Department no. 103 Hon. Lance A. Ito, Judge
APPEARANCES: (Appearances as heretofore noted.)
(Janet M. Moxham, CSR no. 4855, official reporter.)
(Christine M. Olson, CSR no. 2378, official reporter.)
(The following proceedings were held in open Court, out of the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: Good morning, counsel. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. Mr. Simpson is again present before the Court with his counsel, Mr. Shapiro, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Blasier, Mr. Scheck, Mr. Neufeld, People represented by Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Darden. Good morning, counsel.
MR. SHAPIRO: Good morning, your Honor.
MR. COCHRAN: Good morning, your Honor.
MR. NEUFELD: Good morning, your Honor.
MR. SCHECK: Good morning, your Honor.
MR. BLASIER: Good morning, your Honor.
MR. GOLDBERG: Good morning, your Honor.
MR. DARDEN: Good morning, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. We have the items of evidence present from the LAPD; is that correct?
MR. GOLDBERG: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. GOLDBERG: With the exception of three control bindles on item 7, 12 and 49, which I advised counsel of.
THE COURT: All right. And, Mr. Neufeld, you wanted to inspect those items and, Mr. Goldberg, you wanted that done on the record; is that correct?
MR. GOLDBERG: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Let's proceed.
MR. GOLDBERG: Well, he has inspected the items, but he would like to open them. Some of them are sealed.
THE COURT: All right. How many of those items do you need to see, to open to see?
MR. NEUFELD: I just wanted to open the coin envelopes. But, you know, there's the 16 or so items.
THE COURT: How many?
MR. NEUFELD: One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, seventeen, twenty-three items.
THE COURT: Haven't you already been given the opportunity to do this previously?
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor--oh, no. That's not the point here. The point is, before I actually display them to the witness, I just want an opportunity to make sure these are the same ones that I've seen in the past. That can take literally seven or eight minutes to do. I was here at 8:30 for that purpose, as you know, your Honor.
THE COURT: Uh-huh.
MR. NEUFELD: I can do it during a very brief recess between the end of their recross--end of their redirect and my cross. I just need those seven minutes though before I actually show them to the witness, I've had an opportunity to look at them myself to make sure that they're the same.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Goldberg, would you approach, please.
MR. GOLDBERG: Yes.
THE COURT: Let me give you my scissors. You've got 10 minutes.
MR. NEUFELD: Thank you very much.
THE COURT: We'll do it on the record. Do you need gloves for these things?
MR. GOLDBERG: I'm going to have Miss Mazzola do it if I may, and she has gloves.
THE COURT: All right.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Mr. Goldberg.
MR. GOLDBERG: We were just discussing that we don't have any seals to reseal the items, which we would like to do after they're reopened because they are analyzed evidence. Miss Mazzola just brought it to my attention.
THE COURT: All right. Mrs. Robertson, do you have evidence seals so we can reseal each of these items after they've been opened?
THE CLERK: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Would you supervise that process then over there, please. All right. Mr. Goldberg, Mr. Darden, can I ask you to clear a few items off your counsel table there, put them over here on the bar over by the jury rail so I can observe what's going on as well. And let's do this as expeditiously as we can.
MR. GOLDBERG: I will.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: All right. Let's get started.
MR. GOLDBERG: Try to take them out to the best of your ability in numerical order.
THE COURT: All right. Miss Mazzola has resumed--excuse me--removed the contents of a 9 by 12 manila envelope. There appear to be numerous coin envelopes. All right. Which one do you have there, Miss Mazzola?
MS. MAZZOLA: It's item 8.
THE COURT: All right. Item 8. There appear to be two coin envelopes. They appear to be what, stapled together?
MS. MAZZOLA: Stapled together.
THE COURT: All right. You've removed two bindles. Mr. Harmon, you're going to have to stand out of the well, please. Mrs. Robertson, let me ask you to reseal these items.
THE CLERK: Yes.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 11.
THE COURT: Again, two coin envelopes that appear to be stapled together.
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor, just to tell you, if you want, since they have about 40 minutes of redirect, I can start on the recross before I get to this issue if you want to do this during the recess if you prefer.
THE COURT: Well, let's do it now.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay.
THE COURT: All right. Which item is this?
MS. MAZZOLA: This is still 11.
THE COURT: All right. Two bindles.
MR. GOLDBERG: For the record, they are in a sealed condition, the bindles.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. NEUFELD: Thank you.
MS. MAZZOLA: Number 12.
THE COURT: Also appears to be two coin envelopes stapled together. Excuse me, counsel.
MR. NEUFELD: I am sorry. Just getting my coffee.
THE COURT: That's three times now. Deputy Jex. Appears to be one bindle.
MR. GOLDBERG: This bindle just has--does that just have a 12 on it? Is that a 12? What is that?
MS. MAZZOLA: 12.
MR. GOLDBERG: It doesn't have a 12-c?
MS. MAZZOLA: This is property item 42.
THE COURT: Appears to be a single coin envelope. Appears to contain two paper bindles.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 43.
MR. GOLDBERG: Two paper bindles came out of that item, your Honor.
THE COURT: Noted.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 44.
THE COURT: All right. A single coin envelope.
MR. GOLDBERG: Again, two paper bindles.
THE COURT: Noted.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 45.
THE COURT: Appear to be two coin envelopes stapled together. All right. Two paper bindles.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 46.
THE COURT: All right. 46. Deputy Magnera, would you make preparations to resume again at 1 o'clock instead of 1:30? All right. Item 46. Would you describe that, Miss Mazzola?
MS. MAZZOLA: Appears to be a menu from a Thai-Chinese restaurant.
THE COURT: All right. Folded.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 14.
THE COURT: All right. Single coin envelope.
MR. GOLDBERG: Two envelopes. I mean two bindles again.
THE COURT: Noted. Single coin envelope.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 47.
THE COURT: Appears to be three coin envelopes stapled together.
MR. GOLDBERG: And also for the record so far, all the coin envelopes from which the bindles came were sealed.
THE COURT: Yes. And, Miss Mazzola, what is that?
MS. MAZZOLA: It is another single bindle that appears to be sealed up with tape, plastic seal.
MR. GOLDBERG: Does that say c or is that a control bindle or just a number?
MS. MAZZOLA: Number. This is the second coin envelope.
THE COURT: All right. The second sealed coin envelope.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and Ms. Mazzola.)
THE COURT: All right. A single bindle out of the second coin envelope. All right. Miss Mazzola.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 48.
THE COURT: Three coin envelopes. Deputy Jex, there's a lot of talking in the audience. I know three journalists and one book author that are about to go out. Ms. Hayslett, would you come here for a moment. Miss Mazzola, what is that? Is that a paper bindle?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes. Single paper bindle with at least two color seals and several initials.
THE COURT: It's past 10 minutes at this point. Okay. What item is that?
MS. MAZZOLA: This is still item 48. This is the second sealed envelope.
THE COURT: All right. That was a single paper bindle?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: It also appears to be sealed with tape and it appears to be a control bindle.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 41.
THE COURT: Single coin envelope. All right. Two paper bindles.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item no. 1.
THE COURT: All right. Two coin envelopes stapled together, one sealed.
MR. GOLDBERG: And two bindles.
THE COURT: Two paper bindles.
MR. GOLDBERG: Appear to be sealed.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 4.
THE COURT: Two coin envelopes stapled together, one sealed. Two paper bindles.
MR. GOLDBERG: And two bindles.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 5.
THE COURT: Appear to be two coin envelopes stapled together. One is sealed. Appear to be two paper bindles. Mr. Fairtlough, is there a reason you can't do that during a recess?
MS. MAZZOLA: Item no. 6.
THE COURT: Two coin envelopes stapled together. One appears to be sealed.
MS. MAZZOLA: Actually both are sealed.
THE COURT: Both are sealed. Mr. Neufeld, could you take two steps to the left? Thank you.
MS. MAZZOLA: Single bindle.
THE COURT: Single paper bindle. All right. Second coin envelope, appears to be one paper bindle. Next item.
MS. MAZZOLA: Next item is 49.
THE COURT: Two coin envelopes stapled together.
MS. MAZZOLA: One sealed.
THE COURT: One sealed.
MS. MAZZOLA: One bindle.
THE COURT: One bindle.
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 52, three bindles, two sealed.
THE COURT: Was the last item 2?
MS. MAZZOLA: The last item was 49.
THE COURT: 49, but there were two envelopes, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Two envelopes.
THE COURT: Right. All right. Which number is this?
MS. MAZZOLA: This is item 52. There are three envelopes, two of them are sealed.
THE COURT: Awfully long seven minutes.
MR. NEUFELD: The observation time if you add that up would be less than seven minutes.
MS. MAZZOLA: One bindle. This is the second sealed bindle--coin envelope, one sealed bindle and two micro centrifuge tubes. Item 7, two coin envelopes, one sealed. Excuse me. Two sealed.
THE COURT: Mrs. Robertson, do you have your stapler there?
THE CLERK: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Miss Mazzola.
MS. MAZZOLA: One of the sealed envelopes is empty. One paper bindle and four micro centrifuge tubes, C-E-N-T-R-I-F-U-G-E.
MR. GOLDBERG: This just says 7, it doesn't say 7c?
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 51, two coin envelopes, one sealed, two paper bindles. Item 50, three coin envelopes, two sealed, no paper. One paper bindle control. One paper bindle.
THE COURT: All right. If you'll--Mrs. Robertson, if you'll reseal all those items, please. All right. Mr. Neufeld, have you had the opportunity to observe those items?
MR. NEUFELD: I certainly have, your Honor. Thank you, your Honor. I just want to ask the Court that since the Prosecution chose not to use this evidence as its direct, as part of its direct case with this witness and I did ask specifically to use it for my cross and I had to delay the end of my cross until they were produced, that the People not be allowed to use this or these items, refer to them on their redirect since it's not something I went into on cross yet and I would have been entitled to show them for the first time on my cross.
THE COURT: Well, Mr. Goldberg indicated to me that he only had 20 more minutes. There's been no indication that he intends on using any of these items. Since that's a decision I don't have to make--
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, we had an issue as to items no. 15 and 16 which the Court asked that we bring here this morning--
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: --and now have. I don't know whether the Court wants to see--
THE COURT: Have you displayed those to Mr. Neufeld?
MR. GOLDBERG: Yes. This is item no. 15.
THE COURT: All right. Standard American Airlines ticket jacket with what appears to be a ticket sticking out of it or at least the stub.
MR. GOLDBERG: And item no. 16 which appears to be a baggage claim tag.
THE COURT: Is that one of those double stick fold-over, bar coded?
MS. CLARK: Right.
MR. GOLDBERG: Right.
THE COURT: All right. Noted. All right. Deputy Magnera--I'm sorry. Madam Court reporter, how do you want to split the morning?
THE COURT REPORTER: I'm fine for the morning.
THE COURT: I'm tempted to go straight through.
THE COURT REPORTER: That's fine.
THE COURT: All right. Let's have the jurors.
(The following proceedings were held in open Court, in the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good morning.
THE COURT: The record should reflect we've been joined by all the members of our jury panel. Ladies and gentlemen, as you recall, yesterday, I indicated to you that we had a delay because of some of the items, physical items of evidence were not immediately available to us. And the delay this morning was that those items were delivered to the Court and I wanted to examine each piece of that evidence before it was presented to you. So we've had to go through--how many were there? 15 or 16 pieces of evidence?
MR. GOLDBERG: I think there were more than that.
THE COURT: In any event, that's what we've been doing. We've been here since 8:30 this morning for that purpose just to let you know what the delay was. All right.
Andrea Mazzola, The witness on the stand at the time of the evening adjournment, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
THE COURT: Good morning again, Miss Mazzola.
MS. MAZZOLA: Good morning.
THE COURT: You are reminded again you are under oath. And, Mr. Goldberg, you may continue with your redirect examination.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. GOLDBERG
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, I was asking you yesterday about this white item, the blanket that you saw in the vicinity or on Mr. Goldman at some point. What was that blanket again?
MS. MAZZOLA: It was a white blanket or sheet. I wasn't sure which one.
MR. GOLDBERG: And was that something that came from the Coroner's office?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. If she knows.
THE COURT: Rephrase the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Do you know if that came from the Coroner's office?
MS. MAZZOLA: At the time, I did not.
MR. GOLDBERG: All right. Maybe we can see People's 99 for identification.
MR. FAIRTLOUGH: Your Honor, you should cut the feed for this photo.
THE COURT: Cut.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. Now, if you can look at the background of this photograph and take a look at the white blanket or white sheet that appears to have some writing on it. Is that what you saw?
MS. MAZZOLA: I saw him on a white blanket or sheet.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. And when you looked at this--did you look at this photograph prior to testifying today, the actual photograph as opposed to an image of it?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And did you look at other crime scene photographs depicting this same scene or similar scene?
MS. MAZZOLA: I had seen crime scene photographs previous, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And what was the writing--what is the writing that appears on the right-hand side of the display yet somewhat blurry?
MS. MAZZOLA: On this image, it's hard to tell. But on the photographs, it appears to be from the L.A. Coroner.
MR. GOLDBERG: All right. And is this consistent with what you saw when you were referring to a white blanket?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now--thank you. Was there another white blanket that was at the crime scene that was still there after the bodies had been removed when you were engaged in the evidence collection process?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes, there was.
MR. GOLDBERG: And where was that white blanket?
MS. MAZZOLA: It was on the walkway near the first steps.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, from your own independent recollection, based upon what you saw when you were at the scene, did you ever see that blanket on anyone?
MS. MAZZOLA: From what I can recall, I did not see that particular blanket on anybody.
MR. GOLDBERG: Either the body of Nicole Simpson or Ronald Goldman?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not that I can recall, no.
MR. GOLDBERG: Does that mean that it wasn't ever on Nicole Simpson or just that you did not see that?
MS. MAZZOLA: That I did not see that.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, you were asked some questions on cross-examination about your conversations with me, and you said that at one point, you had been in the District Attorney's office for perhaps five hours or so?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. That was not the testimony. More than one occasion.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, on the occasion or occasions when that happened, was that while you were waiting to testify?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not--well, I believe on maybe one occasion, it was while I was waiting.
MR. GOLDBERG: And were people talking to you the whole time about this case or what were you doing?
MS. MAZZOLA: For the most part, I was left alone.
MR. GOLDBERG: And did the Defense attorneys ever attempt to your knowledge to contact you and say, we'd like to sit down with you and go over what we're going to question you about or talk about the case"?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection as to form.
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Have the Defense attorneys ever contacted you and asked you prior to today to discuss any part of the case with them?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. Today, did you have a little bit of a conversation with Mr. Neufeld about certain items of evidence?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And other than that, is that the only time that you had an off the record conversation that you can recall with one of the Defense lawyers?
MS. MAZZOLA: That I can recall--
MR. GOLDBERG: Relating to the case.
MS. MAZZOLA: That I can recall, I believe it was, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Did you consider your conversation with Mr. Neufeld to be witness preparation?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection to what she considered.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Was he asking you questions about, oh--well, can you just give us a generic or general description of what the conversation was about?
MS. MAZZOLA: He was just asking about certain items of evidence, if I would unseal them.
MR. GOLDBERG: He was asking what?
MS. MAZZOLA: That if I would open them for him to see.
MR. GOLDBERG: Was he asking any questions about those items of evidence or what you put on them or what they were or so on?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not really.
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, I wanted to ask some questions about 15 and 16 pursuant to our conversation.
THE COURT: All right. I think our agreed-upon perimeter is physical description, dimension.
MR. GOLDBERG: Without telling us what these items--
THE COURT: Hold on. Hold on. Mr. Neufeld.
MR. NEUFELD: Brief sidebar. I think we can resolve this very briefly.
THE COURT: Do you want to talk to Mr. Cochran first?
MR. NEUFELD: Yes.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: Can we have a second, your Honor?
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: Excuse us a minute.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
THE COURT: All right. Counsel. Mr. Goldberg.
MS. CLARK: Can we have just one more minute, your Honor, please? Your Honor, please?
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MS. CLARK: Thank you.
MR. GOLDBERG: All right.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)
MR. COCHRAN: Can we approach briefly?
THE COURT: With the Court reporter.
(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)
THE COURT: We're over at the sidebar. Where are we going to go with this?
MR. COCHRAN: We're willing I think just to go forward and we'll stipulate to any withdrawal of any objection.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. COCHRAN: So you can mark them. But that's it. That's what we were talking about. We were trying to save time.
THE COURT: Do I have to tell them I previously instructed them to ignore it or just let it lie?
MR. NEUFELD: Just let it lie I think because obviously it's coming in.
MS. CLARK: You know what you could do? Just say the parties agree that--
THE COURT: 15 and 16 are going to be shown to you.
MS. CLARK: Without reminding them, just say the parties agree.
MR. COCHRAN: The parties have agreed 15 and 16 can come in.
(The following proceedings were held in open Court:)
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, counsel. Ladies and gentlemen, if you recall--well, with regard to evidence collection, items number 15 and 16, the parties, both sides have withdrawn their objection to those items. So we will proceed with those. All right. Mr. Goldberg.
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, then I'll mark as my next exhibit in order as People's 203--
THE COURT: 203.
MR. GOLDBERG: --item no. 15, and as 204, item no. 16. I'm not going to write on these because they already have markings on them.
THE COURT: All right.
(Peo's 203 for id = item no. 15)
(Peo's 204 for id = item no. 16)
MR. GOLDBERG: May I approach the witness?
THE COURT: You may.
MR. GOLDBERG: Miss Mazzola, showing you item no. 15 and item no. 16, do you recognize those?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And what are those?
MS. MAZZOLA: They are the two items which were collected at Rockingham on the afternoon of June 13th.
MR. GOLDBERG: And when was the packaging that they're now contained in, when were they placed in those packaging materials?
MS. MAZZOLA: That happened June 14th back at the laboratory.
MR. GOLDBERG: Can you remove the item from People's 1--excuse me--203 for identification, that's number 15, and tell us what you're doing for the record?
MS. MAZZOLA: I am opening the coin envelope and removing appears to be airline tickets.
MR. GOLDBERG: All right. Maybe you can just hold that up so the jurors can see what you have.
(The witness complies.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, when you were actually at the location, did you put that in any packaging material other than the plastic bag itself?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, can you remove item no. 16 from its coin envelope and describe what you're doing for the record?
MS. MAZZOLA: Okay. I am removing item no. 16 from the envelope. It appears to be a baggage claim ticket from an airline.
MR. GOLDBERG: And was that placed in any other packaging material on the 13th when you were at Rockingham other than the plastic bag itself?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Thank you. Can you just hold up item no. 15 one more time after you put 16 away?
MS. MAZZOLA: Sure (Witness complies).
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, maybe I could just take a look at 163-h for identification, the gray analyzed evidence envelope.
(Brief pause.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Can you put that--just keep that out for a second.
THE COURT: Do you want the item itself kept out?
MR. GOLDBERG: Yeah, if she would.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. GOLDBERG: I would like to give you 163-h. Maybe you can just hold the two of those up so we can get a relative size comparison.
(The witness complies.)
MR. GOLDBERG: And neither that item that you're holding now nor item no. 16 were placed in any other packaging material other than the plastic bag while you were at the Rockingham location?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, when you were carrying the plastic bag out of the location, did it feel to you like it weighed anything more than what you would expect with just item 15 and 16 and the little cards, collection cards?
MS. MAZZOLA: It felt like it was a little heavier than it should be, but I didn't give it much thought.
MR. GOLDBERG: Thank you. You can replace that item.
(The witness complies.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Could you just hold up the envelope itself so that we can--no, no. The envelope, coin envelope. Is that the type of coin envelope or one of the kinds of coin envelopes that you do have in your crime scene boxes?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And where were those coin envelopes at the time that you and Mr. Fung recovered item 15 and 16?
MS. MAZZOLA: They were in the back of the truck.
MR. GOLDBERG: Locked?
MS. MAZZOLA: Locked.
MR. GOLDBERG: Thank you. Now, turning to the Bronco search and collection of evidence, you said that on the pedals, that you used the same swab for the purposes of the phenolphtalein test?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: Why was that done?
MS. MAZZOLA: Mr. Fung just wanted to see if the pedals had been manipulated as if someone had driven the Bronco.
MR. GOLDBERG: As opposed to what?
MS. MAZZOLA: As opposed to just getting in the Bronco and then getting right back out.
MR. GOLDBERG: So he wanted to see whether there was any evidence of any blood on any one of the three pedals?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: And when he directed you to do this test, did you have any fear or concern on your part that if you suggested to him that three different swabs should be used that he was going to say to you, "I can't believe that you would question my judgment. I think you should be fired"?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Or anything along those lines?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: And when you were doing this phenolphtalein test, was it your intent to collect anything or try to collect anything from the pedals?
MS. MAZZOLA: No. He said we were just--
MR. NEUFELD: Objection to what he said.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. GOLDBERG: If you could just tell us what your intent was.
MS. MAZZOLA: The intent was to see if the pedals had been manipulated. That was it.
MR. GOLDBERG: And is it your practice not to collect every single last stain that you see in a car that contains many stains such as the Bronco?
MS. MAZZOLA: A representative sample of what is in the car would be taken.
MR. GOLDBERG: And who was making the judgment call as to which samples to take and not to take from the Bronco?
MS. MAZZOLA: That was Mr. Fung.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, I would like to direct your attention to People's 195-a for identification.
(Brief pause.)
MR. GOLDBERG: This photograph is a little bit washed out. Have you had an opportunity--
MR. NEUFELD: Objection, your Honor, to his testifying.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. GOLDBERG: Have you had an opportunity to look at the actual photograph before?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And was this a photograph that was taken on the 14th when you and Mr. Fung were doing the evidence collection at the Bronco?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes, it was.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, do you have an independent recollection of seeing any of the stains that appear in the running board area of the driver's side door?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not on the running board itself, no.
MR. GOLDBERG: Let's take a look at 197 for identification. Now, with respect to the little stains that are contained in this photograph--
MR. NEUFELD: Objection, your Honor, to little stains.
THE COURT: Sustained. Counsel, objection. Then I'll ask for the grounds. Both sides.
MR. GOLDBERG: Do you see some stains that are contained in this photograph?
MS. MAZZOLA: I see cards where there would be stains.
MR. GOLDBERG: No. I'm talking about the area of the running board, the driver's area.
MR. NEUFELD: Objection as to the characterization. Assumes facts not in evidence.
THE COURT: Rephrase the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Talking about the white metallic area that's in the forefront of this area.
MS. MAZZOLA: There appears to be a dark spot on it.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, do you recall seeing that on the 14th?
MS. MAZZOLA: No, I don't recall if I saw that or not.
MR. GOLDBERG: And do you recall seeing any other spots in that area on the 14th?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, when you say you don't recall, does that mean that they weren't there?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Rephrase the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: When you say that you don't recall, does that mean that you looked in that area, examined it and that they weren't there?
MS. MAZZOLA: It means I don't recall if I saw stains there or not.
MR. GOLDBERG: And prior to looking at the crime scene photographs, did you have any recollection as to the rear gate at Bundy being there?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: But does that mean that it wasn't there?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection, your Honor, again as to form.
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Does that mean that you looked and you examined the area and you saw that there was no rear gate at Bundy?
MS. MAZZOLA: I did not remember if--seeing a rear gate at Bundy.
MR. GOLDBERG: But do you now know that there was in fact one there?
MS. MAZZOLA: I know now that there was a gate, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And prior to seeing the videotape of yourself collecting the glove at the Bundy location--
THE COURT: I think we've asked this question already, counsel.
MR. GOLDBERG: Not in this context.
THE COURT: We asked the same question yesterday afternoon though in a similar context.
MR. GOLDBERG: Well, you testified yesterday that you didn't have an independent recollection prior to seeing the videotape of collecting the glove at Bundy. Does that mean that you didn't collect it or you remember not collecting it?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection.
THE COURT: Counsel, we've already been through--you've already asked that question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, who was doing most of the work in terms of trying to identify stains on the Bronco prior to the actual physical collection of the stains?
MS. MAZZOLA: Mr. Fung.
MR. GOLDBERG: What were you doing?
MS. MAZZOLA: I was passing him the photo id cards, doing a sketch, helping with measurements, passing him supplies as he needed them.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. Now, Miss Mazzola, with respect to the stains that are in this People's exhibit 197 for identification, did you ever consider at all testifying that you did see them on the 14th?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection.
THE COURT: Ground?
MR. NEUFELD: Irrelevant.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: If I didn't remember seeing them, then that's how I would testify, I didn't remember them.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. And you never thought of saying, "Yeah, I do remember seeing them," to help the Prosecution's case, did you?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, I would like to ask you some questions about the collection video, the blood collection video that was played. That's Defense 1117 for identification. And I'd just like to play it all the way through, and then I'll ask you some questions about what we saw.
(Brief pause.)
(At 10:40 A.M., Defendant's exhibit 1117, a videotape, was played.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. In this scene where you're pouring some items out into the cap, what are you doing?
MS. MAZZOLA: I am putting some of the swatches into the cap so I could pick them up with tweezers.
MR. GOLDBERG: And now you are doing what?
MS. MAZZOLA: Adding a drop of distilled water to the swatch and shaking it out.
MR. GOLDBERG: And now you've placed the swatch down, and for what purpose is that?
MS. MAZZOLA: To take a control.
MR. GOLDBERG: And this is right by the card that says number 5?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: And you just put it into an object. What did you put the control swatch in?
MS. MAZZOLA: It's placed in a small plastic bag.
MR. GOLDBERG: And that had some writing on it?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: What was the writing?
MS. MAZZOLA: The item number and c for control.
MR. GOLDBERG: So that's all you have to put on there, is the item number and c for control?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. Leading.
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Is that all you have to put on there, just the item number and c for control?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, what did you just do?
MS. MAZZOLA: Clean the tweezers again.
MR. GOLDBERG: And now you are placing the swatch down on the stain?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, when you were handling the swatch with the tweezers, what portion of the tweezers comes into contact with the swatch?
MS. MAZZOLA: The extreme pointed end.
MR. GOLDBERG: Are those tweezers--is there anything special about them that distinguishes them from ordinary tweezers?
MS. MAZZOLA: Well, they're extremely sharper and they have a longer area where you would handle the items that you need to.
MR. GOLDBERG: Are they serrated at all so as to be able to grab things or are they just smooth?
MS. MAZZOLA: We have some that are serrated, some that are smooth.
MR. GOLDBERG: But these particulars ones that you use for this task are the smooth ones?
MS. MAZZOLA: Those are smooth.
MR. GOLDBERG: And now what are you doing?
MS. MAZZOLA: Placing the swatch with the item in a separate plastic bag.
MR. GOLDBERG: What does that plastic bag have on it?
MS. MAZZOLA: The item number.
MR. GOLDBERG: But it doesn't have a c?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: And why is that? Why do you put a c on one and just the item number on the other, for what purpose?
MS. MAZZOLA: Well, I do it to designate the control. That's the only reason.
MR. GOLDBERG: Couldn't you designate it even if you didn't write that on it?
MS. MAZZOLA: For the most part, you can tell if the swatch has blood on it or not. But I just put a c.
MR. GOLDBERG: Makes it easier?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Do you write your initials anywhere on those plastic envelopes?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, when you got up, you touched the ground. Did you notice that?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Does that sometimes happen at a crime scene, where you will touch the ground for whatever the reason, to balance yourself?
MS. MAZZOLA: Touch the ground or something to maintain your balance.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Does touching the ground have any impact in terms of the evidence collection?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. She's not qualified.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: Not really, no.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, what are you filling out now?
MS. MAZZOLA: It could be another envelope for the next item.
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. Speculation.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. GOLDBERG: When you looked at this videotape, does it look like you have more than one item in your hand--yeah. Okay--right now?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: What items do you have in your hand?
MS. MAZZOLA: A plastic bag and coin envelope.
MR. GOLDBERG: And what do you write on the plastic bag?
MS. MAZZOLA: The item number.
MR. GOLDBERG: What do you write on the coin envelope?
MS. MAZZOLA: The item number.
MR. GOLDBERG: And in this case, that would have been 6?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: And what are you doing now?
MS. MAZZOLA: Cleaning the tweezers again.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, between the time that you cleaned your tweezers and the time you picked up this next swatch, did you ever touch the tip end of the tweezers that comes in contact with the swatch?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Is that the way that you do it at a real crime scene too?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And now what are you collecting?
MS. MAZZOLA: The next control.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. GOLDBERG: And you've just put the swatch, the control swatch, where?
MS. MAZZOLA: In a plastic bag.
MR. GOLDBERG: And is that designated in some way again to separate it from the stain swatch?
MS. MAZZOLA: It has an item number and a c on it.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now you're writing on another plastic bag?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: You just wrote the item number and is that it?
MS. MAZZOLA: For that one, it would be just the item number.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. And again, you dropped the swatch in this video. Did you try to recover that swatch or did you just leave it on the ground?
MS. MAZZOLA: Leave it on the ground.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, you're having a little bit of difficulty getting this off the tweezers?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: But when you look closely, did you ever touch the swatch with your gloved hand?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Or did you ever touch the area of the tweezers that comes into contact with the swatch?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Is that consistent with your practice at a real crime scene?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, this swatch seems to be soaking up a little easier than the other one; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: It appears to be, yes.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. Thank you.
(At 10:50 A.M., the playing of the videotape was concluded.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, I want to ask you a few more questions about the videotape. First of all, in this videotape, did your gloved hands ever come into contact with a swatch?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: And when I say that, I mean a swatch was used for either a control or for collecting a stain.
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: And towards the beginning portion of the videotape, do you recall a segment where your pinkie was somewhat extended almost as if you were holding a china cup?
MS. MAZZOLA: I recall it was extended, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, what were you doing with your pinkie in that particular segment? You were also asked about it on cross-examination.
MS. MAZZOLA: Just helping to turn over the lid of the cap.
MR. GOLDBERG: And when you reviewed the videotape--did you review the videotape again after your testimony?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Could you actually see the cap being flipped before it was put on--back on top of the pill box?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And is that also your practice at a crime scene; that in terms of the swatches that you're going to use for controls or stains, that you do not touch them with your gloved hand?
MS. MAZZOLA: They are not touched with our hands, no.
MR. GOLDBERG: When you watched this videotape, was there ever a time when you touched with your gloved hands the portion of the tweezers that you would use to collect either a control or a swatch after they were cleaned but before the swatch was collected?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: And is that also consistent with the practice that you used at a crime scene?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, on stain no. 5, the demonstration stain, do you know from viewing this videotape for sure whether or not the moisture from the control swatch did eventually migrate over to the stain?
MS. MAZZOLA: From the videotape, it looked like it was coming close, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: It could have?
MS. MAZZOLA: Could have, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, does that present a problem when you are collecting evidence?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not really, no.
MR. GOLDBERG: Why not?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection, your Honor. No foundation.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. Well, counsel give you a hypothetical where he related to you a set of facts under which the swatch came into contact with your hand and then was placed as the substrate control down on the cement and then the water migrated over to the stain itself. Do you recall a hypothetical along those lines?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Under that hypothetical situation, is there any danger of contaminating the item being collected, the stain?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. Still no foundation with this witness.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: Very little if any.
MR. GOLDBERG: And if the control swatch were in fact contaminated, could that be tested for by testing the control swatch?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. Beyond the scope of her expertise.
THE COURT: Foundation. Sustained.
MR. GOLDBERG: Well, have you been taught what the control swatch is for?
MS. MAZZOLA: We have been told what it can be used for, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And when it gets back to the laboratory, what do the people in serology use those control swatches for?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection.
THE COURT: Rephrase the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Do you know what the people in serology use those for?
MS. MAZZOLA: I know they are used to see if anything in the background would interfere with the tests they were going to run and they can also be tested for contamination, DNA, whatever.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. And if the control swatch was in fact tested and it was determined that it did not contain biological material, would that indicate that you did not contaminate the control swatch and hence the stain?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. Not qualified.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, with respect to swatches that are dropped, if you drop one of the swatches and you just leave it on the ground, can that somehow affect or contaminate the stain that you're collecting?
MS. MAZZOLA: If it is just left on the ground?
MR. GOLDBERG: Right.
MS. MAZZOLA: No, because it wouldn't be used.
MR. GOLDBERG: Is there any significance to that at all that you're aware of based upon your training and experience?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: And when you were testifying on direct examination, do you recall being asked a couple questions about different things that could conceivably happen while you're collecting a stain?
MS. MAZZOLA: I think so, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, at this time, I would like to read from page 23700.
THE COURT: What volume is this? What volume, counsel?
MR. GOLDBERG: Excuse me, your Honor?
THE COURT: What volume is this?
MR. GOLDBERG: This is volume 130. I'm going to start on line--well, actually I would like to page on page 23699 on line 27 through line 6.
THE COURT: Mr. Neufeld?
MR. NEUFELD: One second.
THE COURT: Do you have the page?
MR. NEUFELD: This is direct examination?
THE COURT: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: I would object to rereading direct examination. It's beyond the scope of redirect examination.
MR. GOLDBERG: No. He got into this on cross.
THE COURT: It's a prior consistent statement. It's hearsay. There's no inconsistency.
MR. GOLDBERG: No, but it's not being--
THE COURT: Let me see counsel at sidebar.
MR. GOLDBERG: Thank you.
(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)
THE COURT: All right. We're over at the sidebar. Mr. Goldberg, what is your purpose?
MR. GOLDBERG: Yes. On cross-examination, Mr. Neufeld asked about the portion of the direct examination where she admitted that you can drop swatches and said that the only reason that you admitted that was because you knew it was on videotape and you knew that we had that videotape and possibly were going to play it. I want to show--she admitted also she could drop the tweezers. It's not on any videotape, not any still photography. And when you bring out a portion of the statement, under the res gestae rule, we get to bring up the other story. It's fair and proper in light of cross-examination.
THE COURT: Objection sustained.
(The following proceedings were held in open Court:)
THE COURT: Thank you, counsel. Proceed.
MR. GOLDBERG: On direct examination, were you trying to in any way conceal different problems that could happen when you're collecting a stain?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: And is one of the things that could conceivably happen, dropping tweezers?
MS. MAZZOLA: It can happen, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. And did you admit that on direct examination?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection.
THE COURT: It's hearsay.
MR. GOLDBERG: Did you make any effort to conceal that during direct examination, that that could be a problem?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection again.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: All right. And do you know for a fact whether or not you did drop any tweezers at the crime scene at Bundy or at Rockingham?
MS. MAZZOLA: I do not believe I did.
MR. GOLDBERG: But if that problem does occur, how do you handle it?
MS. MAZZOLA: Clean the tweezers.
MR. GOLDBERG: So this is a potential mistake that could occur while you're collecting evidence; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: It's not really a mistake. It can happen.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. But it couldn't have any impact on the evidence collection?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, getting back to the control swatches, I wanted to show you the evidence collection board. I think it was 177.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Excuse me. It's 167.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Mr. Goldberg.
MR. GOLDBERG: I want to ask you some questions about cell number 8 on this board, Miss Mazzola. You may have to step down in order to see this.
(The witness complies.)
MR. GOLDBERG: On cell 8, do you see that there are--the two little white items that are sort of in the area that's framed by your hands and your body?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: One of them seems to be closer to your right knee and the other one appears to be a little closer to the edge of the coin envelope, but they're both on the cement.
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: What are those white items?
MS. MAZZOLA: They appear to be swatches.
MR. GOLDBERG: And if someone had asked you to look at this photograph and said, "What are those items and how did they get there," would you have told them they fell out while you were taking them out of the pill box?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained. Speculative.
MR. GOLDBERG: What would you have told them?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. GOLDBERG: All right. You can resume your seat.
(The witness complies.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Thank you. I'm finished with the board. I'll take it--
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, let me ask you about another issue relating to the collection of biological evidence. To your recollection, has there ever been an instance where you had the tweezers in your hand with a bloody swatch and dropped the bloody swatch?
MS. MAZZOLA: That hasn't happened to me, no.
MR. GOLDBERG: And if that did happen, how would you handle that situation?
MS. MAZZOLA: Well, if there was enough of the stain left, you'd just take another swatch.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. But what if you wanted to save that swatch, the one that you dropped?
MS. MAZZOLA: Then you could package it in a separate plastic bag, separate coin envelope along with another control of the area where it fell, make a note on there what happened.
MR. GOLDBERG: And why would you take another control?
MS. MAZZOLA: Well, to get a sample of the area where the swatch fell.
MR. GOLDBERG: So what would you do, to give you another hypothetical, if you had a situation where for some reason you dropped the bloody swatch and instinctively you caught it in a gloved hand? How would you handle that situation?
MS. MAZZOLA: Same way except you'd just include the glove as the substrate.
MR. GOLDBERG: So you could include the glove as a substrate control?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: So there are ways to deal with problems even such as dropping a bloody swatch?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Would you package--how would you package the glove if you saved that as your substrate control?
MS. MAZZOLA: That would be packaged in a separate plastic bag, separate coin envelope just to keep them separate.
MR. GOLDBERG: Or could you conceivably take a control swatch from the area of the glove nearby where the stain fell?
MS. MAZZOLA: You could. Either way.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, with respect to your evidence collection of the bloodstains at Bundy and Rockingham, are there any mistakes that you can think of that you could have made that could have caused the blood at that location to somehow change into the Defendant's blood?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection, your Honor. No foundation.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. GOLDBERG: Are there any mistakes that you can think of that you could have made that could have caused those stains to become contaminated in such a way that they had the genetic--same genetic markers as the Defendant's blood?
MR. NEUFELD: Same objection, your Honor.
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Are you aware of any mistakes that you made or could have made to contaminate those stains?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, once you get back to the laboratory with these stains on the evening of the 13th, did you play some role in the drying process of those stains?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And then on the 14th, to your recollection, did you play any role in the packaging of the dried stains?
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. Beyond the scope of cross-examination to date.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I may have.
MR. GOLDBERG: Okay. And was there something else that you were working on involving a case that was separate from this at or around that time?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Did that involve any biological evidence?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. GOLDBERG: Now, when the items are packaged during the drying--after they're dry into bindles, what information is placed on the bindles?
MS. MAZZOLA: The item number and c for control on the bindle containing the control swatch.
MR. GOLDBERG: So is that similar to the same type of information that was placed on the plastic bags at the scene?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: Do you have to distinguish necessarily between the control and the stain swatch?
MS. MAZZOLA: It just makes it easier for the serologist.
MR. GOLDBERG: And when you're participating in this process of packaging the dried stains, is it your practice to initial the coin envelopes?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: And is any other information placed on the coin envelopes?
MS. MAZZOLA: The property number, which is usually different than the photo id number, but not always.
MR. GOLDBERG: Is any DR number placed on those?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes. The DR number for the case is placed on each envelope.
MR. GOLDBERG: And based upon your training and your experience, is the coin envelope what is used in order to determine what case those stains came from and where they were found at the crime scene?
MS. MAZZOLA: It contains the information necessary, yes.
MR. GOLDBERG: I think that's all I have. Let me just check.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Do--you said you generally initial the coin envelope?
MS. MAZZOLA: At booking?
MR. GOLDBERG: Yes.
MS. MAZZOLA: It is initialed.
MR. GOLDBERG: And do you have to initial the bindles necessarily?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: Objection. Leading.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: No, not necessarily the bindles.
MR. GOLDBERG: But you do place generally the item number and then designate the difference between the control and the stain?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: On the bindle?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. GOLDBERG: Thank you. I have nothing further.
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor, two minutes.
THE COURT: All right. Two minutes or 10 minutes?
MR. NEUFELD: Comfort break.
THE COURT: I see. Okay. Folks, we'll take about 10 minutes. All right. Please remember all my admonitions to you. We're just going to recycle into recross. And just for your information, because of the lost time we had this morning, we're going to resume this afternoon at 1 o'clock rather than 1:30, little shorter lunch break today. Miss Mazzola, you may step down. 10 minutes.
(Recess.)
(The following proceedings were held in open Court, out of the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are present. Good morning, Mr. Dixon.
MR. DIXON: Good morning, your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Let's have the jurors, please.
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor, I just wanted to make one point which I believe that Mr. Goldberg opened the door to me playing the audio portion of the demonstration tape. He elicited a series of answers from Miss Mazzola about no one ever suggested to her that she shouldn't mention the swatches, that we would be willing to show the swatches, it is not a problem. It is not something we are trying to cover up.
THE COURT: Yes, I recollect the testimony.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. And yet in fact what we have on the videotape and the audiotape--audio portion of the videotape, is Mr. Goldberg in her presence saying--saying, you know, "Can we get rid of that portion of the videotape?"
THE COURT: Can we edit that out.
MR. NEUFELD: What?
THE COURT: His comment was, "Can we edit it out?"
MR. NEUFELD: Can we make an edit of it and Mr. Goldberg said, "Then there will be a gap, won't there," and then the cameraman said, "No, no, no, we will make it clean."
THE COURT: So you are still suggesting the conversation of counsel regarding the preparation of demonstrative evidence should come in before the jury?
MR. NEUFELD: I'm saying since she was present for those comments of Mr. Goldberg it directly contradicts the suggestion that Mr. Goldberg made to this jury to this witness on redirect that no, we had never suggested to you that these fallen swatches should be kept away from the jury, something we don't want to see, when clearly the opposite is true.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, counsel. All right. The Court's previous ruling stands. Let's have the jury.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: And we will call this cross completion. And Mr. Goldberg, you have all the items here?
MR. GOLDBERG: Excuse me, your Honor?
THE COURT: You have all those items here?
MR. GOLDBERG: Yes.
(The following proceedings were held in open Court, in the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. All right. Let the record reflect we have now been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Ladies and gentlemen, if you recollect, yesterday Mr. Neufeld concluded his cross-examination pending permission from the Court to reopen when certain items of evidence were delivered to the Court. Those items have been received by the Court and I'm going to allow Mr. Neufeld to continue and conclude his cross-examination, including questioning as to these items. All right. Mr. Neufeld.
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor, I believe I will also be doing the recross as well now, so it is all--
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Thank you.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. NEUFELD
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, it has been brought to my attention that on occasion I may have mispronounced your name during the cross-examination because of my accent, and although I'm proud of my accent and I'm sure you are proud of your accent, I meant no disrespect and I hope you didn't take it that way.
MS. MAZZOLA: No, I didn't take it that way.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Fine. Good morning. And good morning.
THE JURY: Good morning.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, you said a little bit--a while ago on redirect examination, that Dennis Fung had directed you just to use a single swab on the gas pedal, the brake pedal and the emergency brake when you got to the Bronco on the 14th; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: That's correct.
MR. NEUFELD: You said he wanted you to use the same swab on all three because he just wanted to see whether or not they had been used at all or blood had been in contact with them; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, wouldn't it have been very important, Miss Mazzola, if there was blood on only one pedal, wouldn't that indicate that someone had climbed into the car, as opposed to have driven the car?
MR. GOLDBERG: Calls for speculation.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MS. MAZZOLA: You can--
THE COURT: Sustained.
MS. MAZZOLA: I'm sorry.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, Miss Mazzola, would you agree that to drive a car one has to use both the brake and the gas pedal?
MR. GOLDBERG: Argumentative.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And would you agree that if you only saw some indicia of blood on, let's say, the emergency brake, but not on the accelerator, nor the brake, that would be evidence that someone had not driven the car who had blood on their shoe but rather someone may have climbed into the car and not driven it?
MR. GOLDBERG: Argumentative.
THE COURT: Well, it is still speculative, but the jury is smart enough to figure this out, as they have all driven cars.
MR. NEUFELD: And by the way, Miss Mazzola, you said that you didn't even see any red stains on any of those three items in the car, did you?
MS. MAZZOLA: No. They were black. I did not see any red stains.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, you examined those items with that flashlight that you can see in the picture, didn't you?
MS. MAZZOLA: Mr. Fung did, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And Mr. Fung never said in your presence that he observed any stains on those three items, did he?
MR. GOLDBERG: Hearsay.
THE COURT: Sustained. It is hearsay.
MR. NEUFELD: Well--
THE COURT: Rephrase the question. Did Mr. Fung ever direct your attention to anything on the brake pedals?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
THE COURT: Proceed.
MR. NEUFELD: And in fact, neither you nor Mr. Fung that day collected any swatches from any of those three items, did you?
MS. MAZZOLA: No, we did not.
MR. NEUFELD: And it is not because you were only looking for representative stains, because there were no other stains on any of those three items, were there?
MS. MAZZOLA: I do not know if there were any stains present.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, you didn't see any stains, did you?
MS. MAZZOLA: I personally did not, no.
MR. NEUFELD: And again, repeating his Honor's question to you and I'm going to get it wrong--perhaps you could repeat your own question. Did Mr. Fung direct your attention to any stains at all on either of these three items?
MR. GOLDBERG: Asked and answered.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: Thank you.
THE COURT: I liked it the first time, too. No, don't ask it again.
MR. COCHRAN: Just kidding.
MR. NEUFELD: When you did the demo, the demonstration videotape, ma'am, you wanted to perform on that tape as well as possible, right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you were told in fact that there was a chance that this tape might be played for the jury? You were told that, too, weren't you?
MR. GOLDBERG: Asked and answered.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: That there was a chance.
MR. NEUFELD: And when you did this demonstration, I mean relative to an actual crime scene, it was under ideal conditions, wasn't it?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not ideal, no.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, Miss Mazzola, there were no bodies present, were there?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: There were no 20 or 25 police officers present, were there?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: There weren't a phalanx of journalists with t.v. cameras across the street, were there?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: And there were no time constraints, were there?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: And nonetheless, Miss Mazzola, problems still arose during the course of making that video, didn't they?
MR. GOLDBERG: Vague as to "Problems."
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: Problems such as the stains being a little difficult to remove, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Other than the stain being difficult to remove, is it your opinion, ma'am, that no problems occurred or are visualized in that entire demonstration video?
MR. GOLDBERG: It is still vague as to "Problems."
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't understand what you mean by "Problems." (Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: Well, without telling us what was said, Miss Mazzola, were any problems with what happened on that videotape called to your attention while you were there shooting it?
MR. GOLDBERG: It is irrelevant. Calls for hearsay.
THE COURT: Directly called to your attention?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not that I can recall.
MR. NEUFELD: So as you sit here today, having seen this videotape now, both yesterday--I'm sorry, the day before and again today, it is your opinion that there were no mistakes made by you?
MR. GOLDBERG: It is still vague as to "Mistakes."
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: None that I can really see, no.
MR. NEUFELD: Thank you.
(Brief pause.)
MR. NEUFELD: Yesterday, Miss Mazzola, you said that you were not familiar with Mr. Simpson's name when you arrived at the scene on the 13th; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: That's correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, would it be fair to say that by the time you left Rockingham late in the afternoon on the 13th that it certainly came to your attention that he was a famous person?
MS. MAZZOLA: I found out who he was, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, not just who he was, but you found out that because of who he was that this case was going to receive a great deal of attention?
MS. MAZZOLA: I could tell that from the cameras already gathered at his house.
MR. NEUFELD: And even though you may not have thought about everything that happened on the 13th, the night of the 13th, certainly within the next couple of days you were able to glean just from the vast media attention that this was going to be a case which was very high-profile?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes, it was going to be high-profile.
MR. NEUFELD: And in fact, ma'am, in the next few weeks there was actually a hearing held in connection with that case, wasn't there?
MS. MAZZOLA: Are we talking about in August?
MR. NEUFELD: No. There was--was there a preliminary hearing held in late June that was televised?
MS. MAZZOLA: It could have been.
MR. NEUFELD: And would you agree, ma'am, that throughout the month of June, the month of July and the month of August, up until the time you testified on August 23rd, there was a tremendous amount of media attention to this case?
MS. MAZZOLA: I guess it was on t.v., yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you realized during those two and a half months, Miss Mazzola, that you played a very significant role in this case, didn't you?
MR. GOLDBERG: Argumentative as to the word "Significant."
THE COURT: Overruled. But we have sort of plowed this ground already.
MR. NEUFELD: Two more questions on this, your Honor.
THE COURT: Please.
MS. MAZZOLA: As I said before, I didn't give it much thought about what was going on in the media.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, you realized from the day you collected evidence in this case that there was going to come a time when you were going to have to testify about what you did, right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And with all that media attention that you were conscious of between June 13th and August 23rd, didn't you at any point during those two months, with this being in the newspapers, on television and on the radio, at all review in your own mind what it is that you actually did on the 13th?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: You never reviewed it at all?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Now, you also said that what helped you to remember better what actually happened on the 13th and 14th was when you look at photographs; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And I believe you said that, for instance, looking at the photograph of item no. 47, refreshed your recollection about what happened; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Well--
MR. NEUFELD: That was one of the examples used by Mr. Goldberg; isn't that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: I believe it was 47. I'm not quite sure.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, let me just show you the photograph of item 47.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
THE COURT: All right. And Mr. Douglas, this is People's exhibit which?
MR. DOUGLAS: Your Honor, this is no. 165.
THE COURT: Thank you. Why don't you take a long pointer with you.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, Miss Mazzola, I'm pointing to item 47, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And that is the photograph of item 47. Is that the photograph of item 47 that you looked at.
MR. GOLDBERG: Assumes facts not in evidence, that there was only one photograph.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I looked at several photographs of the scene.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, you said that you looked at a photograph of item 47, did you not?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Was this the photograph of item 47 that you looked at?
MS. MAZZOLA: I do not believe this was the exact photograph of item 47 that I looked at.
MR. NEUFELD: All right. What other photographs of item 47 did you look at to refresh your recollection?
MS. MAZZOLA: Overall views of the scene. That is what helped most.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, ma'am, yesterday you said that specifically you recalled looking at a photograph of item 47 and that refreshing your recollection about what transpired on June 13th. I'm simply asking you whether or not this is the photograph you looked at of item 47 or was there another photograph of item 47 that you looked at?
MR. GOLDBERG: Asked and answered.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: Is it now your testimony that it wasn't a photograph of item 47 which refreshed your recollection but instead other photographs of the scene?
MR. GOLDBERG: Assumes facts not in evidence.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: You may sit down again.
MS. MAZZOLA: (Witness complies.)
MR. NEUFELD: You would agree, Miss Mazzola, that that photograph of item 47 is nothing more than a red stain on a piece of concrete or the ground cover? Isn't that right?
MR. GOLDBERG: Irrelevant; best evidence.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: Have you looked at any photograph at all, Miss Mazzola, which shows anyone collecting item 47?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: Have you looked at any photograph which shows anyone kneeling down next to item 47?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: But it is your testimony that looking at photographs of item 47 refreshed your recollection about what happened; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And since photographs refresh your recollection, did you also look at photographs of the other items that were collected in this case at Bundy?
MR. GOLDBERG: That is compound as phrased.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I looked at several photographs, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Did you look at a photograph which reflected the location of item 50?
MS. MAZZOLA: Which item is 50?
MR. NEUFELD: Item 50 would be photo identification 115, you know, one of the blood drops taken from Bundy.
MS. MAZZOLA: I looked at several photographs of the scene.
MR. NEUFELD: And were they photographs that depicted the location of the different blood drop stains at Bundy?
MS. MAZZOLA: It showed their overall view, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: All right. Next in order, your Honor?
THE CLERK: 1121.
THE COURT: I'm sorry, Mrs. Robertson?
THE CLERK: 1121.
THE COURT: 1121.
(Deft's 1121 for id = photograph)
THE COURT: All right. It appears to be a photograph of the rear stairway at Bundy.
MR. NEUFELD: Do you recognize the card that is sitting at the top of the stairs in front of the gate?
MS. MAZZOLA: It appears to be one of ours.
MR. NEUFELD: And can you recognize what number it is on it?
MS. MAZZOLA: 115.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. And 115 corresponds with item no. 50, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: I will take your word for it, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, no, no, please. Check your notes.
MS. MAZZOLA: (Witness complies.)
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Hum, yes?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: You were present when these photographs were taken, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: I was at Bundy, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, didn't you testify on direct examination and on redirect examination that you and Dennis Fung together participated in setting up the photographing of the various items at Bundy?
MR. GOLDBERG: That misstates the evidence.
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. NEUFELD: Wasn't one of your responsibilities at Bundy to participate in the documenting of items of evidence?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And part of the documenting of evidence entails the photographing of items, does it not?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And one of the things that you had been taught at the SID mini academy was to get various angles or various distances of the different items, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: The forensic photographers know that, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: To shoot a close-up and to shoot it further away?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And you--did you, with Dennis Fung, put down the various numbers along the way so the items could be photographed?
MS. MAZZOLA: I helped put down some of them, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Do you have an independent recollection, as you sit here today, as to which number you put down and which numbers he put down?
MS. MAZZOLA: The ones I participated in were up near the front of the house in the area that the crime occurred.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. But where 115 is in this picture, Miss Mazzola, is actually where item 50, the blood stain is; isn't that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And you personally knelt down and collected that stain, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And Miss Mazzola, when you collected that stain, you were just a few feet in front of that rear gate, weren't you?
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MS. MAZZOLA: It appeared--
MR. NEUFELD: Weren't you?
MS. MAZZOLA: It appears that 115 is near the gate, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you have to pass through that gate to get to 117 which became item 52, don't you?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, if photographs--did seeing photographs refresh your recollection, Miss Mazzola? When you were shown this photograph, when you looked at the different photographs at the scene of Bundy before taking the witness stand, did that refresh your recollection that there was in fact a rear gate located there?
MS. MAZZOLA: The photographs show that yes, there was a rear gate.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, did seeing that photograph refresh your recollection even before you took the witness stand in this case, that there was a rear gate at that location?
MS. MAZZOLA: That morning I did not recall seeing a back gate.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, when you say, "That morning," you mean the morning of June 13th?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: When you say you didn't recall seeing a gate on June 13th, are you saying that at a certain point in time when I thought back to June 13th I don't recall seeing a gate? Is that what you mean by that statement?
MR. GOLDBERG: Well, it misstates the testimony as to a "Rear gate."
THE COURT: Overruled. Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: That morning I did not remember seeing a back gate. After seeing photographs apparently there is a back gate.
MR. NEUFELD: All right. Miss Mazzola, when was the first time that somebody asked you about a back gate?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't remember the exact date.
MR. NEUFELD: The month?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not even the month.
MR. NEUFELD: The season?
MS. MAZZOLA: I can't even remember that.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, was it several months after you were out there in June, more or less?
MS. MAZZOLA: It was after we had been out there in June.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, when you say "After," was it the next day?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. So it was many weeks later?
THE COURT: I think we have given the jury a picture of what the state of the recollection is.
MR. NEUFELD: All right.
MR. NEUFELD: And when you say you didn't recall seeing a back gate there, do you mean that at that first time, sometime after June 13th, when someone asked you about a back gate, in that conversation you didn't recall a back gate? Is that what you are saying, ma'am?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes, I did not remember seeing a back gate.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. And then subsequent to that first conversation you had with someone when they asked you about a back gate and you said no, I don't recall one, were you then shown photographs, prior to taking the witness stand at this trial, where you actually saw the back gate?
MS. MAZZOLA: I saw photographs, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And did those photographs include a photograph of this back gate, Miss Mazzola?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And so before you took the witness stand in this case, Miss Mazzola, did seeing that photograph of the back gate refresh your recollection that there was a back gate there on June 13th?
MS. MAZZOLA: I still say on June 13th I did not remember seeing a back gate.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, you have testified before this jury that there was some things you don't remember but when you finally see photographs of them you then begin to have your recollection refreshed; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: On some things, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Is there any other item, by the way, Miss Mazzola, where you have seen a photograph of it since where, nonetheless, it is your recollection that an object didn't exist the way you saw it on June 13th?
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, at this time I would object under 352.
THE COURT: Well, the question is vague.
MR. NEUFELD: One moment.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: Now, Miss Mazzola, you have testified, I believe yesterday, that you first realized that the blood vial had been carried in the black trash bag on the morning of June 14th when you arrived at the evidence processing unit; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: I had seen it in the evidence processing unit, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: On the 14th?
MS. MAZZOLA: On the 14th.
MR. NEUFELD: Right. And that is when you realized that it had been in that trash bag; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And in fact where you saw it was when you lift--took item 15, item 16, you say, and the gray envelope out of the trash bag on the 14th; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: I did not personally remove those items from the trash bag, no.
MR. NEUFELD: You did not remove any of the items?
MS. MAZZOLA: Personally, no.
MR. NEUFELD: Were they removed in your presence?
MS. MAZZOLA: The blood sample was, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, who removed item 15 and 16 from the trash bag?
MS. MAZZOLA: Those were removed later. I'm not sure if it was myself or Mr. Fung did it later.
MR. NEUFELD: When you say "Later," you mean in the afternoon, after you came back from the Bronco?
MS. MAZZOLA: I'm not sure. It was sometime on the 14th, but I'm not sure when.
MR. NEUFELD: But you do recall in the morning when you first got there that Mr. Fung removed--I'm sorry. Did you say you removed the blood vial in the gray envelope or that Mr. Fung did?
MS. MAZZOLA: Mr. Fung.
MR. NEUFELD: In your presence?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes, I was there.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Now, you have also said that you have watched portions of this trial, either on t.v. or listened to it on the radio; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Bits and pieces, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And are you aware, Miss Mazzola, that two weeks ago on April 12th Dennis Fung testified that he carried the blood sample to the crime scene truck either in a paper bag, a posse box or by itself?
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, this is irrelevant and calls for hearsay.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola--one second.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor, may I please have a side bar on this particular question, on this line?
THE COURT: Miss Mazzola, are you aware of Mr. Fung's testimony regarding the collection of the blood vial envelope?
MS. MAZZOLA: No, I don't believe I watched it or listened to it.
THE COURT: All right. Has anybody discussed that with you?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't believe so, no.
THE COURT: Proceed.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, at any point prior to Mr. Fung's testimony on April 12th did you tell anyone in the District Attorney's office that you realized on the morning of June 14th that you had carried the blood sample out of Rockingham in a trash bag?
MR. GOLDBERG: Calls for hearsay.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: No, I don't believe so.
MR. NEUFELD: You testified on redirect examination yesterday that you had an independent recollection of carrying a trash bag out of Rockingham even before seeing the videotape; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you also testified that you figured out on the morning of June 14th that you had carried the vial of blood out of Rockingham in that trash bag; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you say that you came to realize, on the morning of June 14th, that you took items 15 and 16 out of the trash bag--I'm sorry. Withdrawn. And you also said yesterday that when you were shown the gray envelope you were able to see the time on it as well, time of collection; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: There was a time on it, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, what you saw on the 14th was a statement in Dennis Fung's handwriting that said, "Received" with a date and a time of 5:20 in the afternoon or 1720 hours?
MS. MAZZOLA: I'm not sure what all it said.
MR. NEUFELD: At this point in time you are not sure?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes, at this point in time.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: Might it refresh your recollection as to what time you observed if you actually saw a photograph of that envelope?
MS. MAZZOLA: At what time I observed on the envelope itself or--
MR. NEUFELD: No, no, of the time that was written on the envelope that you observed on the 14th if I showed you now a photograph of--of the gray envelope?
MR. GOLDBERG: Unintelligible.
THE COURT: Do you understand the question?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not really.
MR. NEUFELD: All right.
THE COURT: Would a photograph of the gray envelope--
MS. MAZZOLA: Right.
THE COURT: --which reflects Mr. Fung's notations as to when it was collected, would that refresh your recollection as to what you saw there?
MS. MAZZOLA: I remember seeing the gray envelope and the writing.
MR. NEUFELD: I'm sorry, you said--
MS. MAZZOLA: I remember seeing the gray envelope and writing.
MR. NEUFELD: Next in order--
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: Could we have 184-a, Deirdra.
THE COURT: All right. Mrs. Robertson, do you have that handy?
(Brief pause.)
(Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: Let me just show you, Miss Mazzola, what is Prosecution's exhibit 184. I will ask you to take a look at that, whether it refreshes your recollection as to the writing that you claim to have seen on the morning of June 14th when the gray envelope was removed from the garbage bag?
MR. GOLDBERG: Object to the word "Claimed" as argumentative.
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. NEUFELD: Does seeing that photograph refresh your recollection as to what it is you say you saw on the morning of the 14th?
MS. MAZZOLA: It looks like what I saw. I said I saw the writing.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. And the writing you saw said that it was received by Mr. Fung, right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Well, "Received from Detective Vannatter."
MR. NEUFELD: And that is in Dennis Fung's handwriting?
MS. MAZZOLA: It looks like his signature. I'm not very familiar with his handwriting.
MR. NEUFELD: Looks like his signature, though?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And there is a time on it, right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: 1720 hours?
MS. MAZZOLA: Looks like "1720."
MR. NEUFELD: And there is a date?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And the date is June 13th, 1994, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Thank you.
MR. NEUFELD: And you are absolutely sure, as you sit here today, Miss Mazzola, this you came to this realization about having carried the blood vial on the morning of June 14th, long before you viewed the videotape?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: When was the first time that you told anyone at all about realizing that you had carried the blood sample out of Rockingham and back to the laboratory in a trash bag?
MR. GOLDBERG: Asked and answered and hearsay.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't remember when. It was not a big deal, so I don't remember.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, was it in the last three months?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't remember.
MR. NEUFELD: Was it in the fall?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't remember.
MR. NEUFELD: Was it during one of the prep sessions with the District Attorney?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't remember when.
THE COURT: All right. I think we have covered this.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay.
MR. NEUFELD: Do you remember when it was the first time--I asked you before about the first time you told anyone. Do you remember the first time you told the Prosecutor? Same answer?
MS. MAZZOLA: Same answer.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Well, two weeks ago, ma'am, on or around April 12th, did any Prosecutor ask you about your recollection as to who carried the blood sample out of Rockingham and as to how it was carried?
MS. MAZZOLA: That might have been asked.
MR. NEUFELD: But as you sit here today you have no recollection whether any Prosecutor asked you on or about April 12th whether you had a recollection as to how the blood vial was carried out of Rockingham and if so by whom?
MS. MAZZOLA: I had talked to them on and off. I don't recall exactly what we all talked about.
MR. NEUFELD: And you don't recall whether or not this was even talked about at all, do you?
MS. MAZZOLA: It could have been. I don't remember--
MR. NEUFELD: As you sit here today, you have no independent recollection--
THE COURT: Wait, wait.
MR. NEUFELD: Sorry.
THE COURT: Let her finish the answer. Don't cut her off, him please.
MR. NEUFELD: Sorry, Miss Mazzola.
MS. MAZZOLA: Be my guest.
MR. NEUFELD: As you sit here today you have no independent recollection of having said that to any of the Prosecutors on or about April 12th of 1995?
MR. GOLDBERG: Vague as to "That."
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I'm not sure of the date. We may have talked about it. I'm not positive.
MR. NEUFELD: And--one second.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: You said that you don't remember the first time you told the Prosecutors that you had carried out the blood vial in that black trash bag, but whenever that time was, Miss Mazzola, did the Prosecutors seem surprised or elated by that remark by you?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, on November 22nd, at a restaurant, you had a meeting where your boss, Michele Kestler, was present, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: She was present at a meeting at a restaurant, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And there were two investigators from the District Attorney's office present at that meeting as well?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And during the course of that discussion the subject of Detective Vannatter giving the vial of Mr. Simpson's blood arose, didn't it?
MR. GOLDBERG: This has been asked and answered.
THE COURT: Sustained. We have already gone through this.
MR. NEUFELD: We went into it on redirect.
THE COURT: We have already gone through this, counsel.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: May I have a side bar, your Honor? There is a new issue relating to this that came up, I believe.
THE COURT: No. Proceed.
MR. NEUFELD: Do you recall on redirect--
THE COURT: Excuse me. You can make your record at the noon break.
MR. NEUFELD: Do you recall, Miss Mazzola, Mr. Goldberg on redirect asking you a question about handling the evidence versus carrying it?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And didn't you tell the detectives on November 22nd that you never handled the blood vial?
MR. GOLDBERG: This has been asked and answered.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I'm not exactly sure remembering what I told them. It has been a while.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, did Miss Michele Kestler at any time during that interview ask you to clarify the difference between "Handling" the blood vial and "Carrying" the blood vial?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't remember if she did or not.
MR. NEUFELD: Do you recall Miss Kestler actually specifically asking you, not the detectives now, "Did you ever handle O.J.'s vial of blood?" unquote?
MS. MAZZOLA: She might have. I--I don't remember.
MR. NEUFELD: And if she had asked you that, Miss Mazzola, given the distinction that you gave to this jury between "Handle" and "Carry," would your answer to that question be no or would it be yes?
MR. GOLDBERG: Calls for speculation.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. GOLDBERG: It has also been asked and answered.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, you said you learned that that meeting had been tape recorded; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Ask you to take a look at this and see if it refreshes your recollection as to what you said.
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, this has been asked and answered. I object.
THE COURT: Overruled.
(Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, we need to approach before he does this.
THE COURT: No, we don't. It is for purposes of refreshing her recollection.
MR. GOLDBERG: This is something that they did not provide to us in discovery.
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor, this is now a speaking objection.
THE COURT: Hold on. Both of you are doing it, counsel. All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our recess for the morning session actually right now, get you started on your shortened lunch hour. Please remember all my admonitions to you. Don't discuss the case amongst yourselves, form any opinions about the case, don't discuss the matter with anybody else, conduct any deliberations until the matter has been submitted to you. See you back here at one o'clock. Miss Mazzola, you may step down. You are ordered to return at one o'clock. Thank you.
(At 12:00 P.M. the noon recess was taken until 1:30 P.M. of the same day.)
Los Angeles, California; Thursday, April 27, 1995 1:00 P.M.
Department no. 103 Hon. Lance A. Ito, Judge
APPEARANCES: (Appearances as heretofore noted.)
(Janet M. Moxham, CSR no. 4855, official reporter.)
(Christine M. Olson, CSR no. 2378, official reporter.)
(The following proceedings were held in open Court, out of the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present. Deputy Magnera, let's have the jurors, please.
MR. NEUFELD: Your Honor, we had an objection on that issue. You want to just resolve that before the jury comes in just so we're clear on this?
THE COURT: You got to where you needed to get to is my recollection.
MR. NEUFELD: What I wanted to do at this point is refresh her recollection with the transcript.
THE COURT: I'm sorry. I recollect now. Apparently there's a tape-recorded statement, the tape recording of the statement.
MR. NEUFELD: That's right. There was a surreptitious tape-recording by the detectives who interviewed her that day. And I want the Court to be very clear--
THE COURT: D.A. Investigators.
MR. NEUFELD: D.A. Investigators. Thank you. Number one, this is a tape that was produced by the Prosecution and given to the Defense in discovery. There was no duty on the Defense to give it back to the Prosecution. It's a private tape and by this witness.
THE COURT: All right. Hold on. Hold on. What's the objection?
MR. GOLDBERG: Well, my objection is, your Honor, they created a transcript, which could qualify as work product and normally would unless they're going to use it, which he now intends to do. I don't have that transcript. This tape is extremely difficult to hear because the audio is poor and there's a lot of background noise. And if they're going to use this to refresh her recollection, then I am entitled to it. If he doesn't want to use it, fine. Maybe counsel doesn't know that in this county, there is basically an informal practice by most attorneys that although technically, transcribing a tape is work product and not something we have to turn over, that we do turn over transcripts. He may not know that because he does not practice here. But at any rate, once he wants to use it, at that point, we're entitled to a copy, we're entitled to sit down and determine whether it's correct.
MR. NEUFELD: I actually would be more than happy to let her listen to the tape to refresh her recollection. I was actually just trying to save time.
THE COURT: All right. Do you have any objection to providing Mr. Goldberg with a copy of the pages you intend on using out of this transcript?
MR. NEUFELD: Not at all.
THE COURT: All right. Then--it would have helped if you had talked about this over the lunch hour.
MR. GOLDBERG: I asked him for the transcript.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, I actually--excuse me. No, you didn't ask me for the transcript. What I suggested to Mr. Goldberg--
THE COURT: Well, counsel, if you're willing to share it, then there's no issue, is there?
MR. NEUFELD: Right.
MR. GOLDBERG: May I take a look--
THE COURT: Sure. Take a look.
MR. GOLDBERG: Which part did you want her to read?
THE COURT: You know, it would be thrilling if you guys talked about this stuff over the lunch hour rather than taking the jury time to do this.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Basically what counsel has pointed out to me is identical to what the witness has already testified to, and the Court already gave very limited rulings on this. So I don't know why we're going over this all over again.
MR. NEUFELD: Mr. Goldberg is misstating the record. She said she didn't remember saying these statements to them and I now wanted to show her the actual statements to see if it refreshes her recollection.
THE COURT: All right. And that's the purpose for which it will be allowed. All right. Let's have the jurors.
MR. NEUFELD: Yeah. I may have to at some point call a detective, but not--I can't put it into this witness. I accept that.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Let's have the jurors. And, Mr. Goldberg, you do have your next witness available, correct?
MR. GOLDBERG: Yes.
THE COURT: All right.
(The following proceedings were held in open Court, in the presence of the jury:)
THE COURT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. Let the record reflect we've been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good afternoon.
THE COURT: All right. Miss Andrea Mazzola is again on the witness stand undergoing cross-examination by Mr. Neufeld. Mr. Neufeld. I am sorry.
Andrea Mazzola, the witness on the stand at the time of the lunch recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
THE COURT: Miss Mazzola, good afternoon. You are reminded you are under oath.
MS. MAZZOLA: Good afternoon.
THE COURT: Proceed.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. NEUFELD
MR. NEUFELD: Good afternoon, Miss Mazzola.
MS. MAZZOLA: Good afternoon.
MR. NEUFELD: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good afternoon.
MR. GOLDBERG: All right. Miss Mazzola, right before lunch, I asked you a series of questions about what you said and was said to you at a meeting held on November 22nd, 1994 at which investigators from the District Attorney's office and your boss, Michelle Kestler, were present. Do you recall that?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you recall having that meeting with those people?
MS. MAZZOLA: I remember a meeting with those people, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And at that meeting, there was a discussion about your involvement in this case. That's one of the things that was discussed.
MR. GOLDBERG: Well, that's vague.
THE COURT: Well, we've been over this. We've been over this.
MR. NEUFELD: All right. Miss Mazzola, I would like you to simply look at this item, see if it refreshes your recollection as to certain things that you said. I'd like you to read this portion of the transcript here?
MR. GOLDBERG: May I just approach for a moment?
THE COURT: You may.
MR. NEUFELD: All the way to here. Okay? Right there.
(The witness complies.)
MR. NEUFELD: Okay? Now, during that meeting on December--December 14th, you didn't tell the detectives, did you, that you realized on the morning of June 14th that you had unknowingly carried the blood sample out of Rockingham in a trash bag, did you?
MS. MAZZOLA: December 14th?
MR. NEUFELD: No. On November--no. June 14th. Sorry.
MR. GOLDBERG: Irrelevant unless she was asked.
MR. NEUFELD: At November 22nd meeting--
THE COURT: Hold on. Restate the question.
MR. GOLDBERG: Calls for hearsay.
THE COURT: Restate the question.
MR. NEUFELD: Isn't it a fact that during the November 22nd meeting with the investigators from the D.A.'s office and Miss Kestler, that you didn't tell them that you realized on the morning of June 14th that you had unknowingly carried the blood sample out of Rockingham in a trash bag?
MR. GOLDBERG: Calls for hearsay, not impeaching.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, didn't you tell the detectives that you could only assume that Vannatter had come up and given the vial to Dennis Fung because you weren't there then?
THE COURT: It's irrelevant.
MR. NEUFELD: At that meeting on November 22nd, in response to a specific question from Michelle Kestler, quote, did you ever handle O.J.'s vial of blood, unquote, didn't you answer her no?
MR. GOLDBERG: I object. It's been asked and answered, not impeaching.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I honestly cannot remember what I said at that meeting.
MR. NEUFELD: Having shown you this portion of the transcript, does it refresh your recollection?
MS. MAZZOLA: It doesn't. I'm sorry.
MR. NEUFELD: In the discussion you had on November 22nd with the detectives and Miss Kestler, were you deliberately trying to distance yourself from the whole subject of what happened to Mr. Simpson's blood vial?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: In fact, when telling the detectives the extent to which you were involved with the evidence since the morning of June 13th, did you not tell the detectives during that meeting that, quote, it wasn't my job to analyze any part of it. I didn't want to know anything about it, unquote? Did you say that to the detectives?
MR. GOLDBERG: Hearsay.
THE COURT: Sustained. Also assumes facts not in evidence. Also misstates the evidence.
MR. NEUFELD: Did you say to the detectives at the June 22nd meeting--
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, I'm going to object.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: Putting aside the quotation marks, didn't you inform the detectives--
MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor--
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: To this entire line, your Honor?
THE COURT: No. You're asking the wrong question here, counsel.
MR. NEUFELD: Did you ever say to the detectives during that meeting--
THE COURT: Sustained. Are there any detectives at this meeting, counsel?
MR. NEUFELD: I'm sorry. Investigators from the District Attorney's office.
THE COURT: Big difference.
MR. NEUFELD: And I appreciate that difference. Okay.
MR. NEUFELD: At the meeting on November 22nd, did you say to Michele Kestler and to District Attorney investigators--senior investigators Michael Stevens and Dana Thompson, quote, it wasn't my job to analyze any part of it. I didn't want to know anything about it?
MR. GOLDBERG: Hearsay, not inconsistent.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: I might have.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, having shown you this portion of the transcript, does it refresh your recollection as to whether in fact you did? Would you like to see that portion again?
MS. MAZZOLA: I see it on the paper, but I--
MR. GOLDBERG: Well--
THE COURT: Hold on. She gets to answer the question, counsel.
MS. MAZZOLA: I still actually do not remember saying that.
THE COURT: All right. Let's proceed.
MR. GOLDBERG: I make a motion to strike the witness' answer.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. GOLDBERG: "I saw it on paper."
THE COURT: Overruled.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, you testified on redirect examination that the most time-consuming portion of the process of evidence collection is to properly document and photograph the items being collected as opposed to the actual physical collection; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And two of the items that you collected late in the day were items 15 and 16.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: 203 and 204.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and Defendant.)
MR. NEUFELD: I ask you to please reopen Prosecution's exhibit--it doesn't have a number on it. I'm sorry. The number is?
THE COURT: 203 and 204, 203 being item 15, 204 being item 16.
MR. NEUFELD: All right.
(The witness complies.)
THE COURT: All right. The witness has cut through the sealing tape on the envelope.
MR. NEUFELD: And could you please examine what you've listed as item 15, please? And it's an airline ticket, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: It appears to be, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And just so that it's no surprise about it, it's a used airline ticket; is it not?
MR. GOLDBERG: Irrelevant.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And it has a date on it, doesn't it?
MS. MAZZOLA: Let's see.
MR. NEUFELD: Does it have the date of June 10th on it?
MS. MAZZOLA: A return flight, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And it's not--has nothing to do with New York--with Chicago to Los Angeles, does it?
MR. GOLDBERG: It's best evidence.
THE COURT: Overruled. Is there any dispute as to what the airline ticket says?
MR. NEUFELD: No.
MS. MAZZOLA: Doesn't appear to be.
MR. NEUFELD: Thank you.
THE COURT: Don't forget we have an airline expert on the jury.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. And by the way, item 16--is item 16 a luggage ticket for the same flight?
MS. MAZZOLA: I'd have to check and make sure it was the same flight.
THE COURT: Although you have a layperson reading airline documents.
MR. NEUFELD: I know. All right.
MS. MAZZOLA: It appears to be for the 10th.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, before items 15 and 16 could be collected by you and Dennis Fung on the afternoon of the 13th, it had--they had to be documented, didn't they, just like other items?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And part of that documentation process entails photographing them, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And so these items were photographed in their original state before they were picked up by you, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't recall if they were or not.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, if they had been photographed, Miss Mazzola, the first thing you would do is, you'd bring over the photographer, correct, the forensic photographer?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And the next thing you would do is, you would document the location of the item someplace in writing?
MR. GOLDBERG: It's vague and it's misstating testimony as to would do.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you would document--
MR. GOLDBERG: Well, this is an improper hypothetical.
THE COURT: Overruled. Proceed.
MR. NEUFELD: And you would document the location in writing where the objects are, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And you would make that documentation in your field notes, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And then you would take out a photo id card and you would set it near the object, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And you would instruct the forensic photographer to photograph it, correct?
MR. GOLDBERG: It's still vague whether he's talking about these items or a hypothetical.
THE COURT: Overruled. We're talking about these two items, correct?
MR. NEUFELD: Yes.
THE COURT: Proceed.
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you would do that first--you said item 15 was the first one collected?
MS. MAZZOLA: Item 16.
MR. NEUFELD: Item 16 was the first item collected. And--and if these two items were both photographed, they would both be photographer prior to the collection; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And all those different steps would occur prior to the actual collection, right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And would it be fair to say that if that happened here, that process takes anywheres from what, five to 10 minutes? Is that a fair estimate?
MS. MAZZOLA: In this case, probably less.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Approximately how long, ma'am? It's just as best you can approximate, to do the documentation, get the photographer, to get the cards set up, to photograph them.
MS. MAZZOLA: Probably just a few minutes.
MR. NEUFELD: Few minutes. And then you collect them, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Then after you collect them, you said that both items were handed to you?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And after they were both handed to you, you said you walked into the kitchen; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: I believe I was around the kitchen area.
MR. NEUFELD: And is the kitchen area next to the foyer?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: So you could have been either in the foyer or the kitchen? You're not sure?
MS. MAZZOLA: I'm not sure which one.
MR. NEUFELD: And you remained there for a few more minutes waiting for a garbage bag to be produced; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: I'm not sure how many minutes it was.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, approximately how long was it that you waited in that foyer kitchen area before you got a garbage bag?
MS. MAZZOLA: It wasn't too long.
MR. NEUFELD: Approximately how long? Approximately how many minutes, ma'am?
MS. MAZZOLA: I wouldn't hazard to guess.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, just give us your best estimate.
MS. MAZZOLA: Maybe five minutes or so.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. So you waited there approximately five minutes, you received a trash bag and you said that you then put items 15 and 16 in this black trash bag; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And do you have a recollection at that same time of putting the different photo id numbers in the trash bag?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't think I put those in personally.
MR. NEUFELD: Did you see them put in the bag?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't recall.
MR. NEUFELD: So the photo id numbers are something that Dennis Fung could have put into the bag after you left the bag on the foyer floor?
MR. GOLDBERG: Calls for speculation.
THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, when you--
MR. NEUFELD: One moment.
(Brief pause.)
MR. NEUFELD: You say, however, that as you sit here today, you don't have a present recollection of ever photographing items 15 and 16?
MS. MAZZOLA: No, because the detectives were not interested in them as evidence. They just wanted them collected.
(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.) (Brief pause.)
MR. NEUFELD: With the Court's permission, I would like to put exhibit number 1107 up on the elmo.
THE COURT: All right. Defense 1107.
(Brief pause.)
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, do you recognize this document as the evidence collection list for Rockingham that day, June 13th?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes. Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And this was the list that was filled out by you, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: By myself and Mr. Fung, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And do you notice in the first column it has a--you're supposed to put in the sample number, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And the sample number could be different from the item number; could it not?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And so at that point, what you were using is a sample number or id photo number; isn't that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And the next column says i.d. Photo, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And that column is there so you can indicate whether or not a photograph was taken of the object before it was collected; isn't that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, I would like you to look down item 15 and 16 at the bottom of the page. Those are the last two entries you made on that page. Do you see where it says 15 and 16 at the bottom?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And do you see the column where it says photo id?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you checked off that a photo id had been made for items 15, item 16, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And now that you've seen those checkmarks for photo id's for 15 and 16, does that refresh your recollection that in fact photographs were taken at the scene of those two items?
MS. MAZZOLA: I have not seen any photographs of those two items.
MR. NEUFELD: Didn't ask you whether you had seen any photographs of those two items. I asked you whether by looking at your own field note and the fact that you personally had checked off photo id next to items 15 and 16, does that refresh your recollection as to whether or not photographs were taken of items 15 and 16 while you were at the Rockingham residence?
MS. MAZZOLA: According to the notes, photos were taken. Independent recollection, I can't say.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, in fact, those are your checkmarks. You wrote those checkmarks in, didn't you, ma'am?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Would you have written checkmarks in the box that says that a photo was taken if a photo hadn't been taken?
MS. MAZZOLA: If I had assumed that one had been taken, they would be checked, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: You mean you would make an entry in this report about something which you did not factually know to be correct just because you would assume that it must have happened?
MR. GOLDBERG: Overbroad.
THE COURT: It's argumentative. Rephrase the question.
MR. NEUFELD: One moment.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)
MR. NEUFELD: Next in order would be?
THE COURT: 1122.
MR. NEUFELD: There's actually two though.
THE COURT: All right. 1122 and 1123.
(Deft's 1122 for id = perspective shot)
(Deft's 1123 for id = close-up shot)
(Brief pause.)
MR. GOLDBERG: Is that 1120, your Honor?
THE COURT: 1122, number one, the perspective shot, 1123 will be the close-up shot.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, do you recognize what's in that photograph--oops. Do you recognize what's in that photograph?
MS. MAZZOLA: It's a little hard to see exactly what it is.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, seeing that photograph of that bench, do you have any idea what's sitting on that bench?
MS. MAZZOLA: I know that item 16 was recovered from a bench.
MR. NEUFELD: But you can't tell from that picture?
MS. MAZZOLA: Not from--
MR. NEUFELD: Do you see a card that says 16 on it?
MS. MAZZOLA: I see a card, but the picture is a little--
MR. NEUFELD: All right. Now I'm going to be showing what's 1123, your Honor.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, this is a close-up, is it not, of the same shot?
MS. MAZZOLA: It appears to be, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And do you now know what the item is?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes. It is item 16.
MR. NEUFELD: And that's a card next to it that says item 16, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, having seen the photograph with the card in it of item 16 and the luggage ticket, which is item 16, does this now refresh your recollection as to whether or not you had forensic photographs taken of the items 15 and 16 that day?
MS. MAZZOLA: I personally do not remember standing there watching the photograph being taken.
MR. NEUFELD: You collected item 16, didn't you?
MS. MAZZOLA: I collected item 16, yes.
THE COURT: Wait, wait, wait, wait. You're both doing this again. Let him finish answering the question. And, Mr. Neufeld, three times already this afternoon you've cut her off again.
MR. NEUFELD: I know you had mentioned that one of the best ways for you to refresh your recollection is by looking at photographs; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: In some instances, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: I know you said that with respect to the gate, seeing the photograph of the gate did not refresh your recollection that a gate was there; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: That's correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, how about this photograph with item 16 in it, seeing the luggage ticket which became item 16. Seeing that photograph now, does that refresh your recollection about whether this item was photographed by a forensic photographer on the afternoon of June 13th, 1994?
MS. MAZZOLA: Seeing this photograph, it would have to have been photographed by a forensic photographer.
MR. NEUFELD: But it doesn't refresh your recollection as to whether or not you actually saw it being photographed?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: You can print that also.
MR. NEUFELD: And, Miss Mazzola, you said that items 15 and 16 were put into the trash bag; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And the next day in the afternoon, they were removed from the trash bag?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes. Mr. Fung or by you?
MS. MAZZOLA: I can't remember which one of us physically removed them from the trash bag.
MR. NEUFELD: Do you remember seeing them removed? Do you have an independent recollection as you sit here today?
MS. MAZZOLA: I remember seeing them in the trash bag at the lab. I don't remember seeing them removed.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, Miss Mazzola, showing you the actual envelopes that item 15 and 16 are in, isn't it a fact, Miss Mazzola, that those envelopes--that you had those envelopes in your presence at the time that items 15 and 16 were photographed and collected?
MS. MAZZOLA: No.
MR. NEUFELD: Is it possible, Miss Mazzola, that just like you don't remember items 15 and 16 being photographed, that you don't remember these envelopes actually being present with you when the items were collected?
MR. GOLDBERG: Argumentative.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, Miss Mazzola, you don't know whether it was you or Dennis Fung who removed these two items from the trash bag on the 14th; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Isn't it a fact, Miss Mazzola, that on item 15, Dennis Fung wrote his initials on it?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And isn't it a fact, ma'am, that in item 16, you wrote your initials on it?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And isn't it the reason that your initials are on 16 is because you collected 16?
MS. MAZZOLA: That I packaged 16.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, isn't it a fact that the reason your initials appear on 16 is, as you testified earlier, you personally collected it, you physically picked it up?
MR. GOLDBERG: Asked and answered.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: Isn't it a fact, Miss Mazzola, that the reason Dennis Fung's initials appear on item 15 is because he collected item 15 at the Rockingham house?
MS. MAZZOLA: He collected 15, but he had also packaged 15 because his initials are on it.
MR. NEUFELD: So it's your testimony that it just so happens that your initials are on 16 and his initials are on 15 not because you each collected those respective items, but because you happened to package one at the laboratory and he happened to package the other?
MS. MAZZOLA: That's correct.
MR. NEUFELD: Miss Mazzola, isn't it a fact that in your lab box, you not only carry coin envelopes basically the size shown here for 15 and 16, but you also carry other manila envelopes such as the one I have in my left hand?
MS. MAZZOLA: In the kits?
MR. NEUFELD: In the kits.
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
THE COURT: The one you're holding in your left hand, what's the size of that? It should be written on the bottom of the bag. Turn it over. Down at the bottom. What's it say?
MR. NEUFELD: What does it say on the seal?
THE COURT: Does it have a size designation?
MR. NEUFELD: No, I don't see one.
THE COURT: All right. Give me an estimate for the record.
MR. NEUFELD: Hmm?
THE COURT: Give me an estimate for the record.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, Miss Mazzola, what would be your estimate of the size of this envelope I'm holding in my right hand?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't know. Maybe 7 by 11, 8 by 11, something like that.
MR. NEUFELD: Might it be a bit smaller, perhaps--
MS. MAZZOLA: It's possible.
MR. NEUFELD: Could be 6 or 7 by 9 or so?
MS. MAZZOLA: It's possible.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. And you said that after you had been standing in the kitchen for five or so minutes with Dennis Fung, that you then took the bag with items 15 and 16 in it and you walked into the foyer; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: I received the bag after five minutes or so.
MR. NEUFELD: And after you received the bag after five minutes or so, did you continue to stand in the kitchen foyer area with Dennis Fung for some period of time before putting the bag down?
MS. MAZZOLA: I was in that area for a short period of time, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And approximately how long were you in that area after you received the plastic bag?
MS. MAZZOLA: I'm not sure exactly how long.
MR. NEUFELD: I'm not asking you to be sure, ma'am. Just give me your best approximation.
MS. MAZZOLA: I couldn't even approximate. I wasn't looking at my watch.
MR. NEUFELD: Well, is it closer to two or three minutes or closer to 10 minutes? How long approximately?
MS. MAZZOLA: It was more than two or three minutes, but other than that, I'm not sure.
MR. NEUFELD: So--so would it be fair to say that--now that you know by the way that 15 and 16 or at least 16 were photographed--but had these items been photographed--which I think you said takes a few minutes to set up and actually document. Is that a fair statement?
MR. GOLDBERG: Vague as to document.
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. MAZZOLA: Few minutes, yes. Not many.
MR. NEUFELD: And then you said that you were in the kitchen for approximately five minutes waiting for the--with Dennis Fung until you got the bag; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Approximately.
MR. NEUFELD: And then you said it was another few minutes, more than two, but you said less than 10, that you continued to talk to Dennis Fung or stand near Dennis Fung before going to the living room, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't believe I said it was less than 10. I said it was more than two or three.
MR. NEUFELD: Fine. Well, was it close to five perhaps?
MS. MAZZOLA: I do not know.
MR. NEUFELD: Somewhere between two and three and five? Would that be a fair estimate?
MS. MAZZOLA: I don't know.
MR. NEUFELD: But more than two or three?
MS. MAZZOLA: More than two or three.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. So just those three times alone, we're talking about a period of about perhaps 10 minutes or so before you went into the living room. Is that your testimony?
MS. MAZZOLA: Could be a little more than that.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Perhaps as much as 12 minutes or so?
MS. MAZZOLA: I--
MR. GOLDBERG: Calls for speculation.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, it's your testimony on direct examination that there came a time when you walked into the living room after leaving the bag, trash bag on the foyer, and you sat down on the couch and then you have an independent recollection that you closed your eyes; is that correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
(Brief pause.)
MR. NEUFELD: I want you to take a look carefully, Miss Mazzola, at the--at this videotape that we received in evidence which is time coded.
MR. NEUFELD: One moment.
(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)
THE COURT: And, Mr. Harris, which exhibit is this?
MR. HARRIS: P-183.
(At 1:38 P.M., People's exhibit 183, a videotape, was played.)
MR. NEUFELD: You can set it up at 17:12. Fast forward. No. Just fast forward to 17:12, when they're about to go back in, showing them going in. Okay. Could you just back up a second?
MR. NEUFELD: Now--
MR. NEUFELD: Little bit more. Stop. Well--
MR. NEUFELD: Now, according to the tape, it's approximately 17:12 when you begin to walk back into the Rockingham house having made that first trip out to the van; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: Okay. Could you continue, please.
MR. NEUFELD: And according to this tape--do you recognize that gentleman in the picture; not the one in the blue uniform, the one in the gray suit?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And who is that?
MS. MAZZOLA: Detective Vannatter.
MR. NEUFELD: All right. And according to the tape, he's arriving at approximately 17:17; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: About five minutes after you finish packing up the van and begin heading back to the house?
MS. MAZZOLA: Approximately.
MR. NEUFELD: Go on. Stop. Well, stop there.
MR. NEUFELD: Now, do you recognize the gentleman on the left as Dennis Fung?
MS. MAZZOLA: Yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And Dennis Fung seems to be holding some objects, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And what is the time?
MS. MAZZOLA: 17:18.
MR. NEUFELD: All right. Now, Miss Mazzola--
THE COURT: Actually 17:18:57 because you need the precise fame--
MR. NEUFELD: Thank you.
THE COURT: --at fourteen hundredths. Proceed.
MR. NEUFELD: Would you agree that if it's 17:12 you started walking back into the house, by 17:18, Dennis Fung is standing in the foyer with an object which has been purported to be the blood vial envelope, would you agree that that period of time is six minutes approximately or six and a half minutes from when you started walking back into the house to the image in this frame?
MS. MAZZOLA: Approximately, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And you said a moment ago, ma'am, that when you and Dennis Fung returned to the house in the van, the first thing that was done was that item 15 and 16 were collected; is that right?
MS. MAZZOLA: When we got back there, yes.
MR. NEUFELD: And that to collect them, they first had to be documented, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: Correct.
MR. NEUFELD: And you said that took a few minutes, correct?
MS. MAZZOLA: To documen