Court Case*show the evidence of the outfit he wore on that dayWitnesses:Officer Sampson[Prosecutor]: What justification, what evidence, what factual discoveries did you make justifying the continuing custody of Dror Goldberg and asking one of the uniformed officers to take him down to homicide?[Officer Sampson]: He matched the general description of the person seen running from the wig shop. He had an injury that I saw on his chest that was consistent in appearance to what I had been told about some activity that took place inside the wig shop where the murder took place. [Prosecutor]: Did Goldberg have blood on him?[Officer Sampson]: I discovered he had blood on his shirt[Prosecutor]: When informing Goldberg of the reason for the police investigation, how did he react?[Officer Sampson]: He became extremely nervousalmost hyperventilating.[Prosecutor]: When the police searched appellant's pick-up truck, what did they find?[Officer Sampson]: A Swiss army knife and a large, double-edged knife[Prosecutor]: No further questions Evidence: Prosecution brings out, the sweatshirt and the sweat pants, show that they're dark colored. Every witness that saw the killer say he had on a dark or black jogging outfit with a white stripe down the side. They're consistent about that.Comment by Dominguez, Marcela - 9973790: Defense says that blood comes from playing footballOfficer GriestOfficer Griest was Houston Independent School District (HISD) Officer-in-Training. 7 years ago Goldberg entered the school under the influence, his car was searched a book bag was found. [Prosecutor]: Officer Griest, when Goldbergs book bag was searched, there was a notebook found. What did this notebook contain?[Officer Griest]: A page, how to rape a woman and details on how to do it. There is another page that details how to kill a woman.[Prosecutor]: Please explain what this page details [Officer Griest]: The page states "I'd stab her with a knife. A knife again. To make a number of stab wounds, small ones, so that she knows she's going to die. Telling her: 'Do you like this?' Looking at her dead eyes. Telling her that she looks pretty."[Prosecutor]: No further questions*And when you hear these references, isn't that exactly the same words used when the defendant committed this crime when he was talking to Roberta IngrandoForensic Examiner[Prosecutor]: Please discuss the forensic fiber evidence [Forensic Examiner]: The fiber found at the location at the Navigator matched to the fiber found at the wig shop, from the wigs that were being worked on, and from the wigs in the back of the shop.[Prosecutor]: Were those fibers found on the deceased and on the victims? [Forensic Examiner]: Yes [Prosecutor]: From the eight fibers located at the Navigator how many matched those from the scene? [Forensic Examiner]: Eight matched [Prosecutor]: No further questions

Defense AttorneyOpening Statement:This is a case of misidentification. The experts will tell you that the most persuasive and yet the least reliable evidence in criminal cases is eyewitness identification testimony. And the evidence will show that when shown a video of Goldberg, Roberta Ingrando, rather than being certain, was very tentative in her identification of Goldberg as perhaps the person who stabbed her. She was not certain. Some year and a half after the event, she says that she's 100 percent certain. The media who completely exploited Goldberg, spreading biased news reports of the defendant, skewed Ingrandos certainty. Dr. Beckman, a witness, who supposedly chased the defendant tried to copy down the numbers of the Navigators license plate but had difficulty in doing so. While the killer was casing the wig shop, was on the telephone with his buddies and running errands; while the killer was escaping, Goldberg was again on the phone with some friends and driving to play football with his buddies. After, when Goldberg was found, he agreed to the polices request to search his car. What did they find? Absolutely nothing. No blood was found on the navigator, no blood on the brake pedal, no blood on the keys, and no blood on the door handle. The car had not been previously cleaned; therefore, Goldberg had nothing to hide. Hes innocent. There are no hairs, fingerprints, or clothes with blood on them that links to the crime scene. Dror Goldberg is not guilty. Thank you.

Roberta IngrandoVictim at the crime scene was almost killed. Ingrando described how the killer hugged around her and hit her, and stabbed her. The victim was hit, had her nose cut, had her neck stabbed so hard the knife went entirely through her neck. Ingrando went through a lot, she went through trauma therefore Roberta Ingrando is an irrelevant evidence due to her indecisiveness of who could have been the killer. [Defense Counsel]: When you were questioned to identify the appellant were you sure it was him?[Ingrando]: Well when I saw his face it scared me, it could be him[Defense]: How sure were you of him being guilty?[Ingrando]: I wasnt 100% sure [Defense]: Why did you file charges against this man then?[Ingrando]: To find out if it was him [Defense]: No further questionsRandall Beckman got the license plate number from Goldbergs Navigator. Anybody can make a mistake. Everybody makes mistakes, he could have written it down incorrectly. You know, it would be a miracle if he wrote it down wrong and it came back to a black Navigator wouldn't it? There were eighteen Navigators in the Houston area alone with almost the same license number. Not only that, there are seven dark Navigators with almost the same license plate. They differed in either the last digit or the last two digits. Randall Beckman recorded the numbers while the driver sped off. Dr. LoftusDefense: What are your areas of expertise?Loftus: I am an expert in problems with memory as well as identificationDefense: What does research show in a person's perception and the ability to recall something when they write it down?Loftus: in a series of numbers, the ones most likely to be remembered and gotten right are the first in the series. In this case both letters and numbers -- the more difficult it is when you get to the end of a string of numbers to remember that, to write it down correctly, and to perceive it correctly.Defense: So is there a high probability that Randall Beckman could have misinterpreted those numbers?Loftus: It is likely. Defense: Can post-event information influenced Roberta Ingrandos decision on who the killer was? Loftus: Post event information can heavily influence the certainty expressed by a personDefense: Therefore, the media, newspapers, television news, could have influenced Ingrandos decision?Loftus: YesDefense: No further questions

Crime Scene Unit Officer:Defense: How many samples of blood did you take?Crime Scene Unit Officer: Six Defense: From where? Crime Scene Unit Officer: Some from spots outside, I took part of what was on the push bar for the door, one of the drops that was by the cash register, another swab from the cash register door and another someplace else. Defense: Was there any blood, hair, fibers, on the knife found in Goldbergs car?Crime Scene Unit Officer: NoneDefense: Was there any blood anywhere on the car?Crime Scene Unit Officer: NoDefense: No further questions

Marleny (House Helper in the Goldbergs home)Defense: Did Goldberg walk the dogs ?Marleny: Yes.Defense: How long did he walk them and at what time?Marleny: About fifteen minutes at 3:30. Defense: Did he come back to the house?Marleny: He came back to the house.Defense: What time?Marleny: 3:45.Defense: What time did he leave in his white pickup truck for the second time that day?Marleny: At 4:30.Defense: And the next time he left the house was about 4:30? Marleny: Yes.Defense: Is it true that each time you saw Dror leave, he left in his white pickup truck?Marleny: Yes.Defense: And the white pickup truck was parked in front of the house?Marleny: Yes.Defense: So when Dror left, he would go out the front door to drive the white pickup, correct?Marleny: Yes.Defense: He didn't go out the back door of the house that day where the Navigator was?Marleny: Yes. That's correct.Defense: When you do your washing and ironing, what part of the house do you work in?Marleny: In the washroom. The washroom is next to the back door. Defense: At any time when you were working in this portion of the house, you would be able to see whether anyone was in or out of the house out of the back door, is that right? Marleny: Yes. The back door has a large window that looks out onto the carport.Defense: During the entire time, did you see Dror go out the back door?Marleny: No.Defense: Did you see the Navigator exit the area at ALL that day?Marleny: No. Defense: No further questions. Closing StatementDror Goldberg simply is not guilty; Floyd McDonald was with the Houston Police Department for forty years. He's testified in previous cases and after a career of forty year spent working for the State, he says he has never seen a case where the killer didn't get some blood on him and that blood would have been transferred to the getaway car. The State and the prosecutor have done their best and they can't explain the lack of blood. There is simply no link or connection between Dror Goldberg and the crime scene. Dror Goldberg is not guilty. Not guilty means not proved guilty. Hes innocent. There are no hairs, fingerprints, or clothes with blood on them that links to the crime scene. Think this thoroughly, members of the jury, you all might be placing an innocent individual in prison. Dror Goldberg is innocent. Thank you.