DEPARTMENT NO. 103 HON. LANCE A. ITO, JUDGE

APPEARANCES: (APPEARANCES AS HERETOFORE NOTED.)

(JANET M. MOXHAM, CSR NO. 4855, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)

(CHRISTINE M. OLSON, CSR NO. 2378, OFFICIAL REPORTER.)

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

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. MR. SIMPSON IS AGAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH HIS COUNSEL, MR. SHAPIRO, MR. COCHRAN, MR. DOUGLAS, MR. BAILEY. THE PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY MISS CLARK, MR. DARDEN AND MISS LEWIS. GOOD MORNING, COUNSEL.

MS. LEWIS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ANYTHING WE NEED TO TAKE UP BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURORS IN? MR. COCHRAN? MS. LEWIS?

MS. LEWIS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. JUST BRIEFLY, YESTERDAY I FILED A MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE MOTION TO COMPEL EXPERTS NOTES AND SO FORTH, WHICH IN THE COURT'S WRITTEN RULING OF JANUARY 29 HAD ORDERED THE DEFENSE TO DISCLOSE IMMEDIATELY. I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WAS SHORT NOTICE; HOWEVER, BECAUSE THESE ARE MATERIALS WHICH WERE PREVIOUSLY ORDERED BY THIS COURT TO BE DISCLOSED, I DON'T THINK THE NORMAL TEN-DAY PERIOD IS APPROPRIATE. SO WHAT IS THE COURT'S PLEASURE IN TERMS OF WHEN WE SHOULD CALENDAR THIS?

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. DOUGLAS, WHEN DO YOU THINK YOU WILL BE AVAILABLE OR ABLE TO ADDRESS THIS MATTER?

MR. DOUGLAS: YOUR HONOR, THE MOTION WAS FAXED TO DEAN UELMEN YESTERDAY. HE ASKED THAT WE -- THAT HE BE GIVEN UNTIL TUESDAY TO RESPOND. I WOULD ASK TO HAVE THE MATTER HEARD ON WEDNESDAY, WHICH IS LESS THAN THE TEN DAY'S NOTICE. I DO NOT THINK THAT THE MATERIALS UNDER THIS MOTION ARE PART OF THE COURT'S EARLIER DISCOVERY ORDER. I THINK, AS THE COURT WILL RECALL, WE MENTIONED THIS PARTICULAR PROBLEM AND THE NEED TO RESOLVE IT AND SO NOW IS A GOOD TIME AS ANY I THINK.

THE COURT: MISS LEWIS, ARE YOU GOING TO BE AVAILABLE WEDNESDAY?

MS. LEWIS: CERTAINLY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WEDNESDAY 9:00 A.M. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE INVITE THE JURORS TO COME IN?

MS. CLARK: I'M SORRY, YOUR HONOR. JUST THAT BEFORE -- BEFORE ANY VIDEOTAPES ARE SHOWN TO DETECTIVE LANGE, WE WANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY. SO WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT, I WOULD APPRECIATE IF COUNSEL WOULD LET US KNOW.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, THIS ONE PART, I DON'T HAVE ALL OF IT YET, AND I WILL DO THAT REGARDING ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE RECEIVE, BUT MR. HARRIS CAN SHOW THE COURT THIS ONE PART. IT IS VERY, VERY SHORT.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU ANTICIPATE USING THAT THIS MORNING?

MR. COCHRAN: NO, YOUR HONOR. THERE IS SO MUCH, I -- I DOUBT IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO LOOK AT IT. IT IS GOING TO TAKE TWO MINUTES. CAN DETECTIVE LANGE STEP OUT, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: SURE.

(DETECTIVE LANGE EXITED THE COURTROOM.)

MR. COCHRAN: I DOUBT IT THIS MORNING, BUT I WOULD LIKE YOU JUST TO LOOK AT IT.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. HARRIS, GOOD MORNING. DO YOU WANT TO RUN THIS FOR US, PLEASE.

MR. HARRIS: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ARE THERE ANY VICTIMS?

MR. HARRIS: NO.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.

(AT 9:15 A.M., A VIDEOTAPE, WAS PLAYED.)

MR. COCHRAN: I THINK THAT IS IT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION?

MS. CLARK: MAY I HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?

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

MS. CLARK: IS THAT IT?

MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS IT FOR NOW, MISS CLARK, AND IF THERE IS OTHERS THAT COME IN, I WILL LET YOU KNOW BEFORE I EVER SHOW IT.

MS. CLARK: OKAY.

THE COURT: ANY OBJECTION?

MS. CLARK: NO OBJECTION.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT: ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO COUNSEL AT THE SIDE BAR WITHOUT THE REPORTER, PLEASE.

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

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

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

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: DEPUTY MAGNERA.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE COURT AND DEPUTY MAGNERA.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, LET'S MOVE THE PARTIES NOW.

MS. CLARK: THAT IS ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THEN DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S FILL THE FRONT FOUR SEATS.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE. AND DEPUTY RUSSELL, CAN WE HAVE DETECTIVE LANGE, PLEASE. DEPUTY RUSSELL: YES, YOUR HONOR.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

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

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE SEATED. ALL RIGHT. DETECTIVE LANGE, WOULD YOU PLEASE RESUME THE WITNESS STAND.

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

THE COURT: LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

THE JURY: GOOD MORNING.

THE COURT: THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT DETECTIVE TOM LANGE IS ON THE WITNESS STAND. GOOD MORNING, DETECTIVE LANGE. YOU ARE REMINDED THAT YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH, SIR. GOOD MORNING, MR. COCHRAN. YOU MAY CONTINUE WITH YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION.

MR. COCHRAN: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR. GOOD MORNING, DETECTIVE.

CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)

BY MR. COCHRAN:

Q: GOOD MORNING, DETECTIVE LANGE. WHEN WE LEFT OFF YESTERDAY, SIR, I THINK WE ADDRESSED SOME ISSUES AT THE SCENE AT BUNDY AND YOU HAD SHARED WITH US, I BELIEVE, THAT IT WAS YOUR OPINION THAT MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S BODY WAS IN FULL RIGOR, FULL RIGOR MORTIS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: OF COURSE YOU NEVER TOUCHED THE BODY, DID YOU?

A: NO, I DID NOT.

Q: HOW DID YOU MAKE THAT DETERMINATION OF YOUR OWN INDEPENDENT KNOWLEDGE THAT SHE WAS IN FULL RIGOR WITHOUT TOUCHING THE BODY?

A: BY OBSERVING THE CORONER'S INVESTIGATOR EXAMINE THE BODY.

Q: SO YOU STOOD THERE AND WATCHED THEM; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, IN THAT CONNECTION YOU HAVE SHARED WITH US THAT PART OF YOUR REGULATIONS AND PART OF THE LAPD MANUAL WOULD PROHIBIT AN OFFICER FROM TOUCHING THE BODY PRIOR TO THE ARRIVAL OF THE CORONER; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: UNDER MOST CIRCUMSTANCES. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN THE INVESTIGATOR MAY REQUEST THAT THE DETECTIVE ASSIST PERHAPS IN MOVING THE BODY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU OF COURSE NEVER TOUCHED THE BODY, RIGHT, BEFORE THE CORONER ARRIVED?

A: BEFORE THE CORONER ARRIVES, NO, I DON'T BELIEVE I DID.

Q: AND IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE -- I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS CASE?

A: YES.

Q: AND AS FAR AS YOU KNOW DETECTIVES VANNATTER, PHILLIPS NOR FUHRMAN TOUCHED THE BODY; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I NEVER SAW THEM TOUCH THE BODY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU AWARE THAT OFFICER RISKE, THE FIRST PATROLMAN ON THE SCENE, TOUCHED MR. GOLDMAN'S EYE? ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT?

A: ONLY THROUGH THE TESTIMONY OF OFFICER RISKE.

Q: AND WHERE DID YOU SEE THAT TESTIMONY OR HEAR THAT TESTIMONY?

A: I HEARD THAT TESTIMONY.

Q: WHERE DID YOU HEAR IT? WERE YOU HERE?

A: I WAS OBSERVING IT ON TELEVISION.

Q: SO YOU WERE WATCHING TELEVISION?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU REMEMBER HE SAID HE WENT AROUND AND TOUCHED MR. GOLDMAN'S FACE I GUESS IN THE AREA OF THE EYE?

A: I THOUGHT IT WAS THE EYEBALL, MAYBE.

Q: THE EYEBALL?

A: MAYBE I AM MISTAKEN.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND OTHER THAN THAT, DO YOU KNOW OF ANYONE WHO TOUCHED THESE PARTICULAR BODIES?

A: PRIOR TO THE ARRIVAL OF THE CORONER, I DON'T BELIEVE I SAW ANYONE DO THAT.

Q: NOW, YESTERDAY YOU SHARED WITH US YOUR BELIEF THAT THERE WAS NO LIVIDITY IN THE BODY OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WHILE AT THE SCENE. AND YOU RECALL THAT TESTIMONY?

A: I BELIEVE I TESTIFIED I DIDN'T OBSERVE ANY, THERE DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE ANY LIVIDITY.

Q: CAN YOU TELL THE COURT AND JURY WHAT IS LIVIDITY?

A: LIVIDITY IS A SINKING OF THE BLOOD IN THE BODY AFTER DEATH TO THE LOWEST POINT OF THE BODY AND THIS IS CAUSED BY A GRAVITATIONAL PULL. POSTMORTEM LIVIDITY WILL USUALLY BECOME FIXED IN THREE TO FOUR HOURS AFTER DEATH AND REMAIN FIXED.

Q: AND IS IT YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT YOU SAW NO LIVIDITY IN THE BODY OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: THAT IS MY RECOLLECTION, YES.

Q: YOU RECALL THAT WHEN SHE WAS LAYING ON HER SIDE THERE WAS A PURPLEISH COLOR IN HER FACE, THAT YOU NOTICED CERTAIN PORTIONS OF HER BODY THAT WERE DIFFERENT COLORS?

A: I DIDN'T MAKE ANY CLOSE OBSERVATION ON LIVIDITY.

Q: DID YOU AT ANY TIME SEE HER BODY WHEN THE BLACK DRESS SHE WAS WEARING WAS IN ANY WAY PULLED UP SO IT WOULD REVEAL HER BODY

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

THE WITNESS: I MAY HAVE.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND DO YOU RECALL SEEING LIVIDITY OR ANY DISCOLORATION OF THE SKIN AT THAT POINT?

A: I DON'T RECALL SEEING ANYTHING THAT I WOULD CALL MARKED LIVIDITY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHEN YOU SAY "MARKED LIVIDITY," DID YOU SEE ANY LIVIDITY AT ALL, SIR, AS YOU THINK ABOUT IT NOW? AND YOU CAN FEEL FREE TO LOOK AT YOUR NOTES IF YOU HAVE NOTES IN THAT REGARD.

A: I DON'T RECALL SEEING ANY LIVIDITY. THAT IS NOT SAY THAT IT WASN'T THERE. THAT IS TO SAY THAT THAT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT I PARTICULARLY LOOKED FOR.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, YESTERDAY YOU SHARED WITH US THAT YOU HAD -- THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT THE CORONER'S OFFICE HAD TAKEN A LIVER TEMPERATURE OF MISS NICOLE BROWN; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU RECORDED A NUMBER OF 82 FOR US AND YOU RECORDED THAT AS ABOUT 10:30 TO 10:40 A.M. ON JUNE 13; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I BELIEVE SO.

Q: NOW, IN ORDER TO TAKE A LIVER TEMPERATURE DID YOU SEE THE CORONER ACTUALLY USE A SCALPEL TO ACTUALLY TAKE THE LIVER TEMPERATURE IN THIS CASE? DID YOU SEE THAT?

A: THAT IS THE METHOD THAT IS NORMALLY EMPLOYED BY THEM, YES.

Q: SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, THE METHOD IS THAT -- THE LIVER IS SOMEWHERE UNDER THE DIAPHRAGM, UNDER THE RIB CAGE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: IT IS A LITTLE LOWER THAN THAT, BUT YES.

Q: AND IN ORDER TO TAKE THIS LIVER TEMPERATURE THEY HAVE TO MAKE AN INCISION, PUT A HOLE IN THERE AND THEY TAKE THE TEMPERATURE THAT WAY; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: NOW, WERE YOU PRESENT WHEN THIS HAPPENED?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: FOR EITHER ONE OF THE BODIES?

A: I WAS PRESENT FOR MR. GOLDMAN. AS FAR AS MRS. SIMPSON, I BELIEVE THAT WAS DONE IN THE VAN, SO I DIDN'T ACTUALLY OBSERVE THAT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO WITH REGARD TO MRS. SIMPSON -- AND YOU WERE TOLD BY SOMEBODY THAT THIS WAS DONE OR YOU WERE JUST TOLD THE RESULTS?

A: NO. IT IS MY RECOLLECTION I BELIEVE I -- I REQUESTED OF THE INVESTIGATOR TO DO A LIVER TEMP. I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS DONE IMMEDIATELY WHEN THE BODY WAS REMOVED.

Q: AND SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, WHY DID YOU WANT TO HAVE A LIVER TEMPERATURE DONE, SIR?

A: IT COULD BE AN INDICATOR TO ASSIST ONE IN ESTABLISHING AN APPROXIMATE TIME OF DEATH.

Q: IN FACT, IN YOUR TWENTY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, YOU HAVE ALMOST ALWAYS TRIED TO GET LIVER TEMPERATURE WHERE POSSIBLE, WHERE YOU ARE ON THE SCENE WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME AFTER WHAT YOU BELIEVE IS THE TIME OF DEATH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE APPEARANCE OF THE BODY. AS AN EXAMPLE, ONE WOULDN'T WANT TO NECESSARILY DO THAT IF YOU HAD A DECOMPOSED BODY OR A BLOATED BODY.

Q: I UNDERSTAND THAT.

A: UNDER -- UNDER MOST CIRCUMSTANCES, IF YOU CAN GET A LIVER TEMPERATURE, THEN THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO THAT IS A NORMAL THING UNDER MOST CIRCUMSTANCES. AND IN THIS INSTANCE, WITH REGARD TO MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, YOU WERE NOT PRESENT. AND DO YOU KNOW HOW THE LIVER TEMPERATURE WAS ACTUALLY TAKEN? DO YOU KNOW THAT FOR A FACT?

A: AGAIN, I DON'T RECALL OBSERVING IT MYSELF.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, A COUPLE DAYS LATER, ON THE 14TH OR THEREABOUTS, OR DAY OR SO LATER, YOU ATTENDED AN AUTOPSY IN THIS MATTER, DID YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: AND SO YOU WERE PRESENT WHEN THESE BODIES WERE AUTOPSIED; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT IS CORRECT.

Q: AND AT THAT TIME DID YOU SEE ANY KIND OF A ROUND HOLE IN THE BODY AT OR ABOUT THE PLACE WHERE THE LIVER WOULD BE, DO YOU REMEMBER, ON MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: I WOULDN'T HAVE LOOKED FOR ONE, SO I DON'T RECALL SEE ONE.

Q: SO YOU DON'T RECALL ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: SO AT ANY RATE, WITHOUT SEEING THIS, YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THE LIVER TEMPERATURE WAS 82 BY THE CORONER'S INVESTIGATOR, MS. RATCLIFFE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO MR. GOLDMAN, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT THAT -- LET ME SEE IF I UNDERSTAND THE SEQUENCE OF EVENTS. SOME SHEETS WERE PLACED DOWN UNDER THESE BODY; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: NO. THE -- THERE WAS A PLASTIC SHEET PLACED OUT ON THE WALKWAY.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: AND THE BODIES WERE MOVED ONTO THE PLASTIC SHEET WHERE THE -- WHERE THEY WERE EXAMINED FOR SUCH THINGS AS RIGOR MORTIS AND LIVER TEMPERATURE AND THESE TYPES OF THINGS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AFTER THE EXAMINATION WAS CONCLUDED WITH REGARD TO MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, WAS THE SHEET LEFT THERE AND THE BODY WAS TAKEN AWAY?

A: NO. THE PLASTIC SHEET THAT SHE WAS ON REMAINED WITH HER. SHE WAS WRAPPED IN THAT SHEET.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WAS THERE SOME OTHER KIND OF SHEET LEFT THERE UNDER THE PLASTIC SHEET AFTER THE BODY WAS TAKEN AWAY?

A: THERE WAS A LIGHT COTTON BLANKET THAT WAS THERE, YES.

Q ALL RIGHT. AND THAT LIGHT COTTON BLANKET HAD BEEN PUT DOWN AT WHAT TIME, IF YOU RECALL?

A: I DON'T RECALL. IT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE BEEN SOMETIME AROUND 7:30 A.M. PERHAPS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AFTER YOU HAD COME BACK FROM THE ROCKINGHAM RESIDENCE, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW -- AND THEN AFTER MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S BODY HAD BEEN MOVED, THEN MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY WAS LIFTED AND PUT SOMEWHERE IN THAT AREA, SOMEWHERE NEAR WHERE HER BODY HAD BEEN? IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WAS HE PUT -- THERE WAS A PLASTIC SHEET PUT AROUND HIS BODY ALSO?

A: THE PLASTIC SHEET WAS LAID DOWN FIRST ON THE WALKWAY AND HE WAS PLACED ON TOP OF THAT SHEET.

Q: DID YOU AT ALL ASSIST THE CORONER'S REPRESENTATIVES IN MOVING THAT BODY OUT OF THIS VERY SMALL AREA WE DESCRIBED YESTERDAY OVER ONTO THE SHEET, MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY?

A: I DON'T RECALL IF I ASSISTED THEM OR NOT. I DON'T BELIEVE SO, BECAUSE OF THE CONFINED SPACE.

Q: THE SMALL SPACE?

A: I MAY HAVE ASSISTED IN SOME SLIGHT WAY, BUT I DON'T RECALL.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WITH REGARD TO MR. GOLDMAN, NOW WERE YOU PRESENT WHEN THE LIVER TEMPERATURE WAS TAKEN?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT DID YOU -- WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DID YOU SEE THE CORONER DO IN TAKING HIS LIVER TEMPERATURE?

A: MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT IT WAS TAKEN IN THE CONVENTIONAL WAY.

Q: AND BY THAT WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "CONVENTIONAL WAY"?

A: THERE WAS A CUT MADE AROUND THE AREA AND THE THERMOMETER WAS INSERTED, TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION.

Q: AND AS YOU SIT HERE NOW CAN YOU VISUALIZE THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENING? THINK BACK.

A: I RECALL SEEING THE -- I WAS DOING SEVERAL THINGS WHILE THIS WAS GOING ON. I WAS AWARE THAT IT WAS GOING ON. MY ONLY VIVID RECOLLECTION IS OF THE THERMOMETER IN THE BODY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU RECALL SEEING THE THERMOMETER STUCK IN THE BODY?

A: I RECALL SEEING IT IN THERE, YES.

Q: OKAY. AND WHAT WAS THE LIVER TEMPERATURE OF MR. GOLDMAN THAT YOU RECEIVED?

A: I BELIEVE THAT WAS ALSO --

Q: IF YOU NEED YOUR NOTES AT ANY POINT, LET US KNOW.

A: OKAY. I BELIEVE THAT WAS ALSO 82 DEGREES.

Q: 82 DEGREES?

A: YES.

Q: AND THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE WAS ABOUT THE SAME AS YOU TOLD US YESTERDAY?

A: YES, 70 DEGREES.

Q: 70 DEGREES ON JUNE 13?

A: YES.

Q: BY THE WAY, DID YOU EVER HAVE OCCASION, DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION, TO DETERMINE THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AT ABOUT BETWEEN 11:00 AND TWELVE O'CLOCK P.M. ON JUNE 12?

A: I MAY WELL HAVE. I REQUESTED VARIOUS RECORDS FROM I BELIEVE THE NATIONAL WEATHER BUREAU, AND WITHOUT CHECKING THOSE, I COULDN'T TELL YOU JUST HOW FAR THEY WENT BACK.

Q: WELL, DO YOU HAVE SOME NOTES THAT WILL REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION IN THAT REGARD?

A: I HAVE A WEATHER SERVICE REPORT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. CAN YOU GET THAT FOR US? CAN WE GET THAT FOR YOU?

A: FINE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, WHERE DO WE LOOK?

A: WELL, IT MIGHT TAKE A MOMENT HERE.

MR. COCHRAN: WELL, IF THE COURT WOULD ALLOW, I WILL ASK.

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE WITNESS: I HAVE IN FRONT OF ME THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE REPORT.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

THE WITNESS: CONSISTING OF SEVERAL PAGES DATED AUGUST 10, 1994. I ALSO HAVE A NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE REPORT DATED JUNE 12, 1994. THERE ARE QUITE A FEW FIGURES ON HERE. IT MAY TAKE A MOMENT TO -- IS THAT 11:00 P.M.?

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: BETWEEN 11:00 AND TWELVE MIDNIGHT ON JUNE 12?

A: HERE WE GO.

THE COURT: DO YOU NEED A STRAIGHT EDGE, DETECTIVE LANGE?

THE WITNESS: WELL, I THINK I HAVE IT HERE, YOUR HONOR. IT APPEARS THAT AT 2351, WHICH WOULD BE 11:51 P.M., THE TEMPERATURE WAS 64 DEGREES.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN YOU COMPARE THIS WITH THIS OTHER GAUGE YOU HAVE FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, SIR?

THE COURT: DETECTIVE LANGE, YOU ARE LOSING YOUR MICROPHONE.

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

THE WITNESS: AT THE SANTA MONICA STATION ON THE OTHER REPORT STATES THAT AT 11:46 P.M., 66 DEGREES.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND THE FIRST ONE THAT YOU READ, IS THAT FOR LOS ANGELES OR SANTA MONICA OR BRENTWOOD OR DO YOU KNOW?

A: I BELIEVE IT IS LAX, BUT I WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE-CHECK HERE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO CAN WE -- AND YOU WERE AROUND THAT MORNING, HAVING GOTTEN UP AND COME FROM YOUR HOME, SO WOULD YOU -- WOULD YOU BELIEVE THAT THE TEMPERATURE WAS PROBABLY SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 64 TO 66, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN, SAY, 11:00 AND MIDNIGHT ON JUNE 12?

A: I --

Q: WOULD THAT BE A FAIR STATEMENT?

A: I WOULD SAY THAT WAS FAIR, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, SO WITH REGARD TO MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY, YOU WERE THEN GIVEN THIS 82 LIVER TEMPERATURE AND THE AMBIENT TEMPERATURE WAS 70 AND THEN HIS BODY WAS THEN MOVED FROM THE LOCATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, THESE BODIES WERE MOVED FROM THE BUNDY LOCATION BY THE CORONER'S REPRESENTATIVES ABOUT WHAT TIME ON JUNE 13, 1994?

A: APPROXIMATELY 10:30 OR 10:40 A.M.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW --

A: PERHAPS A LITTLE BEFORE THAT.

Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO MR. GOLDMAN'S SHOES, CAN YOU DESCRIBE FOR THE JURY THE KIND OF SHOES HE WAS WEARING?

A: I WOULD CALL THEM CLOTH TYPE ATHLETIC BOOTS. THEY WERE -- THE BOTTOMS WERE RUBBER. APPEARED TO BE RUBBER. THEY APPEARED TO BE SOME TYPE OF ATHLETIC BOOTS, AND IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, THERE WAS A -- A CLOTH UPPER PART THAT WENT ALL THE WAY TO MID-CALF PERHAPS.

Q: AND THEY HAD SOME KIND OF A PATTERNED SOLE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I BELIEVE SO.

Q: NOW, IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION YOU HAD OCCASION, DID YOU NOT, TO TRY AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT YOU SAW THE PATTERN THAT WAS DISPLAYED ON MR. GOLDMAN'S SHOES, WHETHER OR NOT YOU SAW THAT PATTERN IN ANY OF THAT BLOOD, WHETHER YOU HAD ANY BLOODY FOOTPRINTS FROM HIS SHOES? YOU CHECKED THAT, DIDN'T YOU?

A: I MAY HAVE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU DIDN'T FIND ANY PATTERN THAT MATCHED MR. GOLDMAN'S SHOES IN ANY OF THAT BLOOD THERE THAT DAY, DID YOU?

A: IF I HAD, I WOULD HAVE NOTED IT.

Q: AND YOU DIDN'T FIND ANY, DID YOU?

A: NO.

Q: SO AS FAR AS THE FACTS THAT EVENING, WE KNOW YOU WEREN'T THERE, SO WE HAVE TO THEORIZE ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS? IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, THAT IS ARGUMENTATIVE.

MR. COCHRAN: WELL, THAT IS PRELIMINARY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU.

THE COURT: YOU CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.

THE WITNESS: I GENERALLY WOULD NOT THEORIZE. I WOULD GO WITH THE EVIDENCE.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. BUT I'M SAYING WITH REGARD TO WHO WAS KILLED FIRST, YOU WERE NOT THERE, WERE YOU?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO IF YOU SPECULATE AS TO SOMETHING, IT IS -- THAT IS A THEORY, ISN'T IT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, THAT IS ARGUMENTATIVE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MS. CLARK: CONCLUSION.

THE WITNESS: AS FAR AS WHO WAS KILLED FIRST?

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: YES.

A: IT WOULD BE SPECULATION BECAUSE I MIGHT HAVE TWO OR THREE VERSIONS OF WHAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED, ACCORDING TO THE EVIDENCE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS THERE IS ONLY ONE BODY THAT WILL MAKE THAT DETERMINATION IN THIS CASE, ISN'T THAT RIGHT, AND THAT IS THE TWELVE PEOPLE OVER THERE; IS THAT CORRECT?

MS. CLARK: SAME OBJECTION.

THE COURT: THAT IS ARGUMENTATIVE.

MR. COCHRAN: ARGUMENTATIVE.

THE COURT: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

Q: NOW, SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, THE PATTERNS ON MR. GOLDMAN'S SHOES, YOU DID NOT FIND THOSE PATTERNS IN ANY OF THAT BLOOD WHICH WAS VERY PLENTIFUL THERE AT THE SCENE AT BUNDY; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: THERE WAS PLENTY OF BLOOD, YES.

Q: AND YOU DID NOT FIND THE PATTERN OF THOSE SHOES; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. COCHRAN: IF I WERE TO SHOW YOU -- SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, I WOULD LIKE TO MARK AN EXHIBIT, COUNSEL.

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

THE COURT: 1028.

MR. COCHRAN: WHAT IS OUR NEXT ONE?

THE COURT: 1028.

(DEFT'S 1028 FOR ID = PHOTOGRAPH)

MR. COCHRAN: I HAVE SHOWN THIS TO COUNSEL. MAY I APPROACH THE WITNESS?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

MR. COCHRAN: I HAVE WHAT PURPORTS TO BE A WHITE PATTERNED ATHLETIC SHOE.

Q: AND I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE THIS BEFORE DETECTIVE LANGE AND ASK HIM, DOES THAT APPEAR TO YOU TO BE A FAIR PORTRAYAL OF THE BOTTOM OF MR. GOLDMAN'S SHOE THAT APPEARED AT THE CORONER'S OFFICE THERE WHERE THAT PICTURE WAS ALLEGEDLY TAKEN?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE THIS WAS TAKEN AT THE CORONER'S OFFICE, SIR.

Q: WHERE WAS IT TAKEN?

A: THIS APPEARS TO BE TAKEN AT THE CRIME SCENE.

Q: OKAY.

A: YES, THAT APPEARS TO BE MR. GOLDMAN'S RIGHT FOOT, THE BOTTOM OF HIS SHOE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND DO YOU WANT TO CHECK ANY NOTES TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU DID NOT SEE OR FIND THAT PATTERN ANYWHERE? ARE YOU PRETTY SURE ABOUT THAT?

A: I DON'T RECALL SEEING THAT PATTERN.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: I HAVE SEVERAL PAGES OF NOTES. I COULD REVIEW THEM, I SUPPOSE, BUT I DON'T RECALL SEEING THAT THERE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IF DURING THE BREAK, IF YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND ON THAT OR CHANGE YOUR TESTIMONY, YOU WILL LET US KNOW?

A: I CERTAINLY WILL.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WITH REGARD TO -- AND THIS PICTURE -- PICTURE HERE, 1028, WAS, AS BEST YOU CAN TELL, TAKEN AT THE SCENE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THERE IS A PERSON DRESSED IN BLUE WHO HAS A GLOVE ON. DO YOU RECALL SEEING ONE OF THE CORONER'S REPRESENTATIVES WITH A GLOVE ON?

A: YES.

Q: THAT MORNING?

A: YES.

Q: DID -- WERE YOU ABLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE CORONERS, IN MOVING THE BODY, GOT OR TOUCHED MR. GOLDMAN'S SHOES WITH THE BLOOD THAT WAS THERE? DO YOU RECALL THAT?

A: I'M NOT SURE I'M CLEAR ON YOUR QUESTION.

Q: AT ANY POINT WHEN YOU WERE AT THE SCENE, WHEN THE CORONER'S REPRESENTATIVES MOVED MR. GOLDMAN'S BODY FROM ONE LOCATION TO THE OTHER, DID YOU SEE THEM HAVE HIS SHOES COME IN CONTACT WITH ANY OF THAT BLOOD THAT WAS THERE ON THE SIDEWALK AND AROUND?

A: I DON'T RECALL EVER SEEING THE SHOES COME IN CONTACT WITH ANY BLOOD.

Q: YOU DID AT SOME POINT SEE STAINS ON THE SHOES, DID YOU NOT, BLOOD STAINS?

A: YES.

Q: BOTH ON THE TOP OF THE SHOES AND KIND OF UNDER AND TO THE SIDE OF THE SHOES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: I BELIEVE SO.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I HAVE JUST A SECOND, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I HAVE JUST ONE SECOND?

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. SORRY.

Q: WHILE AT THE SCENE THERE DID YOU EVER INSTRUCT THE CORONER'S REPRESENTATIVES TO BAG THE HANDS OF BOTH MR. SIMPSON AND MRS. -- MRS. SIMPSON AND MR. GOLDMAN?

A: NO.

Q: AND WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE OF BAGGING HANDS, REGARDING DECEDENTS?

A: IF THERE APPEARS TO BE PERHAPS EVIDENCE ON THE HANDS OR IF THERE WAS PERHAPS A FIREARM INVOLVED, THE CORONER'S INVESTIGATOR MAY IN FACT WANT TO BAG THE HANDS.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: I DON'T RECALL SEEING THAT IN THIS CASE.

Q: YOU DON'T RECALL SEEING THAT?

A: NO.

Q: AND IF THERE WERE EVIDENCE, LET'S SAY, UNDER MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S FINGERNAILS, BAGGING THE HANDS WOULD HELP PRESERVE ANY TRACE EVIDENCE THAT MIGHT BE UNDER HER FINGERNAILS OR ON HER HANDS; ISN'T THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS WITNESS' EXPERTISE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. YOU CAN ANSWER.

MS. CLARK: CALLS FOR SPECULATION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: AGAIN THAT WOULD BE SPECULATIVE ON MY PART. I --

Q: WELL, LET'S SEE NOW. YOU ARE A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE OF OVER TWENTY YEARS EXPERIENCE, RIGHT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, ARGUMENTATIVE.

MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS FOUNDATIONAL.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. THE WAY IT IS PHRASED IT IS ARGUMENTATIVE.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU ARE A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE OF TWENTY YEARS EXPERIENCE, AREN'T YOU?

A: YES.

Q: AND IN THAT CONNECTION YOU HAVE SEEN HANDS BAGGED BEFORE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES, I HAVE.

Q: AND IF YOU KNEW THERE WERE TRACE EVIDENCE UNDER THE FINGERNAILS OF MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO TRY AND PRESERVE THAT?

A: I BELIEVE THAT WAS PRESERVED WITHOUT THE BAGS IS WHAT I'M GETTING AT.

Q: THE QUESTION IS WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO TRY AND PRESERVE THAT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, ASKED AND ANSWERED.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: CERTAINLY.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AND WOULDN'T THE BEST WAY TO PRESERVE IT SO IT WOULDN'T BECOME DEGRADED OR CONTAMINATED IN ANY WAY WOULD BE TO PUT BAGS OVER THE HANDS SO THEY ARE PROTECTED FOR LATER ANALYSIS? ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: WELL, THAT IS ONE WAY. THERE ARE OTHER WAYS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHAT ARE THE OTHER WAYS?

A: TO WRAP THE BODY IN PLASTIC AND PRESERVE THE WHOLE BODY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DID THE CORONER'S OFFICE DO THAT IN THIS CASE?

A: YES.

Q: THEY WRAPPED THE BODY IN PLASTIC, BOTH BODIES?

A: PLASTIC -- THE BODIES WERE WRAPPED IN A PLASTIC SHEET INITIALLY, YES.

Q: BUT WHEN YOU WRAP THE BODY IN PLASTIC SHEETS, DON'T YOU THEN WRAP ALL OF THE CLOTHES AND ANY TRACE EVIDENCE ON THE CLOTHES IS ALL WRAPPED UP AND BROUGHT TOGETHER? ISN'T THAT ANOTHER DOWN SIDE OF THAT?

A: NO. THAT IS EXACTLY THE PURPOSE IN DOING THAT, TO KEEP EVERYTHING TOGETHER.

Q: I SEE. SO IN THIS CASE YOU ARE SAYING TO US THAT A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO BAGGING THE HANDS IS TO WRAP THESE BODIES IN PLASTIC?

MS. CLARK: SAME OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. BEYOND THIS WITNESS' EXPERTISE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED. OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I'M NOT NECESSARILY SAYING THAT. I'M SAYING THAT THERE ARE OTHER WAYS OF DOING THINGS --

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. BUT CERTAINLY BAGGING THE HANDS WOULD --

THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN, YOU NEED TO LET HIM FINISH HIS ANSWER.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. I'M SORRY. EXCUSE ME, YOUR HONOR.

Q: DID YOU FINISH?

A: I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD THAT THIS IS COMMON, VERY COMMON IN GUNSHOT CASES WHERE PERHAPS YOU WANT TO PRESERVE THE HANDS TO TAKE GUNSHOT RESIDUE EXAMINATIONS ON THE HANDS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, IN THIS CASE WE DIDN'T HAVE GUNSHOTS, SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU, IS THAT ONE OF THE WAYS OF PRESERVING TRACE EVIDENCE UNDER FINGERNAILS AND ON THE HAND WOULD HAVE BEEN TO BAG THE HANDS; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: I SUPPOSE ONE COULD SAY THAT.

Q: AND THAT WAS NOT DONE, WAS IT?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS.

Q: FOR EITHER MISS SIMPSON OR MR. GOLDMAN; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, YESTERDAY YOU HAD TOLD US IN YOUR DISCUSSION OF RIGOR MORTIS, YOU GAVE US, I BELIEVE, A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE RIGOR MORTIS TO BE AND I BELIEVE YOU TOLD US THAT YOU BELIEVE IT WAS COAGULATION OF PROTEINS IN THE BLOOD. DO YOU REMEMBER SAYING THAT YESTERDAY?

A: IT IS A STIFFENING OF THE MUSCLES IN THE BODY AFTER DEATH CAUSED BY A COAGULATION OF THE BLOOD IN THE MUSCLES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IS IT NOT TRUE THAT RIGOR MORTIS IS CAUSED BY THE COAGULATION OF PROTEINS IN MUSCLE AND NOT -- NOT PROTEINS IN THE BLOOD? IT IS THE COAGULATION OF PROTEINS IN THE MUSCLE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS IS BEYOND THE WITNESS' EXPERTISE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: BLOOD AND BLOOD THAT WOULD BE IN THE MUSCLE TISSUE.

Q: IN THE MUSCLE TISSUE?

A: YES.

MS. CLARK: I GUESS NOT. WITHDRAWN.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU NOTICE ANY KIND OF PURPLEISH COLOR TO MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S FACE AS SHE LAID AT THE SCENE THERE?

A: I DON'T RECALL ANY PURPLEISH COLOR.

Q: YOU DON'T RECALL THAT?

A: NO.

Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO MR. GOLDMAN, BECAUSE OF THE STRUGGLE HE WAS INVOLVED IN, WASN'T THAT AN INDICATION TO YOU, AS A SEASONED HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR, THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO PRESERVE ANY POSSIBLE TRACE EVIDENCE UNDER HIS FINGERNAILS ALSO?

A: THAT WOULD BE A CONSIDERATION, YES.

Q: AND DID YOU THINK ABOUT THAT THAT MORNING?

A: CERTAINLY.

Q: AND DID YOU THEN INSTRUCT THE CORONER TO BAG THE HANDS?

A: NO.

Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE CORONER, WE KNOW THAT THE CORONER'S REPRESENTATIVES GOT THERE AT ABOUT 9:10 AND 9:20; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: APPROXIMATELY, YES.

Q: AT WHAT POINT DID YOU INSTRUCT OR DID YOU CALL FOR THE CRIMINALIST TO COME TO THE SCENE?

A: I DID NOT SPECIFICALLY REQUEST THE CRIMINALIST TO THE SCENE. THE CRIMINALIST HAD BEEN ORIGINALLY DISPATCHED TO THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION AND IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WHEN THE CRIMINALIST WAS THROUGH AT ROCKINGHAM THEY WOULD PROCEED TO BUNDY.

Q: LET ME SEE IF I UNDERSTAND THIS. THE CRIMINALIST IN THIS CASE WENT TO ROCKINGHAM FIRST BEFORE THEY CAME TO THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: WHO CALLED THEM TO COME TO THE ROCKINGHAM CRIME SCENE -- ROCKINGHAM SCENE?

A: I BELIEVE THAT WAS DONE BY MY PARTNER.

Q: AND WHAT YOUR PARTNER'S NAME?

A: VANNATTER.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, SO THERE IS NO CONFUSION, AS BETWEEN YOU AND VANNATTER, WITH REGARD TO TIME IN GRADE AS A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE, IS HE SENIOR TO YOU?

A: NOT AS A HOMICIDE DETECTIVE, BUT TIME AND GRADE AND RANK HE IS PERHAPS THREE MONTHS SENIOR TO ME IN RANK.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO HE OUTRANKS YOU AT THE SCENE THERE?

A: THAT IS NOT REALLY THE WAY IT WORKS.

Q: WELL, I'M JUST ASKING YOU FROM THE STANDPOINT OF TIME AND GRADE IN THIS POSITION, FIRST OF ALL?

A: AS FAR AS OUR RANK STRUCTURE, YES, BY THREE MONTHS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. BY THREE MONTHS?

A: HE WAS PROMOTED THREE MONTHS BEFORE I WAS.

Q: OKAY. NOW, SO THAT THE JURY IS CLEAR, THOUGH, AS BETWEEN YOU AND VANNATTER, WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF THIS INVESTIGATION ON THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE 12, JUNE 13 -- JUNE 13 ACTUALLY?

A: IT IS A RESPONSIBILITY THAT WOULD BE SHARED BY BOTH PARTNERS.

Q: SO YOU WERE CO-LEADERS?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU BOTH HAD EQUAL RESPONSIBILITY?

A: INITIALLY AT A CRIME SCENE THAT IS THE WAY IT STARTS OUT. IT DEPENDS. ALL CRIME SCENES ARE DIFFERENT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR CRIME SCENE. WHEN THIS CASE STARTED OUT, HE ARRIVED FIRST; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: HE WAS SENIOR IN GRADE, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THAT WILL NEVER CHANGE? THOSE THINGS WILL NEVER CHANGE, WILL THEY?

A: NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WITH REGARD TO HOW THE INVESTIGATION OF THIS CASE HAS CONTINUED, HAVE YOU CONTINUED AS CO-LEAD INVESTIGATORS IN THIS CASE?

A: YES.

Q: TO THIS DAY?

A: WELL, THE -- THE ROLES HAVE SOMEWHAT CHANGED AROUND A BIT, BUT BASICALLY THAT IS WHAT WE DO, WE WORK AS PARTNERS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU HAVE WORKED AS PARTNERS FOR HOW LONG?

A: WITH VANNATTER?

Q: YES, WITH VANNATTER?

A: I WANT TO SAY AS A REGULAR PARTNER APPROXIMATELY FOUR TO FIVE YEARS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHAT TIME DID THE CRIMINALISTS ARRIVE AT THE ROCKINGHAM SCENE, IF YOU KNOW, THAT MORNING, JUNE 13?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 10:10 A.M.

Q: AND THAT IS AT ROCKINGHAM?

A: I'M SORRY. I WASN'T AT ROCKINGHAM WHEN THE CRIMINALISTS ARRIVED.

Q: SO YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TIME THEY GOT THERE. WOULD THE LOG OR REVIEW OF THE LOG ASSIST YOU IN THAT REGARD AND REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION?

A: CERTAINLY.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

MR. COCHRAN: I AM PLACING BEFORE THE WITNESS, YOUR HONOR, DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NO. 1006 AND I WILL ASK HIM TO READ IT TO HIMSELF AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT A REVIEW OF THAT DOCUMENT WOULD REFRESH HIS RECOLLECTION REGARDING WITH TIME THE CRIMINALISTS ARRIVED AT THE ROCKINGHAM SCENE.

THE WITNESS: (WITNESS COMPLIES.) I BELIEVE THIS IS THE BUNDY LOG YOU HAVE HERE, SIR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. THAT IS THE BUNDY LOG?

A: YES.

Q: IS THERE A ROCKINGHAM LOG?

A: I AM NOT AWARE OF ONE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN A ROCKINGHAM LOG?

A: I AM NOT AWARE OF ONE.

Q: DO YOU HAVE ANY NOTES THAT WILL REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION WITH REGARD TO WHAT TIME THEY ARRIVED THERE?

A: I WASN'T THERE.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: SO I WOULDN'T --

Q: LET'S TRACE BACK. YOU ARRIVED AT ROCKINGHAM AT ABOUT 5:00 OR 5:00 A.M. IN THE MORNING?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 5:05 A.M.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU LEFT ABOUT 6:35, 6:45 IN THE MORNING?

A: ABOUT 6:45, YES.

Q: AND WHEN YOU -- WHEN YOU LEFT AT 6:45 THEY HAD NOT ARRIVED?

A: THE CRIMINALISTS?

Q: THE CRIMINALISTS.

A: THEY HAD NOT ARRIVED, CORRECT.

Q: HAD THEY BEEN SUMMONED AT THAT POINT?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS ABOUT THE TIME I LEFT THAT I WAS TOLD A CRIMINALIST WAS GOING TO COME BY THE LOCATION TO DO A PRESUMPTIVE TEST ON THE VEHICLE AND THEN PROCEED TO BUNDY RIGHT AFTER THAT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHO TOLD YOU THAT?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS VANNATTER.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND VANNATTER REMAINED AT THE -- AT THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: WHEN YOU WENT BACK OVER TO BUNDY?

A: CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO IT WAS SOME TIME AFTER 6:45 THIS MORNING THAT THEY ARRIVED; IS THAT CORRECT, AT ROCKINGHAM?

A: THAT WOULD BE MY ASSUMPTION, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND SINCE YOU WEREN'T THERE YOU DON'T KNOW THE EXACT TIME, BUT WE KNOW THAT THEY ARRIVED AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE AT WHAT TIME?

A: I BELIEVE THAT WAS APPROXIMATELY 10:10 A.M.

Q: AND THE BODIES WERE STILL THERE AT THAT POINT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN THE CRIMINALISTS ARRIVED -- LET'S GIVE THESE CRIMINALISTS SOME NAMES. YOU SAW MAZZOLLA, DID YOU NOT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU SAW FUNG? YOU SAW TWO OF THEM; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN THEY ARRIVED AT THE BUNDY CRIME SCENE DID YOU GIVE THEM SOME INSTRUCTIONS?

A: NOT IMMEDIATELY, BUT SHORTLY THEREAFTER, YES.

Q: AND AS YOU HAD DONE WITH RATCLIFFE, THE CORONER'S INVESTIGATOR, YOU WOULD TAKE -- YOU TOOK RATCLIFFE AROUND THE SCENE AND ADVISED HER OF WHAT YOU HAD THERE AND WHAT YOU HAD FOUND; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: AT THE LOCATIONS OF THE BODIES AND JUST SUBSEQUENTLY IN THE HOUSE IN THE UPPER BEDROOM, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WITH REGARD TO THE ARRIVAL OF THE CRIMINALISTS, DID YOU TAKE THEM AROUND AND SHOW THEM WHAT YOU HAD THERE?

A: YES.

Q: AND IT IS IMPORTANT, IS IT NOT, DETECTIVE, FOR YOU TO COLLECT APPROPRIATELY EVIDENCE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO IT CAN BE SUBJECTED TO ANALYSIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE? THAT IS APPROPRIATE, IS IT NOT?

A: WELL, IT WOULD BE PREFERABLE, BUT THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS HAPPEN.

Q: WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT. LET'S TALK ABOUT IT BEING PREFERABLE. YOU WOULD ALWAYS PREFER TO HAVE THE EVIDENCE COLLECTED AS SOON AS YOU SEE IT OR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: AGAIN, YOU WOULD PREFER THAT, BUT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT WAY.

Q: WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS: YOU SAID IN YOUR TESTIMONY YOU SAW SOME BLOOD SPOTS ON THE BACK -- ON THE REAR GATE THERE AT BUNDY, ON JUNE 13, 1994; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: THOSE SPOTS HAD BEEN POINTED OUT TO YOU BY DETECTIVE PHILLIPS?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU IN TURN POINTED THEM OUT TO MR. FUNG?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: DID YOU DIRECT MR. FUNG TO COLLECT THOSE PARTICULAR BLOOD SPOTS?

A: I DIRECTED HIM TO DO THAT AND I BELIEVE I MENTIONED TO CHECK THE ENTIRE GATE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU EXPECTED THAT TO BE DONE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, IT WAS NOT DONE ON JUNE 13TH, WAS IT?

A: NO.

Q: IN FACT, IT WASN'T DONE ON JUNE 14TH, WAS IT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND NEITHER THE 15TH?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. COCHRAN: I WON'T GO ANY FURTHER.

Q: IN FACT, IT WAS NOT DONE UNTIL JULY 3RD, THREE WEEKS LATER; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: SO DID FUNG COME BACK OUT THERE ON JULY 3RD? IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE -- THIS CRIME SCENE AT BUNDY HAD BEEN WASHED DOWN AT SOME POINT ON JUNE 13 OR JUNE 14; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: I AM AWARE THAT THE FRONT WALKWAY WAS WASHED DOWN.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WHAT DATE WAS THAT?

A: I DON'T KNOW. I ASSUMED IT WAS A DAY OR TWO AFTER THE CRIME SCENE WAS STRUCK.

Q: WOULD I BE SAFE IN SAYING IT WAS DONE -- IT WAS WASHED DOWN AT LEAST BY THE 14TH OF JUNE, SIR? WOULD THAT BE SAFE?

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: A DAY OR TWO AFTER JUNE 13TH WOULD BE THE 14TH OR 15TH, RIGHT?

A: I JUST ASSUMED THAT. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHEN IT WAS WASHED DOWN.

Q: ALL RIGHT. CERTAINLY THE CRIME SCENE ITSELF WAS BROKEN DOWN BY THREE O'CLOCK OR SO IN THE AFTERNOON ON THE 13TH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU READ THE LOG YESTERDAY, RIGHT?

A: RIGHT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. THAT MEANT THAT PEOPLE WERE FREE TO GO AND COME WITH REGARD TO THOSE PREMISES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: NO.

Q: THAT MEANT THAT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAD FINISHED THEIR BUSINESS AT THAT LOCATION; ISN'T THAT CORRECT, SIR?

A: NO.

Q: SIR, IF YOU HAD KNOWN THAT FUNG HAD NOT COLLECTED AND SOUGHT TO PRESERVE ANY BLOOD SPOTS THAT WERE ALLEGEDLY ON THIS BACK FENCE, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE RELEASED THAT CRIME SCENE, WOULD YOU HAVE?

A: I WOULDN'T HAVE.

Q: YOU WOULDN'T HAVE, WOULD YOU?

A: NO.

Q: OKAY. BUT IT WAS RELEASED ON THE 13TH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT.

A: NO, IT WAS NOT RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC.

Q: WELL -- LET'S SEE NOW. WAS THE CRIME SCENE RELEASED ON THE 13TH, SIR?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS IS ASKED AND ANSWERED.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: CRIME SCENE WAS SECURED. THE RESIDENCE WAS SECURED, THE GATES WERE LOCKED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WAS THE CRIME SCENE RELEASED ON THE 13TH, DETECTIVE LANGE?

A: WE COMPLETED OUR INITIAL CRIME SCENE INVESTIGATION ON THE 13TH, YES, BUT I GOT THE INFERENCE THAT YOU WERE TRYING TO SAY IT WAS OPENED TO THE PUBLIC AND THAT IS NOT THE CASE.

Q: YOU SHOULDN'T TRY TO GET ANY INFERENCES FROM MY QUESTIONS.

A: I APOLOGIZE.

Q: DON'T GET ANY INFERENCES. LET ME APPROACH AND ASK YOU, I WANT YOU TO READ WHAT YOU READ FOR MISS CLARK. WHAT TIME WAS THAT CRIME SCENE RELEASED?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, THIS IS -- OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. THIS IS MISLEADING.

THE COURT: 352?

MS. CLARK: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE WITNESS: I BELIEVE --

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT.

THE WITNESS: THE LAST ENTRY IT IS, KIND OF WRITTEN OVER, IT APPEARS TO BE 1545 PERHAPS.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: 1545 ON JUNE 13 IS WHAT TIME?

A: 3:45 P.M.

Q: IN THE AFTERNOON, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: THAT MEANS YOU TOOK THOSE -- YOU TOOK THOSE TAPES THAT HAD BEEN AROUND THAT SCENE DOWN AT THAT POINT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THE OFFICER DID, YES.

Q: AND BETWEEN THAT TIME, 3:45, ON JUNE 13TH, AND JULY 3RD, 1994, DID YOU EVER GO BACK OUT TO THE SCENE BETWEEN THOSE DATES?

A: I BELIEVE I DID.

Q: WHAT DATE DID YOU GO BACK?

A: I BELIEVE I WAS THERE ON JUNE 23RD.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO THERE WAS A TEN-DAY PERIOD BETWEEN THE TIME YOU WERE THERE ON THE 13TH AND THE TIME YOU CAME BACK ON THE 23RD?

A: THAT WOULD BE TEN DAYS, BUT I'M NOT CLEAR ON WHETHER I MIGHT HAVE GONE BACK IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO DATES.

Q: DO YOU HAVE SOME NOTES THAT WILL HELP YOU IN THAT REGARD?

A: YES.

Q: CAN YOU LOOK AT THEM?

A: CERTAINLY.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

THE WITNESS: MY NOTES INDICATE I WAS AT THE LOCATION ON JUNE 16TH, BUT I DIDN'T ENTER THE PREMISES. I JUST DID A -- A MILEAGE CHECK FROM THE LOCATION.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN I ASK YOU A QUESTION? WHILE YOU WERE THERE ON JUNE 16 --

A: CERTAINLY.

Q: -- DID YOU NOTICE THAT THE BLOOD HAD BEEN WASHED DOWN?

A: NO.

Q: YOU DON'T RECALL OR YOU DIDN'T NOTICE IT?

A: IF THE BLOOD HAD BEEN WASHED DOWN ON THE FRONT WALKWAY?

Q: YES.

A: I DON'T RECALL MAKING THAT OBSERVATION.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: THAT IS NOT TO SAY THAT IT HADN'T BEEN DONE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

A: MY NOTES DO INDICATE I WAS THERE ON JUNE 23RD AT 10:15 A.M.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WERE YOU THERE AFTER JUNE 23RD, BEFORE JULY 3RD? WERE YOU THERE ON JULY 3RD, BY THE WAY?

A: YES, I WAS.

Q: WERE THERE ANY VISIT BETWEEN THE 23RD OF JUNE AND JULY 3RD?

A: THERE WAS A VISIT ON JUNE 27TH.

Q: ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER VISITS?

A: NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU HAVE TOLD US ALL THE VISITS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: AS REFLECTED BY MY NOTES, THOSE ARE THE ONLY ONES I HAVE HERE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. BUT DESPITE ALL THOSE VISITS, THIS BLOOD THAT WAS ALLEGEDLY ON THIS BACK GATE WAS NOT COLLECTED ON ANY OF THOSE DATES THAT YOU CAME THERE, ON THE 17TH, 23RD, THE 27TH; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

Q: IT WAS NOT COLLECTED, WAS IT?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS THE 16TH, BUT THAT IS CORRECT.

Q: 16TH. AND IT WAS FINALLY COLLECTED ON JULY 3RD, 1994; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND WHAT TIME OF DAY WAS THAT?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS IN THE MORNING.

Q: WERE YOU PRESENT?

A: APPROXIMATELY 10:00 A.M.

Q: WERE YOU PRESENT?

A: YES.

Q: WITH REGARD TO BLOOD SPOTS AND BLOOD DROPS, YOU CAN'T TELL THE DATE THAT WAS PLACED THERE, CAN YOU?

A: YOU CAN'T REALLY TELL THE AGE, NO. MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. I AM GOING TO SHOW YOU A PHOTOGRAPH OF MR. FUNG. THIS, COUNSEL, IS DEFENDANT'S 1007. THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH D-1007, YOUR HONOR, AND I WANT TO PLACE IT BEFORE THE DETECTIVE AT THIS POINT.

Q: WHO IS DEPICTED IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH, SIR?

A: IT IS A CRIMINALIST FUNG.

Q: AND HE IS POINTING TO A GATE. IS THAT THE REAR GATE AT BUNDY?

A: YES.

Q: AND, UMM, WHAT DATE WAS THAT PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN, IF YOU KNOW?

A: THAT WOULD BE ON JULY 3RD.

Q: SO THIS WAS THE PHOTOGRAPH OF JULY 3RD, 1994, WHEN FUNG WAS POINTING TO THE FENCE; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I PUT THIS ON THE ELMO, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: THIS IS D-1007.

THE COURT: MR. HARRIS, DO YOU HAVE A SHIELD?

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN YOU SEE THAT ON THE MONITOR?

A: YES.

Q: THAT IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF DENNIS FUNG, A CRIMINALIST, TAKEN ON JULY 3RD, 1994; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU WERE OUT THERE AT THAT LOCATION?

A: YES.

Q: YOU ARE AWARE THAT AFTER THE CRIME SCENE PERIMETER WAS TAKEN DOWN BY OFFICER JONES AND PERRIDINE, P-E-R-R-D-I-N-E, THEY HAD A NUMBER OF LOOKIE-LOOS AND OTHER TOURISTS FROM THE WORLD WHO CAME IN AND AROUND THAT LOCATION; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU ARE AWARE OF THAT, AREN'T YOU?

A: YES.

Q: YOU ALSO KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE PLACED FLOWERS ON THE WALKWAY AT VARIOUS PLACES AROUND THE BUNDY LOCATION? YOU ARE AWARE OF THAT ALSO, AREN'T YOU?

A: YES.

Q: BY THE WAY, WHEN DID YOU FIRST LEARN THAT NO BLOOD WAS ALLEGEDLY TAKEN FROM THE BACK GATE? WHEN DID YOU FIRST LEARN THAT?

A: ON THAT DATE, JULY 3RD.

Q: YOU WERE NOT AWARE OF IT ON ALL THOSE OTHER VISITS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND WITH REGARD TO THAT LOCATION -- MAY I HAVE JUST A SECOND, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES.

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

MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE ARE OVER AT THE SIDE BAR. WHAT ARE WE ARGUING OVER?

MR. COCHRAN: SORRY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: WHAT ARE WE FIGHTING OVER?

MR. COCHRAN: WE ARE NOT FIGHTING, YOUR HONOR. WE ARE SPIRITUAL AND WE ARE NOT FIGHTING. THERE IS A REPORT -- AND I'M GOING TO ASK MR. PAVELIC TO GO FOLLOW THIS UP ON THE PAGE FROM THEIR DISCOVERY -- BUT THERE IS A PROWLER IN AND AROUND 875 BUNDY STREET. I WANT TO ASK HIM IF THERE ARE PROWLERS, IF HE IS AWARE OF THE PROWLERS. SOMEONE SAID THEY WERE LOOKIE-LOOS. I MEAN, THEY DID NOT PRESERVE THE SCENE. I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY SAID, THEY CAN'T GET AROUND THIS. IT HAPPENED AT 2359 WHICH IS CLOSE TO MIDNIGHT.

THE COURT: MIDNIGHT.

MR. COCHRAN: THE QUESTION IS WHAT ARE THESE NUMBERS? PAVELIC SAYS HE THINKS IT IS 13TH, SO I TOLD HIM HE HAS GOT TO PROVE THAT, WHAT THE DATE IS, AND THAT IS ALL IT IS. THEY HAVE THESE TWO MALE BLACK SUSPECTS, I GUESS, BOTH WEARING WHITE BASEBALL CAPS, POSSIBLE FIVE-ELEVEN, SIX --

MR. BAILEY: THE WITNESS MIGHT BE ABLE TO READ THAT CODE.

MR. COCHRAN: I JUST WANT TO ESTABLISH PROWLERS AROUND THERE AND ALL KIND OF THINGS THAT HAPPENED IN BETWEEN THESE THREE WEEKS WHEN THEY DIDN'T COLLECT THIS.

MR. DARDEN: YOUR HONOR, THE DATE OF THIS -- THIS INDICATES THAT THE DATE IS THE 16TH OF JUNE.

MR. COCHRAN: IF HE CAN READ IT, THAT IS FINE.

MR. DARDEN: YEAH.

MR. COCHRAN: THAT IS BETWEEN THE 13TH AND JULY 3RD.

MS. CLARK: WAIT.

MR. COCHRAN: ONE PERSON AT A TIME.

MR. DARDEN: THAT IS THAT, SO?

MS. CLARK: THE PROBLEM IS THAT WHAT IT INDICATES IS THAT WHOEVER THE PERSON REPORTING HAS REFUSED TO LEAVE NAME AND NUMBER, THAT THERE WERE PEOPLE SEEN IN FRONT OF THE LOCATION, AROUND THE VEHICLE, IN FRONT OF LOCATION. AND WHAT JOHNNIE IS TRYING TO GET AT IS THE REAR GATE AND THERE IS NOTHING SHOWN ABOUT ANYBODY IN THE REAR OF THE LOCATION.

MR. COCHRAN: BUT --

MS. CLARK: VERY MISLEADING. HE DOESN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT DATE IT IS FOR.

MR. COCHRAN: THERE IS TWO PEOPLE TALKING, JUDGE.

MS. CLARK: HEARSAY ON HEARSAY HERE.

THE COURT: I AM NOT SURPRISED BY THIS KIND OF THING. YOU KNOW, THERE HAS BEEN -- THERE WERE PROBABLY A THOUSAND PEOPLE WHO STOPPED AND GOT OUT AND LOOKED AT THIS PLACE.

MR. COCHRAN: IF THEY WANT TO STIPULATE TO THAT, THAT IS FINE.

THE COURT: BUT THE QUESTION IS DID THIS -- WAS THE SCENE MAINTAINED AS A SECURE LOCATION OR WASN'T IT?

MR. SHAPIRO: WAS IT LOCKED?

MS. CLARK: YES, IT WAS.

MR. COCHRAN: HOW DO WE KNOW THAT?

THE COURT: WELL, SOMEBODY FROM THE FAMILY WILL COME AND SAY WE LOCKED UP.

MR. COCHRAN: YOU THINK THIS JURY IS GOING TO BUY THAT? I DON'T THINK THEY ARE. THAT IS BALONEY, JUDGE.

THE COURT: NO, NO, NO. I'M SAYING IT IS A RELATIVELY INCONSEQUENTIAL POINT, THOUGH. THE POINT IS THE POLICE LEFT SOMETIME ON THE 13TH.

MR. COCHRAN: YES.

THE COURT: THEY DIDN'T FIGURE OUT THAT THIS THING HADN'T BEEN COLLECTED UNTIL JULY 3RD AND IN THE INTERIM THERE WAS NOBODY -- YOU CAN JUST ASK HIM, BETWEEN THESE DATES WAS THERE ANY POLICE CARS OR ANY UNUSUAL SECURITY MAINTAINED THERE? NO, THERE WASN'T. YOU CAN ARGUE FROM THAT.

MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. BUT I ALSO WANT TO ASK WHETHER THERE WERE PROBLEMS IN AND AROUND THE LOCATION. THIS IS A PROBLEM.

THE COURT: BUT MR. COCHRAN, I'M NOT TELLING YOU NOT TO GO INTO THIS. I'M JUST SAYING THAT THE JURORS THEMSELVES KNOW ABOUT ALL THE LOOKIE-LOOS.

MR. COCHRAN: I UNDERSTAND THAT. I UNDERSTAND THAT.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, SO YOU ARE TELLING MR. COCHRAN -- YOU ARE GIVING HIM PERMISSION TO GO INTO HEARSAY ON HEARSAY INTO A REPORT HERE THAT IS TOTALLY UNSUBSTANTIATED?

THE COURT: THAT IS NOT WHAT I AM SAYING, MISS CLARK. WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IS PERSUADE HIM THAT THIS IS SO INCONSEQUENTIAL BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A THREE-WEEK TIME AT THAT TIME THAT THE CRIME SCENE WASN'T SECURED. THAT IS WHAT HE IS TRYING TO GET AT.

MR. DARDEN: HE IS TRYING TO GET OUT PROWLERS AND MEN IN BASEBALL CAPS.

MS. CLARK: THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, YOU MAY BE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT, BUT EVERYBODY HAS TO TRY THEIR CASES THE WAY THEY SEE THEM AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO ANY DETAILS. I WANT TO ESTABLISH IT WAS NOT SECURED, THERE WAS NO POLICE CARS AT THAT SCENE.

THE COURT: RIGHT.

MR. COCHRAN: THERE WAS A PROWLER CALL IN AND AROUND THAT LOCATION SOME TIME IN THE MONTH OF JUNE AFTER THE 13TH.

THE COURT: SO WHAT IS YOUR OBJECTION TO THAT?

MR. COCHRAN: WHAT IS THE OBJECTION TO THAT?

MS. CLARK: I'M ASKING YOU TO PRECLUDE COUNSEL FROM USING HEARSAY DOCUMENTS TO TALK TO -- TO CROSS-EXAMINE A WITNESS WHO HAS NOT -- HAS NO FAMILIARITY WITH THE EVENTS OR WITH THE REPORT OR WITH WHATEVER THE WITNESSES WERE WHO CALLED. YOU ARE ASKING -- YOU ARE ALLOWING HIM TO SHOW A DOCUMENT THAT CONTAINS HEARSAY ON HEARSAY ON HEARSAY OF OBSERVATIONS THAT ACTUALLY DO NOT GO TO ANYTHING PERTAINING TO THE STATED PURPOSE. IT IS IRRELEVANT. IT IS HEARSAY. IT IS UNRELIABLE. COUNSEL SIMPLY WANTS TO GET OUT SOME REPORT ABOUT BASEBALL CAPS AND HE WANTS TO READ --

THE COURT: SO YOU ARE SAYING AT THIS POINT THERE IS INADEQUATE FOUNDATION AND IT IS A 352 PROBLEM? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?

MS. CLARK: YES.

THE COURT: I WILL SUSTAIN THE OBJECTION.

MR. COCHRAN: WAIT A MINUTE, JUDGE.

MR. DARDEN: THE COURT HAS RULED.

MR. COCHRAN: I HADN'T BEEN HEARD. BOTH OF YOU GUYS TALKED AND THAT IS NOT FAIR. YOU ARE NOT --

MR. DARDEN: WE ARE ACCUSING YOU OF WHINING.

THE COURT: HOLD ON. HOLD ON. COUNSEL, COUNSEL, "HOLD ON" MEANS STOP. WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH -- I HAVE DISCUSSED THIS WITH YOU, MR. COCHRAN. YOU CAN ESTABLISH THE POINT THAT THIS PLACE WAS UNSECURED FOR THREE WEEKS. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT. BUT WHEN WE START GETTING INTO HEARSAY PEOPLE -- CALLS TO 911, WITHOUT ANY FURTHER FOUNDATION, THAT IS -- IT IS NOT GOING TO FLY.

MR. COCHRAN: CAN I ASK HIM IF HE IS AWARE OF THE 911 CALLS, PROWLERS IN AND AROUND THAT LOCATION?

THE COURT: YOU CAN ASK IF HE IS AWARE OF ANY INTRUSIONS.

MR. COCHRAN: IF HE IS AWARE OF.

MS. CLARK: ONLY THROUGH HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR. HE OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T WITNESS IT.

THE COURT: NOT NECESSARILY.

MS. CLARK: THEN HE SHOULD BE ASKED IF HE SAW ANY PROWLERS OR INTRUDERS.

THE COURT: LET'S SUPPOSE THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS, THE TAYLORS, SAID THERE WERE PEOPLE ALL DAY AND ALL NIGHT AND THEY COME IN AND TESTIFY, THE CONDO NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS?

MS. CLARK: THEN THAT WOULD BE FINE THEN, THEY CAN COME IN AND TESTIFY TO THAT, BUT HIS KNOWLEDGE OF THAT WOULD STILL BE HEARSAY.

MR. COCHRAN: I CAN REFRESH HIS RECOLLECTION, AS YOU SAID MANY TIMES, ON ANYTHING, YOUR HONOR.

MS. CLARK: I UNDERSTAND UNDER A PROP 115 PRELIM THAT IS ONE THING, BUT THIS WITNESS YOU ARE SAYING CAN COME IN AND REPORT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE TOLD? FINE, I'VE GOT A LOT OF THINGS I'VE GOT TO ASK HIM.

THE COURT: MISS CLARK, IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. I HAVE SUSTAINED YOUR OBJECTION AT THIS POINT. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE.

MS. CLARK: AT THIS POINT HE IS ASKING TO GET INTO HEARSAY BECAUSE YOU ARE PERMITTING HIM TO ASK IF HE IS AWARE OF ANY INTRUSIONS.

THE COURT: IF HE IS AWARE.

MS. CLARK: THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE.

THE COURT: THAT IS TRUE.

MR. COCHRAN: HE WILL HAVE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.

THE COURT: WHY ARE WE ARGUING?

MS. CLARK: I DON'T KNOW.

MR. COCHRAN: BECAUSE THEY LIKE TO ARGUE WHEN THEY CAN.

THE COURT: BEATS ME. COUNSEL, WE NEED TO TAKE OUR COURT REPORTER BREAK AT THIS POINT. MADAM REPORTER, WHY DON'T YOU STAY THERE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

THE COURT: LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR SHORT MORNING RECESS AT THIS TIME. PLEASE REMEMBER MY ADMONITION TO YOU. DON'T DISCUSS THE CASE, FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU, OR ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU REGARDING THE CASE. YOU HAVE TO STEP BACK IN THE JURY ROOM. SEE YOU BACK IN ABOUT FIFTEEN MINUTES. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL STAND IN RECESS FOR FIFTEEN. AND DETECTIVE LANGE, YOU CAN STEP DOWN.

(RECESS.)

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

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURORS, PLEASE.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, I'M SORRY.

THE COURT: YES. HOLD ON.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, THE ITEMS THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR TO INTRODUCE INTO EVIDENCE WITH DETECTIVE LANGE HAVE BEEN RETURNED NOW. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO WITH THE COURT'S PERMISSION IS TO OPEN THESE BOXES, DETERMINE WHERE THE ITEM IS THAT I WANTED TO INTRODUCE TO DETECTIVE LANGE ON THE RECORD BECAUSE THESE ITEMS DID NOT COME BACK TO US FROM THE DEFENSE IN THE SAME CONDITION THAT THEY WERE SENT TO THE DEFENSE BY US. SO I DON'T HAVE AN INVENTORY FOR EACH ENVELOPE AND BOX TO INDICATE WHAT'S INSIDE.

THE COURT: UH-HUH. WELL, I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE DO THAT THEN, THAT WE DO THE INSPECTION AT THE NOON HOUR SINCE IT APPEARS TO ME THAT MR. COCHRAN IS JUST GETTING WARMED UP.

MS. CLARK: ALL THE MORE REASON TO DO IT NOW, YOUR HONOR.

MR. COCHRAN: SHE'S TRYING TO BREAK MY RHYTHM, YOUR HONOR. I HAVEN'T EVEN STARTED YET.

MS. CLARK: BREAK HIS STRIDE. THAT'S FINE.

THE COURT: I WON'T TOUCH THAT CERTAINLY. ALL RIGHT. HOW ABOUT IF WE DO THAT? WE CAN INVENTORY THE BOX ON THE RECORD AND IF -- YOU CAN INVENTORY THE BOX, AND IF NECESSARY, WE CAN PUT SOMETHING ON THE RECORD.

MS. CLARK: OKAY. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. IN THAT CASE, THE --

THE COURT: WHAT WE CAN DO IS, YOU CAN HAVE THE BOX -- HAVE THE COURIER GIVE THE BOX TO THE CLERK WHO WILL ACCEPT IT IN A SEALED CONDITION AND THEN COME BACK AT NOON AND WE'LL SEE WHAT'S THERE.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU. THAT WAY, HE DOESN'T HAVE TO STAY HERE.

THE COURT: CORRECT.

MS. CLARK: I APPRECIATE THAT. AND LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT HE IS -- WOULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD, SIR?

MR. SALVINO: INVESTIGATOR SALVINO, GENE SALVINO. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: WOULD YOU GIVE THAT, PLEASE, TO MRS. ROBERTSON, AND SHE WILL MAINTAIN CUSTODY OF THE BOX. EXCUSE ME, COUNSEL. CAN WE HAVE IT QUIET? THE COURT REPORTER IS TRYING TO WRITE THIS DOWN.

MS. CLARK: CAN WE DESCRIBE WHAT'S BEING HANDED OVER TO THE CLERK RIGHT NOW?

THE COURT: APPEARS TO BE A SEALED BOX AND MANILA ENVELOPE, TWO MANILA ENVELOPES.

MS. CLARK: ONE SMALLER WITH RED TAPE AND ONE LARGER WITH BLUE TAPE AND RED TAPE.

THE COURT: YES. NOTED. THREE ITEMS.

MS. CLARK: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. DEPUTY MAGNERA, LET'S HAVE THE JURY, PLEASE.

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

THE COURT: THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED. LET THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. WE'VE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. DETECTIVE TOM LANGE IS STILL ON THE WITNESS STAND ON CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN. GOOD MORNING AGAIN, DETECTIVE LANGE.

THE WITNESS: GOOD MORNING, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. AND, MR. COCHRAN, GOOD MORNING, SIR. YOU MAY CONTINUE.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DETECTIVE LANGE, SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, BETWEEN THE PERIOD OF JUNE 3RD AND JULY 3RD, THERE WAS NO POLICE PRESENCE AT BUNDY ON A REGULAR BASIS TO GUARD THAT LOCATION; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

THE COURT: YOU WANT TO RESTATE YOUR QUESTION? I THINK YOU GOT THE DATES WRONG.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: BETWEEN THE DATES -- I AM SORRY, YOUR HONOR -- OF JUNE 13TH, 1994 AT ABOUT 3:45 IN THE AFTERNOON AND JULY 3RD, 1994, THERE WAS NO POLICE PRESENCE AT THE BUNDY LOCATION; IS THAT CORRECT?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. VAGUE, POLICE PRESENCE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: THERE WAS NO PERMANENT POLICE AT THAT LOCATION. I BELIEVE THEY WERE CALLED TO THAT LOCATION ON SEVERAL TIMES.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. AND THEY WERE CALLED TO THAT LOCATION ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS TO CHASE AWAY INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

MR. COCHRAN: I AM ASKING --

MS. CLARK: CALLS FOR HEARSAY.

MR. COCHRAN: I'M REQUESTING TO ASK HIM A QUESTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: YOU CAN ASK HIM IF HE HAS PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THESE THINGS.

MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ARE YOU AWARE OF CALLS MADE BY -- MADE TO THAT LOCATION FOR POLICE ASSISTANCE BECAUSE OF THE CROWDS AND INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE COMING TO THAT LOCATION?

A: I HAD HEARD OF THOSE THINGS HAPPENING THROUGH THE MEDIA. I DIDN'T HAVE -- I WASN'T THERE ON A PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF IT.

Q: WELL, YOU'VE SEEN ON THE MEDIA THAT THERE WERE HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE IN AND AROUND THAT LOCATION AFTER JUNE 13TH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY SPECIFIC POLICE CALLS THAT WERE MADE REGARDING SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS IN AND AROUND THE BUNDY LOCATION AFTER THE CRIME PERIMETER WAS TAKEN DOWN AT ABOUT 3:45 ON JUNE 13TH, 1994?

A: I DON'T RECALL ANY SPECIFIC INCIDENTS.

Q: WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION TO SEE ANY PARTICULAR DOCUMENTS IN THAT REGARD?

A: IF THAT OCCURRED, IT CERTAINLY MAY, YES.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I BE PERMITTED, YOUR HONOR, TO ASK --

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. I THOUGHT THAT WE -- MAY WE APPROACH?

THE COURT: OVERRULED AT THIS POINT. HE CAN SHOW HIM TO SEE IF IT REFRESHES HIS RECOLLECTION.

MR. COCHRAN: I WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH.

THE COURT: THE ISSUE IS STILL PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE AND 352 THOUGH.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE THIS BEFORE YOU AND ASK YOU TO READ THIS TO YOURSELF, DETECTIVE LANGE. I WANT YOU TO REVIEW THIS DOCUMENT HERE AND I WANT YOU TO LOOK AT THESE NUMBERS HERE AND I'LL ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.

A: OKAY.

Q: HAVE YOU READ THE PARTICULAR AREA THAT I DIRECTED YOU TO?

A: YES.

Q: AND HAS THE REVIEW OF THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT REFRESHED YOUR RECOLLECTION REGARDING ANY POLICE CALLS TO THE LOCATION 875 SOUTH BUNDY?

A: NO.

MS. CLARK: SAME OBJECTION. NO PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE.

THE COURT: HE SAID NO.

MS. CLARK: WITHDRAWN.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, SIR. AT ANY RATE, HOW DID YOU DETERMINE THAT THERE HAD -- THAT THERE HAD BEEN NO BLOOD SAMPLES COLLECTED NEAR THE REAR GATE AREA OF BUNDY AFTER JUNE 13TH, 1994? HOW DID YOU MAKE THAT DETERMINATION?

A: THE DETERMINATION WAS MADE AS I APPROACHED THE REAR GATE AND ENTERED ON THAT DATE. I HADN'T BEEN TO THE REAR GATE PRIOR TO THAT TO EXAMINE IT. I REALLY FELT I DIDN'T HAVE ANY REASON TO. AS I WALKED THROUGH THE GATE, MYSELF AND OTHERS OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE THE BLOOD SMEAR THAT WAS OBSERVED EARLIER ON THE 13TH.

Q: SO YOU SAW IT ON JULY 3RD. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND HAD YOU MET WITH THE CRIMINALISTS AT ANY TIME BETWEEN JUNE 13TH AND JULY 3RD?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

Q: SO YOU HADN'T MET WITH EITHER FUNG OR MAZZOLA TO DISCUSS THEIR WORK?

A: TO DISCUSS THEIR WORK, NO.

Q: HAD YOU READ ANY REPORTS FROM FUNG OR MAZZOLA BETWEEN THE DATES OF JUNE 13TH AND JULY 3RD?

A: NO.

Q: AND WHEN YOU WERE AT THE SCENE ON JULY 3RD, I PRESUME FROM WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, YOU WERE THERE IN THE COMPANY OF SOME OTHER OFFICERS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU WERE THERE BEFORE FUNG WAS CALLED AS DEPICTED IN THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT WE SHOWED JUST BEFORE THE BREAK; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: WE WERE DOING A DISTRICT ATTORNEY WALK-THROUGH AND I DON'T RECALL --

Q: CAN YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION? WERE YOU THERE BEFORE FUNG WAS THERE?

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: WELL, IF YOU DIDN'T -- AT THE TIME YOU ARRIVED THERE, WHEN YOU WERE WALKING THROUGH AT THAT POINT, NO BLOOD SAMPLES HAD BEEN COLLECTED, RIGHT, ON JULY 3RD AT THAT POINT?

A: AT THE TIME OF MY ARRIVAL, THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: RIGHT. BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T KNOW. YOU THOUGHT THEY HAD ALREADY BEEN TAKEN, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO IT WAS AFTER THAT THAT THE BLOOD SAMPLES OF NOVEMBER WERE TAKEN; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND DO YOU REMEMBER WHETHER YOU CALLED FUNG TO COME TO THE SCENE OR WAS HE OUT THERE OR WAS HE DUE OUT THERE? WHAT HAPPENED?

A: I DON'T RECALL HOW THAT JUST HAPPENED. I MAY HAVE THAT WRITTEN SOMEWHERE.

Q: WHAT TIME OF DAY WAS IT THAT FUNG CAME TO THE SCENE ON JULY 3RD, 1994?

A: I DON'T RECALL. I THINK IT WAS PERHAPS LATE IN THE MORNING.

Q: AND BEFORE THAT TIME, DID YOU EVER READ THE PROPERTY REPORT TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THESE STAINS ALLEGEDLY FROM THE REAR GATE HAD BEEN BOOKED?

A: I DON'T RECALL SEEING THE PROPERTY REPORT PRIOR TO THAT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WHEN FUNG CAME OUT, WHENEVER HE ARRIVED, WERE YOU STILL PRESENT AT THAT TIME?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHO CAME WITH HIM, IF ANYONE?

A: I BELIEVE HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN BY HIMSELF, BUT I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE ANY NOTES THAT WOULD REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION?

A: IT MAY BE IN MY NOTES.

Q: WELL, YOU MAY BE HERE AFTER LUNCH. SO CAN YOU CHECK YOUR NOTES AFTER LUNCH SO WE WON'T DELAY?

A: YES, I WILL.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND LET US KNOW IF HE CAME WITH ANYONE ELSE? WHO WERE YOU WITH AT THAT TIME?

A: I BELIEVE I ARRIVED ALONE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU MET SOME OTHER PEOPLE OUT THERE?

A: YES.

Q: WAS VANNATTER THERE THAT DAY?

A: I DON'T RECALL IF HE WAS THERE OR NOT.

Q: AND YOU SAID THERE WAS SOME KIND OF A D.A.'S WALK-THROUGH?

A: YES.

Q: THAT MEANS DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S WALK-THROUGH?

A: YES.

Q: WERE ANY OF THE D.A.'S TO MY IMMEDIATE RIGHT OUT AT THAT SCENE ON THAT PARTICULAR DAY?

A: YES.

Q: WAS IT A FEMALE?

A: YES.

Q: IS THAT MISS MARCIA CLARK THERE?

A: YES.

Q: MR. DARDEN WASN'T THERE, WAS HE?

A: NO.

Q: ANY OTHER D.A. THERE ALONG WITH MARCIA CLARK?

A: MR. HODGMAN.

Q: SO IT WAS MARCIA CLARK AND BILL HODGMAN?

A: YES.

Q: DID YOU GET THERE FIRST?

A: I THINK I DID.

Q: YOU WERE THE FIRST ONE THERE AT THE SCENE?

A: I BELIEVE I WAS.

Q: AND WHO ARRIVED NEXT AFTER YOU?

A: I DON'T WANT TO BE INACCURATE ABOUT THIS. I DON'T RECALL A SPECIFIC -- SPECIFICS AS FAR AS WHO ARRIVED WHEN.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND I PRESUME THERE WAS NO LOG THAT DAY?

A: WELL, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A LOG AS TO WHO WAS THERE.

Q: WHERE IS THE LOG?

A: WELL, IT WOULD BE IN MY MURDER BOOK.

Q: WERE YOU PLANNING TO HAVE LUNCH TODAY, BECAUSE I MIGHT IMPINGE UPON THAT A LITTLE BIT. CAN YOU CHECK THAT LOG FOR US OVER THE LUNCH HOUR?

A: MAKE A LIST, AND I'LL DO IT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MAKE A LIST OF THE THINGS WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO TAKE A LOOK AT OVER THE LUNCH HOUR. NOW --

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I HAVE JUST A SECOND, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: CERTAINLY.

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN DEFENSE COUNSEL.)

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: NOW, WITH REGARD TO YOUR TESTIMONY YESTERDAY, YOU INDICATED TO US THAT YOU HAD NOTICED SOME BLOOD SPLATTERS OR SOME BLOOD SPOTS ON THE BACK OF MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON. DO YOU RECALL THAT?

A: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: AND IF WE CAN HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH. YOUR HONOR, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO CUT THE FEED ON THIS OR NOT. BUT DO YOU RECALL THIS PARTICULAR PHOTOGRAPH?

THE COURT: YES. YES, I DO.

MR. COCHRAN: MR. HARRIS.

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

THE COURT: MR. HARRIS, WHICH PHOTO IS THIS?

MR. HARRIS: THIS IS DEFENSE 1012.

THE COURT: THANK YOU.

MR. COCHRAN: 1012, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN YOU SEE --

(BRIEF PAUSE.)

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THIS, DETECTIVE LANGE, IS THE BACK OF MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON. ON THAT BACK, DO YOU SEE THOSE BLOOD SPOTS OR SPATTERS?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU DIRECT THE CORONER'S OFFICE TO DO SOMETHING WITH REGARD TO THOSE PARTICULAR BLOOD SPOTS AND SPATTERS?

A: I POINTED THOSE OUT TO THE INVESTIGATOR PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF THE VICTIM, YES.

Q: AND THAT WAS TO MISS RATCLIFFE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND WHEN YOU SAY YOU POINTED THEM OUT, YOU JUST SAID, "TAKE A LOOK AT THESE"?

A: SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WERE YOU EVER ABLE TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER OR NOT THOSE BLOOD SPOTS AND/OR SPATTERS WERE EVER COLLECTED BY THE CORONER'S OFFICE OR BY THE CRIMINALISTS OR ANYONE AND PRESERVED AND TESTED TO DETERMINE WHOSE BLOOD THAT WAS ON HER BACK?

A: THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN COLLECTED BY OUR CRIMINALISTS THERE. NORMALLY, THAT WOULD BE DONE AT THE CORONER'S OFFICE, AND MY INFORMATION IS THAT IT WAS NOT DONE.

Q: IT WAS NOT DONE?

A: YES.

Q: YOU POINTED IT OUT AND IT WAS NOT DONE?

A: YES.

Q: WHY WASN'T IT DONE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THAT CALLS FOR SPECULATION.

MR. COCHRAN: I THINK IF HE KNOWS.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: WHEN I SPOKE WITH THE CORONER'S CRIMINALIST, HE STATED TO ME THAT --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. HEARSAY.

THE COURT: DO YOU KNOW OF YOUR PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE WHY THAT WASN'T DONE OTHER THAN WHAT SOMEBODY TOLD YOU?

THE WITNESS: NO, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: NEXT QUESTION.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WOULD YOU AGREE THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO DETERMINE WHOSE BLOOD THAT WAS ON HER BACK?

A: I FELT THAT IT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT, YES.

Q: AND IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION, IN AN EFFORT FOR YOU TO DETERMINE WHO THE PERPETRATORS OR PERPETRATOR WAS, THAT WOULD BE A KEY FACTOR IF THAT WAS THE PERPETRATOR'S OR PERPETRATORS' BLOOD; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO -- WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE BLOOD.

Q: AS AN INVESTIGATOR, YOU WANT TO GET AS MANY FACTS AS YOU CAN; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU DON'T WANT TO RUSH TO JUDGMENT IN THESE THINGS, DO YOU?

A: CERTAINLY NOT.

Q: SO YOU WANT TO GATHER ALL THE FACTS THAT YOU POSSIBLY CAN; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND ARE YOU TELLING US THAT THAT BLOOD WAS NEVER EXAMINED OR COLLECTED IN THE CORONER'S OFFICE? IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S MY INFORMATION, YES.

Q: AND WHO DID YOU TALK TO IN THE CORONER'S OFFICE WHO GAVE YOU AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THEY DIDN'T COLLECT THAT BLOOD?

A: BE A MR. MAHANEY.

Q: MR. -- SPELL THAT FOR THE --

A: MAHANEY.

Q: CAN YOU SPELL THAT FOR US?

A: I BELIEVE IT'S M-A-H-A-N-E-Y.

Q: AND WHAT WAS THE DATE OF YOUR CONVERSATION WITH MR. MAHANEY?

A: I DON'T RECALL. IT WAS SOMETIME AFTER I GOT THE CORONER'S CRIMINALIST REPORT.

Q: AND WHEN WAS THAT?

A: I DON'T RECALL. THIS WAS PROBABLY SEVERAL MONTHS AGO.

Q: SEVERAL MONTHS AGO?

A: YES.

Q: SO FROM THE TIME YOU SAW -- YOU LAST SAW THAT PHOTOGRAPH THAT WE JUST DEPICTED ON THE SCREEN FOR THE JURY OR THAT YOU SAW THAT SCENE ON JUNE 13TH; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND IT WASN'T UNTIL SEVERAL MONTHS AGO THAT YOU FOUND OUT THAT THEY HAD NOT COLLECTED THE BLOOD THAT WAS ON HER BACK?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN DID YOU INSTITUTE A CALL TO MR. MAHANEY?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT'S HIS TITLE IN THE CORONER'S OFFICE?

A: HE'S A CRIMINALIST.

Q: THEY HAVE CRIMINALISTS WITHIN THE CORONER'S OFFICE?

A: YES.

Q: IN ADDITION TO THE DOCTORS?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, THE DOCTOR WHO DID THE AUTOPSIES IN THIS CASE IS DR. GOLDEN, G-O-L-D-E-N, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND MAHANEY WAS THE CRIMINALIST ASSIGNED TO THIS PARTICULAR CASE?

A: I BELIEVE HE WAS A CRIMINALIST ON DUTY WHEN THE BODIES ARRIVED. I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY ASSIGN CRIMINALISTS PARTICULAR CASES.

Q: SO HE WOULD BE THE ONE WORKING TO DEAL WITH THIS PARTICULAR BODY; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: HE WAS AT THIS PARTICULAR TIME, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND SO WHEN YOU TALKED TO HIM -- GIVE US A LITTLE CLEARER DATE AS TO WHEN YOU TALKED TO MAHANEY ABOUT THEIR FAILURE TO COLLECT THESE SPOTS AND EXAMINE THEM. WHAT DATE WAS THAT?

A: AGAIN, I DON'T RECALL. I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE CORONER'S REPORT AND PERHAPS GO FROM THERE.

Q: AND AGAIN, OVER THE LUNCH HOUR, CAN YOU LOOK AT THAT FOR US?

A: PUT IT ON THE LIST.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WE'LL TRY TO GET THAT LIST. MR. DOUGLAS. THE CONVERSATION THAT YOU HAD -- DID YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE CONVERSATION WITH MAHANEY AT ALL OR JUST ONE?

A: REGARDING THIS, I BELIEVE IT WAS JUST ONE.

Q: DID YOU WRITE A REPORT REGARDING THAT?

A: NO.

Q: AND YOU NEVER TALKED TO ANYBODY ELSE IN THE CORONER'S OFFICE REGARDING IT?

A: I BELIEVE I DID.

Q: AND WHO ELSE DID YOU TALK ABOUT -- TALK TO ABOUT THIS?

A: I BELIEVE I HAD A DISCUSSION WITH DR. LAKSHSMANAN.

Q: AND HE IS THE CORONER?

A: YES.

Q: WAS THAT AFTER YOUR CONVERSATION WITH MAHANEY?

A: YES.

Q: AND WAS THAT IN THE NATURE OF A COMPLAINT TO DR. LAKSHSMANAN?

A: NO. IT WAS IN THE NATURE OF A GENERAL CONVERSATION THAT I HAD WITH HIM.

Q: NOW, WERE YOU ABLE TO ASCERTAIN OF YOUR OWN KNOWLEDGE THAT THIS BLOOD SPOT, THE BLOOD SPOTS ON MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S BACK HAD BEEN WASHED OFF AT THE CORONER'S OFFICE? WERE YOU ABLE TO ASCERTAIN THAT?

A: FROM MY OWN KNOWLEDGE?

Q: YES, FROM YOUR OWN KNOWLEDGE.

A: NO.

Q: WELL NOW, YOU AND VANNATTER ATTENDED THE POST OR THE AUTOPSY OF THESE TWO BODIES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT DATE WAS THAT?

A: I BELIEVE THAT WAS ON THE 14TH OF JUNE.

Q: OKAY. JUNE 14TH. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THEN ON A TUESDAY; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN YOU WENT OVER THERE, YOU SAW THESE BODIES; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AT THAT TIME, HAD THE BODIES BEEN WASHED AND PREPPED?

A: WHEN WE FIRST ARRIVED, I BELIEVE THEY HAD BEEN AT THE -- AT THE TIME OF AUTOPSY, CERTAINLY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. THEY HAD BEEN WASHED AND PREPPED?

A: YES.

Q: SO AT THAT TIME, DID YOU ASK THE CORONER DR. GOLDEN AND SAY, "LOOK, DID YOU PRESERVE THAT BLOOD THAT WAS ON THE BACK?" DID YOU ASK THAT QUESTION?

A: THAT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ASKED OF DR. GOLDEN, NO.

Q: DID YOU ASK MAHANEY OR ANY CRIMINALISTS ON DUTY THAT DAY HAD THEY PRESERVED IT?

A: I DIDN'T TALK TO A CRIMINALIST THAT DAY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, AS AN EXPERIENCED HOMICIDE INVESTIGATOR, WHEN YOU ATTEND AN AUTOPSY, YOU'RE THERE TO OBSERVE AND TO POINT OUT CERTAIN THINGS TO THE DOCTOR WHO MAY NOT KNOW ALL THE FACTS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WE DO, YES.

Q: AND YOU AGREED WITH ME YESTERDAY THAT -- AND EVERY DAY THAT IN DETERMINING THE TIME OF DEATH IN A HOMICIDE CASE, IT'S OFTEN TIMES VERY IMPORTANT; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: CERTAINLY.

Q: AND NOW, YOU WERE PRESENT DURING THE AUTOPSY -- LET'S TAKE FIRST THE AUTOPSY OF MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON. YOU WERE PRESENT DURING THAT AUTOPSY.

A: YES.

Q: HOW LONG DID THAT AUTOPSY TAKE, SIR?

A: I -- I DON'T RECALL HOW LONG. I DIDN'T TIME IT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IN YOUR BEST ESTIMATE, SIR.

A: THERE'S AN EXAMINATION OF COURSE.

Q: YES, SIR.

A: TWO EXAMINATIONS PRIOR TO AUTOPSY BY THE CRIMINALIST AND BY THE PATHOLOGIST THAT I WASN'T PRESENT FOR. THIS IS PART OF THE AUTOPSY PROCEDURE.

Q: WELL, LET'S TAKE THE PART WHERE YOU WERE PRESENT, THE PART THAT YOU DEALT WITH, SIR.

A: OKAY. THAT WOULD BE THE ACTUAL AUTOPSY. I -- PERHAPS TWO HOURS.

Q: PERHAPS TWO HOURS?

A: IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO --

Q: AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON.

A: YES.

Q: SO THAT THE EXAMINATION BY THE CRIMINALIST OR WHATEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED AT A TIME BEFORE YOU GOT THERE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN YOU GOT THERE, DID YOU ASK THEM, DID YOU ASK THE CRIMINALIST ON DUTY THAT DAY IF HE HAD DONE ANYTHING REGARDING THESE BLOOD SPLATTERS ON THE BACK?

A: NOT THAT DAY, NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IT WASN'T UNTIL 1995 THAT YOU ASKED THAT QUESTION. WOULD YOU SAY THIS YEAR?

A: NO. NO. IT WAS SEVERAL MONTHS AGO AFTER I RECEIVED THE CRIMINALIST REPORT OF BLOOD THAT HE HAD TAKEN FROM THE BODY.

Q: SEVERAL MONTHS AGO. AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN WHAT MONTH?

A: AGAIN, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT REPORT.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: THAT'S ON THE LIST.

Q: AT LUNCH TIME. NOW, IN YOUR ROLE THERE AT THE SCENE, DID YOU INSTRUCT THE CORONER, DR. GOLDEN, TO SAVE THE STOMACH CONTENTS OF MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON SO THAT WE COULD USE THOSE STOMACH CONTENTS TO EXTRAPOLATE BACKWARDS WITH REGARD TO THE DIGESTIVE PROCESS AND SEEKING TO DETERMINE --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: -- THE TIME OF DEATH?

THE COURT: COUNSEL IS TESTIFYING. ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE AT THIS POINT.

MR. COCHRAN: OKAY, YOUR HONOR. MAY I SEEK TO RESTATE THAT IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T DO THAT?

THE COURT: PLEASE.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU ASK THE CORONER TO SAVE THE STOMACH CONTENTS OF MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: NO.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. AGAIN, YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. THAT'S NOT THIS WITNESS' JOB.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MR. COCHRAN: BESIDES THAT, SHE'S WRONG.

MS. CLARK: OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF HIS EXPERTISE.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: YOU DIDN'T ASK THE CORONER TO SAVE, RIGHT?

A: NO.

Q: WOULDN'T YOU HAVE LIKED TO HAVE THE STOMACH CONTENTS AND NOT HAVE THEM THROWN AWAY?

THE COURT: ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. WERE THE STOMACH CONTENTS PRESERVED IN THIS CASE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. THIS IS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE.

MR. COCHRAN: YOU KNOW, I CAN MAKE HIM MY OWN WITNESS FOR THIS QUESTION, YOUR HONOR.

MS. CLARK: STILL OUTSIDE THE SCOPE.

MR. COCHRAN: I'LL MAKE HIM MY OWN WITNESS FOR THIS --

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. WERE THE STOMACH CONTENTS OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON PRESERVED IN THIS CASE?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. COUNSEL CAN CALL HIM IN HIS OWN CASE IN CHIEF. THIS IS BEYOND THE SCOPE OF DIRECT.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR ALREADY RULED ON THIS.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MS. CLARK: THE CORONER WILL BE TESTIFYING.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: THE CONTENTS WERE EXAMINED BY DR. GOLDEN.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WERE THEY PRESERVED, SIR, IS THE QUESTION.

A: I DON'T KNOW.

Q: YOU DON'T KNOW -- YOU DON'T KNOW TO THIS DATE WHETHER OR NOT THE STOMACH CONTENTS WERE PRESERVED, SIR?

A: I HAVE HEARD THAT THEY WERE NOT PRESERVED, BUT --

Q: HAVE YOU CHECKED?

A: NO.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MS. CLARK: NO. CAN THE WITNESS BE ALLOWED TO FINISH THE ANSWER, PLEASE?

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: I WANT YOU TO FINISH YOUR ANSWER. SO IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING MORE TO SAY, PLEASE SAY IT.

A: I'VE COMPLETED.

Q: OKAY. AS THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER IN THIS CASE, HAVE YOU CHECKED TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE STOMACH CONTENTS FROM NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON WERE PRESERVED IN THIS CASE SO THEY CAN BE EXAMINED?

A: I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY CHECKED, BUT I HAVE KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY WERE DESTROYED.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IS THAT SOMETHING YOU ASKED THE CORONER TO DO?

A: TO DESTROY THE STOMACH CONTENTS?

Q: YES. YES.

A: NO.

Q: THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WANTED DONE?

A: NO.

Q: WITH REGARD TO A RAPE KIT ANALYSIS, DID YOU ASK THE CORONER TO PERFORM A RAPE KIT ANALYSIS ON THE BODY OF NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: NO.

Q: WAS THAT DONE?

A: NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.

Q: NOW, DID YOU THINK THAT IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION REGARDING THE RAPE KIT ANALYSIS? AND YOU CAN ANSWER THAT YES OR NO.

A: NO.

Q: WHAT IS A RAPE KIT ANALYSIS?

A: RAPE KIT ANALYSIS WOULD INCLUDE SWABS FROM THE VAGINAL AREA, PERHAPS THE ANAL AREA IF THERE'S ANY EVIDENCE OF THAT, PERHAPS THE MOUTH.

Q: NOW, WHEN YOU ARRIVED AT THE LOCATION OF BUNDY, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT YOU SAW CANDLES BURNING IN THE LIVING ROOM; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHAT TIME IS THIS THESE CANDLES WERE BURNING AT THAT POINT?

A: WELL, I ARRIVED AT 4:25 A.M. SO I'M APPROXIMATING 10, 15 MINUTES AFTER THAT.

Q: SO BETWEEN 4:25, LET'S SAY BY 4:40 OR THEREABOUTS, THE CANDLES WERE BURNING; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND DID YOU FIND OUT FROM TALKING TO THE OTHER OFFICERS THAT THOSE CANDLES HAD BEEN BURNING SINCE MIDNIGHT OR 12:15 OR THEREABOUTS?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN YOU WENT UPSTAIRS IN THE BEDROOM, HOW MANY CANDLES DID YOU FIND BURNING?

A: I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY. I BELIEVE THERE WERE TWO OR THREE OR FOUR IN THE BEDROOM AND PERHAPS TWO OR THREE IN THE BATHROOM.

Q: AND THEY WERE ALL STILL BURNING?

A: YES.

Q: SO WOULD YOU SAY THERE WERE AT LEAST NINE CANDLES ALTOGETHER BURNING AT THIS POINT?

A: YES.

Q: AND YOU WERE AWARE, WERE YOU NOT, THESE CANDLES HAD BEEN BURNING SINCE AT LEAST 12:15, THE ARRIVAL OF OFFICER RISKE, RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: BY THE WAY, DID YOU IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION DIRECT THAT ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OR PICTURES BE TAKEN OF THESE BURNING CANDLES?

A: NO.

Q: DID IT EVER OCCUR TO YOU THAT WE MIGHT LOOK AT THE CANDLES AND DETERMINE THE STATE OF THEIR BURNING AT A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME AND EXTRAPOLATE BACKWARDS TO DETERMINE WHEN THEY MAY HAVE BEEN LIT? DID THAT OCCUR TO YOU EVER?

A: CERTAINLY NOT. I SEE NO WAY TO DO THAT.

Q: YOU SEE NO WAY TO DO THAT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: HOW LARGE ARE THESE CANDLES?

A: THE CANDLES WERE VARIOUS WIDTHS AND SIZES AND LENGTHS. THEY WERE ALL DIFFERENT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY PHOTOGRAPH ANYWHERE OF THESE CANDLES BURNING?

A: NO. NOT THAT I KNOW OF.

Q: WHEN YOU ARRIVED INSIDE THE HOUSE, YOU ALSO HEARD SOME MUSIC PLAYING; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: SEEMS TO ME THERE WAS MUSIC, YES.

Q: AND THAT MUSIC WAS EMANATING FROM WHAT ROOM?

A: IT WAS SOMEWHERE IN THE LIVING ROOM AREA.

Q: DID YOU EVER ASCERTAIN WHETHER OR NOT THAT WAS A CD PLAYING OR WHAT WAS PLAYING?

A: NO.

Q: DO YOU KNOW IF IT WAS AN FM STATION?

A: NO.

Q: WHAT KIND OF MUSIC DID YOU HEAR?

A: IT SEEMED TO ME TO BE A NEW WAVE TYPE MUSIC, INSTRUMENTALS.

Q: NEW WAVE TYPE?

A: WELL, MODERN TYPE INSTRUMENTALS.

Q: KIND OF SOFT, ROMANTIC KIND OF THING?

A: I WOULDN'T SAY ROMANTIC. IT'S JUST IN THE BACK OF MY MIND, I RECALL THIS. I MEAN I CAN'T BE MUCH MORE SPECIFIC THAN TO SAY THAT I SEEM TO RECALL A NEW WAVE TYPE OF MUSIC.

Q: DID YOU EVER GO OVER TO A STEREO OR A COMPONENT BOX OR SOMETHING AND DETERMINE WHETHER THIS WAS AN FM OR A CD OR A TAPE OR WHATEVER?

A: NO.

Q: DID ANYBODY UNDER YOUR DIRECTION EVER DO THAT?

A: NOT UNDER MY DIRECTION, NO.

Q: THERE WAS BATH WATER IN THE MASTER BEDROOM IN THE BATHTUB; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: I OBSERVED NO BATH WATER IN THE BATHROOM.

Q: YOU NEVER OBSERVED BATH WATER?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND DO YOU REMEMBER LOOKING IN THE BATHTUB?

A: YES.

Q: AND THERE WAS NO BATH WATER IN THE BATHTUB?

A: THERE WERE CANDLES ON THE TUB, BUT THERE WAS NO WATER IN THE TUB.

Q: IF OTHER OFFICERS HAVE TESTIFIED THERE WAS BATH WATER IN THE BATHTUB, DO YOU THINK ONE OF THEM LET THAT BATH WATER OUT BEFORE YOU CAME?

A: DID THEY LEAVE IT OUT? NO, BUT I BELIEVE IT DRAINED.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU HAVE NO DOUBT THAT AT SOME TIME EARLIER, THERE WAS BATH WATER IN THE BATHTUB?

A: THAT'S THE TESTIMONY OF THE ARRIVING OFFICER, THAT HE SAW BATH WATER. I DIDN'T SEE ANY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT RISKY?

A: YES.

Q: YOU JUST DIDN'T SEE IT WHEN YOU GOT THERE?

A: THERE WAS NONE IN THERE WHEN I GOT THERE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE BED, YOU DESCRIBED THE BED WAS MADE, BUT RUMPLED. IN OTHER WORDS, THE COVERS WERE RUMPLED IN THE CENTER OF THE BED; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YES.

Q: AND ARE THERE ANY PICTURES OR PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN OF ANY OF THIS INTERIOR AREA AT ALL?

A: OF THE BEDROOM?

Q: YES. OF THE BEDROOM.

A: NO.

Q: ANY PICTURES TAKEN OF ANY OF THOSE CANDLES IN THE BATHTUB AT ALL?

A: NO.

Q: ANY PICTURES TAKEN OF THE STEREO OR COMPONENT SYSTEM WHERE THIS MUSIC WAS EMANATING FROM?

A: NO.

Q: AND THE TELEVISION WAS ON IN THE BEDROOM ALSO UPSTAIRS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: NOW, YOU SHOWED US THE OTHER DAY -- YOU TOOK SOME PICTURES OF THE -- OF A FERRARI IN THE GARAGE AS YOU WERE COMING INSIDE THE HOUSE. BUT ONCE YOU GOT INSIDE THE HOUSE BY THAT BANISTER, DID YOU TAKE ANY PICTURES OF THE -- OF THE ICE CREAM CUP THAT WAS THERE?

A: NO.

Q: THERE ARE -- WE HAVE NO PICTURES TO THIS DATE OF THAT ICE CREAM CUP AND THE STATE OF THE ICE CREAM AT THAT POINT WHEN YOU ARRIVED?

A: WELL, IT WOULDN'T BE ACCURATE FOR ME TO SAY THAT. I BELIEVE THAT IN THAT OVERALL SHOT, IF ONE LOOKS, THEY'LL SEE A -- WHAT APPEARS TO BE A SMALL ICE CREAM CUP IN THE BLOW-UP.

Q: YOU MEAN THE PICTURE -- LET ME APPROACH IF I CAN. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT FROM PEOPLE'S EXHIBIT 74? IS THAT THE ONE TAKEN FROM THE GARAGE AREA OF THE FERRARI? IS THIS THE ONE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT (INDICATING)?

A: THIS IS A LITTLE DARKER. THIS IS THE AREA THOUGH. BUT WHEN I VIEWED THE PHOTO ON THE STAND THE OTHER DAY, IT APPEARED TO BE A POSSIBLE OUTLINE OF AN ICE CREAM CUP HERE WHERE IT WOULD NORMALLY HAVE BEEN ON THE BANISTER, BUT THERE WERE NO PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN CLOSE UP.

Q: AND WHY WAS THAT? WHY DIDN'T YOU DO THAT?

A: I FELT NO REASON TO DO THAT. IT WAS NOT PART OF MY CRIME SCENE. I WANTED TO DOCUMENT IT, THE STATE THAT IT WAS FIRST OBSERVED. I SAW NO REASON TO TAKE A PHOTOGRAPH OF MELTED ICE CREAM.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, OF COURSE, IT WAS MELTED BY 4:25. BUT YOU WERE AWARE, ARE YOU NOT, THAT WHEN OFFICER RISKE FIRST SAW IT AT 12:35 OR 12:40, IT WAS MELTING AND WAS NOT MELTED AT THAT POINT? YOU'RE AWARE OF THAT; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I BELIEVE HIS DESCRIPTION IS MELTING, YES.

Q: RIGHT. YOU ARE AWARE OF THAT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WOULDN'T THE BEST EVIDENCE OF THAT HAVE BEEN FOR US TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT PHOTOGRAPH OF THAT BEN AND JERRY'S CUP WITH A PHOTOGRAPH OR A PICTURE HAVING BEEN TAKEN THAT NIGHT?

A: WELL, THERE WAS NO PHOTOGRAPHER THERE THAT NIGHT WITH OFFICER RISKE; AND AS FAR AS BEST EVIDENCE, I NEVER CONSIDERED IT EVIDENCE AT ALL.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: THAT'S WHY IT WASN'T PHOTOGRAPHED OR OTHER THINGS WEREN'T DONE WITH IT.

Q: AS THE INVESTIGATOR IN THIS CASE, YOU DON'T ALWAYS DO EVERYTHING YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO, DO YOU? YOU MAKE MISTAKES, DON'T YOU?

A: CERTAINLY.

Q: NONE OF US ARE PERFECT, ARE WE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW -- AND WITH REGARD TO THIS ICE CREAM CUP, IT WAS A BEN AND JERRY'S ICE CREAM CUP, WAS IT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, YOU DID TAKE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS OR A PHOTOGRAPH OR TWO OF A KNIFE ON THE KITCHEN -- IT'S A MARBLE OR COREAN OR WHATEVER -- GRANITE; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: COUNTER TOP.

Q: COUNTER TOP. WHAT DATE WAS THAT, THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN?

A: THAT WAS TAKEN ON JUNE 13TH.

Q: BY THIS PHOTOGRAPH -- BY THE PHOTOGRAPHER ROKAHR?

A: I BELIEVE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ROKAHR, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, THAT KNIFE HAS BEEN TESTED UNDER YOUR DIRECTION; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: THERE'S NO BLOOD FOUND ON THAT KNIFE, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: NO FINGERPRINTS OF MR. SIMPSON FOUND ON THAT, ON THAT KNIFE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND THERE WAS A LOT OF TESTIMONY YESTERDAY ABOUT FINGERPRINTS AND YOU HAD THAT AREA DUSTED FOR PRINTS INSIDE AND OUT; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: TELL US AGAIN BRIEFLY WHAT AREAS, IF ANY, YOU HAD DUSTED FOR PRINTS.

A: INSIDE AND OUT?

Q: INSIDE AND OUT.

A: ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE LOCATION, I HAD THE FENCE, RUNG FENCE FINGERPRINTED AROUND THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE AROUND THE VICTIMS, THE FRONT AREA MAILBOX, THE INTERCOM SYSTEM, THE GATE, STATIONARY GATE, THE FENCE AROUND THE VICTIMS AS WELL AS A RAILING.

Q: MAY I STOP YOU AT THAT POINT? DID YOU HAVE THE FRONT GATE, BOTH THE INSIDE WHERE ONE WOULD HAVE TO COME DOWN FROM THE HOUSE AND LET SOMEWHERE IN, AND THE LATCH ON THE OUTSIDE, DID YOU HAVE BOTH OF THOSE FINGERPRINTED ALSO, DUSTED FOR PRINTS?

A: YES. THE ENTIRE GATE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. THE ENTIRE GATE WAS DUSTED?

A: YES.

Q: THE CALL BOX OUTSIDE, WAS THAT DUSTED?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. PLEASE PROCEED. I'M SORRY.

A: THE RAILING LEADING ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF THE WALKWAY ALL THE WAY TO THE REAR, THE REAR GATE, THE TWO VEHICLES PARKED AT THE REAR, ONE IN THE GARAGE AND THE BLACK GRAND CHEROKEE IN THE DRIVEWAY, THE FRONT DOOR, THE MOLDINGS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE FRONT DOOR, THE BATHROOM ON THE FIRST LEVEL AS YOU WOULD WALK IN WITH THE MOLDINGS AROUND IT, THE TELEPHONES THROUGHOUT THE RESIDENCE.

Q: DID YOU HAVE THE TELEPHONE IN THE LIVING ROOM AREA DUSTED FOR PRINTS SPECIFICALLY?

A: THERE WAS A PHONE IN THE KITCHEN AREA I BELIEVE.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: YES.

Q: WELL, DO YOU RECALL ONE ALSO IN THE LIVING ROOM AREA?

A: THERE MAY HAVE BEEN. I DON'T RECALL.

Q: WITH REGARD TO THE PHONE IN THE KITCHEN AREA --

MR. COCHRAN: I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE 1022 ON THE ELMO AND SHOW IT TO THE WITNESS.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 1022.

MR. COCHRAN: 1022.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN YOU SEE --

MR. COCHRAN: CAN WE MAKE IT A LITTLE CLEARER?

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: CAN YOU SEE THAT, WHAT'S DEPICTED THERE? AND IT'S APPARENTLY A SPEED DIALER COMPONENT OF A PHONE SUPPOSEDLY IN THE KITCHEN OF THE BUNDY RESIDENCE. DO YOU REMEMBER SEEING A PHONE IN THAT CONDITION WITH THE NAMES BY THE SPEED DIALER OF DADDY, DITA-OPA, CORA, PAM OR ROBIN, ROBIN AND PAM?

A: YOU CAN'T MAKE THEM OUT, BUT YES, I RECALL SEEING THAT.

Q: YOU REMEMBER SEEING THAT THERE THAT PARTICULAR NIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THAT'S A FAIR PORTRAYAL OF HOW THAT PHONE IN THE KITCHEN APPEARED THAT PARTICULAR NIGHT OR THE DATE OF JUNE 13TH, 1994?

A: I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T RECALL. I DON'T RECALL SEEING IT LIKE THAT.

Q: YOU REMEMBER SEEING THE NAMES ON THERE; DID YOU NOT?

A: I REMEMBER SEEING SOME NAMES. I DON'T BELIEVE DADDY WAS THE TOP ONE. I DON'T RECALL NOW.

Q: BY THE WAY, DID YOU TAKE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF THAT YOURSELF?

A: NO.

Q: TAKE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS?

A: NO.

Q: SO YOU HAVE NONE, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: OKAY. DO YOU RECALL WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A PHONE ANYWHERE IN THE LIVING ROOM AREA WHEN YOU FIRST WALKED IN THE HOUSE?

A: ONCE AGAIN, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC RECOLLECTION OF THAT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND YOU SAW THE TESTIMONY OF OFFICER RISKE; DID YOU NOT?

A: I SAW PARTS OF IT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WITH REGARD TO THE -- IF THERE WAS SUCH A PHONE IN THE LIVING ROOM AREA, YOU WOULD HAVE HAD THAT DUSTED ALSO; WOULD YOU NOT HAVE?

A: MY INSTRUCTIONS WERE FOR ALL PHONES.

Q: AND YOU CAN CONTINUE ON WITH WHAT YOU HAD DUSTED IN THE INTERIOR IF YOU HAD NOT COMPLETED IT.

A: THE KNIFE SUBSEQUENT TO EXAMINATION FOR BLOOD, THE BANISTER RAILING GOING UP THE FRONT STAIRWELL ALL THE WAY TO THE TOP AND ACROSS TOWARDS THE MAIN BEDROOM, VARIOUS MOLDINGS IN THE UPSTAIRS AREA, THE BED IN THE BEDROOM, THE POSTS ON THE BED, THE TELEVISION SET, I BELIEVE AROUND THE BATHTUB OF THE MASTER BEDROOM, THE COUNTERS UP IN THAT AREA. THERE WAS A PACK OF CIGARETTES THAT I BELIEVE WAS ON THE FLOOR OF THE BATHROOM THAT WAS PRINTED. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN OTHER AREAS THAT THEY DID. BASICALLY MY INSTRUCTIONS WERE TO DO EVERYTHING THAT HAD THE POSSIBILITY OF CONTAINING PRINTS.

Q: SO THIS WAS A THOROUGH JOB THAT YOU WERE GOING TO HAVE DONE TO TRY TO DETERMINE LATENT PRINTS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: I CERTAINLY WANTED EVERY AREA COVERED WHERE SOMEONE MIGHT HAVE LEFT PRINTS, YES.

Q: DID YOU HAVE THE ICE CREAM CUP DUSTED AT ALL?

A: NO.

Q: AND WHAT IS A LATENT PRINT, OFFICER?

A: A LATENT PRINT IS A FINGERPRINT THAT'S NOT READILY OBSERVABLE WITH THE NAKED EYE.

Q: AND SO IN ORDER TO BRING SUCH A PRINT UP, IS THERE SOME KIND OF A POWDER THAT'S USED BY THE PRINT TECHNICIANS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN GET A PRINT FROM A PARTICULAR SUBJECT OR OBJECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND IN THIS CASE, YOU HAD A VERY THOROUGH DUSTING DONE OF THE RESIDENCE THERE AT BUNDY AND THEREAFTER YOU RECEIVED A REPORT BACK; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: AND IF I CAN SHOW THIS TO COUNSEL AND APPROACH THE WITNESS, YOUR HONOR, A TWO-PAGE REPORT. I WOULD LIKE TO MARK THIS AS DEFENDANT'S NEXT IN ORDER.

THE COURT: I BELIEVE THAT'S 1029.

MR. COCHRAN: 1029. THANK YOU.

(DEFT'S 1029 FOR ID = 2-PAGE PRINT REPORT)

(DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN THE DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY AND DEFENSE COUNSEL.) MR. COCHRAN: I'LL PLACE A 1029 ON THIS TWO-PAGE REPORT, YOUR HONOR, THAT'S LABELED LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION DIVISION LATENT PRINT SECTION. 1029?

THE COURT: 1029.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: I WOULD LIKE TO PLACE THIS TWO-PAGE REPORT BEFORE YOU, DETECTIVE LANGE, AND ASK YOU TO TAKE A MINUTE -- TAKE A LOOK AT THAT FIRST OF ALL.

A: OKAY.

Q: HAVE YOU HAD OCCASION TO SEE THAT REPORT BEFORE TODAY?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHERE HAVE YOU SEEN THAT REPORT?

A: ONE WAS FORWARDED TO ME.

Q: AND WHEN DID YOU RECEIVE IT?

A: GOSH, IT'S BEEN SOME TIME BACK. I DON'T RECALL.

Q: APPROXIMATELY.

A: THIS PARTICULAR ONE WAS PROBABLY A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WITH REGARD TO THAT REPORT, IS THAT A REPORT OF THE FINDINGS OF THE PRINT TECHNICIANS WHO DUSTED THE AREA YOU'VE DESCRIBED FOR THE COURT AND JURY AT THE BUNDY LOCATION?

A: TO DATE, YES.

Q: AND IN CONNECTION WITH THAT REPORT, WHO WAS THE PRINT TECHNICIAN WHO DID THIS WORK?

A: WHO DID THE COMPARATIVE WORK?

Q: YES. COMPARITIVE WORK.

A: IT IS ALVARADO. EXCUSE ME. ALVARDO, A-L-V-A-R-D-O.

Q: AND SO ALVARDO WORKING UNDER YOUR DIRECTION DUSTED THESE AREAS YOU'VE DESCRIBED FOR PRINTS REGARDING BUNDY?

A: NO. MAYBE I SHOULD CLEAR THAT UP. ALVARDO DID THE COMPARISON WORK IN THE LAB. THE DUSTING AT THE SCENE WAS DONE BY FOUR DIFFERENT PERSONS.

Q: WHO WERE THEY?

A: BRAGGS, DUKE, UDESHI AND CLAIBORNE.

THE COURT: HOW DO YOU SPELL THOSE NAMES?

THE WITNESS: BRAGGS, B-R-A-G-G-S, DUKE, D-U-K-E, UDESHI APPEARS TO BE U-D-E-S-H-I, CLAIBORNE, C-L-A-I-B-O-R-N-E.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: AS I UNDERSTAND IT THEN, THESE FOUR INDIVIDUALS ARE LIKE TECHNICIANS. THEY'RE THE ONES WHO WORK IN THE FIELD. THEY FOLLOW OUT -- THEY CARRY OUT YOUR INSTRUCTIONS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: THEY THEN TAKE -- AFTER THEY MAKE THE COLLECTION OF THE LATENT PRINTS, IF ANY, THEY THEN TAKE THEM DOWNTOWN TO THE SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION DIVISION; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN A COMPARISON IS MADE BY ALVARDO; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS, YES.

Q: AND THEN THE REPORT BEFORE YOU IS A TWO-PAGE REPORT BY ALVARDO; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND IN THE COURSE OF THIS, WERE YOU LOOKING TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT MR. SIMPSON'S FINGERPRINTS WERE ON ANY OF THESE PARTICULAR AREAS?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND WHAT IS THE -- COUNSEL -- AND THE REPORT -- YOU HAVE A REPORT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT MR. SIMPSON'S PRINTS WERE IN ANY OF THESE LOCATIONS, DON'T YOU?

A: YES.

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

MR. COCHRAN: MAY WE HAVE A MOMENT, YOUR HONOR? I'M TRYING TO AVOID A SIDEBAR.

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

MS. CLARK: MAY WE APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YES, WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

MS. CLARK: I ATTEMPTED TO RESOLVE THIS WITH COUNSEL. MR. COCHRAN WOULD LIKE TO GET INTO THE RESULTS OF THE COMPARISONS MADE AT BUNDY, AND I SAID I DON'T OBJECT TO THAT AS LONG AS HE LET US GET INTO THE RESULTS OF THE BLOOD WORK SHOWING HIS BLOOD ON THE WALKWAY AT BUNDY. HE'S AWARE OF BOTH IN THE SAME WAY AND HE HAS THE SAME EXPERTISE WITH RESPECT TO THE RESULTS OF BOTH. THAT IS, HE'S NEITHER PRINT SPECIALIST NOR IS HE A SEROLOGIST OR A DNA ANALYST. SO IF COUNSEL WOULD LIKE TO GET INTO THE FINGERPRINTS, THEN I WOULD -- YOU KNOW, I WOULD AGREE TO THAT IF I CAN GET INTO THE BLOOD WORK.

MR. COCHRAN: SINCE I AM THE PROPONENT OF THIS, MAY I BE HEARD NOW?

THE COURT: YES.

MR. COCHRAN: ALL I AM GOING TO ASK THIS OFFICER IS WHAT I ASKED HIM SO FAR AND ASK -- I WANT TO FIND OUT THE FOLLOWING THINGS. NUMBER ONE, WHETHER OR NOT O.J. SIMPSON WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THEY WERE LOOKING AT. I WANT TO FIND OUT THE OTHER PEOPLE THEY WERE LOOKING AT. AND IF SHE WANTS TO OBJECT, WE CAN BRING THE TECHNICIAN IN. IT'S NOT HIS PRINTS. IT DIDN'T COME BACK TO HIM AS I UNDERSTAND IT. I WANT TO FIND OUT WHOSE PRINTS DID COME BACK. ULTIMATELY WE WILL GET IT IN. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE ARE STOPPED AT THIS POINT. I THINK -- HE'S THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER. THE REPORT COMES BACK TO HIM. THEY'RE DOING WHAT HE ASKED THEM TO DO. HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO COMMENT ON THAT REPORT.

MS. CLARK: I HAVEN'T HEARD ONE LEGAL BASIS FOR GETTING IN A DOCUMENT THAT WAS NOT PREPARED -- LET ME FINISH -- NOT PREPARED BY THIS WITNESS THAT PERTAINS TO AN EXPERT'S ANALYSIS, COMPARISON AND CONCLUSION. NOT ONE LEGAL BASIS HAS BEEN SHOWN FOR THIS WITNESS TO TESTIFY TO COMPLETE HEARSAY. NOT ONE. I HAVEN'T HEARD IT.

MR. COCHRAN: FIRST OF ALL, THIS DOCUMENT ISN'T HEARSAY. THIS DOCUMENT MAY NOT BE THE ORIGINAL, BUT IT'S KEPT IN THE COURSE AND SCOPE OF THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION DIVISION. THIS IS A DOCUMENT -- REPORT SENT BACK TO THIS WITNESS REGARDING THEIR FINDINGS AT HIS REQUEST AND I THINK HE CAN SO TESTIFY. HE'S THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER.

MS. CLARK: I STILL HAVEN'T HEARD ANY LEGAL BASIS TO GET IT IN, NOT ONE.

MR. COCHRAN: I JUST STATED IT, COUNSEL. BUT --

THE COURT: OKAY. OBJECTION SUSTAINED.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

MR. COCHRAN: I AM GOING TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION.

THE COURT: MR. COCHRAN.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: I'M GOING TO ASK YOU A FEW OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT. THIS -- YOU ASKED TO HAVE A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS COMPARED I PRESUME TO SEE IF YOU COULD LOCATE THEIR PRINTS INSIDE BUNDY; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: THE TERM WE USE IS ELIMINATED.

Q: ALL RIGHT. ELIMINATED.

A: YES.

Q: YOU SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND CAN YOU TELL US WHAT SUBJECTS, IF ANY, YOU SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE AS HAVING THEIR PRINTS INSIDE THE LOCATION?

A: ALL LAPD PERSONNEL AT THE SCENE, ALL CIVILIAN PERSONNEL AT THE SCENE, FAMILY MEMBERS, ANY FRIENDS THAT WE FIND MAY HAVE VISITED THE SCENE AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER, JUST BASICALLY ALL PERSONS WHO HAVE HAD ACCESS TO THAT SCENE.

Q: WELL, LET'S -- OKAY. YOU'VE GIVEN US SOME NAMES. WAS MR. SIMPSON ONE OF THE PEOPLE YOU SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WAS MR. COWLINGS ONE OF THE PEOPLE YOU SOUGHT TO SEE IF HE WAS ELIMINATED?

A: YES.

Q: WAS MR. MARCUS ALLEN ONE OF THE PEOPLE YOU SOUGHT TO SEE IF HE WAS ELIMINATED?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE SO. I DON'T HAVE ANY RECORD OF THAT.

Q: AND IN MAKING A DETERMINATION OF WHETHER OR NOT -- ANYBODY ELSE YOU CAN RECALL WAS -- WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION. WAS FAYE RESNICK A PERSON THAT YOU SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE?

A: YES.

Q: WHAT ABOUT ROBIN GREER?

A: I DON'T RECALL IF WE RAN ROBIN GRIER'S PRINTS OR EVEN HAD HER PRINTS.

Q: WHAT ABOUT CORA FISCHMAN?

A: WE DID NOT GET CORA FISCHMAN'S PRINTS.

Q: ANYONE ELSE THAT YOU CAN RECALL THAT YOU SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE AS HAVING PRINTS AT THE BUNDY STREET LOCATION IN THE ANALYSIS THAT WAS DONE AS DEPICTED ON 1029?

A: THERE WERE -- THERE'S A LIST OF NAMES, SEVERAL NAMES ON A LIST. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME.

Q: CAN YOU GET THAT PRETTY READILY FOR US?

A: I CAN CHECK HERE.

Q: SEE IF YOU CAN GET THAT WITHOUT TOO MUCH DELAY. BY THE WAY, WHILE YOU ARE DOING THAT, MAY I ASK YOU A QUESTION OR TWO?

A: CERTAINLY.

Q: WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING TO THERE?

A: THIS IS MY MURDER BOOK, THE --

Q: THAT'S YOUR HOMICIDE BOOK?

A: YES. THAT'S ONE OF THEM.

Q: AND SO HOW MANY BOOKS DO YOU HAVE, HOMICIDE BOOKS DO YOU HAVE?

A: IN THIS CASE?

Q: YES, IN THIS CASE.

A: FOUR OR FIVE.

Q: AND SO --

A: JUST --

Q: OVER THE LUNCH HOUR, IF WE ASK YOU TO LOOK AT SOMETHING, YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK IN YOUR HOMICIDE BOOK TO TRY TO FIND IT?

A: IF I THINK IT'S IN HERE.

Q: AND THOSE ARE ORIGINALS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: THANK YOU.

A: THIS LIST MAY BE WITH -- WAS COMPILED BY THE LATENT PRINT UNIT AND THAT'S PERHAPS THE ONES THAT STILL HAVE IT. THIS IS AN ON-GOING PROCESS WHERE THEY ARE ADDING TO IT EVERY TIME WE COME UP WITH ANOTHER NAME. SO I AM NOT CERTAIN THAT I WOULD EVEN HAVE THAT ONGOING LIST.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WOULD IT BE EASIER FOR YOU IF WE PUT THAT ON THE LIST FOR LUNCH TIME, YOU TOOK A LOOK AT LUNCH TIME?

A: IT WOULDN'T BE EASIER, BUT I'LL DO IT.

Q: WELL --

A: HERE IT IS HERE. I AM SORRY. I DO HAVE IT.

Q: ONE LESS THING TO DO. CAN I LOOK AT THAT WITH YOU?

A: YES. THIS IS A -- APPEARS TO BE A PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS RUN AND ELIMINATED. THE CURRENT LIST, THE ONGOING LIST WOULD BE MAINTAINED BY THE PRINT UNIT AND I DON'T BELIEVE ALL THE NAMES WOULD BE ON THERE.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, THIS LIST THAT YOU HAVE HERE, DO YOU MIND IF WE MARK THIS?

THE COURT: HOW ABOUT IF WE HAVE A PHOTOCOPY MADE OF IT?

THE WITNESS: PLEASE.

MR. COCHRAN: SO WE'LL GET THE CLERK TO MAKE A COPY, YOUR HONOR? MAY I PASS THAT TO THE COURT?

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WHILE WE ARE WAITING TO DO THAT, IS THAT A COMPLETE LIST OF EVERYBODY INCLUDING MR. SIMPSON?

A: ONCE AGAIN, I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS. I THINK THERE'S AN ON-GOING LIST MAINTAINED BY THE PRINT UNIT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AT THE LUNCH TIME, CAN YOU ALSO CHECK TO SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER LIST OR IS THAT THE ONLY ONE YOU HAVE AT THIS POINT?

A: I BELIEVE IT'S THE ONLY ONE, BUT I DON'T KNOW FOR SURE.

Q: OKAY. SO WE ARE CLEAR, WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO HERE IS ELIMINATE CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL'S FINGERPRINTS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THAT'S THE ACTUAL LIST OF THE INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED AT THIS POINT THAT COMES OUT OF YOUR HOMICIDE BOOK; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: THE LIST WOULD BE THOSE WHO ARE ELIMINATED AND THE ONES WHO ARE MADE ON PRINTS.

Q: RIGHT. AND SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, YOU DID IN FACT MAKE SOME INDIVIDUALS ON THE PRINTS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: IN FACT, YOU MADE SOME POLICE OFFICERS, DIDN'T YOU?

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. OBJECTION. OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. HE DIDN'T MAKE ANYBODY --

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WELL, THE --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR. COUNSEL --

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MR. COCHRAN: WELL, I HAVEN'T ASKED THE QUESTION YET. THE? YOU OBJECTED TO "THE"? OKAY. LET ME SEE IF I CAN STATE A QUESTION.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE NOT ELIMINATED AND YOU HAVE THE NAMES OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND ON THAT LIST OF PEOPLE WHO WERE NOT ELIMINATED, WOULD THERE BE SOME FRIENDS OF MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON?

A: YES.

Q: AND WOULD THERE BE POLICE OFFICERS ON THAT LIST ALSO?

A: ONE POLICE OFFICER.

Q: WOULD HE BE A DETECTIVE?

MS. CLARK: WELL, YOUR HONOR, SAME OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

MS. CLARK: MOTION TO STRIKE. COUNSEL CAN CALL A PRINT SPECIALIST.

THE COURT: NO. SUSTAINED, COUNSEL.

MR. COCHRAN: YOUR HONOR, MAY I PLEASE -- WE HAVE A COPY. WE'LL GIVE THE ORIGINAL BACK. MAY I MARK THIS AS 1030, YOUR HONOR, TWO-PAGE DOCUMENT?

THE COURT: YES.

THE WITNESS: I THINK THAT'S MINE. IS THAT MY ORIGINAL?

MR. COCHRAN: MAYBE -- I THOUGHT I HAD A COPY. MAY I APPROACH?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU. THANKS, JUDGE.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: SO YOU HAVE YOUR COPY BACK?

A: YES.

Q: THANKS.

MR. COCHRAN: I'LL MARK THIS TWO PAGES AS 1030.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. 1030. BUT, MR. COCHRAN, THIS IS NOT THE PERSON WHO DID THE COMPARISON.

(DEFT'S 1030 FOR ID = 2-PAGE PRINT REPORT)

MR. COCHRAN: I UNDERSTAND, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: THANK YOU.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: WITH REGARD TO 1030, SO WE CAN MAKE IT CLEAR FOR THE RECORD, YOUR HONOR, WHAT THIS IS, TELL US WHAT 1030 IS.

A: 1030 IS A PARTIAL LIST ENTITLED "HOMICIDE WORK SHEET" OF POLICE PERSONNEL WHO WERE -- WHOSE PRINTS WERE COMPARED TO LIFTS, PRINT LIFTS MADE AT THE BUNDY LOCATION.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND WHO IS THE PERSON WHO CAN COME IN HERE AND TELL US WHAT THE FINDINGS WERE, WHO WAS ELIMINATED AND WHO YOU MADE, WHO YOU FOUND PRINTS OF? WHO IS THAT PERSON?

A: WELL, THERE ARE PROBABLY SEVERAL DEPENDING WHEN THE INITIAL INFORMATION CAME IN. ALVARDO I BELIEVE WOULD BE ONE OF THEM. SOME OF THIS WORK IS DONE ON DAY WATCH AND SOME MAY BE DONE ON NIGHT WATCH. I THINK THE BEST WAY TO TELL WOULD BE TO CONTACT THE PRINT SUPERVISOR FOR THAT INFORMATION.

Q: THE PRINT SUPERVISOR?

A: YES. THE SUPERVISOR OF THAT UNIT.

Q: DO YOU -- I WAS ASKING YOU SOME QUESTIONS YESTERDAY AND THIS MORNING WITH REGARD TO LIVIDITY BEING PRESENT ON FIRST NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON, AND REMEMBER YOU INDICATED THAT YOU DIDN'T RECALL ANY? REMEMBER THAT?

A: I DON'T RECALL ANY MARKED LAVIDITY.

Q: AND BY THE WAY, WITH REGARD TO MR. GOLDMAN, DO YOU RECALL ANY LAVIDITY ON HIS BODY?

A: HE WAS CLOTHED. I WOULDN'T HAVE OBSERVED ANY.

Q: WELL, IN ORDER TO TAKE THE LIVER TEMPERATURE, DIDN'T THEY HAVE TO RAISE UP HIS CLOTHING AT THE SCENE THERE?

A: TO THAT AREA, YES.

Q: DID YOU SEE ANY LAVIDITY THEN?

A: I DON'T RECALL SEEING ANYTHING THAT STOOD OUT TO ME.

Q: WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION TO SEE A DOCUMENT WITH REGARD TO THAT FROM THE CORONER'S OFFICE?

A: CERTAINLY MAY.

MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MARK AS THE NEXT EXHIBIT 1030 IS IT?

THE COURT: 1031.

MR. COCHRAN: 1030. IT'S A TWO-PAGE DOCUMENT --

THE COURT: 1031.

MR. COCHRAN: 1031, TWO-PAGE DOCUMENT, PAGE 2 AND 3, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW IT TO COUNSEL.

(DEFT'S 1031 FOR ID = 2-PAGE DOCUMENT)

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

MS. CLARK: I WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WITH THE COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:)

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE ARE AT THE SIDEBAR. MISS CLARK, WHAT'S THE OBJECTION?

MS. CLARK: COUNSEL IS ATTEMPTING TO IMPEACH --

MR. COCHRAN: NOT IMPEACH.

MS. CLARK: HOLD IT.

MR. COCHRAN: I WILL TELL YOU WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.

MS. CLARK: YOU'RE NOT TRYING TO IMPEACH THE OBSERVATIONS OF ONE WITNESS WITH THE OBSERVATIONS OF ANOTHER THROUGH A HEARSAY DOCUMENT? HE'S GOING TO ASK HIM TO REFRESH HIS RECOLLECTION ABOUT LAVIDITY, SHOW HIM THE REPORT OF A CORONER'S INVESTIGATOR WHO MADE HIS OWN OBSERVATION. IT'S IMPROPER IMPEACHMENT. IT'S HEARSAY.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I BE HEARD? ALL I AM SEEKING TO DO, AS YOU SAID ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS, IS ASK HIM IF IT REFRESHES HIS RECOLLECTION. HE'S BEEN SOMEWHAT EQUIVOCATING REGARDING LAVIDITY. THERE'S LAVIDITY. THEY KNOW THAT, I KNOW THAT, EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT. I'M JUST GOING TO ASK HIM WHETHER THIS REFRESHES HIS RECOLLECTION THAT LAVIDITY WAS PRESENT AND FIXED, FULLY ESTABLISHED AND I THINK AS TO BOTH VICTIMS AND I JUST WANT TO ASK HIM THAT QUESTION. THAT'S ALL. I AM PERMITTED TO DO THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE HAVE TO RACE UP HERE EVERY FEW SECONDS, BUT THAT'S THE SITUATION. I JUST WANT TO REFRESH HIS RECOLLECTION.

THE COURT: YOU CAN SEE IF IT REFRESHES HIS RECOLLECTION, BUT HE'S ALREADY TESTIFIED HE DIDN'T SEE ANY AND THAT RONALD GOLDMAN, HE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN IN A POSITION TO SEE IT. BUT YOU CAN ASK HIM.

MR. COCHRAN: THAT'S ALL I WANT TO DO.

MS. CLARK: CAN I ASK COUNSEL WHY IT'S HIGHLIGHTED?

MR. COCHRAN: SOMEONE ELSE HIGHLIGHTED IT.

MS. CLARK: TOP LINE ON THIS DOCUMENT.

THE COURT: COUNSEL, THE JURY IS NOT GOING TO SEE THIS.

MR. COCHRAN: IT WAS HANDED TO ME THIS WAY.

MS. CLARK: IT WAS MARKED AS AN EXHIBIT.

THE COURT: COUNSEL, A CLEAN COPY GOES IN.

MR. COCHRAN: I WILL CLEAN THIS UP. I'M AWARE OF THAT. I'M UP HERE IN THE MIDDLE OF MY EXAMINATION. I CAN'T DO EVERYTHING. I'D LIKE TO GET MY ERASER OUT --

THE COURT: AT THIS TIME, THE OBJECTION IS PREMATURE.

MR. COCHRAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:)

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

THE COURT: YOU MAY.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU A DOCUMENT THAT'S BEEN MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S 1031. IT'S A TWO-PAGE DOCUMENT. AND I WANT TO ASK YOU, THE QUESTION OF LAVIDITY WHETHER OR NOT -- YOU READ TWO PARAGRAPHS. BY THE WAY, THE TWO DECEDENTS WERE GIVEN DIFFERENT CORONER'S NUMBERS; WERE THEY NOT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. I WANT YOU TO READ TWO SEPARATE PARAGRAPHS IF YOU WOULD.

A: THIS AND THIS (INDICATING)?

Q: THIS ONE AND THIS ONE (INDICATING).

A: OKAY.

Q: AND THEN I'LL ASK YOU A QUESTION.

A: OKAY.

Q: HAVE YOU READ BOTH PARAGRAPHS NOW?

A: YES. YES.

Q: AND DOES THE REVIEW OF THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT, INVESTIGATOR'S REPORT, REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS LAVIDITY PRESENT AND FIXED IN EITHER ONE OF THESE BODIES?

A: NO.

Q: IT DOESN'T REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION AT ALL?

A: NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. YOU WERE PRESENT WHEN THE AUTOPSIES WERE DONE ON BOTH INDIVIDUALS?

A: YES.

Q: AND AS YOU THINK BACK ABOUT YOUR BEING PRESENT AT THAT TIME, DOES IT IN ANY WAY -- DOES THAT IN ANY WAY REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION OF WHETHER YOU SAW LAVIDITY ON EITHER OF THESE BODIES?

A: THOSE OBSERVATIONS WOULD BE MADE PRIOR TO THE AUTOPSY AND PROBABLY MY ARRIVAL. I DON'T RECALL MAKING THOSE OBSERVATIONS.

Q: ALL RIGHT. IT DOESN'T REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION?

A: NOT AT ALL.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, YOU RECEIVED A CALL TO RESPOND TO THIS HOMICIDE AS I UNDERSTAND IT SOMETIME IN THE EARLY MORNING HOURS OF JUNE 13TH, 1994; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHO CALLED YOU AT THAT TIME, IF YOU RECALL?

A: I BELIEVE IT WAS A DETECTIVE FROM DETECTIVE HEADQUARTERS, ON-DUTY DETECTIVE.

Q: AND DO YOU REMEMBER WHAT TIME IT WAS THAT YOU RECEIVED THIS CALL?

A: APPROXIMATELY 3:00 A.M.

Q: AND I PRESUME YOU WERE AT HOME IN BED AT THAT POINT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN YOU DROVE FROM YOUR HOME IN SIMI VALLEY DOWN TO THE LOCATION; IS THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: AND HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO GET FROM SIMI VALLEY TO THE LOCATION IN BRENTWOOD?

A: PERHAPS 50 MINUTES, AN HOUR. I HAVE NO -- I DON'T KNOW.

Q: YOU ARRIVED AT THE LOCATION AT ABOUT 4:25 IN THE MORNING?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHEN YOU GOT THERE, VANNATTER WAS ALREADY THERE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THE TWO OF YOU HAD WORKED TOGETHER FOR ABOUT FOUR YEARS PRIOR TO THIS PARTICULAR TIME?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: YOU BECAME AWARE THAT YOU WERE TAKING THIS CASE OVER FROM TWO OTHER DETECTIVES; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: YOU HAVE NEVER WORKED BEFORE WITH MARK PHILLIPS OR FUHRMAN; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: MARK FUHRMAN OR RON PHILLIPS.

Q: OR RON PHILLIPS. YOU HAD NOT WORKED BEFORE WITH HIM?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND ONCE YOU ARRIVED AT THE SCENE, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US HOW YOU WERE BRIEFED AND TAKEN AROUND THE SCENE PRIMARILY BY PHILLIPS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND IN THE COURSE OF THAT -- YOU ALL HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS. WHEN I SAY "YOU ALL," I MEAN THAT YOU AND VANNATTER AND PHILLIPS AND FUHRMAN HAD SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT YOU HAD HERE, WHAT KIND OF HOMICIDES THESE WERE AND THAT SORT OF THING; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

A: YES.

Q: IT'S TRUE, IS IT NOT, SIR, THAT UPON ARRIVAL AT THE CRIME SCENE, YOU WERE MET BY DETECTIVE III, RON PHILLIPS, WEST LOS ANGELES DIVISION HOMICIDE COORDINATOR? THAT'S CORRECT; IS IT NOT?

A: HE'S ONE OF THE PEOPLE, YES.

Q: AND PHILLIPS STATED TO YOU THAT VICTIM BROWN WAS THE EX-WIFE OF O.J. SIMPSON, THE WELL-KNOWN ATHLETE/ACTOR, RIGHT?

A: I DON'T BELIEVE HE STATED THAT VERBATIM. I BELIEVE IT WAS INFORMATION THAT ONE OF THE VICTIMS APPEARED TO BE MR. SIMPSON'S EX-WIFE.

Q: WELL, LET ME -- MAYBE I CAN APPROACH AND I'LL SHOW YOU 1021.

MR. COCHRAN: COUNSEL, YOU HAVE SEEN THIS BEFORE.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: THIS IS DEFENDANT'S 1021. I'M GOING TO PLACE THIS BEFORE YOU. FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO ASK YOU -- AND I CAN SHOW YOU IF YOU'D LIKE. THIS IS A REPORT PREPARED BY YOU AND VANNATTER. IT'S A CONTINUOUS REPORT IN THE HOMICIDE BOOK PREPARED UNDER YOUR DIRECTION AND THAT OF DETECTIVE VANNATTER; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. SO LET'S LOOK AT IT TOGETHER. DOES THAT REPORT INDICATE THAT: "PHILLIPS STATED THAT VICTIM BROWN WAS THE EX-WIFE OF O.J. SIMPSON, THE WELL-KNOWN ATHLETE/ACTOR"?

A: YES, IT DOES.

Q: AND DOES IT SAY ADDITIONALLY: "PHILLIPS STATED THAT MR. SIMPSON AND VICTIM ONE HAD BEEN EMBROILED IN PREVIOUS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATIONS, ONE OF THESE RESULTING IN THE ARREST OF MR. SIMPSON"? DOES THAT REPORT SAY THAT?

A: YES, IT DOES.

Q: PHILLIPS TOLD YOU THAT, DIDN'T HE?

A: NOT AT THE PARTICULAR TIME OF MY ARRIVAL, BUT HE DID PRIOR TO -- PRIOR TO GOING TO THE ROCKINGHAM LOCATION.

Q: ALL RIGHT. WELL, HE TOLD YOU -- AND THE REPORT SAYS UPON ARRIVAL AT THE CRIME SCENE. YOU WERE MET BY DETECTIVE III PHILLIPS, RIGHT?

A: THAT WAS MEANT TO BE THE END OF THAT THOUGHT, MET BY DETECTIVE PHILLIPS. IT WAS LATER ON THAT HE MADE THAT STATEMENT.

Q: OKAY. BUT HE TOLD YOU THIS BEFORE YOU WENT OVER TO ROCKINGHAM; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY: "MR. SIMPSON RESIDED AT 360 NORTH ROCKINGHAM PLACE IN BRENTWOOD APPROXIMATELY TWO MILES FROM THE CRIME SCENE." IS THAT WHAT IT SAYS?

A: THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS.

Q: NOW, YOU WROTE THIS, DIDN'T YOU?

A: YES, I DID.

Q: AND AS AN EXPERIENCED POLICE OFFICER, IN WRITING THIS, YOU STRIVE TO BE AS ACCURATE AS POSSIBLE; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND THAT'S WHAT YOU DID IN THIS CASE, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND SO WHEN YOU -- BEFORE YOU WENT OVER TO ROCKINGHAM, PHILLIPS HAD TOLD YOU ALREADY THAT SIMPSON HAD BEEN EMBROILED IN THIS PREVIOUS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATION RESULTING IN O.J. SIMPSON'S ARREST, RIGHT?

A: THAT WAS A GENERAL STATEMENT.

Q: I'M ASKING, DID HE TELL YOU THAT?

A: NOT -- NOT IN FORM, NO.

Q: WELL, I'VE READ EXACTLY WHAT YOU WROTE DOWN. YOU WROTE DOWN WHAT HE TOLD YOU, DIDN'T YOU?

A: THAT'S NOT A QUOTE. THAT'S WHAT I WROTE AND WHAT I INTERPRETED FROM PHILLIPS.

Q: RIGHT. THAT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING WHAT PHILLIPS WAS SAYING TO YOU, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S A GENERAL STATEMENT OF WHAT PHILLIPS TOLD ME, YES.

Q: I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT WE JUST READ IT AND IT TALKED ABOUT PREVIOUS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATIONS REGARDING O.J. SIMPSON AND HIS WIFE NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

A: THAT'S MY WORDS, MY INTERPRETATION OF WHAT PHILLIPS TOLD ME.

Q: RIGHT.

A: YES.

Q: THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, YOUR WORDS.

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: PHILLIPS. I MEAN LANGE'S WORDS, RIGHT?

A: CORRECT.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU KNEW THIS BEFORE YOU EVER DECIDED TO GO OVER TO ROCKINGHAM, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND FURTHER, YOU ALSO TALKED TO FUHRMAN, DID YOU NOT, WHO TOLD YOU ABOUT AN INCIDENT THAT HE HAD DEALT WITH OR HAD RESPONDED TO AT THE ROCKINGHAM INCIDENT BACK IN 1985? DID YOU NOT?

A: NO. FUHRMAN TOLD PHILLIPS ABOUT AN INCIDENT THAT HE HAD RESPONDED TO AND PHILLIPS TOLD ME.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU DIDN'T TALK TO FUHRMAN, BUT YOU TALKED TO PHILLIPS WHO TALKED TO FUHRMAN, RIGHT?

A: THAT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING. THAT'S WHAT WAS RELATED TO ME BY PHILLIPS.

Q: AND THEN PHILLIPS TOLD YOU, RIGHT?

A: CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU ARRIVED AT THE SCENE AT 4:25 AND YOU HAVE TWO DEAD BODIES, RIGHT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: AND YOU'RE GIVEN THIS WALK-THROUGH BY PHILLIPS, IS THAT CORRECT, THAT YOU DESCRIBED?

A: CORRECT.

Q: AND WAS IT AFTER THE WALK-THROUGH THAT PHILLIPS TOLD YOU ABOUT THIS SITUATION OF MR. SIMPSON HAVING BEEN EMBROILED IN A PREVIOUS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATION WITH HIS WIFE OR EX-WIFE OR DURING THE WALK-THROUGH?

A: NO. IT WAS JUST AFTER THAT HE TOLD ME THAT FUHRMAN HAD RESPONDED YEARS BEFORE TO A RADIO CALL AT THAT LOCATION.

Q: ALL RIGHT. MY QUESTION IS, WHEN WAS THAT? WAS IT JUST AFTER OR WHAT?

A: THAT WAS JUST AFTER THE WALK-THROUGH.

Q: JUST AFTER THE WALK-THROUGH?

A: AROUND THAT TIME, YES.

Q: AND WAS VANNATTER PRESENT ALSO AT THAT POINT?

A: HE WAS NEAR BY.

Q: ALL RIGHT.

A: I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY WHERE.

Q: DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT HE HEARD AT THAT POINT?

A: WHETHER HE HEARD THAT CONVERSATION?

Q: THE CONVERSATION WITH PHILLIPS, SIR.

A: HE MAY HAVE. I --

Q: NOW, YOU SAID SOMETHING EARLIER WITH REGARD TO THE FACT THAT INITIALLY WAS VANNATTER TAKING A MORE ACTIVE ROLE IN THIS INVESTIGATION THAN HE IS NOW?

A: I DON'T THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. LET ME STATE IT THIS WAY. YOU SAID I THINK EARLIER IN RESPONSE TO ONE OF MY QUESTIONS THAT YOU'RE CO-LEAD INVESTIGATORS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: I THOUGHT YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT SOMETHING HAD TURNED AROUND OR SOMETHING HAD CHANGED. DID YOU INDICATE THAT EARLIER TODAY?

A: I BELIEVE I WAS ALLUDING TO THE FACT THAT AFTER FIVE DAYS, THIS CASE WAS FILED WITH THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND --

Q: WELL, LET ME STOP YOU THERE. THIS CASE WAS FILED WITHIN THE FIRST FIVE DAYS?

A: WELL, I BELIEVE I STATED AFTER THE FIRST FIVE DAYS.

Q: WAS IT FILED ON JUNE 17TH, 1994?

A: I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE DATE, YES.

Q: AND THESE KILLINGS HAD OCCURRED ON JUNE 12TH IN THE LATE EVENING HOURS; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: SO WITHIN FIVE DAYS, BY THAT FRIDAY -- WAS 17TH FRIDAY?

A: CORRECT.

Q: ALL RIGHT. BETWEEN THE 12TH AND THE 17TH, WERE YOU CO-LEAD INVESTIGATORS DURING THAT TIME?

A: YES.

Q: BETWEEN THE 17TH AND TODAY, 2-22-95, YOU STILL CO-LEAD INVESTIGATORS?

A: CERTAINLY.

Q: SAME BASIC ROLES?

A: YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NOW, SO YOU HAD THIS CONVERSATION WHEREIN PHILLIPS TELLS YOU ABOUT THIS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SITUATION AND YOU BECOME AWARE ALSO THAT COMMANDER BUSHEY HAS TOLD PHILLIPS TO GIVE PERSONAL NOTIFICATION TO O.J. SIMPSON; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: NOW, THERE WAS NOTHING THAT WOULD PROHIBIT YOU AS THE INVESTIGATOR NOW, YOU AND YOUR PARTNER AS THE CO-LEAD INVESTIGATORS, FROM GIVING THAT NOTIFICATION TO MR. SIMPSON; ISN'T THAT CORRECT? YOU COULD HAVE DONE IT ALSO, COULDN'T YOU?

A: I COULD HAVE.

Q: JUST LIKE YOU GAVE THE NOTIFICATION TO THE REAL NEXT OF KIN, MR. LEWIS BROWN; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: BUT IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY THAT AFTER HEARING THIS FROM PHILLIPS, ALL FOUR OF YOU --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. I AM SORRY. OBJECTION TO REAL NEXT OF KIN.

THE COURT: I'M SORRY. I COULDN'T HEAR.

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION TO THE QUESTION AS PHRASED, REAL NEXT OF KIN.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I TRY TO RESTATE MY -- SHE WOULDN'T OBJECT TO THIS QUESTION, SO LET ME RESTATE IT.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: SO IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY -- WELL, STRIKE THAT. YOU WERE AWARE, WERE YOU NOT, THAT VANNATTER HAD WORKED WEST LOS ANGELES? YOU WERE AWARE OF THAT AT SOME TIME IN THE PAST?

A: SOME 20 YEARS PRIOR, YES.

Q: AND WERE YOU AWARE THAT HE'S TESTIFIED HE KNEW THE AREA IN WEST LOS ANGELES AND KNEW HOW TO GET TO O.J. SIMPSON'S HOUSE ON ROCKINGHAM?

A: HE STATED TO ME THAT NIGHT THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW THE WAY.

Q: ALL RIGHT. NO. MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, WERE YOU AWARE THAT HE TESTIFIED BEFORE THAT HE KNEW THE AREA OF WEST LOS ANGELES, HAVING WORKED --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. HEARSAY.

MR. COCHRAN: MAY I FINISH THE QUESTION?

MS. CLARK: IT'S ALREADY HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: DID YOU WATCH YOUR PARTNER TESTIFY AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING IN THIS CASE?

A: I DID NOT. I WAS BANNED FROM THE COURTROOM.

Q: WELL, DID YOU HAVE TELEVISION?

A: I WAS SENT INTO THE HALL AND NOT ALLOWED TO WATCH.

Q: WELL, YOU WEREN'T HERE ALL THE TIME, BUT YOU WATCHED, RIGHT?

A: AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, I WAS EXCLUDED WHILE MY PARTNER TESTIFIED AND HE WAS EXCLUDED WHILE I TESTIFIED.

Q: SO YOU DIDN'T HEAR WHAT HE SAID?

A: THAT'S CORRECT.

Q: DID YOU READ HIS TESTIMONY IN THE PRELIMINARY HEARING TRANSCRIPT?

A: NO.

Q: ALL RIGHT. HAVE YOU TALKED TO HIM ABOUT IT, HIS TESTIMONY?

MS. CLARK: YOUR HONOR, SAME OBJECTION.

MR. COCHRAN: I CAN ASK THAT, YES OR NO.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I DON'T RECALL DISCUSSING SPECIFICS LIKE THAT. THE ONLY CONVERSATION I HAD REGARDING YOUR QUESTION WITH VANNATTER WAS THAT EVENING.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AT ANY RATE, YOU WERE AWARE HE HAD WORKED WEST LOS ANGELES AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: OKAY. AND YOU AND VANNATTER WERE IN ONE CAR; IS THAT CORRECT?

A: YES.

Q: AND WHO WAS DRIVING THAT CAR?

A: VANNATTER.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY THAT YOUR PURPOSE AFTER HEARING THIS FROM PHILLIPS WAS TO GO OVER AND JUST TO ESTABLISH SOME RAPPORT WITH MR. SIMPSON SO YOU COULD GET TO KNOW HIM SO HE COULD COOPERATE AS THIS INVESTIGATION PROCEEDED. IS THAT WHAT YOUR TESTIMONY IS?

A: THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS, YES.

Q: WAS ONE OF YOUR REASONS THAT YOU WENT OVER THERE BECAUSE YOU THOUGHT HE WAS A SUSPECT IN THIS CASE?

A: NO, NOT AT THAT TIME.

Q: WELL, LET'S SEE NOW. IF -- WHEN YOU GOT INSIDE THE ROCKINGHAM RESIDENCE, IF KATO KAELIN WAS A POTENTIAL SUSPECT AND YOU LOOKED AT HIS SHOES, O.J. SIMPSON WASN'T A SUSPECT?

A: I'M NOT SAYING THAT KATO KAELIN WAS A POTENTIAL SUSPECT. I BELIEVE FUHRMAN REQUESTED TO LOOK AT HIS SHOES.

Q: WELL, LET ME ASK YOU THIS. YOU TOLD US YESTERDAY THAT FUHRMAN LOOKED AT HIS SHOES. DIDN'T YOU SEE FUHRMAN GIVE KATO KAELIN A NYSTAGMUS TEST? DID YOU SEE HIM LOOKING IN HIS EYES TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ANYTHING AT SOME POINT? WERE YOU AWARE OF THAT?

A: HE MAY HAVE DONE THAT. I WASN'T IN THE ROOM. I WAS OUT IN THE WALKWAY. HE MAY HAVE.

Q: BUT YOU READ REPORTS, HAVE YOU NOT, ABOUT THAT?

A: I DON'T RECALL --

MS. CLARK: OBJECTION. CALLS FOR HEARSAY, YOUR HONOR.

MR. COCHRAN: HE'S THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER, YOUR HONOR.

MS. CLARK: IT DOESN'T MATTER. THE HEARSAY RULE --

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. SUSTAINED.

Q: BY MR. COCHRAN: ALL RIGHT. NOW, DID YOU -- WERE YOU AWARE THAT FUHRMAN LOOKED THROUGH THIS PILE OF CLOTHES THAT WERE IN KATO KAELIN'S ROOM?

A: HE MAY HAVE. I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC RECOLLECTION. I DIDN'T SEE HIM LOOK THROUGH ANY CLOTHES.

Q: NOW, WITH REGARD TO YOUR GOING TO THIS LOCATION, YOU DESCRIBED FOR US YOUR GOING OVER THERE, YOUR PURPOSE THEN WAS TO ESTABLISH THIS RAPPORT WITH MR. SIMPSON, RIGHT, AMONG OTHER PURPOSES?

A: THAT'S ONE REASON, YES.

Q: ALL RIGHT. AND THE OTHER TWO DETECTIVES, FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS, WERE GOING TO GO OVER THERE TO -- FOR PHILLIPS TO GIVE NOTIFICATION; IS THAT CORRECT? ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

A: WELL, IF MR. SIMPSON WERE AT HOME, MYSELF OR DETECTIVE VANNATTER WOULD HAVE PROBABLY ACTUALLY GIVEN THE NOTIFICATION.

Q: WELL THEN, WHY THEN WOULD YOU NEED FUHRMAN AND PHILLIPS TO GO