Doctor, let me ask you to review, including the part that is going to come after what I've just read to you, and also invite your attention to page 85. I think I may have made a mistake. I may have misinterpreted, but I want to be sure that the doctor--
Doctor, in fact are those the five cuts which you have identified collectively as injury no. 5?
What I was reading? All right. Then continuing on: "Question: And were all of those antemortem wounds, as far as you could determine? "Answer: Yes, they were." Doctor, are you in agreement with that opinion that those five are antemortem wounds?
Now, let me refer you to page 85 to questioning starting on line 14. I'm sorry, let me start on line 7. "Question: Those are the five cutting wounds you've testified to? "Answer: Yes. So it had two things visible there, the multiple abrasions on the cheek" --and this refers to this injury no. 3, the confluent abrasions, doctor?
--"And then the circumscribed area which contained the cutting wound, the superficial cutting wounds. "Question: And sir, with reference to diagram People's 28 for identification, you are indicating an area on that figure in the lower left-hand side; is that correct? "Answer: Yes. "Question: Now, with regard to those abrasions," this is injury no. 3, "Would you characterize those abrasions as antemortem, perimortem or postmortem? "Answer: I would not characterize them as postmortem. They appeared to be perimortem based on their color, coloration. "Question: And again, `perimortem' meaning? "Answer: At about the time of death which could be shortly before, at the time of or shortly thereafter." Again, doctor, you reviewed that testimony?
Doctor, do you agree with that opinion concerning that area of confluent abrasion?
No. I think it is antemortem because as I pointed out earlier, the five--I mean out of the small stab sharp force injuries we discussed, four of them overlie this area of abrasion, and these sharp force injuries show evidence of hemorrhage in the tissue which would indicate that the person had blood pressure and the heart was beating when those sharp force injuries took place. So if they overlie an area of abrasion, the abrasion must have occurred before the sharp force injury, which would indicate that they also occurred before death when the person had blood pressure and the heart was beating.
And assuming hypothetically that Dr. Golden testified that in his opinion the confluent abrasions, which underlie the cuts, were perimortem, that is around the time of death, would it make any medical sense to you how the cuts that are overlaying those abrasions could have been antemortem?
No. My question is given Dr. Golden's opinion that the underlying abrasions are perimortem--that was his opinion according to this hypothetical transcript, correct?
--does it make any medical sense how the injury which in your opinion comes after the cuts overlaying the abrasions, how they could be antemortem with the underlying injury, the abrasions, being perimortem?
Doctor, if Dr. Golden testified that injury no. 3, the abrasions, were perimortem and he also opined that the cuts, injury no. 5, were antemortem, in your opinion, would that indicate that the cuts came before the abrasions?
No, I understand what your opinion is, doctor. My question is if Dr. Golden had the opinion that the abrasions were perimortem, and the cuts were antemortem, would that indicate that at least in Dr. Golden's view the cuts came before the abrasions?
And, doctor, if the cuts came before the abrasions how, if you can explain medically, could the cut be overlaying the abrasions rather than the abrasions overlaying the cuts?
Would you consider that opinion, if held by Dr. Golden, that the cuts came before the abrasions, to be a mistake?
Well, he said it is perimortem and perimortem also includes injuries which could just occur around the time of death, but in this situation I would consider it a mistake.
Now, doctor I think we are done with the picture of the facial injuries, and let's go, if we could, to the board that I had marked just before we started for afternoon session--just before the morning session ended.
Doctor, again, with the Court's permission, would you step to this board of photographs.
And this board is titled "Sharp force injuries to the left flank, left thigh and right chest of Mr. Goldman; blunt force trauma and lividity." First of all, doctor, we have a photograph in the center at the top underneath of which there is a designation 43-E. I ask you to assume that that is a copy of the same photograph which is marked already as People's exhibit 43-E, and it reflects the condition of Mr. Goldman's body at the time the body was discovered by Officer Riske around 12:13 in the morning on June 13, 1994.
Doctor, first of all, inviting your attention to G-1 and G-2, are you familiar with what is shown in those two photographs?
Yes. Those are the photographs of Mr. Goldman taken at the Coroner's office on June 14Tg, 1994, in the morning with his clothing present.
And doctor, does this--each of these photographs represent what you saw on June 13th, the day before, when you viewed Mr. Goldman's body and ms. Nicole Brown Simpson's body at the time they arrived at the Coroner's office?
Now, doctor, let me invite your attention, if I could, please, first to a photograph in the lower left-hand corner of the chart or series of photographs marked G-17. Are you familiar with what is shown in that?
That is a close-up photograph of the left thigh area of Mr. Goldman after his clothing has been removed and this is the photograph taken after the body is washed. And what you see here is a stab wound to the left thigh and it is a gaping wound. It has got a blunt end on its posterior aspect or on the right side of the photograph, and the sharp end on the left side of the photograph, and this wound is an antemortem penetrating stab wound and it was about three inches deep.
Doctor, from your description of a posterior blunt end and using the left side of the photograph, the sharp end being on the left side, is that accurate?
Do you have an opinion as to the type or class of knife or knives which could have caused that stab wound?
And going back, if you can recall, to our chart with three different examples of wound patterns, which wound pattern, if any, would this particular wound reflect?
This would reflect an injury pattern 1, but I must emphasize that there is also a cutting component to this stab wound. That is, the blunt end is still retained, but the single-edged knife which caused this wound also caused a cut extension of the--of the--of the wound.
What, if any, reaction from the body would you expect, given the location of that stab wound?
Doctor, I want to invite your attention--and by the way, which leg is this, doctor?
Your Honor, for the record, the witness is identifying an area that is just to the front of his left pant pocket and down near the bottom of where the pant pocket ends.
When I measured it in my one-as-to-one photographs it measured--G-17--one and 7/8 inch by 7/8 inch in the gaping state.
Doctor, is that hypothetical single-edge knife with an approximate six-inch long blade tapering at the tip consistent with having caused this stab wound?
I want to invite your attention back to G-1 and G-2 and in particular your attention to the left pant leg as shown in each of those photographs. Is the appearance of the pant leg in each of those photographs of some significance to you in evaluating the relative positions of Mr. Goldman and the perpetrator at the time that wound was inflicted?
Because what we have here in G-1 and G-2 is extensive blood staining of the left part of the jeans which Mr. Goldman is wearing, which would indicate that he was most likely upright for some time after this injury was inflicted, because as you know, blood would come out of a wound such as we have here if the left thigh, would drain down the thigh due to gravity, if somebody is upright, and that would stain the trouser or the jeans.
For example, doctor, if Mr. Goldman had been in the position, as shown in these photos, G-1 and G-2 and had remained in that position with the stab wound received in that position, would you have any scientific explanation as to how the blood could be on the pant leg below the area of the wound going towards the shoe?
It won't fit that kind of position because the blood seems to be definitely going downwards as if he was upright in the line of gravity.
KEY QUOTEDoctor, how rapidly a response of external bleeding would you expect from a wound the nature of this particular stab wound as seen in G-17?
You would have significant bleeding from that stab wound. Even though it did not injure any major big vessel, there are a lot of smaller vessels which supply the muscles in the front of the thigh and it was a wound which went up to three to three and a half inches in depth and you have a pretty gaping wound, so there would be significant bleeding from that wound, but it is not a fatal wound because no major vessel was struck.
Doctor, is there a description provided by Dr. Golden in his protocol regarding this stab wound?
Does the description include a description internally of the pathway of this stab wound?
Basically it goes through the muscular tissues to the left thigh and it did not strike any major vessel, and it was three to three and a half inches deep going in a left to right direction without deviation.
Given that description, are you able to offer an opinion as to the relative position--you have indicated Mr. Goldman was upright in your judgment when he received this injury and for some period thereafter--are you able to offer an opinion for the relative positions of the perpetrator and Mr. Goldman at the time that stab wound was inflicted?
I would not be able to give a specific scenario. The perpetrator could have been in the front or the back. If he was holding the right hand, the knife, it could be that the perpetrator was in the front, but I won't be able to say with definite certainty where the person was or where the victim was when this wound was inflicted.
If we could find a ruler again, would you show us what you mean with a right-handed person, that is, a person holding the knife in the right hand, the relative positions, and then show us a left-handed person in the sense of holding the knife in the left hand. I will take on the role of Mr. Goldman. You tell me where you need me to be in relation to yourself.
One, you can be facing me in the front. One method could be with the knife being held in this manner with the blunt edge on the outer aspect and the sharp edge on this aspect like this on the thigh, (indicating).
If you will stop this very quickly, the doctor has taken the ruler to represent the knife in his right hand and he referred to the blunt edge as being the edge which is outer, the outer side of the knife, the sharp edge being the inner side, and he has pressed it against that same area of my left thigh with the angulation being full--
He has the bottom of the ruler in contact with my body slightly lower, perhaps at about a thirty-degree angle from the horizontal.
Can we turn in some fashion, doctor, so the ladies and gentlemen of the jury can see what you are just pointing--set the ruler?
Like this, yes, (indicating). The other point I want to make is there is also a cutting component to the stab wound, so there was either movement of the knife or the victim's thigh during this time, during this penetration and withdrawal, which caused this stabbing, plus a cutting component to it.
Well, if it was the left hand, you could have the same manner, standing behind him and stabbing him in this manner, (indicating).
For the record, Dr. Lakshmanan has taken a position behind me and basically now holding the ruler in his left hand.
The blunt edge would still be to the back. It has to be a single-edged knife for this wound.
The blunt edge would be facing me and the sharp end would be facing the front.
I think you need to angle around the other way to show the jurors at the other end of the box.
Doctor, you indicated that Dr. Goldman--Golden, excuse me, addressed this in the protocol; is that correct, this stab wound?
Page 9 and 10. Starts on page 9, no. 4. Starts here as "No. 4 stab wound of left thigh."
Before we flip it, let me mark--is this the only injury, doctor, of photograph G-17?
Let me just outline that then on our protocol and I will write "G-17" and now if we can flip the page.
Doctor, where on the diagram, if we put up board 21--perhaps Mr. Lynch can refresh my memory as to the number of that board on the back.
It is diagrammed in the right--left lateral view of--the left lateral view diagram on the left thigh.
Yes. It says, "Length" and I can't read the letters. I'm sorry, it says "Left to right."
So if I circled this entire area, doctor, would this accurately identify what is G-17?
I want to move then, if we could, doctor, to photograph G-10, the photograph in the lower right corner of exhibit 362. What are we seeing in that photograph, doctor?
You are seeing evidence of three sharp force injuries to the right--first of all, you are seeing the right side of the trunk, right side of the trunk from the right chest to the right hip area and this is the upper part of the body and the lower part of the photograph shows the upper hip area here, (indicating). The right lower chest shows two sharp force injuries, both are stab wounds; one located in the front of the side of the chest, which is toward the right side of the photograph. The other sharp force jury is to the left side of the photograph on the back side of the side of the chest. This stab wound, (indicating)--both of them are fatal stab wounds. They entered the lung and caused hemorrhage. We have another sharp force injury to the lower right flank area, (indicating), and this one is a superficial wound. It was non-fatal. So this photograph then in addition, we also have some abrasions which are--appear postmortem on the side of the right chest, some between the two sharp force injuries of the right chest, and the sharp force injury of the right flank, and some--and an area of abrasion just below the stab wound in the posterior aspect of the side of the chest. I numbered them for my convenience and they have been addressed in the protocol and diagram and we can discuss it in detail.
Doctor, with respect to these two fatal stab wounds, are those arbitrarily designated 1 and 2?
Yes. I numbered them 1--the one which is in the front I called no. 1 and the one in the back I called as no. 2.
Let's start with no. 1. Can you point out exactly, using yourself, where that area is on the body?
Your Honor, for the record, the doctor has pointed to an area below the nipple area of the right breast and toward the back of the body along the midline of the side.
Doctor, are you able to tell, from examining the photograph, the type of knife or classes of knives, if it is more than one, which could have caused that particular fatal stab wound?
Because you have a blunt end on the lower part and a sharp end on the upper part of the wound.
The sharp end is on the top here and the blunt end on the bottom here, (indicating).
For the record, the witness has pointed on the photograph to the top and bottom portions of the wound.
Doctor, in your opinion that stab wound could not have been caused by a double-edged knife?
Let me move briefly to no. 2 and ask you the same series of questions. Are you able to determine from the appearance of that wound the type of class or classes of knives which could have caused that fatal wound?
That one was also caused by a single-edged knife. You have a blunt end in the back and a sharp end in the front.
Could the hypothetical approximately six-inch long single-edged knife tapering at the point have caused both of those fatal stab wounds?
Doctor, are you able to determine, from any description provided by Dr. Golden, the relative positions of Mr. Goldman and the perpetrator at the time either of these two fatal stab wounds was inflicted?
It would again--there are various possibilities for this--in which--various possibilities how this stab wound could have been sustained.
Let's start with this stab wound no. 1. What is the description--in fact, you said it is described--let's find the actual description, if we could, in the protocol.
It is on page 8, no. 1. The entire description applies to injury no. 1 on G-5--I'm sorry, G-10.
Doctor, can you summarize in lay terms for us the description provided here by Dr. Golden and let me get out of the way so you can do so.
Basically the stab wound entered the right chest in the area which I just showed you, went through a rib, the seventh rib, went through the lung, the right lung, and then came to strike the right fourth rib in its back--
It cannot be explained.
It won't fit that kind of position because the blood seems to be definitely going downwards as if he was upright in the line of gravity.
Both of them are fatal stab wounds. They entered the lung and caused hemorrhage.
There is also a cutting component to this stab wound. That is... there was either movement of the knife or the victim's thigh during this time, during this penetration and withdrawal.