Mr. Kelberg.

Thank you, your Honor.

Doctor, before we move into the autopsy of Ronald Goldman, I want to ask you a few questions about this process that you have undertaken in reviewing all of the autopsy materials in both cases. Doctor, is it an uncommon experience for you to review autopsy materials in cases for which you were not the actual autopsy surgeon?

It's not at all uncommon in my capacity.

How does this come about?

I--I review cases and close cases for doctors who are no longer with the department. I review cases for case--for purposes of court testimony taken in conjunction with photographic review for doctors who have either passed away or no longer are with the department so that the department responds to the needs of the criminal justice system as far as testimony goes for forensic expertise, forensic pathology expertise. We--I--I also--I review files whenever I get queries from law enforcement agencies.

I'm sorry. When you get--

Queries.

Inquiries?

Inquiries from law enforcement agencies, from families of the people who have died. So you have to review these files for various reasons. And I've done depositions for--on reports of other physicians. And so basically there are many reasons why I do this quite commonly, reviewing other doctor's reports and review photographs. Sometimes the doctors close the case and there will be questions raised and I have to review the whole file and the photographs and microscopic studies to look into some new information brought to our attention and reopen the case. So there are many reasons why I have to evaluate the case.

Doctor, can you approximate how many times you have testified as a forensic pathologist on a case for which you were not the original autopsy surgeon?

Hundreds of times.

Doctor, have you ever had to spend the kind of time that you have spent in this case when you have done this similar process in these other cases?

Objection to the form of the question.

Overruled.

No.

Is the process nevertheless--setting aside the amount of time, is the process you have undertaken here any different than the process you undertake in these other cases when you are called to testify on a case for which you were not the original autopsy surgeon?

The process is no different. You have to go through the same process. You have to review the report, you have to review the photographs. And sometimes if the report doesn't have the medical--let's say somebody who has been hospitalized, we need the medical information, you need to look at the medical information. So the process is not different. But here, I have to do a certain few other--some other work in addition to what I normally do.

Doctor, in your experience of testifying in cases for which you were not the original autopsy surgeon, have you reached independent opinions from any opinions expressed in any report from the actual autopsy surgeon which was different than the original autopsy surgeon's opinion?

Is this for testimony or is it for changing the cause of death and manner of death? In what context do you want me to answer that question?

First of all, in the context in which you review these cases where you will be testifying for the medical examiner who actually performed the autopsy, do you have as a reason for doing so the need to independently, that is on your own, from your review of the materials, form opinions on issues like cause and manner of death?

Yes.

And have you done that process where at the end, your opinion differed from any opinion expressed by the actual medical examiner who performed the autopsy?

Sometimes it's happened.

Is there any feeling that you have that what you are really doing is merely puppeting an opinion that was expressed in a report from the actual medical examiner rather than being an independent assessment by you of these issues?

Doctor, is the process you have undertaken in this case and these other cases where you were not the original autopsy surgeon similar in nature to what forensic pathologists who are retained by people charged with crimes do when they evaluate issues of forensic pathology in a criminal homicide case?

Yes.

Doctor, we're going to move into the autopsy of Ronald Goldman.

Your Honor, I have a series of exhibits I'd ask to be marked. May I have just a moment with Mr. Shapiro, please?

You may. Would this be a good place to take a break?

Any time the Court would wish to do so is fine.

I mean, do you need time to arrange your exhibits and reorganize the boards?

We will need to use the ones we have been using to the back and get the ones that have been to the back to the front.

All right. Given the number and size of these exhibits, perhaps we should take the break now.

Whatever you wish.

All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to take a--our 15-minute recess, our first 15-minute recess for the Thursday afternoon. Please remember all of my admonitions to you. We'll stand in recess for 15.