Defense expert Larry Ragle, a former Orange County crime lab director, testified for most of the day that LAPD's handling of the Bundy and Rockingham crime scenes fell below minimum professional standards. Prosecutor Goldberg's cross-examination methodically challenged Ragle's credibility, establishing that he had not worked an actual crime scene in 19 years and arguing that some disputed procedures reflected variation in forensic practice; Ragle defended the consistency of core principles and clarified his supervisory review experience. The day began with administrative battles over evidence handling and discovery, and later included questions over whether Ragle's examination of the Bronco without protective equipment raised contamination concerns, followed by defense testimony that he did not touch or process the console and remained under observation.

• Prosecution withdrew its request for a nighttime Bundy Drive jury viewing after the judge and counsel determined that the June 12 lighting conditions could not be adequately replicated.
• Defense expert Larry Ragle testified that LAPD did not begin criminalist processing at Bundy until approximately ten hours after the bodies were discovered, improperly handled blood evidence, and neglected proper crime scene documentation.
• Prosecutor Goldberg challenged Ragle's current hands-on experience, eliciting that he had not worked an actual crime scene in 19 years.
• Ragle testified that two blood spots on the Bronco door would not be visible with the door closed, testimony used to question Fuhrman's credibility.
• Goldberg introduced a photograph showing Ragle examining the Bronco without gloves, hairnet, or lab coat, raising implicit contamination concerns for DNA evidence later collected from the console.
• Judge Ito sharply rebuked prosecutor Goldberg as 'unreasonable' over a dispute regarding Dr. Henry Lee photographs.