Direct examination of Herbert MacDonell (part 4)

📄 Direct examination of Herbert MacDonell (part 4) — Monday, September 18, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\SEP\18\DIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-HERBERT-.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 156 of 167

Witness: Prof. Herbert MacDonell
Examiner: Peter Neufeld
Called by: Defense • Date: Monday, September 18, 1995 • Utterances: 17

Defense expert Herbert MacDonell answers two final questions on direct examination by Peter Neufeld. He testifies that blood smearing on the gloves could not account for 10-15% shrinkage, and he directly contradicts FBI Agent Bodziak's earlier testimony by asserting that thin bloodstains do not fade over time — they oxidize and darken, just like thick ones.

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

# 2 THE COURT:

All right. Deputy Bashmakian, would you hand that back to Professor MacDonell. Excuse me. Yeah. Professor, may I see that, please?

PROF. MACDONELL: Certainly.

# 3 THE COURT:

Thank you.

# 4 MR. NEUFELD:

May I continue?

# 5 THE COURT:

Two seconds.

# 6 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay.

# 7 (Brief pause.)

# 8 THE COURT:

All right. Professor, thank you. Mr. Neufeld.

# 9 MR. NEUFELD:

Thank you.

# 10 MR. NEUFELD:

Professor MacDonell, in your experiment and based on the experiment that you conducted, could the Rockingham glove and the Bundy glove be smeared with--I'm sorry--could the smearing of the Bundy glove and the Rockingham glove with blood on the evening of June 12th, 1994 account for 10 to 15 percent shrinkage in those gloves?

# 11 MS. CLARK:

Objection. That's irrelevant, calls for speculation.

# 12 THE COURT:

Overruled.

PROF. MACDONELL: I can't imagine it's at all possible, no.

# 13 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, let me ask you one other question not involving these gloves, sir. Did you hear FBI Agent Bodziak's testimony this morning and yesterday regarding the color changes that bloody shoeprint stains will undergo during the course of time?

PROF. MACDONELL: Yes, I did.

# 14 MR. NEUFELD:

And did you hear his testimony in which he said that whereas a glob of blood will turn from red to black or dark brown to black, a light bloodstain will not go through that color transformation, but instead will simply fade and get lighter and lighter? Do you recall that testimony?

PROF. MACDONELL: Yes, I do.

# 15 MR. NEUFELD:

Is agent Bodziak right scientifically, sir, when he says that?

PROF. MACDONELL: Scientifically, I wouldn't say so. Maybe that's what he observed. I don't know what he had his thin blood prints on. But that has not been my experience and I have them back in the 60's that are thin blood prints and they're still dark, they didn't fade.

# 16 MR. NEUFELD:

Could you please explain very briefly to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury what is the biochemical process that occurs that causes bloody prints, be they globs of blood or light bloody prints, to go from red to dark brown to black?

PROF. MACDONELL: Well, the color portion of blood, the red portion is hemoglobin, and as it oxidizes, it gets darker. And it doesn't matter whether it's a thin film or a thick film. It will get darker. I do not know of an instance where it has disappeared except some of my cardboard, the silverfish have eaten it away. But just chemically, it doesn't disappear.

# 17 MR. NEUFELD:

Thank you very much. No further questions.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

PROF. MACDONELL

Scientifically, I wouldn't say so. Maybe that's what he observed. I don't know what he had his thin blood prints on. But that has not been my experience and I have them back in the 60's that are thin blood prints and they're still dark, they didn't fade.

Direct scientific rebuttal of FBI Agent Bodziak's testimony about bloodstain color behavior — undermines the prosecution's shoeprint evidence analysis.

PROF. MACDONELL

I can't imagine it's at all possible, no.

Definitively rules out blood smearing as an explanation for the gloves' shrinkage, supporting the defense's theory that the gloves were planted or otherwise tampered with.

PROF. MACDONELL

The color portion of blood, the red portion is hemoglobin, and as it oxidizes, it gets darker. And it doesn't matter whether it's a thin film or a thick film. It will get darker.

Scientific explanation grounding his rebuttal of Bodziak — makes it accessible to the jury and harder to dismiss.

Evidence (2)

Informal

The Rockingham glove and the Bundy glove — discussed in context of whether blood smearing could cause 10-15% shrinkage

discussed

Informal

FBI Agent Bodziak's testimony about color changes in bloody shoeprint stains over time

challenged

Notable Exchanges (2)

Peter Neufeld•PROF. MACDONELL

MacDonell methodically rebuts Bodziak's color-change theory, citing his own decades-long samples from the 1960s as empirical counter-evidence.

strategic

Marcia Clark•Lance A. Ito

Clark objects to the glove shrinkage question as irrelevant speculation; Ito overrules without elaboration.

procedural

Light Moments (1)

PROF. MACDONELL

MacDonell notes that the only exception to bloodstains not disappearing is silverfish eating his cardboard samples.

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ FBI Agent Bodziak

expert contradiction

MacDonell disputes Bodziak's claim that thin bloodstains fade rather than darken, offering both personal empirical experience and biochemical explanation (hemoglobin oxidation) as the scientific basis for his disagreement.

Witness Demeanor

(Brief pause.) — after judge reviews exhibit before examination resumes

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)

Proceeding 7731 • 17 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103