Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. All right. Let the record reflect that we've been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Dr. Lakshmanan is again on the witness stand undergoing direct examination by Mr. Kelberg. And, Mr. Kelberg, you may resume with your direct examination.
Thank you, your Honor. I have another photograph for Mr. Fairtlough. And actually before you put it on, Mr. Fairtlough, a couple more questions of Dr. Lakshmanan.
Doctor, I was asking you why you did not consider performing the autopsies on these two cases. Were there any other reasons that you took into account for deciding not to?
As I told you, I have numerous responsibilities as a Coroner for Los Angeles. I'm responsible for the quality of the reports which go on all the 6,000 autopsies we do, another 5,000 examinations which we do, and I'm also available for other functions in the office. And it's all enumerated--all my functions are enumerated in my curriculum vitae. But besides the point, I feel that the comple--different cases have to be experienced by different pathologists in my department so they're all capable of doing complex cases.
Doctor, you've used this term again, "Complex cases." Did you consider each of these two cases to be a complex case?
When you--when you refer to the case complex, complex--complexity may refer to the number of injuries a particular decedent has and complexity can also refer to a difficult medical case where there's been hospitalization and lot of medical problems which had to be correlated with pathological findings, and that will be a different type of complexity. A child abuse case could be more complex than a case like this where you have injuries which are clearly observable.
When you're talking about more complex in the sense that you've mentioned child abuse cases and so forth, is that a thought process requiring a more experienced individual than maybe a younger forensic pathologist in your office?
Well, it--it would be preferable for a more experienced person doing the case. But in our office, we have all the board certified pathologists and also fellows in training who do the cases, but they work under the supervision of the experienced pathologist. So what I'm trying to say is, every as--every type of case can be handled by any of one of my--any one of my pathologists with the assistance or without the assistance of other experienced pathologists.
Would you consider the case of Nicole Brown Simpson from a forensic pathology standpoint to be a bread and butter type of case for a Los Angeles County Deputy Medical Examiner?
Because this is a kind of homicide case we see routinely in our office, and any given day, we have about ten--eight to ten homicide cases being performed and we have a significant number of them which have sharp force injuries, blunt force injuries or firearm injuries.
KEY QUOTENow, if Mr. Fairtlough could put on this photograph. And, this, your Honor, I would ask to be marked 316.
That also shows the same refrigerated crypt space, but you're looking at it from the outside of the door. You saw the photograph from the inside. This is from the outside.
This is another autopsy room in the Coroner's office. This is a smaller room, and these have crypt spaces with doors which can be locked. And what you're seeing is two doors in which there are crypt spaces available, and this would give more security to the bodies if the doors are locked. And in the normal process over the years, we use this crypt space for bodies which are decomposed or skeletonized remains. And this area--
Skeletonized--partially skeletonized remains. And this area of the crypt space in our office is reserved for these type of decedents.
And is this crypt space what you were referring to earlier in nos. 3 and 4 or something else?
No. No. 3 and 4 was referred to the crypt space in the other area, in the refrigerated crypt space.
This is the area of the office where photographs are taken. This is the photo studio area of the office. And the decedent's clothing is removed. They're photographed before the clothing is removed, and after the clothing is removed, body is washed. All the photographs are taken here.
Let's start this process. First of all, in the cases of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, when is this process taking place?
The process is, the photographer takes the remains to this photo studio area. He makes a blue photographic--you know, the blue card which we saw earlier, that is completed for each decedent. And one of the procedures in the Coroner's office is to take a picture of the card and the id band so you know you're taking the picture of that person, and the number is also cross-checked. Then photographs are taken of the decedent with the clothing on in the condition they are seen at that time. Following this process, the photographer removes the clothing and places them in the clothing rack which you saw earlier sometime. And the body is washed and photographed with special attention to injuries. And one of the important steps in the photography would be to take a photograph of the injury so that the anatomical region can be identified, and then a close-up photograph is also taken so that the injury can be better documented. And this is one stage of the photography of a decedent before autopsy.
Is the medical examiner who is going to perform the autopsy expected to examine the body at the time the photographs are first being taken with the clothes on?
Usually the medical examiner will examine the body before the photographs are taken and sometimes during the process itself. It depends. And in this particular situation, Dr. Golden saw the bodies with me on the 13th.
Now, was anything done to the bodies between the 13th and the 14th when they're going to be photographed clothed?
Yes. I told you that Mr. Mahanay, our criminalist, saw the remains along with Miss Claudine Ratcliffe to see whether any other evidence needs to be collected, and I think--not I think. On Miss Nicole Brown Simpson, he collected bloodstains which were found in the right lower extremity, which is the thigh and cuff area, and he collected that as physical evidence, and that was submitted on the 13th. And he examined the bodies with Miss Claudine Ratcliffe. I was also present at that time, before he collected the evidence rather, and that process also took place in addition to the nail collection, the hair collection, the fingerprint card processing, and this all happened on the 13th. Dr. Golden and I looked at the bodies on the 13th and then Dr. Golden did the autopsies on the 14th and the photographic process took place on the 14th of June, 1994. And--
In selecting Dr. Golden to perform these two autopsies, had you become familiar with Dr. Golden's performance in any other high publicity double homicides?
Yes. He did the Menendez decedents who died and it was a double murder, and he has been with the office for 15--14 years as I mentioned earlier. He's one of our experienced pathologists who has done many demanding complex cases for the Coroner's office. As I told you, he has done over 5,000 cases. He always handles them consistent manner. And to answer your question, he had handled other high profile complex cases before.
As of the 14th--13th of June actually, 1994, had you been aware of any cases in which Dr. Golden had been the forensic pathologist in which he had made what you believed to be a major mistake in the course of his duties as a forensic pathologist autopsying a body?
Subsequent to your involvement in this case, have you become aware of several such cases?
We're going to get into that later. But at the time you assigned Dr. Golden, were you aware of any such problems?
Now, doctor, in going through this process, the bodies are photographed clothed first and then you said the clothing is removed by the photographer; is that correct?
Are the bodies then rephotographed basically in the same place in the same position with the clothing removed?
The--the--correction. That photography may have taken place, but also the body is washed and then photographed.
Because when you have bloodstains on the body from injuries, they obscure the details of the injury. The purpose of the photography is to document the injuries so that there's a permanent documentation of the injuries in a manner that can be easily evaluated by any qualified professional forensic pathologist to make an interpretation of the injury pattern seen. So if you don't wash the bodies, one, you'll miss injuries. No. 2, you won't have a proper documentation because when you have blood staining which are dried up, it will cause problems in interpretation.
They use soap and water and also the sponge, soft sponge so that the blood staining can be removed. And this is the reason that any evidence collection which needs to be done is done before photography because after the body is washed, you really cannot collect any evidence--
Is it expected that some examination will be done at the time that these photographs are taken of the head of each decedent to see whether or not any injuries may be covered by the hair over the head?
Usually the--the forensic autopsy photographic technician who does the process will look at the head region separating the hairs and looking for any injury while he's washing the body because when you have a bloodstain and you wash the bloodstain off, you can perceive the injuries when you do this process. But sometimes you may not be able to see the injuries clearly and which is corrected--not corrected--which is taken care of when the body's autopsied. When you open the head to reflect the skin of the scalp, you see the hemorrhage from injuries, and then you can retrace your steps, go back to the skin surface wherein you may see an injury which you did not see earlier because of the--which you have not seen earlier, and then you can shave the hair and observe the injury better. So that is a process which can take place during the photography if you see the injury when you separate the hair or the shaving can take place during the autopsy itself. Then you observe the injury better.
And initially, at the time of the photography being performed, who is expected--in the case of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, who is expected to do the initial examination and, if necessary, shaving?
The photographer, they are very experienced in our office. They will automatically see the--any particular injury and they will shave the area and photograph the area.
Regular fresh scalpel blade which is used to shave the hair after you use the soap and water there.
Now, the washing of the body that you've described has already occurred before the shaving of the hair; is that correct?
It's part of the whole--all these things occur during the same time. That is, you wash the body, you wash the hair area also because naturally, when you have so much bleeding--in these two victims, you had a lot of head and neck injuries, which we'll be discussing later, where there is blood staining in the hair and also soaking which has to be washed off and then you perceive the injuries.
Doctor, is it common that when hair is shaved from the decedent's body, that some loose hair will remain clinging to the body when the autopsy is actually performed?
And in fact, you have examined all of the autopsy photographs taken in this case of both Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman; is that correct?
In some of the photographs in each case, do you see what appear to be the remnants of hair that has been shared in the course of the process you've described?
Now, doctor, if--we've got the head shaved. What is the next step with respect to the bodies?
The photography usually takes place the same day of the autopsy, and once the photographer has done the photography, if there is necessity to do x-rays and fluoroscopy--especially this happens in deaths from firearms--that is the next stage of the processing of the decedents in the Coroner's office. They go to the fluoroscopy or x-ray room and x-rays are taken, as I told you, if there is an injury from firearms because our x-rays are taken to localize projectiles, and that is the next stage if that is necessary.
Nicole Brown Simpson had x-rays taken at a later stage of the spinal specimen, which was removed during autopsy. We didn't do any x-rays on the day of the autopsy.
Fluoroscopy is an x-ray process by which you can see the body as you're looking--you look at--you look at the x-ray picture on a monitor, but you don't take the x-ray. So you have--you can screen the body. Basically the body is screened with the fluoroscope. And once you localize an area of the body where there's a particular projectile or foreign body which is radiopaque, then you shoot an x-ray of that particular area.
Do you feel that it was indicated in either case after your review of everything?
Because when you have an injury from sharp force injury--especially tips of weapons can sometimes--especially a knife can sometimes break especially in the--when they impinge on the scull area or the facial area, and that can be picked up on an x-ray. Fluoroscope may not pick up a small fragment of a knife, but an x-ray will. So in hair and neck sharp force trauma deaths, an x-ray may be indicated to exclude that possibility. In this particular situation, on Miss Nicole Brown Simpson, the only bony injury which Dr. Golden saw during his autopsy was the spine, third thoracic spine which was injured. So we had the whole specimen itself and--but I ordered x-rays on the spinal specimen at a later date to make sure that we don't have any metallic fragment left in the spine, and this was done at a later stage.
Now, doctor, in your opinion, does the absence of an x-ray of the head or neck, other than the one you've described in the case of Nicole Brown Simpson, diminish your ability to determine any of the issues that you have reviewed in this case?
And would your answer be the same with respect to your ability to evaluate the issues that you have in the circumstance of Ronald Goldman?
This is the same third autopsy room I was mentioning where you have the crypt spaces with doors available to secure the decedents. What we have--this room is being shown to show the portable x-ray machine in this room which is available because what has happened is, our current x-ray machine is being--being replaced with a new x-ray machine. So right now, we are doing portable x-rays only. We are not doing any fluoroscopy at this time.
It's being installed. We should be in operation in the next few weeks. It's a supposedly state of the art x-ray machine.
Yes. We have a main autopsy room with six autopsy stations, we have another autopsy room with five autopsy stations, and this is the third autopsy room, which is used for cases where the bodies are decomposed or where there is a communicable disease suspected. This room has negative air exchange flow available and this is a room we use for such cases. This has three autopsy stations. So basically we have capability of 14 autopsy stations which are used.
That is basically the--when you have air coming into a room, the same air is not recirculated. It's--it's--it's--it's removed from the autopsy room to a suction type of situation.
Why do you do that in the cases such as you've indicated are autopsied in this room?
Because these communicable diseases, as I've mentioned, is done there. We also have decomposed bodies being done there. You have the--in the latter, you have the situation of smell and that factor. And the communicable disease situation, you have aerosolization of microorganisms which are more--the potential is higher. Not that every case, you have to treat as though it could be potentially infectious. And in our office, protective clothing, mask and eye shields are used on by the doctors and technicians on every case entering the high risk area. We call all these areas a high risk areas, but this has an additional feature to this room where there's negative air flow available.
Doctor, on any given day at your office--you say you have 14 autopsy stations. I assume "Station" means there's a table and whatever necessary accouterment are required by your medical examiner. How many of those stations are being used to conduct autopsies?
Any given day, I would say at least 10 or 11 are being used. Sometimes all 13, 14 can be used. We handle 19,000 inquiries. We bring in 10,000 bodies to the central office. 6,000 autopsies on an average are performed a year, 2500 homicides--I mean investigated as homicide. We treat them like homicides and 2,000 are certified as homicides every year. And even though only 6,000 autopsies approximately take place every year, you have 4,000 cases which are examined which kept partial or just an examination, and those kind of examinations take place in this third autopsy room.
And so when you were saying how Dr.--I'm not sure if it was Sherry or Rebie--was off on Tuesday or Wednesday when you're talking about going through the process of who was available to handle the case, those would be the normal days off for some of your doctors?
Yes. I have--see, as I told you, there are senior doctors who do the triaging for the Coroner's office who make that important decision which bodies need to get autopsied. As you know, the autopsies are--cost the taxpayer about 2,000 plus dollars a case, and we are to be cognizant in what we do, which case, because our mandate is--determine the cost and manner of death, and that decision is made by the senior doctor on the call that day.
That is, you select the cases which need--and you decide the extent of examination based on the circumstances. Some cases like a 20-Year old who suddenly drops dead by playing football will need a full autopsy and everything to try and find out what happened. But somebody with known heart disease or has history of heart disease who suddenly--who's had two bypass surgeries, who suddenly collapses but has not seen a physician in 20 days becomes a Coroner's case. In that particular situation, you just do an examination and--because the circumstances point to that person having had a natural death and most of them might have--some of them might have gone to a hospital and you may have enough medical information to give a cause and manner of death. So that's where the differentiation comes, or we may just do a limited exam of the heart in that particular situation. So this is where the senior doctor makes that important decision, the extent of examination.
I don't think he applied for the position. Some physicians don't like to have administrative responsibilities. They just like to do their routine, regular work and they want to be there--he didn't apply.
What are we looking at in this photo which I would ask the Court to mark as exhibit 320.
Oh, this is the room where the drying rack--you know, the clothing which is taken off the decedents are placed to dry. They're initially kept in the photo area and then moved to this room. You can see that the clothing is all being air dried in this room. And it's important that the drying takes place--air drying. You don't--that's the only way to dry the clothing.
Because if you wrap clothing which is moist with blood or body fluids, you will have growth of mold. And the reason you dry the clothing is, if any evidence needs to be collected from the clothing, especially body fluids or bloodstains, it has to be air dried and you should not have contamination of overgrowth of fungus or bacteria. So air dried and then you wrap it in paper.
And who is responsible, number one, for getting the clothing from the photography room to this drying area?
The photographer. And then from this stage, the evidence custodian takes the process over.
And then who was responsible for taking over the collection of the clothing to the drying room?
I don't recall the name exactly, but it's in the evidence log sheet. I think it's Mr.--
The--as I mentioned, Mr. John Marsden removed the clothing. Mr. Patino received the clothing in the evidence room.
Because paper is the best material to use for wrapping clothing because you want air flow in the--around the clothing even when it's dry for the same reason earlier; you don't want mold to grow.
The evidence custodian, after the clothing is wrapped, from the drying rack takes it to the evidence room, which is a separate area in the office.
We'll get to that in a moment. But what is to happen to the clothing when it gets to that evidence room?
It's placed in a larger bag and then--and stored in the evidence room. All this information of the chronology of events is recorded in the evidence log sheet.
Now, doctor, if you look in this photograph that's up on the screen, 320, there appears to be some kind of sign to the right of the entryway. Do you see that?
It's a secure room. It's locked and you have to call the evidence--I mean, the technician who--autopsy technician who placed the clothing there can access it, but usually we call the evidence custodian who will retrieve the clothing from this room for examination. This is if the doctor wants to go back and examine the clothing.
Doctor, is the medical examiner expected to examine the clothing--not just look at the clothing, but examine the clothing of a decedent such as Ronald Goldman?
What is the medical examiner expected to be looking for in examining the clothing of these people?
One, you describe what clothing was present on the decedent, whether a shirt, pant, the nature of the clothing. Then also, you have to look at the size, the label, manufacturer, give a description of the color, give a description of the material and then--then look at the clothing in detail for distribution of staining if you can make that determination, then look for defects. Basically you--you--you look at the clothing before autopsy, and then following autopsy, you may have a better understanding of all the injuries which you observed on the decedent so you can go back to the clothing to correlate and see whether there are any defects corresponding to every injury of the body or there are additional defects or there are no defects, depending on what the situation may be.
Hole in the clothing which is not from fraying or normal process. It's a hole made by an object or a--like if it's a gunshot wound, a defect in the clothing caused by the gunshot wound. If it's from a knife, a hole caused by the knife.
Have you examined in the fashion that you've indicated you would expect a medical examiner to examine the clothing examined the clothing of Nicole Brown Simpson as you saw that same clothing on the 13th of June?
Yes. I examined them twice, once briefly with Dr. Badin on the 22nd, and then I did a detailed examination of the clothing with my criminalist I think in March of this year. I forget the exact date.
Yes. One examination, June 22nd with Dr. Badin, the second examination with my criminalist on March of this year.
In your examination of the clothing of Mr. Goldman, did you examine a shirt that he appeared to have been wearing when you saw the bodies on the 13th of June?
Had you already reviewed any reports of Dr. Golden regarding any examination he made of that same shirt?
Did you find that there was a difference in the number of defects, as you use the term, that you identified in Mr. Goldman's shirt from what Dr. Golden described in any report that he observed?
He described three defects in Mr. Goldman's shirt. When I examined it with our criminalist and Dr. Golden again--I forgot to mention that Dr. Golden was during--present during the exam in March--we found three additional unlabeled defects, because when we examined the clothing in March, rather when I examined it in detail, the clothing already had been examined by several persons, criminalists who had removed evidence from the clothing. So when I examined the clothing in March in detail, there were three additional unlabeled defects. "Unlabeled" means which would signify that there are defects which were from the injuries.
KEY QUOTEIn your March examination, you say you saw other areas that appeared to have been cut out from the same shirt?
But did those areas all have some kind of initialing alongside the area where the hole now appeared?
So when you're talking about these three additional defects, you're talking about three additional tears if you will?
When you and Dr. Badin examined the shirt I think you said on June 22nd, did you examine it in the same fashion with the same detail that you examined it in March of this year?
No, I did not because there was--the clothing had not yet been released for scientific analysis and we had to be careful. It was just a brief examination because, as you know, there were material on the clothing which had to be analyzed. So we just did a brief examination and I did it out of courtesy to the Defense pathologist so they could have a view of the clothing. So we instructed them not to do a more detailed exam at that point till the evidence was examined.
And when you say "Evidence was examined," the evidence was turned over to the Los Angeles Police Department, the clothing that is?
Now, doctor, do you consider Dr. Golden's failure to describe the three additional defects that you saw--you saw a total of six defects in the shirt?
Did you see of your six, three that appeared to correspond to the description provided by Dr. Golden as to the three he saw?
Do you consider his failure to identify in the report the three additional defects that you saw a mistake?
Do you consider that mistake to have any significance on any of the issues that you have reviewed for testimony in this case?
Because there are defects in the clothing and the clothing was--is available, and it didn't play a role in the cause and manner of death or the injuries of the body which have been documented. The--the clothing in this situation would be useful to--to try and analyze whether there's any injury on the clothing which is not present on the body, in which case it would reflect that there was some kind of injury to the person which--the instrument which caused that defect in the clothing did not really cause injury to the body. That would be one reason you examine the clothing; to see for defects which don't exist on the body surface when you put the clothing on the body.
Let's say there's a gunshot wound to the arm. I'm just giving an analogy. When you examine the shirt with the long sleeve, you find one gunshot wound to the arm which has entered and exited the arm, and you have two defects in the clothing corresponding to that. But when you examine the sleeve of the shirt, you find two other gunshot wound defects that would signify--which are not in the same area, which would signify there are additional wounds to the body which did not strike the decedent. In that kind of example, it would indicate there were more shots fired which did not strike the decedent because when you do the body, you only see the injuries which caused injury to the body. I hope I've conveyed what I wanted to say.
I'm not sure. Doctor, with respect to tears in clothing, in your experience in cases of this type, is it common to see that the clothing during the course of the assault which leads to the death may become disarrayed from the way it is normally worn?
And is that something that you also are looking for with respect to the defects in the clothing and trying to correlate it with any particular injuries?
You must have injuries on the clothing which are of similar size to the wounds on the body and they must be in a location of the clothing within the same region where the injury's on the body. For example, in Mr. Ron Goldman's autopsy report, which shows some injuries to the right chest and right flank, there are defects in the clothing which may help in bringing up the example you--you--you just gave in your question.
And right flank, just for our present purposes, is what area of the body, doctor?
And for the record, your Honor, the witness is pointing to his right side, perhaps an inch and a half or two above the belt line.
And there were also two defects in the back of the shirt when--the way we examined it when we--correction--when we examined it, and there's no defect in the back in Mr. Goldman's body as an injury.
One explanation could be that there was some twisting and turning of Mr. Goldman during the altercation which would move the clothing on the body like--because he was--he didn't have any undershirt on. And this is a larger shirt, and the shirt would move on the body like a cylinder within a cylinder, the outer cylinder moving. And you could have--what I'm trying to say is, the clothing which shows the defect could have been in the area of the injury of the body during this twisting and turning of Mr. Goldman because the clothing is loose on his body surface.
And then when one might put the clothing on as it would normally be worn, the defect will appear in an area other than where the defect is in the body itself?
That is correct. That is correct. So there are two reasons which can be helpful to the clothing. One, you see additional defects which don't necessarily have an injury in the body and the second reason we just analyzed.
Doctor, Dr. Golden's mistake in failing to identify these three defects, in your opinion, does that have any significance in your ability to determine whether one knife could have caused all of what I'll call sharp force injuries received by Mr. Goldman?
Because I have the injuries on the bodies which I examined. I've examined all the photographs, injuries in the body through the photographs which I saw. I had one-as-to-one photographs which were available to me, and the injury pattern was quite distinct in some of the injuries which I saw. So the clothing doesn't really help you much with the injury pattern as looking at the injuries on the body.
But in spite of all that, it's still a mistake for Dr. Golden not to have identified these three additional defects?
Yes. That's one of the reasons I examined the clothing again in detail in March.
Your Honor, I've been told and thank Mr. Blasier that we did not mark that last photograph, which should be exhibit no. 321.
And Mr. Lynch--obviously it's been a long day already for me. Mr. Lynch has pointed out I really shouldn't have moved to this photograph yet. I have a couple more questions about clothing.
We didn't talk about Mr. Goldman's pants. You examined his pants as well, didn't you, doctor?
And you examined Dr. Golden's report, did you not, of any observations he made regarding defects in Mr. Goldman's pants, correct?
When you examined the pants with Dr. Badin on June 22nd, how meticulous an examination did the two of you do?
We did the same brief examination for the same reason I alluded to earlier, because the evidence had not been collected from this piece of evidence and actually we--we were keeping that in mind, and Dr. Badin was also considerate enough to go along with our request. And there's a brief examination which showed the defect in the left pocket area of the jean. We didn't do a detailed exam at that point.
Okay. If you could point out--and you stood again--and, your Honor, where the witness is pointing, on the left side to the left of the midline of the leg down about six inches, doctor, from the belt line?
Now, doctor, when you examined the clothing, the jeans, in March of 1995, did you find any additional defects in the pants?
There were two more unlabeled defects which were in the pocket underlying this defect in the trouser.
Or--with the tears again, we're going to use this lay terminology? "Tears," would that be accurate?
Well, I like to use the word "Defect" because "Tear" somehow has the connotation that it's a fraying of the clothing. So I like to use the word "Defect." And in this way, it could be later explained with a particular instrument or--in question.
The defect was in the inside--the pocket of--underlying the defect in the outer aspect of the jean. So you had the--and the defects in the pocket were in line with the defect on the jean on the outside. So it's--
Basically the pocket has two layers which were both traversed and underlying the defect on the outer surface of the pant (Indicating).
Incidentally, doctor, these defects, all of the ones you saw, the six on the shirt, the three in the pants, in your opinion, what if any source or sources could cause those kinds of defects?
And we're going to get into some discussion of types of knives, class characteristics and so forth, but is there something called a single-edged knife that has significance to you as a term?
Basically, the knife only has one cutting edge, the other edge as being blunt.
Can such a knife have caused all of the defects that you identified in Mr. Goldman's shirt?
It could have, because in the clothing, it's very difficult to say blunt edge and sharp edge. You just have a defect. And all I can say is, it's capable of causing the defects in the clothing.
Is it also capable of causing the three defects you saw in the pants of Mr. Goldman?
In your opinion, was it a mistake on Dr. Golden's part not to identify all three?
Is there any consideration to be given to the need for that clothing to be examined such as by the Los Angeles Police Department for blood or whatever they're going to do with it, and as a result, Dr. Golden not pulling out the pant pocket for examination?
That would be a good reason for not having done it if he--if that's the reason he didn't do it.
If that is the reason he didn't do it, would you still consider it a mistake on his part not to have done it?
If he didn't do the process, it is not possible to see these defects. So if that is taken as a reason, then it won't be a significant mistake--a stronger mistake.
Is it significant whatever his reason is to you in assessing whether a single, single-edged knife could have caused those three defects?
Because the clothing, as I told you, is very difficult to tell single edge and double edge especially in a jean because you have fraying of the fibers also when the defect is created. It's very difficult to analyze that.
There were no defects which I could attribute to instruments as I just did with Mr. Goldman.
Were there defects in the sense of what you described with Mr. Goldman's shirt as far as cuttings that had been taken with initialing?
Yes. I examined the panties twice. Again, Miss Nicole's clothing, also I examined twice, once with Dr. Badin on June 22nd of `94, and the second time, this March. And during the time of the examination with Dr. Badin, we use an ultraviolet light in our office--actually in most of the examination--to--to look for staining through some patterns on the clothing we examined.
We were looking for any seminal stainings which we could see in the panty area.
Doctor, had you examined that clothing, including the panties, on June 13th of 1994?
I didn't examine the panties in detail like I did on June 22nd and March. But I did see the clothing as it was on Miss Nicole when the body was brought into our office.
And when we get into some of the photographs, I'm going to ask you some questions about the clothing and what if any significance what you saw may have had in any determinations made on June 13th.
But we'll move on to photo 56, Mr. Fairtlough. And, your Honor, ask that this be marked as 322.
That is the main autopsy room of the Coroner's office. We have six autopsy stations, but you can see--I think you can see all of them.
And basically, if we count tables, one table constitutes one autopsy station; is that correct?
Those are the weighing scales where the doctors place the organs for taking the weight of the organs.
And is there a pan or something that is a little more difficult to see? Mr. Fairtlough sees it obviously.
And what is the process that the autopsy surgeon uses in weighing an organ, let's say the lung, one of the lungs?
The lung is dissected after examination in-situ--in-situ means in the body and the organ is weighed separately. Each one of them is weighed separately.
Now, doctor, is this the room in which the autopsies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were performed?
Now, doctor, at my request, was this photograph taken at a time when there were no bodies being autopsied?
And in fact, is that unusual; that at some point in the day, there are no bodies on any of these tables?
Usually in the afternoons after the autopsy is completed, there is intense cleaning process of the autopsy room which takes place, and you're seeing our autopsy room late in the afternoon after the autopsies had been completed, at least the main autopsy room.
What are the medical examiners like Dr. Golden doing at this time or at least what are they expected to be doing at this time when they're not down there in fact doing the autopsy?
The medical examiners have numerous responsibilities. Autopsy's only one part of it. They have to review microscopic slides. They review medical charts which may be needed to make a good diagnosis. They may need to go to court. They may need to dictate their findings in the afternoon. They may have appointments with families. They may have depositions. It's a busy office. And each of our medical examiners, as I mentioned earlier, does 350 cases a year. And between the demands placed by the public, the criminal justice system and the workload which I make them do, they have their hands full. So they have enough to do and more than enough to do anyway.
Doctor, you indicated I think on Friday and you've just alluded to it again that they must dictate reports; is that correct?
I do not see in this photograph microphones hanging down from the ceiling as you see the scales over each of these tables. Do you have such things?
We don't have that in our office because of the noise factor. Because as I told you, at any given time, 10 to 15 autopsies are going on--14 autopsies are going on at the same time. The doctors take good notes during the autopsy, diagram the injuries, but dictate the findings soon after the autopsy.
Doctor, in your opinion, would it be better if feasible to have the medical examiner dictating away--let me use an example. Have you seen on television on Quincy or movie, Dirty Harry, where they'll sometimes have a scene of an autopsy being performed, one body in a room and the microphone hanging down? Have you seen such a thing?
Do you think that that would be a better system if feasible in your operation so that the medical examiner would dictate as the medical examiner is doing the autopsy rather than the process that you are describing and will describe in further detail?
That would be a good process to have. But as I told you, because of the number of cases we do and the noise factor of the saws and other things, it's not practical in our office. But sometimes if you start a case later in the afternoon, we do have hand-held dictating machines available if someone wants to dictate. But generally, the process in our office is, do the autopsy, take good notes, make good diagrammatic documentation and dictate the case at a later point the same day or within 24 hours.
And in the regular course of the Coroner's business, you say this is your main autopsy room?
This is the main autopsy room. We have another room with five autopsy stations.
Is this room normally operating with all six stations doing autopsies beginning early in the morning?
And normally, how late does it run in the ordinary kinds of cases before the area gets cleaned out for the purposes of cleaning up for the next day?
Generally whereabout about 2:30, 3:00 o'clock. Usually the cleaning crew starts coming at 3:00 o'clock in the afternoon. And if there is a case which is going on late in the afternoon, then that area will be cleaned up later.
Mr. Fairtlough, could we have no. 57, please? And, your Honor, I would ask that this be marked as 323.
This is the autopsy station, first autopsy station where the autopsies of the decedents were conducted. And I would like to point out also that we have a board available for making notations.
If Mr. Fairtlough could get our arrow out. Are you talking about where he's got the arrow now?
You can make notations with the chalk as to the findings so that the doctor could transfer it back to the report if necessary at the conclusion of the autopsy, to take notes.
Well, it will be more convenient for that station. But doctors also use marking pens on the--on the metallic board like area behind the weighing scale. They could make markings there also which are easily removable after the autopsy. This is just to jot down the memory on a trajectory because you are in the middle of an autopsy, and you document trajectories, weights, and then you enter the data in the prescribed forms of the Coroner's office.
Doctor, when you said this is the station where the decedents were autopsied, are we talking specifically about Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman?
And from that, is it accurate to say that they were not done simultaneously by Dr. Golden?
And is there a form that is completed by Dr. Golden to indicate when that autopsy began and when it ended?
Yes. That is only the autopsy process. It doesn't take into time the dictation time which is done later.
But basically the time that Dr. Golden spends with the body at this station no. 6?
Your Honor, I'm going to get into some forms and so forth. I don't know if this is a good time for the Court to break.
Because this is a kind of homicide case we see routinely in our office, and any given day, we have about ten--eight to ten homicide cases being performed.
He described three defects in Mr. Goldman's shirt. When I examined it with our criminalist and Dr. Golden again... we found three additional unlabeled defects.
What I'm trying to say is, the clothing which shows the defect could have been in the area of the injury of the body during this twisting and turning of Mr. Goldman because the clothing is loose on his body surface.
A sharp instrument like a knife.