Redirect examination of Adalberto Luper (part 3)

📄 Redirect examination of Adalberto Luper (part 3) — Thursday, July 20, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JUL\20\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-ADALBE.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 119 of 167

◀ Sidebar: evidence collection Recross-examination of Adalberto Luper ▶

Witness: Det. Bert Luper
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Defense • Date: Thursday, July 20, 1995 • Utterances: 207

Johnnie Cochran cross-examines Det. Luper about the timing and circumstances of the sock collection at Simpson's Rockingham estate on June 13, 1994. Cochran methodically establishes that Luper cannot confirm when the socks were collected, never saw blood on them, and behaved inconsistently — failing to seize other items (a glove, clothes from a hamper, straps on the bed) while specifically directing the seizure of two socks he says were 'out of place.' The proceeding is dominated by repeated objections from Darden over Cochran's attempts to use the criminalists' collection log to refresh Luper's recollection, a process that fails when Luper admits the log does not actually refresh his memory.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held in open court:)

# 2 MR. COCHRAN:

Thank you, your Honor.

# 3 MR. COCHRAN:

With regard, sir, to Dennis Fung, you knew Dennis Fung prior to that day or did you?

# 4 DET. LUPER:

I've only seen him at maybe one additional crime scene.

# 5 MR. COCHRAN:

So you knew he was a criminalist for the Los Angeles Police Department?

# 6 DET. LUPER:

I did, yes, sir.

# 7 MR. COCHRAN:

And you saw him there on that particular date?

# 8 DET. LUPER:

Yes, sir.

# 9 MR. COCHRAN:

And did you see him on various occasions collecting various items?

# 10 DET. LUPER:

That's correct. Yes, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 11 MR. COCHRAN:

And in connection with the log of the times that items were actually picked up, referring to Defendant's exhibit 1091, I want to ask you whether or not you ever at any time have seen the log of the collection of the various items. Okay?

# 12 DET. LUPER:

Okay.

# 13 MR. COCHRAN:

May I approach, your Honor?

# 14 THE COURT:

Yes.

# 15 MR. COCHRAN:

I want to ask you to take a look, first of all, at this log and then I'll ask you to look down specifically to items collected and I want you to look specifically at item--

# 16 MR. DARDEN:

This is leading, your Honor. Objection.

# 17 MR. COCHRAN:

I'm just asking him to look specifically, your Honor.

# 18 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 19 MR. COCHRAN:

Will you look at items 12, 13 and 14, just look down at those.

# 20 (The witness complies.)

# 21 MR. COCHRAN:

Have you looked at the log now?

# 22 DET. LUPER:

Yes, sir.

# 23 MR. COCHRAN:

Do you recognize that as a log kept by the members of the Special Investigations Division regarding the collection of items at a crime scene?

# 24 MR. DARDEN:

Objection to the form of the question.

# 25 THE COURT:

Sustained. Rephrase the question.

# 26 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Do you recognize that particular log and how it's used, sir.

# 27 MR. DARDEN:

Same objection.

# 28 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 29 DET. LUPER:

I've never seen a log used like this before.

# 30 MR. COCHRAN:

Have you ever seen a log used by the members of the Special Investigation Division at all?

# 31 DET. LUPER:

No. I mean, I've never paid much attention to how they record their evidence.

# 32 MR. COCHRAN:

Do you know who collected these socks allegedly on that day?

# 33 DET. LUPER:

What I saw was Mr. Fung collecting them.

# 34 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. And what time of day did Mr. Fung collect these socks? Well, without looking at the log.

# 35 DET. LUPER:

Well, there's no time on the log anyway. So it had to be in-between 3:30, 3:45, somewhere in that general area.

# 36 MR. COCHRAN:

3:30, 3:45?

# 37 DET. LUPER:

Yes.

# 38 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, if a--

# 39 MR. DARDEN:

Objection.

# 40 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 41 MR. COCHRAN:

I haven't asked a question.

# 42 THE COURT:

I know. It was "If a."

# 43 MR. COCHRAN:

Huh? "If a." I want to phrase this question, your Honor, if I might. May I phrase the question?

# 44 THE COURT:

Proceed.

# 45 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, with regard to Dennis Fung, have you had occasion to see his testimony in this court before this jury regarding the time that he picked these socks up allegedly?

# 46 DET. LUPER:

No, sir, I have not.

# 47 MR. COCHRAN:

Have you had occasion to talk with Mr. Fung at all regarding the time these socks were picked up?

# 48 DET. LUPER:

No, sir, I have not.

# 49 MR. COCHRAN:

Are you aware of whether or not the foyer blood drops, the socks were picked up sequentially or in order from the standpoint of time, one being first and the other being second and something was third? Are you aware of that?

# 50 DET. LUPER:

No, I'm not aware.

# 51 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, your estimate is that Mr. Fung picked these socks up at--what time was that now?

# 52 DET. LUPER:

Well, about 3:30, 3:45, in that general area in the afternoon.

# 53 MR. COCHRAN:

And is that--do you have that written in a report anywhere?

# 54 DET. LUPER:

No, sir, I do not.

# 55 MR. COCHRAN:

Who do you think would have the best recollection of what the time these socks were picked up; you or Mr. Fung?

# 56 MR. DARDEN:

Objection. That's argumentative. Calls for hearsay.

# 57 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 58 MR. COCHRAN:

Well, may I ask it another way, your Honor?

# 59 MR. COCHRAN:

Who do you think would be in the best position to know what time these socks were picked up; the person who collected them allegedly or you, sir?

# 60 MR. DARDEN:

Same objection, your Honor.

# 61 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 62 MR. COCHRAN:

Your Honor, I have another question I'd like to ask if I might at this point.

# 63 THE COURT:

Do you want to approach before you do that.

# 64 MR. COCHRAN:

Yes. Yes.

# 65 THE COURT:

All right.

# 66 (A conference was held at the bench, not reported.)

# 67 (The following proceedings were held in open court:)

# 68 MR. COCHRAN:

Thank you, your Honor.

# 69 MR. COCHRAN:

Detective Luper, do you know what time Dennis Fung collected or Dennis Fung or Andrea Mazzola collected the spots in the foyer?

# 70 DET. LUPER:

Not without looking at their notes.

# 71 MR. COCHRAN:

Would you like to look at their log?

# 72 MR. DARDEN:

Objection, your Honor.

# 73 MR. COCHRAN:

Well, if that refreshes his recollection.

# 74 THE COURT:

He can use it if it will refresh his recollection.

# 75 MR. DARDEN:

He never testified that he ever knew.

# 76 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 77 MR. COCHRAN:

May I proceed?

# 78 MR. DARDEN:

Foundation.

# 79 MR. COCHRAN:

Will you look at this and see what--if you can look at this and see if it refreshes your recollection as to what time they picked up the spots in the foyer?

# 80 DET. LUPER:

According to their log, it said--

# 81 MR. DARDEN:

Objection, your Honor.

# 82 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 83 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, the proper way I guess, your Honor--

# 84 MR. COCHRAN:

Having looked at the log, does that refresh your recollection as to the time that Mr. Fung or Miss Mazzola picked up the--collected the spots in the foyer?

# 85 MR. DARDEN:

Objection, your Honor. Lack of foundation.

# 86 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 87 MR. COCHRAN:

I'm asking.

# 88 MR. COCHRAN:

You can answer that.

# 89 DET. LUPER:

It would appear by their log that they--

# 90 MR. DARDEN:

Objection, your Honor.

# 91 THE COURT:

Sustained. Rephrase the question.

# 92 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Again, I'll rephrase it again.

# 93 MR. COCHRAN:

With regard to the document I placed before you, is your memory refreshed as to the time that Dennis Fung or Andrea Mazzola collected these spots in the foyer at Rockingham on June 13th, 1994 in the afternoon?

# 94 MR. DARDEN:

Foundation, your Honor.

# 95 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 96 DET. LUPER:

The log indicates--

# 97 MR. DARDEN:

Pardon me, sir.

# 98 THE COURT:

Yes. Wait a minute. Detective Luper, the question is, is your personal recollection refreshed as--after having read the log as to when those spots were recovered in the foyer?

# 99 DET. LUPER:

No, sir.

# 100 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. So you have no way of knowing at all?

# 101 DET. LUPER:

No, sir.

# 102 MR. COCHRAN:

Do you know whether or not that the foyer spots were collected prior to the time that you say the socks were collected?

# 103 MR. DARDEN:

Your Honor, may the record reflect the witness is looking at the log?

# 104 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 105 MR. COCHRAN:

Want me to remove that?

# 106 DET. LUPER:

Yeah, would you? Thank you. I don't know how they were--if they were done in a certain order or sequentially. I know that Miss Mazzola and Dennis Fung were working pretty much--

# 107 MR. DARDEN:

I object at this time as nonresponsive.

# 108 THE COURT:

All right. Next question.

# 109 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. So--there was an objection to the question by Mr. Darden. So I didn't get to finish hearing it. So you don't know--I guess my question was, do you know whether or not the spots in the foyer were collected prior to anything being collected upstairs?

# 110 DET. LUPER:

I don't know.

# 111 MR. COCHRAN:

You don't know. And the form that I've given you does not refresh your recollection?

# 112 DET. LUPER:

No, sir.

# 113 MR. COCHRAN:

And you've not spoken with either Mazzola or Fung about their testimony?

# 114 DET. LUPER:

That's correct.

# 115 MR. COCHRAN:

And you don't know the times that they said?

# 116 DET. LUPER:

That's correct.

# 117 MR. COCHRAN:

Do you know the time that Mr. Willie Ford videoed Mr. Simpson's bedroom and there were no socks at the foot of that bed? Do you know that time?

# 118 MR. DARDEN:

Objection.

# 119 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 120 MR. COCHRAN:

Do you know that time, sir?

# 121 DET. LUPER:

I did not look at my watch on that particular day to be specific. No, sir.

# 122 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Well, you weren't in the bedroom at the time Mr. Ford was videoing the area of Mr. Simpson's bedroom?

# 123 DET. LUPER:

No, I was not in the bedroom.

# 124 MR. COCHRAN:

You were someplace else in the house, right?

# 125 DET. LUPER:

That's correct. Yes, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 126 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. He was accompanied by some other people, not you?

# 127 DET. LUPER:

That's correct. Yes, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 128 MR. DARDEN:

Assumes facts not in evidence.

# 129 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 130 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, you mentioned, sir, that when you were downstairs, one of the reasons that you had inadvertently put down the glove that we talked about was because you were trying to follow some blood spots or wood spots or something?

# 131 DET. LUPER:

Well, they appeared to be discolo--red discoloration on the wood floor and they appeared to be spots that were not one right after another, but fairly far apart from each other.

# 132 MR. COCHRAN:

Did you pursue these spots?

# 133 DET. LUPER:

Yes, sir, I did.

# 134 MR. COCHRAN:

And you found out later that was not blood, was it?

# 135 DET. LUPER:

That's correct. Yes, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 136 MR. COCHRAN:

So it was kind of like a trail of no blood, right?

KEY QUOTE

# 137 DET. LUPER:

That's correct. Yes, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 138 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, speaking of that by the way, as a detective and as the first person up those stairs--

# 139 MR. DARDEN:

Objection. That assumes facts not in evidence.

# 140 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 141 MR. COCHRAN:

Well--counsel is absolutely correct.

# 142 MR. COCHRAN:

As the police officer who went up the stairs after 12:00 o'clock on that date, you didn't see any blood on the stairs going up there, did you?

# 143 DET. LUPER:

I didn't see any, no, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 144 MR. COCHRAN:

And you didn't see any blood on the carpet of Mr. Simpson's bedroom as you go in there, did you?

# 145 DET. LUPER:

No, sir, I did not.

# 146 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, with regard to these socks that you had seized, you didn't see any blood on those socks either, did you?

# 147 DET. LUPER:

I didn't get close enough to examine them.

# 148 MR. COCHRAN:

Is the answer, you didn't see any blood on the socks?

# 149 DET. LUPER:

No, sir.

# 150 MR. COCHRAN:

And it's your testimony that you had these socks seized or asked to have them seized whatever time they were seized because they were out of place; is that right?

# 151 DET. LUPER:

They were out of place and it seemed like a very good idea.

KEY QUOTE

# 152 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. And you had them seized; is that correct?

# 153 DET. LUPER:

That's correct. Yes, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 154 MR. COCHRAN:

And you never got very close to them at that time?

# 155 DET. LUPER:

No, sir.

# 156 MR. COCHRAN:

And so--I may have asked you this. You did not have the straps on the bed seized at any point, right?

# 157 DET. LUPER:

That's correct. Yes, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 158 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Those were just left there; is that correct?

# 159 DET. LUPER:

That's right, sir.

# 160 MR. COCHRAN:

May I have just a moment, your Honor?

# 161 THE COURT:

Certainly.

# 162 (Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

# 163 MR. COCHRAN:

May I have just a moment, your Honor?

# 164 THE COURT:

Certainly.

# 165 (Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

# 166 MR. COCHRAN:

Just a couple other questions.

# 167 MR. COCHRAN:

Few other questions. Detective Luper, again, with regard to--strike that. With regard to criminalists Fung and Mazzola, did you notice as they were doing their work at Rockingham that day, they had kind of a clipboard or something of that nature where they were logging and writing down things as they would pick up various items? Do you remember seeing that?

# 168 MR. DARDEN:

Objection. Leading.

# 169 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 170 DET. LUPER:

Yes, I did.

# 171 MR. COCHRAN:

And so that as they--you would see them in one particular area. They would then write something down on a piece of paper although you don't know what they were writing, right?

# 172 DET. LUPER:

That's correct. Yes, sir.

KEY QUOTE

# 173 MR. COCHRAN:

Your experience as a detective of some eight years and a 23-year member of the Los Angeles Police Department, you believe that what you saw them writing was a log that they kept consistent with keeping track of what they were collecting and the time that they were collecting these items; isn't that correct?

# 174 MR. DARDEN:

Objection. Calls for speculation and it's leading, your Honor.

# 175 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 176 MR. COCHRAN:

Well, what did you think this was that they were writing down as they could collect various items?

# 177 MR. DARDEN:

Objection. Irrelevant.

# 178 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 179 DET. LUPER:

I felt that what they were writing down was the dimensions as to where certain items were being recovered and as to its description.

# 180 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. So item--location of the item, where recovered, right?

# 181 DET. LUPER:

That's correct.

# 182 MR. COCHRAN:

The item collected, right?

# 183 DET. LUPER:

That's correct.

# 184 MR. COCHRAN:

The time collected?

# 185 MR. DARDEN:

Objection. This is leading.

# 186 MR. COCHRAN:

I'm asking.

# 187 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 188 MR. COCHRAN:

You can answer that.

# 189 DET. LUPER:

I was unaware that they were making a notation of time.

# 190 MR. COCHRAN:

But it was possible, wasn't it?

# 191 MR. DARDEN:

Objection.

# 192 THE COURT:

Sustained.

# 193 MR. COCHRAN:

Now, I want to make sure I understand this. You took clothes out of the hamper to have photographs taken of them and didn't seize any of those clothes, right?

# 194 DET. LUPER:

That is correct.

# 195 THE COURT:

Mr. Cochran, we've gone through this a number of times.

# 196 MR. COCHRAN:

This is foundational, your Honor. It's foundation. Bear with me.

# 197 MR. COCHRAN:

You took--you looked in the closet and you never seized anything there, right?

# 198 DET. LUPER:

That's correct.

# 199 MR. COCHRAN:

You saw these suspenders or--strike that. You saw these straps on the bed and you never seized those, right?

# 200 DET. LUPER:

That's correct.

# 201 MR. COCHRAN:

You took a glove from upstairs and brought it all the way downstairs and you didn't seize that either, right?

# 202 DET. LUPER:

That's correct.

# 203 MR. COCHRAN:

It's your testimony that you saw some socks that were out of place and you instructed that be seized; is that right?

# 204 DET. LUPER:

That's correct.

# 205 MR. COCHRAN:

And it's your best testimony before this jury that those items were seized about 3:30 to 3:45 on June 13th?

# 206 DET. LUPER:

That general time frame, yes, sir.

# 207 MR. COCHRAN:

All right. Thank you very kindly, your Honor. I have nothing further of this witness.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Det. Bert Luper

They were out of place and it seemed like a very good idea.

Luper's justification for seizing the socks — which would later test positive for both OJ Simpson's and Nicole Brown's blood — amounts to intuition, undermining the evidentiary basis for the seizure.

Det. Bert Luper

That's correct. Yes, sir.

Luper's repeated affirmation to Cochran's litany — didn't seize the glove, didn't seize the clothes, didn't seize the straps, didn't see blood on the socks — building a pattern of selective evidence collection the defense used to suggest planting.

Johnnie Cochran

So it was kind of like a trail of no blood, right?

Sardonic summary after Luper admits he pursued discolorations on the wood floor that turned out not to be blood — undermining the idea that the scene's physical evidence was as incriminating as the prosecution claimed.

Det. Bert Luper

No, sir.

Luper's final answer when Judge Ito personally intervenes to ask whether the collection log refreshed his personal recollection of when foyer spots were collected — collapsing Cochran's entire line of questioning on timing.

Evidence (5)

Defendant's 1091

SID criminalist collection log recording items recovered at Rockingham on June 13, 1994, including apparent location and sequence of collection

Cochran attempts to use it to refresh Luper's recollection of collection times; Luper says it does not refresh his memory; Darden repeatedly objects to Luper reading from it directly

Informal

Two socks found at the foot of OJ Simpson's bed

Discussed — Luper testifies he directed their seizure around 3:30–3:45 PM because they were 'out of place'; admits he saw no blood on them

Informal

Willie Ford video of Simpson's bedroom showing no socks at foot of bed

Referenced by Cochran to challenge the timeline; Luper says he was not in the bedroom when Ford was filming

Informal

Glove recovered from upstairs at Rockingham

Discussed — Luper confirms he carried it downstairs and did not seize it

Informal

Clothes in hamper and straps/suspenders on bed in Simpson's bedroom

Discussed — Luper confirms he photographed hamper clothes and saw the bed straps but seized neither

Notable Exchanges (4)

Johnnie Cochran•Det. Bert Luper•Christopher Darden•Lance A. Ito

Extended battle over using Defense exhibit 1091 to refresh Luper's recollection. Cochran tries multiple phrasings; Darden objects repeatedly on foundation; Ito ultimately takes over and asks the proper question himself, only to have Luper confirm the log does not refresh his personal memory at all.

procedural battle

Johnnie Cochran•Det. Bert Luper

Cochran walks Luper through his selective evidence handling: carried glove downstairs (didn't seize), looked through hamper clothes (didn't seize), saw straps on bed (didn't seize), yet directed seizure of two socks he couldn't see blood on because they were 'out of place.'

strategically devastating

Johnnie Cochran•Lance A. Ito•Christopher Darden

Darden objects to Cochran's unfinished sentence beginning 'Now, if a--'; Ito overrules and explains the objection was to 'If a,' prompting Cochran's bemused 'Huh?' and a request to be allowed to finish his question.

absurdist/light

Johnnie Cochran•Det. Bert Luper

Cochran gets Luper to admit he pursued a trail of reddish discolorations on the wood floor that later proved not to be blood, then summarizes: 'So it was kind of like a trail of no blood, right?'

strategic/sardonic

Light Moments (2)

Lance A. Ito / Johnnie Cochran

Darden objects to Cochran's unfinished sentence 'Now, if a--'; Ito overrules, noting 'It was "If a"'; Cochran responds 'Huh? "If a."' and asks permission to finish his question.

Johnnie Cochran

'So it was kind of like a trail of no blood, right?' — Cochran's dry summary of Luper following discolorations that turned out not to be blood.

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Det. Bert Luper

internal inconsistency / selective behavior

Cochran establishes that Luper handled or observed multiple items at Rockingham (glove, hamper clothes, bed straps) without seizing them, but specifically directed the seizure of the socks — without seeing blood on them and based only on them being 'out of place' — suggesting either incompetence or improper motive.

⚔ Det. Bert Luper

lack of documentation / unreliable recollection

Luper admits his estimated collection time of 3:30–3:45 PM for the socks is not written in any report, he never discussed timing with Fung or Mazzola, and neither the criminalists' log nor his own memory can establish the sequence of evidence collection.

⚔ Crime scene evidence (socks)

timeline challenge via video evidence

Cochran references the Willie Ford video showing no socks at the foot of Simpson's bed; Luper was not present during filming and cannot account for the timing, leaving open the window the defense would exploit to argue the socks were placed there after the video was shot.

Witness Demeanor

(The witness complies.) — Luper looks at items 12, 13, and 14 in the collection log

Luper attempts to read directly from the log twice before being stopped by sustained objections

Luper asks Cochran to remove the log from his view: 'Yeah, would you? Thank you.' — suggesting he was inadvertently referencing it

Objections

21 objections (9 sustained, 12 overruled)

Proceeding 6986 • 207 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103