|
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 blood cells - EAP vs. THE WITNESS: A little bit, yes. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) That stands for a erythro acid phosphotase? A. Erythrocyte acid phosphotase. Q. And that is a genetic marker, as you described, other than ABO typing and A. It is a genetic marker, yes. It's located on the red blood cell. Q. And -- THE COURT: Excuse me. That's on the TV screen? MR. BLASIER: I'm sorry, on the screen. THE COURT: I just want to keep the record straight. Okay. No problem. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, it's true, is it not, when you look at the genetic A. I -- probably on the surface of it. But it is associated with the red blood Q. When you do DNA testing, you're not looking at something in the red blood A. That's correct. The red blood cells have no DNA in them. Q. You're looking at two different things. Those are apples an oranges in the A. If it is possible to totally separate the different cells within a blood Q. Now you indicated that you did testing, initial testing to determine whether MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Misstates the evidence, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. A. Well, the nature of serology analysis is to try and exclude, that's correct. Q. I'm sorry? A. To get more and more information, narrow the scope of a sample to try and Q. And you performed testing in this case on the finger nail clippings or MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, none of these tests, none of the tests that you talked A. That's correct. They're not like fingerprints. Q. When you say a fingerprint, we're talking about fingerprints from your A. I don't know about the dermal, they're fingerprints or your fingers, that's Q. That is one forensic technique that does allow you to identify somebody A. That's correct. And none of the tests in this case, other than -- well, none MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Well, all of the tests that you talked about require the A. Once you start looking at multiple markers, that's correct. You use the Q. And in order to use that particular rule, there must be what's called A. That's correct. Q. And a good example of that, if you were trying to figure out how many people A. That's correct. I believe there is an association between the -- Q. The reason you can't use that formula is because there's some connection A. Like I said, I believe there is, yeah. Q. So that only works where there is absolutely no connection between one A. Where they're genetically independent, that's correct. THE COURT: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, 10. Don't talk about the case; don't do (At 12:00 p.m a recess was taken until 1:30 p.m. 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 THE COURT: (Nods to Mr. Blasier.) MR. BLASIER: Thank you, Your Honor. GREGORY MATHESON, the witness on the stand Q. Mr. Matheson, let me show you a photograph that's previously been marked as (The instrument herein referred to as Photo of the Bronco taken on August 10 of Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Take a look at that, sir, and tell me if that appears to be MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Excuse me? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. No foundation, Your Honor. MR. BLASIER: That's what I'm asking him for. THE COURT: Okay, overruled. (Witness reviews photo.) THE WITNESS: There are two photographs on this, the top one showing an On the bottom part is a photograph of a Bronco looking in from -- I guess it's I never saw the whole vehicle. I don't know if that's that vehicle or not. Q. Do you recall testifying this morning about the carpeting that was removed A. Yes, I do. Q. That was actually removed on the 14th of June, was it not? A. It's my understanding, yes. Q. And can you see from this picture that the carpeting in this car has already A. Yes, it appears to be. Q. And that's consistent with the appearance of the Bronco with the carpet MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Calls for a conclusion. THE COURT: Sustained. This witness said he never saw a photograph of the Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, when you examined the console on September 1, it was A. That's correct. MR. BLASIER: Can we zoom in on the console. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Do you see any evidence of any blood whatsoever on that MR. LAMBERT: Objection. No foundation. Calls for conclusion, speculation on the THE COURT: Sustained as to foundation for the photograph. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Are you aware of any photographs of the Bronco taken A. I don't know of any, but I hadn't seen all the photographs. Q. Now, could you take a look at 216 that I have in front of you there. (Witness reviews Exhibit 216.) Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, reference blood samples -- reference blood sample from A. All the evidence that is associated with the case can be important. The Q. The reference sample from -- that sample that -- everything else that's A. That's correct. Q. If that becomes compromised in some fashion, that can affect the validity of A. If there's a problem with a particular reference sample, yes, it's correct. Q. On that list there, number 59 and 60, those are also reference samples, are A. Yes, they are. Q. And those are reference samples for Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, A. That's correct; they're the blood vials. Q. Those are the EDTA purple-type vials, as we saw with Mr. Simpson's vial, A. That's correct. Q. Those are directed at the time of autopsy, are they not? A. Excuse me. That's my understanding, yes. Q. And your chart here, or the plaintiffs' chart here, indicates that the Los A. That's correct. Q. That accurate? A. It is the date that they were booked into property as those items. Q. Is says it was collected by LAPD. Was it? A. Those particular items were prepared by the coroner's office. They were Q. And it indicates on there that the blood was sent to Cellmark on what date? A. For both of these items, on June 23, 1994. Q. Between June 15 and June 24 of 1994, where were the victims' blood samples? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Do you know where it was? A. Yes. Q. Where? A. In the refrigerator located in the serology unit. Q. We've already discussed that Mr. Simpson's reference vial on this chart is A. That's correct. Q. Is there any way for blood to get from Mr. Simpson's reference vial into the MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Improper, hypothetical, assumes facts not in evidence. MR. BLASIER: We'll tie it up. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I would say for the blood to get from one to another, somebody MR. BLASIER: That's all I have. THE COURT: Redirect? MR. LAMBERT: Thank you, Your Honor. REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. LAMBERT: Q. Now, Mr. Matheson, there was some discussion during your cross-examination How were those items contained inside the box? A. Okay. What we were talking about are the items that have the biological To give you an example, I've described before the process of doing the swatches And items like clothing items that are a little bit larger, they are put into Q. So is each item of evidence separately wrapped -- A. Yes. Q. -- in its own container? A. Yes. Q. Also, you were asked some questions about the examination by Colin Yamauchi A. Yes, I did. Q. And about when was that; do you remember? A. I believe that was in mid-September. Q. Okay. And on that occasion, how did the socks appear to you when you first looked at A. Well, the socks were still the same. They looked the same as they did on the Q. Did you see blood when you first looked at the socks? A. It's not apparent, no. It's very difficult to see anything on it. It just Q. And by the time you looked at them, were you aware of the fact that Mr. A. Yes, I was. Q. So you were looking specifically to find blood on this occasion? A. That's correct. Q. And were you ever able to actually see it with your eyes? A. Yes. Q. And how did you go about doing that? A. Well, the socks are very, very dark, like I said in my inventory, I'm not Blood, when it dries, can also be very dark. In order to do an examination of You have high intensity lights that can be placed near the surface to be able After a little while, it becomes very easy to pick out the areas that are Q. Other than making that kind of close examination, is the blood readily MR. BLASIER: Objection. Leading. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: No, it is not. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Finally, Mr. Blasier asked you some questions about whether Are you aware of anyone ever mixing together the reference samples in the case? A. No, I'm not. MR. LAMBERT: Thank you, sir. RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BLASIER: Q. Mr. Matheson, you were aware at the time you examined the socks on the 29th, A. Not until I pulled them out of the bag. Q. Then you were aware of it, weren't you? A. Yes. Q. And you were looking at them to see what kind of evidentiary value they had, A. I was making a quick determination, yes, of what evidence value there might Q. And criminalists are trained, when they collect evidence, to look at to see A. That's correct. Q. Is it your testimony that no one saw any blood on that sock until August 4? A. That's correct. Q. When it was seen on the 4th, it was a very large stain in the ankle area of A. On the 4th, I believe at that point there was just a presumptive test done I did find a stain that I sampled. Q. It was a large stain that was on the ankle area, wasn't it, Mr. Matheson? A. That was one of many stains. Q. It was a large stain, wasn't it? A. Yes. MR. BLASIER: That's all I have. MR. LAMBERT: Nothing further. THE COURT: You may step down. MR. BAKER: Your Honor, subject to recall, on our part of the case. THE COURT: Your part of the case. THE WITNESS: Thank you. MR. LAMBERT: We'd like to call now, Dennis Fung, Your Honor. DENNIS FUNG, THE CLERK: You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause THE WITNESS: I do. THE CLERK: And would you please state and spell your name for the record. THE WITNESS: My name is Dennis Fung, D-E-N-N-I-S, F-U-N-G. MR. LAMBERT: Thank you, Your Honor. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. LAMBERT: Q. Mr. Fung, what is your occupation? A. I'm a criminalist. Q. And by whom are you employed? A. I am employed by the Los Angeles Police Department, and I am assigned to the Q. Can you explain to us what a criminalist is? A. A criminalist is somebody who applies the principles of the physical and Q. And in order to become a criminalist at the LAPD, are you required to have A. Yes. Bachelor's degree in natural science is required. Q. And do you have a bachelor's degree? A. Yes, I do. I have a bachelor of science degree in criminalistics from the Q. When did you receive those degrees? A. The criminalistics degree was received in 1982, and the chemistry degree was Q. And when did you join the Scientific Investigation Division? A. I started there in October of 1984. Q. And have you worked there continually since that time? A. Yes, I have. Q. And you currently are assigned to the firearms -- is it called division or A. I'm with the firearms analysis unit. Q. Firearms analysis unit. And what level of criminalist are you with LAPD? A. I am a criminalist 3. Q. And can you describe, please, what it takes to become a criminalist 3 with A. A criminalist 3 requires expertise in three areas of the laboratory, and at Q. And on June 13, 1994, were you a criminalist 3 at that time? A. Yes. Q. Now, turning your attention to June 13, 1994, did you receive a call in A. Yes, I did. Q. And about what time did you receive that call? A. I received a telephone call at approximately 5:30 in the morning. Q. And who was that from? A. That was from criminalist Mazzola. Q. And what did Ms. Mazzola tell you in that call? A. She informed me that there was a homicide in West LA division. Q. And what was the reason for calling you? A. I was assigned as her criminalist 3; she was a criminalist 1; she is Q. And she had received the call concerning the crime scene and then called A. Yes. Q. And what did you do as a result of this phone call from Ms. Mazzola? A. I proceeded to meet Ms. Mazzola at the crime lab, and we got in the crime Q. Do you recall about what time you arrived at the Rockingham location? A. Referring to my notes, I received -- or I arrived there at approximately Q. Okay. And what did you do when you arrived there? A. When I arrived there, I was briefed at the scene by Detective Vannatter. Q. And how did he go about briefing you? What did he say? MR. BLASIER: Objection. Hearsay. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Did Detective Vannatter give you a walk-through of the A. Yes, he did. Q. What did he show you? A. He showed me items of evidence that he was interested in, such as a red MR. BLASIER: I object and move to strike any testimony about a blood trail. THE COURT: Overruled. The Court's going to permit it to show this witness's Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, Mr. Fung, calling your attention to this board, which A. If I may. Q. You can step down. MR. BLASIER: Sorry, Mr. Lambert; what exhibit number was that? MR. LAMBERT: 155. MR. BLASIER: Thank you. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Does this exhibit reflect some of the items of evidence A. Yes, it does. Q. And are these the things that were pointed out to you by Detective MR. BLASIER: Objection. Leading. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Did Detective Vannatter point out these things to you A. Yes. MR. BLASIER: Same objection. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Let me ask you this: What was the next thing you did after A. The first thing I did was to test a red stain on the door of the Bronco, on Q. Did you -- when you were at the Bronco, was the Bronco open or locked? A. It was locked. Q. Did you look inside the Bronco? A. Yes, I did. Q. Were you able to observe anything inside the Bronco? A. I saw what appeared to be red stains on the interior left door and on the Q. And this stain that you saw on the door of the Bronco, was that collected? A. It was collected the next day, but not -- Q. The one on the door. A. On the outside of the door it was collected, yes. Q. Okay. And after collecting that stain on the side of the door, did you then proceed A. Yes, I did. Q. You can -- you can sit down; you might want to look at your notes. Do you recall how many of the -- of these blood drops that you discussed you A. Yes. I collected -- or six drops of blood were collected at the Rockingham location Q. And what are the item numbers that were ultimately assigned to those blood A. Those would be items Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Q. And which one is the item that was on the door of the Bronco? A. Take was item No. 1. Q. And 4 through 8, where were those items located? A. Excuse me? Q. Where were items 4 through 8 located? A. 4 was located in the street. 5 and 6 were on the south portion of the Q. Okay. And the first one of those drops that was collected, was that number A. Yes. Q. Could you please describe for the jury the process that you used to collect A. After labeling, measuring, and photographing the blood stain, a substrate The substrate control is then placed into a plastic bag, and then we proceed to MR. BLASIER: I object to the narrative. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: And again, a pair of tweezers that are clean are used to apply the And the stain is allowed to be absorbed onto the cloth. And once the cloth or Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) And this is the process that you used to collect item A. Yes. Q. And did you use that same process to collect all the other items at A. Yes. Q. And you mentioned that sometimes you have to use more than one swatch. Did A. Yes. Q. And you also mentioned the taking of a substrate control. What is the A. The purpose of the substrate control is to determine if there are any And secondary use for the substrate control is to determine if our technique is Q. Did you collect the substrate control for all of these blood drops that you A. Yes. Q. You did ultimately collect all of the drops you've listed? A. Yes. Q. And after collecting those drops, did you then collect another item of A. Yes. MR. LAMBERT: Can I get Exhibit 204. (Clerk hands Exhibit 204 to Counsel.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) In this item of evidence that you then collected was the A. Yes. Q. -- or seen before? And let me show you this exhibit here, which is 204 in this case. It has See if you can tell from this if this appears to be the glove that you A. Yes, it does. Q. Okay. Now, when you collected that glove, what did you package it in? A. I placed the glove in a paper bag. Q. And is that the process that you normally use for collecting that kind of an A. Yes. Q. And after -- Let me ask you this. When you collected this glove, where was it? Was it laying on the ground or was A. The glove was located at the south side of the house. It's not on that chart Q. Was it on the ground? A. Yes, it was. Q. Did -- could you describe to the jury, the -- well, its appearance when you A. The glove appeared to have red stains on it, and there was a slight Q. Is that -- does that glistening appear to you to be blood on the glove? A. Yes. Q. Let me ask you this: Based upon your experience, was that glove wet or dry A. It appeared dry to me. Q. Now, what time did you finish your collection of evidence at Rockingham that A. We finished collecting evidence approximately 10 o'clock that morning at Q. Okay. When you finished the evidence collection, is there any step that you A. Before leaving Rockingham, we did an inventory of the evidence that we had Q. And you did do that in this case? A. Yes. Q. And what did you then do next? A. After that, we proceeded on to Bundy, the Bundy location. Q. And approximately what time did you arrive at the Bundy location? A. We arrived at Bundy at approximately 10:15 in the morning. Q. And what did you do when you arrived at Bundy? A. Upon arriving at Bundy, I had a briefing with Detective Lange. Q. And did Detective Lange give you a walk-through of that crime scene? A. Yes, he did. Q. Detective Lange was in charge of the Bundy crime scene, was he? A. Yes, he was. Q. Did Detective Lange point out to you any particular items of evidence that A. Yes, he did. He showed me keys, a pager, glove, and a cap in the caged area, and then there Q. And these blood drops that you described, what condition did they appear to A. They -- MR. BLASIER: Objection. No foundation. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: The blood drops appeared to be fairly fresh, meaning that they MR. LAMBERT: Let me change charts here a second, Your Honor. (Counsel displays large board entitled blood drops at Bundy June 13, 1994.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) And this chart which I put up, which is Exhibit No. 67 -- MR. BLASIER: 67? MR. LAMBERT: 67, yes, sir. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Does this chart represent the location of the blood drops A. If I may examine it. Q. Sure. Here's this pointer if you need it. A. Yes, it does. Q. Are these -- in these photographs, there are little cards with numbers next What do those numbers reflect? A. These numbers 112, 113, 114, 115, and 117, are photo identification numbers. Q. And when you got to Bundy that day, which number did you start with? A. I started with No. 100 or photo I.D. No. 100. Q. Why did you start with No. 100? A. I knew that the detectives were getting a search warrant for the Rockingham Q. Okay. So then you could go back to Rockingham and add other numbers later? A. Right. Q. Now, this one here at the desk was this No. 117? A. Yes, it was. Q. And did you walk all the way back to the back of the house and see that A. Yes, I did. Q. And how did it appear to you? A. It also appeared to be red, and have a tacky appearance to it. Q. Okay. All right. You can take your seat again, if you will. Now, did you collect these same -- were these same five -- excuse me. Were these five blood drops collected using the same procedures that you used A. Yes. Q. Did you -- was there substrate control obtained for these items, as well? A. Yes. Q. You also collected a couple of items that are -- let me start with number You know where item 41 was collected? A. Item 41 was collected from a -- from the dirt area which was by a tree Q. And what was the purpose in collecting that item? A. That item had a red stain which was very near where the male victim was. Q. And how about item number 42? What was that item? A. Item 42 was also a red stain that was collected by the base of the stairs. Q. And these five blood drops up here in this chart, we showed their photo I.D. A. Yes. Photo I.D. No. 112 became 47. Item 47. Photo I.D. 113 became item 48. Photo I.D. 114 became item 49. Photo I.D. 115 became item number 50. And photo I.D. 117 became item number 52. Q. Thank you. In addition to collecting these items of blood evidence, did you also collect A. Yes, I did. Q. Did you collect a glove? A. Yes, I did. Q. And a hat? A. Yes. Q. Now, when you were doing this collection of the evidence at Rockingham and A. We did not divide our responsibilities; we were working as a team. However, I was in charge of the collection and I made the discretionary Q. Some of the actual, physical steps of doing the collection. Did you do some A. Yes. Q. And in terms of -- Of taking measurements as to where things were located, A. I did that in conjunction with Ms. Mazzola. Q. Now, after collecting these items of evidence at Bundy, did you then do an MR. BLASIER: Objection. Leading. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Yes, we did. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) And having done that, did you assure yourself that A. Yes, I did. Q. And having done that, what did you then do? A. After performing the inventory, we proceeded back to the Rockingham Q. And this was now to collect additional evidence from Rockingham? A. Yes. MR. LAMBERT: Let me show you one more board. (Counsel displays board labeled Rockingham Biological Evidence.) MR. LAMBERT: This board, which is Exhibit number -- what exhibit number is I'm sorry; I should have had that written down. Q. Does this board reflect evidence that you collected at Rockingham on your A. Yes. Q. -- to Rockingham? A. If I may examine it closer. Q. Please. A. Yes, it does. Q. Could you -- could you tell us what item 12 is, up at the top of the chart? A. Item 12 is a -- is two drops of what appear -- what turned out to be blood. Q. And what portion of the house was that collected from? A. That is in the foyer area of the front door. Q. Okay. A. The front entrance. Q. And that was collected on your second trip to Rockingham? A. Yes, it was. Q. What is item 13? A. Item 13 is a pair of socks that were located in the master bedroom. Q. And was that collected on your second trip to Rockingham? A. Yes, it was. Q. And when you collected the socks, how did you package them? A. Those were placed in a paper bag. Q. And then item 14, what is item 14? A. Item 14 is a red stain that was located in from the master bathroom. Q. And did you collect that item? A. Yes. Q. And were items 12 and 14 collected from the same way as you've described the A. Yes. Q. Now, while you were -- when you were at Rockingham that day, did you also A. Yes, I did. Q. And what is evidence item 17? A. Evidence item number 17 is a vial of reference blood from O.J. Simpson. Q. And what -- Who delivered item 17 to you? A. That was delivered to me by Detective Vannatter. Q. And do you recall approximately at what time he delivered it to you? A. Yes. That was delivered to me at 5:20 in the afternoon. Q. While you were at Rockingham? A. While I was at Rockingham, yes. Q. And what did you do with evidence item 17 after you received it from A. I put my initials and dated it, and then we brought it to the crime scene Q. And after you finished this second time at Rockingham, what did you then do? A. We then proceeded to the crime laboratory to process the evidence and start Q. And the crime laboratory is located where, sir? A. The crime lab is located downtown, on 555 Ramirez Street. Q. And that's where you took all the evidence that you had collected? A. Yes. Q. And was there a particular portion of the crime laboratory that you took the A. All the evidence was brought into the evidence processing room. Q. That's a room that's used for the purpose of processing evidence, obviously. A. Well, that's where we bring evidence after we've been out at a crime scene. Q. Is that room locked? A. Yes, it is. Q. And how did you gain access to it? A. I have a magnetic card that acts as a key. Q. Those are cards that people at Scientific Investigation Division have? A. Yes. Q. Now, you mentioned that there was some drying of the evidence at this time; A. Yes. Q. How do you go about drying the evidence? How do you go about drying the evidence? A. Well, for the drying process of blood swatches, each item of evidence is First the substrate control is transferred from the bag into a labeled test This is done until all the items of evidence that need to be handled in this Q. Now, you mentioned earlier that sometimes when you collect blood evidence, A. Yes. Q. When you have multiple swatches, how do you handle the drying of multiple A. I place the swatches in the test tube, much in the same manner as I do a Q. If you had multiple swatches, they would all go into one test tube? A. Yes. Q. Then they're left for the test tube together to dry? A. Yes. Q. And those are the procedures that you followed on that afternoon and evening MR. BLASIER: Objection leading. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Were those the procedures that you followed for all of the A. Yes. Q. Now, sir, on the morning of June 14, did you return to work that morning? A. On June 14? Yes. Q. Where did you go to work that morning? A. I returned to the crime laboratory. Q. And was there any further procedure that you did that morning in regard to A. Yes. At that point, I transferred the swatches from test tubes onto paper Q. And after you transferred the swatch from the test tube into the paper A. The paper bindles are labeled and placed back into the coin envelopes from Q. And do you do all of them at once, or do you do one at a time? How do you process these bindles? A. Again, each item of evidence is handled one at a time. So you never have Q. So you put the evidence item into a bindle; it goes in the coin envelope. A. The control swatch also goes into its own bindle and then goes into its own Q. And did you follow that procedure with all of the blood evidence that you'd A. Yes. Q. Now, at -- At the time you were doing this -- strike that. When you completed this process of putting the swatches into bindles, did you A. I also went into the serology laboratory. Q. And what did you do there? A. I went in there to talk with Mr. Matheson, and Lieutenant Lange was there Q. And did you also talk with Colin Yamauchi at all? A. Yes. MR. BLASIER: Objection. Leading. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Yes, I did. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) At some point did you -- did you and Matheson and Yamauchi A. Yes. Q. And did Mr. Yamauchi go about doing that sampling? A. Yes, he did. Q. Did he do all that after you completed your packaging process that you just A. Yes. Q. Now, later that morning, did you do any further collecting of the evidence? A. Yes, I did. Q. And what did you do in that regard? A. We also had to process the interior portion of the Bronco. Q. Where was the Bronco located? A. The Bronco was located across from Parker Center, which is 150 North Center. Q. And what particular location was the Bronco at? A. It was in a building we refer to as the print shed. Q. And when you arrived at the print shed, was it locked or unlocked? A. It was locked. Q. And how did you access it? A. I have a key. Q. And the Bronco was inside the print shed? A. Yes, it was. Q. Was it locked or unlocked? A. The Bronco was locked. MR. LAMBERT: This is Exhibit 211, Your Honor. (Counsel displays Exhibit 211.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) You said the Bronco was locked. How did you obtain access A. I requested that a detective from burglary auto division come and slim-jim Q. And someone did that for you? A. Yes. Q. And you then had access to the Bronco? A. Yes. Q. And why don't you step down for a second with your pointer. Is this exhibit -- does this Exhibit 211, the photographs up at the top and on A. Yes. Q. And those little cards that you see in the pictures are -- what do those A. Those reflect items of evidence which I collected. Q. Okay. Let's start with this one right here in the middle, 22 and 23. Would A. 22 is a blood stain on the interior of the driver door, and 23 is a blood Q. 23 is actually inside that little notch we see in the picture? A. Yes. Q. Was there also an item 21 that's not in the photograph? A. Yes. 21, you can see it right at the top of the -- of this picture. You just Q. Okay. And how about item 24? What is that item? Can you see it from here? A. 24 is a red stain that was on the dashboard area, next to the light switch. (Indicating to card.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Item No. 33 up at the top, can you describe for us what A. Item No. 33 was a red stain that had the appearance of a partial shoe print. MR. BLASIER: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) What did you do with that stain that appeared to have a A. I cut out the entire carpet area of the floor, driver floorboard, and Q. Now, on the console portion of the Bronco, way over here to the right, you A. Yes. Q. Did you collect items 31 and 30, as well? A. Yes, I did. Q. What were those? A. Those were red stains that were very light. Q. Did you collect all of the stains that were on the console? A. No; I collected a representative sample of them. Q. And how did you decide what was a representative sample? A. I collected one -- well, I collected a swatch that was darkened by it. Q. And how did you go about doing that? A. In the same method that I had described before. Q. Okay. So you collected one swatch from each of those areas by getting it A. Yes. Q. Were these evidence items that you collected from the Bronco automobile then A. Yes. Q. Were they later then packaged in the manner you described? A. Yes. Q. And the big carpet that was cut out, item No. 33, what did you do with that A. That I placed in a paper bag and booked it to be frozen. Q. So it was handled a little bit differently than the swatches were handled? A. Yes. Q. Now, let me see the property reports. I'd like to show you some property reports which are Exhibit 141. (The instrument herein referred to as Photo of Criminalist Dennis Fung pointing THE COURT: Before we get into the property report, let's take a ten-minute Don't talk about the case; don't form or express any opinion. (Recess.) (Jurors resume their respective seats.) THE COURT: You may resume. MR. LAMBERT: Thank you, Your Honor. MR. BLASIER: Did I -- can I see 1412. MR. LAMBERT: Sure. It's pages 1 through 12. (Mr. Blasier reviews document.) Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Mr. Fung, let me show you pages 1 through 12 of Exhibit A. These are property reports of the items of evidence I collected on June 13 Q. And are those prepared by you, those property reports? A. Yes, they were. Q. An do those reflect all the evidence items take you collected at Bundy A. Yes. Q. And in the property report, would you tell me what exhibit -- what item A. In the property report, 17 is listed as a as blood, comma, within a vial Q. Now would you take a look at this document that we've put up on the Elmo I don't know if you can see it very well from there. Do you recognize that document? A. Yes. That is a document filled out by or made up by Ms. Mazzola. Q. So the handwriting on there, is that of Andrea Mazzola? A. Yes, it is. Q. And I notice she listed on this, the blood vial as being number 18 as A. Ms. Mazzola -- MR. BLASIER: Objection. No foundation. THE COURT: Foundation. MR. LAMBERT: By the way, Your Honor, this is exhibit 212. I should have (The instrument herein referred to as lab note referring to Items 17, 18, 19 Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Did Ms. Mazzola -- was Ms. Mazzola aware of the fact that MR. BLASIER: Objection. Calls for speculation. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: No, she was not. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Did you, the next day, later, tell Ms. Mazzola that you had MR. BLASIER: Objection. Hearsay and leading. THE COURT: Sustain as to leading. Q. (BY MR. LAMBERT) Did you have -- did you have a conversation the next day A. Yes, I did. Q. Now, and did you tell her what the evidence item was for that blood vial? A. I told her that it would be 17 instead of 18. Q. And did this piece of paper that we see here, was this part of an official A. That was notes. Q. In your official report, how is the blood vial listed? A. No. The property report, the blood vial was listed as item number 17. Q. Thank you. Now, we've already talked about your doing a search of Mr. Simpson's Bronco You can take that down. Did you ever do a search of Mr. Simpson's Bentley automobile? A. Yes, I did. Q. When was that search done? A. That was done on June 30. Q. And where was that done? A. That was also done in the print shed. Q. And what were you looking for specifically in that search? A. In that search, I was looking for blood within the interior of the Bentley Q. And did you find any knife in the Bentley? A. I found a small pocket knife, but that didn't fit the criterion for what we Q. Did you find any blood inside the Bentley? A. No. We could not detect the presence of blood within that vehicle. Q. Is there a test that you use for the purposes of determining whether blood A. Yes. The presumptive tests using the reagent phenolphthalein and hydrogen Q. And that test can tell whether a stain is presumptively blood or not blood? A. It detects the presence of blood. Q. Did you use that test on the interior of the Bronco? A. Bronco or Bentley? Q. I'm sorry, thank you. The interior of the Bentley? A. Yes, I did. Q. In how many places in the interior of the Bentley did you check; do you A. There were numerous areas checked. Anytime I saw what appeared to be an Q. Anything that you thought could possibly be blood, you tested it? A. Yes. Q. Did you find any blood at all? A. No. Q. Did there come a time after June 14 when you returned to the Bundy location A. Yes, I did. Q. And when was that? A. That was on July 3, 1994. Q. Who asked to go to Bundy on that occasion? A. Detectives Lange and Vannatter requested that I come back to the Bundy Q. And when you arrived, who was there? A. When I arrived, Detectives Lange and Vannatter were there. Q. And what did they ask you to collect on that occasion? A. There was a -- there was this blood on the back gate of Bundy and they Q. And did you collect it? A. Yes, I did. Q. Did that blood get item numbers? A. Yes. Those items -- those items became numbers 115, 116, and 117. Q. And was that blood collected in the manner that you previously described? A. Yes. Q. And those blood drops on that back gate, did you see them when you were A. No, I did not. Q. Do you remember examining the back gate to look for evidence at all? A. Not specifically, no. MR. LAMBERT: I'd like at this time, Your Honor, to move in some exhibits, items 208 is partially already stipulated to, Your Honor. MR. BLASIER: Can I see what they are? MR. LAMBERT: One of them is the glove. 1412 is the thing you just looked at. 211 is the board -- the Bronco board. MR. BLASIER: Okay. THE COURT: Okay. They're received. (The instrument herein referred to as a box and contents Nos. 9, 10, 18 and 27 (The instrument herein referred to as a box and contents Nos. 9, 10, 18 and 27 (The instrument herein referred to as a posterboard entitled "Bronco Evidence" (The instrument herein referred to as a posterboard entitled "Bronco Evidence" (The instrument herein referred to as a blank property report was received in (The instrument herein referred to as Rockingham interior biological evidence (The instrument herein referred to as Rockingham interior biological evidence MR. LAMBERT: I have no further questions, Your Honor. THE COURT: Cross-examine. MR. BLASIER: Thank you, Your Honor. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BLASIER: Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Fung. A. Good afternoon. Q. How are you today? A. Good. Q. Mr. Fung, have you spent any time preparing for your testimony in this case? A. Yes. Q. And since Mr. Simpson was acquitted in October of 1995, how much time would A. About 48 hours. Q. And of that 48 hours, how much of that time was spent at the behest of the A. Probably about 40. Q. And of the 40 hours that you spent with the plaintiffs, can you -- can you MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Misstates the evidence, "spent with the plaintiff," MR. BLASIER: I thought I said plaintiffs' attorneys and plaintiffs' THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I've spent about six -- six hours with the plaintiffs' attorneys. Q. And of the other 34 hours, what was that devoted to? A. Reading all that testimony, going through the transcripts. Q. That was reading the nine days of your direct and cross-examination from the A. Yes. Q. Now, did you do that on city time? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. MR. BLASIER: Goes to bias. THE COURT: Excuse me? MR. BLASIER: Goes to bias. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I'm not sure how it's being worked out. Yes, it was on city time. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) So you got approval, or someone apparently got approval to MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Argumentative, "working for." THE COURT: Overruled. I'm not sure exactly how or what's been worked out, but I Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Are you keeping track of your billing so that you can bill A. They told me to keep track of the hours that I worked on it, yes. Q. Have you ever worked for plaintiffs on a civil case before other than the A. Not to my recollection. Q. Now, as of June 13, when you started working on this case, had you received A. Yes. Q. And what sort of training had you received? A. We received -- I received a brief lecture on the amount needed for RFLP Q. One brief lecture? A. Yes. Q. And what were you told was the amount needed for RFLP testing? A. At this time, I was told they needed a quarter to a -- I think it was a Q. By the way, do you have a procedures manual within S.I.D. that tells you how MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Beyond the scope, irrelevant. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I'm aware that one had been drafted but it is not an official MR. BLASIER: Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Is that true since you started working for S.I.D. from 1986 A. Is what true? Q. That there has been no procedures manual within S.I.D. that tell A. There's no manual written, no. Q. And as of your testimony in the criminal case, there was a manual in draft A. During the criminal trial, yes. Q. And there's still a manual; it is only in draft form, correct? A. Yes. Q. And you've never seen it? A. I've seen it now, but I haven't read everything. Q. When you were preparing for your testimony in the criminal case, did deputy MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BLASIER: Did you know what DNA was at the time you testified in the MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, argumentative. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Fung, what is the procedure that is used to call a Would you describe that in general to me? A. I can in general. What usually happens -- Q. Um-hum? A. -- a detective will request that -- well, they'll call you up, detective Q. And how, when that's done, generally isn't that done a soon as a crime scene A. I can't really speak from that end of the -- from that position cause I Q. Were there any criminalists called to the Bundy crime scene between 12 A. No. Q. Is it standard practice for there to be a ten-hour delay between the time a MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BLASIER: Isn't it important to you that you be called to a scene as soon as MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Overruled. It depends on the scene. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Evidence can change at a crime scene, can it not? A. Yes, it can. Q. Biological evidence can change substantially, can't it? A. Depending on the conditions, yes, it can. Q. Hair and trace evidence can get moved all around, can't it? A. Again, depending on the conditions. It would depend. Q. There are changes that can occur to bodies, as well, in that period of ten MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Are you aware of any instance in any other case, other than MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. And as of June 13 of 1994, how long had Andrea Mazzola been a criminalist? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BLASIER: Your Honor, there's testimony about her working on this case. THE COURT: Excuse me? MR. BLASIER: There was testimony about her working on this case. THE COURT: Why don't you ask her. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Do you have that information, Mr. Fung? MR. LAMBERT: Objection, Your Honor. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Well, I think it is irrelevant. This is the wrong person to ask. MR. BLASIER: He's the witness that's here, Your Honor. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You were supervising, were you not? A. Yes, I was. Q. She was a beginner, wasn't she. MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Argumentative. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: She was a criminalist 1. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) It was only her third crime scene wasn't it? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Are you aware of how many crime scenes she worked at prior A. I'm not exactly sure of the number I knew -- I know it is less than ten. Q. It is two, isn't it? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Foundation, argumentative? THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Andrea Mazzola was placed in charge of the crime scene at A. She was initially listed as the officer in charge. However, when I found out Q. At what time was that? A. I don't know the exact time. It was somewhat into the crime scene at Q. Before you went to Bundy? A. Yes. Q. And when you say the scope of the case, what did you mean by that? A. That it was a high profile case. Q. High profile meaning what? A. There was a celebrity involved. Q. Was there any other reason why she was not kept in charge? A. Not that can think of, no. Q. Let me show you what's been previously marked as exhibit 202. Do you recognize this document, Mr. Fung? (The instrument herein referred to as crime scene checklist was marked for A. Yes, I do. Q. What is that document? A. That is a crime scene checklist? Q. And tell us how that document gets generated? A. Well, when a call gets made to a criminalist, they start filling it out and Q. Now Mr. Fung, isn't it correct that on that form, Andrea Mazzola is listed A. That's correct. Q. And she was actually the first one called to the scene, wasn't she? A. The detective headquarters division did notify her. Q. And were you dispatched to the Bundy scene first or the Rockingham scene? A. We were requested to respond to the Rockingham scene first. Q. You were never told to go to Bundy and then that order was changed to go to A. That's correct. Q. Now, is it -- is it standard procedure at a crime scene to -- well, let me What is crime scene tape used for? A. Crime scene tape is used to delineate or used to delineate the perimeters of Q. All right. And is one of the main reasons for that is to keep people away A. That and it also helps the officers know what the parimeters of the crime Q. And during your several visits to the Rockingham crime scene, both in the MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, beyond the scope. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Not to my knowledge. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Fung, can you See that board okay? A. Yes. Q. And that is -- what number is that? A. 155. Q. Now you arrived at the Rockingham scene at about what time? A. I arrived at Rockingham at 7:10 in the morning. Q. By the way, when did you first become aware that there was a celebrity A. During the walk through, Detective Vannatter told me this was the residence THE COURT: What are you doing? MR. P. BAKER: Booking that. I didn't want to drip. (Laughter.) MR. BLASIER: You indicated that that morning when you got there, that Detective A. I believe so. Q. Didn't Detective Fuhrman point that out to you? A. I believe it was Detective Vannatter. Q. Detective Fuhrman was there, was he not? A. Yes, he was. Q. Did Detective Fuhrman ever point out any stains on the Bronco to you that A. I don't recall him pointing anything out. I do recall that he was there. But Q. Now, you observed the blood spot near the door, correct? A. The door of the -- Q. Of the Bronco? A. -- Bronco. It was on the handle of the Bronco, yes. Q. Did you collect that? A. I was present during the collection and participated in phases of it, yes. Q. You testified on direct that you collected that. Did you prepare the Swatch A. The actual manipulation of the tweezers was done by Ms. Mazzola. However, Q. We have a picture also on the television. MR. BLASIER: Which is that, Phil? MR. P. BAKER: 108. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Is that a picture of you pointing out a spot on the door of A. Wrote it is. Q. Were there any pictures of Andrea Mazzola pointing out a spot, that spot or MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, you testified about how blood drops -- I think you A. Yes. Q. You have no way of knowing what direction -- if it is indeed a trail -- that A. Well, there is one spot that does have directionality to it. Q. What spot is that? A. That is item number 7 and that's the far right bottom picture. You can see Q. Any other item have any directionality to it? A. I wouldn't call any directionality to any of the others. Q. You have no way of knowing whether the other drops -- whether the other A. I can tell that they were all fresh drops and -- but as far as minute -- a Q. When you say fresh drops, you're saying that because of what? A. Their appearance. Q. And their appearance is what? What tells you that they're fresh? A. They were red and slightly tacky. Q. Okay. Why don't you step down here for a second look at the picture on the What is that -- does that picture represent? A. That represents another drop of -- well, it is a red stain that was tested Q. And is that the only apparent blood in that picture? A. Well, yeah. Q. Okay. This item up here to the left of the C, that's not blood; is it? A. I don't recall if it is or not. Q. If you had seen blood, what you thought was blood right next to C, you would A. If it was in that very close proximity, I may or may not, depending on the Q. Did you ever make any notation, in any document whatsoever that C stands for A. No, I did not. Q. You would never make an assessment it was blood just based on looking at a MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. What's that board? MR. PETROCELLI: 155. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. THE WITNESS: I wouldn't. I would rather have it tested. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, Mr. Fung, the red dots on the chart up here, are those A. The most approximate drops, yes. Q. Did you find any drops of a parent blood between this one, which is -- you A. Let me check my notes. Q. 6N. (Indicating to diagram 155.) Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) And the garage area on the south side of the house? A. There was a stain that we found positive for with phenolphythalein on a Q. Well, I'm talking about on the ground back here. A. No, not on the ground. Q. You would never testify that something was blood just based on a A. I would say that it was presumptively positive. Q. Tell me all -- I'm sorry. Were you done? A. Yes, I am. Q. Tell me all the things that give a presumptive positive reading that aren't A. There are items that have vegetable peroxidase in them that are reported in Q. There are oxidizing agents that also give a false positive, correct? A. Are we speaking in terms of the two-step phenolphthalein hydroperoxidase? Q. I'm talking about the phenolphthalein test, correct? A. I believe that in the two-step phenolphthalein test only vegetable Q. What Sort of vegetable materials are you talking about that will give a A. Vegetable peroxidase, that's an enzyme I believe contained within vegetable Q. Apricots, black berries, artichokes, potatoes, turnips, cabbage; all of A. They -- I'm not sure about all of them, but many of those on the list do Q. None of those are blood, are they? A. None of them have the initial appearance of blood. Q. When you -- A. However -- Q. When you do a positive, when you do a test, you collect a blood stain A. I'm sorry. Can you repeat that? Q. Yeah. You don't make an assessment that something is blood just based on a A. I don't know. I mean, no, I don't. Q. And what you do is, you collect it and you take it back to the lab and you A. Well, it is done by somebody else but, yes. Q. Okay. You never collected -- well, let me strike that. Now, Mr. Fung, this is an overview of Rockingham that contains more information A. Yes. Q. This is number -- MR. P. BAKER: I believe it is 145. MR. BLASIER: 145. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Can you tell me the distance from the air conditioner A. From the air conditioner to the gate? Q. Yes. A. I can give you an approximate distance. Q. Okay. (Witness reviews documents in notebook.) Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Let me show you something that might help: Exhibit 905. A. Yeah. But it doesn't have the air conditioner on it. Q. Well, would you agree that it appears to be approximately 250 feet from the A. Somewhere between 250 and 220. Q. Okay. By the way, isn't one of your jobs to measure distances such as that? A. It is my job to measure distances relative to the evidence I collect. Q. Okay. And did you take any measurement from the area where the glove was A. I measured the distance from the west wall of the garage to the glove. Q. Okay. Why don't you tell us what that distance is? A. The distance was measured as 118 feet east of the west wall of the garage. Q. So that would be indicated in this corner, where my pen is? A. Yes. Q. The lower left corner of the garage as it appears on the diagram? A. It would be from this point here. Q. Okay. 119 feet you say? A. 118. Q. 118 feet. Now, did you find a single blood drop or single drop that was collected and A. On the ground? Q. Correct. A. No. Q. Did you find any drop along here anywhere that was tested and confirmed to A. No. Q. Did you find any tissue samples on the air conditioner? A. No. Q. Did you find any shoe prints or shoe imprints in blood along this entire 119 A. I could not detect any. Q. Did you find any shoe impressions that appear to be in blood anywhere A. No. Q. Did you find any evidence whatsoever indicating that anyone climbed over the A. No. Q. When you found that glove back there, it didn't have any dirt on it at all, A. I did not examine the glove that closely. Q. Well, when you collect evidence, you try to preserve evidence that might be A. Yes. Q. And did you observe any dirt on that glove? A. I didn't observe any and I didn't look for any. Q. There weren't any cobwebs on it either, were there? A. No cobwebs. Q. No evidence of any kind of insect activity, was there? A. I don't remember any. Q. There was no evidence of any hair and fiber that you collected anywhere from A. There -- Well, excluding the glove? Q. Excluding the glove. A. I did not find any or I did not collect any hair and fiber evidence from Q. By the way, animal blood gives you a positive phenolphthalein, doesn't it? A. Yes, it does. Q. Such as from a dog? If you tested it from a dog, you'd get a positive A. Yes. Q. Now, it is accurate, is it not, that there is a door that goes into the A. Yes. Q. And is it also accurate that there is a second door into the residence and A. I don't recall that door. I don't dispute it, but I don't recall if there is Q. There isn't a single door into the Rockingham house from the air conditioner A. No, there is not. Q. By the way, there is also a -- it is not depicted in that diagram, but there A. I don't remember that. Q. Do you remember a second large tree just past the first one? A. I know there were trees, but I don't know the exact position. I don't Q. It was a relatively tight squeeze to get around this corner, is it not? You A. I remember it was tight in some positions. Q. Now, is it considered to be a good technique to conduct phenolphthalein MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, Your Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You did a phenolphthalein test on that group while you were A. Yes, I did. Q. Doing a phenolphthalein test actually dries some of the potential evidence, A. Not if it is done in a careful manner. Q. Well, the spot on the Bronco door, that was ruined for any further testing MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Argumentative, assumes facts not in evidence. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I don't believe it was ruined. It started out at as a very light Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Do you know whether anyone was ever able to type that at MR. LAMBERT: Objection. No foundation. MR. BLASIER: Do you know? THE COURT: Overruled. You may answer. THE WITNESS: I am not aware of any further testing done on item No. 1. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Now, is it an acceptable procedure in your mind to do a MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: As posed, sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Detective Vannatter told you to do that test, didn't he? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. THE WITNESS: He asked that I perform that test, yes. Q. You didn't want to do that test, did you? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Argumentative. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: It was important to him at that point in the investigation, so I MR. BLASIER: Move to strike as nonresponsive. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You didn't want to do that test, did you? A. I had -- I had no problem doing that test. Q. You knew it was bad technique to do that test, didn't you? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You refused to do a phenolphthalein test on the knit cap at MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Argumentative and irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Did you do a phenolphthalein test on the knit cap at Bundy A. I was never asked to. Q. You were never asked to? When you manipulate evidence at a crime scene, you can lose trace evidence, can A. It is possible to. Q. And you try to leave items of physical evidence that you're going to collect A. When -- when? Yes. That is the preferable method. Q. And anytime you do something like a phenolphthalein test on a piece of A. If it is done carefully, I don't, sometimes; or if it is done carefully, the Q. When you manipulate evidence at a crime scene valuable trace evidence can be MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: It is possible for it to be lost. However, if it is done Q. Anytime you touch a piece of physical evidence at the scene, you can also MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, assumes facts not in evidence, calls for THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Were you wearing gloves when you collected the glove? A. I don't recall if I was or not. Q. By the way, which part of the glove did you handle to do the phenolphthalein A. There was a -- I didn't actually handle the glove. I would have used a Q. In what area of the glove do you remember? A. Whatever was facing up and had the red stain on it. Q. Do you know whether you were wearing gloves at time that the drops on the A. I know Ms. Mazzola was. Q. Now, you didn't collect any of those drops, did you? A. As I had described before, the collection process involves many steps, and I Q. Do you remember, you testified at a grand jury here in this case, did you A. Yes, I did. Q. And that was right after -- it was before the preliminary hearing, was it A. Yes. Q. It was very close in time to when you processed the crime scene, was it not? A. Yes. Q. It was in -- I believe early July, correct, of '94? A. Somewhere in there, yes. Q. Do you remember being asked questions regarding the spot on the Bronco door? A. Yes. Q. And do you remember testifying at the grand jury hearing that you recovered A. I did say that I collected them because Ms. Mazzola and I were working as a Q. But you said that you did that work, correct? A. In my mind, when we were working as a team, I did it. I was in charge of Q. She collected all the Bundy drops, didn't she? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: She collected most of the Bundy drops. However, I did collect some Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Do you remember being asked this question at the grand jury "Q. Did you attempt to retrieve and preserve the blood found in those blood "A. Yes, I did. "Q. What did you do? "A. I transfered the blood drops onto cloth squares or cloth swatches." Do You remember testifying that way, Mr.'Fung? A. Yes. Q. That wasn't true, was it? A. I was answering the questions from a position of what was done and not of a Q. You were asked what did you do, Mr. Fung, correct? A. Yes. Q. You said, "I transferred the blood onto cloth squares," didn't you? A. Yes, I did. Q. That wasn't true, was it? A. Because we were working as a team and she was working under my direction, I Q. You never mentioned Andrea Mazzola once during the grand jury proceedings, MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. Beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You were attempting to minimize Angela Mazzola's MR. LAMBERT: Same objection and argumentative. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAKER: Which ground, Your Honor? THE COURT: Both. MR. BLASIER: Mr. Fung, do you remember testifying that when you're involved in MR. LAMBERT: Same objections, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. LAMBERT: Could I get the page and line evidence reference? MR. BLASIER: 22937, line 1. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Do you remember that testimony? A. Can you repeat that? Q. Let me read the question. (Reading:) "Q. If you were to divide the work up of a criminalist into the mental "A. Primarily I was involved with the mental aspect of the crime scene Remember that testimony? A. Vaguely. Q. And that's your basis for using the term "I" when you're asked when you did A. That's one of the bases, yeah. Q. By the way, when we talk about hair and fiber evidence, tell us what that A. Hair and fiber evidence is, or it can be hair that is left at a crime scene Q. Fiber from something like a carpet or a piece of clothing or any -- Any item A. That's correct. Q. Or synthetic material? A. Yes. Q. And isn't it true, Mr. Fung, that where you have a scene like the Bundy MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence, calls for speculation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Let me ask you hypothetically, Mr. Fung; isn't it true that MR. LAMBERT: Outside the scope, assumes facts not in evidence, speculation. THE COURT: Sustained. You may call him as your own witness when your turn MR. BLASIER: We'll do that, Your Honor Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Who was in charge of the crime scene at Bundy? A. The officer in charge. Q. Who was in charge of processing the crime scene? THE COURT: Sustain my own objection as being vague. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) What was your function at Bundy? A. I was in charge of collecting evidence. Q. Okay. Are you the one that was in charge of deciding what evidence should be A. Yes, ultimately. Q. And you were in charge of deciding where evidence was located, correct? A. Yes. Q. You were in charge of conducting searches of the area to find all relevant A. My search was directed towards the cage area and the walkway north of the Q. I move to strike as nonresponsive, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overruled. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Tell us what your responsibility was again? A. My search was directed towards the caged area of the Bundy location and the Q. Okay. MR. BLASIER: We're going to have a board put up here in a second. THE COURT: Okay. Let's take a ten minute recess, ladies and gentlemen. Don't (Recess.) (Jurors resume their respective seats.) (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Thank you, Mr. Fung. I have one question on the area at Rockingham. Isn't it true that from the area A. Yes. Q. And, in fact, you can see it fairly well in the bottom left -- actually, the A. Yes. Q. It's extremely narrow in there, is it not? A. It's narrow. Q. And did you measure the distance from the corner here, where it gets real A. I don't remember taking measurements of the air conditioner itself. Q. How about where the glove was found, as compared to the corner where it's A. I'm referring to my notes. From the -- from this point to the glove was 19 Q. Okay. Now, we put the Bundy board back up, which is number -- MR. P. BAKER: Exhibit 67. MR. BLASIER: -- 67. Now, Mr. Leonard, you can go ahead and sit back down. (Counsel resumes his seat.) Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Incidentally, the distance from Mr. Simpson's gate to where A. The distance from the gate to the Bundy glove? And that distance -- I Q. Well, you can take a look. It's only 170 feet from the alleyway to Bundy, A. That's correct. Q. It's about 250 feet from Mr. Simpson's gate to where the glove was found? A. Between that and -- Q. Approximately? A. Approximately, yes. Q. 220. Now, did I understand you to say that you confined yourself to just the walkway A. That is where my search was directed. Q. Were you the criminalist in charge of processing that scene? A. Yes. Q. Was there somebody else that was to look other places? A. Well, the detective had looked all over the crime scene, and he pointed out Q. That was Detective Lange? A. Yes. Q. He never told you about any blood on the back gate, did he? A. I don't remember him telling me about the blood on the back gate. Q. Now, the back gate is part of the walkway, is it not? A. Yes, it is. Q. Now, did you confine your search to just everything within a couple inches A. No. Q. So you looked higher than that. Was your area of responsibility a little A. Yes. Q. How many times did you walk in and out of the back gate while you were A. Several. Q. And is it your testimony that you never looked at it? A. It's my testimony that I don't remember seeing or having been -- I don't Q. Your testimony was that you never looked at the back gate while you were at A. I may have seen it, but I didn't search it, that I can remember. Q. How long were you at Bundy? A. I was there for about four hours. Q. It was light the whole time, wasn't it? A. Yes, it was. Q. You had access to the whole area the whole time, didn't you? A. Yes, I did. Q. Anybody ever tell you go look at the gate? A. Nobody ever told me that. Q. Now, you had made a reference in your direct testimony about collecting A. Generally, we like to collect items of evidence sequentially, but that's not Q. Well, you try to do that. Tell me why you try to do that. A. Well, we try to number items of evidence in a logical manner; and if it's in Q. Now, who is it that directs the photographer to take pictures when you're A. That would be me or the criminalist in charge of the scene. Q. And is it accurate that you have -- essentially, you have the photographer A. No, not really. I'll lay out the numbers and then have the photographer take Q. Now, Mr. Fung, you are the one that assigns the numbers that are on the A. Yes, I was at that scene. Q. And all the cards that appear on the board there, 67, are cards that you A. Yes. Q. Now, as far as the Bundy drops are concerned, the first drop is No. 112; is A. The first drop along the trail? Q. Correct. A. Yes. Q. And you gave that No. 112 as being the first drop closest to the bodies, A. Excuse me? Q. You can come look. A. Yes; 112 is this one. Q. And you're trying to process the crime scene in a logical sequence? A. Attempting to, yes. Q. And you gave the next drop 113, which was the next one in sequence. You gave A. That's correct. Q. You went further down the path and we get to 114, which is the next drop in A. That's correct. Q. You assigned that 114 consecutively, correct? A. Yes. Q. Then we get back right by the back gate, we have 115, correct? A. Yes. Q. And you assigned that sequentially because that's the next drop on the way A. Correct. Q. By the way, how far is 115 from the gate? A. From this gate? Q. The back gate. A. I don't have that measurement. Q. Very close, isn't it? A. Oh, it's possibly within 10 feet. Q. Mr. Fung, what was No. 116? A. No. 116 was a red stain on the front gate. MR. BLASIER: We need a new number, Your Honor. THE COURT: We want a new number. MR. BLASIER: The next number. THE CLERK: 2134. (The instrument herein referred to as Photograph of stain No. 116 was marked Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Fung, let me show you what's been marked as 2134. That A. That is a picture of photo item 116. Q. Okay. A. Or photo No. 116, which became item number -- Q. Fifty what? A. 51. Q. So you went from item 115, all the way back to the front gate, and put the A. Well, yes. Q. Then you went all the way back out to 117, which is a drop on the other side A. That's correct. Q. This is a different 116 than the one you collected on July 3, isn't it? A. Yes, it is. Q. You looked on that back gate; you didn't find any blood. Somebody had told A. I never -- I don't recall looking on the back gate that day. Q. Why did you leave your sequence at 115 and go back to the front gate and A. Ms. Mazzola saw that there was additional blood on the front gate and said So I agreed to give her a number and let her collect that blood from the front Q. She was collecting all of this blood along here, wasn't she? A. Well, you have to realize that we are numbering first; and then as we're Q. And you collected one sample from the front gate and went back out to the A. I gave her -- I said, "Go ahead and get that blood that you want to collect, Q. Is it your testimony that it's just a coincidence that the blood drop No. A. It's quite a coincidence. Q. Now, when you got to the Bundy scene, the print people were already looking A. At the Bundy scene? Q. Yeah. A. Yes. Q. The things are checked for fingerprints, they put on graphite on objects to A. Well, they use dusting powder. It's made of different chemicals or different Q. When you're dusting for prints, if you get that on the blood, you can really A. It's preferable to collect blood before printing. Q. It's a horrible idea to have the print people out there before you even get MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Who was responsible for sending the print people out first? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Same objection. MR. BLASIER: Do you know? THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BLASIER: Can we have a ground, Your Honor? THE COURT: Beyond the scope of the direct. I think this witness is only Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You were in charge of this crime scene, were you not, MR. LAMBERT: Objection. THE WITNESS: Is there an objection? THE COURT: You can answer it. MR. BLASIER: You can try that one. THE WITNESS: I was in charge of the evidence portion of the crime scene. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Including? A. Of the collection force. Q. You weren't in charge of the fingerprint people? A. I -- to a certain extent, I would tell them when I was done with my Q. They had already started before you even got there, didn't they? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: They had done certain portions of the crime scene. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) What portions? A. I don't have a vivid memory of what portions they had started. They were Q. By the way, Mr. Fung, in this entire area that you served, there wasn't a A. I'm not aware of any. Q. The Bundy glove that was on the ground had very little blood on it, didn't A. I did not examine the Bundy glove very closely for the presence of blood. I Q. Didn't you see it when you got back to the lab, as well. A. I did see it, but I didn't take a note of how much blood was on it or -- I Q. By the way, at one point, isn't it accurate that you took the Rockingham A. That's correct. Q. That's a horrible technique, isn't it? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: On that basis, it's overruled. MR. LAMBERT: Argumentative and beyond the scope. THE COURT: Sustained as to that one. MR. BLASIER: Beyond the scope? THE COURT: No, argumentative. MR. BLASIER: Okay. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Is it acceptable procedure to take evidence from one bloody A. If the evidence is handled in a careful manner, I don't see a problem with Q. Now, you didn't want to take that glove from Rockingham and carry it into MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You were ordered to do that by Detective Lange, weren't MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Hearsay. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I was requested to do so. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) And you did? A. Yes, I did. Q. Did you ever tell him that was a bad idea? A. I told him that -- well, I made the conclusion in my mind that I would not Q. Now, you could have taken the Bundy glove and taken it out to the crime A. That's possible, yes. Q. Now, isn't it accurate that there were quite a few police officers that you A. Actually, there were, that I recognized, less than ten. Q. Let me ask you this: You made no effort, did you, to isolate the two crime MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustain the objection. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) You can move evidence back and forth from one crime scene MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant and calls for speculation; assumes facts not THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: If one isn't careful, it can occur. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Did you make any effort to isolate the Rockingham scene MR. LAMBERT: That's been asked and answered. Same objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Did he make any attempts, sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Was there any attempt made that you're aware of to isolate MR. LAMBERT: Same objections. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: No, that was not my responsibility. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) By the way, when you were at Rockingham in the afternoon, Do you remember seeing the dog? A. There was a dog there, yes. Q. And it was your understanding that was the dog they had found blood on at A. I don't know which dog that was. I know there was a dog at the Rockingham Q. Did you make any effort to isolate the Rockingham scene from blood that MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Can you repeat that question? MR. BLASIER: Sure. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Did you make any efforts to isolate the Rockingham scene A. We tried to keep the dog away from the evidence or the fresh blood drops. Q. Who was assigned to watch the dog? A. No one was specifically -- watched. Q. That's the only effort that was made to isolate -- to keep the dog from A. Well, there were fresh blood stains at Rockingham. And when the dog got near Q. Your answer is yes, that was the only effort made to protect the Rockingham A. To the best of my knowledge, yes. Q. When you were at the Bundy scene in the caged-in area -- that was, again, an A. Yes. Q. Did you observe what appeared to be blood drops on Nicole Brown Simpson's A. By the time I had reached Bundy, she had already been moved or she was in Q. Now, are you in charge of collecting evidence that might be on a body? A. The evidence that is on the body is the jurisdiction of the coroner. Q. And you're not allowed to even touch that, are you? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, beyond the scope. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Usually not. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Is there any kind of scientific principle that requires MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Whose job is it to see that evidence that might be on a MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, outside the scope. THE COURT: He says it's not his place. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Is it your responsibility to preserve imprint evidence that A. Yes. Q. And tell us what imprint evidence is. A. Imprint evidence can be tool marks or shoe prints, tire tracks, that sort of MR. BLASIER: Let me show you what's been marked as 40 previously. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Do you recognize this picture, Mr. Fung? A. Yes, I do. Q. That's a picture of Mark Fuhrman pointing at a glove? A. I can't identify that as Mark Fuhrman, but it is somebody pointing at the Q. That was an area of the crime scene that you had responsibility over A. Once I arrived there, yes. Q. And that -- MR. BLASIER: Can you zoom in on that post by the knit cap. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Fung, do you see what appears to be parallel line A. I -- what was the question again? Q. Do you see what appears to be parallel line imprints on the post above the A. I don't see the knit cap anymore, but I do see a -- some sort of pattern on Q. Did you make any effort at all to preserve or closely photograph that MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant, outside the scope. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Other than general, overall, no. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Did you ever notice it at the time? A. No. Q. Let me show you what's previously been marked as 13 -- I'm sorry, 1532. Mr. Fung, when you arrived at the crime scene at about 10:15 on the 13th, did A. I do not recall seeing that piece of paper. Q. It wasn't there, was it? A. I don't know if it was there or not. I just don't recall seeing it. MR. BLASIER: Well, let's zoom in on it. MR. PETROCELLI: Can we have some exhibit numbers, Your Honor? MR. BLASIER: I think I gave that, 1532. MR. PETROCELLI: Previous photo. MR. P. BAKER: Previous photos was 40. MR. BLASIER: I'm sorry, 40. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Mr. Fung, do you see what appears to be similar imprint MR. LAMBERT: Objection. No foundation; calls for speculation, calls for THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: Without benefit of a ruler or scale within that picture, I cannot Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) That's one of the reasons why you collect such things as A. That's one of the reasons, yes. Q. Now, you were trying to find out whether there might have been a second set A. That had gone through my mind, yes. Q. And the area on this piece of paper that I'm indicating up in this area and MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Lack of foundation, calls for speculation. THE COURT: You may answer if you can. THE WITNESS: Just by looking at those two patterns, I wouldn't say they were Q. That would be? A. In evidence. Q. You would definitely collect that, had you seen it, wouldn't you, Mr. Fung? MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Calls for speculation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Did Detective Lange ever tell you that he already looked at MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Hearsay. THE COURT: Sustained. Q. (BY MR. BLASIER) Did Detective Lange ever give you any instructions with A. I don't recall him mentioning that piece of paper to me at the crime scene, Q. Is it an appropriate procedure to make an assessment at the crime scene on MR. LAMBERT: Objection. Irrelevant. THE COURT: It's irrelevant as to this witness. MR. BLASIER: Your honor, this might be a good time. THE COURT: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen, we'll adjourn. MR. LAMBERT: Can we approach for a second, Your Honor? In light of today's testimony, we've all agreed that there is no need for the MR. BLASIER: I agree. THE COURT: Okay. 8:30 tomorrow. Again, please don't talk about the case; don't form or express any opinions; JURORS: Thank you. THE COURT: You're excused and ordered to come back tomorrow. (At 4:30 p.m., an adjournment was taken until Tuesday, November 5, 1996, at |