Professor MacDonell, does the official U.S. weather service report that you have in front of you state what the relative humidity was at each of those different hourly readings?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes, it does.
And what was the relative humidity range from 10:50 in the evening of June 12th until approximately 9:50 in the morning on June 13th?
PROF. MACDONELL: The total range was 72.7 to 81 percent. But I should point out, this doesn't mean it starts at the low value and goes to the high value any more than the temperature. That was the maximum range. It doesn't mean the lowest temperature was the first reading. So it ranged in those--between those figures I've given.
And, sir, what was the humidity that you set in your drying chamber?
PROF. MACDONELL: I set the humidity--you don't set it. You use a system of chemicals to establish a constant humidity by which hydrometers are calibrated, and the nearest mixture that I could produce was 85 percent, which was slightly higher than the percent listed, but not from what I was first informed, which was in error. It was 85 percent.
And, sir, on the official U.S. weather service report, is there a column which indicates whether or not there was any precipitation taken during each of those hours?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes.
And, sir, at any time from 10:50 in the evening on June 12th through 9:50 in the morning on June 13th, was there any recorded precipitation?
PROF. MACDONELL: There's many columns here. I've got to find the right one. Pardon me. There was none. Zero.
And, sir, during that same period of 10:50 P.M. to 9:50 A.M., was there any dew on the ground?
PROF. MACDONELL: No. The dew point never got within six degrees--the temperature never got within 60 degrees of dew point, which is the point where you would see condensation or dew moisture.
And, sir, is there a column in the official weather service reports to indicate the presence of any obstruction, any visual obstruction such as fog or haze?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes.
And do the reports indicate whether there was any ground fog at all that would obstruct one's view from 10:50 in the evening on June 12th to 9:20 in the morning on June 13th?
Objection. That's irrelevant, beyond the scope, your Honor, beyond the scope of his expertise.
Do the reports indicate, sir, what the visibility level was for each--
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes.
Professor MacDonell, are you aware of the fact that the only official weather service readings throughout the entire night for the Los Angeles vicinity are those at lax?
Is there any indication at all in those official weather service reports there was any fog that could create any moisture on the ground on the night of June 12th and the morning hours of June 13?
Sustained. I think we have the basics. We have temperature and humidity. So let's move on.
Okay. Now, did you examine--visually examine the glove that was collected at Rockingham?
And did you have an opportunity to see the places where there is dry blood on the palm side of the glove and the backside of the glove?
PROF. MACDONELL: Well, there's stains which has been testified to as being blood. I did not test them, but there's certainly staining consistent with what bloodstains look like.
Professor MacDonell, here's a picture that was taken by the police of the glove at Rockingham, a close-up in the area where it was collected. Do you see that picture?
Photo Xerox because the original photograph is mounted on the board that is in the basement, your Honor.
And, sir, based on your expertise in the area of bloodstains and bloodstain analysis, if this glove had been dropped at that location within 10 or 15 minutes after the wet blood was smeared on it, would you expect to see blood on the leaves or on the pavement that the glove is resting on?
Sir, did you actually see the location of the bloodstains on the glove that was found at Rockingham?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes, I do.
And from looking at this photograph, would those areas that have bloodstains be in contact with the pavement and leaves directly beneath it?
Sir, are you aware of the fact that the criminalist in this case did not offer any testimony of seeing bloodstains either on pavement--
Now, you said that there came a time when the gloves were dry that you did this experiment on; is that right?
PROF. MACDONELL: That's correct.
And after they were dry, what did you then do with the two gloves?
PROF. MACDONELL: I copied them on the copy machine that I'd used before when I copied them prior to the experiment, same copy machine.
And did you then compare the Xerox copy of the gloves taken before you did the experiment with the transparency Xerox of the gloves after they had dried, having had all of this blood smeared on them?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes, I did.
And what, if any, shrinkage did you observe as a result of your experiment on both the left glove and the right glove?
PROF. MACDONELL: I would have to say it's negligible. They're certainly not congruent because they were done at different times, but I put them down as fairly as possible. That is to say, without any lateral teasing around to stretch them one way or another. Just laid them flat, did the experiment, when they're dried, laid them flat again, and they are not congruent and that is, they're not the same copy. But when you place one over the other and move it around slightly, I could detect no shrinkage or no linear or vertical or horizontal shrinkage at all or change in shift.
And, sir, do you have the Xeroxes and the transparencies that you made when you conducted this experiment with you today?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes, I do.
Could you take them out, sir? Let's start with the left glove first if you have that handy or the right glove, whichever is easiest for you.
Which glove do you have out?
PROF. MACDONELL: I don't have either glove, but I've got a transparent, a copy of one of the left gloves.
Okay. Let's start with the left glove. Now, we'll have to mark these for identification.
Why don't you give the red one. Red one. Left too? Just the left glove?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yeah, that's the left glove.
You'll have to bring me those back first because I don't want to mix up the left hand and the right hand.
All right. Thank you, counsel. Don't mix those up, Mr. Neufeld. He noticed it. Mr. Neufeld.
Fine. Let's begin with the left hand. You have in front of you three different items.
Let's make this 1379-A, B and C and then make the other hand 1380 if that's all right.
Professor MacDonell, could you please explain to the jury what 1379-A, B and C are?
A will be the four-shot, the predrying--I'm sorry--the pre-shrinkage experiment, Xerox of the glove. The brown transparency can be--after the gloves are dried will be B.
PROF. MACDONELL: That's not after. That's before. There are two before and one after for clarification.
All right. Well--okay. You mean, there's one transparency and one on white that's before?
PROF. MACDONELL: Shall I explain this?
Please do.
PROF. MACDONELL: The one on paper is before. "Lb" stands for "Left glove before experiment." I then made a left glove before transparency because I felt by having "Left after" in red was perhaps not easy to hold up to a light. So I thought I'd make it what I call "Jury friendly" and have them both transparencies. That's all. So my label "1" is before the experiment. My label "Upper left 2" is the same thing. It's the same identical picture, and then "3" is after in red. And you can compare 3 to 1 or 2, whichever seems to be the easiest for your eyesight.
Then with the court's permission, perhaps it would be easier not to introduce at all the one on white paper and simply introduce the two transparencies. The brown one will be transparency of the condition of the glove prior to the shrinkage experiment and the red transparency will reflect the condition of the glove after the shrinkage experiment.
--my personal examination of the one on the paper with the red, that it's easier to make the overlay comparison. But you're the lawyer.
All right. At this point, I--really to move this along--do it that way then and simply introduce--the one on the paper then will be a and the red overlay will be B and we will not introduce the other transparency.
Okay. And--so, Professor MacDonell, did you do the same thing for the right glove?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes, I did.
And could you please show the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what it appears to be, both the before photocopy and the post-shrinkage experiment transparency?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes. In this instance, my no. 7 is the right glove before which is on paper. It's not a transparency. The red transparency is the right glove after. And again, they are not congruent because they're not exactly the same. They were done hours and hours apart.
But was the one in red done only after the gloves were dry?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes. It says "RA," that's right after, and the other one says "RB," that's right before.
Your Honor, at this time, I would like to--and by the way, I think the second set should be marked Defendant's 1380-A and B with a being--unfortunately, a is going to be before and B is after.
And at this time, with the court's permission, I would like to be able to pass them to the jury.
Yes. Would you hand the left glove to juror no. 1 and the right glove to juror no. 7.
All right. Mr. Neufeld, would you collect those items, 1379 and 1380, from Deputy Bashmakian, please. All right. The record should reflect the jurors have had the opportunity to review both 1379 and 1380. Mr. Neufeld.
Yes. And remember when I asked you at the very beginning of your testimony, professor, whether or not you recall Mr. Rubin's testimony that the evidence gloves that he examined were 15 percent smaller than the--than new Aris light extra large gloves? Do you recall that?
Thanks.
PROF. MACDONELL: And on that basis, I prepared a way to show both 10 and 15 percent or 85 or 90 percent of the original.
KEY QUOTEOkay. Did you prepare transparencies which reflect these gloves if they were 10 percent smaller and 15 percent smaller than they are in the new condition?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes.
And how did you do that, sir?
PROF. MACDONELL: I prepared yet another master of the left glove by putting a ruler next to it and then using a variable enlargement reducing copier, not my own. I do not have one of that nature yet. I'm expecting one shortly. I set it at 90 percent and simply made, again, a red transparency that I could first check the ruler, which is quite faint, and see that it is exactly 90 percent. In other words, 100 centimeters on the smaller one only is 90--I'm sorry. 100 millimeters is only 90 millimeters on the original, and so it is a right exactly 90 percent as I read it. And that was just to show the reduction by placing the red transparency over the original to see how much smaller it would be, and that is--that is the figure I would give to the evidence gloves because I've examined them. They're--the gloves on my pictures are 10 inches. The extra gloves I have--and 90 percent of that is nine inches and the evidence gloves are nine inches. So I think it's 90 percent and not 85. But I also have prepared the 85 which is, of course, 15 percent reduction. And I would say simply that it goes from a man's size to a lady's size. It's very much smaller. But either way, it's incredible shrinkage.
Okay. Can you--is it possible--the way you have done the transparencies on the photocopying machine, is it possible for the jurors to actually compare what the Aris light extra large glove looked like before it was--had blood put on it in this case and your experiment and what gloves that are 10 percent smaller would look like and what gloves that are 15 percent smaller would look like?
PROF. MACDONELL: Yes, I'm sure they can. They just did it before. I watched them.
Your Honor, I would ask that the two reduced versions, the 10 percent, 15 percent be marked 1381-A and B and for--
Your Honor, I think for the purpose of this experiment, one hand should be adequate. So we'll do it just for the left hand. And I would ask, your Honor, at this time to be able to pass that around to the jurors as well.
(Deft's 1381-A and B for id = Xerox
Copies of glove experiment)
I could detect no shrinkage or no linear or vertical or horizontal shrinkage at all or change in shift.
The gloves on my pictures are 10 inches. The extra gloves I have--and 90 percent of that is nine inches and the evidence gloves are nine inches. So I think it's 90 percent and not 85. But I also have prepared the 85 which is, of course, 15 percent reduction. And I would say simply that it goes from a man's size to a lady's size. It's very much smaller. But either way, it's incredible shrinkage.
I thought I'd make it what I call 'Jury friendly' and have them both transparencies.
Thanks.