In your examination of the hairs collected from the evidence items in this case, sir, did you find any hairs that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those of Nicole Brown?
These hairs were found on the glove identified as originating from the Rockingham location, a glove found at the Bundy location as well as from the knit hat that was recovered at the Bundy location. Hairs that exhibited the same characteristics as those of Nicole Brown Simpson were also found on the pants and shirt of Ronald Goldman.
Now, have you seen each of those items that you've just described, the glove recovered at Rockingham, the glove recovered at Bundy, the blue knit cap recovered at Bundy and the pants and shirt of Ronald Goldman?
These are items previously marked in evidence, your Honor. Okay. This is People's 55-G.
Well, one of the gloves I did look at came from the Bundy crime scene. I believe this is that glove.
This is kind of hard to see. The photographs on the screen now is People's 56. It's a laser and a little difficult to see, your Honor. I'm going to ask to zoom it in on the elmo if I can.
People's 56-I, do you recall you indicated earlier that on August 8th, one item of the actual fabric itself was transported to you, you remarked the blue knit cap. Does this appear to be that cap?
And the pants and shirt belonging to Ronald Goldman, do you recall having seen those items, sir?
And those are the items on which you found the head hairs of Nicole Brown that appear to exhibit the same microscopic characteristics as those of Nicole Brown?
Yes. There were hairs that were found on these items that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as the known hairs submitted to me from Nicole Brown Simpson.
I'm going to remove the strip concerning Nicole Brown revealing the results testified to by Mr. Deedrick.
Did any of the hairs that you found on either of the gloves or the clothing of Mr. Goldman appear to be forcibly removed?
The one hair on the Rockingham glove did appear to be forcibly removed. It's approximately 12 inches long and was broken at the proximal end or at the end nearest the point of attachment near the skin. The hairs from Ronald Goldman's shirt, which was my Q23, there were about 35 forcibly removed hairs exhibiting the same microscopic characteristics as those of Nicole Brown Simpson.
And what about the hairs that were on the Bundy glove? What did those hairs look like?
They were--they were fragments. They were--actually it was a treated head hair fragment.
What about the hairs that could have come from Nicole Brown that you found on Ronald Goldman's pants and knit hat? What did those hairs look like?
They were fragmentary as well, under--under three and a half inches. No roots were present on any of these.
No. Naturally shed hair will have a root that has a club shape like I previously testified to, and none of these had roots of that condition.
KEY QUOTENone of these--in other words, none of the hairs that could have come from Nicole Brown had the appearance--roots the appearance of which would show that they were naturally shed?
Did you prepare a chart depicting the microscopic appearance of the hairs, the known head hairs of Nicole Brown and the hairs that you determined could have come from her from the evidence items?
Mr. Escobar, you need to move that back as far as you can so you don't block the witness. All right. 2:30. Can you see that? 165, can you see that?
All right. Now, does this depict all of the hairs Nicole Brown--Nicole Brown's known exemplar that you determined to exhibit the same microscopic characteristics as the hair recovered from the evidence in this case?
I don't believe all of the hairs. The questioned hairs were photographed that are represented on that board.
If you would, sir, could you please step down and explain to the jury what it is that you saw that was significant to you to cause you to come to the conclusion you did with respect to the hairs that are depicted on this board that I'd ask be marked People's 476.
With respect to questioned hair no. 1, it was a 12-inch long hair that was recovered from the--identified as recovered from the Rockingham glove. I photographed an area of the known, which was K4, known sample no. 4 from Nicole Brown Simpson, an area from the Rockingham glove again, that being Q1. Always keep in mind that these photographs are about 250 magnification, and I'm just representing an area that appeared to me to be similar microscopically. I'm not trying to do an entire hair examination for you. I'm just trying to represent what the area that I saw that exhibited the same characteristics. The hair also appeared to be lighter in certain areas. The hair from--another hair from the Rockingham glove had some coloration to it or bleaching or something that altered the color and made it lighter. So that's another hair that was recovered from the Rockingham glove. 7B was recovered from the Bundy glove. Again, that was I believe about six inches long or so and it did not have a root. As you can see, there's a range of color as people have depending on the hairs that you're attempting to compare. K4 is an area that has been very light--lightened, again artificially lightened hair that was recovered. This is the same hair, an area of one portion of the hair and the area of the hair which is further out nearest to the tip. This known sample was compared with Q23. And again, I mentioned that there were about 35 hairs to compare it to, but this is just one of the hairs. The last photograph depicts the condition of the roots that were present in both the known sample and the questioned sample. Again, this just indicating how a hair would look if it's been forcibly removed. The reddish substance that you see appears to be blood.
KEY QUOTENow, you earlier spoke to us about the range of characteristics that you'll find on the head of any individual. Do these hairs that you photographed here from the known sample of Miss Brown exhibit that range of characteristics you spoke of?
Yes. You can see that there's a range, that not all hairs are all--are duplicates of each other, that some hairs are lighter, some hairs are darker, some hairs have medullation, some hairs don't. It just depends upon the range of characteristics of that individual. And here you see that an area of the hair that probably was down a little bit further near the base was a little bit darker whereas some hairs were lighter in certain portions of the hair. This particular--this piece of hair that was recovered from--identified as coming from the Rockingham glove would have been probably a more distal portion out towards the tip as opposed to a full-length hair which would indicate a darker portion of the hair, the same thing with the hair fragment that came from the Bundy glove (Indicating). It's probably a distal portion as opposed to something that's nearer to the base of the hair.
Now, you indicated earlier in your testimony that when you do a hair examination, you look through the whole length of the hair, the entire hair, correct?
Right. You look through the--everything you have to compare. Some hairs may be three and a half or less. Some hairs may be 12 inches like in this particular case. So that when a comparison--the comparison process involves looking for hairs in the known sample that compare both by the length and how the characteristics change along the length and also doing regional type comparisons if you have portions of hair, that is if the hair portion--if the question is, could this portion of hair come from that individual, the comparison would be with areas of the hair that have the same microscopic characteristics, which might be out at the end of the hair. So the comparison is based on what you have.
So do these photographs depict the entire length of the hair that you saw when you performed your examination?
No. If I did--for instance, if I--if I'd wanted a photograph--serial photographs of each section of that hair, it would be about 25 feet long. So we don't do that. We just try to take an area that--that appears to represent the conclusion that--that's being drawn from that comparison.
KEY QUOTEOkay. You only photographed I think on this board two of the hairs you determined to exhibit the same microscopic characteristics as Nicole Brown on the Rockingham glove. In this board, they're both labeled Q1 on the far left as I face it?
How many hairs did you actually find on the Rockingham glove that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as the hairs of Nicole Brown?
As I said, the one was approximately 12 inches long and it was broken at the proximal end or nearest to where the hair attaches itself to the scalp. The others were fragments. Again, I don't recall the exact length, but they were shorter fragments.
Is there any significance to the fact, sir, that you found the same microscopic characteristics in several questioned hairs, that is hairs collected from the evidence in this case as the known standard for Nicole Brown?
Well, the more associations that are made between hairs that vary a little bit in characteristics, the more significant that association is because you're associating different hairs that also appear in the known sample.
How many hairs did you find that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those of Nicole Brown on the Bundy glove?
And how many hairs did you find on Mr. Goldman's shirt that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those of Nicole Brown?
What in your experience, sir, could account for the hairs that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those of Nicole Brown on Ron Goldman's shirt?
Either a primary or a secondary transfer. Either came there directly from the head of Nicole Brown Simpson or they were transported there as a secondary transfer.
KEY QUOTEAll right. Sir, I would like to pose for you a hypothetical if I may. You indicated that the finding of hairs that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those of Nicole Brown on Ron Goldman's shirt could be there by primary or secondary transfer. If you were to assume the following events, sir. That the killer pulled back Nicole's head with his hand, with his left hand in order to slit her throat with his right hand and then went over to Ron Goldman for final attack, touching him in the process with the hand that held Nicole's hair by the head, could that account for the hairs that you found on Ron Goldman's shirt?
You also indicated that you found more hairs that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as those of Nicole Brown on the Rockingham glove than on the Bundy glove, correct?
Now, are you aware that the Bundy glove was found at the scene of the crime of the murder?
What does that finding indicate to you based on your experience with respect to how long each of those gloves remained on the hands of the killer during the murders?
You indicated earlier, sir, that with respect to fibers, they have--they move freely, more freely than hairs, correct?
Let me pose this to you in the form of a hypothetical. If the killer, while wearing both gloves, launched an initial attack on Nicole by knocking her unconscious, having very limited contact with her in that initial contact and the subsequently lost the Bundy glove early in the struggle with Ron Goldman, could that account for the fact that you found more of the hairs that exhibited the same microscopic characteristics as Nicole Brown's hair on the Rockingham glove than on the Bundy glove?
There were approximately 35 on the shirt... As I said, they were forcibly removed.
The reddish substance that you see appears to be blood.
Either a primary or a secondary transfer. Either came there directly from the head of Nicole Brown Simpson or they were transported there as a secondary transfer.
If you were to assume the following events, sir. That the killer pulled back Nicole's head with his hand, with his left hand in order to slit her throat with his right hand and then went over to Ron Goldman for final attack, touching him in the process with the hand that held Nicole's hair by the head, could that account for the hairs that you found on Ron Goldman's shirt?
No.