Xref: world alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts:78 Newsgroups: alt.fan.oj-simpson.transcripts Path: world!uunet!news.cloud9.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!myra From: myra@netcom.com (Myra Dinnerstein) Subject: SIDEBARS - MATHESON Message-ID: Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 20:57:58 GMT Approved: myra@necom.com Lines: 95 Sender: myra@netcom11.netcom.com Sidebars from May 1, 1995 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) MR. BLASIER: MR. SIMPSON WANTS TO SEE THESE. AS THEY ARE GOING THROUGH THEM HE WANTS SOME WAY OF SEEING THEM. CAN YOU PUT THEM ON HIS MONITOR? I KNOW YOU ARE WATCHING IT ON COURT T.V. I THINK. I THINK HE HAS A RIGHT TO -- THE COURT: WELL, I WILL TELL YOU WHAT. LET'S DO THIS. LET'S PUT THEM WHERE WE NORMALLY PUT THEM AGAINST THE WALL THERE FOR THE JURY TO SEE. MR. COCHRAN: WE CAN STAY IN OUR SEATS, TOO. UNLESS HE CAN WALK OVER WITH ME AND STAY AWAKE. MR. GOLDBERG: WELL, MR. COCHRAN HAS COMPLAINED ABOUT THE HIGHLY EXCITING AND STIMULATING NATURE OF THIS PORTION OF THE DIRECT EXAMINATION, BUT IF COUNSEL WISHES TO STIPULATE, I WILL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO DO THAT. THE COURT: NO. LET'S PUT THE EASEL OVER -- (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN OPEN COURT:) THE COURT: MR. FAIRTLOUGH, DO YOU WANT TO JOIN US, PLEASE. (BRIEF PAUSE.) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE NEED TO ANGLE THE EASEL SO THAT MR. SIMPSON CAN SEE THE EXHIBIT. HE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THESE THINGS. SO CAN YOU PUT IT BACK IN THE STANDARD POSITION AND LET'S SEE HOW MUCH WE CAN GET OUT OF THAT. MR. FAIRTLOUGH: WHAT I CAN DO IS RAISE IT UP SO THAT IF I POSITION IT I CAN RAISE THE EASEL UP BUT HE MIGHT MISS THE BOTTOM PORTION FROM WHERE HE IS SITTING, BUT HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO CATCH MOST OF IT FROM THE TOP. THE COURT: LET'S TRY THAT. **** Sidebars from May 2, 1995 (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) THE COURT: WE'RE OVER AT THE SIDEBAR. MR. BLASIER. MR. BLASIER: SINCE HE DIDN'T ASK THE QUESTION, I WOULD ASK TO REINSTRUCT THE JURY THAT THIS WAS PROVIDED TO THE DEFENSE FOR PURPOSES OF INSPECTION. I ASSUMED HE WAS GOING TO ASK THAT RATHER THAN LEAVING THE IMPLICATION IT WENT TO ALBANY WITHOUT EXPLAINING WHY IT WAS BACK THERE. MR. GOLDBERG: I THOUGHT THE ONLY THING I WAS ALLOWED TO ASK IS THAT IT WENT, BUT NOT ANYTHING ELSE. THE COURT: YOU CAN ASK, WAS IT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING THE DEFENSE TO INSPECT THE ITEMS. MR. GOLDBERG: I DON'T KNOW IF HE KNOWS FOR SURE WHAT THEY DID. THE COURT: THE PURPOSE OF RELEASING IT. ASK A LEADING QUESTION, THE PURPOSE WAS TO INSPECT. **** (THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD AT THE BENCH:) THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WE'RE OVER AT THE SIDEBAR. MR. BLASIER. MR. BLASIER: YES. HE'S ATTEMPTING TO ANALOGIZE 42 WITH FINGERNAILS. THE ONLY TESTIMONY THAT'S BEEN ELICITED CONCERNS THE TACKINESS OF THE BLOOD ON THE GROUND. HE'S NOT DEMONSTRATED THAT THE CONDITIONS OF COLLECTION, THE MANNER OF PRESERVATION, THE CONDITIONS OF THE FINGERNAILS ARE IN ANY WAY THE SAME AS THE BLOOD ON THE GROUND. THEREFORE, ANY TESTIMONY THAT YOU CAN SOMEHOW ANALOGIZE THESE TWO SAMPLES TOGETHER WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE FOR LACK OF FOUNDATION. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MR. GOLDBERG. MR. GOLDBERG: WHAT, YOUR HONOR? THE COURT: MR. GOLDBERG. MR. GOLDBERG: I THOUGHT THE COURT ALREADY RULED ON THIS, AND WE ARGUED EXTENSIVELY ABOUT IT. BUT WHAT THE EVIDENCE SHOWS IS THE BARE HANDS ARE PUT IN PHYSICAL CONTACT WITH THE BLOOD, AND AS I ARGUED PREVIOUSLY, ARE CONTIGUOUS AND CONTINUOUS WITH THE BLOOD, AND THEN EXPLAINING WHY MR. MATHESON BELIEVES IT IS LEGITIMATE TO DRAW INFERENCES ABOUT 42 AND UNDER THE FINGERNAILS WILL DO THAT. SHOWING THE PICTURE WILL DO THAT. IT IS THE SIMPLEST WAY OF CONVEYING THAT TESTIMONY. THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. OBJECTION IS OVERRULED.