📄 Sidebar: Promega article admissibility — Thursday, December 12, 1996
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\DEC\12\SIDEBAR-PROMEGA-ARTICLE-ADMISS.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 31 of 57

Sidebar: Promega article admissibility

Examiner: Examiner
Date: Thursday, December 12, 1996 • Utterances: 105
Plaintiff's attorney Tom Lambert sought to use a paper by defense DNA expert Dr. Gerdes — presented at the Promega Conference — that contained a parenthetical stating 'Mr. Simpson acknowledged he cut himself.' Judge Fujisaki excluded the article as an exhibit but allowed Lambert to question Gerdes about the underlying hypothesis without the jury present first. Examination revealed Gerdes sourced the cut claim from criminal trial testimony, not directly from Simpson, and that defense attorney Bill Thompson had reviewed the article before publication.
1 THE COURT:

Okay. Approach the bench.

2 (The following proceedings were held at the bench, with the reporter.)
3 MR. LAMBERT:

This is a specific article on the test results in this case. I want to ask him what he said right there.

4 (Court reads document proffered by Mr. Lambert.)
5 MR. BLASIER:

Which part?

6 MR. LAMBERT:

Right here (indicating), where Mr. Simpson acknowledged he cut himself.

7 THE COURT:

What do you want to offer this for?

8 MR. LAMBERT:

I want to ask him if this is the basis for his conclusion as to how the contamination on the second day of collection, that the only way it could have been, is if it was actually his blood.

9 MR. BLASIER:

This came out with --

10 THE COURT:

Wait. I can't understand what he's saying, first. So let me try to understand what he's saying. Then I'll hear from you, okay?

11 (Pause for Court to read document.)
12 THE COURT:

Okay. With are you saying?

13 MR. LAMBERT:

He's now saying that on the second day of collection, it's possible that some contamination took place between evidence collected at Rockingham and that found in the Bronco.

I want to ask him if the basis for that, as he states here, is that the reason that that fits his theory, is that the evidence collected at Rockingham was, in fact, from Mr. Simpson.

14 MR. BLASIER:

It's a hearsay statement. We couldn't do this with Dr. Weir, when I tried to use some of his article from the Simpson case. We weren't allowed to do it.

15 THE COURT:

What was it about Dr. Weir?

16 MR. BLASIER:

He wrote an article about the Simpson case. You wouldn't let me read excerpts from it.

17 THE COURT:

What was it that he wrote that warranted you to use that?

18 MR. BLASIER:

It was the article that he had written where he talked about tape 31, as a matter of fact, and gave the wrong --

19 THE COURT:

What did he say?

20 MR. BLASIER:

You wouldn't let me read it.

21 MR. LAMBERT:

You cross-examined him.

22 THE COURT:

Will you stop it?

23 MR. LAMBERT:

Sorry.

24 MR. BLASIER:

I cross-examined him. You can cross.

25 THE COURT:

Try to answer my question. I'm trying to get some information from you.

What is it that I prevented you from asking Dr. Weir?

26 MR. BLASIER:

I wanted to read -- like Mr. Lambert wants to do -- I wanted to read from an article that he had written.

27 THE COURT:

Tell me what it is so I can understand your point.

28 MR. BLASIER:

It was a statement that he had in his paper about item 31.

29 THE COURT:

And did he -- what did he say in the paper?

30 MR. BLASIER:

He gave statistics about item 31 that were later determined to be wrong.

31 THE COURT:

Okay.

32 MR. BLASIER:

He stated his analysis there of how, gee, the defense should have done it this way; it would have gotten much more favorable results.

I was not allowed to do -- I was allowed to cross on it, but I wasn't allowed to read the article.

33 THE COURT:

Okay. And you want -- you want to ask him about this highlighted part?

34 MR. LAMBERT:

Yeah. Where he acknowledged that he cut himself.

35 THE COURT:

That who acknowledged it? Simpson?

36 MR. LAMBERT:

That's a good question. I'll ask this guy.

37 THE COURT:

No, I'm not going to allow that.

38 MR. LAMBERT:

What if Simpson told him?

39 MR. PETROCELLI:

If it's an admission --

40 MR. BLASIER:

We'll make an out-of-the-presence jury --

41 MR. LAMBERT:

I'm entitled to ask him if he cut himself from Mr. Simpson.

42 MR. BLASIER:

Do it without the jury.

43 THE COURT:

You can do it outside the presence of the jury, but I'm not going to let you do that in front of the jury.

44 MR. LAMBERT:

Okay. Maybe I should ask him where he got this piece of information.

45 THE COURT:

Okay.

46 MR. LAMBERT:

Okay.

47 MR. BLASIER:

Outside the presence of the jury.

48 (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury.)
49 THE COURT:

Okay.

Jurors, you want to step out in the back? Take them back into the hallway or into my chambers.

Don't let them read anything on my desk.

50 (Laughter.)
51 THE COURT:

The jury has left the courtroom.

52 (The following proceedings were held in open court, outside the presence of the jury.)
53 Q:

(BY MR. LAMBERT) This is a portion of your paper from the Promega Conference.

When you say, on the next morning here you're, talking about June the 15th, correct Doctor?

54 A:

Correct.

55 Q:

This is the second day of Collin Yamauchi's work?

56 A:

Yes.

57 Q:

Right.

And that's when evidence from Rockingham was processed that we just talked about?

58 A:

Yes.

59 Q:

And here you say in parentheticals, "where Mr. Simpson acknowledged he cut himself," right?

60 A:

Yes.

61 Q:

Mr. Simpson told you that?

62 A:

That was my understanding from the testimony. He didn't tell me that.

KEY QUOTE
63 Q:

From Mr. Simpson's own testimony, you heard that?

64 A:

From the testimony of the criminal trial.

65 Q:

What testimony was that, that led you to believe that he cut himself?

66 A:

I can't recall specifically. I can't recall where I saw it.

67 Q:

Did this article -- before you presented it at Promega, it was reviewed by Mr. Simpson's lawyers?

68 A:

It was reviewed by one of their lawyers, yes.

KEY QUOTE
69 Q:

Barry Scheck?

70 A:

No, Bill Thompson.

71 Q:

Bill Thompson.

So Bill Thompson reviewed this article. He didn't tell to you take that parenthetical out?

72 MR. BLASIER:

Objection. Irrelevant.

73 THE COURT:

Sustained.

74 A:

He doesn't say anything about that.

75 MR. BLASIER:

It's sustained.

76 Q:

(BY MR. LAMBERT) You're sure you didn't hear that information directly from Mr. Simpson, that he cut himself?

77 A:

Pardon?

78 Q:

You're sure you didn't hear that directly from Mr. Simpson, that he cut himself?

79 A:

Yes. I never spoke to Mr. Simpson.

80 MR. LAMBERT:

That's all I have on that subject, Your Honor.

81 MR. BLASIER:

So you never got that information from Mr. Simpson, did you?

82 THE WITNESS:

No.

83 THE COURT:

Same thing he just asked.

84 MR. BLASIER:

You don't know where that came from, do you?

85 THE WITNESS:

That's correct; I don't.

86 MR. BLASIER:

Thanks.

87 THE COURT:

Okay. You want to argue it, go ahead.

88 MR. LAMBERT:

Well, Your Honor, what I want to use it for is the purpose of trying to clarify that his purpose, or his idea as to how contamination could have taken place on that second day of collection has to do with the evidence at Rockingham, one containing Mr. Simpson's blood. That's the underlying hypothesis.

89 THE COURT:

Why don't you ask him?

90 MR. LAMBERT:

Can I do it with the jury?

91 THE COURT:

No. Ask him now.

92 MR. LAMBERT:

I don't think I want to let him practice too much, Your Honor.

KEY QUOTE
93 Q:

(BY MR. LAMBERT) Isn't it, in fact, the hypothesis, Dr. Gerdes?

94 A:

Well, it's not specifically that it's Mr. Simpson's, but that particular item has a lot of DNA, and has the type that's consistent with Mr. Simpson.

95 Q:

Right. That particular item that's got an RFLP result, it's directly indicative of being Mr. Simpson?

96 A:

Yes.

97 Q:

Therefore, that is likely his blood. You're saying that could have been the cause of this other?

98 A:

Most likely the same type; so, yes.

99 MR. LAMBERT:

That would be the examination, Your Honor.

100 THE COURT:

Okay.

Bring the jury back in.

You may examine in the manner that you have just done.

101 MR. LAMBERT:

Thank you. Can I use the exhibit?

102 MR. BLASIER:

No.

103 THE COURT:

No.

104 MR. LAMBERT:

Okay. I'll do it without the exhibit.

105 (Jurors resume their respective seats.)

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Tom Lambert
I don't think I want to let him practice too much, Your Honor.
Lambert resists examining the witness outside the jury's presence because he doesn't want to give Gerdes a rehearsal for his answers before the jury hears them.
Witness (Dr. Gerdes)
That was my understanding from the testimony. He didn't tell me that.
Gerdes undermines the parenthetical in his own article — 'Mr. Simpson acknowledged he cut himself' — by clarifying it came from criminal trial testimony, not personal communication with Simpson.
Witness (Dr. Gerdes)
It was reviewed by one of their lawyers, yes... Bill Thompson.
Reveals that Simpson's own defense team reviewed and implicitly approved the article's contents, including the damaging parenthetical about Simpson cutting himself.
Hiroshi Fujisaki
Don't let them read anything on my desk.
Offhand remark prompting laughter as the jury was sent out — a rare light moment in an otherwise procedural sidebar.

Evidence (2)

Informal
Gerdes's paper presented at the Promega Conference, discussing contamination on the second day of evidence collection (June 15) and containing a parenthetical referencing Simpson acknowledging he cut himself
discussed, ultimately excluded as exhibit but basis for oral examination
Informal
Article by Dr. Weir about the Simpson case, referencing item 31 statistics
cited as precedent by Blasier for why Lambert should not be allowed to read from the Gerdes article

Notable Exchanges (3)

Robert BlasierHiroshi Fujisaki
Blasier argued Lambert should be barred from reading the Promega article by analogy to a prior ruling preventing Blasier from reading Weir's article. Fujisaki pressed Blasier to explain what Weir had actually written before ruling, exposing that the situations were not identical.
strategic
Tom LambertHiroshi Fujisaki
Lambert asked to examine Dr. Gerdes about the article's hypothesis with the jury present; Fujisaki insisted on the examination outside the jury first. Lambert was transparently reluctant, admitting he didn't want to give the witness a practice run.
candid
Tom LambertWitness (Dr. Gerdes)
Outside the jury's presence, Lambert established that (1) Gerdes could not specifically recall what testimony led him to write the parenthetical, (2) Gerdes never spoke to Simpson directly, and (3) Bill Thompson reviewed the article before publication without flagging the parenthetical.
revealing

Light Moments (1)

Hiroshi Fujisaki
Judge Fujisaki told staff not to let the departing jury read anything on his desk, prompting laughter in the courtroom.

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Dr. Gerdes
prior inconsistent statement / impeachment with own published work
Lambert used Gerdes's own Promega Conference article to challenge his contamination theory, highlighting that Gerdes had written a parenthetical implying Simpson's blood was the source of contamination — undercutting Gerdes's defense-friendly testimony about unreliable DNA evidence.

Witness Demeanor

(Pause for Court to read document.)
(Laughter.)

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)
Proceeding 8628 • 105 utterances
Civil Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 DEC 12, 1996 📄 Sidebar: Promega article admis
DEC 12, 1996 KRT DvH TD