THIS IS GOING TO BE A LONG TRIAL, AS YOU CAN TELL. IN THE EVENT THAT YOU SHOULD NEED TO TAKE AND UNSCHEDULED COMFORT BREAK, AND WE WILL TAKE REGULAR BREAKS, BUT IF SOMETHING COMES UP, FEEL FREE TO RAISE YOUR HAND, BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN TO ME DURING THIS TRIAL, AND I'M SURE IT WILL HAPPEN TO ONE OR TWO OF YOU DURING THE TRIAL, SO IF WE HAVE TO TAKE AN UNSCHEDULED BREAK, THAT IS LIFE IN THE CITY, FEEL FREE TO LET US KNOW. OUR REGULAR BREAKS YOU SHOULD EXPECT ABOUT EVERY HOUR AND A HALF OR SO, AN HOUR AND 45 MINUTES. WE ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR FIRST BREAK THIS AFTERNOON AT THREE O'CLOCK. YOU NOTICE I'M VERY TIME CONSCIOUS. I HAVE CLOCKS ALL OVER MY COURTROOM. ALL RIGHT. MISS CLARK, WOULD YOU RESUME YOUR COMMENTS, PLEASE.
NOW, THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW THAT THE AMNIOCENTESIS PROCEDURE HAS MANY OF THE SAME PROBLEMS THAT CRIME SCENE ANALYSIS DOES AND THOSE PROBLEMS ARE THAT YOU HAVE LIMITATIONS IN QUANTITY. THERE IS ONLY SO MUCH YOU CAN GET, RIGHT? IF YOU GO TO A CRIME SCENE, YOU COLLECT THE EVIDENCE THAT YOU FIND AND YOU ARE LIMITED BY THAT. THE SAME THING IS TRUE OF THE AMNIOCENTESIS. FIRST OF ALL, YOU CAN'T WITHDRAW TOO MUCH FLUID OR IT WILL ENDANGER THE BABY, NOT TO MENTION IT IS VERY UNCOMFORTABLE FOR THE MOTHER. YOU ARE LIMITED IN QUANTITY THEN IN BOTH SITUATIONS. YOU ALSO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A MIXTURE. BY THAT I MEAN AT A CRIME SCENE YOU OFTEN HAVE A MIXTURE OF THE VICTIM'S BLOOD, EITHER WITH EACH OTHER OR WITH THE DEFENDANT, AND THAT MEANS THAT THEY HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO SEPARATE THEM OUT, WHO COULD BE THE SOURCE OF THIS AND WHAT POSSIBLE MIXTURE YOU HAVE. THAT IS A VERY SIMILAR PROBLEM TO THE AMNIOCENTESIS WHERE YOU MIGHT PICK UP CELLS FROM THE MOTHER AND THEN YOU ARE ANALYZING FOR THE GENETIC MAKE-UP OF THE MOTHER INSTEAD OF THE BABY, SO THEY HAVE TO KNOW HOW TO SEPARATE THAT OUT IN CASE IT HAPPENS, SO YOU HAVE VERY SIMILAR SITUATIONS. ANOTHER SITUATION THAT IS SIMILAR TO CRIME SCENE ANALYSIS IS IDENTIFICATION OF THE WAR DEAD. ONE OF THE TRAGIC ASPECTS OF DYING IN A WAR IS THAT SOMETIMES WE ARE LEFT WITH NOTHING BUT BODY PARTS AND WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHOSE THEY ARE. IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY THEY WILL TAKE THAT BODY PART, EXTRACT THE DNA AND DETERMINE IF IT MATCHES TO -- THAT GOES INTO A PARENTAL THING. YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE PARENTS AND THEN YOU CAN TELL BASED UPON WHAT THE PERSON'S MAKE-UP IS WHETHER THIS WAS THEIR CHILD. THAT IS ONE WAY OF DOING IT. IT IS CALLED PATERNITY MATCH. DNA TESTING CAN DO THAT. NOW, OBVIOUSLY THE BODY PARTS, TISSUES OR ORGANS THAT ARE FOUND IN WAR DEAD ARE FOUND OUT IN JUNGLES, IN DESERTS, THEY ARE FOUND IN TERRIBLE PLACES WHERE THERE IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF DETERIORATION AND IT IS DIFFICULT, THE SAME WAY AS IN A CRIME SCENE, BECAUSE IN A CRIME SCENE IT IS MESSY AND DIRTY, THERE IS GOING TO BE A STREET, A SIDEWALK, A HOUSE, A CAR. THAT IS NOT A LABORATORY SITUATION. WELL, IT IS THE SAME THING WITH THE WAR DEAD. YOU HAVE KIND OF UNFAVORABLE CONDITIONS THAT ARE GOING TO DETERIORATE A SAMPLE VERY RAPIDLY, AND SO YOU HAVE A SIMILAR PROBLEM WITH NON-CRIMINAL CRIME SCENE USES AS DO YOU WITH CRIME SCENE USES AND YET DNA HAS BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL IN IDENTIFYING THE WAR DEAD. ANOTHER WAY THAT DNA HAS BEEN USED THAT IS NOT IN CRIME SCENE ANALYSIS IS IN IDENTIFYING OLD REMAINS. BY THAT I MEAN SKELETONS. THEY EXTRACT THE DNA FROM SKELETONS TO DETERMINE THE IDENTITY OF THE PEOPLE THAT ONCE THOSE SKELETONS WERE, AND THEY DID THAT RECENTLY TO IDENTIFY THE RUSSIAN ROYAL FAMILY THAT LIVED BACK IN 1917. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THE DNA TESTING PROCEDURES IS A VERY POWERFUL TOOL THAT IS USEFUL IN MANY, MANY WAYS, NOT JUST IN CRIME SCENE ANALYSIS, BUT IN MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS AND IN IDENTIFICATIONS THAT ARE NECESSARY IN OTHER AREAS. NOW, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF APPROACHES TO DNA TESTING THAT CAN BE TAKEN. THE FIRST ONE -- YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR THESE TERMS A LOT SO I'M GOING TO START YOU TODAY -- IS RFLP. THAT STANDS FOR RESTRICTION FRAGMENT LENGTH POLYMORPHISM AND ALL YOU HAVE TO KNOW IS RFLP FOR NOW. THE EXPERTS WILL EXPLAIN EVERYTHING TO YOU AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. THAT IS A VERY POWERFUL TOOL USED TO PINPOINT THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSON WHO LEFT BLOOD OR HAIR OR FIBER -- EXCUSE ME -- BLOOD OR HAIR OR BODILY FLUID IN AN AREA, VERY POWERFUL TOOL. ANOTHER DNA TEST, NOT QUITE AS POWERFUL BUT STILL MORE POWERFUL THAN WE USED TO HAVE, IS CALLED PCR, POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION. IN THAT FORM OF TESTING YOU CAN TAKE MUCH SMALLER BITS OF DNA AND AMPLIFY THEM. ACTUALLY YOU JUST MULTIPLY THEM LIKE XEROXING AND YOU MAKE IT LARGE ENOUGH SO THAT YOU CAN TEST IT AND THAT HAS BEEN A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT FULL TOOL AS WELL IN ANALYZING AND DETERMINING THE SOURCE OF A STAIN OR BODILY FLUID THAT YOU FIND AT A CRIME SCENE. REGARDLESS OF THE METHOD USED, WHETHER IT IS RFLP OR PCR, THEY ARE BOTH DNA TESTING AND THE TESTS ARE REALLY TESTS OF EXCLUSION. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THAT MEANS THAT WHEN YOU CONDUCT THESE TESTS, THE EFFORT IS TO EXCLUDE. YOU ANALYZE THE DNA AND YOU SAY CAN I EXCLUDE THE SUSPECT? CAN I RULE HIM OUT? IS THERE ANYTHING HERE INCONSISTENT WITH THE SUSPECT OR THE VICTIMS, DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT? AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WAS DONE IN THIS CASE WITH EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE COLLECTED. THE EFFORT WAS TO EXCLUDE THE DEFENDANT AND TO EXCLUDE THE VICTIMS. THAT WAS THE FOCUS AND THAT IS THE AIM OF DNA TESTING. IN THIS CASE WE ASKED THIS QUESTION OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. CAN THE DEFENDANT BE EXCLUDED? NO MATTER HOW HARD WE TRIED, OVER AND OVER THE SAMPLES WERE TESTED AND RETESTED AND TESTED AGAIN. OVER AND OVER AGAIN WE ASKED OURSELVES CAN THE DEFENDANT BE EXCLUDED? AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN THE ANSWER WAS NO, THE DEFENDANT CANNOT BE EXCLUDED. I WOULD NOW LIKE TO BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE FOR YOU ALL OF THE TEST RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE EVIDENCE THAT I HAVE JUST DESCRIBED AND I'M GOING TO START WITH THE HAIR AND FIBER. NOW, THE HAIR AND FIBER IS MICROSCOPIC ANALYSIS; IT IS NOT DNA. THIS IS THE COMPARISON OF HAIRS AND FIBERS FOUND ON VARIOUS ITEMS OF EVIDENCE AND IN LOCATIONS AT THE SCENE THAT WERE COMPARED TO THE DEFENDANT, THE VICTIMS AND VARIOUS OTHER ITEMS OF EVIDENCE. IT IS EASIER TO EXPLAIN TO YOU IF I ACTUALLY TELL YOU THE RESULTS.
SKI CAP THAT WAS FOUND AT THE FEET OF RON GOLDMAN WAS EXAMINED FOR HAIR AND TRACE ANALYSIS AND IT WAS FOUND ON THAT HAT THAT THERE WAS FIBER LIKE THOSE FROM THE CARPET OF THE DEFENDANT'S FORD BRONCO. NOW, STOP AND THINK. WHY WOULD THERE BE CARPET FIBERS LIKE THOSE FROM THE DEFENDANT'S FORD BRONCO --
OKAY. ALSO ON THAT KNIT HAT WE FIND HAIRS LIKE THOSE OF THE DEFENDANT, WHICH IS WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT TO FIND ON A HAT WORN BY THE DEFENDANT. YOUR HONOR, THE NEXT ONE -- THE --
THANK YOU. ON THE SHIRT OF RON GOLDMAN WE FIND A HEAD HAIR LIKE THAT OF THE DEFENDANT.
ON THE GLOVE FOUND AT THE DEFENDANT'S HOME AT ROCKINGHAM WE FIND HAIR LIKE THOSE OF NICOLE BROWN, HAIR LIKE THOSE OF RON GOLDMAN, FIBERS LIKE THOSE FROM THE SHIRT OF RON GOLDMAN AND FIBER LIKE THOSE FOUND IN THE CARPET OF THE DEFENDANT'S FORD BRONCO.
THIS SHOWS YOU THE DEFENDANT'S FORD BRONCO. YOU SEE THE TAGS. THOSE ALL INDICATE BLOOD SPOTS THAT WERE RECOVERED ON JUNE THE 14TH. THE BLOOD STAIN ON THE PANEL, AND I'M GOING TO TRY AND INDICATE IT WITH THE RED LIGHT BECAUSE IT IS AT THE EDGE OF THE PHOTOGRAPH WHERE THAT TAG IS, (INDICATING), THAT BLOOD, AS WELL AS THE BLOOD ON THE -- THAT BLOOD ON THE PANEL MATCHES THE DEFENDANT.
THIS BLOOD ON THE CONSOLE MATCHES THE DEFENDANT. THE ITEM NO. 31 ON THE CONSOLE CONSISTENT WITH A MIXTURE OF THE DEFENDANT AND RON GOLDMAN.
THIS BLOOD STAIN WAS ON THE CONSOLE. THIS WAS RECOVERED LATER IN TIME AFTER THE 14TH. THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH A MIXTURE OF THE DEFENDANT, RON GOLDMAN AND NICOLE BROWN.
THE BLOOD STAIN FOUND IN THIS AREA MARKED WITH THE NO. 33, (INDICATING), MATCHES NICOLE.
ON THE ROCKINGHAM BLOOD TRAIL THE ITEM NO. 6 WHICH IS -- THEY DON'T HAVE A CLOSE-UP OF IT. IT IS ONE OF THESE THREE MARKERS. WE WILL HAVE IT BETTER EXPLAINED TO YOU WITH A DIAGRAM DURING THE TRIAL. THE BLOOD SPOT NO. 6 MATCH IS THE DEFENDANT.
AGAIN THE BLOOD DROPS THAT WERE FOUND JUST INSIDE THE FRONT ENTRY OF THE DEFENDANT'S HOME. THIS IS BLOOD DROPS NO. 12.
THE SOCKS THAT WE INDICATED EARLIER TO YOU WERE FOUND IN THIS CONDITION THROWN HASTILY AT THE FOOT OF THE DEFENDANT'S BED IN HIS BEDROOM, THE BLOOD ON THOSE SOCKS WAS ANALYZED.
IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE BLOOD ON ONE SPOT MATCHED THE DEFENDANT; THE BLOOD ON ANOTHER SPOT MATCHED NICOLE.
THE GLOVE THAT WAS FOUND AT THE SOUTH WALKWAY OF THE DEFENDANT'S PROPERTY AT ROCKINGHAM REVEALED BLOOD THAT WAS CONSISTENT WITH A MIXTURE OF RON GOLDMAN, NICOLE BROWN AND THE DEFENDANT.
THESE ARE BLOOD DROPS AT THE BUNDY LOCATION AT 875 SOUTH BUNDY. THIS BLOOD DROP THAT YOU SEE HERE MARKED WITH THE ITEM NO. 112 MATCHES THE DEFENDANT.
MATCHES THE DEFENDANT. APART FROM THE TEST RESULTS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THE MERE FACT THAT WE FIND BLOOD WHERE THERE SHOULD BE NO BLOOD IN THE DEFENDANT'S CAR, IN HIS HOUSE, IN THE DRIVEWAY AND EVEN ON THE SOCKS IN HIS VERY BEDROOM AT THE FOOT OF HIS BED, THAT TRAIL OF BLOOD FROM BUNDY THROUGH HIS OWN FORD BRONCO AND INTO HIS HOUSE IN ROCKINGHAM IS DEVASTATING PROOF OF HIS GUILT. AND THE RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS OF THAT BLOOD CONFIRMS WHAT THE REST OF THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW THAT ON JUNE THE 12TH, 1994, AFTER A VIOLENT RELATIONSHIP IN WHICH THE DEFENDANT BEAT HER, HUMILIATED HER AND CONTROLLED HER, AFTER HE TOOK HER YOUTH, HER FREEDOM AND HERSELF RESPECT, JUST AS SHE TRIED TO BREAK FREE ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, TOOK HER VERY LIFE IN WHAT AMOUNTED TO HIS FINAL AND HIS ULTIMATE ACT OF CONTROL. AND IN THAT FINAL AND TERRIBLE ACT RONALD GOLDMAN, AN INNOCENT BYSTANDER, WAS VICIOUSLY AND SENSELESSLY MURDERED. REMEMBER THAT IN VOIR DIRE WE ASKED YOU IF YOU COULD USE YOUR COMMON SENSE AND REASON TO FAIRLY AND TO OBJECTIVELY EVALUATE THIS EVIDENCE AS NEUTRAL IMPARTIAL JUDGES OF THE FACTS. YOU ALL PROMISED THAT YOU COULD AND YOU WOULD AND WE BELIEVE THAT YOU WILL.
WE HAVE EVERY FAITH AND BELIEF IN THE FACT THAT YOU WILL ALL KEEP THAT PROMISE, BUT IT WILL NOT BE EASY. YOU WILL BE TESTED AND TEMPTED THROUGHOUT THIS CASE TO ACCEPT THE UNREASONABLE AND BE DISTRACTED BY THE IRRELEVANT. THE DEFENSE WILL TALK TO YOU ABOUT POSSIBILITIES AND THEY WILL INSINUATE MANY SINISTER THINGS BASED ON THOSE POSSIBILITIES, POSSIBILITIES OF CONTAMINATION, POSSIBILITIES OF SET-UP, ALL IN AN EFFORT TO EXPLAIN AWAY ALL OF THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, BUT POSSIBILITIES ALONE DO NOT EQUAL PROOF. YOU'VE HEARD THE INSTRUCTION THAT SAYS THAT ALL MATTERS SUBJECT TO HUMAN AFFAIRS ARE CAPABLE OF SOME POSSIBLE DOUBT. THAT IS WHY THE STANDARD IS REASONABLE DOUBT. AND YOU WILL HEAR THE WORD "REASONABLE" MORE THAN ONCE IN THE JURY INSTRUCTIONS AND YOU ALREADY HAVE, BECAUSE IF THE PROOF STANDARD WAS BEYOND ALL POSSIBLE DOUBT, THERE COULD NEVER BE A CONVICTION, THERE CAN ALWAYS BE A POSSIBLE DOUBT ABOUT SOMETHING. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER YOU HAVE A DOUBT THAT IS FOUNDED IN REASON, SO BEWARE OF THE EFFORTS TO GET YOU TO ACCEPT THE UNREASONABLE, BE DISTRACTED BY THE IRRELEVANT AND TO BASE YOUR DECISION ON SPECULATION, ON MERE POSSIBILITIES WITH NO HARD EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT ANY OF THEM REALLY OCCURRED. LISTEN CAREFULLY TO ALL THE POSSIBILITIES AND THE HINTS RAISED BY THE DEFENDANTS AND ASK YOURSELVES IS THERE ANY PROOF THAT ANY OF THESE POSSIBILITIES ACTUALLY OCCURRED? LISTEN CAREFULLY FOR THE DEFENSE TO EXPLAIN HOW THE DEFENDANT'S BLOOD GOT ON 875 SOUTH BUNDY WALKWAY. IT IS GOING TO BE UP TO YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE EVER VIGILANT IN ACTING AS THE JUDGES IN THIS CASE. EACH ONE OF YOU IS A JUDGE. EACH ONE OF YOU IS A TRIER OF FACT. YOU HAVE TO EXAMINE ALL THE EVIDENCE VERY CAREFULLY AND ASK YOU DO ASK YOURSELVES IS THIS REASONABLE? IS THIS LOGICAL? DOES THIS MAKE SENSE? WOULD I LOOK AT THIS EVIDENCE THE SAME WAY --
LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE THE SAME WAY YOU WOULD FOR ANY OTHER CASE. NOW, WINNING IS NOT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT. THIS IS NOT A GAME. THIS IS ABOUT JUSTICE AND SEEING THAT JUSTICE IS DONE. TWO PEOPLE HAVE BEEN BRUTALLY MURDERED AND THE EVIDENCE CONSISTENTLY WILL POINT TO THE GUILT OF ONLY ONE PERSON AS THE MURDERER.
UH-HUH. THANK YOU. THERE WAS NO RUSH TO JUDGMENT IN THIS CASE. IT WAS VERY CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BEFORE IT WAS FILED. THE EVIDENCE WILL SHOW, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THAT AS OF JUNE THE 15TH MANY DNA RESULTS HAD ALREADY BEEN RETURNED. AS OF JUNE THE 15TH THERE HAD ALREADY BEEN A MATCH BETWEEN THE DEFENDANT AND THE BLOOD FOUND AT BUNDY DRIVE. THERE HAD ALREADY BEEN A MATCH BETWEEN THE VICTIMS AND THE BLOOD FOUND ON THE GLOVE AT HIS HOUSE. MANY THINGS WERE KNOWN AND YET IT WAS EXAMINED CAREFULLY, THE ENTIRE CASE EXAMINED VERY CAREFULLY, AND WAS NOT FILED UNTIL TWO DAYS AFTER THOSE RESULTS WERE OBTAINED. MY JOB IS TO SEEK JUSTICE. I'VE HAD CASES BEFORE THIS ONE, THERE WILL BE CASES AFTER IT. THIS THIS CASE NOT ABOUT THE LAWYERS, MYSELF, MR. HODGMAN, MR. DARDEN OR MR. COCHRAN. YOU WILL HAVE TO REMEMBER WHAT THIS CASE IS ABOUT; JUSTICE FOR ALL. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IF THOSE WORDS ARE TO MEAN ANYTHING, WE MUST ALL BE EQUAL IN THE EYES OF THE LAW AND WE CANNOT USE A SLIDING SCALE TO JUDGE GUILT OR INNOCENCE BASED ON A DEFENDANT OR A VICTIM'S POPULARITY. WE LIVE IN VERY, VERY STRANGE TIMES.
WE CANNOT SUCCUMB TO THE TEMPTATION TO THWART JUSTICE AND THROW TRUTH OUT THE WINDOW.
COUNSEL, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO STOP YOU RIGHT HERE. I HAVE WARNED YOU THREE TIMES NOW.
KEY QUOTETHANK YOU. ALL WE ASK IS THAT YOU STAY FOCUSED ON WHAT THE CASE IS ABOUT, ABOUT THE MURDER OF RON GOLDMAN.
THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I WANT TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND ATTENTION IN THIS MATTER AND TO THANK YOU ALSO ON BEHALF OF ALL OF US FOR PUTTING UP WITH THE RIGORS OF SEQUESTRATION. WE ALL KNOW IT IS DIFFICULT, AND WE APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR DEDICATION TO DUTY AND SERVICE IN THIS CASE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THAT TRAIL OF BLOOD FROM BUNDY THROUGH HIS OWN FORD BRONCO AND INTO HIS HOUSE IN ROCKINGHAM IS DEVASTATING PROOF OF HIS GUILT.
ORENTHAL JAMES SIMPSON, TOOK HER VERY LIFE IN WHAT AMOUNTED TO HIS FINAL AND HIS ULTIMATE ACT OF CONTROL.
POSSIBILITIES ALONE DO NOT EQUAL PROOF.
WE CANNOT USE A SLIDING SCALE TO JUDGE GUILT OR INNOCENCE BASED ON A DEFENDANT OR A VICTIM'S POPULARITY.
COUNSEL, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO STOP YOU RIGHT HERE. I HAVE WARNED YOU THREE TIMES NOW.