Thank you, your Honor. And Mr. Fairtlough is going to be helping me out with the elmo.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. KELBERG
But first of all, doctor, let me show you the documents I just marked as exhibits 364-A through I.
364-A is the autopsy evidence collection log. This is the log to reflect the--which specimens were collected during autopsy, and that is reflected on the current cases being discussed. And then this log is--when the specimens are received in the toxicology lab, it is marked off by the person receiving the specimens in the lab saying they received the specimen, they put their initials, and then they keep a copy and a copy is sent back to the autopsy area.
Doctor, is that document a true and correct copy of the particular autopsy evidence log from the two cases of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson?
Are the entries which are made on that document entries made by employees of the Coroner's office acting in their official duties as such employees?
Are the entries which they make entries which are made at or near the time of the events which are recorded in that document?
Perhaps instead of going forward to the next one, could Mr. Fairtlough put that document up on the elmo and let me show you the blow-up--and I'm not sure we got a stipulation yet. Mr. Shapiro, will you stipulate that we have blow-ups that correspond identically, except for size, to the documents which have been marked as 364-A through I?
Doctor, again with the Court's permission, if you could step to the board with the pointer and tell us what is the information that is contained in this document pertaining specifically to the Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson autopsies?
Yes. This is the autopsy evidence collection log. The date of this log was June 14, 1994. You have 5135 is the Coroner's case number that belonged to Mr.--the number given to Mr. Ron Goldman. Golden is the medical examiner. This is the verifying forensic technician.
He checked that these specimens were collected during the autopsy. The specimens collected on Mr. Goldman were blood, stomach contents, bile, a histo jar, that is the storage jar with the tissues and formalin and typing blood and these initials are J.M., which is the--Mr. Murillo who is the technician in the toxicology lab. When this log comes up he initials saying that he received it and checks off there, too.
M-u-r-I-l-l-o. So that belongs to Mr. Goldman's autopsy. Unfortunately due to the copying this is a little bit dark here. Thinks 5136 here, Dr. Golden. And this belongs to Miss Nicole Brown Simpson's specimen collection. They collected blood, urine, the storage jar which contains the tissues, and the typing blood and again the same initials indicating Mr. Murillo received it in the toxicology lab.
Doctor, is that a document of this nature prepared for each day of the year concerning all autopsies performed at your offices?
Yes. This is the initial chain of custody of specimens collection at the autopsy room, and then I gave you the next stage which is the toxicology lab, wherein a person receives it and signs off on it, so you call a chain of custody from the autopsy room to the toxicology lab. And I already discussed the form 15 which is the initial log saying the doctor did collect it, he initials the 15th, so so far we have got the chain of custody for these specimens.
All right. Doctor, why don't you, if you wouldn't mind, please, just stay where you are--and by the way, your Honor, I have marked these big boards correspondingly to the small paper exhibit by adding an extra letter, so this one is 364-AA to correspond to the blow-up of 364-A.
This is the master evidence log for the--which records the collection of any physical evidence; hair samples, type blood, et cetera, for the department. Usually the investigator initiates this when the evidence collection starts. This particular exhibit refers to Mr. Ron Goldman's evidence log maintained by the Department of Coroner. As you can see the Coroner's number is here, 5135, and--
Is there an individualized evidence log kept for each case handled by the Coroner's office?
Yes, there is, and what this card will reflect is the--when a particular piece of evidence was obtained, the date, the person obtaining it, how long it was in our custody, and also if it was released, the date of release and the person who obtained that specimen from us will be recorded also.
Are the entries which are made on this document made by employees of the Coroner's office?
Yes. I already mentioned that this particular exhibit belongs to the evidence log of Mr. Ron Goldman. We will start with the typing blood swatch.
Typing blood swatch. This refers to a swatch which is made on every case where typing blood is obtained. It was done by Mr. Adrian Dersidan, D-E-R-S-I-D-A-N, and it was made on June 15, eight o'clock.
Yes. And it was received in the evidence room by Mr. Siglar--Mr. Siglar who is our senior criminalist who is also in charge of the evidence area of our office. And it was released to Mr. Phil Vannatter of LAPD, robbery/homicide, by Mr. Siglar, on June 15 at 8:45.
The next entry, this is for the typing blood which was--which I discussed so far. This just indicates that the swatch was made.
Then we have the hair kit. I discussed this I think on Tuesday last week. Miss Claudine Ratcliffe obtained the hair samples from Mr. Ron Goldman, put it in the drop-off box, which I mentioned, on June 13th in the afternoon at 1440.
Then Mr. Patino retrieved it from our drop-off box in the evidence--and took it to the evidence room on June 15, `94, at seven o'clock. And as we discussed earlier, Mr. Grandis of LAPD SID retrieved it from our office from Mr. Patino on June 24 at 9:30.
The next entry is the clothing. The clothing, as you recall, Mr. Goldman had shirt, pants, shoes and socks. As I discussed earlier, on June 13th--I'm sorry--June 14th the photographs were taken. During that time the clothing was removed and I--if you recall, it was Mr. John Marsden who was our autopsy technician, forensic photographic technician, who took the clothing off. It was done on June 14th at 8:40. As I mentioned earlier, this clothing is dried and when it is completely dry Mr. Patino retrieved it, kept it in the evidence room on June 20th, `94, and Mr. Grandis took custody of the clothing from our office from Mr. Patino. And Mr. Grandis works for LAPD SID and that was done on June 24th at 9:20 in the morning. And of course this just refers to this evidence here, that only the whole blood--the blood was released to Mr. Vannatter.
Yes, yes. Then the typing blood swatch, as I mentioned earlier, was made by Mr. Dersidan on June 15th. Mr. Siglar got custody of it, of the swatch, at three o'clock in the afternoon because it has to dry. And then that was released to Mr. Grandis of LAPD SID on June 24th at 9:20. The fingerprint card, palmprint cards, as you recall, the fingerprints and palmprints were obtained by Mr. Jacobo of our office. It was obtained on June 13th, the day the remains were brought to our. Mr. Patino received those cards on June 15th in the evidence room and it was released to one Mr. Dube of LAPD by Mr. Patino on June 16th, 1994, at 8:45. The liver temperature thermometer which was used to obtain the liver temperature on both the decedents was kept in our custody on June 22nd by Mr. Mahanay. He calibrated the instrument that day. And Mr. Siglar has it in custody since February. It has not been released. It is still in our custody. That was the thermometer that was used to obtain the temperature.
All right. Let me put up what I will ask to be marked as our 364 double C, a blow-up of the small document.
And it appears to be a similar one to 364 double B, except it refers to refer to Nicole Brown Simpson instead of Mr. Goldman. Would you take us--first of all, let me ask you, in general terms, is this the same kind of document as the previous exhibit, 364 double b?
And would your answers be the same with respect to the manner in which this document is created and retained by the Coroner's office?
Yes. The investigator starts the document and then it is kept in the evidence room of the Coroner's office.
And the entries again are all made by employees of the Coroner's office in their duties as employees?
Again we will start--again this belongs to Miss Nicole Brown Simpson. Typing blood was received in the lab in the evidence room on 15--actually both the typed bloods were collected by Dr. Golden at autopsy and in the evidence room Mr. Siglar signs off on it, released to Mr. Vannatter the same day, of LAPD, at 8:45 in the morning. The fingernail kit was processed by Miss Ratcliffe on June 13th at 1340 hours, received in the evidence room by Mr. Patino from the drop box on June 15th, released to Mr. Grandis on June 24th at 9:30, Mr. Grandis of LAPD. Hair kit, Claudine Ratcliffe obtained it on June 13th, 1340. Patino receives it in the evidence room from the drop-off box on June 15th, and this specimen was also released to LAPD on June 24th. As you recall, the clothing worn by Miss Simpson was a dress and a panty. Recovered by our photographer, John Marsden, at seven o'clock on June 14th during the photographic autopsy process. The dry clothing was recovered by Mr. Patino on June 16th, released to the same Mr. Grandis of LAPD on June 24th. The liver thermometer, I already addressed this. One thermometer was used and it is in our custody. The blood scrapings, as you recall, was obtained by our criminalist from the right thigh and right calf of Miss Nicole Brown Simpson. This took place on June 13th and they were placed in evidence and retrieved from the box by Mr. Patino on the 15th and released again to the same LAPD person, Mr. Grandis, on June 24th. The finger and palmprints obtained by Jacobo on June 13th when the body came in. Patino retrieved it from the evidence room on June 15th, released to Mr. Dube on June 16th at 8:45. The typing blood swatch made by Mr. Adrian Dersidan on June 15th, received by Mr. Siglar the same time, released to Mr. Grandis on June 24th of 1994 by Mr. Patino.
Let me take this one down and give it to Mr. Lynch and put up what I would ask to be marked as 364 double D as blow-up.
Yes. This is the drop off log sheet which is kept to the--next to the mailbox which we discussed last Tuesday.
Is to record who dropped off what evidence in the drop off log--I mean the drop-off box and to record it.
Are the entries that are made on this document entries made by employees of the Coroner's office?
Is the document kept in the course of the official duties of the Coroner's office?
Are the events recorded on this document by the Coroner employee ones which reflect acts occurring at or about the time of the events recorded?
Yes. We will start--5135 belongs to Mr. Ron Goldman. And this refers to Miss Ratcliffe dropping off the hair kit which was collected on Mr. Ron Goldman and you can see her initials here, (indicating), on 5135, which is the case number for Miss Brown Simpson. A fingernail kit was processed, a hair kit was processed which was also collected, some physical evidence of the bloodstains, scrapings taken by Mr. Mahanay, and all these samples were dropped off by Miss Ratcliffe. She also indicated that she had placed the evidence log card, because you know they generate--they--they start the evidence log sheet, so that was also made available.
Doctor, before you go further, I just want to be sure, is that a reference to, for example, I don't know if I've got the one for Goldman or the one for brown Simpson, but is that the document you are referring to?
Yes. You see, Miss Ratcliffe starts off the document and that is--that is what is recorded there.
It was 364 double B. Thank you, your Honor. Let me just outline this area where you have just been discussing.
Yes. It is just a drop-off box and a log to show what specimens or evidence was dropped off. And then, if you go lower down on the same sheet, 5136 and 5135, 5136 belongs to Miss Simpson and 5135 to Mr. Ron Goldman.
This reflects the drop off of the fingerprint and palmprint cards. The prints were taken by Mr. Jacobo but the drop-off log indicates that it was dropped off by one Mr. Mettin, M-E-T-T-I-N.
When they volunteer to work for your office are they considered employees in the sense that they have responsibilities as if they were being paid employees to do certain things that are the responsibilities of the Coroner's office?
Let me outline this area that you have now been describing. I will do that in red also.
Is there anything else about this particular document that pertains to these two cases?
Your Honor, I have another board that I would ask for the record to be marked 364 double E.
This reflects the histopathology evidence log wherein the tissue jar, which is generated at the autopsy, containing the specimens from the autopsies. They are received in the histopathology area, which is a separate section of the laboratory division, and a chain of custody is maintained for the histopathology specimens. And basically you have a reflection of how many jars there were, whether any microscopic sections were submitted, the date they were submitted and duplicates were made, et cetera.
The hold jar was received on Mr. Goldman, the number is here, Coroner's case number, on June 14th. The name of the DME is here. One jar was received on Goldman and Miss Simpson each, and on Miss Simpson microscopic section was cut.
Doctor, what is that category that is described at the top, "Cassettes prepared in the laboratory by DME"? What does that category refer to?
That refers to when you--when you take a microscopic section, you take a piece of tissue and put it in what's called a cassette, which is then submitted and that is taken to a processing laboratory where it goes through a process wherein the tissue is made into what's called a paraffin block, wherein a histopathology technician can take sections of that tissue, thin sections, so that tissue can be studied under the microscope. And this process is what is done in the histopathology laboratory and a cassette is--this particular column refers to if microscopic sections were--were done. And on Miss Brown Simpson, but not on Mr. Goldman at that time, one section of the brain was submitted on July 1st, I discussed it briefly during my testimony, and then the slides that are available on July 12th and returned August 2nd back to the lab, and this refers to the same slide which--which came to me--
This date--this says 2/1/94 and it should be `95. In February of this year, I think when we wanted to make duplicates for the Defense to send it to the--in February of this year to Albany we made some duplicate slides of the brain slide and that is reflected on the 28th here, two slides were made. And originally I sent the original slide to Albany and it came back, and when I got the duplicates I mailed it to Dr. Baden, so that is what is reflected here and this log is not--this is a copy of a log which is not really up to date, because in May of this year we cut additional sections at the request of the Defense on both the cases, a total of 16 cassettes were cut, nine on Miss Brown Simpson, if I recall, and seven on Mr. Goldman, and the current log in our office should reflect that having taken place. So what I'm saying is this log is a permanent log in the Coroner's office. Any additions or entries which are made at a later date, a few days later, will be maintained in the same log sheet, so that is a chain of custody of what sections were taken at what time as long as we have custody of the specimens.
Doctor, have you examined all of the slides that have been prepared in this case, including the most recent series of slides?
Let me just outline again in red the areas that refer to the two cases before the Court and the jury.
Well, an entry which has not yet been made on this particular copy of the log when Miss Nicole Brown Simpson's jar was originally examined by the Defense pathologist and myself on June 22nd, the spine specimen and the laryngeal specimen of the same jar.
Were in the same jar, but now we made an additional jar to keep the specimens because we made some additional examinations goes. As you recall during my testimony about Miss Simpson, we had the evaluation by our criminalist on the laryngeal specimen and spine specimen, and as I recall, we also did x-rays on the spine specimen. So originally we put it in a separate jar, so we have two jars on Miss Simpson and one on Mr. Goldman. I just wanted to reflect that also and that will complete this chart.
Your Honor, for the record, I would ask that this first page of this blow-up series with the toxicology log handwritten entry be marked as 364 double F.
This is the internal toxicology specimen log. As I recall, you saw the autopsy specimen log sheet wherein the log comes up. The toxicology technician signs off that he received the specimen but that log sheet goes back to the autopsy area. He just keeps a copy. So a new log is maintained in the toxicology lab and this is the internal toxicology log with reference to the specimens on each Coroner's case. And this particular document refers to both our cases. 5135 is Ron Goldman. We received blood sample. They also received stomach and bile.
All right. You have got some letters that you've just been pointing to. Can you tell was those letters refer to?
Is that a common designation used by personnel in your office to refer to such things?
Yes, and it is the same as to Joe Murillo, M-U-R-I-L-L-O, who received it in the lab, and 5136 is the blood specimen on Miss Nicole Brown Simpson, plus we got urine sample received, "U" stands for urine, and of course the--don't worry about the date here. We use old books so that we don't--I mean, we use the same books, but the dates are different.
I was going to ask you, this document has up in the left-hand corner the date "May 10." Is that the date that refers to the entries that appear on this document?
No, no, no. The date is the correct date here. I just said that we use an older book because we have some books available, so we just use it. But the key thing is the date of entry for each specimen.
And these numbers that appear to be stamped in vertically starting with 005127, I believe, in the upper left-hand corner, what do they refer to, doctor?
They are the different cases which have specimens for that day, because you know in the Coroner's office, our case assignments go from the no. 1 for each year to the end of the year, so this particular day on June 14th and 15th all those case numbers are the ones which were processed in our office.
Yes, it was--to a certain extent it is, but the entries are all made as the specimens are received.
Are the entries then made by employees of the Coroner's office in the course of their official responsibilities?
And are the entries to reflect acts or events which occurred at or about the time the entries were made?
Let me outline, if I could, please, in red, the areas that you were just identifying.
Let me flip on this chart--and your Honor, I ask that this blow-up be marked 364 double G to correspond with the paper document.
It is it same only the only thing is there are more entries made here with reference to--to what happened to these samples, as you recall, February of this year, I think February 17th or 18th of this year the Defense wanted specimens sent to Albany. And I was in Seattle and we coordinated the release of those specimens. Basically I think a sample of blood sample from each blood bottle was sent to Albany, and also I sent stomach contents on Mr. Goldman which was available for the Defense pathologist to examine. So in that particular day I communicated with the D.A.'s office, who in turn communicated with the Defense attorneys. We communicated with--I communicated directly with Dr. Baden, and we had what specimens they needed. And all these entries reflect the removal of the specimens from the lab, transmission to Albany and then back and when they were received, so a chain of custody is maintained at all times of any specimen in the Coroner's office, and it shows that we have a very good chain of custody in our office.
Please take us through that chain of custody as reflected by the entries here, doctor.
As you can recall, this part I've already discussed, and this aliquot of blood and stomach contents of Mr. Goldman.
We didn't give the whole sample because that was agreed on by Dr. Baden and myself, what they needed, and then it was released by Mr. Gary Siglar to Brian Hale of L.A. County District Attorney's Office on February 17 at 4:45 and it was returned by our chief of laboratories, Joe Muto, on February 21, 1995 at 1500. That is the stomach contents was returned. The blood sample we sent they retained, and then we also put an indefinite hold on all the specimens we have on these particular two cases.
Yes, it does, because you know we do 6000 autopsies and 3000 examinations a year so we have retention time for every specimens. We cannot retain them indefinitely. But in a particular case if a request is made for a hold, then we retain it, and that is what it reflects, so otherwise these specimens get discarded on the retention time schedule maintained by the Coroner's office.
And does that complete a discussion of the entries that have been added on this document 364 double G to refer to the chain of events for the release and subsequent return of some but not all of the materials sent to Dr. Baden in Albany?
Again, doctor, any of the additional entries, would these be entries made by employees of the Coroner's office in the course of their official duties?
Doctor--and I would ask, your Honor, the record reflect a designation of 364 double H for a blow-up of the single-paged document?
This is a label which is on every blood bottle where a blood sample is obtained from a particular decedent. It has got two layers. One layer is left on the bottle. The outer layer is taken off in the toxicology lab. And this is the copy of the label of the blood bottle which was on Mr. Ron Goldman, 5135 Coroner's case number.
And the number is again handwritten here, and it also says here--I mean, first let's start here. The autopsy was done on June 14th. The sample was obtained at 11:30 by Dr. Golden. He initials off the bottle here that he took the blood sample, and that is the way we know that he has seen that the sample belongs to that particular person. And as you recall, this blood sample was--the label was removed by Mr. Joe Murillo of our toxicology lab as part of maintaining the evidence on this particular case.
Let me flip to a document, your Honor, I would ask to bear the designation 364-II.
Doctor, this appears to be a similar kind of form to the one you were just talking about. Is that an accurate assessment?
What is the difference between this form and the one we were just looking at, double h?
This belongs to Miss Nicole Brown Simpson, 5136. This is a pre-stamped imprint card information, handwritten case number again here, (indicating), blood sample was obtained by Dr. Golden June 14th, 9:30 in the morning. Mr. Murillo received the blood sample on June 15th and Dr. Golden has initialed it. It is upside down but I.G. Here June 14th, so that authenticates that he took the blood sample of this particular person on that particular date.
Doctor, again all entries made by employees of the Coroner's office in the course of their official responsibilities?
Doctor, following the meeting on June 22nd, 1994, with doctors Baden and Wolf, was a document prepared by Mr. Siglar in your office?
I don't know which particular document you are referring to, because we--we made some minutes during the meeting. I had some handwritten notes and Siglar had some handwritten notes and it was later transcribed. I had kept a copy of the transcript, copy for both Prosecution and Defense.
Your Honor, I have what appears to be a three-page document along with a one-page handwritten form 42. The document is dated July 28, 1994. It appears to be a letter from Mr. Siglar to Mr. Hodgman of our office. May it be marked collective as exhibit 365?
Doctor, let me show you this series of documents. I will take the other exhibits away. Are you familiar with this letter and the one-page form 42 notes?
In general, doctor, what is this letter, this July 28th letter from Mr. Siglar to Mr. Hodgman?
This is a letter sent by Mr. Siglar to Mr. Hodgman based on his request regarding our weekly meeting of the DME's on June 23rd. This letter was sent out when I was not--I had not seen the letter before it was sent out, but I have a copy of it, because I was on vacation at that time. It reflects some information which was discussed in a DME meeting which we had in our office on June 23rd of `94. And do you want me to go into the contents of the letter?
Yes. In general first and then we will put it up on the elmo so the ladies and gentlemen of the jury will have an opportunity to read it.
They discussed the different issues pertaining to the two cases which are being discussed in trial and we are going to put it up on the elmo so we can discuss each item as we go through--as you put it up on the elmo. But what happens was after the DME meeting on June 26th, they also discussed it in a meeting of the forensic technicians, and these are internal department meetings, but I think somehow the information went to the press and then we were asked about these--this information and that is how the District Attorney's office wanted to have information--input on this information and that is how this letter came about.
Doctor, would it be accurate as a summary that the information pertains to possible mistakes or errors in the Coroner's office that relate to these two cases?
Why don't we just start at the top, Mr. Fairtlough, and focus it in so that the ladies and gentlemen of the jury will have an opportunity to read it. And your Honor, I would ask that the jurors have an opportunity to read the letter and Mr. Fairtlough can move it at any time appropriate from the Court's perspective down so all paragraphs of each page can be read.
Doctor, this summary listing on this page, six items, starting with item no. 1, what does that refer to?
As you recall on Tuesday, I--last week, I showed you where the homicide cases are normally stored. That is in that crypt area where there were different levels where the gurneys could be placed. I also showed you on Tuesday a separate area in the Coroner's office, the third autopsy room with closed--where there are locked doors available. Basically this refers to that--placing certain types of cases where there is a lot of interest to place them in a more secure area in a locked crypt. That is what he is trying to refer to here.
All bodies are in full security because they are in the Coroner's office in the cold crypt area and nobody can enter it unless you are a Coroner's employee. And what is meant here is little more security, locking the bodies in a secure area, that is what it means. It doesn't mean that the bodies are not secure. Everybody body in the Coroner's office is secure in the cold crypt area which I already showed all of you on Tuesday last week. If you want, you can show the photographs again and we can explain this a little better.
I think we can recall that particular location. I would rather try and get through this list of items if we could, doctor. Item no. 2, what does that refer to?
Preventing uninvolved employees from observing decedents should have occurred. Again, this is a personal opinion expressed I think by--
It is a personal opinion expressed. Basically in the Coroner's office we have visitors, volunteers, we also sometimes have people coming to watch autopsies, especially medical students and other pathology staff. And what is meant by this is if you keep the decedents secure, only the person who is responsible for the particular case will be able to visualize the--to view--not visualize, view the remains because they are the only persons who need to be involved with the particular case. This is what is meant by this sentence.
Doctor, were any personnel not directly involved in the autopsies in that location of no. 6, that table no. 6 where you've testified the autopsies were performed during the course of those two autopsies?
My recollection is the detectives were there. As I told you, I went there twice briefly. I was not there all the time, but the detectives were there and Dr. Golden was there. And of course you see we have six autopsy stations there, and autopsies are going on at every station, so you have pathologists there, forensic technicians, and if some of them are homicides, you are going to have the detective of those decedents there, and if it is an in-custody Defendant, you are going to have other personnel there. And it depends. I can't tell you all persons who were there, but all persons who are there in the autopsy room are all persons working on a case or have to be there for some reason. And the other personnel who--who could be in the corridors would be the cleaning personnel, if at all there were any there that day. I don't know.
How about item no. 3? We have already talked about the fact that the stomach contents of Nicole Brown Simpson were not saved and you've testified as to the reason why you asked Dr. Golden to save the stomach contents of Mr. Goldman. Beyond what you've already testified to is there anything else that concerns item no. 3?
Nothing. It is a factual statement. We didn't save Nicole's stomach contents.
KEY QUOTEIs item no. 4 something you have also testified about when we were looking at the form 15 on the autopsy forms for Mr. Goldman?
Yes. That is just that he collected the bile, everything is recorded properly, but the only thing is on the bottle the urine box was marked and not bile.
Item no. 5, I believe we had testimony when we were doing the photographs of the Coroner's office, we also looked at photographs of various kits including the fingernail kits for--or kit for Nicole Brown Simpson. Is there anything beyond what you've already testified to that concerns item no. 5?
Item no. 6 is--refers to when the clothing is dried, the correct procedure is to place each item of clothing in a separate brown paper wrap--to wrap them separate. On June 22nd, when Dr. Baden was there to see the evidence specimens, we found that Nicole Brown Simpson's panty and dress had been wrapped in the same envelope and that is what this refers to.
And what, if any, significance, from a forensic pathologist standpoint, is there regarding having the panties and the dress wrapped together?
Well, it is the same person's clothing, and as you recall the scene photographs, the dress was overlying the panty when--if at all, if there was any blood staining there, it was already in contact. It is not a correct procedure, so that is a mistake, but as far as the significance in this particular case, I don't think it has much significance, because the clothing was put together only after it was dry, and it happened and it is recorded.
Yes. The jury is to disregard the last comment regarding the significance of this. That was nonresponsive to the question.
Doctor, have you evaluated, as part of your preparation before testifying, the significance, if my, of putting those two pieces of clothing together?
Objection, calls for speculation, also goes beyond the expertise of this witness.
Already--I said already they were laced together and the clothing was already dry. What I'm trying to say is this: I don't see anything new that would have occurred even if they had been placed together that any new evidence would be transferred to each other because they belonged to the same person. That is what I meant.
Well, it is self-explanatory. Apparently a reporter was in our lunchroom without our knowledge and that is an indication for the security for the building, and that again states a fact which apparently happened.
Doctor, where is the lunchroom? First of all, is your building a building of more than one floor?
We have two buildings in the Coroner's office. We have the 1102 building and the 1104 building. The 1104 building the medical building, the lab building and the autopsy areas. It has got four floor; a basement, a service floor, a first floor, second floor.
We have lunchroom in two of the floors; on the first floor and the second floor, and this refers to the first floor lunchroom.
It is a secured floor you need a key to get to the service floor or one of the Coroner's employees has to personally take you down there. You cannot go to the service floor without a key.
Do all employees of the Coroner's office have keys which allow access to the service floor?
Item 8 refers to trying to have a response team from the Coroner's office on certain types of cases wherein you have a team of a pathologist, a criminalist and an investigator and transport to go to a scene. Well, that is just a situation which we do sometimes when we have the necessity to do it.
Doctor, what resources would be required in order to do that recommendation in every case?
You need more personnel in each area so that you have them available, because in our office many of the employees wear different hats. For example, our criminalist is also our toxicologist. Pathologist need for autopsy but he also has to go to court, so if you have more staff, you can have the luxury of sending people to every scene, but it is not practical.
And you already, I believe, have testified last week regarding whether in your opinion it would have made any significant difference on the issue of the Coroner visiting the Bundy location at the time the bodies were still there?
Item 9 refers to the Coroner's office not having been allowed access to decedent by LAPD for ten hours.
We are going to discuss that I believe when we talk about time of death, correct, doctor?
This refers to--there was a request for valve procurement on Miss Brown Simpson and that is a routine procedure in our office wherein, as you know, organs for transplant is--is obtained from--from different people in the familiar. If the family agrees to donate the organs and usually the--certain organs are removed from individuals where such permission is obtained, and our office is quite cooperative with all the organ procurement agencies as long as it doesn't interfere with our cause of death determination and injury interpretation. In this particular instance this refers to heart valve donation being allowed by the Simpson family. And when it was brought to my attention, I denied it in the night and in this particular case and that is what this refers to.
Because heart valve donation is an intrusive process because I would prefer that the DME is available to be there, the medical examiner who does the autopsy to be there when the valve is taken. And you know, any organ procurement has to be done in a particular time frame. You can't just do it anytime and use the valve, and there was a time frame constraint here. The doctor assigned was Dr. Golden, because remember, on June 13th assigned the cases to him. This request was brought to my attention in the night the evening of June 13th and apparently one of my assistant doctors had given permission but he asked the organ procurement agency to contact me, and I at that time told him no, because Dr. Golden was not the one who was going to be there, they had got another doctor there who was--because as I told you, in our office we like a doctor to watch the procedure so that he knows exactly--or she knows exactly what was being done, because you open the chest, you take the valve, so you have to collect the blood sample properly, so there is a lot of procedures involved in this. So I made the medical decision, since Dr. Golden was not available in the night to go to this procedure and they had already got another doctor there and I felt in the best interest of the department that this procedure not be carried out and that was my decision.
Let's take a break here. All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our recess for the morning session. Please remember all of my admonitions to you. Do not discuss the case among yourselves, form any opinions about the case, conduct any deliberations until the matter has been submitted to you or allow anybody to communicate with you with regard to the case. We will stand in recess for fifteen minutes. And Miss Fitzpatrick, can I talk to you, please.
It is a factual statement. We didn't save Nicole's stomach contents.
On June 22nd, when Dr. Baden was there to see the evidence specimens, we found that Nicole Brown Simpson's panty and dress had been wrapped in the same envelope and that is what this refers to.
I don't see anything new that would have occurred even if they had been placed together that any new evidence would be transferred to each other because they belonged to the same person.
Apparently a reporter was in our lunchroom without our knowledge and that is an indication for the security for the building.