All right. Any other issues we need to address before we go to the Fuhrman tape issue?

One short issue, your Honor. I noticed yesterday, in reviewing some tapes of Dr. Lee's testimony, that there was a question--

Once wasn't enough?

Well, it was something that came out that was--when I watched the tape and I correlated with what I heard in court, it came out a little differently than I had heard it, and I just wanted to be clear on the record because of what the events--

I'm not getting the drift of what you are saying.

Let me be specific. What happened was that Mr. Goldberg asked Dr. Lee a question to the effect of did you make any findings consistent with blood at the Rockingham location? And Dr. Lee said something to the effect of he had conducted tests on a doorknob, sink traps and air conditioner, and at that point as he was about to explain something further, Mr. Goldberg got up and said I think you've answered the question. Now, I at that point was standing up as well because I thought, and it was--I thought what Mr. Goldberg was doing is that he knew, we all knew that there had be presumptive tests conducted at Rockingham on sink traps and a doorknob and the metal top of an air conditioner where there was no red stain, and these are the kind of presumptive tests that Dr. Lee was about to say give false positives because they are metal surfaces and if he tests any sink, any trap of a sink, he is going to get a false positive if he did it in any household, because of bacteria, metal, et cetera, so I thought that was what the answer was. When Mr. Goldberg was stopping him from answering I thought he was doing that because he didn't want to elicit testimony that was against the rule of the court and I thought that it hadn't really come out because he didn't testify to what the results were. But then yesterday, looking at the tapes and the reaction of some people to the tapes, it became a concern of mine that the People might actually try to use that testimony to sum up that blood was found in the air conditioning area of Rockingham. I just want to make clear that we have an objection to that.

All right.

And that that would have been improper. I didn't think it came out that way. That is not what Dr. Lee's testimony would be. And if an affidavit is necessary, I spoke to him this morning, he would gladly submit it to the court, so basically the only relief I'm asking for at this point is that no reference be made to that testimony or argument to that effect, that there was blood evidence found in that area because, that is not the results.

All right. This is a comment for the purposes of making a timely objection, I take it then?

Yes.