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.
All right. Richard Rubin, recalled. Mrs. Robertson.
Richard Rubin, recalled as a witness by the People in rebuttal, was sworn and testified as follows:
Please raise your right hand to be sworn. You do solemnly swear that the testimony you may give in the cause now pending before this court shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God.
Thank you, your Honor. Good morning.
THE JURY: Good morning.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DARDEN
Mr. Rubin, you testified before this jury on June 21st, that was the last time; is that correct?
Okay. And you visited me in my office last week or rather the 30th or 31st of August?
And prior to that date had you been sent to videotape and/or photographs by a member of my office?
There were various still photos and videos of a group of NFL football games where Mr. Simpson was announcing.
Okay. And you weren't present in the courtroom yesterday afternoon; is that correct?
Okay. But did you watch on television the photographs and videotape that was displayed to the jury?
Okay. Did those videotapes and photographs appear to be videotapes and photographs that you have seen before?
And having had copies of those same videotapes and photographs, did you have an opportunity to study them carefully?
Okay. And have you also spoken to the Defense about your observations of that videotape and those photographs?
Yes. Initially I was contacted at my home by Mr. Blasier on September 1st when I was told I would be coming back, which was news to me at the time, and then yesterday morning during a break I spent some time with Mr. Blasier and then yesterday at the conclusion of court I spent some time with Mr. Blasier.
Now, when you were here on other occasions, you took a look at the Rockingham glove which has been marked 164-A; is that correct?
Okay. And you also had the opportunity to take a look at the new Aris Leather Light gloves marked 372-C; is that correct?
Okay. You told us that the style number of the glove at Rockingham and Bundy was an Aris 70263; is that correct?
And you also told us that the new pair of gloves tried on by the Defendant were also 70263's?
And the videotape that you looked at and the photographs that you also looked at, why were you looking?
I was asked to look at these various photos and videos and try to establish whether or not they were the same.
To determine whether or not they were the same style as what was shown to me as part of the crime scene gloves.
And you also told us when you testified here in June that you in the past had actually manufactured, sold, marketed and designed gloves for Aris; is that correct?
And you also told us that the Aris style no. 70263 was a unique glove; is that correct?
It was quite rare by comparison to all the gloves that I was involved in, as far as production, design and marketing. It was very limited in quantity and extremely difficult to make, very slow production. It was very distinctive by nature due to some of the characteristics of the glove, yes.
Okay. And are there certain characteristics of the glove that help you as an expert to identify the glove when you see the glove?
There are certain characteristics of the Brossier sewn style 70263 which in the design of the glove were built to make sure that it really didn't look like gloves that were less expensive. It was stated on the record, I believe, that the gloves were retailing at $55.00 and while to the average layman a glove is really four fingers and a thumb, we had to be able to justify the fact that this glove was going to be retailing at $55.00.
A blind hem is where at the end of the glove at the wrist the leather is turned over, a seamstress, usually very skilled, actually sews through the lining, through the hem on the inside and then catches a little bit of the leather that would be toward the outside of the glove without going through the leather and then comes back through and closes the seam.
The leather that was used in the Aris lights program exclusively for Bloomingdales was approximately 33 to 40 percent lighter weight than the conventional leather used in all the other production of men's gloves. It was approximately .55 to .6 millimeters in thickness.
This was the only leather glove style that was ever produced with a ten-gauge very thin lining which was one end of cashmere yarn so that the entire glove package itself was extremely thin. All of the other glove linings that we used were twice as thick.
Now, let me direct your attention to the stitching on the back of 164-A. Is there needlepoint stitching on the backhand--on the back of the hand?
It is part of style 70263. Most men's gloves do this three points on the back or three draws. This particular draw is a one, two, three needle configuration without cord underneath to raise them. It is a flat point, but they are used on other men's gloves.
And you told us a little while ago, a few moments ago, that you were able to determine whether or not some of the gloves worn by the Defendant in those videos and photographs--
You were able to determine whether or not some of those gloves in the photos and videos were in fact Aris 70263's?
And if in fact they are, they would be the same model and style at the crime scene and Rockingham glove; is that right?
I'm going to show you some videotape to start off. I'm going to start off, so that the record is clear, with the Bengals versus Bills game on January 6, `91. I'm not going to show you the entire tape. This is exhibit 608, I believe, but I am going to ask you to take a look at certain frame. Okay. For the record, the frame number is indicated on the video.
All right. Mr. Darden, if you would call those out when you start to examine Mr. Rubin as to any particular frame, please.
Looking at that--that particular frame and the gloves shown in that frame, can you tell us whether or not that glove, the glove the Defendant is wearing, is a 70263?
Of the key features that would be part of identifying style 70263, on the right hand the fine ridge stitching along the fingers primarily, the second finger, as well as the three-needlepoint configuration to the left of it are the two identifying factors that I would use to say that this is style 70263. This particular Brossier sewing machine creates a stitch with approximately 22 to 24 stitches to the inch and creates a continuous ridge which when I eliminate the other kinds of sewing that I know about within the glove industry, that to my way of thinking this can only be a Brossier seam.
Mr. Darden, on this particular monitor I can see a little bit, but as you know, I've had the advantage of looking at these photos and videos on small monitors.
Have you seen other--strike that. Have you seen this same videotape on a smaller monitor?
And when you looked at this same frame on that smaller monitor were you able to see water spots or water stains?
Could you tell whether or not the glove was absorbing that water with those water stains, just by looking at it?
Well, this particular glove is made out of naked leather and at this point in time it was in a position to absorb water or stains and literally the staining of the water droplet made the leather in that area appear darker.
I have seen the video roll, yes. There has been rainfall and he is holding an umbrella.
Okay. And how about the fit of the glove? Can you tell us anything about the way the gloves fit in this particular frame?
Could you direct the arrow to the Brossier stitching that you referred to on the second finger a moment ago?
On the right hand, if you go down to the second finger and you see that fine ridge from left to right, right across the finger, it is about a three-inch curve.
This is another version of the first picture. I can see some ridges on the top left finger that concur with what Brossier stitching would look like in a photograph.
What characteristics are there, that is that relate to Brossier stitching, that are different from other kind of stitching that are done?
It is really the most continuous seam that has ever been utilized within the glove industry, to my knowledge. The other sewing techniques create high/lows or raw edge effects or continuous curved effects, whereas this is clearly a seam that is created by the sewing machine grabbing the two pieces of leather and putting them together.
Okay. And is that reflected in the crime scene glove or rather the Rockingham glove marked 164-A?
No, it is not. This particular pair was the pair that they produced with the same style number after they went out of production.
KEY QUOTEOh, so that pair of gloves right there is not the same kind, the same type as the crime scene glove?
What is the difference between the Rockingham and Bundy glove and this later model, the later model glove that you have in front of you?
Even though it was manufactured with the same style number, 70263, the sewing technique is actually what is called one-half pk sewing and it has a totally different effect both on the palm and on the back of the glove, and in this particular case this isn't even the same leather that was utilized in the original gloves.
What is--well, strike that. How many stitches per inch are there to a Brossier stitch?
It is only a hundred percent more than the other conventional sewing techniques that exist and in the case of a hand-sewn it is approximately four times the amount.
Let me ask you to take a look at the fingertips, the ends of the finger in that particular photograph.
Does it appear that the Defendant's hand or rather that his fingers are fully and completely into the glove?
In this particular picture one of two things have occurred. Either the gloves are not completely pulled down all the way onto his hand or there is a little excess in the fingertip.
Now, when you were here last you spoke to us about the--the length of the fingers in the crime scene and Rockingham glove?
Mr. Simpson has a size extra large palm and the fingers on both of his hands are size large. Technically he is real size is a cadet extra large and this is where the actual fingers are approximately 3/8 to a half-inch shorter than a conventional perfect extra large.
And so would you expect that if the Defendant fully placed his hand into a glove that his fingers would not reach the end of a traditional extra large glove?
In this particular case, as I stated for the record in my previous visit, there are definitely three different size extra large gloves; one being slightly under size, one being exactly standard, and one being a little bit larger than standard. And for this exercise I would say we have to use standard. In a standard extra large glove that was perfectly made for a perfect extra large hand, the fingers in that glove would be approximately 3/8 of an inch longer than Mr. Simpson would require.
This would be consistent with a lighter piece of lightweight leather, the leather is not that rigid or firm, and you could get easily get a gathered up look in a lighter weight leather.
And so this bunching up or gathering up at the wrist area, is that consistent with this glove style being 70263?
This particular shot shows me the three three-needlepoints on the back as well as the blind hem.
Take a look at this frame, if you will. Can you see the Defendant's left hand in this picture?
This is a slightly larger shot of the opening of the palm vent on the left hand--on the left hand.
Three points on the left hand as well as the blind hem and the palm vent on the right hand.
You described for us a little while ago some of the characteristics unique to style no. 70263; is that correct?
Did you see each of those characteristics exhibited in these frames of this particular video?
The palm vent, the blind hem, the three three-needlepoints, as well as the Brossier stitching.
Let's assume that we've heard testimony that this videotape is from January 6, 1991. At that time and on that date did this glove come in a double extra large?
And do you have an opinion as to whether or not the gloves worn by the Defendant in this video are Aris leather lights style no. 70263?
Based on what I've seen I would say that this is style 70263 size extra large brown, knowing that I measured the Defendant's hand.
KEY QUOTEWe are going to go to 606, your Honor. May I ask Mr. Rubin to step down, your Honor?
First, let me ask you to step to the side of the photograph, if you will, the photo board--no, to this one, between Miss Clark and the board. Now, are these--do these appear to be photographs also taken from that January 6, 1991, game?
And would you also take a look at the photographs just to the right of the first one you just looked at.
And if you will, will you turn around, please, and take a look at the photograph Miss Clark is holding. That would be 606.
Are the gloves worn by the Defendant in these four photographs the same style as the gloves found at Bundy and Rockingham?
I would like to go to the Kansas City/Buffalo game of January, 1994, which is on laser, your Honor.
Let me show you the photographs shown on the screen here. Those are black gloves; is that correct?
Looking at that glove, can you tell us whether or not there are any characteristics that are consistent with an Aris style no. 70263?
This is a very clear picture of the Brossier stitching on the right hand forefinger, as well as the three three-needlepoints. There is a blind hem. And in addition to that, it confirms that this leather is very lightweight the way it is actually folded over in that one spot where it is bunched up, you can see that they are very close to each other, so it is a very, very thin glove with thin lining.
I'm going to take a look at the photographs taken by Stewart West on December 29, 1993.
Looking at those photographs can you tell us whether or not the glove worn by the Defendant in those photographs is style no. 70263?
The fact that the three most important elements of the design of the Brossier stitching, the three points and the blind hem, and those are the three elements I can see in this picture.
While you are here, let me direct your attention to the photographs taken by Michael Romano. There are two photographs to the right of the board depicting the Defendant wearing black gloves; is that correct?
And how does that tag compare in appearance to the tag that we see on the Michael Romano photographs?
I'm going to object to that characterization of what that is in the picture. No foundation.
All of the Aris leather gloves that were made in production for many years contained a printed rose patch, printed label with beige material with burgundy printing which determined the--it had the size, the country of origin, it did not include the style number, and it had the Aris logo with double chevrons and it was framed in a box in burgundy just a this is, and this one says, "100 percent cashmere made in the Philippines size extra large."
Does the tag shown in the photographs taken by Mr. Romano--strike that. How does the tag in the photograph taken by Mr. Romano compare to the tag on People's 401, the Aris glove that you are holding in your hand?
It has the same characteristics of the beige background. I see some printing. I can see some burgundy printing, but I can't read it in this photo, but there is definitely something with a burgundy cast in it, which is--this is what--this is what it is.
For the record, the witnesses is holding up 401, your Honor, the Romano photograph, and comparing the tags in each.
When you first came out here to testify you were aware that Nicole Brown purchased two pairs of 70263's?
Okay. By the way, did you have any discussion with Mrs.--with Mrs. Brenda Vemich regarding this particular receipt?
Are the black gloves that you just saw in the Romano and West photographs style no. 70263?
I would like to show you a frame from a football game played on January 5, 1992, frame no. 25862.
What characteristics, if any, do you see in that glove, that is, characteristics that are consistent with style no. 70263?
This is the clearest and best shot that I have seen of the Brossier sewing on the fingers, but I can also see the image of the three points, but just the two characteristics, but this clearly is that continuous ridge of sewing that is indicative of style 70263.
And to go back to the tags for a moment, you pointed out the tag in the Romano photograph and you also pointed out the tag on People's 401, the gloves, the new gloves the Defendant tried on here in open court; is that right?
Let me show you the left-handed glove--I don't see the evidence tag--the glove recovered at Bundy. Does it also have an Aris tag?
And how does that tag compare in the appearance to the tag to the Michael Romano photographs?
Can you tell us whether or not the glove worn by the Defendant in still 25862, People's 614--
Can you tell us whether or not the glove depicted in People's 614 is an Aris light 70263?
Showing you the glove tried on by the Defendant, People's 401, both the crime scene glove at Bundy, the glove found at Rockingham, and directing your attention to the glove shown in People's 614 here on the screen--
The two gloves in front of me are marked extra large. They are extra large, and I believe that the gloves in the picture are extra large, knowing the Defendant--that I did measure the Defendant's hands.
Let me ask you to step down and take a look at the photographs marked 612-A and B, the photographs taken by Debra Guidera on December 23rd, 1993. That would be a little over six months before the murders; is that correct?
Do you see any characteristics on these particular gloves that help to determine--help you to determine whether or not the Defendant is wearing style no. 70263?
On this particular photo there doesn't seem to be any decorative stitching on the hem or any stitching on the hem and there are three three-needlepoints and on the left hand you can see a little bit of the ridge on the tip of the finger, very fine ridge, continuous sewing. There is a slouchiness in the leather which is characteristic of that particular style. It is not as good a photo as some of the other photos or videos, but there is nothing here that leads me to believe that it would be another style than 70263.
Directing your attention to 612, the first photograph to your left as you face the board, this slouchiness, to what to you tribute that to?
Well, I think a lot of it has to do with the way you are holding your hand. When you move your fingers back a little bit the glove gets a little slouchy, and when you curve your hand you seem to tighten up on the glove, but it basically indicates that the gloves had been moved back and forth and you are going to get some of that slouchiness because every time you wear a pair of gloves they are going to stretch a little and compress a little, so when you move your hand back and forth you are going to get a little bit of that bagginess.
They will stretch somewhat, but these particular gloves do have memory. A lot of it comes back. It depends upon how the person holds their hand, but they do have a lot of stretch in them.
Just so it is clear, when was it that you were sent copies of some of the videotape and some of the photographs you have seen here in court?
I believe that the Guidera photograph arrived September 5th. They called me to notify me that they were sending another photo to me after I left here on the 31st.
Is there anything about the brown gloves that you have seen the Defendant wearing that would suggest to you that they are anything other than 70263?
Are all the characteristics that you have observed in the brown gloves worn by the Defendant consistent with style 70263?
All right. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to take our recess for the noon hour. Please remember all my admonitions to you. Don't discuss the case among yourselves, don't form any opinions about the case, don't conduct any deliberations until the matter has been submitted to you, don't allow anybody to communicate with you with regard to the case. We will stand in recess until one o'clock. Let me see counsel without the court reporter, please. Mr. Rubin, you can step down. One o'clock.
All right. Back on the record in the Simpson matter. The Defendant is again present before the court with counsel, People are represented. The jury is not present. All right. Mr. Darden, are you ready to conclude your direct examination of Mr. Rubin?
All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. All right. Let the record reflect we've been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good afternoon.
Mr. Rubin, would you resume the witness stand, please.
Richard Rubin, the witness on the stand at the time of the noon recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
All right. Let the record reflect that Mr. Richard Rubin is again on the witness stand undergoing direct examination by Mr. Darden. And, Mr. Darden, you may conclude with your direct examination.
Thank you, your Honor, and I will. Good afternoon.
THE JURY: Good afternoon.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. DARDEN
Now, Mr. Rubin, I wanted to ask you some questions about the wear and tear, if any, on these particular gloves. If we assume--well, strike that. Now, there's been testimony in this case that Nicole Brown purchased two pairs of gloves on December 18, 1990.
Okay. And I believe you offered some testimony with regard to the style numbers, Bloomingdales carried back in December 1990, when you were first here; is that correct?
We've also shown you today photographs and video of brown gloves worn by the Defendant on January 6th, 1991, correct?
Where would you--well, strike that. Where would you first expect to see wear on those gloves, if any?
Did you attempt to assess the life and durability of the glove once it was sold into the general public?
Life expectancy and wear and tear was the major concern of our company because it was our reputation, and with regard to this particular pair of gloves, the wear and tear would show up first in the lining.
You wouldn't expect to see the wear and tear first on the outside leather portion of the glove?
And you looked at the lining of the crime scene at Rockingham glove when you were here last; is that right?
Okay. Did you note any wear or tear, any evidence of any wear or tear on the cashmere linings of the Rockingham and Bundy glove?
In both articles, there actually is no excessive wear and tear whatsoever present.
KEY QUOTEOkay. And what does that indicate to you in terms of how often those gloves were worn?
And did you discuss with Bloomingdales the price at which the gloves would be sold?
Sustained. I think we've already had testimony from the people at Bloomingdales as to the manufacturer's suggested retail price, the sale price.
And with regard to the black glove that you've seen, okay, the Stewart West photographs, the Romano photographs, you were shown photographs taken December 23, 1990 and in January, 1994; is that correct?
And on the Michael Romano photograph, is the date indicated to be January 15, 1994?
Could he rephrase the question, your Honor, or can he restate the question, please?
It is a Brossier sewing machine that was made by the singer sewing machine corporation. To the best of my knowledge, the model is 46K30 and it was produced around World War II for the last time. So to my knowledge, there has been no Brossier sewing machine produced in the last 45 to 50 years.
Okay. And you've told us that this particular type of stitching is rare in gloves, men's gloves?
--has 37 machines of which approximately 20 to 25 of them are operational, and of my personal knowledge, going back to 1990 of the 11,000 employees of Aris Philippines, only 10 people were qualified to sew that stitch on a glove.
Based on what I've seen I would say that this is style 70263 size extra large brown, knowing that I measured the Defendant's hand.
Now certain are you of that? I'm a hundred percent certain.
No, it is not. This particular pair was the pair that they produced with the same style number after they went out of production.
Of my personal knowledge, going back to 1990 of the 11,000 employees of Aris Philippines, only 10 people were qualified to sew that stitch on a glove.
In both articles, there actually is no excessive wear and tear whatsoever present.