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

APPEARANCES: (Appearances as heretofore noted.)

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

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

(Pages 30825 through 30828, volume 161A, transcribed and sealed under separate cover.)

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

THE COURT: Back on the record in the Simpson matter. Mr. Simpson is again present before the Court with his counsel, Mr. Shapiro, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Kardashian, Mr. Douglas, Mr. Blasier. The People are represented by Miss Clark, Mr. Darden, Mr. Kelberg, Mr. Lynch. The jury is not present. Counsel, this morning at nine o'clock the Court conducted an in camera presentation by County counsel with regard to certain personnel records that were requested by means of subpoena duces tecum by the Defense, and those matters, along with the representations of County counsel, have been presented to the Court. And in the Court's abundant spare time the Court will look over those records and redact any unnecessary matters. And just so the parties understand, both--if the Court finds these to be relevant to the professional competence issues that we discussed, then the Court will disclose a copy to each side and there will be a protective order that those records are not to be further copied or disseminated. All right. Anything else we need to take up before--

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I have one question for clarification.

THE COURT: Yes. Mr. Cochran, good morning, sir.

MS. CLARK: Can we have a moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: Certainly.

(Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)

MR. COCHRAN: Good morning, your Honor. Just a brief question, your Honor, with regard to the Court's order regarding the Coroner's photos. The Court indicates that the Court will allow limited public access to the autopsy photos and I guess my question is when representatives are selected from the news media pool, they will not then be allowed to take pictures, will they?

THE COURT: No. It will be strictly viewing here in Court, similar to the crime scene photos that was--viewing that was conducted previously.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Thank you for that clarification, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, I do have an additional matter.

THE COURT: Yes, sir.

MR. KELBERG: Somewhat in line with the Court's in camera reviewing. At some point after we complete the discussion with Dr. Lakshmanan of the autopsies of both cases, I would anticipate covering the two mistake cases that the Court has allowed the Defense to raise on the issue of Dr. Golden's competency. I need to make the motion in limine formal that I have tried to make all along regarding the other incidents that have been alleged because I need a ruling from the Court as to whether any of those three additional incidents is admissible. If they are, I would anticipate covering them on direct examination with Dr. Lakshmanan, as well as the two that the Court has already ruled are admissible. Likewise, I would like to know if there is any anything in the personnel evaluation file that the Court will be reviewing in camera which may be relevant, in the Court's judgment, to the issue of Dr. Golden's competency, because if there is and if I can concur in the Court's assessment that this has some bearing on his competency, then again it would be a matter I would expect to elicit through direct examination of Dr. Lakshmanan. I doubt I would finish both autopsy testimony by the end of today, because of the Court session and a juror apparently having a medical appointment, but it is most likely that if I don't today, it would be a matter that I would address quite early, I would think, tomorrow.

THE COURT: All right. How has that--refresh my recollection as to how this issue has been presented to the Court as to these three additional--I don't recollect having read any--

MR. KELBERG: No, I don't think any materials have been submitted. They have been given to Mr. Shapiro. There are three cases. One is the blue case which is a case involving a woman who was shot, taken to Martin Luther King Hospital for treatment and she died at Martin Luther King Hospital. I should point out, all of these incidents arise out of this prime time live broadcast, including the two incidents that the Court has already ruled are admissible. This is the third incident, the blue incident. Allegedly Dr. Golden identified only one gunshot wound to ms. Blue, and allegedly, according to the emergency room doctor who may have been the resident actually, ms. Blue had sustained three gunshot wounds. We believe the evidence will in fact show that Dr. Golden was absolutely correct in identifying only one gunshot wound. We have the photographs of the x-rays. We have the autopsy photographs. And quite frankly, the doctor at Martin Luther King Hospital is simply wrong and we will have to litigate the merits of whether there was a mistake or not and I have no difficulty in litigating the merits because on the merits I believe the evidence will show Dr. Golden made no mistake. So my argument is a 352 argument that this Court has already heard and the jury has already heard testimony that Dr. Golden made a lot of mistakes in this case, these two cases, I should say, of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, and they are going to hear evidence that he made two mistakes that we concede in this other case. Do we really need to spend the time litigating the merits of this blue case? Because if we do, we are going to be bringing in the doctor from Martin Luther King Hospital and we are going to be bringing in other experts, if necessary, to show that Dr. Golden made absolutely no mistake whatsoever. And do we really advance the search for the truth here or are we wasting a whole lot of time over nothing when the jury already understands that mistakes were made in these cases that are before the jury, which is really the most important thing. So that is the first case. The second case is the Erin Abernathy case. This was a child who died and the matter was investigated for possible shaken baby syndrome, and again, according to the broadcast on prime time live, allegedly Dr. Golden threw away the child's brain, making it impossible for anyone to reach a conclusion that would be with sufficient medical certainty to support a criminal prosecution of anyone for killing this child through the shaking of the baby and the so-called shaken baby syndrome. Interestingly, I received a call from a Dr. Speth who claimed to have been retained by ABC and Mr. Donaldson to review the Abernathy case, and according to Mr. Speth or Dr. Speth, he told Mr. Donaldson that there was no mistake made on Dr. Golden's part in supposedly throwing away the brain, and that in fact if there was responsibility it was the neuropathologist, Dr. Itabashi, and he told Mr. Donaldson, but Mr. Donaldson didn't search for another expert, and that was broadcast. Well, we will litigate this issue because there was no mistake made and there was no inability to evaluate the case for shaken baby syndrome. I happen to have been involved as a consultant in our office in that case, so I'm quite familiar with the case, and if we have to litigate it, we will litigate it. Now, of course the comparison of an infant death from allegedly shaken baby syndrome to the circumstances of this case are hard for me to fathom, but again, we can spend the time if the Court wants, but we will be litigating the merits of whether or not a mistake was made.

THE COURT: But wouldn't the relevance in Abernathy be the fact that an important sample was discarded and therefore not available for review, similar to the stomach contents here?

MR. KELBERG: If that were the case. Our contention is that in fact the brain was properly preserved, examined, sections were taken and the neuropathologist examined those as well and that material was available for review and it is not the so-called throwing away of the stomach contents where basically there is nothing left except Dr. Golden's description. And the important thing to recognize is Dr. Golden is not involved with that in the first place as far as--he preserved the brain for examination by the neuropathologist. The third case is this one that recently came to light, Mr. Hall, and this is the incident involving the missing thyroid gland, if you will. According to Dr. Golden's autopsy the gentleman had a thyroid gland. According to a lawyer representing I believe the widow of Mr. Hall, she contended that Mr. Hall had had his thyroid gland removed many years earlier, and it appears that that is in fact the case, that Dr. Golden made a mistake in identifying the thyroid gland as being present when in fact it was not. Again, now what that has to do--I mean, this is an elderly man and allegations were made that in fact this elderly man was killed as a part of a scheme to acquire assets or something of that nature. The matter has been reviewed within our office, and as of when I last spoke a couple of days ago with a lawyer who has reviewed the case in our office, insufficient evidence was found to support a criminal complaint. We have to litigate the merits, we will litigate the merits. But again, does this give the jury anything of substantial additional information about Dr. Golden's competency that is not available from the two cases that the Court has already ruled are admissible, and all of the mistakes that we are going to be talking about here? Because even, pardon me, when the Court talks about the stomach contents and so forth, obviously we haven't gotten to the issue of is there any significance of throwing away the stomach contents, but the Court has heard my argument before when we were talking about the alleged gun incident with Dr. Golden, that people talk a lot in the press, it seems, about what horrible things are done in the way of throwing away material, without having a basis of fact on which to make these judgments. We are going to give this jury bases and facts as to whether they can make a judgment as to whether they are significant or not and my argument is when the jury hears all the evidence, for example, on time of death, they will understand that the stomach contents is not a factor which is a reliable indicator at all on estimation for range of time of death. And if one wants to use it at all, it serves to narrow the time of death much closer to 10:15 than it would to eleven o'clock. And if Dr. Baden testifies, as I pointed out before, we will certainly question him about his previous testimony in 1988 regarding time of death and stomach contents which I will say for the record is not supported by any medical literature that I have reviewed, the most recent literature in spits and fisher and so forth, but we will litigate it. And the point is that that is the issue, the significance or lack of significance. These issues of the thyroid or the non-thyroid, the evidence would show that the absence of the thyroid gland from this person, when it is represented to have been present, does not deprive the medical examiner of assessing whether or not this person was killed at the hands of another. There were problems in making the assessment because the body was embalmed to begin with and not turned over for possible investigation as a criminal homicide for about eight days, as I recall, from the general information. So there is a lot to litigate as to whether there is any significance whatsoever to having identified a gland that was in fact not present. Those are the three cases that I would ask the Court not to permit testimony about under 352 on the ground that it would engage the jury in a waste of time for material that is duplicative of the evidence that they will have heard that indicates mistakes by Dr. Golden which are directly relevant to their assessment of issues in this case.

THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Shapiro.

MR. SHAPIRO: Thank you very much. Mr. Kelberg is in an ironic position. Yesterday he wasn't talking about the competency of Dr. Golden, rather, he conducted what I thought was a very effective or would have been a very effective cross-examination of the incompetency of Dr. Golden. Today now he is talking about the competency of Dr. Golden and none of these are issues that we have brought up at all. We haven't said a word, filed one motion, and we have no obligation in advance to tell Mr. Kelberg what our cross-examination is going to be. If he wants to challenge the competency of Dr. Golden, that is his privilege, and he did that yesterday and I thought he did that quite effectively. If he does not want to challenge the competency of Dr. Golden, then he can call him as a witness and vouch for his credentials, but I don't know how to respond to any of this other than it seems like Mr. Kelberg may want to sue Sam Donaldson.

THE COURT: Well, sounds to me like a motion in limine, and if there is no opposition, then I will grant his motion.

MR. SHAPIRO: Well, we are greatly opposed to anything that is relevant in this case, and clearly Dr. Lakshmanan has put into issue the fact that prior to reviewing the records in this case he had no knowledge whatsoever of any errors done by Dr. Golden, and apparently it was only until we retained our experts, Dr. Baden and Dr. Wolf, to examine this case and point out the errors to Dr. Lakshmanan and his staff, that Dr. Lakshmanan then conducted his own investigation and concurred with the findings of Dr. Baden and Dr. Wolf, that errors had been made. So we think clearly the issue has been put in by the Prosecution and they should not now be able to limit what evidence comes in and what doesn't come in regarding competency.

THE COURT: How about Mr. Kelberg's argument regarding the factual dispute to the blue case, the fact that in the Abernathy case the discarding of the samples was done by someone other than Dr. Golden, and that in the Hall case the presence or absence of that gland had ultimately nothing to do with the ultimate conclusions?

MR. SHAPIRO: Well, these are all issues that go to the competency of Dr. Golden. They are issues that we have to review regarding the reports that have been filed with your Honor as to whether or not mistakes have been made in the past by Dr. Golden and whether Dr. Lakshmanan or his staff were aware of those mistakes. But for them to be able to pick and choose and say, yes, he made these errors, he made thirty errors in this case and in two other cases, one case which resulted in the dismissal of a capital murder case, Dr. Golden misdiagnosed an entrance wound and an exit wound and a person who had been in jail and in custody for a prolonged period of time was rendered factually innocent by Judge Pounders. They have chosen, I guess, to bring those things up themselves, to--for whatever strategic advantage may lie in doing that, but I don't see where the Court should rule in limine on any prior activity regarding Dr. Golden's competency. They have put it in issue and we should be allowed wide cross-examination.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. KELBERG: May I briefly respond, your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: For the record Dr. Baden and Dr. Wolf did not point out anything to Dr. Lakshmanan. There was a joint examination on June 22nd and Dr. Lakshmanan was not told of anything identified by Dr. Baden or Dr. Wolf. Dr. Lakshmanan saw exactly what doctors Baden and Wolf saw and Dr. Lakshmanan identified whatever he did.

THE COURT: Well, Mr. Kelberg, the issue is Dr. Golden's competence, we agree.

MR. KELBERG: I understand. Your Honor, the Court is well aware of motions in limine. I am contending under section 352, which the Court is well aware of, does not violate the sixth amendment right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, that this evidence should be deemed inadmissible and that is what I ask the Court to rule on. And I believe there is no basis from the Defense to say that the Court is without jurisdiction to rule on a motion in limine. If the Court is without jurisdiction, then I must have been missing something for seventeen years of practice because it is such a common procedure for courts to make such rulings in advance of the anticipated testimony and the Court understands that if in fact there is going to be testimony permitted. And just to refresh everybody's recollection, including Mr. Shapiro's, we made a motion in limine regarding the first two incidents, as the Court will recall. The Court made a ruling, in essence, saying that we were wrong and I abide by that ruling and that is why we are going to bring the matter out.

THE COURT: I think I gave a split decision on that.

MR. KELBERG: You did, your Honor, that is quite true.

THE COURT: Yes, yes.

MR. KELBERG: But nevertheless, we are not here contesting the Court's ruling as to those two issues that were deemed admissible, and we are here merely now because we have these three additional cases which we have examined and we saw claims were made, mistakes were made. We say either no mistakes, blue, Abernathy, nothing attributable to Dr. Golden and completely unrelated to these cases before this jury, and in the case of Hall, something that is simply of no significance whatsoever with respect to that issue. So on that basis I ask the Court to rule under 352 that this evidence is inadmissible.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. KELBERG: Submitted.

THE COURT: Thank you. All right. As to the blue case, since there is a factual dispute that will involve essentially the Court and the jury having to try that case as well, I'm going to sustain the 352 objection as an undue consumption of Court time. As to Abernathy, since it appears from the offer that it is not contested that Dr. Golden did in fact retain the brain and that it was actually processed and handled and then discarded by another doctor, I find also that that is subject to a 352 objection that is well taken. As to the Hall matter, this involved the thoroughness in which a body is examined, the amount of time that is spent during the course of the examination, and I find that that does have substantial probative value and I will allow cross-examination as to the Hall matter. All right. Anything else?

MR. KELBERG: No, your Honor.

MR. SHAPIRO: Nothing, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: One brief matter.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Just for the record, because the Defense objected to certain--I think in fact all of our autopsy photographs, but they asked that a particular photograph, G34, be used in our presentation along with the photos that the Court has ruled are admissible, and I have no objection to doing that. And the Defense has agreed that we may also use a cropped photograph, G25, showing the hand of Mr. Goldman which has one particular injury that is not clearly visible in the alternative photograph which the Court allowed us to use which is G26.

MR. SHAPIRO: That's correct, that it should not be in any way viewed as a waiver of our previous objections.

THE COURT: Noted. Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: Nothing further.

THE COURT: Let's have the jurors, please. Let me see Mr. Cochran and Mr. Kelberg without the Court reporter, please.

(A conference was held at the bench, not reported.)

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

THE JURY: Good morning.

Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran, the witness on the stand at the time of the evening adjournment, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:

THE COURT: All right. Dr. Lakshmanan is again on the witness stand. Good morning, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Good morning, your Honor.

THE COURT: Doctor, you are reminded, sir, that you are still under oath. And Dr. Lakshmanan is undergoing direct examination by Mr. Kelberg. Ladies and gentlemen, before we proceed any further, as I mentioned to you earlier in the week, that some of this presentation will be unpleasant, and we understand that it is difficult duty as jurors for you to have to view some of these items of evidence. However, it is necessary that you consider each item of evidence that is presented to you. If you have difficulty or find yourself feeling very uncomfortable and if you think it would be appropriate to take a break, please feel free to let me know. All right. All right. Mr. Kelberg.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor. And your Honor, for the record, we have moved the easel, again at the suggestion of one of the deputies, to try and do as much as we can to shield the photographs from the audience section and at the same time give the ladies and gentlemen of the jury an opportunity to view the photographs. I would ask if the newest movement creates an inability on any of the juror's part to see what the juror feels he or she needs to see, I would ask that the Court be apprised of that so that we could perhaps juggle it a little bit better.

THE COURT: All right. The Court routinely canvasses the extremities of the jury panel for their ability to see.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Proceed.

MR. KELBERG: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good morning.

MR. KELBERG: Good morning, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Good morning.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, I have what appears to be a newspaper photograph that I would ask to be marked as exhibit 353.

THE COURT: All right. Have you shown that to Mr. Shapiro?

MR. KELBERG: I showed it to Mr. Cochran this morning.

THE COURT: All right. People's 353.

(Peo's 353 for id = newspaper photo)

MR. KELBERG: Yes, and I will ask Mr. Fairtlough to put it on the elmo.

DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. KELBERG

MR. KELBERG: Doctor--

MR. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, may we have just a moment before that is put up?

THE COURT: Yes.

(Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)

MR. SHAPIRO: May we approach, your Honor?

THE COURT: With the court reporter, please.

(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

THE COURT: We are over at the side bar.

MR. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, we believe that this is in the form of asked and answered. What he is attempting to do is show a photograph of a demonstration that took place yesterday, and it would be objected to.

THE COURT: Okay. The objection is noted. Overruled. Proceed.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you.

(The following proceedings were held in open court:)

THE COURT: Thank you, counsel.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, if you could invite your attention to the photograph, exhibit 353 that is on the overhead. Doctor, does this photograph fairly and accurately depict the demonstration that you performed yesterday afternoon regarding your opinion as to the manner in which that major stab/incise wound was inflicted to the neck of Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It catches one moment of the beginning of the description of the fatal stab/incise wound I described yesterday.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, given how you appear in this exhibit, is it your opinion that the perpetrator of that stab/incise wound used his or her right hand to inflict that injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is it your opinion that the perpetrator used his or her left hand to pull the hair of Nicole Brown Simpson and thus reflect the neck in a hyperextended fashion as shown in this photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And if Mr. Fairtlough will print that, I think we are done with that photograph.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, if you could step down, I'm going to put back--take the pointer with you, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: (Witness complies.)

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Kelberg, if you would just wait for opposing counsel and their experts to position themselves.

MR. KELBERG: Absolutely. And your Honor, as we discussed with Mr. Cochran, we are going to have some easels up and there is going to have to be some movement to allow everybody to see everything and at the same time have certain exhibits prepped for the jury's observation.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Kelberg.

MR. KELBERG: I think I lost my witness for a second, your Honor.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, I want to go back to the photographs B-13 and B-16 regarding the blood flow that you would expect from such a stab/incise wound. Are you familiar with the term called "Aspiration of blood"?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What does that mean, and if you will keep your voice up, please?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: "Aspiration" means that you aspirate the blood into the airways or the respiratory tract.

MR. KELBERG: "Aspirated" in essence means swallowing it, instead of down the esophagus, down your windpipe?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Basically the blood enters your windpipe and you can't breathe.

MR. KELBERG: Is aspiration of blood of any significance in evaluating a sharp force injury such as the one seen in these two photographs, B-13 and B-16?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: When you have an injury of such a nature to the neck, especially slicing the large thyrohyoid radia, you would expect some bleeding and aspiration of blood into the respiratory tract, and none was found here.

MR. KELBERG: You have reviewed Dr. Golden's report concerning an examination of the trachea and the lungs?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And does he make a specific reference with respect to whether or not any such aspiration of blood was found?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: He makes no reference?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: He makes a reference about the lungs and bronchi, but he doesn't discuss any aspiration.

MR. KELBERG: Were representative samples of the lungs preserved by Dr. Golden at the autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Have you examined those preserved samples?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I have.

MR. KELBERG: Have you examined them from the standpoint of looking for evidence of aspirated blood?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What, if any, findings did you make?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: None.

MR. KELBERG: None? You made no findings?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I made findings, but there is no aspiration which I could see in the sections which I examined.

MR. KELBERG: And that would be consistent with the absence of a finding of aspirated blood in the trachea?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And in the lungs?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: May I have just a moment, your Honor, to speak with Mr. Cochran and Mr. Shapiro?

(Discussion held off the record between Deputy District Attorney and Defense counsel.)

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, assuming that there was no blood aspirated by Nicole Brown Simpson, what, if any, significance does that have to you in forming any opinion as to the circumstances under which this wound was inflicted and she subsequently died?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: As I opined yesterday, she was most likely face down when the final fatal stab/incise wound was inflicted, and I also opined that the neck was hyperextended, and when this incision took place all the bleeding, the blood flow, went to the ground. And also the injury you are discussing endures nearly all the four major blood vessels, both the jugular veins and the carotid artery and this would lead sometimes as to immediate death or death within a very few minutes. And since there is bleeding there, she was definitely having blood pressure for at least a short time, which would cause her death, and also because of the position, I'm not surprised if she didn't aspirate because the blood flowed out to the ground and there was no evidence of aspiration seen.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, you have had an opportunity to review photographs taken by the police department at the Bundy scene when the bodies were found; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, I have another board of photographs that I would ask to be--that I would ask to be marked as exhibit 354, entitled "Blood from sharp force injuries to the neck of ms. Brown."

(Peo's 354 for id = posterboard)

THE COURT: Do you want to just put it on top?

MR. KELBERG: I'm going to.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, I invite your attention on this new exhibit--354 I believe I would ask to have the Court marked as.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. KELBERG: I think 353 was our single photograph.

THE COURT: 354.

MR. KELBERG: Inviting your attention to a photograph that is marked cS-11, does that photograph have some significance to you on the subject about which you were just testifying?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is the significance?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Ms. Brown Simpson is lying semi-prone here on her left side, and if you can see the left forearm and hand, the knuckles are opposing the ground.

MR. KELBERG: Does that mean in contact with the ground?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. And you have the--her right hand flexed at the elbow and under her chin area, around the chin area here, (Indicating), this is the pavement here and this is the--

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The head here and the pharynx here and the chin is here so the other hand is somewhere in that region, (Indicating). Now, if you look at crime scene photograph 39, you looked at crime scene photograph 11 now, giving you the general position, if you look at crime scene no. 39, the same knuckle, if you look here, (Indicating), the knuckle for the index finger and the knuckle for the middle finger is pale and there is no blood staining there. This would indicate that the hand was in contact because you will have massive blood flow from this neck wound, and this means that this hand was in contact with the ground, this is my opinion, when this neck was hyperextended and incised, so the blood flowed around the hand and left the areas in contact. You can also see the watch area here, (Indicating), and this area which didn't have blood on it because those are the areas in contact, so the blood flows and whatever is in contact with the ground will not have any blood staining and that supports my opinion that she was on the ground face down when this fatal wound took place with the blood flowing around the extremity as I just described.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, which hand--CS, crime scene 39 photograph, which hand does that photograph depict?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The left hand.

MR. KELBERG: And I ask you to assume for your opinion that that photograph fairly and accurately represents the condition of the hand as the body was observed on June 13th, 1994. Now, doctor, I want to invite your attention--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Right here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: I think we have a mistake. On the board it says June 13th, 1995. Somebody patched a 5 over our 4, but I will ask, your Honor, that we will remove that patch or put another one on. It is obviously from 1994.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, I can't quite see that. CS-40 I believe is the photograph in the same row on the opposite side. Is that photograph of any significance to you?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. This also shows that the right hand area, this is the right hand, which I'm looking--which we are looking at, and if you look at the area around the knuckle proximal phalanx, this is the area of the hand. If you read into crime scene photograph 11, it would indicate that this part of the hand is in this region here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Indicating, your Honor, for the record, the doctor took the back of his right hand and had up against the--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Chin area.

MR. KELBERG: --chin area on the left side, a bit of his chin.

THE COURT: Noted.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: So this--these photographs clearly demonstrate the blood flow pattern and why these photographs support my opinion which I opined yesterday as to the neck stab/incise wound being the last wound which Miss Simpson suffered.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, in your opinion, the head can be pulled back with the left hand by use of the hair and the neck hyperextended and still have the two hands in contact with the ground, as you have indicated here?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Not--only one hand on the ground. The other one was there after the incision was made and then--

MR. KELBERG: Contact with the chin?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: So one hand in contact with the ground, one hand in contact with the chin when the head is pulled back? Is that your opinion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. One hand was in contact with the ground. The head was pulled back. The other hand fell in place when the final resting position came in.

MR. KELBERG: All right. And so both hands were on the ground at the time the wound actually was inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, inviting your attention to what appears to be blood around the head of Nicole Brown Simpson in photograph cS-11, doctor, assuming that that is the blood of Nicole Brown Simpson, is that blood volume that appears in that photograph consistent with the kind of bleeding you would expect from that major stab/incise wound seen in the photographs in exhibit 352?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: How long would it take, in your opinion, for that blood to be flowing outside of the body to create what we are seeing in crime scene 11 photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: As I described earlier, this is the last wound, in my opinion, and I also discussed loss of blood and--if you lose about--I don't think I discussed that. If you lose--the normal blood volume is 4 to 5.5 liters in an average human being.

MR. KELBERG: Can you give us an idea what a liter is?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: A thousand cc's or 5 liters is about 5000 cc's.

MR. KELBERG: Hang on. Before you--can we move it into a system that most of us might understand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Okay.

MR. KELBERG: Gallons, quarts?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is one and a half gallons roughly.

MR. KELBERG: One and a half gallons is the equivalent of--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The blood volume because this--I'm talking about the U.S. gallon because the imperial gallon is much higher amount. I think the U.S. gallon is 3.4 or 3.5 liters, if I am right, and the imperial gallon is about 4.4.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, I didn't even know there was an imperial gallon, so I will be satisfied with the U.S. gallon?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: About one and a half gallons of blood volume and just an approximate maybe. The normal blood volume, as you know, the metric system is 5 to 5.5 liters. If anybody loses 2 to 2.5 liters rapidly they will go into shock and following shock you more or less will die after that without medical treatment because your heart will go into irregular beats and then you will die. Miss Brown had other injuries which also would cause significant bleeding. She had four sharp force injuries to the neck here, (Indicating). She had some sharp force injuries to the head which would also cause bleeding. And those, in my opinion, occurred before this wound, so accounting for some blood loss from those wounds and this, I would say she died within a few minutes, probably much less than a minute or so, because the--she would have gone into rapid shock with this massive injury.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, is that time frame, minutes to perhaps less than a minute, sufficient for that volume of blood to flow outside of her body?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, because as I told you, these are large vessels in the neck, the carotid artery. The carotid artery roughly pumps about 200 cc's a minute on both sides. And you also have the jugular veins which are large venus channels but also all the smaller vessels are getting cut at the same time. I'm not discussing the smaller vessels rest else.

MR. KELBERG: When you say "Smaller vessels," smaller mall blood vessels?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, which are branches of these injuries.

MR. KELBERG: What would be the effect of all of those injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Blood pressure goes to zero. And the blood pressure goes to zero when you lose about 25 percent to 35 percent of your blood volume.

(Brief pause.)

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

MR. KELBERG: Mr. Fairtlough suggests pulling the microphone--I'm not sure which microphone.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, when you testified yesterday about this stab/incise wound, you talked about in your opinion how it is deeper on the left side and shallower on the right side. Was there also something about the angulation of the wound which was of any significance to you?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. It angulates from the mid-portion of the left neck upwards to the right side of the neck below the ear. The wound ends just below the right ear.

MR. KELBERG: How is the angulation of any significance to you, if it is, in forming your opinion as to the sequence or circumstances of how the wound was in fact inflicted, as shown in the demonstration yesterday afternoon?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That will support my opinion in the manner that when the head is hyperextended and a right-handed person inflicts this injury, at least a person who used his right hand to inflict this injury, the upward angle will fit the scenario which I just opined.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, you said a right-handed person and then you talked about a person using his right hand. How do you distinguish those two concepts?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because some people may be strong in both the hands, and some people are, so there could be equal dexterity in both extremities.

MR. KELBERG: Equal dexterity in both extremities?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: "Extremities" meaning in this case the hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: If you keep your voice up, it would really help the reporter because she is behind you and it is very difficult, so--doctor, before I move to another photograph that you briefly talked about, B-18, I just want to talk briefly about an area on B-13 that appears on the left side of the face of Nicole Brown Simpson and what appears to be some kind of discoloration. Do you see that in the photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is that of any significance to you as a forensic pathologist?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. That is the discoloration caused by postmortem lividity which is also known as livor mortis.

MR. KELBERG: And we touched on that I think on Friday when we were looking at those forms that Claudine Ratcliffe filled out. Can you point out the area, first of all, in the photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This area here, (Indicating), and this mottled area here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: I know the Court can't see it. My representation would be that the doctor pointed to the area just above the left side of the chin.

MR. KELBERG: And would you point again, doctor, to another area.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Below the left cheek area, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And the left cheek area of the photograph B-18?

THE COURT: The Court is familiar with the photographs.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry, B-1.

THE COURT: The Court is familiar with the photograph.

MR. KELBERG: And again we are going to get into a much more detailed discussion of lividity, but for purpose of our discussion, doctor, what is it and how does it have significance, if any, to you?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Lividity is the draining of blood, after the circulation has ceased, to the dependent parts of the body by the action of gravity causing discoloration in areas which are not under pressure, so--

MR. KELBERG: Let me--if I could, could I have our exhibit 354 board, if you will just slide it this way--don't. Thank you, doctor. Because you have used some terms, dependent part of the body and so forth. Can you use photographs cS-11--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: --to demonstrate what you are talking about, dependent part of the body?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. In cS-11 you see the left side of the face of Miss Nicole Brown Simpson is the most dependent part of the body touching the ground, and almost touching the ground except for the interspersed right hand I discussed earlier. So the discoloration which I showed you in B-13 is the draining of blood to that area, because of this position she ultimately came to rest after death, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, when you are talking about dependent part of the body, in essence are you saying the lowest part of the body?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In that position, yes, for--

MR. KELBERG: And obviously that can change depending on the position of the body?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: But in this particular photograph cS-11, with respect to the face, the dependent part of the face is which side?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The left side of the face.

MR. KELBERG: And then is the appearance of lividity that you have identified in B-13 consistent with what you would expect to see from a body that had been in that position?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is there anything--I'm sorry. Umm, you mentioned on B-16 I think the thyrohyoid area; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And in your testimony, as I recall, you used the term a cornu, C-O-R-N-U; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is that area shown in some fashion in photograph B-16?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is approximately shown here on the right side here, (Indicating). This is the thyroid cartilage I am pointing to in B-16 and the cornu, C-O-R-N-U, are also known as horns, H-O-R-N-S, thyroid horns. They are situated at the back of the upper part of the thyroid cartilage on both sides. And this right cornu was also incised by the same wound as it was traversing from left to right.

MR. KELBERG: Incidentally, doctor, this wound in B-16 is in a gaping state; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: You talked about lines of Langer or Langers lines. Do those lines come into play in this issue of the gaping--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In this situation the neck has almost been sliced half from front to back, so it is more than this line of Langer. All the structures here have been cut so that the wound--the neck is not as stable as it should be because the spine has also been cut. So you have--and also the positioning of the body when you take a photograph--

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: --when you take a photograph of the front wound, because of the gaping wound, you see more gaping.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, did you find that in Dr. Golden's original protocol he described this major stab/incise wound that we have seen in the photographs B-13, B-16 and the small portion in B-18?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Did Dr. Golden also diagram, in one or more of the forms that you have previously identified, that same injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he has.

MR. KELBERG: Did he in his original protocol or his original diagrams identify the injury to the right cornu?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No, he did not.

MR. KELBERG: Is that a mistake for him not to have addressed that in his protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is a mistake.

MR. KELBERG: Is it a mistake of his not to have diagrammed that in one or more of the diagram forms available?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It was a mistake.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, have you considered those mistakes--those are two mistakes then; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Have you considered those mistakes as to their significance on all these issues you have been asked about?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I have.

MR. KELBERG: In your opinion does that mistake of failing to identify it in the protocol and the mistake of failing to diagram it have any significance on any of the issues that you have addressed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Why not?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because that is an ear injury in a massive injury to the neck, and most importantly, the neck organ was saved and is available for review and that is how I saw it. And to me it has no significance as far as the cause of death goes or in explaining what I just explained regarding aspiration and other issues, and it is a mistake, but it is not of significance for any of the issues as far as the cause of death, bleeding patterns and evaluating the injury.

MR. KELBERG: Does it have any significance in your ability to assess the class of knife or classes of knives which could be responsible for inflicting that major stab/incise wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No, because the--the cornu has been incised so it could be both a single-edged or a double-edged knife. Anybody with a sharp edge could have caused that transection of the cornu.

MR. KELBERG: So this is one of the sharp force injuries that you are not able to distinguish by the appearance of the injury itself, whether it is a single-edge or a double-edge?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: But it is a sharp force injury that is consistent with a six-inch long single-edged knife blade?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, but I would favor it being a single-edged because there is one area, which if you look at B-18, the wound started as an incise wound, but then there is a bridge here, (Indicating), following that, which I would favor a single-edged knife, but because a double-edged knife would not leave a bridge there, because a single-edge knife, when you start using the sharp portion of the knife to make the cut and then you do the penetrating part, the blunt edge will leave a bridge there. And that is why this photograph is important, (Indicating), that this wound, even though I can't say with full certainty that it is only a single-edged knife, I would favor a single-edged knife, but a double-edged knife could do--can create a wound of similar nature.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, just for the record--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: And you can see the bridge better if you use the magnifying glass.

MR. KELBERG: I think you may be seeing with the magnifying glass, but I'm afraid the jurors probably can't see it from where they are seated, but for the record, doctor, you were pointing to an area on B-18 that is two--it is the left side of the neck area and it is the area that is immediately adjacent to where there appears to be that side of this major stab/incise wound; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, it is--yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is there anything else of significance to you with respect to these three photographs, with particularity on this stab/incise wound, that we have not discussed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Before we move to the more detailed description of the other stab wounds, if we could have just a moment to set up the easels and maybe ask all counsel to help us out a bit to give us a little room.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: Given our problems, here, counsel why don't you step to the well and you are welcome to do so.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Kelberg.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Dr. Lakshmanan, we have up on the left side the blow-up of what is exhibit 349, the protocol?

THE COURT: Excuse me. Mr. Lynch, I think you are blocking juror no. 7's view.

MR. KELBERG: Perhaps Mr. Lynch can come over here.

THE COURT: Let me just check. 165, can you see these items?

MR. KELBERG: Dr. Lakshmanan, you may be blocking.

JUROR NO. 165: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, this is the blow-up of the actual original protocol; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What page or pages in this protocol reflects Dr. Golden's identification of this major stab/incise wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I think it is page 3 and 4.

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

MR. KELBERG: And I'm going to ask Mr. Lynch to turn to page 3. If you need some help--

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, on this page, where, if at all, do you see the start of any description regarding that injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is page 3 in the bottom of the page. It says, "Description of incise wound of neck and evidence of injury" and then it starts the description of the wound and then continues to page 4.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Before we flip to page 4, your Honor, for the record, I'm going to mark "B-13, 16, 18" along the left margin of page 3 by the description where Dr. Lakshmanan has identified.

MR. KELBERG: And now, if we could continue on.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Page 4 continues the description of what I just discussed. It also discusses the injury to the carotid artery, the jugular vein. And what I would like to point out as the description of the right jugular vein where there is only a quarter-inch cut whereas the internal jugular vein on the left side is almost transected which again would support my opinion that the left side was a deeper part of the wound than the right side which was shallower.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, does this entire page cover aspects of the description and opinion from Dr. Golden regarding that same injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, so I may also mark similar along the left side "B-13, B-16, B-18" of that series.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor we have to the left of Mr. Lynch a blow-up of another one of the exhibits from 349 and it is smaller version in the 348 series. Is this one of the diagrams that was used by Dr. Golden with respect to drawing in observations made during the course of the autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does this diagram contain any reference to this stab/incise wound that we have been discussing over the last few minutes?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Will you step perhaps to the--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It shows the wound in the left neck going up the mid-portion of the left neck up to the lower right ear. It is a diagrammatic representation.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, does there appear to be any description or writing made by Dr. Golden reflecting his observations of that wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. This particular handwriting here refers to this wound, (Indicating), and it--you can also--starts with "Edges smooth" and continues up to here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: When you say the words "Edges smooth," is that consistent with your examination of the margins of that stab/incise wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And the significance of the edges being smooth?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I discussed that it is a single cut and in my opinion there was not any resistance offered.

MR. KELBERG: By Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, where Dr. Golden has--I'm sorry, Dr. Lakshmanan has testified regarding the entries by Dr. Golden on this form, may the record reflect I have encircled the area in red and on the big diagram form 22 and I am writing out at the edge "B-13, B-16, B18."

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, I'm going to ask Mr. Lynch, if he would, to take down 22 and put up another form--by the way, that was on board 3B and I can't tell the number--I think that is 0B, the protocol, the original protocol, but I will verify that when we get it down. It is on the other side.

MR. LYNCH: It is.

MR. KELBERG: 0B Mr. Lynch confirms.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is this a form 20 that is used by Dr. Golden in the course of the autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is there an entry by Dr. Golden on this form with respect to that same neck injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. You can see it on the neck going from the left side of the mid-part of the neck to the upper right neck below the ear, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And is there any writing that you attribute from Dr. Golden to that particular injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: When it says "Trans" here that means transfers and going up here, this part here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And your Honor, where Dr. Lakshmanan has testified regarding the diagram by Dr. Golden on form 20, I'm circling it in red and out at the side writing "B-13, B-16, B-18." Now, I'm going to ask Mr. Lynch to put up a copy of the addendum report--I'm sorry, before he does so, if I may just have a moment to get a different diagram.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: I'm going to ask that this board, which is 6B be put up. By the way, 20, was 2B.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, there is a form 24; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: This is another one of the forms used by Dr. Golden in the course of the autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is there any entry or markings on this form that reflect upon this same injury we have been discussing?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Here is showing the injury to the thyrohyoid here, (Indicating), and given this description, so this and this whole area and this whole area would reflect the--internal description of the injury to the neck which I just opined on.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, does this form depict in a diagrammatic fashion the cornu or horn area that you talked about earlier this morning?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, because there is a lot of writing here. He used this part. This is the thyroid cartilage, the side view. This is the cornu area of the thyroid cartilage and you can see it here, too, it may be difficult to see, but you can see on it both sides. This is the thyroid cartilage area, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, if you could stay there for just a moment, if I write in "Thyroid cartilage," and would you point out again the horns.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Umm--

MR. KELBERG: Starting down here, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: (Witness complies.)

MR. KELBERG: All right. I will circle that area, doctor. And where is it on the other side, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: I will circle that area and draw lines and write the word "Horns"?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: And in this picture you can see that here, the front view, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: In that area, doctor, I will circle in red and write "Horns" to represent what you've identified. And all of the writing in this upper right quadrant of form 24?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Yes, and also this side, (Indicating), because there is the description of the thyroid area but here he describes the left palm and carotid artery transectioned. LIJV is left internal jugular vein, "Subtotal jugular transection thin strand" which is the portion of the vein which is left there, and on the right side it says, "Right internal jugular vein only nick, right palm and carotid artery transected," so this all would belong to the injury we described.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, "Subtotal" is a fancy way of saying what? Subtotal transection?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Almost transectioned with only a small bridge of the vein wall left in the back.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, where the doctor has indicated there has been an entry by Dr. Golden on this diagram, I have encircled it with a red pen and I will write in the upper left-hand corner, "B-13, B-16, B-18."

MR. KELBERG: By the way, doctor, there is a stamp that appears in the upper right corner of that diagram. Do you see that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: How does that stamp come to be on these forms?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We have a blue card just like your credit card. We make a credit card for every case we have in our office and you just take the card and you imprint any form or diagram you want to use so you have the number, the name, and you can see we also have the crypt number that we discussed yesterday.

MR. KELBERG: That is what I was going to--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Number 4. No. 4.

MR. KELBERG: So if I circle this, "No. 4," and I will write in "Crypt number" on the diagram, that is what her crypt number was as assigned?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Okay. Any other injuries on this particular diagram?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Incidentally, doctor, is it--with respect to either the right upper quadrant or the right lower quadrant of this diagram that you would have expected Dr. Golden to have made an entry regarding the cornu?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, he has drawn a number of lines in the thyrohyoid area, but he has not specifically addressed that the right cornu was incised.

MR. KELBERG: Is that where you would have expected to him do so, in the upper right quadrant diagram?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And that board was 6B, your Honor, 24. And Mr. Lynch is now putting up--is now putting up our blow-up of the addendum report.

MR. KELBERG: Is that correct, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: This is the addendum report, the final addendum report?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is there a page or pages of the addendum report which address the cornu injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Page 2, no. 2, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: All right. We will ask Mr. Lynch, if he could.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Where you have just pointed with the pointer, this is the entry by Dr. Golden to reflect the injury that you observed in the right cornu?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I think that is pretty self-explanatory, your Honor. All I did was circle the area, item 2 on page 2 and I will write "B-13, B-16, B-18."

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, let me--I will ask Mr. Lynch to get that down. I think we are done with this for the moment.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: That board was 8B.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: May I have just a moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes. And Mr. Kelberg, we will be going to 10:30 this morning.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, let me invite your attention now specifically to the photo on exhibit 352. I think counsel may want to move back. I think we are done with the two easels down there, B-18. And now with respect to these four stab wounds that you identified earlier--and briefly, have they been given arbitrary numbers?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And by "Arbitrary," what do you mean?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is they were just given numbers for convenience. They do not--do not reflect sequence of infliction.

MR. KELBERG: So if you have a wound that is injury no. 1 or stab wound no. 1, it doesn't mean that that was the first stab wound that was inflicted; is that accurate?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: And in this photograph, how many stab wounds do you see to the left side of the neck of Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There are four; 1, 2, 3, 4, and three of them are really stab wounds. One of them is a superficial sharp force injury there.

MR. KELBERG: When you say "Superficial sharp force injury" in defining, as you did yesterday, incise wound as being longer than they are deep and stab wound as being deeper than they are long, how would you define this one?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, it could be the tip of the knife barely penetrating the upper part of the skin and soft tissue or it could be a nick from the knife. It is difficult to be specific on it because it is a very superficial wound. There is no depth which was available to analyze it.

MR. KELBERG: Let's start with kind of a collective question. Injuries 1, 3 and 4, from your examination of the appearance of those wounds in this photograph, do you have an opinion as to the class or classes of knives which could inflict each of those wounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: My opinion is that they were all three caused by a single-edged and each of the wounds have a blunt end and a sharp end.

MR. KELBERG: Start with injury no. 1 and just use the pointer. I don't think we are going to be able--at some point perhaps the injury will have a magnifying glass and an opportunity to look for that, but if you will start by just pointing, which is the blunt end and which is the sharp end of each?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Injury no. 1 you can see the blunt end of the lower part and the sharp end in the upper end.

MR. KELBERG: So as we look at photograph, the blunt end is going to be toward the bottom of the photo?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And the sharp end is going to be toward the top?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. How about injury no. 3?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The sharp end is in the posterior part and the blunt end is in the front.

MR. KELBERG: When you say "Posterior," for our purposes is that to the right side of the photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: And the sharp end is to the left side?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And how about injury no. 4?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The blunt end is to the left side of the photograph, the sharp end is to the right side of the photograph.

MR. KELBERG: How about injury no. 2, are you able to form an opinion as to the class or classes of knives which created that sharp force injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Injury no. 2 I can't tell. It would be either be a single-edge or double-edged.

MR. KELBERG: In your opinion could all four of these stab wounds be caused by the same single-edged knife blade?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: You described one that was six inches long?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, because as we discussed yesterday, these stab wounds, if you read the description, only have a depth of one and a half to two inches, so you don't have to have necessarily the entire knife penetrate in this area, so you could have a six-inch knife with a tapering blade which would have caused these injuries.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, does Dr. Golden describe each of these four stab wounds in his original protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he does.

MR. KELBERG: Does he diagram each of these four stab wound in one or more diagrams?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he does.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, given the area where these stab wounds were received, and given the nature of the major stab/incise wound that you have described earlier in the three photographs, 13, 16 and 18, can you determine, as a forensic pathologist, whether, for example, starting with stab wound no. 1, that stab wound actually punctured or struck in any way either the jugular vein on the left side or the carotid artery on the left side?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Dr. Golden's description is that they may have endured these vessels, but because of the massive transection of the jugular vein of the left side and complete transection of the carotid artery on the left side, he could not see whether there was injury from these four--these three wounds which I have discussed, because in their depth the region of the injury, which they caused by the track in the body was the same area which had already been endured by the major incise/stab wound.

MR. KELBERG: When you say already--you have testified your opinion was that the major stab/incise wound came last; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And if in fact that is what occurred and these four stab wounds were already inflicted, would that last stab wound, in essence, create damage over whatever damage to the jugular and/or carotid had been inflicted by one or more of the four stab wounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is the opinion which was given in the report which indicates that the injury, the massive injury to the carotid artery and jugular vein on the left side, precluded him from evaluating injuries from these stab wounds.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, in your opinion could Dr. Golden have made a more complete or detailed evaluation through dissection of the area to see if there was a way to state with greater certainty whether either the carotid or jugular was actually nicked or hit by any one of these three stab wounds, four stab wounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The--there could have been a little more dissection of the carotid vessels on either side of the transection because the vein is difficult to dissect because it will fall apart. It is a very thin wall structured by the carotid artery. Could have been opened on both sides of the transection to see if there were any nicks. And the report doesn't reflect whether that was done or not, but definitely it doesn't indicate that there was additional cuts.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, if that had been done, would it necessarily have allowed Dr. Golden to see whether any one of those stab wounds did in fact hit the jugular and/or carotid?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Umm, if he had done the dissection he could have said that he did the dissection and he didn't see it, which would support his original opinion wherein he had indicated that he could not evaluate the injury to the structures because of the massive injury caused by the fatal stab wound which was inflicted last.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, assuming that Dr. Golden failed to do the kind of dissection, more detailed dissection that you have indicated, would that be a mistake, in your opinion, in the manner in which he conducted the autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Umm, if he had not done the dissection it would be a mistake, but if he had done the dissection and not reported it, it would not be a mistake.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry, not recorded it?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If his evaluation included that he had done the dissection but he had not stated as such, then it would not be a mistake.

MR. KELBERG: But if he didn't do the dissection it would be a mistake?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I would do the dissection to see whether there is additional injuries there.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, if Dr. Golden did not do the dissection, in your opinion, would such a failure have any significance to you on any of the issues that you have been talking about?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Including on whether a single single-edged knife could have caused all of these sharp force injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: Why would that have no significance?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because we can--the opinion on the nature of the sharp force instrument can be made from the wound patterns on the skin. The bleeding patterns have been described from the vascular injuries which I already discussed, so really it is not significant to the cause of death or the manner of death or the bleeding blood flow patterns.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, if I could have the board--not the pointer, I'm sorry--the board that has been marked as 354, let's--this is one of the crime scene photographs. Assume for the sake of argument that stab wound no. 1 did not strike either the left carotid artery or the left jugular vein. Would that stab wound, nevertheless, have caused some bleeding?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, it would. It is a highly vascular area of the neck.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: A highly vascular area of the neck.

MR. KELBERG: When you say "Highly vascular," what does that mean in lay--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The term--has got a lot of branches from the arteries and a lot of venous channels, and a wound to this area of the neck, which is one and one-half to two inches deep would cause significant bleeding.

MR. KELBERG: And if in fact either the jugular or the carotid or both had been hit, what kind of bleeding, over and above bleeding without such a nick, would you expect?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There would be more bleeding.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, is there a difference between the stab wound, what it can do to the carotid or jugular, and the incise stab wound that you identified as transecting?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yeah. The--if it just punctures the carotid artery you will have spurting of blood by transection. Also you can have spurting but you will have more bleeding because the whole vessels has been transected and also the person will lose blood pressure much faster and die earlier with the transection than just from a puncture. So the severity for a puncture wound would be longer than a transection.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, let me invite your attention to another photograph from our exhibit 354 that is marked cS-12 and again I will ask you to assume that this photograph is a fair and accurate representation of the position and condition surrounding Nicole Brown Simpson as her body was found on June 13th, 1994. And now I want to invite your attention specifically to a step that appears immediately above her body in that photograph. Do you see that, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And do you see what appears to be blood surrounding that--part of the area of that step?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I see that.

MR. KELBERG: In looking at the quantity of blood, assuming it is the blood of Nicole Brown Simpson, is that amount of blood seen there consistent with what you would expect from the four stab wounds that we are looking at on B-18?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Why is that, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because as I told you, the area of the neck is quite vascular and whether they struck the jugular vein or carotid artery, or they did not, still combined they would cause significant bleeding which would account for this blood here, (Indicating), if the--Miss Simpson's upper portion of the body had been in contact with that area.

MR. KELBERG: After the wound had--wound or wounds had been inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does the Court wish to take a break at this point?

THE COURT: Yes. All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our regular recess at this time. Please remember all my admonitions to you. Do not discuss the case among yourselves, do not form any opinions about the case, do not conduct any deliberations until the matter has been submitted to you, do not allow anybody to contact or communicate with you with regard to the case. We will stand in recess for fifteen minutes.

(Recess.)

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

THE COURT: Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present. 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. Let the record reflect we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Dr. Lakshmanan is still on the witness stand undergoing direct examination by Mr. Kelberg. And Mr. Kelberg, you may continue with your direct examination.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor. And again, with the Court's permission, could Dr. Lakshmanan step down, and we will put the photographic board--and maybe all counsel and Drs. Baden and Wolf will wish to retake their position.

THE COURT: Which board are you putting up, Mr. Kelberg?

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry?

THE COURT: Which board are you putting up?

MR. KELBERG: 352 again, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, I would like to now go into a more detailed description from you of stab wound no. 1 and then go through the series of the four stab wounds.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Stab wound no. 1 is--

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up again, please?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Stab wound no. 1 is located on the left neck and it measures 7/16 of an inch by 1/8 of an inch in the photographic measurement I did.

MR. KELBERG: 7/16 of an inch in what direction, doctor? Can you show us with the pointer?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In a superior interior direction.

MR. KELBERG: More or less up and down?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, (Indicating), and 3/16 inch in the transverse or anthroposterior access as I'm pointing here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Side to side?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: So this is the wound, when I measured it, in the state I could see it in the photograph, in the one-as-to-one photograph which I had.

MR. KELBERG: The life-size photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: The wound in Dr. Golden's measurement is 5/8 inch in length, in his description. The blunt end, as I mentioned earlier, is in the inferior part and the sharp end is in the upper part of the wound, and this wound penetrated the left side of the neck in a left to right direction and was up to two inches in-depth.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, from the information in Dr. Golden's protocol and your evaluation of the life-size photograph, can you tell us anything about the relative positions of the perpetrator and Nicole Brown Simpson at the time stab wound no. 1 was inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Could you expand on your question? You want more information?

MR. KELBERG: Yes. Doctor, for example, when I say "Relative positions," can you say whether the two were, relatively speaking, face-to-face, one was behind the other? Can you give us any additional information from that stab wound no. 1?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It could be a situation where they were facing each other and the assailant had a weapon in the right hand and that wound could have been inflicted in that manner.

MR. KELBERG: Excuse me. I will step over back here again. Can you use me as Nicole Brown Simpson, just to show, relatively speaking--incidentally, when you use the term, and I used the term "Relative positions," what does that mean to you as a forensic pathologist?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It just means the positions in which these wounds could have been inflicted by the medical findings one has.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Can you use me as Nicole Brown Simpson and indicate how in your opinion the--Nicole Brown Simpson and the perpetrator could have been face-to-face and have the stab wound no. 1 inflicted with a right-handed held knife?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In this manner, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And your Honor, for the record, Dr. Lakshmanan with his right hand, clenched fist representing holding a knife, has raised his arm above my left shoulder and has it angled at about a 45-degree angle towards my neck.

THE COURT: All right. Why don't you trade places so that the jurors can actually see the right arm.

MR. KELBERG: All right.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, let's ask you to do that again.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The knife in question is a single-edged knife and the blunt edge would be on the lower part and the sharp edge would be the upper part corresponding to the wound.

MR. KELBERG: Is that consistent with what you see in fact in stab wound no. 1?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor are there other relative positions that could account for that--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There could be other positions, too.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any way for you as a forensic pathologist to be able to say with specificity what was the actual relative positions?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any way, given that you cannot say with specificity the relative positions, that you can say whether the knife was being held by the right hand or the left hand of the perpetrator?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I cannot say that. I cannot say which hand.

MR. KELBERG: And does the hand depend on what the actual--I will tell you what--does the hand that has the knife then depend--a finding depend on the relative positions at the time the wound was inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: Now, can you do basically the same identification process for stab wound no. 2, or I'm sorry, sharp force injury no. 2?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Sharp force injury no. 2, I'm pointing to it right now, (Indicating), 1/8 inch, superficial. It is a superficial puncture/incise wound.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, in your opinion would that superficial incise wound create any extensive bleeding?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Incidentally, stab wound no. 1, if it did in fact strike either the left jugular vein or the left carotid artery, would that wound in your opinion be fatal if there was no medical intervention?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It could be potentially serious wound if the carotid artery and jugular vein was injured.

MR. KELBERG: My question is would it, in your opinion, be a fatal wound if in fact Nicole Brown Simpson did not receive immediate and appropriate medical care?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If she did not receive proper medical care it could be a potentially serious fatal wound.

MR. KELBERG: I would assume a fatal wound is a serious wound. In your opinion is it a fatal wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, in fact if there had been such a striking of the jugular or--and/or carotid, could that wound be fatal even with immediate and proper medical intervention?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It could be fatal.

MR. KELBERG: Now, stab--I'm sorry--sharp force injury no. 2, in your opinion is that a non-fatal injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And other than being a superficial incise wound, does it have any significant bearing on the cause of death of Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Is there anything else about--I'm sorry. Can you tell anything about the relative position of Nicole Brown Simpson and the perpetrator from the appearance of that sharp force injury no. 2?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The same statements I applied to the stab wound no. 1 would apply to this.

MR. KELBERG: So in the relative positions of face-to-face that you showed, that is a possibility?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is a possibility and it could also be the person who had the weapon in the left hand and was in the back, that same kind of wound could have been inflicted in a left or right direction.

MR. KELBERG: If it was face-to-face again it would be a knife held in the right hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, stab wound no. 3, in the photograph B-18, a description of that, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This stab wound, (Indicating), is transversely oriented. That is side-to-side in this photograph, in contrast to the other wound which is more in a vertical orientation, so this is more in a horizontal orientation. It has got a blunt end in the front and a sharp end in the back and this wound measures 5/16 inch by 3/16 inch in the state of the photography reviewed in the one-as-to-one photograph.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, from your review of the life-size photograph, is your measurement consistent with any measurement made by Dr. Golden, given limitations of measurements from photographs that you described yesterday?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There is no significant difference if you take the limitations of the process into consideration.

MR. KELBERG: And those limitations were?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I discussed them yesterday. The photograph I'm viewing is a two-dimensional photograph. It is a slightly gaping wound. Dr. Golden approximated the wound when he did the measurement and when you approximate, you know, the wound can be longer because he measured it as a half an inch long wound and this--and also indicated that--the other problem when you do photographic measurement is that when you have a curvature like this, the neck is a curved area of the body, your measurement of the photograph doesn't take into consideration the curvature component which you would do in a real life measurement when you are measuring the wound in an approximated. State so given those limitations, his measurements are not significantly different from mine.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, is in your opinion stab wound no. 3 a potentially fatal stab wound if in fact it struck either the carotid or the jugular?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And the same would apply if it struck both, I assume?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: If it did not strike either would it be a fatal stab wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Would it still be a stab wound that would produce significant bleeding?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: How about stab wound no. 4? Can you give us some more detailed information?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Stab wound no. 4 is the lower most wound. It also has the same horizontal orientation. It has got a sharp end on the right side of the photograph and a blunt end on the front of the photograph. And this wound in its gaping state measured 9/16 inch by 3/8 of an inch, the 9/16 inch being the horizontal component and 3/8 being the vertical component. And Dr. Golden measured his wound in his original notes as 7/8 inch in the approximated state, and given the limitations of the process, I saw no significant difference attributable to my measurements. And this wound also is a track in the body about one and a half inches.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, I don't think I asked you on stab wound no. 3 about relative positions. Would your answers be the same as to relative positions of Nicole Brown Simpson and the perpetrator in a right-handed or left-handed nature of the knife being held as they were for stab wound 1 and 2?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Now, stab wound no. 4, excuse me, if that had--stab wound had in fact hit in any fashion, either the jugular or the carotid, would that stab wound be a fatal stab wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And if it hit both, a fatal stab wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And if it neither, a non-fatal stab wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Would it still be a stab wound which would produce significant bleeding if it struck neither the carotid or the jugular?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Would your--I'm sorry, did you want to add something?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Would your answers about relative positions of the perpetrator and Nicole Brown and the right-handed or left-handed nature of holding the knife be the same for stab wound no. 4 as they have been for stab wound 1, 2 and 3?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is there any significance to you, as a forensic pathologist, that these four stab wounds appear to have a linear relationship if one goes from the stab wound no. 1 to sharp force injury no. 2, to stab wound no. 3, to stab wound no. 4?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. It does have a significance because they are all localized to one area of the neck which would signify that there was some limitation of movement created at least to the neck area when these wounds were inflicted by the assailant, because they are localized to one area, more or less in the same area. And there is some movement, because one wound is not as deep as the other, but still it would signify some partial immobilization, at least because given the localized area of all these four stab wounds on that area.

MR. KELBERG: When you say immobilization, immobilization of who or what?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Miss Brown Simpson by the assailant.

MR. KELBERG: And immobilization is a long word to mean in essence what?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Prevent movement of the person by holding them or holding them against a wall or just holding them tight so that you have some control over them that they cannot exert the same degree of movement as you would expect in a person who is not so compromised.

MR. KELBERG: If a person were not so compromised, would you expect that person to try to avoid being struck by the knife?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. SHAPIRO: Objection, calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: And your answer, doctor, is?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, is there anything else, with respect to a description of these four sharp force injuries along the neck as seen in photograph B-18, you wish to bring out?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: If we could move them, we are going to go back to the protocols and the diagrams.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: And I will ask Mr. Lynch when he is at that position, we are putting 0B up, and we are putting--which is the protocol, and we are putting 3B up which is our form, I believe, 22.

(Brief pause.)

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

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, did Dr. Golden address each of these four sharp force injuries that we have been looking at in B-18 in his original autopsy report?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he has.

MR. KELBERG: Where?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: On page 5 and 6 of the report.

MR. KELBERG: If Mr. Lynch can turn to page 5 of the protocol blow-up.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, where does that start?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: 1, 2, 3 and 4 is the same numbers which I used when I described photograph B.

MR. KELBERG: 18 I believe it is?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: B-18, yes, so it follows the same format.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Your Honor, then on page 5 of the protocol in the upper left-hand corner under "Description and multiple stab wound," I'm writing "B-18." I will leave it at that.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. KELBERG: And you said--it continues on to page 6 is it, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, no. 4 stab wound the 7/8 wound which I discussed last continues on to page 6.

MR. KELBERG: If Mr. Lynch could flip that, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Just the first two paragraphs.

MR. KELBERG: Would it be accurate, doctor, that the description on B-18 ends where I've got the red marker here, (Indicating)?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And so your Honor, with that red marker I'm making a u-shaped box, if you will, around those two photographs on page 6 and writing "B-18" within the margin.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, did Dr. Golden diagram in any fashion on any of the diagrams those four sharp force injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did.

MR. KELBERG: Is it seen in diagram 22?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Would you show us, please, where.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. I'm going to--

MR. KELBERG: And keep your voice up, please, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The four stab wounds are diagrammed on the left side of the neck, in the lower right quadrant of this board, 1, 3, 4 and 2 is here, (Indicating), and you also have the description of all the wounds described.

MR. KELBERG: Well, let's start--first of all, where do you see the description for the four stab wounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: One description is here, (Indicating), and then 2 and then you have stab wound no. 3 here, (Indicating), and 4 here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: All right. Doctor--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: So the whole thing is the description for all the four stab wounds.

MR. KELBERG: So basically it is the lower half of form 22 which has been used by Dr. Golden?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: To identify and describe those four sharp force injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, and to repeat, this is no. 1, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: All right. Let me just mark that. Which is no. 1, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: All right. I'm going to put a box around that on the diagram and write in "SW no. 1."

DR. LAKSHMANAN: And actually this includes also because it says, "Three inches below the EAC" which is external auditory canal. From here it is three inches below here, (Indicating), so that should be included, too.

MR. KELBERG: All right. I will raise the even circled area on the lower right-hand side of the diagram to include that.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I'm sorry. Can you all see? No. 1 is this 1/8 superficial wound here which I alluded to here which is no. 2, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: All right. In that area, doctor, I'm going to circle where you have just been pointing and write "SW--actually "SF" for sharp force no. 2.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. How about no. 3?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. 3 is here, (Indicating), and the orientation is here and this half an inch and this is the--

MR. KELBERG: All right. Would it be accurate to say, doctor, that the area I'm circling now in the form, taking in the right lower quadrant, is the area of the diagram of sharp force injuries 1, 3 and 4?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: So I'm going to mark "SW no. 1, SW no. 3, SW no. 4," and then the area that you circled or with the pointer outlined in the lower left quadrant of form 22 I'm circling and I will write in this is "SW no. 3"; is that correct, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Now, where is the description with respect to the fourth wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And I will circle that area and write "SW no. 4." Doctor, can you identify the content of Dr. Golden's description there for us?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is--he described as a 7/8 inch wound, 1/32 blunt end in the front, sharp end in the back and one-to-one and a half inches deep, and if you look at the same description here, one to one and a half inches.

MR. KELBERG: "Here" was a reference to page 6 of the autopsy form no. 12. Doctor, anything further with respect to identification on these four sharp force injuries on diagram 22?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. And--for this diagram that is it.

MR. KELBERG: Was any other diagram used by Dr. Golden regarding these?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No, no.

MR. KELBERG: Was there any reference to these four sharp force injuries in Dr. Golden's addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Was there any need, from your perspective, for any reference in the addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: While we are in this position, let me cover just a couple of brief points, if we could.

THE COURT: All right. You have put up 1B.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor. You've got a position to see that.

MR. KELBERG: And this is a blow-up, doctor, is it part of the form 15 document?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, in the upper part of that document there is a date and time listed. Do you see that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And that time is to reflect what?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Usually that is the time the autopsy is started.

MR. KELBERG: And the class a is checked?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And that is what you indicated is the fullest type of autopsy performed in your office; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: You also testified yesterday, I believe, regarding a mix-up in identification of a specimen between urine and bile; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does this form show that front page that was completed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is not--it is not on Miss Simpson's 15.

MR. KELBERG: Mr. Goldman's?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yeah, but the form doesn't reflect the mistake because the form was correctly marked as bile in there. What was marked wrongly was the bottle. You see, the bottle has spaces--the wrong box was marked off on the bottle, so not on the 15.

MR. KELBERG: Okay.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: So that doesn't apply to this form.

MR. KELBERG: And there is a box marked "Witnesses to autopsy" which has been checked and there appear to be the name of "Vannatter and Lange, LAPD 6/14/94"?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And that is to reflect officers Vannatter and Lange were present to observe the autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, if we could flip this to the next form, 16, now, you mentioned that this type of form is used to write in a lot of information as the autopsy is performed; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And it also includes a reference to the time over which the autopsy was conducted, the formal autopsy; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And in this case is there an entry by Dr. Golden for that time?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And where is that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In the lower part of the form. The autopsy was started at 8:30 and completed at 10:30 from the inscriptions on this form.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, I'm just going to outline that box with red on this form 16.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, also, is this from an external exam list of areas an indication by Dr. Golden regarding the height and weight of ms. Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And in this case is the height listed as 65 inches as I am outlining in red?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is the weight listed as 129, we will assume, pounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you. I think we are done with that.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: I think we will go back to the photo board, if we could, please.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is there anything else that you wish to bring to the attention of the ladies and gentlemen of the jury regarding those four stab wounds or sharp force injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: I would like to move just briefly to what is obviously a cropped photograph that is right next to you in the lower series of photographs that I believe is marked B-10. Is that the designation of a better view of it than I, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, again just to be clear, this is cropped pursuant to the order of the Court, correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And you viewed the full photograph both in the set of sizes these are in general and also in the life-size photographs; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is shown in B-10?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It shows a small reddish brown abrasion in the right side of the face a short distance from the eyebrow area.

MR. KELBERG: Now, you talked about an abrasion yesterday being a blunt force trauma type injury; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is the color that you see of that abrasion of any significance to you in evaluating when in relationship to death that injury was received by Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It was antemortem abrasion. That means it happened when she was alive.

MR. KELBERG: How can you tell?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: From the appearance of the coloration.

MR. KELBERG: What is the coloration?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Reddish brown color we have here, would indicate it is an antemortem abrasion.

MR. KELBERG: Why is that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because it shows evidence of vital reaction photographically.

MR. KELBERG: "Vital reaction" meaning?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That it happened during when the person was alive.

MR. KELBERG: Is vital reaction something regarding how the body is reacting?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is the body reacting to? I would like to get a definition of that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Basically when you have an injury indicated that you will have inflammatory response and sometimes bleeding. Here there is no bleeding but you have the reddish brown color because of the vascularity of the structures underlining it. And there is no microscopic section available of this area, but looking at it from my experience and the appearance of this wound, it is a wound which happened when she was alive.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, can you identify any source for the abrasion that you see in that photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is a nonspecific type of abrasion. There is no pattern to it. So any rough surface could have caused this type of abrasion which could be--any type of rough surface could have caused this. Depending on what kind of items are given as a hypothetical situations, we can discuss it further.

MR. KELBERG: From your visits to the 875 south Bundy location--and you testified yesterday you did examine the environmental surroundings there for looking for sources for blunt force trauma--can you--did you find any that would be consistent with being a source for this particular abrasion identified in B-10?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. There is--there is a staircase there and there is a wall, a metal side wall, and this could be from the wall where there is enough surface from the wall.

MR. KELBERG: How is that inflicted then between a rough surface of a wall and the area of the body where this abrasion is seen?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, the head could have come in contact with the wall. That would be one way it could have been caused.

MR. KELBERG: Come in contact in what fashion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Being pushed against the wall.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, could you slide the photograph board--just slide it down for me and take a look for a second.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: May I have just a moment, your Honor, and I think it will be helpful, doctor, if you slide the board back the other way so microphone is not covered.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, in your opinion, is that particular abrasion a non-fatal blunt force trauma injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is it of any significance to the cause of Nicole Brown Simpson's death?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Is it something which would allow you, as a forensic pathologist, to identify with specificity the manner in which it was inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any way that you as a forensic pathologist can tell us, in the sequence of wounds that were received by Nicole Brown Simpson, when that was, other than to say it was received while she was alive?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Did Dr. Golden describe this particular abrasion in his original autopsy protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did, and he also diagrammed it. He described it in page 8 of his autopsy protocol.

MR. KELBERG: Before we move, page 8--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Diagram 22.

MR. KELBERG: All right. If we could ask counsel to move briefly.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: And doctors Baden and Wolf as well. (Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. You have put up again B0 and--

MR. KELBERG: 3B, your Honor.

THE COURT: --3B.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry, doctor, page 8 was it?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: We need another few inches to help out.

MR. KELBERG: All right, doctor. Can you find on page 8 where there is a description?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Fifth paragraph: "External injuries of the scalp, small abrasion, reddish brown measuring 3/8 by quarter inch appearing to be antemortem is found lateral to eyebrow."

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, may the record reflect with the red marker I am circling that area. I am writing "B-10" on the left margin of that on page 8 of the form 12 protocol.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, would you identify on form 22 where Dr. Golden has described it or diagrammed it.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Diagrammed it here, (Indicating), and you can see the description here.

MR. KELBERG: All right. First of all, where he diagrammed it, I will circle that area, and this is in the lower left quadrant. I will draw a line out to the clear area and I will write "B-10" there?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: And this description here, antemortem.

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: "Abrasion, reddish brown, 3/8 by quarter inch, antemortem."

MR. KELBERG: And I will circle that area and drawn a line to connect the earlier writing of mine of B-10.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any additional information in the addendum regarding this injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. We did an addendum on this and the measurement has changed in the addendum.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: And this is 8B. Why don't we put it up over where we had the protocol.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Excuse me. Where is there a reference to this, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Page 1, roman number ii, item 2.

MR. KELBERG: And I will circle that on the blow-up and write "B-10" out at the margin. Now, what is the difference, doctor, between what is described here in the addendum and what was initially--let me hold up--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The initial measurement was 3/8 by quarter inch. The measurement was about half an inch by quarter inch.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, do you have any information, from your review of all of the materials, on which this revision on the description of that abrasion was made?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: He made it in the addendum and I--I think what happened was he had included this injury in the body of the report under the systemic review and he thought he probably didn't address it and then when he saw the photographs he addressed it in the addendum thinking he didn't address it. But I don't have an answer why he called it half-inch by quarter inch. I think he measured it from the photograph he had when he measured it.

MR. SHAPIRO: Motion to strike as speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained. The jury is to disregard the last question and answer.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor--sorry, your Honor. Doctor, according to the diagram, that diagram entry that we circled in the lower left side with the B-10, that handwritten entry was made at the time of the autopsy by Dr. Golden?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. SHAPIRO: Objection, calls for speculation, motion to strike.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: Your answer, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: One other thing--is there anything further on this abrasion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any significance to you, with respect to the difference in description half an inch versus quarter inch, 3/8 inch by quarter inch, on this particular abrasion on any of the issues you reviewed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: And did you measure that particular abrasion from the one-to-one photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I did.

MR. KELBERG: What was your measurement?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: 7/16 inch by 3/16 inch.

MR. KELBERG: So you have what would be a third series of dimensions for that particular abrasion; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any significance to you in the difference between your measurement from the one-to-one photograph and the two measurements that are provided in the original protocol and the addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Not of significance. There is a difference.

MR. KELBERG: Is that difference a difference that can be attributed to something other than the limitations of the process of photographic measurement?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No, because there is only 1/16 inch difference.

MR. KELBERG: And given that difference of 1/16 of an inch, is that difference consistent with the limitations that you have described of photographic measurement?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: My arm is getting tired. I will put that down. If we could take the addendum down.

MR. KELBERG: As long we are in this position, one thing I failed to I think bring out with the protocol, and getting back to the very first major stab/incise wound and what we started with this morning of the aspiration of blood, you mentioned something about it being addressed in some fashion in Dr. Golden's protocol; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Go to page 9.

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Page 9.

MR. KELBERG: We are going to put this back up. I will switch with Mr. Lynch.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: And what is of significance here, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If you look at page 9, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5--the paragraph just before the last paragraph of the page--you see: "Injuries to the upper airway including the incise wound of the hypopharynx and epiglottis have been described. Otherwise, the mucosa of the larynx piriform sinuses and trachea and major bronchi are anatomic. No mucosal lesions are evident and no blood is present."

MR. KELBERG: And is that the basis on which you form an opinion that there was no aspiration of blood by Nicole Brown Simpson from that major stab/incise wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, and also--

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: And also the next page.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Before we move to the next page, your Honor, for the record, I'm outlining with the red marker that paragraph and I'm going to write "B-13, 16, B-16, and B-18" and the word "Aspiration of blood" on the left margin.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, the next page; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Page 10.

MR. KELBERG: Page 10. All right. Mr. Lynch is--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Under "Lungs" if you look, it says that the lungs: "Sectioned surface of the lungs show minimal congestion and no injuries or lesions."

MR. KELBERG: And that again is consistent with your opinion of an absence of aspiration?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, because you have aspiration, you will describe it--when you section the lung you will see the aspirated blood in the distal portion of the airways and you will see it on the dissectioning of the lung.

MR. KELBERG: And you also examined those sections of lung that were preserved?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The sections which were preserved I examined.

MR. KELBERG: You found no evidence of that aspiration of blood?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Grossly.

MR. KELBERG: When you say "Grossly" what does that mean?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: On the sections we examined.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, I have outlined that area on page 10. I will again write "B-13, B-16, B-18" and aspirate--"Asp of blood."

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, one other thing while we are on this page, we will flip back to page 9, there is an entry regarding the cornu, that horn, in Dr. Golden's original protocol that--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: --that is not accurate?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: All right. If we could flip back to page 9 because I think it is caught in mid-sentence in the flip. Doctor, inviting your attention to the last sentence that begins at the bottom of page 9 and continues then on to page 10, does this deal with Dr. Golden's observation regarding that area, including the cornu or horns?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. He says: "The hyoid bone and thyroid cartilages are intact, inasmuch as the incised wound passes through the thyrohyoid membrane and the ligament and both greater cornuas of the thyroid cartilage are intact."

MR. KELBERG: Were they, in your opinion, intact?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No, the right cornu was cut and I already addressed it earlier.

MR. KELBERG: And that is a matter that you have addressed as you have identified in Dr. Golden's addendum; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: So your Honor, where Dr. Lakshmanan has just made mention from page 10, I have circled it and I will write "B-13, B-16, B-18" and I will write the word "Horns."

THE COURT: Yes. Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: So, doctor, the reference here in your opinion would be a mistake by Dr. Golden?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, because it was incised.

MR. KELBERG: The cornu was incised on the right side?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is that mistake of any significance to you on these issues that we have discussed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I already said it is not of significance because the hold is available and the major description have been described.

MR. KELBERG: Does it in any way, whether it was nicked or not nicked, impact on the manner or sequence of how she died?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: I think we are done with that.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: All right. Doctor, I think we are going to go back to the photographs if counsel and the doctor would like to change positions again.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, I want to invite your attention now to a photograph that has underneath it the designation "Right side of the head" and the letter and number B-20. Do you see that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is depicted or shown in this particular photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The right side of the head is shown. The scalp hair has been shaved postmortem and you can see a discoloration of the skin which is a bruise. And in my measurement, using the one-as-to-one photograph, it was 7/8 of an inch in diameter.

MR. KELBERG: When you say "A bruise," that is our lay term. What is the more technical term for the bruise?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Contusion in the right temporal area of the head which is the right side of the head.

MR. KELBERG: Could you turn so that the jury can see the right side of your body and point to the area that is shown with this contusion.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Right here I'm pointing, right side, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, for the record, the witness is using his index finger to point to the--appears to be close to the right temple.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, doctor.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, first of all, is this evidence of blunt force trauma?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: From the appearance, the color that you see in this photograph--and incidentally, this was a photograph taken during the course of the autopsy procedures?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And in the manner you described yesterday of shaving when there appears to be an injury that may be hidden by the hair of the decedent?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is the color that appears in this contusion of significance to you in assessing, no. 1, when in relationship to death this injury was received by Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This occurred when she had blood pressure, she was alive, and there is evidence of hemorrhage. And the color, as I said, is reddish brown in color and this would signify that she had blood pressure when she sustained this injury.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, how long, if you can offer an opinion, must Nicole Brown Simpson have lived in order for that coloration to have shown and be seen at autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You can get this kind of hemorrhage into the soft tissues within minutes after the injury.

MR. KELBERG: And when you say "Within minutes," how many minutes?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You can see it as early as a minute, because when you crush the tissues, the tissues bleed and you can get the bleeding immediately.

MR. KELBERG: In your opinion could Nicole Brown Simpson have died as little as one minute after this injury was inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, that is always a possibility, but it could be also a few minutes later.

MR. KELBERG: Could Nicole Brown Simpson have received the sharp force injury that you identified as the last major sharp force injury inflicted, that fatal neck wound, received that within seconds of having received the blunt force trauma injury shown in this photo?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And then lived for the period of time necessary, as you indicated, to allow for the discoloration?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Not seconds, because you need to have enough blood pressure to cause this bruising. I missed your earlier question. The injury to the neck which caused the fatal wound must have occurred after a few minutes or a minute later, because you need some time for the bleeding to occur in the tissues. And for that reason I would say that she was alive at least for a few minutes, at least a minute, if not more, before the last wound was inflicted, because once the last wound is inflicted, you won't have any blood pressure available to cause this kind of bleeding in the scalp.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, do you have an opinion as to any source or sources that could cause that blunt force trauma contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It could be something like a fist, it could be an object with a round smooth surface, like the base of a knife could do that. You could also have the head being struck against a smooth-surfaced area, which is rounded.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, what, if any, physiological or body reaction would you expect from Nicole Brown Simpson having sustained that injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The injury itself is not fatal, but as you know, the--this is a covering of the head, the skin of the covering of the head, and you have the brain inside, and as you all know that you can have what's called a concussion happening, which is transient loss of consciousness can occur. If somebody sustains a bruising to the head, it can occur.

MR. KELBERG: What is the effect if a concussion occurs?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You can remain unconscious for some time.

MR. KELBERG: What kind of time period?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The concussion syndrome can occur for a few seconds to minutes and you may not find any structural abnormality of the brain.

MR. KELBERG: You may not find any structural abnormality of the brain at autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: So in other words, a concussion can be sustained from this blunt force trauma and you, as a forensic pathologist at autopsy, can't see something which confirms that that occurred?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct. And this is commonly seen in boxers, boxing, when people get hit with a fist, they transiently get dazed or even lowering--

MR. KELBERG: Transiently meaning?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Seconds. And then sometimes it can be even for minutes and that is what you see in the countdown and then they get up. And people have done studies and they have found that you don't find anything on the CT scans or MRI scans.

MR. KELBERG: Before you run ahead, CT scans are cat scans?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is that a fancy term for?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Basically a computerized tomography of the head, computerized axiom tomography of the head.

MR. KELBERG: Can we get it down to a lower level for me? Is it a fancy x-ray?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is a fancy x-ray giving three-dimensional views.

MR. KELBERG: All right. And another one you were talking about was an MRI?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yeah.

MR. KELBERG: What is an MRI?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Magnetic resonance imaging.

MR. KELBERG: What is a fancy device for?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is another way of looking at the brain structures when somebody is alive.

MR. KELBERG: All right. And what do you want to say about those with respect to--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: What I'm trying to say is that you can have the syndrome of concussion without leaving any finding at all and you can have the syndrome of concussion when somebody is alive the without leaving any brain damage.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, assume hypothetically that Nicole Brown Simpson was struck on the head, either with a hand, fist or the rounded end of a knife in the manner you described, and became dazed, as you have indicated, and slumped to the ground and the perpetrator then moved from where her body was over to where Mr. Goldman's body is found, to that area, and then came back to Nicole Brown Simpson and raised her head in the manner you described yesterday and inflicted that major incise stab wound as you demonstrated yesterday. Would that circumstance be consistent with the time frame required to create the bruising coloration in the scalp as seen in B-20?

MR. SHAPIRO: Objection, calls for speculation, improper hypothetical, not based on any facts in this case.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: You may answer the question, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: But I also want to ask in your hypothetical discussion regarding the stab wound of the neck and the other wound she had on the head.

MR. KELBERG: All right. What do you want to ask?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I want to know they were also there when this bruising occurred?

MR. KELBERG: Let's assume they weren't there.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Then to answer your hypothetical question that is a possibility.

MR. KELBERG: And let's assume they were there.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Then also it is a possibility but that means the stab wounds to the neck and the other sharp force injuries to the head must have occurred around the time of the bruising but before the final wound in the neck.

MR. KELBERG: And on what basis do you draw that distinction?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because my opinion is that the major wound to the neck is the final wound, and the stab wounds to the left side of the neck have hemorrhage in the deep tissues which indicated that she had blood pressure when those wounds were inflicted and they would also cause bleeding. We also have evidence of injuries to the--other sharp force injuries to the left side and back side of the head, in addition to this bruising on the right side of the head, which all have evidence of bleeding in the tissues, which indicates that she had blood pressure when those injuries were inflicted, so--and I already opined that the last wound was the fatal incise wound to the neck. So that is why I am saying that I wanted to know in your hypothetical whether these wounds were there when the bruising to the right side of the head took place.

MR. KELBERG: And if they were, they would result in a lowered blood pressure; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: They would cause lowering of the blood pressure, but what I am see saying is that they could have occurred concurrently while the infliction of the stab wounds took place. During the altercation the person could have also been pushed or hit on the right side of the head simultaneously while the stab wounds are taking place.

MR. KELBERG: And still produced the discoloration that you have seen in this photograph B-20?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And still subsequently then produce the major stab/incise wound as the last sharp force injury received?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. What I'm trying to say is you have sharp force injuries to the left neck, you have sharp force injuries to the side and back of the head, a blunt force injury to the right side of the head. I can't say how they occurred had sequence, but they occurred before the fatal stab wound. And since I already opined that the fatal stab wound occurred when the person was incapacitated and probably unconscious face down, combined, these injuries somehow resulted in her being unconscious.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry, resulted in her being?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Unconscious.

MR. KELBERG: Unconscious?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: With blood pressure.

MR. KELBERG: With blood pressure?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, in your opinion, given that set of circumstances, could all of those other injuries have been inflicted in a very short period of time?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: How short a period of time, in your opinion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Within minutes. The altercation can take place so fast because you are talking about three sharp force traumas to the neck and three sharp force traumas to left side of the neck and these sharp force traumas could have occurred within minutes.

MR. KELBERG: When you say "Minutes" do you mean multiple minutes or on you using that term--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: A few minutes, few minutes or even less than that, less than that.

MR. KELBERG: How much less?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Within a minute also because this kind of altercation can take place pretty rapidly.

MR. KELBERG: Does the period for the altercation to some degree depend upon the relative physical size and strength between the perpetrator and the victim?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does it also depend on whether or not the victim is taken by surprise or is aware of impending danger?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does it also depend upon how motivated the perpetrator may be in inflicting injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does it also depend on whether the perpetrator has the element of surprise on his or her side?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And from the standpoint of the forensic pathologist, is there any way medically on that basis alone that you can draw conclusions to a reasonable medical certainty as to how these occurred?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: May I have just a moment, your Honor?

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

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, did Dr. Golden address the contusion that is seen in this photograph B-20 in his original protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did.

MR. KELBERG: Did he also diagram it?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, let me move--we will come back to this photograph and we will come back to the diagrams and the chart--protocols in a moment, but I would like to move to the photograph that is immediately to the right on this exhibit 352 of photograph B-20. That has a marking of B-33, brain tissue sample. Do you see that, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Are you familiar with that particular sample that is shown in that photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I am.

MR. KELBERG: What is that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is a sample of the brain of Miss Simpson which was saved by our--by Dr. Golden during his autopsy which Dr.--which I saw when I reviewed the tissue samples with the Defense pathologist, Dr. Baden, and Dr. Wolf was also present at that time.

MR. KELBERG: And that was on June 22nd of 1994?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, you indicated that Dr. Golden saved this section of brain tissue; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And it was saved in one of those jars that you showed us yesterday from the photographs?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, the formalin containing jar.

MR. KELBERG: Was there more than this--one sample of brain tissue saved by Dr. Golden from the autopsy of Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There are several samples saved.

MR. KELBERG: Approximately how many samples were saved, and if up need to refresh your memory with something, please do so.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I have.

THE COURT: While he is refreshing his memory, Miss Clark.

(Brief pause.)

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In addition to this specimen which had the contusion, there were 13 sections of brain and brain stem of varying sizes.

MR. KELBERG: That were preserved from the autopsy of Nicole Brown Simpson by Dr. Golden?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: So if we include this section, we would have 14?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, did you examine each of the 14 sections grossly, that is, without the aid of a magnifying device or a microscope?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I did.

MR. KELBERG: On June 22nd?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I did.

MR. KELBERG: At the same time that doctors Baden and Wolf could do so if they so desired?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: When you did this, did you observe anything of significance to you in looking at the brain tissue that is shown in the photograph that is B-33?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There was evidence of hemorrhage on the surface of the brain which we refer to in medical terms as subarachnoid hemorrhage, S-U-B-A-R-A-C-H-N-O-I-D, hemorrhage, and underlining the hemorrhage on the surface because it is a section of the brain there was evidence of discoloration of the gray portion of the cerebral cortex and this was a contusion of the brain and it measured ten millimeters by four milliliters when we examined it on June 22, 1994.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, when that examination took place did either Dr. Baden or Dr. Wolf tell you anything regarding what, if any, observation they made of that tissue?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We were together and I--myself and Dr. Baden felt that this was a brain contusion.

MR. KELBERG: Did you identify that, without hearing from Dr. Baden, as--as to any view he might have?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Absolutely.

MR. KELBERG: And as to any view Dr. Wolf might have?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Absolutely.

MR. KELBERG: Were basically the three of you independently looking at this series of tissue samples?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And when you--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: But independently looking at it but collectively there was one sample there.

MR. KELBERG: Independently looking as you are three individuals, but you are all looking at the same thing?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Now, doctor, how long did it take you in looking at that sample to think that there is something of significance, to you as a forensic pathologist, shown in that sample?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Immediately you could realize that there was a pathology there.

MR. KELBERG: Why can you do that immediately, as a forensic pathologist?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because if you look at the photograph here, (Indicating), you see the normal gray/brown cortex and you see the white matter underlying that and that is a normal appearance and it is obvious that this part of the brain is discolored and hemorrhagic, that is there is bleeding into this part of the brain and that is how a contusion looks.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, when you use the term "Contusion" with this brain tissue, are you using it in the same terms that you have used it with respect to the photograph B-20?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. It is a bruising of the brain.

MR. KELBERG: And as you have described in general with blunt force trauma that is of a contusion nature?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, from your examination--and by the way, have you microscopically examined this tissue sample?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What, if any, significant findings did you make from that observation?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It was an acute--"Acute" means fresh--contusion of the brain with hemorrhage.

MR. KELBERG: What does the--what is the significance, if any, of the finding that it is an acute hemorrhage?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It could have occurred as--it occurred immediately after the injury, but it can be observable as early as a minute.

MR. KELBERG: A minute after the injury was inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: So if the person lived a minute with blood pressure, that the injury could get to a condition where it can be seen as it is in this photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And then the person could be dead?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct.

MR. KELBERG: I'm not saying from this injury, but is this injury, in your opinion, a fatal injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Why not?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because it is a single contusion to the brain, but it is a marker for injury.

MR. KELBERG: What does that mean?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is, you could have this injury as part of the head injury which Miss Simpson sustained when the contusion to the brain was--contusion to the scalp, skin was sustained on the right side of the head, and by itself you can't call it a fatal injury because it is only a small portion of the brain which is endured, but it could be part--this could be associated with a concussion syndrome. No. 1, it could cause seizures sometimes but by itself you cannot say it can cause death like you can say with a stab wound or sharp force injury.

MR. KELBERG: In order to gain context for that injury, what are you going to have to look for?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We need to know which side it was from and Dr. Golden's report indicates it was from the right side underlying the contusion--underlying the contusion of the skin.

MR. KELBERG: We are going to get into that in a moment in more detail, but first, when a contusion to the brain is observed at autopsy, would it be the custom and practice in your office to retain that sample of brain tissue?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: In retaining that sample of brain tissue would the forensic pathologist be expected to cut it in a fashion so that the entire area of the contusion is preserved?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: From your observation on June 22nd, your observation of this photograph and your microscopic examination--or let me finish the question, please, doctor--from your examination microscopically can you determine whether all of the contusion in this area of Nicole Brown Simpson's brain was excised at autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The photograph we took was on the 30th. The margins of the area we saw of the brain cortex did show hemorrhage in the margins, so I can't say with certainty whether the contusion which was seen was the extent of the contusion or there was any visible contusion which was left in the brain when this portion was resected.

MR. KELBERG: For a little more clarity, at least for me, is this photograph, B-33, a fair and accurate representation of the tissue as you saw it with Dr. Baden and Dr. Wolf on June 22nd?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This photographer was taken on June 30th, which is not--

MR. KELBERG: I understand that. My question, though, is irrespective of the difference in dates, is the photograph a fair and accurate representation of the tissue as you saw it on the 22nd?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No, because we took a section for microscopic study so the photograph we have reflects the injury, but I cannot say with certainty that it reflects the state of the contusion as we saw it on the 22nd, because we didn't take photographs on the 22nd.

MR. KELBERG: You did not take photographs on the 22nd?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct.

MR. KELBERG: But did you, on or after the 22nd and before the 30th, take a sample of that tissue in order to prepare one or more microscopic slides?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It was done on the 30th.

MR. KELBERG: And that was done before this photograph was taken?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: A section was taken and this contusion was photographed at the same time.

MR. KELBERG: Well, was the photograph taken--I mean we don't see anything in the form of a cutting device in this photograph.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. We have additional photographs which show the section we photographed also.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Do you have a photograph which shows the section before any cutting for microscopic examination was performed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I have to see my photographs, whether we have additional photographs.

MR. KELBERG: Could we have a moment for the doctor to do that, your Honor?

THE COURT: Go ahead.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, go ahead.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: Although at this point we might as well take a break.

MR. KELBERG: Well, I will get a few more minutes in doctor. Why don't you come back here, we can talk some more, and then you will have a chance to look for it over the noon hour.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, the kind of brain tissue that is represented in photograph B-33 is what kind?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is the cerebral cortex.

MR. KELBERG: What is the cerebral cortex?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is the outer surface of the brain.

MR. KELBERG: Is it localized in certain areas of the brain?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is mainly the surface of the brain and all the lobes of the brain. You have the same appearance grossly of the brain tissue.

MR. KELBERG: Did you examine this tissue sample to try and determine with greater specificity what part of the brain it could have come from?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. I--I did a microscopic study--I examined the microscopic sections which were submitted and microscopically there was evidence of the internal granular layer. The brain cortex has several layers and there is an internal granular layer present which would go along with it being from the parietal or temporal lobe of the brain.

MR. KELBERG: Would you show us, please, turning--this is from--well, let me start this way. Can you determine, from examination of the tissue sample, what side of the brain, right or left side, parietotemporal area that tissue come from?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You cannot tell the side.

MR. KELBERG: Can you tell it in any fashion, by either gross examination or microscopic examination?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Not from a small sample like this you cannot tell, but microscopically you cannot tell the side either.

MR. KELBERG: Would you now--let's assume for just the sake of argument it is the right side. Would you turn to the right side for the jury to view and point out the area or areas from which this tissue sample would be consistent.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: From this parietal area or temporal area. Actually I'm showing the outside of the head. The brain has got a special structure on the inside. Just a rough demonstration of the anatomical location in the brain. Parietal here, (Indicating), and temporal area here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, for the record, Dr. Lakshmanan is turning to face the jury with profile to the right side has circled with his finger the area just immediately in front of and slightly above the right top of the ear, as the temporal area.

MR. KELBERG: Is that correct, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And parietal area you circled, if you could do that one more time.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Is an area that is directly above the first area that I just described and circles a larger area of the--starting to get to the top of the head.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And doctor, obviously there is no way that you can show with us your brain because it is, I assume, safely encased within your skull.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: At this time, yes.

MR. KELBERG: At this time. We will try and keep it in that condition. Can I have one moment, your Honor, with one diagram?

THE COURT: Yes.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor. This is going to be board 5B out of our set 349.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: And if Mr. Lynch, while counsel and the doctors are moving, could flip to the form 29.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, this form 29, is this the form that was available for Dr. Golden during the course of the autopsy of Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And does this in schematic form show the brain?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Can you show us on this form these areas that could be the areas from which the sample of brain tissue seen in photograph B-33 originated?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. For that I discussed briefly the anatomic description here.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, will you give me a few more minutes?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, we will do so then.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is the side view of the brain. This is the--what we call as the cerebrum, c-e-r-e-b-r-u-m, and this is the portion of the brain called the cerebellum, c-e-r-e-b-e-l-l-u-m, and you have a smaller structure here which is the brain stem. The anatomical regions; parietal, temporal lobes which we were discussing refers to this part of the cerebrum, (Indicating). The front--there is a--the brain, as you know, has convolutions on the surface and it is basically divided into a frontal lobe, parietal lobe, temporal lobe and occipital lobe, so the parietal lobe is somewhere this area, (Indicating), and the temporal lobe is this area of the brain, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, before you go further, just briefly, so I can mark in where--I'm going to put f or frontal.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: "P" for parietal.

MR. KELBERG: "P" for parietal; "T" for temporal and "O"--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Occipital.

MR. KELBERG: "O" for occipital on the lower right hand schematic.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: So this is what I refer to when I say parietotemporal area and this is what I refer to when I said that microscopically there was internal granular layer present on the layers of the cortex, because the layers of the context have six layers. The frontal area of the brain usually doesn't have a granular layer and it is usually a granular layer so that I can--how I see it is from a parietotemporal area. The occipital lobes has also different areas but they are different areas, so just microscopically I can say that this is from the parietotemporal area.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is this schematic showing the right side of the brain?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And the diagram directly above it the reverse showing the left side of the brain?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, and this diagram shows the top part of the brain as you are looking at the brain from above, and this is the lower part of the brain showing the brain when you are looking at it from the bottom, the brain is turned upside down, and to--your have the cerebellum here, brain stem here, and this is the rest of the brain and this part of the brain is the undersurface of the frontal portion of the brain, the "F" part. This is the undersurface of the temporal lobe which is the "T" part here, (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, during the recess I will mark what has been done and ask that it be reflected on the record at the afternoon start of the trial.

THE COURT: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our recess for the morning session. Please remember all of my admonitions to do. Do not discuss this case among yourselves, don't form any opinions about the case, do not conduct any deliberations amongst yourselves until the matter has been submitted to you, do not allow anybody to communicate with anybody with regard to the case. We will stand in recess until one o'clock.

(At 12:04 P.M. the noon recess was taken until 1:30 P.M. of the same day.)

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; WEDNESDAY, JUNE 7, 1995 1:05 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. Thank you, counsel. Let's come to order. All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. The Defendant is again present before the Court. All parties are present. Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: Yes, your Honor. Thank you very kindly. Good afternoon, your Honor. Your Honor, I would like to present a matter to your attention. It's been brought to my attention that--from calling my office and talking to a number of people--that the camera has apparently been pretty much fixated on Mr. Simpson during these proceedings, and that's apparently different from what normally happens here. And I'm concerned about that. I think it's unfair. This is a very emotional time for him. To have the camera on him every second is just quite unfair. I'm not sure what the Court can do about it, but I would certainly appeal to the good judgment and the sense of fairness of those who operate the camera to use the camera as you normally use it and put it on the lawyer and the witness as opposed to fixating on Mr. Simpson, your Honor.

THE COURT: Well, we have one practical difficulty in that I've directed them not to photograph or video any of the victims in the matter. So that limits their ability to move around, especially when Mr. Kelberg is working with any of the--with chart 352 and the other charts that contain crime scene photos. So I understand your position and we'll have to trust the good taste and judgment of the directors upstairs from Court TV.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you. Please do that. Thank you.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Kelberg, any other comment?

MR. KELBERG: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. I might add that I found distracting the contortions of some members of the audience, and if it continues to be distracting, those persons will be asked to leave the courtroom. Also, people appear to have forgotten about the no gum chewing or eating in the courtroom, and I have six people on videotape from this morning's session that are going to be excluded from all further sessions. All right. Let's proceed. Let's have the jury. Also, the note passing from the audience is going to as well.

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

THE COURT: All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Let the record reflect we've been rejoined by all the members of the jury panel. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good afternoon.

THE COURT: Dr. Lakshmanan, would you resume the witness stand, please.

Lakshmanan Sathyavagiswaran, the witness on the stand at the time of the lunch recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:

THE COURT: All right. Good afternoon again, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Good afternoon.

THE COURT: You are reminded, sir, you are still under oath. And, Mr. Kelberg, you may continue with your direct examination.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: I'm glad Dr. Lakshmanan agrees that I may continue with my direct.

THE COURT: Good.

DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. KELBERG

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, over the lunch hour, and perhaps you can step to the board, did we have an opportunity to complete a generalized description of the areas of the brain on this form 29 from the big blow-up that is a part of our exhibit 344--349? Excuse me.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, does the--does each of the entries that have been made in my handwriting or printing accurately reflect what is described by the entry made?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And basically, does it accurately summarize what you told us this morning regarding the various structures and locations of the brain?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: The only word that I did not indicate anywhere is the word "Cerebrum," and you were talking about the cerebral cortex. That covers the entire area of the occipital, parietal, frontal and temporal lobes as we see it on the two right side--left and right side depictions of the brain?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. The cerebrum includes all the four lobes we alluded to.

MR. KELBERG: And I didn't want to write that in because I think it's getting a bit crowded in that chart. There is also--I think you testified yesterday regarding the material and horizontal running schematic that we have written in the words "Spinal cord." And does that accurately reflect what that diagram or schematic is intended to reflect?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: While we're up here--and yesterday, I asked you about one of the mistakes of Dr. Golden involving this contusion to the brain that is seen in photograph B-33 of exhibit 354 I believe it is.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry. 352.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, let me circle--in fact, if I could get a blue marker just to--

MR. KELBERG: For the record, your Honor, with the blue marker, I've outlined what appears to be two handwritten words in the middle of form 29.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, are you familiar with what's written there?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Was that written by Dr. Golden?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What does that reflect?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: "No injuries."

MR. KELBERG: And in the course and practice of the forensic pathologist conducting an autopsy and using this form, would you expect the doctor, having examined the brain as you expect the doctor to do so, to make an entry if in fact the doctor observes no injuries in the area depicted by this diagram?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. This kind of entry is made only after examining the brain.

MR. KELBERG: And do you interpret for your use in forming opinions from the entry of no injuries that Dr. Golden at the time of the original autopsy felt that there were no injuries observed by him in the areas of the brain depicted in these schematic drawings?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That would be my conclusion.

MR. KELBERG: You'll have to keep your voice up, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That would be my conclusion.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, there's also a similar entry that appears at the very bottom--

MR. KELBERG: And, if I might, your Honor, for the "No injury" that I just circled, I'm going to make a line and write B-33 to reflect the photograph that we're talking about and then I'm also going to outline in blue at the bottom this second entry that seems to say "No injuries" as well.

MR. KELBERG: Is that correct; doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And you interpret that to reflect no injuries observed with respect to what area of the body?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The spinal cord.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry. Keep your voice up.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The spinal cord.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, you indicated yesterday I believe that Dr. Golden addressed this contusion in an addendum; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And if we could ask Mr. Lynch to set up our other easel so we can put--I'll get the board if you'll set up the easel. And this is board 8-B as in boy, your Honor.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, I want to invite your attention to page 2 of the addendum that has this date handwritten in of July 1, 1994. This is Dr. Golden's addendum in the case of Nicole Brown Simpson; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does this page--does this page reflect an entry by Dr. Golden regarding this brain contusion that you saw in the photograph B-33?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Would you identify it for us, please?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is item 1. On June 30th, I examined--I was present when he examined the tissue jar again, at which point I did show him the cerebral cortex with the contusion and we took photographs and a section was submitted for microscopic examination.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, you indicated that you observed this contusion initially when you examined the tissue in the presence of Drs. Baden and Wolf on June 22nd; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Did you speak with Dr. Golden at some time after that observation of June 22nd before the time that this addendum got even drafted in a rough form?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: When approximately did you speak to him?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I don't recall the exact date, but when I saw that there was a contusion to the brain which he had not addressed in his original report, I brought it to his attention, at which point, he was already planning to do an addendum anyway because of the other injuries which were not addressed which were seen in the photographs. So at my direction, an addendum was prepared.

MR. KELBERG: And did you give instructions to Dr. Golden as to whether or not you expected any addendum prepared by him to include reference to this brain contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I did.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, is this part that you've just outlined on page 2 of the addendum report to reflect what you were talking about when we were looking at the photograph, that is a section on July--I'm sorry--on June 30th of 1994, a section of that contused area of the brain was cut in order to provide for microscopic examination?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, for the record, I'm going to outline in blue on page 2 of the addendum the material referred to by Dr. Lakshmanan and I'll write again B-33.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, before we leave this entry, the last line of that paragraph says, "My recollection is that the above section was from the right parietal temporal region." Are you familiar with how that came about?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I asked him where he--when he saw the contusion, asked him where it--what side of the brain was it from and the region, and he indicated that he recollects that it was from the right parietal temporal area.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, is there any way--you testified I believe this morning that there was no way from a scientific standpoint of looking at that tissue to distinguish whether it came from the right side from the parietal temporal area or from the left side of the parietal temporal area. Is that an accurate recitation of your morning testimony?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: And short of Dr. Golden's memory being accurate, is there any way that you can confirm or refute that recollection?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I can do neither.

MR. KELBERG: You have to keep your voice up, please, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I can do neither.

MR. KELBERG: If we can flip briefly, Mr. Lynch, on the addendum blow-up.

MR. KELBERG: Now, we're looking at a document on a form 14 that is titled, "Microscopic description," and it appears to be dated July 7, 1994. Are you familiar with this document, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is this?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is a microscopic examination report on the examination of the contusion done by Dr. Golden.

MR. KELBERG: Did you direct that he do that, that is make a microscopic examination?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Because we--when we had the injury examined on June 30th, I discussed with him that we should do a microscopic exam. That was why a section was submitted and a report has been generated to document this injury.

MR. KELBERG: Did you tell him that you wanted a report generated?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Did you, however, independently examine microscopically the tissue section that was removed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I did.

MR. KELBERG: Is your opinion as to what it shows the same or different from what Dr. Golden indicates in this form 14 report?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: My conclusion is that it is an acute cerebrocortical contusion.

MR. KELBERG: And when you say "Acute," in the sense that you described it earlier this morning?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I discussed the contusion of the scalp and also the contusion of the brain, but I gave the timing for the scalp.

MR. KELBERG: All right. If you'll keep your voice up. You said you gave the timing only for the scalp contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Is there any difference in timing when you use the term "Acute" to reflect the brain contusion rather than the scalp contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, here we have a microscopic section available. In the scalp, we did not have a microscopic section available. So this makes it easier to date an injury than just looking at it grossly.

MR. KELBERG: And "Dating" in this sense means what when the interpretation is that it's an acute contusion to the brain?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: "Dating" means you try to see how old the injury is since the injury was inflicted. "Cerebrocortical contusion" means this injury could have occurred soon after the injury and though the bruising of the brain occurred at the time of injury, you can perceive it grossly, that is on naked eye examination, within a minute and microscopically also, that's what it reflects. So this contusion could be as early as one minute and could be several hours old also.

MR. KELBERG: If you'll recall my hypothetical question with respect to the perpetrator striking Nicole Brown Simpson on the scalp with either a closed fist or the rounded end of a knife and then moving to the area where Mr. Goldman was and then returning before inflicting the major stab incised wound, and you gave answers regarding that hypothetical set of circumstances, would your answers be the same with respect to that hypothetical as applied to the brain contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, is it a mistake of Dr. Golden's, number one, to have not identified that brain contusion at original autopsy?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is it a mistake of Dr. Golden's to have written on form 29 that there were no injuries to the brain given what you saw in the tissue sample seen in photograph B-33?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is it a mistake of Dr. Golden's not to have diagrammed on form 29 an area where this brain contusion actually was?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, taking into account all of these mistakes by Dr. Golden, do any or altogether have any significance to you in addressing any of the issues that we asked you about and about what you have been testifying?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Why not?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because it didn't cause death. The cause of death was the sharp force injuries, which I already discussed, the big wound to the neck, the four stab wounds; but it is a brain injury which is important to be documented, but it didn't play a part in the cause of death.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, over the lunch hour, did you have an opportunity to examine your photographs to attempt to refresh your memory as to whether or not our B-33 photograph reflects the tissue, the brain tissue sample before there was a section taken out for microscopic exam or after?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It was a photograph--B-33 is a photograph of the brain contusion before the microscopic section was taken, and you can see that is also indicated in the previous page.

MR. KELBERG: All right. The addendum page 2?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Incidentally, before Mr. Lynch flips this, let me write in the blue on the microscopic description, I'll write B-33 on that page.

(Brief pause.)

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Paragraph 1, line 4, the initial specimen as well as the representative section was photographed.

MR. KELBERG: Now, if we could briefly put the photograph back up and leave the two schematics or the schematic and addendum--and we're looking again, doctor, at photograph B-33 to give counsel and the doctors an opportunity to position themselves. This photograph, now, doctor, your independent memory is a picture of the whole sample; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I want to go back to the question or questions that I was asking this morning about when a forensic pathologist sees a brain contusion, would you expect the pathologist to excise the entire area of the brain contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If it is a smaller contusion, yes. But if it's a larger contusion, you describe the dimensions of the contusion, photograph it if necessary, then take a section off a portion of the contusion in conjunction with the normal piece of brain tissue so that you can study it well.

MR. KELBERG: Would you describe the contusion that you believe was sustained by Nicole Brown Simpson as reflected in this sample as a small contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: As a result of that belief, doctor, would you have expected Dr. Golden to take out the entire section of brain tissue with the contusion in it?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If he had observed it, yes.

MR. KELBERG: And if that had been done, would you expect to see around the margin or outside portion of the brain tissue an area of normal brain tissue so that you would know that you're seeing the entire contused area in that sample?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: In the photograph B-33, is that in fact what you see?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. You can see the contusion come into the margin.

MR. KELBERG: And as a result of that, are you able to say how much more extensive, if at all, that brain contusion was than from what you can see in the photograph B-33?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I can not say how much more it was.

MR. KELBERG: But if it had been significantly more, would you expect to see on the photographic review of the head area of Nicole Brown Simpson some evidence to reflect that the brain contusion had in fact been sustained?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You can not make that kind of judgment by looking at the external photographs. You need to see photographs of the brain itself in the entirety to make that kind of judgment.

MR. KELBERG: I was talking about the scalp for example.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Okay.

MR. KELBERG: Can you look at the photographs showing the scalp to get some idea whether any additional area of contusion was significant or not if it had not been retained at the time of autopsy in the sample taken?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You can't do it from the scalp photograph.

MR. KELBERG: So basically, doctor, on what basis then if any are you able to say that that's a small contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, the--you could see the other margins of the contusion which is--which was there when I saw it. It's about a sonometer by 4 milliliters.

MR. KELBERG: A sonometer is a centimeter?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Less than half an inch. And by 4 millimeters, which is 1/5 of an inch, approximately less than 1/5 of an inch. And based on my experience, when you see a contusion of this size, generally it's not a large contusion even if a portion of it is not available for review.

MR. KELBERG: I want to go back now to the diagrams. We'll take this down for a moment. And, doctor, I want to focus on this last line of the addendum opinion regarding Dr. Baden--I'm sorry--Dr. Golden's recollection of the location of the brain tissue with the contusion. Are you familiar with something called a "Coup," c-o-u-p, type injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is the term used to describe a brain injury which is on the same side of a surface injury, the scalp or skull, at the point the skull or scalp injury is. That would be a coup type of injury. That is the same location underlying the scalp and skull injury.

MR. KELBERG: Now, given what Dr. Golden has had transcribed in that paragraph as to his recollection--and let me--I'm sorry to put this back so quickly, but just very briefly, to go back to g--I'm sorry--B-20 I believe it is, the scalp contusion.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, if Dr. Golden's recollection is correct--that's fine. If his recollection is correct, that it's from the right parietal, temporal region, where would that be in relationship to the contused area of the scalp seen in photograph B-20 on the right side of the head?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It would be--it would be in the same vicinity in the brain underlying this contusion (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: If that is an accurate recollection and that means therefore that it is the circumstance you just described, would that have any bearing in forming an opinion as to whether a coup type injury had occurred?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That would be--that would be consistent with that kind of diagnosis, a coup type injury to the brain.

MR. KELBERG: How is a coup type injury inflicted that would leave a contusion to the scalp and a contusion to the brain?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If you have nonmobile head and if somebody strikes you on the head, you can have a contusion of the brain--scalp, and the forces which causes the contusion of the scalp can cause the contusion to the brain also.

MR. KELBERG: And if that occurs--but you said an immobile head?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Meaning it's stationary?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. But you could also have a nonmobile head, but it's--but it's more common with a nonmobile head.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is a non-moving head. Non-moving head. That will be a simpler term to use.

MR. KELBERG: I think we have two non-moving heads. I'm trying to clarify in my own mind. The way that this can occur, the most common way involves the head not moving at the time the head is struck in some fashion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And, for example, could be struck by a closed fist?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Or by the rounded end of a knife?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And when that occurs, then you can have injury that will be seen both to the scalp and to the underlying brain that is on the same side as the scalp injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. And the force should be considerable force.

MR. KELBERG: And is there another way that is a common way that a coup type injury can be inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. Usually the coup injury is underlying the area of impact, and the area of impact could be a direct impact or the coup injury is always from a direct impact underlying the area of direct impact.

MR. KELBERG: All right. A direct impact to, in this case, the head?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Head on the right side because the contusion, as Dr. Golden recollects, was on the right side of the brain.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, are you familiar with something called a "contre coup" type injury, C-O-U-N-T-R-E--actually I think I got a u in there that's not entitled the credit--C-O-N-T-R-E C-O-U-P injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And what is that kind of injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That injury occurs in an area of the brain opposite the area of impact to the skull of the scalp.

MR. KELBERG: So using, for example, the right side of the head B-20 contusion as the area where there has been force applied, for example, by a closed fist or by the rounded end of a knife, if this were a "Contre coup" injury, where on the brain, if anywhere, would you expect to see a contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In the hypothetical situation you just raised wherein the right side of the head was struck by base of a knife or a fist, that will not cause a--that could cause a contre coup injury if the head was not mobile and fixed. But then you'd also expect to see a coup injury associated with it. If the head had been pushed against a smooth surfaced object and the right side of the head had sustained this contusion so you have--now the situation is a little different. You have a moving head which is being--which is striking a fixed object--then you could have a contre coup injury diametrically opposite the area of initial impact on the other side of the brain, which would be the left side of the brain.

MR. KELBERG: So in the hypothetical I raised initially, you could actually end up with both a coup type injury and a contre coup type injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Assuming that this direct impact with the base of the knife or the fist, as you postulated, occurred with a nonmobile head.

MR. KELBERG: Now, in the third circumstance that you're indicating--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: And again, you must use considerable force for this injury to occur.

MR. KELBERG: What do you mean by "Considerable force"?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The force was not just somebody hitting like this, but a good punch or a good forcible striking of the head (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Well, when you say "Considerable force" and "It wasn't like this" (Indicating), you took your fist, your left-handed fisted hand and I'm not even sure if you even touched the side of your head.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. But I don't want to hurt myself.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sure you don't, doctor. But can you give us some indication as to the degree of force that's required?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, like a knockout punch.

MR. KELBERG: A knockout punch?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yeah, which you see in the boxing matches. When somebody hits or somebody gets knocked out, that is a good considerable force punch which has caused--which will cause a coup and contre coup injury or a nonmobile head.

MR. KELBERG: Now, to the third situation of a pure contre coup type injury, is the head moving?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. The head is moving. It strikes an area and the brain opposite the area where the head has struck gets the contre coup injury.

MR. KELBERG: In your visits to the 875 Bundy location, did you find environmental source or sources against which a moving head of Nicole Brown Simpson could have been struck in the area of the right side of the head shown in B-20 to create a contre coup injury, that is with the scalp contusion seen on the right side, but a brain contusion seen on the left side?

MR. SHAPIRO: Objection. No foundation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, hypothetically--well, let me withdraw the question. First of all, were you able to find smooth type surfaces at the Bundy location which would be of a type that if a moving head were forced against such a surface, a contre coup injury could have been inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. SHAPIRO: Objection. No foundation. Motion to strike.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: You may answer the question.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What surface or surfaces did you examine that would be consistent with that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We had a side railing which had a rounded end. We also had evidence of a side railing on the--next to the wall which has posts in it, metal posts. And if you have a photograph, I can show you the areas.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Before I get to a photograph, those types of surfaces would be consistent with creating a contre coup injury if the head of Nicole Brown Simpson had been forced against one or more of them?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Because--the reason I have to emphasize the smooth surface is, the scalp contusion doesn't have any abrasion on it. It is a smooth--it was--so it has to be a smooth surfaced area where the head impacted.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, in your examination of the surfaces at 875 Bundy, did you examine railings and fences, metal fences and the paint surface to look to see whether the surfaces were all smooth or there were rough spots in any of the surfaces?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. SHAPIRO: Objection. No foundation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: You may answer.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What were your findings?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We had evidence of a tree there with a rough box surface. We had a--some plants which had been pruned and you had stumps of stalks of the stems of the plants too in place in the ground.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, I'm not sure that's responsive to my question because my question was dealing with the painted surfaces.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Okay.

MR. SHAPIRO: There would be a motion to strike.

THE COURT: Yes. The jury is to disregard the last answer.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: The painted surfaces of any of the metal posts and so forth, did you examine those?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And what were your findings with respect to smoothness versus roughness?

MR. SHAPIRO: Your Honor, again, there's no foundation as to when this examination took place.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: You may answer the question, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This was the painted surfaces of the railings and the gate and the side railing also.

MR. KELBERG: And what were your findings with respect--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There was smooth areas. There was also some irregular areas, but there were smooth areas to the metal railing.

MR. KELBERG: And irregular areas would be the same as rough areas?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And if the head is forced against a rough area, what would you expect to see if something different than, for example, the contusion identified in B-20?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You would expect to see an abrasion contusion. You would expect to see a scraping of the skin in addition to the bruising.

MR. KELBERG: And where within the contusion would you expect to see the area of the abrasion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It would be on the area overlying the contusion.

MR. KELBERG: And you see no such area shown in the scalp contusion identified in photograph B-20?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. The only abrasion I see is the postmortem abrasion on a portion of the bruise which was from the shaving of the scalp.

MR. KELBERG: Can you show us what you mean by the postmortem abrasion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's right here on the upper part here, a little bit because of the shaving, but the contusion still doesn't--it's not an antemortem abrasion (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: For the record, your Honor, on photograph B-20, Dr. Lakshmanan pointed to the top of the discoloration area that's depicted.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, is it a relatively common matter that when the head is shaved at the Coroner's office, that such postmortem, after death abrasions can be created?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I wouldn't say common, but it does happen.

MR. KELBERG: And is it something for which you are trained to be able to differentiate between a postmortem abrasion from shaving from what was an abrasion inflicted while the person was alive?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And on what basis do you differentiate it in this photograph that circumstance?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Basically the appearance.

MR. KELBERG: What about the appearance?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's very superficial and it's from a sharp like a scalpel blade which has done it. And I used a magnifying glass when I did that examination.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, in the circumstance of a coup injury, Dr. Golden's recollection then would place that brain injury that's seen in B-33 under the scalp contusion seen in B-20?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In the same vicinity.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any way that you can distinguish whether this brain contusion was the product of a coup injury from a blow to an immobile head from either a fist or a rounded end of the knife or a contre coup injury from the head in the area of the scalp contusion being forced against a smooth surface that was stationary?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I can't.

MR. KELBERG: The fact that you can not distinguish--the fact that you can not distinguish whether this is a coup or a contre coup type injury, that is the brain contusion, in your opinion, is that significant in your ability to answer any of the questions that have been posed to you?

MR. SHAPIRO: Objection. It calls for a conclusion.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: You may answer the question, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Why not?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because, as I already mentioned, the fatal injury is to Miss Brown Simpson where the stab wounds and the large slash wound to the neck, and this contusion occurred before that. So she was alive when this contusion occurred. So it has no significance as far as the cause of death goes or describing or explaining the major injuries. Explaining the bleeding pattern, explaining whether it's a single knife--a single-edged knife or a double-edged knife, I give no opinion on that. So really, it's not affected the big picture.

MR. KELBERG: But it would affect your ability to give a more definitive opinion as to the exact manner in which that brain contusion was inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: I think we're done with--let's see. I'll put it down for just a moment if I could.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: I think we're going to go back to the blow-ups. (Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, I want to invite your attention to one of the other blow-up diagrams from our 349 collection. In general terms, doctor, would this diagram be useful to diagram any injury to the skull that may have been received?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Not skull. Scalp.

MR. KELBERG: All right. So this is a diagram that would be used solely for the scalp?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. But if there's any skull injury and a fracture, they could use the same diagram on the left side. On the right side, it's used to diagram the scalp injury.

MR. KELBERG: And I want to talk only about the left side. And on the left side, do you see any entry made by Dr. Golden to reflect an observation of any injury to the skull?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Now, if Mr. Lynch could--

THE COURT: And those last questions were directed towards chart 20-F.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. KELBERG: On the same poster board, but now 20-G--and I think there were two 20-G's. So this is the one that appears to have outlines of the neck and top of the head. Doctor, is this a form that Dr. Golden can use at the time of autopsy to identify any injury to the skull should he find such an injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. On the lower part of the 20-G, there's an area where you can diagram skull injury.

MR. KELBERG: And is there any entry reflecting such a finding?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Now, if we can flip one more. Now, doctor, form 20-H--and again, I think there are two 20-H's. So this appears to be a diagram showing four different views of the human skull; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is this a diagram that can be used by Dr. Golden to indicate any observed injury to the skull of Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Do you find any entry made to reflect that there was any kind of sharp force injury resulting in penetration of the skull?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There's no record of any sharp force injury penetrating the skull, though hemorrhage has been described underlying some injuries.

MR. KELBERG: And we're going to get to those in a little bit when we look at some other photographs. Is that your reflection of your review?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And--I'm not sure if there's one--yes. And this is the second 20-G, which appears to show a cut-away section of the human skull; is that correct, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And what is--is this a diagram that can also be used by Dr. Golden to reflect injuries observed to the skull of Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does this diagram in fact have an entry in Dr. Golden's handwriting regarding his observations?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What has he indicated?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: He has indicated "No internal injuries."

MR. KELBERG: And what significance if any does that have to you?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That he did not find any internal injuries such as fractures, which may not be visible on the outside, because you could have what is called inner table fractures and they are not seen either. So that's what he has indicated in this.

MR. KELBERG: What is the inner table?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The skull has got two tables. You have the inner table and the outer table and indicating to what is called the diploe, D-I-P-L-O-E, part of the skull and where the vascular channels of the skull traverse. So this is the inner part of the skull cap and this is the base of the skull on the inside (Indicating). So "No internal injuries" means no internal fractures of the inner table was documented.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, if there had been a portion of a knife blade which penetrated the skull and had broken off in the skull, would you expect Dr. Golden to have identified that on this form?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You would have--if he had seen it, you would have identified it.

MR. SHAPIRO: Objection. Calls for speculation. He's already admitted to 30 mistakes.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor--

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. KELBERG: Your answer? I'm sorry, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If he had seen it, he would have documented it.

MR. KELBERG: I think we're done with this chart.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Going back to our exhibit 352, doctor, is there anything else that you want to bring to our attention regarding your examination and observations of either the scalp contusion seen in B-20 or the contusion to the brain seen in B-33?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: I'd like to move then to the series of photographs that are to the left of the right side of the head, B-20, and look at photographs B-23, B-24 and B-26.

(Brief pause.)

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You want to start with B-23 first or--

MR. KELBERG: Let's start with B-23. Doctor, what is shown in this particular photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There are two areas of sharp force injury seen of the back, mid back and right side of the head of Miss Simpson. The one which is on the right side of the back of the head is a linear sharp force injury, which is 3/8 of an inch in length in my measurement of the one is to one photograph, and this is located about two and a quarter inches behind the right ear canal, behind the right ear canal two and a quarter inches and three-quarters of an inch above it. So it's somewhere two and a quarter inches behind and three-quarters inches above this ear canal. This is the location of the injury, 3/8 of an inch in length.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, can you again turn to indicate the left side of your head towards the jury and--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Right side of my head. It's the right side (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Okay. Then there's a label that's wrong.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: If the label says, "Lower middle and left of back of head," the "Left" is inaccurate?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, we'll correct that for the record and--

THE COURT: At our next recess.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Doctor, if you'll turn to the right, would you point out the area where this first sharp force injury you identified in B-23 is?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Right here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And, your Honor, for the record, the witness has basically pointed in an area above and behind by several inches the top of his right ear.

THE COURT: By several, how many? Five?

MR. KELBERG: Can I get a ruler?

THE COURT: No. Just tell me.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's about 3/4 of an inch above the right ear canal and two and a quarter inches behind the right ear canal. So--

THE COURT: All right. That's a more accurate description.

MR. KELBERG: I agree.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, if you could hold that--that one. And is there any way you can show us simultaneously where the area of the scalp contusion was that we see in B-20?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: How about if you use my--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The sharp force injury which I just described is here, from right here, about three-quarters of an inch above the ear canal and two and a quarter inches behind the ear canal. The contusion I discovered in the scalp was here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And I think we described that contusion earlier. So I don't see any need for the record. Now, doctor, the description that you've given of this first sharp force injury, B-23--and for the record, it appears to be the sharp force injury which is closest to the vertically oriented blue measuring card; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Are you able to determine whether this is an incised wound or a stab wound or what?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is an incised wound.

MR. KELBERG: And in your opinion, is this injury a fatal wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. It's a nonfatal wound.

MR. KELBERG: In your opinion, would this injury have created any significant bleeding?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It would cause some bleeding, but not significant.

MR. KELBERG: In your opinion, does it play any significant role in the death of Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. No.

MR. KELBERG: Are you able to determine from the appearance of that incised wound whether a single-edged knife could have inflicted it?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It could have been a single-edged knife.

MR. KELBERG: Why?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because it's just a incised wound, and I already said that any sharp instrument, either the single--one edge of a knife can cause this incised wound.

MR. KELBERG: And based on what you told us earlier in the schematics that we've gone through, can you eliminate the possibility that a double-edged knife could have caused such an incised wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I can not exclude that possibility.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, are you able to determine if this is a wound inflicted before death, that is an antemortem wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's an antemortem wound.

MR. KELBERG: How are you able to tell?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because of the hemorrhage in the tissues described in the report.

MR. KELBERG: And that's Dr. Golden's report?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Does he in fact in his original protocol address this particular incised wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he does.

MR. KELBERG: Does he diagram this particular incised wound anywhere in any of the available diagrams?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: He does.

MR. KELBERG: And is there any aspect of this incised wound addressed in the addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Is there in your opinion any reason why there should have been?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Why?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because my measurement of using the one as to one photograph, it's a 3/8 of an inch in length, but the real measurement he has given--the measurement he has given is 3/16 of an inch.

MR. KELBERG: And why in your opinion does that require an entry in the addendum for this particular incised wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, since we addressed all the errors in measurement with any--since I found an error in the measurement, I thought if it had been measured correctly, it should have been reflected by the number.

MR. KELBERG: In your--

THE COURT: Excuse me, Mr. Kelberg. Could we have the doctor keep his voice up, please? I'm having a hard time hearing.

MR. KELBERG: Sure.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, in your opinion, was your measurement obtained by reviewing the life-size photographs one which was different from Dr. Golden's for reasons other than the limitations of the process of photographic measurement?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And as such, is it your opinion that Dr. Golden made a mistake in measuring the dimensions of that wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And as a result of feeling he made a mistake, you feel that if he looked at the photographs after the original autopsy protocol was prepared, that he should have addressed that error in his addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If he has had--if he had looked at the one is to one photograph, yes.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, in your opinion, are any or all of these mistakes of any significance in evaluating any of the issues you've reviewed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Why not?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because, as I already told you, it doesn't affect the big picture of the cause of death, the major wounds I described already, the bleeding pattern or my ability to tell whether it's a single-edged or a double-edge knife.

MR. KELBERG: Whether his measurement is correct or your measurement is correct, the same single-edged knife that you described as being consistent with causing all of the sharp force injuries could have caused this incised wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: While we're here, let's take care of the second sharp force injury that appears to the left in the photograph B-23 of the one you've just described. Tell us about that one, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is a wound which is located in the mid lower back of the head, and in my measure--in my measurement using the one is to one photograph, I measured this wound to be 5/8 of an inch in length and--

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry. Would you point to where--no, doctor. I want to--I want to focus if we could on this injury that's on the far left side. Is that the one you're talking about?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. It's the same injury which is better reflected in this photograph.

MR. KELBERG: Okay. Let's make that clear first then. Is B-24 a close-up if you will of the injury which is seen on the left side of the photograph B-23?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Then let's focus on B-24 if you feel that that's a better depiction of the sharp force injury. The measurement you obtained is?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: 5/8 of an inch.

MR. KELBERG: And if you'll show us slowly with the pointer in what direction that is obtained.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The length was obtained in the one as to one photograph from this forked end to this end here. So it measured 5/8 of an inch, the forked end was up to quarter inch in width and this is the sharp end of the left side of the wound (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: So as one looks at the photograph, the forked end is to the right side of the photograph of the wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And the sharp end is to the left side?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And the 5/8 runs from the forked end to the sharp end?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, is this a stab wound, an incised wound or what?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is a fatal stab--nonfatal stab incised wound.

MR. KELBERG: And on what basis do you have that opinion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because the--the depth and the--the--the length of the wound surface is more like--it's longer than the depth, but the margin of the wound has some forking. So it could have been a kind of initial penetration component to the knife with either a movement of the head or the knife which created this--and turning of the knife which created this forking as well as the incision component to the wound.

MR. KELBERG: So if I understand correctly, initially there could have been a penetration of the scalp with the knife?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. But either the head was moving or the knife was moving on the scalp and some twisting to cause the fork appearance of the wound with the knife being drawn to create this type of wound.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is that the schematic no. 3 that we saw in that chart that was up here yesterday afternoon?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And given the depiction of a forked end and a sharp end, are you able to tell us whether a single-edged knife could have caused that particular sharp force injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: A single-edged knife could have caused it.

MR. KELBERG: And is it also fair to say that you can not exclude from the appearance of the wound that a double-edged knife could have done so?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: But is there any finding which in fact says that it was a double-edged knife and not a single-edged knife?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor--I'm sorry. You wanted to add something?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. The depth was, as I said, 3/8 inch to half an inch and the length of the wound surface is 5/8 of an inch. So by definition, should be an incised wound, but because of the appearance, we call it a stab/incise because of the explanation I've already given you.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, why is this in your opinion a nonfatal sharp force injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because it would cause some bleeding, but not significant bleeding to result in death.

MR. KELBERG: In your opinion, is this also a wound that was received before death?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: So it's antemortem?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any way medically that you can determine how long prior to death at a minimum that that wound must have been inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Before death? Could be few minutes before death.

MR. KELBERG: Can it be less than a few minutes?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It could be.

MR. KELBERG: How few could it be?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's a sharp force injury which has hemorrhage in the tissues. If you look at the diagram we just saw earlier, you can see the hemorrhage underlying--I'm sorry. Not underlining this one. The other one. This hemorrhage could be as early as--as short as even a minute before death.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, is this sharp force injury seen in both 23 and 24 addressed by Dr. Golden in his original protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is it diagrammed anywhere in any of the original diagrams provided?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is it addressed in any fashion in Dr. Golden's addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Why was there a need if you believe there was a need to address it in the addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because in the diagram, he diagrammed it as a half an inch long wound, but in the original report, it was transcribed as a one and a half inch--one and a half inch long wound, and also the depth was given as one and a half inches, and this had to be corrected in the addendum.

MR. KELBERG: Before we move to those protocol pages, diagrams and addendums, is there anything else--something I wanted to ask. From either of these two sharp force injuries in B-23, are you able to determine whether the perpetrator held the knife in the right hand or the left hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I can't say which hand the knife was held.

MR. KELBERG: With respect to either of those sharp force injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is there anything about Dr. Golden's mistakes with respect to either of those two sharp force injuries that would have, had they not occurred, facilitated your ability to make that determination?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Could you repeat your question?

MR. KELBERG: I'll try again. You have to keep your voice up, please, doctor. Assuming Dr. Golden hadn't made the mistakes you identified with respect to these two sharp force injuries, would you have been better able to determine whether the person held the knife in the right hand or the left hand when these two sharp force injuries were received?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Even if he had accurately depicted them, it would not have made any difference in my ability to opine what I already opined.

MR. KELBERG: Is this simply one of the limitations of forensic pathology?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, is there anything else you want to talk about with respect to the wounds themselves as seen in the photographs before we move to the protocol diagrams and addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: And, your Honor, we put up 0-B board and 5-B board.

THE COURT: All right. We're going to be taking our break at 2:15.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, where in the original protocol does Dr. Golden address either--the protocol, doctor, not the diagrams.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's in--

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's in page no. 6.

MR. KELBERG: Let me just get my markers. Doctor, where on this page--let's start with the one on B-23 that was more or less in the center of the photograph next to the vertically oriented measuring card.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Which one? There was one--

MR. KELBERG: You want to look at the photograph real quickly?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: B-23 is this one, and we're talking about that one.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: B-23 is reflected in item 7 on page 6.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, with the red marker, I'll outline that and mark--

MR. KELBERG: This is only seen in B-23, correct, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. This is seen only in B-23, yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. And according to this, the measurement was 3/16 of an inch in length?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And involved the skin only?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is your measurement of that different than the 3/16?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is your measurement from the life-size photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: 3/8 of an inch.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, where if at all in the diagram or diagrams was that particular wound identified?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Right here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And this is on 20-F and with the red pen--well, and is there an entry for it?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. 3/16 inch wound tapered and--

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, you've got to keep your voice up. Remember that the reporter is behind you. So it's difficult to hear you.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, where Dr. Lakshmanan has indicated with the pointer, I'm circling the area on form 20-F and I'm writing B-23 in red.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: And I'm going to need another red marker. This one is deceased. Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is this sharp force injury diagrammed anywhere else in any of the other diagrams?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Now, if we could then--this is not addressed in the addendum; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: That is not correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's not addressed in the addendum.

MR. KELBERG: But should have been?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Given what you believe is an error.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: In other words, if you had an opportunity to look at the one as to one photographs and measure.

MR. KELBERG: But it's based ultimately on your belief that there was an error made in the measurement?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct.

THE COURT: Mr. Kelberg, Mr.--doctor, perhaps you can allow each other to finish asking the question before you start to answer, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: And I apologize, your Honor. I'm just going to use the marker with a little more ink in it and write in the 23 on form 20-F in a little clearer fashion.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, let's go to the second of the sharp force injuries seen in B-23 which is shown, as you said, in close-up on B-24. Where is that addressed in the protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's item no. 6 here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: All right. And I'll mark in--actually in blue just to set it off a little better, and I'll write B-24 and comma and B-23. Now, doctor, you mentioned something about how the measurement was reflected in the original protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Where is that within this paragraph 6?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The transversely oriented wound measures one and a half inches in length and the depth of penetration is 3/8 of an inch to one and a half inches.

MR. KELBERG: Is this wound diagrammed somewhere in any of the diagrams?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. In 20-F.

MR. KELBERG: All right. And, doctor, perhaps if Mr. Lynch could move to this side.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This wound here has got the forking on the right side and here's a description, it says transverse cutting half an inch wound and 3/8 inch to half an inch deep. So he has diagrammed the measurement accurately (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And the area, doctor, where you've just outlined, I'm circling in blue and I'll write again B-24, B-23. The measurement that is given on the diagram itself, the 1/2 inch and then the depth of 3/8 to 1/2 inch, do those measurements correlate with your measurements?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. My measurements was actually 5/8 of an inch in length and a quarter inch wide fork, but given the limitation of the process--as you know, it's a gaping wound--I could not approximate it. So given the limitation of the process, his measurement is--falls within my perimeters, given the limitation of the process.

MR. KELBERG: So given that limitation, your measurements are consistent with what is diagrammed?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. There is a--from my measurement and his measurement, there is a 1/8 inch difference in the length. But I would attribute it to the limitation process because of the gaping nature of the wound and the forking that you see there.

MR. KELBERG: But your measurement and Dr. Golden's diagram description of the measurement differ from what is actually in the transcription of the description of the wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct. But he did correct that typographical error in the addendum.

MR. KELBERG: And let's look at that if we could. Is there any other diagram that has any reference to that second sharp force injury from B-23?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. Not for that one.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Let's--we'll put the addendum up and pull the diagram down.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, on this first page, do you see the reflection in the addendum of a correction for that sharp force injury that's seen in both 23 and 24?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. For--actually the correction is for photograph 24--I mean wound for 23 and 24. It's number 1, page 6, line 4 and line 6 (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And where you've just pointed, doctor, I'll outline that in blue and write B-24, B-23. And in essence, does--I'm sorry. You wanted to add something, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yeah. I said can be attributed to limitation of the process. This can not be attributed to the limitation of process because there is an 1/8 inch difference. I opined a little differently. It should be--it can not be attributed to the limitation process. So there is a difference.

MR. KELBERG: We'll back up and make sure we have that clear. Let's start with this first of all. The addendum change is to change what the measurements were as transcribed on page 6 of the protocol--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: --to the measurements that were written in on the form 20-F that we saw just a moment ago?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, you say that your measurement in some fashion, which differs from a measurement of Dr. Golden's as he diagrammed it and as he has corrected the report to reflect, differs in a way that you believe cannot be attributed to the limitation of the process?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Explain.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because he has diagrammed the wound length to be half an inch.

THE COURT: Excuse me, doctor. Would you turn just slightly because I don't think all the members of the jury can hear you.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: He has diagrammed the injury to be half an inch in length and the gaping state of the photograph in the one as to one photograph I measured it to be 5/8 of an inch, which is 1/8 inch more in the gaping state, which I can not attribute to the limitation of the process of the gaping state.

MR. KELBERG: If you recall, yesterday we had several photographs from a forensic pathology text shown on the overhead and we've had them made into exhibits that showed a gaping wound and then it had been approximated. Do you recall those photographs, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And when a gaping wound is approximated, what would you expect with respect to the length of the wound when approximated from the length of the wound in the gaping state?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The length of the wound in the approximate state is longer than the length of the wound in the gaping state.

MR. KELBERG: You have to keep your voice up, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The length of the wound in approximated state is longer than the length of the wound in the gaping state.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, did you find from your measurement in the life-size photograph, that in the gaping state, the length of the wound was greater than Dr. Golden has diagrammed and indicated in the addendum from an approximated state?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And from the standpoint of forensic pathology, does that make any sense to you?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, it's definitely a measurement error, but not as far as the appearance of the wound. It's a nonfatal wound. As far as the big picture goes, it doesn't have any immediate impact on the cause and manner of death.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is there any significance as to whether this wound is 5/8 of an inch that you measured in the gaping state or 1/2 inch as measured in the approximated state, according to Dr. Golden, on any of these big ticket questions?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Why not?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: As I already mentioned, it's a nonfatal wound. I already discussed the major wounds where I've indicated the cause of death. I've indicated the blood flow pattern. I've indicated that it's a single-edged knife or double-edged knifed which caused those wounds. I've indicated in this wound, I can't tell if it's a single or a double-edged knife. So I met the requirements to give an opinion on this case. So this small difference in measurement doesn't impair my ability to give an opinion of this case.

MR. KELBERG: Is there anything else you want to say--and don't forget, if you'd speak to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I'm sorry.

MR. KELBERG: Is there anything else you wish to add regarding these two sharp force injuries that we've talked about from photographs B-23 and B-24?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, I notice the time. Does the Court wish to take a break now?

THE COURT: Yes. Let's do that. All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we'll take a 15-minute recess. Please remember all of my admonitions to you. We'll stand in recess until 2:30.

(Recess.)

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

THE COURT: Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present. I wanted to play a videotape for the parties here. May we have the videotape, please.

(At 2:30 P.M., a videotape, was played.)

THE COURT: This is during the doctor's testimony regarding the autopsy of Nicole Brown Simpson. All right. I think we've made the point. Thank you. All right. Fair warning. All right. Let's have the jurors. By the way, that videotape was the result of comment by viewers calling into the Court about people in the audience eating.

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

THE COURT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. Doctor. All right. Let the record reflect we've been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Dr. Lakshmanan is again on the witness stand. Mr. Kelberg, you may continue.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor. And, your Honor, I have another board of photographs that I will ask to be marked as exhibit I think we're at 355?

THE COURT: People's 355.

(Peo's 355 for id = board of photos)

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, again, with the Court's permission--and I think we're going to start with these photos.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: Mr. Kelberg.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Dr. Lakshmanan, I want to begin the testimony of these photographs on exhibit 355 by looking initially at the photographs B-30 and B-29 that are in the lower series of photographs. Let's start with B-30. What is shown in that photograph, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: B-30 shows the left hand of Miss Nicole Brown Simpson. You can identify all Coroner's photographs by the blue card. It has the case number there. And it shows the palmar aspect of the ventral aspect of the left hand and also the portion of the forearm, and there are no injuries seen in the areas which has been photographed.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, what kind of injuries if any in particular would you as a forensic pathologist be looking for on the palmar surface or in the palmar area of the hand and fingers as shown in this photograph in a case involving sharp force injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You would expect to see Defense wounds like cuts and puncture wounds, and that's what you look for, and that is why this photograph is taken, to show there's no injuries seen to the palmar aspect of the left hand.

MR. KELBERG: How are defensive wounds created?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: They are created when the victim uses the hand or palm of the hand to ward off any inflicting injury.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, are there common ways that forensic pathologists find victims of impending sharp force injury attack try to ward off such attack by use of the hands?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You will usually see the cuts in the palms of the hands, you can see the wrists and forearms sometimes and the back of the hands.

MR. KELBERG: With respect to the palms of the hands, how can those injuries be created?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: One, the victim could try to hold the knife, and you would get injuries which would be consistent with it, or sometimes when a thrust is attempted on the victim, the victim could hold up the hand to prevent the thrust hitting the vital area. So the hand could get a puncture type stab wound. So it could be a variety of types of injuries you could see on the hand depending what the victim tried to do, if the injury pattern allows a forensic pathologist to interpret.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, and on this left hand of Nicole Brown Simpson, the palmar side, did you find any evidence whatsoever of defensive wounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Was the absence of defensive wounds of any significance to you as a forensic pathologist?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We only looked at the left hand.

MR. KELBERG: Yes. And I want to ask you with respect to the absence of defensive wounds that you say are not present, that is the absence of them, what significance if any does that have to you as a forensic pathologist?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The absence of injuries to the left palmar hand shows that she did not receive any such injuries to that part of the body. So most likely, she was either incapacitated or rapidly incapacitated and did not use the left upper extremity in that Defense.

MR. KELBERG: And if incapacitated, not just didn't use, but incapable of using that area of the hand to ward off an attack?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, does Dr. Golden in his report protocol address the absence of defensive wounds to the palmar surface of the left hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And does he diagram in any fashion on any of the available diagrams the absence of such wounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The diagrams are blank. There's no injury described on the diagram.

MR. KELBERG: Would you expect him to have a separate entry to reflect no defensive wounds noted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: He has done that.

MR. KELBERG: And we'll see that on whichever is the appropriate diagram?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, looking now on B-29, what does that show?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That shows several findings. There is a linear--

MR. KELBERG: We'll get the pointer. Mr. Lynch can--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There's a 3/8 inch linear cut type abrasion to the back of the left hand, it appears the left ring finger. There is a small punctate abrasion which measures 1/16 of an inch in the base of the left ring finger. There is another 1/16 inch abrasion to the middle of the middle finger and there's also another small abrasion here (Indicating) to the base of the left middle finger. So the main injuries are three small abrasions and the small cut abrasion to the back of the left hand.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, in your wound chart for Nicole Brown Simpson, which I believe is exhibit 350, do you identify each of these injuries that you just pointed out on this photograph, B-29?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And do you do so under the description for photograph B-29?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Have you arbitrarily identified these injuries by sequential numbering?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, I have.

MR. KELBERG: And did you number them sequentially in the fashion in which you just pointed them out?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, starting with what you described as the cut abrasion which, in looking at the photograph, appears to be about perhaps a half an inch or so below the blue horizontally oriented measuring card; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is a cut abrasion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Basically the--

MR. KELBERG: And keep your voice up, please, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It is caused by a knife, but it could have been from the knife being drawn on the skin wherein you have some scraping of the skin, but doesn't cause a clear-cut deep incision wound there.

MR. KELBERG: And is that something that can be caused by a single-edged knife such as you've previously described?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is that caused by the sharpened--the edged--sharp-edged side of the blade or the blunt-end side of blade or what?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I would favor it being caused by a blunt-edged tip of the blade.

MR. KELBERG: Why?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because it's not caused a significant deep cut. It's just a superficial linear cut type abrasion.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, would you describe that cut abrasion as a defensive wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Why?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because that part of the hand was trying to ward off a particular injury to the body, but only a portion of the knife struck the skin surface. So it was not--so it didn't leave a deeper cut.

MR. KELBERG: Can you, using myself as one participant and yourself as the other, indicate in some fashion how that type of injury could come to be inflicted if you use my left hand to represent that of Nicole Brown Simpson and you play the role of the perpetrator holding a knife, how that can occur?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: If I'm trying to stab you in the neck and you try to ward your hand, your hand may not have come at the same time when I--when I was trying to inflict the injury on the neck (Demonstrating). So only a portion of the blunt part could have struck the hand is one way, and this cut abrasion could also be caused by other mechanisms.

MR. KELBERG: What other mechanisms?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well--

THE COURT: And, Mr. Kelberg, let me ask that you repeat that in reverse--

MR. KELBERG: Oh, okay.

THE COURT: --because I think the jurors on that end of the box were not able to see your demonstration.

MR. KELBERG: And I didn't try to describe it for the record because I don't think I could do that very easily, but we'll try maybe better with this.

THE COURT: All right. Doctor, I think you're going to have to take a step that way since you're being shielded out by the diagram. Go ahead.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: One mechanism would be, when the thrust is being attempted, the hand could be raised and block the stabbing of the vital area of the body by the victim and--but the knife did not strike the entire portion of the hand, only the tip of it grazing the surface of the skin (Demonstrating). And that would be a mechanism by which this cut abrasion could have taken place.

MR. KELBERG: And basically, your Honor, for the record, I raised my left hand so the back of the hand is facing Dr. Lakshmanan who is facing me. Dr. Lakshmanan raised his right hand and made a thrusting motion in the direction of my left hand as if to have a knife being thrust towards me.

THE COURT: In an overhand motion. Yes.

MR. KELBERG: In an overhand motion.

THE COURT: Yes.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's one mechanism as I said. But the other--there are many other possibilities. When the knife is being wielded against this particular victim, the hand could have been injured in a similar fashion, but not necessarily when the thrust to a particular area of the body took place.

MR. KELBERG: Can you explain it in some fashion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: When the hand is--when the victim is trying to protect herself from this assault and the knife is being wielded, you could have a similar cut, but the knife did not cause a deep cut, but just a superficial cut. So it could be two--one--

MR. KELBERG: Talk to this side.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: One way could be that when the hand was right in front, but did not get the full cut. The other way is that the hand just got a portion of the knife injury causing a superficial cut.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, from the depiction of that cut abrasion in the photograph B-29, is there any way that you as a trained forensic pathologist can provide more--a more definitive answer as to the actual positions of the perpetrator and Nicole Brown Simpson at the time that cut abrasion was inflicted?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, can you determine from your review of the photograph whether that cut abrasion was in fact inflicted while Nicole Brown Simpson was alive?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: How can you do so?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because of appearance and the coloration and the description given in the report.

MR. KELBERG: Can you form an opinion as to how long from the infliction of that cut abrasion at a minimum Nicole Brown Simpson must have had a beating heart and blood pressure?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This happened when she was alive, and you can get this injury as early as one minute before death.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, starting with that cut abrasion, did Dr. Golden address that cut abrasion in his original protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did.

MR. KELBERG: Did he diagram it anywhere?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And was it addressed at all in his addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. No. It was not addressed in his addendum.

MR. KELBERG: Was there any need in your opinion for it to be addressed in his addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Why not?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because he had addressed it properly in the original report.

MR. KELBERG: Now, the second wound that you identified or injury, I believe you referred to as a "Punctate abrasion"?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And we had that term on our chart yesterday. But would you refresh our recollections regarding what is a "Punctate abrasion"?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: "Punctate abrasion" is a very small localized area of the scraping injury.

MR. KELBERG: And what if any causes would be possible for this particular punctate abrasion that you have identified in photograph B-29?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's a very non-specific injury.

MR. KELBERG: Can you generalize as to the type of mechanisms that can lead to such a punctate abrasion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The--it's a blunt force trauma against a rough surface. But also, as I recall, she was wearing a ring on the finger, the crime scene photograph, if you can go back to the--

MR. KELBERG: You're going to have to keep your voice up and we'll get the crime scene photograph out. Doctor, if you'll slide the board that's closest--I have a feeling that people that run that machine don't like to hear the sound of metal against that machine. Thank you. Let me put back up 354 and ask if you see something. We invite your attention to--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: --the photograph cS-39.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There's a ring in that same area and the abrasion--

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: --the abrasion is the same region. So during the altercation of the hand that hit any particular rough surface, you could get an abrasion in relationship to that area.

MR. KELBERG: Would you describe these stairs that you visited at the Bundy location as a rough surface?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Or the walkway that is shown in a number of these photographs as a rough surface?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, are you able to determine whether or not that punctate abrasion was inflicted while Nicole Brown Simpson was alive?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What's your opinion on that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: She was alive.

MR. KELBERG: Why?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because of appearance of abrasion.

MR. KELBERG: And is it safe to say that neither the cut abrasion nor this punctate abrasion have any significance whatsoever on the cause of death for Nicole Brown Simpson?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: Did Dr. Golden describe in his protocol the punctate abrasion that you have pointed out on photograph B-29?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Did Dr. Golden diagram that punctate abrasion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And did he address it at all in his addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It was not addressed in his addendum because there was no necessity to.

MR. KELBERG: No necessity to?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right, doctor. And we're not marking on the photograph where these injuries are, but the punctate abrasion is on the left ring finger; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And it's closer to the hand than it is to the nail of that finger; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, the third injury--would you point that one out again for us, where it is, please, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Back of the middle pharynx or the middle of the middle finger.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, would it be accurate to say that that injury can be seen, it's in about the middle if you look side to side of that finger and it's a little bit closer to the nail than it is to the hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What kind of injury is injury no. 3?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Again, it's a non-specific blunt force injury. It's a scraping against a rough surface or contact with a--blunt force injury on a rough surface.

MR. KELBERG: Did Dr. Golden address this in the protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Did Dr. Golden diagram this in any of the diagrams?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No. No.

MR. KELBERG: Did Dr. Golden address this in any of the--in the addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: In your opinion, doctor, is his failure to do each of those three things a mistake?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any significance on any of these big ticket questions for his mistakes either singularly or all three together?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: None.

MR. KELBERG: Why not?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because it's a non-specific abrasion and it doesn't affect the big picture as I already alluded to earlier in my other injury descriptions.

MR. KELBERG: Are you able to tell from looking at this particular blunt force trauma, the specific positions or the rela--even the relative positions. Let me ask you that--the relative positions of Nicole Brown Simpson and the perpetrator at the time that injury was received?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: And if not the relative, then may we safely assume that you can not identify the specific positions that the two of them had at the time that injury was received?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, there was a fourth injury I believe you described?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The approximate portion of the--

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: --base of the right middle--excuse me--left middle finger, and I found a small abrasion there.

MR. KELBERG: And for the record, that appears to be very close to where the finger joins the hand; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor--I'm sorry. That is an abrasion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And again, are you able to identify the type of source or sources responsible for that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's a non-specific blunt force trauma.

MR. KELBERG: Received prior to death?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Of any significance in any of the big picture questions?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Was it addressed in the protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Was it diagrammed anywhere?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Was it addressed in any of the addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: All mistakes?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Any significance to the mistakes?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: For all the same reasons?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: So we have two that are addressed and two that are not; is that accurate?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Let's take a quick look at the two that are addressed.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Kelberg, we'll need to move that one for--

MR. KELBERG: Which one, your Honor?

THE COURT: The tall board.

MR. KELBERG: The tall one?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Can we just put it back and--

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Fortunately, I think that's the only place that--

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: That's going to be 0-B and 4-B.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, on the protocol, where do we find a description of injury no. 1? The protocol, doctor, not the diagram.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's on page 7.

MR. KELBERG: And where on this page is that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's on the sixth paragraph. You see the cut.

MR. KELBERG: This right here, doctor (Indicating)?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: With a blue marker, your Honor, I'm circling that.

MR. KELBERG: And that is photograph B-29 I believe it was.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Okay. And I'll write B-29 for that. And while we're here, what about injury no. 2?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's on paragraph no. 5.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Incidentally, I think I'll write no. 1 under the B-29 that I just outlined. And--I'm sorry. Which paragraph, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The paragraph above that.

MR. KELBERG: Under "Left hand"?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll outline that in blue also, and I'll put a line for B-29 connecting to both of the paragraphs, but I'll put out no. 2 for the top of the two paragraphs and a line connecting no. 1 to the lower paragraph. Doctor, with respect to a diagram, is the diagram that is reflective of those injuries this form 23?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Would you show us, please, where there is any entry regarding those two injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Here and here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: You have to keep your voice up, please, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's here in the back of the left hand and the back of the base of the left ring finger here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: What has Dr. Golden written with respect--if anything, with respect to the first injury that you described?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's half an inch incised cut here for injury no. 1 and he has described it as a punctate abrasion (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Is that what he has written in shorthand fashion on form 23?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. You can see Punc A-B-R, and this is the abrasion here, the reddish brown, and this shows the superficial incised wound (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, where Dr. Lakshmanan has been indicating, I'll circle in the blue area.

MR. KELBERG: And is this injury no. 1 then, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll write the same thing, B-29, no. 1. And this other area?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Actually, this also belongs to the same injury because this is diagram oriented.

MR. KELBERG: So if I circle this as well--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And this is also B-29?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: No. 1?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is this area here the area that reflects injury no. 2 of photo B-29 (Indicating)?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll circle that in blue, write B-29 no. 2. I'm sorry. Doctor, there appears to be two words written in the center of the top of this form. What are those words?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: "Defense wounds."

MR. KELBERG: And is that commonly the procedure followed by the medical examiner who is looking in a sharp force injury case for these kinds of injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Did you want to add something?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yeah. The left hand palm shows no injury.

MR. KELBERG: And the left hand palm is in outline form the lower left quadrant of this diagram 23?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. When we saw the photograph in--

MR. KELBERG: That's B-30 I believe.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll write B-30, "No injuries" on the form 23. Anything further on those?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor--I'm sorry. There was nothing addressed in the addendum, two of them, because they were properly addressed, two of them, simply not addressed at all when they should have been?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct.

MR. KELBERG: While we're up in this position, I think we may not have identified all of the sharp force injuries to the scalp or skull area of Nicole Brown Simpson that appear in diagrams; is that correct, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct.

MR. KELBERG: But we've seen them in the photographs now, have we?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We saw the photograph, but we didn't discuss it.

MR. KELBERG: Didn't discuss them with respect to the diagrams and so forth?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Let's complete that if we could. And we're back to 5-B, board 5-B. And I don't think we touched upon it also in the protocol, did we, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We touched upon the description of the injuries of B-24 and B-23, but there's one more additional scalp wound which we did not discuss.

MR. KELBERG: But we have seen in the photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We didn't discuss the photograph either.

MR. KELBERG: You're absolutely correct. Let me cover that while we're here with this board.

THE COURT: And, Mr. Kelberg, this is--

MR. KELBERG: This is going to be 352, your Honor.

THE COURT: Counsel, while we are in this configuration, counsel have permission to cross the well when traipsing over here.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, is that our photograph B-26?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Let's cover that now then. First of all--and we--unfortunately at the break, we still didn't put a correction to B-23 reflecting that it's not the left, but the right, and we will do that at the end of today. What is shown in this photograph B-26?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Shows the left side of the back of the top of the head. And what you see here is a sharp force injury. It's an incised wound. And when I measured it using a one is to one photograph, it measured at one and a quarter inches in length. Would be--this is the front part of the wound corresponding to the front of the body and this is the back part of the wound corresponding to the back part of the body. The back part of the wound is curved. So it's a incised wound (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, can you indicate using your own head where approximately this particular sharp force injury was?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's in the--my back, this part here (Indicating). And I'm going to turn, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: I'll tell you what. Why don't you use me and it's probably easier.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's somewhere here in this region (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And I can't see--I can feel, but I can't see. So if you could--

MR. KELBERG: Maybe the Court--and I'll turn just briefly so the Court can identify the area for the record.

THE COURT: Looks like the left rear back of the head towards the top.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, in the configuration of the incised wound that you see, do you see a sharp end?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yeah. Both the ends are sharp, and this part a scrape wound.

MR. KELBERG: Does that have any significance to you in your ability or lack of ability to identify the class of knife responsible?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is an incised wound. It could be either a single-edged or double-edged knife.

MR. KELBERG: So again, is this consistent with that same single-edged knife being responsible for all of the sharp force injuries?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, is this sharp force injury one which you can tell from the photographic review was received before death?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And from its appearance, can you give us an opinion as to the minimum amount of time from its infliction until death that must have occurred for the injury to appear as it does.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It could have occurred as early as or as short as one minute before death or much longer.

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, is this a nonfatal incised wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: And in the big picture of cause of death and so forth, is there any significance to it?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Did Dr. Golden address this sharp force injury in his protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did.

MR. KELBERG: Did he diagram it in one or more of the available diagrams?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did.

MR. KELBERG: And was it addressed at all in any addendum?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did.

MR. KELBERG: In general, what is the difference from the addendum or what is added in the addendum from how the wound was initially described in the protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The initial wound was discovered as being rounded ends. The measurement was different. Actually the whole description has changed and we could look at it.

MR. KELBERG: You want to look at it from the description?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: But as a bottom line--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The bottom line was, he described it as rounded ends and then in the addendum, he described it as tapered ends, which is consistent with what is seen in the photograph.

MR. KELBERG: Would it be accurate to say that from his description in the protocol, it is completely inaccurate?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct.

MR. KELBERG: And did he diagram it in a fashion that was consistent with his inaccurate description in the protocol?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: His diagram was also inaccurate.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, obviously then, would these be mistakes on the part of Dr. Golden?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, it was.

MR. KELBERG: Any significance in the big picture of any of the issues from those mistakes?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: For all the same reasons?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Why don't we move then, if we could. Put this back down and move--we've got the protocol. I believe we have the proper forms. Let's start with the protocol. Where in the protocol does Dr. Golden address this particular wound in B-26?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Page 6, no. 5.

MR. KELBERG: And so that's going to be this paragraph that has the no. 5?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Why don't we outline that also in red. And that's going to be B-26 which I'll write on the left margin.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Doctor, let's get to the diagram so we can see if there's any comparison or difference where on--or which diagram shall we select?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: We have 20-F, 20-G and 20-H to--

MR. KELBERG: So we have three diagrams?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. And we have 20-F already up.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. We'll start with that one.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Why don't you go, if you would please, to that one and show us where there's an indication.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is the injury that's being described, and he has measured it as one and a half inches here, but the protocol says half an inch in length. He has said that--he said both ends up here are rounded, and that's what his diagram and this diagram including the--

MR. KELBERG: All right. Just a second. Let's circle this. On 20-F, this is B-26, and I've written that in as well. What's the next diagram, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: 20-G and 20-H. Go to 20-G. That's fine.

MR. KELBERG: Incidentally, just the general location where Dr. Golden drew that injury, is that an accurate depiction of the area that's actually seen in the photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Now, 20-G, why don't you show us, if you would, please.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This is the same injury as diagrammed here and has got the same measurement as one and a half inches there (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Same measurement as he had given in the earlier form?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Earlier diagram, yes.

MR. KELBERG: Okay. The 20-F?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor--well, let me circle this. Is the--and I'll write--I'm sorry--B-26. Is the diagrammed form of the wound accurate? That is, is the appearance as hand-drawn accurate to how the wound actually appears in the photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: In what fashion--perhaps you can use the pointer. In what fashion is there a difference? We don't have the photograph up.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The wound doesn't have this forking and actually tapers off like a superficial incised wound here. So the wound diagramming is not accurate (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Let me just briefly put this up so the ladies and gentlemen of the jury can have a comparison.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You look here, there's no forking and then it tapers off on both sides (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: Now, you said 20-H, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And if Mr. Lynch can--is this the 20-H?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And this, your Honor, is the 20-H that appears to have outlines of the human skull.

THE COURT: Yes.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: There is evidence of hemorrhage underneath this incised wound one and a half inches by one and a half inches. And I just said the right upper quadrant, 20-H.

MR. KELBERG: And on that upper right quadrant outline, I'll write B-26. Incidentally, while we have this here, doctor, in the lower left quadrant of this same form, is there some outline that reflects on one of the earlier injuries that you've identified?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. That reflects the hemorrhage on any of the bruise we've discussed in the right side of the head.

MR. KELBERG: Is that our B-20 photograph with the contusion to the scalp?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: I think--

MR. KELBERG: You want to bend over a second here and take a peek at the--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. B-20.

MR. KELBERG: And is this writing--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: --to reflect what is being diagrammed here?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Can you identify what is said in that writing, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's a superficial temporal and this is SGH, with subgaleal hemorrhage, two inches by one and a quarter inches.

MR. KELBERG: And is that consistent with what you see in the form of the contusion on--under the scalp in the photograph B-20?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. But you can't see this because this is a diagram of the hemorrhage after the scalp was reflected. So this is the diagram the doctor uses to show the hemorrhage after you reflect the skin. What you saw in the other diagram was the diagram of the injury on the surface. I don't know whether you saw that diagram or not. And that was diagram--

MR. KELBERG: I'm going to write B-20 while you're finding that particular diagram.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The diagram was 22 and 20-H.

MR. KELBERG: Okay.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: 20-H, that is the head cover. That is the inner--that is the doctrination of the hemorrhage underneath the scalp.

MR. KELBERG: Incidentally, doctor, while we've got this up, there's some other writing here. Can you--that's between the two outlines above and the two outlines below.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. What he's trying to say here is that it's deep scalp hemorrhage under the same--there's also blood to the same injury and he says "No abrasion or laceration."

MR. KELBERG: So does all of this writing that is between this upper and lower half go to the B-20?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll circle that as well and connect up to the lower diagram that was circled.

MR. KELBERG: Mr. Lynch, I believe we need your help.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, Mr. Fairtlough. It's good to see it takes three people from our office to get an easel to stand straight.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, the other diagram is 22; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Let's get that up. We can take 20-H down.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: Now, doctor, where on this particular form is there a reflection of that B-20 contusion?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Right there (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And--

THE COURT: Maybe we ought to use the word "Mention" since "Reflection" has a specific meaning within this context.

MR. KELBERG: Okay. First of all, when you say the skin is "Reflected," why don't you tell us what that means.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: As--one moment. As I discussed the autopsy process, I said when the head is opened for examination of the brain, the first process is opening up the scalp, which is the reflection of a scalp skin. So when we discover injury on the skin surface, is what we see on the skin surface. Once you reflect the scalp skin away from the skull--

MR. KELBERG: Again, doctor, you are using the same term we're asking you to define. "Reflect" means what? Pull away?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Pull away. Pull away. And the scalp has got five layers. The letters themself reflect the different layers of skin. The c stands for carotid tissue. And underneath the scalp, part of the scalp is a muscle called the occipital frontalis muscle.

THE COURT: Excuse me. Mr. Kelberg, I was just getting you to try to use a different word than reflect as to the board, that it mentions it in the report. That's all we need to do at this point.

MR. KELBERG: Okay. That's fine.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, why don't you point out where there is any entry on form 22.

MR. KELBERG: Is that satisfactory, your Honor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It just shows the hemorrhage on the scalp surface. It doesn't show the hemorrhage on the deep tissues as we saw it on the skull diagram.

MR. KELBERG: Is there any handwritten notation to go along with that particular outline that's on this form 22?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The handwritten notation is on the 20-H we already saw, and the combined effects of this description is seen on page 7, no. 8.

MR. KELBERG: All right. We'll get to page 7, no. 8, but let me just circle this area on our form 22, and this goes to B-20; is that correct, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I've done that in blue marker. All right. Now, which page, doctor? I'm sorry.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Page 7, no. 8.

MR. KELBERG: Mr. Lynch, could we move to--

MR. KELBERG: Of the protocol; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. Now, I will explain both the diagrams so it's easy to understand. 22 shows four inches above the right ear canal is a bruise, and you can see here on the right side of the scalp, four inches above the right ear canal is a scalp bruise. Now, if you go to the other diagram, 20-H, you can see the rest of the information which is there. It's been dictated to--transcribed as no. 8 on page 7.

MR. KELBERG: Is this the diagram you need, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. He says that this bruise was red violet in color, scalp bruise, one inch by one inch. You can see the red violet, purple color, one inch by one inch, deep scalp--with deep scalp hemorrhage which he has diagrammed here. No abrasion or laceration. He has put skin is smooth, nonabrated, nonlacerated. Subsequent autopsy shows deep scalp hemorrhage, which is this one which is diagrammed (Indicated), and it measures two inches by one and a quarter inches, I showed that, two inches by one and a quarter inches, and it says that it's a subgaleal, it's a subgaleal hemorrhage here, and is again shown that the wound is four inches above the right ear canal. So between the diagrams--you see, this is what medical examiner is doing. That's why you need a pathologist to interpret the notations. We take notes on different parts of the diagram and then when you dictate, you synthesize the data to give a composite report.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor--

THE COURT: And, your Honor, for the record, on item 8 on page 7 that the doctor was just referring to of the protocol, on that in red and mark B-20, and I'll also indicate 20 form, 20-H and 22.

MR. KELBERG: Those are the two forms, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Anything further--well, are you able to determine--going back just for a second to B-26, are you able to determine the relative positions of Miss Brown Simpson and the perpetrator at the time that injury was received?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: For all the same reasons you've given before?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is there anything further you wish to discuss regarding this contusion either in the diagrams, in the protocol or in the photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: I think we're done with this, and we'll move back to examination of the hand photographs.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The addendum--

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry. The addendum on the last sharp force injury; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. We'll take down the protocol and we'll put up form 8-B from exhibit 349, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Doctor, where in the addendum is there a reference to this particular sharp force injury that's seen in photograph B-26?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Roman numeral ii, item 1, entire paragraph, line 1 through 5 of that description as amended to read, as that paragraph states, that the wound to the scalp is one and a quarter inches in length, diagonally oriented, superiorly is tapered and inferiorly it is also tapered and then continue as a superficial incised wound. So basically the entire description was changed in that addendum--

MR. KELBERG: Doctor--I'm sorry.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: --based on the photograph.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, from your review of the photograph, including the life-size photograph of that particular sharp force injury, in your opinion, does the addendum accurately describe the wound that is seen?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And, your Honor, I'll, in the blue marker, outline this area on page 1 of the addendum and write B-26 along the side.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. KELBERG: Anything further, doctor, regarding this sharp force injury? All right. I think we are now ready to move back to the photograph of the hand.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: Proceed.

MR. KELBERG: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, let me invite your attention now to photograph B-31 in the lower right corner of this array of photographs. What is shown--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is shown in this photograph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: B-31 shows the palmar aspect of the right hand, and you can see an area of injury to the right ring finger. It's a superficial cut. The photograph is a little dark here, but there's a cut here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: There's--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You can see it better in the other photograph.

MR. KELBERG: Which photograph is it better seen in, doctor, if it's one of these that's on the board?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. It's seen better in B-12. You can see the cut here better. Yes, you can see it better here in this (Indicating)--

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: You can see it better in B-12. If you use a magnifying glass, you can see it very well.

MR. KELBERG: All right. And which finger is it again?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Right ring finger, palmar aspect.

MR. KELBERG: Okay. And is this in your opinion what you would call a defensive wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And are you able to tell in any generalized fashion the manner in which that was received?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It was a defensive wound which happened when Miss Simpson tried to defend herself when she was being stabbed.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, is there more than that one defensive wound on the palmar surface of the right hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: What if any significance is there for you that there is one and only one defensive wound to the palmar surface of the right hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: This would indicate to me that she was probably rapidly incapacitated and was not able to offer much resistance.

MR. KELBERG: On what do you base that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Because there's very few Defense wounds in her upper extremities. Because whenever you see Defense wound in the upper extremities, that is the hands and forearms, that means the person was conscious and was able to defend themselves. But when you see a paucity of defensive wounds, it would signify as a forensic pathologist that the person was rapidly incapacitated and was incapable of offering much resistance.

MR. KELBERG: Doctor, did Dr. Golden address in his original protocol this particular defensive wound to the palmar surface of the ring finger of the right hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes, he did. But in the anatomic summary, he described it properly, but in the protocol itself, he described it in the report as the index finger, but in the diagram, he diagrammed it correctly.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Let's break this down. There is a reference to this defensive wound in the protocol; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And there is an entry on a diagram that reflects this defensive wound; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: But there is a difference between what the diagram shows and what the protocol says; is that correct?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Is either one of them accurate based upon what these two photographs, B-12 and B-31, show?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: The diagram is accurate. The description of the wound in the protocol is wrong because it was said as index finger, but the anatomic summary reflects the injury correctly. The anatomic summary says "Right ring finger."

MR. KELBERG: When you say "The anatomic summary," what is that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's the front page of the autopsy report where all the injuries are summarized.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Is this defensive wound one which in your opinion was received before death?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And with respect to the minimum amount of time before death, would your answers be the same as they've been to the last series of wounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Also, that this is not a fatal wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That is correct.

MR. KELBERG: And in the big picture of things, does this have any significance beyond its significance on the issue of a defensive wound and the absence of other defensive wounds?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Anything further that we need to photograph for either B-31 or B-12 for the purposes of identifying that injury?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Then perhaps we can--

MR. KELBERG: I believe we have until 3:30, your Honor? If we could just finish with--why don't we let counsel go through and then the doctor.

(Brief pause.)

MR. KELBERG: By the way, doctor, is the addendum--does the addendum reflect--I'm sorry--include any reference to the difference between the diagram and the protocol description?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: I'm sorry. Keep your voice up.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: Would you expect the addendum to include--I'll have to get that word out of my vocabulary--to include something to show that there was in fact this difference and to show which is the accurate identification?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It should have included it.

MR. KELBERG: Keep your voice up, doctor.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Should have included it.

MR. KELBERG: And again, would that be a mistake by Dr. Golden?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Significant on any of the big ticket questions?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: No.

MR. KELBERG: For all the same reasons?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. If Mr. Lynch can put up--this is 0-B. Where is there an entry on this summary that you described that accurately reflects the right ring finger defensive wound in photograph B-31 and B-12?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Page 1 of the autopsy report, roman numeral iii.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll outline that. And this I'll mark B-31, B-12, and I'll write the word "Correct" in the margin. Now, doctor, in this same protocol, there is an inaccurate description provided?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Where is that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Page 7.

MR. KELBERG: Where on this page, doctor, is that?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Paragraph no. 2, right hand. It says there's a 5/8 inch incised wound on the volar surface of the right index finger.

MR. KELBERG: And is "Volar" another term to indicate the back--I'm sorry--the palm of the right hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Palm and inner surface of the right hand.

MR. KELBERG: So these are somewhat interchangeable terms?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: That's correct.

MR. KELBERG: But this is the description that we're talking about (Indicating)?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll write again--I've circled it in red--B-31 B-12. And it's this particular indication of "Right index finger" that is inaccurate?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll write "Inaccurate" after circling the right index finger area and "SB" should be ring. Would that be accurate, doctor?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Ring finger. All right. And you said there was a diagram that had an entry to indicate the identification of that defensive wound?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. 23. Palm print 23.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll ask Mr. Lynch to put that up. And show us, please, doctor, where there is that indication.

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It's on the right lower quadrant of the diagram here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And, doctor, is there an entry, that is a written description of any type?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: What is written in there?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: It says 5/8 inch tangential cut skin avulsed and given a diagram of the injury here, and actually he has described that there is some forking to the ulnar aspect, that is this aspect of the wound (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: The ulnar aspect being toward the little finger side of the hand?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes. This side of the hand. And you have to add that paragraph also in the description here.

MR. KELBERG: All right. Let me just cover--. This whole area that I'm circling here, doctor--

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: --indicates the defensive wound for B-31 and B-12?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And is this an accurate description?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And I'll write "Accurate." Incidentally, doctor, this word "Defense" and "Ante"--is that "Antemortem" that appears there?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: To which of any of these things does that go?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Well, if--all of these are antemortem wounds. So it could reflect for all of them.

MR. KELBERG: I think you used the wrong term.

THE COURT: He did.

MR. KELBERG: It would have significance to all of them?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: All right. The area that you talk about, the ulnar area of the hand, the palmar area is also discussed in a paragraph?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yeah. The next paragraph here (Indicating).

MR. KELBERG: And that area I'll outline also in red on page 7 of the protocol and draw a line to connect up also with the B-12 and the B-31 of the first paragraph that you've already identified. Is that description in that second paragraph accurate?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: And corresponds to what Dr. Golden has diagrammed in the lower right quadrant for form 23?

DR. LAKSHMANAN: Yes.

MR. KELBERG: Your Honor, would this be the appropriate time?

THE COURT: Yes, it would. All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our recess for the afternoon. Please remember all my admonitions to you; do not discuss this case amongst yourselves, do not form any opinions in the case, do not conduct any deliberations until the matter has been submitted to you and do not allow anybody to communicate with you with regard to the case. As far as the jury is concerned, we'll stand in recess until 9:00 A.M. tomorrow morning. All right. Thank you, counsel.

(At 3:35 P.M., an adjournment was taken until Thursday, June 8, 1995, 9:00 A.M.)

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

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

The People of the State of California,)

Plaintiff,)

Vs.) no. BA097211)

Orenthal James Simpson,)

Defendant.)

Reporter's transcript of proceedings Wednesday, June 7, 1995

Volume 162 pages 30829 through 31061, inclusive

(Pages 30825 through 30828, inclusive, sealed)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPEARANCES:

Janet M. Moxham, CSR #4588 Christine M. Olson, CSR #2378 official reporters

FOR THE PEOPLE: Gil Garcetti, District Attorney by: Marcia R. Clark, William W. Hodgman, Christopher A. Darden, Cheri A. Lewis, Rockne P. Harmon, George W. Clarke, Scott M. Gordon Lydia C. Bodin, Hank M. Goldberg, Alan Yochelson and Darrell S. Mavis, Brian R. Kelberg, and Kenneth E. Lynch, Deputies 18-000 Criminal Courts Building 210 West Temple Street Los Angeles, California 90012

FOR THE DEFENDANT: Robert L. Shapiro, Esquire Sara L. Caplan, Esquire 2121 Avenue of the Stars 19th floor Los Angeles, California 90067 Johnnie L. Cochran, Jr., Esquire by: Carl E. Douglas, Esquire Shawn Snider Chapman, Esquire 4929 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1010 Los Angeles, California 90010 Gerald F. Uelmen, Esquire Robert Kardashian, Esquire Alan Dershowitz, Esquire F. Lee Bailey, Esquire Barry Scheck, Esquire Peter Neufeld, Esquire Robert D. Blasier, Esquire William C. Thompson, Esquire

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I N D E X

Index for volume 162 pages 30829 - 31061

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Day date session page vol.

Wednesday June 7, 1995 A.M. 30829 162 P.M. 30956 161

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PROCEEDINGS

Motion in limine 30829 162 re Dr. Sathyavagiswaran testifying as to mistakes of Dr. Golden

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LEGEND: Ms. Clark-mc Mr. Hodgman-h Mr. Darden d Mr. Kahn-k Mr. Goldberg-gb Mr. Gordon-g Mr. Shapiro-s Mr. Cochran-c Mr. Douglas-cd Mr. Bailey-b Mr. Uelmen-u Mr. Scheck-bs Mr. Neufeld-n

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES

PEOPLE'S witnesses direct cross redirect recross vol.

Sathyavagiswaran, Lakshmanan 162 (Resumed) 30849bk (Resumed) 30960bk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES

WITNESSES direct cross redirect recross vol.

Sathyavagiswaran, Lakshmanan 162 (Resumed) 30849bk (Resumed) 30960bk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EXHIBITS

PEOPLE'S for in exhibit identification evidence page vol. Page vol.

353 - Photograph of 30848 162 a newspaper article of Dr. Sathyavagiswaran and Mr. Kelberg (Computer printout)

354 - Chart 30856 162 entitled "Blood from sharp injuries to the neck of ms. Brown"

355 - Chart 31015 162 entitled "Blunt force trauma and defensive wounds to ms. Brown"