Cross-examination of Werner Spitz (part 3) (1 of 2)

📄 Cross-examination of Werner Spitz (part 3) (1 of 2) — Tuesday, November 12, 1996

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\NOV\12\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-WERNER-SP.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 13 of 57

◀ Cross-examination of Werner Spitz (part 2) Exhibit clarification ▶

Witness: Dr. Werner Spitz
Examiner: Edward Medvene
Called by: Defense • Date: Tuesday, November 12, 1996 • Utterances: 167

Baker cross-examines plaintiff's forensic pathology expert Dr. Spitz, challenging his opinions about the volume of blood in Goldman's retroperitoneal space, the interpretation of crime scene photographs, and the amount of blood transfer that would have reached the assailant. Baker attempts to use Spitz's own testimony to argue a single assailant would have been covered in blood — undermining the case against Simpson — but Spitz consistently held that little to no blood would reach the attacker given the scenario he described.

# 1 (Jurors resume their respective seats.)

# 2 THE COURT:

Mr. Baker, I think you gave them a page number. You didn't give them enough time to get the document out.

# 3 MR. PETROCELLI:

Exactly.

# 4 MR. BAKER:

I'll give them more time.

# 5 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Now, Dr. Spitz, you believed early on that the area behind the peritoneal area, there was quarts of blood, liters of blood in that area of the peritoneal space, right?

# 6 A:

Well, when -- yes. Well, liters sounds like a -- quart sounds like five, ten. That's not how it works. It's --

# 7 Q:

Well, was that your belief or was that not your belief?

# 8 A:

Yeah. My belief is that there was more than one.

# 9 Q:

Now, on page 70, line 27 through 8, on page 71, let me just read quickly what you said on Friday.

Okay. (Reading:)

"Q. By wound track, what do we mean?

"A. The track from line of the knife, through the tissues, from the entrance into the flank until it pierced the aorta.

All this space here lined the sack containing the organs, was filled with blood because the aorta seized the aorta, when the damage causes the bleeding into this area.

This area behind the front compartment contained quarts of blood. Liters of blood."

# 10 Q:

That's what you testified to on Friday, right?

# 11 A:

Yes.

# 12 Q:

And how many quarts or how many liters of blood did it contain?

# 13 A:

I don't know. But it in order to be filled with blood, you can possibly have two or thereabouts.

# 14 Q:

Two or more or just two?

# 15 A:

Maybe two or less. Maybe two or more.

# 16 Q:

Is it your opinion, then, sir, that Mr. Goldman's blood loss of two quarts of blood caused his demise because there was an substantial bleeding in the lungs, you agree to that?

# 17 A:

Yes.

# 18 Q:

There was insubstantial bleeding in the peritoneal cavity. You agree with that?

# 19 A:

Yes.

# 20 Q:

And, in fact, if the aorta had been cut on one side, the other side and the knife had gone through, as it had to, because you have an inch cut in the exit hole of the aorta, there should have been, if the bleeding had occurred early on, as I you say it occurred, there should have been quarts of blood in the peritoneal cavity, true?

# 21 A:

No, never. Never. Shall I explain it to you.

# 22 Q:

Well, put up the picture, Phil.

MR. P. BAKER: Which one?

# 23 MR. BAKER:

Yeah. And I apologize for the quality of this picture.

MR. P. BAKER: Page 1 of 1420.

# 24 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) This is a --

# 25 MR. MEDVENE:

Excuse me. Could we get a look at what this is?

# 26 MR. BAKER:

On the contact sheet, page 1 of 1420.

# 27 THE COURT:

I don't know what that means.

MR. P. BAKER: Contact sheet are the negatives of what Mr. Rokahr took. This is page 1 of the pages of contact sheets which is a collage of negatives.

# 28 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Now, that red spot we're seeing is, in fact, a flank wound, which you say was this devastating wound that you said early on, caused the demise of Mr. Goldman?

# 29 A:

This wound here is a stab wound situated right there.

# 30 Q:

And the blood tract from that stab wounds goes across the back and down towards the ground. There's a picture of Mr. Goldman lying on the ground, correct, after he has expired?

# 31 A:

From this injury?

I'm not sure I understand.

# 32 Q:

Let me --

# 33 A:

You mean externally or internally?

# 34 Q:

This is a picture taken after Mr. Goldman has expired and is still at the crime scene, lying on the dirted area with his shirt pulled up as it was when they found him, correct; on the right -- left side?

# 35 A:

Yes.

# 36 Q:

This is the blood tracking down towards the ground area; is it not, from the flank wound?

# 37 A:

No. This is not blood tracking. This is a smear of blood which probably occurred when they removed the body.

# 38 Q:

Did you --, the body has not been touched when this picture was taken?

# 39 A:

Then it is.

# 40 MR. MEDVENE:

Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.

# 41 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 42 MR. MEDVENE:

Mr. Baker is testifying.

# 43 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) I want you to assume that the body has never been moved when this picture is taken and I want you to further assume that this wood stake is a stake on the tree in the closed-in area. You have any problem assuming that sir?

# 44 A:

No.

# 45 Q:

And then that the body has not been touched in the area of the flank whatsoever at the time that photograph has been taken. Does that alter your opinion in any way that that is blood coming from the flank wound?

# 46 A:

This is --.

# 47 Q:

Does that alter your opinion?

# 48 A:

No. It does not alter my opinion. This is --

# 49 Q:

Thank you.

# 50 A:

This is blood.

# 51 Q:

Thank you. Now, if you have two quarts of blood in the back of the retroperitoneal space of Mr. Goldman, this is going to cause certainly a protuberance in tissue. It's not -- that's going to be visible by the human eye just looking, true?

# 52 A:

No.

# 53 MR. MEDVENE:

Objection. Assumes facts not in --

# 54 THE COURT:

Excuse me.

# 55 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) If you put two quarts of blood in your abdominal cavity --

# 56 THE COURT:

Did you make an objection -- I can't hear you.

# 57 MR. MEDVENE:

Assumes facts not in evidence, Your Honor.

# 58 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 59 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) If -- hypothetically, if you are correct, and there is two quarts of blood that is in the retroperitoneal space, we can -- you know, maybe as I get older, my back is a little more firmer than my abdomen. If we put two quarts of blood in the abdominal cavity, that causes a major protuberance or expansion of the abdominal cavity, true?

# 60 A:

This is not the abdominal cavity.

# 61 Q:

I understand that, sir.

# 62 A:

That's behind the --

# 63 Q:

Could you --

# 64 A:

-- Behind the abdominal cavity.

# 65 Q:

Sir?

# 66 A:

And my answer to you is no, it does not cause any protuberance.

# 67 Q:

Okay.

# 68 A:

I'd explain that to you if you like.

# 69 Q:

I'm sure you have an explanation for everything.

KEY QUOTE

# 70 MR. MEDVENE:

Objection to Mr. Baker's comments. Move to strike and ask that he cease making them.

# 71 MR. BAKER:

I think in view of this witness's comments, that I'm totally entitled to make those comments, Your Honor.

# 72 THE COURT:

I'll sustain the objection. Please don't make -- because this witness is also being admonished not to volunteer any answer that is not asked by the question, please.

# 73 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Now, did you review any of Dr. Goldman's (sic) testimony in the preliminary hearing?

# 74 MR. MEDVENE:

Objection. Relevance, hearsay, Your Honor.

And it opens up an area.

# 75 THE COURT:

Does not open up an area. If it's something he read before the deposition, he may inquire.

# 76 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Did you or did you not?

# 77 A:

I don't recall.

# 78 Q:

You don't have a recollection one way or the other?

# 79 A:

No.

# 80 Q:

All right.

Now, in terms -- one more area, sir. In terms of the -- of Mr. Simpson, you went through all of the photographs -- well, strike that.

In the closed-in area, this four foot by six foot area, based upon your reconstruction, there was hand-to-hand combat going on in that area between Mr. Goldman and -- Mr. Goldman and the assailant, correct?

# 81 A:

Yes.

# 82 Q:

He was striking out. He was kicking. He was attempting to hit the assailant, correct?

# 83 A:

No, I don't think so. I think he wasn't kicking. I think he was using his lower extremities to defend himself, to put them out as a barrier. That's what you do. Like when you put your hands out to grab the knife or to do something to prevent the blade from hitting your body.

So that's when you do, these kind of things instinctively, protecting the face and chest.

# 84 Q:

Well, instinctively protecting the face and chest. We saw where the bloody boot had, more likely than not, came in contact with the knife?

# 85 A:

That is correct. He fought off the assailant like that.

# 86 Q:

Okay. Except with the other boot, right?

# 87 A:

I beg your pardon.

# 88 Q:

The cut is on the right, sir?

# 89 A:

I'm talking about the injury to the thigh. When he turned and got the cut on the boot, he used his right leg.

# 90 Q:

He wouldn't have been kicking, and you can tell that he wouldn't have been trying to kick the knife out of -- out of the assailant's hand?

# 91 A:

He may have been kicking. But the usual and the expected is that people use their extremities to ward off an on-coming blade, other than in contrast to what happened -- what happens in gun shot wounds.

# 92 Q:

The usual and expected, right, in a knife fight?

# 93 A:

This is --

# 94 Q:

Okay. Thank you, sir.

Now, you -- Mr. Goldman is not only trying to ward off, he's trying to get the knife away from the attacker. That's usual and expected; isn't it?

# 95 A:

And he is, exactly that. That's when he got the stab wounds between the fingers.

# 96 Q:

All right.

Now, Mr. Simpson's had some photographs taken, six of him, within a couple of days of the murders and you reviewed those photographs, correct?

# 97 A:

Yes.

# 98 Q:

Did Mr. Simpson's have any bruises on his abdominal area, chest or abdomen?

# 99 A:

I'm not aware of any.

# 100 Q:

Put that up.

# 101 (Indicating to photo 4 of Exhibit No. 714.)

# 102 (The instrument herein referred to as a series of photos of O.J. Simpson was marked for identification as Defendants' Exhibit No. 714.)

# 103 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) You see any bruises whatsoever?

# 104 A:

No, I do not.

# 105 Q:

Did you see any bruises on his face?

Put up the facial shot.

MR. P. BAKER: This is photograph 1, 2 and 3 of 714. (Photo Nos. 1, 2 and 3 or Exhibit No. 714 are displayed on TV screen.)

# 106 Q:

No bruises there?

# 107 A:

No. There are no bruises and I wouldn't expect any bruises, either.

# 108 Q:

Put up his arm.

# 109 (Photo Nos 4 and 5 of Exhibit No. 714 are displayed.)

# 110 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Bruises there, sir?

# 111 A:

Here, there is a bruise.

# 112 Q:

You believe that's a bruise?

# 113 A:

That's what I thought, leaning on -- gleaned of a picture that I saw of this area.

# 114 Q:

So you think that's a bruise?

# 115 A:

If it isn't so, let it not be, but it looks like a bruise.

KEY QUOTE

# 116 Q:

All right.

Those are the only two options.

Now, in terms of the -- that was the only thing on any part of his body that you felt even resembled a bruise, right?

# 117 A:

You mean this area?

# 118 Q:

Yeah.

# 119 A:

I would not expect bruises.

# 120 Q:

I didn't ask you what you expect.

# 121 A:

Yes. That is correct. That's the only bruise that I saw on the rest of the body, other than the hands because there are bruises on the hands.

# 122 Q:

I've gone into the bruises on the hands from your quasi, crushing fingernail cuts in some detail?

# 123 A:

And bruises.

# 124 Q:

And by the way, Doctor, when -- Mr. Goldman had some significant blood on his hands, did he not?

# 125 A:

Yes.

# 126 Q:

And if he had, of course, come in contact with Mr. Simpson, if in fact, Mr. Simpson were the assailant, blood would have been transferred from the cuts that you saw on Mr. Goldman's hands to clothing that Mr. Simpson, if he were the assailant, was wearing, true?

# 127 MR. MEDVENE:

Objection. Vague, calls for speculation. Calls for a conclusion, lack of foundation.

# 128 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 129 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) There would have to have been, if Mr. Goldman hit his assailant and the cuts were made on his hands, there would have been a transfer of blood from Mr. Goldman hands to the assailant, correct?

# 130 MR. MEDVENE:

Same objection. It's an argumentative question, Your Honor.

# 131 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 132 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) On which grounds, sir. I'm not following.

# 133 THE COURT:

You can argue that to the jury.

# 134 Q:

(BY MR. BAKER) Well, then, let's go back one thing and I'll try to sit down.

When Nicole Brown Simpson had the carotid arteries severed, blood went splirting out of those carotid arteries onto the attacker, onto the tile and onto Ms. Simpson, true?

# 135 A:

No.

# 136 Q:

When you cut the carotid artery, Dr. Spitz, that carotid artery -- well, let's go back.

When the heart pumped blood, it pumps 20 percent to the brain, 80 percent to the rest of the body, correct?

# 137 A:

I never thought of it that way. Maybe that's correct. I don't know if it does that or not.

# 138 Q:

And when it pumps blood from the heart, the two most direct sources of oxygenated blood to the brain are the carotid left and right, true?

# 139 A:

Yes.

# 140 Q:

And they are a force relatively close to the heart as contrasted, for example, to our abdomen, to our legs, et cetera?

# 141 A:

Yes.

# 142 Q:

And when that area is severed --

# 143 A:

Yes.

# 144 Q:

-- The blood, the heart is still pumping and the blood pushes out of there when the left side contracts, true?

# 145 A:

Yes.

# 146 Q:

And so that is why this is an exceedingly bloody scene; is because both of this young woman's carotid arteries were severed, true?

# 147 A:

Because, of course, it's a bloody scene, all you need to do is look at the walkway.

# 148 Q:

I understand, sir. And if, in fact, someone had their left arm where you placed it, that left arm would be covered in blood, wouldn't it?

# 149 A:

No.

# 150 Q:

So your view of the severance of the carotid are that -- and when you have whoever is the attacker, and you know kind of the position that Mrs. Nicole Brown Simpson was in, down, with her head back and all of that; have you a clear picture of -- and you're clear picture of the bleeding that is caused by the direct severance of two carotid arteries in this young woman does not cause closed bleeding upon the assailant? True or untrue, sir?

# 151 A:

Correct. My opinion is that in the scenario which I described, and which is the basis of my opinion, there would be very little and maybe none on the assailant.

KEY QUOTE

# 152 Q:

And there would be none on the assailant from Mr. Goldman attacking the assailant after he had defensive wounds on his hands, correct?

# 153 A:

Again, the same thing.

# 154 Q:

Can you answer?

# 155 A:

It may be.

# 156 Q:

Can you answer my question for a change?

KEY QUOTE

# 157 A:

That is correct. There may be very little blood on the assailant from Mr. Goldman.

# 158 Q:

And?

# 159 A:

Or from the first victim.

# 160 Q:

Now, if Nicole Brown Simpson, she had defensive wounds on her hands as well, didn't she?

# 161 A:

Not bleeding defensive wounds, scratches.

# 162 Q:

Okay.

So let's see if I got this straight, her wounds don't bleed but Mr. O.J. Simpson if, in fact, he was the attacker, those nail crushing injuries they bleed, right? Is that true? Is that your testimony or not?

# 163 A:

That is absolutely my testimony. All he need to --

KEY QUOTE

# 164 Q:

Nothing further from this witness.

# 165 A:

You have to look at the witness' pictures.

# 166 Q:

Nothing further from this witness.

# 167 THE COURT:

Anything further?

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (5)

Robert Baker

I'm sure you have an explanation for everything.

Sarcastic editorial comment that prompted a sustained objection and judicial admonishment — rare moment where Baker's frustration broke through visibly.

Werner Spitz

If it isn't so, let it not be, but it looks like a bruise.

Unusual, hedged phrasing while identifying a bruise on Simpson's arm — undercut the definitiveness expected of an expert witness.

Werner Spitz

My opinion is that in the scenario which I described, and which is the basis of my opinion, there would be very little and maybe none on the assailant.

Central conclusion Baker was driving toward — Spitz's own expert opinion that the attacker would have little blood on them, consistent with Simpson's clothing.

Robert Baker

Can you answer my question for a change?

Openly hostile challenge revealing the friction between Baker and the witness; Spitz had repeatedly volunteered explanations beyond the question asked.

Werner Spitz

That is absolutely my testimony. All he need to --

Spitz's final aborted answer as Baker cut him off with 'Nothing further' mid-sentence — a deliberate rhetorical move to end on Spitz confirming Simpson's cuts would bleed.

Evidence (2)

Defendants' Exhibit No. 714

Series of six photographs of O.J. Simpson taken within a couple of days of the murders, showing his body for bruising

displayed and discussed; Spitz identified one possible bruise on arm, no bruises on face or torso

Informal

Contact sheet page 1 of 1420 — collage of negatives from photographer Rokahr showing Goldman at crime scene with shirt pulled up, flank wound visible

displayed; disputed interpretation of whether blood tracking was from flank wound or post-mortem smear

Notable Exchanges (4)

Robert Baker•Werner Spitz

Baker challenged Spitz's Friday testimony claiming 'quarts' and 'liters' of blood in the retroperitoneal space, trying to pin down a specific volume. Spitz hedged to 'maybe two or less, maybe two or more,' undermining the dramatic language of his direct examination.

strategic

Robert Baker•Werner Spitz

Dispute over crime scene photo showing blood near Goldman's flank wound. Spitz initially said the blood was a post-mortem smear from body removal; when Baker asked him to assume the body was never moved, Spitz reversed: 'It does not alter my opinion. This is blood.'

revealing

Robert Baker•Werner Spitz•Edward Medvene

After Spitz said 'I'd explain that to you if you like,' Baker replied 'I'm sure you have an explanation for everything.' Medvene immediately objected, Baker argued he was entitled given the witness's conduct, and the judge sustained while admonishing both Baker and Spitz.

heated

Robert Baker•Werner Spitz

Baker's closing series on blood transfer: establishing severed carotids, Goldman's bloody hands with defensive wounds, and whether blood would reach the attacker. Spitz maintained 'very little and maybe none' would reach the assailant — a conclusion that actually supported the defense narrative despite Spitz being a plaintiff's witness.

strategic

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Werner Spitz

Prior inconsistent statement

Baker read back Spitz's own Friday testimony using dramatic language ('quarts of blood, liters of blood') and pressed him to commit to a volume, exposing the gap between vivid courtroom language and clinical precision.

⚔ Werner Spitz

Inconsistent opinion under hypothetical

On the crime scene photo, Spitz first attributed blood tracking to post-mortem body handling, then reversed when asked to assume the body was untouched — suggesting his initial interpretation was not grounded in the actual evidence.

⚔ Werner Spitz

Eliciting concession damaging to calling party

Baker successfully extracted Spitz's admission that 'very little and maybe none' of Goldman's or Nicole's blood would have reached the assailant — a concession consistent with Simpson having limited blood on him and undermining the plaintiffs' case.

Witness Demeanor

Repeatedly volunteered explanations beyond the question asked ('Shall I explain it to you,' 'I'd explain that to you if you like'), prompting a judicial admonishment

Kept talking after Baker said 'Nothing further' twice at the close of examination

Objections

6 objections (5 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 8224 • 167 utterances • Defense witness

Civil Trial

Department 103