1 SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA; MONDAY, JANUARY 6, 1997
2 8:30 A.M.
3 DEPARTMENT NO. WEQ HON. HIROSHI FUJISAKI, JUDGE
5 (PER COVER PAGE.)
6 (REGINA D. CHAVEZ, OFFICIAL REPORTER)
8 (The following proceedings were
9 held in open court outside the
10 presence of the jury.)
11THE COURT: Good morning.
12MR. PETROCELLI: Good morning.
13MR. GELBLUM: Good morning.
14MR. KELLY: Morning, Your Honor.
15THE COURT: Okay. Somebody wanted to do
16 something out of the presence of the jury.
17MR. LEONARD: Yes, Your Honor, we have two
19 First of all, I'd like to bring -- I
20 don't have a written motion, but I will file one by
21 the close of business today. We'd like to bring to
22 the Court's attention that the attacks on Robert
23 Groden that commenced in the courtroom were continued
24 by an agent of the plaintiff outside the courtroom by
25 way of a news conference that was broadcast on a local
26 television station, and also by an appearance or at
27 least a videotape on a national television program on
28 MSNBC; that person's name is David Lifton. He
1 represented himself to be a photographic consultant
2 for the plaintiffs. He's in the courtroom today,
3 sitting in the second row, back there, the gentleman
4 with glasses on the right-hand side there.
5 We'd ask that the plaintiffs be
6 sanctioned, that Mr. Lifton be excluded from the
7 courtroom, and additional sanction be levied against
8 the plaintiffs; and that would be that we bring before
9 the jury that the plaintiffs have violated the gag
10 order in particular by attempting to attack Mr. Groden
11 through this agent of theirs. He made very derogatory
12 remarks about Mr. Groden.
13 We have taken -- we had a full-blown
14 hearing on this. We have the tape-recordings we can
15 present to Your Honor.
16MR. GELBLUM: Morning, Your Honor.
17 Mr. Groden is not an agent of the
18 plaintiffs, he's --
19MR. PETROCELLI: Not Mr. Groden.
20MR. GELBLUM: Mr. Lifton is not employed, is
21 not the Mr. Lifton, is not a photographic agent, not a
22 consultant to the plaintiff's, he's a member of the
23 public who has known Mr. Groden for over 20 years and
24 has provided us with information regarding
25 Mr. Groden's background, and that is it. He's not our
26 agent, he's not under our control, never paid him a
27 dime. We don't intend to pay him a dime he's somebody
28 just like, I'm sure defendants have a person, who
1 provides us with information. He's not an agent, not
2 under our control.
3MR. LEONARD: I would like to put point out
4 that during the examination and cross-examination of
5 Mr. Groden, I saw Mr. Gelblum and Mr. Petrocelli
6 consulting with Mr. Lifton, that Mr. Lifton came into
7 the building this morning with the plaintiffs party,
8 he's sitting in the plaintiffs' seats, it was accepted
9 on national television that he was a consultant, a
10 photographic consultant for the plaintiffs.
11 It seems to me that if this gag order is
12 to have any teeth in it or have any affect, that they
13 can't use a shill like Lifton to make their point to
14 the press, and in the press and national television
15 that's exactly what's going on, so I think that --
16 that Mr. Lifton should be removed from the courtroom
17 at a minimum.
18MR. GELBLUM: He's not a shill, he's not under
19 our control. I can't tell him what to say or not to
20 say. I didn't tell him what to say or not to say. I
21 didn't know what he was going to say or not say. I
22 didn't know he was going to go on the television.
23THE COURT: Has he conferred?
24MR. GELBLUM: He has provided us information
25 about Mr. Groden's historical background, yes, Your
27 He's not consulted with us. He's not a
28 photographic consultant.
1THE COURT: What's his name?
2MR. LEONARD: David Lifton.
3THE COURT: Okay, sir, you're excluded. Step
5MR. LEONARD: Thank you, Your Honor.
6MR. LEONARD: The other matter is a -- we filed
7 by way of a written motion, and I'm not sure
8 whether -- whether it's ripe at this point because we
9 have gotten no indication whatsoever in written form
10 or even orally that the plaintiffs intend to utilize
11 these newly emerged photographs.
12 I think if you -- if you had an
13 opportunity to read the motion, I think it speaks for
14 itself. It's a total -- it's a 23 and a half hour
15 situation. We obviously are going to -- if these
16 photographs come into this case at all, we are going
17 to vigorously fight their -- their admission, we are
18 going to attack their authenticity naturally, and we
19 would need -- we would need time to do discovery on
20 this. We need to go back and do the deposition of
21 the -- of the photographer who purported to take the
23 Interestingly enough, the middle-man or
24 the agent who's either attempting to or has already
25 sold the photographs to a tabloid is the same one who
26 sold the Scull photograph that we're dealing with
27 here. We want to take his deposition. We want to
28 take the deposition of whoever was involved in the
1 discovery of this photograph including Mr. Kelly and
2 Mr. O'Connor, another attorney who was involved in
3 this effort with Mr. Kelly.
4 We think it's highly suspicious that the
5 photograph has emerged at this time, particularly in
6 view of the fact that there was -- there was an
7 investigation done, there were attempts at the
8 beginning of the criminal case to locate photographs
9 of Mr. Simpson, particularly among photographers at
10 football games.
11 So we would vigorously object to any
12 mention of this photograph at this juncture -- at any
13 point in this trial.
14 I can tell you one thing, that if -- if
15 they attempt to get this in, we're going to ask for at
16 least a two-week recess in order to investigate and to
17 do the appropriate discovery we need to do to prove
18 that this photograph is either irrelevant or faked.
19 So that's one thing that we'd be looking for.
20 And I think in the interest of fairness
21 and in the interest of judicial efficiency and under
22 the laws of the State of California, particularly the
23 discovery statutes, this photograph has no business
24 being in this case at this point. We haven't even
25 seen it yet, by the way.
26MR. PETROCELLI: Your Honor, there's absolutely
27 no basis for this position at all.
28 Mr. Simpson took that stand, under oath,
1 and said he was not wearing the shoes in that
2 photograph, he said the photograph was a fake.
3 Mr. Baker told the jury the same thing.
4 They put this would-be expert on the
5 stand to say that this photo is a fake. This is about
6 as pure impeachment as you can find, Your Honor.
7 You want to get on the stand and tell
8 those kind of -- make those kind of representations,
9 you have to suffer the risk that you may get caught
10 red-handed. That is what has happened.
11 These photos emerged this weekend. I
12 just got them on Saturday, Your Honor. They were just
13 handed --
14MR. LEONARD: You haven't --
15THE COURT: Excuse me. He didn't interrupt you
16 when you were talking, Mr. Leonard.
17MR. PETROCELLI: I just got them this weekend.
18 There are photos, eight or nine of them,
19 contact sheets, and everything from the same game,
20 Your Honor, the September 26, 1993, game, taken by a
21 completely different photographer unrelated to -- to
22 Mr. Scull.
23 In addition, one of the photographs
24 appeared in a Buffalo Bills newsletter of sorts, that
25 was printed and circulated to the public. Mr. Simpson
26 and his defense lawyers obviously had full access to
28 This is classical impeachment material,
1 Your Honor, and they don't have any right to advance
2 disclosure of it, even if we had obtained it in
3 advance, which we did not.
4 We fully intend to confront the witnesses
5 with the photographs that directly destroy the
6 representations they made to this jury, Your Honor.
7THE COURT: Well, I order you to make them
8 available to the defense.
9MR. PETROCELLI: Give them copies, Steve.
10MR. LEONARD: Your Honor.
11THE COURT: Yes.
12MR. LEONARD: We have had no opportunity to
13 look at these photographs to determine whether they're
14 authentic. There's no chain of custody that's been
15 developed on these. I think it's highly improper for
16 them to be put in at this point.
17 Your Honor, we've had no opportunity to
18 look at them. It would seem after the first time --
19 is it -- are you going to permit them to confront this
20 witness with these photographs when they haven't been
21 able to establish any kind of a chain with them, where
22 they were taken, how they were taken, whether they're
23 authentic at all? I think that's highly unfair to us
24 at this point, Your Honor, and I would object.
25MR. PETROCELLI: First of all, we will right
26 now make copies of everything available to you.
27 Secondly, you have indicated a number of
28 times to the Court how you were going to tie things up
1 later on.
2 We can authenticate these pictures
3 through the defendant himself, no less, Your Honor,
4 when we question him about the photographs and to
5 allay any possible concern, I have produced a sworn
6 affidavit of the photographer who has indicated that,
7 if necessary, he will come to testify in this court
8 and authenticate the photographs.
9THE COURT: Okay.
10MR. LEONARD: File it.
11MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, we would like a
13THE COURT: File it.
14MR. LEONARD: This is something, again, I
15 haven't seen, Your Honor.
16MR. PETROCELLI: This is my only copy.
18 (Mr. Petrocelli hands document to
21MR. LEONARD: It's a total sandbag.
22THE COURT: That's usually what impeachment
23 amounts to, counsel.
25 (Court reviews document.)
27THE COURT: When is this witness going to be
1MR. PETROCELLI: We can make him available on
2 24-hour's notice. We were planning to call him in our
3 rebuttal case. I'm told the defense is resting
4 probably by the end of this week or early next week,
5 and he will probably be our first witness.
6THE COURT: Okay. Serve a copy on the defense.
7MR. PETROCELLI: Thank you.
8MR. LEONARD: We'd like an opportunity to
9 depose this witness.
10THE COURT: You can do whatever you can to
11 assist you in your case. This is rebuttal evidence.
12THE COURT: Okay. Is there anything else?
13 What about the declarations that also
14 were filed with respect to Ferrara and Siglar.
15MR. PETROCELLI: It seems like this fellow
16 can't serve many people, Your Honor, but the bottom
17 line is I don't have any objection to Ms. Ferrara
18 being read in by her criminal trial testimony. We'll
19 read in our portions.
20THE COURT: There's no objection, then I will
21 allow it.
22MR. PETROCELLI: And --
23THE COURT: It appears that the declaration
24 with regards to Siglar is sufficient on its face.
25MR. PETROCELLI: As to the one regarding
26 Mr. Siglar, I haven't yet seen the designations. Once
27 I see the designations, I'd be happy to confer about
28 our position on that.
1THE COURT: Bring the jury in. Who are we
2 starting with?
3MR. GELBLUM: Mr. Groden.
4THE COURT: Okay.
5MR. GELBLUM: He still resumes the stand.
7 (Jurors resume their respective
10THE COURT: Morning, ladies and gentlemen.
11JUROR: Morning, Your Honor.
12THE CLERK: You are still under oath.
13 Would you please state your name again
14 for the record.
15THE WITNESS: Robert -- Robert Groden.
16THE CLERK: Thank you.
17THE COURT: You may proceed.
20 BY MR. GELBLUM: (continued)
21Q. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
22 Morning, Mr. Groden.
24Q. Because it's been quite a while since
25 We've been here, I thought we'd start by summarizing
26 where we were, about the point you were making about
27 the photograph in question.
28 Try to write on the easel here.
1 The first problem that we discussed --
2 the first issue we discussed on the cross-examination
3 was the blue lining that you saw on the picture of
4 Mr. Simpson wearing Bruno Magli shoes, between the
5 image and the sprocket holes, correct?
6A. I believe that was the first one.
7Q. The blue line?
9Q. I'm just going to write blue line up
11MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I'm going to object
12 to going through the cross-examination again. This
13 has been asked and answered.
14MR. GELBLUM: Very quickly.
15THE COURT: Overruled.
16 Go ahead.
17Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And you acknowledged,
18 at one point, that that could be a scratch, correct?
19A. Yes, I believe so.
21 And we also looked at some of the other
22 photographs, and again we saw blue lines between the
23 image and the sprocket holes, but you said those were
24 different than the ones on this picture; is that
26A. That's correct.
28 The next -- next point we talked about
1 was the alignment of the -- of the photographs,
2 correct, the alignment of the frames?
4MR. GELBLUM: Steve, could you put up 1832,
5 please, on the monitor.
7 (Exhibit 1832 displayed.)
9Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And your point was that
10 No. 1 and No. 2, No. 1 being the picture of
11 Mr. Simpson with the Bruno Magli shoes, were not
12 aligned, right?
13A. 1 and 2 were not aligned.
14Q. You're saying that those are the only
15 adjoining frames on the contact sheet that were not
17A. That's correct.
18Q. We looked at some others and you
19 disagreed about -- with -- about them being
21A. Yes, that's correct.
22Q. Did you look at other contact sheets,
23 too, to see if there were any out of alignment?
25Q. You found none of those were out of
26 alignment either?
27A. That's correct.
28Q. On this point, I think you did agree with
1 me that there is some?
2MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I'm going to object.
3 He's now back on this point of asking specific
4 questions. This has all been asked and answered.
5MR. GELBLUM: This is going to take less than
6 five minutes to bring it up to speed. There are
7 points to be made later that have to do with the
8 totality of his evidence. I have to get it in before
9 the jury. It's fair.
10THE COURT: Ask it in the form of a question,
11 not in the form of an argument.
12MR. GELBLUM: That's fine, Your Honor.
13Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Do you recall that we
14 discussed that there is some play in the back of a
15 camera that allows the film to move through?
16A. You made that representation.
17Q. And you agree with me that there is
18 normally some play?
19A. I don't believe that I agreed with that.
20 I said that -- that it would vary from camera to
23 And -- but you -- in any event, you said
24 that that play that varies from camera to camera would
25 not account for the misalignment, in your opinion?
26A. Not by this amount, no.
27Q. And then the next point we discussed was
28 the -- the issue of the length.
1 Your opinion is that the photograph of
2 Mr. Simpson wearing the Bruno Magli shoes is longer
3 than the other frames, correct?
4A. That's correct.
5Q. And I want to make sure, did you compare
6 it only to the one next to it or did you compare it to
7 every other frame on the contact sheet?
8A. Well, to be fair, since the first two are
9 disconnected from all the others, the only one we can
10 rely on as being together are the first two, I would
11 think that to be fair in the argument we can only
12 compare the first two.
13Q. Is that all you compared?
14A. No, I compared the rest as well.
15Q. And your testimony was that this frame of
16 Mr. Simpson is longer than all the other frames?
18Q. And we talked about that at your
19 deposition, and you had said that you had enlarged the
20 contact sheet eight times, to make it eight times
21 bigger, and at that measurement, at this size, you
22 measured it, the measurement was approximately a
23 quarter of a millimeter longer, right?
24A. As I pointed out, that was a rough
25 approximation, it wasn't accurate.
26Q. I think you said it was an arbitrary
28A. Yes. The way it was actually stated was
1 it wasn't a quarter of a millimeter, a quarter of a
2 millimeter, give or take.
3Q. Anyway that was an arbitrary figure?
5Q. And you made that eight times enlargement
6 on a photocopying machine, not a photographic
7 enlarger, is that right?
8A. That's correct.
9Q. And you believe that the photocopy image
10 is an absolutely 100 percent accurate, precise
11 reproduction of the size of what it's coping?
12A. My opinion is that a photocopying machine
13 does not give the option for -- for photographic
14 manipulation. It's just a straight scan copy, rather
15 than a photographic copy.
16Q. But do you believe that the copy does not
17 distort or stretch the image in any way whatsoever,
18 the photocopy?
19A. It's my opinion that it probably doesn't.
20 I have no personal knowledge whether it
21 does or doesn't. I'm not a photocopying machine
23Q. So if the photocopy does distort or
24 stretch the image, the image would not necessarily be
26MR. LEONARD: Objection, lack of foundation.
27THE COURT: Sustained.
1 (Court reviews real time screen.)
3Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) You don't know whether
4 it's an accurate reproduction?
5MR. LEONARD: Objection, lack of foundation,
6 called for speculation.
7THE COURT: Overruled. This man works on copy
9MR. LEONARD: No, I don't think that's
11Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Is it true you don't
12 know whether the photocopy accurately and precisely
13 reproduces the size of the image?
14A. I have no way of knowing whether any
15 particular machine might be different than another.
16Q. Where did you have your copies made, the
17 eight times enlargements?
18A. I have them made in Dallas at -- I
19 believe it was either Kinko's or something of that
22 The next point we discussed was the point
23 about the edge.
24MR. GELBLUM: Steve, can you put up -- do you
25 have the slides?
26 I think it's 2282, exhibit slide No. 3.
27Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) All right.
28 And we discussed -- you said that there
1 was an extra edge down here at the bottom, is that
2 right, that has some parallel lines in it?
3A. Yes, there is a horizontal and several
4 vertical lines.
5Q. And your opinion was that there was no
6 natural process in photography that could possibly
7 account for that?
8A. That's correct. There's no photographic
9 reason I can find for that.
10Q. You agreed though, that frame zero which
11 comes just before the frame we're looking at here
12 could, in theory, as the photographer's loading the
13 camera and clicking the film through, be underexposed
14 through the length of the camera and produce
15 underexposed images, correct?
16A. In theory.
18 And I asked you whether those parallel
19 lines can be an underexposed image of the lines in the
20 football field that we see in other frames, and you
21 said there's no way in the world?
23MR. LEONARD: Objection. He's going back
24 through cross-examination. He's going point by point.
25THE COURT: I'm about to sustain that objection
26MR. GELBLUM: I'm about done.
27Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) The last point that we
28 went through last time was something about the left
2MR. GELBLUM: You can take this off, Steve
3 Steve, do you have the exhibit number for
4 these enlargements.
5MR. FOSTER: Yes, 2287.
7 (Exhibit 2287 displayed.)
9Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Putting up 2287, this
10 was the enlargement of Mr. Simpson wearing the Bruno
11 Magli shoes.
12 You said that there is a retouching mark,
13 what you perceive to be a retouching mark on the left
14 leg right above a fold in the pants, right?
15A. Near a fold in the pants, yes.
17 Now, another point that you mentioned
18 with Mr. Leonard was a problem with the right leg as
20MR. GELBLUM: Can everyone see this?
21 You said --
22 Do you have the slide for that one?
23 I apologize. It's No. 7. 2282 and
24 No. 7.
25Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) You said that you
26 observed some kind of linear tonal change across the
27 leg; is that right?
28A. That's correct, with retouching marks
1 attached to it.
2Q. Now, you remember at your deposition, we
3 went through -- you gave me a list of the observations
4 you had made at that time that you said led you to the
5 conclusion that the photograph is probably a fake,
6 remember that?
8Q. And you didn't mention this, did you?
9A. I had interpreted that as being wind
10 effect, that's the way I had spoken about at the
12Q. You didn't mention a linear tonal change
13 across the right leg at all at your deposition, did
15A. Not with that -- not with that
16 phraseology, no.
17Q. Well, you didn't.
18MR. GELBLUM: Put up 2291, please.
20 (Exhibit 2291 displayed.)
22Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) This was the list of
23 your observations that you gave me at the deposition,
24 that you said were all the observations you made
25 regarding the photograph being a fake, right?
27Q. I'll hand you a copy of it so you can see
28 it better.
1 There's nothing at all on there about a
2 linear tonal change in the right leg, is there?
3A. It's not on this, but we did discuss it.
4Q. We didn't discuss linear tonal change in
5 the right leg, did we, sir?
6A. Three -- we discussed three differences
7 in the two lengths that appear to be different
8 responses to wind; one being affected, the other one
9 not. That was the same issue I was talking about.
10Q. There's nothing on the piece of paper you
11 gave me at your deposition that you said was the
12 complete list of your observations about anything
13 about wind difference; is there, sir?
14A. No, there's nothing on that.
16 When did you come up with that one, sir?
17MR. LEONARD: Objection. Argumentative, Your
19THE COURT: Overruled.
20A. We had discussed it at the deposition and
21 I had told you at that time it was a complete list.
22 Before we left we had more issues than
23 are on that list. You know that.
24Q. I know you did not discuss that.
25 Your lawyer can point it out in his
27MR. LEONARD: I object to this argument in
28 front of the jury.
1THE COURT: Sustained.
2MR. GELBLUM: You can take that down, Steve.
3 Put up 1832 again, please.
4Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Another point you made
5 with Mr. Leonard on direct examination was about the
6 tint of the photograph of Mr. Simpson wearing the
7 Bruno Magli shoes.
8 Do you recall that?
10Q. You said that all the other frames have a
11 slightly blue or blue to green tint, and this frame
12 alone has a pinkish tint or magenta tint, right?
13A. That's correct.
15MR. GELBLUM: Is that the whole sheet, Steve?
17 (Elmo adjusted.)
19Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Did you know,
20 Mr. Groden, that of all the other frames on the
21 contact sheet, other than this one, there's a green
22 field evident, and in this one Mr. Simpson is walking
23 on a red and white end zone?
24A. Of course, yes.
25Q. Did you notice that?
27 But you don't think that could account
28 for the different tint?
2Q. There are different kinds of reflections
3 that photographers deal with, right?
5Q. There something called spectral
6 reflection. You heard of spectral reflection?
8Q. Spectral reflection is what happens when
9 light hits a shiny surface and bounces off something
10 like a mirror, it comes right in and goes out, right,
11 out the same angle?
12A. Doesn't necessarily have to be the same
14Q. It's a pretty clean reflection?
16Q. And diffused reflection, on the other
17 hand, is when light hits on a non-shiny surface like a
18 football field, and light diffuses out in all
19 directions, correct?
22 Now, I think -- as an example of this
23 difference in tint, other than this green and red you
24 pointed to --
25MR. GELBLUM: You can take that down, Steve.
26 Mr. Simpson's shirt, again, I'm putting up 2287.
27MR. FOSTER: Yeah.
28Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And we'll put it here,
1 if you don't mind, and I'll show it to you first, and
2 then show it to the jury. The light's not good here.
3 You said that the pinkish tint was so
4 pronounced you thought Mr. Simpson was wearing a pink
5 shirt in this picture?
6A. I said I had to find out whether it was
7 pink or not because it does appear so pink, especially
8 in the shadow areas.
9Q. You said you thought he was wearing a
10 pink shirt rather than a white?
11A. I said I had to find out -- it appears to
12 me that, possibly, he was wearing a pink shirt.
13Q. In this picture?
15Q. I'll show this to the jury.
16 Your eyes tell you that that is a pink
18A. Can I see it again?
20 (Witness reviews photograph.)
22 A. Yeah. Look in the shadow areas, you can
23 definitely see that. See. (Indicating.)
24Q. I'm not talking about shadows. I'm
25 talking about a pink shirt.
26 You said it was a pink shirt, right?
27MR. LEONARD: Objection, argumentative.
28THE COURT: Overruled.
1A. The shirt itself in the photograph.
2Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Mr. Groden, you said
3 you thought it was a pink shirt, right?
4MR. LEONARD: Objection, that's asked and
6THE COURT: Overruled.
7A. That's not what I said.
8Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) All right.
9 Turn to your testimony on December 18,
10 direct examination, page 190, trial testimony, lines
11 20 to 24, this is on your examination by Mr. Leonard.
12MR. LEONARD: What page?
13MR. GELBLUM: Page 190.
14MR. LEONARD: Okay.
15Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) The two prints in
16 question show a reflective value. Frame 1-1 shows a
17 magenta and pinkish tint to a point of where just
18 inspected this photograph, I thought it was a pink
19 shirt instead of a white shirt.
20A. I stand corrected. What I meant was --
21Q. Thank you.
22A. I had to find out whether it was.
23Q. I didn't ask you what you meant. I just
24 asked you what you said.
25 Are you saying that shirt in that picture
26 is a fake?
27A. No, of course not.
28Q. You know Mr. Simpson sat where you sat
1 and admitted it was his shirt, don't you?
2 end oj01061a
3 BEGIN SECTION OJ0106-2.TRF
4A. I have no way of knowing that.
5Q. You didn't know that?
6A. No. I don't doubt that it's his shirt.
7Q. Now, another point you made with
8 Mr. Leonard had to do with the right shoe.
9MR. GELBLUM: Can you put up the slides, Steve,
10 that show the reflection on the bottom of the shoe.
11Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) You said that the red
12 reflection on the sole of the right shoe should be
13 white, correct?
14A. From my analysis of it, it appears that
15 it should be white, that's correct.
16Q. That's based entirely on your perception
17 that his foot is over the white area, correct?
19Q. All right.
20A. No, it's based on the angle of the bottom
21 of the shoe as well.
22Q. It's your opinion, based on your
23 perception, that the shoe is over the white area on
24 the field, correct?
25A. I didn't say that. I just said -- I just
26 said it's not true.
27Q. Look at your -- look at your trial
1MR. GELBLUM: Page 185, Mr. Leonard, lines 20
2 to 23. I can read the whole sentence if you want.
3 Got it? December 18, page 185.
4MR. LEONARD: Okay.
5MR. GELBLUM: Okay.
6Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) (Reading:).
7 The bottom of the shoe on the
8 right foot appears to be reflecting
9 light, indicating a sole pattern based
10 on the positioning of that shoe over the
11 line. It's my opinion that should be
12 reflecting white instead of red.
13 Is that what you said?
14A. The position of the shoe, yes.
15Q. You weren't saying it's over the -- onto
16 the white?
17A. No, I said the positioning of the -- of
18 the shoe over the line, the shoe is over the line.
19Q. So you're saying the shoe is over the
20 line. Okay.
21A. It's above the line.
22Q. Where is the tip of the shoe in your
23 perception, sir?
24A. In this particular case it's very
25 difficult to tell because you don't have a side view.
26 However, the angle of the bottom of the shoe would
27 reflect off the white rather than the red.
28Q. Well, Mr. Groden, the red reflection goes
1 all the way back down here, doesn't it?
2 This is your slide, sir.
4Q. The reflection goes --
5A. It could be lightened up to show it
7Q. There you go.
9 (Elmo readjusted.)
11Q. The red reflection goes how far back?
12A. The red reflection goes on the outside
13 extending beyond the edge of the shoe back to the
14 bottom back into the shadowy area.
15Q. Almost to the heel?
17Q. You're saying that that entire shoe is --
18 entire part of the shoe is over the line?
19A. No, the -- no, the entire part we're
20 talking about the reflection of the edge here.
21Q. You're mathematics tells you that shoe
22 and that position should be reflecting white?
23A. It's my opinion it should be, yes.
24Q. Now, the lens that was used by Mr. Scull
25 was a long lens, right?
27Q. One of those long lenses that you see
28 photographers use at football games?
2Q. 500 millimeter lens.
3 And that kind of lens when you use it
4 compresses space, right?
5A. Yes, it's called foreshortening.
7 The distance between objects seems much
8 smaller than they actually are?
9A. Depending on the distance from the
10 camera, yes.
11Q. Is it your testimony, sir, that if --
12 even if that foot is entirely over the red, it should
13 still be reflecting white?
14A. Based on the angle, I believe it should
15 be reflecting white.
17 And what do you mean by based on the
19A. Well, we're not talking about a ricochet
20 effect where we're going this way and bouncing off to
21 the far end. We're talking about a reflective
22 situation that you see through a mirror, the mirror
23 bounces off at a specific angle, as with the bottom of
24 the shoe, if in fact there is any legitimate
25 reflection at all.
26Q. Do you think there should be some
28A. On the bottom of a shoe of that color, I
1 would doubt it. I certainly doubt that it would,
2 though, the way it does in this photograph.
4 I just want to be clear what you're
6 Now, you agree, sir, the shadow of the
7 shoe in that picture is entirely in the red, right?
8A. The shadow that -- which we see a shadow
9 is, yes, but the shadow is much shorter than the
10 actual shoe. And considering the lighting, I think
11 that if it were a direct single point of light, it
12 would extend farther and into the light.
13Q. Whatever shadow there is is entirely on
14 the red, there's no shadow on the white?
16MR. GELBLUM: Steve, would you put up the next
17 slide, the next one for him, but on the left shoe,
18 showing the red extending beyond the sole.
19MR. FOSTER: Number 6.
20MR. GELBLUM: This is 2282, number --
21MR. FOSTER: 6.
22MR. GELBLUM: Thank you.
23Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And so you also have a
24 problem with the left shoe, right?
25A. That's correct.
27 And your problem here is that --
28MR. GELBLUM: That's not -- that's not the
1 right one. Sorry. Number 9. Number 9.
2Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) The problem here is you
3 say that the red extends beyond both the right sole
4 and the left heel?
5A. That's correct.
6Q. And that could just be a printing issue,
7 couldn't it, sir?
8A. Can you restate that.
10 You're aware that colors can be changed
11 very easily in a printing process, right?
13Q. You can make this whole photo green if
14 you wanted to?
17 And if there's too much red in the
18 printing, that could cause this kind of effect,
19 couldn't it?
20A. No, I wouldn't think so, not based on the
21 rest of the photograph.
22Q. And diffused reflection that we discussed
23 before could also cause this effect, right?
24A. But it doesn't anywhere else on the
26Q. But it could cause it on the shoes --
27 well, the shoes are closest to the reflective surface?
28A. If you got the reflective surface itself
1 which has no such effect --
2Q. Sir, try to answer my question.
3A. I think I just did.
4Q. No, I don't think you did.
5MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object to Mr.
6 Gelblum --
7MR. GELBLUM: I object to the witness not
8 answering the questions.
9THE COURT: Okay.
10 Answer the question.
11Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) The shoes are closest
12 to the reflective surface, right?
14Q. And couldn't the red that you see be a
15 result of the reflection from the surrounding
17MR. LEONARD: Objection, asked and answered.
18THE COURT: Overruled.
19A. I think not.
20Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) You don't think it's
22A. I don't think that's what we're seeing.
23 It extends beyond the physical surface itself.
25 Would you agree that the general lighting
26 in this photograph is from the back -- roughly from
27 the back?
28MR. GELBLUM: I'll put up the whole photograph.
1 You can take that down.
3 (Mr. Foster complies.)
5Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) The light seems to be
6 coming from his right and behind a little bit?
7A. No, I can't agree with that at all.
9 In any event, sir, are you aware that the
10 kind of red aura that you claim to see in that picture
11 is something that happens with back-lit objects?
12A. Under certain lighting and atmospheric
13 circumstances, I guess it could.
15A. Why only one picture? Why not all the
17Q. We've already discussed, sir, that this
18 is the only picture on the whole roll where somebody
19 is walking and on a red surface, haven't we?
20A. No, I don't believe we have.
21Q. You do have memory problems?
22MR. LEONARD: Objection, argumentative.
23THE COURT: Overruled. He testified to that at
24 the last session he was a witness at.
25A. Yes, I have problems with memory.
26Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Quite severe sometimes,
28A. It happens.
1Q. Let me go on to the next point.
2 You said something about you had a
3 problem with the exposure, right, exposure between
4 various photographs?
5A. That's correct.
6Q. Now, exposure in a photograph depends on,
7 oh, a whole host of factors, right?
9Q. The size of the opening of the shutter
10 when it's open is one factor?
14Q. And amount of time the shutter is open?
15A. When you say shutter, you mean aperture?
18Q. The time that the shutter is open?
19A. That's correct.
20Q. The film speed?
22Q. The amount of light at the moment the
23 photo is clicked?
24A. That's correct.
25Q. All sorts of things?
27Q. Now, you've taken lots of pictures in
28 your life, right?
2Q. And you've had pictures where some of the
3 pictures on the roll are exposed properly and some are
4 not exposed properly?
5A. That's correct.
6Q. You've even had situations where you got
7 a good exposure followed by bad exposure followed by
8 good exposure, right?
9A. Depending on the camera, yes.
10Q. Now, what you said about this on direct
11 examination -- I'm going to read it. I want to make
12 sure we get it exactly right.
13MR. GELBLUM: It's page 194, Mr. Leonard, from
14 December 18.
15MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object unless there
16 can be a foundation laid with this inconsistent
18THE COURT: Overruled.
19MR. GELBLUM: Are you there?
20MR. LEONARD: 194?
21MR. GELBLUM: Yes, lines 3 to 11.
22MR. LEONARD: Of the trial testimony?
23MR. GELBLUM: Yes. It says, "The ones near
24 Mr. Simpson" -- I'm sorry, could you put up 1832
26MR. FOSTER: The same?
27MR. GELBLUM: 1832, the contact sheet, yes.
1 (Exhibit 1832 is displayed.)
3MR. GELBLUM: Thank you.
4Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) (Reading:).
5 The ones near Mr. Simpson are
6 extremely overexposed and they're the
7 only ones that are overexposed,
8 indicating that perhaps someone had
9 tried, at some point, to balance frames
10 of him to the mean roll and perhaps did
11 not bother to make any kind of a
12 correction around the ones close to him.
13 It's conjecture, but there is a
14 problem with that because the exposures
15 are so dead on for all the rest.
16 Do you recall that testimony?
17A. Pretty much, yes.
18Q. And the one from Mr. Simpson is dead on,
19 too, right?
20A. Can -- can we focus that and top light
22 (Elmo is adjusted.)
25 Mr. Groden, the exposure from Mr. Simpson
26 is dead on as well? That was the point of your
2 Now, sir, isn't it true that, unless
3 you're looking for conspiracies everywhere you go in
4 life, to the extent there's any problem with the
5 exposures in this, the problem is that the two that
6 are overexposed -- are overexposed, that's the only
7 problem, isn't it?
8MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object. That's
10THE COURT: Overruled.
11A. Can you repeat the question.
12Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Yeah.
13 The only problem with the exposures on
14 this contact sheet is that these two, numbers 2 and 3,
15 are overexposed, that's the only problem, right? The
16 other exposures, including the one of Mr. Simpson, are
17 perfectly exposed, right?
18A. Yes, they're all normal except those two.
19Q. Now, when Mr. Simpson was -- I'm sorry --
20 Mr. Leonard was examining you, you added another point
21 that you didn't make at your deposition having to do
22 with moisture.
23 Do you recall that?
24A. In response to a question?
25Q. Yes, from Mr. Leonard.
26A. I believe, if I remember correctly, I was
27 asked whether I noticed any moisture on the shoe or on
28 the field, and I answered as I recall.
1Q. No, no, you answered more than that. You
2 answered you would have expected to see some moisture
3 on the side or sole of the shoe or even some splashing
4 where the heel hit the ground.
5 Do you recall that?
6A. Based on the representation that it had
7 been raining that morning, yes.
9 Who made that representation to you?
10A. I don't recall.
11Q. Well, did you talk to any defense lawyer
12 besides Mr. Leonard?
13A. I've spoken with several of them.
14Q. Which one told you it was raining that
15 morning, sir?
16A. I don't recall. As I remember, it was --
17 I was told it -- or it was in the deposition somewhere
18 along the line.
19Q. Well, I'll tell you it wasn't in the
22 Who told you?
23A. I don't recall.
24Q. When did they tell you?
25A. I don't recall that either.
26Q. After the deposition, right?
27A. Again, I don't recall.
28MR. GELBLUM: Want to put up 2291 again,
3 (Exhibit 2291 is displayed.)
5Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) You didn't mention this
6 point at the deposition, did you?
7A. Wasn't a major point for me.
8Q. Well, please answer -- listen to my
9 question and the answers will go much faster.
10 You didn't mention it in the deposition,
11 did you?
12A. The answer is no.
13Q. Yet you said in court, on that stand that
14 it was one of the first things you looked for when you
15 went to Buffalo, right?
16 Do you recall that?
17A. I don't recall saying that, no.
18Q. You went to Buffalo before the
19 deposition, didn't you?
20A. That's correct.
21Q. You never mentioned this at the
22 deposition, did you?
23A. About moisture?
26Q. In fact, Mr. Leonard is the one who told
27 you to mention it on the stand?
28A. I don't know.
1Q. That's a point he told you to make?
2A. I was asked during the testimony if I saw
3 any moisture. I said no.
4Q. You were prepared for that, sir, weren't
5 you? You didn't hear that for the first time on the
7A. I told you I heard that it had been wet
8 on the field.
9Q. Mr. Leonard, before you testified, told
10 you to make a point of saying that there was no
11 evidence of moisture, right?
12A. That's correct.
13MR. LEONARD: Argumentative, asked and
15THE COURT: The answer may remain.
16Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) This is a whole kind of
17 different point. Your other points have to do with
18 photographic anomalies?
19A. That's correct.
20Q. This isn't a photographic anomaly, is it?
22Q. You don't expect to see moisture if the
23 field was in fact wet?
24A. That's correct.
25Q. You have no personal information
26 whatsoever about the field was wet at the time that
27 picture was taken, do you?
1Q. You weren't there, right?
2A. Of course not.
3Q. You never physically observed, visually
4 observed anything yourself -- anything yourself to
5 show you that the field was wet, have you?
7Q. You looked at the whole contact sheet,
9A. That's correct.
10Q. Nobody else's shoes are wet, are they?
12Q. Nobody else splashing around there?
14Q. So why would you expect to see Mr.
15 Simpson's shoes wet?
16MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object. This is
18THE COURT: Overruled.
19Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) So why would you expect
20 Mr. Simpson's shoes to be wet, sir?
21A. I heard that it had been raining, I don't
22 remember from where, but I would have expected that if
23 it had been raining, his shoes would have been wet.
24 It's not --
25Q. Sir, when you looked at other contact
26 sheets, nobody else's shoes are wet, are they?
28MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object,
1 argumentative, asked and answered.
2THE COURT: You've gone through that twice.
3MR. GELBLUM: Okay.
4Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Did you talk to a
5 single person that was at the game?
7Q. You talk to Mr. Simpson?
9Q. So obviously, if the field was not wet,
10 you wouldn't expect to see moisture, would you?
12Q. Now, I want to try and figure out exactly
13 what you're saying about this picture, sir.
14 By the way, have I listed all the points
15 you made about the picture that make you think that
16 it's probably a fake?
17A. All the points that we discussed, yes, I
18 believe so.
19Q. I want you to tell the jury what you
20 think was faked on this picture.
21 Are you telling the jury, sir -- I'll
22 withdraw that question.
23 Are you telling the jury that somebody
24 went in and put new shoes on a picture of Mr. Simpson?
25A. That's a possibility, yes.
26Q. Is that what you're telling the jury?
27A. I'm saying it's a possibility, yes.
28Q. Are you saying that's what happened?
1A. I'm saying it's a possibility.
2Q. Are you saying somebody put new pants on
3 Mr. Simpson?
4A. Partial. It is possible. Partial. I
5 don't think that somebody put a whole new set of
7Q. You are aware Mr. Simpson admitted, when
8 he was sitting in the same chair you're sitting in,
9 the top part of the picture is, in fact, a picture of
10 him, his head, his upper torso, his hands, his tie,
11 his shirt, his jacket?
12A. I was not present for his testimony.
13Q. Assume that's true.
14A. If you want me to assume it --
15Q. Assuming that's true, what you're saying
16 is that you think there's a possibility that somebody
17 went in and took an existing picture of Mr. Simpson at
18 that game, on that field, and put new pants and new
19 shoes on his body?
20 Is that what you're saying?
21A. That's a possibility.
22Q. A one percent possibility?
23A. I'd say a very large possibility. I
24 can't -- I can't quantify that.
25Q. What? What quantity?
26A. I can't. I just told you.
27Q. More than 50?
28A. I'd say much more than 50.
1Q. More than 60?
3Q. More than 65?
4A. You're playing games, aren't you?
5 I'm sorry --
6Q. Mr. Groden, you're up here in a very
7 important trial.
8THE COURT: Just a minute. You don't need
10Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Mr. Groden, more than
11 65 percent?
13Q. More than 70 percent?
15Q. More than 75 percent?
17Q. More than 80 percent?
18A. Would you give me the question one more
19 time, exactly as you phrased it.
20Q. If somebody went and took a picture of
21 Mr. Simpson --
23Q. -- that had been taken on September 26,
24 1993, in that location, the end zone of Rich Stadium
25 in Buffalo, and put on new pants and new shoes.
26A. I'm saying it's an extremely high
27 possibility. I would say, to stop this, I would say
28 greater than a 90 percent probability either the pants
1 and/or the shoes were -- or the shoes alone were
2 changed. If indeed that was a legitimate picture of
3 Mr. Simpson in the first place.
4Q. Well, let's -- we'll find out what your
5 opinion is.
6 Was it a legitimate picture of
7 Mr. Simpson in the first place?
8 Bear in mind, sir, Mr. Simpson has
9 admitted that the top part of the picture is in fact a
10 picture of him wearing those clothes at that game.
11A. I have no way of knowing whether there
12 was a legitimate picture like this prior to this or
14Q. What do you mean?
15A. If this picture is a composite, as I
16 believe it to be, the whole thing could have been
17 manufactured. I don't know that -- there could have
18 been a whole separate picture of Mr. Simpson that I'm
19 not even aware of. I don't know.
20Q. Taken where, on Mars?
21MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object.
22Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Taken where?
23THE COURT: Overruled.
24Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Taken where?
25A. I don't know.
26Q. Mr. Simpson -- we have a videotape that
27 we showed of Mr. Simpson at the game.
28 Would you like to see it?
1A. I don't care.
2Q. At the game -- did you see the videotape?
4Q. You've seen the videotape.
5 He's wearing the same tie and the same
6 shirt and the same jacket and the same pants.
7 Have you seen that videotape?
8A. Yes. The tonal values of the tie are
9 different, but I would probably say it's probably the
10 same outfit.
11Q. Well, Mr. Simpson said it's the same, so
12 he ought to know.
13A. I don't doubt it.
15 Given all that, you still think that this
16 was not a picture taken at this game on this day?
17A. I have no way of knowing. I didn't take
18 the picture. You want me to assume that I know for a
19 fact that it was taken that day, I don't know that.
20Q. You're being passed off to this jury as a
21 photo expert. We're entitled to your opinion about
22 what's going on with this picture.
23MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object. This
24 witness was qualified by you as an expert in a
25 hearing. I object to passed off. I think it's
26 argumentative; it also misstates the state of the
28THE COURT: The record is that I am not
1 vouching for this or any other expert put on by
2 anybody, and I don't think that's an appropriate
3 comment for you to leave with the jury. I'm not
4 vouching for any expert, whether it's the plaintiff
5 expert or defense expert.
6MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object to this
7 remark, passed off. I object to that.
8Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Mr. Groden, in your
9 expert --
10MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I'd like a ruling.
11THE COURT: Overruled.
12Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) In your expert opinion,
13 sir, was this a photograph taken of Mr. Simpson at
14 this football game on this day in this end zone and
15 somebody went back and put new shoes and pants on him?
16A. And/or pants, yes. It's my opinion --
17Q. And --
18A. It's my opinion that it could very well
19 have been a legitimate photograph initially; in other
20 words, there may have been a photograph of him that
21 has in some way been altered.
22Q. And in some way -- is it greater than 90
23 percent chance that the way it was altered -- that new
24 pants and new shoes were put on him?
25A. New pants and/or --
26Q. Well --
27A. -- certainly --
28Q. Is there --
1A. I would say certainly shoes, yes, or --
2 or if, in fact, they're the shoes, have not been
3 changed, that they have been altered in some way.
4Q. It's a very important point, sir. I want
5 to be specific.
6 Are you saying there's a greater than 90
7 percent chance that somebody put new shoes on this
8 picture of Mr. Simpson?
9A. Based on my analysis of the photograph, I
10 would say yes.
11Q. And what were the original shoes?
12A. I have no idea.
13Q. But they weren't these, right, wouldn't
14 make any sense to replace the same shoes, right?
16Q. And one of the points you made and
17 missed, but I will, that this is the first frame on
18 the roll, remember mentioning that with Mr. Leonard?
19A. Um-hum. Yes.
20Q. And you found that significant 'cause
21 that's the easiest to alter, right?
23Q. So by pointing out that this is the first
24 frame on the roll, sir, are you trying to tell this
25 jury that what happened was, on September 26, 1993,
26 Mr. Scull took a photograph of Mr. Simpson, making
27 sure it was head to toe, making sure it was the first
28 one on the roll, the prime position for alteration,
1 'cause he knew that nine months later somebody would
2 kill Mr. Simpson's former wife and Ronald Lyle Goldman
3 and leave bloody shoe prints in Mr. Simpson's size 12
4 in an extraordinarily rare shoe type to this, so that
5 Mr. Scull would have a picture that was in prime
6 position to go in and put those Bruno Magli shoes on
7 Mr. Simpson?
8 Is that what you're saying?
9A. Of course not.
10MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I object.
11THE COURT: Sustained.
12MR. GELBLUM: Excuse me one minute, Your Honor.
16Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Now, when we were here
17 last time, you talked a little bit in the course of
18 reading the deposition excerpt that one of the things
19 you had done recently in looking at whether a
20 photograph was altered or not in another situation was
21 you saw a picture of a road sign in Dealey Plaza where
22 Mr. Kennedy was shot purported to show a bullet hole
23 in it?
24A. That's correct.
25Q. One of the reasons you were suspicious
26 about that, you had seen other photographs of that
27 road sign taken on that day and had never seen a
28 bullet hole before?
1A. I don't know that they testified to that,
2 but it is accurate, yes.
3Q. So one thing that you do when you're
4 determining authenticity of a photograph is to see
5 whether you can find other photographs of the same
6 object, the same scene, the same day, to see whether
7 what you're looking at is in those photographs as
9A. That would be part of it, yes.
10Q. So if there were other photographs of
11 Mr. Simpson taken on this same day, at this same game,
12 in this same stadium, and he's wearing the same
13 outfit, and they're taken by a different photographer,
14 with a different camera, and he's wearing the same
15 pants and same shoes, that would affect your opinion,
16 wouldn't it, sir?
17MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I'm going to object.
18 There's a lack of foundation basis. Same basis for
19 the objection I made prior as well.
20MR. GELBLUM: We'll tie it up.
21THE COURT: Based on the affidavit or
22 declaration filed on this -- in support of plaintiffs'
23 position, motion overruled.
24Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Can you answer the
25 question, please.
26A. Will you finish -- will you repeat the
27 question or finish it.
28Q. Sir, if there were other photographs of
1 Mr. Simpson taken on the same day, September 26, 1993,
2 in the same stadium, same football game, different
3 camera, different photographer, and Mr. Simpson has
4 the same clothes on, same jacket, same tie, same
5 shirt, same belt, same pants, same shoes, wouldn't
6 that compel you to conclude that your testimony that
7 these shoes have been put on is wrong?
8MR. LEONARD: Same objection.
10Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) It wouldn't?
11A. It would not change what I found in the
13Q. You've answered the question.
14A. I did.
15Q. Let me show you some photographs, sir.
16MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, this is outside the
17 scope. Also, based on the previous answer, these are
18 irrelevant at this point.
19THE COURT: Overruled.
20Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) See a photograph here
21 of Mr. Simpson with five other gentlemen standing on a
22 football field?
25 And here's an enlargement of the bottom
26 half of that photograph.
27 Do you see that?
28 Do you see the shoes Mr. Simpson is
4 Show you some more.
5MR. GELBLUM: Your Honor, these are our only
6 prints. If I may, I'd like to pass them around to the
7 jury once Mr. Groden has looked at them.
8THE COURT: If you want to.
9 Mark them.
10MR. GELBLUM: I'll mark the first one, the
11 group photo --
12MR. FOSTER: 2295.
13MR. GELBLUM: 2295.
15 (The instrument herein described
16 as a group photo was marked for
17 identification as Plaintiffs'
18 Exhibit No. 2295.)
20Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Does 2295 change your
21 opinion, sir?
22A. About what I found?
23Q. About whether -- about your opinion that
24 somebody added shoes to Mr. Scull's photograph.
25A. Doesn't change my opinion at all.
27MR. GELBLUM: Mark the next one, which is an
28 enlargement of the bottom half of 2295. That's 2296.
1 (The instrument herein described
2 as an enlargement of bottom half
3 of Exhibit 2295 was marked for
4 identification as Plaintiffs'
5 Exhibit No. 2296.)
7Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) I ask you if that one
8 changes your opinion, sir?
9A. Does not.
11MR. GELBLUM: Mark next in order a photograph
12 of Mr. Simpson signing an autograph for the
13 white-haired gentleman with the blue jacket with a
14 camera in his hand. It's 2297. That shows
15 Mr. Simpson's shoes.
16 (The instrument herein described
17 as a photograph of Mr. Simpson
18 with a white-haired gentleman in a
19 blue jacket with a camera in his
20 hand was marked for identification
21 as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 2297.)
23Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) I ask you if that
24 changes your opinion?
27 Show you an enlargement of the bottom
28 half of 2297 --
1MR. GELBLUM: Which we'll mark as 2298.
3 (The instrument herein described
4 as enlargement of bottom half of
5 Exhibit 2297 was marked for
6 identification as Plaintiffs'
7 Exhibit No. 2298.)
9Q. I ask you if 2298 changes your opinion?
10A. No, it doesn't.
11Q. Show you another photograph of
12 Mr. Simpson with another one of the gentlemen who were
13 in 2295, this gentleman is wearing a blue shirt, blue
14 pants and a dark blue jacket and brown shoes.
15MR. GELBLUM: We'll mark that next in order.
16THE CLERK: 2299.
17MR. GELBLUM: 2299.
19 (The instrument herein described
20 as a photograph of Mr. Simpson
21 with a gentleman wearing a blue
22 shirt, blue pants and a dark blue
23 jacket and brown shoes was marked
24 for identification as Plaintiffs'
25 Exhibit No. 2299.)
27Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And I ask you if that
28 changes your opinion?
1A. It does not.
2Q. And I'll show you an enlargement of the
3 bottom half of 2299.
4MR. GELBLUM: Which will be 2300.
6 (The instrument herein described
7 as an enlargement of bottom half
8 of Exhibit 2299 was marked for
9 identification as Plaintiffs'
10 Exhibit No. 2300.)
12Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And I ask you if that
13 changes your opinion, your opinion being that somebody
14 went in and added Bruno Magli shoes to Mr. Scull's
16A. Does not change my opinion at all.
17Q. Show you another photograph of another
18 gentlemen who's in the overall picture.
19MR. GELBLUM: We'll mark this as 2301. This
20 gentleman has his jacket buttoned, he's wearing tan
21 slacks and a brown plaid jacket.
23 (The instrument herein described
24 as a photograph of Mr. Simpson
25 with a gentleman wearing a brown
26 plaid jacket and tan slacks was
27 marked for identification as
28 Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 2301.)
1Q. I ask you if 2301 changes your opinion?
2A. Does not.
3Q. And I'll show you an enlargement of the
4 bottom half of 2301.
5MR. GELBLUM: We'll mark that 2302.
7 (The instrument herein described
8 as an enlargement of bottom half
9 of Exhibit 2301 was marked for
10 identification as Plaintiffs'
11 Exhibit No. 2302.)
13Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And I ask you if that
14 changes your opinion?
15A. Does not.
16Q. Finally, sir, I'll show you two contact
18MR. GELBLUM: We'll mark the first one as 2303,
19 the contact sheet on which these enlargements appear,
20 and on this contact sheet, 2303, there are a total of
21 27 images of Mr. Simpson with these various gentlemen,
22 all of which show Mr. Simpson's feet and shoes.
24 (The instrument herein described
25 as a contact sheet containing 27
26 images of Mr. Simpson was marked
27 for identification as Plaintiffs'
28 Exhibit No. 2303.)
2Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And I ask you if that
3 changes your opinion?
5MR. GELBLUM: And finally, it's -- 2304,
6 another contact sheet, in the same game as the first
7 three photographs, making a total of 30 photographs of
8 Mr. Simpson with shoes on.
10 (The instrument herein described
11 as a contact sheet containing 30
12 photographs of Mr. Simpson was
13 marked for identification as
14 Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 2304.)
16Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) And I ask you if that
17 changes your opinion?
18A. Does not.
20MR. GELBLUM: May I pass these to the jury,
21 Your Honor?
22THE COURT: You may.
23MR. LEONARD: Same objection.
24THE COURT: Overruled.
25MR. GELBLUM: I'm going to put the contact
26 sheets on top because they're smaller.
28 (Jurors review exhibits.)
2MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, these photographs
3 haven't been admitted into evidence.
4THE COURT: I'll let the jury review them --
5MR. GELBLUM: We'll tie them up.
6THE COURT: -- On the representation and
7 declaration filed by plaintiff.
8Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Now, Mr. Groden, you
9 noticed, I assume, that in these photographs
10 Mr. Simpson has a handkerchief in his pocket?
11A. That's correct.
12Q. He doesn't have one in the photograph of
13 him wearing the shoes that Mr. Scull took?
14A. That's correct.
15Q. You know he does have the handkerchief in
16 the videotape?
17A. I don't recall the videotape.
18Q. Did you see any sign of moisture on any
19 of these photographs I just showed you?
21Q. You did.
22 Where was that, sir?
23A. The --
24Q. Which one would you like?
25A. I'm not sure which one it was.
26 This one. 2302.
1 (Witness indicates to Exhibit
4Q. You're pointing to darker spots on the
6A. Yes, which could well be moisture. It's
7 a possibility.
8Q. You see any moisture on the field?
10Q. And you don't know what those dark spots
13Q. Could this be a difference in the brush
14 of the leather, could be a number of things, right,
16A. Could be any number of things.
17 On 2300 it shows it as well.
18Q. It being the darker spots on the shoes?
21 Now, you knew about these photos before
22 you took the stand today, right?
23A. I heard about them, yes.
24Q. And you discussed them with Mr. Leonard
25 before you took the stand, didn't you?
26A. That's correct.
28 You discussed what you're going to say
1 about them?
3Q. You discussed the pictures?
5Q. Now, your bottom line opinion, sir, on
6 the photograph of Mr. Scull -- by Mr. Scull showing
7 Mr. Simpson wearing the Bruno Magli shoes, is that you
8 think on balance it's probably not genuine, it's
9 probably a fake, but you're not sure; isn't that
11A. No one could be 100 percent sure.
12Q. Please answer my question.
13A. On balance, yes.
14Q. But you're not sure, correct?
16Q. Am I correct that you're not sure?
17A. If you're asking yes or no, the answer is
18 yes, I, to a massive degree of certainty, am sure that
19 they are faked.
20MR. GELBLUM: Would you put up the deposition,
22 This is page 14, lines 5 to 12.
23A. Massive is the wrong word. I would say
25Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Say whatever you want.
26 Right now, sir, I'm going to look at your deposition.
28 Q. Your bottom line opinion
1 here is that you observed what you
2 perceive are some problems with the
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. That leads you to think
6 that on balance it's probably not
7 genuine, it's probably a fake, But
8 you're not sure. Is that fair?
9 A. I'd say that that's
10 accurate, yeah.
11 Now, particularly after seeing these new
12 photographs of Mr. Simpson wearing the same shoes,
13 isn't it particularly clear that you're not sure about
14 these, about Mr. Scull's photos?
15A. It doesn't change my opinion, no.
17MR. GELBLUM: No further questions, Your Honor.
18THE COURT: Ten-minute recess, ladies and
19 gentlemen. Don't talk about the case, don't form or
20 express an opinion.
23 (Jurors resume their respective
26 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
27 BY MR. LEONARD:
28Q. Good morning, Mr. Groden?
1A. Good morning.
2Q. Before we get into some of the substance
3 here I want to go through, based on some of
4 Mr. Gelblum's questions in cross-examination, some of
5 your background again.
6 Mr. Gelblum asked you on
7 cross-examination about your experience in the
8 military and particularly the reason for and the basis
9 for your leaving the military.
10 Do you remember that?
12Q. Can you tell the jury -- can you explain
13 to the jury why you left the military?
14A. A sergeant in my company was drunk and
15 beat me up and to keep it under the rug, they gave me
16 a discharge because of an existing sinus problem that
17 I had that they weren't able to deal with. That was
18 the excuse, but the real reason was, in fact, I had
19 been beaten up by the sergeant.
20Q. Why did this sergeant beat you up, sir?
21MR. GELBLUM: Objection, speculation,
23MR. LEONARD: Your Honor --
24THE COURT: Overruled. You opened it.
25A. The sergeant was anti-Semitic and I'm
27Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) Now, do you think that
28 the fact that you were beaten up -- by the way, how
1 old were you, sir?
3Q. Do you think the fact that you were
4 beaten up when you were 18 years old by an
5 anti-Semitic sergeant has anything to do with your
6 ability to observe the phenomena that you observed and
7 also to explain them to the jury?
8A. No, not at all.
9Q. Mr. Gelblum asked you about strokes that
10 you had had.
11 How did you happen to have strokes, can
12 you explain that to the jury?
13A. About two years ago I was walking in a
14 parking lot and slipped on a patch of ice and hit my
15 head, which precipitated a series of strokes.
16Q. And from time to time have you some
17 memory problems as a result of that; is that right?
18A. That's correct.
19Q. Do you think that has affected your
20 ability whatsoever to analyze the photograph and to
21 explain your analysis to the jury?
22A. Not at all.
23Q. Now, Mr. Gelblum got into some extent
24 your experience with the House Assassination
26 Do you remember that?
28Q. I asked you in some detail what your role
1 was, correct, do you remember that?
3Q. And in particular he was asking you if
4 you had done any actual analysis of photographs on
5 behalf of, or in conjunction with your work with the
6 Kennedys, do you remember those questions?
8Q. Now, in fact, did you do a photo
11Q. At some point, there was a panel of
12 photographic experts, correct?
15 And you were working in conjunction --
16 you weren't a member of the panel, you were working in
17 conjunction with the panel; is that correct?
18A. That's correct.
19Q. And was there -- did there come a time
20 when a proficiency test was undertaken of the panel
21 and that you participated in that?
22 In other words, a test to determine the
23 proficiency of the experts and also yourself in
24 analyzing and determining whether the photographs are
25 fake or real?
28 Describe just in very general terms that
1 proficiency test that was done?
2A. A few members of the photo panel were
3 assigned to create four sets of photographs, genuine
4 photographs that look genuine, genuine photographs
5 that appear to be fake, fake photographs that appear
6 genuine, and fake photographs that were obviously
7 fake. And the set of all four of those were placed as
8 a package, they were numbered and packaged, and a
9 written test was given to the entire photo panel and
10 myself to determine the ability to detect phonies and
11 to detect fake phonies, in fact.
12Q. How did you do on that test?
13A. I got 100 percent.
14Q. Did anyone else get 100 percent?
15A. No, none of them did.
16Q. Mr. Gelblum asked you if you had dropped
17 out of high school.
18 Did you drop out of high school, sir?
20Q. Why was that?
21A. We didn't have very much money and my
22 going to school and remaining there was a strain on my
23 mother. My mother and father had just separated and
24 it was my sister, myself and my mother, and it was a
25 real financial drain on her.
26Q. When you dropped out of high school is
27 that when you went into the military?
28A. That's correct.
1Q. By the way, you have a high school
2 degree, don't you?
4Q. How did you get that?
5A. When I was in the army I took the general
6 equivalency diploma, GED test and passed it with
7 flying colors, and also got a year's college credit
8 the same way.
9Q. Does the fact that you had to drop out of
10 high school, you think that affects your ability to do
11 the analysis you did here and to explain your results
12 to the jury; you think that affects it at all, sir?
14Q. Mr. Gelblum asked you about a situation
15 where you had contributed to a story to the Globe
17 Do you remember that?
19Q. Now, Mr. Gelblum, in his questioning, was
20 trying to suggest that you were --
21MR. GELBLUM: Objection, Your Honor.
22THE COURT: Sustained.
23Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) Explain to the jury,
24 No. 1, what that -- what the story was, in general
25 terms, and whether or not it was your purpose to sell
26 photographs as opposed to the story itself, sir?
27A. When I was a staff photographic
28 consultant to the House Assassinations Committee I had
1 made the discovery that the autopsy photographs of
2 President Kennedy, at least some of them, were
3 questionable as to their authenticity based on
4 physical anomalies within the photograph itself, and
5 my knowledge of the statements of Dallas doctors who
6 had worked on President Kennedy in the lifesaving
7 efforts on November 22nd of '63, and also of medical
8 personnel who had worked on the -- on the president
9 after that time and in Bethesda Naval Hospital. The
10 photographs did not show what was described by every
11 one of the doctors.
12 I had gone to the Chief Counsel of the
13 House Committee which was Professor Blakey and
14 suggested, very strongly, perhaps it would be a good
15 idea to show those questionable photographs to the
16 Dallas doctors to determine their authenticity. For
17 two solid years Professor Blakey refused to do it.
18 When the committee broke up and didn't
19 exist anymore I was very disturbed by the fact that
20 this had not been resolved, so I took copies of
21 autopsy photographs and went to the Dallas doctors and
22 other witnesses who dealt with the body, including
23 Dealey Plaza witnesses, and I showed them the
24 photographs, and every single one of them without
25 exception said that the photographs were indeed fake,
26 and I then knew that I was correct.
27 And I felt that the public needed to know
28 this, I thought it was a major issue, and an issue of
1 the Kennedy assassination.
2Q. Now, was -- was the Globe, the Globe
3 newspaper your first choice of a medium to get this
4 out to the public, sir?
6Q. Did you -- had you attempted to go to
7 other publications to try to get this story out to
10Q. Were your efforts unsuccessful?
11A. They were unsuccessful, yes.
12Q. Did you prepare a documentary on this
13 issue of the autopsy photographs?
14A. Yes, a videotape documentary.
15Q. Now, Mr. Gelblum also asked you about the
16 backyard photograph of Oswald; do you remember that?
19 You did an analysis of that photograph?
21Q. And you came to the opinion that the
22 photograph was fake; is that right?
23A. That's correct.
24Q. Now, there was -- there were some people
25 in the committee that agreed and some that disagreed
26 with regard to that; is that true, sir?
27A. That is correct.
28Q. Subsequent to your analysis -- by the
1 way, there are others who agreed with you in that
2 respect; is that correct?
3A. Yes, within the committee.
4 Also photographic experts for the Royal
5 Canadian Mounted Police and Scotland Yard have also
7Q. Now, when you were on cross-examination
8 today, you were shown some photographs of the court to
9 show Mr. Simpson wearing particular shoes and
10 particular clothing.
11 When was the first time you've ever seen
12 those photographs?
13A. Right here in this courtroom a few
14 minutes ago.
15Q. Mr. Gelblum asked you if we had spoken
16 about the photographs.
17 Did we speak about the photographs?
18A. We did.
19Q. When was our discussion with regard to
20 the photographs, sir?
21A. I believe he asked me if I had seen them,
22 and I had not.
23Q. Was it your understanding, sir, that
24 those photographs have just been miraculously
25 discovered since you testified here last?
26MR. GELBLUM: Objection, argumentative.
27MR. LEONARD: Withdrawn.
28Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) Is it your
1 understanding, sir, that those photographs have just
2 arisen for the first time since you testified here?
3MR. GELBLUM: Objection.
4A. That's correct.
5MR. GELBLUM: His understanding is irrelevant.
6 Move that his answer be stricken.
7THE COURT: Overruled. State of mind of this
9Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) Do you have any idea,
10 sir, whether those photographs are authentic or not?
11A. None at all.
12Q. Do you have any idea who created the
13 photograph, when the photograph was taken, whether or
14 not the photograph was sold to a tabloid or anything
15 like that, sir?
16A. None at all.
17Q. Now, you said to this jury that seeing
18 those photographs for a short period of time, just
19 glimpsing them does not change your opinion about your
20 analysis of this photograph.
21 Tell the jury why, sir.
22A. The anomalies, the problems that I found
23 within that photograph are still there. Existence of
24 other photographs that have not been verified, which I
25 haven't had a chance to examine, don't change the fact
26 that the problems of that photograph are there, they
27 certainly are, and 100 more pictures are not going to
28 change that.
1Q. Now, let's get -- let's talk a little bit
2 about a couple of other points that Mr. Gelblum raised
3 on cross-examination about the photograph itself.
4MR. LEONARD: I'd like to put up the first
5 image, please. I don't believe this has been marked.
6 Has it? Oh, it has.
7MR. P. BAKER: This is 1835.
9 (Exhibit 1835 displayed.)
11MR. LEONARD: Zoom in on the right upper
13Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) First of all, I'd like
14 to --
15MR. LEONARD: Pull back, Mr. Baker, if you
18 (Elmo adjusted.)
20MR. LEONARD: Can you give me the number again.
21MR. P. BAKER: 1835.
22Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) What does 1835
23 represent, sir?
24A. Its a blowup of the frame we've been
25 referring to as 1-1, contact sheet 1, frame No. 1.
26Q. Is there also a portion of the -- very
27 small portion of the bottom edge or the side edge
28 depending on how you look at it, of 1.2?
1A. That's correct. Right at the very top
2 which is almost off the frame here.
4 Now --
6MR. LEONARD: If we can focus in.
8 (Elmo adjusted.)
10Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) All right.
11 Now, you see the vertical line -- and
12 actually there appears to be two lines; there's one
13 vertical line that runs -- it appears to run across
14 from 1-1, to 1-2; do you see that, sir?
16Q. Now, Mr. Gelblum suggested in his
17 questioning --
18MR. GELBLUM: Objection, Your Honor,
19 mischaracterizes my question.
20THE COURT: Sustained.
21Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) Have you had a chance
22 to -- you've had a chance to look at this image, have
23 you not, sir?
26 First of all, is there anything about
27 this image that supports your opinion that this first,
28 that 1.1 is -- is out of register? That is, that 1.1
1 is not aligned with 1.2?
2A. Yes, definitely.
3Q. Can you demonstrate that to us.
4 You can step down with the Court's
6MR. LEONARD: Can the witness step down?
7THE COURT: Yes.
8MR. LEONARD: Thank you.
9A. It's extremely obvious here without --
10 without even measuring it, though I guess we could
11 measure it if we want to, that the difference
12 between -- the space between the scratch itself and
13 the edge of frame 1-1 is much closer than it is on
14 1-2. 1-2 is, I'd say, probably twice as far away from
15 the scratch, indicating even better than a straight
16 edge that it's out of alignment.
18 Now, of course, that assumes that that
19 scratch is straight, correct?
22 Now, if this is -- if this is supposed to
23 be a mechanical scratch from a camera, okay, would you
24 assume that it would be straight?
27MR. LEONARD: If you can pull the photograph
28 back, please, all the way back, please.
1Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) Now, utilizing this
2 same image, sir, is there another way that you can
3 demonstrate the fact that this negative or this frame
4 is out of line, out of register?
5A. Yes. It's kind of difficult here because
6 you can't see the sprocket holes, but by measuring the
7 sprocket holes to the edge of the frame the picture is
8 measurably closer to the sprocket holes on the right
9 side as we view it than it is on the left.
10MR. LEONARD: If you can focus in on the --
11A. There we go. Now you can see it.
12Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) Now, if you point out
13 the outline of the sprocket hole, sir, in particular
14 the left edge of the sprocket hole.
15A. Can we try to focus a little more.
16 Great. Okay.
17 This is the left edge of the sprocket
18 hole here and this is the edge of the frame.
20 Now, can you go down to the left-hand
21 corner. Now --
23Q. Directing your attention to the edge of
24 the sprocket hole there.
25A. It's right here. Right here.
27Q. And the edge of the frame?
28A. Right here. (Indicating.)
1Q. Now, the distance between the -- that
2 distance is larger than the distance on the right-hand
3 side, that is the same measurement that is from the
4 edge of the sprocket hole to the edge of the frame; is
5 that right?
6A. That is correct.
8MR. LEONARD: You can pull back.
10 (Indicating to Elmo.)
12Q. Now, you were asked questions about
13 whether or not the negative could be out of line or
14 out of register by virtue or as a result of some play
15 or movement in the film; is that correct?
16 Do you remember that?
17A. Yes, I remember that.
18Q. And you expressed an opinion that it
19 wouldn't be possible for it to be that out of line; is
20 that correct?
21A. That's correct.
22Q. Again, I want you to assume now that for
23 purposes of my question that, in fact, the line along
24 the right-hand side between the sprocket hole and the
25 edge of the film is a mechanical scratch from the
27 Are you with me?
2 Does -- Would you expect the -- if there
3 was movement in the film would you expect that line,
4 that scratch to be straight, sir?
5A. Yes. You'd expect it to run -- well, the
6 length of the film.
8 If there was movement, if there was play
9 in the film and the film was jiggling, would you
10 expect that line to be straight or would you expect
11 that there would be indicia of the movement within the
12 scratch, sir?
13A. If the film were shifting from a --
14 running horizontally, it's shifting top to bottom,
15 would you expect the scratch to be diagonal by the
16 degree that the frames would be out, and that's not
17 the case.
18Q. In other words, what we have here is --
19MR. LEONARD: If you can focus in on the
20 right-hand side of the image, please.
21Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) You see the -- what
22 appears to be a blue lining there, sir?
24Q. What you're saying is that if the camera
25 was moving you'd expect to see a shift in the line; is
26 that correct?
27A. That's correct. In order for the -- in
28 order for the frame to have been off because of film
1 movement, you would expect that that line would be
2 diagonal in the same direction as the shift of the
4Q. So if it was shifting to the right you'd
5 expect some shifting in the line; is that correct?
6A. That's correct.
7Q. Do you see any there, sir?
9Q. Now, if -- let's assume that that is a
10 scratch from the camera in question, all right, the
11 camera that was actually used to take whatever image
12 was there before.
13 If you were going to create a copy
14 negative, a composite negative, and you wanted to hide
15 your tracks would you use the same camera, sir?
16A. Well, you'd have to if you expected that
17 it would be investigated, yes.
19A. Well, scratches from a camera could be I
20 guess compared to fingerprints; they should be unique
21 or unique to some degree to each camera.
22 In other words, if there's a
23 manufacturing flaw in one particular camera, a burr,
24 for instance, that could cause a scratch and you
25 wouldn't expect to find that on every camera.
26Q. So you -- and so what would be the
27 purpose again for using the same camera, sir?
28A. Again, and we saw this happen in the
1 investigation of the backyard photographs of Lee
2 Harvey Oswald, scratches were determined to be linked
3 to that particular camera.
4 And in this particular case, if indeed
5 these are scratches, that could be linked to that
6 camera, you would want to have those scratches on
7 the -- on the film.
8Q. Now, assuming that you're making a copy,
9 composite negative, and you want to cover your tracks,
10 what do you do with the camera once you -- what would
11 you do with the camera once you created the copy
13A. You get rid of it.
14Q. What did Scull say happened to the camera
15 in this case in his deposition, sir?
16A. He claimed it was stolen.
18 You didn't have a chance to look at the
19 original camera, did you?
22MR. LEONARD: You can put up the -- take that
23 down. Yeah.
24MR. P. BAKER: No. 3 of 2282.
25Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) Now, can you tell us
26 what this depicts, sir?
27A. This is frame 1-1 from the contact sheet
28 showing the edge of the film against the edge of the
1 contact sheet itself.
3A. And --
4Q. I'm sorry. Go ahead.
5A. I would just say it has one horizontal
6 line and several vertical lines.
7Q. Now, you were asked on -- on
8 cross-examination if that could be actually a
9 photographic image on -- on what would be I guess 00,
10 and in particular the photographic image of the
11 football field.
12 Can you explain to the jury how that is
13 impossible, sir?
14A. Well, for several reasons.
15Q. If you need to focus why don't you direct
16 Mr. Baker's attention.
18 Mr. Baker, if you could just kind of come
19 in and make this as large as possible, side to side,
20 I'd appreciate it.
21MR. P. BAKER: That's as high as it goes.
22MR. LEONARD: Just focus in. That's the
23 highest focus. All right. Okay. That's fine.
24A. Can I come down?
26A. Upon the suggestion of Mr. Gelblum that
27 this might be the football field, I have spent a
28 little more time checking this out because it sounds
1 so ridiculous and I found out that in fact it could
2 not be that. No. 1, if this is the edge of an
3 incoming frame line as he's suggesting, how is it that
4 the so-called lines of the football field extend
5 beyond the edge of the frame where no light could
6 possibly hit. No. 1.
8A. No. 2, these lines are random.
9Q. What do you mean by that, sir?
10A. They are not an equal distance from each
12Q. What do you know about a football field
13 that makes that point relevant, sir?
14A. Well, how would you know how far the ball
15 had traveled if you didn't have an accurate
16 measurement between the lines. They would have to be
17 an equal distance from each other. They'd have to
18 have a vanishing point. If these were parallel lines
19 and if the photographer were shooting away, either on
20 purpose or by accident, there would be a vanishing
21 point which is --
22MR. LEONARD: Why don't you -- let's put -- we
23 can illustrate that.
24 Why don't you put up -- with the Court's
25 permission, I can put up the drawing pad.
26THE COURT: All right.
27MR. LEONARD: Thank you.
28Q. (BY MR. LEONARD) There's a marker.
1A. There's one right there.
3A. No matter what the focal lengths of the
4 lens is, whether it's a wide angle lens like a 28 or
5 35 millimeter or a normal lens like a 50 to 85
6 millimeter or a wide angle lens -- I'm sorry, a
7 telephoto lens like a 500, 1500, something of that
8 nature, I end up with something called a vanishing
10 That's something used in art as well as
11 photography, and that is at some point away from the
12 lens you're going to have a point where parallel lines
13 run together. If you stand on a railroad track and
14 look towards the distance they tend to run together,
15 and the point where they disappear and become one line
16 is call the vanishing point.
17 If the camera lens is here and aiming
18 this way, and there are lines on a football field they
19 would appear like this, and depending on the focal
20 length of the lens they would still all run together.
21 These are absolutely parallel.
22 So that's another problem with it.
23 The third problem is that they are far
24 too sharp and they're too narrow. Lines on the
25 football field would be much wider than this. The
26 other problem is that these are blue and lines on the
27 football field would be white.
28 There's probably other problems too, but
1 I think the major problem is that this image falls
2 outside of where the frame line would be. That's a
3 photographic impossibility.
4Q. You can resume the stand.
5A. Thank you.
6Q. Is there anything, sir, that has been
7 discussed on your cross-examination including the
8 photographs that you were shown for the first time
9 that changes your opinion at all with regard to this
11A. None at all, no.
12MR. LEONARD: I don't have any further
14MR. GELBLUM: Just a few, Your Honor.
15 Put 1832 up, please.
17 (Exhibit 1832 displayed.)
20 BY MR. GELBLUM:
21A. Last point.
22 We were just talking about, Mr. Groden,
23 would be a what you call the disappearing point.
24MR. PETROCELLI: Vanishing.
25Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) The vanishing point?
27Q. If you're looking at lines from the
28 sideline, if you're looking at the lines as they're
1 going around from you?
3Q. If you're looking at the lines so you're
4 perpendicular to the lines --
5MR. GELBLUM: Can you focus on line -- on
6 No. 12, please.
7Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) If you're looking at
8 the lines across the field, rather on the field,
9 looking down the field --
10MR. GELBLUM: Can you sharpen the lines in
11 here, please, Steve, if you can.
12Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) There's no vanishing
13 point, is there?
14A. There's the equivalent of a vanishing
16Q. What happens -- you said the lines get
17 closer together as you go back, right?
18A. Equal distance, closer together, right.
19MR. GELBLUM: Take that down, Steve.
21 (Indicating to Elmo.)
22Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Now, by the way, on
23 that same point, we talked before the -- before the
24 break we were talking about that image, we were
25 talking about what could happen on the frame numbered
26 0, remember that, right?
28Q. And I asked you if there was a zero zero
1 and you said no, that's silly, just a 0?
2A. No, I said -- you said zero zero zero.
3Q. There is a zero zero?
4A. There is a zero, there is a zero zero.
5Q. You saw that on these contact sheets?
6A. No, I didn't look.
7Q. You want to look?
8A. If you like.
9Q. Your see a zero zero?
11Q. Now, Mr. Leonard asked you a whole bunch
12 of questions about the scratches.
13 Are you now conceding that that blue line
14 is in fact a scratch, sir?
15A. I'm not conceding it. I'm saying if it
16 is a scratch then there are certain issues that relate
17 to it.
18Q. If it is a scratch that supports your
19 point about alignment, right?
21Q. But if it's not a scratch it doesn't
22 support your point about alignment, right, at least
23 that mark doesn't, right?
24MR. LEONARD: Objection, Your Honor, lack of
25 foundation, vague.
26THE COURT: Overruled.
27A. My point as to the alignment doesn't rely
28 on that scratch, it's just a point. You said it was a
1 scratch, you.
2Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Well, you just went
3 through a whole series of questions with Mr. Leonard
4 about the scratch. Remember that he called it a
5 scratch. If this is a scratch, if it is a scratch,
8Q. Remember that?
9A. Oh, sure.
10Q. Is it a scratch?
11A. I don't think that it's a scratch. It
12 appears there's more than one.
13Q. If it's not a scratch, then everything
14 you just did with Mr. Leonard -- we can do this
15 outright. Everything you did with Mr. Leonard about
16 the scratch being equal distance or not equal distance
17 from the frame?
18A. No matter what, it is a parallel line to
19 the sprocket holes. Therefore, it still proves the
20 point whether there's a scratch or not.
21Q. You just don't know whether it's a
22 scratch or not?
24Q. Now, you talked about the strokes you had
25 which were caused by a fall?
26A. That's correct.
27Q. At a Toyota dealership?
28A. That's correct.
1Q. That also affected your vision, didn't
3A. It affected my -- Yes.
4Q. Blurriness in your right eye?
5A. Yes. Actually, a slightly detached
7Q. Now, you said that the -- I think you
8 said something about if you saw 100 new photos of
9 Mr. Simpson wearing the same shoes, that it wouldn't
10 make a difference to you in your analysis of the Scull
12A. Doesn't change my mind.
13Q. Doesn't change that you say you saw a
14 retouching mark, you say you saw a problem with the
15 length, and all those things we went through, right?
17Q. On at least some of them you said there
18 could be an innocent explanation like exposures, this
19 could be a scratch as opposed to some other problem,
23 So if you see 100 other photos or 30
24 other photos of Mr. Simpson wearing this same exact
25 outfit including the same exact shoes, doesn't that
26 have some bearing on your opinion -- on your
27 conclusion that you draw from these observations that
28 somebody added shoes to the Scull photo?
1A. I don't know that those are the same
2 shoes. I don't know.
3Q. Assume for a second they're the same
4 shoes, okay. Please assume they're the same shoes.
5MR. LEONARD: Your Honor --
6THE COURT: I --
7MR. GELBLUM: I want to ask a hypothetical to
9MR. LEONARD: There's no basis for that.
10THE COURT: Overruled.
11MR. GELBLUM: We'll tie it up.
12Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) Assume they're the same
13 shoes, Mr. Groden, assume we've seen 30 other
14 photographs with those shoes.
15 Doesn't that affect your opinion that the
16 Scull photo -- somebody put new shoes on the Scull
18A. It doesn't affect at all what I found in
19 the photographs; the anomalies are there.
20Q. You're not answering my question.
21 I'm asking about the conclusion that you
22 draw from the anomalies. Let's assume for a second
23 that you really saw everything that you say you saw,
24 retouching marks, blue lines, length issues, all that
25 stuff, let's say you saw all that,
26 If, however, you see 30 other photographs
27 of Mr. Simpson wearing those shoes, doesn't that cause
28 you to pause a little bit and say wait, maybe there's
1 some other explanation for those observations I saw,
2 other than somebody putting new shoes on him, because
3 here's 30 other pictures of him with those same shoes;
4 yes or no?
5A. If I were able to authenticate the other
6 photographs as genuine then it probably would.
7Q. Okay. Thank you.
8 Now, Mr. Leonard also referred to this --
9 let me use the word "miraculous" discovery of those
11 Do you remember that?
13Q. You're aware, sir, that one of those
14 photographs was published in November 1993?
15MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, I'm going to object
16 to this.
17THE COURT: Sustained.
18MR. LEONARD: Thank you.
19Q. (BY MR. GELBLUM) If you were --
20MR. LEONARD: I move to strike, Your Honor.
21THE COURT: Stricken.
22Q. Did you do any searching of any
23 publications, sir, to see if there had been any
24 published photos of Mr. Simpson wearing Bruno Magli
25 shoes prior to the murders?
27Q. Wouldn't that make a difference to you if
28 there were, in fact, photos of him published prior to
1 any issue arising, what kind of shoes Mr. Simpson
2 owned before these murders occurred and Bruno Magli
3 footprints were found at the scene?
4A. Again, to answer your question as
5 accurately as I can, it wouldn't change what I found
6 in that photograph.
7Q. Again, Mr. Groden, we're talking about
8 your conclusion that you have -- you're drawing from
9 what you found in the photograph.
10 Just as you said, if you found that there
11 were other photographs, if they were found to be
12 authentic, of Mr. Simpson wearing those shoes, that
13 might indeed change your conclusion that you draw from
14 your observations about the shoes being added, if, in
15 fact, you found that a photograph had been published
16 prior to the murders --
17MR. LEONARD: Objection.
18Q. -- of Mr. Simpson wearing those Bruno
19 Magli shoes as he's seen wearing in the Scull
20 photograph, wouldn't that affect the conclusion you
21 draw from your observations?
22MR. LEONARD: Your Honor, improper,
24THE COURT: Overruled.
25A. If the photographers -- if I could
26 confirm -- if I confirm that the photographs are
27 legitimate, and if they can be proven that those were,
28 in fact, Bruno Magli shoes in the photographs, I would
1 say that it would affect my -- my overall conclusion.
2MR. GELBLUM: No further questions.
3THE WITNESS: But --
4MR. LEONARD: Nothing, Your Honor.
5THE COURT: You may step down.