Thank you very kindly, your Honor.

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN

Good afternoon, Miss Vemich.

Hello.

How are you?

Good.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good afternoon.

Now, as I understand your testimony, Miss Vemich, what you've told us is that if we look at this Bloomingdales glove purchase receipt there, you can't tell us the color of the gloves purchased; is that right?

That's right.

You can't tell us the size of the gloves purchased; is that correct?

Correct.

And as I understand from looking at the receipt, this purchase of two pair of gloves was made on December 18 of 1990; is that correct? Is that your understanding?

Yes.

And further, if we are to look at the style number of these gloves, 70268 there, if I can make--Jonathan--move on to 70268, please. That style no. 70268, you are telling us that that was not a style number that Bloomingdales purchased from Aris Isotoner in 1990? Is that what you indicate?

I'm indicating that that is not a style number that existed at Bloomingdales ever.

All right. Well, let me ask you this: Is the numbering 70268, is that a style number that existed with Aris Isotoner in 1990?

Not that I know of.

Have you done any checking in that regard?

I have inquired.

All right. And who did you inquire of?

I called to see--I called Aris Isotoner to see if that number existed.

And where did you call?

I called the New York office.

And who--do you know the name of the person that you spoke with, ma'am?

At the time Steph Fogelson.

Steph Fogelson?

Yes.

Do you have a report from Steph Fogelson?

No, not really. He was not sure.

Do you know how to spell Steph Fogelson for our court reporter?

F-o-g-e-l-s-o-n.

How do you spell the first name?

Steph, s-t-e-p-h.

Thank you.

What was the time of that conversation with Steph Fogelson, ma'am?

It was the time when I was shown a receipt at Bloomingdales and when I started to inquire what the merchandise was, umm, the 70268--my record showed 70263. This was 70268. I had no record of 70268, so I called the resource and asked them if it ever existed.

Back to my question now. What was the date that you called Mr. Fogelson?

Probably sometime in January.

Of what year?

Of this year.

So January of 1995 you called him and you found out, did you not, that the style no. 70268 did in fact exist with Aris Isotoner gloves and in fact it had been assigned to a customer named Harry; isn't that correct?

Objection, hearsay.

Sustained.

Could you repeat the question.

Let me rephrase the question.

Please.

Thank you, your Honor.

Did you find out, in the course of your conversation, first of all, that Aris Isotoner did in fact have a style number of 70268?

Objection.

That was a style number that they produced?

Objection, hearsay.

Sustained.

I still don't understand the question.

Well, you don't have to answer that.

When there is an objection and I sustain the objection you don't have to answer the question.

Thank you.

All right. The purpose, as I understand your call, was to find out about other style numbers were produced by Aris Isotoner; is that correct?

Yes.

And you had a conversation with Mr. Steph Fogelson in which you inquired as to whether or not there were other style numbers produced by Aris Isotoner, specifically whether or not there was a 70268 style number produced, did you not?

Yes.

Objection.

Yes or no.

Overruled. You can answer that question yes or no.

Yes.

You asked that question, didn't you?

I asked the question, yes.

Just say yes or no. All right. Did you get an answer to that question?

No, I did not.

Did you get anything in writing with regard to that question?

No, I did not.

Prior to your testifying here today have you ever seen a report from a Mr. Fogelson who purports to be the general manager of Aris Isotoner gloves and knits department?

No.

You have never seen such a report?

No.

Have you ever heard the name Hering before, H-E-R-I-N-G?

No.

Now, with regard to this purchase back on December 18 of 1990, you at that time were a buyer for Bloomingdales; is that correct?

Yes.

You were not the sales person in this transaction; is that correct?

No.

And you don't--you didn't see who may have purchased this two pair of gloves on that particular evening or that day?

No.

From the number of the employee, you do know if was a person by the name of Phipps who basically waited on this particular customer; is that correct?

Yes.

And have you talked to Miss Phipps?

Yes.

She is in this building?

Yes.

Today?

Yes.

You talked to her today, I presume?

Yes.

You have also talked to Mr. Rubin today also?

Yes.

Now, with regard to this transaction that Mr. Darden asked you some questions about, as I understand it, there is nothing on this particular sales slip that tells us this is an Aris Isotoner glove, is there?

Yes. The vendor number tells that it is an Aris.

Yes.

And the style number and the price, $55.00, tells me that it is an Aris leather light glove.

But then when you look at the style number, that is a style number that was not a style number assigned to Bloomingdales; isn't that correct?

All except the last number.

I'm asking you, is that number--that is not a number that was assigned to Bloomingdales, was it?

All right. And Mr. Darden pointed out, that is a mistake, you believe?

Yes, I do.

But you were not present at the time of this purchase; is that correct?

No, I was not.

And what you have been asked to do is to look at some records that are now approximately four and a half years old; is that correct?

Yes.

And to try and interpret them for us; isn't that correct?

Yes.

Now, these particular gloves that were shown to you during the break, was that the first time that you had seen these particular gloves?

No.

When had you seen them before?

In January.

And where did you see them at that time?

I saw them I believe at the evidence place.

At the police department?

Yes.

In other words, you came out here--you live in California?

No, I live in New York.

All right. So you came out here from New York and you looked at the gloves at that time?

Yes.

All right. So when we saw these during the recess today, was that the second time that you had seen them?

Yes.

And who, may I ask, was present at the time you saw them in January?

Phil Vannatter.

Detective Vannatter. Anyone else?

Detective Lange.

All right. Anyone else?

There could have been someone else, but I didn't know the name.

All right. Those are the only ones you can recall at this point?

Yes.

All right. And you didn't make any reports or anything regarding that particular visit, did you?

No.

And I think we've established that you can't tell from this receipt either the color or the size of these particular gloves; is that correct?

From the receipt?

Yes.

No.

Now, with regard to the gloves--and if we might see the gloves, your Honor?

Which one do you want, Mr. Cochran?

Let's start with the right glove.

Your Honor, I think Mr. Cochran is going to have to change his gloves.

Yes, your Honor. We have certainly made everybody more sensitive about gloves around here, your Honor, and I will be glad to.

All right. The record should reflect Mr. Wooden has put another piece of clean paper on the shelf before the witness.

Thank you, your Honor.

May I approach, your Honor?

You may.

For the record, your Honor, I'm taking People's exhibit no. 9 for identification out and I'm going to place this before the witness.

Actually that is LAPD item no. 9, People's 164-A.

Thank you, your Honor. Item no. 9, yes.

Now, this is--this particular glove that I placed here is one of the items that you saw back in January; is that correct?

Yes.

And this is one of the items that you saw here in court today; is that correct?

Yes.

And if we are to look inside this particular item, it has some kind of a lining. And is that cashmere lining, as far as you know?

Yes.

And in this particular glove, which I guess is the right glove, there are no markings in this glove that came from the factory, are there?

Not, no, no.

There are no markings that came from the factory; is that correct?

No.

All right. The writing inside this glove was placed by someone at a later time; is that correct?

Yes.

This is a brown glove; is that correct?

Yes.

Can you tell the size of this glove from looking at it?

Yes. It appears to be an extra large glove.

May I try this on, your Honor?

Supposed to be an extra large glove?

Yes.

Are these gloves, do they come--where are they made?

They are made in the Philippines.

Do they come--the extra large is kind of small?

No, but they stretch.

I see. So this is a--this is a normal extra large glove; is that correct?

Yes.

But you are saying they stretch?

It is too small?

It is too big.

Since I'm wearing it, it seems too small for me, but we won't argue about that. You are saying--

Your Honor, I would like to get the other glove out, if I might, and change gloves.

Mr. Wooden.

May I approach again, your Honor?

You may.

I believe this purports to be the left-handed glove, your Honor.

Yes, People's 77.

People's 77.

And this People's 77, if you know, does that appear to be at least similar to the other glove that you saw back in January of 1995?

Yes.

I presume that you did not put your initials on either of gloves at that time; is that correct?

My initials?

Yes. You didn't put your initials on either glove, did you?

No.

All right. You were just present with Detectives Vannatter and Lange at the time that these gloves were displayed to you; is that correct, ma'am?

Yes.

And at the time when you saw Detectives Vannatter and Lange handle these gloves at that time, were they using any kind of paper like this?

Yes.

Were they using any gloves, if you recall?

Absolutely.

You recall that, do you?

Yes, because I touched the gloves and I had to use the latex gloves and the butcher paper and--

And this--this particular glove has a label inside of it; is that correct?

Yes.

And the label says "Aris"; is that correct?

Yes.

And it is a cashmere lined?

Yes.

And it says "Made in Philippines."

Yes.

And it says "Extra large"; is that correct?

Yes.

Is there any other--is there a particular lot or style number in either of these gloves indicating this is a 70263 glove?

No, not that I know of.

Well, do you want to take a look?

I already looked.

So is it in there?

Not to the visible eye, no.

All right. Well--not to the visible eye?

Right.

All right. Did you use anything other than the visible eye to try to determine that?

That is what I used.

That is what you used?

Yes.

You did not see anything that indicated 70263, did you?

No, I did not.

Did you see anything that indicated 70268?

No.

Did you ever have a conversation with Detective Vannatter in which you discussed the subject of whether or not Detective Vannatter ever spoke with Mr. Steph Fogelson?

Objection, irrelevant.

Overruled.

I don't know if he had a conversation with Steph Fogelson.

That wasn't my question. Did you ever have a conversation with him wherein you discussed whether or not you had ever talked to Mr. Fogelson?

No.

And is this--this is supposedly also an extra large glove?

Yes, it is.

Now, prior to coming here to testify today have you had occasion to watch these proceedings on television?

I work so only--the answer is not too much.

Well--

Except on the news.

Let's get back to my question. Have you watched these proceedings on television?

Sometimes, yes.

And that was during the course of this past year; is that correct?

Yes.

When did you receive your subpoena or that you were advised to testify in this matter?

I didn't receive a subpoena.

You were told that you were going to testify at some point, however?

Yes.

When was that?

Yesterday--Tuesday at 4:30.

Well, you live in New York, right?

Yes.

And you were told Tuesday at 4:30. Were you out here when you were told that?

No.

You were still in New York?

Yes.

And when you came out here in January did you expect you might be testifying in this matter?

I wasn't sure.

But you were told that you were a potential witness; is that correct?

Yes.

And you were called yesterday and told to come to testify; is that correct?

Today is Thursday? Tuesday. I was called.

Tuesday you were told and then you came to California yesterday?

Yes.

And did you talk with the District Attorney's office, or representatives thereof, before you testified today?

Yes.

Who did you talk with?

Umm, Patty Jo Fairbanks.

And who else?

Chris Darden.

Mr. Darden here?

Yes.

Had you talked with Mr. Darden back in January of this year?

No, I did not.

Now, is your testimony that Bloomingdales sold 300 pairs of extra large Aris Isotoner gloves, brown--was that back in 1990?

Objection, misstates the testimony.

I'm asking.

Overruled.

Is that correct?

I was asked how many pairs were purchased in brown.

All right.

And I said approximately 300 were purchased in brown.

Purchased by customers; is that correct?

No, purchased for Bloomingdales to sell.

All right. Purchased to sell to customers; is that correct?

Correct.

Over what period of time were these 300 pairs purchased by Bloomingdales?

Between October and December.

Of what year?

`90.

All right. So between the period October to December, 1990, Bloomingdales purchased 300 pairs of Aris Isotoner brown gloves; is that correct?

Extra large.

All right. Are you aware that the original order by Bloomingdales of Aris light gloves was approximately 6000 pairs?

The original order for Aris leather lights were 12,000 pair.

All right. Well, let's talk about that. It wasn't 6000 pairs; it was 12,000?

The purchase was approximately ten to 12,000 pair.

All right. Which was it, ten or twelve?

Between ten and twelve.

All right. When was that--when was that original order?

For October delivery.

All right. So we could expect then they received somewhere between ten or 12,000 pairs of these Aris light gloves shortly after October and for October of 1990; is that correct?

Yes.

And what you are telling us is that during the period between October and the end of the year--strike that. Of that number, 300 were of the extra large brown variety; is that correct?

Yes.

Do you know how many you sold during that period of the 300 pairs that were brown extra large?

Approximately 200 were sold.

200 of the 300?

And how do you know that?

It is about a 65 percent sell-through and that is an average normal sell-through for gloves during a fall season.

All right. So are you giving us your estimate or are there some records you referred to prior to coming to California?

Okay. So have you--let me ask you this: Have you had occasion to go and actually check what was sold between October and December of 1990 regarding these gloves?

I don't have documentation that proves that.

Okay. I understand. What you then have given this jury is your best estimate of what would happen in a sale over Christmas time and in the fall; is that correct?

Yes, on this particular glove.

And this is garnered over your experience; is that correct?

Yes.

All right. So it could have been more or it would have been less; is that correct?

Could have been.

All right. But you have no records to back that up, do you?

I have records that back up--that back up that approximately 65 percent sell-through on leather gloves or gloves during a fall season is a very good estimate.

I understand that, but you don't have any records to say the exact number, do you, ma'am?

No, I do not.

Okay. So we will accept the fact that about 65 percent you believe could have been sold during this period; is that correct?

Yes.

That is how you arrive at the number of 200; is that correct?

Right.

Now, if you know, are there any knock-offs of these gloves that are sold, at least back in 1990 or produced?

Not that I know of because of the distinct characteristics.

So you are not aware of any knock-offs, are you?

No, I am not.

With regard to the two gloves that I put before you, you can't tell by looking at those gloves whether actually they are an actual pair, can you?

They appear to be a pair.

They look similar, don't they?

They sure do.

No, no.

You can't do that, can you?

No.

In your business have you had occasion to do any investigations regarding so-called knock-offs of these kind of gloves?

Sure. As a buyer I think that it is very important to be aware of what is going on in the marketplace, so yes, I study, I go to competition, I go to stores. I get the opportunity to see every single glove manufactured. I go into factories, et cetera, and I have not seen a knock-off of these gloves.

All right. Now, with regard to the bar coding of this particular number--

Uh-huh.

--bar coding is a procedure by which you would swipe the glove through some kind of electronic procedure and you would actually get the number up; is that correct?

Yes.

And as I understand your testimony, in December of 1990 when Miss Phipps made this particular purchase, you did not have bar coding at Bloomingdales is that right?

Not at that time, no.

So that the style number that Mr. Fairtlough has been kind enough to put up there for us was manually entered; is that correct?

Yes.

And hence we got this no. 70268; is that correct?

Yes.

Have you checked the other numbers that were on that particular receipt?

Yes.

You have done that?

Yes.

Do any of your receipts or any of the receipts you had back at that time spell out either the color or the size of a particular item at all?

No, they do not.

With regard to the prices of gloves back in December of 1990, I presume that Bloomingdales sold a number of different kind of gloves at that time; is that correct?

Yes.

And were there other gloves that were of the same price or the same discount accorded during December of 1990 as Aris Isotoner?

Not at the same price.

There were no other gloves in which the discount rate would be thirty percent?

No.

At that time? Are you sure about that? Do you have records to that effect?

No, but I remember very clearly, because I spent a great deal of time on the selling floor selling gloves personally myself. I was very involved on each style and understanding what made it sell, what made it not sell. And I know that there were no other gloves at $55.00, specifically from Aris, Aris.

That was back in 1990, you remember this and you know that?

Yes, I remember this.

Were there any other gloves, other than Aris gloves, that sold for that approximate price, $55.00, back in December of 1990?

I don't recall.

That is what I'm asking. I wasn't just talking about Aris; I was talking about any gloves.

Okay.

In Bloomingdales in December of 1990, were there others or can you not tell us?

I can't recall.

All right. May I have just a second, your Honor?

Certainly.

These gloves that were ordered from Aris, were they shipped to Bloomingdales in October or were they shipped in August, if you know?

They were shipped in the fall season. They were shipped on several different orders depending on how the manufacturer shipped. They came into--into our warehouse approximately October through the beginning of December.

These particular gloves retail for what, 18 or 19 dollars?

These gloves retail for $55.00.

I mean they wholesale for 18 or 19?

They are about $20.00.

They retail for about 55?

55.

Is that right? Nice mark-up, isn't it?

No comment.

Just curiosity.

They were thirty percent off.

But that was only at Christmas time, right?

Very well. Thank you. I have nothing further your Honor at this point.

Mr. Darden, any further questions from Miss Vemich?