Your Honor, on cross-examination counsel elicited that 15 and 16 went into the plastic bag which I think went beyond a little bit where previously rulings had left us. I think now there is some relevance, obvious relevance to having at least a generic description of 15 and 16, but are they metal, are they paper, what general size are they, how much do they weigh. And that is what I would like to do with this witness.
Your Honor, I don't believe I went beyond the limitation. It was simply a question of showing that 15 and 16 were put in the bag, and our suggestion is that it was either 15 and 16 may have been put in the bag and the numbers may have been put in the bag, but that doesn't mean that the bag was used for the blood vial. And it was limited for that purpose. I don't believe we have opened the door for them to go beyond any further description of 15 and 16.
Well, the relevance is that now we have to show that the appearance and weight of the bag is inconsistent with only containing 15 and 16. I mean, if an item of evidence is truly suppressed, it is gone. You don't allude to it and say, well, there is an item 15 and 16. We are not going to tell you what it is, but it exits itself. We collected from it here and there and we won't tell you what it is.
Back then they offered to stipulate and let the stuff in and you declined to stipulate. Is there a reason for that? Knowing all the issues that are involved in this case, is there a reason, other than just to be spiteful to each other?
KEY QUOTEThe reason, more than not stipulating to it at that point in time, was that our position was that, as your Honor knows, and I hate to go over old ground, that I had--I had mistakenly elicited this information, it was in violation of agreement--
--not to do so, it should not have been done, but that there was no prejudice. And your Honor, I know the Court disagrees with us, but respectfully, it was our position that the sanction that we were given was not appropriate, in light of the lack of prejudice, and we wanted to have that sanction removed.
So what you are asking for at this point is the opportunity to physically describe what it is, that it is a piece of thin cardboard. Let's see. We are talking about an airline ticket and a baggage--
We haven't seen it, your Honor. I think before she even does that, at least they should be produced.
We've got about twenty minutes left in the Court day. Let's see them tomorrow morning first thing.
Also let me ask another question. When are we going to see these items that we are expecting?
Your Honor, I spoke to Mr. Matheson during the noon break and he told me that he has two criminalists that are assigned to working on this project.
They were pulled off a project where the LAPD was asked to get test results on a child molest Defendant.
I'm just telling the Court that so your Honor knows we are not delaying and we are--
In fact, I would like to have that 25 minutes so I can request we don't waste any of the Court's time and the jury's time between 8:30 and 9:00 A.M.
When we conclude, we will do that. I agree with you, you may be entitled to go into the dimensions, the weight, the material. Let's see what they are. So let's finish up the twenty minutes.
Your Honor, one other item. Several times when I was asked--I walked up there while Mr. Goldberg was asking questions of the witness on redirect when Marcia Clark was standing next to him and she was giggling and laughing, and she was doing that visibly repeatedly.
If you will give me--I did not observe anything like that. In fact, I've observed that Miss Clark appears to me to be under the weather today and so I didn't observe that, but if you will bring my attention to it or wave at me, I will be happy to look over that way.
May I indicate to the Court that this did not happen. Mr. Neufeld is on some other planet. Mr. Goldberg turned to look at me quizzically and suppose it was into his ear that I was giggling and laughing. He didn't remember seeing this obviously.
Miss Clark, I didn't see anything, and counsel, I would like to spend the rest of the twenty minutes we have left in the Court day asking questions.
I agree with that, your Honor. Just I am noticing 2179. She seems like more preoccupied.
She told us earlier--she doesn't seem like she is the same, and I just wanted to point out to you, she seems like looking--just looking ahead and hasn't taken any notes all day and preoccupied.
Back then they offered to stipulate and let the stuff in and you declined to stipulate. Is there a reason for that? Knowing all the issues that are involved in this case, is there a reason, other than just to be spiteful to each other?
If an item of evidence is truly suppressed, it is gone. You don't allude to it and say, well, there is an item 15 and 16. We are not going to tell you what it is, but it exits itself.
Mr. Neufeld is on some other planet.
She seems like more preoccupied. She told us earlier--she doesn't seem like she is the same, and I just wanted to point out to you, she seems like looking--just looking ahead and hasn't taken any notes all day.