Redirect examination of Prof. Herbert MacDonell (part 3)

📄 Redirect examination of Prof. Herbert MacDonell (part 3) — Tuesday, August 1, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\AUG\1\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-PROF-H.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 126 of 167

◀ Sidebar: clotting and sock drying Recross-examination of Prof. Herbert MacDonell ▶

Witness: Prof. Herbert MacDonell
Examiner: Peter Neufeld
Called by: Defense • Date: Tuesday, August 1, 1995 • Utterances: 12

In this brief final redirect, Neufeld asks MacDonell one pointed question: could the blood staining on the sock have occurred naturally at the Bundy crime scene? MacDonell says no, explaining that the transfer from surface 2 to surface 3 was impossible if a foot was inside the sock at the time — reinforcing the planted-evidence theory. Clark's objection for vagueness was overruled.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held in open court, in the presence of the jury:)

# 2 THE COURT:

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. The record should reflect that we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury. Mr. Neufeld, do you have any further questions?

# 3 MR. NEUFELD:

Yes.

# 4 MR. NEUFELD:

Professor MacDonell, based on your observations of surface 1, surface 2 and surface 3 of the sock in question, is it your opinion that the staining of that sock could have happened at the Bundy crime scene?

# 5 PROF. MACDONELL:

No.

# 6 MR. NEUFELD:

Why not?

# 7 PROF. MACDONELL:

If there was a foot or an ankle in the sock it could not transfer from surface 2 to 3.

KEY QUOTE

# 8 MS. CLARK:

Objection, that was vague, staining as to 1, 2 or 3.

# 9 THE COURT:

Overruled. Overruled.

# 10 MR. NEUFELD:

Would you please start again, sir.

# 11 PROF. MACDONELL:

The staining that transferred, in my opinion, from surface 2 to surface 3 could not occur if a foot was in the sock.

KEY QUOTE

# 12 MR. NEUFELD:

Thank you very much. No further questions.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (2)

Prof. Herbert MacDonell

The staining that transferred, in my opinion, from surface 2 to surface 3 could not occur if a foot was in the sock.

The core defense conclusion: blood was applied to a flat, unworn sock, pointing to planting rather than natural transfer at a crime scene.

Prof. Herbert MacDonell

If there was a foot or an ankle in the sock it could not transfer from surface 2 to 3.

The initial, unvarnished statement of his opinion before being asked to restate it more clearly.

Evidence (1)

Informal

The sock (surfaces 1, 2, and 3), previously examined by MacDonell

discussed — conclusion drawn about impossibility of natural staining transfer

Notable Exchanges (1)

Peter Neufeld•Prof. Herbert MacDonell

Neufeld asks MacDonell to restate his opinion cleanly after Clark's overruled objection, producing a sharp, quotable conclusion for the jury.

strategic

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 7113 • 12 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103