Cross-examination of Detective Tom Lange (afternoon, part 5)

📄 Cross-examination of Detective Tom Lange (afternoon, part 5) — Wednesday, February 22, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\FEB\22\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-DETECTIVE.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 23 of 167

◀ Status check Sidebar: cross-examination scope ▶

Witness: Det. Tom Lange
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Wednesday, February 22, 1995 • Utterances: 200

Cochran resumed cross-examination of Detective Lange focusing on two main areas: the handling of blood evidence on Nicole Brown Simpson's back when her body was removed from the scene, and the chain of custody problems surrounding the rear gate blood collected on July 3rd, 1994 — nearly three weeks after the murders. Cochran established that no police perimeter was maintained at Bundy during those three weeks, and that Lange had no log of who may have accessed the scene. The session ended when Clark successfully objected that questioning about OJ Simpson's interview at Parker Center was beyond the scope of direct examination.

# 1 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. BE SEATED. ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

# 2 THE JURY:

GOOD AFTERNOON.

TOM LANGE, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE NOON RECESS, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:

# 3 THE COURT:

DETECTIVE TOM LANGE IS STILL ON THE WITNESS STAND. GOOD AFTERNOON, DETECTIVE.

# 4 DET. TOM LANGE:

GOOD AFTERNOON.

# 5 THE COURT:

YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. COCHRAN, YOU MAY CONTINUE WITH YOUR CROSS-EXAMINATION.

# 6 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU VERY KINDLY, YOUR HONOR.

GOOD AFTERNOON, THE JURY, AND DETECTIVE LANGE. DID YOU HAVE A PLEASANT LUNCH?

# 7 DET. TOM LANGE:

NOT REALLY.

# 8 MR. COCHRAN:

I'M SORRY.

# 9

CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)

# 10

BY MR. COCHRAN:

# 11 Q:

WERE YOU ABLE TO GET THE ITEMS AND REFER TO THEM OVER THE LUNCH HOUR, SIR?

# 12 A:

YES.

# 13 MR. COCHRAN:

MAY I APPROACH WITH REGARD TO THE LIST AND MAYBE IF WE CAN HAVE A MOMENT AND SAVE SOME TIME AND TELL ME THOSE ITEMS HE WAS ABLE TO FIND AND WHATEVER?

# 14 THE COURT:

MISS CLARK, DO YOU WANT TO APPROACH?

# 15 MS. CLARK:

YES.

# 16 MR. COCHRAN:

YES. MISS CLARK.

# 17 (DISCUSSION HELD OFF THE RECORD BETWEEN MS. CLARK, MR. COCHRAN AND THE WITNESS.)

# 18 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SORRY FOR THE DELAY.

# 19 THE COURT:

MR. COCHRAN.

# 20 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

# 21 Q:

DETECTIVE LANGE, OVER THE LUNCH HOUR WERE YOU ABLE TO REVIEW ANY OF YOUR REPORTS AND DETERMINE, FIRST OF ALL, WHEN IT WAS THAT YOU RECEIVED SOME COMMUNICATION FROM MR. MAHANAY WHO IS A CRIMINALIST IN THE CORONER'S OFFICE WITH REGARD TO THEIR FAILURE TO COLLECT THE BLOOD DROPS OR SPATTERS ON NICOLE SIMPSON'S BACK?

# 22 A:

MY OFFICE WAS FAXED MR. MAHANAY'S REPORT ON JUNE 23, 1994.

# 23 Q:

WAS THAT JUNE 21ST?

# 24 A:

IT MIGHT BE 21ST, YES.

# 25 Q:

JUNE 21ST?

# 26 A:

JUNE 21ST, YES.

# 27 Q:

SORRY. OKAY. AND THEREAFTER DID YOU DO SOMETHING AFTER THAT?

# 28 A:

YES. I TELEPHONICALLY SPOKE WITH MR. MAHANAY.

# 29 Q:

AND THAT WAS --

# 30 A:

APPROXIMATELY TWO TO THREE WEEKS AFTER, AND THAT IS ONLY A GUESS.

# 31 Q:

AND IT WAS IN THAT CONVERSATION WHEN YOU DISCUSSED WHETHER OR NOT THE CORONER'S OFFICE HAD REMOVED OR EXAMINED OR PRESERVED THESE BLOOD SPOTS ON THE BACK; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 32 A:

YES.

# 33 Q:

NOW, IN THAT CONNECTION, WHEN WE HAVE SEEN PICTURES OF HOW MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON'S BODY WAS KIND OF ON HER SIDE IN A FETAL POSITION AND WHEN THE CORONER'S REPRESENTATIVES, RATCLIFFE AND -- WHAT WAS THE GENTLEMAN'S NAME WHO CAME OUT?

# 34 A:

THERE WAS A DRIVER. IT IS IN THE LOG.

# 35 Q:

WAS IT JACOBO, J-A-C-O-B-O?

# 36 A:

POSSIBLY SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

# 37 Q:

WHEN THEY CAME OUT, YOU WERE STANDING THERE WHEN HER BODY WAS PLACED ON THIS -- THIS SHEET IN THE PLASTIC; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 38 A:

YES.

# 39 Q:

AND YOU RECALL THAT THEY TURNED HER BODY OVER ON THE BACK SO SHE IS LYING ON HER BACK; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 40 A:

I BELIEVE THEY MAY HAVE, YES.

# 41 Q:

AND SO -- DID YOU TELL THEM "BE CAREFUL, DON'T PUT THE BODY ON THE BACK BECAUSE YOU ARE GOING DO SMEAR THAT BLOOD"?

# 42 A:

I POINTED THAT OUT TO THE CRIMINALIST AND I DON'T RECALL SPECIFICALLY SAYING THAT. I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS IN A POSITION TO BE SMEARED. IT WAS CAKED AND DRIED.

KEY QUOTE

# 43 Q:

WELL, LET ME ASK THIS: WHAT CRIMINALIST DID YOU POINT THAT OUT TO?

# 44 A:

THE INVESTIGATOR. I MISSPOKE.

# 45 Q:

OKAY.

# 46 A:

TO THE INVESTIGATOR WHO PUT THE BODY ON THE --

# 47 Q:

ALL RIGHT. SO THAT WE ARE CLEAR, WHEN -- BEFORE HER BODY WAS REMOVED FROM THAT SCENE, HER BODY WAS PLACED ON ITS BACK; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 48 A:

IT WAS ON THE BACK SO MUCH THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO STRAIGHTEN THE BODY OUT BECAUSE OF THE STATE OF RIGOR MORTIS.

# 49 Q:

ALL RIGHT.

# 50 A:

SO I DON'T RECALL THE BODY BEING PERFECTLY SUPINE.

# 51 Q:

ALL RIGHT. BUT AS OPPOSED TO BEING ON ITS FACE, IT WAS ON THE BACK, THOUGH; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 52 A:

MORE OR LESS, YES.

# 53 Q:

OKAY, SIR. AND THE PERSON THAT YOU POINTED OUT TO BE CAREFUL NOT TO SMEAR THE BLOOD ON THE BACK WOULD HAVE BEEN RATCLIFFE, THE CORONER'S INVESTIGATOR?

# 54 A:

YES. THAT IS THE ORIGINAL PERSON I DISCUSSED THAT WITH.

# 55 Q:

OKAY. AND WE HAD ASKED YOU IF YOU COULD CHECK YOUR NOTES OR YOUR HOMICIDE BOOKS AND FIND OUT ABOUT THIS JULY 3RD, 1995 -- STRIKE THAT -- JULY 3RD, 1994 VISIT TO BUNDY WHEN YOU HAVE TESTIFIED THE BLOOD SPOTS -- BLOOD SPOTS ON THE REAR GATE WERE COLLECTED. DO YOU RECALL THAT?

# 56 A:

YES.

# 57 Q:

AND DID YOU HAVE OCCASION OVER THE LUNCH HOUR TO LOOK AT ANY KIND OF CHRONOLOGICAL ENTRY IN THE LOG REGARDING THAT?

# 58 A:

YES.

# 59 Q:

AND DID YOUR REVIEW OF THAT LOG INDICATE THAT YOU WERE THE FIRST ONE AT THE SCENE, OTHER THAN A POLICE OFFICER, WHO MAY HAVE GOTTEN THERE BEFORE YOU DID?

# 60 A:

THAT IS MY RECOLLECTION, YES.

# 61 Q:

AND THAT POLICE OFFICER WOULD HAVE BEEN DETECTIVE PAYNE?

# 62 A:

YES.

# 63 Q:

BY THE WAY, DETECTIVE PAYNE IS THE OFFICER WHO HAS BEEN RUNNING DOWN LEADS, IF ANY, REGARDING OTHER SUSPECTS; IS THAT CORRECT, IN THIS CASE?

# 64 A:

NO. HE HAS BEEN DOING SOME OF THAT, BUT MOSTLY COORDINATE THAT TYPE OF THING.

# 65 Q:

COORDINATING WHAT TYPE OF THING?

# 66 A:

RUNNING DOWN LEADS, RUNNING DOWN SO-CALLED CLUES AS THEY COME IN.

# 67 Q:

THE CLUES AND HIS NAME IS PAYNE, P-A-Y-N-E?

# 68 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 69 Q:

IS HE ASSIGNED TO WEST LOS ANGELES?

# 70 A:

NO HE IS ASSIGNED TO ROBBERY/HOMICIDE DIVISION.

# 71 Q:

SO HE IS ONE OF YOUR PEOPLE AT ROBBERY HOMICIDE DOWNTOWN?

# 72 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 73 Q:

THAT IS A CHORE OR TASK THAT YOU ASSIGNED HIM EARLY ON IN THIS CASE?

# 74 A:

IT WAS DONE BY MY LIEUTENANT AT THE TIME.

# 75 Q:

THAT IS LIEUTENANT ROGERS?

# 76 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 77 Q:

OKAY. AT ANY RATE, SO DETECTIVE PAYNE MAY HAVE BEEN AT THE SCENE. WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN THE SECOND POLICE OFFICER THERE?

# 78 A:

MORE THAN LIKELY.

# 79 Q:

AND DO YOU HAVE A RECORD TO INDICATE WHAT TIME YOU ACTUALLY ARRIVED, APPROXIMATELY?

# 80 A:

YES.

# 81 Q:

ABOUT WHAT TIME DID YOU ARRIVE?

# 82 A:

AT 9:45 A.M.

# 83 Q:

ON JULY 3RD; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 84 A:

YES.

# 85 Q:

AND THEN AFTER YOU ARRIVED -- IT WAS SOMETIME AFTER YOU ARRIVED THAT MISS CLARK ARRIVED; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 86 A:

YES.

# 87 Q:

AND WHO ARRIVED FIRST AS BETWEEN MISS CLARK AND MR. HODGMAN?

# 88 (NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE.)

# 89 Q:

IF YOU RECALL?

# 90 THE COURT:

WHAT IS THE POSSIBLE RELEVANCE OF THIS?

# 91 MR. COCHRAN:

THERE MAY BE, YOUR HONOR. I WILL BE -- THERE MAY BE. I WILL BE VERY BRIEF ON THIS.

# 92 THE COURT:

IF THERE IS ONLY MAYBE, THEN WE OUGHT TO MOVE ON.

# 93 MR. COCHRAN:

WE WILL MOVE ON. I JUST WANT TO FIND OUT IF I CAN, YOUR HONOR.

# 94 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT.

# 95 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: THEY DIDN'T COME TOGETHER, DID THEY?

# 96 A:

I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

# 97 Q:

AND WITH REGARD TO THE TWO OF THEM, WHO ARRIVED FIRST?

# 98 A:

I DON'T RECALL.

# 99 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND IT WAS AFTER THEY ARRIVED -- DO YOU KNOW THE TIME THEY ARRIVED?

# 100 A:

IT HAD TO BE RIGHT AROUND 10:00 A.M., SHORTLY THEREAFTER.

# 101 Q:

ALL RIGHT.

# 102 A:

I BELIEVE 10:00 A.M. WAS THE MEETING TIME.

# 103 Q:

AND DO YOU RECALL WHETHER OR NOT MR. FUNG, THE CRIMINALIST, WAS SUMMONED THERE AT SOME TIME THAT MORNING?

# 104 A:

YES.

# 105 Q:

AND DO YOU KNOW WHAT TIME HE ARRIVED?

# 106 A:

NO. IT HAD TO BE OBVIOUSLY AFTER 10:00.

# 107 Q:

YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT TIME HE ARRIVED?

# 108 A:

NO.

# 109 Q:

AND WAS A PHOTOGRAPHER SUMMONED ALSO?

# 110 A:

YES.

# 111 Q:

AND THE PICTURE WHICH I SHOWED YOU, THE PICTURE WHICH I SHOWED YOU EARLIER, WAS THAT TAKEN AT SOME TIME LATER THAT DAY ON JULY 3RD?

# 112 A:

YES.

# 113 MR. COCHRAN:

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

# 114 MS. CLARK:

OBJECT, VAGUE AS TO WHICH PICTURE COUNSEL IS REFERRING TO.

# 115 MR. COCHRAN:

SURE, COUNSEL.

# 116 MS. CLARK:

THE RECORD IS NOT CLEAR.

# 117 MR. COCHRAN:

COUNSEL IS CORRECT, YOUR HONOR. THE PICTURES THAT WE SHOWED IS 1007, 1007, YOUR HONOR. THAT PICTURE OFF A PHOTOGRAPH HERE WAS TAKEN SOME TIME LATER THAT DAY, JULY 3RD, 1994; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 118 Q:

WHEN YOU ARRIVED ON THE SCENE ON JULY 3RD, UP TO THAT POINT YOU HAD NOT SEEN ANY PROPERTY REPORTS, ANY REPORTS FROM THE CRIMINALIST, MR. FUNG OR MISS MAZZOLLA?

# 119 A:

THAT IS MY RECOLLECTION.

# 120 Q:

ALL RIGHT. DID YOU VISUALLY LOOK AT THE REAR GATE OF THE BUNDY LOCATION THAT DAY?

# 121 A:

YES, I WALKED -- SORRY.

# 122 Q:

DID YOU VISUALLY LOOK AT THAT GATE?

# 123 A:

YES, I WALKED IN THROUGH THAT GATE.

# 124 Q:

THEREAFTER OR AFTER YOU HAD YOUR MEETING THERE, THAT IS WHEN FUNG WAS ACTUALLY CALLED TO THE SCENE; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 125 A:

YES.

# 126 Q:

AND YOU HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF WHO MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN AT THAT LOCATION BETWEEN THE DATES OF JUNE 13TH AND JULY 3RD, 1994, DO YOU?

# 127 A:

WHO WOULD HAVE BEEN AT THE LOCATION?

# 128 Q:

YES. THERE IS NO LOG TO INDICATE WHO MAY HAVE PASSED BY THERE OR COME TO THAT LOCATION, DO YOU?

# 129 A:

I HAVE MY ENTRIES ONLY. I DON'T KNOW IF SOMEONE ELSE HAS A LOG.

# 130 Q:

ALL RIGHT. YOU HAVE NO LOG OF PEOPLE WHO WERE AT THAT SCENE DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME?

# 131 A:

ON THE 3RD?

# 132 Q:

NO, BETWEEN JUNE 13TH AND JULY 3RD?

# 133 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, VAGUE AS TO THE LOCATION. WHAT SCENE, WHERE?

# 134 THE COURT:

OVERRULED. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT BUNDY.

# 135 MR. COCHRAN:

TALKING ABOUT BUNDY.

# 136 MS. CLARK:

WHERE AT BUNDY?

# 137 THE COURT:

875 SOUTH BUNDY.

# 138 MS. CLARK:

FRONT, BACK, WHAT?

# 139 MR. COCHRAN:

YOUR HONOR, SPEAKING OBJECTION.

# 140 Q:

WOULD YOU PLEASE ANSWER?

# 141 A:

THERE ARE SEVERAL LOGS IN THE BOOK AND I KNOW THAT I HAD BEEN TO THAT LOCATION PRIOR. I DON'T KNOW --

# 142 Q:

WHAT I'M ASKING YOU, SIR, IS THERE WAS NO POLICE WHO MAINTAINED A PERIMETER FOR THE THREE-WEEK PERIOD OF TIME AFTER YOU TOOK THE YELLOW TAPE DOWN; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 143 A:

THE ENTIRE TIME? OKAY. I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION. NO, THERE WASN'T.

KEY QUOTE

# 144 Q:

OKAY. THAT IS ALL I WAS ASKING YOU, SIR. NOW, WHEN WE BROKE FOR LUNCH, WE WERE JUST ASKING YOU ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU HAD LEFT THE BUNDY SCENE AT SOMETIME AROUND NOON, WAS IT, ON JUNE 13TH, 1994?

# 145 A:

I BELIEVE IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 12:15, YES.

# 146 Q:

ALL RIGHT. DID YOU LOG OUT AT THAT POINT, IF YOU RECALL?

# 147 A:

I BELIEVE I DID.

# 148 Q:

AND DID YOU RECEIVE A TELEPHONE CALL OR SOMETHING THAT CAUSED YOU TO LEAVE THE LOCATION?

# 149 A:

YES.

# 150 Q:

WHO CALLED YOU?

# 151 A:

THE STATION FROM THE DIVISION, ONE OF THE SECRETARIES.

# 152 Q:

OKAY. YOU HAD A BRIEF CONVERSATION WITH HER?

# 153 A:

YES.

# 154 Q:

YOU LEFT AT ABOUT 12:15; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 155 A:

YES.

# 156 MR. COCHRAN:

IF I MIGHT APPROACH AGAIN, YOUR HONOR.

# 157 THE COURT:

YES.

# 158 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: THE LOG WHICH IS NOW DEFENDANTS 1006, THE LOG INDICATES YOU ARRIVED AT ABOUT --

# 159 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, OBJECTION. THE WITNESS CAN REFRESH HIS MEMORY. COUNSEL IS READING FROM THE DOCUMENT.

# 160 MR. COCHRAN:

I AM NOT TRYING TO REFRESH HIS RECOLLECTION.

# 161 MS. CLARK:

CAN THE WITNESS BE ALLOWED TO READ?

# 162 THE COURT:

WHAT IS THE QUESTION?

# 163 MS. CLARK:

THERE IS A PROPER WAY TO DO THIS, YOUR HONOR.

# 164 MR. COCHRAN:

DO WE HAVE TO HAVE THE SPEAKING OBJECTIONS, YOUR HONOR?

# 165 THE COURT:

WHAT IS THE QUESTION?

# 166 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: THE QUESTION IS DID YOU ARRIVE AT THE SCENE AT ABOUT 4:25 IN THE MORNING?

# 167 A:

YES.

# 168 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND YOU LEFT TO GO DOWNTOWN TO PARKER CENTER AT ABOUT 12:15?

# 169 A:

THAT IS CORRECT.

# 170 Q:

NOW, DOES THE LOG REFLECT THE TIME THAT YOU LEFT BUNDY TO GO OVER TO ROCKINGHAM AND THEN THE TIME THAT YOU CAME BACK FROM ROCKINGHAM TO BUNDY?

# 171 A:

NO. I CHECKED OUT WITH MY LIEUTENANT AT THE SCENE.

# 172 Q:

ALL RIGHT. WELL, NOW YOU CAN LOOK AT THE LOG. DID YOU INDICATE THAT? IS THAT INDICATED ON THE LOG THAT YOU LEFT AT ALL?

# 173 A:

THAT WOULDN'T BE INDICATED ON THERE, NO.

# 174 Q:

SO THE LOG INDICATES WHAT?

# 175 A:

WHEN I FIRST ARRIVED AT THE LOCATION AND WHEN I LEFT THE LOCATION FOR THE DAY.

# 176 Q:

ALL RIGHT. IT DOES NOT SHOW THE ROCKINGHAM SOJOURN, RIGHT?

# 177 A:

NO. AGAIN THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MY LIEUTENANT WHO I CHECKED OUT WITH.

# 178 Q:

OKAY. NOW, SO WHEN YOU WENT DOWNTOWN WERE YOU ACCOMPANIED BY ANYONE WHEN YOU WENT DOWNTOWN AT 12:15?

# 179 A:

NO. I BELIEVE I WAS ALONE.

# 180 Q:

OKAY. DID YOU GO ANY PLACE ELSE AFTER YOU LEFT BUNDY BEFORE HEADING DOWNTOWN?

# 181 A:

I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

# 182 Q:

YOU DIDN'T STOP BY ROCKINGHAM AT ALL?

# 183 A:

NOT AT THAT TIME, NO.

# 184 Q:

OKAY. HOW LONG DID IT TAKE YOU TO GET DOWNTOWN, DO YOU RECALL?

# 185 A:

PERHAPS THIRTY, FORTY MINUTES. I DON'T RECALL.

# 186 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AT ANY RATE, YOU WENT DOWNTOWN TO PARKER CENTER AND THAT IS WHEN YOU FOUND MR. SIMPSON TO BE COOPERATIVE, RIGHT?

# 187 A:

YES.

# 188 Q:

CAN YOU TELL US HOW LONG YOU WERE IN MR. SIMPSON'S PRESENCE DURING THAT TIME?

# 189 A:

APPROXIMATELY THREE HOURS, PERHAPS A LITTLE MORE.

# 190 Q:

AND OF THAT THREE-HOUR PERIOD OF TIME, THE TIME YOU ACTUALLY SPOKE TO HIM WAS HOW LONG?

# 191 A:

I SPOKE TO HIM OFF AND ON FOR MUCH OF THE TIME. THERE WAS A -- A FORMAL INTERVIEW PROCESS THAT TOOK A LITTLE OVER THIRTY MINUTES.

# 192 Q:

I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FORMAL INTERVIEW PORTION. SO ABOUT 33 MINUTES?

# 193 A:

I BELIEVE IT WAS, YES.

# 194 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND DURING THE TIME THAT YOU WERE WITH MR. SIMPSON AND AFTER THE FORMAL INTERVIEW, DID YOU TAKE SOME BLOOD FROM HIM?

# 195 A:

I DID NOT.

# 196 MS. CLARK:

YOUR HONOR, I'M GOING TO OBJECT. THIS IS ALL BEYOND THE SCOPE OF DIRECT, ALL OF IT.

# 197 MR. COCHRAN:

I ASK LEAVE OF THE COURT TO MAKE HIM MY WITNESS FOR THAT PURPOSE, YOUR HONOR, RATHER THAN RECALLING HIM.

# 198 THE COURT:

THE OBJECTION WILL BE SUSTAINED.

# 199 MR. COCHRAN:

MAY WE BE HEARD, YOUR HONOR, WITH REGARD TO THAT?

# 200 THE COURT:

YES.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Tom Lange

I POINTED THAT OUT TO THE CRIMINALIST AND I DON'T RECALL SPECIFICALLY SAYING THAT. I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS IN A POSITION TO BE SMEARED. IT WAS CAKED AND DRIED.

Lange defends the handling of Nicole's body but contradicts himself — he first says he 'pointed that out to the criminalist' then admits he misspoke and meant the coroner's investigator, undermining his account.

Tom Lange

THE ENTIRE TIME? OKAY. I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION. NO, THERE WASN'T.

Lange confirms no police perimeter was maintained at Bundy for the three-week period between June 13 and July 3 — directly supporting the defense argument that the rear gate blood could have been planted or contaminated.

Tom Lange

THERE WAS A FORMAL INTERVIEW PROCESS THAT TOOK A LITTLE OVER THIRTY MINUTES.

Establishes that the formal interview of OJ Simpson lasted only about 33 minutes, which the defense used to suggest investigators were not seriously pursuing Simpson as a suspect.

Johnnie Cochran

DID YOU HAVE A PLEASANT LUNCH?

Lighthearted opener that set an ironic tone after Lange had been asked over lunch to review records about gaps in evidence collection.

Evidence (3)

Defendant's 1006

Homicide log / chronological entry log for the Bundy scene visits, including Lange's arrival time of 4:25 AM on June 13 and departure around 12:15 PM

discussed, used to establish timeline and gaps in record-keeping

People's 1007

Photograph of the Bundy rear gate taken on July 3, 1994, showing blood spots collected that day

discussed, Clark objected to vague reference requiring clarification of exhibit number

Informal

Mahanay report from the coroner's office documenting failure to collect blood drops/spatters on Nicole Simpson's back, faxed to Lange's office June 21, 1994

discussed as basis for Lange's telephonic follow-up with Mahanay two to three weeks later

Notable Exchanges (4)

Johnnie Cochran•Tom Lange

Cochran established that no police perimeter was maintained at 875 South Bundy for the entire three-week period between June 13 and July 3, 1994, and that Lange had no log of who may have accessed the scene during that window. Lange initially misunderstood the question before confirming the gap.

strategic

Johnnie Cochran•Marcia Clark•Lance A. Ito

Clark objected to questions about who arrived first between Clark and Hodgman on July 3rd. Ito questioned relevance; Cochran said there 'may be' relevance but moved on when pressed. Clark then objected to the Bundy location questions as vague, prompting Cochran to call it a 'speaking objection.'

procedural friction

Johnnie Cochran•Tom Lange

Cochran walked Lange through the body removal process — Nicole's body being turned from fetal/prone position to supine — and whether Lange warned investigators about smearing the blood on her back. Lange initially said he told 'the criminalist' then corrected to 'the investigator,' a minor self-contradiction.

revealing

Marcia Clark•Lance A. Ito•Johnnie Cochran

Clark objected that questions about the Parker Center interview of OJ Simpson were beyond the scope of direct. Cochran asked to treat Lange as his own witness for that purpose rather than recall him later. Ito sustained the objection and called a sidebar.

procedural

Light Moments (1)

Johnnie Cochran / Tom Lange

Cochran opened the afternoon session by asking Lange 'Did you have a pleasant lunch?' — to which Lange replied flatly 'Not really,' having spent his lunch hour reviewing records at Cochran's request.

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Tom Lange

omission / chain of custody gap

Cochran established that no police maintained a perimeter at Bundy for three weeks between June 13 and July 3, and that Lange had no log of who may have accessed the rear gate area during that period — directly undermining the integrity of blood evidence collected there.

⚔ Tom Lange

self-contradiction

Lange initially said he pointed out the blood on Nicole's back to 'the criminalist' before correcting himself to say it was 'the investigator,' creating a minor inconsistency in his account of crime scene protocols.

⚔ LAPD investigation

investigative minimalism

Cochran highlighted that the formal interview of OJ Simpson — the primary suspect — lasted only about 33 minutes, suggesting investigators were not seriously treating him as a suspect at that stage.

Witness Demeanor

(NO AUDIBLE RESPONSE) — Lange paused when asked who arrived first between Clark and Hodgman

Lange corrected himself mid-sentence when he misspoke 'criminalist' for 'investigator' regarding who he warned about Nicole's blood

Objections

5 objections (2 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 4945 • 200 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103