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. GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL. DO WE HAVE MR. HARMON OR MR. CLARKE ANYWHERE ABOUT?

MS. CLARK: YES, WE DO, YOUR HONOR, AND THEY ARE PREPARED TO COME IN AND ADDRESS THE COURT. THEY JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO DO IT AT THIS MOMENT.

THE COURT: I THOUGHT WE WOULD TRY TO RESOLVE THAT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THIS MORNING.

MS. CLARK: RIGHT AWAY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SERGEANT ROSSI, WHY DON'T YOU HAVE A SEAT. NO, NOT THERE. THAT IS A JUROR'S SEAT.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: ARE THEY ON THEIR WAY?

MS. CLARK: YES.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: MR. SCHECK, HAVE YOU READ OVER MR. HARMON'S LETTER OF TODAY?

MR. SCHECK: NO.

THE COURT: THAT MAY SOLVE MANY OF OUR PROBLEMS.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, WHEN DID MR. HARMON RECEIVE WORD TO BE HERE? I THOUGHT I TOLD HIM TO BE HERE AT 9:00.

MS. CLARK: I THINK THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING, YOUR HONOR. HE INDICATED HE DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER YOU WANTED TO DO IT BY LETTER OR IN PERSON, SO WE MADE A PHONE CALL.

MR. DARDEN: HE IS FROM ANOTHER COUNTY, YOUR HONOR. MAYBE YOU SHOULD LOCK HIM UP.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: THAT GETS US MOST OF THE WAY THERE. I MEAN, MISS CLARK, IS HE ON HIS WAY?

MS. CLARK: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: AHA, MR. HARMON. ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT WITH COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY, MR. BLAISER, MR. SCHECK. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MR. DARDEN, MR. HARMON AND MS. CLARK. MR. HARMON, I HAVE JUST RECEIVED YOUR LATER DATED TODAY'S DATE INDICATING THAT THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION WILL CONDUCT THE EDTA TESTS THAT THEY PROPOSE ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY THE 20TH, AND THAT YOU WILL BE DOING THAT ON ITEMS 13, WHICH ARE THE SOCKS, 59 AND -- WHICH I BELIEVE IS A REFERENCE SAMPLE FROM NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, 72, WHICH IS A NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON REFERENCE SWATCH, 86, WHICH IS A -- APPARENTLY A SWATCH CUT FROM THE BLACK DRESS THAT NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WAS WEARING, NO. 117, WHICH IS APPARENTLY A SWATCH FROM A -- EXCUSE ME. 117, WHICH IS A SWATCH TAKEN FROM THE REAR GATE, WHICH APPARENTLY IS AT -- PRESENTLY AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN BERKELEY UNDERGOING RFLP TESTING, AND NO. 17, WHICH IS THE DEFENDANT'S REFERENCE SAMPLE; IS THAT CORRECT?

MR. HARMON: THAT'S CORRECT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE OTHER BIOLOGICAL ITEMS THAT YOU LIST IN PARAGRAPH 2, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION, PURSUANT TO MR. SCHECK'S PROPOSAL YESTERDAY, TO RELEASE THOSE ITEMS FOR PHYSICAL EXAMINATION WITH THEIR AGREEMENT THAT THEY WILL NOT TEST OR CONSUME ANY OF THE SAMPLES, CORRECT?

MR. HARMON: THAT'S CORRECT, YOUR HONOR, AND WITH THE PROVISIONS THAT YOU MADE IN YOUR COURT ORDER LAST WEEK ABOUT US BEING ABLE TO BE PRESENT AND VIDEOTAPE.

THE COURT: AND/OR PHOTOGRAPH, YES.

MR. HARMON: OR PHOTOGRAPH THEM.

THE COURT: AS THE CASE MAY BE. MR. SCHECK, ANY COMMENT?

MR. SCHECK: YES. I THINK THIS GOES SOMEWHAT TO ALLEVIATING OUR CONCERNS, BUT A FEW QUESTIONS. NO. 1, WITH RESPECT TO ITEM 13, THE SOCK, WE HAVE A STRONG DESIRE TO EXAMINE THE SOCK ITSELF. MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT THERE IS A CUTTING FROM THE SOCK AND I PRESUME THAT THAT IS WHAT THE PROSECUTION INTENDS TO PERFORM THIS TEST ON, AND SO, UMM, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE SOCK AVAILABLE FOR IMMEDIATE EXAMINATION. THAT IS REALLY CRITICAL.

THE COURT: IT IS CRITICAL ON THEIR ISSUE TO EDTA.

MR. HARMON: IT IS INDISPENSABLE TO THAT, YOUR HONOR.

MR. SCHECK: I WOULD INDICATE THAT IN TERMS OF TIMING, I REALLY THINK THAT OUR NEEDS IN THIS REGARD TAKE PRECEDENCE BECAUSE ANY TESTIMONY THAT WILL BE OFFERED BY THE PRESENCE OF EDTA IS CERTAINLY GOING TO BE SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPEARANCE, FOR EXAMPLE, OF MR. FUNG ON THE WITNESS STAND AND WE NEED AN OPPORTUNITY TO PHYSICALLY EXAMINE THAT SOCK, TO HAVE A TRAINED CRIMINALIST EXAMINE THAT SOCK. AT THIS POINT ALL THAT HAS BEEN PERMITTED IS DR. BLAKE TAKING PICTURES OF IT AND THAT REALLY ISN'T THE SAME THING. AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO PERFORM ANY DESTRUCTIVE TESTING. NOW, THEY HAVE A CUTOUT OF THE AREA WHERE BLOOD WAS FOUND, SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IN FACT THAT IS ALL THEY ARE GOING TO BE SAMPLING ANYHOW WHEN THEY DO THE EDTA TESTS, SO IT IS NOT REASONABLE FOR US TO BE WITHHELD THE SOCK. THAT IS JUST -- I AM JUST MAKING THAT SUGGESTION SIMPLY BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT EDTA TESTING OUGHT TO BE PERFORMED AT ALL, GIVEN THE RECORD BEFORE THE COURT, BUT I'M JUST ASSUMING THAT FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT BEFORE I ADDRESS THE ISSUE. JUST TRYING TO BE PRACTICAL, JUST MAKING THAT ASSUMPTION. SO THE FIRST QUESTION THAT I RAISE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE SOCK. WE WANT THE ACTUAL SOCK. THEY CAN HAVE THE CUTTING THAT THEY HAVE MADE IF IN FACT THAT TESTING IS TO GO FORWARD. SECONDLY, I HAVE A SIMILAR CONCERN ABOUT ITEM 117, WHICH IS THE BUNDY REAR GATE. YOUR HONOR, THIS -- THE BUNDY RARE GATE IS AN ITEM THAT THE PROSECUTION OBVIOUSLY HAS HAD FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. THEY SENT IT OUT IN SEPTEMBER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOR TESTING. IT WAS ONE OF THE MATTERS THAT WE HAD HEARINGS AND DISCUSSION ABOUT. I SEE NO GOOD CAUSE WHY THAT TESTING DIDN'T BEGIN UNTIL ESSENTIALLY THIS TRIAL BEGAN. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO -- THE DNA TESTING HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ISSUE OF EDTA OR OPENING STATEMENTS. THERE IS NO GOOD CAUSE FOR THE DELAY. AND WHAT IS TOTALLY PECULIAR, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT EVEN WHEN WE BEGAN THIS IN THE BEGINNING OF JANUARY, THEY DID NOT INDICATE THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE TESTING THIS. NOW, AS FAR AS THIS SAMPLE 117 IS CONCERNED, WE HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT BEING SUBJECT TO EDTA TESTING, NO. 1, BUT NO. 2, I DON'T SEE ANY GOOD CAUSE WHY THEY SHOULD BE -- HAVE SOME PRIORITY ON THE TESTING OF THIS WHEN THEY WAITED SO LONG, FOR NO GOOD REASON THAT I CAN SEE, TO BEGIN TESTING ON THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE. FINALLY, AND THIS REALLY GETS TO THE CRUNCH OF THE ISSUE, THERE IS NO SHOWING HERE BY MR. HARMON AT ALL AS TO WHAT IS EVEN NECESSARY, HOW MUCH SAMPLE IS EVEN NECESSARY TO DO EDTA TESTING.

LAST NIGHT I LOOKED AT THE SUBMISSIONS THAT MR. HARMON MADE TO THE COURT ABOUT EDTA TESTING, WHICH HAD TO DO WITH DISCOVERING EDTA IN TIME RELEASE COLD CAPSULES, IN MOUSSE, FOOD SUBSTANCES WHERE YOU ALREADY KNOW IT IS THERE. THAT IS AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PROPOSITION THAN TESTING A SAMPLE WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE THERE. AND -- AND THIS IS REALLY THE MOST CRITICAL POINT I THINK, IS THAT MR. HARMON WAS INDICATING YESTERDAY THAT THEY HAVE NO IDEA HOW MUCH SAMPLE IS NECESSARY TO PERFORM THIS TEST, EVEN ASSUMING THAT IT COULD GET PAST KELLY-FRYE AND IT'S RELIABLE ON A FORENSIC SAMPLE, I MEAN NOT EVEN ADDRESSING THAT. I'M JUST SAYING IN TERMS OF WHAT IS REASONABLY NECESSARY UNDER GRIFFIN, THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MUCH SAMPLE THEY NEED, SO LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT 117, THE SAMPLE FROM THE BACK GATE. DO THEY HAVE TO TAKE, UMM --

THE COURT: HOW MANY SWATCHES DO WE HAVE FROM 117?

MR. SCHECK: I HAVE NO IDEA.

MR. HARMON: I DO.

THE COURT: MR. HARMON.

MR. HARMON: I WILL ADDRESS THAT WHEN MR. SCHECK IS DONE. I DON'T WANT TO CUT HIM OFF. HE IS JUST GETTING STARTED.

MR. SCHECK: WELL, THERE IS NO SHOWING HERE. I WAS ACTUALLY CURIOUS. THE COURT HAD INDICATED THAT IT HAD DONE SOME RESEARCH OF SOME KIND, I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I MISINTERPRETED THAT YESTERDAY, ABOUT EDTA TESTING.

THE COURT: IF YOU WILL NOTICE THE COURT ORDER, I CITE TO A LAW REVIEW ARTICLE THAT DISCUSSES EDTA.

MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT.

THE COURT: THAT'S ALL.

MR. SCHECK: THAT'S ALL.

THE COURT: SOMETHING THAT IS RELATIVELY AVAILABLE THROUGH LEXIS.

MR. SCHECK: I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHAT THE KNOWLEDGE BASE WAS.

THE COURT: VIRTUALLY NONE. YOU CAN BE ASSURED OF THAT.

MR. SCHECK: WELL, I DON'T WANT TO PROFESS THAT I HAVE ANYTHING MUCH GREATER, BUT I DID DISCUSS THIS MATTER WITH A DEFENSE EXPERT WHO I THINK IS CONSIDERED ONE OF THE LEADING TOXICOLOGISTS IN THE COUNTRY, DR. READERS, WHO INFORMED ME THAT BEFORE I THINK EVEN THE OPENING STATEMENT, ALTHOUGH I'M NOT SURE OF THE DATE, BUT I THINK IT IS AT SOME TIME BEFORE, MR. MATHESON OF THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT LABORATORY HAD MADE INQUIRY OF HIM ABOUT WHAT LITERATURE EXISTED OR WHETHER IT WAS POSSIBLE TO DO EDTA TESTING OF THIS KIND, AND OUR EXPERT SENT HIM AVAILABLE LITERATURE HERE. BUT IT IS OUR POSITION THAT THE PROSECUTION HAS TO MAKE A SHOWING AS TO ESSENTIALLY WHAT IS THE EXPECTED SENSITIVITY OF THE TEST. THAT IS TO SAY, DO THEY HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MUCH SAMPLE WOULD BE NECESSARY TO GET A RESULT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER THAT THEY WOULD CLAIM TO BE RELIABLE? AND I'M NOT EVEN ADDRESSING WHETHER OR NOT IT COULD GET PAST KELLY-FRYE OR ANYBODY HAS EVER DONE IT BEFORE. I'M JUST SAYING -- BECAUSE I DON'T THINK ANYONE HAS -- I'M JUST SAYING THAT AS A PRELIMINARY SHOWING ON THE GROUND OF REASONABLE NECESSITY TO DESTROY SAMPLES, PRECIOUS BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES, THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO TELL US HOW MUCH THEY NEED, IF THEY NEED TO CONSUME NEARLY ALL OF THE SWATCHES, THAT -- OR THEY DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY NEED TO CONSUME ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THEY HAVEN'T EVEN MADE A PRELIMINARY SHOWING HERE, AND THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT, AND I DON'T SEE, FRANKLY, GIVEN THE ABSENCE OF THAT SHOWING, WHAT THE GREAT RUSH IS IN TERMS OF EDTA TESTING PRIOR TO THE DEFENSE HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY JUST TO EXAMINE ALL THE SAMPLES SO THAT WE CAN SEE WHAT THERE IS AND WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT REASONABLE TESTING, IF ANY, WE THINK WOULD BE NECESSARY, AND THEN THE COURT CAN MAKE A REASONED AND INFORMED DECISION, BASED ON SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, AS TO WHAT IS REASONABLY NECESSARY AND WHAT ISN'T. AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IN TERMS OF THE BALANCE OF EQUITIES HERE, IN TERMS OF WHO HAS THE NEED TO EXAMINE THE MATERIAL FIRST, WE MERIT PRIORITY HERE ON, NO. 117, FOR EXAMPLE, WHICH THEY DIDN'T CHOOSE TO TEST UNTIL VERY LATE IN THE GAME FOR NO REASON THAT IS APPARENT TO ME. AND CERTAINLY, WITH RESPECT TO JUST LOOKING AT THE REST OF 13, THE SOCK, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A RIGHT TO LOOK AT THE ACTUAL SOCK ITSELF AND THEY CAN RETAIN THE CUTTING IF THEY WANT FOR THE TIME BEING.

THE COURT: MR. HARMON.

MR. HARMON: SOUNDS LIKE THEY REALLY DON'T WANT US TO FIND OUT WHAT IS IN THOSE TWO ITEMS, DOESN'T IT, YOUR HONOR? I GUESS WE NEED TO GO BACK TO LAST SUMMER AND LAST FALL AND REMIND COUNSEL THAT WHILE THEY MAY SAY WE HAVE TO HAVE -- MAKE CERTAIN SHOWINGS IN ADVANCE OF TESTING, THE LAW IN THIS STATE, IN THIS STATE, HAS ALWAYS BEEN GRIFFIN AND THAT IS A RETROSPECTIVE CONCERN. THAT IS, IF WE WANT TO INTRODUCE OUR EVIDENCE, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT WHATEVER TESTS WE HAD DONE WERE REASONABLY NECESSARY. AND THE COURT RECOGNIZED THIS WHEN YOU ISSUED YOUR ORDER THAT THERE WAS NO PROPOSITION THAT THE DEFENSE HAD LITIGATED AND CAUSED UNDUE CONSUMPTION OF TIME. THE DEFENSE SIMPLY HAS NO RIGHT AT THAT POINT IN TIME TO INSIST THAT WE MAKE THESE SHOWINGS. THAT IS SIMPLY NOT THE LAW IN THIS STATE. WE DON'T HAVE TO SHOW WHY TESTING HAD NOT BEGUN. YOU RECOGNIZED THAT AND WE SURE DON'T HAVE TO SHOW HOW MUCH IS NECESSARY. ON THE OTHER HAND, IF WE CAN'T JUSTIFY, WHEN THEY DON'T LIKE THE ANSWERS THAT WILL CERTAINLY COME FROM THESE TESTS, IF WE CAN'T JUSTIFY WHY WE HAVE CONSUMED WHAT WE HAVE, THEN YOU HAVE SOME RIGHTS AND THEY HAVE SOME RIGHTS TO KEEP US FROM USING THE EVIDENCE, WHATEVER RESULTS ARE PRODUCED FROM IT. WE UNDERSTAND THAT. WE HAVE ALWAYS APPRECIATED THAT. I CAN TELL THE COURT THAT THE SENSITIVITY LEVEL, AND I WILL DESCRIBE WHY WE NEED THE SOCK IN A MOMENT, IS APPROXIMATELY 50 PARTS PER MILLION. NOW, I CAN'T SPEAK TO WHAT SIZE STAIN THAT MEANS HAS TO BE CONSUMED, I CAN'T ADDRESS THAT, BUT WE WILL ADDRESS THAT WHEN THE DEFENSE CERTAINLY COMPLAINS THAT WE HAVE PROVEN CONCLUSIVELY THAT THERE IS NO EDTA ON EITHER OF THOSE TWO STAINS. SO WE ARE PREPARED TO ABIDE BY THE PROVISIONS OF GRIFFIN, BUT THERE IS SIMPLY NO REASON FOR THE DEFENSE TO INTERRUPT OUR TESTING AT THIS POINT IN TIME, ESPECIALLY AFTER THEY HAVE FORMALLY MADE SERIOUS ACCUSATIONS ABOUT THE SOCK.

AND HAD THEY KNOWN THAT THAT IS MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD ON THE REAR GATE IN BUNDY, MR. COCHRAN WOULD HAVE ALLEGED THAT PERHAPS VANNATTER WENT OVER THERE AND SPRINKLED IT ON THE GATE AT SOME LATER DATE. HE JUST DIDN'T KNOW THAT BECAUSE THOSE TEST RESULTS WERE JUST MADE AVAILABLE RECENTLY TO DR. BLAKE. SO HAD THEY KNOWN THAT, THEY CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE MADE THAT ACCUSATION, AND KNOWING THAT THAT IS MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD ON THE REAR GATE, AND WE WILL DEFINITIVELY SHOW THAT THROUGH THE RFLP TESTS, THEY ARE BEGINNING TODAY. THAT IS WHY WE HAVE SELECTED JUST THOSE TWO ITEMS OF EVIDENCE. BUT LET ME DESCRIBE WHY WE'VE SELECTED THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE, BECAUSE MR. SCHECK JUST DOESN'T SEEM TO GET THE IDEA THAT WE ARE TRYING TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE FAILURE TO SHOW EDTA IS PRESENT MEANS THAT IT IS NOT THERE, AND THIS IS WHY WE NEED THE SOCK. WE NEED THE SOCK BECAUSE EDTA IS PRESENT IN MANY ITEMS AND -- AND IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT SOCK WAS IMPROPERLY RINSED IN THE RINSE CYCLE, THERE IS EDTA IN LAUNDRY DETERGENT, SO WE NEED TO DO A SUBSTRATE CONTROL. WE NEED TO SAMPLE EXTENSIVELY FROM THAT VERY SOCK TO PROVE THAT IF THERE IS EDTA ON UNSTAINED AREAS OF THE SOCK, THAT IT IS PROBABLY FROM ONE OF THESE OTHER SOURCES IN THE ENVIRONMENT, LIKE LAUNDRY SOAP. IF THERE IS NO EDTA PRESENT IN UNSTAINED AREAS IN THE SOCK, THEN THAT SUGGESTS THAT AT LEAST THERE IS NO BACKGROUND CONTRIBUTION FROM THE SOCKS THAT COULD HAVE COME FROM SOME OTHER SOURCE. SO HAVING THE SOCK AS A CONTROL IS INDISPENSABLE TO THIS AS A SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENT TO PROVE THAT THIS EXQUISITELY SENSITIVE TEST, WHEN IT SAYS WE HAVEN'T FOUND EDTA ANYWHERE IN ANY OF THESE ITEMS, THAT MEANS IT IS NOT THERE AND THAT IS WHY WE NEED ALL THE ITEMS THAT WE'VE DESCRIBED. WE NEED THE REFERENCE SAMPLE, 59 AND 72, FROM NICOLE. WE HAVE HAD THE O.J. CUT FROM A VERY LARGE STAINED AREA ON NICOLE'S BLACK DRESS THAT CERTAINLY MUST BE FROM HER OWN BLOOD, AND THAT IS ANOTHER CONTROL JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS NO EDTA PRESENT IN HER OWN BLOOD, BECAUSE MANY FOOD SUBSTANCES HAVE EDTA AS A PRESERVATIVE IN IT. THAT IS ANOTHER VITAL CONTROL TO THE TEST. THAT IS WHY WE'VE ALSO SENT 117, THE BUNDY REAR GATE, WHICH THE DEFENSE KNOWS IS THE -- THE TESTS ARE SHOWING THAT THAT IS MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD, AND THEN MR. SIMPSON'S REFERENCE SAMPLE. SO LEGALLY WE'VE TRIED TO PARE IT DOWN. THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO WAIT UNTIL MONDAY. THESE TESTS SHOULD BE DONE MONDAY, AND THE COURT REALIZES MONDAY IS A HOLIDAY FOR EVERYBODY, BUT THEY ARE GOING TO DO IT MONDAY AND WE ARE GOING TO GET IT TO THE EAST COAST ON FRIDAY, AND THESE TESTS, UNLESS THERE IS A POWER OUTAGE OR A BIG BLIZZARD, THEY WILL BE DONE MONDAY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY REALLY HAVEN'T ADDRESSED IS ALL OF THEIR EXPERTS, AND THIS IS SOMETHING I TOUCHED ON IN MY LETTER, WE SEEM TO HAVE DRIFTED FROM THE COURT'S ORDER OF REQUIRING THESE THINGS TO BE DONE LOCALLY ABSENT A SHOWING OF GOOD CAUSE, AND WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO WHOEVER IS DOING IT, BUT IT JUST SEEMS TO ME YOU HAVE ORDERED THEM TO DO IT LOCALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE CASE LAW THAT I CITED AND THEY HAVEN'T MADE ANY KIND OF SHOWING OR GOOD CAUSE. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF HENRY LEE IS THE ONE WHO IS GOING TO LOOK AT ALL THESE OTHER ITEMS, BUT HE IS NOT COMING BACK FROM SEATTLE UNTIL THURSDAY NIGHT. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT DOCTORS BADEN AND WOLF, BUT THEY ARE NOT LOSING ANY TIME. THEY CAN LOOK AT ALL THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WE WILL MAKE AVAILABLE TO THEM AND THAT WE HAVE MADE AVAILABLE TO THEM. SO WE ARE JUST TALKING ABOUT A FEW CRITICAL ITEMS THAT IF THEY WANT TO TRY TO LOOK AT THEM MONDAY NIGHT, IF THE TESTS ARE ALL DONE BY MID-AFTERNOON, WE WILL TRY TO SHIP THEM UP TO THEM WHEREVER THEY WANT THEM TO BE SHIPPED OR WHEREVER YOU TELL US TO SHIP THEM THE SAME DAY, MONDAY. SO TO ME THIS IS A BIG TO DO ABOUT NOTHING, BUT IT CLEARLY REFLECTS THAT THEY ARE CONCERNED. THEY MADE THESE ALLEGATIONS AND THESE TEST RESULTS WILL SERIOUSLY UNDERMINE THEIR CREDIBILITY IN THE EYES OF THIS JURY BASED ON MR. COCHRAN'S OPENING STATEMENT.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. HARMON. MR. SCHECK, ANY BRIEF RESPONSE?

MR. SCHECK: YES. IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE, FIRST OF ALL, MR. HARMON IS EXPLAINING WHY THERE MAY BE RESULTS FINDING EDTA IN THESE MATERIALS AHEAD OF TIME THAT HE CAN THEN EXPLAIN AWAY IF THEY FIND IT. AND HE DIDN'T TELL US WHAT 50 PARTS PER MILLION MEANS IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT OF BLOOD THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE. IS THAT A HALF MILLILITER OF BLOOD WHICH MAY BE MORE THAN ARE ON ANY OF THESE SWATCHES? BUT I THINK HIS ARGUMENT REALLY PROVES THE WISDOM OF THE SUGGESTION THAT WE ARE PUTTING BEFORE THE COURT. BEFORE THEY TAKE -- CUT UP THAT SOCK ANY MORE AND PERFORM THE DESTRUCTIVE TESTS ON IT, EVEN IF THEY ARE USING IT FOR PURPOSES OF A SUBSTRATE CONTROL, ALL WE WANT TO DO IS LOOK AT IT, AND OUR PROPOSAL WOULD BE IS TO HAVE THOSE MATERIALS SENT, UMM, TO ALBANY, SO OUR EXPERTS, ALL OF THEM OUT THERE WITH THEIR OWN INSTRUMENTS IN A LABORATORY THAT HAS BEEN DEDICATED FOR THIS PURPOSE, CAN LOOK AT IT OVER THE WEEKEND. THAT IS WHAT WE REALLY WANT, AND THE SOCK, OF COURSE, IS ONE OF THE MOST CRITICAL ITEMS, BECAUSE WE WANT TO JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THEM. UMM, THEY CAN VIDEOTAPE, UMM, THAT -- UMM, SO THAT THERE IS NO ALLEGATION THAT ANYBODY PUT ANYTHING ON THEM. OUR REQUEST IS MERELY FOR A TRUE PHYSICAL INSPECTION AND EXAMINATION, NOT A DESTRUCTIVE TEST. THEY ARE ASKING TO PERFORM A DESTRUCTIVE TEST AND THE POINT HERE IS SIMPLY WHICH SHOULD TAKE PRIORITY? AND I DON'T SEE THE GREAT NECESSITY TO HAVE THEM DO THAT IMMEDIATELY RIGHT NOW BEFORE WE EVEN GET A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THEM. THAT IS ALL.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. ALL RIGHT. AS TO ITEMS 13, 59, 72, 86 AND 117, THIS ALL BEING PROSECUTION EVIDENCE, THEY MAY MAINTAIN CONTROL OF THIS ITEM AND HAVE THAT TESTED BY THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION CRIMINALISTICS LABORATORY, THAT TESTING TO COMMENCE ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY THE 20TH. IMMEDIATELY UPON THE CONCLUSION OF THOSE TESTS THE PROSECUTION IS TO MAKE THOSE SAMPLES AVAILABLE IMMEDIATELY TO THE DEFENSE FOR THEIR INSPECTION AND TESTING PURSUANT TO THE COURT ORDER. THE COURT NOTES THAT AS TO THE CRITICAL ITEM NO. 13, THE SOCKS, THAT THE DEFENSE HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VIEW THESE ITEMS AT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ALTHOUGH NOT EXAMINE THEM IN A PRIVATE SETTING. THE PROSECUTION IS ORDERED TO TURN OVER THE ITEMS LISTED IN PARAGRAPH 2 OF MR. HARMON'S LETTER OF FEBRUARY 15 FORTHWITH TO THE DEFENSE FOR THEIR TESTING PURSUANT TO THE COURT'S PREVIOUS ORDER. AND THE NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE IS LIKEWISE ORDERED TURNED OVER TO THE DEFENSE FOR THEIR TESTING. I DO MAKE A FINDING THAT GIVEN THE LOCATION OF THE DEFENSE EXPERTS, ALL OF THEM APPARENTLY ON THE EAST COAST, AND THE LABORATORY FACILITY BEING AVAILABLE IN ALBANY, NEW YORK, THAT THEY HAVE SHOWN SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO TEST THOSE MATTERS OUT OF STATE. HOWEVER, THE COURT WARNS THAT THERE WILL BE UNBELIEVABLY NEGATIVE SANCTIONS SHOULD THESE ITEMS BECOME LOST OR DESTROYED.

MR. HARMON: YOUR HONOR, COULD I JUST INJECT ONE THING? I'M NOT SURE IF YOU NOTED IN MY LETTER, MR. HODGMAN, ON NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, HAS ASKED JUST TO HAVE A COUPLE OF HOURS TO REVIEW THAT, AND I DON'T EXPECT ANYTHING WILL BE EXCEPTED, BUT I JUST WANT TO ADVISE THE COURT.

THE COURT: HE CAN COME AND ASK ME FOR A GOOD CAUSE EXCEPTION TO THE COURT'S ORDER.

MR. HARMON: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COUNSEL. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE RESUME WITH SERGEANT RISKE? ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY HIGGINS, LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH FOR JUST A MOMENT?

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED.

(A CONFERENCE WAS HELD AT THE BENCH, NOT REPORTED.)

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.

THE COURT: MY APOLOGIES TO YOU FOR THE DELAY IN GETTING STARTED; HOWEVER, YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT WE HAVE BEEN IN SESSION ON OTHER MATTERS SINCE 8:30 THIS MORNING AND SOMETIMES THESE THINGS TAKE LONGER THAN I ANTICIPATE THAT THEY WILL TAKE. ALL RIGHT. SERGEANT ROSSI, WOULD YOU COME FORWARD, PLEASE. RESUME THE WITNESS STAND.

DAVID ROSSI, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE EVENING ADJOURNMENT, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING, SERGEANT ROSSI. YOU ARE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. BAILEY, YOU MAY CONTINUE WITH YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I APPROACH THE WITNESS, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)

BY MR. BAILEY:

Q: SERGEANT ROSSI, I HAND YOU WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED DEFENSE 1013 FOR IDENTIFICATION AND ASK YOU TO LOOK AT IT AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN TELL ME THAT THAT REPRESENTS A MAP OF THE AREA SHOWING BOTH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND 875 SOUTH BUNDY AT THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY?

A: YES, IT DOES.

(DEFT'S 1013 FOR ID = BUNDY MAP)

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU SEE A SCALE ON THAT MAP?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT IS YOUR PRESENT ESTIMATE OF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN -- BY ROAD -- THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE POLICE STATION AT 1663 BUTLER AVENUE AND 875 SOUTH BUNDY?

A: THREE TO FIVE MILES.

Q: THREE TO FIVE MILES?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: HOW ABOUT ONE MILE, 2842 FEET?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. OBJECTION. IS COUNSEL TESTIFYING?

THE COURT: THAT IS A LEADING QUESTION.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DOESN'T IT LOOK MORE LIKE A MILE AND A HALF?

A: IT LOOKS A LITTLE MORE THAN THAT TO ME, SIR.

Q: OKAY. WHEN WE ADJOURNED YESTERDAY, SERGEANT, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE CORONER HAD NOT BEEN NOTIFIED AS OF 5:00 A.M. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU PERSONALLY DIDN'T KNOW OF ANYONE HAVING NOTIFIED THE CORONER OF THESE HOMICIDES BY 5:00 A.M. --

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: -- IS THAT CORRECT?

MS. CLARK: THIS IS THE SAME OBJECTION AS YESTERDAY. THIS WITNESS DOESN'T --

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. NOW, IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT THAT YOU, AS A POLICE OFFICER, HAVE SOME FAMILIARITY WITH THE LAWS REGULATING THE CONDUCT OF HOMICIDE INVESTIGATIONS?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: THERE IS NONE?

A: IF I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION, THE LAWS REGULATING THE CONDUCT OF THE INVESTIGATORS THAT ARE HANDLING THE CASE?

Q: NO. IS THERE ANY REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAVE FAMILIARITY WITH THE LAWS THAT REGULATE HOMICIDE INVESTIGATIONS?

A: YES. LAWS OF THE STATE, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH ANY LAW THAT DICTATES WHEN THE CORONER SHOULD BE NOTIFIED WHEN A DEATH HAS OCCURRED?

A: NO, I'M NOT, SIR.

Q: YOU NEVER HEARD OF SUCH A LAW?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU EVER HEAR OF SECTION 10250 OF THE CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. OBJECTION. MAY WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: NO. YES OR NO. ARE YOU AWARE OF THE CODE SECTION?

THE WITNESS: NO, SIR.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU KNOW THAT IT IS --

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY. I'M TOLD I MISSPOKE. NOT THE CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE, THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE.

Q: DO YOU KNOW THERE IS A HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: HAVE YOU EVER REVIEWED THAT CODE?

A: THE ENTIRE CODE, NO, SIR.

Q: ANY SECTIONS OF THE CODE THAT MIGHT PERTAIN TO YOUR WORK?

A: YES, SOME.

Q: ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH A SECTION THAT DEALS WITH THE NOTIFICATION OF THE CORONER IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES AFTER DEATH?

A: NO, I'M NOT.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT IS NOT THIS WITNESS' JOB.

THE COURT: THAT IS A LEGAL -- COUNSEL, LET ME SEE YOU OVER HERE AT SIDE BAR.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: COUNSEL, WE ARE OVER HERE AT THE SIDE BAR. MISS CLARK, THIS GUY IS THE WATCH COMMANDER, THE AWC. HE IS IN CHARGE OF THE CRIME SCENE WHEN HE IS THE SENIOR OFFICER THERE. I THINK COUNSEL IS ENTITLED TO ASK HIM ARE YOU AWARE OF A REQUIREMENT TO CALL A CORONER, BECAUSE HE HAD PHYSICAL AND LEGAL CONTROL OF THAT CAME SCENE FOR A RATHER BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME UNTIL LIEUTENANT SPANGLER SHOWS UP, SO I THINK COUNSEL IS ENTITLED TO ASK HIM ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY LEGAL REQUIREMENT TO CALL THE CORONER. HIS ANSWER TO THAT IS GOING TO BE NO AND THEN WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON.

MS. CLARK: YOU KNOW, IT IS NOT -- GO AHEAD, CHRIS.

MR. DARDEN: THAT IS NOT WHAT IS --

THE COURT: WHEN YOU MAKE AN OBJECTION THAT IT IS NOT HIS JOB, THE OBJECTION IS THAT IT IS IRRELEVANT.

MS. CLARK: YES.

THE COURT: NOT THAT IT IS NOT HIS JOB.

MS. CLARK: I WAS ABOUT TO SAY THAT, I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR.

MR. DARDEN: I APPRECIATE THE --

MR. BAILEY: PLEASE, ONE LAWYER.

MS. CLARK: I ASKED MR. DARDEN TO RESPOND.

MR. BAILEY: THIS IS YOUR WITNESS NOW.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, YOU STARTED WITH THE OBJECTION, SO YOU START WITH THE ARGUMENT.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MS. CLARK: NO. 1 PROBLEM IS THAT IT IS IRRELEVANT WITH THIS WITNESS WHEN HE TESTIFIED ON DIRECT. IT IS ALSO BEYOND THE SCOPE, BECAUSE HE TESTIFIED ON DIRECT THAT THESE ARE NOT WITHIN HIS DUTIES OR HIS PURVIEW. HE IS JUST A WATCH COMMANDER, HE IS NOT THERE -- THE CODE REQUIRES THAT THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER NOTIFY THE CORONER, NOT THE WATCH COMMANDER. HE IS THERE TO MAKE SURE THE PERIMETER IS SECURED AND HE SO TESTIFIED ON DIRECT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT COUNSEL HAS HERE. THAT IS NOT EVEN --

MR. BAILEY: DON'T SNATCH IT FROM UNDER THE JUDGE.

MS. CLARK: THAT IS NOT EVEN THE CODE. IT IS SIGNED BY ONE OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS AND IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING PERTINENT TO THIS WITNESS' TESTIMONY.

SECONDLY, COUNSEL IS NOT MOVING ON. NOW HE IS READING THIS CODE INTO THE RECORD AND POUNDING THE WITNESS WITH IT AND ASKING HIM QUESTIONS ABOUT SOMETHING HE HAS ALREADY TEN QUESTIONS AGO SAID I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING, SO WHAT WE ARE DOING IS ALLOWING HIM TO BADGER AND HARASS HIM ON THE SUBJECT MATTER HE HAS ALREADY TESTIFIED HE HAS NO KNOWLEDGE, NO INVOLVEMENT AND HAD RESPONSIBILITY FOR.

THE COURT: BUT MISS CLARK, ISN'T IT A FACT THAT IN FACT THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS HAD TO GO BACK AND REEVALUATE THEIR PROCEDURES TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE CODE SECTION, THAT THE CHIEF OF POLICE HIMSELF HAS ORDERED AN INVESTIGATION FOR THE FAILURE OF THE DETECTIVES? ISN'T IT ALSO A FACT THAT THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CORONER'S OFFICE HAS LODGED AN OBJECTION WITH THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR FAILURE TO NOTIFY? AREN'T THESE ALL FACTS?

MS. CLARK: I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY ARE. I ASSUME IF THE COURT IS SAYING SO THAT THEY ARE, BUT THIS IS NOT THE WITNESS TO TAKE THAT UP WITH. IF COUNSEL WANTS TO POINT ALL THAT OUT, CALL THE APPROPRIATE WITNESS. THIS WITNESS IS JUST SECURING A PERIMETER, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, YOU NOTICE HE DIDN'T ASK THESE QUESTIONS OF THE FIRST PATROL OFFICER BECAUSE NOBODY IS GOING TO ASSUME THE FIRST PATROL OFFICER HAS ANY AUTHORITY TO DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN SECURING THE SCENE.

MS. CLARK: BUT THIS IS THE ASSISTANT WATCH COMMANDER. HE IS NOT THE HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

MS. CLARK: HE HAS NO RESPONSIBILITY IN THIS. THIS IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE WITNESS.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, DO YOU HAVE THE TESTIMONY THAT THE PATROL DIVISION HAS THE AUTHORITY OVER THE CRIME SCENE UNTIL THE DETECTIVES ARRIVE?

MS. CLARK: BUT NOT OVER THE EVIDENCE AND THE BODY, YOUR HONOR. THEY HAVE CONTROL OVER THE PERIMETER. THEY HAVE CONTROL OVER WHETHER TRAFFIC GETS BLOCKED. THAT IS BASICALLY WHAT THEY HAVE.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MS. CLARK: THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT WITNESS. I'M NOT SAYING THAT COUNSEL CAN'T GO INTO THIS OR OBJECTING TO THAT. I'M SAYING LET'S GET THE RIGHT WITNESS, AND THE RIGHT WITNESSES ARE COMING. COUNSEL CAN CALL THEM IF THEY ARE PRESENTED.

MR. BAILEY: HOMICIDE MANUAL, YOUR HONOR. I'M SORRY, LAPD MANUAL.

MS. CLARK: THAT HAS GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS WITNESS. COUNSEL, YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND.

MR. BAILEY: YOU SAID IT HOW MANY TIMES ALREADY.

MS. CLARK: MAYBE YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND. THIS IS NOT A HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR. HIS RESPONSIBILITY IS NOT TO SECURE THE SCENE FOR THE PURPOSE OF NOTIFYING THE CORONER. HE SECURES THE PERIMETER.

MR. BAILEY: HIS TESTIMONY WAS THAT HE WAS IN CHARGE.

MS. CLARK: HIS TESTIMONY WAS THAT HE WAS IN CHARGE OF SECURING THE PERIMETER.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. THE OBJECTION IS OVERRULED.

MS. CLARK: THAT IS WHAT HE WAS THERE TO DO. MAY I SEE WHAT HE IS SHOWING? THE CODE, PLEASE, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: THE CODE SECTION.

MS. CLARK: MAY I SEE BOTH OF THEM?

THE COURT: AND THE LAPD MANUAL; HOWEVER, I'M GOING TO GIVE DIRECTION TO COUNSEL, THIS IS A VERY LIMITED AREA OF INQUIRY.

MR. BAILEY: I UNDERSTAND.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, MAY I SHOW THE COURT THIS?

THE COURT: I READ IT.

MS. CLARK: NO, THIS ONE.

THE COURT: I READ IT.

MS. CLARK: IT IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M SAYING.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. BAILEY.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: SERGEANT ROSSI, YOU SAID YOU WERE FAMILIAR WITH CERTAIN PARTS OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE?

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, MAY I PLEASE SEE WHAT COUNSEL IS READING FROM?

MR. BAILEY: YOU ALREADY HAVE.

MS. CLARK: HE SNATCHED IT OUT OF MY HANDS.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, HAVE A SEAT, PLEASE.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU REMEMBER THE QUESTION, SERGEANT?

A: YES, I DO, AND YES, I AM FAMILIAR WITH SOME SECTIONS.

Q: ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH ANY PORTION OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE THAT MANDATE THE CALLING OF THE CORONER IN A HOMICIDE CASE?

A: NO, I'M NOT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU FROM TIME TO TIME REVIEW THE LAPD MANUAL?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DID YOU EVER LOOK AT VOLUME 4?

A: OCCASIONALLY, YES.

Q: GOOD. WHAT ABOUT SECTION 238.46 ENTITLED "NOTIFICATION OF THE CORONER"? DO YOU EVER LOOK AT THAT?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE EVER LOOKED AT THAT, NO.

Q: OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO LOOK AT THESE TWO PROVISIONS TO REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION PERHAPS?

A: IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. HOW CAN HE REFRESH RECOLLECTION IF HE --

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: I THOUGHT YOU SAID THAT YOU DID AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER ACQUAINT YOURSELF WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE?

A: SOME SECTIONS, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU EVER RECALL READING ANYTHING ABOUT THE MANDATE TO NOTIFY THE CORONER?

A: NO.

Q: YOU DON'T? WERE YOU IN FACT IN CHARGE OF THIS CRIME SCENE FROM YOUR ARRIVAL AT 1:25 A.M. UNTIL 2:10 WHEN DETECTIVE PHILLIPS SHOWED UP?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AS ONE IN CHARGE OF THE CRIME SCENE, WERE YOU NOT OBLIGATED TO CARRY OUT ANY LEGAL DUTY IMPOSED ON THE BOSS?

A: REPEAT THE QUESTION, SIR. I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

Q: OKAY. WERE YOU OBLIGATED TO CARRY OUT ANY LEGAL DUTY IMPOSED ON THE PERSON IN CHARGE?

A: REPEAT IT AGAIN. I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION. I WAS IN CHARGE UNTIL --

Q: I WILL REPEAT IT AGAIN.

A: I WAS IN CHARGE UNTIL THE DETECTIVE SHOWED UP.

Q: WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A BRACKET FROM 1:25 TO 2:10. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

A: TIME BRACKET?

Q: YES.

A: YES.

Q: THAT IS 45 MINUTES; IS IT NOT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU HAD MEANS OF COMMUNICATION AT HAND, DID YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, DID YOU, DURING THAT 45-MINUTE PERIOD, HAVE A LEGAL DUTY TO CALL THE CORONER?

A: NOT AS FAR AS I KNOW, NO.

Q: DID YOU KNOW IT WAS A MISDEMEANOR TO FAIL TO CALL THE CORONER, SERGEANT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

THE WITNESS: I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS, SIR.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

MR. BAILEY: MAY I NOW APPROACH THE WITNESS AND SHOW HIM THE SECTION?

MS. CLARK: I DON'T KNOW WHAT HE IS SHOWING. CAN I PLEASE SEE IT, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: THAT IS AN OBJECTION FOR RELEVANCE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, RELEVANCE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: NO FOUNDATION.

THE COURT: THANK YOU.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: SO IF THERE WAS SUCH A LAW ON JUNE 13, 1994, YOU WERE NOT FAMILIAR WITH IT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: OKAY. AND IF YOU VIOLATED THAT LAW, IT WAS UNKNOWING ON YOUR PART; IS THAT CORRECT?

THE COURT: CALLS FOR A LEGAL CONCLUSION.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. I WILL SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION.

MR. BAILEY: VERY WELL.

THE COURT: MR. BAILEY, THIS IS A RATHER LIMITED AREA OF INQUIRY AT THIS POINT.

MR. BAILEY: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

THE COURT: THANK YOU.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IS THERE ANY LIMITATION, QUITE APART FROM THE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE, IN THE MANUAL OF THE LAPD, THAT REQUIRES YOU, WHEN YOU ARE IN CHARGE OF A HOMICIDE SCENE, TO NOTIFY THE CORONER PROMPTLY?

A: NOT UNLESS I AM INSTRUCTED BY THE INVESTIGATING DETECTIVE.

Q: WHAT REGULATION ARE YOU REFERRING TO THAT SAYS YOU ARE EXEMPTED FROM THAT OBLIGATION UNLESS THE INVESTIGATING DETECTIVE ORDERS YOU TO?

A: THAT IS OUR DEPARTMENT'S POLICY, SIR.

Q: WHERE IS THE POLICY PRINTED? CAN YOU TELL US?

A: NO, I CAN'T.

Q: IS IT ANY PART OF SECTION 238.46 OF VOLUME 4?

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: HAVE YOU EVER READ THAT SECTION?

A: PROBABLY, BUT I DON'T REMEMBER HOW LONG IT HAS BEEN, BUT YES, I PROBABLY HAVE. I READ THE ENTIRELY MANUAL WHEN I WAS STUDYING FOR SERGEANT.

Q: YOU DON'T RECALL NOW WHAT IS IN IT?

A: NOT THAT SECTION.

Q: WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION IF I SHOWED YOU THAT SECTION?

A: POSSIBLY.

MR. BAILEY: MAY I DO SO?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

MS. CLARK: MAY I PLEASE SEE IT?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WOULD YOU EXAMINE THAT?

A: WHICH SECTION IS IT? THIS ONE HERE?

Q: UH-HUH.

A: 238.46?

Q: UH-HUH, YES.

A: (WITNESS COMPLIES.) OKAY.

Q: DO YOU FIND ANYTHING IN THAT SECTION THAT EXEMPTS YOU FROM NEEDING TO NOTIFY THE CORONER UNTIL THE DETECTIVES ARRIVE?

A: YES.

Q: WOULD YOU READ THE SECTION OR THAT PART OF IT WHICH YOU BELIEVE EXEMPTS YOU FROM THAT OBLIGATION?

A: "IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER TO NOTIFY THE CORONER OF DEATHS OCCURRING." AND I WAS A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATING SERGEANT AND I TAKE THIS AS INVESTIGATING OFFICER, MEANING THE RESPONDING DETECTIVES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, WHEN YOU PERSONALLY OBSERVE ANOTHER POLICEMAN VIOLATING THE LAW, WHAT IS YOUR OBLIGATION?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, IRRELEVANT.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. I THINK WE HAVE ALREADY ASKED THIS QUESTION, THOUGH.

MS. CLARK: ASKED AND ANSWERED.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. YESTERDAY.

MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY.

Q: ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH SECTION 210.46 OF VOLUME 1 DEALING WITH MISCONDUCT OF OFFICERS AND THE DUTY TO REPORT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID YOU EVER HEAR ANY DETECTIVE CALL THE CORONER --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: -- THAT MORNING?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: HAVE YOU EVER REPORTED THE FACT THAT THE DETECTIVES HAD VIOLATED THE RULES OF THE MANUAL?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT.

Q: WHAT OBLIGATIONS DO YOU HAVE TO MAKE REPORTS OF A HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION OF THIS SORT WHEN YOU ARE AT LEAST TEMPORARILY IN CHARGE OF THE MATTER?

A: THE ONLY OBLIGATION THAT I HAVE IS TO ENSURE THAT A CRIME SCENE LOG IS BEING COMPLETED.

Q: AND HOW DID YOU CARRY OUT THAT OBLIGATION THAT MORNING?

A: WHEN I ARRIVED AT THE SCENE I ASKED SERGEANT MARTY COON WHO WAS HANDLING THE CRIME SCENE LOG, AND HE INDICATED THAT IT WAS A POLICE OFFICER BY THE NAME OF CHRIS CUMMINGS AND HE WAS STANDING VERY CLOSE TO MY PROXIMITY AND I SAW THAT HE WAS -- WAS IN FACT ENGAGED IN THAT DUTY.

Q: AND DID YOU TAKE ANY FURTHER STEPS TO ASSURE THAT THE CRIME SCENE LOG WAS BEING ACCURATELY CARRIED OUT?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: HAVE YOU EVER EXAMINED IT TO SEE THAT IT REFLECTS WHAT YOU REMEMBER?

A: HAVE I EVER EXAMINED THE CRIME SCENE LOG?

Q: UH-HUH.

A: YES, I HAVE LOOKED AT IT.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU FIND INACCURACIES THERE THAT YOU WERE ABLE TO REPORT OR LOG?

A: NO.

Q: ACCORDING TO THE CRIME SCENE LOG ARE VARIOUS PEOPLE ON THE SCENE GIVEN TIMES AND THE DEPARTURE REPORTED AS "UNKNOWN," IF YOU KNOW?

A: I'M SORRY, SIR, WHAT WAS THE QUESTION?

Q: DID YOU KNOW?

A: IF I KNOW WHAT?

Q: WHETHER OR NOT AS TO CERTAIN PEOPLE, INCLUDING THE LIEUTENANT AND YOUR SUPERIOR, CAPTAIN DIAL, THE DEPARTURE TIME WAS LOGGED AS "UNKNOWN"? DID YOU EVER INQUIRE INTO THAT?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: DID YOU NOTICE, FOR INSTANCE, THAT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ARRIVED AT 2:10 AND DIDN'T LEAVE UNTIL 10:00 A.M. FROM BUNDY?

A: I BELIEVE I SAW WHAT TIME HE LOGGED IN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TIME HE LEFT.

Q: MY QUESTION IS WHEN YOU REVIEWED THE CRIME SCENE LOG DID YOU NOTICE THAT ACCORDING TO IT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS ARRIVED AT BUNDY AT 2:10 AND DIDN'T DEPART UNTIL 10:00 A.M.?

A: NO, I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

Q: YOU KNOW THAT IS FALSE, DON'T YOU?

A: NO, SIR, I DON'T KNOW THAT IS FALSE.

Q: DIDN'T HE CALL YOU FROM ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES, SIR, HE DID.

Q: YOU NOW KNOW IT IS FALSE, DON'T YOU?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION?

A: YES.

Q: I TAKE IT YOUR REVIEW WAS SOMEWHAT CURSORY?

A: YES, PROBABLY SO.

Q: OKAY. AND OF COURSE THAT SAME ENTRY AS TO DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WOULD BE WRONG, WOULDN'T IT?

A: POSSIBLY. IT IS NOT MY JOB TO REVIEW THE CRIME SCENE LOG. THAT GOES TO DETECTIVE.

Q: I THOUGHT DID YOU REVIEW IT?

A: I LOOKED AT IT.

Q: BUT BECAUSE IT WAS NOT YOUR JOB YOU DIDN'T LOOK AT IT CAREFULLY? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE TELLING ME?

A: I DIDN'T SCRUTINIZE IT, NO.

Q: OKAY. NOW, WHEN OFFICER RISKE CALLED YOU FIRST, I TAKE IT YOU DID NOT NOTE THE TIME ON ANY PIECE OF PAPER OR LOG?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU SATISFY YOURSELF FROM YOUR CONVERSATION WITH HIM THAT THE VICTIMS WERE BOTH DECEASED?

A: YES.

Q: DID HE TELL YOU THAT HE TOUCHED THE EYE OF ONE OF THE VICTIMS TO ASCERTAIN THAT?

A: NOT AT THAT TIME, NO.

Q: DID YOU LATER LEARN THAT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DID YOU LATER LEARN HOW HE ACCOMPLISHED THAT?

A: YES. HE TOLD ME HE WENT AROUND TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE MALE VICTIM AND I BELIEVE HE SAID HE REACHED THROUGH THE FENCE.

Q: SO THAT HE WASN'T TRAMPLING ON THE CRIME SCENE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: WHEN HE SAID THE CRIME SCENE IS SECURE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOU ACCEPTED THAT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: DID YOU KNOW, AT THE TIME YOU ACCEPTED IT, THAT HIS TRAINING IN CRIME SCENE PROTECTION WAS ENTIRELY SUPERFICIAL?

A: IT WAS SERGEANT COON WHO TOLD ME THE CRIME SCENE WAS SECURE.

Q: I THOUGHT YOU TOLD US YESTERDAY THAT OFFICER RISKE TOLD YOU THAT BEFORE SERGEANT COON ARRIVED, DID YOU NOT?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: YOU DIDN'T SAY THAT?

A: WELL, HE DID CALL ME AND HE TOLD ME WHAT HE HAD.

Q: DID YOU SAY THAT?

A: BUT I DON'T REMEMBER SAYING THAT.

Q: DID YOU SAY THAT YESTERDAY?

A: I DON'T REMEMBER.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO LEAVE IT? DID YOU OR DID YOU NOT AT ANY TIME RELY ON THE TESTIMONY OF THE -- OR THE STATEMENT OF OFFICER RISKE THAT THE CRIME SCENE WAS SECURED?

A: I MAY HAVE. I DON'T REMEMBER WHETHER HE TOLD ME THAT OR NOT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IF YOU DID RELY ON THAT, DID YOU KNOW AT THE TIME THAT HIS TRAINING WAS, BY HIS OWN ACCOUNT, SUPERFICIAL?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: I'M SORRY, GLOSSED OVER?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. STILL MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY. THAT IS NOT THE ONLY --

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID OFFICER RISKE EVER TELL YOU, WHEN YOU WERE DISCUSSING THE SECURITY OF THE CRIME SCENE, THAT HIS TRAINING IN CRIME SCENE PROTECTION HAD BEEN GLOSSED OVER?

A: NO, SIR.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: I THINK YOU MENTIONED YESTERDAY THAT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS WAS MAKING NOTES OF THE CRIME SCENE?

A: HE HAD A NOTE PAD WITH HIM.

Q: DID YOU SEE HIM WRITING NOTES?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE I SAW HIM WRITING NOTES. I ASSUMED HE HAD BEEN.

Q: NOW, WAS THERE SOME INTEREST IN LEARNING THE IDENTITY OF THE MALE VICTIM AT THE CRIME SCENE?

A: NOT BY ME, BUT I'M ASSUMING THERE WAS BY THE DETECTIVES.

Q: YOU MEAN DURING THE 45 MINUTES THAT YOU WERE IN CHARGE YOU DIDN'T CARE WHO HE WAS?

A: IT WASN'T THAT I DIDN'T CARE, SIR. IT WASN'T PART OF MY JOB. I WAS MORE INTERESTED IN SECURING THE EVIDENCE THERE.

Q: WAS IT IMPORTANT TO NOTIFY HIS NEXT OF KIN WHO MIGHT BE THREATENED, AS YOU AGREED MR. SIMPSON MIGHT BE?

A: IT WAS IMPORTANT I THINK IF I WAS INSTRUCTED TO DO SO BY THE DETECTIVE, BUT AT THAT POINT THAT WASN'T WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO.

Q: IS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT FROZEN TIGHT UNTIL THE DETECTIVES ARRIVE?

A: IN SOME CASES, YES.

Q: ON THIS OCCASION APPARENTLY; IS THAT SO?

A: TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. I WAS WAITING FOR INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE DETECTIVES, YES, SIR.

Q: AFTER 300 HOMICIDES YOU DIDN'T INCLINE YOURSELF TO TRY AND FIND OUT WHO HAD BEEN KILLED; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE IN TAKING AND RUNNING THROUGH THE COMPUTER THE TAG NUMBERS ON THE VEHICLES IN THE AREA?

A: POSSIBLE WITNESSES.

Q: WAS IT OF INTEREST TO YOU TO KNOW WHICH OF THE TWO VICTIMS MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE PRIMARY TARGET OF THE ASSASSIN OR ASSASSINS?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS IS BEYOND THE SCOPE, YOUR HONOR, AND THIS IS --

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I THINK THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO KNOW FROM A DETECTIVE'S STANDPOINT, YES, SIR.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: NOT SOMETHING IN WHICH YOU HAD AN INTEREST?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. IS IT TRUE THAT UNTIL FIVE O'CLOCK ON JUNE 13 NOBODY KNEW THAT THE MALE VICTIM WAS RONALD GOLDMAN, IF YOU KNOW?

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: IS IT TRUE THAT AS OF FIVE O'CLOCK A.M., WHEN YOU WERE ON THE PHONE WITH WESTEC TRYING TO HELP THE OFFICERS GET INTO MR. SIMPSON'S HOME, THAT YOU HAD NO IDEA WHO THE VICTIM WAS?

A: THAT'S TRUE.

Q: AND WHEN IS THE FIRST TIME YOU EVER HEARD THE NAME RONALD GOLDMAN?

A: I DON'T REMEMBER. I DON'T REMEMBER EVEN IF IT WAS THAT DAY.

Q: DID YOU READ IT IN THE PAPERS?

A: OH, I MAY HAVE. I DON'T RECALL.

MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MS. CLARK:

Q: SERGEANT ROSSI, IS IT YOUR JOB TO TAKE NOTES AT A CRIME SCENE?

A: NO, IT IS NOT.

Q: IS IT YOUR JOB TO NOTIFY THE CORONER?

A: NO, IT IS NOT.

Q: IS IT YOUR JOB TO DIRECT THE INVESTIGATION?

A: NO, IT IS NOT.

Q: IS IT YOUR JOB TO CALL FOR A CRIMINALIST TO APPEAR?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT YOUR JOB TO ASK FOR A PHOTOGRAPHER TO COME?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT YOUR JOB AS TO ASK FOR A PRINT EXPERT TO GET THERE?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT YOUR JOB TO DIRECT THE SEARCH AT A CRIME SCENE?

A: NO.

Q: OR THE COLLECTION OF EVIDENCE?

A: NO.

Q: WHAT IS YOUR JOB WHEN YOU GO TO A CRIME SCENE?

A: AS A WATCH COMMANDER MY JOB IS TO ENSURE THAT THE CRIME SCENE IS SECURE AND THAT ANY EVIDENCE IS PROTECTED AND TO MAKE THE NECESSARY NOTIFICATIONS TO THE DETECTIVES AND TO MY COMMAND STAFF.

Q: SO YOU ARE NOT TRAINED, PER SE, IN HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION; IS THAT RIGHT?

MR. BAILEY: OBJECTION, LEADING.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ARE YOU TRAINED IN HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION, SIR?

A: NO.

Q: SO ARE YOU THERE TO MAINTAIN THE SCENE FOR THE DETECTIVE WHO IS TRAINED IN HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION?

A: THAT IS CORRECT.

Q: AND SO WHEN YOU SAY IT IS YOUR JOB TO SECURE THE CRIME SCENE, AS YOU -- YOU REFERRED TO CHECKING THE PERIMETER IN YOUR TESTIMONY YESTERDAY. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF SECURING THE CRIME SCENE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: SO YOU MAKE SURE THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IS WHERE IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE?

A: THAT IS PART OF IT, YES.

Q: AND THAT NOBODY GOES IN THROUGH THE TAPE WHO ISN'T SUPPOSED TO?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND YOU DO THAT UNTIL THE DETECTIVE WHO IS HANDLING THE CASE GETS THERE?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: NOW, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU HAVE BEEN TO WHAT, 300 HOMICIDE SCENES?

A: IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 250 TO 300 IN MY CAREER, YES.

Q: AND HAVE YOU BEEN TO OTHER HOMICIDE SCENES IN YOUR CAPACITY AS SERGEANT, WATCH COMMANDER, ON PREVIOUS HOMICIDE CASES?

A: YES, I HAVE.

Q: AND IN THOSE OTHER HOMICIDE CASES WHERE YOU APPEARED AS A -- IN YOUR CAPACITY AS WATCH COMMANDER, WHAT FUNCTION DID YOU PERFORM?

A: THE EXACT SAME FUNCTION THAT I PERFORMED AT THIS HOMICIDE.

Q: YOU MEAN IN THOSE OTHER CASES YOU DID NOT NOTIFY THE CORONER?

A: NO, MA'AM.

Q: YOU DID NOT ATTEMPT TO ASCERTAIN THE IDENTITY OF THE VICTIM?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: YOU DID NOT ATTEMPT TO CALL FOR THE CRIMINALIST?

A: NO.

Q: OR PHOTOGRAPHERS?

A: NO.

Q: OR NOTIFY CORONERS?

A: NO. I HAVE DONE THAT, BUT ONLY UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE DETECTIVE.

Q: WHEN THE DETECTIVE HANDLING THE CASE ASKED YOU TO DO HIM A FAVOR AND HELP HIM OUT?

A: THAT IS EXACTLY RIGHT.

Q: SO THIS CASE WAS NO DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHERS?

A: NO, IT IS NOT.

MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, EVERY QUESTION IS LEADING.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, YOU INDICATED THAT YOU NEEDED TO OBSERVE THE SCENE BEFORE YOU SAW THE DETECTIVES WHO WERE GOING TO HANDLE THE CASE?

A: YES.

Q: WHY IS THAT?

A: BECAUSE THE DETECTIVES WILL COME TO ME BEFORE ANYBODY ELSE AND ASK ME WHAT -- WHAT WE HAD HERE AND I NEED TO GIVE THEM A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE SCENE SO WHEN THEY START WALKING THROUGH IT AND TAKING A LOOK AT IT, THEY KNOW WHERE TO STEP AND WHERE NOT TO STEP AND WHAT TO BE LOOKING OUT FOR.

Q: OKAY. I THINK YOU INDICATED YESTERDAY THAT OFFICER RISKE TOLD YOU HE THOUGHT ONE OF THE VICTIMS MIGHT BE RELATED TO MR. SIMPSON; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: BUT AT THE POINT THAT YOU GOT THERE WAS THERE A CONFIRMATION OF THAT INFORMATION?

A: NO, THERE WAS NO CONFIRMATION.

Q: HAVE YOU EVER MADE NOTIFICATION TO THE NEXT OF KIN IN A HOMICIDE CASE?

A: NO, I HAVE NOT.

Q: ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY POLICY WITH RESPECT TO HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE, BY TELEPHONE OR IN PERSON?

A: THAT IS DONE IN PERSON IF AT ALL POSSIBLE.

Q: AND IS IT ALSO A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU CONFIRM THE IDENTITY OF THE VICTIM BEFORE YOU GO MAKING NOTIFICATIONS?

A: BY ALL MEANS.

Q: SO UNTIL IT IS CONFIRMED THAT THE -- WHAT THE VICTIM'S IDENTITY IS --

MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, OBJECT TO MISS CLARK TESTIFYING.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. IT IS LEADING.

MS. CLARK: WHICH?

THE COURT: LEADING.

MS. CLARK: WHICH QUESTION WAS LEADING, I'M SORRY?

MR. BAILEY: ALL OF THEM.

THE COURT: COME ON OVER HERE TO THE SIDE BAR WITHOUT THE REPORTER.

(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 CONTINUE.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT NOTIFICATIONS.

MS. CLARK: RIGHT. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: WHAT IS THE POLICY OR WHAT IS THE ROUTINE WITH RESPECT TO THE DISCOVERY OF THE IDENTITY OF THE VICTIMS AND WHEN YOU MAKE NOTIFICATION?

A: WELL, AGAIN, I THINK THAT HAS TO BE JUDGED ON EACH -- EACH CASE HAS TO BE JUDGED ON ITS OWN MERIT AND THAT IS WHAT THE DETECTIVES DO. I THINK IT IS HARD TO GIVE A PAT ANSWER ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

Q: NOW, WHAT IS THE -- IF YOU KNOW, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE POLICY IS WITH RESPECT TO WHO IS ALLOWED TO TOUCH THE BODIES OF THE VICTIMS?

A: NO, I DON'T.

Q: NOW, YOU REMAINED ON THE SCENE AFTER THE DETECTIVES ARRIVED, DID YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: FOR WHAT PURPOSE?

A: JUST TO AVAIL MYSELF TO THEM IF THEY NEEDED ME TO DO ANYTHING FOR THEM OR DIRECT ANY OF MY POLICE OFFICERS TO DO ANYTHING.

Q: SO IS IT YOUR DUTY TO ASSIST THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS ONCE THEY ARRIVE?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU STAYED THERE UNTIL HOW LONG?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: UNTIL WHEN?

A: I BELIEVE I LEFT RIGHT AROUND 4:10.

Q: NOW, DID YOU JUST TAKE OFF BY YOURSELF OR WHAT -- HOW DID YOU GET TO GO?

A: NO. I RETURNED TO THE POLICE STATION WITH SERGEANT HUSSEY. HE DROVE ME TO THE POLICE STATION.

Q: AND WHO LET YOU GO?

A: CAPTAIN DIAL RELEASED ME FROM THE SCENE.

Q: SHE SAID SHE RELIEVED YOU AT THAT POINT OR WERE YOU RELIEVED BY SOMEONE?

A: I HAD BEEN RELIEVED, AS FAR AS RESPONSIBILITY OF IN CHARGE OF THE SCENE, BY DETECTIVE PHILLIPS PRIOR TO THAT.

I WAS JUST CHECKING WITH MY COMMANDING OFFICER WHO WAS THERE AND LETTING HER KNOW THAT I WAS INTERESTED IN LEAVING TO COMPLETE SOME PAPERWORK THAT I HAD TO DO, AND SHE SAID FINE.

Q: OH, YEAH. I BELIEVE COUNSEL WAS ASKING YOU IF YOU ASKED OFFICER RISKE WHAT HE MEANT BY "SECURED," THAT THE CRIME SCENE WAS SECURED. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?

A: DO I REMEMBER BEING ASKED THAT?

Q: YES.

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU DID NOT ASK HIM WHAT HE MEANT BY THAT?

A: NO.

Q: WHY NOT?

A: BECAUSE I KNEW WHAT HE MEANT BY THAT.

Q: IS THAT COMMON KNOWLEDGE AMONG POLICE OFFICERS, WHAT THAT MEANS?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

A: IT MEANS THAT THE CRIME SCENE IS SECURED AND THAT NO ONE UNAUTHORIZED IS ALLOWED TO ENTER THE SCENE AND THAT ANY EVIDENCE IS BEING PROTECTED.

Q: AND DOES IT MEAN ANYTHING WITH RESPECT TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE INJURED VICTIMS OR SUSPECTS STILL AROUND?

A: PLEASE REPEAT THE QUESTION.

Q: UH-HUH. DOES IT ALSO HAVE ANY MEANING CONCERNING WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE SUSPECTS IN THE AREA OF THE CRIME SCENE STILL OR INJURED VICTIMS NEEDING ATTENTION IN THE AREA OF THE CRIME SCENE?

A: AS FAR AS THE CRIME SCENE BEING SECURED?

Q: RIGHT.

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DOES IT MEAN WITH RESPECT TO THAT?

A: WELL, IT MEANS THAT -- THAT THERE -- IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THERE WERE TWO -- TWO VICTIMS OF HOMICIDE STILL WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN WITH RESPECT TO SUSPECTS BEING IN THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE?

A: THAT THERE MAY BE. AS FAR AS THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION WAS CONCERNED, WHEN OFFICER RISKE WAS TALKING TO ME, IF YOU RECALL, HE HADN'T HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK IN THE HOUSE YET, SO -- IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE GETTING AT?

Q: NO. WHEN YOU APPEARED AT THE SCENE, WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY IT WAS ABOUT 1:30?

A: YES.

Q: BY THAT TIME HAD OFFICER RISKE HAD GONE INTO THE HOUSE?

A: YES.

Q: AND AT THAT TIME DID OFFICER RISKE TELL YOU THAT THE CRIME SCENE WAS SECURED?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID THAT MEAN TO YOU WITH RESPECT TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A SUSPECT IN THAT CONDOMINIUM OR THAT WALKWAY?

A: OKAY. AT THAT POINT THEN THAT MEANT TO ME THAT THERE WERE NO SUSPECTS.

Q: IN THAT AREA?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND WHAT DID THAT MEAN TO YOU WITH RESPECT TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE WERE STILL INJURED PARTIES IN NEED OF ATTENTION, LIVING VICTIMS IN NEED OF ATTENTION IN THAT AREA?

A: THAT THERE WERE NONE.

Q: COUNSEL WAS ASKING YOU YESTERDAY ABOUT INVISIBLE SHOEPRINTS. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: OKAY. NOW, YOU TALKED ABOUT WANTING TO PRESERVE THE EVIDENCE AT THE CRIME SCENE. DO YOU REMEMBER THAT?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND WHAT IS THE POINT OF PRESERVING THE EVIDENCE? WHEN YOU SAY "THE EVIDENCE," WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

A: OBVIOUS EVIDENCE.

Q: THINGS CONNECTED TO THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME?

A: YES.

Q: THAT MIGHT HELP SOLVE THE CASE?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, THAT WALKWAY THAT -- WHERE YOU SAW THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS --

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE IT ON YOUR MONITOR, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: AND DO YOU SEE WHAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO EARLIER ABOUT THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: NOW, THAT WALKWAY -- THOSE SHOEPRINTS GOING DOWN TOWARD THE REAR ALLEY AWAY FROM THE BODIES OF THE VICTIMS, THAT WALKWAY LEADS -- RUNS FROM THE FRONT OF THE RESIDENCE BACK TO THE DRIVEWAY AT THE REAR; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS EXHIBIT NO. 45-E.

THE COURT: 45-E. THANK YOU. LET ME KNOW BEFORE YOU CHANGE EXHIBITS. THANK YOU.

MS. CLARK: AND COULD WE HAVE 45-F.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: WE INTEND TO CHANGE THE PHOTOGRAPH. THIS IS 45-F.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHAT DO YOU SEE THERE, SIR?

A: THE SAME WALKWAY.

Q: OKAY. AND THE SAME WALKWAY, AND DO YOU SEE MORE OF THOSE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT?

A: YES.

Q: IF YOU COULD LOOK UP AT THE SCREEN FOR A MOMENT, SIR. CAN YOU SEE IT FROM WHERE YOU ARE?

A: YES.

Q: I'M CIRCLING WITH THE LASER. ARE THESE THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT?

A: YES, THEY ARE.

Q: AND DOWN HERE, (INDICATING)?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO THAT WOULD BE THE WALKWAY THAT YOU USED TO GO FROM THE REAR DRIVEWAY UP TO THE FRONT DOOR?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, IF THERE WERE INVISIBLE SHOEPRINTS, GIVEN THE LOCATION OF THAT THAT WALKWAY, HOW SIGNIFICANT WOULD THAT BE TO YOU IN TERMS OF HOW -- WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE CONNECTED TO THE COMMISSION OF THIS CRIME?

A: IT WOULDN'T BE THAT SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE I WOULD IMAGINE THEY COULD HAVE BEEN ANYBODY'S. I WAS MORE KEYING IN ON WHAT I COULD SEE AND WHAT RELATED TO THE CRIME.

Q: SO IF THERE WERE INVISIBLE SHOEPRINTS -- YOU SAID THEY COULD BE FROM ANYONE?

A: I WOULD IMAGINE SO.

Q: THERE COULD BE LOTS OF PRINTS THERE THAT WERE MADE MAYBE WEEKS, MONTHS AGO?

MR. BAILEY: I OBJECT ONCE AGAIN, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. IT IS LEADING.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. THE FACT THAT THESE SHOEPRINTS WERE BLOODY, IS THAT WHAT MADE THEM SIGNIFICANT TO YOU?

MR. BAILEY: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT MADE THESE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS SIGNIFICANT TO YOU? I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR.

A: THE FACT THAT THEY WERE BLOODY.

Q: AND WHY IS THAT?

A: BECAUSE OF THE BLOOD AT THE IMMEDIATE HOMICIDE SCENE.

Q: AND WAS THERE A LOT OF BLOOD AROUND THE BODIES OF THE VICTIMS, SIR?

A: YES, THERE WAS.

Q: HOW MANY -- HOW MANY SETS OF BLOODY SHOEPRINTS DID YOU SEE?

A: I SAW ONE SET, TWO PRINTS.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, THIS NEXT PHOTOGRAPH WILL BE EXHIBIT NO. 48-F.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS SHOWN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH, SIR?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND DO YOU SEE THE LITTLE TAG THAT IS ON THE GROUND JUST INSIDE THE GATE?

A: YES.

Q: AND IS THAT THE REAR GATE?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT DO YOU RECALL SEEING IN THAT LOCATION IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE THE 13TH?

A: THERE WAS A BLOOD SPOT ON THE GROUND.

MS. CLARK: CLOSE-UP.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES, YOUR HONOR. THIS IS EXHIBIT NO. 48-G.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND IS THAT THE APPEARANCE, IF YOU CAN RECALL, OF THE BLOOD DROP THAT YOU SAW JUST INSIDE THE REAR GATE?

A: YES.

MS. CLARK: EXCUSE ME. COUNSEL, MAY I SEE THE COPY OF THE PAGE YOU SHOWED THE WITNESS FROM THE MANUAL? THANK YOU.

Q: SIR, YOU WERE SHOWN THIS PAGE BY COUNSEL, SECTION 238.46 OF THE LAPD MANUAL?

A: YES.

Q: AND IN IT -- AND YOU WERE ASKED IF THERE WAS ANYTHING IN IT THAT EXEMPTS YOU FROM HAVING TO NOTIFY THE CORONER OF A HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU SAID THERE WAS?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN YOU READ: "IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS TO NOTIFY THE CORONER OF ALL DEATHS OCCURRING."

A: YES, MA'AM.

Q: "INVESTIGATING OFFICER," IS THAT ONE OF THOSE TERMS THAT WE ALL -- YOU ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

A: IT MEANS THE RESPONDING DETECTIVES.

Q: YOU ARE NOT A DETECTIVE, ARE YOU?

A: NO, MA'AM.

Q: YOU ARE A SERGEANT?

A: I'M A SERGEANT.

Q: AND SO IN SAYING THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS IN THAT MANUAL, DOES THAT REFER TO YOU AT ALL?

A: NO, IT DOES NOT.

MS. CLARK: I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.

THE COURT: AND MISS CLARK, DO YOU HAVE YOUR NEXT WITNESS AVAILABLE?

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE YOUR NEXT WITNESS AVAILABLE?

MS. CLARK: UH-HUH, I DO.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. BAILEY, RECROSS.

RECROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. BAILEY:

Q: AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOUR VIEW OF THAT REGULATION IS THAT WHEN THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS ARRIVE IT WAS THEN THAT THE OBLIGATION TO NOTIFY THE CORONER AROSE; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: IT WAS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY.

Q: UH-HUH. AND YOU WATCHED THEM VIOLATE THAT RESPONSIBILITY FOR SIX HOURS, DIDN'T YOU?

A: NO, SIR.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. OBJECTION. THAT IS ARGUMENTATIVE AND ASSUMES FACTS NOT EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED, SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU HEAR THEM CALL THE CORONER?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU MENTION TO THEM THEIR RESPONSIBILITY UNDER THAT SECTION AT ANY TIME?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHY NOT?

A: IT IS NOT MY PLACE.

Q: YOU WATCHED THEM VIOLATE A REGULATION AND YOU DIDN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DOESN'T SECTION 210.46 REQUIRE YOU TO REPORT MISCONDUCT BY OFFICERS EVEN IF THEY ARE YOUR SUPERIORS?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

MR. BAILEY: OKAY.

Q: NOW, YOU SAID ON REDIRECT EXAMINATION, IN RESPONSE TO A WHOLE SERIES OF QUESTIONS, THAT YOU REALLY HAD NO DUTY TO DO ANYTHING DURING YOUR TENURE AS SENIOR PERSON AT THE SCENE EXCEPT PROTECT IT; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. ISN'T IT A FACT THAT YOUR OBLIGATION, AFTER INITIALLY DEPLOYING PEOPLE TO THE SCENE, WAS TO WORK AS PARTNERS IN PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATIONS AND COMPARE NOTES TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL FACTS HAD BEEN GATHERED? WAS THAT YOUR OBLIGATION?

A: WITH WHOM?

Q: ALL THE PEOPLE AT THE SCENE BEFORE THE DETECTIVE GOT THERE?

A: NO.

Q: IT WAS NOT YOUR OBLIGATION?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. WAS IT YOUR OBLIGATION TO LOCATE AND IDENTIFY WITNESSES, REQUEST THEM TO REMAIN FOR QUESTIONING AND QUESTION THEM SEPARATELY?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. COUNSELS SEEMS TO BE READING FROM SOMETHING. MAY I SEE IT?

MR. BAILEY: I AM PUTTING QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: HE IS ASKING QUESTIONS. YOU CAN'T SEE EACH OTHER'S NOTES WHEN HE IS ASKING QUESTIONS.

MS. CLARK: IT IS PRINTED.

THE COURT: COUNSEL, THE SOURCE OF THAT SHOULD BE PRETTY OBVIOUS.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU REMEMBER THE QUESTION?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: OKAY. WAS THAT YOUR OBLIGATION?

A: YES. IF IT IS POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN WITNESSES, I SHOULD --

Q: WAS IT YOUR OBLIGATION TO ESTABLISH THE ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME AND OTHER DETAILS RELATING TO WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY AND HOW AND COMPLETE THE NECESSARY REPORTS? WAS THAT YOUR OBLIGATION?

A: ONLY IF POSSIBLE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU TELL US HOW YOU CARRIED OUT, IF AT ALL, THIS LATTER OBLIGATION?

A: I DID NOT DO THAT, SIR.

Q: OKAY. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU DO THAT?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU EVER READ A PUBLICATION PUT OUT BY THE LAPD CALLED "GENERAL REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS"?

A: NOT THAT I RECALL.

Q: DID YOU EVER READ A SECTION CALLED "CONDUCTING THE INVESTIGATION" WITHIN THAT PUBLICATION?

A: NOT THAT I RECALL.

MR. BAILEY: COULD THIS BE MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION?

MS. CLARK: MAY I JUST SEE WHAT COUNSEL IS REFERRING TO?

MR. BAILEY: CERTAINLY.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: MRS. ROBERTSON, 1014.

(DEFT'S 1014 FOR ID = 1-PG LAPD MANUAL)

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, HOW ABOUT IF I HAVE MISS ROBERTSON HAVE A PHOTOCOPY MADE FOR YOU?

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. IN THE MEANTIME THAT IS FINE.

MR. BAILEY: THERE IS ONLY ONE SHORT SECTION.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

MR. BAILEY: MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

Q: I SHOW YOU WHAT WILL BE MARKED AS DEFENSE 1014 FOR IDENTIFICATION AND ASK YOU IF YOU HAVE EVER SEEN THAT WRITING BEFORE?

A: I MAY HAVE, BUT I'M NOT SURE.

Q: WOULD YOU THEN PLEASE READ THE SECTION TO WHICH I AM POINTING ENTITLED "CONDUCTING THE INVESTIGATION" TO SEE IF YOUR RECOLLECTION IS REFRESHED AS TO WHAT YOUR OBLIGATIONS WERE THAT MORNING.

A: DO YOU WANT ME TO READ THIS WHOLE THING?

Q: I WANT YOU TO READ IT TO YOURSELF TO SEE IF IT HELPS YOU REMEMBER WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT IS ARGUMENTATIVE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THE LAST COMMENT BY MR. BAILEY AS BEING ARGUMENTATIVE?

THE WITNESS: (WITNESS COMPLIES.) I DID MOST OF THAT, SIR.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. NOW, A MOMENT AGO, WHEN I ASKED YOU WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD AN OBLIGATION TO PERFORM THESE DUTIES, YOU REALIZE NOW I WAS READING FROM YOUR OWN GENERAL REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS MANUAL, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. BUT I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT YOU HAD NO OBLIGATION TO ESTABLISH THE ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME AND OTHER DETAILS RELATING TO WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY AND HOW AND COMPLETE THE NECESSARY REPORTS. DO YOU WISH TO CHANGE THAT ANSWER?

A: NO, I DON'T.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IS IT SET FORTH HERE THAT THAT IS YOUR OBLIGATION?

A: IF THAT IS POSSIBLE.

Q: SO DO YOU DISAGREE WITH THE MANUAL?

A: IN THIS CASE IT WASN'T POSSIBLE.

Q: DO YOU DISAGREE WITH THE MANUAL?

A: NO, I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THE MANUAL.

Q: SO YOU ARE SAYING THE REASON YOU DIDN'T UNDERTAKE SOME SEGMENT OF WHAT WAS PRINTED HERE IS BECAUSE IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: OKAY. YOU ALSO I BELIEVE TOLD US THAT YOUR DUTY TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE WAS ONLY TO PRESERVE THAT WHICH WAS OBVIOUS. WAS THAT YOUR STATEMENT ON REDIRECT?

A: YES, IT WAS.

Q: AND IF EVIDENCE IS NOT OBVIOUS TO YOU IT IS OKAY TO OBLITERATE IT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: OF COURSE NOT.

Q: WELL, THEN WHY DID YOU RESTRICT YOUR OBLIGATION TO PRESERVE OBVIOUS EVIDENCE?

A: BECAUSE OBVIOUS EVIDENCE IS THE FIRST EVIDENCE YOU SEE.

Q: OKAY. WHAT ABOUT WHAT EVIDENCE THAT IS NOT OBVIOUS, LIKE FINGERPRINTS ON GLASSES AND OTHER THINGS OF THAT SORT?

A: THAT IS IMPORTANT.

Q: IS THAT PART OF YOUR DUTY TO PROTECT BECAUSE IT IS OBVIOUS OR BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SEE IT OR WHY?

A: IF IT IS WITHIN THE CRIME SCENE, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. TELL ME WHAT STEPS, IF ANY, YOU TOOK TO PROTECT THAT PORTION OF WHAT MIGHT BE EVIDENCE THAT WAS NOT VISIBLE TO THE NAKED EYE?

A: THE AREA WAS CORDONED OFF AND NOBODY UNAUTHORIZED WAS ALLOWED INTO IT.

Q: YOU SAY "UNAUTHORIZED." WHERE IN THE MANUAL DOES IT MANDATE THAT YOU AS A WATCH COMMANDER, AWAITING DETECTIVES, GO TO THE CRIME SCENE PERSONALLY AND GO PAST THE TAPE ONCE IT HAS BEEN SECURED? WHERE IN THE MANUAL?

A: I HAVE NO IDEA.

Q: IS THAT SOMETHING YOU DO SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS A HABIT?

A: IT WAS SOMETHING I DO BECAUSE IT IS MANDATED BY OUR DETECTIVES.

Q: WELL, YOU HAVE DISCLAIMED, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, ANY EXPERTISE OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOLVING THE CRIME, HAVE YOU NOT?

A: FOR SOLVING THE CRIME, THAT'S CORRECT, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL IF THAT IS SO, WHY IN THE WORLD WOULD YOU JEOPARDIZE THE CRIME SCENE BY WALKING ON IT?

A: I DIDN'T JEOPARDIZE THE CRIME SCENE BY WALKING ON IT.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU REALLY HAVE ANY BUSINESS AT ALL IN INSPECTING THOSE BODIES THAT MORNING?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHERE IN THE MANUAL IS IT MANDATED THAT YOU DO THAT?

A: I HAVE NO IDEA.

Q: IT ISN'T MANDATED IN THE MANUAL ANYWHERE, IS IT, SERGEANT?

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU READ THE MANUAL, DO YOU REMEMBER?

A: COVER TO COVER? ABOUT FIFTEEN YEARS AGO.

Q: AND ANY PART THEREOF?

A: UMM, PROBABLY THREE TO FOUR TIMES A WEEK.

Q: OKAY. NOW, DID YOU RECEIVE, YOU, A COMPLAINT FROM THE CORONER'S OFFICE FOR FAILING TO NOTIFY THEM?

A: NO, SIR.

Q: DID YOU LEARN THAT THE CORONER FELT THAT THE LAW HAD BEEN VIOLATED --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: -- KEPT FROM THE SCENE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID ANYONE DISCUSS WITH YOU AT ANY TIME, AFTER YOU RETURNED TO YOUR STATION OR BEFORE, THE ISSUE OF THE FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE CORONER TO COME TO THE SCENE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: NO, SIR.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: TO THIS DAY YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN QUERIED AS TO WHY THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IS THAT RIGHT?

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MS. CLARK: THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: NO, I HAVE NOT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: AM I THE FIRST ONE EVER TO QUESTION YOU AS TO WHY THE CORONER WASN'T NOTIFIED?

A: YES.

MR. BAILEY: THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU. I'M SORRY. ONE MORE QUESTION.

Q: YOU SAID YOU SAW A SINGLE SET OF FOOTPRINTS. DO YOU RECALL SAYING THAT?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: HOW WOULD YOU KNOW THAT?

A: I SAW TWO FOOTPRINTS.

Q: ARE YOU AN EXPERT IN FOOTPRINTS?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU EXAMINE A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE FOOTPRINTS?

A: JUST NOW YOU MEAN?

Q: NO, AT THE SCENE?

A: NO.

Q: THERE WERE NO PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN UNTIL YOU LEFT AT 4:10, WEREN'T THERE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, IRRELEVANT.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MS. CLARK: ARGUMENTATIVE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I DON'T REMEMBER IF PHOTOGRAPHS WERE TAKEN WHILE I WAS THERE OR NOT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YOU NEVER SAW A FLASHBULB GO OFF, DID YOU?

A: RIGHT.

Q: IT WAS NOT LIGHT ENOUGH TO TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS BY NATURAL LIGHT, WAS IT?

A: I HAVE NO IDEA.

Q: YOU DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS DARK OR NOT, SERGEANT?

A: I KNOW IT WAS DARK.

Q: CAN YOU TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS BY NATURAL LIGHT WHEN IT IS DARK?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, IRRELEVANT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: IF YOU KNOW?

A: I DON'T KNOW CAMERAS THAT WELL, SIR. I DON'T KNOW.

Q: HOW DID YOU ASCERTAIN THAT THERE WAS A SINGLE SET OF FOOTPRINTS, SERGEANT ROSSI?

A: I SAW TWO BLOODY SHOE -- SHOEPRINTS.

Q: LEFT AND A RIGHT? TWO LEFT? WHAT WERE THEY?

A: I SAW TWO.

Q: HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT ALL THE PRINTS THAT YOU SAW, BOTH OF THEM, WERE MADE BY ONE SET OF FEET?

A: I DON'T KNOW THAT.

Q: OKAY. WHERE EXACTLY, BETWEEN THE TWO GATES, DID YOU SEE THESE FOOTPRINTS?

A: APPROXIMATELY HALF THE WAY BETWEEN THE REAR GATE AND THE FRONT PART OF THE HOUSE. HALFWAY DOWN THE WALKWAY, I SHOULD SAY.

Q: HALFWAY DOWN THE WALKWAY?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, YOU KNOW TODAY, FROM JUST HAVING VIEWED A PICTURE OF IT, THAT THERE IS NO WALKWAY, DON'T YOU?

A: THERE IS NO WALKWAY?

Q: YEAH. BRING OUT 48, PLEASE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: MR. BAILEY, WHICH -- WHICH LETTER?

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

THE COURT: E AND F.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 48-E.

MR. BAILEY: AS LONG AS YOU BROUGHT THAT ONE UP, STOP THERE.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU SEE THIS -- COULD YOU BRING THAT BACK FOR A MINUTE?

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: SURE.

THE COURT: 48-G WAS A CLOSE-UP OF A BLOOD SPOT?

MR. BAILEY: YES.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: I'M SORRY, DO YOU WANT ME TO PULL BACK UP 48-B OR 48-G?

MR. BAILEY: BLOOD SPOT.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS 48-G, YOUR HONOR. THE FIRST ONE WAS 48-E.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DID YOU SEE THAT BLOOD SPOT THAT MORNING?

A: I SAW A BLOOD SPOT THAT MORNING.

Q: I UNDERSTOOD YOU TO SAY ON REDIRECT EXAMINATION THAT YOU RECOGNIZED THIS BLOOD SPOT. DO YOU OR DON'T YOU?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: WHAT DID YOU MEAN TO SAY ABOUT THIS BLOOD SPOT WHEN IT WAS SHOWN TO YOU ON REDIRECT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT IS ARGUMENTATIVE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I SAW A BLOOD SPOT IN THE BEGINNING OF THE WALKWAY AREA.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DOES THAT LOOK LIKE THE BLOOD SPOT YOU SAW THAT MORNING?

A: IT LOOKS LIKE THE AREA WHERE I SAW ONE.

Q: LOOK THE AT THE SPOT, IF YOU WILL, ON THIS SCREEN. DO YOU NOTICE THAT IT IS PRETTY MUCH CIRCULAR?

A: YES.

Q: WAS THE SPOT THAT YOU LOOKED AT THAT MORNING THAT YOU ALLUDED TO IN YOUR REDIRECT EXAMINATION A CIRCULAR SPOT OF THAT TYPE?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY TRAINING AT ALL IN BLOOD SPOTS?

A: NO.

Q: CAN YOU TELL, FROM LOOKING AT THAT SPOT, THAT WHOEVER DROPPED IT WAS STANDING STILL?

A: NO.

Q: YOU CAN'T? OKAY. WHERE -- BRING UP E, PLEASE.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: E.

MR. BAILEY: AND PRINT THAT, IF YOU WILL.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: DO YOU WISH THIS PARTICULAR PHOTO PRINTED?

MR. BAILEY: YES, PLEASE. 1015, MISS ROBERTSON?

THE COURT: NO. THIS IS ALREADY PEOPLE'S 48-G.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: NOW, PEOPLE'S 48-E.

THE COURT: G IS A SHOEPRINT.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 45. PEOPLE'S 45-E, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. IS THAT THE AREA WHERE YOU SAW SHOEPRINTS?

A: I BELIEVE I SAW IT A LITTLE BIT FARTHER DOWN.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHERE WE ARE IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH?

A: ISN'T THAT TOWARD THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE?

Q: WELL, YOU ARE THE WITNESS.

A: THAT IS WHAT IT APPEARS TO ME, YES.

Q: IS THAT WHAT YOU RECOGNIZE FROM YOUR VISIT TO THE SCENE?

A: WELL, I DIDN'T WALK THAT FAR, BUT THAT IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME.

Q: YOU NEVER WENT UP THE STEPS, DID YOU?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: ANY ENTRY YOU HAD TO PART OF THE WALKWAY OR SERIES OF STEPS AND WALKWAY NEAREST THE ALLEY WAS THROUGH THE ALLEY GATE, WASN'T IT?

A: YES, SIR.

Q: NOW, HOW FAR FROM THE ALLEY GATE IN FEET, IF YOU CAN TELL US, WERE THE TWO PRINTS THAT YOU THOUGHT WERE BLOODY FOOTPRINTS?

A: 50 FEET.

Q: 50 FEET?

A: APPROXIMATELY.

Q: COULD YOU TELL ME HOW YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE THEM SINCE YESTERDAY YOU TOLD US YOU NEVER WENT MORE THAN THIRTY FEET FROM THE GATE?

A: DID I SAY THAT. WELL, THEN MAYBE THIRTY FEET, I'M SORRY.

Q: WOULD YOU LIKE TO ELECT ONE OF THE TWO AS YOUR FINAL STATEMENT ON THAT?

A: I THINK IT WAS PROBABLY CLOSER TO 50.

Q: 50 FEET. YOU DON'T THINK YOU WENT ANY FURTHER THAN THAT?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: SO AS WE VIEW THE EVIDENCE WE OUGHT TO FIND TO BLOODY SHOEPRINTS 50 FEET FROM THE GATE OR LESS, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY OTHER FOOTPRINT AT ANY TIME?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU LOOK FOR ANY OTHER FOOTPRINTS?

A: YEAH, I USED THE FLASHLIGHT, BUT LIKE I SAY, I DIDN'T GO ANY FARTHER PAST THE ONES THAT I SAW.

Q: WHEN YOU CAME UPON THIS SET AND YOU HAD YOUR FLASHLIGHT IN YOUR HAND, DID YOU SHINE IT DOWN ON THE WALKWAY TO SEE IF THERE WERE OTHER AND FURTHER FOOTPRINTS?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT DID YOU SEE?

A: I DIDN'T NOTICE ANY AT THAT POINT.

Q: SO APPARENTLY SOME PERSON HAD WALKED A DISTANCE FROM THE CRIME SCENE TOWARD THE REAR GATE AND SUDDENLY THEIR SOLES GOT BLOODIED? IS THAT WHAT IT APPEARED TO YOU?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. CAN YOU TELL ME WHETHER OR NOT, UNDER THE TERMS OF THE MANUAL THAT GOVERN THE CONDUCT OF ALL POLICE OFFICERS IN LAPD, IT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT ALL EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT ARE TO CONFORM WITH ITS RULES AND PROVISIONS AT ALL TIMES? DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

A: YES, I DO.

MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MS. CLARK:

Q: THOSE SHOEPRINTS THAT ARE BEING SHOWN RIGHT NOW IN 45-E -- IS THAT E?

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES, THAT IS 45-E.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHEN YOU POINTED THEM OUT FOR THE JURY EARLIER, SIR, WERE YOU -- THIS IS TO DEMONSTRATE WHAT THE ONES YOU SAW LOOKED LIKE?

MR. BAILEY: OBJECT AS LEADING.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ARE THOSE SHOEPRINTS -- DO THOSE SHOEPRINTS IN 45-E LOOK LIKE THE ONES YOU SAW FROM YOUR POSITION HALFWAY DOWN THE WALKWAY?

A: YES, THEY DO.

Q: AND HOW FAR BEYOND THE SHOEPRINTS THAT YOU SAW HALFWAY DOWN, APPROXIMATELY HALFWAY DOWN THE ALLEY, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE WITH YOUR FLASHLIGHT?

A: HALFWAY DOWN THE WALKWAY.

Q: RIGHT. YOU SAID YOU WERE HALFWAY DOWN THE WALKWAY AND YOU TOLD US THAT YOU SHONE YOUR FLASHLIGHT DOWN THE WALKWAY TO SEE IF YOU COULD SEE ANYTHING ELSE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: HOW FAR WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE?

A: OH, MAYBE TEN FEET. I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE. IT WASN'T ALL THAT FAR.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, WE HAD TROUBLE PRINTING YESTERDAY. YOU HAD ASKED US TO HAVE HIM DRAW AND IF I MAY AT THIS TIME --

THE COURT: WHAT IS THE STATUS OF OUR --

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, IT IS AGAIN FULLY OPERATIONAL. WE REPAIRED A SLIGHT WIRING PROBLEM THAT DISENABLED THE PRINTER.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, REFRESH MY RECOLLECTION. WHICH PHOTOGRAPH IS THIS?

MS. CLARK: THIS IS 43-B-1.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. YOU MAY APPROACH.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.

Q: SIR, IF YOU RECALL YESTERDAY, WE WERE SHOWING YOU THIS PHOTOGRAPH AND TRYING TO LET -- HAVE YOUR PATH -- THE PATH YOU TOOK UP TO THE CALL BOX AREA AT THE FRONT OF THE CONDOMINIUM AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY, HOW YOU AVOIDED THE WALKWAY?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: YOU INDICATED THAT YOU TOOK A PATH THAT TOOK YOU THROUGH THE GRASS?

A: YES.

Q: AND WE WERE TRYING TO TRACE IT BUT IT WOULDN'T PRINT. REMEMBER THAT?

MR. BAILEY: PLEASE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: THESE ARE FOUNDATIONAL QUESTIONS, COUNSEL. WE GIVE THEM SOME LEEWAY ON THIS.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: COULD YOU PLEASE TRACE YOUR PATH NOW, SIR.

A: IT WAS OVER TO THE LEFT OF THESE PLANTS, (INDICATING).

Q: THAT BLACK PEN ISN'T SHOWING UP VERY WELL, IS IT? LET ME GET A RED ONE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, I HAVE A RED MARKS-A-LOT.

MS. CLARK: THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: TRY THIS ONE.

A: (WITNESS COMPLIES.)

THE COURT: BETTER?

MS. CLARK: YES.

THE WITNESS: ENDED UP AT ABOUT THERE, (INDICATING).

MS. CLARK: OKAY. FOR THE RECORD, THE WITNESS HAS PUT AN ARC IN RED ON IT. I'M GOING TO SHOW IT ON THE ELMO NOW. AND PERHAPS IF THIS IS NOT DISTINCT ENOUGH, WE CAN -- WE HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO PRINT NOW, WE ARE JUST GOING TO DO IT AGAIN AND WITHDRAW THIS EXHIBIT. COULD WE CUT THE FEED, YOUR HONOR? I'M SORRY.

MR. COCHRAN: CUT THE FEED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. THE ARC THAT YOU HAVE DRAWN ON THIS EXHIBIT, 43-B-1, SIR, IS THAT -- THAT ARC DESCRIBE YOUR PATH THAT YOU TOOK UP TO THE CALL BOX IN ORDER TO EXAMINE THE SCENE?

A: YES, IT DOES.

Q: AND FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT WHAT EVIDENCE WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE?

A: I WAS ABLE TO SEE A MALE AND A FEMALE VICTIM OF AN APPARENT HOMICIDE.

Q: AND DID YOU -- AND FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE EVIDENCE IN THE AREA AT THE FEET OF RON GOLDMAN?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: AND WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE?

A: I WAS ABLE TO SEE AN ENVELOPE AND A DARK-COLORED KNIT CAP, A BLACK GLOVE OR A DARK-COLORED GLOVE.

Q: NOW, YOU INDICATED -- YOU INDICATED, SIR, THAT YOU WALKED 50 FEET DOWN THE ALLEY?

A: DOWN THE WALKWAY.

Q: I'M SORRY, DOWN THE WALKWAY?

A: APPROXIMATELY, YES.

Q: RIGHT. AND THAT IS WHEN YOU SAW THAT LAST SET OF BLOODY SHOEPRINTS?

A: YES.

Q: IS THAT AN APPROXIMATION, THAT DISTANCE, SIR?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: HOW MANY FEET DO PEOPLE HAVE?

A: TWO.

Q: AND YOU SAW HOW MANY SHOEPRINTS?

A: I SAW TWO.

Q: NOT FOUR?

A: NO.

Q: COUNSEL WAS SHOWING YOU WHAT PURPORTS TO BE A SECTION FROM THE LAPD MANUAL CALLED "GENERAL REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS."

A: YES.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

MS. CLARK: MAY WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO. MR. BAILEY, DO YOU WANT TO TAKE YOUR SEAT.

MR. BAILEY: SORRY, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: DO YOU WANT TO TAKE YOUR SEAT, PLEASE. THANK YOU.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: ONE, PLEASE.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO NOW THE JURY CAN SEE IT, TOO. FIRST OF ALL, CONDUCTING THE INVESTIGATION. WERE YOU CONDUCTING THE INVESTIGATION, SIR?

A: NO.

Q: NOW, YOU NOTICE THAT AFTER THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH IT TALKS ABOUT OFFICERS WORKING IN PARTNERS, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND THEN IT SAYS THAT THERE IS A DUTY TO NOTIFY THE INVESTIGATING UNIT WITHOUT DELAY IF THERE IS A NEED FOR AN IMMEDIATE MAJOR CRIME INVESTIGATION?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND START A CRIME SCENE LOG IF APPROPRIATE. DO YOU SEE THAT?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: DID YOU DO THAT?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU NOTIFY INVESTIGATING UNITS RIGHT AWAY?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND YOU STARTED A CRIME SCENE LOG OR YOU MADE SURE ONE WAS STARTED?

A: I MADE SURE ONE WAS STARTED.

Q: AND THEN PROTECTING THE SCENE, EG, BANNER TAPE. DOES THAT MEAN THAT CRIME SCENE TAPE THAT WE SAW IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS YOU TALKED ABOUT?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS -- THAT WAS DONE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND THAT THE TAPE WAS PLACED IN THE APPROPRIATE POSITION?

A: YES.

Q: AND IT SAYS "LOCATE ITEMS THAT COULD IDENTIFY THE SUSPECT OR SHOW HOW THE CRIME WAS COMMITTED"?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: IT SAYS THAT? DO YOU SEE THAT ON THE MONITOR?

A: I TAKE THAT AS EVIDENCE, YES, AND WE DID THAT.

Q: OKAY. DO YOU KNOW HOW YOU CAN POSSIBLY DO THAT IF YOU DON'T CROSS THE CRIME SCENE TAPE AND LOOK AT THE CRIME SCENE?

A: NOT -- NO, NOT -- NOT THOROUGHLY, THAT IS FOR SURE.

Q: CAN YOU FLY?

A: NO.

Q: YOU'VE GOT A WALK ON YOUR FEET?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THINGS LIKE FINGERPRINTS, IS THAT WHY THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IS PUT UP THERE?

A: THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IS PUT UP TO DISALLOW PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO ENTER THE CRIME SCENE.

Q: AND WHY DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT?

A: TO PROTECT THE EVIDENCE FROM ANY TYPE OF CONTAMINATION.

Q: AND DO YOU KNOW OF ANY WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE APPROPRIATE DISTANCE AROUND THE EVIDENCE IS PROTECTED -- LET ME SEE IF I CAN SAY THIS IN ENGLISH. DO YOU KNOW OF ANY WAY TO DETERMINE WHERE THE CRIME SCENE TAPE SHOULD BE PLACED WITHOUT LOOKING TO SEE WHAT THE EVIDENCE IS?

A: NO.

Q: WITH RESPECT TO LOCATE AND IDENTIFY WITNESSES, WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DID YOU ASCERTAIN WITH RESPECT TO THE ATTEMPT TO LOCATE AND IDENTIFY WITNESSES WHEN YOU WERE AT THE SCENE?

A: WHEN I ARRIVED I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS ONE TEAM OUT KNOCKING ON DOORS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA TRYING TO GET POSSIBLE WITNESSES.

Q: NOW, WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHING THE ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME AND OTHER DETAILS AND COMPLETE THE NECESSARY REPORTS -- FIRST OF ALL, THE NECESSARY REPORTS. WHAT REPORTS?

MR. BAILEY: I OBJECT. SHE IS GOING AHEAD, YOUR HONOR. SHE OUGHT TO READ THE WHOLE PARAGRAPH AND NOT LEAVE OUT THE KEY WORDS.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. IT IS BEING DISPLAYED FOR THE JURORS. THEY CAN MAKE THEIR OWN DETERMINATION. MISS CLARK.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WITH RESPECT TO "COMPLETE THE NECESSARY REPORTS," WHAT KIND OF REPORT IS THE WATCH COMMANDER REQUIRED TO MAKE?

A: AT THE SCENE OF A HOMICIDE?

Q: UH-HUH.

A: THE CRIME SCENE LOG.

THE COURT: IS THAT YES?

MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY, YES. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. I'M DOING IT.

Q: OKAY. THE CRIME SCENE LOG. ARE YOU REQUIRED TO FILL THAT OUT, SIR?

A: NO. I'M REQUIRED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS FILLED OUT.

Q: THAT SOMEONE IS DOING IT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND DID YOU DO THAT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: IS THERE ANY OTHER REPORT THAT YOU ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE?

A: NO.

Q: WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHING THE ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME AND OTHER DETAILS RELATING TO WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, WHY AND HOW, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THAT MEANS, WHAT KIND OF DUTY THAT IMPOSES ON THE WATCH COMMANDER AT A HOMICIDE SCENE?

A: THAT IS NOT GENERALLY WHAT THE WATCH COMMANDER DOES. THAT IS USUALLY LEFT UP TO THE RESPONDING DETECTIVES.

Q: NOW, THIS SECTION OVERALL, SIR, ENTITLED "GENERAL REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS," TELL US WHAT -- WHAT IS THIS? IS THIS A -- THIS IS A RULE BOOK YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW HARD AND FAST? DOES IT GOVERN EVERY DETAIL OF YOUR WORK, YOUR SPECIFIC WORK AS A WATCH COMMANDER ESPECIALLY?

A: NO, IT IS JUST WHAT THEY SAY. IT SAYS "GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS," A REFERENCE.

Q: AND IS THERE ANYTHING IN THESE SECTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO YOU BY COUNSEL THAT SPECIFICALLY REFERS TO WHAT YOUR DUTY AS A WATCH COMMANDER SHOULD BE AT A HOMICIDE SCENE?

A: OTHER THAN NOTIFYING THE RESPONDING DETECTIVES AND SECURING IT, NO.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MADAM REPORTER, WHY DON'T WE TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE PAPER.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.

THE COURT: MR. BAILEY.

MR. BAILEY: MAY WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: AT SIDE BAR.

MR. BAILEY: I RECALL, YOUR HONOR, FROM THE TIME THAT WE WERE APPROVING GRAPHICS BEFORE THE TRIAL BEGAN, A LARGE SKETCH DRAWING BY SOME ENGINEER, I GUESS, OF BUNDY TO ALLEY WALKWAY LAID OUT. MR. FAIRTLOUGH THOUGHT IT WAS UP IN THAT GROUP OF EXHIBITS; IT IS NOT. I SIMPLY WANTED TO ASK THE WITNESS AS A FINAL QUESTION WHETHER HE SAW THE FOOTPRINTS BY INDICATING ON THE DIAGRAM, IF IT EXISTS.

THE COURT: DO WE HAVE THAT EXHIBIT DOWN HERE?

MR. COCHRAN: IT HAS NOT MARKED YET, BUT IT IS HERE. IT WAS HERE.

MS. CLARK: COUNSEL IS FREE TO GET HIS OWN. I HAVEN'T MARKED IT AND I AM NOT USING IT WITH THIS WITNESS. I THINK WHAT COUNSEL IS REFERRING TO, IT IS AN OVERALL -- IT IS A -- IT IS ILLUSTRATIVE. IT IS NOT TO SCALE. IT IS SIMPLY AN AREA WHERE SHOEPRINTS -- I THINK SHOEPRINTS AND BLOOD DROPS ARE SHOWN. I'M NOT EVEN SURE WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. I DON'T THINK THAT WAS COMPLETED ACTUALLY.

MR. COCHRAN: CAN WE HAVE A MINUTE TO TAKE A LOOK FOR IT? I THINK I CAN HELP HIM FIND IT.

MR. BAILEY: ARE WE GOING TO GO, AT ANY RATE, THROUGH TO 12:00?

THE COURT: LET ME TOSS THE JURORS IN THE BACK.

MR. COCHRAN: WHATEVER YOUR PLEASURE, BUT IT WILL ONLY TAKE A MINUTE. I KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT.

THE COURT: BEFORE YOU GUYS START FLIPPING STUFF AROUND, YOU KNOW, THE JURORS CAN SEE, LET ME TOSS THEM THIS BACK AND WE WILL DO THAT.

MS. CLARK: MAY I ASK ONE FAVOR, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: SURE.

MS. CLARK: DURING MY REDIRECT MR. BAILEY WAS BACK THERE TALKING TO JONATHAN FAIRTLOUGH AND DISTRACTING HIM WHEN HE NEEDS TO HELP ME.

THE COURT: WHICH IS WHY I ASKED HIM TO GO TAKE A SEAT.

MS. CLARK: PRIOR TO THAT I HAD ASKED COUNSEL TO SIT DOWN AND HE REFUSED.

MR. BAILEY: I WAS TRYING TO LOCATE AN EXHIBIT, AVOID THE DELAY WE NOW SUFFER.

MR. DARDEN: MAY I MAKE A REQUEST?

THE COURT: SURE.

MR. DARDEN: IT IS COMMON COURTESY THAT WE SHOW COUNSEL EXHIBITS BEFORE WE MARK THEM AND THAT HASN'T HAPPENED THIS MORNING. I THINK THAT IS A LITTLE UNFAIR. AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO THAT TO YOU GUYS.

THE COURT: ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE MANUAL PAGES?

MR. DARDEN: YEAH.

THE COURT: I NOTICED YOU HAD THE MANUAL THERE.

MR. DARDEN: SO IF HE IS GOING TO MARK SOMETHING, JUST LET US SEE IT BEFORE YOU EXHIBIT IT TO THE WITNESS.

THE COURT: MR. DARDEN, THE REASON I WASN'T REAL CONCERNED ABOUT THAT IS I NOTICE THAT YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE MANUAL AT COUNSEL TABLE.

MR. DARDEN: ALL 400 PAGES.

MS. CLARK: HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT.

THE COURT: I ASSUMED THAT YOU --

MS. CLARK: AT LEAST GIVE US A PAGE NUMBER.

MR. COCHRAN: BOTH SIDES HAVE DONE THIS AND WE DIDN'T GET PHOTOGRAPHS EITHER. WE ALWAYS WANT TO DO -- WE ALWAYS WANT TO DO THAT.

THE COURT: THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO STEP BACK IN THE JURY ROOM. THIS WILL BE FIVE MINUTES, PROMISE, SO YOU CAN JUST RELAX A LITTLE, STRETCH YOUR LEGS, USE THE FACILITIES THERE IF YOU NEED TO. I. NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT A FEW EXHIBITS OUT OF YOUR PRESENCE, SO ABOUT FIVE MINUTES. IF YOU WILL JUST STEP BACK INTO THE JURY ROOM, PLEASE.

(AT 11:24 A.M. THE JURY WAS EXCUSED AND THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: SERGEANT ROSSI, YOU CAN STEP DOWN THERE AND STRETCH YOUR LEGS.

MR. BAILEY: IF IT PLEASE THE COURT.

THE COURT: COUNSEL, DO YOU WANT TO PULL OUT THE EXHIBIT?

MR. BAILEY: 45-F, THEIR EXHIBIT. THE FACT THAT THEY HAVEN'T USED IT I DON'T THINK BARS MY USE.

MR. DARDEN: IF IT WAS MARKED 45-F IT HAS BEEN INTRODUCED.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MR. BAILEY: CAN WE LEARN FROM MR. FAIRTLOUGH IF IT EXISTS?

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YES, YOUR HONOR, HOWEVER, BUT THIS PARTICULAR DIAGRAM HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED BY THE PEOPLE WHETHER OR NOT IT WILL BE USED BY THE WITNESS SO IT HAS NOT BEEN MARKED.

THE COURT: DO WE HAVE IT HERE IN THE COURTROOM?

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: WE DON'T HAVE IT HERE.

MR. HARRIS: THE ENTIRE BUNDY AND CONDO AND ONE WALKWAY TO THE OTHER WALKWAY.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. IS IT HERE IN THE COURTROOM?

MR. DARDEN: WE WILL SELL IT TO THEM, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: I'M SURE YOU WILL. IS IT HERE IN THE COURTROOM? SIMPLE QUESTION. YES OR NO.

MS. CLARK: NO.

THE COURT: NOT IN THE COURTROOM.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. BAILEY: I HAVE SEEN IT IN THIS COURTROOM.

MR. DARDEN: WE MODIFY THESE BOARDS FROM TIME TO TIME BEFORE WE PRESENT THEM. I HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT BOARD THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT AND I HAVEN'T APPROVED THE USE OF THE BOARD. IF THEY WANT TO PAY FOR THE BOARD --

THE COURT: NO, WE DON'T.

MS. CLARK: WHAT COUNSEL REFERS TO IS BEING WORKED ON. IT HASN'T BEEN COMPLETED. IT IS -- IT IS IN THE PROCESS OF HAVING PHOTOGRAPHS ADDED.

THE COURT: WELL, SIMPLE QUESTION. IT IS NOT HERE, CORRECT?

MS. CLARK: CORRECT.

MR. BAILEY: IT WAS COMPLETED WHEN I SAW IT.

MS. CLARK: NO.

MR. BAILEY: AT LEAST FOR THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO USE IT WITH THIS WITNESS.

THE COURT: WELL, MR. BAILEY, IT IS NOT HERE, AND WE ARE GOING TO FINISH, I HOPE.

MR. BAILEY: ALL RIGHT. MAY WE SUSPEND THIS WITNESS UNTIL WE HAVE A CHANCE TO OBTAIN THE DOCUMENT? I WOULD LIKE HIM TO SHOW WHERE THESE MIGRANT FOOTPRINTS WERE LOCATED.

THE COURT: I ASSUME THAT THE DEFENSE ALSO HAS THEIR OWN SCALE DRAWING OF THE SCENE AVAILABLE TO THEM OR WE CAN ASK ONE OF THE T.V. STATIONS FOR THEIR 3-D MOCK-UPS OF THE CRIME SCENE.

MR. BAILEY: I THINK WE SO ADMIRED THE PROSECUTION'S HANDIWORK WE HAD CHOSEN TO RELY ON IT.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, WE TURNED OVER --

THE COURT: COUNSEL, I ASSUME BOTH SIDES HAVE A SCALE DRAWING ACCESSIBLE TO THEM. IF YOURS WAS AVAILABLE IMMEDIATELY AND THERE WAS NO OBJECTION, WE WOULD USE YOURS. YOURS ISN'T HERE. WE WILL PROCEED. ALL RIGHT. HAVE WE GIVEN THE JURORS FIVE MINUTES?

MR. DARDEN: I THINK WE STILL HAVE TWO MINUTES LEFT, DON'T WE?

THE COURT: LOOKS THAT WAY.

MR. DARDEN: I WILL TAKE MY TWO MINUTES, YOUR HONOR.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY HIGGINS, LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE.

MR. BAILEY: IF IT PLEASES THE COURT, I WILL ASK TO SUSPEND THIS WITNESS AND NOT EXCUSE HIM.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET'S FINISH WITH HIM, WHAT WE CAN DO.

MR. BAILEY: THAT IS THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD LEFT.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MR. BAILEY: SO I HAVE NO RECROSS WITHOUT THE EXHIBIT AND I INFORMED THE COURT THAT ACCORDING TO --

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, HAVE A SEAT, PLEASE. WE ARE STILL MISSING ONE JUROR. SERGEANT, WHY DON'T YOU RETAKE THE WITNESS STAND, PLEASE.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. MR. BAILEY, I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU NEED AN EXHIBIT AND THAT YOU HAVE CONCLUDED WITH THIS WITNESS UNTIL WE HAVE THAT EXHIBIT?

MR. BAILEY: I HAVE BEEN SAVED BY CO-COUNSEL, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED.

MR. BAILEY: I AM ABOUT TO MARK AS DEFENSE I THINK 1016 --

THE COURT: 1015.

(DEFT'S 1015 FOR ID = SCHEMATIC DRAWING/875 S. BUNDY)

MR. BAILEY: LET THE RECORD SHOW I AM SHOWING COUNSEL WHAT WILL BECOME 1016 IDENTIFIED.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DEFENSE 1015.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

FURTHER RECROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. BAILEY:

Q: SERGEANT ROSSI, AS YOU LOOK AT DEFENSE 1015 FOR IDENTIFICATION, ARE YOU ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THIS OVERHEAD SKETCH OF THE FLOORPLAN OF 875 BUNDY?

A: NO.

Q: ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE ANY PART OF THAT SKETCH THAT PURPORTS TO SET FORTH THE WALKWAY THAT YOU ENTERED FROM THE ALLEY THAT MORNING?

A: YOU WOULD HAVE TO POINT IT OUT, SIR. I CAN'T READ SCHEMATICS VERY WELL.

MR. BAILEY: FINE. WOULD YOU PUT AN ARROW, PLEASE, ON THE ALLEY ENTRANCE TO THE WALKWAY.

Q: YOU WILL RECALL, SERGEANT, THAT YOU SAID IT WAS ADJACENT TO THE GARAGE?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU SEE THE GARAGE?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU RECOGNIZE BUNDY IN THAT SKETCH?

A: OKAY. NOW, I DO WHEN YOU MOVED IT, YES.

Q: OKAY. CAN YOU POINT OUT TO US ON THAT SKETCH THE FRONT GATE REPRESENTED BY AN ARC, I BELIEVE?

A: NO.

MR. BAILEY: MR. HARRIS, WOULD YOU CIRCLE THE FRONT GATE, PLEASE.

Q: DO YOU SEE THE RED CROSS, SERGEANT?

A: YES, I DO.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. INCORRECT. INCORRECT.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MR. BAILEY: STRIKE IT OUT AND DO IT AGAIN.

MS. CLARK: THAT IS THE PROBLEM. WE NEED THE WITNESS TO TESTIFY; NOT MR. HARRIS.

MR. BAILEY: I WANT MR. HARRIS TO INDICATE, FOR PURPOSES OF CROSS-EXAMINATION, A POINT AND ASK THE WITNESS --

THE COURT: COUNSEL, YOU NEEDN'T TALK TO EACH OTHER. YOU NEED TO TALK TO ME ABOUT THIS.

MR. BAILEY: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: MR. HARRIS, DO YOU HAVE AN ARROW? THERE YOU GO. THANK YOU.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT SPOT, SERGEANT?

A: NO, SIR, I DON'T.

Q: OKAY.

A: THAT IS A SCHEMATIC, SIR.

Q: WHAT IS THAT?

A: THAT IS A SCHEMATIC.

Q: THAT'S CORRECT.

A: I HAVE NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE.

Q: I UNDERSTAND, BUT YOU WERE ON THE SCENE, RIGHT?

A: I WAS ON THE SCENE, YES.

Q: ARE YOU ABLE TO DERIVE FROM THAT EXPERIENCE ENOUGH MEMORY TO PLACE YOURSELF ON THE SCHEMATIC?

A: NO, NOT THE SCHEMATIC.

MR. BAILEY: OKAY. WOULD YOU PLEASE PLACE AN INDICATOR ON THE REAR GATE OF THAT SCHEMATIC, DEFENSE 1015.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: NO, COUNSEL. HOLD ON.

MS. CLARK: CAN WE HAVE THE WITNESS -- THERE SHOULD BE A QUESTION AT LEAST POSED OF THE WITNESS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT HE --

MR. BAILEY: HE IS WAITING, YOUR HONOR, AT YOUR DIRECTION.

THE COURT: PROCEED, COUNSEL.

MR. BAILEY: OKAY. WOULD YOU LOCATE THE ARROW AT THE REAR OF THE GATE ON THE SCHEMATIC.

Q: SERGEANT ROSSI, DO YOU RECOGNIZE ON THE SCHEMATIC THAT PLACE?

A: NO, BUT IF YOU TELL ME THAT IS THE REAR GATE, I WILL BELIEVE YOU.

Q: I DON'T WANT YOU TO TAKE ANYTHING FOR GRANTED. DO YOU SEE WHAT PURPORTS TO BE STEPS, UP AND DOWN STEPS?

A: THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE STEPS TO ME, SIR.

Q: DID YOU GO DOWN ANY STEPS THAT NIGHT WHEN YOU ENTER THE ALLEY EITHER WITH PHILLIPS OR WITH RISKE?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND AFTER YOU WENT DOWN THE STEPS DID YOU THEN GO UP SOME STEPS?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN DID YOU DESCEND A SECOND SET OF STEPS?

A: I DON'T RECALL.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US, WITH RESPECT TO THE STEPS THAT YOU WENT DOWN AND THEN UP, WHERE YOU SAW WHAT YOU THOUGHT WERE TWO BLOODY FOOTPRINTS?

A: IF THAT IS THE WALKWAY, I SAW THE FOOTPRINTS APPROXIMATELY HALFWAY DOWN THE WALKWAY TOWARDS BUNDY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU SEE THE SCALE ON THE BOTTOM SHOWING IT IS 170 FEET?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT IS -- THAT MISSTATES WHAT IS ON THE DIAGRAM.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MS. CLARK: 170 FEET OUT TO BUNDY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE JURY CAN SEE THE SAME THING.

THE WITNESS: YES, I DO SEE THAT.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: OKAY. NOW, CAN YOU LOCATE YOURSELF, WITH RESPECT TO THE STEPS THAT YOU WENT DOWN AND THEN UP, AND TELL US WHERE PRECISELY YOU SAW THESE FOOTPRINTS, SERGEANT ROSSI?

A: ABOUT HALF WAY DOWN THAT WALKWAY, SIR.

Q: WITH RESPECT TO THE STEPS?

A: ABOUT 50 FEET FROM THOSE STEPS.

Q: THE DOWN STEPS OR THE UP STEPS?

A: THE ONES BY THE GATE, CLOSEST TO THE GATE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. 50 FEET FROM THE STEPS GOING DOWN NEAR THE REAR GATE?

A: NEAREST THE REAR GATE.

Q: YOU SAW BLOODY FOOTPRINTS?

A: AS I RECALL, YES.

Q: OKAY. SO I TAKE IT THEN THAT YOU SAW THE FOOTPRINTS BEFORE YOU PROCEEDED UP THE STEPS YOU HAVE JUST TOLD US YOU CLIMBED?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: OKAY. THEN YOU SEE A VERY BRIEF LEVEL AREA BETWEEN THE SECOND SET OF STEPS AND THE THIRD SET AS YOU WALK FROM THE ALLEY TOWARD BUNDY?

A: IF THAT IS WHAT THAT IS.

Q: WELL, ASSUMING THAT IS WHAT IT IS, IS THAT WHERE THE FOOTPRINTS WERE?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THIS WITNESS --

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I CAN'T ACCURATELY TESTIFY TO THAT, SIR, OFF THE SCHEMATIC. I'M SORRY.

Q: BY MR. BAILEY: YOU SAW THEM TWICE THAT MORNING?

A: YES.

Q: THEY WERE POINTED OUT AND YOU DISCOVERED THEM WITH OFFICER RISKE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND THEN YOU TOOK DETECTIVE PHILLIPS SO COULD YOU POINT THEM OUT TO HIM?

A: YES.

Q: ARE YOU TODAY UNABLE TO LOCATE THOSE FOOTPRINTS ON THIS SCHEMATIC?

A: IF I WAS AT THE SCENE I WOULDN'T. I WOULD BE ABLE TO, BUT NOT OFF THE SCHEMATIC.

Q: YOU CANNOT LOCATE, WITH RESPECT TO THE STEPS, WHERE YOU SAW FOOTPRINTS?

A: NOT ACCURATELY. ALL I RECALL IS, IS THAT THEY WERE APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET FROM THE GATE AS YOU ENTERED THAT WALKWAY GOING TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.

Q: WOULD 50 FEET FROM THE GATE BE TO A SET OF STEPS OR DID YOU SEE THEM ON LEVEL GROUND?

A: IT WAS LEVEL GROUND.

Q: BUT YOU ARE UNABLE TO TELL US WHICH LEVEL SEGMENT OF THAT WALKWAY IS WHAT YOU HAVE IN MIND?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. BAILEY: THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, ANYTHING ON THAT ISSUE?

MS. CLARK: NO, YOUR HONOR, NOTHING FURTHER.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SERGEANT ROSSI, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU ARE HOW EXCUSED AS A WITNESS. I'M GOING TO DIRECT YOU NOT TO DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH ANYBODY ELSE UNTIL THE CASE HAS BEEN CONCLUDED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.

MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, WE WOULD LIKE THE WITNESS NOT TO BE EXCUSED.

THE COURT: HE IS AN LAPD OFFICER. HE IS AVAILABLE. WE KNOW WHERE TO FIND HIM. THANK YOU, SERGEANT. NEXT WITNESS.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THE PEOPLE CALL DETECTIVE RON PHILLIPS.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

RONALD PHILLIPS, CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE PEOPLE, WAS SWORN AND TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:

THE CLERK: PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. 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: 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: RONALD PHILLIPS. R-O-N-A-L-D, PHILLIPS, P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S.

THE CLERK: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MS. CLARK:

Q: GOOD MORNING, SIR.

A: GOOD MORNING.

Q: WILL YOU PLEASE TELL US WHAT YOU DO FOR A LIVING.

A: I'M A POLICE OFFICER FOR THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES CURRENTLY ASSIGNED TO WEST LOS ANGELES DETECTIVES WHERE I WORK THE HOMICIDE UNIT.

Q: NOW, HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN ASSIGNED TO THAT PARTICULAR JOB?

A: I HAVE BEEN A DETECTIVE SINCE 1978. I WORKED WEST LOS ANGELES DETECTIVES SINCE 1989 AND I HAVE WORKED THE HOMICIDE UNIT THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF.

Q: NOW, CAN YOU TELL US, SIR, WHAT ARE YOUR DUTIES AS A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE?

A: WELL, I'M A HOMICIDE COORDINATOR IS WHAT I AM. I SUPERVISE A HOMICIDE UNIT. MY RESPONSIBILITIES ARE AS SOON AS A HOMICIDE OCCURS IN THE WEST LOS ANGELES AREA, I AM NOTIFIED BY THE WATCH COMMANDER OR BY MY COMMANDING OFFICER, WHO WOULD BE LIEUTENANT SPANGLER, THAT A HOMICIDE HAS OCCURRED AND REQUEST THAT I ROLL TO THE SCENE. I WILL THEN MAKE THE DETERMINATION ON HOW MANY OTHER DETECTIVES OUT MY HOMICIDE UNIT WILL ROLL TO THAT CRIME SCENE AND THEN I WILL ASSIGN THAT CRIME SCENE TO A PARTICULAR DETECTIVE OR TEAM OF DETECTIVES TO HANDLE IT. I DO NOT INVESTIGATE THE HOMICIDES MYSELF.

Q: DID YOU AT ONE TIME?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN WAS THAT?

A: THE FIRST HOMICIDE I EVER INVESTIGATED WAS BACK IN 1970 IN RAMPART DIVISION AND I WENT ON LOAN TO ROBBERY/HOMICIDE DIVISION AND WORKED A MAJOR OFFICER INVOLVED SHOOTING WHERE A LOS ANGELES POLICE OFFICER WAS KILLED. I HAVE WORKED SOME HOMICIDE IN NORTHEAST, 77TH AND HARBOR DIVISION.

Q: OKAY. HOW LONG?

A: I HAVE ALSO WORKED SEVERAL HOMICIDES IN RELATIONSHIP TO WORKING AS A ROBBERY DETECTIVE OR VICTIMS OF STORES OR SUSPECTS IN THE COMMISSION OF ROBBERIES WERE KILLED IN THESE ROBBERIES AND I EITHER INDIRECTLY OR DIRECTLY WAS INVOLVED IN THOSE HOMICIDE INVESTIGATIONS AS A ROBBERY DETECTIVE.

Q: HOW LONG WERE YOU A ROBBERY DETECTIVE?

A: SINCE 1978 I HAVE BEEN A ROBBERY DETECTIVE PROBABLY 75, 80 PERCENT OF THE TIME.

Q: YOU HAVE BEEN A POLICE OFFICER FOR HOW LONG?

A: 28 YEARS.

Q: WITH LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT?

A: YES.

Q: HOW MUCH OF THAT TIME HAS BEEN SPENT IN WEST LOS ANGELES?

A: AS I SAID, I WENT TO WEST LOS ANGELES DIVISION IN FEBRUARY OF 1989.

Q: NOW, AS OF JUNE 12, 1994, WHAT WAS YOUR ASSIGNMENT?

A: I WAS A WEST LOS ANGELES HOMICIDE COORDINATOR. I WAS ALSO THE WEST LOS ANGELES MAC COORDINATOR, WHICH IS A MAJOR ASSAULT CRIME TABLE THAT WE ALSO HAVE THAT DEALS WITH CRIMES LESS THAN ACTUAL HOMICIDES. I WAS WILL IN CHARGE OF THE CAPS UNIT WHICH WAS A CRIME AGAINST PERSONS UNIT AND I WAS ALSO IN CHARGE OF THE SEX CRIME UNIT. I WORE THREE HATS AT ONE TIME.

Q: HOW MANY HOURS A DAY DID YOU WORK?

A: A LOT.

Q: NOW, THE MAC UNIT THAT YOU DESCRIBED, MAJOR --

A: MAJOR ASSAULT CRIMES. THAT HAS TO DO WITH SPOUSAL ABUSE, SPOUSAL CRIMES, ADW'S, BATTERIES, THREATENING PHONE CALLS, THINGS LIKE THAT THAT BASICALLY HAVE TO DO WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

Q: BY "ADW" YOU MEAN?

A: ASSAULT WITH A DEADLY WEAPON, I'M SORRY.

Q: AND FOR HOW LONG -- ALL RIGHT. DO YOU CONTINUE TO FULFILL ALL THOSE THREE FUNCTIONS?

A: NO, I DON'T. THE ONLY FUNCTION I HAVE TODAY IS AS THE WEST LOS ANGELES HOMICIDE COORDINATOR.

Q: DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION, SIR, TO THE DATE OF JUNE 13, 1994, DID YOU GET WOKEN UP IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT?

A: I WAS WOKEN UP ABOUT ONE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING ON JUNE 13 BY A SERGEANT ROSSI.

Q: AND WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT PHONE CALL?

A: HE INFORMED ME THAT THERE HAD BEEN A DOUBLE HOMICIDE IN WEST LOS ANGELES DIVISION, THAT IT HAD OCCURRED AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY, THAT THERE WAS A FEMALE AND I BELIEVE A MALE IS WHAT HE TOLD ME, VICTIMS, AND THAT PRELIMINARILY HE THOUGHT THAT MAYBE THE FEMALE WAS THE EX-WIFE OR WIFE OF O.J. SIMPSON.

Q: DID HE TELL YOU THAT WAS CONFIRMED OR --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO ANYTHING FURTHER. THAT WAS PRELIMINARY. I OBJECT. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: UPON HANGING UP WITH SERGEANT ROSSI, DID YOU -- WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: UPON HANGING UP I THEN CALLED DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN, WHO WAS IN THE WEST L.A. HOMICIDE UNIT, INFORMED HIM OF WHAT I HAD BEEN TOLD AND REQUESTED THAT HE RESPOND TO WEST L.A. STATION WHERE I WOULD MEET HIM AND WE WOULD TRAVEL TO THE LOCATION TOGETHER.

Q: AND DID YOU IMMEDIATELY ATTEMPT TO NOTIFY MR. SIMPSON OF THE MURDERS THAT YOU HAD JUST HEARD ABOUT?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: WHY NOT?

A: WELL, I HAD NO INTENTIONS OF NOTIFYING MR. SIMPSON. I HAD NO IDEA HE WAS INVOLVED OR ANYTHING ABOUT MR. SIMPSON AT THAT TIME. ALL I WAS TOLD IS IT WAS A POSSIBILITY THAT A FEMALE AT THAT LOCATION MAY OR MAY NOT BE HIS WIFE OR EX-WIFE. I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T MAKE A PHONE CALL AT THAT TIME LIKE THAT.

Q: YOU WOULD WANT TO BE SURE FIRST?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT. COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WOULD YOU WANT TO BE SURE?

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE.

THE COURT: SHE HAS WITHDRAWN THE QUESTION AND ASKING A NEW QUESTION. PROCEED.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.

Q: WOULD YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE OF WHO THE VICTIM WAS FIRST BEFORE YOU MADE NOTIFICATION?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO AFTER YOU CALLED DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I THEN CALLED A DETECTIVE BRAD ROBERTS WHO ALSO WORKS WEST LOS ANGELES DETECTIVES IN THE HOMICIDE UNIT. I INFORMED HIM OF THE SITUATION THAT I HAD JUST BEEN INFORMED OF AND ASKED THAT HE RESPOND TO WEST L.A. STATION AND PICK UP HIS UNIT AND MEET ME AT THE LOCATION ALSO.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO AFTER THAT?

A: I THEN ALSO NOTIFIED -- I BELIEVE I MIGHT HAVE DONE THIS ON MY CELLULAR PHONE ENROUTE TO THE STATION -- I ALSO NOTIFIED TOM NOLAN WHO IS A WEST L.A. HOMICIDE DETECTIVE. I BELIEVE I NOTIFIED TOM NOLAN AFTER I MADE THREE OTHER ATTEMPTS TO NOTIFY THREE OTHER DETECTIVES WHO WERE NOT AVAILABLE, AND THEN I NOTIFIED TOM NOLAN AND HE SAID HE WOULD MEET DETECTIVE ROBERTS EITHER AT THE STATION OR AT THE SCENE, DEPENDING ON WHAT TIME THEY GOT IN THERE TOGETHER.

Q: AND YOU GOT TO THE STATION?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHO ELSE WAS THERE OF THE PEOPLE YOU HAD NOTIFIED WHEN YOU GOT TO THE STATION?

A: WHEN I FIRST ARRIVED THERE WAS NOBODY THERE.

Q: YOU WERE THE ONLY ONE?

A: WELL, I MEAN THERE WAS POLICEMEN IN THE STATION BUT NONE OF MY DETECTIVES WERE THERE.

Q: DID SOMEONE EVENTUALLY SHOW UP OF THE PEOPLE YOU CALLED?

A: YES. WITHIN ABOUT FIVE MINUTES AFTER I ARRIVED DETECTIVE FUHRMAN SHOWED UP.

Q: AND ABOUT WHAT TIME WAS THAT?

A: I WOULD SAY IT WAS ABOUT 1:50 IN THE MORNING BECAUSE WE SPENT MAYBE FIVE OR TEN MINUTES INSIDE THE STATION GETTING STUFF READY. I TALKED TO A COUPLE OF OFFICERS AT THE DESK AND THEN WE ROLLED OUT TO THE LOCATION.

Q: NOW, DID YOU GO ALONE OR DID YOU GO TOGETHER?

A: I WENT TO 875 SOUTH BUNDY ALONG WITH DETECTIVE FUHRMAN.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU RIDE IN THE SAME CAR TOGETHER, YOU AND HE?

A: YES. I DROVE AND HE WAS A PASSENGER.

Q: OKAY. WHEN YOU GOT TO THE LOCATION OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY, WHERE DID YOU PARK?

A: I DROVE UP BUNDY AVENUE. I MADE A RIGHT TURN ON DOROTHY BECAUSE I NOTICED THERE WERE SEVERAL POLICE CARS INSIDE THE -- IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. THERE WAS YELLOW TAPE ACROSS BUNDY AVENUE RIGHT AT DOROTHY, SO I MADE A RIGHT TURN AND PARKED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF DOROTHY JUST EAST OF BUNDY.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: TWO, PLEASE. HIS IS PEOPLE'S 51, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: SHOWING YOU PEOPLE'S 51, SIR, DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT WE ARE SHOWING YOU HERE?

A: YES. THAT IS THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US WHICH IS DOROTHY AND WHICH IS BUNDY?

A: THE POLICE CARS THAT ARE FACING -- THE TWO POLICE CARS FACING IN ONE DIRECTION WITH THE LIGHTS ON THE POLICE CAR IS BUNDY. DOROTHY IS WHERE THIS CAR AT THE LOWER PART OF THE PICTURE IS FACING.

Q: OKAY. NOW, THE POLICE CAR AND THE BROWN CAR, ARE THEY -- WHICH DIRECTION ARE THEY FACING ON BUNDY?

A: NORTHBOUND.

Q: AND THE CAR IN THE FOREGROUND OF THIS PHOTOGRAPH IS FACING IN WHICH DIRECTION ON DOROTHY?

A: IT APPEARS TO BE FACING SOMEWHAT EASTBOUND ON DOROTHY.

Q: AND IF YOU COULD ORIENT YOURSELF WITH RESPECT TO THIS PHOTOGRAPH, TELL US WHERE YOU PARKED THE CAR.

A: IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, I THINK I PARKED MY CAR, IT WOULD BE FURTHER EAST OF THE CAR THAT IS PARKED IN THE FOREGROUND OF THIS PICTURE.

Q: ON DOROTHY?

A: ON DOROTHY.

Q: AND ON THAT SAME SIDE OF THE STREET; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO AFTER THAT?

A: I EXITED THE CAR, WALKED OVER TO THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET WHERE I MET WITH SERGEANT DAVE ROSSI.

Q: AND WHERE WAS IT YOU MET WITH SERGEANT ROSSI?

A: HE WAS STANDING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET AT DOROTHY AND BUNDY MORE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DOROTHY, BUT STILL IN THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US, DETECTIVE, FOR A MOMENT, WHAT IS SERGEANT ROSSI'S RESPONSIBILITY THERE?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR, AS IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. BRIEFLY.

THE WITNESS: WELL, SERGEANT ROSSI IS AN AWC, WHICH IS AN ASSISTANT WATCH COMMANDER. HE -- IN THE ABSENCE OF A LIEUTENANT HE IS IN CHARGE OF WHATEVER WATCH HE HAPPENS TO BE WORKING, WHICH MEANS THAT HE IS THE HIGHEST RANKING OFFICIAL THAT IS WORKING ON THAT WATCH. HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE POLICE OFFICERS, DESK PERSONNEL, JAIL FUNCTIONS. ANYTHING THAT GOES ON IN THAT STATION DURING HIS WATCH HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR. I THINK THAT HIS REASONING FOR BEING OUT THERE --

THE COURT: WAIT.

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE THE LATTER PART.

THE COURT: HIS REASONING FOR BEING OUT THERE IS NOT RELEVANT TO THE QUESTION.

MS. CLARK: OKAY.

Q: SO WHAT ARE HIS RESPONSIBILITIES AT THE CRIME SCENE?

MR. COCHRAN: AGAIN, YOUR HONOR, THIS IS 352.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: WELL, HIS RESPONSIBILITY AT THE CRIME SCENE WOULD BE TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE THAT CRIME SCENE UNTIL WE ARRIVE, THE DETECTIVES WHO WERE GOING TO TAKE OVER THAT INVESTIGATION AND TAKE OVER THAT CRIME SCENE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND IS IT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE AND CALL THE CORONER, CALL THE PHOTOGRAPHER AND THE CRIMINALIST?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THE FORM OF THIS QUESTION. THIS QUESTION IS COMPOUND, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: I WAS TRYING TO PUT IT ALL INTO ONE.

THE COURT: I KNOW. THERE IS AN OBJECTION AND IT IS WELL-TAKEN. SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: IS IT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO CALL FOR THE CRIMINALIST TO ARRIVE AND EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO SEE THAT THE EVIDENCE IS COLLECTED?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO SEE THAT A PHOTOGRAPHER IS CALLED?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO DIRECT THE PHOTOGRAPHER IN WHAT TO TAKE PICTURES OF?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY THE CORONER?

A: NO.

Q: IS IT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO SUPERVISE WHAT YOU DO AND DETERMINE WHEN AND HOW YOU SHOULD CALL THE CORONER?

A: NO, IT IS NOT.

Q: WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY ARE THOSE THINGS?

A: ALL THE FUNCTIONS YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT ARE THE DETECTIVE WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THAT INVESTIGATION RESPONSIBILITY.

Q: ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE TERM "INVESTIGATING OFFICER"?

A: YES.

Q: AND HOW IS THAT DIFFERENT FROM THE TERM "WATCH COMMANDER"?

A: WELL, IT IS TWO -- TWO COMPLETE SEPARATE FUNCTIONS. THE WATCH COMMANDER IS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS; IT IS A WATCH COMMANDER. HE COMMANDS THAT ENTIRE WATCH, WHATEVER THAT WATCH HAPPENS TO BE. AN INVESTIGATING OFFICER IS A PERSON WHO IS ASSIGNED TO A PARTICULAR CRIME OR A PARTICULAR INVESTIGATION THAT HAS TO DO WITH A CRIME. THAT IS HIS SOLE RESPONSIBILITY AS THE INVESTIGATION OF THAT CRIME. HE IS THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER. HE IS -- THE OTHER PERSON IS A WATCH COMMANDER OF AN ENTIRE WATCH.

Q: AND WHEN YOU SAY HE WATCHES THE ENTIRE COMMAND, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

A: WELL, HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERYTHING THAT OCCURS ON HIS WATCH. HE HANDLES ROLL CALLS, HE HANDLES END OF WATCHES, HE REVIEWS REPORTS, APPROVES BOOKINGS, MAKES JAIL CHECKS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE JAIL IS BEING RUN ADEQUATELY, SEES THAT PROPERTY IS BOOKED PROPERLY. IF THERE IS A SITUATION THAT WARRANTS HE GO OUT BECAUSE IT IS A MAJOR OCCURRENCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEN HE HAS TO GO OUT AND SEE WHAT IT IS BECAUSE HE IS GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE TO NOTIFY THE NEXT CHAIN OF COMMAND.

Q: AND THAT IS HIS RESPONSIBILITY, IS TO NOTIFY THE NEXT CHAIN OF COMMAND?

MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: IF THE SITUATION DICTATES IT, THEN HE WILL NOTIFY THE NEXT CHAIN OF COMMAND UP AND KEEP ON GOING.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: SO WITH RESPECT TO THE DUTIES OF A WATCH COMMANDER AT A HOMICIDE SCENE, WHAT ARE THOSE DUTIES?

A: I'M SORRY, WHAT WAS THAT?

Q: WHAT ARE THE DUTIES OF A WATCH COMMANDER AT THE SCENE OF A HOMICIDE?

A: HIS DUTIES?

MR. COCHRAN: DEPENDS. I THINK THAT IS -- THERE IS A LOT OF FACTS. THIS DEPENDS. ARE THE DETECTIVES THERE NOW? HE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

MS. CLARK: I WILL MAKE IT MORE SPECIFIC, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: BRIEFLY.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: PRIOR TO THE ARRIVAL OF DETECTIVES, WHAT ARE THE DUTIES OF A WATCH COMMANDER AT THE SCENE OF A HOMICIDE?

A: WELL, HIS DUTIES WOULD JUST BE TO SEE THAT HIS PERSONNEL, WHOEVER IS AT THAT CRIME SCENE, DID THEIR JOB IN AN ADEQUATE MANNER. HE WOULD GO OUT THERE AND LOOK AT IT AND SAY, WELL, I THINK IT IS DONE RIGHT OR THIS IS WHAT YOU GUYS NEED TO IMPROVE ON OR THIS HASN'T BEEN DONE CORRECTLY AND IMPROVE THIS. BASICALLY TO OVERSEE WHAT HIS PEOPLE ARE DOING, TO SEE WHAT HE HAS, SO WHEN HE MAKES A NOTIFICATION TO ME, HE HAS SOME IDEA OF WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. WHEN HE MAKES NOTIFICATION TO THE NEXT LEVEL, HE HAS SOME IDEA WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT.

Q: AND WHAT WITH RESPECT TO SECURING THE SCENE IS HIS DUTY?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO THIS. THIS IS ALL REDUNDANT, CUMULATIVE, 352.

THE COURT: WE ARE GETTING CLOSE.

MS. CLARK: ONE LAST ONE.

THE COURT: WE ARE GETTING CLOSE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WITH RESPECT TO SECURING THE CRIME SCENES, WHAT ARE HIS DUTIES?

A: WELL, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THE CRIME SCENE HAS ALREADY BEEN SECURED BY THE TIME HE GOT THERE. IT WOULD BE SECURED BY THE PATROL OFFICERS AND THE FIELD SUPERVISORS THAT HAVE ALREADY ARRIVED MUCH HIT FUNG OR HIS RESPONSIBILITY, IF HE WENT OUT THERE, WOULD JUST BE TO OVERSEE IT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT HE EXPECTS OF HIS FIELD SUPERVISORS AND HIS FIELD FORCES WAS ADEQUATELY DONE. AND IF HE SAW SOMETHING THAT WASN'T DONE, BRING IT TO THEIR ATTENTION AS A TRAINING EXERCISE, MAYBE SO IT WOULDN'T OCCUR IN THE FUTURE.

Q: AND KEEP PEOPLE OUT OF THE CRIME SCENE THAT DON'T BELONG THERE?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT, YOUR HONOR, LEADING.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. COCHRAN: SUGGESTIVE, 352.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED OPEN THE LEADING.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT ARE HIS DUTIES WITH RESPECT TO ALLOWING -- WHO TO ALLOW INSIDE THE CRIME SCENE?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, 352 AGAIN, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. LAST QUESTION.

THE WITNESS: HIS RESPONSIBILITIES OF ALLOWING ANYBODY INTO THE CRIME SCENE? I WOULD ASSUME BY THE TIME HE GOT THERE THAT CRIME SCENE WOULD HAVE BEEN SEALED OFF, AND WITH THE EXCEPTION OF MAYBE HIMSELF GOING THROUGH THAT CRIME SCENE TO ACTUALLY SEE WHAT WAS THERE, I WOULD ASSUME THAT HE WOULD NOT ALLOW ANYBODY ELSE INTO THAT CRIME SCENE OTHER THAN WHO HAD ALREADY BEEN IN THERE PRIOR TO HIS ARRIVAL.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, WHEN YOU GOT TO THE LOCATION OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY ON THE NIGHT OF JUNE -- IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE THE 13TH, SIR, DID YOU SEE CRIME SCENE TAPE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: IT WAS ALREADY UP?

A: YES, IT WAS.

Q: DO YOU SEE THAT IN THE PHOTOGRAPH MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 51?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND WAS -- DOES THAT -- DOES THAT TAPE APPEAR TO BE BLOCKING OFF THE TRAFFIC ON BUNDY?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: WAS IT BLOCKED OFF WHEN YOU GOT THERE?

A: YES, IT WAS. BOTH NORTH AND SOUTHBOUND TRAFFIC HAD BEEN BLOCKED OFF.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS EXHIBIT 38.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS SHOWN IN P-38, SIR?

A: YES. THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE REAR OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY. I BELIEVE -- WE ARE STANDING ON DOROTHY AVENUE LOOKING NORTHBOUND THROUGH THE ALLEY AT THE REAR OF THAT LOCATION.

Q: AND DO YOU SEE THE CRIME SCENE TAPE THERE?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND WAS IT IN THAT POSITION WHEN YOU APPEARED ON THE -- IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE THE 13TH?

A: YES, IT WAS.

Q: WERE THERE OTHER POLICE OFFICERS AND POLICE CARS THERE WHEN YOU ARRIVED?

A: YES, THERE WERE SEVERAL.

Q: WHAT TIME WAS IT THAT YOU AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN ARRIVED AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY?

A: I ARRIVED AT THAT LOCATION AT 2:10 IN THE MORNING OF JUNE 13.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU ARRIVED THERE, YOU INDICATED EARLIER, I THINK, THAT YOU MET WITH SERGEANT ROSSI AT THE INTERSECTION OF DOROTHY AND BUNDY?

A: YES.

Q: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WAS WITH YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT -- YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIM?

A: YES.

Q: DID HE -- WHAT DID HE TALK TO YOU ABOUT?

A: HE TOLD ME --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT. THIS WILL BE HEARSAY.

MS. CLARK: YEAH.

Q: JUST GENERALLY, DID HE TELL YOU WHAT HE HAD SEEN AT THE SCENE THERE?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: AND DESCRIBED IT BRIEFLY?

MR. COCHRAN: I WILL OBJECT. THAT IS HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID HE RELATE TO YOU WHAT HE HAD SEEN THERE?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: AND I THEN ASKED FOR THE OFFICER WHO WAS THE FIRST OFFICER ON THE CRIME SCENE TO ALSO TELL US WHAT HE HAD LEARNED OR WHAT HE HAD BEEN INFORMED, OF WHICH SERGEANT ROSSI ASKED OFFICER RISKE TO WALK OVER.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT?

A: OFFICER RISKE THEN TOLD ME WHAT HE HAD SEEN AND WHAT HE HAD BEEN TOLD AND WHAT HE HAD OBSERVED.

Q: AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED?

A: I THEN ASKED FOR A PRELIMINARY WALK-THROUGH OF THE LOCATION AND I ASKED THAT OFFICER RISKE DO IT, SINCE HE IS THE ONE THAT KNEW THE MOST ABOUT IT.

Q: AND WAS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT HE WAS THE FIRST OFFICER ON THE SCENE?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THAT, AFTER YOU SPOKE TO OFFICER RISKE?

A: HE THEN TOLD US THAT WE WERE GOING TO APPROACH THE BODIES --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT AS HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: HE --

A: I THEN --

Q: DID HE HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH YOU, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: BASED ON WHAT HE TOLD YOU, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: WE APPROACHED THE BODIES FROM BUNDY AVENUE ITSELF FROM THE FRONT.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, CAN WE CUT THE FEED?

MR. COCHRAN: THIS WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE TIME, YOUR HONOR, TO BREAK FOR LUNCH.

MS. CLARK: MAY I? MAY I?

THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE AN APPOINTMENT, MR. COCHRAN?

MR. COCHRAN: WELL, MAY WE APPROACH FOR A MINUTE?

THE COURT: WELL, IF WE DO THAT WE WILL SHOOT UP OUR LAST FOUR MINUTES. ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, CONTINUE, PLEASE.

MS. CLARK: CAN WE CUT THE FEED?

THE COURT: YES, IT IS.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS PEOPLE'S 42.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 42?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US, YOU SAID YOU APPROACHED THE -- YOU APPROACHED THE CRIME SCENE?

A: YES.

Q: TELL US, FIRST OF ALL, DO YOU SEE THAT WALKWAY?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT?

A: YES. THAT IS THE WALKWAY THAT WALKS FROM THE SIDEWALK ON BUNDY TO THE RESIDENCE AT 875.

Q: AND DO YOU RECALL WHETHER IT APPEARED THEN AS IT DOES NOW IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH?

A: IT APPEARS EXACTLY THE SAME.

Q: NOW, HOW -- DID YOU WALK ON THAT WALKWAY, SIR?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: HOW IS IT THAT YOU APPROACHED THE CRIME SCENE?

A: OFFICER RISKE INFORMED -- I WENT THE SAME WAY --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT. NONRESPONSIVE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OFFICER RISKE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND BASED ON WHAT HE TOLD YOU, SIR, HOW DID YOU APPROACH THE CRIME SCENE?

A: I FOLLOWED OFFICER RISKE TO THE CRIME SCENE FOLLOWING BEHIND HIM AS HE WALKED ACROSS THE SIDEWALK INTO SOME SHRUBBERY AND GRASS AND DIRT AREA UP TO WHERE WE COULD VIEW THE BODIES.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: IF YOU WOULD WATCH YOUR MONITOR, SIR, AND TELL US -- AND DIRECT THE POINTER, IF YOU COULD, TO SHOW THE PATH THAT YOU TOOK.

A: IT IS RIGHT IN THAT AREA THERE, (INDICATING).

Q: ALL RIGHT. IS THAT CORRECT?

A: A LITTLE BIT OVER TO THE RIGHT.

Q: TO THE RIGHT?

A: YEAH. RIGHT IN THAT AREA, (INDICATING).

Q: OKAY?

A: AND WALKED UP TO THAT CALL BOX AREA RIGHT THERE, (INDICATING).

MS. CLARK: IF WE COULD PLACE -- OR PLACE AN "X", ACTUALLY.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. HOW ABOUT IF WE PUT "R.P." UP IN THE UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER FOR "RON PHILLIPS."

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: LEFT-HAND, RIGHT-HAND, WHO CARES.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, I THINK THIS WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE POINT.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE LUNCH HOUR. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, YOU ARE ORDERED TO STEP DOWN. YOU ALSO ARE ORDERED TO RETURN AT 1:45.

THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PLEASE REMEMBER THE ADMONITION TO YOU. DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONG YOURSELVES, DON'T FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU ABOUT THE CASE. DON'T CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU. WE WILL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 1:45. COUNSEL, WE ARE GOING TO GO STRAIGHT THROUGH TO 4:00.

MR. COCHRAN: CAN WE HAVE IT CUT DOWN?

THE COURT: YES.

(AT 12:00 P.M. THE NOON RECESS WAS TAKEN UNTIL 1:30 P.M. OF THE SAME DAY.)

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1995 1:45 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. GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNSEL.

MR. COCHRAN: GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONOR.

MS. CLARK: GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY HIGGINS, LET'S HAVE THE JURY.

MR. BAILEY: YOUR HONOR, BEFORE THE JURY COMES IN, CAN I BRING UP A MATTER OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE? OUR WITNESS HAS GONE TO EL SALVADOR DUE TO HARASSMENT FROM SEVERAL SOURCES ACCORDING TO HER FAMILY. SHE'S TAKEN OFF. NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE HER DEPOSITION IN EL SALVADOR. I THINK WE SHOULD ADDRESS IT PROMPTLY BECAUSE I THINK IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME. I DON'T KNOW ANY WAY TO COMPEL HER TO COME BACK.

THE COURT: THE INTERSTATE COMPACT ON WITNESSES DOES PROVIDE FOR A CONSULAR EXAMINATION OF SOME FORM. I'VE NEVER DONE IT MYSELF, BUT HEARD ABOUT IT.

MR. BAILEY: HAS YOUR HONOR EVER BEEN TO EL SALVADOR? I SOLD THE PRESIDENT AIRPLANES. SO I GOT TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE COUNTRY.

THE COURT: MY RECOLLECTION IS, CONTINENTAL AIRLINES STOPS THERE ON THE WAY TO COSTA RICA.

MR. BAILEY: IF WE COULD TAKE A DEPOSITION IN COSTA RICA, I WOULD FEEL EVER SO MUCH BETTER.

THE COURT: SO WOULD I.

MR. BAILEY: I THINK WE SHOULD EXPLORE THE MACHINERY, GET IT IN MOTION. IT'S ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL WE GET HER.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. I'LL SEND ONE OF MY STAFF TO -- SERIOUSLY, WE MAY HAVE TO ENLIST THE UNITED STATES CONSULATE, ACTUALLY THE EMBASSY FOR THAT PURPOSE. THANK YOU, MR. BAILEY.

MR. BAILEY: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: LET'S HAVE THE JURY, DEPUTY HIGGINS.

MR. DARDEN: SHALL DETECTIVE PHILLIPS RESUME THE WITNESS STAND?

THE COURT: YES, PLEASE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, BE SEATED. WE'RE MISSING ONE. ALL RIGHT. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT WE'VE BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL AND THAT DETECTIVE PHILLIPS IS ON THE WITNESS STAND. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, GOOD AFTERNOON.

THE WITNESS: GOOD AFTERNOON.

THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. AND, MISS CLARK, DO YOU WISH TO RESUME WITH YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION?

THE CLERK: YES. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. GOOD AFTERNOON.

THE JURY: GOOD AFTERNOON.

MS. CLARK: WE HAVE PRINTED THIS OUT NOW, YOUR HONOR, WOULD ASK THAT IT BE MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 42-A.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 42-A, DIAGRAM BY DETECTIVE PHILLIPS.

(PEO'S 42-A FOR ID = DIAGRAM)

DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED)

BY MS. CLARK:

Q: NOW, FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT -- OKAY. FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT, SIR, THAT WAS INDICATED THERE ON PHOTOGRAPH 42-A AND THEN PHOTOGRAPH 42, CAN YOU TELL US WHAT YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE?

A: YES. I FIRST OBSERVED A FEMALE LYING ON HER LEFT SIDE, A SEMI-FETAL POSITION, WEARING A BLACK DRESS. I THEN OBSERVED A MALE CAUCASIAN ON HIS RIGHT SIDE FACING MORE OF AN EAST-WEST DIRECTION THAT WAS LYING UP NEAR A IRON GATE, THIS GATE AREA THAT SURROUNDED A LITTLE DIRT AREA. I NOTICED A WHITE ENVELOPE AND THEN I WAS POINTED OUT WHERE A -- IT WAS POINTED OUT TO ME WHERE A SKI CAP OF SOME TYPE WAS AND A GLOVE WAS AND ALSO WHERE A BEEPER WAS AND A SET OF KEYS.

Q: NOW, WERE YOU ABLE TO -- CAN YOU TELL US, SIR, WHEN YOU LOOKED OVER TOWARDS THE BODY OF THE MALE THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED, WHAT WAS IT YOU SAW IN THE AREA OF HIS FEET IF ANYTHING?

A: WELL, AT HIS FEET WAS THE GLOVE AND THE HAT, THE KNIT CAP. THEY WERE DIRECTLY BELOW HIS FEET NOT QUITE AT HIS FEET, BUT MORE BETWEEN HIM AND THE FEMALE WAS THE ENVELOPE.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS GOING TO BE PEOPLE'S --

MS. CLARK: 43? 43-E?

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS PEOPLE'S 43-E, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: AND WOULD YOU CUT THE FEED?

THE COURT: YES.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT'S BEING SHOWN TO YOU HERE, SIR?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND CAN YOU TELL US, IS THAT THE BODY OF THE MALE VICTIM YOU'VE JUST DESCRIBED?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: WITH THE LASER POINTER, I'M GOING TO POINT TO THIS WHITE OBJECT HERE (INDICATING). IS THAT THE ENVELOPE THAT YOU OBSERVED?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: AND THEN YOU INDICATED AT THE -- CLOSE TO THE FEET OF RON GOLDMAN, THAT YOU SAW A KNIT CAP AND A DARK LEATHER GLOVE?

A: YES.

Q: IS THAT IN THE AREA I'M INDICATING NOW WITH THE POINTER (INDICATING)?

A: YES, IT IS.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: OKAY. YOUR HONOR, THIS IS PEOPLE'S 44.

THE COURT: PEOPLE'S 44.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: IF YOU CAN LOOK UP AT THE MONITOR, SIR, THE SCREEN I MEAN, THE ITEM I'M CIRCLING RIGHT NOW, WHAT'S THAT?

A: I CAN'T REALLY SEE IT. LOOKS LIKE THE HAT, THE KNIT CAP.

Q: OKAY. CAN YOU LOOK DOWN AT -- YOU SEE WHERE I'M POINTING TO?

A: YES.

Q: LOOK AT YOUR MONITOR.

A: YES. KNIT CAP.

Q: OKAY. AND THEN THE ITEM THAT'S JUST BELOW IT ON THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT I'M CIRCLING NOW?

A: THAT WOULD BE THE GLOVE.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, IF YOU NEED TO, DETECTIVE PHILLIPS CAN STEP OFF THE WITNESS STAND. IT IS A DIFFICULT ANGLE TO SEE.

MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU OBSERVE ANYTHING ELSE FROM YOUR VANTAGE POINT AT THAT TIME?

A: AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, NO.

Q: NOW, WHO WAS WITH YOU WHEN YOU SAID THOSE OBSERVATIONS?

A: OFFICER RISKE AND DETECTIVE MARK FUHRMAN.

Q: THEY WERE BOTH STANDING NEXT TO YOU?

A: WE WERE IN A ROW OR KIND OF ONE, TWO, THREE AT ONE TIME, AND THEN AFTER I TOOK MY LOOK, I KIND OF BACKED OFF, ALLOWED MARK FUHRMAN TO GET UP CLOSER AND TAKE A LOOK AND THEN WE BACKED OUT OF THE AREA.

Q: BY THE WAY, WHAT WERE YOU WEARING?

A: A SUIT. I THINK IT WAS A BLUE SUIT.

Q: LIKE THE ONE YOU'RE WEARING NOW?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. WHAT WAS MARK WEARING?

A: HE HAD SOME -- I THINK HE HAD SOME BLACK SLACKS ON AND A WHITE SHIRT AND A TIE.

Q: WAS HE WEARING A JACKET?

A: NO, HE WAS NOT.

Q: WAS THAT UNCOMMON FOR HIM?

A: NO. MARK FUHRMAN NEVER WEARS HIS JACKET.

Q: NOW, DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH COMMANDER BUSHEY AT AROUND THAT TIME WHEN YOU FIRST ARRIVED AT THE SCENE?

A: WHEN I FIRST ARRIVED AND I WAS TALKING TO OFFICER RISKE, SERGEANT ROSSI WAS TALKING ON THE CELLULAR TELEPHONE AND HE HANDED ME THE TELEPHONE, AND THE INDIVIDUAL ON THE PHONE INFORMED ME THAT HE WAS COMMANDER KEITH BUSHEY.

Q: WHO'S THAT?

A: COMMANDER KEITH BUSHEY IS THE COMMANDER OF OPERATIONS, WEST BUREAU, WHICH IS THE BUREAU THAT I WORK FOR. WEST L.A. IS IN WEST BUREAU.

Q: AND SO WHAT IS HE -- WHAT DOES HE HAVE COMMAND OVER?

A: HE HAS COMMAND OVER WEST BUREAU. HE'S DIRECTLY UNDERNEATH DEPUTY CHIEF FRANKLE.

Q: DOES THAT MEAN THAT HE'S OVER ALL OF THE DETECTIVES?

A: WELL, HE'S OVER --

Q: IN WEST L.A.?

A: HE'S OVER THE DIVISIONS IN WEST LOS ANGELES OR IN WEST BUREAU WHICH IS WILSHIRE DIVISION, PACIFIC DIVISION, HOLLYWOOD DIVISION AND WILSHIRE DIVISION AND WEST L.A.

Q: AND EVERYBODY IN THOSE DIVISIONS?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: SO HE'S YOUR BOSS?

A: HE'S ONE OF OUR HIGHEST RANKING BOSSES, YES.

Q: WERE YOU GIVEN SOME INSTRUCTION WITH RESPECT TO THE HANDLING OF THIS CASE BY COMMANDER BUSHEY?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THAT?

MR. COCHRAN: CALLS FOR HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: ORIGINALLY HE ASKED ME WHAT I HAD, WHAT I KNEW.

THE COURT: THE QUESTION WAS, WHAT INSTRUCTION WERE YOU GIVEN BY COMMANDER BUSHEY, NOT WHAT HE ASKED. WHAT WAS THE INSTRUCTION GIVEN TO YOU?

THE WITNESS: HE GAVE ME TWO INSTRUCTIONS. ONE -- OKAY. ONE INSTRUCTION WAS THAT IF IT WAS OUTSIDE THE REALM OF WEST LOS ANGELES BEING ABLE TO INVESTIGATE THIS CRIME BECAUSE IT WAS NICOLE SIMPSON TURNED OUT TO BE THE DECEASED, THAT I SHOULD THINK ABOUT THE RESOURCES I HAD AVAILABLE, AND THE OTHER ONE WAS THAT IF IT TURNED OUT THAT IT DID INVOLVE O.J. SIMPSON, THIS BEING HIS EX-WIFE OR WIFE, THAT HE DID NOT WANT MR. SIMPSON TO BE MADE AWARE OF THE DEATH OF NICOLE IN THE MEDIA AND HE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I NOTIFIED HIM IN PERSON AS A COURTESY TO HIM.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THE RESOURCES? WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT, WHETHER WEST L.A. HAD THE RESOURCES FOR THIS CASE?

A: WELL, I THINK HE -- I WAS CONCERNED AND HE WAS ALSO CONCERNED I BELIEVE THAT IF IT TURNED OUT TO BE NICOLE SIMPSON, IT WAS GOING TO BECOME A MAJOR NEWS MEDIA EVENT. IT WAS GOING TO POSSIBLY INVOLVE O.J. SIMPSON ONLY AS THE FACT THAT HE WAS AT ONE TIME HER HUSBAND. WE HAD HIS CHILDREN AT WEST L.A. STATION AND IT MAY BECOME A BIGGER CASE THAN THE FOUR DETECTIVES I HAVE AT WEST L.A. COULD HANDLE THE PROPER WAY AND THAT POSSIBLY WE WOULDN'T WANT TO TAKE THIS CASE AND TRANSFER IT DOWNTOWN TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION WHO HAS MUCH -- MANY MORE RESOURCES THAN WE HAVE.

Q: YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF MANPOWER AND IN JUST NUMBERS, IN QUANTITIES OF DETECTIVES AND OFFICERS AVAILABLE TO YOU?

A: OH, THEY HAVE A GREAT DEAL MORE RESOURCES THAN WE HAVE AS FAR AS MANPOWER, ABILITY TO GO AND DO THINGS.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, PERSON POWER.

THE COURT: PERSON POWER, DETECTIVE POWER. THANK YOU, MR. COCHRAN.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. AND THEN HE GAVE YOU SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS TO MAKE SURE YOU PERSONALLY NOTIFIED MR. SIMPSON --

MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: JUST FOUNDATION.

THE COURT: HE'S ALREADY TESTIFIED TO IT.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH OFFICER RISKE WHEN YOU RESPONDED TO THE SCENE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: DID HE EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT BROUGHT HIM TO THAT LOCATION TO BEGIN WITH?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: WHAT KIND OF A CALL IT WAS?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WAS IT -- WHAT WAS IT THAT HE EXPLAINED TO YOU?

MR. COCHRAN: IT'S HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

MS. CLARK: GOES TO EXPLAIN SUBSEQUENT CONDUCT.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: HE TOLD ME THAT HE HAD ARRIVED AT THAT LOCATION RESPONDING TO A 459 CALL ACROSS THE STREET I BELIEVE AT 873 OR 874 SOUTH BUNDY AND THAT --

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT'S A 459 CALL?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, SHOULDN'T THERE BE A LIMITING INSTRUCTION IN THERE? AND THAT OBJECTION, IT'S LEGAL -- THAT'S A LIMITING INSTRUCTION, NOT OFFERED FOR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER ASSERTED.

THE COURT: IT'S NOT VERY CONSEQUENTIAL AT THIS POINT, COUNSEL. I DON'T THINK A LIMITING INSTRUCTION IS NECESSARY AT THIS POINT. PROCEED. IT'S JUST TO EXPLAIN SUBSEQUENT CONDUCT AFTER TALKING TO RISKE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHAT IS A 459 CALL?

A: IT'S THE PENAL CODE SECTION FOR BURGLARY.

Q: AND SO OFFICER RISKE TOLD YOU HE HAD RECEIVED A BURGLARY SUSPECT CALL FROM 874 SOUTH BUNDY?

A: YES.

Q: AND THAT WAS A 911 CALL?

A: YES.

Q: SO DID YOU GO TO INVESTIGATE THE SOURCE OF THAT CALL YOURSELF?

A: LATER ON THAT MORNING I DID.

Q: AND DID YOU SPEAK TO THE PERSON AT 874 SOUTH BUNDY WHO HAD CALLED 911?

A: YES.

Q: WHO WAS THAT?

A: THE LADY'S NAME WAS ELSIE TISTAERT, TISTAERAT. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SPELL HER NAME.

Q: TISTAERT?

A: TISTAERT.

Q: AND YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HER?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND DID YOU CONFIRM THAT SHE WAS THE ONE WHO CALLED OFFICER RISKE -- NOT OFFICER RISKE. I MEANT MADE THE 459 CALL TO 911.

A: YES.

Q: NOW, WHY DID YOU WANT TO GO AND TALK TO HER?

A: I WENT OVER THERE TO FIND OUT IF IN FACT THAT SHE DID MAKE A PHONE CALL, IF THERE WAS IN FACT A SOURCE OF THIS BURGLARY CALL OVER THERE AND EXACTLY WHAT TRANSPIRED THAT MADE HER MAKE THIS ORIGINAL CALL.

Q: WERE YOU TRYING TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS RELATED TO THE HOMICIDES ACROSS THE STREET OR A SEPARATE INCIDENT?

A: WELL, I WANTED TO FIND OUT IF SHE HAD WITNESSED ANYTHING OR HAD HEARD ANYTHING OR WHAT SHE DID HERE SINCE SHE IS THE ONE THAT MADE THE CALL THAT BROUGHT THE POLICE THERE TO BEGIN WITH.

Q: UH-HUH. AND WHAT DID YOU DETERMINE?

A: I DETERMINED THAT SHE NEVER OPENED HER DOOR, THAT SHE HAD ORIGINALLY HEARD A BARKING DOG AND CALLED WEST L.A. DETEC OR WEST L.A. DESK AND THEY TOLD HER TO CALL THE ANIMAL POUND, AND THEN LATER ON THERE WAS SOME KNOCKING AT HER DOOR AND SHE BECAME ALARMED ON IT BECAUSE OF THE LATE EVENING HOUR, AND I BELIEVE SHE TOLD ME SHE LOOKED THROUGH THE PEEPHOLE BUT DIDN'T SEE ANYBODY AND SO SHE BECAME FRIGHTENED AND CALLED 911 AND TOLD THEM THERE WAS SOME BURGLARS OR PROWLERS AT HER FRONT DOOR.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DETERMINE WITH RESPECT TO THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSONS KNOCKING ON HER DOOR?

A: WELL, IT WAS RIGHT AFTER THAT THAT I WALKED ONE HOUSE NORTH AND MET ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL OVER THERE, WHO I DO NOT KNOW HIS NAME, AN ELDERLY GENTLEMAN WHO BASICALLY TOLD ME THAT HE HAD --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO WHAT HE TOLD HIM. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ANOTHER NEIGHBOR?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND BASED ON THAT CONVERSATION, WHAT DID YOU CONCLUDE?

A: I CONCLUDED THAT THE BURGLARS THAT ELSIE HAD CALLED --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THIS. IT'S NOT BASED UPON THE SUBJECT OF THE PHONE CALL.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I DETERMINED THAT THE BURGLAR OR INDIVIDUAL THAT ELSIE HAD CALLED ON WAS IN FACT AN INDIVIDUAL THAT HAD GONE TO THE NEXT HOUSE NORTH AND ASKED THAT GENTLEMAN TO MAKE A 911 CALL BECAUSE HE HAD DISCOVERED SOME BODIES ACROSS THE STREET AND HE HAD ADMITTED THAT HE WAS OVER AT ELSIE'S HOUSE BANGING ON HER DOOR.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, DID YOU HAPPEN TO NOTICE A DOG ANYWHERE NEAR THE LOCATION OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY WHEN YOU ARRIVED?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU -- WHERE DID YOU SEE THAT DOG?

A: THE DOG WAS TIED UP TO A POST ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BUNDY AND DOROTHY. IT WAS A WHITE AND PARTIALLY BROWN AKITA.

Q: AND IT WAS TIED UP TO A POST NEAR THE LOCATION?

A: POST OR TELEPHONE POLE OR LAMP STANDARD OF SOME TYPE.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, PEOPLE'S 40-A.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: IN PEOPLE'S 40-A, SIR, DO YOU SEE A DOG DEPICTED THERE?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US IF THAT APPEARS TO BE THE DOG YOU SAW TIED TO THE TELEPHONE POST NEAR 875 SOUTH BUNDY ON THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE 13TH?

A: IT APPEARS TO BE THE SAME DOG.

Q: NOW, DID YOU HAPPEN TO NOTICE WHETHER THERE WERE ON THE WALKWAY LEADING FROM THE SIDEWALK TO THE FRONT STEPS OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY WHERE YOU HAD EARLIER DESCRIBED A LOT OF BLOOD, CAN YOU TELL US WHETHER YOU COULD SEE ANY SHOEPRINTS ON THAT WALKWAY IN THE BLOOD?

A: I SAW SHOEPRINTS LEADING NORTH OR WEST AWAY FROM THE BODY OF THE FEMALE WESTBOUND TOWARDS THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOUSE.

Q: DID YOU SEE THOSE SHOEPRINTS IN THE FRONT WALKWAY THAT LED DOWN TO THE SIDEWALK?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: WHERE DID YOU SEE THOSE SHOEPRINTS, THE ONES YOU'RE REFERRING TO, THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS YOU'RE REFERRING TO?

A: THEY WERE AT THE TOP OF THE STAIRS, THREE STAIRS UP FROM -- THREE STEPS UP FROM WHERE THE BODY WAS AND THEN LED OFF IN A WESTERLY DIRECTION.

Q: LEADING DOWN TOWARDS THE REAR GATE AND THE REAR ALLEY?

A: YES, ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOUSE, RESIDENCE.

Q: NOW, IN THE FRONT WALKWAY THAT WE'RE DESCRIBING NOW, IS THAT A TILED WALKWAY? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN, BLOCKS?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: SQUARES? AND THAT WALKWAY THAT LEADS FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE FRONT STAIRS DOWN TO THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THE LOCATION, THE SIDEWALK RUNNING IN FRONT OF BUNDY --

MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: HAVEN'T HEARD ALL THE QUESTION --

MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: I HAVEN'T HEARD ALL THE QUESTION YET.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: THAT FRONT WALKWAY THAT LEADS DOWN TO THE SIDEWALK, YOU INDICATED EARLIER YOU SAW BLOOD IN IT. DID YOU SEE ANY PAW PRINTS?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: IN THAT WALKWAY?

A: WELL, THEY WERE MORE TOWARDS THE BOTTOM OF THE WALKWAY AND THEN LEADING DOWN THE SIDEWALK ON BUNDY IN A SOUTH DIRECTION TOWARDS DOROTHY.

Q: AND HOW FAR DID YOU SEE THOSE PAW PRINTS CONTINUE?

A: THEY CONTINUED DOWN DOROTHY IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION AND THEN THEY WENT WESTBOUND ON DOROTHY AND THEN FADED OUT.

Q: DID SOMEONE POINT THOSE OUT TO YOU?

A: OFFICER RISKE DID.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AFTER YOU MADE YOUR FIRST VIEW OF THE CRIME SCENE AND YOU SAW THE BODIES OF BOTH VICTIMS, WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT?

A: I BACKED OUT OF THE PLANTED AREA THAT WE WERE IN AND OFFICER RISKE WALKED US AROUND TO A WALKWAY WHICH WAS JUST NORTH OF WHERE THE MALE BODY WAS LYING IN A SMALL AREA THERE AND WE VIEWED THE BODIES FROM OVER IN THAT LOCATION ALSO.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MS. CLARK: CUT THE FEED, YOUR HONOR?

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-46.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT, SIR. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE LOCATION SHOWN THERE?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND WHAT'S THAT?

A: THAT'S THE FRONT ENTRANCE TO 875 SOUTH BUNDY.

Q: AND DO YOU SEE THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IN FRONT OF THE LOCATION?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: IS THAT THE POSITION IT WAS IN WHEN YOU ARRIVED?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: NOW, THAT FRONT WALKWAY -- EXCUSE ME. IS THAT -- THAT FRONT WALKWAY THAT IS SHOWN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH, IS THAT THE ONE WHERE YOU SAW THE BLOODY PAW PRINTS?

A: THE BLOODY PAW PRINTS STARTED TOWARDS THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THAT WALKWAY AND LED OUT ONTO THE SIDEWALK.

Q: AND THEN DO THEY PROCEED TO THE LEFT AS YOU FACE THIS PHOTOGRAPH?

A: MOST OF THEM LED TO THE RIGHT AND THAT'S ALL I SAW AT THAT TIME, SOUTHBOUND.

Q: AS YOU FACE THE PHOTOGRAPH?

A: IT WOULD BE TO MY LEFT.

Q: OKAY. NOW, YOU INDICATED AN AREA THAT YOU WENT TO EXAMINE THE BODIES FROM THE NORTH OF THE VICTIMS?

A: YES.

Q: CAN YOU SEE IT HERE?

A: YES. IT'S A LITTLE FARTHER TO THE RIGHT, RIGHT IN THERE (INDICATING).

Q: UH-HUH. AND DID YOU WALK UP --

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR --

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU WALK --

MR. COCHRAN: I WOULD LIKE FOR THE WITNESS TO TELL US BEFORE THE MARKER IS PUT UP THERE.

MS. CLARK: I THINK THE WITNESS HAS ALREADY TESTIFIED TO IT.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, PROCEED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: YES. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, DID YOU WALK UP BEHIND THE BODIES ON THAT NORTH SIDE OF THEM?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: CAN YOU DIRECT THE POINTER TO DESCRIBE YOUR PATH, PLEASE?

A: JUST CONTINUED STRAIGHT, RIGHT ABOUT THERE (INDICATING).

Q: NOW, WERE YOU BEHIND THE -- WAS THERE A GATE OR A FENCE THERE THAT YOU WERE BEHIND?

A: YES. THERE'S A WROUGHT IRON GATE, WROUGHT IRON FENCE.

Q: FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT, WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE? WHAT SIDE OF RON GOLDMAN WERE YOU ON?

A: WE WERE TO HIS BACKSIDE.

Q: AND WHAT WERE YOU ABLE TO OBSERVE FROM THAT LOCATION?

A: I WAS ABLE TO OBSERVE THE BEEPER AND THE KEYS THAT OFFICER RISKE HAD TOLD ME ABOUT THAT WE COULD NOT SEE VERY WELL FROM THE OTHER LOCATION AND YOU COULD ALSO -- I COULD ALSO SEE THE GLOVE AND THE HAT FROM THAT LOCATION A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

Q: AND WHO WAS WITH YOU AT THAT TIME?

A: OFFICER RISKE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND MYSELF.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MS. CLARK: WE HAVE "RP" IN THE LEFT-HAND CORNER. THIS WAS 46-A, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 46-A.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS P NUMBER 59 AND YOU'LL NEED TO CUT THE FEED AGAIN.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: CAN YOU SEE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR, THE AREA THAT YOU DESCRIBED WHERE YOU STOOD TO OBSERVE THE SCENE FROM THE NORTH SIDE OF THE GATE?

A: YES, I CAN.

Q: AND CAN WE -- IF YOU WOULD DIRECT THE POINTER TO THE AREA.

A: IT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE RIGHT BACK UP IN THAT AREA THERE. WELL, SHOULD BE OVER MORE TOWARDS THAT TREE IS AT. RIGHT THERE (INDICATING).

Q: RIGHT THERE?

A: RIGHT THERE (INDICATING).

Q: COULD YOU PLEASE PUT THE INITIALS "RP". AND THIS WOULD BE 59-A? B? B?

THE COURT: 59-B.

MS. CLARK: B.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: NOW, YOUR HONOR, THIS IS PEOPLE'S 43-A, AND AGAIN, THE FEED WILL NEED TO BE CUT ON THIS PHOTO.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE THIS -- DO YOU SEE WHAT'S DEPICTED IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH YOU'RE LOOKING IN YOUR MONITOR, SIR?

A: YES, SIR. YES, MA'AM.

Q: AND CAN YOU TELL US, SIR, IF YOU CAN SEE THE PAW PRINTS THAT YOU WERE EARLIER REFERRING TO?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: NOW, THOSE -- YOU SEE SPLOTCHES OF BLOOD, WHAT APPEARS TO BE BLOOD ON THIS WALKWAY? I AM GOING TO CIRCLE IT. IF YOU CAN'T SEE IT, YOU CAN STEP DOWN.

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND ANOTHER ONE OVER HERE AND UP HERE (INDICATING)?

A: YES.

Q: YOU WERE THERE, SIR. TELL US WHAT THEY APPEARED TO -- WHAT THEY LOOKED LIKE TO YOU.

A: THEY WERE JUST POOLS OF BLOOD.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT DID YOU DO AFTER YOU OBSERVED FROM THE LOCATION NORTH OF THE VICTIMS?

A: WE WERE TOLD THAT YOU COULD GET A BETTER LOOK.

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THIS, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. WHAT DID YOU DO, NOT WHAT YOU WERE TOLD.

THE WITNESS: WALKED AROUND SOUTHBOUND ON BUNDY AND THEN WALKED WESTBOUND ON DOROTHY AND THEN NORTHBOUND INTO THE ALLEY TO THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, WHO WAS THERE? WHO WENT ON THIS WALK?

A: OFFICER RISKE, SERGEANT ROSSI, MARK FUHRMAN AND MYSELF AND THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A SERGEANT COON, BUT I'M NOT SURE.

Q: AND DID YOU WALK INTO THE ALLEY THEN?

A: YES.

Q: WHERE DID YOU GO NEXT?

A: WALKED NORTHBOUND IN THE ALLEY TO THE REAR OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY.

Q: AND WHERE DID YOU ENTER? DID YOU ENTER THROUGH THE GARAGE OR HOW DID YOU GO IN?

A: WHEN WE ORIGINALLY ENTERED INTO THE HOUSE, WE ORIGINALLY -- WE WENT THROUGH THE GARAGE.

Q: NOW, BEFORE YOU ENTERED THE GARAGE, DID YOU MAKE ANY OBSERVATIONS OUTSIDE IN THE DRIVEWAY?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT DID YOU SEE?

A: I NOTICED A JEEP PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY WITH THE PASSENGER DOOR SEMI AJAR, LOOKED LIKE IT HADN'T BEEN SHUT ALL THE WAY, I NOTICED SOME CHANGE IN THE DRIVEWAY AND ALSO A COUPLE OF DROPLETS OF BLOOD.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, P-52.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT'S SHOWN THERE, SIR?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: WHAT IS THAT?

A: THAT'S THE REAR OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY.

Q: NOW, DID OFFICER RISKE POINT OUT TO YOU THAT THE GARAGE DOOR WAS NOW OPEN?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: DID HE EXPLAIN TO YOU IN WHAT CONDITION HE ORIGINALLY FOUND THE GARAGE DOOR WHEN HE FIRST APPEARED ON THE SCENE?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: AND WAS IT OPEN OR CLOSED WHEN IT WAS --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID HE EXPLAIN TO YOU HOW THE GARAGE DOOR CAME TO BE OPEN?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, WHERE IF YOU CAN RECALL DID YOU SEE THE CHANGE AND THE BLOOD DROP ON THE DRIVEWAY?

A: IT WAS TO THE LEFT OF THE JEEP I BELIEVE.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, EXHIBIT NO. 48-K.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: EXCUSE ME. LEFT OF THE JEEP AS WE FACE IT NOW?

A: YES.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. YOU'VE SEEN THAT PHOTOGRAPH. I'M GOING TO GET A PERSPECTIVE SHOT FOR YOU.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: THIS IS 48-J.

MS. CLARK: AND 48-J. NOW CLOSE-UP ON THE PHOTOGRAPH.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 48-I.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THE CLOSE-UP AND THE PERSPECTIVE SHOT OF WHAT YOU'VE JUST SEEN HERE?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT IS THAT?

A: THAT'S THE CHANGE AND THE BLOOD DROP THAT I OBSERVED BY THE JEEP.

Q: DID YOU MAKE THOSE OBSERVATIONS BEFORE GOING IN THROUGH THE GARAGE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: OKAY. SO YOUR FIRST ENTRY WAS IN THROUGH THE GARAGE, IS THAT RIGHT, OR WAS IT THROUGH THE REAR GATE?

A: THE FIRST ENTRY I WENT IN WAS THROUGH THE REAR GATE WITH SERGEANT ROSSI. HE WANTED TO SHOW ME SOMETHING.

Q: AND WHEN YOU WALKED THROUGH THE REAR GATE, WAS IT -- WHO WENT WITH YOU?

A: JUST MYSELF AND SERGEANT ROSSI.

Q: AND WHAT HAPPENED TO OFFICER RISKE AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: THEY STAYED OUT IN THE DRIVEWAY BY THE JEEP.

Q: WHAT DID -- WHAT HAPPENED WHEN YOU WENT THROUGH THE REAR GATE WITH SERGEANT ROSSI?

A: WE WALKED EASTBOUND A PORTION OF THE WAY UNTIL HE POINTED OUT SOME FADED FOOTPRINTS, WHAT APPEARED TO BE FADED FOOTPRINTS AND THEN SAID HE HAD NOT GONE ANY FARTHER THAN THAT AND I SAID, "WELL, LET'S GO BACK OUT AND GET THE REST OF THEM," AND THEN WE WENT BACK OUT. WE DIDN'T GO ANY FARTHER.

Q: OKAY. THOSE FOOTPRINTS, HOW WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE THEM?

A: WITH THE AID OF A FLASHLIGHT. SERGEANT ROSSI HAD ONE AND I HAD ONE.

Q: DID THEY APPEAR TO BE -- WHAT COLOR DID THEY APPEAR TO BE?

A: THE FOOTPRINTS APPEARED TO BE IN A RED STAIN.

Q: DID THEY APPEAR TO BE BLOOD TO YOU?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THAT, YOUR HONOR. CALLS FOR CONCLUSION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. HE'S A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE. HE CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

THE WITNESS: IT APPEARED TO BE A RED STAIN THAT RESEMBLED BLOOD, YES.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, BEFORE YOU ENTERED THROUGH THE REAR GATE, SIR, WAS ANYTHING POINTED OUT TO YOU TO BE CAREFUL OF?

A: WELL, I WAS POINTED OUT SOME BLOOD THAT WAS ON THE TOP RUNG OF THE REAR GATE AND ALSO ON THE BOTTOM RUNG OF THE REAR GATE AND THEN ALSO AT A LATCH ON THE REAR GATE.

Q: AND SO DID YOU TOUCH THE GATE?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: AND WAS THERE ANY OTHER BLOOD POINTED OUT TO YOU NEAR THAT AREA OF THE REAR GATE?

A: I BELIEVE THERE WAS ANOTHER DROP OF BLOOD OR TWO IN THE VICINITY OF THAT REAR GATE.

Q: ON THE GROUND?

A: ON THE GROUND.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS EXHIBIT 48 I BELIEVE H. I AM SORRY. 48-G, YOUR HONOR.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 48 I BELIEVE F.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: UH-HUH. OKAY. DO YOU SEE THE MARKER IN THE PHOTOGRAPH?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND THE GATE THAT IS DEPICTED IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, WHICH GATE IS THAT?

A: THAT'S THE GATE THAT LEADS OUT TO THE ALLEY AT THE REAR OF 875 BUNDY.

Q: OKAY. THE MARKER THAT YOU SEE THERE, DOES THAT -- IS THAT A LOCATION THAT YOU WERE DISCUSSING JUST NOW WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT A BLOOD DROP --

A: YES.

Q: -- ON THE GROUND?

A: YES.

Q: WAS THAT POINTED OUT TO YOU BEFORE YOU WENT THROUGH THE REAR GATE?

A: AFTER I WENT THROUGH THE REAR GATE.

Q: AND DID YOU AVOID STEPPING ON IT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WERE YOU USING YOUR FLASHLIGHT THE ENTIRE TIME THAT YOU WALKED DOWN THE WALKWAY?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: YOU INDICATED THEN THAT DETECTIVE -- THAT SERGEANT ROSSI -- WHEN YOU GOT TO THE POINT JUST BEFORE YOU WERE AT THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS ON THE WALKWAY, THEN YOU TURNED AROUND?

A: THEN WE RETURNED BACK TO THE ALLEY, YES.

Q: THEN WHAT HAPPENED?

A: I THEN ENTERED THE RESIDENCE THROUGH THE GARAGE WITH OFFICER RISKE LEADING THE WAY AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND I FOLLOWING HIM AND SERGEANT ROSSI STAYED OUTSIDE.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO WHEN YOU GOT INTO THE RESIDENCE?

FIRST OF ALL, LET ME BACK UP, LET ME ASK YOU, HOW DID YOU GET INTO THE RESIDENCE?

A: WALKED THROUGH THE OPEN GARAGE DOOR AND WALKED TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF A WHITE SPORTS CAR THAT WAS PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY OR IN THE GARAGE AND THEN WENT THROUGH THE DOOR THAT LEADS FROM THE GARAGE INTO THE HOUSE.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHAT DID YOU SEE WHEN YOU GOT INSIDE THE HOUSE?

A: THE FIRST THING I NOTICED WAS SOME STAIRS THAT LED UP TO ANOTHER LEVEL IN THE HOUSE, AND WE STARTED TO ASCEND THOSE STAIRS.

Q: AND TELL US WHAT YOU OBSERVED WHEN YOU ENTERED, WHEN YOU FIRST ENTERED THE DOOR.

A: WHEN WE FIRST ENTERED THE DOOR, OFFICER RISKE POINTED OUT AN ICE CREAM CUP THAT WAS POSITIONED ON A BANISTER ABOUT FOUR FEET INSIDE THE RESIDENCE FROM THE BACK DOOR AND HE ALSO POINTED OUT A SPOON THAT HAD FALLEN OR BEEN MISPLACED OR SOMETHING THAT WAS TO THE LEFT OF THAT BANISTER LYING ON ONE OF THE STEPS LEADING DOWN INTO ANOTHER ROOM.

Q: OKAY. WHAT ELSE DID YOU SEE?

A: AT THAT TIME, JUST THE ICE CREAM AND THE SPOON.

Q: OKAY. AND THEN WHAT?

A: WALKED UP INTO THE KITCHEN AREA OF THE RESIDENCE, WALKED THROUGH THE KITCHEN AREA INTO THE LIVING ROOM, OUT THE LIVING ROOM AND TO A FRONT DOOR THAT I WAS TOLD THAT HAD BEEN FOUND OPEN.

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO WHAT HE WAS TOLD.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THE LAST COMMENT, HE WAS TOLD THAT THE DOOR WAS FOUND OPEN.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: YOU WENT UPSTAIRS AND YOU WENT THROUGH A KITCHEN AREA?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR GOING INTO THE HOUSE AT THIS TIME?

A: GOING INTO THE HOUSE BECAUSE OFFICER RISKE WAS GOING TO SHOW ME A BETTER LOCATION TO VIEW THE CRIME SCENE FROM.

Q: AND DID YOU COME OUT -- WHEN YOU CAME TO THE FRONT DOOR, WAS IT OPEN OR CLOSED?

A: IT WAS OPEN.

Q: AND WERE YOU INFORMED OF THE MANNER IN WHICH IT WAS FIRST FOUND BY THE FIRST OFFICER ON THE SCENE, OFFICER RISKE?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN YOU WALKED THROUGH THE OPEN DOOR?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU SEE?

A: SAW FOOTPRINTS THAT APPEARED TO BE GOING IN A WESTBOUND DIRECTION AWAY FROM THE ACTUAL CRIME SCENE OR THE MAIN CRIME SCENE PAST THE FRONT DOOR AND ALONG THE ALLEY OR ALONG THE WALKWAY THAT I HAD WALKED PARTIALLY UP TO BEFORE.

Q: OKAY. DID THOSE SHOEPRINTS ANGLE IN TOWARDS THE FRONT DOOR AT ANY TIME?

A: NO.

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: NO.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: THEY APPEARED TO GO STRAIGHT PAST IT?

A: YES.

Q: AND HOW MANY OF THEM DID YOU OBSERVE, SIR, IF YOU RECALL?

A: I DON'T RECALL HOW MANY I SAW.

Q: OKAY. HOW MANY SHOEPRINTS -- HOW MANY SETS OF SHOEPRINTS DID YOU SEE?

A: DIFFERENT SETS?

Q: UH-HUH. DIFFERENT SETS.

A: THEY APPEARED TO ALL BE THE SAME.

Q: ONE SET OF SHOEPRINTS?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, DID YOU SEE ANY SHOEPRINTS DOWN BETWEEN THE BODIES OF RONALD GOLDMAN AND NICOLE BROWN?

A: DOWN ON THE STEPS IS THE ONLY PLACE I OBSERVED THEM. I DIDN'T GET THAT CLOSE TO ACTUALLY OBSERVE IF THERE WAS ANY AROUND THE BODIES.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO CUT THE FEED. THIS IS 45-B.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. WERE YOU ABLE -- DO YOU SEE ONE OF THE SHOEPRINTS THAT YOU SAW THAT NIGHT FROM THE VANTAGE POINT OF THE TOP OF THE LANDING?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND CAN -- IF YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE SCREEN, I'M GOING TO POINT IT OUT WITH THE LASER. IS THAT --

A: YES.

Q: THAT'S ONE OF THEM? OKAY.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 45-C.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECALL SEEING WHAT I'M CIRCLING RIGHT NOW, IF YOU CAN LOOK?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WERE THE -- DID YOU SEE THOSE THAT NIGHT?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT DID THEY APPEAR TO BE?

A: FOOTPRINTS, SOME TYPE OF RED STAIN THAT APPEARED TO BE BLOOD.

Q: BARE FOOTPRINTS?

A: NO. FOOT -- SHOEPRINTS. I AM SORRY.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 45-D.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M CIRCLING ON THE SCREEN NOW, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU RECALL SEEING THESE SHOEPRINTS?

A: YES, I DO.

Q: AND WERE THOSE AT THE TOP OF THE LANDING, SIR?

A: YES, THEY WERE.

Q: AND WHO POINTED THEM OUT TO YOU?

A: OFFICER RISKE.

Q: AND AFTER HE POINTED THEM OUT TO YOU, DID YOU GO OVER AND STEP IN THEM?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: YOU AVOIDED THEM?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: DID EITHER YOURSELF, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN OR OFFICER RISKE STEP IN THOSE FOOTPRINTS?

A: NO, WE DID NOT.

MS. CLARK: NEXT.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 45-E.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: CAN YOU SEE WHAT I'M CIRCLING HERE, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU RECALL SEEING THESE THINGS THAT I'M CIRCLING THAT NIGHT?

A: WELL, THESE APPEAR TO BE THE SAME SHOEPRINTS LEADING WESTBOUND OUT THAT WALKWAY.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 45-F.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND ONCE AGAIN, DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M CIRCLING?

A: YES.

Q: SAME THING, THOSE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS?

A: YES.

Q: YOU SAW THEM THAT NIGHT?

A: YES.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: 45-G.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WERE YOU ABLE TO EVER EXAMINE THEM CLOSELY, SIR, BY SHINING YOUR FLASHLIGHT AND LOOKING CLOSELY AT THESE SHOEPRINTS?

A: I NEVER EXAMINED THEM CLOSELY, NO.

Q: DID YOU EVER SEE ONE AS CLOSE-UP AS YOU'RE SEEING ON THE SCREEN HERE?

A: NO.

Q: NOW, FROM THE VANTAGE POINT OF THE TOP OF LANDING, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE THE CRIME SCENE AREA WHERE THE VICTIMS AND THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED PREVIOUSLY WAS MORE CLEARLY?

A: YES.

Q: AND AFTER MAKING THOSE OBSERVATIONS FROM THE TOP OF THE LANDING, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I THEN FOLLOWED OFFICER RISKE WESTBOUND OUT THE -- THE NORTH PATHWAY TO THE NORTH OF THE RESIDENCE TO THE REAR GATE AND EXITED OUT THE REAR GATE.

Q: AS YOU DID SO, DID OFFICER RISKE POINT ANYTHING OUT TO YOU?

A: YES. HE POINTED OUT DROPLETS OF WHAT APPEARED TO BE BLOOD AND ALSO THESE FOOTPRINTS UNTIL THEY FADED OUT.

Q: NOW, DID OFFICER RISKE EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT HE HAD DONE WHEN HE HAD WENT INSIDE THE HOUSE EARLIER?

A: I DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION.

Q: DID OFFICER RISKE TELL YOU WHAT HE HAD DONE AT THE SCENE BEFORE YOU ARRIVED?

A: AS FAR AS THE INSIDE OF THE HOUSE?

Q: YES.

A: YES.

Q: AND DID HE TELL YOU ABOUT GOING THROUGH THE HOUSE AND WHAT HE HAD DONE WITH ANY PERSONS HE FOUND INSIDE?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: YES.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. YOU SAID YOU WALKED DOWN THE WALKWAY, HE POINTED OUT BLOOD DROPS TO YOU?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU OBSERVE THOSE BLOOD DROPS NEXT TO ANY OF THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED TO US?

A: YES.

Q: AND TO WHAT SIDE OF THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS WERE THEY?

A: TO THE LEFT.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-48A.

THE COURT: 48-A.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. YOU CAN SEE THE ITEM 112?

A: YES.

Q: AND THE AREA I'M CIRCLING RIGHT THERE, IS THAT ONE OF THOSE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT?

A: YES.

MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. AND THE ITEM 112 CLOSE-UP?

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-48B.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECALL SEEING BLOOD DROPPED -- AND THAT APPEARS TO BE TO THE LEFT OF THE SHOEPRINT THAT YOU EARLIER DESCRIBED?

A: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THE FORM. YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: SURE, WITH THE REPORTER.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: WE'RE OVER AT SIDEBAR. MR. COCHRAN.

MR. COCHRAN: I OBJECT TO THIS EDITORIALIZING. YOU HAD THE MONITOR ON THAT. THERE'S A SHOEPRINT WAY BACK HERE AND BLOOD DROP WAY OVER HERE. MAY BE TO THE LEFT, BUT THAT'S NOT ANYWHERE NEAR THE SHOEPRINT AS I SAW IT UNLESS I MISSED IT. BUT I OBJECT TO THE FORM AND EDITORIALIZING THAT THE DROP WAS BY THE SHOEPRINT. IT'S NOT NEAR THE SHOEPRINT. THERE SEEMS TO BE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AND IT WAS -- THE BLOOD DROP AS I UNDERSTOOD WAS OVER NEAR THE HOUSE AND THE FOOTPRINT WAS LIKE IN THE WALKWAY. DID YOUR HONOR SEE IT?

THE COURT: I UNDERSTAND IT, BUT IT'S TO THE LEFT OF WHERE THE SHOEPRINT -- THE LINE IN WHICH THE SHOEPRINTS WERE GOING.

MR. COCHRAN: THERE'S NO SHOEPRINT UP THERE. THE SHOEPRINT IS BACK HERE AND THE BLOOD DROP IS WAY UP THERE.

THE COURT: IT'S ALL A MATTER OF INTERPRETATION, COUNSEL. I THINK YOU CAN COVER THAT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION. THE BLOOD DROP IS HERE, THE SHOEPRINTS ARE GOING DOWN HERE AND TO THE LEFT OF THE SHOEPRINTS.

MR. COCHRAN: LEFT, BUT SOME DISTANCE AWAY FROM THAT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: I'M SURE YOU'LL POINT THAT OUT ON CROSS-EXAMINATION.

MS. CLARK: IT'S A MATTER OF PERSPECTIVE IN THE PHOTOGRAPH. THERE IS ANOTHER SHOEPRINT THERE, BUT IT DOESN'T COME UP CLEARLY IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH. NEVERTHELESS, I'M NOT EDITORIALIZING. THE BLOOD DROP IS TO THE LEFT OF THE SHOEPRINTS. AND AS A MAN WALKS AND SWINGS HIS ARMS, YOU CAN UNDERSTAND HOW THAT MIGHT HAPPEN, ESPECIALLY A BIG MAN.

MR. COCHRAN: YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONVINCE ME, COUNSEL. I DON'T HAVE A VOTE.

THE COURT: OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHAT'S THE MEASURE OF THE STRIDE BETWEEN THESE? JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY.

MS. CLARK: WE HAD A STRIDE ANALYSIS DONE THAT'S GOING TO COME LATER.

THE COURT: JUST CURIOUS.

MR. BAILEY: BIG FOOT.

MS. CLARK: IT IS A BIG FOOT.

MR. COCHRAN: BIG STRIDE TOO, JUDGE.

THE COURT: THE OBJECTION IS OVERRULED. BUT, MISS CLARK, YOU ARE LEADING AGAIN BECAUSE OF HIS ANSWERS, YES, YES, YES.

MR. COCHRAN: I DON'T WANT TO KEEP OBJECTING. SHE KNOWS BETTER. SHE'S AN EXPERIENCED LAWYER.

THE COURT: THANK YOU.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COUNSEL, YOU MAY PROCEED.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION IS OVERRULED, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES, IT IS. PROCEED. SOMETIMES THEY'RE SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: SOMETIMES THEY'RE OVERRULED.

THE COURT: SOMETIMES THEY'RE OVERRULED.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-48A.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH ALL OF THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS YOU WERE DESCRIBING?

A: I DON'T SEE ALL OF THEM, NO.

Q: HOW MANY OF THE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS THAT YOU DESCRIBED ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH?

A: I CAN ONLY SEE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH MAYBE ONE.

Q: THE ONE THAT WE EARLIER CIRCLED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PHOTOGRAPH?

A: THAT'S RIGHT.

Q: AS YOU WALKED DOWN THE WALKWAY, WERE YOU USING YOUR FLASHLIGHT, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: OFFICER RISKE WAS LEADING?

A: YES.

Q: AND WAS HE POINTING THESE THINGS OUT TO YOU?

A: YES.

Q: WHERE WAS DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

A: I BELIEVE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WAS FOLLOWING ME. I THINK IT WAS RISKE, THEN MYSELF AND THEN OFFICE FUHRMAN.

Q: BUT IT WAS ALL THREE OF YOU?

A: YES. WE WERE WALKING IN A SINGLE FILE.

Q: DID YOU AVOID THE BLOOD DROPS AND THE SHOEPRINTS?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU STEP IN THE BLOOD DROPS AND THE SHOEPRINTS?

A: NO.

Q: AND DID YOU EXIT THROUGH THE REAR GATE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT? OH, LET ME BACK UP, SIR. LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING. DID THOSE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS CONTINUE ALL THE WAY DOWN THE WALKWAY TO THE REAR GATE?

A: NO, THEY DID NOT.

Q: DID THEY STOP AT SOME POINT?

MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED BY THIS WITNESS AND LAST WITNESS.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. BRIEFLY.

THE WITNESS: I CAN'T RECALL THE EXACT LOCATION WHERE THEY FADED OUT, BUT IT WAS NOT QUITE HALFWAY I DON'T BELIEVE BETWEEN THE FRONT AND THE BACK. I DON'T RECALL WHERE THE LAST ONE THAT I SAW WAS.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: BY THE TIME YOU EXITED THROUGH THE REAR GATE, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE ANY MORE BLOODY SHOEPRINTS?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY IN THE REAR DRIVEWAY?

A: NO.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO AFTER YOU EXITED THROUGH THE REAR GATE?

A: WE REENTERED THE -- I REENTERED -- WE REENTERED THE HOUSE AND OFFICER RISKE WALKED US THROUGH THE RESIDENCE TO GIVE US A BASIC LAYOUT OF THE RESIDENCE.

Q: NOW, AT THAT POINT, DID YOU GO THROUGH ALL OF THE ROOMS?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU GO BACK THROUGH THE KITCHEN AREA?

A: YES.

Q: TELL US WHAT YOU SAW.

A: WENT BACK THROUGH THE KITCHEN AREA. I DIDN'T OBSERVE ANYTHING AT THAT TIME. THEN WE WENT INTO THE LIVING ROOM AREA AND I NOTICED A -- SOME CANDLES ON A TABLE.

Q: WERE THEY LIT?

A: YES.

Q: WERE THESE BOOK -- DO YOU REMEMBER HOW BIG THESE CANDLES WERE?

A: I DON'T KNOW HOW BIG THEY WERE, NO.

Q: BUT THEY WERE STILL BURNING?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHERE IS THE LIVING ROOM IN RELATION TO THE KITCHEN?

A: THE LIVING ROOM IS IN THE FRONT PORTION OF THE HOUSE, THE KITCHEN WOULD BE MORE LESS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE HOUSE AND I THINK THERE'S A DINING AREA OF SOME TYPE BETWEEN THE KITCHEN AND THE LIVING ROOM.

Q: AND AFTER YOU MADE -- AFTER YOU LOOKED IN THE LIVING ROOM AND THE KITCHEN, SIR, DID YOU SEE ANY EVIDENCE OF RANSACKING?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY BLOOD?

A: NO, I DIDN'T.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY LEAVES TRACKED INSIDE THE HOUSE?

A: NO.

Q: WERE THERE LEAVES OUTSIDE THE HOUSE AROUND THE BODIES OF THE VICTIMS?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU SEE -- STRIKE THAT. WHERE DID YOU GO NEXT?

A: I THEN WENT UPSTAIRS INTO THE MASTER BEDROOM WHERE I OBSERVED THE TELEVISION ON AND THE BED UNMADE AND THEN WENT INTO A MASTER BEDROOM WHERE I WAS -- NOTICED A COUPLE OF CANDLES ALSO ON A BENCH TYPE AREA BEHIND THE BATHTUB, I BELIEVE IT WAS WEST OF THE BATHTUB, THEN EXITED THAT MASTER BATHROOM AND WALKED DOWN ANOTHER HALLWAY INTO TWO ROOMS THAT I WAS TOLD WERE THE ROOMS OF THE CHILDREN.

Q: AND IN THOSE LOCATIONS, SIR, DID YOU SEE ANY SIGNS OF A STRUGGLE OR FIGHT?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU SEE DRAWERS PULLED OPEN?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY BLOOD?

A: NO.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY ITEMS OF JEWELRY OR PROPERTY THROWN ON THE GROUND?

A: NO.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT?

A: THEN EXITED THE RESIDENCE.

Q: AND WHO WAS WITH YOU AT THIS TIME?

A: OFFICER RISKE AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND MYSELF.

Q: OKAY. AND HOW DID YOU EXIT?

A: THROUGH THE GARAGE DOOR, OUT THE GARAGE, BACK INTO THE ALLEY.

Q: AND WHO DID YOU SEE WHEN YOU GOT OUT OF THE HOUSE?

A: WHEN I EXITED THE RESIDENCE AND WALKED TO THE ALLEY, I WAS MET BY MY COMMANDING OFFICER, LIEUTENANT FRANK SPANGLER.

Q: WAS THERE ANYBODY WITH HIM?

A: THERE WAS A COUPLE POLICEMEN STANDING THERE WITH HIM. I THINK A SHORT TIME AFTER THAT, CAPTAIN CONNIE DIAL SHOWED UP.

Q: OKAY. WAS SERGEANT ROSSI BACK THERE AS WELL?

A: YES, HE WAS.

Q: NOW, LIEUTENANT SPANGLER, IS HE YOUR DIRECT BOSS?

A: YES, HE IS.

Q: AND DID YOU RECEIVE SOME INFORMATION AT THAT TIME, SIR, CONCERNING WHO WOULD BE HANDLING THIS CASE?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHO DID YOU GET THAT FROM?

A: SERGEANT ROSSI.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU LEARN?

A: I LEARNED THAT HE HAD -- I LEARNED THAT I WAS SUPPOSED TO TURN THIS CASE OVER TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE AS PER CHIEF FRANKLE.

Q: WHO IS CHIEF FRANKLE?

A: HE IS THE CHIEF OF WEST BUREAU. HE IS THE ONE STEP ABOVE COMMANDER BUSHEY.

Q: AND SO IT WAS CHIEF FRANKLE'S ORDER THAT THE CASE BE HANDED OVER?

MR. COCHRAN: THIS HAS BEEN ASKED AND ANSWERED.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: I AM SORRY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AFTER YOU RECEIVED THAT INFORMATION, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I THEN MADE A TELEPHONE CALL ON MY CELLULAR PHONE TO DETECTIVE HEADQUARTERS DIVISION, WHICH IS THE CENTRAL DETECTIVE FACILITY FOR THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT DURING MORNING WATCH, AND ASKED THAT THEY PUT ME IN TOUCH WITH CAPTAIN GARTLAND, WHO IS THE COMMANDER OFFICER OF ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION.

Q: AND DID YOU SPEAK TO CAPTAIN GARTLAND?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND HOW IS IT THAT YOU WERE MAKING THESE PHONE CALLS, SIR?

A: ON A CELLULAR TELEPHONE.

Q: YOU HAD IT WITH YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND AFTER SPEAKING TO CAPTAIN GARTLAND, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I THEN MADE -- EITHER MADE OR RECEIVED ANOTHER PHONE CALL FROM A LIEUTENANT JOHN ROGERS WHO ALSO WORKED ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION AND WAS INFORMED AT THAT TIME -- ACTUALLY CAPTAIN --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THE FORM. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. WHAT DID YOU DO, NOT WHAT YOU WERE TOLD. NEXT QUESTION.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: YOU WERE INFORMED BY WHO, SIR? YOU WERE TOLD SOMETHING BY WHO?

A: LIEUTENANT ROGERS, JOHN ROGERS.

Q: AND BASED ON WHAT HE TOLD YOU, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: WAITED FOR ANOTHER PHONE CALL.

Q: DID YOU GET ANOTHER PHONE CALL?

A: YES.

Q: FROM?

A: GOT A CALL BACK FROM JOHN ROGERS, LIEUTENANT ROGERS.

Q: AND DID YOU HAVE ANOTHER CONVERSATION WITH HIM?

A: YES.

Q: WHO IS LIEUTENANT ROGERS, SIR?

A: LIEUTENANT ROGERS IS ONE OF THE LIEUTENANTS THAT WORKS OUT OF ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION THAT'S IN CHARGE OF THE HOMICIDE SPECIAL OR HOMICIDE MAJOR UNIT.

Q: AND THE HOMICIDE MAJOR OR HOMICIDE SPECIAL UNIT IS WHAT?

A: IT'S TWO ENTITIES OUT OF ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION THAT HANDLE SPECIALIZED HOMICIDE CASES.

Q: SO THOSE ARE DETECTIVES THAT HANDLE SPECIALIZED HOMICIDE CASES?

A: YES.

Q: AND IS LIEUTENANT ROGERS -- HE WAS THEIR BOSS?

A: HE WAS THEIR SUPERVISOR, YES.

Q: SUPERVISOR? ALL RIGHT. AND LIEUTENANT -- DID YOU SAY LIEUTENANT ROGERS CALLED YOU BACK?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU GIVE HIM SOME INFORMATION?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT WAS THAT?

A: I INFORMED HIM OF THE INFORMATION I HAD RECEIVED ABOUT THE DOUBLE HOMICIDES AND WHO MAY BE INVOLVED IN THE DOUBLE HOMICIDE AS FAR AS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AND THAT SHE WAS THE EX-WIFE OR CURRENT WIFE OF O.J. SIMPSON AND THAT CAPTAIN GARTLAND REQUESTED THAT HIS UNIT TAKE IT OVER.

Q: AND WHAT WERE YOU -- WERE YOU GIVEN SOME INSTRUCTION AT THAT TIME?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THAT?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. HEARSAY.

MS. CLARK: THIS IS TO EXPLAIN --

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I WAS INFORMED AT THAT TIME THAT THAT INVESTIGATION WAS NO LONGER MY RESPONSIBILITY, THAT IT WAS NOW GOING TO BE HANDLED AND INVESTIGATED BY ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION AND WE WERE TO DO NO MORE FURTHER ACTION AT THAT SCENE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND AFTER HAVING RECEIVED THAT INFORMATION, SIR, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I WALKED BACK INTO THE RESIDENCE AND INFORMED DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS A POLICE OFFICER WITH HIM, THAT THE CASE NOW BELONGED TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE, IT WAS NO LONGER OUR INVESTIGATIVE RESPONSIBILITY AND THAT WE WERE GOING TO LEAVE THE RESIDENCE AND GO BACK OUT TO DOROTHY AND BUNDY AND AWAIT THE ARRIVAL OF THE ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DETECTIVES.

Q: SO YOU NOTIFIED THE UNIFORMED OFFICER AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WHO WERE INSIDE THE HOUSE?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID THEY THEN COME OUT WITH YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHERE DID YOU GO?

A: WALKED BACK SOUTHBOUND IN THE ALLEY TO DOROTHY AND THEN BACK OUT TO DOROTHY AND BUNDY WHERE THE POLICE CARS WERE PARKED AND THE OTHER SUPERVISORS WERE STANDING AROUND.

Q: SO AT THAT POINT, WAS THERE ANYONE LEFT IN THE SCENE, THE CRIME SCENE?

A: NOT IN THE CRIME SCENE ITSELF, NO. THE PERIMETER WAS STILL ESTABLISHED.

Q: AND BY THE PERIMETER, YOU MEAN?

A: WE HAD OFFICERS NORTH AND SOUTH OF BUNDY AND WE HAD THEM ON NORTH AND SOUTH OF THE ALLEY PROTECTING THE CRIME SCENE, THAT NO ONE WOULD ENTER THAT LOCATION OTHER THAN POLICE OFFICERS.

Q: SO WHY DID YOU DO THAT?

A: TO -- THE INTEGRITY OF THE CRIME SCENE. IT WAS NO LONGER OUR RESPONSIBILITY. IT WAS BEST FOR US TO NOW LEAVE THE CRIME SCENE, GO BACK OUT AND WAIT FOR THEIR ARRIVAL AND SEE IF THEY HAD ANY INSTRUCTIONS ON WHAT THEY WANTED US TO DO SINCE IT WAS NOW THEIR CASE.

Q: SO WHAT WERE YOUR DUTIES AT THAT POINT WITH RESPECT TO THE CRIME SCENE AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY?

A: MY RESPONSIBILITIES AT THAT TIME CEASED AS ALL OF WEST L.A. DETECTIVES CEASED. IT WAS NO LONGER OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT CRIME SCENE.

Q: NOTHING? YOU COULD JUST WALK AWAY AND LEAVE IT?

A: WELL, WE WEREN'T GOING TO WALK AWAY AND LEAVE IT. WE WERE GOING TO WAIT FOR THE ARRIVAL OF THE ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DETECTIVES TO GIVE THEM THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAD, GIVE THEM THE NOTES THAT MARK FUHRMAN HAD TAKEN AND HAVE A SHORT DISCUSSION WITH THEM ABOUT WHAT WE HAD SEEN, WHAT WE HAD DONE, SO THEY COULD HAVE THEIR -- YOU KNOW, BE BROUGHT UP-TO-DATE AND -- BUT AS FAR AS ACTUALLY INVESTIGATING ANYTHING AT THE CRIME SCENE, THAT WAS FINISHED.

Q: OKAY. DID YOU HAVE ANY DUTY TO KEEP IT SECURE WHILE YOU WERE WAITING FOR THEM?

A: IT WAS ALWAYS SECURE.

Q: WHILE YOU WERE WAITING FOR THEM?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU -- CAN YOU TELL US, SIR, WHY IT IS THAT YOU STOPPED DOING ANY WORK OR ANY INVESTIGATING AT THAT SCENE WHILE YOU WERE WAITING FOR THE ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DETECTIVES TO APPEAR?

MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: WELL, BECAUSE OF THE INTEGRITY OF THE CRIME SCENE. WHEN WE WALKED THROUGH THE CRIME SCENE AND WE WERE TAKING NOTES AND DOING THINGS, IT WAS OUR INVESTIGATION. WE WERE PREPARING TO TAKE PART. WE WERE PREPARING TO DO THINGS. AT THE TIME IT WAS TAKEN AWAY FROM ME, THAT WAS ALL CEASED BECAUSE IT WAS NOW GOING TO BE UNDER THE DIRECTION OF ANOTHER HOMICIDE UNIT WHO MAY WORK A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN I DO OR A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY THAN THE DETECTIVE WHO WAS THERE DOING IT. THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO START AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION AND TAKE IT FROM THERE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: NOW, IS THAT AN ESTABLISHED PROCEDURE OR POLICY? IS THAT A ROUTINE THING; WHEN A NEW SET OF DETECTIVES IS ASSIGNED TO A SCENE, THAT THE FIRST DETECTIVES ON THE SCENE STOP ALL WORK?

A: IT ALL DEPENDS ON THE TIMING. IF WE HAD ALREADY BEEN INTO IT FOR AN HOUR OR TWO, THEN NO, IT WOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED THAT WAY. BUT SINCE WE HAD DONE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OTHER THAN JUST A CURSORY WALK THROUGH THE CRIME SCENE, WE -- I HAD ONLY BEEN THERE APPROXIMATELY 30 MINUTES AND HAD DONE VIRTUALLY NOTHING AS FAR AS THAT CRIME SCENE WAS CONCERNED. THEN YES, IT WAS OUR RESPONSIBILITY -- MY RESPONSIBILITY TO PULL MY PEOPLE OUT SO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE WOULD HAVE AS CLEAN AND UNTOUCHED CRIME SCENE AS POSSIBLE TO BEGIN THEIR INVESTIGATION.

Q: NOW, WHAT ABOUT THIS REASSIGNMENT TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION? THIS WAS A CASE IN WEST L.A., WASN'T IT?

A: YES, IT WAS.

Q: AND IT WAS REASSIGNED TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION?

A: YES, IT WAS.

Q: HAS THAT EVER HAPPENED BEFORE?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: YES, IT HAS.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHY ON PREVIOUS OCCASIONS HAS IT HAPPENED, IF YOU KNOW?

MR. COCHRAN: IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL, PREVIOUS OCCASION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: EACH CASE HAS ITS OWN MERIT. IT WOULD -- SOME OF THE CASES ARE TAKEN AWAY FROM US AFTER THE PRELIMINARY CRIME SCENE IS DONE. SOME OF THEM ARE TAKEN AWAY FROM US TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE WEEKS AFTER THE CRIME OCCURS. SOME ARE TAKEN AWAY IMMEDIATELY.

THE COURT: I DON'T THINK THE QUESTION WAS WHEN. I THINK THE QUESTION WAS WHY, WASN'T IT?

MS. CLARK: YES, IT WAS WHY. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

THE WITNESS: DIFFERENT CRIME SCENES ARE TAKEN AWAY FROM US FOR DIFFERENT REASONS.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT WAS -- IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WHAT WAS THE REASON?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. CALLS FOR SPECULATION.

THE COURT: HAVEN'T WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ALREADY?

MS. CLARK: HAVE WE?

MR. COCHRAN: HAVEN'T WE COVERED THIS ALREADY?

THE COURT: I THOUGHT SO.

MS. CLARK: HAVE WE?

THE COURT: BETTER RESOURCES.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: THAT WAS ONE -- WAS THAT THE REASON?

A: YES.

Q: I WON'T ASK AGAIN. OKAY. AND HAS THAT BEEN A REASON IN PREVIOUS CASES AS WELL, WHY CASES HAVE BEEN REASSIGNED TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE?

MR. COCHRAN: IRRELEVANT AND IMMATERIAL.

THE COURT: IT'S IRRELEVANT TO THIS CASE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: HOW DID YOU FEEL ABOUT LOSING THIS CASE TO ANOTHER SET OF DETECTIVES, SIR?

A: DIDN'T BOTHER ME AT ALL. I MEAN IT WAS -- I WAS DISAPPOINTED IN THE FACT THAT WE HAD ALL GOTTEN UP AFTER AN HOUR AND A HALF SLEEP, WE HAD GONE OUT THERE AND WE HAD AN INVESTIGATION THAT WE WERE GOING TO TAKE PART IN, BUT IT CERTAINLY AT THE TIME APPEARED TO ME TO BE THE CORRECT CALL. I HAD NO PROBLEM WITH IT; IN FACT, AGREED WITH IT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO THERE YOU WERE ON THE SCENE. YOU SAY YOU GOT THERE ABOUT 2:10 IN THE MORNING. WHEN YOU FIRST ARRIVED AT THE SCENE, DID YOU CALL THE CORONER?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: WHY NOT?

A: BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT I DO AND THAT'S NOT GENERALLY WHAT IS DONE WHEN YOU FIRST ARRIVE AT THE CRIME SCENE. YOU FIRST ARRIVE AT THE CRIME SCENE AND YOU TALK --

MR. COCHRAN: ASKED AND ANSWERED, DID HE CALL THE CORONER.

THE WITNESS: DID NOT.

MS. CLARK: I SAID WHY NOT.

THE COURT: WHY NOT. YOU CAN EXPLAIN THE ANSWER. OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: YOU HAVE TO ORIGINALLY FIND OUT WHAT YOU HAVE AND WHETHER SUSPECT'S IN CUSTODY, NOT IN CUSTODY, FIND OUT JUST ABOUT THE CRIME SCENE ITSELF, FIND OUT A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE DECEASED, FIND OUT ABOUT YOUR CRIME SCENE, WALK THROUGH YOUR CRIME SCENE, SEE WHAT KIND OF EVIDENCE YOU HAVE. THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO GET IN YOUR OWN MIND BEFORE YOU EVEN START TO FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHY IS THAT? WHY DO YOU NEED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT YOUR CRIME SCENE AND EXAMINE EVERYTHING BEFORE YOU HAVE THE CORONER IN THERE?

A: WELL, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN OF ACTION, NUMBER ONE, WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO. AND ONCE THE CORONER GETS THERE, IF YOU'RE NOT READY FOR THE CORONER, THE CORONER'S GOING TO STAND AROUND DOING NOTHING UNTIL YOU ARE READY FOR HIM BECAUSE YOU'RE CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO ALLOW THE CORONER INTO A CRIME SCENE UNTIL YOU ARE THROUGH MEASURING EVERY ITEM, PHOTOGRAPHING EVERY ITEM, FINGERPRINTING EVERY ITEM, EXAMINING EVERYTHING YOU HAVE AT YOUR CRIME SCENE BEFORE YOU EVER ALLOW THE CORONER IN THERE, AND THAT COULD TAKE HOURS BEFORE YOU EVER ALLOW -- ARE EVER ABLE TO DO THAT.

Q: SO IF THE CORONER GETS IN THERE, COULD EVIDENCE BE MOVED OR LOST BEFORE IT GETS A CHANCE TO BE DOCUMENTED?

A: WELL, IT COULD BE. WE WOULD NEVER LET THE CORONER IN UNTIL WE WERE THROUGH WITH OUR INITIAL CRIME SCENE, UNTIL WE WERE THROUGH WITH OUR CRIME SCENE.

Q: FOR THAT REASON.

A: FOR THAT EXACT REASON.

Q: NOW, WHOSE DUTY IS IT TO NOTIFY THE CORONER TO ARRIVE AT THE SCENE?

A: IN A --

Q: IN GENERAL.

A: IN GENERAL, AT A HOMICIDE SCENE, IT'S THE HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR WHO IS ASSIGNED TO THAT CRIME SCENE WOULD BE THE ONE THAT NOTIFIES THE CORONER.

Q: NOW, ABOUT WHAT TIME WAS IT THAT YOU RECEIVED FINAL WORD THAT THE CASE WAS GOING TO BE REASSIGNED TO ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DIVISION?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS 2:39 IN THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH.

Q: AND AT SOME POINT, DID YOU ATTEMPT OR ASK PERMISSION TO MAKE NOTIFICATION TO THE CORONER?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AT WHAT TIME?

A: IT WAS ABOUT 10 MINUTES OR FIVE MINUTES TO 3:00 THAT MORNING, I MADE A STATEMENT THAT I WAS GOING TO NOTIFY THE CORONER.

Q: AND WHO DID YOU MAKE THAT STATEMENT TO, SIR?

A: LIEUTENANT SPANGLER, MY COMMANDING OFFICER.

Q: AND WHAT DID -- WHAT WAS HIS RESPONSE TO THAT?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: TOLD ME NOT TO.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHY NOT?

THE COURT: THAT'S HEARSAY.

MR. COCHRAN: HEARSAY.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: HE GAVE YOU -- BUT I TAKE IT HE GAVE YOU A REASON?

A: YES, HE DID. HE GAVE ME AN ORDER.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO AFTER YOU RECEIVED THAT ORDER, SIR?

A: I DID NOT CALL THE CORONER.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: WENT OUT TO BUNDY AND DOROTHY AND WAITED FOR THE ARRIVAL OF THE ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DETECTIVES.

Q: WHO WERE THE ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DETECTIVES ASSIGNED TO THE CASE?

A: PHIL VANNATTER AND TOM LANGE.

Q: PRIOR TO THAT NIGHT, SIR, HAD YOU EVER MET THEM BEFORE?

A: NEVER MET EITHER ONE OF THOSE DETECTIVES BEFORE.

Q: SO THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME YOU EVER SAW THEM?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: WHO GOT THERE FIRST?

A: PHIL VANNATTER.

Q: AND WHEN HE GOT THERE, DID YOU HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HIM?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: IN GENERAL TERMS, DID YOU TELL HIM WHAT YOU HAD SEEN AT THE CRIME SCENE?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT YOU HAD LEARNED FROM THE FIRST OFFICER ON THE SCENE?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I TOOK PHIL VANNATTER UP TO THE CRIME SCENE, THE SAME ROUTE THAT I HAD BEEN TAKEN UP TO PRIOR AND SHOWED HIM THE BODIES.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU HAD THE CONVERSATION WITH LIEUTENANT SPANGLER, WAS DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WITH YOU?

A: IN REGARDS TO THE CORONER'S OFFICE?

Q: RIGHT.

A: NO. I BELIEVE HE WAS INSIDE THE HOUSE WHEN THOSE -- WHEN THAT WAS GOING ON.

Q: WITH THE UNIFORMED OFFICER?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN WHEN YOU WERE WAITING FOR THE ROBBERY-HOMICIDE DETECTIVES TO SHOW UP, WAS HE WITH YOU THEN?

A: YES, HE WAS.

Q: OUT IN THE INTERSECTION?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN PHIL VANNATTER APPEARED, WAS DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WITH YOU THERE IN THE INTERSECTION?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU TAKE -- WHEN YOU TOOK DETECTIVE VANNATTER UP TO THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE, DID DETECTIVE FUHRMAN GO WITH YOU?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: CAN YOU DESCRIBE FOR US THE PATH THAT YOU TOOK WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

MR. COCHRAN: HE'S DESCRIBED THAT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. NO, WE'RE WITH VANNATTER NOW.

THE WITNESS: THE EXACT SAME ROUTE THAT I HAD TAKEN WITH OFFICER RISKE BEFORE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: MEANING?

A: ACROSS THE SIDEWALK, INTO THE PLANTED AREA WHERE THE BUSHES AND LEAVES AND GRASS IS AND UP TO THAT CORNER SPOT AND VIEWED THE BODIES.

Q: DID YOU POINT THINGS OUT TO DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND JUST TO SAVE US SOME TIME, YOU POINTED OUT THE SAME EVIDENCE TO HIM THAT YOU DESCRIBED SEEING TO US?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: I EXITED THAT LOCATION THE SAME WAY AND THEN WALKED VANNATTER AROUND TO THE REAR OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY.

Q: AND AT THE REAR OF THE LOCATION, WHAT DID YOU DO THERE?

A: SHOWED HIM THE JEEP, THE CHANGE AND THE BLOOD DROP AND THEN ENTERED INTO THE GARAGE, WENT INTO THE RESIDENCE, WALKED OUT THE FRONT DOOR, STOOD IN THE EXACT SAME LOCATION I HAD STOOD BEFORE AND SHOWED HIM THE CRIME SCENE FROM UP ABOVE THE THREE STEPS.

Q: AND DID YOU POINT OUT THE EVIDENCE FROM THAT VANTAGE POINT AS WELL?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: THEN WALKED HIM WESTBOUND THROUGH THE NORTH WALKWAY TO THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE, THE SAME ROUTE THAT I HAD TAKEN PRIOR POINTING OUT THE SHOEPRINTS AND POINTING OUT THE BLOOD DROPS.

Q: AND AGAIN, DID YOU TAKE CARE NOT TO STEP IN THOSE BLOOD DROPS AND SHOEPRINTS?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND WHEN YOU GOT TO THE REAR GATE AREA AFTER YOU FINISHED -- AFTER YOU WALKED TO THE END OF THE WALKWAY, DID YOU POINT ANYTHING OUT AT THAT LOCATION?

A: YES. I POINTED OUT THE THREE AREAS ON THE GATE THAT HAD BEEN POINTED OUT TO ME WHERE BLOOD WAS.

Q: OKAY. AND WERE YOU AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN, VANNATTER ALL WALKING TOGETHER ALONG THAT WALKWAY?

A: WE WERE WALKING IN SINGLE FILE.

Q: DID YOU WALK OUT THE REAR GATE AT THAT POINT?

A: YES.

Q: WHERE DID YOU GO THEN?

A: WENT BACK OUT TO BUNDY AND DOROTHY.

Q: DID YOU POINT OUT THE BLOODY PAW PRINTS GOING SOUTH ON BUNDY FROM THE FRONT WALKWAY AND AROUND THE CORNER OF DOROTHY TO DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND THEN WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: WE STOOD IN THAT INTERSECTION AGAIN WAITING FOR HIS PARTNER TO SHOW UP, DETECTIVE TOM LANGE, WHO SHOWED UP APPROXIMATELY 25 MINUTES LATER.

Q: AND WHERE DID HE CONTACT YOU, SIR?

A: AT DOROTHY AND BUNDY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INTERSECTION.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO WHEN DETECTIVE LANGE ARRIVED?

A: FIRST OF ALL, HE WALKED UP TO HIS PARTNER VANNATTER AND THEY HAD A SHORT CONVERSATION AND THEN VANNATTER POINTED OUT ME TO HIM AND INTRODUCED ME TO HIM AND SAID THAT, "PHILLIPS CAN FILL YOU IN ON WHAT HAPPENED AND ALSO WALK YOU THROUGH THE CRIME SCENE."

Q: OKAY. AND IS THAT WHAT YOU DID?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU TAKE DETECTIVE LANGE UP THROUGH THE SAME STEPS THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

A: EXACT SAME STEPS.

Q: OKAY. SO THEN YOU WENT -- WHEN YOU WENT OUT THE REAR GATE WITH DETECTIVE LANGE, DID YOU TAKE HIM BACK INTO THE RESIDENCE AGAIN?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND WHEN YOU DID THAT, WHERE IN THE HOUSE DID YOU TAKE HIM?

A: TOOK HIM THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENCE THAT I HAD GONE THROUGH AND SHOWED HIM THE MASTER BEDROOM AND THE MASTER BATH AND THE KIDS' BEDROOMS AND THE LIVING ROOM AND POINTED OUT THE CANDLES TO HIM.

Q: AND THEN DID YOU EXIT THE RESIDENCE WITH HIM?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. NOW, THAT WALK THROUGH THAT YOU TOOK HIM ON THROUGH THE INTERIOR OF THE HOUSE, WAS THAT MEANT TO BE A DETAILED INVESTIGATION AT THAT POINT?

A: NO. IT WAS A VERY CURSORY, QUICK WALK THROUGH JUST TO GIVE THEM AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT I HAD BEEN TOLD, WHAT I HAD SEEN MYSELF.

Q: AND BY WHAT MEANS DID YOU EXIT THE RESIDENCE AT THAT TIME?

A: EXITED THROUGH THE GARAGE AND OUT INTO THE ALLEY AGAIN.

Q: WHERE DID YOU GO THEN?

A: BACK OUT TO BUNDY AND DOROTHY.

Q: AND WHEN YOU GOT OUT TO DOROTHY AND BUNDY, WHO DID YOU SEE?

A: WELL, THERE WERE SEVERAL POLICE OFFICERS OUT THERE. IT WAS KIND OF A GROUPING OF INDIVIDUALS, COMMAND STAFF, SUPERVISORS, DETECTIVES. EVERYBODY WAS JUST KIND OF GATHERED AROUND RIGHT THERE.

Q: AND WHO WAS -- WHO DID YOU SPECIFICALLY GO TO SEE AT THAT POINT?

A: WELL, AT THAT TIME, I TOOK LANGE BACK TO HIS PARTNER VANNATTER WHO WAS STANDING THERE WITH FUHRMAN.

Q: DID YOU HAVE A DISCUSSION AT THAT POINT?

A: WELL, AT THAT TIME, THE FOUR OF US KIND OF BROKE AWAY FROM THAT GROUP AND WALKED OVER TO THE FRONT OF THE BUNDY LOCATION OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET AND VIEWED THE CRIME SCENE FROM OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET. I THINK VANNATTER AND LANGE WERE ASKING US A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CALL ACROSS THE STREET, THE 459 CALL, AND I BELIEVE I POINTED OUT THE HOUSE WHERE THAT CALL HAD COME FROM AND THE HOUSE JUST NORTH OF THAT, GIVEN HIM ANOTHER OVERVIEW OF WHERE LOCATIONS WERE AND WHERE PEOPLE LIVED.

MS. CLARK: DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A BREAK NOW?

THE COURT: WE ARE GOING TO GO STRAIGHT HOW. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE PLAN TODAY, SINCE WE ARE BREAKING EARLY AT 4:00 O'CLOCK, IS TO GO STRAIGHT THROUGH TO 4:00 O'CLOCK. HOWEVER, IF THERE IS A NEED TO STOP, FEEL FREE TO RAISE YOUR HAND AND LET ME KNOW. ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU HAD A DISCUSSION, THE FOUR OF YOU, ABOUT THE CRIME SCENE; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND THEN WHAT ELSE DID YOU TALK ABOUT?

A: THEN I BELIEVE THAT I BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT I HAD BEEN TOLD EARLIER IN THE EVENING THAT I WAS TO NOTIFY O.J. SIMPSON OF THE DEATH OF NICOLE BROWN AND THAT WE HAD HIS CHILDREN, AND I WAS TO DO THAT IN PERSON, AND I RECEIVED THAT ORDER FROM COMMANDER BUSHEY.

Q: NOW, IN THE WEST L.A. DIVISION WHERE YOU WORK, SIR, ARE THERE A LOT OF WEALTHY AND FAMOUS PEOPLE THERE?

A: YES.

Q: HAVE YOU BEEN REQUESTED TO GIVE VIP TREATMENT BEFORE?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, VIP. CAN WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: SURE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, FIRST OF ALL, THIS STUFF ABOUT VIP TREATMENT, THAT'S HER CONCLUSION.

THE COURT: LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. WHY WOULD YOU OBJECT TO THAT?

MR. COCHRAN: WELL, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THIS WAS VIP TREATMENT. I DON'T THINK THIS WAS VIP TREATMENT BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE, THESE GUYS SAID THEY WERE GOING TO GO OVER THERE, THEY WERE TOLD NOT TO GIVE HIM ANY SPECIAL NOTICE. AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, THEY PUT ON TESTIMONY TO SHOW THE DIRECTIONS AND THERE WASN'T ANYTHING ABOUT VIP TREATMENT. WE DIDN'T HEAR ABOUT THIS UNTIL NOW.

MS. CLARK: THIS WITNESS DIDN'T EVEN TESTIFY AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING.

MR. COCHRAN: OBVIOUSLY THE OTHER OFFICERS WOULD KNOW ABOUT THIS.

MS. CLARK: NO, THEY WOULDN'T. IT WAS DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND DETECTIVE LANGE.

THE COURT: BUT IF SHE ASKS THE QUESTION, WHICH IS, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU HAD A COMMANDER TELL YOU TO GO PERSONALLY NOTIFY SOMEBODY, NOT OFTEN.

MR. COCHRAN: YES.

THE COURT: JOHNNIE, YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.

MR. COCHRAN: JUDGE, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I DON'T HAVE TO LISTEN. THERE IS NOT ANY REPORTS, NOTHING WE'VE SEEN OR HEARD BEFORE TODAY. I'M SHOCKED AND SURPRISED THE LAPD WOULD HAVE VIP TREATMENT AND I THINK I HAVE A RIGHT TO OBJECT. HER QUESTION WAS OBJECTIONABLE BECAUSE SHE TALKED ABOUT VIP TREATMENT. I PRESUME THEY NOTIFY PEOPLE ALL THE TIME.

MS. CLARK: REQUIRE THEM TO, BUT DON'T REQUIRE THEM TO GO TO THE LENGTH HE WENT TO. AND THIS IS RELEVANT TO THE OFFICER'S STATE OF MIND AND WHAT THEY DID, YOUR HONOR. I MEAN, AS THE COURT IS VERY WELL AWARE, THE OFFICERS ARE GOING TO BE QUESTIONED IN GREAT DEPTH.

THE COURT: AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO OVERRULE THE OBJECTION. AND CAN YOU HEAR IT? I'M OVERRULING THE OBJECTION. DON'T ASK ME AGAIN. BUT THIS IS A VERY -- NOT A BIG DEAL. LET'S NOT SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON IT.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOMETHING I SHOULD --

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, HERE'S THE PROBLEM. YOU'RE DOING A LOT OF THIS STUFF IN ANTICIPATION, CORRECT?

MS. CLARK: UH-HUH.

THE COURT: OKAY.

MS. CLARK: I AM, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE A BIG DEAL.

THE COURT: WELL --

MR. COCHRAN: WHY DON'T YOU WAIT AND SEE IF IT BECOMES A BIG DEAL.

THE COURT: LET'S SEE IF IT DOES BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I'VE ALREADY INDICATED 1538 ISSUES HAVE BEEN RESOLVED. SO THAT'S IRRELEVANT. LET'S ROLL.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MISS CLARK, WOULD YOU PROCEED, PLEASE.

MS. CLARK: YES. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT NOTIFICATIONS.

MS. CLARK: RIGHT. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, HAVE YOU BEEN REQUESTED TO GIVE VIP TREATMENT BEFORE, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: AND TELL US WHAT IS MEANT BY THAT.

A: WELL, IT'S A LITTLE BIT EXTRA THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT DOES. WE HAVE A LOT OF INDIVIDUALS IN WEST LOS ANGELES DIVISION THAT -- CELEBRITY, VIP'S, WEALTHY PEOPLE. SOMETIMES THEIR NAME COMES ACROSS AND THE DEPARTMENT DOES CERTAIN THINGS TO, YOU KNOW, TO HELP THEM OUT OR DO CERTAIN THINGS A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN ON A NORMAL OCCASION.

Q: ON HOW MANY OCCASIONS HAVE YOU BEEN REQUESTED BY COMMANDER BUSHEY TO MAKE PERSONAL NOTIFICATION TO THE NEXT OF KIN IN A HOMICIDE CASE?

A: THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST TIME.

Q: NOW, YOU'RE A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: IS THERE A POLICY WITH RESPECT TO HOW NOTIFICATIONS TO NEXT OF KIN ARE SUPPOSED TO BE MADE?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT IS THAT POLICY?

A: THE POLICY IS THAT WHENEVER PRACTICAL, THE HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR ASSIGNED TO THE CASE SHOULD NOTIFY THE NEXT OF KIN IF THE NEXT OF KIN LIVES IN THE AREA THAT THE HOMICIDE OCCURRED. IF THEY DO NOT LIVE IN THAT AREA, THEY LIVE OUTSIDE THE AREA, THEN A POLICE OFFICER FROM THAT ADJOINING AREA WOULD MAKE THAT NOTIFICATION, AND IF IT'S OUT OF STATE, THEN WE WOULD MAKE INQUIRIES TO THAT JURISDICTION TO MAKE NOTIFICATIONS THEN.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IS IT DONE -- IS THE POLICY TO MAKE THOSE NOTIFICATIONS IN PERSON OR BY TELEPHONE?

A: WHENEVER POSSIBLE, IT'S TO BE DONE IN PERSON.

Q: AND WHY IS THAT?

A: WELL, I THINK IT'S THE COURTEOUS THING TO DO THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TRIES TO DO INSTEAD OF MAKING A PHONE CALL AND TELLING SOMEBODY THAT SOMEBODY'S DEAD. WE TRY TO DO IT THIS WAY. IT DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK THAT WAY, BUT WE TRY.

Q: SO WHY IS IT SO UNUSUAL THAT COMMANDER BUSHEY TOLD YOU TO MAKE THE NOTIFICATION TO THE DEFENDANT IN PERSON?

A: IT'S NOT UNUSUAL THAT WE WERE MAKING THE NOTIFICATION. IT'S UNUSUAL THAT THE COMMANDER GAVE ME A DIRECT ORDER THAT I SHOULD DO EVERYTHING I COULD TO FIND MR. SIMPSON AND NOTIFY HIM IN PERSON BEFORE THE NEWS MEDIA BECAME AWARE OF WHAT HAPPENED OUT AT THAT RESIDENCE. HE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE VERY INSENSITIVE IF WE KNEW ABOUT IT AND DID NOT NOTIFY HIM IN PERSON PRIOR TO THE NEWS MEDIA NOTIFYING HIM.

Q: NOW, AT THE TIME THAT YOU INFORMED DETECTIVE LANGE AND DETECTIVE VANNATTER THAT YOU WERE GOING TO GO OUT TO NOTIFY THE DEFENDANT, WAS THERE SOME DECISION OR DISCUSSION CONCERNING WHETHER THEY WOULD GO WITH YOU OR NOT?

A: WELL, IT WAS KIND OF A CONVERSA -- YES. IT WAS A CONVERSATION THAT TOOK PART -- AND THIS WAS ALL PART OF THE SAME CONVERSATION. WE WERE ALL TALKING AT ONE TIME.

Q: AND WHAT WAS DISCUSSED ABOUT THAT?

A: WELL, I WAS MAKING THE STATEMENT THAT I NEED TO GO UP AND NOTIFY O.J. SIMPSON IF I CAN ABOUT THIS DEATH, AND THEY WERE MAKING THE STATEMENT, WELL, WE SHOULD PROBABLY GO UP AND TALK TO O.J. SIMPSON AT THE SAME TIME AND GET A STATEMENT FROM HIM OR MAYBE HE CAN GIVE US SOME INFORMATION. AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT SINCE THEY WERE THE INVESTIGATING OFFICERS ON THE SCENE AND THEY WERE THE ONES THAT WERE GOING TO DO THE INVESTIGATION, THAT THEY SHOULD BE THE ONES TO TALK TO O.J. SIMPSON, AND AFTER HE WAS TALKED TO, THEN I WOULD TAKE IT FROM THERE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO DID YOU WANT THE DETECTIVES LANGE AND VANNATTER TO GO ALONG BECAUSE THEY WERE THINKING -- YOU WERE ALL JUST CONSIDERING THE DEFENDANT TO BE A SUSPECT AT THAT TIME?

A: NO. WE NEVER CONSIDERED MR. SIMPSON TO BE A SUSPECT AT THAT TIME.

Q: WHAT WAS THE INFORMATION THAT EVERYBODY WAS THINKING HE COULD GIVE?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, HOW WOULD HE KNOW?

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT DID YOU THINK HE COULD GIVE? WHAT INFORMATION DID YOU THINK MR. SIMPSON COULD GIVE AT THAT TIME?

A: WELL, FOR ONE THING, WE HAD A BODY THERE THAT WE HAD NO IDEA WHO THAT WAS. THAT WAS A MALE BODY THERE. WE DIDN'T KNOW IF MR. SIMPSON HAD ANY KNOWLEDGE OF MRS. SIMPSON'S WHEREABOUTS THE NIGHT BEFORE, UH, IF HE COULD GIVE US SOME INFORMATION ON WHO THIS PERSON WAS. AS FAR AS WE KNEW, THE INDIVIDUAL THAT WAS LYING THERE COULD HAVE EASILY BEEN A SUSPECT. WE HAD NO IDEA WHO THIS INDIVIDUAL WAS.

Q: SO THEN WERE ARRANGEMENTS MADE TO GO TO THE DEFENDANT'S HOME?

A: YES, THERE WAS.

Q: HOW DID YOU FIND OUT WHERE THAT WAS?

A: I BELIEVE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN ASKED OFFICER RISKE TO RUN THE JEEP AT THE REAR OF THE RESIDENCE TO SEE WHAT ADDRESS IT CAME BACK TO.

Q: AND WHAT ADDRESS DID IT COME BACK TO?

A: 360 ROCKINGHAM.

Q: SO HOW DID YOU DECIDE TO PROCEED TO 360 ROCKINGHAM?

A: 360.

Q: 360.

A: YES. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND I WENT IN OUR CAR AND DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND LANGE WENT IN THEIR CAR, AND WE WENT FIRST TO BASICALLY CUT DOWN THE TIME AND SHOW THEM WHAT THE QUICKEST ROUTE TO THAT LOCATION WAS.

Q: SO YOU WENT IN TWO SEPARATE CARS?

A: YES. THERE WAS A REASON FOR THAT.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR THAT?

A: WELL, THEY, VANNATTER AND LANGE, WERE GOING TO RETURN AS SOON AS THEY TALKED TO MR. SIMPSON. FUHRMAN AND I WERE GOING TO STAY AT THE SIMPSON RESIDENCE. AND MY THEORY ALONG WITH -- AFTER TALKING TO LIEUTENANT SPANGLER BEFORE WE LEFT THIS LOCATION, WAS THAT WE WERE GOING TO OFFER MR. SIMPSON A RIDE IF POSSIBLE IF HE WANTED IT BACK TO WEST L.A. STATION TO PICK UP HIS CHILDREN. THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY HE MAY HAVE BEEN TOO UPSET TO DRIVE OR THAT WE SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED HIM TO DRIVE. I DID NOT WANT MR. SIMPSON GOING BACK TO THE BUNDY LOCATION TO SEE THE SCENE. SO I WAS GOING TO DO WHATEVER I COULD TO KEEP HIM FROM GOING TO BUNDY. SO I WAS GOING TO OFFER MR. SIMPSON MY SERVICES, MY POLICE VEHICLE UNTIL HE GOT SOME SUPPORT OR AT LEAST WE GOT HIS CHILDREN BACK TO HIM.

Q: OKAY. WHY DID YOU WANT TO KEEP HIM FROM THE BUNDY SCENE?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THE QUESTION. THAT'S APPARENTLY CLEAR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: WELL, I DIDN'T WANT MR. SIMPSON GOING BACK TO SEE THE VERY BLOODY CRIME SCENE. I HAD NO IDEA AT THAT TIME THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MR. SIMPSON AND NICOLE BROWN.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: SO YOU WANTED TO PREVENT HIM FROM THE TRAUMA OF SEEING THAT?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, OBJECT TO THIS. LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. LEADING.

MS. CLARK: SORRY.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU HAVE SOME CONCERN FOR MR. SIMPSON'S WELFARE IN GOING BACK TO THE 875 SOUTH BUNDY SCENE?

MR. COCHRAN: LEADING AND SUGGESTIVE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: YES.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHAT WAS THAT CONCERN?

A: I DID NOT WANT HIM TO HAVE TO FACE AND SEE THAT SCENE, WHICH WAS A VERY BLOODY SCENE, A VERY TRAUMATIC SCENE.

Q: SO YOU TOOK TWO CARS?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND YOU WERE THE LEAD YOU SAID?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHY WERE YOU LEADING?

A: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN KNEW THE WAY.

Q: HAD -- HAD ONE OF THE OTHER OFFICERS AT THE SCENE TOLD DETECTIVE FUHRMAN HOW TO GET THERE THAT NIGHT?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT CALLS FOR HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: BEFORE YOU LEFT, DID DETECTIVE FUHRMAN SAY HE WAS GOING TO GO AND ASK FOR DIRECTIONS?

MR. COCHRAN: HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: UNDER --

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: I CAN'T GIVE THE THEORY. I HAVE A THEORY.

THE COURT: I THOUGHT OF THE THEORY. I'VE SUSTAINED IT.

MR. COCHRAN: IT'S STILL HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: YOU ARE WELCOME.

MS. CLARK: I HAVEN'T TRIED.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. OKAY. SO YOU AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN LED AND THEN DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND DETECTIVE LANGE FOLLOWED IN THEIR CAR?

A: YES.

Q: ABOUT HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO GET TO THE LOCATION OF 360 ROCKINGHAM FROM 875 SOUTH BUNDY?

A: NO MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES.

Q: WHAT TIME -- BACK UP. I FORGOT TO ASK YOU SOMETHING. WHAT TIME DID DETECTIVE VANNATTER GET TO THE LOCATION OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY THAT NIGHT?

A: I BELIEVE HE ARRIVED AT 4:25 OR 4:30 IN THE MORNING.

Q: AND DETECTIVE LANGE?

A: I'M SORRY. DETECTIVE VANNATTER ARRIVED AT 4:05. I AM SORRY. DETECTIVE LANGE ARRIVED AT 4:25 TO 4:30.

Q: AND WHAT TIME DID YOU LEAVE 875 SOUTH BUNDY?

A: JUST SHORTLY BEFORE 5:00 IN THE MORNING.

Q: AND YOU -- WHAT TIME DID YOU ARRIVE AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

A: APPROXIMATELY 5:05 TO 5:10.

Q: NOW, WHEN THE FOUR OF YOU LEFT 875 SOUTH BUNDY, DID YOU TELL ANYONE ABOUT IT OR DID YOU JUST PACK UP AND GO?

A: NO. I HAD WALKED OVER TO LIEUTENANT SPANGLER AND JOHN ROGERS AND INFORMED THEM OF WHERE WE WERE GOING AND WHAT WE WERE DOING AND TOLD THEM WE SHOULD BE BACK IN A VERY SHORT TIME AND I INFORMED LIEUTENANT SPANGLER OF MY INTENTIONS OF OFFERING MY SERVICES TO O.J. SIMPSON.

Q: AND YOU SPOKE TO LIEUTENANT ROGERS AS WELL THEN?

A: WELL, HE WAS STANDING IN THE AREA. I WASN'T SPEAKING DIRECTLY AT HIM. I WAS SPEAKING DIRECTLY AT LIEUTENANT SPANGLER.

Q: WHEN YOU LEFT, WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF THE CRIME SCENE AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY?

A: LIEUTENANT ROGERS.

Q: DID YOU -- DID YOU HAVE ANY CONVERSATION WITH LIEUTENANT ROGERS ABOUT WHAT HE WOULD DO WITH THE CRIME SCENE IN YOUR ABSENCE?

A: NO.

Q: AND DID YOU SEE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN GO OVER TO ASK FOR DIRECTIONS FROM ANOTHER OFFICER THERE?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. SAME QUESTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU SEE DETECTIVE FUHRMAN GO OVER TO OFFICER RISKE AT SOME POINT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WAS THAT JUST BEFORE YOU LEFT FOR 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

A: A FEW MINUTES BEFORE, YES.

Q: AFTER DETECTIVE FUHRMAN SPOKE TO OFFICER RISKE, DID HE COME BACK TO YOU?

A: YES.

Q: DID HE GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID THAT CONCERN THE ROUTE YOU WOULD TAKE TO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU.

MS. CLARK: CAN WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: SURE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: THIS IS REALLY INCONSEQUENTIAL, ISN'T IT?

MS. CLARK: I WAS GOING TO --

THE COURT: THIS IS INCONSEQUENTIAL. I MEAN ROCKINGHAM -- I MEAN EVERYBODY KNOWS WHERE IT IS.

MS. CLARK: NOW THEY DO.

MR. COCHRAN: THERE'S EVIDENCE THAT FUHRMAN'S BEEN OUT THERE. VANNATTER IS GOING TO SAY HE KNEW WHERE IT WAS. HE WORKS WEST LOS ANGELES. IT'S PREPOSTEROUS. WE'RE WASTING ALL THIS TIME.

THE COURT: AGREE.

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION UNDER 352.

MS. CLARK: THIS IS NOT -- CAN WE --

THE COURT: AT THIS POINT, OBJECTION SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: I NEVER EVEN GOT A CHANCE TO OFFER ARGUMENT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: TELL ME.

MS. CLARK: YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE HERE IF YOU DON'T WANT TO.

THE COURT: SHE WANTS TO TELL ME HER ARGUMENT. OKAY.

MS. CLARK: EXCUSE ME, BUT I THINK THAT EVERY OTHER ATTORNEY WHO HAS APPROACHED AND HAD A REASONABLE BASIS FOR GETTING SOMETHING IN OVER AN OBJECTION HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO OFFER THAT BASIS. I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT TOO.

THE COURT: THAT'S WHAT I AM OFFERING.

MS. CLARK: NUMBER ONE, 1241, PEOPLE VERSUS ACALDI, STATEMENT OF FUTURE INTENT. DETECTIVE FUHRMAN STATING THAT HE WAS GOING TO GO AND GET DIRECTIONS FROM OFFICER RISKE SHOULD COME IN UNDER 1241 OF THE EVIDENCE CODE. AND SECONDLY, IT GOES TO EXPLAIN THEIR SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS AND ROUTE THEY TOOK TO ROCKINGHAM, THAT IT WAS BASED ON DIRECTIONS RECEIVED FROM OFFICER -- FROM DETECTIVE FUHRMAN THROUGH OFFICER RISKE.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I BE HEARD? WE HEARD FROM RISKE. THIS IS INCONSEQUENTIAL. IT'S STILL HEARSAY. FUHRMAN'S STATE OF MIND IS NOT RELEVANT. THERE'S GOING TO BE PLENTY OF TESTIMONY REGARDING THIS. THESE GUYS ALL KNEW WHERE IT WAS. THIS IS PREPOSTEROUS. IT'S STILL HEARSAY AND THE COURT HAS LISTENED TO HER AND WE SHOULD PROCEED ON.

MS. CLARK: YOU KNOW SOMETHING? COUNSEL IS HYPOCRITICAL. HE'S GOING TO CHALLENGE EVERY ONE OF THESE OFFICERS BASED ON THEIR STATE OF MIND, THEIR MOTIVATION AND INTENTIONS IN EVERY NITPICKING DETAIL HE POSSIBLY CAN. AND TO OBJECT -- I AM TAKING A LONG TIME OVER ITEMS THAT WE KNOW ARE GOING TO BE IN CONTROVERSY. COUNSEL IS FAR BEYOND DISINGENUOUS. COUNSEL IS SIMPLY ATTEMPTING TO RESTRICT DIRECT EXAMINATION.

MR. COCHRAN: SHE'S BEING HYSTERICAL.

THE COURT: CAREFUL WITH THAT. MR. COCHRAN, BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU CALL PEOPLE HYSTERICAL.

MR. COCHRAN: WE HAVEN'T ASKED ONE QUESTION YET. THAT IS THE POINT I AM INDICATING.

THE COURT: AT THIS POINT, I'M GOING TO SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION UNDER 352 SIMPLY BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS AN INCONSEQUENTIAL POINT THAT WE ARE WASTING A LOT OF TIME ON. IF DURING CROSS-EXAMINATION HE GOES INTO THIS, YOU CAN COME BACK TO IT.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: MADAM REPORTER? MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: CAN I HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE HERE A BOARD CONTAINING SIX PHOTOGRAPHS, ASK THAT THE BOARD BE MARKED PEOPLE'S -- I AM SORRY, YOUR HONOR, NEXT IN ORDER.

THE COURT: 62. AND, MISS CLARK, WOULD YOU HAVE YOUR ASSISTANTS PUT ON LETTERS ON ANY REMAINING SO WE CAN AVOID THE CONFUSION?

MS. CLARK: YES. DEFINITELY.

THE COURT: GREAT. THANK YOU.

MS. CLARK: IF I MAY FOR THE TIME BEING, YOUR HONOR, SIMPLY INDICATE WHAT THEY ARE.

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

MS. CLARK: AS FOR THE TOP THREE, STARTING FROM THE LEFT OVER, A, B AND C, AND THEN BEGINNING FROM THE LOWER RIGHT HAND -- LOWER LEFT-HAND CORNER, D, E AND F.

MR. DARDEN: THAT WAS 62, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: PEOPLE'S 62-A THROUGH F. (PEO'S 62-A THROUGH F FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPHS)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT, SIR. DID YOU -- WHAT ROUTE DID YOU TAKE TO GET TO 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

A: WENT NORTH ON BUNDY AND THEN ON KENTER I BELIEVE IT WAS TO SUNSET, MADE A LEFT ON SUNSET, TRAVELED WESTBOUND ON SUNSET TO ROCKINGHAM AND TURNED NORTHBOUND ON ROCKINGHAM.

Q: AND WHEN YOU WENT NORTHBOUND ON ROCKINGHAM, WHAT DID YOU SEE?

A: AS WE APPROACHED THE 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM ADDRESS, I OBSERVED A WHITE VEHICLE PARKED ON THE EAST CURB FACING NORTHBOUND.

Q: AND WHAT KIND OF VEHICLE WAS THAT THAT YOU SAW?

A: IT WAS A WHITE FORD BRONCO.

Q: DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION, SIR, TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT ARE NOW MARKED AS 62-A THROUGH F, CAN YOU TELL ME IF YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT'S SHOWN THERE?

A: YES. THAT APPEARS TO BE THE WHITE VEHICLE THAT I SAW PARKED IN THE LOCATION WHERE IT WAS PARKED AT.

Q: AND CAN YOU SEE WHAT -- NO. NEVER MIND. DID YOU NOTICE THAT RIGHT AWAY WHEN YOU STARTED TO DRIVE NORTH ON ROCKINGHAM, THAT VEHICLE?

A: I JUST NOTICED THE VEHICLE THERE BECAUSE I PULLED IN KIND OF IN FRONT OF THE VEHICLE AND MADE A RIGHT-HAND TURN ONTO ASHFORD AND PARKED MY VEHICLE. SO I HAD TO PAY ATTENTION TO IT. BUT I -- I JUST HAD TO PAY ATTENTION TO IT AS I DROVE UP.

Q: AND WHY DID YOU HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO IT?

A: SO I WOULDN'T HIT IT.

Q: LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT THAT. ROCKINGHAM, IS THAT A REAL WIDE STREET?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THE FORM OF THAT QUESTION. WIDE COMPARED TO WHAT?

THE COURT: OVERRULED. ANYONE WHO DRIVES IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE.

MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S TRUE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: BESIDES, THE JURY HAS BEEN THERE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: IS THAT A VERY WIDE STREET?

A: IT'S NOT A REAL WIDE STREET, NO.

Q: WHERE DID YOU PARK?

A: PARKED ON ASHFORD JUST AFTER I MADE THE RIGHT OFF OF ROCKINGHAM ONTO ASHFORD ON THE SOUTH CURB OF ASHFORD.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

THE COURT: ARE THESE GOING TO BE ROCKINGHAM PHOTOS?

MS. CLARK: THEY ARE.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, MAY THIS PHOTOGRAPH BE MARKED PEOPLE'S 63?

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER, PEOPLE'S 63.

(PEO'S 63 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT'S SHOWN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH, SIR?

A: YES. THAT'S THE O.J. SIMPSON RESIDENCE.

Q: YOU SAID THAT YOU PARKED ON THE -- AROUND THE CORNER FROM THE BRONCO?

A: YES.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US APPROXIMATELY WHERE YOU PARKED IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH? CAN YOU SHOW US THAT IS?

A: UMM, RIGHT ABOUT IN THAT LOCATION THERE (INDICATING).

Q: RIGHT THERE (INDICATING)?

A: RIGHT THERE (INDICATING).

Q: AND DO YOU RECALL WHERE DETECTIVE LANGE AND DETECTIVE VANNATTER PARKED?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, MAY WE HAVE THE POINTER REMAIN OUT UNTIL THE WITNESS --

THE COURT: YES.

THE WITNESS: I DON'T RECALL WHERE THEY PARKED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHEN YOU GOT THERE -- SO DID YOU AND DETECTIVE FUHRMAN GET OUT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: THE FOUR OF US WALKED UP TO THE ASHFORD GATE AND I BELIEVE THAT I WAS THE FIRST ONE TO PUSH THE INTERCOM BUZZER TO TRY AND RAISE SOMEONE IN THE RESIDENCE.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU WENT TO THE ASHFORD GATE, SIR, LET ME ASK YOU THIS. WAS IT COVERED IN ANY KIND OF MATERIAL?

A: NO. IT WAS JUST A WROUGHT IRON GATE.

Q: AND IN THE PHOTOGRAPH NEXT TO YOU THAT'S BEEN MARKED 62-D, THAT WOULD BE THE LOWER LEFT-HAND PHOTOGRAPH?

A: YES.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US WHAT GATE IS DEPICTED IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH?

A: THAT WOULD BE THE ROCKINGHAM GATE.

Q: AND DOES THAT DEPICT THE GATE IN THE CONDITION YOU SAW IT ON JUNE THE 13TH?

A: YES.

Q: THE VEHICLE THAT'S DEPICTED IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS A THROUGH E, IS THAT THE VEHICLE THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED HAVING SEEN ON -- PARKED JUST NORTH OF THE ROCKINGHAM GATE AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM?

A: YES.

Q: AND THE POSITION IN WHICH IT'S PARKED IN THESE PHOTOGRAPHS, IS THAT THE POSITION IN WHICH YOU SAW IT PARKED IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE THE 13TH?

A: YES

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, MAY THE PRINT OF THE IMAGE BE MARKED AS 63-A?

THE COURT: 63-A.

(PEO'S 63-A FOR ID = PRINT OF IMAGE)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, MAY THIS NEXT IMAGE BE MARKED PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 64?

THE COURT: 64, NEXT IN ORDER.

(PEO'S 64 FOR ID = IMAGE)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY, SIR. DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT'S SHOWN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH?

A: YES. THAT'S THE SIMPSON RESIDENCE AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD BE THE ASHFORD GATE.

Q: AND IS THAT THE GATE THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED THAT THE FOUR OF YOU WALKED UP TO?

A: YES.

Q: IS IT IN THE CONDITION IN WHICH YOU SAW IT ON JUNE THE 13TH, 1994?

A: YES.

Q: FROM THE -- WHERE WAS IT IF YOU CAN TELL US AND IF YOU CAN SEE IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, WHERE WAS IT THAT YOU WENT TO TRY AND MAKE CONTACT WITH THE HOUSE?

A: WELL, THERE'S A SPEAKER BOX INTERCOM SYSTEM JUST TO THE LEFT OF THE DRIVEWAY AS YOU WALK UP RIGHT ABOUT WHERE THOSE BUSHES ARE THAT YOU PUSH A BUTTON AND HOPEFULLY SOMEBODY TALKS TO YOU.

Q: CAN YOU TELL US WHERE IT IS IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH?

A: IT'S RIGHT ABOUT WHERE THE WHITE FLOWERS THERE, THE WHITE PLANTS ARE, RIGHT ABOUT IN -- LITTLE BIT LEFT, RIGHT ABOUT IN THAT AREA THERE (INDICATING).

Q: IS THAT IT, WHAT'S BEEN CIRCLED?

MR. COCHRAN: COULD THE WITNESS CIRCLE IT BEFORE MR. --

THE COURT: IS THERE A POSSIBILITY WE CAN GET A TELESTRATOR UP HERE ON THE WITNESS STAND?

MS. CLARK: WE CAN, BUT IT'S REALLY VERY -- IT'S NOT EASY TO USE, YOUR HONOR. WE WOULD HAVE TO TEACH THE WITNESSES FIRST. BECAUSE YOU DON'T SEE THE IMAGE HERE. IT'S BLANK. YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SCREEN --

THE WITNESS: I DON'T REALLY SEE IT. I KNOW WHERE IT'S LOCATED, BUT I DON'T REALLY SEE IT IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: BUT THAT WAS THE -- CAN YOU DIRECT THE POINTER DOWN TO THE GENERAL LOCATION WHERE YOU REMEMBER IT BEING?

THE COURT: HE INDICATED IT WAS ABOVE THE WHITE BUSH.

MS. CLARK: UH-HUH. CAN WE PUT AN X THERE THEN?

THE WITNESS: IT'S SOMEWHERE IN THAT VICINITY RIGHT THERE (INDICATING).

THE COURT: NO. LET'S TRY THIS AGAIN. HOW ABOUT WE JUST PUT AN ARROW ON THE BUSH. THAT'S THE -- ABOVE THE WHITE BUSH, JUST AN ARROW.

THE WITNESS: A LITTLE MORE LEFT.

THE COURT: JUST LEAVE THE ARROW THERE. CAN WE LEAVE THE ARROW THERE? PERFECT.

MS. CLARK: CAN WE PUT INITIALS ON IT?

THE COURT: SOME OF THIS WHIZ BANG STUFF HAS TOO MUCH WHIZ.

MS. CLARK: IT DOES.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: ALL RIGHT. SO WHEN YOU WENT TO PUSH THE BUZZER, SIR, COULD YOU HERE IT BUZZING?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU GET ANY ANSWER?

A: NO.

Q: HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU BUZZ THAT BUZZER? A: SEVERAL TIMES IN THE NEXT 10 TO 15 MINUTES, NOT MYSELF AS BEING THE ONLY ONE THAT DID IT. SEVERAL OF THE OTHER OFFICERS ALSO PUSHED IT.

Q: HOW MANY OFFICERS WERE THERE?

A: FOUR.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU WENT TO PRESS THE BUZZER, WHERE DID DETECTIVE VANNATTER AND LANGE GO?

A: WE ALL STOOD RIGHT THERE FOR THE FIRST COUPLE OF MINUTES HOPING THAT SOMEONE WOULD ACKNOWLEDGE US.

Q: AND AT SOME POINT, DID YOU FAN OUT?

A: YES.

Q: WHERE -- WHO WENT WHERE?

A: I BELIEVE I WALKED BACK TO MY CAR AND GOT MY CELLULAR TELEPHONE.

Q: AND WHAT ABOUT DETECTIVE LANGE? WHERE DID HE GO?

A: DON'T RECALL WHERE HE WENT.

Q: WHAT ABOUT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN? DO YOU KNOW WHERE HE WENT?

A: I DON'T RECALL WHERE THEY WENT. EVERYBODY WAS TALKING AND PUSHING THE BUZZER AND GOING DIFFERENT LOCATIONS AND I WENT BACK TO GET MY CELLULAR PHONE. I WAS GOING TO CALL THE WATCH COMMANDER.

Q: HOW FAR APART DID YOU SPREAD OUT?

A: WELL, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I REALLY WASN'T PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT EACH ONE OF US WAS DOING AT THAT TIME.

MR. COCHRAN: HE ANSWERED THE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: NEXT QUESTION.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT WERE YOU DOING?

A: I WENT BACK TO MY CAR TO GET MY CELLULAR TELEPHONE.

Q: AND FOR WHAT PURPOSE DID YOU DO THAT?

A: CALL THE WATCH COMMANDER.

Q: WHY?

A: BECAUSE I NOTICED A WESTEC SIGN IN THE FRONT YARD AND I THOUGHT PERHAPS WESTEC MIGHT BE ABLE TO ASSIST US IN RAISING SOMEBODY AT THAT LOCATION OR GIVING US A PHONE NUMBER OF SOMEONE AT THAT LOCATION.

Q: AND SO YOU CALLED THE WATCH COMMANDER?

A: I CALLED SERGEANT ROSSI AT THE WEST LOS ANGELES WATCH COMMANDER'S OFFICE.

MS. CLARK: MAY I HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DO YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE MEMORIZED THE PHONE NUMBER THAT -- FOR THE WATCH COMMANDER THAT YOU USED THAT NIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU USE IT OFTEN?

A: YES.

Q: LET ME SHOW YOU A PHONE NUMBER THAT HAS BEEN WRITTEN DOWN PREVIOUSLY AND MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 61 AND ASK YOU IF YOU RECOGNIZE THE PHONE NUMBER.

A: YES. THAT'S THE INSIDE PRIVATE LINE.

Q: FOR THE WATCH COMMANDER?

A: YES.

Q: AND IS THAT THE PHONE NUMBER THAT YOU DIALED THAT NIGHT ON YOUR CELL PHONE?

A: YES, IT IS.

Q: YOU SPOKE TO SERGEANT ROSSI?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU ASK HIM TO DO SOMETHING?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT?

A: I ASKED HIM TO GET AHOLD OF WESTEC SECURITY AND ASK THEM IF THEY COULD ASSIST US IN RAISING SOMEONE AT THAT RESIDENCE, GETTING A PHONE NUMBER FOR US AT THAT RESIDENCE, POSSIBLY GETTING A KEY FOR US AT THAT RESIDENCE AND ALSO TELLING US IF THEY HAD ANY INFORMATION WHETHER THE PEOPLE THAT WERE AT THAT RESIDENCE WERE OUT OF TOWN FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME OR NOT.

Q: AND DID YOU RECEIVE WORD BACK FROM SERGEANT ROSSI?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AFTER YOU HAD MADE THAT REQUEST OF HIM?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID HE GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION?

A: YES.

Q: BASED ON WHAT HE TOLD YOU, WHAT DID YOU DO?

A: BASED ON WHAT HE TOLD ME, I DIDN'T GET THE INFORMATION THAT I REQUESTED OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT I WAS -- I HAD LEARNED THAT THERE WAS NO RECORD OF ANYBODY BEING OUT OF TOWN. SO I ASKED THEM TO SEND A UNIT, A WESTEC UNIT, TO OUR LOCATION.

MR. COCHRAN: MOVE TO STRIKE. YOUR HONOR, I MOVE TO STRIKE PART OF THAT LAST ANSWER.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: A SHORT TIME LATER, AFTER A COUPLE MORE PHONE CALLS WERE MADE, A WESTEC UNIT WAS DRIVING SOUTHBOUND ON ROCKINGHAM, AND I FLAGGED HIM DOWN IN THE MIDDLE OF ROCKINGHAM AND ASHFORD.

Q: AND DID YOU GO AND TALK TO THAT PERSON?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: WHAT DID YOU -- DID YOU MAKE SOME REQUEST OF HIM?

A: ORIGINALLY I ASKED HIM IF HE WAS THE UNIT THAT HAD RESPONDED TO OUR CALL, AND HE DID NOT KNOW WHAT CALL I WAS REFERRING TO, AND THEN I ASKED HIM, I SAID, "DO YOU HAVE A PHONE NUMBER OR CAN YOU GET ME A PHONE NUMBER TO THIS RESIDENCE," AND HE MADE AN INQUIRY AND THEN TOLD ME HE COULD NOT --

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: HE TOLD ME HE COULD NOT DO THAT FOR SECURITY REASONS.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHAT WAS YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT?

A: I INFORMED HIM THAT I WAS A LOS ANGELES POLICE DETECTIVE, THAT I WAS INVESTIGATING A CRIME AND THAT I WANTED THE PHONE NUMBER OF THAT RESIDENCE AND IF HE COULDN'T GIVE IT TO ME, THEN TO GET HIS SUPERVISOR OUT HERE THAT COULD.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: A SHORT TIME LATER, THE WESTEC OFFICER GAVE ME THE PHONE NUMBER TO THE RESIDENCE.

Q: AND WHO DID YOU GET IT FROM, DO YOU REMEMBER?

A: I GOT IT FROM THAT SAME WESTEC OFFICER THAT I HAD FLAGGED DOWN THAT WAS STILL AT THE LOCATION.

Q: NOW, AT THE TIME THAT YOU GOT THE PHONE NUMBER -- DID THAT WESTEC PATROL OFFICER STAY THERE?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: AND WHEN YOU GOT THE PHONE NUMBER, DID ANOTHER WESTEC UNIT ARRIVE?

A: SHORTLY THEREAFTER, A WESTEC SUPERVISOR, A SERGEANT FROM WESTEC SHOWED UP.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO AFTER YOU GOT THE DEFENDANT'S PHONE NUMBER?

A: PHONED THE RESIDENCE.

Q: NOW, AT SOME POINT, DID DETECTIVE FUHRMAN COME AND REPORT SOME OBSERVATION HE HAD MADE TO YOU?

A: YES, HE DID.

Q: WAS THAT BEFORE OR AFTER YOU GOT THE DEFENDANT'S PHONE NUMBER?

A: THAT WAS BEFORE I GOT THE PHONE NUMBER.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THE OBSERVATION THAT YOU --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION AS HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. DID HE MAKE SOME REMARK TO YOU ABOUT SOMETHING HE HAD SEEN?

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, OBJECT. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: YES.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND BASED ON WHAT HE TOLD YOU, SIR, DID YOU GO AND OBSERVE SOMETHING?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT WAS THAT?

A: I OBSERVED A SPOT ON THE BRONCO ON THE PASS -- ON THE DRIVER'S DOOR JUST ABOVE THE DOOR HANDLE THAT WAS A BROWNISH RED SMALL DOT AND --

Q: AND DIRECTING YOUR ATTENTION, SIR, TO THE PHOTOGRAPHS THAT HAVE BEEN MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 62-B AND C, DO YOU SEE WHAT'S BEING SHOWN IN THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT?

A: IT'S A MAN POINTING TO A SPOT ON THE DRIVER'S DOOR AND THEN IT'S A CLOSE-UP OF WHAT HE'S POINTING TO WITH A FIGURE OF NUMBER 1 IN HIS HAND, ROMAN NUMERAL NUMBER I.

Q: IS THAT THE LOCATION IN WHICH YOU SAW THE SPOT THAT YOU'VE JUST INDICATED YOU SAW THAT NIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU MAKE THAT OBSERVATION BEFORE OR AFTER YOU GOT THE DEFENDANT'S PHONE NUMBER?

A: BEFORE.

Q: DID YOU CALL -- DID YOU CALL THE PHONE NUMBER THAT YOU WERE GIVEN FOR THE DEFENDANT?

A: YES.

Q: AND HOW SOON AFTER RECEIVING THE PHONE NUMBER DID YOU CALL?

A: WITHIN A COUPLE OF MINUTES. IT JUST -- HOWEVER LONG IT TOOK ME TO PUT IT IN THE CELLULAR PHONE AND SEND IT.

Q: AND WHERE WAS EVERYBODY WHEN YOU MADE THAT PHONE CALL?

A: WALKING AROUND BETWEEN THE BRONCO, THE ASHFORD GATE. I WAS KIND OF LEFT OUT BY MYSELF TALKING TO THE WESTEC OFFICER AND USING MY TELEPHONE.

Q: AND WHERE WAS THE WESTEC OFFICER?

A: HE WAS PARKED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STREET ON ROCKINGHAM FACING SOUTHBOUND ALMOST INTO THE INTERSECTION OF ASHFORD, JUST NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF ASHFORD.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, MAY PRINT IMAGE OF THE SCREEN BE MARKED AS PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 64-A?

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PEOPLE'S 64-A.

(PEO'S 64-A FOR ID = PRINT IMAGE)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS PEOPLE'S 63.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: GOING BACK TO THIS -- YOU INDICATED THAT THE OTHER DETECTIVES WERE BETWEEN THE ASHFORD GATE AND THE BRONCO?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU SEE THAT LOCATION DEPICTED IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH, SIR, THAT AREA?

A: YES.

Q: ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH, DO YOU SEE THE LOCATION OF THE ASHFORD GATE?

A: YES.

Q: CAN YOU DIRECT THE POINTER TO THAT AREA, PLEASE?

A: TO THE POINTER -- THE ASHFORD GATE?

Q: TO THE ASHFORD GATE.

A: OKAY (INDICATING).

Q: LET'S PUT -- TELL WHERE TO GO?

A: THAT'S THE ASHFORD GATE.

Q: CAN YOU MAKE A SMALL X THERE? IS THAT CORRECT, SIR?

A: THAT'S THE ASHFORD GATE, YES.

Q: OKAY. AND IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH WHERE THE BRONCO WOULD BE?

A: COMPLETELY TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PICTURE. YOU CAN JUST BARELY SEE THE FRONT END OF THAT.

Q: THAT WHITE SPOT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: MAKE AN X. WHY DON'T WE JUST LEAVE THE ARROW THERE.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, JONATHAN. INITIAL THAT.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND WHERE WERE YOU?

A: WELL, YOU'D HAVE TO FIND OUT WHAT TIME.

Q: I AM SORRY. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE TIME WHEN YOU'RE TALKING TO -- GETTING THE PHONE NUMBER OF THE DEFENDANT AND USING YOUR CELL PHONE TO CALL.

A: WELL, THE -- I WAS MORE OR LESS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INTERSECTION MAKING PHONE CALLS TO SERGEANT ROSSI, MAKING -- TALKING TO THE WESTEC OFFICER. WHEN THE WESTEC OFFICER SHOWED UP, HE WAS SOUTHBOUND ON ROCKINGHAM JUST -- HAD JUST ENTERED THE INTERSECTION OF ASHFORD AND ROCKINGHAM, HAD NOT GONE ALL THE WAY THROUGH IT.

Q: CAN YOU DIRECT THAT CROSS TO THAT LOCATION?

A: I -- THAT WOULD BE APPROXIMATE LOCATION. DEPTH PERCEPTION IS THE ONLY THING THAT'S LACKING. THAT WOULD BE CLOSE.

Q: OKAY. THANK YOU. THEN USING YOUR CELL PHONE, YOU MADE THE CALL TO THE DEFENDANT'S RESIDENCE; IS THAT RIGHT, SIR?

A: YES.

MS. CLARK: I HAVE HERE ANOTHER BOARD, YOUR HONOR.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: YOUR HONOR, MAY THE PRINT IMAGE OF THE SCREEN BE MARKED AS PEOPLE'S 64 -- SORRY -- 63-B?

THE COURT: 63-B.

(PEO'S 63-B FOR ID = PRINT IMAGE OF SCREEN)

MS. CLARK: CAN WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: WITH THE REPORTER, PLEASE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

MR. COCHRAN: WE WANTED TO APPROACH BECAUSE I HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THIS PARTICULAR EXHIBIT. WE WANT TO KNOW WHO PHILLIPS WAS CALLING ON THE CELLULAR PHONE AND WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO GET INTO THAT. I JUST TOLD COUNSEL IT WASN'T CLEAR EXACTLY WHERE THE RECORD WAS, THAT WE WOULD MAKE AN OFFER OF PROOF AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME AS TO OUR ABILITY TO FIND OUT WHAT CALLS ARE MADE, THE ONES ON THE 13TH, YOU KNOW, CRITICAL PERIOD OF TIME.

THE COURT: IF YOU RECALL, WE WENT THROUGH THIS A COUPLE MONTHS AGO BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME PRIVATE PHONE CALLS, SOME CALLS TO THE WATCH COMMANDER, SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT FOR PUBLIC CONSUMPTION.

MR. COCHRAN: YEAH. I WANT THE COURT TO KNOW AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME, I WILL MAKE AN OFFER OF PROOF, WHAT WE EXPECT TO SHOW. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT CHART.

MS. CLARK: AS TO THIS ISSUE, WE DISCUSSED THE FACT THE BLACKED OUT NUMBERS WERE NOT GOING TO BE GIVEN OUT FOR PRIVACY REASONS THAT HAVE NO BEARING ON THIS CASE.

MR. COCHRAN: THEY MAY HAVE BEARING ON THIS CASE IS WHAT I'M SAYING. I JUST WANTED TO ALERT THE COURT TO THAT. WE WILL ADDRESS THAT.

THE COURT: OKAY.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: THE CHART WILL BE MARKED PEOPLE'S 65. MISS CLARK.

(PEO'S 65 FOR ID = CHART)

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: SHOWING YOU A CHART NOW THAT'S BEEN MARKED PEOPLE'S 65, CAN YOU TELL US IF YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT IS SHOWN IN THIS CHART?

A: THAT'S A PHOTOCOPY OF MY PHONE BILL, CELLULAR PHONE THAT I WAS USING THAT NIGHT FOR THE DATE OF 6-12 TO 6-13, '94.

Q: AND THAT'S THE CELL PHONE YOU WERE USING ON THE DATE OF JUNE 13TH, 1994?

A: YES.

Q: AND DO YOU SEE A PHONE CALL AT THE TIME OF 5:36 A.M. FOR JUNE THE 13TH MADE FROM YOUR CELL PHONE TO THE NUMBER (310) 476-4619?

A: YES.

Q: AND NOW IT'S BEING SHOWN UP ON THE SCREEN. I'M GOING TO INDICATE THAT WITH THE LASER, IF YOU CAN SEE -- CAN YOU SEE IT, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M INDICATING ON THE SCREEN THERE FOR THE JURY?

A: YES.

Q: SO AT 5:36, YOU CALLED THIS NUMBER (310) 476-4619?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHERE DID YOU GET THAT PHONE NUMBER FROM?

A: THAT'S THE PHONE NUMBER I RECEIVED FROM THE WESTEC OFFICER.

Q: WHEN YOU DIALED THAT NUMBER, WHAT HAPPENED?

A: I RECEIVED A RECORDING, ANSWERING MACHINE RECORDING.

Q: AND WHAT DID THE ANSWERING MACHINE SAY? SORRY.

A: WELL, I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY WHAT IT SAID, BUT IT MADE REFERENCE TO THE FACT, "HELLO, THIS IS O.J. I'M NOT HOME. LEAVE A MESSAGE," SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

Q: SO YOU GOT AN ANSWERING MACHINE?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU INFORM ANYONE OF THAT, OF THE FACT THAT YOU GOT AN ANSWERING MACHINE, NO ONE ANSWERED THE PHONE?

A: YES. I INFORMED THE OTHER DETECTIVES AT THE SCENE THAT NO ONE ANSWERED, THAT THERE WAS AN ANSWERING SERVICE.

Q: NOW, DID THE WESTEC --

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID THE WESTEC SUPERVISOR REMAIN THERE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME WHILE YOU WERE THERE?

A: YES, HE DID. BOTH WESTEC UNITS STAYED THERE FOR A LITTLE BIT OF TIME.

Q: AND DID SOMEONE -- ONE OF THE DETECTIVES HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH WESTEC ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT A MAID WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ON THE PREMISES?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU LEARN ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID YOU FIND OUT?

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT, YOUR HONOR. IT'S HEARSAY.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: YOU AND THE OTHER DETECTIVES LEARNED SOMETHING ABOUT A MAID BEING ON THE PREMISES; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU THEN HAVE A CONVERSATION?

THE COURT: OVERRULED. PROCEED.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID YOU THEN HAVE A CONVERSATION AMONGST YOU OR DID DETECTIVE VANNATTER, DETECTIVE LANGE, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO NEXT?

A: YES. I WAS A SEPARATE FROM THE GROUP --

THE COURT: HOLD ON. THE ANSWER IS YES OR NO. YES, YOU HAD A CONVERSATION?

THE WITNESS: YES.

THE COURT: NEXT QUESTION.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: AND AFTER THAT CONVERSATION, SIR, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN WENT OVER THE WALL OF THE ROCKINGHAM RESIDENCE.

Q: WAS THAT AT SOMEONE'S REQUEST?

A: YES.

Q: WHOSE?

A: VANNATTER OR LANGE. I BELIEVE IT WAS VANNATTER.

Q: AND WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: DETECTIVE FUHRMAN THEN OPENED THE GATE FROM THE INSIDE AND ALLOWED THE OTHER ONES OF US IN.

MR. FAIRTLOUGH: P-64, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: OKAY. AGAIN, THAT'S THE GATE YOU'VE IDENTIFIED AS THE ASHFORD GATE. IS THAT THE ONE YOU ALL WENT THROUGH?

A: YES.

Q: AND DO YOU RECALL SEEING -- WELL, YOU TELL US, WHAT DID YOU SEE WHEN YOU FIRST WENT INSIDE?

A: WE FIRST WENT INSIDE, WE WALKED UP TO THE FRONT DOOR.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY DOGS THERE?

A: WELL, AFTER WE GOT TO THE FRONT DOOR, WE SAW THIS DOG WALK --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION. WHAT HE SAW.

THE WITNESS: THIS IS WHAT I SAW.

THE COURT: YES.

THE WITNESS: I SAW THIS DOG WALKING OUT OF WHAT APPEARED TO BE THE BACKYARD AND THE FOUR OF US STARTED BACKING OUT OF THE YARD.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: WHY IS THAT?

A: HAD NO IDEA WHAT THE DOG WAS GOING TO DO.

Q: DID IT ATTACK YOU?

A: NO.

Q: WHAT COLOR WAS THAT DOG?

A: IT WAS ALL BLACK.

Q: WHAT DID YOU DO AT THE FRONT DOOR?

A: WELL, THE DOG THEN LAID DOWN. SO WE WENT OVER AND KNOCKED ON THE FRONT DOOR AND RANG THE DOORBELL.

Q: DID YOU GET ANY ANSWER?

A: NO.

THE COURT: GREAT WATCHDOG.

MS. CLARK: YEAH. FIERCE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: DID ANYBODY RING THE DOORBELL?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU GET AN ANSWER TO THAT?

A: NO.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: AFTER RECEIVING NO ANSWER, THEN WE WALKED AROUND TO THE LOCATION WHERE THE DOG WAS NOW LAYING AND WALKED AROUND THE DOG AND INTO THE BACKYARD.

Q: NOW, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE ANY LIGHTS ON IN THE HOUSE BEFORE YOU GOT INSIDE THE PROPERTY?

A: YES.

Q: WHERE?

A: THE ONLY LIGHT THAT I OBSERVED WAS A LIGHT UPSTAIRS IN THE CENTER PORTION OF THE RESIDENCE. THAT'S THE ONLY LIGHT I OBSERVED MYSELF.

Q: I AM SORRY?

A: THAT'S THE ONLY LIGHT I OBSERVED MYSELF.

Q: AND AGAIN, BEFORE GOING ONTO THE PROPERTY, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE ANY CARS IN THE DRIVEWAY?

A: I BELIEVE I SAW ONE BLACK VEHICLE IN THE DRIVEWAY, YES.

Q: NOW, AFTER HAVING RUNG THE DOORBELL AND KNOCKED ON THE DOOR AND GOTTEN NO ANSWER, WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: WE -- I WALKED AROUND TO THE BACK -- TO THE SOUTH END OF THE RESIDENCE -- I MEAN THE NORTH SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE PAST THE DOG AND INTO THE BACKYARD TO WHERE THERE WAS A POOL AREA.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU SEE THERE?

A: SAW THE POOL, THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AND AS I WALKED CLOSER, WE SAW SOME WHAT LOOKED LIKE LITTLE COTTAGES OR EXTENSIONS OF THE HOUSE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.

Q: DID YOU HAVE YOUR FLASHLIGHTS WITH YOU?

A: WE HAD THEM ORIGINALLY, BUT AT THIS TIME IT HAD GOTTEN LIGHT.

Q: IT WAS WHAT TIME THEN?

A: JUST SHORTLY BEFORE 6:00.

Q: HOW LONG AFTER YOU CALLED THE DEFENDANT AND GOT NO ANSWER ON HIS RESIDENCE PHONE DID YOU ACTUALLY WIND UP ENTERING THE PROPERTY?

A: I WOULD SAY FIVE MINUTES, SIX, SEVEN MINUTES, SOMEWHERE IN THAT VICINITY.

Q: SO BE ROUGHLY ABOUT 5:41, 5:42?

A: ROUGHLY.

Q: WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE THE GROUNDS IN THE BACKYARD WHEN YOU WERE WALKING THROUGH IT AND THE POOL AREA?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANYBODY INJURED?

A: NO.

Q: WERE YOU LOOKING TO SEE THAT?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT WERE YOU LOOKING AROUND FOR? WHY DID YOU GO ON THE PROPERTY?

A: WE WERE LOOKING AROUND TO SEE IF WE COULD --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECT TO WHAT WE WOULD DO. THE QUESTION IS WHAT HE WAS DOING.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. DETECTIVE, THE QUESTION IS JUST WHAT WERE YOU DOING, WHY WERE YOU THERE, NOT WE.

THE WITNESS: I WAS LOOKING -- I HAD BEEN INFORMED OF THE POSSIBLE BLOOD SPOT ON THE --

MR. COCHRAN: OBJECTION TO THIS, YOUR HONOR, AS NONRESPONSIVE, HEARSAY.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. THE QUESTION WAS WHY DID YOU GO ON THE PROPERTY.

MR. COCHRAN: HIS RESPONSE WAS SOMETHING HE WAS INFORMED OF --

THE COURT: RIGHT. WHICH IS WHY I TOLD HIM TO TELL US WHAT HE DID AND WHY HE DID IT, NOT WHAT WE DID OR WHY WE DID IT. DO WE UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION?

THE WITNESS: NO. WHY DON'T WE -- START OVER, PLEASE.

THE COURT: OKAY. MISS CLARK.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: YOU KNOW --

MS. CLARK: MAY I HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MS. CLARK: WE WITHDRAW THAT QUESTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. PROCEED.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: SO YOU WERE ON THE GROUNDS AND YOU SAW THE LIKE ROW OF GUEST UNITS?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHERE WERE THOSE GUEST UNITS IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE MAIN HOUSE?

A: THEY WERE AT THE REAR OF THE HOUSE RUNNING ALONG THE SOUTH END OF THE PROPERTY AND GOING EAST AWAY FROM THE MAIN HOUSE.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE HERE ANOTHER BOARD I BELIEVE IT HAS NOT BEEN APPARENTLY MARKED. I WOULD ASK IT BE MARKED PEOPLE'S NEXT IN ORDER, 66.

THE COURT: PEOPLE'S 66.

(PEO'S 66 FOR ID = BOARD)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THIS APPEARS TO BE A DIAGRAM OF THE SIMPSON RESIDENCE?

MS. CLARK: YES, YOUR HONOR, AND IT'S ENTITLED 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM AVENUE.

Q: BY MS. CLARK: SIR, IF YOU WOULD TAKE THE POINTER TO YOUR LEFT, POINT OUT TO US THE AREA THAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED AS BEING THE GUEST UNITS.

A: THESE SERIES OF BUILDINGS OR AREAS DOWN IN HERE (INDICATING).

Q: AND YOU WALKED TOWARDS THOSE, SIR?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT HAPPENED NEXT?

A: THE -- I WALKED DOWN THESE STAIRS AND APPROACHED THIS DOOR TO THIS ROOM RIGHT HERE FIRST (INDICATING).

Q: AND WHAT ROOM IS THAT DESIGNATED ON THE DIAGRAM, SIR?

A: KAELIN'S ROOM.

Q: OKAY. WHAT DID YOU DO AT THAT DOOR?

A: KNOCKED ON IT.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU -- WHEN YOU WALKED ONTO THE PROPERTY AND YOU WENT TO THE FRONT DOOR, WHO -- DID ALL FOUR OF YOU GO TO THE FRONT DOOR TOGETHER?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN YOU SAY YOU WALKED -- CAN YOU TRACE THE PATH THAT YOU ALL WALKED TO GET AROUND THE POOL AREA?

A: THIS IS THE FRONT ENTRANCE. WE BACKED OUT, WALKED AROUND HERE, TOOK THIS WALKWAY AROUND OVER HERE INTO THE POOL AREA AND I BELIEVE IT WAS OUT INTO THIS AREA AND THEN DOWN THESE STEPS (INDICATING).

Q: ALL FOUR OF YOU TOGETHER?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN ALL FOUR OF YOU STOOD AT THE ROOM MARKED AS KAELIN'S ROOM?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN WHAT HAPPENED?

A: I KNOCKED ON THE DOOR.

Q: DID SOMEONE ANSWER?

A: EVENTUALLY.

Q: NOT RIGHT AWAY?

A: NO.

Q: EVENTUALLY WHEN SOMEONE DID ANSWER, CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE PERSON THAT OPENED THE DOOR?

A: HE WAS A MALE CAUCASIAN WITH BROWNISH BLOND HAIR, LEARNED HIS NAME LATER TO BE KATO KAELIN.

Q: WHAT DID HE LOOK LIKE TO YOU? WHAT WAS HIS CONDITION?

A: LOOKED LIKE HE HAD JUST BEEN WOKEN UP FROM A SLEEP, LIKE ANYBODY DOES WOKEN UP FROM A SLEEP.

Q: AND WHEN HE -- DID YOU TALK TO HIM?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DID YOU SAY?

A: I ASKED HIM IF HE KNEW IF O.J. SIMPSON WAS HOME.

Q: DID YOU TELL HIM WHY YOU WERE ASKING?

A: NO.

Q: AND WHAT WAS HIS RESPONSE?

A: HE SAID HE DID NOT KNOW I BELIEVE AND SAID THAT HIS DAUGHTER WAS RIGHT NEXT DOOR, MR. SIMPSON'S DAUGHTER WAS RIGHT NEXT DOOR AND I SHOULD GO OVER THERE AND ASK HER.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, MAY I ASK THAT THE BOARD BE SHOWN TO THE REST OF THE JURY? I THINK THE JURORS IN THE BACK CAN'T SEE IT.

THE COURT: SURE. MR. FAIRTLOUGH, COULD YOU BRING THAT DOWN TO THE END OF THE JURY BOX THERE. IT'S MILLER TIME. ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR RECESS FOR THE AFTERNOON AT THIS TIME. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU; DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DON'T DISCUSS THE MATTER WITH ANYBODY, DON'T ALLOW ANYBODY TO CONTACT OR COMMUNICATE WITH YOU ABOUT THE CASE, DO NOT CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS ON THE MATTER UNTIL IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU. HAVE A PLEASANT EVENING AND WE WILL SEE YOU AGAIN TOMORROW MORNING AT 9:00 O'CLOCK. DETECTIVE PHILLIPS, YOU ARE EXCUSED, TOMORROW MORNING AT 9:00 O'CLOCK. DON'T DISCUSS YOUR TESTIMONY WITH ANYBODY EXCEPT WITH THE LAWYERS FROM BOTH SIDES. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS 9:00 O'CLOCK. AND, COUNSEL, I'D APPRECIATE IF YOU WOULD BE PROMPT TOMORROW MORNING BECAUSE WE HAVE BUSINESS TO TAKE CARE OF. THANK YOU, DETECTIVE. YOU MAY STEP DOWN.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, OUT OF THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

THE COURT: MR. FAIRTLOUGH, WOULD YOU TAKE DOWN THE EXHIBIT, PLEASE. THANK YOU. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THE JURORS HAVE WITHDRAWN FROM THE COURTROOM. COUNSEL, MRS. ROBERTSON ADVISED ME THAT MR. HODGMAN CALLED, SAID HE'S ON HIS WAY DOWN. MR. HARMON AND MR. CLARK, WE HAVE TO RESOLVE THAT LAST ISSUE REGARDING PHYSICAL EVIDENCE.

MS. CLARK: MAY I ASK THE COURT, IS IT THE NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE WE ARE GOING TO ADDRESS?

THE COURT: YES.

MR. SCHECK: ALSO --

THE COURT: MR. HARMON, ARE YOU GOING TO SPEAK FOR MR. HODGMAN ON THIS NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE ISSUE?

MR. HARMON: NO. I KNOW MR. HODGMAN IS ON HIS WAY DOWN.

THE COURT: GREAT. OKAY.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, IN THE MEANTIME, SO THE RECORD IS CLEAR, I JUST RECEIVED THIS AFTERNOON A STATEMENT GIVEN TO ME BY MR. DOUGLAS. IT'S A STATEMENT APPARENTLY FROM FIELD COLEMAN, A DEFENSE WITNESS, DATED JANUARY 21, 1995. IT RELATES TO DETECTIVE FUHRMAN AND IT'S AN ISSUE I'LL BRING UP LATER TO THE COURT.

THE COURT: NOTED THAT YOU RECEIVED IT THIS AFTERNOON, HOWEVER.

MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, WHILE MR. HODGMAN IS COMING DOWN, CAN WE ADDRESS THAT ONE MATTER THAT HE RAISED WITH YOU, THE VISITATION AND THE FBI MONITORING ISSUE?

THE COURT: YEAH. MR. HARMON, ARE YOU READY TO ADDRESS THAT MATTER?

MR. SCHECK: YOUR HONOR, JUST AS WE FINISHED OUR COLLOQUY THIS MORNING, I ASKED MR. HARMON AS HE WAS EXITING WHAT ARRANGEMENT COULD BE MADE TO OBSERVE THE SAMPLING OF THE SOCK AND ANY OTHER ITEM THAT THE FBI WAS GOING TO DO FOR PURPOSES OF EDTA TESTING, AND HE INDICATED TO ME AS WE LEFT THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED AND --

THE COURT: NO OBSERVATIONS, NO OUTSIDE OBSERVERS.

MR. SCHECK: YES.

THE COURT: NO PHOTOGRAPHY AND NO VIDEOTAPING.

MR. SCHECK: I UNDERSTAND THAT TO BE THE POLICY. NOW AGAIN, THIS RAISES JUST IN TERMS OF TIMING AND EQUITY THE SAME POINT THAT I MADE THIS MORNING, BUT I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THIS WOULD ACTUALLY BE THE CASE WITH THE FBI WITH RESPECT TO THIS TEST. AND THAT IS THAT IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY ARE GOING TO BE CUTTING APART THE SOCK AS MR. HARMON INDICATED THIS MORNING THEY WOULD BE AT VARIOUS DIFFERENT POINTS, WE WOULD NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXAMINE THAT SOCK, TO LOOK AT IT UNDER A MICROSCOPE, TO EXAMINE IT BEFORE IT IS AGAIN CUT AND DESTROYED. AND WE WANT THAT OPPORTUNITY BEFORE THE WITNESSES GET ON THE STAND AND TESTIFY, TO HAVE OUR EXPERTS LOOK AT IT. NOW, THE COURT DID NOTE THIS MORNING THAT -- I THINK THE ACTUAL TERM YOU USED WAS EXAMINE -- THAT DR. BLAKE HAD A CHANCE TO EXAMINE THE SOCK AND --

THE COURT: NO. I THINK -- I THOUGHT I WAS VERY, VERY PRECISE IN WHAT I SAID. THAT HE'S HAD THE CHANCE TO OBSERVE IT AND TO PHOTOGRAPH -- CONDUCT PHOTOGRAPHS AND/OR HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO VIDEOTAPE. HOWEVER, I NOTE JUST SO THE RECORD IS CLEAR THAT HE DID NOT PHYSICALLY TOUCH IT, FEEL IT, LOOK AT IT.

MR. SCHECK: YES. THAT'S THE PROBLEM. HE DOESN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT NOR DOES HE DIRECT THE EXAMINATION IN ANY WAY. MR. SIMS GETS SAMPLES, DOES WHAT HE WANTS WITH THEM. DR. BLAKE IS THERE SIMPLY AS A REPORTER AND OBSERVER AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM HERE. SO AGAIN, I WOULD BESEECH THE COURT TO PERMIT US WITH REGARD TO THE SOCK, TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY PERHAPS THIS WEEKEND SO THAT WE CAN HAVE OUR EXPERTS EXAMINE THE SOCK ALONG WITH THE OTHER EVIDENCE SO THAT WE CAN AT LEAST SEE IT BEFORE THEY PERFORM THE DESTRUCTIVE TEST. AND I THINK THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE REASONING OF GRIFFIN AND SOME GROUND THAT WE TRAVELED OVER ONCE BEFORE THIS AUGUST.

THE COURT: ABOUT THREE TIMES BEFORE. ALL RIGHT. MR. HARMON.

MR. HARMON: YOUR HONOR, IT'S JUST AMAZING. THEY JUST DON'T WANT US TO DO THIS THE WAY WE PROPOSE TO DO IT. AND IF WE REFLECT BACK ON WHEN I FIRST BROACHED THIS SUBJECT, I INVITED THEM TO AVOID THIS VERY THING BY JOINING WITH US. LET'S NOT -- YOU KNOW, DON'T MAKE US PICK A LAB THAT YOU DON'T LIKE AND THEN WANT TO NITPICK WITH DISCOVERY. AND I HAVE A LITTLE DIFFICULTY WITH MR. SCHECK'S SURPRISE THAT HE -- THAT THE FBI WON'T ALLOW VISITORS. HE KNOWS THAT. HE'S A NATIONAL DNA EXPERT. THEY JUST DON'T ALLOW THAT. SO THIS FEIGNED INDIGNATION OR SURPRISE IS, TO BORROW ONE OF HIS FAVORITE PHRASES, DISINGENUOUS AT BEST. WE COULD HAVE AVOIDED THIS HAD THEY SOUGHT TO DO THIS, TO FIND OUT THE TRUTH OF WHAT'S IN THOSE SOCKS AND NOW THE GATE STAINS WHICH HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS MR. SIMPSON'S. AND THEY DIDN'T DO IT. AND NOW WE HAVE FINALLY FOUND A SCHEDULE THAT PLEASES THIS COURT AND THEY WANT TO DO SOMETHING BEFORE THAT THAT INTERRUPTS THE LOGISTICS.

THE COURT: IT DOESN'T PLEASE ME. IT MOLLIFIES ME.

MR. HARMON: I'M NOT SURE I'M IN THE BUSINESS OF MOLLIFYING ANYBODY. I'M SORRY.

THE COURT: LAWYERS SHOULD ALWAYS BE IN THE BUSINESS OF MOLLIFYING THE COURT.

MR. HARMON: ONLY WHEN IT SUITS THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

MR. HARMON: DR. BLAKE HAS SEEN THESE THINGS. HE'S SEEN WHEN THEY'VE BEEN SAMPLED. I RECOUNTED A DAY IN THE LIFE OF GARY SIMS OCTOBER 27TH WHEN THEY WERE THERE UNTIL MIDNIGHT. AND NOW, YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN THE BUSINESS OR WE'VE BEEN SETTING UP THIS ELABORATE PICKUP AND DELIVERY SCHEDULE WHERE WE WILL GET THE EVIDENCE WHERE WE SAID WE WOULD ON FRIDAY AND NOW THEY WANT IT TO BE SOMEPLACE ELSE ON SATURDAY AND SUNDAY. SO I'M AT A LOSS TO DO ANYTHING EXCEPT TO SAY YOU HAVE TOLD US WHAT WE COULD DO. THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO. WE WILL BE GLAD -- EVERYTHING HAS BEEN DOCUMENTED. THERE'S NOTHING TO FEAR EXCEPT THE TRUTH OF IS THERE ANY EDTA IN THAT SOCK, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF, AND WE WILL KNOW THAT MONDAY EVENING AND MR. SCHECK CAN THEN HAVE AT IT. HE CAN HAVE HIS FRYE HEARING OR WHATEVER ELSE HE WANTS TO. SOMEHOW THE TALK OF ALL THESE FRYE HEARINGS TELLS YOU THAT THEY KNOW WHAT THE ANSWER IS GOING TO BE. THERE'S A REASON THEY KNOW BECAUSE SOMEBODY AT THE END OF THE TABLE TOLD THEM THAT. SO WE'D JUST LIKE TO --

MR. SHAPIRO: YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT TO THAT. I THINK THAT'S HIGHLY IMPROPER, IT SERVES NO PURPOSE WHATSOEVER AND IF THIS IS A LEGITIMATE MOTION, LET HIM MAKE A MOTION, BUT IF HE'S HERE TO GIVE SPEECHES TO THE PUBLIC, WE HAVE A PLACE OUT FRONT TO DO THAT.

THE COURT: WELL, COUNSEL, COUNSEL, COME ON. WELL, MR. HARMON, ACTUALLY THE ISSUE WE ARE DISCUSSING HERE IS THE FBI POLICY REGARDING OUTSIDE OBSERVERS. WILL THEY BE VIDEOTAPING?

MR. HARMON: NO, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ANY PHOTOGRAPHY CONDUCTED DURING THE COURSE OF THEIR TESTING? I ASSUME SOME?

MR. HARMON: WHATEVER THEY ROUTINELY DO. I'M IGNORANT OF THAT POINT, YOUR HONOR. I'M SORRY.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SO IT'S YOUR POSITION THAT THIS IS THE LAB THAT CAN DO THIS TEST AND THAT'S THEIR STANDING POLICY, HAS BEEN THEIR POLICY FOREVER AND EVER.

MR. HARMON: THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. MR. SCHECK KNOWS THAT TOO. COULD, YOU KNOW, SINCE WE ARE ADDING THINGS ON THE CALENDAR, WHERE IS 47, 50 AND 78? YOU ORDERED THEM TO TELL US WHERE THAT IS AND WE'RE DYING TO FIND THAT OUT.

THE COURT: I WANT TO JUST HEAR THE LAB COMMENTS ABOUT THE FBI POLICY, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM MR. HODGMAN ON THE NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE AND THEN WE'LL SHIFT INTO THE WHEREABOUTS OF THOSE THREE OTHER ITEMS.

MR. HARMON: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

MS. CLARK: WITH RESPECT TO MR. HODGMAN, YOUR HONOR, MAY WE -- HE'S NOT DOWN HERE, AND MAY WE REQUEST THAT WE ADDRESS THE NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FIRST THING IN THE MORNING?

THE COURT: NO. I WAS TOLD WE WERE GOING TO DO THAT -- WE WERE SUPPOSED TO DO IT TODAY AT 9:00 O'CLOCK, AND YOU ASKED LEAVE OR MR. HARMON ASKED LEAVE ON MR. HODGMAN'S BEHALF TO FILE A LETTER WITH THE COURT WHICH I HAVE BEEN EXPECTING ALL DAY AND HAS NOT ARRIVED. I WAS TOLD THAT MR. HODGMAN WAS ON HIS WAY DOWN.

MS. CLARK: IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE THE CASE. WE HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THIS WITH MR. HODGMAN. THE FIRST THAT I HEARD HE WAS COMING DOWN WITH ANY KIND OF LETTER WAS WHEN THE COURT TOLD ME JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO.

THE COURT: WELL, THIS WAS THE BEGINNING OF OUR DISCUSSION AT 9:30 THIS MORNING IF YOU RECALL. MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT YOU WERE HERE IN COURT WITH US.

MS. CLARK: THAT WAS CONCERNING BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: CORRECT. AND THE AGREEMENT WAS THAT MR. HODGMAN -- I WAS -- I HAD ENTERED AN ORDER THAT ALL THE NON-BIOLOGICAL MATTERS BE TURNED OVER. I RECOLLECT MR. HARMON THEN ASKED WOULD I PUT THAT OFF UNTIL THE END OF BUSINESS TODAY TO ALLOW MR. HODGMAN TO EXAMINE THE LIST AND LODGE ANY SPECIAL OBJECTIONS WHICH I SAID I WOULD GIVE HIM LEAVE UNTIL THE END OF THE DAY TODAY. SO I ASSUME EITHER I AM GOING TO GET A LETTER FROM MR. HODGMAN LAYING OUT SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS AND/OR A WAIVER OF THE OBJECTIONS TO THE ORDER OF TURNING OVER THE BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE -- NON-BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE. SPEAK OF THE DEVIL.

MR. HODGMAN: I'VE BEEN CALLED MANY THINGS.

THE COURT: GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. HODGMAN, AND WELCOME.

MR. HODGMAN: AND GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: I'M HAPPY TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

MR. HODGMAN: THANK YOU, SIR.

THE COURT: I FEEL SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ABSENCE FOR THE LAST FEW DAYS, LAST SEVERAL DAYS.

MR. HODGMAN: DON'T TAKE ANY RESPONSIBILITY ON YOURSELF, YOUR HONOR. I THINK THE RESPONSIBILITY WAS MINE. I APPRECIATE THE THOUGHT.

THE COURT: WELL, I'M CONCERNED THAT THE PRESSURES AND THE PACE OF THIS CASE ARE GOING TO TAKE ITS TOLL ON EVERYBODY INVOLVED AND I'M CONSIDERING MODIFYING THE COURT HOURS SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE PHYSICAL STRESS THAT'S INVOLVED. AND I THINK -- I RECOLLECT THE LAST TIME WE MET THAT I HAD NEVER SEEN YOU QUITE IN THAT STATE BEFORE. AND YOU AND I HAVE KNOWN EACH OTHER FOR MANY YEARS, AND SO I FEEL SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR HAVING CAUSED SO MUCH STRESS IN YOUR LIFE. I APOLOGIZE TO YOU FOR THAT. BUT HAVING SAID THAT --

MR. HODGMAN: YOUR HONOR, I DO HAVE A MATTER TO RAISE WITH THE COURT THIS MORNING HENCE MY ARRIVAL. BEFORE I ADDRESS THE COURT, MAY I HAVE JUST A MOMENT WITH COUNSEL?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

MR. HODGMAN: FELLOW COUNSEL.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS.)

MR. HODGMAN: YOUR HONOR, IN ORDER TO EXPEDITE MATTERS THIS AFTERNOON, I PREPARED THE LETTER WHICH I HAVE SERVED UPON THE COURT AS WELL AS COUNSEL.

THE COURT: OKAY. LET'S TAKE IT FROM THE TOP. ITEMS -- CATEGORY ONE, ITEMS WHICH THE PEOPLE REASONABLY ANTICIPATE WILL BE THE SUBJECT OF IMMINENT INTRODUCTION AT TRIAL. AND WHAT ARE THESE ITEMS? I DON'T HAVE MY CORRELATION LIST IMMEDIATELY AT HAND.

MR. HODGMAN: YES, YOUR HONOR. ITEM 18, ATHLETIC SHOES, REEBOK; ITEM 19, HAIR AND FIBERS WHICH WERE REMOVED FROM THE NUMBER 9 GLOVE; ITEM 27, A PLAID CAP; ITEM 35, KEYS, WHICH WERE RECOVERED FROM THE GROUND AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE; ITEM 40, A WHITE METAL RING RECOVERED FROM THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE; ITEM 46, A MENU OR PAPER MENU RECOVERED FROM THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE AND ITEM 110 WHICH CONSISTS OF SOME HAIRS AND FIBERS COLLECTED FROM THE GLOVE, OTHERWISE REFERRED TO AS ITEM NUMBER 9.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WHEN YOU SAY IMMINENT INTRODUCTION, MISS CLARK, WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE GETTING TO THESE ITEMS?

MS. CLARK: THE -- I BELIEVE THE PLAID CAP, THE SKI CAP ARE GOING TO COME ON WITH THE VERY NEXT WITNESS. THE KEYS ARE GOING TO -- AND ITEM 35 AS WELL WILL COME ON WITH THE NEXT WITNESS.

THE COURT: WHO IS THE NEXT WITNESS?

MS. CLARK: DETECTIVE LANGE. AND THE RING AS WELL.

THE COURT: DID WE IDENTIFY THAT RING AS BELONGING TO ANYBODY?

MS. CLARK: YES. RON GOLDMAN. AND THE MENU ALSO. I MEAN THESE ARE ALL COMING IN NOW, I MEAN FRIDAY OR THE END OF TOMORROW DEPENDING ON WHEN WE FINISH DETECTIVE PHILLIPS.

THE COURT: LET ME ASK AS TO ITEMS 113, 160 THROUGH 169, 221, 225 THROUGH 235, ITEMS IN PARAGRAPH TWO, MR. SCHECK, IT'S THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE THAT THESE ITEMS HAVE ALREADY BEEN EXAMINED BY THE DEFENSE.

MR. HODGMAN: DO YOU RECALL THIS, MR. SCHECK?

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

THE COURT: LET'S DO THIS. COUNSEL, I'VE HAD MY COURT REPORTER WORKING ALL AFTERNOON. SO LET'S TAKE A BREAK. WHY DON'T YOU GUYS COMPARE YOUR NOTES BECAUSE -- YOU ATTORNEYS COMPARE YOUR NOTES. I'VE BEEN CRITICIZED FOR REFERRING GENERICALLY TO YOU ALL. WHY DON'T WE COMPARE OUR NOTES TO SEE WHAT ITEMS BECAUSE BY ITEM NUMBER, I CAN'T RECOLLECT AS TO WHAT EACH ONE OF THESE ARE. LET'S COMPARE OUR NOTES AND THEN WE CAN CONFER IN CHAMBERS AFTERWARDS. I NEED TO GIVE MY COURT REPORTER A BREAK. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS THEN TO 9:00 O'CLOCK. WE ARE IN RECESS UNTIL 9:00 O'CLOCK. I WILL SEE MR. SCHECK AND MR. HODGMAN IN CHAMBERS.

(AT 4:20 P.M. AN ADJOURNMENT WAS TAKEN UNTIL, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1995, 9:00 A.M.)

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
)
PLAINTIFF, )
)
) VS. ) NO. BA097211
)
ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, )
)
)
DEFENDANT. )

REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1995

VOLUME 88

PAGES 14642 THROUGH 14892, INCLUSIVE
(PAGES 14620 THROUGH 14641, INCLUSIVE, SEALED)

APPEARANCES: (SEE PAGE 2)

JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR #4588
CHRISTINE M. OLSON, CSR #2378 OFFICIAL REPORTERS

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE PEOPLE: GIL GARCETTI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
BY: MARCIA R. CLARK, WILLIAM W.
HODGMAN, CHRISTOPHER A. DARDEN,
CHERI A. LEWIS, ROCKNE P. HARMON,
GEORGE W. CLARKE, SCOTT M. GORDON
LYDIA C. BODIN, HANK M. GOLDBERG,
AND DARRELL S. MAVIS, DEPUTIES
18-000 CRIMINAL COURTS BUILDING
210 WEST TEMPLE STREET
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012

FOR THE DEFENDANT: ROBERT L. SHAPIRO, ESQUIRE
SARA L. CAPLAN, ESQUIRE
2121 AVENUE OF THE STARS
19TH FLOOR
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067

JOHNNIE L. COCHRAN, JR., ESQUIRE
BY: CARL E. DOUGLAS, ESQUIRE
SHAWN SNIDER CHAPMAN, ESQUIRE
4929 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
SUITE 1010
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90010

GERALD F. UELMEN, ESQUIRE
ROBERT KARDASHIAN, ESQUIRE
ALAN DERSHOWITZ, ESQUIRE
F. LEE BAILEY, ESQUIRE
BARRY SCHECK, ESQUIRE
ROBERT D. BLASIER, ESQUIRE

I N D E X

INDEX FOR VOLUME 88 PAGES 14642 - 14892

-----------------------------------------------------

DAY DATE SESSION PAGE VOL.

WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 15, 1995 A.M. 14642 88
P.M. 14765 88
-----------------------------------------------------

PROCEEDINGS

DISCUSSION RE DNA DISCOVERY (RESUMED) 14642 88

LEGEND:

MS. CLARK - MC
MR. HODGMAN - H
MR. DARDEN D
MR. KAHN - K
MR. GOLDBERG - GB
MR. GORDON - G
MR. SHAPIRO - S
MR. COCHRAN - C
MR. DOUGLAS - CD
MR. BAILEY - B
MR. UELMEN - U
MR. SCHECK - BS
MR. NEUFELD - N

-----------------------------------------------------

CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES

PEOPLE'S
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.

ROSSI, DAVID 88 (RESUMED) 14660B 14683MC 14698B
(FURTHER) 14715MC 14735B

PHILLIPS, 14743MC 88
RONALD
(RESUMED) 14768MC

-----------------------------------------------------

ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES

PEOPLE'S
WITNESSES DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS VOL.

ROSSI, DAVID 88 (RESUMED) 14660B 14683MC 14698B
(FURTHER) 14715MC 14735B

PHILLIPS, 14743MC 88
RONALD
(RESUMED) 14768MC

EXHIBITS

PEOPLE'S FOR IN
EXHIBIT IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE

PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.

42-A - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14767 88
WALKWAY WITH THE BODY OF VICTIM NICOLE BROWN
SIMPSON AND MARKINGS AND INITIALS "R.P."

62 - POSTERBOARD WITH 14848 88
SIX PHOTOGRAPHS

62-A - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14848 88
360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM WITH A WHITE VEHICLE

62-B - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14848 88
WHITE VEHICLE WITH A MAN

62-C - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14848 88
LAPD RULER WITH THE NUMBER "1" AND THE HANDLE OF A VEHICLE

62-D - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14848 88
REAR OF WHITE VEHICLE

62-E - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14848 88
REAR OF WHITE VEHICLE

62-F - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14848 88
PACKAGES IN WHITE VEHICLE

63 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14850 88
360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM AVENUE

63-A - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14852 88
360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM AVENUE WITH A RED "X"
AND THE INITIALS "R.P."

64 - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14852 88
360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM AVENUE

64-A - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14862 88
360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM AVENUE WITH RED MARKINGS
AND THE INITIALS "R.P."

63-B - PHOTOGRAPH OF 14864 88
360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM AVENUE WITH RED MARKINGS
RED ARROWS AND THE INITIALS "R.P."

65 - POSTERBOARD 14868 88
ENTITLED PHILLIPS' CALLS TO 360 NORTH
ROCKINGHAM AVENUE"

EXHIBITS
(CONTINUED)

PEOPLE'S FOR IN
EXHIBIT IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE

PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.

66 - POSTERBOARD 14877 88
ENTITLED "360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM" DEPICTING
DIAGRAM OF SIMPSON RESIDENCE

-----------------------------------------------------

DEFENSE FOR IN
EXHIBIT IDENTIFICATION EVIDENCE

PAGE VOL. PAGE VOL.

1013 - MAP OF WEST L.A. 14660 88
(BUNDY) AREA

1014 - 8-PAGE DOCUMENT 14720 88
ENTITLED "GENERAL REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS
(LAPD MANUAL)

1015 - SCHEMATIC DRAWING 14734 88
FLOOR PLAN OF 875 SOUTH BUNDY

??

14845