|
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) MR. LAMBERT: Morning, Your Honor. THE COURT: MR. PETROCELLI: Couple of housekeeping items. Mr. Lambert will address the court. MR. LAMBERT: Thank you, Your Honor. One thing this morning, we intend to read into evidence some requests for And I would ask the Court to also let us mark those as exhibits so they can Secondly, Your Honor, in regard to presumptive blood tests, I know we've set a I just want to alert the Court to the fact that one of the witnesses who will It is also my understanding from the defense's position, that the only thing MR. BLASIER: That's correct. MR. LAMBERT: Finally, Your Honor, I want to put -- I'm going to put on Greg THE COURT: Can I get a witness schedule? MR. LAMBERT: Pardon me? THE COURT: Aren't you supposed to be providing opposing party with a schedule MR. LAMBERT: I've given them all the witnesses. THE COURT: You gave me the first list; you didn't give me one after that. MR. PETROCELLI: I didn't provide one to the Court. I will do so. THE COURT: All right. Anything else? MR. LAMBERT: That's it for me. MR. KELLY: I'm sorry; one other thing while they're coming in with regard to THE COURT: They're received. (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 387, Coroner's Report, (The instrument previously marked as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 721, Coroner's SID MR. GELBLUM: The first witness will be a minute and a half. He is tow-truck I'd like to have Mr. Foster read the answers and I'll read questions, and that THE COURT: Okay. If there's no objection. MR. BAKER: I'd like something showing that he's unavailable. I haven't seen any MR. GELBLUM: I have a declaration. MR. BAKER: Let me see it. (Pause in proceedings.) THE COURT: Which witness? MR. GELBLUM: Bernie Douroux, Your Honor. MR. BAKER: The only thing I don't see in here, he was apparently served with a MR. GELBLUM: The subpoena, I believe, was possibly for the first day of trial: MR. BAKER: A body attachment ought to issued for this man. This is not -- MR. GELBLUM: Your Honor, this is literally a minute and a half, MR. BAKER: I see. The form, since it's short, we can disregard the law; that's MR. GELBLUM: I think we established his unavailability, Your Honor. MR. BAKER: Your Honor, if he's going to read that, we want to read the THE COURT: I haven't even finished reading this thing -- MR. BAKER: I'm sorry. THE COURT: -- you know. (Pause in proceedings.) THE COURT: Go ahead. MR. BAKER: A body attachment ought to issued for him if he's unavailable, if MR. GELBLUM: We're prepared to go ahead today. We did what we could do. I think all the law requires us to do is serve him a subpoena, try to get him We have no objection to them reading in anything, as long as it's not THE COURT: All right; you may do so. MR. GELBLUM: Thank you, Your Honor. (Jurors resume their respective seats.) (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the THE COURT: Morning, ladies and gentlemen. JUROR: Good morning. THE COURT: I appreciate the fact that you all get up so early and get to the For that reason, we occasionally have to start late, like we are starting late All right. Plaintiff may proceed. MR. GELBLUM: Your Honor, as you know, we are going to begin by reading in some To make it a little easier for the jury to follow, we're going to ask our THE COURT: You may. MR. GELBLUM: Your Honor, he was -- Mr. Douroux obviously was sworn in at the THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, this is testimony given at the previous trial; Go ahead. (The following testimony of Bernie Douroux was read into the record, with Mr. "Q. Can you spell your first and last names for the record. A. Bernie Douroux, B-E-R-N-I-E D-O-U-R-O-U-X. Q. Mr. Douroux, who were you working for on June 13, 1994? A. Rheuban Motors. Q. And Rheuban Motors is a towing -- automobile towing company? A. It's a police impound, yes. Q. And what do you do for Rheuban Motors? A. Impound vehicles at LAPD, to request have impounded or private towing. Q. On the afternoon of June 13, at around 3:06 p.m., did you receive a radio A. Yes, we did. Q. And after receiving that radio call, did you go somewhere? A. Yes, I did. Q. Where did you go? A. 360 Rockingham. Q. Why did you go to 360 Rockingham? A. We were asked by LAPD to pick up a vehicle. Q. And what time did you arrive at 360 North Rockingham? A. Approximately 3:30. Q. And did you speak to a police officer at that location? A. I spoke to a couple of them, yes. Q. Were you given any instructions? A. Yes, I did. Yes, I was. Q. What instructions were you given by the officers? A. Not to touch the vehicle, not to open it, and to take it downtown. Q. And were you directed toward a certain vehicle? A. Yes. Q. To a certain vehicle? A. Yes, I was. Q. And what vehicle was that? A. Ford Bronco. Q. Okay. The Ford Bronco that's been on -- A. Yes. Q. Mr. Simpson's Ford Bronco? A. Yes, sir. Q. And did you tow that Ford Bronco? A. Yes, I did. Q. Did you touch it prior to hooking it up to your tow truck? A. Not prior, but after I hooked it up, I did touch the front right tire, to Q. Can you tell whether or not the Ford Bronco was locked? A. Yes, it was locked, because it had little -- the buttons were down on the Q. It was locked when you first saw it? A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you unlock that vehicle? A. No, sir. Q. And did you tow that vehicle? A. Yes, sir, I did. Q. Where did you tow the Ford Bronco to? A. To Parker Center, to the print shed, over here. Q. To Parker Center, over here on Los Angeles Street? A. Yes, sir. Q. To the print shed? A. Yes, sir. Q. What time, sir, did you leave Rockingham with the Bronco? A. Approximately 3:40. Q. And what time did you arrive downtown at Parker Center, if you know? A. Took me about an hour to get there. To probably -- probably about 4:40, MR. GELBLUM: I have nothing further. THE COURT: Cross. (The following testimony of Bernie Douroux was read into the record, with Mr. MR. P. BAKER: Page 26269, line 9 -- we're at line -- through line 13. "Q. With regard to your towing of this vehicle, as I understand it, this took A. That's correct. Q. And can you tell the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what time you received A. We received a call in the mike room -- LAPD mike room at approximately 3:06. Q. Then you responded to that call and arrived at the location on Rockingham? A. Yes, sir, around 3:31. Q. All right. Around 3:31 in the afternoon? A. Yes, sir. Q. And when you got to that location, was the media present at that time, sir? A. Yes, they were. Q. And did you see a lot of media there? A. Yes, there was. Q. While you were there at Rockingham, did you ever see a lady walk up or run A. I -- not myself, no. Q. You never saw that personally? A. No. Q. Did you become aware of that at some point? MR. GELBLUM: Objection, Your Honor. Hearsay. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. So you learned about it afterwards; is that correct? A. Yes. MR. GELBLUM: Objection. Hearsay. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. With regards to this particular vehicle, prior to the time that you started A. No, I didn't. Just after I hooked it up, just to make sure it was nothing -- Q. You described for us that you touched I guess the front wheel part of the A. Yes, sir, the front right tire. Q. Did you have occasion to look at any of the doors of that vehicle at all? A. No, I didn't. Q. And you didn't notice anything on the exterior of that vehicle that you can A. No, sir. Q. Did you have occasion to look at the driver's side door down by the sill, A. No, sir. Q. You never looked at that? A. No, sir. Q. Did you look -- Did you see what appeared to be any coffee-cup stains on the A. No, sir. Q. You didn't see that, either? A. No. Q. All right. So I understand, this is a fairly routine tow for you at this A. Yes, sir; it was. Q. The only different (sic) missing (sic) from this scene from other scenes is A. That was it, yes. Q. You were working that day -- by yourself that day, sir? A. There was -- there was three other drivers that day. I was the only one that Q. When you say "three other drivers" three other drivers who responded to the A. No, no, just on the shift. Q. Working for Rheuban's that day? A. Yes. Q. You responded to a call, and when you got there at Rockingham, at or about A. That's correct. Q. All right. You talked to a police officer once you got to the Rockingham A. Yes, I did. Q. And you know the name of that police officer? A. I can't remember his name, no. Q. Was this police officer in civilian clothes, or was he in uniform? A. He was in civilian, the one who instructed me where to take the Bronco was. Q. He was in what? A. In civilian clothes. Q. You don't know his name? A. No. No, sir, I don't. Q. All right. At any rate, you then proceeded, as I understand your testimony, A. That's correct. Q. And it was your understanding that you were going to meet a detective A. That's correct. Q. Is that correct? A. Yes, sir. Q. And then you described for us that it took you perhaps an hour or more to A. That's correct. Q. Where is the print shed located, sir, downtown here in LA? A. Directly behind Parker Center, on San Pedro Street. Q. All right. You went to that location, and did you see any detective when you A. No, I didn't. Q. All right. So how long did you wait at that location? A. Approximately ten minutes. Ten, fifteen minutes. Q. All right. And what time was that by now? A. I would say about 3:30, 3:40, somewhere around that time. Let's see. No, no. Q. All right. So 4:30, 4:40? A. Yes, sir. Q. All right. Did you talk to anybody at the print shed when you first got A. There was nobody there. Q. All right. Nobody. It was like locked? A. Yes. Q. All right, sir. So you waited about ten minutes. And then thereafter, as I A. That's correct, to the front of Parker Center. Q. And you were by yourself at that point, so when you went in to try to locate A. That's correct. Q. And so how long were you away from that vehicle when you left it? A. Approximately three minutes, just to go inside. Q. All right. Now, what street did you park the vehicle on, sir? A. Los Angeles. Q. On Los Angeles Street? A. Yes, sir. Right. Q. And is that in front of Parker Center? A. That's correct. Q. Out on the street. So you would be heading northbound on Los Angeles? A. I thought it was eastbound. Q. Well, you're on Los Angeles Street, right? A. Yeah. I was directly in front of Parker Center, in front of the doors. So I Q. All right. You headed toward Union Station, did you? A. That's correct. Q. Towards Olvera Street? A. Yes. Q. So let's call that north, now. A. Okay. Q. All right. And you parked the car -- parked your vehicle there and your A. That's correct. Q. And you left it and then you went inside Parker Center, in the front doors A. Yes, sir. Q. When you left the vehicle to go inside, the media was outside, also? A. Yes, they were. Q. Can you approximate for the Court and jury how many members of the media A. It was a group. I couldn't -- maybe 10, 15 more. Q. A group, like a pack of media? A. Yeah. They're all hanging out on the lawn. Q. A Pack? How about a swarm, a swarm of media, Your Honor? So how many would A. I would say probably about ten, maybe more. Q. All right. So ten -- about ten different cameras and that sort of thing? A. Yes, exactly. Q. And how far away were they from you at the time that you went inside when A. It was about 15 yards. Q. Fifteen yards away? A. Yes. Q. And then -- you then left the vehicle and went inside is; is that correct? A. That's correct. Q. And you went inside to try to find a detective; is that correct? A. I went inside and I asked the desk sergeant there, the person in charge, I Q. All right. And then that's kind of at the front desk when you walk inside A. That's correct. Q. And during this time while you were inside, there was nobody outside with A. That's correct. Q. All right. So your best recollection is, you stayed inside for -- how long A. No, sir, I didn't. Q. All right. After you talked with this desk sergeant and you were told that a A. That's correct; I did. Q. All right. And then you walked back outside to the vehicle? A. Yes, sir. Q. All right. And I presume it was still parked at the same place; is that A. Yes, it was. Q. And did you wait outside on the sidewalk at that point? A. Yes, I did. Q. When you went back outside to wait for the detective, how long did you wait A. About three minutes. Q. All right. And -- A. Less than five minutes. Q. Less than five minutes? A. Yes. Q. During that period of time, Mr. Douroux, did you have occasion to look at A. No, sir. Q. So up to the time that you left that particular vehicle on June 13, 1994, A. Yeah. Just, I mean, took a quick glance, see that there was no damages, and Q. Did you have to log on any particular form whether or not there were damages A. It's usually marked on this when we look. We can look over the vehicle, make Q. That's called some sort of inventory, this sheet that you have before you? A. Yes. Q. And in completing this particular inventory form, for instance, there are -- A. Well, right. Right here it says remarks that's where we put all the -- all Q. Okay. And you have a "Y" column. I presume that's for yes and an (sic) "N" A. That's correct. (Counsel hands document to witness.) Q. Did you fill this form out? A. No, sir; that was already filled out by the LAPD. Q. It was filled out by the LAPD -- A. Yes, sir. Q. -- when you got the form? A. Yes, sir. Q. Where did you get that form? A. From the LAPD, on Rockingham. Q. When you first arrived there? A. Yes, sir. Q. All right. So that we're clear. MR. P. BAKER: Then he offers to approach. If we can look at the exhibit, this would be next in order. It was criminal MR. BAKER: Why don't you put it on the -- THE CLERK: 2112. MR. GELBLUM: Your Honor, it's already been marked on that list as 271. THE CLERK: 271. Thank you. (The instrument herein referred to as LAPD investigation impound report was THE REPORTER: Excuse me; does that mean it's not 2112? THE CLERK: Correct; it's 271. MR. P. BAKER: 26281, Line 11. (The following testimony of Bernie Douroux was read into the record, with Mr. Q. These were filled out by someone else; is that correct? A. That's correct. Q. Did you fill out any portion of this form at all? A. Just the part here, where my signature and the tow fee and the storage fee. Q. All right. You filled out just the part where it indicates, 'Garage employee A. That's correct. Q. That's your signature, and your name is Bernie Douroux? A. Douroux, yes, sir. Q. All right. All right. Anything else filled out? A. No. That's it. Q. All right. And so with regard to the inventory on the vehicle you quickly A. That's correct, just the exterior, just to make sure there were no damages, Q. You mentioned also, sir, that at some point, you had occasion to glance A. Yes, sir, just the front, the window, just to look to see if -- four-wheel Q. And where were you when you glanced inside the vehicle? A. On the right-hand side, passenger side. Q. All right. And more specifically, what location were you at? A. Oh, in the front. Q. No. What where were you, at Rockingham or -- A. Oh, yes. Yes. I'm sorry. Yes, Rockingham. Q. So as I understand it, then you looked inside the vehicle while you were A. Yeah. We just glanced in and looked. Q. You did this from the passenger side of the vehicle? A. That's correct. Q. Pardon me. And you did this from the passenger side of the vehicle; is that A. That's correct. Q. And you don't recall seeing anything that you noted inside that particular A. That's correct. Q. All right. This would have been shortly after you arrived, about 3:30 in the A. Yes, sir. Q. So you looked inside. All right. Now, when you went back outside, after A. That's correct. Q. You know the name of that detective, sir? A. No, I don't remember it. Q. And you talked briefly with that detective? You had a conversation with that A. Yeah. Weather. Q. You talked about the weather? A. Yeah, weather, and how -- because it was a nice, warm day. Other than that, Q. June 13 was a warm day? A. It was. Q. All right. After you had that conversation with the detective, did you then A. Yes, we took it over there. He got in the truck and we went down to the Q. So the detective rode with you? A. Yes, sir. Q. All right. You went back to the print shed. And at that time, you gained A. That's correct. Q. And you, I presume, took the vehicle inside and parked at some location? A. That's correct. I backed it in and parked the vehicle. Q. About what time was it at this time, sir? A. Oh, maybe a quarter of five, maybe almost five, by that time. Q. Somewhere around 5 o'clock in the afternoon? A. I believe it was before five. Q. All right. And then -- and you then left the vehicle; is that correct? A. That's correct. Q. While you were there, did you ever see any -- any person get inside that A. No, sir. Q. Did you ever get inside it? A. No, sir. Q. By the way, do you carry -- in the course of your work as a tow-truck A. Yes, sir, I do. MR. GELBLUM: Objection. Relevance, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. (READING) Q. That is the kind of instrument that works to open vehicles; is that correct? A. That's correct. Q. With regard to that slim jim, you could open that vehicle real quickly, MR. GELBLUM: Objection. Vague, "real quickly." THE COURT: Overruled. A. Yes, I could. Q. In other words, you're an experienced tow-truck driver? A. Yes. Q. How long would it take you to -- using your slim jim, to open a vehicle like A. Couple of minutes if I had to open it. Q. If you wanted to open it, couple of minutes? A. Yes. Q. Did you see whether or not the detective who rode back over with you to A. I didn't notice one, no. Q. And did you ever see the detective open the vehicle while you were there? A. No, sir. Q. And you then left the vehicle and that ended your involvement with the A. That's correct. Q. With regard to the form that's before you, again, Defense 271 -- Exhibit A. That's correct. I really didn't even notice the part of -- up there. Q. So look at it now for me, will you? A. Yes. I'm looking at it. Q. And the area called stolen, lost or embezzled, there's an indication, the MR. GELBLUM: Objection. Relevance, Your Honor. This call is not stolen lock or THE COURT: Sustained. MR. P. BAKER: (READING) Q. There's an indication whether the doors are locked. There's nothing MR. GELBLUM: Same objection. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. P. BAKER: (READING) Q. You then left the print shed and it was about 5 o'clock or so that A. About 5 o'clock, yes, sir. Q. And what time did you check out that day from your -- terminate your A. 7 o'clock. Q. And did you pick up any other vehicles on that day before you -- on that day A. Before or -- And there's an objection. THE COURT: Sustained. (READING) A. Before -- a few cars before. MR. P. BAKER: 26289, line seven. (READING) Did you write any other notes with regard to any of your observations A. No, sir that's it. Just that -- Q. Pretty much it? A. Yes, sir. Q. And with regard to your observations or lack thereof of things either A. No, sir. Q. And you never saw anything inside the interior of that vehicle; is that A. No. Q. Never saw any blood inside that vehicle? A. No, sir. Q. Never saw any blood on the outside of that vehicle? A. No, sir. Q. Did you see anything in the rear of the vehicle at all that you recall? A. No, sir. MR. P. BAKER: Nothing further. MR. GELBLUM: I have nothing, Your Honor. MR. LAMBERT: With the Court's permission, we'd like to read from "Requests for THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, in a civil case, there are several ways that THE JURORS: Yes. MR. LAMBERT: (Reading:). Plaintiff Fredric Goldman first set of admission. It's directed at Defendant Fredric Goldman requests that defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, admit the Request No. 196: Admit that your ABO blood type is A. Defendant's response: Admit. Request No. 194: Admit that your EAP blood type is EA. Defendant's response: Admit. Request number 213: Admit that you have an ESE blood type 1. Defendant's response: Admit. Request No. 195: Admit that your phosphoglucomutase, here and after, PGM blood Defendant response: Admit. Request number 205: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 203: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting that request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 212: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 204: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request No. 199: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as LAPD Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request No. 198: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as LAPD Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 202: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 201: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 208: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 206: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 207: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 211: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request number 209: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting this request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's Request No. 210: Admit that the item identified at the criminal trial as LAPD Defendant's response: Admit. In admitting that request for admission, the defense will adopt the plaintiff's MR. LAMBERT: And I would ask Your Honor that these requests for admissions be MR. BAKER: I would object to them being received into evidence. THE COURT: Is there anything in them aside from what you've just read? MR. LAMBERT: No. It's the same thing. THE COURT: Okay. They'll be received. (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 196 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 194 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 213 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 195 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 205 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 203 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 212 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 204 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 199 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 198 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 202 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 201 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 208 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 206 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 207 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 209 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 210 was marked for (The instrument herein referred to as Request No. 211 was marked for MR. LAMBERT: At this point, we call Gary Matheson to the stand. GREGORY THE CLERK: You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause THE WITNESS: I do. THE CLERK: Please be seated. And sir, if you please state and spell your name THE WITNESS: Gregory Matheson, G-R-E-G-O-R-Y, M-A-T-H-E-S-O-N. DIRECT Q. By whom who are you employed Mr. Matheson? A. By the city of Los Angeles. Q. And what is your occupation? A. My current position is Chief Forensic Chemist, Assistant Laboratory Director Q. Is that part of the scientific investigation division? A. Yes, it is. Q. Were you employed on June 13, 1994? A. Only June 13, 1994, I was not in my current position. I was the supervisor Q. And you've since then been promoted? A. Yes. Q. When did you first join the scientific investigation division? A. I was hired by the city as a criminalist in June of 1978. Q. And have you worked as a criminalist with the city through various positions A. Yes, I have. Q. When did you first become aware of an investigation into the murders of A. Sometime approximately about 7:45 on the morning of Monday, June 13. Q. Did you play any role in the work of the scientific investigation division A. Yes, I did. Q. What role did you play? A. Well, initially my role, as I mentioned earlier at this time was -- I was Q. And as part of that initial role that you played, did you assign anyone A. Yes, I did. Q. And who did you assign? A. A criminalist by the name of Collin Yamauchi. Q. And when did you assign him to do that work? A. I believe that was the afternoon of Monday, June 13. Q. And what did you direct Mr. Yamauchi to initially do in the case? A. Well, initially he needed to get together with the criminalist that had Q. Okay. And a decision was made to do certain test to see if parties could be A. That's correct. Q. What tests did Mr. Yamauchi do to see if parties could be excluded? A. Well within -- MR. BLASIER: Objection. No foundation. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: -- Serology unit. We chose to go with a type of DNA testing Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) And those are the initial tests that you did on these blood A. Yes, it is. Q. Let me show you what's been marked as exhibit 216 in this case. Do you MR. BLASIER: May I look at that? MR. LAMBERT: I gave it to you. (The instrument herein referred to as a posterboard entitled "LAPD Evidence (Witness reviews exhibit 216.) THE WITNESS: Yes, I do. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) And we put the first page of it up on the television set THE COURT: Is that the best you can do? MR. LAMBERT: It's a little vague. There we go. No, we won't be on it too long. Q. Have you had an opportunity to review this exhibit prior to your testimony A. Yes, I have. Q. Would you please describe what this exhibit is? A. What it is, is a summary of a number of the evidence items that were Q. And is that summary, summarized? Does that summary summarized other reports A. Yes, it does. Q. And what kind of reports in -- and other documents are in that group of this A. There are several different types of documents. They're all prepared during They're S.I.D. documents that are both typed and handwritten letters of Q. And are these documents that are generated by the S.I.D. personnel as part A. Yes, that's correct. Q. And have you had an opportunity to compare the underlying documents to this A. Yes, I do. Q. Does it do so? A. Yes. I went through each of the items, found the documents to support it and MR. LAMBERT: Your Honor, I move exhibit 216 into evidence. MR. BLASIER: I object on foundational grounds, subject to a motion to strike THE COURT: Received as business records. (The instrument herein described as a posterboard entitled "LAPD Evidence Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Now, you mentioned before that, part of your role in this A. Yes, I did. Q. And who else participated in that meeting? A. Well, present during it was myself, criminalist Yamauchi and my supervisor, Q. And what was the purpose of that meeting? A. The purpose of it was to look at the evidence items that we currently had Q. And at that point in time, did you have a fairly substantial number of A. Yes. Q. Was any actual examination of the evidence done at that meeting? A. No. No malice was done, that's correct. MR. BLASIER: Objection. Move to strike, nonresponsive. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MS. LAMBERT) Was any testing of any of the evidence done at that A. No. Q. Like to show you -- why don't you take this off, please, Steve, and put on (The instrument herein referred to as notes of summary analyzed evidence was Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Put the first page of that up. (Mr. Foster complies.) Q. Do you recognize that document, sir? A. Yes, I do. Q. Is that a document that you generated during the course of the meeting? A. Yes. The writing on it is mine. Q. And what was the purpose of the document? A. Well, again, it was to summarize the items that we currently had in You can see the item number on the left, a brief description of it. To Q. Like, take for example, item number 4 here and perhaps you can tell us what A. Well, as it's described, it's a swatch which I described as medium to dark Q. If you could move it over for me, Steve. And all the way over. (Indicating to TV screen.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) In the comments section here, what is it you said about A. That it appeared from that one swatch, that 8 millimeter square that there Q. So your purpose in going through these various evidence items at this A. Right. It was to determine how much was there, and give a quick idea, maybe MR. LAMBERT: Let's go to the second page now, Steve? (Mr. Foster places on view screen second page). Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Would you take a look now, Mr. Matheson, item number 13, A. Item number 13, I've described as socks. I believe I put down here navy blue Q. Um-hum. If you can move it over a little Steve. (Mr. Foster complies.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) To the final column, what did you write in the comments A. In the comment section, I have in quotes dress socks, just another Q. That's what this says nonobvious? A. Yes. Q. And so you're decision at that meeting was to later have someone do a blood MR. BLASIER: Objection. Leading. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: That's correct. Q. Was there a blood search later done on the socks? A. Yes, there was. Q. And do you know whether that was done? MR. BLASIER: Objection. Lack of foundation. THE COURT: Lay a foundation. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Was that blood search later done under your direction, sir? A. Yes, it was. Q. And did you direct some particular person to do it? A. Yes, that's correct. Q. And do you know when it was done? A. I don't remember the exact date. Q. Okay. It was done -- Do you know who it was done by? A. Yes. Q. Who was it done by? A. Criminalist Yamauchi. Q. Did he report back to you after he had done the blood search? A. Yes, he did. Q. And did he tell you whether he had discovered any blood during the blood MR. BLASIER: Objection. Hearsay. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) During the time period after this meeting of June 29, 1994, A. In a box inside of the freezer which is located in the serology unit of the Q. And during that time period, who had access to the evidence in the serology MR. BLASIER: Object. Lack of foundation. THE COURT: Overruled. A. The laboratory has an electronic access system. That the doors are all I'm explaining this because the access changes. During normal working hours, In other words, they can get into narcotics, serology, blood, all the different They have to have a card to have the door unlocked for them. Off watch, the access becomes limited to a criminalist to their own unit plus So during the day, during Monday through Friday, Friday normal working hours Off watch, it would be limited to the criminalists that are assigned to the Q. Did any of the Los Angeles police department officers investigating this MR. BLASIER: Objection. No foundation. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WTTNESS: They cannot get into any of the facilities without being accompany Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) And have you reviewed the records to determine whether A. The people that I mentioned have access to the room, would have access to Q. Was there any indication that any Los Angeles police department officer had A. Not that I can find. Q. Now, let me put up another board, here. You can take that off Steve, yeah. (Mr. Foster complies, removes item from view screen.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) I don't know how well you can see that, Mr. Matheson. You (Indicating to board.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) My question to you, sir, were you, yourself, involved in an A. Yes, I was. Q. And when did your examination take place? A. I believe it was September 1, 1994. Q. And where was that examination conducted? A. It was conducted within the serology unit of the laboratory. Q. Calling your attention to this exhibit, in particular to this photograph on (Indicating to photo on board.) THE WITNESS: What this photograph shows is the console unit that was taken out As you can see, there's also numbers that are on the console indicating areas Q. And did you in fact, take blood samples from these areas that are marked A. Yes. I collected blood from four separate areas on what would be the right Q. Now, in collecting that blood, sir, did it appear to you that any of that A. Yes, it did. Q. Which portion appeared to you to have been previously swatched? A. It was in the area on the console here as marked 303, and I believe in the Q. So you could tell by looking at those that someone had previously wiped A. That's correct. You can see where a portion of them was -- you've collected Q. Was it apparent to you that although this blood had been checked in the MR. BLASIER: Objection. Leading. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Yes, there was. Q. And that's what you did? A. Yes. Q. Now, let's take a look at this picture while we're out here. Did you also, A. Yes, I did. Q. And what was that from? A. The carpet area that had been removed from the Bronco. Q. Okay. This carpet area, is it -- it was sectioned out of the bottom part of A. Yes, it was cut out from the driver's floor board area. Q. And do you know when that was cut out? A. I believe it was on June 14, 1994. Q. Was that by Dennis Fung? A. Yes. Q. And where had that piece of carpet been after it was cut out by Dennis Fung A. It was also maintained in a box in the freezer of the serology unit. Q. So on September the 1st, did you take that out of the box, out of the A. Yes. Q. What was it that you did precisely? A. I went and I removed some additional blood stain area of the fibers in the You can see there are some clippings already in a bindle that's folded up, In addition to a stained area always collect what's called a control or an So what I did is collect a portion of the blood stain area here and a control Q. Those things that you checked there, did you give them item number 293? A. Yes. Q. So item number 293 is in fact pieces of the carpet that you cut out that A. That's correct. Q. And do you know the item number of the carpet itself that was taken from -- A. Yes I believe it was 33. Q. And these item numbers here 303, 304, 305 and 306, those are the items A. Yes, it is. MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, we're having technical difficulty with this TV. THE COURT: All right. Let's take ten minutes. Don't form any opinions about the (Recess.) (Jurors resume their respective seats.) (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the THE COURT: You may proceed. MR. LAMBERT: Thank you, Your Honor. Why don't you put that back up, please. (Mr. Foster complies.) DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. LAMBERT: Q. Mr. Matheson, we were talking before about this console in the Bronco that Would you point out on this television screen here the items of evidence which A. There are four separate areas where I collected blood off the console: This Q. Of these items that you collected, which were the ones that appear to you to A. What I have marked as 303, the area up on the console lid here, and 304 on Q. And could you tell from looking at them that someone had previously A. That's correct. Q. When you did this collection in your laboratory in serology, who else was A. I don't have the complete list with me. I was present; there were people But in addition, as far as technical-type staff, there were a Mark Taylor and Q. Those were Mark Taylor and Larry Ragle were experts look working for Mr. A. Yes. Q. They were there watching you do this collection? A. That's correct. Q. And the evidence items that you took off this, you then did what with them, A. Well, they were collected on swatches, which is the way we collect blood The items placed in the bindle; the bindle's closed up, sealed, marked as to Q. Now, you mentioned when you were talking about the June 29 meeting where you Can you explain to us what you mean by "triage?" A. Well, I believe it's mainly a medical term. It has to do with doing the most I used it -- There were many evidence items associated with this case. We don't have the resources to analyze every item first, so you do a triaging Q. And that's what you were doing that day with these evidence items in this A. That was part of it, yes. Q. Now, let's talk a little bit about serology at SID. You have been involved in serology there for some time? A. Yes, since August of 1981. Q. And prior to joining SID, what was your educational background? A. Well, I got a degree, bachelor of science degree in criminology from the Q. And since the time that you joined SID, have you been actively involved in A. Yes. Like I said, I started in June of 1978. In August of 1981, I was transferred into the serology unit as a criminalist. Q. And for how long were you the supervisor of the serology unit? A. Well, of just the serology unit, I was a supervisor for about three years. Like I mentioned, at the time in June of 1994, I not only supervised serology, Q. In terms of serology, what type of testing is done in the LAPD serology A. Well, there's a number of different type of techniques. They can be broken To touch real quick on the DNA, there's a couple different types of analysis Q. In terms of conventional serology, could you describe a little bit more what A. Sure. Conventional serology is what I mainly worked as a criminalist, or did The best example of conventional serology would be ABO blood typing used in That is one of the systems or genetic markers that we use in conventional In addition to the ABO, which has been around for decades, there are techniques An example of that is one of the enzymes that we look at goes by the initials Q. Is there also a conventional serology typing called the PGM type? A. Yes, there is. That's one of the other enzymes that we look at. Q. Okay. Is it similar to the ESD type? A. It is similar in that it's an enzyme; it performs a function in your body. Q. So all of us have one of those ten different sub types? A. Yes. Q. Is there also an EAP type that you're familiar with? A. Yes. Q. And what is that? A. Again, it's just another enzyme that performs a function in your body, Q. And are all these conventional serology systems separate and apart from DNA A. They're separate, in that you're testing for the enzyme itself, or in the Q. But if a person has a particular one of these types, that doesn't A. They are independent from the DNA markers that we look at in forensic Q. Okay. Looking at these -- These four conventional types that you've A. Yes. Q. And how do you do that? A. Like I mentioned, you have a blood type that is yours from the time you're For example, going back to the ABO blood typing system, approximately half of The next most common is A, then B, then AB. Within our laboratory, we've been doing this conventional type of serology Q. And is it possible that if you know all four of these different blood types A. Yes. Q. And how do you go about doing that? A. Well, it's something called a product rule. It's just as simple as you take Then you go on to another marker and say -- let's see: We've used ESD -- excuse If we have a stain that I know is ABO type O and ESD type 1, we'd multiply 50 Q. So if a person has an ABO type A, an ESD type 1, a PGM type 2 plus, 2 minus, A. By taking each of those pieces of information, determining the population or Q. So in this case, evidence on the item 49, which was one of the blood drops A. Given the information you gave me, again, it would be about .17 percent of Q. And if Mr. Simpson had those same four blood types, would he then be one of MR. BLASIER: Objection. Argumentative. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: He would be included in that group that could have left that MR. LAMBERT: Thank you. I have no further questions. THE COURT: Mr. Blasier. MR. BLASIER: Thank you. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BLASIER: Q. Morning, Mr. Matheson. A. Morning. Q. How are you today? A. Good. Q. We've had quite a few discussions, you and I, during the course of the last A. Yes, we have. Q. Since Mr. Simpson was acquitted on October 3 of 1995, can you give me a A. Well, it's interspersed with an awful lot of other things. Of the total Q. And of that 40 to 60 hours, how much of that has been at the request of the A. And all of that includes just my personal preparation time and that type of Q. Or doing work that the plaintiffs requested that you do? A. Well, no additional work was done as far as analytical type of work. I don't know. I'd say probably 10 to 15, maybe. It's hard to estimate. Q. You say that there's no additional analytical work. You mean there was no A. There was no additional testing as far as analysis on evidence items. Q. Experimentation? A. Yes. Q. There was no additional experimentation? A. No. I'm sorry. There was an additional experiment that I ran. Q. How much time did you devote to that experiment? A. Actual work time, possibly a couple hours. Q. Did you do that during the course of your county time? A. Actually, I work for the city. Q. City? A. Some of it was, some of it wasn't. I came in on my own time, just to check Q. And a think you said 10 to 15 hours you spent working with the plaintiffs. A. Well, no. I think again, these are very rough estimates. It has to do with, Q. And let me ask you, have you ever, in the course of your career, done an A. It's kind of an interesting thing. I mean, there's a question there that To answer your question, I have not ever performed an experiment specifically Q. And this experiment that you performed was at the request of the plaintiffs, A. It was a -- we brought up in my mind -- it was a question I wanted to answer Q. There were many questions other than the one that dealt with that experiment A. Yes, there was. Q. Have you done any experiments, since Mr. Simpson was acquitted in October of A. No, I have not. Q. How many meetings have you had with the plaintiffs' attorneys? A. Are we talking solely with them, defense not being present? Q. Correct. A. Being spread out over the last many months, I'd have to say three to five, Q. And did you meet with them last night or this morning? A. Not last night; this morning I did, yes. Q. And how long did you meet with them? A. About an hour and 15 minutes, something like that. Q. Did they explain to you the parameters of your testimony? A. Well, we did discuss the areas that we'd been covering, yes. Q. Now, you did quite a bit of testing, yourself, in this case, did you not, of A. Yes, I did. Q. Now, Exhibit No. 216, which was the chart -- do you have that in front of A. Talking about the summary of -- Q. Correct? A. -- items? Q. Yeah. A. Yes, I do. Q. Now, you prepared that; is that correct? A. No, I did not. Q. Who prepared that? A. It was provided to me by the plaintiff. Q. So this is not a document generated by the Los Angeles Police Department A. I did not generate it; that's correct. Q. So this is not a business record; this is not a record that was prepared by A. This particular document was not prepared by our agency, yes. Q. When were you presented with this document? A. I believe that was last Tuesday. Q. And did you spend time going over the document and determining whether it A. Yes, I did. Q. How much time did you spend doing that? A. Probably, if I added up all the little bits and pieces that I spent in Q. And I take it you reviewed documents that were generated within your lab to A. That's correct. Q. Looking at page 2, number 17, that indicates number 17 is Mr. Simpson's A. That's correct. Q. Is it your understanding that that was the reference blood sample taken by A. Yes, it is. Q. That document indicates that Mr. Simpson's reference vial was given item A. Yes. Q. Before I show you these documents, let me ask you a couple questions about What is a DR number? A. DR number, I believe it stands for division of records, something like that. Q. Now, when is a DR number assigned in a case, generally? A. Well, it's rarely involved in SID. I believe it's assigned when a detective Q. And that's something that they can do, basically, from any location at any A. Well, mechanically, I believe they can. I don't know what their procedures Q. I mean, all they need to do is call up on the phone and ask for the next MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Lay a foundation. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You're aware of the procedure where DR numbers are assigned A. General procedures, yes. Q. That involves calling up and saying, give me a number; this is going to be A. Yes. Except for I don't know what information they need to convey when they Q. Okay. And once they get a number, all of the evidence that's collected in a A. That's correct. Q. Now, once they have a DR number, if a detective collects a piece of evidence A. That case number, yes, the DR number. Q. If they have an item of evidence that he wanted to bring to SID, what's the A. Well, if he wanted the item analyzed, they would book it into property Q. And that's done all the time, isn't it? A. That's a regular procedure, yes. Q. Now, when your criminalists are collecting and booking evidence in the A. There's documentation, yes. Q. And that documentation includes listing items that they collect or observe, A. Correct. Q. And writing down information about those items' location, who collected A. The "who collected them" isn't necessarily done at the scene; but, yes, a Q. And items are given what are called item numbers as they are collected, A. Not necessarily. They're given photo numbers. The item numbers aren't Q. Well, item numbers can be assigned in the field, as well, can they not? A. They can be, yes. Q. Now, with respect to the evidence that was collected that's reflected on MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You've reviewed the records that form the basis for this A. Yes, I have. Q. And that includes property records that correspond -- that have the same A. That's correct. Q. And you reviewed records that relate to the items that were picked up at A. Yes. Q. And let me show you what's previously been marked as Exhibit 212. MR. BLASIER: Put this on the Elmo. Let me give you a copy of it. THE WITNESS: Thank you. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) That document is in Dennis Fung's handwriting, is it not? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Overruled. Excuse me. Lay a foundation. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You are familiar with Dennis Fung's handwriting, are you A. Not to the point if I was given a lot of different handwriting, I could pick Q. Does that appear to be his handwriting? A. It appears. Q. You've seen that document before, have you not? A. I believe I have, yes. Q. Now, that document case -- that item number 17 -- MR. BLASIER: Can we get that in better focus? There you go. Q. --is a pair of tennis shoes, correct? A. That's what it reflects, yes. Q. Those tennis shoes were collected, were turned over at a meeting that you A. That's possible. I don't specifically remember when we received those. Q. But you remember that you received those from Detective Lange the morning A. I believe so, yes. I don't know if I received them. They were received in Q. You were aware that Detective Lange had taken those tennis shoes home A. I had subsequently heard that. Q. Now, item number 18 on that document indicates that Mr. Simpson's reference A. Yes. Q. And it was listed there after the tennis shoes that were turned in on the A. That's what this list shows, yes. Q. I have this -- MR. BLASIER: This is a new exhibit. Could I have a number, please? THE CLERK: 2130. MR. BLASIER: I'm sorry. 2130? THE CLERK: (Nods affirmatively.) (The instrument herein referred to as Serology item description notes was Q. Let me show you 2130. I'll give you a copy; maybe you can see it a little A. Thanks. Q. Now, you recognize that document, don't you? A. Yes, I do. Q. That's -- its title, serology item description notes, why don't you tell me A. This is used in a lot of different instances when a criminalist in the It's also kind of generally used as a note pad or a place just to record notes Q. Now, directing your attention to the bottom, that is number 18 and refers to A. That's correct. Q. And it was being referred to by that number on, according to that document, MR. BLASIER: Can we back out on that a little, Phil? (Mr. P. Baker complies.) THE WITNESS: That's correct. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) That's indicated by the dates on the right, correct? A. Yes. The day received is 6/14/94. Q. Let me give you another exhibit, which I'll number 2131. (The instrument herein referred to as document entitled Serology Case Typing Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Let me show you -- MR. BLASIER: Phil, can we back out on that a little bit? (Mr. P. Baker complies.) Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, that is a document entitled Serology Case Typing A. Yes, it is. Q. And you recognize that document, as well, do you not? A. Yes, I do. Q. And tell us what that document is for. A. Okay. When a criminalist in serology unit is doing a DNA analysis, this is Q. Okay. MR. BLASIER: Can we zoom in on the left-hand column, lower column now. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) The last entry on that form indicates number 18 as Mr. A. Yes, it does. Q. That document is as of what date? A. I believe it was started on June 14, 1994. Q. Is there a completion date on that? Do you have that in front of you? A. It has a day completed, which refers, I believe, to the analysis of June 17, Q. So as of the 17th, according to that document, Mr. Simpson's reference vial A. I don't believe that's what this says. Q. What does the No. 1 indicate? A. The item number 18 that's on there would be the item number which the -- Q. At some point in time, the number on Mr. Simpson's reference vial was A. Yes, it was. Q. That's because had it been number 18, that would have indicated that it was MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Argumentative. THE COURT: Sustained` Q. BY MR. BLASIER: That was done because the records indicated, as item number MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Argumentative. THE COURT: Sustained. You may ask the question. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Why was 18 changed to 17? A. On this specific item, I don't know. Q. You have no idea? A. No. Item numbers and photo numbers do regularly get changed for a variety of Q. Those numbers refer to photo I.D. numbers, do they not? A. Yes, they do. Q. You're talking about the first two comments that say looks like 107 and A. Something like that, yes. Q. That wasn't the item number they were given; that was the photo I.D., A. At this point, it was the number that was indicating that item, but it was Q. So that's why those numbers became a different number, because they were A. From the photo number, yes. That was an example I gave as to how it can Q. Now, item 18, however, was given that number in sequence after the tennis MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. Lay a foundation. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) We looked at the document before that showed item 17 as the A. We saw a document that had that on it, yes. Q. That's document number 212, correct? A. It's the one we looked at earlier, yes. Q. All right. This is done by Dennis Fung at the time he receives the items, MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Is that a document prepared in the regular course of MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: It's a plain white piece of paper that has three lines of text Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) So now is it your testimony that you have no idea when that A. I do have some idea. I know it was changed sometime from when Criminalist MR. BLASIER: Let me mark a new exhibit next in line. THE CLERK: 2132. (The instrument herein referred to as Copy of a follow-up investigation report Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Let me show you Exhibit 2132. MR. BLASIER: Can you zoom in on that a little bit. (Referring to TV screen.) Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) That's a document that's called a follow-up investigation A. Yes, it is. Q. And that's a document that was prepared specifically to change the item A. No, it isn't. Q. What is it for? A. This was the form in general that is used to correct information that This particular one was prepared by Mr. Yamauchi, not to change the item number Q. It says "change item number 18 to item number 17," correct? A. On his analyzed evidence report, correct, not on a property report or Q. And why was that necessary? A. Because when Mr. Yamauchi started the analysis on these items, he was under At some point, it was determined that the whole blood would become item number Q. Now, the date of this change was what? June 28, was it not? A. This form, or the report was dated June 28, that's correct, 1994. Q. And it was signed by you, was it not? A. Yes. Q. Why was it necessary to change the blood in item number 18 for item number MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Misstates the testimony, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. I don't understand your objection. THE WITNESS: I don't know. That's something that Mr. Fung will have to answer. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Can you tell me whether there is any other item in these A. By the criminalist or by SID? As I mentioned earlier, there were many other items that received an initial Without going through all 450 or 500, I can't answer specifically if there was To me, an item number occurs when the property is booked. Prior to that, it's Q. Are you aware of any single document, a checklist that gives items numbers A. Are we talking about this -- Q. This case. A. I have not gone through and reviewed all of the stuff in the notes. At this Q. Do you remember seeing any other follow-up investigation report like 2132 in A. Yes. As a matter of fact, I filled one out that changed because I made a Q. Which one was that? A. Had to do with, I believe, the property report I filled out, collecting Q. And which item are you thinking about? A. Well, in the body of the report -- if I can refer to the report, I can give Q. Sure. A. Okay. In the property report, I refer to item No. 306 as a hair fiber collected from This form is used for corrections like that. Q. Okay. But that was because there had already been the number 30 assigned to A. That's correct; it was a correction. Q. Are you aware of any instance where an item number that was assigned by a A. Well, again, we're getting into a discussion of when it becomes an item The item number is what's on the property report. I don't believe any of them I know of no other ones, other than the photo I.D.s that I mentioned earlier, Q. Well, that's the chart number 216, again, the summary chart prepared by the A. Yes, I do. Q. Isn't it accurate that every single item number, with the exception of 17, A. No. Q. Point to one that is not. A. All the items that were checked at Bundy were given an item number or Q. Well, the items that refer to the blood drops that were collected at Bundy, A. Yes. Q. That's because of the order in which the photographs were taken; when they A. That's correct. Q. When evidence was started to be collected at Rockingham, Dennis Fung started A. The photo numbers and eventually they made it -- they happen to match when Q. Is there a photo number for Mr. Simpson's reference vial? A. I don't believe so, no. Q. So we're not talking about a photo I.D. number that had been changed with A. No. Q. Now, on that chart, I want to direct your attention to number 84. Number 84 A. Yes, it does. Q. This is done as a routine procedure by the coroner, collecting scrapings A. That's correct. Q. That's to determine whether there might be blood or skin from a person that A. I believe that's the reason, yes. Q. You did serological testing on those samples, did you not? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Were you told by the plaintiffs that you weren't going to MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Hearsay, irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Matheson, let me put on the Elmo, a picture that's (The instrument herein referred to as a Picture of the blood in the vial that Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You see that picture, Mr. Matheson? A. Yes, I do. Q. Do you recognize that to be a picture of the blood in the vial that was MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Yes, I do. Q. There are records, are there not, within SID, that demonstrate any time that A. Well, when each person analyzes it, they record that the vial was open, yes. Q. And they actually write their initials on the label and the date, correct? A. That's correct. Q. That's required procedure? A. To mark the item, yes. Q. And that's so that you can at any time determine who opened the vial at any A. That's one of the ways, yes, to be able to check the markings that are on MR. BLASIER: Now, can we zoom in on the stopper. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Can you see the blood on the stopper in that vial? A. Yes, behind the glass. Q. Do you have any idea when this particular picture was taken? A. I don't remember the date. I believe it was one of the times when Q. Do you know whether there are any pictures that exist of that blood vial I'm sorry. Let me give you June 14. A. Not to my knowledge, no. Q. So you have no way of knowing whether there was blood on the stopper in that MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BLASIER: Let me show you what's been marked as 225. (The instrument herein referred to as outside of a gray analyzed evidence Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Can you tell us what that is? A. That's the outside of a gray analyzed evidence envelope that we used to book Q. And can you see that closely enough to determine whether that's Mr. A. I did see the item number 17, which is the property item number for Mr. Q. Okay. MR. BLASIER: Why don't you back that off, Phil. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) That number 17 is written in red, correct? A. Appears to be. Q. Do you have any idea when that number was put on that envelope? A. No, I don't. Q. Okay. Now, what is the correct procedure when blood is collected with MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BLASIER: You can take that off, Phil. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Let me show you again, 2130 serology description notes. MR. BLASIER: And I want to zoom in right there. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Can you see that entry, Mr. Matheson? A. (No verbal response.) Q. Let me give you a copy of that. A. I thought I had one. Okay. Q. And that entry that we've zoomed in on indicates that on June 13, MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope, no foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BLASIER: It's their business record; they used it to formulate this chart. THE COURT: I know. It's beyond the scope of their examination. You may do it on Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Matheson, do you have 1302 in front of you? A. Which one is that one? Q. That's the document you prepared on the 29th of June. A. Yes, I do. MR. BLASIER: Could we have page 2 please. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, I believe it was your testimony that the purpose of A. Yes, there was. Q. And one of those was to determine whether there was biological evidence or A. Part of it, yeah. That's the reason for the column that says "split." Part Q. And so each item of evidence was examined to determine whether it had A. No, it wasn't. Q. When you were examining these items, were you looking at them to see whether A. Generally, yes. We weren't doing an examination; we were looking at it and Q. You looked at each item, did you not? A. Yes, we did. MR. BLASIER: Let's zoom in on number 13. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, when you got to number 13 -- By the way, did you fill out this form as you did your examination? A. Yes, I did. Q. And when you got to number 13, you were in the room with Mr. Yamauchi and A. That's correct. Q. You were all looking at the items of evidence, correct? A. Yes. Q. And number 13, pair of socks, you looked at those items, correct? A. Yes. I pulled them out of the bag; that's how I determined the color of Q. Now, let's go over to the far right-hand column. Under comments, you wrote A. Yes, I did. Q. And that's because you looked at them to see if there was any blood on them, A. No. If I had done that -- If I had performed an analysis, it would have It does appear in the comments, indicating that is something that we needed to MR. BLASIER: Well, let's go to the left a little bit, Phil, and go out, Phil, Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You have on the "analysis performed" column for number 12, A. At the top of the page? Yes, I do. Q. You didn't perform that analysis that day, did you? A. No. Q. But it had been performed? Well, number 17, Mr. Simpson's blood again, you indicate RFLP. That had not A. It had not yet been performed, but I believe it had been submitted out for Q. So the analysis performed was -- that column was for things that had already A. No, I believe it was for the things that had already been done or things Q. Now, when you wrote "none obvious," you obviously examined the socks for A. I brought them out, gave them the color -- Or the color description, took a Q. Did Ms. Kestler or Colin Yamauchi say to you, when you made that notation, A. Not that I recall, no, or I would have indicated that. Q. And going to page -- or the page that has item number 84 on it, please. The A. 84 A and B refer to nail scrapings. Q. Scrapings? A. 84 C is the nail clippings. Q. And you don't have any indication there about any analysis that's going to A. I believe I do. In the comments, I indicate possible PCR conventional for 84 Q. That was done, was it not? A. Yes, it was. THE COURT: You're not going to be through with this witness for what? MR. BLASIER: Not for a little while. THE COURT: Take ten minutes, ladies and gentlemen. (Recess.) (Jurors resume their respective seats.) CROSS EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) BY MR. Q. Mr. Matheson, did you review records from the lab to determine how many A. I made a quick check, yes. Q. And how many times were they looked at by other people? A. It's a quick check I said I did -- I performed. I didn't find that they had Q. Were you present when Drs. Boden and Lee examined the socks? A. No, I was not. Q. Now, on August 4, is it correct, then, that is the first time that Mr. A. That was the first date that blood was located, yes. That's correct. Q. Now, you indicated that there was a piece of carpeting that was cut out of A. Yes, I believe it was item No. 33. Q. And that was a piece of carpeting from the floor board area of the driver A. That's correct. Q. What else was in that box? A. That particular box contained most, if not all of the freezer storage items Q. And that would include the gloves, the knit cap, correct? A. That's correct. Q. Now, I want to ask you about the stains on the console that -- you indicated A. Yes. Q. That's the stains represented on the lower right hand part of this picture, A. That's correct. The numbers that are on there are the different stain Q. And one of those stains is No. 305? A. Yes. Q. Are you aware of any picture at all taken prior to the time this was taken A. No, I did not. (Referring to large board entitled "Bronco Evidence.") Q. Is it accurate to say that the total amount of blood on this console is A. I'm not sure what you mean by extremely small. Q. Less than a drop is enough to create smears that size, correct? A. I'm not so sure less than a drop would be enough to do that. I have not Q. Have you heard any other estimate that people have given for the amount of MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Hearsay, irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You say when you collected those stains, you swatched them A. That's correct. Q. Is there a procedure that you have within S.I.D. for collecting blood A. There's an informal procedure, yes. MR. BLASIER: Could I have a new number, please? THE CLERK: 2133. (The instrument herein referred to as instructions included in blood sample Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Let me show you what's been marked as 2133 and could you A. Actually these are a couple of different documents. One of them is a set of The other two I don't have any specific LAPD footer or notation on that. I Q. The last page is instructions that are given to homicide detectives and all A. Well, not all of them. MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, beyond the scope. THE COURT: Excuse me? MR. LAMBERT: Irrelevant and beyond the scope, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'll permit that question. THE WITNESS: Not all the detectives have them or even would be provided with Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) And homicide detectives are trained on how to collect MR. LAMBERT: Same objection. THE COURT: That is sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Matheson, does scientific investigation division at MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) When you tried to collect a sample such as on the console, A. We want to collect as much of the blood as possible, that's correct. Q. That's because if you want to do particular kinds of tests such as RFLP A. That's correct. It takes a certain amount. Q. You can't tell from looking at a smear as we see on the console, whether A. Just from looking at it, or you can have kind of a guess, no, there's no Q. When your criminalists are there when they see a smear like that, they're A. We ask them to collect as much as possible, up to a quarter size stain. Q. When you say a quarter size stain, what do you mean? A. Well, for -- With a stain that's about the size of a quarter either when it Q. Does it say that anywhere in any document they provided to your criminalist? A. No. Q. Now the stains that you've indicated on the console were actually discovered A. I believe two of the stains were previously collected by Mr. Fung. The one Q. While there were inspections of the Bronco, now, the August 26 date, that A. No, I was not. Q. You were aware of that search taking place, were you not? A. I was aware of it, yes. Q. That was a search that was done at the direction of Michele Kestler, the MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Prior to August 26 and after stains 31 and 30 were A. I don't believe they were -- we were involved in any sort of searching or Q. Did Dennis Fung, at any time, tell you that he only collected part of the MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Hearsay. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, you indicated that the procedure you used, you put a A. Yes. It's a set on a bindle or on a small piece of plastic under the Q. Okay. And, well, describe that procedure to me in a little bit more detail? A. The collection process like I did in the laboratory? Q. Yeah. A. It's simple. You have a stain on a surface we collect on small clean cotton The whole idea you're trying to take the blood or whatever it is off of the Once you feel you have as much as you want to on the swatches, you take an -- Q. And the bindle, all that is a little piece of paper. Like a piece of scratch A. That's correct. Just a piece of white paper we have around the lab, Q. The proper procedure calls for drying the swatch before it's put in a paper A. It's supposed to be, yes. Q. And you said that you date and you initial the bindle, correct? A. Yes. Q. And the purpose for doing that is to be able to track, to make sure that the A. That's correct. Q. If you date and initial a bindle and sometime later you pull what's supposed A. I'd be concerned if -- like in these cases, if I dated and initialed it when Q. Now, it's correct that all of the biological evidence, all of the blood MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. MR. BLASIER: Your Honor, the chart has information about being sent to other THE COURT: Let me see counsel on that issue. (The following proceedings were held at the bench:) THE COURT: This is 216? MR. LAMBERT: Yes. THE COURT: I'm on 216. I think there was an objection, wasn't there? MR. LAMBERT: There was -- THE COURT: Well, I overruled it on the ruling -- apparently I think I overruled MR. LAMBERT: What it is, Your Honor, it's a summary, voluminous business MR. BLASIER: It wasn't prepared by him. MR. LAMBERT: Doesn't have to be. This is the same exhibit introduced at the criminal trial. THE COURT: Doesn't make it any better. MR. LAMBERT: No. No, I'm saying it's obviously standard, compiled of underlined THE COURT: There is no 1209. MR. LAMBERT: I must be wrong. It's the summary of voluminous records. Exception MR. PETROCELLI: If it's in sequence. MR. LAMBERT: Maybe it's 14 -- MR. PETROCELLI: It might be in the 14 hundred sequence, Judge. THE COURT: Is it 1340? MR. LAMBERT: Its actually called summary or voluminous records. MR. PETROCELLI: It's 1509, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. The court sets aside its previous ruling that it was a (The following proceedings were resumed in open court in the presence of the THE COURT: Mr. Blasier, I'm reading the question and frankly I can't make sense MR. BLASIER: Let me try it again. THE COURT: Okay. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Matheson, on chart number 216, every item on here that A. Well, they were all processed through at some point. In other words, I As far as collected, a notable example would be item number 17, Mr. Simpson's But at some point, all of these other items listed on this chart were processed Q. And indeed, everything you mentioned, are there any things that are -- went A. I didn't go through to check to see if there were additional items that went Q. Isn't it accurate that everything that went out to other labs was processed A. That's correct. If we submitted it to an outside laboratory, we'd prepare it Q. Now, the booking process involves -- well tell me what that involves; A. Basically as it's -- you have an item. You have basically scientifically They're prepared -- collected, prepared, packaged, sealed within an envelope or It happens that S.I.D. has a part of our division which is property facility So if a criminalist books something, normally it just goes into this evidence It's then stored at that location, if it's appropriate for it. If not, it's An example being, if a homicide detective collects a blood sample at a Q. When an item is booked, it's entered into the LAPD computer system for A. Not when it's booked. Sometime later it is, yes. Q. Isn't it correct that none of the items in this case were booked until June MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: I'll allow it. THE WITNESS: I believe that would be the first date item No. 1, I think was Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) So the computer system that LAPD has for tracking items MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: I'll sustain it. I didn't hear any foundation with regard to this Q. Well, we've gone through this before, have we not, Mr. Matheson, about the A. I have a general knowledge of the department's computer system and a little Q. And you're aware that the computer system allows you at any time you can A. Not necessarily 'cause there are two different systems. The property system Q. And in those two Systems, none of the evidence was tracked or accounted for A. Assuming the 16th is the proper date, I don't have the property report in MR. BLASIER: We have 1025 on the board with -- can you back out a little bit. Mr. Matheson, you testified on direct about EAP tests, correct? (The instrument herein referred to as Printout of sample b |