If the Court please, the picture was taken under the supervision of Dr. Spitz, and results from a strangulation case where the victim supposition would have acted in a similar way. That's our foundation, Your Honor.
I don't think that's adequate foundation.
Number one, under 721 of the Evidence Code, he cannot be examined, and his supposition is pretty loose; and,
Number two, his supposition as to how somebody was struggling is exactly the same supposition he's made here today. I don't think that's appropriate foundation for either supposition.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Dr. Spitz, with respect to the picture, could you tell us what part, if any, you had in the taking of that picture?
Your Honor, I was the chief medical examiner. And the picture -- we had a photographer -- two photographers, actually and the photographer would take pictures of deceased people at my direction. And I would tell the photographer what I wanted photographed, how I wanted it photographed; and what he would do is focus and pull the shutter.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) And the particular victim, or the particular hand that was photographed, what was the event that encompassed the injury on the hand?
This is a strangulation case, where an assailant had his arm around the victim and strangled her.
Well, you see, this is a textbook, and it's meant to depict typical injuries for students of this discipline, and so, depicts a typical type of a fingernail mark.
Fingernail marks may be difficult to diagnose, especially for somebody who is learning the profession.
And what is the similarity, if any, between the photograph of a different person and the marks that you described on Mr. Simpson's finger?
Well, I know what it shows, but I think there is considerable similarity.
Fingernail marks may have different configurations. Some fingernail marks look this way; other fingernail marks look differently. And this fingernail mark, or the fingernail marks on the picture in question, are very much like the fingernail marks in question here. They are ragged; they are jagged; they are the same similar size. I mean, everything about this is the same.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) I'm placing before you, your book, Medicolegal Investigation of Death, third edition, in particular page 265.
And could you tell the Court the heading and the purpose.
Oh. The purpose of the photos is to show fingernail marks resembling gouges, as the caption indicates, on victims' wrists, indicating a struggle had taken place. The struggle in this case was a struggle to get a hand off somebody's neck.
Well, the foundation is, I think, still lacking as to how this witness determined that the photograph that he had his photographer make shows fingernail marks.
Well, for several reasons.
First of all, it looks like fingernail marks.
Secondly, there is no other type of trauma.
Thirdly, we know how the strangulation occurred. I cannot, as I sit here, tell you whether the police found other evidence that would be corroborative or not, but there is no question in my mind. I would not have put it in the book as a typical case if it weren't a fingernail mark.
Your Honor, on the basis of what was just related, I would move to strike all of his opinions from the testimony relative to what are fingernail marks.
He obviously relied on what's in his book. There's inadequate foundation to show those are fingernail marks. I move to strike all of his testimony relative to his opinions concerning the cuts on Mr. Simpson's hands being fingernail marks.
That motion is denied.
This witness is testifying as an expert. Whatever experience and basis on which he formed those opinions, subject to your cross-examination, will simply go to its weight.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Dr. Spitz, before the break, I inadvertently, on 2164 -- that's number 8 -- showed you a picture, and I believe I referred to it as a finger.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Could you tell me, did you have an opportunity, Doctor, to look at 2164 -- that's number 8 -- at the break?
The error was mine.
I attributed the gouges on the web side of the hand, and it is the opposite side of the hand, two gouges on the side of the little, pinky finger.
And they show -- you see the edge of the -- of a bone here, and under the skin, a little, white tissue area.
Place on the board number 2, I believe, from 715, and ask if you would please put it on the screen.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) This is Mr. Simpson's hand, discussed yesterday by Dr. Huizenga.
Can you tell the jury rather, the Court, if you see any marks on Mr. Simpson's hand?
Yes, I see marks. I see little -- a row of little superficial injuries, drying injuries on the back of the left hand, in proximity of the middle knuckle, and at least one additional one there.
These are little superficial gouges. And the reason that there are many is because they're skipping; the movement caused the hand of the individual in collecting these, to skip from one to the next, to the next, to the next. And here on the other one, it didn't skip.
Dr. Spitz, in your opinion, would one that causes fingernail marks on another individual necessarily have that other individual's skin underneath their nails?
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Do you have an opinion whether or not the person who received the fingernail -- excuse me -- do you have an opinion whether or not the person who caused the fingernail marks would necessarily have skin underneath their nails?
Well, because in the case of gouges, there's a substantial amount of skin. The skin, many times, remains suspended on the individual on whom the fingernail mark is.
It remains suspended; it does not get any blood; it dries up and falls off in a day or two.
Doctor, I show you a picture that's been previously marked. It's of Mr. Simpson somewhere prior to -- I believe the facts are somewhere prior to 7:00 p.m. on June the 12th.
I ask you to look at that picture.
If we can narrow it down or get a close-up of Mr. Simpson's hands.
(BY MR. MEDVENE) Do you see on Mr. Simpson's hand in this picture, taken sometime on the 12th before 7:00 p.m. at his daughter's recital, any of what you have identified as the fingernail marks?
No, I don't see any here.
If you make it less magnified, there are no -- there are no marks here, either.
They are ragged; they are jagged; they are the same similar size. I mean, everything about this is the same.
The error was mine. I attributed the gouges on the web side of the hand, and it is the opposite side of the hand, two gouges on the side of the little, pinky finger.
The skin, many times, remains suspended on the individual on whom the fingernail mark is. It remains suspended; it does not get any blood; it dries up and falls off in a day or two.
No, I don't see any here. If you make it less magnified, there are no -- there are no marks here, either.