Your Honor, I would offer to stipulate that detective Vannatter's testimony during the motion to suppress can be incorporated and made part of the record for the preliminary hearing.
I think I've said this before. You've previously been sworn and remain under oath. Please have a seat in the witness stand.
Yes, Your Honor, and thank you. phillip vannatter, called as a witness by and on behalf of the People, having been previously called and duly sworn, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
Sir, did you attend the autopsies of the victims in this matter, Ron Goldman and Nicole Simpson?
And in the course of that autopsy, sir, did you observe the coroner to obtain blood from each of the victims, blood samples?
Those vials of blood samples that you recovered from each of the victims, how were they packaged when you recovered them?
Certainly. They had the victim's names and the coroner case number that corresponds to their names on the vial.
Showing you People's 2 and 3, sir, can you tell me whether the people depicted in these photographs are the ones whose autopsies you attended in this matter?
The coroner's case number for Mr. Goldman was 945135, and the number for Nicole Brown Simpson was 945136.
I hand carried those to Scientific Investigation Division, Los Angeles Police Department, and handed them over to an employee there, Colin Yamauchi.
He's an employee of the Scientific Investigation Division that works in the serology department.
Now, you've earlier testified regarding a glove that was found at the south side of the location of 360 north Rockingham?
and I ask you if this is the glove that you saw on the grounds on the south side of Rockingham in the position in which you saw it?
Now, you indicated that -- yesterday, sir, at approximately 7:30 you left the Rockingham address to secure a search warrant.
I continued into the residence with the search warrant, was there a short time; and I had left instructions with officers, if Mr. Simpson arrived at the location, to keep him from coming into the residence. And shortly after that period, while I was inside, I looked down and I saw Mr. Simpson at the location.
Shortly after making contact with him, I removed the handcuffs and I noticed a bandage on his left hand, the left middle finger in the upper joint area.
KEY QUOTENow, when I said, "Mr. Simpson," then I said, "the defendant," do you see Mr. Simpson in court today?
Once downtown, did you take -- make some effort to document the condition of his left middle finger?
I took him to the photo lab, photography lab of the police department, and had it photographed.
I kept that vial in my possession and hand-carried it to criminalist Dennis Fung, and turned it over to him to be booked with the evidence.
And that vial was -- did you do it on the same day that it was -- the blood was taken from the
I have checked with the lawyers and investigators from my office, and we do not believe that we have received a copy of this photograph. I could take a moment and check with the criminalist, but I believe -- but my recollection is we have not seen this photograph, and the date on this photograph is June 21st of '91.
Two gloves, each of them bearing an item number that has already been related to this case. What it does is depict the glove recovered from the crime scene and the glove recovered from the house side by side. I would be delighted to provide counsel with a copy of that photograph if he feels he does not have one. I thought we had given him copies of all photographs. This is not a crime scene photograph at all. It is a lab photograph.
I don't. As far as I know, that is the only one; but I don't know. I thought counsel had all photographs, your Honor; but I will certainly have it duplicated for him. It is not a problem. It doesn't constitute any evidence he has not already seen. It simply puts the two items together in one picture.
Perhaps we could use another item of evidence that we have already seen for the purposes of this examination at this time and give us an opportunity to examine this photograph.
Well, I will give you a chance to examine that photograph. Do you have other evidence that you can present with regard to this at this point?
I don't know how long it takes counsel to look at a picture of two gloves, but I will be glad to wait until he has satisfied himself that he can match the item numbers of the gloves with the item numbers on his property report and the appearance of those gloves with the appearance of the gloves in the photographs he has already got.
I would say it would take me time to get expert witnesses from New York, from other parts of the United States, to review this. I am obviously capable of looking at it and seeing it is two gloves. If that is the only purpose of this photograph, I think detective Vannatter can identify hundreds of pictures of gloves that we have. It is just ironic there is one picture we don't have that they want to use for some reason.
It is one photograph that we have that shows the two gloves in one place, side by side. That's all, your Honor. I don't understand counsel's objection. I don't see why it takes an expert to look at a picture of two gloves.
Mr. Shapiro, I am not going to preclude Miss Clark from utilizing the photo. I take her word for the fact this is a photo of apparently the gloves that we have heard testimony concerning in this preliminary hearing. You are entitled to a copy of it. They have indicated they would provide one to you. When can that be provided? Do you know?
I have just been handed a series of photographs that are all crime lab photographs of the gloves. I believe counsel does have them, but I will be glad to give him these again and have another set made for myself.
We have inventoried each and every item of evidence that has been received, and we have not received those photographs.
That representation was made to me yesterday, and other counsel for the defense indicated they did indeed have what they said they didn't have; So I would ask Mr. Shapiro to examine the items he has been given to date again.
How do we know what he has back at his office, your Honor? I am turning over all of these photographs that were taken at the crime lab. These are my only set. And ordinarily we order two sets, which would indicate to me counsel has his. But in an abundance of caution, I am going to turn them over again and I am going to get another set for myself.
Thank you. The last time we got these, we got a bill for $4,000. That is very kind of you.
KEY QUOTESir, showing you what has now been marked as People's 22, do you recognize what I am showing you?
That is an item number of a piece of evidence that has been recovered and booked as evidence with our crime lab.
And are you familiar with the property report that lists the item numbers for the evidence that was recovered in this case, sir?
was each of the gloves recovered, the one at the 875 south Bundy address and the one at the 360 Rockingham address, given a separate item number?
Can you tell us, sir, whether those are the item numbers that go to each of those respective addresses for each glove?
Yes. Item No. 9 is the glove that was recovered at 360 Rockingham, and item 37 is the glove recovered at 875 south Bundy.
They normally get what is called a "c" number, and it is issued by the photography department; and then the crime report D.R. number is affixed, also.
For example, in the exhibit next to you, which is People's 19, in "B," "C" -- actually, all of them, you see these numbers?
Your Honor, I am going to object to this series of photographs being shown. May we be heard at side bar?
Shortly after making contact with him, I removed the handcuffs and I noticed a bandage on his left hand, the left middle finger in the upper joint area.
It is just ironic there is one picture we don't have that they want to use for some reason.
I don't understand counsel's objection. I don't see why it takes an expert to look at a picture of two gloves.
The last time we got these, we got a bill for $4,000. That is very kind of you.