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

APPEARANCES: (Appearances as heretofore noted.)

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

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

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

THE COURT: All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. The Defendant is again present before the Court with his counsel, Mr. Shapiro, Mr. Douglas, Mr. Bailey. The People are represented by Mr. Darden, Miss Clark. The jury is not present. Counsel, anything we need to take up before we proceed with the next witness?

MR. COCHRAN: Good morning, your Honor. Yes, I think so, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: May I have just a second?

THE COURT: Certainly.

MR. COCHRAN: I was talking to the Prosecution about some stipulations.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

THE COURT: Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: Good morning, your Honor. I understand there may be some relevant discovery about today's witness and we just got it, so there may be a reason to take a look at it. I was just speaking with Mr. Darden briefly.

THE COURT: Which witness is this?

MR. COCHRAN: Ms. Delaney, your Honor, Kathleen Delaney.

MR. COCHRAN: So maybe we will have time to do that, but we have not seen this discovery. We just got it.

THE COURT: What does this relate to?

MR. COCHRAN: Apparently phone records from the Mirage Hotel, apparently, Mr. Douglas is telling me.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: Also I see Mr. Rubin back in court, your Honor, and we would like an opportunity to briefly talk with him before he is called to the stand and we have not had that opportunity. But secondly, I have, as I promised, an argument I would like to make regarding any further demonstrations of so-called new gloves and I would like to cite some cases to the Court at the appropriate time. So we would like to talk to Mr. Rubin. I would like an offer of proof from the people so we are not wasting our time so at least we know where we are going to go, and then I can address that.

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Good morning, sir. We have a couple of requests. First, we would like the Court's permission to measure both of Mr. Simpson's hands, and depending upon that measurement then we will decide what we want to do next.

THE COURT: And in what manner do you propose to measure Mr. Simpson's hands?

MR. DARDEN: Well, Mr. Rubin is here. He has a measuring tape. It will be out of the presence of the jury. We would just like his hands measured.

MR. COCHRAN: I would like to do it in the presence of the jury. We have nothing to hide, your Honor. This is a search for truth here.

THE COURT: Well, Mr. Darden tells me he would like to do it out of the presence of the jury so that they can determine what they are going to do next.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, the only thing I would say, yes, he did say that, but perhaps they should have done this, umm, before last Thursday.

MR. DARDEN: Well, the gloves fit last Thursday, Mr. Cochran, and we are going to show that today `kay.

MR. COCHRAN: I'm not going to debate that or get into that, your Honor. I think we all know about those gloves and that is why Mr. Rubin is back here for a third time. I object. I have no objection to them measuring Mr. Simpson's hands. Obviously the Court has the authority to order that. I have no problem with that, but I just think that in a case where we are talking about doing everything out here in the open, let's do it before the jury, I have no problem with that. Before we get to that point I wanted to be able to talk to Mr. Rubin and I wanted to be able to address the Court on any demonstrations that they may have in mind down the road.

THE COURT: Mr. Darden, do you want to enlighten us as to what the options are after Mr. Rubin measures Mr. Simpson's hands?

MR. DARDEN: The options are doing nothing ever again related to gloves or doing something later on down the road. Another option--

THE COURT: How far down the road--I mean, you didn't have Mr. Rubin to come out from New York to do a tape measure of Mr. Simpson's hands.

MR. DARDEN: That is true. It was obvious to us that the gloves from the crime scene and Rockingham fit the Defendant. I mean, they are his gloves, but aside from that, today we would like to have a measurement of his hands. Now, should we decide to go forward with Mr. Rubin's testimony today, then I will be asking the Court to order Mr. Simpson to place on his hands a new pair of Aris leather lights, size extra large. Mr. Rubin has represented to me that the gloves the Court handed over to both the Prosecution and the Defense yesterday represent the crime scene gloves in their original and ordinary condition.

THE COURT: You are speaking of the gloves that the Court received from Steph Fogelson of Aris Isotoner by federal express yesterday, correct?

MR. DARDEN: That's correct. So we are going to be asking perhaps for a demonstration similar to the one we had last week, except this time we won't have the crime scene gloves and Mr. Simpson won't have the opportunity at that time to put on latex gloves and jack around with us and play games with us in front of the jury.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, these terms like "Jack around" are totally inappropriate.

THE COURT: I agree.

MR. COCHRAN: And disrespectful to the Court.

THE COURT: I agree.

MR. DARDEN: That is disrespectful to the Court?

THE COURT: No. I don't need that terminology here.

MR. DARDEN: Okay.

MR. COCHRAN: Now, shall I proceed, your Honor? So I don't know what point we are at, your Honor.

THE COURT: We are at the point as to at what point am I going to allow the measurement of Mr. Simpson's hands by tape measure by Mr. Rubin. And my inclination at this point is to allow that to occur now so the Prosecution can make a determination whether or not they are going to recall Mr. Rubin.

MR. COCHRAN: That is fine. And my only request, if we are going to do that, let's do it in the presence of the jury. Obviously I think we have a right to bring that out. It is not a secret and I'm going to bring it out regardless.

THE COURT: Well, Mr. Cochran, what I would probably do is that I will allow Mr. Rubin to make the measurement here today right now out of the presence of the jury. If you want to call him out of order as an adverse witness, since he is here from New York, I would allow you to recall him for further cross-examination.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor. Thank you. I think he would appreciate it also. Well, then I will old off my other argument regarding whether we should have this demonstration regarding whether we should make this judgment.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: May I have a moment with my client, your Honor?

THE COURT: Certainly.

MR. COCHRAN: I was talking with the Prosecution when you came out.

THE COURT: Mr. Rubin, do you have your measurement with you.

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I do.

MR. COCHRAN: I would like the opportunity to talk with Mr. Rubin.

MR. DARDEN: I would like the opportunity to sit in.

MR. COCHRAN: We didn't have the option to sit in on all their meetings.

THE COURT: Counsel, why don't you talk to your client.

MR. COCHRAN: Certainly, your Honor.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

THE COURT: And do we have our Airtouch representative?

MS. CLARK: Yes.

THE COURT: I see we have been joined by Investigator Bell.

MR. DARDEN: And Investigator Stevens, your Honor.

THE COURT: Well, Mr. Stevens we have seen before. This is the first appearance of Mr. Bell and also the first appearance of Miss Filipe.

MS. FILIPE: Good morning, your Honor.

THE COURT: Good to see you again.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

THE COURT: And Mr. Darden, let me ask you this: Which of the exemplar pairs of gloves are you proposing to use?

MR. DARDEN: The extra large.

THE COURT: Which one of the four?

MR. DARDEN: Do you want to see the pair?

THE COURT: You are going to use one of the four that you have--excuse me. One of the two?

MR. DARDEN: Yes.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. DARDEN: Although I did want to make an additional point on that issue when Mr. Cochran is free.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: Yes. Thank you very much for the time, your Honor. Having expressed my belief that the Court certainly does have the authority to do this, I have no problem with it. I just think that it should be in front of the jury, but what the Court has proposed is certainly acceptable to us, that I can bring it out on cross or make him my own witness right today because he lives in New York, and that is fine. I will hold off the argument with regard to any demonstrations until we see what happens at this point, if that is all right.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Rubin, why don't you step forward, please.

MR. COCHRAN: Not to shift subjects, can we find out how many witnesses the Prosecution has today altogether so we know where we are going today?

THE COURT: Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: I have two--I don't have to whisper. I have two.

MR. COCHRAN: Including Mr. Rubin?

MS. CLARK: Oh, no, that is three.

MR. COCHRAN: Okay. Mr. Darden has one and you have two. Who are the two?

MS. CLARK: I believe so.

MR. COCHRAN: Can we find out?

MS. CLARK: Just what I told you before, Lu Ellen Roberts and the custodian of records from the Mirage Hotel.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. We are trying to work out some stipulations.

MS. CLARK: I did not take into account the other witnesses that would be called if we don't stipulate, but I think that we will.

THE COURT: Let me ask Mr. Simpson to stand. And Mr. Rubin, would you walk over, please, and conduct your measure.

(Mr. Simpson's left hand is measured by Mr. Rubin.)

MR. DARDEN: Can we ask Mr. Simpson not to chat?

MR. COCHRAN: Not on the record, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: I'm standing here.

THE COURT: This is not part of the record.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Counsel, I'm going to ask you to all be quiet while Mr. Rubin does this.

MR. RUBIN: Do you want to do the measurement?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. RUBIN: It is about nine and five eights inches.

THE COURT: All right. That was the left hand.

MS. CLARK: May the record reflect the witness has asked Mr. Simpson to please close his fingers and relax his hand.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Simpson has done that.

MR. RUBIN: It is really in the area plus or minus about eighth of an inch, in the nine and a half area.

THE COURT: All right. That is the left hand?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

(Mr. Simpson's right hand is measured by Mr. Rubin.)

MR. RUBIN: Nine and five eights.

THE COURT: All right. Nine and a five eights?

MR. RUBIN: Nine and a half on the left.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: Are we on the record?

THE COURT: No, we are not. All right. Mr. Rubin, would you step back and take your seat again, please. Thank you. All right. Mr. Darden, based upon the nine and a half and nine and 5/8 measurements, what is your desire as far as Mr. Rubin is concerned? And Mr. Cochran, do you want some time of your own to chat with Mr. Rubin?

MR. COCHRAN: Yes, we would like to do that.

THE COURT: All right.

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

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Rubin--

MR. DARDEN: Can I have one moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: Certainly. Mr. Darden, why don't your complete your discussions with Mr. Rubin and I will allow him to speak with Mr. Cochran.

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

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

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Rubin.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, may we have a few minutes--we would like--we can't use the jury room? The jury is down here now? May we use someplace in the back?

THE COURT: I think you will have to chat right there.

MR. COCHRAN: All right.

THE COURT: Because everything else is in operation in the back.

MR. COCHRAN: Can we take a break to do this, your Honor, five minutes or so?

THE COURT: Do you really need five minutes to talk to Mr. Rubin?

MR. COCHRAN: I think so, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Is there anything else we need to discuss? I hate to lose all this time.

MR. COCHRAN: Well, I would like to then address the issue--why they said they wanted a demonstration. In other words, I will wait until the time--

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Can I wait until he finishes his conversation with Mr. Rubin.

MR. COCHRAN: It would save time, your Honor. I would have to talk to him again.

THE COURT: Do you wish to go forward with the use of the exemplar gloves provided by Aris?

MR. DARDEN: I think that I do, but I need to talk to Mr. Rubin for just a couple of more minutes.

THE COURT: All right. Let me know when you are ready.

(Recess.)

THE COURT: All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. Mr. Simpson is again present before the Court with his counsel. The People are represented. The jury is not present. Mr. Shapiro, did everything go well with Mr. Metzner yesterday?

MR. SHAPIRO: Yes. Thank you so much for asking.

THE COURT: Would you convey to him the Court's best wishes.

MR. SHAPIRO: Thank you. I appreciate that.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Darden, are we ready to proceed?

MR. DARDEN: Yes, your Honor. We would like to have Mr. Simpson try on a new pair of Aris leather lights.

THE COURT: All right. This is one of the exemplar pairs that we received from Aris Isotoner yesterday; is that correct.

MR. DARDEN: That's correct.

THE COURT: Any comments on that, Mr. Cochran?

MR. COCHRAN: Yes. I would like to be heard on that.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. DARDEN: May I add a couple other exhibits so that Mr. Cochran can respond to those while he is at the podium? We want to ask that Mr. Simpson be required to put the gloves on over at the Defense table and then walk over to the jury after he has placed them on his hands. We are going to ask the Court to direct Mr. Simpson not to communicate with the jurors, certainly not to communicate with me as well.

THE COURT: And when do you propose to do this? During the course of your request to recall Mr. Rubin?

MR. DARDEN: Yes, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. And what else are you going to be calling Mr. Rubin for other than to testify that these gloves have the Brossier stitching and are exact replicas or part of the batch that was produced back in `90, `91.

MR. DARDEN: We are going to ask him to take a look at Mr. Simpson's hands after he places the gloves on and then we are going to have him step back up on the witness stand and indicate whether or not it is a perfect fit or something less and talk to him a little bit about the lining and a little bit more about shrinkage. And it shouldn't take very long at all.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. DARDEN: Now, in the event that Mr. Simpson is unable to place his hand in the glove, we have gentlemen here whose hands are larger than Mr. Simpson's.

THE COURT: Who would that be?

MR. DARDEN: That would be Mr. Bell and Mr. Stevens.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you very kindly, your Honor.

THE COURT: Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: Spending an awful lot of time on gloves. The problem, however, is, your Honor, last Thursday the Prosecution made a calculated decision to have Mr. Simpson try on some gloves that did not fit and they are the relevant gloves in this case. And I want to address that issue to the Court at this point. I want to talk to the Court. The relevance of the fit of these alleged new gloves depends on showing--showing by the Prosecution, it seems to me, of substantial similarity between the conditions of these new gloves and the gloves in evidence, items 9 and items 37, your Honor. That is what is really relevant. Those gloves were found one at Rockingham allegedly and one at the Bundy scene. So those are the relevant gloves that he tried on last Thursday that didn't fit. Now we are asked to take some gloves that were apparently found in the factory after an exhaustive search, made in the Philippines, then brought forward. And I think the Court may want to take some testimony from Mr. Rubin. We thank you for the opportunity. There are--basically within the extra large gloves there are basically three different sizes in the extra large. Mr. Rubin is in fact an expert in this area and he shared his knowledge with us. There are the perfect extra large, the snug extra large and the oversize extra large, and so that, you know, within the extra large there is a little bit of play or give. We talked to him about that. He or no one else can tell us the condition of those gloves, the gloves in evidence, as of June 12th, which is the relevant time, your Honor. We do know in fact that as of June 21st some measurements were taken of 9 and 37, so we know those particular measurements. But we are now--now on June 21st, 1995, and so, you know, this is an experiment that doesn't make any sense. Doesn't matter whether these gloves would fit Mr. Simpson or these other gentlemen at this time if they are extra large. In fact, I think Mr. Rubin would testify, if we were allowed some brief hearing--is time flying?--if Mr.--

THE COURT: This is my fondest dream come true.

MR. COCHRAN: This case is about to be over; is that it?

MR. COCHRAN: Time flies when you are having fun, your Honor.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: If I might proceed?

THE COURT: Please.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, with regard--if Mr. Rubin will testify that extra large gloves will--within the range that I just described for you, will fit 99.5 percent of all men in America--and that is all nice to know and the jury needs to be told that because what does that have to do with anything? The question is the gloves in this case so it is not--it is not particularly helpful. Mr. Rubin will talk about gloves stretching out from north to south and Mr. Darden has already told us that they have two very large men here who purport to have hands bigger than Mr. Simpson and they have tried these gloves on. I mean, they are being a lot more careful. These are stretched out by their hands--so I mean these are not pristine gloves. Mr. Rubin will also say these--that the gloves in evidence, 9 and 37, have been handled in such a way he can't tell us anything about how they were back on June 12th or on June 21st, which would be a much more relevant time. And he himself saw two men who I presume are Messers. Bell and Stevens, try on these gloves that our client is now going to be asked to try on today. That is not fair. We don't have any pristine gloves from that standpoint. Further, if the Court pleases, it just seems like under the cases that I now want to cite to the Court, that you have the authority, you have the discretion to exclude this bogus courtroom demonstration in which they seek to recapture some credibility for the mistakes they made last Thursday. And I would ask the Court to read several cases that I think would be on point or at least with regard to the exclusion of evidence. And I would cite to the Court the case of People versus V-A-I-Z-A, 244 cal.app.2D, 121. I would cite additionally People versus Boyd, 222 cal.app.3D, 541, People versus Gilbert, 5 cal.app.4th, 1372, People versus Bonin, 47 cal.3D, 808. And the key issue with respect to substantial similarity is not that they are the same glove, your Honor, but the condition of the gloves, and that is what we are talking about, the alleged shrinkage, if any, the alleged condition, if any. If Mr. Rubin can't tell us whether those gloves, when they were purchased, if they were purchased back in 1990, were the snug extra large, the perfect extra large or the oversize extra large, and so that is a real problem. The condition of the gloves at that time, at the time on June 12th, is what's relevant to this jury and we are not here to mislead this jury. We are not here to try to have somebody recover from a mistake they made. This is not anything personal. This is a case that your Honor will make us try based upon what's appropriate evidence and that is not fair to my client. As to the next point, I just want to point out to the Court that--and you sustained many of my objections.

It was Mr. Darden who was doing most the talking. You had allowed a demonstration, and Mr. Darden took it upon himself to go forward and ask Mr. Simpson to grip something because they were embarrassed and he kept talking and I kept objecting and it was totally unfair. They are the ones who asked to have Mr. Simpson over there. Now, because they are so wounded, they don't want him over there. That is unfair. If he is going to try on these gloves, he should try them on right in front of the jury again, but the point--let me just summarize what I have tried to say. These gloves would fit almost every male in America, these new gloves, and especially since they have been stretched, so they are being very cautious. What they have done to today, your Honor? They have his hands measured, they bring two big fellows down here who had their hands in these gloves. They have Mr. Rubin have his hands in these gloves. What kind of test is this? We are spinning their wheels because they want to end on some kind of a high note. And I think it is very important--and the burden of proof is on the Prosecution to show that there is substantial similarity of the conditions of these gloves and they can't do it. And we ask for a hearing on that point before we proceed, your Honor. It is totally unfair. And if you rule against us--and I would ask you to look at these cases because you have wide discretion in this matter--and I would ask you to do that, and then--when you rule against us, certainly Mr. Simpson should be able to try these gloves on front of the jury, just as he did before, and if there is going to be--and I would ask you to caution counsel not to make all these statements back and forth. Mr. Simpson was only responding to what he was saying to him and trying to comply and he didn't like the results so now they want to change that. It is really strange, your Honor, where we all hear all this talk for months about the search of truth and they now want to do it in secret and we want it to be in the open. And I would ask the Court to read the cases and I'm specifically for a hearing. If you have any questions about the representations I've made about how many people these gloves would fit, the people that tried on these gloves--and this is just a demonstration that takes no--takes us nowhere and means nothing, your Honor, because the only real test is extremely prejudicial, it seems to us also, so I think that it would be very, very unfair.

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Well, I think it is--

THE COURT: I am concerned about the point raised by Mr. Cochran regarding the trying on of these gloves by Messers. Bell and Stevens.

MR. DARDEN: Untrue, your Honor. Mr. Bell and Mr. Stevens tried on a single pair of gloves, the same gloves I myself kept Mr. My possession, another pair of extra large gloves, and only Mr. Rubin has seen those gloves to measure them, so I don't know where he gets that.

THE COURT: All right. So it is your representation to the Court that the ones that were used with Mr. Stevens and Mr. Bell were the second pair?

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: Yes.

THE COURT: The record should reflect that yesterday we did receive from Aris four pairs of extra large. The Court kept one, gave two to the Prosecution, gave one to the Defense. I indicated I wanted to keep one--one pair of extra large in the Court's possession for precisely this reason.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And I have asked Mr. Yochelson to call the general counsel for Aris to obtain another pair.

THE COURT: All right. Do you have any objection then to using the pair--the extra large pair that the Court kept in its custody yesterday for your demonstration, so there is no question, nobody has put these gloves on?

MR. DARDEN: Let me take a look at them.

MR. COCHRAN: Wait a minute. Is he questioning the Court?

MR. DARDEN: No, I'm not questioning the Court. You have a pair of gloves. I want to take a look at them.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. DARDEN: I'm sure there won't be a problem, but I would like to take a look at them.

(Discussion held off the record between the Court and the clerk.)

THE COURT: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: May I say one other thing?

THE COURT: I do agree with Mr. Cochran's point, though, that a foundation will need to be laid whether or not these are in fact, as represented by Mr. Rubin, to be from that particular run, the Brossier stitching, the sizing, et cetera, et cetera.

MR. DARDEN: Okay.

THE COURT: If you lay that foundation, then I will allow the use of these new gloves.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor--

THE COURT: If there is a demonstration, if you do request that demonstration to take place, it will take place at the direction of the Court. I will direct Mr. Simpson what to do and not to do and counsel will make no comments during the course of that demonstration. Is that clear?

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: You mean to Mr. Simpson or to the Court?

THE COURT: Either.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. May I approach?

THE COURT: You may. And Mr. Cochran, do you want to approach?

MR. COCHRAN: Sure, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: Will the Court kindly lay the ground rules for us in a little detail at side bar before--

THE COURT: No. What I will do is after Mr. Rubin has testified to the foundation, if I'm satisfied with the foundation, then I will allow any other comment at side bar. If I overrule any objections that exist at that time, I will have Mr. Simpson step over to the podium, have him try on those two exemplar gloves, the extra large that the Court kept, and I will direct him to put them on and then to remove them.

MR. COCHRAN: Would the Court--

THE COURT: With no comment from counsel or Mr. Simpson.

MR. COCHRAN: Will the Court allow, during the foundational phase at least, before the demonstration, a couple of questions of Mr. Rubin? Would the Court allow that, in fairness?

THE COURT: I will allow you to take him on voir dire for that purpose, for the foundational purpose.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you.

THE COURT: Mr. Cochran--I'm sorry. Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: May I have one moment, your Honor? I may want to lodge an objection.

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

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, our only concern about having Mr. Simpson, who seems to be in a rather animated mood today, is that to have him come over to the podium and put the gloves on is that he will make facial gestures and other types of things in front of this jury.

THE COURT: Well, counsel, the problem is what the jury needs to see is the fit of the gloves. The jury needs to see Mr. Simpson and he needs to be close enough to the jury panel so that they can see him. And the jury can take into consideration what other gestures or facial expressions Mr. Simpson makes during the course of that and determining his credibility--well, not determining his credibility--but in evaluating this demonstration.

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

THE COURT: But I'm not going to direct him not to make any comments and not to make any overt gestures to the jury.

MR. COCHRAN: And the same thing with the lawyers, your Honor.

THE COURT: I'm going to have the lawyers seated during the course of the demonstration.

MR. DARDEN: To allow him to act in front of jury--

THE COURT: I'm not allowing him to act, counsel. I'm going to direct him where to stand, what to do, where to turn.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, could the record reflect that Mr. Rubin is measuring your Honor's gloves?

THE COURT: Yes, yes. All right. Anything else?

MR. COCHRAN: Umm--

THE COURT: I'm afraid to ask.

MR. COCHRAN: May I have just a second, your Honor? Thank you.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin indicates that your extra large is a little smaller than my extra large.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, that is precisely the point and that is why this demonstration is bogus and the Court knows you kept this extra large. I made that representation to you. You may want to take some testimony from Mr. Rubin, your Honor, with regard to these gloves. That is the problem within the extra large. There is these three different sizes. And nobody has ever tried these gloves on, but you get this lot out here and it is a real problem for us.

THE COURT: Let see what the testimony is, counsel.

MR. COCHRAN: Can we do that?

MR. DARDEN: After Mr. Simpson puts on the Court's pair, is there any reason why he can't put on my pair?

THE COURT: We'll see. Let's see what kind of foundation you lay for these gloves.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, this is not a modeling show. This is a murder trial.

THE COURT: Counsel, we'll proceed.

MR. DARDEN: In addition of course the Defense has a pair.

MR. COCHRAN: Yes, they do.

THE COURT: Counsel, also I'm going to explain to the jury there were a number of matters that I had to take up out of their presence which counts for the delay. I will tell them about the delay that we are going to have tomorrow because of the hearing we are going to have with Dr. Weir, and the Defense witnesses who I don't recollect, that we will be in session with them tomorrow afternoon. That is the bad news. The good news is that the Prosecution has announced that they will try to wind up by the end of next week. All right. So the jury will have some light at the end of the tunnel. All right. Deputy Magnera, let's have the jurors, please.

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

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: And Mr. Darden, will you mark on the label of the Court's pair on the inside of the label, of the attached label, "Court," so we know which one is which.

MR. DARDEN: I have done so, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you.

(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.

THE COURT: First of all, my apologies to you for having kept you waiting so long this morning, and also for not being in session yesterday afternoon. There were a number of things that I had to take up out of your presence, and it took longer than I thought it would, obviously. Also, for your information, tomorrow morning I'm going to be conducting another hearing out of your presence regarding some potential evidence and that will probably take the entire morning session, so we will not be calling you back here to the courtroom until tomorrow afternoon, so that is the bad news. The good news is that I've been informed by the Prosecution that they anticipate concluding the presentation of their case in chief by the end of next end, so we are making some progress and hopefully we will be able to wind this up, at least as far as the first half of the case is concerned. All right. Just to keep you apprised as to what is going on, we are making progress, and the reason for that is some of these things that I have to take up out of your presence. So I hope you understand. My apologies to you, but we are trying to make as much progress as is possible. All right. Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Thank you, your Honor. Good morning.

THE JURY: Good morning.

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, the People call Mr. Rubin back to the stand.

THE COURT: All right. And I released Mr. Rubin again last time, so we need to reswear him.

Richard Rubin, (Recalled) recalled as a witness by the People, having been previously sworn, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:

THE CLERK: Please raise your right hand. You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this Court, shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God.

MR. RUBIN: I do.

THE CLERK: Please have a seat on the witness stand and state and spell your first and last names for the record.

MR. RUBIN: Richard Rubin, R-U-B-I-N.

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN

MR. DARDEN: Good morning, Mr. Rubin.

MR. RUBIN: Good morning, Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, you returned to Los Angeles at my request?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: And when did you arrive back in L.A.?

MR. RUBIN: A little after eight o'clock last night.

MR. DARDEN: Were you brought to my office?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I was.

MR. DARDEN: Did we meet and talk?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, we did.

MR. DARDEN: Did I she you some objects or items in my office last night?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, you did.

MR. DARDEN: What did I show you?

MR. RUBIN: You showed me four different pair of Aris lights gloves.

MR. DARDEN: And what were the sizes of those gloves?

MR. RUBIN: I believe one was a small, one was a large and two were extra large.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Did you see a medium?

MR. RUBIN: And also a medium.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. So you saw five pairs of gloves?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: Showing you a pair of Aris leather light gloves, may these be marked People's next in order?

THE CLERK: 401.

THE COURT: 401.

MR. DARDEN: 401.

(Peo's 401 for id = pair of brown leather gloves)

MR. DARDEN: And I am indicating 401 on the inside of the tag, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: Showing you what has been marked People's 401 for identification.

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: You didn't see those gloves in my office last night, did you?

MR. RUBIN: No, I did not.

MR. DARDEN: When was the first time you saw those gloves?

MR. RUBIN: Three, four minutes ago.

MR. DARDEN: I'm going to ask you to take a look at those gloves, if you will.

MR. RUBIN: (Witness complies.) Yes.

MR. DARDEN: And do you have fresh in your mind the style and appearance of the Rockingham and Bundy glove?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I do.

MR. DARDEN: Those gloves were Aris leather lights; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, they were.

MR. DARDEN: What is the make and style of the gloves in your hand?

MR. RUBIN: This is Aris leather light style 70263, brown, extra large.

MR. DARDEN: Now, the gloves you saw from Rockingham and Bundy, were they extra large gloves?

MR. RUBIN: The left glove that I saw was definitely an extra large.

MR. DARDEN: And the other one?

MR. RUBIN: In its current condition I believe it is closer to a large than an extra large or it is a very small extra large at this point in time.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And was there some unique kind of stitching on the Rockingham and Bundy glove?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, there was.

MR. DARDEN: What kind of stitching was that?

MR. RUBIN: It is called Brossier stitching. It is a very fine whip stitch.

MR. DARDEN: And the stitching on the gloves in your hand now marked People's 401?

MR. RUBIN: Is the same.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Same color?

MR. RUBIN: Same color, brown, very--slight different shade, but the colors do vary between pairs.

MR. DARDEN: May I have one moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: You may.

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

MR. DARDEN: So is it your testimony that the gloves marked 401 are the same make, model style and style as the glove from Rockingham and Bundy?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, they are.

MR. DARDEN: Now, what is the size of the gloves there in front of you?

MR. RUBIN: These are extra large.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And this is a tag that indicates that they are extra large; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, both inside the glove and outside the glove.

MR. DARDEN: Now, during the break this morning did you measure Mr. Simpson's hands?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Would you describe for the jury how you conducted that measurement?

MR. RUBIN: Basically I took my right hand and put it up against Mr. Simpson's left hand. I took a pen from my pocket and I put the pen in the crotch of Mr. Simpson's finger and I slid my hand up against his hand to give me a finger length measurement. After that I then took a normal soft tape measure, put it in the palm of Mr. Simpson's hand, moved the ruler over to the ten-inch mark, wrapped the actual soft tape measure around the hand, thus giving me the approximate circumference of his left hand and his right hand, which is the conventional way that we would measure someone's gloves for size.

MR. DARDEN: Okay.

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

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, could I have Mr. Rubin step down and show the jury how he conducted these measurements, using Mr. Bell?

THE COURT: Certainly.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Bell.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, may we--

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. COCHRAN: May we approach just for a moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: All right. With the reporter.

(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

THE COURT: On the record.

MR. COCHRAN: My objection is that the Court recalls that we said that--you know, dancing around with all this stuff. I just don't see that as being that important, and if they are going to make some measurements, let them do it in front of the jury but why is Bell relevant? It is a relevance objection. And if he wants to do that, that is fine, but I'm just saying that we object. I mean, Mr. Simpson has a right to go over and happy to describe it.

THE COURT: All right. All he is showing is measuring techniques here. He can shown it on Miss Clark if he wants.

MR. COCHRAN: She has little gloves.

MS. CLARK: I'll submit it. I'm extra small. It is ridiculous.

THE COURT: I expect you to do the same thing with Mr. Simpson, but it is relevant, so the objection is overruled.

(The following proceedings were held in open court:)

THE COURT: All right. Thank you very much, counsel. Mr. Darden, you may continue.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, if you would step down and show the jury the manner in which you measured Mr. Simpson's hands. Mr. Bell, if you would assist, please.

THE COURT: All right. Also present is Mr. Kenneth Bell.

MR. RUBIN: Basically I took his left hand--

MR. DARDEN: You can't turn your back to the jury.

MR. RUBIN: Sorry. Took his left hand and I put my right hand up against it. Will you hold this, please. I first took my pen and put it in the actual crotch of Mr. Simpson's fingers and slid my hand up to correctly a get alignment as to attempting to figure out what size Mr. Simpson's fingers were in comparison to mine.

THE COURT: Mr. Rubin, Mr. Bell, could you then turn around because the jurors on that end of the box can't see. There you go.

MR. RUBIN: In this particular case my fingers are slightly longer than Mr. Bell's. Then using this tape measure, I took the palm, I moved the tape measure right under the knuckle area. This is where we actually measure for a glove size, right across this particular area. I took the measure to make it easy on myself to around the ten mark. I wrapped it around. And in this particular case Mr. Bell is about nine and 5/8 inches, as far as circumference in the hand, and I did this procedure on both, both hands.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Rubin, Mr. Bell, would you move down to this end of the jury box. They were not able to see that demonstration.

MR. RUBIN: I'm sorry.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Bell's left hand is nine and 5/8?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: Would you show the jury the process using Mr. Bell's right hand.

THE COURT: That may be a better angle for these jurors.

MR. RUBIN: Once again, just where the hand breaks is where we more or less measure. For convenience I moved it up to ten, I wrapped the tape measure around and it come to about 9 and a half.

THE COURT: All right. 795, can you see that?

JUROR NO. 795: Yes.

THE COURT: Thank you.

MR. RUBIN: Which is a nine and a half, approximately.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you, counsel. Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Bell is nine and 5/8 and nine and a half; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct. Let me say this, within an eighth of an inch or so. It depends upon exactly how snugly you pull the tape, but very, very close, yes.

MR. DARDEN: And Mr. Simpson, what were his measurements?

MR. RUBIN: On the left hand it was nine and a half and on the right hand it was nine and 5/8.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Simpson and Mr. Bell basically have the same size hands?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, it speaks for itself. The measurements speak for themselves.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. DARDEN: I will withdraw the question, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Looking at the glove marked 401--

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: --would you expect that a man having the hands--having hands the size of Mr. Bell and Mr. Simpson could put that glove on their hand?

MR. RUBIN: This particular pair?

MR. DARDEN: Yes.

MR. RUBIN: This particular pair will go on either one of those hands, but it is going to be very, very tight.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Why is that?

MR. RUBIN: Well, in the manufacturing of these particular gloves they are table cut by hand and there is a slight variance. The standard for extra large is to fit perfectly nine and a half inch circumference around the hand. That would be the perfect fit. And basically the glove would be manufactured so that there is no excess leather passed the nine and a half. That would be a perfect nine and a half. This particular style is--also fit a nine and a half, but it is a little bit on the snug side and it is also a little bit short and that is what gave me that indication. This would be on the small size of extra large. On the large size of extra large, the glove would actually fit someone up to a size 10 in circumference.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Now, you testified last week that these gloves were designed to give a snug fit; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, they are.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. When you purchase gloves for the first time and put your hand in them for the first time, do they tend to be tighter on your hand than they will be later?

MR. RUBIN: They should be.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And after you have worn a pair of gloves, let's say once, do those gloves become looser?

MR. RUBIN: Gradually over time the gloves, as you move your hand back and forth, the leather will stretch, the gloves will get a little bit looser, yes.

MR. DARDEN: But they can also shrink; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: The only time they would actually shrink would be if they are exposed to the elements.

MR. DARDEN: Like water?

MR. RUBIN: Water.

MR. DARDEN: And if they are exposed to blood also they shrink?

MR. COCHRAN: I object. Calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. COCHRAN: No foundation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you.

MR. DARDEN: What if the gloves are frozen?

MR. COCHRAN: Relevant.

MR. COCHRAN: Irrelevant, material. Assume fact not in evidence.

MR. DARDEN: Offer of proof.

THE COURT: Overruled?

MR. RUBIN: I am not a technician, but if I were to speculate--

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you very kindly.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. COCHRAN: I would ask him not to speculate, your Honor.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you.

MR. DARDEN: Is this a speaking objection, your Honor?

THE COURT: Proceed.

MR. DARDEN: What if they were wet and then dried and then wet again and then dried again?

MR. RUBIN: They would shrink.

MR. DARDEN: May I have one moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: Certainly.

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

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, the gentleman seated here next to Mr. Bell, Mr. Stevens--

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: --you met Mr. Stevens when you were here last week?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: Have you measured his hands?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I have.

MR. DARDEN: What were the measurements of his hands?

MR. COCHRAN: Issue your Honor, that is irrelevant and immaterial.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: The Aris leather lights have a cashmere lining; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, they do.

MR. DARDEN: Does cashmere shrink if wet?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, it can.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Will cashmere shrink if not wet but as it ages?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object to this without a further foundation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: It should not.

MR. DARDEN: Did you test the gloves from Bundy--I'm sorry. Strike that. Did you examine the gloves from Bundy and Rockingham to see if the linings had shrunk at all?

MR. RUBIN: It was actually difficult to tell. I looked at the lining, but I really couldn't determine whether the lining had shrunk.

MR. DARDEN: And you testified last week that in their original form a size extra large Aris leather light glove would fit the Defendant; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: Do you still hold that opinion?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I do.

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

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, if it pleases the Court, I would like to have Mr. Bell try on People's 401.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, objection. That is irrelevant and immaterial.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: May I approach?

THE COURT: Sure. With the court reporter,

(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

THE COURT: We are over at the side bar. Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, the witness will testify that Mr. Bell has the same size hand as the Defendant has. And our concern is that Mr. Simpson is just going to act out in front of the jury and attempt to testify under circumstances where he can't be cross-examined. That is substantial similarity. But the men both have the same size hands.

THE COURT: I don't think the record supports that, though, because Mr. Rubin indicated that Mr. Bell's fingers were actually shorter, so I don't think they are the same size, so I don't think you have a foundation to do that. We have Mr. Simpson here. He's the relevant fit. But if you want the demonstration, it will be done at my direction without any comment from any counsel.

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

MR. DARDEN: Obviously we are concerned that we are just--

MR. COCHRAN: Fine. We are ready to proceed, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: --inviting another circus-like situation involving the Defendant.

MR. COCHRAN: We accept that.

THE COURT: Well, I don't think Mr. Bell's hands are--I'm not convinced that he and Mr. Simpson have the same size hands at this point. And based upon Mr. Rubin's testimony I don't think it is an appropriate demonstration.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor. All right. Thank you, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: Wait. I'm not finished yet. We do have our own pair of leather gloves which have been kept in my custody, so Mr. Simpson--it is another pair of gloves that have not been altered in any way--what the Defense can put on Mr. Simpson's hands.

MR. COCHRAN: No.

MR. DARDEN: And they do have their own pair of gloves.

MR. COCHRAN: I object for the reasons we talked about, your Honor. These gloves are pristine, and as I said, your Honor, this demonstration is spending much more time than it is worth. The Court has ruled and I don't want to use their gloves. They have been tried on by other people and it is not recommended to have somebody else do it. It is either Simpson or someone else and you have set the ground rules and I take umbrage about Simpson acting up. The evidence now is that that left glove was more like a large, so no one was acting up. Those gloves are smaller and that is what we are talking about, so I would just submit it.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. DARDEN: Additional concern I have of course is--

MR. SHAPIRO: One second.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. DARDEN: People used to say "Please" where I come from.

MR. SHAPIRO: I'm sorry.

MR. DARDEN: Another concern of course is that Mr. Simpson has arthritis and we looked at the medication that he takes and some of it is anti-inflammatory and we are told that he has not taken the stuff for a day and it caused swelling in the joints and inflammation in his hands and I'm concerned about that.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, the man has--my dear friends are being paranoid, your Honor. The man has medicine. He doesn't want to be sick. And they are doing this, your Honor. We haven't asked to do this.

MR. COCHRAN: So may we proceed, your Honor?

THE COURT: All right. The objection is sustained.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: May I have one moment?

THE COURT: Sure.

(The following proceedings were held in open court:)

(Brief pause.)

MR. COCHRAN: May we proceed, your Honor?

THE COURT: I believe Mr. Darden wanted--

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, you have your own pair of Aris letter lights; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I do.

MR. DARDEN: Do they fit you?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, they do.

MR. DARDEN: When you were here last night did you put on your pair of leather lights?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: Did they fit?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: And did you put on latex gloves?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: Did you then attempt to put your leather gloves on?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, this is--

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: Did you then attempt to put your gloves on? Did you put on a pair of latex gloves and then put your Aris--

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: --gloves on?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: Did you encounter some difficulty in doing that?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object. This is leading and suggestive and all covered last time.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: And you told us that Mr.--that Mr. Simpson has an extra large glove hand; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: Does this appear to be the box that you--from which you removed latex gloves last week?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And looking at that box, does it indicate a size, as the size of the latex gloves contained in that box?

MR. RUBIN: Size large.

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

MR. DARDEN: Not extra large?

MR. RUBIN: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: I object, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: May I have one moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: Overruled.

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

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, if it pleases the Court, we would like to have Mr. Simpson try on the gloves marked 401 for identification.

MR. COCHRAN: I would like to question on voir dire, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you very kindly, your Honor. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good morning.

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN

MR. COCHRAN: Good morning, Mr. Rubin.

MR. RUBIN: Good morning, Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Rubin, sir, with regard to the Aris extra light gloves, those placed before you there, am I to understand that within the extra large glove there is some variance in size of the extra large gloves manufactured by Aris Isotoner?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Am I to understand, sir, that within the extra large category there are at least three different kinds; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: I've always considered it that way, yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And what are the three different areas?

MR. RUBIN: There would be a perfect size extra large, which would be the bench mark that every cutter should try to achieve in the manufacturing process. There would be an oversized extra large which would be a by-product of a cutter leaving a little bit too much excess leather in the pattern when he was actually producing the product and then there would be an undersized extra large which would be the exact reverse of the oversize where they really were trying to make an extra large glove out of a size large.

MR. COCHRAN: And so this variation was what you came to expect as an expert in the field within the extra large area; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: It was commercially acceptable, correct.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And so when you received a particular glove, you wouldn't know whether you had gotten--they all say "Extra large" on them, don't they?

MR. RUBIN: All three of those would.

MR. COCHRAN: They all say "Extra large" and you wouldn't know whether it was a perfect extra large or an oversize extra large or a snug extra large until you actually put it on your hand; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: I don't believe that the average person in America even knows what size they are, so unless your perception was that it felt good or that it fit well, the perception becomes reality.

MR. COCHRAN: I understand.

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, I object. This is improper voir dire. This is cross.

THE COURT: Overruled. Goes to foundation.

MR. COCHRAN: So that this whole area of trying on gloves and glove making is part science, part craft; would that be correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And so you would have to like put your hand in and feel it to make a determination; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And so you cannot say that the gloves before you there--which I guess are marked now 401, your Honor?

THE COURT: People's 401.

MR. COCHRAN: So you cannot say that these gloves before you, People's 401, were cut by the same person as the gloves we saw in this case, items 9 and items 37, can you?

MR. RUBIN: I cannot from the outside tell that.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And the--these gloves are made in the Philippines; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: In manila.

MR. COCHRAN: In manila?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: With regard to those gloves before you, items 401, you looked at the gloves; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I have.

MR. COCHRAN: May I approach, your Honor?

THE COURT: You may.

MR. COCHRAN: And with regard to--with regard to these particular gloves here, 401 for identification, we know, according to the label, that, first of all, there is an extra large on the outside, right?

MR. RUBIN: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: But that doesn't tell you whether they are a snug, oversize or perfect?

MR. RUBIN: It does not.

MR. COCHRAN: Right. And that regarding these Aris lights, we see a style number and a color; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And from looking at the outside there can you tell us when those particular gloves there, 401, were made?

MR. RUBIN: I cannot.

MR. COCHRAN: So--and with regard to those gloves there, 401, you can't tell us whether they are made at the same time or in the same year as the gloves that we have in this case that Mr. Simpson attempted to try on last Thursday, can you?

MR. RUBIN: I cannot.

MR. COCHRAN: As I understand and understood your testimony, did you tell us that the left glove of the gloves that were tried on last week, the so-called Bundy glove, that that left glove was now, at least according to your estimation, I believe you tried it on, was now perhaps a large or just a little bit larger than a large; is that right?

MR. RUBIN: That is what I said.

MR. COCHRAN: And that the right glove, the appearance--from appearances in your examination, was larger than the left but the left was the smaller of the two?

MR. RUBIN: It is difficult to calculate it, but it appeared that way from just having it on my hand briefly.

MR. COCHRAN: And Mr. Rubin, you can't tell us anything about the size of the gloves in this case back in June of 1994, can you?

MR. RUBIN: They were designed to be an extra large. I do not know the exact sizing as of June, 1994.

MR. COCHRAN: Are you aware and did you become aware today that the gloves in this case, items 9 and items 37, were measured by a Susan Brockbank of the Los Angeles Police Department on or about June 21st, 1994?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I am aware of that.

MR. COCHRAN: You became aware of that today?

MR. RUBIN: I believe I became aware last evening.

MR. COCHRAN: And would you agree that the relevant--well, strike that. With regard to the gloves that are before you now, items 401, you have not today, have you, compared the gloves before you with the gloves in evidence in this case, have you?

MR. RUBIN: I have not.

MR. COCHRAN: But you can tell us, as an expert, that the gloves that are in evidence are smaller than the gloves before you; isn't that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, they are.

MR. COCHRAN: For whatever reason they are smaller; isn't that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Now, counsel asked you some questions about this concept of shrinkage. Do you recall that?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And with regard to the gloves that you saw last week and the gloves in evidence here, you cannot tell this jury whether those gloves were shrunk in 1990, 1991, `92?

MR. DARDEN: Objection, this is not--

MR. COCHRAN: `93, `94, can you?

MR. RUBIN: No, I cannot.

MR. COCHRAN: And you cannot tell this jury the condition of the gloves in evidence as of June 12th, 1994; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: I cannot.

MR. COCHRAN: All you know is that there were measurements taken on June 21st, 1994, and the measurements and the appearance and your putting your hand in those gloves make you know they are substantially smaller than those gloves before you there, 401; isn't that correct?

MR. RUBIN: I would like to reserve judgment until I could see the other gloves next to these and I have not measured the other gloves myself, so I really can't say.

MR. COCHRAN: But you've already told us that you tried on the left glove. Do you recall that?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And you told us that it is now a large or a little more than large; isn't that correct?

MR. RUBIN: I believe that those gloves are definitely shorter but may not be that much different in the palm area.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Now, with regard to the shrinkage that counsel brought up, when gloves shrink, they shrink from north to south, don't they?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: That is one of your terms, is it not, north to south?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: What does that mean?

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, this is improper voir dire.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. COCHRAN: What does north to south mean? Would you show the jury?

MR. RUBIN: What it means is that in the manufacturing process the gloves are actually stretched over a pattern to create the length and then that piece of leather is then stretched to the width. What you have to do is get enough leather in width which when stretched north/south creates the exact perfect size with no excess letter on the edges. Pretty much, though, to get a size nine and a half extra large glove in this type of weight of leather, what you would have to do when you stretched it to the width, you would require an additional one and one-half inch which is called an allowance, so to get a perfect nine and a half, you would actually have to have 11 inches of leather in a square left to right and then when you went north to south you would come up to about 10 and 3/8, 10 and a half inches, and you would have a perfect extra large. And what happens is because it is cut to the width and stretched to the length, when it shrinks the glove will come down in length, but not so much down here in the body.

MR. COCHRAN: Not in width, is that what you are saying to us?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. With regard to gloves, such as the gloves in evidence here, they can be stretched--strike that. Once they've been shrinked--that is a terrible word--once they have been shrunk, they can--once they have been shrunk they can be brought back to their normal size by continual usage of people putting their hands in them; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: They cannot really come all the way back.

MR. COCHRAN: Some of the way back?

MR. RUBIN: A good portion, depending on how long they were wet, how they were dried, what temperature conditions, how much liquid of any type was absorbed into the leather, because these particular leathers are naked. In other words, these leathers can't be absorbed.

MR. COCHRAN: With regard to the gloves in this case, you have no knowledge of what if any liquid may have been on those gloves and how much, do you?

MR. RUBIN: I do not know, no.

MR. COCHRAN: With regard to gloves such as 401 and the gloves that Mr. Darden has here, those gloves, if a big--if a big person, such as these two gentlemen here, Messers. Bell and Stevens, puts their hands in some of these gloves, an extra large glove, they would tend to stretch those gloves, don't they?

MR. RUBIN: Not initially. They would have to wear them some time before they would actually stretch. They would have to open and close their hand quite a few times. This is what really stretches a glove. When you open and close your hand, your knuckles become quite broad. That is what creates the stretch.

MR. COCHRAN: For the record he was moving his hands up and down.

MR. COCHRAN: But this morning in this building you saw these gentleman try on gloves that you received yesterday from Aris?

MR. RUBIN: I saw them try on one pair of gloves.

THE COURT: I think we are beyond the scope.

MR. COCHRAN: All right, your Honor. May I have just a minute, your Honor? Thank you.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. COCHRAN: Now, with regard--thank you, your Honor. Just a couple more questions. Now, with regard to the extra large that is before you, is it correct that 99.5 percent--

MR. DARDEN: Objection, this is irrelevant.

MR. COCHRAN: --of all males in America--

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. COCHRAN: --are--may I finish the question, your Honor?

THE COURT: I overruled the objection.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor. Thank you.

MR. COCHRAN: Is it correct, sir, that 99.5 percent of all males in America could wear an extra large glove?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: That is expected, isn't it?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: In that pristine condition before you there--

MR. RUBIN: A perfect extra large. Very few people would be double XL in size, that would require a larger glove than an extra large. The gloves might fit tight on some, perfect on others, a little loose on others, but basically anybody that is smaller than an extra large in size is going to be able to get their hand in the gloves.

MR. COCHRAN: Like 99.5 percent of the population?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Male population, right?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you. May we approach, your Honor, just a moment?

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

(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

THE COURT: All right. We are over at the side bar. Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: You just said that once you gave me the voir dire opportunity that I could renew my objection. And just that the last question I asked, you know, I just fail to see, if they still want to go forward with it, how this becomes relevant. And I would just like to briefly state it, your Honor, if your Honor would allow me, that there are three different sizes within the extra large.

THE COURT: I heard the testimony.

MR. COCHRAN: Okay.

THE COURT: I heard the testimony.

MR. COCHRAN: That fits 99.5 percent and that he has already told your Honor, that the left glove, the Bundy glove, is down to almost a large size. I mean, there is a significant difference, for whatever reason, with regard to the gloves here, and so I think under the substantial similarity test you laid out the ground rules, but I would just renew my objection. But I don't think it is fair and that is the whole issue. I don't think it is a fair test, but we will see.

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Well, obviously the test is substantial similarity and I think the bottom line question is whether or not those gloves could have been worn by the Defendant, okay? Excuse me. Obviously they are extra large gloves. Obviously the Defendant's blood and the victim's blood are on those gloves and obviously those gloves were transported to the murder scene and they were used on the commission of that murder, okay? So obviously those gloves were used during the commission of the murder. They are both extra larges, that is the crime scene gloves and the gloves that we have here, and in fact these gloves may be a little smaller than those were originally. They may not be the exact same size, but that isn't the test, and the fact that they are not perfect extra larges, then that is to the Defendant's benefit. But in any event, we have clearly met our burden in terms of substantial similarity and I don't know why Mr. Cochran is so afraid to have this man put these gloves on. At some point we are going to have a picture of him with the gloves on, so hey, you know, why we are burning up all this paper?

THE COURT: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: I don't want to engage in anything of a personal nature. I'm just doing the best job I can for my client. All I'm saying, and counsel misses the point, last week I invited them and said that is precisely what you said, to put the gloves on. We saw what happened. What I'm talking about now is this example. What he misses is this demonstration here I'm saying is not substantial similarity, doesn't make any difference that 99.5 percent of all men in America could wear those pristine gloves there that are extra large no matter what size. That is the question. That is the relevant question. And so I don't think it makes any difference regarding, your Honor, the condition of the gloves in this case and that was the point I was making.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. DARDEN: I have an additional question.

THE COURT: What is that?

MR. DARDEN: Well, do you want to rule on the objection and then I can make--

THE COURT: All right. I'm going to overrule the objection. I will allow the trying on of the gloves.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Given that Mr. Cochran has pointed out that there is variance within the extra large gloves, I would ask that the Court instruct Mr. Cochran to surrender his pairs and I will surrender my pristine pair and let's have him try on all three.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. COCHRAN: These gloves--my objection is as we said before, these gloves--first of all, your Honor--well, obviously we will abide by whatever you say, but this is becoming close to silly just for them to redeem and recoup and they are not going to be able to recoup because this is not the same test. And the purpose for the pristine gloves which you asked us about which we complied and we didn't--we had people putting their hands in his gloves and I don't know what they have done and we have tried our gloves on also and that is unfair.

MR. DARDEN: I made the representation about the gloves. Why are you so afraid?

MR. COCHRAN: I am not afraid of anything.

MR. DARDEN: We have a pristine pair of gloves.

THE COURT: Well, the Court has a pristine pair of gloves which is now People's 401. The jury has heard Mr. Rubin's testimony and description of that and I will allow the use of that pair of gloves.

MR. COCHRAN: This pair?

THE COURT: This pair.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

(The following proceedings were held in open court:)

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: A few more questions.

DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. DARDEN

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, you did testify that you spoke to me in my office last night and this morning?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: When you came into the court this morning you spoke to some other lawyers, didn't you?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: Where were you when you spoke to those other lawyers?

MR. RUBIN: Right behind that partition.

MR. DARDEN: Over in the corner?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: And how many lawyers did you speak to in that corner?

MR. RUBIN: I believe it is four.

MR. DARDEN: And who were those lawyers?

MR. RUBIN: Mr. Cochran, Mr. Shapiro--

MR. SCHECK: Mr. Scheck.

MR. RUBIN: Mr. Scheck and Mr. Blasier.

MR. SHAPIRO: Also for the record Miss Filipe was also present from my office.

MR. RUBIN: I'm sorry.

MR. DARDEN: So you were in the corner of the courtroom with five Defense attorneys?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I was.

MR. DARDEN: For how long were you there?

MR. RUBIN: I think approximately fifteen minutes.

MR. DARDEN: Did they ask you a lot of questions?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, they did.

MR. DARDEN: Did you answer them?

MR. RUBIN: I answered them.

MR. DARDEN: May we proceed with the demonstration, your Honor?

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Rubin, the pair of gloves that you have in front of you, is there anything in them right now? Any cardboard stretching material, anything like that?

MR. RUBIN: Yes. There are some forming inserts in them.

THE COURT: All right. Would you remove those, please.

MR. RUBIN: (Witness complies.)

THE COURT: All right. Let me ask counsel to be seated. And Mr. Simpson, would you please step over to the podium. (Mr. Simpson complies.)

THE COURT: And Mr. Rubin, would you--you have removed the forming inserts?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

THE COURT: All right. And would you--I think we need to cut the string that is in between them. Can you pull those apart?

MR. RUBIN: (Witness complies.)

THE COURT: Thank you. Would you hand the right hand glove to Mr. Simpson, please.

MR. RUBIN: (Witness complies.)

MR. DARDEN: Could we have Mr. Simpson step back to the podium?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor--

THE COURT: No comments, counsel. I will direct it. And Mr. Simpson, would you please, however, stand at the podium.

(Mr. Simpson complies.)

THE COURT: Thank you. Turn to your right, please.

(Mr. Simpson complies.)

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Darden, would you please have a seat.

MR. DARDEN: I'm just trying to see the demonstration.

THE COURT: Counsel, be seated, please.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Rubin, would you give Mr. Simpson the left glove, please.

MR. RUBIN: (Witness complies.)

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Simpson, would you show your hands to the jury, please, front and back.

(Mr. Simpson complies.)

THE COURT: All right. Thank you, sir. And would you remove the gloves and give them back to Mr. Rubin, please.

(Mr. Simpson complies.)

MS. CLARK: Your Honor, may I request that Mr. Rubin feel the gloves on Mr. Simpson's hands?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, this is not her witness. I object.

THE COURT: Sustained. Mr. Rubin, would you retake the witness stand, please.

MR. RUBIN: (Witness complies.)

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, I didn't see what happened. Could you tell me what happened?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object. This is not important--objection, your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: Mr. Simpson--

MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of this question.

THE COURT: Sustained. Why don't you reask the question.

MR. RUBIN: --approached the podium.

MR. COCHRAN: Just a moment.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, could you describe for me what occurred, please, during that demonstration?

MR. RUBIN: Mr. Simpson approached the podium in front of the jury box and took the right glove from me and proceeded to put it on his right hand and then I handed him the left glove and he proceeded to put it on his left hand.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Did he have any difficulty.

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object to the form of that question. Calls for speculation.

THE COURT: You can ask him his opinion regarding the fit.

MR. DARDEN: Would you give us your opinion regarding the fit of the glove on Mr. Simpson's hands?

MR. RUBIN: I think they fit quite well.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And would you--

MR. RUBIN: And--this is an extra large glove. It was a little on the snug side, since these had never been tried on before, but basically he was able to get them over his hand tugging at them a little bit that you would normally do when you first try on a pair of gloves for the first time. And they appeared to fit him snug and tight, pretty much the way the gloves were designed.

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

MR. DARDEN: And you have indicated that these gloves are on the small size of extra large; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: I indicated that initially.

MR. COCHRAN: I object. That misstates the evidence, your Honor. That is not what he said.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

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

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, do those gloves fit the way they should fit when they are new?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: And with time would you expect those gloves to loosen up, that is, if the Defendant wore them for more than the brief moment he wore them here in front of the jury?

MR. RUBIN: They wouldn't change in two minutes, but over time, if someone were to move their hands back and forth, drive a car, do something with the gloves on, they gradually would get a little looser initially, yes.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Now, you told us last week that those gloves were not manufactured after 1992; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Umm, I was under the impression, according to Brenda Vemich, she testified earlier, that she, starting in 1992, started to receive merchandise that was not sewn in the same construction; however, it was considered the same style number.

MR. DARDEN: So between 1992 and `94 that would allow the owner of a pair of these gloves many opportunities to wear them and stretch them?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, that calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

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

MR. DARDEN: Thank you.

THE COURT: Mr. Cochran, anything further?

MR. COCHRAN: Yes. Just a very few brief questions, your Honor.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN

MR. COCHRAN: So what that demonstration by the Prosecution just showed us--

MR. DARDEN: I'm going to object to the form of this question.

MR. COCHRAN: I haven't finished the question yet, your Honor. May I?

THE COURT: Proceed.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you.

MR. COCHRAN: What that demonstration by the Prosecution just showed us is that Mr. Simpson would be like 99.5 percent of all males in America; is that correct, in putting the gloves on?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And you understand in this case the real question is whether or not the gloves that were found allegedly in this case would fit on Mr. Simpson? You understand that, do you?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I do.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And those are the gloves that we talked about last week; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And those are the gloves that you found, that the left glove is now maybe slightly bigger and larger; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, but I would like to reexamine them. If you really pinned me down, I would rather reexamine them and compare them to the gloves here or any other pair that is in the courtroom to give myself a more accurate statement as to exactly what size they are.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. But what you told us before was that you thought it was similar to a large; isn't that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: But in any event, you know they were smaller than these gloves, these new gloves that we got sent out here yesterday from back east; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: In length.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Is that right? You understand that that is your understanding?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: Right now, with regard to Miss Susan Brockbank, the lady from the Los Angeles Police Department that I asked you about--

MR. DARDEN: Objection, that exceeds direct.

THE COURT: Overruled. Rephrase the question.

MR. COCHRAN: Certainly.

MR. COCHRAN: With regard to your knowledge of the gloves having been measured by a representative of the Los Angeles Police Department on June 21st, 1994, how did you come by that knowledge?

MR. RUBIN: I was shown statistics regarding certain key measurements of the gloves.

MR. COCHRAN: And who showed you those statistics?

MR. RUBIN: Mr. Darden.

MR. COCHRAN: And that was in his office this morning?

MR. RUBIN: I believe it was last night.

MR. COCHRAN: Oh, I see. You met with Mr. Darden last night, too?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. COCHRAN: You flew in here last night at eight o'clock?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And then what time did you meet with Mr. Darden?

MR. RUBIN: Approximately quarter to 9:00.

MR. COCHRAN: How long did you meet with him at that time and where?

MR. RUBIN: Until approximately eleven o'clock.

MR. COCHRAN: So about two hours and fifteen minutes last night?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And was that meeting in this building?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, it was.

MR. COCHRAN: And then did you meet with him after that or did you go home at that point or go someplace at that point?

MR. RUBIN: I didn't go out at that point.

MR. COCHRAN: Okay. And then you came back this morning?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. COCHRAN: And you met with Mr. Darden again?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. COCHRAN: What time did you start meeting with him this morning?

MR. RUBIN: A little after 8:00.

MR. COCHRAN: How long did you meet with him?

MR. RUBIN: Until approximately 10 minutes before 10:00.

MR. COCHRAN: So you met with him then almost two hours more?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: So you came back here last night at about eight o'clock and since that time you met with Mr. Darden for approximately four hours; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: I think it was less than that.

MR. COCHRAN: A little less? A little bit less?

MR. RUBIN: Three and a half hours.

MR. COCHRAN: During that period of time were there any other Deputy District Attorneys present?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: Who were they?

MR. RUBIN: David Wooden, Alan--

MR. COCHRAN: This gentleman here?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: With the--I'm sorry, the gentleman with this colorful tie, a red color?

MR. RUBIN: Alan, Anthony, another gentleman. There were people coming in and out.

MR. COCHRAN: The back row people here, you met with all of those people?

MR. RUBIN: The back row?

MR. COCHRAN: When you say "Alan," were you talking about somebody not here?

MR. RUBIN: Umm, correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Alan Yochelson?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, Alan Yochelson.

MR. COCHRAN: He is a Deputy District Attorney?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Who else?

MR. RUBIN: Marcia Clark.

MR. COCHRAN: Miss Clark. Last night and this morning?

MR. RUBIN: Last night only.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Not this morning. It was too early for her?

MR. RUBIN: Not this morning.

MS. CLARK: I knew that was going to happen.

MR. COCHRAN: Only kidding, your Honor.

MR. COCHRAN: Who else did you meet with?

MR. RUBIN: Detective Stevens and Bell.

MR. COCHRAN: You met with them and that is when you saw them try on one of the gloves that Mr. Darden had there; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And you measured their hands, did you?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Now, you were asked to measure Mr. Simpson's hands this morning outside the presence of this jury; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I was.

MR. COCHRAN: You don't have any objection to measuring his hands?

MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor.

THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained.

MR. COCHRAN: Well, let me see if I can ask it another way, your Honor.

MR. COCHRAN: Do you have a problem with measuring Mr. Simpson's hands?

MR. DARDEN: Same objection.

THE COURT: Sustained. The measurement is what is the issue.

MR. COCHRAN: All right, your Honor.

MR. COCHRAN: You measured Mr. Simpson's hands here in this court; is that right?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. COCHRAN: And we were all present at the time?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And that was before the jury came in; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Now, so you met with Mr. Darden three and a half hours and you met with us about fifteen minutes; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Approximately.

MR. COCHRAN: And during the last part of our meeting, when we were over in this corner, who came and stood by us as we were having the meeting, as we were talking?

MR. RUBIN: Mr. Darden.

MR. COCHRAN: Hurrying us up; isn't that correct? Do you remember that?

MR. RUBIN: I can't--I don't know what Mr. Darden was thinking at the time.

MR. COCHRAN: Well, what--

MR. RUBIN: He did come over.

MR. COCHRAN: What did he say when he came over?

MR. RUBIN: (No audible response.)

MR. COCHRAN: Hurry up?

MR. RUBIN: I don't remember his exact words.

MR. COCHRAN: You saw him standing there, didn't you?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. COCHRAN: While we were talking, right?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Just another minute, your Honor. I am mindful of the time.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. COCHRAN: Just a couple more questions, your Honor. I can finish him so he can hopefully go back to New York.

MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Rubin, sir, on this subject of shrinkage, you have no knowledge of how much liquid was on either of the gloves involved in this case, items 9 or item 37, do you?

MR. RUBIN: I do not.

MR. COCHRAN: You would expect, however, would you, sir, that of those two gloves, 9 and 37, the one with the most liquid would tend to shrink more than the one with less liquid? Is that a reasonable statement?

MR. DARDEN: Objection. That calls for speculation.

MR. COCHRAN: I'm asking him.

THE COURT: Overruled. Do you know?

MR. RUBIN: If--if both gloves were identical to start, you have to go on that assumption, that they were perfectly identical, and that they are a pair and that they were cut from the same skin, the glove with more liquid absorbed into it would shrink more than the glove with less.

MR. COCHRAN: But we know these gloves aren't perfect, don't we?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you very kindly, your Honor. I have nothing further of this witness.

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: About five minutes, your Honor.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN

MR. DARDEN: When you met with the lawyers over in the corner of the courtroom, you met with Mr. Scheck, right?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: You understand he is a DNA expert, don't you?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object to that.

THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: Do you know why you met with Mr. Scheck as well as the other lawyers?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, that is immaterial.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: Now, Mr. Cochran asked you whether or not 95 percent of the population could fit their hands into an extra large?

MR. COCHRAN: Misstates the evidence, your Honor; 99 percent.

THE COURT: Overruled. 99.

MR. DARDEN: 99 percent?

MR. COCHRAN: 99.5.

MR. DARDEN: 99.6 percent, how about that?

MR. RUBIN: He discussed that point.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. But how many people with size small hands buy extra large gloves?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object. That is irrelevant and immaterial, your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: Nobody that I would think of.

MR. DARDEN: And you met last night with me in my office; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: And you know I don't get paid extra to meet with you that late at night?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, he is testifying. I object. Move to strike.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: But you saw Mr. Bell for a few moments yesterday?

MR. RUBIN: No, I did not.

MR. DARDEN: You didn't see him at all yesterday?

MR. RUBIN: No.

MR. DARDEN: You saw Mr. Stevens for a few moments yesterday?

MR. RUBIN: No, I did not.

MR. DARDEN: You didn't see him at all? How about the gentleman here, Mr. Escobar, did you see him yesterday?

MR. RUBIN: No, I did not.

MR. DARDEN: Did you see him this morning?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: What was he doing when you saw him?

MR. COCHRAN: Irrelevant and immaterial, your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: I'm not exactly sure what he was doing. To me I don't think he was doing anything.

MR. DARDEN: You saw Mr. Wooden last night; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: And you saw Mr. Wooden this morning?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: He works for me; is that right?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. And you saw Marcia Clark last night?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I did.

MR. DARDEN: How long did you see her?

MR. RUBIN: Approximately thirty minutes.

MR. DARDEN: All right. So the person you met with primarily last night then was me; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: Now, you also testified, in response to Mr. Cochran's questions, that you measured the Defendant's hands this morning?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: And that was after the Court ordered him to submit to a measurement; is that correct?

MR. COCHRAN: I object to the form "Order him."

THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: In response to Mr. Cochran's question you testified that the demonstration showed that the Defendant could wear gloves that 99.5 percent of the population could wear?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: Is that right?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: But it also showed that he could have worn the gloves at Bundy and Rockingham?

MR. COCHRAN: I object. Misleading and suggestive, your Honor.

THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.

MR. DARDEN: Did the demonstration indicate to you at all that he would wear the gloves at Bundy and Rockingham?

MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of that question, your Honor, without a further foundation.

THE COURT: I will sustain the objection because it is--contains multiple components.

MR. DARDEN: In any event, the gloves he tried on today are extra large just as the Bundy and Rockingham gloves apparently are; is that correct?

MR. COCHRAN: Object to the form of that question, your Honor. That is not what he said.

THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.

MR. DARDEN: Is the glove at Bundy an extra large?

MR. RUBIN: I can confirm the left hand glove was definitely an extra large when it was produced.

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

MR. DARDEN: But the Rockingham glove you are not so sure of?

MR. RUBIN: I would like the opportunity to inspect it.

MR. DARDEN: How long will that take?

MR. RUBIN: Two minutes.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. What will you be required to do to inspect this glove?

MR. RUBIN: To really confirm that it was an extra large?

MR. DARDEN: Yes.

MR. RUBIN: I would actually have to somehow look through either the hole in the glove or the hole in the lining or just take the lining slightly away from the glove and get the thumb pushed up so I could see the markings as to who was the cutter, in what sequence it was made and what size it actually was produced as.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. All of that information will be contained inside the glove do you expect?

MR. RUBIN: Inside the thumb.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Now, is it possible for that kind of information to fade with wear and with time?

MR. RUBIN: It could.

MR. DARDEN: Do you require a knife or some other item to do the examination?

MR. RUBIN: I don't think so initially.

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, may I hand the witness 164-A, LAPD item 9?

THE COURT: Do you want any paper up there?

MR. DARDEN: Yes.

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

MR. DARDEN: Don't take them out yet, Mr. Rubin.

THE COURT: I think there is a pad right--Mr. Darden, right here to the left of the witness stand there should be a pad of paper there.

(Brief pause.)

MR. DARDEN: How about a small piece? Is this big enough?

(Brief pause.)

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, before he does that, if I can pose another question.

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, Mr. Stevens and Mr. Bell never tried on People's 401-A; is that correct--People's 401?

MR. RUBIN: I believe they were given to me by Judge Ito.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. You don't know where these gloves came from?

MR. RUBIN: I believe earlier it was stated that they were flown here federal express yesterday from the manufacturer.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Let the record reflect that Mr. Rubin has before him the glove. And Mr. Darden, that is People's exhibit which?

MR. COCHRAN: May I approach, your Honor?

THE COURT: You may.

MR. DARDEN: 164-A.

(Brief pause.)

MR. RUBIN: This glove is--was manufactured as an extra large.

THE COURT: How can you tell that?

MR. RUBIN: (Indicating). It actually--

MR. DARDEN: It actually what?

MR. RUBIN: It has the markings "Extra large" in it.

MR. DARDEN: Does it also have the cutter's number?

MR. RUBIN: Those--those particular numbers are not here at this point in time.

MR. DARDEN: And what does that indicate to you?

MR. RUBIN: It indicates to me that when they glove was manufactured, it was manufactured as an extra large.

MR. DARDEN: Well, the fact that the cutter's number is not there, can you offer an explanation as to why the cutter's number isn't apparent?

MR. RUBIN: I'm not a hundred percent sure.

MR. DARDEN: How sure are you?

MR. COCHRAN: I object, your Honor. Calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: I'm sorry, I found in another location--I'm sorry--I now have the cutter number. It was in another location.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. What is that number?

MR. RUBIN: 359.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. Now, is there something called a sequence number?

MR. RUBIN: Yes. It is a 9.

MR. DARDEN: What exactly is a sequence number?

MR. RUBIN: In the manufacturing process they normally would give a cutter approximately a hundred feet of leather which would make around thirty pair of gloves and they would actually chart the process in which the first glove he made, the second glove he made, the third glove he made, et cetera, and that is how they keep track of the particular product.

MR. DARDEN: I'm going to ask you to replace that glove back into the bag.

MR. RUBIN: (Witness complies.)

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, may I have Mr. Rubin take a look at People's 77?

THE COURT: Yes. And would you retrieve the other--all right. Thank you.

MR. DARDEN: I'm going to ask you, Mr. Rubin, to locate the cutter number, sizing number.

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

MR. DARDEN: I'm going to ask you to locate the sequence number, the cutter's number and the sizing stamp inside the glove, Mr. Rubin.

THE COURT: All right. While he is doing that, let's allow the court reporter to change paper so don't ask any more questions.

MS. CLARK: Could we approach while we are doing that, your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

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

(The following proceedings were held in open court:)

THE COURT: All right.

MR. DARDEN: I'm sorry, is Mr. Cochran interviewing the witness in front of the jury?

MR. COCHRAN: Just looking at a glove.

THE COURT: Mr. Darden, ask your next question, please.

MR. DARDEN: Thank you.

THE COURT: You are welcome, sir.

MR. COCHRAN: We are going to move over in the corner.

THE COURT: All right, counsel, that is enough.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor.

MR. DARDEN: You told us that the first glove was XL cutter 359 sequence 9; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: And the second glove?

MR. RUBIN: It is the same. This is a pair.

MR. DARDEN: This is a pair. Okay. That is all.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Cochran, do you have any further questions for Mr. Rubin?

MR. COCHRAN: Yes, I do, your Honor.

RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN

MR. COCHRAN: With regard to these gloves now that we are talking about, the ones you have in your hand now, you said that if you looked at the left glove you would be able to give the Court and jury some indication as to whether or not you believe that the left glove, or the glove allegedly found at Bundy, was closer to a large or a little bit larger than a large glove now?

MR. RUBIN: I'm trying to get the lining back in. Once I get the lining back in, I think I might be able to figure that out.

MR. COCHRAN: Sure, sir.

(Brief pause.)

MR. COCHRAN: You have now--Mr. Rubin, sir, you have now had occasion to examine and try on that left glove. Is it your opinion that that left glove, the left glove allegedly found at Bundy, is smaller than the gloves that we had here in court this morning, items 401?

MR. RUBIN: In the finger length, yes, and in the actual palm, I believe this is just slightly smaller than the gloves that we had on here today.

MR. COCHRAN: Slightly smaller in the palm and in the finger length. How much in the finger length are they smaller? Can you give us an estimate, sir?

MR. RUBIN: It appears a half-inch or better at this point.

MR. COCHRAN: A half-inch or better?

MR. RUBIN: I could--if I had a tape measure, if I could borrow the tape measure I could tell you.

MR. COCHRAN: May I, your Honor?

THE COURT: You may.

(Brief pause.)

MR. RUBIN: This is measuring approximately 9 and 3/8. The glove that was on the table before measured 10.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. So it would be about 5/8?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: 5/8 smaller? This glove is 5/8 smaller; is that correct?

MR. RUBIN: Shorter.

MR. COCHRAN: Shorter. You measured the length, right, north and south?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Okay. And given that 5/8 difference, would that put it in the range, as you have indicated, it may be large to extra large, smaller than the regular extra large, right?

MR. RUBIN: As is, this is smaller than the conventional extra large, yes.

MR. COCHRAN: So you were right all along, right?

MR. RUBIN: I think I was somewhat correct.

MR. COCHRAN: But we wanted to just prove it. You will also notice this particular glove, the left glove. As you look at that glove, there is not much in the way of liquid. Look first at the--

MR. DARDEN: Objection. That is irrelevant a year later.

THE COURT: Do you want to rephrase the question.

MR. COCHRAN: Do you see much in the way of liquid on this left glove? And I want you to look first at the fingers here.

THE COURT: I think does he see evidence of liquid having been there.

MR. COCHRAN: Yes. Let me phrase it appropriately, your Honor.

MR. COCHRAN: Do you see evidence of liquid having been there in the last--in the recent past? And look specifically at the gloves--at the fingers of the glove.

MR. RUBIN: Something--something was here.

MR. COCHRAN: Uh-huh.

MR. RUBIN: And the reason I can confirm that is if you notice the grain of the leather has shrunken somewhat compared to the other gloves that have been shown that are new and that is what really happened when the shrinkage occurred, the grain has been pulled up somewhat.

MR. COCHRAN: All right.

MR. RUBIN: If you notice there is a little more shrinkage in the fingers than maybe down here, (Indicating).

MR. COCHRAN: Something was there but you can't tell us what that something was, can you?

MR. RUBIN: I cannot.

MR. COCHRAN: In fact, you don't see any spots or anything on the fingers of this glove, do you?

MR. DARDEN: Objection, that is irrelevant.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: I do not see anything--any spots from here up, (Indicating).

MR. COCHRAN: All right.

THE COURT: Indicating from the fingers up.

MR. COCHRAN: He is talking about midway I guess the glove, your Honor?

MR. RUBIN: Right.

MR. COCHRAN: If you turn it over, you find pretty much the same thing on the other side; is that correct, sir?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: In that area you don't see any spots, you don't see any real discoloration, do you?

MR. RUBIN: I do not.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Now, however, with regard to this glove, you--it is possible, is it not, to find some--some spots or some discoloration in the area near the--

MR. RUBIN: The vent in the vent.

MR. COCHRAN: Isn't that correct?

MR. DARDEN: Objection to the form of the question.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. COCHRAN: It is possibly visually you can do that, can't you?

MR. RUBIN: I can see spots.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And this comparing and looking at the two items--and I will be glad to bring back the right glove for you--there appear to be more spots and more residue on the right glove than on the left glove; isn't that correct?

MR. RUBIN: I would like to see.

MR. DARDEN: Your Honor, beyond the witness' expertise.

MR. COCHRAN: May I have this, your Honor?

THE COURT: You may. But what he sees on the glove I don't think--unless it goes to the issue of shrinkage directly--

MR. COCHRAN: May I ask a question, your Honor?

THE COURT: You may.

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

MR. COCHRAN: I'm going to place before you the right glove--and I guess we should change now, please.

THE COURT: At this point does anybody anticipate testing these gloves any further?

MR. DARDEN: We got everything we need from them, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: Is the answer no, your Honor?

THE COURT: The answer is no.

MR. COCHRAN: Move to strike his other remark.

THE COURT: But Mr. Rubin, just for your own safety, why don't you use the gloves.

MR. RUBIN: Okay.

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: And Mr. Cochran, would you keep in mind--

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you. I will move back.

MR. COCHRAN: With regard to this glove, the alleged right glove, which was LAPD no. 9, I don't know the exhibit number, your Honor, does this glove appear to have more of a substance on the leather--

MR. RUBIN: Yes, it does.

MR. COCHRAN: --than the left glove? That is obvious, is it not?

MR. RUBIN: Very much so.

MR. COCHRAN: And with regard to those two gloves, would you have expected that the glove on the right, that seems to have more residue of some sort of a liquid, would have shrunk more than the glove on the left, the glove found allegedly at Bundy?

MR. DARDEN: That calls for speculation, your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I would.

MR. COCHRAN: You would expect that? All right. Now, also with regard to the left glove, do you see any cuts on the left glove specifically in the area of this middle finger here, (Indicating)? Do you see any cuts?

MR. RUBIN: I do not.

MR. COCHRAN: Hum?

MR. RUBIN: I do not.

MR. COCHRAN: You have had occasion to look on the outside and the inside, have you not?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, I have.

MR. COCHRAN: You saw this cut, right?

MR. RUBIN: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Now, let's turn over the right glove again if we can. This--in the palm of the right glove here, it appears to have--are those wear marks? I think we talked about that before.

MR. RUBIN: I can't determine that.

MR. COCHRAN: Can't tell whether that was just worn as opposed to anything else?

MR. RUBIN: (No audible response.)

MR. COCHRAN: Does this right glove seem to be more worn as you look at it?

MR. RUBIN: It definitely seems to be more worn.

MR. COCHRAN: Than the left glove?

MR. RUBIN: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: It is possible these are wear spots on this glove; isn't that correct, as an expert?

MR. DARDEN: That calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: While it is definitely possible and it is definitely true that this is a pair, I'm actually somewhat surprised that this glove is worn to this level and this one isn't, (Indicating).

MR. COCHRAN: It appears that the right glove is worn a lot more than the left glove, right?

MR. RUBIN: It appears that.

MR. COCHRAN: You were asked some questions about people and their buying patterns in buying gloves. People don't usually buy gloves that fit, do they?

MR. DARDEN: Objection, that is vague.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: Men generally do not generally buy gloves.

MR. COCHRAN: Does that answer my question?

MR. RUBIN: Well, eighty percent of the gloves.

MR. COCHRAN: Let me ask you a question. Men don't generally buy gloves?

MR. RUBIN: They do not.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. But if men--I guess men do buy gloves sometimes and if they buy gloves they generally buy gloves that fit, don't they?

MR. RUBIN: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Because as a former salesperson, that is the salesperson's job, to get the person a pair of gloves that fit; isn't that correct?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: You described for us how you put the gloves on and move them around and see if they are snug or whatever and you make a judgment, right?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: If you had a pair of gloves that didn't fit, you would get rid of them? Isn't that normal?

MR. DARDEN: Objection, that is speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. COCHRAN: Isn't that right?

MR. RUBIN: I think the first thing you do is return them.

MR. COCHRAN: Return them or get rid of them, right? If they don't fit they are not worth anything to you, are they?

MR. RUBIN: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Now, you have no knowledge of the condition of those two gloves before you, items 9 and 37, on June 12th, 1994, do you?

THE COURT: I think that is the third time I've heard this question this morning.

MR. COCHRAN: Foundational.

MR. DARDEN: This is the third time I would like to object to it.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. COCHRAN: It was foundational.

MR. COCHRAN: But with regard to that, you have no knowledge of at what point the items before you were shrunk, if they were shrunk at any time?

MR. DARDEN: Objection.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. COCHRAN: It is a question.

MR. RUBIN: I do not.

MR. COCHRAN: And when you talked to Mr. Darden on all these occasions, did he show you some charts that had been drawn by the LAPD back on June 21st, 1994, with the actual measurements of those two gloves there before you?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, he did.

MR. COCHRAN: And so you saw that those--from those charts that the actual fingers had actually been measured back on June 21st, right?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And how long did you get have occasion to study those particular charts that he gave you?

MR. RUBIN: Just a moment.

THE COURT: All right. Anything else, counsel?

MR. COCHRAN: May I have just a second, your Honor?

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

MR. COCHRAN: Nothing further, your Honor.

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

MR. DARDEN: Just a few, your Honor.

FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN

MR. DARDEN: Mr. Rubin, you testified a moment ago that there is more substance on the right glove?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. That would be item 9, the Rockingham glove for the record, your Honor.

THE COURT: The right glove?

MR. RUBIN: The right glove, that's correct.

MR. DARDEN: And the fact that there is more substance on the Rockingham glove, that is consistent then with that glove having been--

MR. COCHRAN: Object to this, your Honor.

THE COURT: Overruled so far.

MR. DARDEN: Is that consistent with that glove with having been saturated in more liquid than the left glove?

MR. COCHRAN: Object. Calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: I'm not a hundred percent sure I understand the question. You want me to tell you that--

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object to anything further at this point.

THE COURT: Overruled. He can ask for clarification.

MR. RUBIN: You want me to tell you what the effect of the excessive substance on the right glove did to the glove in comparison to the left glove?

MR. DARDEN: No. All I want to know, was there more substance on the right glove?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, there is.

MR. DARDEN: Does that mean that the right glove absorbed more substance than the left glove?

MR. COCHRAN: Calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: Do you know? Can you tell us whether or not the right glove absorbed more--

MR. COCHRAN: Calls for speculation.

MR. DARDEN: He asked the same question.

MR. RUBIN: It appears that way.

MR. DARDEN: You are not--strike that.

MR. DARDEN: You didn't watch the Coroner's testimony in this case, did you?

MR. RUBIN: No, I did not.

MR. DARDEN: So you don't which hand he says the killer used?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, I object. This is irrelevant and immaterial and beyond the scope.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: You also told us that there is no cut on a finger on the left glove?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: That would be the Bundy glove, your Honor.

THE COURT: Yes.

MR. DARDEN: Are you aware that that glove was found at the scene at Bundy?

MR. COCHRAN: Object to this, your Honor. Object to the form.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. RUBIN: I am since I arrived here.

MR. DARDEN: Okay.

MR. DARDEN: You also indicated that the right-handed glove had more wear and tear on it, apparently?

MR. RUBIN: Most definitely.

MR. DARDEN: Okay. That is than the left glove?

MR. RUBIN: Excuse me.

MR. DARDEN: It has more wear and tear than the left glove?

MR. RUBIN: Definitely.

MR. DARDEN: And having that information, does that indicate to you, give you any indication as to whether or not the person who owned those gloves was right-handed or left-handed?

MR. RUBIN: I can't determine that.

MR. DARDEN: You also told us that women usually buy gloves?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: They usually buy mens gloves?

MR. RUBIN: That's correct.

MR. DARDEN: Do they usually get the right size?

MR. COCHRAN: Object. That calls for speculation, your Honor.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: Does it happen that women, when they buy gloves for their men, don't get the right size?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, that calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained. I don't think we need a glove expert to tell us about shopping.

MR. DARDEN: I have two diagrams, your Honor. May they be marked 402-A and B?

THE COURT: All right. 402-A and B.

MR. COCHRAN: May I see it, your Honor?

THE COURT: Yes.

(Peo's 402-A & b for id = diagrams)

MR. DARDEN: May the record reflect that I have indicated 402-A and b in the upper right-hand corner?

THE COURT: Noted. And would you show those to Mr. Cochran, please.

(Brief pause.)

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

THE COURT: Show them to Mr. Cochran.

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

MR. DARDEN: Showing you what has been marked 402-A and B, are these the two diagrams you saw in my office?

MR. RUBIN: Yes, they are.

MR. DARDEN: And those diagrams indicate the amount of shrinkage to the Rockingham and Bundy gloves; is that correct?

MR. COCHRAN: Your Honor, the diagrams speak for themselves and I object.

THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question.

MR. DARDEN: Do you know what is depicted on those documents?

MR. RUBIN: Excuse me?

MR. COCHRAN: Hearsay, your Honor. No foundation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

MR. DARDEN: Throw them on the elmo. Can I throw then on the elmo?

THE COURT: Counsel, let me see you at side bar with the reporter.

(The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

THE COURT: We are over at the side bar. We've got a foundational problem with those charts.

MR. COCHRAN: Brockbank.

MR. DARDEN: I was objecting to those types of questions relative to those charts when he was asking questions and they were allowed.

MR. COCHRAN: But that--I did not bring those charts out and the Court had me rephrase it. He knows that. Throw them up on the elmo?

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

MR. DARDEN: Okay. I'm sorry, were you moaning again?

THE COURT: You know--wait a minute. I've about had enough of this between the two of you.

MR. DARDEN: He started it, your Honor.

THE COURT: You are both baiting each other. You both violated the Court's order. 250 bucks both of you today.

MR. DARDEN: I am very short today, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. I've had enough of this. All right. You've got a foundational problem. I will sustain the objection.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you, your Honor.

(The following proceedings were held in open court:)

THE COURT: Thank you, counsel. Proceed.

MR. DARDEN: I have nothing further.

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Cochran?

MR. COCHRAN: One second, your Honor.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

MR. DARDEN: Can I have one moment, your Honor?

THE COURT: Certainly.

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

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

MR. COCHRAN: Can I ask one last question, your Honor?

THE COURT: One.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you.

FURTHER RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN

MR. COCHRAN: Mr. Rubin, with regard to the Aris light gloves there that are supposed to be a light--a snug fit--

MR. DARDEN: Objection. This exceeds direct.

THE COURT: Overruled.

MR. COCHRAN: It is very difficult, is it not, to get a snug fitting pair of those Aris light gloves off of one's hands once they are fitted on your hands; isn't that correct?

MR. DARDEN: Objection, your Honor, the jury saw the demonstration.

THE COURT: Overruled. He can tell us about what it was designed to do.

MR. RUBIN: These gloves, as well as most fine dress gloves, come off easiest when the hand is extended and the thumb is tucked in toward the hand to make the glove slide up easier. Any movement of the thumb upwards would restrict going on or off, obviously, and then any cupping of the fingers would restrict the glove coming off easily.

MR. COCHRAN: Thank you very kindly, your Honor.

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

THE COURT: All right. Mr. Rubin, thank you, sir. All right. You are excused.

MR. RUBIN: Thank you.

THE COURT: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, when we scheduled the testimony for today, it was my anticipation that we would just have a short session this morning and I made plans to take my staff out to lunch. I'm sure you will not be surprised to learn that Mrs. Robertson has been voted the Superior Court employee of the quarter. I'm sure that comes as no surprise to you.

(Applause, applause, applause.)

THE COURT: And also one of our court reporters, today is her birthday, and so we were going to go out to lunch. I would like to finish the next two quick witnesses so we can go out and do that. But anybody need to take a comfort break? We will do that right now. Okay. Let's take a five-minute comfort break and we will finish the two witnesses. All right.

(Recess.)

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21, 1995 12:45 P.M.

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

APPEARANCES: (Appearances as heretofore noted.)

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

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

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

THE COURT: All right. Back on the record. Let's have the jury, please.

MR. COCHRAN: Can I approach?

THE COURT: Mr. Darden.

(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. All right. The record should reflect we've been rejoined by all of our jury members. And the People may call their next witness.

MS. CLARK: Thank you very much, your Honor. Let me thank the Court and the ladies and gentlemen of the jury for allowing us to go through the noon hour. People call Miss Lu Ellen Robertson.

THE COURT: All right. Miss Robertson, come forward, please.

Lu Ellen Robertson, called as a witness by the People, was sworn and testified as follows:

THE COURT: Please raise your right hand and face the clerk.

THE CLERK: You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this court, shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes, I do.

THE CLERK: Please have a seat in the witness stand and state and spell your first and last names for the record.

MS. ROBERTSON: Lu Ellen Robertson.

THE COURT: And would you spell that for us, please.

MS. ROBERTSON: L-u capital e-l-l-e-n, last name r-o-b-e-r-t-s-o-n.

THE COURT: All right. Thank you, ma'am. Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY Ms. CLARK

MS. CLARK: Miss Robertson, would you please tell us what you do for a living?

MS. ROBERTSON: I am one of the custodian of records for air touch cellular.

MS. CLARK: And what is air touch cellular?

MS. ROBERTSON: We are a provider of cellular services.

MS. CLARK: And when you say "Cellular services," is that a phone company of some kind?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes. Mobile phone cellular service.

MS. CLARK: Does that company service telephones that are completely portable only or does it also service telephones that are affixed in a car?

MS. ROBERTSON: Three different types of phones; portable, completely portable, transportable and also installed in the car.

MS. CLARK: What do you mean by "Transportable"?

MS. ROBERTSON: It can be either plugged into the car or you can take it with you, hang it over your shoulder.

MS. CLARK: And you service all three kinds?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Is there any way that you can tell by looking at someone's bill, phone bill whether the phone is portable completely, that is, you just take it anywhere and use it, or transportable, that means plugged into a car or taken out of the car or affixed in a car?

MS. ROBERTSON: On the phone bill, no.

MS. CLARK: Is there some other record you have that does indicate that?

MS. ROBERTSON: The manufacturer can usually tell.

MS. CLARK: But your company can't tell that?

MS. ROBERTSON: No.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us, sir--ma'am, what are your duties?

MS. ROBERTSON: Mainly, my main duties are to respond to court orders and search warrants, subpoenas, any kind of request for customer information.

MS. CLARK: Now, are you--do you have some expertise in the interpretation of the phone records that your company generates?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes. I am familiar with the billing that our company generates.

MS. CLARK: And the records that are generated, that is internally in your company as well as the bills that go out to customers, are those records that are maintained and kept in the normal course of business?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And are they filled out in the normal course of business at or near the time of the call being made?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: We have a chart. That's all right. People's next in order, your Honor, People's 404 would that be?

THE CLERK: 403.

THE COURT: 403.

MS. CLARK: 403? Thank you.

(Peo's 403 for id = chart)

THE COURT: All right. This is a chart?

MS. CLARK: I'm sorry, your Honor. It is a chart entitled "Defendant's cell phone calls for the night of June the 12th, 1994," and it bears an enlargement of one page of the phone bill for the Defendant.

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

MS. CLARK: If I may, your Honor, I'm going to ask to put it, locate it centrally so the jurors can see it.

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Mr. Escobar is assisting me.

THE COURT: Noted. Thank you.

MS. CLARK: Have you been able to see this, Miss Robertson?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, the board that is now in front of the jury, does it--what does it depict?

MS. ROBERTSON: Well, I personally can't see it right now.

MS. CLARK: Want to step down and look?

MS. ROBERTSON: I have a copy of what you've got there.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Why don't you take the copy you have and step down and look at the chart and tell us if the chart shows an accurate and true copy of the record that your company generates.

MS. ROBERTSON: (The witness complies.) Yes.

MS. CLARK: Go ahead. You can have a seat now.

(The witness complies.)

THE COURT: Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: Now, Miss Robertson, let me ask you a couple of preliminary questions. First of all, what is the record marked on this chart, 403?

MS. ROBERTSON: This is a copy of the 12th page for the billing date June 15th, 1994 for mobile phone number (310) 613-3232.

MS. CLARK: And to whom is that number registered?

MS. ROBERTSON: Our records indicate that the account was assigned to O.J. Simpson.

MS. CLARK: And with respect to the date of June the 12th--well, let me ask you more generally. On your phone bills, including the one now marked as People's 403, is there certain information generated concerning the nature of each call made?

MS. ROBERTSON: Each call is registered on the billing statement with the date of the call, the time, the location to which the call was made or what type of call it was, the number that was dialed, any features involved with that call such as call forwarding, the duration of the call, what we charge and some summary information also.

MS. CLARK: All right. I'm going to go through the bill that's now in front of the jury and I'm going to ask you with respect to certain entries for this phone bill for the Defendant what each of the entries means. I'm going to take as my first example, there's a phone call on June the 12th at--and that seems--it's under the date?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, do these bills register every phone call made from the cellular phone?

MS. ROBERTSON: Some calls never make it to the bill.

MS. CLARK: For the purpose of privacy of some of the numbers, we're going to make sure that all of these numbers have been changed. I believe they have.

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

(Brief pause.)

THE COURT: All right. Proceed. Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: All right. So is--every call is not registered on the bill?

MS. ROBERTSON: Some calls are--never even make it into the cellular system because of one reason or another, and so they never get processed and end up on the billing statement.

MS. CLARK: How does that happen?

MS. ROBERTSON: What we call call blocking. Maybe there's too many calls taking place near a certain cell site and it may not make it. You get a fast busy signal.

MS. CLARK: If the cell site is busy?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Okay. But when the actual phone--when the phone being called--let me make this clear. When the cell phone is used to place a call, the number is dialed and the phone rings. Will it then register on the bill?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, with respect to June the 12th, after that, there is a column entitled "Time." Does that reflect the time at which the call was made?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Is that accurate?

MS. ROBERTSON: To the best of our knowledge, it's accurate.

MS. CLARK: And how is that time registered? Is there a computer or something to register that?

MS. ROBERTSON: There's a timer in our switching equipment that is set, and that's the time that's recorded when the call's made.

MS. CLARK: There's a call indicated here at 2:18 P.M. and then the next column, it says, "To-from location"?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And what does that mean?

MS. ROBERTSON: This was a call that was placed to a number that is listed in the west Los Angeles exchange.

MS. CLARK: Does that indicate the location to which the call is made?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And then after that, it says "Number." And what does that indicate?

MS. ROBERTSON: Indicates the number dialed.

MS. CLARK: And at 2:18 P.M. on June the 12th, the number (310) 826-0403 was called?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: After that, there's a column that is indicated as "Feat," f-e-a-t?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And what is that?

MS. ROBERTSON: It's short for "Feature."

MS. CLARK: What does that mean?

MS. ROBERTSON: It could include a feature, maybe call forwarding or call waiting or three-way calling. Just a feature that might have been used with that call.

MS. CLARK: In the instance of the call placed to 826-0403, there is no feature listed, correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: Which means what?

MS. ROBERTSON: Person-to-person call, no call forwarding, it's an outgoing call, there were no other parties involved in this call. It was just from the cellular phone to that number.

MS. CLARK: Now, after that, there's a column that says "Minutes," and in that column, for that column, it indicates 4 minutes.

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: Now, first of all, this is the bill that is sent to the customer, correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And the area--the column that shows minutes shows 4 minutes on this bill, correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: Correct.

MS. CLARK: Is that the actual duration of the call?

MS. ROBERTSON: It may not be.

MS. CLARK: And why is that?

MS. ROBERTSON: We round--air touch cellular in their billing process rounds up to the next minute. So if you had a call that lasted for say 3-1/2 minutes, we would charge for 4 minutes.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: And what is the actual duration of that--well, do you maintain records that show the actual duration of the phone call?

MS. ROBERTSON: We have other records that show the actual duration, yes.

MS. CLARK: And do you have those records with you?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Are those records kept in the normal course of business?

MS. ROBERTSON: We keep them as a reference. They are not billing records, but they're backup.

MS. CLARK: I understand that. But are they kept in the normal course of your business?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And are they prepared at or near the time that the call is made?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Under employees, under a duty to do so?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And can you tell us what the actual duration of the call to 826-0403 was on June the 12th?

MS. ROBERTSON: At 2:18 P.M., the call was for 3 minutes and 9 seconds.

MS. CLARK: Counsel, I believe we've already marked the phone records that belong to--marked and introduced the phone records belonging to Nicole Brown that indicate her phone number is (310) 826-0403. I'll have them pulled for counsel.

MS. CLARK: With respect to the bottom, two numbers that are highlighted on this chart, they indicate for the date of June the 12th?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And the time 10:03 P.M., would that be an accurate time for those phone calls to have been made from this cellular phone?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: I'm going to back up for a moment and ask you to interpret a couple of other entries here. After the 2:18 phone call to 826-0403, Nicole Brown's number, we have two more phone calls made at 2:22.

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: Given the duration of the--actual duration of the phone call made to Nicole Brown at 2:18, does the time registered at 2:22 for those two incomplete calls appear to have come immediately thereafter?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes. Immediately thereafter.

MS. CLARK: Counsel, may it be stipulated that the phone call--the phone numbers registered under these two incomplete calls at 2:22, that is (305) 582-6952, is the phone number in Florida for Paula Barbieri, was on the date of June 12?

MR. COCHRAN: Was. So stipulated it was.

MS. CLARK: And may it also be stipulated, counsel, that the phone--the phone call indicated at 2:23 at west Los Angeles at (310) 470-3468 was the west Los Angeles phone number for Paula Barbieri as of June the 12th, 1993?

MR. COCHRAN: So stipulated, your Honor, it was.

THE COURT: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Thank you kindly, counsel.

MR. COCHRAN: Certainly.

MS. CLARK: With respect to the incompletes noted at 2:22 for the 305 number for Paula Barbieri on June the 12th, can you indicate to us what that means?

MS. ROBERTSON: This means that at 2:22 P.M., there were two calls placed within that minute time frame to area code (305) 582-6952, which were incomplete calls, meaning that the call was never picked up at the other end. Either there was no answer or it was a busy.

MS. CLARK: Do you have--you indicate on the phone bill here for those two calls one minute each.

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: Do you have an actual duration for those calls in your records?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us what that--what they were?

MS. ROBERTSON: For the first call, the duration was 46 seconds, the second call for 13 seconds.

MS. CLARK: Now, moving down to 2:23, is that an accurate time for the call on June the 12th to Paula Barbieri's west Los Angeles number?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: At 470-3468?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: That was placed at 2:23?

MS. ROBERTSON: Correct.

MS. CLARK: It indicates the duration of time to be 2 minutes for that call?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: What is the actual duration for that call that you have listed in your records?

MS. ROBERTSON: 1 minute and 27 seconds.

MS. CLARK: And following that entry on June the 12th, there is an entry at 2:24. Is that an accurate time for that phone call then?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: It's indicated as incomplete for the phone number of Paula Barbieri in Florida. Again, that's because the call did not go through?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's what it says, yes. Incomplete.

MS. CLARK: It was not picked up?

MS. ROBERTSON: Right. Correct.

MS. CLARK: And that could be, as you've indicated, because it was busy or just not answered?

MS. ROBERTSON: Correct.

MS. CLARK: And the duration of that call as indicated here as being 2 minutes as well.

MS. ROBERTSON: Correct.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us what is the actual duration of that phone call?

MS. ROBERTSON: 1 minute and 30 seconds.

MS. CLARK: And just below that at 2:24 on June the 12th, is that the accurate time for that phone call?

MS. ROBERTSON: The call below the 2:24 call?

MS. CLARK: No. The 2:24 call, is that an accurate time for that next phone call?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Given the actual duration of the call just before it to Paula Barbieri's west Los Angeles number, would this call have been placed immediately thereafter?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And this call is to (305) 582-6952, Paula Barbieri's number in Florida?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And what does that indicate with respect to whether or not the call was picked up by anyone on the other side?

MS. ROBERTSON: It could mean anything. Whether it let it ring, he let it ring or whoever was using the phone let it ring for a minute and 27--a minute and 30 seconds.

MS. CLARK: And that--so that call at 2:24 to Paula Barbieri's number in Florida was incomplete as well?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And the duration was I'm sorry?

MS. ROBERTSON: 2 minutes.

MS. CLARK: On the phone bill.

MS. ROBERTSON: Oh, the actual duration. 1 minute and 30 seconds.

MS. CLARK: And so we have four calls to Paula Barbieri immediately after the call to Nicole Brown at 826-0403?

MS. ROBERTSON: Four calls in total that day, yes.

MS. CLARK: Now, right after that 2:24 entry in the afternoon of June the 12th, we have an entry here at 6:56 P.M. that says "Message mgr"?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: What's "Message mgr"?

MS. ROBERTSON: It's a voice mail system for your cellular phone number.

MS. CLARK: And what is that?

MS. ROBERTSON: You can leave a recording that says, "I'm away from my phone. Please leave a message. I'll call you back." So what this means is that someone attempted to call this mobile number, (310) 613-3232, and the call was forwarded to the message manager.

MS. CLARK: Okay. So that message manager there at 6:56 is and incoming call to the mobile phone?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And that call--under feature, you have "Cf."

MS. ROBERTSON: Right.

MS. CLARK: What does that mean?

MS. ROBERTSON: It means that no one picked up the cellular phone or answered the cellular phone. So the call was call forwarded to the voice mail system.

MS. CLARK: So this--the Defendant's cell phone received a call at 6:56 P.M. which was not picked up by him. It was picked up by the message manager?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And you have a duration of the call, that incoming call at 6:56 P.M. as 5 minutes on the bill?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: What was the--do you have the actual duration for that?

MS. ROBERTSON: I--I do not. That is not here on this record.

MS. CLARK: And on June 12th again at 8:55 P.M., you have message manager?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And again, that's an incoming call?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And you have "CF" under the feature indicating again that the voice mail picked up that call?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Because the cell phone was not answered?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: All right. Now, on--after 8:55 P.M., on June the 12th at 10:03 P.M., we have a call--is that an accurate time, ma'am?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: --a call to west Los Angeles to Paula Barbieri's west Los Angeles number, indicates the duration to be 1 minute?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: What is the actual duration of that phone call according to your records?

MS. ROBERTSON: 33 seconds.

MS. CLARK: And then there is a second call as registered here as being 10:03 P.M. as well?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: Okay. So the second call immediately following that first call?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: This one indicates what with respect to under the title of "To and from location"?

MS. ROBERTSON: That it was an incomplete call.

MS. CLARK: Again, for the same reasons stated before?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And this to Paula Barbieri's Florida number at 582-6952?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And the duration shows 1 minute on the bill. Can you tell us what the actual duration of that phone call was?

MS. ROBERTSON: 23 seconds.

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

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

MR. COCHRAN: If I could just have a second.

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

MR. COCHRAN: I just have a few questions, your Honor.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN

MR. COCHRAN: Good morning, Miss Robertson. How are you?

MS. ROBERTSON: Good morning or good afternoon.

MR. COCHRAN: I guess it is afternoon. With regard to these records that you've gone through with Miss Clark, let's take, for instance, the incomplete phone call on June 12th at about 2:13 P.M. in the afternoon.

MS. ROBERTSON: Okay.

MR. COCHRAN: If one--first of all, in calling the (305) 582-6952 number, that number, you could call that particular number, and the person who has that 305 number, if it's a portable phone, could be in California, is that correct, or anyplace in the United States; isn't that right?

MS. ROBERTSON: They could be.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. So the question would be as to whether or not the 305 number was a portable phone. Is that a correct statement?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Now, with regard to shifting to the two phone calls that were in rapid succession at about 2:22 that are both labeled incomplete on the People's exhibit here for identification, if the number (305) 582-6952 were called for approximately one minute, in that instance, it would have been possible to--person in a vehicle to make that call, for the phone to disconnect--perhaps you went into an area where there were no cells or whatever--and if you lost contact, turn around and call right back again; isn't that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: In fact, in the--if you have a car phone, you know that's a matter that happens very frequently, doesn't it?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: That you'll be driving along, you'll have a number, for some reason, because the cells or something happens, you'll lose contact with the person you're trying to call or whatever. You have to then dial back; isn't that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's considered a dropped call.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And so--and that--that would also show in here as an incomplete; would it not?

MS. ROBERTSON: Actually, it would show up as a completed call, but it would have a star next to it that showed that it was dropped.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. But--

MS. CLARK: I'm sorry. I didn't hear that.

THE COURT: Dropped.

MR. COCHRAN: Dropped.

MR. COCHRAN: But as an incomplete call, if you were making a call to the 305 number?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And as you got through the call and all of a sudden you lost contact and you then dialed it again, that would be consistent with the two incompletes if you weren't able to complete the call, is that correct, if you made them in succession?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And in fact, on this particular date, you alluded to the fact there were I think you said four calls made to the 305 number?

MS. ROBERTSON: In total, yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All tolled? And each of those 305 calls were all incomplete; is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And that meant that the caller was not able to reach whoever the person was at the 305 number; is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. With regard to the call at 2:18, that was a completed call; is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And on the record here, it shows that call lasted approximately 4 minutes. And what was your--what was the exact time of that call from your records?

MS. ROBERTSON: 3 minutes and 9 seconds.

MR. COCHRAN: And again, you just rounded it up, on the bill you rounded it up to like 4 minutes?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's what our billing system does, yes.

MR. COCHRAN: Okay. And that was a completed call?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: At 2:18?

MS. ROBERTSON: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And you don't have or don't show any other calls to the number 826-0403 and area code 310 after 2:18 P.M. in the afternoon on June 12th, do you?

MS. ROBERTSON: No, sir.

MR. COCHRAN: That's the only call you--your records reveal on that day; is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And you're aware that number was registered to Miss Nicole Brown Simpson on that date?

MS. ROBERTSON: I am now.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. You are now--you're aware of it today, right?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And you show no other calls--

MS. CLARK: Stipulate.

MR. COCHRAN: And you show no other calls to that location that day, do you?

MS. ROBERTSON: No, I do not.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And then lastly, ma'am, with regard to the two calls at 10:03, on the People's chart here, it's shown that these calls both occurred at about 10:03. Is that what your records show?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes, sir.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And that would indicate to you these calls were made again in succession; is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And with regard to the first call, the one to the 470-3468 number, was that a completed call?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: Was that a message left or did the parties talk or what happened? Do you know?

MS. ROBERTSON: There's no way of indicating that here.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. So there was some kind of completed call?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Some thing picked up that phone; is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. What if that 305 phone--what if the 310 number had some kind of answering machine. Would that show as a completed call?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: So if you dialed that, that would show as a completed call even though it's 1 minute; is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And just so we're clear, how long was the 6-12 10:03 call to west Los Angeles that your records show 1 minute? How long was that call?

MS. ROBERTSON: 33 seconds.

MR. COCHRAN: And then there was a call right after that to the 305 location, and that was--you have that marked incomplete.

MS. ROBERTSON: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: And how long was that?

MS. ROBERTSON: 23 seconds.

MR. COCHRAN: So there was a--only a 10-minute difference between the so-called completed call and the incomplete call?

MS. CLARK: Your Honor, misstates the testimony.

MR. COCHRAN: Strike that. Counsel is correct.

MR. COCHRAN: There's only a 10-second difference between the so-called completed call and the incomplete call?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's--that's about right plus or minus a couple seconds.

MR. COCHRAN: One was 33 seconds, one was 23 seconds?

MS. ROBERTSON: Yes.

MR. COCHRAN: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: May I have just one last second?

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel and the Defendant.)

MR. COCHRAN: So with regard--

MR. COCHRAN: Just one or two last questions.

MR. COCHRAN: So that I'm clear if I might, with regard to the 10:03 call on 6-12 to the 310 number, the bill that you see there in the 33-second actual time, would that be consistent with the call being placed to an answering machine and the caller completed a message or whatever to that answer machine?

MS. ROBERTSON: It could be.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And then the later call, the call directly after that which is marked incomplete to the 305 exchange, would that be consistent to--with a call that was not complete? Is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: Not complete, yes.

MR. COCHRAN: And if that 305 number was a portable number, that person could be in Las Vegas or Los Angeles or anyplace; is that correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: They could be anywhere.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. You can't tell that from your records?

MS. ROBERTSON: We cannot.

MR. COCHRAN: Now, you mentioned something about a manufacturer and telling where calls were made from. Do you have those records with you? You don't have those records, do you?

THE COURT: I think she testified that the manufacturer could tell what kind of phone it is.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Is the Court correct?

MS. ROBERTSON: That's my understanding.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And you don't have any records from any manufacturers?

MS. ROBERTSON: No, sir.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Thank you very kindly. Thank you, your Honor.

MS. CLARK: No further questions.

THE COURT: All right. Miss Robertson, thank you very much. You are now excused. All right. Next witness.

MS. CLARK: Your Honor, let me offer to stipulate--I believe counsel is agreed and I will stipulate that as of June the 12th, Nicole Brown's phone number was (310) 826-0403.

MR. COCHRAN: So stipulated.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. COCHRAN: May we also have a stipulation with regard to Paula Barbieri's phone number?

MS. CLARK: I thought we already did. You want to do it again? Did we already do it? Shall we do it again?

THE COURT: All right. Why don't you take the exhibit down. And, Miss Robertson, you can go. Thank you. Take the exhibit down.

MS. CLARK: Yes, you want me to do the stipulation?

THE COURT: Yes. Say it over.

MS. CLARK: I just need to look at the board while I'm doing it, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

MS. CLARK: Counsel, may it be stipulated that as of June the 12th, 1994, the phone number (310) 470-3468 was--belonged to Paula Barbieri, and that as of June the 12th, 1994, the phone number (305) 582-6952 also belonged to Paula Barbieri, but in Florida?

MR. COCHRAN: Well, I can't--let me--just one second. One second.

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

MS. CLARK: I have to do it one more time. With respect to the phone number (305) 582-6952, that was also a phone number registered to Paula Barbieri as of June the 12th, 1994.

MR. COCHRAN: So stipulated.

THE COURT: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, as I instructed you yesterday, a stipulation is an agreement between the attorneys as to the facts that the stipulation relates to. You are to assume those facts to be true for the purpose of this trial. Next witness.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor. People call Miss Kathleen Delaney.

THE COURT: All right. Is she available immediately outside?

MS. CLARK: I'm sorry, your Honor?

THE COURT: Is she immediately outside?

MS. CLARK: I believe so.

Kathleen Delaney, called as a witness by the People, was sworn and testified as follows:

THE COURT: All right. Good afternoon, Miss Delaney. Would you please raise your right hand and face the clerk, please.

THE CLERK: You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this Court, shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

MS. DELANEY: I do.

THE CLERK: Please have a seat in the witness stand and state and spell your first and last names for the record.

MS. DELANEY: Kathleen Delaney, k-a-t-h-l-e-e-n d-e-l-a-n-e-y.

THE CLERK: Thank you.

THE COURT: Miss Clark.

MS. CLARK: Thank you.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY Ms. CLARK

MS. CLARK: Miss Delaney, can you please tell us what you do for a living?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. I'm an attorney for the Mirage Casino Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada.

MS. CLARK: And as such, what are your specific duties?

MS. DELANEY: Part of my duties include custodian of records for the hotel.

MS. CLARK: And in your capacity as custodian of records, are you familiar with the records maintained by the hotel and the manner in which they are prepared?

MS. DELANEY: Yes, I am.

MS. CLARK: Did you bring with you some records reflecting whether someone by the name of Paula Barbieri checked into the Mirage Hotel on or about June the 12th, 1994?

MS. DELANEY: I did.

MS. CLARK: Can you please retrieve the records that are relevant to this determination?

MS. CLARK: For the record, your Honor, counsel has received a copy of all records, and I only intend to mark those relevant.

THE COURT: All right.

MS. CLARK: You have I see in front of you a record that appears to be a computer printout?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: May I approach?

THE COURT: Yes, you may.

MS. CLARK: And underneath that, I see that you have another record. Is that a duplicate?

MS. DELANEY: That is a duplicate, yes.

MS. CLARK: That appears to have writing on it?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. That would be my writing.

MS. CLARK: Your writing?

MS. DELANEY: Uh-huh.

MS. CLARK: All right.

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

MS. CLARK: Your Honor, counsel has agreed we can show this on the elmo. We are going to block out the information relevant to other parties who probably would not appreciate the publicity.

(Brief pause.)

MS. CLARK: With respect to this record, your Honor, ask that it be marked People's 404.

THE COURT: People's 404.

(Peo's 404 for id = Mirage record)

MS. CLARK: All right. It's showing on the screen right now, ma'am. And if you need to refer to your copy with the notes on it, please do so.

MS. DELANEY: Okay. That would probably be easier.

MS. CLARK: Okay. Now, first of all, can you tell us whether this record is a record that is generated by the Mirage Hotel in normal course of business?

MS. DELANEY: It is.

MS. CLARK: And is it compiled by employees under a duty to do so?

MS. DELANEY: Yes, it is.

MS. CLARK: And is it also compiled at or near the time of the event, that is the check-in or the information is entered with respect to a party checking into the hotel?

MS. DELANEY: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Can you tell us, ma'am, what is shown in terms of information concerning the check-in of Paula Barbieri to the Mirage Hotel on this form?

MS. DELANEY: This particular screen is actually the reservations division, the reservations listing by name, which is one section or one division of our computer system. And with regard to this form, what it shows is that a reservation was made for the name Paula Barbieri. The reservation was made on June 11th, 1994, and then it contains information regarding how that reservation was guaranteed.

MS. CLARK: All right. If I may, your Honor, I'd like to highlight the area the witness is talking about since there are so many numbers on this.

MS. CLARK: All right. Ma'am, with respect to the name--I'm going to highlight. You tell me if I'm doing the right thing. Where I'm about to highlight, that's the name of the customer?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: Or the name to whom the room will be registered?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct. Uh-huh.

MS. CLARK: Is there an indication on this form as well when the reservation was made?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. That would be, if you follow the line where the name appears all the way across, you will see a date portion, and it will say 6-11-94. There are no slashes dividing that date, but you should see that.

MS. CLARK: All right. And would that be right there (Indicating)?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct. And you can see above it on the report where it indicates that, the date column.

MS. CLARK: I see. And that will be right here (Indicating)?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And I've highlighted those--

THE COURT: There should be a monitor right--there you go.

MS. DELANEY: I'm sorry. Okay. That's easier.

MS. CLARK: Thank you, your Honor. And for the record, I've highlighted where the witness has guided me to and I guess the exhibits will be the best evidence of that.

MS. CLARK: Now, with respect to--then it was--that room was reserved for Paula Barbieri on June the 11th, 1994?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And there is an indication--I'm going to move it to the middle. It shows petite plan A. What's that?

MS. DELANEY: That is one line that we have to give detailed information which the reservation clerk might feel is important regarding that reservation. Any information that can't fit on that line would then scroll on over to the comments screen which would appear on the check-out sheets. So this would have detailed information regarding the information that we would have been given at the time the reservation was made.

MS. CLARK: What does petite mean?

MS. DELANEY: Petite would be one of our room types. It's a petite suite.

MS. CLARK: And then it says "Attention: Dorothy"?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. Actually directly after petite, it says plan A. That's the rate plan at which the room was reserved and then rented at. The "Attention: Dorothy" is the designation. The reservation clerk always indicates the name of the travel agent if there is one who made the reservation. So that would be Dorothy, the travel agent. And just above her name, you will see the name Tzell Travel. That would be the company that made--that Dorothy works for.

MS. CLARK: And I see below Tzell Travel, it says "CC holder Michael" and then it goes down to "Bolton"?

MS. DELANEY: Well, what this record does is, on this line, it says "CC," means credit card holder, "Michael." And then again, we only have the one line within this division, this reservations division of our records. Any comments--we have unlimited comment space--it would scroll down to the--to the remainder comments screens, which would be in the check-out division. And the name "Bolton" does appear on that particular record.

MS. CLARK: For the record, I've highlighted where it says "CC holder Michael," and then I'm going to highlight "Bolton" on the line below.

MS. CLARK: Have I done so correctly?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And what does that indicate?

MS. DELANEY: That would indicate that per Dorothy with Tzell Travel, who spoke to our room reservations clerk, that that reservation was guaranteed by Michael Bolton, and there's a credit card number that would pertain to that reservation.

MS. CLARK: Are you aware of who Michael Bolton is?

MS. DELANEY: I know of a singer named Michael Bolton.

MS. CLARK: Was he performing in Las Vegas at that time to the best of your knowledge?

MS. DELANEY: I am not aware if he was performing, but I am aware that he was staying at the hotel.

MS. CLARK: At--

MS. DELANEY: During that time. Uh-huh.

MS. CLARK: On--as of what? June the 11th or June the 12th?

MS. DELANEY: As of June the 12th.

MS. CLARK: Now, over to the side where--the left-hand side of the page as you face it where it says "Comment," I see 6-11-94 and 15:55. Can you tell us what that means?

MS. DELANEY: That would be the time that the reservation was taken. And I might indicate you're showing a person's name there on the--

MS. CLARK: Just realized that. I'm going to try and--I'm going to cover that up right now with my fingers and ask that Mr. Fairtlough hide that information. And I'm going to just highlight that. 15:55--I'm going to take this down now. But 15:55 on June the 11th indicates--

MS. DELANEY: When the reservation was received.

MS. CLARK: And 15:55 is military time is it?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: For what?

MS. DELANEY: 3:55.

MS. CLARK: I'm going to ask that Mr. Fairtlough be allowed to black out the name that goes to another customer.

MS. DELANEY: It actually might be more accurate to say that that would be the time that the information was inputted into the system.

MS. CLARK: And would the information then have been given at or near the time of that input?

MS. DELANEY: Absolutely. Immediately after.

MS. CLARK: So it would have been very near--almost--so the time of 3:55 on June the 11th would have been within minutes after having received the information, that is the reservation for Paula Barbieri?

MS. DELANEY: The reservation clerk would have a headset, would be receiving the information and would be inputting it into the computer as it's being received. But, you know, in terms of all of the information that's contained here, some may be inputted after the call is terminated. But it would all be contemporaneous.

MS. CLARK: Now, can you tell us if you have records reflecting exactly when Paula Barbieri checked into the Mirage Hotel in Las Vegas?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. I have another document which would be a guest registration card which was provided, and that would indicate the time of check-in.

MS. CLARK: All right. May I see it? Okay. I'm going to show it to counsel.

MS. DELANEY: We also have in our check-out screen an indication of arrival and departure times, and they correspond.

MS. CLARK: And is that a separate record that you're referring to, ma'am?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: Can you show us which one that is?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. That would be (Indicating).

MS. CLARK: All right. Now, the record you've just shown myself and counsel appears to have a cut off. If I take this away, how are you going to be able to answer a question?

MS. DELANEY: That's all right.

MS. CLARK: Sorry. Okay. With respect to the first bill I've just shown to Mr. Cochran, there appears to be a signature at the bottom?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And it's a little bit cut off. Can you tell us what happened to the lower right-hand corner?

MS. DELANEY: It appears to be partially obscured. It would be a flaw in the--the process of putting it onto the microfiche. All of these records are maintained--kept and maintained on microfiche, and there would have been a flaw.

MS. CLARK: Now, there does appear to be a signature there.

MS. DELANEY: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Does it appear to be most of the name Paula Barbieri?

MS. DELANEY: I see the name Paula and I see the last name b-a-r-b-I-e.

MS. CLARK: That's it, and then it cuts off?

MS. DELANEY: And then it cuts off.

MS. CLARK: Is there, however, also her printed name on this form?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. Directly to the left of the signature and address block.

MS. CLARK: And does it reflect on this form what time she checked in?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. It's just above and to the left of the name and address block, and it indicates 13:59 military time or 1:59.

MS. CLARK: Okay. So--

MS. DELANEY: P.M.

MS. CLARK: --at 1:59 on June the 12th, she checked into the Mirage Hotel?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: Pursuant to the reservation by Michael Bolton made the day before?

MS. DELANEY: Correct.

MS. CLARK: Now, there appears to be a partial address underneath her signature?

MS. DELANEY: Yes.

MS. CLARK: Okay. I'm going to block that out, but I would like to allow the ladies and the gentlemen of the jury to see this record. With--

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

MS. CLARK: With the agreement of counsel, I'm blocking out the address, your Honor. I've blocked it out. We're also going to put a piece of paper over it. Thank you, John.

MS. CLARK: All right. Then on this bill that indicates--now, once again, is this a--is this a record prepared by the Mirage Hotel in the normal course of business?

MS. DELANEY: Yes, it is.

MS. CLARK: And is this record prepared by an employee under a duty to prepare such records?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MS. CLARK: And is it also prepared at or near the time of the event, that is of the check-in of the person that is indicated on the form?

MS. DELANEY: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And can you tell us where on this form it's indicated what date Miss Barbieri checked in?

MS. DELANEY: There is a box on the top line that has a heading "Arrival." And it indicates 6-12-94.

MS. CLARK: I'm going to remove this for a moment, your Honor. We have a credit card number indicated on it.

THE COURT: All right. Counsel, can we speed this up? I mean, is the issue the check-in and the check-out times?

MS. CLARK: Yes, your Honor. Almost done.

THE COURT: All right.

MS. CLARK: Okay. For the record, I've highlighted the date and time of arrival of June the 12th at 1:59 P.M. and I'm going to ask to leave this record with Mr. Fairtlough so he can block out the identifying information.

MS. CLARK: And is there an indication as to when she checked out? Do you have a record for that?

MS. DELANEY: Yes. Again, a screen I mentioned a moment ago, the third of the three division screens in our tandem system is considered a check-out listing by name. We have that record. And that not only shows the arrival time, it shows the check-out, and it contains various other information including all comments made during that particular guest's stay.

MS. CLARK: And what record is that?

MS. DELANEY: I would call it check-out listing by name. It's a check-out division printing, computer printing. And I handed it to you a moment ago. Should have it. It has other people's name on it again as did the prior document. Miss Barbieri's information is towards the bottom of that document.

MS. CLARK: All right. I'm folding it down now so that I can show--just reveal the information pertaining to Miss Barbieri.

MS. DELANEY: There is one additional name below Miss Barbieri which you might want to block out.

MS. CLARK: I'll do that as well. I'm just going to fold it.

MS. CLARK: And that last record, your Honor, I ask that it be marked People's--

THE COURT: 405.

MS. CLARK: Thank you.

(Peo's 405 for id = document)

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

MS. CLARK: All right. Your Honor, I have a--the record referred to by the witness, would like it to be marked People's 406 if I may.

THE COURT: I thought we just marked it. Proceed.

MS. CLARK: This is another record.

THE COURT: All right. Proceed.

(Peo's 406 for id = document)

MS. CLARK: Is this the folded version of the record you just referred to, ma'am?

MS. DELANEY: Yes, it is.

MS. CLARK: And again, with respect to its preparation, is this prepared in the normal course of business at the Mirage Hotel?

MS. DELANEY: Yes.

MS. CLARK: By people under a duty to do so?

MS. DELANEY: Yes.

MS. CLARK: At or near the time of the events that are reflected in that document?

MS. DELANEY: Yes.

MS. CLARK: And does this document reflect when Miss Barbieri checked out?

MS. DELANEY: It does. As a matter of fact, you've partially folded I believe or maybe you just caught that--it should be at the very top right-hand side of the screen "Arrive," and then it has a 6-12-94, 13:59. Then just below it, "Depart 6-15-94 at 13:50--46" military time.

MS. CLARK: All right. We are zooming in on that now.

MS. DELANEY: The times are to the right, yes.

MS. CLARK: And I'm going to highlight that for the record. So it reflects that Miss Barbieri checked in at 1:59 P.M. on June the 12th and checked out at 6:15--

MR. COCHRAN: Counsel, there's a number.

MS. CLARK: I'm going to take it down.

MS. CLARK: --and she checked out at--on June 15th at 1:46 P.M.?

MS. DELANEY: Correct.

THE COURT: All right. Anything else?

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

MS. CLARK: Nothing further.

THE COURT: Mr. Cochran.

MR. COCHRAN: Just one or two questions. Very briefly, your Honor.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN

MR. COCHRAN: Good afternoon, counsel.

MS. DELANEY: Good afternoon.

MR. COCHRAN: With regard to the records we've just seen, are you aware that on that particular weekend, Michael Bolton was hosting a celebrity softball game in Las Vegas on Sunday, June 12th?

MS. DELANEY: I'm not aware of that in particular. I remember the event taking place at some point in time.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. And you knew it was on that particular date, on or about June 12th?

MS. DELANEY: I'm not aware of what date it was.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. But you--from checking your records as a custodian of records, you are aware that he had maintained and brought a number of people in and guaranteed their rooms at the Mirage, had he not, during this time frame?

MS. DELANEY: I know that he was staying there personally. I'm not aware of what other reservations might have been made by him or under his name.

MR. COCHRAN: You didn't--you didn't have occasion to check those?

MS. DELANEY: They didn't appear in correlation to Miss Barbieri's records, and the subpoena was limited to that.

MR. COCHRAN: It was limited to just Barbieri; isn't that correct?

MS. DELANEY: Correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Okay. So there may have been others and other people who were there as his guests, but you weren't asked to look at that; is that correct?

MS. DELANEY: No.

MR. COCHRAN: Is that correct?

MS. DELANEY: That's correct.

MR. COCHRAN: Okay. I just wanted to make sure. Thank you. And with--are you--were you aware also that on that Monday, which I guess would be June 13th, that Michael Bolton had a concert at the Thomas and Mack Arena there in Las Vegas unveiling his new video?

MS. DELANEY: I was not aware of that.

MR. COCHRAN: Were you aware of whether or not Paula Barbieri had been in that video, his musical video?

MS. DELANEY: No, I'm not aware of that.

MR. COCHRAN: You were not aware of that either?

MS. DELANEY: No.

MR. COCHRAN: All right. Well, thank you very kindly.

MR. COCHRAN: Nothing further, your Honor.

THE COURT: Miss Clark, anything else?

MS. CLARK: Nothing further, your Honor.

THE COURT: Thank you very much, counsel. You are excused.

MS. DELANEY: Thank you.

THE COURT: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to take our recess for the day. Let me say one other thing to you, however. When I was commenting to you earlier about the fact that the Prosecution anticipates resting perhaps at the end of next week and I indicated to you that means perhaps we've finished half of the case at this point, I misspoke myself because, as you recollect, the Defense has no obligation whatsoever, as I instructed you at the beginning of the case, to present any evidence at all. So at this point, all we're certain is that the Prosecution may be concluding their case by the end of next week. All right? I think you recollect my initial instructions regarding the burden of proof. All right. As far as the jury is concerned, we will stand in recess until 1:30. And I'll expect counsel here at 9:00 o'clock tomorrow morning for the hearing. All right. We'll be in recess.

(At 1:55 P.M., an adjournment was taken until, Thursday, June 22, 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 21, 1995

Volume 172 pages 32945 through 33120, inclusive

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 172 pages 32945 - 33120

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Day date session page vol.

Wednesday June 21, 1995 A.M. 32945 172 P.M. 33067 172

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

Rubin, Richard (Recalled) 32978D 172 (Voir dire) 33000C (Resumed) 33016D 30024C 33032D 33044C (Further) 33055D 33064C

Robertson, 33070Mc 33088C 172 Lu Ellen

Delaney, 33100Mc 33117C 172 Kathleen

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES

WITNESSES direct cross redirect recross vol.

Delaney, 33100Mc 33117C 172 Kathleen

Robertson, 33070Mc 33088C 172 Lu Ellen

Rubin, Richard

(Recalled) 32978D 172 (Voir dire) 33000C (Resumed) 33016D 30024C 33032D 33044C (Further) 33055D 33064C

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EXHIBITS

PEOPLE'S for in exhibit identification evidence page vol. Page vol.

401 - Pair of gloves 32979 172 brown in color, Aris light

402-A - Diagram 33058 172 depicting a right glove, LAPD evidence item no. 9

402-B - Diagram 33058 172 depicting a left glove, LAPD evidence item no. 37

403 - Chart 33072 172 entitled "Defendant's cellular phone calls for the night of June 12, 1994

404 - Redacted record 33102 172 from the Mirage Hotel, Las Vegas, for the date of June 12, 1994

405 - Redacted record 33114 172 from the Mirage Hotel, Las Vegas, for the date of June 12, 1994

406 - Redacted record 33115 172 from the Mirage Hotel, Las Vegas, for the date of June 12, 1994