All right. Dr. Lee, would you resume the witness stand.
Henry C. Lee, the witness on the stand at the time of the evening adjournment, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
The record should reflect we've been joined by all the members of our jury. Dr. Henry Lee is again on the witness stand undergoing direct examination by Mr. Scheck. Good afternoon again, Dr. Lee.
Doctor, you are reminded you are still under oath. And, Mr. Scheck, you may continue with your direct examination.
Thank you very much, your Honor. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good afternoon.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. SCHECK
Dr. Lee, over lunch, did you have some opportunity to place some red tape on the board entitled "Closed-in area of Bundy"?
And does this red tape reflect the different portions of the central photograph that you were discussing in your testimony with the jury?
And at various times, you pointed to one photograph and explained its relation to the other. And does this red tape reflect what you were testifying to this morning?
This red tape basically indicate the location which I explain this morning and shows the general correlation between one photograph to another.
Dr. Lee, we ended the morning by discussing the envelope and the two different positions. Do you recall that, sir?
Now, I move to the next exhibit, which would be marked 1344, and this one is entitled, "Evidence found, eyeglasses envelope, envelope at Bundy scene." And, Dr. Lee, I would ask you, if you could, to come down and discuss this with us.
All right. Mr. Scheck, if you would tell me that since it's--I can't tell which one we're talking about here.
This board consist of six photographs. I took this photograph on February 18, 1995 at Albany Medical Center. The first photograph depicts an overall view of this item, taking out front of box, shows item no. 39, brown paper bag inside of a plastic bag. First column, second photograph depicts a close-up view of this top opening of the brown paper bag of a scotch tape, that scotch tape depicting this area (Indicating). They're trace material, some are consistent with blood crust, was noticed on those plastic scotch tape. The middle column are those blood-stained debris found inside of the brown paper bag, predominantly consist of leaf material. However, on the leaves, there are hairs and fiber-like trace was noticed. In addition, blood like crust also noticed on the leaf which depicts a close-up view, shows one of the leaf in column no. 2, photograph no. 2. Some of the blood crust, it's clearly flaked out to a regional location. Other still are here on the surface. The next two photograph depicts the envelope inside this plastic bag. Column 3, top view, depicts the front portion of this envelope with some writing and some blood-like stain. Column no. 3, photograph 2, depicts an overall view of this envelope which shows large amount of bloodstain, blood spatter were noticed on the surface of this backside of envelope.
Uh, basically, at one point in time, those material probably collect with those envelope together and place in a brown paper bag.
And it's entitled, "Evidence found--eyeglasses envelope, evidence found at Albany Medical Center."
The overall view of the center picture depicts the items I found inside of the envelope and the brown paper bag which consist a pair of eyeglasses. However, only one lens was found.
Now, are you familiar with the testimony of Dr. Baden and Dr. Wolf that on June 22nd, when they were at the Los Angeles Police Department laboratory with Michele Kestler, they observed the eyeglasses with two lenses?
Counsel, it's also argument. The jury was here, has heard the testimony. They know the state of the record. Ask the questions about what's there, please.
All right. In the records you have received with respect to discovery in this case, do you have any records indicating what happened to the other lens?
Call your attention now to the picture in the upper left-hand column indicating "Eyeglasses with single lens." Could you describe the evidence pattern there?
This picture depicts when a time we remove the eyeglasses out the envelope. I found this lens already out of the eyeglass. The left lens, a single lens, it's a bifocal type of a lens. The right side lens appeared to be missing. On this remaining lens, there are smears and debris on the lens itself. Also noticed are material on the earpiece of the eyeglass (Indicating).
This reflect the earpiece on the right-hand side. There are some reddish color material adhere.
That indicates the photograph on the bottom left-hand column of this board indicating "Trace evidence on earpiece"?
Now, is there a close-up photograph of what you described as the smear on the lens?
On the third column top frame, the picture depicts a close-up view of this lens. Reddish blood-like smear can be seen on the top of the lens (Indicating).
The bottom right-hand depicts a further close-up view for this portion of the lens, have large amount of a trace material. Those trace material consists predominantly of soil, blood crust, fiber and hair-like material.
Now, Dr. Lee, does the smearing you saw in this lens, is that consistent with someone touching the lens of the glasses?
Based on the pattern that you see on the lens, can you describe the mechanism that would be consistent with creating that pattern?
At one point in time, a small amount of blood-like substance have contact with portion of lens, cause a transfer.
Well, in terms of mechanisms, what kind of mechanisms could cause that kind of smear?
You can develop latent print on a glass. Subsequently, you can lift the fingerprint. First you have to develop it.
At the Albany Medical Center, when you examined this, were--were you allowed to test this in terms of the order?
My order is, I can only do physical observation, microscopic examination and photographing, measurement, cannot remove or cutting, doing destructive test.
Now, Dr. Lee, assuming--well, withdrawn. From the photographs of the crime scene, where are the glasses in relation to the envelope? Are they inside or outside?
All right. Is the smearing pattern you observed consistent with someone manipulating that envelope and touching the glasses inside of it?
Yes. Entitled "Evidence found, eyeglasses, envelope, bloodstain evidence on envelope."
Dr. Lee, could you please describe for us the bloodstain patterns depicted on this board?
This board consist of again six individual photographs. Depicts various view on the back of this envelope, the backside of an envelope (Indicating).
Please proceed with your description of the bloodstain pattern as depicted on the board.
The bloodstain pattern on the back of the envelope consists of great amount, over hundreds of bloodstain pattern. What the photograph depict, only certain sections. The top row middle column shows, if I look at an envelope in the back directly, it's on my left-hand side. If I'm--and envelope should be on the right. So basically depends which side you're looking at. Here clearly have another imprint consistent like a shape of an E, which later was identify consistent with a portion of the sole pattern of a Bruno Magli. Besides that, we have large amount of blood drops, blood spatter, blood smear cover the whole area. This area alone probably consists 200 or more individual bloodstain. The most interesting one is one in the lower middle portion here. A crease was noticed on the envelope. This was enlarged, which depicts in the photograph on the third column, top view. I'm showing here that's the crease. Here have a blood pattern, two pattern, look like a mirror image, which suggest this portion and this portion could have made contact, meanwhile the blood still wet (Indicating).
Well, Dr. Lee, could you with the red tape please indicate where the mirror image is on bloodstain pattern no. 1 and what you just described in the photograph with close-up view 1-B?
Now, Dr. Lee, in order to obtain a mirror image pattern such as this, what state does the liquid blood--what state does the blood have to be in?
Blood have to be in liquid state. Cannot be a bloodstain. Still wet in a liquid stage.
KEY QUOTESo would this mirror image pattern be consistent with someone folding or manipulating this envelope while the blood depicted in the close-up view of 1-B is still wet?
Uh-huh. Could you please now turn to the close-up view, 1-A, and indicate where that is on bloodstain pattern no. 1?
Dr. Lee--I have to ask you a question first. Dr. Lee, could you please describe the bloodstain patterns in close-up view 1-A?
The close-up view 1-A depicts an area on the--when I place the envelope on the right-hand corner, this blood smear, blood spatter, that's angular deposit, blood drops and could be contact pattern deposit in that little area. It also indicate to me the smear has to be applied on the envelope first and the spatter apply afterward (Indicating).
So might I ask you, could you indicate with the pen the smear and put down "1" next to it indicating that's first and the spatter--maybe "SM" for smear, "SP" for spatter.
Thank you. So in other words, the smear had to come first and then spatter after that?
In addition, a small drop consistent vertical deposit. Those consistent with impact splash path with an angular deposit.
Is that smear--can that be caused--can the mechanism for that smear be a hand brushing against the envelope?
Is the smear consistent with the mechanism of a hand brushing against the envelope?
All right. Can you tell us what kinds of mechanisms are consistent with the scientific evidence you see here of that smear?
Contact mechanism of this, a surface have to have some wet blood, has to have a direct contact with the movement. The movement here is from the left to right, being lateral movement (Indicating).
Bloodstain pattern no. 2 is--depicts an envelope, upper--if I place the envelope upper right corner of this envelope. A multiple bloodstain pattern can be seen in this location. Over hundreds of bloodstain can be counted in this area too (Indicating). The most important observation of this area consist of a three, four areas. Close-up view no. 2-A, which depicts this area, a teardrop type of pattern, a vertical drop blood pattern, a contact transfer pattern, additional spatter pattern.
Could you please with the red tape indicate for the jury the relationship of the close-up view 2-A to bloodstain pattern no. 2?
Some area I can tell. Other area I can not. For example, this one, I can tell deposit after this group of a pattern has to be applied on the envelope first. It clearly shows this on top, the rest of it. As far this one, this one, I can not tell when was deposit (Indicating).
However, could the ones that you can tell which came first or second, could they have come at the same time?
So your judgment is, it's more likely they came at different times, but you can't tell which came first or second?
Would this kind of blood pattern that we see on 1-A and 2-A be consistent with struggle in the area, struggle between two individuals around this envelope?
It could indicate dynamic movement, different time contact, could be consistent with this.
Okay. Any other observations of interest with respect to the close-up on view 2-A?
View 2-A, in the lower portion middle, have a place labeled 1-B, something like that. Have one drop. This drop, the side appear to be diluted and a swab motion appear to apply into this drop. This indicates this drop has been sampled by laboratory examiner to type this drop (Indicating).
Indication of "B." Now, could you move to close-up view 2-B. What does the close-up view 2-B indicate in terms of the pattern?
Close-up view 2-B consist of heavy bloodstain on top of the bloodstain caked with some soil debris. In addition, numerous hair, fiber-like material adhere on this surface (Indicating).
Now, what is the--the fact that this debris, the soil and fibers caked on the surface, what does that indicate about the mechanism of transfer?
This area indicates blood has to be deposit on the envelope first. Subsequently, the soil, hair, fiber debris was deposit on top of this bloodstain area; and during this drying and coagulation process, this material cake onto the surface (Indicating).
Now, Dr. Lee, show you two additional photographs that are not on this board that--
Well, should we make them subdivisions of the board even though they're not on it? What's the court's preference?
Show you two photographs that have been marked 1347 and 1348 and ask you if you recognize them.
It's two picture which depict, 1347, the mid portion of this envelope; 1348 is this faint area of this envelope (Indicating).
Could you in the two areas you've indicated write "1347" in the area depicted in the photograph 1347 and "1348" for the area of 1348?
Your Honor, with permission of the court, I'd like to place 1347--1348 first on the elmo.
And ask that Dr. Lee approach the telestrator and direct Mr. Harris on focusing in on the areas of interest.
All right. Dr. Lee, what pattern is depicted--what kind of pattern is depicted by 1348?
And that imprint pattern, the ridges, are those consistent with the pattern given by a fingerprint in blood?
What is that consistent with--start this way. Dr. Lee, in your observations of evidence at crime scenes, can you make observations from blood patterns with respect to fingerprints?
All right. Now, with respect to that, what is your opinion of the pattern depicted on 1348?
All I can report to you, it's consistent with imprint pattern. I can not definitively tell you this is a fingerprint.
What about this pattern makes it consistent with the pattern that would be caused by a bloody fingerprint?
It's have the general contour, have some appear to be certain pattern there and any of those pattern which indicate indicative of pattern transfer of course and hence would be able to shows exact pattern.
Ask that we put now 1347 on the elmo. Yeah. We should print this out. I'm sorry. Can we make that 1348-A?
Now, while that's printing out, Dr. Lee, this imprint pattern, would the blood have to be wet at the time this imprint pattern was made?
This is a pattern area which we notice in this exhibit. This pattern area shows here it's not a drop, it's not a spatter, it's not a smear. It's a contact impression type of pattern. Fiber-like material can be seen adhere onto the surface. This area consist of large quantity of blood. No ridge characteristic can be clearly seen (Indicating). However, in the middle--
In the middle, there are some appear to be pattern area which consistent again we say imprint.
Now, the imprint you've indicated by the arrows, is that consistent with a bloody finger making the contact imprint that you've indicated there?
All right. In terms of the mechanism of transfer, is that imprint pattern consistent with a finger covered with blood making contact with the envelope?
Again, Dr. Lee, based on your observations of fingerprint patterns at crime scenes, if a finger is covered with lots of blood and makes contact with a paper surface, will it necessarily leave a ridge design?
No. It will not leave any ridge characteristic. Once the blood cover the whole surface, fell the land and groove of the finger surface when you have this contact because abundance of blood, you only leave a general pattern, will not transfer individual ridge characteristics.
Is the pattern depicted here in 1347 consistent with a finger covered with blood to the point that it would make a contact impression in the envelope, but not leave ridge characteristics?
All right. In terms of fingerprint impressions, is that consistent with the--an imprint of a finger covered with blood as you just explained before?
Can you please describe for us in terms of mechanisms of transfer how that pattern might be consistent, if it is, with a finger imprint?
All right. Did you examine that carefully as much as you could from the photograph?
So from the contour of this imprint, it is consistent with a bloody finger making contact with the envelope?
It consistent with a--either finger or an object have same contour cause such transfer.
Dr. Lee, the imprint that you described on 1348, the imprint you've described as 1347, the mirror image you've described under the picture, close-up view 1-B, are all those consistent with this envelope being manipulated when the blood was wet?
Your Honor, I'm going to object at this point. I think this would call for speculation and conjecture.
All right. Dr. Lee, assuming that these imprint patterns are consistent with fingerprints, what does these patterns indicate with respect to the manipulation of this envelope when the blood was wet?
Dr. Lee, with respect to the close-up view 1-B and your observations of the glasses in the envelope, could the envelope be folded in that fashion while the glasses were in it?
All right. From your observations, could this what you've described as a mirror image pattern in the close-up view 1-B have been made when the glasses were in the envelope while wet blood was in the envelope?
Well, in terms of the fold with the glasses in the envelope, could--would the glasses in the envelope prevent this manipu--the fold that we see in the close-up view 1-B?
If the glass is in this area, very difficult to fold over the glass itself (Indicating).
KEY QUOTEYour Honor, I'm sorry. For the record, maybe we could have the court indicate where he pointed at this time.
But he said "If the glasses were in this area." Could we just have the record reflect where he was pointing when he said that? Well, your Honor, just for the record, when he was pointing, he was pointing on the "Evidence found, eyeglass envelope" exhibit, the photograph on the top center, bloodstain pattern 1, approximately bisecting the photograph in what appears to be a fold.
In fact, I would add to that description that the fold begins at the bottom of the picture--
Blood transfers are what--the envelope's been moved around. It's at a crime scene. Let's proceed.
Can we have the next board, please? Your Honor, this is 1349 and it's entitled, "Evidence found, envelope."
An imprint consistent like a shape of an E, which later was identify consistent with a portion of the sole pattern of a Bruno Magli.
Blood have to be in liquid state. Cannot be a bloodstain. Still wet in a liquid stage.
Maybe, maybe not. I did not do any test.
If the glass is in this area, very difficult to fold over the glass itself.
Blood transfers are what — the envelope's been moved around. It's at a crime scene. Let's proceed.