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. Bailey, Mr. Blasier. The People are represented by Miss Clark, Mr. Darden and Mr. Escobar. The jury is not present. Counsel, anything we need to take up before we invite the jurors to rejoin us?

MS. CLARK: Yes, your Honor. The Court instructed us to prepare photographs of the crime scene at Bundy in the manner in which it currently appears, and I have done so. I gave a copy of these photographs to the Defense and this is the Court's copy. Would you like me to give it to the clerk?

THE COURT: Why don't you give it to the clerk and I will take a look at it when we are in recess. Thank you, counsel.

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, I believe last week you instructed the Defense to provide us with a witness list this morning.

THE COURT: I don't see Mr. Douglas. Mr. Shapiro, are we anticipating Mr. Douglas' arrival shortly?

MR. SHAPIRO: I believe so, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. As soon as Mr. Douglas arrives, we will take care of that, since he is the person appointed by the Defense to handle those discovery matters, but I anticipate we should resolve that this morning.

MR. DARDEN: Thank you.

MS. CLARK: Mr. Goldberg would like to address the Court very briefly if he may.

THE COURT: As to what issue?

MR. GOLDBERG: Good morning, your Honor.

THE COURT: As to what issue, counsel?

MR. GOLDBERG: We just wanted a clarification on the Court's ruling regarding Mr. Harmon not being allowed to contact Mr. Mullis. It seemed pretty specific to us and it seemed to us that that would not prohibit the People from sending letters to other experts to invite them to interview with our office.

THE COURT: That was a specific request by Dr. Mullis not to be contacted any further.

MR. GOLDBERG: That is all we wanted to clarify. Thank you.

THE COURT: Anything else?

MR. BAILEY: Your Honor, the witness currently giving evidence has colored charts which relate to color absorption across the spectrum, graphs, and I'm just wondering if we have received all that he has, because we would like to copy them in color. The ones we have are black and white and they really don't tell us what we would like to know.

THE COURT: Do you have those available?

MR. DEEDRICK: I have them.

THE COURT: Do you have copies available?

MR. DEEDRICK: No, I don't.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Bailey, do you want some additional time to take a look at them or are you prepared to go forward.

MR. BAILEY: We would like to look at them and make copies at Kinko's during the recess.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. BAILEY: We think there may be some we haven't seen before.

THE COURT: Miss Clark tells me that you have seen everything she has got.

MS. CLARK: Yeah.

MR. BAILEY: Well--

THE COURT: All right. Then we will talk about making copies available over the lunch hour.

MR. BAILEY: All right. I have an idea these things may be displayed this morning.

MS. CLARK: No.

THE COURT: I assume--

MS. CLARK: No, we won't, and as a matter of fact, Mr. Morton and Mr. Deedrick were just comparing notes and Mr. Morton has more charts than we do currently here.

MR. MORTON: I have one that he didn't have with him and there are some we don't have or at least I don't have.

MS. CLARK: That you don't have.

MR. MORTON: Right.

THE COURT: All right. Well, we will play trading cards with these exhibits at the noon hour.

MS. CLARK: But I don't intend to use the charts, and if any change in that occurs, we will approach the bench and I will let counsel know.

THE COURT: All right. Anything else? All right. Let's have the jurors, please.

(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. The record should reflect that we have now been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good morning.

THE COURT: I trust we all survived the 4th of July. Good. All right. Mr. Deedrick, would you resume your place on the witness stand, please.

Douglas W. Deedrick, the witness on the stand at the time of the evening adjournment, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:

THE COURT: All right. Good morning again, Mr. Deedrick?

MR. DEEDRICK: Good morning.

THE COURT: Mr. Deedrick, sir, you are reminded that you are still under oath. And Miss Clark, you may continue with your direct examination.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good morning.

DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MS. CLARK

MS. CLARK: Now, Mr. Deedrick, when we left off we were talking about a hair consistent with those of the Defendant found on Ronald Goldman's shirt. Do you recall that?

MR. DEEDRICK: I do, yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, I would like for you to assume the following facts for the purpose of a hypothetical: If you would, sir, please assume that at some time in the morning hours of June the 13th, after 10:00 A.M., a detective placed a white blanket over the body of Nicole Brown and that that blanket was never placed over the body of Ronald Goldman. Okay?

MR. DEEDRICK: Okay.

MS. CLARK: Now, if that blanket contained the head hairs of the Defendant, where would you be most likely to find those hairs if they were to transfer from the blanket to any other place? I'm talking about the blanket that was on the body of Nicole?

MR. BAILEY: Object to the form.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: The most likely individual that may have a hair or hairs from an individual--another individual, that is from that blanket, would have been Nicole Brown, since she had direct contact with the blanket, based on your information.

MS. CLARK: Okay. And if that blanket was never placed on the body of Ron Goldman, what is the likelihood that any hairs that may have been present on that blanket would transfer from the blanket onto his body?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, insufficient foundation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: If the--

THE COURT: The problem with the question, counsel, is "Likelihood."

MS. CLARK: Likelihood? Okay.

MS. CLARK: In your experience, sir, when an article of clothing or a blanket is responsible for a hair or fiber transfer, in your experience have you commonly found that the hair or fiber flies onto some other object or body with which it has no direct contact?

MR. BAILEY: Object, your Honor.

THE COURT: Ground.

MR. BAILEY: No showing he has expertise in crime scene investigation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Okay. From my experience of examining evidence that is submitted from crime scenes, the individuals most likely to have evidence of hair or fiber transfer would be those individuals that had some contact with an item, such as body bags we often get in, blankets and transport sheets that are often submitted along with other items from the victims. That is where you generally see the contact and generally see the fiber or hairs transferred. It is just common sense.

MS. CLARK: Now, did you examine the hair and fiber removed from the body and clothing of Nicole Brown?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did.

MS. CLARK: And did you find any hairs consistent with those of the Defendant on her body or clothing?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did not.

MS. CLARK: And if the blanket had been the source of the head hair you found on Ronald Goldman's shirt that was consistent with the Defendant's, where would the likely place to find it--where would the most likely place you would expect to find it be?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Counsel, the problem is "Likely."

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MS. CLARK: In your experience where would you expect to find that hair if the blanket was the source of it?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, asked and answered.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, if the blanket is covered with hairs from an individual or from any other source, and that blanket comes in contact with a person or the clothing of that person, because of the primary transfer and secondary transfers that are going on, that person would be the most likely candidate to have a hair on the clothing of that individual.

MS. CLARK: Okay. By the way, did you find any head hairs on Nicole's body or clothing that were consistent with the head hairs of Ronald Goldman?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did not.

MS. CLARK: Sir, if a stabbing occurs in which the victim offers little or no resistance and there is primarily arm's length contact, what impact does that have on whether or not there will be hair or fiber transferred to the body or clothing of that victim?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculative.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. Is the lack of any hairs consistent with those of Ronald Goldman or those of the Defendant consistent with her having been rapidly incapacitated and murdered while unconscious?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: How would you explain the lack of any hairs consistent with those of Ronald Goldman or any other foreign hairs consistent with those of her attacker perhaps on the body of Nicole Brown?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, calls for speculation.

THE COURT: My problem with that one is foundational regarding his expertise to tell those things.

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MS. CLARK: Sir, you processed, I think you told us before, 4000 hair and fiber cases in your time?

MR. DEEDRICK: Around 4000 cases. I've also done crime scene investigation, too.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Would you please explain to us, sir, what you have done in that connection.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, within--within the area of crime scene investigation I have attended a course at the FBI academy on how to examine crime scenes and collect evidence from crime scenes. I also lecture national academy individuals, in-service agents taking training at the academy, people that come through, through the hair and fiber school down at the FBI academy, and other people, on how to collect evidence at a crime scene, so I am familiar with the collection and preservation of physical evidence. And I'm also familiar with what one--an individual might expect to find on clothing items or blanket items or other items that are recovered at a crime scene and knowing what one might expect to find helps in the actual examination of a crime scene so that the evidence can be collected properly.

MS. CLARK: In light of that and your expertise, sir, in hair and fiber examinations, on how many occasions have you examined the clothing, hair and trace recovered from the clothing and bodies of stabbing victims?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, many times, many times.

MS. CLARK: And on any of those occasions were you aware of the--the facts of the case in terms of how the stabbing occurred?

MR. DEEDRICK: Sometimes yes; sometimes no.

MS. CLARK: In any of those cases was there a confession, for example?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, irrelevant.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MS. CLARK: In those--based on that experience, sir, and the knowledge you acquired from those cases, can you tell us whether the lack of any foreign hairs on the body and clothing of Nicole Brown is consistent with her having been rapidly incapacitated and murdered while unconscious?

MR. BAILEY: Object. Ask to approach, your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled on the request to approach. The objection to the question, though, is sustained.

MS. CLARK: How do you explain or how can you account for the lack of foreign hairs or fibers on the body of Nicole Brown?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, the lack of hair and fiber evidence would indicate to me that there was limited contact with a surface that contained either hair or textile fibers. The lack--the less--the less the amount of contact, the less the force of the contact would result in less evidence being found.

MS. CLARK: Now, I think you said earlier that you found some limb hairs of black origin collected from the evidence in this case?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And by "Limb hairs" I think you defined it before as from the hand or the arm or the leg?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And which items of evidence revealed black limb hairs?

MR. DEEDRICK: That would have been Ron Goldman's shirt as well as the glove recovered at Rockingham.

MS. CLARK: Now, did you receive any limb hair samples from the Defendant?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did not.

MS. CLARK: What is your habit and custom with respect to the comparison of limb hairs?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, they are not routinely compared in a forensic laboratory because of their limited nature.

MS. CLARK: What do you mean by that, "Limited nature"?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, limb hairs do not have enough individual microscopic characteristics, like head hairs and pubic hairs, for me to say or for forensic examiners to say that this person is a likely candidate of this particular hair as being the source. There is too much overlap that we find. There is some broad conclusions that can be reached. That is, a person with blond limb hair is going to look different than an individual that has black-colored limb hair. It is possible to distinguish race in some instances, but they are not as good as head and pubic hairs for comparison purposes.

MS. CLARK: What kind of reliability is there then in the conclusion that you reached concerning the race of the limb hair you found on Ronald Goldman's shirt and the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: These are all just pieces of information that--that are collected from the analysis of trace evidence. That is, the little bits and pieces that may have been exchanged during some contact between the assailant and the victims and from the clothing that they may have worn. It is just another piece of evidence, piece of information.

MS. CLARK: Okay. And is--is the conclusion you reached, the result you reached, concerning the racial origin of that limb hair on Ron Goldman's shirt and the Rockingham glove, is that reliable?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes. Yes, the identification is fine as far as I'm concerned.

MS. CLARK: Where on the Rockingham glove was the limb hair found?

MR. DEEDRICK: That was on the inside.

MS. CLARK: Were there any--were there any head hairs of black origin found inside the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: There was a head hair fragment, yes. It was not suitable for meaningful comparison purposes.

MS. CLARK: And that is because you could not compare it because--

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it was a fragment that was called opaque, that is, it is black and you cannot actually pass light through it enough so that you can look at the internal microscopic characteristics.

MS. CLARK: Sir, if an African American individual would wear those gloves, the Rockingham glove in specific, would that be consistent with the limb hair that you found inside the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: It would.

MS. CLARK: And again, if the attacker, if the murderer of Ron Goldman were an African American individual, would that be consistent with the limb hair you found on his shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, it would.

MS. CLARK: Now, we've talked a little bit about your experience in previous stabbing cases, sir, and I wanted to ask you is it common in your experience to find head hair transfers in stabbing cases?

MR. DEEDRICK: It is not very common from my experience, no.

MS. CLARK: And why is that?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, certain types of cases don't lend themselves well for a transfer of hair evidence. Cases like sexual assault case where you have bed sheets and clothing and worn by the individuals are often probably the better items of evidence to collect--to collect hair and fiber material from. They are large items, they tend to hold hair and fiber for a longer period of time. But in stabbing cases I just haven't seen it. And I would have expected in stabbing cases, being violent as they are, that--that I would find a lot of hair transfers, such as head hair transfers, but I just don't see it. Once in awhile you do, but it is uncommon.

MS. CLARK: And under what circumstances and in what cases did you have head hairs and fibers for comparison in a stabbing case?

MR. DEEDRICK: Specific cases?

MS. CLARK: No, generally what circumstances?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, any--

MR. BAILEY: I'm going to object as irrelevant, your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled, but it is vague.

MS. CLARK: It is vague?.

MR. DEEDRICK: I'm not real clear, but any stabbing case that is submitted to the laboratory for analysis to determine if there are hair or fibers that may have been exchanged, they come in from all around the country from mostly local and state police agencies, but we also investigate crimes on government reservations and Indian reservations that come under our jurisdiction that involve often very violent crimes.

MR. BAILEY: Objection, nonresponsive, move to strike.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MS. CLARK: It proves the question was vague. Let me ask a more specific one.

MS. CLARK: In stabbing cases what--let me ask you this: In prior stabbing cases have you had a situation where clothing of the perpetrator--items of clothing of the perpetrator were left behind?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, that has happened. Probably the best example of where you would might--might find hair evidence or fiber evidence, rather than on the clothing itself of the victims.

MS. CLARK: And an example of that in this case, like the knit cap that was found at Ron Goldman's feet?

MR. BAILEY: I object, your Honor, and ask to approach.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, this is an example of an item that would be of extreme value, from my standpoint, to--for the presence of hair and fiber evidence, because it may be something left behind by the assailant. Not knowing information about a case, the laboratory examiner, like myself, would identify the materials not knowing if the hat or glove or any other item belonged to anybody. There is no information that is given to me, it was just submitted to me for analysis, but in a struggle, this may occur. And that gives us the best information and often that is what I end up testifying about. After bank robberies, they drop clothing. After violent crime, they drop clothing. Or they may try to discard and get rid of clothing and they discover the clothing. Those are good examples.

MR. BAILEY: I object, your Honor. Way beyond the question.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. BAILEY: I will move to strike.

THE COURT: Ask another question.

MS. CLARK: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Let's move on to fiber. Did you do some fiber examinations in this case, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did.

MS. CLARK: With regard to those fiber examinations you conducted in this case did you examine Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, I did.

MS. CLARK: Your Honor, I would like to mark the next chart. I think we left off with--

THE COURT: 482.

MS. CLARK: Was it 482?

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: 482. That is next in order? The photograph being shown on the screen, your Honor, is from this board.

(Peo's 482 for id = chart)

THE COURT: All right. I will need that on my monitor as well.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us, first of all, sir, what kind of fibers the shirt of Ronald Goldman is made of?

MR. DEEDRICK: They are made of cotton fibers; primarily two colors, an off-white and a sort of a brownish color, light brown.

MS. CLARK: When you examined the fibers collected from the glove at Rockingham, did you find any fibers that matched the fibers on Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. BAILEY: I object, your Honor, and ask to approach.

THE COURT: Sustained. We are not going to approach, though.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor. Thank you.

THE COURT: Proceed.

MS. CLARK: When you examined the Rockingham glove, did you find any fibers that were consistent with the fibers of Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did.

MS. CLARK: And what did you base your conclusion on, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: That would have been a microscopic comparison.

MS. CLARK: When you examined the fibers collected from the glove at Bundy, did you find any fibers that were consistent with the fibers on Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And what method of comparison did you use for that?

MR. DEEDRICK: That would have been the same, a microscopic comparison.

MS. CLARK: Were there any other items at the crime scene that you found that were found to contain fibers consistent with those of Ronald Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: That would have been the knit hat that was recovered at the crime scene.

MS. CLARK: And again, what method of comparison did you use for that?

MR. DEEDRICK: Microscopic comparison.

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. Now, off-white cotton fibers, isn't that fairly common?

MR. DEEDRICK: It is common, yes, yes.

MS. CLARK: Was there something about the appearance of these particular fibers that you found on the Rockingham and Bundy gloves and on the knit cap that strengthened your opinion that those fibers were consistent with those of Ronald Goldman's shirt?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, leading.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, there did appear to be blood on these fibers which tended to place to me a little bit more significance. The fact that they are off-white cotton does not have significance, but the fact that they appeared to have blood and may be in some way linked to the event, I felt they were important.

MS. CLARK: Did you cause photographs to be taken of the fibers that were collected from the Rockingham and Bundy gloves and the knit hat that you determined to be consistent with the fibers of Ronald Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: Your Honor, the neck board we would ask that it be marked People's 483 entitled, "Known cotton fibers from Ronald Goldman's shirt."

(Peo's 483 for id = chart)

MS. CLARK: All right. Mr. Deedrick, if you wouldn't mind stepping down with the pointer, can you tell us, first of all, the photos at the top that are labeled K18, can you tell us what that is?

MR. DEEDRICK: K18, these--this is the specimen number for the--for the shirt. That was the number that we gave it in the FBI laboratory. The off-white cotton fibers are represented in the upper left-hand portion of the chart again marked K18. On the right-hand portion of the chart they are the brownish-colored fibers that make up the shirt that Ronald Goldman wore that evening, and again that is also marked K18. The bottom photographs I have six photographs in all and they are so labeled as to where the fibers originated. The first photograph I took from Goldman's shirt, Q23, to give you an idea of what the fibers looked like from actually debris that came off this shirt. K3B is the center photograph. It is from the right glove. That is the glove from Rockingham. K1 from again the glove from Rockingham, which is to the right of that photograph. Q8B2 is from the knit hat and that is the outside of the hat. Q76 from the left glove, that is the glove from Bundy. And K47 from the knit hat as well and I believe that is the from the outside of the hat.

MS. CLARK: And the Q47 fiber, was this part of the Q47, that is part of the debris that you yourself collected from the hat?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. That would have been the debris that I--that I processed from the hat in the laboratory.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, sir. And if I may, your Honor, I would like to remove the result mat.

(Brief pause.)

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: All right. Mr. Deedrick, if the murderer of Ron Goldman wearing the gloves found at Bundy and Rockingham and the knit hat found at Bundy attacked and stabbed Ronald Goldman through his shirt, would those--would those set of events be consistent with the fibers of Ronald Goldman's shirt that you found on the Bundy and Rockingham gloves and on the knit cap?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, argumentative.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: It could be consistent, especially since there would be damage to the fabric, damage to the shirt that would cause a greater loss of fibers.

MS. CLARK: And if the murderer, wearing those gloves and knit cap, were to have held Ronald Goldman from behind with his left arm and his left hand in contact with Ronald Goldman's shirt, might that account also for the fibers consistent with Ronald Goldman's shirt that were found on the Bundy glove?

MR. BAILEY: Same objection.

THE COURT: It is leading.

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us, sir--well, in terms of--I will frame my hypothetical. Assume the following: That the murderer attacked Ronald Goldman from holding him from behind with his left arm wearing the Bundy glove and that the Bundy glove was in contact with Ronald Goldman's shirt. Can you tell us whether that set of events, hypothetical, would be consistent with your findings of the fibers on--of Ronald Goldman's shirt, the fibers consistent with those of Ronald Goldman's shirt on the Bundy glove?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, leading, argumentative.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: If--if the glove, for instance, came in actual contact with the shirt and the glove had any type of fluid on it, possibly blood, that would be an excellent source of the fiber being present because of the actual contact. The glove, a dry glove is not going to hold onto fibers like a damp glove would and the fiber, I believe, did appear to have blood on it.

MS. CLARK: From the Bundy glove as well?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, Ronald Goldman's shirt was long-sleeved, was it not?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, it was.

MS. CLARK: Assume again, for the purpose of a hypothetical, sir, that if in the struggle Ron Goldman reached behind him to grab his attacker and grabbed the knit cap off of his head, would that account for the fibers from his shirt, the fibers consistent with Ronald Goldman's shirt being found on the knit cap?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, leading and argumentative.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Again, if the fabric from the victim's shirt came in physical contact with the hat, certainly that would be a logical explanation for the fibers being present on the hat.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Now, are you saying that is the only logical explanation that there could be for that finding?

MR. DEEDRICK: No, no. It is just a reasonable explanation based on what I see.

MS. CLARK: And is it also based, sir, on your judgment and your experience and expertise over these last 17 years?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, again, that is why I look at clothing items that are submitted from victims and suspects in cases, because of transfer that can occur between them during physical contact. It can be easily explained by identifying these materials and then doing comparisons, and seeing that over the years supports the contention that you are bringing here, that when two objects do come in contact there is a good chance that material can be exchanged.

MS. CLARK: Now, assume further, hypothetically, sir, that the murderer, while wearing the Rockingham glove, stabbed Ronald Goldman in which--in a manner that brought his glove into contact with Ronald Goldman's shirt, say, stabbed him in the left abdomen, in the left side. Would that--would those set of events be a reasonable explanation for your finding of fibers consistent with Ronald Goldman's shirt on the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yeah, there--

MR. BAILEY: Objection, leading, argumentative.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: There are two events that are happening here. One, you have contact between the surface of the glove and the surface of the fabric. The second thing that is happening is that the fabric is being damaged so that a number of loose fibers are now being released. The two events would--again, I would expect a transfer in this instance, especially on a damp bloody glove.

MS. CLARK: And in that regard, sir, do you have any similar observations to those that you made concerning the adherence of the fibers consistent with Ronald Goldman's shirt to the Bundy glove as you do with respect to the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, both gloves had bodily fluids on them. They were damp possibly from blood. Both gloves would be likely candidates for fiber transfers, especially from the shirt, because of it being damaged.

MS. CLARK: Did you also, sir, examine Ronald Goldman's jeans?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And did you examine hair and trace recovered from those jeans, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did.

MS. CLARK: Did you, in your experience of hair and fiber, find any fiber that was consistent with the fibers of Ronald Goldman's jeans?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did.

MS. CLARK: And what method did you use to examine and compare those fibers that you found to be consistent with the jeans of Ronald Goldman?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, that would again have been a microscopic comparison.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us, sir, from which items of evidence the fibers consistent with Ronald Goldman's jeans were collected?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, these fibers were found on both gloves, the Rockingham glove and the Bundy glove, and also on items of clothing submitted from Ronald Goldman.

MS. CLARK: And when you say "Items submitted from Ronald Goldman," what did his shirt--did you find any fibers consistent with his jeans on his shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, I did.

MS. CLARK: Now, is that, in your experience, sir, common, to find transfer of fibers from one item of clothing onto another item of clothing that someone has worn?

MR. DEEDRICK: That is not very surprising. I would expect that, yes.

MS. CLARK: So, for example, if you are wearing two or more items of clothing, say, a shirt and pants or pants and socks, is it common in your experience to find fibers from your shirt on your pants?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, it is.

MS. CLARK: Or from your pants on your socks?

MR. DEEDRICK: It wouldn't surprise me. I would expect that.

MS. CLARK: Come back to that a little bit later.

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: May I pull off the results?

THE COURT: Yes.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. Did you, in your examination of fibers collected from the evidence in this case, find any that were consistent with the dress of Nicole Brown?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, I did.

MS. CLARK: And again, what method of comparison did you use to arrive at that conclusion, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: That would have been almost the entire battery of tests that we routinely conduct, microscopic comparison, an instrumental comparison, visual comparison, polarized light comparison, all of the normal tests that we run.

MS. CLARK: Okay. And when you say "All of the normal tests that you run," earlier you indicated to us there were certain tests that could be performed on manmade fibers that you could not perform on the natural occurring fibers like cotton?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

MS. CLARK: Were all of those additional steps and tests used in the case of the dress Nicole Brown was found in?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, because her dress was composed of synthetic or manmade fibers.

MS. CLARK: May I have a moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes. (Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)

THE COURT: Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor. I would like to mark as People's next in order a photograph of a dress as People's 484.

THE COURT: 484.

(Peo's 484 for id = photograph)

MS. CLARK: Did you examine the dress itself, sir, at some point?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And we are showing you the picture that has now been marked as People's 484.

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: We are going to try and lighten it up there on the screen. That is great.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: Thank you.

MS. CLARK: Now, where--on what item of evidence were fibers consistent with the dress of Nicole Brown found, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, they were found on Ronald Goldman's shirt. They are actual yarns.

MS. CLARK: What do you mean by that?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it appears to be a knitted fabric, and when knitted fabrics are damaged they often will break, and depending on the fabric and depending on the fibers, they will actually break off in yarns. And the dress is made--it is a very tight knit and the yarns are very small.

MS. CLARK: Was there any damage that you observed on Nicole Brown Simpson's dress that could account for the yarns you found on Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, the only damage that I saw was in the zipper area on the back.

MS. CLARK: Is it possible for you to see that on your monitor?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, no. It would have to be enlarged quite a bit. Just a small area near where the zipper is attached to the fabric. It appeared to be pulled apart in one location.

MS. CLARK: Can you see it there, sir? For the record, we have enlarged and zoomed into the zipper area described by the witness.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it would have been at the base, the base portion of the zipper at the bottom portion where it--at its full open point.

MS. CLARK: At the bottom? You mean where--in a position where the zipper would have been opened at the bottom?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, no, the zipper may have--again, I have to think about this a little bit now. The zipper itself was right near--again it was a low-cut back. It would have been at the top, I'm sorry, right at the top portion of the zipper where it closed.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: Right at the top?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: And can we zoom in there?

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: There we go. Okay.

MS. CLARK: Can you see the damage you refer to in this photograph, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it is difficult to see. There wasn't a great deal of damage. Just at the point where the zipper made contact with the fabric it was pulled apart. Not a great deal of damage.

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. Can you--is there a logical explanation for how yarns from the dress of Nicole Brown came to be transferred to the shirt of Ronald Goldman?

MR. BAILEY: I object to this.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: Assume the following facts for a hypothetical, sir: That the murderer attacked Nicole grabbing her on the back of the dress, throwing her down, at which point the dress was ripped, yarns came--from the dress came into his hand that he used to throw her down, then grabbed her dress with, and that he then went over to Ronald Goldman using that same hand to touch Ronald Goldman on his shirt. Would those events be consistent with the finding of yarns from Nicole Brown Simpson's dress on the shirt of Ronald Goldman?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, leading, argumentative, speculative.

THE COURT: You add assumes facts that aren't in evidence?

MR. BAILEY: Yes.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: Well, sir, in your experience is this--would it be reasonable to infer from the finding of the yarns on Ronald Goldman's dress that are consistent with Nicole Brown Simpson's dress--did I just say "Dress" twice? In your experience and your judgment, sir, would it be reasonable and logical to infer that the damage to Nicole Brown Simpson's dress caused yarns to come off in the hand of the killer and get transferred to the shirt of Ronald Goldman?

MR. BAILEY: Objection on the same grounds.

THE COURT: Sustained. Let me see counsel over 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: Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: Okay. You have described to us the damage you saw on Nicole Brown Simpson's dress, correct?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, that's correct.

MS. CLARK: And did you see any loose yarns in the area of damage you have just described?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, there was damage. Difficult to say a lot of damage because of the knitted fabric.

MS. CLARK: How many of those yarns consistent with her dress were found on Ronald Goldman's?

MR. DEEDRICK: There were four.

MS. CLARK: Would a bloody glove be a good medium for the transfer of those fibers from her dress to Ronald Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, it would.

MS. CLARK: All right. In your experience, sir, of the fibers selected from the evidence in this case, did you find any that could have come from the blue knit ski cap?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, I did.

MS. CLARK: And--

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: We are going to show you a photograph on the monitor that is already contained on the board marked as People's 483.

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: It has been individually marked as well as People's 441.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: All right. From what items of evidence were fibers consistent with those of the blue knit ski cap collected in this case?

MR. DEEDRICK: They would have been collected from the--from Ronald Goldman's shirt.

MS. CLARK: And again, what was the method of comparison used for this blue knit cap?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it could have been all of the tests that we normally do with manmade fibers.

MS. CLARK: The blue knit ski cap, what were the fibers that you found on Ronald Goldman's shirt consistent with those, what kind of fibers were they?

MR. DEEDRICK: They were acrylic fibers.

MS. CLARK: So did you perform all of the methods of comparison that you earlier described to us that could be done on manmade fibers?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes. The first test would be a simple microscopic comparison, that is, taking a look at them visually to see if they look the same, and then if they do, the follow-up tests to confirm that.

MS. CLARK: Did you prepare photographs of these fibers to show the jury?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: Did you mount all the photographs or all of the fibers that you saw in this case?

MR. DEEDRICK: No. I believe there were at least one or two fibers I didn't photograph.

MS. CLARK: And why is that?

MR. DEEDRICK: I just took representative samples.

MS. CLARK: Okay. When you do a comparison, sir, do you compare photographs?

MR. DEEDRICK: No, no. The examinations are done visually in a field of view of the microscope. Photographs are just aids to allow jurors to see what I was seeing.

MS. CLARK: And I would ask that this be marked People's 486 or 485.

THE COURT: 485.

(Peo's 485 for id = photograph)

THE COURT: Mrs. Robertson says 485.

MS. CLARK: 485.

MS. CLARK: How many fibers consistent with those of the blue knit cap were found on Ronald Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: There were three or four.

MS. CLARK: If you wouldn't mind, sir, could you step down and show to the jury what is shown on these photographs on the chart marked as People's 485?

MR. DEEDRICK: (Witness complies.) All right. This particular chart has photographs of the known fabric from the--from the knit hat that was submitted. It is marked here as K47. It is actually Q47 known sample. Okay. So it is actual fibers from the knit hat and that would be the top two photographs on the upper left-hand side. The photographs at the bottom would be photographs of fibers recovered from Ron Goldman's shirt. In the known sample of fabric from the hat there were larger diameter fibers, as well as finer diameter fibers, and they were both present in the questioned and the known materials. The photograph on the far right, listed as K17, is just the fibers that make up the dress of Nicole Brown. The fiber on the lower right is from the--is one fiber taken from the yarn, one of the yarns from Q23, which would be Ron Goldman's shirt, and this does appear to have some blood on the surface of the fiber.

MS. CLARK: All right. Then is the--is Q23 a fiber that you found to be consistent with the fibers of Nicole's dress?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. I testified about this previously. This is just one of the fibers taken off Ron Goldman's shirt and it exhibited the same characteristics as the dress fibers Nicole Brown.

MS. CLARK: And then in the other four photographs, the upper two are the exemplars, the sample actually from the knit cap?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. Those are fibers taken actually from a cutting from the knit hat, so those are fibers that make up the hat. The questioned fibers on the bottom would be just loose individual fibers that were recovered from the debris in the victim's clothes.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, sir. And if I may pull off the result on the result board.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: Now, your finding of fibers consistent with those of the knit hat on Ron Goldman's shirt, does that indicate to you, in your experience and judgment, that there was contact between the wearer of that hat and Ronald Goldman?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.

MS. CLARK: How could that--in your experience and judgment, sir, the finding of fibers consistent with those from the knit cap on Ronald Goldman's shirt, what kind of transfer mechanism or what kind of transfer would that be, would have caused that finding?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation, assuming facts not in evidence.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Fibers, and I have said this a number of times already, that I find on an item of clothing are the result of either a direct physical contact with the fabric or indirect. There could be events that are taking place at some point in between that one might say could have happened. It is difficult to know. Either they got there directly from actual contact between the hat and the shirt, or they got there because some--something else came in between. Something maybe removed the hat, maybe there was contact with the victim and the hat, maybe there was contact with the assailant and the hat and then the victim. There could be a number of events that are taking place which could result in the presence of those fibers.

MS. CLARK: Hypothetically speaking, sir, would it be reasonable then, given your findings, are your findings consistent with Ronald Goldman having been attacked by the person wearing that cap, in the course of the struggle Ronald Goldman reaches behind him to pull the cap off? Would that set of events be consistent with the finding of the knit cap fibers which were consistent with those from the knit cap being found on Ronald Goldman's shirt?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: I think we are assuming facts that aren't in evidence for the purpose of that hypothetical.

MS. CLARK: All right. Hypothetically speaking, sir, if Ronald Goldman were attacked by the wearer of the knit cap, in the course of their struggle the knit cap came off, off the murderer, would that event be consistent with your findings of the fibers consistent with those of the knit cap found on Ronald Goldman's shirt?

MR. BAILEY: Same objection.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, we know one thing, that the fibers on the shirt look like the fibers from the hat. It could have been a direct contact while the person was wearing the hat or during the process of removing the hat could have resulted in the transfer. There is really no way to know that for sure. All I do know is that there were fibers on the shirt that looked like the hat fibers.

MS. CLARK: Well, let me ask you this, sir: You told us, I believe, that you found fibers consistent with those of Ronald Goldman's shirt on the knit cap, did you not?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

MS. CLARK: Would that finding also be consistent with the hypothetical I just gave you of the--of Ronald Goldman being attacked by the wearer of the knit cap, the knit cap coming off in the struggle?

MR. DEEDRICK: A two-way transfer is--it increases the likelihood that there was actual contact directly or indirectly, but it shows a close relationship between those items and each other.

MS. CLARK: Now, you--you recall testifying concerning your findings of the--concerning the examination of hair and fiber taken from the dress and body of Nicole Brown, correct?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, that's right.

MS. CLARK: And you indicate that you found--did you find any fibers consistent with those of the blue knit hat on Miss Brown's clothing?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did not.

MS. CLARK: And what, if anything, does that indicate to you with respect to the amount of contact she had with her attacker while he was wearing that knit hat?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, assuming facts not in evidence.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, there may not have been any contact then between the individual wearing the hat or with the person that had fibers on their hands or arms when that contact took place. Sometimes--sometimes you see fibers; sometimes you don't, and it is difficult to know exactly how they got there. One can assume certain things, but the fact is, I did not find any fibers like the hat on Nicole Brown's dress.

MS. CLARK: Would that finding be consistent with having had the murderer having had limited contact--limited physical contact with Nicole Brown and her being rapidly incapacitated offering little resistance?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: If the knit cap, hypothetically speaking, came off early in the struggle with Ronald Goldman and prior to the major wounds inflicted on Nicole Brown, would that be consistent with your failure to find any fibers consistent with the blue knit cap on the dress of Nicole Brown?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation, assuming facts not in evidence.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Yeah. The--it is--this is persistence that is taking place. This persistence of fibers. How long the fibers are going to remain is coming into play here, besides actual transfer, so that if an individual comes in contact initially with an item and fibers are transferred onto that person, and in this particular case if the hat is removed early on, but there was a transfer of fibers from the hat onto the assailant and then onto a victim, these fibers will dissipate in number and in fact they won't persist on the--on the subject or the assailant. So that if there is subsequent contact, it is reasonable to believe that less fibers, if any, might transfer onto the next person because of a loss of these fibers. You only transfer so many. You are not walking around with large fuzz balls all over you. You transfer a few things and then you move on to the next item and you may not even transfer to the second item. But sometimes persistence of fibers and the number of fibers that one finds may indicate order, that is, order to an event, and I have seen it before in case work where you can determine possibly that one victim may have been killed first and then a second victim and then a third victim and a fourth victim, and you can see that actually on--from the fibers that one finds, that the fiber numbers drop off. And the last victim may not have anything, whereas the first victim may have a lot of fiber evidence.

MS. CLARK: And what do you attribute the rapid loss of fiber--that dwindling amount of fibers that you find on the bodies of successive victims to?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, there is only a certain amount of material that is ready to go, ready to transfer, either on the surface of the fabric or from the actual fabric, and a lot of the fibers are the loose fibers that are laying on the surface of the fabric. They are not really bound into the fabric unless there is some damage to it, and then the fibers will become free, up those loose fibers are--there is maybe a set number, depending on the fabric. The transfer occurs, contact occurs and then a transfer takes place. A certain number of fibers then will be removed from the surface of that fabric onto that victim. A second victim may come into play and there may not be as many. The third victim, the fourth victim, you will see an ever decreasing number until you might not find anything.

MS. CLARK: And I think you indicated earlier as well, sir, that fibers are not as persistent in terms of whether they stay on an object as hairs are?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's--

MS. CLARK: Do you recall that?

MR. DEEDRICK: That is true. The fiber evidence is extremely useful in cases where you have dead bodies because they are not moving and the fibers that one finds on these dead bodies often indicates last contact, because that is the last bit of fiber transfers that are taking place, whereas an assailant who leaves the scene within hours, the fibers will be lost, and if you don't get the item from the assailant within short order, the evidence of a fiber transfer may not be seen because they are lost. We just--because we brush things off, we get off the ground, we brush ourselves, we wash our clothes, we do a number of things, like we normally we sit in a car, we lose fibers on the seat. So many things happen that can cause the loss of fibers, but with dead bodies they are not moving and they are often a very good source of fibers of the last contact they may have had.

MS. CLARK: So the finding of fibers, does this assist you in determining whether there has been recent contact or the recent deposit of evidence?

MR. DEEDRICK: It is possible to draw some conclusions from that. There are always going to be fibers that one cannot account for, but certain populations of fibers on certain items may take on increased significance, yes.

MS. CLARK: In your experience of fibers collected from the evidence in this case, sir, did you find any that could have originated from the lining of either the Bundy or the Rockingham gloves?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And can you tell us what kind of fibers make up the lining of those gloves, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: Those are cashmere.

MS. CLARK: And on what items did you find those fibers?

MR. DEEDRICK: One fiber was found on Ronald Goldman's shirt, another fiber was found on the knit hat left at Bundy.

MS. CLARK: And you made that finding based on what kind of comparison?

MR. DEEDRICK: That would have been a microscopic comparison. Those are hairs.

MS. CLARK: Those are hairs?

MR. DEEDRICK: Those are untreated, undyed natural hairs from a goat.

MS. CLARK: And what--after you made the comparison of the fibers from the knit hat and Ronald Goldman's shirt, when you compared those to the lining fibers of both gloves, Bundy and Rockingham, what conclusion did you reach?

THE COURT: Excuse me, counsel. Why don't you rephrase your question. You are referring to it as fiber.

MS. CLARK: Right. Thank you, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: When you compared those hairs from Ronald Goldman's shirt and the knit cap, the blue knit cap, to the hairs recovered from the interior of the lining of the gloves at Bundy and Rockingham, what conclusion did you reach?

MR. DEEDRICK: I may be a little confused here. Talking about hairs and fibers. We are mixing the two. Hairs become fibers when they end up on fabric, so essentially they are animal fibers. And when I compared those fibers found on Ronald Goldman's shirt and on the knit hat, they could have come from either glove, because both gloves had the same types of fibers or hairs.

MS. CLARK: Now, can you tell us, sir, that those fibers could have only come from the Bundy and Rockingham gloves?

MR. DEEDRICK: No, I can't say that.

MS. CLARK: What can you say?

MR. DEEDRICK: That they could have come from those gloves or another glove or another fabric that had exactly the same animal hairs or animal fibers present.

MS. CLARK: And may I remove the--

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: All right. Now, if the attacker wore these gloves during the murders and during the struggle with Ronald Goldman one of those gloves was pulled off, would there be fibers from the lining of that left glove on his bare hand?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes.

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: They would--there would be probably a number of fibers from the inside of that glove on the hands of the individual.

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MS. CLARK: And if the murderer continued to pursue attack on Ronald Goldman after that glove came off his left hand, would those fibers on his hand be transferred to the body of Ronald Goldman, if there was contact?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

MR. DEEDRICK: It could have, but just again, this transfer that is taking place here, it would have been a secondary transfer in this instance because the primary transfer takes place between the glove and the hand. Secondary transfer then from the hand to the victim, yes.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Well then, can you, sir, tell us, if that is the case, I think you indicated to us that numerous hair fibers from the lining of that glove would have come--on have been on the bare hand of the attacker when the glove came off?

MR. DEEDRICK: It could have been any number. I don't really know for certain. Likely more than one.

MS. CLARK: And you indicated--how many of the fibers on Ronald Goldman's shirt did you find that were consistent with the lining of the gloves?

MR. DEEDRICK: There was one, just one.

MS. CLARK: Well, why only one?

MR. DEEDRICK: That is all that I found.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Is there any explanation, based on your experience and judgment, that could account for the fact that only one such fiber was found on the shirt of Ronald Goldman?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, the action of the contact here may have resulted in the loss of fibers, again, that there may have been a larger population initially deposited. The contact caused the loss of the fibers and they could be on the ground. I mean, there is no way to know where they were or if more fibers were even transferred. Maybe only one fiber was transferred. Maybe in the processing technique we just didn't find it. Maybe they are still there. I only looked at what was recovered and submitted to me and in that debris there was only one fiber.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Now, did you receive a fiber mounted on a slide that had been found in the Coroner's jar containing the neck tissue of Nicole Brown?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And were you able to associate that fiber with any of the known clothing standards submitted to you in this case?

MR. DEEDRICK: I could not.

MS. CLARK: Can you describe for us the appearance of that hair that you--was submitted to you mounted on a slide?

MR. DEEDRICK: It was a blue cotton fiber.

MS. CLARK: I think you earlier indicated to us, sir, that the off-white cotton fiber of Ronald Goldman's shirt was a very common one. What, if any, observation would you make in that regard with respect to the blue cotton fiber that was on the slide that you saw?

MR. DEEDRICK: I wouldn't say necessarily it was common. Cotton fibers are relatively common. The color blue is a common color, but there are many, many shades of blue. Blue jean fibers, that is too common. We don't even consider blue jean cotton. This didn't appear to be a new jean type fiber. This appeared to have come from some type of processed fabric with a reasonable dye absorption and the color was sort of a purplish blue almost, so it would have been significant to compare if I had a fabric that looked like it.

MS. CLARK: Now, with respect to this fiber that was found in the neck tissue excised from Nicole Brown Simpson's body, can you tell us, sir, whether you know what the Coroner's employee who put that tissue into the jar was wearing at the time that they put the tissue into the jar?

MR. DEEDRICK: No, I don't.

MS. CLARK: Do you know what the Coroner who actually excised that neck tissue was wearing at the time that he did so?

MR. DEEDRICK: I do not.

MS. CLARK: Do you know whether that fiber may have already been in the jar her neck tissue was placed into?

MR. DEEDRICK: No.

MS. CLARK: At the time it was placed into it?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. I wouldn't know.

MS. CLARK: Do you know what the Coroner investigators who first handled her body at the scene were wearing?

MR. DEEDRICK: No.

MS. CLARK: And if Nicole's body had been covered with a blanket which contained blue cotton fiber like that you saw on the slide that was prepared from her neck tissue, could that fiber have been transferred by the placement of the blanket on her body to the neck wound?

MR. DEEDRICK: It is possible, yes.

MS. CLARK: Many things are possible?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, you have to look at what you have and sometimes you can speculate, but you have to basically fall back on what you have.

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. Did you examine fibers collected from the evidence in this case that consisted of carpet sample from the Bronco owned by the Defendant?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And were the known carpet samples collected from the Bronco and submitted to you at your request, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: They were, yes.

MS. CLARK: And why did you make the request for carpet samples from the Bronco to be sent to you?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, found on the Rockingham glove, as well as on the knit hat, were two rose beige carpet fibers. Fibers like these were also found on the towel, the shovel and the plastic that were recovered from the Bronco. I saw no differences between them. For this reason I requested samples from the Bronco to see if they may have originated from that source.

MS. CLARK: So before you requested the carpet sample from the Defendant's Bronco, you saw fibers recovered from the towel, plastic and shovel which you knew to have been found in that Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. There was one fiber on each of these items that--that exhibited the same characteristics as the single fiber found on the Rockingham glove, as well as a single fiber recovered from the knit hat at Bundy.

MS. CLARK: So the items that you knew to come from the Bronco, those fibers exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as the fibers that were found on the knit cap, the glove--

MR. BAILEY: Objection, leading.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: They looked the same to me. They had an unusual cross-section. I had not seen it before, so I wanted to get a sample from the Bronco to see if it could have come from that source.

MS. CLARK: And what is it that you found to be unusual about those carpet fibers, in your experience, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, I had not seen this particular cross-section before. I called it earlier the jack cross-section with the knobs on the end.

MR. BAILEY: I'm going to object and ask to approach.

THE COURT: All right. With the court reporter, please.

(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

THE COURT: We are over at the side bar. I take it, Mr. Bailey, your objection is the scope, the prohibited scope running the rarity of the fabric?

MR. BAILEY: I would ask that you give the Prosecution some guidance. I think we are walking perilously close to the information.

MS. CLARK: I already asked the Court about this. I previously asked the Court, outside the presence of the jury, as to the permissibility of asking his conclusions and findings made prior to the Masland inquiry. The Court indicated that that would be acceptable, that was within the bounds, and that is all we are doing.

THE COURT: He can say that he examined it, compared it with the known carpet fibers. He can say it looked unusual to him by his initial microscopic examination, the triangular shape of it. He can say, yes, it was unusual, and they appeared to be the same.

MS. CLARK: Right. And that is all we are doing. We are not going to talk about what he discovered after.

MR. BAILEY: We are stopping right there?

MS. CLARK: He can talk about what he knew at the time he was making the examination. He can discuss his--his opinion of the fiber he saw based on what he knew at the time that he was making that comparison, as I understand it, but he cannot talk about the further inquiry that he conducted and that is all we are doing.

THE COURT: Are we going to do any light absorption, anything like that?

MS. CLARK: Yeah. We have a couple of charts that we had looked at but I decided--

THE COURT: I just wanted to know if we are going to wind it up in the next 15 minutes and the answer is no if we are going to explain light absorption.

MR. BAILEY: 6:00 today, Judge?

THE COURT: Wednesday is a five o'clock day.

MS. CLARK: But we might finish cross today you think? Why not?

THE COURT: Maybe. He is a cut-to-the-chase kind of guy.

MS. CLARK: He is. He is. I know, so maybe we will.

(The following proceedings were held in open court:)

THE COURT: All right. Thank you, counsel. Proceed.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. You were indicating that based on your prior experience and previous case work that you saw something unusual in the carpet fiber--carpet fibers that were recovered from the knit cap, from the glove and from the items that were taken out of the Bronco; the towel, the shovel and the plastic. And what was that?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it was the cross-section of the fiber, right. I had--I have worked for many years with carpet fibers and I had not seen this particular cross-section before.

MS. CLARK: And that was, I think you described it to us earlier, was that the tri-lobal aspect you described?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. It was a three-lobed nylon fiber that had little knobs on the--knob on the end of each lobe. I called it the jack cross-section.

MS. CLARK: May I have one moment, your Honor?

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: Sir, did you ever examine a piece of carpet from--taken from the Defendant's Bronco known as item no. 33, LAPD identification number?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: I have a photograph that was previously marked as People's 440 that I would like to show to you, as well as People's 439. And ask you if the carpeting depicted in People's 440 and 439 appears to be the same as the carpet piece that was sent to you at your request?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, the piece that I got was not this particular piece. I did get vacuum sweepings from it--from this particular item. The actual sample came from different areas within the vehicle, right.

MS. CLARK: So you--can you tell us, sir, what exactly you requested with respect to exemplars--with respect to carpet samples taken from the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, I requested samples from all the fabric surfaces that were present within the vehicle. And an interior of a vehicle is often comprised of a lot of different fabrics. It is a little world in itself. There is carpeting, there are floor mats, there is door panel fibers, there are seat cover fibers, in this particular case I believe they were leather, and there is also seat back fibers. There was a back portion of the vehicle, cargo area, that had fabric, so an interior of a vehicle is a source of many different types of fibers, and I asked for all fabric surfaces and I--and I received samples from several areas.

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. When you received those samples--when you received those samples, sir, can you tell us whether you conducted some form of comparison with respect to the fibers collected from the towel, the shovel, the plastic, the knit cap, the blue knit ski cap, the glove found at Rockingham?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes. Initially tests that were conducted before I got the known material were done on the--on just the material taken from the inside of the Bronco, as well as from the--from the knit hat and from the--from the Rockingham glove. A number of tests were conducted there. Ultimately I wanted to get samples from the vehicle. Those were submitted in about a week later or so, and I did--I did the entire battery of tests again on all of those--of the known standards. In the carpeting, the main body of the carpeting of that vehicle was the nylon, tri-lobal, rose beige, jack cross-section fiber.

MS. CLARK: Of all of them?

MR. DEEDRICK: Of all of the carpeted surfaces, right. The door panels were different, seat backs were different. One was polyester, one was an olefin fiber, but all of the actual carpeting was--was the same type.

MS. CLARK: And when you say you used all the usual methods, these were manmade fibers, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: Manmade fibers. First a visual comparison under the comparison microscope, polarizing microscope, fluorescent microscope, microspectrophotometry, FTIR, and SEM, which is scanning electron microscope.

MS. CLARK: With the use of all of those methods, when you perform the comparison from the known carpet sample from the Defendant's Bronco to the fibers you found on the knit cap, the Rockingham glove, as well as the towel, the shovel and the plastic, what conclusion did you reach?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, all of those fibers, the questioned fibers from the--from the towel, the shovel, from the plastic, from the Rockingham glove and also from the knit hat could have originated from that Bronco.

MS. CLARK: And if I may, your Honor.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: Sir, did you look at any tapings from the Bronco of A.C. Cowling?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And what kind of carpet--was that a Bronco as well, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: It was a Bronco.

THE COURT: Excuse me, counsel. "Tapings"?

MS. CLARK: Yes. Maybe I will ask.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us, please, what are tapings?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, tapings are used to collect trace materials, just like a vacuum sweeper might be used. A piece of sticky tape when placed onto the surface of a fabric will cause loose fibers and hairs to adhere. These--these tapings would--could be placed on a number of different surfaces. They could be placed on clear plastic sheets. In this particular case they were placed on petrie dishes, plastic petrie dishes, and then covered over.

MS. CLARK: And is that sticky tape a common method of fiber collection?

MR. DEEDRICK: It is one method, yes, it is.

MS. CLARK: And is it commonly used for the collection of samples, for known samples, to compare questioned items to?

MR. DEEDRICK: It can be used for that purpose, right. When actual known samples are not collected, you will pick up actual fibers from that surface on the tape, as well as questioned material.

MS. CLARK: When you--and after having examined the tapings, the known samples collected by the tapings from A.C. Cowling's Bronco, can you tell us, sir, whether or not the fibers that were found on the knit cap, the carpet fibers that were found on the knit cap, the Rockingham glove, could have come from A.C. Cowling's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Could not have.

MS. CLARK: And why is that?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, his carpeting was blue.

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MR. DEEDRICK: Same fiber cross-section, though.

MS. CLARK: Now, did you prepare a chart, sir, that shows the fiber associations that you've just told us about, the carpet fibers on those items we have listed?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: I have a chart, your Honor, that I would ask be marked as People's 486.

THE COURT: Yes.

(Peo's 486 for id = chart)

MS. CLARK: All right. If you wouldn't mind stepping down, sir, and take the pointer and please explain to us what you are showing us on this chart.

MR. DEEDRICK: All right. This chart, which is titled "Known carpet fibers from O.J.'s Bronco" indicates the top three photographs being from--actual fiber standards from the interior from the carpeting. K14 is one source of fibers and I don't recall specifically if it was from the rear floorboard or the front floorboard, but that--these are fibers from the floor carpeting. K9 in the center, that is a cross-section that was done using the scanning electron microscope of a carpet fiber from the interior of the Defendant's Bronco. The photograph on the lower left, 3C, that is a fiber from the glove recovered at Rockingham. On the right-hand side is a picture of a fiber that was recovered from the knit cap that was found at the Bundy scene. The center picture is a section of that fiber on the left-hand side and it is a photograph using a scanning electron microscope just to show you what the cross-sections look like for both of them.

MS. CLARK: So the photographs shown in the center of this chart, the upper one labeled K9, first of all, that one, that is from a known sample taken from the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, it is.

MS. CLARK: And that is the scanning electron microscope photograph?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

MS. CLARK: The one below it, which is labeled "Q3C fiber from the Rockingham glove, SEM," is that the photograph taken with the scanning electron microscope on the questioned fiber that was found on the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. It would have been this fiber here, (Indicating). There is only one fiber that was recovered from the glove as well as one fiber from the knit cap.

MS. CLARK: And when the witness referred to this fiber, here, your Honor, he was referring to the photo to the far left on the bottom row as you face this chart.

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, you can--I see some spots up here on the SEM picture of K9, the known sample of the Defendant's carpet, brock carpet fiber, that I don't see down here, (Indicating). Can you explain what that is and why that didn't preclude you from saying that these fibers could have come from the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, you don't--you don't see them here on the bottom picture of 3C from the Rockingham glove simply--you see a couple, but not the same number that you see on the top picture from the carpeting and it could have been just from the source. That area was dirtier. Tri-lobal fibers are used for that purpose. They tend to hide dirt very well. That is why you have them inside your house as well as in vehicles, so dirt often collects down in the lower portion of the lobes and in a vehicle they often tend to get pretty dirty, so this happened to be where that particular fiber came from.

MS. CLARK: All right. Now, what significance, sir, does the finding of fibers consistent with those of the carpet in the Defendant's Bronco on the Rockingham glove and the blue knit cap have?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it is significant from the standpoint of transfer. That is, if you are trying to find a relationship between items recovered from a crime scene or from an area from the Defendant, with a particular item that may be associated with the Defendant, it becomes significant in that regard, because it is possible then to possibly link all of these items together.

MS. CLARK: And given what you told us earlier, sir, about how easily fibers are moved around, does that play any part in the significance of your finding of those carpet fibers on the blue knit cap, the Rockingham glove--

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, there is going to always be loose fibers that are present on the seats, on consoles, in different areas of a vehicle just because they--they shed. They get loose and they are moved around. Finding them on the seat of a vehicle that--that looked just like the carpeting is not significant, but it becomes significant when an individual may have contact with the surface of that interior of the vehicle, like a seat, and then through--through secondary transfer then actually picks up the fibers on the clothing and then may deposit them on items--other item. So fibers tend to move a little bit and again they only move so far--

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MR. DEEDRICK: --because of persistence.

MS. CLARK: Because they do fall off more easily?

MR. DEEDRICK: Carpet fibers are big, they are actually pretty big fibers. One would not expect to find an awful lot of carpet fibers transferred between items unless you have a dead body laying in a car and then dumped out of a car you might find a few more.

MS. CLARK: I'm sorry, sir. How does the largeness of the fiber impact on its mobility, how easily it will be transferred or fall off an item?

MR. DEEDRICK: The bigger the fiber, the more likely you are going to brush it off. It is not going to become lost in all of the hundreds of fibers that may be found and actually become part of the fabric. It will tend to lay on the surface of the fabric as opposed to becoming part of it.

MS. CLARK: Which would expect in a smaller fiber?

MR. DEEDRICK: Smaller fibers will tend to make their way into the fabric. Because of the contact and the force that may be applied between two fabrics, it tends to go within it more, whereas a carpet fiber is big, it is actually pretty big, and you can see it with the naked eye pretty easily. It will lay right on the surface, and depending on the nature of the fiber, it may be brushed off more easily.

MS. CLARK: Sir, how many--do you want me to break here? Do you want me to keep going?

THE COURT: Good place?

MS. CLARK: Good place? Pardon?

THE COURT: Good place to break?

MS. CLARK: That's fine.

THE COURT: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our recess for the noon hour. Please remember all of my admonitions to you. Don't discuss the case amongst yourselves, don't form any opinions about the case, don't conduct any deliberations until the matter has been submitted to you, do not allow anybody to communicate with you with regard to the case. We will stand in recess until 1:00 P.M.

(At 12:02 P.M. the noon recess was taken until 1:00 P.M. of the same day.)

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; WEDNESDAY, JULY 5, 1995 1:00 P.M.

Department no. 103 Hon. Lance A. Ito, Judge

APPEARANCES: (Appearances as heretofore noted.)

(Janet M. Moxham, CSR no. 4855, official reporter.)

(Christine M. Olson, CSR no. 2378, official reporter.)

(The following proceedings were held in open court, out of the presence of the jury:)

THE COURT: All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present. And counsel, over the noon hour did everybody have the opportunity to see the exhibits, color exhibits?

MR. BLASIER: We have a copy of them, your Honor. We don't have a color copier so we are going to have to try and transcribe them onto a black and white and perhaps over the evening break if we could take them and have copies made.

THE COURT: All right. But you have had the opportunity to examine them?

MR. BLASIER: Just briefly.

THE COURT: And Mr. Darden, you had a question earlier about a witness list from the Defense. Have you received a witness list?

MR. DARDEN: Yes, your Honor, I have. The Defense handed us a witness list at noon today. It contains the names of apparent witnesses for whom we have no statements for and no discovery. There are others for whom we have discovery; however, it would appear that any testimony they might offer would be irrelevant to these proceedings. In any event, there will be 352 objections to just about everyone on the list and we will take that up at a later time.

THE COURT: All right. I just wanted to make sure the list at least had been exchanged. All right. Deputy Magnera, let's have the jurors, please.

(Brief pause.)

(The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury:)

THE COURT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. All right. Let the record reflect that we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good afternoon.

THE COURT: Mr. Deedrick, would you resume the witness stand, please.

Douglas W. Deedrick, the witness on the stand at the time of the noon recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:

THE COURT: Good afternoon again, Mr. Deedrick. Miss Clark, you may continue with your direct examination.

MS. CLARK: Good afternoon.

THE JURY: Good afternoon.

DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MS. CLARK

MS. CLARK: All right. Mr. Deedrick, when we left off we were talking about the carpet fibers that you found on the knit cap, the Rockingham glove, that exhibited the same characteristics as the fibers in the sample taken from the carpet of the Defendant's Bronco. Now, can you tell us, sir, in what manner carpet fibers from the Defendant's Bronco could have been transferred to the knit hat found at the crime scene at Bundy and the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, if the fibers originated from the Bronco, they could have gotten on these items either through direct physical contact with the carpet or indirect or secondary transfer from an occupant or from laying on a surface of a--such as a seat that may not have carpeting.

MS. CLARK: By indirect or secondary transfer, would an example of that be, for example, if the Defendant touched the carpet and then touched the cap, the blue knit cap?

MR. DEEDRICK: Sure.

MS. CLARK: Would a primary transfer example be that the knit cap was laying on the carpeted floor of the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Or that the Rockingham glove at some point was in contact with the carpet in the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, that's correct.

MS. CLARK: Now, how many carpet fibers that exhibited the same characteristics as those of the Defendant's Bronco, how many of those did you find on the knit cap?

MR. DEEDRICK: Just one.

MS. CLARK: And how many carpet fibers that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those of the Defendant's Bronco did you find on the towel, the plastic and the shovel that were actually recovered from the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: There was just--just one fiber per item.

MS. CLARK: Only one per item from items that we know were found in his Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Just one.

MS. CLARK: Why would there be so few carpet fibers items that were kept in the car?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained. It is compound as well.

MS. CLARK: Why would there be so few carpet fibers found on those particular items, the towel, the shovel and the plastic?

MR. BAILEY: Object.

THE COURT: Sustained. It is compound, counsel.

MS. CLARK: All right.

MS. CLARK: Why would you--you said there was only one fiber found on the towel that was recovered from the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

MS. CLARK: In your experience and judgment, sir, can you explain to us as an expert, based on your expertise, how you can account for only one fiber being on that towel?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, one fiber could be there because of--that is all that was left on the surface of the fabric on the carpet when the towel made contact with it. When the towel was collected, if there were more present, maybe a couple fell off. Maybe there were more to begin with, but all I ended up with was just one. I don't even know when it got there.

MR. BAILEY: Object as speculation; move to strike.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MS. CLARK: Is there something--there is anything unusual about that, sir, about having found only one carpet fiber on the towel?

MR. BAILEY: Objection.

MS. CLARK: Given the fact that the towel was found in the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. BAILEY: Speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it is just a fact that fibers can be transferred either directly through a primary contact or secondarily from indirect contact. If the towel were laying on the surface of the carpet, one might expect that a fiber or two may have transferred and they may not have also. It is possible to collect an item from a carpet surface and not actually find a fiber on it. It just depends on what you find, what transfers.

MS. CLARK: And again the plastic that was also recovered from the Defendant's Bronco, you only found one fiber--one carpet fiber that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those of the Defendant's carpet--Bronco carpet fiber on that item as well?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

MS. CLARK: And that was an item found inside that Defendant's Bronco, correct?

MR. DEEDRICK: I believe it was, yes.

MS. CLARK: Can you explain or do you have any different explanation for why there is only one fiber on that particular item, given your experience--

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: This is not a big deal. I mean, as far as numbers and fibers, items that are taken out of the inside of the Bronco, you find carpet fibers like the Bronco, it doesn't really matter that much to people, I don't think. One fiber, more fibers may be transferred. You just get what you get.

MS. CLARK: So is there anything unusual in the fact that you found only one such fiber on the towel, one on the plastic, one on the shovel?

MR. DEEDRICK: No.

MS. CLARK: Even in light of the fact that they were items actually found in the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, argumentative.

THE COURT: Sustained. I think we've covered it.

MS. CLARK: Sir, there was some testimony earlier concerning the brown--there is a plaid cap found inside the Defendant's Bronco. Do you recall testifying to the examination of hair and fiber collected from that item?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, I do.

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: Did you find--on that plaid cap that was found in the Defendant's Bronco, did you find, in the analysis of hair and fiber evidence recovered from that cap, any carpet fibers like those from the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did not.

MS. CLARK: Well, how can you explain that?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it is a fabric item. The item was from the flooring, actually laying on the carpet. It was collected and processed by the crime lab in Los Angeles and no fibers like the carpet were found.

MS. CLARK: All right. I'm showing you the photograph that has been previously marked as People's 439. If the cap was found in that position in the Defendant's Bronco. As shown in this photograph, is there anything unusual in the fact that no fibers collected from that cap proved to be carpet fiber of the type that could have come from the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Yeah, that is not--it is not a significant thing to me. The fact is there were none found. I mean, we have a picture of it. It shows it laying in there. The purpose of my work is to--is an attempt to link objects into physical contact. If you have an actual photograph of something laying on an item, well, you don't need me, but if there is question about where that item was, and there might be a fiber on that item that links it to a source, like a carpet, that is--you might ask me to talk about that, but if there is a photograph of it laying on the carpet, it serves no purpose for me to be up here talking about it.

MS. CLARK: Okay. And did you answer, is there anything unusual in the failure to find Bronco carpet fiber--fibers consistent with those from the Defendant's Bronco on that cap?

THE COURT: I think you have already asked that question.

MS. CLARK: Thank you. I wasn't sure.

MR. DEEDRICK: Yeah.

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MS. CLARK: Now, given the fact that items may or may not pick up fibers as they travel through the world, in your experience, sir, has it ever happened that you have found fibers on pieces of evidence at a crime scene that were not, you could not associate with any of the known clothing standards or cloth from other aspects of the case?

MR. DEEDRICK: That would not be unusual. That is very common to find.

MS. CLARK: And why is that?

MR. DEEDRICK: I would be surprised not to find it, just to find only things that associate to an item submitted, because as we go through life, the clothing that we wear at any given time comes into contact with the people we meet, with the chairs we sit on, with the loose fibers that are in our environment, but most of the material would likely somehow associate us with where we live, our family, the kind of vehicles we might drive. It is just part of our identity. Each person has his little cluster of debris we walk around with everyday. We drop a little bit off as we go and we pick a little bit more up, and depending on where you stop that event, if a person dies, it stops, but if you can stop a person, a living person at a given time, you can get some idea as to where they've been or who they have been with or what kind of vehicle they may drive or what kind of sofa they have in their living room. Because you tend to collect some of that material and carry it with you, but only for a short while, and then you start to drop it off. Then you collect up new stuff. We kind of walk around as little garbage collectors. We pick things up as we go and then we drop off some. That is where I come in, when that time period is stop, whether it is a dead person or a suspect who has been arrested, and at that time I get the clothes and I try to report on what I find at that particular time.

MS. CLARK: Then why in your experience, in cases that you have seen, has there ever been a case where you did not have fibers that--let me see if I can frame that in the positive. Has it been--in all of the cases you have done, sir, has every case presented you with some fibers or some hairs that could not be associated with any of the known individuals or other items of evidence in the case?

MR. DEEDRICK: Almost--I would say every case where there is fabric involved, and most of them have fabric, there is going to be fibers that cannot be accounted for. Their relevance to a particular case may never be known and you just--you just use what you have, what is submitted, what you are asked to compare, and you try to derive conclusions from that. To identify the source of every little fiber that is found on a fabric is--takes a little bit too much time and you may not be able to do that, because fabrics themselves don't last forever. We give them to the salvation army or we donate them or we destroy them. We get a rip in them, we just throw them in the garbage. Fabrics themselves don't last a long time. They are transient. They stay for a while and then we get rid of them.

MS. CLARK: Is this case any different in that respect? Were there fibers found on the various pieces of evidence submitted to you that could not be associated with any known standard?

MR. DEEDRICK: There were some, yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, you indicated I think with respect to the blue knit cap, sir, there was a carpet fiber consistent with those of the Defendant's Bronco on that item and you indicated I think to us earlier that you picked off--some items off that blue knit cap yourself?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: Was this carpet fiber that you picked off the hat one of those items that you picked off yourself?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes. It would have been from a scraping process.

MS. CLARK: Can you explain to the jury how--what you mean by the scraping process?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, the hat is taken into a room where there is some paper spread out on a table and the item is just scraped. It is like a large cake decorator, a spatula, and scraping the item will remove any loosely adhering material. This fiber you couldn't see. This particular piece of fiber was very small.

MS. CLARK: You were not able to see it?

MR. DEEDRICK: Oh, you can't see most of the little fibers in a case. Some larger fibers you can, but if you just pick, you are not going to get very much.

MS. CLARK: Well, I thought you said earlier that the fibers from the exemplar from the Defendant's Bronco were large, that all these carpet fibers in fact were large?

MR. DEEDRICK: They are large in terms of their diameter, they are very fat fibers, but some of the lengths can be very short lengths, just depends on what you get, but carpet fibers are the easiest to see in terms of fiber evidence.

MS. CLARK: Was the--the fiber--you also indicated that you saw--that there was fiber removed from the Rockingham glove that was consistent with the carpet fiber of the Defendant's Bronco. Do you recall that?

MR. DEEDRICK: I do.

MS. CLARK: Do you recall where on the glove or in the bag that fiber was found?

MR. DEEDRICK: I believe that came from the bag that held that particular item.

MS. CLARK: Now, in your experience, sir, in all of the cases that you have had, has it ever occurred before that items of hair or fiber are found in a bag in which evidence is contained?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes.

MS. CLARK: How common or unusual is that?

MR. DEEDRICK: It is not unusual. That is why we always examine the interior of the bag or the container that had an item, because just as hairs and fibers can cling to an item from contact, they also fall off, so they could--easily and they often do fall off inside the container, inside the bag.

MS. CLARK: And that is a routine thing that is done, at least at the FBI, to examine containers in which evidence is held for hair or trace that might have come off?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, it is.

MS. CLARK: Now, are you aware, sir, that there was a piece of carpet marked as item no. 33 that was wrapped up in paper and taped up and placed into a box which also contained bags containing the items of the blue knit cap the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: Is that a question?

MS. CLARK: Yes. Are you aware of those facts, sir?

MR. DEEDRICK: I don't know if I know all of those facts, no, as to how they were originally contained.

MS. CLARK: Then let me pose a hypothetical to you. Assume the following facts: That a piece of carpeting marked as item no. 33 removed from the Defendant's Bronco was folded inward with a fiber inward, that it was then wrapped up in paper and completely taped closed so that no carpet was showing. That item was placed in a box along with bags containing the following items of evidence and each of these bags is sealed shut with tape, folded over and taped shut: The knit cap, that is, the blue knit cap, the Rockingham glove, Bundy glove, and the plaid cap that was recovered from the Defendant's Bronco and the Defendant's--the socks found in the Defendant's bedroom. Each of those items separately packaged in their own paper bags and taped shut. They are all in the box along with the carpet from the Defendant's Bronco, that it is wrapped in paper and completely taped shut. Assume those facts, sir. Did you find any Bronco carpet--any carpet fibers that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those from the Defendant's Bronco on the Defendant's socks?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did not.

MS. CLARK: Or on the Bundy glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: No.

MS. CLARK: And I believe you earlier indicated that you also did not find it on the plaid cap that was taken from his car?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

MS. CLARK: Now, what, if anything, does the lack, the failure to find any carpet fibers consistent with those from the Defendant's Bronco on other items contained in that same box with the carpet sample as the items that you found to contain carpet fibers consistent with those of the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: That is a mouth full.

MS. CLARK: What does that mean to you in terms of whether or not the carpet fibers found on the Rockingham glove and the knit cap were found as a result of cross-transfer from being stored in the same box as the carpet sample, item 33?

MR. BAILEY: Object to the form.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, we--we have fibers on some items; we don't have fibers on other items. If care and attention were taken when the item--the carpeting was sealed, and there was an attempt made, an effort made not to allow loose fibers to be inside that box, I might not expect to see trace fibers on other items. Even if there were a lot of loose fibers, because of sloppy handling perhaps, then I might expect to see fibers on all of the items, simply because they were all in the same box. But again, you find what you find and it is difficult to know precisely. I would say if they are all sealed and there is an effort made to seal the items carefully, then it would minimize the risk of contaminating evidence.

MS. CLARK: And the fact that no carpet fibers consistent with those of the Defendant's Bronco were found on other items in the same box, does that contribute in any to your--let me rephrase that. The fact that you did not find carpet fibers consistent with those of the Defendant's Bronco on other items kept in the same box, does that support your conclusion that the carpet fibers found on the knit cap at Rockingham were not the result of transfer from being stored with the carpet sample item 33.

MR. BAILEY: Object, asked and answered, assumes facts not in evidence.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, that would be consistent with that, that the fact is if it appears that the carpeting was sealed up adequately, and if it weren't I might expect to see the fibers on all the items. It just depends on how loose it is and how many loose fibers are floating around in there. It is a real hit or miss thing. But if you only find it on a couple items and you don't find it on others, one might be led to believe that the fiber was actually originally on this item and not a contaminant.

MS. CLARK: Now, what does the--the finding of the carpet fiber on the Rockingham glove, what does that indicate to you with respect to the manner in which it could have been transferred--that carpet fiber could have been transferred to the Rockingham glove from the Defendant's Bronco?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, either--as I said before, either a direct or indirect contact could result in that fiber being present.

MS. CLARK: Would the Defendant necessarily have had to be wearing the Rockingham glove at the time he was in the Bronco for it to pick up the carpet fibers?

MR. DEEDRICK: No.

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MS. CLARK: So if, for example, all he did was get into the car, the Bronco, carrying--and take off the Rockingham glove and throw it on the seat or on the console next to him, could the glove pick up carpet fibers just by that mere presence on the console inside the car?

MR. DEEDRICK: It could--it could be the source, yes, that is possible.

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. Testimony was presented in this case that as of 9:45 on the night of June the 12th the Defendant was wearing a dark blue or black cotton type sweatsuit. Did you find any fibers like that in any of the fibers collected from the evidence that you examined in this case?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did.

MR. BAILEY: Objection.

THE COURT: What is the objection?

MR. BAILEY: Speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MS. CLARK: Can you please tell us from which items you found such fibers?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, there were blue black cotton fibers found on the Rockingham glove, on Ron Goldman's shirt and on the socks from the Defendant's bedroom.

MS. CLARK: Can I--

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: Now, did you actually examine the Rockingham glove, the shirt of Ronald Goldman and the Defendant's socks?

MR. BAILEY: I object and ask if we can approach, please.

THE COURT: With the court reporter, please.

(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

THE COURT: All right. We are over at the side bar. Mr. Bailey, what is the objection?

MR. BAILEY: There is no evidence whatsoever and she has asked him to assume that the Defendant was wearing dark blue clothing at 9:45 that night.

MS. CLARK: Well, Kato testified to--

MR. BAILEY: He testified that it was dark clothing period. He didn't say cotton, wool or anything.

MS. CLARK: Oh, yes, he did.

MR. BAILEY: No, he did not.

MS. CLARK: He most certainly did.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Let me go get it. I have got it.

THE COURT: All right.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Back on the record. What do you have?

MS. CLARK: I didn't bring mine down with me, Dana went up to get it, but I know what he said and I had it pulled ahead of time.

MR. COCHRAN: Blasier found it. Why don't you use his and save some time. He didn't say cotton; he said like cotton.

MS. CLARK: Okay. I will correct it. I don't think that is all that he said, though. I think you have only pulled out a part of it.

MR. BAILEY: Black or blue like cotton.

MS. CLARK: And that is so much different than what I said?

THE COURT: I will overrule the objection. That is close enough.

MR. COCHRAN: Shouldn't she restate it?

THE COURT: Miss Clark.

MR. COCHRAN: Restate it, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: I'm sorry?

THE COURT: Rephrase the question, though, in terms of Kaelin's testimony.

MS. CLARK: Yeah. But didn't he say dark blue or black like cotton?

THE COURT: Sweat outfit.

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MR. COCHRAN: That is all we are asking.

(The following proceedings were held in open court:)

THE COURT: All right. Thank you, counsel.

MS. CLARK: I will rephrase it.

THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Blasier, for finding that in your database.

MS. CLARK: Sir, in this case testimony was presented that as of 9:45 on June 12th, 1994, the Defendant was wearing dark blue or black like cotton type sweatsuit. And in the question I posed to you earlier you indicated that you did find fibers like that in some of the evidence that you collected in this case?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did, yes.

MS. CLARK: And did you examine the actual items, the Rockingham glove, Ronald Goldman's shirt and the Defendant's socks?

MR. DEEDRICK: I looked at debris that was removed from these items.

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: And did you also see the items themselves?

MR. DEEDRICK: I did at some point, yes.

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: Cut the feed for this, your Honor. I'm sorry.

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, you have examined the crime scene photographs, some of them in this case, correct?

MR. DEEDRICK: I have, yes.

MS. CLARK: Were you able to determine where on Mr. Goldman's shirt you found the blue black cotton fiber?

MR. DEEDRICK: No.

MS. CLARK: People's 167, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: The Defendant's socks depicted in this photograph, sir, did you actually examine the items themselves?

MR. DEEDRICK: I saw the socks at a later date, yes.

MS. CLARK: Were you able to determine where on the socks the blue black cotton fiber was found?

MR. DEEDRICK: No.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us, sir, what conclusion you reached concerning the blue black cotton fibers found on the Rockingham glove, Ron Goldman's shirt and the sock found in the Defendant's bedroom?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, they all could have originated from the same fabric.

MS. CLARK: What appearance would those fibers have in a piece of fabric in terms of color?

MR. DEEDRICK: They would be black. It would look black.

MS. CLARK: May I pull off the result, your Honor?

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Miss Clark, does that complete the items on that board?

MS. CLARK: I believe it does, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Then I would ask you to bring it down to this end of the jury box, because it is hard to see the detail.

MS. CLARK: Thank you.

(The exhibit was displayed to the jury.)

THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: Now, Mr. Deedrick, did you have a photo board prepared to demonstrate to the jury the blue black cotton fibers that you were able to match that you found on Ron Goldman's shirt--that you found consistent on Ron Goldman's shirt?

THE COURT: Excuse me.

MR. BAILEY: I object and ask to approach.

THE COURT: No. It has been rephrased. Proceed.

MS. CLARK: The blue black cotton fibers that you found to be consistent with each other exhibited the same microscopic characteristics that you found on Ron Goldman's shirt, on the Defendant's socks and on the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, I did prepare a board.

MS. CLARK: Ask to mark this as People's 4--

THE COURT: 87.

MS. CLARK: --87. Thank you.

(Peo's 487 for id = posterboard)

MS. CLARK: All right, sir. If you wouldn't mind stepping down with a pointer to explain to us what we see on this board.

MR. DEEDRICK: (Witness complies.) Okay. The board consists of eight photographs, the top three being from the Rockingham glove on the left, from Ron Goldman's shirt in the middle and from the socks from the Defendant's residence. Numbers--the numbers we have are Q3B in the laboratory, which refers to the Rockingham glove, Q23 from Ron Goldman's shirt, and Q37 which would have been our item number for the socks. The photographs that you see, these would be the cotton fibers, the dark ones with the blue accent or portions of the fiber that are blue. The brownish fiber in the background would be from the cashmere. That is the lining fibers. Q23, that is a clump of fiber here from Ron Goldman's shirt and this is a fiber from the socks from the Defendant. The next three photographs depict again another photograph from the Rockingham glove fiber, a fiber from Ron Goldman's shirt and another fiber that was removed from the Defendant's socks. The bottom two photographs, another fiber here which appears to have blood on the surface from the Rockingham glove and another fiber located next to a hair that--that hair was like the hairs of Nicole Brown and that is one of the fibers that was lying next to it.

MS. CLARK: So Q23 at the bottom here of this chart actually shows a hair that you determined to be consistent with those of Nicole Brown associated with one of the blue black cotton fibers that you determined to be consistent with those found on the Defendant's socks and the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right. You are right, all from the same item. And again, I said before, there were a number of hairs that were found on Ron Goldman's shirt.

MR. BAILEY: Your Honor, I object and move to strike the statements "All from the same item."

THE COURT: Overruled.

MS. CLARK: And this Q23 that was taken off the--that was found on Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right. All three center photographs were photographs of the fibers recovered from Ron Goldman's shirt.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us, sir, what this--this blue black cotton fiber, this would have been a natural fiber, correct?

MR. DEEDRICK: Natural plant fiber.

MS. CLARK: And what method of comparison or examinations did you use with respect to those blue black cotton fibers?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, the fibers are compared microscopically with a comparison microscope. They are also compared with fluorescent microspectrophotometry by the color, so the color is compared as well instrumentally. That would be the methods that were employed.

MS. CLARK: Now, given what you said earlier about fibers and the fact that they come and go, what is significant to you about this new black cotton fiber that you found on the three different items of evidence in this case?

MR. BAILEY: Object to the form.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: Okay. I stated previously that fibers don't exist a long time and routinely the fibers that you find on an item often reflect the last contacts that they have occurred with that item. The blood associated or what appears to be blood associated with the Rockingham glove fiber probably caused the fiber to adhere, so that appears to be a contiguous or an event that is happening about the same time, fiber coming in contact with the glove, it sticks to the glove and that is how we end up finding it. The shirt, the shirt fibers are the same thing. Any fibers that you find on an item of clothing, at least within a certain number of fibers that you find, again may reflect the recent contact and there is no absolutes here, but you do find that recent contacts will result in fibers that you do find. The clump of fibers here associated with the cashmere like fibers that you see on the upper left, again it is a clump of fibers, a group of fibers that are found, as opposed to just a loose fragment.

MS. CLARK: A clump?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it appears to be a clump. A clump. There is actually a group of fibers here, maybe two or possibly three fibers in this particular region.

MS. CLARK: On the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: The same with Ron Goldman's shirt, another clump which may have been just a loose clump of fibers that we often find on our clothes, a tuft of fibers.

MS. CLARK: Now, you saw a lot of fibers in this case, correct?

MR. DEEDRICK: A lot, yes.

MS. CLARK: Was there something unusual about these particular blue black cotton fibers that drew your attention or made you pay particular attention to them?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes. Well, cotton fibers themselves they are common. There is a lot of cotton fibers out there. What gives cotton fibers significance is that when you add color to them in a specific way, some you see more, maybe less likely than others. These particular--these are--actually it is a real dark blue, it looks black, but in some areas the dye was not absorbed the same and this may be where the yarns are attached to the fabric. The same thing appeared also on the fibers that were recovered from Ron Goldman's shirt. The bluish area, also present here. It was recovered from the Defendant's socks, (Indicating). The bluish area here, (Indicating), is starting to show. Some of these areas can--can better be shown using instrumental techniques with color, because the eyeball sees this as a shade of blue, this as a shade of blue and so forth. The instrument, the microspectrophotometer can actually break down this color, its components, and then you compare the absorption spectra which is an assistance to the eye comparison.

MS. CLARK: I think you sometime last week marked a chart showing the wave patterns of light absorption?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

MS. CLARK: You indicated that that was a method you could use to compare fibers to one another to see if they could have had a common source?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. It is a tool that is used to help the examiner to make a decision on whether the fibers are alike or different.

MS. CLARK: Was that method used with respect to the blue black cotton fibers in this case?

MR. DEEDRICK: It was, yes.

MS. CLARK: And a chart was generated?

MR. DEEDRICK: I think there were several charts generated, yes.

MS. CLARK: And what did those charts indicate?

MR. DEEDRICK: It indicated to me that the absorption spectra were the same. That is the dye components that were present that make up the color that we see are the same. Still can't say that they all came from the same fabric. You have to understand all it says is that they appear to exhibit similar properties, both instrumentally and visually.

MS. CLARK: Did you prepare another chart, photographs pertaining to this blue black cotton fiber?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes, I did.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: Your Honor, this other chart has three photographs on it and it shows the known cotton fiber from Goldman's jeans on the left-hand side as you face it and two other photographs concerning the blue black cotton fiber. Ask that it be marked People's 480--

THE COURT: 488.

MS. CLARK: If I could ask Jonathan to hold it for the brief period of questioning for Mr. Deedrick.

(Peo's 488 for id = photograph)

THE COURT: All right. That is Mr. Fairtlough.

MS. CLARK: No, I meant--for Mr. Deedrick. Thank you, Mr. Fairtlough. Oh, I said Jonathan. Thank you.

MS. CLARK: Can you please describe to us what you have attempted to depict on this chart that has been marked as People's 488?

MR. DEEDRICK: A couple things here. One, just give you an idea what the blue jean cotton fibers look like. The blue jean cotton fibers, you see areas where the dye is absorbed to lighter than others, and the more fading that you have with blue jeans, the color just bleaches out and you will see some white. Even though they look blue, there is actually white fibers that are mixed in there with it. But the purpose of showing you this photograph was to show you the difference between this particular fiber and this particular fiber down here, (Indicating), that are also cotton, but they are colored differently.

MS. CLARK: For the record, when he said this particular item and this particular item, he was referring to the photographs labeled as Q23.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. DEEDRICK: Now, both of the photographs that you see on the right-hand side of the photograph were fibers that were recovered from Ron Goldman's shirt. The one in particular at the top right, you can see how closely associated it is with a hair that exhibited the same characteristics as Nicole Brown. In fact, it somehow wrapped itself around the hair.

MS. CLARK: Mr. Deedrick, let me ask you a real quick question here. This item Q23 on this chart that was recovered from the shirt of Ronald Goldman shows the blue black cotton fiber wrapped around the hair that you describe as being consistent with those of Nicole Brown. How could it have come--become wrapped around in that manner?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, the hair has to actually roll, it has to roll across the fiber. Either that fiber is a loose fiber that happened just to land on it and rolled over it, or the hair rolled on the fabric. If the hair rolls on a fabric surface that is comprised of these fibers, there is a good chance that that hair, depending on what type of material is on the hair, can actually cause the roll effect and the fiber will roll right around the hair. That is how it ended up in that state.

MS. CLARK: Do you have an opinion as to how it occurred in this particular case?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, it is difficult to know exactly how that fiber got there. Perhaps again the two methods I mentioned; one being maybe a little more likely than the other. If it actually landed on the fiber and rolled, that would be less likely, in my opinion, than if it actually came in contact with the fabric, which would be a more likely event.

MS. CLARK: So for example, if--if the Defendant wearing a dark cotton sweatsuit that had fibers like those you have described here in these charts, the blue black cotton fibers, and he attacked Nicole Brown with his sleeve coming into contact with her hair, could that account for the manner in which you found the fabric wrapped around hair like those of Nicole Brown?

MR. DEEDRICK: It is possible it could have happened that way. Sweatsuits tend to have, because of their plush nature, tend to have longer, looser fibers on the surface.

MS. CLARK: Now, the bottom photograph here, is that another area of the same hair and fiber depicted in the upper photograph?

MR. DEEDRICK: I don't believe so, no. That is another fiber.

MS. CLARK: Another blue black fiber on Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right. There were what, a number of fibers, I don't recall the exact number, that were found on Ron Goldman's shirt.

MS. CLARK: And just above it, is that a hair above it there, (Indicating)?

MR. DEEDRICK: Yes. Again, I had 35 hairs, remember, off of this that were like Nicole Brown's on Ron Goldman's shirt and these are on those slides, the same slides.

MS. CLARK: So is this hair depicted in the lower photograph next to the blue black cotton fiber also consistent with the hairs of Nicole Brown?

MR. DEEDRICK: I believe that hair is. Again, I'm only going by a fuzzy photograph here, but a lot of the fibers and hairs were in close proximity. I'm not implying and I don't want to imply in this instance here that this fiber is like this fiber in the sense of how it is oriented. It just happened to land on the hair.

THE COURT: Juror no. 7, can you see this exhibit.

JUROR NO. 795: Yes.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MS. CLARK: Thank you. Could we take this chart down to the end, your Honor. Mr. Fairtlough. Thank you.

(The exhibit was displayed to the jury.)

THE COURT: All right. Thank you, Mr. Fairtlough. Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.

(Brief pause.)

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

MS. CLARK: Mr. Escobar is assisting me. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

MS. CLARK: Now, sir, we spoke earlier about it being common to find fibers of one item of clothing on another item of clothing worn at the same time by the same person. Do you recall that?

MR. DEEDRICK: I do.

MS. CLARK: And I think you discussed it in the context of having found fibers from Ron Goldman's shirt or fibers consistent with Ron Goldman's shirt on his jeans.

MR. DEEDRICK: Right.

MS. CLARK: Okay. The blue black cotton fiber that you have just described as having been found on the Defendant's socks, what reasonably logically can you infer about how that fiber came to be transferred onto the Defendant's socks, based on your expertise?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: All right. Is the finding of the blue black cotton fiber you found on the Defendant's socks consistent with the Defendant having worn an item of clothing made of such blue black cotton fibers at the time he wore the socks?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: It is certainly not inconsistent with it. He could have come in contact with an outfit, that is how the fibers got there, or some other way.

MS. CLARK: And what other way would that be?

MR. DEEDRICK: Walked on the fiber.

MR. BAILEY: Object, your Honor, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: Okay.

MS. CLARK: You also found the blue black cotton fibers on the Rockingham glove. Is that finding consistent with the Defendant having worn a dark--dark blue to black cotton sweatsuit at the time he wore that glove?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: How many fibers of the blue black cotton fibers did you find on the Rockingham glove?

MR. DEEDRICK: I don't recall. I believe there were several.

MS. CLARK: And if the Defendant were wearing a dark blue black cotton sweatsuit at the time he wore the Rockingham glove, would that account for the transfer of those fibers, the blue black cotton fibers, onto that glove where you found them?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: Is the finding of the blue black cotton fibers on the Rockingham glove consistent with the same phenomena you described earlier when you found--when you testified that you found fibers consistent with Ron Goldman's shirt on his jeans?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: No. That would be the same if you are assuming then that the individual who wore the gloves also had the dark sweatsuit on at the same time. The same principles are taking place, that is, in--in the process of wearing an item of clothing loose fibers are going to be present making contact with that item of clothing with the glove or whatever could result in a transfer, yes.

THE COURT: All right. Counsel, I think we have gone over the manner in which fibers or hairs are transferred now about eight times.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Let me just ask you this then, sir:

MS. CLARK: Given all that you have told us about fibers and the manner in which they are transferred and how easily they are moved and lost, what is the significance of your findings concerning the blue black cotton fibers which exhibit the same microscopic characteristics on three different pieces of evidence; one, at Rockingham, the Rockingham glove, Defendant's socks and Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation, compound.

THE COURT: Sustained. He can form an opinion as to any possible relationship between the three.

MS. CLARK: What, if any, opinion do you have concerning the significance of your finding the blue black cotton fiber on the Defendant's socks, on the Rockingham glove and on Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. BAILEY: Objection.

THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question. The issue is, is there a relationship between the three?

MS. CLARK: I understand.

MS. CLARK: What opinion, sir, do you have as to the relationship of the blue black cotton fibers you found on the Defendant's socks, the Rockingham glove and Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. BAILEY: Objection. It is for the jury.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: I had previously stated that persistence is a phenomena that is very important here as well as how fibers can be transferred. The fibers that you find on a particular item of clothing often reflect--reflect last contacts. If all three items have--have fibers that are alike microscopically, that would suggest that all three items had last physical contact with an item of clothing that had exactly the same fibers in it. It could be one item, I'm not saying it is, but it could be one item of clothing.

MS. CLARK: And the blue black--how many blue black cotton fibers did you find on Ron Goldman's shirt?

MR. DEEDRICK: There were more. There were a number of fibers. Again, I don't have an exact count on that. The population was greater.

MS. CLARK: Does the presence of that number of fibers found on Ron Goldman's shirt indicate to you what--what does it indicate to you with respect to the manner in which it could have been transferred to that shirt?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MS. CLARK: Does the number of those blue black cotton fibers found on Ron Goldman's shirt indicate there was some contact between Ron Goldman's shirt and someone wearing a fabric comprised of that kind of fiber?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, leading.

THE COURT: Leading, counsel.

MR. BAILEY: Same question.

THE COURT: We have established the transfer and all of that.

MS. CLARK: Does the number of fibers found on Ron Goldman's shirt of the blue black cotton variety indicate anything of significance to you with respect to the nature of the contact that transferred them to his shirt?

MR. BAILEY: Objection, same question.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DEEDRICK: The more rigorous the contact, the longer the duration. The more forceful contact often results in greater fiber exchanges up to a certain number. Again, it just depends on the nature of the fibers. It depends on the nature of the contact, but the greater force, the more surface area coming into actual physical contact in the common sense kind of, but they show this through studies, that you will transfer more fibers that way. Just like if you walk through the mud, the more you walk through the mud, you get more mud on you. It is kind of all the same principle.

MS. CLARK: Thank you. I have nothing further.

THE COURT: Mr. Bailey.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAILEY

MR. BAILEY: Good afternoon, Mr. Deedrick. Mr. Deedrick, do you prefer to be called agent Deedrick or Mr. Deedrick?

MR. DEEDRICK: Mr. Deedrick is fine.

MR. BAILEY: Okay. That is what we will use then. You have testified, I believe, that you have handled about 4000 cases, as you sit here, since becoming a hair and fiber examiner at the FBI laboratory?

MR. DEEDRICK: That's right.

MR. BAILEY: Can you tell me when it was that you first went over the thousand mark? At what point in your career?

MR. DEEDRICK: I don't even recall. It was some time ago.

MR. BAILEY: Well, do you do any kind of annual reports that indicate what your activity has been during a calendar year?

MR. DEEDRICK: I believe those records are kept, yes.

MR. BAILEY: Well, can you tell me approximately how many cases you have done per year since you became an examiner?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, probably the average was around thirty cases plus probably per month, so over 300 cases per year probably on an average.

MR. BAILEY: Okay. Is that pretty consistent from year to year or does it vary greatly?

MR. DEEDRICK: It was pretty consistent there for a long time, yes.

MR. BAILEY: Now, your duties have changed twice, I believe, since you became an examiner. First you became in charge of training sometime in the eighties?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, I had--that actually was just an added duty. It didn't detract from my case load. I still got plenty of cases to work.

MR. BAILEY: All right. So your handling of cases remained consistent despite that additional chore?

MR. DEEDRICK: Right, remained pretty consistent.

THE COURT: Excuse me, gentlemen. You are both going to have to finish to allow the other to finish speaking.

MR. DEEDRICK: Sorry.

MR. BAILEY: How about when you became section chief, did that alter your work routine at all?

MR. DEEDRICK: After I was officially assigned as unit chief in hairs and fibers, yes, my case load dropped, so I don't handle many cases any more.

MR. BAILEY: How are cases distributed among the examiners who work in your section?

MR. DEEDRICK: Well, they are distributed on the basis of expertise, length of service, how quickly they can turn a case around, type of examiner they are. It depends upon the individual. Cases are assigned based on those reasons.

MR. BAILEY: And who do they come to initially within the section?

MR. DEEDRICK: