Recross-examination of Tom Lange (part 4)

📄 Recross-examination of Tom Lange (part 4) — Wednesday, March 8, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAR\8\RECROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-TOM-LAN.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 33 of 167

◀ Lunch recess Sidebar: Faye Resnick testimony ▶

Witness: Det. Tom Lange
Examiner: Johnnie Cochran
Called by: Prosecution • Date: Wednesday, March 8, 1995 • Utterances: 145

Cochran resumed recross-examination of Detective Lange, pressing on three fronts: the handling of exculpatory clues, the specific ice cream flavor Nicole purchased at Ben & Jerry's the night of the murders (suggesting the defense had information different from Lange's), and Lange's knowledge of drug-related killing methods ('Colombian necktie') and Faye Resnick's drug history — the latter triggering a sidebar before Cochran could finish the question.

# 1 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT, IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:)

# 2 THE COURT:

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. PLEASE BE SEATED. LET THE RECORD REFLECT WE HAVE NOW BEEN REJOINED BY ALL THE MEMBERS OF OUR JURY PANEL. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

# 3 THE JURY:

GOOD AFTERNOON.

TOM LANGE, THE WITNESS ON THE STAND AT THE TIME OF THE NOON RECESS, RESUMED THE STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:

# 4 THE COURT:

DETECTIVE TOM LANGE IS STILL ON THE WITNESS STAND ON RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. COCHRAN. GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN, DETECTIVE LANGE.

# 5 DET. TOM LANGE:

GOOD AFTERNOON, YOUR HONOR.

# 6 THE COURT:

YOU ARE REMINDED YOU ARE STILL UNDER OATH. MR. COCHRAN, YOU MAY CONTINUE.

# 7 MR. COCHRAN:

CONTINUE.

# 8 THE COURT:

RECROSS-EXAMINATION.

# 9 MR. COCHRAN:

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, YOUR HONOR. GOOD AFTERNOON, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

# 10 THE JURY:

GOOD AFTERNOON.

# 11 MR. COCHRAN:

GOOD AFTERNOON, DETECTIVE LANGE.

# 12 DET. TOM LANGE:

GOOD AFTERNOON.

# 13

RECROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED)

# 14

BY MR. COCHRAN:

# 15 Q:

WITH REGARD TO THE CLUES THAT YOU SPOKE ABOUT, I GUESS YESTERDAY AND THIS MORNING, THAT YOU HAVE INVESTIGATED, ARE THERE SOME CLUES THAT OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR TEAM HAVE PURSUED THAT WOULD BE OF AN EXCULPATORY NATURE AS THEY RELATE TO MR. SIMPSON THAT WOULD POINT TOWARD HIS INNOCENCE?

# 16 A:

POSSIBLY OF AN EXCULPATORY NATURE, YES.

# 17 Q:

AND THERE ARE SOME CLUES LIKE THAT YOU HAVE NOT PERSONALLY INVESTIGATED; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 18 A:

I BELIEVE SO.

# 19 Q:

AND WOULD -- WOULD DETECTIVE PAYNE BE ONE OF THOSE WHO WOULD HAVE LOOKED AT THOSE CLUES?

# 20 A:

DETECTIVE PAYNE SUPERVISES THE ASSIGNMENT OF THOSE CLUES TO A GREAT EXTENT AND HAS THOSE CLUES ON HIS COMPUTER.

# 21 Q:

AND IF I WERE TO ASK YOU TO SEARCH THROUGH YOUR COMPUTER TO GIVE US A COMPUTER RUN OF THE NUMBER OF THOSE CLUES AND WHAT THE STATUS OF THEM -- OF THOSE CLUES ARE, COULD YOU DO THAT OVER A PERIOD OF TIME?

# 22 A:

YES.

# 23 Q:

AND ARE YOU WILLING TO DO THAT?

# 24 A:

CERTAINLY.

# 25 Q:

AND DO YOU HAVE A BALLPARK ESTIMATE OF HOW MANY SUCH CLUES THERE ARE NOW PENDING?

# 26 A:

I WOULD HAVE NO IDEA EXCEPT TO STATE THAT THEY HAVE ALL BEEN TURNED OVER TO YOU. I HAVEN'T REVIEWED PERSONALLY EACH AND EVERY ONE SO I DON'T HAVE ANY IDEA.

# 27 Q:

AND IN THAT CONNECTION, AS I UNDERSTAND YOUR TESTIMONY, THOSE CLUES REGARDING NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON OR WHATEVER COME IN PRETTY MUCH ON A DAILY BASIS; IS THAT CORRECT, CLUES IN THIS CASE?

# 28 A:

NO, NOT NECESSARILY.

# 29 Q:

ALL RIGHT. LET ME REPHRASE IT. YOU STILL GET CLUES IN THIS CASE ON A DAILY BASIS; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 30 A:

PRACTICALLY.

# 31 Q:

AND SO THE INVESTIGATION IN THIS CASE WILL AND MUST CONTINUE BECAUSE OF THAT; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 32 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 33 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND SO YOU WILL TRY TO GET THAT FOR US, AND IF WE CAN FINISH YOU TODAY, YOU CAN PERHAPS BRING THAT BACK AT SOME LATER TIME; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 34 A:

WELL, AGAIN, I HAVE TURNED OVER ALL CLUES. I -- IT MIGHT BE VERY SUBJECTIVE AS TO WHAT IS EXCULPATORY AND WHAT IS NOT. I MIGHT SUGGEST THAT YOU HAVE YOUR PEOPLE LOOK AT THOSE ALSO.

# 35 Q:

WE WILL DO THAT.

# 36 A:

BECAUSE YOU MAY INTERPRET SOMETHING AS EXCULPATORY AND I MAY NOT.

# 37 Q:

OKAY. ONE PERSON --

# 38 A:

SO I REALLY DON'T KNOW.

# 39 Q:

ONE PERSON'S EXCULPATORY MIGHT BE ANOTHER PERSON'S INCULPATORY? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING?

KEY QUOTE

# 40 A:

CERTAINLY.

# 41 Q:

YOU WILL MAKE THAT JUDGMENT BUT YOU WILL GIVE US WHAT YOU HAVE?

# 42 A:

WE WILL MAKE THAT ATTEMPT, BUT AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE ASKING FOR.

# 43 Q:

ALL RIGHT. I APPRECIATE YOUR DOING THAT. ALL RIGHT. NOW, WITH REGARD TO THE SUBJECT OF ICE CREAM, YOU KNOW YOU SAID YESTERDAY THAT PHOTOGRAPHS TEND TO MEMORIALIZE WHAT IS AT THE SCENE AND THAT SEEMED TO BE A FAIR STATEMENT. AND IN THIS INSTANCE YOU DID NOT TAKE ANY PHOTOGRAPHS OF MANY OF THE THINGS THAT WERE IN THE INTERIOR OF THAT RESIDENCE; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

# 44 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 45 Q:

OR HAVE THEM TAKEN. AND WE HAVE ESTABLISHED PREVIOUSLY THAT YOU DIDN'T TAKE ANY PHOTOGRAPH OF THE ICE CREAM, RIGHT?

# 46 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 47 Q:

NOW, WITH REGARD TO -- TO THAT, HAVE YOU PERSONALLY OR ANYONE AT YOUR DIRECTION TALKED TO A YOUNG LADY WHO I BELIEVE IS EIGHT YEARS OLD OR THEREABOUTS WHOSE NAME IS RACHEL BERMAN?

# 48 A:

I DON'T KNOW IF RACHEL WAS SPOKEN TO OR HER MOTHER. I BELIEVE HER MOTHER WAS.

# 49 Q:

ALL RIGHT. AND WITH REGARD TO THE KIND OF ICE CREAM THAT YOU HAD THE DETECTIVE DO A TEST ON, I THINK YOU TOLD US THAT WAS SOME KIND OF -- WHAT ICE CREAM WAS THAT?

# 50 A:

CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIE DOUGH.

# 51 Q:

DID YOU RUN ANY TESTS ON AN ICE CREAM FLAVOR NAMED RAIN FOREST CRUNCH?

# 52 A:

NO.

# 53 Q:

DID YOU HAVE INFORMATION THAT MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON THAT NIGHT --

# 54 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, OBJECTION.

# 55 MR. COCHRAN:

DID YOU HAVE INFORMATION THAT NIGHT -- MAY I FINISH THE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR?

# 56 THE COURT:

YES.

# 57 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION DID YOU HAVE INFORMATION THAT ON THE NIGHT OF JUNE 12, 1994, MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON PURCHASED AN ICE CREAM CALLED RAIN FOREST CRUNCH?

# 58 A:

NO. MY INFORMATION WAS THE CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIE DOUGH AND I BELIEVE THERE WAS A CHOCOLATE CHIP --

# 59 Q:

YOUR ANSWER IS NO, YOU DIDN'T HAVE IT AS RAIN FOREST CRUNCH?

# 60 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 61 Q:

SO IN YOUR VOLUMINOUS MATERIALS DO YOU HAVE ANY STATEMENT OR HAVE YOU READ A STATEMENT FROM RACHEL BERMAN WHO APPARENTLY WAS WITH THEM THAT EVENING? HAVE YOU READ THAT STATEMENT?

# 62 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION. THAT ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

# 63 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 64 DET. TOM LANGE:

I READ A STATEMENT FROM RACHEL BERMAN.

# 65 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: AS TO WHAT KIND OF ICE CREAM THEY PURCHASED WHEN THEY WENT TO BEN AND JERRY'S?

# 66 A:

NO. I RECEIVED THAT INFORMATION THROUGH THE BROWN FAMILY AS TO WHAT EACH ONE OF THE THREE CHILDREN PURCHASED.

# 67 Q:

ALL RIGHT. DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL -- STRIKE THAT. IN YOUR INVESTIGATION YOU LEARNED, DID YOU NOT, THAT THE BROWN FAMILY THEMSELVES WERE NOT WITH MISS NICOLE BROWN SIMPSON AND THE CHILDREN AND RACHEL BERMAN WHEN THE ICE CREAM WAS PURCHASED? DID YOU NOT FIND THAT OUT?

# 68 A:

THEY JUST LEFT THEM WHEN THEY WALKED ACROSS THE STREET, THAT'S CORRECT.

# 69 Q:

THEY WEREN'T WITH THEM. NOW, WOULD IT BE HELPFUL TO YOU TO TALK TO A CHILD NOT INVOLVED IN THIS CASE WHO WAS PRESENT WHEN THE ICE CREAM WAS PURCHASED?

# 70 A:

THAT WAS --

# 71 Q:

WOULD THAT BE HELPFUL?

# 72 A:

THIS WAS DONE THROUGH THE BROWN FAMILY.

# 73 Q:

I'M ASKING WOULD THAT BE HELPFUL FOR YOU TO DO THAT?

# 74 A:

YES.

# 75 Q:

THE BROWN FAMILY, THEY AREN'T MEMBERS OF THE LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMENT, ARE THEY?

# 76 A:

I WAS ADVISED BY THE BROWN FAMILY THAT I COULD NOT TALK TO THE CHILDREN, THAT THEY WERE UNDER THE CARE OF A CHILD PSYCHOLOGIST, SO I RESPECTED THAT.

KEY QUOTE

# 77 Q:

I UNDERSTAND YOU TOLD US THAT YESTERDAY. I'M ASKING YOU NOW ABOUT RACHEL BERMAN, NOT THE SIMPSON CHILDREN. I'M ASKING YOU HAVE YOU OR ANYONE UNDER YOUR DIRECTION TALKED TO THAT CHILD INDIVIDUALLY?

# 78 A:

AS TO THE ICE CREAM?

# 79 Q:

YES.

# 80 A:

NO. AGAIN, THAT WAS DONE THROUGH THE BROWN FAMILY.

# 81 Q:

WELL, AS THE INVESTIGATOR, WOULD IT BE HELPFUL TO YOU TO TALK TO A CHILD WHO WAS PRESENT, SIR, AND FIND OUT ABOUT THE ICE CREAM?

# 82 A:

YES.

# 83 Q:

DID YOU ALSO -- DID YOU FIND OUT AT ANY POINT THAT -- LET ME ASK YOU THIS: DID YOU FIND OUT AT ANY POINT DURING THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION THAT THE FLAVORS PURCHASED WERE RAIN FOREST CRUNCH? DID YOU EVER FIND THAT OUT?

# 84 A:

I DON'T RECALL RAIN FOREST CRUNCH.

# 85 Q:

ALL RIGHT. DID YOU FIND OUT THAT ONE OF THE FLAVORS PURCHASED WAS CHOCOLATE FUDGE?

# 86 A:

YES.

# 87 Q:

DID YOU FIND OUT ONE OF THE FLAVORS PURCHASED WAS COOKIE DOUGHNUT?

# 88 A:

I BELIEVE IT WAS COOKIE DOUGH. MY INFORMATION WAS ONE CHOCOLATE FUDGE AND TWO COOKIE DOUGHS.

# 89 Q:

ALL RIGHT. BUT YOU HAVE NOT TALKED TO RACHEL BERMAN RIGHT, CORRECT?

# 90 A:

I HAVE NOT TALKED TO RACHEL BERMAN.

# 91 Q:

NOW, IN THIS -- YOU DESCRIBED FOR US THAT BEFORE LUNCH ABOUT THESE DRUG KILLINGS AND YOU -- I ASKED YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS COLOMBIAN NECKLACE AND REMEMBER WE TALKED ABOUT THAT?

# 92 A:

YES.

# 93 Q:

DO YOU KNOW WHAT A COLOMBIAN NECKTIE IS?

# 94 A:

YES, I'VE HEARD STORIES OF COLOMBIAN NECKTIES.

# 95 Q:

WHAT IS A COLOMBIAN NECKTIE?

# 96 A:

MY INFORMATION IS THAT IT IS A TIRE THAT WOULD BE PUT OVER SOMEONE'S NECK AND SET AFIRE.

# 97 Q:

THAT IS A COLOMBIAN NECKTIE?

# 98 A:

THAT IS WHAT I'VE HEARD. I HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED THAT.

# 99 Q:

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF A COLOMBIAN NECKTIE BEING A SITUATION WHERE IN A DRUG --

KEY QUOTE

# 100 MS. CLARK:

ASSUMES FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE.

# 101 MR. COCHRAN:

I ASK THIS QUESTION, YOUR HONOR, AS AN EXPERT.

# 102 THE COURT:

OVERRULED.

# 103 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF A COLOMBIAN NECKTIE BEING A SITUATION WHERE IN A DRUG KILLING A PERSON'S THROAT IS SLASHED AND THEIR TONGUE IS PULLED DOWN THROUGH WHERE THEIR -- THROUGH THE NECK AREA? HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF THAT?

KEY QUOTE

# 104 A:

NO.

# 105 Q:

ALL RIGHT. WHAT YOU TALKED ABOUT WAS A NECKTIE USED IN SOUTH AFRICA WHERE TIRES WERE PUT OVER --

# 106 A:

I THOUGHT THAT IS WHAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO.

# 107 Q:

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT COLOMBIA, NOT SOUTH AFRICA.

# 108 A:

I DON'T KNOW WHERE THESE THINGS OCCUR. THE ONLY NECKTIE REFERENCE I'VE HEARD IS WITH A TIRE.

# 109 Q:

YOU WERE THE DETECTIVE ON THE WONDERLAND CASE; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 110 A:

THAT'S CORRECT.

# 111 Q:

WAS THAT A DRUG CASE?

# 112 A:

YES.

# 113 Q:

WAS THAT A DRUG CASE THAT INVOLVED KNIVES?

# 114 A:

NO.

# 115 Q:

DIDN'T IT INVOLVE -- DRUG CASE INVOLVING KILLINGS?

# 116 A:

IT INVOLVED KILLING, YES.

# 117 Q:

WAS THERE A KNIFE INVOLVED IN THAT CASE AT ALL?

# 118 A:

THERE WERE NO KNIVES INVOLVED IN LAUREL CANYON, NO.

# 119 Q:

BUT IN THAT CASE THERE WAS A DRUG KILLING THAT RESULTED IN WHICH YOU INVESTIGATED; IS THAT CORRECT?

# 120 A:

THERE WERE SEVERAL. THERE WERE FOUR OF THEM, YES.

# 121 Q:

HOW LONG AGO WAS THAT?

# 122 A:

THAT WAS IN JULY 1ST, 1981.

# 123 Q:

19 --

# 124 A:

'81.

# 125 Q:

VERY WELL. NOW, THIS MORNING I ASKED YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT FAYE RESNICK, AND YOU ARE AWARE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEEN RECORDS SUBPOENAED FROM A DRUG TREATMENT FACILITY CALLED EXODUS -- ISN'T THAT RIGHT, REGARDING FAYE RESNICK? YOU HAVE SEEN THOSE RECORDS, HAVEN'T YOU?

# 126 A:

I DON'T RECALL SEEING ANY RECORDS LIKE THAT.

# 127 Q:

YOU ARE THE LEAD INVESTIGATOR IN THIS CASE AND YOU HAVE NEVER SEEN ANY RECORDS FROM A DRUG TREATMENT FACILITY CALLED EXODUS?

# 128 A:

FAYE RESNICK BECAME A WITNESS AFTER THIS CASE WAS FILED AND DEALT WITH THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND I WASN'T PRESENT FOR THOSE INTERVIEWS.

# 129 Q:

I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT, BUT HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THOSE RECORDS FROM EXODUS?

# 130 A:

AGAIN, I DON'T RECALL EVER SEEING THOSE RECORDS.

# 131 Q:

HAVE YOU HAD OCCASION, IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION, TO EVER REVIEW THIS BOOK ALLEGEDLY WRITTEN BY FAYE RESNICK?

# 132 A:

I HAVE READ THE BOOK.

# 133 Q:

YOU HAVE READ THE BOOK?

# 134 A:

YES.

# 135 Q:

AND WHEN DID YOU READ THE BOOK?

# 136 A:

SHORTLY AFTER IT CAME OUT.

# 137 Q:

AND IN THAT BOOK, AFTER READING THE BOOK, IF IT IS TO BE BELIEVED, YOU BECAME AWARE, DID YOU NOT, THAT FAYE RESNICK HAD HAD A HISTORY --

# 138 MS. CLARK:

OBJECTION, YOUR HONOR.

# 139 MR. COCHRAN:

MAY I FINISH THE QUESTION?

# 140 THE COURT:

FINISH THE QUESTION.

# 141 MS. CLARK:

YOUR HONOR --

# 142 Q:

BY MR. COCHRAN: BECAME AWARE --

# 143 MS. CLARK:

MAY WE APPROACH?

# 144 MR. COCHRAN:

MAY I FINISH THE QUESTION, YOUR HONOR?

# 145 THE COURT:

WHY DON'T YOU APPROACH BRIEFLY.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Tom Lange

I WAS ADVISED BY THE BROWN FAMILY THAT I COULD NOT TALK TO THE CHILDREN, THAT THEY WERE UNDER THE CARE OF A CHILD PSYCHOLOGIST, SO I RESPECTED THAT.

Cochran used this to expose a gap: Lange deferred to the victim's family rather than independently interviewing a non-Simpson child witness (Rachel Berman) who was present at the ice cream purchase.

Tom Lange

IT MIGHT BE VERY SUBJECTIVE AS TO WHAT IS EXCULPATORY AND WHAT IS NOT. I MIGHT SUGGEST THAT YOU HAVE YOUR PEOPLE LOOK AT THOSE ALSO.

Lange acknowledged that the determination of what qualifies as exculpatory is judgment-dependent, potentially undermining the completeness of the investigation's disclosure to the defense.

Johnnie Cochran

HAVE YOU EVER HEARD OF A COLOMBIAN NECKTIE BEING A SITUATION WHERE IN A DRUG KILLING A PERSON'S THROAT IS SLASHED AND THEIR TONGUE IS PULLED DOWN THROUGH WHERE THEIR -- THROUGH THE NECK AREA?

Cochran was laying groundwork for the drug cartel alternative suspect theory, connecting the method of Nicole's killing to a known drug execution style.

Tom Lange

ONE PERSON'S EXCULPATORY MIGHT BE ANOTHER PERSON'S INCULPATORY? IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? CERTAINLY.

Cochran got Lange to concede the subjectivity of evidence interpretation — useful for arguing the police filtered evidence through a lens of Simpson's guilt.

Evidence (5)

Informal

Computer database of investigative clues managed by Detective Payne, including potentially exculpatory leads

discussed — Lange agreed to produce a printout

Informal

Ice cream purchase at Ben & Jerry's on the night of June 12, 1994 — flavor disputed (defense suggests Rain Forest Crunch; Lange's info was Chocolate Fudge and Cookie Dough)

challenged

Informal

Statement from Rachel Berman, child witness present at the ice cream purchase

discussed — Lange had not personally read it regarding ice cream flavors

Informal

Records from Exodus drug treatment facility regarding Faye Resnick

discussed — Lange claimed he did not recall seeing them

Informal

Book allegedly written by Faye Resnick

discussed — Lange confirmed he read it shortly after publication

Notable Exchanges (3)

Johnnie Cochran•Tom Lange

Cochran repeatedly pressed Lange on why he never spoke directly to Rachel Berman — a child witness present at the ice cream purchase — instead relying on the Brown family as intermediaries. Lange eventually admitted it would have been helpful to interview her directly.

strategic

Johnnie Cochran•Tom Lange

Cochran walked Lange through the definition of a 'Colombian necktie,' exposing that Lange confused it with the South African 'necklacing' method. The exchange was designed to show Lange lacked expertise in drug cartel killing methods while suggesting the murders fit that pattern.

revealing

Johnnie Cochran•Marcia Clark•Lance A. Ito

Clark repeatedly objected as Cochran tried to ask Lange about Faye Resnick's drug history as revealed in her book. The examination was cut off for a sidebar before Cochran could complete the question.

heated

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Tom Lange

omission / investigative failure

Cochran established that Lange never interviewed Rachel Berman directly about the ice cream purchase, instead relying on the Brown family — who had an interest in the case — as intermediaries, and that Lange's information about the ice cream flavor may have been incomplete or incorrect.

⚔ Tom Lange

lack of expertise

Cochran exposed that Lange confused the 'Colombian necktie' (throat-slash drug killing method) with South African 'necklacing' (tire-burning), undermining his credibility as an expert on drug-related homicide patterns relevant to the alternative suspect theory.

⚔ Tom Lange

selective investigation

Cochran highlighted that Lange, as lead investigator, had not personally reviewed Faye Resnick's drug treatment records from Exodus, suggesting the investigation failed to pursue leads that might point away from Simpson.

Objections

4 objections (0 sustained, 3 overruled)

Proceeding 5212 • 145 utterances • Prosecution witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103