All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. All parties are again present. Mr. Blasier.
Your Honor, I'm sorry, Mr. Darden and Miss Clark aren't here. Mr. Darden is on his way back from the restroom and Miss Clark on is her way. I would beg the court's indulgence, since I don't know what Mr. Blasier is about to say, and I probably don't have any knowledge about what he is going to address.
I'm going to submit the letter to the court and you may have a chance to look at it and when they come back--
All right. We have been rejoined by Mr. Darden. And Mr. Darden, for your information, the Defense has offered to the court the letter of July 6th from Mr. Rubin. Mr. Blasier.
Your Honor, this is not what we were told it was. He says in this letter, which is in the form of a report: "On all eight photos none of the detail that can be seen indicates that the gloves could be a style other than 70263, which is the Aris Lights." We just confirmed that with Mr. Rubin that he--it is his opinion, which he expressed back on July 6th, that these are the same kind of gloves. This is not a preliminary indication. This is not an indication--well, I'm not so sure. He says in here that these are the gloves and this is what they were told on July 6th. Now, I still haven't gotten the letter that they sent to him asking him for some findings, but I think that this has been totally misrepresented to the court. This is a final report and they had it before they rested.
Yes, your Honor. This morning of course the court heard our offer of proof and Mr. Hodgman's and Mr. Yochelson's representations to the court. And after this morning's proceeding I saw Mr. Rubin and I discussed the details of that--of those representations by Mr. Hodgman and Mr. Yochelson. And Mr. Rubin indicated that our representations to the court earlier were correct. Just now I asked Mr. Rubin what he meant by that particular sentence and by this letter in general and he indicated to me just now that he needed to see more information, that he was not stating conclusively that these were 70263's. He needed more information. He needed other photos.
Anyway, and that this is in fact a preliminary on his part. And once again I would point out that the date of the letter is July 6th. Our representations to the court this morning are consistent with what is contained in the letter and Mr. Rubin confirms that. I should indicate as well that after we received the letter we went about blowing up photos, enhancing photos, attempting to identify those characteristics that are--that are unique to this particular glove so that Mr. Rubin could come to some conclusive opinion at some point.
He says in here: "All other photos appear to be brown, crime scene gloves' color. Photo no. 4 from Robert Lee is the glove." This is not equivocal, your Honor. This is him saying I saw the pictures; that is the glove.
We rested. He sent a letter from I guess New Jersey. Obviously we didn't have this letter. The court will note that the letter is not faxed, the letter was mailed, so obviously we rested with not having this particular information.
KEY QUOTEMr. Rubin, what manner of communication did you use to send this letter to Mr. Yochelson?
I think it is obvious from the letter what has happened here, and I think--I think this evidence should be excluded based on this report.
All right. The court notes the first paragraph at page 2 of Mr. Rubin's letter where the text is as follows: "The key to an accurate identification of the glove would be fastest from no. 3, John Cassidy photo, because the fine edge on the fingers shows the Brossier stitching and three points on the back are flat. "Do you have a clear original?" Question mark.
"No. 4 from Robert Lee is clear enough but black," indicating a desire still to have further photographs. Although this does have a conclusion in it, it was sent after the Prosecution rested, so the ruling stands. All right. Let's go to the issue of Defense motion to strike Detective Fuhrman's testimony.
Your Honor, could I say one thing before we go on? I notice Mr. Rubin is here. I am not prepared to cross-examine him. I can cross-examine the photographers, I have no problems with that, but I am not ready for him.
He says in this letter, which is in the form of a report: 'On all eight photos none of the detail that can be seen indicates that the gloves could be a style other than 70263, which is the Aris Lights.' We just confirmed that with Mr. Rubin that he--it is his opinion, which he expressed back on July 6th, that these are the same kind of gloves. This is not a preliminary indication.
He just told us the opposite.
'No. 4 from Robert Lee is the glove.' This is not equivocal, your Honor. This is him saying I saw the pictures; that is the glove.
Although this does have a conclusion in it, it was sent after the Prosecution rested, so the ruling stands.
We rested. He sent a letter from I guess New Jersey. Obviously we didn't have this letter. The court will note that the letter is not faxed, the letter was mailed, so obviously we rested with not having this particular information.