SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff-Respondent, Defendant-Appellant )

Transcription

1 TR SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF CALFORNA PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALFORA Plaintiff-Respondent vs. - KEVN COOPER Defendant-Appellant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COPy CR Supreme Court No. C/?ij '- APPEAL FROM THE SUPEROR COURT OF SAN DEGO COUNTY HONORABLE RCHARD C. GAmER JUDGE PRESDNG REPORTERS' TRANSCRPT ON APPEAL i i J J APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Respondent: For Defendant-Appellant: HON. JOHN K. VAN DE KAMP State Attorney General Department of Justice 0 West -A- Street Suite 00 San Diego California 0 N PROPRA PERSONA L' " J Olumes. VOLUME Pages to Pages to incl. JLL D. Me KMMEY C.S.R. C- and BRAN V. RATEKN C.S.R. C-S Official Reporters J - - -

2 COP Y SUPEROR COURT OF TF..E STATE OF CALFORNA FOR THE COUNTY OF SA.'l BERNARDNO THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE ) OF CALFOR.."iA ) ) Plaintiff ) vs. ) KEV! COOPER ) ) NO. OCR- VOLUME Defendant. ) Pgs. thr incl. REPORTERS' DALY -:.'RANSCRPT :'"'l:-.;.-""'-._. BEFORE HONORABLE RCHJ._lD C. C;ER JUDGE DEPARTHEUT - ONTARO CALFORNA APPEARANCES: For the People: For the Defendant: Monday July DD."NS KOTT}tEER District Attorney DENNS KOT''MEER District Attorney By: JOHN P. KOCHS Deputy District Attorney DAVD McKENtiA Public Defenjer By: DAVD NEGUS Deputy Public Defender -' U Reported by: JLL D. McKMMEY Official Reporter C.S.R. No. and R}\.N RATEKN Official Reporter C.S.R. no. '- J J /--

3 i N D E X DEFE&T'S WTNESSES PAGE GREGONS Daniel J. Direct Examination Direct Examination Direct Examination Direct Examination by Mr. Negus on Limited ssues by Mr. Kochis. Resumed by Mr. Negus Resume by Mr. Negus " '- " -' U '- : U

4 H::l'day Jul}' ':}." Q :lj.uhs D:..;rcr by r-:.r. Negus <::-;::' l'u."l-"ose for goh to English Rcd on -- FourdaUon an h.is eq:erti in bleo:] spat.ters :;--;-'} nterrret able blocx:: pr.ttens ir. R:P. hcr.e: lc::x::-ation - Arrhal beuse to' length of tjr.v..naly::ing patterr.s; th? po.ir;t ana:;.ysis...-as steppe'd its reason - \\-.at the pc:t.terr.s i.. CUcat.ed "isii \':r t [urn JPr arm' j ys is \o'oldd h"lc:cat ' 'ille r 'as(;! fer tlrll Ur!g furt.h 'r :Al> ':' ij t''; (; 0 ('lr bu 0 Ut;.:lo - L: i ott t u h. "'e c-;.:a:: j r... ' tj on r 'S'..lr.l:'Ci 'Jj::e r("'\:>dh:i for furt!jpr exar:"i:-.cticn Loc"lz:' ':;t ing the' r.atterr.s - proo?ss.. n rrcto;):-apr:y \.;j tu'ss' c 's j l"p t.:; collpct lrore> s':.:+es - \.T!t;""! j t arose A-} blood drop - his.ir.pressions tlrl of its eriqjn hi:.: trdiljn;; i!' ccll 'Ct.jng a'd Jjresen'ing r::'s:i cal '\'ide.'"k.""e' Con:ersdjO!". ef '.'gir.o an::] Baird or Len ghet.t.i Kottr.c-ier CO:\"ersa tj 0."... i til!:r. Forhls. D.i SiA'!!;U hlg the> i.:edrcxt..: VUt.:::t. i ()!: n' :-l 'Cdut.:i ens in prpn'ing the carpet pref ere:-.ces i.: t:rqc.'e>ssing Saml-' les taken T('C;t jar.s in J..rC's('rving t.he cajx't: jiclciec:uac.' fo!' takirv traa> evidence sclateo.d bairs!=-oss.ibly lost. Heir lac...; of rple\"?..!:c ' Hedsc:.s "t.' t:.'r 'Cautjor.s ::ct ta;':m for tr.e carp:>t. W s lack of o: jec-t. ior.s to it \0: :. i i. i J i r l j }J i " h ) ':'. lj.ji" OtilPr inn."sticatjcns: tile' other hlt :'rxi:" i:.::;ll... cty dcross frcr. L.ltlirOC! Eefr:i... prator stains!:ast{. ; l;qu..:-oo": liglt S\.i td blocrist.ai!. - rease!'" for net. collectj jt l-'hotoo! ih.ls taj.:er; - h'.sufficient for erir... scene rt?'_'"'onst.ructi.on Sl'illEu' n:d:' ; (di} - A:;"lyzjng blocx:l drops :i d mult.i Vlcti:: cdfe'" sa>ne: i!': > involve'(] TP s0utl... -: later enzyttl? te'stins: :in tl..: cri::c lab & rpsults (..':-' - TrY' c! i:..loc.e pa tt etls: arted dl ::* 'Olu. velocjty cast-off..jtj ; - -;P"-Tll(.st. :(j!" saliva sample: i}'':').' by Hr. Kochis tag a::;:ss by Hr. Negus (.R..lljr.;g by t.he Court (; DF:-:C: ReS..rr"E'Ci by Nr. Negus BlOCX::stai'.s in carpet in relation t.o.. nere victims j e (( - Stoc;"-;L'll' s scur.plc' coll('ctjan and do r:l?r:tatio." - its use for reconstruction '>in Pos j Dp :i nferena-> h:ld proper analysis been done ';0 F.is q::inio." of the questicr.s not ars... :pr=j by U-.e evidence' collected ( - kc'!u:t 0: b':'l? to colle'ct the sample. ir..:j t;;.ess opinion Possible "a}'s of doc'ul'lentlng \jdence G G Ti.. c.' involved Freserving evidence Stair.s c:: th? sheet questkned: A-St A-Be l.;eed for doc::u:rentation in recanstructjol Beer cans - saving blocri vs. f:ire'rr:rinting Procedure for preserving blcod. 0.>" such objects Plastj c l::r.g storage - w'bat enzl'res drade i: not drie'd a:>fore ent_ry ;- =-.!cl \';-: \.ny a>rtair. er..zyrres W'("';-f' t}-p?ci.. hich OOUld ha\? t.e - r. u.ttpr 0:' & T-sr.i.rt: th? stain raroved.j/( r' fran.it i.;':.! u j.j :H: lyljiuy t.l'cllldtjlll' Ul fu..."tli ture n u -. :l - J

5 Tl... 0 ONTARO CALFORA DEPARTMENT NO. APPEARANCES: MONDAY JULY : :0 A.M HON. RCHARD C. GAP.NER JUDGE The Defendant with his Counsel DAVD NEGUS Deputy Public Defender of San Bernardino CountY JOHN P. KOCHS Deputy District Attorney of San Bernardino County representing the People of the State of California. (Jill D. McKimnley C.S.R. Official Report:=r C- Brian Ratekin. C.S.R. Official Repcrter C-) r ' "" / THE COURT: Good morning. Mr. Nequs. Mr. Kochis y. Cooner are all present. We are ready for your next witness. NEGUS: Dan Gregonis. Do you want him res.:o:-n? THE COURT: t's been so long. He's estified before but let him be sworn again. _ J. Q.!! Q!!!. t ca:aed as a witness by the defense was exined anc ttified as follows: THE CLERK: You do solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give in the action now pending before this court shall be the truth the... hole t.. th and n u C :J - a nothing but the truth so help ou God?

6 THE Wr.t!:SS l do. THE CLERK: Please be seated. State your ne please for the record and spell your last name. TEE lflti!:s: lfltn!:ss: Daniel J. Gregonis G-r-e-g-o-n-i-s. DRECT EXAMNATOn 0 BY MR. NEGUS: 0. Mr. Gregonis on June did you go to English Road in the Chino Hills? Yes did. A. Q. What was your purpose in going ere? The basic purpose is e and. Ogino went ere was to observe the crle scene and also to see if we can do soething ith the blood spatter that was out there. What do yo me do soethin with the blood spatter? As to any possibility for placlg the victims or such as far as the patterns of the blood spatter. You ean inte.-preting the blood spatter patterns to tr.l a."ld recostruct what had happened during the n u o A. 0- A. cri.:le? Essentially yes. Did you also go out t.ere to seek additional evidence? - That was not our primary purpose but it was a J possibility yes.

7 0 A. Q. What do you mean by that? Well we did not mean our prry purpose was for the blood spatter evidence and then our secondary purpose if we found any was to collect additional evidence. en you went out with the purpose of doing the blood spatter interpretation what -- what -- what actually were you going to do just look or photograph and document or what? Basically at that point just look at it and see if see what could be done at that point if anything. Were there interpretable patterns in the Ryen house when you got there? MR. KOCHS: Objection no foundation on his part. THE CCURT: He laid a foundation before did he not. Kochis? MR. KOCHS: Not with this witness not for blood splatter patterns. THE COURT: All right some sort of foundatio foundation Mr. Negus. p. P. BY MR. NEGUS: Mr. Gregonis in the field -- you are a criminalist; right? A. Yes am. And you received your degree in criminalistics from the Metropolitan University of Denver: is that correct? A. A. Metropolitan State College college yes.! t ::::-.. :.-.. _ n u C J : C o / /

8 .. / 0 Excuse me. -etropoli tan State Cclleg of Denver. And the particular course of curriculum was one where your rjor was in fact the study of the science as it applies to studying crime; is that correct? Essentially. yes. n e field of criminalistics is there a sub-specialty which deals with the study of the patterns made by -- by blood when it's deposited through flying through the air tl-.rouqh dropping through a variety of means? That's a sub-field yes. within that sub-field is there one particular -- is there one particular person who who has done the most publishing in that particular field? A. To my knowledge yes. 0. Who is that? A. Trt would be Herb MacDonell. A.d he teaches somewhere somwhere in upstate New York and has been doing this for nany :;tany years? 'm not sure where heeaches but he has been doing it for many years. 0. d he has a book entitled Fligt Characteristics and Stain Patterns of Human Blood; is that right? Yes he does. Q. A.d that is the major text in the field; is that correct? " U l' :J o.:......

9 .. 0 '. t is a major text yes. t's one of the -- it or like reeditions of it are the only actual books on bloodstain pattern interpretation; is that right? can't say it's the only book but it is a book. believe it is the only book that know of that is only on blood spatter. And you have read and studied that book; is that correct? A. have read it yes. Have you also read in criminalistics textbooks where blood spatter interpretation is mentioned? A. Yes have. For example have you read a book by Paul Kirk entitled Crime nvestigation? A. No have not. What books have you read where blood spatter interpretations TEE COURT: Counsel ycu needn't go into it. will permit his opinion on the subject. The further objection on fondational grour-ds is overruled. MR. NEGUS: Can have the last question that we had the objection to? (ereupon the last qyestion was read by the reporter.)!-!r. NEGUS: lihat was talking about -- j.--. \ ' U " :J L - U - U '-

10 0 THE COURT: Counsel believe -- can't you pick it up? He went ere pri:arily to interpret blood patterns but also to collect other evidence. MR. NEGUS: know what it was. Were there interpretable blood patterns in the Ryen residence? A. Yes there were. n what areas? A The major areas were what would be the -- believe the sou th wall which is above the headboard on the bed. You're talking in the aster bedroom now? k Yes. There were se on the east wall basically all the walls. Any other areas? A. There were se patterns potentially on the door leading to the hallway from the master bedroom and also in the bathroom.!ihat about on the furniture? A. There were definitely blood spatter o the furniture also. d were those patterns interpretable?. A. Yes they were Was there blood spatter on the carpet? A. reme.'!lber blood being or. the carpet bu t don' t know whether they were blood s?atter or not. - U. U..: r - - U

11 -;-.. :' 0 0. Were the patterns of blood on the carpet be they pooled blood or dripped blood or spattered blood or whatever interpretable? Okay. 'm unclear as to what you mean by interpretable. (NO omissions.) "=-.-." t t ;...:..." 0 - n u : L u " : L

12 ;::;:.-;;-;.;;..;-;-.:.': T As you were using them before that is. you could get by exaininq th through the study of criminaistics get some idea of how they were deposited. from where they e deposited that sort of thing? k believe there was some information that could have been gained ot o. What? of that yes _.. k :.M.\... -_. A Basically just the ones that remember are basically 0 just where the victims were lying. The victims weren't there when you were in the rooms /- is that right? A NO sir they were not. But becase of the patterns on the rug you could make inferences about where they were -- the victims had been lying? Plus the fact that had been told by one of the - U detectives t who was lying where. But just from looking at the blood alone could you make inferences that somebody had been lying in certain positions on the -- on the carpet? couldn't tell you e positions. could tell you that somebody was -- what was at that point bleeding. What eant by positions was positions on the carpet -- - L :; not the position the body was in; locations on the carpet.

13 A. A. A. 0 A. A. Q. A. A. A. Locations. Basically yes. Was there also blood on the ceiling? don't remember at this point. How long did you and. Ogino spend analyzing the patterns tpt were in the master bathroom hall and master bedroom of the Ryen house? Are you asking just the bathroom and the hall? And bedrooms. would say at the most a couple of hours. You arrived at approximately :? That sounds about right yes. s that what you have in your notes? Yes it is. And before you began attempting to analyze the patterns were you taken on a tour through the house by one or the other of the detectives? Yes we were. How long did that take? don't rerober Fifteen inutes specifically how long it took. maybe. And after that you also toured e house? Yes we did. cow long did that take? Again possibly minutes. don't know. outside of the After you did your two tours is that when you began U " - -' U '-

14 to try and -- and interpret the patterns? J As recall yes. (.l At some point in time. were you interr.lpted in that work? A. don't remember. Well at some point in time did you stop doing it? Yes we did. 0. Okay. h'hy did you stop? t --. "-. -.-'-" Okay. Again don't rember at that point. 0 it seems to me that we had already walked around the entire bedroom and done -- looked at all the blood spatters at that point and got an idea nat -- what they were and what could be done with them at that point. 0. What do you mean what they were and what they - could be done with them? Would you elaborate on that? iat were they and what could be done? Basically the reason why we stopped is trat we had already gone around the room looking at them. What they were is it looked to me consistent with coming from e victims various types of blood spatter including arterial blcod. cast-off type patterns. 0. What was the significance of their coming fro the victim? As far as the location of the victims the type of U " - --' U - :J patterns that they were my knowledge at that point.\

15 0 as to the wounds inflicted upon the victims it was pretty uch consistent wi; what we saw at the crime scene. Okay. What -- what could -- what could those patterns tell you about what had happened to the victim? A Okay. Basically it's going to tell us possibly at least what tlpe of blows were inflicted whether there was arterial bleeding some inference as to what type of weapon that was used as to whet!er it was a blunt instrument or whether it was whatever gunshot for instance. That's basically it. Well would -- would the patterns at you saw in your opinion have been -- enabled you to determine t.;e location of v ictlrns in the room when they were attacked? When they were bleeding yes to soe extent. Given what you knew about the nature of the wounds that had been inflicted on the victims and the general history it was a fair inference to make that they were bleeding at the te that they were attacked is t.at correct? A. asme or shortly afterwards yes. Would the patterns you saw have enabled you to make inferences as to the nber of people who were assaila.!'lts? A Not to my k.owledge no. t-:--.-.: n u J t.. U " f a ---

16 i\"ould the patterns that you saw have enabled you to make inferences as to the order in which the victims ""-ere attacked? A. That is a possibility yes. You did.'t carry your analysis far enough to determine whether or not that could be done? A. No sir _ : ' Why didn't you? Basically because we were stopped at that point from 0 doing any further analysis. By whom? A. By the sergeant -- detective that was in charge at Q. A. that point. That was Mr. Swanlund? Yes sir. How did. """ere doing? Swanlund stop you from doing what you " U b A. After we had done some analysis on the scene and gone around d looked at all the -- the blood spatter pa tterns we talked to -- or Mr. Ogino talked to. Swanld resting or asking for more time to do any further analysis ar.d was denied at that point. Was t.ere any reason given for denyi:lg it? - - Ī-' - U A. don't remember. W:"l0 denied Mr. Cgino more time? Was that Mr..r. Swa::lund as well?

17 0 A. A. A.. A. A. M.r. Swanlund talked -- or Mr. Ogino talked to Sergeant Swanlund yes. And Sergeant Swanlund said no as far as his request for more time? dontt -- don't r&ber his specific words but the end point was no. Okay. Did you and Mr. Oqino believe that having more time was iortant? To reconstruct the blood spatter patterns yes it was. now many people did you and. Ogino together cqntact to try and get Sergeant Swanlund's decision reversed? believe at that point we contacted x. Bill Baird concerning the reversal of the decision. And did that conversation take place by telephone? Yes it did. And do you remember approximately what time that was? No don't. Let -- as far as -- as far as as -- as the sequence of -- of times during the day is concerned you tve notes of your arrival. Do you have notes of any other times during the. day? have notes of when we collected t pieces of evidence a piece of bloody gauze and some dirt from the roadway. "hen was that? Those times are at : and : in the afternoon.. i i! : - -. G

18 Were those times after you had made your phone call to -- to Mr. -- to Mr. Baird? A don't recall. o Did you talk to anybody after you talked to Mr. did you a:ld Mr. Ogino talk to anybody after you talked to H'. Baird? A Okay. -- know that we talked to Mr. Longhetti at one point but believe that was concerning another issue. J.nd again l-lr. Ogino talked to Mr. Longhetti. 0 believe that was concerning a request for overtime. Q. 'hen -- when was was that request made before or /"- after you talked to Mr. Baird? don't recall. Well after you -- did you talk to anybody else? Not to my knowledge no unless Mr. Ogino did himself. (No omissions.) U " - -. U " J

19 T 0 0. tst al::cut - did}'ol ever have any conversations with k.r. Koc his? We did have a conversation with Mr. Kottrneier. 0. Was Mr. Kochis present? k believe so yes. 0. And did the conversation that you had with.r. Kottmeier k take place before or after your conversation with l>tt. Baird? That was before. 0. And did that likewise concern asking for more time? k Yes it did. p.gain Y.r. Ogino did the talking in that conversation. 0. But you were present? Yes was. At some point in tine do you recall doing some testing uslg ortho-tolidine on some suspected bloodstains in a refrigerator? Not specifically in a refrigerator. reoember doing tests on a can believe it was Olpia Gold beer can. Did you sequence that in tes of these events? Did that occur after you had talked to Mr. Baird and Mr. Kottmeier? believe it was before but 'm not sure. AS far as doing -- completing the rk of analysis that you set out to do that is analyzing the blood spatter patterns alone how much additional time would....:.... _ " n u u : L U "

20 0 that rve taken you? At that polt believe using two crlinalists it would have taken two possibly three days. Why wold it take that long? Because of the complexity of the scene. There was a lot of blood spatter to analyze also dependent on how ch we were going to do with it. well at a minimum in order to document the -- the blood spatter patterns you nead to take perpendicular photographs of the blood spatter patterns with a ruler showing in the photograph so you'd have some idea of the distance; is that correct? n order to document them yes. And that process could have been dene in an hour or two? Not in that room no. That would have taken believe a full day to do it properly. THE COURT: Just to photograph? THE tutness: Yes sir. There was a lot of blood spatter BY MR. NEGUS: well how sll an area do you have to -- A. did you have to photograph in order to properly document it? t depends on e blood spatter that's there. n the Ryen bedroom. Okay. Again it depends on which blood spatter you're..:.:. "'-"" ".-. n u : L

21 " i 0 talking about. There were several that varied in size and complexity. 0- Okay. Let's take -- take the -- start with the east wall between the dresser and the -- and the glass doors. A. As to how small an area? 0- s Yeah. How many photographs would you have to take of that east wall to be able to document it?.: A- Okay. Just between the dresser and the glass door 0 would have taken probably three. 0- Okay and using a tape recorder to dictate what you're A. ' taking photographs of one crimlalist could have done that in three inutes: correct? would say it depends on how you do it. The way would have done it is gotten a tripod and a larger cera in there to docuent it with a scale and our normal procedure isn't using a tape recorder so it would have been taking notes. would have said three." U Q. pictres probably would have taken approximately 0 minutes to set up properly. The work that's involved in setting up properly is basically to make -- to visually observe that you have - - A. Q. a 0-degree angle fron lens to wall: is that correct? Or measure it wi a protractor preferably the latter. And then to focus the camera? C A. Yes.

22 Take the picture and make notes? Yes. How many pictures would you have needed taken of the glass doors? don't recall the glass doors at this time so don't -- can't tell you how much blood spatter was 0" there as to whether it would have been three shots four shots or one shot. Basically. could you have done the whole roon with 0 A. 0 shots? That sounds reasoable but it is hard to say at this A. point. So if it were 0 shots eva for three shots that would take you ee hours approximately? f you are asming at your speed of 0 minutes and a half 0 shots but 'm also assuming that it's going to take lonqer to set up some of those shots too because some 'Were obviously at different angles. Some were on pieces of furniture that were harder to see so you'd have to use different lighting to document that properly which would have taken additional ttce to set it up. could you have taken perfectly adeqate adate using photographs well you don't need to do color photographs in order to do this: right? Not necessarily no. would prefer color photographs. U " :f L L :

23 0. Just using a millir:leter camera can you take perfectly adeqate photographs just -- MR. KOCHS: for what? MR. NEGUS: reconstruction. THE COURT: Objection vag-ue perfectly adequate For the purposes of crime scene OVerruled. THE WTNESS Okay. Again you know what 0 i! am basing it on is that if you want to reconstruct e blood spatter you are going to want to blow up the pictures as large as possible. n order to do that properly you are going to need a larger camera. The one that would have used is one we have in our lab which is a Mamiya. 0. BYom. NEGUS: Oth than - - other tr.an taking photographs at 0-degree angles with a ruler and doentation of what you're taking photographs of what other work would you have r.ad to have done at the scene? A. Okay. At the scene itself if we are going to do you know total blood spatter reconstruction we would have also easured the angles at which the blood spatter was deposited Okay. -- which it would have involved taking a number of strings a number of earents some calculations -' U :J L L

24 : :.t. Q. A. A. Q. 0 A. A. A. A. and S where various patterns came from. And have you ever done that? Yes have. How long does that take? Again it depends on the blood spatter. The one that 've done it on is rather simple. Mr. Ogino. did that with That took -- think it took us about 0 n:inutes somewhere around there. Would it have been possible for one crlinalist to set up the strings while the other was documenting? That's wy said two crimlalists a minimum of two to three days. l'jell ho... long do you thlk it would have taken to set up just to try and locate e areas in which action occurred using the string method in the Ryen master bedroa:n? Again a minl of two to three days. CO:lplex scene. t was a very That's the kind of work that can't be done back in the laboratory or using photos; is that correct? That is correct ygs. Once you've done that work the. deperrling upon what infor-tion you get in a scene like the Ryen bedroom it's possible trt there wold be additional work that 'WOuld need to be done; is that -- is that correct? That is correct yes. t is a possibility. n u J L f J

25 .. /"' For example collecting evidence? A. That is a possibility yes. How would that work? mean why would that -- A. Basically if there was sorneing inconsistent with the blood spatters after doing that work that we had not seen by visual observation before then whatever it may be may clue us in to doing additional work. One example might be -- would one example be that if :;;... "'.. '." you traced the majority of blood back to the positions 0 where the victims had been lying and you found some blood that went to other places that that might / suggest to you several possibilities one of which that that might be the blood of an assailant? Or that the victims were moving around the room. t might suggest to you then that in order to test that hypothesis you'd want to take additional samples of blood? That is a possibility yes. U " Q. Getting back to the conversation that was held with Mr. Baird did you talk to Mr. Baird at all? No sir did not. (NO omissions.) J L f- a..

26 .. T 0 Did you talk to Mr. Longhetti? A Not that can recall no. Well you -- you're positive you didn't talk to A Mr. Baird but you 're not sure about Mr. Longhettil is that right? That's basically correct yes. {). Not absolutely sure about Mr. Baird either? A At this point don't believe that talked to him. But you 're not sure about that either then? k Not absolutely no. 0. At the point in time that you were stopped in your work by Sergeant Swanlund did you.likewise wish to collect more blood samples? Not at that point no. At some point in time did you? r.- oj A. Afterwards yes. o How long afterwards? A One was the preliminary hearing. would say can't really giveyou a date. believe it was ater June th June th when discovered the sa::ple that essentially did not belong to any of the victims. June th if -- would be the date that you discovered that there were six different types of blood in the house: is that right? A f that was the date yes. Would you look at your PGM results for June th

27 A. (Wiess complies.) Yes it was. A-! i i 0! 0- {l And why did that change your cind about wanting :nore samples? Basically because it indicated to me that there was a sixth person bleeding in that house and t.'lat it was a good likelihood that or a possible likelihood that t.t could have been the assailant. A."l.d that wanted to go back and see if o"e could find any more. That would be the value of collecting :lore. Did you have any suspicions that an assailant or assailants might be bleeding when you "re out there on t.lte th? /r---." A. No sir.... : Q. A. 0- A- Why not? Basically because all the things trat we saw were consistent with the victims. Did!-f.r. Baird come out to the sce."le on the th? don't beliee so no. U " 0- A. 0- Do you ramenber -- yeu were only there at the Ryen house on the th; is that right? Yes was. Do you - you remember a spot where the A- blood drop was collected being pointed out? :f L o A. 0- Yes do. And was that by Mr. Baird? : A. believe it had been pointed out earlier to me by one /

28 0 b of the detectives. That was pointed out to you as a blood drop that was sonehow roved from the -- from the action of the crime and just by itself; is that right? A. dontt know as it was pointed out to me as -- as stated -- as you stated but it was obvious that it was different or it was away from the action of the criz:te Did you suspect that ight be an assailantts blood? A That was one possibility that had cressed my mind. The -- the later possibility that crossed y mind at that point was that it was a blood drop that somehow the assailant had gotten on hself and dropped at that point from one of t.'&e victims. What -- what training did you rve in your -- in your particular career as a crlinalist with San Bernardino county as far as teachlg you you knw what -- what procedures were to be used as far as collecting and preserving physicai evidence is concerned? A Could you restate t.'e question. 'm not sure A Youtve worked for San Bernardino County for about five years? Yes sir. When you when you came to work was this your first job as a crioinalist? A. Yes it is. - n u u :J L o J

29 -- t What training were you given as far as procedures at the San Berrrdino County Sheriff's Office for collecting and preserving evidence? A. Basically my instruction was based on going to crime scenes with another or several other experienced criminalists and learning from them hew they collect evidence. Was there ever any -- any writt materials that you -"'--' ;. '.'.- ""'.' were furnished? 0 A. Myself no. Did you receive any instructions from tr. Longhetti? A. Not specifically no not from him. Did you ever receive any instructions that in any crime scene you should never overlook the possibility of finding the assailant's blood along with that of the victi!'ns? A. can't say that have ever received instructions like that no. Q. Was the content of the conversatio.n with -- between Mr. Ogino and.r. Baird -- did you hear both sides of that? No did not. Did you hear.r. Oqino's side? A. Not really no. Did you hear parts of it? U " :J L - - U " A. Yes did.

30 .;or.s::-:-"''::..' Did you hear -- did you hear Mr. Ogino request more time? A. Again don't reme::.ber specific words at this time. n gist trt was at the conversation was about believe. You can -- Did you -- okay. Excuse me. -- ask Mr. Ogino simply. Did you hear. OgLo articulate reasons why he wanted ::tore time? 0 A. Q. A. Q. don't recall at this point. Was Mr. Ogino raising his voice or getting excited during the conversation? Again don't recall at this point. n general. Ogino is not the kind of person trt nornally raises his vcice or gets excited about things; is that correct? would say in general no. Were you did you believe at that point in time that the urgency with which a request to your superios for more te would be treated would depend on how loudly and vociferously the request was made? Did believe at trt time? No. Do you believe that now? No. When you -- when y had -- when "..r. Ogino with you present. had talked to Sergeant Swanlund had Sergeant _.-'-"'.' -' U C

31 ::"... ;;... ;:. 00 SWanlund communicated to you that it _-as Mr. Kottmeier who wanted the evidence taken out of the bedroom? don't recall at this point. Q. Do you recall why he went to.mr. Kottmeier? B.!lsically believe it was kind of a coincidence that we were talking up at the crime scene again after Mr. Kottmeier was leaving. We asked hi."' at that point. Q. This was after you had been told by Sergeant SwanluM r! i _......_ t before you contacted Mr. aaird? 0 We contacted Mr. -- or Sergeant Swanlund after we contacted Mr. Kottmeier. " (\ Well did you -- when you -- when you talked to Mr. Kottmeier did you know that the -- tha t you were not going to have more time at that -- to analyze the scene? A. don t recall at this point. tole were -- lo'.r. Kottr.leier indicated to us to talk to somebody in charge with the Sheriff's Depart."'ent to -- in order to find out " U whether we did or did not. 0. ere did the meeting with Mr. Kottmeier take place? t was out on the lawn to the -- would say the northeast lawn'portion of the house. U;O omissions.) : c - - :J t.

32 TS 0 A Showing you photograph H- which shows amongst other things yourself Mr. Kochis and Mr. Ogino.. is at the approximate location where you had your conversation with Mr. Kott:neier? would say yes possibly a little bit further north of t.lult. Q. North o that photograph would be to the left of it? A. To the right. Oh excuse me. believe itls further north 0 to the right if that's looking at the east side of the house. When yo'.l talked to!'.r. Kottmeier fron where had you been coming? A. believe were cing from the road but 'm not sure. w'"hat had you been doing at the road? A. t's possible at that time tt we were oolleotlg the piece of gauze and the possible bloodstain in dirt from the roadway. v.'hen -- at that point in time had e truck arrived in which the stuff was being packed? A. don't believe so no. Had -- people from t.e CCD were there in the bedroom with you: is that right? They were in the bedroom yes. n u u : L C - Were they taking things apart?

33 .. 0 MR. KOCHS: Objection vag-..le as to what point in time are we talking about? THE COURT: Clarify it please. 0. BY MR. NEGUS: When you were doing your -- when you and Mr. Ogino were going around the room doing your analysis were they in there startlq to take things apart? A. While Mr. Oq ino and myself were in the room taking a :._...' look at the blood spatter don t believe they were 0 no at that point. 0. Well when you cet Mr. Koteier had they begun to take thing apart? A Again don't recall. 0. Did you and Mr. Ogino tell Mr. Kottrneier that you wanted more time at the crle scene? A Okay. Again.. Ogino did the talking. believe that was the gist of the conversation. -' U Q How long did that conversation last? A A couple of minutes at the most. Q. What did Hr. Kottmeier respond? A Essentially his end result was to ask the person in.- -: --: charge of the Sheriff's Office personnel at that point for additional time or request..- -U Q. Did Mr. Kottmeier indicate that he was the person that had decided to have the stuff removed? A. know that he indicated at least the wall or the south

34 0 wall of the master bedroom --as to be rel:loved and believe that it was from his reqest. don't recall what the -- who requested the additional stuff to be removed. {\ How did he conicate to you that it was his request that the south wall be removed? A. don't specifically recall. Was it -- did he appear defensive in communicating -... ' :..'-... ' that to you? 0 MR. KOCHS: Objection. That would call for speculation. THE COURT: Perhaps. Sustained. BY MR. UEGUS: Did he col'cnunicate to you a -- his A. belief that you were questioning his decision? Again don't recall whether he was or was not. Q. Did he give you any reason why he was referring you A. to the sheriffs? No he did not. o Did he give you any reason why he wanted to remove the A. south wall? He gave reasons based on previous case history guess. What was t.t? He mentioned so.-nething abou t the lack of bloodstain evidence : the t-'.anson case very quickly somethinq n u - -: --: - -- :J about t.t and that that was misplaced or lost

35 0 0. somehow in that case. Did he indicate to you basically that words to the effect of well we're definitely going to take the wall and that Mr. Kottrneier didn't ant there to be A. 0. any further question of blood evidence like there was in the Manson case? Something like that yes. When Mr. Ogino talked to Sergeant Swanlund did 0 Sergeant Swanlund say no right away or did he go an:! consult with somebody? A. believe his answer was no right away but m not sure at this point. Q. Y'he.ll you went -- when you talked to Sergeant Swanlund had!-'.r. Kottmeier already departed? A. Or in the process of departing yes. Do.you remember Mr. Swanlund went over to talk to Mr. Kottmeier? i A. No sir do not. 0. When.r. Ogino talked to Sergeant Swarund did he indicate that he wanted more time to analyze the blood patterns? A. Okay. Again don't recall the specific wording of what Mr. Ogino said. 0. Just the gist. A. don't know whether he said the blood spatter patterns alone. 'm not sure. U " :J L :J L. a

36 "0 But that was part of what he said? Again 'm not sure. Did he also indicate that he wanted time to collect additional evidence? Again 'm not sure Xactly what Mr. Ogino said but it was requesting addtional time. t was your belief at tha point in time -- was it your belief ct t>lt: point in time that if you were given more time you and Mr. Ogino you wculd be able 0 to find more e\ idence? A. t was my blief at: that time that it s a possibility t.."lat we may have found more evidence. Whether we would have or uld not have don't know at this point. Jt Lat possibility was based upon the need to do additional work in processing the bedroom? A. Yes sir. After your conversation \ith Mr. Baird no additional scientific rk was done at the scene; is that correct? That is correct yes. On Decaer last year did you talk to Mr. Forbush about these issues? don't recall the specific date. You did talk to. Forbush? n u :J L :J L Yes did. And it was about -- it was about the -- it was about

37 " ::';-: 0 your testimony at the preliminary hearing where you said you had not been given enough time; is that correct? A- Yes it is. S 0- s At t.at point in ti."'!le did you tell Mr. Forbush that that the question of extra te had been broached by.r. Ogino to }..r. Longhetti? A- may have yes. was unclear on that. believe it was Mr. Baird rather than '.r. Longhetti that we 0 talked about extra time. 0- s your belief now -- is that base:! on your own memory or somet.ing other people have told you? /"'---"" A- Basically talking with Mr. Ogino as to who he talked to requesting further time. (No omissions.) n u o

38 T 0 After you got off the phone on that conversation in the stables things were being boxed up; is that correct? A. Or shortly afterwards yes. And you and Mr. Ogino essentially participated in the work of dismantling the bedroom? A. Yes sir. When the -- ongst the items in the master bedroom from which you might -- might be able to get evidence 0 was the carpet one of them? A. Q. A. A. A. Tha t was one of those yes. n order to assure that evidence would be obtained from the carpet was it necessary to take any particular precautions in handling it? As it was being collected you mean or -- Just handling the carpet from the -- from the -- just in general. Okay. As far as if you're going to take it for the physical evidence that was on it it would have preferably been processed at the scene first of all. Why is that? Basically to elinate containation from other srces. And then other things trt -- well that that basically is my -- what would have done is would have precessed it at the scene for the evidence. u 'n : Wha t do you mean by "processed "?

39 0 A. To look over it possibly vacuum it for any trace evidence in connection with the blood spatter to see if there's any -- anything unusual on the carpet that we may want. That's basically it. Would you also want to take blood samples free various areas on the carpet? t depends. And that would be connected again with the blood spatter patterns. believe there were a ner of saoples taken froc where the victims were 0 reported to have been lyinq. A. A. A. Okay. is trt Were there four sacples in fact from the carpet correct of blood? 'm not sure exactly the exact number. about riqht. Four sounds They were -- you have your -- your summary there of the evidence collected; is that correct? Yes. do. And A- A- A- and A-0 are the only sacples of blood that were taken from the carpets in the master bedroom and the hallway: is that correct? Yes sir it is. Excuse me. believe A-. That's the bathroom is it not? Yeah. 'm not -- 'm not sure where that's from. And then A- A-. A- and are all taken from the master bathroom;. n u J L J U "

40 .;;:;..;; :. 0 is that correct? A. Okay. From Mr. Stockwell's evidence report that is what it says from the bathroom. So the -- the only samples that were taken from the from the carpet in the -- in the -- in the master bedroom would have been those which were directly underneath the victim; is trt right? A. Yes sir " " And in order to do the work that you wanted to do 0 it would have been necessary to take additional sat.lples than just those known sa.i?les; is that correct? A. t all depends on what we would have found out from the blood spatter evidence. Possibly yes possibly no. THE COURT: Are you about to conclude? MR. NEGUS: Conclude? 'm -- we can take a break if you want. THE COURT: wi the witness. You're not? thought you might be about finished MR. NEGUS: No. THE COURT: Okay. All right. Let' s take the morning recess. (Recess.) THE COURT; l-'.r. Negus. Mr. Kottmeier good rnornil'lg. BY MR. NEGUS: When the why was it important to to take the trace evidence fro!:! the carpet at the U " :

41 0 scene rather than after say the carpet is collected? As said before to minimize the contamination from ot...'er sources. Q. n this particular case did you see the carpet actually being taken away from the scene? A. Yes did. Q. Were adequate precautions taken during that work to preserve the carpet as best as could be for trace -.-: ;._'- '. analysis given the decision to take it away? 0 THE COURT: Counsel. 'm getting so bored with this same evidence. We've gone through it with every / witness now. know what S happened to that carpet from the 'WOrd go. MR. NEGUS: trn sorry Judge. THE COURT: As there has been no contrary evidence to speak of why do you belabor it? MR. NEGUS: That fs not true. f there had been no contrary evidence Your Honor wouldn't be doing it. on u. Kochis has brought in evidence that -- at that it was done correctly. mean that's been his -- certainly don't think he's conceding that it was done wrong. THE COURT: Well that's arent sir. Thatls not changing the facts. MR. NEGUS: Well but 'm trying to bring out the facts tat are -- he has -- he has produced -- he has J L :f J C produced Judge testimony fro.':l his witnesses that this is

42 :r.c..;;;.... " the way it was done correctly and think 'm entitled to bring out testimony from prosecution witnesses that it wasn't. THE COURT: urqe you but 'm not cutting you off Mr. Negus. Belabor it. Go ahead. MR. NEGUS: 'm sorry Judge. But belabor it 'm going - 'm afraid 'm going to do. THE COURT: Proceed. BY r.m. NEGUS: Were adequate precautions -- well take 0 it back. Start again. Given the decision to take the carpet away before trace evidence was collected were adequate precautions taken in the removal of it? A. n the idea of taking the carpet for specifically trace evidence no. What was not done? A. Well again the preferable thing to do here was to U " j collect the trace evidence before it was moved. A. A. Okay. The next thing that should have been done if it was collected for trace evidence is to isolate the carpet from other objects and things plus isolating different parts of the carpet from different parts of itself. And that wasn't done in -- in transporting it out? NO sir it was not. And in fact was the carpet left in the room while the j - j

43 S A south wall was being removed? believe the carpet was pulle:i back frcm the south lr.-all at the point when it was being ret:loved. 'm / 0 b not sure if it was up against the wall. don't believe it was. Was it back a couple of feet? A. Sounds reasonable hut 'm not -- don't rember. n Sowing you H- and H- did that depict the approxt A location of the carpet? When the wall was being re!loved yes. 0. Yes. A. Yes it does. Q. A. was the debris from the wall being transferred onto the carpet durlg that process of removal? A. Okay. don't recall specifically but there is obviously some debris on the carpet as in the photograph. 0. What sort of information can you get fro collecting trace evidence off the carpet? MR. KOCHS: Objection. rrelevant unless it's this case. Q. SY M..tt. NEGUS: n this case. A. Okay. That-- THE COURT: Overruled. l-. -' '..... " U J L :J U Go ahead. THE WTNESS: That depends on basically you know

44 the evidence itself. Possibly nothing. Possibly you could find hairs or fibers of anyone no was in the room previous to the collection. BY MR. NEGUS: Given the way that the carpet was treated in this particular case would the existence of hairs and fibers collected after the removal of the carpet from the -- fr the Ryen master bedroom have any remaining relevance? '_.. t-._... & They could yes. 0 Q.. How? A. Basically if you found a large nu.r of hairs or fibers something like that that indicates that it Q.. is not simply something that was deposited from transportation or such. Just isolated fiber and hairs which might have been significant before the -- before the -- the carpet was treated the way it was would no longer have significance? A. Okay. Given the basis on this case and the way the carpet -- the condition of the carpet in the first place don't think that hairs or fibers would have had much significance anyway. Q. Why not? A. Because it was a very unclean carpet. t was obviously n u C : - J not a well-kept house. What difference does that make? /---""'-""\

45 ; ;... That would tell rne that any fibers or hairs could have been very historic. They could have be"l there for you know as far as know two or three months. s there any way to determine fro looking at some kinds of hairs as to whether or not they had been there for any length of time? There is a possibility that you could look if a hair was removed forcibly you could possibly look at it at the root end for the presence of isczymes or enzymes 0 which were still fresh in the hairs. Wouldn't just the presence of -- having a -- an unshriveled root on the hair be iraication that it's fresh? k Okay. don't know enough about hairs to tell you whether it would or would not. 0. Was the carpet still dp while it was in there? k There were portions of the carpet that were damp yes. 0. Was Lere anything done that you saw to dry the carpet before it was transported away?- away?' k t was laid out on the lawn for a short period of tine yes. 0. Was that sufficient to dry it? k do not know. didn't test any of the spots to see if they were dry. 0. Did you see anybody else doing that? r r )"-.. ' n u : L : =t - a

46 A No did not. Did you make any protest to anybody about the way the carpet was being treated? A. No sir. (No omissions.) 0 -' U - - :J - :

47 Why not? A Basically because it was obvious to me that any analysis at the scene was cooplete and the analysis any analysis that we would do would be at the Sheriff's loft or wherever it was being taken. 0. Would it have been futile to try and have the carpet handled better at the scene than it was? MR. KOCHS: Objection. That calls for speculation on his part. THE COURT: Yes sustained. 0. BY MR. NEGUS: Did you feel it would be futile to atter.tpt to have it handled better at the scene? MR. KOCHS: Sarne objection. His feelings are going to call for speculation. THE COURT: Yes. Without better foundation it is a good obj ection. Sustained BY MR. NEGUS: Given the fact at the carpet was being taken to the loft why didn't you try and ensure that it was handled as well as it could be under the circumstances? A Okay for what purposes the purposes of collecting trace evidence? 0. For preserving it for all its various evidentiary value. A. Basically because at that time we did not have the proper tools or things to do it with "' '._ n u : l. - : o

48 What would have been necessary? To preserve all the trace evidence uld say you would have to wrap it in a brown paper before it was removed fro!:l the room. So for lack of brown paper you didn't make that request? Essentially yes. Why didn t you try and get brown paper? -"--:-- ""-: _. t " Because it was obvious at the tle that the carpet 0 was going to be re.or.oved at that time. {). What do you mean it was obvious? How was it obvious? /'------"""\ A. Well it was being pulled up and removed. {). Well was e situation that the people that were F'-llling it up and rer:oving it waren't paying any attention to advice from criminalists? A. No it was net. We did not give them advice as to how they were collecting the carpet. Q. sn't that your job? - U n some aspects yes. Why didn't you do it? At this point don't recall. - -j Did you specifically ask that the carpet not be treated the way it was that you be given more time to do it properly? No sir. o :J 0. Did you ask -- did you ask that you be given more time

49 to analyze the carpet? Well given the context of the previous statements about Mr. Ogino asking Mr. Swanlund the carpet would have been included in that any analysis that we would have done of the room. After the carpet was taken -- you knew it was going to be taken to the D loft: is that right? believe at that point knew that it was going to be taken to Property. have never been in the property 0 Division so don't know whether it was a 0ft or whatever... {l Why didn t you go down the next day to try and collect blood samples from it? At this point don't know. {l Had you gone do the next day would it have been likely that any blood samples that you would have n u collected would have still been able to be typed for for various genetic markers? believe so yes. {l Had there been any hairs with sheaths on them would they have been still able to he typed for genetic - tj markers had they been deposited during the crime? MR. KOCHS: Objection. That would call for speculation. THE COURT: SUstained. U " {l BY MR. NEGUS: Mr. Gregonis your basic specialty is

50 /'-----." /---"'" 0 serologyf correct? A. Yes it is. And amongst the things that serologists do is they A type hairs for isoenzymes; is that right? That would be one thing that can be done yes. And proteins? A. Yes. ;-lell as far as proteins 'm not sure but enzymes yes. How long can a hair re."!lain deposited on a scene before it loses its ability to be typed for isoenzymes? A. -Okay. As far as my experience in hairs it would be -- 've typed the."n three or four days old. So if you'd gone down on June it's possible you could still have been able to type the hairs that were on the carpet? A. f we could have found any yes. MR. KOCHS: Well Your Honor that assumes facts that are not in evidence and would object on that ground. t asses that there were such hairs. THE COURT: No. For our purposes overruled. MR. GUS: didn't hear -- THE COURT: OVerruled MR. NEGUS: didn't.hear whether got an answer or not. THE WTNESS: Excuse me. f we could have found any hairs like that yes ' l

51 :Q;:.; BY MR. NEGUS: When you were a t the - in the Ryen master bedroom was it possible for you to tell where Mr. Stockwell collected his samples from his blood samples? No sir not -- can' say that at this point 0 because don't recall ever looking at exactly where he did coll&et his samples from. Could you see any places in the Ryen master bedroom wit!:i patterns of blood from which it was obvious that no sle rd been taken? A. Okay. Again because did not look specifically for patterns or places where blood haj not been taken don't know. can't answer that question. A. A. A. Q. A. Q. Did you study any rooms of the house other than the hallway the master bathroom and master bedroom? We walked through variot.ls parts cf the house yes. Did you go into the non-master bathroom? Yes we did. Did y.l do y analyses in there? did an ortho-tolidine test for blood on a very smal.l quantity of blood. lihere was that small quantity of blood? t was around the sink area. Was it like -- was it a drop or a ear or a dilute stain or -- would say it was fly speck size. possibly it was..._ t..... n u :t U :t L L