ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MR. SCHECK, YOU MAY CONTINUE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR.

BY MR. SCHECK: MR. FUNG, JUST BEFORE WE BROKE, WE WERE DISCUSSING YOUR ACTIVITIES ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH AT SID.

YES.

AND YOU INDICATED AT ONE POINT THAT YOU HAD REFRESHED YOUR RECOLLECTION BY LOOKING AT SOME RECORDS WITH RESPECT TO WHERE YOU WERE AT PARTICULAR TIMES THAT MORNING.

YES.

WHAT RECORDS DID YOU LOOK AT?

THERE'S A CARD KEY IN THE LABORATORY THAT KEEPS A RECORD OF WHEN PEOPLE GO IN AND OUT OF CERTAIN AREAS OF THE LABORATORY, AND THOSE RECORDS WERE WHAT I REFERRED TO.

YOU MEAN A COMPUTER PRINTOUT OF SOME KIND?

YES.

AND MR. GOLDBERG SHOWED YOU A COPY OF THAT?

YES.

MR. FUNG, I NOTICED THAT ON DIRECT EXAMINATION, YOU WERE NOT ASKED WHETHER DETECTIVE FUHRMAN SHOWED YOU FOUR RED STAINS ON THE BOTTOM EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH.

I OBJECT TO THAT.

SUSTAINED. IT'S NOT A QUESTION, COUNSEL. IT'S TESTIFYING. THE JURY IS TO DISREGARD THAT LAST QUESTION. ASK A QUESTION, MR. SCHECK.

BY MR. SCHECK: WERE YOU ASKED ON DIRECT EXAMINATION IF YOU RECALL ABOUT WHETHER DETECTIVE FUHRMAN SHOWED YOU FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH?

NOT RELEVANT.

AS PHRASED, THAT'S CORRECT. SUSTAINED. ASK HIM IF THE EVENTS OCCURRED ON JUNE THE 13TH, NOT WHETHER OR NOT HE WAS ASKED THE QUESTIONS. THAT'S IRRELEVANT.

BY MR. SCHECK: ALL RIGHT. HAVE YOU SPENT IN YOUR PREPARATION TIME WITH PROSECUTORS SOME HOURS DISCUSSING THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT FOUR RED STAINS WERE SEEN BY YOU ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR?

I WOULDN'T SAY HOURS. I WOULDN'T EVEN SAY ONE HOUR. I WOULDN'T EVEN SAY MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES.

THE ISSUE, HOWEVER, AROSE?

YES.

ALL RIGHT. WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION WITH YOU AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU SHOULD DISCUSS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER YOU SAW FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH?

I DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION.

WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION OF WHETHER OR NOT YOU SHOULD TESTIFY ON DIRECT EXAMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU SAW FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH?

I DON'T KNOW OR I DIDN'T TELL MR. GOLDBERG AND HE DIDN'T TELL ME THAT HE WOULD BE ASKING ME THOSE QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY.

SO IN OTHER WORDS, IN YOUR REVIEW SESSIONS FOR YOUR DIRECT EXAMINATION, YOU DID NOT ANTICIPATE BEING ASKED THAT QUESTION ON DIRECT?

YOUR HONOR, THAT'S IRRELEVANT.

SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SCHECK: YOU TESTIFIED AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING IN THIS CASE ON JULY 6 AND JULY 7TH?

YES.

PRIOR TO YOUR TESTIMONY ON JULY 6TH, DO YOU RECALL THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN TESTIFIED ON JULY 5TH?

I KNOW THAT HE TESTIFIED BEFORE ME, BUT TO THE DATE, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE.

DO YOU RECALL THAT PRIOR TO YOUR TESTIMONY AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, DETECTIVE FUHRMAN TESTIFIED THAT HE DID NOT DIRECT YOU OR A PHOTOGRAPHER TO TAKE ANY PICTURES OF FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR?

I DON'T RECALL ANY OF HIS TESTIMONY FROM THE PRELIMINARY HEARING.

ARE YOU AWARE AT THIS TRIAL DETECTIVE FUHRMAN TESTIFIED THAT HE DID SHOW YOU FOUR RED STAINS AT THE BOTTOM EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH?

THAT MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.

SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SCHECK: ARE YOU AWARE THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN TESTIFIED AT THIS TRIAL THAT HE DIRECTED YOUR ATTENTION TO FOUR -- THREE OR FOUR LITTLE MARKS, LITTLE LINES, TRANSLUCENT, RED ON THE DOOR SILL OF THE DRIVER'S DOOR ON JUNE 13TH?

I DON'T KNOW WHAT HIS TESTIMONY WAS.

NO ONE TOLD YOU FROM THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE THAT HE TESTIFIED TO THAT EFFECT AT THIS TRIAL?

NO.

DID ANY DETECTIVE TELL YOU THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN HAD TESTIFIED TO THIS JURY ABOUT SHOWING YOU THOSE FOUR LINES THE BOTTOM OF THE BRONCO DOOR BEFORE YOU CAME IN HERE TO TESTIFY?

NO.

DID ANYONE AT THE CRIME LAB TELL YOU ABOUT IT?

YOUR HONOR, IT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE. IT ALSO MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.

OVERRULED.

NO.

YOUR HONOR, IF COUNSEL IS GOING TO READ FROM --

IF YOU WANT TO CONSULT THE TESTIMONY, IT'S AT PAGE 18550.

ARE WE TESTIFYING HERE?

PROCEED.

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

BY MR. SCHECK: OKAY, MR. FUNG. LET ME ASK YOU DIRECTLY, ON JUNE 13TH IN THE MORNING, DID DETECTIVE FUHRMAN POINT OUT FOUR RED LINES, RED STAINS TO YOU ON THE BOTTOM OF THE BRONCO DOOR?

I DON'T RECALL HIM DOING SO.

WHEN YOU SAY YOU DON'T RECALL, ARE YOU SAYING IT DIDN'T HAPPEN?

I'M NOT SAYING THAT. I'M SAYING I DON'T RECALL IF HE DID OR IF HE DIDN'T.

ALL RIGHT. IF YOU HAD SEEN FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 13TH, YOU WOULD HAVE TAKEN A PHOTOGRAPH OF THEM; WOULD YOU NOT?

THAT WOULD DEPEND, BUT I DON'T KNOW. BUT THAT WOULD DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES.

LET'S TRY THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. YOU WERE POINTED OUT A RED STAIN BY THE DOOR HANDLE?

YES.

YOU WERE PHOTOGRAPHED POINTING TO THAT RED STAIN, CORRECT?

YES.

AND YOU'RE THE PERSON THAT'S SUPPOSED TO DIRECT THE PHOTOGRAPHER DURING THE COLLECTION PROCESS?

YES.

YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO PHOTOGRAPH ITEMS OF EVIDENCE OF SOME IMPORTANCE THAT ARE POINTED OUT TO YOU BY THE DETECTIVES?

YES.

IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, IF YOU HAD SEEN FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR, WOULD YOU NOT HAVE DIRECTED THE PHOTOGRAPHER TO TAKE A PICTURE OF IT?

IT WOULD BE LIKELY. YES.

IF YOU HAD SEEN FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR, WOULD YOU HAVE NOT DONE A PRESUMPTIVE TEST ON JUNE 13TH?

POSSIBLY. I -- IF IT WAS NECESSARY, I WOULD HAVE.

IF YOU HAD SEEN FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR, WOULD YOU HAVE NOT SWATCHED THEM?

I WOULD -- I WOULD POSSIBLY HAVE SWATCHED THEM.

IF YOU HAD SEEN FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR, WOULD YOU NOT HAVE INCLUDED THAT OBSERVATION IN YOUR REPORTS FOR THAT DAY?

IF I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO THE INVESTIGATION, I WOULD HAVE INCLUDED IT IN MY NOTES, YES.

LOOKING BACK AT THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE, WOULD NOT THOSE FOUR RED STAINS HAVE BEEN AN IMPORTANT DETAIL THAT YOU WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY INCLUDED IN YOUR NOTES?

CALLS FOR SPECULATION.

OVERRULED.

FROM MY PERSPECTIVE NOW?

BY MR. SCHECK: LET'S TRY YOUR PERSPECTIVE THEN.

I DON'T RECALL MY EXACT STATE OF MIND THEN, BUT IT -- I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY IF I WOULD HAVE PUT IT DOWN OR NOT.

ON JUNE 14TH, YOU CONDUCTED THIS EXAMINATION OF THE BRONCO AT THE PRINT SHED?

YES.

AND YOU WERE LOOKING FOR ANY EVIDENCE OF BLOOD IN THE BRONCO?

I WAS LOOKING FOR BLOOD EVIDENCE, YES.

RED STAINS?

YES.

YOU GOT ON YOUR HANDS AND KNEES WITH A FLASHLIGHT AND EXAMINED THE EXTERIOR AREA OF THAT DOOR SILL?

I DID EXAMINE THE AREA OF THE DOOR SILL. I DON'T KNOW IF I WAS ON MY HANDS AND KNEES.

DON'T YOU RECALL A PICTURE OF YOU WITH A FLASHLIGHT ON YOUR HANDS AND KNEES LOOKING AT RED STAINS JUST INSIDE THE INTERIOR OF THE BRONCO?

MAY HAVE BEEN SQUATTING, BUT I WASN'T ON MY HANDS AND KNEES.

ALL RIGHT. SQUATTING.

YOUR HONOR, I WOULD LIKE TO DISPLAY A PICTURE NOW THAT I HAVE SHOWN TO THE PROSECUTION.

I WOULD ASK THIS BE MARKED DEFENDANT'S NEXT IN ORDER ALTHOUGH I BELIEVE THERE MAY BE A PICTURE OF IT.

1097.

1097.

BY MR. SCHECK: IS THIS NOT A PICTURE OF YOU HOLDING A FLASHLIGHT EXAMINING THE DOOR SILL AREA OF THE BRONCO ON JUNE 14TH AT THE PRINT SHED?

I THINK IN THAT PARTICULAR PHOTOGRAPH, I AM INDICATING TO THE PHOTOGRAPHER WHERE I WANT HIM TO LOCATE A SHOT, AND THAT WOULD BE WHERE THE CARD -- CARD IS. I CAN'T READ THE NUMBER FROM HERE.

DID YOU NOT EXAMINE THE DOOR SILL AREA AT THE PRINT SHED ON JUNE 14TH?

YES, I DID.

MR. HARRIS, CAN WE GO TIGHTER ON THE DOOR SILL AREA RIGHT WHERE THE DOOR IS OPENING?

I DON'T THINK COUNSEL -- DID COUNSEL MARK THIS FOR IDENTIFICATION?

YES. 1097.

BY MR. SCHECK: MR. FUNG, DO YOU SEE FOUR RED STAINS ON THE DOOR SILL OF THAT BRONCO IN THIS PICTURE?

YOUR HONOR, I'LL OBJECT BECAUSE I DON'T THINK YOU CAN SEE THE EXTERIOR DOOR SILL IN THIS PICTURE.

OVERRULED.

IT'S WASHED OUT. THE WHITE AREA IS VERY WASHED OUT. YOU CAN'T EVEN MAKE ANY DETAIL OUT IN ANY OF THAT PORTION.

BY MR. SCHECK: LET ME PUT IT DIRECTLY TO YOU, SIR. ON JUNE 14TH, WHEN YOU EXAMINED THE BRONCO, DID YOU SEE FOUR RED STAINS ON THE DOOR SILL OF THE BRONCO?

YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT TO COUNSEL'S TONE OF VOICE. I ALSO OBJECT BECAUSE THIS DOES NOT REFER TO THE AREA THAT WAS RELATED TO THE TESTIMONY BY FUHRMAN.

I OBJECT TO THAT OBJECTION.

OVERRULED.

IT'S A SPEAKING OBJECTION.

IT IS A SPEAKING OBJECTION. PROCEED.

BY MR. SCHECK: MY QUESTION TO YOU, SIR, ON JUNE 14TH, DID YOU SEE FOUR RED STAINS ANYWHERE ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR?

THERE WERE STAINS PRESENT, BUT I DID NOT COLLECT THEM.

IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY, SIR, THAT YOU SAW ON JUNE 13TH -- JUNE 14TH, JUNE 14TH AT THE PRINT SHED FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR SILL?

MISSTATES THE TESTIMONY.

THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID.

SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SCHECK: ON JUNE 14TH, DID YOU SEE FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR DOOR SILL OF THIS BRONCO?

I DON'T KNOW IF I SAW FOUR RED STAINS.

IF YOU HAD SEEN FOUR RED STAINS ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH, WOULD YOU NOT HAVE DIRECTED THE PHOTOGRAPHER TO TAKE A PICTURE OF IT?

IF THEY WERE HEAVY ENOUGH STAINS, THEN I WOULD HAVE, YES.

IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT YOU SAW FOUR RED STAINS ON JUNE 14TH, BUT YOU DIDN'T THINK THEY WERE HEAVY ENOUGH AND, THEREFORE, YOU DID NOT TAKE -- DIRECT THE PHOTOGRAPHER TO TAKE A PICTURE?

THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF BLOOD -- QUITE A BIT OF LIGHT STAINING AROUND THE DRIVER COMPARTMENT OF THE VEHICLE, AND I ONLY DIRECTED THE PHOTOGRAPHER TO CONCENTRATE ON THE HEAVIER STAINS.

THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION. MY QUESTION, SIR, IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT YOU SAW FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR ON JUNE 14TH, BUT YOU THOUGHT THEY WERE NOT HEAVY ENOUGH AND, THEREFORE, YOU DID NOT DIRECT THE PHOTOGRAPHER TO TAKE A PICTURE? IS THAT WHAT HAPPENED?

I CAN'T -- I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE FOUR OR NOT. I -- THE NUMBER FOUR IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE -- WITH THE ANSWER.

YOU SAW THREE ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO ON JUNE --

I DON'T RECALL THE NUMBER.

YOUR HONOR, OBJECTION. HE'S NOT --

MISS CLARK.

MAY THE WITNESS BE ALLOWED TO ANSWER? I'M SORRY.

THAT'S TWICE WITH THIS WITNESS.

PLEASE REPEAT IT.

REPEAT THE QUESTION.

BY MR. SCHECK: ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU SAW THREE RED STAINS ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH?

YOUR HONOR, AT THIS POINT, IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE.

OVERRULED.

NO, I'M NOT SAYING THAT.

BY MR. SCHECK: ARE YOU SAYING YOU SAW TWO RED STAINS?

I DO REMEMBER THAT THERE WAS EITHER A STAIN OR TWO STAINS THAT WERE VERY LIGHT ALONG THE SILL AREA THAT I DID NOT COLLECT.

CAN YOU POINT OUT FOR US USING THE ELMO THE AREA IN THIS PICTURE WHERE YOU CLAIM TO HAVE SEEN SOME RED STAINS ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH?

WELL, IT ASSUMES A FACT NOT IN EVIDENCE, THAT IT WOULD BE ON THIS --

SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SCHECK: WELL, YOU WERE JUST MAKING REFERENCE BEFORE IN ANSWERING MY QUESTION, YOU WERE LOOKING TOWARDS THE MONITOR AND INDICATING SOMETHING ABOUT AN AREA; WERE YOU NOT?

I WAS TRYING TO FIND SOME DETAIL IN THE PHOTOGRAPH THAT COULD HELP ME, BUT IT WAS REALLY -- LOOKS FAIRLY WASHED OUT TO ME.

WELL, CAN YOU JUST SHOW US THE AREA WHERE YOU'RE CLAIMING TO HAVE SEEN RED STAINS ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH?

WOULD YOU REPHRASE THE QUESTION, PLEASE?

BY MR. SCHECK: COULD YOU SHOW US THE AREA IN THIS PHOTOGRAPH WHERE YOU SAW RED STAINS ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH?

I'LL HAVE TO MAKE SEVERAL ASSUMPTIONS IN DOING SO IN THE PHOTOGRAPH.

WELL, DOES THIS PHOTOGRAPH DEPICT THE AREA?

IT DOES, BUT IT DOES NOT SHOW SUFFICIENT DETAIL FOR ME TO POINT OUT SPECIFIC AREAS.

WELL, CAN YOU JUST DIRECT THE POINTER TO THE AREA AS BEST YOU CAN?

AS BEST I CAN MAKING SOME ASSUMPTIONS.

WELL, AT THIS POINT, THERE'S NO FOUNDATION FOR THE WITNESS' TESTIMONY.

OVERRULED. HE SAID IT DEPICTS THE AREA.

AND SPECULATION.

GO AHEAD.

UP HERE. OKAY. SLOWLY TO THE RIGHT. DOWN LOWER, SLOWLY TO THE RIGHT. LITTLE HIGHER. IN THAT AREA THERE (INDICATING).

BY MR. SCHECK: OKAY. CAN WE -- CAN YOU DIRECT IT IN A CIRCLE? HOW FAR DID THEY EXTEND?

NO. THAT'S NOT THE AREA I INDICATED.

OKAY. LET'S TRY AGAIN.

RIGHT -- OKAY. A LITTLE OVER THERE. NO. LITTLE HIGHER. OKAY. NOW JUST MAYBE A LITTLE BIT MORE TO YOUR LEFT. LITTLE BIT MORE TO THE RIGHT. OKAY. NOW YOU'RE COVERING IT. THAT'S JUST ABOUT THE AREA (INDICATING).

OKAY. CAN WE PRINT THAT AND MAKE THAT DEFENDANT'S NEXT IN ORDER?

1098. 1098, MRS. ROBERTSON? 1098, NEXT IN ORDER, DEFENSE?

YES, YOUR HONOR. SORRY.

BY MR. SCHECK: NOW, DID YOU REPORT TO ANYONE SEEING A RED STAIN ON THE EXTERIOR DOOR OF THE BRONCO ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH?

NO.

DID YOU MAKE ANY NOTATION OF IT?

NO.

YOU WENT BACK TO THE BRONCO FOR A VISIT ON JUNE 28TH?

YES.

DID YOU SEE THE RED STAIN ON JUNE 28TH?

I DIDN'T LOOK FOR IT.

YOU WENT WITH ANOTHER CRIMINALIST, MR. MARACOVO?

MASTRACOVO.

MASTRACOVO. DID YOU POINT IT OUT TO HIM?

NO. WE WERE THERE FOR SPECIFIC COLLECTION, DIRECTED COLLECTION.

YOU WERE THERE TO GET THE SHOVEL AND THE PLASTIC BAG AND THE TOWEL?

THAT'S ALL.

AND YOU DID A PHENOL TEST ON THE TOWEL AND IT CAME OUT NEGATIVE, RIGHT?

I DON'T KNOW IF WE DID IT ON THAT DAY, BUT AT SOME POINT, THE TOWEL WAS TESTED IN THE FIELD. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS DONE ON THE 14TH OR THE 28TH. I'LL HAVE TO CHECK MY NOTES.

THAT WAS -- THE TOWEL WAS TESTED ON THE 14TH OF JUNE.

BY MR. SCHECK: ON JULY 6TH, YOU TOOK ANOTHER TRIP TO THE BRONCO AT THE REQUEST OF MISS CLARK?

YES.

AND YOU DID THIS JUST BEFORE YOU TESTIFIED AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING?

YES.

AND THAT WAS AFTER DETECTIVE FUHRMAN HAD TESTIFIED AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING?

YES.

AND YOU WERE INFORMED BY MISS CLARK THAT DETECTIVE FUHRMAN HAD TESTIFIED TO SEEING FOUR RED STAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE DOOR SILL?

AND DID SHE TELL YOU ON THE MORNING OF JULY 6TH THAT ONE DETECTIVE HAD TESTIFIED TO SEEING IT, THESE RED STAINS, AND TWO OTHER DETECTIVES HAD TESTIFIED AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING THAT THEY HADN'T SEEN IT?

NO.

SHE DIDN'T INDICATE ANYTHING TO YOU ABOUT A CONFLICT IN TESTIMONY?

SHE JUST REQUESTED ME TO LOOK SPECIFICALLY AT THAT AREA AND DO A PRESUMPTIVE TEST ON IT.

NOW, THIS TRIP THAT YOU MADE TO THE BRONCO ON JULY 6TH, YOU FIRST REVEALED THIS IN TESTIMONY AT A HEARING IN OCTOBER OF 1994?

YES.

AND THAT WAS WHEN YOU WERE CALLED BY THE DEFENSE TO TESTIFY?

I -- I DON'T RECALL WHO CALLED ME, BUT I DID TESTIFY.

DO YOU RECALL ON DIRECT EXAMINATION IN OCTOBER BEING ASKED QUESTIONS BY DEAN UELMEN?

YES, I DO.

DO YOU KNOW WHO HE IS?

YES.

AND HE ASKED YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF TIMES YOU HAD TAKEN TRIPS AND INSPECTED THE BRONCO?

YES.

AND WHEN HE FIRST ASKED YOU ABOUT THIS TRIP TO THE BRONCO ON JULY 6TH, YOU TOLD HIM, "I WENT TO THE BRONCO AND LOOKED TO SEE IF IT WAS THERE," REFERRING TO THE RED STAINS, "THAT'S ALL I DID"?

ON JULY 6TH?

YES.

YOUR HONOR, PERHAPS I COULD HAVE A TRANSCRIPT CITE ON THIS.

PAGE AND LINE, COUNSEL?

YES. IT'S THE TRANSCRIPT OF OCTOBER 6TH, AND I'M REFERRING TO QUESTIONS THAT BEGIN AT 2581. AND MAYBE TO MAKE IT EASIER, I'LL START ON LINE 1 OF 2581 AND I'LL READ --

LET MR. GOLDBERG CATCH UP.

IS THIS THE PRELIM?

THIS IS THE HEARING ON OCTOBER 6TH. IF YOU WANT, HERE'S A COPY.

THAT'S NOT THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT. THAT'S NOT THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE READING FROM? READ FROM THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU GOT IT.

(BRIEF PAUSE.) MR. GOLDBERG: THIS TRANSCRIPT IS APPARENTLY DIFFERENT FROM --

YOUR HONOR, I WOULD ASK MR. SCHECK READ FROM THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT BECAUSE THERE'S NO VOUCHING FOR ACCURACY.

ARE YOU --

HOLD ON. LET ME SEE COUNSEL OVER AT THE SIDEBAR, PLEASE.

ALL RIGHT. DO YOU HAVE THE TRANSCRIPT?

YEAH. THE GRIFFEN HEARING TRANSCRIPT.

I'M SORRY?

THE OFFICIAL GRIFFEN HEARING TRANSCRIPT.

WHAT MR. SCHECK IS REFERRING TO IS, THE COURT REPORTERS ALSO PROVIDE A CONDENSED FOUR PAGES TO A PAGE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT.

WE'VE NEVER SEEN IT.

THAT'S AVAILABLE TO YOU. IF YOU RECALL, WHEN WE STARTED THE CASE, I GAVE YOU YOUR OPTION OF A HARD COPY, ASCII DISK, FOUR BY FOUR. THIS IS WHAT WE CALL THIS, THE THING THAT SCHECK HAS, OR ANY NUMBER OF DIFFERENT VERSIONS. SO THIS IS WHAT HE'S REFERRED TO I BELIEVE, IS THAT FOUR BY FOUR.

ARE YOU SURE? I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT BEFORE AND DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE FOUR BY FOURS. I'VE NEVER SEEN THEM BEFORE.

THAT'S WHAT I HAVE. THAT'S WHAT I USE. IT'S A LOT EASIER TO CARRY. HOLD ON.

MISS CLARK, WHO'S IN CHARGE HERE? IS MR. GOLDBERG RUNNING THIS EXAMINATION OR YOU? YOU NEED TO LET HIM HANDLE THE MATTER.

SORRY, YOUR HONOR.

IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE. THIS IS THREE TIMES NOW THAT YOU'VE INTERRUPTED THE OTHER COUNSEL'S MATTER, AND I WOULD LIKE NOT TO HAVE TO HAVE IT HAPPEN AGAIN.

IT WON'T, YOUR HONOR.

ANYTHING ELSE?

MAYBE I CAN LOOK AT COUNSEL'S TRANSCRIPT.

WHY DON'T YOU LOOK AT IT.

THEY HAVE DIFFERENT PAGE NUMBERS. I WENT TO THE PAGE THAT TIME -- HE WENT TO THE PAGE BARRY CITED --

NO. I ORDERED THOSE BECAUSE IT'S A LOT EASIER TO CARRY AROUND, FOUR PAGES AT A TIME.

COULD WE GO OFF THE RECORD?

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. HAVE YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE TRANSCRIPTS?

WHAT'S THE DATE OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, OCTOBER 6TH?

THIS IS OCTOBER 6TH. AND FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, YOUR HONOR, I'LL BEGIN ACTUALLY AT PAGE 2580, LINE 23, WHICH IS THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. UELMEN.

BY MR. SCHECK: "QUESTION: ALL RIGHT, MR. FUNG. "YOU PARTICIPATED THEN IN TWO DIFFERENT SEARCHES OF THE BRONCO AUTOMOBILE; IS THAT CORRECT?

"ANSWER: YES.

"QUESTION: ONE ON JUNE 14TH AT THE PRINT SHED?

"ANSWER: YES.

"QUESTION: AND THEN A SECOND ONE ON JUNE 28TH AT VIERTEL'S?

"ANSWER: YES.

"QUESTION: DID YOU VISIT THE BRONCO ON ANY OTHER OCCASION OTHER THAN THESE TWO OCCASIONS WHEN YOU WERE EXECUTING A SEARCH WARRANT?

"ANSWER: YES, I DID.

"QUESTION: WHEN WAS THAT?

"THE WITNESS: LET ME REFER TO MY NOTES.

"BRIEF PAUSE.

"ANSWER: THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL TIME WHERE I HAD TO -- WHERE I WAS ASKED TO SEE IF THERE WAS ADDITIONAL BLOOD ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE DOOR, AND I DID THAT THE FIRST TIME I TESTIFIED, ON THE SAME DAY THAT I TESTIFIED IN THE PRELIMINARY HEARING. I DON'T HAVE THAT WRITTEN DOWN THOUGH.

"QUESTION: OKAY. "SO YOU HAVE NO RECORD OF HAVING MADE ANOTHER VISIT TO THE BRONCO AUTOMOBILE TO EXAMINE IT?

"ANSWER: NO.

"QUESTION: YOU DID NOT PREPARE ANY REPORT TO THAT EFFECT?

"ANSWER: I WENT TO THE BRONCO, LOOKED TO SEE IF IT WAS THERE, AND THAT WAS ALL I DID."

WERE YOU ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS AND DID YOU GIVE THOSE ANSWERS?

TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, YES.

NOW, LATER ON IN YOUR EXAMINATION AT THAT HEARING, YOU WERE ASKED SOME QUESTIONS BY MISS CLARK, STARTING ON PAGE 2584, 2585, 2586.

MAY WE JUST HAVE ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR?

YOUR HONOR, I JUST NEED ONE MOMENT TO TRY TO GET OUR TWO TRANSCRIPTS TO CORRESPOND BECAUSE WE'RE READING OFF DIFFERENT TRANSCRIPTS, IF I MAY.

ALL RIGHT. COUNSEL, I HAVE TWO COPIES HERE. WOULD IT HELP YOU IF I GAVE YOU MY COPY?

WE DON'T HAVE THIS CONDENSED VERSION, YOUR HONOR. THAT'S THE SAME ONE THAT WE HAVE. SO --

THEY APPARENTLY DON'T HAVE THE WHOLE THING THEY SAY.

CAN I SEE WHAT THE COURT HAS?

THAT'S MY COPY.

DO YOU HAVE A VIDEOTAPE?

2584.

OKAY. COUNSEL, WHERE DO YOU PROPOSE TO READ FROM?

THE QUESTIONS I SHOWED YOU BEFORE.

MAY I PROCEED?

YOUR HONOR, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING INCONSISTENT WITH THIS. PERHAPS WE COULD APPROACH.

YOUR HONOR, MAY I PUT SOMETHING ON THE RECORD, PLEASE?

NOT AT THIS POINT. LET'S EXPEDITE THIS MATTER. 2584 OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, THERE'S SOME MINOR DISCREPANCY REGARDING THE PRESUMPTIVE TESTING ON THE TOWEL. HOWEVER, THE BOTTOM OF THE DRIVER'S DOOR, THERE'S AN INDICATION THAT HE TESTED IT ON PAGE 2586, AND THAT'S INCONSISTENT WITH HIS TESTIMONY.

YES.

IT IS.

THE TESTIMONY HERE?

YES. HE SAID HE DIDN'T TEST IT.

NOT HERE.

YES, HE DID. LOOK AT 2586. 2586.

NO. IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOUR HONOR.

YES. JUST NOW. 10 MINUTES AGO.

NO. I THINK HE TESTIFIED --

MAY WE PROCEED, YOUR HONOR?

I THINK THERE'S A SERIES OF CONTRADICTORY ANSWERS, AND I WANT TO EXPLORE THEM AS THEY WERE GIVEN.

ALL RIGHT. OBJECTION IS OVERRULED.

BY MR. SCHECK: JUST TO PICK UP THE THEME FOR A SECOND, MR. FUNG, WHAT WE JUST REVIEWED IS THAT WHEN YOU ANSWERED MR. UELMEN'S QUESTIONS, YOU TOLD HIM, "I WENT TO THE BRONCO, LOOKED TO SEE IF IT WAS THERE, AND THAT'S ALL I DID." DO YOU RECALL GIVING THAT ANSWER?

YES.

ALL RIGHT. THEN WHEN MISS CLARK ASKED YOU QUESTIONS, YOU GAVE -- YOU WERE ASKED THESE QUESTIONS AND YOU GAVE THESE ANSWERS:

"QUESTION: NOW, ON THE DATE THAT YOU WENT BACK TO THE BRONCO TO LOOK AT IT, WHICH WAS THE SECOND DAY OF YOUR TESTIMONY --

"ANSWER: I THINK SO, YES.

"QUESTION: -- IT WAS DURING YOUR TESTIMONY AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, DURING THAT TIME?

"ANSWER: YES.

"QUESTION: HOW DID YOU GO AND -- HOW DID YOU GO GET TO THE CAR? WERE YOU JUST ABLE TO WALK IN THROUGH AN OPEN DOOR?

"ANSWER: I WENT TO VIERTEL'S TOW AND I SHOWED -- I SHOWED MY BADGE OR SOMETHING TO THE ATTENDANT TO LET ME INTO THE GARAGE AREA OR THE TOW YARD AND THEN I WENT INTO THEIR PRINT AREA AND OBSERVED WHAT WAS ON THE DRIVER DOOR.

"QUESTION: SO YOU HAD TO SHOW IDENTIFICATION IN ORDER TO BE ALLOWED IN?

"ANSWER: SOMETIMES I HAVE TO SHOW IDENTIFICATION. BUT IF THEY RECOGNIZE THE POLICE CAR, THEY'LL OPEN THE DOOR FOR ME.

"QUESTION: SO IF THEY KNOW THAT YOU'RE A POLICE OFFICER, THEY LET YOU IN. OTHERWISE YOU HAVE TO SHOW IDENTIFICATION?

"ANSWER: YES.

"QUESTION: AND WHEN YOU MADE THAT EXAMINATION, YOU LOOKED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DRIVER'S DOOR?

"ANSWER: YES, I DID.

"QUESTION: WHAT DID YOU SEE?

"ANSWER: THERE WAS A DARK AREA WITH THE APPEARANCE OF POSSIBLE BLOOD.

"QUESTION: DID YOU TEST IT?

"ANSWER: YES, I DID.

"QUESTION: AND IT GAVE PRELIMINARY TESTS FOR THE PRESENCE OF BLOOD?" I AM SORRY.

"QUESTION: AND?

"ANSWER: IT GAVE PRELIMINARY TESTS FOR THE PRESENCE OF BLOOD."

WERE YOU ASKED THOSE QUESTIONS AND DID YOU GIVE THOSE ANSWERS TO MISS CLARK?

FROM THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, YES.

SO IT'S YOUR TESTIMONY OR IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT ON JULY 6TH, YOU WENT TO VIERTEL'S AT THE REQUEST OF MISS CLARK AND YOU LOOKED FOR BLOODSTAINS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR?

THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR BY THE DOOR SILL, YES.

WHERE YOU INDICATED -- THE GENERAL AREA YOU INDICATED IN THE PICTURE WE SHOWED YOU?

YES.

AND IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY, SIR, THAT YOU SAW DARK SPOTS THERE?

IT WAS DARK IN COMPARISON TO THE REST OF THE VEHICLE.

RED STAINS?

I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS RED AT THE TIME -- AT THAT TIME.

WERE YOU ALONE WHEN YOU MADE THIS VISIT?

I BELIEVE I WAS.

DID YOU BRING ANY PHOTOGRAPHER WITH YOU?

NO.

DID YOU CONDUCT A PRESUMPTIVE PHENOLPHTHALEIN TEST?

YES, I DID.

AND YOU GOT A POSITIVE RESULT?

YES.

AND AT THAT TIME, YOU DID NOT WRITE ANY REPORT ABOUT HAVING PERFORMED SUCH A TEST?

THAT'S CORRECT.

YOU DID NOT TAKE ANY PICTURE OF THOSE DARK SPOTS THAT YOU CLAIM TO HAVE SEEN BEFORE YOU TESTED IT?

THAT'S CORRECT.

NOW, ON JULY 6TH, YOU CAME BACK TO TESTIFY AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING?

YES.

WHEN YOU CAME BACK TO TESTIFY, DID YOU REPORT TO MISS CLARK THAT YOU HAD SEEN THESE DARK SPOTS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR?

I DON'T KNOW IF I RELAYED THAT TO HER AT THAT TIME OR MAYBE OR IF I HAD RELAYED THAT INFORMATION TO HER BEFORE.

WELL, YOU WENT OUT TO LOOK AT THAT THE MORNING OF YOUR TESTIMONY?

THAT'S CORRECT.

AND ARE YOU SAYING THAT AFTER LOOKING AT THOSE DARK SPOTS, TESTING THEM FOR THE PRESENCE OF BLOOD AT MISS CLARK'S REQUEST, THAT YOU DID NOT IMMEDIATELY RETURN AND REPORT TO HER WHAT YOU HAD SEEN AND WHAT YOU HAD DONE?

I DON'T RECALL IF I DID OR NOT.

ARE YOU SAYING YOU DON'T RECALL, SIR, BECAUSE YOU THINK THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE OF SOME ASSISTANCE TO THE PROSECUTION'S CASE HERE?

YOUR HONOR, THAT'S ARGUMENTATIVE.

SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SCHECK: WHEN YOU PERFORM A PHENOLPHTHALEIN TEST -- WITHDRAWN. WHEN YOU PERFORMED THE PHENOLPHTHALEIN TEST ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BRONCO DOOR ON JULY 6TH, YOU TOOK A SWAB AND YOU PUT SOME DISTILLED WATER ON IT?

YES.

AND THEN YOU PUT THAT SWAB ONTO THE DARK SPOT YOU SAW AND REMOVED SOME OF IT?

A PORTION OF IT, YES.

PORTION OF IT?

YES.

NOW, AT SOME POINT, DID YOU REPORT TO MISS CLARK WHAT YOU HAD DONE ON JULY 6TH?

I DID RELAY TO HER AT SOME POINT THAT I HAD DONE WHAT SHE REQUESTED OF ME, YES.

DID SHE TAKE ANY NOTES WHEN YOU RELAYED THIS INFORMATION TO HER?

I DON'T BELIEVE SHE DID.

WHERE DID THIS CONVERSATION TAKE PLACE?

I'M NOT SURE. IT WAS IN THE D.A.'S OFFICE SOMEPLACE.

DID YOU RELAY THIS INFORMATION TO MISS CLARK BEFORE YOU TESTIFIED ON JULY 6TH AND JULY 7TH AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING?

I DON'T RECALL WHEN EXACTLY I RELAYED IT TO HER.

CAN YOU THINK OF ANY POSSIBLE REASON THAT YOU WOULD NOT TELL MISS CLARK ON JULY 6TH OR 7TH WHAT YOU'D SEEN ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT BRONCO DOOR IF YOU'D SEEN IT?

ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE AND IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE.

OVERRULED.

BY MR. SCHECK: A MINOR THING.

IS THAT A QUESTION?

BY MR. SCHECK: YOU THOUGHT IT WAS A MINOR THING?

I DIDN'T -- I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS -- NEEDED A REPORT WRITTEN AT THE TIME I DID IT.

WELL, YOU DIDN'T FILL OUT A REPORT ABOUT DOING THIS UNTIL OCTOBER?

THAT'S CORRECT.

BUT IT IS REQUIRED AT THE SID LABORATORY, AT YOUR CRIME LABORATORY THAT IF YOU ARE TO PERFORM A PRESUMPTIVE TEST IN A CASE, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO MAKE A RECORD OF IT?

THAT'S IN THAT PROPOSED MANUAL, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S ACTUAL POLICY OR NOT.

WELL, ISN'T THAT YOUR GENERAL PRACTICE; THAT WHEN YOU PERFORM A PRESUMPTIVE TEST ON AN ITEM OF EVIDENCE IN THE CASE, YOU MAKE A REPORT ABOUT IT?

YOUR HONOR, IT'S IRRELEVANT. HE DID MAKE A REPORT.

OVERRULED.

IN CERTAIN INSTANCES, YES.

BY MR. SCHECK: YOU WOULD MAKE A REPORT ABOUT IT IF IT REALLY HAPPENED, IF YOU REALLY WENT OUT THERE AND SAW THOSE DARK SPOTS AND DID A PRESUMPTIVE TEST, RIGHT?

I AM GOING TO SUSTAIN THE COURT'S OWN OBJECTION TO THAT QUESTION. REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

BY MR. SCHECK: MR. FUNG, WOULD IT NOT BE YOUR PRACTICE IF YOU HAD IN FACT GONE OUT, SEEN DARK SPOTS ON THE DOOR SILL OF THE BRONCO ON JULY 6TH AND DONE A PRESUMPTIVE TEST, WOULD IT HAVE NOT BEEN YOUR PRACTICE TO MAKE A REPORT ABOUT IT?

NOT NECESSARILY, NO.

WAS IT SO MINOR AN EVENT THAT YOU NOT ONLY DIDN'T TELL MISS CLARK ABOUT IT, BUT YOU DIDN'T FEEL IT NECESSARY TO MAKE OUT A REPORT?

I TOLD MISS CLARK ABOUT IT AT SOME POINT IN TIME. I DON'T RECALL WHEN, AND EVENTUALLY I DID MAKE A REPORT.

AND YOU'RE TELLING US, SIR, THAT ON JULY 5TH, YOU THOUGHT THAT SEEING A RED STAIN ON THE EXTERIOR OF THAT BRONCO DOOR WAS A MINOR THING NOT WORTH MENTIONING?

WANT TO REPHRASE THE QUESTION?

BY MR. SCHECK: YOU THOUGHT IT WAS A MINOR THING NOT WORTH MENTIONING TO MISS CLARK?

I MAY NOT HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SIT DOWN AND TALK TO HER ABOUT IT. I DON'T RECALL WHEN I TALKED TO HER. I MAY HAVE TALKED TO HER ABOUT IT AT THAT TIME. I DON'T RECALL WHEN THOUGH.

WELL, YOU TESTIFIED AT THAT PRELIMINARY HEARING ON JULY 6TH AND 7TH?

YES, I DID.

AND THAT TESTIMONY WAS ON NATIONAL TELEVISION?

YES, IT WAS.

AND YOU WERE RECOUNTING THE EVENTS OF JUNE 13TH?

IT'S OVERBROAD.

OVERRULED.

ALSO IRRELEVANT.

OVERRULED.

AND I WAS RECOUNTING THE EVENTS OF JUNE 13TH?

BY MR. SCHECK: YES. PART OF YOUR PRELIMINARY HEARING TESTIMONY UNDER QUESTIONING OF MISS CLARK WAS TO RECOUNT THE EVENTS OF JUNE 13TH AND YOUR ROLE IN COLLECTING EVIDENCE?

YES.

ARE YOU TELLING US, SIR, THAT YOU DID NOT HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH MISS CLARK ABOUT YOUR TESTIMONY BEFORE YOU TESTIFIED?

I DID HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH MISS CLARK BEFORE I TESTIFIED.

AND IN THAT DISCUSSION, DID YOU GIVE HER ANY REPORT ABOUT SEEING DARK SPOTS ON THE EXTERIOR DOOR SILL OF THAT BRONCO?

VAGUE.

OVERRULED.

DURING OUR -- THAT WAS THE POINT IN THE CONVERSATION WHERE SHE REQUESTED ME TO LOOK SPECIFICALLY AND DO THE TEST FOR PHENOLPHTHALEIN AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DOOR SILL.

BY MR. SCHECK: OH. SO YOU HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HER ON JULY 6TH, AND WHEN THE ISSUE AROSE ABOUT THESE RED STAINS, SHE THEN DIRECTED YOU TO GO TO VIERTEL'S AND LOOK AT THE DOOR SILL?

NO. THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID.

WELL, PLEASE CLARIFY.

THERE WAS A CONFERENCE THAT WE HAD PRIOR TO MY PRETRIAL CONFERENCE OR PRETRIAL HEARING TESTIMONY IN WHICH WE DISCUSSED WHAT I DID; AND AT THAT TIME, SHE MADE THAT REQUEST FOR ME TO DO A PRESUMPTIVE TEST AT THE DRIVER DOOR SILL OF THE BRONCO.

AND WHEN SHE MADE THAT REQUEST, DID SHE SUGGEST TO YOU BRING A PHOTOGRAPHER SO THAT YOU CAN DOCUMENT THE EXISTENCE OF THESE RED STAINS BEFORE YOU DO A TEST?

NO, SHE DID NOT SAY THAT.

DID IT OCCUR TO YOU THAT THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA?

NOT AT THE TIME, NO.

WHEN YOU FINISHED THIS TEST AND YOUR OBSERVATIONS ON JULY 6TH, I ASK YOU AGAIN, SIR, DID YOU COME BACK AND REPORT TO MISS CLARK BEFORE YOU TESTIFIED ON YOUR FINDINGS?

I DON'T RECALL IF I TOLD HER BEFORE I TESTIFIED OR NOT.

AT THE PRELIMINARY HEARING, YOU WERE ASKED NO QUESTIONS, WERE YOU, ABOUT SEEING ANY RED STAINS AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT BRONCO DOOR?

YOUR HONOR, THAT'S IRRELEVANT, WHETHER HE WAS ASKED.

OVERRULED. DO YOU RECALL.

I DON'T RECALL.

BY MR. SCHECK: AND YOU DID NOT TESTIFY, SIR, ABOUT SEEING RED STAINS AT -- ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT BRONCO DOOR?

IRRELEVANT IF HE WASN'T ASKED.

OVERRULED.

I DON'T RECALL.

BY MR. SCHECK: MR. FUNG, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU NEVER SAW ANY RED STAINS ON THE BOTTOM OF THAT BRONCO DOOR ON JULY 6TH?

NO. I DID SEE A STAIN THAT GAVE A POSITIVE FOR THE PRESENCE OF BLOOD AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DOOR SILL THERE.

ISN'T IT TRUE, MR. FUNG, THAT YOU NEVER REMOVED ANYTHING FROM THE BOTTOM OF THAT BRONCO DOOR ON JULY 6TH FOR PURPOSES OF PERFORMING A PRESUMPTIVE TEST?

I DID PERFORM A PRESUMPTIVE TEST ON A DARK STAIN AT THE DOOR SILL OF THE DRIVER DOOR.

AND YOU REMOVED SOME OF THAT STAIN, SOME OF THAT EVIDENCE FOR PURPOSES OF YOUR TEST?

YES.

BECAUSE YOU'VE TOLD US THAT THE STAIN IS THE EVIDENCE.

YES.

AND YOU'RE SURE OF THAT?

YES.

YOU'RE AS SURE OF THAT AS THE FACT THAT WHEN YOU TOOK THAT ENVELOPE ON JUNE 13TH, YOU DIDN'T TAKE IT WITH YOUR BARE HANDS?

IT'S ARGUMENTATIVE, COUNSEL.

BY MR. SCHECK: MR. FUNG, ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU WENT OUT ON JULY 6TH TO LOOK AT THE BRONCO SIMPLY TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY FOR COURT?

I WENT THERE SPECIFICALLY TO LOOK AT THE DRIVER DOOR SILL AND PERFORM A PRESUMPTIVE TEST ON IT.

MR. FUNG, YOU WERE AWARE THAT A DETECTIVE MULLDORFER FROM THE L.A. POLICE COMMISSION CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION WITH RESPECT TO BREAK-INS OF THE BRONCO AT VIERTEL'S?

SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SCHECK: WERE YOU QUESTIONED BY A DETECTIVE MULLDORFER WITH RESPECT TO YOUR VISITS TO THE BRONCO?

IRRELEVANT.

OVERRULED.

NO.

BY MR. SCHECK: NO? WERE YOU QUESTIONED BY ANYONE FROM THE L.A. POLICE COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO VISITS TO THE BRONCO?

NO.

NO RECOLLECTION OF THAT AT ALL?

NONE.

YOU DO NOT RECOLLECT TELLING DETECTIVE MULLDORFER OR ANYONE ELSE ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT TIMES THAT YOU VISITED THE BRONCO AT VIERTEL'S?

I DON'T RECALL ANY PERSONAL INTERVIEWS. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A PHONE CONVERSATION, BUT I DON'T RECALL.

SO YOU RECALL A PHONE CONVERSATION?

THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A PHONE CONVERSATION, BUT I DON'T RECALL ANY PERSONAL CONVERSATIONS.

DID YOU NOT ON AUGUST 8TH, 1994 HAVE AN INTERVIEW WITH DETECTIVE MULLDORFER WITH RESPECT TO YOUR VISITS TO THE BRONCO?

I DON'T RECALL.

WAS IT A DETECTIVE CARSON?

I DON'T RECALL ANY PERSONAL INTERVIEWS WITH THEM.

DID YOU TELL ANYONE ON AUGUST 8TH THAT YOU VISITED THE VEHICLE ON JULY 6TH TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY FOR COURT?

I DON'T RECALL SAYING THAT.

DID YOU TELL ANYONE ON AUGUST 8TH THAT YOU DID NOT REMOVE ANY EVIDENCE FROM THE VEHICLE ON JULY 6TH?

YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT. THAT'S NOT INCONSISTENT. IT'S MISLEADING.

OVERRULED.

YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH FOR A MOMENT?

OVERRULED.

I DID NOT COLLECT ANY EVIDENCE THAT DAY.

BY MR. SCHECK: WELL, WHEN YOU PERFORMED THE PRESUMPTIVE TESTS, DIDN'T YOU JUST TELL US THAT YOU WERE REMOVING EVIDENCE BY TAKING THAT SWAB AND SWABBING THE DARK SPOT?

YOUR HONOR, THAT'S ARGUMENTATIVE.

OVERRULED.

TAKING A SWAB FOR PRESUMPTIVE TESTS AND COLLECTING ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

BY MR. SCHECK: AFTER YOU TOOK THE SWAB AND RUBBED THE DARK SPOT ON JULY 6TH, WAS ANY RED STAIN LEFT?

I DON'T RECALL IF ANY WAS LEFT OR NOT. I DON'T THINK I USED UP THE WHOLE STAIN.

WELL, IF YOU DIDN'T USE UP THE WHOLE STAIN, DID IT EVER OCCUR TO YOU TO SUGGEST SOMEBODY SHOULD GO BACK AND TAKE A PICTURE OF WHAT WAS LEFT?

NO.

NEVER MADE THAT SUGGESTION TO ANYONE?

NO.

MISS CLARK NEVER TOLD YOU TO GO BACK AND TAKE A PICTURE OF IT?

NO.

DIDN'T YOU TELL SOMEONE ON AUGUST 8TH WITH RESPECT TO THIS INVESTIGATION OF THE BRONCO THAT YOU DID NOT REMOVE ANY EVIDENCE ON JULY 6TH AND YOU DID NOT NOTICE ANY PAPERS IN THE VEHICLE AT THAT TIME EITHER?

I DIDN'T LOOK FOR PAPERS IN THE VEHICLE.

ARE YOU SURE, SIR, THAT YOU DID NOT TELL SOMEONE FROM THE L.A. POLICE COMMISSION THAT YOU VISITED THE VEHICLE ON JULY 6TH TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY FOR COURT AND YOU DIDN'T REMOVE ANY EVIDENCE FROM IT?

I DON'T RECALL THE EXACT CONVERSATION. I DON'T EVEN RECALL TALKING TO SOMEBODY FROM THE L.A. COMMISSION, POLICE COMMISSION.

ONE MOMENT, YOUR HONOR.

BY MR. SCHECK: MR. FUNG, BEFORE WE LEAVE THIS TOPIC, LET ME JUST SHOW YOU SOME DOCUMENTS TO SEE IF THEY REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION.

YOUR HONOR, I OBJECT. THERE'S NO SHOWING HIS RECOLLECTION NEEDS REFRESHED.

SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SCHECK: WELL, YOU'VE INDICATED THAT YOU DON'T RECALL SPEAKING TO ANYBODY FROM THE LOS ANGELES POLICE COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO YOUR VISITS TO THE BRONCO?

I DON'T REMEMBER ANY SPECIFIC CONVERSATIONS, NO.

ALL RIGHT. MAY --

COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS.

I AM SORRY?

COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT.

BY MR. SCHECK: WOULD IT REFRESH YOUR RECOLLECTION, SIR, TO EXAMINE SOME DOCUMENTS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH SOMEONE FROM THE LOS ANGELES POLICE COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO YOUR VISITS TO THE BRONCO?

YOUR HONOR, MAY WE APPROACH FOR A MOMENT?

OVERRULED.

IT MAY IF -- BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SOURCE OF THE DOCUMENTS ARE.

ALL RIGHT. MAY I APPROACH, YOUR HONOR?

YOU MAY.

YOUR HONOR, I ASK THAT --

WHY DON'T YOU JUST SHOW IT TO COUNSEL.

YES.

YOUR HONOR, CAN WE APPROACH FOR A MOMENT SO THE COURT CAN SEE, TAKE A LOOK AT THIS DOCUMENT?

I'M AWARE OF WHAT THESE DOCUMENTS ARE, COUNSEL. WE HAD A WHOLE PROCEEDING ON THESE DOCUMENTS.

MAY I APPROACH THE WITNESS, YOUR HONOR?

PLEASE.

BY MR. SCHECK: MR. FUNG, PLEASE TAKE YOUR TIME. SHOWING YOU A SERIES OF DOCUMENTS. IN PARTICULAR, I'M GOING TO ADDRESS YOUR ATTENTION TO PARAGRAPHS -- THE PAGE THAT'S MARKED HERE 1187, AND THERE'S ANOTHER SHORT ONE HERE. I'VE TABBED THEM WITH YELLOW POST-IT'S. PLEASE TAKE YOUR TIME, LOOK AT ALL THE DOCUMENTS FOR AS LONG AS YOU WANT.

BY MR. SCHECK: SIR, HAVING EXAMINED THESE DOCUMENTS, IS YOUR RECOLLECTION REFRESHED ABOUT HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH ANYONE ON AUGUST 8TH ABOUT YOUR VISIT TO THE BRONCO ON JULY 6TH?

EVEN FROM REVIEWING THAT -- THOSE NOTES, I -- OR THAT REPORT, I -- MY MEMORY IS NOT REFRESHED.

SO AS FAR AS -- THE WAY YOU WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE IT, SIR, IS THAT YOU NEVER --

YOUR HONOR, OBJECT TO THE WAY THAT'S PHRASED.

REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

BY MR. SCHECK: IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY, SIR, THAT TO THE BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION, YOU WERE NEVER INTERVIEWED BY ANYONE FROM THE LOS ANGELES POLICE COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO YOUR VISIT TO THE BRONCO ON JULY 6TH?

MISSTATES HIS TESTIMONY.

SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SCHECK: WERE YOU INTERVIEWED BY ANYONE FROM THE LOS ANGELES POLICE COMMISSION ON AUGUST 8TH, SOMETIME IN AUGUST ABOUT YOUR VISIT TO THE BRONCO ON JULY 6TH?

I DON'T RECALL ANY PERSONAL INTERVIEW. IT MAY HAVE BEEN TELEPHONIC.

ALL RIGHT. DO YOU RECALL A TELEPHONIC INTERVIEW?

NO, I DON'T.

AND IS YOUR TESTIMONY, SIR, WITH RESPECT TO RED STAINS IN THE BRONCO THAT YOU'VE GIVEN TO THIS JURY IN ANY WAY MOTIVATED BY A DESIRE TO COVER FOR DETECTIVE FUHRMAN?

NO.

NOW I WOULD LIKE TO TURN TO A NEW TOPIC, YOUR HONOR. I WON'T BE ABLE TO FINISH IT BEFORE THE BREAK.

TRY.

I CAN'T.

TRY.

I'LL DO MY BEST, BUT WE'RE GOING TO 12:00?

BY MR. SCHECK: MR. FUNG, YOU'VE TOLD US THAT ON THE AFTERNOON OF JUNE 13TH AT ROCKINGHAM, YOU RECEIVED MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD VIAL FROM DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

YES.

YOU DID NOT RECEIVE THIS BLOOD VIAL FOR THE FIRST TIME ON THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH?

THAT'S CORRECT.

NOW, DID YOU DISCUSS IN YOUR PREPARATIONS FOR THIS CASE, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS, THIS ISSUE AS TO WHEN YOU RECEIVED THE BLOOD VIAL?

ASSUMES IT'S AN ISSUE.

REPHRASE THE QUESTION.

BY MR. SCHECK: DID YOU DISCUSS WITH THE DISTRICT ATTORNEYS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF HOW YOU RECEIVED THE BLOOD VIAL IN THIS CASE?

YES.

AND WAS THAT AN ISSUE THAT YOU DISCUSSED AT SOME LENGTH?

ABOUT 15 MINUTES.

DID YOU DISCUSS THE ISSUE ABOUT HOW YOU RECEIVED THE BLOOD VIAL WITH MICHELE KESTLER?

I DON'T BELIEVE SO, NO.

WITH GREG MATHESON?

NO.

WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

BY ISSUE, DO YOU MEAN WHY IT WAS DONE THAT WAY OR --

DID YOU DISCUSS WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER BEFORE YOU CAME HERE TO TESTIFY, PREPARATION FOR YOUR TESTIMONY, THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING YOUR RECEIPT OF THE BLOOD VIAL FROM HIM?

NO.

COMPOUND.

OVERRULED.

BY MR. SCHECK: DID YOU HAVE ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER CONCERNING HOW MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD VIAL WAS TURNED OVER FOR PURPOSES OF BOOKING?

COULD YOU REPEAT THAT QUESTION?

COULD YOU TELL US -- YOU SAID -- DID YOU HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH DETECTIVE VANNATTER ABOUT MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD VIAL?

YES.

WHEN?

THE DAY I RECEIVED THEM FROM HIM.

SINCE THEN, ANY DISCUSSIONS?

NOT TO MY RECOLLECTION, NO.

ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE DECISION TO BRING THE BLOOD VIAL FROM DOWNTOWN TO YOU AT ROCKINGHAM?

NO.

DID YOU DISCUSS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF RECEIVING MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD VIAL WITH DETECTIVE LANGE PRIOR TO COMING IN HERE AND TESTIFYING?

I DON'T RECALL ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT, NO.

SO OTHER THAN THE PROSECUTORS AND IN PREPARATION FOR YOUR TESTIMONY, YOU HAVE NOTED -- OH, WITHDRAWN. DID YOU DISCUSS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE RECEIPT OF MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD VIAL WITH ANDREA MAZZOLA?

I ONLY STATED TO HER THAT WE DID RECEIVE OR I DID RECEIVE THE BLOOD VIAL FROM DETECTIVE VANNATTER.

WHEN DID YOU HAVE THAT DISCUSSION?

THAT WAS THE MORNING OF JUNE 14TH.

NOW, WHO WAS PRESENT ACCORDING TO YOU AT ROCKINGHAM WHEN YOU RECEIVED THE BLOOD VIAL FROM DETECTIVE VANNATTER?

WE WERE IN THE FOYER AND I WAS THERE OF COURSE, DETECTIVE VANNATTER WAS THERE AND I KNOW THERE WERE OTHER DETECTIVES AROUND, BUT I DON'T RECALL WHO THEY WERE EXACTLY AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT WAS IN THE FOYER OF MR. SIMPSON'S HOME?

THAT'S WHEN I RECEIVED THE ENVELOPE CONTAINING THE VIAL OF BLOOD.

THAT WAS INSIDE?

YES.

WAS THE DOOR CLOSED?

I DON'T RECALL.

CAN YOU DESCRIBE FOR US IN AS MUCH DETAIL AS YOU CAN RECOLLECT EXACTLY HOW THIS TRANSFER OCCURRED?

DETECTIVE VANNATTER SAID -- SAID TO ME OR SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF I HAVE MR. SIMPSON'S BLOOD AND I WANT YOU TO BOOK IT (INDICATING).

NOW, YOU MADE A GESTURE WITH YOUR HAND --

YES.

-- JUST NOW. AND ARE YOU INDICATING, SIR, THAT HE THEN GAVE YOU SOMETHING?

YES. THAT HE GAVE ME THE ENVELOPE CONTAINING THE VIAL.

ALL RIGHT. AND WHERE WAS HE -- WAS HE HOLDING IT IN HIS HAND?

YES.

DID YOU SEE -- WHEN DID YOU FIRST SEE DETECTIVE VANNATTER BEFORE HE GAVE YOU THIS ENVELOPE?

I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY WHEN HE CAME. I ONLY -- BUT I DO RECALL THAT PARTICULAR EVENT.

AND DID HE TAKE IT OUT OF SOMETHING OR DID HE JUST HAVE IT IN HIS HAND?

I -- I DON'T RECALL.

DID HE PULL IT OUT OF A BLACK DUFFLE BAG AND GIVE IT TO YOU?

I DON'T RECALL HIM HAVING A BLACK DUFFLE BAG.

YOU DIDN'T SEE HIM CARRYING A BLACK DUFFLE BAG?

NO.

DID HE TAKE IT FROM A CLIPBOARD AND GIVE IT TO YOU?

I DON'T RECALL HIM HAVING A CLIPBOARD EITHER.

SO TO THE BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION, DETECTIVE VANNATTER HANDED YOU A GRAY ENVELOPE AND HE JUST HAD IT IN HIS HAND?

TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION, YES.

AND THEN AFTER YOU RECEIVED THAT GRAY ENVELOPE, WHAT DID YOU DO WITH IT?

I WROTE ON THE ENVELOPE THAT I RECEIVED IT FROM HIM AND I PUT THE TIME, DATE AND MY INITIALS.

AND WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE ENVELOPE AT THAT POINT?

I LOOKED INSIDE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS A VIAL IN IT AND THAT IT WAS IN A CONDITION THAT WAS UNOPENED AND I PUT IT IN THE CRIME SCENE TRUCK.

WELL, WE'RE STILL IN THE FOYER WHEN YOU GOT IT, CORRECT?

YES.

DID YOU OPEN IT, THE ENVELOPE IN THE FOYER?

YES.

AND THAT'S WHEN YOU LOOKED AT IT?

AT THE VIAL?

YES.

YES.

AND WHEN YOU -- DID YOU THEN -- WHAT DID YOU HAVE WITH YOU AT THAT TIME, IF ANYTHING?

I HAD A PEN.

AND AFTER YOU RECEIVED THE ENVELOPE FROM DETECTIVE VANNATTER IN THE FOYER, DID YOU THEN WALK OUT THE DOOR TO THE CRIME SCENE TRUCK?

I DON'T KNOW IF I DID THAT IMMEDIATELY OR IF I HAD OTHER THINGS THERE I HAD TO DO PRIOR TO THAT.

DID YOU PUT THIS ENVELOPE IN A BROWN PAPER BAG?

I DON'T RECALL IF I DID OR NOT.

DID YOU PUT IT INSIDE YOUR BLACK KIT?

NO. I DON'T THINK I DID THAT.

DID YOU AT SOME POINT WALK OUT OF THE FOYER TO THE CRIME SCENE TRUCK HOLDING THE GRAY ENVELOPE?

I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

WELL, WHAT DID YOU DO WITH IT? HOW DID YOU GET IT TO THE CRIME SCENE TRUCK?

IT MAY HAVE BEEN IN A PAPER BAG, BUT I DON'T RECALL IF I ACTUALLY DID PUT IT IN THERE OR IT MAY HAVE BEEN PUT IN THE -- IN A POSSE BOX.

IS IT POSSIBLE YOU JUST WALKED OUT THE DOOR WITH THE ENVELOPE IN YOUR HAND?

IT'S POSSIBLE, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S LIKELY.

ALL RIGHT. MR. SCHECK, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR BREAK AT THIS TIME. ALL RIGHT. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PLEASE REMEMBER ALL OF MY ADMONITIONS TO YOU, DO NOT DISCUSS THIS CASE AMONGST YOURSELVES, DO NOT FORM ANY OPINIONS ABOUT THE CASE, DO NOT ALLOW ANYBODY TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU, DO NOT CONDUCT ANY DELIBERATIONS UNTIL THE MATTER HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO YOU. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS UNTIL 1:30.

MR. FUNG, YOU ARE ORDERED TO RETURN 1:30. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL STAND IN RECESS. AND GREETINGS TO JUDGE SCOTT. THANK YOU.