📄 Redirect examination of Gregory Matheson — Tuesday, December 10, 1996
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\DEC\10\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-GREGOR.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 29 of 57

Redirect examination of Gregory Matheson

Witness: Gregory Matheson
Examiner: Tom Lambert
Called by: Plaintiff • Date: Tuesday, December 10, 1996 • Utterances: 27
Tom Lambert conducts redirect examination of LAPD criminalist Gregory Matheson after Blasier's cross, focusing on two key issues: rehabilitating the blood measurement discrepancy and reinforcing that blood under Nicole's fingernails was her own. Matheson concedes his initial estimate of 2mL in the reference vial was significantly off from a later measurement of 3.8mL — nearly double — but frames both as estimates rather than precise measurements.
1 Q:

First, Mr. Matheson, on this question of the amount of blood taken from the reference sample, were the figures that you were discussing with Mr. Blasier just estimates of the amount of blood that was taken out?

2 A:

Yes, that's correct.

3 Q:

When criminalists would draw the blood at SID to use it, did they actually measure it or did they estimate how much they were taking?

4 A:

I'm sorry, when you say when we withdraw it.

5 Q:

Yeah, when you take blood out of the blood vial for testing, do you measure it or do you estimate the amount you're taking?

6 A:

No, it's all just estimations.

7 Q:

In your experience, can those estimations be pretty far off?

8 A:

Yes, they can.

9 Q:

In fact, in connection with this case, didn't you once make an estimate and then go back and do a precise measurement to see how close your measurement was?

10 A:

Even the second one wasn't a precise measurement. Yes, I did first an eyeball guess of how much blood was in the blood vial. Later on I did what I thought was a more precise way of measuring it and was significantly off.

11 Q:

What was your guess of how much was in it?

12 A:

On the day we did the inventory of the evidence, I eyeballed it and concluded in the chart there was approximately 2 milliliters of blood in that vial.

KEY QUOTE
13 Q:

And then when you later went back and did the more precise measurement efforts, what did you come up with?

14 A:

3.8, or almost twice as much.

15 Q:

In regard to this issue of the blood under Nicole's fingernails, is part of your opinion that -- well, first let me start off with your opinion to what's the most likely, and as to the correct EAP type for that blood?

16 A:

Well, given that particular sample, looking at all of the other information associated with the -- where the sample was taken from, I -- and not just looking totally at the analytical information, the most likely conclusion is that it's a degraded BA, and that it came from Nicole Brown.

17 Q:

Can you tell the jury some of the -- of the circumstances that you took into account in reaching that conclusion?

18 A:

Well, having done a number of fingernail scrapings type of analysis, particularly when there is a lot of blood involved, the most common source of blood under the nails is the victim's own blood.

As a matter of fact, it's very rare to finds somebody else's blood under a victim's fingernails. It does happen occasionally, but it's fairly rare.

In this particular case, having seen some of the crime scene photographs and her hands, there was blood present on it, and along with the known fact that EAP can degrade to a B, that I've seen in other tests that I've performed, I feel the most likely explanation, though I can't rule out the other possibility, most likely is that the blood that's there is from Ms. Brown.

19 Q:

And that's just based on your own conventional serology expertise?

20 A:

Yes, that's correct.

21 Q:

Now, in addition to that, Mr. Matheson, you -- we have heard in the courtroom the testimony of Gary Sims and Dr. Robin Cotton, both of whom independently performed PCR tests, different PCR tests on the blood under Nicole's fingernails, both of which concluded that that blood had DNA type that was consistent with Nicole Brown Simpson and did not show a mixture containing any other person's blood.

Would those test results confirm your conventional serology opinion that this is Nicole's blood under the fingernails?

22 A:

I think it confirms that the most likely answer is that it's her own blood.

KEY QUOTE
23 Q:

And as to all of the other blood that was at the crime scene that you did conventional serology tests on, was all of that typing consistent with coming from either one of the victims or Mr. Simpson?

24 A:

Of the stuff from the crime scene, that's correct.

25 Q:

Yes.

This knife that Mr. Blasier was asking about, do you know where that knife came from?

26 A:

Right now, no. I'd -- I'd have to look at a property report. I don't believe it came from the crime scene.

27 MR. LAMBERT:

Thank you. I have no further questions.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. BLASIER:

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Matheson
On the day we did the inventory of the evidence, I eyeballed it and concluded in the chart there was approximately 2 milliliters of blood in that vial. Later on I did what I thought was a more precise way of measuring it and was significantly off.
Directly concedes the measurement discrepancy the defense has been pressing — the 2mL vs 3.8mL gap that suggests blood may have been removed from the reference vial.
Matheson
It's very rare to find somebody else's blood under a victim's fingernails. It does happen occasionally, but it's fairly rare.
Expert opinion deflecting the implication that the fingernail blood could have been an assailant's — supports the narrative that Nicole's own blood was present.
Matheson
I think it confirms that the most likely answer is that it's her own blood.
Synthesizes serological and PCR DNA evidence to reinforce that the fingernail blood was Nicole Brown Simpson's.

Evidence (4)

Informal
Simpson reference blood vial — estimated at 2mL then re-measured at 3.8mL
discussed
Informal
Blood under Nicole Brown Simpson's fingernails — EAP typing results
discussed
Informal
PCR test results by Gary Sims and Dr. Robin Cotton on fingernail blood
discussed
Informal
Knife referenced by Blasier during cross — origin unknown to Matheson
discussed

Notable Exchanges (2)

LambertMatheson
Lambert walks Matheson through the blood vial measurement issue, framing both figures as 'estimates' to soften the defense's implication that blood was removed. Matheson agrees but still admits being 'significantly off.'
strategic
LambertMatheson
Lambert asks Matheson to integrate the PCR results from Sims and Cotton with his own serology opinion on the fingernail blood, building a multi-layered case that the blood was Nicole's.
rehabilitative

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Matheson
prior inconsistent statement / demonstrated error
The redirect inadvertently highlights Matheson's own acknowledgment that his initial 2mL eyeball estimate was nearly half the 3.8mL figure he later measured — a discrepancy Lambert tries to neutralize by calling both figures 'estimates.'

Objections

None recorded
Proceeding 8558 • 27 utterances • Plaintiff witness
Civil Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 DEC 10, 1996 📄 Redirect examination of Gregor
DEC 10, 1996 KRT DvH TD