COURT: YES.
AND, MISS MAZZOLA, WHAT IS THAT?
THE WITNESS: IT IS ANOTHER SINGLE BINDLE THAT APPEARS TO
BE SEALED UP WITH TAPE, PLASTIC SEAL.
MR. GOLDBERG: DOES THAT SAY C OR IS THAT A CONTROL BINDLE
OR JUST A NUMBER?
THE WITNESS: NUMBER. THIS IS THE SECOND COIN ENVELOPE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE SECOND SEALED COIN ENVELOPE.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL AND
MS. MAZZOLA.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. A SINGLE BINDLE OUT OF THE SECOND
COIN ENVELOPE.
ALL RIGHT. MISS MAZZOLA.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 48.
THE COURT: THREE COIN ENVELOPES.
DEPUTY JEX, THERE'S A LOT OF TALKING IN THE AUDIENCE.
I KNOW THREE JOURNALISTS AND ONE BOOK AUTHOR THAT ARE ABOUT TO GO
OUT.
MS. HAYSLETT, WOULD YOU COME HERE FOR A MOMENT.
MISS MAZZOLA, WHAT IS THAT? IS THAT A PAPER BINDLE?
THE WITNESS: YES. SINGLE PAPER BINDLE WITH AT LEAST TWO
COLOR SEALS AND SEVERAL INITIALS.
THE COURT: IT'S PAST 10 MINUTES AT THIS POINT.
OKAY. WHAT ITEM IS THAT?
THE WITNESS: THIS IS STILL ITEM 48. THIS IS THE SECOND
SEALED ENVELOPE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THAT WAS A SINGLE PAPER BINDLE?
THE WITNESS: CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: IT ALSO APPEARS TO BE SEALED WITH TAPE AND
IT APPEARS TO BE A CONTROL BINDLE.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 41.
THE COURT: SINGLE COIN ENVELOPE.
ALL RIGHT. TWO PAPER BINDLES.
THE WITNESS: ITEM NO. 1.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. TWO COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED
TOGETHER, ONE SEALED.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND TWO BINDLES.
THE COURT: TWO PAPER BINDLES.
MR. GOLDBERG: APPEAR TO BE SEALED.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 4.
THE COURT: TWO COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED TOGETHER, ONE
SEALED. TWO PAPER BINDLES.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND TWO BINDLES.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 5.
THE COURT: APPEAR TO BE TWO COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED
TOGETHER. ONE IS SEALED. APPEAR TO BE TWO PAPER BINDLES.
MR. FAIRTLOUGH, IS THERE A REASON YOU CAN'T DO THAT
DURING A RECESS?
THE WITNESS: ITEM NO. 6.
THE COURT: TWO COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED TOGETHER. ONE
APPEARS TO BE SEALED.
THE WITNESS: ACTUALLY BOTH ARE SEALED.
THE COURT: BOTH ARE SEALED.
MR. NEUFELD, COULD YOU TAKE TWO STEPS TO THE LEFT?
THANK YOU.
THE WITNESS: SINGLE BINDLE.
THE COURT: SINGLE PAPER BINDLE.
ALL RIGHT. SECOND COIN ENVELOPE, APPEARS TO BE ONE
PAPER BINDLE.
NEXT ITEM.
THE WITNESS: NEXT ITEM IS 49.
THE COURT: TWO COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED TOGETHER.
THE WITNESS: ONE SEALED.
THE COURT: ONE SEALED.
THE WITNESS: ONE BINDLE.
THE COURT: ONE BINDLE.
THE WITNESS: ITEM 52, THREE BINDLES, TWO SEALED.
THE COURT: WAS THE LAST ITEM 2?
THE WITNESS: THE LAST ITEM WAS 49.
THE COURT: 49, BUT THERE WERE TWO ENVELOPES, CORRECT?
THE WITNESS: TWO ENVELOPES.
THE COURT: RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. WHICH NUMBER IS THIS?
THE WITNESS: THIS IS ITEM 52. THERE ARE THREE ENVELOPES,
TWO OF THEM ARE SEALED.
THE COURT: AWFULLY LONG SEVEN MINUTES.
MR. NEUFELD: THE OBSERVATION TIME IF YOU ADD THAT UP WOULD
BE LESS THAN SEVEN MINUTES.
THE WITNESS: ONE BINDLE.
THIS IS THE SECOND SEALED BINDLE -- COIN ENVELOPE,
ONE SEALED BINDLE AND TWO MICRO CENTRIFUGE TUBES.
ITEM 7, TWO COIN ENVELOPES, ONE SEALED. EXCUSE ME.
TWO SEALED.
THE COURT: MRS. ROBERTSON, DO YOU HAVE YOUR STAPLER THERE?
THE CLERK: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MISS MAZZOLA.
THE WITNESS: ONE OF THE SEALED ENVELOPES IS EMPTY.
ONE PAPER BINDLE AND FOUR MICRO CENTRIFUGE TUBES,
C-E-N-T-R-I-F-U-G-E.
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS JUST SAYS 7, IT DOESN'T SAY 7C?
THE WITNESS: ITEM 51, TWO COIN ENVELOPES, ONE SEALED, TWO
PAPER BINDLES.
ITEM 50, THREE COIN ENVELOPES, TWO SEALED, NO PAPER.
ONE PAPER BINDLE CONTROL. ONE PAPER BINDLE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. IF YOU'LL -- MRS. ROBERTSON, IF
YOU'LL RESEAL ALL THOSE ITEMS, PLEASE.
ALL RIGHT. MR. NEUFELD, HAVE YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY
TO OBSERVE THOSE ITEMS?
MR. NEUFELD: I CERTAINLY HAVE, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU, YOUR
HONOR.
I JUST WANT TO ASK THE COURT THAT SINCE THE
PROSECUTION CHOSE NOT TO USE THIS EVIDENCE AS ITS DIRECT, AS PART
OF ITS DIRECT CASE WITH THIS WITNESS AND I DID ASK SPECIFICALLY
TO USE IT FOR MY CROSS AND I HAD TO DELAY THE END OF MY CROSS
UNTIL THEY WERE PRODUCED, THAT THE PEOPLE NOT BE ALLOWED TO USE
THIS OR THESE ITEMS, REFER TO THEM ON THEIR REDIRECT SINCE IT'S
NOT SOMETHING I WENT INTO ON CROSS YET AND I WOULD HAVE BEEN
ENTITLED TO SHOW THEM FOR THE FIRST TIME ON MY CROSS.
THE COURT: WELL, MR. GOLDBERG INDICATED TO ME THAT HE ONLY
HAD 20 MORE MINUTES. THERE'S BEEN NO INDICATION THAT HE INTENDS
ON USING ANY OF THESE ITEMS. SINCE THAT'S A DECISION I DON'T
HAVE TO MAKE --
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, WE HAD AN ISSUE AS TO ITEMS NO.
15 AND 16 WHICH THE COURT ASKED THAT WE BRING HERE THIS MORNING
--
THE COURT: YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: -- AND NOW HAVE. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE
COURT WANTS TO SEE --
THE COURT: HAVE YOU DISPLAYED THOSE TO MR. NEUFELD?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES. THIS IS ITEM NO. 15.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. STANDARD AMERICAN AIRLINES TICKET
JACKET WITH WHAT APPEARS TO BE A TICKET STICKING OUT OF IT OR AT
LEAST THE STUB.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND ITEM NO. 16 WHICH APPEARS TO BE A
BAGGAGE CLAIM TAG.
THE COURT: IS THAT ONE OF THOSE DOUBLE STICK FOLD-OVER,
BAR CODED?
MS. CLARK: RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: RIGHT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. NOTED.
ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY MAGNERA -- I'M SORRY.
MADAM COURT REPORTER, HOW DO YOU WANT TO SPLIT THE
MORNING?
THE COURT REPORTER: I'M FINE FOR THE MORNING.
THE COURT: I'M TEMPTED TO GO STRAIGHT THROUGH.
THE COURT REPORTER: THAT'S FINE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE JURORS.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE SEATED.
GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.
THE COURT: THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT WE'VE BEEN JOINED BY
ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AS YOU RECALL, YESTERDAY, I
INDICATED TO YOU THAT WE HAD A DELAY BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE
ITEMS, PHYSICAL ITEMS OF EVIDENCE WERE NOT IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE
TO US. AND THE DELAY THIS MORNING WAS THAT THOSE ITEMS WERE
DELIVERED TO THE COURT AND I WANTED TO EXAMINE EACH PIECE OF THAT
EVIDENCE BEFORE IT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU. SO WE'VE HAD TO GO
THROUGH -- HOW MANY WERE THERE? 15 OR 16 PIECES OF EVIDENCE?
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK THERE WERE MORE THAN THAT.
THE COURT: IN ANY EVENT, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.
WE'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 8:30 THIS MORNING FOR THAT PURPOSE JUST TO
LET YOU KNOW WHAT THE DELAY WAS.
ALL RIGHT.
ANDREA MAZZOLA,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT,
RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING AGAIN, MISS MAZZOLA.
THE WITNESS: GOOD MORNING.
THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED AGAIN YOU ARE UNDER OATH.
AND, MR. GOLDBERG, YOU MAY CONTINUE WITH YOUR
REDIRECT EXAMINATION.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q NOW, I WAS ASKING YOU YESTERDAY ABOUT THIS WHITE
ITEM, THE BLANKET THAT YOU SAW IN THE VICINITY OR ON MR. GOLDMAN
AT SOME POINT.
WHAT WAS THAT BLANKET AGAIN?
A IT WAS A WHITE BLANKET OR SHEET. I WASN'T SURE WHICH
ONE.
Q AND WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAME FROM THE CORONER'S
OFFICE?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. IF SHE KNOWS.
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DO YOU KNOW IF THAT CAME FROM THE
CORONER'S OFFICE?
A AT THE TIME, I DID NOT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
MAYBE WE CAN SEE PEOPLE'S 99 FOR IDENTIFICATION.
MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, YOU SHOULD CUT THE FEED FOR
THIS PHOTO.
THE COURT: CUT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
NOW, IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THE BACKGROUND OF THIS
PHOTOGRAPH AND TAKE A LOOK AT THE WHITE BLANKET OR WHITE SHEET
THAT APPEARS TO HAVE SOME WRITING ON IT.
IS THAT WHAT YOU SAW?
A I SAW HIM ON A WHITE BLANKET OR SHEET.
Q OKAY.
AND WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THIS -- DID YOU LOOK AT THIS
PHOTOGRAPH PRIOR TO TESTIFYING TODAY, THE ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPH AS
OPPOSED TO AN IMAGE OF IT?
A YES.
Q AND DID YOU LOOK AT OTHER CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS
DEPICTING THIS SAME SCENE OR SIMILAR SCENE?
A I HAD SEEN CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS PREVIOUS, YES.
Q AND WHAT WAS THE WRITING -- WHAT IS THE WRITING THAT
APPEARS ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE DISPLAY YET SOMEWHAT
BLURRY?
A ON THIS IMAGE, IT'S HARD TO TELL. BUT ON THE
PHOTOGRAPHS, IT APPEARS TO BE FROM THE L.A. CORONER.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND IS THIS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU SAW WHEN YOU
WERE REFERRING TO A WHITE BLANKET?
A YES.
Q NOW -- THANK YOU.
WAS THERE ANOTHER WHITE BLANKET THAT WAS AT THE CRIME
SCENE THAT WAS STILL THERE AFTER THE BODIES HAD BEEN REMOVED WHEN
YOU WERE ENGAGED IN THE EVIDENCE COLLECTION PROCESS?
A YES, THERE WAS.
Q AND WHERE WAS THAT WHITE BLANKET?
A IT WAS ON THE WALKWAY NEAR THE FIRST STEPS.
Q NOW, FROM YOUR OWN INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION, BASED
UPON WHAT YOU SAW WHEN YOU WERE AT THE SCENE, DID YOU EVER SEE
THAT BLANKET ON ANYONE?
A FROM WHAT I CAN RECALL, I DID NOT SEE THAT PARTICULAR
BLANKET ON ANYBODY.
Q EITHER THE BODY OF NICOLE SIMPSON OR RONALD GOLDMAN?
A NOT THAT I CAN RECALL, NO.
Q DOES THAT MEAN THAT IT WASN'T EVER ON NICOLE SIMPSON
OR JUST THAT YOU DID NOT SEE THAT?
A THAT I DID NOT SEE THAT.
Q NOW, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION ABOUT YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH ME, AND YOU SAID
THAT AT ONE POINT, YOU HAD BEEN IN THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
FOR PERHAPS FIVE HOURS OR SO?
A CORRECT.
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. THAT WAS NOT THE TESTIMONY. MORE
THAN ONE OCCASION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, ON THE OCCASION OR OCCASIONS
WHEN THAT HAPPENED, WAS THAT WHILE YOU WERE WAITING TO TESTIFY?
A NOT -- WELL, I BELIEVE ON MAYBE ONE OCCASION, IT WAS
WHILE I WAS WAITING.
Q AND WERE PEOPLE TALKING TO YOU THE WHOLE TIME ABOUT
THIS CASE OR WHAT WERE YOU DOING?
A FOR THE MOST PART, I WAS LEFT ALONE.
Q AND DID THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS EVER ATTEMPT TO YOUR
KNOWLEDGE TO CONTACT YOU AND SAY, WE'D LIKE TO SIT DOWN WITH YOU
AND GO OVER WHAT WE'RE GOING TO QUESTION YOU ABOUT OR TALK ABOUT
THE CASE"?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION AS TO FORM.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: HAVE THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS EVER
CONTACTED YOU AND ASKED YOU PRIOR TO TODAY TO DISCUSS ANY PART OF
THE CASE WITH THEM?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
TODAY, DID YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A CONVERSATION
WITH MR. NEUFELD ABOUT CERTAIN ITEMS OF EVIDENCE?
A YES.
Q AND OTHER THAN THAT, IS THAT THE ONLY TIME THAT YOU
HAD AN OFF THE RECORD CONVERSATION THAT YOU CAN RECALL WITH ONE
OF THE DEFENSE LAWYERS?
A THAT I CAN RECALL --
Q RELATING TO THE CASE.
A THAT I CAN RECALL, I BELIEVE IT WAS, YES.
Q DID YOU CONSIDER YOUR CONVERSATION WITH MR. NEUFELD
TO BE WITNESS PREPARATION?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION TO WHAT SHE CONSIDERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WAS HE ASKING YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT,
OH -- WELL, CAN YOU JUST GIVE US A GENERIC OR GENERAL DESCRIPTION
OF WHAT THE CONVERSATION WAS ABOUT?
A HE WAS JUST ASKING ABOUT CERTAIN ITEMS OF EVIDENCE,
IF I WOULD UNSEAL THEM.
Q HE WAS ASKING WHAT?
A THAT IF I WOULD OPEN THEM FOR HIM TO SEE.
Q WAS HE ASKING ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE ITEMS OF
EVIDENCE OR WHAT YOU PUT ON THEM OR WHAT THEY WERE OR SO ON?
A NOT REALLY.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I WANTED TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS
ABOUT 15 AND 16 PURSUANT TO OUR CONVERSATION.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
I THINK OUR AGREED-UPON PERIMETER IS PHYSICAL
DESCRIPTION, DIMENSION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WITHOUT TELLING US WHAT THESE ITEMS
--
THE COURT: HOLD ON. HOLD ON.
MR. NEUFELD.
MR. NEUFELD: BRIEF SIDEBAR. I THINK WE CAN RESOLVE THIS
VERY BRIEFLY.
THE COURT: DO YOU WANT TO TALK TO MR. COCHRAN FIRST?
MR. NEUFELD: YES.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. COCHRAN: CAN WE HAVE A SECOND, YOUR HONOR?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. COCHRAN: EXCUSE US A MINUTE.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
COUNSEL. MR. GOLDBERG.
MS. CLARK: CAN WE HAVE JUST ONE MORE MINUTE, YOUR HONOR,
PLEASE? YOUR HONOR, PLEASE?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. COCHRAN: CAN WE APPROACH BRIEFLY?
THE COURT: WITH THE COURT REPORTER.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD
AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: WE'RE OVER AT THE SIDEBAR.
WHERE ARE WE GOING TO GO WITH THIS?
MR. COCHRAN: WE'RE WILLING I THINK JUST TO GO FORWARD AND
WE'LL STIPULATE TO ANY WITHDRAWAL OF ANY OBJECTION.
THE COURT: OKAY.
MR. COCHRAN: SO YOU CAN MARK THEM. BUT THAT'S IT. THAT'S
WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. WE WERE TRYING TO SAVE TIME.
THE COURT: DO I HAVE TO TELL THEM I PREVIOUSLY INSTRUCTED
THEM TO IGNORE IT OR JUST LET IT LIE?
MR. NEUFELD: JUST LET IT LIE I THINK BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY
IT'S COMING IN.
MS. CLARK: YOU KNOW WHAT YOU COULD DO? JUST SAY THE
PARTIES AGREE THAT --
THE COURT: 15 AND 16 ARE GOING TO BE SHOWN TO YOU.
MS. CLARK: WITHOUT REMINDING THEM, JUST SAY THE PARTIES
AGREE.
MR. COCHRAN: THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED 15 AND 16 CAN COME
IN.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU RECALL -- WELL, WITH
REGARD TO EVIDENCE COLLECTION, ITEMS NUMBER 15 AND 16, THE
PARTIES, BOTH SIDES HAVE WITHDRAWN THEIR OBJECTION TO THOSE
ITEMS. SO WE WILL PROCEED WITH THOSE.
ALL RIGHT. MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THEN I'LL MARK AS MY NEXT
EXHIBIT IN ORDER AS PEOPLE'S 203 --
THE COURT: 203.
MR. GOLDBERG: -- ITEM NO. 15, AND AS 204, ITEM NO. 16.
I'M NOT GOING TO WRITE ON THESE BECAUSE THEY ALREADY
HAVE MARKINGS ON THEM.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(PEO'S 203 FOR ID = ITEM NO. 15)
(PEO'S 204 FOR ID = ITEM NO. 16)
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I APPROACH THE WITNESS?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: MISS MAZZOLA, SHOWING YOU ITEM NO.
15 AND ITEM NO. 16, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THOSE?
A YES.
Q AND WHAT ARE THOSE?
A THEY ARE THE TWO ITEMS WHICH WERE COLLECTED AT
ROCKINGHAM ON THE AFTERNOON OF JUNE 13TH.
Q AND WHEN WAS THE PACKAGING THAT THEY'RE NOW CONTAINED
IN, WHEN WERE THEY PLACED IN THOSE PACKAGING MATERIALS?
A THAT HAPPENED JUNE 14TH BACK AT THE LABORATORY.
Q CAN YOU REMOVE THE ITEM FROM PEOPLE'S 1 -- EXCUSE ME
-- 203 FOR IDENTIFICATION, THAT'S NUMBER 15, AND TELL US WHAT
YOU'RE DOING FOR THE RECORD?
A I AM OPENING THE COIN ENVELOPE AND REMOVING APPEARS
TO BE AIRLINE TICKETS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
MAYBE YOU CAN JUST HOLD THAT UP SO THE JURORS CAN SEE
WHAT YOU HAVE.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, WHEN YOU WERE ACTUALLY AT THE
LOCATION, DID YOU PUT THAT IN ANY PACKAGING MATERIAL OTHER THAN
THE PLASTIC BAG ITSELF?
A NO.
Q NOW, CAN YOU REMOVE ITEM NO. 16 FROM ITS COIN
ENVELOPE AND DESCRIBE WHAT YOU'RE DOING FOR THE RECORD?
A OKAY.
I AM REMOVING ITEM NO. 16 FROM THE ENVELOPE. IT
APPEARS TO BE A BAGGAGE CLAIM TICKET FROM AN AIRLINE.
Q AND WAS THAT PLACED IN ANY OTHER PACKAGING MATERIAL
ON THE 13TH WHEN YOU WERE AT ROCKINGHAM OTHER THAN THE PLASTIC
BAG ITSELF?
A NO.
Q THANK YOU.
CAN YOU JUST HOLD UP ITEM NO. 15 ONE MORE TIME AFTER
YOU PUT 16 AWAY?
A SURE (WITNESS COMPLIES).
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, MAYBE I COULD JUST TAKE A LOOK
AT 163-H FOR IDENTIFICATION, THE GRAY ANALYZED EVIDENCE ENVELOPE.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: CAN YOU PUT THAT -- JUST KEEP THAT OUT FOR A
SECOND.
THE COURT: DO YOU WANT THE ITEM ITSELF KEPT OUT?
MR. GOLDBERG: YEAH, IF SHE WOULD.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU 163-H.
MAYBE YOU CAN JUST HOLD THE TWO OF THOSE UP SO WE CAN GET A
RELATIVE SIZE COMPARISON.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND NEITHER THAT ITEM THAT YOU'RE
HOLDING NOW NOR ITEM NO. 16 WERE PLACED IN ANY OTHER PACKAGING
MATERIAL OTHER THAN THE PLASTIC BAG WHILE YOU WERE AT THE
ROCKINGHAM LOCATION?
A CORRECT.
Q NOW, WHEN YOU WERE CARRYING THE PLASTIC BAG OUT OF
THE LOCATION, DID IT FEEL TO YOU LIKE IT WEIGHED ANYTHING MORE
THAN WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT WITH JUST ITEM 15 AND 16 AND THE
LITTLE CARDS, COLLECTION CARDS?
A IT FELT LIKE IT WAS A LITTLE HEAVIER THAN IT SHOULD
BE, BUT I DIDN'T GIVE IT MUCH THOUGHT.
Q THANK YOU.
YOU CAN REPLACE THAT ITEM.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: COULD YOU JUST HOLD UP THE ENVELOPE
ITSELF SO THAT WE CAN -- NO, NO. THE ENVELOPE, COIN ENVELOPE.
IS THAT THE TYPE OF COIN ENVELOPE OR ONE OF THE
KINDS OF COIN ENVELOPES THAT YOU DO HAVE IN YOUR CRIME SCENE
BOXES?
A YES.
Q AND WHERE WERE THOSE COIN ENVELOPES AT THE TIME THAT
YOU AND MR. FUNG RECOVERED ITEM 15 AND 16?
A THEY WERE IN THE BACK OF THE TRUCK.
Q LOCKED?
A LOCKED.
Q THANK YOU.
NOW, TURNING TO THE BRONCO SEARCH AND COLLECTION OF
EVIDENCE, YOU SAID THAT ON THE PEDALS, THAT YOU USED THE SAME
SWAB FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PHENOLPHTALEIN TEST?
A CORRECT.
Q WHY WAS THAT DONE?
A MR. FUNG JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THE PEDALS HAD BEEN
MANIPULATED AS IF SOMEONE HAD DRIVEN THE BRONCO.
Q AS OPPOSED TO WHAT?
A AS OPPOSED TO JUST GETTING IN THE BRONCO AND THEN
GETTING RIGHT BACK OUT.
Q SO HE WANTED TO SEE WHETHER THERE WAS ANY EVIDENCE OF
ANY BLOOD ON ANY ONE OF THE THREE PEDALS?
A CORRECT.
Q AND WHEN HE DIRECTED YOU TO DO THIS TEST, DID YOU
HAVE ANY FEAR OR CONCERN ON YOUR PART THAT IF YOU SUGGESTED TO
HIM THAT THREE DIFFERENT SWABS SHOULD BE USED THAT HE WAS GOING
TO SAY TO YOU, "I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT YOU WOULD QUESTION MY
JUDGMENT. I THINK YOU SHOULD BE FIRED"?
A NO.
Q OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES?
A NO.
Q AND WHEN YOU WERE DOING THIS PHENOLPHTALEIN TEST, WAS
IT YOUR INTENT TO COLLECT ANYTHING OR TRY TO COLLECT ANYTHING
>FROM THE PEDALS?
A NO. HE SAID WE WERE JUST --
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION TO WHAT HE SAID.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: IF YOU COULD JUST TELL US WHAT YOUR
INTENT WAS.
A THE INTENT WAS TO SEE IF THE PEDALS HAD BEEN
MANIPULATED. THAT WAS IT.
Q AND IS IT YOUR PRACTICE NOT TO COLLECT EVERY SINGLE
LAST STAIN THAT YOU SEE IN A CAR THAT CONTAINS MANY STAINS SUCH
AS THE BRONCO?
A A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF WHAT IS IN THE CAR WOULD
BE TAKEN.
Q AND WHO WAS MAKING THE JUDGMENT CALL AS TO WHICH
SAMPLES TO TAKE AND NOT TO TAKE FROM THE BRONCO?
A THAT WAS MR. FUNG.
Q NOW, I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO
PEOPLE'S 195-A FOR IDENTIFICATION.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS A LITTLE BIT
WASHED OUT. HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY --
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, TO HIS TESTIFYING.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK
AT THE ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPH BEFORE?
A YES.
Q AND WAS THIS A PHOTOGRAPH THAT WAS TAKEN ON THE 14TH
WHEN YOU AND MR. FUNG WERE DOING THE EVIDENCE COLLECTION AT THE
BRONCO?
A YES, IT WAS.
Q NOW, DO YOU HAVE AN INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION OF
SEEING ANY OF THE STAINS THAT APPEAR IN THE RUNNING BOARD AREA OF
THE DRIVER'S SIDE DOOR?
A NOT ON THE RUNNING BOARD ITSELF, NO.
Q LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT 197 FOR IDENTIFICATION.
NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE LITTLE STAINS THAT ARE
CONTAINED IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH --
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, TO LITTLE STAINS.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. COUNSEL, OBJECTION. THEN I'LL ASK
FOR THE GROUNDS. BOTH SIDES.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DO YOU SEE SOME STAINS THAT ARE
CONTAINED IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH?
A I SEE CARDS WHERE THERE WOULD BE STAINS.
Q NO. I'M TALKING ABOUT THE AREA OF THE RUNNING BOARD,
THE DRIVER'S AREA.
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION AS TO THE CHARACTERIZATION.
ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: TALKING ABOUT THE WHITE METALLIC
AREA THAT'S IN THE FOREFRONT OF THIS AREA.
A THERE APPEARS TO BE A DARK SPOT ON IT.
Q NOW, DO YOU RECALL SEEING THAT ON THE 14TH?
A NO, I DON'T RECALL IF I SAW THAT OR NOT.
Q AND DO YOU RECALL SEEING ANY OTHER SPOTS IN THAT AREA
ON THE 14TH?
A NO.
Q NOW, WHEN YOU SAY YOU DON'T RECALL, DOES THAT MEAN
THAT THEY WEREN'T THERE?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHEN YOU SAY THAT YOU DON'T RECALL,
DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU LOOKED IN THAT AREA, EXAMINED IT AND THAT
THEY WEREN'T THERE?
A IT MEANS I DON'T RECALL IF I SAW STAINS THERE OR NOT.
Q AND PRIOR TO LOOKING AT THE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS,
DID YOU HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION AS TO THE REAR GATE AT BUNDY BEING
THERE?
A NO.
Q BUT DOES THAT MEAN THAT IT WASN'T THERE?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, AGAIN AS TO FORM.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOES THAT MEAN THAT YOU LOOKED AND
YOU EXAMINED THE AREA AND YOU SAW THAT THERE WAS NO REAR GATE AT
BUNDY?
A I DID NOT REMEMBER IF -- SEEING A REAR GATE AT BUNDY.
Q BUT DO YOU NOW KNOW THAT THERE WAS IN FACT ONE THERE?
A I KNOW NOW THAT THERE WAS A GATE, YES.
Q AND PRIOR TO SEEING THE VIDEOTAPE OF YOURSELF
COLLECTING THE GLOVE AT THE BUNDY LOCATION --
THE COURT: I THINK WE'VE ASKED THIS QUESTION ALREADY,
COUNSEL.
MR. GOLDBERG: NOT IN THIS CONTEXT.
THE COURT: WE ASKED THE SAME QUESTION YESTERDAY AFTERNOON
THOUGH IN A SIMILAR CONTEXT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, YOU TESTIFIED YESTERDAY THAT
YOU DIDN'T HAVE AN INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION PRIOR TO SEEING THE
VIDEOTAPE OF COLLECTING THE GLOVE AT BUNDY. DOES THAT MEAN THAT
YOU DIDN'T COLLECT IT OR YOU REMEMBER NOT COLLECTING IT?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: COUNSEL, WE'VE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH -- YOU'VE
ALREADY ASKED THAT QUESTION.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, WHO WAS DOING MOST OF THE WORK
IN TERMS OF TRYING TO IDENTIFY STAINS ON THE BRONCO PRIOR TO THE
ACTUAL PHYSICAL COLLECTION OF THE STAINS?
A MR. FUNG.
Q WHAT WERE YOU DOING?
A I WAS PASSING HIM THE PHOTO ID CARDS, DOING A SKETCH,
HELPING WITH MEASUREMENTS, PASSING HIM SUPPLIES AS HE NEEDED
THEM.
Q OKAY.
NOW, MISS MAZZOLA, WITH RESPECT TO THE STAINS THAT
ARE IN THIS PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 197 FOR IDENTIFICATION, DID YOU EVER
CONSIDER AT ALL TESTIFYING THAT YOU DID SEE THEM ON THE 14TH?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: GROUND?
MR. NEUFELD: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IF I DIDN'T REMEMBER SEEING THEM, THEN THAT'S
HOW I WOULD TESTIFY, I DIDN'T REMEMBER THEM.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
AND YOU NEVER THOUGHT OF SAYING, "YEAH, I DO REMEMBER
SEEING THEM," TO HELP THE PROSECUTION'S CASE, DID YOU?
A NO.
Q NOW, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
COLLECTION VIDEO, THE BLOOD COLLECTION VIDEO THAT WAS PLAYED.
THAT'S DEFENSE 1117 FOR IDENTIFICATION.
AND I'D JUST LIKE TO PLAY IT ALL THE WAY THROUGH, AND
THEN I'LL ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT WE SAW.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(AT 10:40 A.M., DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT
1117, A VIDEOTAPE, WAS PLAYED.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
IN THIS SCENE WHERE YOU'RE POURING SOME ITEMS OUT
INTO THE CAP, WHAT ARE YOU DOING?
A I AM PUTTING SOME OF THE SWATCHES INTO THE CAP SO I
COULD PICK THEM UP WITH TWEEZERS.
Q AND NOW YOU ARE DOING WHAT?
A ADDING A DROP OF DISTILLED WATER TO THE SWATCH AND
SHAKING IT OUT.
Q AND NOW YOU'VE PLACED THE SWATCH DOWN, AND FOR WHAT
PURPOSE IS THAT?
A TO TAKE A CONTROL.
Q AND THIS IS RIGHT BY THE CARD THAT SAYS NUMBER 5?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU JUST PUT IT INTO AN OBJECT. WHAT DID YOU PUT
THE CONTROL SWATCH IN?
A IT'S PLACED IN A SMALL PLASTIC BAG.
Q AND THAT HAD SOME WRITING ON IT?
A CORRECT.
Q WHAT WAS THE WRITING?
A THE ITEM NUMBER AND C FOR CONTROL.
Q SO THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE TO PUT ON THERE, IS THE ITEM
NUMBER AND C FOR CONTROL?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. LEADING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: IS THAT ALL YOU HAVE TO PUT ON
THERE, JUST THE ITEM NUMBER AND C FOR CONTROL?
A YES.
Q NOW, WHAT DID YOU JUST DO?
A CLEAN THE TWEEZERS AGAIN.
Q AND NOW YOU ARE PLACING THE SWATCH DOWN ON THE STAIN?
A CORRECT.
Q NOW, WHEN YOU WERE HANDLING THE SWATCH WITH THE
TWEEZERS, WHAT PORTION OF THE TWEEZERS COMES INTO CONTACT WITH
THE SWATCH?
A THE EXTREME POINTED END.
Q ARE THOSE TWEEZERS -- IS THERE ANYTHING SPECIAL ABOUT
THEM THAT DISTINGUISHES THEM FROM ORDINARY TWEEZERS?
A WELL, THEY'RE EXTREMELY SHARPER AND THEY HAVE A
LONGER AREA WHERE YOU WOULD HANDLE THE ITEMS THAT YOU NEED TO.
Q ARE THEY SERRATED AT ALL SO AS TO BE ABLE TO GRAB
THINGS OR ARE THEY JUST SMOOTH?
A WE HAVE SOME THAT ARE SERRATED, SOME THAT ARE SMOOTH.
Q BUT THESE PARTICULARS ONES THAT YOU USE FOR THIS TASK
ARE THE SMOOTH ONES?
A THOSE ARE SMOOTH.
Q AND NOW WHAT ARE YOU DOING?
A PLACING THE SWATCH WITH THE ITEM IN A SEPARATE
PLASTIC BAG.
Q WHAT DOES THAT PLASTIC BAG HAVE ON IT?
A THE ITEM NUMBER.
Q BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE A C?
A NO.
Q AND WHY IS THAT? WHY DO YOU PUT A C ON ONE AND JUST
THE ITEM NUMBER ON THE OTHER, FOR WHAT PURPOSE?
A WELL, I DO IT TO DESIGNATE THE CONTROL. THAT'S THE
ONLY REASON.
Q COULDN'T YOU DESIGNATE IT EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T WRITE
THAT ON IT?
A FOR THE MOST PART, YOU CAN TELL IF THE SWATCH HAS
BLOOD ON IT OR NOT. BUT I JUST PUT A C.
Q MAKES IT EASIER?
A YES.
Q DO YOU WRITE YOUR INITIALS ANYWHERE ON THOSE PLASTIC
ENVELOPES?
A NO.
Q NOW, WHEN YOU GOT UP, YOU TOUCHED THE GROUND. DID
YOU NOTICE THAT?
A YES.
Q DOES THAT SOMETIMES HAPPEN AT A CRIME SCENE, WHERE
YOU WILL TOUCH THE GROUND FOR WHATEVER THE REASON, TO BALANCE
YOURSELF?
A TOUCH THE GROUND OR SOMETHING TO MAINTAIN YOUR
BALANCE.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOES TOUCHING THE GROUND HAVE ANY
IMPACT IN TERMS OF THE EVIDENCE COLLECTION?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. SHE'S NOT QUALIFIED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NOT REALLY, NO.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, WHAT ARE YOU FILLING OUT NOW?
A IT COULD BE ANOTHER ENVELOPE FOR THE NEXT ITEM.
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THIS VIDEOTAPE,
DOES IT LOOK LIKE YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE ITEM IN YOUR HAND --
YEAH. OKAY -- RIGHT NOW?
A YES.
Q WHAT ITEMS DO YOU HAVE IN YOUR HAND?
A A PLASTIC BAG AND COIN ENVELOPE.
Q AND WHAT DO YOU WRITE ON THE PLASTIC BAG?
A THE ITEM NUMBER.
Q WHAT DO YOU WRITE ON THE COIN ENVELOPE?
A THE ITEM NUMBER.
Q AND IN THIS CASE, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN 6?
A CORRECT.
Q AND WHAT ARE YOU DOING NOW?
A CLEANING THE TWEEZERS AGAIN.
Q NOW, BETWEEN THE TIME THAT YOU CLEANED YOUR TWEEZERS
AND THE TIME YOU PICKED UP THIS NEXT SWATCH, DID YOU EVER TOUCH
THE TIP END OF THE TWEEZERS THAT COMES IN CONTACT WITH THE
SWATCH?
A NO.
Q IS THAT THE WAY THAT YOU DO IT AT A REAL CRIME SCENE
TOO?
A YES.
Q AND NOW WHAT ARE YOU COLLECTING?
A THE NEXT CONTROL.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND YOU'VE JUST PUT THE SWATCH, THE
CONTROL SWATCH, WHERE?
A IN A PLASTIC BAG.
Q AND IS THAT DESIGNATED IN SOME WAY AGAIN TO SEPARATE
IT FROM THE STAIN SWATCH?
A IT HAS AN ITEM NUMBER AND A C ON IT.
Q NOW YOU'RE WRITING ON ANOTHER PLASTIC BAG?
A CORRECT.
Q YOU JUST WROTE THE ITEM NUMBER AND IS THAT IT?
A FOR THAT ONE, IT WOULD BE JUST THE ITEM NUMBER.
Q OKAY.
AND AGAIN, YOU DROPPED THE SWATCH IN THIS VIDEO. DID
YOU TRY TO RECOVER THAT SWATCH OR DID YOU JUST LEAVE IT ON THE
GROUND?
A LEAVE IT ON THE GROUND.
Q NOW, YOU'RE HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF DIFFICULTY GETTING
THIS OFF THE TWEEZERS?
A CORRECT.
Q BUT WHEN YOU LOOK CLOSELY, DID YOU EVER TOUCH THE
SWATCH WITH YOUR GLOVED HAND?
A NO.
Q OR DID YOU EVER TOUCH THE AREA OF THE TWEEZERS THAT
COMES INTO CONTACT WITH THE SWATCH?
A NO.
Q IS THAT CONSISTENT WITH YOUR PRACTICE AT A REAL CRIME
SCENE?
A YES.
Q NOW, THIS SWATCH SEEMS TO BE SOAKING UP A LITTLE
EASIER THAN THE OTHER ONE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A IT APPEARS TO BE, YES.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. THANK YOU.
(AT 10:50 A.M., THE PLAYING
OF THE VIDEOTAPE WAS CONCLUDED.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, I WANT TO ASK YOU A FEW MORE
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VIDEOTAPE.
FIRST OF ALL, IN THIS VIDEOTAPE, DID YOUR GLOVED
HANDS EVER COME INTO CONTACT WITH A SWATCH?
A NO.
Q AND WHEN I SAY THAT, I MEAN A SWATCH WAS USED FOR
EITHER A CONTROL OR FOR COLLECTING A STAIN.
A NO.
Q AND TOWARDS THE BEGINNING PORTION OF THE VIDEOTAPE,
DO YOU RECALL A SEGMENT WHERE YOUR PINKIE WAS SOMEWHAT EXTENDED
ALMOST AS IF YOU WERE HOLDING A CHINA CUP?
A I RECALL IT WAS EXTENDED, YES.
Q NOW, WHAT WERE YOU DOING WITH YOUR PINKIE IN THAT
PARTICULAR SEGMENT? YOU WERE ALSO ASKED ABOUT IT ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
A JUST HELPING TO TURN OVER THE LID OF THE CAP.
Q AND WHEN YOU REVIEWED THE VIDEOTAPE -- DID YOU REVIEW
THE VIDEOTAPE AGAIN AFTER YOUR TESTIMONY?
A YES.
Q COULD YOU ACTUALLY SEE THE CAP BEING FLIPPED BEFORE
IT WAS PUT ON -- BACK ON TOP OF THE PILL BOX?
A YES.
Q AND IS THAT ALSO YOUR PRACTICE AT A CRIME SCENE;
THAT IN TERMS OF THE SWATCHES THAT YOU'RE GOING TO USE FOR
CONTROLS OR STAINS, THAT YOU DO NOT TOUCH THEM WITH YOUR GLOVED
HAND?
A THEY ARE NOT TOUCHED WITH OUR HANDS, NO.
Q WHEN YOU WATCHED THIS VIDEOTAPE, WAS THERE EVER A
TIME WHEN YOU TOUCHED WITH YOUR GLOVED HANDS THE PORTION OF THE
TWEEZERS THAT YOU WOULD USE TO COLLECT EITHER A CONTROL OR A
SWATCH AFTER THEY WERE CLEANED BUT BEFORE THE SWATCH WAS
COLLECTED?
A NO.
Q AND IS THAT ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE PRACTICE THAT
YOU USED AT A CRIME SCENE?
A YES.
Q NOW, ON STAIN NO. 5, THE DEMONSTRATION STAIN, DO YOU
KNOW FROM VIEWING THIS VIDEOTAPE FOR SURE WHETHER OR NOT THE
MOISTURE FROM THE CONTROL SWATCH DID EVENTUALLY MIGRATE OVER TO
THE STAIN?
A FROM THE VIDEOTAPE, IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS COMING
CLOSE, YES.
Q IT COULD HAVE?
A COULD HAVE, YES.
Q NOW, DOES THAT PRESENT A PROBLEM WHEN YOU ARE
COLLECTING EVIDENCE?
A NOT REALLY, NO.
Q WHY NOT?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. NO FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
WELL, COUNSEL GIVE YOU A HYPOTHETICAL WHERE HE
RELATED TO YOU A SET OF FACTS UNDER WHICH THE SWATCH CAME INTO
CONTACT WITH YOUR HAND AND THEN WAS PLACED AS THE SUBSTRATE
CONTROL DOWN ON THE CEMENT AND THEN THE WATER MIGRATED OVER TO
THE STAIN ITSELF.
DO YOU RECALL A HYPOTHETICAL ALONG THOSE LINES?
A YES.
Q UNDER THAT HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION, IS THERE ANY
DANGER OF CONTAMINATING THE ITEM BEING COLLECTED, THE STAIN?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. STILL NO FOUNDATION WITH THIS
WITNESS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: VERY LITTLE IF ANY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND IF THE CONTROL SWATCH WERE IN
FACT CONTAMINATED, COULD THAT BE TESTED FOR BY TESTING THE
CONTROL SWATCH?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. BEYOND THE SCOPE OF HER
EXPERTISE.
THE COURT: FOUNDATION. SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, HAVE YOU BEEN TAUGHT WHAT THE
CONTROL SWATCH IS FOR?
A WE HAVE BEEN TOLD WHAT IT CAN BE USED FOR, YES.
Q AND WHEN IT GETS BACK TO THE LABORATORY, WHAT DO THE
PEOPLE IN SEROLOGY USE THOSE CONTROL SWATCHES FOR?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PEOPLE IN
SEROLOGY USE THOSE FOR?
A I KNOW THEY ARE USED TO SEE IF ANYTHING IN THE
BACKGROUND WOULD INTERFERE WITH THE TESTS THEY WERE GOING TO RUN
AND THEY CAN ALSO BE TESTED FOR CONTAMINATION, DNA, WHATEVER.
Q OKAY.
AND IF THE CONTROL SWATCH WAS IN FACT TESTED AND IT
WAS DETERMINED THAT IT DID NOT CONTAIN BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL, WOULD
THAT INDICATE THAT YOU DID NOT CONTAMINATE THE CONTROL SWATCH AND
HENCE THE STAIN?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. NOT QUALIFIED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, WITH RESPECT TO SWATCHES THAT
ARE DROPPED, IF YOU DROP ONE OF THE SWATCHES AND YOU JUST LEAVE
IT ON THE GROUND, CAN THAT SOMEHOW AFFECT OR CONTAMINATE THE
STAIN THAT YOU'RE COLLECTING?
A IF IT IS JUST LEFT ON THE GROUND?
Q RIGHT.
A NO, BECAUSE IT WOULDN'T BE USED.
Q IS THERE ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO THAT AT ALL THAT YOU'RE
AWARE OF BASED UPON YOUR TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE?
A NO.
Q AND WHEN YOU WERE TESTIFYING ON DIRECT EXAMINATION,
DO YOU RECALL BEING ASKED A COUPLE QUESTIONS ABOUT DIFFERENT
THINGS THAT COULD CONCEIVABLY HAPPEN WHILE YOU'RE COLLECTING A
STAIN?
A I THINK SO, YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO
READ FROM PAGE 23700.
THE COURT: WHAT VOLUME IS THIS? WHAT VOLUME, COUNSEL?
MR. GOLDBERG: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: WHAT VOLUME IS THIS?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS IS VOLUME 130. I'M GOING TO START ON
LINE -- WELL, ACTUALLY I WOULD LIKE TO PAGE ON PAGE 23699 ON LINE
27 THROUGH LINE 6.
THE COURT: MR. NEUFELD?
MR. NEUFELD: ONE SECOND.
THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE THE PAGE?
MR. NEUFELD: THIS IS DIRECT EXAMINATION?
THE COURT: CORRECT.
MR. NEUFELD: I WOULD OBJECT TO REREADING DIRECT
EXAMINATION. IT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF REDIRECT EXAMINATION.
MR. GOLDBERG: NO. HE GOT INTO THIS ON CROSS.
THE COURT: IT'S A PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENT. IT'S
HEARSAY. THERE'S NO INCONSISTENCY.
MR. GOLDBERG: NO, BUT IT'S NOT BEING --
THE COURT: LET ME SEE COUNSEL AT SIDEBAR.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD
AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WE'RE OVER AT THE SIDEBAR.
MR. GOLDBERG, WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
ON CROSS-EXAMINATION, MR. NEUFELD ASKED ABOUT THE
PORTION OF THE DIRECT EXAMINATION WHERE SHE ADMITTED THAT YOU CAN
DROP SWATCHES AND SAID THAT THE ONLY REASON THAT YOU ADMITTED
THAT WAS BECAUSE YOU KNEW IT WAS ON VIDEOTAPE AND YOU KNEW THAT
WE HAD THAT VIDEOTAPE AND POSSIBLY WERE GOING TO PLAY IT.
I WANT TO SHOW -- SHE ADMITTED ALSO SHE COULD DROP
THE TWEEZERS. IT'S NOT ON ANY VIDEOTAPE, NOT ANY STILL
PHOTOGRAPHY. AND WHEN YOU BRING OUT A PORTION OF THE STATEMENT,
UNDER THE RES GESTAE RULE, WE GET TO BRING UP THE OTHER STORY.
IT'S FAIR AND PROPER IN LIGHT OF CROSS-EXAMINATION.
THE COURT: OBJECTION SUSTAINED.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
PROCEED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ON DIRECT EXAMINATION, WERE YOU
TRYING TO IN ANY WAY CONCEAL DIFFERENT PROBLEMS THAT COULD HAPPEN
WHEN YOU'RE COLLECTING A STAIN?
A NO.
Q AND IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COULD CONCEIVABLY
HAPPEN, DROPPING TWEEZERS?
A IT CAN HAPPEN, YES.
Q OKAY.
AND DID YOU ADMIT THAT ON DIRECT EXAMINATION?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: IT'S HEARSAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DID YOU MAKE ANY EFFORT TO CONCEAL
THAT DURING DIRECT EXAMINATION, THAT THAT COULD BE A PROBLEM?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION AGAIN.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
AND DO YOU KNOW FOR A FACT WHETHER OR NOT YOU DID
DROP ANY TWEEZERS AT THE CRIME SCENE AT BUNDY OR AT ROCKINGHAM?
A I DO NOT BELIEVE I DID.
Q BUT IF THAT PROBLEM DOES OCCUR, HOW DO YOU HANDLE IT?
A CLEAN THE TWEEZERS.
Q SO THIS IS A POTENTIAL MISTAKE THAT COULD OCCUR WHILE
YOU'RE COLLECTING EVIDENCE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A IT'S NOT REALLY A MISTAKE. IT CAN HAPPEN.
Q OKAY.
BUT IT COULDN'T HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE EVIDENCE
COLLECTION?
A NO.
Q NOW, GETTING BACK TO THE CONTROL SWATCHES, I WANTED
TO SHOW YOU THE EVIDENCE COLLECTION BOARD. I THINK IT WAS 177.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: EXCUSE ME. IT'S 167.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: I WANT TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS
ABOUT CELL NUMBER 8 ON THIS BOARD, MISS MAZZOLA. YOU MAY HAVE TO
STEP DOWN IN ORDER TO SEE THIS.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ON CELL 8, DO YOU SEE THAT THERE
ARE -- THE TWO LITTLE WHITE ITEMS THAT ARE SORT OF IN THE AREA
THAT'S FRAMED BY YOUR HANDS AND YOUR BODY?
A YES.
Q ONE OF THEM SEEMS TO BE CLOSER TO YOUR RIGHT KNEE AND
THE OTHER ONE APPEARS TO BE A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE EDGE OF THE
COIN ENVELOPE, BUT THEY'RE BOTH ON THE CEMENT.
A CORRECT.
Q WHAT ARE THOSE WHITE ITEMS?
A THEY APPEAR TO BE SWATCHES.
Q AND IF SOMEONE HAD ASKED YOU TO LOOK AT THIS
PHOTOGRAPH AND SAID, "WHAT ARE THOSE ITEMS AND HOW DID THEY GET
THERE," WOULD YOU HAVE TOLD THEM THEY FELL OUT WHILE YOU WERE
TAKING THEM OUT OF THE PILL BOX?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SPECULATIVE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE TOLD THEM?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT. YOU CAN RESUME YOUR
SEAT.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU. I'M FINISHED WITH THE BOARD.
I'LL TAKE IT --
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT ANOTHER
ISSUE RELATING TO THE COLLECTION OF BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE.
TO YOUR RECOLLECTION, HAS THERE EVER BEEN AN INSTANCE
WHERE YOU HAD THE TWEEZERS IN YOUR HAND WITH A BLOODY SWATCH AND
DROPPED THE BLOODY SWATCH?
A THAT HASN'T HAPPENED TO ME, NO.
Q AND IF THAT DID HAPPEN, HOW WOULD YOU HANDLE THAT
SITUATION?
A WELL, IF THERE WAS ENOUGH OF THE STAIN LEFT, YOU'D
JUST TAKE ANOTHER SWATCH.
Q OKAY.
BUT WHAT IF YOU WANTED TO SAVE THAT SWATCH, THE ONE
THAT YOU DROPPED?
A THEN YOU COULD PACKAGE IT IN A SEPARATE PLASTIC BAG,
SEPARATE COIN ENVELOPE ALONG WITH ANOTHER CONTROL OF THE AREA
WHERE IT FELL, MAKE A NOTE ON THERE WHAT HAPPENED.
Q AND WHY WOULD YOU TAKE ANOTHER CONTROL?
A WELL, TO GET A SAMPLE OF THE AREA WHERE THE SWATCH
FELL.
Q SO WHAT WOULD YOU DO, TO GIVE YOU ANOTHER
HYPOTHETICAL, IF YOU HAD A SITUATION WHERE FOR SOME REASON YOU
DROPPED THE BLOODY SWATCH AND INSTINCTIVELY YOU CAUGHT IT IN A
GLOVED HAND? HOW WOULD YOU HANDLE THAT SITUATION?
A SAME WAY EXCEPT YOU'D JUST INCLUDE THE GLOVE AS THE
SUBSTRATE.
Q SO YOU COULD INCLUDE THE GLOVE AS A SUBSTRATE
CONTROL?
A YES.
Q SO THERE ARE WAYS TO DEAL WITH PROBLEMS EVEN SUCH AS
DROPPING A BLOODY SWATCH?
A YES.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WOULD YOU PACKAGE -- HOW WOULD YOU
PACKAGE THE GLOVE IF YOU SAVED THAT AS YOUR SUBSTRATE CONTROL?
A THAT WOULD BE PACKAGED IN A SEPARATE PLASTIC BAG,
SEPARATE COIN ENVELOPE JUST TO KEEP THEM SEPARATE.
Q OR COULD YOU CONCEIVABLY TAKE A CONTROL SWATCH FROM
THE AREA OF THE GLOVE NEARBY WHERE THE STAIN FELL?
A YOU COULD. EITHER WAY.
Q NOW, WITH RESPECT TO YOUR EVIDENCE COLLECTION OF THE
BLOODSTAINS AT BUNDY AND ROCKINGHAM, ARE THERE ANY MISTAKES THAT
YOU CAN THINK OF THAT YOU COULD HAVE MADE THAT COULD HAVE CAUSED
THE BLOOD AT THAT LOCATION TO SOMEHOW CHANGE INTO THE DEFENDANT'S
BLOOD?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. NO FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ARE THERE ANY MISTAKES THAT YOU CAN
THINK OF THAT YOU COULD HAVE MADE THAT COULD HAVE CAUSED THOSE
STAINS TO BECOME CONTAMINATED IN SUCH A WAY THAT THEY HAD THE
GENETIC -- SAME GENETIC MARKERS AS THE DEFENDANT'S BLOOD?
MR. NEUFELD: SAME OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY MISTAKES THAT
YOU MADE OR COULD HAVE MADE TO CONTAMINATE THOSE STAINS?
A NO.
Q NOW, ONCE YOU GET BACK TO THE LABORATORY WITH THESE
STAINS ON THE EVENING OF THE 13TH, DID YOU PLAY SOME ROLE IN THE
DRYING PROCESS OF THOSE STAINS?
A YES.
Q AND THEN ON THE 14TH, TO YOUR RECOLLECTION, DID YOU
PLAY ANY ROLE IN THE PACKAGING OF THE DRIED STAINS?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. BEYOND THE SCOPE OF
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO DATE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I MAY HAVE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
AND WAS THERE SOMETHING ELSE THAT YOU WERE WORKING ON
INVOLVING A CASE THAT WAS SEPARATE FROM THIS AT OR AROUND THAT
TIME?
A YES.
Q DID THAT INVOLVE ANY BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE?
A NO.
Q NOW, WHEN THE ITEMS ARE PACKAGED DURING THE DRYING --
AFTER THEY'RE DRY INTO BINDLES, WHAT INFORMATION IS PLACED ON THE
BINDLES?
A THE ITEM NUMBER AND C FOR CONTROL ON THE BINDLE
CONTAINING THE CONTROL SWATCH.
Q SO IS THAT SIMILAR TO THE SAME TYPE OF INFORMATION
THAT WAS PLACED ON THE PLASTIC BAGS AT THE SCENE?
A YES.
Q DO YOU HAVE TO DISTINGUISH NECESSARILY BETWEEN THE
CONTROL AND THE STAIN SWATCH?
A IT JUST MAKES IT EASIER FOR THE SEROLOGIST.
Q AND WHEN YOU'RE PARTICIPATING IN THIS PROCESS OF
PACKAGING THE DRIED STAINS, IS IT YOUR PRACTICE TO INITIAL THE
COIN ENVELOPES?
A YES.
Q AND IS ANY OTHER INFORMATION PLACED ON THE COIN
ENVELOPES?
A THE PROPERTY NUMBER, WHICH IS USUALLY DIFFERENT THAN
THE PHOTO ID NUMBER, BUT NOT ALWAYS.
Q IS ANY DR NUMBER PLACED ON THOSE?
A YES. THE DR NUMBER FOR THE CASE IS PLACED ON EACH
ENVELOPE.
Q AND BASED UPON YOUR TRAINING AND YOUR EXPERIENCE, IS
THE COIN ENVELOPE WHAT IS USED IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHAT CASE
THOSE STAINS CAME FROM AND WHERE THEY WERE FOUND AT THE CRIME
SCENE?
A IT CONTAINS THE INFORMATION NECESSARY, YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. LET ME JUST
CHECK.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DO -- YOU SAID YOU GENERALLY
INITIAL THE COIN ENVELOPE?
A AT BOOKING?
Q YES.
A IT IS INITIALED.
Q AND DO YOU HAVE TO INITIAL THE BINDLES NECESSARILY?
A NO.
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. LEADING.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO, NOT NECESSARILY THE BINDLES.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: BUT YOU DO PLACE GENERALLY THE ITEM
NUMBER AND THEN DESIGNATE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTROL AND
THE STAIN?
A CORRECT.
Q ON THE BINDLE?
A CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, TWO MINUTES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
TWO MINUTES OR 10 MINUTES?
MR. NEUFELD: COMFORT BREAK.
THE COURT: I SEE. OKAY.
FOLKS, WE'LL TAKE ABOUT 10 MINUTES.
ALL RIGHT.
PLEASE REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
WE'RE JUST GOING TO RECYCLE INTO RECROSS. AND JUST
FOR YOUR INFORMATION, BECAUSE OF THE LOST TIME WE HAD THIS
MORNING, WE'RE GOING TO RESUME THIS AFTERNOON AT 1:00 O'CLOCK
RATHER THAN 1:30, LITTLE SHORTER LUNCH BREAK TODAY.
MISS MAZZOLA, YOU MAY STEP DOWN.
10 MINUTES.
(RECESS.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER.
ALL PARTIES ARE PRESENT.
GOOD MORNING, MR. DIXON.
MR. DIXON: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE ONE POINT
WHICH I BELIEVE THAT MR. GOLDBERG OPENED THE DOOR TO ME PLAYING
THE AUDIO PORTION OF THE DEMONSTRATION TAPE.
HE ELICITED A SERIES OF ANSWERS FROM MISS MAZZOLA
ABOUT NO ONE EVER SUGGESTED TO HER THAT SHE SHOULDN'T MENTION THE
SWATCHES, THAT WE WOULD BE WILLING TO SHOW THE SWATCHES, IT IS
NOT A PROBLEM. IT IS NOT SOMETHING WE ARE TRYING TO COVER UP.
THE COURT: YES, I RECOLLECT THE TESTIMONY.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY.
AND YET IN FACT WHAT WE HAVE ON THE VIDEOTAPE AND THE
AUDIOTAPE -- AUDIO PORTION OF THE VIDEOTAPE, IS MR. GOLDBERG IN
HER PRESENCE SAYING -- SAYING, YOU KNOW, "CAN WE GET RID OF THAT
PORTION OF THE VIDEOTAPE?"
THE COURT: CAN WE EDIT THAT OUT.
MR. NEUFELD: WHAT?
THE COURT: HIS COMMENT WAS, "CAN WE EDIT IT OUT?"
MR. NEUFELD: CAN WE MAKE AN EDIT OF IT AND MR. GOLDBERG
SAID, "THEN THERE WILL BE A GAP, WON'T THERE," AND THEN THE
CAMERAMAN SAID, "NO, NO, NO, WE WILL MAKE IT CLEAN."
THE COURT: SO YOU ARE STILL SUGGESTING THE CONVERSATION OF
COUNSEL REGARDING THE PREPARATION OF DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE
SHOULD COME IN BEFORE THE JURY?
MR. NEUFELD: I'M SAYING SINCE SHE WAS PRESENT FOR THOSE
COMMENTS OF MR. GOLDBERG IT DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS THE SUGGESTION
THAT MR. GOLDBERG MADE TO THIS JURY TO THIS WITNESS ON REDIRECT
THAT NO, WE HAD NEVER SUGGESTED TO YOU THAT THESE FALLEN SWATCHES
SHOULD BE KEPT AWAY FROM THE JURY, SOMETHING WE DON'T WANT TO
SEE, WHEN CLEARLY THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
ALL RIGHT. THE COURT'S PREVIOUS RULING STANDS.
LET'S HAVE THE JURY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: AND WE WILL CALL THIS CROSS COMPLETION.
AND MR. GOLDBERG, YOU HAVE ALL THE ITEMS HERE?
MR. GOLDBERG: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YOU HAVE ALL THOSE ITEMS HERE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
PLEASE BE SEATED.
ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY
ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF YOU RECOLLECT, YESTERDAY MR.
NEUFELD CONCLUDED HIS CROSS-EXAMINATION PENDING PERMISSION FROM
THE COURT TO REOPEN WHEN CERTAIN ITEMS OF EVIDENCE WERE DELIVERED
TO THE COURT.
THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE COURT AND I'M
GOING TO ALLOW MR. NEUFELD TO CONTINUE AND CONCLUDE HIS
CROSS-EXAMINATION, INCLUDING QUESTIONING AS TO THESE ITEMS.
ALL RIGHT. MR. NEUFELD.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, I BELIEVE I WILL ALSO BE DOING
THE RECROSS AS WELL NOW, SO IT IS ALL --
THE COURT: YES.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY. THANK YOU.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. NEUFELD:
Q MISS MAZZOLA, IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION
THAT ON OCCASION I MAY HAVE MISPRONOUNCED YOUR NAME DURING THE
CROSS-EXAMINATION BECAUSE OF MY ACCENT, AND ALTHOUGH I'M PROUD OF
MY ACCENT AND I'M SURE YOU ARE PROUD OF YOUR ACCENT, I MEANT NO
DISRESPECT AND I HOPE YOU DIDN'T TAKE IT THAT WAY.
A NO, I DIDN'T TAKE IT THAT WAY.
Q OKAY. FINE.
GOOD MORNING.
AND GOOD MORNING.
THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, YOU SAID A LITTLE BIT
-- A WHILE AGO ON REDIRECT EXAMINATION, THAT DENNIS FUNG HAD
DIRECTED YOU JUST TO USE A SINGLE SWAB ON THE GAS PEDAL, THE
BRAKE PEDAL AND THE EMERGENCY BRAKE WHEN YOU GOT TO THE BRONCO ON
THE 14TH; IS THAT RIGHT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q YOU SAID HE WANTED YOU TO USE THE SAME SWAB ON ALL
THREE BECAUSE HE JUST WANTED TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAD BEEN
USED AT ALL OR BLOOD HAD BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THEM; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q WELL, WOULDN'T IT HAVE BEEN VERY IMPORTANT, MISS
MAZZOLA, IF THERE WAS BLOOD ON ONLY ONE PEDAL, WOULDN'T THAT
INDICATE THAT SOMEONE HAD CLIMBED INTO THE CAR, AS OPPOSED TO
HAVE DRIVEN THE CAR?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
THE WITNESS: YOU CAN --
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
THE WITNESS: I'M SORRY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, WOULD YOU AGREE
THAT TO DRIVE A CAR ONE HAS TO USE BOTH THE BRAKE AND THE GAS
PEDAL?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IF YOU ONLY
SAW SOME INDICIA OF BLOOD ON, LET'S SAY, THE EMERGENCY BRAKE, BUT
NOT ON THE ACCELERATOR, NOR THE BRAKE, THAT WOULD BE EVIDENCE
THAT SOMEONE HAD NOT DRIVEN THE CAR WHO HAD BLOOD ON THEIR SHOE
BUT RATHER SOMEONE MAY HAVE CLIMBED INTO THE CAR AND NOT DRIVEN
IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: WELL, IT IS STILL SPECULATIVE, BUT THE JURY IS
SMART ENOUGH TO FIGURE THIS OUT, AS THEY HAVE ALL DRIVEN CARS.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND BY THE WAY, MISS MAZZOLA, YOU
SAID THAT YOU DIDN'T EVEN SEE ANY RED STAINS ON ANY OF THOSE
THREE ITEMS IN THE CAR, DID YOU?
A NO. THEY WERE BLACK. I DID NOT SEE ANY RED STAINS.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, YOU EXAMINED THOSE ITEMS WITH THAT
FLASHLIGHT THAT YOU CAN SEE IN THE PICTURE, DIDN'T YOU?
A MR. FUNG DID, YES.
Q AND MR. FUNG NEVER SAID IN YOUR PRESENCE THAT HE
OBSERVED ANY STAINS ON THOSE THREE ITEMS, DID HE?
MR. GOLDBERG: HEARSAY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. IT IS HEARSAY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL --
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
DID MR. FUNG EVER DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO ANYTHING
ON THE BRAKE PEDALS?
THE WITNESS: NO.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND IN FACT, NEITHER YOU NOR MR.
FUNG THAT DAY COLLECTED ANY SWATCHES FROM ANY OF THOSE THREE
ITEMS, DID YOU?
A NO, WE DID NOT.
Q AND IT IS NOT BECAUSE YOU WERE ONLY LOOKING FOR
REPRESENTATIVE STAINS, BECAUSE THERE WERE NO OTHER STAINS ON ANY
OF THOSE THREE ITEMS, WERE THERE?
A I DO NOT KNOW IF THERE WERE ANY STAINS PRESENT.
Q WELL, YOU DIDN'T SEE ANY STAINS, DID YOU?
A I PERSONALLY DID NOT, NO.
Q AND AGAIN, REPEATING HIS HONOR'S QUESTION TO YOU AND
I'M GOING TO GET IT WRONG -- PERHAPS YOU COULD REPEAT YOUR OWN
QUESTION.
DID MR. FUNG DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO ANY STAINS AT
ALL ON EITHER OF THESE THREE ITEMS?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: I LIKED IT THE FIRST TIME, TOO.
NO, DON'T ASK IT AGAIN.
MR. COCHRAN: JUST KIDDING.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WHEN YOU DID THE DEMO, THE
DEMONSTRATION VIDEOTAPE, MA'AM, YOU WANTED TO PERFORM ON THAT
TAPE AS WELL AS POSSIBLE, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU WERE TOLD IN FACT THAT THERE WAS A CHANCE
THAT THIS TAPE MIGHT BE PLAYED FOR THE JURY? YOU WERE TOLD THAT,
TOO, WEREN'T YOU?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THAT THERE WAS A CHANCE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND WHEN YOU DID THIS DEMONSTRATION,
I MEAN RELATIVE TO AN ACTUAL CRIME SCENE, IT WAS UNDER IDEAL
CONDITIONS, WASN'T IT?
A NOT IDEAL, NO.
Q WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, THERE WERE NO BODIES PRESENT,
WERE THERE?
A NO.
Q THERE WERE NO 20 OR 25 POLICE OFFICERS PRESENT, WERE
THERE?
A NO.
Q THERE WEREN'T A PHALANX OF JOURNALISTS WITH T.V.
CAMERAS ACROSS THE STREET, WERE THERE?
A NO.
Q AND THERE WERE NO TIME CONSTRAINTS, WERE THERE?
A NO.
Q AND NONETHELESS, MISS MAZZOLA, PROBLEMS STILL AROSE
DURING THE COURSE OF MAKING THAT VIDEO, DIDN'T THEY?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO "PROBLEMS."
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: PROBLEMS SUCH AS THE STAINS BEING A LITTLE
DIFFICULT TO REMOVE, YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: OTHER THAN THE STAIN BEING DIFFICULT
TO REMOVE, IS IT YOUR OPINION, MA'AM, THAT NO PROBLEMS OCCURRED
OR ARE VISUALIZED IN THAT ENTIRE DEMONSTRATION VIDEO?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT IS STILL VAGUE AS TO "PROBLEMS."
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN BY
"PROBLEMS."
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, WITHOUT TELLING US WHAT WAS
SAID, MISS MAZZOLA, WERE ANY PROBLEMS WITH WHAT HAPPENED ON THAT
VIDEOTAPE CALLED TO YOUR ATTENTION WHILE YOU WERE THERE SHOOTING
IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT IS IRRELEVANT. CALLS FOR HEARSAY.
THE COURT: DIRECTLY CALLED TO YOUR ATTENTION?
THE WITNESS: NOT THAT I CAN RECALL.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: SO AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY, HAVING
SEEN THIS VIDEOTAPE NOW, BOTH YESTERDAY -- I'M SORRY, THE DAY
BEFORE AND AGAIN TODAY, IT IS YOUR OPINION THAT THERE WERE NO
MISTAKES MADE BY YOU?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT IS STILL VAGUE AS TO "MISTAKES."
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NONE THAT I CAN REALLY SEE, NO.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YESTERDAY, MISS MAZZOLA, YOU SAID
THAT YOU WERE NOT FAMILIAR WITH MR. SIMPSON'S NAME WHEN YOU
ARRIVED AT THE SCENE ON THE 13TH; IS THAT RIGHT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q WELL, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT BY THE TIME YOU
LEFT ROCKINGHAM LATE IN THE AFTERNOON ON THE 13TH THAT IT
CERTAINLY CAME TO YOUR ATTENTION THAT HE WAS A FAMOUS PERSON?
A I FOUND OUT WHO HE WAS, YES.
Q WELL, NOT JUST WHO HE WAS, BUT YOU FOUND OUT THAT
BECAUSE OF WHO HE WAS THAT THIS CASE WAS GOING TO RECEIVE A GREAT
DEAL OF ATTENTION?
A I COULD TELL THAT FROM THE CAMERAS ALREADY GATHERED
AT HIS HOUSE.
Q AND EVEN THOUGH YOU MAY NOT HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT
EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED ON THE 13TH, THE NIGHT OF THE 13TH,
CERTAINLY WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF DAYS YOU WERE ABLE TO GLEAN
JUST FROM THE VAST MEDIA ATTENTION THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE A
CASE WHICH WAS VERY HIGH-PROFILE?
A YES, IT WAS GOING TO BE HIGH-PROFILE.
Q AND IN FACT, MA'AM, IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS THERE WAS
ACTUALLY A HEARING HELD IN CONNECTION WITH THAT CASE, WASN'T
THERE?
A ARE WE TALKING ABOUT IN AUGUST?
Q NO. THERE WAS -- WAS THERE A PRELIMINARY HEARING
HELD IN LATE JUNE THAT WAS TELEVISED?
A IT COULD HAVE BEEN.
Q AND WOULD YOU AGREE, MA'AM, THAT THROUGHOUT THE MONTH
OF JUNE, THE MONTH OF JULY AND THE MONTH OF AUGUST, UP UNTIL THE
TIME YOU TESTIFIED ON AUGUST 23RD, THERE WAS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT
OF MEDIA ATTENTION TO THIS CASE?
A I GUESS IT WAS ON T.V., YES.
Q AND YOU REALIZED DURING THOSE TWO AND A HALF MONTHS,
MISS MAZZOLA, THAT YOU PLAYED A VERY SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN THIS
CASE, DIDN'T YOU?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE AS TO THE WORD "SIGNIFICANT."
THE COURT: OVERRULED. BUT WE HAVE SORT OF PLOWED THIS
GROUND ALREADY.
MR. NEUFELD: TWO MORE QUESTIONS ON THIS, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: PLEASE.
THE WITNESS: AS I SAID BEFORE, I DIDN'T GIVE IT MUCH
THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE MEDIA.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, YOU REALIZED FROM THE
DAY YOU COLLECTED EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE THAT THERE WAS GOING TO
COME A TIME WHEN YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE TO TESTIFY ABOUT WHAT YOU
DID, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND WITH ALL THAT MEDIA ATTENTION THAT YOU WERE
CONSCIOUS OF BETWEEN JUNE 13TH AND AUGUST 23RD, DIDN'T YOU AT ANY
POINT DURING THOSE TWO MONTHS, WITH THIS BEING IN THE NEWSPAPERS,
ON TELEVISION AND ON THE RADIO, AT ALL REVIEW IN YOUR OWN MIND
WHAT IT IS THAT YOU ACTUALLY DID ON THE 13TH?
A NO.
Q YOU NEVER REVIEWED IT AT ALL?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
NOW, YOU ALSO SAID THAT WHAT HELPED YOU TO REMEMBER
BETTER WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED ON THE 13TH AND 14TH WAS WHEN YOU
LOOK AT PHOTOGRAPHS; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT, FOR INSTANCE, LOOKING AT
THE PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM NO. 47, REFRESHED YOUR RECOLLECTION ABOUT
WHAT HAPPENED; IS THAT CORRECT?
A WELL --
Q THAT WAS ONE OF THE EXAMPLES USED BY MR. GOLDBERG;
ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A I BELIEVE IT WAS 47. I'M NOT QUITE SURE.
Q WELL, LET ME JUST SHOW YOU THE PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
AND MR. DOUGLAS, THIS IS PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT WHICH?
MR. DOUGLAS: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS NO. 165.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
WHY DON'T YOU TAKE A LONG POINTER WITH YOU.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, MISS MAZZOLA, I'M POINTING TO
ITEM 47, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THAT IS THE PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47.
IS THAT THE PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47 THAT YOU LOOKED AT.
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, THAT THERE
WAS ONLY ONE PHOTOGRAPH.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I LOOKED AT SEVERAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SCENE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, YOU SAID THAT YOU LOOKED AT A
PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47, DID YOU NOT?
A YES.
Q WAS THIS THE PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47 THAT YOU LOOKED
AT?
A I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS WAS THE EXACT PHOTOGRAPH OF
ITEM 47 THAT I LOOKED AT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHAT OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS OF ITEM 47 DID YOU LOOK AT TO
REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION?
A OVERALL VIEWS OF THE SCENE. THAT IS WHAT HELPED
MOST.
Q WELL, MA'AM, YESTERDAY YOU SAID THAT SPECIFICALLY YOU
RECALLED LOOKING AT A PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47 AND THAT REFRESHING
YOUR RECOLLECTION ABOUT WHAT TRANSPIRED ON JUNE 13TH.
I'M SIMPLY ASKING YOU WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS THE
PHOTOGRAPH YOU LOOKED AT OF ITEM 47 OR WAS THERE ANOTHER
PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47 THAT YOU LOOKED AT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: IS IT NOW YOUR TESTIMONY THAT IT
WASN'T A PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47 WHICH REFRESHED YOUR RECOLLECTION
BUT INSTEAD OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SCENE?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. NEUFELD: YOU MAY SIT DOWN AGAIN.
THE WITNESS: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YOU WOULD AGREE, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT
THAT PHOTOGRAPH OF ITEM 47 IS NOTHING MORE THAN A RED STAIN ON A
PIECE OF CONCRETE OR THE GROUND COVER?
ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT; BEST EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: HAVE YOU LOOKED AT ANY PHOTOGRAPH AT
ALL, MISS MAZZOLA, WHICH SHOWS ANYONE COLLECTING ITEM 47?
A NO.
Q HAVE YOU LOOKED AT ANY PHOTOGRAPH WHICH SHOWS ANYONE
KNEELING DOWN NEXT TO ITEM 47?
A NO.
Q BUT IT IS YOUR TESTIMONY THAT LOOKING AT PHOTOGRAPHS
OF ITEM 47 REFRESHED YOUR RECOLLECTION ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED; IS
THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND SINCE PHOTOGRAPHS REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION, DID
YOU ALSO LOOK AT PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE
COLLECTED IN THIS CASE AT BUNDY?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT IS COMPOUND AS PHRASED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I LOOKED AT SEVERAL PHOTOGRAPHS, YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DID YOU LOOK AT A PHOTOGRAPH WHICH
REFLECTED THE LOCATION OF ITEM 50?
A WHICH ITEM IS 50?
Q ITEM 50 WOULD BE PHOTO IDENTIFICATION 115, YOU KNOW,
ONE OF THE BLOOD DROPS TAKEN FROM BUNDY.
A I LOOKED AT SEVERAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SCENE.
Q AND WERE THEY PHOTOGRAPHS THAT DEPICTED THE LOCATION
OF THE DIFFERENT BLOOD DROP STAINS AT BUNDY?
A IT SHOWED THEIR OVERALL VIEW, YES.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
NEXT IN ORDER, YOUR HONOR?
THE CLERK: 1121.
THE COURT: I'M SORRY, MRS. ROBERTSON?
THE CLERK: 1121.
THE COURT: 1121.
(DEFT'S 1121 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
IT APPEARS TO BE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE REAR STAIRWAY AT
BUNDY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE CARD THAT IS
SITTING AT THE TOP OF THE STAIRS IN FRONT OF THE GATE?
A IT APPEARS TO BE ONE OF OURS.
Q AND CAN YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT NUMBER IT IS ON IT?
A 115.
Q OKAY.
AND 115 CORRESPONDS WITH ITEM NO. 50, CORRECT?
A I WILL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT, YES.
Q WELL, NO, NO, PLEASE. CHECK YOUR NOTES.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: HUM, YES?
A YES.
Q YOU WERE PRESENT WHEN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN,
CORRECT?
A I WAS AT BUNDY, YES.
Q WELL, DIDN'T YOU TESTIFY ON DIRECT EXAMINATION AND ON
REDIRECT EXAMINATION THAT YOU AND DENNIS FUNG TOGETHER
PARTICIPATED IN SETTING UP THE PHOTOGRAPHING OF THE VARIOUS ITEMS
AT BUNDY?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WASN'T ONE OF YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES
AT BUNDY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DOCUMENTING OF ITEMS OF EVIDENCE?
A YES.
Q AND PART OF THE DOCUMENTING OF EVIDENCE ENTAILS THE
PHOTOGRAPHING OF ITEMS, DOES IT NOT?
A YES.
Q AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU HAD BEEN TAUGHT AT THE
SID MINI ACADEMY WAS TO GET VARIOUS ANGLES OR VARIOUS DISTANCES
OF THE DIFFERENT ITEMS, CORRECT?
A THE FORENSIC PHOTOGRAPHERS KNOW THAT, YES.
Q TO SHOOT A CLOSE-UP AND TO SHOOT IT FURTHER AWAY?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU -- DID YOU, WITH DENNIS FUNG, PUT DOWN THE
VARIOUS NUMBERS ALONG THE WAY SO THE ITEMS COULD BE PHOTOGRAPHED?
A I HELPED PUT DOWN SOME OF THEM, YES.
Q DO YOU HAVE AN INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION, AS YOU SIT
HERE TODAY, AS TO WHICH NUMBER YOU PUT DOWN AND WHICH NUMBERS HE
PUT DOWN?
A THE ONES I PARTICIPATED IN WERE UP NEAR THE FRONT OF
THE HOUSE IN THE AREA THAT THE CRIME OCCURRED.
Q OKAY.
BUT WHERE 115 IS IN THIS PICTURE, MISS MAZZOLA, IS
ACTUALLY WHERE ITEM 50, THE BLOOD STAIN IS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU PERSONALLY KNELT DOWN AND COLLECTED THAT
STAIN, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND MISS MAZZOLA, WHEN YOU COLLECTED THAT STAIN, YOU
WERE JUST A FEW FEET IN FRONT OF THAT REAR GATE, WEREN'T YOU?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE WITNESS: IT APPEARED --
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WEREN'T YOU?
A IT APPEARS THAT 115 IS NEAR THE GATE, YES.
Q AND YOU HAVE TO PASS THROUGH THAT GATE TO GET TO 117
WHICH BECAME ITEM 52, DON'T YOU?
A YES.
Q WELL, IF PHOTOGRAPHS -- DID SEEING PHOTOGRAPHS
REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION, MISS MAZZOLA?
WHEN YOU WERE SHOWN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, WHEN YOU LOOKED
AT THE DIFFERENT PHOTOGRAPHS AT THE SCENE OF BUNDY BEFORE TAKING
THE WITNESS STAND, DID THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT THERE
WAS IN FACT A REAR GATE LOCATED THERE?
A THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOW THAT YES, THERE WAS A REAR GATE.
Q WELL, DID SEEING THAT PHOTOGRAPH REFRESH YOUR
RECOLLECTION EVEN BEFORE YOU TOOK THE WITNESS STAND IN THIS CASE,
THAT THERE WAS A REAR GATE AT THAT LOCATION?
A THAT MORNING I DID NOT RECALL SEEING A BACK GATE.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, WHEN YOU SAY, "THAT MORNING," YOU MEAN
THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH?
A CORRECT.
Q WHEN YOU SAY YOU DIDN'T RECALL SEEING A GATE ON JUNE
13TH, ARE YOU SAYING THAT AT A CERTAIN POINT IN TIME WHEN I
THOUGHT BACK TO JUNE 13TH I DON'T RECALL SEEING A GATE?
IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT STATEMENT?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, IT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY AS TO A
"REAR GATE."
THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THAT MORNING I DID NOT REMEMBER SEEING A BACK
GATE. AFTER SEEING PHOTOGRAPHS APPARENTLY THERE IS A BACK GATE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
MISS MAZZOLA, WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT SOMEBODY
ASKED YOU ABOUT A BACK GATE?
A I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT DATE.
Q THE MONTH?
A NOT EVEN THE MONTH.
Q THE SEASON?
A I CAN'T EVEN REMEMBER THAT.
Q WELL, WAS IT SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER YOU WERE OUT THERE
IN JUNE, MORE OR LESS?
A IT WAS AFTER WE HAD BEEN OUT THERE IN JUNE.
Q WELL, WHEN YOU SAY "AFTER," WAS IT THE NEXT DAY?
A NO.
Q OKAY. SO IT WAS MANY WEEKS LATER?
THE COURT: I THINK WE HAVE GIVEN THE JURY A PICTURE OF
WHAT THE STATE OF THE RECOLLECTION IS.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
Q AND WHEN YOU SAY YOU DIDN'T RECALL SEEING A BACK GATE
THERE, DO YOU MEAN THAT AT THAT FIRST TIME, SOMETIME AFTER JUNE
13TH, WHEN SOMEONE ASKED YOU ABOUT A BACK GATE, IN THAT
CONVERSATION YOU DIDN'T RECALL A BACK GATE?
IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, MA'AM?
A YES, I DID NOT REMEMBER SEEING A BACK GATE.
Q OKAY.
AND THEN SUBSEQUENT TO THAT FIRST CONVERSATION YOU
HAD WITH SOMEONE WHEN THEY ASKED YOU ABOUT A BACK GATE AND YOU
SAID NO, I DON'T RECALL ONE, WERE YOU THEN SHOWN PHOTOGRAPHS,
PRIOR TO TAKING THE WITNESS STAND AT THIS TRIAL, WHERE YOU
ACTUALLY SAW THE BACK GATE?
A I SAW PHOTOGRAPHS, YES.
Q AND DID THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS INCLUDE A PHOTOGRAPH OF
THIS BACK GATE, MISS MAZZOLA?
A YES.
Q AND SO BEFORE YOU TOOK THE WITNESS STAND IN THIS
CASE, MISS MAZZOLA, DID SEEING THAT PHOTOGRAPH OF THE BACK GATE
REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT THERE WAS A BACK GATE THERE ON
JUNE 13TH?
A I STILL SAY ON JUNE 13TH I DID NOT REMEMBER SEEING A
BACK GATE.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, YOU HAVE TESTIFIED BEFORE THIS JURY
THAT THERE WAS SOME THINGS YOU DON'T REMEMBER BUT WHEN YOU
FINALLY SEE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THEM YOU THEN BEGIN TO HAVE YOUR
RECOLLECTION REFRESHED; IS THAT CORRECT?
A ON SOME THINGS, YES.
Q IS THERE ANY OTHER ITEM, BY THE WAY, MISS MAZZOLA,
WHERE YOU HAVE SEEN A PHOTOGRAPH OF IT SINCE WHERE, NONETHELESS,
IT IS YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT AN OBJECT DIDN'T EXIST THE WAY YOU
SAW IT ON JUNE 13TH?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS TIME I WOULD OBJECT
UNDER 352.
THE COURT: WELL, THE QUESTION IS VAGUE.
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, MISS MAZZOLA, YOU HAVE
TESTIFIED, I BELIEVE YESTERDAY, THAT YOU FIRST REALIZED THAT THE
BLOOD VIAL HAD BEEN CARRIED IN THE BLACK TRASH BAG ON THE MORNING
OF JUNE 14TH WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT THE EVIDENCE PROCESSING UNIT; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A I HAD SEEN IT IN THE EVIDENCE PROCESSING UNIT, YES.
Q ON THE 14TH?
A ON THE 14TH.
Q RIGHT.
AND THAT IS WHEN YOU REALIZED THAT IT HAD BEEN IN
THAT TRASH BAG; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND IN FACT WHERE YOU SAW IT WAS WHEN YOU LIFT --
TOOK ITEM 15, ITEM 16, YOU SAY, AND THE GRAY ENVELOPE OUT OF THE
TRASH BAG ON THE 14TH; IS THAT CORRECT?
A I DID NOT PERSONALLY REMOVE THOSE ITEMS FROM THE
TRASH BAG, NO.
Q YOU DID NOT REMOVE ANY OF THE ITEMS?
A PERSONALLY, NO.
Q WERE THEY REMOVED IN YOUR PRESENCE?
A THE BLOOD SAMPLE WAS, YES.
Q WELL, WHO REMOVED ITEM 15 AND 16 FROM THE TRASH BAG?
A THOSE WERE REMOVED LATER. I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS
MYSELF OR MR. FUNG DID IT LATER.
Q WHEN YOU SAY "LATER," YOU MEAN IN THE AFTERNOON,
AFTER YOU CAME BACK FROM THE BRONCO?
A I'M NOT SURE. IT WAS SOMETIME ON THE 14TH, BUT I'M
NOT SURE WHEN.
Q BUT YOU DO RECALL IN THE MORNING WHEN YOU FIRST GOT
THERE THAT MR. FUNG REMOVED -- I'M SORRY.
DID YOU SAY YOU REMOVED THE BLOOD VIAL IN THE GRAY
ENVELOPE OR THAT MR. FUNG DID?
A MR. FUNG.
Q IN YOUR PRESENCE?
A YES, I WAS THERE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, YOU HAVE ALSO SAID THAT YOU HAVE WATCHED
PORTIONS OF THIS TRIAL, EITHER ON T.V. OR LISTENED TO IT ON THE
RADIO; IS THAT CORRECT?
A BITS AND PIECES, YES.
Q AND ARE YOU AWARE, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT TWO WEEKS AGO
ON APRIL 12TH DENNIS FUNG TESTIFIED THAT HE CARRIED THE BLOOD
SAMPLE TO THE CRIME SCENE TRUCK EITHER IN A PAPER BAG, A POSSE
BOX OR BY ITSELF?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS IRRELEVANT AND CALLS FOR
HEARSAY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA -- ONE SECOND.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, MAY I PLEASE HAVE A SIDE BAR ON
THIS PARTICULAR QUESTION, ON THIS LINE?
THE COURT: MISS MAZZOLA, ARE YOU AWARE OF MR. FUNG'S
TESTIMONY REGARDING THE COLLECTION OF THE BLOOD VIAL ENVELOPE?
THE WITNESS: NO, I DON'T BELIEVE I WATCHED IT OR LISTENED
TO IT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
HAS ANYBODY DISCUSSED THAT WITH YOU?
THE WITNESS: I DON'T BELIEVE SO, NO.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, AT ANY POINT PRIOR TO MR.
FUNG'S TESTIMONY ON APRIL 12TH DID YOU TELL ANYONE IN THE
DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THAT YOU REALIZED ON THE MORNING OF
JUNE 14TH THAT YOU HAD CARRIED THE BLOOD SAMPLE OUT OF ROCKINGHAM
IN A TRASH BAG?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR HEARSAY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YOU TESTIFIED ON REDIRECT
EXAMINATION YESTERDAY THAT YOU HAD AN INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION OF
CARRYING A TRASH BAG OUT OF ROCKINGHAM EVEN BEFORE SEEING THE
VIDEOTAPE; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU ALSO TESTIFIED THAT YOU FIGURED OUT ON THE
MORNING OF JUNE 14TH THAT YOU HAD CARRIED THE VIAL OF BLOOD OUT
OF ROCKINGHAM IN THAT TRASH BAG; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU SAY THAT YOU CAME TO REALIZE, ON THE MORNING
OF JUNE 14TH, THAT YOU TOOK ITEMS 15 AND 16 OUT OF THE TRASH BAG
-- I'M SORRY.
WITHDRAWN.
AND YOU ALSO SAID YESTERDAY THAT WHEN YOU WERE SHOWN
THE GRAY ENVELOPE YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE THE TIME ON IT AS WELL,
TIME OF COLLECTION; IS THAT RIGHT?
A THERE WAS A TIME ON IT, YES.
Q WELL, WHAT YOU SAW ON THE 14TH WAS A STATEMENT IN
DENNIS FUNG'S HANDWRITING THAT SAID, "RECEIVED" WITH A DATE AND A
TIME OF 5:20 IN THE AFTERNOON OR 1720 HOURS?
A I'M NOT SURE WHAT ALL IT SAID.
Q AT THIS POINT IN TIME YOU ARE NOT SURE?
A YES, AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MIGHT IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION
AS TO WHAT TIME YOU OBSERVED IF YOU ACTUALLY SAW A PHOTOGRAPH OF
THAT ENVELOPE?
A AT WHAT TIME I OBSERVED ON THE ENVELOPE ITSELF OR --
Q NO, NO, OF THE TIME THAT WAS WRITTEN ON THE ENVELOPE
THAT YOU OBSERVED ON THE 14TH IF I SHOWED YOU NOW A PHOTOGRAPH OF
-- OF THE GRAY ENVELOPE?
MR. GOLDBERG: UNINTELLIGIBLE.
THE COURT: DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION?
THE WITNESS: NOT REALLY.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
THE COURT: WOULD A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE GRAY ENVELOPE --
THE WITNESS: RIGHT.
THE COURT: -- WHICH REFLECTS MR. FUNG'S NOTATIONS AS TO
WHEN IT WAS COLLECTED, WOULD THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO
WHAT YOU SAW THERE?
THE WITNESS: I REMEMBER SEEING THE GRAY ENVELOPE AND THE
WRITING.
MR. NEUFELD: I'M SORRY, YOU SAID --
THE WITNESS: I REMEMBER SEEING THE GRAY ENVELOPE AND
WRITING.
MR. NEUFELD: NEXT IN ORDER --
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: COULD WE HAVE 184-A, DEIRDRA.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MRS. ROBERTSON, DO YOU HAVE THAT
HANDY?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: LET ME JUST SHOW YOU, MISS MAZZOLA,
WHAT IS PROSECUTION'S EXHIBIT 184.
I WILL ASK YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, WHETHER IT
REFRESHES YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO THE WRITING THAT YOU CLAIM TO
HAVE SEEN ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH WHEN THE GRAY ENVELOPE WAS
REMOVED FROM THE GARBAGE BAG?
MR. GOLDBERG: OBJECT TO THE WORD "CLAIMED" AS
ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DOES SEEING THAT PHOTOGRAPH REFRESH
YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHAT IT IS YOU SAY YOU SAW ON THE MORNING
OF THE 14TH?
A IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT I SAW. I SAID I SAW THE WRITING.
Q OKAY.
AND THE WRITING YOU SAW SAID THAT IT WAS RECEIVED BY
MR. FUNG, RIGHT?
A WELL, "RECEIVED FROM DETECTIVE VANNATTER."
Q AND THAT IS IN DENNIS FUNG'S HANDWRITING?
A IT LOOKS LIKE HIS SIGNATURE. I'M NOT VERY FAMILIAR
WITH HIS HANDWRITING.
Q LOOKS LIKE HIS SIGNATURE, THOUGH?
A YES.
Q AND THERE IS A TIME ON IT, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q 1720 HOURS?
A LOOKS LIKE "1720."
Q AND THERE IS A DATE?
A YES.
Q AND THE DATE IS JUNE 13TH, 1994, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
Q AND YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY SURE, AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY,
MISS MAZZOLA, THIS YOU CAME TO THIS REALIZATION ABOUT HAVING
CARRIED THE BLOOD VIAL ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH, LONG BEFORE
YOU VIEWED THE VIDEOTAPE?
A YES.
Q WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU TOLD ANYONE AT ALL
ABOUT REALIZING THAT YOU HAD CARRIED THE BLOOD SAMPLE OUT OF
ROCKINGHAM AND BACK TO THE LABORATORY IN A TRASH BAG?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED AND HEARSAY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN. IT WAS NOT A BIG
DEAL, SO I DON'T REMEMBER.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, WAS IT IN THE LAST THREE
MONTHS?
A I DON'T REMEMBER.
Q WAS IT IN THE FALL?
A I DON'T REMEMBER.
Q WAS IT DURING ONE OF THE PREP SESSIONS WITH THE
DISTRICT ATTORNEY?
A I DON'T REMEMBER WHEN.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE HAVE COVERED THIS.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY.
Q DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN IT WAS THE FIRST TIME -- I ASKED
YOU BEFORE ABOUT THE FIRST TIME YOU TOLD ANYONE.
DO YOU REMEMBER THE FIRST TIME YOU TOLD THE
PROSECUTOR? SAME ANSWER?
A SAME ANSWER.
Q OKAY.
WELL, TWO WEEKS AGO, MA'AM, ON OR AROUND APRIL 12TH,
DID ANY PROSECUTOR ASK YOU ABOUT YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHO
CARRIED THE BLOOD SAMPLE OUT OF ROCKINGHAM AND AS TO HOW IT WAS
CARRIED?
A THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ASKED.
Q BUT AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY YOU HAVE NO RECOLLECTION
WHETHER ANY PROSECUTOR ASKED YOU ON OR ABOUT APRIL 12TH WHETHER
YOU HAD A RECOLLECTION AS TO HOW THE BLOOD VIAL WAS CARRIED OUT
OF ROCKINGHAM AND IF SO BY WHOM?
A I HAD TALKED TO THEM ON AND OFF. I DON'T RECALL
EXACTLY WHAT WE ALL TALKED ABOUT.
Q AND YOU DON'T RECALL WHETHER OR NOT THIS WAS EVEN
TALKED ABOUT AT ALL, DO YOU?
A IT COULD HAVE BEEN. I DON'T REMEMBER --
Q AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY, YOU HAVE NO INDEPENDENT
RECOLLECTION --
THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT.
MR. NEUFELD: SORRY.
THE COURT: LET HER FINISH THE ANSWER.
DON'T CUT HER OFF, HIM PLEASE.
MR. NEUFELD: SORRY, MISS MAZZOLA.
THE WITNESS: BE MY GUEST.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY YOU HAVE NO
INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION OF HAVING SAID THAT TO ANY OF THE
PROSECUTORS ON OR ABOUT APRIL 12TH OF 1995?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO "THAT."
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I'M NOT SURE OF THE DATE. WE MAY HAVE TALKED
ABOUT IT. I'M NOT POSITIVE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND -- ONE SECOND.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YOU SAID THAT YOU DON'T REMEMBER THE
FIRST TIME YOU TOLD THE PROSECUTORS THAT YOU HAD CARRIED OUT THE
BLOOD VIAL IN THAT BLACK TRASH BAG, BUT WHENEVER THAT TIME WAS,
MISS MAZZOLA, DID THE PROSECUTORS SEEM SURPRISED OR ELATED BY
THAT REMARK BY YOU?
A NO.
Q NOW, ON NOVEMBER 22ND, AT A RESTAURANT, YOU HAD A
MEETING WHERE YOUR BOSS, MICHELE KESTLER, WAS PRESENT, CORRECT?
A SHE WAS PRESENT AT A MEETING AT A RESTAURANT, YES.
Q AND THERE WERE TWO INVESTIGATORS FROM THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PRESENT AT THAT MEETING AS WELL?
A YES.
Q AND DURING THE COURSE OF THAT DISCUSSION THE SUBJECT
OF DETECTIVE VANNATTER GIVING THE VIAL OF MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD
AROSE, DIDN'T IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. WE HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THIS.
MR. NEUFELD: WE WENT INTO IT ON REDIRECT.
THE COURT: WE HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THIS, COUNSEL.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: MAY I HAVE A SIDE BAR, YOUR HONOR? THERE IS
A NEW ISSUE RELATING TO THIS THAT CAME UP, I BELIEVE.
THE COURT: NO.
PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DO YOU RECALL ON REDIRECT --
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME. YOU CAN MAKE YOUR RECORD AT THE
NOON BREAK.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DO YOU RECALL, MISS MAZZOLA, MR.
GOLDBERG ON REDIRECT ASKING YOU A QUESTION ABOUT HANDLING THE
EVIDENCE VERSUS CARRYING IT?
A YES.
Q AND DIDN'T YOU TELL THE DETECTIVES ON NOVEMBER 22ND
THAT YOU NEVER HANDLED THE BLOOD VIAL?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE REMEMBERING WHAT I TOLD
THEM. IT HAS BEEN A WHILE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, DID MISS MICHELE KESTLER AT
ANY TIME DURING THAT INTERVIEW ASK YOU TO CLARIFY THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN "HANDLING" THE BLOOD VIAL AND "CARRYING" THE BLOOD VIAL?
A I DON'T REMEMBER IF SHE DID OR NOT.
Q DO YOU RECALL MISS KESTLER ACTUALLY SPECIFICALLY
ASKING YOU, NOT THE DETECTIVES NOW, "DID YOU EVER HANDLE O.J.'S
VIAL OF BLOOD?" UNQUOTE?
A SHE MIGHT HAVE. I -- I DON'T REMEMBER.
Q AND IF SHE HAD ASKED YOU THAT, MISS MAZZOLA, GIVEN
THE DISTINCTION THAT YOU GAVE TO THIS JURY BETWEEN "HANDLE" AND
"CARRY," WOULD YOUR ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION BE NO OR WOULD IT BE
YES?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. GOLDBERG: IT HAS ALSO BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, YOU SAID YOU LEARNED
THAT THAT MEETING HAD BEEN TAPE RECORDED; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
MR. NEUFELD: ASK YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AND SEE IF IT
REFRESHES YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHAT YOU SAID.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND
ANSWERED.
I OBJECT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, WE NEED TO APPROACH BEFORE HE
DOES THIS.
THE COURT: NO, WE DON'T. IT IS FOR PURPOSES OF REFRESHING
HER RECOLLECTION.
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY DID NOT PROVIDE
TO US IN DISCOVERY.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS NOW A SPEAKING OBJECTION.
THE COURT: HOLD ON. BOTH OF YOU ARE DOING IT, COUNSEL.
ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS
FOR THE MORNING SESSION ACTUALLY RIGHT NOW, GET YOU STARTED ON
YOUR SHORTENED LUNCH HOUR.
PLEASE REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, FORM ANY
OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T DISCUSS THE MATTER WITH ANYBODY
ELSE, CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN
SUBMITTED TO YOU.
SEE YOU BACK HERE AT ONE O'CLOCK.
MISS MAZZOLA, YOU MAY STEP DOWN.
YOU ARE ORDERED TO RETURN AT ONE O'CLOCK. THANK YOU.
(AT 12:00 P.M. THE NOON RECESS
WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:30 P.M. OF
THE SAME DAY.)
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1995
1:00 P.M.
DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
(APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED.)
(JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.) (CHRISTINE
M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON
MATTER. ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, WE HAD AN OBJECTION ON THAT
ISSUE. YOU WANT TO JUST RESOLVE THAT BEFORE THE JURY COMES IN
JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR ON THIS?
THE COURT: YOU GOT TO WHERE YOU NEEDED TO GET TO IS MY
RECOLLECTION.
MR. NEUFELD: WHAT I WANTED TO DO AT THIS POINT IS REFRESH
HER RECOLLECTION WITH THE TRANSCRIPT.
THE COURT: I'M SORRY. I RECOLLECT NOW. APPARENTLY THERE'S
A TAPE-RECORDED STATEMENT, THE TAPE RECORDING OF THE STATEMENT.
MR. NEUFELD: THAT'S RIGHT. THERE WAS A SURREPTITIOUS
TAPE-RECORDING BY THE DETECTIVES WHO INTERVIEWED HER THAT DAY.
AND I WANT THE COURT TO BE VERY CLEAR --
THE COURT: D.A. INVESTIGATORS.
MR. NEUFELD: D.A. INVESTIGATORS. THANK YOU. NUMBER ONE,
THIS IS A TAPE THAT WAS PRODUCED BY THE PROSECUTION AND GIVEN TO
THE DEFENSE IN DISCOVERY. THERE WAS NO DUTY ON THE DEFENSE TO
GIVE IT BACK TO THE PROSECUTION. IT'S A PRIVATE TAPE AND BY THIS
WITNESS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. HOLD ON. HOLD ON. WHAT'S THE
OBJECTION?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, MY OBJECTION IS, YOUR HONOR, THEY
CREATED A TRANSCRIPT, WHICH COULD QUALIFY AS WORK PRODUCT AND
NORMALLY WOULD UNLESS THEY'RE GOING TO USE IT, WHICH HE NOW
INTENDS TO DO. I DON'T HAVE THAT TRANSCRIPT.
THIS TAPE IS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO HEAR BECAUSE THE
AUDIO IS POOR AND THERE'S A LOT OF BACKGROUND NOISE. AND IF
THEY'RE GOING TO USE THIS TO REFRESH HER RECOLLECTION, THEN I AM
ENTITLED TO IT. IF HE DOESN'T WANT TO USE IT, FINE.
MAYBE COUNSEL DOESN'T KNOW THAT IN THIS COUNTY, THERE
IS BASICALLY AN INFORMAL PRACTICE BY MOST ATTORNEYS THAT ALTHOUGH
TECHNICALLY, TRANSCRIBING A TAPE IS WORK PRODUCT AND NOT
SOMETHING WE HAVE TO TURN OVER, THAT WE DO TURN OVER
TRANSCRIPTS. HE MAY NOT KNOW THAT BECAUSE HE DOES NOT PRACTICE
HERE. BUT AT ANY RATE, ONCE HE WANTS TO USE IT, AT THAT POINT,
WE'RE ENTITLED TO A COPY, WE'RE ENTITLED TO SIT DOWN AND
DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S CORRECT.
MR. NEUFELD: I ACTUALLY WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO LET
HER LISTEN TO THE TAPE TO REFRESH HER RECOLLECTION. I WAS
ACTUALLY JUST TRYING TO SAVE TIME.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO
PROVIDING MR. GOLDBERG WITH A COPY OF THE PAGES YOU INTEND ON
USING OUT OF THIS TRANSCRIPT?
MR. NEUFELD: NOT AT ALL.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THEN -- IT WOULD HAVE HELPED IF YOU
HAD TALKED ABOUT THIS OVER THE LUNCH HOUR.
MR. GOLDBERG: I ASKED HIM FOR THE TRANSCRIPT.
MR. NEUFELD: WELL, I ACTUALLY -- EXCUSE ME. NO, YOU DIDN'T
ASK ME FOR THE TRANSCRIPT. WHAT I SUGGESTED TO MR. GOLDBERG --
THE COURT: WELL, COUNSEL, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO SHARE IT,
THEN THERE'S NO ISSUE, IS THERE?
MR. NEUFELD: RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I TAKE A LOOK --
THE COURT: SURE. TAKE A LOOK.
MR. GOLDBERG: WHICH PART DID YOU WANT HER TO READ?
THE COURT: YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE THRILLING IF YOU GUYS
TALKED ABOUT THIS STUFF OVER THE LUNCH HOUR RATHER THAN TAKING
THE JURY TIME TO DO THIS.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. GOLDBERG: BASICALLY WHAT COUNSEL HAS POINTED OUT TO ME
IS IDENTICAL TO WHAT THE WITNESS HAS ALREADY TESTIFIED TO, AND
THE COURT ALREADY GAVE VERY LIMITED RULINGS ON THIS. SO I DON'T
KNOW WHY WE'RE GOING OVER THIS ALL OVER AGAIN.
MR. NEUFELD: MR. GOLDBERG IS MISSTATING THE RECORD. SHE
SAID SHE DIDN'T REMEMBER SAYING THESE STATEMENTS TO THEM AND I
NOW WANTED TO SHOW HER THE ACTUAL STATEMENTS TO SEE IF IT
REFRESHES HER RECOLLECTION.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. AND THAT'S THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT
WILL BE ALLOWED.
ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE JURORS.
MR. NEUFELD: YEAH. I MAY HAVE TO AT SOME POINT CALL A
DETECTIVE, BUT NOT -- I CAN'T PUT IT INTO THIS WITNESS. I ACCEPT
THAT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. LET'S HAVE THE JURORS.
AND, MR. GOLDBERG, YOU DO HAVE YOUR NEXT WITNESS
AVAILABLE, CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE
SEATED.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE
MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS ANDREA MAZZOLA IS AGAIN ON THE
WITNESS STAND UNDERGOING CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. NEUFELD.
MR. NEUFELD. I AM SORRY.
ANDREA MAZZOLA,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE LUNCH RECESS, RESUMED
THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: MISS MAZZOLA, GOOD AFTERNOON. YOU ARE REMINDED
YOU ARE UNDER OATH.
THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. NEUFELD:
Q GOOD AFTERNOON, MISS MAZZOLA.
A GOOD AFTERNOON.
MR. NEUFELD: GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT. MISS MAZZOLA, RIGHT
BEFORE LUNCH, I ASKED YOU A SERIES OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU
SAID AND WAS SAID TO YOU AT A MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 22ND, 1994
AT WHICH INVESTIGATORS FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND
YOUR BOSS, MICHELLE KESTLER, WERE PRESENT. DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU RECALL HAVING THAT MEETING WITH THOSE PEOPLE?
A I REMEMBER A MEETING WITH THOSE PEOPLE, YES.
Q AND AT THAT MEETING, THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT
YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE. THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS
DISCUSSED.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, THAT'S VAGUE.
THE COURT: WELL, WE'VE BEEN OVER THIS. WE'VE BEEN OVER
THIS.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT. MISS MAZZOLA, I WOULD
LIKE YOU TO SIMPLY LOOK AT THIS ITEM, SEE IF IT REFRESHES YOUR
RECOLLECTION AS TO CERTAIN THINGS THAT YOU SAID. I'D LIKE YOU TO
READ THIS PORTION OF THE TRANSCRIPT HERE?
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I JUST APPROACH FOR A MOMENT?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ALL THE WAY TO HERE. OKAY? RIGHT
THERE.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: OKAY? NOW, DURING THAT MEETING ON
DECEMBER -- DECEMBER 14TH, YOU DIDN'T TELL THE DETECTIVES, DID
YOU, THAT YOU REALIZED ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH THAT YOU HAD
UNKNOWINGLY CARRIED THE BLOOD SAMPLE OUT OF ROCKINGHAM IN A TRASH
BAG, DID YOU?
A DECEMBER 14TH?
Q NO. ON NOVEMBER -- NO. JUNE 14TH. SORRY.
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT UNLESS SHE WAS ASKED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AT NOVEMBER 22ND MEETING --
THE COURT: HOLD ON. RESTATE THE QUESTION.
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR HEARSAY.
THE COURT: RESTATE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ISN'T IT A FACT THAT DURING THE
NOVEMBER 22ND MEETING WITH THE INVESTIGATORS FROM THE D.A.'S
OFFICE AND MISS KESTLER, THAT YOU DIDN'T TELL THEM THAT YOU
REALIZED ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH THAT YOU HAD UNKNOWINGLY
CARRIED THE BLOOD SAMPLE OUT OF ROCKINGHAM IN A TRASH BAG?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR HEARSAY, NOT IMPEACHING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, DIDN'T YOU TELL THE DETECTIVES
THAT YOU COULD ONLY ASSUME THAT VANNATTER HAD COME UP AND GIVEN
THE VIAL TO DENNIS FUNG BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T THERE THEN?
THE COURT: IT'S IRRELEVANT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AT THAT MEETING ON NOVEMBER 22ND, IN
RESPONSE TO A SPECIFIC QUESTION FROM MICHELLE KESTLER, QUOTE, DID
YOU EVER HANDLE O.J.'S VIAL OF BLOOD, UNQUOTE, DIDN'T YOU ANSWER
HER NO?
MR. GOLDBERG: I OBJECT. IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED, NOT
IMPEACHING.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I HONESTLY CANNOT REMEMBER WHAT I SAID AT
THAT MEETING.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: HAVING SHOWN YOU THIS PORTION OF THE
TRANSCRIPT, DOES IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION?
A IT DOESN'T. I'M SORRY.
Q IN THE DISCUSSION YOU HAD ON NOVEMBER 22ND WITH THE
DETECTIVES AND MISS KESTLER, WERE YOU DELIBERATELY TRYING TO
DISTANCE YOURSELF FROM THE WHOLE SUBJECT OF WHAT HAPPENED TO MR.
SIMPSON'S BLOOD VIAL?
A NO.
Q IN FACT, WHEN TELLING THE DETECTIVES THE EXTENT TO
WHICH YOU WERE INVOLVED WITH THE EVIDENCE SINCE THE MORNING OF
JUNE 13TH, DID YOU NOT TELL THE DETECTIVES DURING THAT MEETING
THAT, QUOTE, IT WASN'T MY JOB TO ANALYZE ANY PART OF IT. I
DIDN'T WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT, UNQUOTE? DID YOU SAY THAT
TO THE DETECTIVES?
MR. GOLDBERG: HEARSAY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. ALSO ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
ALSO MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DID YOU SAY TO THE DETECTIVES AT THE
JUNE 22ND MEETING --
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO OBJECT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: PUTTING ASIDE THE QUOTATION MARKS,
DIDN'T YOU INFORM THE DETECTIVES --
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR --
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. NEUFELD: TO THIS ENTIRE LINE, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: NO. YOU'RE ASKING THE WRONG QUESTION HERE,
COUNSEL.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DID YOU EVER SAY TO THE DETECTIVES
DURING THAT MEETING --
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. ARE THERE ANY DETECTIVES AT THIS
MEETING, COUNSEL?
MR. NEUFELD: I'M SORRY. INVESTIGATORS FROM THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
THE COURT: BIG DIFFERENCE.
MR. NEUFELD: AND I APPRECIATE THAT DIFFERENCE. OKAY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AT THE MEETING ON NOVEMBER 22ND, DID
YOU SAY TO MICHELE KESTLER AND TO DISTRICT ATTORNEY INVESTIGATORS
-- SENIOR INVESTIGATORS MICHAEL STEVENS AND DANA THOMPSON, QUOTE,
IT WASN'T MY JOB TO ANALYZE ANY PART OF IT. I DIDN'T WANT TO
KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: HEARSAY, NOT INCONSISTENT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I MIGHT HAVE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, HAVING SHOWN YOU THIS PORTION
OF THE TRANSCRIPT, DOES IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO
WHETHER IN FACT YOU DID? WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THAT PORTION
AGAIN?
A I SEE IT ON THE PAPER, BUT I --
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL --
THE COURT: HOLD ON. SHE GETS TO ANSWER THE QUESTION,
COUNSEL.
THE WITNESS: I STILL ACTUALLY DO NOT REMEMBER SAYING THAT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET'S PROCEED.
MR. GOLDBERG: I MAKE A MOTION TO STRIKE THE WITNESS'
ANSWER.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: "I SAW IT ON PAPER."
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, YOU TESTIFIED ON REDIRECT
EXAMINATION THAT THE MOST TIME-CONSUMING PORTION OF THE PROCESS
OF EVIDENCE COLLECTION IS TO PROPERLY DOCUMENT AND PHOTOGRAPH THE
ITEMS BEING COLLECTED AS OPPOSED TO THE ACTUAL PHYSICAL
COLLECTION; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND TWO OF THE ITEMS THAT YOU COLLECTED LATE IN THE
DAY WERE ITEMS 15 AND 16.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: 203 AND 204.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL AND
DEFENDANT.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: I ASK YOU TO PLEASE REOPEN
PROSECUTION'S EXHIBIT -- IT DOESN'T HAVE A NUMBER ON IT. I'M
SORRY. THE NUMBER IS?
THE COURT: 203 AND 204, 203 BEING ITEM 15, 204 BEING
ITEM 16.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE WITNESS HAS CUT THROUGH THE
SEALING TAPE ON THE ENVELOPE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND COULD YOU PLEASE EXAMINE WHAT
YOU'VE LISTED AS ITEM 15, PLEASE? AND IT'S AN AIRLINE TICKET,
CORRECT?
A IT APPEARS TO BE, YES.
Q AND JUST SO THAT IT'S NO SURPRISE ABOUT IT, IT'S A
USED AIRLINE TICKET; IS IT NOT?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND IT HAS A DATE ON IT, DOESN'T IT?
A LET'S SEE.
Q DOES IT HAVE THE DATE OF JUNE 10TH ON IT?
A A RETURN FLIGHT, YES.
Q AND IT'S NOT -- HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NEW YORK --
WITH CHICAGO TO LOS ANGELES, DOES IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S BEST EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. IS THERE ANY DISPUTE AS TO WHAT THE
AIRLINE TICKET SAYS?
MR. NEUFELD: NO.
THE WITNESS: DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: DON'T FORGET WE HAVE AN AIRLINE EXPERT ON THE
JURY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: OKAY. AND BY THE WAY, ITEM 16 -- IS
ITEM 16 A LUGGAGE TICKET FOR THE SAME FLIGHT?
A I'D HAVE TO CHECK AND MAKE SURE IT WAS THE SAME
FLIGHT.
THE COURT: ALTHOUGH YOU HAVE A LAYPERSON READING AIRLINE
DOCUMENTS.
MR. NEUFELD: I KNOW. ALL RIGHT.
THE WITNESS: IT APPEARS TO BE FOR THE 10TH.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, BEFORE ITEMS 15 AND 16 COULD BE
COLLECTED BY YOU AND DENNIS FUNG ON THE AFTERNOON OF THE 13TH, IT
HAD -- THEY HAD TO BE DOCUMENTED, DIDN'T THEY, JUST LIKE OTHER
ITEMS?
A YES.
Q AND PART OF THAT DOCUMENTATION PROCESS ENTAILS
PHOTOGRAPHING THEM, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND SO THESE ITEMS WERE PHOTOGRAPHED IN THEIR
ORIGINAL STATE BEFORE THEY WERE PICKED UP BY YOU, CORRECT?
A I DON'T RECALL IF THEY WERE OR NOT.
Q WELL, IF THEY HAD BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED, MISS MAZZOLA,
THE FIRST THING YOU WOULD DO IS, YOU'D BRING OVER THE
PHOTOGRAPHER, CORRECT, THE FORENSIC PHOTOGRAPHER?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THE NEXT THING YOU WOULD DO IS, YOU WOULD
DOCUMENT THE LOCATION OF THE ITEM SOMEPLACE IN WRITING?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S VAGUE AND IT'S MISSTATING TESTIMONY AS
TO WOULD DO.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND YOU WOULD DOCUMENT --
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, THIS IS AN IMPROPER HYPOTHETICAL.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND YOU WOULD DOCUMENT THE LOCATION
IN WRITING WHERE THE OBJECTS ARE, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU WOULD MAKE THAT DOCUMENTATION IN YOUR FIELD
NOTES, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THEN YOU WOULD TAKE OUT A PHOTO ID CARD AND YOU
WOULD SET IT NEAR THE OBJECT, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU WOULD INSTRUCT THE FORENSIC PHOTOGRAPHER TO
PHOTOGRAPH IT, CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S STILL VAGUE WHETHER HE'S TALKING ABOUT
THESE ITEMS OR A HYPOTHETICAL.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE TWO
ITEMS, CORRECT?
MR. NEUFELD: YES.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND YOU WOULD DO THAT FIRST -- YOU
SAID ITEM 15 WAS THE FIRST ONE COLLECTED?
A ITEM 16.
Q ITEM 16 WAS THE FIRST ITEM COLLECTED. AND -- AND IF
THESE TWO ITEMS WERE BOTH PHOTOGRAPHED, THEY WOULD BOTH BE
PHOTOGRAPHER PRIOR TO THE COLLECTION; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND ALL THOSE DIFFERENT STEPS WOULD OCCUR PRIOR TO
THE ACTUAL COLLECTION, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT IF THAT HAPPENED
HERE, THAT PROCESS TAKES ANYWHERES FROM WHAT, FIVE TO 10 MINUTES?
IS THAT A FAIR ESTIMATE?
A IN THIS CASE, PROBABLY LESS.
Q OKAY. APPROXIMATELY HOW LONG, MA'AM? IT'S JUST AS
BEST YOU CAN APPROXIMATE, TO DO THE DOCUMENTATION, GET THE
PHOTOGRAPHER, TO GET THE CARDS SET UP, TO PHOTOGRAPH THEM.
A PROBABLY JUST A FEW MINUTES.
Q FEW MINUTES. AND THEN YOU COLLECT THEM, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q THEN AFTER YOU COLLECT THEM, YOU SAID THAT BOTH ITEMS
WERE HANDED TO YOU?
A YES.
Q AND AFTER THEY WERE BOTH HANDED TO YOU, YOU SAID YOU
WALKED INTO THE KITCHEN; IS THAT RIGHT?
A I BELIEVE I WAS AROUND THE KITCHEN AREA.
Q AND IS THE KITCHEN AREA NEXT TO THE FOYER?
A YES.
Q SO YOU COULD HAVE BEEN EITHER IN THE FOYER OR THE
KITCHEN? YOU'RE NOT SURE?
A I'M NOT SURE WHICH ONE.
Q AND YOU REMAINED THERE FOR A FEW MORE MINUTES WAITING
FOR A GARBAGE BAG TO BE PRODUCED; IS THAT CORRECT?
A I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY MINUTES IT WAS.
Q WELL, APPROXIMATELY HOW LONG WAS IT THAT YOU WAITED
IN THAT FOYER KITCHEN AREA BEFORE YOU GOT A GARBAGE BAG?
A IT WASN'T TOO LONG.
Q APPROXIMATELY HOW LONG? APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY
MINUTES, MA'AM?
A I WOULDN'T HAZARD TO GUESS.
Q WELL, JUST GIVE US YOUR BEST ESTIMATE.
A MAYBE FIVE MINUTES OR SO.
Q OKAY. SO YOU WAITED THERE APPROXIMATELY FIVE
MINUTES, YOU RECEIVED A TRASH BAG AND YOU SAID THAT YOU THEN PUT
ITEMS 15 AND 16 IN THIS BLACK TRASH BAG; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND DO YOU HAVE A RECOLLECTION AT THAT SAME TIME OF
PUTTING THE DIFFERENT PHOTO ID NUMBERS IN THE TRASH BAG?
A I DON'T THINK I PUT THOSE IN PERSONALLY.
Q DID YOU SEE THEM PUT IN THE BAG?
A I DON'T RECALL.
Q SO THE PHOTO ID NUMBERS ARE SOMETHING THAT DENNIS
FUNG COULD HAVE PUT INTO THE BAG AFTER YOU LEFT THE BAG ON THE
FOYER FLOOR?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, WHEN YOU --
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YOU SAY, HOWEVER, THAT AS YOU SIT
HERE TODAY, YOU DON'T HAVE A PRESENT RECOLLECTION OF EVER
PHOTOGRAPHING ITEMS 15 AND 16?
A NO, BECAUSE THE DETECTIVES WERE NOT INTERESTED IN
THEM AS EVIDENCE. THEY JUST WANTED THEM COLLECTED.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. NEUFELD: WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, I WOULD LIKE TO
PUT EXHIBIT NUMBER 1107 UP ON THE ELMO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DEFENSE 1107.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THIS
DOCUMENT AS THE EVIDENCE COLLECTION LIST FOR ROCKINGHAM THAT DAY,
JUNE 13TH?
A YES. YES.
Q AND THIS WAS THE LIST THAT WAS FILLED OUT BY YOU,
CORRECT?
A BY MYSELF AND MR. FUNG, YES.
Q AND DO YOU NOTICE IN THE FIRST COLUMN IT HAS A --
YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO PUT IN THE SAMPLE NUMBER, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THE SAMPLE NUMBER COULD BE DIFFERENT FROM THE
ITEM NUMBER; COULD IT NOT?
A YES.
Q AND SO AT THAT POINT, WHAT YOU WERE USING IS A SAMPLE
NUMBER OR ID PHOTO NUMBER; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THE NEXT COLUMN SAYS I.D. PHOTO, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THAT COLUMN IS THERE SO YOU CAN INDICATE WHETHER
OR NOT A PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN OF THE OBJECT BEFORE IT WAS
COLLECTED; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q NOW, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO LOOK DOWN ITEM 15 AND 16 AT
THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE. THOSE ARE THE LAST TWO ENTRIES YOU MADE
ON THAT PAGE. DO YOU SEE WHERE IT SAYS 15 AND 16 AT THE BOTTOM?
A YES.
Q AND DO YOU SEE THE COLUMN WHERE IT SAYS PHOTO ID?
A YES.
Q AND YOU CHECKED OFF THAT A PHOTO ID HAD BEEN MADE FOR
ITEMS 15, ITEM 16, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND NOW THAT YOU'VE SEEN THOSE CHECKMARKS FOR PHOTO
ID'S FOR 15 AND 16, DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT IN
FACT PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN AT THE SCENE OF THOSE TWO ITEMS?
A I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF THOSE TWO ITEMS.
Q DIDN'T ASK YOU WHETHER YOU HAD SEEN ANY PHOTOGRAPHS
OF THOSE TWO ITEMS. I ASKED YOU WHETHER BY LOOKING AT YOUR OWN
FIELD NOTE AND THE FACT THAT YOU PERSONALLY HAD CHECKED OFF PHOTO
ID NEXT TO ITEMS 15 AND 16, DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION
AS TO WHETHER OR NOT PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN OF ITEMS 15 AND 16
WHILE YOU WERE AT THE ROCKINGHAM RESIDENCE?
A ACCORDING TO THE NOTES, PHOTOS WERE TAKEN.
INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION, I CAN'T SAY.
Q WELL, IN FACT, THOSE ARE YOUR CHECKMARKS. YOU WROTE
THOSE CHECKMARKS IN, DIDN'T YOU, MA'AM?
A YES.
Q WOULD YOU HAVE WRITTEN CHECKMARKS IN THE BOX THAT
SAYS THAT A PHOTO WAS TAKEN IF A PHOTO HADN'T BEEN TAKEN?
A IF I HAD ASSUMED THAT ONE HAD BEEN TAKEN, THEY WOULD
BE CHECKED, YES.
Q YOU MEAN YOU WOULD MAKE AN ENTRY IN THIS REPORT ABOUT
SOMETHING WHICH YOU DID NOT FACTUALLY KNOW TO BE CORRECT JUST
BECAUSE YOU WOULD ASSUME THAT IT MUST HAVE HAPPENED?
MR. GOLDBERG: OVERBROAD.
THE COURT: IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: NEXT IN ORDER WOULD BE?
THE COURT: 1122.
MR. NEUFELD: THERE'S ACTUALLY TWO THOUGH.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 1122 AND 1123.
(DEFT'S 1122 FOR ID = PERSPECTIVE SHOT)
(DEFT'S 1123 FOR ID = CLOSE-UP SHOT)
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: IS THAT 1120, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: 1122, NUMBER ONE, THE PERSPECTIVE SHOT, 1123
WILL BE THE CLOSE-UP SHOT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, DO YOU RECOGNIZE
WHAT'S IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH -- OOPS. DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT'S IN
THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.
Q WELL, SEEING THAT PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT BENCH, DO YOU
HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT'S SITTING ON THAT BENCH?
A I KNOW THAT ITEM 16 WAS RECOVERED FROM A BENCH.
Q BUT YOU CAN'T TELL FROM THAT PICTURE?
A NOT FROM --
Q DO YOU SEE A CARD THAT SAYS 16 ON IT?
A I SEE A CARD, BUT THE PICTURE IS A LITTLE --
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT. NOW I'M GOING TO BE SHOWING
WHAT'S 1123, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, THIS IS A CLOSE-UP, IS IT NOT,
OF THE SAME SHOT?
A IT APPEARS TO BE, YES.
Q AND DO YOU NOW KNOW WHAT THE ITEM IS?
A YES. IT IS ITEM 16.
Q AND THAT'S A CARD NEXT TO IT THAT SAYS ITEM 16,
CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q NOW, HAVING SEEN THE PHOTOGRAPH WITH THE CARD IN IT
OF ITEM 16 AND THE LUGGAGE TICKET, WHICH IS ITEM 16, DOES THIS
NOW REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD
FORENSIC PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OF THE ITEMS 15 AND 16 THAT DAY?
A I PERSONALLY DO NOT REMEMBER STANDING THERE WATCHING
THE PHOTOGRAPH BEING TAKEN.
Q YOU COLLECTED ITEM 16, DIDN'T YOU?
A I COLLECTED ITEM 16, YES.
THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. YOU'RE BOTH DOING THIS
AGAIN. LET HIM FINISH ANSWERING THE QUESTION. AND, MR. NEUFELD,
THREE TIMES ALREADY THIS AFTERNOON YOU'VE CUT HER OFF AGAIN.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: I KNOW YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT ONE OF
THE BEST WAYS FOR YOU TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION IS BY LOOKING
AT PHOTOGRAPHS; IS THAT RIGHT?
A IN SOME INSTANCES, YES.
Q I KNOW YOU SAID THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE GATE, SEEING
THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE GATE DID NOT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT
A GATE WAS THERE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q WELL, HOW ABOUT THIS PHOTOGRAPH WITH ITEM 16 IN IT,
SEEING THE LUGGAGE TICKET WHICH BECAME ITEM 16. SEEING THAT
PHOTOGRAPH NOW, DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION ABOUT WHETHER
THIS ITEM WAS PHOTOGRAPHED BY A FORENSIC PHOTOGRAPHER ON THE
AFTERNOON OF JUNE 13TH, 1994?
A SEEING THIS PHOTOGRAPH, IT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN
PHOTOGRAPHED BY A FORENSIC PHOTOGRAPHER.
Q BUT IT DOESN'T REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO
WHETHER OR NOT YOU ACTUALLY SAW IT BEING PHOTOGRAPHED?
A NO.
MR. NEUFELD: YOU CAN PRINT THAT ALSO.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND, MISS MAZZOLA, YOU SAID THAT
ITEMS 15 AND 16 WERE PUT INTO THE TRASH BAG; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND THE NEXT DAY IN THE AFTERNOON, THEY WERE REMOVED
>FROM THE TRASH BAG?
A YES.
Q BY MR. FUNG OR BY YOU?
A I CAN'T REMEMBER WHICH ONE OF US PHYSICALLY REMOVED
THEM FROM THE TRASH BAG.
Q DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING THEM REMOVED? DO YOU HAVE AN
INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY?
A I REMEMBER SEEING THEM IN THE TRASH BAG AT THE LAB.
I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THEM REMOVED.
Q WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, SHOWING YOU THE ACTUAL ENVELOPES
THAT ITEM 15 AND 16 ARE IN, ISN'T IT A FACT, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT
THOSE ENVELOPES -- THAT YOU HAD THOSE ENVELOPES IN YOUR PRESENCE
AT THE TIME THAT ITEMS 15 AND 16 WERE PHOTOGRAPHED AND COLLECTED?
A NO.
Q IS IT POSSIBLE, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT JUST LIKE YOU
DON'T REMEMBER ITEMS 15 AND 16 BEING PHOTOGRAPHED, THAT YOU DON'T
REMEMBER THESE ENVELOPES ACTUALLY BEING PRESENT WITH YOU WHEN THE
ITEMS WERE COLLECTED?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, YOU DON'T KNOW
WHETHER IT WAS YOU OR DENNIS FUNG WHO REMOVED THESE TWO ITEMS
>FROM THE TRASH BAG ON THE 14TH; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q ISN'T IT A FACT, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT ON ITEM 15,
DENNIS FUNG WROTE HIS INITIALS ON IT?
A YES.
Q AND ISN'T IT A FACT, MA'AM, THAT IN ITEM 16, YOU
WROTE YOUR INITIALS ON IT?
A YES.
Q AND ISN'T IT THE REASON THAT YOUR INITIALS ARE ON 16
IS BECAUSE YOU COLLECTED 16?
A THAT I PACKAGED 16.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, ISN'T IT A FACT THAT THE REASON YOUR
INITIALS APPEAR ON 16 IS, AS YOU TESTIFIED EARLIER, YOU
PERSONALLY COLLECTED IT, YOU PHYSICALLY PICKED IT UP?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ISN'T IT A FACT, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT
THE REASON DENNIS FUNG'S INITIALS APPEAR ON ITEM 15 IS BECAUSE HE
COLLECTED ITEM 15 AT THE ROCKINGHAM HOUSE?
A HE COLLECTED 15, BUT HE HAD ALSO PACKAGED 15 BECAUSE
HIS INITIALS ARE ON IT.
Q SO IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY THAT IT JUST SO HAPPENS THAT
YOUR INITIALS ARE ON 16 AND HIS INITIALS ARE ON 15 NOT BECAUSE
YOU EACH COLLECTED THOSE RESPECTIVE ITEMS, BUT BECAUSE YOU
HAPPENED TO PACKAGE ONE AT THE LABORATORY AND HE HAPPENED TO
PACKAGE THE OTHER?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, ISN'T IT A FACT THAT IN YOUR LAB BOX,
YOU NOT ONLY CARRY COIN ENVELOPES BASICALLY THE SIZE SHOWN HERE
FOR 15 AND 16, BUT YOU ALSO CARRY OTHER MANILA ENVELOPES SUCH AS
THE ONE I HAVE IN MY LEFT HAND?
A IN THE KITS?
Q IN THE KITS.
A YES.
THE COURT: THE ONE YOU'RE HOLDING IN YOUR LEFT HAND,
WHAT'S THE SIZE OF THAT? IT SHOULD BE WRITTEN ON THE BOTTOM OF
THE BAG. TURN IT OVER. DOWN AT THE BOTTOM. WHAT'S IT SAY?
MR. NEUFELD: WHAT DOES IT SAY ON THE SEAL?
THE COURT: DOES IT HAVE A SIZE DESIGNATION?
MR. NEUFELD: NO, I DON'T SEE ONE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GIVE ME AN ESTIMATE FOR THE RECORD.
MR. NEUFELD: HMM?
THE COURT: GIVE ME AN ESTIMATE FOR THE RECORD.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, WHAT WOULD BE
YOUR ESTIMATE OF THE SIZE OF THIS ENVELOPE I'M HOLDING IN MY
RIGHT HAND?
A I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE 7 BY 11, 8 BY 11, SOMETHING LIKE
THAT.
Q MIGHT IT BE A BIT SMALLER, PERHAPS --
A IT'S POSSIBLE.
Q COULD BE 6 OR 7 BY 9 OR SO?
A IT'S POSSIBLE.
Q OKAY. AND YOU SAID THAT AFTER YOU HAD BEEN STANDING
IN THE KITCHEN FOR FIVE OR SO MINUTES WITH DENNIS FUNG, THAT YOU
THEN TOOK THE BAG WITH ITEMS 15 AND 16 IN IT AND YOU WALKED INTO
THE FOYER; IS THAT RIGHT?
A I RECEIVED THE BAG AFTER FIVE MINUTES OR SO.
Q AND AFTER YOU RECEIVED THE BAG AFTER FIVE MINUTES OR
SO, DID YOU CONTINUE TO STAND IN THE KITCHEN FOYER AREA WITH
DENNIS FUNG FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE PUTTING THE BAG DOWN?
A I WAS IN THAT AREA FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, YES.
Q AND APPROXIMATELY HOW LONG WERE YOU IN THAT AREA
AFTER YOU RECEIVED THE PLASTIC BAG?
A I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY HOW LONG.
Q I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO BE SURE, MA'AM. JUST GIVE ME
YOUR BEST APPROXIMATION.
A I COULDN'T EVEN APPROXIMATE. I WASN'T LOOKING AT MY
WATCH.
Q WELL, IS IT CLOSER TO TWO OR THREE MINUTES OR CLOSER
TO 10 MINUTES? HOW LONG APPROXIMATELY?
A IT WAS MORE THAN TWO OR THREE MINUTES, BUT OTHER THAN
THAT, I'M NOT SURE.
Q SO -- SO WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT -- NOW THAT YOU
KNOW BY THE WAY THAT 15 AND 16 OR AT LEAST 16 WERE PHOTOGRAPHED
-- BUT HAD THESE ITEMS BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED -- WHICH I THINK YOU
SAID TAKES A FEW MINUTES TO SET UP AND ACTUALLY DOCUMENT. IS
THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO DOCUMENT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: FEW MINUTES, YES. NOT MANY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND THEN YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE IN
THE KITCHEN FOR APPROXIMATELY FIVE MINUTES WAITING FOR THE --
WITH DENNIS FUNG UNTIL YOU GOT THE BAG; IS THAT RIGHT?
A APPROXIMATELY.
Q AND THEN YOU SAID IT WAS ANOTHER FEW MINUTES, MORE
THAN TWO, BUT YOU SAID LESS THAN 10, THAT YOU CONTINUED TO TALK
TO DENNIS FUNG OR STAND NEAR DENNIS FUNG BEFORE GOING TO THE
LIVING ROOM, CORRECT?
A I DON'T BELIEVE I SAID IT WAS LESS THAN 10. I SAID
IT WAS MORE THAN TWO OR THREE.
Q FINE. WELL, WAS IT CLOSE TO FIVE PERHAPS?
A I DO NOT KNOW.
Q SOMEWHERE BETWEEN TWO AND THREE AND FIVE? WOULD THAT
BE A FAIR ESTIMATE?
A I DON'T KNOW.
Q BUT MORE THAN TWO OR THREE?
A MORE THAN TWO OR THREE.
Q OKAY. SO JUST THOSE THREE TIMES ALONE, WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT A PERIOD OF ABOUT PERHAPS 10 MINUTES OR SO BEFORE YOU WENT
INTO THE LIVING ROOM. IS THAT YOUR TESTIMONY?
A COULD BE A LITTLE MORE THAN THAT.
Q OKAY. PERHAPS AS MUCH AS 12 MINUTES OR SO?
A I --
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY ON DIRECT
EXAMINATION THAT THERE CAME A TIME WHEN YOU WALKED INTO THE
LIVING ROOM AFTER LEAVING THE BAG, TRASH BAG ON THE FOYER, AND
YOU SAT DOWN ON THE COUCH AND THEN YOU HAVE AN INDEPENDENT
RECOLLECTION THAT YOU CLOSED YOUR EYES; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: I WANT YOU TO TAKE A LOOK CAREFULLY,
MISS MAZZOLA, AT THE -- AT THIS VIDEOTAPE THAT WE RECEIVED IN
EVIDENCE WHICH IS TIME CODED.
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE COURT: AND, MR. HARRIS, WHICH EXHIBIT IS THIS?
MR. HARRIS: P-183.
(AT 1:38 P.M., PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT
183, A VIDEOTAPE, WAS PLAYED.)
MR. NEUFELD: YOU CAN SET IT UP AT 17:12. FAST FORWARD.
NO. JUST FAST FORWARD TO 17:12, WHEN THEY'RE ABOUT TO GO BACK
IN, SHOWING THEM GOING IN. OKAY. COULD YOU JUST BACK UP A
SECOND?
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW --
MR. NEUFELD: LITTLE BIT MORE. STOP. WELL --
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, ACCORDING TO THE TAPE, IT'S
APPROXIMATELY 17:12 WHEN YOU BEGIN TO WALK BACK INTO THE
ROCKINGHAM HOUSE HAVING MADE THAT FIRST TRIP OUT TO THE VAN; IS
THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY. COULD YOU CONTINUE, PLEASE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND ACCORDING TO THIS TAPE -- DO YOU
RECOGNIZE THAT GENTLEMAN IN THE PICTURE; NOT THE ONE IN THE BLUE
UNIFORM, THE ONE IN THE GRAY SUIT?
A YES.
Q AND WHO IS THAT?
A DETECTIVE VANNATTER.
Q ALL RIGHT. AND ACCORDING TO THE TAPE, HE'S ARRIVING
AT APPROXIMATELY 17:17; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q ABOUT FIVE MINUTES AFTER YOU FINISH PACKING UP THE
VAN AND BEGIN HEADING BACK TO THE HOUSE?
A APPROXIMATELY.
MR. NEUFELD: GO ON. STOP. WELL, STOP THERE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE GENTLEMAN
ON THE LEFT AS DENNIS FUNG?
A YES.
Q AND DENNIS FUNG SEEMS TO BE HOLDING SOME OBJECTS,
CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND WHAT IS THE TIME?
A 17:18.
Q ALL RIGHT. NOW, MISS MAZZOLA --
THE COURT: ACTUALLY 17:18:57 BECAUSE YOU NEED THE PRECISE
FAME --
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: -- AT FOURTEEN HUNDREDTHS. PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IF IT'S 17:12
YOU STARTED WALKING BACK INTO THE HOUSE, BY 17:18, DENNIS FUNG IS
STANDING IN THE FOYER WITH AN OBJECT WHICH HAS BEEN PURPORTED TO
BE THE BLOOD VIAL ENVELOPE, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THAT PERIOD OF
TIME IS SIX MINUTES APPROXIMATELY OR SIX AND A HALF MINUTES FROM
WHEN YOU STARTED WALKING BACK INTO THE HOUSE TO THE IMAGE IN THIS
FRAME?
A APPROXIMATELY, YES.
Q AND YOU SAID A MOMENT AGO, MA'AM, THAT WHEN YOU AND
DENNIS FUNG RETURNED TO THE HOUSE IN THE VAN, THE FIRST THING
THAT WAS DONE WAS THAT ITEM 15 AND 16 WERE COLLECTED; IS THAT
RIGHT?
A WHEN WE GOT BACK THERE, YES.
Q AND THAT TO COLLECT THEM, THEY FIRST HAD TO BE
DOCUMENTED, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU SAID THAT TOOK A FEW MINUTES, CORRECT?
A TO DOCUMENT AN ITEM, YES.
Q TO DOCUMENT -- WELL -- AND THEN YOU SAY THAT AFTER
THEY WERE DOCUMENTED AND COLLECTED, THAT YOU STOOD WITH DENNIS
FUNG FOR ABOUT FIVE MINUTES IN THE KITCHEN FOYER AREA WAITING TO
RECEIVE THE TRASH BAG, CORRECT?
A I BELIEVE I SAID APPROXIMATELY FIVE MINUTES OR SO.
Q AND YOU SAID THAT AFTER YOU RECEIVED THE TRASH BAG,
MISS MAZZOLA, THAT IT WAS ANOTHER -- THAT IT WAS AT LEAST TWO
MINUTES MORE THAT YOU WAITED WITH DENNIS FUNG BEFORE WALKING INTO
THE LIVING ROOM, CORRECT?
A I WAS IN THE GENERAL VICINITY, YES.
Q AND SO, MA'AM, I THINK YOU ALSO SAID A LITTLE WHILE
AGO, THEREFORE, THAT IT WAS AT LEAST 10 MINUTES THAT YOU WERE
WITH DENNIS FUNG EITHER PROCESSING THESE TWO ITEMS OR STANDING
WITH THEM WITH THE TRASH BAG BEFORE YOU PUT THE TRASH BAG DOWN IN
THE FOYER AND WALKED INTO THE LIVING ROOM; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DIDN'T YOU TESTIFY THAT IT WAS AT
LEAST 10 MINUTES FROM THE TIME YOU BEGAN TO DOCUMENT AND
PHOTOGRAPH AND COLLECT ITEMS 15 AND 16 UNTIL YOU LEFT THE TRASH
BAG IN THE FOYER AND WENT INTO THE LIVING ROOM?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, BY YOUR OWN
ESTIMATES IN THE LAST FEW MINUTES, WOULDN'T YOU AGREE THAT MORE
THAN 10 MINUTES PASSED FROM THE TIME YOU REENTERED ROCKINGHAM AND
BEGAN THE COLLECTION PROCESS OF ITEMS 15 AND 16 UNTIL THE TIME
THAT YOU WENT INTO THE LIVING ROOM TO SIT ON THE COUCH?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I BELIEVE I WAS GIVING ESTIMATES. IT COULD
HAVE BEEN ONE OR TWO OR EVEN THREE MINUTES OFF.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, BUT GIVEN THE
ESTIMATES THAT YOU GAVE -- NOT THAT I GAVE, BUT THAT YOU GAVE --
BY THOSE ESTIMATES, WASN'T IT AT LEAST 10 MINUTES FROM THE TIME
THAT YOU FIRST WENT INTO ROCKINGHAM TO COLLECT ITEMS 15 AND 16
UNTIL YOU LEFT THE BAG ON THE FOYER AND WENT INTO THE LIVING ROOM
AND CLOSED YOUR EYES?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: BY YOUR ESTIMATES THAT YOU JUST
GAVE.
A BEING OFF A COUPLE OF MINUTES TO A FEW MINUTES, COULD
BE ANYWHERE FROM SIX MINUTES TO 10 MINUTES.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, A FEW MINUTES AGO, BEFORE I SHOWED YOU
THE KABC TAPE, DIDN'T YOU SAY IT WAS AT LEAST 10 MINUTES?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. I THINK WE'VE SPENT ENOUGH TIME ON
THIS, COUNSEL.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT. WE CAN STOP THE TAPE.
(AT 1:44 P.M., THE PLAYING
OF THE VIDEOTAPE WAS CONCLUDED.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, MISS MAZZOLA, I THINK YOU
TESTIFIED ON DIRECT EXAMINATION THAT BY THIS POINT IN THE DAY,
YOU WERE VERY TIRED; IS THAT RIGHT?
A I WAS --
Q IT HAD BEEN A LONG DAY.
A I WAS TIRED, YES.
Q AND DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR EXAMINATION, WOULD IT
BE FAIR TO SAY THAT WHEN I ASKED YOU ABOUT CERTAIN ITEM NUMBERS,
IT WAS FREQUENTLY NECESSARY FOR YOU TO REFER TO YOUR NOTES TO SEE
WHAT ITEM NUMBER A PARTICULAR OBJECT WAS?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND DURING THE COURSE OF JUNE 13TH,
YOU COLLECTED MANY DIFFERENT ITEMS; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND IN FACT, YOU HAD A DIFFERENT SET OF NUMBERS FOR
THE ITEMS YOU WERE COLLECTING AT BUNDY FROM THE ITEMS YOU WERE
COLLECTING AT ROCKINGHAM?
A YES.
Q WELL, HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU WERE UP TO ITEM 16
AND ITEM 15 WHEN YOU COLLECTED THE LAST TWO ITEMS AT THE
ROCKINGHAM HOUSE?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: BECAUSE WE HAD STARTED WITH NO. 1 AT
ROCKINGHAM AND WE STARTED WITH 100 AT BUNDY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: BUT, MISS MAZZOLA, IS IT YOUR
TESTIMONY THAT EVEN AFTER YOU PUT THE FIELD NOTES BACK INTO THE
VAN, THAT YOU HAD AN INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION THAT THE NEXT ITEM
YOU WERE UP TO WAS 15?
A THAT WAS THE NEXT ITEM THAT WAS UP.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU THOUGH IS WHETHER
OR NOT AT THIS POINT IN THE DAY WHEN YOU SAID YOU WERE SO
EXHAUSTED AND YOU COLLECTED SO MANY DIFFERENT ITEMS, THAT YOU
WERE ABLE TO REMEMBER THAT THE NEXT ITEM NUMBER AVAILABLE FOR AN
ITEM WAS 15 WITHOUT REFERRING TO YOUR FIELD NOTES.
A YES.
Q ISN'T IT A FACT, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT THE NOTATIONS FOR
ITEMS 15 AND 16 AND THE TIMES THAT THEY WERE RECORDED WERE
WRITTEN CONTEMPORANEOUS TO THEIR COLLECTION ON THE AFTERNOON OF
JUNE 13TH?
A ITEMS 15 AND 16 WERE THE NEXT ITEMS UP. THE TIMES ARE
WRITTEN THE NEXT DAY.
Q ISN'T IT A FACT THAT YOU RECORDED ON THIS FIELD
DOCUMENT THE NUMBERS 15 AND 16, THE CHECKMARKS FOR ID PHOTO,
THEIR LOCATIONS OF THE ITEMS, WHAT THEY WERE AND THEIR TIMES ON
THE AFTERNOON OF JUNE 13TH AT ABOUT THE TIME THAT YOU WERE
ACTUALLY COLLECTING THEM?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REFERRING TO 1107.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, I
WOULD LIKE TO SIMPLY PASS THIS DOCUMENT TO THE JURORS.
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
MR. NEUFELD: HOW IS THAT DONE HERE? DO I HAVE TO GIVE IT
TO SOMEONE FIRST?
THE COURT: HAND IT TO JUROR NO. 1.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY. THANK YOU.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. NEUFELD: OH, JUST ONE QUESTION FIRST IF I MAY. MAY I?
JUST -- OKAY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA -- AND YOU CAN LOOK AT
YOUR OWN NOTES IF YOU WANT -- DIDN'T YOU IN FACT GIVE A DETAILED
DESCRIPTION OR DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTUAL LOCATION OF EACH OF
THESE ITEMS ON YOUR FIELD NOTES?
MR. GOLDBERG: OBJECTION AS TO THE WORD "DETAILED."
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THERE'S LOCATION NOTED, YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND DOESN'T THE LOCATION FOR ITEM 15
NOT SIMPLY SAY THAT IT'S IN A GARBAGE CAN IN THE BATHROOM, BUT IT
EVEN SAYS WHAT CORNER OF THE BATHROOM THE GARBAGE CAN IS IN?
ISN'T THAT ALSO IN THE NOTES?
A THAT IS THE LOCATION MR. FUNG TOLD ME, YES.
Q AND ISN'T THAT THE LOCATION THAT MR. FUNG TOLD YOU ON
THE AFTERNOON OF THE 13TH WHEN YOU ACTUALLY WROTE IT DOWN ON THAT
DOCUMENT?
A NO, I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS ON THE AFTERNOON OF THE
13TH.
Q IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY THAT DENNIS FUNG RECALLED THE
VERY NEXT DAY WHEN HE TALKED TO YOU THAT THAT TRASH CAN WAS IN
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE BATHROOM?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR HEARSAY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I CAN NOT TESTIFY TO WHAT MR. FUNG REMEMBERED
OR NOT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: I'M NOT ASKING YOU WHAT HE
REMEMBERED. I'M ASKING YOU WHETHER THAT'S WHEN HE TOLD IT TO YOU
FOR THE FIRST TIME.
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR HEARSAY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IT WAS THE NEXT DAY.
MR. NEUFELD: I'LL JUST TAKE A MINUTE TO ALLOW THEM TO DO
THAT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL
THE JURORS HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW DEFENSE EXHIBIT
1107.
MR. NEUFELD.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, MISS MAZZOLA, WAS IT AFTER THAT
THAT YOU AND DENNIS FUNG REMOVED ITEMS 15 AND 16 FROM THE TRASH
BAG THAT YOU LOGGED THEM IN ON THIS FIELD SHEET? IS THAT YOUR
TESTIMONY?
A YES.
Q AND THAT WAS DONE IN THE AFTERNOON OF JUNE 14TH,
CORRECT?
A IT WAS DONE ON JUNE 14TH.
Q WELL, ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH, YOU SAID YOU
BECAME AWARE THAT THE BLOOD VIAL FROM MR. SIMPSON WAS IN THE
TRASH BAG, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU CERTAINLY KNEW, MA'AM, ON THE MORNING OF THE
14TH THAT THE SNEAKERS HAD NOT BEEN IN THAT TRASH BAG; ISN'T THAT
RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU SAY YOU SAW ON THE GRAY ENVELOPE WHEN IT WAS
REMOVED FROM THE TRASH BAG THE INSCRIPTION INDICATING THAT MR.
FUNG HAD RECEIVED THE BLOOD VIAL FROM VANNATTER ON JUNE 13TH AT
5:30 P.M., CORRECT?
A I CAUGHT A GLIMPSE OF IT, YES.
Q YET, ISN'T IT A FACT YOU STILL MADE OUT THIS
HANDWRITTEN LIST ON JUNE 14TH WITH THE SNEAKERS IDENTIFIED AS
ITEM 17, THE VIAL AS ITEM 18 AND THE HAIR FROM THE GLOVE AS ITEM
19?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND, MA'AM --
MR. NEUFELD: WOULD YOU PUT THIS ON THE ELMO, PLEASE?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YET ON THIS HANDWRITTEN SHEET --
THIS IS THE HANDWRITTEN SHEET YOU PREPARED, MA'AM?
A YES.
Q WITH THE ITEM 17 BEING THE SNEAKERS, 18 BEING THE
BLOOD VIAL AND 19 BEING SOME HAIR REMOVED FROM THE GLOVE?
A CORRECT.
Q YOU DIDN'T PUT ANY TIME DOWN ON THIS HANDWRITTEN
SHEET FOR WHEN THIS BLOOD VIAL WAS ALLEGEDLY OBTAINED, DID YOU?
MR. GOLDBERG: OBJECT TO THE WORD "ALLEGEDLY,"
ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YOU DIDN'T WRITE DOWN ANY TIME NEXT
TO THE ITEM NO. 18, THE BLOOD VIAL, SO THE TIME THAT YOU READ ON
AN ENVELOPE AS TO THE TIME IT WAS RECEIVED?
A ON THIS? NO.
Q YET, THE ONLY DATE -- IN FACT THERE'S NO DATE EITHER,
IS THERE, NEXT TO THE ITEM?
A NO.
Q THE ONLY DATE ON THAT PIECE OF PAPER THAT YOU WROTE
IS JUNE 14TH; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A FOR THE TENNIS SHOES, YES.
Q EXCUSE ME. THE -- WELL, YOU CERTAINLY KNEW THAT ITEM
19, THE HAIR, WAS NOT COLLECTED ON THE -- IT WAS NOT SOMETHING
THAT YOU WERE BOOKING IN ON THE 13TH, CORRECT?
A IT WAS NOT COLLECTED ON THE 13TH?
Q WELL, THE HAIR WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU WERE
SEPARATING ON THE 18TH -- ON THE 13TH?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT'S IRRELEVANT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, DIDN'T YOU --
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. YOU'RE REPHRASING THE QUESTION?
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DIDN'T YOU INCLUDE OR KEEP ITEM 19,
THE HAIR, FROM ITEM 9 ON A SEPARATE PAGE WITH THE SNEAKERS IN
SUBSEQUENT REPORTS?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AND OVERBROAD.
THE COURT: IT'S IRRELEVANT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ISN'T IT A FACT THAT YOU NEVER WROTE
DOWN ON THAT SHEET THAT THE BLOOD VIAL WAS RECEIVED ON JUNE 13TH
AT 1720 IN THE AFTERNOON?
A ON THIS? NO.
Q AND ISN'T IT A FACT, MA'AM, THAT THE REASON YOU WROTE
DOWN THE VIAL AS NO. 18 AND THE SNEAKERS AS NO. 17 IS THAT YOU
NEVER SAW A VIAL COME OUT OF THE PLASTIC BAG IN THE EARLY MORNING
HOURS OF JUNE 14TH?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. WHAT ITEM IS IT WE HAVE ON THE ELMO
NOW?
MR. NEUFELD: I'M SORRY? WHAT?
THE COURT: WHAT DEFENSE -- ITEM IS ON THE ELMO?
MR. HARRIS: 1107.
THE COURT: 1107.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, YESTERDAY, YOU WERE ASKED BY
MR. GOLDBERG WHETHER YOU HAD AN INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION THAT ON
JUNE 13TH, 10 MONTHS AGO, YOU REMEMBERED THAT THE TRASH BAG FELT
A LITTLE BIT HEAVIER WHEN YOU CARRIED IT DOWN THE DRIVEWAY THAN
IT HAD FELT EARLIER ON WHEN YOU WERE HOLDING IT WITH ITEMS 15 AND
16 IN IT; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. NEUFELD: 24643. DID YOU HEAR ME, YOUR HONOR? 24643?
THE COURT: WHAT LINE?
MR. NEUFELD: BEGINNING AT LINE 10.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT'S NOT INCONSISTENT. IT'S HEARSAY.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
MR. NEUFELD: IT'S A FOUNDATIONAL QUESTION, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WHEN YOU TESTIFIED YESTERDAY UNDER
QUESTIONING FROM MR. GOLDBERG, DID YOU TESTIFY THAT -- WELL, WERE
YOU ASKED THIS QUESTION, DID YOU GIVE THIS ANSWER?
"QUESTION: NOW, IN TERMS OF WEIGHT, WHEN YOU
WERE CARRYING THE BAG, DID THE WEIGHT APPEAR TO BE CONSISTENT
WITH ONLY 15, 16 AND THE LITTLE CARDS?
"ANSWER: IT APPEARED TO BE A LITTLE HEAVIER, BUT AT THE
TIME, I DIDN'T THINK MUCH ABOUT IT."
YOU WERE ASKED THAT QUESTION, GAVE THAT ANSWER
YESTERDAY?
A CORRECT.
Q OKAY. AND WHEN YOU TESTIFIED THAT WAY, MISS
MAZZOLA, WERE YOU SAYING IN EFFECT THAT YOU WERE RECALLING THAT
THE BAG HAD A LITTLE MORE HEFT WHEN YOU CARRIED IT DOWN THE
DRIVEWAY AS OPPOSED TO THE AMOUNT OF HEFT THAT IT HAD WHEN YOU
WERE HOLDING IT IN THE HOUSE?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY. CALLS FOR
SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IT WAS A LITTLE HEAVIER THAN WHAT ITEM 15, 16
AND THE FEW CARDS WOULD HAVE HAD.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, WHEN YOU SAY -- WHEN YOU
TESTIFIED THAT WAY YESTERDAY AND YOU SAID IT WAS HEAVIER THAN
WHAT THE CARDS IN 15 AND 16 WOULD HAVE FELT LIKE, WERE YOU SIMPLY
ASSUMING A WEIGHT FOR 15 AND 16 AND THE CARDS OR WERE YOU
THINKING BACK TO HOW HEAVY THE BAG FELT WHEN YOU HELD IT WITH 15
AND 16 AND THE LITTLE CARDS BEFORE YOU PUT IT DOWN IN THE FOYER?
THE COURT: DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION?
THE WITNESS: I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW IF I
WAS ASSUMING THE WEIGHT GIVEN THE FEW PIECES OF PAPER VERSUS
REMEMBERING EXACTLY HOW HEAVY IT WAS WHEN I HAD IT IN MY HAND.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, THE ACTUAL -- THE PHOTO ID
CARDS ARE PIECES OF CARDBOARD; ARE THEY NOT? THEY'RE INDEX CARDS
THAT ARE FOLDED IN HALF?
A THEY'RE ABOUT THAT WEIGHT, YES.
Q AND THERE WERE ABOUT A HALF DOZEN OF THEM OR EIGHT
OF THEM I THINK WE SAID YESTERDAY; IS THAT RIGHT?
A I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE EIGHT. THERE WERE A FEW.
Q WELL, THERE WAS -- ITEM NO. 4 HAD AN INDEX CARD,
RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q ITEM NO. 5, 6, 7, 8, A, B AND C; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q SO APPROXIMATELY HALF DOZEN OR SO?
A APPROXIMATELY.
Q AND THOSE ARE CARDBOARD?
A MORE LIKE, AS YOU SAID, INDEX CARDS.
Q INDEX CARDS. SORRY. THANK YOU. AND IT'S YOUR
TESTIMONY YESTERDAY AND TODAY THAT YOU COULD RECALL THAT WHEN YOU
CARRIED THAT BAG DOWN THE DRIVEWAY, THAT IT HAD MORE HEFT THAN IT
WOULD HAVE WITH JUST THE FOLDED INDEX CARDS IN IT AND ITEMS 15
AND 16; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. IT WAS A LITTLE HEAVIER.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, I
WOULD SIMPLY LIKE TO TAKE THE STAPLE OFF OF THESE THREE OBJECTS
SO I CAN ISOLATE ONE OF THEM.
THE COURT: WHICH ITEM IS THAT?
MR. NEUFELD: THESE ARE THE THREE ENVELOPES THAT ARE USED
FOR DEMONSTRATIVE PURPOSES BY THE PEOPLE. IT'S 163-H.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. YOU MAY UNSTAPLE THEM. OF COURSE
YOU HAVE A STAPLE REMOVER.
MR. NEUFELD: IN BROOKLYN, WE USE OUR TEETH.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, I BELIEVE YOU ALREADY
TESTIFIED THAT THE ANALYZED EVIDENCE REPORT WHICH WOULD HOLD A
BLOOD VIAL IS THE GRAY ENVELOPE WHICH WAS PART OF PEOPLE'S
EXHIBIT 163-H; IS THAT RIGHT?
A THE ENVELOPE, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT. AND YOU OF COURSE HAVE SEEN THE BLOOD
VIALS THAT ARE USED TO HOLD REFERENCE SAMPLES, HAVEN'T YOU, IN
YOUR WORK IN TOXICOLOGY?
A I HAVE SEEN STILL SAMPLES, YES.
Q AND I NOW SHOW YOU WHAT IS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT --
THERE'S A NUMBER COVERED UP WITH THE STRIP BUT -- 1112? 1112 --
AND ASK YOU WHETHER OR NOT IT APPEARS TO BE THE SAME SIZE AND
SHAPE THAT IS USED AS A STANDARD VIAL FOR HOLDING BLOOD,
REFERENCE SAMPLES.
A IN TOXICOLOGY, WE DO NOT HAVE THE ONES WITH THE EDTA
PRESERVATIVE.
Q YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF STOPPER ON IT?
A CORRECT.
Q BUT IT'S THE SAME SIZE, CORRECT?
A IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT SMALLER. I'M NOT POSITIVE.
I NEED TO COMPARE THE TWO.
MR. NEUFELD: MAY WE HAVE A VERY BRIEF SIDEBAR, YOUR HONOR?
I THINK I CAN -- JUST A QUESTION OF FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER VIALS AVAILABLE?
MR. NEUFELD: THIS IS THE VIAL WE REFERRED -- MAY I JUST
APPROACH VERY BRIEFLY ON THAT?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WHY DON'T YOU TALK TO MR. SCHECK.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, WE BELIEVE THAT DENNIS FUNG HAS
ALREADY ADDRESSED THIS ISSUE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET ME SEE COUNSEL WITHOUT THE
REPORTER.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT
REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, I BELIEVE THERE'S A STIPULATION
>FROM THE PEOPLE.
MR. GOLDBERG: NO, THERE IS NO STIPULATION.
THE COURT: PROCEED. LAY YOUR FOUNDATION.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE COURT: MISS MAZZOLA, WHAT BRAND BLOOD CONTAINER DOES
THE LAPD USE? DO YOU KNOW?
THE WITNESS: OFF HAND, I DON'T KNOW.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU RECOGNIZE ONE IF YOU SAW
A PICTURE OF IT?
THE WITNESS: TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH, I DON'T PLAY -- PAY
CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT BRAND IT IS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: SHOW YOU THIS PICTURE, SEE IF IT
REFRESHES YOUR RECOLLECTION. AND I'M ALSO GOING TO SHOW YOU --
MR. NEUFELD: I GUESS MY NEXT IN ORDER ON THIS ONE --
THE COURT: WOULD BE 1124. CORRECT, MRS. ROBERTSON?
(DEFT'S 1124 FOR ID = PHOTO)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND SEE IF -- TAKE A LOOK AT THAT,
PLEASE. TAKE A LOOK AT THE PHOTO.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
THE COURT: DO YOU WANT TO MARK THE PHOTO AS 1125?
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
(DEFT'S 1125 FOR ID = PHOTO)
THE WITNESS: OKAY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WOULD YOU AGREE, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT
A PURPLE TOP MONO-JET TUBE WAS USED TO HOLD MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD?
A YES.
Q AND THAT THE MONO-JET TUBE THAT WAS USED WAS THE SAME
SIZE AND SHAPE AS THE ONE YOU'RE HOLDING IN YOUR RIGHT HAND?
A IT APPEARS TO BE.
Q OKAY. THANK YOU. AND WHAT I'VE DONE, MISS MAZZOLA,
IS, I'VE PUT WATER IN THIS TUBE, OKAY?
A OKAY.
Q AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE YOU TO DO IS TO PLACE THE TUBE
INTO THE ENVELOPE AND I WOULD LIKE YOU TO CLASP IT?
A OKAY (THE WITNESS COMPLIES).
Q NOW, I WANT YOU TO HOLD THAT WITH YOUR HAND TO GET A
SENSE OF HOW MUCH IT WEIGHS.
A ALL RIGHT.
Q NOW, IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT YOU
HAVE AN INDEPENDENT MEMORY OF THE ADDITIONAL HEFT OR WEIGHT
GENERATED 10 MONTHS AGO BY THE INCLUSION OF THE TRASH BAG OF AN
OBJECT WITH THAT AMOUNT OF WEIGHT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALSO ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, THAT
THEY WEIGH THE SAME.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL BIT OF WEIGHT IN THE
BAG, YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS, IS IT
YOUR INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION THAT YOU COULD TELL THAT THE BAG
THAT YOU CARRIED OUT TO THE TRUCK WEIGHED MORE THAN THE BAG WHEN
YOU HELD IT IN THE KITCHEN GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF WEIGHT THAT YOU
NOW SENSE THAT THIS OBJECT HAS?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES. THE WEIGHT WAS A LITTLE BIT MORE AND
CONCENTRATED IN ONE AREA.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND SOMETHING YOU COULD ACTUALLY
FEEL THAT DAY?
A YES. IT FELT A LITTLE HEAVIER.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION --
AND THEN I WILL BE FINISHED WITH THIS AREA OF RE-CROSS AND I'LL
GET BACK TO FINISHING THE CROSS -- MAY I SIMPLY PASS THIS
ENVELOPE AROUND SO THE JURORS CAN EXPERIENCE THE WEIGHT?
THE COURT: I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE AN ADEQUATE FOUNDATION
AT THIS POINT GIVEN THE TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESS. DEMONSTRATION
HAS TO MOST CLOSELY BE IDENTICAL, AND HER TESTIMONY IS THAT THIS
IS NOT IDENTICAL.
MR. NEUFELD: WELL, THERE'S BEEN TESTIMONY THAT --
THE COURT: NO. COUNSEL, I'M JUST --
MR. NEUFELD: I'M SORRY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE COURT: LET ME SEE COUNSEL WITHOUT THE COURT REPORTER.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT
REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WAS
ANYTHING ELSE IN THAT GRAY ENVELOPE ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH
WHEN YOU SAW IT AT THE LAPD SID LABORATORY OTHER THAN A TEST TUBE
OF BLOOD?
MR. GOLDBERG: NO FOUNDATION, PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DID YOU AT ANY TIME, MISS MAZZOLA,
FEEL IN THAT ENVELOPE ANY OTHER OBJECTS OTHER THAN A TEST TUBE?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO DATE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: FROM THE BIT I SAW THE ENVELOPE, IT LOOKED
LIKE IT WAS JUST ONE TUBE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS JUST A
SMALL TUBE IN IT?
A ONE TUBE.
Q AND NOTHING ELSE WAS IN THE ENVELOPE OTHER THAN THAT
ONE TUBE?
A FROM WHAT I COULD SEE, IT LOOKED LIKE A TUBE.
Q THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING.
MR. GOLDBERG: STILL NO FOUNDATION, PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE.
MR. NEUFELD: I BELIEVE, YOUR HONOR, NOW -- I AGAIN NOW
ASK IF I CAN PASS THIS AROUND GIVEN HER LAST ANSWER TO THE JURY.
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG, ANY OBJECTION?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, COULD I TAKE THE WITNESS ON VOIR
DIRE?
THE COURT: YES.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q DID YOU LOOK INSIDE THE ENVELOPE ON JUNE THE 14TH?
A NO.
Q SO WHEN YOU SAID THAT THERE ONLY APPEARED TO BE ONE
TUBE IN IT, WHAT WERE YOU BASING THAT OPINION ON?
A FROM THE OUTLINE ON THE ENVELOPE.
Q YOU DID NOT LOOK INSIDE?
A NO.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD ASK THEN SUBJECT TO
CONNECTION --
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS MAZZOLA, DOES THIS APPEAR TO
APPROXIMATE, ACCURATELY APPROXIMATE THE WEIGHT OF THE ENVELOPE
THAT YOU HAVE FELT OR SEEN WITH REGARDS TO THIS CASE?
THE WITNESS: IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO TELL, YOUR HONOR.
BLOOD -- I DON'T KNOW IF BLOOD WEIGHS MORE THAN JUST A HUNDRED
PERCENT WATER OR NOT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. OTHER THAN THAT DIFFERENCE, DOES IT
FEEL APPROXIMATELY THE SAME?
MR. GOLDBERG: I DIDN'T HEAR THE COURT'S QUESTION OVER OUR
COMPUTERS.
THE COURT: OTHER THAN THAT DIFFERENCE, DOES ANYTHING FEEL
-- DOES IT FEEL THE SAME?
THE WITNESS: FEELS A LITTLE LIGHTER, BUT --
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WERE THERE ANY
OTHER ITEMS INSIDE THAT ENVELOPE, ANY REPORTS OR ANYTHING LIKE
THAT, AT THE TIME THAT YOU CARRIED IT?
THE WITNESS: THAT I KNOW OF PERSONALLY, NO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD.
MR. NEUFELD: WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, I WOULD NOW LIKE
TO PUBLISH THE ENVELOPE, LET THE JURY HOLD IT.
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY, MAY I HAVE THAT, PLEASE?
THANK YOU.
MR. NEUFELD.
MR. NEUFELD: MAY I CONTINUE?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
MR. NEUFELD: I'M MOVING INTO A WHOLE NEW AREA.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
MR. NEUFELD: YOU'RE WELCOME.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. NEUFELD:
Q ON REDIRECT EXAMINATION, MR. GOLDBERG ASKED YOU ABOUT
YOUR MEMORY. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO --
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, HE ASKED YOU ABOUT YOUR MEMORY
FOR DETAILS. DO YOU RECALL THOSE QUESTIONS THAT HE ASKED YOU?
MR. GOLDBERG: STILL VAGUE.
THE COURT: AS TO WHAT ITEMS, COUNSEL?
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DO YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR MEMORY IS
SATISFACTORY, MISS MAZZOLA?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, OVERBROAD.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE YOUR OWN
MEMORY, MISS MAZZOLA?
THE COURT: MEMORY AS TO WHAT PARTICULAR POINT, COUNSEL?
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: HOW WOULD YOU -- WELL, WHEN YOU
WORKED AT THE KERN COUNTY CRIME LABORATORY, DID YOU EVER HAVE THE
EXPERIENCE IN WHICH YOU BELIEVED YOU HAD INVENTORIED AN ITEM ONLY
TO LEARN SOMETIME LATER THAT YOU HAD FAILED TO INVENTORY THAT
ITEM?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. NEUFELD: IT'S FOUNDATION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, AT THE LOS ANGELES POLICE
DEPARTMENT TOXICOLOGY LABORATORY, DID YOU EVER HAVE THE
EXPERIENCE WHERE YOU BELIEVED YOU HAD INVENTORIED AN ITEM ONLY TO
LEARN LATER ON YOU THAT HAD FORGOT TO DO SO?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: INVENTORIED IN WHAT RESPECT? I DON'T
UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MAKING AN ENTRY IN THE BOOKS OR
MAKING YOUR OWN ENTRY ON A SAMPLE THAT YOU RECEIVED FOR
TOXICOLOGY ANALYSIS.
MR. GOLDBERG: STILL VAGUE AND AMBIGUOUS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND OF COURSE, WHEN YOU WORK IN
TOXICOLOGY, YOU UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF CHAIN OF CUSTODY; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO DEMONSTRATE
THE INTEGRITY OF THE EVIDENCE HAS NOT BEEN UNDERMIND; ISN'T THAT
RIGHT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, OVERBROAD.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: CORRECT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND SPECIFICALLY IN TOXICOLOGY, YOU
KNEW THAT A POLICE OFFICER OR OTHER EMPLOYEE WHO TOOK URINE OR
DREW BLOOD WOULD INITIAL THAT SAMPLE THAT WAS EVENTUALLY TESTED
IN YOUR LABORATORY?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR --
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: THAT WAS THE STANDARD PROCEDURE?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION, NOT RELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: INITIAL THE SAMPLE ITSELF OR WHAT?
Q BY MR NEUFELD: YES. INITIAL THE SAMPLE ITSELF.
A I HAVE SEEN OFFICERS SEND IN SAMPLES BOTH WAYS.
Q WELL, EITHER THEY INITIAL THE SAMPLE ITSELF OR THEY
AT LEAST INITIAL THE PACKAGE THAT IT'S CONTAINED IN, ISN'T THAT
CORRECT, ONE OR THE OTHER?
A THEY FILL OUT THE PACKAGE THAT THE SAMPLE IS
CONTAINED IN.
Q WITH THEIR NAME ON IT, CORRECT, THE POLICE OFFICER
WHO ACTUALLY COLLECTED THE SAMPLE?
MR. GOLDBERG: NOT RELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: EITHER COLLECTED OR BOOKED IT, YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND YOU TESTIFIED THAT ON THE FIELD
REPORTS, THERE IS A BOX TO FILL IN WITH THE INITIALS OF THE
CRIMINALIST WHO PERSONALLY COLLECTED EACH ITEM OF EVIDENCE; ISN'T
THAT CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WOULD YOU AGREE, MA'AM, THAT ONE
REASON THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO DOCUMENT WHO COLLECTED WHICH
SWATCHES AND WHERE THEY WERE COLLECTED IS BECAUSE LITTLE SWATCHES
ALL LOOK PRETTY MUCH ALIKE?
A THE SWATCHES ARE SIMILAR IN SIZE, YES.
Q AND JUST BY LOOKING AT A SWATCH, YOU CAN'T TELL
WHETHER IT WAS FROM A DROP AT ROCKINGHAM OR A DROP AT BUNDY?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. WE'VE ASKED THESE QUESTIONS
ALREADY, COUNSEL, LAST WEEK.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, AT THE MINI ACADEMY AT LAPD
SID, WERE YOU EVER INSTRUCTED THAT ITEMS OF EVIDENCE SHOULD BE
PHOTOGRAPHED PRIOR TO THEIR ACTUAL BOOKING?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: IT HAS.
MR. NEUFELD: NOT WITH RESPECT TO THESE ITEMS, YOUR HONOR.
NOT WITH RESPECT TO THE SWATCHES.
THE COURT: IT HAS. YOU'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE
GENERAL BOOKING PROCEDURES, COUNSEL.
MR. NEUFELD: NOT --
THE COURT: YES, YOU HAVE. PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, WERE YOU TAUGHT THAT
PHOTOGRAPHS MUST BE TAKEN BEFORE THERE WAS ANY MANIPULATION OR
ALTERATION OF THE EVIDENCE?
THE COURT: SAME QUESTION. PROCEED, COUNSEL.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DID ANYONE AT THE LOS ANGELES POLICE
DEPARTMENT EVER INSTRUCT YOU TO HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OF THE
SWATCHES PRIOR TO THEIR BOOKING?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED, IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: THAT QUESTION HASN'T BEEN ASKED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND YOU DID NOT TAKE THE INITIATIVE
TO DO THAT ON YOUR OWN?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: SO WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT
THERE ARE NO PHOTOGRAPHS TO SHOW WHAT THE SWATCHES LOOKED LIKE
WHEN THEY WERE COLLECTED BUT BEFORE THEY WERE PASSED TO THIRD
PARTIES?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q AND THERE WAS NO PHOTOGRAPH TO INDICATE THE NUMBER OF
SWATCHES THAT YOU COLLECTED FOR EACH STAIN?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q AND WOULD IT ALSO BE CORRECT, MA'AM, THAT THERE ARE
NO WRITTEN RECORDS CREATED BY YOU INDICATING THE NUMBER OF
SWATCHES THAT YOU PERSONALLY COLLECTED?
MR. GOLD: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THAT IS CORRECT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YOUR FIELD NOTES ONLY SAY, QUOTE,
RED STAIN, UNQUOTE?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THE OFFICIAL PROPERTY REPORTS ONLY MENTION A,
QUOTE, SWATCH, UNQUOTE, IN THE SINGULAR; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DID NOT FILL OUT THE PROPERTY REPORTS. I
COULD LOOK AT THEM AND GIVE YOU AN ANSWER.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, YOU WERE ABLE TO TESTIFY ABOUT
THE PROPERTY REPORTS I BELIEVE DURING THE REDIRECT EXAMINATION OF
MR. GOLDBERG, WEREN'T YOU?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: COULD YOU PLEASE LOOK AT THE
PROPERTY REPORTS AND TELL ME?
A SURE. IT IS IN THE SINGULAR.
Q IT'S IN THE SINGULAR. AND IN FACT, ISN'T THERE A BOX
OR A COLUMN WHERE THE PERSON FILLING OUT THE PROPERTY REPORT IS
TO INDICATE THE QUANTITY OF AN ITEM?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q AND ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE QUANTITY, NAMELY, THE
NUMBER OF SWATCHES FOR EACH OF THESE BLOODSTAINS THAT YOU
COLLECTED IS NOT FILLED IN WITH A NUMBER?
A THE BOXES ARE NOT FILLED IN. THAT'S CORRECT.
Q SO THERE IS NO LISTING OF THE QUANTITY OF THE
SWATCHES THAT WERE COLLECTED FOR EACH OF THESE STAINS?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, EVEN WITHOUT PHOTOGRAPHS, WOULD
YOU AGREE THAT ONE WAY TO DISTINGUISH ONE SET OF SWATCHES FROM
ANOTHER IS TO CLEARLY DOCUMENT THE COIN ENVELOPE THAT THE
SWATCHES ARE COLLECTED IN?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO "CLEARLY DOCUMENT."
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE INFORMATION ON THE
ENVELOPE, YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND WOULD YOU AGREE THAT ONE
ELEMENT OF PROPERLY DOCUMENTING THE COIN ENVELOPE THE SWATCHES
ARE COLLECTED IN IS TO RECORD THE INITIALS OF THE CRIMINALIST
WHO'S COLLECTING THOSE SWATCHES?
A NOT NECESSARILY.
Q WELL, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT ONE REASON FOR INITIALING
THE ENVELOPE IS SO IT WOULD BE PERFECTLY CLEAR THAT THIS
PARTICULAR PACKAGE CONTAINS THE SWATCHES THAT YOU COLLECTED AS
OPPOSED TO SOME OTHER SET OF ANONYMOUS SWATCHES?
A THE ITEM NUMBERS AND DR NUMBERS IDENTIFY WHICH CASE
AND WHICH ITEM NUMBER THE SWATCHES CAME FROM.
Q AND DO INITIALS OF THE CRIMINALIST ALSO HELP TO
IDENTIFY IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THEY COULD.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND WOULDN'T IT BE FAIR TO SAY,
MA'AM, THAT ON THE DAY THAT YOU COLLECTED SWATCHES IN THIS CASE,
YOU DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THE DR NUMBER, DID YOU?
A AT THAT TIME, NO.
Q THE DR NUMBER HADN'T BEEN BOUGHT ON JUNE 13TH, HAD
IT?
A I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT HAD BEEN BOUGHT.
Q WELL, IF YOU HEARD -- IF YOU KNEW THAT THERE WAS
TESTIMONY THAT IT WAS NOT BOUGHT UNTIL THE 16TH OF JUNE --
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, LET'S TAKE OUR
BREAK AT THIS POINT.
ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE
A 15-MINUTE RECESS. PLEASE REMEMBER ALL OF MY ADMONITIONS TO
YOU; DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS
ABOUT THE CASE, CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS ON THE MATTER OR ALLOW
ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU.
WE'LL TAKE A 15-MINUTE RECESS. AND, COUNSEL, WHY
DON'T YOU ORGANIZE YOUR EXHIBITS FOR THE NEXT PHASE.
ALL RIGHT. MISS MAZZOLA, YOU MAY STEP DOWN.
(RECESS.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD. ALL PARTIES ARE
AGAIN PRESENT.
MR. NEUFELD, DID YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ORGANIZE
THE EXHIBITS FOR THE NEXT PHASE?
MR. NEUFELD: YEAH. THEY'RE VERY SIMPLE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE JURORS.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE
SEATED.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE
MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. ANDREA MAZZOLA IS ON THE WITNESS STAND
UNDERGOING CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. NEUFELD.
GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN, MISS MAZZOLA. YOU ARE REMINDED
YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH.
AND, MR. NEUFELD, YOU MAY COMPLETE YOUR
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, FOR EVERY STAIN THAT
YOU COLLECTED, YOU PLACED THE SWATCHES INTO A SMALL PLASTIC BAG;
IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND JUST AS THE SWATCHES LOOK PRETTY MUCH ALIKE,
THESE LITTLE PLASTIC BAGS LOOK PRETTY MUCH ALIKE ALSO, DON'T
THEY?
A CORRECT.
Q AND IF YOU COULD JUST TO -- SO THE JURY CAN SEE IT,
THIS IS -- I'M LOOKING NOW AT PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 163-E. THIS IS A
COIN ENVELOPE CONTAINING SOME PLASTIC BAGS, A WHITE PAPER BINDLE.
AND INSIDE THE BINDLE -- IS THERE ANYTHING INSIDE THE BINDLE,
MA'AM?
A THERE'S SOME WHITE SWATCHES.
Q OKAY. AND ARE THOSE THE TWO WHITE SWATCHES I HAVE
NOW PUT ON THE COIN ENVELOPE?
A IT LOOKS MORE LIKE THREE. THERE'S ONE ON TOP OF THAT
ONE.
Q OKAY. THEY SOMETIMES GET STUCK TOGETHER?
A SOMETIMES.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT. WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, I'M
NOT GOING TO PASS THEM AROUND. I'D JUST LIKE TO HOLD THEM UP IN
FRONT OF THE JURY.
THE COURT: I DON'T KNOW NOW EFFECTIVE THAT'S GOING TO BE
SINCE THEY'RE -- DON'T ANYBODY SNEEZE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND YOU WOULD AGREE, MISS MAZZOLA,
THAT WITHOUT PROPER DOCUMENTATION, THESE SWATCHES AND THESE
PLASTIC BAGS COULD EASILY GET MIXED UP?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO "PROPER DOCUMENTATION, MIXED
UP."
THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE JURY CAN DRAW THEIR OWN
CONCLUSIONS.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT?
A YES.
Q WOULD YOU AGREE THAT WITHOUT PROPER DOCUMENTATION,
IT'S EASIER FOR SOMEONE TO TAMPER WITH THEM TOO?
A I DON'T FOLLOW THAT QUESTION.
Q ALL RIGHT. NOW, THE NEXT THING YOU DID WITH THE
PLASTIC BAG WAS TO PUT IT INTO A CLEAN COIN ENVELOPE AT THE
SCENE; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND JUST AS THE SWATCHES AND THE PLASTIC BAGS ALL
LOOK PRETTY MUCH ALIKE, SO DO THE COIN ENVELOPES, DON'T THEY?
A YES.
Q AND SO IT IS THE STANDARD PRACTICE AT THE LOS ANGELES
POLICE DEPARTMENT TO WRITE IDENTIFYING INFORMATION ON EACH COIN
ENVELOPE AT THE SCENE; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND THAT IS DONE SO THAT ONE ENVELOPE AND ITS
CONTENTS CAN BE DISTINGUISHED FROM ANOTHER?
A CORRECT.
Q AND WOULD YOU AGREE, MA'AM, THAT PUTTING ONE'S
INITIALS ON THE COIN ENVELOPE AT THE SCENE IS ONE WAY TO IDENTIFY
A PIECE OF EVIDENCE?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. BUT WE'VE PRETTY MUCH BEEN THROUGH
THIS PROCEDURE.
MR. NEUFELD: I HAVEN'T BEEN THROUGH THIS PROCEDURE WITH
THIS WITNESS.
THE COURT: WELL, COUNSEL, THE JURY ALREADY KNOWS ABOUT
THIS PROCEDURE.
MR. NEUFELD: I THINK --
THE COURT: PROCEED.
THE WITNESS: PLACING ONE'S INITIALS ALONE ON A COIN
ENVELOPE WOULD NOT HELP DISTINGUISH IT FROM ANOTHER.
Q BY MR NEUFELD: BUT PLACING ONE'S INITIALS IN
CONJUNCTION WITH PLACING THE ITEM NUMBER ON THE ENVELOPE WILL?
A THE ITEM NUMBER IS MORE IMPORTANT, YES.
Q BUT COIN -- BUT PLACING ONE'S INITIALS ALSO ENHANCE
IDENTIFICATION PROCESS, RIGHT?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AMBIGUOUS AS TO "ENHANCE."
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, WOULD YOU AGREE,
FOR INSTANCE, IN THIS CASE -- WELL, WOULD YOU AGREE, MISS
MAZZOLA, THAT PHOTO ID NUMBERS CAN BE USED AGAIN AND AGAIN AT
DIFFERENT CRIME SCENES AND DIFFERENT INVESTIGATIONS?
A YES.
Q AND SO THERE COULD BE MORE THAN TWO COIN ENVELOPES IN
THE LABORATORY HAVING THE SAME NUMBER SUCH AS 27 OR 35 OR 110?
A YES.
Q AND SO IN ADDITION TO PLACING THE PHOTO ID NUMBER AND
ITEM NUMBER ON A COIN ENVELOPE, PLACING THE INITIALS OF THE
PERSON WHO COLLECTED THAT ITEM ON THE ENVELOPE IS AN ADDITIONAL
WAY TO INDIVIDUALIZE THE ENVELOPE, ISN'T IT?
A YES.
Q OKAY. AND ISN'T IT A STANDARD PRACTICE OF THE LOS
ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT TO RETAIN FOR TRIAL PURPOSES THE
ORIGINAL COIN ENVELOPES USED AT THE CRIME SCENE?
A I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS THE STANDARD PRACTICE OR NOT.
I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT.
Q WELL, DID YOU EVER TESTIFY AS A WITNESS IN A
TOXICOLOGY CASE?
A YES.
Q AND YOU WERE GIVEN A VIAL IN AN ENVELOPE?
A YES.
Q AND WHEN YOU WOULD TESTIFY IN COURT, DID THAT -- WAS
THAT SAME ENVELOPE RETAINED AND PRODUCED IN COURT?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WOULD YOU AGREE THAT RETENTION OF
THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTED COIN ENVELOPE IS ONE WAY TO DOCUMENT THE
BEGINNING OF CHAIN OF CUSTODY?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED AND IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, ON DIRECT EXAMINATION, MISS
MAZZOLA, BY MR. GOLDBERG, YOU DENIED PERSONALLY PUTTING YOUR
INITIALS ON THE COIN ENVELOPES FOR THE BLOODSTAINS THAT YOU
PERSONALLY COLLECTED AT ROCKINGHAM AND BUNDY; IS THAT CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I BELIEVE I SAID SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ON AUGUST 23RD, 1994, WHEN YOU WERE
UNDER OATH, DIDN'T YOU SWEAR THAT FOR EACH BLOODSTAIN THAT YOU
COLLECTED AT ROCKINGHAM, YOU PERSONALLY PUT YOUR INITIALS ON THE
COIN ENVELOPE?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE AS PHRASED AND WOULD ALSO ASK
FOR THE PAGE AND LINE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ON AUGUST 23RD, 1994 -- REFERRING TO
PAGE 705.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALSO, I THINK THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND
ANSWERED.
THE COURT: WHAT LINE, COUNSEL?
MR. NEUFELD: HMM?
THE COURT: WHAT LINE, COUNSEL?
MR. NEUFELD: I'M SORRY. BEGINNING AT LINE 2 AND ENDING AT
LINE 15.
MR. GOLDBERG: WHICH PAGE?
MR. NEUFELD: 705.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LINE 2 TO 15.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ON AUGUST 23RD, WHEN YOU TESTIFIED
UNDER OATH, WERE YOU ASKED THESE QUESTIONS AND DID YOU GIVE THESE
ANSWERS, MISS MAZZOLA?
"QUESTION: WHEN YOU PLACED THE PLASTIC INTO THE
COIN ENVELOPE, YOU SAID YOU MAKE A NOTATION ON THE COIN ENVELOPE;
NAMELY, THE PHOTO NUMBER AT THAT POINT AS WELL?
"ANSWER: IT IS LABELED THE PHOTO ITEM NUMBER.
"QUESTION: DO YOU INITIAL THE PLASTIC BAG YOURSELF?
"ANSWER: THE COIN ENVELOPE IS INITIALED.
"QUESTION: BY YOU?
"ANSWER: THAT IS CORRECT.
"QUESTION: AND IN EACH OF THESE INSTANCES WHERE YOU
COLLECTED THE STAIN, YOU PERSONALLY INITIAL THE ENVELOPE?
"ANSWER: I COLLECTED THE STAIN, IT WAS INITIALED BY ME."
DID YOU GIVE THOSE ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS UNDER
OATH ON AUGUST 23RD, 1994?
A YES.
MR. NEUFELD: NOW, YOUR HONOR, ALSO PAGE 768, LINE 16
THROUGH 18.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND THEN AGAIN ON PAGE 768, MISS
MAZZOLA, AT THE SAME HEARING ON AUGUST 23RD, 1994, WERE YOU ASKED
THIS QUESTION, DID YOU GIVE THIS ANSWER?
"QUESTION: WELL, I'M SORRY. YOU KNOW THE COIN
ENVELOPES WERE INITIALED BY YOU, CORRECT?
"ANSWER: CORRECT."
DID YOU GIVE THAT ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION ON AUGUST
23RD?
A I BELIEVE SO.
Q NOW, YOUR INITIALS WOULD BE WHAT, A.M.; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND WHEN DENNIS FUNG WOULD INITIAL AN ENVELOPE OR
ITEM, HE WOULD INITIAL IT D.F.?
A YES.
Q SO IT WAS YOUR SWORN TESTIMONY ON AUGUST 23RD THAT
YOU AND NOT FUNG INITIALED THE COIN ENVELOPES FOR THE STAINS YOU
PERSONALLY COLLECTED?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: AT THAT TIME, I BELIEVE I HAD INITIALED THEM,
YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND AT THAT TIME, MA'AM, ON AUGUST
23RD, IT WAS JUST TWO MONTHS AFTER YOU HAD ACTUALLY GONE OUT AND
COLLECTED THE STAINS IN THIS CASE; IS THAT RIGHT?
A APPROXIMATELY TWO MONTHS, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT. AND WOULD YOU -- SINCE AUGUST 23RD, HAVE
YOU BEEN INVOLVED IN OTHER CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATIONS?
A YES.
Q APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY?
THE COURT: HAVEN'T WE GONE THROUGH THIS ALREADY?
MR. NEUFELD: I HAVE -- WELL, IT'S JUST A FOUNDATION TO GET
INTO THE NEXT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: WELL, THEN ASK THE NEXT QUESTION.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ISN'T IT A FACT, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT
THIS CRIME SCENE ON JUNE 13TH WAS YOUR VERY FIRST ONE WHERE YOU
WERE THE PRIMARY COLLECTOR OF BLOODSTAIN EVIDENCE?
THE COURT: WE'VE ASKED THAT QUESTION AS WELL.
MR. NEUFELD: I UNDERSTAND. THERE'S A FEW OF THESE THAT
SIMPLY LEAD INTO THE NEXT POINT, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: WELL, IF WE'VE ASKED THEM ALREADY, LET'S
PROCEED TO WHAT'S NEW.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: OKAY. WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, BETWEEN
JUNE 13TH AND AUGUST 23RD, ISN'T IT A FACT THAT YOU DIDN'T DO ANY
OTHER CRIME SCENES?
A I DON'T RECALL IF I HAD OR NOT.
Q ALL RIGHT. AND WOULDN'T YOU AGREE, MA'AM, THAT SINCE
THIS WAS YOUR VERY FIRST CRIME SCENE WHERE YOU WERE THE PRIMARY
COLLECTOR OF EVIDENCE, THAT YOUR RECOLLECTION OF WHAT TRANSPIRED
IS MORE VIVID THAN IT IS AFTER DOING MANY MORE CRIME SCENES IN
THE INTERIM?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE AND IT'S ALSO
UNINTELLIGIBLE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION?
THE WITNESS: NOT REALLY.
THE COURT: DOES THIS PARTICULAR EVENT STICK OUT IN YOUR
MIND IN ANY WAY BECAUSE IT WAS YOUR FIRST MAJOR CRIME SCENE THAT
YOU COLLECTED THE EVIDENCE?
THE WITNESS: IT DOESN'T STICK OUT IN A MAJOR WAY, NO.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: IN FACT, IT WAS YOUR VERY FIRST
CRIME SCENE, MISS MAZZOLA, AND IT WAS A CASE INVOLVING SUCH
NOTORIETY. ISN'T IT MORE VIVID IN YOUR MIND THAN ARE THE OTHER
CRIME SCENES THAT YOU HAVE DONE IN THE INTERIM?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY AS TO "FIRST CRIME
SCENE."
THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.
THE WITNESS: WELL, IT WAS NOT MY FIRST CRIME SCENE AND
IT'S JUST ANOTHER SCENE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, THIS WAS JUST ANOTHER
SCENE FOR YOU?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, WE'VE GONE OVER AND OVER
AND OVER THIS.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA --
MR. NEUFELD: I'M SORRY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: -- IT WAS YOUR FIRST CRIME SCENE
THOUGH WHERE YOU WERE THE PRIMARY COLLECTOR OF BLOOD EVIDENCE,
WASN'T IT?
THE COURT: THIS IS THE FIFTH TIME WE'RE ASKING THIS
QUESTION, COUNSEL.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WHEN YOU TESTIFIED ON AUGUST 23RD,
MISS MAZZOLA, YOU DIDN'T FIRST DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH YOUR
SUPERIOR, MRS. KESTLER, DID YOU?
A NO.
Q BUT SINCE AUGUST 23RD, YOU HAVE DISCUSSED YOUR
INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE IN THE PRESENCE OF MISS KESTLER, HAVEN'T
YOU?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: BEFORE YOU TESTIFIED ON AUGUST 23RD,
YOU HADN'T DISCUSSED THIS TESTIMONY WITH THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS,
HAD YOU?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. NEUFELD: HE WENT INTO IT ON REDIRECT, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: COUNSEL, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE HAVE TO HEAR
IT FOR THE THIRD TIME.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY.
THE COURT: ARE YOU ABOUT TO FINISH WITH YOUR
CROSS-EXAMINATION? DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING NEW?
MR. NEUFELD: YES, I DO, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. BECAUSE THE CROSS-EXAMINATION IS
ABOUT TO END.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AT ANY TIME DURING THE LAST 10
MONTHS, MISS MAZZOLA, DID YOUR COLLEAGUES AT SID TELL YOU IT'S
TIME TO CLOSE RANKS BECAUSE THEY'RE UNDER ATTACK?
A NO.
Q ARE YOU AWARE AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY THAT ANY OF YOUR
COLLEAGUES HAVE BEEN CRITICIZED FOR THE WAY THEY CONDUCTED
THEMSELVES IN THIS CASE?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S ALSO ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: SOME OF THEM HAVE BEEN TALKED ABOUT, YES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, NOT JUST TALKED ABOUT. ARE
YOU AWARE THEY'VE BEEN CRITICIZED?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT'S VAGUE AS TO BY WHOM.
THE COURT: THAT'S IRRELEVANT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ARE YOU AWARE, MISS MAZZOLA, AS YOU
SIT HERE TODAY THAT THERE HAVE BEEN REPORTS IN THE MEDIA THAT THE
DEFENSE IN THIS CASE HAS CRITICIZED THE SID WHERE YOU WORK AND
THE MANNER IN WHICH EVIDENCE WAS COLLECTED IN THIS CASE?
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. JURY IS TO DISREGARD THE
IMPLICATION OF THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU
REVIEWED YOUR TRANSCRIPT OF THE TESTIMONY OF AUGUST 23RD?
A MAYBE A MONTH OR SO AGO. MAYBE A LITTLE MORE. I'M
NOT EXACTLY SURE WHEN.
Q AND DID YOUR SUPERVISORS AT SID TELL YOU THAT THERE
WAS A BIG PROBLEM WITH YOUR SWORN TESTIMONY OF AUGUST 23RD THAT
YOU PERSONALLY PUT YOUR INITIALS ON EVERY COIN ENVELOPE FOR EVERY
STAIN THAT YOU COLLECTED ON JUNE 13TH?
A NO.
Q DID THE PROSECUTORS TELL YOU THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH
YOUR AUGUST 23RD TESTIMONY ON THAT POINT?
A NO.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR --
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WHEN DID THE PROSECUTORS OR SID
SUPERVISORS FIRST SHOW YOU WHAT THEY CLAIM WERE THE ORIGINAL COIN
ENVELOPES FROM JUNE 13TH?
A I SAW PICTURES OF THE COIN ENVELOPES AT THE D.A.'S
OFFICE.
Q AND WHEN WAS THAT?
A I -- PROBABLY A MONTH OR LESS AGO.
Q AND WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THOSE COIN ENVELOPES AT THAT
TIME -- I'M SORRY. WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THOSE
COIN ENVELOPES AT THAT TIME, DID YOU EXPERIENCE A MOMENT OF PANIC
WHEN YOU DIDN'T SEE YOUR INITIALS ON THOSE COIN ENVELOPES?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: HOW DID YOU FEEL WHEN YOU SAW THOSE
PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE COIN ENVELOPES THAT DIDN'T HAVE YOUR INITIALS
ON IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: WELL, ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
MR. NEUFELD: SUBJECT TO CONNECTION WITH THE VERY NEXT
QUESTION.
THE COURT: PROCEED. HOW DID YOU FEEL WHEN YOU SAW THE
PHOTOGRAPHS?
THE WITNESS: I DIDN'T FEEL ANYTHING DIFFERENT.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL --
MR. NEUFELD: I ASK THAT THESE BE MARKED FOR
IDENTIFICATION, YOUR HONOR. THEY ARE ONE, TWO --
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO OBJECT TO THOSE
BEING INTRODUCED BASED UPON OUR PRIOR CONVERSATIONS. THEY STILL
HAVE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE IN THEM.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MARK THEM BY REFERENCE. DO
WE HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THEM AS WELL?
MR. NEUFELD: I DON'T HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF ALL OF THEM, NO.
MR. GOLDBERG: I THOUGHT WE HAD -- WE PROBABLY DO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MARK THEM BY REFERENCE
BECAUSE THE STORAGE WILL REMAIN WITH THE LAPD. HOWEVER, YOU MAY
MARK THEM BY REFERENCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT. SHOULD WE MARK THEM COLLECTIVELY
AS ONE EXHIBIT NEXT IN ORDER?
THE COURT: I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE ARE GOING
TO NEED TO REFER TO THEM INDIVIDUALLY WHEN WE GET TO THE TESTING.
SO UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK WE NEED TO INDIVIDUALLY MARK EACH ONE
OF THESE.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG, DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, YOUR HONOR, WHAT WE HAD INTENDED TO DO
-- I DON'T KNOW WHETHER YOU WANT ME TO DISCUSS THIS IN OPEN COURT
-- IS SIMPLY REFER TO THEM BY THEIR ITEM NUMBERS, AND THAT'S THE
WAY EVERYTHING WOULD BE CONNECTED UP.
THE COURT: SO WE'LL HAVE A THIRD NUMBERING SYSTEM IN THIS
CASE, ITEM NUMBER COIN ENVELOPES?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, I DON'T KNOW --
THE COURT: IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING?
MR. GOLDBERG: YEAH. BUT IT'S AN EVIDENTIARY ITEM NUMBER
SYSTEM AS OPPOSED TO AN EXHIBIT ITEM --
THE COURT: I AGREE. SINCE WE'VE BEEN REFERRING TO THAT
CONFUSINGLY. SO LET'S DO THAT.
MRS. ROBERTSON, WE'LL START A THIRD LIST, COIN
ENVELOPES BY ITEM NUMBER.
ALL RIGHT. AND, COUNSEL, WILL BOTH SIDES STIPULATE
THAT THE COIN NUMBER -- ITEM NUMBER WILL BE AS WRITTEN ON THE
COIN ENVELOPE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE RECORD? THAT WILL MAKE IT
SIMPLER.
MR. NEUFELD: YES. AND I --
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET'S DO IT THAT WAY. PROCEED.
MR. NEUFELD: AND I -- AND ALSO WITH THE FURTHER
STIPULATION IN FACT THAT THESE ARE THE ORIGINAL COIN ENVELOPES.
THE COURT: WELL, I ASSUME AS SOON AS WE START WITH THE
WITNESS, WE'LL GET THAT. PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO SHOW
YOU THEN THE COIN ENVELOPES WITH THE FOLLOWING NUMBERS ON THEM;
1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12 AND 14. LIKE YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT
THEM, PLEASE?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THESE ARE THE ROCKINGHAM ITEM
NUMBERS?
MR. NEUFELD: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
THE WITNESS: OKAY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, WHAT I WOULD LIKE YOU
TO DO IS AT THIS TIME COLLECT FROM THAT PILE THE ORIGINAL COIN
ENVELOPES FOR THE ROCKINGHAM SAMPLES THAT YOU TESTIFIED TO ON
AUGUST 23RD YOU HAD PUT YOUR INITIALS ON.
MR. GOLDBERG: I OBJECT TO THAT QUESTION ON THE GROUNDS
THAT IT'S UNINTELLIGIBLE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. GOLDBERG: CAN I JUST APPROACH FOR ONE MOMENT TO SEE
THE COIN ENVELOPES?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY. COUNSEL, I DON'T KNOW THAT ANYBODY
KNOWS SPECIFICALLY WHAT ITEM NUMBERS SHE WAS ASKED QUESTIONS
ABOUT DURING THE AUGUST 23RD HEARING.
MR. NEUFELD: SHE WAS ASKED ABOUT --
THE COURT: SO WHY DON'T YOU JUST GO OVER EACH ONE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT. MISS MAZZOLA, REFERRING
TO PAGE 705 OF YOUR TESTIMONY OF AUGUST 23RD, WERE YOU ASKED THIS
QUESTION, DID YOU GIVE THIS ANSWER?
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I HAVE A LINE CITE?
MR. NEUFELD: LINE 11.
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR
HONOR.
MR. NEUFELD: JUST ONE QUESTION.
THE COURT: ONE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: "QUESTION: AND IN EACH OF THESE
INSTANCES WHERE YOU COLLECTED THE STAIN, YOU PERSONALLY INITIALED
THE ENVELOPE?
"ANSWER: I COLLECTED THE STAIN, IT WAS INITIALED BY ME."
YOU WERE ASKED THAT QUESTION, YOU GAVE THAT ANSWER,
CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q NOW, MISS MAZZOLA, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU TO DO IS, IN
THAT PILE OF COIN ENVELOPES THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU WITH
THE NUMBERS THAT I JUST GAVE YOU, EACH OF THOSE NUMBERS
REPRESENTS A DIFFERENT ITEM NUMBER; DOES IT NOT?
A YES.
Q WHAT I'M ASKING YOU TO DO IS TO PULL OUT THE COIN
ENVELOPES WITH THE ITEM NUMBERS FOR THE BLOOD DROPS FOUND AT THE
ROCKINGHAM PROPERTY THAT AT THAT AUGUST 23RD HEARING I JUST READ
TO YOU FROM IN THIS CASE HAS YOUR INITIALS ON THEM.
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S STILL ARGUMENTATIVE AND UNINTELLIGIBLE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, DO ANY OF THOSE COIN
ENVELOPES THAT HAVE BEEN PRODUCED IN COURT TODAY BY THE
PROSECUTOR HAVE YOUR INITIALS ON THEM?
A THESE ALONE OR --
Q WELL, I'M ASKING YOU ABOUT THOSE. THOSE ARE THE
ROCKINGHAM -- THOSE HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO BE THE ROCKINGHAM BLOOD
DROPS.
A NO, THEY DO NOT.
Q AND IN FACT, MISS MAZZOLA, WHOSE INITIALS ON EACH ONE
OF THOSE ENVELOPES?
A MR. FUNG'S.
Q AND, MISS MAZZOLA, LET'S FOR INSTANCE TAKE ITEM NO.
11. ITEM NO. 11 YOU COLLECTED WITHOUT MR. FUNG BEING PRESENT,
CORRECT? HE DIDN'T OBSERVE IT?
A CORRECT.
Q THE COIN ENVELOPE HERE THAT HAS ITEM 11 ON IT, WHOSE
INITIALS ARE ON IT?
A MR. FUNG'S AS --
Q YOUR INITIALS -- I'M SORRY.
THE COURT: COUNSEL.
THE WITNESS: MR. FUNG'S AS THE ONE WHO BOOKED THEM, DID
THE FINAL PACKAGING.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, DID YOU TESTIFY ON
AUGUST 23RD THAT FOR EVERY STAIN THAT YOU PERSONALLY COLLECTED,
YOU PUT YOUR INITIALS ON THEM?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: IT HAS. WE'VE ESTABLISHED THAT POINT, COUNSEL.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, ITEM NO. 11, HE WASN'T
EVEN PRESENT WHEN YOU COLLECTED IT, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YET YOUR INITIALS ARE NOT ON THAT
ENVELOPE; IS THAT CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: CORRECT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: ITEM NO. 7 AND ITEM NO. -- I'M
SORRY. ITEM NO. 7 WAS A STAIN THAT YOU PERSONALLY COLLECTED ON
THE DRIVEWAY IN FRONT OF MR. SIMPSON'S HOUSE, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND FOR ITEM NO. 7, DENNIS FUNG WASN'T PRESENT, WAS
HE?
A CORRECT.
Q WOULD YOU PLEASE LOOK AT ITEM 7 ON THIS ENVELOPE AND
SEE WHETHER OR NOT YOUR INITIALS ARE PRESENT?
A MY INITIALS ARE NOT PRESENT.
Q ITEM NO. 8, ANOTHER ITEM THAT YOU COLLECTED WITHOUT
DENNIS FUNG EVEN BEING PRESENT; IS THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q ARE YOUR INITIALS ON ITEM NO. 8?
A NO, THEY'RE NOT.
Q AND ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE REASON YOUR INITIALS ARE
NOT ON THESE ENVELOPES IS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T BOOK THEM? IS THAT
YOUR TESTIMONY TODAY, MA'AM?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YOU SAID THAT DENNIS FUNG'S INITIALS
APPEAR ON THAT ENVELOPE. IS THAT BECAUSE HE'S THE ONE WHO BOOKED
THE ENVELOPE?
A HE IS THE ONE WHO DID THE FINAL PACKAGING FOR THAT
ENVELOPE.
Q IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY NOW AS OPPOSED TO AUGUST 23RD
THAT THE PERSON WHO ACTUALLY COLLECTED THE STAIN DOESN'T PUT HIS
OR HER INITIALS ON THE ENVELOPE?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE AND ALSO VAGUE AS TO WHICH
STAIN.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: BACK IN AUGUST, I WAS UNDER THE ASSUMPTION
THAT I HAD TO PUT MY INITIALS ON THE ENVELOPES, AND I WAS WRONG.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WHEN YOU TESTIFIED ON AUGUST 23RD,
DID YOU SAY, "I'M ASSUMING THAT TO BE TRUE," OR DID YOU SAY IT
WAS TRUE, MISS MAZZOLA?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE AS WELL.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, IN RESPONSE TO THE
QUESTION AS TO WHETHER YOU INITIALED THE ENVELOPES AT THE AUGUST
23RD HEARING WHEN YOU TESTIFIED UNDER OATH, DID YOU EVER SAY,
"I'M NOT SURE"?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DO NOT REMEMBER IF I SAID, "I DO NOT
REMEMBER."
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: LET ME SHOW YOU YOUR TESTIMONY JUST
TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION.
THE COURT: COUNSEL, WE'VE GONE OVER IT NOW. YOU'VE
ESTABLISHED THE POINT.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY, IT IS YOUR
CURRENT BELIEF THAT DENNIS FUNG PUT HIS INITIALS ON THESE
ENVELOPES?
A ON THESE, YES.
Q AND THE REASON HE PUT THEM ON THESE ENVELOPES IS
BECAUSE HE WAS THE ONE WHO WAS GOING TO BOOK THEM?
A THAT HE WAS THE ONE WHO DID THE FINAL PACKAGING OF
THAT ITEM, YES.
Q WHEN YOU SAY THE FINAL PACKAGING, WHAT DO YOU MEAN?
A PLACING THE BINDLE CONTAINING THE CLOTH SWATCHES IN
THE ENVELOPE AND SEALING THE ENVELOPE.
Q AND WAS THE ENVELOPE SEALED ON THE MORNING OF THE
14TH TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE?
A I DO NOT REMEMBER.
Q NOW SHOW YOU A GROUP OF BINDLES -- I'M SORRY -- A
GROUP OF ENVELOPES WHICH WOULD BE ITEM -- FOLLOWING ITEM NUMBERS:
ITEM 41, ITEM 42, ITEM 43 -- ACTUALLY -- WITHDRAW THAT. I'M
GOING TO FOCUS A LITTLE BIT. THERE WERE A NUMBER OF DROPS THAT
WERE COLLECTED AT BUNDY; IS THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THEY RECEIVED PHOTO ID NUMBERS AND ITEM NUMBERS;
DID THEY NOT?
A YES.
Q AND THE FIRST ITEM NUMBER WOULD BE 47?
A PHOTO ID 112?
Q RIGHT.
A CORRECT.
Q AND THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE 48?
A CORRECT.
Q PHOTO ID 113, RIGHT?
A UH-HUH.
Q NEXT ITEM WOULD BE ITEM 49?
A CORRECT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD WILL REFLECT THE WITNESS
IS REFERRING TO HER FIELD NOTES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE ITEM 50,
WHICH IS ID 115, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND FINALLY THE LAST ONE IN THAT SERIES OF DROPS IS
ITEM 52, WHICH IS 117, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q OKAY. ASK YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT THESE ITEMS.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW --
THE COURT: HOLD ON. LET HER LOOK AT THE ITEMS.
MR. NEUFELD: SORRY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE WITNESS: OKAY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, YOU PERSONALLY
COLLECTED THE BLOOD DROP STAINS THAT BECAME ITEMS 47, 48 AND 50;
IS THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q DO 47, 48 OR 50 HAVE YOUR INITIALS ON THEM?
A 49 DOES.
Q I'M SORRY. I ASKED YOU FIRST ABOUT 47, 48 AND 50.
A OH, EXCUSE ME.
Q DO THOSE THREE HAVE YOUR INITIALS ON THEM?
A NO.
Q THEY DON'T?
A NO.
Q NOW, ITEMS 49 AND 52 HAVE YOUR INITIALS; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU'RE SAYING NOW THAT ITEMS 49 AND 52 HAVE YOUR
INITIALS BECAUSE YOU WERE THE PERSON WHO WAS THERE WHEN THE
PACKAGE WAS ULTIMATELY SEALED FOR BOOKING?
A I AM THE ONE WHO PLACED THE BINDLE IN THE PACKAGE AND
SEALED IT.
Q AND SEALED IT. AND WHEN DID THAT SEALING OCCUR,
MA'AM? WHAT DAY?
A I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS THE 14TH OR NOT.
Q AND THEY WOULD BE SEALED FOR BOOKING AT THE EVIDENCE
CONTROL UNIT; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT. WELL, EVIDENCE PROCESSING ROOM ACTUALLY.
Q WELL, THAT'S WHERE YOU WOULD DO THE SEALING. BUT
ONCE THEY ARE ACTUALLY SEALED, THEN THEY'RE TAKEN OVER TO THE
EVIDENCE CONTROL UNIT TO BE FROZEN; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A TO BE BOOKED IN AND FROZEN, YES.
Q AND SO TO THE BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION AS YOU SIT
HERE TODAY, YOU SEALED ITEMS 49 AND 52 ON JUNE 14TH FOR BOOKING;
IS THAT CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: COMPOUND.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, TO THE BEST OF YOUR
RECOLLECTION AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY, DID YOU SEAL ITEM 49 FOR
BOOKING?
A YES.
Q ON JUNE 14TH?
A I -- I'M NOT POSITIVE IF IT WAS JUNE 14TH OR NOT.
Q TO THE BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION, WHICH DAY WAS IT?
A I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS THE 14TH OR THE 15TH. I'M
NOT POSITIVE.
Q COULD BE ONE OR THE OTHER?
A COULD BE.
Q HOW ABOUT ITEM 52? ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE REASON
YOUR INITIALS APPEAR ON ITEM 52 IS BECAUSE YOU'RE THE PERSON WHO
SEALED THAT ENVELOPE FOR BOOKING ON JUNE 14TH OR JUNE 15TH?
A CORRECT.
Q NOW, UP UNTIL THE TIME THAT YOU SAW PHOTOGRAPHS OF
THESE COIN ENVELOPES, DIDN'T YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU HAD PERSONALLY
PUT YOUR INITIALS ON EVERY ONE OF THEM?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED, 352.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.
THE WITNESS: YES, I BELIEVE SO.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND SO THE REASON YOU'RE NOW
CHANGING YOUR MIND AS TO WHETHER YOU HAD IN FACT, AS YOU
TESTIFIED ON AUGUST 23RD, PUT YOUR INITIALS ON EACH COIN ENVELOPE
FOR THE STAINS THAT YOU COLLECTED, IS BECAUSE THEY'RE TELLING YOU
THAT THESE ARE THE ORIGINAL COIN ENVELOPES; ISN'T THAT TRUE?
A THESE ARE THE ORIGINAL ENVELOPES.
Q WHEN THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS SHOWED YOU PHOTOGRAPHS OF
THESE COIN ENVELOPES, DID THEY POINT OUT TO YOU THAT MOST OF THE
ENVELOPES, CONTRARY TO YOUR SWORN TESTIMONY OF AUGUST 23RD,
DIDN'T HAVE YOUR INITIALS ON THEM?
A I DO NOT BELIEVE SO.
Q AND DID YOU REALIZE THAT WHEN THE PROSECUTORS SHOWED
YOU THE COIN ENVELOPES, THAT IF YOUR SWORN TESTIMONY OF AUGUST
23RD WAS CORRECT, THEN THE ABSENCE OF YOUR INITIALS ON SOME OF
THESE COIN ENVELOPES COULD MEAN THAT THE ORIGINAL EVIDENCE MAY
HAVE BEEN TAMPERED WITH?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR --
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: IN YOUR MIND?
MR. GOLDBERG: -- ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, WHEN THE PROSECUTORS SHOWED
YOU THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS, UP UNTIL THAT TIME, YOU BELIEVED TO THE
BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT YOU HAD WRITTEN YOUR INITIALS ON
THE ORIGINAL COIN ENVELOPES AT THE SCENE ON JUNE 13TH; ISN'T THAT
TRUE?
A YES.
Q WOULD YOU AGREE, MA'AM, THAT IF YOUR TESTIMONY ON
AUGUST 23RD WAS TRUTHFUL AND WAS ACCURATE, THAT THAT WOULD MEAN
THAT THESE ENVELOPES WERE NOT THE ORIGINAL ENVELOPES?
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SPECULATION, COUNSEL.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND BEFORE YOU TESTIFIED ON DIRECT
EXAMINATION, MISS MAZZOLA, DID THE PROSECUTORS TELL YOU THAT THEY
WANTED YOU TO TESTIFY AT THIS TRIAL THAT YOUR AUGUST 23RD
TESTIMONY WAS FALSE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS NOT --
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. COUNSEL, WITHOUT THE COURT
REPORTER, PLEASE.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT
REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, AFTER YOU LEFT ROCKINGHAM FOR
THE SECOND TIME, YOU SAID YOU RETURNED TO YOUR OFFICES AT PIPER
TECH; IS THAT RIGHT?
A BACK TO THE LABORATORY, YES.
Q AND THAT YOU WOULD BE ARRIVING ABOUT 6:30?
A SOMEWHERE AROUND THERE.
Q AND YOU BROUGHT ALL THE EVIDENCE THAT HAD BEEN
COLLECTED THAT DAY INTO THE EVIDENCE PROCESSING UNIT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THERE ARE TWO ENTRANCES TO THAT UNIT; ARE THERE
NOT?
A YES.
Q ONE IS A DOOR FOR WHICH YOU NEED AN ID CARD TO GET IN
AND OUT OF?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THE SECOND ENTRANCE IS A GARAGE DOOR; IS THAT
RIGHT?
A IT IS A ROLL-UP DOOR, YES.
Q AND, FOR INSTANCE, IF I WERE TO ENTER THE EVIDENCE
PROCESSING UNIT WITH YOU AND YOU PUT UP YOUR CARD TO GAIN ACCESS,
I WOULD NOT HAVE TO PUT UP MY CARD TO GO IN WITH YOU, WOULD I?
A NO, YOU WOULD NOT.
Q AND IF ONCE INSIDE, SOMEONE OPENED THAT ROLL-UP DOOR,
THEN OTHER PEOPLE COULD COME AND GO FROM THE EVIDENCE PROCESSING
UNIT THROUGH THAT LARGE DOOR WHICH IS BIG ENOUGH FOR A CAR OR
TRUCK; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: COMPOUND.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, YOU SAID THAT WHEN YOU GOT BACK
TO THE EVIDENCE PROCESSING UNIT, THE ITEMS WERE TAKEN OUT OF THE
COIN ENVELOPES FOR DRYING; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND IF THEY WERE STILL WET WHEN THEY WERE TAKEN OUT
OF THE PLASTIC BAGS, THEN THERE WOULD BE TRANSFER STAINS ON THOSE
PLASTIC BAGS; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q DID YOU PRESERVE THE PLASTIC BAGS?
A NO.
Q WERE YOU TRAINED TO THROW THEM OUT?
A YES.
Q BY THE WAY, DID YOU OR DENNIS FUNG SAVE THE BLACK
PLASTIC TRASH BAG THAT YOU WERE SEEN CARRYING ITEMS OUT OF
ROCKINGHAM THAT AFTERNOON?
A NO, I DO NOT BELIEVE SO.
Q AND YOU SAID THAT YOU AND MR. FUNG BEGAN TO PUT THE
WET SWATCHES INTO THE TEST TUBES; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND ARE THE TEST TUBES MARKED AT THAT POINT?
A THEY WERE -- WE MARKED THEM, YES.
Q AND THE TEST TUBE WAS THEN PUT BACK IN THE SAME
LITTLE BROWN COIN ENVELOPE; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT, CORRESPONDING TO ITS ITEM NUMBER.
Q AND YOU DO THAT BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL COIN ENVELOPE
CONTAINS THE MARKINGS TO ENABLE YOU TO IDENTIFY THE SWATCHES YOU
COLLECTED FROM OTHER DROPS AT DIFFERENT SCENES?
A THEY CORRESPOND TO THE ITEM NUMBERS THAT ARE ALSO
WRITTEN ON THE TEST TUBES.
Q AND I BELIEVE IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY UNDER DIRECT
EXAMINATION THAT AT LEAST WITH RESPECT TO SOME OF THE
BLOODSTAINS, YOU PERSONALLY REMOVED THE SWATCHES FROM THE
PLASTIC BAGS AND PUT THEM INTO TEST-TUBES; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A ON A FEW OF THEM, YES.
Q AND YOU PROCESSED THAT EVENING BOTH THE ROCKINGHAM
AND BUNDY ITEMS AT THE SAME EVIDENCE PROCESSING UNIT?
A CORRECT.
Q DID YOU PLACE -- I'M SORRY. DID YOU PLACE A SHEET OF
PAPER ON THE TABLE BEFORE YOU BEGAN TO TRANSFER THE SWATCHES FROM
THE PLASTIC BAGS TO THE TEST TUBES?
A I DON'T REMEMBER IF WE DID OR NOT. WE MIGHT HAVE.
Q DID YOU RECEIVE ANY TRAINING AT THE SID MINI ACADEMY
ON THE NECESSITY OF PLACING A SHEET OF PAPER ON THE LABORATORY
COUNTER BEFORE WORKING WITH THE DIFFERENT ITEMS?
A FOR MR. FUNG'S PROCEDURE, THE SWATCHES AND ENVELOPES
WERE NOT IN CONTACT WITH THE TABLE.
Q FOR THE PROCEDURE THAT YOU UTILIZED, MISS MAZZOLA,
DIDN'T YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY USE AN ITEM TO SCOOP THINGS OUT OF
THE PLASTIC BAG?
A I USED A PIPE -- GLASS -- GLASS PIPETTE TO MOVE THE
SWATCHES INTO THE MOUTH OF THE TEST TUBE.
Q OKAY. AND HAVEN'T YOU BEEN TAUGHT TO PUT DOWN SOME
PAPER JUST FOR SAFETY PRECAUTIONS JUST TO AVOID AN ACCIDENT OF A
WET BLOODY SWATCH FALLING ONTO THE TABLE?
A THE SWATCHES WERE NEVER WHERE THEY COULD FALL ON THE
TABLE.
Q WAS THIS EXERCISE DONE OVER A TABLE?
A YES.
Q AND DID YOU WEAR A PAIR OF GLOVES FOR THE REMOVAL OF
THE SWATCHES FROM THE PLASTIC BAGS?
A I DID, YES.
Q AND DID YOU WEAR THE GLASS FOR THE SAME REASON THAT
YOU WORE THE GLOVES AT THE CRIME SCENE; NAMELY AS A SAFETY
PRECAUTION FOR YOURSELF?
A IT'S JUST A FORCE OF HABIT TO WEAR THE GLOVES.
Q AND SO DO YOU HAVE ANY INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION AS TO
CHANGING YOUR GLOVES BETWEEN THE HANDLING OF EACH ITEM THAT
EVENING?
A INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION, NO, I DON'T RECALL.
Q AND THE SAMPLES FROM BOTH LOCATIONS, THAT IS
ROCKINGHAM AND BUNDY, WERE PROCESSED IN THE SAME ROOM AT THE SAME
TIME; IS THAT CORRECT?
A I WAS WORKING AT A DIFFERENT TABLE THAN MR. FUNG, AND
AFTER A FEW, I JUST STARTED LABELING THE TEST TUBES FOR HIM.
Q WELL, WHEN YOU STARTED WORKING AT A DIFFERENT TABLE,
WERE YOU WORKING ON THE SAMPLES FROM ROCKINGHAM OR BUNDY AS
OPPOSED TO DENNIS FUNG WORKING ON SAMPLES FROM THE OTHER
LOCATION?
A WE WORKED ON SAMPLES FROM THE SAME LOCATION.
Q AND THEN THE SAMPLES FROM BOTH LOCATIONS ARE THEN
LAID OUT ON A CARTON; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU LAY THEM OUT ON THE BOTTOM OF THIS CARTON
UNTIL THE BOTTOM IS COVERED WITH ENVELOPES; IS THAT RIGHT?
A NOT COMPLETELY COVERED, NO.
Q WELL, YOU MEAN YOU LEFT SOME SPACE?
A THERE HAD TO BE SOME SPACE LEFT, YES.
Q AND YOU SAID ALL THE BUNDY BLOODSTAINS WERE PUT INTO
A BROWN SHOPPING BAG BACK AT BUNDY; IS THAT RIGHT?
A A BROWN PAPER BAG, YES.
Q AND A BROWN PAPER BAG WAS USED FOR THE ROCKINGHAM
SAMPLES AS WELL; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q WHEN --
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DID YOU WATCH DENNIS FUNG DO HIS
PROCEDURE AFTER YOU STOPPED DOING YOURS?
A I WASN'T WATCH HIM CONSTANTLY.
Q WELL, WERE YOU WATCHING HIM SOME OF THE TIME?
A SOME OF THE TIME, YES.
Q DID YOU EVER SEE WHEN HE WOULD -- HE ACTUALLY WOULD
TAKE A TEST TUBE AND SCOOP IT RIGHT INTO THE PLASTIC BAG TO SCOOP
OUT THE INDIVIDUAL SWATCHES? IS THAT HOW HE DID IT?
A HE MANEUVERED THE SWATCHES FROM THE OUTSIDE OF THE
BAG RATHER THAN PLACE ANYTHING IN THE BAG ITSELF.
Q WELL, THE SWATCHES WERE STILL WET, WEREN'T THEY?
A NOT NECESSARILY WET WET. SLIGHTLY DAMP, YES.
Q WELL, SOME WERE STICKING TO THE SIDES OF THE PLASTIC
BAG?
A A FEW, YES.
Q AND TO GET THOSE -- THOSE SWATCHES THAT ARE STICKING
TO THE PLASTIC BAG, DID HE USE THE TUBE TO SORT OF SCOOP THEM
OUT?
A NO. HE WOULD MANIPULATE THE PLASTIC BAG ITSELF TO
MOVE THE SWATCHES DOWN.
Q IS IT POSSIBLE THAT WHEN HE DID THIS, THAT BLOOD
WOULD SOMETIMES COLLECT ON THE OUTSIDE LIP OF THE TEST TUBE?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WHEN THE TEST TUBE IS THEN PLACED
INTO THE COIN ENVELOPE, IS THE LIP OF THE TEST TUBE STICKING OUT?
A YES.
Q AND THE ENVELOPE ITSELF IS LEFT OPEN IN THE CARTON;
IS IT NOT?
A YES.
Q HAS ANYONE AT THE SID TAUGHT YOU THAT WHEN THE BLOOD
-- THAT WHEN BLOOD ON THE TEST TUBE OR ON THE LIP OF THE TEST
TUBE DRIES, IT CAN FLAKE OR AEROSOL?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TAUGHT ANYTHING
ABOUT THE DANGERS OF OR THE POSSIBILITY -- I'M SORRY. WITHDRAWN.
HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY TRAINING AT ALL ABOUT POTENTIAL
CONTAMINATION WHICH CAN OCCUR AS THE BLOOD DRIES IN THOSE TEST
TUBES WHEN THE ENVELOPE IS LEFT OPEN?
MR. GOLDBERG: STILL ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. HAVE YOU RECEIVE SUCH TRAINING?
THE WITNESS: NO.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND YOU LEFT THESE ENVELOPES IN THE
CARTON IN A CABINET IN THE ROOM, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q THE CABINET'S NOT LOCKED, IS IT?
A NO.
Q AND WHEN YOU LEFT FOR THE EVENING, DID YOU TAKE THE
CLIPBOARD -- I'M SORRY -- THE CLIPBOARD WITH THE FIELD NOTES HOME
WITH YOU?
A NO.
Q DID YOU LEAVE THEM ON THE TABLE AT THE EVIDENCE
PROCESSING UNIT SO YOU WOULD HAVE THEM OUT THE NEXT DAY?
A THEY WERE LEFT IN THE EVIDENCE PROCESSING ROOM.
Q NOW, THE NEXT DAY, YOU ARRIVED AT THE EVIDENCE
PROCESSING UNIT AT ABOUT 6:52 IN THE MORNING, DIDN'T YOU?
A I DON'T RECALL THE EXACT TIME I SHOWED UP.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: MADAM REPORTER, TILL 4:00 FOR A BREAK?
MR. GOLDBERG: LET ME CHECK MY NOTES, SEE WHAT WAS
INTRODUCED INTO EVIDENCE.
MR. NEUFELD: JUST ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE COURT: CAN WE PROCEED WITH SOMETHING ELSE, MR.
NEUFELD?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S CONCEIVABLE IT COULD BE 194-A. IT'S A
PRINTOUT, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: MRS. ROBERTSON, 194-A? I'M SORRY.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, WHILE THEY'RE
LOOKING FOR IT, WHATEVER TIME IT WAS ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH,
IT WAS EARLY; WAS IT NOT?
A I BELIEVE SO, YES.
Q OKAY. AND YOU LEFT THE LABORATORY AROUND 10:30 TO GO
TO THE PRINT SHED WITH DENNIS FUNG TO EXAMINE THE BRONCO; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT YOU WERE AT THE
LABORATORY THAT MORNING BEFORE LEAVING TO GO TO THE PRINT SHED
FOR THREE OR THREE AND A HALF HOURS?
A ABOUT, YES.
Q AND WHEN YOU TESTIFIED -- I'M SORRY.
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, I SIMPLY SHOW YOU, SEE
IF IT REFRESHES YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHAT TIME YOU ARRIVED,
DEFENSE EXHIBIT NO. 1100.
THE COURT: WHAT IS 1100? WHAT IS 1100, MR. NEUFELD?
MR. NEUFELD: WHAT IS IT?
THE COURT: WHAT IS IT?
MR. NEUFELD: IT IS A COMPUTER PRINTOUT.
THE COURT: NEXT QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: OKAY. AND WHEN YOU ARRIVED THAT
MORNING ON THE 14TH, DIDN'T YOU AND DENNIS FUNG PARTICIPATE IN
REMOVING THE SWATCHES FROM THE TEST TUBES?
A CORRECT.
Q AND DIDN'T YOU AND DENNIS FUNG MAKE A VISUAL
INSPECTION OF THE SWATCHES TO ASSURE THAT THEY WERE DRY?
A YES.
Q AND DIDN'T YOU AND DENNIS FUNG AT THAT POINT SEPARATE
THE ITEM NUMBERS BOTH ON BUNDY AND ROCKINGHAM AND THEN PROCEEDED
TO MAKE BINDLES?
A THE BINDLES FOR THE MOST PART MR. FUNG WAS WORKING
ON. I WAS FILLING IN THE DR NUMBER AND THE ITEM NUMBER THAT HE
WAS ASSIGNING.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, DIDN'T YOU PERSONALLY PREPARE, THAT IS,
CREATE BINDLES ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH --
THE COURT: WE'LL HAVE TO GET A BUCKET OF WATER FOR THOSE
THINGS. PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, THIS IS A PAPER
BINDLE; IS IT NOT?
A YES, IT IS.
Q AND YOU CREATE THESE BINDLES BY SIMPLY FOLDING UP A
PIECE OF WHITE PAPER INTO DIFFERENT SECTIONS; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND THEN ONCE YOU FOLD UP THIS PIECE OF PAPER, YOU
THEN PUT THE SWATCHES INSIDE AND THEN YOU FOLD IT CLOSED, AND
THAT'S HOW YOU HOLD THE SWATCHES; IS THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q ISN'T IT A FACT THAT ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH,
THAT YOU PERSONALLY CREATED THESE BINDLES FOR SOME OF THE ITEMS
OF EVIDENCE, FOR SOME OF THE STAINS IN THIS CASE AND PUT SWATCHES
IN THEM?
A FOR A FEW OF THEM, YES.
Q AND WHEN YOU -- THERE WAS NO PARTICULAR WAY -- I'M
SORRY. THERE WAS NO PARTICULAR ASSIGNMENT, WAS THERE, WHERE YOU
WOULD ONLY DO CERTAIN SELECT STAINS AND HE WOULD DO OTHER STAINS,
WAS THERE?
A NO.
Q I MEAN, IT WAS BROKEN UP PRETTY RANDOMLY?
A WE WERE NOT ASSIGNED WHICH STAINS TO DO.
Q ALL RIGHT. AND ALL YOU DID THAT DAY IS, YOU AND
DENNIS FUNG SIMPLY DIVIDED UP THE TEST TUBES CONTAINING THESE
SWATCHES AND PERFORMED THESE TESTS AT DIFFERENT TABLES IN THE
SAME ROOM; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
MR. GOLDBERG: OBJECTION TO TESTS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT?
THE COURT: OVERRULED. ACTUALLY NO. SUSTAINED. IT'S NOT
TESTS.
MR. NEUFELD: TEST TUBES I SAID, DIDN'T I?
THE COURT: NO. YOU SAID TESTS.
MR. NEUFELD: I APOLOGIZE.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: IN FACT, WHAT HAPPENED ON AUGUST --
WHAT HAPPENED ON JUNE 14TH IS THAT YOU AND DENNIS FUNG SIMPLY
DIVIDED UP THE TEST TUBES CONTAINING THE SWATCHES AND BEGAN TO
PROCESS THEM?
A I STARTED PROCESSING, AS I SAID, A FEW AND THEN AFTER
A FEW, MR. FUNG WAS MUCH FASTER AND I STARTED HELPING HIM.
Q WHEN YOU TESTIFIED ON AUGUST 23RD, DID YOU EVER LIMIT
YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE TO SIMPLY A FEW?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THAT'S IMPROPER IMPEACHMENT,
HEARSAY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: DID YOU PUT DOWN A SHEET OF PAPER
ON THE TABLE AT WHICH YOU WERE WORKING WHEN YOU BEGAN TO PROCESS
THE SWATCHES ON JUNE 14TH?
A YES.
Q AND AGAIN, WAS THAT DONE TO PROTECT THE TABLE SO NO
BLOODY SWATCHES WOULD GET ON IT?
A AND TO PROTECT THE SWATCHES THEMSELVES. JUST
EVERYTHING IN GENERAL.
Q WERE YOU EVER TRAINED TO CHANGE THE SHEET OF PAPER
EACH TIME YOU MOVED ONTO A DIFFERENT ITEM NUMBER?
A THE SWATCHES NEVER CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE PAPER.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, THE INDIVIDUAL BINDLES WERE RIGHT ON
TOP OF THE TABLE, RIGHT ON TOP OF THE PIECE OF PAPER THAT WAS ON
THE TABLE; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO CALL OR USE SOME
INSTRUMENT TO GET THE SWATCHES OUT OF THE TUBE INTO THE PAPER
BINDLE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q IS THERE ANY DANGER THAT ANY OF THOSE SWATCHES COULD
EITHER MISS THAT -- THAT PIECE OF PAPER THAT'S A BINDLE AND HIT
THE TABLE OR SIMPLY GLANCE OFF THE PAPER AND HIT THE TABLE?
ISN'T THERE A DANGER THAT CAN HAPPEN?
A NO.
Q OKAY. AND SO YOU WERE NEVER TRAINED TO CHANGE THE
SHEET OF PAPER BETWEEN ITEM NUMBERS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: UNINTELLIGIBLE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: DID THE COURT READ THAT?
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND DO YOU ALSO WEAR A PAIR OF
GLOVES FOR THIS OPERATION AS WELL?
A YES.
Q BUT YOU WERE NOT TRAINED TO CHANGE YOUR GLOVES
BETWEEN THE HANDLING OF EACH ITEM WHEN YOU WERE DOING THIS
PROCEDURE, WERE YOU?
A NO, BECAUSE THE HANDS NEVER CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE
SWATCHES.
Q WHY ARE YOU WEARING GLOVES, MA'AM, IN THE FIRST
PLACE?
A IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT IS ROUTINE THAT I DO.
Q WELL, WEREN'T YOU TAUGHT TO WEAR GLOVES WHEN YOU WERE
PERFORMING THIS PROCEDURE, MISS MAZZOLA?
A I WOULD DO IT WHETHER OR NOT I WAS TAUGHT OR NOT.
Q MISS MAZZOLA, WERE YOU TAUGHT TO WEAR GLOVES FOR THIS
PROCEDURE?
A I DO NOT BELIEVE WE WERE TAUGHT TO SPECIFICALLY WEAR
GLOVES FOR THAT PROCEDURE.
Q WERE YOU TAUGHT TO WEAR GLOVES ANY TIME YOU'RE
HANDLING BLOODY SWATCHES?
A A PERSON DOES NOT NEED TO BE TAUGHT THAT.
Q AND THE REASON YOU HAVE TO WEAR THOSE GLOVES WHEN
YOU'RE HANDLING SWATCHES EVEN IF YOU'RE USING INSTRUMENTS IS
BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS THAT DANGER THAT AN ACCIDENT COULD HAPPEN
AND A SWATCH COULD COME IN CONTACT WITH YOUR SKIN; ISN'T THAT
CORRECT?
A IT'S POSSIBLE.
Q WELL, ISN'T THAT THE REASON FOR THE RUBBER GLOVE; TO
PROTECT YOUR SKIN FROM COMING INTO CONTACT WITH THE BLOODY
SWATCH?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS IS ARGUMENTATIVE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT JUST AS
THERE'S NOTHING SPECIAL ABOUT THE COIN ENVELOPE AND THE PLASTIC
BAG, THERE IS NOTHING UNIQUE OR SPECIAL ABOUT A FOLDED PIECE OF
PAPER THAT BECOMES A BINDLE?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q THAT WITHOUT SOME KIND OF IDENTIFYING MARKINGS ON IT,
THEY ALL LOOK ALIKE?
A CORRECT.
Q SO YOU PUT THE SWATCHES THAT YOU REMOVED FROM SOME OF
THE TEST TUBES INTO PAPER BINDLES THAT YOU HAD CREATED; ISN'T
THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THERE WERE NO PHOTOS TAKEN OF THE SWATCHES AS
THEY'RE SITTING IN THE PAPER BINDLE BEFORE IT'S FOLDED; ISN'T
THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THEN THERE'S NO NOTATION BY YOU IN ANY DOCUMENT
AT THAT POINT IN TIME OF THE NUMBER OF SWATCHES THAT YOU'RE
PUTTING INTO EACH OF THOSE BINDLES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND OF COURSE, YOU HAVE NEVER DIRECTED A FORENSIC
PHOTOGRAPHER TO TAKE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SWATCHES AS THEY'RE
SITTING ON THAT BINDLE BEFORE IT GETS FOLDED UP; ISN'T THAT
CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q DO YOU KNOW AS TO YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT DAY, WERE
THE SWATCHES ALL DRY AS THEY WERE PUT INTO THE PAPER BINDLES?
A THE SWATCHES WERE ALL DRY BEFORE THEY WERE PUT INTO
THE PAPER BINDLES.
Q DO YOU HAVE AN INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION OF THAT?
A IF THEY WERE NOT DRY, THEY WOULD NOT BE PUT INTO THE
PAPER.
Q THAT'S JUST STANDARD PROCEDURE?
A YES.
Q NOW, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, HAVE ANY OF THE SWATCHES BEEN
MIXED UP AND PLACED IN THE WRONG PAPER BINDLE OR THE WRONG COIN
ENVELOPE EITHER ACCIDENTALLY OR INTENTIONALLY IN THIS CASE?
A NO.
Q WELL, ITEM 11 IS A STAIN THAT YOU COLLECTED FROM A
WIRE AT ROCKINGHAM ON JUNE 13TH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU COLLECTED THAT STAIN WITH A SWATCH; ISN'T
THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU MOISTENED THAT COTTON -- SORRY. ARE YOU AWARE
AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT A TECHNICIAN EMPLOYED
BY THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TESTED THE SWATCH THAT
YOU PUT IN THE EVIDENCE BINDLE AND IT TESTED NEGATIVE FOR THE
PRESENCE OF BLOOD?
MR. GOLDBERG: WAIT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THE
IMPLICATION OF THAT LAST QUESTION.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WOULD YOU AGREE, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT
SOME SWATCHES COULD GET PUT INTO THE BINDLE WHICH HAS BEEN
INCORRECTLY ACCIDENTALLY MARKED?
A NO.
Q WOULD YOU AGREE, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT WITHOUT WRITING A
PROPER DOCUMENTATION ON EACH BINDLE, THERE IS REALLY NO WAY TO
IDENTIFY THESE OTHERWISE UNIDENTIFIABLE SWATCHES?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THE BINDLES WERE MARKED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: NOW, MISS MAZZOLA, WHEN YOU --
SORRY?
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WITH RESPECT TO EVERY BINDLE, MISS
MAZZOLA, THAT YOU PERSONALLY FOLDED AND PACKAGED ON THE MORNING
OF JUNE 14TH, DIDN'T YOU WRITE YOUR OWN INITIALS ON THOSE
BINDLES?
A ON THE OPINIONS THEMSELVES?
Q YES.
A NO. THE ITEM NUMBER.
MR NEUFELD: PAGE 768, YOUR HONOR, LINE 19 TO LINE 22.
THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE THAT, MR. GOLDBERG?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, AGAIN REFERRING YOU TO
THE AUGUST 23RD, 1994 HEARING WHEN YOU TESTIFIED UNDER OATH, WERE
YOU ASKED THE FOLLOWING QUESTION, DID YOU GIVE THE FOLLOWING
ANSWER?
"QUESTION: AND YOU ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE BINDLES
THAT YOU PACKED THAT MORNING WERE ALSO INITIALED BY YOU?
"ANSWER: THAT'S CORRECT."
DID YOU GIVE THAT ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION JUST TWO
MONTHS AFTER OR TWO AND A HALF MONTHS AFTER YOU WERE INVOLVED IN
PACKAGING BINDLES ON JUNE 14TH?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THAT'S BECAUSE ON AUGUST 23RD, WHEN YOU TESTIFIED
IN THIS CASE, IT WAS YOUR BELIEF THAT YOU HAD IN FACT INITIALED
THE BINDLES THAT YOU HAD PREPARED THE MORNING OF THE 14TH; ISN'T
THAT RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND THE REASON THAT YOU WOULD PUT YOUR INITIALS --
I'M SORRY. THE REASON THAT YOU WOULD PUT YOUR INITIALS ON THESE
BINDLES IS BECAUSE YOU HAD LEARNED THAT TECHNIQUE FROM WATCHING
OTHER CRIMINALISTS AT THE CRIME SCENES THAT YOU HAD BEEN PRESENT
AT; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND THAT YOU LEARNED FROM THESE OTHER CRIMINALISTS,
MISS MAZZOLA, THAT WHENEVER YOU PERSONALLY CREATE A BINDLE, YOU
WRITE YOUR INITIALS ON THE OUTSIDE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND ISN'T IT TRUE, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT YOU WERE SIMPLY
FOLLOWING THE SAME PROCEDURE THAT YOU HAD SEEN THESE OTHER
CRIMINALISTS USE ON THE MORNING OF THE 14TH?
A NO.
Q ISN'T IT A FACT, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT ALL THE BINDLES
THAT YOU INITIALED WERE PUT BACK IN THE ORIGINAL COIN ENVELOPES
ON THE MORNING OF THE 14TH?
A I DID NOT INITIAL ANY BINDLES.
Q YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOUR TESTIMONY, YOUR SWORN
TESTIMONY OF AUGUST 23RD IS WRONG?
A CORRECT.
Q IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
A CORRECT.
Q WERE YOU TAUGHT, MISS MAZZOLA, THAT TO DEMONSTRATE A
RELIABLE CHAIN OF CUSTODY, THE ORIGINAL PAPER BINDLES CREATED THE
MORNING OF JUNE 14TH, 1994 ARE RETAINED FOR TRIAL? HAVE YOU BEEN
TAUGHT THAT?
A NOT REALLY, NO.
Q HAVE YOU BEEN TAUGHT THAT BY KEEPING THE ORIGINAL
BINDLES, THAT THE POLICE CAN SHOW THAT THE SWATCHES SENT OUT TO
OTHER LABS COME FROM THE ORIGINAL BINDLE THAT THE EVIDENCE WAS
PLACED IN?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I DO NOT KNOW THAT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WERE YOU TAUGHT AT ANY POINT, MISS
MAZZOLA, THAT AT TRIAL, BY PLACING ONE'S INITIALS ON THE ORIGINAL
BINDLE, IT CAN BE IDENTIFIED BY A CRIMINALIST AS THE SAME BINDLE
THAT THAT CRIMINALIST FOLDED AND PERSONALLY PLACED EVIDENCE IN ON
A PARTICULAR DATE?
A I WAS NOT TOLD THAT, NO.
Q WERE YOU TOLD THAT ONE REASON TO RETAIN THE ORIGINAL
BINDLES IS TO REFUTE AN ALLEGATION THAT THE ORIGINAL EVIDENCE HAD
BEEN TAMPERED WITH?
A NO.
Q HAVE YOU BEEN TOLD THAT THE PRACTICE OF SAVING
ORIGINAL BINDLES IS A STANDARD PRACTICE OF THE LOS ANGELES POLICE
DEPARTMENT?
A I HAD NOT BEEN TOLD THAT, NO.
Q WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, WHAT I WOULD LIKE YOU TO DO NOW,
LOOKING AT THE ENVELOPES THAT ARE IN FRONT OF YOU, THE COIN
ENVELOPES, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO PRODUCE THOSE PAPER BINDLES THAT
IN YOUR SWORN TESTIMONY OF AUGUST 23RD YOU CLAIMED HAD YOUR
INITIALS WRITTEN ON THEM.
MR. GOLDBERG: UNINTELLIGIBLE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, WHEN WAS THE FIRST
TIME YOU LEARNED THAT THE PAPER BINDLES THAT THE PROSECUTION
INTENDED TO INTRODUCE IN THIS CASE DID NOT HAVE YOUR INITIALS ON
THEM?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, WOULD YOU PLEASE NOW
LOOK THROUGH THOSE ENVELOPES AND SHOW THIS JURY WHICH IF ANY OF
THOSE BINDLES HAVE YOUR INITIALS ON THEM?
A AS I SAID BEFORE, THEY DO NOT HAVE MY INITIALS ON
THEM.
Q AND YOU KNOW THAT, MISS MAZZOLA, BECAUSE BEFORE THIS
JURY WALKED IN HERE TODAY, YOU OPENED EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE
COIN ENVELOPES, DIDN'T YOU?
A I HAD KNOWN THAT MY INITIALS WERE NOT ON THE BINDLES
BEFORE TODAY.
Q WHEN WAS IT THAT YOU FIRST LEARNED THAT YOUR INITIALS
WERE NOT ON THE COIN -- ON THE BINDLES, MISS MAZZOLA?
A IT WAS SOMETIME AGO.
Q WELL, WAS IT AFTER AUGUST 23RD, MISS MAZZOLA?
A IT WAS AFTER, YES.
Q WAS IT DURING ONE OF THE PREP SESSIONS WITH THE
PROSECUTORS THAT YOU LEARNED THAT, MISS MAZZOLA?
A NO, I DO NOT BELIEVE SO.
Q WAS IT ONE OF YOUR SUPERIORS AT THE -- AT SID WHO
FIRST BROUGHT THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION?
A NO.
Q WAS IT ANOTHER EMPLOYEE AT SID WHO BROUGHT THAT TO
YOUR ATTENTION?
A I DO NOT BELIEVE IT WAS OTHER EMPLOYEE WHO BROUGHT IT
TO MY ATTENTION.
Q WERE YOU SHOWN PHOTOGRAPHS OF THOSE BINDLES?
A NO.
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WHO WAS IT THAT FIRST BROUGHT IT TO
YOUR ATTENTION THAT THE BINDLES THAT THE PROSECUTION WAS SAYING
WERE THE ORIGINAL BINDLES DID NOT HAVE YOUR INITIALS ON THEM?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I HAD SEEN A FEW OF THE BINDLES IN SEROLOGY,
AND THEY DID NOT HAVE MY INITIALS ON THEM.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND WHEN WAS THAT APPROXIMATELY?
A I CAN'T TELL YOU APPROXIMATELY. I DON'T REMEMBER THE
DATE.
Q WHEN YOU SAY YOU SAW A FEW OF THE BINDLES,
APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY BINDLES DID YOU SEE?
A I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBER OR EVEN APPROXIMATE
NUMBER.
Q WELL, YOU SAID --
A IT WAS SOME BINDLES.
Q ALL RIGHT. BUT AS YOU KNOW, MISS MAZZOLA, THERE WERE
AT LEAST 30 OR 40 BINDLES GENERATED IN THIS CASE, CORRECT, BY YOU
ON THE 13TH AND 14TH?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: WELL, WOULD YOU AGREE, MISS MAZZOLA,
THAT THERE WERE MORE THAN 25 BINDLES GENERATED BY BLOODSTAIN
EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE?
A I DID NOT COUNT THEM.
Q WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT YOUR NOTES?
MAYBE THAT WILL REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO HOW MANY BLOOD
STAIN BINDLES WERE GENERATED IN THIS CASE.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
THE WITNESS: IT'S APPROXIMATELY 35.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND YOU SAID YOU SAW A FEW IN
SEROLOGY ONE DAY; IS THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q BY THE WAY, YOU'RE NOT ASSIGNED TO SEROLOGY. YOU'RE
ASSIGNED TO TOXICOLOGY; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A CORRECT.
Q WERE YOU BROUGHT OVER TO SEROLOGY TO LOOK AT SOME OF
THE BINDLES THAT HAD BEEN COLLECTED IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE?
A I WAS NOT BROUGHT OVER, NO.
Q WELL, WHY WERE YOU LOOKING AT SOME OF THE BINDLES IN
THIS CASE IN THE SEROLOGY LABORATORY?
A BECAUSE I HAD GONE OVER THERE TO LOOK AT THEM.
Q AND HAD SOMEONE ASKED YOU TO COME OVER TO LOOK AT
THEM?
A NO.
Q WELL, HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT THESE BINDLES WERE OUT ON
THE COUNTER IN THE SEROLOGY LABORATORY?
A I SAW THEM AS I WAS PASSING BY.
Q YOU MEAN -- HOW BIG IS THE LAB -- THE SEROLOGY
LABORATORY, MISS MAZZOLA?
A I DON'T KNOW.
Q WELL, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IT'S CERTAINLY LONGER THAN
THE WIDTH OF THIS COURTROOM, THE ENTIRE SEROLOGY LABORATORY?
A I DON'T GO INTO SEROLOGY A LOT. I COULDN'T TELL YOU
HONESTLY.
Q WELL, JUST APPROXIMATE. WOULD YOU SAY IT'S ALMOST AS
LONG AS THIS ROOM?
A I DON'T KNOW.
Q IS IT AT LEAST HALF THE SIZE OF THIS ROOM, MISS
MAZZOLA?
A AT LEAST HALF THE LENGTH, YES.
Q AND THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT WORK SPACES IN THERE?
A THERE ARE THE MAIN TABLE DOWN THE MIDDLE, YES.
Q AND THAT TABLE RUNS THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE ROOM,
DOESN'T IT?
A NOT THE ENTIRE LENGTH, NO.
Q AND THERE ARE WORK STATIONS AROUND THE PERIMETER OF
THE ROOM AS WELL?
A I DON'T KNOW IF THOSE ARE WORK STATIONS OR NOT.
MR. NEUFELD: JUST ONE MOMENT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND, MISS MAZZOLA, THE BINDLES THAT
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE ABOUT THIS SIZE THAT I'M SHOWING YOU
RIGHT NOW (INDICATING)?
A CORRECT.
MR. NEUFELD: I'M REFERRING TO BINDLES IN PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT
1630-D.
THE COURT: APPROXIMATELY INCH BY INCH AND A HALF, TWO
INCHES.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: AND IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT YOU
JUST HAPPENED TO BE WALKING THROUGH THIS ROOM AND YOU NOTICED
THAT A COUPLE OF THE BINDLES THAT WERE ON THE COUNTER SOMEWHERE
HAPPENED TO BE FROM YOUR CASE? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
A I HAD SEEN THEM OUT, PEOPLE WORKING, AND I WENT IN TO
SEE.
Q WELL, DID YOU GO IN TO SEE BECAUSE YOU KNEW THAT
PEOPLE WERE WORKING ON THE BINDLES IN THIS CASE? IS THAT THE
REASON YOU WENT INTO SEROLOGY?
A I SAW THEY WERE WORKING ON SOMETHING. I WENT IN TO
CHECK OUT WHAT IT WAS.
Q YOU MEAN YOU HAD NO IDEA THAT WHAT THEY WERE WORKING
ON WAS THIS PARTICULAR CASE?
A THEY WORK ON SEVERAL CASES.
Q THEY WORK ON HUNDREDS OF CASES, DON'T THEY?
A PROBABLY HUNDREDS, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT. BUT YOU WALKED IN THINKING THAT PERHAPS
THEY WERE WORKING ON THE SEROLOGY OF THIS PARTICULAR CASE. ISN'T
THAT FAIR TO SAY?
A YES.
Q THAT'S WHAT PEEKED YOUR INTEREST, ISN'T IT?
A YES.
Q BUT YOU SAID EARLIER THAT YOU HAD NO PARTICULAR
INTEREST IN THIS CASE, DIDN'T YOU, MISS MAZZOLA?
A I HAD SEEN MY COLLEAGUES WORKING ON IT. I THOUGHT IT
WAS THIS CASE. SO I JUST WENT IN TO SEE WHAT THEY WERE WORKING
ON. THAT'S IT.
Q AND THE REASON YOU WENT IN TO SEE WHAT THEY WERE
WORKING ON IS BECAUSE YOU WANTED TO SEE WORK GOING ON IN THE CASE
THAT YOU PARTICIPATED IN; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?
A NOT THE ACTUAL WORK. I JUST WAS INTERESTED IN WHAT
THEY WERE DOING.
Q WHO WERE THE COLLEAGUES YOU SAW WORKING ON IT THAT
DAY?
A OH, I CAN'T REMEMBER. THIS WAS A WHILE AGO.
Q WELL, WAS THIS THE -- THIS IS AFTER AUGUST 23RD
THOUGH, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU DON'T REMEMBER WHICH SEROLOGISTS WERE WORKING
ON IT THAT DAY?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS IS ASKED AND ANSWERED. BADGERING.
THE COURT: THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING
I THINK HAS BEEN EXHAUSTED.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, BUT NEEDLESS TO SAY,
THEY WERE NOT WORKING -- I'M SORRY. HOW MANY DIFFERENT BINDLES
DID YOU SAY WERE CREATED IN THIS CASE. WAS IT 35 OR THEREABOUTS?
A THOSE --
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO THIS CASE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT DOES HE MEAN? JUST THOSE ITEMS ON 13?
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: YOU TESTIFIED A MOMENT AGO TO A
CERTAIN NUMBER AND I DON'T RECALL THE NUMBER. COULD YOU REMEMBER
IT?
A THOSE WERE THE NUMBER OF -- THE ITEM NUMBERS WITH RED
STAINS THAT WERE PICKED UP.
Q OKAY. AND WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT SIMPLY FROM
-- SINCE MR. FUNG COLLECTED MANY OF THESE BINDLES OR PERFORMED
MANY OF THESE BINDLES AND YOU MADE MANY -- SOME OF THE BINDLES,
THAT JUST SEEING SOME BINDLES NOT HAVING YOUR INITIALS ON THEM
WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE SURPRISING, WOULD IT?
A YES.
Q I MEAN ACCEPTING YOUR TESTIMONY ON AUGUST 23RD, ONE
WOULD EXPECT TO SEE YOUR INITIALS ON SOME OF THE BINDLES AND
DENNIS FUNG'S INITIALS ON OTHER BINDLES, CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q SO SIMPLY SEEING DENNIS FUNG'S INITIALS ON SOME
BINDLES THAT THEY WERE WORKING ON IN THE SEROLOGY LABORATORY ON A
DATE AFTER AUGUST 23RD DID NOT CAUSE YOU ANY ALARM, DID IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. COUNSEL, WE'VE COVER THIS AREA.
Q BY MR. NEUFELD: MISS MAZZOLA, DID YOU REALIZE AT
SOME POINT THAT BASED ON YOUR AUGUST 23RD TESTIMONY, THAT IF THE
PROSECUTORS COULD NOT PRODUCE THE ORIGINAL BINDLES THAT YOU
CLAIMED YOU HAD INITIALS, THAT THAT COULD BE DEVASTATING?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THE
IMPLICATION OF THAT QUESTION. ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, WE'RE GOING
TO TAKE A 10-MINUTE --
MR. NEUFELD: I'M THROUGH.
THE COURT: YOU'RE THROUGH?
MR. NEUFELD: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE'RE STILL GOING TO TAKE A
10-MINUTE RECESS, AND WE'LL CONCLUDE WITH MR. GOLDBERG. I WOULD
LIKE TO FINISH THIS WITNESS TODAY.
ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'LL TAKE A BRIEF
10-MINUTE RECESS. REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
MISS MAZZOLA, YOU MAY STEP DOWN.
WE WILL RECONVENE IN 10 MINUTES. AND LET'S RESTAPLE
116.
(RECESS.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER.
ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT.
LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
PLEASE BE SEATED.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY
ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
MS. MAZZOLA IS AGAIN ON THE WITNESS STAND.
MISS MAZZOLA, GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN.
AND YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH.
AND MR. GOLDBERG, YOU MAY COMMENCE AND CONCLUDE YOUR
REDIRECT EXAMINATION.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. I DON'T THINK I WILL
BE TOO LONG, HOPEFULLY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q GOOD AFTERNOON, MISS MAZZOLA?
A GOOD AFTERNOON.
MR. GOLDBERG: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: MISS MAZZOLA, AS TO THE COIN
ENVELOPES THAT YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE
DEFENSE ATTORNEY, DID YOU OPEN UP AND LOOK IN EVERY SINGLE ONE OF
THESE COIN ENVELOPES TODAY?
A YES.
Q AND WHERE DID YOU DO THAT?
A HERE IN THE COURTROOM.
Q WHO WAS PRESENT WHEN YOU DID THAT?
A THE PROSECUTION AND THE DEFENSE.
Q WAS THIS SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE ON THE RECORD BUT
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY?
A CORRECT.
Q AND DID YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE BINDLES THAT WERE IN
EACH ONE OF THOSE COIN ENVELOPES?
A CORRECT.
Q WHEN YOU DID THAT, DID YOU RECOGNIZE THE BINDLES IN
EACH ONE OF THE COIN ENVELOPES?
A I RECOGNIZE THEM AS TO THE ITEM NUMBERS.
Q DID YOU RECOGNIZE THE WRITING ON THE NUMBERS AS BEING
EITHER YOURS OR DENNIS FUNG'S?
A FOR THE ITEM NUMBERS, YES.
Q AND ON MANY OF THEM DID YOU RECOGNIZE DENNIS FUNG'S
INITIALS?
A I DON'T REMEMBER IF I SAW HIS INITIALS OR NOT.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
LET'S TAKE ONE OF THESE ITEMS AS AN EXAMPLE, ITEM NO.
47, IF I MAY.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE NOW, BUT I
WOULD LIKE HER JUST TO REMOVE FROM ITEM NO. 47 --
THE COURT: CERTAINLY. PROCEED.
THE WITNESS: GLOVES?
THE COURT: DO YOU NEED GLOVES?
THE WITNESS: YES.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, DID YOU WANT TO HAVE HER PUT
SOMETHING DOWN ON THE COURT'S --
THE COURT: PLEASE. WHY DON'T YOU CLEAR THAT BOX OFF, MR.
GOLDBERG, FOR US. THERE IS -- WHY DON'T YOU HAD ME THE TOWELS --
I MEAN THE GLOVE BOX.
THANK YOU.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. EVIDENCE ITEM 47 APPEARS TO BE COMPRISED
OF THREE COIN ENVELOPES STAPLED TOGETHER.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, MAYBE YOU CAN JUST HOLD THAT
UP FOR THE JURY SO THAT THEY CAN SEE IT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, YOU WILL HAVE TO STAND BACK.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, THIS APPEARS TO HAVE QUITE A
BIT OF WRITING ON IT.
DID IT HAVE ALL THAT WRITING ON IT WHEN YOU CREATED
THE BINDLE INITIALLY?
A NO.
Q CAN YOU TELL US WHAT WRITING WAS ON IT AT THE TIME
THAT THE BINDLE WAS ORIGINALLY CREATED?
A ON THIS PARTICULAR BINDLE THE NUMBER "112" AND THE
INITIALS "D.F."
Q DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT TO BE DENNIS FUNG'S INITIALS?
A YES.
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. I DON'T BELIEVE SHE
IS COMPETENT TO TESTIFY THAT DENNIS FUNG'S INITIALS -- THAT
DENNIS FUNG CREATED THAT BINDLE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE QUESTION WAS DO YOU RECOGNIZE DENNIS FUNG'S
INITIALS? YES OR NO?
THE WITNESS: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THAT IS WHERE IT STANDS.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHEN YOU AND MR. FUNG WERE
PROCESSING THESE, WAS IT -- WAS HE WRITING ON THE BINDLES THAT HE
WAS CREATING AND YOU WERE WRITING ON THE BINDLE THAT YOU WERE
CREATING?
A AT THE TIME I THOUGHT I WAS WRITING ON THE BINDLES I
WAS CREATING.
Q I MEAN THE ITEM NUMBER?
A THE ITEM NUMBER, YES.
Q AND WHEN YOU WENT THROUGH THESE VARIOUS ITEMS, DID
YOU RECOGNIZE THEM TO BE THE ORIGINAL BINDLES THAT WERE CREATED
BY YOU AND MR. FUNG?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION AS TO WHEN.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ON THE 14TH?
A YES.
Q DID YOU RECOGNIZE THEM?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
NOW, MAYBE YOU CAN REPLACE ITEM NO. 47 INTO THAT COIN
ENVELOPE.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q TELL US WHAT YOU ARE DOING FOR THE RECORD.
A JUST PLACING THE BINDLE BACK INTO THE COIN ENVELOPE.
Q AND BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT BINDLE IN ITEM NO.
47, DO YOU SEE THE ORIGINAL COIN ENVELOPE INTO WHICH THE ITEM WAS
PLACED ON THE 13TH WHEN IT WAS COLLECTED?
A YES.
Q CAN YOU HOLD THAT UP SO THE JURORS CAN SEE.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
IS THE ACTUAL WRITING ON THAT IMPORTANT ON THE FACE
OF THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: UMM --
THE COURT: I'M NOT SURE THAT 1492 CAN SEE THAT.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAYBE WE SHOULD PUT THAT ON THE ELMO.
CAN YOU JUST DETACH THAT FROM THE REMAINING COIN
ENVELOPE SO I DON'T HEAT UP THE OTHER REMAINING ITEMS.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE WITNESS: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: THIS IS THE ORIGINAL COIN ENVELOPE
INTO WHICH ITEM NO. 47 WAS PLACED?
A YES.
Q WHEN IT WAS SWATCHED AT THE SCENE ON
JUNE 13TH?
A CORRECT.
Q AND YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT PHOTO DOCUMENTING THESE
ITEMS.
WAS THIS PARTICULAR COIN ENVELOPE PHOTO DOCUMENTED IN
ANY WAY ON THE 13TH?
A YES, IT WAS.
Q HOW WAS THAT?
A THIS PARTICULAR COIN ENVELOPE, PHOTO
ITEM 112, WAS THE ACTUAL PHOTO I.D. CARD AT THE SCENE FOR ITEM
112.
Q SO IF WE LOOKED AT THE PHOTOGRAPH FOR ITEM NO. 47
THAT WAS TAKEN AT THE BUNDY LOCATION, WE WOULD ACTUALLY SEE THIS
PHOTO I.D. NO. 112?
A CORRECT.
Q AND WHY IS THIS PARTICULAR COIN ENVELOPE FOLDED?
A BECAUSE IT WAS FOLDED TO BE USED AS THE ACTUAL PHOTO
I.D. CARD.
Q AND HAVE YOU RECOGNIZED, WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE PHOTO
I.D. NUMBERS THAT WERE PLACED ON THE BUNDY TRAIL, FOR INSTANCE,
WERE YOU ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THOSE WERE IN FACT THE COIN ENVELOPES
INTO WHICH THE ITEMS WERE PLACED?
A YES.
Q NOW, AT THE UPPER PORTION OF THIS COIN ENVELOPE THERE
IS SOMETHING THAT SAYS "DR" AND THEN THERE IS A NUMBER ON IT.
WHAT IS THAT?
A THAT IS THE DR NUMBER THAT IS ASSIGNED TO EACH
PARTICULAR CASE, SCENE, SAMPLE THAT WE GET INTO TOXICOLOGY.
Q AND WAS THIS ASSIGNED AND PUT ON THERE WHEN THEY WERE
PROCESSED ON THE 14TH?
A NO. THAT IS BOUGHT USUALLY BY THE DETECTIVES THAT
ARE IN CHARGE.
Q OKAY.
AND THE ITEM NO. 47, WHEN IS THAT PLACED ON THE
ENVELOPE?
A THAT IS THE PROPERTY I.D. NUMBER. THAT WAS PLACED ON
THIS PARTICULAR ONE WOULD BE ON THE 14TH.
Q AND THE "112" WAS PLACED AT THE SCENE?
A THE "112" WAS PLACED AT THE SCENE.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT
ANOTHER EXHIBIT THAT IS ALREADY MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 48-B FOR
IDENTIFICATION, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO PUT IT UP, IF WE CAN,
SIMULTANEOUSLY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION TO
PEOPLE'S 48-B, WHAT IS THAT?
A THAT IS ITEM 112.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
AND CAN WE ALTERNATE NOW BACK TO THE COIN ENVELOPE,
ITEM 48. MAY WE CAN JUST DO THAT A COUPLE MORE TIMES?
IS THAT POSSIBLE?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: CAN WE PUT THOSE NEXT TO EACH OTHER?
THANKS.
Q SO TAKING A LOOK NOW AT THE CARD NO. 47 AND THE
PHOTOGRAPH THAT DEPICTS A CARD NO. 112, ARE THOSE THE SAME
OBJECT?
A YES, THEY ARE.
Q WHEN YOU GOT BACK TO THE LABORATORY THE ITEM NO. 47
AND THE PHOTO I.D. WAS ADDED?
A RIGHT, BACK AT THE LABORATORY.
Q AND THEN THE DR NUMBER?
A CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
Q NOW, AT THE TIME THAT YOU TESTIFIED AT THE GRIFFIN
HEARING YOU WERE UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU HAD INITIALED THE
COIN ENVELOPE AND THE BINDLES -- EXCUSE ME -- THE COIN ENVELOPE
IN THE FIELD; IS THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q AND I KNOW WE DISCUSSED THIS A LITTLE BIT ON DIRECT
EXAMINATION, BUT WHY IS IT THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE CASE?
A BECAUSE AT THE PREVIOUS SCENE THAT I HAD DONE, MY
FIRST SCENE, THAT IS THE WAY THE CRIMINALIST AT THAT SCENE DID
IT.
Q OKAY.
AND WHY IS IT THAT YOU DID NOT DO THAT IN THAT
PARTICULAR WAY ON THE 13TH?
A BECAUSE MR. FUNG SAID WE WOULD BE WORKING AS A TEAM.
THERE WAS ONLY TWO OF US, AND IT HAD TO BE PICKED UP BY EITHER
ONE OF US.
Q AND SIMILARLY, YOU BELIEVED, AT THE TIME OF THE
GRIFFIN HEARING, THAT YOU HAD INITIALED THE COIN ENVELOPE THAT
YOU CREATED; IS THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q WHY DID YOU BELIEVE THAT?
A BECAUSE AGAIN, THAT WAS THE WAY IT HAD BEEN DONE AT
THE FIRST SCENE I HAD GONE TO AND I BELIEVE THAT I HAD DONE IT ON
THE 13TH.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING, BASED UPON YOUR
TRAINING AS A CRIMINALIST, THAT WHAT INDIVIDUALIZES THE BINDLES
IN THE COIN ENVELOPE IS THE HANDWRITING NUMBER THAT IS PLACED ON
BY THE CRIMINALIST AT THE TIME THAT THEY ARE CREATED?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, LEADING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT IS YOUR UNDERSTANDING AS A
CRIMINALIST WITH RESPECT TO WHAT INDIVIDUALIZES THE BINDLES THAT
ARE CREATED BY THE CRIMINALIST?
A IT IS THE ITEM NUMBERS THAT ARE IMPORTANT, BECAUSE
THE ITEM NUMBER ON THE BINDLE TIES IT TO THE ITEM NUMBER OF, SAY,
THE BLOOD STAIN THAT WAS COLLECTED.
Q OKAY.
NOW, MAYBE WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THE OTHER BINDLE
THAT IS CONTAINED IN ITEM NO. 47.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q MAYBE YOU CAN HOLD THAT ONE UP FOR THE JURY.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
IT IS A LITTLE HARD TO SEE.
Q AND DOES THAT HAVE SOME WRITING ON IT?
A YES, IT DOES.
Q WHAT WRITING IS THAT?
A IT HAS SEVERAL INITIALS, SOME DATES AND 112-C.
Q OKAY.
AND IS IT THE "112-C" WHAT WAS PLACED ON THERE BY MR.
FUNG ON THE 14TH?
A YES, IT WAS.
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION AS TO WHAT WAS PLACED ON BY MR.
FUNG.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, YOU AND MR. FUNG WERE WORKING
ON THESE TOGETHER; IS THAT CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q WHOSE IS 112-C IS THAT?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, IMPROPER FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DO YOU RECOGNIZE MR. FUNG'S
WRITING?
A SOMEWHAT.
Q AND WERE YOU THERE WHEN THESE WERE CREATED?
A YES.
Q DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHOSE WRITING IS ON THAT 112-C?
A IT IS NOT MINE; IT IS MR. FUNG'S.
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION. MOVE TO STRIKE THE LAST ANSWER.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, THE OTHER WRITING THAT WAS PUT
ON THERE, WAS THAT AT SOME SUBSEQUENT TIME BY OTHER PEOPLE?
A YES.
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: NO FOUNDATION FOR THAT. THE ANSWER IS
STRICKEN.
THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD IT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, DID YOU SEE THAT WRITING
BEING PUT ON THERE?
A NO.
Q THANK YOU.
YOU CAN REPLACE THIS ITEM.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AT THE TIME THAT YOU WERE WORKING
ON THEM WAS ANY OF THE OTHER WRITING ON THERE OTHER THAN THE
112-C?
A NO.
Q THANK YOU.
YOU CAN REPLACE THAT ITEM.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
THE WITNESS: SEALS.
MR. GOLDBERG: SHE DOESN'T HAVE ANY SEALS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WITH REGARDS TO THIS ITEM, I WILL DIRECT MRS.
ROBERTSON TO RESTAPLE AND RESEAL.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AS TO THE WRITING THAT WAS ON THE
BINDLE, DID YOU RECOGNIZE ANY OF THAT AS BEING WRITING FROM OTHER
PEOPLE IN YOUR LABORATORY?
A I BELIEVED I RECOGNIZED A FEW OF THE INITIALS.
Q WERE THERE ANY -- WAS THERE ANY WRITING ON THE ITEM
THAT APPEARED TO BE FROM PEOPLE THAT WERE FROM AN OUTSIDE LAB
THAT YOU DID NOT RECOGNIZE?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
HAVE YOU REPLACED THOSE?
THE COURT: YES, SHE HAS.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, YOU SAY THAT AT ONE POINT YOU
WENT INTO THE SEROLOGY LABORATORY AND SAW SOME OF THE BINDLES
THAT YOU AND MR. FUNG CREATED IN THIS CASE?
A CORRECT.
Q ARE YOU ALLOWED AS A CRIMINALIST --
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, AS TO THE LAST PORTION
OF THE QUESTION. IT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ARE YOU ALLOWED INTO THE SEROLOGY
LABORATORY?
A YES.
Q YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THIS AS A CRIMINALIST?
A YES.
Q ARE THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN SEROLOGY YOUR COLLEAGUES?
A YES.
Q DO YOU KNOW -- ARE YOU ON A FRIENDLY BASIS WITH THOSE
PEOPLE?
A YES.
Q IS THERE ANY LAB POLICY OR RULE THAT PROHIBITS YOU
>FROM GOING INTO SEROLOGY AND TALKING WITH COLLEAGUES?
A NO.
Q WHEN YOU BROUGHT THE ITEMS BACK FROM THE BUNDY AND
ROCKINGHAM LOCATION ON THE EVENING OF THE 13TH, HOW DID YOU GET
INTO THE EVIDENCE PROCESSING ROOM?
A I BELIEVE WE -- ONE OF US ENTERED THE EVIDENCE
PROCESSING ROOM AND OPENED THE LARGE OUTER DOOR.
Q CAN YOU OPEN THE LARGE OUTER DOOR FROM THE EXTERIOR
OF THE FACILITY?
A WE CANNOT.
Q SO YOU HAVE TO GO IN AND GO THROUGH THE EVIDENCE
PROCESSING ROOM FIRST?
A CORRECT.
Q WHAT IS THIS LARGE OUTER DOOR IN THE EVIDENCE
PROCESSING ROOM?
A IT IS A LARGE HEAVY-DUTY METAL DOOR THAT IS ELECTRIC
THAT CAN BE ROLLED UP TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE ROOM.
Q OKAY.
AND WHEN YOU WENT IN THROUGH THE LARGE METAL DOORS,
DID YOU BRING THE ITEMS WITH YOU, YOU AND MR. FUNG?
A THAT IS HOW WE BROUGHT THEM INTO THE ROOM, YES.
Q DID ANYONE ELSE GO IN THERE WITH YOU?
A NO.
Q IS IT POSSIBLE THAT MAYBE SOME PERSON RAN IN THERE
AND SNUCK INTO THE EVIDENCE POSSESSING ROOM AND THEN HID UNTIL
YOU AND MR. FUNG LEFT?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, LEADING AND SPECULATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, DID YOU SEE ANYONE SCURRY
INTO THE ROOM AND HIDE WAITING FOR YOU AND MR. FUNG TO LEAVE?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND WHEN YOU LEFT THE EVIDENCE PROCESSING ROOM WERE
THE DOORS CLOSED?
A THE DOOR WAS CLOSED.
Q AND LOCKED?
A AND LOCKED, YES.
Q NOW, IN ORDER TO GET INTO THIS DOOR IN THE EVIDENCE
PROCESSING ROOM, DO YOU NEED ANY KIND OF KEY OR ELECTRONIC
DEVICE?
A IT IS OPERATED BY A COMPUTER LOCK. WE HAVE AN I.D.
CARD THAT WE MUST PUT OVER THE LOCK FOR THE DOOR TO UNLOCK.
MR. GOLDBERG: I WANTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE
DRYING -- EVIDENCE DRYING BOARD.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK IT IS PEOPLE'S 170 FOR
IDENTIFICATION.
Q DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE THAT KEY CARD WITH YOU THAT YOU
USE?
A YES, I DO.
Q DON'T WORRY, WE WON'T MARK IT AS AN EXHIBIT, BUT
MAYBE WE COULD JUST --
A PLEASE DON'T.
THE COURT: WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THAT FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE,
MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: YES. SHE APPEARS TO BE HOLDING A PLASTIC
CARD THAT APPEARS TO BE ABOUT A QUARTER OF AN INCH IN WIDTH. IT
SEEMS TO HAVE A BAR CODE STICKER ON ONE SIDE AND IS APPROXIMATELY
TWO-AND-A-HALF INCHES BY THREE-AND-A-HALF INCHES.
MR. GOLDBERG: PEOPLE'S 170.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 170.
MR. GOLDBERG: MISS MAZZOLA, MAYBE YOU COULD JUST STEP DOWN
FOR A MOMENT.
THE WITNESS: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOES PEOPLE'S 170 DEPICT MOST OF
THE MAJOR STEPS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THE EVIDENCE DRYING PROCESS?
A YES, IT DOES.
Q AND YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW MR. FUNG WAS
MANIPULATING THE SWATCHES INTO THE TUBES IN ORDER TO SET THEM OUT
FOR DRYING.
IS THAT DEPICTED ON THIS BOARD?
A YES, IT IS.
Q IS THAT CELL NO. 2?
A IT IS NO. 2, YES.
Q AND WHEN HE DID THAT -- WHEN HE DID THAT IN YOUR
PRESENCE, DO HIS HANDS EVER COME INTO CONTACT WITH THE SWATCH?
A NO, IT DID NOT.
Q AFTER HE DOES THAT WHAT DOES HE --
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, AND MOVE TO STRIKE; NO
FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND AFTER HE DOES THAT, WHAT DOES
HE DO WITH THE TEST-TUBE?
A THE TEST TUBE IS PLACED BACK INTO THE COIN ENVELOPE
CORRESPONDING TO THE ITEM NUMBER.
Q AND IS THE SAME THING THEN DONE FOR THE CONTROL
SWATCH?
A IDENTICAL SAME THING.
Q NOW, WHEN YOU WERE WORKING ON THESE ITEMS ON THE
EVENING OF THE 14TH, DO YOU SIMPLY LINE UP ALL THE COIN ENVELOPES
IN A BIG ROW AND THEN INTO AN ASSEMBLY LINE FASHION GO FROM
ENVELOPE TO ENVELOPE?
A NO.
Q WHY DON'T YOU DO IT THAT WAY?
A IT IS JUST AS EASY TO WORK ON ONE AT A TIME. IT IS
SAFER TO WORK ON ONE ITEM AT A TIME. PUT THAT COMPLETELY FINISHED
IN THE BOX BEFORE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ONE.
Q WHAT ADVANTAGES ARE THERE TO WORKING ON ONE ITEM AT A
TIME IN TERMS OF MAKING IT SAFER?
A YOU DECREASE THE RISK OF PUTTING SWATCHES MIXED UP,
GETTING YOUR NUMBERS MIXED UP, POSSIBILITY THAT TWO SWATCHES FROM
TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS WOULD COME INTO CONTACT WITH EACH OTHER OR
THE SAME SURFACE.
Q SO YOU ARE ONLY PROCESSING ONE ITEM AT A TIME?
A CORRECT.
Q AND AFTER THIS ITEM IS PROCESSED AND BOTH THE
CONTROL AND SWATCHES ARE IN THEIR RESPECTIVE TEST-TUBES AND IN
THE COIN ENVELOPE, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE COIN ENVELOPE?
A THE COIN ENVELOPES ARE PLACED IN A SHALLOW CARDBOARD
BOX FOR SECURITY. WE HOLD THEM TOGETHER.
Q AND WHERE DOES THIS BOX GO?
A THE BOX GOES INTO A CABINET WHERE THE SWATCHES ARE
ALLOWED TO DRY OVERNIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. THANK YOU.
NOW, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK THE PEOPLE'S 171.
IT IS THE EVIDENCE PACKAGING BOARD.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WHICH ITEM IS THIS?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS IS PEOPLE'S 171 FOR IDENTIFICATION.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: MISS MAZZOLA, DIRECTING YOUR
ATTENTION TO PEOPLE'S 171, DOES THIS DEPICT MOST OF THE STEPS
THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THE EVIDENCE PACKAGING PORTION OF THE
POSSESSING PHASE?
A YES, IT IS.
Q AND WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT PLACING THE ITEMS ON
A BINDLE, IS THAT DEPICTED HERE?
A YES.
Q AND WHICH PHOTO I.D. NUMBER IS THAT?
A PHOTO 1.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND HOW ARE THE SWATCHES PLACED ON THE BINDLE?
A THEY ARE PLACED ON THE BINDLE USING A LONG GLASS
PIPETTE.
Q CAN YOU ALSO DO THAT SIMPLY BY TAPPING THE TEST-TUBE
ON TO THE BINDLE ITSELF?
A YES.
Q EITHER WAY?
A EITHER WAY.
Q WHAT HAPPENS TO THE PIPETTE AFTER YOU HAVE USED THE
PIPETTE TECHNIQUE?
A THE PIPETTE IS THROWN AWAY.
Q AND THE TEST TUBE?
A THE TEST-TUBE IS ALSO THROWN AWAY.
Q WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THOSE ITEMS ARE THROWN AWAY?
A THE BINDLES ARE FOLDED UP AND THE FLAPS ARE TUCKED IN
TO SECURE IT.
Q AND THEN WHAT IS DONE WITH THE BINDLE?
A THE ITEM NUMBER IS PLACED ON THE BINDLE TO
DISTINGUISH IT FROM ANY OTHER BINDLE.
Q AND DO YOU ALSO PLACE A NUMBER TO DISTINGUISH THE
CONTROL OR A LITTLE "C" TO DISTINGUISH THE CONTROL FROM THE
SWATCH?
A MOST PEOPLE DO, YES.
Q THEN WHAT IS DONE WITH THE BINDLES?
A THE BINDLES ARE PLACED BACK INTO THE ORIGINAL COIN
ENVELOPES AND THE ENVELOPES ARE THEN SEALED.
Q NOW, WITH THIS PROCEDURE DO YOU DO THIS IN AN
ASSEMBLY LINE FASHION?
A NO, ONE AT A TIME.
Q AND AGAIN, WHY IS IT THAT YOU ONLY WORK ON ONE ITEM
AT A TIME?
A FOR THE SAME REASONS AS BEFORE.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. THANK YOU.
YOU MAY RESUME YOUR SEAT.
THE WITNESS: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT LOOKING
AT PHOTOGRAPHS IN ORDER TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION, AND
SPECIFICALLY ITEM NO. 47, I THINK IT WAS PHOTO I.D. NO. 112?
A CORRECT.
Q WHEN YOU LOOKED AT A PHOTOGRAPH THAT REFRESHED YOUR
RECOLLECTION, WAS THAT A CLOSE-UP OR A PERSPECTIVE SHOT?
A IT WAS A PERSPECTIVE SHOT.
Q AND WHAT DID IT SHOW?
A IT SHOWED THE LOCATION OF ITEM 112 AT THE SCENE.
Q WHAT WAS IT ABOUT THAT ITEM, IF ANYTHING, THAT WAS --
THAT STOOD OUT IN YOUR MEMORY?
A WELL, IT WAS THE FIRST BLOOD DROP ON THE TRAIL AT
BUNDY.
Q AND WHEN YOU SAME THE TRAIL, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT
THE SERIES OF DOTS THAT STARTED ON THE WALKWAY AND ENDED IN THE
AREA OF THE DRIVEWAY?
A CORRECT.
Q AND WHAT WAS IT ABOUT THAT -- THE LOCATION OF THAT
DROP, IF ANYTHING, THAT CAUSED YOU TO RECALL THAT MR. FUNG HAD
PARTICIPATED IN SWATCHING THAT PARTICULAR STAIN?
A WELL, THE FACT THAT IT WAS THE FIRST --
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
IT IS BEYOND THE SCOPE AT THIS POINT, I BELIEVE MY
AREA OF RECROSS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IT WAS THE FIRST DROP AT THE TRAIL AND IT WAS
ALSO AT THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE IN THE FRONT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE BLOOD VIAL CONTAINING THE REFERENCE SAMPLE OF THE
DEFENDANT.
DID YOU EVER TOUCH THAT BLOOD VIAL?
A THE BLOOD VIAL ITSELF, NO.
Q DO YOU EVER RECALL TOUCHING THE ENVELOPE ITSELF?
A I DON'T BELIEVE I DID.
Q SO DID YOU EVER HANDLE THE BLOOD VIAL?
A NO.
Q AND TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE DID YOU EVER HANDLE THE
ENVELOPE?
A TO THE BEST THAT I CAN RECALL, NO.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO ITEM NO.
47 FOR A SECOND THAT YOU LOOKED AT THE PHOTOGRAPH IN ORDER TO
REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION.
COULD YOU SEE IN THAT PERSPECTIVE SHOT WHERE THE
BLOOD DROP WAS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING?
A SOMEWHAT, YES.
Q IN OTHER WORDS, COULD YOU SEE THE PLACEMENT OF THE
DROP?
A YES.
Q THE RELATIVE POSITION OF THE DROP?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND IS THAT -- WAS IT VIEWING THAT
THAT CAUSED YOU TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO THAT DROP?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, PLEADING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT WAS IT THAT CAUSED YOUR
RECOLLECTION TO BECOME REFRESHED AS TO THAT DROP, WHEN YOU SAW
THE PHOTOGRAPH?
A THE FACT THAT IT WAS THE FIRST DROP ON THE TRAIL AND
ITS POSITION RIGHT IN THE FRONT AT THE CORNER OF THE HOUSE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, GOING BACK TO THE BLOOD VIAL FOR A SECOND, WAS
IT YOUR BELIEF, WHEN YOU TESTIFIED AT THE GRIFFIN HEARING, THAT
YOU HAD LEFT SHORTLY AFTER FIVE O'CLOCK?
A YES.
Q AND WHY DID YOU BELIEVE THAT?
A BECAUSE THAT IS THE TIME THAT I THOUGHT WE HAD LEFT.
IT DID NOT SEEM THAT A LONG PERIOD OF TIME HAD GONE BY.
Q WHEN DID YOU DISCOVER THAT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE?
A WHEN MR. FUNG TOLD ME TO WRITE DOWN THAT HE HAD
RECEIVED THE BLOOD VIAL AND THE TIME.
Q NOW, ON EITHER THE 13TH OR THE 14TH DID YOU EVER HAVE
ANY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE ISSUES RELATING TO WHEN AND WHERE
AND HOW THAT BLOOD VIAL AND ITS PACKAGING WAS RECOVERED WOULD BE
IMPORTANT?
A NO.
Q OR THAT THERE WOULD BE ANY KIND OF ALLEGATIONS OF
WRONGDOING IN CONNECTION WITH THE BLOOD VIAL BY THE DEFENDANTS OR
BY --
A NO.
Q OKAY.
NOW, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM NO. 15 AND 16, WHEN DID YOU
PUT THOSE ITEMS ON THE CRIME SCENE IDENTIFICATION CHECKLIST?
A I BELIEVE IT WAS THE NEXT DAY ON THE 14TH.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAYBE I CAN SEE I THINK IT IS DEFENSE 1107.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: WHILE THEY ARE GETTING THAT, I ALSO WANTED
TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT A PORTION OF PEOPLE'S 186, THE SCENE
SHOWING MISS MAZZOLA PLACING STUFF -- ITEMS IN THE BACK OF THE
LAPD CRIME SCENE IDENTIFICATION -- CRIME SCENE TRUCK.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: IS THIS THE ONE WITH THE TIME CODE ON IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: HOW MANY TIMES DO YOU THINK IT IS NECESSARY FOR
US TO SEE THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: I DON'T KNOW. IT SEEMS TO COME UP OVER AND
OVER AGAIN.
WE ARE ONLY GOING TO SEE A LITTLE SNIPPET OF IT, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE IT CUED UP?
MR. GOLDMAN: MAYBE WE COULD FAST FORWARD A LITTLE BIT JUST
UP TO THE POINT WHERE THEY PUT THE ITEM IN THE BACK OF THE TRUCK.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. LET'S JUST GO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. LET'S STOP FOR A SECOND.
(AT 3:45 P.M., DEFENSE EXHIBIT
1107, A VIDEOTAPE, WAS PLAYED.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: HAVE YOU SEE YOUR HANDS AND MR.
FUNG'S HANDS IN THIS FRAME 17:11:57:28?
A I CAN SEE MR. FUNG'S HANDS AND ONE OF MINE, YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: LET'S GO A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AND TAKE A
LOOK AT YOUR HANDS AND MR. FUNG'S HANDS.
WE DON'T HAVE TO GO IN SLOW MOTION.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU.
Q NOW, WERE EITHER YOU OR MR. FUNG CARRYING ANYTHING
BACK INTO THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION WHEN YOU LEFT THE CRIME SCENE
TRUCK AFTER YOU HAD PLACED THE KITS AND ALSO THE ITEMS OF
EVIDENCE IN THE REAR OF THE TRUCK?
A NO.
Q SO DID YOU HAVE YOUR CRIME SCENE IDENTIFICATION
CHECKLIST?
A NO.
Q DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING AT THAT TIME THAT YOU COULD USE
TO FILL OUT AND RECORD THE LOCATIONS OF ITEM NO. 15 AND 16?
A NO.
Q DID YOU HAVE ANY OF YOUR COIN ENVELOPES WITH YOU OR
ANY PACKAGING MATERIALS WITH YOU AT THAT TIME?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
WELL, MISS MAZZOLA, YOU SAY THAT YOU DON'T HAVE --
DIDN'T HAVE YOUR CRIME SCENE IDENTIFICATION CHECKLIST OR ANY COIN
ENVELOPES.
COULD YOU HAVE HIDDEN YOUR CRIME SCENE
IDENTIFICATION CHECKLIST IN THE COIN ENVELOPE IN YOUR SOCK?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, LEADING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, DID YOU HIDE THEM SOMEWHERE
ON YOUR PERSON SO THAT YOU COULD PRODUCE THEM LATER ON WHEN YOU
GOT BACK TO ROCKINGHAM?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, RELEVANCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DID YOU SEE MR. FUNG DOING THAT?
A NO.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
NOW, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT DEFENSE 1107.
MAYBE WE CAN SEE 15 AND 16 A LITTLE BIT BETTER AT THE
BOTTOM.
OKAY. THAT'S FINE.
Q NOW, ON 15 AND 16, DID YOU WRITE COUNSEL ANY
MEASUREMENTS AS TO WHERE THE ITEMS WERE ACTUALLY LOCATED?
A NO.
Q DID YOU HAVE YOUR MEASURING TAPE WITH YOU AT THE
TIME?
A NO.
Q WITH RESPECT TO THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WERE COLLECTED
AT ROCKINGHAM THAT ARE CONTAINED ON THIS LIST, MAYBE WE CAN JUST
TAKE A LOOK AT ITEM NO. 1.
STARTING WITH NO. 1, THAT IS THE STAIN THAT WAS
CONTAINED ON THE BRONCO?
A CORRECT.
Q AND EVEN FOR THAT YOU HAVE SOME MEASUREMENTS?
A YES.
Q DO YOU DO MEASUREMENTS FOR THE OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE
CONTAINED ON THIS LIST, INCLUDING A, B AND C WHICH A AND B WHICH
WERE NOT COLLECTED?
A CORRECT.
Q SO THE ONLY ONES THAT YOU DON'T HAVE MEASUREMENTS FOR
ARE 15 AND 16?
A CORRECT.
Q AND WHY IS THAT?
A WE DIDN'T HAVE OUR MEASURING TAPE WITH US.
Q SO WHEN DID YOU PLACE THE NOTATIONS AS TO WHERE THOSE
ITEMS WERE LOCATED?
A WHEN WE PLACED THE ITEMS THEMSELVES ON THE
IDENTIFICATION CHECKLIST.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. THANK.
Q NOW, YOU SAID WHEN YOU WERE WALKING OUT WITH THE
PLASTIC BAG THAT IT APPEARED THAT THE WEIGHT WAS CONCENTRATED ON
A PART OF THE BAG.
WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THAT PART OF YOUR TESTIMONY.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WAS HER
TESTIMONY.
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK SHE DID.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DO YOU RECALL TESTIFYING IN
SUBSTANCE THAT THE WEIGHT WAS CONCENTRATED IN ONE PART OF THE
BAG?
MR. NEUFELD: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. IT IS A LEADING
QUESTION ALSO.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WAS THE WEIGHT CONCENTRATED IN ONE
PART OF THE BAG?
A IT APPEARED TO BE HEAVIER IN ONE AREA.
Q OKAY. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?
A WELL, IF IT WAS ITEM 15, 16 AND THE PHOTO I.D. CARDS,
THERE REALLY -- THEY REALLY DIDN'T WEIGH THAT MUCH, AND THE
WEIGHT I FELT TENDED TO BE ON -- IN ONE AREA RATHER THAN SPREAD
OUT OVER THE WHOLE BAG.
Q NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE PHOTO I.D. CARDS AT THE
ROCKINGHAM LOCATION, IS IT YOUR GENERAL PRACTICE THAT AFTER THE
ITEMS ARE COLLECTED, THE STAINS, THE CARD WOULD BE LIFTED UP?
A YES.
Q DO YOU RECALL SEEING A SEGMENT OF VIDEOTAPE THAT
SHOWED MR. FUNG LIFTING UP SOME CARDS IN WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE
AFTERNOON?
A YES.
Q DO YOU KNOW WHETHER THOSE WERE CARDS A, B AND C?
A I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE WHICH ONES THEY WERE, NO.
Q DO YOU KNOW FOR SURE WHETHER ALL THE CARDS WERE DOWN
IN THE AFTERNOON?
A I DON'T KNOW.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I JUST HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I JUST WANTED TO SHOW ONE MORE
PHOTOGRAPH.
MR. NEUFELD: CAN WE SEE IT, PLEASE?
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK IT IS ALREADY IN EVIDENCE.
MR. NEUFELD: I'M SORRY, I CAN'T --
THE COURT: WHICH NUMBER IS THIS, MR. GOLDBERG?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT IS 48-A.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: I DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO 48-A FOR
IDENTIFICATION.
DOES THAT DEPICT PHOTO I.D. NO. 112, ITEM NO. 48?
A YES, IT DOES.
Q AND IS THIS THE PERSPECTIVE SHOT THAT YOU WERE
REFERRING TO?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.
MR. NEUFELD: ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT. MISS MAZZOLA, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO
COLLECT THE ITEMS BEFORE YOU, RETURN THEM TO MRS. ROBERTSON, THE
CLERK.
YOU ARE NOW EXCUSED AS A WITNESS, HOWEVER, YOU ARE
SUBJECT TO RECALL.
ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.
COUNSEL, GIVEN THE TIME THAT WE HAVE EXPENDED TODAY
BEFORE THE JURY, I THINK WE ARE GOING TO CALL IT QUITS FOR TODAY.
ALL RIGHT.
I DO HAVE A FEW MATTERS I WANT TO TAKE UP WITH
COUNSEL, THOUGH, BEFORE WE LEAVE.
ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. PLEASE REMEMBER ALL OF MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
DO NOT DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, FORM ANY
OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE
MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, DO NOT ALLOW ANYBODY TO
COMMUNICATE WITH YOU WITH REGARDS TO THE CASE.
AND HAVE A PLEASANT WEEKEND.
I THINK I MENTIONED TO YOU THAT WE HAVE OTHER
COMMITMENTS TOMORROW, COUNSEL AND MYSELF. WE WILL NOT BE IN
SESSION, AS FAR AS WITNESSES ARE CONCERNED, TOMORROW.
WE WILL START AGAIN PROMPTLY MONDAY MORNING, NINE
O'CLOCK, AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A FULL WEEK OF TESTIMONY NEXT
WEEK.
SO I WILL SEE YOU NEXT WEEK.
HAVE A PLEASANT WEEKEND, ENJOY THE OUTINGS.
ALL RIGHT.
AND MISS MAZZOLA, YOU MAY STEP DOWN, AND WOULD YOU
TAKE THOSE ITEMS, PLEASE, OVER TO MRS. ROBERTSON.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(AT 4:55 P.M. THE JURY WAS EXCUSED
AND THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT THE JURORS HAVE ALL
GONE FROM THE COURTROOM.
COUNSEL, I HAVE ISSUED AN ORDER WITH REGARDS TO ITEM
1, EVIDENCE ITEM 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14, 41, 42, 43, 44,
45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 AND 52, THAT THOSE ITEMS ARE TO BE
RETURNED TO THE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION DIVISION OF THE LOS
ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT, KEPT IN STORAGE BY THEM AND RETURNED
TO THE COURT UPON NOTICE BY THE CLERK.
LET ME ASK COUNSEL, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE GOING TO
HAVE MR. MATHESON AS OUR NEXT WITNESS.
ALL RIGHT. ARE WE GOING TO NEED ANY OF THESE ITEMS
FOR HIM TOMORROW?
MR. GOLDBERG: DO I NEED ANY OF THESE ITEMS FOR HIM
TOMORROW?
THE COURT: CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOU MEAN MONDAY?
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, MONDAY.
MR. GOLDBERG: I DON'T THINK I NEED THEM.
THE COURT: MR. -- WHO IS GOING TO BE DOING -- MR. BLASIER
DOING THE CROSS-EXAMINATION AS TO MR. MATHESON?
MR. BLASIER: I AM, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: DO YOU ANTICIPATE NEED OF THESE FOR
CROSS-EXAMINATION?
MR. BLASIER: I DON'T AT THIS TIME BUT COULD I REQUEST THE
PROSECUTION HAVE AVAILABLE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THOSE ITEMS IN CASE WE
DO NEED PHOTOGRAPHS TO REFER TO?
MR. GOLDBERG: IS IT OKAY IF MISS MAZZOLA RETURNS THOSE TO
THE CRIME LABORATORY?
THE COURT: YES. SHE IS SO ORDERED.
THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: THEY ARE IN A SEALED CONDITION NOW, MRS.
ROBERTSON?
THE CLERK: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, DID YOU HEAR MR. BLASIER'S COMMENT
REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF PHOTOGRAPHS AS TO THESE ITEMS?
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M SORRY?
THE COURT: DID YOU HEAR MR. BLASIER'S REQUEST REGARDING
THE AVAILABILITY OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF THESE ITEMS?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, I THINK WE PROBABLY HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS
OF ALL OF THESE ITEMS BECAUSE THEY WERE SENT OUT TO THE DEFENSE
IN ALBANY AND PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN AT THOSE TIMES, SO THEY
SHOULD HAVE ALL OF THEM.
I DO NOT KNOW IF WE HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BINDLES
OF ALL OF THOSE ITEMS.
MR. BLASIER: WE ARE CERTAINLY WON'T NEED THEM MONDAY. I
UNDERSTAND MR. GOLDBERG IS GOING TO TAKE AT LEAST A DAY FOR MR.
MATHESON.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WELL, WHOEVER NEEDS THE PHOTOGRAPHS OUGHT TO HAVE
THEM HERE.
DO YOU HAVE A SET OF PHOTOGRAPHS, MR. BLASIER?
MR. BLASIER: I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE ALL.
MR. GOLDBERG: THERE ARE VOLUMINOUS SETS OF PHOTOGRAPHS.
THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND IT TAKES SOME GOING THROUGH TO FIND
THEM, BUT I THINK THEY ARE ALL THERE.
THE COURT: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
WE HAD ONE OTHER ITEM REGARDING THE EAP, ISSUES ON
THE DEMONSTRATION BOARD FOR MR. MATHESON.
LET'S TAKE THAT UP NOW.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, YOUR HONOR, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE
COURT HAD A CHANCE TO READ OUR LETTER BRIEF THAT WE FILED.
THE COURT: WHEN DID THAT GET FILED?
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK THAT WAS JUST TODAY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
THE COURT: WELL, IN CASE YOU HADN'T NOTICED, I HAVE BEEN
BUSY.
MR. GOLDBERG: I KNOW, YOUR HONOR. THAT IS WHY I ASSUME
THE COURT WOULDN'T HAVE PROBABLY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY --
THE COURT: NO, I HAVE NOT SEEN IT.
MR. GOLDBERG: THERE ARE --
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I WILL READ IT.
ALL RIGHT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT WE CAN
RESOLVE?
MR. GOLDBERG: IS THE COURT GOING TO READ IT BEFORE WE HAVE
ANY FURTHER ARGUMENT ON THAT?
THE COURT: IF YOU WANT ME TO READ IT, I WILL READ IT.
MR. GOLDBERG: I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.
THE COURT: I WILL READ IT.
MR. BLASIER: I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO IT. I CAN DO THAT
IN WRITING OVER THE WEEKEND IF YOU LIKE.
THE COURT: HOW ABOUT TOMORROW, BY TOMORROW MORNING? YOU
CAN FAX IT TO ME.
MR. BLASIER: OKAY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. BLASIER: I WILL DO THAT.
MR. GOLDBERG: BUT THERE WERE WILL SOME
OTHER --
THE COURT: I WILL BE HERE. I HAVE A SESSION REGARDING
THIS CASE TOMORROW MORNING AT NINE O'CLOCK, SO I WILL BE HERE.
MR. GOLDBERG: THERE ARE ALSO SOME OTHER ISSUES REGARDING
EAP THAT I WANTED TO RAISE AND I DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
BEFORE THE CLOSE OF YESTERDAY'S SESSION.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WELL, LET ME ASK COUNSEL TO BE HERE
THEN ON MONDAY AT 8:30.
MR. BLASIER: YOU DO NOT WANT ANY ARGUMENT TOMORROW
HOWEVER? I MEAN, I WILL BE HERE IF YOU --
THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU FILE YOUR DOCUMENTS.
THE REASON WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE IN SESSION IS
BECAUSE I HAVE GOT OTHER THINGS, OTHER CASES, OTHER THINGS TO DO
TOMORROW.
MR. BLASIER: OKAY.
THE COURT: BUT IF YOU FILE WHATEVER YOU WANT, THEN I WILL
CONSIDER IT OVER THE WEEKEND AND DO ANY RESEARCH THAT I NEED TO
DO.
MR. GOLDBERG: I KNOW WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST TIME
THE COURT SUGGESTED THAT YOU WANTED TO HEAR MR. MATHESON TESTIFY
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY IN A 402 HEARING, NOT YESTERDAY
BUT THE TIME BEFORE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE COURT STILL DESIRES THAT.
IT IS SOMEWHAT OF AN INVOLVED ISSUE IN THAT I THINK ONCE THE
COURT UNDERSTANDS THE TECHNOLOGY AND THE SCIENTIFIC ISSUES, THAT
THE LEGAL ISSUE WILL BECOME ABSOLUTELY CRYSTAL CLEAR, AND PERHAPS
THE COURT WOULD WANT THAT TESTIMONY FIRST, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW
WHETHER I HAVE ADEQUATELY EXPLAINED WHAT OUR POSITION IS AND WHY
IT IS THAT WE FEEL WE ARE ENTITLED TO PREVAIL.
THE COURT: WELL, AS I HAVE INDICATED TO YOU, I WILL READ
YOUR LETTER BRIEF, I WILL READ THE CASES THAT YOU HAVE CITED, AND
I WILL READ THE RESPONSE FROM MR. BLASIER AND THEN WE WILL SEE
WHERE WE ARE AT 8:30 ON MONDAY.
ANYTHING ELSE ON THE ANTICIPATE ISSUE?
MR. SCHECK?
MR. SCHECK: A BRIEF REQUEST THAT I WILL THINK WILL SAVE US
TIME IN THE LONG RUN. I UNDERSTAND THEY HAVE CHANGED THE ORDER
OF THE WITNESSES NOW BECAUSE WE ANTICIPATED MR. YAMAUCHI AND NOW
WE HAVE MR. MATHESON AND I HAVE BEEN FURTHER INFORMED THAT THE
PROSECUTION INTENDS TO THEN START WITH DNA WITNESSES AND WE HAVE
BEEN GIVEN A LEAD TIME OF THREE DAYS.
THE PROBLEM IS, IS THAT THE DNA EVIDENCE IS SO
VOLUMINOUS, AS OF TEN DAYS AGO WE GOT A 200-PAGE HANDWRITTEN SET
OF NOTES FROM DOJ AND I MUST CONFESS I HAVEN'T READ THEM YET.
WHAT WE WOULD REQUEST IS THAT WE BE GIVEN MORE
ADVANCED NOTICE, JUST WE WANT TO KNOW WHICH LABS ARE COMING FIRST
SO WE CAN BE PREPARING THIS WEEKEND, BECAUSE IF WE GET THAT KIND
OF ADVANCE NOTICE, THEN IT WILL GO FASTER.
FRANKLY, GIVEN THE VOLUMINOUS DATA, THE CONTINUING
RESULTS THAT ARE COMING IN, WE DON'T WANT TO BE IN THE A
POSITION WHERE WE WOULD HAVE TO TURN TO THE COURT AND ASK FOR
SOME EXTRA TIME. THAT WOULD BE THE LAST THING WE WOULD WANT TO
DO, BECAUSE I WANT TO GO HOME.
SO I THINK IT WOULD EXPEDITE EVERYTHING IF WE COULD
HAVE -- JUST AS FAR AS THE DNA ISSUES BECAUSE IT IS SO DENSE --
THAT WE GET MORE ADVANCED NOTICE WITH RESPECT TO WHICH SET OF
TESTS AND WITNESSES ARE COMING FIRST.
THE COURT: REFRESH MY RECOLLECTION AS TO WHAT OUR SPECIFIC
AGREEMENT WAS REGARDING PRIOR NOTICE AS TO THE WITNESSES? WAS IT
THE NEXT --
MR. COCHRAN: THREE DAYS OF WITNESSES. THEY HAVE CHANGED
THE ORDER OF WITNESSES.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, I ADVISED THEM THAT I CHANGED THE
ORDER OF WITNESSES ON THURSDAY OF LAST WEEK AND I EXPECTED MR.
MATHESON TO BE TESTIFYING.
MR. SCHECK: WELL --
THE COURT: WELL, LET ME JUST ASK, SO I CAN ALSO GET
PREPARED MYSELF, WHO DO YOU ANTICIPATE FOR OUR DNA WITNESSES?
HAVE YOU SET AN ORDER YET?
MR. CLARKE?
MR. CLARKE: YES, YOUR HONOR.
I BELIEVE THE FIRST WITNESS WILL BE DR. COTTON FROM
CELLMARK WHO WILL TESTIFY TO THE RESULTS IN THE SERIES OF REPORTS
THAT CELLMARK HAS ALREADY ISSUED.
THE COURT: WHO DO YOU ANTICIPATE AFTER THAT?
MR. CLARKE: THEN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WHO DO YOU ANTICIPATE COMING FROM THE DOJ?
MR. CLARKE: AT THIS POINT WOULD IT APPEAR --
THE COURT: I TAKE IT CALIFORNIA DOJ?
MR. CLARKE: CORRECT. GARY SIMS AS WELL AS RENEE
MONTGOMERY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WHO DO YOU ANTICIPATE AFTER THAT?
THE CLERK: MR. YAMAUCHI MOST LIKELY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK: THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT WE WOULD INDICATE,
THAT THE PREVIOUS ORDER OF WITNESSES HAD INCLUDED THE NURSE, MR.
PERATIS, AND MR. YAMAUCHI, WHICH WE REGARD AS CHAIN OF CUSTODY
WITNESSES AND FOUNDATIONAL WITNESSES WITH RESPECT TO THE BLOOD,
PARTICULARLY THE BLOOD VIAL, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY OF GREATEST
INTEREST TO THE DEFENSE.
THEY MUST HAVE SOME --
THE COURT: IT WOULD SEEM TO MAKE SOME LOGICAL SENSE, YEAH,
YOU ARE RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK: SO THEY -- WE OBVIOUSLY WOULD REQUEST AND
MAYBE THEY CAN BRIEF IT, IF THEY WANT, BUT WE THINK THAT
CERTAINLY THE NURSE'S TESTIMONY SHOULD COME IN BEFORE THEY START
INTRODUCING THE TEST RESULTS.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, AS TO THE NURSE'S TESTIMONY, MR.
VANNATTER TESTIFIED ALREADY THAT HE SAW THE BLOOD BEING DRAWN AND
THAT HE DROPPED IT OFF TO DENNIS FUNG. THERE IS NO FURTHER
FOUNDATION.
EVEN IF THE COURT WERE TO REQUIRE US TO PUT IT ON IN
SOME PARTICULAR ORDER, THERE IS NO FURTHER FOUNDATION THAT IS
NECESSARY.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR -- YOUR HONOR --
THE COURT: WELL, THE ISSUE HERE, FIRST OF ALL, IS NOTICE
TO THE DEFENSE AS TO WHO IS COMING.
MR. CLARKE, MY GUESS IS THAT YOU HAVE JUST GIVEN TO
US THREE WEEKS WORTH OF WITNESSES.
MR. CLARKE: THAT DEPENDS ON CROSS-EXAMINATION.
MR. GOLDBERG: THEY TOLD US THAT THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY
WITNESSES WERE GOING TO TAKE A WEEK. THAT IS WHAT WE WERE TOLD.
MS. CLARK: RIGHT.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE ONE CONCERN ABOUT THE LAST
WORDS OF MR. GOLDBERG'S, WHICH IS THAT IT IS OUR POSITION, AS IT
HAS BEEN ALL ALONG, NO SURPRISE THAT WE HAVE BEEN CHALLENGING THE
CHAIN OF CUSTODY AND WE ARE CHALLENGING THAT THERE IS NOT A
PROPER FOUNDATION, WHICH IS FOR SOME OF THESE DNA TEST RESULTS TO
COME IN.
AND I THINK YOU YOURSELF SAID, EVEN IN YOUR RULING,
THAT NO MATTER WHAT THE RULING WAS ON THE KELLY-FRYE ISSUES, THAT
THE PEOPLE STILL HAVE TO LAY THE PROPER FOUNDATION BEFORE ANY
WITNESS CAN TESTIFY TO RESULTS.
AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS JUST THE NEW YORK RULE,
YOUR HONOR, I'M SURE IT IS A CALIFORNIA RULE AND A RULE IN EVERY
JURISDICTION IN THIS COUNTRY, AS A MATTER OF FOUNDATION, YOU
INTRODUCE THE BLOOD INTO EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU CAN HAVE ANYBODY
TESTIFY TO WHAT THE RESULTS ARE WITH THE BLOOD. INTRODUCE THE
NARCOTICS INTO EVIDENCE BEFORE A TECHNICIAN CAN TESTIFY TO THE
RESULTS.
THE COURT: WELL, COUNSEL, THE ISSUE HASN'T BEEN PRESENTED
TO ME YET. I DON'T HAVE TO RULE ON IT.
THE ISSUE HERE IS MR. SCHECK ASKED WHO IS COMING
NEXT. HE KNOWS.
YOU CAN TAKE WHATEVER ACTION YOU FEEL IS APPROPRIATE
IN LIGHT OF THAT INFORMATION.
MR. NEUFELD: JUST SO THAT THE PEOPLE ARE ON NOTICE WE WILL
OBJECT TO ANY TESTIMONY ABOUT RESULTS, FOR INSTANCE, RESULTS OF A
DNA PROFILE OR A CONVENTIONAL SEROLOGICAL PROFILE ATTRIBUTED TO
MR. SIMPSON, UNTIL THE BLOOD IS INTRODUCED IN EVIDENCE, AND THE
SAME WILL APPLY TO SWATCHES ALLEGEDLY SENT TO THESE LABORATORIES
BY --
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY.
ANY OTHER SWATCHES OR ANYTHING ELSE? AT LEAST THE
PERSON WHO COLLECTED IT. IT HAS TO BE INTRODUCED.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WELL, YOU ARE TIPPING OFF WHAT YOUR OBJECTIONS ARE
GOING TO BE AND WE WILL SEE WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE GET THERE.
MR. NEUFELD: OKAY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. BLASIER: ONE FINAL THING, YOUR HONOR. THE PEOPLE
FILED A BRIEF TODAY ALSO ABOUT THERE WAS NO STATEMENT OF FACT,
BUT THE SUBJECT MATTER WAS INTRODUCING POLICE REPORTS IN LIEU OF
HAVING WITNESSES TESTIFY AS BUSINESS RECORDS.
THE COURT: SOMETHING TO DO WITH LAB REPORTS, YES, I SAW
THAT.
MR. BLASIER: AND WE ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT IT IS
THEY INTEND INTRODUCE THAT WAY. WE WILL HAVE CERTAIN OBJECTIONS
AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE SOME SORT OF AN OFFER AS TO WHAT IT IS
THEY INTEND TO INTRODUCE THIS WAY SO THEY CAN MAKE THE
APPROPRIATE OBJECTIONS.
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG, THAT WAS YOUR HANDIWORK, CITING
YOUR OWN HANDIWORK?
MR. GOLDBERG: I HAD MY ABLE ASSISTANT PUT THAT TOGETHER
FOR ME.
YOUR HONOR, WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO IS WE ARE GOING
TO PUT ON EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE AND EVERY TEST RESULT THROUGH A
SINGLE WITNESS FROM LAPD AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO CALL ANY OTHER
WITNESSES.
I GUESS HUMOR ISN'T VERY -- THE ROOM DOESN'T SEEM TO
BE A RECEPTIVE AUDIENCE.
MS. CLARK: TOO TIRED.
MR. GOLDBERG: IT IS A HUMORLESS GROUP OF PEOPLE, I GUESS.
THE COURT: MIRTHLESS.
MR. BLASIER: I GOT IT, JUDGE.
THE COURT: MIRTHLESS.
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M SORRY.
WHAT WE DO PLAN ON DOING IS WE PLAN ON PUTTING
CERTAIN CHAIN OF CUSTODY EVIDENCE ON THROUGH MR. MATHESON THAT
WOULD -- THAT WOULD NORMALLY REQUIRE SOME OTHER WITNESSES TO BE
CALLED, AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT HE IS GOING TO BE TESTIFYING TO IS
THAT ITEMS ARE PACKAGED UP AND MAILED OUT BASED ON BUSINESS
RECORDS AND THAT IS WHAT THE BRIEF GOES TO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS DOESN'T REFER TO TEST RESULTS.
THE COURT: OKAY.
MR. BLASIER: WE WILL OBJECT TO THAT AND WE WILL FILE
SOMETHING IN WRITING BY MONDAY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY INTERESTED IN THE 980 HEARING, I
WILL SEE YOU TOMORROW.
OTHERWISE HAVE A NICE WEEKEND.
MR. COCHRAN: THANKS, JUDGE.
MR. SIMPSON SAYS HE WILL WAIVE HIS PRESENCE, YOUR
HONOR, FOR THAT.
(AT 5:09 P.M. AN ADJOURNMENT
WAS TAKEN UNTIL, FRIDAY,
APRIL 28, 1995, 9:00 A.M.)
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; FRIDAY, APRIL 28, 1995
9:05 A.M.
DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
(BETH A. FINLEY, ATTORNEY AT LAW,
APPEARING ON BEHALF OF MR. ROBLES.)
(JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.) (CHRISTINE
M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING. I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE COUNSEL FOR
MR. ROBLES PRESENT.
MS. FINLEY: YES, YOUR HONOR.
GOOD MORNING. I'M BETH FINLEY APPEARING ON BEHALF OF
MR. ROBLES.
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL.
THE REASON I ASKED MR. ROBLES TO APPEAR THIS MORNING
IS I UNDERSTAND HE IS ONE OF THE VERY TALENTED SKETCH ARTISTS
THAT HAS BEEN COVERING THIS CASE, AND WHILE WATCHING ONE OF THE
LOCAL INDEPENDENT TELEVISION PROGRAMS THE OTHER DAY I HAPPENED TO
SEE A RENDERING OF OUR JURY THAT WAS ASTONISHING IN ITS ACCURACY
AND DEPICTION.
AND I MADE INQUIRY AS TO WHO WAS THE ARTIST AND HOW
IT CAME ABOUT THAT THAT PARTICULAR RENDERING WAS BROADCAST AND I
WAS CONCERNED, BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, THE COURT HAS ORDERED THE USE
OF AN ANONYMOUS JURY IN THIS CASE AND THAT CALIFORNIA RULES OF
COURT 980 PROHIBITS THE DEPICTION OF JURORS, CLOSE-UP OF JURORS,
AND I WAS CONCERNED THAT THE ARTIST DEPICTIONS WERE TOO CLOSE TO
WHAT WE HAVE IN THE JURY BOX.
MS. FINLEY: WELL, MR. ROBLES HAS BROUGHT ALL OF HIS
DRAWINGS HERE.
I THINK THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM BECAUSE
SOMETIMES MR. ROBLES IS NOT IN THE COURTROOM EVERYDAY, AND
ALTHOUGH HE IS TRYING TO HAVE ALL OF HIS DRAWINGS CLEARED BY YOUR
REPRESENTATIVE, HE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO CONNECT WITH HER ON ALL
OCCASIONS AND PERHAPS THAT IS HOW ONE OF THE DRAWINGS WAS
BROADCAST WITHOUT SOMEONE ELSE IN THE COURT SEEING IT.
IT CERTAINLY WAS NOT DONE INTENTIONALLY, BUT HE HAS
BROUGHT ALL OF THE DRAWINGS, BUT IF YOU COULD PERHAPS IDENTIFY
FOR HIM WHICH ONE IN PARTICULAR YOU SAW RECENTLY.
THE COURT: COUNSEL, WHAT I PROPOSE TO DO IS ISSUE A FORMAL
ORDER TO ALL SKETCH ARTISTS, AND ALL ARTISTS INVOLVED IN THIS
CASE, THAT THEIR DRAWINGS BE SUBMITTED TO THE PUBLIC INFORMATION
OFFICER FOR APPROVAL BY THE COURT PRIOR TO BROADCAST.
AND MISS HAYSLETT IS PRESENT HERE IN THE COURTHOUSE
EVERYDAY AND THIS COURT RARELY LEAVES THE COURTHOUSE BEFORE 6:00
IN THE EVENING EVERYDAY, SO WE WILL BE AVAILABLE TO IN AN
EXPEDITIOUS MANNER REVIEW ANY DRAWINGS THAT YOU WANT TO USE
IMMEDIATELY THAT DAY.
MS. FINLEY: THAT WOULD BE FINE, YOUR HONOR.
I THINK THE UPON HAS BEEN THERE ARE DEADLINES AND MR.
ROBLES DOES NOT DO HIS WORK HERE IN THE COURTHOUSE AND I BELIEVE
THE OTHER SKETCH ARTISTS DO. THEY WORK UP ON THE 12TH FLOOR AND
THEY HAVE CLOSER ACCESS, WHEREAS MR. ROBLES RETIRES TO THE CBS
TRAILER TO COMPLETE HIS DRAWINGS.
THE COURT: WE CAN SET UP A REGULAR SCHEDULE AT THE
CONCLUSION OF BUSINESS. WE WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR, SAY, HALF AN
HOUR AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF BUSINESS EVERYDAY, OR WE CAN BE
AVAILABLE JUST BEFORE THE START OF THE AFTERNOON SESSION FOR
OTHER DEADLINES.
MS. FINLEY: I GUESS WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BOTH IN THE
INSTANCE THAT IF THERE IS A DRAWING THAT WE NEED TO USE IN
ADVANCE OF THE EVENING NEWS, IT WOULD NEED TO BE CLEARED BEFORE
THE CLOSE OF SESSION THAT PARTICULAR DAY.
IF THERE IS A DRAWING THAT WE DON'T NEED TO USE, THEN
YES, WE COULD HAVE IT CLEARED AT THE END OF THE DAY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THEN I WILL ISSUE THIS ORDER AND I WILL DIRECT MISS
HAYSLETT TO SET UP A REGULAR SCHEDULE WHERE SHE AND THE COURT
WILL BE AVAILABLE AT THE CONCLUSION OF EACH COURT SESSION, BOTH
AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE MORNING SESSION, CONCLUSION OF THE
AFTERNOON SESSION.
IS THAT ACCEPTABLE?
MS. FINLEY: THAT WILL BE FINE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THEN THAT WILL BE THE ORDER.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
MS. FINLEY: THANK YOU.
(AT 9:09 A.M. AN ADJOURNMENT
WAS TAKEN UNTIL, MONDAY,
MAY 1, 1995, 9:00 A.M.)
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
)
PLAINTIFF, )
)
)
VS. ) NO. BA097211
)
ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, )
)
)
DEFENDANT. )
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1995
FRIDAY, APRIL 28, 1995
VOLUME 135
PAGES 24688 THROUGH 24955, INCLUSIVE
APPEARANCES: (SEE PAGE 2)
JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR #4588
CHRISTINE M. OLSON, CSR #2378
OFFICIAL REPORTERS
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE PEOPLE: GIL GARCETTI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
BY: MARCIA R. CLARK, WILLIAM W.
HODGMAN, CHRISTOPHER A. DARDEN,
CHERI A. LEWIS, ROCKNE P. HARMON,
GEORGE W. CLARKE, SCOTT M. GORDON
LYDIA C. BODIN, HANK M. GOLDBERG,
ALAN YOCHELSON AND DARRELL S.
MAVIS, BRIAN R. KELBERG, AND
KENNETH E. LYNCH, DEPUTIES
18-000 CRIMINAL COURTS BUILDING
210 WEST TEMPLE STREET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012
FOR THE DEFENDANT: ROBERT L. SHAPIRO, ESQUIRE
SARA L. CAPLAN, ESQUIRE
2121 AVENUE OF THE STARS
19TH FLOOR
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067
JOHNNIE L. COCHRAN, JR., ESQUIRE
BY: CARL E. DOUGLAS, ESQUIRE
SHAWN SNIDER CHAPMAN, ESQUIRE
4929 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
SUITE 1010
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90010
GERALD F. UELMEN, ESQUIRE
ROBERT KARDASHIAN, ESQUIRE
ALAN DERSHOWITZ, ESQUIRE
F. LEE BAILEY, ESQUIRE
BARRY SCHECK, ESQUIRE
PETER NEUFELD, ESQUIRE
ROBERT D. BLASIER, ESQUIRE
WILLIAM C. THOMPSON, ESQUIRE
ALSO PRESENT: BETH A. FINLEY, ESQUIRE
I N D E X
INDEX FOR VOLUME 135 PAGES 24688 - 24955
-----------------------------------------------------
DAY DATE SESSION PAGE VOL.
THURSDAY APRIL 27, 1995 A.M. 24688 135
P.M. 24780 135
FRIDAY APRIL 28, 1995 A.M. 24952 135
LEGEND:
MS. CLARK - MC
MR. HODGMAN - H
MR. DARDEN D
MS. LEWIS - L
MS. KAHN - K
MR. GOLDBERG - GB
MR. GORDON - G
MR. SHAPIRO - S
MR. COCHRAN - C
MR. DOUGLAS - CD
MR. BAILEY - B
MS. CHAPMAN - SC
MR. UELMEN - U
MR. SCHECK - BS
MR. NEUFELD - N
-----------------------------------------------------
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
PEOPLE'S
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.
MAZZOLA, ANDREA 135 (RESUMED)
24702GB 24748N
(RESUMED) 24786N
(VOIR DIRE) 24833GB
(RESUMED) 24835N
(FURTHER) 24905GB
-----------------------------------------------------
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.
MAZZOLA, ANDREA 135 (RESUMED)
24702GB 24748N
(RESUMED) 24786N
(VOIR DIRE) 24833GB
(RESUMED) 24835N
(FURTHER) 24905GB
EXHIBITS
PEOPLE'S FOR IN EXHIBIT
IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE
PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.
203 - ITEM NO. 15 24710 135
AMERICAN AIRLINES AIRLINE TICKET
204 - ITEM NO. 16 24710 135
AMERICAN AIRLINES BAGGAGE CLAIM TICKET
-----------------------------------------------------
DEFENSE FOR IN EXHIBIT
IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE
PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.
1121 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 24760 135
THE REAR STAIRWELL AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY
1122 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 24801 135
A PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF A BENCYH AT 360
NORTH ROCKINGHAM
1123 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 24801 135
A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF A BENCYH AT 360
NORTH ROCKINGHAM
1124 - GLASS VIAL 24828 135
1125 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 24829 135
A GLASS VIAL WITH WRITING
??
24697
