Direct examination of Susan Brockbank (part 3)

📄 Direct examination of Susan Brockbank (part 3) — Wednesday, December 11, 1996

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\DEC\11\DIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-SUSAN-BR.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 30 of 57

◀ Sidebar: chain of custody Redirect examination of Susan Brockbank ▶

Witness: Susan Brockbank
Examiner: Robert Blasier
Called by: Plaintiff • Date: Wednesday, December 11, 1996 • Utterances: 89

Defense attorney Blasier continues cross-examining LAPD criminalist Brockbank about fiber and hair evidence, focusing on what she did and did not find on various items including the knit cap, gloves, and Bronco. A recurring theme is that Brockbank did not perform any hair comparisons herself — all comparisons were done by FBI agent Doug Deedrick — which repeatedly blocks Blasier's attempts to get her to confirm or deny specific findings.

# 1 Q:

BY MR. BLASIER: Ms. Brockbank, you would agree there are pieces of scotch tape in there that appear to have something attached to them?

# 2 (Witness examines inside of Defendants' Exhibit 2260.)

# 3 A:

I see two pieces of scotch tape and the -- well, they're stuck to the side of the box.

# 4 Q:

Okay.

Now, would you agree that when you opened that carpeting in July for the first time, a lot of carpet fibers came off of it, flaked off of the edges of it?

# 5 A:

I don't recall if any flaked off or not, actually.

I examined the carpet. I was looking at the shoe print. And we kept the carpet, you know, on the paper that actually it was wrapped in, somewhat.

# 6 Q:

Do you recall examining the paper to see whether anything came off the carpet?

# 7 A:

No, that wasn't the reason I was looking for the -- at the carpet at the time; I was looking at the shoe print that was on it.

# 8 Q:

Okay.

So you never examined it to see if fibers readily came off of it at that time?

# 9 A:

Never.

# 10 Q:

Okay.

Now, you make it a practice to, if possible, only examine one item at a time in the lab, correct?

# 11 A:

Unless I'm making a comparison between two different items.

# 12 Q:

Right. The purpose for that is to prevent items fiber evidence from one item getting onto another piece of evidence, if possible, correct?

# 13 A:

Just to prevent that potential, yes.

# 14 Q:

And, of course, you have no control over what happens at a crime scene, before the evidence gets to you, as to that possibly happening, do you?

# 15 A:

I have no control over the crime scene at all, no.

# 16 Q:

Okay.

Now, is it accurate that on the various pieces of evidence that you examined in this case, you found many animal fibers, dog fibers, dog hairs?

# 17 A:

On which?

# 18 Q:

On the various items of physical evidence in this case.

# 19 A:

There were animal hairs on a lot of the different items, yes.

# 20 Q:

That was a fairly common finding for you, wasn't it?

# 21 A:

Yes. And I didn't report it any more than that, just saying animal hairs.

# 22 Q:

Yeah.

And fibers can be trans -- and hair can be transported in a dog's coat?

# 23 MR. GELBLUM:

Objection. Vague. I didn't understand the question.

# 24 THE COURT:

Sounds like a pretty simple question. Overruled.

# 25 A:

If someone's head made contact with the dog's coat and left hairs on it, is that what you're asking?

# 26 Q:

If the dog picked up any hair or fiber at one location, it would be a pretty good vehicle to move it to another location, wouldn't it?

# 27 A:

It may. Or its hairs or whatever it is transporting may just fall off after a few steps.

# 28 Q:

And be found someplace, right?

# 29 A:

Possibly on the ground.

# 30 Q:

Now, the knit cap, how many times did you examine the knit cap in this case?

# 31 A:

Um, I believe twice. But just let me check.

Twice. Once on June 21 and once on June 23.

# 32 Q:

And is it accurate that, on neither of those occasions, you discovered a carpet fiber?

# 33 A:

I don't know if I did or didn't.

I removed hairs and fibers from the hat on the first date, and all I noted was fibers.

You don't make any notation as to whether it's a carpet fiber or any other type of fiber, just that it is a fiber.

# 34 Q:

Are you aware of Douglas Deedrick examining that hat yet a third time at the FBI lab in your presence, correct?

# 35 A:

Yes, I am.

# 36 Q:

And it was then that -- that a fiber consistent with the Bronco carpet's fiber was found, correct?

# 37 A:

I believe so.

# 38 Q:

Okay.

Now, the Bronco carpet fiber up there -- let me show you 1195.

Is it accurate, with respect to the Bronco, you didn't find any hair consistent with Nicole Brown Simpson or Ronald Goldman?

# 39 A:

I didn't perform any of the comparisons in this case. They were all done by Doug Deedrick.

# 40 Q:

You're aware of the results, are you not?

# 41 A:

Of some of them, not all of them.

# 42 Q:

Are you aware of any hair consistent with Nicole Brown Simpson or Ronald Goldman being found in the Bronco?

# 43 MR. GELBLUM:

I object. Mr. Deedrick was here; he testified.

# 44 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 45 Q:

BY MR. BLASIER: Did you find any hair from the Bronco consistent with either two people?

# 46 MR. GELBLUM:

Objection. Asked and answered. She said she didn't --

# 47 THE COURT:

You may answer.

# 48 A:

Again, I didn't make any comparisons at all, so . . . I don't know.

# 49 Q:

You examined the glove, did you not?

# 50 A:

Yes, I did.

# 51 Q:

And you found no hair on either of the gloves consistent with O.J. Simpson's head hairs, did you?

# 52 MR. GELBLUM:

Same objection. Witness said she didn't do any comparisons.

# 53 MR. BLASIER:

She just said she examined the gloves.

# 54 MR. GELBLUM:

Not -- no comparisons.

# 55 THE COURT:

She said she didn't do any comparison on the hat.

# 56 MR. GELBLUM:

I thought she said --

# 57 THE COURT:

I may be mistaken. She is going to say that. Let me hear it.

# 58 A:

I did not perform any comparisons in the case at all. They were all done by Doug Deedrick.

KEY QUOTE

# 59 THE COURT:

All right. Then the objection is sustained.

# 60 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) Ms. Brockbank, you never found, on any piece of evidence in this case, a single blue, black or blue-black cashmere fiber, did you?

# 61 A:

Again, I don't know. When I removed fiber evidence, all I did was describe it as fibers. I didn't go any further than that; so I may have, I may not have.

# 62 Q:

Check your notes and tell us if you found any blue, black, or blue-black cashmere fibers.

# 63 A:

On?

# 64 Q:

Anything.

# 65 MR. GELBLUM:

Objection, Your Honor. She just said she doesn't have that kind of information in her notes.

# 66 THE COURT:

I'm going to sustain it. You want to lay more foundation, you may inquire.

# 67 Q:

(BY MR. BLASIER) You were present when Doug Deedrick examined this evidence, as well, weren't you?

# 68 A:

I was present in the lab.

# 69 Q:

You're aware what the findings are, aren't you?

# 70 A:

Not all of them, no.

# 71 Q:

Much of them?

# 72 A:

Maybe some of them.

# 73 Q:

Are you aware that -- did you find, or did anybody find, to your knowledge, any blue, black, or blue-black cashmere fiber on any piece of evidence from the Bundy crime scene?

# 74 MR. GELBLUM:

Objection. Same objection. Mr. Deedrick testified to the findings.

# 75 THE COURT:

The question is overruled to the extent that it applies to whatever she observed Mr. Deedrick discovered.

Do you understand the question? In your presence, whatever you observed, if anything.

# 76 A:

Well, Mr. Deedrick was performing the examinations and comparisons of all the hair and fiber evidence. And occasionally, he would call something to my attention. I would come and I would look.

I don't recall, off the top of my head, seeing a blue-black cashmere. I don't know if he did. I don't recall that.

# 77 Q:

He never called it to your attention, did he?

# 78 A:

I don't recall what he called to my attention at this point in time.

# 79 Q:

You don't recall him ever bringing that to your attention, do you?

# 80 MR. GELBLUM:

Hearsay, Your Honor.

# 81 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 82 MR. BLASIER:

I have no further questions.

Wait a second.

# 83 Q:

BY MR. BLASIER: Did you -- haven't you reviewed Doug Deedrick's reports of all of his findings in this case?

# 84 A:

No. I've never seen -- I saw his very first one that he put out. That's the only one I've ever seen.

KEY QUOTE

# 85 Q:

That was at about what time?

# 86 A:

That was shortly after my visit to the FBI lab.

# 87 Q:

Okay.

After that time, you -- they no longer had you doing any work on the case?

# 88 A:

No. I actually, before that time --

# 89 MR. BLASIER:

Okay.

That's all I have.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Brockbank

I did not perform any comparisons in the case at all. They were all done by Doug Deedrick.

Repeated acknowledgment that her role was limited to collection, not comparison — undermines the line of questioning but also highlights a chain-of-custody gap

Brockbank

I don't recall, off the top of my head, seeing a blue-black cashmere. I don't know if he did. I don't recall that.

Blasier is trying to establish absence of cashmere fibers (possibly linked to a dark sweater worn by the killer), and her uncertainty neither confirms nor denies it

Brockbank

No. I've never seen -- I saw his very first one that he put out. That's the only one I've ever seen.

Brockbank was largely kept out of the loop on Deedrick's findings after her initial work, suggesting compartmentalization of the investigation

Evidence (5)

Defendants' Exhibit 2260

Box with scotch tape attached to sides, examined at start of proceeding

physically examined by witness on stand

1195

Bronco carpet fiber exhibit

referenced by Blasier in questioning about fiber findings

Informal

Knit cap

discussed — examined by Brockbank twice (June 21 and 23), then a third time by Deedrick at FBI lab where Bronco carpet fiber was found

Informal

Gloves

discussed — Brockbank confirmed she examined them but did no comparisons

Informal

Bronco carpet

discussed in context of fiber found on knit cap during Deedrick's third examination

Notable Exchanges (3)

Blasier•Brockbank•Gelblum•Fujisaki

Extended back-and-forth over whether Brockbank can speak to Deedrick's findings on hair consistent with victims in the Bronco — Fujisaki ultimately allows her to testify only to what she personally observed Deedrick discover in her presence

strategic

Blasier•Brockbank

Blasier presses on absence of blue-black cashmere fibers across all evidence; Brockbank can neither confirm nor deny because her notes only recorded 'fibers' without further categorization

strategic

Blasier•Brockbank

Blasier establishes that Brockbank never reviewed Deedrick's full reports and was essentially removed from the case after her initial FBI lab visit

revealing

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Brockbank

highlighting scope limitations

Blasier repeatedly exposes that Brockbank's documentation was cursory (noting only 'fibers' without type), she did no comparisons, and she was kept out of the loop on Deedrick's full findings — suggesting her testimony has limited probative value

⚔ investigation (LAPD/FBI)

chain of custody / gap in examination

Blasier establishes that a carpet fiber consistent with the Bronco was only found on the knit cap during a third examination by Deedrick at the FBI lab, implying it was missed or transferred later

Witness Demeanor

(Witness examines inside of Defendants' Exhibit 2260.)

Objections

9 objections (5 sustained, 2 overruled)

Proceeding 8615 • 89 utterances • Plaintiff witness

Civil Trial

Department 103