Direct examination of Andrea Mazzola

📄 Direct examination of Andrea Mazzola — Tuesday, December 10, 1996

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\DEC\10\DIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-ANDREA-M.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 29 of 57

◀ Sidebar: examination procedures Recess (1) ▶

Witness: Andrea Mazzola
Examiner: Tom Lambert
Called by: Defense • Date: Tuesday, December 10, 1996 • Utterances: 215

Defense attorney Robert Blasier conducted direct examination of LAPD criminalist Andrea Mazzola, methodically establishing her inexperience at the time she collected evidence from the Bundy and Rockingham crime scenes — only six months on the job and by her own prior admission a 'crime scene trainee.' The examination focused on her failure to change gloves between collecting the knit cap and the Bundy glove, the uncollected blanket covering Nicole Brown Simpson's body, and a piece of paper photographed between the two bodies that Mazzola never collected and doesn't remember seeing.

# 1 THE CLERK:

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

# 2 ANDREA MAZZOLA:

I do.

# 3 MR. BAKER:

Your Honor, while Mr. Blasier is getting the material, I'd like to move into evidence 1797, 2250, 2251 and 2252.

# 4 (The instrument herein described was received in evidence as Defendants' Exhibit No. 1797.)

# 5 (The instrument herein described was received in evidence as Defendants' Exhibit No. 2250.)

# 6 (The instrument herein described was received in evidence as Defendants' Exhibit No. 2251.)

# 7 (The instrument herein described was received in evidence as Defendants' Exhibit No. 2252.)

# 8 THE COURT:

Hearing no objection, they're received.

# 9 THE CLERK:

Please state and spell both your first and your last names for the record.

# 10 ANDREA MAZZOLA:

Andrea Mazzola, A-n-d-r-e-a M-a-z-z-o-l-a.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BLASIER:

# 11 Q:

Ms. Mazzola, can you please tell the jury your occupation.

# 12 A:

I'm a criminalist employed with the City of Los Angeles.

# 13 Q:

And you're with the Scientific Investigation Division of the police department?

# 14 A:

Correct.

# 15 Q:

Now, could you tell us since the verdict in the criminal case acquitting Mr. Simpson in October of 1995, have you spent any time working with the plaintiffs' attorneys or other representatives in this case?

# 16 A:

I've only had one meeting with the plaintiffs' attorneys.

# 17 Q:

When was that?

# 18 A:

This past Saturday.

# 19 Q:

How much time did you spend with them?

# 20 A:

An hour and a half.

# 21 Q:

Who did you spend that time with?

# 22 A:

Mr. Lambert.

# 23 Q:

Now, in preparation for your testimony, did you review the work that you had done on the Simpson criminal case?

# 24 A:

I looked at some of the paperwork, yes.

# 25 Q:

Now, as of June 13 of 1994, the time that you went to the various crime scenes in this case, had you received any training whatsoever in the collection of evidence for possible DNA testing?

# 26 A:

I received the training that we get for the collection of biological fluids at a scene.

# 27 Q:

Had you received any specific training with respect to DNA testing?

# 28 A:

With respect?

# 29 Q:

And particular problems that might relate to biological evidence with DNA testing?

# 30 A:

No.

# 31 Q:

Now, as of that date, June 13 of 1994, how long had you been a criminalist?

# 32 A:

Approximately six months.

KEY QUOTE

# 33 Q:

And prior to the time that you were a criminalist at LAPD, you didn't have any experience of processing crime scenes; is that accurate?

# 34 A:

That's correct.

# 35 Q:

And at the time that you processed the scenes in this case, how long had you been -- how long had you been in training, shall I say, to process crime scenes?

# 36 A:

In training as --

# 37 Q:

In learning how to process a crime scene.

# 38 A:

We were given in-house instruction on how to process crime scenes, plus as criminalists, once we went out with the more experienced criminalists during the day calls, and also we volunteered to go out with them at night and on the weekends.

# 39 Q:

As of June 13 you were -- you were still a trainee, were you not?

# 40 A:

I was a Criminalist 1.

# 41 Q:

You considered yourself a trainee, didn't you?

# 42 A:

I was a Criminalist 1. There is no designation as trainee.

# 43 Q:

Do you remember testifying in August of 1994 at a hearing concerning what procedures were used to collect evidence in this case?

# 44 A:

I remember testifying in '94, yes.

# 45 Q:

And you testified at that time that you considered yourself a trainee; isn't that correct?

# 46 A:

That, I do not remember.

# 47 Q:

Referring to testimony of August 23, 1994, page 689, line 20.

Do you recall being asked this question and giving this answer? (Reading:)

# 48 Q:

And I take it currently,

as of right now, today, this being

August of '94, you are still a trainee

in crime scene collection; is that

correct? A. I would go out with the

Criminalist 3 to a crime scene, so yes,

I guess you would classify me as a crime

scene trainee.

# 49 Q:

Do you recall giving that testimony?

# 50 A:

No, I do not.

# 51 Q:

Would it refresh your memory to look at it?

# 52 A:

I doubt it. I might have. I don't remember exactly what happened in '94.

# 53 Q:

Now, at the time that you went to the crime scenes in this case, that was only the third crime scene that you had worked on; is that correct?

# 54 A:

I think it was about the third, yes.

# 55 Q:

And at the two crime scenes that you worked on prior to this one, you weren't the primary person in charge of collecting evidence, were you?

# 56 A:

I was not the primary criminalist. That is correct.

# 57 Q:

So, would it be fair to say that the Simpson crime scene, and Simpson case in June of '94 was the first scene where you were given the principal responsibility for actually collecting the evidence from the ground and various other places?

# 58 MR. LAMBERT:

Objection, irrelevant, in limine order No. 11.

# 59 THE COURT:

Read that question again.

THE COURT REPORTER: (Reading:)

# 60 Q:

So, would it be fair to say

that the Simpson crime scene and Simpson

case in June of '94, was the first scene

where you were given the principal

responsibility for actually collecting

the evidence from the ground and various

other places?

# 61 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 62 A:

At the other two scenes, I worked as part of a team with the other criminalists. I collected biological samples from those scenes as well as the Simpson scene.

# 63 Q:

(BY MR BLASIER) You collected most of the biological samples in the Simpson case, did you not?

# 64 A:

That's correct.

# 65 Q:

Now, in fact, when you got the call -- By the way, what time did you get called out to a location in the Simpson case?

# 66 A:

I received a call at home at approximately 5:26 to 5:30, somewhere in there.

# 67 Q:

In the morning?

# 68 A:

In the morning.

# 69 Q:

And where were you told to go?

# 70 A:

Rockingham.

# 71 Q:

Now, at that time, you were -- it was specified that you were going to be the officer in charge; isn't that correct?

# 72 A:

That's what was written on the form.

# 73 Q:

And that's what you were to be, correct?

# 74 A:

Officer in charge. The fact that I was the primary criminalist on call, I was the one that received the call.

# 75 Q:

But what -- Is that all that being the officer in charge means?

# 76 A:

As being the primary, yes.

# 77 Q:

It doesn't have anything to do with what your responsibility is at the crime scene?

# 78 A:

Well, in this case, after we got to Rockingham and learned more of what had happened, then the Criminalist 3, Mr. Fung, became in charge. He -- He became more of the person who made the decisions on what would happen.

# 79 Q:

So then being the officer in charge, that does have a certain meaning beyond just the fact that you're on call, correct?

# 80 A:

Correct.

# 81 Q:

And now let me show you what's been marked as Civil Exhibit 943.

Do these appear to be your crime-scene notes from the Rockingham location from June 13,1994?

# 82 (The instrument herein described as copy Mazzola crime-scene investigation checklist was marked for identification as Defendants Exhibit No. 943.)

# 83 A:

Yes.

# 84 Q:

You would agree that document lists you as the officer in charge, correct?

# 85 A:

Correct.

# 86 Q:

And is it accurate that most of that document is in your handwriting, that you prepared that?

# 87 A:

Most of it appears to be in my handwriting, yes.

# 88 Q:

Incidentally, at that time, were you the least experienced criminalist at SID in processing crime scenes?

# 89 MR. LAMBERT:

Objection, irrelevant.

# 90 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 91 A:

The least experienced as in?

# 92 Q:

Processing crime scenes?

# 93 A:

I was hired with other people, we were all Crim 1's.

# 94 Q:

Was there anybody with less experience than you?

# 95 A:

I don't know how many calls the other people had gone out on.

# 96 Q:

Is it accurate that you collected -- at the Bundy crime scene you collected every biological stain, with the exception of two stains from -- from bloody shoe prints?

# 97 A:

That is not correct.

# 98 Q:

What stains -- Now, the two stains that I'm referring to is stain Nos.' 55 and 56.

Does that sound familiar to you?

# 99 A:

From the two bloody shoe prints?

# 100 Q:

Those were collected by Dennis Fung, correct?

# 101 A:

Correct.

# 102 Q:

Is it your testimony that he collected other biological samples from the Bundy crime scene other than those two?

# 103 A:

Only one stain -- he collected a little more blood and he collected maybe one or two stains from the caged area that were on the -- actual fence.

# 104 Q:

Do you remember testifying at the criminal trial in this case, with respect to who collected blood stains at what location?

# 105 A:

I remember testifying, yes.

# 106 MR. PETROCELLI:

What page?

# 107 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) Referring to -- I'm sorry, this would be the August -- August 23 of 1994, the hearing that we talked about a little while ago, page 735, line 16.

You remember being asked this question and giving this answer -- this series of answers.

# 108 (Reading:)

# 109 Q:

Would you please look at

your notes and tell me which numbers

those are, and when you say that you say

he collected the actual shoe prints or

he collected alleged drops that were

near the shoe prints. A. He, meaning Dennis Fung,

if I remember correctly, took swatches

of the red stains that were constituting

the footprint itself. Q. Can you tell us which ones

those were, please. A. Property Items 55 and 56. Q. And is that it? A. Yes. Q. All other blood stains at

the Bundy crime scene were collected by

you? A. Yes.

# 110 Q:

Do you remember that testimony?

# 111 A:

Not really, no.

# 112 Q:

You do recall testifying in August?

# 113 A:

Yes, I do recall testifying in August.

# 114 Q:

You have any reason to think that your testimony was anything other than that?

# 115 A:

No, not if it's there.

# 116 Q:

Now, with respect to the Rockingham scene, is it accurate to say that Dennis Fung collected a stain or two on the street, but you collected every other biological stain at that scene?

# 117 A:

For the most part, yes.

# 118 Q:

And for some of those stains you collected, Dennis Fung wasn't even supervising you, correct?

# 119 A:

Correct.

# 120 Q:

Was there at any time any discussion that perhaps someone with more experience should be processing these crime scenes?

# 121 A:

Not that I remember, no.

# 122 Q:

Now, when you were at the Bundy scene -- what time did you get to the Bundy scene?

# 123 A:

May I look at the note?

# 124 Q:

Sure.

# 125 A:

We arrived at Bundy approximately quarter after 10.

# 126 Q:

And what time had you arrived at Rockingham?

# 127 A:

Approximately 10 minutes after 7.

# 128 Q:

So you had been at Rockingham for approximately 3 hours before you went to Bundy, correct?

# 129 A:

Correct.

# 130 Q:

When you got to the Bundy scene, did you observe a blanket covering the body of Nicole Brown Simpson?

# 131 A:

I do not recall seeing Nicole Simpson when we arrived.

# 132 Q:

Do you recall seeing a blanket on the ground?

# 133 A:

Yes, I recall seeing a blanket.

# 134 Q:

Did you ever examine that blanket for any possible trace evidence?

# 135 A:

No.

# 136 Q:

Did you ever examine it for anything?

# 137 A:

No.

# 138 MR. LAMBERT:

Objection, irrelevant under in limine order No. 11.

# 139 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 140 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) And that blanket was left on the ground, after that crime scene was released, correct?

# 141 A:

I do not know what the detectives did with the blanket.

# 142 Q:

You and Dennis Fung never collected it, did you?

# 143 A:

We never collected it.

# 144 Q:

Now, at the Bundy scene, is it accurate that you are the one who collected both the knit cap and the Bundy glove?

# 145 A:

Correct.

# 146 Q:

And which one did you collect first?

# 147 A:

Offhand, I can't remember which was collected first.

# 148 MR. BLASIER:

Do we have the video?

MR. P. BAKER: This is Civil 918.

# 149 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) Ms. Mazzola, can you turn and look at the video here. See if this refreshes your recollection.

# 150 (Exhibit 918, videotape, played at CTC 135143.)

# 151 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) Do you recognize that as you collecting the knit cap?

# 152 A:

Yes.

# 153 Q:

And you are wearing gloves, correct?

# 154 A:

Correct.

# 155 Q:

Now you're collecting the glove, correct?

# 156 A:

Correct.

# 157 MR. BLASIER:

You can turn it off.

# 158 (Videotape stopped at 17:52:30.)

# 159 Q:

Now, you would agree that you did not change your gloves between collecting the knit cap and the glove; is that correct?

# 160 MR. LAMBERT:

Objection, irrelevant.

# 161 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 162 A:

Correct.

# 163 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) You did not examine your hands between collecting the knit cap and the glove for any biological material that may have gotten on your hands from the knit cap, correct?

# 164 A:

Correct.

# 165 Q:

And you didn't examine your gloves for any possible trace evidence that might have come off the knit cap onto your gloves before you picked up the glove, correct?

# 166 A:

Correct.

# 167 Q:

Now, do you know -- do you have any independent recollection at all as to when you had changed your gloves prior to the time that you picked up the knit cap?

# 168 MR. LAMBERT:

From when? Vague question, Your Honor.

# 169 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) From the time you got there?

# 170 A:

That day? I can't begin to tell you how many times I changed my gloves. I don't remember when I changed them. I know I changed them many times that day.

# 171 Q:

Can you tell me prior to the time that you picked up the knit cap, when you changed your gloves?

# 172 A:

No, I cannot.

# 173 Q:

And your reason for not changing your gloves between the knit cap and the glove was what?

# 174 A:

They're both in extreme close proximity to each other. When they are picked up, as you pick up any piece of evidence, if you're going to use your hands, you pick them up securely within the smallest area possible, you would not pick up a hat just by grabbing it, you pick it up in the smallest area possible, touch it as least as possible.

KEY QUOTE

# 175 Q:

You're saying that you did that because the hat and the glove were in close proximity to each other?

# 176 A:

That I did what?

# 177 Q:

That's why you didn't change your gloves?

# 178 A:

That was one of the reasons.

# 179 Q:

Do you remember testifying at the criminal trial, page 23746, line 1, when you were asked with respect to why you didn't change your gloves. (Reading:)

# 180 A:

The hat and the glove at

Bundy were touching each other.

# 181 Q:

Do you remember that testimony?

# 182 (Reading:)

# 183 Q:

Remember that testimony?

# 184 A:

I think so, yes.

# 185 Q:

And that's not accurate, is it?

# 186 MR. LAMBERT:

That wasn't impeachment, Your Honor.

# 187 MR. BLASIER:

I'll withdraw that.

# 188 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) Was there a time when they were touching each other, prior to the time that you collected them?

# 189 A:

At the time that I testified to that, I believed, to the best of my recollection, that the two items were touching each other.

# 190 Q:

Had you seen them touching each other prior to the time you collected them?

# 191 A:

I don't remember.

# 192 Q:

Prior to the time that you collected the Bundy glove, had you seen anyone pick it up and replace it on the ground?

# 193 A:

No, I did not.

# 194 Q:

Prior to the time -- Now, you collected the envelope with the glasses as well, did you not?

# 195 A:

Yes.

# 196 Q:

Prior to the time that you collected the envelope with the glasses, did you see anyone pick it up and replace it on the ground in a different location?

# 197 A:

No.

# 198 MR. BLASIER:

Now, could we have.

# 199 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) Let me show you Exhibit 1532.

Ms. Mazzola, when you arrived at the Bundy scene at approximately 10, 10:15 on the morning of the 13th, was there a piece of paper, as depicted in this photograph, on the ground between the bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman?

# 200 A:

Right now, I don't remember seeing a piece of paper.

# 201 Q:

Did -- in your presence, did Detective Lange of -- did you ever see him examine a piece of paper like that at the scene -- at the Bundy scene?

# 202 A:

In my presence, no.

# 203 Q:

And you never collected that piece of paper, did you?

# 204 A:

Does not look familiar.

# 205 Q:

It doesn't show up anywhere in your checklist, either, as anything that you collected on that day, correct?

# 206 A:

If it's not on the checklist, we did not pick it up.

KEY QUOTE

# 207 Q:

You want to verify that it's not there.

# 208 (Witness reviews documents in a blue notebook binder.)

# 209 Q:

That's correct, you did not collect that?

# 210 (Nods affirmatively.)

# 211 Q:

Let me show you People 92 -- I apologize for the picture -- to help situate the location of that piece of paper.

And your testimony is that you never saw that there, correct?

# 212 A:

That?

# 213 (Indicating to photograph of paper.)

# 214 A:

I honestly don't remember seeing it.

# 215 Q:

Okay.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Andrea Mazzola

I would go out with the Criminalist 3 to a crime scene, so yes, I guess you would classify me as a crime scene trainee.

Prior testimony from August 1994 read into record establishing Mazzola considered herself a trainee when she processed the most high-profile crime scene in LAPD history.

Andrea Mazzola

Approximately six months.

Her answer when asked how long she had been a criminalist as of June 13, 1994 — she had only six months of experience and this was essentially her third crime scene.

Andrea Mazzola

They're both in extreme close proximity to each other. When they are picked up, as you pick up any piece of evidence, if you're going to use your hands, you pick them up securely within the smallest area possible.

Her justification for not changing gloves between collecting the knit cap and the Bundy glove — a key contamination concern for DNA evidence.

Andrea Mazzola

If it's not on the checklist, we did not pick it up.

Confirms the unidentified piece of paper photographed between the two bodies at Bundy was never collected as evidence.

Evidence (5)

Defendants' 1797, 2250, 2251, 2252

Four exhibits received into evidence at the opening of the proceeding; contents not described in transcript

received into evidence without objection

Defendants' 943

Copy of Mazzola's crime-scene investigation checklist from Rockingham, June 13, 1994

marked for identification, used to confirm Mazzola listed as officer in charge

Civil 918

Videotape of Mazzola collecting the knit cap and Bundy glove at the crime scene

played to confirm she did not change gloves between collecting the two items

1532

Photograph showing a piece of paper on the ground between Nicole Brown Simpson's and Ronald Goldman's bodies

shown to witness; Mazzola confirmed she never collected it and does not remember seeing it

People's 92

Photograph used to situate the location of the uncollected piece of paper at Bundy

shown to witness for context

Notable Exchanges (4)

Robert Blasier•Andrea Mazzola

Blasier read Mazzola's 1994 hearing testimony back to her where she admitted being a 'crime scene trainee'; she said she didn't remember the testimony but had no reason to doubt it was accurate.

strategic

Robert Blasier•Andrea Mazzola

Blasier played videotape (Civil 918) showing Mazzola collecting the knit cap then immediately the Bundy glove without changing or examining her gloves — she confirmed she did not change them and could not recall when she had last changed them before collecting the cap.

revealing

Robert Blasier•Andrea Mazzola

Blasier introduced a photo of an unidentified piece of paper lying between the two bodies at Bundy — Mazzola confirmed it does not appear in her checklist and was never collected, and she has no memory of seeing it.

strategic

Robert Blasier•Tom Lambert

Lambert repeatedly objected on relevance grounds citing in limine order No. 11, apparently covering Mazzola's qualifications and experience; Fujisaki overruled every time.

procedural

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Andrea Mazzola

prior inconsistent statement / prior testimony

Blasier used Mazzola's August 23, 1994 hearing testimony to establish she considered herself a 'crime scene trainee' and that all blood stains at Bundy except items 55 and 56 were collected by her alone — Mazzola repeatedly said she did not remember giving the prior testimony.

⚔ Andrea Mazzola

establishing inexperience

Blasier established Mazzola had only six months on the job, this was approximately her third crime scene, she had never been primary criminalist before, and she had no specific training in DNA evidence collection protocols.

⚔ Andrea Mazzola

demonstrating procedural failures

Via videotape, Blasier showed Mazzola did not change gloves between collecting the knit cap and the Bundy glove, did not examine her gloves for contamination between items, and could not recall when she had last changed gloves before collecting either item.

Witness Demeanor

(Witness reviews documents in a blue notebook binder.)

(Nods affirmatively.)

Objections

5 objections (0 sustained, 4 overruled)

Proceeding 8576 • 215 utterances • Defense witness

Civil Trial

Department 103