Redirect examination of Roger Martz (afternoon, part 2)

📄 Redirect examination of Roger Martz (afternoon, part 2) — Wednesday, July 26, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JUL\26\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-ROGER-.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 122 of 167

◀ Sidebar: blood spot photographs Recross-examination of Roger Martz ▶

Witness: Roger Martz
Examiner: Robert Blasier
Called by: Defense • Date: Wednesday, July 26, 1995 • Utterances: 180

Defense attorney Blasier continued pressing FBI forensic agent Martz on the adequacy of his EDTA testing methodology, focusing on whether Martz used sufficient blood quantities to reliably detect EDTA in the sock and back gate samples. Blasier established that Martz ran an informal 'dilution experiment' for which he kept no notes, couldn't remember the conditions, and admitted he did it 'for dramatic effect.' Blasier also drew out admissions that Martz suspected EDTA might be present but never attempted to test larger blood quantities to confirm or rule it out.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held in open court:)

# 2 MR. BLASIER:

Agent Martz, did you do any testing to see what size blood drop you would get with various quantities of blood?

# 3 MR. MARTZ:

Umm, I put a couple different size drops on paper to see how big they were, yes.

# 4 MR. BLASIER:

One of your methods that you used to estimate how much blood you had from the evidence was to look at those blood drops, correct?

# 5 MR. MARTZ:

No. I used that--basically put them on paper so I would know how much sample to take and I measured a certain amount out so I knew how large the area was.

# 6 MR. BLASIER:

Does the same amount of blood put on different substrates look different in terms of the quantity, the size of the drops?

# 7 MR. MARTZ:

Yes.

# 8 MR. BLASIER:

How much different?

# 9 MR. MARTZ:

Oh, it would depend. Maybe 20, 30 percent. I don't know specifically. I certainly didn't do any calculations.

# 10 MR. BLASIER:

You didn't do any testing at all of that, did you?

# 11 MR. MARTZ:

No.

# 12 MR. BLASIER:

Did you prepare some sample with blood drops to compare--you indicated you did one set of blood drops on different substrates?

# 13 MR. MARTZ:

I believe I did something on filter paper and one on a cloth. I think it was a towel.

# 14 MR. BLASIER:

On a--okay. And did you do a second sample of blood drops on the same kind of material as the towel?

# 15 MR. MARTZ:

I don't understand.

# 16 MR. BLASIER:

Your dilution experiment, do you remember that?

# 17 MS. CLARK:

Objection, your Honor.

# 18 MR. BLASIER:

That you talked to me about?

# 19 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 20 MS. CLARK:

Objection.

# 21 MR. MARTZ:

I don't think I did that dilution experiment.

# 22 MR. BLASIER:

What was the material you used for that dilution experiment?

# 23 MR. MARTZ:

I didn't do that experiment.

# 24 MR. BLASIER:

So the size of a blood drop--or your testimony is it can only vary by 20 percent?

# 25 MR. MARTZ:

I'm not saying that. I don't know. I didn't measure. I gave you an approximation. I--

# 26 MR. BLASIER:

So you don't know how much the size of a blood drop will change given different substrates?

# 27 MR. MARTZ:

No, and that is why, you know, in this particular case when I did the sock I made sure I used the sock as a control and the gate was swabbed with a cotton swab or cotton swatch, so I used the cotton swatch. I used similar material.

# 28 MR. BLASIER:

How do you know you used the same kind of swatch? You didn't look at them, did you?

# 29 MR. MARTZ:

Well, they were the type that were used for serology and DNA and I got mine from the DNA unit.

# 30 MR. BLASIER:

In your opinion can the size of a blood drop with a given quantity of blood vary by eight times, depending on the substrate?

# 31 MR. MARTZ:

I have never observed that. That is all I can say.

# 32 MR. BLASIER:

Your Honor--

# 33 THE COURT:

Proceed. He indicated he didn't do that dilution.

# 34 MR. BLASIER:

Did you examine the photographs that you provided to me of blood spots?

# 35 MR. MARTZ:

I looked at them.

# 36 MR. BLASIER:

Did you examine the sizes of blood spots that you had in your photograph to determine whether or not what the difference might be with different substrates with the same amount of blood?

# 37 MR. MARTZ:

We are back to the ones that I prepared?

# 38 MR. BLASIER:

Yeah. Did you ever compare those to the dilution ones that were prepared for you?

# 39 MR. MARTZ:

No.

# 40 MR. BLASIER:

I would like to refresh his memory.

# 41 MS. CLARK:

Objection, your Honor. If he has never seen them how can he refresh his memory?

# 42 THE COURT:

He said he provided them. I assume he has seen them.

# 43 MS. CLARK:

But he has never compared, your Honor.

# 44 THE COURT:

It is for the use--purpose of refreshing recollection. It is also a speaking objection. Have a seat.

# 45 MR. BLASIER:

Agent Martz, I would like you to review those photographs.

# 46 MR. MARTZ:

I would like to make a correction. This is something I did prepare here. I thought you were referring to the other one.

# 47 MR. BLASIER:

All right. So you prepared both those photographs?

# 48 MR. MARTZ:

Yes, I did.

# 49 MR. BLASIER:

You prepared the stains that are contained in the photographs?

# 50 MR. MARTZ:

Yes.

# 51 MR. BLASIER:

Your Honor, may I have them marked?

# 52 THE COURT:

Yes.

# 53 MR. BLASIER:

Two photographs.

# 54 THE COURT:

1274 and 5.

# 55 MR. BLASIER:

1274 and 5?

# 56 THE COURT:

Yes.

# 57 (Deft's 1274 & 1275 for id = photos)

# 58 MR. BLASIER:

Agent Martz, when you prepared these did you measure out the quantities of blood that you put on them?

# 59 MR. MARTZ:

Umm, can I see those again?

# 60 MR. BLASIER:

Sure.

# 61 MR. MARTZ:

I know that I did in this one and I can't--

# 62 THE COURT:

Which one is that? What is the number on that?

# 63 MR. MARTZ:

1274. Those are all labeled five microliters, so I know that that is what I did. In this other one, 1275, I don't remember what I did.

# 64 MR. BLASIER:

Do you remember me showing you that picture about a hour and a half ago and asking you how much blood you used for that second picture?

# 65 MR. MARTZ:

Yes.

# 66 MR. BLASIER:

You told me ten microliters, didn't you?

# 67 MR. MARTZ:

I can't remember if that is what I said. It--I probably said five--I don't know if I said ten, five. I don't know what it is.

# 68 MR. BLASIER:

Did you tell me ten?

# 69 MR. MARTZ:

I can't remember. I can't remember.

# 70 MR. BLASIER:

Your Honor, I would like to show these--

# 71 MS. CLARK:

Objection, your Honor, same as previously.

# 72 THE COURT:

1274 you can show. 1275 the objection is sustained.

# 73 MR. BLASIER:

Let me ask you a foundational question. 1275, the second picture, was that the same substrate as the first?

# 74 MR. MARTZ:

I can't remember.

# 75 MR. BLASIER:

When you did the experiment, this dilution experiment, did you write down any of the conditions of your experiment?

# 76 MR. MARTZ:

No, I did not.

# 77 MR. BLASIER:

Is that because you could remember them?

# 78 MR. MARTZ:

I felt for the purposes that I did there was no reason to do it. The pictures are quite evident. I did it for dramatic effect just so you could see the pictures.

KEY QUOTE

# 79 MR. BLASIER:

What kind of dramatic effect?

# 80 MR. MARTZ:

Well, just to show that blood, when it is diluted, the color changes.

# 81 MR. BLASIER:

And you didn't record the quantities of blood that you put on these?

# 82 MR. MARTZ:

No. I--the amount of blood makes absolutely no difference. It is the dilution factor that is important.

KEY QUOTE

# 83 MR. BLASIER:

But you can't remember now what you put on it?

# 84 MR. MARTZ:

No.

# 85 MS. CLARK:

Objection, asked and answered.

# 86 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 87 MR. BLASIER:

Let me show 1274.

# 88 MR. BLASIER:

Agent Martz, looking at 1274, those are five-microliter blood drops that you put on some sort of substrate, two different substrates, correct?

# 89 MR. MARTZ:

That's correct.

# 90 MR. BLASIER:

What was the substrate on the top ones?

# 91 MR. MARTZ:

I believe it was a towel.

# 92 MR. BLASIER:

And this was what you used to determine what a five-microliter blood drop--or five microliters of blood would look like?

# 93 MR. MARTZ:

Yes.

# 94 MR. BLASIER:

Is that towel anything similar at all to swatches that you got with evidence?

# 95 MR. MARTZ:

In what respect?

# 96 MR. BLASIER:

Any respect?

# 97 MR. MARTZ:

Well, I don't know because I didn't do the test.

# 98 MR. BLASIER:

So you have no idea what five microliters of blood would look like on a swatch from LAPD, do you?

# 99 MR. MARTZ:

No.

# 100 MR. BLASIER:

And you are using quantities of blood in this experiment from the evidence that were relatively close to the minimum detectable amounts that you had determined for your negative ion test, correct?

# 101 MR. MARTZ:

For the negative ion? I was above the minimum detectable amount.

# 102 MR. BLASIER:

You were close, weren't you?

# 103 MR. MARTZ:

Oh, I don't--I don't believe I was that close.

# 104 MR. BLASIER:

Stain Q207 from the sock, do you remember that one?

# 105 MR. MARTZ:

Yeah.

# 106 MR. BLASIER:

That was taken from the middle part of the stain rather than the edge?

# 107 MR. MARTZ:

The 207, I don't know. As I told you, I don't know where it came from. You showed me a picture. I don't know where it came from.

# 108 MR. BLASIER:

Did you ever ask?

# 109 MR. MARTZ:

I've asked many times and I don't think I have gotten a satisfactory answer.

# 110 MR. BLASIER:

Is there more blood on Q207 than Q206?

# 111 MR. MARTZ:

Are you talking the total amount that is on 206 versus 207?

# 112 MR. BLASIER:

Yeah.

# 113 MR. MARTZ:

Or where the cut--

# 114 MR. BLASIER:

Now, your cutting, your Q206 cutting?

# 115 MR. MARTZ:

I tried to take the same amounts of cuttings from both. I tried to get the same amount of blood.

# 116 MR. BLASIER:

You didn't do a cutting on Q207, did you?

# 117 MR. MARTZ:

Yes.

# 118 MR. BLASIER:

Q207?

# 119 MR. MARTZ:

Yeah, the first day. The charts are labeled 206/207.

# 120 MR. BLASIER:

Did you have a lot of Q207 left over?

# 121 MR. MARTZ:

It is all relevant--relative. I didn't use as much as I was presented. There is more present now--there is less present now than there was when I started.

# 122 MR. BLASIER:

So you didn't use all of Q207 to try to get as much blood as possible so that you could have higher amounts of blood to look for EDTA, did you?

# 123 MR. MARTZ:

As I mentioned earlier, in all the cases--

# 124 MR. BLASIER:

Move to strike, nonresponsive.

# 125 THE COURT:

Sustained. Reask the question.

# 126 MR. BLASIER:

You did not use all of Q207 which had much more blood than the cutting you took, correct?

# 127 MR. MARTZ:

I don't agree with that.

# 128 MR. BLASIER:

How much did you cut out of Q207?

# 129 MR. MARTZ:

In all cases I took larger than the minimum amount that was needed and I combined 206 and 207.

# 130 MR. BLASIER:

And you had determined the minimum amount you needed from your calculations of sizes of blood drops and what size square swatch you would need to have minimum amounts of blood, correct?

# 131 MR. MARTZ:

Yes.

# 132 MR. BLASIER:

Did you suspect, when you saw the 160 ion in the back gate and the sock, that there might be EDTA there?

KEY QUOTE

# 133 MR. MARTZ:

Yeah, yes.

# 134 MR. BLASIER:

You could have used more blood than you used in that experiment to try and find the 132 daughter ion, couldn't you?

# 135 MR. MARTZ:

Umm, I didn't believe that was relevant.

# 136 MR. BLASIER:

You could have used more blood, couldn't you, if you wanted to use a larger quantity of blood to try and find whether there was a true EDTA spectrum there, couldn't you?

# 137 MR. MARTZ:

To me it was irrelevant and I didn't want to consume all the evidence in case the Defense wanted to use it.

# 138 MR. BLASIER:

You asked--you said you called the Prosecution to see if you could get some more, didn't you?

# 139 MR. MARTZ:

Right.

# 140 MR. BLASIER:

That was for their test, right?

# 141 MR. MARTZ:

Yes, and I wanted to save some for the Defense.

# 142 MR. BLASIER:

Did they ever tell you that you had a limitation on what you could use?

# 143 MR. MARTZ:

No, but I generally will never consume all the evidence.

# 144 MR. BLASIER:

Did you ever ask for some more so that you could run larger quantities of blood to really determine whether there was EDTA there or not?

# 145 MR. MARTZ:

I didn't feel it was relevant.

# 146 MR. BLASIER:

Is the answer to that no, you didn't?

# 147 MR. MARTZ:

I didn't. What is the question?

# 148 MR. BLASIER:

You didn't make any effort to try and run more blood than you had run in your first set of tests to try and actually identify EDTA in the back gate and the sock, did you?

# 149 MR. MARTZ:

Well--

# 150 MS. CLARK:

Asked and answered.

# 151 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 152 MR. MARTZ:

Well, I did, and that is why I went to the positive ion mode the next day, because I felt that EDTA may be present in blood.

# 153 MR. BLASIER:

Move to strike, nonresponsive.

# 154 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 155 MR. BLASIER:

Quantity, Agent Martz. Did you ever try to test more blood that you had available to you when you suspect there was EDTA on the gate and the sock?

# 156 MR. MARTZ:

I felt there was a better way and that was to do the positive ion and that is the way I looked for the EDTA. It was ten times more sensitive.

# 157 MR. BLASIER:

Did you ever consider using more blood?

# 158 MR. MARTZ:

No.

# 159 MS. CLARK:

Objection. This is argumentative, your Honor.

# 160 THE COURT:

Overruled. Overruled.

# 161 MR. MARTZ:

I always try to save evidence in case the Defense wants to examine it.

KEY QUOTE

# 162 MR. BLASIER:

You had the sock at one point, didn't you?

# 163 MR. MARTZ:

Yes.

# 164 MR. BLASIER:

How large a cutting did you take compared to what was left on the sock?

# 165 MR. MARTZ:

I probably took no more than one/tenth would be just an estimate.

# 166 MR. BLASIER:

You had plenty of more sample on the sock, didn't you?

# 167 MR. MARTZ:

Yeah.

# 168 MR. BLASIER:

You weren't concerned with using up what you had available on the sock, were you?

# 169 MR. MARTZ:

I didn't know what all their testing needed to be done. If DNA testing needed to be done, there would be more blood needed. If it was just for EDTA--there is more things to be done than EDTA.

# 170 MR. BLASIER:

Did you ever ask, "Can I take another cutting since we are pretty close to minimum detectable limits"?

# 171 MR. MARTZ:

No, because we weren't concerned with that because minimum detectable limit had nothing to do with whether it was preserved or non-preserved blood. In preserved blood there was so much present it didn't make any difference.

# 172 MR. BLASIER:

If you test around minimum detectable amounts you are going to find less, aren't you, if it is there? A lot less, aren't you?

# 173 MR. MARTZ:

I don't know about a lot less. Every instrument has a minimum detectable limit and you either have it or you don't have it and the sock and the gate didn't have it.

# 174 MR. BLASIER:

Did you ever consider trying to test your suspicion that you founded EDTA by testing a larger quantity of blood?

# 175 MS. CLARK:

Objection, asked and answered, argumentative.

# 176 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 177 MR. MARTZ:

In this case?

# 178 MR. BLASIER:

Yes.

# 179 MR. MARTZ:

No.

# 180 MR. BLASIER:

No further questions.

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Roger Martz

I felt for the purposes that I did there was no reason to do it. The pictures are quite evident. I did it for dramatic effect just so you could see the pictures.

Martz admits his dilution experiment was theatrical rather than rigorous — no recorded conditions, no measured quantities, done for visual impact rather than scientific documentation.

Roger Martz

Did you suspect, when you saw the 160 ion in the back gate and the sock, that there might be EDTA there? Yeah, yes.

Martz concedes he suspected EDTA was present but still did not attempt to test larger blood quantities to confirm — undermining his claim that the absence of a signal meant absence of EDTA.

Roger Martz

No. I--the amount of blood makes absolutely no difference. It is the dilution factor that is important.

Martz's justification for not recording blood quantities — Blasier uses this to highlight a contradiction between his methodology and his later inability to remember any experimental conditions.

Roger Martz

I always try to save evidence in case the Defense wants to examine it.

Martz's stated reason for not using more sock material, which Blasier counters by pointing out Martz had acknowledged ample sample remained and had even called the prosecution for more.

Evidence (4)

Defense 1274

Photograph of five-microliter blood drops prepared by Martz on two different substrates

Introduced, shown to jury

Defense 1275

Second photograph from Martz's dilution experiment — substrate and blood quantity unrecorded

Marked for identification; objection sustained, not shown to jury

Informal

Q206 and Q207 — sock stain cuttings tested for EDTA

Discussed extensively; Blasier challenged whether Martz took sufficient sample

Informal

Back gate blood sample — also tested for EDTA with 160 ion detected

Referenced in context of Martz's suspicion of EDTA presence

Notable Exchanges (3)

Robert Blasier•Roger Martz

Blasier confronted Martz about telling him ten microliters an hour and a half earlier; Martz repeatedly said he couldn't remember what he said and couldn't recall the conditions of his own experiment.

revealing

Robert Blasier•Roger Martz

Blasier walked Martz through the logic: Martz suspected EDTA was present, had ample sample remaining on the sock (took only ~one-tenth of what was available), could have run larger quantities, and had no one telling him to conserve — yet never considered testing more blood.

strategic

Marcia Clark•Lance A. Ito

Clark objected to refreshing Martz's recollection on photos he had never compared; Ito overruled but then sustained her objection on 1275 after Blasier failed to lay sufficient foundation.

procedural

Credibility Attacks (3)

⚔ Roger Martz

Methodological challenge — inadequate documentation

Blasier established that Martz ran a dilution experiment with no recorded conditions, no measured blood quantities, and no notes, and that Martz admitted he did it 'for dramatic effect' rather than scientific rigor.

⚔ Roger Martz

Failure to pursue adequate testing

Blasier drew out that Martz suspected EDTA might be present on the sock and back gate, had ample sample remaining, faced no conservation constraints, yet never considered running larger blood quantities to confirm or rule out EDTA — repeatedly answering 'I didn't feel it was relevant.'

⚔ Roger Martz

Prior inconsistent statement

Blasier confronted Martz with a statement Martz allegedly made an hour and a half earlier about using ten microliters of blood in his experiment; Martz could not remember making the statement or what quantity he actually used.

Witness Demeanor

Martz repeatedly said 'I can't remember' and 'I don't know' regarding his own experimental conditions

Martz initially denied preparing one photograph, then corrected himself mid-examination after reviewing it

Objections

7 objections (1 sustained, 5 overruled)

Proceeding 7031 • 180 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103