Cross-examination of Andrea Mazzola (part 1)

📄 Cross-examination of Andrea Mazzola (part 1) — Thursday, April 27, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\APR\27\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-ANDREA-MA.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 63 of 167

Witness: Andrea Mazzola
Examiner: Peter Neufeld
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Thursday, April 27, 1995 • Utterances: 360

Defense attorney Peter Neufeld systematically impeaches LAPD criminalist Andrea Mazzola by confronting her with her prior sworn testimony from August 23, 1994, in which she stated she personally initialed every coin envelope for blood stains she collected. The actual coin envelopes produced in court bear Dennis Fung's initials, not hers. Mazzola ultimately admits her August 23rd testimony was based on a mistaken 'assumption,' a concession Neufeld uses to suggest either evidence tampering or a coached change in testimony.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held in open Court, in the presence of the jury:)

# 2 THE COURT:

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. Let the record reflect we've been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Andrea Mazzola is on the witness stand undergoing cross-examination by Mr. Neufeld. Good afternoon again, Miss Mazzola. You are reminded you are still under oath. And, Mr. Neufeld, you may complete your cross-examination.

# 3 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola, for every stain that you collected, you placed the swatches into a small plastic bag; is that right?

# 4 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 5 MR. NEUFELD:

And just as the swatches look pretty much alike, these little plastic bags look pretty much alike also, don't they?

# 6 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 7 MR. NEUFELD:

And if you could just to--so the jury can see it, this is--I'm looking now at People's exhibit 163-e. This is a coin envelope containing some plastic bags, a white paper bindle. And inside the bindle--is there anything inside the bindle, ma'am?

# 8 MS. MAZZOLA:

There's some white swatches.

# 9 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay. And are those the two white swatches I have now put on the coin envelope?

# 10 MS. MAZZOLA:

It looks more like three. There's one on top of that one.

# 11 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay. They sometimes get stuck together?

# 12 MS. MAZZOLA:

Sometimes.

# 13 MR. NEUFELD:

All right. With the Court's permission, I'm not going to pass them around. I'd just like to hold them up in front of the jury.

# 14 THE COURT:

I don't know now effective that's going to be since they're--don't anybody sneeze.

# 15 MR. NEUFELD:

And you would agree, Miss Mazzola, that without proper documentation, these swatches and these plastic bags could easily get mixed up?

# 16 MR. GOLDBERG:

Vague as to "Proper documentation, mixed up."

# 17 THE COURT:

Overruled. The jury can draw their own conclusions.

# 18 MR. NEUFELD:

Would you agree with that?

# 19 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 20 MR. NEUFELD:

Would you agree that without proper documentation, it's easier for someone to tamper with them too?

# 21 MS. MAZZOLA:

I don't follow that question.

# 22 MR. NEUFELD:

All right. Now, the next thing you did with the plastic bag was to put it into a clean coin envelope at the scene; is that right?

# 23 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 24 MR. NEUFELD:

And just as the swatches and the plastic bags all look pretty much alike, so do the coin envelopes, don't they?

# 25 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 26 MR. NEUFELD:

And so it is the standard practice at the Los Angeles Police Department to write identifying information on each coin envelope at the scene; isn't that right?

# 27 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 28 MR. NEUFELD:

And that is done so that one envelope and its contents can be distinguished from another?

# 29 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 30 MR. NEUFELD:

And would you agree, ma'am, that putting one's initials on the coin envelope at the scene is one way to identify a piece of evidence?

# 31 MR. GOLDBERG:

Argumentative.

# 32 THE COURT:

Overruled. But we've pretty much been through this procedure.

# 33 MR. NEUFELD:

I haven't been through this procedure with this witness.

# 34 THE COURT:

Well, counsel, the jury already knows about this procedure.

# 35 MR. NEUFELD:

I think--

# 36 THE COURT:

Proceed.

# 37 MS. MAZZOLA:

Placing one's initials alone on a coin envelope would not help distinguish it from another.

# 38 MR. NEUFELD:

But placing one's initials in conjunction with placing the item number on the envelope will?

# 39 MS. MAZZOLA:

The item number is more important, yes.

# 40 MR. NEUFELD:

But coin--but placing one's initials also enhance identification process, right?

# 41 MR. GOLDBERG:

Vague ambiguous as to "Enhance."

# 42 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 43 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, Miss Mazzola, would you agree, for instance, in this case--well, would you agree, Miss Mazzola, that photo id numbers can be used again and again at different crime scenes and different investigations?

# 44 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 45 MR. NEUFELD:

And so there could be more than two coin envelopes in the laboratory having the same number such as 27 or 35 or 110?

# 46 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 47 MR. NEUFELD:

And so in addition to placing the photo id number and item number on a coin envelope, placing the initials of the person who collected that item on the envelope is an additional way to individualize the envelope, isn't it?

# 48 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 49 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay. And isn't it a standard practice of the Los Angeles Police Department to retain for trial purposes the original coin envelopes used at the crime scene?

# 50 MS. MAZZOLA:

I don't know if that is the standard practice or not. I'm not familiar with that.

# 51 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, did you ever testify as a witness in a toxicology case?

# 52 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 53 MR. NEUFELD:

And you were given a vial in an envelope?

# 54 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 55 MR. NEUFELD:

And when you would testify in Court, did that--was that same envelope retained and produced in Court?

# 56 MR. GOLDBERG:

Irrelevant.

# 57 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 58 MR. NEUFELD:

Would you agree that retention of the original documented coin envelope is one way to document the beginning of chain of custody?

# 59 MR. GOLDBERG:

Asked and answered and irrelevant.

# 60 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 61 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 62 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, on direct examination, Miss Mazzola, by Mr. Goldberg, you denied personally putting your initials on the coin envelopes for the bloodstains that you personally collected at Rockingham and Bundy; is that correct?

# 63 MR. GOLDBERG:

Misstates the evidence.

# 64 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 65 MS. MAZZOLA:

I believe I said something to that effect.

# 66 MR. NEUFELD:

On August 23rd, 1994, when you were under oath, didn't you swear that for each bloodstain that you collected at Rockingham, you personally put your initials on the coin envelope?

# 67 MR. GOLDBERG:

Argumentative as phrased and would also ask for the page and line.

# 68 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 69 MR. NEUFELD:

On August 23rd, 1994--referring to page 705.

# 70 MR. GOLDBERG:

Also, I think this has been asked and answered.

# 71 THE COURT:

What line, counsel?

# 72 MR. NEUFELD:

Hmm?

# 73 THE COURT:

What line, counsel?

# 74 MR. NEUFELD:

I'm sorry. Beginning at line 2 and ending at line 15.

# 75 MR. GOLDBERG:

Which page?

# 76 MR. NEUFELD:

705.

# 77 THE COURT:

All right. Line 2 to 15.

# 78 MR. NEUFELD:

Thank you.

# 79 MR. NEUFELD:

On August 23rd, when you testified under oath, were you asked these questions and did you give these answers, Miss Mazzola? "Question: When you placed the plastic into the coin envelope, you said you make a notation on the coin envelope; namely, the photo number at that point as well? "Answer: It is labeled the photo item number. "Question: Do you initial the plastic bag yourself? "Answer: The coin envelope is initialed. "Question: By you? "Answer: That is correct. "Question: And in each of these instances where you collected the stain, you personally initial the envelope? "Answer: I collected the stain, it was initialed by me." did you give those answers to those questions under oath on August 23rd, 1994?

# 80 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 81 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, your Honor, also page 768, line 16 through 18.

# 82 THE COURT:

Proceed.

# 83 MR. NEUFELD:

And then again on page 768, Miss Mazzola, at the same hearing on August 23rd, 1994, were you asked this question, did you give this answer? "Question: Well, I'm sorry. You know the coin envelopes were initialed by you, correct? "Answer: Correct." did you give that answer to that question on August 23rd?

# 84 MS. MAZZOLA:

I believe so.

# 85 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, your initials would be what, A.M.; is that correct?

# 86 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 87 MR. NEUFELD:

And when Dennis Fung would initial an envelope or item, he would initial it D.F.?

# 88 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 89 MR. NEUFELD:

So it was your sworn testimony on August 23rd that you and not Fung initialed the coin envelopes for the stains you personally collected?

# 90 MR. GOLDBERG:

It's argumentative.

# 91 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 92 MS. MAZZOLA:

At that time, I believe I had initialed them, yes.

# 93 MR. NEUFELD:

And at that time, ma'am, on August 23rd, it was just two months after you had actually gone out and collected the stains in this case; is that right?

# 94 MS. MAZZOLA:

Approximately two months, yes.

# 95 MR. NEUFELD:

All right. And would you--since August 23rd, have you been involved in other crime scene investigations?

# 96 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 97 MR. NEUFELD:

Approximately how many?

# 98 THE COURT:

Haven't we gone through this already?

# 99 MR. NEUFELD:

I have--well, it's just a foundation to get into the next question, your Honor.

# 100 THE COURT:

Well, then ask the next question.

# 101 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay.

# 102 MR. NEUFELD:

Isn't it a fact, Miss Mazzola, that this crime scene on June 13th was your very first one where you were the primary collector of bloodstain evidence?

# 103 THE COURT:

We've asked that question as well.

# 104 MR. NEUFELD:

I understand. There's a few of these that simply lead into the next point, your Honor.

# 105 THE COURT:

Well, if we've asked them already, let's proceed to what's new.

# 106 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay. Well, Miss Mazzola, between June 13th and August 23rd, isn't it a fact that you didn't do any other crime scenes?

# 107 MS. MAZZOLA:

I don't recall if I had or not.

# 108 MR. NEUFELD:

All right. And wouldn't you agree, ma'am, that since this was your very first crime scene where you were the primary collector of evidence, that your recollection of what transpired is more vivid than it is after doing many more crime scenes in the interim?

# 109 MR. GOLDBERG:

Assumes facts not in evidence and it's also unintelligible.

# 110 THE COURT:

Overruled. Do you understand the question?

# 111 MS. MAZZOLA:

Not really.

# 112 THE COURT:

Does this particular event stick out in your mind in any way because it was your first major crime scene that you collected the evidence?

# 113 MS. MAZZOLA:

It doesn't stick out in a major way, no.

# 114 THE COURT:

Proceed.

# 115 MR. NEUFELD:

In fact, it was your very first crime scene, Miss Mazzola, and it was a case involving such notoriety. Isn't it more vivid in your mind than are the other crime scenes that you have done in the interim?

# 116 MR. GOLDBERG:

Misstates the testimony as to "First crime scene."

# 117 THE COURT:

Overruled. You can answer the question.

# 118 MS. MAZZOLA:

Well, it was not my first crime scene and it's just another scene.

# 119 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola, this was just another scene for you?

# 120 THE COURT:

All right. Counsel, we've gone over and over and over this.

# 121 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola--

# 122 MR. NEUFELD:

I'm sorry.

# 123 MR. NEUFELD:

--it was your first crime scene though where you were the primary collector of blood evidence, wasn't it?

# 124 THE COURT:

This is the fifth time we're asking this question, counsel.

# 125 MR. NEUFELD:

All right.

# 126 MR. NEUFELD:

When you testified on August 23rd, Miss Mazzola, you didn't first discuss your testimony with your superior, Mrs. Kestler, did you?

# 127 MS. MAZZOLA:

No.

# 128 MR. NEUFELD:

But since August 23rd, you have discussed your involvement in this case in the presence of Miss Kestler, haven't you?

# 129 MR. GOLDBERG:

Asked and answered.

# 130 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 131 MR. NEUFELD:

Before you testified on August 23rd, you hadn't discussed this testimony with the District Attorneys, had you?

# 132 MR. GOLDBERG:

Asked and answered.

# 133 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 134 MR. NEUFELD:

He went into it on redirect, your Honor.

# 135 THE COURT:

Counsel, that doesn't mean that we have to hear it for the third time.

# 136 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay.

# 137 THE COURT:

Are you about to finish with your cross-examination? Do you have anything new?

# 138 MR. NEUFELD:

Yes, I do, your Honor.

# 139 THE COURT:

All right. Because the cross-examination is about to end.

# 140 MR. NEUFELD:

At any time during the last 10 months, Miss Mazzola, did your colleagues at SID tell you it's time to close ranks because they're under attack?

# 141 MS. MAZZOLA:

No.

# 142 MR. NEUFELD:

Are you aware as you sit here today that any of your colleagues have been criticized for the way they conducted themselves in this case?

# 143 MR. GOLDBERG:

Assumes facts not in evidence.

# 144 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 145 MR. GOLDBERG:

It's also argumentative.

# 146 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 147 MS. MAZZOLA:

Some of them have been talked about, yes.

# 148 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, not just talked about. Are you aware they've been criticized?

# 149 MR. GOLDBERG:

That's vague as to by whom.

# 150 THE COURT:

That's irrelevant.

# 151 MR. NEUFELD:

Are you aware, Miss Mazzola, as you sit here today that there have been reports in the media that the Defense in this case has criticized the SID where you work and the manner in which evidence was collected in this case?

# 152 THE COURT:

Sustained. Jury is to disregard the implication of the question.

# 153 MR. NEUFELD:

When was the first time that you reviewed your transcript of the testimony of August 23rd?

# 154 MS. MAZZOLA:

Maybe a month or so ago. Maybe a little more. I'm not exactly sure when.

# 155 MR. NEUFELD:

And did your supervisors at SID tell you that there was a big problem with your sworn testimony of August 23rd that you personally put your initials on every coin envelope for every stain that you collected on June 13th?

# 156 MS. MAZZOLA:

No.

# 157 MR. NEUFELD:

Did the Prosecutors tell you there was a problem with your August 23rd testimony on that point?

# 158 MS. MAZZOLA:

No.

# 159 MR. GOLDBERG:

Your Honor--

# 160 MR. NEUFELD:

When did the Prosecutors or SID supervisors first show you what they claim were the original coin envelopes from June 13th?

# 161 MS. MAZZOLA:

I saw pictures of the coin envelopes at the D.A.'s office.

# 162 MR. NEUFELD:

And when was that?

# 163 MS. MAZZOLA:

I--probably a month or less ago.

# 164 MR. NEUFELD:

And when you looked at those coin envelopes at that time--I'm sorry. When you looked at the photographs of those coin envelopes at that time, did you experience a moment of panic when you didn't see your initials on those coin envelopes?

# 165 MR. GOLDBERG:

Your Honor, this is argumentative.

# 166 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 167 MR. NEUFELD:

How did you feel when you saw those photographs of the coin envelopes that didn't have your initials on it?

# 168 MR. GOLDBERG:

Irrelevant.

# 169 THE COURT:

Well, assumes facts not in evidence.

# 170 MR. NEUFELD:

Subject to connection with the very next question.

# 171 THE COURT:

Proceed. How did you feel when you saw the photographs?

# 172 MS. MAZZOLA:

I didn't feel anything different.

# 173 THE COURT:

Proceed.

# 174 MR. NEUFELD:

Well--

# 175 MR. NEUFELD:

I ask that these be marked for identification, your Honor. They are one, two--

# 176 MR. GOLDBERG:

Your Honor, I'm going to object to those being introduced based upon our prior conversations. They still have biological evidence in them.

# 177 THE COURT:

All right. We'll mark them by reference. Do we have photographs of them as well?

# 178 MR. NEUFELD:

I don't have photographs of all of them, no.

# 179 MR. GOLDBERG:

I thought we had--we probably do.

# 180 THE COURT:

All right. We'll mark them by reference because the storage will remain with the LAPD. However, you may mark them by reference for the purpose of this hearing.

# 181 MR. NEUFELD:

All right. Should we mark them collectively as one exhibit next in order?

# 182 THE COURT:

I don't know because I think that we are going to need to refer to them individually when we get to the testing. So unfortunately, I think we need to individually mark each one of these.

# 183 MR. NEUFELD:

All right.

# 184 THE COURT:

Mr. Goldberg, do you agree with that?

# 185 MR. GOLDBERG:

Well, your Honor, what we had intended to do--I don't know whether you want me to discuss this in open Court--is simply refer to them by their item numbers, and that's the way everything would be connected up.

# 186 THE COURT:

So we'll have a third numbering system in this case, item number coin envelopes?

# 187 MR. GOLDBERG:

Well, I don't know--

# 188 THE COURT:

Is that what you're suggesting?

# 189 MR. GOLDBERG:

Yeah. But it's an evidentiary item number system as opposed to an exhibit item--

# 190 THE COURT:

I agree. Since we've been referring to that confusingly. So let's do that. Mrs. Robertson, we'll start a third list, coin envelopes by item number. All right. And, counsel, will both sides stipulate that the coin number--item number will be as written on the coin envelope for the purposes of the record? That will make it simpler.

# 191 MR. NEUFELD:

Yes. And I--

# 192 MR. GOLDBERG:

Yes.

# 193 THE COURT:

All right. Let's do it that way. Proceed.

# 194 MR. NEUFELD:

And I--and also with the further stipulation in fact that these are the original coin envelopes.

# 195 THE COURT:

Well, I assume as soon as we start with the witness, we'll get that. Proceed.

# 196 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, all right. I'm going to show you then the coin envelopes with the following numbers on them; 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12 and 14. Like you to take a look at them, please?

# 197 THE COURT:

All right. These are the Rockingham item numbers?

# 198 MR. NEUFELD:

Yes.

# 199 THE COURT:

All right.

# 200 (The witness complies.)

# 201 MS. MAZZOLA:

Okay.

# 202 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola, what I would like you to do is at this time collect from that pile the original coin envelopes for the Rockingham samples that you testified to on August 23rd you had put your initials on.

# 203 MR. GOLDBERG:

I object to that question on the grounds that it's unintelligible.

# 204 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 205 MR. GOLDBERG:

Can I just approach for one moment to see the coin envelopes?

# 206 THE COURT:

Certainly. Counsel, I don't know that anybody knows specifically what item numbers she was asked questions about during the August 23rd hearing.

# 207 MR. NEUFELD:

She was asked about--

# 208 THE COURT:

So why don't you just go over each one.

# 209 MR. NEUFELD:

All right. Miss Mazzola, referring to page 705 of your testimony of August 23rd, were you asked this question, did you give this answer?

# 210 MR. GOLDBERG:

May I have a line cite?

# 211 MR. NEUFELD:

Line 11.

# 212 MR. GOLDBERG:

This has been asked and answered, your Honor.

# 213 MR. NEUFELD:

Just one question.

# 214 THE COURT:

One question.

# 215 MR. NEUFELD:

"Question: And in each of these instances where you collected the stain, you personally initialed the envelope? "Answer: I collected the stain, it was initialed by me." you were asked that question, you gave that answer, correct?

# 216 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 217 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, Miss Mazzola, what I'm asking you to do is, in that pile of coin envelopes that you have in front of you with the numbers that I just gave you, each of those numbers represents a different item number; does it not?

# 218 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 219 MR. NEUFELD:

What I'm asking you to do is to pull out the coin envelopes with the item numbers for the blood drops found at the Rockingham property that at that August 23rd hearing I just read to you from in this case has your initials on them.

# 220 MR. GOLDBERG:

It's still argumentative and unintelligible.

# 221 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 222 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola, do any of those coin envelopes that have been produced in Court today by the Prosecutor have your initials on them?

# 223 MS. MAZZOLA:

These alone or--

# 224 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, I'm asking you about those. Those are the Rockingham--those have been reported to be the Rockingham blood drops.

# 225 MS. MAZZOLA:

No, they do not.

# 226 MR. NEUFELD:

And in fact, Miss Mazzola, whose initials on each one of those envelopes?

# 227 MS. MAZZOLA:

Mr. Fung's.

# 228 MR. NEUFELD:

And, Miss Mazzola, let's for instance take item no. 11. Item no. 11 you collected without Mr. Fung being present, correct? He didn't observe it?

# 229 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 230 MR. NEUFELD:

The coin envelope here that has item 11 on it, whose initials are on it?

# 231 MS. MAZZOLA:

Mr. Fung's as--

# 232 MR. NEUFELD:

Your initials--I'm sorry.

# 233 THE COURT:

Counsel.

# 234 MS. MAZZOLA:

Mr. Fung's as the one who booked them, did the final packaging.

# 235 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola, did you testify on August 23rd that for every stain that you personally collected, you put your initials on them?

# 236 MR. GOLDBERG:

This has been asked and answered.

# 237 THE COURT:

It has. We've established that point, counsel.

# 238 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola, item no. 11, he wasn't even present when you collected it, correct?

# 239 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 240 MR. GOLDBERG:

Asked and answered.

# 241 MR. NEUFELD:

Yet your initials are not on that envelope; is that correct?

# 242 MR. GOLDBERG:

Asked and answered, your Honor.

# 243 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 244 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 245 MR. NEUFELD:

Item no. 7 and item no.--I'm sorry. Item no. 7 was a stain that you personally collected on the driveway in front of Mr. Simpson's house, correct?

# 246 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 247 MR. NEUFELD:

And for item no. 7, Dennis Fung wasn't present, was he?

# 248 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 249 MR. NEUFELD:

Would you please look at item 7 on this envelope and see whether or not your initials are present?

# 250 MS. MAZZOLA:

My initials are not present.

# 251 MR. NEUFELD:

Item no. 8, another item that you collected without Dennis Fung even being present; is that correct?

# 252 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 253 MR. NEUFELD:

Are your initials on item no. 8?

# 254 MS. MAZZOLA:

No, they're not.

# 255 MR. NEUFELD:

And are you saying that the reason your initials are not on these envelopes is because you didn't book them? Is that your testimony today, ma'am?

# 256 MR. GOLDBERG:

Misstates the testimony.

# 257 THE COURT:

Sustained. Rephrase the question.

# 258 MR. NEUFELD:

You said that Dennis Fung's initials appear on that envelope. Is that because he's the one who booked the envelope?

# 259 MS. MAZZOLA:

He is the one who did the final packaging for that envelope.

# 260 MR. NEUFELD:

Is it your testimony now as opposed to August 23rd that the person who actually collected the stain doesn't put his or her initials on the envelope?

# 261 MR. GOLDBERG:

Argumentative and also vague as to which stain.

# 262 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 263 MS. MAZZOLA:

Back in August, I was under the assumption that I had to put my initials on the envelopes, and I was wrong.

KEY QUOTE

# 264 MR. NEUFELD:

When you testified on August 23rd, did you say, "I'm assuming that to be true," or did you say it was true, Miss Mazzola?

# 265 MR. GOLDBERG:

Asked and answered.

# 266 THE COURT:

It's argumentative as well.

# 267 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola, in response to the question as to whether you initialed the envelopes at the August 23rd hearing when you testified under oath, did you ever say, "I'm not sure"?

# 268 MR. GOLDBERG:

Argumentative, asked and answered.

# 269 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 270 MS. MAZZOLA:

I do not remember if I said, "I do not remember."

# 271 MR. NEUFELD:

Let me show you your testimony just to refresh your recollection.

# 272 THE COURT:

Counsel, we've gone over it now. You've established the point.

# 273 MR. NEUFELD:

All right.

# 274 MR. NEUFELD:

As you sit here today, it is your current belief that Dennis Fung put his initials on these envelopes?

# 275 MS. MAZZOLA:

On these, yes.

# 276 MR. NEUFELD:

And the reason he put them on these envelopes is because he was the one who was going to book them?

# 277 MS. MAZZOLA:

That he was the one who did the final packaging of that item, yes.

# 278 MR. NEUFELD:

When you say the final packaging, what do you mean?

# 279 MS. MAZZOLA:

Placing the bindle containing the cloth swatches in the envelope and sealing the envelope.

# 280 MR. NEUFELD:

And was the envelope sealed on the morning of the 14th to your knowledge?

# 281 MS. MAZZOLA:

I do not remember.

# 282 MR. NEUFELD:

Now show you a group of bindles--I'm sorry--a group of envelopes which would be item--following item numbers: Item 41, item 42, item 43--actually--withdraw that. I'm going to focus a little bit. There were a number of drops that were collected at Bundy; is that correct?

# 283 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 284 MR. NEUFELD:

And they received photo id numbers and item numbers; did they not?

# 285 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 286 MR. NEUFELD:

And the first item number would be 47?

# 287 MS. MAZZOLA:

Photo id 112?

# 288 MR. NEUFELD:

Right.

# 289 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 290 MR. NEUFELD:

And the next one would be 48?

# 291 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 292 MR. NEUFELD:

Photo id 113, right?

# 293 MS. MAZZOLA:

Uh-huh.

# 294 MR. NEUFELD:

Next item would be item 49?

# 295 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 296 THE COURT:

All right. The record will reflect the witness is referring to her field notes.

# 297 MR. NEUFELD:

And the next one would be item 50, which is id 115, correct?

# 298 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 299 MR. NEUFELD:

And finally the last one in that series of drops is item 52, which is 117, correct?

# 300 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 301 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay. Ask you to take a look at these items.

# 302 (The witness complies.)

# 303 MR. NEUFELD:

Now--

# 304 THE COURT:

Hold on. Let her look at the items.

# 305 MR. NEUFELD:

Sorry.

# 306 (Brief pause.)

# 307 MS. MAZZOLA:

Okay.

# 308 MR. NEUFELD:

Miss Mazzola, you personally collected the blood drop stains that became items 47, 48 and 50; is that correct?

# 309 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 310 MR. NEUFELD:

Do 47, 48 or 50 have your initials on them?

# 311 MS. MAZZOLA:

49 does.

# 312 MR. NEUFELD:

I'm sorry. I asked you first about 47, 48 and 50.

# 313 MS. MAZZOLA:

Oh, excuse me.

# 314 MR. NEUFELD:

Do those three have your initials on them?

# 315 MS. MAZZOLA:

No.

# 316 MR. NEUFELD:

They don't?

# 317 MS. MAZZOLA:

No.

# 318 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, items 49 and 52 have your initials; is that correct?

# 319 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 320 MR. NEUFELD:

And you're saying now that items 49 and 52 have your initials because you were the person who was there when the package was ultimately sealed for booking?

# 321 MS. MAZZOLA:

I am the one who placed the bindle in the package and sealed it.

# 322 MR. NEUFELD:

And sealed it. And when did that sealing occur, ma'am? What day?

# 323 MS. MAZZOLA:

I can't remember if it was the 14th or not.

# 324 MR. NEUFELD:

And they would be sealed for booking at the evidence control unit; isn't that right?

# 325 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct. Well, evidence processing room actually.

# 326 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, that's where you would do the sealing. But once they are actually sealed, then they're taken over to the evidence control unit to be frozen; isn't that right?

# 327 MS. MAZZOLA:

To be booked in and frozen, yes.

# 328 MR. NEUFELD:

And so to the best of your recollection as you sit here today, you sealed items 49 and 52 on June 14th for booking; is that correct?

# 329 MR. GOLDBERG:

Compound.

# 330 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 331 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, to the best of your recollection as you sit here today, did you seal item 49 for booking?

# 332 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 333 MR. NEUFELD:

On June 14th?

# 334 MS. MAZZOLA:

I--I'm not positive if it was June 14th or not.

# 335 MR. NEUFELD:

To the best of your recollection, which day was it?

# 336 MS. MAZZOLA:

I'm not sure if it was the 14th or the 15th. I'm not positive.

# 337 MR. NEUFELD:

Could be one or the other?

# 338 MS. MAZZOLA:

Could be.

# 339 MR. NEUFELD:

How about item 52? Are you saying that the reason your initials appear on item 52 is because you're the person who sealed that envelope for booking on June 14th or June 15th?

# 340 MS. MAZZOLA:

Correct.

# 341 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, up until the time that you saw photographs of these coin envelopes, didn't you believe that you had personally put your initials on every one of them?

# 342 MR. GOLDBERG:

Asked and answered, 352.

# 343 THE COURT:

Overruled. You can answer the question.

# 344 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes, I believe so.

# 345 MR. NEUFELD:

And so the reason you're now changing your mind as to whether you had in fact, as you testified on August 23rd, put your initials on each coin envelope for the stains that you collected, is because they're telling you that these are the original coin envelopes; isn't that true?

# 346 MS. MAZZOLA:

These are the original envelopes.

# 347 MR. NEUFELD:

When the District Attorneys showed you photographs of these coin envelopes, did they point out to you that most of the envelopes, contrary to your sworn testimony of August 23rd, didn't have your initials on them?

# 348 MS. MAZZOLA:

I do not believe so.

# 349 MR. NEUFELD:

And did you realize that when the Prosecutors showed you the coin envelopes, that if your sworn testimony of August 23rd was correct, then the absence of your initials on some of these coin envelopes could mean that the original evidence may have been tampered with?

# 350 MR. GOLDBERG:

Your Honor--

# 351 MR. NEUFELD:

In your mind?

# 352 MR. GOLDBERG:

--argumentative.

# 353 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 354 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, when the Prosecutors showed you those photographs, up until that time, you believed to the best of your recollection that you had written your initials on the original coin envelopes at the scene on June 13th; isn't that true?

# 355 MS. MAZZOLA:

Yes.

# 356 MR. NEUFELD:

Would you agree, ma'am, that if your testimony on August 23rd was truthful and was accurate, that that would mean that these envelopes were not the original envelopes?

# 357 THE COURT:

Sustained. Speculation, counsel.

# 358 MR. NEUFELD:

And before you testified on direct examination, Miss Mazzola, did the Prosecutors tell you that they wanted you to testify at this trial that your August 23rd testimony was false?

# 359 MR. GOLDBERG:

Your Honor, this is not--

# 360 THE COURT:

Sustained. Counsel, without the Court reporter, please.

Temperature

devastating

Key Quotes (5)

Andrea Mazzola

Back in August, I was under the assumption that I had to put my initials on the envelopes, and I was wrong.

Core impeachment admission — she is now recanting sworn testimony given two months after the crime scene, explaining it as an 'assumption' rather than a memory failure, which undermines her credibility as a meticulous evidence handler.

Andrea Mazzola

I collected the stain, it was initialed by me.

Her August 23, 1994 sworn testimony, read back to her during cross, which directly contradicts the coin envelopes in evidence bearing only Fung's initials.

Andrea Mazzola

No, they do not. [her initials are not on the Rockingham envelopes]

Confirms the factual gap at the heart of the impeachment — items she personally collected, sometimes without Fung even present, do not bear her initials as she previously swore.

Andrea Mazzola

Yes, I believe so. [she believed she had initialed every envelope until she saw photographs]

Establishes that her change of testimony was triggered by reviewing prosecution-provided photographs, raising Neufeld's implied question of whether she was coached to change her story.

Lance A. Ito

don't anybody sneeze.

Rare moment of levity from the bench while Neufeld held up the tiny swatches for the jury.

Evidence (4)

People's 163-e

Coin envelope containing plastic bags and white cloth swatches from a bloodstain collection

displayed to jury to demonstrate how similar swatches, plastic bags, and coin envelopes look, illustrating identification concerns

Item nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14 (Rockingham coin envelopes)

Original coin envelopes for blood drops collected at the Rockingham property

produced in court; shown to bear Dennis Fung's initials, not Mazzola's, despite her prior sworn testimony

Item nos. 47, 48, 49, 50, 52 (Bundy coin envelopes)

Original coin envelopes for blood drops collected at the Bundy crime scene

examined by witness; items 47, 48, 50 (collected by Mazzola) lack her initials; items 49 and 52 bear her initials because she did the final sealing

Informal

Transcript of Mazzola's August 23, 1994 sworn testimony, pages 705 and 768

read back to witness verbatim to establish prior inconsistent statements about initialing coin envelopes

Notable Exchanges (5)

Peter Neufeld•Andrea Mazzola

Neufeld walks Mazzola through items 7, 8, and 11 — each collected by her without Fung present — and confirms none bear her initials, directly contradicting her August 23 testimony. She concedes each one individually.

devastating

Peter Neufeld•Andrea Mazzola

Neufeld asks whether, if her August 23 testimony was accurate, the absence of her initials would mean the envelopes had been tampered with. Sustained on speculation, but the implication lands before the jury.

strategic

Peter Neufeld•Lance A. Ito

Ito repeatedly interrupts cross-examination to note questions have been asked multiple times, at one point saying 'This is the fifth time we're asking this question, counsel.' Neufeld defends repetition as necessary foundation for new points.

tense

Peter Neufeld•Andrea Mazzola

Neufeld asks whether prosecutors told Mazzola her August 23 testimony was false and asked her to recant it at trial. Sustained before she answers, but the question itself is the attack.

heated

Lance A. Ito•Hank Goldberg•Peter Neufeld

Extended procedural discussion about how to mark the coin envelopes for the record — they end up creating a third numbering system using the item numbers already written on the envelopes.

procedural

Light Moments (1)

Lance A. Ito

While Neufeld held up tiny cloth swatches for the jury, Judge Ito quipped 'don't anybody sneeze' about the delicate evidence.

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Andrea Mazzola

prior inconsistent statement

Neufeld reads back Mazzola's August 23, 1994 sworn testimony in which she stated definitively that she personally initialed every coin envelope for every stain she collected. The actual envelopes in court bear Fung's initials. She now claims her prior testimony was based on a mistaken 'assumption.'

⚔ Andrea Mazzola

bias / coached testimony

Neufeld establishes that Mazzola changed her account only after prosecutors showed her photographs of the coin envelopes approximately one month before trial. He implies — through sustained questions — that prosecutors directed her to recant her August 23 testimony rather than allow the jury to consider whether the original envelopes had been switched.

⚔ Andrea Mazzola

institutional pressure

Neufeld asks whether SID colleagues told her 'it's time to close ranks because they're under attack' — denied by Mazzola, but the question places her changed testimony in the context of collective institutional self-protection.

Witness Demeanor

(The witness complies.) — reviewing coin envelope pile

(Brief pause.) — examining Bundy coin envelopes

Witness refers to field notes when reciting photo ID numbers

Witness says she 'didn't feel anything different' when seeing photographs of envelopes without her initials — notably flat affect on a charged question

Objections

26 objections (12 sustained, 11 overruled)

Proceeding 5830 • 360 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103