DOJ MATERIALS US. Department of Justice 950 Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 5.313? 33 51M October 16, 2014 James C. Orenstein District Attorney Of?ce of the Hampden County District Attorney Hall of Justice 50 State Street Spring?eld, MA 01102 Re: State of Massachusetts v. George Perrot, Case No. 85-5415-18,20,25 Dear Mr. Orenstein: On September 30, 2014, we sent you a letter regarding the results of a review of laboratory reports and testimony by FBI Laboratory examiners in cases involving microscopic hair comparison analysis. In your case, that letter inadvertently included the results of the. review with respect to the wrong defendant. Please ?nd enclosed the correct results of the review with respect to George Perrot. We apologize for this error. Sincerely, Norman Wong Special Counsel Enclosure cc: Nicholas C. Perros Innocence Project National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C., 20535-0001 MICROSCOPIC HAIR COMPARISON ANALYSIS RESULT OF REVIEW Date: August 05, 2014 To: innocence Project Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review Team From: Federal Bureau of Investigation Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review Team FBI File Number: Criminal Docket Number: 85?5415~18, 20, 25 Defendant: Perrot, George Victim: Prekop, Mary A. (FBI: 51226011) _)g__Trial Plea Stipulation Transcript enclosed Lab Report enclosed Pursuant to the Letter of Agreement between our organizations, this letter serves to provide your of?ce with the results from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review regarding the analysis of testimony and lab reports provided in the above-referenced so. Please notify the FBI, within 14 days of receipt of this letter, as to whether or not the Innocence Project (IP) agrees with the conclusions. The FBI has conducted its review of the report issued in this case and found it to contain: Appropriate Statements Inappropriate Statements The FBI has conducted its review of the FBI testimony transcript and/or stipulation in accordance with the November 9, 2012 agreed upon scienti?c standards between the IP and FBI with the following results: Error Type 1: The examiner stated or implied that the evidentiary hair could be associated with a speci?c individual to the exclusion of all others. This type of testimony exceeds the limits of the science. Error Type 2: The examiner assigned to the positive association a statistical weight or probability or provided a likelihood that the questioned hair originated from a particular source, or an opinion as to the likelihood or rareness of the positive association that could lead the jury to believe that valid statistical weight can be assigned to a microscopic hair association. This type of testimony exceeds the limits of the science. Error Type 3: The examiner cites the number of cases or hair analyses worked in the lab and the number of samples from different individuals that could not be distinguished from one another as a predictive value to bolster the conclusion that a hair belongs toa specific individual. This type of testimony exceeds the limits of the. science. _Appropriate This document may contain information protected by the Privacy Act of i 974 and is provided by the FBI to your agency solely for authorized law enforcement purposes. The information contained herein may not be ?xrther disclosed 0r disseminated without the express consent of the FBI. Response Sheet Please send completed form within 14 days to: Cherise B. Dreyfus FBI Laboratory 2501 Forensic Way Quantico, VA 22135 Fax: 703-632-7714 Email: FBICaseRevieW2@ic.fbi.gov (please include in the subject line response? and the name of the defendant) Referenced FBI Case Number: 95-Hg-269368 Court Docket Number: 85-5415-18 20 25 Subject(s)/ Defendant(s): F'errotI George - Findings of the Innocence Project (IP): The IP concurs with the conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review, or The IP disagrees with the conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review for the following reasons: Error 1 Error 2 - Error 3 Appropriate The IP would like to meet with the FBI (in person or by phone) to discuss the differing opinions regarding the appropriateness of FBI testimony and/or lab reports. This document may contain information protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 and is provided by the FBI to your agency solely for authoriZed law enforcement purposes. The information contained herein may not be further disclosed or disseminated without the express consent of the FBI. 4. U.S. Department of Justice 950 Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 term is Haesse September 30, 2014 James C. Orenstein District Attorney Of?ce of the Hampden County District Attorney Hall Of Justice 50 State Street Spring?eld, MA 01102 Re: State of Massachusetts v. George Perrot. Case No. 85-5415-18. 20, 25 Dear Mr. Ore-nstein: We write to advise you of the results of a review by the United States Department of Justice (the ?Department?) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation and collectively with the Department of laboratory reports and testimony by FBI Laboratory examiners in cases involving microscopic hair comparison analysis. Through this review, we have determined that a report or testimony regarding microscopic hair comparison analysis containing erroneous statements was used in this case. This error and the process through. which it was identi?ed are explained in more detail below. We ask that you determine the actions your of?ce should take in light of this error. I. Background has been engaged in a review of hair comparison reports and testimony presented by the FBI Laboratory before December 31, 1999, after which mitochondrial DNA testing became routine. The science underlying microscopic hair comparison is not the subject of this review. However, in some cases, FBI Laboratory examiner's exceeded the limits of science by overstating the conclusions that may appropriately be drawn from a positive association between evidentiary hair and a known hair sample. This is in contrast to cases in which the FBI Laboratory report and examiner testimony presented conclusions that may appropriately be drawn ?'om a positive association. Thus, the purpose of this review is to ensure that FBI Laboratory reports and examiner testimony regarding microscopic hair comparison analysis met accepted scienti?c standards and to identify those cases in which those standards were not met so that any appropriate remedial action may be taken. Error Identi?ed in this Matter We have determined that the microscopic hair comparison analysis testimony or laboratory report presented in this case included statements that exceeded the limits of science and were, therefore, invalid: the examiner stated or implied that the evidentiary hair could be associated with a speci?c individual to the exclusion of all others - this type of testimony exceeded the limits of the science; (2) the examiner assigned to the positive association a statistical weight or probability or provided a likelihood that the questioned hair originated from a particular source, or an opinion as to the likelihood or rareness of the positive association that could lead the jury to believe that valid statistical weight can be assigned to a microsc0pic hair association - this type of testimony exceeded the limits of the science; or (3) the examiner cites the number of cases or hair analyses worked in the laboratory and the number of samples from different individuals that could not be distinguished from one another as a predictive value to bolster the conclusion that a hair belongs to a speci?c individual - this type of testimony exceeded the limits of the science. (A copy of the documents upon which our determination is based is enclosed.)1 We take no position regarding the materiality of the error in this case. Potential Victim Noti?cation We recommend that you advise the appropriate victim advocate in your office of this error, so that he/ she may determine how and when to inform the victim or the victim?s family that this matter may be the subject of further litigation and that they may be contacted by the defense. IV. Potential DNA Testing In the event that your of?ce determines that further testing is appropriate or necessary or the court orders such testing, the FBI is available to provide mitochondrial DNA testing of the relevant hair evidence or STR testing of related biological evidence if testing of hair evidence is no longer possible, if (1) the evidence to be tested is in the government?s possession or control, and (2) the chain of custody for the evidence can be established. V. Potential Waiver of Procedural Defenses In the event that the defendant seeks post-conviction relief based on the Department?s disclosure that microscopic hair comparison laboratory reports or testimony used in this case contained statements that exceeded the limits of science, we provide the following information to make you aware of how we are handling such situations in federal cases. In such cases under 28 U.S.C. 2255, in the interest of justice, the United States is waiving reliance on the statute of limitations under Section 2255(t) and any procedural-default defense in order to permit the 1 You should be aware that after reviewing transcripts and laboratory reports in a number of different cases, the FBI conducted additional review of this case. However, certain aspects of the approach of the additional review were rejected by the DOJ. Accordingly, the results embodied in the attached report represent the of?cial results of the review of this case. 2 I resolution of legal claims arising from the erroneous presentation of microscopic hair examination laboratory reports or testimony. VI. Report of Action Taken To assist us in monitoring the status of cases involving microscopic hair analysis comparisons, we ask that you please advise us by November 10, 2014, if you intend to take any action based on the information that we are providing to you. Please send this information to USAEO.HairReview@usdoj . gov, and letus know if we can be of any assistance. VII. Additional Noti?cations You should be aware that we are also notifying the defense, as well as the Innocence Project and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of the error. These organizations have expressed an interest in determining whether improper reports or testimony affected any convictions and, if so, to ensure appropriate remedial actions are taken. To assist them in their evaluation, we will provide them with information from our ?les, including copies of FBI Laboratory examiners? reports and testimony, as well as our assessment of those reports and testimony. If you have any questions regarding this matter please contact us at the email address provided above. Sincerely, Norman Wort? Special Counsel Enclosures '45. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington, D.C., 20535?0001 MICROSCOPIC HAIR COMPARISON ANALYSIS RESULT OF REVIEW Date: August 05, 2014 To: Innocence Project Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review Team From: Federal Bureau of Investigation Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review Team FBI File Number: Criminal Docket Number: CRC8810286CFANO Defendant: McCabe, Daniel Michael Victim: Scramblin, Lewis A Trial Plea Stipulation Transcript. enclosed Lab Report enclosed Pursuant to the Letter of Agreement between our organizations, this letter serves to provide your of?ce with the results from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review regarding the analysis of testimony and lab reports provided in? the above-referenced case. Please notify the FBI, within 14 days of receipt of this letter, as to whether or not the Innocence Project (IP) agrees with the conclusions. The FBI has conducted its review of the report issued in this case and found it to contain: Appropriate Statements Inappropriate Statements The FBI has conducted its review of the FBI testimony transcript and/or stipulation in accordance with the November 9, 2012 agreed upon scienti?c standards between the IP and FBI with the following results: Error Type 1: The examiner stated or implied that the evidentiary hair could be associated with a speci?c individual to the exclusion of all others. This type of testimony exceeds the limits of the science.? 4 Error Type 2: The examiner assigned to the positive association a statistical weight or probability or provided a likelihood that the questioned hair originated from a particular source, or an opinion as to the likelihood or rareness of the positive association that could lead thejury to believe that valid statistical weight can be assigned to a microscopic hair association. This type of testimony exceeds the limits of the science. Error Type 3: The examiner cites the number of cases or hair analyses worked in? the lab and the number of samples from different individuals that could not be distinguished from one another as a predictive value to bolster the conclusion that a hair belongs to a speci?c individual. This type of?testimony exceeds the limits of the science. Appropriate This document may contain information protected by the Privacy Act of I974 and is provided by the FBI to your agency solely for authorized law enforcement purposes. The information contained herein may not be further disclosed or disseminated without the express consent of the FBI. Response Sheet Please send completed form within 14 days to: Cherise B. Dreyfus FBI Laboratory 2501 Forensic Way Qu?antico, VA 22135 Fax: 703-632-7714 Email: FBICaseReview2@ic.fbi.gov (please include in the subject line response? and the name of the defendant) Referenced FBI Case Number: 95-Hg-284421 Court Docket Number: CRC8810286CFANO Subject(s)/ Defendant(s): McCabe Daniel Michael Findings of the Innocence Project (IP): The IP concurs with the conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review, or The disagrees with the conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review for the following reasons: Error 1 Error 2 Error 3 Appropriate The IP would like to meet with the FBI (in person or by phone) to discuss the differing opinions regarding the appropriateness of FBI testimony and/or lab reports. This document may contain information protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 and is provided by the FBI to your agency solely for authorized law enforcement purposes. 1116: information contained herein may not he further disclosed or disseminated without the express consent of the FBI. 8/ 13/ 2014 Response Sheet Please send completed form within 14 days FBI POC FBI Laboratory Quantico, VA 22135 Fax: 703-632-7714 Email: FBI eReviewz 'ic-.tbi. ov (please include in the subject line and NACDL response? and the name of the defendant) Referenced FBI Case Number: 95 HQ - 269368 Court Docket Number: 85-5415-18, 20, 25 George Perrot Independent Findings of both the Innocence Project and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL): The and NACDL independently concur with the conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review that the materials reviewed contain no instances of Error 1, Error 2, or Error 3. The IP and NACDL independently concur with the conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review that the materials reviewed contain the following Error Types: Error Error 2 Error 3 The and NACDL independently disagree with the conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review because, contrary to that conclusion, the and. NACDL have found that the materials reviewed contain the following error types: Error 1 additional instances of error i Error 2 additional instances of error 2 Error 3 Qomments: Additional errors detailed below I. Q: ?Can you say whether you ?nd a hair consistent with somebody somewhere out there in the world there is somebody with that same -- with a hair that is microscOpicaiiy the same. A: ?You would have to identify that individual and you would have to obtain a known hair sample from him or her. Allow me to compare it with that question hair. In other words, if I This document is the property of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. - Do not disseminate further without the prior Written authorization of the FBI Of?ce of the General Counsel. 03/26/13 8/13/2014 match a hair from here, from the stand here, with my known hair standard I can say it?s consistent with being my hair. If you?re asking me could match someone else I can't eliminate that possibility. I would have to have that person?s hairs and I would have to make a comparison and those person?s hairs would also have to match." Error 1 350: 2-15) 2. Q: ?What you?re saying is that this hair that was your questioned sample was suf?ciently similar to one or some of the hairs you received from Mr. Parrot to that you could not excuse Mr. Perrot as having been the source of that hair, correc A: ?That?s your characterization of my results, that?s not how i state my results." Q: ?Is that an accurate statement, though, of the signi?cance of the hair comparison?? A: Errorz 371: 12-21) The and NACDL would like to meet with the FBI (in person or by phone) to discuss the differing opinions of both the IP and NACDL regarding the appropriateness of FBI testimony and/or lab reports. This document is the property of the Federai Bureau of Investigation. Do not disseminate further without the prior written authorization of the FBI of?ce of the General Counsel. 03/26/13 LeBeauL Marc A. From: LeBeau, Marc A. Sent: Friday. September 05. 2014 8:36 AM To: ?Vanessa Antoun'; Lindsay Herf cc: Norman Reimer, Peter Neufeld; Doss, .Todd Sabol, Sherry E. Subject: 95-HQ-269368: George Perrot Thank you for the call yesterday morning. I met with our Review Team and discussed the additional items you referenced for the George Perrot case. Our opinions are as follows: Comment 1 (Testimony page 350, lines 2-15 We do not agree that this is an additional error as the examiner?s testimony is factually correct. Comment 2 (Testimony page 371, lines 12-21): We agree that this passage should be an additional Error 2 and will add it to the FBI's Review Evaluation Form on this case. Our amended results, your result form, and this email, as well as the laboratory reports and transcript will be provided to 00] so that proper noti?cation can be made to the prosecutor and defense counsel. Marc A. LeBeau, F-ABFT Chief Scientist . Scientific Analysis Section FBI Laboratory 2501lnvestigation Pkwy Quantico, VA 22135 703.632.7408 (Office) 202.439.4408 (Cell) U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of investigation Washington, D.C., 20535-0001 MICROSCOPIC HAIR COMPARISON ANALYSIS RESULT OF REVIEW Date: August 05, 2014 To: Innocence Project Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review Team From: Federal Bureau of Investigation Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review Team FBI File Number: Criminal Docket Number: 856415-18, 20, 25 Defendant: Perrot, George Victim: Prekop, Mary A. (FBI: 51226011} Plea _Stipulation enclosed Lab Report enclosed Pursuant to the Letter of Agreement between our organizations, this letter serves to provide your of?ce with the results from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review regarding the analysis of testimony and lab reports provided in the above-referenced case. Please notify the FBI, within 14 days of receipt of this letter, as to whether or not the Innocence Project (iP) agrees with the conclusions. The FBI has conducted its review of the report issued in this se and found it to contain: Appropriate Statements Inappropriate Statements The FBI has conducted its review of the FBI testimony transcriptAand/or stipulation in accordance with the November 9, 2012 agreed upon scientific standards between the 1P and FBI with the following results: Error Type 1: The examiner stated or implied that the evidentiary hair could be associated with a speci?c individual to the exclusion of all others. This type of testimony exceeds the limits of the science. A Error Type 2: The examiner assigned to the positive association a statistical weight or probability or provided a likelihood that the questioned hair originated from a particular source, or an opinion as to the likelihood or rareness of the positive association that could lead the jury to believe that valid statistical weight can be assigned to a microscopic hair association. This type of testimony exceeds the limits of the science. A Error Type 3: The examiner cites the number of cases or hair analyses worked in the lab and the number of samples from different individuals that could not be distinguished from one another as a predictive value to bolster the conclusion that a hair belongs toe speci?c individual. This type of testimony exceeds the limits of the science. Appropriate This document may contain information protected by the Privacy Act of i 9?74 and is provided bythe FBI to your agency solely for authorized law enforcement purposes. The infomatiOn contained herein may not be ?nuser disclosed or disseminated without the express consent of the Bi. Response Sheet Please send completed form within I 4 days to: Cherise B. Dreyfus FBI Laboratory 2501 Forensic Way Quantieo, VA 22135 Fax: 703-632-7714 Email: FBICaseReview2@ic.fbi.gov (please include in the subject line response? and the name of the defendant) Referenced FBI Case Number: Court Docket Number: 856415-18: 29. 25 Subject(s)/ Defendant(s): Ferret, egorge - Findings of the Innocence Project The IP concurs withthe conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review, or The IP disagrees with the conclusion reached by the FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review for the following reasons: Error] Error 2 Error 3 Appropriate The IP would like to meet with the FBI (in person or by phone) to discuss the differing opinions regarding the appropriateness of FBI testimony and/or lab reports. This document may contain information protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 and is provided by the FBI to your agency solely for authorized law enforcement purposes. The information contained herein may not be further disclosed or disseminated without the express consent of the FBI. U.S. Department of Justice 950 Avenue. NW Washington, DC 20530 EST 22 51148132 October 16, 2014 James C. Orenstein District Attorney Of?ce of the Hampden County District Attorney Hall of Justice 50 State Street Spring?eld, MA 01 102 Re: State of Massachusetts v. Geor Perro Case No. 85-5415-18 20 25 Dear Mr. Orenstein: On September 30, 2014, we sent you a letter regarding the results of a review of laboratory reports and testimony by FBI Laboratory examiners in cases involving microscopic hair comparison analysis. In your case, that letter inadvertently included the results of the review with respect to the wrong defendant. Please ?nd enclosed the correct results of the review with respect to George Perrot. We apologize for this error. Sincerely, ?wuZ/ Norman Wong Special Counsel Enclosure cc: Nicholas C. Perros Innocence Project National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Version 6/3/2013 FBI Microscopic Hair'Comparison Analysis Review Evaluation Form Case Inforr'hation: I Case Nilmber: Defendant(s): Perrot, George Date of Review: 06/27/2013 and 09/04/2014 Standard Applied: MHCA Standards dated 11/9/2012 Review Date of Laboratory Report: 11/29/1985 Examiner Issuing Report: Oakes Lab Report Results (mark as appropriate): Positive Association: Yes No Inappropriate Statements El Yes No Limitations Language Included in Report? Yes (Page it) No If Laboratory report contained an Inappropriate Statement, cite statement by Error type(s) and page number(s) (quote if necessary): s3?? sh Review of 1 A -. Date of Laboratory Report: 03/13/1986 Examiner Issuing Report: Oakes Lab Report Results (mark as appropriate): Positive Association: Yes No Inappropriate Statements Yes No Limitations Lan .e Included in Repgrta?.7g Yes (page 2 I: No If Laboratory report contained an Inappropriate Statement, cite statement by Error type(s) and page number(s) (quote if necessaryat. Tsit?fs?a?iafs? Review. Date of Laboratory Report: 04/02/1986 Examiner Issuing Report: Robillard Lab Report Results (mark as appropriate): Positive Association: Yes No Inappropriate Statements Yes No Limitations Lan Included in Repgrte?ig yes (page No If Laboratory report contained an Inappropriate Statement, cite statement by Error type(s) and page number(s) (quote if necessaryPage 1 of 2 Version 6/3/2013 FBI Microscopic Hair Comparison Analysis Review Evaluation Form . . Case File Number: 95-HQ-269368 1 Reamer - Date of Laboratory Report: 08/04/1987 Examiner Issuing Report: Oakes Lab Report Results (mark as appropriate): Positive Association: Yes No Inappropriate Statements Yes No Limitations Lan Included in Yes (page 12' No I a If Laboratory report contained an Inappropriate Statement, cite statement by Error type(s) and page number(s) (quote if necessary): .- Reviewof'l?eStiitiony: . . - Date of Testimony: 01/07/1992 Testifying Examiner: Oakes Name of Prosecutor: Vottero Name of Defense: Ferrara Testimony Results (mark as appropriate): Inappropriate Statements Yes No Limitin Lan Include? in TEEs??rony? Yes No Identify by Page and Line Number(s): Page 349, Lines 3?5 Page 349, Lines 23 to page 350, Line 1 Page 350, Lines 11-12 Page 368, Lines 18-19 Page 370, Line 18 to page 371, Line 11 Page 371, Line 22 to page 372, Line 1 Page 381, Lines 6420 If testimony contained Inappropriate Statements, cite each by Error type, page(s) and line number(s): Page 341, Line 21 to page 342, Line 8 (Error 1) Page 348, Line 23 to page 349-, Line 2 (Error 2) Page 349, Lines 16?18 (Error 3) Page 349, Line 20 to Page 350, Line 1 (Error .2 and Error 3) Page 353, Lines 16-18 (Error 2) Page 361, Lines 9?11 (Error 2) Pa - 371, Lines 12-21 Error 2 . . Approved By: I Date: 09/05/2014 Page 2 of 2 7-18 i n, I (Rev-4' 1? a - REPORT 1 - Mr. 'Oakes . of the . x. LABORATORY FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION WASHINGTON, D. G. 20535 Chief of Police 130 Pearl Street: Springfield. 01105 attention: Nevember 29; 1935 95-359353 51007043 5 WK WM Germain Ernest Stalema- Beteotive Bureau GEORGE JEFFREY ROBERT TIMIERMBN em momma Hr VICTIM: RAPE ASSAULT YOUR N0. Examination requested by: addressee Banner eaten! October 3; 1985 Reference Exan?nation requested: t?eroenepie Analyses: - Chemical Analyses - Fingenprint - Specimens: Fingernail I 7) gheet (8) Sheet (9) Eillowcaee (10) Pilloweaee (11) K1 Heed heir Sample from KEELEY renew! (4) 33 Head hair? sample free exam newsman (5) 3 K3 Bead heir sample 5mm ROBEREB ext-emnmn 75'2Wj?za 1 Page 1 (0&9ng .935 This examination has been made with the understanding that the evidence is c_onnected with an officiated veatigation of a criminal matter and that the Laboratory report will be used for of?clal pun-{gnome only. related - the investigation or a subsequent criminal prosecution. Authorization cannot be granted or the use of the hereby-report in Fonnedtion with a civil proceeding. I I no.1 11.50 . . . ?Rubber fingarprint lifter with latent impresaion (1) Photograph of latent impression (2) Metal door-gull? ?ingexprint cat?a o? GEORGE PERROT, an? JEFFREY.ATKIHS (12) Result of examinahian: Semgn waa identifi?d in two stain? on 92. Grouping ?eets conducte? on these stains diaclosed-the-presence of the and blond group substances. Attempts to further chara?terize thaae stains were eithax incanalusive or precluded dna tc.the limited amount cf samgle. -Hb seman.was identified an 93 through 95. . . ?uman blood of gr?up was iaentified on Q2. EUman blood. ton limited in amount for conclusive grcuping purgosas, was i?entified an Bleed. too limited in amount for arigin-determinatic?, was-identifie? on 93. me blend was identi?ied on 91 gna 95. - - 'Ybu will be advised oi the resul?? cf the other examinations an? the aisPO$ition of the auhmittea itgms by subsequent xeparts. . WU - Paga 2 51007043 WK 7- 'KR?Q'aze?si I REPORT of?the . 12:23; LABORATORY Mr. Cakes FEDERAL BUREAU or o. c. 20535 To: Chief of Police March 13; 1986 Springfield. Massachusetts 01103;. Attention: Captain zone Brown FBI FILE _No. 95?270551 crime Prevention Bureau. LAB. NO. 51226011 5 WE WM Re: seems sensor - oversee; 1i. PREKOP - VIGTIM: YOUR. N0. oAl . 3) Examinstion requested by: - ee Reference: 1. tags ?at %ecember 10. 1985 Examination requested: rosoopfg?lanalf'a'es - Chemical Analyses . Wage-romeo - . Speeim s: I21 illowsasQ? Q2. i?sper 93 Sheet 94 taper 95?35 Gloves Result of. examination: A brown head hair which. exhibits Caucasian characteristics was found. in the debris removed from specimens 93 and 94. minis heir exhibits the same microscopic characteristics as the head hairs ?in speoimen re (FBI haboratory number 60124Q53 8 W2 UK) "and, accordingly; could have originated from GEORGE ?ags 1 - (over) This examination has been made with the understanding'that the evidence is connected with an of?cial investigation of a criminal matter and that the Laboratory report will be used for official purposes only, related to the investigation or a subsequent criminal prosecution. Authorization cannot be granted for the use of the . Laboratory report in connection with a civil proceeding. WWO:kdf#56- (4) ma ather hairs guitable far significant camparison? purposes were fauna on specimens 91 through Q6. . Textile fibers removed from the submitted items have been place& in pillboxes far pessible future comparisons. It is pointe? out that hair comparisons do not canstitute a basis for_absolute personal identification. Grouping tests conaucted on the human,b1coa identifiad on the belawmlisted Specimens disclosed the foliawing: Q3 BAP BA, Hp 2-4.. Tf c" 95 ?PGMsub Q6 ?PGMsub Attempts to further characterize these spe?imena were iacanclusiva or preclude? dua to the limited quantity OE sample. Nb blo?a was iaenti?ied on 91. semen was iaentified Dn_Ql and 93. The submitted items will be returned under sepaxate Ybu are being advised separately of the results c? the fingexprint-examinations.A Fage 2 51225?11 WK i .1- . . REPORT a i -. .J . I ?the On 9 it I LABORATORY 4.3.3. 1 Mr. Cakes FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION WASHINGTON, D. c. 20535 To: Ehi?? of mugs LOCAL 8? STATE March 13.. 1985 .J aprimgfield, ?asaaehusetta 01101 .4. - Attentiam captain John J. Brown FBI FILE NO. ?ts-270551 031mg ?xavention Bataan LAB. N0. 51 2603.1 8 Wit Wt- smnea 33mm seamen: 2 '1 . may: a. manor vxc-mx: YOUR no. RAPE EURGIMY Examination requested by: Reference: Letter: December 15; Examination wasted: titaroacopio Analyaoa - Chemical Analyses I Fingerprint K: Speoimans: - iI 91 Pillowcaae I i 2 ?1 at?: 2% 93 3mm: 94 Paper gangs Gloves! .l . Remit: of examination: 614/, 7 A brown Mad hair which exhibits Caucasian chasacteristies 1 was: fauna in the debris woven ?rm syeoimens Q3 am 94. this hair exhibits the same marosoopic characteristics as the head baits in span}.an 1:6 (FBI Laboratory numban 60128153 3 WE: URI anti, amazingly, coma have origimt?d . WON . L.-. - from ?399.63 FEW. a Page 1 (Ever) This examination has been made with the understanding that the evidence is connected with an official investigation of aeriminal matter and that the Laboratory report will ?e used for o??ioxal put-passe only, related to the investigation or a subsequent criminal prosecption. Authorization cannot be granted for the use of the a Laboratory 1'3me: in?conneotion with a civil proceeding. WWI 3 I no other hairs suitable for significant comparisan purpases were fauna on syecimena 91 through 96. Testilg fibers remavaa from tha submittaa items have Been placed in pillbozes for possible future aomgarisons. It is pointea out that hair comparisons do nat constitute a basis fax absnlute personal identification. Grouping tests ?anducted an the h??an bland identifica on ?ha belounlisted specimens disclosed the following: Q3 HEP BA, 2?13: if '95 96 Attempts to further characterize thase specimens were ineonclusive or pnecludca due to the limited quantity of sample. Nb blood was i?entified on Q1. I no gamma was identified on 91 and Q3. Eng submitted items will be returned under separate . eaves-by registexed mail. Ybu axe_being a?vised separately i af the.results of the fingerprint examinatiuns. . Page 2 Slzz??ll WK 7-1a?chev. 4?56-18) 1 Mr. Hall FEDERAL 0F INVESTIGATION a WASHINGTON, D. 20535 Tm Chief of Police . April 2: 1935 I 130 Pearl Street I Springfield. Massachusetts 01105 m?ES'wm negation, Callahan John Brown FBI FILE NO. 95-?269779 Crime Prevent on aneag . among AB N0. -51112044 8 W2 UK Re. . . 0.5? 50124053 5 oz an View? YOUR N0animation requested by: . Addxessee Reference: Letter detest nonwhm: a .. 1.985 and 1. Rye/- Chemical A?nalyses - Microscopic Analyses letter received January 94. 1936 Examination requested: Specimens received November 12. 1935. nutter center of letter dated November 8, 1985 (51.112044 8 WE UK): git-92 Pillows (1) . 93 Trash bag (2) I Viaga 949:4: Paper sheets .7: i gs Pajama bottoms (4) 96 Pillowcase (5) Q7 . gs Sheet -. - ?2 0? '2 a (1?3 1:1; Page 1 a} (DVBI) I y'oP'n: This examination has been made with the understanding that the evidence is connected wig: 311,1 it.? investigation of a criminal matter and that the Laboratory report will be used for of?cial purpo see only, related to the investigation or a subsequent criminal prosecution: Authorization cannot be granted for the use of the Laboratory report in connection with a civil proceeding?25u57?13}?b?gkg a l- . - a Specimens received January 24, 1986. under cover of letter received.3anuary 24. 1986 (60124053 3 W2 UK): Q9 Head hair combing Exam BMIBY LICHWALA 910 Pubic hair com?ing from EMILY mam . m?xs Hot usea' K6 Heed hair sample free GEORGE PERRDT K7 Pubic hair sample from GEORGE PERROT K8 Head heir sample K9 Pubic hair sample from EMILY LICHWALA K10 Bleed sample from LICHHALA Result of examination: Grouping taste conducted on-the K10 blood sample. disclose& the following: RED 1' 1' AK 1' 2?1. Ge 1.r me e. Human blood.which could not be further characterized was identified on specimen as. we blood.wee found on specimens er 92! 95! 96: and Q7. Semen.wee detected on specimens 95, Q6 and 98. Stamping tests conducted on the stains canteining semen on these specimens disclosed the following: 95 blood group substance 96 blood group substance as blood group substance Further attempts to characterize these stains were inconclusive. Ho semen was found on specimens 01. Q2 and Q7. ?e hairs like these present in $6 and K7 were found on er in the items from the victim; The textile fibers removed frem the items of clothing have been placed in pillboxes for possible future camparieons. The submit?ed items will be returned under separate cover via registered mail. Page 2 51112044 3 WE . 1 2- .- 7?1a (Rev. 4-26-78: . . . REPORT . Mr. Eubanks mundane-on? FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION l: WASHINGTON, D. C. 20535 05335.net of the District: attorney August 5. 1987 Ball of onetime - 53 State Street Springfield. Iiansnohneettc 01103 FBI FILE NO- 95-369779 k1? Automom Fromm W. Bloom LAB- NO- 70491053. 9 WM WK Q: Re: Assistant District 70505033 5 on . Attomy YOUR NO. one or menace: Mn - Examination reqmated by: a?aresaea . Reference: Letters dated April 1.. 3.987 and May a, 198? - Examination Serologioni. analysis Hnirn aria Fibers Byeoimeno yoreonally convened by ting, ?nancio Bloom on April 3.987. under cover of letter cocoa ans-:11 1. 1987 (73431053. 3 in: on): ?13. Elma sample: Exam n12 new hair sample 5mm cannon '51? noon snowmen: rape king '53 3:3. . mammary more no: LABORAWRE MEMBER 51226911 3 on on: 251? slides N. any 94 - mini: o? Malice: 2% . tr 1.33 Pearl. atth a wring?ielaa 01105 ti annexation: Kevin Barnum nonnative um Crime Prevention Unit Page: 1 (over)- . - This examination has be en made with the understanding that the evidence is connected with an official investigation of criminal matter and that the Laboratory report will be used. for of?cial purpose only. related to the investigating: or a subsequent criminal prosecution. Authorization cannot be granted for the use of the Laboratory report on connection with a civil proceeding. 1 W63: s?c#9 5 MAIL Roomy: awn/WWIn?dsi . . 61939 i . Spc?inen received nay 5. 1937. under cover of letter dated Hay 198? an): $13 Blaad sample fram PRBROE Result of examination: The b];an samples were grouped as 1501102125: 3- K11 (PERRGT) ?Esnbub.1+. BAP BA) up-zul, TE 6?5 1:12 (Hanna?) magma tip 2. WEB, The head haix? present in 312 are microscopically dissimilar to the hair previously faun? in the debris removed specimens $3 an& ga Laboratory number 51226011 5 1-12: 3:22-11 and identified in a. report slates?! Kay 13; 1936: as exhibiting the same microscopic characteristica as the K6 knbun hairs af GEGRQB Ldbozatory number 58124553 UH). basca an tha K12 head hair sampla. this hair cauld net have arisinated from the victim. mnnz'a. PRERGP. who submitted items will he ratnr?ed under separate cover by xegisterea mail. Page: 2 7&401?51 S?u? It ?Webb . - L-n-u?u-n?q-q. Hagan Afi?u "ufe?kwv?if?" :5 ?rki arm3.2. I- - n" . 6.5-3? . t. . in}? ?ns??cw??'mis :14: Supe'ribr aburt . ,1 u: the Trial cunt}: :35enema pm a z. . . g? TRIAL: HELD In HAMPDER GOUETY HALL OF JUSTICE, SUPERIOR 7 COURT. SO'State street. Springfield, Haesechusetts, before it 19 Simona. J., and a jury on January 7, 1992, i i 1: 12 4 AETDRREY, representing the if 13 commenwaaith.? - Franzen; rapgesenting the Defendaet. 1 la alicia c. Turruella 19 Certified Shorthand Reporter ii: . Certified shorthand Reporters 21 Certificate of Proficiency Certificate of Merit Q: 22 - 1509 Main Street?Suite 1514 2.0. Box 402 Sprihg'fi-eim in 01115 anaemia, HA 0219: 1'61 (51-3) 133-4073 Tel H13) 499?2231 . Pr,? Miriam a assoc-rams *m-way-.WITNESSES: nxnacw Enoss hsnx?EEh?wh??gb?gw commonwaalth?s Thomas Kelly 212 - .9133a?: - 226 223 230 235 Thomas Kennedy 233 235 239 Vbir nira at . William 6? Eubanks 239 253 261 252 aw Euhanks 259 302 . 322 330 ?nyne M. cakes 333 356 382 334' Thomas Kelly 388 EXHIBITS: for Identificatign for Identification Defendant'a_1% Commonwealth's 15 Commonn?alth's 16 Cu?mb??eilt?'s 17 Commonwealth!a 18 Commonwealth's 19 Gammonwaalth's 20 Commonwealth's 21 newspaper article papa: big photogragh (B for In) gloves (A bedsh?et (D for In} paper bag (G for ID) phatograph (C for ID) Miranda card telephone requeat' H'xrs. q, "4 .J. "w .-np ii. u. . .. . - WNW -.. {4'xufzq??lgin-r, . .-.. . . f? {am-Mzwm macaw}; :1 and an: chaml??m . 5 (Tha caurt and counsal '9 . . 3., ft", air-43:: NEE COURT: Good morning, what do yuu hnv?? HR. First or all theta was a newspaper article last night and there were a number 5 317~ I 'r A . a: :1er a: I 1 3. of things about it that disturbed me. I suppose thhra 1 0 isn't going to be any that wouldn't. - 1a This particular one -r 5 ma awn-r: (Interpo'alng) Is that an extra one? 1, Maybe you ought to put 1m- ,3 I.ggvu them.a strong warning, matter of fact, I i :4 warned tha? a couple of times. lottan does the trick. 3: 15 m. 23mm: the gist or the article, Your 5' anorj is Mr. Parrot 13 an trial to: the secopd tint. Mentions that his life sentence for rape and burglary was 15' ovarturned by the Supreme andicial Court in 1990. It ?9 mentions that Petrot is now serving a 10 to 12 yea: i0 sentence for burglary a! in couple el?ht days 21 after the rape. It thartcterlzas that lnaid?nt an 3 22 break almllat to the one on trial; g; 28 THE EGURE: Okay. . mummpr mtqar?mu . 5 assuming r7?- n_ - . I. I. 355? - pm imam:- mad it states that .t 1 . . 1111!. 1?44.? - Flierwas ordered becausa um ?aunt a poakath??le. ??ahi?l?m?hzaff?as: 7 f. vain" . have ah evidanca and that's of mw?i? 33% 2 concern. 7 I . THE COURT: Okay. 5 mm. mm:' nice you gong to have it Make-:12 s. ml. mm: Yes, Your Honor. cum: on, 811 right. We will mark this . . as an exhibit for identification.? For the 1:3ch 11-. .53ng comes from the Springtiel 11 m. 93mm: (.Interposing) Union News. cm: Of? A. I, m. ?reman; Janyarg 7th, 19'92mi. Mac! The othej: point I need to alert ,5 you to is I wag advised by tom Kelly as he was waiting to I, testify he observed the {lgfapdant'a nether and sister 1-, outside the courtroom and there was another gentleman f? 11; there that "93:3 With The]? were Sitting on my; cf. oppaslta side of the; hallway there and talking and when no ?the jury was excugad for the day that gentleman got up 21 and met one of the jurora _and they le?t togetherrelative yuu hairs one of the jurors that 2 ?Miami? Pose: um canteen; to th? Coonwealth. . . max-maxi pan-.3111 {ah-1 - . \5?5 ti15:" A THE ceunma: Db ybutkHOWTWho? ?it-.1 vemnm I thihk I do. '1 .13IQE 41dceh Q. beck, women ?ne-hoe a son in jail in Kelly to make a note at which sent the juror is ina bet he was pointing he: out to me as she was leaving nod I on very certain that is the jurorg THE counm: All right. I'e.sorry. Your Honor. respect to the newspaper article I was going to ask if you would individually queetion the jut-ere as to whether they read the article or weather they had exposure to any media with respect to this trial! whether they discussed it with someone and part1cu1ar1y_i? they ii the answer is in the affirmative with respect to exposure? of some media coverage, whether they discussed it eich otger jurors. THE COURT: Well, those are tollew~np questions of course. Look, i suppose I cocld-aek them, eel: group, if any juror failed to heed my instructions. HR. FERRARA: My concern with that question, particularly posed that way is quite honeetiy is lees R: h. . n. With comment?s-is: macaw-101i BHIBBIN 5 ASSOCIATES - 1 ~61 ?1-51.44 amalu ig?gw?f-Ln- 1-, visit34:9"31"9? . . 1' ugh-likely be??d??git??ii?i it at}: f?iinra to need your instruction? and I thing. tn?re is th?ra r?luntanca on juror to admit that. but parhapa the morexat?ni? 13; Did anyon? 886 any newspaper article or was anionn 2 expna?d to thE'media without making a Inference tn the instruction, not to do so would be more.1ikalys You can ask the jurors whether anybody had seen the newspapers and anybody who answers in the affirmative we can bring up to side bar and it further. MR. VOTTERO: That avoid; telling them there was somathing thera.r THE COURE: Tn? eagiest thing I will just run through each one. Now. we got that lady. this issue? HR. VOTEERQ: Yegh. i'd like her to be questioned as to whether somehogr'was waiting for her _when she got out of court and who it was and did they discusa.the case or did he; friend discuss with her the people he had nnt_while waiting. I don't know if it is a husband or a son. certain that particular jury; is the woman. I cauld 35:. l; 19:: 0 . I: - .u ,a.3. -..- . I - . Jr ?twang; .: - 11-. ?hwy; up; Shonld "a talk to her about i And again, I am not a hundred percent PHILBIH ASSOCIATES .. v. . . ?nn?nan.4. .u'il- 1' .. . an- :Ira'?itia *r?n?n Ice-11g; ypp'r?a' p?i?hn?i?? 3 dt)? thi'?e. If you're doing 11-. here he chum. .: .. 49g.- was mam: Weil.? m3; gamg Cf- '4 courtr?on. If I can find there is anathar 2; 1 5 'mom I will. do 11: in that one right; next totheii?hh 3 g: we just don't have the 930919 to ma?a people atou?d: .g 7 HR. VDTTERO: it yuu can bring the jut? 5 'g 3 ?fr 1n, give them a few questions, Tom can be?in the i? courtroom and he can tell me at the break which sent. Q: We also have a voir dire coming up this morning 3 ?airly early. I COURT: I '11! going to bring them all. 1m i. That will. give him g: chance to look at. them. I will 7 e?plaln what we are going to do. I feally don't if it?s such a good idea to_havq an individqai v01: qgre until I have some indication that sums of than i: read it in the fgce of the strongest instructions. I must have said it at least three times yaatardny; Let me talk to this group. will age ??at happana. (The discussion endedGEEPUTERIZBD TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIBTEB THAI 4* 4.. - .?mvhugih?g a. wry?Anni \r at.? ?ve . :?u-gul -- .?er (Wot-wag organize; 3; it (The Go?rtwentered at 9&43;owmjiau THE COURT: What I propose to do is iirot. g' a of all we ought to mark this. What is thot going to be? 7 5 TRE CEERK: I believe. tau: Honor(befendant '9 Exhibit Let . THE COURT: okay. I'm going to ask the jurors [a a a - . to come in. I will explain I am goihg to ask them as a :4 - 53 grouy if they headed my instructions and then 5 15 . .r - . preliminarily point out that I'm not looking for any I ?w . right answer, so to speak as a truthful anamor. It's all i an 11 3% important as any question that?h appropriate'to bring it 3: 13 ii: to our attention. WE are not talking about punishment. *3 19 - I think I can proceed on that level. If there is 4 . 20 . no need to voir dire. that we con deal with it, the 21 3% other issue at another recess. We can go right ahead. '3 22 . . You have -- what do you have lined up for the next event? worm-2'21; WSERIETIGH puma-121' ASSOCIATES it" .p ..9 \9 igVWt?k?f-msu?n?n . 1.3jwwnif?l'?'h?Eg?m .3 #?Ekg"1d! "q?HR. vows-am I have Tom' Heatsm?sl?m?' I - th? stand' 5 9??919 questions for pant of it, if there Is any cross; than teatiff that he saw George Perrot's bloodrbeiny-dxagnng?a?: took it to washington and then I have the FBI aeralbgiat we1t1n9.. THE COURT: Are we going to vol: dire him? MR. vomsno: We' 11 need 1:01:01: dire-thin. And the hair and fiber expert I anticipate arriving sometime around noon, between noon and one. THE COURT: All right. Depending on what response I get from the jurors we may have to v01; dire them. Okay. Can ybu bring_them in, please. (The jurors entered at 9:46 a.m.l THE COURT: For the record the defendant is present of course add counsel is present. . Good morning, ladiee_and gentlemen. For the record the jury is present. counsel and present. Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to.1nquire GOMPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIR ASSOCIATES .. - . I '4 - dun-'1? A A I 131'. ., . I (1- - .I. 3.65:" . 5- . .- -ng vonums;{:55 of you. Enfore I do I want to point out'nomot?tng ??ot;l .ER think you alro?dy know: It?s Obvious mam-hotni??ulhiug your intelligence. It is that important that ruins; =2 i$ . - stress it. I on going to inquire at you'now whatnot 1 5 of you had failed either accidentally or for aome.oth?r 33- reason to follow the instructions I gavo about maintaining four impartiality and we ask this for a lot one of which it is not alwayu easy ?av-1"reasons. sometimes casually in looking at a newspaper you come [9 across something and sometimes without intending to you 3 I, vovarhear something. Any of t??so matters don?t call for 5 12 any kind of action on my port other than the doep need Iii: 13 I that we all have to see tolit_tna? there'o a fair trial. A 14 So I'm appealing for each of you to search . g?i 15 your conscience necauoe thorn is no right answer or wrong jg; . is answer here. Ho're for a truthful answer. 11 5? I:m inguiring of you, gave group, whether any of you, la for any reason, has Been introduood to or Bomgnow-onposed ii I 19 whether it be newspaper, oonyersation or any other an to any information about the cage from any source, 3 source. If so please rains your hands. 21 22 . . M: mi: PHILBIH a_nssocxawns CGHPUTERIZED .3 .3: gLMini-"Lu? am? 'a-Aizwrgi?nunt: Al'rosyh 1.. gm 1" . 11 in ?in; 14 15 16. 11' #?wmm?m??xga??gwm?51- 133 hf." 139mp". a. . - - ?inqwe? :azw {u?wg?fo'l? n? 1 or wo~ ~35? Java mas?eomhiz ?nd for the record ig-gq; gjgf-w . . we jurgra. thi?l? th?i?iai? are r?ady to proceed and Lieutenant Kelly Was on Ehof atahd. For the~racoxd you're the same f?omas.kbili who testified here yesterday? .. THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. I 9. Sir, what's been marked Exhibit.n for you tell me again how you an identificatioq, this sheet, cooid had it packade before -e?din?. 11: to the A. Into a plain brown paper? flat piece of paper that it was folded into ond then placed into another box for traveling. Q. And I'd like you to just to look at this and tall me if either you can recognize it as the some, please. or is it the same kind of sheet_that ion oaed? A. game kind of sheet. I Q. You. sumo kind of shoot. 8 11' mam-mast; maintain a assoc-rims I . . . . ?qmu??cunnru? I: . - Inn?4. 4. . . wtf'l'l. . 2-11$: I hali?vs G. "Wham: rear. (Commonwealth's Exhibit was marked for identific?ti?n.) Q. (By Mr. Vottaro) Haw, at same point, a;r, a??at George Parrot was arrested can you tell me whether'or not 1 samples of his hair were obtainad and ?lso sent to the They were. That's all that I have an i?is A. fan, sir. HR. VDTTERO: mutter, Thur Honor. I would iike to call this witness again at a latei time.? All right. You havu any quegtions THE COURT: on these issueu? MR. All right. Ygs, Your Honor. THE COURT: I a! m. ragga iitii Q. I'm sorry, 13 1t Lieutenant Ka;1?? A. It 1-2. (2. Lieutenant, with rasp?ct to in 145mm Drum mini gmhri?a a ?seem-ms imam 4551-3- marii?di?325W?9m1?2? at" ..- - - -. -.- .. Au. Vina . ti?f?kgu' 3'31ritzy-aty- ?-?inganpnintar faundt?at: that Intention ta year I. 3. an, air. - I a . 9. Has evidence of any footprints ta.an from 21 Drive? - 11. Footprints ware recovered, but they were not. at 27 . Malibu Drive. (2. Okay. I'm going to as]: you to just respond. to m} 3 a question and my question 13 Herve any racoverad from . 1 27 Halibut DriVe? I A. ND. . Thank yen . ., f? How, you have testified about sheets and or a sheet and a I: Pillow case being taken from 27 Malibu Drive; is that correct? 1 A. Yes, sir. . s: 15 q_ 33d. when that evide?cg was taken did: you: Yourself. remove the sheet? . 17 A. Yes. 0- And when. you 54331??! at scene' I. E?e?m 2" Malibu Drive, the 1rnt time Mary Prekop was not th?rei 13 20 that correct? 21 A. What. day are we talking, 811:? .22 - .9. November 30, .1985deka 24th he; veribrief-ly at the house and than Meant-?r?? a assocmms . ,nI-hunm?hum-w 10 a ($193.31awn-rt - f: . - - 'wr. .. -- .-. . Latx?e vh??eyeu.thenu1?ft and went tb a?rb?tmade up? 5% Q. isn'tuthtt current? I d1dh?t say that. - ?x i - Is that correct? NO. the remained at 27 Halibu Drive? Yea I it. When you rved the sheet from the bed was the bed . Made up as in ends tucked in and (Igtarpoaing) Yes, With a sheet on it and a bedspread bvez it. A. Q. The. And you testified that gun found the gloves on the bed; 13 that correct? A. floor. Q. I testified I found one on the bed and une on the Thank you. You foupd a glove on the bed that had been made up; is that correct? 53-74;? 3W. 3; 31 A. I don't understand your term "made up.? If yen 22 mean neatened and a pillow placed in the middle and tucked in 23 add hospital that's not made up. FHILBIN a assocrames nu ?m M??fe .. how?1nv3.5?at sit: ii?idt vogue up? it a. Eta mid a b?d'us?road'o?nt- that shoot; .5: .- No. u; was tho .ahoot spread over the bad ?h'amyou' io?o'v?fii itYoumanner which would indicate that it had i been placed there; is that corroct? When I say placed there, let me be clearer, that it had i been placed on the bed to cover the bed. i? A. I don't understand that. 0. wall, was the-sheet in a ball or just thrown oh the - bed? I i .A. The entire area was in disarray. 3' Q. When you take a piece at evidence such aa-the shoot or tho pillow case or these gloves is somothing attached to it to identify the data and placo from which it wtonaelzed? 3 A. Property tag. Q. And if somebody hood: to use that propetty for some 'putpose; such as inspection of the property or testing of it do they sign some kind of a iodgo; document to 1hdicate that i they?ve taken custody of that property? 3 A. You} they would. I mum?'a? a ASSOCIATES . .5 4g; leg: that Ra?xes; p?bcedhr? was 1n place. At one garage 4 'l v: crittere signed the back of a hard copy. And I'm not-?ute" what was in effect at that time. Q. pertaining to this case before testifying? A. rive looked in the document. Q. Have you looked.at what you determined were the evidence tags in this caseany particuler piece of evidence? case, and the gloves. A. No, air. 0. effect te document who would have had access to any one ?t these three pieces of evidence at any time? A. Whit would he eten?etd Ea~me1nte1n the chaibaker t6 he examine, he sis-5:33:13? 5 sheet was kept at the prep?gt? fb??e a At SOEE Point the department cha?ged the propertyr??n?pa?an Have yea had occasion to check the legs or document . And you haven't inspected any log book in respect we are talking about specifieatly'the sheet, the pillow But yuu're certain that there was some method tn :kllu?H: 1. . 335? i dream.- ham-j- W-??-?Awarv Ma: .- My}; an twinnia-:' 1-7-3. Tne?etni?mgen . h-?n??nu .- PHILBLN man-rw 2.- e; '2 . ,k?g Amy-Xvi. ?In . .?girut 3515??; 3 . .. . Vina9w. Mk!? once a .pioga of evidence-.13.; 51': location within the police is considered secure; is that correct? A. Yes, air. And what location would these pieces of evidence; specifically meaning the bedeheet, the pillow case, and the glwea, what location would they have been kept at in November of '85? A. In the Crime Prevention Bureou. Q. Is there a separate property room in the police department? There are several . And is; evidence kept in the property room? Yes . And evidence .for cases which are pending which have yet to come to trial? 5. YES - a. With respect to the bedsheet that you have testified to in this case I believe you testified that when you took that shoot it was Boiled _ancl there were a lot of fibers on it; is that correct? a. There appeared to be. You?; sir. I don't believe I 3"?1 . cmhn'xzhiza? :5 assume-3343Aelt? Z'rfe I w- .?Jhahtui': . . 1AMu?. 9-H. mml?. ?bia?l?i?a? . 1. . Ae-M-i? 4' .. i' 2- v.teen E?ert?gh ha?xeu of fibers." I?lh=. flbar?? Am I don't believe I said that. a a. was there anyone else present or do you re?e?b?? who was present when head hair was taken from George-Parrot? I knew who did. 1 h. . I'wesn?t present. a Q. You knew Iran-conversations with individuals? it a A. tea- ii Q. When you were at 2% Mhtihu Drive did you inspect .H . 7, :1 g: the bedroom from which the sheets were taken? Q. Did you notice blood anywhere else in that :51. 13 Nb. 0. Did you observe stick to be on the bed at the time that you arrived gt that looationDid you make observations of that stick? 18 19 Yes. Q. blood on that stick either? Would it he fair to any that you didn?t notioe any 3. I don't recall whether I did or not, air. a. wa11, at any time you cheerve there to be blood ?n "1:661:11 ?a'iri?g that there were i i231: not? . "if Masai-Mimi: 13311.31I.- duty-+11 .14'yawn-o VII . 'anm'AEphi ?h?t IA- dism Jam-mum a . - . 9; you don?t know it you oboervod stick 031%) ;f bload?or not? 1 A. I dan't rocall. ., let me ask you thip. had you observed something'which you believed to be blood on the otick would you have had that sent to the FBI laboratory for examination? A. Yes. Q. Did you do-hnat? A. Nb. . You would agree that yesterday you testified when you took that shoot it was soiled, wouldn't you? 3. YES. Just 011% moment, please. Your MR. FERRARA: Honor - EBB COURE: Yes. . (Pause) 9. (By Mr. Ferraro) Lieutenant, were you present during a line-up, so-oqllad, when Mary Prekop v4ewed certain individuals with gasyact to this cnao? .. a. u-u-rw-V" ?r PHILBIN ASSOCIATES GBEPUTERIZED Tm'scniwi'o . 1 t. .- me, sir. - and was Mr; Barret one of the. viewed? a; . Yes. - I Q. And who elae was present when Prekop viewed these individuals? . 3? A. Myself. lieutenant than lieutenant Captain '9 i mini-1&3 Arpin and Assistant District Attorney Francis" Bloom, I and Officer John Scenlori. . . Q. And when-Mary Prech first of all him many individuals do you believe she saw? n. I know she looked ct seven pecpie. MR. my I eppr?cach the witness-3 Your .3 . Haunt? . THE COURT: Yee. . HF .4 Q. I Mr. Ferrara) Lieutenant, I went to show you this photograph which has been marked 1: for identi?cation and as]: you -- first of all do you Fecognize that? (Indicating) Yes . 30 I: Q. And what do you recognize that to be? a 31 A. It's a line?up consisting of seven people and it's 33 the line up that I had several victims View on December 7, 1935 . TWSERIPTION PHILBIN a ASSOCIATES F-wv-wMI-v matat. And?dbeesth&u?photngteph fairly andvheeurh??iygq u' degiet.thaae as they appeared on thAt iih?r?350?5 1:1;2 that gay? 3. v.1. I .me Yes; sir. MR. FERRARA: And I weuld like to off?r-this .- 1' into evidence. Q. HR. VDETERO: Thereiia no objection. THE CLERK: W111 be number 14, Ybur Honor. THE COHEN: Okay. ~(Defendantfa Exhibit was 4 new'otfered-and marked 14.) (By Mr. Ferrara) Lieutenant. in Exhibit No. 14 is the indrvidual on the far left George Parrot? A. Q. 1985? A. HDROI. jury} Yes, air. And 13 that the way he appeared on December 7th. I . I I 'Yee, air. THE It was for identification, Your MR. FERRARA: May I heve this published to the Your Honor? THE COURT: Ina. Ladies and gentlemen, you uh?CEMPUTBRIHED TRAFSCRIPTIQN . I -. PHILBIN ASSOCIATES we. an?: . - . 1w. "l 'vmm?aagi-Lv ?H-nluu'v ?a . I - ?4.4 ?mu-n a- agha?x-pu-?tmnmu should not be taking-any notas. I will ?ak do so. a. {By Mr. Ferrgra) ?ow; Lieutenant Kaity; ?iaryauyz- have connoisation with Mary ?rekop while she wag-ti??iny t?as?t _'individnai; in the line-up? a. 2B3, sir. Q. And is it true; air, that at that time aha atated that none of the individuals in the line-up wore the person who had sexually assaulted her? A. Nb. 9. Did she state to you oiearly and unequivocally that all of those people had iong saraggly hair and a mustache and heard or excusexme and facial hair and that her assailant did not look like thmt? a. No. - 0. hieutenant, prior to you were around that line-up; is that correct? I A. YES, 51:. Q. And prior to conducting that line-up is it fair to say that you had reviewed the statements taken from Hazy Prekop by Hirianhe Popho? 3. YES, 81:. Ahd you know in that statement that Mary Prakop'a COHPBTERIEBD TRAKSCRIPTIOH PHILBIN ASSOCIATES .- - . - mur- -i . u- g- .4 .hWL-h- ?nun-?via hec??dzdrant Maxrdg?aci?i'h?ad ca ?:15 .. . a i . 613. - a 7 A: 3133also correct there in not. 5mg. in that lino-'up who's clean shown; is that -. .. A. That-?3 correct. -: .- Q. 51:: individuals in that iine-up have a mustache Mr. Parrot has a mustache and quotes; is that correct? A. Correct .. . 9. Who decided who was going to be in line-up, up. 311:? n. I did. Q. Did you have any discussions with respect to the 13, mine up of the line-up with the then Assistant District 7: Attorney Francis Bloom? 15 ER. VOMERO: Your Honor, may we approach? a ?nwuul. f. - to THE COURT: Well, just yes or no. a: 0- (By Mr. Ferrarothat date, on December 7, 1985, who Kory Prekop IS 20 shown a photograph, if any, of other individuals other than - B- .. ,1 - 21 George Parrot? 7'don't know? if anybody else did~ 23 Q. When this lino-op was conducted was no. gtekop ?rtf . morn-11mm 2311mm :2 ASSOCIATES uc behind a on?nway mirth: of a?me-kihd a; a that each of the individuals would be asked to step fbrw?ra; is that correct? turn to the right? sheet and sending it to the FBI lab? case and the hair from George Parrot? vu". - .fuh 3 4' She timid aha; but th'? person in the line?up 'cdiild i165: 2 Aha as line-up was conducted was 1% dor?hbt 5 Yes, 31:. And then yuu would be asked to turn to the left and Yes, sira And then to backup into the line? 293,-51r. And dider. Parrot do that; did Hr. Parrot do that?: THE, sir. ware yuu personally responsible for Rackaging the HQ: Do yum know who did that? Yes. Who did that, sir? Sergeant David Louden. ?nd did Sergeant Landau also package the pillow EBB. caWEnzzn PHILBIN ASSOCIATES 1 I ?3 a In 9. ?ndwhoi?dokhg?ahhli of those it?ma? a. ?ho tho giou?s-as wall? A. Yes, sir. HR. FBRRARA: Ho furth?r qn?ationo; i i i' EXAMINATION HRwhen you set up a line-up do you generally have one ?i or more suspects in a lihe-up? I A. 163, airabout determining what kinda of othor people to put in the line?up with the suspects? 2 A. The line-up is made up than you make up a lf'line*up you look for people who are similar in appooranco. If your suspect is a white mole with faoial hair you attempt to find other'whita maleo?with facial hair. 0. And in this line-up most of the other people in this photograph are actually police officers; is that torrent? A. Yes, '1 Q. Why do you make an effort to put people who look mu". differont in there I'm sorry, who look the some as the suspect? an?: antCQHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTIGN PHILBIN i ASSOCIATES 1f?- .u-n-t - .r .- .3137an'Clwli?uj .. c, announon 4 ?kw- '4:30 Q. gun by George Parrot? a. Ian. D. and you, on the basis of that Information you caused this lineup to be assembled? A. 1331 Q. What did Hazy Prekop_say when she viewed the individuals? h. I asked her to look at all of the individuals and to tell me if aha recognized anybody in the group. At the conninaion of all seven individualn coming to the window taking_the turns as instructed and returning to the line then aho told no one was unable to recognize anybody. Q- gnoup standing? A. a. tho other six? 3. in the afternoon on December 7? mo~bozfain to tho-shsyoota; and without getting into the details thin Yea . And at that point did you have information givan toq mm, ?gure that window how far: away is the whole Probably from here to the_prisoner dock. as each person comes up and you can still see Yes, sir. CDMPUTERIZEB PHILBIN RESOCIATBS I Ann" sup??~45?. yr-uuv-?uhw u. M..-. . . - - n? yu35-; a. I . .- ?r nhfl- 3 . - 1'13are": Hg . .. g-?:34 ?at is: ?rm ?d?uB?-i?t?u tramp hmoaubwiq?iwgt??gmzr0? {?gs-Tho -..F fr?as?n?gegpih?? ."Ant! eew' Eaton ind?-iduals home Just 111 tame or the condition of the bed, altar . been marked Exhibit 13, is that the way the bed at 27 Malibu . . . . I n' a :u 5? . owl.? Am: -t I- .1 Drive looked when' you removed the sheet? 9 A. Yes, air. to Q- Do you know how the room looked when you left? A. I belie 12 (Intel-posing) 131d .y'ou straighten anything your procedores there? 1* "no. . 15- Q. And the only thing you took with you from the room . was the bedsheet, a piilow ease, the stick, and- the gloves? 1., A. gas, air. . 13 MR. WEED: That's: all I havemamss?mrmnoSo. lieute?ant, as I understand it you explained to 23 us that you arranged this line-sup with Mr. Parrot and the six ?f . . . Mtge?iz??a Manner-non a ASSOCIATES . 1' 53;. - ot-hiar mn?tadhdd?z?i??i??i?dudi's and no one who. was diodn I. poi-mum you fol-t t?nt ?ouldxbe fair 139,11!? Pei-not? 3. Right. I But: you had knowledge of the daooription of the . individual having short dart hair and being clean shaman: is that correct? A. Yes. i Q. And would it be fair to may within the police _g department there are individuals of medium build with short 10 dark hair.- Iwho are clean shaver: who you could have placed in the line-up; is that cot-teatAnd you contemplated who you were going to put up in the line-up *and you dismayed it with the Agaistant 15 District Attorney Francis 31009:. is that correct? 15 a. too. 1., Q. And did it occur to either of you or did it come up in the course of the conversation because you wanted to be i is fair to Mr. Parrot that perhaps if you put an individual in 20 the line-up who matched that deactiption Miss Prokop might identify him as most olooely resembling her assailant? 22 I MR. VOTTERD: I object, Your Honor. 23 THE CGURT: Do you have that question? BOWERIZED PHILBIN a - I ?22 THE wzm??ss: in: Gaunt: THE ?rmness: we did not have ?hct ?o?q?raatiph" as d??ciibhd by you. I h3va it. Ra'?ight have it; 5' . -1- mus-m-?p3?; .u L. A. 353:?. i I I u? I lug-=- u" id 31(By Mr. Farrara) Did it occur to you whar? th? as most clearly resembling he: assailant? Nb. That never occurred to me. victi?.dascribcd her assailant as having short dark hair and bcing clean shaVen that perhaps it you put an individual who catched t?nt description into the ling-up given the appearance of Mr. Parrot that sh? might have identified that individual MR. I have no questions. Ibur Honor. a 'c REDIREQT EXAMINAWIGR BY MR. VDTTERO gt was_thia line-up 1p3t for par? Erakop? Ho, 31:. was also for individuals who had also been victimized on December 1. And was Hazy Prakcp agked to look at it-bacauae or Yea. what George Parrot had told t?e pclicq earlier on the seventh? In fact, hcdn?t Harv Prekop told yqu she did not beiiava she could identify anybody? eduruwk?iz?n manuscnipwidv2" 'E'Hw'a?uuwiv. .43 mn? $.11 r? b.1232?? PHIEBIN i ASSOCIATES .- .-. a i 4 \J1'51 :?5?54'559" s?o 5 ?huge. u-?ww?h 43w? - ith?iggall?: 5:221:hn. rahnaka: Ghjectidn; Ybutl?bh?te' ?m - wan COURT: wall, he may have Eta 9: .(3y Hr. Vbttero) She told yea that? A. Yes. air. a I- And the reason that ceorge Parrot -- the reaabn that nary Prekbp was asked to look at it was because George parrot had acknauledged breaking into 27 Malibu Drive on hhvember 39? MR. Panninn? Objection, Your Honor.. May we approach the bench? THE Yes. was heldxat the side bar.) MR. PERRARR: First of all?I think that it's clear that that?? pfobably not the reason. In fact, the evidence is that the line-up probably was arranged prior to the statement having been taken and been contemplated pilot to that. Secondly, it?s an issue in this case as to'whether that statement was khbwingly and willingly given and voluntarily made. And I think that the prejudicial value Jr)? l?rt??'su? . PHILBIN a AssocIAWEs II..- u- - . {6h- .. i 5.3 i wry-n I a. 3-- i, .pp?a- - -t I .df eff?tt of this question is outweigh the probative value and. I think ?c I hears evioance that they should be ?fth; 9 roepeot to the humane practice ruling in name-matter THE COURT: Well. that is puttingthe' cat-e before the harm. certainly will instruct then on: -: hwv'hw inn.? 9 . rank it at an appropriate time. It doesn't make any some to 5-9.- ?1.9.1 '4 do it new. 1m. VOHERO: Your Honor, it's not a- dose where I need to be concerned about I haire. the 10 5.11: ruling on it. I juet believe the door is opened up ?w - 12 although I thought he was on here just for. chain of custody at this point. I can?t let it. go without . responding to it. r; 3&6wa Wow-"1' h'i'th-h-q? pew- was cover: I am going to earnit-it. I'think that is opened up to that extent at least._ I like to 21 1., confine it to the here minimum, however, if you went to keep some coherence to the issues. (End of the side bar conference.) an 21 . HR. VOTTERO: Thet'a all that I have at this ?4,353,; w? i A -zmiyw_ 33 tim coupuwtaizzo PHILBIN a ASSOCIATES i - I'ri?EFrJegum-.- . 3-3.. - 45 pg"; anYan.~. . a. Othar Individuals who viewed Mr. perxat in 11ne~ap on December 1. included a Mr. unnahh; is that cottec??: .5. "Ian, 51:. Q. And a shileen Sapelli? A. Yes; sir. . qr; qr In": - . 5 I Q. And they h?th identified??r. Parrot as an individual who had committed some acts against them; is that correct(The 'witneas steps down.) h! -- "Ls?i" 15 *l'iti' In THOMAS nannsuv DIRECT Examxnawxou Br_gg, vommsno 4., ?19 .311_'1'hank you, 31:. Could you ten. the jpry you; name. 2: please; and how you're employed? ,3 3- in Thump. P: Remedy. I mix a sergeant in Maiz?i?i?i. . . . 3] ,wunw?mcn I- mp??a?w Il?qm'll? on. d-w-u-onus}:- . :n . . i, -. De?artmoht?. - - ?93- - How long ?hdvo you worked as' 'a policeot?eo??i?f?kiv-? - - i5 an?; For-about 11 and a mu: yours. Were you-working as a police officer in ht - 5 A. Yes, I was. Q. And what were you doing during that time periodthat time I we; designed to the four. pan. to 12 mil. shift in the detective bureau; - luv 19 Q.- Now, did you have occdsion to bacon: involved with the case at George Pei-rot, just yes or no at this point. . 3. YESwould like to address you to a procedure, a 18 14 medical procedure th_at you observed; do you recall that? A. YesWhere did that take place? 1., A. On the third floor of thio?building. Q. And could you tell us roughly when that was? 3 A. That pas on Moran 31, of 1987. E. Q. And can you tell us what you observed? 5 21 A. I observed {a medical technician withdraw two viola 22 of blood from the arm of George Parrot. Q. And what was done with those two viola of blood? A. gmm?nio 5 ASSOCIATES . air-nu 3? ., - ?ashiwgugwmw-?m v, I- . .. ave-m5? . . I a 1 10 W?Ij??f{?.33was withdrawn in the yi?i??gzg?i I . a eu?ttady of the vials. I brought them to the c?rmai . bin-aha, the Springfield Police Department, who're? I this ?5 if as evidenca; .3 a. had at some point in time dio yoo have oc?asion to i take those vials of blood to a difr?rent location? A. Yes, I did. Q. when.and where was that done? 2 A. an April 1-, of 1987, I went to the crinie prevention bugeau, signed the blood out add then I transported it to the FBI laboratory in washington nowith anybody when you wont to Hashington? A. You, I dii. Q. Who was that? A. Fbgmor'hsaigtant District Attorney Francis Bloom. Q. Did he have any role of possessing evidence at anytime? Nb. I was in possession of the evidenoo. Q. ?hat did you do with it when you got to Haohihgton? A. I went to the FBI lobaratory where I turned it in as evidence. Q- Do you know whether you signed anything or whether emu-taxman museum-Ion 21111.31?! 5 ASSOCIATES . mm .95? .?Jog ilk $5133, .mwo -.- . my. ?q5-55,41. a: z. ?r ..-.'a?'Mr. Hirath aig'had Ianyhl??zhg in your presence when - ?in . . . .1 2st: . 524,291 _1 th?ra'a d?n't recall. 0. blood? . - .b a: Bid you take anything else with you uth?r than It. lies. . Q- And what was that? z: A. Tha'i: was hair samples. a. Identified as belonging to whom? A. Prekop. I HR. Thank you. That's all that: I have' . *Iii?l? a! m. twin-u .. x- -. Q. With respect to these vials of blood, after you back those vials pf blond you had taken them to the Springfield Polic? Department? 21. That's __correct. Q. And where in the Springfield Police Department did you take them? - LA: A. To the arm's prevention bureau. Q. And were they kept there; an your knowledge"rid-ml ut- ?n i-i'l cmw?mi?s'n- PHILBIN a ASSOCIATES . pg-?EasinthEy were; 3 a; Eha=didryou:hhvehtobsig? Some dou??e??t Iauwwe?eugu?mitting them to abmeone in the cem?h a bureau? 3. That's correct. 5 i . Q. And who was responsible for custody? 0: tin?- . ,e 3-5-93. particular piece of evidence in the crime prevention bureau? Ir a .s .4 Eta: I l. -. 5a A. Don't recall who signed it, which officer on.thet particular: date . 19 Q. ~You have-Ea sign_eome document indica?ing you were 11 submitting it though? A. Yes. I had to fill out what I called a property 12 la tag- Q. was there any other leg of book which you had to 15 sign? In A. Yes. I believe tpere wasg -- 11.3.3"? 11? a. so it was both?: propecty tag and another log? A. The office; that was receiving it would enter it 18 5) 3. 20 ff. Bur taking the evidence back out. 19 into a log on the date. The next day. the following day. I took the blood to the FBI. I had to sign a log at that time . 22 Q. And the purpose for doing that to evidence in to .32? 13 record everYDne who handled Duet geotidnlor item? Tnansoniprion AssotIAmEs . 4 4 "Viki-1.? F. ;_rn dag-5' [grimy Li?'ff?zy?n?j. .h I .M ?nk-4.253an- ?vyih?w?c?, - . I?rgm correct. q. A. C?pin of custody, -, 0-. And, when you took t?iae blood :te thers?aji?z'f: . ., x. .- in.?aah1ngton did they have the same ,h?jV?g? - a docume?t to evidence that you were . evidence? . . A. or*not. Q. Do you remember who you gave the blood to in ?ashington? A.. No. I don't recall the name of the technician at the time. MR. FERRARA: no further questions. 1.- Q. Washington that all took place over a one to three day period? The drawing of the blood end taking it to A. Yes, it die. The blood wee drawn on March 31} 1331, and it was transferred to Washington on April 1, 1987. MR. Thank you. COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSBCIATES . lf-..1.- ., ?Mn-39 v.?flax?'rr?1cl41v?W 'n . .154don't recall if I signed a documept.ln Wishington .Wang-t. u. . Er- rang-ingw? in? myandJi??rahz?r-??! 5: .II. n" . M?%?ww . 4" l-I .T. 2? io? 33? uri- a. My . id 1. '353 I: . uni-nan um ganglamagoing to .be a matte:- that}: going to raquito and th?t of counsel and will not for your understanding and I want you to 3 - i no don't keep jurors waiting die matters that do concern the court that don't oonc?rn tho jury and we try to schedule that in a way that makes the :3 best use of your time. So we are going to excuse you for what we expect will not be an over long period of timo and wa ask for your understanding and indulgence. I If you kindly follow the court officer, please. i. (Th 13;! exits at 10:26 a a i i at 332Sir, could you tell Judge Simone your name, please? A. wuuam a. Eubanko. Q. And what is your occupation, sir? 2' A. I'm supervisory spacial agent with the Fod?ral 3 momma macaw-non PHILBIN a assocmms . 9 .1- ?us'k' - A I - - mw-ymhw A biology from Southern Hothodist university in Dallas. Torus?vrt' . I .. . 2.35lath-5""qu D. . . in Bolias; T3. . i roe ix?cw'long haue you been with the ?rf tf?i ?Since hugust of 19?3, a. ?ow, prior to joining the FBI coutd you giusit?? a Judge an idea of your education? .. A. Yes. I hoid a Bachelor of Science degree in graduating in may of 1973. I also hold a Master of Science in forensic science from George Washington university in Wsshington, Dc, graduating in 1976. Q. And when you joined the FBI could you tell us how long their training program_was for you? A. Yes. After being assigned to the laboratory division in Washington in August'of 1381 at that time I Iundorwont period of training lasting.approrimsteiy one yeert A That training is under the direct supervision for forensic .f serologists to that unit who have a great deal of experience and who are qualities in the ?isld of forensic serology. In addition, to that one year period.of time I also you're also required to attend and successfully complete two formal courses at the FBI academy at Quantico, Virginia. Both courses are accredited courses from the University of Virginia and one deals in basic forensic serology and one .. 9.: .k-ar-mei?wn COMPUTERI ZED TRANSCRIPTIOK PHILBIN a ASSOCIATES . - . - " {lye v-u if - 3.159" ?1.131.: as?iuam?i . motsla?iiw .. *4 '??aa-e?fsz?i? we gain: bl?tz?faihthg q: ?Weti?hsnass?sn as- hrai .board and ?oat J?ly of 1982 was to examine anda-rbegi?i; 5 the field of forensic serology. a comm:- aim: year was thiha please? 7 times: July, 1982. a COURT: Thank you. a. .. a D. (By Mr.- Vottero). And for the record could you briefly describe for the record what forensic serology is? . A. It is the examination of body ?uid or body ?uid - stains and the analysis of those stains and body. fluid stains an evidence submitted in a case. I Q. Dosing ihah one year periog- could you 15 describe whet the! net-.11: of _the laboratory training was that I. you did during that yes}. . A: 1., A. IWell? the :l'abofetory traist actually consists of In conducting examinations under the direct su?ervision? of 1, qualified examiners in the field of forensic serology, no acteally examining the evidence, isolating the stains and conducting all of the tests that ere routinely ponduoted on 22 dried stains as well so liquid blood samples. 7 23 Q. And who were you ultimately certified by? massages pman a mason-r33 ?b e: q? Styxtisign?- w?adanaL 124.. 4.. . '05.?ff?nu?i?avaa??i. vase . a, the. J'??t?uu - {qli .- 656%; marmmz .- a axingpg-m: A 5 ??au following that cortirication unsig??d town; 2:15.; La!" . 3. Beginning in about later (In-1y 6: 1932 I began 1 examining cases submitted ftom federal, state, and 35w 8 enforcement agencies from across the country for the I 3 9 examination and analysio a: body fluid stoins. '10 . Q- Haw long did you work in the field of forensic 1'1 serology octually comiocting ?laboratorm examinations? I a. From roughly-Auguqt 1982 u?til March 1986. I, Q. And ouriog'tlgot time period did you! tegch or attend" . any additional training noti?es, of any kipd?? ?1 5; 15 A. feah, a'number of govern. I should say Isfnposiums 1.3 and in?saruticea that ore- given a_s new te?hnology and new 1., techniques coma glong primarily .at t1}? FBI Academy in forensic a; 13 science anti xagearch ?29:13:91: gt notation, Virginia-1 is a. From the: tin; of: you: caxtification ban you 20 described the vapigus? titiea and positions you held from than 21 to todayMarch. or 1936 I wan assigned or made the mat 23' Chief of th? Serology Unit at. tho FBI laboratory and toned in? '5 - .. . I. :15 gawm?a?z?u fwsaa-it?a?m? 991mm a gamma 1? w?gn u. . wwmut?tr-?w - runan? ?gig fig52mgr-2a i ?i 93 .w??i-u-ltituttiy re'ua'ponswle to: - I. now tiijnigiei's? tech?ioian'a as they came into tif?' . 3. items? gotta pointy ?ir, did-you with the Springfield Felice Department in an amita'tio? of some materials: that had been sent to youYou recall roughly when that was? i A. That would have been in early 1986. 19 Q. How, to jump ahead just a little bit. you conducted 11 an examination on 9 sheet; is that correctArid while. -- I realize we? are moving quickly, did . 14 You isolate some _blo_od grotp substances at the ghost? I, A. Yes, air. I, Q. How, can you' tell no on that particular 'item what the blood group substances or blood stains were that you FF 18 identifiedrefer to some totesThe sheet that I believe you're talking about was 23 labeled QB in our laboratory. ll?lmt is a number system we give as to items in evidence. And the ra'sulta that I obtained in talisman!) 931mm 5 assocuq?7"35" 1.- 4- ?1?35: i? - 4. L: '1 "nub-imp.- llIggy .. ?30g-arhlmummy: twaheaoa shame on that sheet and :fhaga? .- . I I . 15:! in, ijhnetio-nii'ker manna. .Sh?oiild I- just light-neonate . .32: Q: temp-emu, yes; ifs? . - m. want {no to 1131: them of just. can. you aiic 11st than. -. a. now many did you find? Identified four different markets on that sheet. 0. lith was the first marker that you identified? A. An enzyme called P614 and the type was .0. Now, just for the record, you had previously acerteined that the stain in quetion was blood andtit was lumen blood} A. Yes, sir. a. The. first marker you instituted is 951! hi. That's correct. Q. Can you tell me, 511;, based on your experience and training what petceutage? at the Caucasiou populetion has that. particular enzyme? A. Frog! the population data that's available to us at ?at time roughly.4l percent of the population souls be eugected to he 5 . Q- Did you obtain a secono blood group? A. Yes, sir. I emotisz monimm? PHIBB IN ASSOCIATES - - . - my?" It: . - ram6:33;; ?g - {?ag?ed; ?Fri - - - i" Xxx. w. a 4.. ..5'5? afarg-J- . - - nit-"m! - 45:31mum-iv :?115.211-: 353.3. sumo called? an? and the. . A. J-:a'gam what pare?ntat? 05 I .. ~$fgg? . 7 3:59 tho enzyme, BAP type 5 A. Approximately 41 percent. a . Q. and, again, is this the Caucasian populations 5&3 7 that you how you expifessed it? i 3 You. who population atudiea that we're looking at 9 that time and still today are bxoken dawn, Caucasian and 1.. black. 11 - Q. And for the record are those population studies that you use generally accepted.within your scientific community? A. You. sir. Q- Are you aware of any other population studies that are used by the . ?t this time this is what we are using. Right now '0 Anita..- A. I am not sure what thay_are using; There are many population studies available. Q. Did you'find a third group, blood group? A. You. Q. What was that? a. mud serum protbin callod HP, examined for Muf?n-?ab. Weatan a assocnma .. . Hz?! sir - . 35.44." 4- - ?moiai?itn nu: gin-1, - - 4. . -. in? huh?q . . J, I 1. Tuna . .. .43.nit? 101?]. 'Ei?tgyzes'em And t?e that I identified was a - I. taggzs?wv a aha oi the Hyph?n hue: Hw??zg 3' G. ?nd what percentage of the pbpuietieh ?g #5 a ?tp'tbgi?ebin two de?h one? . i 5 9. Approximately 48 percent. was a fourth marker found on Exhibit 3, the sheetWhat was that? ii a t? A. Another eerum.praperty celled treneferrin. if? to Q. What percentage 6f the POPu15t1?n ?7 ?as it a 11 particular type of transferrin? gt, 1: Yes. grangferrin etc was_the type I identified. 13 13' Q. what percentage of the penuletion hue . 1'4? 2? 3 A. About 99 percent. f? :4 if 1, 0. now. where were all of these particular blood ?f In groups located on the questioned item? g; ,7 hi They were identified on a stain on a sheet. I 18 don't recall exactly where, without looking at the sheet. 19 were you able to locate any other stains on the 20 sheet? - 21 A. There was one other stain on the sheet that I 32 located. 23 Q- And were you Able to dbtain any blood grouping from mien-32mm Pun-am na?ocim:a?tizmu?h (Sea?w?r-h Ana-34.nun-n- memv - .- 5: a I . ..31 . . that'- afniritf - s; ?2 um gums-g 35,on not. - s; o. Werewou able to dot-ermine whether or new .g humanistic?! . '1 5 n. It was human blood. a Q. Bid you also examine a pair: or gloves? 1 A. You; air. a a. All right; Md what were the results of that- 9 exenination? A. On one of the gloves which was labeled, againidentified humn blood on the glove and also identified the enzyme PGM and the type wee one plus. 13 Q. . Here you able to obtain any other blood grouping F- M. from that blood? 1-5 A. No, sir. a. What about the second glove? . 1., l. The otter glove ie 96. Again, I also identified '18 human blood present. on the glove and the enzyme type Pg! 19 Q. How, could you tell the Court whether or not you're . an able to coinbine these peroentages in anyway so you gen, for instance, tell us how many people would have all four of these 22 particular blood group substances? A. Well, booed on the frequen?iee that I mentioned Waugh PHILBIN a assocxms wmwwae. - we. nil-AP. . h; r. H-L ah.- . ag?iiri? stamens: of. the indi?vid?a?l' s??z?i?sut?'?h i: u. . F?asibls to'dstezmiha or estimstsa I 51' the ?sins-non that would ha expectsil' to hairs L?rfa?'psrtisulsr-cbsbinstion of genetic type or gens?ian?hfk?i .I . types. Q. And what is the process that you go through to .obtain that percentage? A. 'It's fairly simple. You simply take the percentages that I mentioned for each of those types sud multiply them together and came up with a total 0. Point 41 times point ?1 times point 43 times point . 99? A. 311:.? Q. And.what is the result of that partitular process? a. The result of that .1: point as which is. the sum: as eight percent. Q. ?aw, does that process have a term process of multiplying? A. It's based on the genetic theory; the-law of independent_svents, goes back.quita a ways in genetics. Q. Could y0u briefly describe what that principle . rid-u:- :r .. -. - {xi-rs . states? A. Very simply each at these factors are inherited CDMPUTERIZEB TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN "Jun-nu.? L-uMJeul . I. - I a AP a 3:411ggw?j?ga and. . ?in? in; 13%. gram-'4 my i. - - Hit, - 1? - 'e .. .?uMl'uv'wijdi?ia??mdui i?u?g??iya some: ms when? 1' did it}? *5 . ?ii?i?ii .maiyaia Unit ilk-1:113, ma?: r? a 2 -. . .4233 hair long did- yen Pt'ga'?gI'? 5 5 - 11-. Praia about November of 1988 until mid June bk 1?96?? ed And what did you do 1a Jun? at 1999? A. At paint I wagutransferred to the office of 1? . . 5; 3 inspections in the inspection division and I served in 9 capacity for approximately one year. A to Q. And what. are you doing tnday? '11 A. I'm.assigned to tn? Dnllaa field office of the FBI in Dallas, Texas. I am a supenriaory: special agent. I antigen-visa a squad. of roughly agents, investigating savings and loan fraud. Q. In that recent qhanga one 31111211.: yon desired? A. . Yes, sir. a 'l 11 9- can_ybu tell ma,,de phiaf of Senology, in the serology unit how may did yen: supervise? A. It vanied; depending .an ?the time during that four 19 20 year period. I believe we had as many at: 14 special agent 21 eminarg under my supervision and domewhere from to about 22 22 or so technicians that I auparviaeq. Q..- Did you than play the rail of trains: for the -- PHILBIR a insaniaw?s n? ii} If. . .n -mW-memrgz nine feet that. itemize a t?e: on?ea?iue; aged? there are ectually 1f) typos 3 We. mean that .g Bil- at: finial: -there- Are about five types. a: 5 independent of the other and there is no connection between an!? of these. I Q. Is the process also known as the product rule? A. Yea. Q. . Or the manila-testing system?- 10 a. When you talk about-'the multi-aystem you are talking about different systems, what: we call electrophoretlo 12 system. What we do go ideptify different types is we are i 13 talking about a technique as opposed to a theory. A mitt-Easting Bragem is a method you nee to I ,5 extract. *the blood grouping? i A. Yes. Hot extraot, but to actually type these u, enzyme markers. 18 Q. And the product rule or the law of independent 19 events is what you need to obtain. the ultimate percentage of 20 population thet would share all of these various blood groups? 21 A. Yes. It?s an approximetion. 22 Q. How many times have you been called to testify in 23 coezts of the United States with regards to serology? PHILBIN ASSOCIATES "use: mmxe'mwii A Muwu?'u- m? o. - .. 2 3 4 5 (-I a 2543 1 .- 8 ii 10 11 gaf.? of 13 Hi. I in": 13 . 1. Jig: if; 1? 35: PIER 53.131; ?76EWh'?r? in? the :natumew-:--= - - I e; Q- ua=ytu bato?any idea; sit. timed ihelu?hq the'eommonwe?lth of Massachusetts? ?gg A. the. they have. 7 Q. 2ou have a rough number? A. TWice I believe. E- can you tell me, sir, how nani times you have been Galled upon to give testimony at to the produot rule when you have had a case that involvee more than one blood gtoup? A. I don't recall the number of times} but most times when that is in the results that.is an issue in tne result or a result. It usually cones up during testimony. Q. How, did you conduct an egamination"f blood identified to you as belonging to Geot?eirerrot?' A. Yes, git. I . Q. And what was the result or that examination? A.- The blood.samgle from Geotge Parrot I examined and obtained five different genetic market types. Q. And what were those.?ive genetic marker types? The first type was PGH The second enzyme typ? A. was BAP Ban The third one waa.HP meaning haptoglobin two ?Inhen one, .Thh fourth one was another protein or soium comment? mmsonrrmon a ABSGCIATES . . 544..? in. -. .32 .-.-. -II- . -. . H- .r '5 gulp . . . andgt?o 15.; onb T: . for transfarrlh type c. Q. blood that you exculan on 03, the, sheet? 4 A. Yes, air. (I. Did you examine blood identified to you as belonging to Mary 92:91:09? A. Yes, air. Q. And what was the result of that examination? A. The blood sample reportedly copy being from Mary Prekop I examined and identified her as being type 0 blood. And. the enzyme types were PGH EAP BA, H92, 'l'f which is transforrln CB, and another factor called the Luis Factor which date-rallies that aha was a aecretor. 9. ?gs George 'Pexrot a oecrotor by the way? 3.. Ho. He was nonrsocretor. a. How, can you tell no, based. on your examination of Mary Prokop's blood. whether or not she could have left the blood that you; found on {23. the sheet?? a. The result on tho sheet compared to her blood sample ate inconsistent and she? could not have been the donor of the blood on the sheet; That?s all that I .2 - . - c. 115was? the blood of?cory?e Parrot cohalat?ht . - -. 2.3 I MR. Thank you . MUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION ASSOCIATES a?i take?? 7 Ar HfJain-3.: . flt?a?'T'Wsi?: - . have {or the voir dire at this time. .q 'k - - *mv? CEES-EWMTEDR Hr. subunits. when you'talk about pen 1?4- you're talking about a factor, a blood factor known as - a phoephogiucemutaee; is that correct? n. Yes, sir. Q. When you talk about one plus is that to be distinguished from - A. It is the some aorta! except that PGM 1 refers to. a more general typing mechanism them: one used or procedure that was used prior to about 198g, early '36 The one plus which 1e consistent with a one refere to a more advanced- technique known as isoelectric focusing which breaks down into 10 types rather than the traditional. three. . Q. Would mm 1 occur less frequently in a given 18 Mule-tier: then 13cm 19 3- one Plus 13 the cat comnmn in the isoelectric 20 focusing type and probablyr -- I don't know ehat the percentage 21 for ?13 Yeamay refer to some notes{ 23 '21- Yeah. commune TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN a ASSOCIATES - 1 '3 . 'weafar ivcgi: rig: - ?go?s-n- f. v.3 ~13 We 1-{ti??ffr? new-gaiz?in; ileum; {an ?gamma-m the Quentin-tee we wecemiiai?? at that time, it toughmy 59 percent of the population. out. n; a' and when ?are trying gun-as latte any two factors such as PGH or HEM 13 1t connect a that experts in serology might differ with respect to~which of ?i 7 theme two factors exist in any given case? 1 1 ;f 8 A. Do-you mean that they would type one person by type 9? I et another way? 10 0- That's correct. lb a 11 A. That'e_poestble. It can occur. It ts interpretive results. In 3 Q. In.ather words there is some subjective Ef detetminetion particularly within typing a patticuler factor; . shuttle . . 15 is that correct? . . A. Yes. . Q. So that in this instance when you talk about these 11 percentages they are 18 A. Yes, sir. . 19 Q. And then when you utilize this product rule that 20 21 particular percentage is multiplied, really, in nunber of 22 times; isn?t that correct? The percentages for the regulta that you have for 23 A. GGEEUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTIOH PHILBIN I ASSECIATBB 1huirr'a?a?Wu "Jul- I-num inn ~ . nu?l-?u?5qu ?re?ieth 'bet'z?ultip'lieaf ?bvernl amass". 13. - hownn??y?types yeuzh?vei '?et i1;.2 1 :f aw'-a? So that if there were ah error in perc??ta?a ii?.fi might; I: that percentage was used under the pro?uot rhi? {5 this formula it would really become pointed; isn't that:- cbrrect? A. That's correct. Q. So if you took the factor at any PGH 1+ and arrived a at a figure of point 41 or 41 percent and you multiplied that no out four times, eech time you multiblied it that margin of 11 error would be further, it would be multiplied; is that 12 correct? 13 .1 A. mhatiguoorrect. 14 Q. And you are aenre of atheies which yould indicate 15 that. for instance, with PGM if the incident ih?the la papulation is higher thah 41 percent. arenft you? ,1 There sure, instances in which the PGH 1+ 13 have reflected in same population stuoies as being higher 19 depending on What technique or racial group youfre leaking at. an hell. within the Caucasian.population ;here are 21 studies that would indicate the incident is perhaps several 22 percentages higher, aren't there? 23 A. Could be. COHPUTERIZEB TRANECRIPTIGH PHILBIH ASSOCIAIBS ?a ., r. seven?nd? r?El; ?niwliether you're talking about -- 5? to say that 11: main be true for each out time- as, taggers. that you described? A. yes. sir. . 5 a. I would say that would be true. There are stui?iib? whioh indicated that their occurrence within the collusion 7 population is higher than the figure you have given us? a A. Yes. There are also some that are lower. I might a mention, if I may, that the percentages that were 'used at this In time. not in the result. but in the other enzyme or serum 11 protein types?sre based on averages taken, from 65 studies, 12 population studies done on these various markers around 1982 13 in which we compiled an of those results to come up with I averages. And those 65 studies were taken from 15 cities. and downs across the oountry, But you were aware there have been studies done 17 since then, aren't you, sir? A. Oh,~ yes. 19 Q. And you're aware that other forensic laboratories 20 use other figure; is that correct?re you femilisr with an individual. named. Henry 23 Lea? EMERIZED TRANSCRIPTIOH PHIEBIN I: ASSOCIATES .. -w Iv- .- 5 n. firm?valueagq?n? hey do yen know Hr. Lee? gask??r Hr. news ar was who 16 :3 cannula-ant State panda crime Lahuxatory from variety: - all meetings and conferences and symposiums in forensic serology . I've attended, primarily through that means. 9. hr. Euhanke, have you worked a?y place or unrked for any employ other than the Federal Bureau of Investigations? A. Re, I have not. Q. And when you received your training it's largely been through the Federal Bureau of Investigation? A. That's correct. a Q. When you're looking at these various factors you have indicated that there were -?.that the pereentagee gnu used ware based on 64. 65 etudiee; is that correctAnd are.thoee studiee based on geographical area? A. ND. They're actually published studies that may have been for Miami, Florida or Detroit, Michigan or county's from where there's 65 of these various areas of the country. I don't know new many states were included,-which were compiled and simulated End grouped, if yen will, back in 1982 must-zen mitt-BIN a Anger-?irts . .uxv .- L. paw-t. . 5 5 . -., . .13the? helmet genergting mm .gas, $152. 23.5 2' I . ?1 "gm. I . I I. j" exam; axe-?they were-.emnt4ailv mines . I '2?5?ftvh. if 1.. geagr'aphitdi areas, currentwas air. .. . as. 3nd based on your knowledge might the differ??t' I geographical areas have different ethnic. mkeupe? 73* A. correct. 0. And would the percentages even within the Caucasian population vary according to the. ethnic makeup of the . population? A. To some extent, yes; 9. And were there any studies that were from the 3' 5 . 1: Massachusetts tree that. existed at the time you ran these - is tests on the blood which is the subject of this case? 'm A. There mu!- heve been. I would have to look back at those studies, the 65 studies?. 13 Q. - Do you remember if, at the time, you referred to specific studies from this geographical area when You "are 2? doing your calculetioes? . at A. Ha, I did not. 22 Q- In that ever done? ?i 23 A. Gdnerelly it's not done and there are specie-1 PHILBIH a ABBGGIATEB . 4-4-5' I: i- w-Jamw-su ?F-t-ul' mu a a, - a- av E3.- a; .Hzi. .?is ?ii-l1"; 5-{'13 6 tir'rfgl-lwould indicate that? Gauche dons-53$ ii hive a sps?ific?srsw.guu c:n.uss waastnii?s cases from all over ths?couh?ty :34 over the go?htry'tn?thoss rssuits us have campiisani?s??i?g?a?E data from 1111 over the country and th's combining. of sasais?sii' data tram various studies fron'ail over the country, diffsr?nt;: geographiqal areas is supported in the literature, that methqd of combining that information and averaging. 0.. ?buld yau agree though, that scientificsliy yuu would be more likely to achieve an accurate result with respect to the occurrence of any one of these blood factors in a population by referring to the studies closest to that population? I a. I would not disagres_with that, Q. And since 1988 of any studies which First of all. are you aware of shy further studies with respect to the occurrence or these various rm how is it best to describe these. genetic markers? A. Yes, sir. a. The frequency of these various genetic markers within the population nationsily? at any additional studies since 1988? I'm aura . a gins - - f? 5-. . . Ii,? u' - i I . cumin-satst PHILBIN a Assassin-1' .-. r- earn-hga?aif?i 5'5171.titan? . ?aw ?daky ., v'I 4.1 .J I .7 .. menthol-studio? any!? - 1?33. - . mg! - 33mm?wt?i?m i n?qm? I sea a anti-you don?t know? how the? efgt??f; 3' Emma-d expect: and I'm basing this on lily op'i?i?an??. in in; T. . that those percentages would not he that much different than the percentages that we were using at this time, the (percentages I have testified to today. Q- When you say that, not that such difference, do you mean a matter of a few percentage points? A. Yes . Q. For ,sny given factor? - A. Probably to; any of these factors. You know, I would expect that there are going to he population studies that one going to show numbers higher end numbers lower, upwards of, you know, four. or five pegsentage points. That would not surprise me at. all. Upward of four 'or five percentage points higher or Yes, sir. Would you agree that every single one of these factors which you found on that bedeheet are the most common factors -- let me strike that. Within each of the genetic markers you testified tor: the ?attent?d'es :"tliht you have testified to? I 7 . . - MiaPER-BIN ASSOCIATEH souPU?anizzn u. .4, Lmh?? - p. ?unuu-vHNn-IWIwm-y?w-?m - l' 1..- anarein.- inaisJ-?hiiuif?w . . . 1 luv: 95:. I- 3:5 I I (istii?i- Eli?k?tvfmind ?Manama c?i?mgm- 53333;?: thagagfactdt?rt -- . ll- ?bula; a '03 Pb: :11 four? . I .- 3 A. the, 31:. MR. FBRRARA: nu furthar questions; Your abhor. *I'ii?i 33 asaxnacr EXHMINHTION BY vumwnno wl'icbt i; . 11 I take-;t the beat poagible population Etudy In a. would be whgxa avezgona living in the world was tested? 13 A: Year. b9. a . a. ma instead, collected 55 different: 5i' 1, population studies thrbughont the united States? *i [a A. Yes, sir. I, Q. And tombineg than? :Hw. 3. That's correct. ?lg-n 13 -E3 is a. Is theta any way ypu can.say that the study, if it ?g 20 was done for say Boatqn in 1930 wauld have the same results :5 3: 21 a study done.for Boston in 1390? 22 a. Rat without lockiqg at actual published rgaults for 23 thosa tub studies. . twining - a ASSOCIATES . 2.144 .Janet .. . e. ammoAnd the actual ?ushes of psopis in itientitias in what, some 10 years? A. 'That's correct; wbuia_yuu, in sact. think that would changayth?? i blood results? A. Yes, it would. (2. Are you usage of any controlled nationwide scale efforts in the nature of 65 studies that has heat: generated since the time you have been using these figures?- - A. 'I'm not emote. but it's 'poasihla major arise laboratories age using" studies of this sort, although they tyziically . state crime laboratories I would expect would focus on population stud}?s conducted in their states. Q. But for the tings this 65 study pool is what is used by the FBI to give their estimate of population frequency? 11. That's cargoot. MR. FERRARA: A few more questions. calmer: Sure. a II. :k at nocaoss-sxa?xggsios a? ma. FERRARA i i i Q. But the percentages of ?raquancy of occurrence of any ofthasa genetic markers in a population might be affected 4:2. I . moths-3.: . 1bPHILBIN a ASSOCIATES - . by any Ma's o: th'a away; 159 that correct? a . 1h; what's correct. 0. This partmular -- in on}! particular swam-fare larger the population you tank? the greater likelihood ydt': of accuracy; is that correct? f- 5 A. That 13 correct. 1 MR. Thank You. a HR. W30: Thot'a all I have for the v01: 9 dire. - COURT: All right. .we are we going jio out . now on trio 133's? of quali?ygng this witness. a Do you" wag?: to be heard on that? 1, MR. Hagan: Ho. .5 MEG: you can go this the 15 presence of the. jury. is HR. FEM: No. 1., I THE All right. I find this In witness to be quali?ed to 1n the area of forensic serology and specifically those_ matters covered an in the course of the web: dire. 21 Anything else we need to do out of the presence of 22 the jury? 33? HR. FERRARA: May we take up the inane whatnot QQHPUTERIZ-ED PHILBIN ASSOCIATES - n? rcl-n' .. . . . -- wM'susmaWa.-. ..-. - . .. 4 I. - ,n 111:. whilkipezgho.can tastxuy as Eo the final bud result 1" I '13 - I i?a_pnbduct Eula. . -.. THE sonar: Iq the issue the HR. roman. You, Your Honor. w-rz-Wti' - THE COURT: Has that been laid to rest??n Commonwealth versus cones? NR. FERRARA: II don't believe so, Your HonorTHE COURI: You want to second gueaa.the Supreme Judicial Court?' . mu. I'd like to do it. I un?erstand they only had before them, what they had before th the t??timony you have hetero you is different. It's a Eula of review uhat they're not going to -- a THE chRE: (Interpoaing) well, let's break 3 .1t down. The method of extraotgng the markers; is there on issue about that? MR. FBRRARA: No, Your Honor. THE CGURT: All right. The population standard used, is that an issue? MR. EERRARA: I believe it is. .3 CGUET: qkny._ You want to go to woight? i There is a foundation in fact for the study. MR. FERRARA: That'o correct. TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH 5 assocxnmus . w? - - . . "Pt-n39 1feet ie}iwhne_wae it, 65 I heliete ageie?gsj IV - . - r- armies: Yea, air. was spun: Sixty??ve separate penulgteefnm studies averaged from different parts cf?the;naticn; HR. FERRARI: THE COURT: That was as of 1982 and these tests Yea, sir. were done in 1935. HR. HERRERA: correct. Qr early ?86 Mai FERRARA: Within that time rengeJ THE Yeah. 59,! mean whether there were teats available in '83 -- I'm not sure it's really probative, but the; I'anet foreciceieg you {rum going in an.thet. Sc the populatinn study beaed on what I've - heard I think is eutficie?t tc establish. If yeu have counter availing evidence I'll hear it. MR. FERRARA: respect to the product rule yon have. THE COURT: new, let'e.move onto product rule. Okay. The product rule is simple statistical nature that operatee on the theory that if there's one marker in the population that has a certain value, but the existence of What I would like to address with ambient?!) imsenrmon . - . . - . . - -, -.- 1. . . .-). 1a.. .fu. - ASSOCIATES .- il I ?1?43 c.1- n-J-ui-a nu- ?hm-aid .-.. . . n,Nu Ip-q-u ?rm-43:- .I . 36% $3311 6&3" Mari-mm Eh?? #53 9593? mood" isiia miter?er ?iminio'h'od. ma?a . . 5: fz-J- 3'2? mirke?? ho fou??, no I noderotand it. ?nq ghd.proah?? rule is at ainizple statistical ex?z-cia? a?iid ?ia?nd - Ever, I believe. in almost _all the sound.- 1' th-i?thoro is an exception Michigan, oh? of thoSo And 1 i the Comhonwoalth has, at least, the Supreme Judicial Court ot.l?ast as far as I know, the Commonwoalth Versus 9 1g Games looked with favor upon it. So why should I reinvent tho wheel? 41'; . . Am?. I 11 qt. 12 MR. FERRARA: Your Honor, what you havo'betoro ,3 you now is a little bit diffogoni: case. The 1? 3 Commonwealth verous Gamoo,_the parcentage of population 15 2 which could have hnd.a11 of those factors wag one point un?t"? wink; . mun A?lmv, -, . two percent. -. 16 1., 93m: gonzo: Right. 18 HR. FERRARA: I_pelieve that the scientific . 3 19 community, aad if you wish, and that this is established i; an in Commonwealth voraug Bozilay cite which.I . Le' 2? will give you if you wish, but it is a fairly well known 3? case, ot?toa that statistical significance in the "z 22 57? 23 scientific community is about 90 poxoant below nine 5-3.: 1.59ammonia misuse-?r ?o . a Associa'rss . :xmwolelgm? an I - pen-mg. where. $5311? 519?: nepenaaruy. Hem-3th? Fg?ti?tical significance,o? an? . Iii?? . b91?9?? 90 to 59 P?rcant is characterizeghag a . w' W.- from 25 to 99 percent very likely. :w and, of course. in paterniey cases evidence of 'hleed factors and be offered, I believe, unless it?g a; 90 percent. Hare, unlike Games where you have a very'hlgh likelihood of etatieeicel significance you have a marginal one and it is very-important because the Commonwealth's witness. Hr. Euhanka, has testified that there 1e variance in ehe pegceptggee of the eccurrenee of these varioue?gepetic Eadh of these,genetic markere are the meet cepnon found for these particular .hlood tasters. Whep yen en the extrepglation that Mr. Eubanke does. yen come out with a pole; eight percent, but ea he testified, if there la aniegror in either any age marker that is combined it is ,extrapoleted mgqugn Fhe product rule so that whlle you here. might have eight percent haeeq on that pertiqulag study utilized it could just as well came net to ll or 12 percent which wouldn?t be statistically signifinent. . THE COURT: Five or six percent, This is true. CQHPUEERIZBD PHILBIN . - . -. .--.- u- munby. law?, I. .I I 37* And. Your Honor. 13m hot-dhih?j you to k?'ep amt-.- a?11 of this evidence. I would not d?j?ot :1 to-hih testifying?as to the occurrence at those? a" particuiar percentages and let the jury inferences that it wishes to, but I think it is objectionable in this instance and should be kept out to use the product rule. You have more testimony before you now, I believe, - ?lo-hqu- than at least indicated in the case of Games with respect to that and it is a much more specific cada than Games. .1..- I think the prejudice in this case does outweigh the probative voids of jost.that tidal product by the product rule. In other words. I thihh the product can only be good as iteqfactors are. .. we have_some problems with the figures, Your 6 Honor. I ask that you rule that he he pemitted to testify as to the_percentages of given factors, but not i to otilize the product rule. And.this was} I belieye, . the ruling of Judge in the original trial. I 3 recognize Games gas decided after that. I THE COURT: Well, it will pamit the product rule teatimpny and your rights ere saved. MR. VOTTERO: I do need to have another 2212'? PHILBIN a ASSOCIATES ?hmHug-n1 . . 1(Ewerrgv3:33 3 9.. ?3 nu?: A I AK vzl. - . ..-. . - . hr?. at .3: . . If: ire. "344? _i I a - as: COURT: 1 thduk-we have one; a r_ z? right. we will take a recess. 5 (The defendant was (ire Court and the jury sent_ut Sir, could you tell the jury Yeur name please and who's your employer? .A. William G. Euhanks, supervisorf special agent; Federal Bureau of Investigation. Q. How long have yen worked for the Federal Bureau of Investigation? Approximately 18 years. Q. What positions have you held with the A. I was inltielly a laborutpry technician in the FBI COMPUTERIEED TRANSCRIPTION I PHILEIH ASSOCIATES . . mm.? . imam:in gang book tn: the tin of 1-9913 maritime} of?ciated at (a?eoia-l- ogont:_o? the; training in Heron of 1973. 'l a. When kind of work did you do at '1 . 3. Initially? - A a. mean.- A. no a special agent I was assigned to Kansas City field office for about three and a half years as an . investigator investigating federal tiolatione withiy?the jurisdiction of the FBI. Q. And at that time did you hove change in your duties? A. fee. sir. Q. What did you do? . 3. Approximately late August, 1981. I was transferred to the FBI laboratory in ?ashington no. I 3. Whot Rosition.did you ondertoke at that time? A. At that time I was in troiging to become an 1 examiner in the field of forensic serology. Q. What is forepaio serology, air? a. Serology is the attdy of body fluids such as blood, 5+ semen and other body fluids. Forenaio serology in the application of examination techniques for the identification EOHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILEIH ASSOCIATES 'u I . 1 - fv?a. A a, I .- J?f? _v or nibo-um .v .4 - A. .- ..-. . - . Fi?; 123,324-533?: -.2 . iffyV?i?wrii?id; emigre eeida?tis?eg?g?gfg? .. . q?..33 .0 _mu:k TQM what?? your. formal. education prior to - .7 1i 5'31? .41; graduated with Bechelor of Science de?ated?. gin biology of Southern Methodist University of name. Texas in may 1973 I ciao held a master of Science in forensic science degree in George ?ushington University in washington Be graduating What is generally covered in the area of forensic science? A. Forensic science encompasses a broad range of disciplines such as serology, microscopic analysis, firearm: ?1n and ballistic analysis, mineralogy. document analysis, fingerprints and so forth. o. ?ow. when you were ageigned to the serology unit of the FBI did you have to angergo any kind of epeciei training in that area? I a Yes, 31:. Q. Could you describe that, 3. upon being assigned there in August of 1931 I began a period of,training which one year and that_ training consisted of more or less on-the?job training under the direct supervision of experienced and qualified special summarize Twec?i?frw? mum a ASSOCIATES . . . . . . . - . - .J 4.4 43. - . . wan??cm. an . ?g?iito?whrohivz?ro Quali?ed t-ho- field of'for??yg??iv 3 . . a EM ?Were there any formal courses or oius?d a I ih' this o'oa your training program? 5 A. Yes, air; 3 - a: What were those? a: a, I A. There were two normal. courses. Both courses are a groouate level courses with the University of Virginia. The 3 .9 first course dealt. primarily with basic forensic serology techniques. The second course, which is more oomplex, dealt ?with the more advance techniqpea developed in the last 15 years or so in foreoaic serology. I 13 Q. As part of this one year training were we required to pass any kind of, examinations? 3 15 A. Yes. During those tor-non]. courses as well as during a the actual training on? the job in the laboratory. n, I Q. Inoidentaliy, what kind of. laboratory training was I that, how did that work; what did you do in the lab? A. the laboratory troining consisted of a very thorough required reyiew end a list of. reading 21 materials in the literature in the field of forensic serology 22 and related fields such as genetics, such as biochemistry and 23 other fields. It also consisted of the actual examination of TRANSCRIPTION 9311.313 5 ASSOCIATES I10 qualified in the field of forepsic serology. a. assignment than? B. cases subtittod from local and state and enforcement agonci?slaoroas the and the ootual examination and analysis_and ragorting 0% results, that of my results in those cases. Q. devoted to forensic perology in laboratory examinotiong? A. Q. conduct a. . lmr. I i as? 3-4.3..45. -. ?ugh-5? swab??uaw-i?m E'or slum-mung d?ravidenti'ary items as will as: not u?odhin-thb training and testing of an i - certification it the field of forensic serology? . am you ra?aa?iva, ultimately; boi'n? kind at . - A . Yes, sir. Whot was-that? arqu of 1982 I ma certified by the DirectOr of the And was that certification what was your At that point I began having assigned to ma actual federal b. an?. And.how ouch of your work during that time was One hundreg pageant. During this time how many examinations would you in any given your? Several thousand. I don't know the exact number, TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES I .a?m-u-?p-IU-umn .. :a?f?a?m inc-mu than?u?ib?hri-bf-asthih? 1333: w-w . l' 13:53. 2.7swung; 2m ?lghg-?t?g I $53; that wimld affect this numbermama-(ma anamnagmm .11: would be in tho' thousa??as if}; a. How long did you work in. tho =51: Approximately four. yegra._ Did you receive any promotions during this time? You . Q. And what was that? A. In March, Chief of. the Serology Unit in the 3'31 laboratory. (1. How did your responsibilities differ as Chief a: the serology Qnit?i? I a. A. may differod in as much as I have the direct supervision and responsibility for the unit's policies, monogam?ent of tho unis: ?which lociuded at: one point about 14 agent examiners and roughly 18 to 22 technicians. During this time did you than play a role in the training of? individnolg undergoing that one year certification? I was ultimately responsible for recommending A. Yes . whether or nut a person was qualified or not. 1986, I was promoted to the Unit Chief ox." What-3&5 mscnimmx.? mount a asaacn'raa . '?I-Jlfau W- z? .swn ? If SiWnod i'ta'm tar thy bragging; aux-re eh- ot semen- 3 d. . yet: shin to identify either: b19355! m: ?lilou ?ea-hr I was not; a: u: i J: . lull. mam: Hair this be entered as an ., exhibit at this time? . I was calm: Yea. I a an. mama: Ho objection, Your manor; 3 In a I, (Coman?BaIth's Exhibit so. 16 was offepd and' marked.) a G. Hr. Vbttarq) we]; 1. til-era is? a ambit: of m1]. [1qu 11': the pillow cas? bid: iron Em those holes m? - I. A. Yes, air. a. In that. but bf fem:- testing procedure? 5: A. (Witness indicating) a. Did you al?so ?xamiina a sheet? A. Yes; sir. D. I maid like to [and yen Ea?ihibit for Henti?ication, air, and an}: giro? to take a look at it and see if you can f'dantify this objeci: na-aw? . W239 wmcnI-am?u IN a asamzxr?a .7 . -.. - n??M .. . .3 ,9 sari: - . .?r?tjs?nio' mangoes you le?i?zo? iron: ?ha .1 an blight of; that and mo've onto another area!" .- ?car-1. a he 358i 513:. mr - 3: meme that1938. saga? November 1939, I wesmoei?iiew'n? I . the.Ch&e? of the one Analysis Unit in the 7 Q. =wa, as a member of the FBI laboratory were you 3 ever called upon tO'testify In court about your tindinga? A. Yes, sir. . 10 Q. Have you ever been qualified'aa an expert in the ,1 field of forensic serology? A. Yes, 51:. 13 0. Could you give us an idea about a number of times? i! A. Roughly a number?of?timee, roughly 120 to 110 to 15 120 times. Q. courts located where? A. Throughoot the.countpg. ,3 Q. Can you desogibe for us the process in the FBI for in examining items believed to contain body fluid? 20 A. The process varies depending on whet stains you're 21 looking for.. Fog a blood stain the first examination would be ,2 simply visual examination of the piece of evidence. 23 Typically a blood stain will appear no reddish brown or dark CDWERIZBD PHIL-BIN 5 ??out-Momma - . =1541,4?c5J-~ . . Inga53.(1.x .n . a .2 yt-vrn_ - $3715? -- I. . . . bto?n?diieufut?in on a piece bf oiothing. aka: gunman {banana}:un than a' . fr? . .Jf-ff? . . A. eta-1m may be?b?l.dod. The next step could he anothenzcn?mttiilf teat whxa wbeniirmethepnesence?ni' blood. And ateps would be determining whether or not it waa,hunan blood an opposed-caning from an animal such as deer or a dog. And then finally; it there is enough stain left after those tests you wouid uttempt to tine the stain in various steps such as the ABC bloo? groupfour major biood types which are A30. Beyond that would he determining of various enzymes and other proteins ?high are in blood. Q. Those enzymes or blood groups are would it be fair to those, are blood grouping teats? . Yea. . . would you dendribe, roughly, how muny ditferent A. Q- proteins and enzymes you look for when you?re examining blood? 5 a. where's a possibility o?_ettempting about 12 to 13 or 14 in addition to the 350 or includin? the ABC system, enzymes and proteins. Q. And are each of thoee 12 or so identified by the name-of the enzyme or.pnotein that you're looking for? test iy-aonducted; do that test-ab -And 11:13: ?positive reaction gaj COHPUTERIZBB TRANSCRIPTIOK PHILBIN 5 ASSDCIATES .MnWW?iw' ~33v.Hucadnih. 4.4.4-: n11.34911.53- ?un-vi?nal-r .. rmmequu '34.17} 2?35Sir?. I .- . vor- "pawn-I", . you've identified something as human blood; Eh ass acuprotsihtg tq*ara-iooking for when you do would be the enzyme ?hich .le A. an ansyme.callsd phosphogluconutsseprotein which causes a specific reaction in the bodfr 9 chemical reaction. Another type oi enzyme would be BAP which stands for acid phoapatase. And; in addition to there also what we call serum proteins. They are called interserum fraction of the bloo? such as hsptoglobin or up as it's abbreviated, transferrin and others. Q. now.?what is the actual process that you use once Could we take first the A39 system? What do you do to the stain to determine whether what its blood grasp.is? A. You have to remove a portion of the stain and in the ABO system we conduct in the FBI laboratory two tests. Both tests must be conclusive and must confirm each other. One test.tests for the presence of a specific characteristic that is ?ound on the red blood cell. Another one tests for a characteristic found in the serum portion of the blood. If those two tests match than we can conclusively TRAHSCRIPTIGN PHILBIN ASSOCIATES ??th ?mm. - . magnum a 3 .1 1 ?ltu.? - itrt?. 3.. L: ?55375.5: #1 rag? . 'aaytitgnot??g ?ner typoaks.n - s? Hum. . mm- too muoltd?t??g?'??. . Wt?tn?un? what do you do out: the Mtties-Eu?' . 5 :vi A. It's aetually?cut up into several pieces plie?d into test tubss?rand the one test and the other: test in 1-416;me system pioeed.on microscope slides and to the test.tuhes and 1.1-3: the microscope slides are added various chemicals. ?u 0. ?ow that you have described the 388 process, it we ?take, for example, the PGH that you mentioned, that particular . enzyme, what prowess on you one to determine whether PGK is present in the stain?_ I . A. It's a tectnigue known as electropheroeis. . Electrophoresis is a method of separating protein in a-gel medium . .. . 9 Q. Do you have to run a separate test for each of 2 these 12 or so blood group substances? . A. free, sir. Q. You can't take the some?piece of clothing-and do 3 all the tests on it? . a 3. Actually, you take ?oor, three of the enzyme tests. one cutting-or one portion of the stain is pissed in a bluish substonoe and the blood and body fluid in that staio are CBHEUTEREZEB TRANSCRIPTIQH PHIDBIH ASSOGIATEB 1ft? 1 - .E J- 52?: 'Pz. yt?qu. .. Li? . .A v'teem; we1?11: .. . a . t, .345 Ei??iethd?dnaethen you einr?se that extract teu-ti?e- There?siuanethem'eet of team it? wmiuhqugimii; 2 - use an. additional portion of blood: emmrn?ii: depending on how much you have you can take enz?nee, enzymes and proteine. . no you run different teets on an unknown test based 9. on its size and condition? A. of deternining which taste you'll run on a particular stain? A. concentration of the stain, how dark it is, how readily, new easy it is to removelthe stain; clothing, for example, you just.cut it out. on a hard surface, you would scrape the stain off or perhaps abeorb the stain onto a piece of cotton sheeting, It. primarily depends on the amount of the stain that's present. indicated there were 12_or 13a close can you break down these enzymes? Let's Just take PGM. Are there different kinds of PGM or is it whether it?s there or not? A. ?Yea . 553 I- - . . Could you describe how you go through that process It all depends on the amount of stain and the If it's on a piece of 2? If it'e on, say ?ow, within these proteins and enzymes you How do you identity or how Well. PGH is there in everybody'e body fluid and COHPUEERIEED TRANSCRIPTIBH . .4ikameE-al?wm MEAkb-n' . mummy! a ASSOCIATES Wain-IIth :ar a m; 1 bloo?'g- but there orehdtf-i?engnt- types Within theerazg?t??g?agi? If; a a; how many atypes are theretwithin 3 . A: In the system -- there's actually two dit?i?x?ihp,? 3 1 in the more discriminatory system known as PGM eu?t?zping I 5 are. actually 10 types. . Q. And 0 the purpose of your exam is to determine which type of subgroup lei 1n the stain? A Yes" 811.. I 9 Q. Now, what value does that information have dawn-ule- minim . f?w ?vraj?hl?. wall- 3 3; A. The value of the information, not just to FBI, but to anyone who is looking at the results would be to discriminate that etain . from one person to another. In other 14 words to compare-that particular result with that enzyme 15 result, whether it be ABC or enzyme results with a sample for knownblood sample ftom some case. 1., Q. Could you give no an exemgle of what, in the subgroups are what they are called? 19 a. The PGM Subtypes there are 10 of them. One plus 1 f; 20 is one type; another one is one minus; one plus one minue, two #2 31 minus, a two plus, a two minus: two plus, and they have. a 22 combat-nation of two one two plus one and three plus and so .t 23 forth commune PHILBIH a ASSOCIATES {fa - . In - ?rm? '1 a deter-lune what percentage of the population hot butt-toilet kind of subgroup? ,9 a .y it?: . 4 A. You. . '2 5 Q. Can you describe that method? a. They conducted a study book in the 1980?s 7 based on population studies publisheo in the field of serology a and in blood banking studies, so forth, in which they took 65 a 'different published studies for these various genetic markers or enzyme types, if you will, and loomplled those and _ovez:eged them. if you will, to come up gargantegee?of the 12 population' that would 'he expected or estimated to hove eeoh of 13 these particular types. - . 1? IQ- making the subgroupe, for example, could you 15 give us. an idea of. _how these various eub?gtoupe ore in distributed? . mm out one plue, uhet peggeutege of the population 18 shares that? i. in A. According to the emerioeu Association ?of Blood 20 Banks published in 1982 approxlootely 41 percent lo Caucasians 21 and the other remaining subgroups are divided among the other 22 59 percent. 33 Q. How, is that some propose and percentages known for PHILBIH ASSOCIATES ZED TRANSCRI PTIDN [2 2. ?25 . my .9543Iowan; - if?. Q. Md turning to' the grc'mpings as af?h?i?i- ?than .. gm thirtith :thie with an unknown stain of fi?din?f??tv if it's blood and if so what its various groups arei'?w??n?: you get resulta- in these different-groups can you con?nine them to determine the percentege of population who have these, all of those groups? A. Yea, you can. 0. can you describe that is done? A. type within each enzyme hoe a frequency within the population based. on studies_ that have been concocted. For example, as I said the 1+?type estimated at around 41 percent at the Caucasian populetion. if you percent and 30 percent "and pay 90_ percent then "you could. through a mathematical calculation, determine the percentage, the percentege of the population who would be expected to have all five of those typee simply by multiplying the 41 percent times the 50 percent times the. 35 percent times the 90 percent COWBRIZED TRANSCRIPTION outlawed groupez? Well, no I previouely testified to, each. particular . pg enzyme types and let's say that their percentage: note 50 . and you woulci arrive gt a percentage of the population to he expected. And you understand, underline expected of that In?. 1 had any three or four other PHILBIH ASSOC ?4 . . . 11twee-Baa 1:53;: 'i-wazaan? gate that a little 51:. m: a . -- i?Sl? . x' x. u. .1 2.32;? v.13an3:357? 4! 1?.ue?b?irblemt an at- then .: . 33-m- Tait-'6! a?e- pumaatid? Would. it: be single at ?1?51! had ?31m, l?t's any four people, one, two, three; and fear; all. with these mm gimp subata?ces . I take it than. at those four peeple. ybu're saying, for instance, 50 pageant would have ran 80 you would take away two of the that. And.aek the next one how many have the next blood group substance, an for example. And that's the mathematical process? . I h. Yes, basically. Q. Does that have a name, this mathenetihel process? l! A. Itfs based on the genetic theoty of law b} independent evente. 0.. It that generally eccepted 1n the eclentitit It community where you wart? a. It dates back to 1865 end-the.founder of genetics, Mendel. Q. How, did yen heve opcasipn in this gene. in Commonwealth Versus George Ferret, to exam any evidence submitted by the Springfield Felice Department? IA. Yea, I did. a I- :12: 5-5553:13. I, as gain-wan tail. when magi -- . 3% it . 1213511335. Mi}- {Elias-z bh?a? n. . a; 3 item: from the . - . . a? 333w; - neyezggent in aanuaxy. 1986. an t?n. ?-Ei a. Bo-you recall what the lteme "use4hrand.what were they? - A. A pillow case, a piece of paper. a sheet, another 7 131999 613 paper and a of gloves. 19 3 Q. moi, we could Segln with ehat'e been mazked Exhibit 11 A for identification; do you recognize these objects, 511'? (Indicating) . A. Yea. I do. 9. What are'theyIt?s a gel: of gloves. - i. Q. ?And how?ere ypu able to recognize them? 10 I, at I recognize it from my initial on the item on the Z- j?f is evidence tag and other markinge on the item which were mine. 5 19 a. Now, what did you do with those gloves. 20 a. I examined the gloves for the presence of oloog. lg? 0. Could you describe the results of you: examination? 22 First you indicated you always begin a visual examination? .l GGHFUTERIZED TREEBGBIPTIGH 5 ASBOCIAEEB Jill I. . n. .3521? . .. .. 5m?- - v" f? I n. the result of ydur visual 1' - . 3 th?a?.giovs??' - guess it would he the left glove and s?ather?stgin on t?a glavn. 9- Did you assign these glovss.pnrticulsr numbers? A. YES, I did. 9- What kinds of numbers didLyou assign thesa'things? A. Typically when us cut out a stsin ?B?Hill mark it with some indelible ink. The second stain a Q23. a 0a And da you use the letter a in.rs?srencs tn those particular'spains? A. Yes. Th9 syngen-wn use Fa identify and label items is manning questioned item, question, 91, 02 and so forth. 9. And run aiso use ?ns ie?ter in thsse' examinations at sons point? A. tbs. That stands in: s.known item such 43 a known hair or bloog sample. 0- ,wa, your visusi sxamination of the gloves was that there was a stain on both glavss? A. Yes. sir. I fbund stain on glov? 5* 3' 2-: gagmemo-eta you an ?to: having 23-3-3 on ?ne-term: denduct what to known as $ng chemical teat tor of blood whlehsul'loxa??gt?rii'xf end then.renoyed a portion of the stain o! the glovie, Actually that; were fairly small stein: no I resent! unit all of the stale and determined the stain or stains were blood. new, once you determined that they were human blood I take it then you the question Wee whether you could achieve any further teeting la the blood grouping systems or the 330 system you testified to. I . 5 3. That's correct. 1nd.- .- -. .- 0. Did you conduct our of those tests? A. 1n the 330 system. 14.3th L. . a. now, why not? A. The material tige- blood was on, teen amount of eteln that was present, in my experience it was unlikely we were going to be able to get the eonelueive result: ln the two prong test that we utilize in the 330 system. Q. And would that process consume some-of the stein? A. Probably all of the stain. Q. So what test did you do with what was on the glove?mu. . m- 1 r? . amorous-En meek-115nm PKILBIN a ASSOCIATES ?mm?Wadi.? . . MM-wmm-?o?nm wow-p A. an mythic):- is the left gloive', I '13. -- I hypnotic! the 1130 system. I went directly to t?wd of i genetic markers systems.- In the case of 955' thevileitwlove, If p? utilized the system and on as the system and another 5 system called hnptoglohin. - I Q. What were the results of your examination on that 1 glove? 3 A. On both glove or one glove? Q. Take them each separately, if you would; Okay. notuolly they the some, identified human bloodjon both gloves and I use able to type the human blood. The enzyme type was on both gloves. I And what is the percentage of the Regulation that 1? would have Pm sub 1+3 I 15 A. Approximately 41 percent in the Caucasians . 0. lion were you able to obtoi?n? any other. blood n. -- grouping test on the stains from the gloves? . A. No, I was not. . 9. Incidentally whet a?oat does the age of the blood so stain and the Hey it's stored have canyon: ability to do 2' exam? 22 A. Generally speaking the older the stain the less . 23 likely in obtaining conclusive results in these systems. CWERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN a ASSOCIATES ?5 311? W~a1Tali: . a?-thih time? an. mm: cm: . ritte?h: THE CLERK: number 15. (Commonwealth's Exhibit No. .15 was 55d mazku?ij Q. has been marked-Exhibit for 1dant1f1cation. Could you examineyth;t ?nd t?li an if yuu recognize, identify that? (Initiating) A. YES, i db. Q. A. on the inside. Q. ?mnrked as Exhibit for identification that?s what you received from the Springfield Police Degartmant? A. Ian, 51:. Q. K?as?t?aaq w?i? ?ne - an. vaman my these be tarragon a5 no objection, Yhur Honor. (Bi Hr. Vbttero) ?aw, i3n ?ning to-shaw you what And, ignin, do fan recognize that? From the? item includln? my mum How, thi? ?ihk I believe is a did-yau?do of that item? I ?Juana; ?15Ralf?. I ?It. a . ?g Law9?31: I yh?L . ?1 1" HimTRANSCRIPTION 931mm 5 ASSOCIATES 0.. um: is; .A-, . - I 5 ?u?l??at! .sr: . uh :q-p-?au f- .- a . ,u ?Inrgf ., 1. gram ~2u~mar;anigrecanat: ?iv Hzan?athg 18 it? . item-a a ba?dah'aat. .54; '13 this bedtheat you hat frww- Spiingfield Police Department in connection with t?i? ch86? A. Yes. a. Did you conduct some examination 6h the badaheet? A. YES. I did. am. May this be marked aa-m?: exhibit at this time, Your Honor? - THE CQURT: Yea. mi. FERRARM No objection. 3 THE CLERK: Number 17, Ybur ?bnor. (Commanwealth'q Exhibit No. ~mnm$" lb? .- 0. (By Mr. Vbttegol7 NEH. 4; Gun i haie a hand? Now, there's a number of holes in this item as wall, 81:. I I How did thos? hol?? get on this item? (Indicating) A. Those were cuts I took from the item. Q. And let me turn it around, if I can. What are the markings on the hole?? - A. The markinga, two 6: them are marked 13 and the swam mammal 9311.311: 5 ASSOCIATES . '7 u? m. - bEhOrQEh? i?t?hrk?dhzs?aud'tha? ther?vdra same ath??t??i? 1: 'v ?ii?fu?ic.rgha 5. . .. 4?13"? with I I: that 15. as and so ram. a. hub, 4- thank You very ?nch. ?hat did you do with the things that you clipped 6i this B?edaheet? I n. i subjected than to the various analyses, chemical analysis. that I previously testified ta for the presance of body tluid stains. . Q. ?bre yuu able to d?tectt first of all, by quick visual examination whether there ware any stains 6n that sheet? A. Ids, I was. 0- What was the result of that, how many stains did you recall ageing?? . i A. There were two stains that were of a calor which appeared to be blood. There wdre some other lighter stains that were eithet by touch and feel or by sight yellowish or off color stains. Q. HOW, did th angmina tha stains on this angst for the presence of semen? . .g I A. Yes, I did. 0- What Was the results of that examination? A. It was negativg. I did not find any semen. manta WBGRIETION 931mm 5 assocn'ms if it?; I a. thatand. 23. a. 3 and 23. Those reddish stains did you test them to determine whether or not 1-:th were Mood?- .A. YES, I did.. - Q. And the result was? A. I identified both atains as human blood stains. 0. Now, at that point you then moved onto tha grouping: test? A. Yes, air. 9. What did you do? .A. As fan as :13 goes I tested it for the 330 system 5 first as wail as an thinner at; other games and proteins. .5.- a. What were the respite of that exam? 1., an in the A30 results was inconclusive. I could - not determine the A30 type, but I was able to identify four I 19 enzymes, actually enzymes and twa? serum protein types. - i; 20 Q. Let's take th? _enzymes' first from this putticular 21 stain. What was the ?rst enzyme that you identified? 22 A. It was PGH. 23 Q. And what was its aubgtouping? emanmzn PHILBIN a assacn'rzs in: wit. ?L'im-pcx Wu?nu?nn? .- a A: "Edi-?bre" $.23 Eh:ka . 1k". '5 "q a. . 5'13} ?59.04.-. in? 'Vd' 7. I .o ?urEbrty~one percent, appreximately. 5 Q: What win the next enzyme that yen ebteine?gv - Ag Anuther enzyme called E32_and.the type waa??ba. a: 1 R. New, are you able to tell us what percentage of the' population has the enzyne EAP ani Wu. In! wittyg?w .w INA a A. Approximately.41 percent. 10 Q. The thitd teat that?you ran found the presence of a pretein? 7. I ll 13 A. Tnat's norreet. . 13 0- ?nnt was that? 1? A. . Hp whiqh stands tof?haptoglpbin. 15 Q. And are yet able to tell ts whet percentage of the g; ,6 population he; tne protein in their bleed? The haptogiebin type that.I identified waa'two one, A- is or ten hyphen one and approximately 48 percent are expected to . . it have this type. . In 20 Q. now, what was the fourth_protein? v. than-27' 21 A. The fourth protein or the second protein, fourth arr?i:- marker: if will, was Tf which stands for treneferrinhave a perticular aubgreup or type? Putnam a answer-?away . gw?. (p . .. . - n. ?Martin: type A. Q. axe there? A. Q. A. Q. A. are mere? tad. The 1:ng I identified was a. ?nd what percentage of the APPIDXimntely 995 percent. a I: new, I can go back just a little haw-r thin particular stain had 931! an]; how many atria: PGH there are nine others. BAP. -- you indicated this was type Yes. How Imam? o-thefr types of ?ara there? There are four others. Haptogiohiq, this: was type two dash one? Yen. pr my atria: types of naptoglobin are mare? 'i'hr?e others . I And with transferrin type how many other items 5. least: two others. a. wane you able to do any additional blood grouping team an that_ stain? 1. Re. There was not on tnat stain. Np, that was it. a? That was the furthest: .yoq were able tq go, if you m, um.? I: smegma: mac-annex ASSOC 3 3 - o- . - quay-InYes. Q. What Other examinations did you conduct? There was a second stain which I previously estitied was labeled 23 and I conducted tests on that stain and identified it as a human blood stain also, but my various taste to determine either an enzyme type or prot?in tYpe ?919 inconclusive. Q. How, you indicated that age would affect your ability to obtain results. Can you give me an idea of what 11 the effect of repeated washing of a sheet would do to your ii? 42 to do these grouping tests? . 13 A. My opinion that would be totally impossible to obtain any results on any of those enzymes or proteins. [5 - Q. I would like you to aaeume that the blood that you I, found on that sheet was deposited in 1981, 1982 and this sheet ?7 was then washed 20 or more times using detergent; would you be 1. able to obtain the results you obtained? In A. No, I would not. 29- 0. Now, at some point, sir, did you conduct an 21 examination of some known blood samples that were submitteo to 21 you? 2: A. Yea, air. COHPUTERISED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES . Q. And those were known blood samples or when? A. I One known blood sample was received reportedly coming from George Parrot and another blood sample was received reportedly coming from Mary Prekop. Q. What did you do with these blood samples? A. The known liquid blood samples are examined somewhat differently than the dried blood stains. Known blood aamplaa, first step is to separate out what we call the red blood cell fraction from the plasma or serum protein fraction and than we run what we call a forward and reverse grouping. 'Agaln, both must confirm each other to determine the A30 type. Q. And did you do these with these two known blend 3 samples?? A. Yes, I did. Q. I wonder, air, with the Court's permission could you diagram oh the chalkboard or indicate the results on thoee two known blood samples in these various group tests. TEE COURT: Yes. MR. VOTTERD: Thank you. WITNESS: The first known blood sample which I will label K11 and was reportedly taken from George Parrot, I will put his name in the parenthesis. On this particular known blood sample from George Parrot CDHPUTERIZED TRARBCRIPTIOH PHILBIH ABBOCIATEB did not. run the 180 system. Instead I took a of the.whole blood from the vile of blood and deposited on what we cell a piece of cotton sheeting. Allowed it to completely air dry and then used that blood deposited on the cotton sheeting to run the variohs genetic marker tests which I previously testified to. I did that and obtained the following results and this is K11 for George Parrot. The results are and I will just put it underneath, PGM the enzyme Eh? BA: the serum protein Hp or haptoglobin, the result is two hyphen one, also another protein called Go, and the type is one and finally the final protein Tf or transferrin and the type is c. Q. (By Mr. Vottero) And could yon also put the known sample at Mary Prekop up there as well? A. Prekop was listed as K12 and I will draw a line to separate this. I ran the A30 system on Mary Prekop and she was identified as type 0 blood PGM EAP, an or hsptoglobin type two, and Ti standing for transferrin CB. Q. now, if you would, sir, wherever it is convenient on either side of that board could you place the three questioned items that you obtained blood grouping results, the gloves and the sheet and indicate the results you have from . PHILBIN ASSOCIATES . . is . - .. u?h (Immune muscaxmxon .591 nun. VOLUME 11 i . ii those. a. You want me to list below? 9. Whatever is convenient for those. a. Right. The results for those? 0. Yes. Indicate what the item was and the blood grouping you obtained. A. First item was the sheet. And the results whieh I've previously testified to were PGH BAP, BA: HP 2-1, and Ti, for transferrin, c. And for the gloves? The. gloves were labeled as and as. a. A. For the gloves. And the only result I got was the Pen enzyme system on both of these was a 9. Thank you very much. Yes can have a seat. New. I can ask you a couple of questions about this. This RAP BA is that different than this over here where it says RAP Is it the same, however, as what is on the sheet? 1. Yes, it is. a. How about the 392 that you find on nary Prekop's: is that different than from the Hp 2-1? A. Yes, it is. 0- So it's also different from the one found on the sheet down here? (Indicating) COHPHTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES . is: if? . we?. That's correct. Based on those examinations can you tell me whether A. 0. or not the blood of Kory Prekop left the stain you identified on 03, the sheet? The stain, the human blood stain A. Nb, it did not. that I typed on the sheet its results are inconsistent with the known blood sample of Prekop. 9. Because nary Prekop is en BAP and sz she didn't leave a stain of an; is that now it works? That's correct. How, I take it because both nary Prekop and the A. u. gloves have ran 1+ you csn't say that thet's not her blood? A. That's correct. a. You can't exclude her from leaving the blood on those gloves? A. That's correct. Q- Now, could you tell us how Mr. Ferret's known sample compared against the sheet? well. in the systems that are if you compare those systems in which I obtained results on the sheet that is in the PGM system, the sap system, the Hp sud the Tf, trenslerrln. and compare the sheet results sith the known b1??d ?ample with Parrot you will see that those results are COHPUTERIZED PHILBIN ASSOCIATES nut-nu? MW.- u?n- . 35-5:- the some. EEC- Q. shoot? .3. George Parrot no the donor of the blood stain. With them. I cannot exclude him from being the depositor of that stain. Q. can you identify positively a person as leaving blood? you did can we review the percentages? What is the percentage of the population that would have FEM A. A. That in the the BA. the 39 2-1, and tho Does that mean it'e George Ferret's blood on the no, it dose not. It means I cannot eliminate It's Does those blood grouping sets work like Nb, you cannot. You can exclude them or include them? That's correct. ?ow, in this case on the four blood gr0upinge.thot . Forty-one percent opproximately. RAP Fortyeone percent approximately. Hp 2*1? Forty-eight percent. WRIZED. 9311.311: 5 masocnns . Vanna: II 361 Q. A. About 99 percent. 0. Yb? explained earlier the product rule. Did you make an effort in this case to determine what percentage of the population would have all four of these markers in their blood? a. Yea, I did. 0- And what percentage 13 that, air? A. Approximately-eight percent. Q.- new, can you tell met for the record, sir. what was the roughly when did yen conduct the examination on the sheet and the gloves? A. That would have been between early January and approximately mid-February 1986r Q- And when did you receive the sample of George Perrot'a blood? A. That was received?on April 1, of April 1987. Q- - is it a correct statement that.the combination -that'e found on the sheet then of PGM BAP BA. Hp 2-1 and Gal, ?fe you would expect to find in eight percent of the A- Approlxlmutely. Q. Is George Parrot included in that percent? TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH i ASSOCIAEES u: . ?W-eWham" VOLUHI II 302 A. You. HR. VDTTERO: That's all I have of this witness; HR. FERRARA: May I proceed, Your Honor? THE COURT: Yea. *ii?ii BY MR. FERRARA Q. Mr. Euhaoka. I'm not clear on one thing with respect to your duties at the FBI. In August of 1981, were you still running tests yourself or did you have supervisory functions? A. I had supervisory functions. I was also running teats'on those cases I had run previous examinations prior to becoming the chief of the Serology Unit. So in this particular case you, yourself, ran these Q. tests? A. Yes, sir. Q. And yon know that because of your initial on particular items of evidence; is that correct? A. You. 0. And you did submit a report in August of 1937, to the otfice oi the district attorney; is that correct? COHPUTIRIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES l. . . ??nay rotor to some notea? (Pause) dated August a, 1997. (By Mr. Ferraro) The report I am referring to it A. Yes, that's correct. 0- ?nd it's in that report that you edvieed the district attorney's office of the results on the blood that you had and that slide purportedly from both George Parrot and Katy Prekop; 13 that correct? A. Yes, air. You're signature is on that report, is it, air? A. no. air. Q. And is there a do you have a strike that. Does the FBI have a policy or is there a reason for you not signing the report? I'm not sure why. 3. That's their policy. Q. In fact, no reports are ever signed; is that correct? A A. That's correct. D- And are you, your initials Bomawhere-on that report? i CDHPUTERIIED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES ?M-:bs1m a mam? the yellow copy which goes to the FBI file: my initial: are on that. Q. from the police department you receive them both in person and through the nail? A. O. that a cover letter accompany them to identify the sender? A. Q. you're saying it's highly recommended, but my question is that? is this, when you receive a piece of evidence through the mail do you require, for purposes of identifying that piece of evidence that the sender accompany a memorandum or_1etter identifying that sender? A. Q. sent by mail to, in this case, the district attorney's ottice, not on the copy that you received. That's actually ?nd you have that copy of that? I have a facsimile of it. and ere.your initials-on there? Its, sir. Now, air, when the FBI receives samples of evidence I That's correct. If you receive them through the mail do you require Yes, That's highly recommended. okay. I don't know if that's I understand That is a general requirement, gee. And do you usually receive evidence through the COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES -. vomu 39E nail? 3. Typically} yes. 9. But there are some instances where it's hand-delivered: is that correct? . a. Exchse me? Q. A. Yes. You -- do you require the parsan who is delivering it to sign a document or a log book or some document to show who it is who submitted it? A. fee, I do. 0; and go yen know it that A. ,It is the general procedure aiways to have that dune. this time. 0. okay. that is. if you know? A. For what? 0- For the reason for having someone who delivers evidence sign a document to establish who it was that delivered it? That's for chain or custody purposes- There are instances where it is hand?delivered? And when a piece of evidence is hand?delivered do I don't have any document with me which to show that at Would you tell the jury what the reason for was done in this case? COHPUTERIZED PHILBIN ASSOCIATES ?ml-Mm 1 VOLUME 11 303 When you "chain of cuetody" could you just 1 O- explain that a little bit further -H by the way what do you 3 Imenn by "chain of custody"? 4' A. In any type of evidence you want to establish a 3 5 chain which those individuale who handle or who let's any a submitted, delivered, picked up a piece of evidence at a crime scene you establish what's known as a chain of custody, 7 5 showing the normal procedure of who handled that evidence. 9 Q. And is that to show every.poesib1e person who night 10 have had access to thet evidence? A. I wouldn't say every poseible person, but those that had certainly the primary responsibility for handling or picking up that evidence or submitting the evidence or 13 1? examining the evidence, yea. 15 d. And on this report that you prepared would you look is. at the first paragraph under which would be on the first page? i ?7 A. Okay. 13 Q. And, air, who does it indicate delivered. that In particular specimen to the FBI laboratory? 20 MR. VOTTERO: I object, Your Honor. 21 THE WITH: Francis 22 THE COURT: (Interposing) You went to be heard on this? 23 COMPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILEIH ASSOCIATES 'mnfh-m-Mrmu-?wu mo! .. HR. VDTTERO: Yeah, (?ha-fgiiowi?q aidcgaaiqn Hui Heidiat. tug ai?m bar.) HR. VOTTERD: I've asked him about it. he doesn't know who delivered it. He knows whoever signed for it there and his name appears. What he knows is hearsay. MR. FERRARA: It may be hearsay, but h?ra is a document that he already stated no prepared. His initial is on it. It indicataa who delivered the item. I think I am entitled to have him but who-ho put in his report. MR. VOTTERD: He doesn't know he delivered it; You can ask him that if you.yish to. I THE Hhatis the answer going to be? MR. FERRBRA: The answer is going to be personally delivered by Hr. Francis W. Bloom. April 1. 1991, under a letter dated April 1, 1937. THE COURT: And then where are you going to go from there? MR. FERRARA: At this junction I am not going to go any further than that. COHPUTBRIZED TRARBCHIPTIOH . PHILBIH ASSOCIATES .. . .WWMW .. '4mw tests {or all 13 of the genetic markers that you usually run? 4- .A 1.73331. Era 1i vown 11' 30'! THE COURT: All right. You can have it. (and of the side bar discussion.) 0- (By Mr. Ferraro) Hr. Eubanke. what does your report any to who delivered those blood samples? A- The report says the blood samples were personally delivered by Mr. Francis Bloom on April 1. 1987. 0. Generally speaking, if you had a stain. say approximately the size of a half dollar that was relatively a fresh stain would you agree you could run those genetic marker A. Probably so, yes. Q. But If you.don't have a sufficlantly large stain or it the stain ls too old those are factors that affect how many of the markers you can test for; is that correct? a. That 15 correct. 0. And.the age of the stain would be a factor? A. Yes, 31:. Q- But you can too teats for older stains; la that correct? Hhon I say "older" I mean atalna four, five, 10 Yaar? old. COMPUTERIIED TRAHBCRIPTION PHILBIH i 11,3possible. we eould typically attoapt: had a stain the size, for example, a silver dollar even though perhapl it would he reported to us being four. five years old we would attempt to ran the test. 0. And you have done that and gotten results, correct? a. it's extremely rare .In four to five year-old stains to get any results at ail. It depends on. of course, on the concentration of the stain, what item it's on, clothing item versus hard surface, the age of the stain. and very important is how the actual item of evidence was stored during that period of time any four, five, years. . 0- years old you have run tests on those types of stains? my question though, is on a stain four to five A. You. 0. And you have gotten results, haven't you. air? A. I have on stains, air, as identifying stains as blood and as human blood. Perhaps, I don't recall specifically the age, but certainly stains that were about two years old I have obtained a couple of markers, primarily in the serum protein markers. Now, Mr. vottero held up this sheet and showed you all the holes in the sheet and you out those holes out? I. You, sir. TRAHBCRIPTIOH PHILBIN ASSOCIATES - *meM-y. w-W? W- 0. And ran tests on each of thoso places of maturial that wore removod from the holes% A. That's correct. 0. And you were able to Identify two as human blood; 1: that correct? A. Excuse me? Q. Yon were able to identify two of the stains on human blood; is that correct? A. On the sheet? 0. Yes, olr. A. Yes. Q. I'd like to talr to you a little bit. MR. FERRARA: May I approach the witnoasl'Your Honor? THE COURT: Yea. Q. {By-Mr. Ferraro) About these various genetic markers and help me so that I have, I am phrasing this correctly. Flrat of all when you talk about PGM, BAP, Hp which 15 haptoglobin, TE which 13 transferrln, you refer to those as blood groups or A. (Interposing) well, you could refer to them as blood; I guess, groups. Really when you refer to blood groups COHPUTERIIED TRAHSCRIPTIDN PHILBIN i ASSOCIATES a I . i . :11gar 1.3.. 13 55t'genetic system in the field.o? forensic serology: we you are talking about the 130 system. The 330 system is a typically refer to each of these as genetic markers. Technically they are enzymes or proteins which there are And technically various types within each enzyme or protein: it's referred to as phenotype, the one plus as opposed to one minus. 9: So to multiply this you eould call this a genetic marker and the further refinement phenotype? a A. Yes. Q. Can we just refe; to that just as a tyne? A. Yes. 0. would you agree with me, would you agree with me. that for PGM 1+ 13 the most common phenotype found? 3. That's correct. 9- I believe your testimony it is found in 41 percent of the Caucasian population} also 15 the moat common type found; is that correct? . A. That'e correct. 0. Same with the haptoglohln two one? A. Yes I 0- Some transferrln C, they are all the most common type? COMPUTERIZED TRAHSCRIPTIOH PHILBIN 8 ASSOCIATES I WWII-D That is correct. And when you were testifying about how frequently 0. they occur in the population you indicated each time that you gave a number, approximately: isn't that correct? And that is because the figures that you have are based on a collection of studies of frequency'of occurrence of these blood types that the FBI compiled and then averaged'out; is that correct? A. Yes sir. Q. And there were how many'otudiea, 65? A. Yes, 65. . Red Cross or different state laboratories; is that correct? A. That's 13 correct. q. It came fron all different locations of the country? A. Yes . Q. And the incident of occurring, having any one of these genetic markers and their subtypes might vary depending on the ethnic makeup of the particular population? A. That is correct. 0- When I any that I mean within the Caucasian population, a,vnrious of the ethnic makeup, the Caucasian And they were from different associations, American COMPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES meWw?u .- - mm.- . .. population?- A. You. 30 that you would not erpect the percentages 5127",; who l. . A . - :nand area of the country, the mid-west to-Be the same-as they 5 would in the northeast; 13 that correct? a A- I would not expect them to be exactly the some. 1 9. well, understood. In fact, the studies indicated a that there tan standard various, didn't they? A. I don't know that I would use the word standard. From the studies I've looked at-and, you know: You Conld 9? plus or minus four or five percent on any of these. 0. Plus or minus five percent? A. Yes. Q. And of those 65 studies did you have some studies that were from Maesachuoette? A. I don't specifically recall if there were massachnsetta' studies included in this particular compilation' of 65. There may have been. I would have to consult some records. 0- But in this case you didn't do your calculationa based on a more localized study of frequency of particular blood types. You used the 1992 study which was an average of the 65 studies? COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION ASSOCIATES Its. Q. When you have a factor such as PGH 1+ you said there were 10 other potential phenotypes? 3. Nina other. 0. This is the most common? . When you run this test it's this was the test where you extracted the blood from a sample, in this case the sheet; in a test tube; is that correct? A. Correct. 0. You add certain ingredients, did you use a 3 electrolysis in this? Yes, I did. Q. And at some point in this, the extraction it's placed on a gel plate; is that correct? - A. That?s correct. 0. An electrical current is run through? A. Correct. And the examiner, the person who is going to make a :?determination they look at the finished product after this proceoo is completed end they reach a conclusion as to what they have there; is that correct? A. You, based on known controls of known typeo that COHPUTERIZED TRAHBCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES . I . u- Iro?J. .5. . Fit ,y 1'12the plates with the questioned items. 0. And when you looked at this and make this determination was it a color know, was it red or yellow; what was it that indicates to you that you haVB thia Particular PGH 1+ as opposed to is there a Pen A. Yes, there too. 0. Okay. he opposed to PGM A- Itfe done -- it actually bands that, separates out the proteins and the 1+ band is located, will migrate or the 1+ protein type. iaoenayme as itfs known, will migrate in that gel to a specific point in that gel. ?nd using the technology known as isoelectric focusing and that results -- appears sort of as a band alone, if you will, and.that result is coupared to a known control or known controls that are run on that plate. I don't mean known, like for example from Parrot or Prekop, to a plate have been run also. I mean known controla that we designed which are conclusively one plus, one minue with one plus, two plus. So it's a visual comparison. Q. a determination, in Mr. Ferret's case. BAP BA. HE 2?1. In that the name type of test that was run to make A. Yes. With the exception the other systems are run on conventional electrophoresis as opposed to isoeloctric CORPUTEEIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIAEES .. . . ?a A 1.31 - r441 . I'd-n- a-hu-e .. woman: 31? taco-lug. Q. And would it be fair to say that making that determination requires some experience and some specialties and training in examining these types at plates? A. very definitely. Q. And to the extent that you're making measurements and.visuelizing this it's all subjective; is that correct? 3. There's some subjectivity, yes. 0- When I say that whet I mean is if you have a number of experts examining a particular result you know that there can be variance, in the opinion.o? the experts, es to what they have; isn't that true? A. There-can be some variance, but the results in our laboratory are continually read by an examiner doing the test and also read a second time by another examiner. . Q. And in this case who was the second examiner? A. I don't have that document in my notes here. Q. Do you have it in the August 4. 1987, report? A. - No, I don't. Q. There ere various numbers there with initials WI, WM. Would that indicate who the second examiner was in this case? A- Well, there was another examiner, but he was not COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES study he 46 percent Occurrence within that population or it doing any or the sorologf work. He was doing other forensic examinations: He uouid not have looked at this. D. Okay. I guess my question to you is, was there a second examiner uno looked at the blood results? A. m: the time at these tests which were conducted, in the case of the gloves and the sheet which were conducted in 1935: 11'my memory serves me correct we did not have a second exeminer at that time then. The later tests which were run on the. I think. the known blood'eampie, they're more than likaer I can't say for sure, was a second exeniner that looked at thoee?resulte. Q. When you say that, in various studies, you might have a range of variance for any One of these particular blood I groups of four or five percent you mean that it could be four or five percent higher or four or five percent lower? A. it could be either way; plus or minus. Q. So in the case of PGM 1+ this might, in another may be 36 percent; isn't that correct? A. That's correct. D. I'm no mathematician, but when you enter when YOU ?33: lat'a any you had a variance of several percent. You then use it in your calculation. When you reacheq the end COHPUTBRIZBD TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES mama. m: lbw-Mme? vvmm: result was your end result eight percent or something? end_when you use it in that calculation, it there?s a discrepancy, it it's not accurate, I underatand it's just an approximation, let's say for a given population it was 43 percent instead of 41 percent, that error is magnified by the multiplication, isn't it? A. To some-degreer yee. Q. And when the multiplication is carried out repeatedly it's further combined, ian't_that true? . If we were to do the mathematical A. not exactly; computation by coming up with some-fictitious numbers here it would change, definitely change'the end result, but the-change well, I don't know how, any other way to say it, but other than to demonstrate it or something, it doesn't change the end reenlt._ If you up each individual frequency by two or three percent it will up the final frequency, the product of those frequencies by one or two percent or three percent. Q. Or more? A. I'm not sure if it would more. 0. well, air. if you have potential variance of five percent and you multiply something by that it could create, any a variance of at least five percent, couldn't it? A. I think when you multiply those out together the PHILBIN ASSOCIATES -. n. .. .muduw l? L- VOLURE II 319 result is not as significant as you would think. 9- I'm not sure what I think. Hy question is you could have a beginning variance of five percent at least would you agree with that? A. Yes. If you multiply something you have a beginning o. i 2 of five percent -- you're starting with five a . percent? 9 A. That's correct. in Q. And different police laboratories use different 1, population studies in testing for these genetic markers, don?t they, Butanks? .. I 3M ?vs-itchy .-. .. - . ,3 A. That's correct. Massachusetts has a State Police laboratory, don't 5 11 . 15 they? . 1' A. Yes, they do. I, Q. And yen know from your experience that different 8 13 police departments, different law enforcement agencies use - .--. 19 different private labs; is that correct? 23 no A. Yes; 2, Q. In Hessechusetts? 22 A. In Hessachusetts. Q. Do they use a private lab? COMPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES v- v, 3- . ?ue-Wear..- .uu. . gr mm: 11 3&5: I ?hum-i blood types? A. Yes. I don't know. 0. But yen would agree with me thet other lab: use other populations, excuse me, other studies fron.more localized populations in making these determinations at the percentage of frequency of occurrence of these particular A. I don?t hate any-direct knowledge of that. I would aeeume that a local laboratory, for example, the state of Texas would more_than likely focus in on studies that were conducted on Texas. That would make sense. - Q. 50 taking your figures, for a moment, the figures that you have, what you're suggesting thep mean then in that out of every hundred people nationwide in 1955, excuse me well, we don't know the year. but out at every hundred people nationwide you would expect eight of them on an average to exhibit those four blood types that you're talking about. A. Yes, air. 0. About an in a thousand? A. Yes. Q. And it would very or it might highly vary;?you know it would vary depending on the particular population, particular geographic area? A. Yes. There would be some variance. COMPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES - 3.14m venous 11 32; 0. And you do know if that variance would be higher or lower in Massachusetts? no, I don't. 0. Now, on this case you were able to only test for four genetic that sheet; is that correct? A. No, that's not correct;- I'm sorry. Five genetic markers; A. On the sheet there were more genetic markers attempted, but the results were inconclusive. There were four that were conclusive results obtaihed. 0.. Then the correct statement would be you were able to obtain results for only five genetic markers, correct? A. On the sheet just four; 0. Just four? A. Yeah. Q. Does the hole in this sheet approximate the size of the stain for 13? (Indicating) A. Yes, fairly close. 0- If I just Show this to the jury, so this would be 13; is that oor?.ct? A. Yes, sir. D- And I'm showing you new Exhibit 15. are the gloves. and there are some holes in the glovee at the base of COHPUTBRIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES 10?wm VDLUHR If not; do: 312 the fingers. Do you see that, air? a. Yes, air. Q. 7 stains that were in those gloves? Would those hoiee approximate the size or the Approximately. MR. FBRRARA: If I can have just one moment, Year Honor. i i i mining-gen Why does the same person do the exam in a particular case? A. That?s because it's not advantageous to have two or three different examinera from the serology unit to come and testify in the same case. The examiner who initially did those examinations in the first will remain as the examiner in that particular discipline, forensic serology. throughout any later submissions. was com: Yes . (Pause) Eh. FERRARA: no further questions. Your Honor. TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES -. . .. . . Q. and can you tell no, a test is inconclusive is that I i, hicauso nothing hepoenu up on your gel, if you will, or hacmolooking at it you can't say, in your Opinion, it 5- represents a' particular group? 5 A. It. represents -- either there is no activity or in i 5 other word: I can't see any result or that the result was so 1 weak that I could not make a conclusive call or the result was . juet absolutely inconclusive. I Q. Now, can ion tell me, air, in the course of Working i no with the FBI do you have occasions to testify on behalf of i! people who are charged with a crime? I, A. Say that again. 1; 0- Do you ever testify on behalf of the defendant's on the case? I 15 A. Yes. I have. Q. And'you ever undertake any exam where none of your ,7 queatiomd items were consistent with the suspect? a and none given to you? I, A. - You. 20 0- That's not an uncommon occurrence? A- No. it is not. 33 0- Now, I 'm not great at math either so I would like 3; 11? give you a onlculutor here and just no you?re certain the ammonium) PHIL-BIN i EEOCIATES . . . mmdw-DWW? MW?I-ng-l - but 1 ?at *hud calculator work! can you multiply the percentages involvid in this case, 41 percent times 41 percent times 48 percent tile: 99. MR. 8333333: I'm going to object, Year annex. THE couam: You want to be heard? (The following diecuasian was held at the aide kgrg) THE COURT: What's the objection? an. Panama: 1? ?havenft challenged his figure of eight percent. .1 can't see what the need is for this courtroom demonstration. He said eight percent. I accept in. HR. VOTTERD: I am going to have him multiplying a set of figures. They're assuming errors given to him and eak him the change. THE COURT: I'll let him have it. (End of tge aide be; discussion.) 0- (By Mr. Vbttero) Have you been able to do that, air? A. I will do it new. You are asking me which results, PHILBIH ABBOCIATEB . Was -. I: o. a 1' . 1 J-vu-Ieu?tag :3 9h- Point 41 porcaot represents pen 1+ times poihi 41: 3 purco?t rapr?aenting 339 BA times point 48 percent I 45 mtg-ent4ng Hp typo 2?1 times point 99 percent, the 1'16.- nod- a' founding oft, 33.x. what 1.3 the result? I .3 A. Point 079. 1 Q. now, I'd like you to do another multiplication . taking an error of gay three percent; Cauld goo multiply a point 44 percent times point 44 percent times point 51 to percent 1H3 COURT: (Inteoosing) Point what? 1, HR. VOW: Point 51. 13 Q- I Hr. Vottero) Times point 99. We'll leave the last one the some. 15 Q. What's your result in this case? 13 A. I Point 097. 17 Q. So Lt has the three percent change, hasn't been In multiplied by itself for a change of porcant then? 19 A. That's correct. 20 0- Thank you, air. 2. How, I take it would work the same if you read the other 3; WHY instead of point 41 percent point 38 percent? 23 5- Too. I TRAHSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES AWM?Yw-mes ?r I .o-wvw-i?i- 1 - H'J'ql?? q. If there is an error you are not sure o?.uhich it? the error may he, plus or minus? A. fee. a. How. would it be Correct, air, that the ideal population study would be where would be one where you I studied everybody in the world to determine all their blood types and subtypes? A. Yes. Q- . Are you familiar,-sir. with the argument that you should in the area of Springfield. you look for on area close by Springfield or Boston or Hartford? HR. FERRARA: Objection, Your Honor. THE counw:? To the phrasing of the question. MR. VOTTERD: I will rephrase it. THE COURT: It's to form, I will sustain it otherwise. 9. (By or. Vottero) Would you consider having, using a population study oi Hartford as opposed to your study used Yes. Q. And why would you not do that?' A- Why would I not use a Hartford study as opposed to 65 cities? COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES ,rt-vu-{Hill. the argument for not using that is that you'rI" ?ling a population that represents 65 different studies conducted in various cities and towns across the country conducted independently of each other by 65 different research projects. A larger population, simply one study? A. tea, air. G. Let me ask you, sir, would a population with particular percentages of blood groups in population change in- -a particular city of say 10 years apart as different people move in and move out? A. Yes, they would. Q. How, you indicated that one crucial factor in your ability to obtain results on on old stain was to how it is stored, how the item is storedg'how would that effect your dbility? And let's take this sheet as an example. A. A body fluid stain such as a blood stain from the time the stain is deposited there and it dries up, if that stain were or that garment, let's say. The shirt were? placed in a bag, sealed and then again it's a dried stain, now sealed and then placed in a deep freeze situation I would be able to probably type some of these markers, even the A30 system a year later or longer. COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES - ?zzy-c 'identify it as a blood stain. _the Hp are more stable. .. WW Q. And what effect.wou1d time have on that iti??nu? instead of allowing it to dry and washing it with.doter?int 10 time? . I A. well, in my opinion I wouldn't be able to obtain anything. It would be very questionable if I would he-able to You indicated on older stains you sonetimoe had better success with certain proteins as opposed to enzymes? A. Yes? . Q. Could you provide a little more description about that? A. Generally. the protein system, such as the Ti and That is you can obtain results in those eyetems on stains that are older or sometimes weaker Ithan in the enzyme systemo. Now, the enzymes in this case that you found on Q3, the sheet or the PGM enzymes or the ASP enzymes a. (Interposing) Yes. Q. -- what kind of stability do those enzymes have? A. Well, Hp haptoglobin and Tf are more stable. They ara.both serum proteins and would be more stable-than the Pen eyetem and the lost table there would be the EAP system. Q- New, can you tell me. sir, you indicated that your CORPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTIOH PHILBIH i ASSOCIATES . . 1 ?km. 7 . -- vows: t1 sain- . . . :0 report indicates that Francis Bloom delivered these sampler. Do these things come directly iron the hand of Francis Bloom to you? . . 5. Nb. Q. How are they delivered to the 5. The procedure is. in the case of a personal delivery, someone coming to Hashington to the F51 laboratory to deliver evidence that he.wou1d go down in what is known as the evidence control center and in which they would fill out a form or several forms and sign some forms and the evidence would be received in the evidence central center and then within an hoop-or two typically it is brought down to a particular forensic unit that would conduct the analysis of thet case; 'If there ie more than one unit the one'that has the most examinations would typically get the evidence first. Do you have any knowledge ee to whether there was anybody with Mr. Bloom when he turned this evidence into the control center? - A. I vaguely recall Mr. Bloom coming down and I do recall someone else coming with him. Q. Did you A: (Interpoeing) I don't recall who that was. HR. VOTTERO: Thank you. Thank you. That 13 COMPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES Wmlomwu? - 1- .535 I ,5 - f'aII v.3 u-uinlu?I-O??ku a . Markus-UH.? 'r .all that I have. BY MR. FERRARA a. I just want to clarify something. When Hr. Vottero asked you why you do these calculations based on the average of those 65 studies you indicated it was advantageOue in some way; is that correct?? a. Because of shifts in population and I don't recall specifically what my testimony was there. And the literature eupgorte combining copulation studies in the catter in which we did. I believe there are some advantages in doing it that way. an the other hand, a specific ethnic creep in an isolated area of the country you nay also want to look at that group too if you had that availability. 0. The latter, using a population study from a more specific area would you expect to be more accurate, wouldn't you, air? 5. There's arguments pro and con. There are at least two studies that I am aware of and probably more in which the studies suggest or the papers suggest the method of combining population frequencies, population frequency data. 0. Okay; But if you. in any instance have an concurrent]: PHILBIN a ?secures .. .. . 2" 1:319 - .eat.- mu?12? . '5 . . 1*?4 I ?r r: ?Inch-u . J-. - .-- ?lLl-l -, I a? blood you are trying to match shouldn't say match, but you want to whither there are common markers and you know what they're iron and you knew the time frame. wouldn't you agree with he that necessarily it would be more accurate and I advantageous to.use a localized population study? 49. My opinion I'm.not sure. I knew, again, the population shift. It could depend on specific 4? let's take to: exanpla Eskimos in Alaska. In that particular situation you would want to take a leok_in population studies and there have been some studies in that particular isolated ethnic group theta in a particular state in thismgountry. It?s hard to say. I can only tell you the literature supports the combination of these population studies, at least two studies I'm Aware ef-and I think there are more. 0. You?re ignoring an element that I stated, I believe and that's time. A. Excuse me? Q. I believe you're ignoring the element time. HR. VDTTERO: I object and ask for a question please. . rm. ram: It's coming. 12' g! 3 machipuzon pumam r. . -..- I - 's - . use! ?uneasy!? 5min . . . 3vTHE COURT: Yes. Q. (By'ur. Ferraro) That's true only it you're talking about the accuracy of studies ova: a period at time; is that correct? A. That would be, yes, if I understand your questioning. Yes. Q. The reason that would be advantageous and more accurate, generally speaking, because of a shift in population; isn't that correct? A. That's correct. an the other hand, the coubined? totals include a large group of people whereas Your isolated population typically would be a smaller number. The larger the number the more accurate, overall, the frequency data. 0. Are you suggesting than that a local lab would, trying to type blood simples with a population study from their geographic area would achieve a more accurate result by using a national study? A. The literature seems to suggest that. Q- Aha that's because of changes in population? A. And the larger sample too and the cross-section of sampling. It depends on the size of the study that's done. Q- How many people are studied in one of these samples? COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES asc- HWY-rem-? - - n. . gnu?"em . . 3 e331!? . . . ~11 553% - I . lu..g4;ug 3.x - I vomit: 313% 1 n. Sonatina: it?s as many as a hundred or perhaps ovun lons,_upwarda to savorol thousand or more. 3 ran. manna: Okay. No further questions. tour.- 4 Honor. - i 3 MR. VDTTERO: Thank you very much. I THE COHRT: Very well. no will stand in recess 1 until two o'clock. I (The luncheon recess who-hold(The defendant wasgpranant.) 1a (The Court and the jury 1: I . Hora Egosant.at 2:091a.gl?3133 W. CAKES fzuornl 17 - DIRECT EXAMINATION Sir, could you tell the jury your name, please and 21 how you're employed? 2: A. Yes. My name in Wayne W. Dukes. Last name is a: opollod o?n?x?E~s. And I am a supervisory special agent at COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTIOH PHILBIN ASSOCIATES . .s. "mu" van-c.th ?aw?mw voum: II 333 32!, Federal Bureau of Intestigation. a. How long have you worked for the A. Just about 14 years. Q. What sort of duties have you performed tor the FBI in those 14 years? A. In the first three years I was assigned to the I field of criminal investigators working general criminal matters. About 10 years ago I was assigned to the laboratory at headquarters and from that time on I have been assigned to hairs and fibers unit_where I an an examiner in that unit. I have a Bachelor of Science of biology in Boston College where I was a pre~medical major. Q. When you were transferred to the laboratory were you required to do any specialized training for that purpose? A. Yes. Before I was allowed to work cases one year training period. This consisted of formal training at Quantico, Virginia academy under the supervision of experienced agents. Read the available literature and did numerous practicing examinations, comparison of hairs and identification of hairs. Ultimately I was certified by the director Q. What was your certification? 33 My certificate read forensic microscoPics, just a ?1 .- a - . rm.- PHILBIN ASSOCIATES 1.2. .- --.- VOLUME 11: 335 1 scientist who uses the microscope to examine evidence. My 3_ 1 area of expertise is hairs and textile fibers. 3 . Q. . How long have you examined hairs and textile 4 fibers? 5 -. A. Ten years. a 0. During that time could you give us a number of 7 examinations you conducted? a A. I think on the average I work anywhere from three 9 to four hundred, possibly five hundred times a year times 10. la Somewhere in the vicinity of three thousand to five thousand 1: cases. of these cases are either homicide or alleged I I, sexual assaults . ,3 Q. What value is the study of hair and fibers in a 1? criminal investigation? 15 . A. The hairs on our head and or parts of our body are I. constantly being shed naturally and can be forcibly removad in [7 struggle, can be depoeited on another person's body or 13 clothing in a Crime scene or in a vehicle or whatnot. By I, looking at these hairs, these questioned hairs, that might be 39 located in debris, in comparing that with known hair standards 2 from either a victim or we can include or exclude 22 individuals that the source of these hairs that might be on 3' 23 another person or at a crime scene. I COHPUTERIZED TRAHBCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES -. 1 [r vnw-uv? . Ir?uwWhat is the process you {allow when you receive items of evidence for analysis in the hairs and fibers unit of tho a. Typically of allened sexual assault-or any contact type crimes'we will receive the clothing items of both the victim and the suspect and the question will be are there any hairs like the victim on the items from the suspect and vise versa. Or if we have a particular crime scene it might be probative to determine whose hairs are at the crime scene '0 establish associations or like these items will be clippings and.the?debrisuthat comes off these items might contain hairs and textile fibers. The hairs are later picked out of the debris mounted on glass slides. Examined by myself I will determine the race and body area of the hair and'whether it is suitable for comparison. If it is a hair for comparison I will mount known hair from a victim and then compare the question hair to the known hair standard. 0. Now, are there times when you receive evidence to determine whether hairs or fibers that are suitable for analysis are present? . A. certainly. That is the vast majority of the cases. That shall he the tirat thing I would do is determine whether CDHPUJERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES . I - .o-u-u-nv-unb-Af r-me are hairs, in fact, there and whether they are e: value tcem a crime acene and to package these items separately. culpariaen purposes. 0- It that step is successful there are times when you 1 nor obtain some known samples for comparison? A. Yes. Certainly. 1 0- New, yen indicated that when you a'ena they're scraped. Could you describe fpr'ue the ;;eoratory follow? A. Yes. Typically we instruct the field or local apiice agencies to collect items from the victim and suspect fuel these items and package them separately. Once they are received in your unit. the hairs and fibers unit, the items iet's say ?rom.the victim are opened and scraped in-one gtrticnlar room. And in this room we have a table and a rack ever the table with Clips. The item of clothing. whether it he a sheet or a blouse or bra or whatnot is.scraped with a kitchen spatula. Debris is allowed to fall on a table on which has 5933 Placed brown wrapping paper. This debris is then ceilected in and placed in a pill box which is sealed. The pill be: is initialed with my initials HWO, the labbratory archer and the 0 number which just means queationed item? PHILBIN a ASSOCIATES .- An.- a .. . nuiber that corresponds to the garment or the item that one scraped. So it we are calling, let's see, a sheet in iron the crime scene. 03. we label the sheet 03. Scraps the debris oil, let it tell onto the paperl collect that into a pill box. put as on the 9111 box, seal the 9111 box and then later the heirs are taken out of the pill box and mounted on a glass microscope slide which is permanently sealed and labeled like the 9111 box has been labeled. Q. How, could you describe that step a little more? no you take all the hairs out and mount them or do you look_throngh what's in this pill box to select items? A. well. it depends on particular items; If it's, let's say a blanket that might have hundreds and hundreds of hairs on it what we would do. we wonld mount what we call an R8 or representative sample of those heirs and we wonld look at a representative sample of these. If there are little heir fragments or limb heirs or fringe heirs or body heirs in there typically I won't have those mounted on glass microscopes because it's my policy and the general nature of the FBI laboratory. They're used for comparison purpose. Heed heirs and pubic heirs end the reason is one person's heed heirs tend COMPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES - ,H?u?wt?u o'awithin a sane racial group. to differ greatly from other person's; Likewise pubicwhuirs cenfditfer from one person to another. Limb heirs and facial heirs tend not to differ as much from one person to another So I don't use those for comparison purpose. I will primarily limit myself to relatively full length heed heirs and pubic hairs because, as I inuiceted, those tend to differ the most from one person to another. Q. Focusing on the examination of hair, now, as opposed to fibers when you're conducting this kind of examination what is it you're looking for in the hair? A. I'm looking at all of the microscopic characteristics that go to make that hair somewhat unique. would he just like if you asked me to look at an individuel'e face. What would I look at? I would look at his eyes, his ears, his nose, the mouth, the hair, the check structure, the bone structure, etc. There are a number of microscopic characteristics in a person's hairs that I can see under a microscope when I mount the hair in a mounting medium that allows me to look outside. If you look around the courtroom yourself and just look at a person's head hairs you can see tremendous differences on the color. the length and the texture. What I can see, beyond the It. COHPUTERIZED PHILBIH a ASSOCIATES ?Di-v? Mk low a 3'35 1 national. in the internal microscopic characteristics that can a vary greatly from one person to another. - .- 3 0. With the Court's permission can you diagram what 1 . you see under a microscope when you're examining a hair I 5 nuitoble for comparison? a A. Certainly. -. 1 ma mmss: Your Honor, it I may approach? a THE COURT: Yes. 9 THE WITNESS: Would it be permissible to us'e this area of the board. her-e1+ (Indicating) 11 9. (By Mr. Vottero) Yes, please. 12 A. We take just an average head hair, not meant to 13 represent anything in this particular case, but just a generic head hair with a bulbous shaped root and long shaft and. 15 typical cut tip we will see on a head hair, not a virgin head hair, but one that's been cut. r, And we the a portion of the shaft' and let's magnify that a maple of hundred times. You begin to see something that i 19 has these type of characteristics. 20 ?lmy. Now, if you think of this hair as a third 21 dimensional object we are looking inside of this hair shaft now- And think of this as a pencil. Running down the center 23 of the pencil is a core of lead or graphite. Running down the WRIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES :L'Og?h??twin 9 I 1? 18 19 1'h 1'1center of this hair 13 this core of cells called the medulla and that runs right down the middle of the hair. (Indicating) The coin portion at the pencil, the wooden portion is this area here, the cortex. And then on the outside of the pencil -- think of it like a yellow wooden pencil- You have a layer of point. we have the cuticle layer that covers the_ outside of the hair. It's here that we have scales that overlap like shingles on a roof or scales on a fish. now, going back to one of these, the three main anatomical groupings, we have the cuticle, the.medu11a, and the cortex. In this cortex we would typically see, find pigment granules and it's these pigment granules that give hair its color. If you have white hair or gray hair You lack the pigment granules, hence you lack color. We might also expect to 11nd large dark occlusions celled ovoid bodies and sometimes particularly down near the end, root and, down near the end of the root little air filled sacks culled cortical fusi. So those are essentially-the teatuues end the characteristics I can see under a microscope that you can see. ?nd it?s like -- I like to use the analogy of a person's face. I testified previously when you look at a Parson's face you look at their eyes, their ears and mouth.emae?eaud COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES I r' r1. '1an VOLUHBVII 3?2 a?oat people have those characteristics, but when you walk into; a room that's crowd?d you can spot and recognize cocoons you know oven though everyone has two eyes, two ears and a nose and mouth because you know that person. differences. You can detect subtle You can-pick out oh, yeah, that's that person i that I'm-pointing out. An exporienced hair examiner can pick out in these characteristics because theca characteristics require MR. FERRARA: (Interposing) Your Honor, at this point I'm going to object. strike the last portion of that answer. approach the bench and be heard. I'm going to move to I wish to? (The following discussion MR. FERRARA: the side bar.) It's quite clear by that analogy that this expert is, in essence, saying that he can identify an individual by hair comparison. essentially says. his analogy says that he can -- analogy The analogy that someone can look at a person and identify them by their features and he is now saying that he can look at a hair and. you know, use those characteristics, make an identification and that's my basis for my motion to CBHPUTERIZBD TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES 19 11 alWvg: human-.vonuxn 11 strike. HR. VDTTERO: well, this in background information. He is using an illustration of the-process that he uses. I think if he is asked he will acknowledge there are such things and hair: that he can't distinguish. an. rsnaana: I understand. MR. I think that will become quite clear. COURT: I am going to allow this as background as a way to explain what he does. You can have full opportunity on cross?examination on any of those points. HR. FERRARA: Thank you, Thur Honor. 4 (End of the side bar discussion.) D. (By Mr. Vottero) sir, you wore indicating,that an experienced hair examiner would look at each of these various parts of the hair that we might look at various parts of the face. Can I ask you, air, what is it about the hairs that you Pull out from a questioned item that make them suitable for coupumznizzn TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES 4.113% :mm- comparison or not auitahle tor comparison? a. he I indicated, my policy, I will only attempt to associate questioned head hairs or question pubic areas with known pubic or head hair samples because those tend to differ the most from one person to another. And I would not attempt, under normal circumstances, to work with a very small fragment like a email head hair fragment because the characteristics that I am talking about can change from the root to the tip. 50 I want to be conservative. I-want to have relatively a full length hair to compare so I can see if there is any change along the shaft of the hair.. Q. . Now, you've indicated that this area mioht represent the middle of the hair. Are there specific things that you're looking for when you are examining the root of the hair or the end of the hair? I i Sometimee, yeah. Typically I will only look at the roots of the hair to determine how it was removed, whether it was forcibly removed, has adhering to it or perhaps blood or whether it's a bulbous root representing a hair that fell out naturally'when it was ready to he aloughed off from the body. I will look at the tips of the hair, whether they are razor out or maybe it's a virgin hair or maybe it was split CBHPUTERIZED TKAHSCRIPTIOH PHILEIH ASSOCIAEES - .I- I . -l 953votes: II ?because it.wes artificially treated. These characteristics would be found somewhere along the shaft of the hair. 1 that you're looking for when you're making a hair comparison? Q. Is this a complete diagram now of the various items {Indicatingr? A. Essentially, yes. 0. You could have a seat now then if you would. What are you able to determine without using a microscope just upon visual examination of the hair? A. I really don't look at heir without a microscope. I would at least use a very low power stereo microscope to determine, perhaps. the race or the body area or the length to; arrive at or determination whether it was suitable for oomparison or not. Q. And other than whether it was head hair or arm hair or fragments are there eny other factors about an individual strand of hair that would make it unsuitable for comparison? A. Essentially the shortness of the heir, if it was a smell fragment or whether it was from a body hair like the hand or the one or the leg, something like that. Q. -wa. turning to each of the individual parts of the hair what kind of differences do you expect to see when you're examining what you described, it you will, the yellow part of COMPUTBRIZBD TRANSCRIPTIOH PHILBIH ASSOCIATES. .- - .- lama-Muir -.-.. gun?u - Wm?wmm nu: . vows: II 313' the pencil. the scales on the outside of the hair? I ha I attempted to indicate, these characteristics, 2 A. 3 are relatively consistent within a person's own hair sample. 4 In other words, if I were to take 25 hairs from my head 1 a. I ?bald expect to get a very small range of characteristics 3 within these-hairs. These hair: would fall and essentially if 7 I had.a lot of scale damage I would expect that to be a relatitely consistent. ?9 It I had coaree'pigmentation I would expect that to?te? 1a relatively consistent. If I had a thick cuticle that would be 11 Ia trait that would be significant for associated purposes, but ?lp. 12 these characteriatica can vary greatly from one person to another and that's what-allows me to compare question hairs 13 1? with known hair samples.- 15V Some scales may look as they-do in my diagram. Some 1, person's details may be longer or flatter. ?The cuticle layer, 17 Particularly in a person of the Hongoloid and Oriental and 13 American Indian is very thick and well defined. Persons of . 19 Hegroid race have characteristics of a very thin cuticle. The 30 pigment distribution and?aize of granules can vary greatly. 21 some people have no observable ovoid body. Some persons have ,2 a lot of ovoid bodiea. Sometimes you wont see the medulla at 33 all. It's invisible to the under the microscope if of COMPUTERIZED TRAHSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES m. m: ?as m. I .l "peoplo have 3 lot, same people don't. So again, these e?alPlat "hat You described, the ovoid bodies. I understand freq-enter? discontinuance. same with the cortical fusi. Sons characteristics can vary greatly from one person to another. 0- How about the characteristics let's take. for that some hairs may have a lot, some heirs may have few ovoid bodies themselves. hitters from hair to hair or are they always the same that's an ovoid body, and they always look the-same? If I was to look at 25 heirs from my head hair I A. characteristically my hairs have a lot of ovoid bodies. would expect to See a lot of avoids. II could look at 25 hairs from your head and tied none for no reason. You just don't look to heue-e lot of ovoid bodies in your hair sample.- They can very greatly in one person to another. Q. Is there a'specific number of traits that you examine, like a checklist when you look at heads of hair? A. Not a number per say because the number Can vary depending on how you went to caunt the characteristics. we can talk about the cut, the thickness of it, the clarity of it. whether it's white or clear or cloudy or yellow, whether it had Pigment granules in it, how well it?s defined. I don't like to use a specific number when I do a comparison, a COMPUTERIZED TRAHBCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES . . veww. - meme- VOEUHE II 343 .. with an optical bridge that allons me to look at the question hair versus a known hair sample. I will compare all of those characteristics side by side using what's called a comparison.microscope. And that's nothing more than two microscopes that are pushed together ?question hair and the known hair side by aide. And I compared every single one or those characteristics to the root of the hair to the tip of the hair. 0. .Now, when you're making that comparison of the question hair to a known hair what do you have to see to say they're consistent with each other? 3. Let's take the reverse of that. If I see any differences, in other words, if one hair, the question hair has a thick cuticle. but my known hairs don't have a thick cuticle I will conclude that the question hair did not come toms that person represented by the known hair sample. If the Scales are different, if the pigmentation is di?ferent, it the absence of cortical fuel or ovoid bodies is different or if the medullation is different I will eliminate that hair as probably having originated from that, the known hair sample. If the question hair is microscopically indistinguishable, I can't see differences, I will conclude CDHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES . - VOLUME II 3?9_ the question hair is consistent with Coming from the 2 individual represented by the known hair sample. '3 Q. Can you say like in the case of fingerprints, the 4 Question heir came from that person? a A. no. The only instance with ehich I could any with one hundred percent certainty a question hair, let's say round on this stand, come from my head would be if I pulled that hair and 9 pulled it from my head and placed it there. That's the only time I could any that with one hundred percent certainty. 11 Hanover, I will testify if the hair matches, in my opinion, 1, that heir is consistent with coming from me or stated another 13 a way it either came from me or another individual of my same- 1. race whose hair exhibits all of the some microscopic 1, characteristics or in the.same way from the root of the hair 1. and the tips. And it's my experience in 10 years it's 17 extremely rare I will have known heir samples from two ,3 different people I can't tell apart. ,9 Q. I take it has happened? 20 A. It has happened, an extrenely rare number of 2, occasions. Generally, I an able to tell a person's hair apart 2: Wh?nr in my opinion, which I quote, match a hair or make a 23 heir association although it's not positive like a COIIPUTERIZED TRARSCRIPTION PHILBIN a ?assocIM-zs .. . It is basis or strong association. fingerprint. Q. Can-you say whether you find a hair consistent with -a somebody somewhere out there in the world there is somebody I with that -ame with a hair that is microscopically the a same? a A. You would have to identify that individual and.you 1 i would have to obtain a known hair sample from him or her. 3 Allow me to compare it with that qneetion hair. 9 In other words, if I match a hair from here from the 10 stand here. with my'known hair.etandard I can it's . 1: consistent with being my hair. If you're asking'me could it *iap ., match someone else I can?t eliminate that possibility. I 'wouid have to have that person's hairs and I would have to. I: ,4 make a comparison and those person's hair: would also have to 15 match. I. Q. In every respect? 11 A. In every respect. ,3 Q. How, did you receive some evidence from the ,9 Springfield Police Department as concerns the case on trial ,0 regarding George Parrot? 2? a. Yes; I did. a, 9. I?d like to ahow you first what's been marked aa as Exhibit no. 17 and on well what's been marked as Exhibit for COHPUTBRIBED PHILBIN i .idantitication and ask if you recognize eithor or both or Indicating those objects. Both of those items have my initial: awn an A, You. wall as designation 92 roterring to the hrowo paper and 93 rufarriog to the sheet. And that just means question item nunhur two and question item number three that I examined. 0. And are these the items you examined in connection with this case? A. You. MR. VDTTERO: may formally Exhibit for identification 515919 to marked as no exhibit at this time? MR. FERRARA: 'No objection, Your Honor; THE CLERK: Number 18, Your Honor? THE COURT: Yea. (Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 18 Has og?ar?d'and marked.) 0- (BY Mr. Vottero) Now, what did you do with this in this case? A. In this particular case the sheet was examined with using the proctduro that I previously testified to. The dobril that came oi! at that shoot, as well an a brown piece catamaran mscuwmn PHILBIH a ASSOCIATES m. a he?heair!? . . Jae-minpaper that was received with the sheet was collected with placed in a pill box. Hairs were later taken out ot the pill box, mounted on_a glass microscope slide, and examined by myself. Q. Did you/find any hairs as a result of that procedure that were suitable for comparieon? Yea, I did. 0. How many hairs did you find auitable for comparison? 3. One. a. You have any ideas how many you obtained all: together? . A. Of the hairs I examined there were several, as I recall, animal hairs. one white hair which was devoid of many. characteristics. ?erhaps some body hair and one Caucasian head hair that was brown in color. I determined, in my opinion, the only hair that was suitable for significant comparison purposes with known samples or known standards was the one brown head hair. 9- How, did you also perceive known samples-of the hair of George Parrot and the hair of an individual named Mary Prekep? A. Ten, I did- CQHPUTERIZED TRAHBCRIPTIOH PHILBII i ASSOCIATES nutrient-1' new,.firet of all, what did you do with the known sample of George Ferret?s hair and the questioned hair? In.' Hell, the known hair sample for Hr. Parrot was mounted on a glass microscope slide. At least a number of those hairs were mounted on a microscope slide and a side by side comparison of the known heirs of Hr. Ferret's was examined against the questioned hair removed from the sheet and the brown paper that was accompanying the sheet. And a side by side comparison was conducted, utilizing the comparison microscope which allowed no to look at all those internal characteristics side by side at the same time. q. What was the result of your comparieon of George Ferret's hair and the hair you found on the sheet? A. The hair found on the sheet exhibits all the same microscopic hair arranged in the same way as the characteristics present in the known hair from Mr. Perrot. I conclude that question hair was consistent with coming from Mr. Perrot. Q. Did you also compare the questioned hair with the known hair of Mary Prekop? A. Yes, I did. Q. What was the result of that examination? A. It was dissimilar. And in my opinion it did not COMPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES glam .?m'u'mmnw?? A Hun-3?24 ?uh-55If? .1. huh?, Wtbaii?f?olu?la Prokop. a. How, in the course of your work with the can you tell so whether you have boon qualified as an axport in this area in courts in this country? A. Yss, I did have. a. Roughly haw'many times? A. In excoss_o? 150. Q. And I may have asked you this before, but again. roughly, how many hair examinations have you done? A. Literally it would be ?ery hard to figure out. Many oxaminatlons I've conducted. 1 have conducted thousands of examinations in thousands of cases. Many of those cases involved literally hundreds of thousands of hair comparisons or examinations so it would be a very largo number. I would not be able to guess what that number would be. 0. Do you, from time to time, testify on behalf of the, a defendant as well? ?v A. Yes, I have, on several occasions. 0. One last question about the process at taking somebody's hair as that known how was that procedure done? A. Ideally we like to have what is a representatlvo hair sample. 'The way I would personally do that is I would take at least five hairs from the side, the back, the top, and museums-Ion PHILBIH a assocmms the front. And I "would like to have these heirs full length. either plucked or cut as close to the scalp as possible so we can see how the characteristics eight range from this root end or the tip of the hair. The reason I asked for the representative sample because the heirs, let's any on my sideburn area are obviously going to look a little bit different than the hairs on my head. These are starting to grey. They are going to ioek a little bit different. (Indicating) a. If I can take that example right there, if you have heirs to compare from one side of your head end one from the top at your head would those differences, would you be able to. ssy-they-eere consistent with each other? A. I would have to look yith the micrescope. I would associate those heirs with the same person. 0. We can have differences of the hair throughout yeur head? A. {Witness indicating.) MR. VOTIERO: The that's all the questions I have. Thank yen, Your Honor. CDHPUTERIEED TRAHBGRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES u. pm?, I '9 :u-w-q . - . I I gsvm.?.ld BY HR. FERRARA Q. Hr. Cakes, human hair grows about one half inch a Month? A. That's correct. Q. Both on the face and on the head? A. I haven't read any studies about facial hair. The literature suggests head hairs on the average person grows haven't read any such study to about half an inch a month. make the same statement of facial hair. Q. You have read studies that indicate there is no- ditference in growth rate? I can't site one off A. No. I have no such studies. hand, no. Q. Have you ever worked for any agency or company other than the Federal Bureau of Investigation doing hair study? A. No. All of my work with hairs has been with the FBI laboratory. 9- And all of your involvement with forensic began after you ceased to be a field operative for the in that COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES had some torenaic experience in training with law ?enforcement agencies prior to the FBI. 0- In this particular instance you indicated that out brown Caucasian head hair was found that you associated with the shoot that had been submitted; is that correct? A. It actually came from the scrapings, what I designated was Q3, which see a sheet and I believe it was 04-a piece of brown paper. Q. In other words the one hair that you found was in the brown paper which had contained the sheet? A. no. I can't make that distinction. It was either on the sheet or on the brown paper sheet in a sealed brown paper bag which were two items together. One was a sheet which I designated was 93 and one was a piece-of brown paper that was like the sheet was wrapped ini So because those items were received together, sealed in another container, they were scraped together because I would not be able to testify with one hundred percent certainty whether the head hairs were originally on the sheet or the paper. So they are collected together, scraped together. and the debris is from those two items. 0- So you can't say that hair was either on that sheet than? COHPUTBRIZED TRAHSCRIPTIOH PHILBIH i ASSOCIATES 'h'mh?h .- paper that was on the sheet. 0. the Springfield police Department sent those hair: to you? A. no. I don't recall the name. the Springfield police and usually it in a transmittal letter that accompanies the evidence. It's been a while. Q. hair that you found on the brown paper? A. I don't recall. 0. no you have any what the length of the hair was that you found in the brown pupor? A. . No. Q- tho hair was in the brown paper? I could only tell you it was a brown Caucasian head hair that was suitable for comparison purposes so therefore, it was not like a quarter of an inch fragment. hair with natural roots with.relativoly full length and had a cut tip and it was continuous with the long and known hair -l?mP1o from Mr. Parrot. I can't tell you whether it was one It was oithor on the shoot on the brown pioco of Do you know who sent you those head hairs, who from Tha name escapes me right now. Can you tell me this, what was the length of the notes with you that would indicate Do you.hava any recollection of what the length of no. It coma tron It was a head COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN FSSOCILEES luv 'I-?uq . . *5 . - v.35 "pp-half inch, three and a halt inches. 0. A. Nb. Q. microscopic comparison? 1. slides 0+ (Interposing) I am not. me, which I am trying to esteblieh. Ion have no recollection at that? ?bet is the width of the slides you one for doing It youfre attempting to discern the width of the What I want you to help Sure; Cauld you repeat the question? A. Q. What is the width of the slides? A. Approximately half an inch. Q. It is fair to say you would here to cut the hair in any event? I A. No. b. would it be fair to any you have hair greater than one half inch you would have to cut the hair? A. No. Q. You mount the hair on the slide? A. In the figure eight and it is possible to mount an 18 inch hair on one slide. Q. did you, air? You did testify you microscopically measure heirs, COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION 9111mm ASSOCIATES .wuu cum-w n, . A. Re. I did not testify to that. a. Do you recall being asked whether or not yo -- strike that. Can you tell no the length of those, of any of the heirs that you received iron the Springfield Police Department that purported to be George Perrot'e hair? Ar I have no recollection of exactly how long those hairs were. Now, if you have the gloss microscope slide that oontaine* those heirs I can look at those and see if there is, how many I can make a visual estimatemounted on the slide or whether but I don't recall now how long tell.you that the question hair the known hairs from Hr. Parrot- Q. was? a. Can you tell ue_what the diameter the question heir no. Other than that it was the some, in consistence with Mr. Perrot'e known heir sample. Q. A. you do the aide by side comparison. You can't tell us the diameter of either hair woe? It's really irrelevant what the diameter is when some it doesn't matter whether they are point 0 ohe millimeters or point one 15 millimeters as long as they are COHPUTERISED TRANBCRIPTIOH they were. Again. I can only was consistent in length with no long as they are the PHILBIN ASSOCIATES 22-. 23 ?Wu-Tw- the race. testimony. answer to your question the.diameter or the particulars of the length and Q. A. Q- individual 3. Q. Question hair that you found on that paper and you took this one hair that you received, the one hair within the sample of George Parrot'a hair that you felt waa'a match, that if you put those two hairs side by aide they'd be identical. ?ur. Ferret's hair; I thought, was a match. name microscopic haire as hair present in the known hair standard and was consistent with coming from Mr. Perrot. hair, the question hair, was consistent with the diameter, okay; you have got a number of hairs that were provided that were supposed to be Mr. Perrot'e, correct? the head may have differences. Are you telling no, air, that if you took the I don't think I-teotified there was one hair. That was not my My toatimony=was the questiOn hair exhibited the In particulars in the hairs of the known hair sample. T911 me something, when you're examining hairs, Correct. You'd agree with no that hairs from the same can look different under a microscope? Hairs from the same person from different areas of And when you received George Parrot'a hair sample COHPUTERIIED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES away-?mama. mum-v}; . . In 1-: . .mrh?u?n nag?sz u. I .0 u? - yawn: m" uould.yon degree that all 0! the hairs that you received did not look alike? 5. They weren't identical, that'a correct. There in a variation amongst a person's hairs. They weren't identical which they didn't look like- .Q. microscopically? A. Ion're saying two different things. Hot identical and look alike are two different things. Identical, that every single pigment granules was in exactly the same place looking alike in different than not being identical. Q. How many haire did you roceive to be from George Parrot? n. A_eigni?icant number of hairs that would constitute, in my opinion, an adequate known hair sample. I can't tell you whether that point in time. It'e been a number of years. Q. are you telling me you don't know how many hairs? A. I can't give you an exact number; that's correct. 0. And you have a recollection of approximately how many hair: it was? A. My recollection in there were at least two microscope alidea made and again, if you have the microscope and would care to show them to me I can caunt the hairs, but I CORPUTIRIEBD TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH ASSOCIATES . . . VOLUKI II 3.3 much as a dozen victims and make'very general notes so I don't don't recall from a number of years back exactly how aany It was my opinion they were valid hair: Hal there at the time. there to conatitute an adequate known sample to make a nonrjudgnent an to whether or not the question hair-nae consistent with that coming ?rom.Hr. Parrot. _l 9. Let me oak you, thib, when you receive a sample of hair that's supposed to be from an individual can you begin to examine the hair; do you keep records of what-you 369?. A. At the time that I'm doing my examination I make very brief notes of the general appearance of the hair. In some cases I receive there may be known hair samples from as have to keep putting the known heir sample back on so I have a rough idea of what those hairs look like. 0. Do you take a measurement of the length of the hair that you receive? 3. If it's an unusual length, if it's an 18 inch head hair so I would note that. Yes. If it's two and a half or three inches I am not going to note that. That's not really significant if the hairs have been two and a half some might be three and a half. It'a not a big variation. 0. You would note it there were signiticant difference: amongst the hairs within the sample, wouldn't you? COHPUTERIZED i ASSOCIATES ?Wet-4.. .. .. w. ?as?JP; - Wmnwu- .. nw-al WW1 v. .auv *the dianntor of the hair to document that they not. similar in.? wouldn't you, air? 1. hair: match. 0. A. Q. hair: to document that the diameters of the hairs were similar? A. 0. animal or human; is that correct? A. .0. hair; in that fair to say? A. entirely correct. No. On hair tron microscopic examination? A. D. I might. I light. And you could make some notes or 80lit1ll Isaac:- Th1! in my opinion as to whatnot or not no. I Can you answer that question yea or no? .Reatate the question, please. would you, in fact, make measurements of the two No. When you examine a hair you can tell whether it's Yen . You can't determine the sex of the person from the Not froc a microscopic examination. That's not ?re you telling us you can determine the sex of the Under certain circumstancoa, you. What would tho-e circumntanco: be, you? PHILBIH i ASSOCIATES . v. --. "Inn.- t?Jod-a-nln55m' ?huh - i- 1a a test? A. It the hair was forcibly removed we can do -- have a root sheath attached to it we can. a. Can -- wait. I an going to ask you again. Can you tell the sex of a person-fro: a hair based on a microscopic examination of the hair? A. That is what I was attempting to answer. Q. Complete your answer. Thank you. If you-stain the hair, the root sheath tiesue'and count the and Barr bodies you can determine whether the hair was male or female. 0. Was that done in this case. air? A. It was not able to be done in this case. 0. Why was it not able to be done? A. Because the hair was not forcibly removed and didn't have such root sheath tissue attached to it to allow the staining procedure to be effective. 0. Which hair was not forcibly removed? A. The question hair on the sheath. 0. So, in other words, you need some follicular tissue, some tissue from the scalp from the donor to that A- fee. So that determination is not actually made from a TRANSCRIPTION i ASSOCIATES Te raw'Ww?mwmm I h? mu?- part of the hair itself, but rather from sou tissue from the scalp? A.- Tachnically, correct. ?ow. I am going to ask ynu tron the hair root. O. tip: can you. by microscopic examination make a deter-inntion of the sex of the patron absent some tissue from tug scalp? A. I can't, no. a. ?bula it be fair to any you canft determine the age of a person from a hair with the exception of infant's hair? A. ?bt entirely, no. G. . Well, when you say hunt entirely" are you saying you can determine tram the hair a person is perhaps elderly because they are elderly and the absence of pigmentation in the hair? A. Yes. Q. You can tell when a hair fell out or wag pulled, can't you, sir, generally speaking from exa?ining -- A. (Interposing) Generally speaking, yes. Q. Hair which has fallen out because of natural causes or disease will have a bulb Zormation at the and?'- A. TYpically, yeah 0. Typically a clean appearing bulb? A. Yan. COHPUTERIZBD TRAHBCRIPTION PHILBIN I ASSOCIATES Huh 1 . - "ad-sewn-thst's been pulled out would look like at the root end? 'Hlth none of the follicular tissue of scalp tlsluo talked about? A. (Witness 0, And It will have sort of concavity of the root on the bulb and? nap-N. -1 A. Concovlty? I wouldn't ?4 0- (Interposlng) An inword indentation oh the bulb at the root end? A. That?s not my experience, no. 0- And would you for the jury what a hair A. It depends on whether the hair was pulled out during it's active growth state or not. Would you like me to'elaborate? 0. Its. please. A. There ls three stages of hair growth and they .tegln, categorically 1n the telogen stage the hair is ready to be sloughed off naturally and llterature suggests about a hundred heed hair: a day are shed. naturally, it this hair, in this stage, just before it's ready to be shed naturally got pulled it would not give a microscopic appearance that would indicate to me it.wos forcibly removed because the root would be pulled and no root CDHPUTIRIIED TRARBCRIPTIOH PHILBIH i ASSOCIATES sheath tissue attached to it. So in that particular cola could have a hair that was forcibly recoved, it wouldn't horn given microscopic appearance of it. If you have a hair'that is in the anagan stage or active growing stage and you forcibly remove it you would-expect to pull some scalp tissue or some tiaace with.it. The question here, do you havo any notes on to o. observations you made about the root of that hair? A, Yes. . I, Q. But you don't have them with you? I don't have them.with -- onion. I.hovo than in my. briefcase. Can you testify, from your recollection, as to what you observed about the root of that hair, the question hair? A. YES. 0. Tell us what you ooaarvad. A. It was a natural root. 0. now, you're not telling this jury you can identify someone from a hair, are you, air? A I unl? Q. In fact, when you prepared a report in this cos you recall you prepared a report in this case? RI I d0- COHPUTERIEED TRAHSCRIPTIOH PHILBIH i ASSOCIATES ?mt We. "b1.a?pa-o wow-sump. Q. witness, Your Honor? Q. thin report. notations and highlights the be the report that you prepared in this case? And your signature HR. FERRARA: First of all may I approach the THE COURI: Yes. (By Mr. Ferraro) Mr. Dukes, I want to show you It is dated March 13L.F 1986. Aside from I have made, does this appear to It appears to be the copy of the pro?report I A. prepared. -vQ. A copy, yes, air, and that was on March 13, 1986? A. Yes. Yo?i?sighature does not appear on that report; is that correct? 59 That's correct. 0. But you know you d?d, in fact. do the examinations ln this instance? I A. Yes. Q. Are your initials somewhere on that report? A. My symbols were on the report. 0. Where would I find those, air? A. There 15 an eight digit laboratory number, the letters 8 space WINK are my laboratory symbols. COHPUTERIZED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN 8 ASSOCIATEB u. .a m. llall individuals who prepare report! have loll kind at symbol they put on the report to identify thdy prapured It? A. All individnaia in the FBI, yea. Q. ?bula you?knaw what Mr. Eubanka_symbols are? A. Yes. i What art they air? A. WM. 0; And his sy?bol or initial& also appears on this report; is that corre?t? I don't know that. I wuuld have to look at it A. again. Yes. They appear following my gimbals. Q. And you'd agree that well, in fact, in this report that gnu prepared there is a repqrt sent to the Springfield Police Department; is that correct? Yea. A. You state that hair comparisons do not constitute a 0- basis for absolute personal identification? A. was. 0. And that's what you testified? A. Yes. Q- And what ydu are saying gnu can't identity sandbody COHPUTERIIED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIAEIB ?14.3: - . I 1.3tho basis of hair? You cannot positively identify someone. In.othor A. words I can't say with one hundred percent certainty that question hair positively came from Mt. Parrot to tho exclusion of any other person in the world possibly exists that someone else may Have the same characteristics. 0. You're not telling this jury that eferone'a hair is microscopically distinguished, are you? A. Ha, I'm not. Q. You know'that's not true? A. That's right. d. What you're saying is that this hair that was yoor questioned sample was sufficiently similar to one or some of the heirs you roceived from Mr. Parrot so that you could not excuse Hr. Parrot as having been the_30urce of that hair, correct? .A. That's your characterization of my results, that?s not how'I state my results. a. Is that an accurate statement, though, of the significance of the hair comparison? A. NO. Q. You're not telling us a hair is not like a fingerprint? TRAHBCRIPTIOH PHILBIH ASSOCIATES - .u n.l- fray?anan .. A ,1 . . a Hrnor-ended up on the district attorney's clothes. It?s an example I've testified that it's not. A. no. 9. What's secondary traneter with respect to hairs? A. Secondary transfer would be if the defense counsel and myself came into contact with myself and hia hairs became deposited on my jacket and I was later to come in contact with the assistant district attorney and your hairs were then to transfer fromimy jacket to-the district attorney.' Hairs, in fact, they never had contact with each other, but his hairs of secondary transfer. With a piece of fabric as large an that shoot isn't fact{. a. it unusual to find juet one heed hair it someone had, in come in contact with that sheet? a. No, not in particular. 0. would you agree with me that someone -- well, first of all when did you receive that eheet? A. I It was in December of 1985. Q. And do you have a record of the date? A. It would be on the laboratory report.? 0. I show you this, air, would there be something on here that would indicate when you received evidence in that report? (Indicating) A. The report or the evidence. COHPUTSRIIED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIN ASSOCIATES o' -4. .um? . . 4i . a. I'm sorry. You're right. Is there something on 1. that when you reached that evidence? a Yes. December 26, 1985. i Q- And you} know when you received George Ferret's head 5 hairbelieve 1 received it sometiae after that. I 1 don't recall the exact date. Again, I could give you that 3 information from that laboratory report. 9 Q. If a number of persons had been in contact with ur.~ Io Parrot on Deceober 7, 1995, at the police station might some 1 11 of those individual'a gotten his hair on their attire, their I, garments? h. Ybu're asking me a hypothetical question. I wasn't 1? there on December 7. I have no idea what transpired there. i 15 i Q. I know that. But you have already testified that I. when two people come in contact it's the Locard Principle: ,7 isn't it, air; 1: 3- Yes. 19 Q- And you already testified that when two people come ,0 in contact there might be an exchange of hair, isn't that 31 C?rr?ct. didn't you just testify to that a short time ago? 2: A. Yes, in theory. Now, you're asking me a specific 2, date and specific time and asking me i! something happened. I CDHPUTIRIZED .PHILBIH i ASSOCIATES knou no personal knowledge it something happened. a. I understand that. And that'e uny I caid.might. The hair that you found, the question hair didn't hear any indication that it was a hair that had been iorcibly pulled; in that correct? - A. A In my opinion, no, it did not. Q. And when you examined it, is it fair to say you can no indication that it won diseased? A. I don?t recall any indication it was diseased. Did you see any evidence thet it had been damaged in anyway, structure? A. Hot that I recall; Q. You can't detect that in a hair? A. In some instances, sure. now} when you examine a hair it requires some subjective judgment; isn't that correct? 3. That?s correct. In other words if I had 45 forensic experts or a number of forensic experts. perhaps two, examining a hair there might be disagreement as to whether there's a match between two hairs; isn't that correct? A. It one had a lesser amount or training it would certainly be a possibility, sure, because it dependn on how _o TRANBCRIPTION PHILBIK ABBOCIATBB nan-u Ill-l . ?ouch experience you have and someone with less experience or nyeelt right have a different opinion. 9.4 So you're familiar with studies where a number at experts have examined'large samples of hairo and there in ihcaneietency with respect to matches 01 thoee hairs. aren't you? A. no. You would have to site the specific study. d. Haen't therv been considerable -- strike that. Are you familiar with the studies of Barnett and Oggle (phonetic) probabilities in human hair comparison, 1992? A. Yes. Q. And in response to that study there was another article or response by an individual by Gandet} correct? A. Correct. Q. And there has been a series of disagreements as to the significance that can he placed on particular hair comparison; isn't that true? A. Yea I And my question to you was really simple. Would you agree that even amongst experts who examine hairs there is likely to be none difference of opinion as to whether there is a match between two given hairs? A- I don't know if I agree with your categorization, COHPUTBRIZED PHILBIH ASSOCIATEB - . nun-n.? n. "awe-v . den-?u -.- ..ohv-w 'l . ,7 Inquestion hair to any qualified experts they would disagree 4.911 likely to he disagreement. I don't think if you showed that that it matched the heirs of the defendant. That's my honest opinion. new. it you take any two experts, you take two attornoy?u you take two doctors, you're asking me does the poasibiity exist they might have different opinions. or course, that's, what makes the world go round, but if you have qualified experienced competent hair examiners that do this day in and day out and for years on end they are not going to differ, in my opinion. on the conclusion that I reached. I hope that clarifies it. Q, In other words if we can make analogies it's not a situation where when you say that these hairs were, in your opinion, microscopically so similar Hr. Perrot's couldn't be excluded. It?s not a situation where a lay person could simply see these two hairs in comparison on the slide and draw this conclusion? 3. Sir. I have been doing this for 10 years. I have been trained over a year to do this. I have done thousands and thousands of cases, I would not ask someone in the jury or some other lay person that I am skilled and trained with doing. Nb. I would not expect a lay person to make that CEHPUTERIEED TRAHBCRIPTIOH PHILBIN ASSOCIAEEB do. Thut'l comparison to come up with the conclusion 1013: a. I underatand that, air. A. It's not something where I could look through the micrOIcopa and Ice theta two hair: and any, Gees, these are very similar hairs. 'Iou would have to know what to look for. Q. I think you agree with ne'that they looked a lot alike when you could have the experience to determine the significance at that you probably wouldn't. So it gequlrea come training and some subjective judgment on your part? a. Certainly. Q. By'the way, we made reference to the Locard Principle. The glut of that principle in when two objects come into contact, persons may rub off on each other; isn't that essentially what it is? A. Essentially, you. 0. Generally speaking, when you're doing hair comparisons aren't you looking for more than just one question hair? A- Not necessarily. I mean sometimes I might receive a aki mask from a bank robbery that the bank robber threw into a duapltor and it may be only one question hair in there. The calm-13mm: mum a nascent? _?In fact that there in only one hair in there doesn't I can't do a aoaparilon with the known hair sample. a. And did you compare haira tron any other source with this unknown hair? A. You. a. _ware there haira among the aampla that was sent to you from George Parrot which did not match thin queation hair? A. when you any "not matched" okay, as I've testified previously on this requires an explanation. The haira on a peraon'a head can differentiate; I use the exanple on hair, on my sideburns are going to be different than the haira on the top at my head. I: the question hair foand at a crime scene or another peraon'a clothing comes from the top of my head I would not expect that to match with the aideburn hair that wan in ay_ known hair sample, but I would expect it to match those-hairs in the sample that were taken from the same general area. 0. And do you know how these hairs you don't know how these hairs were taken from George Ferret? A. No. I did not take the haira.? a. You don't know it they were taken from parta oi his head or one area of hia head? A. We knowledge. TRAHSCRIPTION PHILBIH ABEOCIATEB h? .ua-? .4 - a ?v $.31 ??hmtm {Jan mean in WI. .n4 0. So the qeeatien I asked you was, was there diaaililarity with the hairs in that sample different from oath other? - 1. Generally, the hairs in the known sample matched I the question hair. They will have been at least one hair that z. a 3 was In other words if I tind_ 1 4; a hair in the known hair sample I compare it, the hair root differehcee I'm not going to go then and I compare it with each and every type, beside taking as much as 10. an hour with the 24 other hairs in there. If it's generally 1: like the other haire, but it's microscopically 13 .. indietinguiehable from one of the first hairs I look at then 13 that is when I am going to stop my comparison. 14 It you are-asking me if it's conceivable that there is a 15 -. hair in there. given a hair I wouldn't match, sure, probably ,3 j: is. And it would be like the example, If I give a known hair ,7 sample from here and you find a question hair on your table 1. from the top of my head would I match them? No. It's a false in excluaion. Yea. It would be a false exclusion. The hair :0 really'came from me, but I can't match it. {1 0. Are you familiar with a study done in 1990 a, published in the Journal of Farenaic involving acaip 1, hair: taken from 97 Caucaiaan ihdividuale, 100 hairs from each TRANSCRIPTION - ASSOCIATES - HI?a-u? I- gnaw}.- . ?pet-h ?Mu-v- -- nowm .- I m?w??those individuals. Who was the article by? a. Q. I'm not sure, air. It wet in Hove-her of 1990. e. What was the basis a! the article? I've read last ertitlee that have been bubliohed on heirs; I don't recall. the substance at that article.. The substance of it was -- 9. HR, VDTTERO: (Interpoeing) I object, that Honor. THE COURT: Sustained. THE WITNESS: You have the erticie? I'd be happy to review it. 0. (By Mr. Ferrera) Did you take photographs of the hairs that you received from a known subject? A. No. Q. Do you eeve the hairs-in some way? A. The heirs are returned to the contributing agency, in this particular case the.Springfield Police Department. They are on permanenet glass microscopes and 0 look at returned. They are there so anybody who wants them, whether it 13 the defense expert can conduct the same: comparisons that I have conducted. out the two hairu that yo? G. You are now talking ab PHILBIH RBSOCIATEB qua-Du,- 15 n- 10 .w-u '11 no 19 20 ?wuw? . 21 22 23 -u VOLUII II r. specifically -- Mr. Parrot. identification is that something that you includ L. colpeirod and mounted on a slide? A. well, the question hair from the sheet and the 10 or 12 whatever number hairs from Hr. Parrot that are Those hairs have all been returned new on glaze microscope slides. kg to the police department. 9. When you are writing a lab report that hair comparisons do not constitute basic for absolute personal as a matter of policy, when I any "policy," FBI policy? A. Yes. Q- Is that something that you're required to put into . a report? A. It is something that I em_in total agreement with. That's my personal feeling. I can?t discount the possibility that there in someone else in the area that night match Prekop' so I put that in there. The person recieving the report in thie particular case, the Springfield Police Department, doesn't think it's a one hundred percent absolute identification like a fingerprint because it's not. No further questions. T. HE, FERRARA: Thank you. COHPUTERIEED TRANSCRIPTION PHILBIH 8 ASSOCIATES . -nmn- n-n- mewwan" A . venue: II 1 a a a .REDIRECT EXAMIENTION You don't neat to mislead anybody? a A. That's oonreot. a Q. new, just couple.o? quick questions, sir, why 1 ioee?everything you examine in.haire and fibers cone wrapped a In a piece of paper? 9 A. so that the evidence isn't lost. we're talking In it tbout truce evidence, hair, fibers, soil and whatnot. Common 11 Erecting ie wrap it up in a clean piece or paper and submit 12 i it. 13 9. That is how the various agencies that give you things are instructed general rule, yes. I, - . Q. What do you do when, in your examination, when 17 you?ve dieoovered a hair, in your opinion, as microscopically ,3 indistinguishable, you do anything else? In a. No. 30 Q. What do you do with the slide? 2, A- Send 11$ back to the contributor of the evidence. 23 Q. You don't take any pictures of it. 23 A. no. No. Not generally. 1 ?2 EEHPUTERIZED PHILBIH i ASSOCIATES BIS vomit ii Is that because you don't make any notes about it a. Eh a nun this long and this color? (Indicating). I have general notes as to maybe unusual I guaranteristics. maybe it has a thick outicle or prominent - ovoid bodies. I don't measure the-diameter of the hair. I a examine diameter of the known hairs. If they are the sale as 1 to color I'am looking to include or encluds another particular individual of being the possible distributor at the hair. I might make a general notation of the hair, not always. If to it's two and a half, three inches long it is really not a 11 significant factor unless it 15-30 unusual, out at the 13 ordinary. I: 9- The point is you either have one that is consistent I. or not consistent? v5 15 A. Right. i I, q. And that 1. your opinion? 17 A. And if it's microscopically dissimilar I will I, report the question hair was dissimilar from the known, from 19 the defendant's and did not originate from him, simple as 2., . that. 21 0- How frequently do you testify in any given weak or ,2 ?month? A- It varies. I usually testify 30 to 40 times a 23 WRIZBD Faxing: "vault your. 17' Q. Do you actually have to got out tho 311d. cello and look borer. you can toutity? n9. 9. Why is that? A. Baoaulo I use the sani pron-dur- and tho lol- protocol. have the some criteria each and ovary tine I note a hair notch. That's all that I m. venom: Thank you. have. v. i a BY i411. FBRRARA .1 I Q. Do you ever briug your notes with you when you toutify? A. When I think I need to, you. Q. But'au you sit there now you can't tell us any of the specitios'about these two hairs that you compared? A. Sure. I can tell you a lot about the hairs. 9. Can't tell us the length. the diameter, and what you can toll no in your subjective opinion what you observed on the microscope, the two hairs was similar? A. I can toll you the question hair was a brown 9311.31! - a ?asco-moss omm?nmo TRANSCRIPTION 385 whatever it was, and the length, what it was like. the hairs 1 in the known hair standard from the defendant's there were no Virginia. Caucasian cut hair with a cut tip and natural root. It had normal pigmentation. It was not medullated. It nad a thick cuticle. It had preminent avoid bodies. The scales were not particularly damaged. They were unremarkable. The diameter. significant microscopic differences. 0. And did you specifically come -- in what town do yen reside now? A. What town do I reside? I reside in Northern Q. I Is that near the FBI laboratory? A. Relatively. Q. And did you come to Springfield to specifically testify in this case? A. Yes. HR. FERRARA: Thank you. Nb further questions. THE COURT: Thank you, air. We will take our afternoon recess. (The jury exited the courtroom at 3:18 . he