Crime scene expert fails pointed defense quiz // Intense probe shows cracks

  in prosecution

  Jonathan T. Lovitt

  04/12/1995

  USA Today

  FINAL

  Page 05A

  (Copyright 1995)

  LOS ANGELES - Police scientist Dennis Fung challenged O.J. Simpson's

  lawyers to prove through a fingerprint check that he mishandled a piece of

  evidence at the scene where Simpson's ex-wife and her friend were slain.

  Returning to the witness stand after a five-day break because of jury illnesses and

  a jury investigation, Fung offered several admissions that support the defense's

  claim that a sloppy investigation discredits tests prosecutors say will prove

  Simpson killed his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman June

  12.

  One of the day's several intense confrontations came when Fung addressed

  defense lawyer Barry Scheck's charge that a videotape showed him picking up a

  piece of evidence with his bare hands.

  "That's you," Scheck said after the videotape was shown repeatedly, "grasping it

  in your bare hands, isn't it?"

  "No," Fung said. "We can always have the envelope printed and if my

  fingerprints are on there, then it is, but I know that my fingerprints are not on

  that envelope."

  A frame froze of the videotape showed Fung receiving a rectangular object that

  could have been the envelope.

  "What about that, Mr. Fung?" Scheck said.

  "It could have been a lot of things," Fung replied.

  Fung's resistance was a turnaround from last week when he agreed with defense

  lawyers' charges that investigators "possibly" made mistakes.

  Still, trial observers see Fung as a major problem for the prosecution's case.

  "It's another disastrous day for Dennis Fung," says Robert Pugsley, Southwestern

  University law professor. "He seemed demoralized, his attention span was

  wandering. Scheck took him apart, bit by bit."

  Prosecutors rallied around Fung. "I'm not disappointed in the way it was going,"

  prosecutor Christopher Darden said after court. "It's a difficult case and we're up

  against some very well-financed and able defense lawyers."

  He also said prosecutors had prepared Fung for the fierce questioning.

  "We don't coach our witnesses," he said. "We discuss their potential testimony.

  We show them the relevant documents."

  In his fifth day on the stand, Fung testified:

  -- He didn't inform his superiors when he found new blood stains inside

  Simpson's Bronco six weeks after the initial investigation. He did not explain the

  significance of the those stains. On the stand last week, he dramatically pointed

  out all the blood stains in the vehicle.

  -- He said he found no blood on the carpeting in Simpson's bedroom where

  police reported finding blood-stained socks. That's a big admission, says Pugsley.

  "Maybe it can be explained, but it raises doubt."

  -- He looked at a photograph of the gate at Nicole Simpson's condo taken June

  13 and said he couldn't see the blood stain he collected three weeks later. The

  defense has suggested the blood was planted.

  -- He was wrong when he said evidence collection didn't begin until after

  coroner's workers left the scene. The videotape showed Fung's assistant Andrea

  Mazzola picking up pieces of evidence while a coroner's aide was on the scene.

  -- But he parried Scheck's attempt to say the videotape showed a glove - a crucial

  piece of evidence - had been tossed onto a blanket from Nicole Simpson's condo

  that was used to cover her body.

  Scheck last week used the videotape to show investigators tossed the blanket

  aside.

  Fung also admitted under questioning that Simpson's hair could have been on the

  blanket and fallen at the crime scene.

  "You know it's the glove, don't you?" Scheck pressed.

  "I don't know," Fung said. "You know it's the glove, and you just got caught by

  the videotape," Scheck said. Judge Lance Ito struck the question and Fung didn't

  answer.

  Cross-examination: One excerpt

  Los Angeles police criminalist Dennis Fung testified that evidence wasn't

  collected until after coroner's workers had left. Defense attorney Barry Scheck

  challenged that, showing a videotape of the crime scene:

  SCHECK: Now this is Ms. (Andrea) Mazzola putting the hat in the bag, correct?

  FUNG: Yes.

  SCHECK: And if you look in the back of the steps, those are the print people

  walking back and forth . . .

  FUNG: Yes.

  SCHECK: Now she's picking up the glove. Now, you remember that Mr. (John)

  Jacobo from the coroner's office. He was the gentleman in the blue suit, the blue

  jumpsuit?

  FUNG: Yes.

  SCHECK: . . . Do you see those shoes, those blue pants?

  FUNG: Yes.

  SCHECK: That's Mr. Jacobo, isn't it?

  FUNG: Appears to be, yes.

  SCHECK: So you did begin evidence collection before the coroners left.

  FUNG: Yes.

  SCHECK: So what you said before wasn't true?

  FUNG: It was to the best of my recollection at the time.

  PHOTO,b/w,Myung J. Chun; PHOTO,b/w,John McCoy