Exhibit markings review

📄 Exhibit markings review — Wednesday, May 17, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAY\17\EXHIBIT-MARKINGS-REVIEW.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 76 of 167

◀ Direct examination of Gary Sims (morning, part 3) Direct examination of Gary Sims (morning, part 4) ▶

Date: Wednesday, May 17, 1995 • Utterances: 15

A brief administrative exchange before the jury returned, focused on whether Harmon's exhibit boards could display 'not excluded' labels on DNA results. Scheck objected that without frequencies, the label was misleading for mixture evidence like the glove stain, but Ito held his prior ruling and allowed the boards.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held in open court, out of the presence of the jury:)

# 2 THE COURT:

All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present. Let's have the jury.

# 3 MR. HARMON:

Your Honor, I have "not excluded" tags on both boards. I've shown Mr. Scheck during the break. I'm just trying to move things along here, Judge.

# 4 THE COURT:

Do you have anything bigger than that?

# 5 MR. HARMON:

How about if I yell, "it's not excluded, that's all it means," every time we show this. I wish--

# 6 THE COURT:

Let me see it.

# 7 (Brief pause.)

# 8 THE COURT:

All right. Thank you.

# 9 MR. SCHECK:

The big problem, your Honor, is with the glove or with respect to the mixtures because at this point, there's a serious 352 problem. They're not putting in frequencies, and we all know that the frequencies are vastly different there. And I think it can be depicted in a way that makes it very clear to the jury which spot they're talking about on the result board corresponding to which thing on the glove without the argumentative kind of statement as to attribution and be done very clearly if they just eliminate the names.

# 10 THE COURT:

The Court's ruling stands.

# 11 MR. SCHECK:

Which is--I didn't know you made a ruling.

# 12 THE COURT:

Yes. I directed them to put the "not excluded" on both boards.

# 13 MR. HARMON:

So I can use those boards now, your Honor?

# 14 THE COURT:

Yes. Let's have the jurors, please. With the direction it also be used with the result board.

# 15 MR. HARMON:

Yes, your Honor. I'll put the result board up first.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Rockne Harmon

How about if I yell, 'it's not excluded, that's all it means,' every time we show this.

Dry sarcasm revealing Harmon's frustration with defense challenges to straightforward DNA terminology.

Barry Scheck

They're not putting in frequencies, and we all know that the frequencies are vastly different there.

Core defense objection: 'not excluded' without population frequency statistics is misleading on mixture evidence, particularly the glove.

Lance A. Ito

Yes. I directed them to put the 'not excluded' on both boards.

Ito clarifying his prior ruling stood, cutting off Scheck's renewed challenge.

Evidence (2)

Informal

DNA result board(s) with 'not excluded' labels

discussed, approved for use

Informal

Glove mixture DNA evidence

referenced in Scheck's 352 argument about missing frequency statistics

Notable Exchanges (1)

Barry Scheck•Lance A. Ito

Scheck attempted to relitigate the exhibit board labeling ruling, arguing mixture evidence required frequency data to avoid misleading the jury; Ito shut it down by clarifying the ruling had already been made.

strategic

Light Moments (1)

Rockne Harmon

Harmon sarcastically offered to just shout 'it's not excluded, that's all it means' every time the board was shown.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 6077 • 15 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103