Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. The record should reflect we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Mr. Yamauchi, would you resume the witness stand, please. And Mr. Harmon, about how much do you have left?
Mr. Yamauchi, I just want to make a point clear. When you took a sampling from all of the evidence items that you've described as having sampled for your PCR DQ-Alpha test in this case, did you consume all of whatever you sampled in the testing process?
Okay. My question was vague then. The portions that you took, the portions that you took for your samplings, were those consumed in the testing process by you?
Okay. And--and whenever, as you've described them, once you took them and processed them in the way that you've described to this jury, none of those samplings or the cuttings that you made remained?
Once you remove those items from the bindles and consumed them in testing, did those samples cease to exist?
Okay. But did they ever--did those extracts ever get sent out to any other laboratory?
Did you prepare what's known as a Los Angeles Police Department analyzed evidence report describing the samples that you tested in this case?
To reflect the results of my testing and impart conclusions and so on and so forth.
Okay. And have you detected any errors that you made in that--in the compilation of that report?
Well, specifics in my notes say that no. 49 is six pieces when I first received it.
And do you remember what condition those swatches were in when you first observed them?
Okay. Did you actually receive all the items that you've listed on your analyzed evidence report on the same date?
No. It collectively includes the--the time frame from when I started it to when I finished.
Okay. Mr. Yamauchi, did you obtain the reference samples from Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman and the Defendant on June 25th for some testing purpose?
And what was the purpose that you took possession of those--the three items, the Defendant's reference tube, the reference tube from Nicole Brown and reference tube from Ronald Goldman?
And do you actually have detailed notes of what you did with those samples on that date?
Okay. Let's start out with the sample from Nicole Brown. What was the purpose that you took that tube that day?
That day it was taken out of property or ECU to do conventional analysis, as I previously stated.
In preparation for the testing that you were--that was about to be performed, what actions did you take with regard to Nicole Brown Simpson's reference sample?
And when you say "Approximately," can you give us a range on how much you withdrew?
When you withdraw it from the tube, what are you actually doing with it once it is in the pipette-man?
Okay. Do you recall whether there was any left in the pipette-man, the disposable tip?
I'm not sure, but if there was, once again, I would throw away that along with the tip.
Why did you take less from Mr. Goldman's reference tube than Nicole Brown Simpson's reference tube?
Well, the way the pipette-man works is you press it and I usually have it set on one ml, that is the full volume that it can take up, and when you stick it into the blood vial, you allow your thumb to go up to pull in whatever you consider a suffer amount or what I considered a sufficient amount, and once I got to there, I stopped, put the tube in the rack, and then opened up my--my microcentrifuge and deposited it, so I don't always suck up the full volume that I potentially can in my pipette-man.
And is there any reason to be precise in withdrawing blood in terms of the scientific tests that are about to be performed?
Well, you need enough to do the ABO testing, and what I have listed there is sufficient.
Okay. And how much blood do you recall withdrawing from the Defendant's reference tube?
Let the record reflect--I'm sorry. Are you finished? The record reflect the witness was just looking at his--
Do you recall whether you filled up the microcentrifuge tube that you put Mr. Simpson's blood all the way?
Let's shift, if you will, to July 20th, 1994. I want to ask you some questions about item no. 78, Ronald Goldman's shoes.
Yes. I did an initial search to see what types of evidence would be on that item.
And ultimately did you swatch either of the shoes, Mr. Goldman's shoes, and in an attempt to remove some apparent evidentiary items?
Okay. It was the left shoe and what I did was I did that preliminary screening test that I described earlier, the phenolphthalein test, and it came up positive in this particular area and there was a notable stain there, and that was transferred to a cotton cloth swatch.
Well, one of them was booked as item no. 174. That would be the smaller one. The other one was sent off to Cellmark.
Okay. Was there a substrate control that you removed from 78, the bottom of that left shoe?
On that shoe I could not find an area near that stain, particular stain that was, umm--that would indicate there wasn't any blood there. In other words, that phenolphthalein test that I was telling you about came up positive in all the areas I checked near that stain, so I decided not to collect a control.
I want to shift to July 27th. Did you examine item no. 97, the underwear that Nicole Brown was wearing?
Okay. Will you describe what you were looking for and what sorts of tests you performed in that regard?
I did an acid phos--excuse me--acid phosphatase test and what that is a preliminary screening test for the presence of semen.
And will you describe how you actually performed that test on an item such as the panties that were item no. 87?
Well, we do what's called an AP map and what that involves is you take a piece of filter paper and you moisten that and allow the stain or the target area on the panties, or whatever item you are looking at, to transfer some of its components into the wet filter paper. Once that transfer is done, you take the filter paper aside and then you add the proper chemicals for this test. A purple color after approximately thirty seconds is indicative of the presence of semen.
And what results did you obtain when you processed item 87, Nicole Brown Simpson's underwear?
Okay. Let's shift or August 4th, 1994, if you will. Did you examine item 13, a pair of socks that were found in Mr. Simpson's residence in the master bedroom?
Your Honor, may I have the plastic bag containing the socks marked as People's 284 for identification?
Mr. Yamauchi, I'm going to ask you to open these. We will get you some gloves. And do you want to put some paper out there? You tell me.
Okay. There is a plastic bag containing a white envelope. I am cutting into the plastic bag. I'm removing the white envelope.
Mr. Yamauchi, before you open that, let me just ask you a couple of general questions. You've described the tests you performed on the panties. Did you, during the course of time from June 13th or June 14th to August 4th--were there also numerous other items? You described Ronald Goldman's shoes that you examined during that time sequence?
Okay. Why don't you go ahead and open up the paper envelope which contains item 13, the socks. Should we mark that separately, your Honor?
The latest seal on the envelope is a red seal. Appears to be Greg Matheson's initials and a signature and a serial number b8927. Under "Division," "Sid." "Date," it appears to be "4/21/95." I'm breaking the seal, red seal that I just described. Inside the brown paper bag is a white envelope. I have opened the white envelope and I'm removing a pair of black socks, dark navy blue, black.
Okay. Mr. Yamauchi, I will ask you about your exam in a second. What were you asked to do with regard to item 13, the two navy blue or black socks that you've just opened up in court?
It would have to be prior to the date that I analyzed it, along with some other items.
You know, at this time I don't have independent recollection of the grouping of items that were asked of me to analyze. Mr. Matheson might have notes as to what date he asked me and when he actually assigned myself and Sue Johnson or Sue Brockbank this task of looking through the items.
Okay. Well, what other items did you look at? You've talked about 87 and 78. 87 is Nicole Brown Simpson's panties and 78 are Ronald Goldman's shoes. What other items had you already look at before you looked at the socks on August 4th?
Okay. And were those all items that you looked at over a period of time before you looked at the socks?
And when Mr. Matheson gave you this assignment, did he tell you which order to look at these items in?
Okay. Looking at dark navy blue or black items like that, have you tried to look at an item like that, that is so dark to detect the presence of blood, in the past?
And what are the general steps that you use when you are trying to look to detect the possibility of blood on an item of that sort?
Well, first and foremost, when examining evidence, you want to take a good visual look at it, and that just simply means taking it, holding it up under a good light, observing all sides and angles of it and trying to see if there are any types of discolorations or anything that could possibly be a stain, and that would be the first step.
Okay. And when you did hold them up in the way you just described, did you notice anything?
Do you have to refer to your notes to--that you made contemporaneous with this exam?
Your Honor, shortly may we have the jury have an opportunity to view them? I'm not sure what the best place for that is, but maybe you can think about that while I go ahead with the next series of questions.
Well, if I'm thinking about that, how am I going to listen to the testimony? Proceed.
KEY QUOTEOkay. And can you tell one of those socks from the other by any sort of lettering or numbering, as you sit there today?
Okay. Would you hold up, just pick either of those socks, if you would, and just show the jury how you examined them visually?
Well, I can't pick up and show them. What I did was I laid them out flat and I carefully looked at--looked them over. I could hold it up to you, to the jury like this, (Indicating).
Your Honor, could we move this down in front of the jury? We will put the pad of paper up on top of the cart.
I'm just wondering the quality of the view for everybody. All right. Let's move it down there and let's make sure everybody gets a close look. All right. Mr. Yamauchi, would you--actually, Mr. Harmon, would you come and grab the packaging materials first.
All right. Mr. Yamauchi, why don't you remove the envelope from underneath the socks there so it lies flat.
Mr. Yamauchi, would you just pick up whichever of those socks you feel and show the jury how you examined them?
Well, I laid them out flat, just like this, and I tried to take a good careful look at it and note any discolorations for a phenolphtalein test, and again that is that preliminary blood screening test I talked about earlier.
On one of the socks there was something towards the tow area that seemed like a discoloration and on the other sock I noticed something in the ankle area.
Just looked like some light discoloration or difference in color between the rest of the sock.
And are those the only two areas of either of those socks that you noticed when you looked at them visually the first time?
Well, to tell you the truth, what I did was I noticed those areas and then I did the phenolphthalein tests. They came up positive. I asked my supervisor. I told him, "I got two positive spots on them. Should I do anything else with it?" And he said, "No, that's it, close it up and we will decide what to do with it," I guess talk about it at administrative levels and stuff.
Now, were those two positive phenolphthalein results on the same sock or different socks?
I may have initialed it, but on something like this--well, actually, I initialed the sock on the inside up here, (Indicating), but I didn't mark the areas that I phenolphthalein tested.
Okay. You said "Up here" somewhere. Could you point to it so we can describe for the record what you have pointed to?
Your Honor, may I request that we just designate the socks. They have other markings on them.
The sock that you just referred to with the "C.Y." Inside the top, what is that down there towards the heel? There is some lettering down there.
Well, I'm not exactly sure that those are my initials. One of the problems with this is when you've got a dark surface, we have this white pen that we write with and it is often very difficult to get legible in certain instances. And to explain the "C.Y." Here, usually I put my serial number after that, but in this case I just marked "C.Y." And tried to--not to put as much markings or anything on the socks as possible because I would want to leave all the areas available for further analysis.
Excuse me, your Honor. In terms of what he has just been pointing to in markings, I think that what he pointed to as a "B" is no. 13, not a "B" and he was then pointing to initials on both different socks. And what I would request is that we designate one sock a, one sock b, and then for the record note what he just did, otherwise we won't be able to reconstruct this.
Did you identify the two areas that you have conducted the phenolphthalein tests on in any way?
Well, in my notes I have approximations on one to help my recollection later on, so I knew it was from the ankle, and the other one I noted somewhere in the toe area.
But I don't believe I marked the sock up, and I don't see anything on the sock in those particular areas.
Now, what I would like you to do, Mr. Yamauchi, is look very carefully and perhaps hold up the sock that you have your clear initials in and look at all those little holes in there, if you would, both sides.
Any juror who needs to stand up, feel free to do so, if you want to get a better look.
And when you conducted your examination on August 4th did you notice any discoloration in any of those areas that have been cut out from that sock?
Well, I indicated before I marked that to the ankle area of one and on the toe area of another there were discolorations.
Ladies and gentlemen, when we are concluded with this what I will have the witness do is move to each part of the jury box and display the sock for you.
Your Honor, I would ask that the witness indicate which of these two socks he just testified about.
I think Mr. Harmon characterized it in his question. Counsel, would you step back, please. Thank you.
Counsel, if you listen to the question, it was directed to the one with his initials in it. Proceed.
Now, the sock with "C.Y." Up inside, the one that has it clearly in there, how many cut-out areas do you see if that sock?
Did you notice any signs of discoloration in any of those areas on the sock when you examined it on August 4th?
Well, there is one down toward the toe area where there is a slight discoloration of this particular sock.
Does that appear to be the sock that you conducted the phenolphthalein testing on and in the toe area?
Yes, I think that is consistent with my notes. There would be some discoloration down toward the toe area.
Where the other seven areas where there are no holes in them, did you notice any discolorations in those areas?
Okay. Let's move on to the sock, if you will, the one that does not have the clear G.Y. inside.
Okay. Did you notice any discoloration in any of the areas where the cuttings or where there are cut-out areas on the sock that we are focusing on when you examined it on August 4th?
I see a discoloration in the ankle area and there is a cutting on the edge of that and some initials.
Does that appear to be--does that sock appear to be the sock where you did the positive phenolphthalein in the ankle area?
All right. Mr. Yamauchi, with Mr. Harmon's assistance would you move the cart down to the end of the jury box there.
All right. If you would just pick up each one of the socks and display it to the jury, each side.
Your Honor, respectfully, may I make the suggestion when he holds them up that he indicates which of the designations he is holding up?
Yes. Mr. Yamauchi--would you tell us which one you are holding up each time you pick it up. Mr. Yamauchi, would you tell us which sock you are handling, please.
This is the one with the initials that aren't very readable or aren't readable and this is the one that I'm holding up at this time, and previous to that I held up the other sock.
Why don't you assist Mr. Yamauchi in bringing the cart down to the bottom end here.
All right. Okay. This has my initials in it, (Indicating). That is one side. That is the other, (Indicating). And this is the one with the initials that are not clear. That is one side and that is the other, (Indicating).
Thank you, your Honor. I think maybe we should put these away now. Can we do that?
Well, Mr. Scheck, do you anticipate cross-examining on that? Well, we won't get to that. Okay. Go ahead and package it back.
Mr. Yamauchi, I'm going to try to direct you to certain other items that you processed in this case. On August 16th did you take some cuttings from 78, 81 and 86, those are respectively Ronald Goldman's jeans, Ronald Goldman's shirt and Nicole Brown's dress?
They were needed as cloth exemplars. In other words, as we use exemplars for blood for individual, clothing articles for the same purpose need exemplars from for the trace analysis and that is something that will be talked about later, I believe.
Do you want to change now to July 29th, 1994. Did you come into possession of LAPD items 115, 116 and 117?
They were taken out of the bindle and observed. In other words, I just took my usual description notes where I draw somewhat of a little sketch of the swatches.
And then later on September 26th, 1995--1994, were those processed or actually processed for shipping somewhere?
Okay. And let me ask you about LAPD items 303, 304 and 305. Did you come into possession of those items on September 6th, 1994?
Mr. Yamauchi, why don't you step down at 177-E, if you will, and while it is up there, start out with 115, 116 and 117. Do you recognize 115, 116 and 117 as the items that were sent to DOJ on September 26th, 1994?
Okay. May I have marked as People's next in order, People's exhibit 285, an additional sock examination board and take down--
Mr. Yamauchi, while Mr. Fairtlough is getting that board up, were you present in the Los Angeles Police Department SID on February 16th, 1995, when a Dr. Henry Lee conducted an examination on the socks that you've just shown to the jury that are marked as exhibit 284 for identification?
Okay. And where did you sit with respect to where the--Dr. Lee conducted his examination?
Okay. Would you step up to the board and use the pointer, if you will, and I would like you to describe what is depicted in the photographs starting with--the board is entitled "Henry Lee sock examination." Would you point to the photo that says, "Puts arm" paren "No lab coat into bag to elbow."
I don't know. That was a brown paper bag. I'm sorry. He was reaching in there. I don't know for what reason.
Where were the socks at the point that he--that you see him reaching into that paper bag?
And was that envelope in the bag at the time he is reaching into the bag that is shown in the photograph?
Okay. Now, the next photo shows Dr. Lee standing up and the description under it is "No lab coat or hairnet." Did Dr. Lee wear a lab coat at all during this?
Could you describe what is on the table in front of Dr. Lee, the equipment and the other items that are there in front of him?
Well, it is a general stereo scope used in low magnification to look over and observe pieces of evidence.
Okay. Let's just jump to the end of that for a second. It appears in the photo on the left there where Dr. Lee is reaching in the bag, he has gloves on; is that correct?
Did Dr. Lee ever change gloves during this entire one-hour examination of both of those socks?
Okay. Are the socks shown in the photo where Dr. Lee is standing up, two black items down in the lower left-hand corner?
Okay. If you would, just try not to block the juror's view. The photo at the top right there, what is Dr. Lee doing in that photograph?
Well, it is hard to tell from this photo, but I have seen him when he was doing that, touching the ruler to the item, yes.
Okay. And in the lower left-hand photo there is actually a photo showing a ruler sitting on top of one of the socks. Did you see that?
Okay. And then the next photo in the middle shows Dr. Lee examining the other sock. Do you remember him examining both socks?
Yes. I got a conflicting answer. Do you need a break now or do you want to proceed?
All right. Thank you, Miss Martinez, Mr. Fairtlough. All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our recess for the morning session at this time. Please remember all of my admonitions to you. Don't discuss the case amongst yourselves, do not form any opinions about the case, don't allow anybody to communicate with you, do not conduct any deliberations until the matter has been submitted to you. We will stand in recess until 1:30. All right. Mr. Yamauchi, you may step down.
Gil Garcetti, District Attorney by: Marcia R. Clark, William W. Hodgman, Christopher A. Darden, Cheri A. Lewis, Rockne P. Harmon, George W. Clarke, Scott M. Gordon Lydia C. Bodin, Hank M. Goldberg, Alan Yochelson and Darrell S. Mavis, Brian R. Kelberg, and Kenneth E. Lynch, Deputies 18-000 Criminal Courts Building 210 West Temple Street Los Angeles, California 90012
Robert L. Shapiro, Esquire Sara L. Caplan, Esquire 2121 Avenue of the Stars 19th floor Los Angeles, California 90067 Johnnie L. Cochran, Jr., Esquire by: Carl E. Douglas, Esquire Shawn Snider Chapman, Esquire 4929 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1010 Los Angeles, California 90010 Gerald F. Uelmen, Esquire Robert Kardashian, Esquire Alan Dershowitz, Esquire F. Lee Bailey, Esquire Barry Scheck, Esquire Peter Neufeld, Esquire Robert D. Blasier, Esquire William C. Thompson, Esquire
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I N D E X
Index for volume 154 pages 29318 - 29428
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day date session page vol.
Thursday May 25, 1995 A.M. 29318 154
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Clark-mc Mr. Hodgman-h Mr. Darden d Mr. Kahn-k Mr. Goldberg-gb Mr. Gordon-g Mr. Shapiro-s Mr. Cochran-c Mr. Douglas-cd Mr. Bailey-b Mr. Uelmen-u Mr. Scheck-bs Mr. Neufeld-n
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
PEOPLE'S witnesses direct cross redirect recross vol.
Yamauchi, Collin 154 (Resumed) 29333rh
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF WITNESSES
Witnesses direct cross redirect recross vol.
Yamauchi, Collin 154 (Resumed) 29333rh
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXHIBITS
PEOPLE'S for in exhibit identification evidence page vol. Page vol.
282 - 3-page document 29340 154 entitled "Serology casework summary sheet/DNA analysis"
283 - 1-page document 29341 154 entitled "DNA electrophoresis record - product gel"
284 - Analyzed evidence 29398 154 envelope containing two dark-colored socks
285 - Chart 29420 154 entitled "Henry Lee sock examination"
No. That is ridiculous.
I noticed those areas and then I did the phenolphthalein tests. They came up positive. I asked my supervisor. I told him, 'I got two positive spots on them. Should I do anything else with it?' And he said, 'No, that's it, close it up and we will decide what to do with it.'
No, they were not.
Well, if I'm thinking about that, how am I going to listen to the testimony? Proceed.
Well, to the best of my knowledge he didn't.