Deposition of Gary Siglar

📄 Deposition of Gary Siglar — Friday, January 10, 1997

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1997\JAN\10\DEPOSITION-OF-GARY-SIGLAR.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 39 of 57

◀ Cross-examination: crime scene evidence Defense motions and rebuttal evidence ▶

Witness: Gary Siglar
Examiner: Robert Baker
Called by: Defense • Date: Friday, January 10, 1997 • Lines: 271

Deposition testimony from Gary Siglar, a supervising criminalist with the Los Angeles County Department of Coroner, addressed the absence of a coroner criminalist response and the uncommon direct release of the victims’ EDTA blood samples to Detective Vannatter. Siglar said investigators did not call for a criminalist; although he considered a response appropriate for the fairly complex double homicide, he described deployment as dependent on circumstances and a judgment call. He also said he released both victims’ samples to Vannatter on June 15, 1994, had not personally done so before, and considered such direct releases uncommon. The testimony further addressed a liver-temperature measurement taken at least ten hours after death, which Siglar said was inappropriate and less helpful as a time-of-death measurement because of the delay.

# 1 MR. LEONARD:

A brief reading, Your Honor. Your Honor, this is the deposition of Gary Siglar taken on May 14, 1996, May 21 and May 23 of 1996, by me. Page 4, line 1. (Reading:) (Reading of deposition of Gary Siglar, questions being read by Mr. Leonard and answers being read by Mr. P. Baker.)

# 2 Q:

Would you state your name for the record, spelling your last name, please.

# 3 A:

It's Gary, middle initial L, Siglar, S-i-g-l-a-r.

# 4 Q:

Where are you presently employed?

# 5 A:

Los Angeles County Department of Coroner.

# 6 Q:

What is your present position there?

# 7 A:

I'm a supervising criminalist II, Roman numeralnumber II.

# 8 Q:

How long have you held that position including that designation?

# 9 A:

Well, I've held the designation since about 1980 when I was employed with the sheriff's department.

# 10 Q:

Okay.

# 11 A:

And I've been with theI was chief of the laboratories division when I came to the coroner's office in 1982, and now my current position is the one I held at the sheriff's department.

# 12 Q:

Let's go back through that in a little bit more detail. When did you join the coroner's office?

# 13 A:

May of 1982.

# 14 Q:

When you first joined the coroner's office what was your position?

# 15 A:

Chief of forensic laboratories.

# 16 Q:

What was your next position after that, and if you can, give me a date?

# 17 A:

Forensic science consultant was the next position, andlet's see.

# 18 Q:

As best you can recollect?

# 19 A:

I think I was in that position up until about three years ago and I held that position for about three years, so it would be six years ago, up until three years ago.

# 20 Q:

So you held the position from 1982 until approximately what

# 21 A:

No.

# 22 Q:

I am going to let you do the math.

# 23 A:

No, 1982, when I came over, I was chief of forensic laboratory.

# 24 Q:

Until?

# 25 A:

I became forensic science consultant about six years ago. So that would be about 1990.

# 26 Q:

Okay.

# 27 A:

Through 1993.

# 28 Q:

In 1993, what was your position?

# 29 A:

Supervising criminalist 2.

# 30 Q:

Now, you say that prior to joining the coroner's office, you worked for the sheriff's

# 31 A:

Yes.

# 32 Q:

-- department?

# 33 A:

Yes.

# 34 Q:

When did you first start working for the sheriff's department?

# 35 A:

November of 1970.

# 36 Q:

What was your first position there?

# 37 A:

Criminalist.

# 38 Q:

Any designation?

# 39 A:

No.

# 40 Q:

Criminalist?

# 41 A:

I believe at the time it was known as criminalist 1. Now called criminalist. But it was criminalist 1.

# 42 Q:

In general terms, what were your duties and responsibilities?

# 43 A:

I worked in all sections of the laboratory, blood alcohol testing section, the physical evidence, trace evidence section, narcotics analysis section. There is another section, I'm leaving one outoh, the serology section.

# 44 Q:

Again, in general terms, what did you do in those sections?

# 45 A:

I did analytical work and corresponding courtroom testimony on my findings.

# 46 Q:

Prior to joining the sheriff's department in November of 1970, had you ever worked as a criminalist?

# 47 A:

No.

# 48 MR. LEONARD:

Over to page 122, line 5, still from the first volume.

MR. P. BAKER: Okay.

# 49 (Reading:)

# 50 Q:

Focusing just for a minute on the Simpson-Goldman case, was there a criminalist response team involved in that case?

# 51 A:

No criminalist responded on that case.

# 52 Q:

And just so the record is clear, that's from the coroner's office criminalist response team.

# 53 Q:

Ratcliffe responded?

# 54 A:

Correct.

# 55 Q:

And another gentleman by the name of John Jacoby?

# 56 A:

John Jacoby.

# 57 Q:

Who are they?

# 58 A:

John Jacoby is one of the police. He's the gentleman that releases evidence to the crime labs.

# 59 Q:

So he was under your control?

# 60 A:

Yes.

# 61 Q:

Okay.

# 62 A:

Wait a minute. No, he wasn't assigned to me at that time, I don't believe. I believe it was after that. Yes, it was after that. No. At that time, he was working in the morgue management section.

# 63 Q:

And what was his exact job title, if you know?

# 64 A:

Student worker.

# 65 Q:

Now he works for you?

# 66 A:

Yes.

# 67 Q:

What is his job title now?

# 68 A:

The same.

# 69 Q:

He's still a student worker?

# 70 A:

Yes.

# 71 Q:

Do you have any idea how long he had been working for the coroner's office prior to June 12, 1994?

# 72 A:

I mean, it's a hunch. I think it's aroundpossibly around a year.

# 73 Q:

When youthat's a guess, you say?

# 74 A:

That's a guess.

# 75 Q:

With regard to Ratcliffe, what was your job title on June 12, 1994, if you know?

# 76 A:

Coroner's investigator 2.

# 77 Q:

Was she a criminalist?

# 78 A:

No.

# 79 Q:

Explain to me the difference between a criminalist and a coroner's investigator.

# 80 A:

A coroner's investigator is a person that has some college education, but a degree isn't required. But they investigate the circumstances of the scene, and act as the eyes and ears of a doctor, because we can't afford to send doctors out on every crime scene, and so they act on their behalf. And they may seal a house for the next of kin; they examine the body and may bring in personal property. And they supervise the coroner's aspects at a scene. Doesn't have to be a homicide, any scene. A criminalist is trained in the natural sciences and is taught to apply the natural sciences to the identification and comparison of physical evidence.

# 81 Q:

As of June 12, 1994, did coroner's investigators have any responsibilities for the collection of physical evidence at crime scenes?

# 82 A:

They're qualified to collect some physical evidence at crime scenes, not all.

# 83 Q:

How about a student working, such as Mr. Jacoby, in the morgue management section? Did he have any responsibility as of June 12, 1994 with the collection of physical evidence at a crime scene?

# 84 A:

No.

# 85 Q:

To your knowledge, did Mr. Jacoby have any training whatsoever in the preservation of a crime scene as of June 12, 1994?

# 86 A:

No.

# 87 Q:

To your knowledge, did Ms. Ratcliffe have any training whatsoever in the preservation of a crime scene as of June 12, 1994?

# 88 A:

I believe she did.

# 89 Q:

Why do you believe that?

# 90 A:

She has worked closely with the criminalistic staff, and she has a technical degree in one of the sciences, and for a while, was working hand in hand with our criminalists. And I believe she has some training in that area.

# 91 Q:

You mentioned that a criminalist response team was not involved in the Goldmanlet me read the question. You mentioned that a criminalist response team was not involved in thea coroner's criminalist response team, was not involved in the Goldman/Simpson case; is that right?

# 92 A:

That's right.

# 93 Q:

Do you know why?

# 94 A:

Because the investigators that were involved did not call out for a criminalist.

KEY QUOTE

# 95 Q:

And no DME, deputy medical examiner, was involved at the crime scene in the Goldman/Simpson case; is that correct?

# 96 A:

That's correct.

# 97 MR. LEONARD:

Over to 128, line 9. (Reading:)

# 98 Q:

But you think it was a problem that criminalists were weren't called out, correct?

# 99 A:

It would have been appropriate for a criminalist to respond to this case.

KEY QUOTE

# 100 MR. LEONARD:

Over to 129, line 1. (Reading:)

# 101 Q:

Why, in your opinion, would it have been appropriate for a criminalist to be called to this particular crime scene?

# 102 A:

In general, because it was a double homicide, and fairly complex. And we can't respond with thewith criminalists to every scene, either, every homicide. But depending on the circumstances, it's a judgment call.

# 103 Q:

To your knowledge, were criminalists available to be called to this crime scene?

# 104 A:

Yes.

# 105 Q:

Okay. Over to pagewe have to go to theI think it's the second volume, page 359.

# 106 A:

Okay.

# 107 Q:

In the first section of your deposition, you talked about a ten-hour delay. Do you recall that?

# 108 A:

Yes.

# 109 Q:

What is your best memory as to the delay?

# 110 A:

Ten.

# 111 Q:

What do you mean? I take it late call-out means just another way of talking about the delay, right?

# 112 A:

Right.

# 113 Q:

Now, what is liver temperature? What relationship, if any, does that have to a late call-out?

# 114 A:

Well, that's an example of a time-sensitive measurement that the coroner makes.

# 115 Q:

So what are you saying is that, the efficacy of the liver-temperature analysis is affected by delay in time in doing it; is that correct?

# 116 A:

The liver measurements, yes.

# 117 Q:

The longer from the time of deaths the measurement is undertaken, the less accurate it is, or the less helpful it is, correct?

# 118 A:

Correct.

# 119 Q:

And what is the purpose of taking liver temperature?

# 120 A:

To help the DME in determining the time of death.

# 121 Q:

In this case, the liver temperature was taken at least ten hours after the death, correct?

KEY QUOTE

# 122 A:

Yes.

# 123 Q:

At least?

# 124 A:

At least.

# 125 Q:

Okay. And that's inappropriate, correct?

# 126 A:

Correct.

# 127 MR. LEONARD:

Back to page 13, line 7. (Reading:)

# 128 Q:

And during your tenure at the sheriff's department, was there a department called the Scientific Investigation Department or Division?

# 129 A:

SID is the equivalent organization within LAPD called scientific services Bureau, SSB.

# 130 Q:

Are you familiar with the SID, in general terms, at LAPD?

# 131 A:

Yes.

# 132 Q:

Just tell me, what does that departmentwhat do they do? What are their normal functions, if you know?

# 133 A:

Well, one of their major functions, the one I know the most about, is their criminalistics laboratory, theone of the elements of SID.

# 134 Q:

Anything else you are familiar with that they do?

# 135 A:

Their firearms identification section is in SID. I believe their polygraph is. I'm not too sure about the other functions. Primarily criminalists.

# 136 Q:

Skipping for a second, in 1994, in your position with the coroner's office, would you be in contact regularly with representatives of the of the LAPD's SID?

# 137 A:

On an occasional basis, not regularly, exceptone of my sections is the evidence handling section. And they were in contact frequently with the evidence people over there.

# 138 Q:

Is it fair to say that the SID section of the LAPD department would be the section that would normally be in contact with the coroner's office to pick up evidence?

# 139 A:

Yes.

# 140 Q:

And that would be the normal practice?

# 141 A:

Yes.

# 142 Q:

And that has been your experience in the time that you've been with the coroner's department; is that correct?

# 143 A:

That's correct.

# 144 Q:

Okay.

# 145 MR. LEONARD:

Back over to 327. And that would be in the second volume?

MR. P. BAKER: I've got it.

# 146 MR. LEONARD:

Got it? (Reading:)

# 147 Q:

I want you to take a look quickly at item B on exhibit 1032-C. It indicates, quote: "EDTA typing blood." Number one, quote: "Both vials were refrigerated," parentheses, his -- Oh, end of parentheses, "prior to release to Detective Vannatter by me." End of quote.

# 148 A:

Yes.

# 149 Q:

What does that indicate? Why did you put that in this memo?

# 150 A:

I know what it means. I don't know why I put it in there.

# 151 Q:

Well, first of all, let melet me ask you what it means in lay terms.

# 152 A:

It means that the EDTA whole blood for typing were contained in the histopathology laboratory refrigerator, and that I released them to Vannatter.

# 153 Q:

There's a heading, EDTA typing blood. What does that refer to?

# 154 A:

Thatthat's the status of the EDTA typing blood; that is what happened to them.

# 155 Q:

In other words, both vials were blood that contained EDTA?

# 156 A:

Correct.

# 157 Q:

And those were turned over directly to Detective Vannatter by you?

# 158 A:

Correct.

# 159 Q:

There's no question in your mind about that, right?

# 160 A:

I remember.

# 161 Q:

You remember distinctly don't you?

# 162 A:

Yes, I do.

# 163 Q:

Because that is something that usually doesn't happen, correct?

# 164 A:

Correct. Well, yes, it does usually happen.

# 165 Q:

Okay.

# 166 A:

We routinely release EDTA blood to the crime lab.

# 167 Q:

Oh, I understand that. But you testified earlier that you routinely release evidentiary items such as EDTA typing blood to the SID section, to the LAPD correct?

# 168 A:

Most, eventually.

# 169 Q:

That is by far the most frequent at the LAPD that you released these types of things to; isn't that fair to say?

# 170 A:

It's by far the most common.

# 171 Q:

Right.

# 172 A:

But it's not rare that we release it to a concerned detective. That's not a rare, isolated event. It's not frequent, but it happens.

# 173 Q:

But the typical, normal procedure would be for the SID to come over and pick up something, like an EDTA typing blood sample correct?

# 174 A:

Yes.

# 175 Q:

Well, I want to you take a look at what I'm going to mark, the following group of documents. I've got 364 A and B. We will get to the bottom of it. I would like you to take a look at what has been marked as 1037. Just count the pages, so I can represent for the record how many there are, please.

# 176 A:

Five.

# 177 Q:

That is a five-page document, at least as I put it together, and we are going to ask you some questions about that. Take a look at it right now.

# 178 A:

Okay.

# 179 Q:

Have you had a chance to look at what is marked as 1037?

# 180 A:

Yes.

# 181 Q:

First of all, I have put it together in any kind of proper order, if you know what I am talking about?

# 182 A:

Yes.

# 183 Q:

Good. That's half the battle.

# 184 A:

Yes, it's in sequence.

# 185 Q:

What is this 1037?

# 186 A:

The top page is the autopsy evidence log.

# 187 Q:

And just in real general terms, what is that?

# 188 A:

It's an accounting of what was checked at autopsy, in this case, Goldman.

# 189 Q:

But some of these subsequent pages also deal with Nicole Brown; is that correct?

# 190 A:

Yes.

# 191 Q:

All right. And at the top page is the autopsy collection looking relative to Goldman, correct?

# 192 A:

Correct.

# 193 Q:

The next page is an evidence log, or portion of evidence log relating to?

# 194 A:

Ronald Goldman.

# 195 Q:

What is an evidence log?

# 196 A:

It's the master log for all the evidence in the department, how it's released and who it's released to.

# 197 Q:

It shows when it came in, right?

# 198 A:

Right.

# 199 Q:

Who collected it, right?

# 200 A:

Correct.

# 201 Q:

When it was collected?

# 202 A:

Right.

# 203 Q:

What was done with it in the coroner's office, correct?

# 204 A:

Correct.

# 205 Q:

Where it was stored?

# 206 A:

Correct.

# 207 Q:

Who did what with it in the coroner's office, right?

# 208 A:

Yes.

# 209 Q:

And then, ultimately, to whom it was released?

# 210 A:

Yes.

# 211 Q:

And by whom it was released?

# 212 A:

Correct.

# 213 MR. LEONARD:

Skipping over to 333. (Reading:)

# 214 Q:

First I want to you look at the evidence log with Goldman, and I misspoke here. I meant Nicole Brown. Where it says Simpson, I meant Nicole Brown Simpson. I am going to ask you this question: Is it true that, except for the typing blood samples, but Goldman and Brown, every other item of evidence that was turned over to the LAPD was turned over to the SID? If I am incorrect, please just let me know.

# 215 A:

Yes.

# 216 Q:

The answer is yes?

# 217 A:

Yes.

# 218 Q:

And those two items, the typing blood samples for Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman, were, in fact, turned over not to SID, but Detective Phillips?

# 219 A:

Correct.

# 220 Q:

What date was that?

# 221 A:

24th, which is the whole blood.

# 222 Q:

Yes. Well, the items that were turned over to Vannatter, first of all, for Goldman, what is the date that it was turned over?

# 223 A:

June 15, '94.

# 224 Q:

With regard to Brown or Simpson?

# 225 A:

Same date.

# 226 Q:

Okay. Is there a time on there?

# 227 A:

8:45 in the morning.

# 228 Q:

For both, right?

# 229 A:

For both.

# 230 Q:

And you were the individual that actually turned them over to Vannatter, correct?

# 231 A:

Correct.

# 232 Q:

Prior to June 15, 1994, when is the last time you had turned over blood typing such as that to a homicide detective?

# 233 A:

I don't think I ever released any whole blood to anybody at the coroner's office, to anybody, besides this case.

# 234 Q:

I didn't understand your answer.

# 235 A:

I don't

# 236 Q:

Let me make sure the question is clear. Prior to June 15, 1994, when was the last time, if any, you recall turning over this type of, what I am going to call blood sample, to a homicide detective?

# 237 A:

I don't believe I did.

KEY QUOTE

# 238 Q:

With the LAPD, you have never done that before?

# 239 A:

I don't think so.

# 240 Q:

Are you aware of anyone else in the evidence sectionis that a fair statement, fair description?

# 241 A:

Yes.

# 242 Q:

When is the last time that you were aware of anyone else in the evidence section, prior to June 15, 1994, turning over this type of blood sample to a homicide detective?

# 243 A:

I can't give you an exact date, but I've seen it occur.

# 244 Q:

And can you tell mecan you give my any description whatsoever the last time, prior to June 15, 1994, that you observed this occur, the name of the case, the name of the detective, anythinganything to help me to identify that?

# 245 A:

No.

# 246 Q:

You're sure?

# 247 A:

Very sure.

# 248 Q:

How long before June 15, 1994, did you observe this occur?

# 249 A:

I would say within a few years of that date.

# 250 Q:

Well, within five years?

# 251 A:

Within that time.

# 252 Q:

Would it have been within one year?

# 253 A:

I don't recall specifically.

# 254 Q:

Is it fair to say that it's a very rareit's fair to say that it's a very rare occurrence, isn't it?

# 255 A:

No, I don't think I would characterize it very rare.

# 256 Q:

You have never

# 257 A:

I would say it's uncommon.

KEY QUOTE

# 258 Q:

You never did it before?

# 259 A:

No.

# 260 Q:

And you are telling me, unless I am mistaken, you have a recollection of a single occasion within several years prior to June 15, 1994, where you are even aware of it occurring? Isn't that fair to say, sir?

# 261 A:

I would characterize it as I've seen it occur a few times over the 12 years I've been with the coroner's office.

# 262 Q:

Five times, maybe?

# 263 A:

Maybe.

# 264 Q:

Maybe. Thank you. Do you know that Detective Vannatter went to Dr. Golden first to try to get those blood samples? Do you know that?

# 265 A:

No.

# 266 Q:

This is the first time you're hearing that?

# 267 A:

Yes.

# 268 Q:

That's not part of the procedure? In other words, the DME, deputy medical examiner, doing the autopsy would never be in possession of those, would he?

# 269 A:

No.

# 270 MR. LEONARD:

Nothing further.

# 271 MR. MEDVENE:

We have nothing, Your Honor.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (5)

Siglar

It would have been appropriate for a criminalist to respond to this case.

Siglar states that a criminalist response would have been appropriate because the case was a fairly complex double homicide, while noting that whether to respond was a judgment call.

Siglar

I don't believe I did. [...] I don't think so.

Siglar admits he had never previously released blood samples directly to a homicide detective — establishing this as an anomaly in the Vannatter handoff.

Siglar

In this case, the liver temperature was taken at least ten hours after the death, correct? ... Yes.

Confirms that the liver-temperature measurement was taken at least ten hours after death; Siglar testified that longer delays make such measurements less accurate or less helpful in determining time of death.

Siglar

I would say it's uncommon.

After resisting the 'very rare' characterization, Siglar nonetheless concedes releasing blood directly to a detective was outside normal procedure.

Siglar

Because the investigators that were involved did not call out for a criminalist.

Explains that no criminalist responded because the investigators involved did not call for one; Siglar described whether to deploy criminalists as a judgment call depending on the circumstances.

Evidence (2)

1032-C

Memo authored by Siglar noting both EDTA typing blood vials were refrigerated prior to release to Detective Vannatter

discussed

1037

Five-page autopsy evidence log and master evidence log for Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson, tracking collection, storage, and release of all coroner evidence

discussed

Notable Exchanges (3)

Leonard•Siglar

Leonard methodically establishes that releasing EDTA blood samples to Detective Vannatter directly — rather than to LAPD SID — was something Siglar had never personally done before and could only vaguely recall seeing happen 'a few times' over 12 years, eventually conceding perhaps five times total.

strategic

Leonard•Siglar

Siglar confirms the ten-hour delay in liver temperature measurement was 'inappropriate' and directly degraded the ability to determine time of death.

revealing

Leonard•Siglar

Siglar explains that John Jacoby, the person who released evidence to crime labs, was a 'student worker' with no training in crime scene preservation as of June 12, 1994.

revealing

Light Moments (2)

Siglar

After the examiner asks Siglar to do math on his own career timeline, Siglar stumbles through the dates before correcting himself multiple times.

Leonard

Leonard asks if he assembled the 1037 document pages in order; Siglar confirms 'Yes, it's in sequence.' Leonard: 'Good. That's half the battle.'

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Coroner's Office procedures

institutional omission

Leonard used Siglar's testimony to establish that no coroner's office criminalist responded to the case and that the liver-temperature measurement was delayed by at least ten hours.

⚔ Detective Vannatter

procedural anomaly

Siglar's admission that releasing blood samples directly to a detective (rather than SID) was 'uncommon' and something he had never personally done before implicitly questions why Vannatter received the samples outside normal channels.

Objections

None recorded

Proceeding 8774 • 271 lines • Defense witness

Civil Trial

Department 103