Interview: Panelists discuss the Simpson civil trial


  Rivera Live

  CNBC, Inc. Burrelle's Information Services

  (Copyright (c) 1996 CNBC, Inc. All rights reserved.)


  HOST: Geraldo Rivera


  GERALDO RIVERA: Hi, everybody. I'm Geraldo Rivera, back from

  Washington and on with the rest of my life. Was the evidence at the murder

  scene on Bundy Drive moved and has O.J. Simpson been harassing a blonde

  18-year-old student intern at his civil trial? Those were the two questions being

  addressed inside and outside the courtroom in Santa Monica today as well as in

  the judge's chambers. This incident with the intern stopped this trial cold.


  Dennis Fung--you remember him, the pitiful LAPD criminalist whose disastrous

  testimony helped doom the prosecution during the criminal trial. Once again he

  faced a barrage of questions accusing him and the cops of contamination and

  corruption. But Fung's appearance on the witness stand, clearly, after it was

  delayed for over an hour by--by the judge, Judge Fujisaki, holding a closed-door

  session about this article from USA Today : Court intern, 18, says Simpson

  harassing her.


  Jane Wells is at the courthouse in Santa Monica with the latest.


  Jane, did you see USA Today before you got there?


  JANE WELLS reporting:


  It's right here.


  RIVERA: All right. And your reaction when you read it?


  WELLS: We're calling it--well, a bit like, `Oh, give me a break,' until it took up

  the court's time. We have now dubbed this incident Ambergate. It's not clear that

  Amber McGrath ever actually used the word harassment. Harassment is the word

  that is used by the reporter in this article. This article landed her and the

  attorneys in the judge's chambers this morning. O.J. was not asked in. When it

  was over, Amber wasn't seen again--just the sort of thing to spice up a very

  boring court day.


  She's young, she's beautiful, and she says O.J.'s hitting on her--at least that's what

  USA Today reporter Jonathan Lovitt claimed she told him. Lovitt reports that

  18-year-old court intern Amber McGrath, blonde, pretty and eerily reminiscent

  of Nicole, has been subjected to unwanted advances by O.J. Simpson. It was all

  over the paper this morning before O.J. got to court.


  Unidentified Man #1: O.J., do you think it's in good taste to hit on court interns.


  Mr. O.J. SIMPSON: Oh, boy.


  WELLS: The article describes three incidents, which the reporter admits that he

  has termed harassment. One, Simpson allegedly asked McGrath out on

  Halloween. She turned him down, saying, `Here he is at the trial involving the

  death of his ex-wife who he's supposed to be in love with and he's hitting on me.'

  Two, when McGrath once bumped into him, Simpson allegedly said, `You can

  bump into me anytime you want.' And, three, when McGrath bent over in court,

  Simpson allegedly motioned as though he was going to lift her skirt until a

  female deputy wagged her finger at him.


  Today the deputy denied the story, and Amber isn't talking. While most reporters

  say they have seen Simpson look--maybe even leer at the girl, they've seen no



  Mr. JONATHAN LOVITT ( USA Today ): I stand by this story. I've checked

  the facts.


  Unidentified Woman #1: Did you ask her out?


  WELLS: Outside court, Simpson wouldn't say a word, but inside he called the

  young woman a liar. Quote, "I can only recall having one conversation with her

  on Halloween," when he says she told him she wanted to pursue an acting career.

  O.J. Simpson also spoke in this exclusive interview with "Inside Edition"

  reporter Star Jones.


  Ms. STAR JONES ("Inside Edition" Reporter): Have you ever asked this young

  woman out?


  Mr. SIMPSON: Never. As I said, I only--I only had the one--I--I don't ever recall

  talking to her, other than she saying hi when I'm with you guys, or all the



  WELLS: O.J. Simpson accuses the newspaper reporter of setting a trap by

  making suggestive comments about Amber to try and get a reaction.


  Ms. LOVITT : I have no comment about that.


  WELLS: So this was a story most reporters were willing to chalk up as Mt.

  Everest made out of a molehill, until attorneys for both sides shut themselves up

  in chambers with the judge for over an hour this morning to discuss the article.

  When they came out, nothing was said and testimony resumed. Yes, folks, there

  was a trial today, as criminalist Dennis Fung faced cross-examination.


  Mr. DENNIS FUNG (Criminalist): Well, it's my job.


  WELLS: Well, his job didn't get much easier, answering questions about possible

  contamination of evidence, blood swatches with no markings and police reports

  written in pencil, but at least this time it only lasted two days, instead of the

  nine-day flogging Fung faced last year.


  Unidentified Woman #2: How does it feel?


  Mr. FUNG: It was a lot shorter.


  WELLS: And with testimony so tame these days, reporters have to look

  elsewhere for a story.


  Now there was word today that Amber's job might be on the line. But last word I

  heard, she's expected back at her post tomorrow handing out media passes. Of

  course, Geraldo, she really wants to be an actress. Maybe she could play herself

  in one of those re-enactments.


  RIVERA: Right. Right. You know, I was just thinking, they could ask Dennis

  Fung, `Isn't it possible that O.J. Simpson sexually harassed Amber?' And, you

  know, Dennis Fung would obviously say, `Yes, it is possible. It's possible that I

  did, but I just forgot.'


  So did the--the whole Amber situation overshadow what was, in essence, a

  sequel to Fung's nine days--obviously, it wasn't nine days. And you had Bob

  Blasier doing the cross instead of Barry Scheck, who was so effective. `Don't

  you see it now, Mr. Shu--Fung?,' instead of--didn't--in a way, did Blasier try to

  mimic Scheck in--in terms of using `Mr. Fung' and--and these pointed, hard

  questions that carry an answer implicit in them?


  WELLS: Yes. I--I don't know if he was as effective, but there was a lot of this,

  `Do you see this, Mr. Fung?' A lot of `Mr. Fung,' boom, boom, boom. And

  several of the questions there were objections to. Many of those objections were

  sustained. There was some new information, though, that came out that we

  haven't heard before. Among it--well, first of all, we heard a lot of the old stuff

  before. You know, you mentioned at the top, `Was the evidence moved? The

  gloves in different pictures'--yeah, we heard that again. Also, though, for the first

  time, Fung talked about presumptive blood tests that he did on evidence in O.J.'s

  bathroom--the sink and the shower. He never talked about that in court before.

  Those tests showed positive for the presence of blood.


  The most interesting thing, I thought, was talking about--for the first time Blasier

  brought up that Nicole's Akita may have been brought from Bundy to

  Rockingham the morning after the murders, therefore, possibly bringing evidence

  from Bundy to Rockingham. Fung did say he did see a dog at Rockingham and

  there was nobody watching the dog, and as the dog would approach, he would

  shoo him away. When this came out, this was kind of a big deal, until on redirect

  today, Tom Lambert, Fred Goldman's attorney, said to Mr. Fung--showed him

  a--said to Mr. Fung--showed him a picture of Nicole's Akita and said, `Was this

  the dog?' And Fung said, `No, that wasn't it.' Showed him a picture of O.J.'s

  Akita Chachi, who's much darker, looks very different, said, `Was this the dog?'

  And Fung said, `Yeah, that's it.' So it kind of stole that thunder.


  RIVERA: Like Chris said, `Isn't it possible, Mr. Fung, that the dog brought the

  bloody glove over to Rockingham.'


  Has--let me just go fr--from the sublime to the ridiculous for--for a second here,

  Jane. D--don't get me wrong about--here, but Simpson's a pretty flirty guy. I

  mean, he's not the only one. He's not even the--the only one on the show tonight.

  But has he ever flirted with you?


  WELLS: Oh, no, I n--I never saw any of these incidents that are mentioned in

  this article.


  RIVERA: No, I'm asking about you personally. Did you ever get any vibes from



  WELLS: Oh, from O.J.?


  RIVERA: Yeah.


  WELLS: Being Geraldo Rivera's reporter at the courthouse makes me the last



  RIVERA: OK. I guess.


  WELLS: I could be the only woman on a deserted island and he would not make

  a pass at me.


  RIVERA: Yeah. Right. Right. All right, J--Jane, stay there. Don't--don't go

  away. I'm going to quickly--Jay, is this, as Jane described, a m--a mountain out

  of a moan--molehill?


  Mr. JAY MONAHAN (Criminal Defense Attorney): I think, actually, Geraldo,

  that it could be trouble for O.J. whether it's true or not. And I seriously question

  the--the validity of it. We have an unsequestered jury, and they're going to be

  hearing about this. And the--this woman, Amber, has been--well, you know, Rob

  was saying earlier, `Why does she have to be named Amber?'


  RIVERA: Really.


  Mr. MONAHAN: I mean, that doesn't help O.J., either.


  RIVERA: Forever Amber.


  Mr. MONAHAN: But--but the--if--the unsequestered jury starts thinking, `Well,

  now O.J.'s hitting on an 18-year-old blonde, she's sort of a Nicole look-alike.

  Nicole was only 17 when they started dating. What kind of a man is this?' You

  know, there's a lot of speculation that goes into it. But I seriously question--I've

  heard so many accounts of what happened or what didn't happen, whether or not

  this--this court bailiff, Vicky McKown, actually witnessed the so-called

  skirt-lifting mimicking or not. She's apparently denied it.


  RIVERA: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.


  Mr. MONAHAN: And I've also heard reports that Jonathan Lovitt himself, the

  reporter, may have tried to hit on Ms. Amber McGrath. So who knows what it

  means? But I th--still think it could hurt O.J.


  RIVERA: Roberto?


  Mr. ROBERT DUNN (Criminal Defense Attorney): Well, I--I think that whether

  he did it or not is not really the issue. The issue is--is that since you have this

  young lady who's working within the court and the judge is trying to keep a lid

  on the media input into the case, going to the media as opposed to going to a

  court official, the judge or someone else, to address a concern is inappropriate. It

  did already cost time down from--from the trial, and I think that her removal was

  warranted under those circumstances.


  RIVERA: Ooh, it's tough to remove someone who makes an accusation of sexual



  Mr. DUNN: Well, I mean, it's not a question of removing her from her job. But

  she can be placed in another--within the court system in some other function so

  she can still keep working without actually being involved in this particular case.


  RIVERA: You know, Jim Moorhead, whenever I was a--a defendant in a civil

  case--and--and I have been always successful--I always point that out--they

  always told me that I had to be like a priest in there. You know, just--you know,

  not even a broad grin, mustache combed, you know, have my--my family

  surrounding me. There is enough--it seems that this guy violated one of the most

  practical pieces of advice that attorneys give to defendants in any kind of case:

  Be purer than the driven snow.


  Mr. JAMES MOORHEAD (Civil Litigation Attorney): Well, particularly--I

  mean, my major worry wouldn't be, if I were the defense lawyer, about the jury;

  it would be about the judge. Because the staff is really the extended family of the

  judge. And if you start to hit on one of the extended family and the judge takes it

  seriously--and, obviously, he did by holding a hearing for an hour--then you may

  have ticked off the judge. And when you come on the stand to testify, he may be

  sending vibes to the jury, based on that alone, that he doesn't like you, doesn't

  believe you.


  RIVERA: And, Bob Tanenbaum, a kind of tragic or a ...(unintelligible) tragic



  Mr. ROBERT TANENBAUM (Criminal Defense Attorney): Oh, definitely. It's

  sort of the burlesque end of--of a non-news day in--in court from that point of

  view. But the judge should have been able to play this off for the jury and tell

  them to--this is the kind of thing that inevitably occurs where you have a circus

  atmosphere in a very, very high celebrity case. And that's what he should do with

  this jury and not leave this thing dormant, lying out there perhaps in--in some

  kind of pregnant fashion that jurors may pick up on and, as was commented by

  Jay, suggest that there may be a fatal attraction here for young blonde women

  with blue eyes who are 18 years old, in that place against Simpson. So the court,

  I think, really has a duty here to--to either conduct a voir dire of this jury to see

  who has heard about it, or just to address them generally and say, `Hey, guys,

  this has nothing to do with this case. It's an inevitability of what happens when

  you have a circus atmosphere.


  RIVERA: I--I totally agree. I mean, everybody is reporting this--AP is leading

  with the Amber situation. Court TV spent the first 10 minutes of their O--O.J.

  show on it, and I can't wait to see the E! TV re-creation of this one.


  Jane Wells, quickly. I'm sorry, I'm almost out of time in this segment. I want you

  to tell me what's--who's up next.


  WELLS: O--OK. But quickly, I just have to say that she never said the word

  harassment as far as I know. She may not have approached this reporter about it.

  To know this reporter, it may be the sort of thing that he drew out of her. She's

  very young, very impressionable. Any attention from O.J. may have freaked her

  out--even a smile. So I just want to put that in perspective. Quickly, Richard

  Rubin is next on the gloves, and after him comes the guy...


  RIVERA: Oh, the glove man. The old glove man...


  WELLS: Yep. And then the...


  RIVERA: ...who wrote the letter about the celebration party. Yeah.


  WELLS: Yeah, and who also measured O.J.'s hands and all that. And then after

  him, the guy who took the picture of O.J. allegedly wearing the Bruno Magli



  RIVERA: Yes or no, Jane, did they score with Fung today?


  WELLS: Oh, I don't know.


  RIVERA: Yes or no?


  WELLS: He wa--he was--he wasn't as bad as he was in the criminal trial.


  RIVERA: OK. OK. I--I...


  WELLS: I don't know. Did he win? I--I hate to predict--I hate to predict what the

  jurors think.


  RIVERA: OK. OK. I'll see you tomorrow.




  RIVERA: Amber and Evidence, that's our title, our focus. Back in a flash. Stay





  RIVERA: I promise I'm going to spend three, four minutes on this and then that's

  it. We have more of the exclusive "Inside Edition" interview that Star Jones

  conducted with Mr. Simpson earlier today. Take a look.


  (Excerpt from "Inside Edition" interview)


  Mr. SIMPSON: She walked by, you know, everybody kind of looked--not

  everybody, but, you know, you glance at her because she's kind of giggly when

  she goes by. And he looked directly back at me to get a reaction, and I started

  laughing and said, `No, no, no, man,' and I walked a--away from him.


  RIVERA: I also read a quote in which he said about the bumping, `You can

  bump into me anytime you want,' that that is a remark--he's a jokey fellow, and it

  is the kind of remark he would typically say. A--and, Bob, you said in the break

  that typical jock humor, which, of course, it is, but most jocks tell a joke like that

  or whatever the reference is, in the context of, you know, their private life, not in

  the context of a wrongful death trial.


  Mr. DUNN: Oh, certainly. I mean, I'm sure Simpson's attorneys have counseled

  him that conduct that otherwise would be acceptable or understood in the context

  of th--of this particular proceeding is not going to be tolerated, and that even if

  it's something he might otherwise do, you shouldn't do it here.


  RIVERA: Get tape B ready. This is something I--I've agonized over this, and

  I--this is "American Journal," another KingWorld production. They have a

  videotape shot by--I think a--a limo driver had a video camera. It was on the

  floor of the backseat 10 years ago in a limousine. I think it was st--Skip Taft and

  O.J. Simpson driving. It is only relevant in the context of what we've been

  discussing for the last 10 minutes. Roll it.


  (Excerpt from videotape)


  Mr. SKIP CROUSE: OK. What do you feel like? A little wine, beer, Pepsi?


  Mr. SIMPSON: No, I'm fine. I have not been drinking at all.


  Mr. CROUSE: Pepsi?


  Mr. SIMPSON: I--I stopped drinking for about--you know what it was? I got so

  busy--we even locked the sun out, huh?


  Mr. SIMPSON: Yeah, that was a little before my time, but still...


  Mr. CROUSE: Well, he--he--he raped (censored).


  Mr. SIMPSON: He raped (censored)?


  Mr. CROUSE: No, this didn't get out. He was my (censored).


  Mr. SIMPSON: Yeah.


  Mr. CROUSE: (Censored) He got him off fast.


  Mr. SIMPSON: Yeah.


  Mr. CROUSE: He didn't really rape her. She was...


  Mr. SIMPSON: I know how it is. She don't want to give it up.


  Mr. CROUSE: Yeah.


  Mr. SIMPSON: Yeah, I raped Nicole.


  Mr. CROUSE: Well, he...


  Mr. SIMPSON: That's how we ended up getting married.


  Mr. CROUSE: This guy...


  (End of excerpt)


  RIVERA: Skip--who? Skip who?


  Unidentified Stagehand: Skip Crouse.


  RIVERA: Skip...


  Stagehand: Crouse.


  RIVERA: ...Crouse. Sorry. Not Skip Taft, Skip Crouse. Tell me who Skip

  Crouse is. Comment, Jay?


  Mr. MONAHAN: I don't know what to make out of it. I don't--I mean, you're

  saying--you're saying that O.J., 10 years ago, was making some comment to

  some guy...


  RIVERA: About how he raped Nicole and then how...


  Mr. MONAHAN: ...about he raped--raped Nicole and that's how they got



  RIVERA: Yeah.


  Mr. MONAHAN: I mean, what--is that a joke? Is that a terrible joke? Is it a

  stupid joke? Is it serious? I don't know.




  Mr. MONAHAN: I don't know what to make out of it.


  RIVERA: Forget it.


  Mr. MONAHAN: It's gross.


  RIVERA: All right. Let me go now to the--the evidence. Dr. Richard Saferstein.

  Let me introduce my panel. I don't--you know, I--I assume everybody knows

  everybody, but--I mean, you do with these guys, but Jay Monahan--you know

  Jay--criminal defense attorney, CS--NBC, whatever you call it.


  Mr. MONAHAN: Alphabet soup.


  RIVERA: Alphabet soup. You know Robert Dunn, criminal defense attorney.


  Mr. DUNN: That's not Robert Dunn.


  RIVERA: No, that's not.


  Mr. DUNN: I know Robert Dunn and that's not Robert Dunn.


  RIVERA: I know Robert...


  Mr. MONAHAN: If you were Robert Dunn--Richard should know Robert Dunn.


  RIVERA: Richard Saferstein, served as chief forensic scientist for the state of

  New Jersey for more than two decades. Flashing out--Where am I going?--oh, to

  Washington, civil litigation attorney Jim Moorhead, the former assistant US

  attorney. Welcome back, Jim. I haven't seen you in a while. And in Los Angeles,

  criminal defense attorney and author Robert Tanenbaum, the man who took my

  seat in the Manhattan district attorney's office so long ago. He is a man who rose

  to the position of chief of the felony trial bureau there. I never went past the

  intern. Bob is also a politician and an author. His latest book is "Falsely



  What do you think of--let me start with you, Bob. You know, Fung is back.

  He--it was a debacle the last time. I mean, Scheck practically testified for him.

  By all accounts, Blasier tried the same tactic. Fung seemed better prepared. How

  does that make the LA DA's office look? I guess that's the first question.

  Secondly, do these discrepancies--the gloves apparently are in different positions

  in various photos--carrying the blood sample in the trash bag--all of these things.

  How do you think they play second time around?


  Mr. TANENBAUM: Well, of course, you know that going to school the first

  time could help just so much. You're stuck with what the record is. Barry Scheck

  did a great job because, in fact, he did what the DA should have done in the

  case. He took Fung through his paces. That--and what did the DAs not do, in

  essence, that Scheck did. And that is to say--remember, Fung is the guy in the

  grand jury who said--when asked the question, `Did you collect all the evidence?'

  he said yes. And the fact is he didn't. Now what does that tell you? It tells you

  the DAs didn't prepare this case. When you have someone like Dennis Fung,

  who's a criminalist, he collects evidence, you go to the scene...


  RIVERA: Tape C.


  Mr. TANENBAUM: pick up all the evidence with him, `Where was

  it?' You go to diagrams in your office. So that what Scheck did, in essence, was

  what good DAs do to prepare the witness. And you have all the notes that he

  made and you have all the evidence present, all the locations marked. Now in

  this particular case, he falls basically into the same kind of trap, doesn't he? One

  the wire near the air conditioner, he testifies on direct that it was blood. And then

  Blasier says, `It was never confirmed to be blood, was it, Mr. Fung?' And he

  says no. So we're still stuck with the same kind of shabby evidence. And

  moreover, what kind of securing of crime scene suggests to individuals that you

  have a dog around? And someone is saying, like Fung, `But when he came close

  to us, we would shoo him away.' What were the detectives doing there? What

  were the uniform officers doing trying to secure a crime scene? That's--that's

  about Crime Scene 101 if you know what you're doing as a DA and a cop.


  RIVERA: Roll tape C and then go to commercial and then I'll ask Dr. Saferstein

  about some of this stuff. Go.


  (Excerpt from footage dated April 11, 1995)


  Mr. BARRY SCHECK (Simpson Attorney): Mr. Fung, isn't it your responsibility

  to investigate whether evidence at the crime scene has been moved or altered

  from its original position?


  Mr. FUNG: In some respects, it is my responsibility. Yes.


  Mr. SCHECK: All right. And you're supposed to make inquiries of people at the

  scene as to whether or not evidence has been moved or altered?


  Mr. FUNG: Yes.


  Mr. SCHECK: Is it your testimony, sir, that on June 13th you did not suspect

  that the glove or the envelope or any other evidence in that area had been moved

  from their original position?


  Unidentified Man #2: Objection, Your Honor.


  Judge LANCE ITO: Overruled.


  Mr. FUNG: I did not suspect that they were moved.


  (End of excerpt)




  (Excerpt from footage dated April 11, 1995)


  Mr. SCHECK: Are you familiar with a book--it's called "Criminalistics, an

  Introduction to Forensic Science" by Richard Saferstein?


  Mr. FUNG: I am familiar with one of the editions, yes.


  Mr. SCHECK: All right. And this is a book that, I take it, you studied when--in

  your training--criminalistics?


  Mr. FUNG: Yes.


  Mr. SCHECK: Doesn't Saferstein say that the packaging of blood evidence in a

  plastic or air-tight containers must be avoided because the accumulation of

  residual moisture could contribute to the growth of blood-destroying bacteria and



  `Preferably each stained article should be packaged separately in a paper bag or

  well-ventilated box.'


  Mr. FUNG: That's what the book says.


  Mr. SCHECK: Now do you agree with that, sir?


  Mr. FUNG: I--I agree with that in the regard if--for final packaging. In the

  intermediate stage, I do not agree with that.


  (End of excerpt)


  RIVERA: You said at the time you--you were misquoted, misused.


  Dr. RICHARD SAFERSTEIN (PhD, Forensic Scientist): Oh, I think it was

  misused somewhat. It wa--but he--it was--it was part--partly--some part truth to

  it. But, Geraldo, knowing what we know today, that really didn't amount to a hill

  of beans from the science point--scientific point of view.


  RIVERA: OK. Let me ask you, of what amounts--wel--hill--back to the hill of

  beans metaphor. Fung--shown photos, evidence moved, some--you know,

  obviously it--it's not a frozen portrait there. It's a crime scene. What overview,

  Doctor, is your impression of the quality of this evidence, given the--the

  discrepancies pointed out with Fung's testimony today as it was a year ago?


  Dr. SAFERSTEIN: Well, Geraldo, this case is--is moving k--along real quick,

  and it--it's what should be happening. The plaintiff has to get all this evidence in,

  bring it before the jury real quick. They want to give that jury a good overview

  of all the evidence.


  RIVERA: But scientifically, what is--what is the implication of the gloves being

  moved, for example?


  Dr. SAFERSTEIN: Well, Geraldo, what's--what's the main evidence in this case?

  DNA blood--DNA-containing blood stains, hairs on the hat, a fiber from O.J.'s

  Bronco found at the crime scene and footprints at the crime scene. All of these

  evidence implicate--all of these items have implicated O.J. None of these items

  would have been of effective from the scientific point of view by any of the

  testimony that was presented yesterday or today by Fung.


  RIVERA: So...


  Dr. SAFERSTEIN: Now--and--and--and, Geraldo, no crime scene is--is--is pure.

  I mean, there's always movement, there's always missteps, and you have to

  expect these things. And--but there was nothing that has occurred so far, in my

  opinion, that would up--upset the scientific integrity of the evidence that

  was--eventually was examined.


  RIVERA: Jim Moorhead, is it a question of scientific certainty, reliability, or is it

  really a question of pointing out discrepancies and making little cracks in the

  wall the plaintiff is trying to build?


  Mr. MOORHEAD: You know, I think they're trying to make little cracks. I

  mean, the real problem is, they're trying to paint this picture of police corruption

  and bungling. And the biggest problem I think they're having in the courtroom is

  the judge.


  RIVERA: Yeah.


  Mr. MOORHEAD: He's a--a real party pooper here, because he keeps knocking

  the paint cans out of their hands or knocking the brushes out of their hands. So

  they never get a chance to really paint this full portrait that they want to paint.

  And he's telling them, `You'll get a chance to do that in your own case, putting

  on your own defense.' But I think that really could be too late for them at that

  point. The other evidence could be too strong.


  RIVERA: It's very disjoint--you mean go back to Fung later on in--in the defense

  case a month or two from now?


  Mr. MOORHEAD: I don't think they'll go back to Fung, but they may go back to

  Vannatter, for example.




  Mr. MOORHEAD: They may want to talk to him about the search warrant he

  filled out.


  RIVERA: S--I'm--I'm sorry, Jim. I've got to take a break.




  RIVERA: Let me do that. I'll be right back. Amber and Evidence.


  (Announcements) Program Time: 9:00-10:00 PM


  Nielson Rating 350526 Reference: 961105