All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present. The jury is not present. Counsel, during the course of Mr. Matheson's testimony, Mr. Byrne, my research attorney, gave each party a photocopy of the handwritten 11-page list of evidence items in this matter. I did have Mrs. Robertson get the exhibits from the August griffin hearing and August, `94, griffin hearing, and it does include a copy of this as item k, so the Defense did mark that, they did have access to it at that early time, so the record should be clear. And Mr. Blasier, you have a copy of that now before you?
All right. As to the second item, the board that the Prosecution proposes to use regarding the Defense testing of evidence items, we are taking those item matters out of Prosecution's custody for evidence purposes. I'm going to ask the Prosecution not to use that board this afternoon because I'm not comfortable with the state of my research at this point. All right. Let's proceed.
Your Honor, there was one other issue that I wanted to bring up and that was I wanted to maybe--I guess what would be a 402 type motion as to what extent Mr. Matheson will be allowed to discuss the issues of PCR typing and PCR type issues, which he is not testifying to in direct except only extremely tangentially to the extent that evidence collection has some overlap to the issue of how a sample can be contaminated. It is subsequently going to be tested, both conventionally and genetically. Specifically, there was an issue regarding some--a lot--not a lot in number, but a lot as in discreet identifiable number of test kits that were provided to the Los Angeles Police Department by Roche Pharmaceutical sometime before this case, I believe it was many months, in which there was a procedure that was identified with the kits that I'm sure counsel probably intends to get into with perhaps other witnesses, but Mr. Matheson does not have any personal knowledge of that, nor has he read any documents, to my understanding, pertaining to that, so we would ask that they be precluded from getting into that area on cross-examination of the witness.
Well, having not heard anything about it yet, I'm loathe to make any kind of a ruling on the basis that this is prematurely brought before the Court. If it exceeds the scope of the direct examination--
I'm sure the Defense will come up with some reason that it is within the scope or necessary to cross-examine Mr. Matheson about it. I don't know.
Your Honor, there has been plenty of questions about contamination and that is directly on point in terms of contamination for later DNA testing, so I think it has already been raised.
Perhaps, but within the specifics of this witness' knowledge regarding PCR testing and the exquisitely sensitive nature of that test, I don't know if he has the expertise to testify to that.
I don't know. We will see. It is not here yet, guys. All right. Let's have the jurors.
Mr. Matheson does not have any personal knowledge of that, nor has he read any documents, to my understanding, pertaining to that, so we would ask that they be precluded from getting into that area on cross-examination of the witness.
I'm loathe to make any kind of a ruling on the basis that this is prematurely brought before the Court.
He is in charge of the lab.