Sidebar: blood spot photographs

📄 Sidebar: blood spot photographs — Wednesday, July 26, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\JUL\26\SIDEBAR-BLOOD-SPOT-PHOTOGRAPHS.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 122 of 167

◀ Redirect examination of Roger Martz (afternoon, part 1) Redirect examination of Roger Martz (afternoon, part 2) ▶

Date: Wednesday, July 26, 1995 • Utterances: 25

A sidebar in which defense attorney Blasier attempts to use FBI Agent Martz's own photographs of blood drops (5 and 10 microliters) to argue that visual inspection alone cannot determine blood quantity — undermining Martz's analytical methodology in the EDTA testing. Clark objected that the photos were taken for a different purpose (demonstrating dilution factors) and that the substrates and conditions differed from the actual evidence. Judge Ito sustained the objection.

# 1 (The following proceedings were held at the bench:)

# 2 MS. CLARK:

The problem with this--

# 3 THE COURT:

All right. We are over at the side bar. Before me there are two photographs that appear to have blood drops on them.

# 4 MR. BLASIER:

I will tell you what these are. These are photographs he provided. That is ten microliters of blood, (Indicating). That is five, (Indicating). You can't tell by the appearance.

# 5 MS. CLARK:

Okay. The point of--these photographs were not taken for that purpose at all. And so we are trying to show photographs that were taken for one purpose to try and impact on a completely different area. What Agent Martz was attempting to do here was show dilution factors and what he was attempting to do is show that in order to get the EDTA levels that were demonstrated on the evidence, you would have to--if it was indeed preserved blood initially, what you would have to do is dilute it to the point where you could no longer see blood at all. That was the point. And so these blood drops were never measured.

# 6 THE COURT:

So you are asking how much blood is in here?

# 7 MR. BLASIER:

He told me; ten microliters.

# 8 MS. CLARK:

There is no scale.

# 9 MR. BLASIER:

The scale is the same. He told me that, too. This is the same as this, (Indicating). Same scale.

# 10 THE COURT:

He provided you with this?

# 11 MR. BLASIER:

Yes, and this, (Indicating).

# 12 THE COURT:

And the question is going to be what?

# 13 MR. BLASIER:

Whether you can accurately determine quantities by looking at spots.

# 14 MS. CLARK:

The unfairness of it is the different substrate obviously. Here we have it on paper, here we have it on whatever that is. I don't know what that is.

# 15 MR. BLASIER:

He didn't use the same substrate between the evidence and his controls either.

# 16 MS. CLARK:

But that is not--yeah, but that was--he did. He used the same substrate for the gate, he used the cotton swatch, and for the sock he used the sock.

# 17 MR. BLASIER:

For the controls he used his own material.

# 18 MS. CLARK:

That is different.

# 19 THE COURT:

Hold on. The issue here, though, is can you show somebody photographs and ask them to tell you how much blood is there from blood spots?

KEY QUOTE

# 20 MR. BLASIER:

No. The issue is--this is his own photography showing--proving that you cannot look at a spot and tell how much blood is there. This is smaller and has twice as much blood. He said that that is his analytical method.

# 21 MS. CLARK:

And you have different substrates and different purposes here. It is not the same condition. We are asking him to estimate under different conditions when he was talking about in terms of estimating sample size.

# 22 MR. BLASIER:

Ask him to estimate?

# 23 MS. CLARK:

Apples and oranges.

# 24 MR. BLASIER:

He told me.

# 25 THE COURT:

The objection is sustained.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Robert Blasier

This is smaller and has twice as much blood. He said that that is his analytical method.

Blasier's core argument: Martz's own photos prove you cannot estimate blood volume by looking at a spot, directly attacking the FBI's EDTA analysis methodology.

Marcia Clark

Apples and oranges.

Clark's blunt dismissal of the comparison — different substrates, different experimental purposes — captures the prosecution's objection in two words.

Marcia Clark

What Agent Martz was attempting to do here was show dilution factors and what he was attempting to do is show that in order to get the EDTA levels that were demonstrated on the evidence, you would have to--if it was indeed preserved blood initially, what you would have to do is dilute it to the point where you could no longer see blood at all.

Clark explains the original purpose of the photographs, arguing they cannot be repurposed for a different evidentiary argument without distorting their meaning.

Lance A. Ito

The issue here, though, is can you show somebody photographs and ask them to tell you how much blood is there from blood spots?

Ito cuts to the heart of the dispute, framing it as a question of what the jury could fairly infer from the photographs.

Evidence (1)

Informal

Two photographs provided by Agent Martz showing blood drops of 10 microliters and 5 microliters on paper substrate, originally taken to demonstrate dilution factors in EDTA testing

offered by defense, objection sustained — excluded

Notable Exchanges (2)

Robert Blasier•Marcia Clark

Blasier argues that Martz's own photographs prove visual inspection cannot determine blood quantity; Clark counters that the photos were taken for a different purpose (dilution demonstration) and that different substrates make the comparison invalid.

strategic

Robert Blasier•Marcia Clark

Brief but pointed dispute over whether Martz used consistent substrates in his controls vs. actual evidence. Clark argues he matched substrates (cotton swatch for gate, sock for sock); Blasier notes the controls used Martz's own material.

technical

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Agent Martz

use of witness's own evidence against methodology

Blasier attempted to use Martz's own photographs to demonstrate that his analytical method of visually estimating blood quantity from spots was unreliable — the photos allegedly showed that a smaller-looking spot contained twice as much blood.

Objections

1 objections (1 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 7030 • 25 utterances

Criminal Trial

Department 103