All right. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Please be seated. All right. Let the record reflect we have been rejoined by all the members of our jury panel. Mr. Deedrick, would you resume the witness stand, please. And good afternoon again, Mr. Deedrick. Miss Clark, you had a couple more questions?
Mr. Deedrick, we asked you--you were asked a little bit on cross-examination about whether an imprint could have been a shoeprint on the jeans. You recall that question?
In your experience, sir, is there a difference, based on what you have seen in the past, between the nature of a fabric impression and a shoeprint impression?
Well, fabric impressions are often a little more hazy, because it is soft, it doesn't leave a very sharp line, sharp indication, like a hard surface would.
KEY QUOTENow, is the science--you talked a little bit about various kind of imprint analysis, you talked about firearms identification, striations on a bullet and fingerprints. Is the science of imprint analysis an old science, sir?
Okay. And when you find, for example, a bloody fingerprint at a crime scene, you have a suspect, do you require the suspect to make his fingerprint in blood before you compare those fingerprints?
So even when you have a bloody fingerprint, you compare that fingerprint in blood to a print taken from the suspect?
KEY QUOTEfabric impressions are often a little more hazy, because it is soft, it doesn't leave a very sharp line, sharp indication, like a hard surface would.
No, they are made in ink. They are inked prints.
So even when you have a bloody fingerprint, you compare that fingerprint in blood to a print taken from the suspect?