I wish to display on the elmo, have printed out as exhibits some photographs from Spitz and Fisher which demonstrate defensive wounds to the arms and leg areas of people who have been killed by sharp force injuries. These are from photographs on pages 260, 261, 262, 263, 264 of the Spitz and Fisher medical legal investigation of death, 3rd edition.
I'm sorry. Is it 261? A full-page photograph as I recall. Can I just approach briefly, your Honor, to--260. May I proceed, your Honor?
Your Honor, Dr. Baden has opined regarding the extent of a struggle between both Nicole Brown Simpson and the perpetrator or perpetrators and between Ronald Goldman and the perpetrator or perpetrators, and as part of a basis for his opinion, he refers to defensive wounds and possibly the absence of defensive wounds as pertains to Dr. Lakshmanan's testimony on the issue of a punch being inconsistent with the kind of blunt force trauma seen on the back of Mr. Goldman's hands.
These photographs from this recognized forensic pathology text show the kind of forensic wounds which in fact are seen on the back of the arms and so forth, and it's important that the jury see what would be there if in fact Dr. Baden's opinion of a punch being thrown were in fact supportable. It is the absence of those kinds of wounds which Dr. Lakshmanan says is part of the reason he forms the opinion that the one bruise on the knuckle is not the product of a blow from a fist of Mr. Goldman to the perpetrator. It's important that this jury see how defensive wounds appear. The photograph of the legs, for example, there's one--
--of the legs is important because Dr. Baden has also formed an opinion with respect to a cut in Mr. Goldman's shoe. And what the text will indicate is that sometimes you will see defensive wounds in the legs, primarily or more commonly with women than with men, according to the text, and will see of course there are no such injuries, no cuts to the jean and so forth in that area of Mr. Goldman's leg to support our contention that Dr. Baden's view of what that cut in the shoe is simply wrong. So the jury needs to see what these kinds of wounds look like, these defensive wounds in various areas of the body so they can understand what is the significance if any of the presence or absence of defensive wounds on both victims in those areas of the body.
Your Honor, with regard to the extent of cross-examination, clearly this is an area where the Prosecutor can make inquiry. With regard to the photographs specifically, I think we're going to run into a 352 problem because that will open a door for enormous amounts of potential photographs of all types of wounds on victims who were unrelated to this case, and there is no showing that those wounds as depicted in those photographs have anything to do with the wounds to the victims in this case. So I think the area of examination can be done, but without photographic demonstration with those photographs because I think we are going to be spending an inordinate amount of time then viewing photographs of potential defense wounds which may run into the tens of thousands.
All right. Mr. Kelberg, you propose to use the photographs of 261, 262, 263 and 264?
I agree with Mr. Shapiro that the issue--I mean the issue is relevant. But these photographs deal with examples and case histories and multiple other bodies and multiple other cases.
I understand, your Honor. But these are representative of the kinds of defensive wounds one can commonly see in these cases of death by sharp force injuries, and whether we have them or we don't have them with respect to these two victims is extremely important for the jury to see and understand in evaluating whether Dr. Baden's opinion of the struggle is correct or Dr. Lakshmanan's opinion of the struggle is correct; and in particular, with respect to Mr. Goldman, whether he threw a punch or he didn't throw a punch, whether he got these injuries to the back of his hands by flailing backwards and hitting trees or bars or whether he got them from trying to punch the perpetrator, whether that cut in the shoe is really a cut from a knife or is pure speculation on Dr. Baden's part. The jury has no way of putting this into context without some kind of reference to what kind of injuries can one see in the form of defensive wounds when people are killed by sharp force injury.
I think your Honor has framed the issue very succinctly, and that is that these are only examples and that when we get into defensive wounds, the position of the Prosecution through their entire eight days of examination has been consistent with, which medically means "Possibly," "Could it have been." And when we get into "Could it have been," we can offer examples for a month as to possible defensive wounds.
Well, I think what Mr. Kelberg is going to say though is, aren't defensive wounds of this particular area commonly found, answer, yes or no; here's an example. Did you see anything like this on either Nicole Brown Simpson or Ronald Goldman. The answer will be no I suspect.
And doesn't that give us the opportunity if we so choose to come back with a myriad of examples of photographs showing defense wounds that are consistent and then we have a trial--
Your Honor, I doubt Dr. Spitz would put odd ball photographs in a book that is to be used nationwide.
KEY QUOTEWell, what I mean by odd ball, I mean a potpourri of different cases of different specific examples of other things that could have happened.
I understand. But I think it's logical to infer that Dr. Spitz uses representative samples of photographs to highlight the kinds of things one commonly sees in the form of defensive wounds with people who are murdered by sharp force injury.
My recollection of Dr. Spitz' book is, there's nothing in there which says these are representative types of injuries and exclude all others, and I think Mr. Kelberg knows that. And then we're getting back away from why an expert is called. An expert is called for the purpose of offering an expert opinion, an opinion that is reasonable to a degree of medical certainty, not speculation. If we want to speculate on defensive wounds, I assure your Honor--and I think your Honor well knows--we could be here for a very long time as we have been in the past with other examples of what could have been, what might have been, what possibly was.
All right. These photographs are in black and white. They appear to be illustrative of certain types of defensive wounds. They do have probative value. I am concerned about the amount of time, however, that we're going to involve in using this. Mr. Kelberg, the manner in which I framed the question is the manner in which I expect it to be done here, in other words, three questions per--
Trial by odd ball photograph.
Your Honor, I doubt Dr. Spitz would put odd ball photographs in a book that is to be used nationwide.
I assure your Honor--and I think your Honor well knows--we could be here for a very long time as we have been in the past with other examples of what could have been, what might have been, what possibly was.
Mr. Kelberg, the manner in which I framed the question is the manner in which I expect it to be done here, in other words, three questions per--