Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. All right. Mr. Matheson, would you resume the witness stand, please.
Gregory Matheson, The witness on the stand at the time of the noon recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:
All right. The record should reflect we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Mr. Gregory Matheson is again on the witness stand now undergoing redirect examination. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
THE JURY: Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, Mr. Matheson. You are reminded you are still under oath. Mr. Goldberg, you may commence your redirect examination.
Sir, I wanted to start out by asking you more about this EAP issue and I know we have discussed it at some length. You were asked about some literature during cross-examination. Do you recall that?
And specifically you were asked about four articles that you were shown on the witness stand that you read prior to your testimony in Court?
Now, you said at one point that those were the only articles that you considered prior to testifying about this EAP issue for your testimony in this proceeding?
Now, why on cross-examination didn't you tell the Defense about what was in this book?
All right. I would like to get into that in a little while, but first let's take a look at some of these articles that were referred to. Mr. Matheson, first on the Wraxall and Emes article--
And did this article actually contain a study that was done involving a number of samples to determine how it degrades, how the EAP marker degrades?
Now, on these stains that were studied in this particular article, were these stains in a wet condition or in a dry laboratory condition?
Now, the stains at the scene in this case, item 42, if we were to assume hypothetically that when Mr. Fung saw that he described it as being tacky when he arrived there at sometime after 10:15, would that distinguish the blood that we are talking about in our case from the type of blood that was studied in the Wraxall article?
Your Honor, I'm going to object. That misstates the testimony if he is talking about fingernails.
If the blood was tacky or damp, then that would be a different set of conditions.
KEY QUOTEAnd when you looked at the bindles on one of the fingernail scrapings in this case, there was some evidence that it was tacky even when it was collected; is that correct?
There was what appeared to be smearing on it that would indicate that it was still damp.
Now, why is this distinction between damp and dry stains in a laboratory condition--let me ask it another way. Why is a distinction between damp stains at a crime scene as opposed to dry stains in a laboratory setting significant?
But what is significant forensically about the different conditions in terms of degradation?
Well, damp conditions, like I mentioned before, hastens certain types of degradation. A dried sample or even a damp sample for that case that is subjected to heat is a different type of environmental situation and potentially could create a different type of result.
KEY QUOTENow, with respect to the Wraxall and Emes article--Wraxall and Emes article, did you, in interpreting that article, take this as a cautionary type statement with respect to the EAP marker?
Did you take this as a statement to a forensic analyst to use caution with the EAP marker in terms of typing it?
The crux of that and many of the other articles is just an indication that the EAP has a problem with degradation and you need to be careful about how it is interpreted.
Now, is it correct that with respect to these dried laboratory stains that they were talking about in Wraxall and Emes they did identify a particular degradation route?
And I would like to direct your attention back to our EAP board so maybe we can understand this.
While we are getting that maybe you can describe for us verbally what this degradation route was that was discussed both during cross-examination and also in Wraxall?
My understanding of it is similar to what was discussed before, that under those conditions in identifying the samples the way they are, you know, the process of identifying the types, the degradation route showed the progressive loss of the faster bands or the anodal bands so that you lose first an a2, b2, a1 and then eventually the b1.
Okay. Now, let's take this step-by-step. You used the term "anodal." What does that mean?
That is an electrical term that has reference to the positive side as opposed to the negative side, which is cathodal.
Looking at our EAP phenotype Board, the block diagrams that we used, can you tell us which is the anodal side of the diagram?
Looking at the diagram, the anodal is the plus sign on the left and the cathodal is on the right where the negative is.
Okay. So with respect to the BA phenotype, can you describe for us the degradation route that was discussed by Wraxall and Emes with respect to dried laboratory stains that were aged?
The degradation route, as was previously described but using this chart now to chart it, would mean that you would have a loss of the a band, which is indicated above the farthest to the left, then the B band, next one to the right of it, then the other a band, second band from the right, and then finally what has been marked as the C band.
Now, sir, in your experience as a serologist, and also based upon your reading of the literature, is that the only degradation route?
And generally speaking, maybe this is a slight oversimplification, you are saying this particular degradation route would be from the positive side to the negative side of the block diagram that we have?
I wasn't asked about it. I was limited to the articles.
If the blood was tacky or damp, then that would be a different set of conditions.
Damp conditions, like I mentioned before, hastens certain types of degradation. A dried sample or even a damp sample for that case that is subjected to heat is a different set of conditions and potentially could create a different type of result.
No, it is not.