All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. Mr. Sims, would you resume the witness stand, please.

Gary Sims, the witness on the stand at the time of the noon recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:

Let the record reflect that we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

THE JURY: Good afternoon.

Mr. Gary Sims is again on the witness stand undergoing direct examination by Mr. Harmon. Good afternoon, Mr. Sims.

Good afternoon, your Honor.

You are reminded, sir, you are still under oath. And Mr. Harmon, you may continue with your direct examination.

Thank you, your Honor.

DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. HARMON

Mr. Sims, I think I was a little confused on what a fibril is. I would like to mark as People's next in order a photograph supplied by Mr. Sims that shows some black cut-out material which we know are fibrils now in the background. May that be--

People's 266.

266. And may I put that on the elmo, your Honor?

Yes. Have you shown to it counsel?

Yes, I have.

Mr. Sims, do you recognize People's 266 for identification?

Yes, I do. That is a photograph that I took on October 4th, 1994.

Okay. You were--we were talking about fibrils. Can you describe where these fibrils are in that white background in the photograph?

Yes. I need a moment on--do I use this device?

Sure. Go ahead.

What I'm--what I'm--what I'm describing is there is some very fine traces--

Mr. Sims, why don't you try this.

Okay. Come out?

Yeah.

Do you want to put it on the podium here?

We were talking about fibrils and what I'm referring to are these little fine pieces of fiber. And most of you have probably seen from common experience when you cut a piece of cloth, especially this cloth, this weave, some of the little fibrils actually come off from the cloth, so these are the four swatches that were present in that tube from Greg Matheson that was submitted along with the sock. Now, that 42 is my number. 13 is the LAPD number. The tube is called 13a and what I'm talking about when I say "fibrils" are these little minute pieces that are present and they come about when you cut the fabric.

Okay. You also described some minute particles of blood?

Yes. The particles are generally associated with these particular fibrils.

What causes the particles to come off?

Well, the particles are usually adhering. That is the blood that is adhering to the actual fiber on the fibrils.

To the fibrils?

To the fibrils, yes.

So is it the cutting of the fabric that causes the blood particles to come off?

Objection.

Sustained. Rephrase the question.

What is it that caused the tiny blood particles to come off with the fibrils?

Well, the blood is adhering to the fibrils and some of it also powders itself so that is the combination of material down in here, (Indicating), and this is on a white piece of filter paper in the laboratory so that you can clearly see it.

When--this morning when you said that should be obvious on the white background is the combination of the fibrils with the cut fabric and the blood particles?

Yes. What I'm saying is once you cut this fibril, you have it on a white background, you can see these particles and you wouldn't really see them until you start cutting the fabric.

Okay. You can go back up and resume your. Seat?

Mr. Harmon, how do you feel the resolution is on the big screen?

Well, I can see it with these glasses on. I'm not sure how the jury--

All right. I was going to give you the option to pass the actual photograph through the jury.

That will be fine, your Honor. Thank you.

All right.

Can I hand this to juror no. 1?

Hand that to juror no. 1. since we are looking at very fine particles on the photograph.

All right. Deputy Smith, would you return that to Mr. Harmon, please.

Now, Mr. Sims, before the break we had discussed a little bit about this infrared video that you had taken of the socks 13 to try to identify possible bloodstains. Why is it that you resorted to infrared lighting to try to find these stains or identify these stains?

Objection, asked and answered.

Overruled.

Well, the video was not so much for the finding them. That to me is much more--much better done through the stereomicroscope, that type of examination. The point of this was for the documentation of showing exactly where those stains were and using the contrast enhancement from the IR photography.

Okay. We will show that tape in a moment, but what I would like you to do is think back to the point where you were visualizing--where you were visually examining the socks and what I would like you to explain is how many stains are visible on the video, the infrared video that we will be marking, that were not apparent to you in your initial visual examination?

Umm, there were several.

Okay. Could we have marked as People's next in order People's 267, infrared video of item 13, the socks, your Honor?

People's 267.

We have given copies of that to the Defense. Can we show that right now?

Mr. Sims, I know it is quite lengthy. Will you stop it at the appropriate time when it depicts enough of what you saw there?

Yes.

Is that okay?

Yes.

How long is this video, Mr. Harmon?

About fifteen minutes.

I would object to that.

Yes. Sustained. Sustained.

I would, too.

Ask him to be sanctioned for it.

I'm sorry. We agree. I'm sorry.

Let's see the videotape.

Your Honor, can I point out one thing as we are going to show this videotape?

What is that, Mr. Sims?

I just want to point out that this is not a test for blood, per say. What we are doing is using it as a contrast.

All right. Mr. Harmon.

Could we start that.

All right. Mr. Sims, you can either look at the small monitor or watch the large monitor.

Your Honor, could we dim the lights?

Mrs. Robertson, cut one bank, would you please.

In the upper portion of the video one can now see one of the stains where there was an arrow. Now we are sort of moving along. The first part of this is just sort of a run-through.

Your Honor, may I ask, if the witness knows, he identify which of the two socks by number this is.

Yes.

This should be 42--number A, sock A.

There is an area down there near my thumb that is of interest.

Mr. Sims, if you see an area that you ultimately identified or tested as a bloodstain, could you please point that out to us.

That--yeah. This is--this is the next part. If we stop right here.

Is this the next sock?

Mr. Sims, which sock is this?

This is still a, sock a.

All right.

So if we stop right here, this is on the side that is actually the same side as which the LAPD cut out was on. This is up near towards--up near the top of the sock. And I did additional testing on this stain near the top there that I identified as stain a3.

Okay. We actually have photos that show exactly where those stains are that we will get to in a little while; is that correct?

Yes. And one can see that there are three areas of interest in this particular area.

Okay.

Three stains of interest.

Okay. Do you want to start--

Can we start it again?

Yes.

Now, we can just start to see the LAPD area, cut-out area of that stain.

Can we stop it there.

The kind of rectangular area?

Yes, the rectangular area.

Back it up just slightly.

That--can you rewind that just slightly?

If you rewind that just slightly we can show where the--there. I think right in the middle now you can see the LAPD cut-out and you can see their arrow down at the bottom of the screen there and it being like 13a is what their arrow is designated with.

It looks like there is a darkened area around the cut-out?

Yes. There is still some staining around the periphery of that cut-out. You can see that under stereomicroscopy.

Even after all of your testing?

Yes. I didn't do any testing, other than examining that particular area.

Okay.

Those are some areas that are not associated as bloodstains. They may be some soiled deposits, that sort of thing.

Those darkened areas?

Yes.

And there is the control, the control by LAPD that we just passed by.

Okay.

Again now we are moving up toward the top of the sock and looking at those stains in that area. There is one sort of near the top now, sort of has a teardrop shape going to the left of the screen. That was one that I designated a3.

Are we switching over to the other sock now?

(No audible response.) No this is now the same sock--if you stop it right there, it is the opposite side, so this is still sock a, but this is that other stain that LAPD apparently had drawn the arrow to that I mentioned earlier on. This is stain a2 so this is also up near the top. It is in the same area as this a3 generally, but it is on the opposite side of the sock.

Okay.

Can we start it again?

Yes.

Now what are we looking at?

This is again the LAPD cut-out so this would be the opposite side.

This is still sock a?

Still sock a.

And you did not cut any further around the cut-out that Greg Matheson made?

That's correct. And again moving up now, you can see a3 has come into the picture and there is two other areas associated with that general area there, two other stains I should say.

And that is just telling you that the first minutes of this were all 42a. This is telling you what you just saw as opposed to what you are going to see. So now we are going to move on to the B sock.

As you move down into the center of this that you pick up the stain--excuse me--that I call B1. There we can start to see one of the stains in the middle and then you can see another stain toward the upper left there, another little stain. And this--this is an area that has a lot of very small stains associated with it.

About how many?

I would have to count them, but I think maybe ten or so, something like that, but actually I have detailed notes about that also. You can see on the--if you go back--can we rewind just a little bit, please?

That is good. It is hard to see, but this 42B1 stain had been outlined somewhat by LAPD and sometimes on this you can pick up the outline.

There is a darkened area down at the bottom. That doesn't look like blood at all, that little dark spot.

Even though it looks pretty dark there?

Yes, that is--that is not.

Are those socks black or navy blue?

I described them as black.

Could they be navy blue?

Yeah. There is b2 now right in the middle. It is sort of a flattened oval right in the middle toward the bottom there. You will notice there are some other darkened areas around that.

On these socks there is a very distinctive logo that I noticed that is in the fabric and that is seen real well now in the middle. That gives you a nice reference point for each one of these little areas.

Do you know what that logo is, Mr. Sims?

Umm, I have never seen that brand logo before. That is just my tag right there, (Indicating), says it is 42b.

Okay. Up to this point have we seen all the stains that are visible on b?

Yes. There is--just briefly, I think there is an examination now of the opposite side of this.

Again there is b2, B1 up on the upper left.

This is again that area with B1 and b2.

At the time we were, of course, interested in this stain, as I mentioned, it turned out not to be a bloodstain.

How did you make that determination?

That examination was done under the stereomicroscope, I believe.

Okay. So have we seen everything now on sock b?

You've probably seen enough. There is--there is a little more maybe on the opposite side of the sock b if we want to just look at this briefly.

The staining in this particular side--on this particular side is much more subtle than it was on the other side of sock b.

How many small stains in total were there on sock b?

On sock b?

Uh-huh.

Umm--we can probably stop the video now if you want.

I count about 19, something like that, that I saw.

That is on sock b?

Yes, that is approximately.

Mr. Harmon.

Let's talk about sock a for a second. Of the stains that you identified and numbered on sock a, how many of them actually appeared visible from the inside of the sock?

From the inside of the sock?

Did you examine them from the inside at all?

I--I peeled back a little bit around the top, as I recall, but I never totally reflexed the sock.

So you can't add anything to that?

I don't really think I can add anything to do other than did--I did photograph, I recall, the area under the LAPD cut-out, for example.

Uh-huh.

And I did look around in the areas where I cut.

Okay. Of the areas that you cut, why don't you describe whether or not the blood soaked through to the other side.

If the witness is going to refer to a page in his notes, Mr. Sims, just give me an indication.

Which page?

I am still looking, your Honor.

All right.

On page 115, this is with regards to the LAPD cut-out area, stain a1. I made a note that: "under the stereomicroscope the area below the other side of the sock, the inner surface, showing relatively few specks of reddish brown" what I call "powdering and no indication seen of soaking through to other side." I made a photograph of that. "still some good quantity of staining around margins of 42a1."

I made a similar notation on--with regards to stain 42a2. Now, that is on the opposite side up near the top. This is page 113. "stereo review cut site" and stereo review means stereomicroscope, "still good reddish brown on the edges. Note some powdering on surface below. Considered, too, if any wicking if wet, just see reddish brown beads." that is all I say about that.

Can I--

Certainly. Mr. Sims, if you will show Mr. Scheck where in your notes you found that. (Brief pause.)

All right. Mr. Harmon.

Mr. Sims, maybe I can cut this a little bit short. Was there--let's focus on 13a where the cut-out was from.

Yes.

Was there any corresponding stain on the opposite side of the sock from where the cut-out was made from 13a1?

There was--there was nothing that I noted that made it look like it had soaked through to that side, no.

When I say--I mean to the other side of the sock?

Oh, I don't recall seeing anything in that area, no. Certainly nothing that corresponded with that large stain.

Well, would you please--do you want to examine your--when we looked at that video, did it look like there was a stain on the opposite side?

Objection, your Honor. The video speaks for itself.

Overruled.

I'm sorry, your question was?

Imagine the sock a is flat.

Yes.

And the area where 13a1 was cut out from was located.

Yes.

Was there any stain on the opposite side, the opposite wall of the sock in the same location which correspond to 42a1?

When you say opposite side, you mean the opposite outer surface?

Right.

Okay. Okay. Well, we are going to have the photos up in a little bit. Why don't we move on to another item that you examined, the Rockingham glove, LAPD item 9.

Okay.

When was it that you first got that glove?

This is item no. 9?

Yes.

No. 9?

Uh-huh.

That was received on September 7, 1994.

And when did you begin to process that glove?

The processing--processing of the glove began on October 15 of 1994.

And over how long a period did your examination of that glove take?

Umm, over about a month.

Essentially were there two major periods of investigation and sampling of that glove?

Yes.

Rather than break them down into separate periods, let's just describe the condition of the glove when it first came into your possession.

Yes. It was in a sealed condition by the--it had an LAPD seal on it. It was presented to us. When I removed it from the envelope it was inside out.

Mr. Sims, which page of your notes are you referring to?

I'm on now page 69.

Thank you.

It was inside out?

Yes, it was inside out.

Your Honor, may I have marked as People's next in order, four photographs. May they be 268-A and b, which are photographs of the glove inside out.

Yes, 268-A and b.

I have already shown them to counsel. And 268-C and d, of the glove right side out.

All right. C and d.

Mr. Sims, did you--the photographs that I'm about to show ones that you took yourself?

Yes, they are.

May I put that on the elmo, your Honor?

You may.

Mr. Sims, do you recognize that as a photograph you took from the inside of the glove from Rockingham, LAPD item no. 9?

I recognize that as that--yes.

Okay. Perhaps side-by-side, may we put 268-B, your Honor?

Yes.

Now, are those both sides of the inside of that glove as it was inside out?

Yes, it is, and you have to remember now this is inside out. It is a right-hand glove. The easiest thing to notice where the thumb position is and then also if you look at that little notch on the right side to the lower right near the initials "C.Y.," that is what I would call the palmer surface.

So the glove, if worn on the right hand, the notch would be by your palm--by the inside of your wrist?

Yes.

Not the back of your hand?

That's correct.

Okay. How did you go about trying to sample this glove when it was presented to you inside out as it was?

Well, I figured since it was inside out, I might as well start with it inside out. The other thing that was interesting was that I--I thought it would perhaps be easier to sample and get results from this sort of material that is on the inside, this lining surface, rather than the leather that is associated with the outer surface.

Why is that?

Well, in general leather can cause problems and also I figured that if there was any kind of soil or contamination of that sort on the outside, that it would be less likely to have that on the inside.

Okay. When you say leather can cause problems, can you give a little more of an explanation than that?

Yes. Leather as a substrate or a surface on which a bloodstain is deposited sometimes is a difficult material to work with because it causes problems with the test, not that it gives you a wrong result, but just that you can't get a result. In other words, you can't get one of these PCR amplifications to occur or you can't get your restriction enzyme to restrict if you are doing PCR.

Okay. So what did you see when you began examining the inside of the glove?

Did you sample the inside of that glove?

Yes, I did.

How many areas did you sample the inside of that glove from?

The--the areas that I actually--first of all, I tested several areas using a presumptive blood test. Not all of those areas were actually sampled for additional analysis.

So now all the areas that gave you presumptive positives were sampled for analysis?

That's correct, and what I did is I assigned a number like a g1, g2-2, et cetera, to these various stains that I tested in any fashion.

And how many areas from the inside of the glove did you sample for testing?

It is--the first examination it went g1 up to g8.