|
REPORTER'S DAILY TRANSCRIPT SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SHARON RUFO, ET AL., N/A, PLAINTIFFS, VS. ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT NO. WEQ (REGINA D. CHAVEZ, OFFICIAL REPORTER) (The Court ordered sealed the notes and transcript of proceedings heard in (Jurors resume their respective seats.) (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the THE COURT: Morning. JURORS: Good morning, Your Honor. THE CLERK: You are still under oath. And would you please state your name again for the record. THE WITNESS: Tom Lange, L-A-N-G-E. THOMAS LANGE, the witness on the stand at Q. Good morning, sir. A. Good morning. Q. Now, last night -- last night, after the jury was released and we stayed A. I was more or less waiting for the attorneys. Q. And you walked across the street to the hotel with the Goldmans, did you A. I believe they were with us, yes. Q. And then you went up to the suite with the attorneys over at the Doubletree A. Yes, we did. Q. How long did you spend last night? A. Fifteen or twenty minutes, I believe. Q. And so, how long did you spend this morning? A. Spend this morning? Q. Yeah, getting ready. You were over there this morning at the hotel, weren't A. Yes. We had breakfast together. Obviously, the case was discussed. I would have a problem with "getting ready." If you mean getting prepared, no. Q. Oh? A. We discussed exhibits that I'd been talking about, certainly. Q. What exhibits did you discuss? A. Mostly exhibits that you've seen yesterday. Q. Now, you definitely would agree that if you have the opportunity, because of A. Mr. Baker, I do not tend to favor anyone in this case. Q. So your answer to my question is simply no, correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, you would never tend to flavor your testimony towards their side A. I didn't invite the Goldmans. Q. Oh, they just happened to be there? A. That's their choice, certainly. And they decided to show up, along with 350 Q. I see. Wasn't an intimate affair? A. I'm sorry? Q. Wasn't an intimate affair? A. An intimate affair? I don't think so. Q. All right. Yesterday -- MR. BAKER: Would you put up that -- light up the Elmo, please. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Yesterday, we were talking about the closed-in area, and it A. Well, the soil is loose, and it's certainly possible that it was dug out in Q. And that depression in the dirt there is what, six, eight inches, twelve A. Something like that. Q. So there was a lot of dirt being kicked around in that area, true? A. The closed-in area? Well, it depends on what you mean by "a lot of dirt." I think what you see is Certainly, the only dirt that's disturbed to any extent is that hole. Q. Well, the entire area from the sidewalk, all the way to six feet over to the A. It's all dirt, but there are trees and stumps around the hole. Q. There's no ground cover? A. No; it's minimal ground cover. You can see what it is in the photograph. Q. So that certainly the boots that Mr. Goldman was wearing got covered with A. Well, there's dirt on the boots. Q. And that indicated to you that there was a struggle going on in the A. Well, that wasn't the only factor. It was pretty evident, though, from Q. Okay. And -- (Counsel displays blow-up entitled "Evidence from closed-in area of Bundy.") Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, you examined the boots in some detail, did you not, when A. I looked at them, but I have a hard time with "in some detail." Q. Well, does the picture on the upper left-hand corner, does that indicate to MR. BAKER: What's the number? MR. P. BAKER: 1349. (The instrument herein referred to as Board containing photographs of evidence Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Exhibit 1349, is that dirt you believe to be from the A. It appears to be dirt, yes. (Indicating.) Q. There's trace evidence in the middle photograph of the exhibit that's up A. That's -- Appears that way, yes. Q. And then there is a cut on the toe, which would appear to be on the right A. That's correct. Q. And that wasn't discovered by you until Dr. Lee discovered that, correct? A. No. I observed the cut on the boot, I believe, that morning. Q. Oh, did you? Did you put it in your notes? Maybe I missed it. A. No. Again, as I stated yesterday, there are probably several things that you won't These types of items are later examined in the lab by a criminalist, and that's Q. Now, the cut on the boot was a fresh cut, was it not? There was no dirt in that cut, was there? A. Well, again, I didn't at the time. I didn't inspect it that closely. And I'd Q. Well, did you subsequently learn that it was determined to be without dirt MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls for hearsay, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) In rendering your opinions that you gave relative to -- as MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. Calls for hearsay; gave no opinions on the THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, when you observed that cut, was it in the morning of MR. MEDVENE: Objection. THE WITNESS: Yes. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: It was consistent. And I believe he was on the ground, perhaps Q. You thought he was possibly on the ground and kicking out at his assailant? A. I certainly believe there's a possibility of that, yes. Q. So that after he had -- well, strike that. It was certainly your view that the encounter started at the area where the cap MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Compound, outside the scope, and it's also speculative. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I don't think with the evidence we can say exactly where he As far as him being down, I think that's very possibly consistent with the I think it's just speculation to say exactly where it started. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) So you don't have an opinion as to where it commenced, true? A. I don't think anyone can say exactly where it started, no. Q. Mr. Lange, I didn't ask you whether you believe anyone can say. All I'm A. It would be the same response. It would go along with me not having an Q. Thank you. A. I don't know who does. MR. BAKER: Well, move to strike the gratuitous remark added to the last part of THE COURT: Stricken. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Mr. Lange, in your analysis of the evidence that you made on A. I believe so. Q. That was of significance to you, was it not? A. Well, yes and no. It could be. Down the line, it could be a significant Q. Well, let's go to page 6 of your notes. You indicate: The door release is inoperable, clicks only. And that would be the button that was in the kitchen that was connected to the A. I believe so. Q. The area -- if you look at the monitor -- can we have the diagram? And we have the diagram in the closed-in area in front of 875 South Bundy. The A. Yes. Q. That's the aerial depiction, is it not, of the area where the intercom comes A. You know I'd have to look at the photograph. I haven't looked at that in a Q. Well -- A. The reason I'm uncomfortable is because there's also a mailbox there Q. Right. A. That may be the mailbox. Q. Okay. Fair enough. One, there is a mailbox, as well as an area where you have the intercom. That's A. Yes. But I don't think it's what you pointed out. I think perhaps you Q. Okay. In any event, sir -- A. Well, I'm trying to be as accurate as I can. I don't want to point out an Q. In any event, sir as you recall, there is an intercom box at the front of A. Yes, there's an intercom. Q. And that intercom is then inside the condominium; that intercom is connected A. That's correct. Q. And as I recall -- you can correct me if I'm wrong -- there's only one A. Yes. Q. You checked and determined that that button was inoperable; it would click, A. We couldn't get it to work; that's correct. Q. That indicated to you that, in your being a detective of some 20 years, that MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Speculation, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, did you ever formulate an opinion that, because the MR. MEDVENE: Same objection. Also outside the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Okay. You didn't make -- in terms of your notes, you didn't A. I don't -- I haven't reviewed that in some time. If you'd like to show it to Q. Sure, I'd be happy to. A. I'm a little uncomfortable, again, with things I haven't looked at in months Q. Right down at the the bottom of page 6, sir. (Witness reviews document.) A. Door release inoperable. Clicks only. Q. Okay. A. If that's what you're referring to, that's what I have. Q. You made no conclusions as to the significance of that when you were doing MR. MEDVENE: Same objection as previously made, Your Honor: Outside the scope, THE COURT: Answer yes or no. THE WITNESS: May I have the question again, please. (The reporter read the record as follows:) "Q. You made no conclusions as to the significance of that when you were doing Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You came to no conclusion as to the significance of that A. Not necessarily; I had thoughts on it. Q. And were those thoughts that Ms. Brown had to come outside of the MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Speculation, outside the scope, Your Honor; asked and THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I thought that was a possibility, certainly. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, you certainly had evidence that the gate didn't open, A. Yes. Q. Didn't that then become a logical conclusion, that she was down there and A. Well, again, it's a possibility, Mr. Baker, but we can't say for sure This particular gate also had an inside dog latch that one would have to reach So there are other factors. What you -- the scenario that you gave is a Q. Well, in terms of having both of the people just inside the gated area, and A. Something like that, yes. Q. And from the head of Nicole Brown to the feet of Mr. Goldman was only two A. That's correct. Q. And so they were both in a very closed-in area, correct? A. That's correct. That's correct. Q. In that closed-in area, Mr. Lange, there was evidence of -- there was A. I would certainly call it a violent struggle, yes. Q. Now, in that closed-in area -- and evidence of the violent struggle included A. That's correct. Q. Okay. I don't know if you can see this, sir. A. I'll get up, if you like. (Indicating.) Q. This is the pager, is it not, on the outside of the fence that is on the A. That's correct. Q. All right. And you can see them a little clearer down here? A. Yeah. (Indicating to photo on board marked "Blood stains from closed-in area at Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And Mr. Goldman's pants had pockets in them, correct? A. Yes. Q. And his pager was possibly, or maybe attached to a belt or something? MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls for speculation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) The keys were found basically at the feet of Mr. Goldman, A. In the general vicinity, yes. Q. And the keys are indicated in, I believe -- and I apologize because it's MR. BAKER: What's this board, Phil? MR. P. BAKER: That is 1342. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Lower middle photo of 1342, those are the keys, and they were A. Yes, that's correct. Q. All right. And the hat and the glove were found in basically the same A. Well, just inside the gate, yes. Q. And the then the keys and the pager were scattered throughout the area. In MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Speculative, vague, scattered all over the area. THE COURT: Speculative. Overruled. THE WITNESS: I would have a problem with the phraseology, scattered all over Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, the glove and hat were under the vegetation, correct? A. Partially. There were a couple of leaves over the top of them. Q. And the cap was actually partially under the fence, correct? A. I'd have to take a look. I mean, it's a possibility that a little bit might Q. Under the horizontal bar? A. Yeah, the lower rung. MR. P. BAKER: That's number 40. (indicating to screen.) THE WITNESS: That -- there is a small portion that appears to be below the Q. In that photo, is somebody lifting up the foliage, or can you tell? MR. MEDVENE: Lack of foundation, Your Honor. MR. BAKER: Put that photo with 102 up there, Phil, please, the one marked 102. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) That's the way the leaves were when you looked at them, A. Yes. Q. And the hat was underneath the leaves, as well as partially underneath the A. Partially, yes. Q. As you indicated, that area is really very, very loose dirt, right? A. It's much looser to the rear is what I alluded to. This is possibly a little more packed in this area, but there is loose dirt. Q. And did you ever pick that cap up and drop it six or nine feet on the plants A. I never touched the cap. Q. Did you ever watch Mr. Fuhrman pick up the glove at any time during the time A. No. Q. Now, the cap didn't have any dirt on it, did it? Had little pieces of debris, but no dirt on it? A. I did not examine the cap that morning. It was checked by the criminalist Q. As it turned out, it had absolutely certainly no blood of Mr. Simpson's on MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls for conclusions. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, the Bundy glove, you examined that? A. No. Q. You looked at it? A. Yes. Q. And that didn't have any dirt on it, either, did it? A. I didn't look at the underside. And again, I looked at it from a distance; I Q. You examined the cap and glove earlier, and identified these as the cap and This is -- the exhibit -- I've got 77 and 78 on here. A. I said they appeared to be the same Q. And did you -- did you see any dirt on either of those items? A. Once again, I wasn't really looking for dirt in -- and I didn't look at the Q. So the answer to my question is no, you didn't see any dirt, correct? MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. The question's been answered. He explained THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, did it occur to you in view of where -- THE COURT: Excuse me, Mr. Baker. Can I -- the clerk has a question. THE CLERK: I think you're using the criminal exhibit numbers 77, 78. MR. BAKER: Oh. THE CLERK: For clarity sake, you want to make sure I you have the right number. MR. BAKER: You're absolutely right. Sorry. THE CLERK: I don't know what numbers. I don't have it in front of me. THE COURT: Is there a number? MR. BAKER: There's no number on them whatsoever except the number that I read. THE CLERK: If you like to mark those exhibits next in order. MR. BLASIER: Its exhibit -- knit cap is 121 and the -- 131 is the knit cap, 129 THE CLERK: Thank you. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, in you inspections that morning of June 13, 1994, did it MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Lack of foundation, assumes facts not in evidence. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) From your entire crime scene investigation, did it occur to A. Certainly not. Q. Never occurred to you? A. Not in any way. Q. All right. Now, in terms of the blood in that -- in the closed-in area, And if we go over to the walkway, there was blood on the walkway and there was A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, none of the blood in the closed-in area was consistent with Mr. Simpson's MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls for conclusion and lack of foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: Well, did you, in terms of you being the co-lead detective in the MR. MEDVENE: If the court please, we attempted to get in blood testimony Same objection: Calls for conclusion; lack of foundation. THE COURT: I didn't hear the question. MR. BAKER: I said in terms of his being the co-lead detective, he certainly THE COURT: I don't know if that was the question. I thought that was a Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Did you become aware of the results of the blood that was MR. MEDVENE: Calls for hearsay. THE COURT: You may answer yes or no. THE WITNESS: Yes. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And you became aware that none of the blood collected in the MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls for hearsay. THE COURT: That's sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Did you, in your role as co-lead detective, find out if there MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Lack of foundation. Calls for hearsay, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Did you, at any time, determine whether or not there were any A. I did. Q. And there were none, correct? A. That's correct. Q. And, in fact -- in fact, Detective Lange, there were eight identifiable MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. Outside the Court's order. It's also not MR. BAKER: Your Honor, it's not outside the Court's order. I'd like to be THE COURT: I don't think it is either. Overruled. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Not one of the identifiable fingerprints found at the crime A. Yes. I don't believe his prints were found at the scene. That's correct. Q. And, in fact, Mr. Lange, there were eight identifiable fingerprints found A. That's not necessarily true. In an unidentifiable print, sometimes the Q. Let me see if I can make my questions very clear to you. There is, in your A. That's a general term, yes. Q. If a print is identifiable, that means there's enough points on the prints A. Depending on the amount of points. It's generally ten. Q. And -- A. However, if you have seven or eight that are consistent, you cannot totally Q. Mr. Lange, I want you to assume -- well, strike that. Did you look at, in terms of you're being the co-lead detective on this case, MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence; outside the scope, Your THE COURT: Assumes facts not in evidence thus far. Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, in terms of the prints, Mr. Lange, were there, or were A. There were. I don't know if it was eight. There were some with an Q. Is it your testimony, as you sit here today, that the prints that were A. Well, I don't know. Again, I believe I'd like to see the print reports. It's Q. I want to understand your testimony here in this courtroom. Are you saying A. Mr. Baker, you gave me a very general term in the word unidentifiable. And Q. So, Mr. Lange, I take it, then, you don't know whether or not the prints A. Of course not. I haven't looked at that. Q. And the only thing you are aware of is that they weren't Mr. Simpson's. MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls to conclusion, Your Honor. Lack of foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You are aware -- well, strike that. Now, in your analysis, there was blood from Nicole Brown on Ron Goldman, right? A. That's correct. Q. And there was blood from Ron Goldman on Nicole Brown's clothing? A. Objection to this area. MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Lack of foundation. Calls for conclusion. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, in your role as co-lead detective, you certainly MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Argumentative, relevance, materiality, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: On which grounds? THE COURT: On the grounds that if this witness has no first-hand knowledge, it MR. BAKER: Your Honor, if he was designated an as an expert. MR. MEDVENE: The court please, Mr. Baker knows we're not supposed to argue in THE COURT: Well, his testimony thus far doesn't seem to be based upon any Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, you in your inspection in processing of the crime scene A. I observed some candles burning, yes. Q. And this was 7:00, 7:15 in the morning of the 13th? A. No, I first observed them about 4:30, 4:40 in the morning. Q. Well, you went back through at 6:45, did you not? A. It was probably after 7:00. Q. Okay. You think you got back about 6:45, then you did a rewalk through? A. Yes. Q. And then you made the notes that you say you made basically contemporaneous A. With the observations that I'd took; the observations that you read there. Q. If it says candles were burning in bedroom and living room, these notes were A. That's correct. Q. And in these notes being -- I think it's exhibit 10 -- 2107. MR. P. BAKER: 2107. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Okay. 2107, which I noted, candles burning in the room and That was at your 7:15 walk-through, right? A. Approximately. Q. So those candles had been burning for some at least seven hours? A. Very large thick candles. The type that do burn for many, many hours and can Q. How big were those candles? A. Approximately three to four inches in diameter. Q. How many were there when you saw them? A. Probably in the vicinity of six, seven inches, maybe eight inches. Some were Q. Did you blow them out? A. No. Q. You found that the bed was rumpled but made, correct? A. That's correct. Q. TV was on, correct? A. That's correct. Q. And then you did an exterior view of the house, did you not; after you had A. I did talk about lighting, yes. Q. And you actually went back to the crime scene on June 23 and made additional A. Yes. That's not uncommon. I've never worked a crime scene that I haven't Q. And then you went back on July 3, 1994 and made additional notes, correct? A. That's correct. Q. Now, there was a -- there was a Malibu light that was right about at the Let me have you look at your diagram. I'm sorry, I've got you at a (Witness reviews.) MR. P. BAKER: Exhibit 1439 is on the screen. (Exhibit 1439 is displayed.) Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Have you reviewed that document lately, Mr. Lange? A. No. In fact, if I may have a moment to orient myself? Q. Sure, take your time. A. I have a corresponding sheet that lists what I have on the schematic. Your Q. Approximately. A. -- Of Nicole Brown. Q. Approximately by the foot of Nicole Brown Simpson that illuminated onto the THE COURT: Is that the clearest it gets? MR. P. BAKER: Yeah. THE WITNESS: There was a directional light that went straight up over in this Now there were four Malibu lights, but there were some that weren't serviceable MR. MEDVENE: Excuse me. If the Court please, for the record, Mr. Baker, could Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Show us where you were pointing. A. The directional light was off to the left. This would be other photos that Q. (BY MR. BAKER) On your diagram that Malibu light is labeled C; is it not? A. No, sir. The C is the directional and D is the Malibu and it states it's not Q. And this is the illumination from the lighting in the area of the Malibu A. No. Q. No. That's something totally separate and apart, correct? A. Yeah. My notes indicate that the Malibu light is not serviceable. It doesn't Q. And that picture was taken at night, was it not? A. I believe so. Q. And you don't know what that circular light that's illuminating -- would A. Could you be a little more specific. Q. Well, it seems maybe -- A. 'Cause I never saw any light illuminating the sidewalk is why I ask. Q. This circular area here, that light, is it not, would it -- would appear to A. Again, I'm not an expert in photography or processing of negatives, but Q. Fair enough. A. So I'm uncomfortable with that. Q. Fair enough. Now, you talked about a duffle bag yesterday that you got from Mr. Simpson on A. I believe. Q. Or a grip? A. I'd call it a travel bag. Q. You had -- you had access to that very same travel bag four days before, A. Four days before what, sir? Q. Four days before you took it from Mr. Simpson on the 17th, you had access to A. No, sir, false. Q. Really. Let me ask you this: Did your partner -- were you in the room when Mr. Simpson A. I was. Q. And that grip was discussed, was it not? MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Hearsay, beyond the scope of direct, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled? THE WITNESS: I believe it was brought up, yes. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And your partner, Phil Vannatter, told you he had that grip MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls for hearsay, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Mr. Baker, you just said it was in the grip of my car (sic) and I Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And I apologize, sir. I'm -- Did you drive down with Mr. A. No, sir. Q. You didn't come down with them and the grip? A. I did not. Q. You came down in a separate vehicle. MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Outside the scope, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. That's correct. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And did you have conversation with your partner relative to MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence hearsay outside the THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: On what grounds, sir, so I can -- MR. MEDVENE: Compound question. MR. BAKER: Okay. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Did you talk to Phil Vannatter about the content of the grip A. No. It was just a comment, I believe, by Vannatter that he had the grip is Q. Well, now, Mr. Simpson was most definitely a suspect on June 13, 1994 when A. I'd call him, at that time, certainly a possible suspect, yes. Q. And you had the grip that he came back from the airplane with, that was the A. I never saw it. All I knew at that time, there was a grip in Mr. Vannatter's Q. So you and Mr. Vannatter had no conversations about the content of that bag? A. I don't believe so. Q. After the 17th, when you got the grip, did you have conversation with Mr. A. Wouldn't have known that, no. Q. Well, didn't you have any conversation with him about what was in the bag A. Certainly subsequently we went through the bag. We did discuss those items, Q. And the passport was in the bag on the 13th, was it not? A. I have no idea. Q. Well, did you discuss it with Mr. Vannatter, about what the contents were of A. The same response. No. Q. Never discussed it? A. Not until we went through it and inventoried it. Q. Now, after you went through it and inventoried it, did you discuss with Mr. MR. MEDVENE: Assumes facts not in evidence Your Honor. Also, hearsay. THE COURT: You may answer yes or no whether you discussed it. THE WITNESS: I don't believe we did. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) So you have no idea what items were in the bag on the 13th as A. The same response, sir. I didn't look in the bag, had no idea what was in Q. Now, did you find, in the bag, any shaving kit, any -- for example, if Anything like that in there? A. I don't recall specifically a shaving kit. And again, I probably haven't Q. Did you find any prescription medication in the travel bag? Do you have any A. There was prescription medication in the name of someone else other than Mr. Q. You were looking for a weapon when you took that bag, were you not? A. No. Q. You were looking for bloody clothing when you took that bag, were you not? A. Not specifically. Q. You were looking for bloody shoes when you took that bag, were you not? A. No, not specifically. Q. The reason you wanted to confiscate that grip is because you believe Mr. A. Which day are you speaking of? Q. The 17th, sir? A. Certainly he was under arrest for murder and he definitely was a suspect. In Q. And you were looking for the bloody clothes, bloody shoes and the murder A. Not specifically. We'd been looking for anything that might tend to connect Q. Did you send, at your direction, Ottis Marlow into the sewers between the MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You never found any bloody clothes, any murder weapon or A. No, I didn't. Q. And it wasn't because you didn't look and have other people look in Los A. Well, there were other reasons but there were places that we looked. Q. Can you answer my question, Mr. Lange? A. I'm trying to do that, sir. I'm trying to do it honestly. Q. You can answer yes or no. A. And I'm trying to do it accurately. Q. You can answer yes or no. THE COURT: Just a minute. Let's not have a -- Ask your question again, Mr. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You looked for bloody clothes, bloody shoes and a murder MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Outside the scope, Your Honor. THE COURT: You may answer yes or no. THE WITNESS: That's true. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now as I understood your testimony, relative to the -- THE COURT: Are we going to get to a different area right now? MR. BAKER: Yes. THE COURT: Let's take ten. (Recess.) (Jurors resume their respective seats.) (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the THE COURT: Counsel? (The following proceedings were held at the bench, with the reporter.) MR. PETROCELLI: More notes? THE COURT: No, this one is not bad. This one, the juror is concerned with MR. MEDVENE: Maybe transferred? MR. PETROCELLI: "Transfer evidence" is the word they're confused about. MR. BAKER: I don't know. THE COURT: You might clear it up. MR. BAKER: "Trace evidence." MR. PETROCELLI: The witness said "transfer." THE COURT: Okay. (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the THE COURT: Oh, I think I know what it was; it's transfer of blood onto the top MR. BAKER: Okay. I'll go back to that in a minute, if I may. THOMAS LANGE, the Q. Now, Mr. Lange, relative to the -- to what you suggested yesterday, that you A. Yeah, that's a fair statement. Q. In other words, as a long-time police officer, you certainly recognize the A. Yeah. But, you know, initially you don't know what you have. There's Q. And you would expect yourself to be thorough in booking the evidence and A. I would hope so. But sometimes mistakes are made, omissions, because you Q. And whether it be evidence inventory or personal property inventory, you A. That would be preferable. It doesn't always happen, but that would be Q. If, in fact, there's no inventory to an item, you can't testify as to where A. I did. Q. And you say they came from the duffel bag the grip, travel bag; that is, you A. No, I didn't say I got them on the 17th. I said it was subsequent to that. I Q. In any event, the property that was removed from the 1993 Bronco, in the A. Yes. Q. And the personal property report, did you inventory that, or did Mr. A. I'd have to take a look at it. Q. Well, do you have any personal knowledge of any of the items that you That is, did you take them out? Did you inventory them? And as you testified yesterday, they came out of the duffel bag, right? A. There were several persons present from the D.A.'s office. Q. Maybe you didn't understand my question. Maybe you didn't understand my My question is: You -- did you have personal knowledge of the -- what came out A. My recollection is that these items did come out of the duffel bag. Q. I didn't ask you is it your recollection. Did you see them come out of the duffel bag, and did you take them out of the A. That's my recollection. Q. Okay. Okay. You are aware, certainly, that the keys that you testified to yesterday A. I don't know if they would be. It seems to me that they did -- if you can Q. And if they weren't listed on the personal property report, the personal A. No. Q. Because you didn't have a recollection just a minute -- you don't have a A. No. You've misstated what I've said. Q. You can answer yes or no. MR. MEDVENE: If the Court please -- MR. BAKER: I'm not stating anything. MR. MEDVENE: The witness is trying to answer the question. THE COURT: Answer the question, please. THE WITNESS: Well, you have misstated my statement. MR. BAKER: I move to strike this witness's commentary and request the Court to THE COURT: Well, answer the question. THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the question. (The reporter read the pending question as follows:) "Q. Because you didn't THE WITNESS: Again, my recollection is that they came out of the duffel bag. I Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Did you review the personal property report in this case? A. No. Again, I asked you a few minutes ago if I could. I don't believe I've seen that Q. You have spent 20 hours reviewing this case, Mr. Lange. Did you review your own notes relative to your investigation of the crime scene A. My notes, yes, but not someone else's report on another investigation. Q. But you did review 2107 in detail, because these are your notes, correct? A. What's 2107? Q. Your notes. A. I have gone over the notes, yes. Q. And did you see on the personal property report, anything indicating the MR. MEDVENE: If the Court please, 2107 is not the personal property report. Can MR. BAKER: Is it on the back? I don't know if it's on the back. MR. MEDVENE: Also object on the basis of lack of foundation. Your Honor, it's MR. BAKER: Can we get a number for the personal property report? THE CLERK: A new exhibit? THE COURT: Yes. THE CLERK: 2108. MR. BAKER: New -- (The instrument herein referred to as Personal property report of property of THE COURT: What is the question? MR. BAKER: The question is: Q. (BY MR. BAKER) That's the personal property report for the items in the A. I didn't write this report and didn't have to review -- Q. I didn't ask you if you wrote the report; I asked you if it is the report. MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Foundation. THE WITNESS: Can I look at it and read it? MR. MEDVENE: Of course you can. THE COURT: Overruled. (Pause in proceedings.) THE WITNESS: I don't see any keys on here. There's no way of telling whether I'll stick with, my recollection is that the keys -- THE COURT: No, no. The question is, is that the personal property report. THE WITNESS: This is a report -- Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And -- A. -- property report listing items from the duffel bag; that's correct. Q. And the keys are not on there? A. I don't see them on there. Q. Thank you. MR. BAKER: Now, put up -- put up that photo of, please, Phil -- what's the name MR. P. BAKER: 2046. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) I want to go back. I found a little better photo. I want to ask you a couple questions about the And we have a blood smear down on the side? A. I believe it is. I -- well, I think it is. If I could see it from another Q. Okay. Let me show you the photo, because it's more clear in the actual MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, can we have an exhibit number? Didn't appear in the MR. BAKER: 2146. MR. PETROCELLI: No, there's a different item on that joint trial statement for MR. P. BAKER: 89. MR. BAKER: Would you believe 89? MR. PETROCELLI: It's what the statement says. MR. BAKER: Okay. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Let me put Exhibit 89 before you. And it's a little easier to A. Yes, that appears to be that support pole for the rung, yes. Q. And the knit cap in that photo would appear to be beyond the horizontal A. See the perpendicular rung with the horizontal from this angle; it's a Q. And certainly, the part of the cap that's under the horizontal rung, the cap A. Could have been kicked during the scuffle. Q. Maybe you didn't understand the question, Mr. Lange. I said, you would agree that the cap could not have been dropped into that A. No, not necessarily. Q. So if it were just dropped, normally, it would come down, would it not? A. Unless someone kicked it while it was being dropped. You know, I -- Q. Okay. A. -- I have no idea how it got in that position. Q. All right. And so the absence of any debris, any dirt on the cap, would MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Assumes a fact not in evidence. THE COURT: Speculative. Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) If it were kicked because you had been in the area -- You may resume your seat. If it had been kicked -- because you've been in the area and you've certainly MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls for speculation -- THE COURT: Sustained. MR. MEDVENE: -- conclusion, lack of foundation. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You would agree with your -- from your review of that MR. MEDVENE: Same objection, Your Honor. Also, lack of foundation. THE COURT: Foundation, sustained. MR. BAKER: Your Honor, may I be heard on that? THE COURT: All right. MR. BAKER: Thank you. (The following proceedings were held at the bench, with the reporter.) MR. BAKER: They have elicited testimony from this witness that he is an expert. He's talked about -- he's become an expert on candle burning, and has talked He goes in and out of his expert mode as he chooses, in my view. But in any THE COURT: Well, I think the question calls for expertise on drop-kicking a Sustain the objection. (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, you didn't, in looking at the photograph that's on the A. I can't tell, because I just saw certain portions of the cap. I didn't Q. In any event, you saw no evidence of it, regardless of your -- and you see MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. Asked and answered, lack of foundation. THE COURT: You may answer whether you see any evidence of it in that picture. THE WITNESS: Any evidence of? MR. BAKER: Transfer of his shoe to a cap. THE COURT: I think the question was from any source. THE WITNESS: Well, I do see evidence of something transferred, but that's -- Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You see particulate matter at about the 1 o'clock position? A. One -- if I could see that other photo, I could possibly see particulate -- Seems to me I did see some particles on that cap, if that's the question. Yes, Q. There's particles all over the cap in that picture in your view, right? A. Particles? Q. Particles all over the blood in your view in that picture, right? A. Well, I can't see from this picture any particles on the glove. There's possibly one here. But there appears to be little, tiny particles on Q. Nothing -- A. If that's -- Q. Nothing consistent with the amount of dirt that you saw on the boots of Mr. A. Consistent with? Q. Consistent with -- MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. Vague and ambiguous, calls for a THE COURT: Overruled on all those grounds. THE WITNESS: I don't -- MR. MEDVENE: I didn't pick the right ground. MR. KELLY: Argumentative. MR. MEDVENE: It is also. MR. BAKER: It's not that good a question; don't worry about it. (Laughter.) THE WITNESS: I'm sure I don't understand the question. MR. BAKER: See? Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You don't see any copious amounts of dirt on either of those MR. MEDVENE: The question is argumentative, Your Honor. Object on that ground. MR. BAKER: Did you answer the question? THE COURT: I'm trying to read the question. MR. BAKER: Sorry. (The reporter read the pending question as follows: "Q. You don't see any THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Not from this angle, no. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You never saw it from any angle, large amounts of debris, A. I didn't look. Q. So, in your investigation, these two pieces of physical evidence that are A. No. I looked at the items, obviously, but I did not pick them up to examine Q. All right. Now, on that photograph, there is blood transfer on the pole, is A. Appears to be, yes. Q. And could you just point to where the blood transfer on the pole is. (Witness complies.) A. Appears to be a transfer in that area right here. (Indicating.) Q. Now, blood transfer, sir, occurs when someone is bleeding, for example from A. That's my understanding. Q. And that particular transfer is right on the pole, the vertical pole that A. Perpendicular corner pole, this one right here? Q. Yes. Now, that particular blood smear is about and an inch or so off of the tile We've got it blown up a pretty good size. A. I really -- to me, it's grainy, and it's very blurred. I would do a lot MR. BAKER: Do we have another one of those so we can have one of these? Let me let you look at this again. (Witness reviews photo.) THE WITNESS: May I have the question again, please. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You certainly may. The smear is about one inch up from the tile, is it not? A. Appears to be, yes. Q. And that is not a blood drop; that has -- in your opinion, that has become A. Well, the problem with that is, it could have at one time have been a drop Now, I don't know how it smeared down -- I don't know how the blood got on the Q. In the terms of blood-stain analysis, if a drop is a vertical drop, it A. If it's a from a 90-degree source that's not moving, yes. Q. And in terms of a blood smear, that is a transfer of blood -- if I had a cut A. I don't know if you had a cut I would call it a smear, perhaps a transfer, Q. Well, let's -- can we then use the term "blood transfer" to include both A. Sure, sure. Q. And you would agree that what's on that pole is a blood transfer; that is, A. Well, it could have been a drop at one time and then gotten smeared. I need to qualify that. Q. What you see in that photograph which was taken on June 13, 1994 at the A. Possibly. Q. Well, in your opinion, is it or isn't it? A. I can't tell you my opinion because I didn't see it deposited. I've given Q. Let's just back up for a minute. You may assume your seat if you like, sir. The crime scene is allegedly secured at 12:30, when the LAPD gets their A. It's secured, yes. Q. And what's supposed to happen is that no one is supposed to go in and A. Certainly, no intentional contamination, obviously. Q. And no one would go -- be walking up the walkway where blood has come down A. I would hope not. Q. And no one would be over at the vertical support for the gate on the A. Not necessarily. I don't understand your question -- Q. Well -- A. -- or is that a statement? MR. BAKER: The actual picture with the foliage, if I may. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You would agree as a general proposition, that certainly, the A. That's correct. Q. And you would -- those pictures were taken at sometime, I want you to MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. Lack of foundation. MR. BAKER: Asking him to assume. THE COURT: Hypothetical. Overruled. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) We've heard testimony that police officers and detectives That would be consistent with what you saw at the time that you were there, A. Well, initially, before they entered the crime scene to do their work, yes. Q. And the pictures that document evidence are to document the evidence so that A. We want to do that, yes. Q. And what you don't want to do, of course, is, you don't want to turn a A. Certainly. Q. And in fact, where that pole is located, which would be on the right side of MR. BAKER: And that's exhibit what, Phil? MR. P. BAKER: 1439. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) 1439. That is an area that, the whole time you were there, A. No, there were people. There were coroners, investigators, criminalists, Q. The coroner didn't get there until after 9:00. The criminalist didn't get A. If I -- is there a specific time here that you're referring to? Q. Yeah. I said that picture, I want you to assume, was taken between 3:00 and A. I would hope not. Q. And that blood smear is within one inch or so from the tile, correct? A. Appears that way. Q. There wasn't anything that matched that on Mr. Goldman's boots, was there? A. That matched what? Q. That matched a blood transfer an inch above ground level. A. I'm sorry, I don't understand that question. A blood transfer here that Q. Well, that blood transfer had to come from someplace, didn't it? A. Well, certainly, yes. Q. It had to come from a bleeding wound, didn't it? A. Yes. Q. And it had to come from a bleeding wound that was an inch or so off the A. No. Q. It was not in an area where Nicole Brown Simpson was, was it? A. It certainly is. Q. Nicole Brown Simpson, in your opinion, was not knocked out before she was MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Beyond the scope, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. BY MR. BAKER: Let me look at your notes. You indicated on your notes that A. That's correct. Q. And she had no dirt on her feet, correct? A. That's correct. Q. Indicating she wasn't in the dirt area, true? A. More than likely. Q. Correct? I'm sorry. A. I would say more than likely that's pretty evident. Q. And your opinion was that she was knocked out basically in the position that A. That's what the evidence shows us, yes. Q. So her blood didn't transfer across the walkway into the vertical pole, did A. Yes, it did. Q. Oh, you think it did? A. I know it did. In that vicinity, I don't know what that blood is on that Q. If it transfered, it wouldn't be a smear. It would be drops as contrasted to A. That's what I said earlier, yes, true. Q. And there is no indication of how that blood smeared on that vertical pole, A. No. We can't tell how that happened. Of course, not. Q. And that could have been the perpetrators of the crime, correct, bleeding at MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Calls for speculation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. BY MR. BAKER: Now, did you, in the back alleyway of 875, did you see a A. Yes. MR. BAKER: Want to put that up. What number is that, please? MR. P. BAKER: 859. (Exhibit 859 is displayed.) (The instrument herein described as photo of blue plastic heart was marked for Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Where was that? A. The pendant was in the -- approximately the driveway area, I believe, Q. Now, when was that item -- strike that. That was an item of evidence? A. It was ultimately booked evidence. It wasn't initially, but ultimately I did Q. Well, it was -- that's the ruler of Mr. Rokahr, the photographer, that he A. That's correct. Q. That item was booked as evidence August 26, 1994, ten weeks later? A. Yes. Q. What happened to it between the 13th and the 26th, Mr. Lange? A. I collected it, Mr. Baker. It was in my -- Q. What did you do with it? A. -- It was in my desk drawer for that amount of time. Q. It was in your desk drawer? A. Yes. Q. For ten weeks. MR. MEDVENE: Objection. THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. MEDVENE: Argumentative, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Would you like me to explain, Mr. Baker? Q. BY MR. BAKER: Now, did you, personally, take any other evidence and have it A. I'm not aware of any evidence that wasn't booked. Q. Well, you're suppose to book things as soon as practical, true? A. That's the key word, "practical." It was not practical to book this item at Q. It wasn't practical to book that piece of evidence for ten weeks while it A. That's correct. Q. Okay. So your drawer, and in the area where you can book evidence, what is A. More like two miles. Q. So couldn't book it for the ten weeks? A. No. It's not that I couldn't. Q. Okay. A. I didn't want to. I specifically withheld that particular item for a Q. Oh, okay. Did you with hold any other evidence, Mr. Lange? A. No. Q. And how about the tennis shoes, did you take those home for my particular A. They couldn't have been booked on the night of the 13th because the ECU is I did, in fact, take them home with me instead of taking them all the way Q. So that was okay as far as you were concerned? A. It was on order by my commanding officer. It was the common sense thing to Q. It was okay, as far as you were concerned, to put the tennis shoes -- where A. Initially when I left I put them inside the vehicle. When I returned home, I MR. BAKER: Now, did Phil put up the triangular paper? MR. P. BAKER: Excuse me? MR. BAKER: No. The triangular paper? (Mr. P. Baker complies, displays item.) MR. P. BAKER: 1532. (The instrument herein described as a triangular piece of paper found at Bundy Q. (BY MR. BAKER) That piece of paper was observed by you at the crime scene on A. That's correct. Q. And that piece of paper has blood pattern evidence on it, correct? A. That's possibly open to interpretation. Q. Well -- well, Mr. Lange, why don't you give us yours, does it or doesn't it? A. Surely, there's a flow of blood on there if you were to interpret that as Again, this is why we take these types of photographs. I don't see anything in Later on, subsequently to this, there were three small lines, I believe, MR. BAKER: Move to strike as nonresponsive, Your Honor. The question was, to THE COURT: Sustained. Stricken. MR. BAKER: Can he answer the question? MR. MEDVENE: Excuse me. The witness said he had an opinion. It's based on what THE COURT: Okay. If you have one, yes or no? THE WITNESS: I formed an opinion, yes. Q. BY MR. BAKER: Did you have an opinion on the night of June 13, 1994, that A. No. I never examined it on that night nor that morning. Q. And did you direct anyone to pick up that piece of paper? A. No, I directed it to be photographed at a crime scene. You don't necessarily In this particular instance, there were other scraps of paper. There were bits You're going to examine it. You're going to document it, certainly, out of an Q. I take it, from your testimony just now, sir, that you personally have made A. No. If I didn't think it was significance, we wouldn't have gone to the Q. Oh? A. I did not direct the criminalist to pick it up. If he had, it wouldn't have Q. So let me see if I understand it. You made the decision there June 13, 1994, that this piece of paper was not A. That's my opinion, it was then and it is now. Q. I see. And you don't know whether there are any fingerprints on it 'cause MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Collection. And we're way beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. BY MR. BAKER: Blood pattern evidence can show shoe prints, can it not? MR. MEDVENE: Same objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Excuse me? MR. MEDVENE: Same Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Blood pattern evidence could show shoe prints. Overruled. I don't Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You don't know that. A. Regardless, that's why we take these identifying photographs so that Q. And you think that the photograph is probably as good as the actual physical A. No, I didn't say that. Q. You should have picked it up, shouldn't you? A. Not necessarily, no. Q. I didn't say -- A. It's become a contention point, Mr. Baker. I wish I had. I wish I directed MR. BAKER: Move to strike as nonresponsive. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. BY MR. BAKER: Now, do we have a picture of that? That piece of totally uncrucial evidence was between the bodies of the victims A. On the way, that's correct. Q. And it was within ten inches of the body of Nicole Brown Simpson? A. I don't know, possibly. Q. What picture is that? MR. P. BAKER: 92. THE COURT: It's a triangular piece of paper that we have on the monitor, THE WITNESS: Yes, it is. (The instrument herein referred to as a Picture of a triangular piece of paper Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Right where there is a copious amount of blood, true? A. There's blood all over, yes. Q. Right where there are shoe prints, correct? A. There are shoe prints that are above that location, yes. Q. And below that location? A. Yes. Q. Correct? A. Appears to be. Q. You never picked up the piece of paper to determine what was on the other MR. MEDVENE: Objection, collection, this line, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. BY MR. BAKER: By the way, did you wear booties at any time when you were at A. I've never worn booties on any crime scene and never heard of a detective Q. Why? Is it too unmacho? A. No. MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Argumentative. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, you're saying that you made the decision at the crime MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. Misstates the testimony. Asked and answered THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And you say, based upon your -- Did you go up and look at it A. I certainly did age, also documented it and I made sure it was photographed Q. In your view that it was appropriate, now, the picture that is on the board MR. P. BAKER: 92. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Were you present when that picture was taken? A. I don't believe so. Q. Were you present when the picture, the close-up I just put up on the board MR. BAKER: Which is what? MR. P. BAKER: 1532. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Were you present when that picture was taken, or were you A. No. I believe I was in the area. Q. It's your testimony that you directed Mr. Rokahr, the LAPD photographer, to A. I don't see that. I did order close-up photos of various items at the scene Q. And that was one of the items that you ordered a close-up photo? A. Well -- Q. You're sure about that as you testified? A. Specifically I can't say yes. I can say in a general sense that we do take orientation shots and we do take We ask the photographer, especially an experienced photographer, to start Q. My question was unclear. Let me see if I can rephrase it. Did you, personally, order any photograph of the piece of paper that is now on A. Same answer: In a general sense, yes. Q. So specifically, the answer is no, correct? A. Specifically, I can't say because there were specific instructions on THE CLERK: For the record, it's exhibit 1532. MR. BAKER: That's as close as I get, 1532. I apologize. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, did you direct Rokahr, the LAPD photographer, to take A. There was a mailer, a common mailer that had been through the neighborhood, There was a follow-up done on that mailer that had been delivered to all of the Q. Well, on June 13, 1994, you didn't know whether that mailer had gone A. That's true. Q. Did you have, did you direct Rolf Rokahr to take a pictures of that, sir? A. Again, there was a general request to photograph various things. I haven't Q. But certainly that would be a piece of evidence that you would at least want A. Certainly. Q. That this is this? A. And possibly writing also. Q. And there should be a photograph of that? A. I would hope that there would be, yes. Q. And it would be improper procedure if there wasn't, correct? MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Relevance, materiality, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, every blood drop that you located on June 13, 1994 was A. No. Q. Well, on the -- A. If you're speaking just specifically of the five drops on the walkway, Q. Well, there were the blood drops that you say you saw on June 13, 1994 in A. That's what I said. Q. And, so, as we go east to west, we have item 112, then we have item 11 -- or A. Correct. Q. And the item No. 113, that's basically in the center; is it not? That's not left or right if someone is walking from east to west, correct? A. No. I believe it is on the left side of the shoe print if you were to Q. And item No. 114, that's not on the left; is it? A. It is to the left of the shoe prints, yes. Q. There are shoe prints where 114 is? You sure of that? A. Well, on that schematic I believe there are prints not directly adjacent to, Q. And 115, that, you believe, that's also -- that's also on the left? A. No, 115, there weren't any shoe prints observed back at 115. Q. And 117, that's about what foot from the wall? If someone was still walking east to west, that wouldn't be on their left, A. I can't -- I couldn't say. Q. Well, so that all of the blood print, blood spots or stains that were out of A. That's correct. Q. And then as you go up to the back gate, and you get to the back gate, there A. That's certainly correct. Q. But these blood spots, you have no doubt, as you sit here today that they MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Question's argumentative as to the form that it was THE COURT: I'll sustain serendipity as inappropriate. The rest of the question MR. BAKER: Answer the question without the word serendipity? THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the question? MR. BAKER: You please read it without the word serendipity in it? MR. MEDVENE: Excuse me, it's not just that word, Mr. Baker, the question's also THE COURT: I think it was clear. Overruled. MR. BAKER: Let me just ask you the question. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) It was just happenstance that the blood on the back gate was MR. MEDVENE: Objection, Your Honor. Compound, about four questions. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I wouldn't call that happenstance. I wouldn't call it Q. (BY MR. BAKER) But these weren't additional blood drops. They were there on A. They were. Q. And you wouldn't put in your written or the additional blood drops because A. I observed blood on that gate on June 13, that's correct. Q. You wouldn't put additional blood drops as you, in fact put in there on June MR. MEDVENE: Excuse me, your honor, there's no need for Mr. Baker to behave MR. BAKER: I don't need -- THE COURT: Excuse me. MR. BAKER: -- An etiquette lesson from Mr. Medvene. THE COURT: Mr. Medvene, would you sit down. Mr. Baker. MR. BAKER: I apologize. THE COURT: Thank you. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Read to the jury what you wrote on June 13, 19 -- Strike that A. I've got a log here and I've got everyone who was there and I'd put down. Q. Just read what the additional blood drops -- MR. MEDVENE: I'd ask that he not interrupt him. THE COURT: Mr. Medvene, we might get this thing done if you wouldn't keep THE WITNESS: Certainly. Additional blood droplets, located rear gate, north Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And that was, sir, the blood drops, these were additional A. That was done additionally on July 3. Q. No, you said additional blood drops. You didn't say it was done A. That's what it says. Q. Now, the --. MR. P. BAKER: 719. (Exhibit 719 is displayed.) MR. BAKER: I should have taken that down. I'll probably hurt somebody if I put (Referring to large exhibit.) Q. (BY MR. BAKER) This picture is the far away view that was taken on June 13, A. It is. Q. And all of the blood drops that you saw and documented and had collected on A. All of the blood drops -- Q. Sure. A. -- I observed on July 3? Q. Yeah. Just let's just take the lower -- A. Well -- Q. -- Horizontal bar of the gate. You saw where we have items No. 115 and 116 A. That's correct. Q. Yeah and both of those drops were definitely in your view, no question about A. That's correct. Q. Zoom in on that. A. You have a terrible photo here. Q. Terrible photo, huh. Tell us where they are. A. This is 115 in this area here. Because of the angle, the graininess of the Q. And 115 isn't there; is it? A. It might be 116. Q. Okay. A. This is 115. 116 is not visible for the reasons stated. Q. So it was there and the photograph, just kind of omitted it, right? A. Photograph? Didn't omitt it. There were, as you can see, it's smaller. This Q. And that photo shows all the way to the mesh in the gate. And if 116 had A. It is on that photo because of the reasons stated. You can't see it because Q. We are well aware of that. A. Well, I don't know, sir. I'm trying to tell you here what happened with this Q. I see. So you believe that 116 is there and it's just impossible to see A. No, no. MR. BAKER: I don't have anything further. THE COURT: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, 1:30. Don't talk about the case. Don't (At 12:00 P.M. a recess was taken until 1:30 of the same day.) SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT NO. WEQ (REGINA D. CHAVEZ, OFFICIAL REPORTER) (Jurors resume their respective seats.) (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the MR. BAKER: Your Honor I apologize. Mr. Lange, I did find the photograph to the menu. THE WITNESS: Okay. Thank you. THE CLERK: And you are still under oath. Would you state your name again for the record. THE WITNESS: Tom Lange. THE CLERK: Thank you. THOMAS LANGE the witness on the stand at the time of the Q. You made reference to the pendant when you were questioned today and the What purpose did you hold it for? A. From time to time, there are items from a crime scene in a case that an So that's why I held onto that particular pendant. Q. Did you use it from time to time in the course of your investigation? A. Yes. Q. There was reference to the Reebok shoes. Approximately what time did you A. I took them into custody sometime after 6:00 p.m., I believe, on the 13th. Q. Did you then have the conversation with Captain Gartland that you made A. Yes. MR. BAKER: I'm going to object. That's leading and suggestive. THE COURT: Sustained. (BY MR. MEDVENE) What did you do with the shoes? Excuse me. When did you book the shoes? A. The following morning, at the lab, turned them over to Mr. Matheson for Q. Approximately what time? A. 7:00 a.m. Q. Now, you made reference to a key being taken out of a duffel bag. Who was present when that key was taken out of the duffel bag; that is, the A. There were other keys taken out. I believe I testified to two rings. It was Q. What did you do with the Smokey the Bear key? A. I gave them to Detective Payne. Q. What was the purpose of giving them to Detective Payne? A. To have -- MR. BAKER: I object, Your Honor. It's irrelevant what the purpose was. It's THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: To get a lock made that would fit. MR. BAKER: I move to strike, Your Honor, in view of the previous ruling of the THE COURT: This portion may come in. THE WITNESS: To get a lock constructed from those keys. (BY MR. MEDVENE) I will -- I'm going to place on the TV monitor what's been (The instrument herein referred to as Copy of property report was marked for Q. (BY MR. MEDVENE) Can you tell me what -- could you first go to the broad Can you tell me what that is? A. That is a property report with this case DR number on it, and a number of Q. Can you then go to date and time property taken into police custody -- Can you zoom in on that, please. A. That's June 17, 1994 at 2030 hours, which is 8:30 p.m., at 360 North Q. Would you now zoom in, please, to the first paragraph. Does that make any reference to the Smokey the Bear key ring? A. Yes. Q. And what does it say? A. Well, if you want it verbatim, you have to hold it still. (Indicating to monitor.) There's an item number 290, states, one key ring with two keys and one small The narrative to this appears -- THE COURT: Can you go back up to the narrative for a moment, please. A. Property recovered pursuant to a 187 investigation, which is murder. Item Q. Could we get down to the key. What number is the key item? A. The keys, I believe there's three items of keys: 289, 290, and 291. Q. Could we go up to the paragraph to see when they were recovered? A. Items 289, 290, and 291, which are the keys in question, retrieved at 360 MR. MEDVENE: Move it over a little bit. No, the other way. A. -- on June 17, 1994. MR. MEDVENE: That's fine. THE WITNESS: That's it. Q. (BY MR. MEDVENE) Next area, some question about a menu. Would you put up -- MR. MEDVENE: Would you put up, please, Exhibit 875. Would you zoom in, if you could. Q. (BY MR. MEDVENE) Could you tell us what that picture depicts? A. That's the right foot of victim Brown, and additionally, that's a fast-food Q. What date was that picture taken? A. That was taken on the morning of June 13. MR. MEDVENE: Would you put on the board, please, Exhibit 2110. Q. (BY MR. MEDVENE) And I ask you what that is. A. It's a close-up shot of the same menu. Q. Thank you. Did you do any investigation to make a determination whether that menu was A. I did. Q. And what did you determine? A. That it was a common item deposited in all of the mailboxes in the Q. Now, with reference to July 3 and the walk-through you've told us about, in What did you mean by the word "additional?" A. I meant additionally collected evidence, additionally collected blood drops. Q. Yesterday, you were asked some questions regarding shoe prints. Did you see more than one pattern of bloody shoe prints on the Bundy walkway? A. No. Q. Did you see more than one pattern of bloody shoe prints between the two A. No. Q. Yesterday, you made reference to a supplemental arrest report that you Can you tell us when that report was written? A. Supplemental report or a follow-up? Q. Follow-up investigation. A. Follow-up report. When it was written? Q. Yes, sir. A. It was written over a period of three or four days. The last paragraph was Q. Did you know on June 13, at about 5:00 a.m. in the morning, that Detective A. No. MR. BAKER: Leading. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. MEDVENE) What was the purpose of the follow-up investigation report? A. That particular follow-up report is a compilation of events and incidents The district attorney's office requires this form before they file any case, THE COURT: Mr. Medvene, would you take a look at that exhibit, make sure the MR. MEDVENE: Yes, sir. THE COURT: -- Gave is correct. MR. MEDVENE: Yes, sir. (Counsel confer.) MR. MEDVENE: I will clear up the record if I have the wrong number, Your Honor. If I could proceed, then I'll clear it up, unless you want me to do it now. MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, it was originally offered by the defense, but they THE CLERK: 2111. MR. PETROCELLI: 2111? THE CLERK: Correct. MR. PETROCELLI: Okay. (The instrument herein referred to as Copy of supplemental report of 6/17/94 Q. (BY MR. MEDVENE) When did you first receive the information that Mr. Simpson A. I believe it was later on in the day, perhaps late afternoon or the evening Q. Yesterday, when counsel questioned you, there was some reference to the word What was your purpose in going to see Mr. Simpson? A. Certainly that was part of it, to attempt to build a rapport, to get to know Q. With reference to fingerprints, any unidentified prints, as you sit here, do A. Unidentified prints? Q. Yeah. A. No. I don't believe there were. Q. If a murderer was wearing gloves when he committed the murders, would A. No. Q. Now, you made reference to an object that was utilized to cover Ms. Brown. A. I believe you're referring to the blanket. It was a hospital blanket, white in color. It was -- had tightly woven fabric. It was a hospital blanket. Q. What time of the morning, approximately, if you recall, did you make a A. I think it was shortly after I returned, which would make it sometime after Q. What were the lighting conditions? A. Excellent. It was daylight. Q. Was the media there? A. They were beginning to arrive, to set up cameras across the street. Q. What were the reasons that you wanted something to cover Ms. Brown? A. At a crime scene, an investigator has to be concerned with contamination With the amount of cameras, the multitude of media across the street, sitting Jewelry or lack thereof on the body is evidence. The number of wounds are To leave that body exposed, number one, is to leave it open to all of the media This is what an investigator calls keys. Keys are things that I could use to As a consequence, I had to protect them. I had to make a decision to protect There's also a secondary consideration. Certainly, regarding that body in MR. MEDVENE: I have nothing further, Your Honor. Thank you very much. RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAKER: Q. Let me see if I -- you testified a little earlier that basically, you A. No. I believe you have -- you're taking that out of contest. Q. Just, if you can, answer the question. Just answer my question, would you, If you didn't testify to that, you have no recollection, just say I didn't; MR. MEDVENE: The question is ambiguous as to time or vague as to time. THE COURT: Vague as to time, sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You say that you were concerned because all of this evidence A. Potential evidence. Obviously, we don't know what we have at the time, but Q. Was all of that potential evidence on the body at 5:00 a.m. when you decided MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence, that he intended to THE COURT: Most of the questions. Okay. Overruled. THE WITNESS: We intended to leave for about 10 or 15 minutes. There were no Q. Now, that blanket then becomes evidence because you have transfer of blood. A. I suppose that's a possibility. It could, yes. Q. Put it on. You left the blanket at the crime scene for souvenir seekers, didn't you? A. No. I wasn't even there at the time the crime scene was closed down, Mr. Q. You made no effort whatsoever, sir, to have the blanket preserved. And A. Unfortunately, I was not afforded the walk-through. I was not there when I take full responsibility for the criminalist not picking up that blanket. I My mind didn't have anything to do with the evidence in this case, no. MR. BAKER: Could I have that read back, Your Honor. THE COURT: Well, I think he's answered it. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) If you wanted to keep the photographs from being taken, all A. No. It was extremely simplistic. That certainly wouldn't have done for the High-tech cameras could have set up in a 360 in the air. It's just -- Q. So it just wouldn't have worked? A. I don't believe it would have, no. Q. Fair enough. Now, let's talk about the keys again. I think we discussed that the plastic heart which you kept in your desk for A. I don't recall how long it was. Could -- would have been something like Q. Let me show you the property report that you just read from, and ask you to A. There were several items booked that day. Q. I'm just asking you to tell -- A. Would you like me to answer your question? Q. Yeah. Just give me a date, Mr. Lange? Give me a date. A. I was about to do that, and you cut me off. Q. Thank you. A. All right. August 25, 1994. Q. So these -- these keys that you say you removed from the duffel bag on June A. No. And I never said that I took them out June 17. Q. Is it your testimony now, that you're saying that the keys, the two keys, A. Now, before and whenever you asked me, that's correct. They were taken out Q. Let me show you another document and ask you if this is a document A. These are other items that were in that bag; that's correct. Q. So those are other items? A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. That I already testified to. Q. Now, these indicate -- well, let me ask you this question, Mr. Lange: I take it that the documentation of crime-scene evidence is more important, and A. It's a possibility of that occurring, certainly. Q. And in the property report, that shows that from the duffel bag, there is no You'll agree with that? A. In this particular report, no, there isn't. There shouldn't be. Q. And in the report -- that is, the other report, it doesn't mention anything A. No. It wouldn't necessarily mention a travel bag. Different items are booked Q. When you inventory property of a person, are you telling us that you take A. That's also a bit of a convoluted explanation in this particular case. I'll Q. No; just answer my question for a change. A. No; it doesn't get that convoluted, no. THE COURT: I don't think you've indicated what the second document was -- MR. BAKER: Thank you. Property report. MR. P. BAKER: 1412. MR. BAKER: 1412. (The instrument herein referred to as Copy of a property report dated July 25, Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And what's the date of the report that indicates evidence was A. The evidence that was recovered this particular -- Q. The day of the report, sir, upper left-hand corner. A. I don't know if i have the right one or you've either misstated or I have Q. The document indicates -- A. This document, okay. Q. It indicates that evidence was recovered from O.J. Simpson's travel bag, A. The date of the report is -- Q. July 25? A. -- July. Q. Right? A. July 25, yes. THE COURT: That's 1412? MR. BAKER: Yes, sir. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) So you had items removed from the -- strike that. All those people that you said were there when all this stuff was removed from A. No, no. Q. It wasn't on the 17th when you removed all of the items from -- A. As to the meeting, no. The meeting occurred sometime after the 17th. This Q. Oh, I thought -- I misunderstood you. A. Maybe I misled you. The meeting occurred sometime after the 17th. That's Q. So there was nothing removed from the bag until the meeting, to the best of A. I don't believe there was. I'm pretty certain that the bag was looked into. But the District Attorney wanted to get a firsthand look at everything that was Q. Now, this indicates -- that is 1412 -- that this property was recovered and A. Yeah. That's the date and time of this report, correct. Q. That's not when the items were recovered, though? A. That's the date and time of that report. Q. Okay. And the date and time that the custody -- the property was taken into A. Yes. That's the bag with everything in it. Q. And then the date and time of this property, when it was recovered -- and it MR. BAKER: What's the number of the other property report, Phil, this one? MR. MEDVENE: 2109. MR. P. BAKER: 2109. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, 2109 doesn't mention anything about any keys in a duffel A. It mentions the keys, yes. Q. It doesn't mention -- maybe my question is unclear. We'll try it again. It doesn't mention anything about a duffel bag, a travel bag, or anything else, A. No, it wouldn't. Various different pieces of -- items -- some of it didn't Q. So the property report that's booked on 8/25/96, that includes the pendant A. You said '96 earlier. Q. I apologize. A. Yes, as stated. Q. All right. So we've got ten weeks before there is any documentation by the A. No. I -- no. Q. Where is the documentation of any of those items before August 25, 1994? A. Written down documentation? I don't know what -- that I'd find -- Q. That's what I mean. A. The item was taken into custody, the travel bag with everything in it, and Q. So there is no documentation until you or others documented it on 8/25, A. The bag is, I believe, documented from June 6 to 17 -- I believe it is -- as Once again, same answer: No, not until we get back to it. Q. Let's get to the murder follow-up report, 2011. The murder follow-up report was done in toto by you, correct? A. No. Q. You authored this; that's what you suggested to us. A. I wrote it, but it's a compilation of information received from people like Q. And you are kind of the melting pot. In other words, the information comes Exhibit 2011 is in a chronological sequence, correct? A. That's basically -- MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, it's 2111, not 2011. MR. BAKER: Okay. Sorry. (The instrument herein referred to as a supplemental report dated 6/17/94 was Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And you put it in a chronological sequence, correct? A. Generally, yes. Q. And you put it -- was your writing that was dated June 13, 1994. At approximately 0010 hours, victim 1, Nicole Brown Simpson, age 35, and victim That was your first paragraph, right? A. Yes. Q. Then you said: Upon arrival at the crime scene, detectives were met by -- A. Could I see a copy of that? Q. Sure. Sure. Page 2, top of the paragraph where you say detectives were met? A. Top paragraph? Q. Paragraph 2, top of the page. A. Oh, I see. Crime scene taken by Detective 3, Ron Phillips, West Los Angeles homicide Q. When you say, "Upon arrival at the crime scene, detectives were met," you A. Yeah. Q. So you two were met by Ron Phillips, West L.A. Division Homicide A. Yes. Q. Phillips stated that victim Brown was the ex-wife of O.J. Simpson. He told you that when you met him? A. I think that was something I learned later. At the time, I didn't know. Q. You can answer it yes or no? A. Well, then, I'd have to say no. Q. Okay. Fine. And you then state that, "Additionally, Phillips stated Mr. Simpson and victim Then you state, "Mr. Simpson resided at 306 North Rockingham Place in That's what you said, right? A. I believe that's what it says. I don't have a copy in front of me. Q. And you were putting all that in chronological sequence, were you not? A. Generally, yes. Q. And so you were going up to check on `Mr. Simpson's welfare? A. That's a very general term, which would include the welfare of his children Q. You never met -- A. -- his emotional -- Sir, I possibly didn't mention a lot of things, but I did mention most things Q. Now, you talked about shoes. And Mr. Medvene just questioned you a little Now, those shoes were shoes that you had obtained from Mr. Simpson, correct? A. Yes. Q. And you obtained those shoes from Mr. Simpson upstairs in his house, in his A. Yes. Q. And so you had been upstairs on the 13th in Mr. Simpson's house, in his A. Yes. Q. And you hadn't found any Bruno Magli or any bloody shoes, had you, and you A. No. MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Outside the scope, Your Honor. THE WITNESS: We had no idea these were Bruno Magli shoes until two months Q. MR. BAKER: You looked for bloody shoes and didn't find them, true? THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection as going beyond the scope of the MR. BAKER: Let me get to it as quick as I can. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You took the Reebok tennis shoes because Mr. Simpson told you A. There were other reasons; there were others. Q. And you took those shoes and you took them to your police unit, and you took A. Yes. Q. And then you took them back the next morning and you booked them as A. No. Q. You had them --you hadn't given -- you had a DR number for the case, and A. No. I gave them to Mr. Matheson at the lab for analysis. He was then going That's why I gave them to Mr. Matheson the following morning at the first Q. And those Reebok shoes were booked as evidence before the blood vial was MR. MEDVENE: Objection. Outside the scope. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I don't believe so. They weren't booked. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) The reference blood from Mr. Simpson's arm that was taken at A. I have no idea as to when it was booked. MR. BAKER: I don't have anything further. MR. MEDVENE: Just a question or two. FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MEDVENE: Q. Was the inventory report that counsel asked you about, I believe it's 1412, A. I don't have -- I don't recall specifically what that date was. I do recall, I don't know. I don't recall what that date was. Q. And 2109 that you have, that property report, that shows the keys retrieved A. Taken into custody on June 17, yes, 1994. Q. At what time? A. 2030 hours, which is 8:30 p.m. Q. Is that when Mr. Simpson was arrested and in Mr. Cowlings' car? A. Yes. MR. MEDVENE: I have nothing further. MR. BAKER: No questions. MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, I have a series of exhibits that were referred to. THE COURT: Go ahead. MR. PETROCELLI: I'll just refer to the numbers. They're in the joint trial Exhibits 20, 57, 36, 46, 47, 719, 32, 91, 38, 43, 45, 47, 1781, 54, 55, 1782, Thank you. THE COURT: There being no objection, they are received. (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 20 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 57 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 36 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 46 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 47 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 719 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 32 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 91 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 38 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 43 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 45 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1781 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 54 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 55 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1782 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2051 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2044 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 125 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 87 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 88 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 89 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 91 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 49 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 69 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2058 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 38 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 43 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 138 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 131 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 24 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 875 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 129 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 717 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 44 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 48 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 50 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 501 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 52 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 53 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 56 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 67 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 68 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 70 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 71 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 72 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 73 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 74 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 75 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 76 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 81 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 84 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 85 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 86 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 82 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 83 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2109 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 689 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 690 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 698 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 699 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 676 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2110 was received in (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2111 was received in THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to take ten minutes. I understand If it's something that's not immediate, let the bailiff know, and the bailiff All right. We'll see you in about ten minutes or so. (Recess taken.) (Jurors resume their respective seats.) MR. BAKER: Your Honor, I would object to 2111 going into evidence. We can argue THE COURT: Okay. MR. BAKER: Thank you, sir. THE COURT: Call your next witness. MR. KELLY: Mr. Vannatter, please. PHILIP VANNATTER, called as a witness on behalf of Plaintiff Brown, was duly THE CLERK: You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause THE WITNESS: I do. THE CLERK: And if you'd please state and spell your name for the record. THE WITNESS: Philip Vannatter, P-H-I-L-I-P, V-A-N-N-A-T-T-E-R. DIRECT Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Vannatter. A. Good afternoon. Q. Mr. Vannatter, are you permanently employed? A. No, sir, I'm retired. Q. And going back to June 13, 1994, were you employed at that time? A. Yes. Q. And by whom? A. The Los Angeles police department. Q. And as of June 13, 1994, how long have you been employed by the Los Angeles A. 26 and a half years. Q. And as of June 13, 1994, were you assigned to any particular division within A. Yes. Q. And what division was that? A. Robbery/homicide division. Q. And did you have a partner, a steady partner within that time? A. Yes. Q. Who was that? A. Tom Lange. Q. Now, did you have occasion, Mr. Vannatter, to be at Parker Center at A. Yes, I did. Q. And first of all, what is Parker Center? A. Parker Center is the main police building to the Los Angeles police Q. Okay. And you recall where, specifically, you were within Parker Center at A. I do. Q. And where were you? A. In the jail dispensary located on the first floor of jail division. Q. And was there anybody else there with you at that time? A. Yes. Q. And who was there with you at that time? A. Tom Lange, O.J. Simpson and Thano Peratis. Q. And were you there for a particular purpose? A. Yes. Q. And what was that purpose that you were there for? A. To obtain a blood sample from Mr. Simpson. Q. And on -- at this time and at that place, did you obtain a blood sample from A. Yes. Q. And could you briefly describe -- first of all, did you have occasion to A. Yes. Q. And could you tell me what you observed in terms of that sample being taken? A. It was taken under medically approved conditions with a syringe placed into Q. Okay. And who actually removed that blood from Simpson using a syringe? A. The registered nurse, Peratis. Q. That was Thano Peratis, as you mentioned before? A. Yes. Q. Was it your request he withdrew the blood from Simpson? A. Yes. Q. And can you tell me once again, what he did with the syringe after he A. He injected the needle through the purple top cap of the vial and injected Q. There was no top to remove from the vial to place the blood in there; is A. That's correct. There was no top removed. Q. The needle was placed through the top? A. That is correct. Q. Okay. And what, if anything, did Mr. Peratis do, Nurse Peratis do with the MR. BAKER: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Witness may testify to what he observed. THE WITNESS: He placed it into a small manila envelope and gave it to me. Q. (BY MR. KELLY) Okay. And do you know whether there were any markings on the vial before it was given A. Yes. Q. And what markings were those? A. Mr. Simpson's name was placed on it and my name was placed on it. Q. Okay. And what, if anything, did you do with the vial when you received it A. I hand carried it up to the third floor, robbery/homicide division. Q. Okay. And what, if anything, did you do once you arrived on the third floor at A. I obtained an analyzed evidence envelope, a specific envelope for blood; for Q. I'm sorry. What color, again, was that envelope? A. A gray envelope. Q. And would you be able to describe the proximate size of that envelope for A. Yeah. It's approximately 8 by 10. Q. And after you placed -- after you completed that paperwork on the envelope, A. No. I laid it down on my desk. Q. Did you place the vial in the envelope? A. Oh, yeah. After I placed the vial in the -- In the envelope, I laid it on my Q. Okay. Did there come a time that you departed Parker Center that day A. Yes. Q. And approximately what time did you depart from Parker Center? A. Approximately 4:00 p.m. Q. Okay. And in what manner did you depart from Parker Center? How did you A. I drove the city issued vehicle that was issued to me. Q. Did anybody leave with you in that car at that time? A. No. I was by myself in the car. Q. Okay. And did you take that evidence envelope with the vial with you at that A. I did. Q. Okay. And could you tell me where, if anywhere, you were heading at A. Yes, to 360 north Rockingham in Brentwood. Q. And can you tell me the route you took in going from Parker Center to get to A. I took the Santa Monica freeway, west to the San Diego freeway, as I recall; Q. Would you be able to describe the traffic conditions to me that existed at A. They were extremely heavy. Q. Do you recall at approximately what time you arrived at Rockingham? A. Shortly after 5:00 P.M. Q. And did you get out of your car at that time? A. Yes. Q. Did you take that evidence envelope with the vial in it at that time also? A. Yes. Q. And what, if anything, did you do with that evidence envelope with the vial A. I walked directly to the front foyer area of the residence and handed it to Q. At any time prior to turning over that vial in the evidence in to Dennis A. Never. Q. Okay. Did you ever even take that vial out of the evidence envelope after MR. BAKER: Leading and suggestive. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: No. Q. (BY MR. KELLY) Mr. Vannatter, I now want to draw your attention to June 15, Do you recall where you were at approximately 8:30 A.M. on that morning? A. I do. Q. And where were you at that time? A. The Los Angeles county coroner's office. Q. And at that time and at that place, did you obtain anything from the A. I did about 15 minutes after 8:30; about 8:45. Yes, I did. Q. And what did you obtain at that time? A. The Nicole Brown Simpson's blood sample and Ronald Goldman's blood sample. Q. And when you say you obtained their samples, what were these blood samples A. They were in vials that had been prepared by the autopsy surgeon. Q. And were the vials contained within anything else? A. They were removed from refrigeration, placed in manila envelopes, sealed and Q. Okay. And those envelopes were sealed when you received them? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And were those envelopes labeled on the outside when you received A. They were just plain envelopes. The actual vial itself was labeled. Q. Okay. Now when you were at the coroner's office receiving these two vials in A. Yes. I had to sign an evidence control log, Los Angeles county coroner's Q. Did you do that on that day? A. I did. Q. Let me see if I can see 387, please. And Mr. Vannatter, I'd like to direct your attention to what's on the screen A. I'm having a hard time seeing. Q. Maybe you might want to stand up and step around and look at -- can you make (The instrument herein described as coroner's documents consisting of autopsy Q. (BY MR. KELLY) First of all, are you able to recognize that document? A. Yes, I am. Q. Okay. Is that the evidence log you referred to that you would have had to A. That's correct. That would appear that that's a copy of it. I recognize my Q. So could you focus it a little bit, please? If you could just step up and point out where you see your signature there. A. Yes, sir. My signature is right above the printed information that was done Q. That's your badge number also? A. Yes. That information was recorded by the coroner's office. Q. Why don't you just read me the information that was recorded on that format A. Phil Vannatter, serial No. 14877, LAPD Robbery/homicide division, by G. Q. Does G. Siglar refer to a name? A. That's a person that works in the laboratory at the coroner's office. Q. Is that the person who you obtained the vials from? A. Yes. Q. What does the time, 8:45 A.M. represent? A. That would have been the time they released to me. Q. Okay. You can have a seat again, please. Now, Mr. Vannatter, after receiving those two vials of blood, one of Nicole A. I proceeded directly to Scientific Investigation Division, located at Piper Q. And how far is Piper Tech from the coroner's office where you picked up the A. Approximately a five- to ten-minute drive. Q. Okay. And what, if anything, did you do when you arrived there with those two vials? A. I signed in the laboratory, went directly to the supervisor serologist's Q. Were the envelopes still sealed when you delivered them as they had when you A. Yes, sir. Q. And one other thing, if we could, flip on 721, please, Steve. (Mr. Foster complies, displays exhibit 721.) (The instrument herein described as SID, sign-in sheets, 6/15/94, was marked Q. (BY MR. KELLY) I'd ask you if -- you indicated you signed in when you A. No. Q. -- Is that correct? I mean at the S.I.D., scientific investigation? A. Yes, sir. Q. That's correct. And you -- do you recognize that document that's reflected A. May I get up and look? Q. Sure. (Witness approaches screen.) A. Yes. This is, it would appear, a xerox copy of the log that was maintained Q. Okay. And if you could just stay there a moment, Steve. Can you focus it a And can you tell me, Mr. Vannatter, what, from -- what information is reflected A. Yes. I recognize my printing. My first initial, last name. RHD stands for Q. That was approximately five minutes after you left the coroner's office? A. That's correct, sir. Yes. MR. KELLY: Okay. I have no further questions. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAKER: Q. Good afternoon. A. Good afternoon, sir. Q. Now, how many meetings did you have with the Plaintiffs' attorneys before A. How many meetings total, sir. Q. Yeah. Since Mr. Simpson was acquitted on October 3, 1994, how many meetings A. I had -- let me think. I had one meeting with Mr. Medvene before I retired, Q. And you consider the Goldmans your friends, do you not? A. I consider -- I would hope that they're my friends, yes. Q. And you've socialized with them out in the hall. You consider them to be -- A. Yes. Q. And you have spent -- well, strike that. Did you spend over 10, 12 hours getting ready to testify in on this case? A. No. Q. And did Mr. Kelly, in your meetings last night, tell you what they wanted to MR. KELLY: Objection, Your Honor. Relevance. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: On what ground? MR. KELLY: Relevance. My discussions with him, what I said to Mr. Vannatter. THE COURT: That I'll sustain. MR. BAKER: Did you understand from your meetings with Mr. Kelly, that you were MR. KELLY: Same objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. That's all that was examined and that goes beyond it. MR. BAKER: I will get into that in a minute, I'm sure. MR. KELLY: Objection. I'd ask Mr. Baker's gratuitous comments be stricken from THE COURT: Let's get on with it, please. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) At 2:30 in the afternoon -- well, strike that. You were the co-lead detective in this case; is that right? A. Yes, sir, I was. Q. You were the co-lead detective from 4:25 in the morning on June 13, 1994, A. Yes. Yes, that's true. Q. And at 2:30 in the afternoon on June 13, 1994, you were at the jail THE COURT: Sustained. I'm not going to get into anything beyond what this MR. BAKER: I would ask the Court to look at cases that I gave to the Court THE COURT: This witness is a witness called for a limited purpose by plaintiff. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) At 2:30, the only reason that you could be at the jail MR. KELLY: Objection. Same objection. Goes beyond the scope as to what was -- THE COURT: It's a party. (Referring to counsel table.). Overruled. THE WITNESS: Yes. He volunteered to give a sampling, yes. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) He had, you had told Mr. Simpson that you had some problems MR. KELLY: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, you certainly couldn't have taken Mr. Simpson's blood MR. KELLY: Objection. Argumentative, Your Honor. THE COURT: Irrelevant. He's -- MR. KELLY: Irrelevant also. (Laughter) Q. (BY MR. BAKER) So Mr. Simpson gave you permission to take his blood on June MR. KELLY: Objection to the second half of that question, Your Honor. Compound THE COURT: Overruled. Let's get on with it. THE WITNESS: Yes. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And when you went down to take Mr. Simpson's blood, did he A. No. Q. And so it was just you, Mr. Lange, and Nurse Peratis, correct? A. And Mr. Simpson, yes. Q. Well, if you were going to take his blood, he ought to be there, don't you So at that time you had a photographer come in, did you not, to the area where MR. KELLY: Objection. Beyond the scope, Your Honor. THE COURT: Photographer came in. Overruled. THE WITNESS: No. I didn't have a photographer come in there. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, a photographer came in and took a picture of Mr. MR. KELLY: Objection. Beyond the scope, Your Honor. THE COURT: That's sustained.if he took the picture of him drawing blood. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) During the time that Mr. Peratis was drawing blood and you MR. KELLY: Objection. Beyond the scope, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: He cleaned his finger, yes and put a Band-Aid on it. Q. And you looked at Mr. Simpson's fingers at that time and his hands at that A. I looked at his hand, yes. Q. And he had one cut that was on the knuckle of -- or the middle joint of his MR. KELLY: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: It's at the time he's there looking at it. THE COURT: I'm just interested in taking of the blood. That's all that was MR. BAKER: Your Honor, I respectfully disagree with the Court's ruling. THE COURT: I know you do. You've done that several times. And I'm just doing my MR. BAKER: I'm trying to do mine. THE COURT: I know. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, where do you live, sir? MR. KELLY: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Did you say this has some relevance to the taking of the blood? MR. BAKER: It has some relevance to him coming back so I can get him here MR. KELLY: Objection. If Mr. Baker has any application, I ask that it be made THE COURT: Mr. Baker, if you want to make a request in that regard, I'll make MR. BAKER: Okay. Let's make it. THE COURT: I'll have him in court. MR. BAKER: Thank you. THE COURT: So at the conclusion of today, please remind me. MR. KELLY: Your Honor, before you do, I would like to be heard on that. THE COURT: You may. MR. KELLY: Thank you. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, so at 2:30, this blood is drawn and you say it's taken A. Yes. Q. And that purple-top tube isn't sealed; is it? A. Yes, it is. Q. You can take the top off that tube with impunity, can you not, sir? A. No, sir. I couldn't. Q. You couldn't. A. No. Q. Well. Was the -- Strike that. The top on that tube can just be removed. It can be taken off with your hands, A. No, sir. I believe it's a vacuum tube. Q. Cannot be taken off with your hands? A. Well, I'm sure it could be if you wanted to pull it off. I believe it's a Q. And you took that tube, purple top tube and you put it in an envelope after A. Yes, sir, that's correct. Q. And the gray envelope that you say it was put in was not given to you by A. No, sir, it was not. Q. And it does not have his signature on that envelope, right? A. Well, it could. I don't know. I recall putting in an analyzed evidence Q. I thought you just testified -- correct me if I'm wrong. I thought you just A. That's the way I recall it occurring, yes, sir. Q. And you never went back with that envelope to Nurse Peratis at all, did you, A. I don't recall ever doing that, no. Q. And it would be highly unlikely that Nurse Peratis came up to your desk A. Yes, I would agree with that. Q. If his signature were on it, you wouldn't know how it got there, but you A. Sir, I said that's the way I recall it occurring. He could have given me one Q. Mr. Vannatter, the issue of the vial of blood in this case has been an issue MR. KELLY: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: Have you talked about this vial of blood on Larry King Live on MR. KELLY: Objection. Relevance. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Yes, I have. Q. And you have gone through every minute detail, telling everyone who would A. I have tried to. MR. KELLY: Objection. Argumentative, Your Honor, "everyone who would listen." THE COURT: Overruled. It's a manner of speech, I believe. THE WITNESS: I have tried to tell the truth as I recall the truth and how I Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You have gone over in your mind a thousand times, the vial of A. I am trying to recall it as best as I can recall it. You're talking about an Q. And it has become exceedingly significant to you or you wouldn't be on A. That doesn't make my memory any better, Mr. Baker. Q. So your memory isn't any better now 40 minutes or 20 minutes from the time A. That's how I recall it happening, yes. Q. All right. Now, when you got this envelope, from your desk and you put the MR. KELLY: Objection. Irrelevant, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled? THE WITNESS: It's approximately a mile from Parker Center. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Can you -- would you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the A. Approximately 15 miles. Q. And you could have -- Strike that. In terms of -- from the time you got this vial at 2:30 until 4 o'clock, the A. I believe I spoke with Ron Phillips. Q. Did you call Rockingham to see if Mr. Fung was there; was the question, sir. THE COURT: Did you misstate it, or did I hear you wrong. MR. BAKER: I could be wrong again, but I -- THE COURT: I thought I heard something strange. MR. BAKER: Okay. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) As I understand it, you left Parker Center at 4 o'clock on A. Yes. Q. And you went there, sir -- and you went there to give this blood vial to Mr. A. That's correct. Q. And you didn't know if Mr. Fung was there, did you? A. Well, I knew the search warrant hadn't been completed and I made an Q. You didn't call out to the Rockingham place to find if Mr. Fung was there, A. I did not no. Q. You didn't use any police communication system to find out if he was there, A. I did not. Q. Did you see the tape where Mr. Fung and Andrea Mazzola were leaving MR. KELLY: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. Did you see that tape, that videotape? A. I've seen a number of tapes. I'm sure that I did, yes. Q. And if Mr. Fung and Ms. Mazzola hadn't decided to take one last look, they A. He was there when I got there, Mr. Baker. Q. Did you see the tape, sir? A. I saw Fung there when I was there. I don't know about him being gone. Q. So you don't even know whether you left at 4 o'clock to -- and that was A. It was to go check on the completion of the search warrant and to deliver Q. Now, the vial of blood was the major reason you left Parker Center and you A. No, I couldn't have booked it. Q. Okay. Now, in terms of your search warrant, let's talk a little bit about MR. KELLY: Objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: I like to be heard on that, Your'Honor. THE COURT: No. I've already made my ruling. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Now, had you in the past, Mr. Vannatter, just tell us how A. Yes. Q. And a reference vial of blood is blood that can be used, in this case of Mr. A. As well as to exonerate him, yes. Q. And one of you would agree that one of the fundamentals of being a good MR. KELLY: Objection, Your Honor. Relevance, beyond the scope, speculative, THE COURT: The argument is overruled -- I mean sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Well, it would be inappropriate to take a reference vial of MR. KELLY: Argumentative. Speculative and it's a compound question. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) Did the reference vial of blood that you took to Rockingham MR. KELLY: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: If you know, overruled. MR. KELLY: Foundation, your Honor, I'm sorry. THE COURT: Sustained on foundation. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You talked about a purple top tube. You remember that? A. Yes, sir. Q. Purple top is a tube that contains EDTA; is it not? A. Yes. MR. KELLY: Objection as to form. I'd ask that the specific tube, if we're THE COURT: The witness answered yes. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) And so this particular reference vial of blood of Mr. Simpson A. I believe it did, yes. Q. An now, you were concerned and you wanted to get it out of there because you MR. KELLY: Objection. Q. That is Mr. Simpson's reference vial of blood. MR. KELLY: Objection. Argumentative and compound. THE COURT: Overruled as to this witness state of mind in taking the blood out THE WITNESS: I believed it was a piece of evidence that could ultimately Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You thought it was so important that you wanted to get it to A. I wanted to get it to the criminalist to get it booked, yes. Q. And you knew, of course, that -- well, strike that. How many times had you MR. KELLY: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: That's irrelevant. THE COURT: We're talking about this case. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) How many times have you ever picked up a blood vial from the MR. KELLY: Objection. Same objection. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Probably a number of times. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) You've actually gone to the coroner's office like you did -- A. Yes, that's correct. Q. And the autopsy was on the 14th; was it not? A. That's correct. Q. So you made a special trip to the coroner's office to get the blood? A. That was not the entire purpose of the trip. Q. Can you answer the question? A. I did. That was not the entire purpose of the trip. Q. You picked up the blood, which normally the coroner transfers to S.I.D. A. Not always, no, I wouldn't. Q. Was there any blood dripping off the vial of the blood vial that was given A. I was given the vial in a sealed envelope. I don't know if there was blood Q. Did you ever look in that envelope to see if blood was dripping off that MR. KELLY: Objection. I ask that the report be clarified to the -- he was MR. PETROCELLI: Switched files, Your Honor. We're in the middle of the THE COURT: Sustained. Rephrase the question. Q. (BY MR. BAKER) The 13 -- A. Okay. Q. -- Did you look in the envelopes or -- strike that. Was that vial -- was A. No. Q. Did you check that? A. Yeah. I placed the vial into an envelope. There was no blood on the vial. Q. And then there would be no transfer of that blood to the envelope, right? A. I didn't see any transfer of any blood, no. Q. Fair enough. Now, in terms of your handling of that blood, that blood was in A. That's correct. Q. And you went upstairs from 2:30 and did you have a cup of coffee? What did A. I had something to eat. Q. You had a cup of coffee, did you? A. I had something to eat. I had a cup of coffee, yes. Q. And you chatted with some people with the blood vial on your desk. Where was A. It was in the envelope on top of my desk. Q. And I take it -- and where were you? Were you eating at your desk the whole A. I was in Robbery/homicide division. I kept control of the envelope and I sat Q. Did you take the envelope with you every where you went from 2:30 to 4 A. No, I don't think I took it every place I went. I think it was on my desk Q. How long were you away from that envelope? A. I don't know I couldn't answer that. That would -- that would be all guess Q. But -- well, if this was such an important piece of evidence and you wanted A. Well, I hadn't eaten for 24 hours. I had gotten up at 3 o'clock in the Q. So that took you an hour and a half, right? A. Well, that took a portion of that time, yes. I talked to my partner a little Q. And you didn't do any detective work in that hour and a half. You just took A. Well, detective work, that's -- Q. Can you let me finish my question. You just talked to your partner and got yourself some nourishment, right? A. Well, you asked the question. You didn't do any detective work. That's Q. Now, presently, sir, do you have a book deal? A. Do I have a signed book deal? No, I don't. Q. Well, I take it then, from the way you answered the question, you're A. Yes. Q. And you have an agent? A. Yes. Q. And you plan to make some money off of writing a book and giving your story A. I hope I do, yes. MR. BAKER: I don't have anything further at this time and I want to be able to THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, we're going excuse you until And let me remind you, again, don't talk about the case with anyone and form or Don't allow anybody to talk to you about this case. I have prepared an order for you with regard to your work. Consider yourself JURORS: (Nod in the affirmative.) THE COURT: Okay. It's very important, don't let anybody give you a hard time Don't -- in other words, don't let them pressure you about anything about this Everybody understand that? JURORS: Yes. THE COURT: Anything like that happens, let me know. JURORS: (Nod in the affirmative.) THE COURT: We'll see you Monday. Have a nice weekend. JURORS: Thank you. (The following proceedings were held in open court outside the presence of the THE COURT: Okay. The jurors have left the courtroom, Mr. Baker. MR. BAKER: I want this witness ordered back to this trial on -- and we'll give MR. KELLY: Your Honor, first of all, Mr. Vannatter is a resident of Indiana. THE COURT: I have him right here in my hands right now. MR. KELLY: I know. We're done with him. Okay. The only thing I would ask, that, at the defense expense, if they want him back MR. BAKER: No. They're making this compartmentalized case instead of having But I think this witness should come back. I don't think we ought to have to MR. KELLY: Your Honor, there's no reason we should bear the expense of Mr. MR. BAKER: I will open my case Monday morning for purposes of taking this MR. KELLY: Your Honor, we -- MR. BAKER: If they don't want to have the expense paid of that, then, you know, THE COURT: Well, in the first place, the plaintiff has the right to put on a The defense has a right to put on their evidence to whatever extent that the With regards to expense, I think if the plaintiff has finished with his portion I have heard a reference that this witness is out of state. If that is true, You may consider him an adverse witness. Nevertheless, he's going to be your MR. BAKER: Fine. I'll put him on Monday morning. MR. KELLY: Your Honor -- THE COURT: He's an out-of-state witness. You will put him on now I've got my MR. KELLY: Well, now, I was going to ask, can he be released and we'll bring THE COURT: Excuse me. MR. KELLY: Said we will undertake the obligation then return him when requested THE WITNESS: Judge. May I say something, Your Honor? I will return voluntarily THE COURT: All right. Then you will defer until the plaintiff completes their THE WITNESS: Absolutely, Your Honor. I'm not -- I'm not hostile to anyone. MR. MEDVENE: Thank you very much, Your Honor. (At 3:30 P.M., an adjournment was taken until Monday, November 4, 1996, at 8:30 |