(BY MR. MEDVENE) Dr. Baden, we talked a little bit about your testimony at another time under oath. We talked about surprisingly little blood on the shirt.
Do you remember that earlier today?
Is it true, sir, that you told this jury, under oath, yesterday, in contrast to that testimony, there was a great deal of blood present on the shirt?
Did you tell this jury that yesterday, sir? Yes or no?
I said there's a great deal of blood present on the shirt and on the jeans.
And I think that, as you point out, it was much more in the jeans than on the shirt.
KEY QUOTESir, you don't recall yesterday, you said there was a great deal of blood present on the shirt; is that correct.
And on the jeans. Not fair to take the sentence in half. Take them both together.
There was a great deal of blood; I agree with you. I hadn't reviewed the shirt; that there's more on the jeans than on the shirt.
Well, as a matter of fact, sir, with respect to the jeans, you had previously said under oath, there was only a few ounces on the jeans; isn't that correct, sir?
Isn't that what you said before?
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Didn't you say, with reference to the left leg, sir, that there were a few ounces of blood adherent to the leg?
Maybe a half a quart, half a liter could be accounted for on the clothing and on the shoes, at a maximum?
Half a quart would be about 16 ounces. So that I would be referring to in the clothing and all that, perhaps that much could be on the clothing.
Of that amount, a few ounces on the shirt and a few ounces on the pants; is that correct, sir?
You don't mean "and" you mean "of that amount."
So it's true also, sir, is it not, that there was little blood on the ground when the body was removed?
Wasn't much blood in the area; isn't that true, sir?
I didn't see much blood as far as the photographs were concerned. But the ground soaks up blood, so I can't --
Sir, I didn't ask you if it did or didn't soak up blood.
I'm asking you, from what you knew -- because we're going to track the amount of blood there is, sir -- from what you knew, there was not much blood on the ground when the body was removed, and not much blood in the area. Haven't you previously said that under oath, sir?
I read you from -- this is in the middle of the answer, but it's the part that has to do the blood on the ground.
I'm sorry. Lines 1 through 6. And lines 3 through 6 deal with the blood on the ground.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Dr. Baden, did you say at a previous time, under oath, with respect to blood on the ground:
"So if he were alive and the heart were pumping, maybe over a quart of blood would have to seep out in the position that he's in, which we don't see any blood in the soil, and there's no -- when the body is removed, there's not much blood in that area to start with."
Did you make that statement under oath on a previous occasion?
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Sir, I'm going to -- going to -- strike that.
In terms of this trail of blood, is it true, sir, that if one were standing, and the blood -- instead of -- the blood on the pant leg, instead of going from the thigh, was coming from the jugular vein, you would expect that blood to soak into the top of the pants, isn't that true, and leave blood in the pants?
All right.
And certainly, if it was flowing down and the material were absorbent, there would be as much soaking at the belt area of the pants as there was lower down; isn't that true?
That varies. It varies on many factors.
The soaking of blood into the clothing in this fashion involves a lot of different factors.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Now, in this trail that you've told us about that's going from the left jugular vein, we discussed already what blood there was or wasn't on the shirt; we discussed the lack of blood on the abdomen, getting down to the pants. And isn't it true, sir, that before the staining starts in the areas shown on the picture, there's little, if any, blood on the upper portion of the pant leg, where you would expect blood naturally to flow, if it was flowing, and Mr. Goldman was standing up for five, ten, whatever amount of minutes?
Isn't that true, sir? There's little or no blood shown at the top of the pants around the belt; yes or no?
And you have no explanation, sir, why there would be all this soaking above in the area of the thigh wound, and little or no blood up at the top of the belt line, if the blood was flowing down from the left jugular vein, somehow not on the abdomen and somehow not on the upper portion of the blue jeans, do you?
(BY MR. MEDVENE) I'm going to ask you a question, sir. Your counsel will be able to ask you whatever, and maybe you'll get this explanation this way, sir.
Is it your contention, sir, that Mr. Goldman was standing five, ten, fifteen, twenty minutes, while this assailant was attacking him with a knife, and the blood was dripping down from the left jugular vein, somehow didn't stain very much, or soak into his shirt on the right, skipped over his abdomen, skipped over the first portion of his jeans?
No, I'm not saying that at all. I didn't say he stood up at any point for two, three, five, ten, fifteen minutes.
I said he stayed up for two or three minutes, yes, while the blood came down and stained some areas and didn't stain other areas, yes
He collapses from loss of blood and whatever else goes on when the jugular vein is cut. There are other things that happen.
I understand.
We'll talk about the two or three minutes we now have him on the ground in a few minutes.
But, what I want to ask is, your explanation is this blood somehow by gravity kind of jumped over these areas that you talked about, jumped over -- kind of jumped over the shirt sort of, jumped over the abdomen, jumped over this first part, and kind of landed here, this slow oozing blood from the vein that's oozing out, is that it, sir?
All right.
Now, you've now told us under oath he's standing maybe two or three minutes before he's on the ground.
Did you tell, in this TV program you went on a month ago, Mr. Rivera and the national TV audience, at that time we had him up at least five or ten minutes, did you tell whoever you were telling on TV that?
Yes or no, just yes or no, sir, did you say that on TV?
Did you say, sir, what I'm saying is that in order for the blood to flow from the neck down to the shoe, bleeding from the jugular vein, would have taken at least five or ten minutes, he was standing for that period of time?
I could play it for you, sir.
Did you say that?
No, no, no, sir. You're a pro. I'm asking you, did you say it on national television on November 11 on the Rivera show? That's what I'm asking you. Did you or didn't you?
I don't answer it that way. What I should have said, would have been -- could have been, could have been standing five or ten minutes.
Sir, I didn't ask you what you should have said, what you could have said.
I know we're now two or three minutes?
Your Honor, I would object to the previous without -- I'd like to see the transcript so I can make an objection if there's one there.
I would ask to approach if they're going to play any more of this tape. After reading the transcript --
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Now, does that refresh you that he was -- that you said he was standing for that period, contrary to what you told this jury under oath a couple minutes ago, that we have him down in two minutes or three minutes on the ground? Does that refresh you, sir; yes or no?
Thank you.
In discussing -- would you agree, sir, that all of the bleeding that we've gone through and described, does not account for the amount of bleeding necessary for Mr. Goldman to -- to collapse?
We have from the -- oh, and by the way, sir, you've told us that the amount of blood in the clothing and in the shoe is approximately half a quart or half a liter, maximum; is that correct, sir? So that's -- the shirt, the pants, the shoe, we're talking about half a quart. That's how many ounces?
Okay.
And would you agree with Dr. Spitz that we need, in terms of sudden blood loss, about roughly a quart or liter and a half to two liters, two quarts; isn't that true?
So we have half a quart, and we need another -- another quart and a half. We don't have it on the clothing, we don't have it on the abdomen, we don't have it on the ground, so --
KEY QUOTEExcuse me, sir.
If the bleeding was internal, Dr. Baden, if it was internal and inside Mr. Goldman's body, it wouldn't have to be in the ground, would it; yes or no?
If there was no external bleeding it wouldn't have to be in the ground, but not everything you bleed from gets soaked up in clothing.
Sir, you told us before that as far as you knew, there was not much, if any, blood on the ground?
Sir, you looked at the pictures, and there was not much blood on the ground; isn't that true?
And that's what you were working with in your diagnosis, photographs of the autopsy and what you saw at the scene around his body; isn't that true?
And lots of other things. I mean I work with many things. But we can never reconstruct, in any murder how much blood is lost to the outside.
I want to find the other quart and a half.
Now, Dr. Baden, yesterday, you talked about the aorta, and isn't it true that if the aorta is almost transected, that you would have massive internal bleeding from an artery? Is that true, sir?
We're trying, all of us, to get the facts here.
Now you're telling me it's not in the autopsy. I'm asking you --
It was not transected, no, it was not almost transected, but it had a big stab wound front and back.
Thank you, sir. It's not almost transected. Thank you, sir.
When you examined this body -- you examined the body, didn't you, Dr. Baden?
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Dr. Baden, I'm showing you some papers that are marked at the top "Defense 001004," and it continues.
Are these your notes, sir?
That's -- I didn't write it, but it's my initials, yes.
Dr. Lakshmanan, Dr. Wolfe, myself, and Dr. Ziegler of the coroner's office.
And do I read accurately, "Aorta with laceration and hemorrhage in surrounding soft" -- what's that word, sir?
Be a fair statement, sir, that that's what you observed when you observed the aorta; yes or no, sir?
So when you told us a minute ago that there was no transection, it wasn't almost transected, that was incorrect, yes or no?
I'd have to describe what almost transected means. Can I say what almost transected is? That's from that little piece of tissue we saw up there --
I believe there were -- no, I adopted Dr. Golden's measurements of half an inch each because there's a shrinkage factor.
Excuse me, sir.
My question was did you measure.
Dr. Spitz measured them as 5/8ths of an inch.
He didn't measure them. He measured the picture, he measured the photograph. I didn't measure the photograph.
That's a distortion. A half an inch, it doesn't make any difference, the aorta will bleed very heavily from a half an inch laceration or whether it's transected. They all bleed very rapidly if a person is alive and the heart is beating effectively.
So you would agree that that -- if there was the kind of stab wound to the aorta that was described, let's put aside when in the struggle it occurred, it's a very serious wound that would bleed very, very profusely?
If the blood was pouring out, the blood pressure would immediately drop if -- if the heart was pumping at the time?
Did you -- didn't you say, sir -- strike that.
Did you tell us when we were talking about transected and almost transected, it really doesn't matter because the blood is gushing out?
No -- yes -- no -- that -- whether it's partially transected or transected or a stab wound front and back, it's going to be a great deal of bleeding in any of those three circumstances in a healthy -- in an otherwise healthy person.
In an otherwise healthy person, if it's almost transected or transected, we're going to have relatively the same amount of blood pouring out, if we have an otherwise healthy person?
The two, half inch stab wounds were almost transected, whatever that means, would pour out a great deal of blood, yes.
And didn't you say, sir, again, on the Rivera show, on November 11, that if it were cut through, if it was transected, it would be very quick, very quick, you wouldn't be able to stand within seconds?
Didn't you say that, sir; yes or no? Just yes or no?
Now, in terms of -- in terms of the blood, you saw, did you not, from looking at the section of the aorta, that the tissue was saturated with blood?
Infiltrated with blood. And the infiltration with blood, didn't that mean that there was still blood pressure in the victim, the homogeneity of the blood surrounding the fatty tissue, isn't that what that means; yes or no, sir?
Not necessarily. Could be a reflection of that, it could be seepage of blood through the --
Okay.
Now, in the autopsy report itself, sir, that report describes a wound starting at the skin on the left flank and passing through that skin into the subcutaneous tissue, went through the retroperitoneal tissue which was bleeding or bloody; isn't that true?
In the back, in the left flank. So there's no question that the stab wound didn't come through the abdomen or the belly button, but it went through the left flank, through the muscle, and cut the aorta, correct, sir?
Now, there's no indication in the autopsy report of a stab wound to the abdomen, isn't that correct, sir?
The abdomen is encased in what you told us about yesterday, this sack, remember, you brought up from lunch, that plastic --
And the aorta is in -- when it bled out, it was described as bleeding out into the retroperitoneal, that there was what, a retroperitoneal hemorrhage; is that correct, sir?
It didn't say he bled out. It said there was hemorrhage in the retroperitoneal soft tissues.
And I think you pointed out yesterday, there was some hemorrhaging or some blood that found its way even to the kidneys?
And in the autopsy report, there was no injury that was noted to the adrenal glands; isn't that correct?
And the adrenal glands are approximately 6, 7 inches from where the aorta was almost transected; isn't that correct?
And that meant, reasonably, that blood that poured out and was observed in that picture made its way to the area of the -- the adrenal glands?
The blood didn't pour out. There was some blood that made its way to the adrenal gland, infiltrated the fatty tissue to the adrenal gland, not to the kidney, though, there's nothing described in the kidney.
You and I would understand, in the old days, when we had tubes in the tires, an aneurysm is like a little ballooning out of that tube.
If that aneurysm, that sac, the saccular dilatation ruptures, as does happen as we get older, in the aorta, then it means the person could bleed from pouring out of blood from that ruptured aneurysm, yes, of the aorta.
All right.
And the reason it remains in the retroperitoneal space is because it's -- it's confined there in this soft tissue in the -- in the retroperitoneal area, correct, sir?
Because the peritoneum blocks it off and there's no communication normally through the peritoneum, so the blood stays behind it and it doesn't get into the peritoneal cavity.
Now, if -- so we know now from a ruptured aneurysm of the aorta, the blood rushes from the aorta and remains in a retroperitoneal space because the peritoneum is protected by that thin membrane, right?
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Now, in -- in this case, sir, there being no wound to the abdomen, isn't it true that the only -- and the abdomen being in the peritoneum, that one explanation for the fact that there's a hundred or 200 cc's of blood in the abdominal cavity is that the tip of the knife that sliced the aorta went through the retroperitoneal area and nicked the membrane of the peritoneum?
It went through the membrane communicating with the abdominal cavity, that is my opinion, that it caused the bleeding.
No, no, not from the retroperitoneum. From the aorta.
See, as in your diagram, it made a -- the stab wound that comes out the front goes right into the peritoneal cavity, and there's a direct communication between the aorta and the peritoneum, and that caused the 100 cc, 3 ounces, of bleeding into that cavity.
There's only -- when we say direct communication, to be more precise, you've told us that on a ruptured aneurysm of the aorta, the blood will stay inside the retroperitoneal cavity and not go into the peritoneum?
It's only if the peritoneum is ruptured by possibly a tip of a knife. In this situation, where some blood could ooze from the retroperitoneum from the aorta into the peritoneum; isn't that correct?
Now, did you speak -- strike that.
You told us, several times on your direct, that you spoke to Dr. Golden; is that correct?
And did you ask Dr. Golden whether or not it was true that there was massive bleeding in the retroperitoneal area that resulted from the almost transection of the aorta? Did you ask him that question?
Excuse me.
Would you listen to the question and answer the question instead of arguing with the lawyer.
KEY QUOTEAnd did you ask Dr. Golden whether or not it was true that there was massive bleeding in the retroperitoneal area that resulted from the almost transection of the aorta?
Did you ask him that question?
(BY MR. MEDVENE) You told us earlier today that whatever the first wound or second wound, that Mr. Goldman slumped to the ground, I think you said after -- is it two or three minutes?
And it's your theory, then, that it could have been two minutes, that after the two minutes, that the assailant then, seeing him still breathing after maybe two minutes, goes over and inflicts wounds to the lungs, the aorta, the abdomen and the neck?
Is that your theory, sir; yes or no?
I don't know he saw him breathing.
You're asking me questions that have six different things in them. If you can ask me one at a time, I can answer them.
I don't know if he saw him breathing.
No, could you -- okay, I agree with just what you read, just what you read, I agree with a few minutes, whatever that is.
Okay.
So you've told us two, three, five, ten, but whatever it is, I think the latest you told us earlier today was two or three?
(BY MR. MEDVENE) All right.
So he's on the ground, and then the assailant sees him breathing and finishes him off?
The assailant -- he's on the ground, and additional stab wounds are inflicted upon him when he's on the ground, yes.
Okay.
And those wounds, as far as you know, could well have been inflicted the moment, even on your theory, the moment after he fell to the ground; yes or no?
Yes or no, sir?
I said there's a great deal of blood present on the shirt and on the jeans. And I think that, as you point out, it was much more in the jeans than on the shirt.
Yes, this page is my handwriting... 'Aorta with laceration and hemorrhage in surrounding soft tissue (almost transection)' — That's correct.
So we have half a quart, and we need another quart and a half. We don't have it on the clothing, we don't have it on the abdomen, we don't have it on the ground, so —
I didn't say he stood up at any point for two, three, five, ten, fifteen minutes. I said he stayed up for two or three minutes, yes.
Would you listen to the question and answer the question instead of arguing with the lawyer.