Xref: world alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts:348
Newsgroups: alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts
Path: world!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!myra
From:
[email protected] (Myra Dinnerstein)
Subject: TRANSCRIPT - 8/28/95
Message-ID: <
[email protected]>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 1995 16:30:15 GMT
Approved:
[email protected]
Lines: 6930
Sender:
[email protected]
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 1995
9:02 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: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER.
MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH
HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. BLASIER, MR. BAILEY,
MR. SCHECK.
THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENT THE BY MR. GOLDBERG AND MR.
DARDEN.
THE JURY IS NOT PRESENT.
COUNSEL, IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO TAKE UP BEFORE
WE --
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, WE WERE IN THE PROCESS OF
SHOWING EXHIBITS TO THE DEFENSE AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE SHOWN
THEM ALL OF THEM YET.
WE HAVE SHOWN THEM THE BOARDS THAT WE BROUGHT DOWN, I
THINK ALL OF WHICH -- ALL OF WHICH WERE COMPLETED EITHER ON
SATURDAY OR SUNDAY -- IN OTHER WORDS, COMPLETED AND DELIVERED TO
OUR OFFICE ON SATURDAY AND SUNDAY.
I WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY JUST TO MAKE SURE I HAVE
SHOWN THE REST OF THE EXHIBITS TO COUNSEL.
WHAT I DID WANT TO BRING UP, PRIOR TO THAT, HOWEVER,
YOUR HONOR, IS THAT THE COURT MAY RECALL THAT WITH RESPECT TO A
COUPLE OF OUR FORENSIC WITNESSES, PARTICULARLY GREG MATHESON,
THERE WAS AN ORDER BY THE COURT THAT THE PEOPLE NOT BE ALLOWED TO
DISCUSS CERTAIN EXHIBITS THAT WERE GOING TO BE USED DURING
CROSS-EXAMINATION WITH THE WITNESS UNTIL THOSE EXHIBITS WERE
USED, AND WE WOULD JUST LIKE A SIMILAR ARRANGEMENT HERE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THAT IS REASONABLE.
MR. GOLDBERG, HOW MANY OF THESE EXHIBITS HAVE YOU
BROUGHT DOWN?
MR. GOLDBERG: I HAVE ALL OF MY EXHIBITS DOWN IN COURT NOW
AND IT MAY TAKE A FEW MORE MINUTES JUST TO MAKE SURE WITH COUNSEL
THAT I'VE GONE OVER MY LIST AND I WANT TO BE SURE THAT HE HAS
SEEN EVERYTHING.
MAYBE I CAN DO THAT WHILE I'M STANDING HERE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WELL, LET'S DO IT RIGHT NOW THEN.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, ANY OTHER ITEMS YOU NEED TO SHOW MR.
SCHECK?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES. I AM SHOWING HIM A COUPLE OTHER ITEMS.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, DO WE HAVE TO SHOW PICTURES OF
THINGS THAT ARE ALREADY DEFENSE PICTURES OR ALREADY MARKED? I
WOULD ASSUME NOT.
THE COURT: NO. THIS IS NEW STUFF THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN
USED, ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED.
MR. GOLDBERG: THERE WERE TWO VIDEO CLIPS THAT WE WANTED TO
USE. ONE WAS A VIDEO CLIP THAT WAS TAKEN AFTER THE CRIME SCENE
WAS SHUT DOWN ON JUNE 13TH OF A PHOTOGRAPHER TAKING SOME PICTURES
AT BUNDY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: I DON'T WANT TO DESCRIBE IT FURTHER FOR THE
RECORD AT THIS POINT IN TIME.
AND ANOTHER ONE IS A VIDEO THAT WAS TAKEN ON THE
17TH.
MR. SCHECK: WELL --
MR. GOLDBERG: ACTUALLY THAT ONE CAME FROM THE DEFENSE.
MR. SCHECK: WHEN YOU SAY "TURNED OVER," THESE ARE TAPES
THAT WERE NOT PUT INTO EVIDENCE YET?
MR. GOLDBERG: PORTIONS OF THE SECOND TAPE WERE, BUT NOT
THE CLIPS THAT WE ARE GOING TO SHOW, AND MAY I JUST CHECK ON THE
OTHER ONE?
MR. SCHECK: I THINK WE HAVE A RIGHT TO SEE WHAT THEY ARE
GOING TO USE BEFORE THEY USE IT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: AND ONE WAS, MISS CLARK ADVISES ME, WAS
PLAYED BEFORE THE JURY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ONE HAS ALREADY BEEN PLAYED.
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT IS WHAT SHE HAS ADVISED ME.
THE COURT: THE OTHER ONE?
MR. GOLDBERG: HAS NOT BEEN PLAYED, THE PORTION, THE CLIP
THAT WE ARE GOING TO SHOW.
THE COURT: WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF THIS VIDEO?
MR. GOLDBERG: NEWS FOOTAGE THAT CAME TO US THROUGH THE
DEFENSE FROM ONE OF THEIR TAPES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THIS IS FROM THE 17TH?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
NEWS FOOTAGE AS TO WHAT? FROM THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
MR. SCHECK: I JUST WANTED TO LOOK AT TO IT SEE WHAT THEY
ARE TALKING ABOUT BEFORE THEY SHOW IT. THAT IS ALL.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU WANT TO SCREEN THIS WITH DR. LEE OUT OF THE
COURTROOM?
MR. GOLDBERG: IF WE COULD, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DR. LEE, WHY DON'T YOU STEP OUTSIDE FOR US, PLEASE.
THE WITNESS: VERY WELL.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
(DR. LEE EXITS THE COURTROOM.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. FAIRTLOUGH, DO YOU HAVE THAT AVAILABLE?
MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: APPROXIMATELY HOW LONG IS THIS?
MR. FAIRTLOUGH: APPROXIMATELY TWO -- TWO TO THREE MINUTES,
YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET'S SEE IT.
(AT 9:11 A.M., A VIDEOTAPE
WAS PLAYED.)
(THE PLAYING OF THE VIDEOTAPE
CONCLUDES.)
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT WAS THE CLIP WE WANTED TO SHOW.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK.
MR. SCHECK: THE FOOTAGE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE POLICE
WALKING IN AND THE GRIEVING COUPLE AND THEN THE POLICE WALKING
OUT, I DON'T REMEMBER THAT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. SCHECK: THE FOOTAGE -- THE AERIAL FOOTAGE OF THE
PEOPLE WALKING AROUND THE REAR OF BUNDY AND THE BACK GATE, THAT I
REMEMBER AS BEING ON THE CLIPS.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHERE THE OTHER CLIPS CAME FROM. I
DON'T RECALL HAVING SEEN THIS.
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: I REMEMBER SEEING IT, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY
MR. FAIRTLOUGH TELLS ME THAT THAT IS WHERE IT COMES FROM AND I
KNOW THAT HE IS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THESE TAPES.
THE COURT: WELL, THE QUESTION BEING ARE YOU GOING TO BE
ABLE TO LAY A FOUNDATION FOR THE SOURCE OF THIS TAPE AND THE DATE
AND TIME?
MR. GOLDBERG: WE WILL BE ABLE TO LAY A FOUNDATION FOR THE
DATE AND THE TIME JUST AS WAS DONE WITH ALL OF THE OTHER TAPES
THAT WERE SHOWN HERE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK: WAIT.
THE WAY WE DID THAT WAS -- WE WERE VERY STRICTLY
LIMITED TO LAYING THE FOUNDATION THROUGH THE WITNESSES
THEMSELVES. WE HAD TO SHOW IT TO THE WITNESSES WHO WERE AT THE
SCENE AND HAVE THEM ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THAT WAS THEMSELVES AND
THOSE WE'RE EVENTS THAT THEY SAW.
THE COURT: AT A PARTICULAR DATE AND TIME?
MR. GOLDBERG: NO. ACTUALLY THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN AT ALL,
YOUR HONOR, AND THAT WAS A MAJOR SOURCE OF CONTENTION.
THE COURT: NO, MR. GOLDBERG.
I ALLOWED THE VIDEOTAPE SUBJECT TO THE PARTIES LAYING
A FOUNDATION FOR IT AS FAR AS DATE AND TIME.
MR. GOLDBERG: I UNDERSTAND.
THE COURT: MY ONLY QUESTION AS FAR AS I ASSUME THE REASON
FOR THIS IS TO SHOW THAT THERE ARE OTHER EXPLANATIONS WHY THERE
MAY BE OTHER FOOTPRINTS AROUND?
MR. GOLDBERG: CORRECT.
THE COURT: BECAUSE OF THE MULTIPLICITY OF PEOPLE GOING UP
AND DOWN THAT WALKWAY? THAT IS WHAT I ASSUME THIS IS FOR.
MR. GOLDBERG: CORRECT.
THE COURT: THE PROBLEM BEING IS OBVIOUSLY WE NEED A DATE
AND TIME AS TO WHEN THESE PEOPLE ARE WALKING UP AND DOWN THE
WALKWAY.
DO YOU HAVE SOME OF THOSE POLICE WHO CAN TESTIFY?
MR. GOLDBERG: OH, YES, WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO CAN AUTHENTICATE
THIS.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK: AS THE COURT --
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK WE PROBABLY ALSO HAVE A CIVILIAN
WITNESS WHO MAY BE HERE TODAY, BUT AT ANY RATE, WE DO.
THE COURT: AS AN A OFFER OF PROOF YOU NEED TO TELL ME WHO
THE PEOPLE ARE AND WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO TESTIFY TO.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL --
THE COURT: YOU NEED TO MAKE AN OFFER OF PROOF THAT YOU CAN
LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR THIS.
MR. GOLDBERG: THE OFFER OF PROOF WOULD BE THAT THERE ARE
POLICE OFFICERS THAT WERE THERE AT THE TIME THAT WILL BE ABLE TO
SAY THAT IS THE 17TH, INCLUDING PEOPLE LIKE RON PHILLIPS,
INCLUDING RON HARDY WHO IS ONE OF THE CIVILIAN WITNESSES DEPICTED
IN THE TAPE.
THE COURT: I SAW MR. HARDY.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND THIS IS NOT AT ALL GOING TO BE
DIFFICULT. I MEAN, THESE ARE VERY UNIQUE EVENTS THAT HOPEFULLY
WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN.
THE COURT: NO, MR. GOLDBERG, THE ONLY POINT I'M MAKING IS
THAT YOU NEED TO MAKE ME AN OFFER OF PROOF NAMING NAMES AS TO WHO
IS GOING TO TELL ME THIS.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK.
MR. SCHECK: YES. IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT IF THEY WANT TO
PUT THIS ON IN TERMS OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHAT THOSE
PEOPLE WALKING IN -- WELL, IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING, FOR EXAMPLE,
>FROM SPEAKING WITH MR. HARDY WHEN WE WENT TO VISIT THE CRIME
SCENE, THAT HE HAD WASHED DOWN THE FRONT AREA OF ALL THE BLOOD.
NOW, THE QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN DID THESE EVENTS
TAKE PLACE? THEY ARE NOT PRESUMABLY WALKING THROUGH BLOOD FROM
THE FRONT WALKWAY UP. ALL THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE EXAMINED WITH
SOME PARTICULARITY.
IT SEEMS TO ME FOR PURPOSES OF CROSS-EXAMINING DR.
LEE IT IS SUFFICIENT TO ASK HIM QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW FOOT
IMPRESSIONS COULD OCCUR AT DATES PRIOR TO THE TIME THAT HE WAS
THERE AND WOULD THAT CHANGE HIS OPINION.
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME IMPROPER AT THIS POINT IN TIME,
GIVEN THIS OFFER, TO ALLOW THEM TO SHOW THE TAPES. THEY CAN PUT
IT ON IN THEIR REBUTTAL CASE, THEY CAN LAY THE PROPER FOUNDATION,
BUT IT SEEMS TO ME DOING THIS AT THIS TIME WOULD BE IMPROPER AND
CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE WERE NOT PERMITTED TO DO WITH ANY OF
THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES.
IN OTHER WORDS, EVERY TAPE WE HAD TO HAVE A
PROSECUTION WITNESS, BE IT DETECTIVE LANGE OR BE IT FUNG OR
MAZZOLA, WHO WOULD SAY, YES, I REMEMBER EITHER SEEING THOSE
PEOPLE --
THE COURT: THAT IS NOT CORRECT, MR. SCHECK. A ALLOWED YOU
TO USE SEVERAL VIDEOTAPES ON OFFERS OF PROOF THAT YOU COULD
ESTABLISH WHEN THEY WERE MADE AND WHEN THEY CAME -- WHERE THEY
WERE FROM, AND SOME OF THEM OBVIOUSLY WERE SELF-AUTHENTICATING,
GIVEN THE EVENTS THAT THEY DEPICTED. THAT WASN'T NECESSARY.
MR. SCHECK: I THOUGHT -- MY RECOLLECTION WAS, IS THAT IN
EACH AND EVERY INSTANCE WE HAD TO SHOW THE TAPE TO THE WITNESS
AND THE WITNESS HAD TO SAY I RECALL THOSE EVENTS OR I WAS THERE
AT THAT EVENT.
THE COURT: SOMEBODY HAS TO LAY A FOUNDATION FOR IT, BUT I
HAVE ACCEPTED OFFERS OF PROOF.
MR. SCHECK: WELL, IN ANY EVENT, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT AT
THIS POINT IN TIME IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO SIMPLY ASK HIM
QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THAT THEY THINK
THESE TAPES WILL SHOW BEFORE SHOWING THESE TAPES WITHOUT AN
OFFER.
THAT IS ALL.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, YOU INDICATED THAT THERE ARE TWO
VIDEOS?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: WHAT IS THE SECOND?
MR. GOLDBERG: THE SECOND VIDEO IS A VIDEO
OF -- THAT MISS CLARK ADVISES ME HAS ALREADY BEEN SHOWN FROM
AMERICAN JOURNAL THAT SHOWS A PHOTOGRAPHER WALKING ON THE BUNDY
WALK AFTER THE --
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: NO?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: ACTUALLY I GUESS THERE ARE TWO TAPES. WE
MAY HAVE HAD A MISCOMMUNICATION. ONE IS A TAPE FROM AMERICAN
JOURNAL THAT IS PEOPLE'S 101 WHICH SHOWS THE POLICE OFFICERS
ROLLING UP THE CRIME TAPE AND WALKING UP THE BLOODY WALK.
I THINK IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTRODUCED BY THE DEFENSE
OR PORTIONS OF IT, AS I RECALL, WITH RISKE, AND SHOWING THAT THE
POLICE TRAMPLED THROUGH AND STOMPED OVER THE BLOOD AND SO ON AND
CONTAMINATED THE CRIME SCENE AND LATER ON THE PEOPLE SHOW THAT
THIS HAPPENED AFTER THE CRIME SCENE WAS BROKEN DOWN, SO THAT IS
ONE TAPE.
BUT THERE WAS ANOTHER TAPE WHICH WAS APPARENTLY THEN
TAKEN CHRONOLOGICALLY AFTER THAT WHICH IS TAKEN BY A PHOTOGRAPHER
OR A VIDEOGRAPHER THAT SHOWS WHAT I REFER TO AS THE SECOND PLANE
OF TILES. IN OTHER WORDS, THE PLANE OF TILES THAT IS IMMEDIATELY
WEST OF WHERE NICOLE WOULD HAVE BEEN LOCATED, AND HE IS WALKING
UP AND DOWN AND HE SCANS BACK AND FORTH OVER THESE TILES AND
SHOOTS INTO THE APARTMENT, AND YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE LETTERS
STILL INTACT, THE CHALK LETTERS FROM THE CRIME SCENE. CRIME SCENE
IS CLOSED. YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE FOOTPRINTS ON THE WALK AND
YOU CAN SEE THIS PHOTOGRAPHER'S FOOT -- FEET COMING INTO CONTACT
WITH THE WALK OF COURSE.
THE COURT: AND WHO IS THIS VIDEOGRAPHER? WHO IS THE
VIDEOGRAPHER?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M NOT SURE IF IT IS THE
SAME -- I'M NOT SURE IF IT IS DARRYL WILLIAMS.
THE COURT: WHAT IS YOUR OFFER OF PROOF AS TO BEING ABLE TO
LAY A FOUNDATION?
MR. GOLDBERG: WE LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR THIS EXACTLY THE
SAME WAY THAT WE LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR THE SEQUENCE OF TAPES
THAT THE DEFENSE FIRST SHOWED OF DENNIS FUNG GOING IN AND OUT OF
ROCKINGHAM. THAT IS CIRCUMSTANTIALLY, JUST AS THEY DID.
THE COURT: HOW LONG IS THIS SECOND TAPE?
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS SECOND ONE IS ONLY ABOUT TEN SECONDS.
THE COURT: LET'S SEE IT.
(AT 9:19 A.M., A VIDEOTAPE
WAS PLAYED.)
(THE PLAYING OF THE VIDEOTAPE
CONCLUDES.)
THE COURT: IS THIS BEST QUALITY THAT YOU HAVE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: WHAT WERE WE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SEEN FROM THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, YOU CAN SEE A PHOTOGRAPHER WALKING ON
THE WALKWAY. YOU CAN SEE CHALK MARKS ON THE WALKWAY WITH LETTERS
ON THEM. YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE BRUNO MAGLI SHOEPRINTS ON THE
WALKWAY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. FAIRTLOUGH, LET ME SEE IT AGAIN.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOU DO ACTUALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT IT MORE THAN
ONCE TO CATCH ALL THOSE FEATURES, BUT THEY ARE ALL THERE.
(AT 9:20 A.M., A VIDEOTAPE
WAS PLAYED.)
(THE PLAYING OF THE VIDEOTAPE
CONCLUDES.)
MR. GOLDBERG: AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE PHOTOGRAPHER'S
TOES, I BELIEVE.
MR. GOLDBERG: DID YOU SEE THAT? CATCH THAT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: THERE APPEARS TO BE ALSO CANDLES BURNING.
MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT? YES.
MS. CLARK: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DO WE HAVE A SOURCE FOR THIS?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, MR. FAIRTLOUGH TELLS US THIS WAS
PROVIDED IN VIDEO CLIPS PROVIDED TO US BY THE DEFENSE, AND NO, WE
DO NOT HAVE A SOURCE OTHER THAN THAT.
BUT THE POINT IS, YOUR HONOR, THAT IT IS OBVIOUS IT
IS AFTER THE MURDER BECAUSE WE HAVE CHALK MARKS. IT IS AFTER THE
MURDER BECAUSE WE HAVE BRUNO MAGLI PRINTS AND IT IS BEFORE HENRY
LEE DID HIS EXAMINATION, AND THAT IS ALL WE NEED TO SHOW
CIRCUMSTANTIALLY FOR THESE PURPOSES.
THE COURT: HOW DO WE KNOW IT IS BEFORE
HENRY LEE DID HIS EXAMINATION?
MR. GOLDBERG: HOW WOULD THE CANDLES STILL BE BURNING ON
JUNE THE 25TH INSIDE THE APARTMENT? AND ALSO THE -- THE -- THE
PRINTS AT THE LOCATION WEREN'T AS --
THE COURT: YOU SEE THE BRUNO MAGLI
SHOEPRINT -- THIS IS A VERY POOR QUALITY VIDEOTAPE.
LET ME SEE THIS AGAIN, MR. FAIRTLOUGH.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: AND ON THE JUNE 17TH VIDEO YOU CAN SEE THAT
THEY DID SOME CLEAN-UP, AND THESE LOOK FAIRLY PRISTINE, THE BRUNO
MAGLI PRINTS.
(AT 9:22 A.M., A VIDEOTAPE
WAS PLAYED.)
(THE PLAYING OF THE VIDEOTAPE
CONCLUDES.)
THE COURT: I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT LEPT AT ME AS BRUNO
MAGLI SHOEPRINTS.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, YOUR HONOR, IF THE COURT IS -- YOU
SEE, I HAVE BEEN OUT TO THE SCENE NOW ABOUT A HALF A DOZEN TIMES
AND I'VE BEEN OUT THERE WITH THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS AND I AM FAMILIAR
-- VERY FAMILIAR WITH THAT BODZIAK CHART AND YOU CAN FIGURE OUT
EXACTLY WHAT TILES VARIOUS PRINTS ARE ON. IT IS FAIRLY EASY TO
DO. OUR CHART IS LAID OUT THAT WAY.
AND IF YOU CONCENTRATE ON THOSE TILES, AND YOU CAN
TELL WHICH TELL NUMBERS THEY ARE FROM THAT PHOTOGRAPH, TOO --
THE COURT: UH-HUH.
MR. GOLDBERG: -- ONCE YOU START ORIENTING YOURSELF WITH
THE GEOGRAPHIC FEATURES.
THE COURT: WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT THERE --
THE COURT: JUST TO SHOW THAT THERE IS SOME VIDEOGRAPHER
WHO IS RUNNING UP AND DOWN THE WALKWAY TAKING PICTURES? IS THAT
THE POINT?
MR. GOLDBERG: RIGHT. IT IS PRETTY SIMPLE. THERE IS A
PERSON WHO IS WALKING ON THE WALKWAY.
THE COURT: MR. SCHECK.
MR. SCHECK: I THINK THAT THIS PARTICULAR ONE CERTAINLY IS
-- BASED ON THIS OFFER WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING EXACTLY WHEN
THIS PICTURE WAS TAKEN, WHO WAS THERE, HOW THEY WERE WORKING,
WHAT THEIR SHOES WERE LIKE OR ANYTHING TO THAT EFFECT, SO I DON'T
THINK THAT BASED ON THIS OFFER IT COULD BE USED AT THIS POINT FOR
IMPEACHMENT.
THE COURT: I DON'T THINK IT IS FOR IMPEACHMENT. I THINK
IT IS FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION; DID DR. LEE TAKE THIS INTO
CONSIDERATION, THE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THAT WALKWAY IMMEDIATELY
AFTER THE CRIME SCENE WAS PROCESSED.
I THINK THAT IS THE ISSUE.
MR. SCHECK: WELL, I THINK HE CAN ASK THAT QUESTION, BUT IT
SEEMS TO ME THAT IT WOULD BE -- WITHOUT KNOWING WHEN THIS WAS
TAKEN AND WHAT WAS INVOLVED AT THE TIME, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT
WOULD
BE CERTAINLY A 352 PROBLEM WITH RESPECT TO SHOWING THAT TO THE
JURY.
THE COURT: BUT AREN'T THOSE -- ISN'T THE DEPICTION OF THE
CANDLES STILL BURNING PRETTY KEY INDICATION AS TO WHAT, WHEN,
WHERE AND WHY?
MR. SCHECK: MAYBE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WERE EVEN SOME INSTANCES
WHERE CERTAIN TELEVISION PEOPLE WENT BACK AND DID PICTURES WITH
RECREATIONS AND MAY HAVE RELIT THE CANDLES. I MEAN, I DON'T
KNOW. WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO AUTHENTICATE PRECISELY THAT TAPE
EITHER.
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, YOUR HONOR, THIS IS KIND OF FUNNY
BECAUSE WE SHOWED THE VIDEOTAPE OF -- TO RISKE OF SOMEONE
TROMPING UP THE WALK BASED ON THE SAME KIND OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL
ARGUMENT, ONLY THERE WASN'T ANYTHING REALLY TO SAY WHEN IT WAS
THE DEFENSE. THE DEFENSE SIMPLY WANTED TO INFER, EVEN THOUGH
RISKE, DIDN'T SEE THOSE EVENTS.
THE COURT: HAVE YOU MADE ANY EFFORTS WHATSOEVER TO LOCATE
SOMEBODY TO LAY A FOUNDATION FOR THIS?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES, WE HAVE STARTED MAKING EFFORTS, BUT AS
YOUR HONOR KNOWS, WE WERE JAMMED WITH THE TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF
INFORMATION AT THE LAST MINUTE, AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING FULL-TIME
ON THIS EVERYDAY.
THE COURT: WELL, YOU'VE HAD THIS VIDEOTAPE FOR A LONG
TIME, COUNSEL.
MR. GOLDBERG: I REALIZE THAT, BUT AS THE COURT CAN
APPRECIATE, MY ATTENTIONS HAVE BEEN DISTRACTED TO OTHER THINGS.
YOUR HONOR, THE WAY THAT THE COURT SHOULD VIEW THESE
KIND OF PROBLEMS IS WHAT SORTS OF ARGUMENTS CAN BE MADE AND WHAT
SORTS OF INFERENCES CAN BE REASONABLY DRAWN FROM THE EVIDENCE BY
THE ATTORNEYS AT THE TIME IT IS ARGUED.
MISS CLARK IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO SAY, LOOK, WE KNOW
WHEN IT WAS TAKEN BECAUSE THERE ARE CHALK MARKS, THERE ARE BRUNO
MAGLI IMPRINTS. SHE IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO CORRELATE IT BACK TO
OUR CHART A HUNDRED PERCENT TO SHOW THAT THIS WAS TAKEN AFTER THE
MURDER. SHE IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO POINT OUT TO THE CANDLES TO
SHOW THAT IT WAS TAKEN BEFORE THE 25TH OF JUNE, AND ALSO SHOW THE
EVIDENCE THAT THE WALKWAY WAS WALKED -- WAS WASHED DOWN AND
THEREFORE THE CHALK MARKS WOULDN'T HAVE APPEARED, ALSO SHOWING IT
WAS BEFORE JUNE 25TGH.
WHAT IS MR. COCHRAN GOING TO DO?
THE COURT: WAIT A MINUTE. WHO WASHED DOWN THE WALKWAY?
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK THAT WAS ALREADY IN EVIDENCE. THAT
WAS RON HARDY.
THE COURT: HAS HE TESTIFIED?
MS. CLARK: NO, HE HASN'T TESTIFIED.
MR. GOLDBERG: I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME EVIDENCE ABOUT HIM
WASHING IT DOWN, BUT AT ANY
RATE -- AT ANY RATE, YOUR HONOR, WHAT IS MR. COCHRAN GOING TO
ARGUE? MAYBE THIS WASN'T --
THE COURT: WELL, AT THIS POINT IT IS NOT RELEVANT AS TO
WHAT MR. COCHRAN IS GOING TO ARGUE OR NOT ARGUE.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, THE POINT IS IN TERMS
OF --
THE COURT: NO, NO, COUNSEL. THAT IS NOT THE POINT.
THE POINT IS IF YOU TELL ME YOU ARE GOING TO BRING IN
RON HARDY TO SAY THAT HE WASHED DOWN THE WALKWAY AND WASHED DOWN
THE BLOOD AND WASHED AWAY THE CHALK AND THAT THIS -- THEN THIS
VIDEOTAPE TOOK PLACE PRIOR TO THAT, THEN I WILL ALLOW THIS.
IF YOU CAN'T MAKE THAT REPRESENTATION TO ME, THEN I'M
NOT GOING TO ALLOW IT.
TAKE YOUR PICK.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD LIKE TO CONFIRM HOW FAR
UP THE WALKWAY HE WASHED BEFORE I MAKE THAT REPRESENTATION.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, MISS CLARK TELLS ME HE WASHED THE
WHOLE THING.
MS. CLARK: WE HAVE SPOKEN TO HIM.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THEN I WILL ALLOW IT.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
THE COURT: I HAVE RULED, COUNSEL.
NEXT ISSUE.
MR. SCHECK: ON THE FACTUAL REPRESENTATION, I JUST WANT TO
MAKE THIS POINT TO THE COURT. YOU SHOULD KNOW --
THE COURT: COUNSEL, I WILL ALLOW IT. IT WILL BE SUBJECT
TO A MOTION TO STRIKE.
LET'S PROCEED.
MR. SCHECK: LET ME PUT THIS ON THE RECORD BEFORE THEY MAKE
THEIR REPRESENTATION JUST SO IT IS CLEAR, AND THAT IS IT IS MY
UNDERSTANDING THE CHALK MARKS WERE VISIBLE ALL THE WAY TO THE
25TH, ALL RIGHT, AND IN THAT WALKWAY AREA.
IN ADDITION, WHEN WE WERE AT THE SCENE FOR OUR LAST
VISIT PRIOR TO THE NIGHT VIEWING MATTER, I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH
MR. HARDY, AND I THINK IT IS ALSO IN THE SO-CALLED MURDER BOOK,
ABOUT WHAT HE WASHED DOWN AND WHAT HE DIDN'T, AND I THINK IT IS
PERFECTLY APPARENT AND IT IS WHAT HE TOLD ME, THAT HE WASHED DOWN
THE FRONT AREA, ALL RIGHT, THE LOWER PLANE NEAR THE CLOSED-IN
AREA, HE DID NOT WASH DOWN THE OTHER WALKWAY.
THAT IS CLEAR, BECAUSE EVEN WHEN DR. LEE WAS LOOKING
THERE ON JUNE 25TH THERE ARE STILL IMPRINTS OF BRUNO MAGLI SHOES,
SO I DON'T SEE HOW THEY CAN MAKE THIS REPRESENTATION THAT HE
WASHED DOWN THAT ENTIRE WALKWAY AREA, BECAUSE I THINK THAT ON
THE FACE OF IT, THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE.
THE COURT: WELL, THEY ARE MAKING THAT REPRESENTATION. WE
WILL PROCEED ON THAT.
MR. SCHECK: I FIND THAT TROUBLING BECAUSE IT IS CONTRARY
TO WHAT WE WERE TOLD.
THE COURT: COUNSEL, I FIND THE FACT THAT THE CANDLES ARE
THERE BURNING AND THE PRINTS ARE STILL THERE AND THE CHALK IS
STILL THERE PRETTY COMPELLING CIRCUMSTANTIALLY, SO I'M GOING TO
ALLOW IT.
MR. SCHECK: THE CANDLES ARE THE ONLY ISSUE, BUT I'M -- I
CAN'T -- HOW DO WE KNOW THAT THOSE CANDLES --
THE COURT: COUNSEL, I'VE RULED.
MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
THE COURT: I HAVE EXPLAINED TO YOU.
ANYTHING ELSE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES. THERE IS ONE MORE CHART THAT I WANTED
TO USE THAT HAS BEEN BAR CODED AND IT IS CALLED "FOUR-WAY
LINKAGE." IT COMES FROM DR. LEE'S BOOK "CRIME SCENE
INVESTIGATION."
CAN WE PUT THAT UP JUST SO THEY CAN SEE THAT?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. FASCINATING.
MR. GOLDBERG: I KNOW IT IS NOT A BIG DEAL, BUT I WANT TO
GIVE COUNSEL NOTICE OF IT. IT IS ON PAGE 80.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK, YOU ARE AWARE OF THAT? I'M SURE YOU HAVE
SEEN THAT BEFORE.
MR. SCHECK: NO. CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
NOTHING TOO SURPRISING ABOUT THAT SINCE IT COMES FROM
DR. LEE'S WORKS?
ALL RIGHT.
ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU NEED TO DISPLAY?
MR. GOLDBERG: NO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR --
THE COURT: YES.
MR. SCHECK: -- WITH RESPECT TO THE OFFERS ON THE FOOTAGE
THAT WAS SEEN BEFORE, I TAKE IT THAT -- HAVE YOU RULED ON THE --
I TAKE IT YOU MADE A RULING ON THE ONE WITH THE CANDLES?
THE COURT: YES.
MR. SCHECK: I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU MADE A RULING ON THE
OTHERS BEFORE.
THE COURT: YES.
MR. SCHECK: JUST WITH RESPECT TO THOSE, IT SEEMS TO ME
THAT WITHOUT ANY SHOWING AS TO FOOTWEAR OR IF THEY MADE ANY
EFFORTS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE FOOTWEAR WAS AND WHAT THE
SITUATION WAS WITH RESPECT TO BLOOD ON WHAT I GUESS THEY ARE
SAYING IS JUNE 17TH IS THE OFFER, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT SEEMS TO
ME AT THIS POINT IN TIME IT WOULD -- IT IS A 352 PROBLEM.
I THINK IT IS MORE PREJUDICIAL THAN RELEVANT AT THIS
POINT.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT IS PERFECTLY OKAY FOR THEM TO
ASK WHETHER DR. LEE HAS CONSIDERED WHO HAS BEEN TO THE CRIME
SCENE, UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES ON PREVIOUS OCCASIONS AND WOULD
CERTAIN THINGS MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BUT TO SHOW HIM A TAPE LIKE
THAT, WITHOUT ANY FOUNDATION THAT WE HAVE AT THIS POINT AS TO
EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE WEARING, WHAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE, WHAT
THE CLEAN-UP WAS OF THE AREA, IT SEEMS TO ME, BEFORE THEY PUT ON
THOSE WITNESSES, UNFAIRLY PREJUDICIAL.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
I'M GOING TO OVERRULE THE OBJECTION SUBJECT TO THE
OFFER OF PROOF BY THE PROSECUTION THAT THEY CAN PRODUCE A POLICE
OFFICER TO LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR THAT PARTICULAR VIDEOTAPE.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET'S HAVE THE JURORS.
ALSO, AS A MATTER OF SCHEDULING, COUNSEL, WE HAVE A
JUROR DENTAL APPOINTMENT WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST. THAT REQUIRES US
TO CONCLUDE AT 3:15 ON WEDNESDAY, JUST FOR YOUR SCHEDULING.
MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, IS IT THE 31ST OR THE 30TH?
THE COURT: I'M SORRY, THE 30TH.
MS. CLARK: THE 30TH?
THE COURT: 30TH, WEDNESDAY.
MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, MAY I INQUIRE ABOUT ONE OTHER
THING ON SCHEDULING?
THE COURT: YES.
MR. COCHRAN: JUST SO WE ARE AHEAD.
I SPOKE -- FIRST OF ALL, GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: GOOD MORNING, MR. COCHRAN.
MR. COCHRAN: I SPOKE BRIEFLY WITH MR. GOLDBERG THIS
MORNING BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANY MORE DOWN TIME IF WE CAN
AVOID IT, AND HE INDICATES HE PERHAPS WILL FINISH WITH DR. LEE IN
A HALF DAY.
THE COURT IS AWARE THAT YOU HAD EARLIER SAID WE WOULD
DO -- YOU ARE SMILING. WE WOULD DO THE MC KINNY MATTER TOMORROW
MORNING. WE HAVE ANOTHER WITNESS WE HAVE GIVEN THE PROSECUTION I
THINK THAT WILL BE HERE FOR THIS AFTERNOON.
TODAY IS A FIVE O'CLOCK DAY, RIGHT? I'M TRYING TO
USE AS MUCH TIME AS POSSIBLE. DID THE COURT WANT TO DO THE MC
KINNY TAPES THIS AFTERNOON? IS THERE A POSSIBILITY OF THAT?
THE COURT: I HAVEN'T FINISHED MY PREPARATIONS YET.
MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT.
WE WILL HAVE ONE OTHER WITNESS TODAY AND WE WILL HAVE
A CHICAGO WITNESS COMING TONIGHT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU.
(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.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT 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. HENRY LEE.
THE WITNESS: YES.
THE COURT: DR. LEE, WOULD YOU RESUME THE WITNESS STAND,
PLEASE.
THE WITNESS: YOUR HONOR. GOOD MORNING.
HENRY C. LEE,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT,
RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
THE COURT: THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT DR. HENRY LEE IS
AGAIN ON THE WITNESS STAND.
GOOD MORNING, DR. LEE.
THE WITNESS: GOOD MORNING, SIR.
THE COURT: DOCTOR, YOU ARE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE STILL
UNDER OATH.
AND MR. GOLDBERG, YOU MAY COMMENCE YOUR
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q GOOD MORNING, DR. LEE.
A GOOD MORNING.
Q HOW ARE YOU DOING TODAY?
A A LITTLE TIRED.
MR. GOLDBERG: GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, DR. LEE, I JUST WANTED VERY
BRIEFLY TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME OF THE
QUALIFICATIONS THAT YOU WENT OVER WITH MR. SCHECK WHEN YOU BEGAN
YOUR TESTIMONY.
JUST SO WE ARE CLEAR, YOU ARE AN EXPERT IN FORENSIC
DNA TECHNOLOGY; IS THAT CORRECT?
A A LOT OF PEOPLE REFER ME AS AN EXPERT, YES.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF TO BE AN EXPERT IN FORENSIC
DNA TECHNOLOGY?
A I KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT DNA. LITTLE BIT; NOT
EVERYTHING.
Q QUITE A BIT, RIGHT, IN TERMS OF ITS FORENSIC
APPLICATION?
A FORENSIC APPLICATION, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND MR. SCHECK WAS ASKING YOU ABOUT SOME OF THE
THINGS THAT YOUR LABORATORY DOES IN THE FORENSIC AREA.
IS THIS LABORATORY EXCLUSIVELY A FORENSIC LABORATORY?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND ARE YOU USING RFLP TECHNOLOGY IN FORENSIC CASES?
A YES.
Q AND ARE YOU ALSO USING PCR TECHNOLOGY IN FORENSIC
CASES?
A YES.
Q DR. LEE, ARE YOU USING PCR TECHNOLOGY IN CRIMINAL
CASES BOTH TO INCLUDE AND EXCLUDE PEOPLE AS HAVING COMMITTED A
CRIME?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT SOME OF THE CASES THAT YOU
AND YOUR LAB PEOPLE HAVE PARTICIPATED IN INVOLVING THE
IDENTIFICATION OF HUMAN REMAINS.
DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, MOST OF THE CASES THAT WERE REFERRED TO HAPPENED
ABROAD, I THINK ONE IN SOUTH AMERICA AND THEN THERE WAS A NUMBER
OF INSTANCES IN EUROPE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A SOME IN THIS COUNTRY, TOO, YES.
Q WHAT WERE THE TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE BEING USED IN THE
CASES THAT YOU REFERRED TO ON DIRECT EXAMINATION FOR PURPOSES OF
HUMAN IDENTIFICATION?
A HUMAN IDENTIFICATION BASICALLY BONE TECHNIQUE,
DEPENDS ON THE BONE SAMPLE. SMALLER SAMPLE, WE HAVE TO USE PCR,
NO OTHER CHOICE. IF NO HIGH MOLECULAR WEIGHT DNA, WITH EXTRACT
>FROM THE SAMPLE, WE WILL HAVE TO DO THE BEST WE CAN DO.
IF HAVE A LARGE AMOUNT OF SAMPLE, OF COURSE RFLP IS A
CHOICE.
Q OKAY.
AND SIR, WHEN YOU ARE SAYING THAT YOU USED PCR
TECHNOLOGY, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE CASES THAT YOU WERE REFERRING
TO IN -- AS A RESULT OF THE CONFLICTS IN EUROPE TO IDENTIFY
PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN KILLED AS A RESULT OF THE WAR THERE?
A YES. THOSE ARE VICTIM WAS FOUND ON AN UNNAMED GRAVE
OR MASKED GRAVE, UNIDENTIFIED HUMAN REMAINS. FOR HUMANITY REASON
WE WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT IS THE LOVED ONE, SO WE TRY TO HELP
THOSE COUNTRY IDENTIFY THOSE HUMAN REMAIN.
Q AND DR. LEE, IS IT YOUR STATED POSITION THAT FORENSIC
SCIENTISTS ARE IN THE BEST POSITION TO EVALUATE WHETHER PCR
TECHNOLOGY IS READY TO MAKE THE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER INTO THE
FORENSIC FIELD?
A I THINK FORENSIC SCIENTISTS SHOULD HAVE A GOOD SAY
ABOUT WHAT METHOD WE SHOULD DO, WHAT IS THE RELIABLE PROCEDURE,
WHAT KIND OF APPLICATIONS.
CERTAIN SAMPLE, DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE DO, WE HAVE
PROBLEMS. OTHER SAMPLES, FORENSIC SCIENTISTS, WE SHOULD HAVE A
CHOICE NOT DICTATED BY MOLECULAR BIOLOGIST OR OTHER SCIENTISTS
TELL US WHAT TO DO.
Q OKAY.
NOW, DR. LEE, I WANTED TO JUST MENTION VERY BRIEFLY
OR ASK YOU VERY BRIEFLY ABOUT ONE OF THE MATTERS THAT YOU JUST
ALLUDED TO A FEW MOMENTS AGO.
A YES, SIR.
Q REGARDING IDENTIFICATION OF HUMAN REMAINS IN CASES
HERE IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES.
A YES.
Q YOUR MOST FAMOUS SUCH CASE WHERE YOU WERE PERSONALLY
INVOLVED AT THE CRIME SCENE, NOT AT THE TIME OF THE CRIME, BUT
AFTERWARDS.
A THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
Q YES.
-- WAS THE PEOPLE VERSUS CRAFTS CASE; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
AND WAS THAT A CASE, SIR, WHERE THE VICTIM IN THAT
CASE, HELEN CRAFTS, WAS KILLED BY HER HUSBAND AND SHE WAS -- HE
DISPOSED OF HER BY PUTTING HER BODY THROUGH A WOOD CHIPPER
MACHINE?
A YES.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH?
THE COURT: WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE ARE OVER AT THE SIDE BAR.
MR. SCHECK: AS THE JURY WAS FILING IN MISS MARTINEZ WALKED
OVER AND HANDED ME THIS RATHER THICK VOLUME AND SAID, "OH, WE ARE
ALSO GOING TO BE ASKING ABOUT THE CRAFTS CASE."
SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW -- HE MAY KNOW ALL ABOUT DR.
LEE'S CASES, BUT I CERTAINLY DON'T.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I DON'T INTEND TO USE THIS FOR
IMPEACHMENT PURPOSES BECAUSE I THINK HE IS GOING TO TELL ME
EVERYTHING I WANT TO KNOW.
AND I'M GOING TO ASK HIM ABOUT THIS CASE FOR ABOUT
THREE OR FOUR MINUTES VERY, VERY BRIEFLY.
THE COURT: WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? USING DNA TO TELL
US WHO THIS WAS?
MR. GOLDBERG: AND CONVENTIONAL SEROLOGY.
MR. SCHECK: WELL, COULD HE TELL ME WITH SOME SPECIFICITY
SO I KNOW? I MAY NOT REGARD IT AS IMPEACHMENT, BUT I'M ENTITLED
NO KNOW WHAT HE IS GOING TO BE REFERRING TO.
MR. GOLDBERG: I DON'T KNOW IF HE IS ACTUALLY.
THE BODY WAS CHOPPED UP, WAS SPREAD OUTDOORS, IT WAS
THERE FOR SOME TIME, THE POLICE COLLECTED IT, THINK --
THE COURT: BITS AND PIECES.
MR. GOLDBERG: YES. IT IS A VERY FAMOUS CASE.
THE COURT: YES, I AM FAMILIAR WITH IT.
MR. SCHECK: I AM THE ONLY ONE THAT ISN'T.
THE COURT: THIS IS THE ONE WHERE THE GUY KILLS HIS WIFE,
CHOPS HER UP AND PUTS HER IN A WOOD CHIPPER.
MR. SCHECK: THIS IS THE WOOD CHIPPER CASE?
THE COURT: THERE IS LITTLE BITS OF BONES AND THEY DO DNA
AND HE SAYS THE WIFE TOOK OFF. HE GIVES SOME ALIBI THAT SHE --
MS. CLARK: SHE SPLIT.
THE COURT: -- SHE SPLIT OR LEFT HIM OR SOMETHING LIKE
THAT, BUT SHE IS ACTUALLY SPREAD OVER THE NORTH FORTY.
MS. CLARK: REMIND YOU OF TROTT'S CASE?
THE COURT: OKAY. LET'S PROCEED.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
MR. GOLDBERG, YOU MAY PROCEED.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q AND IN THAT PARTICULAR CASE IS IT A FAIR SUMMARY OF
WHAT HAPPENED THAT THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE WAS SPREAD OVER A VERY
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TERRITORY, ABOUT 2500 SQUARE FEET, IN THE
SNOW BY A RIVER AS A RESULT OF THE BODY HAVING GONE THROUGH THE
WOOD CLIPPER MACHINE?
A THE MAJORITY THIS AND PROBABLY WOUND UP IN THE RIVER.
ONLY SMALL FRAGMENT WERE FOUND SCATTERED AROUND THE RIVER BANK.
Q OKAY.
AND WHEN YOU GOT OUT TO THE CRIME SCENE THE POLICE
OFFICERS WERE PICKING OUT ONE LITTLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE AT A TIME;
IS THAT CORRECT, IN A VERY LABORIOUS PROCESS?
A WE ACTUALLY MELT THE SNOW INCH BY INCH AND WE DON'T
KNOW WHAT WE PICKED UP, JUST LEAVES, DEBRIS, AND GO THROUGH
PRELIMINARY RECOGNITION AND IDENTIFICATION THROUGH THAT.
Q OKAY.
THAT WAS THE SUGGESTION THAT YOU CAME UP WITH TO
SPEED THINGS UP, BECAUSE YOU SAW THAT THE POLICE METHOD WAS JUST
GOING TO TAKE TOO LONG; IS THAT CORRECT?
A NO. WE WORK TOGETHER. IT IS A TEAM EFFORT.
Q RIGHT.
AND JUST SO IT IS CLEAR, WHAT WAS DONE IN THIS CASE
IS LARGE AMOUNTS OF SNOW WERE PUT IN BUCKETS AND THEN TAKEN INTO
TENTS AND MELTED AND THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE WOULD TEND TO FALL
OR SINK TO THE BOTTOM OF THE BUCKET AND ALL THE DEBRIS WOULD TEND
TO RISE TO THE TOP AND YOU JUST THROW THE DEBRIS OUT AND TAKE THE
BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OUT IN THE BOTTOM?
A NOT EXACTLY. ANY RECOGNIZABLE MATERIAL, FOR EXAMPLE,
WE FOUND A FINGERNAIL, YOU CAN RECOGNIZE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO THROW
IN A BUCKET. YOU JUST TAKEN IT OUT. IF IT IS BONE CHIPS, WE CAN
RECOGNIZE, OR A TOOTH.
WE HAVE A TEAM OF SCIENTISTS, TEAM OF INVESTIGATOR
WORK TOGETHER SINCE WE CAN SEE AND RECOGNIZABLE RIGHT AWAY, YOU
REMOVE IT.
FOR EXAMPLE, I CAN SEE A SCISSOR, I COLLECT A
SCISSOR. I DON'T HAVE TO THROW THE SCISSOR IN THE BUCKET.
THINGS WE CANNOT VISUALLY RECOGNIZE, WE USE THE SECOND PROCEDURE.
Q AND THAT INCLUDED SOME OF THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE IN
THE CASE?
A YES.
Q AND DR. LEE, WHEN THAT OCCURRED, WHEN THE ITEMS WOULD
FALL TO THE BOTTOM OF THE BUCKET, VARIOUS DIFFERENT BIOLOGICAL
SAMPLES COULD GET MIXED TOGETHER OR WERE MIXED TOGETHER; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES, YES.
Q AND IT ALSO MIXED TOGETHER HUMAN BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES
WITH OTHERS THAT WERE OUT THERE, LIKE DEER BONES AND THE LIKE; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A YES, CORRECT.
Q YES.
AND DESPITE THAT, SIR, IT WAS PROPER AND YOU DID
DECIDE TO ATTEMPT DNA TECHNOLOGY ON THIS EVIDENCE; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT THIS CASE WAS A LITTLE WHILE AGO, AS I RECALL, IT
WAS IN THE MID-EIGHTIES?
A YES.
Q SO WITH THE STATE OF THE TECHNOLOGY AT THAT TIME, YOU
WERE NOT ACTUALLY ABLE TO DO DNA, TRUE?
A NO. WE DID SOME DNA WORK.
Q OH, YOU DID?
A WE DID SOME X, Y, DETERMINE MALE, FEMALE.
Q OKAY.
YOU WERE ALSO ABLE TO DO -- WHEN I SAY "YOU" I'M ALSO
INCLUDING YOUR LABORATORY PEOPLE --
A YES.
Q -- ABLE TO DO SOME CONVENTIONAL SEROLOGY; IS THAT
TRUE?
A WE DID WITH LABORATORY SCIENTISTS ALSO ARE SOME
CONSULTANT LIFE CODE SCIENTISTS, UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAVEN, DR.
GAENSSLEN, AND WE BRING IN A LOT OF OTHER EXPERT TOGETHER WORK ON
THE EVIDENCE.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU WERE ABLE TO GET RESULTS THAT IDENTIFIED THE
HUMAN REMAINS IN THAT CASE EVEN THOUGH ALL THE BIOLOGICAL
EVIDENCE WAS MIXED TOGETHER AT THE TIME THAT IT WAS COLLECTED?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND IN FACT IN THAT CASE, TO YOUR RECOLLECTION, DID
THE POLICE TRANSPORT THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE TO THE LAB IN SEALED
CONTAINERS?
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I THINK THAT THIS IS OUTSIDE THE
SCOPE OF DIRECT AND IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: WE -- THOSE MATERIAL COLLECT IN A CONTAINER
IS A PLASTIC CUP, HAVE A SCREW-UP CAP. ALSO PUT IN AN ENVELOPE,
IT IS A SEALED PAPER BAG.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WHEN YOU WERE LOOKING AT THE SOIL SAMPLES IN
THIS PARTICULAR CASE, YOU DIDN'T FIND BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL SUCH AS
DEER BONES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT AT THE BUNDY LOCATION, DID YOU?
A I FOUND SOME BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL, AS I TESTIFIED,
HAIR, THAT IS CONSIDERED AS A BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL. I DID NOT
LOOK FOR DEER BONE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, YOU WERE ALSO ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR
LABORATORY IN GENERAL AND THE PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR YOU AND SUCH,
THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH YOU ARE WORKING AS A FORENSIC SCIENTIST,
AND I WANTED TO ASK YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS THERE, IF I MAY.
A YES.
Q DO YOU AGREE, SIR, THAT ONE OF THE PRACTICAL
REALITIES THAT CRIMINALISTS FACE WHO ARE WORKING FOR LAW
ENFORCEMENT, IS BUDGETARY PROBLEMS AND MONETARY SHORTFALLS?
A YES.
Q AND IS IT TRUE THAT EVEN RECENTLY, AFTER YOU GOT INTO
YOUR NEW LABORATORY, YOU HAD TO LAY OFF SOME PEOPLE DUE TO SOME
FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES IN THE STATE?
A HAVE TO REMOVE, NO, THAT IS NOT CORRECT.
Q WAS THAT SLIGHTLY --
A BEFORE. A COUPLE YEARS AGO WE HAVE TO LAY OFF SOME
PEOPLE. AFTER WE MOVED TO THE LABORATORY WE HAVE SOME VACANT
POSITIONS AND WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE, WE
WAS ABLE TO FILL THOSE POSITIONS.
Q SO WOULD YOU AGREE, SIR, THAT GENERALLY SPEAKING,
FORENSIC RESOURCES ARE SCARCE IN THE SENSE THAT WE CAN'T DO ALL
THE TESTING AND ALL THE STUDY IN EVERY CASE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO
DO?
A THAT IS ABSOLUTE CORRECT. OF COURSE IF YOU HAVE THE
SUPPORT OF THE LEADERSHIP, FOR EXAMPLE, I HAVE A GOOD BOSS, MY
COMMISSIONER VERY SUPPORTIVE TO FORENSIC SCIENCE, SO WE TRY TO DO
WHAT SUPPOSED TO DO.
OF COURSE IMPOSSIBLE TO DO EVERY POSSIBLE TEST IN
THIS EARTH FOR A CERTAIN CASE.
Q OKAY.
SO IN THEORY THERE ARE THEORIES ABOUT THE IDEAL IN
TERMS OF CRIME SCENE PROCESSING AND HANDLING A CASE THAT ARE
STATED IN THE TEXTBOOKS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A HANDLING CRIME SCENE AND LABORATORY TESTS, THAT IS
TWO SEPARATE THINGS. HANDLING CRIME SCENE, YOU DON'T NEED
SOPHISTICATED INSTRUMENTS SUCH AS SEM OR MASS SPECTROGRAPH, OR
HANDLING CRIME SCENE BASICALLY IS TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE AND
SOME MECHANIC ISSUES.
Q LET ME GIVE A CONCRETE EXAMPLE.
WE TALKED ABOUT USING VIDEOTAPES AT CRIME SCENES.
A YES.
Q AND IDEALLY THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA IF WE COULD USE
THAT AT EVERY CRIME SCENE?
A YES, SIR.
Q BUT BASED UPON YOUR EXPERIENCE, NOT ONLY AT YOUR OWN
LAB, BUT TRAVELING AROUND THE COUNTRY AS YOU DO INTO OTHER
COUNTRIES, IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THAT EVEN IN VERY SERIOUS CRIMES
A VIDEOTAPE IS NOT NOW CURRENTLY BEING USED AS A STANDARD
TECHNIQUE AT CRIME SCENE IDENTIFICATION, CRIME SCENE
INVESTIGATION?
A IT IS DIFFICULT TO -- MOST -- MOST OF CRIME SCENE
INVOLVE HOMICIDE USUALLY WE SUGGEST USE VIDEOTAPING AND MOST THE
CASES I SEE VIDEOTAPE WHEN IT SUBMIT TO ME, BUT ONCE IN A WHILE
CASES WITHOUT VIDEOTAPING.
Q OKAY.
AND THAT IS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES
NECESSARILY TO DO ALL THE VIDEOTAPING WE WOULD LIKE TO DO; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A THAT IS A JUDGMENT CALL. IF YOU WANT TO FIND A
VIDEOTAPE, YOU ALWAYS CAN FIND A CAMCORDER. WHETHER OR NOT THE
DEPARTMENT HAS THAT, I DON'T KNOW.
I CANNOT COME HERE TO TELL YOU WHAT THE LAPD BUDGET
LOOKS LIKE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, DOES FINANCIAL DIFFICULTY ALSO PLAY A LITTLE BIT
OF A ROLE IN TERMS OF TESTING AT THE LABORATORY AND THE AMOUNT OF
TESTING THAT DO YOU IN
A LIKE --
A YES. THAT IS AN EXCELLENT QUESTION. WE USUALLY HAVE
TO DETERMINE WHAT TYPE OF TEST TO DO FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, SO
NON-DESTRUCTIVE TEST.
BASICALLY VISUAL EXAMINATION, MICROSCOPIC,
MICROSCOPIC EXAMINATION, THAT DON'T COST ANY MONEY, THEN THE REST
OF TESTS, SOME ARE MORE SOPHISTICATED, THEM COST MONEY, YOU HAVE
TO MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL.
Q AND TO FACE A LOT OF PROBLEMS ALONG THOSE LINES OVER
THE YEARS IN YOUR LABORATORY, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE OLD FACILITIES,
IS IT TRUE THAT WHEN YOU WOULD USE THE ELECTROPHORESIS MACHINES
THE AIR CONDITIONING WOULD SHUT DOWN?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I THINK THAT THIS LINE IS GOING TO
BE IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON.
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M ALMOST FINISHED, YOUR HONOR. I JUST
HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS.
Q AND FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE DNA TESTING, YOU HAVE USED
PAPER TOWELS AS BLOTTERS INSTEAD OF THE BLOTTER PAPER, TO SAVE
MONEY?
A EARLY DAYS. EARLY DAYS WE HAVE TO -- MY LABORATORY
IS A MENS ROOM, LITERALLY A MENS ROOM, SO YOU HAVE TO DO THE BEST
YOU CAN.
Q YEAH.
A YOU CAN'T JUST SAY I'M IN A MENS ROOM, I DON'T DO ANY
TESTS.
Q RIGHT.
AND THE DRYING FACILITIES, UP UNTIL QUITE RECENTLY,
FOR BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, WAS IN THE YARD OF THE LABORATORY; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A THAT IS ABOUT FIFTEEN YEARS AGO. WE DON'T HAVE A
DRYING ROOM, SO EVERYTHING HAVE TO DRY IN THE YARD. EVEN NOW
SOMETIMES DRY MY CLOTHES IN THE YARD. NOTHING WRONG DRY IN THE
YARD.
Q I'M NOT SAYING THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT, NO,
NOT AT ALL, AND THAT WAS PARTICULARLY TRUE IN THE SUMMER MONTHS,
SOME OF THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE YOU WOULD TRY TO DRY IN THE YARD
BECAUSE IT WAS SMELLY?
A YES. THE OLDER REALLY TERRIBLE, YOU DON'T WANT TO
HAVE THE WHOLE LABORATORY EVACUATE. SOMETIME THE ODOR THE YOUNG
AND NORMAL PERSON CAN TAKE.
Q AND WAS THE PRACTICE OF DRYING THE BIOLOGICAL
EVIDENCE IN THE YARD DISCONTINUED ONCE WHEN A DOG ABSCONDED WITH
A RAPE VICTIM'S PANTIES?
A NOT REALLY. THERE ARE NUMEROUS CLOTHING.
ONE OF MY ANALYSTS WAS ASSIGNED TO GUARD THOSE
CLOTHING. SOMEHOW A WILD DOG TOOK A PIECE OF GARMENT AND RUN
AWAY AND LUCKILY THAT JUST ONE PIECE OF AN UNDERGARMENT. IT IS
NOT ALL DECOMPOSED.
Q OKAY.
A SO SINCE THEN WE HAVE TO POST TWO GUARDS TO WATCHING
THE CLOTHING.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND DESPITE THESE KINDS OF PROBLEMS AND ISSUES THAT
WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS MORNING, GENERALLY, DR. LEE, WOULD
IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT YOU AND YOUR LABORATORY PEOPLE IN THE AREA
OF DNA AND CONVENTIONAL SEROLOGY HAVE STILL BEEN DOING A VERY
HIGH QUALITY WORK?
A WE TRY OUR BEST.
Q YES. THESE ARE LITTLE OBSTACLES THAT HAVE TO BE
OVERCOME; IS THAT TRUE?
A YES.
Q NOW, DR. LEE, I WOULD LIKE TO TURN TO THE SHOEPRINTS
AT BUNDY AND LET'S TRY TO DIVIDE OUR DISCUSSION UP INTO THREE
CATEGORIES, IF WE CAN.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SHOEPRINTS, OR EXCUSE ME,
THE -- THE ITEMS THAT WE CANNOT SAY ARE IMPRESSIONS AT ALL FOR
SURE.
A WHAT I TESTIFY IS IMPRINT EVIDENCE.
Q YES.
A IMPRINT EVIDENCE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, IS ONE CATEGORY, THOUGH, ITEMS WHERE YOU CAN'T
EVEN BE SURE THAT IT IS IN FACT AN IMPRINT; IT COULD BE AN
IMPRINT, IT MIGHT NOT BE?
A WELL, IMPRINT IT IS DIFFERENT -- IT IS A TERM WE USE
TO DIFFERENTIATE FROM IMPRESSION.
IMPRESSION IS A THREE-DIMENSIONAL PATTERN. AN
IMPRINT IS A TWO-DIMENSIONAL PATTERN.
WHAT I TESTIFIED FIRST DAY I WAS HERE TO REPORT TO
YOU THOSE TWO-DIMENSIONAL IMPRINT PATTERN I OBSERVE ON DIFFERENT
AREAS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU, THOUGH, DR. LEE, AT THE
BUNDY LOCATION AND THE EVIDENCE THAT CAME FROM THE BUNDY LOCATION
--
A YES.
Q -- WERE THERE CERTAIN INSTANCES WHERE YOU SAW
SOMETHING AND IT WAS YOUR OPINION I CAN'T TELL WHETHER THAT IS AN
IMPRINT OR NOT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
A SOME EVIDENCE I SEE A PATTERN BECAUSE I EXAMINE
PICTURE.
WHEN YOU EXAMINE PICTURE, YOU ARE EXAMINING SOMETHING
THROUGH PHOTOGRAPHER'S CAMERA LENS. I WASN'T THERE MYSELF. IF I
SEE SOMETHING, I CAN TELL THAT IS SOME KIND OF AN IMPRINT. AS
FAR AS A SHOEPRINT OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE AN
OPINION ON THAT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
WELL, LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET INTO SOME OF THE
SPECIFICS HERE.
REGARDING RON GOLDMAN'S JEANS --
A YES.
Q -- WITH RESPECT TO SOME OF THE ITEMS ON THE JEANS,
WAS IT YOUR OPINION "I SEE TO PARALLEL LINE IMPRINT CONSISTENT
WITH IMPRINT"?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND BY THAT DID YOU MEAN I'M NOT POSITIVE WHETHER
THIS IS AN IMPRINT OR NOT?
A WELL, I'M PRETTY SURE IT IS AN IMPRINT; HOWEVER, AS A
SCIENTIST I USUALLY REPORT TO YOU WHAT I SEE.
I DID EXAMINE THE BLUE JEAN, BY THE WAY, HOWEVER, I
DON'T KNOW THE BLUE JEAN -- WHEN SOMEBODY WEAR THE BLUE JEAN,
THAT IS THREE-DIMENSIONAL SETTING.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I THINK HE HAS ANSWERED THE
QUESTION.
THE COURT: NEXT QUESTION.
MR. GOLDBERG: IT WILL MAKE THINGS A LITTLE FASTER.
I WILL GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN.
Q DR. LEE, SO WITH RESPECT TO SOME OF THE ITEMS ON THE
BLUE JEANS, IT WAS A SITUATION WHERE YOU CANNOT STATE TO A
SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY THAT THEY WERE IN FACT IMPRESSIONS AT ALL;
IS THAT TRUE?
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION, VAGUE, AS TO WHICH ITEMS.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
REPHRASE THE QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, AS TO THE PRINTS THAT YOU
WERE TALKING ABOUT ON THE RIGHT PORTION OF THE LOWER LEG --
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: THAT IS VAGUE, "RIGHT PORTION LOWER LEG."
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ON THE RIGHT LEG, LOWER PORTION,
DR. LEE?
MR. SCHECK: THERE IS A BOARD, YOUR HONOR. THERE IS A LOT
ON THE RIGHT --
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I SEE SOME PATTERNS, PARALLEL PATTERN
CONSISTENT WITH IMPRINT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
AND "CONSISTENT WITH" IS A PHRASE THAT IS USED WHEN
WE ARE NOT CERTAIN; IS THAT RIGHT?
A (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)
Q SOMETIMES?
A YEAH.
Q NOW, THERE WAS ALSO A PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU WERE SHOWN
THAT DEPICTED THE CAGED-OFF AREA AND WE WILL GET TO THAT IN A
LITTLE MORE DETAIL LATER.
A OKAY.
Q BUT THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT LOOKED LIKE A HOLE IN
THAT.
DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND WITH REGARD TO THAT HOLE, WAS IT YOUR VIEW THAT
YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER IT IS AN IMPRINT OR NOT, IT COULD JUST BE
A HOLE?
A I SAY THAT IS AN INDENTATION. IT IS NOT AN IMPRINT.
DEFINITELY NOT A TWO-DIMENSIONAL THING. IT IS AN INDENTATION.
Q IN OTHER WORDS, IT COULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE DOG OR
THE GARDENER DUG OUT?
A I DON'T KNOW.
Q NOW, WERE THERE ALSO SOME ITEMS AT THE BUNDY LOCATION
WHERE YOU WERE ABLE TO DETERMINE THAT WAS AN IMPRINT BUT YOU
WEREN'T SURE THAT IT WAS A SHOEPRINTS?
A YES.
Q AND WITH REGARD TO THAT, WOULD THE ENVELOPE FIT INTO
THAT CATEGORY?
A YES.
Q AND COULD THAT BE A FABRIC PATTERN ON THE ENVELOPE?
A I COMPARE SOME KNOWN FABRIC PATTERN. I CANNOT MATCH
THE PATTERN.
Q AND THAT WAS THE JEANS AND THE SHIRT?
A SHIRT.
Q BUT IS THERE ANY WAY OF MATCHING IT TO THE FABRIC
THAT THE SUSPECT WAS WEARING?
A I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SUSPECT OR SUSPECTS WEARING.
Q OKAY.
WHAT I'M ASKING YOU, DR. LEE, IS COULD IT BE SOME
TYPE OF FABRIC PATTERN ON THE ENVELOPE?
A IT COULD BE A PARALLEL LINE. ANY TYPE OF OBJECT HAVE
THIS SAME DESIGN --
Q OKAY.
A -- CAUSE A REPLICATE.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ARE YOU FAMILIAR, SIR, WITH THE
KIND OF PARALLEL LINES THAT ARE SOMETIMES ON THE CUFFS OF MEN'S
SWEATSUITS?
A I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF SWEATSUIT YOU REFER TO.
IF, SAY, A FABRIC DESIGN, YOU HAVE A WEAVE PATTERN, THAT COULDN'T
BE JUST A PARALLEL LINE. IT IS NO OTHER HORIZONTAL WEAVE PATTERN
I CAN SEE.
Q SO IF WE HAVE A PARALLEL LINE, FOR EXAMPLE, ON A CUFF
--
A IT MAY BE.
Q IT MAY BE.
AND THIS COULD BE FABRIC OF SOME TYPE THAT IMPRINTED
THE ENVELOPE; IS THAT TRUE?
A IT IS DIFFICULT TO -- IF YOU JUST LOOK
AT A SURFACE, IT IS A FLAT SURFACE. SOMETHING HAS TO BE -- ARE A
CERTAIN FORCE OR FLAT. WE SAY CERTAIN FORCE APPLIED HAVE A VERY
DEFINITIVE LINE, NOT SOMETHING BEING A CURVATURE SURFACE.
I DID NOT SEE A CURVATURE PATTERN. NEITHER I DID NOT
SEE ANY FABRIC DESIGN.
Q OKAY.
WE WILL GET BACK TO THAT A LITTLE LATER THEN.
NOW, DR. LEE, WITH RESPECT TO -- WELL, DID YOU FORM
THE OPINION THAT THAT WAS A SHOEPRINT?
A NO. I SAID CONSISTENT -- COULD HAVE MADE BY A SHOE.
Q NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE PRINTS ON THE BUNDY WALK --
A YES.
Q -- THERE WERE TWO PARALLEL LINE PRINTS THAT YOU SAW
ON THE WALK; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND THOSE WERE IN FACT SHOEPRINTS, CORRECT?
A IN JUNE 25TH THAT -- YES, I DID ISSUE OPINION ONE
DEFINITE IS A SHOEPRINT.
Q NOW, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY, DR. LEE, THAT THE ONLY
ITEMS THAT YOU IDENTIFIED THAT YOU ARE CERTAIN THAT IT IS, ONE,
AN IMPRINT?
A YES.
Q AND TWO, A SHOEPRINT?
A YES.
Q ARE THOSE TWO ITEMS ON THE BUNDY WALK?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WOULD IT BE CORRECT TO SAY THAT IN YOUR OPINION
YOU DETERMINED THAT THEY WERE IN BLOOD?
A YES.
Q AND WOULD YOU SAY, THEREFORE, DR. LEE, WOULD IT BE
FAIR TO SAY THAT FROM A FORENSIC SCIENCE STANDPOINT BY FAR THE
MOST IMPORTANT COMPELLING IMPRINT EVIDENCE THAT YOU DISCOVERED
WOULD BE THOSE IMPRINTS?
A ALL THE IMPRINT EVIDENCE IMPORTANT. IF YOU SAY
SHOEPRINTS, YOU ARE RIGHT, YOU ARE CORRECT, THAT, TOO, IS
COMPELLING.
IF YOU SAY IMPRINT, THOSE -- EVERY IMPRINT IS EQUALLY
IMPORTANT.
Q BUT ONLY THOSE THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY ARE THE
ONES ON THE BUNDY WALK?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND THERE WERE TWO OF THOSE?
A YES.
Q AND WE WILL COME BACK TO THOSE A LITTLE BIT LATER,
BUT LET'S JUST MOVE ON TO BINDLE 47, WHICH WAS THE ONE THAT HAD
THE TRANSFER STAINS IN IT.
DO YOU RECALL WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?
A YES.
Q NOW, IS IT YOUR VIEW, DR. LEE, THAT OFTEN SCIENCE
CANNOT PROVIDE EXPLANATIONS FOR EVERY PHENOMENA THAT WE SEE?
A YES. I SPEND MY LIFE IN THIS. STILL A LOT OF
PHENOMENA I STILL CANNOT EXPLAIN AND REPORT TO YOU.
Q AND THE WAY, YOU SOMETIMES PUT THAT IS THAT LIFE IS
COMPLEX, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
A YES, I DO.
Q NOW, DOES THAT MEAN THAT IF YOU LOOK AT SOMETHING AND
YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN IT AS A FORENSIC SCIENTIST, THAT THERE IS
SOMETHING WRONG?
A YES, THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG.
Q OKAY.
BUT ISN'T IT OFTEN THAT YOU LOOK AT SOMETHING AND YOU
CAN'T EXPLAIN IT?
A IF EVERYTHING RIGHT, I SHOULD BE EXPLAINABLE. IF
SOMETHING I CANNOT EXPLAIN, I SEE SOMETHING, I OBSERVE, FOR
EXAMPLE, YOU MENTION 47 LIKE IMPRINT. DOESN'T MATTER WHAT, YOU
SEE A WET TRANSFER WHICH MEANS SOMETHING WRONG.
Q I'M NOT ASKING YOU ABOUT THAT. WE WILL GET BACK TO
THAT IN A FEW SECONDS.
BUT JUST IN GENERAL, DR. LEE, ARE THERE MANY
OCCASIONS WHERE YOU SAID AS A FORENSIC SCIENTIST WHERE YOU LOOK
AT A CASE OR A PIECE OF EVIDENCE AND YOU JUST DON'T HAVE ALL THE
ANSWERS?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND THERE IS NOTHING SURPRISING ABOUT THAT, IS THERE?
A NOTHING SURPRISING.
Q NOW, IF THERE IS IN FACT A SITUATION WHERE A SWATCH
IS PACKAGED WHEN IT IS STILL DAMP, IN A BINDLE, AND THERE IS A
TRANSFER, IS THAT SITUATION GOING TO CAUSE THE BLOOD TO CHANGE
INTO SOMEONE ELSE'S BLOOD?
A THAT IS A DIFFICULT QUESTION. IF THAT IS ORIGINAL
BINDLE, THEREFORE SHOULD NOT CHANGE. IF IT IS NOT THE ORIGINAL
BINDLE, AM GOING TO CHANGE.
Q OKAY.
LET ME JUST GIVE YOU A HYPOTHETICAL SO WE ARE CLEAR
ON WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
A RIGHT.
Q LET'S SAY THAT I'M A CRIMINALIST AND I TAKE SOME
SWATCHES OUT OF A DRYING CABINET IN A TEST-TUBE. I DON'T TOUCH
THEM TO SEE WHETHER THEY ARE DRY.
A OKAY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT I THINK THAT THEY LOOK DRY. I'M LOOKING THROUGH
THE TEST-TUBE AND THEY LOOK DRY, AND I DUMP THEM OUT INTO THE
BINDLE.
ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME SO FAR?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, BY THE WAY, IS IT OKAY, FROM A FORENSIC SCIENCE
STANDPOINT, THAT I DID NOT TAKE OFF MY GLOVE AND TOUCH THE
SWATCHES WITH MY HAND TO CHECK TO SEE WHETHER THEY WERE DRY?
A USUALLY EXPERIENCED CRIMINALIST --
Q I'M JUST ASKING YOU THAT QUESTION. SHOULD I HAVE DONE
THAT?
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR --
THE COURT: LET HIM FINISH HIS ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: EXPERIENCED CRIMINALIST SHOULD KNOW HOW LONG
TO GET DRY. ONCE YOU DUMP OUT ON PAPER, YOU SHOULD SEE WHETHER
OR NOT DRY. TO TOUCH OR NOT TOUCH, THE AMATEUR DOES THAT. WE
DON'T DO THAT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: IT WOULD BE A VERY BAD IDEA TO
ACTUALLY TAKE MY GLOVE OFF AND TOUCH IT TO MAKE SURE, WOULDN'T
IT?
A WELL, SOME PEOPLE DOES THAT, BUT I DON'T DO THAT.
Q AND YOU WOULDN'T RECOMMEND DOING THAT, WOULD YOU?
A I WOULD NOT SUGGEST PEOPLE -- YOU SHOULD MAKE SURE IT
DRY BASICALLY.
Q BUT NOT WITH YOUR HANDS, RIGHT?
A NOT YOUR HAND.
Q NOW, DR. LEE, LET'S SAY THAT I DUMPED IT OUT INTO THE
BINDLE AND I JUST DIDN'T WAIT LONG ENOUGH, OKAY, AND I CLOSED UP
THE BINDLE AND THERE IS A TRANSFER IN THE BINDLE.
FOLLOWING ME?
A YES.
Q NOW, IS THAT GOING TO CHANGE THE BLOOD INTO SOMEONE
ELSE'S BLOOD IN MY HYPOTHETICAL?
A IN THEORY WILL NOT.
Q AND THAT WOULD BE YOUR FORENSIC OPINION?
A YES, SIR.
Q AS A LEADING -- AS AN EXPERT IN CONVENTIONAL AND DNA
TECHNOLOGY?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WOULD IT CHANGE THE DNA PATTERN OF THE EVIDENCE?
A SOMETIME IT WILL CHANGE THE PATTERN, MAKE IT
UNREADABLE.
Q OKAY.
IT MIGHT CAUSE MORE DEGRADATION?
A YES, SIR.
Q RIGHT. BUT IF WE WERE ABLE TO TEST THAT, FOR
EXAMPLE, AND GET A FIVE-PROBE MATCH --
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION. I THINK THIS IS NOW IRRELEVANT AND
HYPOTHETICAL, NO FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND IF WE WERE ABLE TO GET A
FIVE-PROBE MATCH, WOULD THE PACKAGING PROCEDURE HAVE CAUSED THAT
FIVE-PROBE MATCH TO HAVE OCCURRED ERRONEOUSLY?
A IN THEORY NOT.
Q AND THAT IS YOUR OPINION?
A YES.
MR. SCHECK: MOVE TO STRIKE, MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE --
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. SCHECK: -- ON THE ITEM IN QUESTION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: WE ARE JUST TRYING TO GET THE PRINCIPLES.
Q AND IF YOU WERE ABLE TO DO CONVENTIONAL SEROLOGY,
SAME ANSWERS, CORRECT?
A IN THEORY SHOULD IF YOU GET AN ANSWER, THE ANSWER
SHOULD BE THERE.
Q SHOULD BE CORRECT?
A IF YOU DID NOT GET THAT ANSWER OR THE ANSWER BECOME
SO AMBIGUOUS YOU CANNOT MAKE A DETERMINATION, NOW YOU HAVE A --
Q SO IN OTHER WORDS, YOU MIGHT GET AN INCONCLUSIVE
RESULT OR NO RESULT AS A RESULT OF DEGRADATION?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
FOR -- NOW, I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU THE EXHIBIT THAT
HAS BEEN MARKED AS DEFENSE 1362 FOR IDENTIFICATION IF WE COULD
PUT THAT UP.
IT IS THE LARGE SWATCH BLOW-UP.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 1386, CAN YOU SEE THAT?
JUROR NO. 1386: (NODS HEAD UP AND DOWN.)
THE COURT: 165, CAN YOU SEE THIS?
JUROR NO. 165: YES, SIR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.
MR. GOLDBERG.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, DR. LEE, WOULD IT BE CORRECT
TO SAY THAT THE FOUR TRANSFERS YOU SAW ON THIS ITEM, ITEM 47,
WERE IN FACT RELATIVELY LIGHT?
A RELATIVE --
Q LIGHT?
A NO, THAT IS NOT SAY RELATIVE LIGHT. I SAW LIGHTER
THAN THOSE KIND OF TRANSFER. IN MY OPINION THIS TRANSFER SORT OF
CONSIDER PRETTY -- SOME ARE PRETTY DEFINED AND HEAVY. OTHER
MAYBE CLASSIFY LIGHTER.
Q SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, THOUGH, DR. LEE, THIS IS THE
INTERIOR OF THE BINDLE SO THAT IF I UNFOLDED IT, THIS IS THE
INSIDE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND DID YOU SEE ANY EVIDENCE OF BLOOD ON THE OUTSIDE
OF THE BINDLE?
A I DID NOT SEE THAT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DR. LEE, IF WE HAD A SITUATION WHERE I WAS
WORKING WITH A REFERENCE VIAL STANDING APPROXIMATELY WHERE I AM
RIGHT NOW AND THIS BINDLE WERE SEALED CLOSED IN A COIN ENVELOPE
THAT WAS TAPED SHUT AND SITTING ON THE LITTLE PODIUM IN FRONT OF
YOU AND I'M WORKING WITH THE REFERENCE VIAL, YOU WOULDN'T EXPECT
THAT TO ACCOUNT FOR THESE TRANSFERS, WOULD YOU?
A IF THE ENVELOPE SEALED WITH TAPE, PUT IN AN ENVELOPE,
IN THEORY SHOULD NOT GET TO THE ENVELOPE.
Q IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO IMAGINE THAT HAPPENING,
CORRECT?
A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT.
Q OKAY.
NOW, DR. LEE, WE USE THE TERM HERE WET AND DRY IN
CONNECTION WITH DISCUSSING EXHIBIT 1362; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND FROM A FORENSIC SCIENCE STANDPOINT, AS A FORENSIC
SCIENTIST, IS THERE A LITTLE BIT OF AN AMBIGUITY WHEN WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT THE WORD WET AND DRY IN RELATIONSHIP TO BLOOD?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND IS THAT BECAUSE THE THRESHOLD BETWEEN WET AND DRY
IS SOMEWHAT FUZZY?
A WET AND DRY, THAT IS NOT FUZZY AT ALL.
Q OKAY.
EITHER WET OR DRY, BUT THEY ARE IN BETWEEN DAMP. NOT
SAY SOAKING WET. WHAT THE DEFINITION OF THE WET? YOU KIND OF
GET INTO A SEMANTIC ISSUE.
AS A SCIENTIST, IF A SWATCH DRY, IT IS DRY. IF IT IS
NOT DRY, ANYTHING ELSE I CALL IT WET.
Q ALL RIGHT.
I WILL COME BACK TO THAT IN JUST A SECOND.
BUT DOCTOR, CAN YOU TELL US WHEN A SWATCH IS DRY IN
THE SENSE THAT IT LOOKS DRY AND IF I FELT IT, IT WOULD FEEL DRY
--
A YES, SIR.
Q -- HOW MUCH WATER DOES IT HAVE IN IT?
A I HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH WATER.
Q BUT IT DOES HAVE WATER IN IT?
A I DON'T KNOW.
Q WELL, DOCTOR, I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THE BOOK THAT YOU PARTICIPATED IN "FORENSIC SCIENCE
HANDBOOK," RICHARD SAFERSTEIN.
YOU ARE VERY FAMILIAR WITH IT?
A SORT OF.
Q THIS IS ONE OF THE REFERENCES THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT
WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE TWENTY BOOKS?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND SIR, WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THE PROPOSITION THAT --
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, MR. GOLDBERG. CAN YOU SHOW MR.
SCHECK WHATEVER IT IS.
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 385.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: HE HAS IT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, DO YOU AGREE WITH THE
PROPOSITION THAT:
"THE THRESHOLD BETWEEN WET AND DRY IS SOMEWHAT
FUZZY. MOST IMPORTANTLY, DRY MATERIAL DOES IN FACT CONTAIN SOME
WATER. PROTEINS, FOR EXAMPLE, BIND WATER VERY TENACIOUSLY."
A YES, AGREE.
Q OKAY.
AND DO YOU AGREE THAT:
"THE WATER CONTENTS OF DRIED MATERIALS IS AN EQUILIBRIUM
WITH A FRACTIONAL SATURATION OF WATER VAPOR IN THE SURROUNDING
ATMOSPHERE, THAT IS, THE RELATIVE HUMIDITY. THUS, FOR EXAMPLE,
BLOOD DRIED TO AN EQUILIBRIUM IN AIR AT 25 PERCENT RELATIVE
HUMIDITY MAY CONTAIN ABOUT FIVE PERCENT OF ITS TOTAL WEIGHT IN
WATER."
A MAY, YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND SIR, WHAT WOULD THE AMOUNT OF WATER BE IF
SWATCHES WERE DRIED AT 50 PERCENT RELATIVE HUMIDITY?
A I DON'T KNOW HOW TO CALCULATE AT THIS MOMENT. MAY
CONTAIN SOME WATER.
Q OKAY.
WELL, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IT WOULD CONTAIN AS MUCH
AS TEN PERCENT OF ITS WEIGHT IN WATER?
A MAYBE.
Q AND IF THE SWATCHES WERE DRIED AT 75 PERCENT RELATIVE
HUMIDITY, WHAT WOULD THE PERCENTAGE OF WATER BE IN THE SWATCHES?
A I HAVE NO IDEA.
Q WOULD 20 PERCENT SOUND REASONABLE TO YOU?
A REASONABLE.
Q OKAY.
DID YOU HAPPEN TO GO BACK AND CHECK THE SAFERSTEIN
REFERENCE BOOK BEFORE TESTIFYING HERE ABOUT THE SWATCHES IN THIS
CASE?
A NO.
Q OKAY.
SO THERE WOULD BE A NUMBER OF FACTS THAT WE WOULD
HAVE TO KNOW, SUCH AS RELATIVE HUMIDITY, IN ORDER TO FIGURE OUT
HOW MUCH WATER THE SWATCHES IN THIS CASE HAD AFTER THEY LOOKED
DRY?
A IT DOESN'T MATTER. IF SEVEN SWATCHES --
Q WELL, I'M JUST ASKING YOU THAT.
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.
THE WITNESS: IF IT DRY --
THE COURT: WAIT. FINISH YOUR ANSWER.
THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.
EVEN IF DRY, SHOULD BE ALL DRY. IF, SAY, SOME
CONTAINS 20 PERCENT OF WATER, SEVEN ALL SHOULD CONTAIN 20 PERCENT
OF WATER.
MR. GOLDBERG: MOTION TO STRIKE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WOULD WE HAVE TO KNOW THE RELATIVE
HUMIDITY TO KNOW HOW MUCH WATER WAS IN THE SWATCHES?
A THAT IS WHY I SAY I DON'T KNOW.
Q OKAY.
A I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE PERCENTAGE.
Q WELL, CAN YOU EXPLAIN FOR US A LITTLE -- IN A LITTLE
BIT MORE DETAIL THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RELATIVE HUMIDITY AND
AMOUNT OF WATER THAT IS IN A DRIED SWATCH?
A I GUESS THE BEST PERSON HAVE TO EXPLAIN THAT IS
WHOEVER WROTE THAT CHAPTER. I DID NOT READ THAT. I WANT TO SEE
IT. IS THAT MY WRITING, THEN I HAVE TO EXPLAIN. IF IT IS NOT MY
WRITING, I DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN.
Q ACTUALLY I THINK IT IS IN MR. SENSABAUGH'S CHAPTER.
A OKAY.
LET GEORGE EXAMINE THAT -- EXPLAIN THAT. THAT IS NOT
MY PROBLEM.
Q WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT?
A NO, NO. IF THAT IS NOT MY WRITING, I DON'T HAVE TO
EXPLAIN.
Q OKAY.
A BECAUSE VERY DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO DETERMINE IN A
SWATCH HOW MANY PERCENT OF A HUMIDITY. IF HE COME UP WITH A
NUMBER, I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH GEORGE; HE IS THE ONE HAVE TO
EXPLAIN.
Q THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT AFTER SOMETHING IS DRYING IT
STILL DOES HAVE TO WATER IN IT, CORRECT?
A YES, I AGREE.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, WOULD YOU ALSO AGREE THAT THERE ARE A
LOT OF VARIABLES IN DETERMINING HOW LONG SOMETHING TAKES TO DRY?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE LABOR AND EPSTEIN
MATERIALS THAT THEY PUT TOGETHER IN CONNECTION WITH MAC DONNEL'S
BOOK DEALING WITH EXPERIMENTS AND BLOOD SPATTER ANALYSIS?
A A LONG TIME I DID READ SOME OF THEIR MATERIAL.
Q OKAY.
A EXCELLENT MATERIAL.
Q OKAY.
AND SIR, DO YOU AGREE WITH THE PROPOSITION THAT THE
AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR A BLOODSTAIN --
MR. SCHECK: IS HE READING SOMETHING, YOUR HONOR?
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M ACTUALLY READING IT OUT OF MY NOTES.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR --
THE COURT: PROCEED.
MR. GOLDBERG: AT ANY RATE, FOR THE RECORD, WE HAVE HANDED
HIM A COPY OF LABOR AND EPSTEIN.
MR. SCHECK: WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. CAN I SEE WHAT HE IS
READING?
THE COURT: HE SAYS HE IS READING HIS NOTES. HE CAN ASK
QUESTIONS AS HE CHOOSES.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR --
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, DO YOU AGREE WITH THE
PROPOSITION THAT THE AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR A BLOODSTAIN TO
DRY IS DEPENDENT UPON VARIOUS FACTORS, SUCH AS WEATHER
CONDITIONS, TEMPERATURE, AIR MOVEMENT, HUMIDITY, SIZE AND DEPTH
OF STAIN OR BLOOD POOL, AND THE NATURE OF THE SURFACE UPON WHICH
THE BLOOD IS SHED?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND DO YOU ALSO AGREE THAT IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO
PREDICT ALL OF THE FACTORS THAT GO INTO DETERMINING HOW LONG
SOMETHING IS GOING TO TAKE TO DRY?
A NOT NECESSARILY.
Q WELL, LET ME JUST ASK YOU THIS, SIR:
DO YOU AGREE THAT THERE ARE SO MANY COMBINATIONS OF
FACTORS THAT EXIST THAT AFFECT THE TIME REQUIRED FOR BLOOD TO DRY
THAT IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE DETERMINATIONS IN EVERY
SITUATION HOW LONG IT IS GOING TO TAKE?
A IF YOU LOOK AT A CRIME SCENE, BLOODSTAIN, I AGREE
WHOLE HEARTILY, TOTALLY, BECAUSE THAT BEYOND OUR CONTROL;
WEATHER, RAIN, SUNLIGHT, SHADE, CONCRETE VERSUS CARPET.
IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A SWATCH, THAT IS A TOTALLY
SEPARATE SITUATION.
Q SIR, ACCORDING TO YOUR RECOLLECTIONS OF THE LABOR AND
EPSTEIN MATERIALS, DIDN'T THEY DO A NUMBER OF DRYING EXPERIMENTS
OF A SINGLE DROP OF BLOOD ON COTTON TO SHOW THAT THERE WERE
EXTREMELY WIDE RANGES OF HOW LONG --
MR. SCHECK: OBJECT TO THIS, YOUR HONOR, UNLESS HE IS ABLE
TO BE SHOWN THE MATERIAL AND LOOK AT IT FOR WHETHER HE RELIES ON
IT AND WHAT IT IS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. SCHECK: I THOUGHT THOSE WERE OUR PROCEDURES.
THE COURT: NO, HE DOESN'T HAVE TO SEE IT. IT HAS TO BE
EXHIBITED TO COUNSEL.
MR. SCHECK: WELL, THAT I HAVEN'T SEEN.
THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK HE HAS ALL OF LABOR AND EPSTEIN.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, HE JUST HANDED ME AS HE IS ASKING
QUESTIONS.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT.
THE COURT: HAVE A SEAT, MR. SCHECK.
PROCEED.
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M SORRY, DID I --
THE WITNESS: DO I ANSWER THE QUESTION NOW?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: YES, YOU MAY ANSWER THE QUESTION IF
YOU REMEMBER IT?
A WELL, IN CONTRAST I THINK THEY COME UP SOME TABLES,
GIVE SOME GENERAL GUIDELINE.
FOR EXAMPLE, SINGLE DROP ON COTTON, IF I REMEMBER
CORRECTLY, IS ABOUT FIVE MINUTE OR SOMETHING, OR 45 MINUTE,
SOMETHING LIKE THAT. I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY. I READ LONG
TIME AGO.
THEY HAVE A TABLE PUBLISHED IN THERE, I SEE APPENDIX,
BACK OF THE BOOK, GIVE MORE OR LESS SPECIFIC TIME.
Q WELL --
A IF YOU GIVE ME THE BOOK I CAN SHOW YOU WHERE IT IS.
Q WELL, LET ME -- YES, I AM FAMILIAR WITH WHAT YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I APPROACH THE WITNESS, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING
--
MR. SCHECK: MAY I APPROACH?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: -- THAT THEY CONCLUDED THAT THE
SINGLE DROP ON BLOOD ON COTTON CLOTH COULD TAKE FROM 55 TO 330
MINUTES DEPENDING ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN THEY CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES AROUND?
A RIGHT. THAT IS THE -- IF YOU LOOK AT CONDITION 3,
THAT IS A TOTAL DIFFERENT CONDITION.
Q YEAH, RIGHT, AND THE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS TO TRY TO
EDUCATE FORENSIC SCIENTISTS HOW DIFFICULT IT IS TO EVER PREDICT
HOW LONG IT IS GOING TO TAKE SOMETHING TO DRY; IS THAT TRUE?
A AT THE CRIME SCENE AGAIN IT IS DIFFICULT TO PREDICT.
IN THE LABORATORY SETTING SHOULD BE CONTROLLABLE CONDITION, WE
SHOULD KNOW TAKE HOW LONG A SWATCH CAN DRY.
Q OKAY.
WASN'T THE PURPOSE OF THEIR EXERCISE TO EDUCATE THE
FORENSIC SCIENCE STUDENT IN HOW DIFFICULT IT IS, EVEN IN A
LABORATORY SETTING, WITH THE SINGLE DROP OF BLOOD ON A COTTON, TO
PREDICT HOW LONG IT IS GOING TO TAKE TO DRY?
WASN'T THAT WHAT LABOR AND EPSTEIN --
A I DON'T THINK THAT YOU CAN -- YOU CAN CALL THEM ON
THE STAND. I DON'T THINK THEY ARE GOING TO SAY A SINGLE DROP OF
BLOODSTAIN ON THE COTTON CLOTH GOING TO BE UNPREDICTABLE.
Q WELL, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU, DOCTOR, IS WHAT THE INTENT
WAS OF THIS MATERIAL, AND WASN'T THE INTENT TO GET ACROSS TO THE
FORENSIC SCIENCE STUDENT BE CAREFUL BECAUSE IT IS HARD TO FIGURE
OUT HOW LONG SOMETHING IS GOING TO TAKE TO DRY, EVEN IN A
LABORATORY?
A YES, IN CERTAIN CONDITION, YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q OKAY.
NOW, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE SOCKS, DOCTOR.
A YES.
Q ON THE SOCKS, THERE WAS A SOCK THAT YOU WERE ASKED
ABOUT THAT WE'VE NUMBERED 13-A.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?
A YES.
Q AND WOULD YOU AGREE, SIR, THAT IT IS DIFFICULT, IF
NOT IMPOSSIBLE, TO RECONSTRUCT ALL OF THE VARIOUS WAYS THAT
DIFFERENT PARTS OF A SOCK COULD COME INTO CONTACT WITH EACH OTHER
WHEN YOU ARE TAKING IT OFF?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WOULD IT -- AND THERE IS A STAIN ON THE SOCK THAT
HAS BEEN LABELED 42-A?
A YES.
Q AND YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?
A ANKLE STAIN.
Q AND ARE YOU GENERALLY AWARE THAT THAT HAS BEEN
IDENTIFIED AS HAVING BLOOD THAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH NICOLE BROWN?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND THEN THERE IS ANOTHER STAIN THAT WE HAVE BEEN
REFERRING TO IN THE TESTIMONY THAT IS ON THE INSIDE, WHAT WE'VE
BEEN REFERRING TO AS WALL 3.
DO YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?
A YES, YES.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, IS IT YOUR POSITION THAT WE CANNOT SAY
WITH POSITIVENESS WHETHER STAIN 42 IS IN FACT RELATED TO THE
STAIN ON WALL 3?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOW, COULD THE QUANTITY OF BLOOD ON STAIN 42 -- 42-A
-- BE AS MUCH AS A MILLILITER?
A 42-A? YOU MEAN SURFACE 1 OR SURFACE --
Q SURFACE 1.
A SURFACE 1.
AGAIN THE CALCULATING OF THE VOLUME OF THE BLOOD IS A
DIFFICULT CHORE AND I PROBABLY THE ONLY ONE WROTE A PAPER IN
THAT; HOWEVER, I ENTITLED THE PAPER CALLED "ESTIMATION OF THE
VOLUME OF THE BLOOD -- BLOODSTAIN." I CHOOSE THE WORD
"ESTIMATION" NOT "DETERMINATION."
AS A SCIENTIST I CANNOT COME HERE TO DETERMINE THAT
IS ONE CC OF BLOOD.
Q OKAY.
A THERE ARE SO MANY WAY TO CALCULATE, SO MANY WAY TO
TRY TO COME UP SOME REASONABLE EXPLANATION.
UNFORTUNATELY, ALTHOUGH THESE SOCKS -- PROBABLY I
WOULD SAY THE MOST EXAMINE SOCKS IN THE WORLD, SO MANY PEOPLE
LOOK AT THESE SOCKS, BUT A BIG HOLE BEING SAMPLED.
NOW, I LOOK AT THE REMAINDER, TRY TO GO BACK, SAY
WHAT'S THE VOLUME? I DID NOT LOOK AT THE CENTER PORTION. I
CANNOT COME HERE, IN FAIRNESS, TELL YOU HOW MUCH BLOOD IN THERE.
Q OKAY.
AND THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES OF
SOMETHING WHERE A LEADING FORENSIC SCIENTIST OR A NUMBER OF
FORENSIC SCIENTISTS CAN LOOK AT AN ITEM AND THEY JUST CAN'T
PROVIDE US WITH ALL OF THE ANSWERS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN SOMETHING IS WRONG, DOES IT?
A IT DOES MEAN SOMETHING WRONG. IF AT THE BEGINNING
FIRST DAY I HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE SOCKS, I CAN GIVE
YOU A REALLY, REALLY CLOSE ESTIMATION, BUT SINCE A BIG HOLE
THERE, I CANNOT CREATE OR RECREATE A HOLE.
Q WELL, WEREN'T THERE PHOTOGRAPHS, THOUGH, OF THE SOCKS
BEFORE THE HOLE WAS CUT OUT?
A I WAS NOT PRIVILEGED TO HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS THE
BLOODSTAIN INTACT.
Q OKAY.
BUT THE POINT IS, IS THAT EVEN WITH ALL THOSE THINGS,
SOMETIMES WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING MORE THAN GIVE A ROUGH ESTIMATION;
IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q THAT DOESN'T MEAN SOMETHING IS WRONG, DOES IT?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE MECHANISM OF
TRANSFER.
YOU'VE EXPLAINED WHAT A COMPRESSION TRANSFER IS. CAN
YOU JUST GIVE US A VERY, VERY BRIEF ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION OF
THAT, SIR?
A THE LIQUID BLOOD EITHER ON AN OBJECT OR ALREADY ON
SURFACE HAVE CERTAIN PRESSURE APPLIED TO IT. I CANNOT COME HERE
AGAIN TELL YOU HOW BIG THE PRESSURE, CERTAIN PRESSURE.
THIS LIQUID TRANSFER ONTO THE SURFACE, THAT IS CALLED
COMPRESSION STAIN.
Q AND CAN YOU GIVE US A BRIEF EXPLANATION AS TO WHAT A
SWIPE IS?
A A SWIPE YOU START GENERALLY WHEN FIRST MOMENT
CONTACT, THAT PROBABLY CAN BE A COMPRESSION. THEN WITH A LATERAL
MOVEMENT YOU -- EITHER THE SURFACE -- RECEIVING SURFACE MOVE OR
THE APPLYING SURFACE MOVE AND COULD BE BOTH SURFACE MOVED.
THAT IS CALLED A SWIPE.
Q AND THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS; IS THAT CORRECT,
DOCTOR?
A THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE DEFINITION.
Q AND TO A FORENSIC SCIENTIST, SUCH AS YOURSELF, THAT
HAS SOME EXPERTISE IN THE AREA OF BLOOD SPLATTER, THAT IS AN
IMPORTANT DISTINCTION, ISN'T IT, BETWEEN SWIPE AND COMPRESSION?
A IT IS IMPORTANT, BUT SOMETIME AGAIN HAVE A GRAY AREA.
YOU CAN'T REALLY TELL TOO CLEARLY THAT IS A COMPRESSION OR A
SWIPE. SOMETIME IT IS A COMBINATION.
Q BUT IF YOU CAN MAKE A DISTINCTION, THAT IS AN
IMPORTANT ONE FROM -- FOR A FORENSIC SCIENTIST, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND IF MR. MAC DONNEL TESTIFIED THAT THAT DISTINCTION
WAS NOT IMPORTANT, WOULD YOU AGREE WITH IT?
A I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HE REFER TO. IF YOU REFER A
SPECIAL SITUATION, THAT IS NOT WRONG. IF, SAY, EVERY CASE YOU
SHOULDN'T DISTINGUISH A COMPRESSION OR A SWIPE, THEN IT IS WRONG.
CERTAIN SITUATION A COMPRESSION AND SWIPE MAY BE A COMBINATION.
THAT IS AGAIN EACH INDIVIDUAL HAVE THEIR OWN OPINION
AND I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH OTHER -- EVERYBODY ENTITLE, OTHER
EXPERT ENTITLED TO THEIR OPINION. CERTAIN SCIENTIFIC FACT SHOULD
NOT BE ARGUED ABOUT IT.
AS FAR AS THE OPINION, THEY ARE ENTITLE GIVE THEIR
OPINION.
Q OKAY.
WELL I DON'T WANT TO ASK YOU TO CRITICIZE SOMEONE
ELSE, BUT WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT WHETHER OR NOT TO THAT
PART OF MR. MAC DONELL'S TESTIMONY YOU TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF A
DIFFERENT VIEW?
A AGAIN, AS I INDICATE, IF ON THE PARTICULAR ITEM MAY
BE NO DIFFERENCES. GIVING OVERALL PICTURE A CRIME SCENE, A
SWIPE, A COMPRESSION, MAYBE MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
Q WELL, YOU HEARD THAT PART OF THE TESTIMONY, DIDN'T
YOU?
A I DID NOT PAY MUCH ATTENTION ON EVERYTHING.
Q NO, NO, THAT PARTICULAR PART THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT
WHERE WE GOT INTO THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN SWIPE AND COMPRESSION?
A I DON'T RECALL. SOME PEOPLE MAY DISCUSS WITH ME;
HOWEVER, I DID NOT REALLY FIRSTHAND HEAR FROM HERB MAC DONELL.
Q YOU WEREN'T IN THE COURTROOM?
A I WASN'T IN THE COURTROOM.
Q RIGHT.
A I WASN'T.
Q OKAY.
A NO, I DON'T THINK I WAS IN THE COURTROOM.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DR. LEE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SOCKS, GETTING BACK
TO THE SOCKS, IS THE STAIN 42-A THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- CONSISTENT WITH A PERSON AT THE CRIME SCENE
TOUCHING THE SOCKS?
A YOU JUST LOOK AT SURFACE 1 OR YOU LOOK AT THE WHOLE
SOCKS?
Q OKAY. LET'S TAKE SURFACE 1 SO FAR.
A SURFACE 1, IN ORDER TO HAVE THAT, THAT IS MY
INTERPRETATION NOW, OKAY?
IN ORDER TO HAVE SOMEBODY TOUCH SOMEBODY ELSE SOCKS,
THE PANTS AND THE SHOES HAVE TO HAVE A SEPARATION TO EXPOSE THE
SURFACE.
THE BEST EXAMPLE I CAN GIVE TO YOU, HAVE TO WEAR THE
PANTS LIKE MICHAEL JACKSON. CERTAIN PORTION OF SOCKS HAVE TO
EXPOSE. IF I WEAR MY PANTS AND SOCKS LIKE THAT, IF TOUCH, HAVE
TO TOUCH MY PANTS, NOT GOING TO BE THE SOCKS, SO THAT IS ONE
CONDITION.
THE SECOND CONDITION THE BLOOD HAS TO BE LIQUID, NOT
COAGULATE, NOT DRY, HAS TO BE IN LIQUID STATE.
THIRD THING HAS TO HAVE CERTAIN PRESSURE. I DON'T --
I CANNOT TELL YOU HOW MUCH PRESSURE. NOT JUST A GENTLE TOUCH.
Q OKAY.
WELL, HAVING SAID ALL THAT, IF THE PANTS ARE PULLED
UP --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- OR IF SOMEONE IS BENT OVER OR HOWEVER IT HAPPENS,
THE SOCK IS EXPOSED AND SOMEONE DIDN'T GRAB THE SOCKS, BUT
TOUCHED THE SOCK WITH A BLOODY FINGER, WET BLOODY FINGER --
A HAS TO BE SINGLE FINGER.
Q SINGLE FINGER?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
AND COULD IT ALSO BE A -- A RESULT -- THIS TRANSFER,
OF OR CONSISTENT WITH SOMEONE WEARING THAT SOCK AND THE SOCK
COMING UP AGAINST A BLOODY OBJECT?
A HAS TO HAVE A PRESSURE IN THAT ONE LOCATION, BECAUSE
WE LOOK AT THAT -- JUST THAT ONE LOCATION AND VERY DEFINED
PARAMETER.
Q OKAY.
SO THE ANSWER IS YES?
A HAS TO BE CERTAIN CONDITION TO CAUSE THAT TRANSFER.
Q WELL, YEAH.
IF SOMEONE COME INTO CONTACT WITH SOME PRESSURE WITH
SOME OBJECT THAT HAS WET BLOOD ON IT, YOU CAN GET THAT TRANSFER?
A RIGHT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, WOULD BE A GOOD SPOT?
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR
MID-MORNING BREAK.
MEALS REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
WE WILL STAND IN RECESS FOR FIFTEEN.
DR. LEE, YOU CAN STEP DOWN.
(RECESS.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER.
ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. THE JURY IS NOT
PRESENT.
ALL RIGHT.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, PLEASE?
THE COURT: YES, MR. SCHECK.
HOLD ON, DEPUTY MAGNERA.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, MY APOLOGIES FOR MAKING A
STATEMENT TO THE COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY ABOUT THESE
EXHIBITS. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT THE RULES.
IF THE WITNESS IS GOING TO BE QUESTIONED ABOUT A
SECTION FROM A TREATISE, IT HAS TO BE ESTABLISHED, AS I
UNDERSTOOD, THAT HE RELIED UPON IT, AND I THOUGHT AS WELL THAT
COUNSEL WOULD BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY.
THE COURT: CORRECT.
MR. SCHECK: I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR TO THE COURT THAT
WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE USED WITH DR. LEE AND
I WAS HANDED THIS PAPER SECONDS BEFORE THE QUESTION WAS ASKED AND
THAT IS THE ONLY REASON I WANTED TIME TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT WAS
BEING ASKED OF THE WITNESS.
THE COURT: YOU WERE GIVEN -- YOU SEE, LET ME TELL YOU WHAT
MY PERSPECTIVE IS, MR. SCHECK, SO WE UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER.
MR. SCHECK: YES.
THE COURT: I DID NOT HEAR THE FOUNDATIONAL QUESTIONS TO
DR. LEE THAT HE WAS ABOUT TO BE CROSS-EXAMINED AS TO SOMEBODY
ELSE'S OPINION IN A LEARNED TREATISE. I DIDN'T HEAR THE
QUESTIONS.
I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING READ FROM AN ARTICLE, SO I
ASSUMED THAT YOUR OBJECTIONS WERE PREMATURE.
AND THAT IS THE WAY I FELT AT THAT TIME AND I THINK
THAT IS THE WAY THE TESTIMONY UNFOLDED, THAT IS WHAT CAME OUT,
BECAUSE HE WAS NOT CROSS-EXAMINED OR IMPEACHED AS TO ANYTHING IN
A LEARNED TREATISE THAT HE DIDN'T RELY UPON OR AGREE WITH.
MR. SCHECK: WELL, IF I --
THE COURT: I HAVE MUCH MORE CONFIDENCE IN THIS WITNESS
THAN APPARENTLY THE LAWYERS DO.
MR. SCHECK: NO, NOBODY CAN -- I YIELD TO NO ONE IN MY
CONFIDENCE IN THIS WITNESS.
BUT THE POINT IS SIMPLY A PROCEDURAL ONE BECAUSE I
DON'T WANT TO BE IN THE POSITION OF WHERE I SAY SOMETHING IN
FRONT OF THE JURY THAT --
THE COURT: BUT UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT OF MY COMMENT.
MR. SCHECK: -- IF YOU AND I GET INTO A
DIALECT --
THE COURT: THIS WITNESS IS NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH EITHER
SIDE ABOUT OTHER SCIENTIST'S OPINIONS.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, THE POINT I WANT TO MAYBE, FOR THE
RECORD --
THE COURT: YOU ARE ENTITLED TO IT, AND IF HE IS ABOUT TO
BE CROSS-EXAMINED, YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ TO SEE WHAT
IT IS.
MR. SCHECK: AND HE DID.
AND JUST SO THAT I'M CLEAR ON THE PRACTICE, HE WAS
ASKED ABOUT LABOR AND EPSTEIN GENERALLY HE SAID EXCELLENT PEOPLE,
AND THEN MR. GOLDBERG READ SOMETHING FROM HIS NOTES WHICH IN FACT
IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING WAS EITHER A DIRECT QUOTE OR A SUMMARY OF
THIS AND I THOUGHT AT THAT POINT --
THE COURT: IT WAS SUCH AN INNOCUOUS QUESTION, AREN'T THERE
VARIABLES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH HOW LONG IT TAKES SOMETHING TO
DRY? THAT IS A QUESTION THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO COME OUT OF A
LEARNED TREATISE AND WAS OBVIOUSLY THE FOCUS OF WHERE MR.
GOLDBERG WAS GOING. IT WAS NOT DIRECTLY FROM THIS ARTICLE.
I AGREE WITH YOU, YOU HAVE GOT THE MATERIALS, IF HE
IS GOING TO USE SPECIFIC PASSAGES TO CROSS-EXAMINE BEFORE HE GOES
INTO IT.
MR. SCHECK: JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WILL MAKE A COPY.
WHAT THEN UNFOLDED IS THAT SPECIFIC TABLES WERE USED
WITH DIFFERENT CONDITIONS FOR DRYING CLOTH SWATCHES WITH ONE DROP
OF BLOOD.
THE COURT: BUT THE OBJECTION SHOULD BEEN THEN FOUNDATION.
MR. SCHECK: WELL, I THOUGHT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE THEM, BUT
I ALSO --
THE COURT: MR. SCHECK, THAT WAS A SPEAKING OBJECTION. IF
YOU HAD SAID "FOUNDATION" YOU PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED.
MR. SCHECK: WELL, YOUR HONOR, I WILL GET TO IT. I JUST
WANT TO HAVE ANY MISUNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN US --
THE COURT: WE HAVE NONE.
MR. SCHECK: OKAY.
AND I WILL MAKE AN APPLICATION WHEN THIS IS DONE, I
WANT YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT, BECAUSE I THINK IT OPENS THE DOOR
TO SOME OTHER THINGS THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN --
THE COURT: IT MAY VERY WELL MIGHT.
MR. SCHECK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: THAT THOUGHT CROSSED MY MIND WHEN I HEARD IT.
MR. COCHRAN: OURS, TOO, YOUR HONOR.
MR. GOLDBERG: I DIDN'T ASK ABOUT ANY EXPERIMENTS. I ASKED
HIM ABOUT THE GENERALIZED KNOWLEDGE THAT HE HAS WHICH IS WHAT HE
TESTIFIED TO ON DIRECT. HE WAS TESTIFYING FROM HIS GENERALIZED
KNOWLEDGE.
THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND, BUT THEN YOU WENT INTO THIS CHART
WHERE SOMEBODY ELSE DID AN EXPERIMENT ABOUT DRYING TIMES.
MR. GOLDBERG: HE WAS THE ONE THAT TOLD ME ABOUT IT. I
WASN'T GOING TO GET INTO THAT EXCEPT DR. LEE WANTED TO.
THE COURT: JUST BECAUSE THEY GO INTO IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU
SHOULD CROSS-EXAMINE ON THAT. I THOUGHT HE LEFT YOU WITH A
PRETTY WIDE PARAMETER, IF YOU SET IT OUT TO DRY AT NIGHT AND YOU
COME BACK THE NEXT MORNING IT OUGHT TO BE DRY. I THINK THAT LEFT
YOU A WIDE ENOUGH PARAMETER TO WORK WITH, BUT YOU INSISTED ON
MAKING IT TIGHTER, SO I DON'T KNOW.
BUT I WILL SEE WHAT THE ARTICLE SAYS AND PROBABLY GET
TO READ THE ARTICLE OVER THE LUNCH HOUR, NOT THAT I HAVE OTHER
THINGS TO OCCUPY MY TIME WITH.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
THE COURT: IF THE DEFENSE INSISTS ON PURSUING THIS
PARTICULAR LINE.
MR. SCHECK: I READ YOU, YOUR HONOR, BUT YOU SHOULD LOOK AT
IT.
THE COURT: BUT YOU GOT THE TRANSFERS. I MEAN, WHAT MORE
DO YOU WANT?
MR. SCHECK: YES.
(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.
THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE BEEN REJOINED
BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY.
DR. HENRY LEE IS STILL ON THE WITNESS STAND UNDER
GOING CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. GOLDBERG.
AND MR. GOLDBERG, YOU MAY CONTINUE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, DR. LEE, YOU DISTINGUISHED IN
YOUR TESTIMONY BETWEEN THE MANNER OF TRANSFER AS OPPOSED TO THE
MODE OF TRANSFER; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND THE MODE OF TRANSFER WOULD BE THE EXACT
MECHANISM, IN OTHER WORDS, WAS IT A HAND, WAS IT A GLOVED HAND,
WAS IT AN OBJECT, WHAT IS IT EXACTLY THAT CAUSED THAT BLOOD
TRANSFER; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THAT ISSUE, THE MODE OF
TRANSFER, WERE YOU ABLE TO RENDER ANY OPINION REGARDING THE MODE
OF TRANSFER ONTO THE SOCKS?
A THERE ARE NUMEROUS POSSIBILITIES. I CANNOT TELL YOU
WHICH ONE IS DEFINITIVELY ONE METHOD.
Q SO WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT ON THAT THIS IS AN
AREA WHERE YOU WERE UNABLE TO RENDER AN OPINION ON THAT QUESTION,
MODE OF TRANSFER?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, YOU WERE ASKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT TRACE ANALYSIS
ON DIRECT EXAMINATION AND YOU SAID THAT IT FELL IN THE AREA OF
HAIR EXAMINATION SOMEWHERE IN BETWEEN CLASS CHARACTERISTICS AND
INDIVIDUALIZATION; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND DID YOU EXPLAIN THIS -- EXCUSE ME.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT:
"WHILE IT IS DIFFICULT TO MAKE ABSOLUTE
INDIVIDUALIZATIONS IN THESE AREAS, THE TRACE ANALYST CAN MAKE
IDENTIFICATIONS WITH A HIGH DEGREE OF CERTAINLY AND CAN OFTEN
ESTABLISH PARTIAL INDIVIDUALITY OF A SPECIMEN WITH CONFIDENCE
BASED ON EXPERIENCE AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS"?
A I WOULD SAY EIGHTY TO NINETY PERCENT THAT STATEMENT
CORRECT. THEY FORGOT ONE THING. DEPENDS ON SAMPLES. NOT ALL
THE SAMPLE YOU CAN REACH THAT DEGREE OF CERTAINTY. SOME OF THE
SAMPLE, YES, YOU CAN. OTHER SAMPLE MAYBE ONLY CAN DO A CLASS
CHARACTERISTIC IDENTIFICATION.
Q SIR, HAVE YOU EVER PUBLICLY STATED THE COMMENT THAT I
JUST MADE IN ANY PUBLIC FORUM, WHETHER IT IS PUBLISHED OR ORAL?
A MAYBE IN CERTAIN CONTEXT. I TRY TO TELL THE
INVESTIGATOR HOW IMPORTANT TRACE EVIDENCE IS IN SOLVING CRIME OR
TO DISASSOCIATE A PERSON FROM A CRIME.
TRACE EVIDENCE HAVE PARTICULAR VALUE. DON'T OVERLOOK
TRACE EVIDENCE. ALTHOUGH TRACE EVIDENCE WE CANNOT APPROACH
POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION, TWO EXTREME. ONE, CALLED
INDIVIDUALIZATION; ONE CALLED IDENTIFICATION.
A LOT OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FALL IN BETWEEN; DEGREE,
DIFFERENT DEGREE. FINGERPRINT, THAT IS A POSSIBLE
IDENTIFICATION. A HAIR WE CANNOT REACH TO THAT, SAY, JUST FROM
THIS PERSON, NO OTHER PERSON.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS, DOCTOR.
MAYBE I CAN JUST APPROACH COUNSEL FOR A MOMENT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. GOLDBERG: SORRY, YOUR HONOR. I JUST NEED TO LOOK AT
MY INDEX FOR A SECOND.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: I WILL COME BACK TO IT LATER.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: LET ME JUST ASK YOU THIS, DR. LEE
--
A YES.
Q -- WITH RESPECT TO TRACE ANALYSIS, WOULD IT BE YOUR
POSITION THAT IN SOME CASES REGARDING HAIR COMPARISONS THAT
IDENTIFICATIONS CAN BE MADE WITH A HIGH DEGREE OF CERTAINTY AND
CAN OFTEN ESTABLISH PARTIAL INDIVIDUALITY OF A SPECIMEN WITH
CONFIDENCE?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
AND THERE WERE CERTAIN ITEMS THAT YOU LOOKED AT WHERE
YOU PACKAGED SOME HAIR AND TRACE EVIDENCE IN BINDLES IN THIS
CASE; IS THAT RIGHT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND ONE WAS THE ENVELOPE AND ONE WAS RON GOLDMAN'S
BOOTS, AND THE OTHER ONE WAS THE SOIL SAMPLE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A NO.
Q THAT YOU WERE --
A ACTUALLY 21 BINDLES.
Q WELL, THAT YOU TESTIFIED TO ON DIRECT EXAMINATION?
A I TESTIFY ON DIRECT, YES, ONLY THREE, BUT IN REALITY
WHEN I EXAMINE I FOUND 21 SEPARATE BINDLES OF TRACE EVIDENCE.
Q I'M SORRY, I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE TESTIMONY.
NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THESE THREE ITEMS, DR. LEE, DID
YOU DO ANY COMPARISONS YOURSELF ON ANY OF THE HAIR AND TRACE
EVIDENCE IN THOSE BINDLES?
A NO, I DID NOT.
Q OKAY.
AND IS THERE ANY FORENSIC SIGNIFICANCE TO FINDING THE
MATERIALS THAT YOU FOUND IN THOSE THREE ITEMS?
A UNLESS EXAMINED, MAYBE SOME SIGNIFICANCE.
Q WELL, SIR, IS IT COMMON TO FIND STRAY HAIR AND TRACE
MATERIALS WHEN YOU ARE ANALYZING A PARTICULAR PIECE OF EVIDENCE
FOR HAIR AND TRACE?
A YES.
Q AND IS THERE ANYTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT THAT?
A JUST SHOWS THE PRESENCE OF TRACE AND OF COURSE WHAT
TYPE OF TRACE BECOMES SIGNIFICANT. WHETHER OR NOT CAN LINK A
PERSON OR DISASSOCIATE A PERSON NOW BECOME SIGNIFICANT.
IF YOU FOUND TRACE, THAT IS UNCOMMON. IF YOU GIVE ME
TIME, I GO TO JEWELRY BOX, I CAN PROBABLY FIND HUNDREDS OF HAIRS,
ALL DIFFERENT FIBERS.
Q AND WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO FIND SOME HAIRS AND FIBERS --
WE WOULD BE ABLE TO FIND SOME HAIRS AND FIBERS IN THE JURY BOX
THAT DON'T BELONG TO ANY OF THE JURORS IN THIS CASE?
A IF YOU GIVE ME TIME I WILL FOUND A LOT OF HAIRS AND
FIBERS, MAYBE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE JURY PANEL.
Q EVEN THOUGH THIS JURY PANEL HAS BEEN SITTING IN THIS
JURY BOX FOR QUITE SOMETIME?
A SURE. MAYBE I CAN FIND YOUR HAIR THERE, TOO.
Q OKAY.
SO THERE WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING UNUSUAL ABOUT BEING
ABLE TO FIND HAIRS AND FIBERS AT A CRIME SCENE THAT DON'T BELONG
TO THE SUSPECTS AND THE VICTIM; IS THAT TRUE?
A YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOW, YOU WERE ASKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE
GENERALITIES OF CRIME SCENE IDENTIFICATION AND THE DEFENSE USED A
CHART THAT WAS DEFENSE 1350, IF WE COULD JUST TAKE A LOOK AT
THAT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, SIR, THIS CHART WAS INTENDED
IN ORDER TO REPRESENT THE BASIC STEPS IN TERMS OF CATEGORIES OF
FORENSIC EXAMINATION FROM CRIME SCENE FORWARD; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING
EXACTLY HOW TO INTERPRET THE CHART CORRECTLY.
LET'S SAY THAT WE HAVE A SITUATION, DOCTOR, WHERE THE
BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE AT A CRIME SCENE, LET'S SAY IT IS BLOOD, IS
STEPPED IN BY A DEFENDANT AND IT IS DEPOSITED ON THE SOLE OF HIS
SHOES AND THEN HE TAKES IT TO SOME OTHER LOCATION.
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THIS HYPOTHETICAL.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
NOW, IN THAT HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO THAT I HAVE GIVEN
YOU HAS THE COLLECTION, IN EFFECT, BEEN DONE BY THE SUSPECT
HIMSELF INSTEAD OF BY A POLICE OFFICER?
A THE COLLECTION ACTUALLY INVOLVE TWO FORCE. YOU START
WITH RECOGNITION. IF SAY AN INDIVIDUAL STEP IN THE BLOOD, WALK
ON THE SURFACE, YOU DEPOSIT SOME EVIDENCE ON THAT WALKING -- SAY
WALKWAY SURFACE.
NOT -- IT IS NOT BY DEFENDANT HIMSELF. THE DETECTIVE
OR THE CRIMINALIST AT THE SCENE HAVE TO SEE IT TO RECOGNIZE IT,
TRY TO ENHANCE IT AND THEN COLLECT IT.
IF YOU FORGET ABOUT THAT YOU CREATE A BIG PROBLEM FOR
FUTURE RECONSTRUCTION.
THE SECOND HALF YOU ARE CORRECT, THE SHOE ITSELF
BECOME A VALUABLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE. UNLESS YOU FIND THE SHOE
YOU CAN'T REALLY DO A SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON.
Q OKAY.
AND IN THAT KIND OF A HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION WHERE
YOU HAD FOUND THE SHOE LIKE THAT, SAY, YOU WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO
TEST THAT SHOE FOR CONVENTIONAL TESTING AND FOR DNA TESTING; IS
THAT CORRECT?
A YEAH. THE SHOE AGAIN, THE TESTING INVOLVE QUITE A
BIT NOW. NOT ONLY SEROLOGICAL ANALYSIS, YOU HAVE TO -- THE MOST
VALUABLE IS A PATTERN COMPARISON, SIDE-BY-SIDE THE SHOE AND THE
FOOTPRINT. YOU WILL HAVE COMPARE NOT ONLY LOOK AT GENERAL
CHARACTERISTIC, ALSO LOOK AT THE WEAR, CUT, PATTERN, SO-CALLED
INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS.
GROUPING JUST ONE PART OF IT, WHETHER
OR NOT YOU CAN LINK TO CERTAIN SOURCE OF A BLOOD, JUST LIKE HAIR,
SOIL, WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE LINK
TO THE -- BACK TO THE SCENE, SO THE WHOLE PROCESS IS INVOLVED IN
RECOGNITION, PRESERVATION, DOCUMENTATION, COLLECTION, EVERYTHING.
Q OKAY.
AND YOU WOULD AGREE THAT -- THAT -- LET ME ASK
ANOTHER QUESTION. LET'S CHANGE THE HYPOTHETICAL A LITTLE BIT.
A YES, SIR.
Q AND LET'S SAY THAT INSTEAD OF A SUSPECT AT THE CRIME
SCENE WE HAVE A BRAND NEW POLICE OFFICER AT HIS FIRST CRIME
SCENE.
A UH-HUH.
Q AND HE ACCIDENTALLY STEPS IN SOME BLOOD.
A YES.
Q AND HE IS A LITTLE PANICKED AND HE IS NERVOUS ABOUT
DOING THAT, OBVIOUSLY, AND HE -- BUT HE IMMEDIATELY TAKES HIS
SHOE OFF, DR. LEE.
A OKAY.
Q AND HE BRINGS IT TO YOU.
A YES.
Q YOU WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO ANALYZE THE BLOOD ON THAT
SHOE, WOULDN'T YOU?
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I HAVEN'T HEARD -- NO FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IF THE SHOE BRING TO ME, YES, I WILL BE ABLE
TO IDENTIFY WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS BLOOD. IF IN FACT BLOOD,
HUMAN BLOOD OR NOT. IF IT IS HUMAN BLOOD, OF COURSE JUST LIKE
YOU INDICATE THAT ADDITIONAL SEROLOGICAL GROUPING TYPE A, TYPE B,
TYPE O, DNA TYPING TRY TO SEE WHOSE BLOOD.
EQUALLY IMPORTANT I HAVE TO LOOK AT A SCENE WHETHER
OR NOT HAVE SAME TYPE OF SHOEPRINT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SO THERE IS A VARIETY OF TESTING
THAT YOU COULD DO EVEN IN THE HYPOTHETICAL THAT I GAVE YOU?
A ALL START WITH RECOGNITION.
Q YEAH.
A YOU HAVE TO SEE IT FIRST.
Q OKAY.
AND IN MY PARTICULAR HYPOTHETICAL, THOUGH, DOCTOR,
THE POLICE OFFICER OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T RECOGNIZE THE BLOOD AT THE
TIME THAT HE STEPPED IN IT, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q AND HE DIDN'T ACCURATELY DOCUMENT IT
OR -- OR PHOTOGRAPH IT; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT TO THIS ON FOUNDATIONAL
GROUNDS AND 352 GROUNDS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND WOULD YOU AGREE, DOCTOR, THAT A
POLICE OFFICER DABBING HIS FOOT IN BLOOD IS -- AND THEN USING HIS
SHOE FOR ANALYSIS WOULDN'T BE THE RECOMMENDED COLLECTION
TECHNIQUE?
A I'M LOST.
Q OKAY.
WELL, YOU GO OUT AND LECTURE POLICE OFFICERS?
A YES, SIR.
Q LET'S SAY A POLICE OFFICER RAISES HIS HAND, HE IS IN
THE AUDIENCE. "DR. LEE, IF I DON'T HAVE ANY SWATCHES OR I DON'T
HAVE ANY BINDLES TO SCRAPE OFF THE BLOOD, CAN I JUST DAB MY FOOT
IN IT AND SUBMIT MY SHOE FOR ANALYSIS?"
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION, ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, NO
FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WOULD YOU TELL THE OFFICER, "WELL,
I DON'T RECOMMEND THAT"?
A I PROBABLY TELL DON'T DAB, JUST GIVE ME YOUR SHOES
AND DON'T DO IT NEXT TIME.
Q OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
SO EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE A BIG MISTAKE IN TERMS OF
RECOGNITION, IN TERMS OF PRESERVATION, DOCUMENTATION, COLLECTION,
IDENTIFICATION, WE CAN STILL DO COMPARISON, WE CAN STILL DO
INDIVIDUALIZATION; IS THAT CORRECT, IN MY HYPOTHETICAL?
A YOU GOING TO BE ON SHAKY GROUND BECAUSE UNLESS WE
RECOGNIZE EVERYTHING WHERE WE CAN DO PARTIAL RECONSTRUCTION.
Q WE PROBABLY CAN'T DO RECONSTRUCTION?
A CANNOT DO A COMPLETE RECONSTRUCTION.
MR. GOLDBERG: IF I MAY APPROACH FOR A SECOND.
Q SO IN MY HYPOTHETICAL WE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO --
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, MR. GOLDBERG. YOU ARE BLOCKING
JUROR NO. 7.
Q WE BOTCHED PRESERVATION DOCUMENTATION AND COLLECTION
IN THE HYPOTHETICAL.
IDENTIFICATION WE NAILED, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q COMPARISON WE NAILED?
A YES.
Q CORRECT?
INDIVIDUALIZATION DEPENDS ON HOW MANY PROBLEMS?
A RIGHT.
Q OKAY. RECONSTRUCTION PROBABLY NOT?
A YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q SO DOCTOR, IF WE WANTED TO CHANGE THE TITLE OF THE
CHART FROM "STEPS IN FORENSIC EXAMINATION" TO "GARBAGE IN,
GARBAGE OUT," THAT WOULD BE INCORRECT FROM A SCIENTIFIC
STANDPOINT, WOULDN'T IT?
A NO, YOU CANNOT CHANGE MY TITLE.
Q OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD.
A BUT GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT, THAT IS A COMMON THING I
USE IN LECTURE. YOU COLLECT A LOT OF GARBAGE FROM THE CRIME
SCENE. LABORATORY SCIENTIST, MY REPORT GOING TO LIKE GARBAGE.
YOU DON'T REALLY DON'T KNOW WHERE IT COME FROM, WHAT IS GOING TO
HAPPEN, LIKE A GARBAGE REPORT.
YOU HAVE TO DO A SO-CALLED TOTAL TEAM APPROACH.
EVERYBODY HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER DO THE BEST JOB.
Q RIGHT. BUT KNOWN CASES, JUST AS THE ONE I RELATED,
SOMETIMES -- I WON'T SAY THAT YOU CAN SAVE THE CASE, BUT YOU CAN
STILL GET SOME VERY MEANINGFUL TEST RESULTS, VERY MEANINGFUL
EVIDENCE?
A YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOW, IF WE CHANGED OUR HYPOTHETICAL AGAIN, DR. LEE,
SEE THAT THE POLICE OFFICER PHOTOGRAPHED THE BLOODSTAIN PROPERLY
--
A UH-HUH.
Q -- BEFORE HE STEPPED IN IT, THEN WE MIGHT EVEN BE
ABLE TO DO SOME RECONSTRUCTION AS WELL; IS THAT TRUE, LIMITED?
A LIMITED.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I WILL AGAIN OBJECT
TO -- UNLESS THERE IS FACTS IN EVIDENCE, I THINK THE
HYPOTHETICALS AND CHANGES HAVE NO BASIS IN FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOCTOR, WHEN I WAS QUESTIONING YOU
A LITTLE WHILE AGO, YOU WERE
TALKING -- I THINK THAT YOU SAID SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT THAT YOU
WOULDN'T RECOMMEND SOMEONE USING THEIR HANDS TO TOUCH THE
SWATCHES TO SEE WHETHER
THEY WERE DRY?
A YES.
Q BUT IF WE HAD SOMEONE WHO DID THAT, AND LET'S SAY OUR
SAME POLICE OFFICER, OUR NEW POLICE OFFICER WHO IS NEW, OH, MY
HEAVENS, NOT ONLY DID I
DO ALL THOSE OTHER THINGS, I ALSO TOUCHED THE SWATCHES WITH MY
HANDS --
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS FOUNDATION, FACTS NOT IN
EVIDENCE; SWATCHES.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, WOULD YOUR PROCEDURE THERE
BE THAT YOU WOULD TAKE A BLOOD SAMPLE FROM THE POLICE OFFICER,
CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU WOULD TEST HIS -- DEPENDING ON WHAT TESTING
YOU WERE DOING, YOU MIGHT DO CONVENTIONAL SEROLOGY, YOU MIGHT DO
PCR AND RFLP, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND YOU WOULD STILL THEN TEST THE EVIDENCE; IS THAT
TRUE?
A YES. I WILL TEST THE EVIDENCE WITH THE CONTROL. IF
SOMEBODY TOUCH IT, THE BODY CELL MAY CONTAMINATE TO THE EVIDENCE.
THAT IS ONE POSSIBILITY.
SECOND, ONLY FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE INDIVIDUAL MAY
HAVE A CUT, SOME HEPATITIS OR AIDS OR OTHER VIRUS MAY INFECT THE
INDIVIDUAL, SO TOUCHING, NOT ONLY IS A CONTAMINATION, ALSO
PROTECTION.
IF HAVE SOME BODY MATERIAL TRANSFER TO THAT SAMPLE,
NOW YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A CONTAMINATED SAMPLE.
WE HAVE TO HAVE A KNOWN CONTROL COMPARE, TRY TO
RESOLVE, SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
Q AND ALTHOUGH THINGS LIKE THAT AREN'T SUPPOSED TO
HAPPEN, EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE THERE ARE CASES WHERE SOMETHING LIKE
THAT DOES OCCUR?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT THE SOCKS BEING PACKAGED
TOGETHER IN AN ENVELOPE AND I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY YOUR
TESTIMONY ON THIS TOPIC.
IS THE PACKAGING -- LET'S SAY THAT YOU HAVE TWO SOCKS
AT A CRIME SCENE AND YOU COLLECT THEM TOGETHER AND YOU PUT THEM
IN THE SAME BAG TOGETHER.
A YES.
Q IS IT YOUR POSITION THAT THERE COULD BE A TRANSFER
>FROM ONE SOCK TO ANOTHER SOCK?
A COULD BE.
Q OKAY.
AND THAT TRANSFER COULD BE HAIR AND TRACE?
A ALSO COULD BE BIOLOGICAL MATERIAL.
Q IF THE SOCKS ARE WET AT THE TIME THEY ARE COLLECTED?
A IF THE SOCKS ARE WET, IF HAVE SOME BODY TISSUES OR
BODY MATERIAL CAN CAUSE A TRANSFER.
Q ARE YOU GOING TO EXPECT A TRANSFER, IN YOUR
EXPERIENCE, AT THAT TIME IF THE SOCKS ARE DRY?
A IF HAVE DRY SKIN, TISSUE, THOSE YOU DON'T NEED ANY
WET MATERIAL. IF IT IS BLOODSTAIN, SOMETIME THIS TOUCH CAN HAVE
A TRACE TRANSFER. IF IT IS WET, YOU DEFINITELY GOING TO EXPECT
TRANSFER.
Q IS PACKAGING THE SOCKS TOGETHER THE WAY THAT I JUST
DESCRIBED GOING TO CHANGE THE DNA TYPE ON THE SOCKS THAT WAS
DEPOSITED THERE?
A I CANNOT SAY SPECIFICALLY WILL RELATE TO THIS CASE,
BUT IF A CASE, FOR EXAMPLE, A SIMPLE EXAMPLE, LET'S SAY ABO
TYPING, THE VICTIM IS TYPE A, THE DECEDENT IS TYPE B. IF HAVE A
TRANSFER, OUR READING GOING TO BE TYPE AB, A MIXTURE.
WHAT AB MEANS COULD BE AN AB TYPE. THERE ARE PEOPLE
AB TYPE. THERE COULD BE A MIXTURE OF A AND B. IN OTHER WORDS,
THE INTERPRETATION GETS SO COMPLICATED NOW. SOMETIME POSSIBLE TO
RESOLVE; OTHER TIMES JUST IMPOSSIBLE. YOU JUST CALL IT COULD BE
A MIXTURE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET ME MAKE THE HYPOTHETICAL A LITTLE BIT MORE
SPECIFIC THEN.
LET'S SAY THAT IN OUR HYPOTHETICAL WE HAVE A 15-PROBE
RFLP MATCH --
A UH-HUH.
Q -- ON ONE OF THE STAINS ON OUR HYPOTHETICAL SOCKS
THAT WERE PACKAGED TOGETHER AT THE TIME THEY WERE COLLECTED.
A YES, RIGHT.
Q DOES PACKAGING AT THE TIME THAT THEY WERE COLLECTED
CHANGE THE DNA TYPE?
A IN THEORY SHOULDN'T; HOWEVER, IF LET'S SAY
HYPOTHETICAL BECAUSE A LOT OF IMPOSSIBLE, LET'S SAY JUST HAPPEN,
I HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BAND, I HAVE A HOMOZYGOTE OR HETEROZYGOTE
-- LET'S CALL THE BAND A HETEROZYGOTE, TWO BANDS INSTEAD OF ONE,
IT IS REMOTE, ALMOST REMOTE, BUT DO HAVE A POSSIBILITY TWO
INDIVIDUAL, EACH ONE HAVE ONE BAND MIXED TOGETHER BECOME TWO
BANDS.
Q OKAY.
NOW, IF WE KNOW THE CONTRIBUTORS TO THE BIOLOGICAL
EVIDENCE ON THAT SOCK AND LET'S SAY WE KNOW THERE IS MORE THAN
ONE DONOR --
A UH-HUH.
Q -- TO THE BLOOD ON THE TWO SOCKS --
A UH-HUH.
Q -- THEN WE CAN ELIMINATE SOME OF THOSE MIXTURE
PROBLEMS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A IF WE HAVE A COMPLETE PROFILE MAYBE WE CAN BE ABLE TO
DO THAT.
Q AND WOULD YOU AGREE THAT EVEN IF THE TWO SOCKS ARE
PACKAGED TOGETHER, A 15-PROBE MATCH WOULD BE AN EXTREMELY
SIGNIFICANT PIECE OF EVIDENCE?
A IF IT IS GENUINE, THAT IS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF
EVIDENCE.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, DR. LEE, JUST VERY BRIEFLY ON
THE ISSUE OF COLLECTING CLOTHES AND THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO A
DIFFERENT TOPIC.
IS IT YOUR POSITION THAT IN TRAINING POLICE OFFICERS
THAT WHERE CLOTHES ARE IN A PILE, FOR EXAMPLE, A NUMBER OF
DIFFERENT ARTICLES OF CLOTHES, THEY SHOULD IN FACT COLLECT THE
CLOTHES AS A GROUP AND PACKAGE THEM TOGETHER IN THE SAME PACKAGE?
IS THAT THE WAY THAT YOU TRAIN THEM?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
SO THERE IS NOT AN ABSOLUTE THAT YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO
PACKAGE THE CLOTHING SEPARATELY?
A IF THEY ARE SEPARATE, YOU SHOULD PACKAGE SEPARATE.
IF YOU HAVE CLOTHING ON TOP OF EACH OTHER, OR MINGLED TOGETHER,
FOR EXAMPLE, CERTAIN PEOPLE TAKE OFF THEIR PANTS, THE UNDERPANT
COME WITH IT ALTOGETHER, YOU DON'T HAVE TO SEPARATE THEM IN THE
CRIME SCENE, YOU SHOULD COLLECT AS ONE GROUP.
Q AND WOULD YOU AGREE THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE SOCK
PHOTOS THAT YOU HAVE SEEN IN THIS CASE, IN YOUR ANALYSIS OF THE
SOCK, WE COULD NEVER EXCLUDE THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE SOCK CAME
INTO CONTACT WITH ONE ANOTHER PRIOR TO BEING COLLECTED ANYWAY?
A I ONLY CAN TESTIFY WHAT I SEE. I SAW THE PICTURE,
THERE IS TWO SOCKS SEPARATE.
Q RIGHT.
A CLEARLY. BEFORE THAT, I DON'T KNOW.
Q THANK YOU.
NOW, THE -- GETTING BACK JUST TO OUR CHART, DO YOU
HAVE ANOTHER CHART THAT YOU SOMETIMES USE IN EXPLAINING THE
CONCEPT OF CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION CALLED YOUR FOUR-WAY
TRANSFER THEORY THAT IS CONTAINED IN THE -- EXCUSE ME.
I THINK IT IS FOUR-WAY LINKAGE. I GOT IT WRONG.
THAT HAS BECOME AN INTERNATIONAL WELL-KNOWN FOUR-WAY
LINKAGE THEORY?
A THAT IS ONE OF MY THEORY, YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
CAN WE MARK AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER, IT WILL BE
591, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
YOU HAVE GIVEN A COPY OF THIS ITEM TO MR. SCHECK?
MR. GOLDBERG: UMM, I DON'T KNOW IF WE GAVE HIM A COPY OR
WHETHER WE JUST SHOWED IT THIS MORNING.
(PEO'S 591 FOR ID = DOCUMENT)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: BUT IT IS ALSO --
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE MR.
SCHECK A COPY OF THE -- I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE IT TO HIM, I'M
GOING TO LET HIM BORROW THE PAGE IN THE BOOK.
MR. SCHECK: THAT IS OKAY.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED.
THIS IS A SLIDE YOU HAD MADE UP?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND DR. LEE, IS THIS EXHIBIT THAT
WE HAVE JUST MARKED AS "HENRY LEE'S FOUR-WAY LINKAGE THEORY," A
--
A I WISH ONLY ONE HENRY LEE. THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE
CALLED HENRY LEE. I JUST FOUND OUT IN L.A. THE TELEPHONE BOOKS A
LOT OF HENRY LEE.
Q OKAY.
IS THIS A SUMMARY OF YOUR CONCEPT OF FOUR-WAY
LINKAGE?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND IS IT TRUE THAT THIS IS THE GOAL OF CRIME SCENE
PROCESSING?
A YES.
Q SO IF WE ARE -- IF A CRIMINALIST GOES OUT TO A CRIME
SCENE, WHAT HE IS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IS THE IDEA OF -- I'M
SORRY -- WHAT HE OR SHE IS TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IS THE IDEA OF
FOUR-WAY LINKAGE?
A YES.
Q CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS TO THE LADIES AND
GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY.
THE WITNESS: WITH A POINTER, YOUR HONOR, OR IF IS --
MR. GOLDBERG: I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A POINTER.
THE COURT: NO, WE DON'T HAVE THAT WORKING RIGHT NOW.
THE WITNESS: THE CRIME SCENE --
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK THAT WE CAN USE THE TELESTRATOR.
THE WITNESS: JUST THE POINTER IS FINE.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
THE WITNESS: ANY INVESTIGATION INVOLVE FOUR IMPORTANT
ELEMENTS.
ONE IS THE SCENE, THE CRIME SCENE ITSELF HAS TO BE IN
FACT PRESERVED.
ANYTIME HAVE A CRIME, HAVE A VICTIM, SO VICTIM ITSELF
BECOME A CRIME SCENE. FOR EXAMPLE, A HIT AND RUN CASE, A
PEDESTRIAN GOT HIT, THE PEDESTRIAN'S BODY BECOME A CRIME SCENE.
A RAPE CASE, SAME THING. THE RAPE VICTIM BECOME A
CRIME SCENE.
OF COURSE THE SUSPECT WHO PERSON OR PERSONS COMMIT
THE CRIME BECOME A CRIME SCENE ITSELF.
AND PHYSICAL EVIDENCE SUCH AS GUNS, SHOEPRINT, HAIR,
SOMETIME EARRING CAN BECOME A PIECE OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, TIRE
TRACK.
ALL THOSE FOUR AREA AS A GOOD INVESTIGATOR, GOOD
CRIMINALIST, WE HAVE TO HAVE A CONCEPT OF THIS BACK IN OUR MIND.
WHEN YOU WALK THROUGH THE CRIME SCENE YOU SHOULD
UNDERSTAND THIS NATURE.
TO LINK YOU NEED THE FOUR-WAY LINKAGE. YOU CAN LINK
THE SUSPECT TO THE SCENE IF YOU FIND CERTAIN CRUCIAL PHYSICAL
EVIDENCE.
ALSO YOU CAN LINK THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE BACK TO THE
SUSPECT OR SUSPECTS. ALSO YOU CAN LINK THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE TO
THE VICTIM.
SO THIS FOUR-WAY LINKAGE IS RATHER IMPORTANT BY USING
SAME ANALOGY TO CASE, LET'S SAY, A HIT AND RUN CASE.
ON THAT STREET WE HAVE A SCENE. AT THE SCENE YOU CAN
FIND BLOOD, YOU CAN FIND TIRE TRACK, YOU CAN FIND GLASS, METAL,
SOIL.
THE VICTIM'S BODY TAKE TO THE HOSPITAL. ON HIS CHEST
MAYBE WE FIND TIRE TRACK. ON HIS CLOTHING WE MAY FIND IMPRINT
PATTERN. MAYBE HAVE GLASS FRAGMENT.
THE VEHICLE ITSELF BECOME A PHYSICAL EVIDENCE WHICH
-- SUCH AS A BROKEN LENS, LOST -- OF COURSE IDEALLY LOST AN
MUFFLER, WE CAN PICK UP THE MUFFLER, AND IT PHYSICALLY FIT, YOU
CAN HAVE A LINK.
AND THE SUSPECT, OF COURSE IF THE SUSPECT AFTER HIT
AND RUN STOPPED, STEP IN THE BLOOD, NOW WE HAVE A FOOTPRINT. WE
CAN LINK THE SUSPECT.
SO THIS SO-CALLED FOUR-WAY LINKAGE YOU HAVE TO ALWAYS
CONSIDER ALL THE POSSIBILITIES.
Q DOCTOR, CAN WE PERHAPS USE A SIMPLER ANALOGY OR FACT
PATTERN. LET'S SAY THAT WE HAVE A CRIME SCENE.
A YES.
Q LET'S SAY IT IS A ROBBERY.
A YES.
Q JUST SO WE ARE UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT.
AND THERE IS AN ARTICLE OF CLOTHING AT THE SCENE THAT
HAS A HAIR THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SUSPECT THAT HE DROPPED AT
THE CRIME SCENE.
A YES.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I THINK AT THIS POINT IT IS
FOUNDATIONAL, 352.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND ON THAT SAME ARTICLE OF
CLOTHING THERE IS ALSO A HAIR THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE VICTIM.
A YES.
Q CAN YOU EXPLAIN HOW THAT WOULD WORK WITH YOUR
FOUR-WAY LINKAGE THEORY?
A LET'S SAY PIECE OF GARMENT WHICH WE DO HAVE CASES,
FOR EXAMPLE, ROBBERY OR BURGLARY, GETTING TOO HOT, THEY TAKE OFF
THEIR JACKET, SOMEHOW LEFT IN A HURRY LEAVING THE SCENE.
WE FOUND HAIRS. THAT HAIR CAN LINK TO A VICTIM.
THAT HAIR ALSO CAN LINK TO A SUSPECT. THIS HAIR ALSO CAN LINK TO
A CRIME SCENE.
Q AND IF THE SUSPECT AND VICTIM HAIR IS FOUND ON THE
SAME ITEM, IT ALSO LINKS THE VICTIM TO THE SUSPECT?
A YES. LINK DEPEND ON THE CONDITION OF THE HAIR,
DEPENDS ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS HAIR SO-CALLED SECONDARY TRANSFER.
Q AND IT WOULD ALSO, IF THE CLOTHING IS FOUND AT THE
CRIME SCENE, LINK THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE UP TO THE SCENE?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND IS IT TRUE, DR. LEE -- I THINK WE ARE FINISHED
WITH THAT.
IS IT TRUE, DR. LEE, THAT THE HALLMARK OF A CRIME
SCENE IDENTIFICATION IS WHETHER OR NOT WE WERE SUCCESSFUL IN
ESTABLISHING FOUR-WAY LINKAGE?
A YES.
Q NOW, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IT IS VERY OFTEN THAT VERY
EXPERIENCED CAPABLE CRIMINALISTS OR CRIME SCENE TECHNICIANS OR
POLICE WILL GO OUT TO A CRIME SCENE AND VERY CAREFULLY
SYSTEMATICALLY PROCESS THE CRIME SCENE, BUT THEY CAN'T ESTABLISH
FOUR-WAY LINKAGE?
A YES. DO HAVE CASES, EITHER FAILURE OF RECOGNITION OR
FAILURE OF ANY OF THOSE STEPS, AND SOMETIME MAYBE JUST NOT EXIST.
Q AND IS IT ALSO TRUE THAT SOMETIMES A LESS CAREFUL
PROCESSING OF THE CRIME SCENE, LESS CAPABLE PROCESSING OF THE
CRIME SCENE CAN, NEVERTHELESS, RESULT IN FOUR-WAY LINKAGE?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, LET'S GET TO THE ISSUE, DR. LEE, OF THE BRONCO
THAT YOU TESTIFIED TO A LITTLE BIT IN YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY.
NOW, DID YOU EVER PHYSICALLY INSPECT THE BRONCO
YOURSELF?
A NO. AS I INDICATE TO THE JURY, I NEVER PHYSICALLY
PERSONALLY LOOK AT THE BRONCO.
Q AND WERE YOU PRESENT -- EXCUSE ME.
DID YOU KNOW THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH OF THE BRONCO
THAT WAS DONE ON AUGUST 26TH OF 1994?
A I DON'T REMEMBER SPECIFIC DATE.
Q OKAY.
WERE YOU GENERALLY AWARE OF SOME SEARCH OF THE BRONCO
THAT WAS DONE IN AUGUST OF '94 AT WHICH SOME DEFENSE PEOPLE AND
SOME --
A YES.
Q -- PROSECUTION PEOPLE WERE PRESENT?
A YES.
Q AND DID SOMEONE DISALLOW YOU FROM COMING THERE?
A NOT EXACTLY THE SITUATION DISALLOW ME. I ONLY CAN
WORK ON MY SPARE TIME ON WEEKENDS.
Q OKAY.
A I CANNOT COME HERE -- I HAVE AN OFFICIAL DUTY ALSO.
THE WORLD CANNOT STOP JUST BECAUSE THIS CASE.
Q OKAY.
SO WITH RESPECT TO YOUR ANALYSIS IN THIS CASE, IS IT
TRUE THAT PART OF THE LIMITATION WAS YOUR OWN BUSY SCHEDULE?
A YES, BECAUSE THE DAY I WANTED WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO
ME, AND THE DAY THEY WANTED I CANNOT COME HERE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE AMOUNT OF BLOOD THAT WE ARE
GOING TO EXPECT TO FIND IN AN ITEM SUCH AS THE BRONCO, DO YOU
AGREE WITH THE IDEA THAT WE CAN ONLY INTERPRET THE BLOODSTAINS
THAT ARE PHYSICALLY PRESENT AND THAT NO ONE SHOULD SPECULATE AS
TO WHY A DEFENDANT WAS NOT BLOOD STAINED EXCEPT IN THE MOST
UNUSUAL CASES?
A YES, IN GENERAL.
Q OKAY.
AND DO YOU AGREE, SIR, THAT IN THE FORENSIC
SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE THAT THERE IS A LOT OF LITERATURE THAT
INDICATES:
"NUMEROUS REFERENCES STATE ASSAILANT IS NOT
ALWAYS BLOOD STAINED AS A RESULT OF THEIR ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN
THE BLOOD LETTING EVENTS."
A THAT AGAIN IN GENERAL DEPENDS ON TYPE OF CRIME AND
WHAT CONDITION OF THE CRIME, WHAT TYPE OF PHYSICAL FORCE
INVOLVED.
Q DO YOU ALSO AGREE THAT FORENSIC SCIENTISTS HAVE TO
INTERPRET WHAT THEY SEE AS OPPOSED TO WHAT THEY DON'T SEE?
A I DISAGREE THAT. ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE NOT NECESSARILY
WASN'T THERE. ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE MAY BE WASN'T THERE; MAYBE
SOMEBODY JUST NOT EXPERIENCED ENOUGH OR INCAPABLE OR INABILITY TO
SEE THAT.
Q OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
HAVE YOU READ MR. MAC DONNEL'S ARTICLE ON THE
"ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE"?
A (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)
Q "ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE"?
A I'M A CHINESE. TAKE ME A WHILE TO THINK ABOUT THIS
DOUBLE-TALK.
ABSENCE --
Q LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET THAT FOR YOU
AND --
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY. I PUT SOME LINES ON MY COPY.
MAY I APPROACH THE WITNESS?
THE COURT: CAN YOU SHOW MR. SCHECK?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I APPROACH?
THE COURT: YES.
MR. SCHECK: MAY I?
MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, WHY DON'T YOU JUST TAKE A QUICK
LOOK AT THAT AND SEE IF THAT REFRESHES YOUR RECOLLECTION IF YOU
HAVE READ THAT ARTICLE?
A I HAVE READ A LOT OF ARTICLE. WHICH PART DO YOU WANT
ME TO READ?
Q YOU DON'T HAVE TO READ IT. I JUST WANT TO SEE IF
LOOKING AT IT SILENTLY TO YOURSELF IF YOU RECOGNIZE IT?
A OKAY.
(WITNESS COMPLIES.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DR. LEE, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE ARTICLE?
THE WITNESS: SORT OF. I DON'T REMEMBER EVERY LINE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: I KNOW, THERE IS AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT
OF FORENSIC SCIENCE LITERATURE OUT THERE, ISN'T THERE?
A YES.
Q AND DO YOU AGREE GENERALLY WITH THE FINDINGS OF MAC
DONNEL IN THIS PARTICULAR ARTICLE?
A IN GENERAL, YES, BUT THE SPECIFIC EXAMPLE HE GIVE
MAYBE NOT TOTALLY COVER THE WHOLE SITUATION.
Q OKAY.
BUT IN GENERAL DO YOU AGREE WITH THE PROPOSITION THAT
WE REALLY CAN'T INFER THAT SOMEONE CANNOT PARTICIPATE IN A CRIME
INVOLVING A BLOODY EVENT SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE BLOOD ON
THEM, ON THEIR CLOTHING OR ON THEIR PERSON?
A AGAIN, AS I INDICATE BEFORE, DEPEND ON SITUATION.
ONE EXAMPLE SAID BEAT UP A RABBIT. RABBIT, HUMAN TWO DIFFERENT
SCENE. YOU BEAT UP A RABBIT, DID NOT GET BLOOD SPATTER ON YOUR
CLOTHING. DOESN'T MEAN YOU BEAT UP A HUMAN DID NOT GET BLOOD ON
YOUR BODY, AND I GUESS DEPENDS ON SITUATION.
IF YOU STANDING A DISTANCE, FIRING A SHOT, GUNSHOT,
THIRTY FEET AWAY, KILL SOMEBODY, I DON'T EXPECT TO FIND BLOOD
SPATTER ON SOMEBODY'S CLOTHING. THAT IS CORRECT.
HOWEVER, IF YOU PUT THE GUN NEXT TO SOMEBODY'S HEAD,
FIRE A SHOT, NOTHING, NO CLOTHING, BLOCK THE BACK SPATTER, I
EXPECT TO FIND SOME BLOOD SPATTER, SO IT VARIES.
I CANNOT IN CERTAIN SENSES, CORRECT. IN OTHER
SITUATION MAYBE NOT.
Q OKAY.
ISN'T THERE A LOT OF FORENSIC SCIENCE LITERATURE OUT
THERE THAT GENERALLY CAUTIONS THE FORENSIC SCIENTISTS WHO ARE
INVOLVED IN BLOOD SPATTER THAT YOU CAN'T REALLY SAY THAT SOMEONE
DIDN'T PARTICIPATE IN A CRIME JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT COVERED
IN BLOOD EVEN IF IT IS SOMETHING LIKE A STABBING?
A YES, SIR.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, PERHAPS I CAN MARK THE ARTICLE
AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER. I GUESS THAT WOULD BE 592.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 592.
(PEO'S 592 FOR ID = ARTICLE)
MR. GOLDBERG: I WILL PUT A 592 ON IT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, DO YOU AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT
THAT WE CAN ONLY INTERPRET THE BLOODSTAINS THAT ARE PHYSICALLY
PRESENT AND THAT NO ONE SHOULD SPECULATE AS TO WHY A DEFENDANT
WAS NOT BLOOD STAINED EXCEPT IN THE MOST UNUSUAL CASES?
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION. IS HE READING FROM SOMETHING, YOUR
HONOR?
MR. GOLDBERG: THESE ARE MY NOTES.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: AGAIN, GENERALLY WE ONLY CAN INTERPRET A
CERTAIN PATTERN WHICH WE CAN SEE. IF YOU DID NOT SEE IT, NOT
NECESSARY WASN'T THERE. YOU CANNOT INTERPRET SOMETHING YOU DID
NOT SEE. THEN YOU SAY NOT THERE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT I WANT TO KNOW, DOCTOR, IS DO
YOU AGREE WITH THAT PARTICULAR QUOTE THAT I JUST READ?
A IN GENERAL.
Q OKAY.
NOW, HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED -- LET ME ASK A COUPLE
OTHER QUESTIONS FIRST.
IS IT TRUE GENERALLY THAT STABBINGS, GENERALLY
SPEAKING, INVOLVE LESS BLOOD THAN BEATINGS?
A NO. STABBING DEPENDS WHERE YOU STAB. YOU CAN HAVE A
LOT OF BLOOD. BEATING DEPENDS WHERE YOU BEAT. IF YOU BEAT
SOMEBODY'S REAR END, WHEN I WAS YOUNG MY MOTHER USED TO
DISCIPLINE ME, I DON'T SEE BLOOD SPATTER, SO ALL DIFFERENT.
Q WELL, I'M TALKING ABOUT BEATING DEATHS.
A BEATING DEATH?
Q WHERE SOMEONE WAS --
A BEAT THE HEAD, BEAT THE BODY, IT IS ALL DIFFERENT.
Q LET'S SAY THAT WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE SOMEONE HAS
BEATEN ANOTHER PERSON TO DEATH IN THE HEAD WITH A BRICK.
THE COURT: THIS IS NOT PARTICULARLY RELEVANT, COUNSEL.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, IT GOES TO THE BRONCO AND A NUMBER OF
OTHER ITEMS THAT THE DEFENSE GOT INTO.
THE COURT: THE CAUSE OF DEATH HERE IS CLEAR.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, I'LL JUST --
THE COURT: LET'S PROCEED.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
NOW, SIR, HAVE YOU HAD SOME CASES YOURSELF IN YOUR
OWN CAREER AS A FORENSIC SCIENTIST WHERE THE CRIME SCENE WAS
EXTREMELY BLOODY?
A YES, SIR.
Q YET -- YET THE SUSPECT DID NOT HAVE A LOT OF BLOOD ON
HIS CLOTHING?
A OFF MY HEAD I DON'T REALLY REMEMBER EVERY CRIME SCENE
I WENT. IN GENERAL MORE BLOOD, I SHOULD EXPECT TO FIND SOME
BLOOD ON THE SUSPECT.
AGAIN, DEPENDS ON SITUATION. YOU HAVE A SHOOTING AT
A DISTANCE, YES, THE VICTIM LYING THERE, HAVE A LOT OF BLOOD.
SUSPECT WITH A LONG GUN, YOU DON'T EXPECT TO FIND THAT. THOSE
ARE CORRECT.
IF A CLOSED COMPACT SITUATION, MAYBE DIFFERENT.
Q OKAY.
NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION, DR.
LEE, YOU SAW SOME SPOTS IN THE FOYER; IS THAT CORRECT, OF BLOOD?
A YES.
Q AND CAN YOU DETERMINE THE DIFFERENCE, AS A FORENSIC
SCIENTIST, BETWEEN A ONE-CENTIMETER CUT AND A TWO-CENTIMETER CUT
BASED UPON THOSE SIX SPOTS?
A IF THE CUT INTO A BLOOD VESSEL, MAYBE; IF NOT, I
CANNOT TELL YOU.
Q SO IF WE ARE DEALING WITH A CUT THAT DID NOT GO INTO
A BLOOD VESSEL, THEN WE CANNOT SAY FROM THE NUMBER OF DOTS THAT
YOU HAD HOW BIG THE CUT WAS?
A NO, JUST CAN SAY A SMALL CUT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, IN ADDITION TO THAT, DOCTOR, WHEN YOU WERE AT
THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION DID YOU HAVE OCCASION TO FIND ANY ITEM
THAT IN YOUR FORENSIC OPINION WAS CONSISTENT OR APPEARED TO BE
BLOOD IN THE AREA OF AIR CONDITIONING NEAR KATO KAELIN'S HOUSE?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU BELIEVED THAT -- THAT
YOU THOUGHT APPEARED TO BE BLOOD?
A I TEST SOME DOORKNOBS, SOME SINK TRAPS AND AIR
CONDITIONER.
Q I'M JUST ASKING ABOUT THE AIR CONDITIONER.
A I SAW IN DIFFERENT PLACES.
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT IS ALL RIGHT, YOUR HONOR. I WILL MOVE
ON. I THINK HE HAS ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
Q NOW, SIR, WITH RESPECT TO THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE
LOCATION, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT YOU DID
IN TERMS OF THE RECONSTRUCTION AT THAT LOCATION.
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND I WOULD LIKE TO MARK --
Q WELL, FIRST OF ALL, LET ME ASK YOU, WERE YOUR
OPINIONS THAT YOU OFFERED REGARDING THE BUNDY LOCATION BASED UPON
WHAT YOU SAW IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS OR DID YOU ALSO TAKE INTO
CONSIDERATION THE TESTIMONY OF PATHOLOGISTS IN THIS CASE?
A WHAT MY OBSERVATION REGARDS TO IMPRINT IS MY DIRECT
OBSERVATION ON JUNE 25TH ON THE TILE. ALSO LOOK AT SOME PHYSICAL
EVIDENCE.
REGARDS TO THIS CLOSED-IN AREA, BASICALLY LOOKING AT
PHOTOGRAPH, THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PATTERN, THE LOCATION OF
SCENE.
REGARD TO SOME OTHER INFORMATION, THEY DID RELATE TO
ME SOME NUMBER OF CUT OR STAB OR INJURY.
Q OKAY. LET ME JUST MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR.
SO IS IT YOUR POSITION THAT AS A FORENSIC SCIENTIST
LOOKING AT THE BUNDY LOCATION YOU HAVE TO SET ASIDE WHAT THE
PATHOLOGISTS SAY AND JUST CONCENTRATE ON WHAT YOU SEE?
A AND THE MAJORITY PART. OF COURSE I CONSIDERED A
NUMBER OF INJURY. NOT ONLY ONE THING I LOOK AT. I DID NOT LOOK
AT STOMACH CONTENTS, LIVIDITY OR POSTMORTEM CHANGE.
Q OKAY.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, THINGS THAT YOU CAN SEE YOURSELF
IN PICTURES?
A RIGHT, RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, I WOULD LIKE TO MARK AS PEOPLE'S NEXT
IN ORDER AN EXHIBIT THAT IS GOING TO BE 593 AND IT IS A BOARD OF
THE BUNDY LOCATION CONCENTRATING ON WHAT WE'VE REFERRED TO IN
THIS CASE AS THE CAGED AREA AND SOME PHOTOGRAPHS.
YOUR HONOR, ONE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS IS PERHAPS ONE
THAT SHOULD NOT BE SUITED FOR DISPLAY.
ALL RIGHT.
(PEO'S 593 FOR ID = POSTERBOARD)
THE COURT: MR. BANCROFT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WHY DON'T YOU SET THE EASEL UP
HERE.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. BANCROFT, STAY OFF THE BOTTOM ROW.
MR. BANCROFT: YES, YOUR HONOR.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION
TO THE EXHIBIT THAT WE'VE MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 593 FOR
IDENTIFICATION, CAN YOU SEE THAT?
THE WITNESS: MAY I STEP DOWN, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES, YOU MAY, DR. LEE?
THE WITNESS: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
YES, I CAN SEE THOSE IN GENERAL.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND, DOCTOR, DO THOSE APPEAR TO BE
THE SAME EXACT PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE USED ON A DEFENSE EXHIBIT
THAT YOU WERE USING TO EXPLAIN TO THE JURY SOME OF THE BLOOD
PATTERN OR BLOOD RECONSTRUCTION ANALYSIS IN THE CASE?
A (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)
Q THE NINE PHOTOGRAPHS YOU USED?
A SOME APPEAR TO BE THE SAME; SOME MAYBE THERE ARE
DIFFERENCES.
Q ARE THERE ANY -- WHICH ARE THE ONES THAT YOU THINK
ARE DIFFERENT?
A THE PICTURE I USE, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS KEY, I DID SEE
SOME REDDISH STAIN; HOWEVER, THIS PICTURE, ONE LOOK AT NOW, I
DON'T SEE ANY REDDISH STAIN.
Q BECAUSE WE ARE GETTING A DIFFERENT VIEW OF THE KEY?
A I HAVE NO IDEA.
Q OKAY.
A AND THIS BOOTS, (INDICATING), THE PICTURE PROVIDE TO
ME HAVE MORE LIKE A BLOODSTAIN, COMPARED TO THIS, YES, I DO SEE
BLOODSTAIN, SOIL MATERIAL, TRACE, BUT MUCH LESS.
AND THIS ONE, (INDICATING), IS A MUCH CLOSER -- IT IS
A CLOSER SHOT, BUT IN GENERAL THIS IS THE SAME.
AND SOME OF THOSE -- THIS, (INDICATING), MUST BE A
SO-CALLED FIRST GENERATION, BETTER PICTURE THAN WHAT I GET IS A
PRINTOUT OF A PRINT.
I WOULD SAY IN GENERAL IT DEPICTS THE SCENE. I
WASN'T THERE. I WASN'T THE ONE TOOK THOSE PICTURES, SO I CAN'T
REALLY COME HERE MISLED YOU, SAY THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I SEE AT
THE CRIME SCENE.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
FOR THE RECORD, THE ONES THAT DR. LEE INDICATED COULD
BE SOMEWHAT DIFFERENT THAN THE PHOTOS THAT HE SAW ARE ON THE
RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THIS EXHIBIT IN WHAT WOULD BE THE EXTREME
RIGHT PORTION AS YOU ARE FACING THE EXHIBIT; THE BOTTOM
PHOTOGRAPH DEPICTING RONALD GOLDMAN'S BOOTS AND THE PHOTOGRAPH
ABOVE THAT DEPICTING THE KEYS AND THE PHOTOGRAPH ABOVE THAT
APPEARS TO BE A CLOSE-UP OF THE CARD THAT HAS ITEM NO. 108 IN IT.
Q IS THAT CORRECT, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW -- BUT OTHER THAN THAT, WE'VE DEPICTED ALL OF THE
AREAS THAT WERE THE SUBJECT OF YOUR TESTIMONY IN TERMS OF THE
RECONSTRUCTION OF WHAT HAPPENED AT THE BUNDY LOCATION; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DR. LEE, COULD YOU USE SOME RED TAPE, IF YOU
HAVE ANY, TO SHOW US WHERE THESE ITEMS ARE ON THE DIAGRAM. I
THINK I HAVE SOME RED TAPE HERE.
A I HAVE SOME.
YOU DON'T HAVE A POLE HERE. BASICALLY IT IS AROUND
HERE, (INDICATING). I DON'T HAVE A DIAGRAM OF BODY, SO I REALLY
CANNOT TELL YOU.
Q OKAY. JUST GIVE US THE --
A GENERAL LOCATION, ALL RIGHT.
Q WHAT ARE YOU POINTING FROM? FROM WHAT TO WHAT?
A THE POLE SHOULD BE LIKE THIS AREA, LANDMARK,
(INDICATING).
Q THE -- YOU HAVE PUT SOME TAPE FROM THE SAPLING?
A RIGHT.
Q OVER TO THE GENERAL LOCATION.
A I CANNOT TELL YOU THE SPECIFIC LOCATION. THIS DIAGRAM
HAS NO WHAT YOU CALL, SAPLING?
Q SAPLING, A SMALL TREE.
HERE, LET ME ASK YOU THIS --
A IS THIS A TREE? IT LOOK LIKE A 2-BY-4 TO ME. IN
FRONT HAVE A POLE.
Q TAKE A CLOSE LOOK. DOES THAT LOOK LIKE A TREE THAT
IS ATTACHED TO A STAKE FOR SUPPORT?
A YEAH.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, MAYBE WE COULD JUST INDICATE -- YOU COULD
INDICATE FOR US THIS FROM THE GATE, THE STAIN.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q OKAY.
YOU ARE CONNECTING TO -- LET'S NOT COVER IT UP.
LET'S GO LIKE THIS.
WOULD THAT BE OKAY?
A SURE.
Q SO YOU HAVE CONNECTED TWO PHOTOGRAPHS; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A RIGHT.
Q AND THOSE ARE THE PHOTOGRAPHS IN THE UPPER RIGHT-HAND
CORNER OF THE EXHIBIT.
CAN YOU CONNECT THIS GATE THAT HAS THE PHOTO CARD 108
IN IT TO WHERE THE GATE WOULD BE, APPROXIMATELY?
A OKAY.
Q AT THE CRIME SCENE?
A IF YOU DRAW THE PICTURE, DIAGRAM WITH THE NUMBER OF
POLE, I WILL TELL YOU EXACTLY. I ONLY GO TELL THAT IS NO. 8
(SIC) HERE IN THE PICTURE. I WOULD SAY APPROXIMATELY IN THIS
LOCATION, (INDICATING).
Q IS THAT A LITTLE CLOSE TO THE CORNER?
A YOU HAVE ONE -- ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX --
SIX.
Q SIX BARS?
A YOU HAVE EIGHT BAR. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PICTURE,
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PICTURE, GIVE YOU A ROUND PROJECTION. THAT
IS CALLED DEPTH OF THE VIEW.
WHEN WE TAKE A PICTURE, THE CLOSER PLACE LOOKS LIKE
BIGGER. THE DISTANCE ONE LIKE A DISTANCE SHORTER.
CAN YOU SEE THE GAP HERE? MUCH BIGGER, (INDICATING).
IN REAL SENSE ALL THOSE GAPS SHOULD BE IDENTICAL.
Q AND WITH RESPECT TO THE PHOTO OF THE KEYS, CAN YOU
CONNECT THAT UP TO THE GENERAL LOCATION?
A YES, SIR.
AGAIN JUST A GENERAL LOCATION. I DON'T HAVE A PLANE
HERE SHOWS ME EXACTLY THE SCENE. I WOULD SAY AROUND HERE,
(INDICATING).
Q SO THAT IS SOMEWHERE -- UNDERSTANDING THIS IS AN
APPROXIMATION OF THE AREA OF WHERE MR. GOLDMAN'S FEET WOULD BE?
A VERY GENERAL. VERY GENERAL.
Q WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD CONNECT UP THE SHOE
-- LET ME THINK. I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD.
A BECAUSE AFTER --
Q LET'S NOT CONNECT THAT, BUT CAN WE CONNECT THE
PHOTOGRAPH THAT HAS PHOTO CARD 119 IN IT?
A AGAIN I HAVE TO MAKE SOME ASSUMPTION THIS IS HERE
AGAIN, (INDICATING), BECAUSE THE PICTURE -- THE DIAGRAM DID NOT
SHOW ME. I WOULD SAY IN THIS GENERAL LOCATION, (INDICATING).
Q SO THAT IS KIND OF LIKE THE POST THAT YOU WOULD
EXPECT THE GATE TO SWING OPENED AND CLOSED ON?
A RIGHT.
Q NOW, DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION, NOW WE ARE GOING TO
MOVE OVER TO THE LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THIS EXHIBIT.
A UH-HUH.
Q WHY DON'T YOU JUST DESCRIBE THIS FOR US ORALLY AND
THEN WE WILL CONNECT IT.
THE GATE PORTION -- EXCUSE ME. GATE IS THE WRONG
WORD. THE FENCE PORTION AT THE BOTTOM?
A YES.
Q WHERE IS THAT?
A THIS LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY TOOK A PICTURE FROM OTHER
SIDE, (INDICATING), OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE LOOK INTO THE FENCE.
FOR EXAMPLE, LET'S SAY JURY BOX HERE IS THE FENCE,
I'M TAKING A PICTURE FROM HERE, NOT INSIDE OF JURY BOX, SO HAS TO
BE OTHER SIDE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, DR. LEE, WOULD IT APPEAR TO YOU
THEN THAT THE PHOTO CARD BEARING 109 IS THE SAME STAIN THAT IS
CONTAINED IN THE LOWER PHOTO ONLY IT
IS THE -- THIS IS FROM THE INSIDE VIEW?
A DEFINITELY DIFFERENT. IT IS SAME LOCATION BUT HERE
SHOWS DIFFERENT STAIN, (INDICATING).
Q YOU MEAN THIS STAIN IN THE BOTTOM PHOTOGRAPH IS NOT
THE SAME AS THIS --
A THIS ONE, (INDICATING), IS THIS, (INDICATING). THIS
DRIPPING, NOT SHOWING IN THIS PHOTO.
Q BECAUSE WE ARE SHOWING --
A HERE HAVE MORE SPATTERINGS ALONG THE COLUMN THAT IS
NOT SHOWING IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, (INDICATING).
Q OKAY.
BUT WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT AT LEAST THE 109
STAIN IS SHOWING THE STAIN WITH THE PHOTO CARD 109 IS SHOWING IN
THE LOWER PHOTOGRAPH?
A BARELY, PARTIALLY.
Q AND FROM THE OTHER SIDE?
A FROM THE OTHER SIDE.
Q WOULD IT BE FAIR THEN FOR US TO LINK THESE TWO
PHOTOGRAPHS UP?
A I WILL TRY, UNLESS WE PUT THE TAPE OTHER SIDE.
Q LET'S TRY TO BLOCK AS LITTLE OF THE PICTURE AS WE
CAN.
A RIGHT, RIGHT.
Q DO YOU WANT ME TO PUT THIS OVER HERE, (INDICATING)?
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q CAN WE JUST TRIM THIS A LITTLE BIT SO IT IS NOT
BLOCKING TOO MUCH OF THE STAIN.
A ACTUALLY WE SHOULD -- IF FOR REAL WE HAVE TO GO OTHER
SIDE.
Q RIGHT.
A NOT THIS SIDE, (INDICATING).
Q AND CAN YOU TELL US WHERE THIS -- THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT
WE ARE SEEING NOW ALSO HAS A STAIN ON THE LOWER PORTION OF THE
RAIL.
IS THAT STAIN THE SAME AS THE 109 STAIN?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
CAN WE CONNECT THOSE -- WELL, I DON'T WANT TO BLOCK
TOO MUCH OF THE -- WITHOUT BLOCKING THE PICTURE, CAN WE CONNECT
THOSE TWO STAINS?
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q SO THE VIEW THAT WE HAVE WITH THE 109 CARD IN IT IS
SIMPLY A CLOSER UP VIEW OF THE VIEW THAT WE HAVE WITH THE 101
CARD THAT SHOWS THE BEEPER WELL; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
AND THEN THE VIEW ABOVE THAT ALSO SHOWS THE BEEPER,
SO CAN WE CONNECT THE TWO BEEPER PHOTOS.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q LET'S NOT BLOCK THAT. LET'S CUT THIS A LITTLE BIT.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q NOW, CAN YOU LOCATE FOR US, USING OUR DIAGRAM, THE
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF THE BEEPER?
A OKAY. NOW, WE KNOW THAT IS POLE NO. 6; HOWEVER,
AGAIN I DON'T KNOW -- NO INDICATION OF A SORT OF A MEASUREMENT.
ALL I CAN SAY, IT IS A ROUND HERE, GENERAL LOCATION,
(INDICATING).
Q COULD THIS BEEPER BE IN THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION --
IF RONALD GOLDMAN'S HEAD WAS UP AGAINST A TREE STUMP THAT IS
DEPICTED IN THE PHOTO THAT HAS THE 101 CARD IN IT, COULD THE
BEEPER BE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO THE BUNDY -- THE BUNDY SIDE OF
THE STREET?
A JUST STRETCH IT A LITTLE BIT.
Q SHOULD WE ADD A LITTLE BIT -- DO YOU WANT TO ADD A
LITTLE BIT MORE TAPE ON THAT?
A THIS IS TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF A TWO-DIMENSIONAL
BACKGROUND. WE TRY TO VISUALIZE A THREE-DIMENSIONAL SETTING, IT
IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE, BUT IN GENERAL PROBABLY THIS LOCATION,
(INDICATING).
IF THIS DIAGRAM GIVE ME NUMBER OF POLE, I CAN TELL
YOU EXACTLY.
Q BUT AT LEAST WE ARE GETTING A GENERAL LOCATION?
A RIGHT, RIGHT.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU FEEL SHOULD BE
CONNECTED UP ON THIS -- HOLD ON FOR A SECOND.
LET ME JUST GIVE YOU A PHOTOGRAPH FIRST, DR. LEE. I
THINK IT HAS BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S -- I WANT TO SHOW HIM
PEOPLE'S 56-D, BUT THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH THAT ALSO SHOULD NOT GO
OUT OVER THE ELMO.
WE ARE GOING TO SHOW YOU A PHOTOGRAPH.
MR. SCHECK: CAN I SEE THAT FIRST?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, I JUST WANT YOU TO TAKE A
LOOK AT THIS PHOTOGRAPH FOR A MOMENT AND TRY TO GET YOURSELF
ORIENTED A LITTLE BIT.
A (WITNESS COMPLIES.)
Q PARTICULARLY ON THE BEEPER.
A THIS BEEPER SHOWS UNDER ALMOST NO. 3 POLE AND HERE
YOU MAY LESS IN BETWEEN HERE NO POLES, THEN YOU HAVE TOO BIG A
GAP, LOOKS LIKE NO. 4 POLE.
Q DR. LEE, IF YOU TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THIS, DOES IT
APPEAR THAT WHAT WE'VE BEEN REFERRING TO AS THE SAPLING IN
PHOTOGRAPH THAT BEARS THE 101 CARD, THAT IS MORE OF A PERSPECTIVE
SHOT THAT THE SAPLING AND THE STAKE ARE BLOCKING ONE OF OUR
POLES?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO WOULD THE BEEPER BE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER BACK
TOWARDS RON GOLDMAN'S BUTTOCKS?
A THAT IS TWO-DIMENSIONAL. LOOKS LIKE THIS PICTURE
COULD BE EVEN LITTLE FURTHER HERE, (INDICATING).
IT IS KIND OF DIFFICULT NOW. IF I GO THAT FAR, HERE
IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE THREE POLES IN THAT LITTLE CORNER AREA.
SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS AREA, SOMETHING WRONG WITH PERSPECTIVE
OF THIS PICTURE.
YOU CAN EAT THE PIE BOTH WAYS.
Q IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THAT WHEN WE ARE INTERPRETING
PHOTOGRAPHS WE HAVE SOME PROBLEMS WITH PERSPECTIVE AND
DISTORTIONS THAT OCCUR?
A EXACTLY.
Q AS A RESULT OF THE PHOTOGRAPHY?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO IS THERE AN AREA WHERE YOU WOULD BE MORE
COMFORTABLE WITH PLACING THIS RED DOT -- THIS RED TAPE THAN WHERE
YOU HAVE IT NOW?
A IF I KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY POLE, IF YOU GIVE ME A
NUMBER, I CAN EVENLY DIVIDE IT UP AND COUNT THE NUMBER OF POLE,
TELL YOU EXACTLY THE LOCATION.
Q WOULD IT BE SAFE TO SAY THAT THE BEEPER APPEARS TO BE
FAR EAST OR AT LEAST EAST OF RONALD GOLDMAN'S SHOULDER?
A THAT DOESN'T MAKE TOO MUCH DIFFERENCE.
Q SO DR. LEE, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT WITH RESPECT
TO ALL OF THE BLOODSTAINS THAT WE REFERRED TO OR THAT YOU
REFERRED TO ON THE BOARD THAT YOU WERE SHOWN BY THE DEFENSE, WHEN
YOU WERE DISCUSSING BUNDY, THAT ALL OF THEM HAPPENED IN AN AREA
THAT IS WEST OF THE -- THE PORTION OF THE FENCE THAT IS PARALLEL
TO BUNDY, THEY ARE WEST OF THERE?
A YES.
Q AND ALL OF THEM ARE SOUTH OF THE FENCE THAT IS
PARALLEL TO THE NEIGHBOR'S YARD?
A WITH THIS PARTICULAR SET OF PICTURE, I DON'T HAVE AN
OVERALL SHOWS THIS PART, (INDICATING). I DID SEE ANOTHER PICTURE
RELATE TO REALLY, SO IN OTHER WORDS, THERE ARE OTHER PATTERNS
WHICH ARE INABILITY FOR ME TO SEE IT.
I ONLY CAN TESTIFY ON THE PICTURE I SAW.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AS TO THE PICTURES THAT YOU SAW, ALL OF THE
BLOODSTAINS ARE TO THE EAST OF --
A WEST.
Q OF --
A WEST. THAT IS THE WEST DIRECTION.
Q OKAY. WELL, I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT TOWARD THE EAST.
A TOWARD THE EAST.
Q OKAY.
ALL OF THE BLOODSTAINS ARE TO THE EAST
OF THE AREA WHERE THE STUMP IS LOCATED?
A NO. THE STUMP IS LOCATED HERE, (INDICATING).
CLEARLY IT IS THE WEST SIDE OF THE STUMP.
Q WHEN I WAS SAYING "STUMP" I WAS REFERRING TO WHAT
APPEARS TO BE --
A OH, OKAY.
A GOOD PORTION IS TO THE EAST. THERE ARE SOME, FOR
EXAMPLE, THIS THREE -- THOSE LITTLE SPATTER DROPS, IT APPEAR TO
BE TO THE WEST OF THE STUMP.
Q SO WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY, DOCTOR, THAT WITH RESPECT
TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU DISCUSSED ON DIRECT EXAMINATION --
A UH-HUH.
Q -- THAT THESE PHOTOGRAPHS AND THE LOCATION OF THE
BLOOD SPATTERS INDICATE THAT THE MURDER OCCURRED IN AN AREA WITH
RESPECT TO RON GOLDMAN ABOUT THE SIZE OF A VERY SMALL WALK-IN
CLOSET?
A LIKE MY HOUSE.
Q MAYBE LIKE MY HOUSE.
A I DON'T KNOW A DEFINITION OF A SMALL WALK-IN CLOSET.
I DO KNOW THIS AREA IS 68 INCHES TOTAL.
IF WE DIVIDED IT BY THE POLE, THEN WE CAN GET THE
NUMBER.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, COULD I JUST --
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
MR. GOLDBERG: COULD I HAVE A FEW MORE MINUTES OR DID YOU
WANT TO BREAK FOR LUNCH NOW?
THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE JUST A FEW MORE MINUTES?
MR. GOLDBERG: YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO TIE UP THIS LAST --
I JUST WANTED TO --
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET'S FINISH THE EXHIBIT.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOCTOR, USING THE SCALE ON THE
BOTTOM OF THIS EXHIBIT, CAN WE JUST GET A MEASUREMENT -- LET'S
SEE IF WE CAN DO THIS -- AS TO THE APPROXIMATE AREA THAT WOULD
CONTAIN ALL OF THE BLOODSTAINS THAT WE HAVE HERE?
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I THINK I HAVE AN OBJECTION TO
THIS ON FOUNDATIONAL GROUNDS.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. GOLDBERG: AS TO WHAT?
THE COURT: FOUNDATION, SCALE.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, I HAVE TO BE HEARD ON THAT, YOUR
HONOR, SO PERHAPS WE NEED TO BREAK FOR
THE --
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS
FOR THE MORNING SESSION.
PLEASE REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, FORM ANY
OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE
MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, OR ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE
WITH YOU WITH REGARD TO THE CASE.
WE WILL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 1:15.
ALL RIGHT. DR. LEE, YOU CAN STEP DOWN.
(AT 12:04 P.M. THE NOON RECESS
WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:15 P.M. OF
THE SAME DAY.)
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 1995
1:15 P.M.
DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE
APPEARANCES:
(APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED.)
(JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.) (CHRISTINE
M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER.
ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. THE JURY IS NOT
PRESENT.
COUNSEL, ANYTHING WE NEED TO TAKE UP BEFORE WE LAUNCH
BACK INTO IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, THERE WAS THE ISSUE OF THE USE OF THE
SCALE DIAGRAM, YOUR HONOR. AND THE DIAGRAM THAT WE BROUGHT TO
COURT TODAY IS A COMBINATION BASICALLY OF THREE EXHIBITS. IT HAS
PART OF THE EXHIBIT THAT WE USED WITH BILL BODZIAK OF THE BUNDY
WALK.
THE COURT: LET ME SEE THE DIAGRAM.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, IS IT OKAY IF I PUT THE BOARD
HERE?
THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU PUT IT ON THE JURY BOX RAIL SO I
CAN SEE THE DIAGRAM PORTION.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, BASICALLY THIS IS A COMBINATION
OF THREE DIAGRAMS. PART OF THE DIAGRAM IS THE BUNDY WALK DIAGRAM
THAT WAS TESTIFIED TO BY BILL BODZIAK, WHICH IS TO SCALE, AND THE
TILES ARE APPROXIMATELY 11 AND A HALF INCHES, AND ALSO THE SCALE
IS THE SAME AS IN THE BODZIAK DIAGRAM. SO THAT'S PART OF IT.
THEN WE ALSO COMBINED IT WITH ANOTHER DIAGRAM THAT
JUST SHOWS THE CLOSE-IN ON THE CAGED-IN AREA, WHICH THE COURT
WILL PROBABLY RECALL WITH THE OUTLINE OF RON GOLDMAN'S BODY AND
NICOLE'S BODY. AND THEN OF COURSE, WE COMBINED THE DEFENSE
DIAGRAM ON HERE WITH ALL THE PHOTOGRAPHS. SO THAT'S ALL THIS IS,
IS A COMPILATION.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ANY --
MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ANY FURTHER COMMENT ON THAT, ON THE SCALE OBJECTION?
MR. GOLDBERG: NO. THAT'S THE SCALE.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I TAKE IT -- MR. GOLDBERG, BEFORE
YOU TAKE THAT DOWN -- THE -- THE FEET THEN REFERS TO THE BODZIAK
DIAGRAM. IS THAT -- I MEAN, THE SCALE, WHERE DID THAT COME FROM?
IS THAT THE BODZIAK --
MR. GOLDBERG: THE SCALE IS FROM THE BODZIAK DIAGRAM.
MR. SCHECK: SEE, I THINK THE PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THIS IS,
YOUR HONOR -- A FEW OF THEM.
NO. 1, I DON'T HEAR MR. GOLDBERG MAKING ANY
REPRESENTATION THAT THOSE BODIES ARE DRAWN TO SCALE IN RELATION
TO THE FIRST -- AS MR. GOLDBERG REFERS TO IT -- THE FIRST PLAIN
WALKWAY AREA AND THE CLOSED-IN AREA, NOR IS MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY AS
DEPICTED IN THAT DIAGRAM NECESSARILY IN SCALE IN RELATION TO THE
TREE OR THE REST OF THE CLOSED-IN AREA.
AND THE PROBLEM THAT I THINK WE'VE HAD WITH DR. LEE
AND THESE PHOTOGRAPHS IS, HE WAS BEING ASKED TO DRAW LINES, IS
THAT IN OUR PHOTOGRAPHS, HE DID EVERYTHING BY POLE PLACEMENTS,
AND THEN WE HAVE DIFFERENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY IN
RELATION TO THESE THINGS. THEY'RE TAKEN FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES,
AND FRANKLY, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT'S ALREADY MISLEADING.
DR. LEE HAS INDICATED, AS HE WAS DRAWING THE VARIOUS
-- EXTENDING THE TAPE, WHAT SOME OF THESE LIMITATIONS WERE. BUT
MY CONCERN AT THE END OF THE MORNING AND FRANKLY MY CONCERN NOW
IS THAT I HAD THOUGHT THAT SOMEHOW THOSE BODIES WERE DRAWN TO
SCALE. I WASN'T TOO SURE WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS INITIALLY.
BUT NOW IT'S APPARENT TO ME THAT IT IS MISLEADING IN TERMS OF
TRYING TO PLACE THE BEEPER IN RELATION TO THE BODY OVER THE
SHOULDER AND THE POLES.
I THINK THAT THERE'S NO FOUNDATION WHATSOEVER THAT WE
CAN DO THAT THROUGH THIS DIAGRAM. IN FACT, THE PHOTOGRAPHIC
EVIDENCE SEEMS TO BE IN CONTRADICTION TO THE WAY THAT THIS IS
DRAWN.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, THEN THIS IS A DIFFERENT OBJECTION
THAN THE ONE HE MADE, WHICH WAS SIMPLY TO THE SCALE. DOES THE
COURT WANT ME TO ADDRESS THAT?
THE COURT: WELL, THE OBJECTION IS TO THE SCALE OF THE
BODIES.
MR. SCHECK: AND THE CLOSED-IN AREAS.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, THE SCALE OF -- FIRST OF ALL, THE
SCALE OF NICOLE IS IRRELEVANT BASICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH
THIS IS SHOWN. BUT SEE, SOME OF THESE THINGS, YOUR HONOR, CAN BE
HANDLED THROUGH INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN
INTRODUCED.
THE COURT: NO. THE SIMPLE QUESTION IS, WAS THERE AN
ATTEMPT MADE TO PLACE THE DEPICTION OF RON GOLDMAN'S BODY -- WAS
THAT -- ANY ATTEMPT TO KEEP THAT IN SCALE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES. AND I'M TELLING -- WHAT I'M TELLING
YOUR HONOR IS THAT THE ONLY WAY THAT THAT CAN BE DONE, TO TRY TO
ACCURATELY TO DO THAT, IS BY LOOKING AT THE CRIME SCENE
PHOTOGRAPHS TO FIGURE OUT WHERE HE WAS PLACED, AND WE ALREADY
HAVE EXTENSIVE CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THAT.
IF THE COURT AND COUNSEL WANT ME TO INTRODUCE EVERY
CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPH ON RON GOLDMAN WITH THIS WITNESS SO THAT
WE CAN MAKE SURE THIS IS PROPER, I'LL DO IT, BUT I DON'T THINK
THAT IS WHAT MR. SCHECK WANTS. I DON'T THINK THAT IS IN ANYONE'S
INTEREST HERE, AND THE JURY CAN SIMPLY LOOK AT THE CRIME SCENE
PHOTOGRAPHS WE HAVE AND SAY YEAH, THAT'S ABOUT RIGHT; HIS FOOT
WAS ABOUT THERE, HIS HEAD IS UP AGAINST THE STUMP.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, MY POINT -- THIS -- I HAVE A
PROPOSAL FOR RESOLVING THIS, AND THAT IS THAT I THINK THE
PICTURES SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY SHOW. MY
PROBLEM IS THAT NOW IT'S CLEAR TO US THAT THE CLOSED-IN AREA AND
THE BOTTOM WALKWAY AREA AND THE BODIES AND WHERE THEY'RE PLACED
THERE IN ARE NOT DRAWN TO SCALE WHEREAS THIS DIAGRAM WITH ITS
SCALE AT THE BOTTOM SEEMS TO GIVE THE IMPRESSION THAT THE ENTIRE
THING IS DRAWN TO SCALE WHEN IN FACT ALL THAT'S DRAWN TO SCALE
ARE THE PLACEMENT OF THE FOOTPRINTS AND ESSENTIALLY THE LIFTING
OF THE BODZIAK DIAGRAM.
WHAT I WOULD REQUEST OF THE COURT IS THAT THERE'S AN
AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES THAT THAT IS THE ONLY PART OF THIS
DIAGRAM THAT IS DRAWN TO SCALE.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, THAT'S JUST NOT TRUE. I MEAN, THE
WHOLE THING --
THE COURT: WELL, DON'T INTERRUPT HIS COMMENT.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, HE WAS FINISHED.
MR. SCHECK: I'M ONLY TRYING TO LISTEN VERY CAREFULLY TO
THE PROFFER, AND THE PROFFER AS I UNDERSTAND IT IS THAT THE
WALKWAY DIAGRAM WHICH SHOWS THE FOOTPRINTS IS DRAWN TO SCALE AND
THE REST OF IT IS NOT DRAWN TO SCALE AND THE DEPICTIONS OF THE
BODIES IN RELATION TO THOSE LOCATIONS IS -- HAS NOT IN ANY
SCIENTIFIC WAY BEEN DRAWN TO SCALE.
MR. GOLDBERG: EVERYTHING IS TO SCALE AND THE ONLY ISSUE IS
THE BODIES, YOUR HONOR, AND THE BODIES ARE BASED ON PHOTOGRAPHS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT'S THE ONLY WAY OF DOING IT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
I'M GOING TO OVERRULE THE OBJECTION AT THIS TIME ON
FOUNDATIONAL GROUNDS. COURT HAS SEEN ALL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT
HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS CASE PLUS BEEN TO THE SCENE ITSELF ON
NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, AND THE DEPICTION ON THIS CHART, WHICH IS I
BELIEVE PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 593, I DON'T FIND IT TO BE MISLEADING.
ALL RIGHT.
LET'S PROCEED.
LET'S HAVE THE JURY PLEASE.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, DO YOU WANT US TO REPLACE THIS
AS THE JURY IS COMING IN OR AFTER?
THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU PLACE IT -- DO YOU HAVE MUCH MORE
WITH THIS DIAGRAM?
MR. GOLDBERG: OH, NO.
(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.
ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE
MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL.
GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.
THE COURT: DR. LEE, WOULD YOU RESUME THE WITNESS STAND,
PLEASE.
THE WITNESS: YES.
HENRY C. LEE,
THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE LUNCH RECESS, RESUMED
THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:
THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON.
THE COURT: DR. LEE IS AGAIN ON THE WITNESS STAND
UNDERGOING CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. GOLDBERG.
GO AHEAD AND HAVE A SEAT, DOCTOR.
AND WE HAVE EXHIBITED TO THE JURY PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT
593, WHICH IS A COMBINATION OF CRIME SCENE PHOTOS AND DIAGRAM OF
875 SOUTH BUNDY.
ALSO, COUNSEL, I'M GOING TO DIRECT YOU THAT DURING
THE COURSE OF THE TRIAL, I DON'T WANT ANYBODY IN THE CLERK'S WELL
WHILE COURT'S IN SESSION.
MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS EXHIBIT
DOES HAVE ONE PHOTOGRAPH.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.
CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q GOOD AFTERNOON, DR. LEE.
A GOOD AFTERNOON.
Q NOW THAT YOU'VE SAT DOWN, MAYBE YOU COULD GET BACK UP
OFF THE WITNESS STAND AND HELP US WITH THIS EXHIBIT AGAIN.
A YOUR HONOR?
Q DR. LEE, USING THE SCALE THAT WE HAVE DOWN HERE, CAN
WE JUST GET AN ESTIMATE OF THE AREA THAT CONTAINS THE VARIOUS
BLOODSTAINS AND BLOOD SPATTERS THAT YOU'VE NOW DIAGRAMMED ON THIS
EXHIBIT. AND WHY DON'T YOU WATCH ME DO THIS AND SEE IF I'M DOING
THIS CORRECTLY.
OKAY.
NOW, I'VE PUT THE RULER UP INDICATING THAT ON THIS
DIAGRAM, THERE'S ABOUT THREE AND A HALF INCHES BETWEEN THE CORNER
OF THE GATE AND THE APPROXIMATE AREA OF THE LAST STAIN.
A YES.
Q SO ON OUR SCALE, THAT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY THREE
FEET, 10 INCHES, SOMETHING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD?
A APPROXIMATELY.
Q A LITTLE UNDER FOUR FEET.
A FOUR FEET, YES.
Q JUST TO KEEP IT SIMPLE, SAY FOUR FEET?
A YES.
Q NOW, I'M GOING TO MEASURE THE GATE THAT'S PARALLEL
WITH BUNDY ON THIS DIAGRAM, AND I'M MEASURING THAT TO BE ABOUT
FIVE AND A QUARTER INCHES.
A CORRECT.
Q AND ON OUR DIAGRAM, THAT'S ABOUT FIVE AND A HALF
FEET.
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q IS THAT TRUE?
SO THE AREA THAT CONTAINS ALL OF THE EVIDENCE THAT
YOU'VE REFERRED TO AS ROUGHLY FOUR FEET BY FIVE AND A HALF FEET?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
AND, YOUR HONOR, IF THE COURT KNOWS, HOW LONG IS --
ARE THE PANELS ON THE JURY BOX? ARE THOSE THREE FEET?
THE COURT: I DON'T KNOW. I BELIEVE THEY ARE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHY DON'T WE MEASURE OUT -- WE SAID
IT WAS FIVE AND A HAVE FEET, DOCTOR?
A YES.
Q SO FIVE AND A HALF FEET -- WHY DON'T WE DO IT FROM
THE END OF THE JURY BOX.
SO FIVE AND A HALF FEET IS A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN TWO
PANELS HERE (INDICATING)?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND WE SAID IT WAS A LITTLE UNDER FOUR FEET, BUT JUST
TO KEEP IT SIMPLE, LET'S SAY FOUR.
SO THE SQUARE THAT WE'VE KIND OF DELINEATED HERE
BETWEEN THE END OF THE JURY BOX WHERE THIS TAPE OCCURRED --
INTERSECTS WITH THE JURY BOX --
A IT'S A RECTANGLE.
Q -- RECTANGLE IS RIGHT. WHERE I'M HOLDING IT AND
BACK, THIS RECTANGLE IS ABOUT THE AREA WHERE ALL OF THE EVIDENCE
IS THAT WE'VE REFERRED TO ON THIS DIAGRAM (INDICATING)?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
SO -- YOU CAN RESUME THE WITNESS STAND.
A (THE WITNESS COMPLIES.)
RETURNING THE TAPE.
THE COURT: THANK YOU, DOCTOR.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SO, DOCTOR, IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT
ALL OF THE EVIDENCE THAT WE HAVE IN THIS CASE OF A HOMICIDE IN
TERMS OF THE CONFRONTATION, THE PHYSICAL CONFRONTATION IS IN A
VERY, VERY TINY GEOGRAPHIC AREA?
A UH, FOUR FEET BY FIVE AND A HALF FEET, THE MAJORITY
EVIDENCE IN THAT AREA, RECTANGLE.
Q AND IS ALL OF THE EVIDENCE CONSISTENT WITH THE
HOMICIDE OF RON GOLDMAN HAVING OCCURRED WITHIN THAT GEOGRAPHIC
AREA?
A I CAN NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WALKWAY BECAUSE NO
INDICATION, NO INFORMATION. THERE ARE SO MANY FOOTPRINTS, SO
MANY BLOODSTAIN ON THE WALKWAY. BUT THE CAGED AREA, THAT AREA
ALONE IS FOUR BY FIVE AND A FEET, THAT GENERAL MEASUREMENT.
Q IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU FOUND THAT IS INCONSISTENT
WITH THE HOMICIDE OF RON GOLDMAN HAVING BEEN COMMITTED WITHIN
THAT FOUR BY FIVE AND A HALF APPROXIMATE FOOT AREA?
A WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S THE LOCATION STARTED, I DON'T
KNOW, BUT I DO KNOW THAT'S THE -- A STRUGGLE IN THAT AREA AND END
IN THAT AREA.
Q AND THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT IT OCCURRED IN ANY OTHER
AREA THAT WE ARE ABLE TO FIND OR THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO FIND BASED
ON PHOTOGRAPHS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A BASED ON PHOTOGRAPH, I SEE QUITE A FEW FOOTPRINT ON
THE WALKWAY, LOWER WALKWAY NEAR THE ENTRANCE.
Q AND MANY OF THOSE WERE DOG PRINTS AND THE LIKE?
A MANY ARE DOG PRINT. OTHER APPEAR TO BE SHOEPRINT.
HOWEVER, TOOK AT ANGLE. I CAN NOT TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT IT IS.
Q WERE THOSE SOME OF THE BRUNO MAGLI SHOES --
A YES, EXACTLY.
Q -- THAT MR. BODZIAK REFERRED TO?
AND JUST GETTING BACK TO THE ISSUE OF RECONSTRUCTION
VERY BRIEFLY, SIR, DO YOU AGREE THAT IN THE AREA OF
RECONSTRUCTION, THAT THERE ARE MANY, MANY LIMITATIONS ON ABILITY
OF A FORENSIC SCIENTIST TO BE ABLE TO TELL US PRECISELY WHAT
HAPPENED BASED ON BLOOD SPLATTER ANALYSIS?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND DO YOU AGREE THAT WE CAN NEVER RECONSTRUCT WITH
CERTAINTY WHAT HAPPENED AND THAT ONLY ONE PERSON EVER REALLY
KNOWS IN A HOMICIDE?
A I THINK MORE THAN ONE PERSON SHOULD KNOW. WHY ONE
PERSON KNOWS.
Q THE PERSON THAT WAS THERE AT THE TIME?
A YEAH. ANY PERSON THERE SHOULD KNOW.
Q OKAY.
BUT OTHER THAN THE PERSON THAT WAS THERE AT THE TIME,
HAS IT BEEN YOUR STATED POSITION ON PREVIOUS OCCASIONS THAT NO
ONE WILL EVER BE ABLE TO RECONSTRUCT WITH PRECISION WHAT HAPPENED
OTHER THAN THE PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE?
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: DEPENDS ON IF HAVE A -- WE HAVE CASES I CAN
DETERMINE PRECISELY WHAT HAPPENED. FOR EXAMPLE, IF I HAVE
CAMERA, VIDEOTAPE RUNNING, TAPING THE WHOLE SCENE DURING THE
COMMISSION OF THE CRIME OR I HAVE A CASE A TAPE RECORDING KICK
ON, SUBSEQUENTLY, I CAN HEAR AND LOOK AT THE PATTERN, I CAN
RECONSTRUCT. SO DEPENDS ON IF NO SUCH RECORDING DEVICE, THE
RECONSTRUCTION ONLY CAN AS GOOD AS WHATEVER EVIDENCE WE MAKE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
BUT EVEN OUTSIDE THE EXTRAORDINARY CASES WHERE WE
HAVE A TAPE RECORDING OR A CAMERA OR THOSE CASES WHERE THIS IS A
WITNESS, A SURVIVING WITNESS, THERE -- WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL
IN TERMS OF HOW WE TRY TO RECONSTRUCT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND HAVE YOU ALL -- IS IT YOUR POSITION, SIR, THAT
THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF BLOODSTAINS DEPENDS UPON A CAREFUL
EXAMINATION AND EXPERIENCE IN RECONSTRUCTION AND THAT
OVERINTERPRETATION OF BLOODSTAIN PATTERNS COULD BE EQUALLY
DANGEROUS AND MISLEADING AS UNDERINTERPRETATION?
A YES. THAT'S CORRECT.
Q IN OTHER WORDS, WE DON'T WANT TO SAY TOO MUCH ABOUT
WHAT HAPPENED?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, DR. LEE, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, ARE YOU ABLE
TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED BASED UPON THE EVIDENCE THAT
YOU HAD? I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT PATHOLOGISTS.
SETTING THAT ASIDE, BASED UPON YOUR EVIDENCE, ARE
YOU ABLE TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE ORDER OR SEQUENCE OF EVENTS?
A THE ORDER AND SEQUENCE EVENT TO CERTAIN EXTENT, I CAN
SAY. PRECISELY, I CAN NOT.
Q TO WHAT EXTENT CAN YOU SAY?
A MR. GOLDMAN HAVE TO GET TO THE SCENE. THAT'S THE
FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS.
Q WELL --
A SOMEONE HAS TO BE THERE.
Q OKAY.
WELL, OTHER THAN THINGS THAT ARE OBVIOUS. I'M
TALKING ABOUT --
A WELL, THAT'S NOT OBVIOUS. A LOT OF PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY
THEY DON'T RECOGNIZE, STILL NOT OBVIOUS.
Q OKAY.
BUT JUST BASED ON THE BLOOD SPATTER. FOR EXAMPLE,
ARE YOU ABLE TO TELL US HOW MANY TIMES RON GOLDMAN WAS STABBED
BASED ON BLOOD SPATTER?
A I CAN TELL BASE ON WHEN I EXAM THE SHIRT. I SEE ALL
THOSE CUT, ALL THOSE STAB -- CUT. I CAN COUNT THE NUMBERS.
SO RECONSTRUCTION, YOU CAN NOT JUST BASE ON ONE PIECE
OF EVIDENCE. YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THE TOTALITY.
Q BUT CAN YOU TELL US THE ORDER IN WHICH THOSE --
A A CERTAIN ORDER I CAN TELL YOU. FOR EXAMPLE, THE
IMPRINT ON THE ENVELOPE, I CAN TELL YOU THE IMPRINT WAS DEPOSIT
FIRST. SUBSEQUENTLY HAVE SOME BLOODSTAIN DEPOSIT ON TOP OF THE
IMPRINT. NOT ORDER I CAN TELL YOU.
Q WHICH IMPRINT? THE BRUNO MAGLI OR THE UNKNOWN?
A NO. THE PARALLEL LINE.
Q OKAY.
BUT IN TERMS OF THE -- LET'S ASSUME THAT THERE IS A
STRUGGLE OR A -- AN ATTACK GOING ON. LET'S USE THE WORD "ATTACK."
CAN YOU TELL US THE SEQUENCE OF THE ATTACK, WHAT BLOW WAS MADE,
WHAT -- WHEN THEY WERE EXCHANGED AND THE LIKE?
A I CAN TELL YOU CERTAIN BLOODSTAIN, YOU CAN SEE HAVE A
CONTACT, SMEAR DOWNWARDS, FLOATING DOWN. YOU CAN TELL THE
SEQUENCE EVENT. FIRST HAVE TO HAVE A CONTACT BEFORE THE SMEAR
DOWN, DOWNWARD. THEN HAVE THE FLOWING DRIPPING DOWN. YOU CAN NOT
GO OTHER WAY AROUND.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, I CAN GIVE YOU CERTAIN SEQUENCE,
NOT AS -- MATTER OF FACT, FIRST DAY, FIRST TIME I WOULD TESTIFY,
SAY CANNOT GIVE YOU COMPLETE RECONSTRUCTION WITH THIS CASE. ONLY
GET -- GIVE YOU PIECES, PARTIAL RECONSTRUCTION.
Q OKAY.
WELL, HAVE YOU TRIED TO GIVE US THE PIECES THAT
YOU'RE ABLE TO GIVE US?
A I ALREADY GIVE YOU TWO, THREE EXAMPLE.
Q NO. BUT I MEAN, BETWEEN THE DIRECT AND
CROSS-EXAMINATION, HAVE YOU GIVEN US THE PIECES THAT ARE --
A YES, SIR. YES, SIR, I DID.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO JUST --
THE COURT: JUST A SECOND.
DOCTOR, IF YOU WOULD, WOULD YOU ALLOW MR. GOLDBERG TO
FINISH ASKING YOU THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU START ANSWERING AND,
MR. GOLDBERG, LET HIM FINISH ANSWERING BEFORE YOU START ASKING
THE NEXT QUESTION. TAKE A BREATH IN-BETWEEN.
THE WITNESS: SURE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: JUST TO MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT
SIMPLER, MAYBE GETTING AT IT MORE SIMPLY, CAN YOU TELL US BLOW BY
BLOW WHAT HAPPENED HERE?
A NO, I CAN NOT. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
AND, DOCTOR, WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT IF WE
CANNOT TELL BLOW BY BLOW WHAT HAPPENED HERE, YOU CAN NOT TELL
BLOW BY BLOW WHAT HAPPENED, THEN IT'S DIFFICULT TO GIVE ANY KIND
OF A SCIENTIFIC ESTIMATION OF TIME?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
OKAY. THANK YOU.
I'M FINISHED WITH THIS BOARD.
YOUR HONOR, IS IT POSSIBLE, BECAUSE I MAY HAVE BEEN
BLOCKING THE BOARD AT TIMES, THAT WE CAN SHOW THE JURORS THE
BOARD BEFORE WE PUT IT BACK UP?
THE COURT: I THINK EACH ONE OF THESE ITEMS IS --
ANYBODY NEED TO SEE IT ANY CLOSER?
ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
THANK YOU.
THE COURT: THESE ARE COMPOSITE EXHIBITS THAT HAVE ALREADY
BEEN SHOWN TO THE JURY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, SIR, I'D LIKE TO SWITCH TO
ANOTHER ISSUE, AND THAT'S THE QUESTION OF RONALD GOLDMAN'S SHOES
OR BOOTS.
A YES.
Q YOU DETECTED A -- SOME TYPE OF A CUT ON ONE OF THE
BOOTS; IS THAT TRUE?
A UH, AS A MATTER OF FACT, I DETECT SOME OTHER DAMAGE
ON THE OTHER BOOTS TOO. HOWEVER, WHEN I TESTIFY, ONLY SHOW YOU
ONE BOOT.
Q OKAY.
THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO GET TO.
NOW, SIR, IF A PERSON IS INVOLVED IN SOME TYPE OF
ACTIVITY WHILE THEY'RE WEARING SHOES SUCH AS SITTING AT A DESK
AND MAYBE HOOKING THEIR FEET UNDER PART OF THE DESK AS THEY LEAN
BACK IN THEIR CHAIR AND KIND OF USING THE DESK AS A FULCRUM --
KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?
A SURE.
Q MIGHT YOU EXPECT TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF DAMAGE TO BOTH
SHOES FROM THAT THAT A FORENSIC SCIENTIST COULD DETECT?
A I DID NOT FIND ANY DAMAGE ON MY SHOES. SOMETIME I DO
THIS GIVEN SOMETIME I SIT ON AIRPLANE, I TRY TO STRETCH THE SEAT
IN FRONT OF ME, DOING THAT. NOT NECESSARY YOU GOING TO HAVE A
SHARP CUT, GORGE. YOU MAY HAVE.
I HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS PERSON'S OR HIS SHOES. IF ALL
HIS SHOES, EVERY PAIR SHOWS IDENTICAL PATTERN, THEN I CAN REACH A
REASONABLE CONCLUSION OF COURSE. THAT'S MORE LIKELY HE CAUGHT --
HAVE THOSE KIND OF DAMAGE DURING THE ROUTINE WORK.
Q OR MAYBE IT WOULD HAPPEN IN A RUBBER SHOE AS OPPOSED
TO A LEATHER SHOE?
A YES.
Q OR THERE COULD BE SOME KIND OF OTHER ACTIVITY SUCH
AS RIDING A BIKE. IF YOU HOOK YOUR FEET, THAT MIGHT CONCEIVABLY
EXPOSE BOTH SHOES TO THE SAME TYPE OF DAMAGE; IS THAT CORRECT?
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: WHEN I WAS KID, RIDE A LOT OF BIKES, BUT MY
SHOES NEVER GOT ANY OF THOSE PATTERN, BUT CAN NOT ELIMINATE
SOMEBODY ELSE DON'T GET THE PATTERN.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AT ANY RATE, THERE ARE A VARIETY OF
ACTIVITY THE PERSON COULD ENGAGE IN THAT COULD CAUSE BOTH OF THE
SHOES TO GET THE SAME TYPE OF DEFECT IN A CORRESPONDING LOCATION
ON EACH SHOE?
A THAT'S KIND OF UNLIKELY BECAUSE IF YOU SEE THE SHOES,
FRONT OF SHOES HAVE MULTIPLE DAMAGE. THAT I WILL THINK MORE
LIKELY BECAUSE EVERY DAY YOU RIDE, YOU FORM A GORGE. YOU CAN'T
SAY EVERY DAY YOU RIDE, THE SAME CONTACT, SAME LOCATION, SAME
PLACE DAY AFTER DAY. IT'S KIND OF MAKE IT DIFFICULT. I CAN NOT
RULE OUT A POSSIBILITY.
Q AND IS THERE ALSO -- HAVE YOU ALSO BECOME AWARE OF
THE PRACTICE BY SOME PEOPLE OF PURCHASING GOODS THAT HAVE BEEN
DAMAGED AT A REDUCED PRICE AT A DISCOUNT LOCATION?
A I DO THAT ALL THE TIME.
Q OKAY.
AND IF WE SAW A MANUFACTURING DEFECT, WE MIGHT EXPECT
A MANUFACTURING DEFECT ON A PARTICULAR SERIES OF ITEMS --
A SURE.
Q -- TO BE IN THE SAME PLACE ON EACH ITEM?
A YES, SIR.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO
MARK AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER A BOARD THAT SHOWS THREE SHOES --
EXCUSE ME -- THREE PHOTOS DEPICTING SHOES.
THE COURT: THIS WILL BE 594.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND THAT WOULD BE 594, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
(PEO'S 594 FOR ID = BOARD)
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR
ATTENTION TO PEOPLE'S 594 FOR IDENTIFICATION.
DOES THIS APPEAR TO BE PICTURES OF THE SHOES THAT
WERE THE SUBJECT OF YOUR EXAMINATION?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, YOU'RE SHADOWING JUROR NO. 7 THERE.
THE WITNESS: YES, SIR.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
AND CAN YOU POINT OUT FOR US AGAIN THE CUT THAT WAS
THE SUBJECT OF YOUR TESTIMONY ON DIRECT EXAMINATION?
A THIS IS THE CUT, CORRESPONDENT TO THIS ONE
(INDICATING).
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
JUROR 7, CAN YOU SEE THAT?
JUROR NO. 7: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: HE'S INDICATING THE TOP LEFT
PHOTOGRAPH.
AND THERE'S A CUT OVER WHAT WOULD BE THE TOE NEXT TO
THE BIG TOE; IS THAT CORRECT, DOCTOR?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND THEN HE POINTED AT THE PHOTOGRAPH BELOW THAT,
POINTING TO THE SHOE THAT APPEARS TO HAVE THE LEAST BLOOD ON IT
OF THE TWO; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOW, YOU JUST ALLUDED TO ANOTHER -- SOME OTHER DAMAGE
THAT YOU SAW ON THE OTHER SHOE. CAN YOU POINT THAT OUT FOR THE
JURORS?
A THIS ONE, LIKE THE STRAIGHT LINE, LITTLE HOOK AT THE
END (INDICATING).
Q AND, DOCTOR, DOES THAT ALSO APPEAR TO BE OVER THE
PROXIMAL AREA WHERE THE TOE NEXT TO THE BIG TOE WOULD BE ON THE
CORRESPONDING SHOE?
A THIS SHOE, I THINK THAT'S TWO DIFFERENT LOCATION.
Q OKAY.
WELL, WHAT IS THE LOCATION OF THE CUT THAT YOU JUST
POINTED TO IN THE OTHER SHOE?
A I JUST COUNTED HERE ONE, TWO -- OH, WELL, YOU HAVE A
RULE -- NO, A RULER CANNOT BE USED.
ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE.
YOU START EIGHT AND NINE GORGES THIS AREA. HERE YOU START ONE,
TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN -- SEVEN, EIGHT DIFFERENT
LOCATIONS (INDICATING).
Q SO ONE'S NINE AND ONE'S EIGHT?
A WELL, YOU CAN START SEVEN OR EIGHT.
Q WELL, APPROXIMATELY.
A APPROXIMATE.
Q THANK YOU, DOCTOR.
A OKAY.
Q I'LL TAKE THAT DOWN.
NOW, ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS, YOU'VE MENTIONED TO
THE JURY THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU EXAMINED WERE SECOND OR
THIRD GENERATION PHOTOGRAPHS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND WHAT IS THE FORENSIC IMPORTANCE OF THAT?
A THE FORENSIC IMPORTANCE IS, EVERY TIME THE
PHOTOGRAPH, YOU MAKE A GENERATION. SOME CAN BE SMALLER OR
PORTION CAN BE CRACK OUT, THE COLOR CAN BE DISTORTED LITTLE BIT.
SO IT'S IMPORTANT WE LOOK AT A -- DIFFERENT GENERATIONS.
Q OKAY.
AND I THINK YOU ALSO USED THE PHRASE "PHOTO OF
PHOTO." WOULD THAT BE A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S A PHOTO ON A
PHOTO THAT'S MAYBE LYING DOWN AND SOMEONE ACTUALLY TAKES ANOTHER
PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT AND THEN HANDS THAT TO YOU?
A YES, SIR.
Q SO EACH TIME THAT'S DONE, THERE MAY BE SOME DETAIL
LOST; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT.
Q NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE EYEGLASS ENVELOPE, I'D LIKE
TO SHOW YOU A PHOTOGRAPH THAT'S PREVIOUSLY BEEN MARKED AS
PEOPLE'S 54-B FOR IDENTIFICATION.
MR. SCHECK: MAY I SEE THIS?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'D ALSO LIKE THE WITNESS TO
TAKE A LOOK AT THE ENVELOPE ITSELF WHICH HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 32.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: SO WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR THAT PHOTOGRAPH,
MAY I HAVE HIM UNSEAL THE ENVELOPE?
THE COURT: MR. SCHECK, YOU WANT TO APPROACH AND OBSERVE
THIS?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOCTOR, CAN YOU UNSEAL THIS AND
DESCRIBE WHAT YOU'RE DOING FOR THE RECORD?
A THIS IS AN ENVELOPE WITH SOME YELLOW EVIDENCE TAPE ON
ONE END WITH A MARKING 7-11-95, SOME INITIAL. RIGHT NOW, I'M
UNSEAL IT.
THIS ENVELOPE PROBABLY UNSEALED BEFORE I UNSEALED. I
CAN SEE THIS SOMEBODY ELSE UNSEAL IT PRIOR TO MY UNSEAL THIS.
INSIDE, CONTAINS ANOTHER ENVELOPE. THIS APPEAR TO BE
A PLASTIC BAG WITH MULTIPLE COLOR, BLUE, RED, YELLOW SEAL ON TOP.
NOW I TRY TO UNSEAL THIS ONE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
HOLD ON JUST A SECOND.
MR. GOLDBERG, DO YOU WANT DR. LEE TO OPEN UP THE
PLASTIC ENVELOPE THAT'S INSIDE?
MR. GOLDBERG: NO. I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO DO THAT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL -- OH, YES.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: CAN YOU HOLD THAT UP FOR A SECOND
SO I CAN SEE IT? NO. MAYBE WE CAN SEE THAT.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I APPROACH?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, CAN YOU SEE THE STAIN THAT
WAS LABELED WITH GREG MATHESON'S INITIALS ON THIS?
A I SEE THREE AREA HAVE THREE LABEL, A, B AND C AND
HAVE SOME INITIAL ON IT.
Q WELL, THERE WAS ONE OF THESE STAINS THAT YOU DIDN'T
SEE IN ONE OF THE EARLIER -- EARLIEST PHOTOGRAPHS, IS THAT
CORRECT, THAT TYPED CONSISTENTLY WITH BEING RON GOLDMAN,
NONCONVENTIONAL?
A RIGHT. RIGHT. RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I PUT THIS ON THE ELMO?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
CAN WE PULL OUT JUST TO GET A CONTEXT OF WHERE THAT
IS, PLEASE?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: IS THAT THE GREG MATHESON STAIN --
WELL, THE STAIN WITH GREG MATHESON'S INITIALS ON IT THAT WE WERE
REFERRING TO?
A NO. THAT'S NOT THE ONE.
Q WHICH IS THE ONE?
A THE B. YOU'RE TALKING A.
Q OH, OKAY. I SEE THAT.
A WE'RE TALKING ON THE LOWER CORNER, THE B.
MR. GOLDBERG: PULL OUT A LITTLE BIT SO WE CAN SEE WHERE IT
IS.
MAYBE WITH THE TELESTRATOR WE CAN JUST MARK THAT, IF
POSSIBLE, AND THEN PRINT IT OUT FOR NOW.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WAS THAT JUST CIRCLED IN YELLOW?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: CAN WE PRINT THAT OUT?
THE COURT: HOW DO YOU WANT TO MARK THE PRINTOUT?
MR. GOLDBERG: THE PRINTOUT WOULD BE PEOPLE'S 595, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
595.
(PEO'S 595 FOR ID = PRINTOUT)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, DOCTOR, JUST FOR ORIENTATION
PURPOSES, ON THE LOWER RIGHT-HAND CORNER OF WHAT WE'RE POINTING
OUT IS WHAT APPEARS TO BE A STAIN THAT SEEMS TO HAVE WHAT LOOKS
LIKE IT WAS ONCE A BUBBLE IN IT. DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M TALKING
ABOUT?
A A BUBBLE.
Q YES. MAYBE THAT'S NOT THE CORRECT --
A I DON'T THINK ANY BUBBLE STILL ON THERE.
Q WHAT?
A I DON'T THINK HAVE A BUBBLE. YOU MEAN WHICH ONE?
HERE (INDICATING)?
Q YES.
A THAT PROBABLY SOME TRACE MATERIAL ADHERE ON THE
ENVELOPE AND SOME -- I HAVE TO LOOK AT A PATTERN ITSELF.
Q OKAY.
NOW I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU -- SO THE GREG MATHESON
STAIN, AS WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS ENVELOPE NOW, IS TO THE LEFT OF
THAT MAJOR STAIN?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE EXHIBIT THAT'S
PREVIOUSLY BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 54-B FOR IDENTIFICATION.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, IS IT POSSIBLE THE WITNESS MAY
EXAMINE THIS BEFORE THEY PUT IT UP ON THE ELMO?
THE COURT: NOT NECESSARILY.
MR. GOLDBERG: WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR THAT TO BE SCANNED
UP ONTO THE SCREEN -- OH, HERE IT COMES. CAN THAT BE -- THAT
CAN'T BE REORIENTED. LET'S DO IT ON THE ELMO.
THE COURT: IS THAT LASER DISK?
MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
NOW, LOOKING AT THIS SAME BUBBLE-LIKE STAIN -- OH,
EXCUSE ME -- STAIN THAT MAY HAVE HAD SOME TRACE MATERIAL ADHERE
TO IT ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE --
A UH-HUH.
Q -- IF WE GO LEFT OF THERE --
A YES.
Q -- THERE'S A SERIES OF --
A THIS AREA (INDICATING).
Q YES.
DOES IT APPEAR THAT THE GREG MATHESON STAIN IS ONE OF
THOSE THREE CONSTELLATION OF STAINS?
A JUDGE BY THE SIZE, IT CANNOT BE. THIS IS A REFERENCE
STAIN STILL ON THE ENVELOPE. IF YOU LOOK AT A PREVIOUS ONE,
PICTURE, USE AS A CONTROL, THAT STAIN IS MUCH SMALLER THAN THOSE
STAIN (INDICATING).
Q OKAY.
A AND NOW THIS STAIN IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THAT THREE
STAIN.
Q NOW, DOCTOR, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THAT STAIN IS IN
THE SAME GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION AS THE GREG MATHESON STAIN?
A YES, SIR.
MR. GOLDBERG: CAN WE CIRCLE THAT ONE WITH YELLOW AND PRINT
IT OUT?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, WHILE WE'RE DOING THAT,
DOCTOR, IS IT TRUE THAT WITH CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHY, SOMETIMES
WE HAVE ARTIFACTS THAT CAN APPEAR IN THE PHOTOGRAPHY THAT MAKE IT
LOOK LIKE SOMETHING IS THERE THAT WASN'T THERE?
A WELL, I THINK THAT'S A CRIME SCENE PHOTOGRAPHER'S
PROVISION, JOB, TO ACTUALLY DEPICT THE SCENE NOT TO SAY SOMETHING
THERE NOT TO BE THERE OR SOMETHING THERE NOT TO BE THERE.
Q OKAY.
WELL, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS THIS.
WE'RE TALKED ABOUT SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WITH
PHOTOGRAPHS.
A YES.
Q AND THERE ARE INHERENT LIMITATIONS OF PHOTOGRAPHS; IS
THAT TRUE?
A THAT'S TRUE.
Q AND IS -- AND SOME OF THEM HAVE TO DO WITH
PERSPECTIVE; IS THAT TRUE?
A RIGHT.
Q AND CAN -- SOME OF THE LIMITATIONS HAVE TO DO WITH
GLARE? NOT ON THIS PHOTOGRAPH, BUT JUST IN GENERAL.
A ALL RIGHT.
YES.
Q NOW, CAN THOSE SOMETIMES HAVE A DISTORTING EFFECT IN
TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IN THE PHOTOGRAPH?
A SURE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DOCTOR, I'D LIKE YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE
ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPH AND LOOK AT THE SAME STAIN THAT WE'VE JUST
REFERRED TO.
A UH, MAY I LOOK AT THE ENVELOPE AGAIN?
Q YES.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, SHOULD WE PRINT THAT?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK
AT THAT?
DID THAT PARTICULAR STAIN WASH OUT OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS
THAT YOU WERE GIVEN THAT WERE COPIES OF MAYBE SECOND OR THIRD
GENERATION PHOTOS?
A I DOUBT IT BECAUSE THE REST OF -- SOLUTREAN (SIC)
STAIN PRETTY DEFINED. YOU CAN'T SELECTIVELY SAY THAT PARTICULAR
STAIN WASHED OUT. MAY HAPPEN, BUT IF WASH OUT, I SHOULD SEE THAT
GENERAL AREA EVERYTHING WASH OUT.
Q OKAY.
BUT IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THAT MAY HAVE WASHED OUT; IS
THAT TRUE?
A IT POSSIBLE.
Q AND BY THE TIME WE GOT A THIRD GENERATION PHOTOGRAPH
TO YOU, YOU MIGHT NOT SEE IT AT ALL; IS THAT TRUE?
A UH, WITH THIS PARTICULAR ENVELOPE VERSUS THIS
PHOTOGRAPH, MY OPINION WOULD NOT CHANGE. MY OPINION WILL NOT
CHANGE. I THINK THAT STAIN WASN'T PRESENT, DID NOT -- PRESENT IN
THAT ENVELOPE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
NOW, DOCTOR, JUST GETTING BACK TO THE SOCKS VERY
BRIEFLY, I WANTED TO ASK YOU A COUPLE QUESTIONS THAT I MAY HAVE
FORGOTTEN.
THE COURT: EXCUSE ME. ARE WE DONE WITH THE EYEGLASSES?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: WHY DON'T WE HAVE DR. LEE REPACKAGE THAT FOR
THE RECORD.
THE WITNESS: OKAY.
I'M PUTTING THE PLASTIC ENVELOPE BACK TO THE MANILA
ENVELOPE, CLOSE IT AND RESEAL IT, PUT MY INITIAL ON IT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
A THANK YOU.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
NOW, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO
SAY THAT THE STAIN, 42 STAIN IS NECESSARILY RELATED TO THE WALL 3
STAIN.
DO YOU RECALL THAT DISCUSSION?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
NOW, IS IT POSSIBLE, DOCTOR, IN YOUR JUDGMENT THAT IN
THE PROCESS OF TAKING OFF THE SOCKS, IF ONE WAS CUT AND THEY
DEPOSITED SOME OF THEIR BLOOD ON THE TOE OF THE SOCK AND THEY
TURNED THE UPPER PART OF THE SOCK INSIDE OUT, THAT THE TOE COULD
COME INTO CONTACT WITH WALL 3, WHICH IS NOW INSIDE OUT?
A ANY TYPE OF TRANSFER HAS -- IN THIS SITUATION HAS TO
BE WET. STILL IN LIQUID STAGE, ONLY HAVE MINUTE TRANSFER. IT'S
NOT A LARGE AMOUNT OF BLOOD OR BLOOD DROP ON IT. IT'S LITTLE,
TINY BEAD. SO I CAN NOT RULE OUT SAY POSSIBILITIES.
Q THE SCENARIO THAT I JUST GAVE YOU?
A YES.
Q AND WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY, AS IN THE CASE WITH SOME
OF THE OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS, THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU SAW OF THE
SOCKS AT ROCKINGHAM WERE AGAIN SECOND OR THIRD GENERATION?
A THE PICTURE I -- MY TESTIMONY IS FIRST GENERATION,
BASE MY OWN OBSERVATION, OWN PHOTOGRAPH. THE PICTURE PROVIDE TO
ME IS DIFFERENT PICTURE TAKEN BY DIFFERENT PEOPLES.
Q I'M TALKING ABOUT THE ROCKINGHAM PICTURE.
A ROCKINGHAM PICTURE IS MAYBE SECOND, MAYBE THIRD. I
DON'T KNOW HOW MANY GENERATION BEFORE GET TO MY HAND.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
I'D LIKE TO MARK AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER, THAT
WOULD BE 595 -- 6 FOR IDENTIFICATION WHAT WOULD APPEAR TO BE A
BOARD WITH SOCKS ON IT, THREE PICTURES. I THINK IT HAS -- OH,
I'M SORRY. I WAS GOING TO DO IT AS A BOARD. IT'S JUST A SINGLE
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SOCKS THAT HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED IN THIS CASE.
(PEO'S 596 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, DOCTOR, YOU SAID THAT ON YOUR
PHOTOGRAPHS, WHICH WERE EITHER SECOND OR THIRD GENERATION, YOU
COULDN'T SEE THE TOES OF THE SOCKS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND YOU COULDN'T TELL WHETHER THE SOCKS WERE INSIDE
OR OUT?
A CORRECT. I HAVE A FEELING, INTERPRETATION. BUT IF I
CAN NOT POSITIVELY SEE THAT, I DON'T WANT TO COME HERE TO MISLED
YOU.
Q AND IF THEY WERE INSIDE OUT PARTIALLY, THEN WALL 3
WOULD BE EXPOSED TO THE OUTSIDE, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU WHAT WE'VE JUST MARKED AS
596.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I PUT A 596 ON THE REVERSE, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I JUST SHOW THIS TO THE WITNESS FIRST
BEFORE I PUT IT ON THE ELMO?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: CAN YOU PLEASE JUST LOOK AT THIS,
JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THAT YOURSELF?
A YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ON THE ELMO.
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
OH, THIS IS NOT VERY GOOD.
THE WITNESS: BUT I CAN TELL YOU. YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY
ABOUT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
I'M GOING TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS WHILE
THIS IS UP AND THEN PERHAPS WE CAN --
OH -- WELL, IT'S A LITTLE BETTER.
DR. LEE, THIS IS A HIGHER QUALITY PHOTOGRAPH THAN THE
PHOTOGRAPH YOU WERE PROVIDED; IS THAT CORRECT?
A MUCH BETTER -- MUCH, MUCH BETTER QUALITY. I WAS NOT
HAVE PRIVILEGE TO LOOK AT THIS PHOTOGRAPH UNTIL JUST MINUTE.
Q OKAY.
AND WITH RESPECT TO THE TOES OF THE SOCKS, THOSE NOW
CAN BE SEEN QUITE CLEARLY; IS THAT CORRECT?
A ONE OF THE SOCKS, THE SOCKS, THE LOWER SOCKS IS
DEFINITE CAN SEE THAT.
Q AND THE OTHER ONE LOOKS LIKE IT'S PRETTY CLEAR TOO;
IS THAT CORRECT?
A THE OTHER ONE LOOKS LIKE IT'S FLOATING IN
THREE-DIMENSION SETTING.
Q AND IS IT CORRECT THAT WITH RESPECT TO BOTH SOCKS,
BOTH SOCKS ARE SUBSTANTIALLY TURNED INSIDE OUT?
A YES, SIR. ESPECIALLY THE LOWER ONE, IT'S POSITIVELY
INSIDE OUT. THE TOP ONE, IT'S KIND OF IN THE BORDERLINE, BUT THE
BOTTOM ONE, DEFINITE INSIDE OUT.
Q AND DOES IT APPEAR THAT THE TOE OF THE TOP SOCK IS
COMING INTO CONTACT WITH WHAT WE'VE BEEN REFERRING TO AS WALL 3?
A YES, SIR. IF ASSUME THAT'S INSIDE OUT.
Q AND MAYBE -- WE CAN'T SAY THIS WITH -- POSITIVELY,
BUT DOES IT APPEAR THAT IT'S COMING INTO CONTACT WITH THE ANKLE
AREA OF WALL 3?
A I CAN NOT COME HERE SPECULATE ANYTHING. IT'S IN THIS
AREA.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
MAY I SHOW THIS TO THE JURORS, YOUR HONOR, BECAUSE IT
IS GETTING A LITTLE WASHED OFF IN THE ELMO.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
HAND IT TO JUROR NO. 1, PLEASE.
(THE PHOTOGRAPH WAS EXAMINED BY
EACH OF THE JURORS.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET ME SEE MR. SCHECK AND MR. GOLDBERG WITHOUT THE
REPORTER WHILE WE'RE WAITING.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE
BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, WOULD YOU COLLECT THAT FROM DEPUTY
BASHMAKIAN, PLEASE.
ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT EACH OF THE JURORS HAD
THE OPPORTUNITY TO CAREFULLY REVIEW PEOPLE'S 596, THE SOCK
PHOTOGRAPH.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO ANOTHER
TOPIC IF WE MAY, AND THAT'S TO ASK YOU A COUPLE CLARIFYING
QUESTIONS ABOUT BINDLE NO. 47.
NOW, IT IS YOUR OPINION THAT THERE WAS A WET TRANSFER
IN THAT BINDLE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. THAT'S NO DOUBT IN MY MIND IT'S A WET TRANSFER.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, SIR, WHEN YOU WERE DOING YOUR EXAMINATION IN
THIS CASE, DID YOU FIND --
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, LET ME WITHDRAW THAT QUESTION, YOUR
HONOR.
I'D LIKE TO MARK ANOTHER EXHIBIT AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN
ORDER WHAT APPEARS TO BE A BOARD OF THREE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING
BINDLE NO. 42 IN THIS CASE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THAT WILL BE PEOPLE'S 597.
(PEO'S 597 FOR ID = BOARD)
THE COURT: 165, CAN YOU SEE THAT?
JUROR NO. 165: YES, SIR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
1386?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR
ATTENTION TO THE ITEM THAT'S BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 596 --
EXCUSE ME -- 5 --
THE COURT: 97.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: -- 97 FOR IDENTIFICATION, DR. LEE.
CAN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THAT?
A YES, SIR.
YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: IS THIS ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT YOU
EXAMINED?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND DID THIS ALSO CONTAIN SOME WET TRANSFERS?
A IN MY NOTES, I DID MENTION THIS ITEM HAVE WET
TRANSFER.
Q AND, SIR, IF THE TESTIMONY IN THIS CASE IS THAT THE
SWATCHES HERE CAME FROM A POOL OF THE VICTIM'S BLOOD, NICOLE
SIMPSON, WOULD YOU EXPECT THAT TO PLAY ANY MATERIAL ROLE IN TERMS
OF WHETHER OR NOT WE WOULD GET A WET TRANSFER? IN OTHER WORDS,
WOULD HER BLOOD BE DIFFERENT FROM SOMEONE ELSE'S BLOOD?
A I DON'T KNOW. I DID NOT GROUP THAT. I CAN'T REALLY
TELL YOU WHOSE BLOOD.
THE TRANSFER IN MY NOTE REFER A BOW TIE, LIKE A BOW
TIE TRANSFER. I TRY TO FIND A PIECE IN HERE HAVE A BOW TIE
(INDICATING). WHETHER OR NOT CAN FIT THIS BOW TIE, I WASN'T TOO
SUCCESSFUL.
Q AND THAT COULD BE SOMETHING TWISTED; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q WHAT I'M ASKING YOU -- I GUESS MY QUESTION WASN'T
VERY CLEAR -- IS, WOULD WE EXPECT THAT PERHAPS ORENTHAL SIMPSON'S
BLOOD DRIES AT A FASTER RATE OR DIFFERENT RATE THAN NICOLE
BROWN'S BLOOD?
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION. IMPROPER HYPOTHETICAL.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT?
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, WOULD WE EXPECT THAT ONE
PERSON'S BLOOD WOULD DRY FASTER OR SLOWER THAN ANOTHER PERSON'S
BLOOD?
A THIS MORNING, INDICATES THERE ARE OTHER FACTORS.
AMONG THEM, SAMPLE, CONDITION OF SAMPLE, THE DRYING CONDITION.
HERE, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY SWATCHES HAVE WHOLE BUNDLE OF IT AND
ONLY FEW SMALL TRANSFER WHICH INDICATIVE THERE ARE SOME WET
TRANSFER. THAT'S ALL I CAN SAY.
Q OKAY.
WELL -- AND THAT'S THE SAME AS BINDLE 47?
A 47 HAVE FEW MORE TRANSFERS, FOUR TRANSFERS.
Q SO THIS HAS A FEW LESS TRANSFERS?
A YES, SIR.
Q BUT BOTH OF THEM HAVE TRANSFERS.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'D LIKE TO SHOW THE WITNESS
VERY BRIEFLY THE EXHIBIT THAT WE'VE MARKED AS "SEROLOGY RESULTS
BOARD," PEOPLE'S 202 FOR IDENTIFICATION.
IT'S OUT IN THE HALL APPARENTLY, IF WE MAY GET IT.
MR. SCHECK: MAY WE APPROACH WHEN HE DOES?
THE COURT: SEROLOGY RESULTS BOARD?
MR. SCHECK: I HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THIS. OUTSIDE THE
SCOPE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THIS IS PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT?
MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 202.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
MR. GOLDBERG.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
DOCTOR, I WANT TO YOU ASSUME THERE'S ALREADY BEEN
TESTIMONY TO THIS BOARD AND THE ACCURACY OF THE PGM SUBTYPES AND
DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE PGM SUBTYPE COLUMN.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SHOWING YOU ITEM NO. 42 FOR
IDENTIFICATION, IT SAYS, "BLOOD UNDER NICOLE BROWN"; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A THE CHART SAY SO.
Q YES.
AND ACCORDING TO THE CHART, THERE IS AN INCONCLUSIVE
RESULT ON THAT PGM SUBTYPE, AN INC. B?
A RIGHT.
Q THANK YOU.
NOW, IN TERMS OF BINDLE 42 CONTAINING BLOOD UNDER
NICOLE BROWN --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- AND BINDLE 47, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE SAME
PROCESS WAS RESPONSIBLE -- I MEAN, ARE THE TYPES OF TRANSFER
STAINS WE'RE SEEING IN BOTH OF THOSE CONSISTENT?
A FIRST, WE DON'T HAVE 47 ON THE BOARD.
Q YEAH. I'M NOT ASKING YOU --
A OH, YOU NOT ASKING ME THE BOARD.
Q -- TRANSFER STAINS, YES.
A I THOUGHT YOU ASKING ME ABOUT A BOARD.
Q BUT THE TRANSFER STAINS ARE CONSISTENT IN BOTH CASES;
IS THAT CORRECT?
A THEY'RE WET TRANSFER. THAT ASPECT SIMILAR, BUT THE
TRANSFER PATTERN BEING DIFFERENT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND THERE WERE DIFFERENT SWATCHES AND DIFFERENT
COMBINATIONS OF SWATCHES?
A YES. YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
NOW, GETTING TO THE SHOEPRINTS THAT WE LEFT OFF WITH
ON THE BUNDY LOCATION --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- ON THE WALKWAY ITSELF, THERE WAS ONE PHOTOGRAPH
>FROM JUNE THE 13TH --
A YES.
Q -- THAT YOU REFERRED TO.
AND WAS IT YOUR CONCLUSION IN YOUR TESTIMONY THAT
THERE WAS SOME PARALLEL LINES THAT COULD BE SEEN IN THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WAS IT YOUR CONCLUSION WHEN YOU TESTIFIED ON
FRIDAY THAT WITH REGARD TO THOSE PARALLEL LINES AND THAT
PHOTOGRAPH, IT COULD BE ANYTHING?
A YES. JUST SOME PARALLEL LINE. AND I CAN NOT SAY
THAT'S A FOOTPRINT.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'D LIKE TO MARK AS PEOPLE'S
NEXT IN ORDER A PHOTOGRAPH THAT IS DEPICTING ONE OF THE
SHOEPRINTS. IT'S P-50.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THIS WILL BE PEOPLE'S 598.
HAVE YOU SHOWN THAT TO MR. SCHECK?
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M SORRY. IT'S ALREADY BEEN MARKED AS
PEOPLE'S 45-I.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WITHDRAW 598.
MR. GOLDBERG: MAY I JUST APPROACH THE WITNESS VERY
QUICKLY?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU QUICKLY
WHAT WE'VE ALREADY MARKED IN THIS CASE AS 45-I.
DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE A FIRST GENERATION PHOTOGRAPH
OF THE JUNE 13TH PHOTOGRAPH THAT APPEAR TO HAVE SOME PARALLEL
LINES THAT COULD BE ANYTHING?
A YEAH. THIS IS A MUCH BETTER PHOTOGRAPH THAN WHAT I
OBTAINED.
Q AND NOW THAT YOU SEE THAT PHOTOGRAPH, DOES IT APPEAR
THAT THE PARALLEL LINES ARE IN FACT TRAWL MARKS OR SCRATCHES IN
THE SURFACE OF THE PAVEMENT?
A COULD BE.
Q DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE THE MOST REASONABLE
EXPLANATION?
A YES. RIGHT.
Q OKAY.
SO THAT LEAVES US WITH THE PARALLEL LINE IMPRINTS
THAT YOU SAW ON JUNE THE 25TH THAT WE DISCUSSED?
A YES.
Q NOW, SIR, WHEN YOU TOOK THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS OF PARALLEL
LINE IMPRINTS ON THE BUNDY WALK ITSELF --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- HAD YOU SEEN THOSE PRINTS ON THE WALK AT ANY TIME
PRIOR TO JUNE THE 25TH?
A I WASN'T THERE. I DEFINITE DID NOT SEE ANYTHING LIKE
THIS BEFORE.
Q AND DID YOU EXAMINE THE PHOTOGRAPHS IN THIS CASE THAT
WERE PROVIDED TO YOU BY MR. SHAPIRO TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT
YOU COULD SEE THOSE PARTICULAR PARALLEL LINE PRINTS IN THE
PHOTOS?
A UNFORTUNATELY, THE AREA I FOUND REALLY DON'T HAVE A
GOOD PHOTOGRAPH. MOST OF THE OVERALL VIEW PHOTO IS TAKEN AT
ANGLE. IT'S LOST THE PERCEPTION. SOME DID. SOME ARE PRETTY
GOOD PHOTOGRAPH. THOSE ARE SELECTIVE. JUST SHOWS THOSE IMPRINT
CONSISTENT WITH BRUNO MAGLI.
Q ALL RIGHT.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE DEFENSE EXHIBIT 1337, WHICH
IS THE FOOTPRINT BOARD IF WE MAY.
A YES.
BLESS YOU.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE PHOTOGRAPH
ON THIS EXHIBIT THAT IS AT THE BOTTOM IN THE MIDDLE THAT SAYS
"WALKWAY, JUNE THE 25TH, 1994 ON IT" --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- CAN YOU SHOW THE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY
CLEARLY WHERE THE PARALLEL LINE FOOTPRINT IS?
A I SAY IMPRINT EVIDENCE. I THINK I DID NOT SAY
FOOTPRINT. I DON'T THINK I IDENTIFY THIS AS FOOTPRINT. I
IDENTIFY THIS ONE AS FOOTPRINT. I SEE PARALLEL LINE IMPRINT HERE
(INDICATING).
Q OKAY.
BUT DOES THIS APPEAR TO HAVE A ROUND EDGE THAT WOULD
SEEM TO BE CONSISTENT WITH SOME SORT OF A MANUFACTURED OBJECT
LIKE A SOLE?
A MAYBE.
Q AND DID YOU SAY THAT THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THESE TWO
ITEMS WERE THE SAME?
A NO. THIS IS A PARALLEL LINE HERE LIKE BRUNO MAGLI.
HERE LOOK LIKE A PORTION ON TOP OF EACH OTHER. YOU ARE
OVERLAPPING THEM TWO PATTERNS. THAT'S WHY I CALL IMPRINT
EVIDENCE. I DID NOT CALL FOOTPRINT.
THIS ONE IS A CLEAR ONE. YOU CAN SEE FROM THE TOE TO
THE HEEL. THAT'S WHY I CALL THIS ONE A FOOTPRINT. IT'S NO DOUBT
IN MY MIND THIS MADE SHOE (INDICATING).
Q BOTH OF THESE IMPRINT -- PARALLEL IMPRINTS WERE IN
BLOOD FROM APPEARANCES?
A THIS DEFINITE IS, AND THIS I TESTED ALSO CONSISTENT
WITH (INDICATING).
MR. GOLDBERG: AND -- WELL, I MAKE A MOTION TO STRIKE THE
PART ABOUT TESTING BECAUSE I SAID APPEARANCES.
THE COURT: APPEARANCES.
THAT WILL BE STRICKEN.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND, DR. LEE, WAS IT YOUR OPINION
THAT INSOFAR AS YOU COULD TELL, THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THESE TWO
ARE CONSISTENT WITH ONE ANOTHER?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, CAN YOU TELL US FROM YOUR -- NOW, THIS PARALLEL
IMPRINT IS IT FAIR TO SAY SORT OF TRANSECTS ONE OF THE TILES?
A IT'S A MIXTURE OF IMPRINTS, DEBRIS OVERLAPPING, QUITE
A FEW STUFF IN THERE, QUITE A FEW IMPRINT ITEMS ALTOGETHER. THIS
ONE IS CLEAR AND DEFINE. THAT'S WHY I CALL THIS AS AN IMPRINT.
I DON'T REFER TO AS A FOOTPRINT (INDICATING).
Q BUT THIS PARTICULAR IMPRINT SEEMS TO GO ACROSS WHERE
THE TILES MEET AT A JUNCTION; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. A PORTION OF THIS APPEAR TO BE CROSS.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND CAN YOU JUST DOUBLE-CHECK YOUR NOTES, DOCTOR, TO
SEE WHETHER YOU ACCURATELY STATED WHAT TILE YOU BELIEVE THE CROSS
FOOTPRINT TO BE IN?
A WELL, ACTUALLY, THIS ONE IS TILE 10. I HAVE NO DOUBT
OF THIS. THIS I DID NOT BRING MY NOTE WITH ME. YOU GET A COPY.
I THINK IT'S BETWEEN TILE 5, 6 OR 7, 6, SOMETHING IN THAT
NEIGHBORHOOD (INDICATING).
Q OKAY.
SO WHEN YOU SAID "THIS," YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE
IMPRINT EVIDENCE THAT'S ON THE BOTTOM IN THE MIDDLE. WE DON'T
KNOW WHAT TILE IT IS ON FOR SURE.
A YES, SIR.
Q AND CAN YOU TELL US WHAT TILE IT WAS ON FOR SURE BY
LOOKING AT YOUR NOTES?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT THE ONE IN THE LOWER PART OF THE DIAGRAM ON THE
RIGHT YOU SAY IS ON TILE NO. --
A 10.
Q OKAY.
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS TIME -- WELL, IS IT
CONCEIVABLE -- I DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE COURTROOM FLOODED WITH
BOARDS, BUT IS THERE A WAY THAT WE CAN HAVE THREE BOARDS AT ONE
TIME OR IS THAT JUST AN IMPOSSIBILITY?
ALL RIGHT.
LET'S JUST TAKE THIS ONE DOWN.
YOUR HONOR, I'D LIKE TO NEXT MARK A BLANK MAGNETIC
BOARD AS PEOPLE'S 5 --
THE COURT: 98.
MR. GOLDBERG: I THOUGHT HAD A 9 -- WE DON'T HAVE A 98?
THE COURT: 98.
(PEO'S 598 FOR ID = MAGNETIC BOARD)
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
CAN WE PUT THE EASEL IN THE MIDDLE, YOUR HONOR?
YOUR HONOR, ACTUALLY LET'S -- YOUR HONOR, I'D LIKE TO
MARK AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER, IT WILL BE -- CAN I MARK IT AS
PART OF THIS -- WELL, I'LL DO IT AS 599-A, B AND C, A SERIES OF
MAGNETIZED PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE BUNDY WALK.
A APPEARS TO BE THE FURTHEST UP THE WALK, B IS THE
MIDDLE PHOTOGRAPH IN TERMS OF WHERE IT'S POSITIONED ON THE WALK.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
DO WE HAVE ANY REMAINS ON THIS?
MR. GOLDBERG: NO, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MAY I SEE IT, MR. BANCROFT?
MR. GOLDBERG: AND C IS GOING TO BE THE FURTHEST EAST.
THAT WOULD BE TOWARDS WHERE NICOLE'S BODY WAS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
NOTED.
(PEO'S 598-A, B AND C FOR ID = MAG. PHOTOS)
MR. GOLDBERG: AND, YOUR HONOR, WITH THE COURT'S
PERMISSION, CAN I PUT A, B AND C TAGS ON THAT JUST SO WE CAN MAKE
THE TESTIMONY A LITTLE EASIER TO FOLLOW?
THE COURT: YES, PLEASE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, DR. LEE, PERHAPS YOU COULD
STEP DOWN FOR A MOMENT.
THE COURT: AND, MR. GOLDBERG --
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, PUT IT WHERE IT'S NOT COVERING ANY OF
THE TILES LIKE ON THE SPOUT.
THE COURT: 2:45. 2:45.
MR. GOLDBERG: 2:45?
OKAY.
YOUR HONOR, WHILE DR. LEE IS EXAMINING THAT
PHOTOGRAPH, I'D LIKE TO PUT PHOTOGRAPH 45 -- PEOPLE'S 45-D ON THE
ELMO, WHICH IS P-46 OR ON LASER, WHICHEVER WAY WE CAN DO IT.
WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT ON THE ELMO INSTEAD, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: I BELIEVE IT HAS TO BE ARRANGED THE OTHER
WAY SO THAT WE CAN SEE THE WHOLE PHOTO.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
DR. LEE, I WANT YOU TO LOOK CAREFULLY AT THIS, AND
I'LL SHOW YOU THE ACTUAL PHOTO OFF THE ELMO IF YOU NEED TO SEE
IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO WHAT WOULD
APPEAR TO BE A DETECTIVE'S LEFT LEG, LEFT FOOT, THIRD TILE.
A YOU HAVE TWO --
Q BLACK --
A SET OF SHOES.
Q BLACK SHOES.
A BLACK SHOES.
Q IN THE THIRD TILE?
A ONE, TWO, THREE. YEAH, THIRD TILE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
I'D LIKE YOU TO LOOK CAREFULLY AT THE SHOEPRINT THAT
IS TO THE RIGHT OF THE THIRD TILE.
A TO THE RIGHT. HERE. YOU MEAN THIS ONE (INDICATING)?
Q YEAH. TO THE RIGHT OF THE TILE IN THE THIRD ROW.
A THIRD ROW. LEFT OR RIGHT?
Q NO, NO. THIRD ROW BACK TOWARDS WHAT WOULD BE THE
ALLEY.
A THAT'S ONE, THAT'S TWO, THAT'S THREE, RIGHT
(INDICATING)?
Q YEAH.
A THE THIRD ROW. OKAY.
Q NOW, DR. LEE, TAKING A LOOK BACK AT -- YOU WANT TO
LOOK AT IT DOWN HERE?
A YES.
I CAN'T SEE THIS ONE (INDICATING).
Q OKAY.
SO THE ONE THAT WE'RE REFERRING TO, THAT WE'VE JUST
BEEN REFERRING TO AS THE SAME AS ON PHOTOGRAPH C ON OUR BUNDY
EXHIBIT; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q SO THAT WOULD BE THE THIRD ROW.
SIR, IS THE ARROW IN THE RIGHT PLACE ON THE
TELESTRATOR?
A YOU MEAN THE SHOEPRINT YOU WANT TO SHOW ME?
Q YES.
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: CAN WE PRINT THAT AND MARK THAT?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
DR. LEE, I'M GOING TO PUT A LITTLE "3" IN AN AREA OF
THE TILE THAT APPEARS TO CONTAIN NO SHOEPRINT EVIDENCE.
IS THIS OKAY?
A SURE.
Q SO THAT WOULD BE THE THIRD ROW. I'M NOT GOING TO
MARK ALL OF THESE BECAUSE OTHERWISE, IT WOULD TAKE TOO LONG. BUT
IF THIS IS 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 --
A 7.
Q 7.
OKAY.
I WANT YOU TO ATTEST IF I'M PUTTING NO. 7 IN THE
RIGHT PLACE.
A YES.
Q OKAY.
LET'S USE THE BIGGER PHOTOGRAPH.
THIS IS 7, 8, 9, 10. AND THE PARALLEL LINE SHOEPRINT
IS SUPPOSED TO BE WHERE?
A HERE (INDICATING).
Q AND DO YOU SEE ANYTHING THAT BEARS --
A I SEE SOMETHING ON THE TILE.
Q YOU SEE SOMETHING ON THAT TILE?
A YEAH.
Q WHERE?
A APPEAR TO BE A PATTERN ON THIS TILE (INDICATING).
Q YOU'RE SAYING YOU COULD SEE A PATTERN ON THAT TILE?
A SOME KIND OF PATTERN. I CAN NOT DESCRIBE THIS
PATTERN BECAUSE THIS PICTURE TAKEN -- AGAIN, IT'S NOT ONE TO ONE
DIRECT DOWN. THE PHOTOGRAPHER TAKE A PICTURE IN MY POSITION. SO
EVERYTHING LOST PERSPECTIVE.
YOU CAN'T -- YOU DO SEE SOMETHING HERE. WHETHER OR
NOT THOSE ARE -- YOU CAN SEE QUITE A FEW STUFF HERE. THIS IS A
SET OF FOOTPRINT. BUT HERE, YOU CAN SEE THEY ARE TRANSFER
IMPRINTS, BUT I CAN NOT TELL YOU WHAT KIND OF A PATTERN
(INDICATING).
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, COULD THE RECORD REFLECT HERE THAT
DR. LEE HAS INDICATED FIRST REDDISH -- THE DARKER RED ONES THAT
WERE PREVIOUSLY REFERRED TO AS BRUNO MAGLI, AND I THINK IT GOES
>FROM THE SET OF TILES WHICH ARE THE --
THE COURT: NO. 7.
MR. SCHECK: WELL, THERE'S -- I THINK IF YOU START FROM THE
NUMBER --
THE COURT: NO. 7.
MR. SCHECK: -- NO. 7, THAT THEY GO STRAIGHT BACK. AND
THEN HE INDICATED ANOTHER SET --
THE WITNESS: COLUMN.
MR. SCHECK: -- ANOTHER COLUMN OF IMPRINTS --
THE COURT: THIRD TILE OVER FROM THE LEFT.
MR. SCHECK: -- ONE TILE OVER FROM THE LEFT. AND IN
PARTICULAR, THE DISCUSSIONS STARTED WITH AN EXAMINATION OF WHERE
MR. GOLDBERG HAD PLACED THE "10" WHICH, IF WE GO THREE TILES OVER
TO THE RIGHT, HE INDICATES SEEING AN IMPRINT THERE.
THE COURT: SO NOTED.
THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SO, DR. LEE, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE
IMPRINT IS 10 DOWN THE TILE --
A YOU CAN ACTUAL START FROM HERE.
Q -- BUT THE POSSIBLE, WHATEVER IT IS, IS 10 DOWN AND
THREE OVER; IS THAT RIGHT?
A BUT HERE AGAIN, 10, 9, 8, 7 AND 8 IS HERE WITH
SOMETHING.
Q NOW, IN YOUR NOTES, DID YOU DOCUMENT ANY IMPRINT AS
BEING 10 DOWN AND THREE OVER?
A I DON'T HAVE THIS PHOTOGRAPH. THAT'S THE FIRST DAY I
SEE THIS PHOTOGRAPH.
Q WELL, DR. LEE, WITH RESPECT TO THE PARALLEL LINE
IMPRINT, DIDN'T YOU SAY IT WAS 10 DOWN AND ONE OVER? IS THAT
CORRECT?
A THAT'S STILL ONE OVER FROM THIS ONE, ONE OVER.
THAT'S NOT RIGHT. THAT'S THE PLANTER (INDICATING).
Q WELL, HERE, LET'S COMPARE THEM. CAN YOU HELP ME WITH
THIS, DOCTOR?
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I THINK WE SHOULD PUT THIS UP TOO.
THE WITNESS: NO, NO. THAT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
AND SO ACCORDING TO YOUR NOTES, THE PRINT THAT WE'RE
LOOKING FOR SHOULD BE 10 DOWN AND TWO OVER?
A NO. MY NOTES SAYS "10TH TILE." I DID NOT PUT --
MAKE THIS BOARD.
Q SO YOU'RE SAYING --
A SOMEBODY MADE THIS BOARD.
Q SO YOU'RE SAYING THIS BOARD IS WRONG?
A I THINK IF I LOOK AT THIS PICTURE TODAY, THIS
PROBABLY ONE NEXT IN THIS LOCATION. I DID NOT MAKE THIS BOARD
(INDICATING).
MR. SCHECK: CAN WE HAVE THAT REFLECTED ON THE BOARD?
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. SCHECK: PUT THAT UP SO THAT WE CAN MAKE A CHANGE?
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, YOU'LL HAVE TO DO THAT ON REDIRECT I
SUPPOSE.
THE COURT: YOU WANT TO AT LEAST -- WAIT, WAIT.
MR. GOLDBERG, WHILE YOU'RE CONDUCTING YOUR
EXAMINATION, WOULD YOU AT LEAST DESCRIBE FOR THE RECORD WHAT THE
WITNESS IS REFERRING TO?
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
I -- HE WAS REFERRING TO THE BUNDY IMPRINT BOARD AND
SAYING, "I DID NOT MAKE THIS BOARD."
THE WITNESS: YES.
THE COURT: WHICH IS DEFENSE EXHIBIT WHAT?
MR. SCHECK: I THINK IT'S 1337.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, DID YOU SAY YOU WERE NOT GIVEN
PHOTOS FROM JUNE THE 13TH OF THIS WALKWAY?
A I DON'T HAVE A PICTURE AS CLEAR AS THIS. I HAVE SOME
PICTURE BARELY SEE THE IMAGES, NOT TOO GOOD.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
COUNSEL, WE'VE GOT A LOGISTICAL PROBLEM HERE BECAUSE
WE'VE GOT FOUR OR FIVE JURORS WHO CAN'T SEE THE WITNESS NOW. SO
--
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, DID YOU ASK --
THE COURT: HOLD ON, HOLD ON, HOLD ON.
ALL RIGHT.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE SOME OF THESE ITEMS. DO
YOU NEED 1337 UP AT THIS POINT?
MR. GOLDBERG: 1337? I DON'T NECESSARILY NEED IT UP AS
LONG AS HE'S CAME DOWN -- WELL, I THINK HE'S ALREADY TESTIFIED
WHERE --
MR. SCHECK: MAY I REQUEST, YOUR HONOR, THAT MARKING BE
MADE ON THE BOARD?
THE COURT: NO. YOU CAN DO THAT ON YOUR PART OF THE
REDIRECT, COUNSEL.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOCTOR, DID YOU EVER ASK THE
DEFENSE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH HIGHER QUALITY PICTURES?
A I GET THE INFORMATION THAT'S ALL THE PICTURE WE GET.
IT'S TOTAL OUT OF SEQUENCE MIXED UP LIKE A DECK OF CARD. I SPEND
LOT OF TIME TRYING TO MAKE SOME SENSE OUT.
Q BUT WHEN YOU GOT IT FROM MR. SHAPIRO, DID YOU SAY,
"PLEASE SEND ME SOME EXAMINATION QUALITY PHOTOS"?
A I DID ASK IT. HE SAID THAT'S ALL HE GET. HE TOOK IT
BACK RIGHT AWAY. I DON'T HAVE THE PHOTOGRAPH.
Q SO YOU DON'T HAVE THEM NOW?
A I DON'T HAVE IT NOW.
Q NOW, I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO YOUR NOTES
>FROM 6-25.
WHAT DOES THAT SAY IN TERMS OF WHERE THE 10TH TILE
FOOTPRINT IS?
A BY THE WAY, THAT'S DR. WOLF, BARBARA WOLF NOTE. BUT
10TH TILE HERE, FIRST LINE PARALLEL, YOU SEE THIS LINE PARALLEL
LINE FOOTPRINT (INDICATING).
Q SO IT'S ON 10, BUT DO WE KNOW HOW MANY OVER IT IS
>FROM THE NOTES?
A BASED ON HER NOTES, I DON'T KNOW.
Q WELL, DO YOU HAVE NOTES THAT SHOW HOW --
A I WAS SO BUSY TAKING PICTURE, I ONLY HAVE 20 MINUTES
TO WORK. I ONLY CAN DO ONE THING AT A TIME. I DICTATE TO HER.
WHETHER OR NOT SHE PUT IT DOWN, I DON'T KNOW.
Q ALL RIGHT.
SO AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE NO RECORD AS TO WHERE THAT
IS?
A JUDGE BY YOUR PHOTOGRAPH, I THINK IT'S THE SECOND ROW
IN FRONT OF HOUSE. THAT'S THE THIRD HOUSE, IN FRONT OF PLANTER.
THAT'S THE SECOND ROW.
Q YOU HAVE NO INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION?
A NO. NO.
Q AND YOU HAVE NO INDEPENDENT RECOLLECTION OF WHERE THE
OTHER ONE IS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A I ONLY HAVE ONE SHOT VERY SHORT TIME. I PHOTOGRAPH
DOCUMENT IT.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
LET'S -- ARE WE GOING TO TAKE A RECESS AT 2:45, YOUR
HONOR, BECAUSE I WANTED TO SWITCH TO THE OTHER PRINT AND MAYBE WE
CAN TAKE A RECESS NOW.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'LL TAKE OUR
MID-AFTERNOON 15-MINUTE RECESS AT THIS POINT.
REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU.
DR. LEE, YOU CAN STEP DOWN.
WE'LL BE IN RECESS FOR 15.
(RECESS.)
(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. LET'S HAVE
IT QUIET IN THE COURTROOM.
ALL RIGHT.
ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. THE JURY IS NOT
PRESENT.
MR. GOLDBERG, YOU GOT YOUR EXHIBITS ALL SET UP?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT'S WHAT I'M JUST DOUBLE-CHECKING RIGHT
NOW JUST TO MAKE SURE.
YES, I DO.
THE COURT: DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THE COURT REPORTER ASKED ME TO
CHANGE THE MAGNETIC STICKERS TO EXHIBIT 598.
THE COURT: I THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY MRS. ROBERTSON.
MR. GOLDBERG: OH, I'M SORRY.
THE COURT: THE COURT CLERK.
MR. GOLDBERG: YES. CORRECT.
(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.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE
MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. DR. HENRY LEE IS ON THE WITNESS STAND
UNDERGOING CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, JUST --
THE COURT: HOLD ON JUST A SECOND. WE'VE GOT ALL OUR
EQUIPMENT?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, I PUT THE NO. 10
STICKER ON THE -- ON EXHIBIT A, 598-A ON THE 11TH TILE, AND DR.
LEE THEN SAID THAT HE HAD SEEN SOMETHING ON 11 DOWN, THREE ACROSS
>FROM LEFT TO RIGHT. I'VE MOVED IT, I'VE MOVED NO. 10 IN MR.
SCHECK'S PRESENCE NOW TO THE 10TH TILE.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
SO WE'RE AGREED THAT THE MARKER FOR THE 10TH TILE IS
NOW CORRECTLY PLACED ON THIS EXHIBIT, CORRECT?
THE WITNESS: YES.
MR. SCHECK: THERE WAS OTHER TESTIMONY ABOUT OTHER TILES,
BUT --
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, DR. LEE --
THE COURT: THE APPELLATE COURTS WILL JUST LOVE THIS
RECORD.
MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT?
THE COURT: NEVER MIND.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION
TO PHOTOGRAPHS 598-A, B AND C, DO YOU SEE SOME FOOTPRINTS ON
THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT HAS BEEN
IDENTIFIED AS A BRUNO MAGLI DESIGN?
A YES.
Q DO YOU SEE ANY ITEMS ON THERE THAT CAN BE IDENTIFIED
AS FOOTPRINTS THAT ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE BRUNO MAGLI DESIGN?
A I SEE SOME IMPRINT EVIDENCE IN DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT TYPE OF PATTERN. IT'S -- IF WE CALL THIS COLUMN
NO. 1, COLUMN NO. 2, WE CAN SEE COLUMN NO. 1 AND COLUMN NO. 2,
THEY ARE VIVID PATTERN WHICH CONSISTENT WITH BRUNO MAGLI.
OF COURSE, THOSE OTHER FOCUS, I DON'T KNOW. COLUMN
NO. 3, THEY ARE SOME APPEAR TO BE IMPRINT EVIDENCE WHICH I DON'T
KNOW WHAT KIND OF PATTERN.
Q OKAY.
SO THE ONLY IMPRINT EVIDENCE ON ANY OF THESE PHOTOS
THAT WE CAN SAY IS BOTH -- THAT WE CAN SAY IS A SHOE IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE BRUNO MAGLI DESIGN; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THESE TWO IN FOCUS. THESE TWO IS IN FOCUS, I CAN
TELL. THE REST OF THEM I CAN NOT TELL.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DID YOU TAKE A LOOK AT BILL BODZIAK'S DIAGRAMS
AND NOTES WITH RESPECT TO HIS INVESTIGATION OF SHOEPRINT EVIDENCE
IN THE BUNDY LOCATION?
A NO. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I SEE THIS BEAUTIFUL
CHART. AND A LOT OF BLUE, BLACK -- DARK BLUE, ALL DIFFERENT
COLOR WHICH APPEARS TO BE INDICATES SOME FOOTPRINT.
MR. GOLDBERG: CAN I PUT THAT UP ON ANOTHER EASEL, YOUR
HONOR?
THE COURT: YES.
ALL RIGHT.
AND, MR. FAIRTLOUGH, WHICH DIAGRAM IS THIS?
MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 387-B.
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WHILE WE'RE WAITING FOR HIM TO PUT
THAT UP, THE OTHER ITEMS THAT YOU SAID ARE IMPRINTS THAT YOU CAN
SEE --
A YES.
Q -- ARE YOU SAYING THAT THOSE ARE SHOEPRINTS OR NOT
SHOEPRINTS OR "I DON'T KNOW"?
A I CAN TELL YOU THAT IMPRINT, BUT I CAN NOT TELL YOU
DEFINITIVELY THOSE ARE SHOEPRINTS.
Q OKAY.
NOW, DOCTOR, WERE YOU AWARE OF ANY TESTIMONY BY MR.
BODZIAK ON CROSS-EXAMINATION OFFERING A THEORY THAT SOMEONE
PERHAPS TURNED AROUND AND WENT BACK DOWN THE WALK AS WELL WEARING
BRUNO MAGLI SHOES?
A WHEN I EXAM SOME CRIME SCENE PHOTO, ALTHOUGH IT'S A
SECOND, THIRD GENERATION, I DO SEE COUPLE FOOTPRINT OUT OF PLACE
IN DIFFERENT DIRECTION. SO I CONCUR WITH HIS OPINION. THAT'S
JUST INTERPRETATION.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT THAT THERE SEEMED TO BE FEWER PRINTS PERHAPS --
WELL, STRIKE THAT.
OKAY.
NOW, DOCTOR --
MR. GOLDBERG: EXCUSE ME.
YOUR HONOR, I'D LIKE TO MARK AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN
ORDER, THAT WOULD BE 598-E AND F --
THE COURT: 599?
I'M SORRY. 598. WE'RE STILL DOING THE MAGNETIC --
MR. GOLDBERG: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND E IS WHAT APPEARS TO BE A --
MR. SCHECK: THIS WOULD BE D I THINK.
MR. GOLDBERG: NO. WE ALREADY HAD --
THE COURT: A, B, C, D.
MR. GOLDBERG: YEAH. HE'S RIGHT. I THOUGHT WE ALREADY
MARKED A D. SORRY.
SO D IS GOING TO BE --
OH, EXCUSE ME. THERE IS A D. OKAY. YES, THERE WAS A
D, YOUR HONOR.
OKAY.
AS E, WHAT APPEARS TO BE A FURTHER-AWAY VIEW OF WHAT
APPEARS TO BE A PARALLEL LINE IMPRINT THAT INTERSECTS WITH A
TILE, AND THEN AS F, WHAT APPEARS TO BE A CLOSER VIEW OF THE SAME
PHOTOGRAPH.
(PEO'S 598-E AND F FOR ID = MAG. PHOTOS)
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, BEFORE HE DESCRIBES WHAT THEY ARE,
MAYBE HE COULD SHOW THEM TO THE WITNESS AND HE'LL AUTHENTICATE
THEM IN THAT FASHION.
THE COURT: HE GETS TO DO IT THE WAY HE WANTS TO DO IT,
COUNSEL.
MR. SCHECK: I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT
IT CONTAINS.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, FOR THE RECORD, I'M TAKING C AND
B DOWN, BUT I'M GOING TO LEAVE A UP.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND, DOCTOR, I'M GOING TO PUT A ON
ITS SIDE. AND THE WAY THAT I'VE ARRANGED THIS, THE DOG'S BOWL IS
ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q SO LOOKING AT IT, IT'S AS IF WE'RE SORT OF LOOKING
DOWN THE WALK TOWARDS THE ALLEY; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS E,
AND I'M ORIENTING THAT SO THAT THE TILE IS PARALLEL WITH THE
FLOOR AS IT'S ON THE BOARD, FLOOR IN THIS COURTROOM; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU F, AND I'M ORIENTING THAT
SIMILARLY SO THAT THE TILE IS PARALLEL WITH THIS COURTROOM FLOOR.
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, ARE THESE -- DO THESE TWO PHOTOGRAPHS DEPICT THE
SAME SCENE?
A APPEARS TO BE DEPICT THE SAME SCENE. APPEARS TO BE
ENHANCED PHOTO.
Q EXCUSE ME?
A ENHANCED PHOTO.
Q YOU MEAN ENHANCED, ENLARGED OR --
A ENLARGED OR ENHANCED BECAUSE THE CONTRAST IS MUCH
BETTER THAN BEFORE, MUCH BETTER THAN MY ORIGINAL PHOTO.
Q LOOKING AT THIS PHOTOGRAPH OR THESE TWO PHOTOGRAPHS
NOW, DOES THIS ITEM THAT INTERSECTS -- THE IMPRINT THAT
INTERSECTS THE WALKWAY APPEAR TO BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE
SHOEPRINT THAN IN THE PHOTOS THAT YOU LOOKED AT?
A MAYBE. I CAN NOT -- I STILL CALL IMPRINT. I CAN NOT
SAY THAT'S A FOOT.
Q NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR, THERE
APPEAR TO BE A NUMBER OF DARK SPOTS.
A IMPRINTS, YES.
Q LITTLE DARK PATCHES?
A YES.
Q WERE THERE BERRIES ON THE WALK?
A YES. THERE ARE BERRIES ON THE WALK.
Q AND DID THE BERRIES LEAVE NUMEROUS BERRY STAINS IN
THE AREA?
A WELL, I GUESS WITH BERRIES, SOMEBODY STEP ON THE
BERRY, GOING TO BE SOME BERRY STAIN.
Q SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE LITTLE DARK SPLOTCHES
ON THE PHOTOGRAPH, THOSE APPEAR TO BE --
A THOSE ARE RESIDUE OF THE BERRY. NOT THE BERRY STAIN.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DOCTOR, I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION BACK
TO BILL BODZIAK'S DIAGRAM.
A YES, SIR.
Q AND LET'S COUNT OVER TO THE 10TH TILE. ONE, TWO --
OKAY.
SO THE 10 -- THE 10TH TILE IS TO THE -- RIGHT BETWEEN
J AND K AND H AND I; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q SO THE CLOSEST PHOTOGRAPHS WE HAVE TO THAT TILE WOULD
BE PHOTOGRAPHS DEPICTING H, I, J AND K, CORRECT?
A THIS BY THE WAY NOT THE 10TH TILE. THIS E AND F BY
NO MEANS IT'S NOT 10TH TILE. ALSO GOING TO BE 10TH TILE AS I
JUST NOTICED THE CHART WAS UPSIDE DOWN AND SHOULD BE HERE, FROM
HERE, THE SIDE INSTEAD OF ON THIS SIDE (INDICATING).
Q OKAY.
NOW, BY SECOND ONE, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? THE
OTHER THAT'S NOT ON --
A NOT -- YOU DID NOT SHOW. NOT SHOWS THE FOOTPRINT.
Q OKAY.
THE ONE THAT'S A FOOTPRINT IS ON WHAT TILE?
A 10TH TILE. ONE ZERO.
Q OKAY.
ONE ZERO. SO THAT SHOULD BE BETWEEN H, I, J AND K?
A IT'S HERE (INDICATING). IT'S NOT. IT'S LITTLE OFF
H, I AND J, K.
Q BUT DO YOU HAVE ANY NOTE -- YOU DON'T HAVE ANY NOTES
REFLECTING WHERE THAT IS?
A ONLY DR. BARBARA WOLF, I DICTATE TO HER. SHE WROTE
DOWN, "10TH TILE PARALLEL LINE FOOTPRINT."
Q AND WITH RESPECT TO THE ONE THAT'S INTERSECTING THE
TILE --
A YES.
Q -- THAT'S THE ONE WHERE WE DON'T KNOW WHERE IT IS?
A PROBABLY FIVE OR SEVEN, IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THE
NOTES DO NOT REFLECT.
Q SO E AND F, WE DON'T KNOW.
A WE DON'T KNOW.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE -- AND JUST SO THAT
WE'RE CLEAR, E AND F ARE THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU TOOK ON JUNE
THE 25TH?
A NO. E -- I TOOK SOME PHOTOGRAPH. YOU USE MY
PHOTOGRAPH TO ENLARGE THOSE, ENHANCE. SHOW ADDITIONAL -- AS I
POINTED OUT, THERE ARE NUMEROUS IMPRINT EVIDENCE ON HERE. THIS
WIGGLY LINE, THAT ANOTHER IMPRINT EVIDENCE. HERE IS ANOTHER
PARALLEL LINE IMPRINT EVIDENCE, ACTUALLY BETTER THAN MY OWN
PHOTO (INDICATING).
Q NOW, DOCTOR, WOULD YOU AGREE THOUGH THAT THESE
PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN ON JUNE THE 25TH, E AND F?
A MY PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN ON JUNE 25TH. THIS PHOTOGRAPH
DEFINITE NOT TAKEN ON JUNE 25TH.
Q WELL, ISN'T THIS -- THIS COMES FROM YOUR PHOTOGRAPH,
RIGHT?
A SO IT'S NOT FROM MY -- YOU ARE TAKING -- RETAKING MY
PHOTOGRAPH. SO YOU DID NOT TAKE ON JUNE 25TH, 1995.
Q OKAY.
WELL, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO SEMANTICS.
A NO, THAT NOT SEMANTIC. THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT --
Q OKAY.
A -- BECAUSE I TOOK MY PICTURE ON JUNE 25TH, 1994.
THIS PICTURE, SOMEBODY TOOK PICTURE OF MY PICTURE.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO MARK
AS PEOPLE'S 598-G A PHOTOGRAPH OF WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE SAME AS
E AND F EXCEPT THAT IT'S NOT ENLARGED.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
(PEO'S 598-G FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOCTOR, IS THIS YOUR PICTURE?
A YES, SIR. THIS IS MY PICTURE.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
LET'S JUST PUT THAT ON THE ELMO SO WE HAVE THAT.
WELL, CAN'T WE GET A LITTLE BETTER THAN THAT?
YOUR HONOR, I'D LIKE TO MARK AS PEOPLE'S 598-H -- DO
WE HAVE AN H STICKER? UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T HAVE AN H STICKER.
BUT FORTUITOUSLY, THIS HAPPENS TO BE FOOTPRINT H AND IT HAS AN H
IN IT.
(PEO'S 598-H FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR
ATTENTION, DR. LEE, TO A FOOTPRINT THAT IS IN PHOTOGRAPH H.
A YES.
Q NOW, DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE ONE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS
THAT WAS TAKEN ON JUNE THE 13TH?
A I TRUST YOU.
Q OKAY.
AND INCIDENTALLY, WHEN WE'RE TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS OF
SHOEPRINTS, IS IT PREFERABLE TO HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS IF POSSIBLE IN
BLACK AND WHITE?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: AND THEN I'D LIKE TO MARK AS PEOPLE'S 594-I
FOR IDENTIFICATION --
MR. SCHECK: 598.
THE COURT: 598.
MR. GOLDBERG: -- 598-I ANOTHER IMPRINT.
(PEO'S 598-I FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)
MR. GOLDBERG: LET'S TAKE ONE OF THESE DOWN.
THE COURT: OR YOU CAN JUST MOVE THEM OVER.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR
ATTENTION TO WHAT -- A PHOTOGRAPH THAT'S ACTUALLY BEEN PREVIOUSLY
TESTIFIED TO IN THIS CASE AND THIS CASE LABELED AS H.
A YES.
Q AND THAT IS ALSO DEPICTED ON BILL BODZIAK'S DIAGRAM.
THE COURT: 387-B.
MR. GOLDBERG: AS H.
THE WITNESS: OKAY.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND NOW I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR
ATTENTION TO A PHOTOGRAPH THAT'S BEEN MARKED AS I FOR
IDENTIFICATION HERE. NOW, I'D LIKE YOU TO COMPARE VERY CAREFULLY
E AND I FOR IDENTIFICATION.
A YES.
Q FIRST I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE HEEL
PRINT OF E AND I.
A ALL RIGHT.
Q DOES IT APPEAR THAT THE SAME PORTION -- DOES IT
APPEAR THAT THE SAME PORTION OF THE HEEL PRINT IS MISSING IN BOTH
OF THOSE?
A YES.
Q AND I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO WHAT WOULD
BE THE TOE AREA OF I.
A RIGHT.
Q DOES IT APPEAR THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE TOE AREA OF
I, THAT PORTIONS OF THE TOE AREA IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE TILE, THE
GROUTING IN THE TILE IS CONSISTENT WITH ITS PLACEMENT ON E?
A COULD BE. I CAN NOT SEE THAT DEFINITIVELY, BUT COULD
BE.
Q BUT YOU AGREE THAT THAT APPEARS TO BE --
A I DON'T HAVE THE TILE HERE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DOCTOR, DO YOU ALSO NOTICE WHAT APPEAR TO BE IN
THIS PHOTOGRAPH SOME POSSIBLE SPLATTER PATTERNS MAYBE FROM A
BIRD?
A IT'S A BIRD? IF YOU SAY THAT'S A BIRD, THAT'S FINE.
Q CAN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THAT SPATTER?
A HOW CAN I LOOK AT SPATTER, TELL YOU THAT'S A BIRD,
SQUIRREL. I CAN'T TELL.
Q WELL, WHATEVER IT IS, THERE'S SOME SORT OF A WHITE
SPATTER PATTERN IN THERE, CORRECT?
A COULD BE A -- COULD BE ANYTHING.
Q OKAY.
WHATEVER IT IS, THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME SORT OF A
WHITE MARK THAT APPEARS TO BE A SPATTER; IS THAT CORRECT?
A SURE.
Q OKAY.
NOW, I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO H FOR
IDENTIFICATION AND SEE WHETHER YOU CAN SEE THAT SAME SPATTER
PATTERN APPEARS IN BOTH PHOTOGRAPHS.
A LOOKS LIKE A SIMILAR PATTERN. BUT AGAIN, I CAN NOT
TELL YOU THAT'S A SPATTER OR NOT SPATTER. IF YOU JUST WANT TO --
ASKING ME IS THIS MORE OR LESS LIKE SAME LOCATION, I WILL TELL
YOU IT LOOKS LIKE MORE OR LESS SAME IF USE THIS RULER. WHETHER
OR NOT ON THE WALKWAY HAVE OTHER SO-CALLED BIRD OR SPATTER OR NOT
-- FOR EXAMPLE, HERE YOU HAVE ONE THAT'S NOT SHOWING IN THE PHOTO
(INDICATING). I DON'T KNOW.
Q OR THIS COULD BE A PHOTOGRAPHIC --
A THIS COULD BE A PHOTOGRAPH.
Q EXCEPT --
A ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WE GET INTO WITH
PHOTOGRAPHS.
A RIGHT. BECAUSE LOOK AT HERE, YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL
STUFF AND HERE I DON'T SEE ADDITIONAL STUFF.
Q NOW --
A IT'S KIND OF DIFFICULT TO JUST LOOK AT THE PICTURE.
THAT'S DIFFICULT.
Q NOW, DR. LEE --
A YES.
Q -- IF YOU ARE PHOTOGRAPHING FOOTPRINTS ON A WALKWAY,
YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO USE A TRIPOD; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT. SUPPOSED TO. ORDINARY, IF I DO MY
CRIME SCENE, I DO. IF YOU ASKING ME DID I TAKE THIS WITH TRIPOD,
NO. I ONLY HAVE 20 MINUTE, JUST ENOUGH TO GET THERE, TAKE COUPLE
SHOT AND GET OUT.
Q BUT IF SOMEONE DOES TAKE A PICTURE WITH A TRIPOD AND
THEY'RE NOT ADJUSTING -- THEY'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE TRIPOD AT THE
SAME HEIGHT AS THEY GO DOWN THE WALK, PHOTOGRAPHS SHOULD MATCH UP
MUCH BETTER THAN ONE WOULD EXPECT; IS THAT CORRECT?
A UH, IN CERTAIN ASPECT, IT'S CORRECT. BUT, FOR
EXAMPLE, THIS PHOTOGRAPH, IT'S NOT CORRECT. THE RULER GOT THE
SHOE AND IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A T-BAR SHAPE. THIS BLOCK
SOMETHING, HERE BLOCK SOMETHING. YOU ARE NOT SEEING THE WHOLE
SHOE.
Q WELL, DOCTOR, ALSO, YOU USED A METAL RETRACTOR.
A THAT'S ALL I GOT.
Q BUT YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO USE THAT IN SHOOTING
PHOTOGRAPHY, CORRECT?
A NO. NOT SAYING YOU NOT SUPPOSED TO. YOU ONLY CAN
USE WHATEVER YOU GET THAT MOMENT.
IF I BRING MY WHOLE CRIME SCENE LAB TO BUNDY THAT
DAY, OF COURSE I CAN. TRIPOD, LASER LOCK, I PROBABLY GOING TO
USE CHEMICAL ENHANCEMENT. I PROBABLY CAN DEVELOP MINIMAL, I JUST
LOOK AT A PHOTO --
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, ACTUALLY THERE'S NO QUESTION
PENDING AT THIS POINT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THE QUESTION WAS REGARDING THE RULER.
PROCEED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, DR. LEE, YOU DIDN'T USE ONE
OF THE RULERS THAT WAS MARKED IN EVIDENCE, DID YOU?
A THAT'S CALLED A RULER TOO.
THE COURT: APPEARS TO BE A TAPE MEASURE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
TAPE MEASURE. AT ANY RATE, LET'S NOT GET OFF THE
SUBJECT AND DEAL WITH ANOTHER AREA.
DO YOU NOTICE ON H THERE APPEARS TO BE A LITTLE
PORTION OF A HEEL PRINT ON --
A YES.
Q NOW, LET'S TRY TO MATCH UP WHAT APPEARS TO BE A
POSSIBLE SPLATTER PATTERN AND THE HEEL PRINT ON THESE TWO
PHOTOGRAPHS. AND NOW, I'M BLOCKING PART OF YOUR PHOTOGRAPH.
A YES.
Q DOES THAT APPEAR TO MATCH UP REASONABLY WELL?
A YES, SIR. YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
IS IT REASONABLE TO BELIEVE THAT THESE TWO
PHOTOGRAPHS ARE DEPICTING PORTIONS OF THE SAME TILE?
A YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, YOU --
MR. GOLDBERG: I'M BLOCKING THE JURORS AGAIN.
THE COURT: NO. NO. IT'S ALL RIGHT. THAT'S NOT MY
CONCERN.
I JUST NEED -- THE RECORD NEEDS TO REFLECT WHICH --
THAT YOU SUPERIMPOSED H OVER --
MR. GOLDBERG: OVER I.
THE COURT: OVER I.
THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: NOW, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT -- BACK
AT A. LET'S GO ON TO THE NINTH TILE.
WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A HEEL IMPRINT THAT SEEMS TO
BE CONSISTENT WITH H.
A RIGHT.
Q AND WE HAVE ANOTHER LARGER FOOTPRINT ON THE --
INTERSECTING THE EIGHTH AND NINTH TILES THAT APPEARS TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH I.
A YES.
Q CORRECT?
A CORRECT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION BACK TO YOUR
PHOTOGRAPH, THE JUNE -- EXCUSE ME -- THE JUNE 25TH PHOTOGRAPH.
A YES, SIR.
Q LET'S CALL IT THAT.
A YES.
Q DO YOU NOTICE WHAT APPEARS TO BE A SIMILAR HEEL PRINT
IN THE BOTTOM CORNER OF THE TILE?
A COULD BE.
Q AND DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE
PORTION OF THE HEEL PRINT IN H?
A YES, SIR.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WITH RESPECT TO -- NOW, DOCTOR, IS IT REASONABLE
TO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE NOW IDENTIFIED PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE
TAKEN ON THE 13TH OF THE SAME AREA THAT WAS PHOTOGRAPHED ON JUNE
THE 25TH?
A YES.
Q NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE WAVE-LIKE PATTERN --
A YES.
Q -- ON THE JUNE THE 25TH PHOTOGRAPH, IS IT FAIR TO SAY
THAT THAT DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE JUNE 13TH PHOTOGRAPHS?
A IT'S UNDER THE RULER FIRST THING. SECOND, THIS
PROBLEM MUCH LIGHTER COMPARED TO THIS PATTERN. IF IT MADE OF
BLOOD, THIS IS DARK, THIS GOING TO BE MUCH LIGHTER, WHICH IF YOU
HAVE A DIRECT LIGHTING, YOU PROBABLY -- JUST LIKE MR. GOLDBERG
JUST SAY, REFLECTION, BLEACH OUT, ALL KIND OF POSSIBILITY, YOU
MAY DON'T SEE IT.
AFTER TIME, AGING, PROGRESSION, THIS THING GETS
DARKER, DARKER. THAT'S WHY THE CONTRAST YOU START CAN SEE.
UNLESS YOU CAN SEE IT, YOU CAN'T TAKE PICTURE.
Q WELL, DR. LEE, WITH RESPECT TO THE JUNE THE 25TH
PHOTOGRAPH --
A YES. RIGHT.
Q -- AND THE WAVE-LIKE PATTERN, THIS WAS NOT ONE OF THE
ITEMS THAT YOU IDENTIFIED AS BEING THE PARALLEL LINE?
A NO.
Q AND THIS WAS NOT SOMETHING YOU IDENTIFIED BEING
CONSISTENT WITH BLOOD; IS THAT CORRECT?
A I DID NOT TEST -- I TEST THIS AREA. I TEST SOME
OTHER AREA, TEST COUPLE AREA (INDICATING). I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY
SPOT SO MANY -- SO LONG AGO.
Q SO YOU CAN'T RECALL?
A I CAN'T RECALL.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT JUST SO THAT IT'S CLEAR, IF WE LOOK AT I AND H --
A YES.
Q -- AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE TILE
IN THE AREA OF THE HEEL PRINT ON H --
A RIGHT.
Q -- DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE THE SAME AS THE
INTERSECTION ON E THAT ALSO CONTAINS A PARTIAL HEEL PRINT?
A YES.
Q NOW, IS THERE ANY PHOTOGRAPHIC -- WOULD YOU AGREE
THAT THERE IS NO INDICATION OF THE PARALLEL LINE IMPRINT ON THE
JUNE THE 13TH PHOTOGRAPHS?
A NOT WHAT WE CAN SEE.
Q BECAUSE HERE WE SEE A FAIRLY DARK IMPRESSION; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND WHAT I'M REFERRING TO HERE, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE
JUNE THE 25TH --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- PHOTOGRAPH. BUT WE DO NOT SEE THAT ON THE JUNE
13TH PHOTOGRAPH; IS THAT CORRECT?
A WITH THIS PARTICULAR PHOTO.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT MR.
GOLDBERG WAS POINTING TOWARDS I THINK IT'S 598-H AT THAT MOMENT,
THE BLACK AND WHITE.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO MOVE
ON TO A DIFFERENT, BUT RELATED AREA. BUT BEFORE I DO THAT, WOULD
IT BE POSSIBLE FOR THE JURORS TO GET A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF THE
PHOTOGRAPHS THAT ARE NOW ON THE BOARD?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LET'S START WITH JUROR NO. 1.
(THE BOARD WITH PHOTOGRAPHS,
PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 598 WAS
EXAMINED BY EACH ONE OF THE
JURORS.)
A JUROR: CAN YOU MOVE IT DOWN A LITTLE BIT?
THE COURT: MR. FAIRTLOUGH, THE JURORS WOULD LIKE IT DOWN A
LITTLE BIT.
(MR. FAIRTLOUGH COMPLIES.)
THE COURT: THANK YOU.
ANY OF THE JURORS WANT TO USE A MAGNIFYING GLASS
LOOKING AT ANY OF THIS?
A JUROR: IT'S FINE.
THE COURT: FINE?
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THE RECORD WILL REFLECT THAT EACH OF THE JURORS HAVE
HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CAREFULLY EXAMINE 598.
MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: EXCUSE ME. SORRY, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: PROCEED.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I WANTED TO SHOW ONE OF THE
VIDEOS THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY MARKED AS 101, BUT MR. SCHECK NOW
WANTS TO APPROACH.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, WHILE WE ARE DOING THAT, IS IT
OKAY IF WE TAKE THESE BOARDS DOWN?
THE COURT: YES, PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD AT THE BENCH:)
THE COURT: OVER AT THE SIDEBAR.
MR. SCHECK.
MR. SCHECK: YES.
MR. GOLDBERG NOW INDICATES TO ME THAT HE WANTS TO
SHOW THE JURORS THE VIDEO THAT PREVIOUSLY HAD BEEN INTRODUCED AND
I DON'T HAVE A CLEAR RECOLLECTION OF, AND NOT THE ONES THAT HE
PREVIEWED EARLIER, AND I JUST WANT TO SEE IT. I MAY HAVE A
POSSIBLE RELEVANCY OBJECTION.
THE COURT: WHICH ONE DO YOU WANT?
MR. GOLDBERG: HE HAD BROUGHT THIS UP BEFORE, YOUR HONOR, I
BELIEVE. I'M NOT 100 PERCENT POSITIVE. IT'S BEEN A LONG DAY.
THE COURT: TOO LONG.
MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, IT WAS WORTH IT FOR US.
MR. COCHRAN: YOU SAY THAT.
MR. GOLDBERG: IT WAS.
THE COURT: WHAT VIDEO DO YOU WANT TO SHOW?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THIS WAS THE VIDEO MISS CLARK
WAS REFERRING TO AND THAT I REFERRED TO EARLIER THIS MORNING OF
SHOWING THE POLICE OFFICER GOING UP THE WALK. IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE
I INDICATED TO COUNSEL LET'S FORGET THE OTHER ONES, LET'S JUST
SAVE TIME. NOW HE WANTS ME TO SHOW ALL THREE.
MR. SCHECK: NO. NOT ALL THREE. I JUST DON'T RECALL WHICH
ONE THIS IS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
WE CAN --
MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT DOES HE WANT ME TO DO? CHANGE MY MIND
AND SHOW ALL THREE OF THEM?
THE COURT: HE'S JUST ASKING TO SEE IT. WE CAN SHOW IT TO
HIM ON THE MONITOR, JUST ON THE MONITOR ON COUNSEL TABLE. WE CAN
DO THAT.
MR. GOLDBERG: WE'LL HAVE MR. FAIRTLOUGH DO THAT.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. GOLDBERG, DO YOU WANT TO SHOW TO THE JURY AND TO
THE WITNESS A VIDEOTAPE THAT HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN SHOWN?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: AND WHAT EXHIBIT IS THIS?
MR. GOLDBERG: IT'S 101.
THE COURT: I'M GOING TO ASK TO REVIEW THE MATTER FIRST SO
THE COURT AND COUNSEL CAN SEE IT ONLY.
MR. GOLDBERG: I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS OF DR. LEE PRIOR TO
THAT IF I MIGHT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
BUT JUST SO OUR TECHNICAL STAFF CAN SET THAT UP.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IF
FOOTPRINTS WERE DEPOSITED ON THE BUNDY WALK AFTER CRIME SCENE
PHOTOGRAPHY WAS DONE AND AFTER THE CRIME SCENE WAS SHUT DOWN,
THAT THOSE FOOTPRINTS WOULD NOT BE OF FORENSIC RELEVANCE?
A UH, I CAN'T SAY THAT TOTALLY. DEPENDS WHAT KIND OF
CONTEXT YOU PUT IN. SOMETIME A CRIMINAL GO BACK TO THE SCENE AND
WE DO TAKE CONSIDERATIONS.
Q OKAY.
WELL, OTHER THAN SOMETHING THAT'S COMPLETELY
SPECULATIVE, WOULD YOU SAY THAT GENERALLY IF A POLICE OFFICER OR
A CITIZEN, WHOEVER IT WAS, DEPOSITED THE SHOEPRINTS AFTER THE
PHOTOGRAPHS AND AFTER THE CRIME SCENE WAS SHUT DOWN, THAT THAT'S
NOT SOMETHING OF FORENSIC RELEVANCE?
A IF IN BLOOD, THAT'S STILL SIGNIFICANT.
Q IF THEY TRAIPSE THROUGH BLOOD AND THEN DEPOSIT
SHOEPRINTS, YOU THINK THAT THAT'S SIGNIFICANT?
A YES. YES.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS.
IF A POLICE OFFICER OR A CITIZEN OR A PHOTOGRAPHER
TRAIPSES THROUGH BLOOD AFTER THE CRIME SCENE'S SHUT DOWN AND
DEPOSITS SHOEPRINTS, IS THAT GOING TO HELP YOU IDENTIFY THE
SUSPECT?
A IF ALL THE EVIDENCE ALREADY COLLECTED, THEY'RE BOND
AT THE SCENE, THERE NO SIGNIFICANCE.
MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
CAN WE NOW PREVIEW THE TAPE ON THE COUNSEL TABLE
MONITORS?
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. JUST ON COUNSEL TABLE, PLEASE.
(AT 3:38 P.M., PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 101,
A VIDEOTAPE, WAS PLAYED FOR COUNSEL
AND THE COURT.)
(AT 3:40 P.M., THE PLAYING OF THE
VIDEOTAPE CONCLUDED.)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK, DO YOU RECOLLECT THE VIDEOTAPE?
ALL RIGHT.
DO YOU REMEMBER THE VIDEOTAPE, MR. SCHECK?
MR. GOLDBERG, DO YOU WISH TO PLAY THIS FOR THE JURY?
MR. GOLDBERG: YES, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. FAIRTLOUGH, WOULD YOU REWIND IT AND PLAY IT,
PLEASE.
MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES, YOUR HONOR.
(AT 3:40 P.M., PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 101,
A VIDEOTAPE, WAS PLAYED FOR THE
JURY.)
(AT 3:42 P.M., THE PLAYING OF
THE VIDEOTAPE CONCLUDED.)
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, DID YOU JUST VIEW THE
VIDEOTAPE THAT WE SHOWED TO THE JURORS?
A UH, THAT'S FIRST TIME I SEE THIS VIDEOTAPE.
Q NOW, IF ONE OF THESE OFFICERS THAT ARE DEPICTED IN
THE VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITED SHOEPRINTS AFTER THE CRIME SCENE WAS SHUT
DOWN, WOULD THAT HELP US DETERMINE WHO COMMITTED THE MURDERS?
A UH, I DON'T THINK THESE TWO OFFICER DEPOSIT THOSE
SHOEPRINT.
Q WELL, WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS, IF THESE OFFICERS
DEPOSITED SHOEPRINTS, WOULD IT HELP US DETERMINE WHO COMMITTED
THE MURDERS?
A IF SET BELONGS TO THEM, NO.
Q AND IF THESE OFFICERS OR SOME OTHER MEMBER OF THE
PUBLIC OR SOMEONE ELSE THAT CAME IN LATER DEPOSITED THE
SHOEPRINTS THAT WERE SEEN ON YOUR PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN ON JUNE THE
25TH --
A YES.
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION. VAGUE AS TO WHICH PHOTOGRAPHS.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: THE TWO PHOTOGRAPHS ON THE WALKWAY,
WOULD THAT HELP US DETERMINE WHO THE KILLER WAS?
A UH, AGAIN, WHAT THE PHOTOGRAPH I TOOK IN JUNE 25TH IS
PARALLEL LINE DESIGN. THESE TWO OFFICER, I DON'T THINK THEIR
SHOE SOLE PATTERN IS SIMILAR TO THE PARALLEL DESIGN. IT'S ON THE
SECOND PLATFORM.
THIS FOOTPRINT HAS A LOT IN BLOOD. NOT GREAT AMOUNT
OF BLOOD. IF GREAT AMOUNT OF BLOOD, SHOULD SEE MUCH DARKER
COLOR. WHAT I SEE, IT'S GRAYISH COLOR. NEED A LOT OF EXPERIENCE
TO RECOGNIZE THAT. IF THOSE FOOTPRINT SAY IN FACT LEFT BY THESE
TWO OFFICER, THEN NO SIGNIFICANCE.
Q NOW, SIR, DID YOU EXAMINE THE SHOES OF ANY OF THE
OFFICERS DEPICTED IN THE PHOTO?
A THESE TWO OFFICER, IF STANDARD POLICE OFFICER ISSUED,
MAYBE I DON'T THINK THEY ARE PARALLEL DESIGN.
Q OKAY.
AND THAT WAS THE BASIS OF YOUR VIEW; IS THAT --
A RIGHT.
Q NOW, IF THIS JURY HAS ALREADY HEARD AND SEEN EVIDENCE
THAT LOS ANGELES POLICE OFFICERS WEAR SHOES WITH A VERY WIDE
ASSORTMENT AND ARRAY OF SOLE DESIGNS, WOULD THAT CHANGE YOUR
VIEW?
A IF YOU CAN GIVE ME THOSE SHOES, I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT
AWAY WHAT TYPE OF SHOES.
Q THAT'S NOT QUITE WHAT I ASKED.
IF MR. BODZIAK THROUGH -- IN HIS TESTIMONY INTRODUCED
AND TALKED ABOUT NUMEROUS PICTURES OF POLICE OFFICERS' SHOEPRINTS
SHOWING A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT PATTERNS --
A WELL, THEN YOU SHOULD ASK MR. BODZIAK.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
MAY I JUST HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: CERTAINLY.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, HYPOTHETICALLY, IF THESE
POLICE OFFICERS THAT WE SAW IN THE VIDEO WALKED THROUGH THE AREA
AFTER THE CRIME SCENE WAS BROKEN DOWN, IF NICOLE BROWN'S FAMILY
WALKED THROUGH THE CRIME SCENE AFTER IT WAS BROKEN DOWN ON JUNE
THE 13TH, IF AN INDIVIDUAL BY THE NAME OF RON HARDY WALKED
THROUGH AND HOSED PORTIONS OF THE CRIME SCENE ON JUNE THE 14TH
AND A NUMBER OF OTHER PEOPLE WALKED DOWN THE WALKWAY PRIOR TO
THE TIME THAT YOU GOT THERE --
A YES, SIR.
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION. IMPROPER FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: -- CAN YOU ELIMINATE THE
POSSIBILITY THAT THOSE PEOPLE DEPOSITED PRINTS AT THE SCENE?
A I CAN NOT ELIMINATE.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DOCTOR.
THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: MR. SCHECK, DO YOU NEED A BRIEF BREAK TO
REORGANIZE?
MR. SCHECK: A FEW MINUTES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LOTS OF
EQUIPMENT. WE'RE NOW GOING TO RESHIFT TO REDIRECT EXAMINATION.
I'M GOING TO GIVE COUNSEL A COUPLE MINUTES JUST TO ARRANGE THE
EXHIBITS.
LET ME JUST ASK YOU TO STEP BACK IN THE JURY ROOM FOR
A QUICK COMFORT BREAK, AND WE'LL CALL YOU OUT IN ABOUT 10
MINUTES.
ALL RIGHT.
LET'S TAKE 10.
ALL RIGHT.
DOCTOR, YOU MAY STEP DOWN.
(RECESS.)
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
MR. SCHECK, ARE WE ALL ORGANIZED?
MR. SCHECK: I THINK SO, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
BACK ON THE RECORD.
ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. THE JURY IS NOT
PRESENT.
DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.
WE'LL BREAK AT FIVE.
LET ME SEE MISS CLARK AND MR. DARDEN.
(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.
THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED.
ALL RIGHT.
LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY
ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. AND DR. HENRY LEE IS AGAIN ON
THE WITNESS STAND. THE PROSECUTION HAS COMPLETED THEIR
CROSS-EXAMINATION.
AND, MR. SCHECK, YOU MAY REDIRECT.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, BEFORE MR. SCHECK STARTS, I
WANTED TO MARK TWO PRINTOUTS, PRINTOUT OF 598-C, I GUESS THIS IS
GOING TO BE 598-C-1, AND IT'S A PRINTOUT OF WHAT APPEAR TO BE THE
PRINTS THAT WERE ON THE SECOND AND THIRD LINES, TILES RATHER AND
I'D LIKE TO MARK AS 595-A WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE PRINTOUT OF THE
EVIDENCE ENVELOPE WITH THE YELLOW CIRCLE AROUND THE DOT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. SO MARKED.
(PEO'S 595-A FOR ID = PRINTOUT)
(PEO'S 598-C-1 FOR ID = PRINTOUT)
THE COURT: MR. SCHECK.
MR. SCHECK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. SCHECK:
Q DR. LEE, MR. GOLDBERG ASKED YOU A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS
TODAY ABOUT IMPRINT EVIDENCE.
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, FIRST, LET'S TALK ABOUT IMPRINT EVIDENCE ON THE
ENVELOPE, THE PIECE OF PAPER AND MR. GOLDMAN'S JEANS.
DR. LEE, IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH OF THOSE
ITEMS WAS RECOVERED ON JUNE 13TH?
A YES, SIR.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. SCHECK: THIS IS 1339, YOUR HONOR, THE BOARD ENTITLED,
"IMPRINT EVIDENCE AT BUNDY, IMPRINT EVIDENCE ON MR. GOLDMAN'S
BLUE JEANS."
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, IN THE SECTIONS MARKED
IMPRINT 1, IMPRINT 2, IMPRINT 3, ARE THESE IMPRINTS?
A YES, SIR. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH IMPRINT.
Q IS -- YOU MADE -- YOU HAVE A DISTINCTION HERE BETWEEN
SCIENTIFIC FACT AND INTERPRETATION.
A YES, SIR.
Q AS FAR AS YOU ARE CONCERNED, ARE THESE IMPRINTS
SCIENTIFIC FACT?
A YES.
Q DR. LEE, YOU WERE SHOWN SOME VIDEOTAPES OF POLICE
OFFICERS WALKING OUT OF THE CRIME SCENE AFTER IT WAS BROKEN DOWN.
A YES.
Q FOR THEIR SHOES TO HAVE LEFT IMPRINTS ON MR.
GOLDMAN'S JEANS, THEY'D HAVE TO STEP ON THEM, RIGHT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IN THEORY, YES.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, FOR A DETECTIVE OR A
PHOTOGRAPHER VISITING THE CRIME SCENE ON JUNE 13TH, TO MAKE
IMPRINTS ON MR. GOLDMAN'S JEANS, THEY'D HAVE TO STEP ON THEM?
A IN THEORY, YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE BECAUSE HE
DIDN'T SAY THEY WERE SHOEPRINTS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS ENTITLED, "IMPRINT
EVIDENCE AT BUNDY," 1338, CONSISTS OF FOUR PHOTOGRAPHS, IMPRINT
ON PAPER, CLOSE-UP OF IMPRINT, IMPRINT ON ENVELOPE, CLOSE-UP OF
IMPRINT.
I ALSO HAVE 1338-A, WHICH IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE
PIECE OF PAPER THAT HAS BLUE MARKINGS ON IT ENTITLED "PLP" AND
1338-B, WHICH IS THE ENVELOPE THAT ALSO HAS BLUE MARKINGS ON IT
ENTITLED "PLP."
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, ARE THESE PARALLEL LINES,
IMPRINTS ON THE PIECE OF PAPER AND THE ENVELOPE, FIRST OF ALL,
ARE THEY IMPRINTS?
A IT'S CONSISTENT WITH IMPRINT.
Q IS THAT A SCIENTIFIC FACT, SIR?
A YES, SIR.
Q DR. LEE, COULD THE POLICE OFFICERS THAT WERE JUST
SHOWN IN THE VIDEOTAPE BY MR. GOLDBERG HAVE MADE THE PARALLEL
LINE IMPRINTS ON THE PIECE OF PAPER ON THE ENVELOPE?
A NO.
MR. GOLDBERG: SPECULATION, YOUR HONOR. MOTION TO STRIKE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, IF A PHOTOGRAPHER OR
DETECTIVE THAT CAME TO THE SCENE WERE TO HAVE MADE THESE PARALLEL
LINE IMPRINTS ON THE PIECE OF PAPER AND THE ENVELOPE, THEY WOULD
HAVE HAD TO COME OVER AND STEP ON THEM?
A YES, SIR.
Q DR. LEE, SHOW YOU WHAT IS I GUESS PEOPLE'S 598-A,
YOUR HONOR --
MR. SCHECK: AND THIS IS ONE OF THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT HAVE
BEEN BLOWN UP AND MAGNETIZED.
THE COURT: YES.
MR. SCHECK: AND THIS IS THE ONE THAT'S ENTITLED "A" AND
NOW HAS A NO. 10 ON A TILE.
THE WITNESS: MAY I STEP DOWN?
THE COURT: YES. DR. LEE, YOU MAY STEP DOWN.
MR. SCHECK: AND, YOUR HONOR, DO YOU HAVE A REMOVAL STICKUM
ARROW SO THAT I CAN PUT A MARK ON IT AND THEN REMOVE IT?
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, YOU INDICATED ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT YOU HAD NEVER SEEN A PHOTOGRAPH OF THIS
SCENE OF THIS QUALITY BEFORE.
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND WHEN MR. GOLDBERG WAS ASKING YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT
IMPRINT IMPRESSIONS, YOU SAID THAT YOU HAD OBSERVED SOMETHING ON
THIS PHOTOGRAPH?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND THAT WAS ON -- COUNTING I GUESS, USING THE TILES
WHERE THE NO. 10 IS, IT WOULD BE THE ONE, TWO, THIRD ONE OVER?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: LEADING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
PLEASE SHOW THE JURY BY PUTTING A YELLOW STICKUM --
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO ASK THAT NOTHING BE
PUT ON THAT'S GOING TO OBLITERATE PART OF THE EXHIBIT.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
THIS IS A REMOVABLE --
MR. GOLDBERG: OH, THIS IS REMOVABLE?
THE COURT: -- POST-IT TYPE --
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.
THE COURT: -- POINT.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: YES.
DR. LEE, COULD YOU PLEASE INDICATE WHAT IMPRINT
IMPRESSIONS YOU SAW IN THE AREA OF -- WITHDRAWN. MISUSE OF WORD.
ALL RIGHT.
IN TERMS OF IMPRINTS ON THAT PHOTOGRAPH WHERE YOU'VE
INDICATED WITH THE YELLOW LINE, COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN TO THE
JURY WHAT'S THERE?
A HERE WE SEE, IF WE USE NO. 10 AS COLUMN NO. 1., NO.
10 IS COLUMN NO. 1. 10. THIS PORTION, ASSUME THIS COLUMN NO. 1.
NO. 1. 2, 3, THE THIRD COLUMN.
ON THE THIRD COLUMN, I CAN SEE IMPRINT EVIDENCE.
COLUMN NO. 3, 1, 2, 3, I CAN SEE IMPRINT EVIDENCE. COLUMN NO. 1,
NO. 2, NO. 3, I CAN SEE IMPRINT EVIDENCE ALONG THIS COLUMN
(INDICATING).
Q NOW, DR. LEE, IN TERMS OF THE IMPRINTS THAT YOU
DESCRIBED FOR US BEFORE ON THE ENVELOPE, THE PIECE OF PAPER, ON
THE JEANS, ARE THOSE CONSISTENT WITH HAVING BEEN MADE IN BLOOD?
MR. GOLDBERG: LEADING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WITH RESPECT TO BLOOD, ALL RIGHT, ARE
THE IMPRINTS CONSISTENT WITH HAVING BEEN MADE IN BLOOD?
A YES.
Q NOW, ARE THERE METHODS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO A
FORENSIC SCIENTIST WHEN EXAMINING IMPRINT EVIDENCE AT A CRIME
SCENE THAT HAD BEEN MADE IN BLOOD TO VISUALIZE THEM?
A YES. SO CALL ENHANCEMENT TECHNIQUE.
Q NOW, CALLING YOUR ATTENTION AGAIN TO 583-A AND THE
SCENE AS DEPICTED HERE, WHAT TECHNIQUES COULD HAVE BEEN USED ON
JUNE 13TH WITH RESPECT TO ENHANCING IMPRINT EVIDENCE HERE?
MR. GOLDBERG: BEYOND THE SCOPE, IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
WHAT -- WHAT TECHNIQUES ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FOR
ENHANCING IMPRINT EVIDENCE MADE IN BLOOD AT A CRIME SCENE?
MR. GOLDBERG: BEYOND THE SCOPE AND IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
WAS NOT IN RESPONSE TO A QUESTION, THAT STATEMENT.
THERE'S ALSO A LINE -- I THINK WE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE, COUNSEL.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WHAT -- WELL, MR. GOLDBERG ASKED YOU
ABOUT TECHNIQUES THAT CAN BE USED IN TERMS OF PHOTOGRAPHY FOR
VISUALIZING IMPRINT EVIDENCE OR POTENTIAL FOOTPRINT EVIDENCE AT
THE CRIME SCENE.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES, I RECALL THOSE.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
IN YOUR OPINION -- AND YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT
WHAT YOU DID ON JUNE 25TH.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE, OVERBROAD AND LEADING, MOTION TO
STRIKE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: IN TERMS OF WHAT RULERS YOU WERE ABLE
TO LAY OUT.
DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?
A YES.
Q AND WHAT WERE THE PROPER TECHNIQUES FOR PHOTOGRAPHING
AND VISUALIZING IMPRINTS.
REMEMBER THOSE QUESTIONS?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: OVERBROAD, MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, DR. LEE, IN YOUR OPINION, WITH
ADEQUATE TIME, WHAT TECHNIQUES CAN BE USED TO ENHANCE AND
VISUALIZE AND PHOTOGRAPH IMPRINT EVIDENCE?
MR. GOLDBERG: SAME OBJECTION, BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SUSTAINED.
YOU CAN GO INTO THE PHOTOGRAPHIC ASPECTS OF IT.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WELL, IF -- YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING
CALL O-TOLUIDINE.
A YES.
Q IS THAT AN ENHANCEMENT TECHNIQUE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: IF AN ENHANCEMENT METHOD SUCH AS
O-TOLIDINE IS USED --
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH?
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. NO. SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ARE THERE TECHNIQUES THAT CAN BE USED
SO THAT WHEN PHOTOGRAPHING IMPRINT EVIDENCE, THERE CAN BE BETTER
VISUALIZATION?
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. SCHECK: MAY WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: NO. WE'RE NOT GOING INTO OTHER TECHNIQUES.
MR. SCHECK: IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF OTHER TECHNIQUES, YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: PROCEED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, YOU INDICATED THAT BY THE --
YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE COLOR OF IMPRINT EVIDENCE YOU
SAW ON THE WALKWAY ON PICTURES YOU TOOK ON JUNE 25TH COMPARED TO
PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU SAW ON JUNE 13TH.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES, I DO RECALL.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
NOW, WHAT IS THE -- ASSUME THAT IMPRINTS HAD BEEN
MADE IN BLOOD. WHAT EFFECT DOES THE PASSAGE OF TIME HAVE ON THE
COLOR OF IMPRINTS?
A WHEN START AGE, IT BECOME GRAYISH AND BLUISH, DARKER
COLOR.
Q AND WOULD -- WOULD AN IMPRINT THAT WAS MADE LIGHTLY
IN BLOOD ON ONE DAY WHEN EXAMINED 14 DAYS LATER APPEAR DARKER
THAN IT DID WHEN FIRST LEFT?
MR. GOLDBERG: SPECULATION.
THE COURT: FOUNDATION.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WHEN YOU SAY THAT IMPRINT EVIDENCE IN
BLOOD GETS DARKER OVER TIME, WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THAT OPINION?
A BASICALLY THE PROTEIN HEME OF THE HEMOGLOBIN START
REACT. THE OXIDATION PROCESS, IT BECOME MORE VISIBLE. INITIAL
DEPOSIT, IT'S LESS CONTRAST, LESS VISIBLE UNLESS YOU ENHANCE IT.
IF AGING, THIS AGING PROCESSING WILL MAKE IT MORE VISIBLE.
Q SO IN OTHER WORDS, OVER TIME, AS THE PROTEINS
DEGRADE, THE IMPRINT BECOMES DARKER AND MORE VISIBLE?
MR. GOLDBERG: LEADING.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: IF I UNDERSTAND YOUR TESTIMONY
CORRECTLY --
MR. SCHECK: I CAN'T DO THAT? I'M NOT ALLOWED?
THE COURT: YOU UNDERSTAND IT. ASK A QUESTION.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
SO WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BREAKDOWN IN
PROTEIN AND THE COLOR OF IMPRINTS MADE IN BLOOD OVER TIME?
A IN ORDER TO SEE IT, TO RECOGNIZE, YOU HAVE TO
DISTINGUISH FROM THE BACKGROUND COLOR VERSUS THE IMPRINT PATTERN
COLOR. IF TWO COLOR VERY CLOSE, SOMETIME HUMAN EYES CANNOT
RESOLVE IT. YOU CAN'T SEE IT. YOU PHOTOGRAPH, YOU CAN NOT TAKE
AN IMAGE.
HOWEVER, WHEN THE TIME GOES BY, THE DENATURATION OF
PROTEIN AND THE BLOOD BREAK DOWN, ALSO THE MATERIAL REACTION,
EVERYTHING, NOW THIS AREA, IMPRINT AREA IF MADE IN BLOOD START
HAVE A CONTRAST WITH THE BACKGROUND BECAUSE BACKGROUND, IF NO
PROTEIN, NO BLOOD, DON'T FORM BREAKDOWN. STAY IN THE SAME COLOR.
MEANWHILE, THE DECOMPOSITION OF THE BLOOD, EVERYTHING COME
DARKER, SO NOW YOU CAN SEE IT.
Q NOW, YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW YOU TOOK
PHOTOGRAPHS AND VISUALIZED IMPRINT EVIDENCE ON JUNE 25TH.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: OVERBROAD.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, IF YOU HAD MORE TIME, WHAT
TECHNIQUES COULD YOU HAVE USED TO -- WITH RESPECT TO
PHOTOGRAPHING IMPRINT EVIDENCE?
MR. GOLDBERG: SAME OBJECTIONS.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WERE YOU LIMITED IN ANY WAY IN WHAT
YOU COULD HAVE DONE ON JUNE 25TH IN TERMS OF VISUALIZING AND
PHOTOGRAPHING IMPRINT EVIDENCE?
A YES.
Q IN WHAT WAY?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, SAME OBJECTIONS.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THERE'S THREE LIMITING FACTORS. THE FIRST IS
THE TIME, AMOUNT OF TIME OF THE LEVEL 2. SECOND IS THE
RESTRICTION. I WASN'T ALLOWED TO EDIT SOMETHING, REMOVE
SOMETHING OR CUT SOMETHING.
THE THIRD, OF COURSE, I DON'T TRAVEL WITH MY CRIME
SCENE VAN WITH ME. SO WITH THAT LIMITED FACTOR, I ONLY CAN USE A
MAJOR IMITATE, A CAMERA, COUCHED-UP IMAGE, WHATEVER, AVAILABLE.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: IN TERMS OF -- YOU WERE ASKED -- NOW,
1337-A IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF A SHOEPRINT, CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q IS THERE ANY DOUBT IN YOUR MIND THAT THAT IS A
SHOEPRINT OF A PARALLEL LINE PATTERN?
A NO.
Q IS THAT A SCIENTIFIC FACT?
A YES.
Q NOW, OTHER IMPRINTS THAT YOU SAW ON THE WALKWAY WERE
NOT IN THE COMPLETE PATTERN OF A SHOEPRINT?
A I CAN NOT COME HERE TO TELL YOU THOSE ARE DEFINITE
SHOEPRINT.
Q NOW, ENHANCEMENT TECHNIQUES, CAN THEY REVEAL MORE
THAN JUST WHAT ONE SEES WITH THE NAKED EYE IN TERMS OF IMPRINTS
MADE IN BLOOD?
MR. GOLDBERG: SAME OBJECTIONS, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, DR. LEE, YOU WERE ASKED ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION QUESTIONS ABOUT -- WITHDRAWN.
AND FINALLY, ON 58 -- 598-A, WHERE YOU'VE PUT THE
YELLOW MARKER, YOU'VE INDICATED THAT WHAT YOU SEE AS IMPRINT
EVIDENCE IS SOMETHING IN THIS ROLL OF TILES THAT IS LEADING IN A
TRAIL BACK TO THE REAR OF THE BUNDY LOCATION.
MR. GOLDBERG: LEADING AND MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: IN WHICH DIRECTION -- JUST
VISUALIZING IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, LOOKING FROM THE YELLOW ARROW
TOWARDS THE STEP AREA, BETWEEN THOSE TWO MARKINGS, THE YELLOW
ARROW AND THE STEP AREA, DO YOU SEE A SERIES OF IMAGES THAT COULD
BE IMPRINT EVIDENCE?
A YES.
Q COULD THAT BE CONSISTENT WITH A TRAIL OF IMPRINTS
HEADING OUT THE BACK OF THE BUNDY LOCATION?
MR. SCHECK: CALLS FOR SPECULATION, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IT COULD BE CONSISTENT. I CAN NOT TELL YOU
EXACTLY WHAT PATTERN, WHAT TYPE OF --
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, YOU WERE ASKED A SERIES OF
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IN CRIME SCENE
TECHNIQUES.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES.
Q AND --
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY, MOTION TO STRIKE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR CHART BEFORE
SOMETHING KNOWN AS "RECOGNITION."
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, IF COUNSEL IS NOT GOING TO ASK
QUESTIONS, MAY WE --
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: -- ASK HIM ABOUT THE CHART, THE WITNESS
SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO TAKE THE WITNESS STAND.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: YOU RECALL YOUR DISCUSSION BEFORE ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION ABOUT RECOGNITION?
A YES.
Q AND COLLECTION, PRESERVATION, DOCUMENTATION?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, IN TERMS OF THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE, IF IMPRINTS
ARE NOT RECOGNIZED, DOCUMENTED, PRESERVED AND COLLECTED BY
CRIMINALISTS, DOES THAT MEAN THEY ARE NOT THERE?
MR. GOLDBERG: BEYOND THE SCOPE, ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO. THEY'RE NOT -- DEFINITE NOT MEANS NOT
THERE. MAYBE PRESENCE. HOWEVER, LACK OF DOCUMENTATION,
ENHANCEMENT OR COLLECTION, NOTHING I CAN DO ABOUT.
MR. GOLDBERG: MOTION TO STRIKE THE LAST PART OF HIS
ANSWER.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPRINTS ON
THE ENVELOPE AND THE PIECE OF PAPER, YOU WERE ASKED SOME
QUESTIONS ON CROSS-EXAMINATION ABOUT CUFFS AND FABRIC.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, YOU EXAMINED MR. GOLDMAN'S BOOTS?
A YES.
Q COULD MR. GOLDMAN'S BOOTS BE THE SOURCE OF THE
PARALLEL LINE IMPRINTS?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED, BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: MR. GOLDMAN'S SHIRT, COULD THAT BE
THE SOURCE OF THE PARALLEL LINE IMPRINTS?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED, BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: IT WAS ASKED AND ANSWERED ONCE BEFORE, COUNSEL.
MR. SCHECK: I'M SORRY?
THE COURT: WE DID -- WE HAVE THAT QUESTION AND ANSWER IN
THE RECORD ALREADY.
MR. SCHECK: I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT THIS IS REDIRECT
EXAMINATION BASED ON FABRICS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
IT'S ALREADY THERE. IT'S REDUNDANT.
MR. SCHECK: YOU CAN SAY THAT ABOUT -- THIS IS REDIRECT.
YOU CAN SAY THAT ABOUT EVERYTHING.
THE COURT: PROCEED. PROCEED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT FABRICS MAKING IMPRINTS.
YOU RECALL THAT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION?
A YES, SIR.
Q IS THERE ANY FABRIC THAT YOU FOUND AT THE CRIME SCENE
THAT COULD HAVE MADE THE IMPRINTS ON THE ENVELOPE AND THE PIECE
OF PAPER?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: NO. I DID NOT OBSERVE ANY SIMILAR PATTERN.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: AND IN ANSWER -- AND IN
CROSS-EXAMINATION, YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT FABRICS MAKING SUCH AN
IMPRINT AND YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE NECESSITY IN THESE
IMPRINTS ON THE ENVELOPE AND THE PIECE OF PAPER FOR DIRECT
CONTACT AND A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF FORCE AND NO MOVEMENT.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: LEADING.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES, I DO RECALL.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT ANSWER
TO THE JURY?
A IN ORDER TO GET THIS TRANSFER, FIRST THING ON THE
SURFACE, HAVE TO HAVE LIQUID BLOOD, A PATTERN AND THE AMOUNT HAS
TO BE JUST RIGHT (INDICATING). SOMETHING HAS TO BE -- HAVE
SIMILAR PATTERN WHICH HAVE TO APPLY TO THE SURFACE WITH CERTAIN
PRESSURE.
I DID NOT SEE ANY MOVEMENT. IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S NOT
THE SMEAR. IT HAS TO BE DIRECT APPLICATION WITH CERTAIN PRESSURE
JUST LIKE WHEN YOU STAMP SOMETHING.
Q I THINK WE'RE FINISHED WITH THIS BOARD.
NOW, DR. LEE, YOU WERE ASKED CERTAIN QUESTIONS ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION ABOUT DNA TESTING.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE?
A DNA?
Q DNA.
A YES.
Q DR. LEE, IS THERE A -- ARE THERE CORRECT WAYS TO DO
DNA TESTING AND INCORRECT WAYS TO DO DNA TESTING?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND IF DNA -- IF DNA TESTING IS DONE PROPERLY IN YOUR
OPINION WITH RFLP AND PCR, CAN IT BE RELIABLE EVIDENCE?
A THAT'S MY POSITION ALL THE TIME. DNA, IF DO
PROPERLY, CORRECTLY, SHOULD BE USED AS EVIDENCE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
IF DONE IMPROPERLY, CAN IT BE UNRELIABLE?
A IF DONE --
MR. GOLDBERG: BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IF DONE IMPROPERLY, THEN SHOULD NOT BE USED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT
FORENSIC SCIENTISTS, MOLECULAR BIOLOGISTS AND HAVING A SAY AS TO
PROPER DNA METHODS.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE QUESTIONS?
A YES.
Q AND YOU SAID THAT FORENSIC SCIENTISTS SHOULD HAVE A
SAY ON THE METHODS THAT ARE USED FOR THE FORENSIC APPLICATION OF
DNA TESTING.
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY, LEADING.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: WELL, AS A FORENSIC SCIENTIST, DEFINITE ANY
--
THE COURT: HOLD ON. HOLD ON. DR. LEE, THE QUESTION WAS,
DO YOU RECALL THAT TESTIMONY.
THE WITNESS: YES.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
NEXT QUESTION.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: AND YOU WERE ASKED -- AND YOU WERE
ASKED ABOUT -- WELL LET ME ASK YOU, IN TERMS OF -- IS IT YOUR
OPINION -- WHAT IS YOUR OPINION ABOUT FORENSIC SCIENTISTS AND
WHETHER THEY SHOULD HAVE A SAY IN TERMS OF WHAT ARE THE PROPER
METHODS FOR DOING DNA TESTING?
A WHAT I'M SAYING, AS A FORENSIC SCIENTIST, WE'RE THE
ONE CONDUCT THE TESTING. WE'RE THE ONE LOOK AT THE SAMPLE.
WE'RE THE ONE EVALUATE THE SAMPLE. SO, THEREFORE, AS A FORENSIC
SCIENTIST, WE SHOULD HAVE SOME SAY IN A COMMITTEE, IN NATIONAL
MEETING, INTERNATIONAL MEETING DETERMINE THE PROCEDURE, THE
METHOD AND THE TYPE OF ANALYSIS WE PERFORM.
AS A FORENSIC SCIENTIST, WE SHOULD HAVE SOME SAY IN.
THAT SHOULDN'T BE JUST BY OTHER VIEW OF EXPERT TO DICTATE WHAT WE
HAVE TO DO.
Q AND IN TERMS OF THE ROLE OF MOLECULAR GENETICISTS AND
POPULATION GENETICISTS WHO ARE FROM CLINICAL TESTING AND
ACADEMIA, DO THEY HAVE A ROLE AS WELL?
A THEY ALL HAVE CERTAIN ROLE. EVEN ATTORNEYS ALSO HAVE
THE CERTAIN ROLES IN THE DNA APPLICATIONS.
Q AND THE NRC PANEL IN WHICH YOU SERVED HAD
REPRESENTATIVES FROM ALL THESE GROUPS?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, YOU WERE SHOWN A PICTURE THAT'S 596 ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE SOCKS IN MR. SIMPSON'S BEDROOM.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND YOU INDICATED THAT THAT WAS THE BEST QUALITY
PHOTOGRAPH YOU HAD BEEN ABLE TO SEE PRIOR TO THIS OCCASION.
A YES. THAT'S AN EXCELLENT PHOTO.
Q SEE ANY BLOOD ON THOSE SOCKS, DR. LEE?
MR. GOLDBERG: OBJECTION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: I CAN NOT DETERMINE ANY BLOODSTAIN ON THERE
OR NOT.
MR. GOLDBERG: I DIDN'T HEAR THE LAST PART OF THE ANSWER.
THE COURT: HE SAID HE CANNOT DETERMINE ANY BLOODSTAIN ON
THERE OR NOT.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, YOU KNOW PROFESSOR HERBERT
MAC DONELL?
A YES.
Q AND WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF HIS EXPERTISE?
MR. GOLDBERG: BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: YOU WERE ASKED QUESTIONS ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION ABOUT PROFESSOR MAC DONELL AND INTERPRETATIONS
OF THE STAINS FOUND ON THE SOCK.
A YES.
Q AND WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF PROFESSOR MAC DONELL AND
HIS EXPERTISE IN THE AREA OF BLOODSTAIN INTERPRETATION?
MR. GOLDBERG: BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: HE HAVE A GREAT AMOUNT OF EXPERIENCE AND DID
LOT OF EXPERIMENT IN THE PAST, PUBLISH A BOOK INVOLVING
INTERPRETATION OF THE BLOODSTAIN ANALYSIS.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: AND DID YOU EXAMINE THE SOCKS WITH
PROFESSOR MAC DONELL?
A UH, YES, WE DID.
Q ALL RIGHT.
DID YOU SEE THE RED BALLS DEPICTED IN PHOTO
MICROGRAPHS THAT HE TESTIFIED ABOUT?
A YES.
Q DID YOU TAKE THOSE PICTURES?
A I TOOK THOSE PICTURES.
Q DO YOU AGREE WITH THE TESTIMONY OF PROFESSOR MAC
DONELL THAT IN TERMS OF THE MODE OF TRANSFER, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS
THE FORM OF THE QUESTION ON CROSS-EXAMINATION, THAT THIS -- THE
MODE OF TRANSFER HERE WITH RESPECT TO THE ANKLE STAIN ON THE
SOCK WAS SIDE 2 HAVING COME INTO CONTACT WITH SIDE 3?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY. ALSO CALLS FOR
SPECULATION, NO FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION ABOUT HAIR AND TRACE EVIDENCE IN THE SOIL
EXEMPLAR AND OTHER SAMPLES.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND YOU RECALL SOME TESTIMONY, SOME QUESTIONS ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION ABOUT HAIR AND TRACE EVIDENCE IN THE JURY BOX?
A YES.
Q NOW, DR. LEE, IF ONE WERE TO DROP A GARMENT OF SOME
SORT INTO THE JURY BOX AREA, WOULD IT BE LIKELY THAT HAIR AND
TRACE FROM SOME MEMBERS OF THE JURY PANEL MIGHT ADHERE TO THAT
GARMENT IF COLLECTED LATER?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION, BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IN THEORY, IF HAVE A TRANSFER, HAVE A
CONTACT, IF THE RECEIVING SURFACE AND DEPOSIT SURFACE BOTH HAVE
HAIR OR FIBER, NOW YOU HAVE A CROSS-TRANSFER.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS
WITH RESPECT TO LINKAGE.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE, FOUR-WAY LINKAGE?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, IN TERMS OF TRACE EVIDENCE AND LINKAGE, DOES THE
INTEGRITY OF THE EVIDENCE COLLECTION HAVE SOME IMPORTANCE IN
TERMS OF FORMING LINKS IN THAT FOUR-WAY LINKAGE DIAGRAM?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE AS TO INTEGRITY OF EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?
A IF THOSE TRACE EVIDENCE WAS NOT PRESERVED PROPERLY,
COLLECT PROPERLY, THINGS CAN MISSING, THINGS CAN GET
CROSS-CONTAMINATED, A FALSE LINKAGE MAY BE RESULT.
Q AND IN TERMS OF PROBLEMS IN RECOGNITION,
PRESERVATION, COLLECTION AND DOCUMENTATION, IF THERE IS
CONTAMINATION OF EVIDENCE OR FAILURE TO RECOGNIZE EVIDENCE, CAN
THAT AFFECT THAT FOUR-WAY LINKAGE?
MR. GOLDBERG: VAGUE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: AND IF SOME LINKS IN THAT FOUR-WAY
LINKAGE -- WITHDRAWN.
IF SOME EVIDENCE IS NOT EVEN GENUINE, CAN THAT AFFECT
THE FOUR-WAY LINKAGE?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT. THAT'S ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
MR. SCHECK: CAN WE HAVE THE BOOT?
THE COURT: MR. HARRIS, WHICH EXHIBIT IS THIS?
MR. HARRIS: IT'S NOT MARKED.
MR. GOLDBERG: I THINK IT WAS A PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT.
MR. SCHECK: DID YOU USE THIS PICTURE, HANK?
YOUR HONOR, THIS IS A SERIES OF THREE PHOTOGRAPHS
THAT I THOUGHT WAS SHOWN TO THE WITNESS ON CROSS-EXAMINATION.
THE COURT: YES, IT WAS.
MR. SCHECK: BUT APPARENTLY --
THE WITNESS: MAY I STEP DOWN?
THE COURT: MRS. ROBERTSON.
MS. CLARK: 594.
MR. SCHECK: WE HAVE THAT AS 594.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
594.
DR. LEE.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
DR. LEE, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT
TO THESE CUTS ON THE BOOT.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE?
A YES.
Q AND YOU WERE GIVEN SOME HYPOTHETICAL ABOUT RIDING
BICYCLES OR RECLINING IN CHAIRS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES.
Q WELL, FIRST, LET ME ASK YOU, POINTING TO THE
PHOTOGRAPH ON THE UPPER LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THAT CUT, WAS THAT MADE
WITH A SHARP INSTRUMENT?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALSO ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: IS THAT IN YOUR OPINION A FRESH CUT?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED, BEYOND THE SCOPE.
THE COURT: WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS ALREADY.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN --
IF ANY, THAT YOU CAN SEE BETWEEN THE DAMAGE CAUSED BY ONE WE'LL
CALL, LEFT-HAND PHOTOGRAPH, THE PENETRATING CUT AND THE DAMAGE ON
THE OTHER BOOT?
MR. GOLDBERG: SPECULATION.
NO FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: THESE TWO DAMAGE ARE DIFFERENT. THIS ONE AND
THIS ONE ARE DIFFERENT TYPE OF DAMAGE (INDICATING).
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES?
A THIS IS A DEFINITIVE AND SHARP. A PIECE OF A
RUBBER-LIKE MATERIAL SEPARATE, DISAPPEAR RIGHT ON SURFACE. THIS
ONE IS MUCH SUPERFICIAL, BEING A SLIGHTLY WAVY PATTERN. DEBRIS
APPEARS TO FORM INTO THIS WIGGLY PATTERN. HERE NO DEBRIS CAN BE
OBSERVED. SO THE FOURTH SLICE, THIS MUCH GREATER FORCE SHARPER
INSTRUMENT (INDICATING).
Q AND IS THERE ANY QUESTION YOU WERE ASKED ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT CHANGES YOUR OPINION THAT THIS IS A FRESH
CUT WITH A SHARP INSTRUMENT?
A NO. WILL NOT CHANGE MY OBSERVATION.
Q THANK YOU.
THE COURT: MR. HARRIS.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT
THE BRUNO MAGLI -- WHAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A BRUIN MAGLI
SHOEPRINT, CORRECT?
MR. GOLDBERG: ACTUALLY IT WAS A -- MISSTATES THE
TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, AND IN THE COURSE OF YOUR
ANSWERS, YOU WERE DISCUSSING THE NEED FOR SIDE-BY-SIDE
COMPARISONS.
DO YOU REMEMBER THOSE ANSWERS ON CROSS-EXAMINATION?
A YES.
Q COULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THAT?
A IF WE SEE AN IMPRINT AT THE SCENE, YOU WILL
RECOGNIZE, SEE THE IMPRINT. IF WE DOCUMENT THAT, NOW WE HAVE AN
IMPRINT EVIDENCE. THAT CALL A QUASHING EVIDENCE. WE DON'T KNOW
WHERE IT COME FROM. WE CAN IDENTIFY, SAY THIS IS A BRUNO MAGLI
OR REEBOK OR CONVERSE. THAT'S CALLED IDENTIFICATION, OR AFTER
OUR SHOES, THAT'S CALLED IDENTIFICATION.
NOW, YOU NEED A KNOWN SHOES TO COMPARE SIDE BY SIDE.
THAT'S CALLED COMPARISON. WHEN WE COMPARE SIDE BY SIDE, NOT ONLY
TO LOOK AT THE SIZE, DIMENSION, PATTERN. THOSE CALL GENERAL
CHARACTERISTIC. JUST GIVE YOU A GENERAL THING JUST LIKE YOU --
AT THE SCENE, YOU SEE A FINGERPRINT. THAT'S A GENERAL
CHARACTERISTIC, A FINGERPRINT.
TO ESTABLISH INDIVIDUALIZATION, YOU NEED A KNOWN
FINGERPRINT FROM SOMEBODY TO MAKE A COMPARISON, EITHER THE SAME
OR THEY'RE DIFFERENT. SO FOR AN IMPRINT EVIDENCE MADE OF A SHOE,
WE NEED A SHOE TO COMPARE SIDE BY SIDE. AND IF WE CAN LINK THAT
SHOE TO THAT IMPRINT, THEN THAT CALLED A CHIEF INDIVIDUALIZATION.
Q NOW, DR. LEE, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ON
CROSS-EXAMINATION WITH RESPECT TO THE TRANSFER STAINS ON THE
BINDLE FROM ITEM 47.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE?
A YES.
Q AND YOU WERE ALSO ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME
CHARTS THAT APPEAR IN A PUBLICATION ENTITLED EXPERIMENTS AND
PRACTICAL EXERCISE IN BLOODSTAIN PATTERN ANALYSIS BY LABOR,
EPSTEIN -- LABOR AND EPSTEIN.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I DON'T KNOW IF MR. GOLDBERG
MARKED THESE. I KNOW HE SHOWED THEM TO THE WITNESS. IF NOT,
I'LL MARK THEM. I DON'T KNOW WHAT --
THE COURT: I DON'T RECOLLECT THEY WERE MARKED.
MR. GOLDBERG: WASN'T MARKED.
MR. SCHECK: WAS NOT MARKED?
ALL RIGHT.
THEN I WOULD LIKE TO MARK THESE DEFENDANT'S NEXT IN
ORDER.
THE COURT: 1363.
MR. SCHECK: 1363?
THE COURT: 1363.
THE WITNESS: 1363.
MR. SCHECK: THANK YOU.
I THOUGHT HE -- IT'S THE HEARING THAT GOES FIRST; IS
THAT --
(DEFT'S 1363 FOR ID = DOCUMENTS)
MR. SCHECK: MAY I APPROACH THE WITNESS, YOUR HONOR?
THE COURT: YOU MAY.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, DR. LEE, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH
THIS STUDY OF DRYING TIMES?
A YES.
Q NOW, MR. GOLDBERG ASKED YOU ABOUT DRYING TIMES WITH
DIFFERENT KINDS OF MATERIALS UNDER DIFFERENT CONDITIONS.
DO YOU RECALL THAT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, ON THIS STUDY ARE A SERIES OF EXPERIMENTS
PERFORMED FOR DIFFERENT AMOUNTS OF BLOOD.
A YES.
Q ONE BEING A SINGLE DROP, ONE BEING ONE MILLILITER OF
BLOOD, ONE BEING FIVE MILLILITERS OF BLOOD, ONE BEING A HUNDRED
MILLILITERS OF BLOOD.
A YES, SIR.
Q AND THEN THERE ARE A SERIES OF MATERIALS LISTED ON
THE CHART; IS THAT CORRECT?
A THAT'S CORRECT.
Q AND OUT OF THE MATERIALS LISTED, WHICH ONE WOULD BE
THE MOST COMPARABLE TO THE SWATCHES AT ISSUE IN THIS CASE?
MR. GOLDBERG: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: COTTON CLOTH.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, WHAT ARE THE DRYING TIMES FOR A
SINGLE DROP OF BLOOD UNDER THE THREE DIFFERENT CONDITIONS FOR
COTTON CLOTH?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IT SAYS CONDITION 1, 55 MINUTE, CONDITION 2,
50 MINUTE, CONDITION 3, 350 MINUTE.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.
AND 350 MINUTES WOULD BE?
A APPROXIMATELY SIX, SEVEN, SIX SOME HOURS.
Q AND --
A SIX -- LITTLE UNDER SIX HOURS.
Q OKAY.
NOW, IN TERMS OF THIS EXPERIMENT, WHAT IS CONDITION
3? WHAT SET -- IN TERMS OF TEMPERATURE, HUMIDITY WHAT IS
CONDITION 3?
A CONDITION 3 APPEAR IN THIS HANDOUT, LABORATORY COLD
WITH GOOD AIR MOVEMENT, TEMPERATURE 38 DEGREE FAHRENHEIT PLUS
MINUS .1 DEGREE, RELATIVE HUMIDITY, 80 PERCENT PLUS MINUS 6
PERCENT.
Q WELL, IN PLAIN ENGLISH, IS THAT A COLD, DAMP ROOM?
A YES, SIR.
Q IS THAT SOMETHING CLOSE TO PRECIPITATION?
A YES, SIR.
Q NOW, WHAT ABOUT CONDITION 1 AND CONDITION 2?
A CONDITION 1 SAYS LABORATORY WORK TABLE WHICH NO MORE
ROOM, AIR CIRCULATION, TEMPERATURE, 75 DEGREE FAHRENHEIT PLUS
MINUS 2 DEGREE, RELATIVE HUMIDITY, 44 PERCENT PLUS MINUS 2
PERCENT.
Q WOULD THAT BE WHAT WOULD BE ORDINARILY REFERRED TO AS
ROOM TEMPERATURE IN A LABORATORY?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WHAT IS CONDITION 2?
A CONDITION 2, IT SAYS DRYING HOOD WITH GOOD AIR
MOVEMENT, TEMPERATURE, 76 DEGREE FAHRENHEIT PLUS MINUS 2 DEGREE,
RELATIVE HUMIDITY, 44 PERCENT PLUS MINUS 2 PERCENT.
Q SO FOR A SINGLE DROP OF BLOOD THEN UNDER CONDITION 1
WHICH DESCRIBED AS NORMAL ROOM TEMPERATURE, THE FINDINGS OF LABOR
AND EPSTEIN IS THE DRYING TIME IS 55 MINUTES?
A YEAH. UNDER ONE HOUR.
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY, LEADING.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: AND UNDER CONDITION 2, IT'S 50
MINUTES?
A YEAH. ONLY 50 MINUTES. 50, NOT 15. FIVE ZERO.
Q FIVE ZERO.
AND IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH OF THE BUNDY
BLOOD DROPS IS A SINGLE DROP?
MR. GOLDBERG: NO FOUNDATION, CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: BASED ON PHOTOGRAPHS THAT YOU'VE
SEEN, THE SO-CALLED ITEMS 47, 48, 49, 50 AND 52, BASED ON THE
PHOTOGRAPHS, WHAT DO THEY APPEAR TO BE?
MR. GOLDBERG: NO FOUNDATION, CALLS FOR SPECULATION.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: HOW MANY DROPS ARE THERE IN A
MILLILITER?
MR. GOLDBERG: IRRELEVANT.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: CAN BE A LOT OF DROPS. AND LET'S SAY WE USE
A .005 AS A NORM. OF COURSE, IT'S VARIABLE. IT'S A WIDE RANGE
>FROM LITTLE DROP, BIG DROP AS I DEMONSTRATE TO YOU BEFORE. LET'S
SAY WE ASSUME A NORM .05 CC. THAT'S ALMOST 20 DROPS.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, FINALLY, YOU WERE ASKED SOME
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CLOSED-IN AREA OF THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE, THE
ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE AND BLOODSTAIN PATTERNS ON CROSS-EXAMINATION.
DO YOU RECALL THOSE?
A YES.
Q DO YOU RECALL THAT CHART WITH THE RED TAPE YOU WERE
ASKED TO CONNECT LINES TO?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND YOU RECALL THE FOUR AND A HALF FOOT BY FIVE FOOT
PARTIAL RECTANGLE?
A YES, SIR.
Q OKAY.
NOW, FIRST OF ALL, THAT IS -- THAT DESCRIPTION IS
SORT OF LIKE PART OF A BASEBALL DIAMOND INSOFAR AS IT'S JUST TWO
PARTS OF THE RECTANGLE, CORRECT?
A I DON'T PLAY THAT MUCH BASEBALL. I DON'T KNOW
BASEBALL DIAMOND.
Q WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS, DR. LEE.
IN A CLOSED ENVIRONMENT, CLOSED-IN ENVIRONMENT WITH
HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT, WITH MULTIPLE STAB WOUNDS, WITH BLOOD STAINS
IN DIFFERENT PLACES INDICATING MULTIPLE CONTACT SMEARS WITH
VERTICAL DROPLETS IN THE AREAS OF THE DIFFERENT MULTIPLE CONTACT
SMEARS, WITH OTHER BLOOD SPATTER CAST OFF IN DIFFERENT
DIRECTIONS, WITH THE KEY IN ONE AREA, BEEPER IN ANOTHER AREA, IN
THAT KIND OF STRUGGLE, DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER OR
NOT AN ASSAILANT OR ASSAILANTS WOULD BE COVERED WITH BLOOD FROM
THE STRUGGLE?
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY, CALLS FOR
SPECULATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
MR. GOLDBERG: INCOMPLETE HYPOTHETICAL.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WHAT IS THAT OPINION?
A IN THEORY, SHOULD HAVE SOME BLOOD.
Q FINALLY, DR. LEE, IN TERMS OF THE FACT THAT YOU FOUND
IMPRINT EVIDENCE ON THE ENVELOPE, PIECE OF PAPER, MR. GOLDMAN'S
JEANS, PLACES ON THE BUNDY WALKWAY, THE FACT THAT YOU FOUND IT,
DOES THAT MEAN IT WASN'T THERE ON JUNE 13TH?
MR. GOLDBERG: ARGUMENTATIVE.
THE COURT: COMPOUND.
MR. SCHECK: COMPOUND?
THE COURT: IT'S COMPOUND.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: WELL, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE WET
TRANSFER STAINS ON BINDLE 47.
DID YOU SEE ANYTHING IN LAPD RECORDS INDICATING THAT
THERE WAS A WET TRANSFER ON THE ITEM 47 BINDLE?
A NO.
Q DOES THE FACT THAT IT WAS NOT RECORDED ON THE LAPD
NOTATIONS MEAN THAT IT WASN'T THERE?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.
THE COURT: SUSTAINED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: DR. LEE, THERE -- YOU MADE THE
DISTINCTION BETWEEN SCIENTIFIC FACT AND INTERPRETATION.
A YES, SIR.
Q ANY QUESTION IN YOUR MIND THAT THE EXISTENCE OF THAT
WET TRANSFER IS A SCIENTIFIC FACT?
A THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S DEFINITIVE. THAT'S SCIENTIFIC
FACT.
Q IS THERE ANY QUESTION IN YOUR MIND THAT THE BLOOD
SWATCHES SUCH AS WE HAVE IN THIS CASE AFTER THREE HOURS SHOULD BE
DRY?
MR. GOLDBERG: CALLS FOR SPECULATION, CONJECTURE, NO
FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: UNDER NORMAL CONDITION, SHOULD DRY.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: IF SWATCHES WERE PLACED INTO A BINDLE
SOMETHING LESS THAN THREE HOURS, MAYBE BETWEEN AN HOUR TO THREE
HOURS, MIGHT THEY LEAVE DAMP WET TRANSFER STAINS?
A COULD HAVE BEEN.
Q ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE TESTIMONY OF MISS MAZZOLA
AND MR. FUNG, THAT THE SWATCHES THAT THEY TOOK OUT OF TEST TUBES
WERE DRY?
MR. GOLDBERG: ASKED AND ANSWERED, ARGUMENTATIVE, MISSTATES
THE TESTIMONY, NO FOUNDATION.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: YES.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, DR. LEE, YOU SAID AT THE END OF
YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION THAT AS FAR AS YOU WERE CONCERNED, THE
EXISTENCE OF THOSE WET TRANSFERS MEANT THAT SOMETHING WAS WRONG.
A I RECALL LAST WEEK I DID SAY THAT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
ANYTHING THAT HAS BEEN ASKED OF YOU IN
CROSS-EXAMINATION THAT'S CHANGED YOUR OPINION ABOUT THAT?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO OBJECT BECAUSE
THAT'S NOT A FORENSIC OPINION. MOTION TO STRIKE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: MY OPINION STILL REMAIN THE SAME.
MR. SCHECK: THANK YOU.
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q DR. LEE, YOU SAID THAT YOUR OWN EXPERIENCE, PERSONAL
EXPERIENCE WITH WET SWATCHES IN CASEWORK WAS LETTING THEM DRY
OVERNIGHT; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND THEN AFTER APPROXIMATELY 12 HOURS, COMING BACK TO
THE LABORATORY AND SEEING THAT THEY WERE DRY?
A YES, SIR.
Q AND WHEN WAS IT THAT THESE PERSONAL EXPERIENCES
STOPPED?
A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE STOP? NO. I CONTINUE GATHER
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE EVEN TODAY. HERE, THAT'S ANOTHER PERSONAL
EXPERIENCE.
Q WITH WET SWATCHES IN TEST TUBES, THE PERSONAL
EXPERIENCES IN CASEWORK WITH WET SWATCHES IN TEST TUBES THAT YOU
REFERRED TO ON DIRECT.
A UH, THE LAST EXPERIMENT I CONDUCT --
Q NO. I'M NOT ASKING ABOUT THAT. I'M SAYING CASEWORK
EXPERIENCE.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I THINK THE WITNESS SHOULD BE
ALLOWED TO ANSWER.
THE COURT: NO. HE'S TALKING -- IT'S CLEARLY CASEWORK
EXPERIENCE. THAT WAS THE QUESTION.
MR. SCHECK: PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: CASEWORK EXPERIENCE.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: OKAY.
DOCTOR --
A CASEWORK EXPERIENCE, EVERY DAY OUR -- ALTHOUGH I
DON'T TRANSFER BLOODSTAIN EVERY DAY, BUT MY SEROLOGISTS, MY DNA
SCIENTISTS, THEY CALL DOES THAT EVERY DAY.
MR. GOLDBERG: NOT RESPONSIVE. MOTION TO STRIKE YOUR
HONOR.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DR. LEE, LET ME ASK YOU THIS WAY.
YOU SAID AT SOME POINT YOU HAVE SWITCHED FROM
SWATCHES TO THREADS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A NO, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. I SAYING IF AT THE
SCENE HAVE A BLOODSTAIN, WE GOING TO -- IF SOMETHING CAN MOVE, I
USUAL ADVISE TAKE THE WHOLE THING BACK TO THE LABORATORY, MOVE
THAT.
FOR EXAMPLE, THIS BOX HAVE SOME BLOOD DROPS. JUST
COLLECT THIS BOX. IF SOMETHING CANNOT MOVE, FOR EXAMPLE, DEPOSIT
IN THIS BENCH, THEN WE SCRAPE, SCRAPE THE BLOODSTAIN. IF CANNOT
SCRAPE, WE USE TAPE, LIFT, LIFTING.
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS ALL NONRESPONSIVE.
MOTION TO STRIKE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED. ASK YOUR NEXT QUESTION.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: DOCTOR, LET'S JUST MAKE IT VERY
SIMPLE.
WHEN STAINS ARE REMOVED FROM A CRIME SCENE --
A YES.
Q -- BY ALLUDING THEM ON TO SOME COTTON OBJECT --
A YES.
Q -- IS IT TRUE YOU ARE NOW USING THREADS AS OPPOSED TO
SWATCHES?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
NOW, WHEN DID THAT CHANGE TAKE PLACE?
A I FORGOT. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY DAY AND TIME.
PROBABLY COUPLE YEARS NOW.
Q WELL, DIDN'T YOU WRITE IN SOME OF YOUR 1986 WORK FOR
THE PROTOCOL FOR CONNECTICUT STATE POLICE TO USE THREADS INSTEAD
OF SWATCHES?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
SO IS IT CORRECT TO SAY THAT SINCE 1986, YOU DO NOT
HAVE ANY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE IN CASEWORK WITH SWATCHES AT CRIME
SCENES?
A NO. THAT'S NOT TRUE. EVERY DAY, WE STILL -- IF THE
KNOWN SAMPLES SUBMIT TO THE LABORATORY, WE TRANSFER TO A SWATCH.
STILL USE SWATCH IN THE LABORATORY.
Q ALL RIGHT.
BUT YOUR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE IN CASEWORK IS CHECKING
THE SWATCHES 12 HOURS AFTER THEY WERE SET OUT TO DRY; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A USUALLY WE DRY OVERNIGHT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND -- AND THE PURPOSE OF THE LABOR AND EPSTEIN
MATERIALS IS BASICALLY A CAUTIONARY STATEMENT, AS YOU SAID, TO
FORENSIC SCIENTISTS, BE CAREFUL, DRYING TIMES ARE HARD TO
PREDICT, A LOT OF VARIABLES GO INTO IT, RIGHT?
A YES.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU AGREE WITH THAT PERSONALLY, DON'T YOU?
A I AGREE WITH THAT IF A RANGE, HAVE A TIME OF THE
RANGE.
Q BUT YOU AGREE THAT THERE ARE MANY, MANY VARIABLES AND
IT'S HARD TO PREDICT AS STATED IN LABOR AND EPSTEIN; IS THAT
CORRECT?
A THERE ARE SOME VARIABLE, MORE VARIABLE AT THE
CRIMINAL SCENE THAN MORE VARIABLE IN THE LABORATORY. LABORATORY
SHOULD BE A CONTROL SITUATION.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND DO YOU HAVE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE AS TO HOW COLD --
WHAT THE TEMPERATURES WERE LAPD --
A NO.
Q -- DRYING FACILITY OVERNIGHT?
A NO.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, LET'S GET TO ONE OF YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT IN
THEORY, THERE SHOULD BE SOME BLOOD IN RESPONSE TO MR. SCHECK'S
LINE OF QUESTIONING.
A YES.
Q REMEMBER THAT?
A YES.
Q OKAY.
WOULD THAT ALSO DEPEND UPON WHERE THE SUSPECT WAS
STANDING?
A UH, DEPENDS ON WHETHER OR NOT A COMBAT SITUATION,
HAND-TO-HAND COMBAT SITUATION. YOU HAVE DISTANCE, OF COURSE, THE
CHANCES FOR GETTING BLOOD ON UNLESS SOME MATERIAL SPURT OR
CERTAIN FORCE, INTERNAL FORCE OR EXTERNAL FORCE. YOU HAVE INJURY
ON THE HAND, HAVE A CAST OFF, HAVE OTHER MOTION, THAT GOING TO
CAST TO GREATER DISTANCE. IF IN CLOSE CONTACT, IF LARGE AMOUNT
OF BLOOD COME OUT, YOU GOING TO HAVE MORE BLOOD.
Q OKAY.
WHAT I'M ASKING YOU IS, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE,
BASED UPON WHAT YOU KNOW, FROM YOUR OWN VIEWING OF THE EVIDENCE,
NOT FROM THE PATHOLOGISTS, WHAT DOES SOME BLOOD MEAN? IS THERE
ANY WAY OF QUANTIFYING THAT?
A YES. IF I LOOK AT MR. GOLDMAN'S BLUE JEAN AND HIS
SHIRT, ONE SIDE OF HIS BLUE JEAN HAVE LARGE AMOUNT OF BLOOD,
COVERS. IF A PERSON IN A CLOSE COMBAT SITUATION, THAT SHOULD
COVER WITH BLOOD. IF DID NOT HAVE A CLOSE COMBAT SITUATION IN A
DISTANCE, THEN YOU HAVE LESS BLOOD.
Q IF SOMEONE IS STANDING BEHIND THE VICTIM IN THIS CASE
WHEN HIS THROAT IS CUT, WOULD THAT INFLUENCE HOW MUCH BLOOD HE
HAD ON HIM, AN ASSAILANT?
A YES. THAT GOING TO BE A FACTOR. AND AGAIN, RON
GOLDMAN'S BLUE JEAN IN THE BACK COVERED WITH BLOOD, WHICH, IF
ASSUME THOSE BLOOD FROM ORIGINAL SCENE, A PERSON HAVE A DIRECT
CONTACT TRYING TO HALT HIM, THEN YOU GOING TO HAVE TRANSFER.
Q AND YOU CAN'T MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION, CAN YOU?
A NO. I WASN'T AT THE SCENE. I DON'T KNOW.
Q AND YOU CAN'T MAKE THE ASSUMPTION REGARDING THE BLOOD
PATTERN ON RON GOLDMAN'S JEANS; IS THAT CORRECT?
A I ONLY CAN SEE ON THE BLUE JEAN THERE ARE PATTERNS.
BUT I KNOW THE MECHANISM, BUT I REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MAIN
MODE TRANSFER.
Q LET ME ASK YOU THIS, DOCTOR.
DO YOU RECALL ONE OF YOUR FAIRLY WELL KNOWN CASES
BACK IN 1984 BY THE NAME OF PEOPLE VERSUS HOEPLINGER WHERE A
HUSBAND BEAT HIS WIFE TO DEATH BY HITTING HER NUMEROUS TIMES IN
THE HEAD WITH A BRICK, DRUG HER BODY OUT TO A FISH POND, DRUG HER
BACK INTO THE HOUSE AND THEN CLAIMED THAT SOMEONE ELSE BROKE INTO
THE HOME AND COMMITTED THE MURDER?
A 80 PERCENT CORRECT. NOT DRAG TO THE FISH POND.
NEVER GOT TO THE FISH POND.
Q ONLY PART WAY?
A DRUG, CARRY TO A LOCATION END OF THE DRIVEWAY AND
DRAG INTO A PACK OF SANDRIL (SIC) TO -- NEAR THE NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE
AND CARRY THE BODY, HALF DRUG, HALF CARRY, PUT BACK IN FAMILY
ROOM ON THE SOFA.
Q AND ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THAT KIND OF AN ASSAULT WITH
THE BRICK ON THE HEAD BY BEATING NUMEROUS TIMES PRODUCES ENORMOUS
AMOUNT OF BLOOD AND IT DID SO IN THE HOEPLINGER CASE?
A YES.
Q AND ISN'T IT TRUE THAT ON THE SUSPECT'S JEANS, THERE
WERE ONLY TWO DROPS OF BLOOD?
A WELL, WE ASSUME THAT'S THE ORIGINAL JEAN. I DON'T
HAVE ANY RECORD, BUT I DO KNOW HE WASH HIS T-SHIRT. I FOUND A
T-SHIRT WASHED IN THE POND.
Q RIGHT.
A BUT THE BLUE JEAN, WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S THE ORIGINAL
BLUE JEAN, I HAVE NO OR INFORMATION, RECORD OF IT.
Q WELL, YOU TESTIFIED IN COURT AND THOSE BLUE JEANS
WERE PRESENTED TO A JURY AS BEING WORN BY THE SUSPECTS --
SUSPECT, THE HUSBAND AT THE TIME OF THE MURDER; IS THAT CORRECT?
A I -- THAT'S LONG TIME AGO. IF YOU SAY CORRECT,
PROBABLY CORRECT. I DON'T RECALL. THERE'S THOUSANDS CASES I
BEEN WORKING ON.
Q DOES THAT SEEM TO BE CONSISTENT WITH YOUR MEMORY?
A SURE. SURE.
Q AND ONLY TWO BLOOD DROPS?
A I DON'T REMEMBER. IF YOU SAY TWO DROPS, IT'S TWO
DROP.
Q AND THE SCENE WAS COVERED IN BLOOD, CORRECT?
A YES.
Q AND WHEN YOU TESTIFIED, YOU DIDN'T TELL THE JURY IN
THAT CASE THAT YOU HAD ANY DOUBT ABOUT WHETHER HE WAS WEARING
THOSE PANTS OR ANYTHING TO THAT EFFECT, DID YOU?
A I WASN'T ASKED. AS A SCIENTIST, I ONLY CAN ANSWER
THE QUESTION, WHATEVER THE LAWYER. OTHERWISE I WILL BE STOPPED.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE A COPY OF THE TRANSCRIPT
TO COUNSEL. AT PAGE 397 OF THE HOEPLINGER TRANSCRIPT.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, DO YOU REMEMBER BEING ASKED A
LOT OF QUESTIONS --
THE COURT: HOLD ON. HOLD ON. HOLD ON.
MR. GOLDBERG: SORRY.
(BRIEF PAUSE.)
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH?
THE COURT: WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD AT THE BENCH:)
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I THINK THIS IS ALL BEYOND THE
SCOPE, NO. 1. NO. 2, I DON'T THINK THE PASSAGE HE'S POINTING TO
IS IN ANY WAY INCONSISTENT WITH HIS TESTIMONY. IT CERTAINLY DOES
NOT SUPPORT THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED, THAT HE TOLD THE JURY
THAT THESE WERE DEFINITELY THE JEANS.
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG, YOU WANT TO CITE ME TO THE
PERTINENT PORTION IN THE TRANSCRIPT?
MR. GOLDBERG: THAT'S ON PAGE 397 WHERE THE DEFENSE
ATTORNEY IS ASKING HIM ABOUT A HYPOTHETICAL, IF IN FACT THE
ASSAILANT OF MISS HOEPLINGER WERE STANDING AT THE TIME WHEN SHE
WAS SITTING OR LYING ON THE COUCH AND IF THERE HAD BEEN AN
IMPACT, WOULD HE EXPECT THE JEANS OF THE PERPETRATOR TO BE
COVERED WITH BLOOD, AND THE ANSWER, DEPENDS ON WHAT OBJECT IN
BETWEEN THE PERPETRATOR AND THE BLOOD SOURCE, ALL DEPENDS ON HOW
FAR THE PERSON STANDS, THERE ARE A LOT OF VARIATIONS.
THE COURT: BUT THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION THAT YOU ASKED
THOUGH, WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS -- WHETHER OR NOT THOSE WERE THE
JEANS.
MR. GOLDBERG: NO. HE ALREADY ADMITTED TO THAT. I'M NOT
IMPEACHING ON THAT. I'M IMPEACHING ON DID HE EXPECT TO FIND A
LOT OF BLOOD IN THIS TYPE OF A CASE. HE SEEMS TO HAVE WAFFLED ON
THAT.
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, I WOULD POINT OUT FROM THE
TRANSCRIPT HERE, POINTING TO 397, HE WAS ASKED A SERIES OF
QUESTIONS ABOUT BLOOD SPOTS AND WOULD IT BE FAIR TO STATE
QUESTION ON 397, "ANSWER: I CAN NOT TELL."
IT GOES ON TO SAY DEPENDS ON A LOT OF VARIATIONS. HE
WAS ASKED A HYPOTHETICAL. I THINK IT'S VERY MISLEADING TO
QUESTION THE WITNESS ABOUT A HYPOTHETICAL WHICH HE SAYS DOESN'T
CONTAIN ALL THE VARIABLES IN ANOTHER CASE THAT'S NOT THIS CASE.
I THINK IT'S WAY BEYOND THE PURPOSE OF THE EXAMINATION.
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG.
MR. GOLDBERG: THIS IS A CASE WHERE THE CRIME SCENE WAS
MUCH BLOODIER THAN OURS, MUCH MORE ACTIVITY. THEY WERE DRAGGING
THE BODIES ALL OVER, AND THE CLEAR IMPORT OF THIS MAN'S TESTIMONY
BEFORE A JURY, SUBSTANTIALLY ADMITTED, WAS THAT THE JEANS ONLY
HAD TWO LITTLE DROPS OF BLOOD ON THIS.
THE COURT: SINCE WE HAVE NO CLOTHING RECOVERED, IT DOESN'T
HAVE A WHOLE LOT OF RELEVANCE, DOES IT?
MR. GOLDBERG: THE DEFENSE -- IF THE DEFENSE WILL STIPULATE
THAT IT'S NOT RELEVANT HOW MUCH IF ANY BLOOD -- WELL, THAT'S WHAT
THEY'RE CLAIMING IS RELEVANT TO THE BLOOD IN THE BRONCO AND THE
BLOOD ON ROCKINGHAM, THE AMOUNT OF BLOOD, BUT IF THEY'LL
STIPULATE THAT'S NOT A RELEVANT ISSUE --
THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG, YOU ALREADY GOT IN THE RECORD THE
DOCTOR SAYING, WELL, UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, YOU WOULD EXPECT
A LOT OF BLOOD GIVEN THE KIND OF ACTIVITY HERE, BUT IT ALL
DEPENDS ON WHAT THE CONTACT WAS, AND WE DON'T KNOW. THAT'S WHAT
HE SAID.
SO I'LL SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION.
(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE
HELD IN OPEN COURT:)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: SIR, IF A PERSON WERE TO WRAP THEIR
HAND AROUND SOMEONE'S THROAT AND SLIT THAT PERSON'S THROAT --
A YES, SIR.
Q -- AND THE BLOOD SPURTED FORWARD, WOULD YOU EXPECT
THE ASSAILANT TO BE COVERED IN BLOOD?
A PROBABLY NOT.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND, SIR, IF A PERSON WERE FOR SOME REASON TO GET
BLOOD ON THE FRONT PART OF THEIR BODY, HOWEVER IT MIGHT HAPPEN,
DURING A BLOOD-LETTING EVENT, BUT NOT ON THEIR BACK DURING THE
ASSAULT --
A YES.
Q -- AND THEIR HINDQUARTERS DURING THE ASSAULT --
A YES.
Q AND THEY SAT DOWN IN A VEHICLE, WOULD YOU EXPECT ANY
KINDS OF TRANSFERS IN THAT VEHICLE NECESSARILY?
A IF THE BLOOD DON'T TOUCH THE SURFACE, THEN YOU DON'T
HAVE TRANSFER.
Q ALL RIGHT.
NOW, SIR, YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT THE IMPRINT EVIDENCE A
LITTLE BIT ON REDIRECT EXAMINATION. DID YOU READ BILL BODZIAK'S
REPORT ABOUT HIS EXAMINATION OF THE BLUE JEAN, SPECIFICALLY THE
LOWER PORTION OF THE RIGHT LEG?
A I RECALL I DID, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER ALL THE DETAIL.
Q BUT YOU DO HAVE -- YOU DO KNOW BILL BODZIAK FROM
BEFORE THIS CASE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES. HE'S AN EXCELLENT SCIENTIST. WE'RE FRIENDS.
Q AND HE'S A TOP-NOTCH EXPERT IN THE AREA OF FOOTPRINT
ANALYSIS?
A YES.
Q AND YOU HAVE NO SPECIFIC RECOLLECTION OF WHAT HE SAID
AT THIS TIME IN HIS REPORT?
A YOU CAN READ TO ME. I CAN AGREE OR DISAGREE.
Q WELL, DIDN'T YOU TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION BEFORE
YOU GOT ON THE WITNESS STAND AND TESTIFIED?
A WELL, DIFFERENT EXPERT HAVE DIFFERENT OPINION. THERE
ARE SOME THING CALLED SCIENTIFIC FACT. THEY ARE FACT. HAVE
IMPRINT, IMPRINT IN BLOOD. IF HE DON'T CALL THAT A FOOTPRINT, I
HAVE NOTHING TO ARGUE WITH THAT. HE ENTITLED HIS OWN OPINION.
EACH EXPERT ENTITLE OUR OWN OPINION. EACH OF US HAVE
TO LIVE WITH OUR CONSCIENCE, STANDARD. DIFFERENT EXPERT CAN HAVE
DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
Q NOW, YOU SAID THAT IN ORDER OR SOMETHING TO THE
EFFECT THAT IN ORDER FOR AN IMPRINT TO HAVE TRANSFERRED TO THE
EYEGLASS ENVELOPE, SOMEONE WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE STEPPED ON IT.
BUT IS THAT TRUE IF IT'S NOT A FOOTWEAR IMPRESSION?
A SOME THING -- AS I SAY, SOME THING HAS TO HAVE SOME
PRESSURE, DIRECT APPLY ONTO THE SURFACE WITHOUT MOVEMENT. IF
THIS ENVELOPE ON THE GROUND, THE MORE LOGIC THING IS SOMEBODY
STEP ON IT.
Q BUT ARE YOU SAYING, SIR, THAT THAT IS A FOOTWEAR
IMPRESSION NOW OR ARE YOU SAYING IT COULD BE ANY KIND OF
IMPRESSION?
A NO. I'M STILL SAYING THAT'S AN IMPRINT. AN IMPRINT,
SAY IS THIS CONSISTENT WITH A FOOTPRINT. IT COULD BE FOOTPRINT.
IT COULD BE OTHER IMPRINT.
Q AND, SIR, REGARDING THE ITEM THAT YOU SAY THAT YOU
SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT'S ON THE 10TH TILE DOWN AND THE THIRD
TILE ACROSS -- YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?
A YES, SIR.
Q ARE YOU FORMING THE OPINION THAT THAT IS IN FACT AN
IMPRINT OR ARE YOU FORMING THE OPINION THAT IT IS A POSSIBLE
IMPRINT?
A IT CONSISTENT WITH AN IMPRINT.
Q OKAY.
AND CONSISTENT WITH MEANS THAT IT MIGHT NOT BE AN
IMPRINT, RIGHT?
A IT MIGHT -- IN OUR STANDARD, CONSISTENT MEANS
CONSISTENT PATTERN SIMILAR TO IMPRINT. IF NOT IMPRINT, I DON'T
CALL IMPRINT. IF DEFINITE IT'S NOT AN IMPRINT, I WILL COME HERE
TELL YOU THAT'S NOT AN IMPRINT. IT'S AN IMPRINT. AN IMPRINT,
WHICH MEANS SOMETHING HAVE PATTERN DEPOSIT ON THE SURFACE AND
CAUSE A TRANSFER. THAT'S CALLED IMPRINT.
Q AND THAT IMPRINT IF IT IS AN IMPRINT AND IF IT'S
THERE COULD BE THE BRUNO MAGLI SHOE; IS THAT CORRECT?
A UH, IF PARALLEL LINE, CANNOT BE. IF NOT PARALLEL
LINE, HAVE A BRUNO MAGLI CONFIGURATION AND DESIGN, I MEAN IT'S
BRUNO MAGLI.
Q OKAY.
BUT IN THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU WERE SHOWN OF THE
BUNDY WALK, YOU DON'T KNOW FROM THAT PHOTOGRAPH?
A OH, YOU MEAN THE COLUMN 3, ALL THOSE IMPRINTS. I
THOUGHT YOU TALKING ABOUT SPECIFIC PARALLEL LINE, I SHOW YOU TILE
10. THEN YOU'RE CORRECT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF A PATTERN IT
IS.
Q OKAY.
SO THOSE ALL COULD BE CONSISTENT WITH BRUNO MAGLI
SHOES; IS THAT CORRECT?
A MAYBE. I DON'T KNOW.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND YOU WERE ASKED A QUESTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT
THERE COULD BE A SERIES OF IMPRINTS TO THE -- I'M GOING TO SAY AS
WE'RE LOOKING DOWN THE WALK TOWARDS BUNDY TO THE RIGHT OF THE
CENTER LINE; IS THAT CORRECT?
THE COURT: I'M SORRY. YOU SAY WE'RE LOOKING DOWN THE WALK
TOWARDS BUNDY?
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: WE'RE LOOKING DOWN THE WALK TOWARDS
THE ALLEY. SORRY.
MR. SCHECK: MAY THE RECORD REFLECT 598-A I BELIEVE?
THE COURT: YES.
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: TO THE RIGHT?
A YES, SIR.
Q DO YOU KNOW IF THERE IS IN FACT A SERIES OF PRINTS IN
THAT LOCATION, DO YOU KNOW WHETHER IT'S COMING DOWN TOWARDS BUNDY
OR HEADING AWAY TOWARDS THE ALLEY?
A I'M NOT THAT GOOD YET.
Q WHAT?
A I SAID, I'M NOT THAT GOOD YET, CAN TELL YOU FROM A
DISTANCE.
Q ALL RIGHT.
AND WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPRESSION ON THE ENVELOPE,
THE PIECE OF PAPER --
A YES.
Q -- THOSE COULD BE A FABRIC IMPRINT; IS THAT CORRECT?
A IT'S CONSISTENT WITH AN IMPRINT.
Q AND IT COULD BE FABRIC; IS THAT CORRECT?
A IT COULD BE A FABRIC.
Q DID YOU MAKE TEST IMPRESSIONS FROM ANY OF THE FABRIC
THAT WAS AT THE CRIME SCENE?
A I DON'T HAVE A FABRIC IMPRESSION.
Q AND USUALLY WHEN ONE IS TRYING TO MAKE A COMPARISON,
DON'T YOU TRY TO TAKE AN IMPRESSION?
A IF I HAVE TO MAKE A COMPARISON. I DID NOT DO SUCH
COMPARISON. I DID SOME MEASUREMENT BETWEEN THE BLUE JEAN, THE
SHIRT, THE BOOTS AND INCONSISTENT WITH THAT DESIGN.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND, SIR, IS IT TRUE THAT THERE IS
NO WAY TO RECONSTRUCT WHETHER OR NOT THE MURDERER'S CLOTHING IS
CONSISTENT WITH THOSE IMPRINTS?
MR. SCHECK: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION, BEYOND THE
SCOPE.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: UNLESS I GET THE CLOTHING.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT
ATTORNEYS.)
Q BY MR. GOLDBERG: AND WHEN I WAS TALKING ABOUT THESE
IMPRESSIONS, I'M TALKING ABOUT -- YOU UNDERSTOOD ME TO BE TALKING
ABOUT THE ENVELOPE AND THE PIECE OF PAPER, CORRECT?
A AGAIN. THOSE ARE IMPRINT, NOT IMPRESSION.
Q OKAY.
BUT WHATEVER, WE CAN'T AT THIS POINT DETERMINE
WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE LEFT BY SUSPECT'S CLOTHING, CAN WE?
A NO.
MR. GOLDBERG: THANK YOU.
I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.
MR. SCHECK: ONE SECOND.
(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD
BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)
MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, JUST ONE OR TWO QUESTIONS THAT I
THINK WILL GET US HOME. YOU'RE GIVING ME THAT LOOK.
THE COURT: I DIDN'T SAY A WORD, MR. SCHECK.
MR. SCHECK: I KNOW. YOU DON'T HAVE TO. I'VE BEEN HERE
AWHILE.
THE COURT: IF I WERE YOU --
MR. SCHECK: I KNOW. I KNOW. I KNOW.
THE COURT: YOU WANT TO LET ME ASK MY ONE QUESTION?
GO AHEAD.
FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. SCHECK:
Q ALL RIGHT.
YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS JUST NOW BY MR.
GOLDBERG ABOUT TRACE EVIDENCE AND BLOOD.
MR. GOLDBERG: MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
Q BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, WOULD YOU EXPECT IN A STRUGGLE
WHERE SHOES WERE IN BLOOD, IN SOIL AND CROSSED A PATH WHERE THERE
WERE BERRIES TO FIND EVIDENCE OF SOIL AND BERRIES AND EVEN HAIRS
AND FIBERS FROM VICTIMS IN A CAR IF THE PERPETRATOR HAD ENGAGED
IN A STRUGGLE AND WALKED INTO THAT CAR?
MR. GOLDBERG: YOUR HONOR, BEYOND THE SCOPE, CALLS FOR
SPECULATION, ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, MISSTATES THE
TESTIMONY.
THE COURT: OVERRULED.
THE WITNESS: IF THE SHOES HAVE CONTACT THE BERRY, CONTACT
THE SOIL OR FIBER DEBRIS, IN THEORY, WE SHOULD SEE THE TRANSFER.
FURTHER RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. GOLDBERG:
Q AND YOU MIGHT NOT; IS THAT CORRECT?
A YES.
MR. GOLDBERG: ALL RIGHT.
THANKS.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. DR. LEE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU ARE
EXCUSED, SIR.
THE WITNESS: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR.
THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS
FOR THE AFTERNOON.
PLEASE REMEMBER ALL MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU; DON'T
DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, MOST IMPORTANTLY, DON'T FORM
ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS
UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY
TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU WITH REGARD TO THE CASE.
AS FAR AS THE JURY IS CONCERNED, WE'LL STAND IN
RECESS.
LET ME SEE COUNSEL AS FAR AS SCHEDULING IS CONCERNED.
(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE
BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)
(AT 5:20 P.M., AN ADJOURNMENT
WAS TAKEN UNTIL, TUESDAY,
AUGUST 29, 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
MONDAY, AUGUST 28, 1995
VOLUME 213
PAGES 43084 THROUGH 43372, 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
KENNETH SPAULDING, 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 213 PAGES 43084 - 43372
-----------------------------------------------------
DAY DATE SESSION PAGE VOL.
MONDAY AUGUST 28, 1995 A.M. 43084 213
P.M. 43218 213
-----------------------------------------------------
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
DEFENSE
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.
LEE, HENRY C. 213
43111GB
(RESUMED) 43227GB 43314BS 43350GB
(FURTHER) 43370BS 43371GB
-----------------------------------------------------
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.
LEE, HENRY C. 213
43111GB
(RESUMED) 43227GB 43314BS 43350GB
(FURTHER) 43370BS 43371GB
EXHIBITS
PEOPLE'S FOR IN EXHIBIT
IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE
PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.
591 - DOCUMENT 43185 213
ENTITLED "HENRY LEE'S FOUR-WAY LINKAGE THEORY"
592 - ARTICLE 43197 213
ENTITLED "ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE IS NOT
EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE" BY HERBERT MAC DONNEL
593 - POSTERBOARD 43202 213
ENTITLED "875 SOUTH BUNDY"
594 - POSTERBOARD 43239 213
WITH 3 PHOTOGRAPHS OF SHOE IMPRINTS
595 - PHOTOGRAPH 43245 213
OF AN ENVELOPE WITH EYEGLASSES, A YELLOW
CIRCLE AND THE INITIALS "H.L."
(COMPUTER PRINTOUT)
595-A - PHOTOGRAPH 43312 213
OF A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF AN ENVELOPE WITH
YELLOW CIRCLE AND THE INITIALS "H.L."
(COMPUTER PRINTOUT)
596 - PHOTOGRAPH 43252 213
OF TWO DARK-COLORED SOCKS
597 - POSTERBOARD 43257 213
WITH 4 PHOTOGRAPHS DEPICTING ITEM 43 BINDLES
AND TRANSFERS
598 - MAGNETIC BOARD 43268 213
598-A - MAGNETIC 43269 213
TRANSFER DEPICTING THE WALKWAY AT THE BUNDY
CRIME SCENE
598-B - MAGNETIC 43269 213
TRANSFER DEPICTING THE FOLIAGE AND MIDDLE
PORTION OF THE WALKWAY AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE
598-C - MAGNETIC 43269 213
TRANSFER DEPICTING THE REAR WALKWAY AT THE
BUNDY CRIME SCENE
598-D - PHOTOGRAPH (NOT MARKED ON THE RECORD)
OF THE FEET OF A STANDING INDIVIDUAL, THE
GROUND AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE WITH SHOE
PRINTS
EXHIBITS
(CONTINUED)
PEOPLE'S FOR IN EXHIBIT
IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE
PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.
598-E - MAGNETIC 43284 213
TRANSFER DEPICTING A WIDE VIEW OF THE TILE AT
THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE
598-F - MAGNETIC 43284 213
TRANSFER DEPICTING A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF THE TILE
AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE WITH A MEASURING TAPE
598-G - PHOTOGRAPH 43289 213
OF A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF THE GROUND AT THE BUNDY
CRIME SCENE WITH A SHOE PRINT
598-H - MAGNETIC 43290 213
TRANSFER DEPICTING A FOOTPRINT WITH TWO RULERS
ON THE GROUND AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE
598-I - MAGNETIC 43291 213
TRANSFER DEPICTING THE GROUND AT THE BUNDY
CRIME SCENE WITH TWO RULERS
598-C(1) - PHOTOGRAPH 43312 213
OF THE GROUND AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE WITH
A YELLOW ARROW AND HEEL PRINT
-----------------------------------------------------
DEFENSE FOR IN EXHIBIT
IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE
PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.
1363 - ARTICLE 43341 213
RELATING TO DRYING TIMES
