Recross-examination of Dr. Henry Lee (part 1)

📄 Recross-examination of Dr. Henry Lee (part 1) — Monday, August 28, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\AUG\28\RECROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-DR-HENR.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 143 of 167

◀ Redirect examination of Dr. Henry Lee (part 1) Sidebar: Hoeplinger case reference ▶

Witness: Dr. Henry Lee
Examiner: Hank Goldberg
Called by: Defense • Date: Monday, August 28, 1995 • Utterances: 86

Goldberg cross-examines Dr. Henry Lee on the limits of his personal casework experience with wet swatches, attempting to undermine his testimony about blood transfer and drying times. The examination culminates in a strategic impeachment attempt using a 1984 case (People v. Hoeplinger) where a brutal beating left enormous blood at the scene but only two drops on the suspect's jeans — directly challenging Lee's 'in theory, there should be some blood' opinion about OJ Simpson. The proceeding ends abruptly with a sidebar request just as Goldberg is about to read from the Hoeplinger transcript.

# 1 MR. GOLDBERG:

Dr. Lee, you said that your own experience, personal experience with wet swatches in casework was letting them dry overnight; is that correct?

# 2 DR. LEE:

Yes, sir.

# 3 MR. GOLDBERG:

And then after approximately 12 hours, coming back to the laboratory and seeing that they were dry?

# 4 DR. LEE:

Yes, sir.

# 5 MR. GOLDBERG:

And when was it that these personal experiences stopped?

# 6 DR. LEE:

Personal experience stop? No. I continue gather personal experience even today. Here, that's another personal experience.

KEY QUOTE

# 7 MR. GOLDBERG:

With wet swatches in test tubes, the personal experiences in casework with wet swatches in test tubes that you referred to on direct.

# 8 DR. LEE:

Uh, the last experiment I conduct--

# 9 MR. GOLDBERG:

No. I'm not asking about that. I'm saying casework experience.

# 10 MR. SCHECK:

Your Honor, I think the witness should be allowed to answer.

# 11 THE COURT:

No. He's talking--it's clearly casework experience. That was the question.

# 12 MR. SCHECK:

Personal experience, your Honor.

# 13 THE COURT:

Casework experience.

# 14 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. Doctor--

# 15 DR. LEE:

Casework experience, every day our--although I don't transfer bloodstain every day, but my serologists, my DNA scientists, they call does that every day.

# 16 MR. GOLDBERG:

Not responsive. Motion to strike your Honor.

# 17 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 18 MR. GOLDBERG:

Dr. Lee, let me ask you this way. You said at some point you have switched from swatches to threads; is that correct?

# 19 DR. LEE:

No, that's not what I'm saying. I saying if at the scene have a bloodstain, we going to--if something can move, I usual advise take the whole thing back to the laboratory, move that. For example, this box have some blood drops. Just collect this box. If something cannot move, for example, deposit in this bench, then we scrape, scrape the bloodstain. If cannot scrape, we use tape, lift, lifting.

# 20 MR. GOLDBERG:

Your Honor, this is all nonresponsive. Motion to strike.

# 21 THE COURT:

Overruled. Ask your next question.

# 22 MR. GOLDBERG:

Doctor, let's just make it very simple. When stains are removed from a crime scene--

# 23 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 24 MR. GOLDBERG:

--by alluding them on to some cotton object--

# 25 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 26 MR. GOLDBERG:

--is it true you are now using threads as opposed to swatches?

# 27 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 28 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. Now, when did that change take place?

# 29 DR. LEE:

I forgot. I don't know exactly day and time. Probably couple years now.

# 30 MR. GOLDBERG:

Well, didn't you write in some of your 1986 work for the protocol for Connecticut State Police to use threads instead of swatches?

# 31 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 32 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. So is it correct to say that since 1986, you do not have any personal experience in casework with swatches at crime scenes?

# 33 DR. LEE:

No. That's not true. Every day, we still--if the known samples submit to the laboratory, we transfer to a swatch. Still use swatch in the laboratory.

# 34 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. But your personal experience in casework is checking the swatches 12 hours after they were set out to dry; is that correct?

# 35 DR. LEE:

Usually we dry overnight.

# 36 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. And--and the purpose of the labor and Epstein materials is basically a cautionary statement, as you said, to forensic scientists, be careful, drying times are hard to predict, a lot of variables go into it, right?

# 37 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 38 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. And you agree with that personally, don't you?

# 39 DR. LEE:

I agree with that if a range, have a time of the range.

# 40 MR. GOLDBERG:

But you agree that there are many, many variables and it's hard to predict as stated in labor and Epstein; is that correct?

# 41 DR. LEE:

There are some variable, more variable at the criminal scene than more variable in the laboratory. Laboratory should be a control situation.

# 42 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. And do you have personal knowledge as to how cold--what the temperatures were LAPD--

# 43 DR. LEE:

No.

# 44 MR. GOLDBERG:

--drying facility overnight?

# 45 DR. LEE:

No.

# 46 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. Now, let's get to one of your comments about in theory, there should be some blood in response to Mr. Scheck's line of questioning.

# 47 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 48 MR. GOLDBERG:

Remember that?

# 49 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 50 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. Would that also depend upon where the suspect was standing?

# 51 DR. LEE:

Uh, depends on whether or not a combat situation, hand-to-hand combat situation. You have distance, of course, the chances for getting blood on unless some material spurt or certain force, internal force or external force. You have injury on the hand, have a cast off, have other motion, that going to cast to greater distance. If in close contact, if large amount of blood come out, you going to have more blood.

# 52 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. What I'm asking you is, in this particular case, based upon what you know, from your own viewing of the evidence, not from the pathologists, what does some blood mean? Is there any way of quantifying that?

# 53 DR. LEE:

Yes. If I look at Mr. Goldman's blue jean and his shirt, one side of his blue jean have large amount of blood, covers. If a person in a close combat situation, that should cover with blood. If did not have a close combat situation in a distance, then you have less blood.

# 54 MR. GOLDBERG:

If someone is standing behind the victim in this case when his throat is cut, would that influence how much blood he had on him, an assailant?

# 55 DR. LEE:

Yes. That going to be a factor. And again, Ron Goldman's blue jean in the back covered with blood, which, if assume those blood from original scene, a person have a direct contact trying to halt him, then you going to have transfer.

# 56 MR. GOLDBERG:

And you can't make that assumption, can you?

# 57 DR. LEE:

No. I wasn't at the scene. I don't know.

# 58 MR. GOLDBERG:

And you can't make the assumption regarding the blood pattern on Ron Goldman's jeans; is that correct?

# 59 DR. LEE:

I only can see on the blue jean there are patterns. But I know the mechanism, but I really don't know what the main mode transfer.

# 60 MR. GOLDBERG:

Let me ask you this, doctor. Do you recall one of your fairly well known cases back in 1984 by the name of People versus Hoeplinger where a husband beat his wife to death by hitting her numerous times in the head with a brick, drug her body out to a fish pond, drug her back into the house and then claimed that someone else broke into the home and committed the murder?

# 61 DR. LEE:

80 percent correct. Not drag to the fish pond. Never got to the fish pond.

KEY QUOTE

# 62 MR. GOLDBERG:

Only part way?

# 63 DR. LEE:

Drug, carry to a location end of the driveway and drag into a pack of Sandril (Sic) to--near the neighbor's house and carry the body, half drug, half carry, put back in family room on the sofa.

# 64 MR. GOLDBERG:

And isn't it true that that kind of an assault with the brick on the head by beating numerous times produces enormous amount of blood and it did so in the Hoeplinger case?

# 65 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 66 MR. GOLDBERG:

And isn't it true that on the suspect's jeans, there were only two drops of blood?

# 67 DR. LEE:

Well, we assume that's the original jean. I don't have any record, but I do know he wash his T-shirt. I found a T-shirt washed in the pond.

# 68 MR. GOLDBERG:

Right.

# 69 DR. LEE:

But the blue jean, whether or not that's the original blue jean, I have no or information, record of it.

# 70 MR. GOLDBERG:

Well, you testified in court and those blue jeans were presented to a jury as being worn by the suspects--suspect, the husband at the time of the murder; is that correct?

# 71 DR. LEE:

I--that's long time ago. If you say correct, probably correct. I don't recall. There's thousands cases I been working on.

# 72 MR. GOLDBERG:

Does that seem to be consistent with your memory?

# 73 DR. LEE:

Sure. Sure.

# 74 MR. GOLDBERG:

And only two blood drops?

# 75 DR. LEE:

I don't remember. If you say two drops, it's two drop.

KEY QUOTE

# 76 MR. GOLDBERG:

And the scene was covered in blood, correct?

# 77 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 78 MR. GOLDBERG:

And when you testified, you didn't tell the jury in that case that you had any doubt about whether he was wearing those pants or anything to that effect, did you?

# 79 DR. LEE:

I wasn't asked. As a scientist, I only can answer the question, whatever the lawyer. Otherwise I will be stopped.

KEY QUOTE

# 80 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. Well, I'm just going to give a copy of the transcript to counsel. At page 397 of the Hoeplinger transcript.

# 81 MR. GOLDBERG:

Sir, do you remember being asked a lot of questions--

# 82 THE COURT:

Hold on. Hold on. Hold on.

# 83 MR. GOLDBERG:

Sorry.

# 84 (Brief pause.)

# 85 MR. SCHECK:

Your Honor, may we approach?

# 86 THE COURT:

With the court reporter, please.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Dr. Henry Lee

Personal experience stop? No. I continue gather personal experience even today. Here, that's another personal experience.

Lee deflects Goldberg's attempt to date-limit his expertise by cheekily noting that the trial itself is adding to his experience — witty and hard to pin down.

Dr. Henry Lee

80 percent correct. Not drag to the fish pond. Never got to the fish pond.

Lee confidently corrects Goldberg's characterization of the Hoeplinger case, demonstrating precise recall — but the correction also confirms the core facts Goldberg needs for his impeachment.

Dr. Henry Lee

I wasn't asked. As a scientist, I only can answer the question, whatever the lawyer. Otherwise I will be stopped.

Lee explains why he didn't volunteer doubts about the suspect's jeans in Hoeplinger — a defense of his role as a scientist, but one that implicitly admits he answered narrowly rather than offering full context.

Dr. Henry Lee

I don't remember. If you say two drops, it's two drop.

Lee's casual acceptance of Goldberg's characterization of the Hoeplinger evidence — strategically damaging, as it concedes the key fact that a bloody scene produced almost no blood on the suspect.

Evidence (4)

Informal

Ron Goldman's blue jeans — both sides discussed blood coverage on front and back

discussed as basis for blood transfer theory

Informal

Labor and Epstein materials — scientific literature on swatch drying times and variables

referenced to establish cautionary nature of drying-time predictions

Informal

People v. Hoeplinger (1984) trial transcript, page 397 — prior case where Lee testified

Goldberg about to read from it for impeachment when sidebar interrupted

Informal

Washed T-shirt found in pond — from Hoeplinger case

referenced by Lee to complicate the blood-on-clothing analysis in that case

Notable Exchanges (3)

Hank Goldberg•Dr. Henry Lee

Goldberg tries to establish that Lee's personal casework experience with wet swatches ended in 1986 when he switched to threads; Lee refuses the binary framing and pivots to lab-based swatch use, frustrating Goldberg into repeated motions to strike.

strategic

Hank Goldberg•Dr. Henry Lee

Goldberg walks Lee through the Hoeplinger case — a husband who beat his wife to death with a brick in a blood-soaked scene — where the suspect's jeans showed only two drops. The implication: Lee testified without raising doubts about the clothing in that case, undercutting his 'there should be some blood' opinion here.

devastating

Barry Scheck•Judge Ito

Scheck objects to Goldberg's narrow framing of 'casework experience,' arguing Lee should be allowed to answer more broadly; Ito sides with Goldberg's framing and overrules.

procedural

Light Moments (2)

Dr. Henry Lee

When Goldberg asks if Lee's personal experience with wet swatches has stopped, Lee quips that he continues gaining personal experience 'even today. Here, that's another personal experience' — treating the Simpson trial itself as a data point.

Dr. Henry Lee

Lee corrects Goldberg's Hoeplinger facts with 'eighty percent correct' before explaining exactly where the body was dragged — precise, slightly pedantic, and delivered with apparent relish.

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Dr. Henry Lee

prior inconsistent conduct / bias by omission

Goldberg uses the Hoeplinger case to show that Lee previously testified without raising doubts when a bloody crime scene produced minimal blood on a suspect — directly contradicting the implication of his 'there should be some blood' testimony here. Lee's defense ('I wasn't asked') actually reinforces that he answers narrowly to whatever lawyers ask, which Goldberg can use to suggest his opinions are shaped by which side retained him.

⚔ Dr. Henry Lee

limiting personal experience

Goldberg attempts to establish that Lee's direct casework experience with wet swatches ended around 1986, potentially dating his practical knowledge and undermining the weight of his drying-time opinions.

Witness Demeanor

Dr. Lee is confident and resistant to narrow framing, consistently giving broader answers than Goldberg wants

Lee appears unbothered by motions to strike, continuing to answer in his characteristic expansive style

When confronted with Hoeplinger, Lee shows no defensiveness — he accepts the facts casually ('If you say two drops, it's two drop') while subtly complicating the picture with the washed T-shirt detail

(Brief pause.) noted before Scheck requests sidebar, suggesting tension building before transcript cuts off

Objections

4 objections (0 sustained, 3 overruled)

Proceeding 7452 • 86 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103