Recross-examination of Dr. Henry Lee (part 2)

📄 Recross-examination of Dr. Henry Lee (part 2) — Monday, August 28, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\AUG\28\RECROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-DR-HENR.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 143 of 167

◀ Sidebar: Hoeplinger case reference Cross-examination of Dr. Henry Lee (part 2) ▶

Witness: Dr. Henry Lee
Examiner: Hank Goldberg
Called by: Defense • Date: Monday, August 28, 1995 • Utterances: 75

Goldberg recrosses Dr. Henry Lee on two fronts: blood transfer mechanics (establishing that an assailant slitting a throat would likely not be covered in blood) and the imprint evidence found on the Bundy walk tiles and the eyeglass envelope. Lee holds firm that certain marks qualify as 'imprints' but concedes he cannot determine their specific origin — fabric, footwear, or otherwise — without the suspect's clothing for comparison. The session closes with a brief, amicable sparring match between Scheck and Judge Ito.

# 1 MR. GOLDBERG:

Sir, if a person were to wrap their hand around someone's throat and slit that person's throat--

# 2 DR. LEE:

Yes, sir.

# 3 MR. GOLDBERG:

--and the blood spurted forward, would you expect the assailant to be covered in blood?

# 4 DR. LEE:

Probably not.

# 5 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. And, sir, if a person were for some reason to get blood on the front part of their body, however it might happen, during a blood-letting event, but not on their back during the assault--

# 6 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 7 MR. GOLDBERG:

--and their hindquarters during the assault--

# 8 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 9 MR. GOLDBERG:

And they sat down in a vehicle, would you expect any kinds of transfers in that vehicle necessarily?

# 10 DR. LEE:

If the blood don't touch the surface, then you don't have transfer.

# 11 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. Now, sir, you were asked about the imprint evidence a little bit on redirect examination. Did you read Bill Bodziak's report about his examination of the blue jean, specifically the lower portion of the right leg?

# 12 DR. LEE:

I recall I did, but I don't remember all the detail.

# 13 MR. GOLDBERG:

But you do have--you do know Bill Bodziak from before this case; is that correct?

# 14 DR. LEE:

Yes. He's an excellent scientist. We're friends.

# 15 MR. GOLDBERG:

And he's a top-notch expert in the area of footprint analysis?

# 16 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 17 MR. GOLDBERG:

And you have no specific recollection of what he said at this time in his report?

# 18 DR. LEE:

You can read to me. I can agree or disagree.

# 19 MR. GOLDBERG:

Well, didn't you take that into consideration before you got on the witness stand and testified?

# 20 DR. LEE:

Well, different expert have different opinion. There are some thing called scientific fact. They are fact. Have imprint, imprint in blood. If he don't call that a footprint, I have nothing to argue with that. He entitled his own opinion. Each expert entitle our own opinion. Each of us have to live with our conscience, standard. Different expert can have different opinions.

KEY QUOTE

# 21 MR. GOLDBERG:

Now, you said that in order or something to the effect that in order for an imprint to have transferred to the eyeglass envelope, someone would have had to have stepped on it. But is that true if it's not a footwear impression?

# 22 DR. LEE:

Some thing--as I say, some thing has to have some pressure, direct apply onto the surface without movement. If this envelope on the ground, the more logic thing is somebody step on it.

# 23 MR. GOLDBERG:

But are you saying, sir, that that is a footwear impression now or are you saying it could be any kind of impression?

# 24 DR. LEE:

No. I'm still saying that's an imprint. An imprint, say is this consistent with a footprint. It could be footprint. It could be other imprint.

# 25 MR. GOLDBERG:

And, sir, regarding the item that you say that you see in the photograph that's on the 10th tile down and the third tile across--you know what I'm talking about?

# 26 DR. LEE:

Yes, sir.

# 27 MR. GOLDBERG:

Are you forming the opinion that that is in fact an imprint or are you forming the opinion that it is a possible imprint?

# 28 DR. LEE:

It consistent with an imprint.

# 29 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. And consistent with means that it might not be an imprint, right?

# 30 DR. LEE:

It might--in our standard, consistent means consistent pattern similar to imprint. If not imprint, I don't call imprint. If definite it's not an imprint, I will come here tell you that's not an imprint. It's an imprint. An imprint, which means something have pattern deposit on the surface and cause a transfer. That's called imprint.

# 31 MR. GOLDBERG:

And that imprint if it is an imprint and if it's there could be the Bruno Magli shoe; is that correct?

# 32 DR. LEE:

Uh, if parallel line, cannot be. If not parallel line, have a Bruno Magli configuration and design, I mean it's Bruno Magli.

# 33 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. But in the photograph that you were shown of the Bundy walk, you don't know from that photograph?

# 34 DR. LEE:

Oh, you mean the column 3, all those imprints. I thought you talking about specific parallel line, I show you tile 10. Then you're correct. I don't know what kind of a pattern it is.

# 35 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. So those all could be consistent with Bruno Magli shoes; is that correct?

# 36 DR. LEE:

Maybe. I don't know.

# 37 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. And you were asked a question as to whether or not there could be a series of imprints to the--I'm going to say as we're looking down the walk towards Bundy to the right of the center line; is that correct?

# 38 THE COURT:

I'm sorry. You say we're looking down the walk towards Bundy?

# 39 MR. GOLDBERG:

We're looking down the walk towards the alley. Sorry.

# 40 MR. SCHECK:

May the record reflect 598-A I believe?

# 41 THE COURT:

Yes.

# 42 MR. GOLDBERG:

To the right?

# 43 DR. LEE:

Yes, sir.

# 44 MR. GOLDBERG:

Do you know if there is in fact a series of prints in that location, do you know whether it's coming down towards Bundy or heading away towards the alley?

# 45 DR. LEE:

I'm not that good yet.

# 46 MR. GOLDBERG:

What?

# 47 DR. LEE:

I said, I'm not that good yet, can tell you from a distance.

KEY QUOTE

# 48 MR. GOLDBERG:

All right. And with respect to the impression on the envelope, the piece of paper--

# 49 DR. LEE:

Yes.

# 50 MR. GOLDBERG:

--those could be a fabric imprint; is that correct?

# 51 DR. LEE:

It's consistent with an imprint.

# 52 MR. GOLDBERG:

And it could be fabric; is that correct?

# 53 DR. LEE:

It could be a fabric.

# 54 MR. GOLDBERG:

Did you make test impressions from any of the fabric that was at the crime scene?

# 55 DR. LEE:

I don't have a fabric impression.

# 56 MR. GOLDBERG:

And usually when one is trying to make a comparison, don't you try to take an impression?

# 57 DR. LEE:

If I have to make a comparison. I did not do such comparison. I did some measurement between the blue jean, the shirt, the boots and inconsistent with that design.

# 58 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

# 59 MR. GOLDBERG:

And, sir, is it true that there is no way to reconstruct whether or not the murderer's clothing is consistent with those imprints?

# 60 MR. SCHECK:

Objection. Calls for speculation, beyond the scope.

# 61 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 62 DR. LEE:

Unless I get the clothing.

# 63 (Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

# 64 MR. GOLDBERG:

And when I was talking about these impressions, I'm talking about--you understood me to be talking about the envelope and the piece of paper, correct?

# 65 DR. LEE:

Again. Those are imprint, not impression.

KEY QUOTE

# 66 MR. GOLDBERG:

Okay. But whatever, we can't at this point determine whether or not they were left by suspect's clothing, can we?

# 67 DR. LEE:

No.

# 68 MR. GOLDBERG:

Thank you. I have nothing further.

# 69 MR. SCHECK:

One second.

# 70 MR. SCHECK:

Your Honor, just one or two questions that I think will get us home. You're giving me that look.

KEY QUOTE

# 71 THE COURT:

I didn't say a word, Mr. Scheck.

# 72 MR. SCHECK:

I know. You don't have to. I've been here awhile.

# 73 THE COURT:

If I were you--

# 74 MR. SCHECK:

I know. I know. I know.

# 75 THE COURT:

You want to let me ask my one question? Go ahead.

FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. SCHECK

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Dr. Henry Lee

Different expert have different opinion. There are some thing called scientific fact. They are fact. Have imprint, imprint in blood. If he don't call that a footprint, I have nothing to argue with that. He entitled his own opinion. Each expert entitle our own opinion. Each of us have to live with our conscience, standard.

Lee deflects Goldberg's attempt to pit him against FBI footwear expert Bill Bodziak, while subtly asserting his own conclusion stands independently of Bodziak's characterization.

Dr. Henry Lee

I'm not that good yet, can tell you from a distance.

A rare moment of self-deprecating humor from Lee — he acknowledges he cannot determine the direction of travel of footprints from a photograph, undercutting the defense's implication that the series of prints could definitively be reconstructed.

Dr. Henry Lee

Again. Those are imprint, not impression.

Lee insists on his precise forensic terminology throughout, resisting Goldberg's deliberate or casual conflation of 'imprint' and 'impression' — a distinction that affects the legal and scientific weight of his testimony.

Barry Scheck

Your Honor, just one or two questions that I think will get us home. You're giving me that look.

Captures the exhausted familiarity of a trial deep into its run — Scheck reads Ito's silent impatience before the judge says a word.

Evidence (4)

People's 598-A

Photograph of the Bundy walk showing a series of possible imprints on tiles

discussed — Lee and Goldberg debate which tile column and row contains a specific imprint, and whether the prints are consistent with Bruno Magli shoes

Informal

Eyeglass envelope with possible imprint/impression on its surface

discussed — Goldberg presses Lee on whether the mark could be fabric and whether any comparative test impressions were made

Informal

Bill Bodziak's FBI report on footwear impressions, specifically on the blue jean lower right leg

referenced — Goldberg challenges Lee on whether he considered it before testifying; Lee says experts may differ

Informal

Bruno Magli shoes (design/configuration)

discussed — Lee says parallel-line patterns would be inconsistent with Bruno Magli; other configurations might match

Notable Exchanges (2)

Hank Goldberg•Dr. Henry Lee

Goldberg attempts to get Lee to admit the tile imprints could be anything — including Bruno Magli shoes — and that without the suspect's clothing no comparison is possible. Lee agrees on the latter but refuses to abandon his characterization of the marks as 'imprints,' drawing a careful methodological distinction between 'consistent with' and definitive identification.

strategic

Barry Scheck•Judge Lance A. Ito

Scheck announces he has 'one or two questions' and preemptively acknowledges Ito's impatient look before the judge says anything. Ito plays along, beginning a sentence ('If I were you--') before Scheck cuts him off three times with 'I know.'

light

Light Moments (2)

Dr. Henry Lee

Dr. Lee responds to Goldberg's question about whether he can determine the direction of footprints with 'I'm not that good yet,' prompting Goldberg's confused 'What?'

Barry Scheck

Scheck tells Ito 'You're giving me that look' before any words are exchanged, and then interrupts the judge's admonishment three times with 'I know. I know. I know.'

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Dr. Henry Lee

omission / failure to consider competing expert

Goldberg highlights that Lee did not specifically recall or address FBI footwear examiner Bill Bodziak's report before testifying, implying Lee formed his imprint opinions without fully engaging with the prosecution's expert findings.

⚔ Dr. Henry Lee

methodological challenge

Goldberg establishes that Lee made no test impressions from crime-scene fabrics before concluding that fabric could have made the envelope imprint, undermining the comparative basis for his opinion.

Witness Demeanor

(Discussion held off the record between the Deputy District Attorneys.)

(Discussion held off the record between Defense counsel.)

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 7454 • 75 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103