|
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1995 9:22 A.M.
DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE APPEARANCES: (APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED.) (JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.) (CHRISTINE M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.) (PAGES 14313 THROUGH 14322, VOLUME 86A, TRANSCRIBED AND SEALED UNDER SEPARATE COVER.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL. MS. CLARK: GOOD MORNING. THE COURT: BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK AND MR. DARDEN. IS MR. DARDEN WITH US TODAY? MS. CLARK: HE HAD TO BE EXCUSED BRIEFLY, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. IS HE IS GOING TO BE BACK SHORTLY? MS. CLARK: VERY SHORTLY, YOUR HONOR, BUT WE CAN PROCEED. MR. COCHRAN: WE CAN PROCEED. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. BEFORE WE RESUME WITH THE JURY AND THE WITNESS, ROBERT RISKE, I JUST WANT TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO THANK BOTH THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR EFFORTS IN COORDINATING OUR CRIME SCENE VIEW ON SUNDAY. I THINK IT WENT AMAZINGLY WELL. IT WAS A VERY, VERY SMOOTH OPERATION. I THOUGHT THAT THE INTRUSION UPON THE COMMUNITIES WAS AS MINIMAL, AS WAS REQUIRED UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. I APPRECIATE THE COOPERATION OF THE NEWS MEDIA HELICOPTERS STAYING OUT OF EARSHOT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. I APPRECIATE THE COOPERATION OF THE PRESS AND NOT BEING OVERLY AGGRESSIVE. AND I APPRECIATE THE PATIENCE AND COOPERATION OF COUNSEL IN ACCOMPLISHING THIS BECAUSE I THINK IT WENT LIKE CLOCKWORK, LITERALLY, AND I THINK IT WAS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW CRIME SCENE VIEWS OUGHT TO BE HANDLED AND THERE WERE NO GLITCHES. MR. COCHRAN: I THINK THE COURT IS AWARE FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE DEFENSE, AT THE SCENE ON SUNDAY WE EXPRESSED THAT WE FELT IT WAS THE ESSENCE OF PROFESSIONALISM THE WAY THIS WAS CONDUCTED AND WE APPLAUDED ALL THE VARIOUS AGENCIES THAT CAME TOGETHER TO WORK AND SHOW HOW THINGS CAN REALLY WORK WELL. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED TO PUT ON THE RECORD BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURORS TO REJOIN US? ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE. THE COURT: OFFICER RISKE, WOULD YOU COME FORWARD, PLEASE. (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED. ALL RIGHT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THE JURY: GOOD MORNING. THE COURT: YOU LOOK WELL-RESTED AND WELL SHOPPED, I UNDERSTAND. ALL RIGHT. I SEE SMILES THERE. THANK YOU. LET ME THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND COOPERATION DURING OUR VISIT TO THE SCENE ON SUNDAY. I REALIZE THAT THERE WAS A LOT OF WAITING INVOLVED FOR YOU; HOWEVER, I FELT THAT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT THAT ALL OF US GO OUT THERE AND LOOK AT THESE LOCATIONS PERSONALLY TO UNDERSTAND THE PERSPECTIVES AND THE DISTANCES OF THE PARTICULAR LOCATIONS, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE AND COOPERATION DURING OUR VISIT. ROBERT RISKE, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS: THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT ROBERT RISKE IS STILL ON THE WITNESS STAND. MR. RISKE, YOU ARE ADVISED THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. COCHRAN, YOU MAY RESUME YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY. GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THE JURY: GOOD MORNING. CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: GOOD MORNING, OFFICER RISKE? A: GOOD MORNING, SIR. Q: WITH REGARD TO THE DOG, YOU SAW THIS AKITA DOG WHILE YOU WERE OUT THERE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND DO YOU KNOW AND CAN YOU TELL US WHAT WAS DONE WITH THE DOG THAT PARTICULAR MORNING? A: IT WAS TAKEN TO ANIMAL REGULATIONS. Q: WAS THAT WHILE YOU WERE THERE? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND DO YOU KNOW WHO SPECIFICALLY THAT DOG WAS TURNED OVER TO AT ANIMAL REGULATIONS? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: THAT IS A CITY AGENCY, IS IT NOT? A: YES, SIR. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ANYONE AT ANY TIME EXAMINED THAT ANIMAL TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS ANY EVIDENCE THAT HE HAD BIT ANYONE THAT NIGHT? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ANYTHING WAS DONE TO PRESERVE THIS BLOOD THAT WE HAVE HEARD WAS ON THE DOG'S PAWS AND HIND LEGS? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: WERE YOU AT THE SCENE WHEN THIS ANIMAL WAS TURNED OVER TO SOMEONE AT ANIMAL REGULATIONS? A: NO, I WASN'T. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHAT TIME THAT WAS DONE? A: OFFICER GLORIOSO AND HIS PARTNER TOOK THE DOG. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TIME THEY LEFT. Q: SO THEY TOOK THE DOG AT THE SCENE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: THEY THEN TOOK HIM TO SOME OTHER LOCATION? A: RIGHT. Q: IN THEIR POLICE CAR? A: YES. Q: HAVE YOU SEEN ANY REPORTS OF WHAT THEY DID WITH THE DOG AND WHO THEY TURNED THE DOG OVER TO? A: NO, I HAVEN'T. Q: WHAT WAS GLORIOSO'S PARTNER'S NAME, SIR, IF YOU RECALL? A: I BELIEVE HIS PARTNER WAS OFFICER ZEIGLER. Q: ZEIGLER? A: I BELIEVE. I'M NOT POSITIVE. Q: OKAY. NOW, TURNING OUR ATTENTION BACK TO THE INTERIOR OF 875 BUNDY, AT ANY TIME -- BEFORE WE GET TO THE INTERIOR, AT ANY TIME THAT MORNING DID YOU EVER GO TO 873, THE UNIT JUST TO THE -- THE SIDE OF 875? DID YOU GO TOWARD DOROTHY STREET? DID YOU EVER GO OVER THERE AND KNOCK ON THAT DOOR AND TRY TO ROUSE ANYBODY THERE? A: TOWARD DOROTHY WOULD BE 877. Q: 877. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 877 AS OPPOSED TO 873 WHICH WOULD BE -- A: NO. I KNOW THERE WAS A DOOR KNOCK BUT I DIDN'T DO IT PERSONALLY, NO. Q: SOMEBODY DID GO KNOCK ON THAT DOOR? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: DID YOU EVER GO TO THE HOUSE THAT IS ON THE CORNER OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: YOU DID NOT DO THAT YOURSELF? A: NO. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE INTERIOR OF BUNDY, WAS ANYONE IN CHARGE OF LOOKING AT THE ITEMS OR EXAMINING ANY ITEMS INSIDE THE INTERIOR OF BUNDY? A: I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THAT. Q: WE KNOW THAT YOU WERE THE FIRST OFFICER WHO WENT INSIDE THERE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND IN THE COURSE OF YOUR SEARCH FOR EVIDENCE DID YOU EVER LOOK AT THE -- LOOK IN THE TRASH CANS INSIDE THE BUNDY LOCATION? A: MY PURPOSE FOR BEING IN THE HOUSE WASN'T TO SEARCH FOR EVIDENCE. MY PURPOSE FOR BEING IN THE HOUSE WASN'T TO SEARCH FOR EVIDENCE, SIR. Q: I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT YOU TOLD US AT SOME POINT YOU SEARCHED IN THE TRASH CANS OUTSIDE AND AROUND. REMEMBER THAT? AND I WAS JUST ASKING DID YOU EVER SEARCH ANY OF THE TRASH CANS INSIDE OF BUNDY? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DO YOU KNOW IF ANY OTHER OFFICER DID AT ALL? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE INTERIOR LOCATION, SO THAT I'M CLEAR, WE HAD A JURY VIEW ON SUNDAY SO THAT THINGS MAY BE A LITTLE CLEARER, IF YOU CAN HELP US WITH THIS, WHAT TIME WAS IT THAT YOU SAW THIS ICE CREAM CUP ON THIS BANISTER ON JUNE 13 IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS? A: BETWEEN 12:30, 12:40 IN THE MORNING. Q: 12:30 TO 12:40? AND AS I UNDERSTAND YOUR TESTIMONY, THIS ICE CREAM CUP WAS ON THE BANISTER AS YOU GO DOWN THE STEPS AND GOING OUT TO THE GARAGE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID YOU EVER LIFT THAT ICE CREAM CUP UP? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: COULD YOU TELL FROM THE CONDITION OF THAT MELTING ICE CREAM, AS YOU HAVE DESCRIBED IT, WHAT WAS THE FLAVOR OF THE ICE CREAM? A: I HAVE NO IDEA. Q: CAN YOU TELL WHETHER IT WAS ONE SCOOP OR TWO SCOOPS OR WHATEVER? A: NO, I HAVE NO IDEA. Q: DID YOU EVER HAVE OCCASION TO LIFT THE CONTAINER UP? A: NO. Q: SO YOU NEVER SAW UNDER IT AS TO WHETHER IT LEFT A RING OR ANYTHING? A: NO. Q: YOU NEVER DID THAT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: HOW MANY OFFICERS, IN ADDITION TO YOU THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF, SAW THE MELTING ICE CREAM CUP THERE ON THAT BANISTER AS YOU ARE GOING OUT THE BACK THERE? A: INCLUDING THE EXECUTIVES? Q: YES, EVERYBODY THAT YOU KNOW WHO SAW IT THAT YOU POINTED IT OUT TO. A: FIVE. I DON'T KNOW. Q: ALL RIGHT. TELL US WHO THOSE FIVE WOULD BE, SIR. A: OFFICER WALLEY, DETECTIVES FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS AND VANNATTER AND LANGE. Q: ALL RIGHT. SO ALL FOUR OF THE DETECTIVES, WALLEY AND YOURSELF? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: SO THAT WOULD BE SIX ALTOGETHER? A: ALTOGETHER, YES. Q: AND WHEN YOU LAST SAW THIS MELTING ICE CREAM, IT WAS STILL ON THIS BANISTER; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: WITH THE SPOON HAVING FALLEN DOWN ON THE GROUND RIGHT BELOW IT; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO -- WHILE WE ARE IN THAT BACK PART OF THE HOUSE, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THE OTHER DAY THAT THE JEEP WAS OUTSIDE THE RESIDENCE WHEN YOU ARRIVED THERE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND THAT THE RIGHT PASSENGER DOOR -- THAT IS THE RIGHT FRONT PASSENGER DOOR OF THAT JEEP WAS OPENED? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND IN AN OPENED CONDITION OF THAT RIGHT FRONT PASSENGER DOOR, WOULD THERE BE AN INTERIOR LIGHT ON? A: THE DOOR WAS AJAR. I DON'T REMEMBER IF THE LIGHT WAS ON OR NOT. Q: SO YOU CAN'T TELL US ONE WAY OR THE OTHER? A: NO. Q: BUT THE DOOR WAS AJAR? A: RIGHT. Q: SO IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU WALK OVER TO THAT DOOR, COULD YOU JUST OPEN IT? A: NO. Q: WAS IT LOCKED AND AJAR OR WAS IT -- DID YOU TRY TO OPEN IT? A: IT WAS -- I DIDN'T TRY TO OPEN IT, BUT IT WAS -- IT WAS CLOSED, BUT NOT ALL THE WAY. IT WAS LOCKED, BUT YOU COULDN'T OPEN IT, BUT IT WASN'T CLOSED ALL THE WAY. Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU KNOW THAT IT WAS LOCKED? A: NO. IT WAS CLOSED. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS LOCKED. Q: IN OTHER WORDS, YOU DIDN'T TRY TO GET INSIDE THERE? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: LOOK TO SEE IF ANYTHING WAS INSIDE THERE? A: NO. Q: DO YOU KNOW IF ANY OF THE OFFICERS THERE LOOKED INSIDE THE JEEP THAT MORNING? A: NO. Q: YOU CAN TELL US THE DOOR WAS AJAR? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND NOBODY EVER TRIED IT, RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, OBJECTION. THAT IS NOT HIS TESTIMONY, THAT NOBODY EVER TRIED IT. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOBODY THAT YOU KNOW OF TRIED IT; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: THAT IS WHAT I'M SAYING. ALL RIGHT. NOW, SIR, WITH REGARD TO THIS, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THE OTHER DAY, I BELIEVE, THAT YOU SAID THAT THERE WAS A DIME AND A PENNY IN THIS DRIVEWAY NORTH OF THE JEEP? A: I DIDN'T SAY THAT, SIR. I SAID THERE WAS CHANGE. Q: CHANGE? OKAY. DO YOU RECALL WHAT THE DENOMINATION OF THE CHANGE WAS? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: DO YOU RECALL THERE WAS TWO DIMES AND TWO PENNIES OUT THERE? A: I HAVE NO CLUE. Q: YOU DON'T HAVE A CLUE. DO YOU RECALL IF THERE WAS MORE THAN TWO PIECES OF CHANGE THERE? A: NO. I DON'T KNOW. Q: YOU DON'T RECALL? A: NO. Q: HAVE YOU SEEN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS -- A: NO, I HAVEN'T. Q: -- OF THIS SINCE THAT HAPPENED? A: WELL, PHOTOGRAPHS UP HERE. Q: YOU SAW THE PHOTOGRAPHS HERE? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND THE OTHER DAY WE HAD A PHOTOGRAPH OF A DIME AND A PENNY, I THINK. A: I BELIEVE SO, YES. Q: AND DO YOU RECALL IF THERE WAS MORE CHANGE THAN THAT THERE? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: HAVE YOU SEEN THE POLICE REPORTS IN THAT MATTER THAT HAVE INDICATED THERE WERE TWO DIMES AND TWO PENNIES? A: NO, I HAVEN'T. Q: DO YOU RECALL SEEING A SMALL BLUE GLASS HEART OR SOMETHING ON THAT -- ON THE DRIVEWAY IN FRONT OF THE RIGHT TIRE OF THAT JEEP? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: YOU DON'T RECALL SEEING THAT? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: ALSO, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT THIS PHOTOGRAPHER WAS TAKING PICTURES OF THE BACK AREA. WAS THAT PART OF THE AREA THEY WERE TAKING PICTURES OF WHERE THE CHANGE WAS AND WHERE THIS HEART MIGHT BE? A: HE WAS TAKING PICTURES OF THE ALLEY AND THE RESIDENCE WHEN I WAS THERE. I DON'T REMEMBER HIM TAKING ANY PICTURES OF ANY EVIDENCE. Q: WHILE YOU WERE THERE DID YOU EVER SEE ANY POLICE OFFICERS DUST THIS JEEP AT ALL FOR ANY PRINTS OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE? A: NO. Q: DID YOU SEE ANY CRIMINALIST, WHILE YOU WERE THERE, LOOK IN THE ALLEYWAY FOR ANY TRACK MARKS OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE? A: NO. Q: YOU NEVER SAW THAT DONE WHILE YOU WERE THERE? A: NO. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE OTHER PART OF THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US LAST WEEK HOW YOU WALKED KIND OF IN THE PLANT AREA SO YOU WOULDN'T WALK THROUGH THE BLOOD. AND DID YOU GET YOUR SHOES MUDDY, DIRTY DOING THAT? A: I DON'T THINK SO, NO. Q: WHEN YOU WENT INSIDE THE HOUSE, DID YOU TRACK ANY MUD OR DIRT INSIDE? A: NO. Q: ARE YOU SURE ABOUT THAT? A: POSITIVE. Q: ALL RIGHT. WHEN YOU WENT INSIDE TO USE THIS PHONE TO CALL YOUR SUPERIOR, DO YOU RECALL THAT? A: YES, SIR. Q: YOU TOLD US THAT YOU SAW THIS ENVELOPE WITH MR. SIMPSON'S NAME ON IT, RETURN ADDRESS? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID YOU KEEP THAT ENVELOPE? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: AND WHEN YOU DESCRIBED THAT MR. SIMPSON TO YOUR MIND AT THAT POINT WAS SOMEHOW INVOLVED FROM THAT POINT FORWARD, BASED UPON THAT ENVELOPE IS WHAT YOU SAW; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, WHEN YOU WENT UPSTAIRS YOU DESCRIBED FOR US SOME CANDLES. I THINK YOU DESCRIBED THREE CANDLES THAT YOU RECALL THAT WERE LIT; IS THAT RIGHT? A: I BELIEVE THERE WAS THREE, YES. Q: DO YOU RECALL ANY MORE BEING LIT? A: NO. Q: ONLY THE THREE? A: YES. Q: AND WHERE WERE THOSE THREE? A: THEY WOULD BE TO THE WEST THE BATHTUB ON THE COUNTER. Q: WEST OF THE BATHTUB AND THAT IS THE BATHTUB IN THE MASTER BEDROOM? A: RIGHT. Q: AND IS THAT THE BATHTUB THAT HAD THIS WATER IN IT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND I MAY HAVE ASKED YOU THIS, BUT WOULD ALLOW ME IF I ASK YOU AGAIN. DID YOU EVER TOUCH THAT WATER? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS HOT OR COLD? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID IT SEEM AS THOUGH SOMEBODY HAD ALREADY TAKEN A BATH? A: I COULDN'T TELL. Q: DIDN'T PAY THAT MUCH ATTENTION TO IT? A: NO. Q: THE CANDLES WERE AROUND THE TUB? A: TO THE REAR. Q: TO THE REAR OF THE TUB? A: TO THE WEST. Q: WERE THERE OTHER LIGHTS ON UPSTAIRS ALSO WHEN YOU GOT UP THERE? A: I BELIEVE THERE WAS A TABLE LAMP IN THE MASTER BATH -- I MEAN IN THE MASTER BEDROOM, I'M SORRY, AND THE HALL LIGHT WAS ON. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND DID YOU -- AS YOU ARE WALKING THROUGH THE HOUSE, DID YOU SEE ANY -- ANY ICE BUCKETS WITH ANY ICE THEREIN OR ANY CHILLED WINE AS THOUGH SOMEBODY MIGHT BE EXPECTING A GUEST? A: NOT THAT I RECALL, NO. Q: YOU DON'T RECALL? IN THE TWO ROOMS WHERE YOU FOUND THE SLEEPING CHILDREN, I ASSUME THOSE LIGHTS WERE OFF IN THOSE PARTICULAR ROOMS? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID YOU SEE -- DID YOU LOOK THROUGH ANY OF THE CLOSETS WHILE YOU WERE THERE, THE CLOTHES CLOSETS? A: JUST FOR SUSPECTS. NOT A THOROUGH SEARCH, NO. Q: YOU DIDN'T LOOK FOR ANY PARTICULAR CLOTHES OR TAKE ANY CLOTHES OR ANYTHING? A: NO, NO. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE BEDROOM, IN THAT MASTER BEDROOM, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT THE CLOTHING OR THE BED CLOTHING WAS KIND OF PILED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE BED AS THOUGH SOMEBODY HAD BEEN IN BED OR IT HADN'T BEEN MADE UP; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID IT APPEAR TO YOU THAT THE OCCUPANT OF THAT HOUSE HAD BEEN EXPECTING SOMEONE TO COME IN, TO COME THERE? A: I REALLY DON'T KNOW. I COULDN'T TELL. Q: YOU COULDN'T TELL? WAS THERE ANY MUSIC ON INSIDE THE HOUSE WHEN YOU CAME IN OR T.V. ON AT ALL? A: THERE WAS MUSIC. Q: THERE WAS MUSIC ON. AND CAN YOU TELL US WHERE THIS MUSIC WAS COMING FROM, SIR? A: FROM THE LIVING ROOM JUST AS YOU ENTER THE FRONT DOOR. Q: COULD YOU TELL WHAT IT WAS? DID YOU TURN IT OFF AT SOME POINT? A: NO. I DIDN'T TOUCH THE STEREO, NO. Q: IT WAS COMING FROM A STEREO? A: YES. Q: COULD YOU TELL WHETHER IT WAS A CD OR A TAPE OR WHATEVER? A: NO. Q: WHAT KIND OF MUSIC WAS IT? A: JUST LIGHT. I DON'T KNOW. Q: LIGHT MUSIC? A: IT WASN'T ROCK, IT WASN'T COUNTRY; JUST LIGHT, LIKE MAYBE CLASSICAL OR JAZZ. Q: OKAY. SOMETHING LIGHT? A: YES, SIR. Q: IT WAS PLAYING WHEN YOU FIRST WENT IN THE HOUSE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: THE SHOES THAT YOU WERE WEARING THIS NIGHT, DO YOU ALWAYS WEAR THOSE SAME SHOES OR DO YOU OWN MORE THAN ONE PAIR OF SHOES? A: I HAVE MORE THAN ONE PAIR. Q: HOW MANY PAIR DID YOU HAVE BACK IN JUNE? A: TWO. Q: IS THAT FAIRLY NORMAL AMONG PATROLMEN? A: YES. Q: LAPD? TWO PAIR OF SHOES? A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) Q: HOW DO YOU DETERMINE? YOU WEAR ONE -- DOES IT DEPEND WHETHER THEY ARE SHINED OR DO YOU JUST WEAR THEM UNTIL THEY WEAR OUT? A: I USUALLY WEAR THE SAME PAIR UNTIL IT RAINS AND THEY GET SOAKED AND THEN I CHANGE UNTIL THEY DRY OUT. Q: SO THEN YOU HAVE A SECOND PAIR? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, YOU TOLD US THERE WAS MUSIC ON. DO YOU RECALL WHETHER OR NOT YOU -- THERE WAS A TELEVISION ON AT ALL, THAT YOU RECALL? A: THERE WAS A TELEVISION ON IN THE MASTER BEDROOM. Q: OKAY. AND IT WAS ON? A: IT WAS ON, YES. Q: AND AGAIN, DID YOU -- YOU JUST LEFT THAT ON? A: JUST LEFT IT ON. Q: YOU LEFT EVERYTHING ON? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: LEFT EVERYTHING ON THAT WAS ON? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: THE STEREO AND THE T.V.? A: YES, SIR. Q: YOU LEFT THE BATH WATER IN THE TUB? A: YES, SIR. Q: YOU LEFT THE ICE CREAM MELTING? YOU DIDN'T TAKE ANYTHING? A: I DIDN'T TOUCH ANYTHING. Q: SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, WHILE YOU WERE THERE THE PHOTOGRAPHER NEVER CAME INSIDE AND TOOK THINK PICTURES OF ANYTHING INSIDE THAT PLACE, RIGHT? A: NOT THAT I WAS AWARE OF, NO. Q: YOU NEVER INSTRUCTED HIM TO DO THAT? A: NO. Q: AND IN YOUR PRESENCE YOU NEVER HEARD EITHER PHILLIPS OR FUHRMAN OR LANGE OR VANNATTER INSTRUCT THE PHOTOGRAPHER TO TAKE ANY PICTURES OF THE INTERIOR? A: NO. Q: DID THE -- ANY MEMBERS OF THE MEDIA ARRIVE AT THAT SCENE AT SOME TIME THAT MORNING? A: NOT WHILE I WAS THERE, NO. Q: EVEN WHEN YOU WERE OUT IN THE BACK OR THE FRONT, YOU WERE NOT AWARE OF THE PRESENCE OF ANYONE FROM THE MEDIA AT THE TIME YOU LEFT AT ABOUT 7:15? A: THERE WAS NO MEDIA. Q: OKAY. WE TALKED LAST WEEK ABOUT THE TIME THAT THE DETECTIVES LEFT TO GO OVER TO THE ROCKINGHAM RESIDENCE. DO YOU RECALL THAT? A: I REMEMBER SPEAKING OF IT. Q: WHAT TIME DID THEY LEAVE? A: I REALLY DON'T KNOW. Q: YOU TOLD US THEY WERE GONE ABOUT AN HOUR? A: HOUR, HOUR AND A HALF. Q: YOU THOUGHT THEY GOT BACK ABOUT WHAT TIME? A: BETWEEN 6:30, 6:45. Q: 6:30, 6:45. SO THEY WOULD HAVE LEFT-- IF THEY WERE GONE ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF, THEY WOULD HAVE LEFT ABOUT 5:00, WOULD THAT BE FAIR? A: 5:15, 5:30. I DON'T REMEMBER. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHAT TIME THE SUN CAME UP THAT MORNING IN JUNE? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: SO SOMEWHERE AN HOUR, HOUR AND A HALF AFTER THEY WERE GONE OUT OF YOUR PRESENCE? A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) Q: WHEN THEY LEFT, WHEN ALL FOUR DETECTIVES LEFT, THE THREE WHO WERE NOW IN CHANGE OF THAT SCENE, WHO WAS IN CHARGE AT THE SCENE AT ROCKINGHAM? A: MY SUPERVISOR. Q: WHO WAS THAT? A: EITHER SERGEANT ROSSI OR SERGEANT COON. Q: THEY WERE BOTH SERGEANTS, SO DID YOU HEAR SOME CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE DETECTIVES WHO WERE NOW LEAVING THE SCENE WHERE THE BODIES WERE TO GO TO SOMEPLACE ELSE? A: NO. Q: AND IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THESE -- ALL FOUR OF THESE DETECTIVES WERE LEAVING TO GO TO ROCKINGHAM TO NOTIFY MR. SIMPSON? A: I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY WERE GOING. Q: THEY DIDN'T TELL YOU? A: NO. Q: ARE YOU AWARE OF THE LAPD POLICY WITH REGARD TO THE NOTIFICATION OF THE NEXT OF KIN, WHAT THE MANUAL SAYS ABOUT THAT? A: NO. Q: YOU ARE NOT AWARE OF THAT? A: NO. Q: YOU WEREN'T AWARE THEN AND YOU ARE NOT AWARE NOW? A: NO. Q: OKAY. DID YOU EVER HEAR ANYBODY DISCUSS NOTIFYING EITHER THE BROWN FAMILY OR THE GOLDMAN FAMILIES REGARDING THESE TRAGIC DEATHS? A: NO. Q: DID YOU NOTICE AS YOU HAD OCCASION TO WALK THIS LONG WALKWAY THAT WE TALKED ABOUT THE OTHER DAY THAT YOU DESCRIBED MAYBE AS BEING 120, 130 FEET, YOU KNOW, FROM THE FRONT ALL THE WAY TO THE BACK ALLEYWAY, DID YOU NOTICE THAT THERE WERE SOME TREES THAT TENDED TO DROP SOME KIND OF BERRIES OR WHATEVER THAT TENDED TO STAIN THAT SIDEWALK? DID YOU NOTICE THAT? A: I DIDN'T NOTICE THAT, NO. Q: YOU DIDN'T -- DID YOU EVER WALK BACK THERE WHEN IT WAS LIGHT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: SO WHEN YOU WERE BACK THERE YOU ONLY HAD THE AID OF A FLASHLIGHT AND YOU DIDN'T SEE IT WHEN IT WAS LIGHT, RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: ALL RIGHT. A: ACTUALLY TWO QUESTIONS, BUT YES. Q: THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING BOTH. YES, YES. OKAY? YOU NEVER SAW ANY BERRIES DEPOSITED ON THAT WALKWAY DURING THE LIGHT HOURS; IS THAT RIGHT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: YOU NEVER WENT OVER TO ROCKINGHAM? A: I WENT LATER IN THE EVENING. Q: LATER ON THAT DAY? A: THAT'S CORRECT, JUST FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL. Q: OKAY. DID YOU EVER GO INSIDE THE PROPERTY? A: NO. I WENT AFTER IT WAS DONE BEING A CRIME SCENE. Q: ALL RIGHT. WHAT TIME DID YOU GET OVER TO ROCKINGHAM? A: 11:15, 11:30 P.M. Q: LATE AT NIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: ON JUNE 13? A: IT WAS EITHER THE 13TH OR THE 14TH. Q: ONE OF THOSE TWO? A: RIGHT. Q: BUT YOU NEVER WENT INSIDE THE PROPERTY? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THIS AREA WHERE YOU SAW THESE BODIES THAT YOU HAVE DESCRIBED FOR US, YOU HAD OCCASION, DID YOU NOT, TO OBSERVE THE BODY OF THE FEMALE VICTIM? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DO YOU RECALL SEEING BLOOD SPOTS ON THE BACK OF THE FEMALE VICTIM, MRS. SIMPSON? A: I REALLY DON'T KNOW, NO. Q: IF YOU WERE TO SEE A PICTURE OF THAT, WOULD THAT -- PERHAPS THAT WOULD REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION? A: MAYBE, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THEM. MR. COCHRAN: MAY I HAVE JUST A SECOND, YOUR HONOR? YOUR HONOR, CAN WE CUT THE FEED? I WANT TO ASK HIM WITH REGARD -- THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE PHOTOGRAPHERS ARE DIRECTED NOT TO ATTEMPT TO TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE SCENE ON THE SCREEN. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. COCHRAN: THIS IS 1012. (DEFT'S 1012 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DO YOU SEE THOSE BLOOD SPOTS THAT APPEAR ON THE BACK THERE? A: YES, SIR. Q: DO YOU RECALL SEEING THOSE -- THE BODY IN THAT CONDITION THAT NIGHT, THOSE SPOTS? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: DID YOU EVER TELL THE PHOTOGRAPHER OR DIRECT HIM TO TAKE ANY PICTURES OF THAT -- OF THE BACK AS IT APPEARED THERE? A: NO. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. YOU CAN TAKE IT DOWN. THANK YOU. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THIS AREA, A VERY SMALL AREA WHERE MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS FOUND, HE WAS LYING SOMEWHERE AGAINST THE TREE RIGHT IN THAT FRONT AREA; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND YOU DESCRIBED THAT AREA AS BEING ABOUT HOW WIDE? GIVEN THE TREE AS THE BACKSTOP, HOW FAR WOULD YOU SAY IT WAS FROM THAT TREE TO THAT FRONT GATE AND FROM THE GATE TO THE WAY YOU WOULD ENTER THAT PLACE? A: I WOULD ESTIMATE 10-BY-6 OR SMALLER. Q: 10-BY-6 OR SMALLER? A: YEAH. Q: YEAH. WITH REGARD TO THAT AREA, WHILE YOU WERE THERE, NOW YOU SAW IN ONE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, YOU SAW HIS SHOES AND FOOTPRINT IN THERE WHEN HE WAS POINTING AT SOMETHING UNDER SOME OF THE FOLIAGE. YOU RECALL THAT, RIGHT, THAT ONE PICTURE? THE COURT: I THINK THAT -- I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANY TESTIMONY THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN'S FOOTPRINTS WERE AT THE SCENE. MR. COCHRAN: LET ME REPHRASE IT, YOUR HONOR. Q: YOU SAW A PHOTOGRAPH, DID YOU NOT, OF A DETECTIVE OR SOME INDIVIDUAL IN A SHIRT AND SOME PANTS POINTING DOWN AT -- TOWARD THE FOLIAGE. DO YOU RECALL THAT? A: THAT'S TRUE. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHO THAT PERSON WAS? A: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN. Q: AND DID YOU SEE THAT PERSON'S SHOE ALSO? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND THE SHOE WAS UNCOVERED? IT HAD NO BOOTIES OR ANYTHING ON THAT SHOE, DID IT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: HE HAD NOTHING ON HIS HAND EITHER, DID HE? A: RIGHT. Q: AND THAT WAS -- THAT PICTURE WAS TAKEN IN THAT AREA, THIS SMALL AREA THAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WHERE MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS FOUND; IS THAT RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: AND WHILE YOU WERE THERE DID YOU EVER SEE ANYONE TAKE OR SEEK TO PRESERVE ANY SHOEPRINTS THAT WERE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, IF ANY? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, VAGUE. HOW DO YOU DO THAT? WHAT, BREAK UP THE CONCRETE? MR. COCHRAN: IF HE UNDERSTANDS THE QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE WITNESS: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU DID NOT SEE ANYBODY DO THAT? A: NO. Q: DO YOU EVER DIRECT ANYONE, WHEN YOU WERE THERE, TO TAKE ANY PICTURES IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: I'M TALKING NOT ONLY ABOUT THE CONCRETE, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE DIRT AREA? A: I DIDN'T DIRECT ANYBODY TO TAKE ANY PICTURES ANYWHERE. Q: DID YOU EVER IN YOUR PRESENCE EVER HEAR ANY OF THE DETECTIVES WHO WERE SUPPOSEDLY IN CHARGE OF THIS SCENE TO DO THAT? A: NO. Q: NOW, WE I THINK WE COVERED LAST WEEK THAT WHEN YOU LEFT THE SCENE, THE CORONER HAD NOT ARRIVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THE CORONER HAD BEEN CALLED AT THAT POINT? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: YOU DIDN'T PARTICIPATE IN THAT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: ALL RIGHT. WE ESTABLISHED YOU LEFT ABOUT 7:15? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND WITH REGARD TO THE MOVEMENT OF EVIDENCE, WE TALKED BRIEFLY ABOUT THIS LAST WEEK, THAT ONE OF THE THINGS YOU TRY TO DO AT A CRIME SCENE IS PRESERVE THE EVIDENCE AND NOT MOVE IT; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: WITH REGARD TO SOME OF THE EVIDENCE I SHOWED YOU LAST WEEK, YOU COULD SEE THAT IT HAD BEEN MOVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THAT EVIDENCE HAD BEEN MOVED BY VIRTUE OF THE CORONER MOVING THE BODY OR DO YOU KNOW? A: I WASN'T THERE. I DON'T KNOW. Q: SO YOU HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING? A: NO. Q: EVEN IF THE CORNER WERE TO MOVE THE BODY, THE BEST PROCEDURE WOULD BE NOT TO MOVE THE EVIDENCE, WOULD YOU AGREE? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. COCHRAN: WELL -- THE COURT: IT IS ARGUMENTATIVE WITH THIS WITNESS. MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: YOU KNOW YOURSELF THAT YOU DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN NOT TO MOVE EVIDENCE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: IF EVER YOU MOVED EVIDENCE OR EVIDENCE WAS MOVED FROM ONE LOCATION TO THE OTHER, YOU WOULD WRITE A REPORT EXPLAINING WHY THAT WAS DONE, RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: THAT WOULD BE STANDARD PROCEDURE, WOULDN'T IT? A: FOR ME, YES. Q: AND YOU ARE A WELL-TRAINED OFFICER? A: I WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE SO. Q: IN ADDITION TO YOU SEARCHING THE AREA FOR ANY WEAPONS OR BLOODY CLOTHES OR WHATEVER, AS YOU DESCRIBED FOR US LAST WEEK, WERE THERE OTHER OFFICERS WHO ALSO SEARCHED UP AND DOWN THAT ALLEYWAY AND THAT SORT OF THING, THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF? A: I KNOW THERE WERE DOOR KNOCKING THE RESIDENCE. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WERE SEARCHING. I CAN'T TESTIFY FOR ANYBODY ELSE. Q: YOU KNOW YOU SEARCHED AND YOU KNOW OTHER OFFICERS WERE OUT THERE, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY SEARCHED? A: RIGHT. MR. COCHRAN: VERY WELL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, OFFICER RISKE. THE WITNESS: THANK YOU, SIR. THE COURT: REDIRECT, MISS CLARK. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CLARK: Q: GOOD MORNING, OFFICER RISKE. A: GOOD MORNING. Q: OFFICER RISKE, YOU GOT ASKED A WHOLE LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE DONE IN THIS INVESTIGATION JUST NOW BY COUNSEL, DIDN'T YOU? A: YES, SIR. Q: WHAT IS YOUR JOB, SIR? A: RESPOND TO THE CALL, SECURE THE SCENE, TO MAKE NOTIFICATIONS. Q: YOU ARE A PATROL OFFICER, RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF THE TITLE OF INVESTIGATING OFFICER? A: YES. Q: CAN YOU TELL US, IS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN THE DUTIES BETWEEN AN INVESTIGATING OFFICER AND A PATROL OFFICER? A: YES, THERE IS. Q: TELL US, WHAT IS AN INVESTIGATING OFFICER SUPPOSED TO DO. A: JUST INVESTIGATE THE CRIME, TAKE COPIOUS NOTES AND LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE AND WRITE IT DOWN. Q: AND DOES HE DIRECT THE CRIMINALIST AND TELL THEM WHAT EVIDENCE TO COLLECT? A: YES. Q: AND DOES HE DIRECT THE PHOTOGRAPHER AND TELL HIM WHAT PICTURES TO TAKE? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. IT IS ALSO HE OR SHE. MS. CLARK: HE OR SHE. MR. COCHRAN: THE PERSON. MS. CLARK: A PERSON. SORRY. Q: WHAT -- WHO TELLS THE PHOTOGRAPHER WHAT PHOTOGRAPHS TO TAKE? A: THE DETECTIVE. Q: THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER? A: YES. Q: AND WHO TELLS THE CRIMINALIST WHAT EVIDENCE TO COLLECT? A: THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER. Q: AND WHO TELLS THE PRINT PEOPLE WHERE TO TAKE FINGERPRINTS AND DUST FOR PRINTS? A: THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER. Q: AND WHO IS SUPPOSED TO OVERSEE THE COORDINATION WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE BODY BY THE CORONER? A: THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER. Q: DO YOU -- ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THAT STUFF? A: NOT IN THIS INSTANCE, NO. Q: AT THIS CRIME SCENE YOU WERE THE PATROL OFFICER WHO HAPPENED TO BE THE FIRST ONE THERE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: SO NONE OF THOSE THINGS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DONE BY YOU? A: NO. Q: AND THAT IS PROPER PROCEDURE, NOT FOR IT TO BE DONE BY YOU? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND IS IT PART OF YOUR DUTIES TO OBSERVE AND MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THESE THINGS WE HAVE JUST MENTIONED ARE DONE? A: NO. Q: IS IT YOUR DUTY TO WATCH AND SEE WHAT IS BEING DONE BY THE PRINT PEOPLE OR THE CRIMINALIST OR A PHOTOGRAPHER OR CORONER? A: NO. MR. COCHRAN: COMPOUND QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, THE FACT THAT YOU DID NOT SEE PHOTOGRAPHS BEING TAKEN INSIDE THE HOUSE, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THEY WEREN'T TAKEN? A: NO, IT DOESN'T. Q: DID YOU STAND GUARD INSIDE THE HOUSE TO WATCH WHERE THE PHOTOGRAPHER WENT? A: NO. Q: DID YOU STAND GUARD BEHIND THE HOUSE TO WATCH AND SEE WHAT THE PHOTOGRAPHER TOOK PICTURES OF? A: NO. Q: DID YOU STAND GUARD IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO SEE WHAT THE PHOTOGRAPHER TOOK PICTURES OF? A: NO. Q: OTHER THAN TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS OF BLOODY SHOEPRINTS, CAN YOU THINK OF ANY OTHER WAY TO PRESERVE THEM? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. ARGUMENTATIVE, LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NO. Q: BY MS. CLARK: HAVE YOU EVER SEEN ANYBODY GO AND BREAK UP THE CONCRETE TO TAKE THE PIECES OF CONCRETE SO YOU CAN PRESERVE SHOE PRINTS? A: NO. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SLOW DOWN, MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: SORRY. Q: NOW, YOUR OBSERVATIONS AT THE CRIME SCENE, SIR, ARE YOU THERE TO CLOSELY EXAMINE THE BODIES? A: NO. Q: WHAT ARE YOU THERE TO DO WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR OBSERVATIONS AS FIRST OFFICER ON THE SCENE? A: NOTIFY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER OF MY OBSERVATIONS AND SECURE THE SCENE AND MAKE SURE NOTHING GETS MOVED. Q: SO WHEN YOU FOUND THAT THE DOOR -- PASSENGER DOOR OF THE JEEP WAS NOT FULLY LOCKED, WOULD IT HAVE BEEN PROPER FOR YOU -- MR. COCHRAN: MISSTATES THE EVIDENCE, YOUR HONOR. NOT FULLY CLOSED, NOT FULLY LOCKED. THE COURT: WE DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS LOCKED. THAT IS A CONCLUSION. IT WAS AJAR WAS HIS TESTIMONY. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. I'M SORRY. I DON'T -- Q: YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER IT WAS LOCKED OR NOT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: HOW WAS IT THEN THAT YOU MADE THE OBSERVATION -- TELL US WHAT YOU SAW ABOUT THAT DOOR THAT MADE YOU THINK IT WASN'T FULLY CLOSED. A: THERE WAS A GAP PROBABLY AN INCH AND A HALF, TWO INCHES, BETWEEN THE DOOR AND THE BODY OF THE VEHICLE. Q: OKAY. THEN IF IT WAS -- IF THERE WAS A GAP SO THAT THE DOOR IS PARTIALLY OPENED, CAN YOU TELL US HOW IT COULD BE LOCKED? A: I DON'T MEAN IT WAS PARTIAL -- I MEAN IT WAS CLOSED, BUT NOT CLOSED ALL THE WAY. Q: OKAY. IF IT WAS CLOSED ALL THE WAY, CAN YOU THINK OF A WAY IT COULD BE LOCKED? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: DO YOU KNOW? THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS LOCKED OR NOT, NO. Q: BY MS. CLARK: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN SENT TO -- YOU HAVE HAD EXPERIENCE WITH CARS? YOU HAVE DRIVEN A FEW, RIGHT? A: A FEW. Q: STILL DRIVING A CAR? A: YES. Q: OKAY. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ABLE TO LOCK THE DOOR WHEN IT HASN'T BEEN FULLY CLOSED? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. IT IS ALSO A MATTER OF COMMON EXPERIENCE. EVERYBODY HERE DRIVES A CAR. WE ARE IN L.A. MS. CLARK: THAT'S TRUE. Q: WOULD IT HAVE BEEN PROPER FOR YOU TO GO AND TRY TO OPEN THAT DOOR? A: NO. Q: WHY NOT? A: BECAUSE I WOULD GET MY FINGERPRINTS ON THE DOOR AND IT WOULD DISRUPT THE INTEGRITY OF THE CRIME SCENE AGAIN. Q: AND YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU DON'T DO THAT UNTIL PRINT PEOPLE COME AND TRY AND LIFT PRINTS? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND YOU DIDN'T SEE THE PRINT PEOPLE TRY AND GET PRINTS OFF THE CAR, DID YOU? A: NO. Q: THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT DIDN'T HAPPEN? A: NO. Q: YOU JUST DIDN'T SEE IT? A: I DIDN'T SEE IT. Q: AND WITH REGARD TO THE ICE CREAM, YOU DIDN'T LIFT THAT CUP? A: NO. Q: YOU DIDN'T TRY AND TASTE THE ICE CREAM? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: WOULD IT HAVE BEEN PROPER FOR YOU TO DO THAT? A: NO. Q: WHY NOT? A: BECAUSE AGAIN IT COULD DISRUPT THE INTEGRITY OF THE CRIME SCENE. I JUST MAKE NOTE OF IT AND LEAVE IT ALONE. Q: LEAVE IT THERE FOR THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER OR HANDLING DETECTIVES TO OBSERVE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, ABOUT THAT ICE CREAM? DID YOU HAVE ANY WAY OF KNOWING HOW FROZEN IT WAS WHEN IT WAS PURCHASED? A: NO. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER IT WAS YOGURT OR ICE CREAM? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: COULD YOU TELL BY LOOKING AT IT? A: NO. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER NICOLE BROWN PUT IT INTO THE FREEZER WHEN SHE GOT HOME AND TOOK IT OUT JUST BEFORE SHE WENT OUTSIDE AND WAS ATTACKED? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THIS, YOUR HONOR. TOTAL SPECULATION ON COUNSEL'S PART. MS. CLARK: AS COUNSEL'S QUESTIONS. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR THAT PARTICULAR BRAND TO MELT? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: DO YOU KNOW HOW -- DO YOU KNOW WHETHER IT WAS FROZEN IN THE MIDDLE AND MAYBE MELTED AROUND THE SIDES? A: THERE APPEARED TO BE A LITTLE BIT OF MASS IN THE MIDDLE WITH FLUID SURROUNDING IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW. LIKE I SAID, I DIDN'T TOUCH IT. Q: SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE CORE WAS STILL FROZEN? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: DO YOU KNOW ANY WAY TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE OF ICE CREAM THAT HAS BEEN MELTED FOR TWO VERSUS TWO AND A HALF HOURS? A: NO. Q: OR TWO AND A HALF HOURS AND TWO HOURS AND FIFTEEN MINUTES? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: DO YOU KNOW HOW ANYBODY COULD TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO HOW ANYBODY COULD. CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE WITNESS: NO. THE COURT: SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. NOW, YOU HAVE A DUTY TO -- WHAT IS YOUR DUTY WITH RESPECT TO -- WHAT IS YOUR DUTY WITH RESPECT TO WRITING THE NOTES ON WHAT YOU OBSERVED AT THE CRIME SCENE? A: JUST GENERAL INFORMATION, BASIC NOTES. Q: AND SO IT IS A GENERAL OBSERVATION OF WHAT YOU SAW? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: WHOSE DUTY IS IT TO WRITE THE MORE DETAILED CRIME SCENE NOTES? A: THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER. Q: OKAY. NEVERTHELESS, DID YOU NOTICE ANYTHING WITH RESPECT TO THE SPOON THAT WAS IN THAT ICE CREAM? A: THAT IT WAS ON THE FLOOR. Q: AS THOUGH IT HAD -- THE ICE CREAM HAD MELTED AND IT FELL OUT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT, YOUR HONOR. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: WAS THE SPOON NEAR WHERE THE ICE CREAM WAS ON THE BANISTER? A: IT WAS ON THE FLOOR DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH THE ICE CREAM. Q: OKAY. WITH RESPECT TO ANY RING THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN UNDERNEATH THE CUP, DO YOU HAVE ANY WAY OF KNOWING WHETHER SHE USED TO REST CUPS ON THAT BANISTER A LOT? MR. COCHRAN: CALLS FOR SPECULATION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. NOW, YOU DIDN'T SEE ALL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE TAKEN, DID YOU? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: AND THE SPOON THAT WAS NEAR THE -- THAT WAS ON THE GROUND, WHAT DID THAT APPEAR TO BE TO YOU? A: IT WAS A PINK PLASTIC SPOON. Q: OKAY. DID YOU ASSOCIATE THAT SPOON WITH THE ICE CREAM CUP? A: YES. Q: WHY? A: GENERALLY WHEN YOU GO GET ICE CREAM THAT IS THE COLOR OF SPOON YOU GET, PINK PLASTIC SPOON. Q: UH-HUH. AND DID YOU -- DID YOU DETERMINE WHY THAT SPOON WAS ON THE GROUND NEXT TO THE CUP? A: NO. Q: DID YOU HAVE -- DID YOU PASS ON ANY OBSERVATION WITH RESPECT TO THAT? A: I TOLD THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER IT LOOKED LIKE IT JUST FELL OUT WHEN THE ICE CREAM MELTED. Q: NOW, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHAT EFFORTS HAD BEEN MADE TO NOTIFY THE FAMILY OF RON GOLDMAN OR THE FAMILY OF NICOLE BROWN? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AT THE TIME THAT YOU WERE AT THE CRIME SCENE, SIR, DID YOU OR ANYONE THAT YOU KNEW OF KNOW NICOLE'S MAIDEN NAME? A: I ALSO BELIEVE I RAN THE LICENSE PLATE ON THE FERRARI THAT SAID NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON. Q: AND FROM THAT WERE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE WHERE HER FAMILY WAS? A: NO. Q: AT THE TIME THAT YOU WERE AT THE CRIME SCENE, SIR, DID ANYONE KNOW THE IDENTITY OF RON GOLDMAN? A: NOT THAT I AM AWARE OF, NO. Q: SO AT THE TIME THAT YOU WERE THERE, DID ANYONE KNOW HOW TO MAKE CONTACT WITH HIS FAMILY? A: NO. Q: AND YOU INDICATED THAT WHEN YOU FIRST ENTERED THE CONDOMINIUM YOU THOUGHT THAT MR. SIMPSON WAS INVOLVED AND BY THAT YOU MEANT -- A: I MEANT MAYBE A RELATIVE OR A FRIEND OR MAYBE A POTENTIAL VICTIM. Q: SO YOU THOUGHT HE WAS A RELATIVE OR A FRIEND OF ONE OF THE VICTIMS? A: RIGHT. Q: BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU SAW INSIDE THE CONDOMINIUM? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, YOU DID NOT SEE ALL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE TAKEN IN THIS CASE; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND YOU WEREN'T PRESENT WHEN -- SO YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHEN SOME OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS HAVE BEEN TAKEN THAT WERE SHOWN TO YOU? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED SEVERAL TIMES ON REDIRECT. THE COURT: TWICE. MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR. I WON'T DO IT. IT IS FOUNDATIONAL. I'M GOING INTO ANOTHER AREA. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED. THANK YOU. Q: BY MS. CLARK: IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, SIR, ARE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER THE CORONER ARRIVES? A: YES. Q: AND HAS IT EVER OCCURRED IN YOUR EXPERIENCE THAT REMOVAL OF BODIES FROM A SCENE WILL CAUSE SOME EVIDENCE CLOSE TO THE BODIES TO BE DISTURBED? A: IN MY EXPERIENCE THEY HAVE ACTUALLY PICKED UP THE EVIDENCE AND TAGGED WHERE IT WAS AT, REMOVED THE BODY AND PUT THE EVIDENCE BACK AND TOOK PHOTOGRAPHS. Q: BUT IN YOUR EXPERIENCE HAVE THEY TAKEN PHOTOGRAPHS BEFORE THE BODIES WERE REMOVED? A: YES. Q: AND IN ORDER TO PRESERVE IT EXACTLY AS IT WAS FOUND? A: RIGHT. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, WHY? THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY, YOUR ANSWER WAS YES? A: YES. Q: THEN PHOTOGRAPHS ARE TAKEN AFTER THE BODIES ARE REMOVED? A: THAT'S CORRECT. MS. CLARK: MAY I HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: BY THE WAY, SIR, WHAT WAS IT AGAIN ON -- I APOLOGIZE IF I HAVE ASKED THIS, I DON'T REMEMBER, BECAUSE THIS IS NOT FROM TODAY. WHAT WAS IT YOU SAW IN THE CONDOMINIUM THAT MADE YOU BELIEVE THAT MR. SIMPSON WAS RELATED TO ONE OF THE VICTIMS? A: THERE WAS A LITHOGRAPH OF MR. SIMPSON ON THE NORTH WALL. THERE WAS SOME FAMILY PHOTOS AND THEN THE LETTER WITH THE RETURN ADDRESS. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, SIR. Q: NOW, YOU WERE NOT WEARING GLOVES, WERE YOU, SIR? A: NO, I WASN'T. Q: AND DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN, HE WAS NOT WEARING GLOVES, WAS HE? A: NOT WHILE I WAS THERE, NO. Q: OKAY. AND SERGEANT ROSSI WAS NOT WEARING GLOVES? A: NO. Q: AND THE DETECTIVES WERE NOT WEARING GLOVES WHILE YOU WERE THERE? A: NO. Q: WERE THEY HANDLING THE EVIDENCE? A: NOT WHILE I WAS THERE, NO. Q: WERE THEY COLLECTING THE EVIDENCE? A: NO. Q: WERE THEY DUSTING FOR PRINTS? A: NO, THEY WEREN'T. Q: WERE THEY LIFTING BLOOD SPOTS? A: NO. Q: SIR, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU DID NOT TOUCH THE JEEP AND YOU DID NOT TOUCH THE CUP, IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WAS PRESERVED? A: RIGHT. Q: SO THAT YOU WOULDN'T GET YOUR PRINTS ON IT? A: RIGHT. Q: HOW MUCH TRAINING DID IT TAKE FOR YOU TO FIGURE OUT THAT YOU SHOULDN'T TOUCH EVIDENCE BEFORE THE CRIMINALIST EXAMINES IT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THAT IS HER OWN WITNESS. THAT IS A SARCASTIC, ARGUMENTATIVE QUESTION. THE COURT: IT IS AN ARGUMENTATIVE QUESTION FOR YOUR OWN WITNESS. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID IT TAKE A LOT OF TRAINING FOR YOU TO FIGURE THAT OUT? A: NO. Q: TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE DO ALL OF THESE DETECTIVES KNOW THAT AS WELL? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION, WHAT THEY KNOW. THE COURT: SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: THE PURPOSE OF YOUR SEARCH INSIDE THE RESIDENCE, SIR, WAS THAT TO EXAMINE IT FOR EVIDENCE? A: NO, IT WASN'T. Q: WHAT WERE YOU DOING IN THERE? A: LOOKING FOR ANY OTHER VICTIMS OR A SUSPECT. Q: SO YOU WERE JUST TRYING TO CLEAR IT IN CASE THERE WAS SOMEBODY IN PERIL OR THERE WAS A SUSPECT INSIDE? A: RIGHT. Q: YOU WERE ASKED BY COUNSEL ABOUT THE STAR 69 FEATURE ON THE TELEPHONE? A: RIGHT. Q: THAT IS THE FEATURE THAT REGISTERS INCOMING CALLS AND IT WILL IMMEDIATELY CONNECT THE CALLER TO THE LAST PERSON WHO CALLED? A: I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THAT IS. Q: OKAY. THEN ARE YOU AWARE THAT NO MATTER HOW MANY OUTGOING CALLS ARE MADE THAT IT WOULD NOT DISRUPT THAT FEATURE BECAUSE IT REGISTERS INCOMING CALLS? MR. COCHRAN: COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING. THAT IS IMPROPER AND SHE KNOWS IT. THE COURT: SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED. HE JUST TESTIFIED HE HAD NO IDEA WHAT IT IS. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL AND THE DEFENDANT.) MS. CLARK: CAN WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: SURE, WITHOUT THE REPORTER. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WHAT WE HAVE HERE, YOU WILL NOTICE THAT WE ALL HAVE COMPUTER SCREENS ON OUR DESKS. THE ATTORNEYS HAVE THEM, I HAVE THEM. THIS IS SO THAT WHEN THE TESTIMONY IS TAKEN DOWN BY THE COURT REPORTER, WE HAVE AN IMMEDIATE READOUT AS TO WHAT THE TESTIMONY IS SO THAT I CAN GO BACK AND CHECK THE LAST QUESTION OR CLARIFY THINGS AND THE ATTORNEYS HAVE THE SAME THING. AND UNFORTUNATELY THE PROSECUTOR'S CONNECTOR CAME APART. REPORTER OLSON: WOULD YOU LIKE TO ME FIX IT? THE COURT: YES, PLEASE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) THE COURT: MISS CLARK, ARE YOU ON LINE? MS. CLARK: YES. I THINK SO. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. Q: YOU INDICATED, SIR, THAT YOU USED THE TELEPHONE INSIDE MISS BROWN'S CONDOMINIUM WHEN YOU FIRST WENT INSIDE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: BUT YOU HAD A ROVER WITH YOU? A: RIGHT. Q: WHY DID YOU USE THE PHONE? A: BECAUSE OUR ROVERS DON'T HAVE TELEPHONE CAPABILITY AND WE DON'T HAVE PHONES IN OUR CARS AND I DIDN'T WANT TO BROADCAST OVER MY ROVER THAT THERE WAS A POSSIBLE DOUBLE HOMICIDE INVOLVING A CELEBRITY. Q: WHY NOT? WHY DIDN'T YOU WANT TO USE YOUR ROVER TO DO THAT? A: BECAUSE THE MEDIA WOULD BEAT MY BACK-UP THERE. Q: I'M SORRY? A: THE MEDIA WOULD HAVE BEAT ALL THE ADDITIONAL OFFICERS THERE. Q: THEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN THERE BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL OFFICERS? A: RIGHT. Q: HOW COME? A: BECAUSE EVERYBODY KNOWS THEY DRIVE AROUND WITH SCANNERS AND THEY RESPOND TO CALLS, AND I DIDN'T WANT THEM TO GET THERE BEFORE WE HAD A CRIME SCENE SET UP. Q: SO THE MEDIA HAS THE FREQUENCY OF YOUR ROVER? A: RIGHT. Q: HAS THAT HAPPENED TO YOU BEFORE, THAT THEY HAVE PICKED UP ON YOUR ROVER? A: ALL THE TIME. Q: THE SHOES THAT YOU WORE AT THE CRIME SCENE, SIR, DID SOMEONE LATER PHOTOGRAPH THE SOLES OF THOSE SHOES SO THEY COULD BE COMPARED TO THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS FOUND AT THE SCENE? A: YES. Q: AND WHO WAS IT THAT DID THAT? A: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS. Q: AND WHEN DID HE DO THAT? A: IT WAS EITHER LATER THAT EVENING OR THE NEXT DAY. Q: SIR, DO YOU RECALL, YOU WERE SHOWN A PHOTOGRAPH OF AN OFFICER WALKING UP THE WALKWAY BY DEFENSE COUNSEL LAST WEEK? A: YES. Q: AND DO YOU RECALL SEEING THE LOGO OF AMERICAN JOURNAL AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT PHOTOGRAPH? A: I DON'T BELIEVE WHEN I SAW IT THERE, NO. Q: YOU DIDN'T SEE IT ON THE PHOTOGRAPH? A: I SAW IT ON THE PHOTOGRAPH UPSTAIRS, BUT NOT -- I DON'T RECALL SEEING IT ON THE ONE HERE. Q: OKAY. THE PHOTOGRAPH YOU SAW UPSTAIRS, DID THAT SEEM TO BE THE SAME ONE THAT MR. COCHRAN SHOWED YOU? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT AMERICAN JOURNAL. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MS. CLARK: DID THE DEFENSE MARK A PRINT OF THAT? THE COURT: YES. IT HAS THE BROADCAST I.D. ON THE LOWER RIGHT-HAND CORNER BLOCKED OUT. MS. CLARK: OF AMERICAN JOURNAL? MR. COCHRAN: NO. MS. CLARK: YOU DON'T KNOW? LET ME SEE. THE COURT: NO IDEA. (BRIEF PAUSE.) (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: YES. Q: BY MS. CLARK: SHOWING YOU WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS DEFENSE 1011, DO YOU SEE THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? A: YES, I DO. Q: IS THAT THE ONE YOU RECOGNIZE THAT MR. COCHRAN SHOWED YOU BEFORE? A: YES, I DO. Q: YOU SEE THIS LITTLE BOX DOWN HERE IN THE RIGHT-HAND CORNER? A: YES. Q: IT IS BLANKED OUT IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, ISN'T IT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH THAT I WOULD LIKE TO BE MARKED AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER. THE COURT: 57. MS. CLARK: 57. THANK YOU. (PEO'S 57 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) MS. CLARK: SHOW IT TO COUNSEL. (BRIEF PAUSE.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: MAY I SHOW YOU, SIR, PEOPLE'S 57. A: YES, MA'AM. Q: DO YOU RECALL SEEING THAT UPSTAIRS? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE A COPY OF THE SAME PHOTOGRAPH YOU WERE SHOWN IN DEFENDANT'S 1011? A: YES. Q: NOW, INSTEAD OF HAVING THAT BLANKED OUT GRAY BOX THAT YOU HAVE IN THE DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT, YOU HAVE "AMERICAN JOURNAL" SHOWN IN THAT SAME AREA WHERE THAT BOX IS BLANK? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND IN THE PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT THEN IT SHOWS YOU THAT IT IS AN AMERICAN JOURNAL PHOTOGRAPH? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND YOU SAID THAT THERE WERE NO MEDIA THERE WHEN YOU WERE PRESENT; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: ARE YOU AWARE OF WHAT AMERICAN JOURNAL IS, SIR? A: IT IS A NEWS MAGAZINE OR A NEWS SHOW. Q: ON TELEVISION? A: RIGHT. Q: NOW, YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHEN THAT PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN, DO YOU? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: BECAUSE YOU WEREN'T PRESENT WHEN ANY MEDIA WAS PRESENT, WERE YOU? A: NO. Q: NOW, AT SOME POINT IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, SIR, AFTER EVIDENCE IS COLLECTED AND THE CRIMINALIST AND THE PHOTOGRAPHER FINISH THEIR WORK AT THE CRIME SCENE, WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT CRIME SCENE? A: TEAR IT DOWN, RELEASE IT. Q: YOU RELEASE THE CRIME SCENE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND IF YOU DIDN'T DO THAT I GUESS ALL OF L.A. WOULD BE TAPED OFF, WOULDN'T IT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: SO AT SOME POINT THE CRIME SCENE IS BROKEN DOWN? MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR. THE WITNESS: RIGHT. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND AT THE POINT THAT YOU LEFT AT 7:15 -- WAS THAT 7:15, SIR? A: 7:15. Q: -- WERE THERE ANY OFFICERS WALKING ON THAT WALKWAY? A: NO. Q: AND IT WAS STILL TAPED OFF? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: AND WHEN YOU WERE THERE THE CRIME SCENE WAS MAINTAINED WITH THAT TAPE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID YOU SEE ANYONE, ANYONE WALK ON THAT WALKWAY WHERE THE BLOOD WAS AS SHOWN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: NOW, WHILE THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IS STILL UP, BEFORE THE CRIMINALIST OR THE PHOTOGRAPHER OR THE PRINT PEOPLE COME IN AND THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS COME IN TO DO THEIR WORK, DO YOU JUST LET ANY CURIOUS COP WALK IN THERE AND CHECK OUT THE CRIME SCENE? A: NO. Q: WHAT DO YOU DO? A: MAKE SURE PEOPLE STAY OUT OF IT. Q: WHO IS ALLOWED IN, INTO THE TAPE? A: THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS. Q: SO WHOEVER IS JUST NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN SECURITY AND DO THE INVESTIGATION WHO IS ASSIGNED THE CASE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: SIR, MR. COCHRAN SHOWED YOU SOME PHOTOGRAPHS LAST WEEK. I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW THEM TO YOU NOW, IF YOU DON'T MIND. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: DO YOU WANT TO CUT THE FEED, YOUR HONOR? I'M SORRY. THIS IS PEOPLE'S -- (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE COURT: MISS CLARK, DO WE KNOW WHAT PHOTOGRAPH THIS IS? MS. CLARK: I THINK IT IS PEOPLE'S 44, YOUR HONOR. I'M ATTEMPTING TO VERIFY THAT NOW. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: IT IS P- -- I BELIEVE, YOUR HONOR, THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS LOCATED ON -- THE COURT: 44. (BRIEF PAUSE.) THE COURT: MRS. ROBERTSON CONFIRMS THIS IS PEOPLE'S 44. MS. CLARK: IT IS PEOPLE'S 44. THANK YOU, JONATHAN. THAT IS OKAY. Q: YOU RECALL SEEING THAT PHOTOGRAPH THAT MR. COCHRAN SHOWED YOU LAST WEEK? A: YES. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND THEN MR. COCHRAN SHOWED YOU THIS PHOTOGRAPH. DO YOU RECALL? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND HE -- YOU MADE NOTE OF THE FACT IN YOUR TESTIMONY, THAT THIS GLOVE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH APPEARS TO BE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION THAN IN THE EARLIER ONE? A: RIGHT. Q: NOW, IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR, YOU SEE A NUMBER TAG? A: YES, I DO. MS. CLARK: GO BACK TO THE OTHER ONE, P-44, JOHN. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: SURE. MS. CLARK: THANKS. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH YOU DON'T SEE A NUMBER TAG, DO YOU? A: NO. Q: DO YOU SEE A SHOE? A: YES. Q: RIGHT NEXT TO THAT GLOVE? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND DO YOU RECALL WHOSE SHOE THAT WAS? A: MR. GOLDMAN. Q: SO IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH IT WOULD APPEAR MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS STILL IN PLACE? A: RIGHT. MS. CLARK: BACK TO THE OTHER ONE. Q: AND IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH DO YOU SEE MR. GOLDMAN'S SHOE? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: IT WOULD APPEAR THEN -- DO YOU SEE BLOODY DRAG MARKS ABOVE THE NUMBER "102" IN THE UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. BLOODY DRAG MARKS. THE COURT: SUSTAINED, LEADING. Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT DO YOU SEE IN THE UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER ABOVE THE NUMBER "102"? A: DARK STRIATIONS. THE COURT: MISS CLARK, WHICH PHOTO IS THIS? MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, WE HAVE NOT INTRODUCED THIS PARTICULAR PHOTO. THIS I BELIEVE WAS MARKED AS DEFENSE EXHIBIT 1005; IS THAT CORRECT? THE COURT: MRS. ROBERTSON? MR. DOUGLAS: NO, NO. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE COURT AND THE CLERK.) THE COURT: NOT 1005. MS. CLARK: THAT IS FINE. I WILL MARK IT AS PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER AT THIS TIME UNTIL WE CAN LOCATE THE DEFENSE NUMBER. THE COURT: WE ARE COMPARING THIS PHOTOGRAPH TO THIS? MS. CLARK: THIS IS THE PEOPLE'S PHOTOGRAPH. THE COURT: I'M SORRY, MRS. ROBERTSON. MS. CLARK: I HAVE IT ON ONE OF THE BOARDS. THE COURT: HOLD ON, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE DUPLICATE PHOTOGRAPHS. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE COURT AND THE CLERK.) THE COURT: PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER WILL BE 58. MS. CLARK: 58, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: 58. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MS. CLARK: IT HAS BEEN MARKED, YOUR HONOR. IT WAS PEOPLE'S 56-H. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 56-H. MS. CLARK: IT IS ON THE BOARD. THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. Q: DO YOU SEE RON GOLDMAN'S BOOT IN THAT PICTURE? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: IT WOULD APPEAR THAT HIS BODY HAS BEEN MOVED; IS THAT CORRECT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DOES HIS BODY APPEAR TO BE THERE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE HIS BODY IN THIS PICTURE? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: YOU DON'T SEE HIS BOOT? A: NO, I DON'T. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, MR. COCHRAN HAS THIS PHOTOGRAPH BUT HE DIDN'T SHOW YOU THIS ONE, DID HE? A: NO, HE DIDN'T. MR. COCHRAN: JUST A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR. I DON'T HAVE THIS PHOTOGRAPH. I DON'T HAVE TO SHOW ANY PHOTOGRAPHS. I OBJECT TO THE FORM. IT IS ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED. EXCUSE ME. COUNSEL ON BOTH SIDES, WE DON'T NEED THIS KIND OF QUESTIONING OR THIS KIND OF RESPONSE. Q: BY MS. CLARK: OFFICER, CAN YOU TELL US DO YOU SEE MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: AND CAN YOU -- THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, DO YOU WANT TO MARK THIS? THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THIS WILL BE PEOPLE'S 58. (PEO'S 58 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) MS. CLARK: IF I MAY CHECK, YOUR HONOR, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVEN'T ALREADY MARKED IT. THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MS. CLARK: PEOPLE'S 58. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: I'M GOING TO ZOOM IN ON THE AREA THAT WAS SHOWN TO YOU IN THE OTHER -- THAT WAS SHOWN TO YOU BY MR. COCHRAN, PEOPLE'S 56-H, AND SEE IF YOU CAN LOCATE THE CLOSE-UP VIEW -- THIS IS A PERSPECTIVE SHOT OF THAT PARTICULAR PHOTOGRAPH. AND WHILE YOU ARE LOOKING AT THIS ONE, SIR, DO YOU SEE THE SAME DARK STRIATIONS ABOVE THAT NUMBER TAG NEAR THE BUSH? A: YES, I DO. THE COURT: MISS CLARK, LET ME JUST ASK YOU A QUICK QUESTION. AS TO THIS PHOTOGRAPH, I DON'T THINK THIS IS A RESTRICTED PHOTO. WHAT IS COMING UP AFTER THIS? THIS IS GOING TO BE A CLOSE-UP OF THIS? MS. CLARK: RIGHT, NOTHING -- THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. SIR, DO YOU SEE THE GLOVE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: YES, I DO. Q: OKAY. IT IS HARD WITH THIS ZOOM AFFECT TO SEE THE NUMBER, BUT LET ME SHOW YOU THE BOARD THAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 56 AND IN 56-H. DO YOU SEE THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT CORRESPONDS TO THE VIEW THAT YOU HAVE THERE ON THE SCREEN? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE 56-H? A: YES, IT IS. Q: AND SO THIS PHOTOGRAPH THAT WAS SHOWN TO YOU BY MR. COCHRAN IS A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF THE -- (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: -- IS A CLOSE-UP SHOT AND THIS ONE THAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS 58 IS THE PERSPECTIVE VIEW? A: RIGHT. Q: AND YOU CAN TELL NOW IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH THAT MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY HAS BEEN REMOVED? A: RIGHT. THE COURT: MISS CLARK, DO YOU WANT TO PRINT THAT CLOSE-UP? MS. CLARK: PRINT THE CLOSE-UP WE JUST DID. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, YOU WERE PRESENT AT THE SCENE, WERE YOU NOT, SIR, AND YOU TESTIFIED THAT THE AREA IN WHICH MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS FOUND WAS 10-BY-6? A: I BELIEVE SO, YES. Q: WAS THAT A VERY SMALL AREA, SIR? A: YES. Q: KIND OF LOOKED LIKE A CAGE? A: RIGHT. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, THE GLOVE AND THE CAP THE ENVELOPE WERE RIGHT AT HIS FEET; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THE GLOVE AND THE CAP. THE ENVELOPE WAS A LITTLE FARTHER AWAY. MS. CLARK: UH-HUH. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, DO WE NEED THIS PHOTOGRAPH ANY MORE? MS. CLARK: NO, I AM JUST WAITING. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE WILL MARK THE PRINTOUT OF THE CLOSE-UP AS 58-A. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. (PEO'S 58-A FOR ID = CLOSE-UP OF 58) (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: I THINK THIS ONE IS -- THIS IS THE ENVELOPE, YOUR HONOR. I THINK IT IS OKAY. Q: OKAY. DO YOU REMEMBER -- AND THIS ONE WAS MARKED -- THIS ONE WAS PEOPLE'S -- ON THE BOARD. THE COURT: THIS IS ONE FROM OF THE CHARTS, I BELIEVE. MS. CLARK: UH-HUH. THE COURT: DID WE ACCOMPLISH LETTERING THOSE? MS. CLARK: IT IS A LETTERED ONE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: IT IS ON PEOPLE'S 56 AND I BELIEVE IT IS 56 -- MS. CLARK: NO, NOT 56. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: I'M SORRY, IT IS ON PEOPLE'S -- (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: THIS HAS BEEN MARKED ALREADY, YOUR HONOR, AS PEOPLE'S 54, BUT IT HAS NOT BEEN INDIVIDUALLY LABELED. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. CHART 54. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MS. CLARK: PEOPLE'S 54. PERHAPS THE COURT WOULD PREFER IF I LABEL IT AS WELL, AS I HAVE THE OTHERS. I WILL LABEL THE ENVELOPE SHOWN IN THE UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER AS A, THE PHOTOGRAPH CLOSE-UP OF THE HAT AND GLOVE AS B, THE PHOTOGRAPH OF MISS BROWN, C. THE COURT: MISS CLARK, I'M SORRY. YOU HAVE THEM NUMBERED THERE, NO. 1, 2, 3. WHY DON'T WE JUST PUT NO. 54, PAREN, 1, 54, PAREN, 2, IN KEEPING WITH WHAT THE EXHIBIT ACTUALLY SAYS, RATHER THAN CONFUSE IT EVEN MORE. MS. CLARK: WELL, IF THE -- BECAUSE, YOUR HONOR, WE DON'T HAVE THE ENVELOPE NUMBERED HERE. THE COURT: IT SAYS "GLASSES" THREE. MS. CLARK: IT SAYS "GLASSES," YEAH. OKAY. THEN WE WILL HAVE IT WITH THE CORRESPONDING NUMBER? THE COURT: YES. 54, PAREN, 3. MS. CLARK: OKAY. THAT WOULD BE 54(3) MARKED AS GLASSES ON THIS. THE COURT: CORRECT. MS. CLARK: OURS? THE COURT: SO WE DON'T CONFUSE IT EVEN MORE. MS. CLARK: OKAY. (PEO'S 54(1) FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) (PEO'S 54(2) FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) (PEO'S 54(3) FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) (PEO'S 54(4) FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) MS. CLARK: NOW, RATHER THAN SHOW THIS BOARD, BECAUSE THEN WE WILL HAVE TO CUT THE FEED AND EVERYTHING, I'M JUST GOING TO USE 54(3). THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, DO YOU HAVE MUCH MORE? MS. CLARK: YES. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THEN WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A 15-MINUTE COURT REPORTER RECESS. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU. DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE. DON'T LET ANYBODY CONTACT OR COMMUNICATE WITH YOU. AND WE WILL SEE YOU BACK HERE IN FIFTEEN MINUTES. LET ME ASK YOU TO STEP BACK INTO THE JURY ROOM, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL STAND -- AND DEPUTY -- OFFICER RISKE, YOU CAN STEP DOWN. FIFTEEN 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. LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE. MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: SOME OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS WE INTEND TO USE YOU'LL WANT TO CUT THE FEED ON. THE COURT: I'VE GOT THE FEED CUT NOW. MS. CLARK: GREAT. (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. OFFICER ROBERT RISKE IS STILL ON THE WITNESS STAND ON REDIRECT EXAMINATION. OFFICER RISKE, YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MISS CLARK, YOU MAY CONTINUE YOUR REDIRECT. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR. THIS IS P-54(3), YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: P-54(3). Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU REMEMBER MR. COCHRAN SHOWED YOU THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: YES, I DO. Q: DO YOU SEE THE POSITION OF THE GLOVE? A: YES. Q: IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOVE THAT GROUTING THAT'S IN THE LOWER LEFT-HAND OF THE PHOTOGRAPH? A: YES. MS. CLARK: CAN WE GET THE PERSPECTIVE SHOT? IF WE COULD CUT THE FEED FOR THE NEXT ONE, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: YES. MS. CLARK: I WOULD ASK THIS BE MARKED P-59. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. P-59. (PEO'S 59 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH MR. GOLDMAN IS PRESENT? A: YES. Q: DO YOU SEE THE ENVELOPE IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH? A: YES, I DO. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: WE ARE LOSING IT. THERE WE GO. PUSH IT UP SLOW, JONATHAN. THANK YOU. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE THE POSITION OF THE ENVELOPE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? A: YES, I DO. Q: DOES IT APPEAR TO BE THE SAME AS THE LAST PHOTOGRAPH YOU SAW, IN THE LAST PHOTOGRAPH THAT WE SHOWED YOU? A: YES. Q: WITH RESPECT TO THE GROUTING AND EVERYTHING? A: RIGHT. Q: SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE BODY IS IN PLACE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND IN THE PREVIOUS ONE AS WELL? A: YES. WELL, YOU COULDN'T SEE THE BODY IN THE PREVIOUS ONE. Q: YES. BUT YOU CAN SEE THE POSITION OF THE ENVELOPE IS THE SAME? A: RIGHT. Q: AND DO YOU SEE THE NUMBER TAG IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: NO. Q: DID YOU SEE THE NUMBER TAG IN THE PREVIOUS PHOTOGRAPH SHOWN? A: NO. Q: OKAY. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, MAY THIS BE MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 59-A? THE COURT: PRINT, 59-A. (PEO'S 59-A FOR ID = PRINT) Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. NOW, YOU RECALL THAT MR. COCHRAN SHOWED YOU THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: YEAH. Q: WITH A NUMBER TAG IN IT? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: OKAY. YOU SAW THAT THE ENVELOPE WAS SLIGHTLY MOVED? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION, SLIGHTLY MOVED. THE COURT: MOVED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. WAS MOVED. OKAY? A: YES. Q: MOVED. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS 56-F. Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. LET ME SHOW YOU THE PERSPECTIVE, PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU WERE NOT SHOWN BY MR. COCHRAN. DO YOU SEE THE ENVELOPE HERE? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THAT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN THUS FAR. MS. CLARK: THAT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN THUS FAR. THE COURT: BY EITHER PARTY. MS. CLARK: CORRECT. THE COURT: THANK YOU. MS. CLARK: ACTUALLY, I THINK I DO HAVE THIS PHOTOGRAPH ALREADY MARKED. THE COURT: I THINK THIS MAY BE ON ONE OF YOUR BOARDS. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? A: YES, MA'AM. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THIS IS WHAT PHOTOGRAPH? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-56(H). MS. CLARK: THIS IS P-56(H). YES. IT HAS BEEN MARKED, YOUR HONOR, AND SHOWN. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE THE POSITION OF THE ENVELOPE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? A: YES, I DO. MS. CLARK: AND IF WE COULD ZOOM IN. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND YOU SEE THE BODY -- THE BODY HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: RIGHT. Q: OKAY. DO YOU SEE THE POSITION OF THE ENVELOPE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: YES. Q: NOW, IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH IN WHICH THE BODY HAS BEEN REMOVED, DOES THE ENVELOPE APPEAR TO BE IN THE SAME POSITION AS THE CLOSE-UP SHOWN TO YOU JUST BEFORE THIS ONE? A: YES. MS. CLARK: OKAY. LET'S GO BACK TO THAT ONE AND LOOK AT THAT, COMPARE. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: I'M SORRY. WHICH PHOTO? (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE IN THE SAME POSITION AS THE PERSPECTIVE SHOT THAT I JUST SHOWED YOU IN WHICH YOU CAN SEE THAT THE BODY HAS BEEN REMOVED? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: CAN YOU ALSO SEE THE EDGE OF A BLANKET IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? A: YES. Q: WAS THERE A BLANKET THERE WHEN YOU SAW THE BODIES IN PLACE? A: NO. Q: ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT DOES IT APPEAR TO BE? WHAT DO YOU SEE HERE, SIR, IN THE DIFFERENCE IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE SHOWN TO YOU? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: RIGHT. WHICH PHOTOGRAPHS? Q: BY MS. CLARK: FIRST OF ALL, WITH RESPECT TO THE ENVELOPE, WOULD IT APPEAR THAT THERE WERE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BEFORE THE BODIES WERE REMOVED? A: YES. Q: AND WOULD IT APPEAR THEN THAT AFTER THE BODIES WERE REMOVED, PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN AGAIN? A: YES, MA'AM. MR. COCHRAN: THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. HE WASN'T THERE. HE WAS TOLD THAT. COUNSEL IS LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE. MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR -- THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MS. CLARK: AS TO WHAT? THE COURT: LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE. MS. CLARK: OKAY. Q: BY MS. CLARK: YOU SAW THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WE'VE JUST SHOWN YOU WHERE PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN OF THE ENVELOPE BEFORE THE BODY WAS MOVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND THEN WE SHOWED YOU A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE ENVELOPE THAT WAS TAKEN AFTER THE BODY WAS REMOVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND IN THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OF THE ENVELOPE AFTER THE BODY WAS REMOVED, YOU SEE A NUMBER TAG? A: YES. Q: AND WAS THERE ALSO A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN OF THE GLOVE BEFORE THE BODY WAS REMOVED? A: YES. Q: AND YOU SAW THAT? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND THEN THERE WAS A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN OF THE GLOVE AFTER THE BODY WAS REMOVED? A: YES. Q: AND YOU SAW THAT? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND YOU SAW THAT THERE WAS A NUMBER TAG ON THE GLOVE AFTER THE BODY WAS REMOVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE TAKEN AFTER THE BODIES WERE REMOVED, THE ENVELOPE AND THE GLOVE APPEARED TO YOU TO BE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION THAN THEY WERE BEFORE THE BODY WAS REMOVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: CORRECT. Q: YOU SEE THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 56-K? IT'S NO. 105. A: YES, I DO. Q: APPEARS TO MARK THE EVIDENCE ITEM OF A RING. THE COURT: I'M SORRY, MS. CLARK. THIS IS 56 -- MS. CLARK: K, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: K. MS. CLARK: I'M GOING TO PUT IT UP ON THE LASER SO EVERYONE CAN SEE IT. Q: BY MS. CLARK: CAN YOU SEE THAT, SIR? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: DID YOU SEE THAT RING WHEN YOU WERE THERE? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: OF COURSE, IF IT WAS UNDER THE BODY OF RON GOLDMAN, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO, RIGHT? A: RIGHT. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. THIS CALLS FOR SPECULATION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: CAN WE CUT THE FEED FOR THE NEXT ONE, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: YES. MS. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS P-55, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. WHO IS THAT PERSON POINTING TO THE GLOVE AND THE CAP UNDERNEATH THE BUSH? A: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN. Q: NOW, YOU I THINK TESTIFIED BEFORE THAT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN RETURNED FROM ROCKINGHAM TOGETHER; IS THAT RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: AND IT WAS AT THAT POINT THAT YOU SAW DETECTIVE FUHRMAN GO AND POINT TO THE EVIDENCE FOR THE PHOTOGRAPHER? A: RIGHT. Q: AND THAT'S HIM WEARING THAT WHITE SHIRT AND THOSE BEIGE PANTS? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND WAS THAT SHORTLY -- MR. COCHRAN: WHAT NUMBER IS THIS, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: 55. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-55. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WAS THAT SHORTLY BEFORE YOU LEFT AND GOT OFF DUTY? A: YES. Q: AND YOU GOT OFF DUTY ABOUT 7:15? A: RIGHT. Q: OKAY. AND WAS IT -- DID YOU TESTIFY BEFORE THAT MARK -- THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND DETECTIVE RON PHILLIPS ARRIVED AT THE SCENE AT ABOUT 2:10 WAS IT IN THE MORNING? A: I BELIEVE SO. I DON'T RECALL WHAT TIME IT WAS. Q: WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION, SIR, IF I SHOWED YOU THE CRIME SCENE LOG? A: I DIDN'T FILL OUT THE LOG. I DIDN'T PUT THE TIME IN, BUT YES. Q: PARDON? A: I DIDN'T FILL OUT THE LOG OR PUT THE TIME IN, BUT, YES. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, YOU'RE SHOWING THE OFFICER THE CRIME SCENE LOG, PERSONNEL LOG? MS. CLARK: YES, SIR. Q: BY MS. CLARK: I'M SHOWING YOU WHAT APPEARS TO BE THE CRIME SCENE LOG FOR 875 SOUTH BUNDY. DO YOU RECOGNIZE YOUR NAME AT THE VERY TOP? A: YES, I DO. Q: BECAUSE YOU WERE THE FIRST OFFICER THERE? A: YES. MY PARTNER AND I. Q: UH-HUH. AND DO YOU SEE THE ENTRY FOR DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS? A: YES. Q: DO YOU SEE THE TIME OF THEIR ARRIVAL STATED? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND IS THAT 2:10 IN THE MORNING? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. THE DOCUMENT SPEAKS FOR ITSELF. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR -- THE COURT: EXCUSE ME. COUNSEL, THIS IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO REFRESH SOMEBODY'S RECOLLECTION, IS IT? MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY. THE COURT: THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO READ IT TO THEMSELVES RATHER THAN TELL US WHAT'S THERE AND ASKED IF THAT REFRESHES THEIR RECOLLECTION. Q: BY MS. CLARK: CAN YOU READ THAT? A: YES, I CAN. Q: DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION? A: GENERALLY, YES. I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY WHAT TIME THEY GOT THERE. Q: DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE -- WHAT DO YOU THINK WAS THE TIME OF THEIR ARRIVAL, SIR? MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, HE'S ANSWERED THAT. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I BELIEVE IT WAS RIGHT AROUND 2:00, 2:15. Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. NOW, BY THAT TIME, THE CRIME SCENE, HAD IT BEEN SECURED? A: YES. Q: FOR ALMOST TWO HOURS? A: ACTUALLY ABOUT MAYBE AN HOUR AND HOUR AND 30 MINUTES, HOUR AND 20 MINUTES. Q: YOU GOT THERE AT? A: 12:13. Q: 12:13? AND HOW LONG AFTER GETTING THERE DID YOU SECURE THE CRIME SCENE? A: IT WAS SECURED WHEN WE STARTED TO SEARCH, WHICH WAS 12:30, 12:40. Q: OKAY. SO BETWEEN 12:30 AND 12:40? A: RIGHT. Q: SO BY THE TIME DETECTIVES PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN GOT THERE, THE CRIME SCENE HAD BEEN SECURED FOR HOUR AND 30, HOUR AND 40 MINUTES? A: RIGHT. Q: AND BY THAT TIME, HAD YOU AND OFFICER TERRAZAS SEEN THE CRIME SCENE? A: YES. Q: AND SERGEANT ROSSI, HAD HE SEEN THE CRIME SCENE AS WELL? A: RIGHT. Q: AND SERGEANT COON AND OFFICER WALLY, HAD THEY BEEN AT THE CRIME SCENE ALSO? A: YES. Q: AND THAT ALL HAPPENED BEFORE DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN GOT THERE? A: YES, IT DID. Q: AND BY THE WAY, SERGEANT COON, IS HE RELATED IN ANY WAY TO THE OFFICER THAT TESTIFIED IN THE RODNEY KING CASE? A: NO. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. ASKED AND ANSWERED. THE COURT: SUSTAINED THREE TIMES. MR. COCHRAN: THREE TIMES. THE COURT: THREE TIMES YOU'VE ASKED THAT QUESTION. MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T REMEMBER, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MS. CLARK: OFFICER RISKE, YOU WERE THE FIRST OFFICER ON THE SCENE, RIGHT? A: MY PARTNER AND I, YES. MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: HOW MANY GLOVES DID YOU SEE AT BUNDY? A: ONE. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, ANY RECROSS? MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR. RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: OFFICER RISKE, A FEW QUESTIONS IF WE MIGHT. MR. COCHRAN: IF I MIGHT APPROACH, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: CERTAINLY. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THE -- THIS PHOTOGRAPH HERE ON EXHIBIT NUMBER -- THIS IS 56-J. DO YOU SEE THIS PHOTOGRAPH HERE WHERE THE -- THIS IS MR. GOLDMAN'S FOOT, SHOE? A: YES. Q: DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE RED? A: IT'S ORANGE OR RED. Q: ORANGE OR RED. AND IT'S ALMOST TOUCHING THE GLOVE, ISN'T IT, ON THAT PHOTOGRAPH? A: RIGHT. Q: AND THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY BEFORE THE BODY WAS MOVED, RIGHT? A: YES. MR. COCHRAN: AND THIS IS 56-J, YOUR HONOR. THE WITNESS: G. MS. CLARK: G. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: G. I AM SORRY. 56-G. AND WHILE WE'RE UP HERE, 56-G, THE GLOVE THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO SEE AND THIS WATCH CAP WERE UNDER THIS KIND OF -- THIS PLANT BASICALLY; IS THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: THE WATCH CAP BEING MORE UNDER THE PLANT THAN THE GLOVE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND SO WE SEE THAT. MR. COCHRAN: NOW, I WANT TO BORROW ONE OF THE PEOPLE'S EXHIBITS, YOUR HONOR. MAY WE SEE NUMBER 55, JONATHAN? THE COURT: PEOPLE'S 55? MR. COCHRAN: ACTUALLY IT'S 55 OR -- 55? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) THE COURT: 55 IS DETECTIVE FUHRMAN POINTING AT THE HAT AND GLOVE. MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. WE'LL START WITH 55, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. NOW, IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH HERE -- CAN YOU SEE THAT? A: YES, I CAN. Q: AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHO WE'VE NOW IDENTIFIED, IS POINTING UNDER THAT SAME PLANT THAT WAS ON 56 -- THE COURT: G? MR. COCHRAN: 56-G, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH, HE'S POINTING WHERE THE WATCH CAP IS AND WHERE THE GLOVE SUPPOSEDLY IS; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. LET'S GO NOW TO 55. 59 RATHER, PEOPLE'S 59. NOW -- MR. COCHRAN: IS THAT 59? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IN 59, DOES IT LOOK TO YOU LIKE THE TENNIS SHOE IS IN A DIFFERENT POSITION THAN IT WAS IN THE ONE WE JUST FINISHED LOOKING AT, 55? A: IT'S HARD TO TELL FROM THAT ANGLE. Q: YOU CAN'T TELL? A: NO. Q: WELL, LET'S LOOK AT 59-A. MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T THINK THAT WAS 59. THIS IS -- WHAT IS THIS? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS PEOPLE'S 59. MR. COCHRAN: THIS IS 59? Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. LOOK AT THOSE TENNIS SHOES ON 59. NOW, I WANT YOU TO LOOK CLOSELY AT 59. DO YOU SEE THOSE WHITE TENNIS SHOES THERE? A: I SEE ONE TENNIS SHOE AND THE TOP OF ANOTHER ONE. Q: ALL RIGHT. DOES IT APPEAR TO BE WHITE TO YOU? A: FROM THIS DISTANCE, YES. Q: WELL, YOU SAW IT THAT NIGHT. APPEARED TO BE WHITE TO YOU, THE TENNIS SHOE? A: WELL, WITH THE ORANGE ON IT, I MEAN THE RED OR ORANGE COLOR. Q: I WANT YOU TO LOOK AT THIS ONE HERE. DO YOU SEE -- DOES THIS APPEAR TO BE WHITE TO YOU? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND DOES THAT -- THAT'S THE RIGHT TENNIS SHOE YOU'RE SEEING THERE? A: I BELIEVE SO. Q: AND THAT APPEARS TO BE WHITE, DOESN'T IT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. MR. COCHRAN: NOW, IS THERE A 59-A, JONATHAN? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES. WE PRINTED THAT. MR. COCHRAN: WANT TO PUT THAT BACK UP THERE? Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: I WANT YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT 59-A. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MR. COCHRAN: NOW, THIS, YOUR HONOR, IS 59-A. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DO YOU SEE 59-A? A: YES. Q: DO YOU SEE THAT WHITE TENNIS SHOE ON THAT? A: YES, SIR. Q: SEE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THAT TENNIS SHOE AND THAT ENVELOPE? A: YES. Q: IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, 59-A, DO YOU SEE ANY -- ANY ONE OF THE TENNIS SHOES BY A GLOVE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. IT'S A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. YOU CAN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THIS. MR. COCHRAN: I'M ASKING HIM, YOUR HONOR, NOT HER. THE WITNESS: I SEE ONE OF THE TENNIS SHOES UNDERNEATH THE PLANT. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND WHERE IS THAT? A: IT'S TO THE LEFT OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OR TO THE RIGHT OF THE PHOTOGRAPH IN THE MIDDLE. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND DO YOU SEE -- AND DOES IT APPEAR TO BE WHITE, THE PART YOU CAN SEE? A: YES. Q: IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE ORANGE AT THAT POINT, DOES IT? A: NO. Q: AND AGAIN, IF WE WERE TO COMPARE THAT PHOTOGRAPH THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT THERE NOW ON THE MONITOR WITH 56-J? THE COURT: IS IT G OR J? MR. COCHRAN: 56-G. I KEEP CALLING IT J. IT'S 56-G. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: IN 56-G, THE TENNIS SHOE APPEARS TO BE ALMOST TOUCHING THE GLOVE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, BASED UPON MISS CLARK'S QUESTIONING, SIR, YOU -- WHEN YOU LEFT THE SCENE, YOU'VE ALREADY DESCRIBED FOR US THAT THE BODY -- THE BODIES HAD NOT BEEN MOVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: IN FACT, YOU CAN'T EVEN TELL US WHETHER OR NOT THE CORONER HAD BEEN CALLED, COULD YOU? A: NO. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT'S IRRELEVANT, WHETHER HE KNEW WHETHER THE CORONER'S BEEN CALLED. MR. COCHRAN: IT BECOMES VERY RELEVANT. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE ANSWER WILL STAND. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. YOU KNOW FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE THAT THERE'S AN OBLIGATION TO CALL THE CORONER AS SOON AS YOU ARRIVE AT THE SCENE WHEN THEY HAVE DEAD BODIES. YOU KNOW THAT, DON'T YOU? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT WITNESS FOR THAT QUESTION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO THIS WITNESS. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. VERY WELL, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AT ANY RATE, THE BODIES WERE STILL THERE WHEN YOU LEFT; IS THAT RIGHT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND WITH REGARD TO YOUR PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE, YOU TOLD US THAT IN OTHER CRIME SCENES WHERE EVIDENCE -- WHERE A BODY IS GOING TO BE MOVED, YOU'VE HAD SITUATIONS WHERE THE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PICKED UP, THE BODIES REMOVED, THE EVIDENCE WAS PUT RIGHT BACK OR MARKED WHERE IT WAS BEFORE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: YOU KNOW IT'S IMPORTANT, IS IT NOT, TO GET THE EVIDENCE RIGHT WHERE IT WAS AND NOT BE MOVED ALL AROUND THE SCENE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: AS CLOSE -- MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASKED AND ANSWERED. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: AS CLOSE AS WHERE IT WAS AS YOU CAN. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S RIGHT. YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO MOVE THE EVIDENCE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: AND IN LOOKING AT THESE SO-CALLED STRIATION MARKS, DOES IT APPEAR TO YOU THAT MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS DRAGGED ACROSS THAT ENVELOPE? DID YOU NOTICE ON SOME OF THOSE PICTURES THERE'S MORE DIRT ON THE ENVELOPE THAN THERE WERE BEFORE THE BODY WAS MOVED? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. MR. COCHRAN: I'M ASKING HIM. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION. THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU LOOK AT THE ENVELOPES THAT -- THE ENVELOPE THAT WAS ON THAT -- ON THE PICTURE -- LET'S JUST GO UP AND JUST PICK A SPECIFIC ONE. THIS IS 56-J. NOW, YOU SEE 56-J HERE? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH WHERE THE ENVELOPE HAS OBVIOUSLY BEEN MOVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO 56-J -- MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, LET ME GET ANOTHER PHOTOGRAPH IF I CAN. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, YOU LOOKED AT 56-J, RIGHT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND I WANT YOU TO LOOK NOW AT THE MONITOR AGAIN. DOES IT APPEAR TO YOU THERE'S MORE DIRT AND DEBRIS ON THAT ENVELOPE AT THE TIME YOU WERE THERE AND PRIOR TO IT BEING MOVED, MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY BEING MOVED? A: IT'S NOT REALLY A CLEAR PICTURE OF THE ENVELOPE. Q: WELL, LOOK AT THE ENVELOPE, SEE IF YOU CAN TELL. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THE WITNESS HAS SAID IT'S NOT A CLEAR ENOUGH PICTURE. THE COURT: HE'S ASKED THE WITNESS TO LOOK AT IT MORE CAREFULLY. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: LOOK AT IT MORE CAREFULLY AND SEE IF YOU SEE THE SAME DIRT THAT YOU SEE ON 56-J THAT YOU SEE ON -- MR. COCHRAN: WHAT'S THE ONE UP THERE NOW, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: THIS IS I THINK -- MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 59-A. THE COURT: 59. MR. COCHRAN: 59-A. THE COURT: MR. HARRIS, CAN WE FOCUS THAT A LITTLE BETTER? MR. HARRIS: IT'S THE COPY OF THE PICTURE. IT'S THE PRINT. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MR. COCHRAN: THIS IS 59? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES. THE COURT: I'M SORRY. CAN WE GET A COVER OVER THAT BECAUSE I'M GETTING LIGHT REFLECTION. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN YOU TELL FROM LOOKING AT 59 AND COMPARE THAT TO 56-H, THAT 59 SEEMS TO HAVE LESS DEBRIS ON IT THAN 56-J? A: IT REALLY LOOKS ABOUT THE SAME TO ME, SIR. Q: IT LOOKS ABOUT THE SAME TO YOU. DOES IT LOOK TO YOU FROM THOSE STRIATIONS THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS DRAGGED ACROSS THESE PARTICULAR EXHIBITS AND THE EXHIBITS WERE NOT MOVED BEFORE HIS BODY WAS DRAGGED ACROSS THE -- MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THE WITNESS: I CAN'T TELL FROM THOSE STRIATIONS. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WELL, ARE YOU -- STRIKE THAT. IN MISS CLARK'S QUESTIONING, WAS SHE SEEKING TO INFER THROUGH YOUR TESTIMONY THESE ITEMS HAVE BEEN MOVED BY THE CORONER? A: I DON'T KNOW WHAT SHE WAS TRYING TO INFER. Q: YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT SHE WAS INFERRING? ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO BACK TO BASICS. THE COURT: PLEASE. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THE EVIDENCE AS I DESCRIBED FOR YOU LAST WEEK AND TODAY WAS IN FACT MOVED FROM WHERE YOU HAD SEEN IT; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND BASED UPON YOUR TRAINING, EVIDENCE SHOULD NOT BE MOVED BY ANYONE AT THE CRIME SCENE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: UNLESS IT'S NECESSARY, RIGHT. Q: UNLESS IT'S NECESSARY? A: RIGHT. Q: CAN YOU THINK OF ANY REASONS WHY IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO MOVE SOMEBODY'S EVIDENCE? A: WELL, IF YOU TAKE PHOTOS BEFORE AND YOU HAVE TO GET THE BODIES OUT AND THEN PUT IT BACK AND TAKE THE PHOTOS AGAIN. Q: SO YOU DESCRIBED FOR US UNDER THE PROCEDURE YOU UNDERSTOOD, YOU WOULD THEN PUT IT RIGHT BACK WHERE IT WAS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: WELL, AS CLOSE AS YOU CAN. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WOULDN'T YOU TRY TO PUT THE EVIDENCE -- WOULD YOU INTENTIONALLY PUT EVIDENCE IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION THAN IT HAD BEEN, OFFICER? A: NO. Q: YOU WOULDN'T DO THAT, WOULD YOU? A: NO. Q: ISN'T IT IMPORTANT FOR A JURY OR A TRIER OF FACT TO HAVE THE EVIDENCE EXACTLY THE WAY IT WAS? MS. CLARK: ASKED AND ANSWERED. ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ONE OF THE REASONS THAT YOU PUT UP THE TAPE IS SO THE EVIDENCE WILL NOT BE INTERFERED WITH AND THE INTEGRITY OF THE EVIDENCE IS PRESERVED; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: THAT'S THE WHOLE REASON FOR TRYING TO PRESERVE THE SCENE, ISN'T IT, SIR? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: OKAY. NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE SCENE, YOU WERE SHOWN THESE PICTURES. YOU WERE SHOWN D-1000 AND 11. MR. COCHRAN: ASK YOU TO PUT THAT UP. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND WE'VE ASKED YOU EARLIER, YOU COULD NOT RECOGNIZE THIS PARTICULAR OFFICER; IS THAT CORRECT? A: NO. Q: BUT YOU HAVE NO DOUBT THIS IS AN LAPD OFFICER? A: I WOULD ASSUME FROM HIS UNIFORM HE IS. Q: SIMILAR TO YOUR UNIFORM, RIGHT? RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IN THIS PARTICULAR PHOTOGRAPH, WE DON'T HAVE THE BENEFIT OF SEEING WHETHER THE YELLOW MARKS ARE STILL UP, DO WE? A: NO. Q: THE YELLOW TAPE. BUT THIS OFFICER IS WALKING RIGHT UP THAT WALKWAY; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND WHETHER THIS PHOTOGRAPH WAS TAKEN BY AMERICAN JOURNAL, HARD COPY OR 60 MINUTES, IT'S STILL A PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT SCENE, THE CRIME SCENE AT BUNDY WALKING UP THAT WALKWAY WHERE YOU FOUND THESE BODIES, RIGHT? A: IT'S A PICTURE OF THE SCENE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A PICTURE OF THE CRIME SCENE. Q: WELL, IS THAT BUNDY? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. IS THAT PART OF THE CRIME SCENE? A: IF THE CRIME SCENE WAS STILL IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME. Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, THERE'S STILL A POLICE OFFICER THERE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: AND POLICE STAYED AROUND THERE FOR A WHILE THAT DAY; IS THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: YOU HAD LEFT AT 7:15 AND YOU NEVER CAME BACK, DID YOU, ON THAT DAY? A: NOT WHEN IT WAS STILL A CRIME SCENE, NO. Q: RIGHT. AND BY THE TIME -- AND AT SOME POINT WHEN YOU CAME BACK, THAT SCENE HAD BEEN WASHED DOWN, ALL THE BLOOD HAD BEEN WASHED AWAY; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: YOU CAN TELL FROM THIS PICTURE, D-1001, THAT THE BLOOD HAD NOT BEEN WASHED AWAY YET; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? A: RIGHT. Q: NOW, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US HOW IT WOULD BE GOOD TO TRY AND PRESERVE THE EVIDENCE AND VARIOUS THINGS BECAUSE AS THE FIRST OFFICER ON THE SCENE, YOU JUST WANT TO KIND OF PRESERVE THINGS UNTIL THE DETECTIVES WHO WERE BASICALLY MORE EXPERIENCED ARRIVED; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND WOULDN'T IT BE HELPFUL THOUGH IF WITH REGARD TO THIS MELTING ICE CREAM IF YOU HAD A PICTURE OF THAT ICE CREAM, THE CONDITION IT WAS IN WHEN YOU WERE THERE? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. MR. COCHRAN: NO. SHE ASKED -- THE COURT: WE'VE GONE OVER THIS. MR. COCHRAN: WELL, SHE ASKED IT - I DON'T WANT TO ARGUE -- ASK LEAVE -- I KNOW, BUT NOT THIS QUESTION, YOUR HONOR. I WOULD ASK LEAVE TO ASK THIS QUESTION. MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. MR. COCHRAN: ASK LEAVE, YOUR HONOR. SHE ASKED A QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THIS AND I THINK I SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO -- MS. CLARK: CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: YEAH. BUT I THINK I STOPPED BOTH OF YOU BECAUSE WE'VE GONE THROUGH -- WE KNOW THERE ARE NO PHOTOGRAPHS, CORRECT? THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW. THE COURT: YOU DIDN'T SEE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN. NEXT QUESTION. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU WERE ASKED THE CONDITION OF THE ICE CREAM BY MISS CLARK, ABOUT THE MASS AND WAS MELTING ON THE SIDES. REMEMBER THOSE QUESTIONS? A: RIGHT. Q: WOULDN'T THE BEST EVIDENCE OF THE CONDITION OF THAT ICE CREAM BE A PHOTOGRAPH OF HOW IT APPEARED WHEN YOU SAW IT AT 12:35 A.M. ON JUNE 13TH, 1994? MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, WITH REGARD TO YOUR GOING INSIDE THE PREMISES, SIR, AND USING THE PHONE, YOU -- SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, YOU COULD HAVE IN FACT CALLED YOUR SUPERIOR SERGEANT ROSSI ON YOUR ROVER, RIGHT? A: SURE. Q: SOME OF THE OFFICERS AT THE SCENE ALSO HAD CELLULAR TELEPHONES; DID THEY NOT? A: NOT TILL LATER, NO. Q: AT SOME POINT, THEY DID, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW THEY HAD THEM AT THAT POINT? A: I FOUND OUT LATER DETECTIVE OR SERGEANT COON HAD ONE AND THEN DETECTIVES, WHEN THEY SHOWED UP, HAD ONE. Q: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS HAD ONE ALSO, RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: SO THAT YOU WOULDN'T ALERT THE PRESS, YOU WENT INSIDE AND YOU USED MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S PHONE; IS THAT CORRECT? A: NOT JUST FOR THAT REASON, NO. Q: I MEAN BUT YOU USED THAT PHONE? A: RIGHT. Q: AND YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY GLOVES ON WHEN YOU USED THE PHONE, DID YOU? A: NO. Q: AND WITH REGARD TO PRINTS ON THAT PHONE, YOU USED YOUR OWN -- YOU USED YOUR PRINTS ON THAT PHONE, RIGHT? WERE YOU SEEKING TO PRESERVE PRINTS WHEN YOU DIALED THE PHONE? A: I REALLY WASN'T EVEN THINKING ABOUT PRINTS WHEN I PICKED UP THE PHONE. Q: YOU WEREN'T THINKING ABOUT IT AT THE TIME, RIGHT? OKAY. AND WITH REGARD TO THE REDIAL BUTTON IF ANY ON THAT PHONE -- MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THIS WITNESS ALREADY TESTIFIED HE DOESN'T KNOW -- THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WITH REGARD TO THE STAR 69 FEATURE ON THAT PHONE IF ANY -- MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU SEE ON THAT PHONE AN AUTOMATIC DIALER TO THE LEFT OF THE PHONE THAT HAD DAD AND OTHER NUMBERS RIGHT TO THE LEFT OF THAT PHONE AS YOU SAT THERE AND STARTED TO DIAL? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. IRRELEVANT. THE WITNESS: I DON'T THINK SO. MR. COCHRAN: IT'S VERY RELEVANT. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DON'T RECALL. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU DON'T RECALL SEEING AN AUTOMATIC DIALER? A: NO. I REALLY DON'T RECALL. Q: YOU DON'T RECALL? DID YOU EVER SEE ANY PICTURES TAKEN OF THE PHONE? A: NO. Q: NEVER? A: NO. Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE MEDIA AND THEIR ABILITY TO PLUG INTO THE FREQUENCY, DON'T YOU HAVE DIFFERENT FREQUENCIES WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT YOU COULD USE A DIFFERENT FREQUENCY WHERE THEY COULDN'T MONITOR IT? A: WE HAVE TAC CHANNELS, BUT -- Q: COULDN'T YOU HAVE USED THAT TO CONTACT THE -- A: I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WOULD BE MONITORED OR NOT. I DON'T KNOW IF A TAC CHANNEL WOULD BE MONITORED OR NOT. Q: WELL, THE TAC CHANNEL -- A: RIGHT. Q: IS THAT WHAT YOU CALL IT, THE TAC CHANNEL? A: RIGHT. Q: AND YOU DIDN'T USE THE TAC CHANNEL THOUGH? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: MISS CLARK SHOWED YOU A LOG INVOLVING DETECTIVES FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS. DO YOU RECALL THAT? A: YES. Q: AND IN LOOKING AT THAT LOG, WERE YOU EVER ABLE TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THEY LOGGED OUT TO GO OVER TO ROCKINGHAM? A: I DIDN'T LOOK AT THE ENTIRE LOG. I DON'T KNOW. Q: LET ME ASK -- MR. COCHRAN: MAY I GET THIS, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, WHY DON'T WE SAVE THAT FOR THE OFFICER WHO WAS MAINTAINING THE LOG. MR. COCHRAN: OKAY, YOUR HONOR. I'LL DO THAT, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU VERY KINDLY. MAY I JUST HAVE A SECOND? THE COURT: SURE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. COCHRAN: I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THIS OFFICER ONE OTHER QUESTION REGARDING THAT. THE COURT: CERTAINLY. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WITH REGARD TO THE LOG AT THE SCENE, WHEN YOU LEAVE THE SCENE, IS IT INCUMBENT UPON THE OFFICER TO GO TO THE PERSON KEEPING THE LOG AND SAY, "I'M LEAVING. CHECK ME OUT, WHEN I COME BACK, LOG ME BACK IN"? A: YES. Q: THAT'S THE OFFICER'S RESPONSIBILITY, RIGHT? RIGHT? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. IN SPEAKING ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE EVIDENCE, OFFICER RISKE, WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IF A BODY WAS DRAGGED OVER KEY ITEMS OF EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE, THERE WOULD BE A GREATER CHANCE FOR CONTAMINATION OF THAT EVIDENCE THAN IF THE EVIDENCE HAD BEEN LIFTED UP OR MOVED? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. WITH THIS WITNESS, COUNSEL. YOU CAN ASK THAT QUESTION OF THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER, THE DETECTIVE AT THE SCENE. MR. COCHRAN: OKAY, YOUR HONOR. I'LL WAIT AND I'LL DO THAT. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: BY THE WAY, OFFICER RISKE, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT FOOTPRINTS IN THE AREA WHERE THAT PICTURE -- WHERE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN HAD HIS FOOT AND WAS POINTING TOWARD THE SO-CALLED EVIDENCE. A: RIGHT. Q: HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A SITUATION WHERE PLASTER OF PARIS CASTS ARE USED TO DETERMINE FOOTPRINTS? HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THAT? A: NO, I HAVEN'T. Q: IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, YOUR FOUR YEARS, YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THAT YET? A: NO. Q: AND SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, AS THE FIRST OFFICER ON THE SCENE, OFFICER RISKE, YOU WERE THERE TO MAKE OBSERVATIONS AND BASICALLY TRY TO PRESERVE THE SCENE UNTIL THE DETECTIVES -- MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, CAN WE GET THE PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN DOWN? MR. COCHRAN: YES. THE COURT: YES. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: -- PRESERVE THE SCENE UNTIL THE INVESTIGATORS ARRIVED; IS THAT RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: HAVE YOU IN YOUR EXPERIENCE SEEN OR BEEN TRAINED THAT THE BEST EVIDENCE OF PRESERVING EVIDENCE AT THE SCENE IS THE USE OF A VIDEOTAPE THAT WOULD COVER, SHOW US EVERYTHING IN PERSPECTIVE? HAVE YOU BEEN SO INSTRUCTED? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE QUESTION IS HAS HE BEEN SO INSTRUCTED. Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: BEEN SO INSTRUCTED? A: NO. Q: THE CRIME SCENES WHICH YOU HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS, HAVE YOU SEEN THE LAPD USE THE VIDEOTAPE OR VIDEO CAMERA? A: NO, I HAVEN'T. Q: AT NO TIME? A: NO. Q: YOU NEVER WENT TO THE ROCKINGHAM SCENE ON THIS DATE, DID YOU, UNTIL LATE -- A: NO, I DIDN'T. MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR. NOTHING FURTHER. THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: VERY BRIEFLY, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: AND I ASSUME WE HAVE OUR NEXT WITNESS ON HIS OR HER WAY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 57. THE COURT: PEOPLE'S 57. FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CLARK: Q: OKAY. THIS PHOTOGRAPH, PEOPLE'S 57, YOU SEE THE LOGO, AMERICAN JOURNAL THE LOWER RIGHT-HAND CORNER? A: YES. Q: DO YOU SEE THE OFFICER AT THE SCENE AT THIS -- WALKING ON THIS WALKWAY, SIR? A: YES, I DO. Q: DOES IT APPEAR TO BE BROAD DAYLIGHT? A: YES, IT DOES. Q: AND THE FACT THAT AN OFFICER IS STILL AT THE SCENE, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE CRIME SCENE IS STILL INTACT? A: NO. Q: HAVE OFFICERS -- IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, HAS IT OCCURRED THAT OFFICERS HAVE BEEN AT A SCENE WHERE THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IS TAKEN DOWN AND THE CRIME SCENE IS RELEASED? A: YES. Q: AND ESPECIALLY AT THAT PARTICULAR SCENE, I THINK YOU INDICATED EARLIER ON CROSS-EXAMINATION, SIR, THAT YOU WENT TO ROCKINGHAM TO ASSIST IN THE TRAFFIC CONTROL AT ROCKINGHAM? A: BUT THAT WAS AROUND MIDNIGHT. Q: AT ROCKINGHAM? A: RIGHT. Q: AT MIDNIGHT ON JUNE 13TH? A: RIGHT. Q: WHY WERE YOU STILL WORKING TRAFFIC CONTROL THERE AT MIDNIGHT? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THIS IS IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: BECAUSE THE NEWS MEDIA SET UP AROUND MR. SIMPSON'S HOUSE AND THE NEIGHBORS COMPLAINED ABOUT NOISE AND TRAFFIC CONGESTION. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND SO -- WHAT ABOUT AT BUNDY? WAS THERE TRAFFIC CONTROL BEING COORDINATED AT BUNDY AS WELL? A: I BELIEVE BUNDY SHUT DOWN FOR A TIME. Q: THE WHOLE STREET SHUT DOWN? A: FROM DOROTHY TO GORHAM. Q: AND WAS THAT WHILE YOU WERE THERE? A: YES. Q: AND TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE, WAS TRAFFIC CONTROL MAINTAINED THERE FOR SOME TIME AFTER THAT? MR. COCHRAN: CALLS FOR SPECULATION. HE LEFT AT 7:15, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SHE ASKED TO HIS KNOWLEDGE. IF HE KNOWS. THE WITNESS: WE OPENED IT UP BEFORE I LEFT. Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. AND THEN WHAT ABOUT MEDIA CONTROL THOUGH AND CROWD CONTROL? WAS THAT STILL SOMETHING BEING DONE AT BUNDY? A: THERE WAS NO MEDIA OR CROWD WHEN I LEFT. I DON'T KNOW. Q: AT 7:15? A: RIGHT. Q: WERE YOU THERE LATER IN THE DAY? A: AGAIN, IT WOULD BE BETWEEN 11:15 AND MIDNIGHT. Q: AT BUNDY? A: RIGHT. Q: OKAY. AND WHAT DID YOU SEE AT BUNDY AT 11:15 OR MIDNIGHT ON JUNE 13TH? A: PEOPLE STANDING ON THE SIDEWALK TAKING PICTURES AND, YOU KNOW, FREE O.J. OR -- Q: SIGNS -- A: -- ONLOOKERS. Q: UH-HUH. SO THERE WAS STILL PEOPLE CROWDING AROUND BUNDY AT MIDNIGHT ON JUNE THE 13TH? A: THAT'S CORRECT. MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR. HE ANSWERED THAT. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: YOU WERE SHOWN THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF DETECTIVE FUHRMAN POINTING TO EVIDENCE AND THEN OTHER PHOTOGRAPHS -- THEN YOU WERE SHOWN PHOTOGRAPH 56-G? A: CORRECT. Q: DID THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS, SIR, APPEAR TO BE TAKEN FROM DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES? A: YES, THEY DID. MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, MR. GOLDMAN IS SHOWN, PART OF HIM, IN PEOPLE 56-D. DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE BLOOD ON HIS JEANS? A: YES, IT DOES. Q: DID HE APPEAR TO BE FAIRLY BLOODY, SIR? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT ABOUT THE BOOT SHOWN IN PEOPLE'S 56-G? DO YOU SEE A PART OF THE BOOT IN THAT THAT IS STILL WHITE? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND THE RED PART, DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE BLOOD, SIR? A: APPEARS TO BE BLOOD AND DIRT. Q: DO YOU RECALL THE POSITION IN WHICH MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS WEDGED AROUND THE STUMP AND UP AGAINST THE GATE? MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION. MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. CAN WE CUT THE FEED, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: YES. MS. CLARK: PEOPLE'S 59, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. Q: BY MS. CLARK: YOU SEE THE POSITION THAT MR. GOLDMAN IS SHOWN IN PEOPLE'S 59, SIR? A: YES, I DO. Q: IS THAT THE WAY YOU FOUND HIM, SIR? A: YES, IT IS. Q: HOW BIG DID HE APPEAR TO BE TO YOU? A: 5/10, 5/11. Q: UH-HUH. ABOUT 180 POUNDS? A: POSSIBLY 190. I DON'T KNOW. Q: UH-HUH. HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO LIFT -- AND YOU TESTIFIED THIS WAS A SMALL AREA WHERE YOU FOUND HIM, RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO LIFT A 180-POUND, 5/11 -- MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. Q: BY MS. CLARK: -- DEAD PERSON FROM A SMALL AREA LIKE THAT? THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: NOT FROM A SMALL AREA LIKE THAT, BUT I HAVE LIFTED A 5/11 DEAD PERSON. Q: BY MS. CLARK: ABOUT 180, 190 POUNDS? A: I REALLY DON'T REMEMBER THE WEIGHT. Q: PRETTY HARD TO DO? A: YES. Q: ESPECIALLY IN A SMALL AREA LIKE THAT. A: RIGHT. Q: DO YOU KNOW THAT -- DID YOU KNOW THAT ONE OF THE CORONER'S INVESTIGATORS THAT REMOVED THE BODY WAS A WOMAN? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. COCHRAN: HE WASN'T EVEN THERE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. DANGEROUS TERRITORY. MS. CLARK: OKAY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: SIR, ARE YOU ACQUAINTED WITH A MAN BY THE NAME OF LIEUTENANT SPANGLER? A: YES. Q: DID YOU SEE HIM AT THE BUNDY SCENE THAT NIGHT? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND WHEN THE DETECTIVE -- BEFORE DETECTIVES LEFT TO GO TO ROCKINGHAM TO NOTIFY THE DEFENDANT, WAS LIEUTENANT SPANGLER AT THE SCENE? MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: WAS HE AT THE SCENE BEFORE THEY LEFT OR -- Q: BY MS. CLARK: AT THE TIME THAT THEY LEFT, WAS LIEUTENANT SPANGLER AT THE SCENE IF YOU KNOW? A: I DIDN'T SEE HIM LEAVE. I DON'T KNOW. I SAW HIM BEFORE. THEY HAD TALKED ABOUT LEAVING. I DIDN'T SEE HIM LEAVE. I DON'T KNOW IF HE WAS STILL THERE OR NOT. Q: YOU DON'T KNOW IF LIEUTENANT SPANGLER WAS STILL THERE WHEN THE DETECTIVES LEFT OR NOT? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: BUT YOU DID SEE HIM AT THE SCENE BEFORE THEY LEFT? A: YES, I DID. MS. CLARK: NOTHING FURTHER. THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN. MR. COCHRAN: JUST THREE QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR. FURTHER RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN: Q: DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY CARS WENT TO ROCKINGHAM? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: AND WITH REGARD TO THAT PHOTOGRAPH OF MR. GOLDMAN WHERE YOU SAW THAT HE WAS COVERED WITH BLOOD, YOU WOULD EXPECT ALSO THAT HIS ASSAILANT WOULD ALSO BE COVERED WITH BLOOD; WOULD YOU NOT? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. MR. COCHRAN: HE CAN ANSWER THAT. IF HE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT, HE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. COCHRAN: I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. ALL RIGHT. OFFICER RISKE, YOU ARE NOW EXCUSED. PLEASE DON'T DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH ANYBODY OTHER THAN THE LAWYERS FROM THE CASE. AND WE'LL -- I'M GOING TO EXCUSE YOU FOR TODAY. YOU MAY BE RECALLED, HOWEVER. THE WITNESS: THANK YOU. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S NEXT WITNESS. MS. CLARK: MAY I HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. HOW ABOUT IF WE GET THE WITNESS ON HIS OR HER WAY THOUGH? MS. CLARK: HE'S DOWN. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, PEOPLE CALL DETECTIVE ROSSI. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WHAT'S SERGEANT ROSSI'S FIRST NAME? MS. CLARK: DAVE. THE COURT: DAVID. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. DARDEN: I DON'T SEE HIM DIRECTLY OUTSIDE THE COURT, YOUR HONOR. MS. CLARK: MAY I CALL UPSTAIRS, PLEASE? THE COURT: PLEASE. MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE APPROACH OFF THE RECORD? THE COURT: SURE. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) THE COURT: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M SURE YOU WILL RECALL THE ELEVATORS IN THIS BUILDING. (BRIEF PAUSE.) THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. I AM SORRY. THE COURT: IT'S ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SERGEANT ROSSI, WOULD YOU COME OVER HERE, STAND BY THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE. MRS. ROBERTSON. DAVID ROSSI, CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE PEOPLE, WAS SWORN AND TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS: THE CLERK: RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE. YOU DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU MAY GIVE IN THE CAUSE NOW PENDING BEFORE THIS COURT, SHALL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? THE WITNESS: YES, I DO. THE CLERK: PLEASE HAVE A SEAT ON THE WITNESS STAND AND STATE AND SPELL YOUR FIRST AND LAST NAMES FOR THE RECORD. THE WITNESS: D-A-V-I-D R-O-S-S-I. THE CLERK: THANK YOU. THE COURT: MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CLARK: Q: SERGEANT ROSSI, CAN YOU PLEASE TELL US WHAT YOU DO FOR A LIVING? A: I'M A SERGEANT WITH THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT PRESENTLY ASSIGNED TO WEST LOS ANGELES DIVISION. Q: AND HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN AT THAT ASSIGNMENT? A: I HAVE WORKED WEST LOS ANGELES FOR JUST ABOUT FIVE YEARS. Q: HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A POLICE OFFICER? A: UMM, IT WILL BE 26 YEARS IN MAY, THIS COMING MAY. Q: 26? HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A SERGEANT, SIR? A: I MADE SERGEANT IN NOVEMBER OF 1979. SO I THINK THAT MAKES IT PRETTY CLOSE TO 15 YEARS. Q: WHAT ARE YOUR -- YOU SAID YOU ARE CURRENTLY ASSIGNED AS A WATCH COMMANDER? A: I'M CURRENTLY ASSIGNED AS THE MORNING ASSISTANT WATCH COMMANDER. WE REFER TO THAT AS AN AWC. MY DUTIES ARE THE SAME AS A LIEUTENANT WATCH COMMANDER WHEN THE LIEUTENANT IS OFF; AND WHEN HE'S ON, IF WE'RE BOTH WORKING, IF HE'S NOT OFF, THEN I ASSIST HIM OR HER. Q: WHAT DO YOU DO? WHAT DOES A WATCH COMMANDER DO? A: A WATCH COMMANDER OVERSEES THE ACTIVITIES OF ALL OF THE POLICE OFFICERS AND FIELD SERGEANTS ON THE WATCH OR SHIFT. THE WATCH COMMANDER APPROVES ALL BOOKINGS OF THE POLICE OFFICERS. OCCASIONALLY, I'LL APPROVE BOOKINGS FOR CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL OFFICERS THAT USE OUR FACILITY. I REVIEW AND APPROVE ALL ARREST REPORTS AND CRIME REPORTS. AND IN ADDITION TO HANDLING USUALLY A MOUNTAIN OF UNRELATED ADMINISTRATIVE PAPERWORK, I RESPOND TO THE FIELD FOR VARIOUS REASONS. Q: NOW, UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THE FIELD? A: I'LL GO OUT IN THE FIELD IF AN OFFICER OR SERGEANT REQUESTS MY PRESENCE ON A PARTICULAR SITUATION, AND THEN THERE ARE SOME INCIDENTS THAT OCCUR THAT THE DEPARTMENT MANDATES THAT I RESPOND TO, AND GENERALLY VIOLENT CRIMES AND OF COURSE ANY KIND OF HOMICIDE I HAVE TO RESPOND TO. Q: IN ANY KIND OF HOMICIDE? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND WHAT ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO DO -- WHAT ARE YOUR DUTIES WITH RESPECT TO, FOR EXAMPLE, A HOMICIDE SCENE THAT YOU RESPOND TO? A: MY JOB IS TO GO OUT TO THE SCENE AND TO ENSURE THAT THE SCENE IS PROPERLY SECURED AND ANY OBVIOUS EVIDENCE IS PROTECTED UNTIL THE INVESTIGATORS GET THERE. PRIOR TO LEAVING TO GO OUT IN THE FIELD, THERE ARE CERTAIN NOTIFICATIONS THAT I HAVE TO MAKE TO THE DETECTIVES AND TO MY COMMAND STAFF. Q: AND WHY IS THAT? WHY DO YOU HAVE TO MAKE THOSE NOTIFICATIONS BEFORE YOU LEAVE THE STATION TO YOUR COMMAND STAFF AND OFFICERS? A: AND TO DETECTIVES? Q: AND TO DETECTIVES? A: WELL, I GENERALLY MAKE THE NOTIFICATIONS TO DETECTIVES FIRST BECAUSE I NEED TO GET THEM ROLLING. THEY ARE THE OFFICERS THAT WILL ULTIMATELY HANDLE THE INVESTIGATION. AND THEN I WILL GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE VARIOUS COMMAND STAFF NOTIFICATIONS BECAUSE OUR COMMAND STAFF NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, ESPECIALLY IN HOMICIDE CASES. Q: AND BY COMMAND STAFF, YOU MEAN THE PEOPLE ABOVE YOU? A: YES. YES, MA'AM. Q: NOW, DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION, SIR, TO THE DATE OF JUNE THE 12TH, 1994, AS OF THAT DATE, WERE YOU ASSIGNED AS THE ASSISTANT WATCH COMMANDER AT THE WEST L.A. STATION? A: YES, I WAS, ON MORNING WATCH. Q: DO YOU RECALL GETTING A CALL FROM OFFICER ROBERT RISKE? A: YES. ACTUALLY I WAS ASSIGNED AS THE WATCH COMMANDER THAT NIGHT BECAUSE THE LIEUTENANT WAS OFF. SO I WAS SITTING IN AS THE WATCH COMMANDER. YES, I DID RECEIVE A CALL FROM OFFICER RISKE. Q: REMEMBER WHAT TIME IT WAS THAT YOU GOT THAT CALL FROM HIM? A: I BELIEVE IT WAS SOMEWHERE AROUND 12:30, 12:35 IN THE MORNING. Q: SIR, IS YOUR MEMORY FRESH WITH REGARD TO WHAT TIME YOU GOT THE CALL FROM OFFICER RISKE? A: IT'S NOT REAL FRESH, NO. I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT ANYTHING SINCE THEN. HOWEVER, IT SEEMS LIKE IT WAS SOMETHING AFTER MIDNIGHT. Q: SHORTLY AFTER MIDNIGHT? A: YES. MS. CLARK: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. (BRIEF PAUSE.) Q: BY MS. CLARK: SIR, WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION IF I SHOWED YOU A COPY OF THE CRIME SCENE LOG AS TO WHAT TIME YOU WERE CALLED? MR. BAILEY: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. HE HASN'T SAID HIS RECOLLECTION NEEDS REFRESHING. MS. CLARK: I THINK THAT'S WHAT HIS LAST ANSWER EXACTLY WAS. THE COURT: NO. HIS LAST ANSWER, HE SAYS SHORTLY AFTER MIDNIGHT, YES, FIRST CALL. CRIME SCENE LOG IS WHEN THEY GOT THERE. MS. CLARK: HE ALSO TESTIFIED, YOUR HONOR, THAT HE THOUGHT IT WAS AROUND 12:30 AND THAT HE -- SHALL I HAVE HIS ANSWERS READ BACK, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: NO. I'VE JUST READ THEM MYSELF. MS. CLARK: AND I ASKED HIM IF HIS MEMORY WAS FRESH WITH RESPECT TO WHEN HE GOT THE CALL AND HE SAID IT'S NOT REAL FRESH, NO. OBVIOUSLY HE HASN'T LOOKED AT ANYTHING SINCE THEN. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION IF I WERE TO SHOW YOU THE CRIME SCENE LOG? A: YES, IT WOULD. Q: THANK YOU YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH HOW THESE ARE PREPARED; ARE YOU NOT, SIR? A: YES, I AM. Q: SHOWING YOU THE LOG WITH THE ENTRY OF OFFICER RISKE FOR HIS TIME OF ARRIVAL -- A: IT SHOWS OFFICER RISKE ARRIVING -- THE COURT: EXCUSE ME. HOLD ON. SERGEANT, WOULD YOU JUST READ THAT TO YOURSELF AND SEE IF THAT REFRESHES YOUR RECOLLECTION. THE WITNESS: (WITNESS COMPLIES.) YES. SOMEWHAT, YES. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND HAVING SEEN THAT CRIME SCENE LOG, SIR, YOUR MEMORY IS SOMEWHAT REFRESHED AS TO WHEN YOU GOT THE CALL FROM OFFICER RISKE? A: YES. Q: AND WHAT IS YOUR ESTIMATE OF THE TIME YOU GOT THAT CALL, SIR? A: AROUND 12 -- 0025, 25 MINUTES AFTER 12:00. MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT. IT APPEARS THAT HE'S READING FROM A PIECE OF PAPER. THE COURT: WOULD YOU TAKE THAT AWAY, PLEASE, MISS CLARK? MS. CLARK: HE DOESN'T APPEAR THAT HE'S DOING THAT AS A MATTER OF FACT WHEN HE TESTIFIED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: LET ME POINT SOMETHING OUT TO YOU, SIR. DO YOU SEE THE TIME OF ARRIVAL -- A: YES. Q: -- FOR OFFICER RISKE THERE? A: YES. 20 MINUTES AFTER 12:00. Q: UH-HUH. AND THEN -- AND THAT HELPS YOU, SIR, TO ASSIST, TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY AS TO WHEN YOU GOT THE CALL? MR. BAILEY: OBJECTION. LEADING. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MS. CLARK: IT'S FOUNDATIONAL. HE'S ALREADY SAID THAT. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. YOU CAN ASK HIM A NON-LEADING WAY. Q: BY MS. CLARK: HOW DOES THAT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION WITH RESPECT TO WHEN YOU GOT THE CALL FROM HIM? A: WELL, I'M JUST -- I'M FIGURING IF OFFICER RISKE ARRIVED AT 20 MINUTES AFTER 12:00, HE PHONED ME SHORTLY THEREAFTER. Q: THANK YOU. AND WHAT DID -- DID OFFICER RISKE GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO WHAT HE WAS THERE -- WHAT HE WAS AT THE SCENE FOR? A: OFFICER RISKE TOLD ME THAT HE WAS ON THE SCENE OF A DOUBLE HOMICIDE. Q: AND DID HE GIVE YOU A LOCATION? A: YES. HE GAVE ME THE ADDRESS. Q: AND WHAT WAS THAT? A: 875 SOUTH BUNDY. Q: AND DID HE TELL YOU -- AND DID HE GIVE YOU ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THE SCENE AS HE FOUND IT AT THAT TIME? A: HE TOLD ME THAT THERE WAS A FEMALE AND A MALE VICTIM OUTSIDE OF THE LOCATION. HE TOLD ME IT WAS A CONDOMINIUM AND HE TOLD ME THAT THE DOOR WAS OPEN TO THE CONDOMINIUM, THE FRONT DOOR, AND HE SAID HE HAD NOT -- HE HAD NOT CLEARED THE HOUSE YET AND HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HE HAD IN THE HOUSE. Q: WHAT DOES THAT MEAN, HAD NOT CLEARED THE HOUSE YET? A: THAT MEANS THAT IT'S UNKNOWN WHAT HAS TAKEN PLACE IF ANYTHING INSIDE THE HOUSE, THAT THERE MAY BE OTHER VICTIMS IN THE HOUSE, BECAUSE THIS WAS SUCH A VIOLENT CRIME, OR SUSPECTS, AND SO IT WAS IMPERATIVE THAT HE GO THROUGH THE HOUSE AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WAS OKAY IN THAT RESPECT. Q: AND DID YOU GIVE HIM SOME INSTRUCTION, SIR? A: YES, I DID. I TOLD HIM TO -- FIRST, I ASKED HIM IF HE HAD REQUESTED A SUPERVISOR, AND HE SAID THAT HE HAD. AND THEN I TOLD HIM, OKAY, GO AHEAD AND CHECK THE HOUSE AND MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE NO MORE VICTIMS AND TELL THE RESPONDING SUPERVISOR TO CALL ME BACK AS SOON AS HE COULD. Q: DID YOU GET ANOTHER CALL THEN FROM THE -- FROM SOMEONE AT THE SCENE? A: YES. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, I RECEIVED A TELEPHONE CALL FROM SERGEANT MARTY COON. Q: AND DID HE GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION AS WELL? A: HE TOLD ME THAT -- THAT HE HAD RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM OFFICER RISKE, THAT THEY HAD CLEARED THE HOUSE, THAT THEY HAD FOUND TWO YOUNG CHILDREN IN THE HOUSE AND THAT HE HAD A UNIT EN ROUTE TO THE LOCATION TO TRANSPORT, TO TAKE THE CHILDREN INTO PROTECTIVE CUSTODY AND TRANSPORT THEM TO WEST LOS ANGELES DIVISION. MS. CLARK: WOULD THIS BE A GOOD TIME? THE COURT: MISS CLARK? MS. CLARK: YES. I'M ASSUMING THE COURT WANTS TO TAKE A NOON BREAK. I'M GOING TO MOVE INTO A DIFFERENT AREA AT THIS POINT. WANT ME TO -- THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE NOON HOUR AT THIS TIME. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU; DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T LET ANYBODY CONTACT, COMMUNICATE WITH YOU, DO NOT CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS ON THE MATTER UNTIL IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU. WE'LL SEE YOU BACK HERE AT 1:30. SERGEANT ROSSI, YOU MAY STEP DOWN. YOU ARE ORDERED TO RETURN HERE AT 1:30. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS, 1:30. (AT 12:00 P.M., THE NOON RECESS WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:30 P.M. OF THE SAME DAY.) LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1995 1:30 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. ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, ANYTHING WE MEDIA TO TAKE UP BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURORS TO JOIN US. ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE. (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED. SERGEANT ROSSI, WOULD YOU RESUME THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE. DAVID ROSSI, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE NOON RECESS, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS: THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON. THE COURT: THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE BEEN JOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY. MISS CLARK, YOU MAY CONTINUE YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MS. CLARK: Q: I THINK WHERE WE LEFT OFF, SIR, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU GOT A CALL FROM SERGEANT MARTY COON WHO TOLD YOU ABOUT A DOUBLE HOMICIDE? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND DID HE INDICATE ANYTHING ELSE TO YOU ABOUT THE NATURE OF THAT CASE? A: HE CONFIRMED WHAT OFFICER RISKE HAD SAID ABOUT A MALE AND A FEMALE VICTIM AND HE HAD TOLD ME -- HE TOLD ME AT THAT POINT THAT THE HOUSE HAD BEEN CLEARED AND THAT THERE WERE NO MORE VICTIMS IN THE HOUSE. Q: DID HE INDICATE ANYTHING TO YOU WITH RESPECT TO WHAT THE POSSIBLE IDENTITY OF ONE OF THE VICTIMS MIGHT BE? A: HE TOLD ME THAT HE WAS PRETTY SURE THAT THE FEMALE VICTIM WAS NICOLE SMITH -- EXCUSE ME -- NICOLE SIMPSON. Q: BUT DID HE KNOW FOR SURE AT THAT POINT? A: HE DIDN'T KNOW FOR SURE. HE THOUGHT THERE WAS A PRETTY GOOD CHANCE THAT IS WHO IT WAS. HE WAS TOLD BY ONE OF THE OFFICERS, I DON'T KNOW WHO IT WAS, THAT NICOLE SIMPSON DID LIVE AT THAT LOCATION. Q: WAS THERE ANY INDICATION AS TO THE POSSIBLE IDENTITY OF THE MALE VICTIM? A: NO. Q: DID YOU GIVE HIM SOME INSTRUCTION AT THAT POINT? A: I ASKED HIM IF THE CRIME SCENE HAD BEEN SECURED AND HE INDICATED THAT IT HAD AND I TOLD HIM THAT I WOULD RESPOND FROM THE POLICE STATION AS SOON AS I COULD, THAT I HAD NOTIFICATIONS TO MAKE, TELEPHONIC NOTIFICATIONS. Q: AND DID YOU MAKE THOSE NOTIFICATIONS? A: YES, I DID. Q: WHO DID YOU NOTIFY? A: I MADE SIX TELEPHONIC NOTIFICATIONS TO DETECTIVES AND MY COMMAND STAFF. THE FIRST TELEPHONE CALL I MADE WAS TO DETECTIVE FRANK SPANGLER, WHO IS THE COMMANDING OFFICER OF WEST LOS ANGELES DETECTIVES. Q: IS HE A LIEUTENANT? A: LIEUTENANT, YES, MA'AM. THERE WAS NO ONE HOME THERE; HOWEVER, I DID GET AN ANSWERING MACHINE AND I LEFT A MESSAGE ON THE MACHINE. Q: NOW, IS HE OF HIGHER RANK THAN THE DETECTIVES? A: YES, HE IS. Q: AND WHO ELSE DID YOU CALL? A: I THEN CALLED DETECTIVE RON PHILLIPS. HE WAS HOME. AND I TOLD HIM WHAT WE HAD AND THE LOCATION AND HE INDICATED TO ME THAT HE WOULD BE RESPONDING VERY SHORTLY THEREAFTER AND THAT HE WOULD PICK UP OR AT LEAST MEET DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN, THAT I DID NOT HAVE TO CALL HIM. Q: OKAY. AND WHO ELSE DID YOU CALL? A: I THEN CALLED WEST L.A. AREA COMMANDING OFFICER, BOB KURTH. Q: WHAT IS HIS RANK? A: CAPTAIN. Q: IS THAT ABOVE A LIEUTENANT? A: YES, IT IS. Q: WHO ELSE DID YOU CALL? A: I THEN NOTIFIED DEPUTY CHIEF RON FRANKLE WHO IS THE COMMANDING OFFICER OF OPERATIONS WEST BUREAU. Q: AND IS HE ABOVE OR BELOW CAPTAIN KURTH IN TERMS OF RANK? A: HE IS ABOVE CAPTAIN KURTH. Q: AND WHO ELSE DID YOU CALL? A: AND THEN I PHONED THE ASSISTANT COMMANDING OFFICER OF OPERATIONS WEST BUREAU WHO IS COMMANDER BUSHY WHO IS JUST UNDER DEPUTY CHIEF FRANKLE. Q: NOW, DEPUTY CHIEF RON FRANKEL AND COMMANDER BUSHEY THEN BOTH OUTRANK LIEUTENANT SPANGLER? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THEY OUTRANK ALL THE DETECTIVES AS WELL? A: YES, THEY DO. Q: AND WHO ELSE DID YOU CALL? A: THE LAST PHONE CALL I MADE WAS TO THE WEST L.A. PATROL CAPTAIN, CONSTANCE DIAL. Q: CONNIE? A: CONNIE DIAL, YES. Q: IS IT COMMON TO MAKE ALL THOSE NOTIFICATIONS WHENEVER YOU GET A HOMICIDE? A: IT IS COMMON TO MAKE THE NOTIFICATIONS TO THE DETECTIVES AND TO THE COMMAND STAFF OF THE -- OF WEST L.A. -- OF YOUR AREA AND DIVISION. AS FAR AS THE OPERATIONS WEST BUREAU COMMAND STAFF, DEPUTY CHIEF FRANKLE AND BUSHEY, I WAS TOLD TO MAKE THOSE NOTIFICATIONS BY CAPTAIN KURTH. Q: WHY? A: BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBLE NOTORIETY OF THIS PARTICULAR INCIDENT. Q: AND AFTER YOU MADE THOSE NOTIFICATIONS, WHAT DID YOU DO? A: I THEN WAS INFORMED BY MY DESK OFFICER THAT THERE HAD BEEN SOME WITNESSES FROM THE LOCATION TRANSPORTED TO THE WEST LOS ANGELES POLICE STATION AND THAT THE TWO CHILDREN HAD ARRIVED. I WAS TOLD THAT THE TWO -- THE WITNESSES, OTHER THAN THE CHILDREN, WERE UPSTAIRS IN DETECTIVES AND THAT THERE WAS AN OFFICER WITH THEM, AND I WAS INFORMED THAT THE TWO CHILDREN WERE IN OUR CONFERENCE ROOM, SO I WENT OVER AND I LOOKED IN THE CONFERENCE ROOM AND I SAW THE TWO CHILDREN IN THERE WITH -- WITH ONE OF MY OFFICERS AND I MADE SURE THAT THEY WERE OKAY. I DIDN'T SPEAK WITH THEM AT THAT TIME, BUT THEY SEEMED TO BE OKAY. Q: AND THEN YOU LEFT? A: YES. THEN I INFORMED THE DESK THAT I WAS GOING TO BE EN ROUTE TO THE LOCATION ON BUNDY AND WE CHECKED OUT A POLICE CAR AND I WAS DRIVEN TO THE LOCATION BY A SERGEANT THAT HAD BEEN IN THE STATION WITH ME BY THE NAME OF SERGEANT KURT HUSSEY. THE COURT: HOW DO YOU SPELL HUSSEY? THE WITNESS: H-U-S-S-E-Y. THE COURT: THANK YOU. Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT TIME WAS IT WHEN YOU GOT TO THE SCENE AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY, SIR? A: I BELIEVE I ARRIVED AT THE SCENE VERY CLOSE TO 0130 HOURS, 1:30 IN THE MORNING, BETWEEN -- I THINK IT WAS RIGHT ABOUT 1:30, YES. Q: OKAY. AND WHAT DID YOU -- WHERE DID YOU PARK? A: THE POLICE VEHICLE THAT I WAS IN WAS PARKED AT THE INTERSECTION OF BUNDY AND DOROTHY. I EXITED THE VEHICLE AND I WAS APPROACHED BY DETECTIVE -- EXCUSE ME -- BY SERGEANT MARTY COON AND OFFICER RISKE. Q: AND THEY APPROACHED YOU ON FOOT? A: YES, THEY DID. Q: WHERE? A: BEG YOUR PARDON? Q: WHERE WAS THAT THAT THEY APPROACHED YOU? A: THAT WAS RIGHT THERE AT THE INTERSECTION, CLOSE TO THE INTERSECTION OF BUNDY AND DOROTHY. Q: WHAT WAS THE FIRST THING YOU DID WHEN YOU GOT THERE? A: THE FIRST THING I DID WAS TAKE A LOOK AT THE FRONT OF THE CRIME SCENE AREA TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS SECURED, AND I SAW THAT A POLICE VEHICLE WAS PARKED AT DOROTHY AND BUNDY. I SAW A POLICE VEHICLE WAS PARKED AT GORHAM AND BUNDY SO AS TO NOT ALLOW ANY TYPE OF VEHICULAR OR PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC TO COME THROUGH THOSE AREAS. I ASKED SERGEANT MARTY COON IF THE BACK HAD BEEN SECURED AND HE SAID, YES, IT WAS SECURED THE SAME WAY THE FRONT WAS AT THE ALLEYWAY AGAIN AT DOROTHY AND NORTH TO GORHAM. I SAW THAT THE FRONT HAD BEEN ALSO SECURED BY YELLOW POLICE BANNER TAPE AND THAT APPEARED TO BE PROPER TO ME. I ASKED THEM IF THERE WAS ANY IN THE REAR AND HE INDICATED THAT THERE WAS, BLOCKING -- AGAIN, BLOCKING OFF THE THOROUGHFARE OF THE ALLEYWAY. AT THAT POINT I MADE A DETERMINATION THAT THE CRIME SCENE WAS PROPERLY SECURED AND I ASKED SERGEANT COON AND OFFICER RISKE TO ESCORT ME UP TO WHERE THEY HAD INDICATED THAT THE VICTIMS WERE. Q: NOW, IS THAT PART OF YOUR DUTIES, SIR, WHEN YOU RESPOND TO A HOMICIDE SCENE, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CRIME SCENE IS POSSIBLY SECURED, THE TAPE WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE? A: YES, THAT IS MY PRIMARY DUTY. Q: AND IN THAT CONNECTION, SIR, IS IT YOUR DUTY ALSO TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PERIMETER, THAT IS, WHERE THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IS PUT UP, IS IN THE PROPER LOCATION? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: WHAT IS IMPORTANT ABOUT THAT? A: THE FACT THAT WE ARE ABLE TO KEEP THAT CRIME SCENE AS SECURE AS POSSIBLE UNTIL DETECTIVES GET THERE. Q: IS IT IMPORTANT THAT YOU MAKE SURE THAT ENOUGH -- THAT A CERTAIN AREA AROUND THE CRIME SCENE ITSELF IS CORDONED OFF? A: THAT'S CORRECT. THAT IS WHAT I DID. WE CORDONED OFF THE ENTIRE CRIME SCENE. Q: WAS THE TRAFFIC ON BUNDY BLOCKED? A: YES, IT WAS. Q: DID YOU HAPPEN TO NOTICE ANY ANIMAL WHEN YOU GOT THERE? A: YES. WHEN I FIRST ARRIVED THERE WAS A MALE CAUCASIAN HOLDING A WHITE AKITA ON A LEASH AND HE WAS -- HE AND THE DOG WERE RIGHT THERE AT THE INTERSECTION OF BUNDY AND DOROTHY. MS. CLARK: OKAY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: THIS IS FROM P-40, YOUR HONOR. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-40-A. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. Q: ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE THAT? A: YES, I AM. Q: AND DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE DOG SHOWN IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? A: YES. THAT APPEARS TO BE THE DOG THAT WAS THERE WHEN I ARRIVED. Q: AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY? HE WAS AT THE INTERSECTION? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: OF BUNDY AND DOROTHY? A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) Q: WAS THAT YES? A: YES, THAT'S CORRECT. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-51, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE THAT, SIR? A: YES, I DO. Q: DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS DEPICTED THERE? A: YES. THAT IS THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY. Q: AND DO YOU SEE THE YELLOW TAPE THAT GOES ACROSS I GUESS IS IT BUNDY, THAT IT IS GOING ACROSS THERE? A: THAT'S CORRECT, GOING ACROSS BUNDY. Q: AND IS THAT THE CRIME SCENE TAPE AS YOU FOUND IT WHEN YOU CAME TO THE SCENE AT APPROXIMATELY 1:30 A.M.? A: YES. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-46. YOUR HONOR, YOU SHOULD CUT THE FEED FOR THIS FILM. Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS SHOWN THERE, SIR? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND IS THAT -- CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THAT IS? A: THAT IS THE POLICE BANNER TAPE STRETCHING UP IN FRONT OF THE BUNDY LOCATION. Q: OKAY. AND IS THAT HOW YOU FOUND IT WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT THE SCENE AT 1:30 A.M.? A: YES, THAT IS HOW IT WAS. MS. CLARK: NEXT. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-38, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS SHOWN IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? A: THAT APPEARS TO BE THE REAR OF THE CONDOMINIUM, THE ALLEYWAY. Q: AND DO YOU SEE THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: YES, I DO. Q: BOTH IN THE FOREGROUND AND IN THE BACKGROUND THERE? A: YES, I DO. Q: AND CAN YOU TELL US IF THAT IS THE MANNER IN WHICH YOU SAW IT TAPED OFF WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT 1:30 A.M.? A: YES, THAT IS HOW IT WAS. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHEN YOU -- AFTER YOU MET WITH THE SERGEANT AND WITH OFFICER RISKE, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT? WHAT DID YOU DO? A: AFTER I WAS CONVINCED THAT THE AREA WAS SEALED PROPERLY, I THEN ASKED THEM TO ESCORT ME UP TO THE LOCATION SO I COULD VIEW THE VICTIMS. MS. CLARK: YES, YOUR HONOR, IF YOU COULD CUT THE FEED. THE COURT: YES. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-42, YOUR HONOR. MS. CLARK: NO. BACK UP. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS P-43-B, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS SHOWN NOW, SIR? A: YES, I DO. THAT APPEARS TO BE THE WALKWAY LEADING UP TO THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. Q: AND DOES IT APPEAR TO BE IN THE MANNER THAT YOU FOUND IT? A: YES, IT IS. Q: AT APPROXIMATELY 1:30 A.M.? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: HOW IS IT THAT YOU APPROACHED TO THE AREA OF THE MAILBOX? A: THE AREA OF THE WHAT, MA'AM? Q: THE MAILBOX IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH, IF YOU CAN SEE? HOW DID YOU DO THAT? A: I WALKED UP THE GRASSY PART OF THE FRONT JUST TO THE LEFT OF WHERE THE VICTIMS ARE AND JUST TO THE LEFT OF WHERE THAT BOX IS. Q: OKAY. A: I WALKED UP TO THE GATE. Q: CAN YOU LOOK AT YOUR MONITOR, SIR? A: PARDON? Q: DO YOU SEE THE RED ARROW? A: YES. Q: CAN YOU TELL US WHERE TO PUT THE RED ARROW THAT SHOWS THE PATHWAY YOU TOOK? A: A LITTLE FARTHER OVER TO THE LEFT. A LITTLE FARTHER OVER. PROBABLY RIGHT AROUND THERE, (INDICATING). Q: AND THEN YOU WALKED UPWARD FROM THERE? A: THAT'S CORRECT, YES. Q: AND IS THAT TRACING YOUR PATH? A: YES, IT IS. Q: AND YOU TOOK THAT PATH ALL THE WAY UP TO -- A: JUST ABOUT AS FAR AS I COULD GO WHICH THERE WAS A FENCE THERE. Q: UP TO THAT MAILBOX THEN OR WHERE THAT ACTUAL CALL BOX IS? A: THAT CALL BOX, YES, MA'AM. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE COURT: THERE SHOULD BE NO PHOTOGRAPHY OF ANY OF THESE CRIME SCENES OR THE VICTIMS OR VICTIM. THANK YOU. MS. CLARK: AND PLACE THE ARROW BY THE CALL BOX AND THAT -- SHALL WE MARK THIS AND PRINT IT AS 43-B-1? MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, MAYBE WE COULD PUT THE WITNESS' INITIALS ON THE PHOTO. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO SORT THESE ALL OUT LATER ON. THE COURT: YES. MS. CLARK: YES. THAT'S FINE. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU PUT A "D.R." UP IN THE UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER, PLEASE. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. Q: NOW, FROM THAT LOCATION, SIR, WAS OFFICER RISKE WITH YOU? A: YES, HE WAS. Q: AND DID HE HAVE A FLASHLIGHT WITH HIM? A: YES, HE DID. Q: AND DID HE POINT CERTAIN THINGS OUT TO YOU? A: YES, HE DID. Q: ALL RIGHT. WHAT WERE YOU -- CAN WE CUT THIS NOW? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: JUST A MOMENT, PLEASE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, IF I MAY HAVE A MOMENT. THE MARKINGS ARE NOT SHOWING UP ON THE PRINT FRAME FOR THE PRINTER. MR. BAILEY: SO LONG AS WE HAVE A MOMENT, MIGHT WE PUT "43-B-1" RIGHT ON THE LOWER CORNER? MS. CLARK: WE ARE GOING TO PUT IT ON THE BACK OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. (PEO'S 43-B-1 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) (BRIEF PAUSE.) (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: APPARENTLY IT WILL NOT PRINT WITH THE MARKINGS ON IT. THE COURT: WHY IS THAT? MS. CLARK: WHY IS THAT? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS POINT IN TIME I'M NOT SURE. THE MARKINGS ARE NOT SHOWING UP ON THE PHOTO CHECK MARK. I WILL CHECK THE ACTUAL PRINT WHICH I CAN PRINT AT THIS TIME. THE COURT: IF NECESSARY, WE CAN HAVE THE WITNESS ACTUALLY DRAW ON THE PHOTOGRAPH. MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE A BLACK MARKER? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: MR. FAIRTLOUGH, WILL A BLACK MARKER WRITE ON ONE OF THOSE PRINTOUTS? MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS PARTICULAR ONE WILL, YOUR HONOR. IT IS A -- IT IS A SHARPIE TYPE THAT IT WILL ACTUALLY MARK ON THE PHOTOGRAPH. THE COURT: GREAT. THANK YOU. MS. CLARK: MAY I PROCEED? THE COURT: YOU MAY. MISS CLARK. MS. CLARK: NOW, WHAT -- I'M SORRY. Q: WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE WHEN THE FLASHLIGHT WAS SHINED ON THE VICTIMS? A: I SAW A FEMALE VICTIM LYING IN A POOL OF BLOOD AND SHE APPEARED TO BE WEARING A BLACK DRESS. Q: OKAY. WHAT ELSE COULD YOU SEE? A: ON THE OTHER SIDE OF HER I SAW THE MALE VICTIM AND IT APPEARED TO ME THAT THE MALE VICTIM WAS NOT COMPLETELY LYING DOWN. IT WAS -- HE APPEARED IN A SEMI-SEATING SLUMPED TYPE OF A POSITION. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: COULD YOU CUT THE FEED, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: YES. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND IS THAT -- DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS SHOWN THERE, SIR? A: YES, I DO. Q: IS THAT THE MALE VICTIM YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBED? A: YES, IT IS. Q: AND IS THAT THE POSITION IN WHICH YOU SAW HIM? A: THAT'S CORRECT, YES. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WHICH EXHIBIT IS THIS? MS. CLARK: THIS IS 43-A. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: E. MS. CLARK: E. THE COURT: 43-E. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, P-59. AGAIN, THE FEED SHOULD BE OFF FOR THIS. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND CAN YOU SEE ANYTHING ELSE THAT IS VISIBLE TO YOU AT APPROXIMATELY 1:30 A.M. ON JUNE 13TH? A: I REMEMBER SEEING A WHITE ENVELOPE OR AT LEAST A LIGHT-COLORED ENVELOPE AND A DARK KNIT CAP. I SAW A BLOCK GLOVE. Q: I'M SORRY? A: I SAW A BLACK GLOVE. Q: GLOVE? A: YES. Q: DID IT APPEAR TO BE LEATHER? A: YES, IT DID. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, P-56-H. THE COURT: 56-H. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-55, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. P-55. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER, YOUR HONOR, P-60. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 60. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. (PEO'S 60 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH) Q: BY MS. CLARK: CAN YOU SEE WHAT IS BEING POINTED TO IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH, SIR? A: YES, I DID. Q: DO YOU RECALL SEEING THIS AT 1:30 A.M. ON THE NIGHT -- THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE 13TH? A: YES, I DO. Q: IS THAT THE GLOVE YOU JUST DESCRIBED? A: YES, IT IS. Q: AND THE CAP YOU JUST DESCRIBED? A: PARDON ME? Q: AND THE CAP? A: YES. THE CAP ALSO, YES. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, AGAIN THE FEED WILL NEED TO BE CUT FOR THESE IMAGES. P-43-C. MS. CLARK: CUT THE FEED, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: YES. MS. CLARK: BACK UP. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 43-B. Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. SHOWING YOU THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, SIR, 43-B AND C, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE THEM? A: YES, I AM. Q: DO YOU SEE THE WALKWAY? A: YES. Q: THAT WALKWAY, IS THAT THE WALKWAY THAT GOES FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE FRONT STEPS OF THE CONDOMINIUM AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY? A: YES, IT IS. Q: AND DO YOU RECALL SEEING IT IN THAT CONDITION? A: YES, I DO. Q: DID YOU LOOK AT IT WHEN YOU WERE FIRST ARRIVED AT THE LOCATION? A: YES, I DID. Q: CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT YOU SAW? A: THERE WAS A LOT OF BLOOD THERE AND IN WITH THE BLOOD THERE WAS A LOT OF DOG PAWS. Q: DOG PAWS? A: PRINTS. Q: PAW PRINTS? A: YES. Q: DID YOU SEE ANY SHOEPRINTS ON THAT WALKWAY? A: NO, I DIDN'T. MS. CLARK: CUT IT. THANK YOU. Q: AFTER YOU MADE THE OBSERVATIONS THAT YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBED TO US, SIR, WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT? A: I THEN ASKED SERGEANT MARTY COON AND OFFICER RISKE TO ESCORT ME AROUND TO THE REAR OF THE LOCATION SO I COULD PREVIEW THAT AND THEY DID. WE WALKED, ON THE SIDEWALK ON THE BUNDY SIDEWALK. WE WALKED SOUTHBOUND TO DOROTHY AND THEN WE WALKED WESTBOUND DOROTHY TO THE ALLEYWAY. Q: AS YOU WALKED SOUTHBOUND ON BUNDY TO -- TOWARD DOROTHY, DID YOU NOTICE ANYTHING UNUSUAL ON THE SIDEWALK? A: AGAIN THERE WERE A LOT OF DOG PAW PRINTS GOING IN THAT DIRECTION. Q: BLOODY PAW PRINTS? A: YES, MA'AM. Q: AND THAT WAS GOING SOUTH ON BUNDY AROUND TO DOROTHY? A: THAT'S CORRECT. THEY CONTINUED ON WESTBOUND ON DOROTHY FOR PROBABLY HALFWAY BETWEEN BUNDY AND THE ALLEYWAY WHERE THEY FADED OUT. Q: DID YOU SEE ANY BLOODY SHOEPRINTS GOING SOUTHBOUND ON BUNDY? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: AND WHEN YOU -- WHERE DID YOU SEE THAT THE BLOODY PAW PRINTS FADED OUT? A: ABOUT HALFWAY BETWEEN THE ALLEYWAY AND THE BUNDY SIDEWALK. Q: ON DOROTHY? A: ON DOROTHY. ON THE SIDEWALK OF DOROTHY, YES. Q: WHERE DID YOU GO WHEN YOU CAME OUT -- WHEN YOU WENT WESTBOUND ON DOROTHY? A: TO THE ALLEYWAY AND WE MADE A RIGHT-HAND TURN AND PROCEEDED TO WALK NORTHBOUND IN THE ALLEYWAY TO THE REAR OF 875 BUNDY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS P-48-H. Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHEN YOU GOT TO THE REAR DRIVEWAY, SIR, WAS SOMETHING POINTED OUT TO YOU? A: YES. Q: WHAT WAS THAT? A: THERE WERE -- THERE WAS A JEEP PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY. I OBSERVED A WHITE-COLORED SPORTS CAR IN THE OPEN GARAGE, AND AS I ROUNDED THE JEEP AND WENT TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE JEEP, I WAS SHOWN SOME CHANGE ON THE GROUND AND THERE WAS ALSO SOME DROPLETS OF BLOOD. Q: AND LOOKING AT THE PHOTOGRAPHS -- PHOTOGRAPH NOW, CAN YOU TELL US IF YOU -- CAN YOU GET A CLOSE-UP OF THE BLOOD DROP. OKAY. DOES THAT -- LOOKING AT THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS, SIR, DOES THAT APPEAR TO BE THE BLOOD DROP AND THE CHANGE THAT YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBED SEEING IN THE REAR DRIVEWAY? A: THAT APPEARS TO BE, YES. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WHAT PHOTOS WERE THOSE, MISS CLARK? MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THE CHANGE IS P-48. MS. CLARK: P-48. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-48-J AND K AND BLOOD DROP IS P-48-I. MS. CLARK: THANKS. THE COURT: THANK YOU. Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, WAS THERE A REAR GATE THAT YOU APPROACHED IN THAT LOCATION, SIR? A: YES, THERE WAS. Q: AND DID YOU GO TO THE -- GO THROUGH THAT REAR GATE? A: THE GATE WAS OPENED AND OFFICER RISKE AND I WALKED DOWN THAT PATHWAY THAT BORDERS THE NORTH SIDE OF THE CONDOMINIUM. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS P-43-A, P-53-B, P-53-C, P-53-D, P-53-E AND P-53-F. MS. CLARK: OKAY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-53-E. MS. CLARK: THANKS. Q: HAVE YOU SEEN THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS, SIR? A: YES. Q: FIRST OF ALL, THE LOCATIONS SHOWN IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, THIS LAST SERIES YOU HAVE BEEN SHOWN, IS THAT THE REAR GATE YOU HAVE DESCRIBED? A: THAT APPEARS TO BE THE REAR GATE, YES. Q: AND DO YOU RECALL SEEING BLOOD ON THE GATE, THE LOWER RUNG WHERE IT WAS SHOWN IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS? A: YES, I DO. Q: NOW, YOU WENT THROUGH THAT REAR GATE THAT IS SHOWN HERE? A: YES. Q: AND FROM THIS VANTAGE POINT SHOWN IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH YOU ARE STANDING OUTSIDE THE REAR GATE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: YOU WENT THROUGH THAT GATE WITH OFFICER RISKE? A: YES, I DID. Q: WHERE DID YOU WALK? A: WE WALKED APPROXIMATELY HALFWAY TOWARD THE FRONT OF THE CONDOMINIUM, AT WHICH TIME I OBSERVED SOMEWHAT APPEARED TO BE BLOODY SHOE SOLE PRINTS ON THE GROUND, ON THE CONCRETE. Q: SO -- AND WHICH DIRECTION WERE THOSE SHOEPRINTS GOING, SIR? A: THEY WERE GOING TOWARD THE REAR OF THE CONDOMINIUM. Q: GOING FROM -- IN A DIRECTION THAT WOULD BE FROM WHERE THE VICTIMS LAY OUT TOWARD THE REAR GATE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND YOU DIDN'T SEE ANY OF THOSE UNTIL YOU GOT HALFWAY DOWN? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: SO THEY FADED OUT HALFWAY AWAY FROM THE VICTIMS? A: YES, THEY DID. Q: WHEN YOU SAW THOSE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS, WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT? A: I STOPPED AND INFORMED OFFICER RISKE THAT I DIDN'T WANT TO GO ANY FARTHER AND WE TURNED AROUND AND WALKED BACK OUT TO THE REAR OF THE COMPLEX. Q: NOW, WHEN YOU DID THAT, DID YOU TAKE CARE TO AVOID THE BLOOD THAT YOU SAW ON THE DRIVEWAY AND THE CHANGE? MR. BAILEY: OBJECTION, LEADING. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: ABSOLUTELY. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND THEN WHERE DID YOU GO? A: WE THEN RETURNED TO THE FRONT OF THE -- TO THE FRONT OF THE CONDO ON BUNDY. Q: WHEN YOU GOT TO THE FRONT OF THE CONDO ON BUNDY, WHAT DID YOU SEE? DID YOU SEE THAT DOG, BY THE WAY? A: DID I -- YES, I SAW THE DOG. Q: WHERE WAS IT WHEN YOU CAME BACK OUT? A: WHEN I CAME BACK OUT IT HAD BEEN SECURED WITH ITS LEASH TO A POLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET. Q: OKAY. AND THEN DID YOU STAY OUT IN FRONT OF THE CONDOMINIUM OR IN THE INTERSECTION? A: I REMAINED OUT THERE UNTIL THE DETECTIVES ARRIVED, THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND WHERE IS "OUT THERE" EXACTLY? A: AT THE -- IN THE STREET CLOSE TO THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY. IN BUNDY -- ACTUALLY ON BUNDY, YES. Q: NOW, WERE THERE OFFICERS GUARDING THE CRIME SCENE TAPE PREVENTING PEOPLE FROM COMING IN? A: YES, THERE WERE. Q: IN FRONT AND IN THE REAR? A: FRONT AND REAR, YES. Q: AND WHICH DETECTIVES ARRIVED FIRST? A: DETECTIVE RON PHILLIPS AND MARK FUHRMAN ARRIVED FIRST. Q: WERE THEY TOGETHER? A: YES, THEY WERE. Q: WHERE DID YOU FIRST MAKE CONTACT WITH THEM? A: THEY WALKED OVER TO ME WHERE I WAS STANDING ON BUNDY. Q: AND WERE THEY ON FOOT? A: THEY HAD PARKED THEIR VEHICLE ON DOROTHY AND THEY HAD WALKED OVER TO ME ON FOOT, YES. Q: AND WHERE ON DOROTHY WAS THAT? WAS THIS EAST OR WEST OF THE INTERSECTION WITH BUNDY? A: WHERE WAS WHAT? Q: WHERE THEY PARKED? A: WHERE THEY PARKED? THEY PARKED THEIR VEHICLE HEADING EASTBOUND ON DOROTHY JUST EAST OF BUNDY. Q: OKAY. SO IT WOULD BE EAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND YOU MET THEM OUT THERE IN THE STREET? A: YES. Q: DID YOU TALK TO THEM? A: YES, I DID. Q: WHAT DID YOU TELL THEM? A: I TOLD THEM WHAT WE HAD THERE IN REGARD TO THE TWO VICTIMS, AND I TOLD THEM THAT WE HAD THE CRIME SCENE SECURED AND THAT THE ONLY PEOPLE -- AFTER I HAD RESPONDED, AFTER I HAD ARRIVED, THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT WERE INSIDE THE BANNER TAPE WERE MYSELF AND OFFICER RISKE AND SERGEANT MARTY COON. AND I TOLD THEM THAT WE HAD GONE AROUND TO THE BACK AFTER WE HAD VIEWED THE VICTIMS AND I TOLD HIM WHAT I HAD OBSERVED IN THE REAR OF THE LOCATION AND I HAD MENTIONED ALSO THE DOG PAW PRINTS THAT I HAD SEEN ON BUNDY AND ON DOROTHY. Q: NOW, YOU HAD OFFICERS THAT WERE SECURING THE CRIME SCENE MAKING SURE PEOPLE DON'T GO INSIDE THE TAPE, RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: WAS THAT ALL THEY WERE DOING OR WERE THERE OFFICERS OUT DOING OTHER THINGS AS WELL? A: I HAD AT LEAST TWO OFFICERS AND SERGEANT MARTY COON -- COON TOLD ME THIS, BECAUSE I ASKED HIM IF ANYBODY WAS CHECKING THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR POSSIBLE WITNESSES, AND HE TOLD ME THAT HE HAD -- AS I RECALL, AT LEAST ONE TEAM, THERE WERE TWO OFFICERS DOING THAT, GOING FROM DOOR TO DOOR, AND INQUIRING AS TO WHERE -- IF THERE WERE ANY WITNESSES AND TAKING INFORMATION DOWN ON FIELD INTERVIEW CARDS. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND AFTER YOU SPOKE TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, TOLD THEM WHAT YOU HAD SEEN AND WHAT YOU HAD THERE, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT? A: WE THEN WALKED TOWARDS THE VICTIM TAKING THE SAME ROUTE THAT I HAD TAKEN WHEN I HAD FIRST OBSERVED THEM UP THE LEFT SIDE OF THE FEMALE VICTIM IN THE GRASSY AREA OF THE FRONT OF THE CONDOMINIUM. HOWEVER, AT THIS POINT I DECIDED TO REMAIN ON THE SIDEWALK BECAUSE THERE WERE MORE PEOPLE NOW AND THERE WAS NO REASON FOR ME TO PROCEED. I ALLOWED SERGEANT MARTY COON AND OFFICER RISKE TO POINT OUT THE VICTIMS TO THE TWO DETECTIVES AND I REMAINED ON THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT. Q: NOW, WHEN THEY WALKED UP TO EXAMINE -- TO LOOK AT THE VICTIMS, WHAT ROUTE DID THEY TAKE? A: THEY TOOK THE SAME ROUTE THAT I HAD EARLIER. Q: YOU MEAN BY WALKING ON THE GRASS AND ON THE BUSHES? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID ANYONE WALK UP THAT WALKWAY WHILE YOU WERE THERE? A: YOU MEAN THE WALKWAY IN FRONT OF THE -- Q: IN FRONT, RIGHT. THE WALKWAY LEADING FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE FRONT STEPS TO THE BODY OF NICOLE SIMPSON, DID YOU SEE ANYONE WALK ON THAT WALKWAY? A: NO ONE WALKED ON THAT WALKWAY WHILE I WAS THERE. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW -- SO YOU SAW DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN AND OFFICER RISKE SHOWING THEM THE CRIME SCENE OUT IN FRONT OF THE CONDOMINIUM, THE BODIES OF NICOLE BROWN AND RON GOLDMAN? A: YES. Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT? A: THEN THEY WALKED BACK DOWN TO WHERE I WAS STANDING ON THE SIDEWALK AND THEY WANTED TO GO AROUND TO THE REAR, SO AGAIN WE PROCEEDED IN THE SAME ROUTE THAT I HAD TAKEN SOUTHBOUND ON BUNDY AND THEN WESTBOUND ON THE SIDEWALK OF DOROTHY. Q: AND WHO WALKED -- WHO TOOK THAT ROUTE AROUND TO THE BACK OF THE CONDOMINIUM SOUTHBOUND ON BUNDY AND WEST ON DOROTHY? A: THAT WAS MYSELF, IT WAS THE TWO DETECTIVES AND SERGEANT MARTY COON AND OFFICER RISKE. Q: YOU ALL WALKED TOGETHER? A: PRETTY MUCH SO, YES. Q: WHERE DID YOU GO? A: WHAT ROUTE AGAIN? Q: (NODS HEAD UP AND DOWN.) A: SOUTHBOUND ON THE BUNDY SIDEWALK TO THE WESTBOUND DOROTHY SIDEWALK. Q: AND DID YOU GO UP THAT ALLEY AGAIN? A: AGAIN UP THE SAME ROUTE IN THE ALLEY, YES. Q: AND DID THEY -- DID YOU ALL GO BACK TO THAT REAR DRIVEWAY AREA? A: YES, WE DID. Q: AND WAS THE EVIDENCE OF THE LOOSE CHANGE AND THE BLOOD DROPS POINTED OUT AGAIN? A: YES. Q: DID YOU SEE ANYBODY STEP IN ANY OF THAT? A: NO. Q: THEN WHAT HAPPENED? A: THEN I TOLD DETECTIVE PHILLIPS THAT I HAD OBSERVED SOME SHOEPRINTS IN THE WALKWAY AND HE ASKED ME TO WALK HIM UP THERE THROUGH THAT AREA AND SHOW HIM, WHICH I DID. Q: SO YOU TOOK DETECTIVE -- YOU TOOK DETECTIVE PHILLIPS THROUGH THAT REAR GATE AND DOWN THE WALKWAY AGAIN? A: YES, I DID. Q: DID YOU -- AND YOU TOOK HIM UP TO THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS THAT YOU SAW? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND THEN STOPPED? A: AND THEN STOPPED, YES. Q: WHAT HAPPENED TO DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND OFFICER RISKE? A: THEY REMAINED AT THE REAR OF THE -- OF THE COMPLEX AROUND THE ALLEYWAY, AROUND THE GARAGE. Q: AND WAS THERE ANYBODY ELSE BACK THERE WITH THEM? A: THERE WAS OFFICER TERRAZAS WHO WAS ON A FIXED POST THERE FOR SECURITY. Q: AND WHAT ABOUT SERGEANT -- SERGEANT MARTY COON? A: YES. Q: WHERE WAS HE? A: YES, HE WAS THERE ALSO AND SO -- Q: IN THE REAR? A: IN THE REAR. SO WAS OFFICER RISKE. Q: SO ALL FOUR OF THEM STAYED BACK THERE WHILE YOU TOOK DETECTIVE PHILLIPS HALFWAY DOWN THE WALKWAY? A: YES. Q: AND WHEN YOU GOT UP TO THE POINT OF THE LAST BLOODY SHOEPRINT ON THE PATH, YOU DID WHAT? A: I POINTED THEM OUT TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND THEN WE RETURNED TO THE BACK OF THE CONDOMINIUM. Q: OKAY. AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED? A: I REMEMBER DETECTIVE PHILLIPS MAKING A PHONE CALL OR TWO ON A CELLULAR PHONE. I BELIEVE HE CALLED ROBBERY/HOMICIDE. BUT A SHORT WHILE LATER WE WENT AHEAD AND -- WELL, CORRECTION. LET ME BACK UP A SECOND. THEY -- THEY, BEING THE TWO DETECTIVES AND OFFICER RISKE, WERE TALKING ABOUT THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE, AND THE TWO DETECTIVES HAD NOT BEEN INSIDE YET, AND RISKE HAD EARLIER, SO THEY ASKED RISKE TO WALK THEM THROUGH THE INSIDE OF THE LOCATION. Q: OKAY. A: AND THEY DID AND I REMAINED OUT AND BEHIND. Q: OKAY. SO DID OFFICER RISKE -- HOW DID HE TAKE THE DETECTIVES INTO THE CONDOMINIUM? A: THROUGH THE GARAGE. Q: NOW, WHY WAS IT IMPORTANT FOR THEM -- FOR THESE DETECTIVES TO SEE THE INSIDE OF THE CONDOMINIUM? A: BECAUSE IT IS AN EXTENSION OF THE CRIME SCENE. Q: OR IT COULD BE? A: OR IT COULD BE, YES. Q: OKAY. AND AT THAT POINT WERE DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN IN CHARGE OF THIS CASE? A: YES, THEY WERE. Q: ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE DUTIES OF A DETECTIVE IN CHARGE OF A HOMICIDE CASE? A: BASICALLY. I HAVE NEVER BEEN A DETECTIVE, BUT I HAVE BEEN ON MANY OF THESE CRIME SCENES. Q: SO IS IT THEIR JOB TO EXAMINE ALL OF THE EVIDENCE AND EXAMINE ALL OF THE CRIME SCENE TO SEE WHAT THERE IS THERE? MR. BAILEY: OBJECTION, LEADING. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT IS THEIR DUTY WITH RESPECT TO THE EXAMINATION OF EVIDENCE AT THE CRIME SCENE? A: THEY HAVE TO TOUR AS MUCH OF THE CRIME SCENE AS THEY POSSIBLY CAN TO GET AN OVERVIEW OF THE ENTIRE SITUATION. Q: SO OFFICER RISKE TOOK DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN INTO THE CONDOMINIUM? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: WHERE DID YOU GO? A: I STAYED IN THE ALLEYWAY. Q: AT THE REAR OF THE CONDOMINIUM? A: YES, THE REAR. Q: AT SOME POINT DID YOU SEE THEM COME BACK OUT? A: YES, I DID. Q: ALL TOGETHER? A: ALL TOGETHER. Q: AND HOW DID THEY EXIT? A: THE SAME WAY THEY WENT IN, THROUGH THE REAR. Q: THROUGH THE GARAGE? A: THROUGH THE GARAGE, YES. Q: NOW, WHILE YOU WERE STAYING OUT THERE BEFORE THEY CAME BACK OUT, DID YOU HAPPEN TO NOTICE ANY CARS -- YOU NOTICED THE JEEP IN THE DRIVEWAY I THINK YOU INDICATED? A: YES. Q: DID YOU NOTICE WHETHER ANY OF THE DOORS SEEMED TO BE OPENED? A: I REMEMBER SEEING THE PASSENGER DOOR, THE FRONT PASSENGER DOOR OF THE JEEP AJAR. Q: WAS IT STANDING OPEN? I MEAN WIDE OPEN? A: NO, IT WASN'T WIDE OPEN. IT WAS -- MAYBE THREE INCHES. Q: NOW, AFTER DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN AND OFFICER RISKE ALL CAME OUT OF THE CONDOMINIUM THROUGH THE GARAGE, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT? A: AT THAT POINT THAT IS WHEN -- THAT IS WHEN I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS. I TOLD HIM THAT WHEN I HAD SPOKE TO DEPUTY CHIEF FRANKLE, CHIEF FRANKLE INFORMED ME THAT IF IT WAS -- IF IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE VICTIM WAS IN FACT NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, THAT HE WANTED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TO NOTIFY ROBBERY/HOMICIDE. Q: AND SO DID DETECTIVE PHILLIPS MAKE THAT CALL? A: YES, HE DID. I REMEMBER HIM TALKING TO ROBBERY/HOMICIDE ON HIS CELLULAR PHONE. Q: NOW, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU HAD LEFT A MESSAGE FOR LIEUTENANT SPANGLER? A: YES, I DID. Q: OKAY. HE IS HIGHER RANKING THAN THE DETECTIVES, RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID YOU SEE HIM ARRIVE AT SOME POINT? A: WHILE WE WERE STILL AT THE REAR OF THE LOCATION LIEUTENANT SPANGLER WALKED UP -- HE CAME FROM THE DOROTHY SIDEWALK AND HE WAS WALKING NORTHBOUND IN THE -- IN THE ALLEYWAY TOWARD US AND HE WALKED UP TO THE TWO DETECTIVES AND THEN THEY ENGAGED IN CONVERSATION. AT THAT POINT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS GAVE LIEUTENANT SPANGLER A RUNDOWN OF WHAT WE HAD SEEN AND WHAT WE HAD BEEN DOING. Q: AND DID LIEUTENANT SPANGLER THEN WALK INTO THE -- WALK DOWN THE WALKWAY AND LOOK AT THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS OR APPROACH THE BODY OF THE VICTIMS? A: NO, HE DIDN'T DO THAT. Q: WHY NOT? A: I THINK HE ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION FROM DETECTIVE -- FROM BOTH THE DETECTIVES. MR. BAILEY: WELL. EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. I DON'T BELIEVE THIS WITNESS SHOULD SPECULATE WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF THE LIEUTENANT. THE COURT: SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AFTER LIEUTENANT SPANGLER MADE CONTACT WITH YOU ALL IN THE REAR OF THE CONDOMINIUM, WHAT DID YOU DO? A: SHORTLY THEREAFTER WE RETURNED TO THE AREA OF BUNDY AND DOROTHY. Q: ALL OF YOU? A: YES. AT THAT POINT ALL OF US WALKED. Q: WHAT ABOUT OFFICER RISKE, DID HE COME BACK ALSO? A: YES. Q: AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ALSO? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND THEN LIEUTENANT SPANGLER WAS IN FRONT AS WELL? A: HE CAME BACK AROUND THE FRONT WITH US, YES. Q: DID YOU REMAIN OUT IN FRONT AT THAT POINT, SIR? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO? WHEN I SAY "OUT FRONT," CAN YOU TELL US WHERE THAT IS, APPROXIMATELY? A: ON -- IN THE STREET ON BUNDY JUST NORTH OF DOROTHY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-51. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AGAIN, WHEN YOU SAID THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY, THAT YOU MET THEM IN THE STREET, YOU STOOD OUT IN THE STREET THERE, IS THAT THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION SHOWN WHERE THE GENTLEMAN ARE STANDING IN THE PHOTOGRAPH NOW BEFORE YOU? A: YES, IT IS. Q: NOW, IS DOROTHY THE STREET THAT IS IN THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THE -- OF THIS PHOTOGRAPH? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND THEN IT INTERSECTS WHERE -- AND BUNDY IS THE STREET THAT YOU SEE THE BROWN CAR PARKED ON? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: AND THE BROWN CAR WOULD BE FACING IN A NORTHBOUND DIRECTION THEN? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND THIS BLUE CAR IN THE FOREGROUND WOULD BE FACING IN AN EASTBOUND DIRECTION ON DOROTHY? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, WHAT DID YOU DO AS YOU STOOD OUT FRONT THERE AT THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY? A: I TOLD THE TWO DETECTIVES THAT I WOULD MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE, I WOULD STAY THERE, AND IF THEY NEEDED ME TO DO ANYTHING OR GET AHOLD OF ME. MY CAPTAIN ARRIVED RIGHT AROUND THAT SAME TIME, CONSTANCE DIAL SHOWED UP. Q: AND DID YOU SPEAK TO HER? A: I DID, YES. I TOLD HER WHAT WE HAD BEEN DOING UP TO THIS POINT AND THE DETECTIVES WENT ABOUT DOING SOMETHING, BUT I LOST SIGHT OF THEM AS I WAS TALKING -- I WAS TALKING WITH CAPTAIN DIAL. Q: SHE IS -- IS SHE YOUR BOSS? A: YES, SHE IS. Q: YOU WERE STANDING WITH HER IN THE INTERSECTION? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID YOU SEE ANY OTHER DETECTIVE ARRIVE? A: NOT TOO LONG AFTER THAT I REMEMBER DETECTIVE VANNATTER ARRIVING. Q: AND WHAT DID YOU SEE HIM DO? A: HE APPROACHED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN. THEY ENGAGED IN CONVERSATION. Q: WHERE? A: THE DETECTIVES PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN HAD RETURNED TO WHERE I WAS ON BUNDY AND DOROTHY AND THAT IS WHERE THEY -- THAT IS WHERE THEY SPOKE WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER. Q: OUT IN THAT SAME INTERSECTION THEN? A: YES. Q: AND THEN WHAT DID YOU SEE THEM DO AFTER THEY SPOKE? A: I REMEMBER JUST A FEW MINUTES LATER THEY WENT AHEAD AND APPROACHED THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE AGAIN WHERE THE VICTIMS WERE. Q: AND WHO WAS IT THAT YOU SAW APPROACH THE CRIME SCENE AT THAT POINT? A: IT WAS DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND VANNATTER. Q: THE THREE OF THEM? A: YES. Q: DID YOU SEE WHAT ROUTE THEY TOOK? A: THEY WENT THE SAME ROUTE THAT THEY HAD TAKEN -- THAT I HAD TAKEN EARLIER. Q: AND THAT -- BY THAT YOU MEAN WHAT? A: TO THE LEFT OF THE FEMALE VICTIM UP THROUGH THE GRASS AND THE -- THE FOLIAGE AREA, UP TO THE FENCE. Q: SO THAT WOULD BE TO THE LEFT OF THE WALKWAY? A: TO THE LEFT OF WALKWAY, CORRECT. Q: NOW, THAT GRASSY AREA YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, IS THAT A FLAT AND LEVEL AREA, SIR? A: NO, YOU HAVE TO WALK UP IT. IT GOES UP AND IT IS KIND OF TIERED. Q: SO IT IS KIND OF UP A LITTLE INCLINE? A: EXACTLY. Q: AND YOU SAW THEM TAKE THAT SAME PATH? A: YES, THEY DID. Q: DID YOU SEE ANYBODY SHINING A FLASHLIGHT ON THE CRIME SCENE AREA AROUND THE VICTIMS? A: THEY WERE USING FLASHLIGHTS, YES. Q: AND THEN DID YOU SEE THEM LEAVE THAT AREA BY THE SAME ROUTE, WALKING BACK THROUGH THE GRASS? A: YES, I DID. Q: AT SOME POINT DID YOU SEE THE THREE OF THEM WALK TOWARD THE REAR ALLEY? A: I DON'T REMEMBER WALKING TOWARD THE REAR. Q: DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING -- DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING THEM COME OUT ON TO THE SIDEWALK OF BUNDY? A: YES. Q: DID YOU EVER SEE THEM THEN PROCEED DOWN DOROTHY TOWARDS THE REAR ALLEY AREA OF THE CONDOMINIUM? A: I REMEMBER THEM WALKING THAT WAY, YES. Q: NOW, AT WHAT POINT DID YOU LEAVE THAT SCENE, SIR? A: I BELIEVE I LEFT RIGHT AROUND 0410, 0415, AROUND THAT TIME. Q: 4:10 TO 4:15 A.M.? A: RIGHT. I DISCUSSED IT WITH CAPTAIN DIAL AND I TOLD HER THAT IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT I AM NEEDED HERE ANY MORE AND THAT I WOULD LEAVE AS MANY POLICE OFFICERS THERE AS THE DETECTIVE WISHED, AND SHE SAID FINE. I TOLD HER I HAD SOME WORK PILING UP AT THE STATION, SO I DISCUSSED IT WITH DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND LET HIM KNOW THAT I WAS GOING TO BE LEAVING AND I TOLD HIM HE COULD USE AS MANY OF THE POLICE OFFICERS AS WERE THERE AND AT THAT POINT I LEFT. Q: NOW, WAS THAT PART OF YOUR DUTIES AS WELL, TO DETERMINE HOW MANY POLICE OFFICERS WILL BE ASSIGNED TO THE INVESTIGATION -- TO ASSIST IN THE INVESTIGATION OF A CRIME SCENE? A: NO, THAT IS NOT MY JOB, BUT I JUST TOLD DETECTIVE FUHRMAN THAT WHATEVER WE HAD WERE AVAILABLE TO HIM, WHATEVER HE NEEDED. OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, WE STILL HAVE A PATROL DIVISION TO RUN AND RADIO CALLS COMING IN, SO I WAS DISCUSSING IT WITH HIM AND WAS WONDERING IF THERE WERE ANY PEOPLE HE COULD KICK LOOSE SO I COULD USE THEM FOR PATROL FUNCTIONS. Q: NOW, WHEN YOU LEFT AT APPROXIMATELY 4:10 TO 4:15 P.M., WAS LIEUTENANT SPANGLER STILL THERE? A: YES, HE WAS. Q: ABOUT WHAT TIME DID YOU GET BACK TO THE STATION, SIR? A: I GOT BACK TO THE STATION RIGHT AROUND FIVE O'CLOCK. I HAD STOPPED AND PICKED UP SOMETHING TO EAT AND BROUGHT IT BACK TO THE POLICE STATION. Q: SHORTLY AFTER YOU GOT BACK, DID YOU GET A PHONE CALL FROM DETECTIVE PHILLIPS? A: YES, I DID. SHORTLY AFTER FIVE O'CLOCK. Q: DID HE MAKE SOME REQUEST OF YOU? A: HE ASKED ME TO CALL WESTEC SECURITY AND HE ASKED ME TO INQUIRE AS TO IF -- INQUIRE IF THEY HAD A LISTING FOR THE SECURITY CONTRACT FOR MR. O.J. SIMPSON'S RESIDENCE ON ROCKINGHAM. Q: AND DID HE ASK YOU TO MAKE ANY OTHER INQUIRIES OF WESTEC? A: HE WAS INTERESTED TO FIND OUT ALSO IF THEY HAD A TELEPHONE NUMBER FOR THAT LOCATION. Q: DID HE ASK YOU TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT THE DEFENDANT WAS IN OR OUT OF TOWN, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE? A: HE ASKED ME TO ASK WHOEVER I SPOKE WITH THERE IF THE DEFENDANT WAS -- IF THEY HAD ANY IDEA IF THE DEFENDANT WAS IN TOWN. Q: AND THEN DID YOU CALL WESTEC? A: YES, I DID. Q: NOW, AT THAT POINT THAT YOU CALLED WESTEC FOR THE FIRST TIME, DID YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC ADDRESS FOR MR. SIMPSON? A: NO, I DIDN'T GET A NUMBER. THE ONLY THING I HAD WAS MR. O.J. SIMPSON'S RESIDENCE ON ROCKINGHAM. Q: YOU SPOKE TO SOMEONE AT WESTEC? A: YES. THE PERSON THAT ANSWERED THE PHONE IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS OPERATOR 48 AND I LATER FOUND OUT HIS NAME WAS FRANK, AND I MADE THE INQUIRY. AT THAT TIME OPERATOR 48 TOLD ME THAT HE DID NOT SHOW A LISTING ON ROCKINGHAM FOR AN O.J. SIMPSON, SO I TOLD HIM THAT -- TO HANG ON, THAT I WOULD CALL HIM BACK, THAT I HAD TO GET BACK IN TOUCH WITH THE DETECTIVES. SO I HUNG UP AND I CALLED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS BACK AND I ASKED HIM FOR THE ACTUAL ADDRESS, THE NUMBER ADDRESS. Q: AND DID YOU GET THE ACTUAL ADDRESS? A: YES. HE GAVE ME 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM. Q: WHEN YOU SAY YOU ARE CALLING DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, HOW ARE YOU DOING THAT? ON WHAT? A: I WAS CALLING HIS CELLULAR PHONE. Q: HE HAD A CELL PHONE? A: YES, HE DID. Q: AND WERE YOU -- YOU WERE AT THAT -- YOU WERE THAT NIGHT THE WATCH COMMANDER? A: YES, I WAS. Q: IS THERE A SPECIAL LINE OR A SPECIAL NUMBER THAT CAN BE CALLED BY THE DETECTIVES SO THAT THEY GO STRAIGHT THROUGH TO YOU? A: YES. I HAVE A STRAIGHT THROUGH NUMBER, REGULAR TELEPHONE NUMBER ON MY DESK, A NUMBER THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE LOBBY DESK. (BRIEF PAUSE.) THE COURT: PRETTY DELICATE. MS. CLARK: I KNOW. CAN WE APPROACH FOR A MINUTE? THE COURT: SURE. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MISS CLARK, YOU MAY PROCEED. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: SIR, I'M GOING TO ASK THAT YOU WRITE THE NUMBER DOWN ON THIS PAD SO THAT WE DON'T PUBLICIZE THIS NUMBER, BECAUSE I THINK YOU PROBABLY DON'T WANT IT PUBLICIZED. A: RIGHT. Q: THAT WILL BE GREAT AND YOU START GETTING 10,000 CALLS A DAY ON THE PRIVATE LINE. A: (WITNESS COMPLIES.) Q: AND THE NUMBER THAT YOU HAVE JUST WRITTEN FOR US, AND I'M GOING TO SHOW TO COUNSEL NOW, THIS NUMBER IS -- IS THIS THE NUMBER THAT MR. -- THAT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS CALLED YOU ON THAT NIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE WILL MARK THAT SHEET OF PAPER PEOPLE'S 61. MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. (PEO'S 61 FOR ID = PAPER W/ W.L.A. WATCH CMDR'S TPN) Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND HOW IS IT THAT YOU HAPPENED TO HAVE DETECTIVE PHILLIPS' CELL PHONE NUMBER? A: HE GAVE IT TO ME OUT AT THE SCENE. Q: WHEN YOU WERE AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. THEN YOU -- AND I THINK YOU INDICATED WESTEC SAID THEY DIDN'T HAVE A LISTING OR THEY ASKED YOU TO GET A SPECIFIC ADDRESS; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THEY INDICATED THAT THEY DIDN'T SHOW A LISTING AND HE ASKED ME IF I COULD GET A NUMBER, YES. Q: OKAY. THEN YOU INDICATED YOU CALLED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND YOU GOT THE ADDRESS? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: THEN WHAT DID YOU DO? A: I CALLED WESTEC BACK, GOT AHOLD OF THE SAME OPERATOR AND I GAVE HIM THE NUMBER OF 360 ROCKINGHAM. Q: AND DID HE -- WHAT DID HE INDICATE THEN? A: WELL, THERE WAS STILL SOME -- MR. BAILEY: EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR. I THINK THE RESULT OF THIS EXCHANGE MAY BE ADMISSIBLE, BUT ALL OF THE TALK BACK AND FORTH I THINK IS PLAIN HEARSAY. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MS. CLARK: THAT'S TRUE. Q: DID YOU ATTEMPT TO -- YOU GAVE THE ADDRESS OF 360 ROCKINGHAM; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND AFTER YOU HAD GIVEN THAT INFORMATION, SIR, DID YOU -- DID YOU CALL -- DID YOU CALL DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AGAIN? A: I CALLED HIM BACK BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CONFUSION AGAIN. EVEN WITH THE NUMBERS THAT I GAVE WESTEC, THEY STILL -- OPERATOR 48 WAS STILL HAVING A HARD TIME FINDING A LISTING, SO I TOLD THEM THAT I WOULD CALL THE DETECTIVES BACK AND I DID. I GOT AHOLD OF DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND HE SAID, WELL, TRY IT AGAIN, BECAUSE THERE ARE SIGNS ON THE PROPERTY INDICATING THAT WESTEC HAS THE SECURITY CONTRACT, SO -- Q: AND DID YOU CALL BACK AGAIN? A: WELL, BEFORE I HAD A CHANCE TO CALL BACK, I GOT A CALL FROM WESTEC AND THAT WAS OPERATOR 48 AND HE SAID WAS THAT NORTH OR SOUTH BUNDY AND I SAID THAT WAS NORTH BUNDY. Q: EXCUSE ME. BUNDY? A: EXCUSE ME, ROCKINGHAM. Q: OKAY. A: AND I TOLD HIM IT WAS NORTH AND HE SAID, "OH, OKAY, WELL, WE HAVE A LISTING FOR A MR. O.J. SIMPSON." MR. BAILEY: I'M GOING TO OBJECT AGAIN, YOUR HONOR. WHETHER HE GOT THE PHONE NUMBER OR DIDN'T GET IT, THAT IS ALL THAT IS RELEVANT. THE COURT: CORRECT. CAN WE ASK QUESTIONS THAT ARE NON-HEARSAY? MS. CLARK: YES, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: THANK YOU. Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU REQUEST -- DID YOU ASK WHETHER THEY HAD ANY INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE DEFENDANT WAS IN OR OUT OF TOWN? A: YES, I DID, ON THAT SAME TELEPHONE CALL, WHEN HE TOLD ME THAT HE HAD A LISTING, YES. Q: OKAY. A: AND HE INDICATED THAT HE DID NOT SHOW THAT MR. SIMPSON WAS OUT OF TOWN. Q: DID YOU THEN CALL -- DID YOU CALL DETECTIVE PHILLIPS BACK THEN? A: YES, I CALLED HIM BACK. Q: AND DID YOU GIVE HIM INFORMATION CONCERNING THE DEFENDANT? A: I TOLD HIM WHAT I WAS JUST TOLD BY WESTEC, YES. Q: THAT THE DEFENDANT -- THEY HAD NO RECORD THAT HE WAS OUT OF TOWN? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, AT THAT POINT, WHEN YOU CALLED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ON HIS CELL PHONE, HAD HE RECEIVED THE DEFENDANT'S PHONE NUMBER AT HIS HOME YET? A: NO. Q: I MEAN THE DEFENDANT'S HOME PHONE NUMBER? A: NO, HE DID NOT. Q: AND DID YOU GET ANOTHER CALL FROM DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AFTER THAT POINT? A: A FEW MINUTES LATER DETECTIVE PHILLIPS CALLED ME BACK AND ASKED ME TO MAKE ANOTHER TELEPHONE CALL TO WESTEC AND TO FIND OUT IF THEY HAD A KEY TO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM AND IF IT COULD BE OUT THERE WITH A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THEIR COMPANY. Q: NOW, DID YOU GET MORE THAN ONE CALL FROM DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AT -- WITHIN THAT TIME FRAME, WITHIN THOSE FEW MINUTES, REQUESTING THE KEY? A: YES, I DID. I BELIEVE I GOT -- I BELIEVE I RECEIVED AT LEAST TWO WITHIN A REAL SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. Q: AND AFTER YOU GOT THE SECOND CALL REQUESTING A KEY, WHAT DID YOU DO? A: THAT IS WHEN I CALLED WESTEC BACK AND THEY TOLD ME THAT -- MR. BAILEY: I'M GOING TO OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THESE CONVERSATIONS -- THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. BAILEY: CAN WE GET TO THE RESULT? THE COURT: SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED. THE WITNESS: THEY TOLD ME -- THE COURT: HOLD ON. WOULD YOU PLEASE LISTEN PRECISELY TO THE QUESTION THAT IS ASKED OF YOU, ANSWER JUST THAT QUESTION. DON'T VOLUNTEER ANYTHING, ANY INFORMATION THAT IS NOT REQUESTED OF YOU, PLEASE. MISS CLARK. Q: BY MS. CLARK: SERGEANT ROSSI, DID YOU ASK WESTEC IF THEY HAD A KEY FOR THE DEFENDANT'S HOME? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND THEY RESPONDED AND THEY GAVE YOU AN ANSWER; IS THAT CORRECT? A: YES. Q: AND BASED ON WHAT THEY TOLD YOU DID YOU CALL DETECTIVE PHILLIPS BACK AGAIN? A: YES, I DID. Q: RIGHT AFTER YOU SPOKE TO THEM? A: YES. Q: AND WHEN YOU SPOKE TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS A SECOND TIME, WHAT DID YOU TELL HIM? A: I TOLD HIM THAT WESTEC INDICATED THEY DID NOT HAVE A KEY. Q: AND DID YOU INDICATE -- ALL RIGHT. THEN DID YOU CALL BACK TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AGAIN ABOUT TEN MINUTES LATER? A: APPROXIMATELY TEN MINUTES AFTER THAT PHONE CALL, YES, I DID. Q: AND AGAIN THIS IS ON A CELL PHONE? A: YES, IT IS. Q: AND WHY DID YOU CALL THAT TEN MINUTES LATER AGAIN? A: I WANTED TO FIND OUT IF -- IF ANYBODY -- IF A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE WESTEC COMPANY HAD ARRIVED THERE BECAUSE I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS A TWO-MINUTE ETA TO GET SOMEBODY OUT THERE TO OUR DETECTIVES. Q: OKAY. SO NOW YOU HAD ASKED WESTEC FOR A KEY? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND DID YOU ASK -- AND BASED ON THEIR RESPONSE TO YOU DID YOU ASK FOR SOMEBODY ELSE? A: WELL, WHEN THEY TOLD ME THEY DIDN'T HAVE ONE, I ASKED THEM IF THEY COULD SEND A REPRESENTATIVE OUT THERE. Q: AND WHY? A: BECAUSE THE DETECTIVES NEEDED -- THEY FELT THEY NEEDED TO GET INTO THE RESIDENCE AND THEY MAY HAVE TO FORCE ENTRY IF THEY COULDN'T GET A KEY, AND IF THAT WAS THE CASE, THEY WANTED SOMEONE FROM WESTEC THERE. Q: FOR WHAT PURPOSE? A: TO BE THERE WHEN THEY MADE FORCED ENTRY. Q: TO WITNESS IT? A: TO WITNESS IT, YES. Q: AND SO AFTER YOU DISCOVERED THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE A KEY, DID YOU CALL WESTEC OR HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION WITH WESTEC CONCERNING HAVING SOMEONE FROM WESTEC GO OUT TO THE PROPERTY? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND YOU WERE GIVEN SOME TIME ESTIMATE AS TO WHEN SOMEONE WOULD ARRIVE? A: YES. OPERATOR 48 TOLD ME IT WOULD BE ABOUT TWO MINUTES. THE COURT: WAIT, WAIT, WAIT. SERGEANT, LISTEN VERY CAREFULLY TO THE QUESTION. THE QUESTION WAS WERE YOU GIVEN SOME TIME ESTIMATE AS TO WHEN SOMEBODY ARRIVED. THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS EITHER YES OR NO; NOT WHAT THE ANSWER WAS. MISS CLARK. Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND AFTER YOU GOT THAT INFORMATION DID YOU -- WAS THAT WHEN YOU CALLED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS BACK? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND YOU WERE CALLING FOR WHAT PURPOSE? A: TO INFORM HIM WHAT WESTEC TOLD ME. Q: AND THEN DID YOU ALSO CALL TO FIND OUT IF HE -- WHAT HAD HAPPENED, IF ANYONE HAD ARRIVED? A: YES, I DID. Q: NOW, YOU WERE AT THE WEST L.A. STATION, SIR? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND WAS IT REQUESTED OF YOU BY DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TO MAKE CONTACT WITH THE CHILDREN, SYDNEY AND JUSTIN? A: YES, HE ASKED ME THAT. Q: AND WHAT WERE YOU DOING AT HIS REQUEST? A: PER HIS REQUEST I WENT IN AND CHECKED ON THE CHILDREN. Q: MORE THAN ONCE? A: NO, I JUST DID IT ONCE. I HAD CHECKED -- Q: I'M SORRY? A: I DID IT TWICE ACTUALLY THAT EVENING, BUT ONLY ONCE TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS' REQUEST. Q: OKAY. AND WAS THAT TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE ALL RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. MS. CLARK: MAY I HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: CERTAINLY. (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.) MS. CLARK: I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER. THE COURT: MR. BAILEY. MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAILEY: Q: GOOD AFTERNOON, SERGEANT ROSSI. A: GOOD AFTERNOON, SIR. Q: COULD YOU GIVE US, PLEASE, A LITTLE BIT OF YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND IN POLICE TRAINING THAT LED YOU TO YOUR PRESENT STATION IN THE FORCE? A: I SPENT FIVE MONTHS IN THE LOS ANGELES POLICE ACADEMY. Q: UH-HUH. A: AND AFTER I GRADUATED FROM THE ACADEMY I ENTERED COLLEGE AND I TOOK A POLICE SCIENCE MAJOR. I HAVE WORKED SEVERAL FIELD-RELATED DETAILS. THE MAJORITY OF MY TIME ON THE JOB HAS BEEN IN UNIFORM AND IN THE FIELD. Q: HOW LONG WERE YOU A PATROLMAN BEFORE YOU MADE SERGEANT? A: TEN YEARS JUST ABOUT. Q: ALL RIGHT. IS THAT NORMAL INTERVAL OR SOMEWHAT FASTER THAN THE AVERAGE? A: IT IS RELATIVELY NORMAL. I ACTUALLY WORKED PATROL FOR THE FIRST FOUR YEARS AND THEN I TRANSFERRED TO METROPOLITAN DIVISION, WHICH IS ALSO PRIMARILY A UNIFORM DETAIL, AND WE DO SIMILAR PATROL TYPE OF WORK, BUT IT IS THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITY, BUT IT IS IN UNIFORM. Q: THE RANK OF SERGEANT, DOES THAT HAVE SEVERAL GRADES? A: YES, SIR, IT HAS TWO GRADES. Q: 1 AND 2? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND THE RANK OF DETECTIVE, HOW MANY GRADES DOES THAT HAVE IN WEST L.A.? A: THAT HAS THREE. Q: AND DOWNTOWN? A: THE SAME. Q: OKAY. AND I TAKE IT THAT 3 IS THE HIGHER RATHER THAN THE LOWER GRADE? A: YES, SIR. Q: ON THE NIGHT IN QUESTION, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS A 3, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WAS A 2; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: HOW DO THOSE RANKS COMPARE WITH THE INSIGNIA THAT YOU ARE WEARING IN THE HIERARCHY OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT? A: A DETECTIVE 3 IS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN ME AND A DETECTIVE 2 IS A LITTLE BIT LOWER THAN ME. Q: YOU ARE IN THE MIDDLE? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: NOW, AS PART OF YOUR TRAINING DID YOU TAKE SPECIALIZED COURSES IN, FOR INSTANCE, HOMICIDE? A: IN COLLEGE I TOOK TWO CRIMINALISTIC COURSES, YES. Q: AND HAVE YOU EVER HAD ANY SPECIALIZED COURSES IN CRIME SCENE PROTECTION? A: THE SAME TWO COURSES COVERED THAT. Q: HAS THERE BEEN ANY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENT OR LAW ENFORCEMENT EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENT IN THE LAPD THAT YOU HAVE OBSERVED? A: NO, SIR. Q: HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO ANY SEMINARS OR SCHOOLS ON CRIME SCENE PROTECTION SINCE YOU BECAME A POLICEMAN? A: OTHER THAN COLLEGE? Q: (NODS HEAD UP AND DOWN.) A: NO, I HAVEN'T. Q: ARE YOU RESPONSIBLE IN ANY WAY FOR THE TRAINING OF YOUNGER OFFICERS WHO ARE USUALLY THE FIRST TO ARRIVE AT A CRIME SCENE, ARE THEY NOT? A: YES, I AM. Q: PATROLMEN? A: YES. MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MS. CLARK: WHO ARE USUALLY? THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IS IT NECESSARY, BECAUSE PATROLMEN ARE APT TO BE FIRST AT THE SCENE, THAT THEY HAVE SOME TRAINING IN WHAT IT IS THAT NEEDS TO BE PROTECTED? A: NO MORE THAN A REGULAR PATROL OFFICER. Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU ARE STARTING FROM SO WE BETTER DEFINE IT. SHOULD THEY BE TRAINED TO PRESERVE FOOTPRINTS AND FOOT IMPRESSIONS, FOR INSTANCE, AND PROTECT THEM? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR; NO FOUNDATION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: THEY ARE NOT TRAINED SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT. THE ONLY THING THEY ARE TRAINED FOR AS FAR AS PRESERVING A CRIME SCENE IS TO SECURE THE LOCATION. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WELL, THAT IS A WORD THAT I WOULD LIKE TO DEFINE WITH YOU IF WE CAN. WHAT DO YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY SECURE THE LOCATION OF A DOUBLE HOMICIDE, SERGEANT ROSSI? A: DISALLOW ANYONE OTHER THAN AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL TO ENTER THE LOCATION. Q: WHAT ARE THE RISKS IF PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO WANDER IN AND OUT OF THE CRIME SCENE? A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) Q: THE RISK TO THE EVIDENCE? A: THAT WOULD CONTAMINATE IT. Q: NOW, YOU ACCEPTED, AS YOUR TESTIMONY, THE WORD OF OFFICER RISKE THAT THE CRIME SCENE WAS SECURED? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: YOU MADE NO INQUIRY OF HIM AS TO WHAT PRECISELY HE MEANT BY THAT OR WHAT IT WAS THAT WAS SECURED, DID YOU? A: NO. Q: YOU ACCEPTED THAT BLANKET ASSURANCE AS BEING SUFFICIENT TO PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF THE EVIDENCE, DID YOU NOT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. I COULD SEE THAT IT WAS SECURED. Q: NO. WHEN YOU WERE TOLD ON THE PHONE, HARD ON THE HEELS OF HIS ARRIVAL, THAT THE CRIME SCENE WAS SECURE, YOU COULDN'T SEE ANYTHING, COULD YOU? A: NO, NOT THEN. Q: YOU HAD TO RELY ON HIS WORD? A: YES, SIR. Q: THAT IT WAS SECURED? A: YES. Q: BUT YOU DIDN'T INQUIRE AS TO WHAT HE MEANT BY THAT? A: NO, I DIDN'T ASK HIM. Q: AND YOU DIDN'T INQUIRE OF THE NATURE OF THE SCENE THAT HE WAS SECURING, DID YOU? A: I DIDN'T ASK HIM. Q: NO. DO YOU KNOW THE DIFFERENCE, FOR INSTANCE, SERGEANT, BETWEEN A FOOTPRINT AND A FOOT IMPRESSION? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: ASSUMING, IF YOU WILL, THAT A FOOTPRINT IS A TWO-DIMENSIONAL RESIDUE OF SOMEONE HAVING WALKED SOMEWHERE WITH A WET OUTER SHOE AND A FOOT IMPRESSION IS A THREE-DIMENSIONAL RESIDUE, WOULD YOU THINK THOSE WORTH PRESERVING FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE DETECTIVES WHO MIGHT BE CALLED UPON TO SOLVE THE CASE? A: YES, SIR, I WOULD. Q: THERE ISN'T ANY QUESTION IN YOUR MIND THAT THIS WAS A BRUTAL AND DELIBERATE DOUBLE HOMICIDE FROM THE MINUTE YOU HEARD THE DESCRIPTION, TRUE? A: THAT IS CORRECT. Q: THIS WOULD HARDLY POSSIBLY BE AN ACCIDENTAL KILLING? A: YES, SIR. Q: FURTHERMORE, THERE WASN'T ANY QUESTION IN YOUR MIND, ONCE OFFICER RISKE HAD SWEPT THROUGH THE PREMISES, THAT THE KILLERS, WHOEVER THEY WERE, WERE GONE, TRUE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AT LARGE, ON THE LOOSE, CARRYING WITH THEM, IN ALL PROBABILITY, SOME BLOODY EVIDENCE, TRUE? MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION. KILLERS, PLURAL? COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING. ASSUMING FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. REPHRASE. MR. BAILEY: ARE WE RESTRICTED TO THE STATE THEORY OF ONE KILLER, ERRONEOUS AS THOUGH IT MIGHT BE? MS. CLARK: OBJECT TO COUNSEL'S QUESTION. THE COURT: HOLD ON. I WAS SPEAKING WITH COUNSEL. THE QUESTION ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE. WE DON'T KNOW. YOU CAN PHRASE IT PROPERLY AS KILLER OR KILLERS. MR. BAILEY: I ACCEPT THAT. THE COURT: THANK YOU. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT BASED ON EVERYTHING YOU KNEW, A KILLER OR KILLERS WERE SOMEWHERE AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY? A: YES. Q: AND POSSIBLY STILL A RISK TO OTHERS IN THE COMMUNITY? A: YES. Q: NOW, WHEN YOU FIRST HEARD OF THIS CRIME AND YOU WERE TOLD THAT THIS WAS THE EX-WIFE OF O.J. SIMPSON, IS THAT THE WAY SHE WAS DESCRIBED TO YOU? A: YES, SIR. Q: ALL RIGHT. NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WAS KNOWN IN THE BRENTWOOD AREA, WAS SHE NOT? A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) Q: KNOWN TO YOU? A: SHE REALLY WASN'T KNOWN TO ME. Q: I DON'T MEAN PERSONALLY ACQUAINTED. WHO SHE WAS? A: YES. Q: SO THAT THE NAME IS ONE YOU WOULD ASSOCIATE WITH MR. SIMPSON? A: YES. Q: OKAY. IS IT FAIR TO SAY AS WELL, SERGEANT, THAT THE MINUTE YOU HEARD THAT YOU HAD THE NOTION THAT THIS MIGHT BECOME A HIGH PRESSURE CASE? A: YES, SIR. Q: WITH LOTS OF MEDIA ATTENTION? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND IN FACT FROM 55 MINUTES AFTER MIDNIGHT, WHEN YOU MADE YOUR FIRST PHONE CALL, TO ONE O'CLOCK WHEN YOU CALLED PHILLIPS AND RIGHT ON THROUGH TO 1:25 WHEN YOU FINISHED TALKING WITH CAPTAIN DIAL, YOU DISCUSSED THE POTENTIAL OF THIS CASE WITH EVERY SINGLE SUPERIOR YOU HAD, CORRECT? A: YES, I DID. Q: ALL RIGHT. IT WAS A MATTER THAT YOU WERE WORRIED ABOUT, TRUE? A: YES, SIR. Q: ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THAT WORRY, AS OFFICER RISKE HAS SAID, IS THAT THE MEDIA MIGHT GET THIS BEFORE THE DETECTIVES AND WRECK HAVOC WITH THE SCENE. THAT IS A FAIR CONCERN, ISN'T IT? A: I WASN'T REAL CONCERNED WITH THAT. Q: YOU WEREN'T CONCERNED ABOUT THAT? A: NO. Q: WELL, DID YOU LEARN FROM OFFICER RISKE, WHEN HE CALLED, THAT HE WAS ON A PHONE IN THE HOME OF THE VICTIM? A: NOT THAT -- NOT WHEN HE CALLED -- NOT WHEN I TALKED TO HIM ON THE PHONE. I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE HE CALLED FROM. Q: DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE OPERATION OF TELEPHONES IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY, IN BRENTWOOD IN PARTICULAR? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT IS VAGUE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. Q: ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH A LAST NUMBER REDIAL OPTION THAT YOU CAN GET ON TELEPHONES IN THIS COMMUNITY? A: YES. Q: ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE STAR 69 SERVICE? A: NO. Q: OKAY. WHAT DOES LAST NUMBER REDIAL DO, IF YOU USE THAT FACILITY ON A PRIVATE PHONE, FOR INSTANCE? A: IT MEANS IF YOU PRESS THE BUTTON YOU WILL DIAL THE NUMBER YOU HAD PREVIOUSLY CALLED. Q: OKAY. WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU PICK UP THAT PHONE AND DIAL A NEW NUMBER? A: I BELIEVE IT ERASES OR OBLITERATES THAT NUMBER. Q: WIPES IT OUT? A: YES. Q: NOW, DID YOU ASK OFFICER RISKE WHETHER OR NOT HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO TAKE A PHONE IN THAT HOME AND TRY LAST NUMBER REDIAL? A: I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE HE WAS CALLING FROM. Q: DID YOU ASK HIM WHETHER OR NOT HE COULD GO INTO THAT HOME AND FIND A PHONE WITH LAST NUMBER REDIAL ON IT AND HIT THE BUTTON? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: MIGHT IT HAVE BEEN USEFUL TO DETECTIVES TO KNOW WHO THE VICTIM LAST TELEPHONED BEFORE HER DEATH? A: YES. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, THAT SHE HAD THE LAST NUMBER REDIAL. THE COURT: IT IS ALSO SPECULATION, BUT THAT IS SOMETHING, IF WE ESTABLISH THAT WAS IN FACT TRUE, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ARGUED TO THE JURY. PROCEED. MR. BAILEY: WE WILL ESTABLISH THAT. THE COURT: PROCEED. MS. CLARK: WAS THAT -- THE COURT: IT IS SUSTAINED. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR SOME OTHER WITNESS. IT IS INTERESTING, BUT IT CAN BE ARGUED LATER. MR. BAILEY: FINE. MS. CLARK: MOTION TO STRIKE THE ANSWER. THE COURT: IT IS INCONSEQUENTIAL AT THIS POINT. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IS IT FAIR TO SAY IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WASN'T DISCUSSED? A: YES. Q: OKAY. NOW, IS IT NOT A CARDINAL RULE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT THAT WHEN DANGER IS AT HAND, POLICEMEN GO IN PAIRS? A: GENERALLY, YES. Q: GENERALLY? A: YES, SIR. Q: WHEN YOU TALKED WITH OFFICER RISKE, HOW MANY ABLE-BODIED POLICE OFFICERS WERE ON THE SCENE ALREADY, DO YOU KNOW? A: NO, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY. Q: WHAT IS A CRIME LOG, SERGEANT? A: IT IS A CHRONOLOGICAL REPORT OF PEOPLE WHO SHOW UP AT THE SCENE. Q: AND WHO KEEPS CRIME LOGS IN HOMICIDE CASES SUCH AS THIS ONE? A: WHO KEPT THAT LOG? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE ASKING ME? Q: YES. WHO KEPT THIS ONE? A: OFFICER CHRIS CUMMINGS. Q: CHRIS CUMMINGS. ALL RIGHT. HE ARRIVED, ACCORDING TO I GUESS HIS OWN CRIME LOG, AT ABOUT HALF PAST MIDNIGHT, CORRECT? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: HAVE YOU EVER LOOKED AT THE CRIME LOG, OTHER THAN WHEN MISS CLARK SHOWED IT TO YOU THIS MORNING? A: I LOOKED AT IT ABOUT THREE DAYS AGO, YES, UH-HUH. Q: IN CONNECTION WITH WHAT? A: AT THE TIME I -- Q: WITH -- A: THE TIME I ARRIVED AND THE TIME I LEFT. Q: WAS THAT IN PREPARATION FOR YOUR TESTIMONY HERE TODAY? A: YES, IT WAS. Q: WHEN YOU LOOKED AT IT, DID YOU EXAMINE IT TO SEE WHAT TIME OTHERS ARRIVED SO COULD YOU PUT THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE? A: I GLANCED OVER IT. Q: WHO ASSIGNED OFFICER CUMMINGS TO BE THE CRIME LOG OFFICER? A: I DON'T KNOW. POSSIBLY SERGEANT COON. Q: THAT WOULD ASSUME, OF COURSE, THAT SERGEANT COON WAS THERE BEFORE SERGEANT CUMMINGS OR THAT THE ORDER WAS FIRST GIVEN WHEN SERGEANT COON ARRIVED, WHENEVER THAT WAS? A: YES. Q: OKAY. WHAT IS THE OBLIGATION OF THE CRIME LOG OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO KEEPING THESE KIND OF RECORDS? A: TO SIGN IN AND TO SIGN OUT OFFICERS THAT ARRIVE AT THE LOCATION. Q: WHEN YOU SAY "SIGN IN AND SIGN OUT," DO THE OFFICERS ACTUALLY HAVE TO LOG IN WITH THEIR HANDWRITING OR DOES THE OFFICER WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THE LOG SIMPLY NOTE THEIR ARRIVAL? A: THE OFFICER THAT IS IN CHARGE OF THE LOG NOTES IT. Q: OKAY. SO THE FACT THAT YOU ARE LOGGED ON TO THE CRIME SCENE AT A CERTAIN TIME DOESN'T MEAN YOU ENDORSE IT, THAT MEANS THAT IS WHAT THAT OFFICER THINKS, RIGHT? A: YES, THAT'S RIGHT. Q: BUT THERE IS A SECOND SOURCE OF TIME INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO ARRIVAL AND DEPARTURE FROM THE SCENE; IS THERE NOT? A: GENERALLY IT IS WITH COMMUNICATIONS. IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT? Q: FIELD REPORTS? A: SOMETIMES, YES. Q: INCIDENT REPORTS? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. IF THERE IS A CONFLICT BETWEEN ONE OFFICER'S TIME LOG AND THE INDIVIDUAL REPORT FILED BY AN OFFICER WHO CAME TO THE SCENE, WHICH IS THE MORE RELIABLE, IF YOU KNOW? A: I DON'T REALLY KNOW. Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, IF WE MAY COME BACK TO THE MOMENT THAT OFFICER RISKE TOLD YOU ABOUT THE HOMICIDE. THIS WAS THE FIRST CALL, RIGHT? A: YES, SIR. Q: UP UNTIL THAT MOMENT, WHEN YOU PICKED UP THE PHONE AND FOUND HIM AT THE OTHER END, YOU HAD NO IDEA ANYBODY HAD BEEN KILLED? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: LET ALONE NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, TRUE? A: TRUE. Q: ALL RIGHT. HE TOLD YOU THAT HE HAD NOT YET HAD A CHANCE TO CLEAR THE VICTIM'S HOME, TRUE? A: TRUE. Q: BUT YOU DID NOT UNDERSTAND THAT HE WAS SPEAKING TO YOU FROM THE VICTIM'S HOME? A: NOT AT THAT TIME, NO. Q: HE EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT THERE MIGHT BE OTHER VICTIMS IN THE HOME? A: YES, SIR. Q: HE ALSO EXPRESSED CONCERN THAT THE PERPETRATORS, ONE OR MORE, MIGHT BE IN THE HOME? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: ALL RIGHT. IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT BASED ON THE INFORMATION YOU ALREADY RECEIVED, THE PERPETRATOR, PAREN, S, COULD BE CONSIDERED ARMED AND DANGEROUS? A: CERTAINLY. Q: DID YOU AUTHORIZE OR DIRECT RISKE TO CLEAR THE HOUSE BY HIMSELF, SERGEANT? A: NO. HE HAD ANOTHER OFFICER. Q: YOU SAID HE HAD ANOTHER OFFICER? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: WELL, BUT YOU DIDN'T MENTION THAT ON DIRECT. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU OVERLOOKED? A: I DON'T BELIEVE I WAS ASKED. Q: I BELIEVE YOU WERE ASKED WHAT DIRECTIONS YOU GAVE OFFICER RISKE AND YOU TOLD HIM TO CLEAR THE HOUSE. DO YOU NOW SAY THAT YOU TOLD HIM TO GET ANOTHER OFFICER TO GO WITH HIM? A: NO. HE HAD TOLD ME THE OFFICER WAS ALREADY THERE, SIR. Q: WHERE WERE THE OTHER OFFICERS WHEN RISKE WAS IN THE HOME CALLING YOU, IF YOU KNOW? A: HE INDICATED TO ME THAT THE OTHER OFFICER WAS IN THE HOME WITH HIM. Q: WHICH ONE? A: OFFICER DICK WALLEY. Q: WALLEY. ALL RIGHT. MC GOWAN/WALLEY TEAM THEN WAS THE SECOND TO ARRIVE, ALMOST AT THE SAME TIME AS RISKE? A: I BELIEVE SO. Q: AND DO YOU, AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY, REMEMBER WHETHER OR NOT OFFICER WALLEY WENT WITH RISKE THROUGH THE HOME AND FOUND NO PERPETRATORS BUT DID FIND TWO YOUNG CHILDREN? A: I WAS TOLD THAT HE DID GO WITH HIM, YES. Q: DO YOU KNOW THE AGE OF THOSE CHILDREN? A: NOT EXACTLY. NOT EXACTLY SIR, NO. Q: DO YOU KNOW IF THEY WERE IN SCHOOL? A: THEY WERE SCHOOL AGE, YES. Q: SCHOOL AGE? A: YES. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ANY OF THE TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT IN THE HOME HAD SPEED DIAL BUTTONS WITH "DAD" WRITTEN NEXT TO THEM? A: NO, SIR. Q: DID YOU EVER INQUIRE? A: NO. Q: ALL RIGHT. IF THE FEAR HAD BEEN EXPRESSED THAT THERE MIGHT BE OTHER VICTIMS, I TAKE IT YOU THOUGHT FROM THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT SOMEBODY MIGHT BE AFTER THE SIMPSON FAMILY OR SOME OF ITS MEMBERS? A: AT THAT POINT I WASN'T ASSUMING ANYTHING LIKE THAT. Q: WELL, I DON'T MEAN ASSUME. LET'S SAY CONCERNED. WERE YOU CONCERNED? A: I THINK THAT WOULD BE A LEGITIMATE CONCERN, YES. Q: HOW MANY OF THESE HOMICIDE CASES HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED IN OVER YOUR CAREER? A: PROBABLY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 300, 250. Q: SO YOU'VE HAD CONSIDERABLE EXPERIENCE IN THE ORDER AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THINGS TO BE ACCOMPLISHED WHEN A HOMICIDE OCCURS, HAVE YOU NOT? A: YES, SIR. Q: IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THE VERY FIRST PRIORITY IS ANY POSSIBLE MEDICAL TREATMENT THAT COULD BE AFFORDED ANY VICTIM WHO HAS NOT DIED? A: THAT IS CORRECT. Q: THERE WAS NO INDICATION IN THIS CASE THAT THAT WAS A REALISTIC POSSIBILITY, WAS THERE? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: COULD YOU REPEAT THAT FOR ME. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YES. THE DESCRIPTION THAT YOU GOT AS TO THE TWO VICTIMS OUT BY THE GATE INDICATED THAT THEY WERE PROBABLY VERY DEAD AT THAT POINT, TRUE? A: YES. Q: THE SECOND CONCERN WOULD BE THE PROTECTION OF ANY OTHER VICTIMS WHO MIGHT BE AT RISK BECAUSE OF WHATEVER DYNAMICS HAD CAUSED THE FIRST HOMICIDE TO OCCUR, TRUE? A: ARE YOU SAYING IF THERE WERE OTHER VICTIMS THAT WOULD BE MY NEXT CONCERN? Q: WOULD YOU NOT AS A POLICE OFFICER, WHEN YOU LEARN THAT SOMEONE -- A PROMINENT PERSON HAS BEEN KILLED, WORRY THAT SOME OTHER FAMILY MEMBER MIGHT ALSO BE A TARGET? A: YES. Q: AND IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, WOULD IT NOT, TO TRY TO IDENTIFY, LOCATE AND WARN ANY SUCH PERSON? A: YES, IF THAT WAS APPROPRIATE, IF THAT WAS POSSIBLE. Q: IF IT WERE POSSIBLE. NOW, YOU KNEW IN THIS CASE THAT O.J. SIMPSON WAS A LIVING CITIZEN OF BRENTWOOD, DIDN'T YOU? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND YOU HOPED, WHEN YOU LEARNED WHAT HAPPENED TO HIS WIFE, THAT HE CONTINUED TO BE LIVING, CORRECT? A: CERTAINLY. Q: BUT THERE WAS ALWAYS THE POSSIBILITY THAT HE, TOO, WAS A TARGET OF WHATEVER FORCE HAD DONE HER IN, ISN'T THAT SO? A: I SUPPOSE. Q: DIDN'T YOU PRIORITIZE TO ANY DEGREE NOTICE TO MR. SIMPSON, IF YOU COULD GIVE IT? A: I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. Q: NOTICE TO MR. SIMPSON MEANS A TELEPHONE CALL OR SOME OTHER COMMUNICATION SAYING YOUR WIFE HAS BEEN MURDERED -- A: YES. Q: -- AND YOU BETTER WATCH OUT? DID YOU PRIORITIZE THAT? A: AT THAT POINT, SIR, THAT WASN'T ONE OF MY CONCERNS, NO. Q: WAS IT YOUR CONCERN BEFORE YOU LEFT THE POLICE STATION AT 1:25 WHEN YOU COMPLETED YOUR PHONE CALLS? A: NOT THEN, NO. Q: CAN YOU TELL US WHY IT WAS THAT FOR THE BETTER PART OF AN HOUR AFTER YOU LEARN OF A BRUTAL HOMICIDE YOU WERE NOT CONCERNED ABOUT NOTIFYING THE EX-HUSBAND? A: BECAUSE THOSE TYPES OF NOTIFICATIONS ARE DONE BY THE DETECTIVES. Q: OH, AND UNTIL THE DETECTIVES COME ON THE SCENE HE STAYS AT RISK? IS THAT IT? A: WELL, IF THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO SAY, YES, THAT IS WHAT WE DO. Q: IT APPEARS THAT THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED AND A LOT WORSE, ISN'T IT? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THE COURT: WE ARE ARGUING WITH THE WITNESS, COUNSEL. MR. BAILEY: WITHDRAW. THE COURT: THANK YOU. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IS IT NOT TRUE THAT NO ONE MADE AN EFFORT TO NOTIFY MR. SIMPSON UNTIL AFTER 5:00 A.M. WHEN YOU WERE ON THE PHONE WITH WESTEC? A: I DON'T KNOW, SIR. I DON'T KNOW IF THE DETECTIVE TRIED TO DO IT EARLIER OR NOT. Q: THEY DIDN'T DO IT IN YOUR PRESENCE, DID THEY? A: OH, NO. Q: YOU DIDN'T LEAVE THE SCENE UNTIL 4:10? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: IF ANYBODY HAD BEEN DISPATCHED TO FIND MR. SIMPSON PRIOR TO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IT, WOULDN'T YOU? A: NOT NECESSARILY. THE DETECTIVES HAVE TAKEN OVER THE CASE AT THAT TIME. Q: DO YOU THINK THEY MIGHT HAVE SLIPPED AWAY WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE TO DO THAT? A: I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WOULD HAVE SLIPPED AWAY, BUT THEY COULD HAVE ASSIGNED SOMEBODY TO DO IT. Q: SIR, THEY WERE THERE UNTIL 4:10 THEMSELVES, WEREN'T THEY? A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.) Q: WEREN'T THEY? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU EVER INQUIRE OF THEM WHAT EFFORTS ARE BEING MADE TO NOTIFY MR. SIMPSON? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: NOW, DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU HAD AT HAND, BEFORE YOU LEFT THE POLICE STATION, THE MEANS TO GET HOLD OF MR. SIMPSON IF YOU CHOSE TO DO SO? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID IT EVER OCCUR TO YOU THAT A SEVEN-YEAR OLD GIRL MIGHT KNOW HER FATHER'S TELEPHONE NUMBER? A: YES. Q: OR BOY? A: YES. Q: OKAY. DID YOU BOTHER TO ASK HIM FOR IT? A: NO. I DID ASK THE LITTLE GIRL IF SHE KNEW IF HER FATHER WAS IN TOWN OR OUT OF TOWN. Q: WHAT DID SHE SAY? A: SHE SAID SHE THOUGHT HE WAS IN TOWN. Q: DID YOU ASK FOR HER PHONE NUMBER SO COULD YOU REACH HIM? A: NO. Q: WHY NOT? A: I DIDN'T THINK OF IT. Q: WHY DID YOU SPEND 50 MINUTES TRYING TO GET IT OUT OF WESTEC AFTER 5:00 A.M. WHEN SHE WAS STILL A FEW FEET AWAY? A: BECAUSE I WAS RESPONDING TO A REQUEST BY THE DETECTIVE. Q: YOU MEAN THE DETECTIVES SAID WE WANT TO GET WESTEC TO GET THE PHONE NUMBER AND YOU DIDN'T TELL THEM I CAN GET IT FROM SYDNEY RIGHT HERE? A: NO. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. HOW DOES HE KNOW IF SHE KNOWS THE NUMBER OR COULD ACCURATELY -- MR. BAILEY: HE TESTIFIED HE THOUGHT SHE WOULD. MS. CLARK: -- GIVE IT? THE COURT: OVERRULED, OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: CORRECTION. THIS IS A NINE-YEAR OLD GIRL. MAKING IT EVEN MORE LIKELY? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING. THE COURT: THAT IS TESTIFYING. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WOULD YOU SAY THAT A NINE-YEAR OLD GIRL WOULD KNOW HER DAD'S TELEPHONE NUMBER? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DIDN'T KNOW. I DIDN'T ASK HER. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YOUR EXPERIENCE DOESN'T TELL YOU WHETHER OR NOT IT IS LIKELY? THE COURT: COUNSEL, WE KNOW FROM THE JURY QUESTIONNAIRES, THE MAJORITY OF OUR JURORS HAVE CHILDREN OR ONCE WERE CHILDREN NINE YEARS OLD. MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. THE POINT IS MADE. THE COURT: THANK YOU. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: NOW THEN, WHAT DUTY DOES A WATCH COMMANDER HAVE TO WALK THROUGH THE SCENE OF A DOUBLE HOMICIDE ONCE HE GETS THERE AND IS TOLD IT HAS BEEN SECURE, WHATEVER THAT MEANS? A: SO I CAN ACCURATE REPORT TO THE DETECTIVE WHEN THEY ASK HIM QUESTIONS. Q: IS IT YOUR EXPERIENCE THAT AT SOME POINT DOWN THE ROAD DETECTIVES AND TECHNICIANS WILL ARRIVE? A: YES. Q: AND THE TECHNICIANS ARE THE PEOPLE WHO TRY TO PRESERVE AND LIFT IMPRESSIONS OF VARIOUS SORTS THAT MAY IDENTIFY OR EXCLUDE CERTAIN SUSPECTS, TRUE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: ALL RIGHT. THAT WOULD INCLUDE FOOTPRINTS? A: YES, SIR. Q: WHICH CAN IN SOME CASES BE AS SINGULAR AS A FINGERPRINT, TRUE? A: YES. Q: AND IT WOULD INCLUDE FINGERPRINTS THEMSELVES? A: YES. Q: AND IN THESE DAYS OTHER CHEMICAL TRACES THAT MIGHT BE RELEVANT AND HELPFUL, TRUE? A: TRUE. Q: IN ADDITION, IN THIS CASE, SERGEANT, YOU SAW THAT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF BLOOD HAD BEEN LOST BY AT LEAST ONE THE VICTIMS, DIDN'T YOU? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND THAT IT HAD ALREADY BEEN TRAMPLED UP BY A DOG, RIGHT? A: YES. Q: NOW, WHAT MADE YOU ASSUME THAT THE PERPETRATOR OR PERPETRATORS HAD NOT WALKED THROUGH THE SOFT EARTH OVER WHICH YOU TRAMPLED TO GET TO THE GATE? HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT? A: BECAUSE WE CHECKED THE PATH AND WE DIDN'T SEE ANY INDICATION THAT SOMEBODY HAD WALKED THROUGH THERE. Q: YOU HAVE AN INSPECTION THAT YOU MADE AS YOU WALKED THROUGH THOSE PLANTS; IS THAT RIGHT? A: YES, WE DID. AS WE WALKED WE SHINED THE FLASHLIGHT TO MAKE SURE WE WEREN'T STEPPING IN ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE OF EVIDENTIAL VALUE. Q: YOU ARE ABLE TO TELL US THAT WHEN YOU WALKED UP THAT PATH THERE WERE NO FOOTPRINTS AHEAD OF YOU; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: DID OFFICER RISKE TELL YOU HE HAD WALKED THE SAME PATH? A: NO, HE DIDN'T. Q: YOU DIDN'T NOTICE HIS FOOTPRINTS THERE; IS THAT RIGHT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: NOW, DID YOU NOTICE THAT THE BODY OF RONALD GOLDMAN WAS LAYING IN THE PLAIN SOFT EARTH, HEAVILY SHADED? A: YES, IT APPEARED TO BE ON SOFT EARTH. Q: WAS IT APPARENT TO YOU, SOON AFTER YOUR ARRIVAL, IF NOT BEFORE, THAT MR. GOLDMAN HAD PROBABLY PUT UP SEVERE RESISTANCE AS HE WAS BEING KILLED? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: DID IT OCCUR TO YOU THAT THERE MIGHT BE IN THAT AREA OF SOFT EARTH NEAR THE WALKWAY, THE FOOTPRINTS OF THE PERSON WHO HAD COMMITTED THE CRIME? A: I DIDN'T THINK -- I WASN'T THINKING ABOUT THAT. Q: YOU WEREN'T THINKING ABOUT IT? A: NO. Q: OKAY. WELL, HOW MANY PEOPLE DID YOU TELL NOT TO GO INTO THAT AREA FOR FEAR OF RUINING THE CASE? A: I DIDN'T HAVE TO TELL ANYBODY. NOBODY WENT IN. Q: NOBODY WENT IN? A: NOT WHILE I WAS THERE. Q: WHY IN THE WORLD DID YOU NEED TO GO ON THE CRIME SCENE TO BEGIN WITH IF YOU ARE NOT A DETECTIVE? A: SO COULD I GIVE THE RESPONDING DETECTIVES AN ACCURATE ACCOUNT OF WHAT WAS THERE. THEY REQUIRE THAT FROM ME. Q: OH, SO WITHOUT WAITING FOR A TRAINED DETECTIVE TO ARRIVE WHO MIGHT KNOW WHAT EVIDENCE TO PRESERVE, IT IS YOUR DUTY TO GO IN AND LOOK SO YOU CAN TELL HIM WHAT HE IS ABOUT TO SEE; IS THAT RIGHT? A: YES, SIR. Q: OKAY. YOU DID THAT IN THIS CASE? A: YES, I DID. Q: NOW, WAS IT FAIRLY APPARENT TO YOU THAT WHOEVER HAD PERPETRATED THESE HOMICIDES HAD DEPARTED IN SOME DIRECTION? A: YES. Q: AND HOW MANY POSSIBILITIES WERE THERE FOR THE DEPARTURE ROUTE ON THAT EARLY MORNING? A: WOULD YOU REPEAT THAT FOR ME, PLEASE. Q: YES. WOULD YOU TELL THE COURT AND JURY HOW MANY POSSIBILITIES YOU SAW FOR AN EXODUS BY THE KILLER OR KILLERS AFTER THE HOMICIDES WERE DONE AND BEFORE THE POLICE ARRIVED? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. AN EXODUS? THE COURT: DO YOU WANT TO REPHRASE THAT. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: A WAY OUT. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? A: YES, I DO. Q: OKAY. HOW MANY WAYS OUT WERE THERE? A: WELL, IT WAS OUTSIDE. THE SCENE OF THE CRIME WAS OUTSIDE. Q: THEY COULDN'T GO STRAIGHT UP? A: OTHER THAN STRAIGHT UP, THEY COULD HAVE LEFT IN ANY DIRECTION. Q: OVER THE ROOF? A: I SUPPOSE, IF THEY -- Q: OVER THE FENCE? A: YES. Q: DIDN'T IT SEEM LIKELY THAT THEY HAD EITHER GONE OUT THE FRONT GATE OR OUT THE BACK GATE? A: IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKELY TO ME UNTIL I WENT AROUND TO THE BACK AND SAW THE FOOTPRINTS. Q: UP UNTIL THEN IT NEVER OCCURRED TO YOU THAT FOOTPRINTS MIGHT BE THERE; IS THAT RIGHT? A: OH, I THOUGHT THERE MAY BE. Q: OKAY. YOU SAID IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKELY THAT THEY HAD GONE THAT WAY. WHY NOT? A: I SAID IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKELY THEY WENT WHAT WAY? Q: OUT THE BACK. A: I DIDN'T SAY THAT. Q: OH, YOU DIDN'T SAY THAT? A: NO, I DIDN'T SAY THAT. Q: PARDON ME. WASN'T THE EVIDENCE STARING YOU IN THE FACE THAT SOMEBODY HAD TO GO OUT THE BACK? A: WELL, LIKE I SAID, IT WAS OUTSIDE, SO -- Q: I UNDERSTAND. DIDN'T YOU TELL US YOUR TESTIMONY WAS THAT YOU SAW TRACKS ON THE SIDEWALK ON BUNDY? A: ON BUNDY? Q: YES. A: FOOT -- DOG -- DOG TRACKS. Q: THAT'S RIGHT. A: YES. Q: SO IF THE KILLER WASN'T A DOG THEN SOMEBODY HAD TO GO OUT THE BACK END, DIDN'T THEY? A: THEY COULD HAVE GONE ANY DIRECTION. Q: WITHOUT LEAVING ANY FOOTPRINTS AFTER BEING IN ALL THAT BLOOD, SERGEANT? A: WELL, THAT IS -- THAT IS POSSIBLE, YES. Q: AND HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? PLEASE TELL ME. A: JUST LEAVE AND COVER THEIR TRACKS SOMEHOW. Q: LEAVE AND COVER THEIR TRACKS. WOULD YOU EXPLAIN TO ALL OF US HOW THAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED BY A KILLER WITH BLOODY FEET? A: IF THEY DIDN'T GET BLOOD ON THEIR FEET, THEY WOULDN'T LEAVE TRACKS. Q: HAVING BEEN AT THE SCENE CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT THE PERPETRATOR OR PERPETRATORS DIDN'T GET BLOOD ON THEIR FEET? CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT? A: THERE WAS A LOT OF BLOOD THERE. Q: NO. CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT THESE MURDERS WERE ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT GETTING ANY BLOOD ON THE FEET OF THE PERPETRATOR? A: I THINK ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE. Q: ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE. SO YOU THINK THEY MAY HAVE BEEN FAST ENOUGH ON THEIR FEET TO AVOID BLOOD WHILE ACCOMPLISHING THE CARNAGE THAT WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT ON SCREEN; IS THAT RIGHT? A: I CAN'T ACCURATELY TESTIFY TO THAT, I'M SORRY. Q: WELL, NOW WHEN YOU GOT AROUND TO THE BACK, IT BEGAN TO OCCUR TO YOU THAT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE MEANS OF ESCAPE, TRUE? A: YES. Q: AND THAT THERE COULD BE FOUND THERE ON THE HARD SURFACE, TERRA-COTTA, A POROUS HARD SURFACE, EVIDENCE OF FOOTPRINTS THAT COULD BE TIED TO A SPECIFIC SHOE, RIGHT? A: ARE YOU ASKING ME IF I SAW FOOTPRINTS? Q: I'M ASKING YOU WHETHER IT OCCURRED TO YOU THAT IF THAT WERE IN FACT THE MEANS OF ESCAPE AND THE KILLER OR KILLERS HAD RUN OUT THAT WAY, THAT THERE COULD BE, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THE POSITION OF THE BODIES AND THE BACK GATE, SOME FOOTPRINTS THAT COULD IDENTIFY THE PERPETRATOR? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. WHEN DID THAT OCCUR TO YOU? A: WHEN I SAW THE FOOTPRINTS. Q: AND WAS IT AFTER YOU SAW THE FOOTPRINTS THAT YOU ELECTED TO GO WITH RISKE AND WALK ON THE WALKWAY? A: NO. IT WAS PRIOR TO THAT THAT I MADE THAT DECISION. Q: PRIOR TO THAT. UNTIL YOU ACTUALLY SAW THE FOOTPRINTS YOU NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT YOU WERE OBLITERATING FOOTPRINT EVIDENCE AS YOU WALKED? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION? A: I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION, YES, SIR. Q: DID IT OCCUR TO YOU, YOU AND RISKE, WHO HAS GOT PRETTY GOOD SIZED FEET, BY WALKING UP THAT WALKWAY YOU COULD BE OBLITERATING EVIDENCE? THE COURT: WELL, WE ARE ASSUMING FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. WE DON'T KNOW HOW BIG THESE OFFICERS' FEET REALLY ARE. MR. BAILEY: WE SAW RISKE'S FEET, YOUR HONOR, FOR QUITE A PERIOD OF TIME. MS. CLARK: I DIDN'T. THE COURT: I DIDN'T LOOK. MR. BAILEY: I DID. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS AT THIS POINT, MR. BAILEY. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A RECESS UNTIL 3:30. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU. DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE. DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU, CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU. SERGEANT ROSSI, YOU MAY STEP DOWN. PLEASE DON'T DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH ANYBODY EXCEPT FOR THE LAWYERS. YOU ARE ORDERED TO COME BACK AT 3:30. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE IN RECESS. (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. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH HIS COUNSEL, PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED. LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE. (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:) THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED. ALL RIGHT. SERGEANT ROSSI, WOULD YOU RESUME THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, AGAIN, SERGEANT. YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY CONTINUE. MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: SERGEANT, I THINK PRIOR TO THE RECESS, WE ESTABLISHED THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE CONCERNS AFTER A HOMICIDE OCCURS IS THE NOTIFICATION OF OTHER POSSIBLE RELATED VICTIMS. A: YES, SIR. Q: AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, FIRST ATTENDED TO SOMETIME AFTER 5:00 O'CLOCK THAT MORNING? A: AS FAR AS I KNOW, YES, THE DETECTIVES DID. Q: NOW, THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO BE LOOKED AFTER AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE WHEN A HOMICIDE OCCURS, RIGHT? A: SUCH AS? Q: WELL, NOTIFYING THE DETECTIVES TO GET TO THE SCENE SO THEY CAN DETECT, RIGHT? A: CORRECT. Q: AND IN THIS CASE, YOU NOTIFIED DETECTIVE III RON PHILLIPS AT EXACTLY 1:00 A.M. ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN RECORDS THAT THERE HAD BEEN A DOUBLE HOMICIDE AND YOU HAD TOLD HIM WHO HAD BEEN KILLED, DIDN'T YOU? A: I TOLD HIM THAT THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY THAT'S WHO THE VICTIM WAS, YES, SIR. Q: AND -- WELL, THERE WASN'T MUCH DOUBT IN YOUR MIND AFTER RISKE TOLD YOU WHAT HE FOUND IN THE HOUSE, WAS THERE? A: I WAS PRETTY SURE. Q: OKAY. YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T KNOW HE WAS CALLING FROM THE HOUSE A LITTLE WHILE AGO, DIDN'T YOU? A: YES, SIR. Q: YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT EVEN THOUGH HE TOLD YOU HE'S LOOKING AT A PICTURE OF O.J. SIMPSON AND A LETTER ADDRESSED TO O.J. SIMPSON? A: HE DIDN'T TELL ME THAT, SIR. Q: OH, HE DIDN'T TELL YOU THAT? A: NO. Q: OH. WHEN DID YOU FIRST HEAR THAT FROM OFFICER RISKE? A: I DIDN'T HEAR THAT FROM RISKE. Q: TO THIS VERY DAY? A: NO. Q: OKAY. THE WORD "LITHOGRAPH" DOESN'T BRING BACK ANY MEMORIES; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. HOW FAR AWAY FROM BUNDY DOES OFFICER PHILLIPS LIVE? A: ABOUT 35 MILES. Q: ALL RIGHT. IN WHAT COMMUNITY? A: IN THE SANTA CLARITA VALLEY. Q: AND OFFICER FUHRMAN LIVES DOWN SOMEWHERE AROUND REDONDO BEACH? A: I'M NOT SURE WHERE OFFICER OR DETECTIVE FUHRMAN LIVES. Q: DO YOU KNOW DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN AT ALL? A: YES, SIR, I DO. Q: HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN FAMILIAR WITH HIM? A: ABOUT FOUR YEARS. Q: FOUR? A: YES, SIR. Q: DID YOU KNOW HIM IN 1989? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID YOU KNOW HIM IN 1985? A: NO, SIR. Q: OKAY. WHEN YOU TALKED TO PHILLIPS AND HE SAID, "LOOK, I'LL TAKE CARE OF NOTIFYING FUHRMAN," YOU TOOK HIM AT HIS WORD AND DID NOT CALL MARK FUHRMAN, CORRECT? A: CORRECT. Q: DID THEY GIVE YOU OR DID PHILLIPS GIVE YOU ANY ESTIMATE AS TO WHEN YOU MIGHT ANTICIPATE THAT HE WOULD ARRIVE TO TAKE OVER THE CRIME SCENE? A: HE TOLD ME HE WOULD GET THERE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Q: AS SOON AS POSSIBLE? A: YES, SIR. Q: WHICH TURNED OUT TO BE AN HOUR AND 10 MINUTES, RIGHT? A: I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, DID HE EXPLAIN WHY IT WAS NECESSARY TO MEET DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AT THE STATION AND THEN THEY BOTH GO TO THE CRIME SCENE? A: NO, HE DIDN'T. Q: WAS IT NOT PLAIN TO YOU THAT THAT ARRANGEMENT WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE LATER OF THE TWO WOULD HOLD UP THE OTHER ONE? A: I DIDN'T KNOW THAT THAT WAS THE PLAN. Q: WERE YOU ANXIOUS TO GET THEM AT THE CRIME SCENE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE? A: YES, I WAS. Q: WOULD YOU EXPLAIN TO THE COURT AND JURY THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN YOURSELF AS WATCH COMMANDER WITH RESPECT TO RESPONSIBILITIES AND SERGEANT COON? A: SERGEANT COON IS A FIELD SUPERVISOR. Q: I UNDERSTAND THAT. HE ARRIVED WITHIN APPARENTLY 10 OR 15 MINUTES OF OFFICER RISKE AND OFFICERS MC GOWAN AND WALLY, RIGHT? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE QUESTION ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT THAT HE HAD TOLD US THAT OFFICER RISKE ARRIVED AT 12:15. THE COURT: NO. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHEN DID OFFICER RISKE ARRIVE -- THE COURT: OFFICER RISKE ALREADY TESTIFIED AS TO WHEN IT WAS HE ARRIVED. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SERGEANT COON. MR. BAILEY: NO, NO. I'M TALKING ABOUT RISKE AND COON AS RELATED TO RISKE. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHEN DID COON ARRIVE IF YOU KNOW? A: SHORTLY AFTER OFFICER RISKE ARRIVED. Q: IF THE CRIME LOG SAYS 30 MINUTES AFTER THE HOUR, WOULD YOU ACCEPT THAT? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. WHEN YOU SAY SHORTLY, YOU MEAN MINUTES, HOURS? CAN YOU HELP US ANY BETTER THAN SHORTLY? A: WITHIN A FEW MINUTES? Q: A FEW MINUTES. NOW, WHEN SERGEANT COON ARRIVED, WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF THAT CRIME SCENE? A: SERGEANT COON. Q: OKAY. SO THAT IF ANY TRANSGRESSIONS WERE MADE UPON THE INTEGRITY OF THE CRIME SCENE, HE WOULD BE THE ONE RESPONSIBLE, TRUE? A: UNTIL I GOT OUT THERE, SERGEANT COON WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CRIME SCENE. Q: NOW, WHEN YOU GOT THERE, WHO WAS IN CHARGE UNTIL THE DETECTIVES ARRIVED? A: I WAS. Q: IF DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHO WAS A SLIGHTLY LOWER GRADE THAN YOU ARE AS I UNDERSTAND IT, HAD ARRIVED ALONE BEFORE PHILLIPS, WOULD HE NONETHELESS HAVE BEEN IN CHARGE OF THE CRIME SCENE BY VIRTUE OF BEING A DETECTIVE? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND WOULD HE HAVE THEN TAKEN FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHATEVER HAPPENED THERE? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND IF HE HAD ISSUED DIRECTIONS, WOULD YOU HAVE FELT BOUND TO FOLLOW THEM? A: YES, I WOULD. Q: BUT WHEREAS THEY ARRIVED TOGETHER, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS OF COURSE BEING A THIRD GRADE, IS SUPERIOR IN RANK ANYWAY; IS HE NOT? A: YES, HE IS. Q: AND BY VIRTUE OF BEING A DETECTIVE, HE NONETHELESS HAS THE RIGHT TO CONTROL THE CRIME SCENE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHERE IN THE REGULATIONS IS IT PROVIDED THAT THE WATCH COMMANDER WILL GO UPON THE CRIME SCENE AFTER IT'S BEEN SECURED AND WHILE WAITING FOR DETECTIVES? IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE MANUAL ABOUT THAT? A: NOT THAT I KNOW OF. Q: HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU DONE IT? A: EVERY TIME I'VE SECURED A CRIME SCENE. Q: OKAY. WELL, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, YOU WERE TOLD THE CRIME KEEP WAS SECURED BEFORE YOU GOT THERE. A: YES. YES, I WAS. Q: EXPERIENCE WOULD TEACH THAT ANY TIME YOU WALK UPON THE GROUND, YOU MAY AFFECT WHAT IS ALREADY THERE, RIGHT? A: NO, NOT IN THIS CASE. I WAS CAREFUL WHERE I WALKED. I WAS WATCHING. Q: YOU WERE CAREFUL WHERE YOU WALKED? A: YES. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHAT A FOOTPRINT LOOKS LIKE? A: YES, SIR. Q: YOU DO. CAN IT BE SEEN WITH A NAKED EYE? A: YES. Q: ALL FOOTPRINTS CAN BE SEEN WITH A NAKED EYE? A: WELL, IF THEY'RE A FOOTPRINT, IF THEY'RE VISIBLE, THEY CAN BE. Q: DON'T YOU KNOW THAT MANY FOOTPRINTS CAN'T BE SEEN UNTIL THEY'RE DUSTED WITH POWDER? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. MS. CLARK: ARGUMENTATIVE. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU KNOW THAT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID YOU KNOW THAT SOME FOOTPRINTS CAN'T BE SEEN EXCEPT WHEN SHOWN WITH AN OBLIQUE LIGHT? MS. CLARK: ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I SUPPOSE THAT'S POSSIBLE. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: HAVE YOU EVER HEARD THAT IN ALL OF YOUR TRAINING IN THE 300 HOMICIDE SCENES YOU'VE BEEN AT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. NOW, HAVING THAT IN MIND, AT THE TIME YOU WERE THERE, DID IT OCCUR TO YOU THAT A FOOTPRINT LEFT ON THE HARD SURFACE AND NOT VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE COULD BE DISRUPTED BY YOU WALKING AROUND THOSE BODIES? A: NO. Q: DID NOT. ALL RIGHT. AS YOU WALKED DOWN THE BACK ALLEY FROM THE ALLEY BEHIND THE HOUSE TOWARD BUNDY UNTIL YOU SAW BLOODY FOOTPRINTS AND TURNED AROUND AND BACKED OUT, HAD YOU SEEN ANYTHING OF SIGNIFICANCE? A: YES, I HAD. Q: WHAT HAD YOU SEEN BEFORE YOU TURNED AROUND? A: THERE WAS SOME BLOOD DROPLETS OUT BEHIND THE GARAGE. Q: OKAY. NOW, THAT GAVE YOU REASON TO SUSPECT THAT MAYBE ONE OR MORE OF THE PERPETRATORS HAD USED THAT MEANS TO EXIT THE PREMISES? A: YES. Q: AND WHEN YOU SAW THE BLOOD DROPS, YOU NONETHELESS CONTINUED DOWN THE WALKWAY, CORRECT? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND PERHAPS IN THE COURSE OF IT, OBLITERATED SOME OF THOSE FOOTPRINTS THE NAKED EYE CAN'T SEE, TRUE? A: I DON'T BELIEVE I DID THAT. Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU SAY YOU DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOU DID. A: NO. Q: WOULD YOU EXPLAIN TO THE JURY HOW YOU COULD NOT BELIEVE THAT YOU OBLITERATED SOMETHING THAT YOU COULDN'T SEE IN THE FIRST PLACE? A: BECAUSE I WAS CAREFUL WHERE I WALKED. Q: WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD THAT MAKE IF THERE WERE A DUST RESIDUE FOOTPRINT ON THE WALKWAY? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THE COURT: NOW WE'RE ARGUING. MR. BAILEY: HUH? THE COURT: WE ARE ARGUING NOW. MR. BAILEY: OKAY. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IF YOU'RE CAREFUL WHERE YOU WALK, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN; THAT YOU AVOID STEPPING ON THINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: OKAY. AND IF SOMETHING SIGNIFICANT CAN'T BE SEEN, CAN YOU AVOID STEPPING ON IT? A: IF I CAN'T SEE IT, NO. Q: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. IS IT YOUR EXPERIENCE FROM BEING INVOLVED AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IN A GREAT MANY HOMICIDES -- STRIKE THAT OUT. DO YOU NORMALLY GET TO THE SCENE BEFORE THE DETECTIVES? A: YES. Q: AND SO THERE GENERALLY IN EACH HOMICIDE THAT YOU INVESTIGATE AS A WATCH COMMANDER AT LEAST WILL BE A PERIOD WHERE YOU HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY, TRUE? A: WOULD YOU REPEAT THAT, SIR? Q: YES. IN THE AVERAGE HOMICIDE ON WHICH YOU WORK LET'S SAY IN THE PAST FIVE OR 10 YEARS, IS THERE GENERALLY A PERIOD OF TIME AFTER THE PATROLMEN ARRIVE AND BEFORE THE DETECTIVES ARRIVE WHEN YOU, THE WATCH COMMANDER, A SERGEANT, WILL BE IN CHARGE OF THE CRIME SCENE? A: YES, THERE IS. Q: ALL RIGHT. AMONG THE OBJECTIVES OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WHEN A HOMICIDE OCCURS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO PREVENT -- PREVENTION IS THE FIRST OBJECTIVE, ISN'T IT? A: THE FIRST OBJECTIVE OF COURSE IS THE SAVING OF ANY LIFE. Q: OF COURSE. BUT I MEAN, IF YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO PREVENT A HOMICIDE, YOU'LL DO THAT. A: ABSOLUTELY. Q: AND IF YOU CAN'T PREVENT IT, BUT CAN SAVE THE VICTIM, THEN THAT BECOMES PRIMARY. A: YES, IT DOES. Q: AND IF YOU CAN'T SAVE THE VICTIM BECAUSE THE VICTIM IS ALREADY DEAD, THEN IDENTIFICATION OF THE GUILTY AND EXCLUSION OF THE INNOCENT ARE TWO PARALLEL RESPONSIBILITIES, CORRECT? A: YES. THE COURT REPORTER: COUNSEL, CAN I STOP YOU FOR A SECOND? MR. BAILEY: CERTAINLY. (BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. BAILEY: ALL SET? THE COURT REPORTER: YES. THANK YOU. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IS IT NOT FAIR TO SAY THAT THEY ARE ABOUT EQUALLY IMPORTANT, SERGEANT ROSSI? A: YES. Q: BECAUSE TO IDENTIFY THE GUILTY PERSON IN A HOMICIDE, IT IS OFTEN NECESSARY TO EXCLUDE OTHER POSSIBLE SUSPECTS, TRUE? A: TRUE. Q: NOW, IN THAT RESPECT, IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT TIME OF DEATH IS AN ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL FACTOR IN SOLVING A HOMICIDE? A: I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. Q: YES. AND IT CAN BE CONTROLLING, CORRECT? A: YES. Q: ONCE YOU KNOW THE TIME OF DEATH, IT BECOMES MUCH EASIER TO EXCLUDE PEOPLE WHO ARE ELSEWHERE, TRUE? A: I CAN'T ACCURATELY TESTIFY TO THAT. I'M NOT A HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR. Q: OH, I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT AS A MATTER OF SURE LOGIC. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. BAILEY: STRIKE IT OUT. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: AS A MATTER OF YOUR EXPERIENCE, WOULD YOU SAY THAT PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT AT A HOMICIDE SCENE AT ANY TIME WHEN IT'S GOING ON PROBABLY DIDN'T COMMIT THE HOMICIDE? THE COURT: WELL, THAT CALLS FOR A LEGAL CONCLUSION, COUNSELOR. MR. BAILEY: IT DOES? THE COURT: WE HAVE THE LAW OF AIDING AND ABETTING IN THIS STATE. MR. BAILEY: NO. I SAID COMMIT. THE COURT: INTO A CONSPIRACY? SURE. TRUST ME, IT'S A LEGAL CONCLUSION. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. IS IT IMPORTANT TO KNOW THE WHEREABOUTS OF POSSIBLE SUSPECTS AT THE TIME OF DEATH AS IT IS ESTABLISHED IN THE INVESTIGATION? A: YES. Q: OKAY. NOW, DID YOU AT THE TIME THAT YOU ARRIVED AT THE CRIME SCENE HAVE ANY BRACKETS? THAT IS TO SAY, THE LAST TIME THE VICTIMS COULD HAVE BEEN ALIVE AND THE LAST TIME -- THE TIME THEY WERE KNOWN TO BE DEAD? A: I DIDN'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. Q: WELL, YOU HAD THIS INFORMATION; THAT SOME WITNESSES AT THE SCENE HAD CALLED THE POLICE -- MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING. MAY WE APPROACH? THE COURT: OVERRULED. MR. BAILEY: WELL, STRIKE IT OUT. STRIKE IT OUT, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: WITHDRAWN. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHAT DID YOU LEARN ABOUT THE DISCOVERY OF THE BODIES AS TO TIME? A: THE ONLY THING I KNEW ABOUT TIME WAS WHEN -- MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. THIS IS NOT A FACT IN DISPUTE, COUNSEL. THE WITNESS: THE ONLY THING I KNEW ABOUT TIME WAS WHEN MY OFFICERS ARRIVED -- THE FIRST ARRIVING OFFICERS WERE -- FOUND THE VICTIMS. IS THAT WHAT YOU MEANT? Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YEAH. AND THEY TOLD YOU THAT THERE WERE WITNESSES THERE WHO DISCOVERED THE BODIES, RIGHT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. AND THAT THIS WAS ALL WITHIN A FEW MINUTES? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. SO AS YOU SAT THERE AS WATCH COMMANDER, DID YOU ASSUME THAT YOU HAD A COUPLE BODIES ON YOUR HAND THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN KILLED AS LATE AS MIDNIGHT, THEREABOUTS? A: I DIDN'T ASSUME ANYTHING ABOUT TIME, SIR, AT THAT POINT. Q: BUT YOU DID KNOW THEY WERE DEAD BY THE TIME THEY WERE REPORTED AS SUCH? A: YES, I DID. Q: AS TO WHEN THEY WERE LAST ALIVE, DID YOU HEAR ANYTHING THAT NIGHT FROM OFFICER RISKE ABOUT ICE CREAM? A: YES, HE -- I DID. Q: WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT ICE CREAM? WHAT DOES IT DO WHEN IT'S OUTSIDE THE REFRIGERATOR? A: IT MELTS. Q: THAT DEPENDS A LITTLE BIT ON THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AS TO THE RATE AT WHICH IT MELTS, RIGHT? A: YES. Q: AND THE KIND OF ICE CREAM THAT'S MELTING? A: I DON'T -- I CAN'T TESTIFY TO THE TYPE OF ICE CREAM. I DON'T KNOW -- Q: YOU'RE NOT AN EXPERT ON MELTING RATES? A: NO, I'M NOT. Q: OKAY. DID OFFICER RISKE TELL YOU THAT HE HAD DISCOVERED IN THE HOME OF THE FEMALE VICTIM SOME PARTIALLY MELTED ICE CREAM? A: AT ONE POINT THAT EVENING, HE DID, YES. Q: AND DID THAT GIVE YOU ANY IDEA AS TO WHAT THE BRACKETS WERE AROUND THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE HOMICIDE COULD HAVE BEEN COMMITTED? A: NO. NO, IT DIDN'T. Q: ALL RIGHT. SO FOR ALL YOU KNEW AT THAT POINT, IT COULD HAVE BEEN MUCH EARLIER THE PREVIOUS DAY, JUNE 12TH, THAT THE VICTIM WAS LAST SEEN ALIVE? A: I WASN'T GIVING TIME OF DEATH ANY KIND OF A THOUGHT, SIR. Q: I UNDERSTAND THAT. YOU WERE GIVEN A TIME WHEN EVERYBODY KNEW THEY WERE DEAD. I'M ASKING YOU, WERE YOU GIVEN ANY INFORMATION AS TO WHEN THEY WERE LAST SEEN OR HEARD AS BEING ALIVE? A: NO. Q: OKAY. THE BROADER THAT TIME CAN BE, THE MORE IMPORTANT THE MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE IS IN ESTABLISHING TIME OF DEATH. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: ARGUMENTATIVE. YES, IT IS, CALLS FOR SPECULATION. IT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS WITNESS' TESTIMONY. THIS IS SOMETHING YOU CAN COVER WITH ANOTHER WITNESS. MR. BAILEY: I UNDERSTAND. THE COURT: THANK YOU. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: I THINK YOU TOLD US SOMETIME AGO THAT YOU WERE AWARE THAT ESTABLISHING TIME OF DEATH COULD BE VERY IMPORTANT TO AN INVESTIGATION. A: YES, I DID. Q: AND I THINK YOU'VE ALSO TOLD US THAT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, FROM 1:25 UNTIL 2:10, YOU WERE THE PERSON IN CHARGE OF THE SCENE. A: CHARGE OF SECURING THE SCENE, YES. Q: AND IN CHARGE OF THE CASE UNTIL THE DETECTIVES ARRIVED? A: NO, I WAS NOT IN CHARGE OF THE CASE, SIR. Q: NO? A: NO. Q: YOU HAD NO OBLIGATION TO TAKE ANY STEPS TO EITHER FIND THE KILLERS OR CALL FOR ADDITIONAL HELP? A: NOT AT THAT POINT. MY OBLIGATION WAS TO MAKE SURE THAT CRIME SCENE WAS PROTECTED. Q: IS IT THE POLICY OF YOUR DEPARTMENT NOT TO LET ANYONE CALL FOR THE CORONER TECHNICIANS UNTIL THE DETECTIVES GET THERE? A: GENERALLY THAT'S A DETECTIVE'S ADVISE, YES. Q: IS THERE ANY CASE, ANY CASE IN LOS ANGELES WHERE THE CORONER IS NOT CALLED AFTER A MURDER OCCURS THAT YOU KNOW OF? A: NOT THAT I KNOW OF, NO. Q: DO YOU THINK THERE'S ANY RISK WHATSOEVER IN NOT CALLING THE CORONER PROMPTLY? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. AGAIN, CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THIS IS NOT -- THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU KNOW HIS NUMBER? A: THE CORONER'S NUMBER? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS IS IRRELEVANT, ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I DON'T KNOW IT BY HEART, BUT I HAD ACCESS TO IT. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: COULD YOU HAVE REACHED THE CORONER'S OFFICE IF YOU WANTED TO? A: YES. YES. Q: IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT AT NO TIME DID YOU ATTEMPT TO DO THAT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: OKAY. NOW, I THINK YOU'VE DESCRIBED FOR US THE PLACES THAT YOU WENT BEFORE DETECTIVES PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN ARRIVED AT ABOUT 10 MINUTES AFTER 2:00 THAT MORNING. A: YES. Q: IS THAT THE FIRST TIME YOU SAW THEM THAT DAY? A: IS THAT THE FIRST TIME I SAW THE DETECTIVES? YES, IT IS. Q: ON JUNE 13TH. A: YES, SIR. Q: HAD YOU SEEN THEM ON JUNE 12TH? A: I DON'T REMEMBER IF I DID. Q: OKAY. DID THEY ARRIVE TOGETHER IN THE SAME VEHICLE? A: YES, THEY DID. Q: DO YOU REMEMBER WHERE THEY PARKED? A: YES, I DO. Q: NOW, HAD YOU THE SLIGHTEST IDEA WHEN THEY ARRIVED WHO THE OTHER VICTIM, THAT IS TO SAY, THE MALE VICTIM WAS? A: NO, SIR, I DIDN'T. Q: DO YOU KNOW IF ANY EFFORTS HAD BEEN MADE TO IDENTIFY THAT VICTIM? A: NO. Q: HAD ANYONE TAKEN DOWN THE NUMBERS OF AUTOMOBILES PARKED IN THE VICINITY ON THE CHANCE THAT THE VICTIM MAY HAVE DRIVEN TO THE SCENE? A: YES. Q: HAD THEY BEEN RUN THROUGH THE CENTRAL COMPUTER TO IDENTIFY THE REGISTERED OWNERS? A: I DON'T BELIEVE SO AT THAT POINT. Q: HAD NOT BEEN DONE BY 2:10 A.M.? A: NOT THAT I KNOW OF. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT -- BY THE WAY, HOW LONG DID YOU SPEND INSIDE THE HOME AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY? A: I NEVER WENT INSIDE. Q: YOU NEVER WENT INSIDE. A: NO, SIR. Q: DID YOU ASK FOR A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT WAS INSIDE FROM ANY OF THE OFFICERS WHO HAD BEEN THROUGH IT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID YOU EVER LEARN WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A LIST IN THE KITCHEN OF ALL THE IMPORTANT NUMBERS, PHONE NUMBERS, POLICE, FIRE, RELATIVES, ET CETERA? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID YOU EVER ASK? A: NO, I DIDN'T ASK. Q: OKAY. WHAT WAS THE VERY FIRST THING THAT THE TWO DETECTIVES DID WHEN THEY ARRIVED AND AFTER YOU TOLD THEM WHAT YOU HAD SEEN WHEN YOU WENT ONTO THE CRIME SCENE? A: THEY VIEWED THE VICTIMS. Q: WELL, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEIR PURPOSE WAS IN DOING THAT? A: TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE. Q: AND WHAT PATH DID THEY TAKE TO GET FROM THE SIDEWALK WHERE I PRESUME THEY STARTED TO THE SCENE INSIDE THE GATE? DO YOU KNOW? A: THEY TOOK THE SAME PATH THAT I HAD TAKEN. Q: SO IF RISKE TOOK THAT PATH AND YOU TOOK IT AND NOW THE TWO DETECTIVES HAD TAKEN IT, HAD ANYONE ELSE TAKEN IT IN THE INTERIM? A: SERGEANT COON. Q: SERGEANT COON. HOW ABOUT ANY -- HOW ABOUT CAPTAIN ZEALMAN FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT? A: HE WASN'T THERE WHEN I WAS THERE. Q: NEVER WAS? A: NO. Q: HADN'T HE ALREADY COME AND GONE? A: I BELIEVE SO, YES. Q: OH. AND HE WAS THERE TO ASSURE THAT THE BODIES WERE DEAD? A: YES. Q: AND HAD DONE THAT? A: AS FAR AS I KNOW. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION, HEARSAY, NO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU KNOW HOW HE GOT FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE CRIME SCENE? THE COURT: WHO IS HE? MR. BAILEY: CAPTAIN ZEALMAN, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: IF HE HAD COME AND GONE, HOW DOES HE KNOW? MR. BAILEY: SOMEONE MAY HAVE TOLD HIM. THE COURT: HEARSAY, SPECULATION. NEXT QUESTION. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT HE HAD WALKED THE SAME PATH THAT YOU WALKED? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, THAT HE WALKED AT ALL. THE COURT: OVERRULED. A MORE ARTFULLY PHRASED QUESTION. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION, IF YOU KNOW. THE WITNESS: PLEASE REPEAT IT. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT HE HAD WALKED FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE CRIME SCENE ON THE SAME PATH THAT YOU AND RISKE AND COON HAD WALKED? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR HEARSAY, ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. THIS WITNESS SAID HE CAME RIGHT BEFORE HE GOT THERE. HOW WOULD HE KNOW? ONLY BY HEARSAY. THE COURT: THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU KNOW. OVERRULED. DO YOU KNOW? THE WITNESS: NO, SIR, I DON'T KNOW. THE COURT: NEXT QUESTION. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. DID PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN WALK TOGETHER UP THAT SAME PATH? A: YES, THEY DID. Q: CAN YOU NOW REMEMBER THE NATURE OF THE SURFACE OF THE EARTH OVER WHICH ALL OF YOU WALKED THAT MORNING? A: IT WAS A FORM OF GRASS AS I RECALL. Q: WASN'T IT SOFT LOAM IN WHICH PLANTS WERE GROWING? A: THERE WERE PLANTS, GROUND-COVER TYPE PLANTS, YES. Q: YOU TOLD US EARLIER THAT IN ORDER TO BE SURE THAT YOU DIDN'T DISTURB ANY EVIDENCE, YOU TOOK YOUR FLASHLIGHT AND WALKED UP THE PATH MAKING SURE THERE WERE NO FOOTPRINTS THERE THAT YOU WOULD STEP ON. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT? A: MAKE SURE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE. Q: FOOTPRINTS WOULD BE EVIDENCE. A: OF ANY KIND. YES. Q: OR ANY OTHER EVIDENCE? A: CORRECT. Q: DID YOU SEE EVERYBODY ELSE DO THAT AS THEY WENT UP THE PATH? A: YES. Q: TOOK THE FLASHLIGHT? A: YES. Q: NOW, YOU SAID THAT WHEN YOU WALKED UP THE PATH, YOU DIDN'T SEE OFFICER RISKE'S FOOTPRINTS. A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: AND YOU DIDN'T SEE SERGEANT COON'S FOOTPRINTS. WELL, WHEN DETECTIVES PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN WALKED UP THAT PATH, DID THEY TURN TO YOU AND SAY, "SERGEANT ROSSI, THERE ARE FOOTPRINTS HERE"? A: NO, THEY DIDN'T. Q: DID NOT. OKAY. THEY CONTINUED UP THE SCENE AND INSPECTED THE AREA AND THE BODIES, RIGHT? A: YES. Q: WHERE DID THEY NEXT GO OR EITHER ONE OF THEM? A: THEY BOTH THEN CAME BACK DOWN TO THE SIDEWALK TO WHERE I WAS. Q: NOW, AT THIS POINT, DID ANY OF YOU LOOK FOR HUMAN FOOTPRINTS AS OPPOSED TO PAW PRINTS AROUND THE AREA OF THE SIDEWALK IN THE STREET AND SO FORTH? A: YES. Q: WHERE DID YOU LOOK? A: RIGHT AROUND THE -- AS WE WALKED ON THE SIDEWALK, WE KEPT LOOKING WITH OUR FLASHLIGHTS. Q: AND DID YOU FURTHER LOOK IN THE SHRUBBERY WHERE YOU HAD WALKED PARALLEL TO THE SIDEWALK TO SEE IF ANYONE HAD LEFT IN THAT FASHION? A: I DIDN'T PERSONALLY, BUT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN WERE USING THEIR FLASHLIGHT IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. Q: WHERE DID YOU SEE THEM INSPECT WHILE YOU WERE THERE? A: AROUND WHERE THE VICTIMS WERE LYING AND IN THE GRASSY AREA. AT ONE POINT, ONE OF THEM WALKED OVER TO THE SIDEWALK AREA THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE WALKWAY AND SHINED HIS LIGHT. Q: OKAY. JUST YES OR NO. DID MR. FUHRMAN SAY WHETHER OR NOT HE KNEW THE FEMALE VICTIM? A: NO, SIR, HE DIDN'T. Q: DID HE SAY WHETHER OR NOT HE HAD EVER MET HER OR HER EX-HUSBAND BEFORE? A: NOT TO ME. Q: NO DISCUSSION ALONG THOSE LINES? A: NO. Q: OKAY. WHAT MEANS OF COMMUNICATION WERE DETECTIVES PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN USING IN YOUR PRESENCE THAT MORNING? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. VAGUE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID EITHER ONE OF THEM HAVE A CELLULAR PHONE? A: YES. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS HAD ONE. Q: DID YOU OBSERVE HIM USING IT TO CALL OTHER PEOPLE? A: YES. Q: AND WERE YOU STANDING CLOSE ENOUGH TO LEARN WHO HE PURPORTED TO BE CALLING? A: YES. ON ONE CALL I DID. Q: WHICH WAS THAT? A: WHEN HE CALLED ROBBERY-HOMICIDE. Q: OKAY. THAT WAS PURSUANT TO THE MESSAGE YOU GAVE HIM FROM THE CHIEF SAYING HE WANTED ROBBERY-HOMICIDE, WHICH MEANT THE DETECTIVES DOWNTOWN, IN ON THIS CASE, RIGHT? A: YES, SIR. Q: DID YOU TELL THEM WHY THE CHIEF SAID THAT HE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE? A: NO. I JUST TOLD THEM THAT WAS WHAT THE CHIEF -- Q: THAT WAS AN ORDER? A: YES. Q: AND IT WAS NON-DISCRETIONARY? A: YES. Q: PURSUANT TO WHICH FUHRMAN MADE THE CALL? A: YES, HE DID. Q: CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT WHAT TIME ACCORDING TO YOUR BEST RECOLLECTION AFTER 2:10 A.M. WHEN HE ARRIVED DETECTIVE PHILLIPS CALLED ROBBERY-HOMICIDE? A: IT WAS AFTER WE WALKED TO THE REAR OF THE LOCATION. SO I WOULD SAY PROBABLY 15 MINUTES AFTER THEY ARRIVED. Q: OKAY. SO THEY ARRIVED AT THE CURB, UP THE LITTLE PATH, LOOK AT THE SCENE, COME BACK OUT, SHINE THEIR LIGHTS IN THE FOLIAGE AND THEN GO AROUND DOROTHY UP THE ALLEY TO THE REAR GATE. A: THAT'S CORRECT, YES. Q: NOW, DID THEY THEN GO IN THE HOUSE? A: YES. Q: THEY DID? A: YES, THEY DID. Q: HOW LONG WOULD YOU SAY THEY HAD BEEN ON THE SCENE WHEN THEY WENT INTO THE HOUSE? A: OH, PROBABLY 15, 20 MINUTES. Q: HAD THEY BEFORE GOING INTO THE HOUSE VENTURED UP THE WALKWAY INSIDE THE REAR GATE? A: DID THEY GO UP THE WALKWAY PRIOR TO GOING IN THE HOUSE? WAS THAT THE QUESTION? Q: YEAH. A: YES, SIR. Q: HOW LONG DID THEY SPEND GOING UP THE WALKWAY TOWARD THE CRIME SCENE FROM THE ALLEY AND THROUGH THE GATE? HOW MUCH TIME? A: IT WAS JUST DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND I AND IT WAS ONLY PROBABLY ABOUT A MINUTE. Q: WELL, DID YOU VENTURE AS FAR AS YOU HAD ON YOUR FIRST TRIP WITH RISKE? A: YES. Q: AND DID YOU STOP IN THE SAME PLACE? A: YES, SIR. Q: AND DID YOU POINT OUT TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS THE VISIBLE FOOTPRINTS THAT YOU HAD NOTICED BEFORE? A: YES, I DID. Q: DID DETECTIVE PHILLIPS SAY ANYTHING TO YOU ABOUT WIPING OUT FOOTPRINTS THAT WEREN'T VISIBLE? A: NO. Q: DID NOT. YOU JUST WALKED UP THERE. HOW MANY FEET WOULD YOU SAY IT WAS FROM THE GATE TO WHERE YOU STOPPED? A: OH, PROBABLY A HUNDRED AND -- FROM WHERE AGAIN? I AM SORRY. Q: FROM THE REAR GATE -- YOU ENTERED THE REAR GATE I TAKE IT? A: RIGHT. Q: YOU NOTICED BLOOD DROPS THERE, THEN WALKED IN. DID YOU NOTICE THEM THE SECOND TIME? A: YES. Q: DID YOU POINT THEM OUT TO DETECTIVE PHILLIPS? A: ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE BLOOD DROPS OR THE FOOTPRINTS? Q: NO. THE BLOOD DROPS NEAR THE GATE. A: YES, I DID. Q: AND THEN YOU WALKED UP THE WALKWAY -- A: RIGHT. Q: -- THAT GOES BESIDES THE HOUSE TOWARDS THE CRIME SCENE. A: YES, SIR. Q: DO YOU KNOW TODAY WHAT THE TOTAL DISTANCE IS BETWEEN THE GATES? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: ANY ESTIMATE? A: 110 FEET. Q: OKAY. WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT DISTANCE WOULD YOU SAY THAT YOU COVERED ON THESE TWO OCCASIONS ON FOOT? A: APPROXIMATELY 30 FEET. Q: 30. A: 30, 35 FEET, YES. Q: SO YOU DIDN'T GET UP AS FAR AS THE ENTRY DOOR OFF THE WALKWAY; IS THAT RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: OKAY. WHAT WAS THE OTHER DETECTIVE DOING WHILE YOU TWO WERE WALKING UP THE WALKWAY? A: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN? Q: UH-HUH. A: HE REMAINED BEHIND BEHIND THE GARAGE. Q: DOING WHAT? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: WELL, DID YOU SEE HIM LOOKING OVER THE JEEP? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: EVER SEE ANYONE TOUCH THE JEEP? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: EVER SEE ANYONE DUST THE JEEP? A: NO, SIR. Q: OKAY. DURING THIS FIRST 15-MINUTE PERIOD AND BEFORE THE CALL WAS PLACED BY PHILLIPS TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE, DID YOU HEAR ANYONE CALL THE CORONER? A: NO, I DID NOT. Q: DID NOT. DID YOU FELLOWS DISCUSS THE WISDOM OF DOING THAT? A: IT WASN'T DISCUSSED WITH ME, NO. Q: WHEN DID THEY ENTER THE HOME? BEFORE OR AFTER THE CALL DOWNTOWN? A: I BELIEVE IT WAS BEFORE. Q: OKAY. AND THEY WALKED IN THROUGH THE GARAGE? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: IS THAT HOW THEY ENTERED? A: YES. Q: YOU CAN ENTER THROUGH THE GARAGE OR THROUGH THE WALKWAY, RIGHT? A: NOT THE WALKWAY. Q: AREN'T THERE TWO DOORS INTO THE HOME FROM THE WALKWAY? A: THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS -- WELL, WHAT WALKWAY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? Q: THE WALKWAY I AM TALKING ABOUT RUNS GATE TO GATE ALL UP AND DOWN. A: I DON'T REMEMBER AN ENTRANCE TO THE HOUSE THERE, NO. Q: NO. A: NO, SIR. Q: WHERE WAS THE ENTRANCE TO THE HOUSE THAT YOU COULD GO IN IF YOU DIDN'T WANT TO GO THROUGH THE GARAGE? A: I SAW A FRONT DOOR THAT WAS ON THE BUNDY SIDE OF THE HOUSE. Q: IS THERE A WALKWAY PARALLEL TO BUNDY? A: PARALLEL TO BUNDY? Q: YEAH. A: YEAH. THERE'S A WALKWAY FROM THE SIDEWALK UP. Q: NO. I UNDERSTAND THAT. EXCLUDE IF YOU WILL THE WALKWAY THAT RUNS GATE TO GATE. A: OKAY. Q: UP SOME STEPS, DOWN SOME STEPS AND SO FORTH. A: EXCLUDE THAT. Q: EXCLUDE THAT. A: OKAY. Q: ARE THERE ANY OTHER WALKWAYS THAT GIVE ACCESS TO THE HOME? A: NO. Q: OKAY. SO, THEREFORE, ANY DOORS AT GROUND LEVEL THAT ENTERED THE HOME HAVE TO BE ADJACENT TO THAT WALKWAY, DON'T THEY? A: TO THE WALKWAY IN THE FRONT. NOW, I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE WALKWAY ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE. Q: THE WALKWAY ON THE FRONT STARTING AT THE GATE RUNS BESIDE THE HOUSE ALL THE WAY TO THE WALKWAY IN THE BACK, DOESN'T IT, SERGEANT? A: IT ALSO LEADS OFF TO THE FRONT DOOR. Q: AND YOU SAY THAT'S NOT ALL ONE WALKWAY. A: WELL, IT LEADS OFF -- YOU HAVE TO TURN INTO THE DOOR TO GET TO IT. Q: LET'S MOVE ON. THEY WENT IN THROUGH THE GARAGE IN ANY EVENT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: YOU NEVER ENTERED THE HOUSE AND YOU MAY NOT EVEN KNOW WHERE THE DOORS ARE; IS THAT FAIR? A: I KNOW WHERE THE FRONT DOOR IS BECAUSE I SAW IT FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. Q: DO YOU KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER DOORS? A: NO. Q: DID THEY BOTH ENTER THROUGH THE GARAGE AND LEAVE THROUGH THE GARAGE? A: YES, THEY DID. Q: HOW LONG WERE THEY IN THE HOUSE? A: NOT LONG. PROBABLY FIVE TO 10 MINUTES. Q: HAD YOU DISCUSSED WITH THE DETECTIVES PRIOR TO THEIR GOING INTO THE HOUSE THE WISDOM OF TRYING TO LOCATE MR. SIMPSON TO WARN HIM? A: NO, I DIDN'T DISCUSS THAT WITH THE DETECTIVES. Q: AND THEY DIDN'T DISCUSS IT IN YOUR PRESENCE I TAKE IT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: IT WAS NOT A TOPIC OF URGENCY AS YOU NOW RECALL IT? A: WE DIDN'T DISCUSS IT. Q: OKAY. WHEN THEY LEFT THE HOUSE, DID THEY TELL YOU THAT THEY HAD FOUND A LISTING OF NUMBERS IN THE KITCHEN? A: NO, SIR. Q: DID THEY TELL YOU THAT THE TELEPHONES HAD SPEED DIALS WITH DAD? A: NO, THEY DID NOT. Q: DID NOT. ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU RECALL ANYTHING THEY TOLD YOU OF NOTE ABOUT WHAT THEY FOUND INSIDE THE HOUSE AS DETECTIVES? A: NO, THEY DIDN'T TELL ME ANYTHING ABOUT THE HOUSE. Q: YOU KNEW THAT OFFICER RISKE HAD WALKED THROUGH THE HOUSE, RIGHT? A: BEFORE I GOT THERE YOU MEAN? Q: YEAH. A: YES. Q: DID YOU EVER ISSUE ANY ORDERS TO PROTECT FOOTPRINTS IN THE CARPETING? A: NO. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THESE QUESTIONS GO TO -- THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU KNOW WHAT THEY ARE, SIR? A: DO I KNOW WHAT FOOTPRINTS IN A CARPETING -- Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT A CARPET CAN YIELD FOOTPRINTS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS? A: YES, THEY CAN. Q: DO YOU KNOW THEY CAN'T BE SEEN WITH A NAKED EYE GENERALLY? A: NO. I'VE SEEN CARPET -- FOOTPRINTS IN CARPET WITH MY NAKED EYE. Q: AND DO YOU KNOW THERE ARE SOME THAT CAN'T BE SEEN WITH A NAKED EYE? A: NO. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT. Q: YOU'VE NEVER HEARD OF THAT? A: NO. Q: OKAY. FINE. IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT NO STEPS WERE TAKEN TO PROTECT THE CARPETING IN CASE THE FOOTPRINTS OF SOMEBODY RELEVANT MIGHT ALREADY BE THERE? A: I DON'T KNOW WHAT STEPS WERE TAKEN INSIDE THE HOUSE, SIR. Q: I'M SORRY. LET ME REPHRASE IT. IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT YOU KNOW OF NO STEPS THAT WERE TAKEN BY YOU OR ANYONE ELSE TO PROTECT THE CARPETING IN THE HOUSE? A: I DON'T KNOW WHAT STEPS WERE TAKEN IN THE HOUSE. Q: OKAY. WERE ANY STEPS TAKEN TO PROTECT ITEMS LIKE THE TELEPHONES FROM FINGERPRINTS? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: WHEN THE DETECTIVES CAME BACK OUT THROUGH THE GARAGE, WERE YOU STANDING -- THE COURT: EXCUSE ME, MR. BAILEY. (BRIEF PAUSE.) (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL AND THE DEFENDANT.) THE COURT: THANK YOU, MR. BAILEY. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHAT DID YOU DO WHILE THEY WERE INSIDE THE HOUSE, SERGEANT? A: I MADE MYSELF AVAILABLE IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE ON BUNDY AT DOROTHY. Q: AND I TAKE IT YOU NEVER SAW THEM COME OUT BACK OUT THROUGH THE GARAGE? A: EXCUSE ME. WHEN YOU -- YOU SAID WHEN THEY WERE IN THE HOUSE? I BEG YOUR PARDON. I JUST STAYED BEHIND THE GARAGE IN THE AREA BACK THERE. Q: WAS THERE ANY REASON THAT YOU DIDN'T ACCOMPANY THEM INTO THE HOUSE? A: I DIDN'T SEE ANY NEED OR I DIDN'T SEE IT NECESSARY FOR ME TO GO IN THE HOUSE. Q: IS THAT BECAUSE FROM THE TIME OF THEIR ARRIVAL ON, THE DETECTING WAS LEFT TOTALLY UP TO THEM? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: OKAY. AFTER THEY CAME OUT OF THE HOUSE, WHAT DID THEY NEXT DO? A: I BELIEVE THAT'S WHEN DETECTIVE PHILLIPS OR WHEN I DISCUSSED WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ABOUT CALLING ROBBERY-HOMICIDE PER THE ORDER OF DEPUTY CHIEF FRANKLIN. Q: ALL RIGHT. THIS WAS 15 MINUTES AFTER THEIR ARRIVAL? A: 15, 20 MINUTES I WOULD SAY, YEAH. Q: OKAY. NOW, IS PROMPTNESS TO THE CRIME SCENE IMPORTANT IN HOMICIDE CASES? A: I WOULD THINK SO. Q: YOUR EXPERIENCE HAS TAUGHT YOU THAT IT IS, RIGHT? A: YES. Q: OKAY. WAS THERE ANY REASON WHY YOU WAITED 15 OR 20 MINUTES TO PASS ALONG THE CHIEF'S ORDER? A: TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST, I DIDN'T THINK OF IT UNTIL THEN. Q: THE CHIEF GAVE YOU AN ORDER AT 1:15 A.M. AND YOU FORGOT IT AT 2:10? A: I DIDN'T FORGET IT. I JUST DIDN'T THINK OF IT UNTIL I TOLD HIM. Q: IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT IT SLIPPED YOUR MEMORY FOR A BIT? A: THERE WAS A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON. YES, COULD HAVE. Q: CAN YOU REMEMBER WHAT IT IS THAT JOGGED IT BACK? A: NO. I JUST REMEMBERED AND I TOLD HIM. Q: LIKE THAT (SNAPPED FINGERS)? A: YES. Q: AND DID DETECTIVE PHILLIPS CALL RATHER PROMPTLY AFTER YOU RELAYED THE DIRECTION YOU HAD BEEN GIVEN? A: YES, SIR. Q: NOW, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE DETECTIVES IN THE DOWNTOWN ROBBERY-HOMICIDE UNIT? A: NO, I'M NOT. Q: DID YOU KNOW ANY OF THEM BEFORE THIS CASE? A: NO. Q: ARE THEY GENERALLY THE MOST SENIOR IN EXPERIENCE TO THE LAPD? A: I WOULD SAY GENERALLY. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND DID THE CHIEF TELL YOU THAT'S WHY HE WANTED THEM CALLED IN THIS CASE? A: THE CHIEF INDICATED TO ME THEY HAD MORE RESOURCES. Q: OKAY. DID THE CHIEF INDICATE THAT HE ALSO WANTED THEM THERE BECAUSE HE ANTICIPATED THE DEGREE OF PRESS ATTENTION THAT WOULD ACCOMPANY THIS CASE? A: I DON'T REMEMBER IF HE INDICATED THAT AT ALL. Q: OKAY. NOW, A DETECTIVE ROBERTS ARRIVED APPARENTLY AT BUNDY SHORTLY AFTER DETECTIVES FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS. DO YOU RECALL THAT? A: YES, I DO. Q: WHO IS DETECTIVE ROBERTS? CAN YOU TELL US? A: THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME I MET DETECTIVE ROBERTS. I BELIEVE HE'S A WEST L.A. DETECTIVE. Q: HIS HEADQUARTERS IS IN YOUR STATION? A: AS FAR AS I KNOW. Q: DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG HE HAD BEEN ATTACHED THERE? A: NO, SIR, I DON'T. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHAT HIS GRADE WAS? A: NO, I DO NOT. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHY HE WAS SUMMONED TO BUNDY ALONG WITH THE TWO THAT YOU HAD BROUGHT THERE? A: NO, I DIDN'T KNOW. Q: AT ABOUT THE TIME DETECTIVE ROBERTS ARRIVED, IT APPEARS THAT LIEUTENANT SPANGLER ARRIVED. IS THAT SQUARE WITH YOUR RECOLLECTION? A: I THINK THEY'RE PRETTY CLOSE, YEAH. Q: WELL, ABOUT 20 MINUTES AFTER DETECTIVES FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS ARRIVED OR ABOUT 2:30? A: THAT SOUNDS REASONABLE, YES. Q: OKAY. AND LIEUTENANT SPANGLER ORDINARILY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SENIOR PERSON THERE, CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: NOW, CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THE RELATIVE AUTHORITY WAS SINCE PHILLIPS AT ABOUT 2:30 WAS CALLING DOWNTOWN FOR THOSE DETECTIVES AND THE CHIEF DETECTIVE FROM WEST L.A. WAS ARRIVING ON THE SCENE? WHAT'S THE PECKING ORDER AT THIS POINT? A: I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. Q: ALL RIGHT. LET ME REPHRASE. WE HAVE PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN IN CHARGE OF THE DETECTIVES THERE FIRST, RIGHT? A: RIGHT. Q: WE HAVE THEM TOLD BY YOU THAT THE CHIEF WANTS THEM NOT TO BE IN CHARGE, BUT TO BRING IN THE DETECTIVES FROM DOWNTOWN. A: RIGHT. Q: AND DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, FOLLOWING THAT DIRECTION, CALLS DOWNTOWN AND RELAYS THAT REQUEST, RIGHT? A: THAT'S RIGHT. Q: THE CHIEF WOULD HAVE NO POWER FROM WEST L.A. TO ORDER THEM OUT THERE IF THEY DIDN'T WANT TO COME, WOULD HE? A: THE CHIEF WOULD -- I DON'T KNOW IF I UNDERSTAND THAT, SIR. Q: CHIEF FRANKLIN COULDN'T ORDER DOWNTOWN DETECTIVES TO COME TO BRENTWOOD, COULD HE? A: WELL, CERTAINLY HE COULD. Q: HE COULD? THE PERSON YOU TALKED WITH? A: CHIEF FRANKLIN COULD HAVE ORDERED THEM, SURE. Q: ALL RIGHT. DOES HE HAVE AUTHORITY OVER ALL, ALL THE DETECTIVES IN THE FORCE? A: WELL, HE'S -- YES, HE DOES. HE'S OF MUCH HIGHER RANK. SO YEAH. Q: OKAY. SO THIS WASN'T OPTIONAL AS TO THEM EITHER, THE DETECTIVES DOWNTOWN THAT WERE RECEIVING THE CALL? A: RIGHT. Q: THEY WERE DIRECTED TO COME, TRUE? A: THAT'S TRUE. Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU KNOW WHAT ROBERTS' RANK IS? A: NO, SIR, I DON'T. Q: DID YOU SEE HIM DO ANYTHING WHEN HE ARRIVED? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID YOU SEE HIM REMAIN THERE AS LONG AS YOU WERE THERE? A: I BELIEVE HE DID. Q: DID YOU SEE HIM TALKING WITH DETECTIVES FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS AT ANY TIME? A: YES, I DID. Q: NOW, DID YOU SPEND MOST OF THE TIME BETWEEN 2:10 AND ABOUT 4:20 OR -30 IN THE COMPANY OF DETECTIVES FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS? A: NO. I WAS IN THE STREET TALKING WITH MY CAPTAIN AFTER I RETURNED TO THE FRONT OF THE CONDO. Q: OKAY. THIS WAS CAPTAIN DIAL? A: YES. Q: AND WHEN DID SHE ARRIVE? A: I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT TIME. I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK ON THE LOG. Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU DON'T RECALL AT THE MOMENT? A: I DON'T RECALL. Q: WOULD ABOUT 10 MINUTES AFTER DETECTIVE ROBERTS AND LIEUTENANT SPANGLER SEEM ABOUT RIGHT? A: I BELIEVE SHE GOT THERE A LITTLE BIT AFTER LIEUTENANT SPANGLER, YES. Q: OKAY. SO IF SHE GOT THERE AT 2:40, WOULD THAT SEEM TO BE SQUARE WITH YOUR RECOLLECTION? A: SOUNDS GOOD. Q: ALL RIGHT. SHE IS YOUR DIRECT SUPERIOR WHEREAS THE DETECTIVES ARE NOT. IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND IF YOU HAD ANY DIRECTION TO GET, IT WOULD BE FROM CAPTAIN DIAL AND NOT FROM THE DETECTIVES ON MATTERS UNRELATED TO THE CRIME SCENE ITSELF; IS THAT FAIR? A: UNRELATED TO THE CRIME SCENE. Q: YEAH. A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AS FAR AS BRINGING OFFICERS TO THE SCENE, SETTING UP PATROLS, ROADBLOCKS, ALL POINT BULLETINS, THINGS LIKE THAT, WOULD THAT BE WITHIN HER PURVIEW TO ORDER? A: YES, IT WOULD. Q: HOW LONG DID YOU SPEND TALKING WITH LIEUTENANT -- I AM SORRY -- WITH CAPTAIN DIAL? A: I WAS PROBABLY TALKING WITH CAPTAIN DIAL FOR ABOUT HALF AN HOUR. Q: SINCE YOU HAD ARRIVED AT ABOUT 1:25, 1:30 -- AND BY THE WAY, WEST L.A. STATION AT -- IS IT AT 1363 BUTLER AV? A: 1663. Q: 1663 BUTLER AV IS LESS THAN TWO MILES FROM 875 SOUTH BUNDY, ISN'T IT? A: I THINK IT'S A LITTLE FARTHER THAN THAT. I THINK IT'S CLOSER ABOUT FIVE MILES. Q: ISN'T ABOUT A MILE 4,000 FEET? A: IT'S 5,280 FEET. Q: NO. ISN'T IT ABOUT A MILE AND 4,000 FEET, IF YOU KNOW? A: SAY AGAIN? BEAR WITH ME, SIR. I'VE BEEN WORKING SINCE 10:00 O'CLOCK LAST NIGHT. WHAT WAS THE QUESTION? Q: I UNDERSTAND. SO HAVE I WAITING FOR YOU. SO WE'RE EVEN. NOW, ISN'T THE DISTANCE LESS THAN 10,000 FEET FROM BUTLER TO BUNDY? A: I DON'T KNOW. Q: OKAY. DIDN'T YOU GET THERE WITHIN A FEW MINUTES WHEN YOU LEFT AT 1:25 AFTER TALKING WITH CAPTAIN DIAL ON THE PHONE? A: IT TOOK ABOUT SEVEN MINUTES AS I RECALL. Q: SEVEN MINUTES. OKAY. IF YOU WENT FIVE MILES IN SEVEN MINUTES, YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN PULLED OVER, WOULDN'T YOU? A: PROBABLY NOT. I'M IN A BLACK AND WHITE. Q: OKAY. YOU MEAN NOBODY ARRESTS YOU FOR SPEEDING? A: I HOPE NOT. Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU HAVE A SIREN ON? A: NO, SIR. Q: WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME AFTER YOU ARRIVED AT THE SCENE THAT YOU SAW SOMEBODY TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS? A: I DON'T RECALL ANYBODY TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS WHILE I WAS THERE. Q: DO YOU KNOW A PHOTOGRAPHER NAMED ROKHAR, R-O-K-H-A-R? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: CAN YOU TELL US WHETHER OR NOT PHOTOGRAPHER ROKHAR ARRIVED AT THE SCENE AT 3:25? A: NO, I CAN NOT. Q: IF THE CRIME LOG SAYS THAT HE DID, IS IT LIKELY THAT HE DID, THIS BEING AN OFFICIAL RECORD? A: YES. Q: OKAY. SO YOU DID NOT LEAVE UNTIL, AS I UNDERSTAND THIS LOG, 4:10. A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND WENT BACK. A: YES. Q: SO IF ROKHAR WAS THERE FIRING FLASHBULBS FOR HALF AN HOUR BEFORE YOU LEFT, YOU NEVER NOTICED IT; IS THAT RIGHT? A: I DID NOT NOTICE IT, THAT'S CORRECT. Q: OKAY. IT WAS STILL PRETTY DARK AT THAT HOUR, WASN'T IT? A: YES, IT WAS. Q: DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT TIME SUNRISE WAS ON JUNE 13, 1994? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: WHAT WAS THE TEMPERATURE THAT NIGHT? DO YOU RECALL THAT? A: I REMEMBER IT AS BEING RELATIVELY WARM. Q: 60 DEGREES? A: THAT'S -- Q: OR BETTER? A: THAT'S REASONABLE, YES. Q: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I BELIEVE THAT YOU SAID ONE OF THE DOWNTOWN DETECTIVES, THAT BEING DETECTIVE PHIL VANNATTER, ARRIVED JUST AS YOU WERE DEPARTING BUNDY. A: I DON'T BELIEVE I SAID THAT. I REMEMBER HIM ARRIVING, BUT I DID STAY FOR SOME TIME AFTER HE SHOWED UP. Q: IF THE CRIME LOG HAS HIM IN AT 4:05 AND YOU OUT AT 4:10, DOES THAT SQUARE WITH YOUR RECOLLECTION, FIVE MINUTES OF TALK? A: SEEMS LIKE HE WAS THERE LONGER, BUT IF THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS, THAT'S PROBABLY CORRECT. Q: WELL, THE CRIME LOG IS NOT INFALLIBLE, IS IT? A: IT'S ONLY AS ACCURATE AS THE PERSON DOING IT. Q: OKAY. BUT YOU UNDERSTAND IN THIS CASE WAS AN OFFICER NAMED CUMMINGS? A: YES, SIR. Q: NOW, DID YOU HAVE SOME CONVERSATION WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER? A: UH, NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID YOU OBSERVE HIM TALKING WITH ANYONE? A: YEAH. I SAW HIM TALKING WITH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS. Q: DID YOU OBSERVE HIM TO GO UPON THE CRIME SCENE AS YOU HAD DONE? A: NO. Q: HOW CLOSE TO THE CRIME SCENE DID YOU SEE HIM GO? A: I DON'T RECALL. Q: WHERE WAS THE CONVERSATION TAKING PLACE BETWEEN DETECTIVE PHILLIPS AND VANNATTER? A: ON BUNDY AT THE INTERSECTION OF BUNDY AND DOROTHY. Q: DOWN AT THE CORNER WE'VE LOOKED AT IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: IS THAT THE CLOSEST YOU SAW DETECTIVE VANNATTER GET TO THE CRIME SCENE? A: YES, SIR. Q: UP UNTIL THE ARRIVAL OF DETECTIVE VANNATTER AT 4:05 A.M., TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, HAD ANY EFFORT WHATSOEVER BEEN MADE TO CONTACT MR. O.J. SIMPSON? A: NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. Q: UP UNTIL THE ARRIVAL OF DETECTIVE VANNATTER AT 4:05 A.M., TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, HAD ANY EFFORT BEEN MADE TO CALL A CORONER TO THE SCENE? A: NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. Q: HOW ABOUT CRIMINALISTS AND TECHNICIANS WHO TAKE FOOTPRINTS, FINGERPRINTS, ET CETERA? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION TO THE LAST THREE QUESTIONS INCLUDING THIS ONE, ALL BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS WITNESS' KNOWLEDGE. HE'S ALREADY TESTIFIED THAT'S NOT HIS JOB. THE COURT: OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU KNOW IF ANY OF THOSE PEOPLE HAD BEEN CALLED BEFORE YOU DEPARTED? A: NO, SIR, I DON'T KNOW. Q: AND WHEN DETECTIVE VANNATTER ARRIVED, DID YOU SEE HIM TAKE ANY STEPS IN THAT DIRECTION? A: NO, I DON'T RECALL. Q: ALL RIGHT. MY UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR TESTIMONY ON DIRECT IS THAT YOU WENT BACK TO YOUR STATION, NUMBER ONE, BECAUSE THERE WAS NO FURTHER NEED FOR YOUR SERVICES AND, NUMBER TWO, BECAUSE YOU HAD OTHER THINGS TO WORRY ABOUT AS WATCH COMMANDER. A: YES, SIR? Q: FAIR STATEMENT? A: YES. Q: BUT YOU WERE STILL READY, WILLING, ABLE AND AVAILABLE TO ASSIST IN THIS CASE IF CALLED UPON TO DO SO? A: YES, SIR. Q: HAD YOU BEEN GIVEN ANY SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS IN THAT REGARD BY CAPTAIN DIAL? A: NO, I WAS NOT. Q: OKAY. DID SHE LEAVE THE SCENE PRIOR TO THE TIME THAT YOU DID, IF YOU KNOW? A: NO. I LEFT BEFORE HER. Q: YOU DID. A: YES. Q: OKAY. DO YOU KNOW OF ANY REASON THAT AS TO BOTH LIEUTENANT SPANGLER AND CAPTAIN DIAL, THEIR TIME OF DEPARTURE ACCORDING TO THE CRIME LOG IS UNKNOWN? A: PLEASE REPEAT THE QUESTION. Q: YES. DO YOU KNOW OF ANY REASON THAT THE TIME OF DEPARTURE OF THOSE TWO OFFICERS, THE LIEUTENANT AND THE CAPTAIN, IS UNKNOWN ACCORDING TO THE CRIME LOG? A: NO, I DON'T KNOW. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY UNKNOWN. THE COURT: OVERRULED. ACCORDING TO THE CRIME LOG. OVERRULED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU PERSONALLY SEE ANYBODY LEAVE BUNDY WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO ROCKINGHAM? A: NO. Q: PRIOR TO THE TIME THAT YOU LEFT AND WENT BACK TO THE STATION, HAD ANYBODY ASKED YOU TO TRY TO ASSIST THEM IN FINDING OUT WHERE MR. SIMPSON RESIDED? A: NO, SIR. Q: WHAT DID YOU DO WHEN YOU GOT BACK TO THE STATION? A: STARTED TO DO SOME PAPERWORK. Q: RELATED TO THIS CASE? A: UNRELATED. Q: UNRELATED. A: YES. Q: DID YOU WRITE ANY REPORTS IN THIS CASE? A: I WROTE A WATCH COMMANDER'S LOG. Q: DID YOU WRITE ANY NOTES AT THE SCENE? A: NO, SIR. Q: DID YOU SEE ANY DETECTIVES WRITING NOTES AT THE SCENE? A: YES, I DID. Q: WHICH ONES? A: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS. Q: WHAT ABOUT THE OTHERS; ROBERTS, FUHRMAN, VANNATTER? A: I DON'T RECALL. Q: IS IT TRUE THAT DETECTIVE LANGE HAD NOT ARRIVED PRIOR TO THE TIME YOU DEPARTED? A: THE NAME AGAIN, SIR? Q: DEPARTMENT TOM LANGE FROM DOWNTOWN? A: THAT'S CORRECT. HE HAD NOT ARRIVED. Q: YOU DID NOT SEE HIM AT ANY TIME THAT NIGHT? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHAT TIME DID YOU GET BACK TO THE STATION? A: IT WAS RIGHT AROUND 5:00 O'CLOCK. Q: AND YOU HAD BEEN THERE ABOUT 13 MINUTES WHEN SOMEBODY ASKED YOU TO CALL WESTEC; IS THAT CORRECT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: AND YOU MADE THAT CALL ON A PHONE THAT HAS A TAPE ATTACHED TO IT AT 5:13 A.M., TRUE? A: I BELIEVE IT WAS NOT -- MY PHONE WASN'T TAPED, NO. Q: NO. I SAID ON A PHONE THAT HAD A TAPE, IN THIS CASE, BELONGING TO WESTEC. A: YES, SIR. Q: OKAY. YOU HAVE SINCE SEEN A TRANSCRIPT OF YOUR CONVERSATION. A: YES, SIR. THAT'S CORRECT. Q: RIGHT? NOW, MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT YOUR FIRST INQUIRY WHEN YOU GOT HOLD OF WESTEC WAS, IS MR. SIMPSON IN TOWN. A: YES. Q: WESTEC SAID THEY THOUGHT HE WAS? A: THE FIRST -- THAT'S NOT WHAT I -- SIR, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FIRST CONTACT I HAD -- Q: WELL, I'M TRYING TO AVOID GOING THROUGH EVERY LITTLE STEP THAT YOU WENT THROUGH ON DIRECT TO GET TO THE MEAT OF IT. FIRST OF ALL, DID YOU EVER INQUIRE OF WESTEC AS TO WHETHER THEY AS A MATTER OF COMMON PRACTICE HAD ANY KNOWLEDGE OF WHETHER MR. SIMPSON WAS IN TOWN? A: YES, I DID. Q: AND WHAT DID THEY TELL YOU? A: THEY SAID THEY DIDN'T KNOW IF HE WAS IN TOWN. Q: NO, NO. PLEASE. THE QUESTION PERHAPS, AS HIS HONOR WOULD SAY, WAS INARTFULLY PHRASED. BEFORE RELYING ON WESTEC'S RESPONSE THAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW IF HE WAS IN TOWN, DID YOU TRY TO ESTABLISH WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN IF HE WAS IN TOWN? A: NO. Q: NO. SO YOU DIDN'T KNOW AT THAT POINT WHETHER THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF HIS WHEREABOUTS WAS EVEN RELEVANT OR NOT? MS. CLARK: WELL, OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU HAVE ANY REASON TO BELIEVE THAT WESTEC, THE SECURITY OUTFIT WHOSE PLAQUE WAS ON THE GROUNDS AT THE -- MR. SIMPSON'S HOME -- A: NO, I DID NOT. Q: -- HAD ANY PRACTICE OF KEEPING TRACK OF IT? A: NO, I DIDN'T KNOW. Q: OKAY. WHEN YOU TALKED TO NO. 48 OR WHOEVER IT WAS WHO SAID THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER HE WAS IN TOWN OR NOT, DID YOU THEN INQUIRE AS TO WHETHER THEY HAD ANY MEANS OF FINDING OUT? A: YES, I DID. Q: OKAY. AND WERE THEY ABLE TO REFER YOU TO ANY LOGS THAT THEY KEPT OR OTHER ROUTINE PIECES OF PAPERWORK WITHIN THEIR OFFICE THAT WOULD INDICATE WHETHER THEIR CLIENTS WERE AT HOME OR ELSEWHERE? A: NO, THEY DIDN'T. Q: THEY INDEED INDICATED THAT WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO IS THE SAME THING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO, AND THAT IS CALL ON THE TELEPHONE OR PAY A VISIT, RIGHT? A: THE OPERATOR 48 SAID HE HAD SOME EXTRA NUMBERS THAT HE COULDN'T GIVE ME, BUT HE WOULD CHECK THEM FOR ME. Q: OKAY. WELL, YOU I BELIEVE AT THIS POINT TOLD HIM YOU HAD AN EMERGENCY ON YOUR HANDS, DIDN'T YOU? A: I TOLD HIM THE DETECTIVES WERE REQUESTING -- I DIDN'T -- I NEVER DID TELL HIM IT WAS AN EMERGENCY. Q: YOU DIDN'T? A: AT ONE POINT, I DID, BUT IT WAS LATER ON IN THE CONVERSATION. Q: WHY DID YOU AFTER 5:00 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, HAVING NOT LIFTED A FINGER TO NOTIFY MR. SIMPSON FOR OVER FOUR HOURS, SUDDENLY DECLARE AN EMERGENCY? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS IS ARGUMENTATIVE, HARASSING THIS WITNESS. HE CAN JUST ASK QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR. THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION. THE WITNESS: PLEASE REPEAT IT. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHY DID YOU DECLARE AN EMERGENCY FIVE HOURS AFTER IT APPARENTLY AROSE? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. WHEN DETECTIVE VANNATTER -- THE COURT: OVERRULED. HE'S ALREADY TESTIFIED HE DID USE THE WORD "EMERGENCY" LATER IN THE CONVERSATION. THE WITNESS: I DIDN'T FEEL I WAS DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. THEY ASKED ME IF IT WAS AN EMERGENCY AND I SAID YES, IT IS. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHY DID YOU USE THE WORD? A: I JUST -- I DIDN'T USE THE WORD. THEY DID. THEY SAID, IS IT AN EMERGENCY, AND I SAID YES, IT IS. Q: WELL, THAT ADOPTED THE WORD THEY USED IN THEIR QUESTION, RIGHT? A: I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT. Q: YOU INTENDED TO CONVEY TO THEM YOU HAD AN EMERGENCY ON YOUR HANDS? A: YES. Q: THEY WERE RELYING ON YOUR JUDGMENT, NOT THERE'S, IN THE USE OF THAT WORD, RIGHT? A: THAT'S CORRECT. Q: ALL RIGHT. AND THE REASON YOU USED THE WORD WAS TO GET THEM TO CIRCUMVENT THEIR OWN RULES IN GIVING YOU SOME NUMBERS, TRUE? A: NO, SIR. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. MS. CLARK: HOW DOES HE KNOW? THE COURT: THE QUESTION AND ANSWER WILL STAND. HE SAID NO. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU AFTER BEING TOLD THAT 48 OR WHOMEVER YOU WERE SPEAKING WITH ON THE PHONE DIDN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GIVE YOU THE NUMBERS, ASKED THAT YOU BE GIVEN THE NUMBERS ANYWAY? A: NO. Q: NEVER DID? A: NO, I DIDN'T. Q: DID YOU ASK THAT A SUPERVISOR BE CALLED SO THAT THE NUMBERS COULD BE GIVEN TO YOU IN WESTEC? A: I ASKED THAT A SUPERVISOR RESPOND TO THE LOCATION ON ROCKINGHAM. Q: OKAY. DID YOU GET A PHONE NUMBER AT SOME POINT ONCE THEY FOUND THEIR CLIENT IN THEIR RECORDS? A: NO, SIR. Q: NEVER DID? A: I NEVER DID. Q: YOU HAVE TOLD US THEN THAT AT AROUND 5:30, 5:40, IT WAS DETERMINED BY PEOPLE AT THE SCENE THAT A FORCIBLE ENTRY MIGHT BE NECESSARY? A: YES. Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHAT REASON WERE YOU GIVEN THAT A FORCIBLE ENTRY AT THE ROCKINGHAM RESIDENCE OF O.J. SIMPSON MIGHT BE NECESSARY AT 5:30 ON JUNE 13TH? A: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS TOLD ME ON THE TELEPHONE THAT THEY HAD FOUND SOME EVIDENCE AT THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION THAT MAY INDICATE THAT THERE COULD BE ANOTHER CRIME SCENE OR A VICTIM INSIDE THAT LOCATION. Q: AND DID HE TELL YOU WHAT IT WAS? A: NO, SIR. Q: OKAY. AND HE SAID IN ESSENCE, THEY MIGHT HAVE TO BREAK DOWN THE DOOR? A: IF THEY COULDN'T GET A KEY, THAT'S CORRECT. Q: OKAY. NOW, DID THEY TELL YOU WHAT EFFORTS THEY HAD MADE TO ATTRACT THE ATTENTION OF ANYONE WHO MIGHT BE RESIDENT WITHIN THE PREMISES? A: NO, THEY DIDN'T. Q: LIKE TURNING ON A SIREN? A: NO. Q: HAD ANYBODY TRIED THAT TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE? A: NOT THAT I KNOW OF. Q: THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER ANYBODY WAS HOME OR NOT AT HOME, DID THEY? A: I DON'T KNOW IF THEY DID OR NOT, SIR. Q: WHO DID YOU UNDERSTAND -- BASED ON WHAT YOU WERE BEING TOLD BY PHILLIPS, WHO DID YOU UNDERSTAND WAS PRESENT AT THAT TIME WHEN THIS MODE WAS BEING CONTEMPLATED? A: HE NEVER TOLD ME, I NEVER ASKED. Q: WELL, DID HE INDICATE THAT HE NEEDED MORE HELP FROM ANY OF YOUR PEOPLE? A: NO, HE DIDN'T. Q: DID HE INDICATE WHETHER IT WAS HIMSELF OR SOMEONE ELSE WHO WOULD COME UPON THIS EVIDENCE THAT NECESSITATED A FORCE ENTRY? A: NO, HE DIDN'T TELL ME THAT. Q: YOU WANTED A WESTEC PERSON IN THE EVENT FORCED ENTRY WAS NECESSARY TO BE PRESENT? A: TO BE PRESENT, YES, SIR. Q: OKAY. AND WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE IN THAT? A: TO WITNESS IF THEY HAD A FORCED ENTRY. Q: WITNESS WHAT? A: THE FORCED ENTRY. Q: AND WHAT COULD THE WESTEC PERSON IN YOUR JUDGMENT CONTRIBUTE TO THE MATTER BY HIM BEING PRESENT WHILE YOU BROKE DOWN THE DOOR? A: THE FACT THAT THEY HAD THE SECURITY CONTRACT, I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE. Q: WELL, WAS THERE ANY THOUGHT ON YOUR PART THAT THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO FIND A WAY IN WITHOUT A KEY AND WITHOUT BREAKING DOWN THE DOOR BY VIRTUE OF THEIR POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THEIR CLIENT, MR. SIMPSON? A: WESTEC? Q: YEAH. A: NO. I DIDN'T GIVE IT ANY THOUGHT. Q: OKAY. AS OF THE TIME THAT THE DOOR WAS IN JEOPARDY AND YOU WERE TRYING TO GET A WESTEC MAN ON THE SCENE AT ROCKINGHAM, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, HAD ANYONE CALLED THE CORONER TO BE PRESENT? A: NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A LEGAL REQUIREMENT OBLIGATING POLICE OFFICERS GENERALLY, INCLUDING YOU, TO SEE THAT THAT IS DONE WITHIN CERTAIN LIMITS? A: NO, I DON'T. Q: BASED ON YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF POLICE PRACTICE, DOES ANYONE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO TELL ANOTHER OFFICER, "WE WILL NOT CALL THE CORONER IN THIS CASE, NOT NOW"? DOES ANYONE HAVE THAT AUTHORITY IN THE LAPD? A: I WOULD THINK THE DETECTIVE IN CHARGE OF THE CASE COULD MAKE THAT JUDGMENT, CERTAINLY. Q: AND FOR HOW MANY DAYS DOES HE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO KEEP THE CORONER AWAY FROM THE SCENE, SERGEANT, IF YOU KNOW? A: I HAVE NO IDEA. Q: CAN YOU THINK OF ANY REASON WHY AT 6:30 P.M., YOUR CORRESPONDENT BY CELLULAR PHONE, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, WOULD TELL ANOTHER, "LET'S NOT CALL THE CORONER IN THIS CASE AS A SPECIAL FAVOR"? CAN YOU THINK OF THAT? THE COURT: 6:30 P.M. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. 6:30 P.M., YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: SUSTAINED. MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY. A.M. A.M. THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WOULD YOU KNOW IF THAT HAPPENED? THE COURT: REPHRASE THE QUESTION. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YES. CAN YOU THINK OF ANY REASON WHY DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WOULD TELL SOMEONE TO PREVENT THE CORONER FROM COMING TO THE SCENE AFTER 6:00 A.M. IN THE MORNING OF THE HOMICIDE? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS DONE? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION. THE COURT: OVERRULED. DO YOU KNOW? THE WITNESS: NO, SIR, I DON'T KNOW. THE COURT: NEXT QUESTION. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: AS YOU SIT THERE TODAY, YOU ARE HEARING FOR THE FIRST TIME FROM ME THAT THAT MAY HAVE OCCURRED. IS THAT YOUR STATEMENT? MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. ARGUMENTATIVE. THE COURT: SUSTAINED. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU FAMILIAR, SERGEANT, WITH THE LAPD MANUAL? A: SOMEWHAT. Q: SOMEWHAT. DO YOU VISIT IT FROM TIME TO TIME TO REMIND YOURSELF OF THE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT GOVERN YOUR CONDUCT? A: YES, SIR. Q: DO YOU TAKE REFRESHER COURSES THAT ENABLE YOU TO REMEMBER WHAT SOME OF THOSE RULES AND REGULATIONS ARE? A: OCCASIONALLY. Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU REMEMBER THE LAST ONE YOU TOOK? A: NO. Q: HOW MANY VOLUMES ARE THERE OF THE LAPD MANUAL IF YOU RECALL? A: FIVE. Q: CURRENT VERSION. A: FIVE. Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT IS CONTAINED IN VOLUME 1, SECTION 210.46? A: NO, SIR. Q: MISCONDUCT OF OFFICERS. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT, SIR. MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THE COURT: OBJECTION OVERRULED. THE WITNESS: I HAVE READ IT. Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DOES IT NOT IMPOSE UPON YOU AND EVERY OFFICER IN THE LAPD A DUTY TO REPORT MISCONDUCT BY OTHERS? A: YES, SIR. MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. YOUR HONOR, THIS IS A GOOD TIME TO BREAK IF IT'S CONVENIENT FOR THE COURT. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE AFTERNOON. SERGEANT ROSSI, YOU CAN STEP DOWN. YOU ARE ORDERED TO RETURN HERE TOMORROW MORNING AT 9:00 O'CLOCK. PLEASE DON'T DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH ANYBODY ELSE EXCEPT FOR THE LAWYERS. ALL RIGHT. SEE YOU TOMORROW MORNING. ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE AFTERNOON. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU; DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T LET ANYBODY TALK TO YOU OR COMMUNICATE WITH YOU ABOUT THE CASE, DO NOT CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS ON THE MATTER UNTIL IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU FOR YOUR FINAL JUDGMENT. ALL RIGHT. AS TO THE ATTORNEYS, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO STAY. WE HAVE A FEW MATTERS WE NEED TO DISCUSS. LET'S CLEAR THE COURTROOM FOR THE JURY, PLEASE. (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, MR. DARDEN, ARE YOU GOING TO HANDLE THIS MATTER? MS. CLARK: NO, YOUR HONOR. WE HAVE MR. HARMON WHO WAS NOTIFIED TO BE HERE. MR. DARDEN: HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN HERE AT 4:00. HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN HERE AT 4:20. THE COURT: CAN WE HAVE IT QUIET, PLEASE. MR. DARDEN: I AM INFORMED HE IS ON HIS WAY DOWN. THE COURT: THERE'S MR. CLARK. THERE'S MR. HARMON. MR. DARDEN: WHILE WE HANDLE THAT, MAY I BE EXCUSED? THE COURT: WE HAVE MR. SCHECK AND MR. BLASIER AVAILABLE. COUNSEL, WHAT'S ON YOUR MIND? MR. HARMON. MR. HARMON: HELLO AGAIN, YOUR HONOR. I KNOW YOU'VE SEEN A SERIES OF LETTERS I'VE WRITTEN AND I JUST HAPPEN TO COINCIDE WITH THE COURT'S ORDER THAT YOU FILED LAST WEEK ON FEBRUARY 8. WE'VE BEEN DYING TO FIND OUT WHAT THE DEFENSE DID WITH THE SAMPLES THEY OBTAINED BACK IN OCTOBER, 47, 50 AND 78. THE COURT: WHAT ARE THOSE ITEMS? MR. HARMON: 47 AND 50 ARE IN THE BUNDY TRAIL AND 78 IS A STAIN ON THE BOTTOM OF MR. GOLDMAN'S SHOE. WE COMPLETED THE TESTING THAT WE CONTEMPLATED AT THAT TIME AND THE COURT, FOLLOWING UP ON A LETTER BY MS. KAHN, ISSUED AN EX PARTE ORDER AND THOSE ITEMS WERE RELEASED TO THE DEFENSE BACK IN OCTOBER. AND SO WHEN I APPRECIATED THAT AND SAW WHERE WE WERE GOING WITH THE NEW DEFENSE TESTING, I SENT A LETTER ON FEBRUARY 3RD ASKING FOR AN ACCOUNTING OF THOSE THINGS, AT LEAST THE PACKAGING, THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY. ALL OF THESE THINGS I REMIND YOU ARE REALLY FOLLOWING A REACTION TO MR. COCHRAN'S OPENING STATEMENT WHERE WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO ACCOUNT FOR THESE THINGS. AND SO FEBRUARY 3RD, I WROTE A LETTER THAT I HAVE NEVER GOTTEN ANY ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ASKING FOR AN ACCOUNTING OF THEM. FEBRUARY 6TH, I MENTIONED THEM IN ANOTHER LETTER. FEBRUARY 7TH, I MENTIONED THEM IN ANOTHER LETTER. AND NOT HEARING ANY RESPONSE AND REALIZING THAT YOU RECOGNIZE OUR LEGAL ENTITLEMENT TO AN ACCOUNTING FOR THESE THINGS ON THE SAMPLES THAT THEY MIGHT TEST PERSPECTIVELY, I WROTE YOU A LETTER ON THE 10TH ASKING FOR YOUR INTERVENTION IN TRYING TO GET THEM TO ACCOUNT FOR THIS. AND THE REASON I THINK THE TIME IS IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE IT'S MY OPINION THAT IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO ACCOUNT FOR THINGS THAT WE GAVE THEM MONTHS AGO, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO FIND OUT WHAT HAPPENS TO SAMPLES THAT WE GIVE THEM RIGHT NOW, IF THEY DISAPPEAR, WHEREVER THEY'RE GOING TO DISAPPEAR, IF THEY CONSUME OR ALTER THEM. SO I GUESS NOW IS THE TIME TO PERHAPS INQUIRE OF THE DEFENSE WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE ITEMS AND ARE WE GOING TO GET THEM BACK AND CAN WE HAVE THE KINDS OF PROTECTIONS OR INFORMATION THAT YOU ORDERED THEM TO PROVIDE PERSPECTIVELY ON THESE NEW ITEMS. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL TAKE UP THESE THREE ITEMS FIRST. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. BLASIER. MR. BLASIER: AFTERNOON, YOUR HONOR. IF I MIGHT STATE, THE COURT'S ORDER ON OCTOBER 26 REGARDING THESE THREE ITEMS PROVIDED THAT WE BE PROVIDED WITH A SMALL SPLIT FROM A REMAINING SWATCH IN EACH OF THOSE THREE INSTANCES. THERE IS NOTHING IN THAT PARTICULAR ORDER REQUIRING US TO ACCOUNT FOR THESE ITEMS TO THE PROSECUTION, TO TELL THEM WHAT WE DID WITH THEM, WHERE WE SENT THEM, WHAT TESTS WE PERFORMED ON THEM AND WE DON'T FEEL WE ARE OBLIGATED TO DO THAT. ON FEBRUARY 3RD, MR. HARMON IN HIS LETTER IN ESSENCE IS TRYING TO BLACKMAIL US BY SAYING WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU ANY MORE DISCOVERY UNTIL YOU TELL US WHAT YOU DID WITH THESE ITEMS AND WHAT TESTING YOU PERFORMED ON THEM, WHERE THEY ARE NOW AND GIVE THEM BACK TO US, WHICH IS NOT REQUIRED BY ANY COURT ORDER FROM THIS COURT. THE ORDER THAT YOU DID ISSUE LAST WEEK DOES NOT SAY THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THEM WITH ANY KIND OF AN ACCOUNTING. IT SAYS THAT FIRST OF ALL, WE ARE ALLOWED TO CONDUCT OUR TESTING IN PRIVATE, WHICH IS OUR RIGHT UNDER THE LAW. THE PART OF THE ORDER THAT APPLIES TO ACCOUNTABILITY SAYS THE DEFENSE MAY CONDUCT ITS TESTING IN PRIVATE WITH THE PROVISO THAT ANY ALTERATION, USE OR CONSUMPTION CAUSED BY THE DEFENSE TESTING WILL BE EXPLAINED TO THE TRIER OF FACT AS HAVING OCCURRED DURING TESTING BY THE DEFENSE. I INTERPRET THAT TO MEAN THAT WITH A PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT WE CAN DO SOMETHING WITH, FOR INSTANCE, THE BUNDY GLOVE, WHICH TO OUR KNOWLEDGE THEY HAVEN'T EXAMINED AT ALL, IF WE WERE TO TAKE THAT AND TAKE A CUTTING FROM IT FROM AN AREA THAT THERE MIGHT BE A DOG BITE, FOR INSTANCE, AND DO SOME TESTING ON IT, THEN WHEN THEY INTRODUCE THE GLOVE, THEY COULD TELL THE JURY THE REASON WHY THERE'S A PIECE CUT OFF OF IT WAS, IT WAS GIVEN TO THE DEFENSE AND THAT'S IT; THAT WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO GIVE THEM THAT PIECE BACK, WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO TELL THEM WHAT WE DID TO IT. THE COURT: WELL, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO GIVE THE PIECE BACK IF IT'S STILL AVAILABLE IF IT HASN'T BEEN CONSUMED IN THE TESTING. THAT EVIDENCE DOESN'T DISAPPEAR INTO A DARK HOLE. I REALIZE SOME OF IT IS GOING TO BE CONSUMED OR DESTROYED IN SOME WAY THROUGH THE TESTING PROCESS. BUT IF IT STILL EXISTS, THEN IT OUGHT TO BE PUT BACK OR AT LEAST SHOWN TO THE JURY WHAT'S THERE. MR. BLASIER: WELL, THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE, WHETHER WE HAVE TO TELL THEM WHAT TESTING WE WERE DOING. THE COURT: THAT'S CORRECT. MR. BLASIER: CERTAINLY IF WE INTRODUCE SOMETHING THAT WE DID -- OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE TO ACCOUNT FOR THE CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF ITEMS. THAT'S NOT THEIR JOB. THAT'S OUR JOB. FURTHER, IT WOULD BE IMPROPER FOR US TO RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT WELL, WHERE DID THAT LITTLE PIECE GO WHEN WE KNOW WE GOT IT. AS OFFICERS OF THE COURT, THAT WOULD BE IMPROPER AND WE WOULD NOT DO THAT. SO CERTAINLY, THEY HAVE NO REQUIREMENT TO ESTABLISH A CHAIN OF CUSTODY FOR A PIECE OF EVIDENCE THEY HAVE NOT TESTED THAT THE COURT ORDERED WE BE GIVEN. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WELL, MR. BLASIER, LET'S SORT OF CUT TO THE CHASE HERE. 47, 50 AND 78, THESE ARE ALL SWATCHES; AM I CORRECT? MR. BLASIER: THEY'RE I THINK SMALL PIECES OF SWATCHES. THE COURT: AND YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN A CUT OF EACH SWATCH OR A SPLIT OF THE SWATCH TO CONDUCT YOUR TESTING, CORRECT? MR. BLASIER: CORRECT. THE COURT: AND THE MAJORITY OR THE MAIN PART OF THE SWATCH IS IN POSSESSION OF THE PROSECUTION, CORRECT? MR. BLASIER: CORRECT. THE COURT: OKAY. MR. BLASIER: NOW, I MIGHT POINT OUT THAT -- THE COURT: SO YOUR POSITION IS THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO DO WHATEVER TESTING IT IS THAT YOU WANT TO DO. THE ONLY THING THAT YOU'RE REQUIRED TO DO IS SAY OF THE SWATCHES THAT REMAIN, 47, 50 AND 78, YOU JUST HAVE TO EXPLAIN THAT WE TOOK THIS SNIPPET OUT OF IT. MR. BLASIER: I'M NOT SURE EVEN THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO BRING THAT UP TO THE JURY. BUT I THINK -- THE COURT: WELL, IF THERE'S AN ISSUE AS TO THE -- WHAT'S THERE AND WHAT'S BEEN TESTED, I THINK THE JURY IS ENTITLED TO KNOW THAT YOU TOOK A PORTION OF IT FOR TESTING. MR. BLASIER: THAT MAY BE. I THINK THAT'S SOMEWHAT OF A DIFFERENT ISSUE. THE COURT: THAT'S THE TRUTH AND WE DON'T HIDE IT FROM THE JURY. BUT I AGREE WITH YOU, YOU ARE ENTITLED TO DO YOUR TESTING IN PRIVATE AND DEEM THOSE RESULTS PRIVATE AND USE THEM IF YOU FEEL FIT. I AGREE WITH THAT TOO. MR. BLASIER: TO WHICH I POINT OUT THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN ANY OF THE ITEMS, THE EDTA TESTING -- THE COURT: LET'S FINISH WITH 47, 50 AND 78 FIRST. IS THAT YOUR POSITION? MR. BLASIER: THAT'S MY POSITION. THE COURT: LET ME HEAR FROM MR. HARMON. MR. HARMON: I'M HAPPY WE BROUGHT THIS UP, YOUR HONOR, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THEY DON'T APPRECIATE THAT YOUR ORDER FROM LAST WEEK WAS BASED ON THE LAW. AND WHILE THEY MAY HAVE THOUGHT THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAW IN OCTOBER, I THINK YOU'VE SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT. WHENEVER CASE -- WHENEVER PHYSICAL EVIDENCE IS OBTAINED, WE ARE ENTITLED TO CONDUCT TESTING UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. SO REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THE ORDER -- AND IT WAS AN EX PARTE ORDER AND IT GAVE THEM THE ENTIRE BALANCE OF THE SAMPLES. THERE WERE NO CUTTINGS MADE. AND IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR ORDER AND THE RECORDS, WHAT REMAINED WAS TURNED OVER TO THEM IN ITS ENTIRETY. SO PERHAPS MR. BLASIER DOESN'T APPRECIATE THAT. ALL WE'RE SEEKING -- THE COURT: SO YOUR POSITION IS THAT THESE WERE NOT SPLITS WHEN THEY ARE ACTUALLY THE ENTIRE REMAINING SAMPLE. MR. HARMON: YES. YES. I MEAN YOUR ORDER WAS CLEAR, TURN OVER THOSE ITEMS. AND, YOU KNOW, JUDGE, WHEN YOU ORDER THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO TURN OVER ITEMS, THEY TURN IT OVER. SO I WAS SURPRISED THAT THEY MIGHT. BUT THAT IS IN FACT WHAT THEY TURNED OVER. EVERYTHING -- THE BALANCE OF THOSE ITEMS WERE TURNED OVER. NOW, WE HAD COMPLETED OUR TESTING AT THIS TIME, SO WE'RE NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT IT. BUT THERE HAVE BEEN CHARGES ABOUT MISHANDLING OF EVIDENCE AND WE WANT AN ACCOUNTING. WE'RE NOT CURRENTLY SEEKING THE RESULTS. I DON'T THINK THE ISSUE'S BEEN ADDRESSED, ARE THEY DONE WITH THEM, BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE ENTITLED TO THEM. WE PROVIDED THEM ACCESS FOR THOSE THINGS. AND IF THEY COME BACK -- IF THE GLOVE WERE TURNED OVER TO THEM AND CAME BACK WITH HOLES IN IT, I THINK WE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO NOT ONLY PROVE THAT THOSE HOLES WERE MADE BY THEM, BUT IF THERE WERE OTHER SAMPLES THAT WERE NOT CONSUMED, I THINK WE ARE ENTITLED TO THEM. IT IS OUR EVIDENCE. UNDER THE LAW, WE'RE REQUIRED TO SHARE IT WITH THEM. WE ARE SHARING IT WITH THEM AND -- THE COURT: LET ME ASK MR. BLASIER THEN A QUESTION. MR. BLASIER, TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, HAVE THESE ITEMS, 47, 50 AND 78 BEEN CONSUMED IN THE TESTING OR IS THERE PART OF THAT SAMPLE STILL OUT? MR. BLASIER: QUITE FRANKLY, I'M NOT SURE, JUDGE. THE COURT: WHY DON'T YOU CHECK ON THAT AND LET ME KNOW. MR. BLASIER: I COULD SAY I HAVE THE OCTOBER 26 ORDER HERE. IT SAYS A SPLIT. NOW, IF THEY GIVE US MORE THAN WE'RE ENTITLED TO, THAT'S NOT OUR PROBLEM. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. BLASIER: ALSO, I READ -- THE COURT: BUT IF YOU HAVEN'T USED IT, I AGREE THAT WHATEVER REMAINS STILL BELONGS TO THE PROSECUTION AND/OR THE COURT. THE COURT HAVING ORDERED YOU TO HAVE POSSESSION OF IT, THE COURT CAN THEN ORDER YOU TO RETURN WHATEVER HAS NOT BEEN CONSUMED IN THE TESTING. DO YOU AGREE TO THAT? MR. BLASIER: I ASSUME THE COURT CAN DO THAT. I MIGHT STATE THOUGH, UNDER YOUR ORDER OF LAST WEEK, IF THAT APPLIES TO THIS EARLIER SAMPLE -- LET'S ASSUME IT DOES -- THEN IT STILL DOESN'T REQUIRE US TO GIVE THEM AN ACCOUNTING. ALL THEY CAN -- THE COURT: MR. BLASIER, WE'RE USING THE WORD "ACCOUNTING" IN AN INARTFUL WAY. ALL THAT MEANS IS, YOU GET TO TAKE YOUR SPLIT, YOU GET TO DO WHATEVER IT IS YOU WANT TO DO WITH THAT, BUT YOU HAVE TO TELL US HOW MUCH YOU TOOK TO EXPLAIN TO THE FINDER OF FACT IF IT BECOMES AN ISSUE WHY PART OF IT IS MISSING AND YOU HAVE TO GIVE BACK WHATEVER IT IS YOU DON'T USE DURING YOUR TESTING. THAT'S ALL AN ACCOUNTING IS. IT DOESN'T MEAN WHAT TESTS YOU DID. IT DOESN'T MEAN WHAT THE RESULTS ARE. IT DOESN'T MEAN IF IT IS GOOD OR BAD. WHO KNOWS? MR. BLASIER: THIS IS WHAT MR. HARMON SAYS. WE HAVE TO TELL HIM IN HIS FEBRUARY 3RD LETTER BEFORE HE'LL GIVE US ANY MORE DISCOVERY OF OTHER THINGS OF WHAT THE CURRENT STATUS IS, WHERE THE SAMPLES ARE, THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE TESTING, WHAT TESTS WERE USED TO CONSUME THE SAMPLES. THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING WE HAVE TO TELL THEM? THE COURT: NO. I'M NOT TELLING YOU YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT. I'M TELLING YOU YOU DO HAVE TO TELL US IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S LEFT, WHERE IT IS BECAUSE WE MAY WANT IT BACK. MR. BLASIER: WE'LL CERTAINLY CHECK ON IT. NONE OF THAT IS RELATED TO ANY OF THE OTHER EXHIBITS I MIGHT ADD. THE COURT: I AGREE. SO HOW ABOUT TOMORROW, YOU CONTACT WHOEVER'S GOT 47, 50 AND 78, FIND OUT WHAT'S LEFT. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE -- AND I WANT TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR, THAT I WANT YOU TO BE ABLE TO RETURN TO THE COURT WITHIN 48 HOURS ANY OF THESE ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE OUTSTANDING FLOATING AROUND BECAUSE I HAVE A FEELING WE ARE ABOUT -- IN THE NEXT WEEK TO 10 DAYS ABOUT TO REACH THE PEOPLE'S PRESENTATION OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, WHICH IS GOING TO MEAN THIS STUFF HAS TO BE IN COURT READY FOR PRESENTATION TO THE TRIER OF FACT. MR. BLASIER: MAY I RAISE ANOTHER ISSUE IN LIGHT OF THAT LETTER? THE COURT: SURE. MR. BLASIER: THAT IS THAT, SO FAR, WE STILL HAVEN'T SEEN THE LIST MR. HARMON PROMISED TO PRODUCE AT THE END OF BUSINESS TODAY. THE COURT: IT'S NOT THE END OF BUSINESS YET. MR. BLASIER: GETTING CLOSE. MR. HARMON: I HAVE IT. MR. BLASIER: THE EDTA TESTS THEY WANT TO DO OBVIOUSLY IS GOING TO -- I BELIEVE IS GOING TO DELAY US BEING ABLE TO SEE THIS EVIDENCE AT ALL BEFORE THEIR WITNESSES TESTIFY ABOUT THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. THE COURT: MAYBE. MAYBE. I HAVEN'T SEEN THEIR PROPOSAL FOR EDTA TESTING. I ASSUME IT'S GOING TO BE SOME KIND OF CHROMATOGRAPHY, WHICH IS A RELATIVELY EXPEDITIOUS TESTING SINCE I READ UP ALL ABOUT EDTA. FUN STUFF. I ASSUME THAT THEY'RE GOING TO TELL ME SOMETHING IN THEIR FILING TODAY THAT THEY DON'T NEED THE ENTIRE REMAINING SAMPLE TO CONDUCT THEIR EDTA TESTING ON SOME OF THESE THINGS I ASSUME. IS THAT CORRECT, MR. HARMON? MR. HARMON: ALL THE NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT INTERESTED. BUT NO, THAT'S NOT QUITE CORRECT. WE INTEND TO RETAIN ALL THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, BUT -- THE COURT: HOW MUCH OF THIS STUFF DO YOU NEED? MR. HARMON: QUANTITY WISE? THE COURT: YEAH. MR. HARMON: SEE, THAT IS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS BECAUSE I GUARANTEE YOU, WE ARE GOING TO HEAR -- WE'VE ALREADY HEARD THESE LITTLE RUMORS THIS HAS NEVER BEEN DONE. THE SMALLER THE SAMPLE -- YOU KNOW, WE ARE ESSENTIALLY TRYING TO PROVE A NEGATIVE MEANS SOMETHING, THAT THE ABSENCE OF EDTA MEANS IT'S NOT THERE. SO THE LARGER AMOUNT OF SAMPLE YOU HAVE FROM WHICH YOU DERIVE YOUR SENSITIVITY LEVEL IS CRITICAL. YOU KNOW, WE'RE KIND OF WAY BACK WHERE YOU WERE LAST SUMMER IN TRYING TO DECIDE WHETHER THE DEFENSE COULD SNAG SOME EVIDENCE AHEAD OF TIME THAT COULD JEOPARDIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR RESULTS. WE DIDN'T CREATE THIS DILEMMA. AND, YOU KNOW, TO SUGGEST THAT WE'RE WITHHOLDING THINGS FROM THEM -- MANY OF THESE THINGS WERE AVAILABLE TO THEM FOR QUITE SOME TIME. THE COURT: LET ME ASK YOU THIS. IN THE RESPONSE THAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO FILE WITH THE COURT AND WITH OPPOSING COUNSEL, DO YOU CONTAIN IN YOUR RESPONSE A TESTING SCHEDULE AND EXPLANATION TO THE COURT AS TO WHY THIS IS NECESSARY? MR. HARMON: WHY THE SCHEDULE IS NECESSARY OR WHY THE TEST -- THE COURT: YEAH. THE TEST TAKES X NUMBER OF DAYS OR X NUMBER OF HOURS. MR. HARMON: THE TEST, AS YOU READ UP ON IT, IS A ONE- OR TWO-DAY TEST. SO THE TEST CAN BE DONE EXPEDITIOUSLY. ONE OF THE PRACTICAL PROBLEMS THAT WE ALL FACE IS, ALL OF THE EXPERTS IN THIS CASE ARE UP HAVING FUN UP IN SEATTLE AT THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF FORENSIC SCIENCE THIS WEEK. SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S TOO MANY PEOPLE THAT CAN DO ANYTHING THIS WEEK. THE COURT: WELL, WE ALL HAVE OUR PRIORITIES I GUESS. MR. BLASIER: WE CAN LOOK AT THEM. WE WANT TO LOOK AT ALL OF THEM. THE OTHER ISSUE I WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT TODAY, MR. SCHECK HAS BEEN IN TOUCH WITH DRS. LEE, BADIN AND WOLF AND I BELIEVE HE CAN MAKE AN OFFER OF PROOF WHY WE NEED THESE SENT ON TO ALBANY, WHY WE CAN NOT DO THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA IF THAT'S OKAY WITH THE COURT. THE COURT: LET'S NOT JUMP AHEAD. I'M REALLY INTERESTED IN THE ROADBLOCK HERE. I'M NOT SO CONCERNED ABOUT EVERYTHING GOING TO NEW YORK. IF YOU CAN ASSURE ME THIS STUFF ISN'T GOING TO DISAPPEAR INTO A BLACK HOLE AND IF I TELL YOU I WANT IT BACK IN COURT IN 48 HOURS, YOU CAN GET IT BACK HERE IN 48 HOURS, I'M NOT THAT CONCERNED ABOUT IT. THE PROBLEM I HAVE OBVIOUSLY IS, I DON'T WANT PLANE CRASHES AND BURNINGS AND TAKING ALL OF OUR EVIDENCE WITH IT. BUT I'M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE TIMETABLE AS TO WHEN YOU GET THIS STUFF TO DO YOUR TESTING VIS-A-VIS THE EDTA TESTING THAT WE NEED TO DO. SO, MR. HARMON, CAN YOU GIVE ME A READERS DIGEST VERSION AS TO SOME OF THESE ITEMS, HOW DO WE TEST FOR EDTA, HOW MUCH OF THE SAMPLE DO WE NEED AND WHAT DO WE HAVE LEFT SPECIFICALLY ITEM BY ITEM? I AGREE WITH YOU THAT ROCK HUDSON'S AUTOBIOGRAPHY IS NOT SOMETHING OR CARLITO'S WAY OR WHATEVER IT WAS, THAT WE DON'T NEED TO ARGUE ABOUT. BUT THE BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES, CAN YOU TELL -- MR. HARMON: NO. THE COURT: -- ME WHAT YOU NEED TO KEEP? MR. HARMON: I MERELY REPEATED WHAT I PUT IN THE LAST LETTER I WROTE ON THIS, THAT WE INTEND TO PURSUE -- ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH BEING TOO SPECIFIC IS, AS THE DEFENSE KNOWS, BECAUSE DR. BLAKE WAS JUST UP AT THE DOJ LAB AGAIN TODAY, THE TESTING IS GOING ON EVERY DAY. HE WAS UP THERE LOOKING AT THE LATEST SET OF RESULTS. SO DEPENDING ON WHAT WE PRODUCE FROM THEM, WE MAY WANT TO PURSUE THEM FOR EDTA. WE'VE HEARD SOME TESTIMONY ABOUT -- FROM OFFICER RISKE ABOUT THE REAR GATE AT BUNDY. WELL, WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT ONE OF THOSE STAINS NOW. SO I HONESTLY CAN'T -- AND I WISH -- YOU PROBABLY KNOW MORE ABOUT GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY THAN I DO AT THIS POINT, YOUR HONOR. I CAN TELL YOU IT'S A FAST TEST. WE PROPOSE TO SEND WHAT HAS TO BE SENT THE WEEK OF THE 27TH TO HAVE IT BE AT THE FBI LAB THE WEEK OF THE 27TH AND HAVE IT BACK HOPEFULLY BY THE END OF THE WEEK. THE COURT: WHY DO WE HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE WEEK OF THE 27TH, TODAY BEING THE 14TH? MR. HARMON: BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY TOLD ME. MR. BLASIER: THAT GIVES US PLENTY OF TIME TO LOOK AT IT. LET ME MAKE A SUGGESTION. WE WILL NOT PERFORM ANY TESTS THAT WOULD RESULT IN ANY DESTRUCTION OF ANY EVIDENCE THAT THEY WANT TO DO EDTA TESTING ON WITHOUT INFORMING THE COURT ON IN ADVANCE, AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE WHAT HAPPENS AT THAT POINT. MR. HARMON: THAT'S NOT A VERY WISE COURSE TO TAKE AT THIS POINT. I MEAN THEY'VE GOT -- YOU KNOW, THEY'VE MADE THESE ALLEGATIONS ABOUT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THERE IS NO REASON WHY THEY DIDN'T DO THIS BEFORE AND THERE'S NO REASON WHY THEY SHOULD BE ENTITLED TO DO THIS NOW AFTER THOSE ALLEGATIONS, YOUR HONOR. THAT'S LIKE THE FOX GUARDING THE HEN HOUSE. PARDON ME. THAT MAKES NO SENSE. YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD -- WE ARE GOING TO HERE FROM THIS DR. GERDES ABOUT HOW CONTAMINATION IS PREVALENT. IT'S VERY LIKELY WE'RE GOING TO HEAR ABOUT THESE 900 LITTLE SWATCHES, BREATHING ALL OVER THEM, DOING ALL THESE THINGS THAT HE'S GOING TO CRITICIZE US FOR HAVING DONE DURING OUR TESTING. THE COURT: IT'S FUNNY HOW THESE ARGUMENTS ARE THE SAME DEPENDING ON WHICH SIDE I'M HEARING THEM FROM. MR. COCHRAN: WE HEARD THAT ARGUMENT BEFORE. MR. HARMON: THERE WAS A POINT IN HIS OPENING STATEMENT ABOUT THAT. MR. COCHRAN: I TOLD HIM STOP FIGHTING IT. THE COURT: THE HAIR, THE DANDRUFF. MR. BLASIER: WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO LOOK AT THIS EVIDENCE FOR EIGHT MONTHS. THE COURT: MR. HARMON, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO -- YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS BECAUSE THE DELAY UNTIL THE 27TH IS NOT FAIR TO THE DEFENSE. IT'S ALSO NOT FAIR TO THE PROSECUTION'S CASE TO HAVE ALL THIS STUFF GO INTO A BLACK HOLE NOT KNOWING WHERE IT'S GONE. SOMEBODY'S GOT TO COMPROMISE HERE. AND MY SUGGESTION IS THAT WE GET THE FBI TO DO THIS STUFF NEXT WEEK RATHER THAN THE 27TH. MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, MAY I MAKE ANOTHER COMPROMISE SUGGESTION, THE ONE MR. BLASIER WAS FOLLOWING UP ON? AND THAT IS, OUR DILEMMA IS THIS. WE HAVE NOT BEEN ALLOWED TO TOUCH THIS EVIDENCE, TO LOOK AT IT FOR EIGHT MONTHS. DR. LEE CAME OUT VERY SOON AFTER IT WAS COLLECTED. THE COURT: WELL, MR. SCHECK, I DON'T NEED TO KNOW. I RECALL. MR. SCHECK: OUR PROPOSAL IS THAT THIS EVIDENCE BE SHIPPED OUT IMMEDIATELY AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO ALBANY COLLEGE OF MEDICINE. WE'LL PUT IN THE NECESSARY AFFIDAVITS. BUT IT IS -- AS MR. BLASIER TOLD YOU, I SPOKE WITH ALL THESE DOCTORS ON SUNDAY HAVING TO DO WITH EQUIPMENT. IT'S AN AUTOPSY LABORATORY. WE'LL DO THIS EXPEDITIOUSLY. SO -- BECAUSE WE NEED TO SEE THE EVIDENCE AND EXAMINE IT SO THAT WE CAN INTELLIGENTLY CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES. WE WILL NOT PERFORM ANY DESCRIPTIVE TESTS OR TAKE ANY SAMPLING THAT MIGHT IN ANY WAY INVOLVE BLOOD AT THIS POINT SUCH THAT IT WOULD IMPAIR THE EDTA TESTING. THAT FRANKLY IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD IMAGINE IS GOING TO COME EITHER AT THE END OF THE PROSECUTION'S CASE OR IN REBUTTAL IF NECESSARY. BUT THE POINT IS, NOW WE'RE GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE PEOPLE ARE PRESENTING THE CRIME SCENE EVIDENCE, AND IT DOES SEEM I WOULD SUBMIT TO THE COURT A LITTLE UNFAIR THAT AFTER EIGHT MONTHS, AS THESE WITNESSES ARE GETTING ON THE STAND, OUR EXPERTS DO NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THIS EVIDENCE AND EXAMINE IT FOR TRACE EVIDENCE. AND I WOULD POINT OUT THAT BOTH SIDES ARE CORRECT IN THIS REGARD. THAT ANY TIME THAT YOU TAKE EVIDENCE, BE IT A SHIRT, AND SOMEBODY FOLDS IT, LOOKS AT IT, PUTS IT BACK IN THE BAG, TAKES IT OUT AGAIN, EACH DIFFERENT TIME IT CAN CHANGE. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, MICROSCOPIC EXAMINATION OF TRACE EVIDENCE. AND IT SEEMS TO US THAT OUR TIME HAS COME TO LOOK AT THAT. WE WON'T PERFORM ANY SAMPLING THAT WOULD INVOLVE A DESCRIPTIVE TEST FOR BLOOD THAT IT DISAPPEARS DOWN A BLACK HOLE. THEY CAN HAVE SOMEBODY THERE. THEY CAN MONITOR ALL OF THAT AND WE CAN REPORT BACK TO THE COURT ON ALL OF THIS. BUT THE POINT IS, WE WANT TO SEE IT. MR. HARMON: WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A NICE PROPOSAL. I MADE A PROPOSAL ABOUT A WEEK AND A HALF AGO THAT WE DO THIS JOINTLY, YOUR HONOR, THE WHOLE EDTA THING SO THEY CAN HAVE THEIR PEOPLE WATCHING IT, KIND OF LOOKING AT IT, CHECKING IT OUT AND ACTUALLY WATCHING THE WHOLE EDTA TEST. THAT WAS ONE POSSIBILITY, IF THEY WANTED TO FIND OUT IF THERE'S REALLY EDTA IN THERE. I MEAN IT WOULD BE A TREMENDOUS ACCOMPLISHMENT FOR THEM TO FIND EDTA IN THIS BLOOD ON THE SOCK. AND THEY KEEP HEDGING ABOUT IT OR AVOIDING IT LIKE A DIRTY DIAPER PAIL HERE. I HAVE A BIG ONE IN MY HOUSE. MR. BLASIER: MOST OF THE BLOOD IS NOT PUT INTO EDTA CONTAINERS. SO IT'S NOT REALLY AN ISSUE FOR US. MR. HARMON: THAT'S NOT TRUE. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. HARMON, WHAT I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO DO -- UNFORTUNATELY, THE FBI IS PROBABLY CLOSED FOR BUSINESS. MR. HARMON: THEY'RE ALL IN SEATTLE, BUT I WILL FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE COURT'S SUGGESTION AND -- THE COURT: HOW LONG DO YOU THINK THIS LATEST BATTERY OF EDTA TESTS WILL TAKE? YOU SAID JUST A DAY OR TWO? MR. HARMON: I'LL SURE TRY TO DEFINE EXACTLY WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AND -- THE COURT: AND YOU AGREE THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF ITEMS, HOWEVER, THAT ARE NOT EVEN UNDER THE SCENARIO THAT MR. COCHRAN INFERRED THEY ARE, SOME ITEMS THAT YOU WILL NOT WANT OR NEED TO SUBMIT TO EDTA THAT YOU CAN IMMEDIATELY GIVE TO THE DEFENSE SO THEY CAN START THEIR PHYSICAL ANALYSIS OF SOME OF THESE THINGS? MR. HARMON: SURE. IT SEEMS TO ME THERE'S ABOUT 150 OTHER NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE ITEMS THAT DR. LEE CAN ONLY LOOK AT ONE AT A TIME. SO WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO START MAKING THEM AVAILABLE, HOWEVER THE COURT ORDERS THIS ACCESS. BUT THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, WE WANT TO MAINTAIN CONTROL OF FOR A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MY PROBLEM IS THAT A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME STARTS ON THE 27TH, WHICH IS JUST TOO FAR AWAY FOR MY COMFORT LEVEL. MR. HARMON: AND I'LL -- THE COURT: BECAUSE THEY'RE ENTITLED TO KNOW TO DO THEIR INVESTIGATION PRIOR TO HAVING TO CROSS-EXAMINE THESE PEOPLE, YOUR EXPERTS. THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. ALL RIGHT. WILL YOU REPORT BACK TO ME THEN TOMORROW MORNING? BECAUSE YOU WILL BE ABLE TO GET UP AT 5:00 IN THE MORNING AND CALL THEM, ALL RIGHT, AND FIND OUT -- MR. HARMON: THEY ARE IN SEATTLE. SO IT'S THE SAME TIME ZONE, I MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET THEM TONIGHT. THE COURT: CALL THEM BETWEEN NOW AND HAPPY HOUR IF YOU CAN. SERIOUSLY, I MEAN -- MR. HARMON: I WILL DO THAT. THE COURT: SO IF YOU WOULD THEN, WOULD YOU COMPILE, MR. CLARK, MR. HARMON, A LIST OF THOSE ITEMS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO IMMEDIATELY TURN OVER, THE NON-BIOLOGICAL ITEMS SO WE ACTUALLY GET THAT SHIPPED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND COME BACK TOMORROW MORNING, TELL US WHAT OUR TESTING SCHEDULE IS? MR. HARMON: SURE. LET ME START -- AND I'LL FILE THIS LETTER ESSENTIALLY BY DEFAULT. ALL THE NON-BIOLOGICAL ITEMS ARE AVAILABLE -- THE COURT: OKAY. MR. HARMON: -- AT THE PRESENT TIME, AND WE HAVE EXEMPTING ALL THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE AND SO WE'LL HOPEFULLY MAKE SOME PROGRESS ON THE EDTA TESTS. MR. SCHECK: I -- THE COURT: WELL, MR. SCHECK, IT LOOKS TO ME -- WHAT I'M TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE IS GETTING THE EDTA DONE BY THE END OF THIS WEEK IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE. MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, YOU KNOW, WE MAY -- I THINK THAT EXEMPTING ALL THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, EVEN EVIDENCE WHERE THEY HAVEN'T EVEN CONDUCTED TESTING LIKE THE GLOVE AT BUNDY, I DON'T THINK -- I THINK THAT'S DISINGENUOUS. THAT'S JUST AN EFFORT TO BLOCK OUR ACCESS. THAT'S NOT -- THE COURT: MR. SCHECK, LET'S -- THEY ARE ENTITLED TO HANG ON TO THEIR EVIDENCE NOW THAT THESE ALLEGATIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED FOR REASONABLE AMOUNTS OF TIME TO DO THIS TESTING. I WANT TO MAKE THAT TESTING HAPPEN IN THE SHORTEST PERIOD OF TIME AND THEN YOU'LL GET IT. MR. SCHECK: WELL, YOUR HONOR, WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE COMPROMISE I'M PROPOSING FOR THIS REASON. I KNOW THAT THE COURT MAY HAVE LOOKED AT SOMETHING ABOUT EDTA TESTING, BUT I'M NOT FULLY SATISFIED I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT IS INVOLVED, WHETHER -- THE COURT: NOR AM I. BUT THERE ARE SOME TESTS OUT THERE THAT ARE RELATIVELY SIMPLE, AT LEAST AS FAR AS THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY IS CONCERNED, AND GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY IS A RELATIVELY WELL-ACCEPTED CHEMICAL TESTING PROCESS. MR. SCHECK: WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FORENSIC TESTING. THAT TECHNOLOGY, SOMETHING THAT'S DONE ON FOOD ADDITIVES, IS EXTREMELY DIFFERENT. THE COURT: DON'T YOU THINK IF IT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE FDA, IT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR US? MR. SCHECK: THESE ARE DIFFERENT KINDS OF SAMPLES. THE COURT: I AGREE. MR. HARMON: IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE HAVING A FRYE HEARING AFTER ALL. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WELL, MR. SCHECK, NOTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN BETWEEN NOW AND TOMORROW MORNING. ALL RIGHT. I EXPECT AN INTELLIGENT ANSWER TOMORROW MORNING, MR. HARMON, ALL RIGHT, AND I EXPECT A FAVORABLE RESPONSE THAT THE FBI WILL TEST THIS FOR US THIS WEEK. AND IF NECESSARY, I'LL CALL ATTORNEY GENERAL RENO IF NECESSARY, NOT THAT IT WOULD HAVE ANY EFFECT. BUT -- MS. SCHECK: I'M NOT SO SURE. THE COURT: IT MIGHT. AND I DON'T SAY THAT FACETIOUSLY, BUT I MEAN, KNOWING THE PICKLE THAT WE'RE IN TIME WISE. AND THIS CASE IS MOVING MUCH FASTER THAN I THOUGHT IT WOULD AS FAR AS THE PRESENTATION OF THE EVIDENCE IS CONCERNED. SO WE ARE GOING TO BE IN THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE IN A WEEK TO 10 DAYS. MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, THAT'S FINE. I HAVE CONCERN ABOUT A NUMBER OF OTHER ITEMS. SINCE MR. HARMON -- AS I RECALL, JUST TO GET BACK -- AT THE TIME THAT WE FIRST BEGAN NEGOTIATING THIS EFFORT TO EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE, THE DAY THAT HE ANNOUNCED THAT THEY HAD FINISHED TESTING VARIOUS ITEMS, WE THOUGHT THAT WAS OUR TIME AND WE BEGAN NEGOTIATING AT THAT POINT SHIPPING THE EVIDENCE TO ALBANY. ALSO, WE HAD THE MATTER OF GETTING INFORMATION FOR -- ABOUT UNDERLYING DATA FROM ARTICLES FROM THE FBI AND THE WHOLE MATTER OF THE ROCHE DATABASE, AT WHICH POINT I RECALL THE COURT DIRECTED MR. HARMON TO USE HIS BEST EFFORTS TO CONTINUE TO HAVE CONTINUED COOPERATION WITH ROCHE AND THE FBI WITH US, THEN ASKED US TO BE AS SPECIFIC AS WE COULD. WE TOOK SOME TIME. WE WROTE TWO EXTRAORDINARILY SPECIFIC LETTERS TO BOTH ENTITIES OVER TWO WEEKS AGO AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING. AND MY CONCERN HERE IS THAT WHAT'S HAPPENED NOW, SINCE THEY ANNOUNCED THAT THEY WEREN'T GOING TO TEST ANYTHING ELSE AND WE INDICATED OUR DESIRE TO TEST AND WE WANTED TO GET THINGS FROM THE FBI AND ROCHE IN AN EXPEDITIOUS MANNER, IS THAT EVERYTHING IS GOING VERY, VERY SLOWLY. AND AS THE COURT KNOWS, WE DO HAVE AN OUTSTANDING OBJECTION HERE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING THAT THIS WHOLE PROCEDURE WHEREBY THE PROSECUTION IS PERMITTED TO TEST WHENEVER IT WANTS TO WITHOUT ANY DUE DILIGENCE OBLIGATION OR ANY TIME -- THE COURT: MR. SCHECK, WE ARE GOING OVER GROUND THAT WE'VE PLOWED. MR. SCHECK: I UNDERSTAND. THE COURT: YOUR OBJECTION IS IN THE RECORD. MR. SCHECK: I UNDERSTAND. I'M ONLY POINTING OUT THAT THE PREJUDICE CONTINUES AND I ASK THE COURT SINCE THE COURT'S INTERPRETATION WAS, THERE IS NO DUE DILIGENCE OBLIGATION BUT THERE'S GOOD FAITH -- IF I INTERPRET THE COURT'S RULING HERE, WAS THE WAY YOU LOOKED AT THE QUESTION. WE HAVE REAL CONCERNS THAT WE ARE BEING BLOCKED ACCESS TO THE EVIDENCE. THAT'S WHY I'M SO DISTURBED THAT A COMPROMISE COULD BE REJECTED. THE COURT: WELL, MR. SCHECK, LET ME HELP YOU OUT HERE. THEY GET TO DO EDTA TESTING, BUT THEY HAVE TO DO IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THE FACT THAT EVERYBODY IS OFF AT A CONVENTION ISN'T GOOD CAUSE. SOMEBODY IS GOING TO HAVE TO CUT THEIR CONVENTION SHORT AND GO HOME AND TEST THIS STUFF IS WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN BOTTOM LINE AND THEY'RE GOING TO GET IT DONE BY THE END OF THIS WEEK, AFTER WHICH YOU GET TO HAVE IT. MR. SCHECK: WELL, YOUR HONOR, THE REASON THAT I HAVE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THAT IS THAT MR. HARMON IS SAYING, WELL, YOU KNOW, THESE EDTA TESTS, WE DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT IT, BUT IT MAY MEAN TAKING A VERY -- VERY LARGE PARTS OF THE SAMPLE THAT'S REMAINING SO THAT THERE'S -- WE HAVE MAXIMIZED OUR CHANCES IN TERMS OF SENSITIVITY. NOW, IT DOESN'T SEEM TO ME THAT THERE CAN BE ANY SHOWING OF NECESSITY AT THIS POINT IN TIME TO DO THAT. AND THE PROBLEM I SEE IS THAT THEN WE'RE CONFRONTING THE ISSUE ABOUT WHAT THE NATURE OF THIS TEST IS AND WHAT THE POSSIBLE FRAUD CHALLENGES COULD BE TO THAT TEST AND DO THEY REALLY NEED TO TAKE SO MUCH OF THE SAMPLE THAT COULD PREVENT OTHER KINDS OF TESTS. AND I SAY THAT WE DON'T KNOW ENOUGH NOW AT THIS POINT. THE COURT: MR. SCHECK, WHY DON'T WE DO THIS. MR. SCHECK: MY SUGGESTION IN TERMS OF US BEING ABLE TO LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE IS NOT CUT AWAY ANYTHING, NOT DO ANY DESTRUCTIVE TESTING, JUST TO LOOK AT THAT BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE SO WE CAN HAVE AN IDEA -- THE COURT: MR. HARMON -- I MAY BUY YOUR ARGUMENT IF THEY COME BACK AND TELL ME THEY CAN'T DO ANY TESTING FOR TWO WEEKS. BUT I WANT A DEFINITIVE ANSWER AS TO WHY THEY CAN'T DO IT THIS WEEK. I MIGHT BUY YOUR ARGUMENT TOMORROW MORNING. MR. HARMON: YOUR HONOR, THEY CAN COME LOOK AT IT IN LOS ANGELES IF THEY REALLY JUST WANT TO LOOK AT IT BEFORE WE SEND IT OFF. MR. SCHECK: NO. WE WANT TO EXAMINE IT. THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND. THAT'S THE HAZARD OF HAVING ALL THESE FOLKS BACK IN NEW YORK. MR. HARMON: WE JUST MAY NEED TO HAVE A GRIFFIN HEARING AGAIN I THINK. THE COURT: NO, WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT AGAIN. SEE YOU ALL TOMORROW MORNING, 9:00 O'CLOCK. MR. COCHRAN: JUDGE, CAN WE APPROACH? THE COURT: SURE. (A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.) (AT 5:05 P.M., AN ADJOURNMENT WAS TAKEN UNTIL, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1995, 9:00 A.M.) SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ) REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1995 VOLUME 87
PAGES 14274 THROUGH 14619, INCLUSIVE APPEARANCES: (SEE PAGE 2)
JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR #4588 APPEARANCES:
FOR THE PEOPLE: GIL GARCETTI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
FOR THE DEFENDANT: ROBERT L. SHAPIRO, ESQUIRE
JOHNNIE L. COCHRAN, JR., ESQUIRE
GERALD F. UELMEN, ESQUIRE I N D E X INDEX FOR VOLUME 87 PAGES 14323 - 14619 ----------------------------------------------------- DAY DATE SESSION PAGE VOL.
TUESDAY FEBRUARY 14, 1995 A.M. 14323 87 PROCEEDINGS DISCUSSION RE DNA DISCOVERY (RESUMED) 14593 87 LEGEND:
MS. CLARK - MC ----------------------------------------------------- CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
PEOPLE'S
RISKE, ROBERT 87 (RESUMED) 14327C 14352MC 14404C ROSSI, DAVID 14436MC 87 (RESUMED) 14447MC 14499B ----------------------------------------------------- ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
PEOPLE'S
RISKE, ROBERT 87 (RESUMED) 14327C 14352MC 14404C ROSSI, DAVID 14436MC 87 (RESUMED) 14447MC 14499B EXHIBITS
PEOPLE'S FOR IN PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.
57 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14373 87
58 - PHOTOGRAPH OF A 14382 87
58-A - PHOTOGRAPH OF A 14386 87
54(1) - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14388 87
54(2) - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14388 87
54(3) - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14388 87
54(4) - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14388 87
59 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14392 87
59-A - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14392 87
60 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14463 87
61 - 1-PAGE PIECE OF 14491 87
DEFENSE FOR IN PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.
1012 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14347 87 14328
|