ALL RIGHT. BACK ON THE RECORD IN THE SIMPSON MATTER. ALL PARTIES ARE AGAIN PRESENT. COUNSEL, WITH REGARDS TO THE IN CAMERA REVIEW OVER THE LUNCH HOUR, I HAVE NOT FINISHED READING THE FILE.
YOUR HONOR, ONE MATTER THAT OTHER COUNSEL HAS ASKED ME TO RAISE AND THERE WAS SOME MENTION DURING THE -- DURING THE REDIRECT OF MR. LANGE AS TO THE EXISTENCE OF SOME DNA RESULTS ON THE FINGERNAIL SCRAPINGS OF MISS SIMPSON. AND I WONDER IF MISS CLARK CAN EDUCATE ME AND THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THIS SIDE, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT FAMILIAR OR AWARE OF ANY REPORTS OR ANYTHING REFLECTING THAT IN FACT THERE HAVE BEEN DNA TESTS PERFORMED.
THIS IS A DISCOVERY ISSUE; NOT A TESTIMONIAL ISSUE. MISS CLARK, IS THERE ANY TESTING RESULTS AVAILABLE REGARDING THE NAIL SCRAPINGS?
YES. DOJ HAS PERFORMED THOSE TESTS AND I BELIEVE THE DEFENSE EXPERT, ED BLAKE, WAS PRESENT WHEN THEY WERE PERFORMED, SO I GUESS THEY ARE NOT COMMUNICATING WITH THEIR EXPERTS, BUT THE RESULTS WERE THAT THE DNA EXPERTS WERE CONSISTENT WITH THE MARKERS OF NICOLE BROWN. AND WE ARE DOING FURTHER TESTING NOW AT CELLMARK. AS THE COURT IS PROBABLY AWARE, THE DOJ DOES D1S80 AND CELLMARK WILL BE DOING POLYMARKERS JUST TO FURTHER DEMONSTRATE THAT IT IS HER BLOOD UNDER THE FINGERNAILS, AND THAT WILL BE COMPLETE SHORTLY, IF IT ISN'T ALREADY. BUT I KNOW THE SAMPLES WERE COMPLETED AT DOJ AND THE RESULTS WERE CONSISTENT WITH NICOLE BROWN AND I THINK IT HAS ALREADY GONE TO CELLMARK. AND ROCK AND WOODY ARE HERE, YOUR HONOR, AND IF THE COURT WOULD LIKE ME TO, I CAN CALL UPSTAIRS AND GET MORE DEFINITIVE INFORMATION ON THAT.
MISS CLARK? MISS CLARK, HAVE YOUR ASSISTANTS BRING DOWN THAT INFORMATION SO WE CAN JUST DOUBLE-CHECK TO MAKE SURE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME REPORTS. YOU MAY ALREADY HAVE IT.
YOUR HONOR, MR. TOURTELOT IS HERE ONLY BECAUSE OF THE IN CAMERA. DOES THE COURT HAVE AN ESTIMATION SO HE CAN GO ON HIS WAY?
WELL, MR. TOURTELOT, AS I INDICATED TO YOU, I DID NOT FINISH READING THOSE MATERIALS OVER THE LUNCH HOUR, BUT I WANT TO GO BACK INTO SESSION WITH THE JURY AND I WILL COMPLETE MY EXAMINATION OF THOSE MATTERS THIS AFTERNOON SOME TIME AND I WILL ISSUE A WRITTEN FINDING. ALL RIGHT.
YOUR HONOR, I THINK THE CONFUSION IS OVER THE EAP MARKER WHICH I DON'T -- TO OUR KNOWLEDGE THERE HAS BEEN NO RETESTING ON THAT. THAT IS THE REPORT THAT INDICATES IT IS NOT NICOLE.
KEY QUOTEWELL, MR. BLASIER, LET'S TAKE THIS UP AFTER WE CONCLUDE WITH THE JURY THIS AFTERNOON.
ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNSEL. MISS CLARK, WHAT IS YOUR GUESSTIMATE AS TO HOW MUCH LONGER WE HAVE?
DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF INTERRUPTIONS, IT SHOULD BE ANOTHER HALF HOUR TO 45 MINUTES.
YOUR HONOR, DID THE COURT INTEND TO ISSUE THAT RULING THIS AFTERNOON, SINCE MR. FUHRMAN MIGHT BE TESTIFYING SHORTLY?
I DON'T MEAN TO BE CURT, BUT I'VE GOT ABOUT EIGHTEEN OTHER THINGS THAT I'M DOING.
KEY QUOTETHE RESULTS WERE THAT THE DNA EXPERTS WERE CONSISTENT WITH THE MARKERS OF NICOLE BROWN. AND WE ARE DOING FURTHER TESTING NOW AT CELLMARK.
I THINK THE CONFUSION IS OVER THE EAP MARKER WHICH I DON'T -- TO OUR KNOWLEDGE THERE HAS BEEN NO RETESTING ON THAT. THAT IS THE REPORT THAT INDICATES IT IS NOT NICOLE.
I DON'T MEAN TO BE CURT, BUT I'VE GOT ABOUT EIGHTEEN OTHER THINGS THAT I'M DOING.
HOW MANY LAWYERS ARE GOING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE FOR THE DEFENSE?