Xref: world alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts:133
Newsgroups: alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts
Path: world!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!myra
From:
[email protected] (Myra Dinnerstein)
Subject: TRANSCRIPT - 6/13/95 - 335k
Message-ID: <
[email protected]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 1995 17:32:58 GMT
Approved:
[email protected]
Lines: 7169
Sender:
[email protected]
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1995
9:05 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: ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON
MATTER.
MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH
HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. NEUFELD, MR. DOUGLAS.
THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MR. KELBERG, MR. LYNCH.
ALSO PRESENT, MR. DARDEN.
THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT.
GOOD MORNING.
MR. NEUFELD, MRS. ROBERTSON TOLD ME THAT YOU HAD AN
ISSUE YOU WANTED TO ADVISE THE COURT OF.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING, SIR.
MR. NEUFELD: YESTERDAY I LEARNED OF A REVISED SCHEDULE
>FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN WHICH THEY SAID THAT
AFTER DR. LAKSHMANAN THERE WERE GOING TO BE SOME WITNESSES
INVOLVING GLOVES AND SHOES AND THEN THEY INTENDED TO CALL BRUCE
WEIR AND THE OTHER DNA WITNESSES.
UMM, YOU MAY RECALL, YOUR HONOR, THAT BRUISE WEIR'S
NAME CAME UP WHEN THE DECISION WAS MADE BY THE PROSECUTION NOT TO
RELY ON DR. COTTON FOR CERTAIN FREQUENCIES, BUT INSTEAD TO HAVE
THAT ARTICULATED BY DR. WEIR.
AT THAT TIME DR. WILLIAM THOMPSON CAME INTO COURT AND
EXPRESSED ON THE RECORD OUR OBJECTION TO WHAT APPEARED TO BE A
PRELIMINARY REPORT OF DR. WEIR'S SUGGESTING THAT HE WAS GOING TO
TESTIFY ABOUT LIKELIHOOD RATIOS, AND OUR OBJECTION WAS BASED IN
PART ON THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO LEGAL PRECEDENT FOR USING
LIKELIHOOD RATIOS IN A CRIMINAL CASE ANYWHERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AND PERHAPS ANYWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES, AS WELL AS
OTHER GROUNDS.
AND AT THAT POINT MR. CLARKE SAID WE DON'T INTEND TO
USE THE LIKELIHOOD RATIOS IN THAT REPORT, THERE IS A LOT OF OTHER
DATA THERE THAT WE INTEND TO RELY ON TO EXPRESS FREQUENCIES.
WELL, WE RECEIVED ANOTHER PRELIMINARY REPORT FROM DR.
WEIR LAST WEEK WHICH AGAIN RELIES HEAVILY ON THIS USE OF
LIKELIHOOD RATIOS.
DR. THOMPSON SAID AT THAT TIME THAT IF THEY INTEND TO
TRY AND OFFER LIKELIHOOD RATIOS OR TO OFFER ANYTHING DIFFERENT
THAN WHAT THE COURT'S ORDER REQUIRED, WHICH WAS SIMPLY AN
AGGREGATION OF FREQUENCIES IN MIXTURES, THAT WE WOULD OF COURSE
DEMAND A 402 HEARING ON THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE, WHICH HAD NOTHING
TO DO WITH THE DNA KELLY-FRYE HEARING, IT JUST HAS TO DO WITH THE
MANNER IN WHICH EVIDENCE CAN BE EXPRESSED TO THE JURY.
IF THEY INTEND TO CALL DR. WEIR AND IF THEY INTEND TO
UTILIZE THESE LIKELIHOOD RATIOS, THEN WE NEED TO SORT OF SCHEDULE
THIS 402 HEARING. WE WOULD CALL WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION AT THAT
HEARING JUST ON THAT ONE ISSUE OF THE LIKELIHOOD RATIOS.
SO I'M SIMPLY ASKING FOR TWO THINGS:
ONE, PERHAPS SOMEONE FROM THEIR OFFICE CAN COME DOWN
EITHER AT THE BREAK, THE LUNCH BREAK, OR THE BEGINNING OF THE
AFTERNOON SESSION SO JUST BOTH OF US CAN TALK TO THE COURT AND
GET SOME HEAD'S UP ON, IF THAT IS THEIR INTENT, SO THAT WE CAN
SCHEDULE THAT AT 1:30.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. NEUFELD: CAN THAT BE DONE AT 1:30?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THE COURT: BY THE WAY, WE WILL BE IN RECESS FOR LUNCH
TODAY UNTIL 1:30.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, MAY I SUGGEST ACTUALLY IF MR.
NEUFELD HAS LIMITED INTEREST IN HEARING ABOUT FORENSIC PATHOLOGY,
THAT MR. CLARKE AND/OR MR. HARMON MAY WELL BE UPSTAIRS ON THE
18TH FLOOR AT THIS TIME, OR SHORTLY FROM THIS TIME, AND IT MIGHT
BE BENEFICIAL IF IN SOME FASHION HE CAN WANDER UP TO THE 18TH
FLOOR OR I ASSUME HE HAS THE OFFICE NUMBER FOR BOTH MR. CLARKE
AND MR. HARMON.
MR. NEUFELD: ALL RIGHT.
MR. KELBERG: SEE IF THEY CAN GET TOGETHER BEFORE 1:30.
MR. NEUFELD: FINE. WE WILL REPORT BACK TO THE COURT AT
1:30.
THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN.
MR. COCHRAN: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
YOUR HONOR, WITH REGARD TO THE SCHEDULING, THE
PROSECUTION YESTERDAY DID DELETE ONE WITNESS FROM THEIR LIST AND
WE UNDERSTAND THEY HAVE CHANGED THE ORDER.
WHAT I'M ASKING NOW IS WHETHER OR NOT FROM THE
PROSECUTION WE CAN GET A LIST, CERTAIN AS POSSIBLE, FOR THE
CONCLUSION OF THE CASE, BECAUSE WE HAVE LAWYERS WHO ARE ALL OVER
THE UNITED STATES, AND RATHER THAN HAVE A DELAY IN THE TRIAL --
THE COURT: THERE WILL BE NO DELAY.
MR. COCHRAN: OKAY, AND I APPRECIATE THAT, AND SO THAT IN
ORDER TO BE READY, YOUR HONOR, WE NEED TO KNOW WHO IS COMING UP
NEXT AND HAVE SOME KIND OF CERTAINTY WITH REGARD TO THAT, SO THE
LAWYERS CAN RETURN IN ENOUGH TIME TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE READY.
THE COURT: LET ME MAKE INQUIRY OF MISS CLARK AND MR.
DARDEN SINCE THEY HAVE THE OVERALL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS.
GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL.
MS. CLARK: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
YES, I INFORMED COUNSEL YESTERDAY THAT WE ARE CLOSER
TO THE END THAN WE THOUGHT WE WERE, AND WE ARE -- I INQUIRED OF
MR. HARMON AND MR. CLARKE YESTERDAY AS TO WHEN THE LAST PROBE
WOULD BE PULLED OFF 117, AND I HAVE TO SOLIDIFY THAT BEFORE I CAN
GIVE COUNSEL A TOTALLY ACCURATE PICTURE.
BUT I HAVE TOLD COUNSEL SO FAR THAT AFTER THE CORONER
-- ACTUALLY, MAYBE I TOLD MR. DOUGLAS, I'M SORRY.
MR. COCHRAN: OKAY.
MS. CLARK: THAT AFTER THE CORONERS IT WOULD BE EITHER
SHOES OR GLOVES, AND THEY KNOW WHAT CHAIN OF WITNESSES THAT IS,
AND FOLLOWING THAT WE BELIEVE WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE REST OF DNA
AND DR. WEIR, AND EDTA, AND THEN PERHAPS THE AIRTOUCH
REPRESENTATIVE CONCERNING CELL PHONE RECORDS, AND A COUPLE OF
OTHER MISCELLANEOUS WITNESSES THAT I HAVE TO SOLIDIFY, AND THEN
HAIR AND TRACE, SO THAT IS ROUGHLY THE SCENARIO.
THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS, OBVIOUSLY FROM WHAT THE
COURT HAS HEARD, THAT WE HAVE TO SOLIDIFY AND I THINK THAT I WILL
BE ABLE TO DO THAT BY THE END OF THE DAY.
I WOULD ASK THE COURT TO ORDER, IN RETURN FOR THIS
REVISED WITNESS ORDER AND LIST, THAT THE DEFENSE BE REQUIRED TO
TURN OVER THE DISCOVERY THAT WE HAVE BEEN REQUESTING FOR MONTHS
NOW.
WE HAVE NO EXPERT REPORTS, WE HAVE NO VALID WITNESS
STATEMENTS. WE HAVE THESE LITTLE NOTES SCRIBBLED THAT ARE
BASICALLY HIEROGLYPHICS. AND WE ARE ASKING THE COURT TO ORDER
THE DEFENSE TO COMPLY IN SPIRIT, AND NOT JUST IN FORM, WITH 1054
AND THE COURT'S DISCOVERY ORDERS, BECAUSE WE HAVE RECEIVED
NOTHING IN RESPONSE TO THE COURT'S ORDERS.
THE COURT: WE HAVE THAT SCHEDULED FOR A HEARING.
MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS GLOVES, SHOES, DNA?
MS. CLARK: OR SHOES, GLOVES, YOUR HONOR, YEAH.
THE COURT: CELLULAR PHONE AND THEN HAIR -- HAIR AND FIBER?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MS. CLARK: YES.
NOW, THE WITNESSES I TOLD YOU THERE WERE SOME THAT WE
HAVE TO SOLIDIFY, REGARD DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND WE ARE NOT SURE
WHICH, OR YOU KNOW, HOW MANY EXACTLY WE ARE GOING TO CALL, BUT
THE COURT KNOWS WHICH ONES THEY ARE POTENTIALLY, AND SO DOES THE
DEFENSE, AND WE HAVE TO FIRM UP EXACTLY WHICH ONES THOSE WOULD
BE, SO THAT -- IT WON'T TAKE VERY LONG.
THE COURT: JUST SCHEDULING WISE, WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE
PUTTING THOSE ON? BEFORE OR AFTER DNA, BEFORE OR AFTER THE CELL
PHONE RECORDS?
MS. CLARK: AROUND THE CELL PHONE RECORDS. BEFORE OR AFTER
THE CELL PHONE RECORDS, THAT IS THE FEELING, AND THERE ARE FOUR
OR FIVE OF THOSE WITNESSES, BUT THEY ARE BRIEF.
THE COURT: YEAH.
MS. CLARK: OKAY.
THE COURT: OKAY.
MR. COCHRAN: ONE LAST THING, YOUR HONOR, IS I PRESUME THAT
THAT -- WHAT MISS CLARK HAS JUST INDICATED WILL BE SOLIDIFIED BY
THE END OF THE DAY AND WE WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO GO WITH THAT
AND WE WILL RELY UPON THAT AND WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE
ALL THE DISCOVERY ALSO FOR THESE UPCOMING WITNESSES.
WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE ALL THE
DISCOVERY FOR BODZIAK AND CERTAINLY WITH REGARD TO ANY
INFORMATION ON THE TICKETS, ON THAT, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE
HAVE ALL THE DISCOVERY AND MAKE SURE THERE IS NO DELAY.
THE COURT: MISS CLARK.
MS. CLARK: THEY HAVE EVERYTHING WE HAVE. WE CAN'T GIVE
THEM WHAT WE DON'T HAVE. AS SOON AS WE HAVE INFORMATION, THEY
WILL HAVE IT WITHOUT ANY DELAY AT ALL BECAUSE EVERYONE IS
INTERESTED IN THE EXPEDITIOUS END TO THIS TRIAL, SO IT WILL BE
LITERALLY WITHIN THE TIME FRAME THAT WE LEARN THAT WE HAVE A
WITNESS WE ARE GOING TO BE CALLING, IT WILL BE MINUTES BEFORE WE
ARE ON THE PHONE TO COUNSEL, I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
AS SOON AS WE FINISH WITH THE CORONER'S TESTIMONY I
WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS AND LAUNCH INTO THE NEXT
WITNESS.
MS. CLARK: SOUNDS GOOD.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.
LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, DEPUTY MAGNERA.
I'M SORRY, MR. KELBERG.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, BEFORE COURT
BEGAN I PROVIDED THE COURT WITH THREE PHOTOGRAPHS. I HAVE
ADVISED MR. SHAPIRO AS WELL.
AND I ASK FOR A MOTION IN LIMINE TO BE HEARD AT THIS
TIME REGARDING THE USE OF THESE THREE PHOTOGRAPHS WITH DR.
LAKSHMANAN'S TESTIMONY.
THE CIRCUMSTANCES AROSE AS A RESULT OF DR.
LAKSHMANAN'S TESTIMONY YESTERDAY CONCERNING A DIFFERENCE OF
OPINION HE HOLDS REGARDING INCISE WOUNDS 1 AND 2 FROM PHOTOGRAPH
G-37 AND THE TIME AT WHICH THOSE WOUNDS WERE INFLICTED.
AS THE COURT WILL RECALL, IT IS DR. LAKSHMANAN'S
OPINION THAT THOSE WOUNDS REPRESENT CONTROL HOLDS THAT WERE
INFLICTED EARLY ON IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES BETWEEN THE ASSAILANT AND
MR. GOLDMAN.
DR. GOLDEN'S TESTIMONY, WHICH WAS READ TO DR.
LAKSHMANAN IN FRONT OF THE JURY, SUGGESTED IN DR. GOLDEN'S
OPINION THOSE WOUNDS APPEARED TO BE INFLICTED CLOSER TO THE TIME
OF DEATH DUE TO THE ABSENCE OF HEMORRHAGE.
IN THE COURSE OF DR. LAKSHMANAN'S TESTIMONY
EXPLAINING A BASIS FOR HIS OPINION THAT THOSE WOUNDS WERE IN FACT
EARLY ON AS CONTROL WOUNDS, HE REFERRED TO REVIEW OF CERTAIN
CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS.
THOSE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS HAVE NOT BEEN MARKED
NOR OFFERED AT ANY PHASE OF THE PROCEEDING, TO MY KNOWLEDGE,
CERTAINLY NOT BY ME. THEY WERE NOT PART OF OUR PHOTOGRAPHIC
MOTION THAT THE COURT REVIEWED CONCERNING AUTOPSY PHOTOGRAPHS,
AND I BELIEVE A TOTAL OF APPROXIMATELY FIVE CRIME SCENE
PHOTOGRAPHS.
THE THREE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT I PROVIDED TO THE COURT,
ONLY TWO OF WHICH WE WERE OFFERING, YOUR HONOR, ONE HAS A GLOVE
COVERING THE EYE AND UPPER FACE AREA OF MR. GOLDMAN. THAT IS ONE
OF THE TWO WE WOULD OFFER.
THE COURT: WHAT DO YOU NEED TO OFFER THIS FOR?
MR. KELBERG: IT IS FOR THE APPEARANCE OF THE TWO
SUPERFICIAL INCISE WOUNDS. THEY SHOW HEMORRHAGE IN THE CRIME
SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH IS THE BASIS FOR DR. LAKSHMANAN'S OPINION
THAT THESE ARE ANTEMORTEM EARLY IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE
ASSAILANT AND MR. GOLDMAN AS TO WHEN THEY WERE INFLICTED.
I WILL BE THE FIRST TO ACKNOWLEDGE TO THIS COURT THEY
ARE NASTY PHOTOGRAPHS TO LOOK AT, PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE BLOOD
THAT IS SURROUNDING THE FACE AND NECK OF MR. GOLDMAN, BUT IT IS
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, YOUR HONOR, EXTREMELY IMPORTANT WHERE
ESPECIALLY THERE IS A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION BETWEEN THE TWO
FORENSIC PATHOLOGISTS, ONE OF WHOM THE DEFENSE HAS INDICATED
YESTERDAY THEY INTEND TO CALL, THAT THIS JURY HAVE THE BEST
AVAILABLE EVIDENCE ON WHICH TO MAKE A DETERMINATION.
IS DR. GOLDEN CORRECT WHEN HE FORMED THE VIEW THAT
THEY WERE INFLICTED AT OR NEAR THE TIME OF DEATH OR IS DR.
LAKSHMANAN CORRECT IN HIS VIEW THAT THEY WERE INFLICTED EARLY ON
BEFORE DEATH AS ANTEMORTEM WOUNDS?
AND UNFORTUNATELY, YOUR HONOR, THERE IS JUST NO EASY
WAY FOR PEOPLE TO BE PRESENTED WITH THIS EVIDENCE, BUT THIS IS
VERY PROBATIVE. OF COURSE THE ASPECT OF WHETHER THEY ARE CONTROL
WOUNDS INFLICTED EARLY ON GOES TO THE ISSUE OF PREMEDITATION AND
DELIBERATION AND ALL OF THE OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WE POSED
BEFORE.
BUT AS I SAID, I WOULD BE THE FIRST TO ACKNOWLEDGE
THAT THEY ARE NOT PLEASANT PARAGRAPHS TO LOOK AT, EVEN IN THE
SCHEME OF A SERIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH THE COURT HAS CANDIDLY
ACKNOWLEDGED ARE UNPLEASANT TO LOOK AT.
I THINK TO SOME DEGREE THIS JURY IS AT LEAST STEELED
TO THIS TYPE OF PHOTOGRAPH, AND IT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION -- I AM
NOT ANTICIPATING, IF THE COURT ALLOWS ME TO USE THE TWO
PHOTOGRAPHS WE HAVE PROPOSED, TO HAVE THEM PRESENTED AT CLOSE
RANGE TO THE JURORS.
I WOULD RATHER HAVE DR. LAKSHMANAN REFER TO THEM,
PERHAPS EVEN WHILE SEATED AT THE WITNESS STAND, AS THE BASIS FOR
PART OF HIS OPINION THAT THOSE EARLY -- THAT THOSE TWO INCISE
WOUNDS WERE INFLICTED EARLY ON, AND THEN HAVE THEM AVAILABLE FOR
THE JURY'S CONSIDERATION.
I WILL NOT HAVE THEM PUT UP EVEN ON THE BOARD. I
WILL NOT HAVE THEM EVEN DISPLAYED TO THE JURY AT THIS PHASE, BUT
RATHER TO HAVE THEM AVAILABLE AS EVIDENCE AT THE END FOR THE
JURY'S CONSIDERATION.
BUT FOR DR. LAKSHMANAN TO SAY, GEE, I REVIEWED SOME
CRIME SCENE PHOTOS, THEY WERE INFORMATIVE TO ME BECAUSE THEY
SHOWED HEMORRHAGE AND SO FORTH, AND THAT IS THE BASIS OF MY
OPINION, THE JURY HAS NO BASIS ON WHICH TO JUDGE HIS
INTERPRETATION, BECAUSE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPHS IF
THE COURT FOUND THAT THE PREJUDICIAL IMPACT OUTWEIGHED --
SUBSTANTIALLY OUTWEIGHED THE PROBATIVE VALUE.
I BELIEVE THESE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY PROBATIVE ON THIS
IMPORTANT ISSUE WHERE THERE MAY BE A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE
OPINIONS AND WHERE THESE PHOTOGRAPHS HELP TO GIVE THE JURY A
LEGITIMATE BASIS ON WHICH TO DETERMINE WHO IS CORRECT IN THEIR
OPINION, DR. GOLDEN OR DR. LAKSHMANAN.
THE COURT: HAVE YOU SHOWN THESE TO MR. SHAPIRO?
MR. KELBERG: MR. SHAPIRO, I'M SURE, HAS SEEN THEM, NOT
TODAY, SO HE MAY NOT KNOW WHICH ONES THEY ARE AND I WILL BE GLAD
TO SHOW THEM TO HIM NOW AND DO WHATEVER THE COURT WISHES.
THE COURT: MR. SHAPIRO, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THESE THREE
PHOTOGRAPHS?
MR. SHAPIRO: YES, I AM, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SHAPIRO: YES.
MR. KELBERG: SO I WILL SUBMIT IT ON THAT MATTER, YOUR
HONOR, ON THAT BASIS.
THE COURT: DON'T YOU FEEL WE SHOULD AT LEAST CROP SOME OF
THESE?
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH CROPPING
TO BASICALLY JUST LEAVE THE NECK AREA THAT WILL SHOW IN CONTEXT
THE COMPLETE NECK AREA THAT IS SHOWN IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS. THAT IN
AND OF ITSELF WILL NARROW BUT NOT ELIMINATE THE UNPLEASANT NATURE
OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS.
BUT AGAIN, I HAVE TO GO BACK TO JUSTICE GARDNER'S
OBSERVATION, THESE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY DO NOT COME
>FROM AN INSULAR WORLD WHERE MATTERS OF THIS NATURE ARE COMPLETELY
FOREIGN, AND CERTAINLY AFTER SIX DAYS OF TESTIMONY INVOLVING, TO
SOME DEGREE, VERY DIFFICULT PHOTOGRAPHS TO LOOK AT, I BELIEVE
THEY HAVE, AT LEAST TO SOME DEGREE, AS I USE THE WORD "STEELED"
-- BECOME MORE COMFORTABLE AS NOT AN ACCURATE WAY OF DESCRIBING
IT -- BUT STEELED AS TO WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO LOOK AT.
AND I BELIEVE THEY DO UNDERSTAND THAT THESE ARE BEING
PRESENTED TO THEM FOR THEIR INFORMATIONAL VALUE, AND IF THE COURT
WOULD LIKE THEM CROPPED, I HAVE NO PROBLEM CROPPING THEM TO
EXPOSE BASICALLY THE NECK AREA AND ELIMINATE EVERYTHING ELSE,
BECAUSE I ANTICIPATE A FOUNDATION WILL BE LAID BY ANOTHER WITNESS
TO SHOW THAT THEY FAIRLY AND ACCURATELY SHOW THE CONDITION OF MR.
GOLDMAN'S NECK AT THE TIME THE BODIES WERE EXAMINED AT THE SCENE
ON BUNDY ON JUNE 13, 1994.
THE COURT: I SUGGEST THAT WE MARK THESE FIRST FOR
IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES, IF NOTHING ELSE, AT THIS POINT.
MR. KELBERG: CERTAINLY, YOUR HONOR. THESE GO WITH WHAT I
BELIEVE IS OUR BOARD 358, SO MAY I SUGGEST THEY BE MARKED
RESPECTIVELY 358-A AND B.
IF I COULD HAVE THE THIRD PHOTOGRAPH
BACK -- I'M REALLY NOT OFFERING IT. IT WAS JUST USED TO GIVE
THE COURT A CONTEXT TO COMPARE TWO ALTERNATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS.
DO YOU WANT ME TO TAKE THE TWO --
THE COURT: I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE YOU MARKED -- THAT YOU
WANT MARKED AS WHICH?
MR. KELBERG: DO YOU WANT ME TO DO IT UP HERE FOR THE
COURT.
THE COURT: PLEASE.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, ON THE BACK OF THE FIRST
PHOTOGRAPH I'M WRITING "358-A" AND ON THE SECOND PHOTOGRAPH I'M
WRITING AT THE BOTTOM "358-B."
AND IF I MAY, YOUR HONOR, I WOULD TAKE BACK THEN THE
THIRD PHOTOGRAPH WHICH I DO NOT INTEND TO OFFER.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.
(PEO'S 358-A & 358-B FOR ID = CORONER'S PHOTOS)
THE COURT: MR. SHAPIRO.
MR. SHAPIRO: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL.
MR. SHAPIRO: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD STRENUOUSLY OBJECT TO THESE
PHOTOGRAPHS, AS WE HAVE STRENUOUSLY OBJECTED TO ALL THE
PHOTOGRAPHS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROSECUTION HAS PRESENTED A
SCENARIO TO ALLOW THESE PHOTOGRAPHS IN AND THEN WITHDRAWN FROM
THAT SCENARIO ONCE THE COURT ADMITTED THE PHOTOGRAPHS.
THE PROSECUTION TOLD YOU, DURING THE ARGUMENTS, THAT
THESE PHOTOGRAPHS WOULD BE NECESSARY BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE A
CONFLICT IN THE TESTIMONY BETWEEN DR. LAKSHMANAN AND DR. GOLDEN
AND THEY WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR DR. LAKSHMANAN TO POINT OUT THE
ERRORS THAT DR. GOLDEN MADE.
NOW, AFTER ALL THE PHOTOGRAPHS HAVE BEEN ENTERED,
THEY HAVE WITHDRAWN DR. GOLDEN AS A WITNESS AND ARE RELYING ONLY
ON DR. LAKSHMANAN WHO DID NOT IN ANY WAY PARTICIPATE IN THESE
AUTOPSIES.
THERE ARE -- WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IS THEY HAVE CREATED
THEIR OWN ISSUE THAT ALLOWED THESE HORRENDOUS PHOTOGRAPHS TO BE
DISPLAYED BEFORE THE JURY, AND THEN SAID THAT IS NO LONGER AN
ISSUE BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE OFFERING TESTIMONY FROM
DR. GOLDEN.
WHAT THEY HAVE DONE, YOUR HONOR, IS DELIBERATELY
PRESENTED TO THIS JURY THE MOST HORRENDOUS AND HORRIFYING
PHOTOGRAPHS THAT ONE COULD IMAGINE WITH ONLY A DESIRE TO INFLAME
THE PASSIONS AND PREJUDICES OF THE JURY AND ANYONE WHO WOULD LOOK
AT THESE PHOTOGRAPHS.
AND CLEARLY THE COURT SAW THAT WAS THE CASE WHEN YOU
HAD TO DECLARE A RECESS LAST WEEK WHEN SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THIS
JURY COULD NOT LOOK AT THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS ANY LONGER AND REPORTED
ILLNESS UPON LOOKING AT THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS.
THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS NOW HAVE NO VALUE WHATSOEVER.
DR. LAKSHMANAN'S OPINION OF WHAT TOOK PLACE NEED NOT
BE BASED ON REPEATED GORY PHOTOGRAPHS. INITIALLY THE ONLY REASON
THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE ALLOWED WAS HE WAS GOING TO SAY, WELL,
DR. GOLDEN LOOKED AT THIS INJURY AND HE IS GOING TO TESTIFY AS TO
WHAT THAT INJURY IS AND MY OPINION IS DIFFERENT THAN HIS, AND HE
IS WRONG AND
WE ARE GOING TO SACRIFICE DR. GOLDEN AND HIS PROFESSIONAL
REPUTATION BECAUSE HIS THEORY DOESN'T FIT THE PROSECUTION'S
THEORY OF THIS.
AND NOW YOU ARE IN A POSITION WHERE YOU HAVE ADMITTED
THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, THEY WANT MORE TO BE ADMITTED WITH NO PURPOSE
WHATSOEVER SINCE DR. GOLDEN WON'T BE A WITNESS.
WE WOULD STRENUOUSLY OBJECT AND WE BELIEVE THAT THERE
SHOULD BE SANCTIONS AGAINST THE PEOPLE FOR PRESENTING A THEORY TO
YOUR HONOR FOR ENTERING THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND THEN AFTER THEY WERE
ENTERED WITHDRAWING FROM THAT THEORY.
THE COURT: MR. KELBERG.
MR. KELBERG: MAY I BRIEFLY RESPOND, YOUR HONOR?
I'M ALWAYS IMPRESSED WITH MR. SHAPIRO'S HYPERBOLE. I
FIND THAT THE MORE HYPERBOLE COUNSEL USES THE MORE PROBATIVE AND
THE MORE RELEVANT AND THE MORE SUCCESS THIS EVIDENCE IS HAVING IN
ESTABLISHING FOR THIS JURY A TRUE UNDERSTANDING OF THE
CIRCUMSTANCES.
THE RECORD WILL CLEARLY REFLECT, AND I KNOW THE COURT
REMEMBERS IT QUITE ACCURATELY, THAT IN OFFERING THESE PHOTOGRAPHS
WE HAVE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IT IS NOT A QUESTION OF WHETHER DR.
GOLDEN TESTIFIES OR NOT, IT IS AN ISSUE THAT DR. GOLDEN MADE A
LOT OF MISTAKES AND THESE PHOTOGRAPHS WILL HELP THIS JURY, AS
THEY HAVE I'M SURE HELPED DR. WOLF AND DR. BADEN WHO HAVE TO GO
THROUGH THE VERY SAME PROCESS DR. LAKSHMANAN HAS GONE THROUGH,
AND I HOPE THEY HAVE SPENT THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME THAT DR.
LAKSHMANAN HAS, BECAUSE IF THEY ARE CALLED TO TESTIFY, THEY WILL
BE QUESTIONED BY ME QUITE EXTENSIVELY, THAT THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE
THE BEST RECORD TO SHOW WHAT IN FACT HAPPENED AND WITH A
QUALIFIED FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST LIKE DR. LAKSHMANAN TO GIVE THE
JURY AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE FINDINGS SEEN IN
THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND THE AUTOPSY MATERIALS AND ALSO TO UNDERSTAND
WHAT, IF ANY, SIGNIFICANCE FLOWS FROM DR. GOLDEN'S MISTAKES,
BECAUSE DR. GOLDEN'S MISTAKES ARE MISTAKES WHETHER DR. GOLDEN
TESTIFIES OR NOT.
AND I DO FIND IT SOMEWHAT DISINGENUOUS FOR THE
DEFENSE TO BE CLAIMING THAT THESE PHOTOGRAPHS ARE IRRELEVANT
BECAUSE OF A CLAIMED, QUOTE, CONFLICT IN TESTIMONY WHICH IS NOT
BEING PRESENTED WHEN OF COURSE THAT IS NOT WHAT WE TOLD THE
COURT, AND THEN COUNSEL STAND UP YESTERDAY AND SAYS, IN ESSENCE,
DR. GOLDEN IS GOING TO BE ONE OF OUR FIRST WITNESSES.
WELL, LET'S GIVE THE JURY THE TRUTH AND LET'S CUT THE
HYPERBOLE DOWN TO A MINIMUM, IF WE POSSIBLY CAN, AND LET'S TALK
ABOUT WHAT DR. LAKSHMANAN SAID YESTERDAY.
MR. SHAPIRO DIDN'T MENTION ONE WHIT OF WHAT THE
TESTIMONY FROM DR. LAKSHMANAN WAS YESTERDAY. MR. SHAPIRO NEVER
OBJECTED WHEN THE TESTIMONY GIVEN BY DR. GOLDEN, I BELIEVE AT THE
GRAND JURY CONCERNING HIS INTERPRETATION OF THOSE TWO SUPERFICIAL
INCISE WOUNDS, WAS PROVIDED TO THE JURY AND FOR DR. LAKSHMANAN TO
COMMENT ON AS ANOTHER MISTAKE IN HIS OPINION, DR. LAKSHMANAN'S,
DR. GOLDEN'S OPINION ON THOSE WOUNDS, THAT IS A MISTAKE.
THE COURT: SO WHAT DOES IT TELL US --
MR. KELBERG: IT TELLS US --
THE COURT: -- TO SEE THE HEMORRHAGE IN THOSE TWO INCISE
WOUNDS? WHAT DOES THAT TELL US?
MR. KELBERG: IT TELLS US, AS I HAVE TALKED WITH DR.
LAKSHMANAN, THAT BY SEEING THAT HEMORRHAGE, THOSE SUPERFICIAL
INCISE WOUNDS BEARING THE SAME GENERAL APPEARANCE FROM THE
STANDPOINT OF HEMORRHAGE AS THE MAJOR STAB WOUNDS WHICH IS TO THE
LEFT SIDE OF THE NECK WHICH IS A FATAL WOUND TO THE JUGULAR VEIN,
WERE INFLICTED ANTEMORTEM, BEFORE DEATH, AND WOULD BE CONSISTENT
WITH DR. LAKSHMANAN'S OPINION THAT THEY ARE IN FACT CONTROL
WOUNDS WHEN THE PERPETRATOR WAS THREATENING OR TAUNTING, PARDON
ME, MR. GOLDMAN, FOLLOWING WHICH IT IS CLEARLY THAT MR. GOLDMAN,
REALIZING THE VERY DANGEROUS AND LIFE THREATENING SITUATION HE
WAS IN, ATTEMPTED TO SAVE HIS LIFE AND FOR WHICH THERE HAS BEEN
MUCH TESTIMONY AND THERE WILL BE MUCH MORE TESTIMONY CONCERNING
HIS INJURIES THAT ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN HIS DEATH.
BUT MR. SHAPIRO NEVER MENTIONS ANY OF THAT ASPECT IN
RESPONDING TO OUR COMMENTS.
HE DOESN'T MENTION THE SUBSTANTIVE VALUE OF SEEING
THOSE WOUNDS WITH THEIR HEMORRHAGE BEFORE THE BODIES ARE WASHED
AT THE FORENSIC SCIENCE CENTER. AND THE WASHING, AS THE COURT
WILL RECALL, IS FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF GETTING RID OF THE
BLOODY APPEARANCE, SO THAT THE WOUND CAN BE CAREFULLY EXAMINED BY
THE FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST.
THE COURT: HOW DO I KNOW THAT THE BLOOD THAT IS APPARENT
HERE IS BLOOD FROM THE WOUND ITSELF OR BLOOD FROM THE JUGULAR
VEIN, GIVEN THE PROXIMITY?
MR. KELBERG: I BELIEVE, AND I CAN ONLY MAKE AN OFFER OF
PROOF -- AND PERHAPS THE COURT MIGHT WANT TO HAVE DR. LAKSHMANAN
BRIEFLY GET ON THE WITNESS STAND AND I CAN DO A VERY QUICK 402
EXAMINATION REGARDING WHAT HE OBSERVES IN THOSE PHOTOS REGARDING
THOSE TWO WOUNDS AND THE SIGNIFICANCE, IF ANY, TO HIM, OR I CAN
MAKE AN OFFER OF PROOF, WHICHEVER THE COURT PREFERS.
THE COURT: LET'S ASSUME THAT THERE IS A DISPUTE WHETHER OR
NOT -- AS TO THE AGE OF THOSE WOUNDS.
WHAT IS THE REAL PROBATIVE VALUE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER?
MR. KELBERG: IF IN FACT THOSE ARE ANTEMORTEM WOUNDS AND
SUPPORT DR. LAKSHMANAN'S OPINION THAT THEY ARE CONTROL WOUNDS
WHICH WOULD BE IN CONFORMITY WITH, AS THE COURT WILL RECALL, THE
DEMONSTRATION WHERE MR. GOLDMAN IS BEING RESTRAINED FROM BEHIND
BY THE PERPETRATOR WHO IS TAUNTING HIM WITH THE KNIFE IN FRONT OF
HIS NECK AND DRAWING THE KNIFE ACROSS TO CREATE THOSE SUPERFICIAL
INCISE WOUNDS, THAT IS A REFLECTION OF PREMEDITATION AND
DELIBERATION, THAT CONTROL AND THOSE THREATENING TYPE WOUNDS,
RATHER THAN AT THE END, WHICH I MUST SUGGEST MAKES NO SENSE
LOGICALLY.
IF ALL HELL BREAKS LOOSE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM,
IN A STRUGGLE BETWEEN MR. GOLDMAN AND THE PERPETRATOR, IT MAKES
NO SENSE LOGICALLY THAT THE PERPETRATOR, WHO IS ENGAGED IN
INFLICTING ALL THE DEFENSIVE WOUNDS AND IN INFLICTING FATAL STAB
WOUNDS TO THE ABDOMEN AND THE CHEST AND LEFT SIDE OF THE NECK IS
THEN GOING TO AT SOME POINT WHILE MR. GOLDMAN IS DISABLED FROM
MOVING, BECAUSE YOU NEED THAT, CAREFULLY DRAW PARALLEL
SUPERFICIAL INCISE WOUNDS ALONG THE NECK.
I MEAN, LOGICALLY I WOULD SUGGEST TO THE JURY, IF I
WERE ARGUING THIS CASE, THAT THAT WOULD MAKE NO SENSE WHATSOEVER
AND WOULD BE ANOTHER REASON WHY DR. GOLDEN'S OPINION WOULD NOT
MAKE SENSE, WOULD NOT STAND THE SCRUTINY OF SCIENTIFIC
INVESTIGATION.
BUT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF MEDICAL EVIDENCE, BESIDES
LOGIC --
THE COURT: MR. KELBERG, ISN'T THE REAL ISSUE HERE WHAT WAS
THE CAUSE OF DEATH AND IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ONE PERSON TO HAVE
COMMITTED BOTH OF THESE KILLINGS? ISN'T THAT THE BOTTOM LINE
HERE?
MR. KELBERG: THAT IS PART.
THE COURT: WHAT DOES THAT TELL ME ABOUT THAT?
MR. KELBERG: IT IS PART OF THE BOTTOM LINE.
ONE PERSON COMMITTING, YES, THE FACT THAT THESE ARE
CONTROL SUPERFICIAL INCISE WOUNDS AT THE BEGINNING WITH A
TAUNTING AND SO FORTH, I THINK DOES REFLECT THAT IT IS A SINGLE
KILLER WHO HAS KNOCKED NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON INTO A DAZED OR
POTENTIALLY EVEN UNCONSCIOUS STATE FROM A CONCUSSION, AS THE
COURT WILL RECALL, TO THE CONTUSION TO THE HEAD AND NOW IS
DEALING WITH MR. GOLDMAN AND DEALING WITH MR. GOLDMAN WITH A
THREATENING, TAUNTING CONTROL TYPE SERIES, TWO SUPERFICIAL INCISE
WOUNDS AND GOING TO THE ISSUE OF PREMEDITATION AND DELIBERATION.
BUT THOSE ARE NOT THE ONLY ISSUES IN THIS CASE. IT
IS NOT JUST CAUSE AND WHETHER ONE PERPETRATOR DID THESE THINGS,
BECAUSE PREMEDITATION AND DELIBERATION IS BUILT ALONG A PROCESS
THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE INVOLVED,
BUT ACTUALLY TO THE MANNER OF THE KILLING ITSELF.
AND CAUSE OF DEATH, AS THE COURT KNOWS, IS A NARROW
AREA DEALING WITH THE MANNER WHICH A MURDER TAKES PLACE AND THIS
IS A MATTER THAT DEALS MORE WITH THE MANNER THAN WITH THE CAUSE.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DISPUTES THE CAUSE, I MEAN,
HAVING KNOWS THESE TWO PEOPLE BLED TO DEATH FROM SHARP FORCE
INJURIES, BUT IF THAT WERE THE ONLY ISSUE, I WOULDN'T BE HERE AND
I WOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN UP SIX DAYS OR SEVEN DAYS OF THIS COURT'S
TIME, THE JURY'S TIME, DEFENSE COUNSEL'S TIME.
WE ARE HERE BECAUSE THERE IS A LOT MORE TO THIS THAN
CAUSE OF DEATH AND THIS CONCEPT OF ONE PERPETRATOR.
THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
MR. SHAPIRO: YOUR HONOR, THIS APPEARS TO BE AN
UNPRECEDENTED MARATHON TO PRESENT EVIDENCE THAT IS READILY
SUSCEPTIBLE OF READING FROM A CRYSTAL BALL, AND WE HAVE SPENT
SEVEN DAYS, THE PEOPLE WANT TO SPEND TWO MORE DAYS, TO CRITICIZE
WHAT THEY SAY IS A SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH.
AND THAT IS, THERE IS NOT ONE MEDICAL EXAMINER OR
FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST IN THE WORLD WHO WOULD TELL YOU THAT YOU ARE
BETTER OFF LOOKING AT PHOTOGRAPHS TO COME TO AN OPINION THAN YOU
ARE AT DOING AN ACTUAL AUTOPSY AND LOOKING FOR EVIDENCE.
THE PEOPLE LOVE TO CONTINUE TO TALK AND PRESS AND GO
INTO MINUTIA AND DETAIL THAT MOST PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING AT THIS
CASE ARE MYSTIFIED BY, AND I THINK IT IS TIME FOR YOUR HONOR TO
STEP IN AND SAY THE JURY HAS ENOUGH EVIDENCE ON THE REAL ISSUES
AT HAND, LIMIT THE ISSUES, LIMIT THE TESTIMONY, AND LET'S, IF THE
REAL INTENT IS TO MOVE THIS CASE ON AND TO GET AT THE TRUTH, GET
AT THE TRUTH, AND THAT WOULD BE BY CALLING THE PERSON WHO DID THE
AUTOPSY, NOT BY SOMEBODY WHO IS TRYING TO NOW LOOK TO THE PAST IN
SOME MYSTIFYING WAY AND RECONSTRUCT IN THEIR MIND WHAT MIGHT HAVE
HAPPENED.
IT IS PURE GUESSWORK AT ITS BEST.
THANK YOU.
MR. KELBERG: JUST BRIEFLY IF I MIGHT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: NO. I THINK I'VE HEARD ENOUGH.
ALL RIGHT.
THE COURT WILL SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION TO 358-A. I
WILL OVERRULE THE OBJECTION TO 358-B.
I WILL DIRECT THAT IT BE CROPPED TO DEPICT ONLY THE
AREA BETWEEN THE GLOVED HANDS.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
YOUR HONOR, IF I COULD GET SCISSORS -- IN FACT,
ACTUALLY I THINK WE HAVE SCISSORS.
CAN I GIVE THE COURT SCISSORS AND THE COURT CROP IT
IN THE MANNER --
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. KELBERG: AND YOUR HONOR, MAY I ASK THAT THE TWO
DISMEMBERED PORTIONS OF THE PHOTOGRAPH BE KEPT, HOWEVER, AS PART
OF THE EXHIBIT IN THE EVENT OF THE CONVICTION AND REVIEW ON
APPEAL, SO THAT THE COURT WILL UNDERSTAND -- COURT OF APPEAL,
THAT IS -- THE DISCRETION EXERCISED BY THIS COURT IN EXCISING
THOSE TWO PORTIONS?
THE COURT: I HAVE STAPLED THEM TOGETHER.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
MAY I APPROACH TO OBTAIN THAT ONE PHOTOGRAPH?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. KELBERG: AND YOUR HONOR, THIS ONE IS NOT MARKED
BECAUSE THE PORTION THAT THE COURT EXCISED HAD THE WRITING.
MAY I MARK THIS AS 358-B?
THE COURT: YES, YOU MAY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, WHILE THE JURY IS COMING OUT, MAY
WE APPROACH WITHOUT THE REPORTER?
THE COURT: YES. MR. COCHRAN.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE
BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL
THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DR. LAKSHMANAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESUME THE WITNESS
STAND.
LAKSHMANAN SATHYAVAGISWARAN,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT,
RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING, DOCTOR.
THE WITNESS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED, SIR, THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER
OATH.
AND MR. KELBERG, YOU MAY CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT
EXAMINATION.
MR. KELBERG: I TAKE IT NOT VERY SUBTLE HINT.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. KELBERG: BUT I ASSUME I HAVE AT LEAST PERHAPS ALL
DAY?
THE COURT: REASONABLE TIME.
MR. KELBERG: GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. KELBERG:
Q GOOD MORNING, DOCTOR.
DOCTOR, I JUST WANT TO COVER A COUPLE OF AREAS THAT
WE TOUCHED UPON YESTERDAY, THE FIRST AREA DEALING WITH A
DIFFERENCE OF OPINION YOU HOLD FROM THAT OF DR. GOLDEN CONCERNING
THE TIME WHEN THOSE TWO SUPERFICIAL INCISE WOUNDS, INJURIES
NUMBERS 1 AND 2 OF PHOTOGRAPHS G-37, WERE RECEIVED BY MR.
GOLDMAN.
DO YOU RECALL THAT TESTIMONY YESTERDAY?
A YES.
Q AND YOU TESTIFIED, AS I RECALL, THAT YOU HAD REVIEWED
CERTAIN CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH CAUSED YOU TO BELIEVE THAT
THOSE SUPERFICIAL INCISE WOUNDS WERE RECEIVED EARLY ON AND WERE
PART OF CONTROL WOUNDS INFLICTED BY A TAUNTING OR THREATENING
PERPETRATOR ON MR. GOLDMAN; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND THAT DR. GOLDEN, IN HIS TESTIMONY IN FRONT OF THE
GRAND JURY, HAD INDICATED HIS OPINION THAT THOSE WOUNDS APPEARED
TO BE INFLICTED CLOSER TO THE TIME OF DEATH DUE TO THE ABSENCE
OF HEMORRHAGE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, BUT I SUPPORTED MY OPINION WITH THE STATEMENTS
HE MADE IN HIS AUTOPSY REPORT, WHICH INDICATES THAT THERE IS
HEMORRHAGE IN THE SOFT TISSUES UNDERLYING THESE WOUNDS, WHICH
WOULD INDICATE THAT THERE WAS BLOOD PRESSURE PRESENT WHEN THESE
WOUND WERE INFLICTED.
AND THAT IS WHY I OPINED THAT THEY WERE ANTEMORTEM
WOUNDS AND I ALSO GAVE AN OPINION THAT THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH
BEING CONTROL WOUNDS WHICH WOULD HAVE HAPPENED DURING THE EARLIER
PART OF THE STRUGGLE, WHICH IS WHAT I FEEL HAPPENED.
Q BUT -- AND DOCTOR, FROM WHAT YOU JUST SAID, DID YOU
FEEL THAT THERE WAS AN INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE MATERIAL THAT
HAD BEEN INCLUDED BY DR. GOLDEN IN HIS PROTOCOL REGARDING THIS
HEMORRHAGE THAT HE OBSERVED AND INCLUDED IN HIS DESCRIPTION AND
YET HIS OPINION BEING THAT THESE WERE WOUNDS THAT WERE INFLICTED
AT OR ABOUT THE TIME OF DEATH RATHER THAN BEFORE DEATH?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, PERHAPS IN FRONT
OF THE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY, MAY I ASK THAT THIS
PHOTOGRAPH THAT IS A SMALL RECTANGULAR-SHAPED PHOTOGRAPH BE
MARKED AS 358-B, AS IN BOY.
THE COURT: SO MARKED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, LET ME SHOW YOU PHOTOGRAPH
358-B.
DID YOU REVIEW, AMONG CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS, THIS
PHOTOGRAPH IN AN UNCROPPED FASHION?
A YES.
Q IN OTHER WORDS, YOU SAW THE FULL PHOTOGRAPH AND THIS
HAS BEEN CROPPED, AS I UNDERSTAND, PURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF JUDGE
ITO?
A YES.
Q IS THERE SOMETHING OF SIGNIFICANCE SHOWN IN THAT
PHOTOGRAPH ON THE ISSUE OF WHEN THOSE TWO SUPERFICIAL INCISE
WOUNDS WERE RECEIVED IN RELATION TO WHEN MR. GOLDMAN DIED?
A YES, THE APPEARANCE OF THE WOUNDS ITSELF, THE
COLORATION, TAKEN IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DESCRIPTIVE REPORT
WHICH WE HAVE IN THE AUTOPSY, SUPPORTS THE OPINION THAT THESE ARE
ANTEMORTEM WOUNDS BECAUSE THERE IS -- YOU CAN SEE THE HEMORRHAGE
IN THE TISSUES, IN THE MARGINS AND ALSO UNDERLYING THE -- THE
SUPERFICIAL AREAS OF THE CUT.
YOU SEE THERE ARE AREAS OF THE CUT WHICH ARE DEEPER
THAN THE AREAS OF THE CUT WHICH ARE NOT SO DEEP, AND IN THE NOT
SO DEEP AREAS YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THE DISCOLORATION WHICH YOU GET
WITH HEMORRHAGE UNDERLYING THE TISSUE WHICH HAS BEEN CONFIRMED IN
THE AUTOPSY REPORT OF DR. GOLDEN WHEN HE DID THE AUTOPSY.
SO THIS PHOTOGRAPH ESPECIALLY YOU CAN SEE VERY
CLEARLY IN THE UPPER WOUND AND ALSO IN PORTIONS OF THE LOWER
WOUND ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, AND I HAVE NO DOUBT
THAT THESE ARE ANTEMORTEM WOUNDS BASED ON THE DESCRIPTION OF THE
AUTOPSY REPORT AND THE APPEARANCE OF THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, THE WAY
THEY ARE PRESENTED TO ME.
Q ANOTHER MATTER, DOCTOR, JUST TO FINISH UP BEFORE WE
GO BACK TO THE HAND AREA, LET ME PUT UP BOARD 4G FROM OUR
COLLECTION FROM 357, I BELIEVE, AND INVITE YOUR ATTENTION -- WITH
THE COURT'S PERMISSION COULD THE DOCTOR STEP DOWN AGAIN, PLEASE?
THE COURT: YES.
MR. KELBERG: IF I COULD FIND THE MARKERS.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: I WANT TO INVITE YOUR ATTENTION,
DOCTOR, THERE IS AN AREA I NOTICED THAT HAS NOT BEEN CIRCLED OR
ADDRESSED IN SOME FASHION BY US.
DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THIS AREA OF THIS
-- THIS IS ROMAN NUMERAL II FORM OF NO. 22?
A YES. THIS REFERS TO THE CUT OF THE EAR AND THE
LENGTH OF THE WOUND AS SIX INCHES AND THIS IS THE SHARP FORCE
INJURY AND IT SAYS, "IF EAR INVOLVED."
THIS REFERS TO THIS WOUND ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE
NECK WHICH IN DR. GOLDEN'S ORIGINAL AUTOPSY REPORT INDICATED
THAT IF THIS LEFT NECK WOUND EXITED BEHIND THE LEFT EAR AND ALSO
CUT THE LEFT EAR, THE TOTAL LENGTH OF THAT WOUND WOULD BE SIX
INCHES. THAT IS WHAT THIS REFERS TO.
Q DOCTOR, IN ESSENCE, IS THIS REFERRING TO WHAT YOU
DESCRIBED AS INJURY NO. 1 OF G-51, THIS FATAL SHARP FORCE INJURY
STAB WOUND, INJURY NO. 2 OF G-51, THE SOMEWHAT LINEAR IN
APPEARANCE WOUND BEHIND THE EAR RUNNING DOWN THE NECK, AND INJURY
NO. 4 OF G-51, A NICK TO THE AREA YOU CALLED THE PINNA,
P-I-N-N-A, OF THE EAR?
A YES.
Q SO THE OVERALL REASONING, ACCORDING TO DR. GOLDEN,
YOU ASSUMED THAT WAS ALL ONE INJURY WITH THE NECK GOING -- I'M
SORRY, THE KNIFE GOING IN THE INJURY NO. 1 AREA AND COMING OUT
THE AREA OF INJURY NO. 2 AND THEN NICKING THE EAR IN THE PROCESS,
WOULD BE SIX INCHES?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, ON THIS FORM LET
ME CIRCLE THIS AREA OF INFORMATION AND I WILL WRITE "G-51 INJ.
NUMBERS 1, 2 AND 4."
DOCTOR, I WOULD LIKE TO GET BACK TO A DISCUSSION OF
THE HAND INJURIES AND SEE IF YOU CAN IDENTIFY IN THE PROTOCOL ANY
OF THEM THAT ARE DESCRIBED AND TO DEAL WITH THE DIAGRAMS AND THE
ADDENDUM.
AND FOR THE RECORD, WITH MR. FAIRTLOUGH'S ASSISTANCE,
WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO APPEND A FLAP, I'M NOT SURE IT IS -- WE MAY
HAVE TO HAVE IT HELD -- WE HAVE APPENDED A FLAP WHICH INCLUDES
THEN THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT WAS DESCRIBED AS G-34.
AND LET ME WRITE "G-34," INCIDENTALLY, ON THE BOARD
UNDERNEATH THE PHOTOGRAPH.
AND ALSO WE HAVE APPENDED, WITH APPARENTLY SOME KIND
OF PHOTO MOUNT, THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT WAS G-25 WHICH I DON'T KNOW
THAT I HAVE A MARKER -- I THINK WE COULD TAKE CARE OF IT AT A
LATER TIME SO THAT WILL BE IDENTIFIED -- BUT FOR THE RECORD WE
WILL DO THAT.
THE COURT: I THINK THERE IS ALSO AN EVIDENCE TAG BELOW IT
THERE.
MR. KELBERG: THERE IS, BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT DOESN'T SAY
THAT IT IS G-35.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED.
MR. KELBERG: IT REFERS TO THAT COURSE OF TESTIMONY.
ALSO WITH MR. LYNCH'S HELP, IF WE COULD SET UP THE
TWO EASELS.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. KELBERG: AND YOUR HONOR, WE ARE GOING TO BE DEALING
WITH 0G, 10G AND A DIAGRAM -- MR. LYNCH, I'M GOING TO ASK THAT
THE ADDENDUM JUST BE KEPT DOWN HERE, IF WE COULD, PLEASE, AND I
WILL ASK YOU TO PUT UP -- THIS IS OUR BOARD 5G THAT APPEARS TO
HAVE A SERIES OF FORMS OUTLINING THE HAND, AGAIN ALL FROM EXHIBIT
357, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, AGAIN, WITH THE COURT'S
PERMISSION, CAN YOU STEP DOWN, AND YESTERDAY WE DID NOT GET INTO
THE SPECIFICS OF WHERE EACH OF THESE INJURIES ARE, IF THEY ARE
DESCRIBED, ET CETERA, SO I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT NOW.
LET'S START IF WE COULD GOING PHOTOGRAPH BY
PHOTOGRAPH, DOCTOR.
I BELIEVE YOU STARTED YESTERDAY WITH PHOTOGRAPH G-35?
A OKAY.
Q IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q LET'S TAKE THOSE INJURIES AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS
OF THE PROTOCOL, THE DIAGRAM, THE ADDENDUM.
A YES. G-35 SHOWS A 5/8 INCH CUT IN THE WEB BETWEEN
THE INDEX AND MIDDLE FINGER OF THE RIGHT HAND ON THE PALMAR
ASPECT.
Q IS THAT DESIGNATED ARBITRARILY BY YOU AS INJURY NO.
1?
A YES.
Q AND THAT IS DESCRIBED BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANY REASON HE SHOULD HAVE?
A TO NEED TO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, INJURY NO. 2 IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A THAT IS PRESENT IN THE PALMAR ASPECT OF THE HAND, OF
THE RIGHT HAND, NEAR THE BASE OF THE THUMB, AND IT MEASURES -- A
Y-SHAPED WOUND, AND IT IS ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL. IT IS
ADDRESSED IN THE DIAGRAM.
IT WAS ACCURATELY DEFINED IN THE REPORTS AND THERE
WAS NO ADDENDUM REPORT PREPARED.
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
AS I RECALL, YOU SAID THOSE WERE THE ONLY TWO
INJURIES YOU OBSERVED IN PHOTOGRAPH G-35?
A YES.
Q AND IS IT ACCURATE TO SAY THAT THE INJURY THAT IS
SEEN IN PHOTOGRAPH G-34 IS INJURY NO. 1 THAT YOU HAVE DISCUSSED
IN G-35?
A THAT IS CORRECT. THERE WERE -- THE ONLY REASON THE
WOUND LOOKS A LITTLE MORE GAPING AND BIGGER IS BECAUSE THE INDEX
FINGER AND THE MIDDLE FINGER HAVE BEEN PRIED OPEN SO THAT THE
WOUND CAN BE BETTER VISUALIZED.
Q DOCTOR, WHERE IN THE PROTOCOL ARE INJURIES 1 AND 2
DESCRIBED?
A PAGE 11, NO. 1 AND 2. NO. 1 AND 2.
Q UNDER "SHARP FORCE INJURIES OF HANDS"?
A YES.
Q WHICH IS INJURY NO. 1?
A THIS IS -- ON PAGE 11, NO. 1, IS THE INJURY NO. 1 AND
PAGE 11, NO. 2, IS INJURY NO. 2.
MR. KELBERG: AND YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO OUTLINE IN BLUE
EACH OF THESE, WRITE AT THE SIDE "G-35 INJ." -- I'M SORRY, IS IT
35?
A YES.
Q "INJ. NO. 1" AND ANOTHER ONE I WILL OUTLINE IN BLUE
AND THAT IS GOING TO BE "G-35 INJ. NO. 2," AND I WILL ALSO, FOR
THE G-35 NO. 1, WRITE SEMICOLON "G AND G-34" AND A LINE
UNDERNEATH THAT TO SEPARATE.
Q IS THAT ACCURATE, SIR?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, ARE THOSE DESCRIPTIONS IN YOUR OPINION THAT
ARE PROVIDED BY DR. GOLDEN ACCURATE ON THOSE TWO INJURIES?
A YES.
Q WHERE ARE THEY DIAGRAMMED, IF AT ALL?
A THE DIAGRAM IS 23-III.
MR. KELBERG: SO IF WE ASK MR. LYNCH TO GET US TO THAT --
THE WITNESS: THE RIGHT LOWER QUADRANT YOU CAN SEE BOTH THE
INJURIES, INCISE WOUND, LENGTH, 3/4 INCH, LENGTH HALF-INCH DEEP,
SUBCU. THIS WOUND IS A Y-SHAPED WOUND, DEPTH IS 1/4 INCH AND
HALF-INCH DIMENSIONS.
Q DOCTOR, YOU HAVE TO KEEP YOUR VOICE UP IF YOU WOULD,
PLEASE.
INJURY NO. 1 -- FIRST OF ALL, JUST CIRCLE THE AREA,
IF YOU WOULD, THAT IS COVERED BY THAT?
A (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR, I WILL CIRCLE
THAT SAME AREA IN BLUE ON THAT AREA OF THE LOWER RIGHT QUADRANT.
I WILL WRITE "G-35 INJ., NO. 1, AND G-34."
Q AND DOCTOR, IS THAT HANDWRITTEN ENTRY THAT YOU JUST
READ BASICALLY THE SAME AS WHAT APPEARS IN THE DICTATION?
A YES.
Q NOW, THE SECOND INJURY IS OUTLINED IN WHAT AREA?
A THE SAME DIAGRAM OF THE RIGHT HAND, IN WHOLE AREA
HERE IS INJURY NO. 2, (INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, IS THIS LITTLE INVERTED Y, WHAT APPEARED TO
BE AN INVERTED Y OF SOME SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU?
A WELL, IT SHOWS THE APPEARANCE OF THE WOUND AS YOU SEE
IT IN THE PHOTOGRAPH.
Q IS THAT A DIAGRAM THAT WAS MADE BY DR. GOLDEN IN THE
COURSE OF THE AUTOPSY?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: WHERE YOU HAVE CIRCLED THAT AREA, LET ME DO
THE SAME WITH THE BLUE AND I WILL WRITE DOWN AT THE BOTTOM "G-35
INJ. NO. 2."
Q DOCTOR, THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME WRITING TO THE LEFT
OF THE SCHEMATIC AND SOME LINES THAT RUN FROM THAT WRITING.
WHAT IS THAT?
A JUST SAYS THERE ARE TWO DEFENSE WOUNDS.
Q DO YOU AGREE WITH DR. GOLDEN'S ASSESSMENT THAT
INJURIES 1 AND 2 ARE IN FACT DEFENSE WOUNDS?
A YES.
Q AS YOU TESTIFIED YESTERDAY?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME JUST CIRCLE THAT AND IN BLUE AND I
WILL PUT A LINE RUNNING TO EACH OF THE TWO AREAS THAT WE HAVE
PREVIOUSLY JUST CIRCLED.
Q ALL RIGHT, DOCTOR. ARE WE DONE WITH INJURIES 1 AND 2
OF G-35?
A YES, WE ARE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S GO BACK THEN, IF WE COULD, I BELIEVE THE NEXT
PHOTOGRAPH YOU LOOKED AT WAS G-34; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q HOW MANY INJURIES DO YOU IDENTIFY IN THERE?
A I IDENTIFIED 12.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S TRY AND TAKE THEM INDIVIDUALLY AND COVER THE
PROTOCOLS, DIAGRAMS, ADDENDUMS AS WE GO SO THAT WE DON'T -- AT
LEAST I DON'T GET LOST.
LET'S START WITH WHAT YOU HAVE ARBITRARILY NUMBERED
INJURY NO. 1.
A INJURY NO. 1 IS AN ABRASION TO THE ULNAR ASPECT OF
THE RIGHT WRIST HERE, (INDICATING).
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP PLEASE.
A RIGHT HERE IN THE ULNAR ASPECT OF THE RIGHT WRIST,
(INDICATING).
Q IS THAT ANTEMORTEM?
A YES.
Q IS THAT DESCRIBED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED?
A YES.
Q AND ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANY REASON TO?
A NO.
Q LET'S FIND OUT WHERE IN THE PROTOCOL AND WHICH
DIAGRAM.
A PAGE 11 AND 12, NO. 1.
Q UNDER "OTHER INJURIES TO HANDS AND UPPER
EXTREMITIES"?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: WE ARE ON PAGE 11 BOARD 0G. LET ME OUTLINE
THIS AND I'M GOING TO WRITE "G-32 INJ. NO. 1" AND SEE IF WE CAN
FLIP THE PAGE.
Q AND IT ENDS BEFORE THE NO. 2?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
LET ME OUTLINE THAT AGAIN AND I WILL WRITE THE SAME
INFORMATION, "G-32 INJ. NO. 1."
Q DOCTOR, IS DR. GOLDEN'S DESCRIPTION IN HIS PROTOCOL
ACCURATE, IN YOUR OPINION, OF THAT PARTICULAR ABRASION?
A YES.
Q WHERE IS IT DIAGRAMMED, IF AT ALL?
A IT IS DIAGRAMMED ON 21-I.
MR. KELBERG: AND MR. LYNCH IS --
Q ALL RIGHT.
DOCTOR, WOULD YOU IDENTIFY WHERE ON THAT PARTICULAR
ITEM -- AND I WILL GET THE BOARD NUMBER DESIGNATION WHEN WE PULL
IT DOWN, YOUR HONOR.
A RIGHT HERE. IT IS A DIAGRAM THAT IS 3/4 INCH BY HALF
AN INCH ULNAR RED BROWN NOT PATTERNED ABRASION, THIS INJURY RIGHT
HERE, (INDICATING), THE WHOLE INJURY.
Q AND IS THERE SOME DESIGNATION ON THE FORM OF THE BODY
AS TO ITS LOCATION?
A YES, ULNAR.
Q I'M SORRY, THERE IS AN ACTUAL DIAGRAM ON SOME PART OF
THE BODY TO SHOW WHAT IT IS THAT DR. GOLDEN IS REFERRING TO?
A HERE, (INDICATING).
Q WHERE THERE APPEARS TO BE ALMOST A CIRCULAR HEAVY
BLACK OUTLINED AREA?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR, THEN I WILL
CIRCLE THIS AREA ON 21-I AND WRITE "G-32 INJ. NO. 1."
THE WITNESS: AND ACTUALLY THIS ALSO WOULD BELONG TO THE
SAME INJURY BECAUSE IT IS IN THE DISTAL FOREARM WRIST AREA.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: WHAT DO THOSE WORD SAY?
A "DISTAL FOREARM."
Q SO ALL OF THAT GOES WITH THIS INJURY
NO. 1?
A YES, YES.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
I WILL CIRCLE THAT AND I WILL CONNECT THESE TWO AREAS
WITH A SOLID BLUE LINE.
Q ANYWHERE ELSE THAT THAT IS DIAGRAMMED, DOCTOR?
A NO.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME TAKE THIS BOARD DOWN.
THAT IS 3-G, YOUR HONOR.
Q ARE WE DONE BASICALLY THEN WITH INJURY NO. 1 OF G-32?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO BACK AND SEE WHAT INJURY NO. 2
IS.
A INJURY NO. 2 IS 5/16 INCH BY 1/16 INCH ABRASION OVER
THE BACK OF THE RIGHT WRIST AND I'M POINTING TO IT RIGHT HERE.
Q IS THAT ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED?
A YES, IT HAS BEEN DIAGRAMMED.
Q AND IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q WHICH DIAGRAM, DOCTOR?
A THE SAME DIAGRAM, 23-III, (INDICATING).
Q YOU ARE POINTING IN THE UPPER RIGHT QUADRANT TO AN
AREA. IS THERE SOME WRITING THAT YOU ASSOCIATE WITH THAT ENTRY?
A YES. IT SAYS, "HALF AN INCH SUPERFICIAL" -- I CAN'T
READ THIS WORD. COULD BE --
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP.
A I CAN'T READ THIS PARTICULAR LETTER HERE, BUT THIS IS
"SUPERFICIAL" AND "HALF AN INCH" AND THESE INJURIES ARE --
MR. KELBERG: WHERE THE DOCTOR HAS JUST OUTLINED WITH THE
POINTER, YOUR HONOR, I WILL CIRCLE THAT IN BLUE AND WRITE "G-32
INJ. NO. 2."
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION WAS IT A MISTAKE FOR DR.
GOLDEN NOT TO INCLUDE A DESCRIPTION OF THAT INJURY IN HIS
PROTOCOL?
A WELL, YES.
Q IS IT OF ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU?
A NO.
Q FOR THE SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q AND IS THERE ANY REASON HE SHOULD HAVE ADDRESSED IT
IN THE ADDENDUM, GIVEN THAT HE DID NOT DESCRIBE IT IN THE
PROTOCOL?
A HE COULD HAVE, BUT HE DIDN'T.
Q IS THAT A MISTAKE?
A YES.
Q ANY SIGNIFICANCE?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING MORE ABOUT INJURY NO. 2?
A NOTHING MORE.
Q LET'S GO TO INJURY NO. 3.
A INJURY NO. 3 IS A 3/4 INCH BY ONE INCH CONTUSION TO
THE RIGHT HAND KNUCKLE AT THE BASE OF THE MIDDLE FINGER HERE,
(INDICATING), AND LET'S SEE --
Q IS THAT ADDRESSED IN THE ORIGINAL PROTOCOL?
A YES, IT IS.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED?
A YES, IT IS.
Q IS THERE ANY AREA OF THE ADDENDUM TO WHICH IT IS
ADDRESSED?
A NO.
Q ANY REASON IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN?
A NOT NECESSARY.
Q BEFORE WE GO TO THAT, DOCTOR, JUST ONE FOLLOW-UP ON
THIS.
YOU TESTIFIED YESTERDAY THAT IT WAS OF SIGNIFICANCE
TO YOU THAT THE ORIGINAL -- IN DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT MR.
GOLDMAN'S HAND HAD BEEN CLOSED INTO A FIST AND DELIVERING A BLOW,
THAT THE ONLY CONTUSION YOU SAW, WITHOUT A PUNCTATE ABRASION
CENTERED OVER THE CONTUSION, WAS TO THAT KNUCKLE; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q CAN YOU POINT OUT WHICH OTHER KNUCKLES YOU WOULD HAVE
EXPECTED TO SEE A CONTUSION IF IN FACT MR. GOLDMAN HAD DELIVERED
A DIRECT BLOW TO THE FACE, FOR EXAMPLE, OF THE PERPETRATOR?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION, CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU HAD
REVIEWED, AMONG OTHER MATERIAL, LITERATURE FROM A SPORTS
MEDICINE PUBLICATION ON BOXING INJURIES; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, I DID.
Q HAVE YOU ALSO, AS PART OF YOUR TRAINING AND
EXPERIENCE, STUDIED BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA INJURIES RECEIVED TO HANDS
OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE STRUCK FACES OF OTHER INDIVIDUALS?
A YES, I HAVE.
Q FROM THAT HAVE YOU FORMED OPINIONS AS TO THE KIND OF
INJURIES IN THE FORM OF BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA CONTUSIONS ONE EXPECTS
TO SEE WHEN A FISTED HAND DELIVERS A DIRECT BLOW TO THE FACE OF
ANOTHER HUMAN BEING?
A YES.
Q IN YOUR OPINION WHY -- WITHDRAW THAT FRAME OF THE
QUESTION AND FRAME IT THIS WAY:
POINT OUT WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE EXPECTED TO SEE
ADDITIONAL AREAS OF CONTUSION, IF ANY, HAD MR. GOLDMAN'S HAND
BEEN CLOSED INTO A FIST DELIVERING A DIRECT BLOW TO THE FACE OF
THE PERPETRATOR?
A I WOULD EXPECT TO SEE CONTUSION IN THE ADJOINING
KNUCKLES AND ALSO THE ADJOINING PORTION OF THE PHALANGES, WHICH
WE DON'T SEE HERE. WE ONLY SEE LOCALIZED TO ONE KNUCKLE HERE,
(INDICATING).
AND THE OTHER ISSUE IS ALSO THAT THE OTHER INJURIES
IN THE OTHER FINGERS SHOW TO BE ABRASION CONTUSIONS, SO THE ONLY
PURE CONTUSION IS TO ONE KNUCKLE, WHICH SEEMS A RATHER UNUSUAL.
IF IT WAS A CLOSED FIST WHICH DELIVERED A DIRECT BLOW
TO A PERSON, I WOULD EXPECT TO SEE MORE INJURIES TO THE OTHER
KNUCKLES, ESPECIALLY THE FOURTH AND FIFTH KNUCKLES AND THE
ADJOINING -- ADJOINING PROXIMAL PHALANGES.
YOU SEE, AFTER ALL, THE CLOSED FIST IS LIKE THIS, AND
IF SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GIVE YOU A DIRECT BLOW, YOU WOULD EXPECT
TO SEE INJURY ON THIS KNUCKLE, ADJOINING KNUCKLES AND THE
ADJOINING PHALANGES.
AND THIS PARTICULAR HAND ONLY SHOWS A BRUISE TO A
KNUCKLE WITHOUT ANY ABRASION ON IT, AND OF COURSE THE OTHER
INJURIES SHOW ABRASION CONTUSIONS WHICH DO NOT FOLLOW THE PATTERN
YOU SEE IN SUCH A SCENARIO.
Q YOU DON'T EXPECT TO SEE THE ABRASION ON TOP OF THE
CONTUSION FROM A BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA FROM A FIST TO THE FACE OF
ANOTHER HUMAN BEING?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND THAT I THINK YOU INDICATED IS PART OF THE BASIS
OF YOUR OPINION AS TO WHY YOU ALSO BELIEVE IT WAS FROM A FLAILING
INTO SOME OF THE TREES AND SURROUNDING AREAS WHERE MR. GOLDMAN'S
BODY WAS FOUND?
A THAT IS CORRECT, AND I ALSO INDICATED YESTERDAY THAT
THE LACK -- THE LACK OF SHARP FORCE INJURIES TO THE BACK OF THE
HANDS FAVOR THAT OPINION, BECAUSE THE SHARP FORCE INJURIES, AS WE
DISCUSSED, ARE ONTO THE FRONT OF THE HAND, AND FURTHER, THERE IS
NO OTHER SHARP FORCE INJURIES WHICH I COULD SEE IN THE FOREARM
EITHER.
Q DOCTOR, LET'S GO TO THE PROTOCOL.
WHERE IS INJURY NO. 3, THAT CONTUSION, ADDRESSED?
A IT IS ADDRESSED ON PAGE 12, NO. 3.
Q WE ARE ON PAGE 12?
A NO. 3, SECOND SENTENCE:
"ON THE PROXIMAL KNUCKLE OF THE RIGHT MIDDLE
FINGER IS A ONE INCH BY 3/4 INCH BRUISE WITH NO OVERLYING
ABRASION."
Q IS THAT THE EXTENT OF THE DESCRIPTION?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THAT THEN ON BOARD 0G AND I
WILL WRITE TO THE SIDE "G-32 INJ. NO. 3."
Q IS THAT AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION, DOCTOR?
A YES. AND IT IS HERE ON 23-III, RIGHT HERE,
(INDICATING), SAME KNUCKLE, "FRESH BRUISE, ONE INCH BY 3/4 INCH"
AND YOU CAN CIRCLE IT.
Q YOU HAVE OUTLINED IT WITH YOUR POINTER.
LET ME ASK, BEFORE I CIRCLE IT, THERE APPEARS TO BE A
CIRCLED AREA WITH SOME SQUIGGLY LINES INSIDE, THE CIRCLE AND A
LINE RUNNING HORIZONTALLY TO THE OUTSIDE OF THIS HANDWRITTEN
ENTRY.
WHAT IS THIS CIRCLED AREA WITH THE WAVY LINES TO
REFLECT?
A IT IS DIAGRAMMATICALLY DEPICTING THE INJURY THAT YOU
SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH AND WHICH HAS BEEN DICTATED AS SUCH ON THE
PROTOCOL AND THAT IS THE MEASUREMENT THERE, (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
LET ME OUTLINE THAT THEN, THIS UPPER RIGHT QUADRANT
WITH THE BOARD 2-3 AND I WILL WRITE OUT AT THE SIDE "G-32 INJ.
NO. 3."
Q ANYTHING ELSE REGARDING THIS INJURY, DOCTOR?
A NO.
Q LET'S GO TO INJURY NO. 4.
A INJURY NO. 4 IS 1/32 INCH PUNCTATE ABRASION IN THE
BASE OF THE RIGHT INDEX, WHICH IS A SMALL ONE RIGHT HERE,
(INDICATING).
Q SO THIS IS ON THE INDEX FINGER AT THE BASE?
A YES.
Q IS THAT ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED ANYWHERE?
A NO.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q AND I THINK WE ARE GOING TO LOSE OUR EASEL IN JUST A
SECOND, IF WE COULD HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IN YOUR JUDGMENT, ALL
MISTAKES BY DR. GOLDEN NOT TO HAVE DESCRIBED, DIAGRAMMED OR
ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A YES.
Q INDIVIDUALLY OR COLLECTIVELY OF ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO
YOU ON THE BIG TICKET ISSUES?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT. LET'S TO GO INJURY NO. 5.
A INJURY NO. 5 IS A LINEAR DIAGONALLY-RUNNING ABRASION
HALF AN INCH TO THE BACK OF THE RIGHT INDEX NEXT TO THE SMALL
ABRASION I JUST DESCRIBED. IT IS ON THE BACK OF THE RIGHT INDEX
HERE, (INDICATING).
Q SO WE ARE WORKING OUR WAY ALONG THE LENGTH OF THE
FIRST FINGER TOWARDS THE NAIL AREA; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IS THAT LINEAR ABRASION ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES. SAME PAGE, 12, FOURTH SENTENCE HERE,
(INDICATING), ON THE -- IT SAYS:
"THERE IS A LINEAR DIAGONALLY HALF AN INCH
REDDISH BROWN ABRASION."
Q DOCTOR, IS THAT WHOLE SENTENCE TO REFER TO THAT
PARTICULAR INJURY NO. 5?
A YES. IT ALSO INCLUDES THE BRUISING YOU SEE THERE
NEAR THE -- ON THE PROXIMAL PHALANGEAL JOINT.
Q DOCTOR, DO YOU IDENTIFY THAT BRUISING AS A SEPARATE
INJURY OR IS THAT, IN YOUR OPINION, A PART OF INJURY NO. 5?
A I DESCRIBED IT AS A SEPARATE INJURY, BUT IT COULD
HAVE BEEN PART OF THE SAME FORCE WHICH CAUSED THAT OTHER INJURY
THERE.
Q AS LONG AS WE ARE HERE, IS THE NEXT INJURY BY YOUR
NUMBERING SYSTEM INJURY NO. 6, WHAT IS DESCRIBED HERE AS THE
FRESH BRUISE?
A YES.
Q SO IF I OUTLINE THIS ENTIRE SENTENCE, WOULD IT BE
ACCURATE TO SAY THAT THIS CONCERNS G-32, INJ. NUMBERS 5 AND 6; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A IT WOULD BE THE -- THAT'S CORRECT.
JUST ONE SECOND.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE WITNESS: YES, FOURTH SENTENCE. ONE,
TWO -- YEAH, FOURTH SENTENCE, YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
A YES.
Q NOW, IS EITHER INJURY 5 OR 6 DIAGRAMMED?
A IT IS RIGHT HERE, (INDICATING).
Q AND WHERE -- IS THERE AN AREA WHERE IT IS ACTUALLY
DRAWN IN IN SOME FASHION ON THE SCHEMATIC?
A YOU CAN SEE IT BEING DRAWN IN RIGHT HERE ON THE INDEX
FINGER HERE HAS A LINEAR THING AND THEN YOU HAVE THE BRUISE NEXT
TO IT.
Q AND IS THERE ANY WRITTEN DESCRIPTION PROVIDED BY DR.
GOLDEN FOR THAT PARTICULAR -- THIS WOULD BE INJURIES 5 AND 6?
A YES. YOU HAVE A LINE GOING FROM THERE AND THIS IS
THE DESCRIPTION FOR THAT.
Q WHAT IS WRITTEN BY DR. GOLDEN THERE?
A IT SAYS:
"HALF AN INCH BY HALF AN INCH REDDISH BROWN
ABRASION AND FRESH BRUISE."
AND THEN HE HAS ALSO DIAGRAMMED THE ABRASION HERE,
(INDICATING), LENGTH, HALF AN INCH SEPARATELY, WHICH CORRESPONDS
TO THIS, SO ACTUALLY THE DESCRIPTION FOR THIS INJURY WOULD
INCLUDE THIS HANDWRITING HERE AND THIS HANDWRITING THERE,
(INDICATING).
Q WOULD IT BE ACCURATE TO SAY, DOCTOR, THAT THIS
HANDWRITING ON THE LEFT OF THE FIRST FINGER REFERS TO WHAT YOU
HAVE DESCRIBED AS INJURY NO. 5, THE ABRASION?
A YES.
Q AND WHAT DR. GOLDEN HAS WRITTEN AS FRESH BRUISE IS
REFERRING TO WHAT YOU DESCRIBED AS INJURY NO. 6?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: FOR THE RECORD, I WILL CIRCLE IN RED THIS
ENTIRE AREA THAT DR. LAKSHMANAN HAS JUST TALKED ABOUT.
ON THE UPPER RIGHT QUADRANT DIAGRAM OF 23 ROMAN
NUMERAL III, I WILL WRITE "G-32 INJ. NUMBERS 5 AND 6."
Q ANYTHING ELSE IN THE WAY OF A DIAGRAM FOR EITHER OF
THOSE TWO INJURIES, DOCTOR?
A NO.
Q ANYTHING ON THE ADDENDUM EITHER?
A NO.
Q I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE ACTUALLY SHOWN US INJURY NO.
6. WHY DON'T DO YOU THAT.
A IT IS HERE ON THE BRUISE ON THE INDEX FINGER,
PROXIMAL INTERPHALANGEAL JOINT.
Q AND AGAIN THIS WOULD BE IN KEEPING WITH A NUMBERING
SYSTEM, IF YOU WILL, WHERE YOU ARE GOING ALONG THE LENGTH OF THE
INDEX FINGER, THE FIRST FINGER, EXCUSE ME, TOWARDS THE NAIL; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q WHAT IS INJURY NO. 7 THEN?
A IT IS A DISCOLORED AREA ON THE NAIL WHICH IS A
SCRAPING AND IT MEASURES 3/8 OF AN INCH IN AREA, AND I'M POINTING
TO IT HERE, (INDICATING).
Q THIS, DOCTOR, AGAIN A PHOTO YOU REVIEWED, LIFE-SIZE
PHOTO, FOR YOUR PURPOSES OF MEASURING?
A YES.
Q ARE YOU ABLE TO TELL, DOCTOR, WHETHER THAT INJURY
OCCURRED DURING THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS INCIDENT ON BUNDY ON
JUNE 12TH OR WHETHER IT OCCURRED AT SOME EARLIER TIME?
A IT IS DIFFICULT TO SAY WHEN YOU HAVE A NAIL INJURY,
BECAUSE THE NAIL INJURIES, UNLIKE SKIN INJURIES, DO NOT LEAVE A
REACTION AND THERE WAS NO HEMORRHAGE WHICH I COULD SEE, SO I
CAN'T TELL WHEN THAT HAPPENED, BUT TAKING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
OTHER INJURIES, IT PROBABLY COULD HAVE HAPPENED AT THE SAME TIME,
BUT I CAN'T TELL.
Q DOCTOR, DOES DR. GOLDEN ADDRESS THAT NAIL INJURY IN
ANY FASHION?
A NO, HE DOES NOT.
Q DOES IT DIAGRAM IT IN ANY WAY?
A NO, HE DOES NOT.
Q DOES HE ADDRESS IT IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO, HE DOES NOT.
Q DO YOU CONSIDER EACH OF THOSE TO BE A MISTAKE?
A YES.
Q INDIVIDUALLY OR COLLECTIVELY OF ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO
YOU?
A NO.
Q WHY NOT?
A BECAUSE AS I TOLD YOU, IT HAS NO BEARING ON THE CAUSE
OF DEATH, MY ABILITY TO DISCUSS THE SHARP FORCE INJURIES, WHAT
TYPE OF WEAPON, THE BLEEDING PATTERNS OR ANY OF THE OTHER ISSUES
WHICH I HAVE ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY MANY TIMES ON THE INJURIES.
Q HOW ABOUT INJURY NO. 8 THEN?
A INJURY NO. 8 IS A 1/8 INCH ABRASION OVER A PINK
CONTUSION JUST ABOVE THE BASE OF THE RIGHT MIDDLE FINGER, RIGHT
HERE, (INDICATING).
Q IS THIS ONE OF THESE ABRASION CONTUSIONS YOU WERE
REFERRING TO AS BEING THE CAUSE, IN YOUR OPINION, FROM CONTACT
WITH A ROUGH SURFACE LIKE THE TREE?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, IS THIS ADDRESSED IN THE ORIGINAL PROTOCOL?
A YES, IT IS.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED?
A YES, BUT THE -- IN THE ORIGINAL PROTOCOL HE HAS
ADDRESSED IT AS AN INDEX FINGER BUT ACTUALLY IT IS THE MIDDLE
FINGER. HE HAS DIAGRAMMED IT CORRECTLY.
Q ALL RIGHT. LET'S SEE EXACTLY WHAT HAS BEEN DONE
HERE.
WHY DON'T WE START WITH THE DIAGRAM.
A OKAY.
Q IS IT ON THIS SAME FORM?
A YES, RIGHT HERE, (INDICATING). YOU CAN SEE IT AS
RIGHT HERE, THE MIDDLE FINGER, YOU HAVE AN ABRASION IN THE
MIDDLE, WHICH IS 1/8 INCH HERE, AND YOU CAN SEE BRUISE HALF AN
INCH BY HALF AN INCH WIDTH ABRASION, SO THIS WHOLE AREA REFLECTS
THE INJURY NO. 8 WHICH I JUST SHOWED YOU IN THE PHOTOGRAPH THERE.
Q DOCTOR, HAS DR. GOLDEN SPECIFICALLY DRAWN
DIAGRAMMATICALLY ON THE OUTLINE OF THE HAND, AND IN PARTICULAR
THE MIDDLE FINGER, TO SHOW THAT THIS IS IN FACT AN ABRASION
SITTING IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS CONTUSION?
A YES, HE HAS. HE HAS VERY ACCURATELY DESCRIBED IT.
YOU CAN SEE THE ABRASION IN THE MIDDLE WHICH IS DENSE COMPARED TO
THE REST OF THE INJURY HERE.
MR. KELBERG: WHERE YOU HAVE JUST POINTED, THE AREA OF THE
ABRASION, I'M GOING TO CIRCLE THAT IN RED AND THEN I'M GOING TO
CIRCLE THE ENTIRE AREA THAT YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBED IN BLUE, AND
MAKE A LINE GOING TO THE TOP OF THE DIAGRAM AND WRITE "G-32".
Q THIS IS NOW INJURY NO. 8, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHERE IS IT DESCRIBED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A IT IS ACTUALLY ON PAGE -- THIRD SENTENCE, AND INJURY
NO. 8 SHOULD BE THE MIDDLE FINGER, BUT JUST AN ERROR HERE WITH
THE INDEX FINGER. IT SAYS "INDEX FINGER" HERE, (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
FIRST OF ALL, IS THERE AN ENTIRE SENTENCE TO REFER TO
WHAT YOU'VE IDENTIFIED AS INJURY NO. 8?
A YES, UMM, TO THE SEMICOLON PART.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
LET ME OUTLINE THAT IN RED AND WRITE TO THE RIGHT
"G-3 2 INJ. NO. 8."
AND IN YOUR OPINION, DOCTOR, THE IDENTIFICATION OF
THE FINGER AS AN INDEX FINGER IS AN ERROR ON THE PART OF THE DR.
GOLDEN?
A IF HE DICTATED IT AS SUCH, YES.
Q AS IT IS DRAWN, IT IS DRAWN ON THE MIDDLE FINGER?
A YES.
Q AND AS YOU SEE IT IN THE PHOTOGRAPH, IS IT THE MIDDLE
FINGER?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME CIRCLE OR UNDERLINE THE WORD "INDEX"
IN BLUE WITHIN THIS AREA AND THEN I WILL DRAW A LINE IN RED OUT
TO THE SIDE AND WRITE "SHOULD BE MIDDLE, SEE DIAGRAM."
Q DOCTOR, IS THIS MISTAKE OF INDICATING "INDEX" RATHER
THAN "MIDDLE" OF ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU ON THE BIG TICKET
QUESTIONS?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
ARE WE DONE WITH INJURY NO. 8?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q WHAT IS INJURY NO. 9?
A INJURY NO. 9 IS A SMALL --
MR. KELBERG: IF I COULD JUST A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. KELBERG: I'M SORRY.
THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q INJURY NO. 9, PLEASE, DOCTOR?
A INJURY NO. 9 IS A SMALL 1/8 INCH ABRASION JUST A
LITTLE BIT AWAY FROM THE INJURY I JUST DESCRIBED ON THE MIDDLE
FINGER. IT IS A LITTLE MORE DISTAL.
Q DOCTOR, IN LOOKING AT THE DIAGRAM, 23-III, DO YOU SEE
A DIAGRAM BY DR. GOLDEN?
A VERY ACCURATELY DIAGRAMMED AS 1/8 INCH ABRASION HERE.
Q AND HE HAS WRITTEN IN SOME IDENTIFICATION FOR THAT?
A YES, HERE, (INDICATING), AND HE HAS DRAWN A LINE AND
SHOWN IT ACCURATELY SO THAT HE HAS --
Q DOCTOR, DOES HE DESCRIBE IT IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES, HE DOES, AND THAT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED ACCURATELY
HERE. AFTER THE SEMICOLON WHICH WE JUST DESCRIBED IT SAYS:
"JUST DISTAL TO THE MIDDLE PHALANGE OF THE MIDDLE
FINGER IS A ONE-INCH NONDESCRIPT ABRASION."
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, FIRST OF ALL, ON THE DIAGRAM THAT
DR. LAKSHMANAN WAS OUTLINING WITH THE POINTER, I WILL CIRCLE IN
RED AND I HAVE A VERY SHORT LINE READING "G-32 INJ. NO. 9."
Q DOCTOR?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: AND AN ARROW GOING TO THAT OUTLINED AREA.
Q AND THEN, DOCTOR -- AND YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, I
WILL OUTLINE THE REST OF THAT SENTENCE AND PUT A LINE OUT TO THE
SIDE, "G-32 INJ. NO. 9."
ANYTHING FURTHER ON THAT INJURY, DOCTOR?
A NO.
Q LET'S GO TO INJURY NO. 10.
A INJURY NO. 10 IS A 1/8 INCH ABRASION OVERLAYING THE
CONTUSION NEAR THE MIDDLE OF THE RING FINGER HERE, (INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, IS THIS AGAIN ONE OF THESE ABRASION
CONTUSIONS WHICH IN YOUR OPINION IS DUE TO CONTACT WITH A ROUGH
SURFACE LIKE THE TREE?
A THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS MY OPINION.
Q AND INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT KIND OF ABRASION -- I'M
SORRY -- WHAT KIND OF BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA YOU WOULD EXPECT IF A
BLOW FROM A CLOSED FIST OF MR. GOLDMAN TO THE HEAD OR FACE OF THE
PERPETRATOR?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q IS THIS ADDRESSED IN THE ORIGINAL PROTOCOL?
A YES, IT IS.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED?
A YES, IT IS.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANY REASON IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN?
A NOT NECESSARY TO DO THAT.
Q LET'S SEE WHERE IT IS.
A IT IS -- IT IS ON PAGE 12, PARAGRAPH
NO. 3, PARAGRAPH 2 HERE, (INDICATING).
Q IS THAT ENTIRE PARAGRAPH TO REFER TO THAT INJURY?
A YES.
Q LET ME OUTLINE THAT.
A ACTUALLY IT ALSO INCLUDES INJURY NO. 11.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S STOP WITH THE PART THAT IS INJURY NO. 10. YOU
TELL ME WHERE IT STOPS.
A "HALF AN INCH BY HALF AN INCH BRUISE ON THE RIGHT
RING FINGER SURROUNDING TWO PUNCTATE ABRASIONS APPROXIMATELY 18
INCH IN MAXIMAL DIAMETER."
Q IS THAT THE PART THAT COMPLETES INJURY NO. 10?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THAT IN RED AND I WILL WRITE
TO THE SIDE ON THE LEFT "G-32 INJ. NO. 10."
Q WHILE WE ARE HERE THEN, WHAT DOES THE REST THAT HAVE
SENTENCE REFER TO, OR PARAGRAPH?
A THAT REFERS TO THE FIFTH FINGER, BUT HE HAS INCLUDED
INJURY NO. 11 WHICH WE SAW IN MY DESCRIPTION -- IN MY DESCRIPTION
IN THE SAME SENTENCE.
Q AND INJURY NO. 11, AS YOU IDENTIFY IT, IS WHAT?
A INJURY NO. 11 IS A PUNCTATE ABRASION WHICH IS NEXT TO
THE INJURY NO. 10 IN THE PHOTOGRAPH.
YOU CAN SEE IT HERE, (INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, WOULD IT BE ACCURATE TO SAY THAT YOU SEE ON
THAT FINGER TWO PUNCTATE ABRASIONS?
A YES.
Q AND YOU SEE A CONTUSION?
A YES.
Q AND THAT YOU FIND THAT ONE OF THE PUNCTATE ABRASIONS
RESTS ON THE CONTUSION?
A YES.
Q AND COLLECTIVELY THAT IS WHAT YOU DESCRIBE AS INJURY
NO. 10?
A I DESCRIBED AS INJURY NO. 10 AND I DESCRIBED THE
OTHER ABRASION AS INJURY NO. 11.
Q SO THE SECOND PUNCTATE ABRASION YOU'VE IDENTIFIED AS
INJURY NO. 11?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: AND THEN FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR, WHERE
DR. GOLDEN HAS WRITTEN "TWO PUNCTATE ABRASIONS," I'M GOING TO BOX
THAT IN BLUE AND WRITE DOWN BELOW "G-3 2 INJ. NUMBERS 10 AND 11."
Q DOCTOR SHOW US, PLEASE, ON THE DIAGRAM, IF THERE IS
AN ENTRY MADE BY DR. GOLDEN?
A IT IS ON NO. 23 ON THE DIAGRAM, IF WE TURN THE PAGE.
Q AND I'VE TURNED THE PAGE TO THE FIRST DIAGRAM.
A IT IS DIAGRAMMED AS THE RING FINGER PROPERLY. IT
DESCRIBES A BRUISE. IT DESCRIBES THE TWO ABRASIONS WHICH ARE
PUNCTATE 1/8 INCH, AND THE WHOLE AREA YOU CAN REFLECT THAT THEY
WERE PRESENT, INJURY 11 AND 10 OF PHOTOGRAPH G-32.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THAT THEN.
Q AND HAS DR. GOLDEN ACTUALLY DIAGRAMMED ON THIS FORM
THE APPEARANCE OF THE PUNCTATE ABRASION?
A YES, HE HAS. YOU CAN SEE THEM HERE, ONE, AND THE
OTHER ONE HERE, (INDICATING), ON THE BRUISE ITSELF.
Q AND IN THE AREA I CIRCLED I WILL WRITE "G-32, INJ.
NUMBERS 10 AND 11."
ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT THOSE TWO INJURIES, DOCTOR?
A NO.
Q LET'S -- I THINK YOU SAID THERE WERE 12 IN THIS
PHOTOGRAPH; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YEAH. 12 IS THE SMALL ABRASION TO THE RING -- I MEAN
TO THE LITTLE FINGER HERE, (INDICATING).
Q IS THAT ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES, IT IS, AND IT IS THE LAST SENTENCE HERE ON PAGE
12, NO. 3, PARAGRAPH 3, LAST SENTENCE.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THAT IN BLUE AND I WILL WRITE
"G-32 INJ. NO. 12."
IS THIS ALSO DIAGRAMMED, DOCTOR?
A YES. YOU CAN SEE IT HERE, 23-III -- 23-I, YOU CAN
SEE IT HERE, 1/16 ABRASION.
Q DOCTOR, IS THE SOURCE OR SOURCES OF THAT ABRASION
CONSISTENT WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL SURROUNDINGS YOU SAW ON THOSE
PHOTOGRAPHS?
A YES, I DO.
Q DOES THAT INCLUDE THE GROUND?
A YES.
Q AND THE ROUGH SURFACE OF THE TREE?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME CIRCLE THAT AREA, I WILL DO IT IN
BLUE, ON THE CHART, AND I WILL WRITE OUT AT THE SIDE "G-32 INJ.
NO. 12."
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION HAS DR. GOLDEN, WITH RESPECT
TO EACH OF THE INJURIES THAT YOU HAVE SEEN IN THE PHOTOGRAPH,
G-32, AND WHICH HE DESCRIBES IN THE PROTOCOL, WITH THE EXCEPTION
OF THE WRONG FINGER ON THE ONE INJURY, WHICH IS INJURY NO. 8, HAS
HE ACCURATELY DESCRIBED EACH OF THE INJURIES?
A YES.
Q AND IN YOUR OPINION HAS HE ACCURATELY DIAGRAMMED, AS
TO THOSE THAT HE HAS DIAGRAMMED, ALL OF THE INJURIES YOU SEE IN
THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES, HE HAS.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT THAT PHOTOGRAPH AND
THAT SERIES OF 12 INJURIES?
A NO.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'M NOT SURE WHEN THE COURT
WANTED TO TAKE A BREAK.
THE COURT: 10:30.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DOCTOR, LET'S GO THEN -- I BELIEVE WE MOVE NEXT TO
G-28, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. YESTERDAY THAT IS WHAT WE DID.
Q AND THEN G-29, BOTH OF THESE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE
PALM SURFACE OF THE LEFT HAND?
A YES.
Q LET'S START WITH 28, IDENTIFYING SPECIFICALLY ANY
INJURIES YOU SEE.
A G-28, I WENT OVER THE SHARP FORCE INJURIES TO THE
BASE OF THE THUMB AND THE BASE OF THE LITTLE FINGER HERE,
(INDICATING), NOT BASE ACTUALLY, IT IS MORE ON THE PALM OF THE
HAND NEAR THE SAME AREA AS THE BASE OF THE LITTLE FINGER, AND WE
ALSO DISCUSSED AN ABRASION TO THE TIP OF THE LEFT THUMB AND WE
ALSO DISCUSSED A LINEAR ABRASION TO THE BASE OF THE LEFT -- LEFT
THUMB.
Q DOCTOR, IS THAT ABRASION OR THOSE OTHER ABRASIONS, I
THINK YOU TALKED ABOUT ABRASIONS THAT CAN BE INFLICTED IF MR.
GOLDMAN ATTEMPTED TO GRAB THE KNIFE AND THE KNIFE ROTATED AGAINST
--
A NOT THIS ABRASION, (INDICATING). THIS IS A SCRAPE
TYPE ABRASION WHICH COULD BE -- IT IS NONSPECIFIC.
Q THAT ABRASION, FOR THE RECORD, IS THE ONE THAT
APPEARS TO BE NEAR THE END ON WHERE THE NAIL IS OF THE THUMB ON
THE PALMAR SURFACE, THOUGH, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q WAS IT CONSISTENT WITH ANY OF THE OTHER -- ANY OTHER
ABRASION YOU SAW?
A NO. EVEN THIS LINEAR ABRASION COULD HAVE A -- IT IS
A NONDESCRIPT LINEAR ABRASION WHICH COULD BE FROM A ROUGH
SURFACE.
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE.
A ROUGH SURFACE FROM THE PLANT MATERIAL, TRYING TO HOLD
IT OR TRYING TO BRACE YOURSELF.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, HAVE YOU ARBITRARILY NUMBERED THESE
INJURIES?
A YES, I HAVE. THE LEFT THUMB, THE ONE NEAR THE TIP, I
CALL INJURY NO. 1.
Q LET'S TAKE CARE OF THAT ONE.
IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NOT IN THE MAIN PROTOCOL, IT IS NOT DESCRIBED ON THE
DIAGRAM; IT IS ONLY ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM.
MR. KELBERG: I THINK WE HAVE THE ADDENDUM RIGHT HERE,
BOARD 10G, IF WE COULD PUT IT OVER THE PROTOCOL FOR JUST A
SECOND.
Q WHERE IN THE ADDENDUM, DOCTOR?
A PAGE 5, NO. 16. NUMBER HERE, "DISTAL PHALANGE OF THE
LEFT THUMB, 3/8 BY 1/16 ABRASION."
Q IS THIS AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION, IN YOUR OPINION, OF
WHAT YOU SEE IN PHOTOGRAPH G-28, INJURY NO. 1?
A YES.
Q LET ME OUTLINE THIS IN THE ADDENDUM IN RED AND I WILL
PUT "G-28, INJ. NO. 1."
Q DOCTOR, AGAIN, WOULD THESE BE MISTAKES ON THE PART OF
DR. GOLDEN NOT TO HAVE ADDRESSED IT ORIGINALLY IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q AND NOT TO HAVE DIAGRAMMED IT?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q ARE THEY OF ANY SIGNIFICANCE INDIVIDUALLY OR
COLLECTIVELY?
A NOT IN THE BIG PICTURE ITEMS WHICH WE HAVE DISCUSSED.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
ARE WE DONE WITH INJURY NO. 1?
A YES.
Q HOW ABOUT INJURY NO. 2?
A INJURY NO. 2 IS THAT LINEAR ABRASION IN THE BASE OF
THE THUMB HERE, (INDICATING). YOU CAN SEE IT HERE RUNNING.
Q IS THAT ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q IN THE DIAGRAMS ANYWHERE?
A NO.
Q IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ALL MISTAKES?
A YES.
Q ANY OF THEM OF SIGNIFICANCE INDIVIDUALLY OR
COLLECTIVELY?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING MORE TO SAY ABOUT INJURY NO. 2?
A NO.
Q LET'S GO TO INJURY NO. 3.
A INJURY NO. 3 IS A CUT TO THE BASE OF THE THUMB --
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, IF YOU WOULD.
A A CUT TO THE BASE OF THE THUMB HALF AN INCH IN
LENGTH.
Q IS THIS A DEFENSIVE WOUND, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q AND IN FACT WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE OTHER TWO AS
DEFENSIVE WOUNDS?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IS THAT INJURY NO. 3 ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q WHERE?
A PAGE 11, NO. 3. RIGHT HERE, PAGE 11, NO. 3:
"PALMAR SURFACE OF THE LEFT HAND, THE WEB OF THE
THUMB, THERE IS A 3/4 OF AN INCH CUTTING WOUND INVOLVING THE SKIN
AND SUBCUTANEOUS TISSUE, QUARTER INCH DEEP WITH HEMORRHAGE IN THE
MARGINS. THIS IS COMPARABLE WITH THE DEFENSE WOUND," THE WHOLE
PARAGRAPH.
Q DOCTOR, IS THIS PARAGRAPH, IN ITS ENTIRETY, IN YOUR
OPINION, ACCURATE IN ITS DESCRIPTION AND OPINION AS TO THE TYPE
OF INJURY THAT INJURY NO. 3 OF G-28 IS?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THAT ON OUR BOARD 0G. I WILL
DO IT IN RED AND I WILL WRITE OUT AT THE SIDE "G-28 INJ. NO. 3."
Q IS THAT INJURY NO. 3 DIAGRAMMED, DOCTOR?
A IT IS DIAGRAMMED IN 23-I HERE, (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
WOULD YOU IDENTIFY, PLEASE, FOR US, WHERE IT IS
DIAGRAMMED AND WHAT, IF ANY, WRITING IS ASSOCIATED WITH IT?
A IT IS DIAGRAMMED AT THE BASE OF THE THUMB.
IT SAYS:
"3/4 INCH INCISE WOUND, WEB OF THUMB, SKIN SUBCU
QUARTER INCH DEEP HEMORRHAGE."
Q WHAT DOES "SUBCU" MEAN, DOCTOR?
A SUBCUTANEOUS TISSUE.
Q "SUBCUTANEOUS" IS A FANCY WORD FOR SAYING WHAT?
A THE SKIN UNDERLYING THE SKIN.
Q WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?
A THE WOUND IS QUARTER INCH IN.
Q IS THAT CONSISTENT WITH SUBCUTANEOUS?
A YES, IT COULD BE REACHING THE SUBCUTANEOUS TISSUE AT
THAT POINT.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME CIRCLE THE AREA ON 23-I, AGAIN BOARD
5G, AND I WILL WRITE "G-28 INJ. NO. 3."
Q IS THE DIAGRAM AND THE DESCRIPTION ALONG WITH IT
ACCURATE, IN YOUR OPINION, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT INJURY NO. 3?
A NO.
Q ANY FURTHER INJURIES ON PHOTOGRAPH G-28?
A IT ALSO SHOWS THE PORTION OF THE SHARP FORCE INJURY
TO THE PALM I DISCUSSED EARLIER, BUT I HAVE DESCRIBED IT UNDER
G-29 ACTUALLY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
ANYTHING ELSE FOR G-28?
A NO.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, DO YOU WISH TO START ON G-29 OR
--
THE COURT: GO AHEAD.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: LET'S START WITH INJURY NO. 1 THEN,
HOWEVER, YOU HAVE DESIGNATED IT ON G-29?
A ON G-29 I STARTED WITH THE -- THIS SAME WOUND WHICH I
DISCUSSED IN G-28. IT IS INJURY NO. 1 IN MY DESCRIPTION, AND IT
IS 5/8 OF AN INCH IN LENGTH AND IT CURVES IN ITS ULNAR ASPECT
HERE, (INDICATING), AND --
Q ULNAR ASPECT AGAIN, DOCTOR, IS TOWARD THE PINKIE OR
LITTLE FINGER SIDE?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IS THAT ADDRESSED IN THE ORIGINAL PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED ANYWHERE?
A NO.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A YES, IT IS.
MR. KELBERG: LET'S GET THE ADDENDUM. I THINK WE WILL
SWITCH HERE FOR JUST A SECOND. LET'S PUT THIS UP ON THIS SIDE.
Q WHERE IN THE ADDENDUM, DOCTOR?
A PAGE 4, NO. 13.
MR. KELBERG: IF I COULD ASK MR. LYNCH TO JOIN ME HERE.
THE WITNESS: NO. 13 SAYS:
"PALMAR SURFACE OF THE LEFT HAND, ULNAR ASPECT,
TRANSVERSELY ORIENTED WOUND, 5/8 INCH IN LENGTH."
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IS THIS AN ACCURATE, DESCRIPTION, IN
YOUR OPINION, OF WHAT YOU SEE IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THAT IN RED AND I WILL WRITE
"G-29 INJ. NO. 1."
Q DOCTOR, AGAIN A MISTAKE NOT TO ADDRESS IT ORIGINALLY
IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q NOT TO DIAGRAM IT?
A YES.
Q SINGULARLY, COLLECTIVELY, ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
THE COURT: ONE MORE.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: OKAY.
INJURY NO. 2 OF PHOTO G-29. LET ME TAKE THIS DOWN,
IF I COULD, PLEASE. I GOT THE PHOTO.
A INJURY NO. 2 IS LOCATED ON THE LITTLE FINGER AND YOU
SEE IT HERE. IT IS A 3/8 INCH BY QUARTER INCH ABRASION IN MY
MEASUREMENT OF THE ONE-AS-TO-ONE PHOTOGRAPH WITH THE SKIN BEING
PEELED OFF WITH A FLAP OF PEELED SKIN SEEN HERE.
I'M POINTING TO IT, (INDICATING).
Q IS THE FACT YOU SEE A FLAP OF PEELED SKIN OF
SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU IN IDENTIFYING HOW THAT INJURY CAME TO BE
INFLICTED?
A AS I MENTIONED EARLIER YESTERDAY, I FELT THAT IT
COULD BE RELATED TO THIS CUT IN THE LEFT PALM OF THE HAND WHEN
THE KNIFE WAS -- THERE WAS AN ATTEMPTED PROBABLE GRABBING OF THE
KNIFE AND WITH THE KNIFE TURNING, THIS SKIN COULD HAVE BEEN
PEELED OFF.
THAT IS ONE WAY IT COULD HAVE OCCURRED, BECAUSE IF
YOU LOOK AT THE FLAP OF THE SKIN, IT LOOKS LIKE VERY THIN FLAP
WHICH HAS COME OFF OF THE SURFACE.
Q IS THE DIRECTION OF THE FLAP OF SOME SIGNIFICANCE TO
YOU IN EVALUATING THE DIRECTION OF THE FORCE WHICH HAS CREATED
THAT ABRASION?
A YES. IT WOULD MEAN TWO THINGS:
EITHER THE SKIN MOVED IN A FASHION TOWARDS THE WRIST,
THE HAND MOVING IN THIS MANNER, (INDICATING), ON THE --
Q DOWNWARD?
A DOWNWARD.
OR THE FORCE WHICH CAUSED IT MOVED UPWARDS TO THE TIP
OF THE FINGER TO PEEL THE SKIN IN SUCH A MANNER THAT YOU HAVE A
FLAP OF SKIN TOWARD THE DISTAL ASPECT OF THE FINGER.
MR. KELBERG: FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR, DR. LAKSHMANAN
USED HIS RIGHT HAND TO MOVE UPWARD AGAINST THE LEFT PALM OF HIS
-- I'M SORRY, THE PALM OF HIS LEFT HAND.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
THE WITNESS: I JUST GAVE YOU ONE POSSIBLE MECHANISM HOW IT
COULD HAVE OCCURRED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: WAS THIS ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL,
INJURY NO. 2?
A NO.
Q DIAGRAMMED?
A NO.
Q ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A YES, IT HAS BEEN.
Q LET'S THROW THE ADDENDUM BACK UP AND TAKE CARE OF
THIS ONE.
WHERE, DOCTOR?
A IT WAS A PAGE ON PAGE 5, NO. 15.
Q PAGE 5, NO. 15?
A 15, YES. IT SAYS:
"THE VOLAR SURFACE OF THE LEFT FIFTH FINGER SHOWS
A SUPERFICIAL BROWN ABRASION WITH A 3/8 -- MEASURING 3/8 OF AN
INCH BY 3/8 OF AN INCH WITH PORTIONS OF AVULSED SKIN."
Q "AVULSED" IS A FANCY WAY OF SAYING WHAT, DOCTOR?
A PEELED OFF.
Q AND "VOLAR" IS THE PALM SIDE OF THE HAND?
A YES.
Q IS THIS AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION, IN YOUR OPINION, OF
THE INJURY NO. 2 OR IS IT INJURY 2 OR 3?
A YES, INJURY NO. 2.
Q THAT YOU SEE IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH G-29?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THAT IN RED ON THE BOARD.
THIS IS 10G AGAIN, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: YES.
MR. KELBERG: AND I WILL WRITE "G-29 INJ. NO. 2."
Q ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT INJURY NO. 2 OF G-29?
A NO, NO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR
RECESS, MID-MORNING RECESS.
PLEASE REMEMBER ALL OF MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, FORM ANY
OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU OR
CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO
YOU.
WE WILL TAKE A 15-MINUTE RECESS.
ALL RIGHT.
(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.
ALL RIGHT.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE
EXCUSE ME, GENTLEMEN.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED.
DOCTOR.
AND, MR. KELBERG, YOU MAY RESUME CONCLUDING YOUR
DIRECT EXAMINATION.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: YOU'RE WELCOME.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, AGAIN, WITH THE COURT'S
PERMISSION, WOULD YOU STEP TO THE BOARD, AND LET'S PICK UP WITH
RESPECT TO THESE INJURIES TO THE HANDS.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AND I THINK WE'RE NOW ON TO, IF
THERE IS AN INJURY NO. 3 OF G-29, WE'RE AT THAT STAGE.
A YES.
THE INJURY NO. 3 IS AN AREA OF ABRASION INJURY TO THE
PALM OF THE HAND IN THE MIDDLE FINGER AND NEAR THE TIP OF THE
MIDDLE FINGER, THERE ARE ABOUT THREE ABRASIONS THERE, ONE, TWO
AND THREE, AND THEY MEASURE APPROXIMATELY QUARTER INCH BY 1/16
INCH AND 3/8 INCH AND QUARTER INCH BY 1/16 INCH, AND THAT'S
INJURY NO. 3.
Q HAVE YOU MARKED THAT THEN COLLECTIVELY, THESE
ABRASIONS, AS INJURY NO. 3?
A YES.
Q DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION, DOCTOR, AS TO THE MANNER IN
WHICH INJURY NO. 3, THESE SERIES OF ABRASIONS, WERE RECEIVED?
A THAT'S A NONSPECIFIC BLUNT FORCE INJURY AND IT COULD
BE FROM SCRAPING AGAINST ANY ROUGH SURFACE.
Q DOCTOR, IS THIS ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q DIAGRAMMED ANYWHERE?
A NO.
Q ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A YES.
Q WHERE IN THE ADDENDUM?
A PAGE 5, NO. 14.
Q LET ME PULL THE BOARD DOWN THIS WAY SO WE CAN SEE THE
INJURY. AND IF MR. LYNCH CAN TURN TO PAGE 5.
DOCTOR, DOES THAT DESCRIPTION IN ITEM 14 OF PAGE 5
ACCURATELY DESCRIBE IN YOUR OPINION WHAT YOU HAVE DESCRIBED AS
INJURY NO. 3?
A NO. IT HAS BEEN DESCRIBED COLLECTIVELY HERE, BUT
ACTUALLY THERE ARE -- YOU CAN SEE THREE SEPARATE ABRASIONS, BUT
IN THE SAME AREA. SO THE REPORT DESCRIBED ABRASION COLLECTIVELY
RATHER THAN INDIVIDUALLY.
Q ARE YOU ABLE THEN TO SEE THAT THESE ARE INDIVIDUAL
ABRASIONS?
A WELL, YOU CAN SEE THE -- THERE ARE SOME AREAS WHERE
THEY OPPOSE EACH OTHER, BUT THEY LOOK LIKE THREE SEPARATE AREAS
OF INJURY.
Q WHEN YOU SAY "THEY OPPOSE EACH OTHER," WHAT DO YOU
MEAN?
A THE MARGINS OPPOSE.
Q THEY'RE OPPOSITE EACH OTHER?
A THEY TOUCH EACH OTHER.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION, IS IT A MISTAKE ON THE
PART OF DR. GOLDEN TO HAVE DESCRIBED THESE IN THE ADDENDUM
"COLLECTIVELY" RATHER THAN TO SEE THEM AND DESCRIBE THEM AS
INDIVIDUAL ABRASIONS?
A YES.
Q AND HIS MISTAKE -- I ASSUME YOU FIND IT TO BE A
MISTAKE OF NOT INCLUDING IT IN THE PROTOCOL AND A MISTAKE OF NOT
DIAGRAMMING IT?
A YES.
Q COLLECTIVELY, INDIVIDUALLY, ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO THEM?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: IF MR. LYNCH COULD, BECAUSE I THINK HE'S
GOING TO HAVE A BETTER CHANCE MAYBE IN BLUE, OUTLINE THAT AREA ON
THE BOARD, THE ADDENDUM 10-G AND THEN WRITE OUT AT THE SIDE, IF
YOU WOULD, PLEASE, "G-29, INJ. 3." AND IF YOU COULD WRITE IN
QUOTATION MARKS "COLLECTIVELY."
(MR. LYNCH COMPLIES.)
MR. KELBERG: AND MAY THE RECORD REFLECT THAT HE HAS DONE
SO, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
DOCTOR, ANYTHING FURTHER REGARDING INJURY NO. 3?
A NO.
Q IF WE COULD ASK MR. LYNCH THEN TO TAKE DOWN THE
ADDENDUM.
LET'S GO TO -- IS THERE AN INJURY NO. 4 IN THE
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PALM OF THE LEFT HAND, G-29?
A NO.
Q SO ARE WE DONE WITH THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES, WE HAVE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S GO TO -- I THINK WE THEN TALKED ABOUT G-26 AND
THEN WE HAD THIS SMALLER PHOTOGRAPH THAT IS B-25.
A YES.
Q AND THIS IS NOW THE BACK OF THE LEFT HAND?
A YES.
Q AND THE WRIST AND LOWER PART OF THE ARM?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU HAVE AGAIN THIS ARBITRARY NUMBERING SYSTEM FOR
INJURIES SEEN?
A YES.
Q LET'S START WITH INJURY NO. 1.
A INJURY NO. 1 IS THE CONTUSION TO THE BACK OF THE HAND
WITH A SMALL ABRASION WHICH IS PUNCTATE OVERLYING IT.
Q DOCTOR, IS THIS AGAIN THE SAME KIND OF CONTUSION WITH
PUNCTATE ABRASION IDENTIFIED EARLIER ON PHOTOGRAPH G-32 IN THE
AREA OF THE KNUCKLES OF THE FINGERS?
A YES.
Q AND IS YOUR OPINION CONCERNING THE SOURCE FOR THAT
ABRASION CONTUSION THE SAME AS YOU OPINED REGARDING THE SOURCE OR
SOURCES FOR THE ABRASION CONTUSIONS TO THE FINGERS AS SEEN IN
G-32?
A COULD BE ONE OF THE SOURCES.
Q IN YOUR OPINION, DOCTOR, IS IT INCONSISTENT, HOWEVER,
WITH THE SOURCE BEING A BLOW FROM MR. GOLDMAN'S CLENCHED FIST TO
THE FACE OF THE PERPETRATOR?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q SAME REASONS AS YOU'VE PREVIOUSLY EXPRESSED?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IS THAT DIAGRAMMED BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED AT ALL IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANY REASON IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN?
A NOT NECESSARY TO.
Q WHERE IN THE PROTOCOL?
A IT'S PAGE 12, NO. 4.
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
A PAGE 12, NO. 4.
Q AND POINT OUT, IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, WHERE ON PAGE 4,
NO. 4 -- PAGE 12, NO. 4 OF BOARD 0G.
A IT'S HERE ON THE LAST LINE, THE LAST SENTENCE OF PAGE
12, NO. 4, THERE'S A FRESH BRUISE ON THE DORSAL SURFACE OF THE
LEFT HAND SURROUNDING A PUNCTATE ABRASION.
Q I'LL OUTLINE THAT IN RED AND WE'LL WRITE IN "G-26."
AND IS IT ALSO SEEN IN G-25, DOCTOR, THE SMALL
PHOTOGRAPH OR IS IT COVERED BY THE CARD?
A IT'S COVERED BY THE CARD ON --
Q THE SMALL PHOTO IS G-25.
A OKAY.
IT'S COVERED ON G-25.
Q ALL RIGHT.
A PARTIALLY COVERED. PARTIALLY COVERED.
Q I'LL WRITE "G-26 INJ. NO. 1."
CORRECT, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q WHERE IS IT DIAGRAMMED, IF AT ALL?
A IT'S DIAGRAMMED ON I THINK 23-II OR III I THINK. CAN
YOU TURN --
Q THIS IS ON 23-II OF THE BOARD. I THINK IT'S 5-G?
MR. LYNCH: 5-G.
MR. KELBERG: MR. LYNCH CONFIRMS IT'S 5-G.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
DOCTOR, IS THERE SOME WRITING THAT GOES ALONG WITH
THIS INJURY DIAGRAM?
A YES. IT SAYS "FRESH BRUISE HEMORRHAGE" AND IT SAYS
HERE -- I'M SORRY -- ONE AND A QUARTER INCH BY ONE INCH. ONE AND
A QUARTER INCH BY ONE INCH AND "PUNCTATE ABRASION."
Q AND HAS DR. GOLDEN SPECIFICALLY DIAGRAMMED THE
ABRASION TO BE IN THE CENTER OF WHAT HE HAS DIAGRAMMED TO BE THE
BRUISE?
A YES.
Q IS THAT AN ACCURATE DEPICTION OF THAT INJURY?
A YES, IT IS.
Q AND IS IT AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF THAT INJURY?
A YES, IT IS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME CIRCLE THIS AREA IN RED AND OUT AT THE SIDE,
"G-26 INJ. NO. 1."
ANYTHING FURTHER ON THAT?
A NO.
Q LET'S GO TO NO. 2 THEN IF WE COULD, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
A NO. 2 IS THE LINEAR ABRASION WHICH IS SITUATED
BETWEEN THE BASE OF THE INDEX FINGER AND THE WRIST WHICH HERE
THIS IS ABOUT THREE-QUARTERS OF AN INCH IN LENGTH IN MY
MEASUREMENT AND IT'S ALSO DIAGRAMMED AND DESCRIBED.
Q DOCTOR, IS THERE ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU IN THE
APPEARANCE OF THAT LINEAR ABRASION?
A IT'S JUST A NONSPECIFIC LINEAR ABRASION.
Q DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO ANY SOURCE OR SOURCES
FOR THAT?
A THE SAME PLANT TYPE ENVIRONMENT WHICH I DESCRIBED
EARLIER IN THE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS, THE BRANCHES OR ONE OF
THEM CAN DO THAT KIND OF ABRASION.
Q DOCTOR, WHERE IS IT DIAGRAMMED?
A IT'S AGAIN DIAGRAMMED IN 33-II RIGHT HERE
(INDICATING).
Q WHAT IS THE DESCRIPTION IF ANY GIVEN?
A IT'S -- IT'S DESCRIBED IN ACTUALLY PARAGRAPH 2 HERE
(INDICATING), AND YOU CAN SEE IT HERE ON 3/4 INCH LONG SKIN
ABRASION TERMINATING 1/8 INCH NONDESCRIPT PUNCTATE ABRASION, AND
THIS IS THE ABRASION WHICH IS --
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
A -- THIS IS THE ABRASION WHICH IS DIAGRAMMED HERE AND
THIS IS THE PUNCTATE PART OF THE LINEAR ABRASION.
Q WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE, IF ANY, TO THERE BEING A
PUNCTATE PART OF A LINEAR ABRASION?
A AS I TOLD YOU, THIS IS A NONDESCRIPT BLUNT FORCE
TRAUMA.
AND LET'S ASSUME THAT THE HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION IS,
YOU HAVE A SMALL BRANCH OR SHARP -- NOT -- SEMI-SHARP, NOT SHARP
BRANCH WHICH STRIKES THE PORTION OF THE SKIN. AND YOU CAN GET A
PUNCTATE PART OF THE ABRASION CAUSED BY THAT, BUT WHEN THE HAND
MOVES, THE BRANCH WILL BE DRAWING AGAINST THE PARTICULAR SURFACE
OF THE SKIN CAUSING THE LINEAR APPEARANCE ADJOINING THE PUNCTATE
PART.
Q THE HAND IN THIS HYPOTHETICAL IS SLIDING DOWN IN
ESSENCE?
A YEAH. THAT WILL BE ONE WAY IT CAN BE CAUSED.
Q NOW, DOCTOR -- I'M SORRY. IS IT JUST THAT ONE
SENTENCE OF ITEM 4 OF PAGE 12 STARTING WITH "ON THE DORSAL
SURFACE"?
A YES. THAT WHOLE SENTENCE AND IT'S DIAGRAMMED HERE
(INDICATING).
Q AND IS THERE A DESCRIPTION GIVEN BY DR. GOLDEN ALONG
WITH THE DIAGRAM OF THE LINEAR ABRASION WITH THE PUNCTATE?
A YES. THIS WHOLE SENTENCE HERE (INDICATING).
Q WHAT DOES HE SAY THAT?
A LENGTH 3/4 INCH SKIN ABRASION. THEN HE SAYS,
ABRASION 1/8 INCH PUNCTATE, WHICH IS THE LOWER PART HERE
(INDICATING).
Q IN YOUR OPINION, DO THESE ENTRIES BOTH ON THE
PROTOCOL AND ON THE DIAGRAM ACCURATELY DESCRIBE AND DIAGRAM THAT
INJURY?
A YES, THEY DO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME OUTLINE THOSE, PLEASE, IN RED ON PAGE 12 OF
THE PROTOCOL, AND I'LL WRITE "G-26, INJ. NO. 2" IS IT, DOCTOR?
A YES. IN MY DESCRIPTION, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND I'LL DO THE SAME OVER HERE AND WRITE OUT AT THE
SIDE "G-26 INJ. NO. 2."
ANYTHING FURTHER ON THAT?
A NO.
Q LET'S GO TO NO. 3 IF THERE IS A NO. 3.
A YES.
NO. 3 IS ABRASION WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS "W" SHAPE IN
THE KNUCKLE AREA AT THE BASE OF THE MIDDLE FINGER HERE
(INDICATING).
Q AND THAT'S AN ABRASION?
A YES.
Q IS THE APPEARANCE OF IT DESCRIBED AS A "W" SHAPE --
FIRST OF ALL, IS THAT AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF IT?
A YES.
IF YOU LOOK IN THE MAGNIFYING GLASS, YOU CAN SEE THE
MIDDLE LIMB OF THE "W", BUT IF YOU LOOK AT IT JUST FROM A
DISTANCE, YOU CAN SEE IT LOOKS LIKE A "V".
Q WELL, WITH THE MAGNIFYING GLASS, YOU SEE ALL THREE
LIMBS IN THE --
A YES. YOU CAN SEE THE -- YOU CAN SEE A FAINT THIRD
LIMB THERE.
Q DOCTOR, IS THERE ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU OF THE "W"
SHAPE IN FORMING ANY OPINION IF YOU HAVE CONCERNING THE SOURCE OR
SOURCES FOR THAT PARTICULAR INJURY?
A IT'S A -- IT'S A -- IT LOOKS LIKE A PARTICULAR
PATTERN, BUT I CAN'T REALLY TELL A SOURCE FOR IT. IT'S A
NONSPECIFIC TYPE OF BLUNT FORCE ABRASION INJURY. IT COULD BE
RELATED TO THE SAME ENVIRONMENT WE DISCUSSED REGARDING THE
BRANCHES AND THE PLANT MATERIAL THERE, BUT I CAN'T REALLY
PINPOINT A PARTICULAR SOURCE TO IT.
Q DESCRIBED BY DR. GOLDEN IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q DIAGRAMMED?
A YES.
Q ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANY NEED TO?
A NO.
Q WHERE IN THE PROTOCOL?
A IT'S ON PAGE 12, NO. 4.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIRST SENTENCE, IT STARTS -- IT'S
A LONG SENTENCE ON ITEM 4, PARAGRAPH 2.
THERE IS AN IRREGULARLY CONFIGURED ABRASION OF THE
PROXIMAL KNUCKLE OF THE LEFT MIDDLE FINGER, APPARENTLY 3 LINEAR
HALF AN INCH ABRASIONS CONVERGING AT THE CENTER HAVING A
CONFIGURATION OF THE LETTER "W". THEY'RE ALL SUPERFICIAL SKIN
ABRASIONS.
Q JUST FOR THE RECORD, YOU'VE LEFT OUT A FEW WORDS AS
YOU'VE READ PORTIONS OF THAT DESCRIPTION; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. I WAS JUST SUMMARIZING THE MAIN HIGHLIGHTS OF
THE DESCRIPTION.
Q IS IT ACCURATE IN YOUR OPINION AS YOU LOOK AT THE
ABRASION IN THE PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES. IT'S DESCRIBED HERE "SUPERFICIAL ABRASION" AND
IT'S DIAGRAMMED AND DESCRIBED THERE.
Q IS THAT AN ACCURATE DIAGRAM, A DIAGRAMMATIC DEPICTION
ALONG WITH DESCRIPTION IN THAT 23-II?
A YES.
Q LET ME OUTLINE THAT AREA THEN IN BOTH THE PROTOCOL --
I'LL DO THAT IN BLUE. I'LL WRITE OUT AT THE RIGHT SIDE "G-26
INJ. NO. 3" ARE WE AT, DOCTOR, INJURY NO. 3?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND I'LL CIRCLE THE SAME AREA YOU OUTLINED IN THE
UPPER LEFT QUADRANT OF 23-I AND II IN BLUE AND WRITE "G-26 INJ.
NO. 3."
ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT NO. 3?
A NO.
Q LET'S GO TO NO. 4 IF THERE IS ONE.
A INJURY NO. 4 IS A PUNCTATE ABRASION ADJACENT TO THE
"W" ABRASION I JUST DESCRIBED, AND THAT HAS BEEN DIAGRAMMED, BUT
NOT DESCRIBED IN THE PROTOCOL.
Q WHERE IS IT DIAGRAMMED, DOCTOR?
A 23-I.
IT'S DIAGRAMMED THERE, NEXT TO IT.
Q IS THERE ANY DESCRIPTION PROVIDED?
A NO.
Q I WANT TO BE SURE -- I'D LIKE YOU TO CIRCLE IF YOU
WOULD, DOCTOR, IN RED, WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE THE DIAGRAMMATIC
DEPICTION OF THIS INJURY.
A THE "W" OR THE SMALLER ONE?
Q THE SMALLER ONE.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AND YOU'VE DONE THAT IN RED, AND
THIS IS DESCRIBED BY YOU AS INJURY NO. 4 OF G-26?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, IS THIS ANOTHER DEPICTION OF THAT "W"
SHAPED ABRASION THAT YOU SAW AND OUTLINED FOR US EARLIER ON II?
A YES. WHAT HE HAS DONE IS, HE DIAGRAMMED IT IN THAT
DIAGRAM AND AGAIN DIAGRAMMED IT IN THIS DIAGRAM, AND IN THIS
DIAGRAM IS INCLUDED A MEASUREMENT OF EACH LIMB, HALF AN INCH.
Q WHAT -- HAS HE WRITTEN ANYTHING BESIDES THE LENGTH OF
THE MEASUREMENT?
A HE SAYS SKIN ABRASION, LENGTH, HALF AN INCH AND
LETTER "W" HERE (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
I'M GOING TO CIRCLE THAT IN BLUE ON I, FORM 23, AND
OUT AT THE SIDE, I'LL WRITE "G-26 INJ. NO. 3."
IS THAT CORRECT, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q AND THE AREA THAT -- I'M SORRY -- THAT YOU CIRCLED --
THIS IS ACTUALLY INJURY NO. 4. I BELIEVE I MADE A
MISTAKE.
A YES. INJURY NO. 4.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, I WROTE NO. 2. MAY I
HAVE THE RECORD REFLECT I'M TAKING THE BLUE MARKER AND COVERING
OVER THE NO. 2, AND IN RED I'LL WRITE THE NO. 4?
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: ANYTHING ELSE REGARDING THAT ONE,
DOCTOR?
A NO.
Q LET'S GO TO NO. 5.
A NO. 5 IS A SMALL ABRASION THE -- AS YOU CAN SEE, THE
BASE OF THE LITTLE FINGER HERE, VERY SMALL ONE (INDICATING).
Q IS THAT ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q DIAGRAMMED?
A NO.
Q IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ALL MISTAKES?
A YES.
Q ANY SIGNIFICANCE?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q ANY OPINIONS REGARDING THE SOURCE OR SOURCES FOR THAT
SMALL ABRASION?
A IT'S THE SAME, SIMILAR NONSPECIFIC BLUNT FORCE
TRAUMA, SAME KIND OF SCENARIO WHICH CAN CAUSE THEM AS I DISCUSSED
EARLIER LIKE THE ENVIRONMENT.
Q IS THERE AN INJURY NUMBER -- I THINK WE'RE UP TO 6.
A YES.
AND THIS IS A QUARTER INCH BY 3/16 INCH ABRASION WITH
A MILD CONTUSION NEAR THE BASE OF THE BACK OF THE INDEX FINGER
RIGHT HERE (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, YOU'RE POINTING -- THAT'S OUR G-25. IS THAT
INJURY SEEN IN BOTH G-25 AND G-26?
A YES.
Q AND FOR THE NEXT SERIES OF INJURIES THAT WE'RE GOING
TO LOOK AT, ARE WE STARTING AT THE BASE OF THE FIRST FINGER AND
WORKING OUR WAY TOWARDS THE NAIL OF THE FIRST FINGER?
A I MEAN INDEX FINGER, YES.
Q I'M SORRY.
AND IS IT ACCURATE TO SAY THAT G-25, THE SMALLER
PHOTOGRAPH, SHOWS MORE FULLY EACH OF THOSE INJURIES?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
TELL US A BIT ABOUT THEN INJURY NO. 6.
A THAT'S A QUARTER INCH BY 3/16 INCH ABRASION WITH A
MILD CONTUSION NEAR THE BASE OF THE INDEX FINGER.
Q IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IN YOUR OPINION IS CONSISTENT
WITH BEING CAUSED BY A FLAILING AND COMING IN CONTACT WITH A
ROUGH SURFACE LIKE A TREE?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q IS THAT DIAGRAMMED SOMEWHERE?
A YES, IT IS. IT'S DIAGRAMMED IN 23-I.
Q WE HAVE THAT UP.
WOULD YOU POINT OUT WHERE THAT IS, DOCTOR?
A (INDICATING).
Q AND IS THERE ANYTHING WRITTEN ALONGSIDE THAT?
A JUST SAYS "PUNCTATE ABRASION" THERE. "PUNCTATE."
DOESN'T SAY "ABRASION." JUST SAYS "PUNCTATE."
Q SAYS "PUNCTATE"?
A YES.
Q IS THAT A COMPLETELY ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOU
SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH AS INJURY NO. 6?
A NO. IT DOESN'T DESCRIBE THE CONTUSION AS YOU CAN
SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH.
Q LET ME CIRCLE THIS AREA IN RED IN THE UPPER LEFT
QUADRANT, AND I'LL WRITE "G-26, 25 INJ. NO. 6."
WOULD IT BE A MISTAKE TO CHARACTERIZE IT ONLY AS A
PUNCTATE ABRASION?
A YES.
Q IS THAT DESCRIBED IN THE PROTOCOL, INJURY NO. 6?
A HE HAS DESCRIBED ALL THE INJURIES TO THE INDEX FINGER
COLLECTIVELY AS ONE SENTENCE IN PAGE 4 -- I MEAN PAGE 12, NO. 4.
Q WOULD YOU SHOW US USING THE PHOTOGRAPH WHAT DR.
GOLDEN HAS DESCRIBED COLLECTIVELY?
A HE HAS DESCRIBED THE INJURIES TO THE DIFFERENT PART
OF THE INDEX FINGER. YOU HAVE AN ABRASION CONTUSION.
LET'S GO TO G-25.
YOU HAVE ABRASION CONTUSION AT THE BASE OF THE INDEX
FINGER, ONE OF THE PROXIMAL INTERPHALANGEAL JOINT, AND THEN YOU
HAVE TWO ABRASIONS DISTAL TO IT ON THE MIDDLE PHALANX.
Q WHEN YOU SAY "DISTAL," MOVING TOWARDS THE FINGER?
A TIP OF THE FINGER, YES.
Q OKAY.
I'M SORRY. THE NAIL I SHOULD SAY.
A YES.
Q SO YOU HAVE IN YOUR OPINION A TOTAL OF FOUR INJURIES?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q IS IT A MISTAKE IN YOUR JUDGMENT FOR DR. GOLDEN TO
HAVE DESCRIBED THESE, AS YOU POINTED OUT ON PAGE 12 OF THE
PROTOCOL UNDER ITEM 4, DESCRIBED THEM COLLECTIVELY RATHER THAN
INDIVIDUALLY?
A WELL, IT IS A MISTAKE IN THE SENSE THAT HE HAS NOT
DESCRIBED THEM INDIVIDUALLY, BUT HE HAS ADDRESSED THEM.
Q IN THE WAY HE ADDRESSES THEM, IS THAT DESCRIPTION
ACCURATE?
A THE ABRASION PART OF IT IS ACCURATE, BUT AS I TOLD
YOU, THE INJURY NO. 7 ALSO HAS A CONTUSION UNDERLYING IT.
Q HOW ABOUT DIAGRAMMING?
BEFORE WE MARK IN ANY FASHION THIS COLLECTIVE
DESCRIPTION, HAS INJURY NUMBER -- I THINK WE'RE UP TO NO. 6.
A NO. 7 NOW.
Q NO. 7, HAS THAT BEEN DIAGRAMMED?
A YES, IT IS. YOU CAN SEE HERE (INDICATING).
Q AND YOU'VE GOT NO. 7 AND WHAT SUBSEQUENT ONE, DOCTOR?
A I HAVE 8 AND 9 AFTER THAT, AND I'VE ALREADY SHOWN
THEM ON THE G-25 DISTAL TO NO. 7.
Q AND DOES DR. GOLDEN DIAGRAM THOSE INJURIES IN THE
SAME SCHEMATIC?
A HE HAS DIAGRAMMED ONE SINGLE MARKING ON THE FINGER
CORRESPONDING TO 8 AND 9.
Q HAS HE WRITTEN ANYTHING CONCERNING ANY OF THAT AREA?
A HE HAS INDICATED THAT THAT IS AREAS OF ABRADED -- I
MEAN BROWN -- I MEAN RED ABRASION IN THE BACK AREA THERE.
Q DOCTOR, WOULD IT BE ACCURATE IF I WERE TO CIRCLE THIS
ENTIRE AREA (INDICATING) TO THEN DESCRIBE WHAT YOU ARE DESCRIBING
AS INJURIES NOS. 7, 8 AND 9?
A YES.
ACTUALLY ALL THIS WOULD ALSO INCLUDE THAT BECAUSE HE
SAYS "MULTIPLE RED BROWN ABRASIONS" AND HE SAYS QUARTER INCH BY
3/8 INCH. THAT'S A MAXIMUM DIMENSION HE GIVES IT, REDDISH BROWN,
AND ALL THIS AREA WOULD BE INCLUDED.
Q AND, DOCTOR, WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DOES THIS REFER TO?
A HE SAYS THAT THIS WILL BE THE THREE KNUCKLES OF THE
INDEX FINGER. HE CALLS THEM, EACH OF THEM A KNUCKLE, THE
INTERPHALANGEAL JOINTS.
Q AND I CAN NOT MAKE OUT, CAN YOU, THE WORDS THAT
APPEAR ABOVE THE WORD "KNUCKLE" THAT YOU WERE JUST POINTING TO?
A I AM NOT ABLE TO READ THAT. I THINK IT'S --
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE.
A I THINK IT REFERS TO "IRREGULAR" HERE AND
CONFIGURATION, "CONF."
Q SO NOW, DOCTOR, I WANT -- BEFORE I DRAW, I WANT TO BE
SURE I'M ACCURATE. WOULD ALL OF THIS INFORMATION REFER THEN TO
WHAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED AS INJURIES 7, 8 AND 9?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
FOR THE RECORD THEN, YOUR HONOR, I WILL DO THAT WITH
THE BLUE PEN.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AND IN THE UPPER LEFT QUADRANT
DIAGRAM 23-I, I'LL WRITE "G-26, 25, INJS. NO. 7, 8 AND 9,"
DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q AND IN THE PROTOCOL ITSELF, DOCTOR, THIS FIRST
PARAGRAPH REFERS TO WHAT YOU HAVE DESCRIBED AS INJURIES 6, 7, 8
AND 9?
A YES. PARAGRAPH 4.
Q I'LL OUTLINE THAT IN RED, AND OUT AT THE SIDE, "G-26,
25, INJS. NO. 6, 7, 8 AND 9" WITH AN ARROW TOUCHING THE BOX.
ANYTHING FURTHER REGARDING THESE INJURIES, DOCTOR?
A NO. I ALREADY ADDRESSED THAT 6 AND 7 ARE ALSO A
CONTUSION UNDERLYING THEM.
Q AND AGAIN, DR. GOLDEN'S DIAGRAM DOES NOT INCLUDE THAT
DESCRIPTION?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOR DOES HIS PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q MISTAKES ON YOUR -- IN YOUR JUDGMENT ON HIS PART?
A YES.
Q ANY SIGNIFICANCE?
A NO SIGNIFICANCE TO THE BIG PICTURE ITEMS.
Q IS IT SIGNIFICANT, HOWEVER, AS TO SOURCES FOR THOSE
BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA INJURIES?
A YES. BECAUSE IF IT'S JUST AN ABRASION, YOU'LL JUST
HAVE A SCRAPE AGAINST A ROUGH SURFACE. BUT IF IT'S AN ABRASION
CONTUSION, IT WOULD BE AN IMPACT OF THE HAND AGAINST THAT SURFACE
WHICH HAS A DIFFERENT CONNOTATION AS TO THE MECHANISM OF INJURY.
Q AND WHEN YOU SAY AN "IMPACT," DOCTOR, WOULD THAT BE
IN YOUR OPINION CONSISTENT WITH A HAND THAT IS MOVING WITH FORCE
IN A BACKWARD DIRECTION BY MR. GOLDMAN COMING IN CONTACT WITH THE
ROUGH SURFACE LIKE THE TREE AND BACKING AWAY FROM THE ASSAILANT?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT INJURIES 6, 7, 8 OR 9?
A NO.
Q IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL INJURY IN EITHER PHOTOGRAPH
G-26 OR G-25?
A THERE IS -- I DESCRIBED ONE MORE INJURY IN G-26.
THERE'S A SMALL ABRASION ABOVE THE ABRASION CONTUSION
THAT WE'VE DESCRIBED HERE, AND THIS IS A 5/16 INCH BY 5/8 INCH
CONTUSION -- I MEAN ABRASION.
Q DOCTOR, IS IT SEEN IN PHOTOGRAPH G-25 AS WELL?
A YES. YOU SEE IT BETTER HERE.
Q AND FOR THE RECORD, ON G-26, IT APPEARS THAT THE AREA
OF THE INJURY THAT IS CLOSEST TO THE HAND IS IN CONTACT OR
COVERED IF YOU WILL BY A MARGIN OF THE PHOTOGRAPHIC
IDENTIFICATION CARD?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DOCTOR, NOW, THIS IS AN ABRASION IN YOUR OPINION?
A YES.
Q DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO THE SOURCE OR SOURCES?
A IT'S A NONSPECIFIC BLUNT FORCE SCRAPING INJURY TO THE
BACK OF THE FOREARM.
Q IS IT ONE THAT IN YOUR OPINION IS ANTEMORTEM, BEFORE
DEATH?
A YES.
Q AND IS IT DIAGRAMMED IN ANY WAY BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES. IT'S DIAGRAMMED AS -- IN 21-I.
Q AND I THINK MR. LYNCH HAS THAT.
MR. KELBERG: IT'S BOARD 3-G, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
THE WITNESS: IT COULD POSSIBLY BE REFLECTED BY THIS
ABRASION INJURY HERE (INDICATING), BUT IT'S DIFFICULT TO DECIDE
WHETHER IF YOU REALLY --
Q BY MR. KELBERG: KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
A THIS DIAGRAMMATIC MARKING HERE COULD REPRESENT THAT.
I'M NOT SURE WHETHER THAT'S WHAT IT WAS REPRESENTING.
Q WHAT IF ANY WRITING IS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT?
A IT JUST SAYS "ABRASION" HERE (INDICATING).
Q IS THERE A DESCRIPTION GIVEN BY DIMENSION OR ANY
OTHER INFORMATION?
A I CAN'T READ -- IT SAYS 3/4 INCH BY HALF INCH, AND I
THINK THAT REFERS TO MORE THE TRIANGULAR ABRASION ABOVE IT, NOT
TO THAT MARKING.
Q AND THERE ALSO APPEARS TO BE SOME WRITING DOWN BELOW
WHERE THE SCHEMATIC OF THE LEFT HAND ENDS. DOES THAT REFER AT
ALL TO THAT SAME AREA?
A NO.
Q SO, DOCTOR, IF YOU'LL POINT CAREFULLY TO THE AREA
WHICH POSSIBLY REFERS TO THIS INJURY.
A POSSIBLY. I'M NOT SURE. THIS ONE (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME CIRCLE THAT IN RED. I'LL WRITE OUT AT THE
SIDE "G-26, 25 INJ. NO. 10" IS IT, DOCTOR?
A YEAH. POSSIBLE.
Q AND I'LL PUT A BIG QUESTION MARK.
A YEAH.
Q ANYTHING IN THE WAY OF A DESCRIPTION IN THE PROTOCOL?
A IT'S ON PAGE 12, NO. 2.
ALL THE INJURIES TO THE LEFT FOREARM HAVE BEEN
DESCRIBED, INCLUDING THE TRIANGULAR ONE WHICH WE JUST DISCUSSED,
AND NO SPECIFIC MENTION OF THIS PARTICULAR ONE, BUT THIS
PARAGRAPH WOULD INCLUDE ALL THE INJURIES IN THE FOREARM.
Q DOCTOR, IF YOU COULD LOOK TO THE PHOTOGRAPH TO THE
LEFT OF G-26 -- AND I CAN'T SEE THE NUMBER AT THE MOMENT.
A G-21.
Q G-21.
DO YOU SEE THIS TRIANGULAR-SHAPED INJURY?
A YES. HERE. YOU CAN SEE IT HERE (INDICATING).
Q AND THAT IS WHAT KIND OF INJURY, DOCTOR?
A THAT'S AGAIN A NONSPECIFIC BLUNT FORCE INJURY WHICH
COULD HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY THE ENVIRONMENT WHICH IS PRESENT ON THE
BUNDY DRIVE.
Q WHAT KIND OF BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA INJURY IS IT?
A AGAIN, THIS COULD BE A BRANCH. YOU KNOW, AS I TOLD
YOU, THERE ARE BRANCHES WHICH HAVE BEEN CUT AND THERE ARE STALKS
THERE; AND WHEN YOU HAVE THE FOREARM RUBBING AGAINST ONE OF THOSE
STALKY BRANCHES OR THE STALKS OF THE BRANCH, YOU COULD HAVE THIS
KIND OF ABRASION.
Q IT IS AN ABRASION?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU'VE ALREADY POINTED OUT, APPARENTLY IT WAS
DIAGRAMMED BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
Q IS THERE ANY DESCRIPTION GIVEN WITH THE DIAGRAM
ITSELF?
A HERE. TRIANGULAR 3/4 INCH BY HALF AN INCH ABRASION
(INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, AND WHAT NUMBER IF ANY DO YOU GIVE TO THAT
INJURY IN G-21?
A IN G-21, I GAVE IT A NO. 2.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME CIRCLE THIS AREA IN BLUE.
A AND THIS MEASUREMENT ALSO CORRESPONDS TO THE SAME.
Q WHICH MEASUREMENT, DOCTOR?
A THE 3/4 INCH BY HALF AN INCH. HE'S GIVEN THE
MEASUREMENT TWICE ON THIS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME TRY AND INCLUDE THAT AS WELL.
DOES THIS "ABR" REFER TO ANYTHING, DOCTOR?
A YES. IT'S ABRASION.
Q YOU'RE REFERRING TO THAT SAME TRIANGULAR AREA?
A YES.
Q I'LL INCLUDE THAT THEN IN THE CIRCLED AREA ON FORM
21-I AND I'LL WRITE AT THE SIDE "G-21" -- AND I'M SORRY, DOCTOR
-- INJURY NO. 1? THE TRIANGULAR-SHAPED INJURY IS WHICH NUMBER
ACCORDING TO YOUR --
A INJURY NO. 2 IN G-21.
Q I'M SORRY.
INJURY NO. 2. I'LL WRITE THAT IN.
ALL RIGHT.
LET'S FINISH.
WHAT OTHER BLUNT FORCE INJURIES ARE INCLUDED
COLLECTIVELY BY DR. GOLDEN IN THIS PARAGRAPH ITEM 2 OF PAGE 12?
IF YOU COULD GO TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND SHOW US.
A HE HAS ALSO ADDRESSED THIS LINEAR ABRASION ABOVE THE
TRIANGULAR ABRASION OF THE LEFT FOREARM IN G-21, AND THAT IS ALSO
DIAGRAMMED HERE, AND HE HAS ADDRESSED IT IN THE PROTOCOL HERE AS
A 3/4 INCH IN LENGTH ABRASION (INDICATING).
Q WHAT INJURY NUMBER HAVE YOU ARBITRARILY ASSIGNED THAT
ONE?
A I ASSIGNED THAT AS INJURY NO. 3.
Q OF G-21?
A YES.
Q LET ME OUTLINE THAT FIRST ON THE PROTOCOL IN BLUE,
AND I'LL WRITE "G-21 INJ. NO. 3."
A AND I ALSO HAVE -- YOU HAVE TO ADDRESS THIS 3/4 INCH
BY HALF AN INCH TRIANGULAR ABRASION AS INJURY NO. 2 OF G-21.
Q ALL RIGHT.
I'LL DO THAT IN RED THEN ON THE PROTOCOL, SAME PAGE.
AND THAT'S GOING TO BE "G-21 INJ. NO. 2"; IS THAT
CORRECT, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q AND THEN OVER HERE WHERE YOU POINTED OUT -- BEFORE I
CIRCLE, DOCTOR, IS THIS THE AREA THAT REFERS TO THAT INJURY NO.
3?
A YES. YES. THIS PARTICULAR ABRASION.
BUT MY CONCERN IS WHETHER THE MEASUREMENT HERE -- IT
SAYS 3/4 INCH BY HALF AN INCH AND AGAIN SAYS 3/4 INCH BY HALF AN
INCH -- WHETHER ONE OF THE 3/4 INCH APPLIES TO THIS MEASUREMENT.
Q DOES HE DESCRIBE INJURY NO. 3 THEN AS 3/4 INCH BY
HALF INCH?
A NO. HE JUST SAYS 3/4 INCH. SO I'LL JUST DIAGRAM THE
NO. 2 THERE NEXT TO IT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME CIRCLE THIS AREA IN RED. ON THE OUTLINE OF
THE SCHEMATIC, I'LL WRITE "G-21 INJ." -- THIS IS NO. 3?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, WOULD YOU CONSIDER THESE MISTAKES IN THE
SENSE THAT --
A WELL, HE HAS DESCRIBED THEM FAIRLY ACCURATELY, THE
TRIANGULAR ABRASION AND THE LINEAR ABRASION. SO THEY'RE NOT
MISTAKES PER SE.
Q IS A FAIRLY ACCURATE DESCRIPTION A SATISFACTORY
DESCRIPTION IN YOUR JUDGMENT, DOCTOR?
A WELL, IT'S A -- THE TRIANGULAR ABRASION HAS BEEN
DESCRIBED PROPERLY AND THE LINEAR ABRASION HAS BEEN DESCRIBED.
Q BUT NOT COMPLETELY?
A THAT'S CORRECT. BECAUSE YOU HAVE ANOTHER ABRASION
THERE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED, BUT HE SAYS THAT THERE ARE
MULTIPLE ABRASIONS IN THE FOREARM. HE HAS NOT ADDRESSED THEM
INDIVIDUALLY.
Q AND IS HIS FAILURE TO DO THAT CONSIDERED BY YOU A
MISTAKE?
A YES.
Q ANY SIGNIFICANCE?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q WHAT'S NEXT IN THE SELECTIVE GROUP?
A WE HAVE A SMALLER ABRASION JUST BELOW THE BLUE CARD
HERE (INDICATING).
Q ON G-21?
A YES. AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE IT ON G-26 HERE
(INDICATING).
Q AT THE TOP OF THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES.
Q HAVE YOU GIVEN IT AN ARBITRARY NUMBER?
A NO. 1.
Q OF WHICH PHOTOGRAPH?
A OF G-21.
Q OF G-21?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU SEE IT DIAGRAMMED?
A WELL, THIS IS THE SAME AREA WHICH WE HAD A QUESTION
MARK WHETHER IT WAS INJURY NO. 10 OF G-26. IT COULD ALSO
REPRESENT INJURY NO. 1 OF G-21 BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY ONE MARKING
THERE FOR BOTH THOSE INJURIES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME THEN ADD UNDER THE DESCRIPTION PREVIOUSLY
GIVEN ON THE DIAGRAM BOARD THE WORD "OR G-21 INJ. NO. 1" WITH A
QUESTION MARK.
A AND YOU CAN SEE BOTH OF THEM IN CONTEXT BETTER IN
G-26.
Q IS THEIR RELATIONSHIP AS SHOWN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH,
G-26, OF SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU IN FORMING ANY OPINION AS TO HOW
THEY WERE INCURRED?
A NO. THEY'RE NONSPECIFIC BLUNT FORCE INJURY. I CAN'T
MAKE ANY INFERENCE ON THAT.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER WITH RESPECT TO THIS COLLECTIVE
GROUP THAT'S IN THIS PARAGRAPH ITEM 2 OF PAGE 12 OF THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q SO IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THIS ITEM, LET ME CIRCLE THE
NO. 2 AND INDICATE COLLECTIVELY WHICH INJURIES, DOCTOR?
A 1, 2 AND 3 OF G-21.
Q "G-21 INJ. NOS. 1, 2 AND 3."
A AND COULD BE G -- INJURY NUMBER 10 OF G-20.
Q AND POSSIBLY --
A INJURY 10.
Q G-26?
A YES.
Q "INJ. NO. 10."
A YES.
Q IS THAT ACCURATE, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER?
A NO.
Q ARE WE DONE WITH G-26?
A YES.
Q ARE WE DONE WITH G-21?
A YES.
Q SO WE ARE LEFT WITH G-20 AND G-23?
A YES.
Q LET'S -- WE TALKED YESTERDAY BRIEFLY ABOUT G-20,
DOCTOR, AND YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS INTERRUPTED ABRASION.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES. AND ALSO, I DESCRIBED THE ABRASION IN DETAIL,
THE DIFFERENT PARTS OF IT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IS, FIRST OF ALL, THAT DIAGRAMMED IN ANY FASHION BY
DR. GOLDEN?
A NO.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED ANYWHERE IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q IS IT DISCUSSED AT ALL IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ALL MISTAKES?
A YES.
Q ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q IS THERE ANY OTHER INJURY YOU IDENTIFY IN G-20?
A THERE'S ALSO A SMALLER ABRASION JUST ABOVE THE -- IN
THE REGION OF THE ELBOW AREA, AND I'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED THIS
COMPLEX INTERRUPTED ABRASION IN THE LEFT ARM AND THE SMALLER
ABRASION ABOVE IT AND --
Q THE INTERRUPTED ABRASION YOU TALKED YESTERDAY ABOUT,
THE CLOTHING GETTING FOLDED IS ONE BASIS THAT YOU END UP WITH
THIS SITUATION?
A YES.
Q NOW, WHAT ABOUT THIS ABRASION THAT YOU DESCRIBE AS
BEING BELOW THE PHOTOGRAPHIC CARD IN G-20?
A YEAH, I GAVE IT A NUMBER ALSO. IT'S AGAIN A
NONSPECIFIC ABRASION.
Q IS THAT DIAGRAMMED?
A NO.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q SAME ANSWER TO THE MISTAKES QUESTION?
A YES.
Q INCLUDING SIGNIFICANCE OR LACK OF SIGNIFICANCE?
A YES.
Q ANY OTHER INJURY IN G-20?
A NO.
Q JUST TO CONFORM TO THE WOUND CHART, WHICH IS OUR
EXHIBIT 351, OF G-20, WHICH IS INJURY NO. 1?
A THE LOWEST ONE IS INJURY NO. 1.
Q WHAT IS INJURY NO. 2?
A INJURY NO. 2 IS THIS -- THE THREE PORTIONS TO THE
LEFT ARM AREA. THREE -- AN ABRASION, JUST THREE PORTIONS TO IT,
AND THEN INJURY NO. 3 IS THE TOP MOST ONE.
Q AND THE TOP MOST ONE IS WHERE, DOCTOR?
A IT'S RIGHT HERE. YOU CAN SEE IT (INDICATING).
Q AND WHAT IS THAT INJURY, NO. 3?
A THAT'S ALSO AN ABRASION WHICH IS 3/4 INCH BY 1/8 INCH
IN SIZE.
Q IS THAT DISCUSSED AT ALL IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q DIAGRAMMED ANYWHERE?
A NO.
Q ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ALL MISTAKES?
A YES.
Q SAME ANSWERS?
A YES.
Q ANY OTHER INJURIES IN G-20?
A NO.
Q ARE WE DONE WITH THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES, WE HAVE.
Q LET'S GO TO G-23.
A YES.
G-23 SHOWS THE LEFT FOREARM AND SHOWS THE INNER
ASPECT OF THE LEFT FOREARM AND ALSO SHOWS THE LEFT NIPPLE AREA.
SO I HAVE DESCRIBED TWO INJURIES.
THE OTHER INJURIES SEEN IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH HAVE
ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED. YOU HAVE THE ABRASION BEHIND THE LEFT
DISTAL FOREARM, WHICH WAS JUROR NO. 10 OF G-26. WE HAVE THE
SMALLER ABRASION HERE, WHICH IS INJURY NO. 1 I THINK OR -- YEAH
-- INJURY NO. 1 OF G-21. YEAH. INJURY NO. 1 OF G-21.
SO BARRING THAT, WE HAVE AN ABRASION OF THE ULNAR
ASPECT OF THE LEFT WRIST AND YOU HAVE THIS ABRASION HERE, THE
LEFT NIPPLE (INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, I WANT TO BE CLEAR IN MY OWN MIND.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT IS THE NIPPLE OF THE LEFT
BREAST?
A OF THE RIGHT BREAST.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO THAT'S THE RIGHT BREAST?
A YES. BUT THE ABRASION IS IN THE LEFT FOREARM WRIST
AREA.
Q AND INJURY NO. 1 FOR G-23 IS THAT AREA OF THE LEFT
WRIST?
A YES.
Q IS THAT DESCRIBED AT ALL IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES, IT IS.
Q WHERE?
A PAGE 13, NO. 5 (INDICATING).
Q IS THAT AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOU SEE IN
PHOTOGRAPH G-23?
A NO, IT IS NOT.
Q IN WHAT WAY IS IT INACCURATE?
A HE DESCRIBED IT AS TWO BRUISES IN HIS PROTOCOL
DESCRIPTION, BUT IT'S NOT A BRUISE. IT'S MORE -- AND HE SAYS
IT'S NOT ABRADED. YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE IT'S AN ABRADED INJURY
WITH A PEELING OF THE SKIN.
Q HOW CAN YOU SEE THAT IT IS CLEARLY ABRADED AND DR.
GOLDEN ON THE OTHER HAND DESCRIBES IT AS FRESH BRUISES?
A I CAN ONLY SAY WHAT I SEE HERE. THIS IS PEELING OF
THE SKIN, WHICH IS A FLAP OF SKIN LIKE ANY OTHER ABRASION LIKE
YOU SAW IN THE LITTLE FINGER HERE WHERE THE SKIN FLAP HAS BEEN
PEELED OFF. AND YOU CAN SEE THE PEELING OF THE SKIN RIGHT HERE
(INDICATING), AND THE INJURY ITSELF IS AN ABRASION INJURY.
Q DOCTOR, WOULD YOU SAY THAT NORMALLY IT IS BETTER TO
SEE THE ACTUAL WOUND ON THE BODY THAN TO REVIEW IT
PHOTOGRAPHICALLY?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION,
"NORMALLY."
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, DO YOU
FIND THAT A REVIEW OF INJURIES ON THE BODY YIELDS A MORE ACCURATE
IDENTIFICATION THAN ONE DRAWN FROM PHOTOGRAPHIC IDENTIFICATION?
A LOOKING AT THE BODY DEFINITELY HELPS BECAUSE YOU HAVE
A 3-DIMENSIONAL LOOK AT THE INJURY. AND ALSO, YOU CAN MAKE
INCISIONS TO SEE THE DEPTH OF THE BRUISING AND OTHER -- THE
ABILITY TO DO OTHER EXAMINATIONS TO BETTER DEFINE THE INJURY.
BUT IN A PHOTOGRAPH, YOU CAN CLEARLY INTERPRET WHAT
THE INJURY APPEARS TO BE, THAT IS AN ABRASION OR CONTUSION,
WITHOUT DIFFICULTY, BUT YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO TELL HOW DEEP THE
BRUISE IS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T CUT -- IT'S ONLY A 2-DIMENSIONAL
VIEW. IT'S NOT A 3-DIMENSIONAL VIEW AND YOU DON'T HAVE THE
ADDITIONAL ABILITY TO STUDY THE INJURY IN MORE DETAIL.
Q AND, DOCTOR, I BELIEVE YOU --
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. MOTION TO STRIKE. NONRESPONSIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, I BELIEVE YOU TESTIFIED
SEVERAL DAYS AGO THAT YOU ROUTINELY REVIEW CASES PERFORMED BY
OTHER MEDICAL EXAMINERS IN FORMING INDEPENDENT OPINIONS TO
TESTIFY WHERE THOSE INDIVIDUALS, FOR EXAMPLE, HAVE LEFT YOUR
OFFICE OR ON VACATION; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND THAT'S THE SAME PROCESS ALSO AVAILABLE FOR DR.
WOLF OR DR. BADEN; THAT IS, THEY WEREN'T THERE TO EXAMINE THE
BODIES EITHER; IS THAT CORRECT?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: I THINK WE'VE ALREADY ASKED THIS QUESTION
BEFORE.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IS THIS DIAGRAMMED, THIS
INJURY NO. 1 DIAGRAMMED?
A YES, IT IS.
Q WHERE IS IT DIAGRAMMED?
A 23-I RIGHT HERE (INDICATING).
Q WHERE YOU POINTED APPEARS TO HAVE A LOT OF BLACKENED
AREA.
A YES.
Q WHAT LEADS YOU TO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS AN ENTRY
THERE THAT CONCERNS INJURY NO. 1 OF G-23?
A IT'S -- IT'S TWO DISCOLORED AREAS ON THE -- I MEAN
TWO MARKINGS ON THE DIAGRAM ON THE SAME AREA WHERE THE INJURY IS
PRESENT, AND THERE IS SOME NOTATIONS HERE WHICH ALSO HAVE BEEN
DARKENED, BUT THE MEASUREMENTS HERE HAVE BEEN DICTATED HERE IN
THE -- IN THE BODY OF THE AUTOPSY REPORT (INDICATING).
Q AND WHEN YOU SAY "THE MEASUREMENTS HERE," YOU'RE
REFERRING TO WHERE?
A YOU CAN SEE THIS TO BE 3/8 INCH BY 3/8 INCH AND THEN
HALF AN INCH BY HALF AN INCH.
Q EVEN THOUGH IT'S DARKENED?
A YES.
Q AND YOU SEE THAT SAME DESCRIPTION PROVIDED IN THIS
PAGE 13, ITEM 5 ENTRY?
A YES.
Q FROM JUST LOOKING AT THE DIAGRAM, DOCTOR, AND YOUR
EXPERIENCE IN THE OFFICE AND ITS CUSTOMS AND PRACTICES AND THOSE
OF DR. GOLDEN, CAN YOU OFFER ANY EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THIS AREA
IS DARKENED?
A WELL, I -- I -- ONE EXPLANATION WOULD BE THAT HE
DIAGRAMMED THE INJURY AND THEN HE MAYBE WENT BACK AND DIDN'T WANT
IT MENTIONED OR DIDN'T THINK IT WAS THE RIGHT AREA, THEN HE WENT
BACK AND THOUGHT IT WAS THE SAME AREA.
I JUST HAVE TO GIVE MY FEELING ON WHAT HAPPENED. I
CAN'T TELL REALLY WHAT HAPPENED.
Q ALL RIGHT.
A BUT THE POINT IS, IT IS AS IT IS ON THE DIAGRAM AND
THE DESCRIPTION IS AS IT IS ON THE PROTOCOL.
Q DOCTOR, IS IT ACCURATE IF I CIRCLE THIS ENTIRE AREA?
AND I DON'T KNOW. IS THIS AREA TO REFER IN YOUR OPINION TO THAT
INJURY?
A IT WOULD REFLECT THE SAME AREA BECAUSE IT SAYS "SKIN"
AND IT SAYS "DERMIS" THERE.
Q AND IS THAT IN YOUR OPINION SOMETHING THAT IS IN
CONSIDERATION IN DESCRIBING THAT INJURY OF NO. 1 OF G-23?
A YES.
Q LET ME CIRCLE THIS INFORMATION IN RED, THE LOWER LEFT
QUADRANT, AND I'LL WRITE "G-23 INJ. NO. 1," AND I'LL WRITE OR
I'LL OUTLINE ON THE PROTOCOL OF THIS ITEM NO. 5 AND WRITE "G-23
INJ. NO. 1" AND I'LL WRITE --
DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION, THIS IS AN -- THIS INJURY IS
AN ABRASION, NOT A CONTUSION?
A WELL, IT'S AN ABRASION AS FAR AS THE SKIN SURFACE
GOES, AND IT LOOKS LIKE AN ABRASION AND NOT AN ABRASION
CONTUSION.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND I'LL WRITE "PER DR. L., ABRASION, NOT CONTUSION."
IS THAT ACCURATE, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT INJURY NO. 1?
A NO.
Q IS THERE ANY OTHER INJURY OF G-23 WHICH YOU IDENTIFY
>FROM THAT PHOTOGRAPH THAT WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED?
A THE -- TO THE RIGHT NIPPLE, YOU HAVE AN ABRASION
CONTUSION HERE (INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, IS THAT DISCUSSED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q DIAGRAMMED?
A NO.
Q ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO THE CIRCUMSTANCE UNDER
WHICH THAT ABRASION CONTUSION WAS RECEIVED?
A AGAIN, NONSPECIFIC BLUNT FORCE INJURY TO THE RIGHT
NIPPLE AREA.
Q AND WOULD YOUR ANSWERS ABOUT THAT BE THE SAME AS THEY
HAVE BEEN CONCERNING ALL OTHER CONTUSION ABRASIONS SEEN IN THE
HAND PHOTOGRAPHS?
A YES.
Q THE MISTAKES -- I ASSUME THEY ARE MISTAKES -- DID NOT
ADDRESS IT, DIAGRAM IT OR ADDRESS IT IN THE ADDENDUM; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q OF ANY SIGNIFICANCE INDIVIDUALLY OR COLLECTIVELY?
A NO.
Q ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT G-23?
A NO.
Q ARE WE DONE WITH THIS PHOTOGRAPH BOARD?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE ANOTHER BOARD OF
PHOTOGRAPHS.
MAY THEY BE MARKED AS EXHIBIT 362?
THE COURT: PEOPLE'S 362.
(PEO'S 362 FOR ID = BOARD OF PHOTOGRAPHS)
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. KELBERG: AND THIS ONE IS ENTITLED "SHARP FORCE
INJURIES TO LEFT FLANK, LEFT THIGH AND RIGHT CHEST OF MR.
GOLDMAN, BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA AND LIVIDITY."
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AGAIN, DOCTOR, WITH THE COURT'S
PERMISSION, IF YOU'LL STEP DOWN -- I'M SORRY.
MR. LYNCH POINTS SOMETHING OUT TO ME AND I DO WANT TO
COVER.
WE LEFT OUT IN OUR EARLIER DISCUSSION PHOTOGRAPH G-55
AND THE FACIAL AREA.
AND, G-55, DOCTOR, IS --
A YES.
Q -- THE PHOTOGRAPH IN THE LOWER AREA SECOND FROM THE
RIGHT BORDER?
A YES.
Q HOW MANY INJURIES HAVE YOU IDENTIFIED TO THE RIGHT
SIDE OF MR. GOLDMAN'S FACE THAT WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED ALREADY?
A I HAVE FIVE AREAS OF INJURY WHICH HAS NOT BEEN
DISCUSSED SO FAR.
Q WOULD YOU JUST TAKE US THROUGH SLOWLY IN GENERAL
TERMS THESE AREAS?
A YEAH.
YOU HAVE TWO TYPES OF INJURY TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE
FACE. YOU HAVE BLUNT FORCE INJURIES AND YOU HAVE SHARP FORCE
INJURIES.
THE BLUNT FORCE INJURIES ARE REPRESENTED HERE AS
SCRAPES. I'LL GO OVER THE NUMBERING AFTER I'VE GIVEN MY INITIAL
DESCRIPTION.
YOU HAVE A LINEAR ABRASION HERE, YOU HAVE A CURVED
ABRASION THERE. YOU HAVE AN AREA OF CONFLUENT ABRASIONS IN THE
RIGHT CHECK.
THE LINEAR ABRASION AND THE CURVED ABRASION ARE TO
THE RIGHT FOREHEAD, RIGHT TEMPORAL AREA. THEN THERE ARE ALSO
ABRASIONS PRESENT AROUND THE RIGHT EYE.
SO THESE ARE ALL THE BLUNT FORCE INJURIES
(INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY "CONFLUENT ABRASIONS"?
A "CONFLUENT" MEANS THEY ARE --- THERE ARE LINEAR
ABRASIONS WHICH ARE MERGING WITH EACH OTHER IN THIS AREA OF THE
CHEEK (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
A AND THEN IN ADDITION, OVERLYING SOME OF THESE
ABRASIONS IN THE RIGHT CHEEK AREA, YOU HAVE EVIDENCE OF FIVE
SHARP FORCE INJURIES, CUTS. YOU HAVE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR AND
FIVE CUTS TO THE SURFACE OF THE SKIN WHICH ARE SHARP FORCE
INJURIES, AND FOUR OF THEM SEEM TO OVERLIE THE ABRASION INJURY TO
THE CHEEK, WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT THESE ABRASION INJURIES
OCCURRED BEFORE THESE SHARP FORCE INJURIES TO THE RIGHT CHEEK
AREA.
YOU ALSO HAVE THIS -- A FIFTH SHARP FORCE INJURY
WHICH IS NOT IN THE AREA OF THE ABRASION INJURY WHEREIN YOU
CANNOT OPINE WHETHER IT HAPPENED BEFORE OR AFTER.
SO THAT ROUGHLY DESCRIBES ALL THE INJURIES YOU SEE IN
THE RIGHTS OF THE FACE. AS I HAVE DONE WITH THE OTHER INJURIES,
I HAVE NUMBERED THEM FOR MY CONVENIENCE, AND WE WILL GO OVER THEM
IF YOU WANT TO.
Q IN JUST A MOMENT. I WANT TO ASK JUST A COUPLE OF
FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS.
THE FIVE SHARP FORCE INJURIES THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED
AS CUTS, FOUR OF WHICH YOU IDENTIFY AS APPEARING TO OVERLIE THE
AREA OF THE ABRASIONS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT WOULD BE A SOURCE OR SOURCES
FOR THOSE CUTS?
A A KNIFE.
Q AND FROM THE NATURE OF YOUR OBSERVATION OF THOSE
WOUNDS, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER THEY ARE ALL
CONSISTENT WITH A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE WITH A MAXIMUM BLADE LENGTH
OF APPROXIMATELY 6 INCHES TAPERING AT THE END AS YOU'VE
DESCRIBED?
A THEY COULD HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY THAT.
Q BUT FROM THE NATURE OF THE FORM OF EACH OF THOSE CUTS
ON THE SURFACE OF THE FACE, CAN YOU EXCLUDE A DOUBLE-EDGED KNIFE
AS A SOURCE FOR EACH OF THEM?
A I CAN NOT.
Q AND, DOCTOR, HYPOTHETICALLY, IS -- WELL, LET ME ASK A
COUPLE OF PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS. THEN I'LL ASK A HYPOTHETICAL.
FROM YOUR EXAMINATION OF THAT AREA, DO YOU HAVE AN
OPINION AS TO WHETHER ONE OR MORE OF THOSE FIVE SHARP FORCE
INJURIES WAS RECEIVED BEFORE DEATH?
A THEY WERE ALL RECEIVED BEFORE DEATH.
Q HOW ARE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT THOSE FIVE SHARP
FORCE INJURIES WERE RECEIVED BEFORE DEATH?
A THE DESCRIPTION IN THE REPORT INDICATES THAT THERE IS
HEMORRHAGE IN THE TISSUE.
Q FROM YOUR OBSERVATION OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS, ARE YOU
ABLE TO CONFIRM FROM JUST THAT OBSERVATION THAT THESE FIVE SHARP
FORCE INJURIES ARE INFLICTED BEFORE DEATH?
A THEIR APPEARANCE ALSO SUPPORTS THAT OPINION BECAUSE
THEY ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER ANTEMORTEM INJURIES THAT ARE
PRESENT.
Q NOW, THE UNDERLYING ABRASIONS TO THE FOUR OF THE FIVE
SHARP FORCE INJURIES, ARE THEY ANTEMORTEM, THAT IS INFLICTED
BEFORE DEATH?
A YES, THEY ARE.
Q HOW ARE YOU ABLE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION?
A THE SAME REASONS. THE APPEARANCE, THE REDDISH BROWN
COLOR AND AS I OUTLINED BEFORE.
Q NOW, HYPOTHETICALLY, DOCTOR, IF MR. GOLDMAN HAD BEEN
DISABLED FROM HIS -- BY HIS ASSAILANT'S ATTACK, BUT STILL HAD A
BEATING HEART AND THE ASSAILANT WANTED TO CHECK TO SEE WHETHER
MR. GOLDMAN WAS STILL ALIVE OR NOT AND TOOK THIS KNIFE, AND WHILE
MR. GOLDMAN WAS IN A POSITION WHERE THE RIGHT SIDE OF HIS FACE
WAS EXPOSED, POKED THE KNIFE IN THE AREA SHOWN IN G-55 TO
BASICALLY DETECT ANY REACTION FROM MR. GOLDMAN, WOULD THAT SET OF
CIRCUMSTANCES BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT YOU SEE ANATOMICALLY IN
THIS PHOTOGRAPH, G-55?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. IMPROPER HYPOTHETICAL.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, FROM THE NATURE OF THE
OBSERVATIONS OF THESE FIVE SHARP FORCE INJURIES WHICH YOU
DESCRIBED AS ALL BEING ANTEMORTEM AND FROM THE UNDERLYING
ABRASIONS WHICH YOU'VE DESCRIBED AS BEING ANTEMORTEM, IS THERE
ANYTHING INCONSISTENT FROM WHAT YOU SEE WITH A HYPOTHETICAL SET
OF CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ASSAILANT IN AN EFFORT TO ASCERTAIN
WHETHER MR. GOLDMAN IS ALIVE POKING HIS FACE FIVE SEPARATE TIMES
WITH THE END OF THE KNIFE?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, MAY I BE HEARD ON THAT, PLEASE?
THE COURT: NO.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, MEDICALLY, IS THERE ANYTHING
>FROM WHAT YOU SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH WHICH PERMITS YOU TO
UNDERSTAND OR OFFER AN OPINION AS TO THE SEQUENCE FROM THE
STANDPOINT OF A SCENARIO SEPARATE AND APART FROM THE CUTS
OVERLYING THE ABRASIONS TO DESCRIBE HOW THOSE CUTS WERE
INFLICTED?
A YES.
LET'S TAKE THE ONE WHICH WE HAVE IN THE RIGHT CHEEK,
LOWER PART, WHICH IS NOT IN AN AREA OF ABRASION. IT'S A
SUPERFICIAL PUNCTURE TYPE SHARP FORCE INJURY.
THAT COULD HAVE OCCURRED AT THE SAME TIME SINCE THEY
ALL HAVE HEMORRHAGE AND THEY ALL OCCURRED WHEN MR. GOLDMAN HAD
SOME BLOOD PRESSURE. IT COULD HAVE OCCURRED AT THE SAME TIME
WHEN THE THREATENING CUTS TOOK PLACE AS A THREATENING PUNCTURE.
THAT PARTICULAR PUNCTURE COULD HAVE TAKEN PLACE AT THAT TIME.
NOW, REGARDING THE OTHER PUNCTURES, THEY'RE ALL
SUPERFICIAL PUNCTURES, AND I HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING EXACTLY WHY
THEY WERE DONE BECAUSE THEY REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY FATAL INJURY
PER SE FROM THEM. THEY ARE ONLY SUPERFICIAL PUNCTURES, AND I
WOULD FAVOR THAT IT COULD BE AFTER THE FATAL INJURIES WERE
INFLICTED. IT COULD BE -- IT COULD HAVE BEEN INFLICTED TO CHECK
WHETHER HE WAS STILL ALIVE OR NOT. THAT WOULD BE ONE CONCLUSION
I WOULD DRAW ALSO.
MR. SHAPIRO: MOTION TO STRIKE AS CALLING FOR SPECULATION
WITHOUT ANY FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: NOW, DOCTOR, YOU STARTED TO SAY
ARBITRARILY HOW YOU HAVE NUMBERED THESE PARTICULAR INJURIES.
LET'S START WITH YOUR INJURY NO. 1 AND GO THROUGH THEM, PLEASE.
A INJURY NO. 1 IS THE LINEAR ABRASION WHICH EXTENDS
>FROM THE RIGHT FOREHEAD DOWN TO THE RIGHT CHEEK AREA.
INJURY NO. 2 IS THE --
Q BEFORE YOU MOVE FROM INJURY 1 TO INJURY 2, HAVE YOU
MEASURED THAT INJURY?
A YES. I MEASURE IT AS TWO AND A HALF INCHES IN
LENGTH.
Q IS THERE ANY SIGNIFICANCE IN YOUR JUDGMENT FROM ITS
LENGTH AND APPEARANCE ON THE QUESTION OF IDENTIFYING ANY SOURCE
OR SOURCES FOR CAUSING IT?
A THIS WOULD AGAIN BE AN ABRASION WHICH COULD BE CAUSED
BY A CUT BRANCH OR A STALK WHICH COULD RUB AGAINST HIS FACE IN
THIS MANNER.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME -- IF I CAN JUST ASK COUNSEL TO MOVE
SLIGHTLY ASIDE AND GET A PHOTOGRAPH.
AND, MR. LYNCH, COULD YOU --
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. KELBERG: WE'RE PUTTING UP, YOUR HONOR, EXHIBIT 359.
HAVE TO FIND A PLACE FOR MR. LYNCH. I THINK HE JUST FOUND ONE.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, WOULD YOU POINT OUT AGAIN ON
THESE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SCENE AT BUNDY THE KIND OF ENVIRONMENTAL
SOURCE OR SOURCES IN YOUR OPINION WHICH COULD HAVE CAUSED THIS
INJURY NO. 1, THIS LINEAR ABRASION?
A THE FACE WAS OBVIOUSLY DRAGGED ON A ROUGH SURFACE AND
OTHER ROUGH SURFACES DRAGGED ON THE FACIAL AREA. WHAT I'M TRYING
TO POINT OUT IS, IF YOU LOOK AT CRIME SCENE NO. 2 AND ALSO CRIME
SCENE NO. 3 AND CRIME SCENE NO. S6, YOU SEE AREAS OF WHERE THE --
THERE ARE CUTS, STALKS OF OR STUMPS OF A PLANT, AND YOU HAVE
SIMILAR CUT STUMPS ALSO AVAILABLE ON THE BRANCH OF THE TREE HERE
(INDICATING). AND STALKS SUCH AS THAT CAN CAUSE ABRASIONS SUCH
AS THIS.
Q IN WHAT MANNER, DOCTOR?
MR. SHAPIRO: YOUR HONOR, THERE WOULD BE A MOTION TO
STRIKE. S PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN IN 1995 AND THERE'S NO
FOUNDATION THAT THEY REFLECT --
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE LAST ANSWER IS STRICKEN. THE
JURY IS TO DISREGARD.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, I WANT YOU TO ASSUME THAT
THE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN IN 1995 FAIRLY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THE
STUMPS AND SHOW THESE -- I WANT TO USE THE SAME WORD YOU USE --
THE "SHOOTS" IF YOU WILL THAT HAVE GROWN SOMEWHAT, BUT ARE
BASICALLY IN THE SAME GENERAL CONDITION EXCEPT FOR THEIR LENGTH
AS THEY WERE ON JUNE 12TH AND 13TH OF 1994.
MR. SHAPIRO: THERE WOULD BE AN OBJECTION. NO FOUNDATION.
MR. KELBERG: THERE WILL BE A FOUNDATION LAID BY ANOTHER
WITNESS LATER IN THIS TRIAL, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SUBJECT TO MOTION TO STRIKE.
PROCEED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: NOW, GIVEN THAT HYPOTHETICAL SET OF
CIRCUMSTANCES, DOCTOR, WOULD YOU PLEASE THEN EXPLAIN HOW THESE
PARTICULAR KINDS OF SHOOTS CAN CREATE AN INJURY LIKE THAT TWO
PLUS INCH LACERATION -- I'M SORRY -- ABRASION, LINEAR ABRASION?
A THE SAME MECHANISM I MENTIONED EARLIER. WHEN YOU HAVE
A CUT BRANCH RUBBING AGAINST YOUR SKIN SURFACE, IT CAN CAUSE A
LINEAR CUT ABRASION.
Q DOCTOR, AS LONG AS I'M HOLDING THE BOARD, WHY DON'T
YOU TAKE US THROUGH INJURY NO. 2 IF IT RELATES ALSO TO THIS
ENVIRONMENTAL SCENE.
A INJURY NO. 2 IS THE CURVED ABRASION HERE IN THE UPPER
PART OF THIS LINEAR ABRASION HERE (INDICATING), IN THE RIGHT
FOREHEAD AREA.
Q IN YOUR OPINION, IS INJURY NO. 2 A DISTINCT INJURY
>FROM INJURY NO. 1?
A YES. IT'S SEPARATE FROM INJURY NO. 1 BOTH -- THOUGH
THEY BOTH MEET AT A PARTICULAR AREA.
Q AND ANY SOURCE OR SOURCES FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PHOTOGRAPHS PROVIDED HERE IN 359 WHICH WOULD BE A SOURCE FOR THAT
KIND OF INJURY, INJURY NO. 2?
A SAME TYPE OF SIMILAR SOURCE. A BRANCH OR CUT STALK
OF A -- CORRECTION -- A STUMP OF A BRANCH.
Q BRANCH OF A STUMP MAYBE?
A WELL, A BRANCH WHICH HAS HAD -- WHICH IS NOT
COMPLETE.
Q THE STUMP, AS YOU USE THE WORD "STUMP" REFERS TO
WHICH OF THE AREA?
A NO. WHAT I'M SAYING IS, YOU HAVE -- I JUST GAVE THE
STUMPS ON THE GROUND LEVEL HERE ON CRIME SCENE NO. 3. WE HAVE
SIMILAR STUMPS ALSO ON THE BRANCH OF THE TREE THERE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DOCTOR, HOW ABOUT INJURY NO. 3 IF IT PERTAINS TO
A SOURCE OR SOURCES FROM THE ENVIRONMENT AS SHOWN IN THESE
PHOTOS?
A INJURY NO. 3 IS THIS CONFLUENT AREA OF ABRASIONS IN
THE RIGHT CHEEK AREA.
Q AND IN YOUR OPINION, ARE THOSE CONFLUENT ABRASIONS
CONSISTENT WITH A SOURCE OR SOURCES FROM SOURCES SEEN IN THE
PHOTOGRAPHS?
A THERE'S A SIMILAR SOURCE AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE CRIME
SCENE AREA.
THE TREE'S NOT WELL SEEN HERE. I SEE IT MORE IN THE
S PHOTOGRAPHS.
Q WELL, WHY DON'T YOU POINT OUT IN THE S PHOTOGRAPHS
WHAT IT IS FROM THE TREE THAT CAN BE A SOURCE FOR THAT CONFLUENT
SERIES OF ABRASIONS.
A IF YOU LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TREE AND AT THE
BASE OF THE TREE AREA HERE (INDICATING), YOU HAVE SIMILAR STUMPS
LIKE YOU SEE ON THE GROUND LEVEL HERE ON CS3. AND THOSE BRANCHES
CAN REPRESENT THESE KINDS OF ABRASIONS.
Q ARE THOSE CONFLUENT ABRASIONS ABRASIONS WHICH ARE
ACTUALLY INDIVIDUAL INJURIES THAT JUST RUN TOGETHER OR ARE THEY
>FROM ONE OVERALL MECHANISM CAUSING THE TOTAL APPEARANCE?
A I WOULD FAVOR OVERALL MECHANISM CAUSING A SIMILAR
APPEARANCE BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEVERAL STRUCTURES THERE WHICH CAN
CAUSE THE ABRASION WHICH YOU SEE HERE IN THE CHEEK (INDICATING).
Q HOW ABOUT INJURY NO. 4?
A INJURY NO. 4 IS THE SMALL LINEAR ABRASIONS AROUND THE
RIGHT EYE AREA HERE (INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, AGAIN, ANY SOURCE OR SOURCES ENVIRONMENTALLY
CONSISTENT WITH THOSE?
A THE SAME SOURCES WHICH I JUST DISCUSSED.
Q AND HOW ABOUT THEN INJURY NO. 5 IS IT?
A INJURY NO. 5 IS -- COLLECTIVELY I DESCRIBED ALL THE
FIVE SHARP FORCE INJURIES TO THE RIGHT CHEEK AREA AND I MEASURED
THEM INDIVIDUALLY IN A COUNTERCLOCKWISE DIRECTION, BUT I LABELED
THEM AS INJURY NO. 5.
Q HAVE WE OMITTED ANY ADDITIONAL INJURIES TO THE FACE?
A NO.
Q AND OTHER THAN GOING THROUGH THE PROTOCOL DIAGRAMS
AND SO FORTH, HAVE WE COVERED A DISCUSSION OF THE FACIAL INJURIES
OF G-55?
A YES.
SO BASICALLY YOU HAVE A BLUNT FORCE AND A SHARP FORCE
INJURY TO THE FACE.
Q WHY DON'T WE USE THE TIME WE HAVE TO TRY AND GO
THROUGH QUITE QUICKLY THE PROTOCOL AND DIAGRAMS IF ANY AND THE
ADDENDUM IF ANY CONCERNING THOSE --
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. KELBERG: AND WE'RE GOING TO GET DIAGRAMS TO PUT ON
THE OTHER EASEL.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, LET'S START WITH INJURY NO.
1, THAT TWO PLUS INCH LINEAR ABRASION.
A IT'S IN DIAGRAM NO. -- YOU WANT TO START WITH THE
DIAGRAM OR --
Q SURE.
A DIAGRAM NO. 22-III.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IF MR. LYNCH COULD TURN TO FORM 3 OF THAT BOARD. I
FORGET THE NUMBER OF IT, BUT WE'LL GET IT.
MR. LYNCH: 4G.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: 4G.
A HE DIAGRAMS THE LINEAR ABRASION, INJURY NO. 1, THE
CURVED ABRASION, THE CONFLUENT ABRASION HERE (INDICATING) IN THE
RIGHT CHEEK AND THE ABRASIONS AROUND THE RIGHT EYE.
THE ONLY THING IS IN THE DIAGRAM FOR THE LINEAR
ABRASION OF THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE FACE AND THE CURVED ABRASION,
HE CALLED THEM CUTS, BUT THEY ARE ABRASIONS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
FIRST OF ALL, LET'S JUST IDENTIFY THEM INDIVIDUALLY.
WHICH REFLECTS OR CONCERNS INJURY NO. 1?
A THIS PARTICULAR LINE GOING DOWN HERE (INDICATING).
Q AND IS THERE A DESCRIPTION THAT GOES ALONG WITH THAT?
A BASICALLY IT SAYS 1-3/4 INCH IN THE PROTOCOL. YOU
WANT TO TURN TO THE PROTOCOL?
Q ALL RIGHT.
WHY DON'T YOU TELL US WHICH PAGE TO TURN TO.
A PAGE 6, NO. 4.
HE DESCRIBED THEM AS MULTIPLE SUPERFICIAL INCISED
WOUNDS AND HE DESCRIBED AS A 3-INCH INCISED WOUND IN THE ORIGINAL
PROTOCOL THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE FACE EXTENDING FROM THE FOREHEAD
TO THE CHEEK, AND HE ALSO DESCRIBED OTHER SUPERFICIAL WOUNDS HALF
AN INCH TO 1 INCH.
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION, THESE ARE NOT INCISED WOUNDS
OR CUTS?
A NO.
Q HOW ARE YOU ABLE TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION
PHOTOGRAPHICALLY?
A JUST THE APPEARANCE, YOU CAN TELL THEY ARE ABRASIONS.
AND ALSO, IF YOU LOOK AT UNDER THE MAGNIFYING GLASS, YOU CAN SEE
THE IRREGULARITY TO THE MARGINS, WHICH WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH
AN ABRASION RATHER THAN AN INCISED WOUND.
Q IN YOUR OPINION, IS IT A MISTAKE FOR DR. GOLDEN TO
HAVE OPINED THAT THESE ARE INCISED WOUNDS?
A YES.
Q ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU IN ANY OF THE BIG TICKET
QUESTIONS?
A NO.
Q WHY NOT?
A BECAUSE OF THE SAME REASONS I'VE TOLD BEFORE. THEY
DON'T INTERFERE WITH MY ABILITY TO TELL YOU THE TYPE OF WEAPON OR
BLEEDING EFFECT CAUSING THE DEATH, ET CETERA.
Q AND, DOCTOR, DOES THIS PARAGRAPH 4 COVER MORE THAN
JUST INJURY NO. 1 AS YOU'VE ARBITRARILY IDENTIFIED THEM?
A IT ALSO REFLECTS THE OTHER CURVE INJURY NEXT TO IT,
AND HE CALLS THEM "CUTS."
Q IS THE SAME SERIES OF ANSWERS GOING TO APPLY THAT YOU
JUST GAVE TO YOUR OPINION THAT THESE ARE -- THIS IS AN ABRASION,
INJURY NO. 1, RATHER THAN AN INCISED WOUND? WILL THAT APPLY TO
THE SAME QUESTIONS IF ASKED OF YOU ON THIS INJURY NO. 2?
A YES.
Q OTHER THAN INJURY 1 AND 2, IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL
INJURY ADDRESSED IN THIS ITEM 4?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME OUTLINE THIS AREA OF THE PROTOCOL IN RED, AND
I'LL WRITE, "G-55 INJ. NOS. 1 AND 2, BUT PER DR. L., ABRASIONS,
NOT CUTS."
IS THAT ACCURATE, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q AND THEN IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, AGAIN ON THE DIAGRAM
FORM, WHICH IS INJURY 1 AND WHICH IS INJURY 2?
A THIS IS 1 AND THIS IS 2 (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND WHERE YOU INDICATED 1, I'LL DO IT IN BLUE.
IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT SAYS "LENGTH 3 INCH, IW," INCISED WOUND,
"SUPERFICIAL."
Q AND I'LL WRITE, "G-55 INJ. NO. 1" AND I'LL WRITE IN
QUOTES, "ABRASION."
AND THEN IF YOU'D POINT OUT INJURY NO. 2, PLEASE.
A INJURY NO. 2 IS THIS CURVED AREA HERE (INDICATING).
Q AND IS THERE ANY WRITTEN DESCRIPTION TO GO ALONG WITH
THAT?
A IT SAYS "CUTS, VARIOUS, SUPERFICIAL."
Q LET ME CIRCLE THAT AREA AGAIN ON THE DIAGRAM IN RED
THIS TIME, AND I'LL WRITE OUT AT THE SIDE "G-55 INJ. NO. 2" AND
I'LL ALSO WRITE "ABRASION" IN QUOTES.
IS IT DIAGRAMMED ANYWHERE ELSE, DOCTOR?
A MAINLY IN 23 OR MAINLY IN THIS DIAGRAM.
Q IS THERE ANY ASPECT OF THE ADDENDUM WHICH ADDRESSES
EITHER INJURY 1 OR INJURY 2?
A YES, IT DOES.
Q WHICH ONE OR ONES?
A PAGE 2, NO. 3.
Q WHY DON'T WE THROW IT UP HERE IN FRONT OF THE
PHOTOGRAPHS.
PAGE 2, NO. 3, DOCTOR?
A YES.
HE AMENDED IT TO INDICATE THAT THEY WERE ALL
ABRASIONS AND HE DESCRIBED THAT THE AREA OF ABRASION IS 4-1/2
INCHES BY 2-1/2 INCHES AND HE DESCRIBES MORE CLEARLY THAT ONE OF
THE ABRASIONS IN THE RIGHT FRONTAL AREA IS CURVILINEAR.
Q IS THAT YOUR INJURY NO. 2?
A YES.
AND HE ALSO DESCRIBES THAT THE LONGEST ABRASION
EXTENDS FROM THE RIGHT TEMPLE TO THE CHEEK 2-1/2 INCHES IN
LENGTH, AND HE ALSO ADDRESSES INJURY NO. 4 OF THE RIGHT LOWER
EYELID AS A TRIANGULAR-APPEARING ABRASION.
Q WE'LL GET TO THAT AFTER LUNCH, BUT IS IT YOUR
OPINION, DOCTOR, THAT THIS PARAGRAPH NOW ACCURATELY DESCRIBES
INJURIES 1 AND 2?
A YES.
Q AND LET ME OUTLINE THEN THAT AREA WITH THE EXCEPTION
OF THE LAST SENTENCE WHICH YOU'VE INDICATED, DOCTOR, GOES TO
ANOTHER INJURY, G-55, AND I'LL WRITE OVER AT THE SIDE "G-55 INJ.
NOS. 1 AND 2."
IS THAT ACCURATE, DOCTOR?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, DOES THE COURT WISH TO BREAK?
THE COURT: YES.
THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR NOON
RECESS.
PLEASE REMEMBER ALL OF MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU; DON'T
DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS
ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER
HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU OR ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH
YOU WITH REGARD TO THE CASE.
WE'LL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30.
ALL RIGHT.
DOCTOR, THANK YOU.
(AT 12:05 P.M., AN ADJOURNMENT
WAS TAKEN UNTIL THE SAME DAY,
1:30 P.M.)
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1995
1:34 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: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. ALL
PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT.
ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS,
PLEASE.
MR. NEUFELD: YOUR HONOR, YOU WERE GOING TO --
THE COURT: I THOUGHT YOU WERE GOING TO TAKE THAT UP
INFORMALLY WITH MR. CLARKE.
MR. NEUFELD: THE WAY IT WAS LEFT I WANTED TO REPORT BACK
TO THE COURT BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT IT, IF I MAY.
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
MR. NEUFELD.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
YOUR HONOR, IT HAS BEEN ABOUT FOUR WEEKS SINCE WE
MADE IT VERY CLEAR TO THE PROSECUTION IN THIS CASE THAT WE
OBJECTED TO DR. WEIR USING ANY LIKELIHOOD RATIOS, IF AND WHEN HE
WAS CALLED AS A WITNESS.
AT THAT TIME FOUR WEEKS AGO, ON MAY 15, AND ON MAY
16, UMM, MR. CLARKE INDICATED TO THE COURT THAT IT WASN'T HIS
INTENTION TO USE DR. WEIR FOR LIKELIHOOD RATIOS BUT RATHER FOR
THE UNDERLYING FREQUENCY DATA CONTAINED IN THAT REPORT.
WE NEEDED TO KNOW WHICH TACT THEY WERE GOING TO TAKE,
BECAUSE AS WE MADE IT CLEAR TO THE COURT AT THAT TIME, IF THEY
TOOK THE TACT OF PURSUING LIKELIHOOD RATIOS, THEN WE WOULD HE
HAVE A 402 HEARING, WE WOULD NEED TO CONTACT WITNESS.
WE HAD NEVER HEARD ANYTHING MORE IN THE INTERVENING
FOUR WEEKS AS TO WHICH WAY THEY WERE GOING TO GO UNTIL WE GOT
THAT REPORT LAST WEEK WHICH SEEMED TO STILL INDICATE THEIR
PURSUIT OF LIKELIHOOD RATIOS.
I SPOKE TO MR. CLARKE THIS MORNING AT THE SUGGESTION
OF THE COURT AND APPARENTLY, AS HE CAN REPORT TO YOUR HONOR, THEY
DON'T KNOW YET AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SPEAK TO DR. WEIR IN
THE LAST FEW DAYS OR WHATEVER BECAUSE HE HAS BEEN ON VACATION.
OUR CONCERN IS, AND I THINK THERE IS SOME FUNDAMENTAL
UNFAIRNESS HERE AND THAT THE DEFENDANT IS CERTAINLY PREJUDICED BY
THIS SITUATION IN THAT THEY'VE HAD MORE THAN ENOUGH TIME TO FIND
OUT WHICH WAY THEY ARE GOING TO MOVE ON THIS, SO WE CAN GO OUT,
AND IF NEED BE, SECURE WITNESSES FOR SUCH A HEARING.
ALL I'M ASKING IS THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, SINCE
THEY HAVE NOW INDICATED THAT THEY INTEND CALL DR. WEIR AS EARLY
AS NEXT WEEK, WHICH DOESN'T GIVE US A LOT OF TIME, THAT THEY
INFORM THE COURT ON THE RECORD AND INFORM COUNSEL, CERTAINLY NO
LATER THAN -- TOMORROW IS WEDNESDAY -- CERTAINLY NO LATER THAN
THURSDAY, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY INTEND TO PURSUE THE ROUTE OF
LIKELIHOOD RATIOS SO WE CAN GET READY IN TIME FOR A HEARING FOR
NEXT WEEK, OTHERWISE WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO IT WITH ENOUGH TIME.
THE COURT: MR. CLARKE.
MR. CLARKE: YES, YOUR HONOR.
WITH REGARD TO DR. WEIR, HE IS ON VACATION AND WILL
BE DRIVING HOME ARRIVING HOME TOMORROW. HE IS TO CONTACT US AS
SOON AS HE IS ABLE TO.
SO IT IS OUR INTENT TO SPEAK WITH HIM TOMORROW, MAYBE
IN THE EVENING, AND I INDICATED TO MR. NEUFELD EARLIER TODAY THAT
ONCE WE'VE HAD THAT DISCUSSION WITH HIM I THINK WE WILL BE IN A
MUCH BETTER POSITION TO DECLARE TO HIM WHAT TYPES OF EVIDENCE WE
MAY WISH TO OFFER IN FRONT OF THE JURY.
SO I THINK AT THIS POINT IT IS PREMATURE, BUT WE ARE
GOING TO OPERATE WITH ALL DELIBERATE SPEED.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THEN MAY I TRUST THAT THIS ISSUE WILL BE LAID TO REST
AT THE LATEST BY THE CLOSE OF BUSINESS FRIDAY?
MR. CLARKE: I WOULD HOPE SO, YES.
I MIGHT INDICATE TO THE COURT, DR. WEIR IN FAIRLY
QUICK FASHION PRODUCED A REPORT, A PRELIMINARILY REPORT, AS MR.
NEUFELD INDICATED, FAIRLY QUICKLY. IT IS NOT TOTALLY COMPLETE
BUT HE FELT IT IMPORTANT THAT BOTH WE AND THE DEFENSE HAVE
SOMETHING TO WORK FROM IN THIS AREA.
IT IS OUR INTENTION TO PRESENT IN TERMS OF POPULATION
FREQUENCIES WHAT THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY FEELS IS APPROPRIATE
AND WE WILL CONVEY THAT DIRECTION THAT THE COMMUNITY IS TELLING
US AS SOON AS WE ARE ABLE TO AFTER WE SPEAK WITH DR. WEIR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. NEUFELD: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
MR. CLARKE: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING MORE DNA.
ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, COULD I HAVE ABOUT THIRTY SECONDS
WITH MR. SHAPIRO?
THE COURT: SURE.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: DEPUTY MAGNERA.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(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.
LAKSHMANAN SATHYAVAGISWARAN,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE NOON RECESS, RESUMED
THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL
THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.
THE COURT: DR. LAKSHMANAN IS AGAIN ON THE WITNESS STAND
UNDERGOING DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KELBERG.
AND MR. KELBERG, YOU MAY CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT
EXAMINATION.
MR. KELBERG: I AM GOING AS QUICKLY AS I CAN, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. KELBERG:
Q DR. LAKSHMANAN, AGAIN WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION
COULD YOU STEP DOWN, AND LET'S FINISH, IF WE CAN, PLEASE, GOING
THROUGH THE INJURIES THAT ARE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH G-55.
I BELIEVE WE STOPPED, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, WITH THE
PROTOCOL AND DIAGRAMS THROUGH INJURY NO. 2; IS THAT CORRECT, THE
CURVA LINEAR?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q LET'S PICK UP, IF WE COULD, DOCTOR, WOULD YOU
IDENTIFY WHAT IS INJURY NO. 3?
A THE INJURY NO. 3 IS THIS CONFLUENT AREA OF ABRASIONS
IN THE RIGHT CHEEK AREA WHICH I HAVE DESCRIBED IN THE MORNING
RIGHT HERE, (INDICATING).
Q HAS DR. GOLDEN DIAGRAMMED THAT CONFLUENT AREA?
A YES, HE HAS.
Q WHERE?
A IN DIAGRAM 22-III.
Q WOULD YOU INDICATE, PLEASE, DOCTOR, WHERE IT HAD BEEN
DIAGRAMMED, AND WHAT, IF ANY, DESCRIPTION HAS BEEN PROVIDED?
MR. LYNCH COULD PERHAPS MOVE BACK THIS WAY?
A THIS IS THE AREA OF ABRASION INJURY WHICH HE HAS
DIAGRAMMED HERE ON THE LEFT LOWER QUADRANT OF 22-III AND HE HAS
DESCRIBED THE DESCRIPTION HERE "ONE AND A HALF BY 3/4 INCH
ABRASION REDDISH BROWN" BELONGS TO THIS AREA HERE AND ALSO THIS
DESCRIPTION HERE APPLIES TO THIS AREA OF INJURY.
Q WHAT IS THAT DESCRIPTION THAT YOU WERE JUST POINTING
TO, DOCTOR?
A CIRCUMSCRIBED AREA OF ABRASIONS. ACTUALLY IS NOT
PATCHES. POORLY DEFINED.
THE COURT: MR. KELBERG, I WONDER IF YOU AND DR. LAKSHMANAN
COULD STOP TALKING OVER EACH OTHER.
MR. KELBERG: I WILL TRY TO DO BETTER.
THE WITNESS: IT SAYS "POORLY DESCRIBED CIRCUMSCRIBED
ABRASIONS."
THE COURT: MR. KELBERG, WOULD IT BE BETTER TO MOVE THE
MICROPHONE IN THE DOCTOR'S TIE? WOULD THAT BE A BETTER LOCATION
FOR IT?
MR. KELBERG: I'M GETTING A SHAKE OF THE HEAD FROM SIDE TO
SIDE FROM THE SOUND PERSON.
THE COURT: HE HAS BEEN TALKING A LONG TIME.
THE WITNESS: THE RIGHT CHEEK AREA. THIS SAYS, "POORLY
CIRCUMSCRIBED AREA OF ABRASIONS ONE AND A HALF INCH BY 3/4 INCH."
"POORLY DEFINED," RATHER.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, DOES IS WRITING IN ANY WAY
AT ALL TO CORRESPOND AT ALL TO WHAT YOU HAVE DESCRIBED AS JURY
NO. 3?
A THIS WOULD BE INJURY NO. 4 NEXT TO THE EYE.
Q SO BEFORE I START MARKING WITH A PERMANENT MARKER,
WOULD IT BE ACCURATE TO INCLUDE THIS AREA?
A NOT THAT AREA.
Q I'M SORRY, NOT THAT AREA?
A JUST THIS AREA.
Q WOULD THAT OTHERWISE BE ACCURATE?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: I HAVE CIRCLED THAT AREA IN THE LOWER LEFT
QUADRANT AND I WILL WRITE "G-55 INJ. NO. 3."
Q DOES DR. GOLDEN THEN DESCRIBE THAT CONFLUENT AREA OF
ABRASIONS, DOCTOR, IN HIS PROTOCOL?
A RIGHT HERE PAGE 6, ITEM 5, THE FIRST FIVE LINES.
Q WOULD YOU POINT TO WHERE THAT ENDS, FOR THAT
DESCRIPTION.
A RIGHT HERE, (INDICATING), ABOUT.
MR. KELBERG: I WILL OUTLINE THAT ON THE PROTOCOL IN RED
AND TO THE LEFT I WILL WRITE "G-55"?
A YES.
Q "INJ. NO. 3"?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, IS THAT AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION, IN YOUR
OPINION, OF THIS CONFLUENT AREA?
A YES.
Q IS THIS INJURY NO. 3 ADDRESSED AT ALL IN THE
ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q IN YOUR JUDGMENT WAS THERE ANY REASON TO DO SO?
A NO.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT INJURY NO. 3 WHICH WE
HAVE NOT DISCUSSED?
A NO.
Q LET'S LOOK AT INJURY NO. 4 THEN IF YOU WOULD IDENTIFY
IT FIRST FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH?
A INJURY NO. 4 INCLUDES THESE ABRASIONS AROUND THE
RIGHT EYE, INCLUDING A TRIANGULAR AREA OF ABRASION.
Q FROM WHAT YOU JUST TOLD US A FEW MOMENTS AGO, I
GATHER THERE WAS SOME INDICATION IN 22 ROMAN NUMERAL III?
A YES. YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE ABRASIONS DIAGRAMMED
THERE, BUT ALSO -- THAT IS ONLY -- THAT IS ONLY DIAGRAMMED WHERE
YOU SEE IT, 22-III, RIGHT THERE, (INDICATING).
Q DOCTOR, IS THERE MORE THAN ONE LINE ON THE SCHEMATIC
TO REPRESENT INJURY NO. 4?
A THERE IS ONE OR TWO LINES HERE.
Q HOW MANY INDIVIDUAL ABRASIONS DO YOU INCLUDE IN YOUR
DESCRIPTION OF INJURY NO. 4?
A I JUST DESCRIBED THEM AS LINEAR AND IRREGULAR
ABRASIONS AROUND THE EYE.
Q FROM LOOKING AT THE PHOTOGRAPH OR ANY OTHER
PHOTOGRAPH CAN YOU APPROXIMATE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SUCH
ABRASIONS AROUND THE EYE?
A ABOUT THREE OF THEM THERE. THREE OF THEM THERE, IN
ALL THE PHOTOGRAPHS I HAVE SEEN.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THIS AREA AGAIN IN RED.
Q IS THAT THE ACCURATE AREA, DOCTOR, THAT I JUST
OUTLINED?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: AND I WILL DRAW A LINE OUT TO THE RIGHT SIDE
AND WRITE "G-55 INJ. NO. 4."
Q ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT THIS?
A HE CORRECTLY LABELS THEM AS ABRASIONS HERE,
(INDICATING), ABRASIONS, ABR.
IN THE DESCRIPTION THEY WERE INCLUDED UNDER THE -- HE
JUST CALLED THEM AREAS OF THE SUPERFICIAL WOUNDS IN THE
DESCRIPTION OF AN ITEM 4 OF PAGE 6, SO IT IS NOT A -- IT REFLECTS
WHAT HE HAS DIAGRAMMED THERE.
Q SO WHAT YOU WERE JUST POINTING TO, DOCTOR, UNDER ITEM
4, PAGE 6 OF THE AUTOPSY PROTOCOL WHERE WE HAVE ALREADY WRITTEN
IN "G-55 INJURIES 1 AND 2 BUT PER DR. L ABRASIONS NOT CUTS," THAT
DESCRIPTION INCLUDES, IN YOUR OPINION, THE DESCRIPTION OF INJURY
NO. 4?
A YES.
Q AND ALTHOUGH DR. GOLDEN HAS ANNOTATED THE DIAGRAM TO
REFLECT MULTIPLE ABRASIONS, HE HAS IN FACT WRITTEN A DESCRIPTION
THAT DESCRIBES THEM AS A SUPERFICIAL WOUND VARYING FROM ONE-HALF
TO ONE INCH?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME CIRCLE THAT AREA IN BLUE JUST TO SET
IT OFF FROM WHAT WE'VE ALREADY OUTLINED IN RED. CIRCLE THAT ON
THE PROTOCOL.
I WILL WRITE OUT AT THE SIDE "G-55 INJ. NO. 4, BUT
SEE DIAGRAM" --
THE WITNESS: OKAY.
MR. KELBERG: -- "22 ROMAN NUMERAL III AND I WILL WRITE
"ABRASIONS" IN QUOTATION MARKS?
THE WITNESS: HE HAS ADDRESSED IT IN THE ADDENDUM ALSO.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: YOU SAID THERE IS SOMETHING
ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q WE HAVE THAT HERE. TELL US WHERE.
A PAGE 2, NO. 3.
Q NO. 3 OF PAGE 2, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q WHERE?
A THE LAST LINE HERE, (INDICATING), HE HAS DESCRIBED
THE TRIANGULAR ABRASION WHICH YOU SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH AS
TRIANGULAR.
"RIGHT LOWER EYELID AS TRIANGULAR IN APPEARANCE,"
PAGE 2 NO. 3 LAST LINE.
Q WOULD YOU POINT AGAIN ON THE PHOTOGRAPH WHERE THAT
PARTICULAR ABRASION IS THERE.
A IT IS RIGHT THERE. THERE ARE OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS WHICH
SHOW IT WELL, BUT IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH THAT IS IN EVIDENCE IT SHOWS
IT RIGHT HERE WHERE I'M POINTING AND BELOW THE RIGHT EYE,
(INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: THAT IS ON G-55, YOUR HONOR, AND APPEARS TO
BE THE INJURY WHICH IS CLOSEST TO THE LOWER PART OF THE RIGHT
EYE.
THE COURT: YES.
MR. KELBERG: I WILL OUTLINE THIS AREA ALSO ON THE ADDENDUM
IN BLUE AND CIRCLE IT AND OUT AT THE SIDE WRITE "G-55 INJ. NO.
4."
Q ANYTHING FURTHER IN THE ADDENDUM REGARDING THAT
INJURY, DOCTOR?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S TAKE THE ADDENDUM DOWN AND ASK YOU, IF YOU
WOULD, PLEASE, TO MOVE TO INJURY NO. 5.
A INJURY NO. 5 I HAVE COLLECTIVELY LABELED AS INJURY
NO. 5 ALL THE FIVE SHARP FORCE INJURIES TO THE RIGHT CHEEK AND
AREA, AND I MEASURED THEM RATING FROM 5/8 INCH, 3/8, QUARTER
INCH, 5/8 INCH AND QUARTER INCH RESPECTIVELY WHEN MEASURED IN A
COUNTERCLOCKWISE DIRECTION; ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE.
Q DOCTOR, THIS IS THE SERIES FOUR OF WHICH, IN YOUR
OPINION, OVERLAY THE CONFLUENT ABRASIONS SHOWN AS INJURY NO. 3?
A YES.
Q DID DR. GOLDEN DIAGRAM ANY OF THOSE FIVE SUPERFICIAL
CUTS?
A YES, IN 22-I, RIGHT HERE IN THE LEFT LOWER QUADRANT,
AND HE HAS LABELED IT, ALL FIVE, "SUPERFICIAL INCISE WOUNDS OF
SKIN OF RIGHT CHEEK," ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE.
Q IS THAT AN ACCURATE, FIRST, DIAGRAMMATIC
REPRESENTATION OF THEIR LOCATION?
A YES.
Q IS IT AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOU SEE IN THE
PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES, AND IT IS ALSO DESCRIBED IN THE REPORT HERE,
(INDICATING).
Q BEFORE WE GET TO THE REPORT, THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME
WRITING TO THE RIGHT OF THE SCHEMATIC.
IS THAT -- DOES THAT ASSOCIATE ITSELF WITH THESE FIVE
SUPERFICIAL CUTS?
A YES. IT SAYS "VERY SUPERFICIAL CUTS" HERE.
Q WHAT DOES IT SAY?
A "SUPERFICIAL CUTS." "SUPERFICIAL IW" IS INCISE
WOUNDS.
Q AND THAT IS A MORE FORMAL WAY OF REFERRING TO A CUT?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME CIRCLE THIS ENTIRE AREA THEN AND I'M
GOING TO ASK YOU, DOCTOR, WHEN I'M DONE DOING THAT, IF YOU COULD,
AFTER I -- TO THE SIDE I'M GOING TO WRITE "G-55 INJ. NO. 5."
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: WOULD YOU POINT OUT VERY SLOWLY, AND
I WILL CIRCLE IN RED, THE FIVE CUTS AS DIAGRAMMED BY DR. GOLDEN.
A ONE, TWO --
Q LET'S STOP AT ONE. AND IS THERE AN ENTRY FOR THE
SIZE OF THAT ADJACENT TO IT?
A IT SAYS HALF AN INCH THERE.
Q SO THIS IS NO. 1?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: I WILL CIRCLE IT AND I WILL WRITE NUMBER "NO.
1 OF 5."
THE WITNESS: THIS IS 2 HERE.
MR. KELBERG: I WILL CIRCLE THAT.
THE WITNESS: NO, THERE IS ONLY ONE THERE. THIS IS 2, 3 AND
4.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: I'M SORRY WHICH IS --
A THIS IS NO. 2.
Q WHICH, DOCTOR?
A THIS ONE, THE ONE I'M POINTING OUT RIGHT THERE.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
LET ME SHORTEN THAT CIRCLE AND I WILL COVER WHAT I
SHOULD HAVE IN A SECOND AND OUT AT THE SIDE I WILL WRITE "NO. 2
OF 5."
Q WHERE IS 3?
A RIGHT NEXT TO IT THERE.
Q I'M SORRY, DOWN HERE, (INDICATING)?
A RIGHT THERE.
Q WHAT IS ALREADY CIRCLED IN RED?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT. LET ME KEEP THAT THEN AND I WILL
WRITE UP HERE "NO. 3 OF 5"?
THE WITNESS: THIS IS NO. 4.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: I'M SORRY, HERE, DOCTOR?
A THIS ONE RIGHT HERE, POINTING RIGHT THERE,
(INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT. I WILL CIRCLE THAT AND I WILL OUT
THE SIDE WRITE "NO. 4 OF 5.".
THE WITNESS: AND THIS IS NO. 5 HERE, (INDICATING).
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AND IS THERE SOME WRITING ASSOCIATED
WITH THAT?
A IT SAYS I THINK IT IS 5/8 OF AN INCH.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME CIRCLE THIS AREA AND I WILL WRITE "NO.
5 OF 5."
Q DOCTOR, WHICH IS THE ONE OF THESE FIVE THAT, IN YOUR
OPINION, DOES NOT OVERLAY THE AREA OF THE CONFLUENT ABRASIONS?
A THIS ONE, (INDICATING).
Q WHAT WE HAVE LABELED NO. 5 OF 5?
A YES.
Q NOW, YOU SAID DR. GOLDEN ADDRESSED THIS AS WELL IN
THE PROTOCOL?
A YES. HE ADDRESSES IT AS PAGE 6, ITEM 2. THIS WHOLE
PARAGRAPH REFERS TO THAT, (INDICATING).
Q IS THAT AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOU SEE IN
THE PHOTOGRAPH G-55 CONCERNING THIS INJURY OR SERIES OF INJURIES?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME OUTLINE THIS IN BLUE. I WILL WRITE
"G-55 INJ. NO. 5."
Q DOCTOR, IN DR. GOLDEN'S DESCRIPTION, THE LAST
SENTENCE, HE SAYS:
"THEY ARE SUPERFICIAL" THESE FIVE WOUNDS,
"INVOLVING THE SKIN AND ASSOCIATED WITH A SMALL AMOUNT OF
CUTANEOUS HEMORRHAGE."
DOCTOR, IS THAT INFORMATION OF ASSISTANCE TO YOU IN
ASSESSING WHETHER THOSE FIVE CUTS WERE INFLICTED BEFORE DEATH, AT
OR AROUND THE TIME OF DEATH OR AFTER DEATH?
A IT WOULD -- TO ME IT WOULD INDICATE THAT THEY
HAPPENED BEFORE DEATH BECAUSE YOU MUST HAVE BLOOD PRESSURE TO
HAVE HEMORRHAGE IN THE SOFT TISSUES.
Q AND THE CUTANEOUS HEMORRHAGE WOULD BE INTO THE SOFT
TISSUES AS YOU DEFINE THAT TERM?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT NO. 5?
A NOTHING ELSE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
I BELIEVE YOU SAID THERE WAS A NUMBER 6 OR AM I
WRONG?
A NO. 6 IS ALREADY WE DISCUSSED. THAT IS THE WOUND TO
THE RIGHT EAR WHICH GOES TO THE TEMPORAL BONE.
Q IS THERE ANY OTHER INJURY TO THE FACE THAT WE HAVE
NOT DISCUSSED IN 1 THROUGH 5?
A NO.
Q IS THERE ANY ASPECT OF THE ADDENDUM THAT ADDRESSES
THE LAST SERIES OF INJURIES NO. 5 THAT WE HAVE NOT GONE INTO YET?
A UMM, NO.
Q SO AS FAR AS YOU ARE CONCERNED, DOCTOR, HAVE WE
COMPLETED A DISCUSSION OF THE FACIAL INJURIES IN G-55?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THE STAND FOR JUST A
BRIEF MOMENT AND SIT, I WANT TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME
TESTIMONY, AND I'M FOCUSING NOW, DOCTOR, STRICTLY ON INJURY 5,
THIS SERIES OF FIVE SUPERFICIAL CUTS, FOUR OF WHICH YOU SAY
OVERLAY THE CONFLUENT ABRASION AREA THAT IS INJURY NO. 3.
IN PART -- AS PART OF YOUR REVIEW, DOCTOR, DID YOU
REVIEW DR. GOLDEN'S PRELIMINARY HEARING TESTIMONY CONCERNING THIS
AREA?
A YES, I DID.
Q AND INVITING --
MR. SHAPIRO: YOUR HONOR, THERE WOULD BE AN OBJECTION BASED
ON THE FACT THAT THIS IS ALL HEARSAY TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. KELBERG: MAY I CONTINUE, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: AT THIS POINT, YES.
MR. SHAPIRO: MAY THERE BE A CONTINUING OBJECTION?
THE COURT: THE OBJECTION IS PREMATURE AT THIS TIME.
THE QUESTION WAS DID YOU REVIEW THE TESTIMONY? YES,
I DID. THERE HAS BEEN NO QUESTION.
MR. SHAPIRO: BUT THE HARM IS GOING TO COME IF THE QUESTION
IS READ.
THE COURT: THAT IS A SPEAKING OBJECTION AS WELL.
PROCEED, MR. KELBERG.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q DOCTOR, AND INVITING COURT AND COUNSEL'S ATTENTION TO
PAGES 81 AND 82 AND 85 OF THAT PRELIMINARY HEARING TRANSCRIPT AND
86, I SHOULD SAY, WAS THIS PART OF THE INFORMATION YOU REVIEWED,
DOCTOR, QUESTIONING BY MR. HODGMAN:
"NOW, DOCTOR I REALIZE THAT THERE ARE MORE LESSER
WOUNDS THAT WERE NOT INDICATED ON YOUR DIAGRAM, BUT I WOULD LIKE
TO MOVE AHEAD NOW TO THE LOWER LEFT HAND FIGURE ON PEOPLE'S 27
FOR IDENTIFICATION, AND SIR, YOU OBSERVED, DURING THE COURSE OF
YOUR AUTOPSY, FIVE WOUNDS TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF MR. GOLDMAN'S
FACE; IS THAT CORRECT?
"ANSWER: YES.
"QUESTION: AND IT APPEARS THAT WE HAVE FOUR OF
THOSE FIVE WOUNDS MARKED IN RED ON THAT LOWER LEFT-HAND FIGURE ON
PEOPLE'S 27 FOR IDENTIFICATION; IS THAT CORRECT?
"ANSWER: YES.
"QUESTION: NOW, WOULD YOU IN BRIEF DESCRIBE
THOSE WOUNDS FOR US, SIR.
"ANSWER: OKAY. REFERRING TO MY NOTES, THESE
WERE SUPERFICIAL CUTS, VARYING IN ORIENTATION INVOLVING THE SKIN
OF THE RIGHT CHEEK AND THEY VARIED FROM APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF TO
ONE INCH IN MAXIMAL LENGTH.
"QUESTION: AND THESE FIVE WOUNDS, SIR, WERE NOT
FATAL; IS THAT CORRECT, IN AND OF THEMSELVES?
"ANSWER: CORRECTION. YES. I SAID ONE-HALF. IT IS OKAY.
REFERRING TO MY PROTOCOL, THEY WERE SMALL CUTS. THEY VARIED FROM
ONE QUARTER INCH IN LENGTH TO 5/8 OF AN INCH IN LENGTH, THE
SUPERFICIAL CUTS TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CHEEK.
"QUESTION: ALL TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CHEEK;
IS THAT CORRECT?
"ANSWER: YES."
AND BEFORE I READ THE NEXT QUESTION AND ANSWER,
DOCTOR, IS THIS A REFERENCE TO WHAT YOU HAVE DESCRIBED AS INJURY
NO. 3, THE AREA OF THE CONFLUENT ABRASIONS?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION, HEARSAY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: YOU MAY ANSWER.
A I THOUGHT THE CUTS YOU DESCRIBED REFERRED TO INJURY
NO. 5, THE FIVE CUTS.
MR. KELBERG: MAY I APPROACH; YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, LET ME ASK YOU TO REVIEW,
INCLUDING THE PART THAT IS GOING TO COME AFTER WHAT I'VE JUST
READ TO YOU, AND ALSO INVITE YOUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 85.
I THINK I MAY HAVE MADE A MISTAKE. I MAY HAVE
MISINTERPRETED, BUT I WANT TO BE SURE THAT THE DOCTOR --
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. KELBERG, PROCEED.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
Q DOCTOR, IN FACT ARE THOSE THE FIVE CUTS WHICH YOU
HAVE IDENTIFIED COLLECTIVELY AS INJURY
NO. 5?
A YES.
Q WHAT I WAS READING?
ALL RIGHT. THEN CONTINUING ON:
"QUESTION: AND WERE ALL OF THOSE ANTEMORTEM
WOUNDS, AS FAR AS YOU COULD DETERMINE?
"ANSWER: YES, THEY WERE."
DOCTOR, ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT OPINION THAT
THOSE FIVE ARE ANTEMORTEM WOUNDS?
A YES.
Q NOW, LET ME REFER YOU TO PAGE 85 TO QUESTIONING
STARTING ON LINE 14. I'M SORRY, LET ME START ON LINE 7.
"QUESTION: THOSE ARE THE FIVE CUTTING WOUNDS
YOU'VE TESTIFIED TO?
"ANSWER: YES. SO IT HAD TWO THINGS VISIBLE
THERE, THE MULTIPLE ABRASIONS ON THE CHEEK" -- AND THIS REFERS
TO THIS INJURY NO. 3, THE CONFLUENT ABRASIONS, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q -- "AND THEN THE CIRCUMSCRIBED AREA WHICH
CONTAINED THE CUTTING WOUND, THE SUPERFICIAL CUTTING WOUNDS.
"QUESTION: AND SIR, WITH REFERENCE TO DIAGRAM
PEOPLE'S 28 FOR IDENTIFICATION, YOU ARE INDICATING AN AREA ON
THAT FIGURE IN THE LOWER LEFT-HAND SIDE; IS THAT CORRECT?
"ANSWER: YES.
"QUESTION: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THOSE ABRASIONS,"
THIS IS INJURY NO. 3, "WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE THOSE ABRASIONS AS
ANTEMORTEM, PERIMORTEM OR POSTMORTEM?
"ANSWER: I WOULD NOT CHARACTERIZE THEM AS
POSTMORTEM. THEY APPEARED TO BE PERIMORTEM BASED ON THEIR COLOR,
COLORATION.
"QUESTION: AND AGAIN, 'PERIMORTEM' MEANING?
"ANSWER: AT ABOUT THE TIME OF DEATH WHICH COULD
BE SHORTLY BEFORE, AT THE TIME OF OR SHORTLY THEREAFTER."
AGAIN, DOCTOR, YOU REVIEWED THAT TESTIMONY?
A YES, I DID.
Q DOCTOR, DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT OPINION CONCERNING
THAT AREA OF CONFLUENT ABRASION?
A NO. I THINK IT IS ANTEMORTEM BECAUSE AS I POINTED
OUT EARLIER, THE FIVE -- I MEAN OUT OF THE SMALL STAB SHARP FORCE
INJURIES WE DISCUSSED, FOUR OF THEM OVERLIE THIS AREA OF
ABRASION, AND THESE SHARP FORCE INJURIES SHOW EVIDENCE OF
HEMORRHAGE IN THE TISSUE WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT THE PERSON HAD
BLOOD PRESSURE AND THE HEART WAS BEATING WHEN THOSE SHARP FORCE
INJURIES TOOK PLACE.
SO IF THEY OVERLIE AN AREA OF ABRASION, THE ABRASION
MUST HAVE OCCURRED BEFORE THE SHARP FORCE INJURY, WHICH WOULD
INDICATE THAT THEY ALSO OCCURRED BEFORE DEATH WHEN THE PERSON HAD
BLOOD PRESSURE AND THE HEART WAS BEATING.
Q AND ASSUMING HYPOTHETICALLY THAT DR. GOLDEN TESTIFIED
THAT IN HIS OPINION THE CONFLUENT ABRASIONS, WHICH UNDERLIE THE
CUTS, WERE PERIMORTEM, THAT IS AROUND THE TIME OF DEATH, WOULD
IT MAKE ANY MEDICAL SENSE TO YOU HOW THE CUTS THAT ARE OVERLAYING
THOSE ABRASIONS COULD HAVE BEEN ANTEMORTEM?
A I SAID THAT THEY ARE ANTEMORTEM.
Q NO. MY QUESTION IS GIVEN DR. GOLDEN'S OPINION THAT
THE UNDERLYING ABRASIONS ARE
PERIMORTEM -- THAT WAS HIS OPINION ACCORDING TO THIS HYPOTHETICAL
TRANSCRIPT, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q -- DOES IT MAKE ANY MEDICAL SENSE HOW THE INJURY
WHICH IN YOUR OPINION COMES AFTER THE CUTS OVERLAYING THE
ABRASIONS, HOW THEY COULD BE ANTEMORTEM WITH THE UNDERLYING
INJURY, THE ABRASIONS, BEING PERIMORTEM?
A THAT IS WHAT I OPINED.
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: BASIS?
MR. SHAPIRO: IMPROPER HYPOTHETICAL, IMPROPER QUESTIONING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IF DR. GOLDEN TESTIFIED THAT
INJURY NO. 3, THE ABRASIONS, WERE PERIMORTEM AND HE ALSO OPINED
THAT THE CUTS, INJURY NO. 5, WERE ANTEMORTEM, IN YOUR OPINION,
WOULD THAT INDICATE THAT THE CUTS CAME BEFORE THE ABRASIONS?
A NO, THE CUTS CAME AFTER THE ABRASION.
Q NO, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR OPINION IS, DOCTOR.
MY QUESTION IS IF DR. GOLDEN HAD THE OPINION THAT THE
ABRASIONS WERE PERIMORTEM, AND THE CUTS WERE ANTEMORTEM, WOULD
THAT INDICATE THAT AT LEAST IN DR. GOLDEN'S VIEW THE CUTS CAME
BEFORE THE ABRASIONS?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q AND, DOCTOR, IF THE CUTS CAME BEFORE THE ABRASIONS
HOW, IF YOU CAN EXPLAIN MEDICALLY, COULD THE CUT BE OVERLAYING
THE ABRASIONS RATHER THAN THE ABRASIONS OVERLAYING THE CUTS?
A IT CANNOT BE EXPLAINED.
Q WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT OPINION, IF HELD BY DR.
GOLDEN, THAT THE CUTS CAME BEFORE THE ABRASIONS, TO BE A MISTAKE?
A WELL, HE SAID IT IS PERIMORTEM AND PERIMORTEM ALSO
INCLUDES INJURIES WHICH COULD JUST OCCUR AROUND THE TIME OF
DEATH, BUT IN THIS SITUATION I WOULD CONSIDER IT A MISTAKE.
Q ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR I THINK WE ARE DONE WITH THE PICTURE OF
THE FACIAL INJURIES, AND LET'S GO, IF WE COULD, TO THE BOARD THAT
I HAD MARKED JUST BEFORE WE STARTED FOR AFTERNOON SESSION -- JUST
BEFORE THE MORNING SESSION ENDED.
THE COURT: 362.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR, YES.
Q DOCTOR, AGAIN, WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION, WOULD YOU
STEP TO THIS BOARD OF PHOTOGRAPHS.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q AND THIS BOARD IS TITLED "SHARP FORCE INJURIES TO THE
LEFT FLANK, LEFT THIGH AND RIGHT CHEST OF MR. GOLDMAN; BLUNT
FORCE TRAUMA AND LIVIDITY."
FIRST OF ALL, DOCTOR, WE HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH IN THE
CENTER AT THE TOP UNDERNEATH OF WHICH THERE IS A DESIGNATION
43-E.
I ASK YOU TO ASSUME THAT THAT IS A COPY OF THE SAME
PHOTOGRAPH WHICH IS MARKED ALREADY AS PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 43-E, AND
IT REFLECTS THE CONDITION OF MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY AT THE TIME THE
BODY WAS DISCOVERED BY OFFICER RISKE AROUND 12:13 IN THE MORNING
ON JUNE 13, 1994.
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION, NO FOUNDATION TO THAT STATEMENT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, FIRST OF ALL, INVITING YOUR
ATTENTION TO G-1 AND G-2, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH WHAT IS SHOWN IN
THOSE TWO PHOTOGRAPHS?
A YES. THOSE ARE THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF MR. GOLDMAN TAKEN
AT THE CORONER'S OFFICE ON JUNE 14TG, 1994, IN THE MORNING WITH
HIS CLOTHING PRESENT.
Q AND DOCTOR, DOES THIS -- EACH OF THESE PHOTOGRAPHS
REPRESENT WHAT YOU SAW ON JUNE 13TH, THE DAY BEFORE, WHEN YOU
VIEWED MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY AND MS. NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S BODY AT
THE TIME THEY ARRIVED AT THE CORONER'S OFFICE?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, LET ME INVITE YOUR ATTENTION, IF I
COULD, PLEASE, FIRST TO A PHOTOGRAPH IN THE LOWER LEFT-HAND
CORNER OF THE CHART OR SERIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS MARKED G-17.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH WHAT IS SHOWN IN THAT?
A YES.
Q WHAT IS THAT?
A THAT IS A CLOSE-UP PHOTOGRAPH OF THE LEFT THIGH AREA
OF MR. GOLDMAN AFTER HIS CLOTHING HAS BEEN REMOVED AND THIS IS
THE PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN AFTER THE BODY IS WASHED.
AND WHAT YOU SEE HERE IS A STAB WOUND TO THE LEFT
THIGH AND IT IS A GAPING WOUND. IT HAS GOT A BLUNT END ON ITS
POSTERIOR ASPECT OR ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, AND THE
SHARP END ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, AND THIS WOUND IS
AN ANTEMORTEM PENETRATING STAB WOUND AND IT WAS ABOUT THREE
INCHES DEEP.
Q DOCTOR, FROM YOUR DESCRIPTION OF A POSTERIOR BLUNT
END AND USING THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, THE SHARP END
BEING ON THE LEFT SIDE, IS THAT ACCURATE?
A YES.
Q DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO THE TYPE OR CLASS OF
KNIFE OR KNIVES WHICH COULD HAVE CAUSED THAT STAB WOUND?
A IT IS A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE.
Q IS THIS A WOUND WHICH COULD ONLY HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY
A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE?
A YES.
Q AND GOING BACK, IF YOU CAN RECALL, TO OUR CHART WITH
THREE DIFFERENT EXAMPLES OF WOUND PATTERNS, WHICH WOUND PATTERN,
IF ANY, WOULD THIS PARTICULAR WOUND REFLECT?
A THIS WOULD REFLECT AN INJURY PATTERN 1, BUT I MUST
EMPHASIZE THAT THERE IS ALSO A CUTTING COMPONENT TO THIS STAB
WOUND. THAT IS, THE BLUNT END IS STILL RETAINED, BUT THE
SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE WHICH CAUSED THIS WOUND ALSO CAUSED A CUT
EXTENSION OF THE -- OF THE -- OF THE WOUND.
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION IS THIS WOUND A FATAL WOUND?
A IT IS A NON-FATAL WOUND.
Q WHAT, IF ANY, REACTION FROM THE BODY WOULD YOU
EXPECT, GIVEN THE LOCATION OF THAT STAB WOUND?
A IT WOULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT BLEEDING.
Q DOCTOR, I WANT TO INVITE YOUR ATTENTION -- AND BY
THE WAY, WHICH LEG IS THIS, DOCTOR?
A THE LEFT THIGH.
Q CAN YOU POINT OUT, IN YOUR OWN BODY, ON YOUR OWN
BODY, A GENERAL AREA LOCATION?
A ROUGHLY IN THIS AREA HERE, (INDICATING).
Q COULD YOU PULL YOUR COAT POCKET BACK?
A RIGHT HERE, (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, THE WITNESS IS
IDENTIFYING AN AREA THAT IS JUST TO THE FRONT OF HIS LEFT PANT
POCKET AND DOWN NEAR THE BOTTOM OF WHERE THE PANT POCKET ENDS.
THE COURT: YES, UPPER THIGH.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE WITNESS: WHEN I MEASURED IT IN MY ONE-AS-TO-ONE
PHOTOGRAPHS IT MEASURED -- G-17 -- ONE AND 7/8 INCH BY 7/8 INCH
IN THE GAPING STATE.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IS THAT HYPOTHETICAL
SINGLE-EDGE KNIFE WITH AN APPROXIMATE SIX-INCH LONG BLADE
TAPERING AT THE TIP CONSISTENT WITH HAVING CAUSED THIS STAB
WOUND?
A YES.
Q I WANT TO INVITE YOUR ATTENTION BACK TO G-1 AND G-2
AND IN PARTICULAR YOUR ATTENTION TO THE LEFT PANT LEG AS SHOWN IN
EACH OF THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS.
IS THE APPEARANCE OF THE PANT LEG IN EACH OF THOSE
PHOTOGRAPHS OF SOME SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU IN EVALUATING THE
RELATIVE POSITIONS OF MR. GOLDMAN AND THE PERPETRATOR AT THE
TIME THAT WOUND WAS INFLICTED?
A YES.
Q HOW SO?
A BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE HERE IN G-1 AND G-2 IS EXTENSIVE
BLOOD STAINING OF THE LEFT PART OF THE JEANS WHICH MR. GOLDMAN IS
WEARING, WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT HE WAS MOST LIKELY UPRIGHT FOR
SOME TIME AFTER THIS INJURY WAS INFLICTED, BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW,
BLOOD WOULD COME OUT OF A WOUND SUCH AS WE HAVE HERE IF THE LEFT
THIGH, WOULD DRAIN DOWN THE THIGH DUE TO GRAVITY, IF SOMEBODY IS
UPRIGHT, AND THAT WOULD STAIN THE TROUSER OR THE JEANS.
Q FOR EXAMPLE, DOCTOR, IF MR. GOLDMAN HAD BEEN IN THE
POSITION, AS SHOWN IN THESE PHOTOS, G-1 AND G-2 AND HAD REMAINED
IN THAT POSITION WITH THE STAB WOUND RECEIVED IN THAT POSITION,
WOULD YOU HAVE ANY SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION AS TO HOW THE BLOOD
COULD BE ON THE PANT LEG BELOW THE AREA OF THE WOUND GOING
TOWARDS THE SHOE?
A IT WON'T FIT THAT KIND OF POSITION BECAUSE THE BLOOD
SEEMS TO BE DEFINITELY GOING DOWNWARDS AS IF HE WAS UPRIGHT IN
THE LINE OF GRAVITY.
Q DOCTOR, HOW RAPIDLY A RESPONSE OF EXTERNAL BLEEDING
WOULD YOU EXPECT FROM A WOUND THE NATURE OF THIS PARTICULAR STAB
WOUND AS SEEN IN G-17?
A YOU WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANT BLEEDING FROM THAT STAB
WOUND. EVEN THOUGH IT DID NOT INJURE ANY MAJOR BIG VESSEL,
THERE ARE A LOT OF SMALLER VESSELS WHICH SUPPLY THE MUSCLES IN
THE FRONT OF THE THIGH AND IT WAS A WOUND WHICH WENT UP TO THREE
TO THREE AND A HALF INCHES IN DEPTH AND YOU HAVE A PRETTY GAPING
WOUND, SO THERE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT BLEEDING FROM THAT WOUND,
BUT IT IS NOT A FATAL WOUND BECAUSE NO MAJOR VESSEL WAS STRUCK.
Q DOCTOR, IS THERE A DESCRIPTION PROVIDED BY DR. GOLDEN
IN HIS PROTOCOL REGARDING THIS STAB WOUND?
A YES.
Q DOES THE DESCRIPTION INCLUDE A DESCRIPTION INTERNALLY
OF THE PATHWAY OF THIS STAB WOUND?
A YES.
Q WHAT IS THAT DESCRIPTION?
A BASICALLY IT GOES THROUGH THE MUSCULAR TISSUES TO THE
LEFT THIGH AND IT DID NOT STRIKE ANY MAJOR VESSEL, AND IT WAS
THREE TO THREE AND A HALF INCHES DEEP GOING IN A LEFT TO RIGHT
DIRECTION WITHOUT DEVIATION.
Q GIVEN THAT DESCRIPTION, ARE YOU ABLE TO OFFER AN
OPINION AS TO THE RELATIVE POSITION -- YOU HAVE INDICATED MR.
GOLDMAN WAS UPRIGHT IN YOUR JUDGMENT WHEN HE RECEIVED THIS INJURY
AND FOR SOME PERIOD THEREAFTER -- ARE YOU ABLE TO OFFER AN
OPINION FOR THE RELATIVE POSITIONS OF THE PERPETRATOR AND MR.
GOLDMAN AT THE TIME THAT STAB WOUND WAS INFLICTED?
A I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GIVE A SPECIFIC SCENARIO. THE
PERPETRATOR COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE FRONT OR THE BACK. IF HE WAS
HOLDING THE RIGHT HAND, THE KNIFE, IT COULD BE THAT THE
PERPETRATOR WAS IN THE FRONT, BUT I WON'T BE ABLE TO SAY WITH
DEFINITE CERTAINTY WHERE THE PERSON WAS OR WHERE THE VICTIM WAS
WHEN THIS WOUND WAS INFLICTED.
MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IF YOU COULD KEEP YOUR VOICE UP,
PLEASE.
Q IF WE COULD FIND A RULER AGAIN, WOULD YOU SHOW US
WHAT YOU MEAN WITH A RIGHT-HANDED PERSON, THAT IS, A PERSON
HOLDING THE KNIFE IN THE RIGHT HAND, THE RELATIVE POSITIONS, AND
THEN SHOW US A LEFT-HANDED PERSON IN THE SENSE OF HOLDING THE
KNIFE IN THE LEFT HAND.
I WILL TAKE ON THE ROLE OF MR. GOLDMAN.
YOU TELL ME WHERE YOU NEED ME TO BE IN RELATION TO
YOURSELF.
A WELL, THESE ARE JUST HYPOTHETICAL DEMONSTRATIONS.
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION, IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: YOU MAY CONTINUE, DOCTOR?
A ONE, YOU CAN BE FACING ME IN THE FRONT. ONE METHOD
COULD BE WITH THE KNIFE BEING HELD IN THIS MANNER WITH THE BLUNT
EDGE ON THE OUTER ASPECT AND THE SHARP EDGE ON THIS ASPECT LIKE
THIS ON THE THIGH, (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: IF YOU WILL STOP THIS VERY QUICKLY, THE
DOCTOR HAS TAKEN THE RULER TO REPRESENT THE KNIFE IN HIS RIGHT
HAND AND HE REFERRED TO THE BLUNT EDGE AS BEING THE EDGE WHICH IS
OUTER, THE OUTER SIDE OF THE KNIFE, THE SHARP EDGE BEING THE
INNER SIDE, AND HE HAS PRESSED IT AGAINST THAT SAME AREA OF MY
LEFT THIGH WITH THE ANGULATION BEING FULL --
Q THAT IS THE ANGULATION, DOCTOR?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: HE HAS THE BOTTOM OF THE RULER IN CONTACT
WITH MY BODY SLIGHTLY LOWER, PERHAPS AT ABOUT A THIRTY-DEGREE
ANGLE FROM THE HORIZONTAL.
THE COURT: YES.
MR. KELBERG: OBVIOUSLY THEN WITH THE HIGHER END --
Q THE OTHER END BEING HIGHER?
A JUST TO ADD TO THE --
Q CAN WE TURN IN SOME FASHION, DOCTOR, SO THE LADIES
AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY CAN SEE WHAT YOU ARE JUST POINTING --
SET THE RULER?
A LIKE THIS, YES, (INDICATING).
THE OTHER POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS THERE IS ALSO A
CUTTING COMPONENT TO THE STAB WOUND, SO THERE WAS EITHER MOVEMENT
OF THE KNIFE OR THE VICTIM'S THIGH DURING THIS TIME, DURING THIS
PENETRATION AND WITHDRAWAL, WHICH CAUSED THIS STABBING, PLUS A
CUTTING COMPONENT TO IT.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: NOW, WHAT ABOUT A PERSON HOLDING THE
KNIFE IN HIS LEFT HAND?
A WELL, IF IT WAS THE LEFT HAND, YOU COULD HAVE THE
SAME MANNER, STANDING BEHIND HIM AND STABBING HIM IN THIS MANNER,
(INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: FOR THE RECORD, DR. LAKSHMANAN HAS TAKEN A
POSITION BEHIND ME AND BASICALLY NOW HOLDING THE RULER IN HIS
LEFT HAND.
Q WHICH WOULD BE THE BLUNT EDGE?
A THE BLUNT EDGE WOULD STILL BE TO THE BACK. IT HAS TO
BE A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE FOR THIS WOUND.
Q BLUNT EDGE WOULD BE THE INNER EDGE?
A THE BLUNT EDGE WOULD BE FACING ME AND THE SHARP END
WOULD BE FACING THE FRONT.
Q AND THE ANGULATION IS STILL THE SAME?
A YES. I JUST GAVE YOU TWO POSSIBILITIES.
THE COURT: I THINK YOU NEED TO ANGLE AROUND THE OTHER WAY
TO SHOW THE JURORS AT THE OTHER END OF THE BOX.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IS THAT THE SAME ANGULATION
NECESSARY, DOCTOR, UNDER THIS SCENARIO?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, YOU INDICATED THAT DR. GOLDMAN -- GOLDEN,
EXCUSE ME, ADDRESSED THIS IN THE PROTOCOL; IS THAT CORRECT, THIS
STAB WOUND?
A YES, HE ADDRESSES IT ON PAGE 9 AND 10, NO. 4.
Q BEFORE WE MOVE ON, DOES HE ALSO HAVE SOME INDICATION
IN A DIAGRAM?
A YES, HE DOES, ON FORM 21, NO. II.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED IN ANY FASHION IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q IS THERE ANY REASON IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN, IN YOUR
OPINION?
A NO.
MR. KELBERG: IF I COULD SWITCH WITH MR. LYNCH.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AND I'M SORRY, THE PAGE NUMBER FOR
THE PROTOCOL, DOCTOR?
A PAGE 9 AND 10. STARTS ON PAGE 9, NO. 4. STARTS HERE
AS "NO. 4 STAB WOUND OF LEFT THIGH."
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION, IS THIS AN ACCURATE
DESCRIPTION OF THAT THIGH INJURY?
A YES.
Q AND IT CONTINUES ON TO THE NEXT PAGE?
A YES. IT IS ON THE TOP OF THE NEXT PAGE.
MR. KELBERG: BEFORE WE FLIP IT, LET ME MARK -- IS THIS THE
ONLY INJURY, DOCTOR, OF PHOTOGRAPH G-17?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME JUST OUTLINE THAT THEN ON OUR PROTOCOL
AND I WILL WRITE "G-17" AND NOW IF WE CAN FLIP THE PAGE.
THE WITNESS: IT ENDS HERE ON PAGE 10.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: WITH AN OPINION?
A YES.
Q IN YOUR OPINION IS DR. GOLDEN'S OPINION ACCURATE ON
THIS PARTICULAR INJURY?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: AND I WILL OUTLINE THAT ON PAGE 10 OF THE
PROTOCOL AND AGAIN WRITE "G-17."
Q DOCTOR, WHERE ON THE DIAGRAM, IF WE PUT UP BOARD 21
-- PERHAPS MR. LYNCH CAN REFRESH MY MEMORY AS TO THE NUMBER OF
THAT BOARD ON THE BACK.
MR. LYNCH: 3G.
MR. KELBERG: 3G YOUR HONOR?
THE WITNESS: THIS IS 21, NO. II.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
THE WITNESS: IT IS DIAGRAMMED IN THE RIGHT -- LEFT LATERAL
VIEW OF -- THE LEFT LATERAL VIEW DIAGRAM ON THE LEFT THIGH.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IS THERE ANY WRITTEN DESCRIPTION
WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THAT?
A YES. IT SAYS, "STAB WOUND TO LEFT THIGH, 33 INCHES
>FROM THE HEEL."
Q AND THERE APPEARS SOME WRITING, IS THERE, DOCTOR,
JUST ABOVE THE "SW"?
A YES. IT SAYS, "LENGTH" AND I CAN'T READ THE LETTERS.
I'M SORRY, IT SAYS "LEFT TO RIGHT."
Q AND THAT REFLECTS WHAT, DOCTOR?
A THE DIRECTION.
Q OF THE STAB WOUND?
A YES.
Q SO IF I CIRCLED THIS ENTIRE AREA, DOCTOR, WOULD THIS
ACCURATELY IDENTIFY WHAT IS G-17?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: AND I HAVE DONE SO IN BLUE AND WRITTEN THE
DESIGNATION G-17.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER ABOUT THAT STAB WOUND,
DOCTOR?
A NO.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER IN THE PROTOCOL ON THAT STAB WOUND?
A NO.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER IN THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT?
A NO.
Q I WANT TO MOVE THEN, IF WE COULD, DOCTOR, TO
PHOTOGRAPH G-10, THE PHOTOGRAPH IN THE LOWER RIGHT CORNER OF
EXHIBIT 362.
WHAT ARE WE SEEING IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH, DOCTOR?
A YOU ARE SEEING EVIDENCE OF THREE SHARP FORCE INJURIES
TO THE RIGHT -- FIRST OF ALL, YOU ARE SEEING THE RIGHT SIDE OF
THE TRUNK, RIGHT SIDE OF THE TRUNK FROM THE RIGHT CHEST TO THE
RIGHT HIP AREA AND THIS IS THE UPPER PART OF THE BODY AND THE
LOWER PART OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS THE UPPER HIP AREA HERE,
(INDICATING).
THE RIGHT LOWER CHEST SHOWS TWO SHARP FORCE INJURIES,
BOTH ARE STAB WOUNDS; ONE LOCATED IN THE FRONT OF THE SIDE OF THE
CHEST, WHICH IS TOWARD THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. THE
OTHER SHARP FORCE JURY IS TO THE LEFT SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH ON
THE BACK SIDE OF THE SIDE OF THE CHEST.
THIS STAB WOUND, (INDICATING) -- BOTH OF THEM ARE
FATAL STAB WOUNDS. THEY ENTERED THE LUNG AND CAUSED HEMORRHAGE.
WE HAVE ANOTHER SHARP FORCE INJURY TO THE LOWER RIGHT FLANK AREA,
(INDICATING), AND THIS ONE IS A SUPERFICIAL WOUND. IT WAS
NON-FATAL.
SO THIS PHOTOGRAPH THEN IN ADDITION, WE ALSO HAVE
SOME ABRASIONS WHICH ARE -- APPEAR POSTMORTEM ON THE SIDE OF THE
RIGHT CHEST, SOME BETWEEN THE TWO SHARP FORCE INJURIES OF THE
RIGHT CHEST, AND THE SHARP FORCE INJURY OF THE RIGHT FLANK, AND
SOME -- AND AN AREA OF ABRASION JUST BELOW THE STAB WOUND IN THE
POSTERIOR ASPECT OF THE SIDE OF THE CHEST.
I NUMBERED THEM FOR MY CONVENIENCE AND THEY HAVE BEEN
ADDRESSED IN THE PROTOCOL AND DIAGRAM AND WE CAN DISCUSS IT IN
DETAIL.
Q DOCTOR, WITH RESPECT TO THESE TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS,
ARE THOSE ARBITRARILY DESIGNATED 1 AND 2?
A YES. I NUMBERED THEM 1 -- THE ONE WHICH IS IN THE
FRONT I CALLED NO. 1 AND THE ONE IN THE BACK I CALLED AS NO. 2.
Q LET'S START WITH NO. 1.
CAN YOU POINT OUT EXACTLY, USING YOURSELF, WHERE THAT
AREA IS ON THE BODY?
A SOMEWHERE HERE ON THIS REGION OF THE CHEST,
(INDICATING).
Q PERHAPS YOU CAN TURN SO THE JURORS ON THE RIGHT SIDE
CAN ALSO SEE.
A RIGHT HERE, (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, THE DOCTOR HAS
POINTED TO AN AREA BELOW THE NIPPLE AREA OF THE RIGHT BREAST AND
TOWARD THE BACK OF THE BODY ALONG THE MIDLINE OF THE SIDE.
THE COURT: YES.
THE WITNESS: AND THE SECOND STAB WOUND -- YOU WANT TO JUST
DO IT ONE --
MR. KELBERG: LET'S SEE IF WE CAN TAKE CARE OF THEM ONE AT
A TIME.
Q DOCTOR, ARE YOU ABLE TO TELL, FROM EXAMINING THE
PHOTOGRAPH, THE TYPE OF KNIFE OR CLASSES OF KNIVES, IF IT IS MORE
THAN ONE, WHICH COULD HAVE CAUSED THAT PARTICULAR FATAL STAB
WOUND?
A IT WAS CAUSED BY A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE.
Q HOW ARE YOU ABLE TO SAY THAT THAT WAS CAUSED BY A
SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE?
A BECAUSE YOU HAVE A BLUNT END ON THE LOWER PART AND A
SHARP END ON THE UPPER PART OF THE WOUND.
Q WOULD YOU POINT OUT FOR US WHICH IS THE SHARP END AND
WHICH IS THE BLUNT END.
A THE SHARP END IS ON THE TOP HERE AND THE BLUNT END ON
THE BOTTOM HERE, (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: FOR THE RECORD, THE WITNESS HAS POINTED ON
THE PHOTOGRAPH TO THE TOP AND BOTTOM PORTIONS OF THE WOUND.
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION THAT STAB WOUND COULD NOT
HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY A DOUBLE-EDGED KNIFE?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q LET ME MOVE BRIEFLY TO NO. 2 AND ASK YOU THE SAME
SERIES OF QUESTIONS.
ARE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE FROM THE APPEARANCE OF THAT
WOUND THE TYPE OF CLASS OR CLASSES OF KNIVES WHICH COULD HAVE
CAUSED THAT FATAL WOUND?
A THAT ONE WAS ALSO CAUSED BY A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE.
YOU HAVE A BLUNT END IN THE BACK AND A SHARP END IN THE FRONT.
Q AGAIN, DOCTOR, NOT BY A DOUBLE-EDGED KNIFE?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q COULD THE HYPOTHETICAL APPROXIMATELY SIX-INCH LONG
SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE TAPERING AT THE POINT HAVE CAUSED BOTH OF
THOSE FATAL STAB WOUNDS?
A IT IS POSSIBLE.
Q DOCTOR, ARE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE, FROM ANY
DESCRIPTION PROVIDED BY DR. GOLDEN, THE RELATIVE POSITIONS OF MR.
GOLDMAN AND THE PERPETRATOR AT THE TIME EITHER OF THESE TWO FATAL
STAB WOUNDS WAS INFLICTED?
A IT WOULD AGAIN -- THERE ARE VARIOUS POSSIBILITIES FOR
THIS -- IN WHICH -- VARIOUS POSSIBILITIES HOW THIS STAB WOUND
COULD HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED.
Q LET'S START WITH THIS STAB WOUND NO. 1.
WHAT IS THE DESCRIPTION -- IN FACT, YOU SAID IT IS
DESCRIBED -- LET'S FIND THE ACTUAL DESCRIPTION, IF WE COULD, IN
THE PROTOCOL.
A IT IS ON PAGE 8, NO. 1. THE ENTIRE DESCRIPTION
APPLIES TO INJURY NO. 1 ON G-5 -- I'M SORRY, G-10.
MR. KELBERG: I WILL OUTLINE THIS ENTIRE AREA AND WRITE
"G-10 INJURY, INJ., NO. 1."
Q DOCTOR, CAN YOU SUMMARIZE IN LAY TERMS FOR US THE
DESCRIPTION PROVIDED HERE BY DR. GOLDEN AND LET ME GET OUT OF THE
WAY SO YOU CAN DO SO.
A BASICALLY THE STAB WOUND ENTERED THE RIGHT CHEST IN
THE AREA WHICH I JUST SHOWED YOU, WENT THROUGH A RIB, THE SEVENTH
RIB, WENT THROUGH THE LUNG, THE RIGHT LUNG, AND THEN CAME TO
STRIKE THE RIGHT FOURTH RIB IN ITS BACK --
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, I THINK WE NEED TO --
MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, MAYBE A BRIEF MOMENT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET'S TAKE TEN MINUTES.
(RECESS.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: MR. KELBERG, MR. SHAPIRO.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE
BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD.
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.
ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE BEEN REJOINED BY
ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF -- THIS HAS BEEN DIFFICULT
TESTIMONY THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS, AND IF AT ANY TIME DURING THESE
PROCEEDINGS YOU FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE AND YOU NEED TO TAKE A BREAK,
JUST LET ME KNOW, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND AND WE WILL TAKE A BREAK
RIGHT AWAY.
BUT IF YOU ARE FEELING UNCOMFORTABLE, DON'T HESITATE
TO LET US KNOW OR LET THE BAILIFFS KNOW.
OKAY?
ALL RIGHT.
MR. KELBERG, WOULD YOU CONCLUDE YOUR DIRECT
EXAMINATION, PLEASE.
MR. KELBERG: I'M MOVING IN THAT DIRECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
BUT I REALIZE WE STILL HAVE TIME OF DEATH ISSUES,
DON'T WE?
MR. KELBERG: WE CERTAINLY DO, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: I JUST REMEMBERED THAT.
MR. KELBERG: I'M SURE YOU WISH YOU HADN'T.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
MR. KELBERG: VERY WELL.
Q DOCTOR, WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION COULD YOU STEP
DOWN.
YOU WERE DESCRIBING FOR US -- AND IF BOTH OWE BOTH OF
US WILL SLOW DOWN WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS CONTAINED ON
THESE CHARTS, I THINK THE REPORTERS WILL FIND IT HELPFUL TO
GETTING A FULLY ACCURATE RECORD.
DOCTOR, YOU WERE DESCRIBING OR BEGINNING TO DESCRIBE
IN LAY TERMS THE SUBSTANCE OF WHAT DR. GOLDEN HAS DESCRIBED IN
THIS AREA OF THE PROTOCOL CONCERNING THAT FATAL STAB WOUND NO. 1.
WOULD YOU PICK UP WHERE YOU WERE, PLEASE.
A THE STAB WOUND ENTERED THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE CHEST,
WENT THROUGH THE RIGHT SEVENTH RIB, WENT THROUGH THE LUNG, THE
RIGHT LOWER PART OF THE LUNG, AND THEN THE STAB WOUND ENDED IN
THE BACK OF THE RIGHT FOURTH RIB.
YOU HAVE TWELVE RIBS ON EACH SIDE, AND THE FOURTH RIB
-- ON THE BACK OF THE FOURTH RIB THE STAB WOUND ENDED AND THE
STAB WOUND TRAVELED FROM BACK TO FRONT, RIGHT TO LEFT, CAUSING
INJURY TO THE LUNG AND THAT CAUSED ALSO BLEEDING.
SO THIS IS A FATAL STAB WOUND AND THE TOTAL LENGTH OF
THE TRACK FROM THE SKIN TO THE BACK OF THE RIGHT FOURTH RIB IS
ABOUT FOUR INCHES.
Q THAT IS HOW DR. GOLDEN HAS DESCRIBED THIS WOUND?
A YES.
Q IN YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF ANATOMY IS A WOUND PATH OF
APPROXIMATELY FOUR INCHES CONSISTENT WITH THE ANATOMY BETWEEN THE
POINT OF ENTRY AND WHERE DR. GOLDEN DESCRIBES THE WOUND AS
ENDING?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION, CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: YOU MAY ANSWER THE QUESTION, DOCTOR.
A THAT WILL BE A FAIR DISTANCE OF WHICH WOULD FALL
WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE ANATOMY.
MR. KELBERG: IF YOU WILL KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE,
DOCTOR.
LET ME UNDERLINE, IF I COULD, THE LAST SENTENCE OF
THE THIRD PARAGRAPH UNDER ITEM 1 WHICH GIVES THE DIRECTION "RIGHT
TO LEFT AND BACK TO FRONT WITH NO OTHER ANGULATION MEASURABLE."
Q DOCTOR, AGAIN GIVING YOU THE RULER, AND I BELIEVE YOU
INDICATED THAT THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES, DEPENDING ON WHETHER THE
KNIFE IS BEING HELD IN THE RIGHT HAND OR IN THE LEFT HAND, ABOUT
THE THIGH INJURY.
WOULD THE SAME APPLY WITH RESPECT TO INJURY NO. 1?
A YES.
Q ASSUMING, HYPOTHETICALLY, THAT THE PERPETRATOR IS
HOLDING THIS KNIFE IN THE RIGHT HAND, AGAIN USING ME AS MR.
GOLDMAN AND YOURSELF AS THE PERPETRATOR, CAN YOU DEMONSTRATE FOR
US HOW THAT WOUND COULD HAVE BEEN INFLICTED?
A YES. THE PERPETRATOR HAS TO BE IN THE BACK OF MR.
GOLDMAN AND THE STAB WOUND ENTRY IS IN THE FRONT OF THE RIGHT
SIDE OF THE CHEST.
AS I TOLD YOU EARLIER, THE DULL END OF THE KNIFE IS
IN THE LOWER PART, THE SHARP END OF THE KNIFE IS IN THE UPPER
PART, SO IF I'M HOLDING THE KNIFE IN THIS MANNER, IT WOULD BE
INTO THE CHEST IN THIS MANNER, (INDICATING), CAUSING FRACTURE OF
THE SEVENTH RIB GOING INTO THE CHEST CAVITY AND ENDING IN THE
FOURTH RIB.
IT IS LIKELY VERTICALLY ORIENTED ALSO, SO THE BLUNT
END IS HERE AND THE SHARP END IS HERE, SOMEWHAT LIKE THIS,
(INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IF YOU WILL FIX THAT POSITION SO WE
CAN DESCRIBE IT FOR THE RECORD.
YOU ARE HOLDING WITH YOUR RIGHT HAND THE RULER TO
REPRESENT THE KNIFE. YOU HAVE POSITIONED YOURSELF BEHIND ME.
YOU HAVE THE KNIFE ANGLED SUCH THAT THE PART IN CONTACT WITH ME
IS CLOSER TO THE FRONT OF MY BODY, THAN THE BACK END OF THE RULER
WHICH IS TOWARD THE BACK OF MY BODY.
Q AND THE ANGLE APPEARS TO BE ABOUT A THIRTY-DEGREE
ANGLE FROM THE HORIZONTAL, DOCTOR?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: MAY THE RECORD SO REFLECT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, I WANT YOU TO, IF YOU COULD,
PLEASE, REPOSITION YOURSELF AS YOU DID FOR THE DEMONSTRATION WHEN
YOU DESCRIBED HOW THE TWO SUPERFICIAL INCISE WOUNDS HAD BEEN
INFLICTED OR AT LEAST IN A FASHION CONSISTENT WITH THAT?
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
MR. KELBERG: AND MAY THE RECORD REFLECT THE WITNESS HAS
DONE THAT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IN THIS POSITION COULD THAT
FATAL STAB WOUND NO. 1 HAVE BEEN INFLICTED ON MR. GOLDMAN?
A AFTER THE HESITATION CUTS OR --
Q IN THIS POSITION WHERE THE PERPETRATOR IS HOLDING MR.
GOLDMAN IN THE FASHION YOU ARE HOLDING ME?
A YES, IT IS POSSIBLE.
Q AND IN WHAT WAY, DOCTOR?
A BECAUSE THE LOCATION OF THE PERPETRATOR IS IN A
POSITION WHERE THIS KIND OF WOUND IS POSSIBLE LIKE THE
DEMONSTRATION I JUST -- I DID.
Q SO IN ESSENCE DOES PUTTING YOUR ARM -- YOUR LEFT ARM
AROUND MY CHEST TO RESTRAIN ME AFFECT IN ANY WAY THE ABILITY OF
THE RIGHT-HANDED PERPETRATOR FROM BEHIND TO INFLICT THAT CHEST
WOUND?
A YEAH. THE ONLY THING IS THE VICTIM'S HAND HAD TO BE
A LITTLE BIT ON THE -- LIFTED FOR THE WOUND TO BE IN THAT AREA
WHEN THE STAB WOUND TOOK PLACE.
Q AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE FORCED BY THE RIGHT
ARM OF THE PERPETRATOR?
A OR THE VICTIM COULD BE TRYING TO MOVE.
AS I TOLD YOU, ALL THESE STAB WOUNDS AND SHARP FORCE
INJURIES ARE DYNAMIC PROCESS. IT IS NOT A STATIONARY PROCESS
WHERE A WOUND TAKES PLACE, SO IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE ARM MUST
HAVE BEEN RAISED, BECAUSE THE LOCATION OF THE WOUNDS ARE TO THE
RIGHT SIDE OF THE RIGHT CHEST AREA, WHICH IF THE ARM IS ON THIS
SIDE HERE, (INDICATING), IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO DO THE STAB
WOUND, SO THE ARM MUST HAVE BEEN RAISED AT SOME POINT TO CAUSE
THE STAB WOUND IN THAT REGION.
SO I REALLY CAN'T TELL WHAT EXACTLY TOOK PLACE AT
THAT TIME, BUT THE SCENARIO WE ENACTED IS ONE POSSIBLE SCENARIO
HOW THIS STAB WOUND COULD HAVE BEEN INFLICTED.
Q LET'S TALK ABOUT IF THE KNIFE IS HELD IN THE LEFT
HAND TO SEE HOW THAT CIRCUMSTANCE ARISES.
A THEN AGAIN THE BLUNT EDGE SHOULD BE IN THE LOWER PART
AND THE SHARP EDGE OF THE KNIFE SHOULD BE IN THE UPPER PART
BECAUSE THAT IS HOW THE WOUND CONFIGURATION OF THE BODY SURFACE
IS SURFACES, SO IT WOULD BE SOMETHING LIKE THIS, (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: INDICATING FOR THE RECORD --
THE WITNESS: BUT THE ONLY PROBLEM -- BUT IT HAS TO BE A
LITTLE MORE -- IT IS GOING FROM THE BACK TO FRONT DIRECTION, BUT
IF I WAS IN FRONT OF YOU, IT WOULD BE MORE IN A FRONT TO BACK
DIRECTION, SO THE DIRECTION ALSO SHOULD BE MORE IN A BACK TO
FRONT RIGHT TO LEFT DIRECTION BECAUSE THAT IS THE DIRECTION IN
THE BODY, SO THE DIRECTION IN THE BODY DOESN'T CHANGE.
SO IF YOU ARE GOING TO ENACT A SCENARIO, THE SCENARIO
SHOULD MATCH THE PATH IN THE BODY.
Q AND SO THE RELATIVE POSITION, IF YOU COULD RETAKE
THAT POSITION, DOCTOR, THE RELATIVE POSITION FOR THE LEFT-HANDED
INFLICTION OF INJURY
NO. 1 HAS MY BODY TURNED AT A DIAGONAL WITH MY RIGHT SHOULDER
CLOSEST TO YOU AND YOU THEN STANDING AT THIS ANGLE TO ME SO THAT
YOUR LEFT HAND IS AROUND THE BACK PORTION OF MY BODY TO INFLICT
THE STAB WOUND; IS THAT ACCURATE?
A ALSO YOUR ARM SHOULD BE RAISED BECAUSE THERE IS NO
CUTS TO THE ARM, YOU SEE, SO THE ARM HAS -- CANNOT BE OBSTRUCTING
THIS ENTRY OF THIS WOUND IN THE RIGHT CHEST AREA, SO THAT ALSO IS
A FACTOR WHICH MUST BE KEPT IN MIND, SO WHEN THESE WOUNDS WERE
INFLICTED, VERY LIKELY THAT THE HAND OF MR. GOLDMAN WAS NOT
OPPOSING HIS BODY. IT WAS PROBABLY UP TRYING TO WRESTLE AWAY
>FROM THE WOUND.
Q AND DOCTOR, IF, IN YOUR OPINION, MR. GOLDMAN HAD HIS
RIGHT ARM RAISED TO WRESTLE AWAY, WOULD THAT SUGGEST TO YOU THAT
THE PERPETRATOR IS BEHIND MR. GOLDMAN, RATHER THAN IN FRONT OF
MR. GOLDMAN?
A THAT COULD VERY WELL BE A SCENARIO.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, AS LONG WE ARE -- WE HAVE THE RULER IN
YOUR HAND, LET'S SEE IF WE COULD GET YOU BACK HERE FOR INJURY NO
2.
WOULD THE SAME SCENARIOS THAT YOU'VE JUST
DEMONSTRATED FOR THE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY APPLY WITH
RESPECT TO INJURY NO. 2, THE SECOND FATAL STAB WOUND SEEN IN
PHOTOGRAPH G-10?
A YES. THAT STAB WOUND, THE -- IT IS LIKELY
DIAGONALLY-ORIENTED, JUST LIKE THE INJURY
NO. 1, AND HERE THE BLUNT END IS IN THE BACK AND THE SHARP END IS
IN THE FRONT. YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE IT, THE BLUNT END OF IT.
Q LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET THE POINTER FOR YOU, DOCTOR.
A THE DULL END OF THE WOUND IS ON THE BACK HERE, AND
THE SHARP END IS IN THE FRONT HERE, (INDICATING), AND IT IS
DIAGONALLY-ORIENTED, SO THIS ALSO IS CAUSED BY A SINGLE-EDGED
KNIFE, AND THIS WOUND PATH DIRECTION IS I THINK RIGHT TO LEFT
GOING IN A SIMILAR FASHION AS IN INJURY NO. 1, BUT MORE JUST IN
A RIGHT TO LEFT DIRECTION.
Q DOCTOR, IS THAT WOUND ALSO DESCRIBED IN DR. GOLDEN'S
PROTOCOL?
A YES. IT STARTS ON PAGE 8 AND CONTINUES ON TO PAGE 9.
Q AND IF WE CAN HOLD UP OR FLIP OVER TO PAGE 9, THIS IS
A PARAGRAPH JUST ABOVE THE OPINION PARAGRAPH FOR THAT PARTICULAR
WOUND.
IS THAT A DESCRIPTION BY DR. GOLDEN OF THE DIRECTION
OF THE WOUND?
A YES. IT GOES STRAIGHT RIGHT TO LEFT WITH NO OTHER
ANGULATION OR DEVIATION DETERMINED.
Q AND ALSO INCLUDING A DEPTH OF PENETRATION AT A
MINIMUM?
A YES. THE ONLY ISSUE HERE IS HE COULDN'T GIVE MORE
DIRECTIONS BECAUSE WHAT YOU HAVE HERE IS A STAB WOUND WHICH
ENTERS A CAVITY AND YOU DON'T HAVE AN END POINT TO IT.
IT WENT THROUGH THE RIGHT LUNG.
UNLIKE THE INJURY NO. 1, WHERE THE STAB WOUND ENTERED
IN THE BACK OF THE RIGHT FOURTH RIB, THERE YOU HAVE A REFERENCE
POINT WHERE THE STAB WOUND ENDED WHERE YOU CAN BE MORE DEFINITIVE
ABOUT THE DIRECTION.
ALL YOU CAN SAY HERE IS IT WENT FROM RIGHT TO LEFT
BECAUSE IT ENTERED A CAVITY.
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE FORM
OF A MISTAKE BY DR. GOLDEN FOR HIS INABILITY TO PROVIDE A
SPECIFIC MEASUREMENT FOR THE DEPTH OF THE WOUND?
A IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO GIVE A FULL DEPTH OF THE
WOUND BECAUSE THE STAB WOUND IS ENTERING A CAVITY. THAT IS WHY
HE GIVE A MINIMUM TOTAL DEPTH OF PENETRATION, WHICH IS CORRECT
THING TO DO IN THIS SITUATION.
Q DOCTOR, FROM YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF ANATOMY IS THAT
MINIMUM DEPTH OF PENETRATION CONSISTENT WITH THE DESCRIPTION OF
THE INJURY PROVIDED BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME JUST OUTLINE THIS AREA FIRST IN BLUE
THAT WAS TALKING ABOUT THE DIRECTION. I WILL OUTLINE THE ENTIRE
PART OF PAGE 9 OF THE PROTOCOL AND WRITE "G-10, INJ. NO. 2," AND
LET ME FINISH OFF ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE WITH THE OUTLINE OF THE
BEGINNING DESCRIPTION OF "G-10, INJ. NO. 2."
Q NOW, DOCTOR AGAIN CAN YOU, USING THE RULER,
DEMONSTRATE FIRST A RIGHT-HANDED PERPETRATOR AND THEN A
LEFT-HANDED PERPETRATOR TO CREATE A DIRECTION SUCH AS DESCRIBED
BY DR. GOLDEN FOR STAB WOUND NO. 2.
A THIS PARTICULAR STAB WOUND, THE BLUNT EDGE IS IN THE
BACK AND THE SHARP EDGE OF THE KNIFE IS IN THE FRONT, AND IT IS
OBLIQUELY ORIENTED, SO THE STAB WOUND IS LOCATED SOMEWHERE HERE,
(INDICATING), IN THE RIGHT SIDE THE CHEST RIGHT HERE.
Q LET ME TURN JUST SO THE JURORS CAN SEE THAT AREA
WHERE YOU ARE POINTING AND THEN I WILL TURN BACK.
A SOMEWHERE HERE, (INDICATING), AND ALL WE COULD SAY
WAS THAT IT ENTERED THE CHEST CAVITY. IT ENTERED IN AN AREA OF
THE CHEST WALL WHICH IS CALLED THE EIGHTH SPACE WHICH IS JUST
BELOW THE EIGHTH RIB, AND IT ENTERED IN THAT SPACE, WENT THROUGH
THE RIGHT LUNG ALSO, PERFORATED THE LUNG, THAT IS, WENT THROUGH
AND THROUGH IN THE LUNG CAUSING BLEEDING.
AND THE DIRECTION GIVEN IS JUST RIGHT TO LEFT. IT
DIDN'T HAVE AN END POINT IN THE CHEST CAVITY.
Q DOCTOR, IF YOU COULD HOLD THAT POSITION ONE MORE
TIME.
IS THAT THE ACCURATE DIRECTION, USING THE RULER TO
REFLECT THE KNIFE ITSELF, THAT CORRELATES WITH THIS WOUND
DESCRIPTION?
A WITH THE DESCRIPTION GIVEN, THIS WOULD REFLECTS
APPROXIMATELY WHAT HAPPENED.
MR. KELBERG: AND YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, DR.
LAKSHMANAN BEING BEHIND ME, IS HOLDING THE KNIFE -- THE RULER TO
REPRESENT THE KNIFE IN HIS RIGHT HAND. IT HAS ITS END TOUCHING
ME. IT APPEARS TO BE SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE END OPPOSITE --
Q IS THAT CORRECT, DOCTOR?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: AND IT ALSO HAS THE BACK END CLOSER TO THE
BACK OF MY BODY THAN THE END TOUCHING ME.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THE WITNESS: THERE IS ONE MORE COMPONENT TO THE WOUND.
THIS WOUND, IF YOU SEE, IT IS MUCH LARGER, SO JUST LIKE THE THIGH
WOUND, THERE HAS BEEN MOVEMENT OF THE BODY OR THE KNIFE BECAUSE
THERE IS A CUTTING COMPONENT TO THIS PARTICULAR WOUND EITHER
DURING PENETRATION OR DURING WITHDRAWAL OF THE KNIFE, WHICH WOULD
INDICATE EITHER THE SUBJECT MOVED OR THE KNIFE MOVED.
IT DOESN'T HAVE JUST A -- IT HAS GOT A LARGER
APPEARING GAPING WOUND WHICH WOULD SIGNIFY THAT THERE IS A
CUTTING COMPONENT TO THE STABBING COMPONENT.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, IF WE ASKED YOU AGAIN TO
REENACT THE POSITION THAT YOU DID SEVERAL DAYS AGO REGARDING THE
SUPERFICIAL INCISE WOUND AND YOUR LEFT ARM AROUND MY UPPER CHEST
AND THE ONE YOU JUST DID FOR INJURY NO. 1, WOULD THE SAME APPLY
FOR INJURY NO. 2, THAT IN THAT POSITION OF THE PERPETRATOR BEING
BEHIND AND RESTRAINING MR. GOLDMAN WITH HIS LEFT HAND ACROSS MR.
GOLDMAN'S CHEST, THAT INJURY NO. 2 COULD HAVE BEEN INFLICTED WITH
THE KNIFE HELD IN THE RIGHT HAND?
A THAT IS A POSSIBILITY.
Q NOW, LET'S SEE THE ALTERNATIVE OF A LEFT HAND KNIFE
HOLDING SITUATION.
A IT WILL BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE JUST DISCUSSED EARLIER.
THE HAND HAS TO BE ELEVATED A LITTLE BIT AND IN THIS MANNER,
(INDICATING), WHICH COULD BE ONE POSSIBLE SCENARIO HOW THIS COULD
HAVE HAPPENED WITH THE KNIFE BEING OBLIQUELY ORIENTED TO CONFORM
-- CONFORM TO THE APPEARANCE OF THE WOUND ON THE BODY'S SURFACE.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, I CANNOT SEE THAT BECAUSE OF MY
RAISED RIGHT ARM. WOULD THE COURT HELP ME OUT A BIT?
THE COURT: YES. DR. LAKSHMANAN HAS THE RULER IN HIS LEFT
HAND. HE IS POINTING IT TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE CHEST AREA
UNDERNEATH YOUR RIGHT ARM, APPROXIMATELY FIVE INCHES BELOW YOUR
RIGHT ARMPIT.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
I THINK YOU NEED TO SWING AROUND TO SHOW THE JURORS
THE ANGLE.
MR. KELBERG: THIS WAY?
THE WITNESS: THIS MANNER IF THE LEFT HAND IS USED.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, DOCTOR.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, WITH RESPECT TO THESE TWO FATAL STAB
WOUNDS, WHAT WOULD BE THE BODY'S REACTION TO EACH THEM?
A WELL, THEY ARE FATAL WOUNDS. THEY CAUSED INJURY TO
THE LUNG, AND YOU HAVE BLEEDING, AND YOU ALSO HAVE, COMPROMISING
THE ABILITY TO BREATHE, YOU HAVE BLEEDING AND YOU ALSO HAVE
COMPROMISING OF THE BLEEDING -- I'M SORRY, BREATHING BECAUSE
BLOOD ACCUMULATION IN THE CHEST CAVITY WILL COMPROMISE YOUR
BREATHING.
Q WHAT KIND OF BLEEDING VOLUME WISE WOULD YOU EXPECT
>FROM THE INDIVIDUAL WOUNDS AND THEN THE COMBINATION OF THE TWO
STAB WOUNDS?
A YOU WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF BLEEDING
BECAUSE THE LUNG IS VERY VASCULAR STRUCTURE, AND ACTUALLY THE
TOTAL BLOOD VOLUME OF THE BODY CAN CIRCULATE IN THE LUNG IN A
MINUTE'S TIME, BUT GENERALLY THESE WOUNDS BLEED AND YOU CAN HAVE
DEATH -- I MEAN YOU CAN LOSE BLOOD PRESSURE RAPIDLY.
IF THERE IS AN ACCUMULATION OF BLOOD AND AIR IN THE
CHEST CAVITY, SO YOU CAN EXPECT DEATH IN A VERY SHORT TIME AFTER
THE INJURY.
Q ASSUMING NO OTHER INJURIES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY MR.
GOLDMAN, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO THE APPROXIMATE MINIMUM
LENGTH OF TIME THE COMBINATION OF THOSE TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS
WOULD REQUIRE BEFORE MR. GOLDMAN DIED?
A WELL, IT COULD -- BECAUSE BLEEDING IS A SIGNIFICANT
COMPONENT, IT COULD BE WITHIN A FEW MINUTES WITHOUT MEDICAL
TREATMENT.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, WOULD THE BLOOD FROM EITHER/OR BOTH OF
THOSE FATAL STAB WOUNDS GO IN ANY PARTICULAR AREA, INTERNALLY,
EXTERNALLY OR BOTH?
A BECAUSE IT IS A FRACTURED RIB IN THE RIGHT, INJURY
NO. 1, YOU COULD HAVE SOME EXTERNAL BLEEDING ALSO, BUT GENERALLY
THESE KIND OF INJURIES BLEED MORE INTERNALLY THAN EXTERNALLY.
Q WHY IS THAT, DOCTOR?
A BECAUSE, FIRST OF ALL, BECAUSE OF THE MUSCLE
ARRANGEMENT IN THE CHEST WALL AND ALSO THE MUSCLE ARRANGEMENT
BETWEEN THE RIBS, THE PLANE WHICH YOU GET MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE
LIKE A DEFECT IN A -- IT WON'T BE A DEFECT WHICH WILL JUST OPEN
UP TO THE OUTSIDE BECAUSE OF THE VARYING AND AMOUNTS OF THE
MUSCLE ARRANGEMENTS IN THAT AREA, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A
DEFECT IN THE SKIN, THE DEFECT INSIDE THE STRUCTURES UNDERLYING
THE SKIN MAY NOT HAVE THE SAME PLANE AS THE INJURY ITSELF.
Q THE SAME PLANE, P-L-A-N-E?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, DID DR. GOLDEN DESCRIBE IN ANY FASHION A
VOLUME OF BLOOD FOUND INSIDE THIS AREA OF THE BODY DURING THE
COURSE OF THE AUTOPSY?
A YES. HE DESCRIBED HUNDRED TO 200 CC OF BLOOD IN THE
RIGHT CHEST CAVITY.
Q LET'S SEE IF WE COULD FIND THE ENTRY THAT YOU ARE
REFERRING TO.
A UMM, IT IS DESCRIBED 100 TO 200 CC IN THE RIGHT CHEST
HERE UNDER INJURY NO. 1, AND HE DESCRIBED THE SAME AMOUNT --
MR. KELBERG: BEFORE YOU FLIP THE PAGE, LET ME JUST
UNDERLINE THAT.
AND FOR THE RECORD, I HAVE UNDERLINED IN BLUE IN THE
THIRD PULL PARAGRAPH OF ITEM 1 OF PAGE 8 OF THE PROTOCOL.
THE WITNESS: I THINK HE DESCRIBED IT -- THIS IS ONLY ONE
HEMOTHORAX BELONGING TO BOTH THE WOUNDS, 100 TO 200 CC.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AND A "HEMOTHORAX" MEANS WHAT,
DOCTOR?
A BLOOD IN THE CHEST CAVITY.
Q SO THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL QUANTIFICATION BY DR.
GOLDEN OF THE BLOOD FOUND IN THIS AREA?
A THAT'S CORRECT. HE SAID THE TOTAL AMOUNT PRESENT IN
THE RIGHT CHEST CAVITY WAS 100 TO 200 CC.
Q DOCTOR, HOW WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE A VOLUME OF 100 TO
200 CC'S IN THAT CHEST CAVITY?
A A VERY SMALL AMOUNT.
Q GIVEN THE NATURE OF THE VOLUME DESCRIBED, ASSUMING
THAT IT HAS BEEN ACCURATELY QUANTIFIED, WHAT SIGNIFICANCE, IF
ANY, DOES THAT HAVE TO YOU IN EVALUATING WHEN, IN RELATIONSHIP TO
THE WHOLE ASSAULT, MR. GOLDMAN RECEIVED THOSE TWO FATAL STAB
WOUNDS?
A BEFORE I ANSWER THE QUESTION I WOULD LIKE TO POINT
OUT ALSO THAT HE HAS BEEN LYING ON --
MR. SHAPIRO: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD OBJECT; NONRESPONSIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION, PLEASE.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q DOCTOR, LET'S GO BACK THEN AS YOU WERE ABOUT TO POINT
TO EXHIBIT 43-E, THE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH WITH THAT EXHIBIT
DESIGNATION THAT WE HAVE ON OUR BOARD, IS THERE SOMETHING OF
SIGNIFICANCE ON THIS ISSUE OF HOW MUCH BLOOD IS FOUND AT AUTOPSY
IN THE CHEST CAVITY FROM THE POSITION THAT MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY IS
IN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES.
Q WHAT IS SIGNIFICANT?
A HE IS FOUND ON HIS RIGHT SIDE, LYING ON THE RIGHT
SIDE WHEN HE WAS FOUND INITIALLY, AND ALSO IF YOU LOOK AT THE
CLOTHING, THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SHIRT AND OTHER AREAS ARE PRETTY
DENSELY STAINED WITH BLOOD, SO ONE OF THE FACTORS ONE MUST KEEP
IN MIND IS THE DEPENDENT DRAINAGE OF BLOOD FROM THE CHEST CAVITY,
BLOOD FROM THE STAB WOUND, BECAUSE ONE LIES ON THE RIGHT SIDE.
Q DOCTOR, YOU EXAMINED, I THINK YOU'VE TESTIFIED, THE
SHIRT MR. GOLDMAN WAS WEARING AT THE TIME HIS BODY WAS FOUND?
A YES.
Q AND YOU HAVE ALSO EXAMINED THE BODY BOTH ON THE 13TH
AND THE 14TH; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q DID YOU FIND, IN EXAMINING THE SHIRT, THAT THE SHIRT
APPEARED MORE BLOOD STAINED ON THE RIGHT SIDE THAN ON THE LEFT?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, DOES THIS DRAINING OF BLOOD WHEN MR.
GOLDMAN IS IN THE POSITION AS SEEN IN THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT WE'VE
MARKED 43-E, DOES THAT STAINING -- DOES THAT EXTERNAL BLOOD FLOW
CONTINUE EVEN IF MR. GOLDMAN'S HEART HAS STOPPED PUMPING?
A BECAUSE IT IS LIQUID BLOOD IN A CAVITY WHICH CAN JUST
OOZE OUT THROUGH THE DEFECT IN THE CHEST WALL.
Q IS THE BLOOD STAINING YOU SEE IN THE RIGHT SIDE OF
MR. GOLDMAN'S SHIRT CONSISTENT WITH THAT KIND OF ACTION, THAT IS,
DRAINAGE OUT OF THE WOUND ITSELF?
A THAT COULD BE ONE WAY THAT STAINING OCCURRED.
Q DOCTOR, IS THERE ANY OTHER WOUND THAT YOU HAVE
IDENTIFIED IN THIS AREA OF MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY COVERED BY THE
RIGHT PORTION OF HIS SHIRT THAT HAS THE BLOOD STAINING THAT YOU
SEE IN PHOTOGRAPH G-1, OTHER THAN THE ONES THAT ARE SHOWN IN THE
PHOTOGRAPH G-10?
A NO.
Q IS THERE ANY OTHER SOURCE THAT YOU CAN THINK OF, FROM
YOUR EXAMINATION OF THE INFORMATION AND THE PHOTOGRAPHS, WHICH
COULD BE THE SOURCE FOR THE BLOOD STAINING TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF
THE SHIRT, OTHER THAN THE TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS AND THE THIRD
SHARP FORCE INJURY YOU'VE IDENTIFIED BUT HAVEN'T DESCRIBED IN
MUCH DETAIL YET, IN PHOTOGRAPH G-10?
A THE SHIRT IS ALSO STAINED IN THE SHOULDER AREA AND IN
THE SIDE AREA, SO SOME OF THE BLOOD OF THE SHOULDER AREA COULD BE
>FROM THE NECK WOUNDS, BUT AS FAR AS THE CHEST GOES, THESE ARE THE
ONLY TWO WOUNDS THERE WHICH CAN ACCOUNT FOR THIS KIND OF
STAINING.
Q DOCTOR, GIVEN THAT FINDING, DOES THAT SERVE AS ANY
BASIS FOR YOU TO DETERMINE WHETHER IN FACT THE VOLUME OF BLOOD
THAT ORIGINALLY WAS IN THE CHEST CAVITY, AFTER THESE WOUNDS WERE
INFLICTED, WAS GREATER THAN WHAT WAS RECORDED AT AUTOPSY BY DR.
GOLDEN?
A THAT WOULD SUGGEST THAT.
Q AND DOCTOR, IF THAT WERE THE CASE, THAT SOME OF THIS
BLOOD FLOWED OUT DUE TO THE EFFECTS OF GRAVITY, WOULD THAT AFFECT
YOUR ABILITY TO ASSESS WHEN IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE ATTACK THOSE
TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS WERE INFLICTED?
A IT WOULD FAVOR THAT IT OCCURRED DURING THE EARLIER
PART OF THE ATTACK RATHER THAN LATTER PART OF THE ATTACK, BUT
AGAIN, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THERE ARE OTHER SIGNIFICANT
INJURIES ON MR. GOLDMAN, INCLUDING THE AORTIC INJURY AND THE
INTERNAL JUGULAR VEIN INJURY.
AND IF, AS I OPINED EARLIER, THAT THEY COULD HAVE ALL
BEEN SUSTAINED WITHIN A MINUTE'S TIME YOU MAY NOT HAVE MUCH
ACCUMULATION IN THE CHEST CAVITY, TOO, IF THEY OCCURRED RAPIDLY
AFTER EACH OTHER.
Q EVEN IF INFLICTED EARLY ON IN THE COURSE OF ALL OF
THE WOUNDS BEING INFLICTED?
A BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE AORTIC WOUND WHICH WOULD BLEED
MORE THAN THE CHEST WOUND AT THAT POINT.
Q WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED THE AORTIC WOUND YET, HAVE WE?
A NO, WE HAVE NOT.
Q DOCTOR, I WANT TO CORRELATE, IF A CORRELATION IS
APPROPRIATE, THE TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS TO THE CHEST AND THE THIGH
WOUND THAT YOU DESCRIBED AS ONE WHICH MR. GOLDMAN MUST HAVE BEEN
IN AN UPRIGHT POSITION TO HAVE RECEIVED BASED UPON THE BLOOD
STAINING PATTERN OF THE LEFT LEG.
IS THERE ANYTHING MEDICALLY INCONSISTENT, DOCTOR,
WITH THOSE TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS TO THE CHEST HAVING BEEN
INFLICTED BY THE PERPETRATOR HOLDING THE KNIFE IN THE RIGHT HAND
AND RESTRAINING MR. GOLDMAN, WITH THE LEFT HAND BEING BEHIND MR.
GOLDMAN, AND THEREAFTER MR. GOLDMAN, IN HIS EFFORT TO BREAK FREE,
BREAKING FREE IN A POSITION SO THAT HE IS NOW FACE-TO-FACE WITH
THE PERPETRATOR AND THE PERPETRATOR STABBING MR. GOLDMAN WITH HIS
RIGHT HAND STILL HOLDING THE KNIFE IN THE AREA OF THE LEFT THIGH
AS YOU DEMONSTRATED EARLIER THIS AFTERNOON?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION, IMPROPER HYPOTHETICAL.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: YOU MAY ANSWER THE QUESTION.
A SO LET ME UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.
THE STAB WOUND TO THE CHEST TAKES PLACE WHILE THE
PERPETRATOR IS IN THE BACK AND THE VICTIM TURNS AND THEN THE STAB
WOUND TO THE THIGH IS INFLICTED IN RAPID SUCCESSION?
Q YES.
A THAT IS --
Q ANYTHING INCONSISTENT WITH THAT --
THE COURT: MEDICALLY INCONSISTENT.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: MEDICALLY INCONSISTENT WITH THAT
HYPOTHETICAL SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES?
A MEDICALLY THERE IS NOTHING INCONSISTENT WITH THAT,
BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT I ALSO EXAMINED THE CLOTHING OF MR.
GOLDMAN WHEREIN WE HAVE DEFECTS IN THE CLOTHING.
THE LARGER DEFECT IN THE CLOTHING CORRESPONDS TO THE
SMALLER WOUND HERE.
Q WHICH WOUND, I'M SORRY, DOCTOR?
A THE ONE IN THE RIGHT FRONT OF THE CHEST.
AND THE SMALLER DEFECT IN THE CLOTHING CORRESPONDS TO
THE LARGER WOUND, WHICH WOULD INDICATE TO ME THAT PROBABLY THE
CLOTHING WAS NOT IN THE SAME POSITION AS THE WOUND WHEN THOSE
WOUNDS WERE INFLICTED.
AGAIN THIS IS ONLY A POSSIBILITY.
Q DOCTOR, FROM WHAT YOU OBSERVED IN THE SHIRT, WERE THE
WOUNDS IN A POSITION -- I'M SORRY -- THE DEFECTS IN THE SHIRT IN
A POSITION WHICH WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PERPETRATOR HOLDING
THE SHIRT UPRIGHT SO AS TO TWIST THE SHIRT FROM ITS NORMAL
POSITION ON THE BODY?
THE COURT: HOLDING THE SHIRT UPRIGHT?
Q BY MR. KELBERG: PULLING IT IN A DIRECTION UP TOWARD
-- DOCTOR, HAVE YOU EVER FOLLOWED HOCKEY?
A NOT MUCH.
Q OKAY.
HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO PULL A SWEATER OFF OVER THE
TOP OF YOUR HEAD?
A YES.
Q WOULD THIS LOCATION OF THE DEFECTS IN THE SHIRT BE
CONSISTENT WITH SOMEBODY TRYING TO PULL THE SHIRT OVER MR.
GOLDMAN'S HEAD?
A NO. IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE THE SHIRT MOVING AROUND
THE BODY RATHER THAN IN A TOP/DOWN DIRECTION.
Q AND IN THE MOVEMENT WOULD THAT BE CONSISTENT WITH MR.
GOLDMAN TRYING TO TWIST AND TURN TO BREAK FREE OF ANY RESTRAINT
THAT IS BEING IMPOSED ON HIM?
A THAT WOULD BE MORE LIKELY A POSSIBILITY THAN THE
FORMER POSSIBILITY YOU BROUGHT UP.
Q AND IF IN FACT THAT WAS THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF MR.
GOLDMAN TRYING TO TWIST AND TURN TO BREAK FREE OF THE PERSON
RETRAINING THEM, WHO IS BEHIND HIM, HOLDING KNIFE IN THE RIGHT
HAND, IS THERE ANYTHING MEDICALLY INCONSISTENT WITH THOSE TWO
FATAL STAB WOUNDS BEING INFLICTED FIRST FOLLOWED BY -- WHEN I SAY
"FIRST" I JUST MEAN RELATIVE TO THE THIGH INJURY -- BEING
INFLICTED FIRST AND THEN AS MR. GOLDMAN BREAKS FREE AND IS MORE
IN A FACE-TO-FACE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PERPETRATOR, TO HAVE THE
PERPETRATOR WITH THE KNIFE STILL IN THE RIGHT HAND MOVING THAT
KNIFE FORWARD TO GET THE AREA OF THE LEFT THIGH?
A NOTHING MEDICALLY INCONSISTENT WITH THAT POSSIBILITY.
Q AND EVEN WITH THE EFFECTS OF THOSE TWO FATAL STAB
WOUNDS TO THE RIGHT CHEST AREA, DOCTOR, MEDICALLY, COULD MR.
GOLDMAN STILL HAVE EXPERIENCED THE KIND OF BLEEDING FROM THIS
LEFT THIGH STAB WOUND WHICH WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE BLOOD
FLOW SEEN ON THE BOTTOM OR DOWN THE LENGTH OF THE LEFT PANT LEG,
HIS JEAN?
A UMM, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THAT HAPPENED, BUT GIVEN THE
AMOUNT OF BLEEDING, I WOULD FAVOR THE THIGH WOUND OCCURRED BEFORE
THE STAB WOUNDS TO THE CHEST.
Q WHY IS THAT, DOCTOR?
A BECAUSE THE THIGH WOUND DIDN'T HIT ANY MAJOR VESSEL
AND THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF BLOOD STAINING ON THE LIMB
PORTION OF THE JEAN, AND THAT COULD -- THAT MEANS WITHOUT ANY
MAJOR VESSEL INJURY THERE IS SIGNIFICANT BLEEDING, THAT MEANS
THIS OCCURRED EARLIER IN THE ALTERCATION.
Q DOES THE TYPE OF INJURY TO THE RIGHT CHEST THAT YOU
EXPECT FROM THOSE TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS IMPACT DIRECTLY ON THE
VOLUME OF BLOOD THAT FLOWS TO THE LOWER HALF OF THE BODY?
A NO.
Q AND IF THAT IS IN FACT THE CASE --
A I'M SORRY, IT DOES IMPACT IN A WAY, BUT NOT DIRECTLY,
BECAUSE YOU HAVE BLEEDING INTO THE CHEST CAVITY, BUT NOT
DIRECTLY.
Q LET ME CONTRAST THAT FOR A MOMENT AND INVITE YOUR
ATTENTION TO PHOTOGRAPH G-8.
YOU TALKED ABOUT THE AORTIC WOUND, I BELIEVE?
A YES.
Q IS THAT SEEN IN PHOTOGRAPH G-8?
A YES, IT IS SEEN ON THE LEFT FLANK HERE, (INDICATING).
Q AND IS THAT A FATAL STAB WOUND?
A YES.
Q CAN YOU POINT OUT ON YOUR BODY, DOCTOR, APPROXIMATELY
WHERE THAT IS ON THE HUMAN ANATOMY?
A IT IS AROUND HERE ON THE LEFT FLANK. I'M POINTING TO
IT RIGHT HERE, (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, ABOUT THE MIDLINE BETWEEN THE
FRONT AND BACK OF THE BODY AND ABOUT MAYBE THREE INCHES UP FROM
THE BELT LINE.
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: NOW, DOCTOR, FROM WHAT YOU KNOW OF
THIS FATAL AORTIC STAB WOUND, MEDICALLY, WOULD THAT STAB WOUND
AFFECT THE VOLUME OF BLOOD THAT COULD FLOW TO THE LOWER PARTS OF
THE LEGS OF MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY?
A YES, IT WOULD, BECAUSE THE FLANK WOUND HIT THE AORTA
ABOUT ONE AND A QUARTER INCHES ABOVE THE BIFURCATION. YOU SEE,
THE AORTA IS A LARGE VESSEL IN THE ABDOMINAL PORTION AND IT
DIVIDES INTO TWO BRANCHES WHICH SUPPLY THE LOWER EXTREMITIES,
WHICH IS YOUR THIGHS AND LEGS, AND THE -- THAT IS WHY I FEEL THAT
THE THIGH WOUND OCCURRED BEFORE THE AORTIC WOUND, BECAUSE IF THE
AORTIC WOUND OCCURRED EARLIER, YOU WON'T HAVE THAT MUCH BLEEDING
IN THE THIGH WOUND BECAUSE THE BLEEDING WOULD BE OCCURRING INSIDE
THE ABDOMEN FROM THE AORTIC WOUND.
Q DOCTOR, IS THAT WHAT YOU WOULD DESCRIBE AS A DIRECT
IMPACT BETWEEN THE AORTIC STAB WOUND AND THE BLOOD SUPPLY
AVAILABLE TO THE LOWER LIMBS WHERE THE THIGH WOUND IS INFLICTED?
A YES, THAT IS WHAT I MEANT BY DIRECT IMPACT.
Q THE CHEST WOUNDS, THE TWO FATAL CHEST STAB WOUNDS, DO
THEY HAVE THAT SAME DIRECT IMPACT ON THE VOLUME OF BLOOD THAT
FLOWS TO THE LOWER EXTREMITIES?
A NOT DIRECTLY AS WE JUST DISCUSSED.
Q AND HOW DO THEY INDIRECTLY, IF AT ALL, AFFECT THE
BLOOD VOLUME THAT FLOWS TO THE LOWER EXTREMITY, THE LEGS?
A WHAT EXACTLY HAPPENS IS THERE IS ONLY SO MUCH BLOOD
IN THE BODY, AS I TOLD YOU SEVERAL TIMES IN THIS LAST FEW DAYS.
THE TOTAL BLOOD VOLUME IN THE BODY IS 5.5 LITERS, AND IF YOU HAVE
BLOOD LOSS IN ONE PLACE, THE BODY STILL TRIES TO MAINTAIN BLOOD
PRESSURE SO THAT THE REST OF THE KEY AREAS OF THE BODY GET BLOOD
SUPPLY.
SO EVEN THOUGH THERE IS BLOOD LOSS -- THERE IS BLOOD
LOSS, THAT WOULDN'T AFFECT THE TOTAL BLOOD VOLUME, THE MECHANISM
INSIDE THE BODY, WHICH INCLUDES THE SYMPATHETIC NERVOUS SYSTEM,
HELPS TO MAINTAIN THE BLOOD PRESSURE, BUT WHEREAS IF YOU HAVE AN
AORTIC INJURY, WHICH WOULD BE A DIRECT INJURY TO THE VESSEL, IN
RELATION TO THE THIGH WOUND, IT WOULD DEFINITELY IMPAIR THE BLOOD
SUPPLY TO THE THIGH, BECAUSE THE AORTIC INJURY OCCURRED EARLIER,
AND THAT IS WHY IT IS A DIRECT IMPACT IN CONTRAST TO THIS.
IT IS A LOSS OF BLOOD TO AN AREA, BUT NOT A DIRECT
IMPACT TO THE -- UMM, AS FAR AS THE THIGH WOUND GOES.
Q AS A RESULT, DOCTOR, IS IT, IN YOUR JUDGMENT, MORE
PLAUSIBLE THAT YOU CAN HAVE THE THIGH WOUND BE INCURRED AFTER THE
TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS TO THE CHEST AND STILL END UP WITH THE
BLOOD FLOW THAT YOU SEE IN THE PANT LEG, THE LEFT PANT LEG, THAN
IT WOULD BE TO HAVE THE AORTIC STAB WOUND INCURRED BEFORE THAT
SAME THIGH WOUND?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q DOCTOR, I DON'T THINK WE'VE COVERED THE DIAGRAMMING,
IF THERE WAS ANY DIAGRAMMING, OF THESE TWO INJURIES 1 AND 2, THE
FATAL STAB WOUNDS, HAVE WE?
A NO.
Q WE HAVE --
A WE HAVE NOT COVERED THE DIAGRAMMING.
Q DOCTOR, WE'VE COVERED -- IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU
WANT TO TELL US JUST IN GENERAL TERMS ABOUT INJURIES NUMBERS 1
AND 2 BEFORE WE GO TO THE DIAGRAM?
A NOTHING ELSE. I HAVE ADDRESSED THE STRUCTURES THEY
CAUSED INJURY TO. I HAVE ADDRESSED THE CLOTHING DEFECTS. I HAVE
ADDRESSED THE -- THEM BEING CAUSED BY A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE. I
HAVE DISCUSSED THAT THEY ARE FATAL WOUNDS.
I DON'T THINK -- I HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO ADD.
Q ONE THOUGHT I JUST HAD POP INTO MY HEAD AND I WANTED
TO ASK YOU ABOUT, DID YOU EXAMINE THE JEAN LEG, THE LEFT LEG AND
THE DEFECTS THAT YOU DESCRIBED YOU OBSERVED IN THAT LEFT LEG,
WITH RESPECT TO THE LOCATION OF THE LEFT THIGH WOUND INJURY?
A YES, I DID.
Q WHAT WERE YOUR FINDINGS, IF ANY?
A HE HAD A DEFECT IN THE OUTER ASPECT OF THE JEAN AND
HE HAD TWO ADDITIONAL DEFECTS IN THE POCKET UNDERLYING THE DEFECT
IN THE JEAN, WHICH WOULD INDICATE THAT THE STAB WOUND WENT
THROUGH THE OUTER GARMENT LAYER, THROUGH THE POCKET LAYERS AND
THEN ENTERED THE THIGH.
Q WAS THERE ANYTHING INAPPROPRIATE ABOUT THE LOCATION
ON THE CLOTHING OF THE DEFECTS WITH RESPECT TO THE LOCATION ON
THE BODY OF THE WOUND, SUCH AS YOU DESCRIBED YOU FOUND WITH THE
DEFECTS IN THE SHIRT, IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE TWO FATAL CHEST STAB
WOUNDS?
A NO.
Q AND WHAT, IF ANY, SIGNIFICANCE DID THAT HAVE TO YOU
IN TALKING ABOUT THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF MR. GOLDMAN RECEIVING THAT
FATAL -- I'M SORRY, THAT THIGH STAB WOUND?
A NOTHING REALLY MUCH SIGNIFICANT, BECAUSE THE -- THE
-- THE LIMB PORTION OF A JEAN IS MORE FIXED THAN A SHIRT ON A
TRUNK OF A BODY.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER, DOCTOR, ABOUT THEN THE TWO FATAL
CHEST WOUNDS?
A NO.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, 3:30? WE ARE GOING TO SET UP
ANOTHER --
THE COURT: GO AHEAD.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
WE WON'T SET IT UP ANYWHERE BUT RIGHT HERE.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, I HAVE PUT ON THE BOARD,
THIS IS BOARD 3G OF OUR COLLECTION 357, THE 21 SERIES.
IS ONE OF THESE FORMS USED BY DR. GOLDEN TO DESCRIBE
IN A DIAGRAMMATIC FASHION THE STAB WOUNDS 1 AND 2 OF THE
PHOTOGRAPH G-10?
A YES, IT IS IN 21-II. IT IS INJURY NUMBER NO. 1 IS
HERE AND INJURY NO. 2 IS THERE, (INDICATING).
Q I'M SORRY, DOCTOR, IF YOU WILL POINT AND HOLD THE
POINTER, WHERE IS INJURY NO. 1?
A THIS IS 1 HERE, (INDICATING).
Q WHAT IS THE WRITING THAT IS ASSOCIATED WITH ANY
DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION?
A IT SAYS, "MID-AXILLARY LINE" AND HE HAS JUST PUT THE
LOCATION ON THIS DIAGRAM.
Q WHAT IS THE MID-AXILLARY LINE?
A THAT IS AN IMAGINARY LINE WHICH PASSED THROUGH THE
MIDDLE OF YOUR ARMPIT, IF YOU RAISE YOUR ARM UP. I'M SORRY, I
CAN'T RAISE MY LEFT SHOULDER VERY WELL.
Q DO YOU WANT ME TO RAISE MINE, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO DO?
A JUST LIFT AND TURN THIS WAY.
Q (MR. KELBERG COMPLIES.)
A THE ARMPIT AREA IS THE AXILLA, MEDICAL TERM.
MID-AXILLARY LINE IS THE IMAGINARY LINE WHICH RUNS IN THE
MID-PORTION OF YOUR ARMPIT AND DOWN THE SIDE OF THE BODY, SO IT
IS AN IMAGINARY LINE AND ANY INJURY IN THAT AREA IS DESCRIBED AS
SUCH.
MR. KELBERG: I THINK THAT IS PRETTY SELF-EXPLANATORY FOR
THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: IT IS.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT, DOCTOR.
NOW, I WANT TO CIRCLE THIS AREA. IS THIS THE
APPROPRIATE AREA FOR FATAL STAB WOUND INJURY
NO. 1 OF G-10?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
I WILL CIRCLE THAT AREA IN RED ON THE LEFT SIDE OF
21, ROMAN NUMERAL II, AND I WILL
WRITE "G-10 INJ. NO. 1."
Q WHERE WAS THE SECOND FATAL STAB WOUND, DOCTOR?
A HERE, (INDICATING). IT IS RIGHT ON THE -- BEHIND IT
ON THE SIDE FLANK AREA.
Q IS THERE ANY WRITING ASSOCIATED WITH THAT PARTICULAR
INJURY?
A NO. IT JUST SAYS NO. 2 THERE.
MR. KELBERG: AND I WILL CIRCLE THAT AREA THEN IN BLUE AND
TO THE SIDE WRITE "G-10 INJ. NO. 2."
Q IS THERE ANY OTHER DIAGRAM, USED BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES. THERE IS A DIAGRAM OF THE -- WHICH ALSO SHOWS
THE SKELETAL AREA OF THE BODY WITH THE OUTLINE OF THE BODY.
Q DID YOU HAVE A FORM NUMBER FOR THAT, DOCTOR?
A I THINK IT IS 2 -- I FORGET THE NUMBER FOR IT.
Q LET'S TRY BOARD 7G?
A THERE IT IS.
MR. KELBERG: AND THIS IS THE SECOND PAGE OF THAT FORM 20H
WITH SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATIONS OF THE HUMAN ORDER FRONT AND BACK
WITH A SKELETON OUTLINE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: YES.
THE WITNESS: HE HAS DESCRIBED BOTH INJURIES AND I HAVE TO
HELP YOU WITH THIS ONE.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE.
A YES. THIS PART HE REFERS TO THE INJURY NO. 1, STAB
WOUND GOING TO THE RIGHT SEVENTH RIB, AND IN THIS AREA HERE,
(INDICATING).
Q WHAT DOES HE SAY THERE, DOCTOR?
A "STAB WOUND RIGHT SEVENTH RIB" AND THAT IS NO. 1.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME -- BEFORE YOU GO ON, LET ME CIRCLE
THAT AREA AND I WILL WRITE "G-10 INJ. NO. 1."
THE WITNESS: AND THEN IT CONTINUES, "RIGHT TO LEFT BACK TO
FRONT, STRIKING CHEST WALL." THE LENGTH OF THE STAB WOUND IS
FOUR INCHES, AND THEN HE CONTINUES THAT IT ENDS IN THE BACK OF
THE RIGHT FOURTH RIB, AND THE -- HE HAS GOT TWO -- TWO DEFECTS IN
THE RIGHT LUNG, HALF AN INCH AND 3/4 INCH, AND THAT COVERS THE
INJURY -- THIS INCLUDES THE PLEURAL --
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP.
A IT SAYS THE PLEURAL AREAS OF THE LUNG HAVE THESE
MEASUREMENTS, HAVE AN INCH AND 3/4 INCH, SO THIS WOULD ALSO
CORRESPOND TO THAT WOUND.
Q TO INJURY NO. 1?
A YES, ALL THIS, (INDICATING), BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE
THE FOURTH RIB IS ON THE FRONT, BUT THE KNIFE CUT THE BACK OF THE
FOURTH RIB INSIDE THE CHEST CAVITY.
Q IF WE CAN SLOW DOWN HERE SO I CAN TRY AND KEEP UP
WITH YOU, DOCTOR, YOU POINTED NOW TO THE LEFT SIDE OF THE DIAGRAM
IN SOME AREA?
A THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE DIAGRAM -- RIGHT SIDE OF THE
BODY, LEFT SIDE OF THE DIAGRAM.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IS THIS AREA HERE, (INDICATING), ALSO TO REPRESENT
INJURY NO. 1?
A ALSO THIS ONE HERE, MID-CLAVICLE LINE.
Q WHAT DOES "MCL" MEAN?
A MID-CLAVICLE LINE. THAT IS ANOTHER IMAGINARY LINE.
YOU HAVE YOUR COLLAR BONE HERE AND AN IMAGINARY LINE WHICH RUNS
IN THE MID-PORTION OF THE LINE IN FRONT OF THE BODY IS THE
MID-CLAVICLE LINE.
MR. KELBERG: LET ME CIRCLE THAT AREA THAT YOU DESCRIBED ON
THE LEFT SIDE OF THERE, 28, AND I WILL WRITE AGAIN "G-10 INJ. NO.
1."
AND DOES THE COURT WISH TO TAKE A BREAK AT THIS
POINT?
THE COURT: YES, I DO.
MR. KELBERG: WE WILL TAKE IT UP AFTER THE RECESS.
THE COURT: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I NEED TO TAKE A
15-MINUTE COURT REPORTER RECESS.
PLEASE REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
THIS WILL BE A 15-RECESS.
LET ME SEE COUNSEL WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: WE ARE OVER AT THE SIDE BAR OUT OF THE
PRESENCE.
COUNSEL, NO. 1290 NEEDS TO SEE HER DOCTOR REGARDING
HER HIP AND THE ONLY DAY THAT WE COULD GET HER APPOINTMENT IS
THURSDAY, AND SO THURSDAY, INSTEAD OF GOING TO 6:00, WE ARE GOING
TO HAVE TO QUIT AT 4:45.
MR. COCHRAN: SORRY.
MS. CLARK: HEARTBROKEN.
MR. COCHRAN: IS SHE THE ONE WHO FELL OUT THERE?
THE COURT: YES, YES, SO WE ARE GOING TO BREAK AT 4:45
THURSDAY SO SHE CAN MAKE HER APPOINTMENT, OKAY, BUT SHE SAYS SHE
DOESN'T NEED TO GO NOW BUT SHE WOULD LIKE TO GO THIS WEEK.
MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS FINE WITH US.
THE COURT: SEE YOU LATER.
MR. COCHRAN: THANKS, JUDGE.
THE COURT: HE IS GOING TO SOME OTHER COURTROOM.
(RECESS.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: LET ME SEE COUNSEL AT SIDEBAR WITH THE
COURT REPORTER.
(PAGES 31793 THROUGH 31794,
VOLUME 166-A, TRANSCRIBED AND
SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD.
THE DEFENDANT IS PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR.
DOUGLAS AND MR. SHAPIRO, PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY MR. KELBERG AND
MR. LYNCH.
ALL RIGHT.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
(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.
DR. LAKSHMANAN IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT.
AND, MR. KELBERG, YOU MAY CONTINUE CONCLUDING YOUR
DIRECT EXAMINATION.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, AGAIN WITH THE COURT'S
PERMISSION, WOULD YOU STEP BACK TO THE EASEL, AND WE'LL GO BACK
ON THIS 21 FORM AND SEE IF WE CAN IDENTIFY --
I WANT TO BE SURE -- I THINK ACTUALLY WE NEED THE
OTHER -- YES, I'M SORRY. WE NEED THE OTHER -- THE 7G BOARD THAT
HAS THE SKELETONIZED SCHEMATIC.
WE'VE IDENTIFIED BY MARKING IN RED IN A DESIGNATION
OF G-10, INJURY NO. 1, TWO AREAS OF THIS DIAGRAM, AND THEN I
THINK, DOCTOR, YOU HAD POINTED OUT ANOTHER AREA IN THE LOWER
RIGHT-HAND CORNER OF THIS FORM THAT REFERS TO INJURY NO. 1, BUT I
WANT TO BE SURE.
SO CAN WE AGAIN SLOWLY GO THROUGH WHAT ADDITIONAL
ENTRIES IF ANY ON THIS FORM REFER TO THAT FATAL STAB WOUND,
INJURY NO. 1 OF G-10?
A WE WENT OVER THE PORTION OF THE SEVENTH RIB WHICH WAS
INJURED BY THE INJURY NO. 1 AS IT ENTERED THE CHEST CAVITY.
THIS PART OF THE DIAGRAM ON THE LEFT SIDE ON THE --
SHOWS SOME MARKINGS WITH REFERENCE TO THE RIGHT FOURTH RIB AREA
WHEREIN THE STAB WOUND ENDED (INDICATING), AND THE DESCRIPTION OF
THAT INJURY TO THE RIGHT FOURTH RIB IS REFLECTED IN THE LOWER
PARTION OF -- LOWER PORTION OF THE DIAGRAM, POSTERIOR RIGHT
FOURTH RIB, 3/4 INCH CUT, AND THEN --
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
IS THIS SOME FORM OF DIAGRAM BY DR. GOLDEN CONCERNING
HIS OBSERVATION IN THAT AREA?
A IT APPEARS TO BE, YES.
Q AND WHAT DO YOU INTERPRET THAT TO BE A DIAGRAMMATIC
REPRESENTATION OF?
A HE'S TRYING TO SHOW A CUT OF THE RIGHT POSTERIOR
FOURTH RIB.
Q AND IN GENERAL, DOCTOR, IS THAT A SHAPE THAT YOU
WOULD FIND CONSISTENT WITH A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE SUCH AS YOU
IDENTIFIED HAD TO HAVE BEEN THE SOURCE OF THAT FATAL STAB WOUND?
A I CANNOT MAKE THAT CONCLUSION FROM A CUT ON THE
POSTERIOR SURFACE OF THE RIB.
Q WHY NOT?
A BECAUSE IT'S JUST A CUT ON THE POSTERIOR SURFACE OF
THE RIB. YOU CANNOT MAKE ANY DETERMINATION FROM THAT.
AND THEN YOU HAVE TWO WOUNDS TO THE RIGHT LOWER LOBE
OF LUNG, WHICH INDICATES THAT THOSE ARE ENTERING PORTION AND A
EXITING PORTION THAT IS -- IT WAS A THROUGH AND THROUGH TYPE OF
WOUND TO THE RIGHT LUNG.
Q AND DOES ALL OF THAT STILL REFER TO THIS INJURY NO.
1?
A YES. ALL OF THIS UP TO THIS POINT (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU'VE JUST POINTED, BEFORE YOU MOVED BACKWARDS,
TO ANOTHER AREA, AND I'M NOT SURE YOU'VE INTERPRETED THAT WRITING
FOR US, IF YOU CAN.
A IT SAYS PLURAL SUPERFICIAL -- I CAN'T READ THIS WORD
HERE, BUT BASICALLY IT REFERS TO THESE DEFECTS IN THE RIGHT LOWER
LOBE OF LUNG.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THEN FOR THE RECORD, I'LL TAKE THE BLUE MARKER AND
MARK THIS AREA OF WRITING THAT THE DOCTOR HAS JUST OUTLINED,
CIRCLE IT IN THE BLUE AND WRITE AT THE LOWER LEFT-HAND MARGIN
"G-10, INJ. NO. 1."
A YES.
ALSO, THIS INSCRIPTION HERE, THE RIGHT LOWER PART OF
THE DIAGRAM, ALSO REFLECTS TO THE SAME INJURY.
Q AND WHAT IS THAT DESCRIPTION?
A IT SHOWS THE DIRECTION RIGHT TO LEFT, BACK TO FRONT
AND THE LENGTH OF THE WOUND TRACK TO BE 4 INCHES.
Q AND THERE'S SOME OTHER WRITING. CAN YOU MAKE THAT
OUT, DOCTOR?
A STRIKING CHEST WALL, AND I THINK THIS IS -- SAYS
POSTERIOR PROBABLY REFLECTING TO THE RIGHT FOURTH RIB POSTERIOR
ASPECT.
Q AGAIN, ALL OF THIS IS STILL INJURY NO. 1?
A YES.
Q I'LL CIRCLE THAT AREA IN BLUE AS WELL AND WRITE "G-10
INJ. NO. 1."
WHAT ELSE, DOCTOR?
A THIS PART OF THE DIAGRAM REFLECTS THE ENTRY PORTION
OF INJURY NO. 2 (INDICATING), GOES TO THE RIGHT EIGHTH SPACE AND
BACK TO FRONT DIRECTION, AND I CAN'T READ THIS PARTICULAR
INSCRIPTION HERE, BUT BASICALLY THIS REFLECTS THE INFORMATION
PERTAINING TO INJURY NO. 2.
Q HAS DR. GOLDEN MADE ANY KIND OF DIAGRAMMATIC ENTRY ON
THE RIGHT FORM OF THE SKELETON -- SKELETONIZED HUMAN FORM TO
REPRESENT THAT SECOND STAB WOUND, THAT FATAL STAB WOUND INJURY
NO. 2?
A YES. HERE IN THE RIGHT RIB SPACE (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME CIRCLE THAT AREA IN BLUE AND I'LL WRITE OUT AT
THE SIDE "G-10" OR ACTUALLY AT THE TOP "INJ. NO. 2."
AND THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION THAT THE DOCTOR JUST
REFERRED TO A MOMENT OR SO AGO, I'LL CIRCLE IN BLUE AND MAKE A
LINE CONNECTING BACK UP TO WHERE THE ACTUAL WOUND IS DRAWN IN ON
THAT SAME DIAGRAM.
ALL RIGHT, DOCTOR.
HAVE WE COVERED ALL OF THE ENTRIES? IT SEEMS TO ME
WE HAVE SOME INFORMATION HERE.
A YES.
Q WHAT IF ANYTHING DOES THAT REFER TO?
A THAT REFERS TO THE STAB WOUND TO THE LEFT FLANK. IT
REFLECTS STAB WOUND GOING THROUGH SKIN "SUBCU" AND ILIOPSOAS
MUSCLE AND AORTA. SO THAT REFERS TO THE LEFT FLANK WOUND.
Q I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO, IF YOU COULD,
PLEASE, SPELL OUT THE MUSCLE THAT IT WENT THROUGH.
A ILIOPSOAS, I-L-I-O-P-S-O-S -- P-S-O-A-S.
Q AND, DOCTOR, IS THIS THE AORTIC WOUND THAT WE SAW
BRIEFLY IN PHOTOGRAPH G-8?
A YES.
Q SO WHILE WE'VE GOT THIS UP, LET ME CIRCLE THIS AREA
IN RED, AND I'LL WRITE "G-8."
IS THERE ANY MORE THAN THE ONE -- I BELIEVE YOU
DESCRIBED THAT AS A FATAL STAB WOUND, DID YOU?
A YES. G-8.
YOU ALSO HAVE DIAGRAM --
Q IS THERE MORE THAN ONE INJURY?
I JUST WANT TO FIND OUT IF THERE'S ANY NEED TO
DESIGNATE AN INJURY --
A THERE'S ONLY ONE INJURY THERE.
Q I THINK WHAT I'LL WRITE IS "FATAL AORTIC STAB WOUND."
IS THAT ACCURATE, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q HAVE WE COVERED ALL OF THE WRITTEN INFORMATION THEN
ON THIS FORM?
A YES.
Q ANY OTHER DIAGRAM CONCERNING THESE TWO FATAL STAB
WOUNDS TO THE CHEST?
A NO.
Q IS EITHER OF THEM ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANY NEED TO IN YOUR OPINION?
A NO.
Q NOW, YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE OTHER INJURIES OR
FINDINGS IN THE PHOTOGRAPH G-10, AND I BELIEVE ONE OF THEM YOU
INDICATED WAS A SHARP FORCE INJURY AS WELL; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. I CALL IT INJURY NO. 3 AND IT'S A 3/8 INCH
SHARP FORCE INJURY WHICH IS SUPERFICIALLY LOCATED TO THE --
MAINLY RUNNING SUPERFICIALLY ON THE SKIN OF THE RIGHT FLANK.
Q CAN YOU POINT IT OUT FIRST OF ALL? THIS IS ON PHOTO
G-10?
A (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: FOR THE RECORD, IT APPEARS TO BE IN THE
CENTER OF THE BODY THAT'S DEPICTED IN THE PHOTOGRAPH AND ABOUT AN
INCH OR SO ABOVE THE TOP EDGE OF THE BLUE PHOTOGRAPHIC
IDENTIFICATION CARD?
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, WHAT KIND OF INJURY IS THAT?
A IT'S A SHARP FORCE INJURY WHICH SUPERFICIALLY -- IT'S
A SUPERFICIAL INJURY. IT'S NOT DEEP. IT DID NOT PENETRATE THE
ABDOMINAL CAVITY.
Q GIVEN ITS SUPERFICIAL NATURE, IS THIS ONE OF THOSE
SHARP FORCE INJURIES WHERE YOU CANNOT BY THE FORM TELL WHETHER
THIS IS DUE TO A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE OR A DOUBLE-EDGED KNIFE?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q BUT IS IT CONSISTENT AGAIN WITH THIS SAME
HYPOTHETICAL APPROXIMATELY 6-INCH LONG SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE BLADE
TAPERING AT THE TIP?
A YES.
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME.
DR. BADEN, COULD I ASK YOU TO -- YOU'RE STANDING IN
FRONT OF THE COURT REPORTER.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IS THAT SUPERFICIAL SHARP FORCE
INJURY, DOCTOR, DESCRIBED BY DR. GOLDEN IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES, HE HAS.
Q DIAGRAMMED ANYWHERE?
A YES.
Q ADDRESSED ANYWHERE IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANY NEED TO?
A NO.
Q ARE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE WHEN IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE
TIME OF DEATH THAT INJURY WAS INFLICTED?
A IT HAPPENED BEFORE THAT.
Q HOW ARE YOU ABLE TO TELL?
A BECAUSE OF THE APPEARANCE OF THE DESCRIPTION.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING OF SIGNIFICANCE TO THE -- TO YOU --
MAY I WITHDRAW THE QUESTION?
ARE YOU ABLE TO TELL ANYTHING WITH RESPECT TO THE
RELATIVE POSITIONS OF MR. GOLDMAN AND THE PERPETRATOR FROM WHAT
YOU SEE IN THAT PARTICULAR SHARP FORCE INJURY?
A NO, I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WISH TO BRING TO OUR
ATTENTION REGARDING THAT SHARP FORCE INJURY?
A NO.
Q WHY DON'T WE SEE WHERE IT IS IN THE PROTOCOL AND SEE
WHERE IT IS IN THE DIAGRAMS.
A IT'S ON PAGE 9, NO. 3.
IT'S LOCATED HERE (INDICATING), PAGE 9, NO. 3, STAB
WOUND TO RIGHT FLANK.
THIS WHOLE DESCRIPTION APPLIES TO THAT.
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION, IS THIS AN ACCURATE
DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOU SEE IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES.
Q LET ME JUST OUTLINE THIS IN RED ON OUR PROTOCOL, PAGE
9.
THIS IS "G-10 INJ. NO. 3," WHICH I'VE WRITTEN IN THE
LEFT MARGIN.
A YES.
Q WHERE IS IT DIAGRAMMED, DOCTOR?
A IT'S DIAGRAMMED IN 21-II.
Q AND WE'LL PUT OUR BOARD RIGHT OVER THE PROTOCOL.
THIS IS 3G.
WHICH FORM, DOCTOR?
A 21-II (INDICATING).
Q AND YOU'RE POINTING TO AN AREA.
IS THERE SOME KIND OF SQUIGGLY LINE SLIGHTLY ABOVE
AND TO THE RIGHT OF IT AS YOU LOOK AT THE DIAGRAM?
A YES.
Q I WAS ACTUALLY LOOKING --
A NO, NO. THIS ONE IS THE SHARP FORCE INJURY. THIS IS
JUST THE FIRST ONE, NO. 3 NEXT TO IT (INDICATING).
Q SO THIS IS WHAT YOU'VE JUST IDENTIFIED AS INJURY NO.
3 OF G-10, WHERE I'M POINTING?
A YES. YES.
Q AND THIS "3" IS DR. GOLDEN'S ARBITRARY DESIGNATION OF
WOUND NUMBERS?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME CIRCLE THAT AREA IN RED, LEFT SIDE, AND I'LL
WRITE OUT TO THE SIDE "G-10 INJ. NO. 3."
ANYTHING FURTHER WITH RESPECT TO THAT INJURY, DOCTOR?
A NOTHING ELSE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
YOU ALSO TESTIFIED THAT THERE WERE OTHER FINDINGS YOU
MADE REVIEWING THIS PHOTOGRAPH G-10.
WHAT ARE THOSE FINDINGS?
A THERE ARE SOME POSTMORTEM ABRASIONS BETWEEN INJURY 1
AND 2 AND 3 HERE (INDICATING) AND --
Q DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO THE CAUSE FOR THOSE
POSTMORTEM ABRASIONS?
A NO.
NON-SPECIFIC POSTMORTEM ABRASIONS.
Q DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION, CAN THOSE POSTMORTEM
ABRASIONS BE DUE TO THE MANNER IN WHICH THE BODY WAS TRANSPORTED
>FROM THE BUNDY LOCATION TO THE FORENSIC SCIENCE CENTER, THE
CORONER'S OFFICE?
A AS ONE -- ONE POSSIBLE SCENARIO.
THE OTHER POSSIBLE SCENARIO IS HIM LYING ON THE RIGHT
SIDE RUBBING -- WITH THE CLOTHING RUBBING AGAINST THE AREA.
THERE ARE MANY POSSIBILITIES FOR THAT POSTMORTEM
ABRASION.
Q IF THE BODY IS NOT MOVING AND MR. GOLDMAN FOR ALL
INTENTS AND PURPOSES IS DEAD OR ACTUALLY IS DEAD AND HIS BODY IS
IN THAT POSITION THAT'S SHOWN IN 43E, THE PHOTOGRAPH IN OUR 362
COLLECTION, CAN YOU STILL HAVE THAT KIND OF POSTMORTEM ABRASION
OCCURRING EVEN IF THE CLOTHING IS NOT MOVING AGAINST THE BODY?
A NO. BECAUSE OF THE CLOTHING PRESSURE ITSELF, YOU CAN
HAVE SOMETIMES ABRASIONS ON THE SKIN SURFACE.
Q SIMPLY FROM THE PRESSURE?
A FROM THE RIGHT SIDE. IT'S JUST A POSTMORTEM
ABRASION. IT'S DIFFICULT TO SPECIFY HOW IT WAS CAUSED.
Q ALL RIGHT.
ANY OTHER INJURIES --
FIRST, LET ME ASK, DOES DR. GOLDEN DESCRIBE THIS IN
THE PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q DIAGRAM IT ANYWHERE?
A HE -- HE DOESN'T DESCRIBE IT IN THE PROTOCOL, BUT HE
DIAGRAMS IT.
Q WHERE DOES HE DIAGRAM IT?
A IT'S RIGHT HERE (INDICATING), THIS LINE HERE YOU SEE
HERE.
Q DOCTOR, DID YOU GIVE AN INJURY DESIGNATION TO THIS
AREA, POSTMORTEM ABRASION?
A I JUST CALLED THEM COLLECTIVELY AS INJURY NO. 4.
Q AND IS THERE SOME WRITING THAT YOU ASSOCIATE WITH DR.
GOLDEN'S DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION?
A YES.
IT SAYS "POSTMORTEM" -- I CAN'T READ THIS, BUT
BASICALLY I THINK REFERS TO THAT MARKING THERE (INDICATING).
Q THEN I'LL CIRCLE THIS AREA IN BLUE THAT YOU'VE JUST
OUTLINED, AND I'LL WRITE BELOW IT "G-10, INJ. NO. 4."
ANYPLACE ELSE IT'S DIAGRAMMED?
A NO.
Q AND I'M SORRY. IT IS NOT DESCRIBED IN THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q IS THAT A MISTAKE?
A WELL, IT'S A POSTMORTEM ABRASION. YES, IT'S A
MISTAKE.
Q ANY SIGNIFICANCE?
A NO.
Q SAME REASONS?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER ON INJURY NO. 4?
A NO.
Q ANY OTHER FINDINGS OR INJURIES IN THIS PARTICULAR
PHOTOGRAPH?
A THERE'S ALSO AREA OF POSTMORTEM ABRASIONS BELOW THE
RIGHT -- AND BELOW THE INJURY NO. 2 IN THE RIGHT CHEST.
Q ARE YOU ABLE TO DIFFERENTIATE HYPOTHETICALLY THE
CAUSES FOR THAT, SUCH AS TRANSPORTATION VERSUS PRESSURE FROM
CLOTHING?
A NO.
Q BASICALLY, WOULD YOUR ANSWERS BE THE SAME REGARDING
THAT AS THEY WERE FOR THE INJURY NO. 4 POSTMORTEM ABRASIONS?
A YES.
Q DID DR. GOLDEN DESCRIBE THAT AREA IN HIS PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q HOW ABOUT DIAGRAM IT ANYWHERE?
A HE -- HE HAS DIAGRAMMED SOME SHADING HERE
(INDICATING) NEAR THE NO. 2. AND THE LINE WHICH READS
"POSTMORTEM" REFLECTS BOTH THOSE AREAS. SO I'M NOT SURE WHETHER
HE DIAGRAMMED THAT COLLECTIVELY WITH THIS OTHER POSTMORTEM
ABRASION WHICH WE HAVE HERE.
Q AND IS THIS AREA BY YOU ARBITRARILY DESIGNATED AS NO.
5?
A YES.
Q WHY DON'T WE WRITE "NO. 4" -- AFTER NO. 4, WE'LL
WRITE "NO. 5" AND PUT A QUESTION MARK BECAUSE OF YOUR
UNCERTAINTY.
IS THAT ACCURATE, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING ELSE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH G-10?
A NO.
Q ANYTHING IN THE ADDENDUM REGARDING THESE LAST
INJURIES?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S GO BACK THEN TO G-8 AND DISCUSS IN GREATER
DETAIL THIS FATAL AORTIC STAB WOUND.
A G-8 SHOWS THE STAB WOUND ENTERING THE LEFT FLANK, AND
THIS WOUND MEASURED IN MY MEASUREMENT 5/8 INCH BY 3/8 INCH IN THE
GAPING STATE, BUT IT'S PART OF THE BODY WHICH IS -- WHICH HAS A
CURVATURE TO THE AREA. SO THE MEASUREMENT IN THE PROTOCOL IS 3/4
OF AN INCH IN LENGTH.
Q IS THIS ONE OF THE AREAS OF THE BODY WHERE YOU
OBTAINED A MEASUREMENT DIFFERENT THAN DR. GOLDEN'S AND WHERE THE
DIFFERENCE IN MEASUREMENT FROM HIS MAY BE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE
PROCESS OF PHOTOGRAPHIC MEASUREMENT?
A YES.
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: NOW, DOCTOR, WHAT ELSE CAN YOU TELL
US ABOUT THIS FATAL STAB WOUND?
A THIS PARTICULAR STAB WOUND ENTERED THE ABDOMINAL
CAVITY, WENT THROUGH THE ILIOPSOAS AREA, WHICH IS A MUSCLE IN THE
BACK OF THE ABDOMINAL WALL.
Q WOULD YOU TURN TOWARDS THE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF
THE JURY AND POINT OUT WHERE THIS WOUND IS ACTUALLY?
A RIGHT HERE IN THIS AREA I POINTED OUT EARLIER IN THE
LEFT FLANK (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND THE RECORD I THINK EARLIER WAS DESCRIBED.
A WENT TO THE ILIPSOAS MUSCLE, THEN STRUCK THE AORTA
ONE AND A QUARTER INCHES ABOVE WHERE IT DIVIDES INTO TWO
BRANCHES.
AND THERE WERE TWO DEFECTS IN THE AORTA, TWO
HALF-INCH DEFECTS IN THE AORTA AND THERE WAS BLEEDING FROM THIS
INJURY WHICH RESULTED IN ACCUMULATION OF BLOOD IN WHAT IS CALLED
THE RETROPERITONEAL AREA, THAT IS IN THE BACK SIDE OF THE
ABDOMEN, AND ALSO THERE WAS SOME BLOOD ACCUMULATION IN THE
ABDOMINAL CAVITY.
Q DOCTOR, FIRST OF ALL, WHY IS THIS IN YOUR OPINION A
FATAL STAB WOUND?
A BECAUSE OF THE INJURY TO THE AORTA, WHICH IS A LARGE
BLOOD VESSELS -- LARGEST BLOOD VESSEL IN THE BODY, AND INJURY TO
THIS STRUCTURE WILL RESULT IN BLEEDING AND RAPID LOSS OF BLOOD
PRESSURE AND DEATH.
Q DOCTOR, IN THIS POSITION THAT MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY IS
FOUND AS SHOWN IN PHOTOGRAPH 43E OF OUR COLLECTION 362, IS THIS
AREA OF THE BODY NOT A DEPENDENT PART?
A YES.
Q AND IS THAT OF SOME SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU --
LET ME REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
WOULD YOU EXPECT -- WHERE WOULD YOU EXPECT THE BLOOD
TO GO? YOU SAID THE RETROPERITONEAL CAVITY AND THE ABDOMINAL
CAVITY; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q RETROPERITONEAL AREA AND THE ABDOMINAL CAVITY; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q WOULD YOU EXPECT BLOOD TO COME OUTSIDE OF THE BODY
>FROM THIS FATAL STAB WOUND?
A GENERALLY NOT BECAUSE IT WILL MAINLY BLEED INSIDE.
Q WOULD THIS BE THE KIND OF WOUND LIKE THE CHEST WOUNDS
WHICH COULD DRAIN OUT OF THE BODY IF THE WOUND WAS IN A POSITION
WHERE GRAVITY COULD RESULT IN THE BLOOD FLOWING DOWN OUT THROUGH
THE STAB WOUND ITSELF?
A YOU WOULD NOT EXPECT THIS IN THE ABDOMINAL WOUND.
AND THE ONLY REASON I SAID THAT IN THE CHEST WOUND
ALSO IS BECAUSE OF THE FRACTURES OF THE -- I MEAN THE STAB WOUND
HAVING GONE TO THE RIB WHICH WOULD HAVE CREATED A DEFECT.
BUT IN THIS WOUND, I WOULD NOT EXPECT IT. USUALLY IN
SUCH WOUNDS, THE BLEEDING IS MORE INTERNAL THAN EXTERNAL.
Q AND DR. GOLDEN IN HIS PROTOCOL, DID HE QUANTIFY THE
AMOUNT OF BLOOD HE OBSERVED IN THE COURSE OF THE AUTOPSY IN THE
AREAS WHERE YOU BELIEVED BLEEDING WOULD OCCUR AS A RESULT OF THAT
FATAL STAB WOUND?
A YES.
HE SAID THERE WAS HUNDRED CC BLOOD IN THE ABDOMINAL
CAVITY IN ADDITION TO THE BLEEDING HE DESCRIBED IN THE
RETROPERITONEAL AREA, WHICH WAS NOT QUANTITATED.
Q WAS NOT QUANTIFIED?
A IT'S NOT QUANTIFIABLE.
Q CAN YOU GIVE US SOME IDEA HOW BIG THE RETROPERITONEAL
AREA IS IN A HUMAN BODY?
A IT'S A FAIRLY -- FAIRLY LARGE AREA, THE AREA IN THE
BACK OF THE ABDOMEN. ACTUALLY, IT EXTENDS ALL THE WAY FROM THE
-- ABOVE THE KIDNEY AREA DOWN BELOW INCLUDING THE PANCREAS AND
OTHER STRUCTURES IN THE BACK OF THE ABDOMEN.
Q FROM DR. GOLDEN'S DESCRIPTION OF THE HEMORRHAGE IN
THAT AREA AND HIS QUANTIFICATION OF THE HEMORRHAGE IN THE
ABDOMINAL CAVITY, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION WHEN IN RELATIONSHIP TO
THE ATTACK ITSELF THAT ABDOMINAL AORTA FATAL STAB WOUND WAS
INCURRED?
A AS I OPINED EARLIER, I THINK IT OCCURRED DURING THE
MIDDLE OF ASSAULT, BUT IT DEFINITELY OCCURRED I WOULD FAVOR AFTER
THE THIGH WOUND WHICH OCCURRED EARLIER THAN THE ABDOMINAL WOUND.
Q DOCTOR, HOW RAPID A RESPONSE FROM THE BODY WOULD YOU
EXPECT FROM THAT FATAL STAB WOUND?
A COULD YOU EXPLAIN YOUR QUESTION FURTHER? WHAT DO YOU
MEAN BY "RAPID RESPONSE"?
Q IN A MECHANISM AS A RESULT OF THAT STAB WOUND, WHAT
IF ANYTHING DOES THE BODY DO TO TRY AND PRESERVE LIFE?
A BASICALLY, AS I TOLD YOU, THERE IS A PART OF YOUR
NERVOUS SYSTEM WHICH IS INVOLUNTARY AND IT'S CALLED THE
SYMPATHETIC NERVOUS SYSTEM THAT COMES TO PLAY SO THAT --
BECAUSE OF THE LOSS OF BLOOD, THE BODY TRIES TO
MAINTAIN THE BLOOD PRESSURE AT ANY COST, AND THIS INVOLUNTARY
NERVOUS SYSTEM IS BROUGHT INTO PLAY SO THAT THE VESSELS CONSTRICT
IN THE OTHER PARTS OF THE BODY SO THAT -- AND ALSO, THE BLOOD
COMING INTO THE HEART FROM THE VENOUS SYSTEM IS ALSO INCREASED SO
THE BLOOD PRESSURE IS MAINTAINED.
SO THE BODY TRIES ITS BEST TO MAINTAIN THE BLOOD
PRESSURE IN THIS MANNER UNTIL YOU LOSE 2/5 THE VOLUME. THAT IS
THE BLOOD VOLUME IS FIVE LITERS. ONCE YOU'VE LOST APPROXIMATELY
TWO LITERS, YOU WILL GO INTO SHOCK.
Q DOCTOR, ASSUMING THAT MR. GOLDMAN HAD SUSTAINED NO
INJURY PRIOR TO THE FATAL ABDOMINAL AORTA STAB WOUND, HOW RAPIDLY
WOULD YOU HAVE EXPECTED HIM TO HAVE DIED?
A THE ABDOMINAL AORTIC WOUND, YOU CAN DIE WITHIN A FEW
MINUTES, BUT EVEN LESS THAN A MINUTE, DEPENDING ON THE AMOUNT OF
BLOOD LOST FROM THOSE DEFECTS.
THESE ARE BIG DEFECTS IN THE AORTIC WALL DESCRIBED BY
DR. GOLDEN. HE SAID HALF AN INCH DEFECTS IN AORTIC WALL.
Q AND, DOCTOR, ASSUMING THAT MR. GOLDMAN HAD RECEIVED
OTHER STAB WOUNDS SUCH AS TO THE CHEST BEFORE THAT AORTIC STAB
WOUND -- AND IS THAT YOUR OPINION; THAT HE IN FACT HAD RECEIVED
THOSE BEFORE THE AORTIC STAB WOUND?
A HE COULD HAVE. I SAID HE RECEIVED THE THIGH WOUND
BEFORE THE AORTIC WOUND.
Q ASSUMING HE RECEIVED THE CHEST WOUNDS, THE TWO FATAL
CHEST WOUNDS AND THE NECK WOUND, THE LEFT NECK WOUND, WHICH I
BELIEVE IS INJURY NO. 3 OF G-37, INJURY NO. 1 OF G-51, BEFORE
THAT FATAL AORTIC STAB WOUND, WHAT EFFECT IF ANY WOULD THOSE
WOUNDS HAVE HAD ON THE LENGTH OF TIME YOU WOULD HAVE EXPECTED MR.
GOLDMAN TO LIVE ONCE THE AORTIC STAB WOUND HAD BEEN INFLICTED?
A IT WOULD DEFINITELY DIMINISH THE AMOUNT OF TIME
REQUIRED TO GO INTO SHOCK BECAUSE YOU ALREADY LOST SO MUCH OF THE
BLOOD VOLUME.
AS I TOLD YOU, THE BLOOD VOLUME IN THE BODY IS FIXED.
IF YOU ALREADY LOST BLOOD FROM THE NECK WOUND, LOST BLOOD FROM
THE CHEST WOUND AND ALSO FROM THE THIGH WOUND -- AND I ALREADY
TOLD YOU IF YOU LOSE TWO LITERS, YOU GO INTO SHOCK IN A NORMAL
PERSON.
THE AORTIC WOUND, WHEN IT WAS INFLICTED, YOU ALREADY
LOST BLOOD FROM THESE OTHER SITES. SO NATURALLY, THE TIME FRAME
WHICH IT WOULD TAKE TO GO INTO SHOCK IS NARROWED, NOT INCREASED.
Q AND, DOCTOR, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO A MINIMUM
PERIOD OF TIME WHICH MUST HAVE PASSED FROM THE TIME THE AORTIC
STAB WOUND WAS INFLICTED, ASSUMING THESE OTHER WOUNDS THAT I'VE
DESCRIBED WERE INFLICTED BEFORE THE AORTIC STAB WOUND, FOR MR.
GOLDMAN TO HAVE DIED?
A I -- I THINK I OPINED THIS EARLIER. HE WOULD HAVE
DIED -- I WOULD EXPECT HIM TO DIE WITHIN FIVE MINUTES AFTER THESE
INJURIES WERE INFLICTED AND EVEN EARLIER.
Q HOW MUCH EARLIER?
A TWO, THREE MINUTES, BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
MAJOR INJURIES TO THE JUGULAR VEIN, THE LUNG, THE AORTA, AND
YOU'LL BLEED FAST AND GO INTO SHOCK RAPIDLY. IT DOESN'T TAKE
MUCH TIME TO LOSE TWO LITERS OF BLOOD FROM ALL THESE SITES TO GO
INTO SHOCK.
Q AND, DOCTOR, AGAIN, FROM THE QUANTIFICATION THAT DR.
GOLDEN PROVIDES IN HIS PROTOCOL REGARDING THE ABDOMINAL CAVITY
BLOOD THAT IS FOUND, DOES THAT GIVE YOU SOME INDICATION AS TO HOW
LONG AFTER THE AORTIC WOUND WAS INFLICTED MR. GOLDMAN LIVED?
A IT DOESN'T HELP THAT MUCH BECAUSE HE -- THE QUANTITY
WE HAVE IS ONLY IN THE CAVITY. I DO NOT HAVE AN ESTIMATE OF HOW
MUCH BLOOD IS IN THE RETROPERITONEUM. SO YOU CANNOT REALLY GIVE
AN ESTIMATE ON HOW MUCH BLOOD LOSS OCCURRED FROM THAT PARTICULAR
WOUND.
Q DO YOU CONSIDER IT A MISTAKE ON THE PART OF DR.
GOLDEN NOT TO HAVE ATTEMPTED TO QUANTIFY AND REPORT THAT EFFORT
ON THE RETROPERITONEAL AREA WHERE HEMORRHAGE WAS FOUND?
A IT'S DIFFICULT TO QUANTIFY THE RETROPERITONEAL AREA,
BUT HE -- IT COULD HAVE BEEN -- YOU COULD HAVE DESCRIBED THE
EXTENT OF THE RETROPERITONEAL HEMORRHAGE.
Q WHAT EFFECT IF ANY DOES HIS FAILURE TO DO THAT, IF
YOU DESCRIBE IT AS A MISTAKE, HAVE ON YOUR ABILITY TO ANSWER
THESE BIG TICKET QUESTIONS?
A EVEN IF YOU HAD GIVEN IT MEASUREMENT, IT WOULD BE
DIFFICULT TO -- TO ESTIMATE THE VOLUME OF BLOOD CLOTS IN THE
RETROPERITONEUM UNLESS YOU TAKE -- IF YOU HAVE TISSUES WHICH YOU
CAN WEIGH WITHOUT THE BLOOD CLOTS. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO
ESTIMATE IT.
Q AND, DOCTOR, OTHER THAN -- I GATHER THIS IS OF SOME
IMPORTANCE TO YOU IN ASSESSING HOW LONG MR. GOLDMAN MAY HAVE
LIVED FROM THE TIME THAT AORTIC STAB WOUND WAS INFLICTED; IS THAT
ACCURATE?
A WELL, I ALREADY TOLD YOU IT WON'T TAKE MUCH TIME TO
GO INTO SHOCK AFTER THE AORTIC WOUND. SO IT WILL HELP TO BETTER
DEFINE A TIME, BUT REALLY, THE TOTAL TIME FRAME YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT IS NOT LONG.
Q AND OTHER THAN THAT, WOULD SUCH A QUANTIFICATION HAVE
ASSISTED YOU IN IDENTIFYING WHETHER A SINGLE SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE
CAUSED ALL OF THE SHARP FORCE INJURIES?
A NO.
Q OR HAVE ASSISTED YOU IN IDENTIFYING THE RELATIVE
POSITIONS OF THE PERPETRATOR AND MR. GOLDMAN AT THE TIME THAT
AORTIC SHARP FORCE INJURY WAS INFLICTED?
A NO.
Q OR IN IDENTIFYING FROM THE APPEARANCE OF THE WOUND
THE TYPE OF KNIFE THAT INFLICTED SUCH AN INJURY?
A FROM THE APPEARANCE OF THE WOUND AS I -- I COULDN'T
SEE THE EDGES PROPERLY FOR THIS WOUND FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHS VERY
CLEARLY, BUT THE DESCRIPTION OF DR. GOLDEN IS THAT THE POSTERIOR
EDGE IS FORKED AND THE FRONT END IS SHARP. AND BASED ON THAT, IT
COULD BE A SINGLE EDGE IF IT'S A STRAIGHT PENETRATION, WHICH
WOULD SUPPORT A THICK EDGE, THICK BLUNT EDGE BECAUSE OF THE
FORKING.
THE OTHER POSSIBILITY IS, IF IT'S A DOUBLE EDGE, YOU
CANNOT EXCLUDE SOME TWISTING.
Q TO BREAK THIS DOWN A BIT, DOCTOR, FROM YOUR REVIEW OF
THE PHOTOGRAPH, THE PHOTOGRAPH IS INSUFFICIENT TO DEFINE WITH
SUFFICIENT CLARITY FOR YOU THE ENDS OF THE STAB WOUND ON THE
SURFACE OF THE BODY?
A YES.
Q SO IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, YOU ARE REFERRING TO
DR. GOLDEN'S DESCRIPTION OF THE ENDS OF THAT SHARP FORCE INJURY,
THAT STAB WOUND IN HIS REPORT?
A YES.
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. HEARSAY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AND BASED UPON WHAT DR. GOLDEN
REPORTS, THEN THIS IS ONE OF THESE FORMS WHERE YOU CANNOT
DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE AND A DOUBLE-EDGED
KNIFE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q WHICH OF OUR ALTERNATIVES IF ANY FROM THAT BOARD 1, 2
AND 3, THE WOUND PATTERN --
A THAT WOULD BE NO. 3.
Q AND, DOCTOR, YOU'VE ALREADY INDICATED THAT A
SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE COULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THIS AND ALL THE
OTHER WOUNDS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
MR. KELBERG: I LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT FOR JUST A MOMENT.
IF I MAY HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: FROM DR. GOLDEN'S DESCRIPTION OF THE
STAB WOUND ITSELF AND THE ENDS OF IT, ARE YOU HOWEVER ABLE TO
DETERMINE THAT IT IS CONSISTENT WITH A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE?
A YES.
Q AND FROM A DESCRIPTION GIVEN BY DR. GOLDEN, ARE YOU
ABLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE LENGTH OF THE STAB WOUND, THAT IS
THE DEPTH OF THE STAB WOUND IN THE BODY IS STILL CONSISTENT WITH
AN APPROXIMATELY 6-INCH LONG TAPERING BLADE?
A YES.
Q IS THIS DIAGRAMMED BY DR. GOLDEN AS WELL AS
DESCRIBED? YOU'VE INDICATED HE DESCRIBED IT I BELIEVE IN THE
PROTOCOL?
A YES, HE DID.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED SOMEWHERE?
A YES, HE HAS.
Q LET'S TAKE THE PROTOCOL FIRST BECAUSE YOU'VE
INDICATED THERE'S SOME QUANTIFICATION IN THE ABDOMINAL CAVITY AND
SO FORTH.
WHERE IN THE PROTOCOL, DOCTOR?
A IT'S ON PAGE 10, NO. 5. PAGE 10, NO. 5, THE WHOLE
FIVE PARAGRAPHS UNDER ITEM 5 THAT REFLECTS THE DESCRIPTION OF THE
STAB WOUND.
Q AND LET ME BOX THAT IN IN RED ON PAGE 10 OF THE
PROTOCOL, 0G, AND I'LL WRITE "G-8, ABDOMINAL AORTA."
NOW, DOCTOR, WOULD YOU POINT OUT FOR US, PLEASE,
WHERE THERE IS THE QUANTIFICATION MADE BY DR. GOLDEN?
A WE HAVE TO START WITH LINE 8 UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 UNDER
ITEM 5, PAGE 10 (INDICATING).
"TWO PERFORATING HALF AN INCH WOUNDS ARE SEEN IN
THE WALL OF THE AORTA WITH SURROUNDING PARA-AORTIC HEMORRHAGE.
IN ADDITION TO THE RETROPERITONEAL HEMORRHAGE, INCLUDING
HEMORRHAGE INTO THE MESOCOLON, APPROXIMATELY HUNDRED CC --
HUNDRED ML OF LIQUID BLOOD IS FOUND FREE WITHIN THE PERITONEAL
CAVITY."
Q LET ME OUTLINE THIS -- ACTUALLY NOT OUTLINE, BUT LET
ME UNDERLINE "APPROXIMATELY 100 ML OF LIQUID BLOOD IS FOUND FREE
WITHIN THE PERITONEAL CAVITY."
IS "PERITONEAL CAVITY" A FANCY WAY OF SAYING THE
ABDOMINAL CAVITY?
A YES.
Q AND, DOCTOR, WHAT IF ANY SIGNIFICANCE IS THERE TO YOU
IN THE OBSERVATION BY DR. GOLDEN THAT THERE ARE -- AND I'LL
UNDERLINE THIS -- "TWO PERFORATING 1/2 INCH WOUNDS SEEN IN THE
WALL OF THE AORTA"?
A IT COULD MEAN TWO THINGS.
YOU HAVE THE -- THE AORTIC -- AORTA IS A TUBULOUS
STRUCTURE. SO THE KNIFE WENT THROUGH THE TUBULOUS STRUCTURE. IT
COULD HAVE GONE IN AND OUT THROUGH THE -- BOTH WALLS OF THE TUBE.
SO YOU COULD HAVE TWO DEFECTS THAT WAY.
THE OTHER POSSIBILITY IS THAT THE KNIFE COULD HAVE
BEEN WITHDRAWN AND REENTERED IN THE SAME AREA OF THE AORTA. I
MEAN NOT IN THE SAME AREA. IN A DIFFERENT AREA OF THE AORTA IN
THE SAME VICINITY.
Q IF THAT HAD BEEN THE SITUATION, DOCTOR, WOULD YOU
HAVE EXPECTED DR. GOLDEN TO SEE SEPARATE WOUND PATHS AT LEAST FOR
SOME DISTANCE TO SHOW THAT THE KNIFE HAD BEEN WITHDRAWN SOME
DISTANCE AND THEN REPLUNGED TO CREATE THE SECOND PERFORATION IN
THE AORTA?
A IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO STUDY TWO DIFFERENT TRACKS
IN THE RETROPERITONEAL SOFT TISSUES. IT'S NOT LIKE GOING THROUGH
A SOLID ORGAN. SO IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ASCERTAIN THAT IN
AN AREA WHERE'S THERE SO MUCH SOFT TISSUES WHERE YOU CANNOT
REALLY DEFINE A TRACK BECAUSE YOU HAVE SO MUCH HEMORRHAGE IN THE
MARGINS.
Q NOW, ACCORDING TO THIS SAME PARAGRAPH, DR. GOLDEN
DESCRIBED THE PATH -- REFERRING TO THE PATH OF THE STAB WOUND; IS
THAT CORRECT, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q -- AS FROM LEFT TO RIGHT AND SLIGHTLY BACK TO FRONT.
WHAT IF ANY SIGNIFICANCE DOES THAT HAVE -- AND I'LL
UNDERLINE THAT FOR THE RECORD.
WHAT IF ANY SIGNIFICANCE DOES THAT HAVE TO YOU IN
ASCERTAINING, IF YOU CAN, THE RELATIVE POSITIONS OF MR. GOLDMAN
AND THE PERPETRATOR AT THE TIME THAT ABDOMINAL AORTA FATAL STAB
WOUND WAS INFLICTED?
A IT COULD HAVE BEEN -- THERE ARE DIFFERENT
POSSIBILITIES AGAIN AS I SAID EARLIER.
ONE POSSIBILITY IS THAT THE PERPETRATOR WAS IN THE
FRONT OF MR. GOLDMAN ON HIS LEFT, SLIGHTLY TO HIS LEFT SIDE, AND
WITH A KNIFE IN THE RIGHT HAND, PLUNGED THE KNIFE STRAIGHT IN A
LEFT TO RIGHT DIRECTION AND IN THIS MANNER (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
AND FOR THE RECORD, DR. LAKSHMANAN WITH HIS RIGHT
HAND APPEARING TO HOLD A KNIFE, MADE A THRUSTING KIND OF A
SIDEWAYS MOTION.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, DO YOU WANT TO DEMONSTRATE,
IF YOU WOULD, USING ME?
WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES, RIGHT-HANDED AND
LEFT-HANDED?
A RIGHT-HANDED COULD BE IN THIS MANNER (DEMONSTRATING).
Q LET'S TURN SO THE JURY CAN SEE.
A IN THIS MANNER HERE (DEMONSTRATING).
MR. KELBERG: FOR THE RECORD, DR. LAKSHMANAN AND I ARE
FACE-TO-FACE. WITH HIS RIGHT HAND, HE'S TAKEN THE RULER, AND THE
RULER APPEARS TO BE PERPENDICULAR TO THE SIDE OF MY BODY WHERE
THE STAB WOUND WOULD BE LOCATED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IS THAT CORRECT, DOCTOR?
A YEAH.
THIS IS A STRAIGHT PENETRATION. BUT AS I TOLD YOU,
YOU COULD HAVE DYNAMICS IN THIS AND IT MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE
THAT THE PLUNGE TOOK PLACE IN THIS MANNER BECAUSE THE BODY OF THE
VICTIM COULD BE TURNING THIS WAY AND IT COULD BE JUST A STRAIGHT
PLUNGE THIS WAY TOO (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT.
HOW ABOUT A LEFT-HANDED SITUATION?
A LEFT-HANDED SITUATION, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE -- THE
PERPETRATOR WOULD HAVE TO BE MORE ON THE LEFT SIDE LIKE THIS, IN
THIS MANNER, BEING THE BACK OF THE VICTIM, OR THE PERPETRATOR
COULD ALSO BE ON THE SIDE, ON HIS SIDE FACING THE -- I MEAN THE
VICTIM COULD BE ON -- THE VICTIM'S SIDE COULD BE FACING THE
PERPETRATOR'S KNIFE IN THIS MANNER, BUT LITTLE MORE, THE VICTIM
BEING TURNING SO THAT HE COULD HAVE BACK TO FRONT, LEFT TO RIGHT
DIRECTION (DEMONSTRATING).
MR. KELBERG: IN THE FIRST DEMONSTRATION, DR. LAKSHMANAN
WAS DIRECTLY BEHIND ME, SHIFTED A LITTLE TO THE LEFT OF CENTER OF
MY BODY, AND THE SECOND DEMONSTRATION -- IF DR. LAKSHMANAN COULD
GET BACK INTO POSITION SO I'LL ACCURATELY DESCRIBE THE SECOND
DEMONSTRATION YOU WERE JUST DOING, DOCTOR?
THE WITNESS: THIS WAY. I'M SORRY. YOU HAVE TO BE LIKE
THIS (DEMONSTRATING).
MR. KELBERG: DR. LAKSHMANAN IS ALMOST TO THE LEFT OF MY
LEFT SIDE OF THE BODY. HE'S HOLDING THE RULER TO REPRESENT A
KNIFE IN A MANNER IN WHICH THE CONTACTING PORTION OF THE RULER IS
FORWARD OF THE BACK OF THE RULER WHICH IS IN DR. LAKSHMANAN'S
HAND ABOUT A 45-DEGREE ANGLE TO THE HORIZONTAL.
THE COURT: NOTED.
THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, WE'VE DONE THIS
DEMONSTRATION WITH THE TWO OF US STANDING.
IS THERE ANYTHING FROM YOUR REVIEW OF THE MATERIAL
WHICH REQUIRES MR. GOLDMAN TO HAVE BEEN STANDING AT THE TIME THAT
FATAL STAB WOUND TO THE AORTA WAS INFLICTED?
A NO.
THE ONLY THING I WANT TO BRING UP IS THAT WHEN I
EXAMINED THE SHIRT OF MR. GOLDMAN, THERE'S NO DEFECT DIRECTLY
CORRESPONDING TO THAT WOUND ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SHIRT. THERE
WERE TWO DEFECTS IN THE BACK OF THE MID PORTION OF THE SHIRT.
SO IF THE SHIRT WAS NOT COVERING THAT AREA WHEN THIS
STAB WOUND WAS INFLICTED, THEN HE NEED NOT NECESSARILY BE
STANDING UP. HE COULD BE ON THE GROUND WEN THE STAB WOUND WAS
INFLICTED.
BUT IF THERE WAS THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE DEFECTS IN
THE BACK OF THE SHIRT, ONE OR BOTH OF THEM CORRESPOND TO THIS
DEFECT ON THE SIDE OF THE ABDOMEN, THEN IT WOULD REFLECT THAT
THERE WAS MOVEMENT OF THE SHIRT ON THE BODY SURFACE IF THAT
PENETRATION TOOK PLACE THROUGH THE SHIRT.
Q IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN MAKE THAT DETERMINATION,
DOCTOR?
A I CAN'T.
Q AND, DOCTOR, COULD THOSE DEFECTS IN THE BACK OF THE
SHIRT THAT YOU DESCRIBED -- I GATHER YOU DID NOT SEE A
CORRESPONDING SHARP FORCE INJURY TO THE BACK WHERE THOSE WOUNDS
WOULD BE -- WHERE THOSE DEFECTS WOULD BE IN THE SHIRT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q WOULD IT BE ACCURATE TO SAY THAT THE KNIFE COULD HAVE
PENETRATED THE SHIRT TO CREATE THE DEFECTS IN A SITUATION WHERE
THERE WAS MOVEMENT BY MR. GOLDMAN SUCH THAT THE KNIFE NEVER CAME
IN CONTACT WITH MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY?
A THAT IS ANOTHER POSSIBILITY.
Q DOCTOR, DO WE SEE THE AREA OF THE ABDOMINAL AORTA
STAB WOUND IN PHOTOGRAPH 43E?
A YES, WE DO.
IT'S JUST -- YOU DON'T SEE THE WOUND ITSELF, BUT IT'S
IN THIS AREA HERE (INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: AND MAY I ASK, MR. FAIRTLOUGH, IS THERE A
MARKER THAT WILL MARK ON THE PHOTOGRAPH UNOBTRUSIVELY?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. KELBERG: MR. FAIRTLOUGH INDICATES TO ME THAT WE HAVE A
GOLD MARKER THAT HE CAN USE.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: AND, DOCTOR --
A I'M GOING TO PUT AN ARROW IN THIS AREA SOMEWHERE HERE
THIS REGION (INDICATING).
THE COURT: I HAVE ARROWS.
MR. KELBERG: IS IT PERMANENTLY A FIXED ONE, YOUR HONOR?
I'M JUST CONCERNED IF IT MIGHT COME OFF.
THE COURT: WELL, TRY IT.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
MAY I APPROACH?
I'LL LET MR. FAIRTLOUGH --
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, WILL YOU POINT OUT WHERE MR.
FAIRTLOUGH SHOULD PUT THE ARROW?
A THIS AREA HERE. THAT'S WHERE THE STAB WOUND IS IN
THE LEFT FLANK.
LITTLE BIT LOWER. YEAH, THAT'S FINE. LITTLE BIT
LOWER (INDICATING).
YOU CAN'T SEE IT BECAUSE IT'S SLIGHTLY ON THE
POSTERIOR CURVATURE OF THE TORSO.
Q AND, DOCTOR, DOES THE POINT OF THE ARROW TOUCH THE
APPROXIMATE AREA THOUGH?
A YES.
AND YOU CAN SEE IT IN G-5 WHERE IT IS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU'VE POINTED NOW --
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, MR. FAIRTLOUGH.
AND I THINK WE OWE THE COURT BACK ITS --
THE COURT: NO. KEEP THEM.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
YOU'RE A PESSIMIST, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOES THAT, WHERE YOU'RE POINTING,
DOCTOR, THEN SHOW THE VERY SAME FATAL ABDOMINAL STAB WOUNDS THAT
YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED IN G-8?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, IN LOOKING AT THE AREA IN 43E, IS THAT
AREA COVERED BY MR. GOLDMAN'S SHIRT IF YOU CAN TELL?
A NO.
Q YOU CAN'T TELL OR IT'S NOT?
A I MEAN -- I'M SORRY. YOU CAN TELL, BUT IT'S NOT
COVERED. THAT'S WHAT I MEANT.
Q DOCTOR, IS THERE ANYTHING INCONSISTENT WITH MR.
GOLDMAN HAVING BEEN IN A POSITION ON THE GROUND WITH HIS SHIRT
NOT COVERING THAT AREA AND THE PERPETRATOR REACHING DOWN WITH A
RIGHT HAND AND INFLICTING THAT FATAL STAB WOUND TO THE ABDOMINAL
AORTA?
A I CAN'T EXCLUDE THAT POSSIBILITY. IT'S -- IT'S --
THERE'S NOTHING INCONSISTENT IN THAT STATEMENT.
Q AND IF THAT WAS DONE, DOCTOR, WOULD IT BE ACCURATE TO
SAY THAT YOU WOULD STILL EXPECT THE BLEEDING TO BE INTERNAL
RATHER THAN OUTSIDE OF THE BODY?
A YES.
AND OF COURSE, THE WOUND SHOULD HAVE BEEN INFLICTED
WHEN MR. GOLDMAN HAD BLOOD PRESSURE TO CAUSE ALL THE BLEEDING
WHICH IT CAUSED.
Q AND IN YOUR OPINION, THAT WAS IN FACT THE CASE, THAT
HE HAD A BEATING HEART WITH SUFFICIENT BLOOD PRESSURE?
A YES.
Q BEFORE WE GO, DOCTOR, TO THE -- I THINK WE'VE TAKEN
CARE OF THE PROTOCOL.
HAVE WE TAKEN CARE OF THE DIAGRAMS THAT SHOW THAT
ABDOMINAL AORTA?
A YES. NO. ACTUALLY NO. THERE'S 20-II.
Q WE'LL GET THAT UP IN JUST A MOMENT.
BEFORE WE DO, DOCTOR, IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER YOU
WISH TO ADD CONCERNING THE WOUND ITSELF AS IT APPEARS IN EITHER
PHOTOGRAPH G-8 OR IN G-5?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S SEE IF WE CAN THEN GET THE PROTOCOL. WE CAN
PUT IT UP RIGHT HERE.
DOCTOR, IS IT ALSO DIAGRAMMED IN 21, ONE OF THE 21
BOARDS?
A YES. 21-III.
Q WHY DON'T WE TAKE CARE OF THAT ONE WHILE MR. LYNCH IS
GOING TO PUT THE OTHER ONE UP ON THE EASEL. WAS GOING TO PUT THE
OTHER ONE UP ON THE EASEL WITH THE PHOTO.
I'LL DO THAT.
THE COURT: THAT'S 2G.
MR. KELBERG: 2G.
THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT, DOCTOR.
WHERE IS IT ON 21-III?
A RIGHT HERE (INDICATING).
Q AND WHAT IF ANY ENTRY, HANDWRITTEN ENTRY IS MADE BY
DR. GOLDEN?
A IT SAYS STAB WOUND ABDOMEN TRANSFERS -- THE LENGTH OF
THE TRACK IS FIVE AND A HALF INCHES AND WENT THROUGH THE
ABDOMINAL AORTA ONE AND A QUARTER INCHES PROXIMAL, P-R-O-X, TO
BIFURCATION.
Q WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, "PROXIMAL"?
A THAT MEANS ONE AND A QUARTER INCHES ABOVE WHERE THE
AORTA DIVIDES.
Q AND IS THERE ANY WRITING BELOW THAT THAT REFERS TO
THAT SAME AREA?
A LEFT TO RIGHT AND SLIGHTLY BACK TO FRONT.
Q AND, DOCTOR, JUST -- THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME WAVING
LINE AROUND THE CIRCLED AREA TO THE LEFT OF WHAT I THOUGHT YOU
POINTED OUT AS THE DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE AORTIC STAB
WOUND.
AM I CORRECT THAT THIS AREA IS THE DIAGRAMMATIC
REPRESENTATION OF THE AORTIC STAB WOUND (INDICATING)?
A YES.
Q LET ME CIRCLE THAT IN RED.
AND WHAT IF ANYTHING IS REPRESENTED BY THE AREA TO
THE LEFT THAT HAS THAT WAVING BLACK LINE?
A WELL, I THINK THAT'S JUST A DELETION OF SOMETHING HE
DREW AND IT DOESN'T REFLECT THIS INJURY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THEN LET ME CIRCLE THE DESCRIPTION IN THE TWO AREAS
THAT ARE COVERED BY THAT, AND I'LL MAKE A LINE OUT TO THE SIDE
OF THE LOWER RIGHT-HAND AREA OF G-8 AND G-5, AND I'LL WRITE
"ABDOMINAL AORTA."
IS THAT ACCURATE, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q NOW, YOU SAID IT'S DIAGRAMMED ALSO IN ANOTHER FORM;
IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. 20-II.
Q WHERE ON 20-II IS THAT DIAGRAM?
A HERE (INDICATING). THIS PARTICULAR AREA HERE
REFLECTS AND IT SAYS, "STAB WOUND TO THE ABDOMEN, LEFT TO RIGHT,
RETROPERITONEAL ILIOPSOAS AREA."
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
A YES.
Q IS ALL OF THIS WRITING HERE TO REFER TO THAT
ABDOMINAL AORTA STAB WOUND?
A YES.
AND ACTUALLY, IT CONTINUES HERE ALSO (INDICATING).
IT REFLECTS THE 3/4 INCH LENGTH OF THE STAB WOUND OF THE SKIN
SURFACE, THE DIRECTION LEFT TO RIGHT, BACK TO FRONT.
AND AGAIN, IT REFLECTS THAT THE INJURY TO THE AORTA
TOOK PLACE PROXIMAL, ONE AND A QUARTER INCHES PROXIMAL TO THE
BIFURCATION, AND YOU HAVE HUNDRED CC BLOOD IN THE PERITONEAL
CAVITY.
Q DOCTOR, WHAT IF ANYTHING IS THIS, WHERE I'M POINTING,
TO REPRESENT?
A WELL, HE DESCRIBES THE STAB WOUND ITSELF, AND I THINK
HE'S TRYING TO POINT OUT THE -- THAT ONE END OF THE WOUND IS
SHARP AND ONE END OF THE WOUND IS FORKED.
Q AND WHAT DOES THIS -- AND I'LL HAVE THE RECORD
HOPEFULLY CORRECTED TO INDICATE WHAT I'VE BEEN POINTING TO.
WHAT IS THIS WHERE I'M POINTING TO, WHICH IS JUST
ABOVE WHAT YOU WERE JUST DESCRIBING? WHAT DOES THAT REFER TO?
A I -- I -- HE'S GOT SOME KIND OF DIAGRAMMATIC NOTATION
HERE, BUT MAINLY HE SAYS IT'S A TRANSVERSELY ORIENTED WOUND,
WHICH MEANS IT'S HORIZONTAL, HORIZONTALLY ORIENTED, WHICH WE
ALREADY SAW IN THE PHOTOGRAPH.
Q DOCTOR, I BELIEVE --
A IT RUNS FROM A FRONT TO BACK DIRECTION, THE STAB
WOUND.
Q I BELIEVE YOU INDICATED DR. GOLDEN DESCRIBED ONE END
OF THE STAB WOUND AS BEING FORKED?
A YES.
Q IS THAT ACCURATE?
A YES.
Q WOULD THIS APPEAR TO BE A REPRESENTATION OF A FORKED
END OF A STAB WOUND?
A NO. IT'S JUST SOME NOTATION THERE.
I CAN'T REALLY MAKE THAT DIAGNOSIS FROM THAT
NOTATION.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO ALL OF THIS AREA HERE, ALL OF THIS AREA HERE
(INDICATING) ALL RELATES BACK TO THAT STAB WOUND, THE AORTIC STAB
WOUND; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME CIRCLE ALL OF THAT.
DOES THE NO. 5 GO ALONG WITH THAT INFORMATION?
A YES. SEE, THIS NO. 5 CORRESPONDS TO THE 5
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROTOCOL.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO I'VE CIRCLED THAT AREA IN RED AND I'LL WRITE "G-8,
G-5, ABDOMINAL AORTA."
DOCTOR, AS LONG AS WE HAVE THIS FORM UP, 20, THERE IS
SOMETHING WRITTEN IN, SEVERAL THINGS THAT APPEAR TO BE WRITTEN IN
ON THE CORRESPONDING LEFT SIDE OF THE FORM.
WHAT ARE THOSE REPRESENTATIONS?
A THIS WOULD REFLECT THE SITE OF LIVER TEMPERATURE
PUNCTURE (INDICATING). THEY PUNCTURE THE ABDOMEN TO GET THE
LIVER TEMPERATURE.
AND "PM" MEANS IT WAS DONE POSTMORTEM. AND THIS IS
THE LIVER TEMPERATURE PROCEDURE CONDUCTED BY MISS RATCLIFFE,
WHICH DR. GOLDEN IS REFLECTING AS HE SAW AS A MARK ON THE BODY
WHEN HE EXAMINED THE BODY.
Q LET ME CIRCLE THAT AREA, AND I'LL JUST WRITE IN
"LIVER TEMP PROBE."
WOULD THAT BE ACCURATE?
A YES.
AND THIS "45H" MEANS THAT THIS STAB WOUND TO THE
ABDOMEN WAS 45 INCHES ABOVE THE HEEL. SO THIS ALSO SHOULD BE
INCLUDED WITH THIS DISCUSSION (INDICATING).
Q ALL RIGHT, DOCTOR.
IS THIS, WHERE I'M POINTING TO RIGHT HOW, THE
LOCATION OF THAT ABDOMINAL AORTIC STAB WOUND?
A YES. YES.
Q SO I WILL CIRCLE THIS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION YOU JUST
INDICATED AND I WILL DRAW RED LINES TO THE ACTUAL WOUND ITSELF
THAT'S DIAGRAMMATICALLY REPRESENTED, CIRCLE THAT IN BLUE, AND OUT
AT THE SIDE, WRITE "G-8, G-5, ABDOMINAL A WOUND."
DOCTOR, WHY WOULD DOCTOR -- LET ME WITHDRAW THAT.
IS IT A COMMON PRACTICE AT YOUR OFFICE THAT MORE THAN
ONE DIAGRAM FORM WOULD BE USED TO INCLUDE INFORMATION FOR THE
VERY SAME INJURY SUCH AS WE HAVE HERE, 21-III AND 20 BEING USED
FOR THE ABDOMINAL AORTA?
A WELL, DR. GOLDEN COULD HAVE -- I MEAN, TO ANSWER THAT
QUESTION, SOMETIMES MORE THAN ONE DIAGRAM IS USED TO REFLECT THE
SAME INJURY BECAUSE WE HAVE DIAGRAMS WHICH SHOW THE ANATOMICAL
LOCATION BETTER.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING IN YOUR OPINION WHICH IS
INAPPROPRIATE FOR DR. GOLDEN TO HAVE SELECTED THESE TWO FORMS TO
INCLUDE FOR THE INFORMATION OF THE ABDOMINAL AORTA FATAL STAB
WOUND?
A NO. NOTHING INAPPROPRIATE.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER ON THE DIAGRAM?
A NO.
Q ANYTHING IN THE FORM OF THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER WITH RESPECT TO THIS INJURY?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S --
NOW, DOCTOR I THINK YOU INDICATED THAT THE ABDOMINAL
AORTA STAB WOUND WAS THE ONLY INJURY WHICH YOU DISCUSSED FROM
PHOTOGRAPH G-8; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND JUST FOR ORIENTATION, IS THIS MR. GOLDMAN'S LEFT
HAND THAT IS LAYING ALONGSIDE THE AREA OF THE BODY IN G-8?
A YES.
Q NOW, WE HAVE ONE PHOTOGRAPH LEFT, DOCTOR, AND THAT'S
G-5; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU'VE ALREADY INDICATED WHERE THE ABDOMINAL
AORTA WOUND ON THE BODY IS LOCATED.
WHAT OTHER FINDINGS HAVE YOU MADE FROM REVIEWING THIS
PHOTOGRAPH?
AND, BY THE WAY, THIS IS A CROPPED PHOTOGRAPH; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU SAW THE FULL PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES.
Q IS THIS ONE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WAS NOT MADE INTO
A LIFE-SIZE PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES.
Q AND IS THAT BECAUSE IN ESSENCE, YOU WOULD NEED A FULL
FIVE FOOT, NINE INCH PHOTOGRAPH TO ACCURATELY REPRESENT A
LIFE-SIZE DEPICTION OF THIS AREA OF MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
NEARLY FIVE FEET NINE INCHES BECAUSE THE PHOTOGRAPH
WOULD VIEW PORTIONS OF THE BODY, NOT THE WHOLE BODY.
Q I'M SORRY.
PORTIONS OF THE BODY?
A BUT NOT THE WHOLE BODY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WOULD YOU TELL US WHAT YOUR FINDINGS ARE THAT
ARE SEEN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A I ALREADY DESCRIBED THE FLANK WOUND WHICH IS SEEN,
WHICH IS SEEN IN G-8. YOU ALSO HAVE AN ABRASION IN THE LEFT
SHOULDER BLADE AREA AND YOU HAVE AN ABRASION IN THE RADIAL ASPECT
OF THE LEFT WRIST.
Q HAVE WE SEEN EITHER OF THOSE INJURIES IN ANY OF THE
OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS?
A NO.
Q LET'S START THEN WITH THIS ABRASION YOU SAY THE LEFT
SHOULDER AREA.
A LEFT SHOULDER BLADE AREA.
Q ALL RIGHT.
FROM YOUR OBSERVATION IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, IS THIS AN
ANTEMORTEM ABRASION?
A YES.
Q DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO ANY POTENTIAL SOURCE OR
SOURCES FOR THAT?
A NONSPECIFIC BLUNT FORCE TRAUMA.
Q DOCTOR, FROM YOUR REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
SURROUNDINGS THAT WE SAW IN THE EARLIER PHOTOGRAPHS, ARE ANY OF
THOSE SURROUNDINGS A POTENTIAL SOURCE FOR THAT ABRASION?
A THERE ARE SEVERAL SOURCES WHICH COULD CAUSE IT. ANY
ROUGH SURFACE COULD CAUSE IT.
Q AND DOES THAT INCLUDE THE GROUND?
A YES.
Q DOES IT INCLUDE ANY OF THE TREES?
A IT COULD. BUT REMEMBER THAT WE ALSO HAVE THE SHIRT
INTERSPERSED BETWEEN THE SKIN AND THE INFLICTING OBJECT.
Q AND WHAT EFFECT IF ANY DOES THE SHIRT INTERPOSING
BETWEEN THE OBJECT AND MR. GOLDMAN'S SKIN HAVE ON HOW THAT
ABRASION CAN BE CREATED?
A YOU CANNOT -- YOU DON'T SEE A PATTERN. SO IT WOULD BE
VERY DIFFICULT TO SAY WHICH OBJECT DID THAT PARTICULAR BLUNT
FORCE.
Q IS THIS ABRASION DISCUSSED BY DR. GOLDEN IN THE
ORIGINAL PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q IS IT DIAGRAMMED?
A NO.
Q IS IT ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ALL MISTAKES?
A YES.
Q COLLECTIVELY AND INDIVIDUALLY, ANY SIGNIFICANCE ON
ANY OF THE BIG TICKET QUESTIONS YOU'VE BEEN REVIEWING AND
TESTIFYING ABOUT?
A NO.
Q FOR THE SAME REASONS THAT YOU'VE ALREADY DESCRIBED?
A YES.
Q NOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS INJURY -- YOU SAID
SOMETHING ABOUT THE RADIAL ASPECT OF THE LEFT HAND; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES.
IT'S RIGHT HERE. YOU CAN SEE AN ABRASION THERE
(INDICATING).
Q AND WHERE -- PERHAPS YOU COULD POINT ON YOUR RIGHT
HAND WHERE IT IS --
A YOU MEAN MY LEFT -- MY LEFT HAND.
Q I'M SORRY.
YOUR LEFT HAND. EXCUSE ME.
A SOMEWHERE IN THIS REGION NEXT TO, NEAR MY WATCH AREA
(INDICATING).
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, BELOW THE BASE OF THE THUMB AT
THE WRIST LEVEL THE DOCTOR IS POINTING.
THE COURT: SLIGHTLY ABOVE THE WRIST LEVEL, YES.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IS THIS DISCUSSED BY DR. GOLDEN IN
THE PROTOCOL?
A NO.
Q DIAGRAMMED ANYWHERE?
A NO.
Q ADDRESSED IN THE ADDENDUM?
A NO.
Q ANSWERS THE SAME REGARDING THESE MISTAKES AS THEY
JUST WERE TO THE MISTAKES REGARDING THE SHOULDER BLADE ABRASION?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q AND AGAIN, NO SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU ON THE BIG TICKET
QUESTIONS?
A NO.
Q ARE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE FROM THAT PHOTOGRAPH A
SOURCE OR SOURCES FOR THAT ABRASION?
A NO.
Q IS ANY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL SURROUNDINGS -- ARE ANY
OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL SURROUNDINGS SEEN IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS FROM
BUNDY POTENTIAL SOURCES FOR THOSE -- FOR THAT ABRASION?
A IT COULD BE ANY ROUGH SURFACE WHICH THE HAND RUBBED
AGAINST OR THE SURFACE RUBBED AGAINST THE HAND TO CAUSE THAT
INJURY.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE IN THE FORM OF INJURIES SEEN
IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH G-5?
A NO.
Q NOW, I WANT TO ASK YOU, DOCTOR, BRIEFLY ABOUT, IN THE
PHOTOGRAPH, YOU'LL NOTICE IN THE TITLE OF THE DOCUMENT OF THE
BOARD THE WORD "LIVIDITY" APPEARS AT THE END.
IS THERE SOMETHING THAT YOU SEE IN PHOTOGRAPH G-5
THAT REPRESENTS TO YOU LIVIDITY?
A YES.
YOU CAN SEE IT ACTUALLY IN G-10 ALSO. YOU SEE IT IN
THE RIGHT SHOULDER AREA, DISTINCT DISCOLORATION, AND ALSO IN THE
RIGHT FLANK AREA, YOU CAN SEE DISTINCT COLORATION.
AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE LOWER PART OF G-10, YOU CAN
SEE THIS PINK DISCOLORATION, WHICH IS RELATED TO THE SAME RIGHT
SIDE, AND THAT ALL WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH LIVIDITY.
Q AND, DOCTOR, AGAIN, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS IN MUCH
GREATER DETAIL WITH THE TIME OF DEATH DISCUSSION. BUT IN GENERAL
TERMS, "LIVIDITY" IS?
A IS A POSTMORTEM DRAINING OF BLOOD TO THE DEPENDENT
PARTS OF THE BODY DUE TO GRAVITY AND CAUSING DISCOLORATION OF THE
SKIN SURFACE.
Q DOCTOR, ASSUMING MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS FOUND IN THE
POSITION IT IS SEEN IN PHOTOGRAPH 43E AND THAT THE BODY REMAINED
IN THAT POSITION MORE OR LESS UNTIL AROUND 10:30 IN THE MORNING
OF JUNE 13TH, 1994, IS THAT POSITION ONE WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE LOCATION, THIS AREA, THE PINKISH DISCOLORATION THAT YOU JUST
IDENTIFIED IN BOTH PHOTOS G-5 AND G-10?
A YES.
Q WOULD YOU POINT OUT WHERE IT IS IN THE PHOTOGRAPH
43E?
A IF YOU LOOK AT THE THIGH HERE AND THE ARROWS GOING
TOWARDS THE WAIST AREA HERE, AND ACTUALLY YOU CAN'T SEE THE RIGHT
SIDE OF THE BODY VERY WELL BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE FERN PLANT IN
FRONT OF THE BODY. BUT BASICALLY, THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE FLANK IS
IN CONTACT WITH THE GROUND. AND THAT'S A DIFFERENT PART OF THE
BODY IN THAT POSITION (INDICATING).
Q AND IS A CONSISTENT POSITION TO HAVING THE DRAINING
SHOW UP AT THE TIME OF AUTOPSY BY THE PINKISH DISCOLORATION
YOU'VE IDENTIFIED IN THESE TWO PHOTOS?
A YES.
Q ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THESE PHOTOS, DOCTOR?
A NO.
Q HAVE WE COMPLETED YOUR DISCUSSION OF ALL OF THE
PHOTOGRAPHS OF MR. GOLDMAN'S AUTOPSY THAT WE ARE USING IN THIS
PRESENTATION?
A YES.
Q HAVE WE DISCUSSED WITH RESPECT TO THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS
ALL OF THE ENTRIES IN THE PROTOCOL?
A YES.
Q ALL OF THE ENTRIES IN THE DIAGRAMS?
A YES.
Q AND ALL OF THE ENTRIES IN THE ADDENDUM?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, THERE ARE SOME OTHER RECORDS WHICH WERE
PRODUCED IN THE COURSE OF THE GOLDMAN AUTOPSY, AND I WANT TO
BEGIN BY PUTTING UP OUR BOARD WHICH IS 11G. AND WE'LL TAKE DOWN
THE PROTOCOL.
AND I'M ALSO GOING TO PUT UP IN JUST A MOMENT --
SHOULD HAVE STARTED AT THE OTHER END -- THE FORM 15, 16 WHICH IS
OUR BOARD 1G.
AND LET ME GET THE CORRESPONDING IDENTIFYING PAPER
DOCUMENTS. OUR FORM 15 IS A PART OF EXHIBIT 356-B. THERE ARE
TWO OF THOSE FORM 15'S, AND THE -- WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE
TOXICOLOGY REPORT IS OUR EXHIBIT 356-P AS IN PAUL.
DOCTOR, AGAIN, ARE THESE TWO DOCUMENTS, THE
TOXICOLOGY REPORT, AND THERE ARE SEVERAL PAGES I BELIEVE, AND THE
FORM 15, FORMS WHICH ARE PRODUCED IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF THE
CORONER'S OFFICE OPERATION?
A YES, THEY ARE.
Q AND IS EACH OF THEM COMPLETED BY AN EMPLOYEE OF THE
CORONER'S OFFICE?
A YES.
Q AND IS EACH OF SUCH EMPLOYEES UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO
COMPLETE THESE RECORDS AT OR ABOUT THE TIME OF THE EVENTS WHICH
ARE RECORDED IN EACH OF THE DOCUMENTS?
A YES.
Q NOW, LET ME INVITE YOUR ATTENTION -- AND I'M GOING TO
SEE IF WE HAVE SOME PINS STILL LEFT. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE
THEM. I DON'T THINK WE DO.
LET ME HOLD THIS BACK.
ON THE FORM --
THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE SOME? MRS. ROBERTSON CAN GET YOU
SOME IF YOU NEED THEM.
MR. KELBERG: I THINK WE CAN PROCEED WITHOUT THEM, BUT
THANK YOU FOR THE OFFER, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, THIS FORM, IS THIS COMPLETED
BY DR. GOLDEN IN THE COURSE OF PERFORMING THE AUTOPSY OF MR.
GOLDMAN?
A YES.
Q AND THERE APPEARS TO BE AN ENTRY AT THE TOP
CONCERNING TIME AND LISTED AS 10:30.
WHAT DOES THAT REFLECT?
A THAT IS THE TIME HE STARTED THE AUTOPSY.
Q AND WITH RESPECT TO WITNESSES, AGAIN, LIKE THE NICOLE
BROWN SIMPSON FORM 15, HAS DR. GOLDEN INDICATED THAT THERE WERE
TWO WITNESSES, DETECTIVES VANNATTER AND LANGE?
A YES.
Q ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE DOCUMENT AGAIN IN THIS AREA
PREPRINTED OF TOXICOLOGICAL SPECIMENS COLLECTED, DID DR. GOLDEN
INDICATE THAT SUCH SPECIMENS WERE IN FACT COLLECTED?
A YES.
Q WHAT DOES HE INDICATE?
A HE SAID HE COLLECTED BLOOD FROM THE RIGHT CHEST AND
BILE, AND THERE'S NOTHING ELSE REFLECTED IN THE -- THIS
PARTICULAR 15, BUT HE HAD COLLECTED STOMACH CONTENTS.
Q DOCTOR, WOULD YOU LIKE A SIP OF WATER?
A YES. THANK YOU.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, I THINK YOU TESTIFIED LAST
WEEK THAT ACCORDING TO DR. GOLDEN'S RECORDS, THERE WAS
INSUFFICIENT HEART BLOOD TO COLLECT AS A RESULT OF WHICH THE
ALTERNATIVE OF USING BLOOD IN THE CHEST WAS COLLECTED?
A YES.
Q NOW, YOU SAY STOMACH CONTENTS WERE SAVED. THIS WAS
SOMETHING YOU ASKED DR. GOLDEN TO DO AFTER YOU LEARNED HE HAD
NOT SAVED THE STOMACH CONTENTS OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q AND YET ON THIS FIRST PAGE OF THE FORM 15, THAT BOX
FOR STOMACH CONTENTS DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE CHECKED; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q THIS IS A FORM I THINK YOU TESTIFIED LAST WEEK ALSO,
IT'S A MULTI-PAGE FORM; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q LET ME FLIP THE PAGE JUST BRIEFLY TO GO TO WHAT
APPEARS TO BE A SECOND FORM 15.
IS THIS IDENTICAL IN ALL RESPECTS WITH RESPECT TO --
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE BOX FOR STOMACH CONTENTS?
A YES.
Q AND CAN YOU GIVE US SOME IDEA OF HOW THIS DOCUMENT
GOT GENERATED TO HAVE A CHANGE BY HAVING AN "X" IN THE BOX TO
MARK STOMACH CONTENTS?
A AS I TOLD YOU, THERE ARE FOUR COPIES TO THIS
DOCUMENT. THE WHITE COPY IS THE FILE COPY AND THEN THERE'S A
CANARY COLOR, YELLOW COPY WHICH GOES TO THE LABORATORY.
THE LABORATORY IS WHERE THEY RECEIVE ALL THE
SPECIMENS. WHEN THE CANARY COPY DID NOT REFLECT THE BOX MARKED
FOR THE STOMACH CONTENTS AND THEY RECEIVED THE STOMACH CONTENTS,
THE LAB MARKED OFF THE BOX FOR THAT, AND YOU CAN SEE THE
DIFFERENCE IN THE MARKING. THERE'S A CHECK DONE BY DR. GOLDEN,
BUT THE "X" IS MADE BY THE LABORATORY ON THE CANARY COPY.
Q LET ME SEE IF I CAN FLIP BACK TO THE ORIGINAL PAGE TO
SHOW THE DIFFERENCE.
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, THIS MISTAKE IS ONE OF DR. GOLDEN'S FOR NOT
MARKING THE BOX?
A YES.
Q IS IT OF ANY SIGNIFICANCE TO YOU ON ANY OF THESE
ISSUES?
A NO.
Q WHY NOT?
A BECAUSE IT'S JUST AN OMITTING THE MARK OF BOX. WE
KNOW HE COLLECTED THE SPECIMEN. IT HAS BEEN RECEIVED IN THE LAB.
THE LAB HAS DOCUMENTED THAT IT HAS RECEIVED THE SPECIMEN.
SO IT'S SORT OF SIGNIFICANCE IN THAT MANNER.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, AGAIN, UNDER TOXICOLOGICAL ANALYSES
ORDERED, THERE APPEARS TO BE A CHECK MARK IN A PARTICULAR BOX.
WHAT IS THAT ALL ABOUT?
A THAT IS THE BOX MARKED FOR "H" AND THAT REFLECTS THAT
WE ORDERED A -- HE ORDERED A HOMICIDE SCREEN, A DRUG SCREEN,
WHICH WE DO ON HOMICIDE CASES.
Q AND IN THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT NOW OFF OF OUR BOARD,
11G, DO WE SEE THE PRODUCT OF THE TOXICOLOGICAL SCREEN OF THE
BLOOD?
A YES.
Q WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT ON THIS -- THE FIRST PAGE IS
ONE THAT IS DATED JUNE 21, 1994?
A YES.
Q WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT?
A THE BLOOD WHICH WAS SUBMITTED WAS TESTED FOR ALCOHOL,
METHAMPHETAMINE, COCAINE, NARCOTICS, WHICH INCLUDES CODEINE,
NARCOTICS, MORPHINE AND PHENCYCLIDINE.
Q I BELIEVE YOU HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED FROM THE
TOXICOLOGICAL RECORDS OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, MR. PARK AND MR.
MAHANAY. SO THEY ARE YOUR TOXICOLOGISTS PERFORMING THESE TESTS?
A YES.
Q AND WHAT ARE THE RESULTS THAT ARE FOUND?
A ALCOHOL WAS NEGATIVE AND NONE OF THOSE DRUGS WERE
DETECTED. "ND" MEANS NONE DETECTED, NOT DETECTED.
Q AND THERE APPEARS TO BE A SECOND PAGE TO THIS
PARTICULAR TOXICOLOGICAL BOARD, THIS ONE DATED AUGUST 11, 1994.
WHAT DOES THIS REPRESENT, DOCTOR?
A THIS IS SOME ADDITIONAL TESTING WHICH WAS REQUESTED
AT A LATER TIME TO COMPLETE THE "C" SCREEN, WHICH IS A
COMPREHENSIVE SCREEN, AND THIS REFLECTS THAT.
Q IS THERE SOME REASON WHY DR. GOLDEN HAS ONLY
REQUESTED AN "H" SCREEN AND ULTIMATELY A "C" SCREEN WAS DONE?
A I REQUESTED --
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IF YOU KNOW, DOCTOR, IS THERE A
REASON WHY A "C" SCREEN WAS PERFORMED?
A YEAH. I ORDERED THE "C" SCREEN TO GET IT COMPLETED.
Q WHY DID YOU ORDER THAT?
A JUST TO COMPLETE THE SCREEN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER DRUGS IN THE SYSTEM.
Q DOCTOR, WOULD IT NORMALLY HAVE BEEN THE CASE IN A LOW
PUBLICITY HOMICIDE WHERE THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE ALL THE SAME WITH
THE EXCEPTION OF THE IDENTITIES OF THE VICTIMS AND THE PERSON
ARRESTED FOR ONLY AN "H" SCREEN TO HAVE BEEN DONE?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THAT IS CORRECT.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: IS THIS ANOTHER INSTANCE WHERE YOU
WERE COVERING YOUR BACKSIDE?
A IF YOU WANT TO PUT IT THAT WAY, YES.
Q IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF WHETHER I WANT TO PUT IT THAT
WAY, DOCTOR. IS THAT WHY YOU ORDERED IT?
A I ORDERED IT TO COMPLETE THE SCREEN SO WE CAN GET THE
SCREEN COMPLETED.
Q IF YOU DON'T DO IT IN OTHER LOW PUBLICITY CASES, THEN
WHY DID YOU DO IT IN THIS CASE?
A I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS NO OTHER DRUGS
WHICH WE CAN TEST FOR WHICH WAS PRESENT IN THE SYSTEM.
Q WHY DON'T YOU DO IT IN THE LOW PUBLICITY CASES?
A I JUST DID IT AS I TOLD YOU ALREADY. I DON'T HAVE A
REASON FOR IT. I JUST DID IT AS A JUDGMENT CALL.
Q AND THE RESULTS?
A NEGATIVE.
Q FOR ANY OF THESE ADDITIONAL DRUGS?
A BOTH BASIC -- THE BASIC DRUGS AND BARBITURATES.
Q ANYTHING FURTHER WITH RESPECT TO THESE TWO DOCUMENTS
ON THE TOXICOLOGICAL ANALYSIS?
A NO.
MR. KELBERG: I WANT TO -- FOR SAFETY SAKE, LET ME MOVE
THIS, THE FIRST EASEL, AND I JUST WANT TO GET THE EXHIBIT
IDENTIFICATION NUMBER.
THIS IS GOING TO BE -- THIS IS 340 -- I'M SORRY.
WRONG ONE. 356-C. MR. LYNCH HELPS ME OUT.
THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: OUR FORM 16 IN THIS CASE SITUATION,
DOCTOR.
FIRST OF ALL, DOES THIS FORM SHOW THE ACTUAL HOURS
INDICATED BY DR. GOLDEN IN WHICH HE PERFORMED THE AUTOPSY, THE
GROSS AUTOPSY AND DISSECTION OF MR. GOLDMAN?
A YES. IN THE LOWER PART, YOU CAN SEE THAT HE
PERFORMED THE AUTOPSY BETWEEN 10:30 AND 1300, WHICH IS 1:00
O'CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON.
Q AND I THINK YOU TESTIFIED LAST WEEK THAT IN YOUR
OPINION, THIS AUTOPSY SHOULD HAVE TAKEN SOMEWHAT LONGER THAN TWO
AND A HALF HOURS AS INDICATED BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
Q HOW LONG WOULD YOU HAVE EXPECTED THIS AUTOPSY TO
TAKE?
A I SAID FOUR TO FIVE HOURS.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, IN THIS PARTICULAR FORM, DOES DR. GOLDEN
INDICATE THE CONTENTS OF THE STOMACH WHICH HE SAVED AT YOUR
REQUEST?
A YES.
Q WHAT DOES HE INDICATE?
A HE SAYS THAT 200 CC OF PARTIALLY DIGESTED MATERIAL
WITH PIECES OF SPINACH -- SPINACH.
Q LET ME ASK MR. LYNCH IF HE COULD JUST CIRCLE THAT
AREA WITH ONE OF THE MARKERS AT THE WITNESS STAND, AND LET ME,
WHILE HE'S DOING THAT, PUT UP THE PROTOCOL.
DOCTOR, IS THERE A DESCRIPTION PROVIDED IN THE
PROTOCOL FOR THE STOMACH CONTENTS OF MR. GOLDMAN?
A YES. IT WILL BE UNDER "DIGESTIVE SYSTEM."
Q AND LOOKING AT PAGE 15 OF THE EXHIBIT BOARD 0G, AT
THE BOTTOM WHERE IT STARTS WITH "GASTROINTESTINAL SYSTEM," IF WE
FLIP THE PAGE NOW, DOES DR. GOLDEN DESCRIBE HIS FINDINGS OF THE
STOMACH CONTENTS?
A YES. IT'S ON PARAGRAPH 1 OF PAGE 16-93, "200 ML OF
PARTIALLY DIGESTED SEMI-SOLID FOOD FOUND IN THE STOMACH WITH THE
PRESENCE OF FRAGMENTS OF GREEN LEAFY VEGETABLE MATERIAL
COMPATIBLE WITH SPINACH."
Q LET ME CIRCLE THAT AREA.
DOES DR. GOLDEN ON THE FORM 16 MAKE ANY REFERENCE TO
THE FATAL STAB WOUNDS HE IDENTIFIED IN THE COURSE OF THE AUTOPSY?
A YES, HE DOES.
Q WHERE?
A HE DESCRIBES THE TWO STAB WOUNDS TO THE RIGHT LUNG
AND SAYS TO THE RIGHT LOWER LOBE AND HE ALSO ADDRESSES THE
HUNDRED CC BLOOD PRESENT IN THE CHEST CAVITY OF LIQUID BLOOD.
Q KEEP YOUR VOICE UP, PLEASE, DOCTOR.
A LIQUID BLOOD.
AND HE ALSO ADDRESSES THE PRESENCE OF HUNDRED CC
BLOOD IN THE ABDOMINAL CAVITY IN ADDITION TO THE RETROPERITONEAL
HEMORRHAGE HERE (INDICATING). AND THAT'S FROM THE FLANK WOUND.
Q AND DOES HE ALSO RECORD THE HEIGHT AND WEIGHT OF MR.
GOLDMAN?
A YES, HE DOES.
THE WEIGHT IS 171 POUNDS AND THE HEIGHT IS 69 INCHES,
WHICH IS FIVE FEET, NINE INCHES.
Q DOCTOR, LET ME SHOW YOU ANOTHER BOARD. IT'S 12G WHICH
IS IN THE PAPER FORM. IT IS 356-Q.
YOU TESTIFIED LAST WEEK ABOUT EXAMINATION MADE BY
DRS. VALE AND ENSELMO ON PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BACK OF NICOLE BROWN
SIMPSON.
DID YOU ALSO OBTAIN A CONSULTATION REPORT FROM THE
TWO OF THEM REGARDING MR. GOLDMAN?
A YES. THEY REVIEWED PHOTOGRAPHS ON MR. GOLDMAN.
Q AND IS THIS FORM 13 PART OF THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
THE CORONER'S OFFICE BY THESE TWO CONSULTANTS?
A YES.
Q AND IN SUMMARY, WHAT WAS THE RESULT OF DR. VALE AND
DR. ENSELMO'S EXAMINATION OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS?
A WE DO NOT FIND EVIDENCE OF BITE MARKS IN THE
PHOTOGRAPHS.
Q AND FLIPPING THE PAGE OF THIS BOARD, DO WE SEE IN
ESSENCE THE HANDWRITTEN VERSION OF THE SAME REPORT YOU JUST
DESCRIBED, ONLY THAT REPORT WAS ON A FORM 13 AND THE HANDWRITTEN
PART IS ON A FORM 42?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q ANYTHING ELSE IN THE WAY OF DR. VALE AND DR. ENSELMO
ON THE GOLDMAN AUTOPSY?
A NO.
Q DOCTOR, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RETAKE THE STAND FOR
JUST A MOMENT.
(THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. KELBERG: I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THE DESIGNATION. I
APOLOGIZE, YOUR HONOR, FOR --
356-M AS IN MARY.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, LET ME SHOW YOU THE BLOW-UP,
WHICH IS OUR BOARD 8G OF THE EXHIBIT, THE PAPER EXHIBIT 356-M.
AND I'M SORRY. YOU'LL HAVE TO GET UP AGAIN, IF YOU
WOULD, PLEASE.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THIS DOCUMENT?
A YES.
Q WHAT IS THIS?
A THIS IS A SUMMARY OF THE VARIOUS SHARP FORCE INJURIES
ON MR. GOLDMAN, AND DR. GOLDEN DID THE SUMMARY, AND BASICALLY THE
DOCUMENT REFLECTS THE SUMMARY.
Q DOCTOR, CAN YOU JUST IN GENERAL TERMS INDICATE WHAT
IS DESCRIBED BY DR. GOLDEN WITH THIS DOCUMENT?
A YES.
HE HAS DIVIDED THE DOCUMENT IN VARIOUS COLUMNS. HE
HAS GIVEN THE NUMBERING WHICH HE USED FOR HIS DESCRIPTION OF THE
VARIOUS SHARP FORCE INJURIES, THE SITE WHERE IT'S LOCATED,
ORIENTATION, WHETHER THE STAB WOUND OR THE SHARP FORCE INJURY WAS
VERTICALLY ORIENTED, DIAGONALLY ORIENTED OR TRANSVERSELY
ORIENTED.
VERTICALLY ORIENTED MEANS THE LONG AXIS OF THE WOUND
WAS IN A HEAD-TOE DIRECTION. DIAGONALLY MEANS WAS DIAGONAL TO
THAT AXIS AND TRANSVERSE IS AN AXIS WHICH IS PERPENDICULAR TO THE
HEAD-TOE AXIS, THAT IS THIS HORIZONTAL AXIS.
SO THAT'S WHAT HE MEANS BY ORIENTATION.
AND THEN THIS IS -- "L" REFERS TO THE LOCATION. THE
-- FOR THE CHEST WOUNDS, IT'S THE LOCATION BELOW THE HEAD. FOR
THE ABDOMINAL AND THIGH WOUNDS, IT'S THE LOCATION ABOVE THE HEEL.
Q I'M SORRY.
YOU CAN OBVIOUSLY UNDERSTAND HOW THAT REFERS TO
LOCATION. BUT COULD YOU EXPLAIN IT TO US, WHY IN NUMBER 22
REFERS TO SOME LOCATION?
A BECAUSE IT'S FROM THE TOP OF THE HEAD TO THE LOCATION
OF THE WOUND ON THE BODY WHERE IT'S LOCATED.
FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S TAKE -- LET'S GO ACROSS ONE WOUND
SO THAT IT WILL BE BETTER UNDERSTOOD.
LET'S TAKE NO. 1, FIRST DEGREE STAB WOUND TO THE
RIGHT CHEST. IT'S VERTICALLY ORIENTED. IT'S 22 INCHES BELOW THE
TOP OF THE HEAD, AND THIS IS THE -- FROM THE BACK, IT'S -- IT'S
SITUATED FIVE INCHES FROM THE BACK. THAT IS WHEN THE BODY IS
LAYING TO THE BACK HERE, FIVE INCHES TO THE FRONT (INDICATING).
THE LENGTH OF THE WOUND IS 5/8 OF AN INCH. AND THIS
IS WITH REFERENCE TO THE EDGES. THE LOWER END WAS THE BLUNT END
FOR THAT FRONT STAB WOUND IF YOU'LL RECALL, AND THAT'S THE
SHARPENED, AND THIS REFERS TO THE DEPTH OF THE WOUND. I CAN'T
READ IT CLEARLY HERE. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE TRACK WHICH GOES TO
THE LUNG, ANGLE IS RIGHT TO LEFT, AND HEMOTHORAX. THEN THE SECOND
--
Q HEMOTHORAX WAS, AGAIN, BLOOD IN THE CAVITY?
A YES.
THEN THE NO. 2 IS THE RIGHT CHEST. IT WAS DIAGONALLY
ORIENTED 21 INCHES BELOW THE HEAD, TWO INCHES FROM THE BACK, ONE
AND A HALF INCHES LONG, AND THE BLUNT END WAS IN THE BACK AND THE
SHARP END WAS IN THE FRONT, SAME RIGHT TO LEFT.
THAT DIAGRAM GOES ON.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, WAS EACH OF THE FATAL STAB WOUNDS THAT
YOU'VE IDENTIFIED, THAT IS THE TWO FATAL STAB WOUNDS TO THE RIGHT
CHEST, THE FATAL STAB WOUND TO THE ABDOMINAL AORTA AND THE FATAL
STAB WOUND TO THE LEFT AREA OF THE NECK, IS EACH OF THOSE FATAL
STAB WOUNDS DESCRIBED ON THIS CHART?
A THE NECK IS NOT.
YOU HAVE THE TWO RIGHT CHEST, THE NONFATAL RIGHT
FLANK, THE LEFT THIGH, WHICH IS NOT FATAL, BUT SIGNIFICANT
BLEEDING, LEFT ABDOMEN, WHICH IS TO THE AORTA. AND HERE HE HAS
GIVEN THE ORIENTATION OF THE FORKING IN THE BACK AND THE POINTING
TO THE FRONT AS FAR AS THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EDGES. I MEAN
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ENDS OF THE WOUND.
Q THAT'S OF THE ABDOMINAL AORTA STAB WOUND?
A YES.
Q AND THAT'S THE ONE THAT YOU SAW IN PHOTOGRAPH G-8 AND
ALSO IN G-5?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
A AND HERE IS A DIRECTION HERE, LEFT TO RIGHT, SLIGHTLY
BACK TO FRONT, HUNDRED CC OF BLOOD IN THE ABDOMINAL CAVITY, 5
DAPI, WHICH IS DEPTH.
SO IT'S BASICALLY A SUMMARY OF ALL THE WOUNDS.
Q WOULD YOU HAVE EXPECTED DR. GOLDEN TO HAVE INCLUDED
THIS FATAL STAB WOUND TO THE LEFT SIDE OF THE NECK IN THIS CHART
REVIEW?
A HE DID NOT. I GUESS --
Q I DON'T WANT YOU TO GUESS, DOCTOR.
A I DON'T KNOW -- I'M NOT SAYING -- HE DID NOT.
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. MOTION TO STRIKE. NONRESPONSIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
PROCEED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, AGAIN, IS THIS A DOCUMENT
THAT IS CREATED IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE
CORONER'S OFFICE?
A YES.
Q AND IS IT TO REFLECT AT A TIME OF OR NEAR THE
OBSERVATIONS THAT ARE RECORDED IN THE DOCUMENT BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
AND I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT ALSO THAT HE HAS GIVEN TO
THE FORKED END, CAN VARY FROM 1/16 INCH TO 1/8 INCH IN WIDTH.
Q THE FORKED END OF WHAT, DOCTOR?
A THE STAB WOUND HERE (INDICATING).
Q THE ABDOMINAL AORTA STAB WOUND?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, IS A CHART LIKE THIS OF ANY EXISTENCE TO YOU
IN FORMING AN OPINION SUCH AS YOU INDICATED YOU DID OF GENERAL
DIMENSIONS OF A KNIFE THAT'S SINGLE EDGED WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN
CONSISTENT WITH ALL OF THE SHARP FORCE INJURIES RECEIVED BY MR.
GOLDMAN?
A YES.
Q AND IN FACT, HAVE YOU REVIEWED FROM THIS CHART AND
ALL OF THE OTHER INFORMATION TO FORM SUCH AN OPINION?
A YES.
Q WHAT IS THE OPINION AS TO THE APPROXIMATE DIMENSIONS?
A AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, IN KNIFE WOUNDS, YOU CAN ONLY
APPROXIMATE. YOU NEED A SUSPECT WEAPON TO COMPARE TO THE WOUNDS.
BUT GIVEN ALL THE MEASUREMENTS I HAVE DONE IN BOTH
THE CASES AND THE MEASUREMENTS GIVEN BY DR. GOLDEN AND
APPEARANCES AND THE DESCRIPTION, I SAID ALL THE WOUNDS COULD HAVE
BEEN CAUSED BY A SINGLE-EDGED KNIFE, BUT A THICK BLUNT EDGE UP TO
1/8 INCH IN WIDTH WITH A TAPERING TIP AND 6 INCHES LONG, 3/4 INCH
WIDE.
Q 3/4 INCH WIDE AT ITS WIDEST POINT?
A YES.
Q AND GETTING NARROWER AS ONE GETS TO THE TIP OF THE
KNIFE BLADE?
A YES. THIS IS JUST AN APPROXIMATE ESTIMATION BECAUSE
NORMALLY KNIFE WOUNDS, AS I SAID EARLIER, YOU LIKE TO COMPARE A
SUSPECT WEAPON TO A WOUND.
Q DOCTOR, BEFORE I GET INTO CHAIN OF CUSTODY DOCUMENTS
THAT REFER TO BOTH THE GOLDMAN AND THE NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON
AUTOPSIES, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO BRING TO OUR
ATTENTION WITH RESPECT TO THE ACTUAL FINDINGS OR CONCLUSIONS FROM
THE GOLDMAN AUTOPSY THAT WE HAVE NOT DISCUSSED?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR A NARRATIVE.
THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
MR. KELBERG: MAY I HAVE JUST A MOMENT THEN, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: THE ONE THING I DID NOT SHOW YOU,
DOCTOR, WOULD BE THE BLOW-UPS OF THE FORM 1 AND 2 THAT IS ON OUR
BOARD 13G. WE SAW THE FORM 1, I BELIEVE IT'S EXHIBIT 298-B, THE
REDACTED VERSION TO LEAVE OUT ANY HOME ADDRESS THAT MIGHT BE
OBSERVED.
THOSE DOCUMENTS, ARE THEY ALSO CREATED IN THE
ORDINARY COURSE OF THE CORONER'S OFFICE OPERATION?
A YES, THEY ARE.
Q AND ARE THE ENTRIES MADE MADE BY EMPLOYEES AT OR
ABOUT THE TIME OF THE EVENTS WHICH ARE REPORTED IN THOSE
DOCUMENTS?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, BEFORE I GO TO THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY
DOCUMENTS, I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT SOMETHING THAT MR. COCHRAN
MENTIONED I BELIEVE SEVERAL TIMES IN OPENING STATEMENT AND IN
SOME EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES, IN PARTICULAR, DETECTIVE LANGE.
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THAT STATEMENT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. SHAPIRO: MOTION TO STRIKE, ADMONISH THE JURY.
THE COURT: STRICKEN. THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD.
PROCEED.
MR. KELBERG: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, HAVE YOU EVER HEARD THE TERM
BEFORE I MAY HAVE MENTIONED IT TO YOU "COLOMBIAN NECKTIE"?
A I HEARD THE TERM.
Q FROM WHOM?
A THAT'S USED TO DESCRIBE A TYPE OF NECK INJURY WHEREIN
YOU HAVE A SLASH WOUND TO THE NECK AND TONGUE IS INTERSPERSED
THERE.
Q WHEN IS THE FIRST TIME YOU HEARD SUCH A TERM?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I'VE HEARD IT MENTIONED BY DIFFERENT -- BY
DIFFERENT PATHOLOGISTS.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, HAVE YOU --
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, MR. KELBERG. I HATE TO BREAK IT UP.
I HAVE A NOTE FROM THE JURORS THAT WE NEED TO TAKE A
COMFORT BREAK.
ALL RIGHT.
SO LET'S TAKE FIVE MINUTES.
ALL RIGHT.
(RECESS.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: MR. KELBERG.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE
BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
(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.
DOCTOR.
MR. KELBERG.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, TO CONTINUE, WHEN
APPROXIMATELY DID YOU FIRST HEAR THE TERM "COLOMBIAN NECKTIE"?
MR. SHAPIRO: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: FROM SOME PATHOLOGISTS -- I DON'T RECALL --
ACTUALLY SOMETIME AGO BECAUSE I'VE NEVER SEEN A CASE OF THAT.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: CAN YOU GIVE ANY APPROXIMATION? ARE
WE TALKING ABOUT WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS?
A NO. BEFORE THAT WHEN I WAS IN THE NEW YORK AREA AND
ALSO IN MEETINGS. BUT I'VE NEVER SEEN A CASE MYSELF.
Q WHEN WERE YOU IN THE NEW YORK AREA?
A FROM 1972 TO '77.
Q DOCTOR, AND YOU --
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION, 352, QUESTIONING ALONG THOSE
LINES.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, YOU HAVE BEEN AT THE LOS
ANGELES COUNTY CORONER'S OFFICE IN ONE CAPACITY OR ANOTHER SINCE
WHEN?
A '78.
Q HAVE YOU EVER --
A SINCE '77. I'M SORRY.
Q HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THE FOLLOWING KIND OF CASE? A
VICTIM'S NECK SLASHED FROM EAR TO EAR WITH THE TONGUE OF THE
VICTIM DRAWN THROUGH THE FATAL INCISED STAB WOUND THAT I'VE JUST
DESCRIBED AS IF TO REFLECT A NECKTIE POSITION?
A I'VE NOT.
Q AND IN YOUR CAPACITY AS THE CHIEF MEDICAL EXAMINER
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, YOU SEE CASES OTHER THAN ONES YOU
ARE PERSONALLY HANDLING?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q AND YOU SEE CASES THAT YOUR OTHER MEDICAL EXAMINERS
ARE HANDLING ON A ROUTINE BASIS?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND IN THAT TIME, YOU'VE NEVER SEEN SUCH A CASE; IS
THAT ACCURATE?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q DOCTOR, BEFORE I GET INTO CHAIN OF CUSTODY, LET ME
COVER A FEW OTHER AREAS CONCERNING DR. GOLDEN.
SINCE THE ARREST OF MR. SIMPSON, DID YOU BECOME
AWARE OF OTHER CASES WHERE ON REVIEW, DR. GOLDEN HAD MADE
MISTAKES?
A YES, I HAVE.
Q WAS ONE OF THE CASES -- ACTUALLY TWO CASES --
INVOLVING INDIVIDUALS BY THE NAME OF GAYE AND PHILLIPS?
A YES.
Q IN GENERAL, DESCRIBE THE CASE, THE MISTAKE OR
MISTAKES MADE BY DR. GOLDEN.
A ONE WAS A FEMALE VICTIM AND ONE WAS A MALE VICTIM.
BOTH WERE IN A VEHICLE WHEN THEY WERE VICTIMS OF A GUNSHOT WOUND
-- I MEAN FIREARM INJURY. THE LADY WAS IN THE DRIVER'S SIDE. THE
MALE WAS IN THE PASSENGER SIDE.
AND THE LADY, DR. GOLDEN REFLECTED THAT THE GUNSHOT
WOUND ENTERED IN THE RIGHT ARM AND EXITED IN THE BACK OF THE
CHEST, BUT LATER, HE AMENDED THE CERTIFICATE TO REFLECT THAT THE
GUNSHOT WOUND ENTERED THE BACK OF THE CHEST AND CAME OUT ON THE
RIGHT ARM.
SO THAT IS THE SUMMARY OF THAT CASE.
Q DOCTOR --
A ON THE --
Q I'M SORRY.
BEFORE YOU GO TO THE NEXT PART, WOULD IT BE ACCURATE
TO SAY THAT DR. GOLDEN MISCHARACTERIZED THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT
WOUNDS OF THOSE -- OF THAT GUNSHOT CASE?
A YES.
Q AND THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS DONE, WAS THAT DONE BEFORE
YOU BECAME AWARE OF THIS CASE AS A POSSIBLE MISTAKE BY DR.
GOLDEN?
A YES.
Q WHO DID THAT AMENDMENT?
A DR. GOLDEN DID THE AMENDMENT. I THINK -- I FORGET
THE EXACT DATE, BUT MUCH LATER.
Q APPROXIMATELY WHEN DID THIS CASE ARRIVE IN YOUR
OFFICE?
A I THINK IT WAS 1990.
Q 1990?
A YES.
Q AND APPROXIMATELY WHEN DID YOU FIRST BECOME AWARE OF
THIS CASE AS A CASE OF A POSSIBLE MISTAKE BY DR. GOLDEN?
A IN AUGUST LAST YEAR WHEN THERE WAS AN EPISODE ON
PRIME TIME.
Q THAT'S A TELEVISION PROGRAM ON ABC?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, YOU WERE GOING TO SAY SOMETHING MORE I
BELIEVE REGARDING THE GAYE AND PHILLIPS CASES; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
THE OTHER GENTLEMAN WHO WAS A VICTIM OF THE SAME
INCIDENT WAS ALSO SHOT IN THE CHEST. HE HAD AN ENTRANCE IN THE
BACK AND EXIT IN THE FRONT, AND DR. GOLDEN PROPERLY CHARACTERIZED
THE GUNSHOT WOUNDS AS FAR AS THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT WENT, BUT HE
FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THE RANGE OF FIRE FOR THE ENTRANCE WOUND IN
THE BACK.
THERE WAS A -- EVIDENCE OF ADDITIONAL INJURY IN THE
BACK NEAR THE ENTRANCE OF THE GUNSHOT WOUND, WHICH WOULD PLACE
THE RANGE OF FIRE TO BE AT CLOSE RANGE RATHER THAN A DISTANT
RANGE, AND THAT WAS A MISTAKE WHICH HAD TO BE CORRECTED, AND IT
WAS CORRECTED LAST YEAR.
Q IF YOU KNOW, ON WHOSE INITIATIVE WAS THIS CORRECTED?
A THE AMENDMENT WAS ISSUED UNDER MY DIRECTION BECAUSE
AN ORDER HAD BEEN ISSUED AT THAT TIME.
Q AND DID YOU INITIATE THAT AMENDMENT AFTER SOMEONE
BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION THIS CASE AS A POSSIBLE CASE OF MISTAKE
BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
Q BUT THIS CASE ALSO ARISES OUT OF A 1990 INCIDENT, THE
SAME INCIDENT AS THE ONE THAT YOU PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED?
A YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, IN YOUR OPINION, WERE THE MISTAKES THAT
YOU'VE DESCRIBED OF A MISCHARACTERIZATION OF ENTRY AND EXIT
WOUNDS AND A MISCHARACTERIZATION OF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE GUN
AND THE BODY AT THE TIME THE SHOT WAS FIRED MATTERS THAT WERE
SIGNIFICANT MISTAKES BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES.
Q HOW WERE THEY SIGNIFICANT MEDICALLY?
A MEDICALLY, THEY WERE SIGNIFICANCE BECAUSE THE RANGE
OF FIRE IS IMPORTANT, AND ALSO THE DIRECTION OF FIRE IS
IMPORTANT. BUT AS FAR AS THE CAUSE OF DEATH GOES, THERE WAS NO
IMPACT.
Q DOCTOR, HAVE YOU TOLD US IN SUMMARY THE CIRCUMSTANCES
OF THOSE TWO CASES AS CASES OF MISTAKES BY DR. GOLDEN?
A YES. I JUST GAVE A BRIEF SUMMARY.
THE MISTAKES WERE MAINLY IN INTERPRETATION OF
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ENTRANCE AND EXIT IN ONE AND THE
INTERPRETATION OF THE RANGE OF FIRE IN THE OTHER CASE.
Q DID YOU ALSO BECOME AWARE OF A CASE INVOLVING DR.
GOLDEN, A DECEDENT'S NAME OF MANLEY HALL, H-A-L-L?
A YES, I DID.
Q WHAT IS THAT CASE ALL ABOUT WITH RESPECT TO ANY
MISTAKES BY DR. GOLDEN?
A THERE, THE ISSUE WAS WHETHER HE IDENTIFIED THE
PRESENCE OF A THYROID GLAND.
THE PERSON IN QUESTION HAD HAD A THYROIDECTOMY BY
HISTORY IN THE PAST AND HE HAD DESCRIBED THE PRESENCE OF A
THYROID GLAND. BUT IN THIS SITUATION, WE DID HAVE THE NECK ORGAN
SAVED. SO -- WHICH WE EVALUATED.
AND BASED ON THE HISTORY AND THE ABSENCE OF THE
THYROID GLAND IN THE NECK ORGANS, AN AMENDMENT TO THE REPORT WAS
ISSUED. THIS IS ONE OF THE AMENDMENTS ISSUED.
Q ON WHOSE INITIATIVE?
A MY INITIATIVE IN THE SENSE THAT AT THE REQUEST OF THE
ATTORNEY OF THE FAMILIES, IT WAS A PERSON IN THE FAMILY WHO
BROUGHT THIS TO OUR ATTENTION.
Q AND YOU REVIEWED THE CASE?
A YES. AND I REVIEWED THE NECK ORGANS WITH DR. GOLDEN.
Q AND YOU BELIEVED THAT IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO ISSUE AN
AMENDMENT?
A YES, BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BECAUSE
APPARENTLY HE -- THIS GENTLEMAN HAD A THYROIDECTOMY MANY YEARS
AGO, 40 YEARS AGO. SO I REQUESTED FOR THE HOSPITAL RECORDS
BEFORE WE ISSUED THE AMENDMENT, WHICH COULD NOT BE OBTAINED
BECAUSE OF THE LONG TIME INTERVAL SINCE THE SURGERY AND THE
DEATH.
BUT THE ATTORNEY PROVIDED A DECLARATION REFLECTING
HER ATTEMPTS TO OBTAIN THOSE RECORDS, AND BASED ON THE REVIEW OF
THE NECK ORGANS, WHICH WERE AVAILABLE, AND THE INFORMATION
PROVIDED AND ALSO REVIEW OF THE MEDICAL RECORDS WHICH INDICATED
THAT THIS PARTICULAR PERSON WAS ON REPLACEMENT THYROID THERAPY, I
BELIEVE -- DR. GOLDEN AND I FELT THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT
INFORMATION TO ISSUE THE AMENDMENT REGARDING THIS ASPECT OF THE
CASE.
Q I'M SORRY.
IN ESSENCE, DID DR. GOLDEN SAY THAT THE PATIENT OR
MR. HALL, THE DECEDENT, HAD A THYROID GLAND WHEN IN FACT THE
THYROID GLAND HAD BEEN SURGICALLY REMOVED 40 YEARS EARLIER? IS
THAT THE ESSENCE OF THE MISTAKE?
A YES.
Q WAS THAT MISTAKE IN YOUR OPINION SIGNIFICANT TO YOUR
EVALUATION OF THE CASE AS A FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST?
A NO. BECAUSE WE HAD THE NECK ORGANS AVAILABLE AND
THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF ANY INJURY OR ANYTHING. SO THERE'S NO
QUESTION OF ANY OTHER FACTOR IN THE CASE.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, AT SOME TIME AFTER THE DEATHS OF NICOLE
BROWN SIMPSON AND RONALD GOLDMAN, WERE YOU APPROACHED BY A
GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME OF SAM DONALDSON FROM ABC NEWS?
A I WAS ACCOSTED BY HIM WHILE I WAS ENTERING MY OFFICE
ONE MORNING WHEN I WAS COMING TO WORK. YES.
Q WOULD YOU DESCRIBE, PLEASE, THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER
WHICH YOU WERE, TO USE YOUR TERM, "ACCOSTED" BY SAMUEL DONALDSON?
A BASICALLY I WAS COMING TO WORK. I PARKED MY CAR AND
I --
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME. HOLD ON, DOCTOR.
WHAT'S THE -- THE RELEVANCE OF THIS IS --
MR. KELBERG: THERE'S GOING TO BE A STATEMENT THAT DR.
LAKSHMANAN MADE TO MR. DONALDSON UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND THE
CIRCUMSTANCES ARE RELEVANT TO THE NATURE OF THE STATEMENT THAT
WAS MADE.
THE COURT: LET ME SEE YOU WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.
MR. KELBERG: MAY I COME THROUGH THE WELL, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
(PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT
THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
MR. KELBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, AGAIN, IF YOU'D DESCRIBE THE
CIRCUMSTANCES, PLEASE.
A I WAS COMING TO WORK THAT MORNING. I PARKED MY CAR,
AND AS I OPENED MY DOOR OF MY CAR, I FOUND SEVERAL CAMERAS AND
SAW SAM DONALDSON COMING APPROACHING ME SUDDENLY AND STARTED
ASKING QUESTIONS ON THE CURRENT CASES WHICH I'M TESTIFYING TO ON
-- AND OTHER ISSUES WHICH HE BROUGHT UP LIKE HE BROUGHT UP THE
ISSUE OF WHAT WAS THE 16 PIECES OF EVIDENCE WHICH WAS A PROBLEM
AND HE WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT DR. GOLDEN PER SE AND ALSO HOW WE HAD
CONDUCTED OUR -- THE -- THE -- WHAT HE FELT ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE
OF THE OFFICE ON THE AUTOPSIES ON THE CURRENT TWO DECEDENTS.
Q DOCTOR, WERE YOU EXPECTING TO SEE SAM DONALDSON THAT
DAY?
A NO. I WAS JUST COMING TO WORK.
Q WAS THE DATE AUGUST 25TH OF 1994?
A THAT SEEMS TO BE ABOUT RIGHT.
Q AND DID YOU LATER SEE AN EPISODE OR A SEGMENT OF A
PROGRAM WITH SAM DONALDSON THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED AS PRIME TIME
LIVE WHICH DISPLAYED A PORTION AT LEAST OF WHAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED
FOR US HERE?
A YES.
AND THAT'S THE EPISODE WHICH BROUGHT UP THESE TWO
CASES OF DR. GOLDEN FROM THE PAST, WHICH I WAS NOT AWARE OF UNTIL
THAT PARTICULAR EPISODE, AND I CAME TO BE AWARE OF THAT.
MR. KELBERG: I HAVE -- MR. FAIRTLOUGH APPARENTLY HAS THIS
CUED UP WITH THE LASER, AND I WOULD ASK AT THIS TIME IF THIS CAN
BE MARKED -- I ASSUME THIS IS MARKED IN SOME FASHION FROM THE
LASER AS AN EXHIBIT.
SO I WOULD ASK THAT IT BE MARKED AS PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT
363.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(PEO'S 363 FOR ID = VIDEOTAPE)
Q BY MY KELBERG: AND I'M GOING TO ASK, DOCTOR, IF THIS
IS WHAT YOU SAW ON TELEVISION.
PLEASE START.
(AT 5:45 P.M., PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT
363, A VIDEOTAPE, WAS PLAYED.)
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DOCTOR, YOU CAN LOOK DOWN.
A I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T SEE IT.
Q WHILE WE HAVE IT STOPPED, DOCTOR, DO YOU RECOGNIZE
THE TWO PEOPLE SEEN IN THIS SCENE FROM THIS EXHIBIT 363?
A YES. HE'S TRYING TO GET SOME INFORMATION FROM DR.
GOLDEN DIRECTLY.
Q JUST FOR THE RECORD, WOULD YOU IDENTIFY WHO DR.
GOLDEN IS AND WHO THE OTHER INDIVIDUAL IS IN THIS STOP OF THE
DISK?
A DR. GOLDEN IS CARRYING SOME PAPERS IN HIS LEFT HAND.
HE'S THE GENTLEMAN ON THE RIGHT SIDE WITH THE GLASSES AND THE
GRAY JACKET. MR. SAM DONALDSON IS HOLDING UP SOME PAPER IN HIS
RIGHT HAND AND IS WEARING A DARKER COLORED SUIT AND HE DOESN'T
WEAR GLASSES.
MR. KELBERG: ALL RIGHT.
IF WE COULD CONTINUE, MR. FAIRTLOUGH, PLEASE.
(THE VIDEOTAPE CONTINUES
PLAYING.)
MR. KELBERG: IF WE COULD STOP IT THERE. I'M THROUGH WITH
THE PLAYING.
(AT 5:47 P.M., THE PLAYING
OF THE VIDEOTAPE CONCLUDED
PLAYING.)
MR. KELBERG: I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, VERY BRIEF, TO ASK DR.
LAKSHMANAN, IF I COULD.
THE COURT: VERY BRIEFLY.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: DR. LAKSHMANAN, WHEN YOU WERE
TALKING TO SAM DONALDSON AND YOU TOLD HIM THAT IN YOUR OPINION,
DR. GOLDEN WAS A VERY COMPETENT FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST, DID YOU
MEAN THAT?
A YES. THAT WAS MY BELIEF AT THAT TIME AND STILL IS
BECAUSE "COMPETENT" TO ME MEANS THAT A PERSON WHOM HAS THE
REQUIREMENTS TO DO THE JOB. HE'S A BOARD CERTIFIED PATHOLOGIST,
HE'S STILL WORKING FOR OUR OFFICE AND DOES HIS WORK IN A
COMPETENT MANNER.
Q DOCTOR, AFTER FINDING ALL OF THE MISTAKES THAT YOU'VE
IDENTIFIED FOR THIS JURY OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST SIX OR SEVEN
DAYS IN THIS SET OF AUTOPSIES, AFTER LEARNING OF THE GAYE,
PHILLIPS MATTER, AFTER LEARNING OF THE MANLEY HALL MATTER, HOW
CAN YOU FORM IN YOUR MIND AN OPINION THAT DR. GOLDEN IS A VERY
COMPETENT FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST?
A I SAID HE'S A COMPETENT PATHOLOGIST.
Q I THINK YOU SAID VERY COMPETENT, AND WE CAN HAVE IT
REPLAYED IF YOU WANT.
A I AGREE THERE I SAID VERY COMPETENT BECAUSE I WAS NOT
AWARE OF THOSE OTHER MISTAKES.
Q DOCTOR, IS THERE A RATING CLASSIFICATION IN THE
COUNTY SYSTEM WHERE YOU MUST ON AN ANNUAL BASIS RATE YOUR
EMPLOYEES?
A YES.
Q IS THE TERM "COMPETENT" A TERM THAT IS USED IN THE
RATING SYSTEM?
A YES.
Q AND WHERE IN THE RATING SYSTEM DOES A COMPETENT
FINDING PLACE ONE?
A ABOUT THAT -- THAT MEANS THEY MEET THE ADEQUATE
REQUIREMENTS TO DO THE JOB AND THERE IS -- IT'S JUST ABOVE THE
"IMPROVEMENT NEEDED" BOX.
Q JUST ABOVE THE -- I'M SORRY?
A THERE ARE ONLY A COUPLE BOXES THERE IN THE COUNTY
EVALUATION. YOU HAVE IMPROVEMENT NEEDED, YOU HAVE COMPETENT,
VERY GOOD AND OUTSTANDING.
Q AND IN THE YEAR OF 1994, WAS DR. GOLDEN RATED AS
"COMPETENT"?
A YES.
Q NOT "VERY GOOD"?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q NOT "OUTSTANDING"?
A THAT IS CORRECT.
Q IS THAT STILL YOUR JUDGMENT, THAT HE IS "COMPETENT"
AS THAT TERM IS USED?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, WERE YOU TRYING TO PROTECT DR. GOLDEN WHEN
YOU WERE, TO USE YOUR TERM, "ACCOSTED" BY SAM DONALDSON ON AUGUST
25TH, 1994?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: WHAT IF ANYTHING WERE YOU TRYING TO
ACCOMPLISH WHEN YOU ANSWERED MR. DONALDSON'S QUESTION REGARDING
DR. GOLDEN?
MR. SHAPIRO: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
YOU CAN ANSWER.
Q BY MR. KELBERG: YOU CAN ANSWER.
A I WAS JUST TRYING TO TELL MR. DONALDSON THAT IN MY
OPINION, DR. GOLDEN IS A COMPETENT PATHOLOGIST, HE HAS BEEN
WORKING WITH OUR OFFICE SINCE 1981 AND HE HAS DONE OVER 5,000
CASES, HE'S ALWAYS BEEN -- HE'S ALWAYS HANDLED HIS CASES, THE
MOST DEMANDING CASES IN A COMPETENT MANNER.
AND, AS I TOLD YOU, I WAS NOT AWARE OF THESE ERRORS
WHICH WERE BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, BUT IN 5,000 CASES, THESE ARE
SOME -- FEW ERRORS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION AS LONG
AS HE'S BEEN IN THE OFFICE.
Q DOCTOR, HOW COULD YOU JUSTIFY A STATEMENT THAT YOUR
OFFICE HAD DONE A VERY GOOD JOB IN THE NICOLE BROWN
SIMPSON/GOLDMAN AUTOPSY CASES KNOWING, AS YOU DID ON AUGUST 25TH,
FOR EXAMPLE, THE MISSED BRAIN CONTUSION? YOU KNEW THAT, DIDN'T
YOU?
A YES, I KNEW THAT.
Q YOU KNEW ABOUT THE MISTAKES IN THE ONE WOUND VERSUS
TWO WOUNDS TO THE NECK ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF MR. GOLDMAN, DIDN'T
YOU?
A YES, I DID.
Q AND YOU KNEW THE SAME MISTAKE, TWO WOUNDS VERSUS ONE
WOUND ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE NECK OF MR. GOLDMAN, DIDN'T YOU?
A YES, I DID.
Q AND YOU HAVE AN ADDENDUM DATED JULY 1 THAT INDICATES
A SERIES OF MISTAKES, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q DOCTOR, HOW COULD YOU SAY TO MR. DONALDSON WHEN YOU
WERE ACCOSTED BY HIM THAT YOU BELIEVED YOUR OFFICE HAD DONE A
VERY GOOD JOB IN THESE TWO CASES?
A WELL, THAT IS MY -- I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL, I WAS TAKEN
BY SURPRISE WHEN THIS HAPPENED. AND NO. 2, IT WAS NOT AN
INTELLIGENT CONVERSATION WHICH TOOK PLACE AT THAT TIME BECAUSE HE
SUDDENLY SURPRISED ME. BUT STILL --
LET ME PUT IT THIS WAY. AT THAT TIME, I FELT THAT WE
DID A VERY GOOD JOB BECAUSE I FELT WE MET THE BIG PICTURE
REGARDING THE CAUSE OF DEATH, THE MANNER OF DEATH. AND REALLY, I
COULDN'T DISCUSS THESE MISTAKES WITH MR. DONALDSON AT THE TIME
BECAUSE THE CASE WAS STILL IN TRIAL AND WE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO
DISCUSS THE CASE AT THE TIME. THE REPORTS WERE NOT RELEASED TO
ANYBODY.
SO REALLY, I COULDN'T INTELLIGENTLY DISCUSS THE
MISTAKES WHICH I KNEW ABOUT AT THAT TIME.
Q DOCTOR, DO YOU STILL FEEL THAT WAY, THAT YOUR OFFICE
DID A VERY GOOD JOB IN THESE TWO CASES GIVEN ALL OF THE MISTAKES
YOU'VE IDENTIFIED AND TESTIFIED ABOUT DURING THE COURSE OF THE
LAST SIX OR SO DAYS?
A NO.
I MEAN I THINK WE STILL DID AN ADEQUATE JOB, BUT I
DON'T THINK WE DID A VERY GOOD JOB BECAUSE WHEN I STUDIED THE
CASE IN DETAIL, I FOUND ADDITIONAL MISTAKES WHICH WE HAVE
DISCUSSED IN THE LAST FEW DAYS IN THIS TRIAL.
I'M NOT -- I WOULD SAY THAT WE WERE DOING A
SATISFACTORY JOB IN PORTIONS OF THE CASE AND LESS THAN
SATISFACTORY AS FAR AS CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE AUTOPSY BECAUSE OF
THE MISTAKES WHICH I'VE ALREADY OUTLINED THESE FEW DAYS.
BUT STILL, AS FAR AS THE BIG PICTURE GOES, I THINK WE
DID AN ADEQUATE PERFORMANCE, THAT THE INJURIES HAVE BEEN
DOCUMENTED, THEY'VE BEEN PHOTOGRAPHED, THE CAUSE AND MANNER OF
DEATH HAS BEEN DISCUSSED -- I MEAN HAVE BEEN DETERMINED.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE LAST FEW DAYS, WHICH WE
HAVE DISCUSSED ALL THE FINDINGS ON BOTH THE CASES, THE
SIGNIFICANT FATAL INJURIES HAVE BEEN WELL DOCUMENTED. THERE HAVE
BEEN SOME OMISSIONS IN CERTAIN OTHER INJURIES. SO I WON'T SAY MY
OPINION HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN IN MY DETAILED REVIEW OF THE CASE.
Q DO YOU THINK THAT YOUR OFFICE STRIVES FOR MERELY
BEING ADEQUATE?
A NO.
WE -- AS I TOLD YOU A FEW DAYS EARLIER, WE WANT TO DO
THE BEST WE CAN WITH OUR RESOURCES. AS I TOLD YOU, WE ARE A
HIGH-VOLUME OFFICE WITH LIMITED RESOURCES. WE TRY VERY HARD NOT
TO MAKE MISTAKES.
AND IN THIS CASE, SOME MISTAKES HAVE OCCURRED AND YOU
ALL HAVE SEEN ME THE LAST FEW DAYS. I HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE HERE
AND I WENT OVER ALL THE MISTAKES.
BUT I ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE SIGNIFICANT INJURIES
HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED AND ONE CAN EASILY INTERPRET THE CAUSE AND
MANNER OF DEATH AND ONE CAN EASILY INTERPRET THE -- WHETHER IT'S
>FROM A SINGLE-EDGED OR DOUBLE-EDGED KNIFE WITH ALL THE FINDINGS
WE HAVE. BUT BY OPINION IS NO LONGER THAT IT WAS A VERY GOOD JOB
ON THESE TWO CASES, NO.
MR. KELBERG: YOUR HONOR, IS THIS A PROPER TIME?
THE COURT: YES.
AND TOMORROW, MR. KELBERG, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU THINK
YOU'LL NEED TO CONCLUDE?
MR. KELBERG: I HOPE BY NOON.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE
OUR RECESS FOR THE EVENING.
PLEASE REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU; DO NOT
DISCUSS THIS CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DO NOT FORM ANY OPINIONS
ABOUT THE CASE, DO NOT CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER
HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, DO NOT ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE
WITH YOU WITH REGARD TO THE CASE.
WE'LL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 9:00 O'CLOCK TOMORROW
MORNING.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DOCTOR. YOU CAN STEP DOWN.
(AT 5:55 P.M., AN ADJOURNMENT
WAS TAKEN UNTIL, WEDNESDAY,
JUNE 14, 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
TUESDAY, JUNE 13, 1995
VOLUME 166
PAGES 31579 THROUGH 31883, 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
I N D E X
INDEX FOR VOLUME 166 PAGES 31579 - 31883
-----------------------------------------------------
DAY DATE SESSION PAGE VOL.
TUESDAY JUNE 13, 1995 A.M. 31579 166
P.M. 31713 166
-----------------------------------------------------
LEGEND:
MS. CLARK - MC MR. SHAPIRO - S
MR. HODGMAN - H MR. COCHRAN - C MR. DARDEN D
MR. DOUGLAS - CD
MS. LEWIS - L MR. BAILEY - B
MS. KAHN - K MS. CHAPMAN - SC MR. GOLDBERG -
GB MR. BLASIER - BB
MR. CLARKE - GC MR. UELMEN - U
MR. HARMON - RH MR. SCHECK - BS
MR. GORDON - G MR. NEUFELD - N
MR. KELBERG - BK
-----------------------------------------------------
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
PEOPLE'S
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.
SATHYAVAGISWARAN, LAKSHMANAN 166 (RESUMED)
31606BK
(RESUMED) 31719BK
-----------------------------------------------------
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.
SATHYAVAGISWARAN, LAKSHMANAN 166 (RESUMED)
31606BK
(RESUMED) 31719BK
EXHIBITS
PEOPLE'S FOR IN EXHIBIT
IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE
PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.
358-A - CORONER'S PHOTO 31592 166
DEPICTING A WOUND IN THE NECK OF MR. GOLDMAN
AND THE GLOVED HAND OF AN INDIVIDUAL
358-B - CORONER'S PHOTO 31592 166
(CROPPED INTO 3 SECTIONS) DEPICTING THE FACE,
WOUND TO THE NECK OF MR. GOLDMAN AND THE GLOVED
HANDS OF AN, INDIVIDUAL
362 - CHART 31694 166
WITH 7 PHOTOGRAPHS ENTITLED "SHARP FORCE
INJURIES TO LEFT FLANK, LEFT THIGH AND
RIGHT CHEST OF MR. GOLDMAN/BLUNT FORCE
TRAUMA AND LIVIDITY"
363 - VIDEOTAPE OF 31874 166
A CONVERSATION BETWEEN DR. GOLDEN AND SAM
DONALDSON; DR. SATHYAVAGISWARAN AND SAM
DONALDSON
??
31628
