Thank you, your Honor. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good morning.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. KELBERG
Now, there is a subspecialty of internal medicine called rheumatology; is there not?
But in your training as an internal medicine resident, were you exposed to how you evaluate people for the possible presence of rheumatoid arthritis?
And the examination you did on the 15th of June, you say you have no notes of that; is that correct?
And that report was to include the most important significant findings you had made in the course of your examination of Mr. Simpson; is that correct?
Doctor, where in your report did you list anything related to Mr. Simpson walking--I hate to use your terminology--like Tarzan's grandfather or having any kind of irregular gait, g-a-I-t?
KEY QUOTEWell, doctor, can you narrow the time frame down at all within 24 hours? Was it the same day?
Now, you said you squeezed Mr. Simpson in during the lunch hour. In fact, this examination was approximately two hours in length; was it not?
And, doctor, this examination was arranged by Mr. Shapiro as the lawyer for Mr. Simpson; is that correct?
And, doctor, is it normally the case as a physician that a patient history is very important to a doctor in evaluating the condition of the patient?
And, doctor, would you agree that under normal circumstances, a doctor accepts as true the history that is given to him by the patient because of the belief that the patient has an incentive to be honest and candid with the physician in order that the physician can accurately identify any problem and subsequently treat it?
In most cases, that's true. It turns out I have a specialty in trying to be detective because when I was team physician for the Los Angeles raiders and in that function of evaluating all-American prospects coming into the Indianapolis combine for a potential drafting position, we were routinely lied to because obviously they viewed the doctor as the enemy and routinely misrepresented their case and said, "No, I have no orthopedic problems, no, I have no medical problems," and it was our duty, and this is something that I've written about, to try to be a medical detective and understand that they were not in a position to necessarily be truthful. And that was the first time I was exposed to a time where I would be seeing a patient and they would not necessarily be wanting to cooperate with me.
Doctor, in that situation, these were people who were trying to get jobs in the NFL, jobs that they believed would be very high-paying careers for them; is that correct?
Did you consider the possibility in evaluating Mr. Simpson on June 15th that he had a motive to lie regarding his symptoms?
And, doctor, you have no independent basis on which to evaluate whether or not Mr. Simpson was truthful with you, fully candid or whether in fact he was pulling his punches with you, can you?
My report is based on the history that I obtained from him and my observations are the observations that I made of him. He may say whatever he wants, but the physical exam in certain aspects is difficult to quote, unquote, lie about. That's an absolute finding.
Well, doctor, my question though to you was, do you have any independent basis on which you could evaluate the truthfulness of Mr. Simpson on the 15th of June with respect to any history he gave you regarding any aspect of your examination?
Well, certain aspects certainly were corroborated when we did get his old records. Even a two-hour exam is very brief when you're discussing the number of problems we discussed and the depth. And certainly when you go over the prioritization that I was faced with that day and the fact that I had, you know, four other people waiting to see me in the extra hour that we had pushed back from lunch, obviously there are some constraints in which you can humanly do. However, all you can do is take the history, try to corroborate it with old records and see the truthfulness of the statements that were made, and the areas where there is no independent corroboration, make your best judgment; and that's what I tried to do.
Doctor, on the 17th of June, you were present again with the Defendant; were you not?
Doctor, where in your report did you list anything related to Mr. Simpson walking--I hate to use your terminology--like Tarzan's grandfather or having any kind of irregular gait?
Uh, that is not in the report.
Patient's history is crucial.
He may say whatever he wants, but the physical exam in certain aspects is difficult to quote, unquote, lie about. That's an absolute finding.