BACK ON THE RECORD. MR. COCHRAN, FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS PROCEEDING, TO CONTINUE THE HEARING AS TO MARGUERITE SIMPSON OVER, DO YOU WANT TO WAIVE YOUR CLIENT'S PRESENCE TO PICK ANOTHER DATE?
YEAH, I WILL DO THAT, YOUR HONOR. WE CAN -- I WILL MAKE SURE HE'S AWARE OF THAT. WE CAN PICK A DATE, WHATEVER DATE.
MR. JONES, YOU HAVE THE COURT'S SINCERE APOLOGIES. OUR SCHEDULE KEEPS CHANGING. A COUPLE OF THINGS HAPPENED THAT CAUSED US TO RESCHEDULE. THIS HAPPENS FROM TIME TO TIME. I APPRECIATE YOUR DILIGENCE TO THE COURT.
YOUR HONOR, WE HAD BEEN USING 4:00 P.M. BECAUSE OF MY TRIAL. BUT WE DO HAVE A WINDOW HERE WEDNESDAY THE 8TH. SO I CAN APPEAR ANY TIME DURING THAT DATE.
WELL, I MEAN, IT'S A HEARING TO QUASH THE SUBPOENA. WHOEVER IT IS THAT YOU HAVE ON THAT MOTION. MR. DOUGLAS.
OKAY. THEN THE BODY ATTACHMENT ISSUED FOR MARGUERITE SIMPSON WILL CONTINUE TO BE HELD UNTIL THE 8TH OF MARCH AT -- EXCUSE ME -- 8TH OF FEBRUARY, 9:00 A.M. THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
YOUR HONOR, FOR PLANNING, I THINK WE AGREED THE HEARING WOULD TAKE APPROXIMATELY 20, 25 MINUTES.
YOUR HONOR, I HAVE BEEN REMISS AND I HAVE BEEN REMINDED BY BOTH MR. BLASIER AND MR. SCHECK IN MY OFFICE OF OUR NEED IF POSSIBLE TO RESOLVE THIS.
MR. DOUGLAS, YOU'RE MAKING REFERENCE TO THE LETTER FROM YOUR OFFICE DATED JANUARY 30, 1995 SIGNED BY MR. BLASIER?
PAGE 2 LISTS THE ITEMS IN NUMERICAL ORDER YOU WISH TO SECURE FOR EXAMINATION, INSPECTION AND TESTING, CORRECT?
THIS IS CORRECT, YOUR HONOR. I THINK WE HAVE AGREED THAT IT CAN BE SENT TO ALBANY AND TO DR. WOLF'S LAB. I THINK THAT WE HAVE AGREED THAT -- AND I'M NOT SURE ON THIS PART -- THAT THE PROTOCOL THAT WAS EMPLOYED AT CELLMARK WOULD BE THE STANDARD PROTOCOL THAT WOULD BE USED WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT ONCE A SPLIT IS TAKEN, THAT THERE WOULD BE PRIVILEGED TESTING SO THAT WE MAY CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN BOTH ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK PRODUCT RESULTS. THERE IS AN ISSUE THAT I BELIEVE THERE IS AN INTEREST THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE IN VIDEOTAPING SOME PORTION OF THIS PROCEDURE. I SIMPLY SAY FOR THE RECORD THAT WE HAD SOUGHT SUCH A CONDITION WHEN WE WENT TO CELLMARK, AND THAT WAS REFUSED. SO I THINK IN FAIRNESS, I WILL OBJECT TO THAT PORTION BECAUSE IT WAS NOT THE BENEFIT THAT WE WERE LIKEWISE GIVEN. GIVEN THE EXPECTATION, YOUR HONOR, THAT WE WILL BE GETTING INTO THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE PORTION OF THE CASE SOMETIME NEXT WEEK, I WOULD LIKE THAT THE COURT CAN ARRANGE FOR THIS TRANSFER SOON. I WOULD ASK THAT WE HAVE -- AND I'M NOT SURE OF THE NUMBER OF ITEMS TO KNOW -- BUT A MINIMUM OF THREE DAYS, I THINK WORK DAYS FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO TEST. IF IT'S NECESSARY THAT IT BE DONE IN SHIFTS, THAT WOULD BE AGREEABLE. I DON'T WANT TO UNDULY BURDEN THE PEOPLE, BUT I DO WANT TO HAVE MY EXPERTS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK THEM OVER AND PHYSICALLY TEST THINGS.
WE NEED TO HAVE THE RELEVANT LAWYERS PRESENT FOR THIS, YOUR HONOR. I CAN'T MAKE AN AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE PROCEDURES. MY UNDERSTANDING DOES NOT MATCH UP TO COUNSEL'S UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE PROCEDURES ARE.
WELL, WE'RE AGREED THAT THESE MATTERS -- THESE ITEMS WILL BE SENT TO DR. WOLF'S LABORATORY IN ALBANY, CORRECT?
ALL RIGHT. AND WE ARE AGREED THAT YOU MAY HAVE A PERSON, AN EXPERT OF YOUR CHOICE PRESENT AT ANY TIME ANY EXAMINATION, SPLIT OF THE SAMPLE IS MADE; IS THAT CORRECT?
AND WE ARE AGREED THAT THEY CAN CONDUCT THEIR OWN TESTING AS THEY SEE FIT IN THE PRIVACY OF THEIR LABORATORY, CORRECT?
WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE COURT ON THAT. MR. HARMON AND MR. CLARK HAVE TO ADDRESS VERY SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH THAT PROCEDURE, AND WE NEED TO -- WE WERE GOING TO HAVE THEM IN ON ONE MORNING, BUT WE HAD TO PROCEED WITH TRIAL. THEY WERE HERE YESTERDAY WAITING TO PRESENT TO THE COURT, AND WE DIDN'T FOR SOME REASON ADDRESS THE MATTER. AND WE NEED TO DO THAT. SO --
ALL RIGHT. THEN WE'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE MR. BLASIER HERE AND MR. CLARK AND MR. HARMON. WHEN WILL THEY BE AVAILABLE?
I ALREADY TOLD THE JURY 9:00 O'CLOCK. HOW ABOUT 1:30, BRING THE JURY BACK FROM LUNCH AT 2:00. WHY DON'T WE DO THAT. THAT WILL TAKE ABOUT HALF AN HOUR TO RESOLVE.
THEN, MR. DOUGLAS, JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR, THE ITEMS THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR SPECIFICALLY ARE THESE ITEMS LISTED HERE ON PAGE 2?
YES, YOUR HONOR. I DO NOT WANT TO MISLEAD THE COURT AND SAY THAT THAT IS THE EXCLUSIVE OR THE ENTIRE LIST.
SO THE RECORD IS CLEAR, TOMORROW, WE ARE PLANNING TO CALL OFFICER LERNER AND SERGEANT LALLY, AND THEIR TESTIMONY WILL RELATE TO THE TAPE THE COURT HEARD JUST PRIOR TO THIS AFTERNOON'S ADJOURNMENT. WE WILL ALSO BE CALLING DENISE BROWN TO THE STAND. AND I DON'T KNOW IF COUNSEL CAN GIVE AN INDICATION AS TO HOW LONG THEY THINK MISS BROWN'S TESTIMONY MAY TAKE, BECAUSE I KNOW WE ADJOURN ON FRIDAY AT 3:00 O'CLOCK AND --
AND SHE MAY BE THE LAST WITNESS OF THE DAY. MAYBE I CAN DIRECT THE QUESTION TO MR. SHAPIRO. DO YOU THINK OFFICER LERNER, SERGEANT LALLY AND DENISE BROWN WILL CONSUME PRETTY MUCH THE ENTIRE DAY TOMORROW?
ARE YOU BRINGING IN DENISE BROWN TO TESTIFY TO THE '93 INCIDENT OR A RANGE OF OTHER INCIDENTS?
A RANGE OF OTHER INCIDENTS. SHE WILL BE TESTIFYING TO THE NATURE OF THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE DEFENDANT, THE DEFENDANT HAD WITH HER SISTER AS WELL. SO --
ALTHOUGH I CAN'T IMAGINE THAT SERGEANT LALLY AND THE OTHER PATROL OFFICER WOULD BE THAT LONG, I HOPE.
IT'S VERY, VERY HARD TO PREDICT. CROSS-EXAMINATION WILL IN LARGE PART DEPEND ON THE DIRECT EXAMINATION.
BUT I HAVE A FEELING GIVEN THE NUMBER OF INCIDENTS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, IT COULD BE EXTENSIVE. OKAY. 9:00 O'CLOCK. THANK YOU, COUNSEL.
I THINK WE HAVE AGREED THAT -- AND I'M NOT SURE ON THIS PART -- THAT THE PROTOCOL THAT WAS EMPLOYED AT CELLMARK WOULD BE THE STANDARD PROTOCOL THAT WOULD BE USED WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT ONCE A SPLIT IS TAKEN, THAT THERE WOULD BE PRIVILEGED TESTING SO THAT WE MAY CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN BOTH ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND WORK PRODUCT RESULTS.
WE HAD SOUGHT SUCH A CONDITION WHEN WE WENT TO CELLMARK, AND THAT WAS REFUSED. SO I THINK IN FAIRNESS, I WILL OBJECT TO THAT PORTION BECAUSE IT WAS NOT THE BENEFIT THAT WE WERE LIKEWISE GIVEN.
MR. HARMON AND MR. CLARK HAVE TO ADDRESS VERY SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH THAT PROCEDURE.
WE WILL ALSO BE CALLING DENISE BROWN TO THE STAND.