All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present. The jury is not present. Mr.--what happened to Mr. Douglas and Mr. Hodgman? There's Mr. Douglas. Mr. Douglas, did you have the opportunity to confer with the gentleman from the department of street lighting?
We did, your Honor. Thank you. Following our discussions, Mr. Hernandez, who was quite cooperative, was unable to confirm specifically that the two lights in both locations are in fact identical to as they were on June the 12th. As the Court will recall, we were informed by the police that a specific order was made to change the lighting given the problems that was attendant to the influx in traffic with tourism and foot traffic, and though he was able to check and verify a certain number on the outside of the lightbulb, he did not actually remove the casing and check the bulb. He will do that today and he will be available on Friday. Assuming we go back out to the scene and if in fact there was a change, it's been agreed, though we still reserve our objections, that he will then make the appropriate changes.
We don't have the representative here, your Honor. I didn't know you were going to address it with Mr. Douglas now. But the representative from our office that talked to Mr. Hernandez with Mr. Douglas is not present. So we don't--
Oh, I accept Mr. Douglas' representation that the bulb will be checked to see if it matches what's supposed to be there, and if it's different, it will be changed to what it was supposed to be. I just said I accept your representation, Mr. Douglas, is what I just indicated.
There's one other thing if I might that I just want to point out. That we got a number of calls--this is from Professor Dershowitz--regarding this high-speed tape reproduction. And these are supposedly experts in the field who stated that if one does a high resolution, high-speed tape reproduction, the very likely result would be significant distortion in voice inflection, word loss, et cetera, et cetera, and this is not the necessary method to duplicate these tapes. And so I raise this because, Judge, we've gone to a lot of trouble, this is very important and I don't want to have these tapes altered or--
I understand apparently it's been worked out. I wanted to make sure it wasn't done by people who didn't understand. Apparently they've worked it out now and it's going to be okay. Thank you, your Honor.
All right. Thank you. We'll leave it to the experts in their respective fields. All right. Anything else we need to discuss before we resume with the jury?
All right. Let me ask one other question. What is the possibility of having witnesses available tomorrow?
Your Honor, I'm glad you asked that question, your Honor. We've thought long and hard and tried to do everything we could in this connection, but the Court I think is aware that we're at the point of the tapes quite frankly. The witnesses after that, the Court knows who those witnesses are. There are several witnesses in Chicago and there's Mr. Weitzman, as I indicated, all of whom are not available at all this week. We just could not get them. So we have Mr. Aguilar for--hopefully we can finish him by lunch time.
Mr. Ragle--as the Court is aware, Mr. Ragle is being handled by Mr. Blasier. As part of our order, he will come right before Dr. Henry Lee. And Mr. Blasier, as you know, because of a previous commitment, will not be here this afternoon or tomorrow either, your Honor.
You certainly could, your Honor. But I think we're not ready yet. He will come right before Dr. Lee if the Court pleases. And that's the problem. So we have tried very hard not to have any downtime, but we need the time for the tapes. We're at that point in the case, and we did lose some time by the People's motion. So I wanted to let the Court know as soon as possible so perhaps the jury can have some type of diversion tomorrow where they won't have to come in. And we've done everything we could as far as getting witnesses, but we're at that point where we're going to be able to do Mr. Aguilar today, hopefully resolve the tape matter on Monday and then finish our case hopefully next week.
All right. Then I will tell the jury when we break today that we have run out of witnesses at this point, that there's a significant legal issue that the Court needs to attend to and that we'll reconvene with the jury hopefully Monday morning.
That's fine. And we'll be in touch with your Honor regarding these tapes and what happens with the--
Right. Well, we're going to make sure you get that. Hopefully we'd like to give you a redacted set that's been enhanced. You know, you have the--and it'll make it easier with all the tapes. It is a lot more work than I thought, doing those verbatim tapes.
Yes, your Honor. Mr. Douglas had given me a handwritten statement as to the stipulation that he wanted, and that was acceptable to me, but I had asked for a stipulation in response to that with respect to prints lifted from the Defendant's Bronco by latent print investigator finch.
Mr. Douglas had asked that I stipulate to the lifting of latent prints from the location at Bundy, which I agreed to do, and I'm only asking that in response, the Defense stipulate to the lifting of latent prints from the Defendant's Bronco on June the 14th.
Well, the only problem--I have no problem with that except that part of my examination today, your Honor, I want to go into the Bundy crime scene. So that with respect--limited to that. This is our case and that's how we choose to call it. So I have no problem with the foundational stipulation, but we would object to beyond the scope of our direct examination, because we're only limiting it to Bundy as the limited portion.
Are you--excuse me. Miss Clark, are you going to be calling Mr. Aguilar as one of your witnesses with regards to the fingerprints in the Bronco?
If we have to, we will. You know, sure. Let's waste some more time. Great idea. You know, we have the witness on the witness stand. We all know he lifted prints from the Defendant's Bronco. We all know that the latent print person was there on the 14th at 1:30, lifted the prints, compared them.
I felt the same way, your Honor. But it is important that--all we're asking is that the Defense stipulate that on June the 14th between 1:30--excuse me. I'm sorry--between 1:30 and 3 o'clock, that latent print investigator finch responded to the Bronco and dusted it for--lifted latent prints from the door, the driver's side door. That's all we're asking.
KEY QUOTEI have no problem with that as I indicated. The problem is, as I said many times, and counsel knows it--
Well, she's asking you at this point, are you willing to stipulate to that while this witness is here.
I'm willing to stipulate to that, yes, your Honor, but I still object to any testimony about the Bronco. I'm limiting my examination to Bundy. I think that's what's relevant.
Well, you're giving me an inconsistent answer here, Mr. Cochran. Are you willing to stipulate to that with this witness here today?
All right. Thank you. You're right. You are entitled to present your case. But since this guy's here--
If I understand Mr. Cochran correctly, he wants to stipulate to the foundational issue of the latent prints having been taken as represented in the report. I would ask that counsel stipulate to the information on this report as being true and accurate, which is a page labeled L99, as I have agreed to stipulate to similar pages for their witness today. And we will--
It would just help if we tried to do these stipulations beforehand, counsel.
KEY QUOTELet's waste some more time. Great idea.
That's hardly surprising.
I felt the same way, your Honor.
We've gone to a lot of trouble, this is very important and I don't want to have these tapes altered or--
It would just help if we tried to do these stipulations beforehand, counsel.