Sidebar: autoradiograph copies

📄 Sidebar: autoradiograph copies — Tuesday, May 9, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\MAY\9\SIDEBAR-AUTORADIOGRAPH-COPIES.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 70 of 167

◀ Direct examination of Dr. Robin Cotton (part 7) Direct examination of Dr. Robin Cotton (part 8) ▶

Date: Tuesday, May 9, 1995 • Utterances: 13

Defense attorney Peter Neufeld raises a concern at sidebar that his discovery copy of the autoradiograph shows visible artifacts ('schmutz') in the Goldman DNA lane that the prosecution's copies do not, suggesting the copies are not identical. Clarke insists they were made simultaneously and look the same. Judge Ito overrules an objection, then Neufeld clarifies he wasn't actually making one.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

# 2 THE COURT:

We are over at the sidebar.

# 3 MR. NEUFELD:

The only question I have--maybe the Defense only gets the photographs, but all these copies show a clean pattern from Mr. Goldman. The one I was given shows it with other markings in the band.

# 4 THE COURT:

Schmutz. We call it schmutz.

KEY QUOTE

# 5 MR. NEUFELD:

That's exactly what it was. This was one I was given in discovery.

# 6 THE COURT:

Keep your voice down.

# 7 MR. CLARKE:

I'm sorry. What is--

# 8 MR. NEUFELD:

See the difference between the Goldman profiles and yours? The one you gave me has all the stuff in it. The band isn't sharp. Something else is going on in the lane. I don't know what it is.

# 9 MR. CLARKE:

They look identical to me. They were made at the same time.

# 10 MR. NEUFELD:

The only one that has all this schmutz on it is mine. Look at yours. None of them do.

KEY QUOTE

# 11 MR. CLARKE:

That's not true. They were made at the same time.

# 12 THE COURT:

At this point, the objection is overruled. This is just for demonstration, not for comparison purposes.

KEY QUOTE

# 13 MR. NEUFELD:

I'm not even objecting.

KEY QUOTE

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Lance A. Ito

Schmutz. We call it schmutz.

Ito casually adopts Neufeld's colloquial description, defusing the moment with unexpected informality.

Peter Neufeld

The only one that has all this schmutz on it is mine. Look at yours. None of them do.

Core of the complaint — Neufeld's discovery copy appears degraded or altered compared to prosecution copies.

Lance A. Ito

At this point, the objection is overruled. This is just for demonstration, not for comparison purposes.

Ito resolves the dispute by limiting the exhibit's use, rendering the copy-quality dispute moot.

Peter Neufeld

I'm not even objecting.

Reveals the procedural confusion — Ito overruled a nonexistent objection, and Neufeld clarifies he was raising a concern, not a formal objection.

Evidence (1)

Informal

Autoradiograph copies showing Goldman DNA profiles — Neufeld's discovery copy vs. prosecution copies

discussed, quality disputed

Notable Exchanges (2)

Peter Neufeld•George Clarke

Neufeld points out visible artifacts on his discovery autoradiograph copy not present on prosecution copies; Clarke denies any difference, asserting all copies were made simultaneously.

strategic

Lance A. Ito•Peter Neufeld

Ito overrules an objection; Neufeld clarifies he wasn't making one — the judge resolved a dispute that had no formal objection attached to it.

procedural confusion

Light Moments (1)

Lance A. Ito

Judge Ito matter-of-factly adopts the Yiddish term 'schmutz' to describe the artifacts on the autoradiograph, normalizing Neufeld's informal language.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 5984 • 13 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103