📄 Redirect examination of Rolf Rokahr (part 1) — Tuesday, September 5, 1995
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\SEP\5\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-ROLF-R.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 147 of 167

Redirect examination of Rolf Rokahr (part 1)

Witness: Rolf Rokahr
Examiner: Peter Neufeld
Called by: Defense • Date: Tuesday, September 5, 1995 • Utterances: 32
Neufeld conducts a brief redirect of crime scene photographer Rolf Rokahr, establishing that the Bundy crime scene was unusual due to the heavy law enforcement presence ('a lot of brass'), and rehabilitating the witness after cross-examination raised questions about his certainty on photo timing. Neufeld ends by getting Rokahr to confirm that a trained photographer could meaningfully distinguish between pre-dawn and post-sunrise photographs, which matters for the defense's timeline arguments.
1 THE COURT:

Mr. Neufeld.

2 MR. NEUFELD:

One moment.

3 (Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)
4 MR. NEUFELD:

Mr. Rokahr, you said that you sometimes photograph as many as two, three homicides a night?

5 MR. ROKAHR:

That is correct.

6 MR. NEUFELD:

But on this particular night, this was the only homicide you handled, correct?

7 MR. ROKAHR:

That was the only homicide I handled.

8 MR. NEUFELD:

And in fact, this was an unusual homicide. There was a lot of brass there; is that correct?

9 MR. ROKAHR:

That is correct.

10 MR. NEUFELD:

And that doesn't happen at most of the cases which you photograph, does it?

11 MR. ROKAHR:

No, sir.

12 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay. Now, when I interviewed you yesterday at the Los Angeles Police Department, sir, did we have a calm conversation?

13 MR. ROKAHR:

Yes, we did.

14 MR. NEUFELD:

I didn't raise my voice, did I?

15 MR. ROKAHR:

No, you were very nice.

KEY QUOTE
16 MR. NEUFELD:

During the hour, hour and a half we were talking, sir, did you ever at any time complain about your health?

17 MR. ROKAHR:

I felt there was no reason--

18 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay.

19 MR. ROKAHR:

--to do so.

20 MR. NEUFELD:

And, sir, you mentioned on cross-examination that you may not be, you know, absolutely certain as to what time a particular photograph or precisely what time a particular photograph was taken. But would you agree, sir, that there's a difference between a photograph taken a half hour, an hour before sunrise and a photograph taken an hour and a half after the sun comes up?

21 MR. DARDEN:

Objection.

22 MR. NEUFELD:

You know, in terms of light in the air?

23 MR. DARDEN:

Objection. Calls for speculation.

24 THE COURT:

Light in the air?

25 MR. NEUFELD:

I'm sorry. In terms of how light it is, that there is an obvious difference between a photograph taken an hour to an hour and a half before the sun rises and a photograph taken an hour to an hour and a half after the sun rises?

26 MR. ROKAHR:

Yes.

27 MR. DARDEN:

Objection.

28 THE COURT:

Overruled.

29 MR. ROKAHR:

Yes, there's a difference.

30 MR. NEUFELD:

And, sir, if the sun raised that morning at 5:41 A.M., you would be able to tell the difference without being precise whether that photograph was a nighttime shot, shot perhaps an hour, hour and a half before sunrise and one shot an hour and a half after sunrise, wouldn't you?

31 MR. ROKAHR:

I would like to think so.

KEY QUOTE
32 MR. NEUFELD:

Thank you. Nothing further.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Rolf Rokahr
No, you were very nice.
Neufeld uses this to preemptively undercut any suggestion that the prior-day interview was adversarial or that Rokahr was pressured or unwell — rehabilitating the witness's credibility and the reliability of what he said.
Rolf Rokahr
I would like to think so.
A hedged but usable answer: Rokahr concedes a professional photographer could distinguish pre-sunrise from post-sunrise lighting, supporting the defense's argument about when certain crime scene photos were actually taken.
Rolf Rokahr
That is correct.
Confirming this was an unusual scene with heavy brass presence — suggesting atypical conditions that could affect normal procedure and documentation.

Evidence (1)

Informal
Crime scene photographs from the Bundy Drive murders, taken in the pre-dawn hours
discussed in context of lighting conditions and timing

Notable Exchanges (2)

Peter NeufeldChristopher Darden
Darden objected twice to Neufeld's question about whether a photographer could distinguish pre-sunrise from post-sunrise lighting — first as speculation, second again without elaboration. Ito's confused interjection ('Light in the air?') prompted Neufeld to rephrase. The final version was overruled.
strategic
Peter NeufeldRolf Rokahr
Neufeld walks Rokahr through their prior-day interview, establishing it was calm and that Rokahr never complained of health issues — a preemptive rehabilitation after cross suggested the witness may have been uncertain or unwell.
rehabilitative

Light Moments (1)

Lance A. Ito
Judge Ito's genuinely puzzled interjection 'Light in the air?' after Neufeld's awkward phrasing momentarily derailed the examination.

Objections

3 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)
Proceeding 7496 • 32 utterances • Defense witness
Criminal Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 SEP 5, 1995 📄 Redirect examination of Rolf R
SEP 5, 1995 KRT DvH TD