All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. All right. Let the record reflect that we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good morning.
Mr. Sims, would you please resume the witness stand.
Gary Sims, the witness on the stand at the time of the evening adjournment, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
Mr. Sims, you are reminded that you are still under oath. And Mr. Harmon, you may continue with your direct examination.
Thank you, your Honor. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good morning.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. HARMON
Mr. Sims, I want to back up to a couple of items, before we resume, where we ended yesterday. I believe in describing your evidence processing and how you open things, did you carefully note any names, initials, any descriptive terms that were on specific items when you received them and opened them for the first time?
Yes, I did. I photographed those and I also wrote down what the information on the envelopes and bindles was.
So you have photos of the items which show all the descriptive names and dates and initials?
If you would, I would like you to refer to your notes, if you need to, to remember the exact descriptions concerning item 47, which was one of the drops from the Bundy walkway.
Okay. And when you first opened and examined and noted the descriptions that were on both the coin envelopes and the bindles, what was on them?
On item no. 47, that was a sealed envelope. The seal had the name "c. Yamauchi, G8880 8/11/94," and then on the front of the envelope was "94-0817"--I'm sorry, "94-0817431," the initials "C.Y." and then "G8880."
There was also then--for that particular item there was--it was circled with a "b" and then "item no. 47".
No. I believe that is all--on the coin envelope that would be it. Now, when you actually get to the bindle--
Yes. This is now on the bindle which is inside the coin envelope for item no. 47. It said, "to DOJ, 8/11/94 C.Y. G8880" and on the back of the bindle it said the sign for number, the symbol for number "112," which is 112 and it looked like the initials "D.F." and then "C.Y. G8880."
I put on--the bindles and the coin envelopes would have my case number, which is DNA-0040-94, the date that I received it or the date that I actually examined it in the case of the bindle, and then also my initials "G.A.S."
Okay. Why don't we shift to item 50, one of the other Bundy walk drops and the same questions. What writing did you see on the coin envelope and the bindle?
Yes. Again there was a sealed envelope. On the seal it said "c. Yamauchi, G8880, SID, 8/11/94." on the front envelope "94-0817431 C.Y. G8880," and then for this--now, this is item no. 50, it said--there was an "e" with a circle around it, "item no. 50."
Yes. I would write our case number, our initials and our date. The only difference would be that I also put our DNA item numbers that are different for those two items on those.
Okay. Those--the correlation between the LAPD item numbers and your DNA lab numbers are reflected in your chain of custody records?
Mr. Sims, we are going to put People's exhibit no. 210 up on the easel there. I would like you to look at photographs that purport to reflect items 47 and 50. And the only question I want to ask you, and I would like you to consider when you look at it, is are the items in the photographs that purport to be 47 and 50 the same items which you received in the DOJ lab and processed in the way that you've described? Okay?
Okay. Now, when you say the items, you are referring to there are two photos in the column labeled "item 47.". Do you recognize--what do you recognize in the two photos that--one over the other, in "item 47" column on People's 210 for identification?
I recognize that--I recognize the initial writing that I mentioned earlier. For example, the "94-0817431" and "item no. 47" with the "d" circled around it. I recognize my case number "DNA-0040-94."
Mr. Sims, you are going to have to turn a little more toward the jury. They are having a hard time hearing you.
I recognize my case number DNA-0040-94. I recognize the date and my initials and then our DNA item number in this case, it was DNA 5 and I also recognize the "C.Y. G8880," et cetera.
Okay. Why don't we shift to item--strike that. When you seal these packages, do you use a specific color tape?
Yes. We use--for the outside of the items we use a whitish tape that has red lettering.
Do you recognize the items that are in the two photographs under item 50 on People's 210 for identification?
Yes, I do. I recognize the writing that I mentioned earlier, such as 94-08-17431, the no. 50 with the "e" circled, my case number, my date and my initials and the item number, and then I also see some of that information again on the bindles. You can see it in one of the photos.
Yes. The coin envelope I did seal with that. The bindles I would just use scotch tape because it is much easier to work with.
You pointed to the top of the photograph in item 50. There is white tape with red lettering. Is that the tape you sealed it with?
Your Honor, at this point I want to mark some more autorads that relate to some of the exhibits that we showed yesterday. With respect to yesterday, we marked as People's exhibit 270-A through C the three autorads from analytical membrane 625. Today I would like to mark additional autorads for that same membrane AM625 and I will--and if--to make sense, I would like to start with 270-D and I will describe the a number for the record so we can keep track of these.
There are five additional autorads for AM625. I would like to have marked as 270-D the autorad labeled A11. As 270-E, the autorad labeled A24. As 270-F, the autorad labeled A15. And as 270-G, the autorad labeled A22. As 270-H, the autorad labeled A24.
And then additionally, with respect to the membrane that we were discussing when we broke yesterday, that series was marked 271-A through C, the first ones that we were in the process of showing, today I would like to add as 271-D the autorad labeled A19--A18, I'm sorry, and as 271-E, the autorad labeled A19.
Okay. Could we get--we didn't capture the photograph of A16 when we broke yesterday, which is 271-A, so could we get that back up on the board.
Could we do that on the break, set it up on the break and capture that on the break?
Mr. Sims, why don't you come back up here and if you would address your answers to the jury.
Okay. Mr. Sims, yesterday you had described A16, which is the autorad for the probe D1S7, and today we have A17 which is the autorad for D2S44 for the membrane AM626 and could you just describe again the samples that are up there and we will go through them and I will have you mark them as best you can.
Okay. Just to reorient you again, in lane 1 this is one of the ladders, the size standards that we mentioned.
Again, this is lane 1. This is the size standard. Lane 2 is the K562. That is the national standard that we use. Lane 3 is the quality control, the blind sample. Lane 4 is another size standard. Lane 5 and the next two lanes now I will talk about, these are the reference bloodstains from Nicole Brown, and then next we have the reference bloodstain from Ronald Goldman.
Okay. And is it easy to distinguish between Miss Brown and Mr. Goldman at their--by their reference sample?
What conclusions could you reach between the comparison of the evidence stains G1, G2 and G4 on the glove, no. 9, and the two reference samples?
Well, the key on this particular autorad is--is to see that if you first start with G1--
--start with G1, that particular sample and it is hard to see, but I believe there is a band down in this area, (Indicating). It is hard to see on the--on this display, but the bands that we see in G1, there are four bands. I will just go slowly through them; 1, 2, 3 and then 4 I believe is down there, (Indicating), and that pattern is composite--that pattern is consistent with a mixture of the samples of Nicole Brown and also Ronald Goldman. In other words, those four bands are consistent with that mixture pattern.
Okay. What about G2? What did you observe in trying to compare G2 with any of the reference stains?
In looking at G2 again one can see four bands, and this gets pretty subtle and we may later want to look--we may later want to look at the light box to see it better.
But I believe you can still see four bands in this particular pattern; 1, 2, 3, 4, and what is of interest to me is that now this--this middle set, these are the two bands in the middle here, now they are starting to get weaker, but you will notice that the band up here is still quite strong, (Indicating), and the band out here is reasonably strong, (Indicating). It is the ones in the middle that are starting to get weaker. And those bands are consistent with the pattern--they match the pattern of Nicole Brown.
Okay. Now, let's just pause and talk about G1 and G2 and their relationship to one another. What is your explanation for the fact that that two-banded pattern appears to be fading and the other two bands seem to be staying there?
I think--I think what we are seeing is that the DNA contribution from one of the individuals is maintaining itself at a certain level where we are getting less DNA from the second contributor.
KEY QUOTEWhy don't we move to G4 then and explain how that fits in with what you just provided us.
G4 again can--the trend continues in G4. You can see a band up here, (Indicating). I think you can see a band down there, (Indicating), and again we will look at these I think on the light box to see it a little more clearly and now these have almost faded out entirely.
When you say "these," you are pointing the arrow to the two-banded pattern that is consistent with Nicole Brown?
Yes. Those are the two bands that are--that are consistent with Nicole Brown. They are fairly close to each other.
Okay. And I believe you mentioned this yesterday as the explanation for why the Defendant's reference blood is not on this gel and that is because he was excluded as a source of any of these stains on the basis of PCR typing?
That's correct. In other words, we looked at--we did additional tests prior so we had that information.
The additional PCR tests were done on DNA that was extracted from these very stains?
Okay. Now, let's--we are not going--I'm not going to ask you to mark this one because we have marked the first one for demonstration purposes. Why don't we move on to a 25 which has been marked 271-C. Okay. Everything is in the same relative position because these samples are all from the same gel; is that right?
Why don't we just jump over to the reference samples. Can you easily distinguish between Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman at this marker which is the D5S110?
No. One can clearly see the difference in the banding patterns for Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman.
Okay. And as far as the stained glove G1, the no. 9 glove from Rockingham, what can you say about the pattern that you see there?
Well, again we see this four-banded pattern; 1, 2, 3, four bands, (Indicating), and again this--at this level the mixture appears fairly equal. In other words, all the bands are fairly close in intensity.
On the stain G1. And furthermore, again the four bands are consistent with a mixture of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, and I think you can--
You can't exclude other possible mixtures as the source of that four-banded pattern?
You can't pair up any two of the bands in that four-banded pattern scientifically; is that true?
That's true. For example, just looking at this G1 pattern, these two bands, for example, could be from one person and these two bands could be from a second person. That would just be one example of the ways a pattern like that could break down.
Okay. But now as you move on to the stains G2 and G4, is what you see in those stains or on this autorad, does that help you pair up the banding patterns that you see?
Yes, it does, and I think this autorad is--is a very good demonstration of what I was talking about earlier. If you look at the G2 pattern now, you can see two bands, I will stop for a second there, (Indicating), and there, (Indicating), that are consistent with the bands seen in Mr. Goldman's pattern and those bands are fairly similar in intensity to the pattern in G1. You can see the intensities, comparing the G1 and G2 lanes you can see the intensity for those two bands are pretty close. But now when I go to these bands that are weaker in G2, here and here, (Indicating), one can see that those bands are consistent with Nicole Brown Simpson's profile and it is interesting to me that they are now weaker. In other words, it appears that those two bands have gotten weaker while these other two bands have maintained a fairly similar level of intensity.
And the other two bands that you refer to are ones that are--that appear to match Mr. Goldman?
Okay. Why don't you discuss G4 then in the same context and what the implications of the pattern that you see there are.
G4 I think again the trend continues and we are not looking at a pattern like this. I think it is very informative to look across those samples because I think you do gain information about interpretations by studying those patterns and how they check across the sample. And in G4 again we see bands in this position, (Indicating), and this position, (Indicating), that visually match the band from Mr. Goldman. They are of similar intensity now all the way across. Slight variation there, but it is pretty close, I think you will see, whereas now those last two bands in G4, the weaker band here, (Indicating), and the weaker band here, (Indicating), those visually match the bands of Nicole Brown and they faded out quite a bit. And you can see in this position, if you look across the band, you can see the fading and I think here you can see the fading, (Indicating), and the relative intensities I believe are very informative in this case because now this tells me that these--the bands in G4 that are in this position, (Indicating), and this position, (Indicating), tend to be associated with Mr.--
Yes, the top one and the third one down, one would tend to associate those now with Mr. Goldman, whereas the ones in the second and fourth position, one would now tend to associate with Nicole Brown.
Okay. And without addressing the PCR test results, which we will address shortly, in reflecting back to the stain from the glove no. 9 from Rockingham that was labeled G3 on the previous membrane, what sorts of conclusions can you draw from your RFLP analysis alone of stains G1, G2, G3 and G4 from glove no. 9 that was found at Rockingham?
The conclusion I would draw was, first of all, that the G3 one that we looked at earlier was--that pattern was consistent only with Mr. Goldman's banding pattern, and that therefore he could be the source of that DNA. And then looking at G1, 2 and 4 we can also see Mr. Goldman's pattern and also I think we can pick out separately that Nicole Brown Simpson's pattern is there also.
KEY QUOTEOkay. So at this point, based on your RFLP results, on G1, G2, G3 and G4, you have identified Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman as possible sources of those stains, either singly as in G3 or in combination, in a mixture, in G1, G2 and G4?
Okay. Now, you also--and we just had them mark--did a couple of other probes for this same membrane; is that correct?
And were there actually a couple of probes or a couple of autorads that were produced for this membrane that were not used in your ultimate opinion?
There was one probe for which we had a problem with the hybridization and I rejected the data. I would not use it.
Did those results tend to exclude what you have already concluded and described for the jury here?
Yes. On the other locus that we mentioned that I haven't mentioned yet was our D4S139 locus and in that locus the two individuals tend to share a band or they have a very close band so you don't see these four-banded pattern in the mixture.
Did those results in any way undermine the conclusions you have already related to the jury?
Okay. We will show the remaining autorads to the jury in a little bit. Okay. Mr. Sims, why don't you go back up to your seat.
Mr. Sims, in reviewing all the tests that were done in this case, both the RFLP and the PCR and in discussing the results with your colleagues at the Department of Justice, is it your opinion that all the tests that were done in this case were performed properly?
Mr. Sims, do you have an opinion about--which is based on the scientific literature, protocols in your lab and whatever user guides were provided to you, about whether or not the tests were performed properly and in accord with that information?
Okay. Your Honor, at this time I would like to--actually we haven't resolved a couple of the boards, but I can do the Rockingham board now and then--
That is the Rockingham exterior photo board. And then we want to display People's exhibit 261 for identification, which Dr. Cotton has already testified about, the Rockingham result board.
Mr. Sims, was one of the stains which the Department of Justice performed DNA analyses on in this case what was--what has been described as item no. 6 from the Rockingham trail?
And what sorts of tests were performed on item no. 6 by the Department of Justice?
On item no. 6, which is from the Rockingham trail, that was our item number DNA-4, LAPD no. 6, PCR-based tests, DQ-Alpha and D1S80 were performed.
Okay. And were similar PCR tests, DQ-Alpha and D1S80 performed on reference samples from the Defendant, Miss Brown and Mr. Goldman?
And would you look at the top of People's 261 for identification and see if the chart, which describes the reference sample typing results, if that reflects the typing results of the Defendant, Miss Brown and Mr. Goldman.
Okay. And were you successful in obtaining PCR results from item no. 6 from the Rockingham driveway?
Excuse me, your Honor. I have a matter with respect to D1S80 results. May we approach?
The conclusion I would draw was, first of all, that the G3 one that we looked at earlier was--that pattern was consistent only with Mr. Goldman's banding pattern, and that therefore he could be the source of that DNA. And then looking at G1, 2 and 4 we can also see Mr. Goldman's pattern and also I think we can pick out separately that Nicole Brown Simpson's pattern is there also.
I think what we are seeing is that the DNA contribution from one of the individuals is maintaining itself at a certain level where we are getting less DNA from the second contributor.
All of the results that we reported would meet those criteria.
Item no. 6, the DQ-Alpha type was 1.1, 1.2, the D1S80 type was 24, 25.