Redirect examination of Herbert Leon MacDonell (part 3)

📄 Redirect examination of Herbert Leon MacDonell (part 3) — Monday, December 16, 1996

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1996\DEC\16\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-HERBER.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 32 of 57

◀ Re-redirect examination of Herbert Leon MacDonell Witness dismissal and recess ▶

Witness: Prof. Herbert MacDonell
Examiner: Robert Baker
Called by: Defense • Date: Monday, December 16, 1996 • Utterances: 15

Plaintiff's counsel Medvene conducts brief redirect examination of blood pattern expert Herbert MacDonell, focusing on the sock evidence. MacDonell confirms his opinion that blood on the sock came from a wet transfer through multiple layers, and that LAPD cut out the center of the stain — the area of highest blood concentration — for testing purposes.

# 1 Q:

Mr. MacDonell, with a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, is it your opinion that the balls that you and Dr. Lee saw on April 2, 1995 are blood from a wet transfer from side 1 of the sock through side 2 of the sock into side 3?

# 2 A:

Yes.

# 3 Q:

And do you know of any reason why LAPD would cut out an area in the sock that had no blood or nothing else on it?

# 4 A:

Yes, they would cut out an area for a control. You always take a sample from an area that is not stained to run reagents on as opposed to an area that you cut out to test with the area that does not have a stain gives a positive test, then the positive test on the other area is meaningless. So you will take out controls. But I think you're referring specifically just to this stained area.

KEY QUOTE

# 5 Q:

This area is basically in the center of the stain, is it not?

# 6 A:

Yes.

# 7 Q:

And that's the area from which you would anticipate the highest concentration of blood volume, correct?

# 8 A:

Correct.

# 9 Q:

Okay.

Now, in your analysis, there was blood around the perimeter of the area that was removed, was it not?

# 10 A:

Yes.

# 11 Q:

And as you got further away, the blood volume -- farther away from the cut-out area, the blood volume became less, did it not, sir?

# 12 A:

Yes.

# 13 MR. MEDVENE:

Objection, beyond the copy.

# 14 THE COURT:

This is beyond the scope of the redirect.

# 15 MR. BAKER:

I don't have anything further.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (2)

MacDonell

Yes, they would cut out an area for a control. You always take a sample from an area that is not stained to run reagents on as opposed to an area that you cut out to test with the area that does not have a stain gives a positive test, then the positive test on the other area is meaningless.

MacDonell provides a legitimate forensic reason for LAPD cutting an unstained area from the sock, potentially undercutting the defense's planted-evidence narrative.

MacDonell

Yes.

Confirms his core opinion that blood balls observed with Dr. Lee resulted from wet transfer through all three layers of the sock — key to the plaintiff's planted-evidence theory.

Evidence (1)

Informal

The sock with blood stains, specifically the cut-out area at the center of the stain examined on April 2, 1995

discussed

Notable Exchanges (1)

Edward Medvene•Hiroshi Fujisaki

Medvene's final question about blood volume decreasing toward the perimeter was cut off by a sustained objection as beyond the scope of redirect, ending the examination abruptly.

procedural

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 8664 • 15 utterances • Defense witness

Civil Trial

Department 103