Mr. Matheson, if we had a mixture that included pgm subtype 2+2- plus some other subtype, at some point, in terms of the ratio of the mixture, the other subtype would be masked and would not appear in your results; isn't that correct?
this is similar to what we were talking about for -- if there was a completely foreign type besides 2+ or 2-?
If you got to the point other blood was diluted to the point it didn't show up, you would still see it.
I suppose at some point it is possible where you would still see the a and not the subtype.
KEY QUOTEDo you make some sort of calculation as to how much of the sample you are consuming in the course of the tests that you are running?
Yes, I can. Referring to my analysis notes, I consumed a portion of one of the swatches that was available to me that was approximately 6 millimeters by 3. Approximation. That left two swatches plus a portion of that one remaining that I worked on.
So each of these tests that you perform consumes a certain proportion of the sample that you have available to test?
With respect to the sample of the item No. 17, the blood of O.J. Simpson, did you similarly inventory how much of that sample you consumed?
The proportion that would be consumed would have been, oh, a stain of -- well, consisting of significantly less than one drop out of the vial, which, when I received it, had about 2 milliliters of blood in it. So it would have been an insignificant quantity to the amount that was present.
KEY QUOTEI suppose at some point it is possible where you would still see the a and not the subtype.
I consumed a portion of one of the swatches that was available to me that was approximately 6 millimeters by 3. Approximation. That left two swatches plus a portion of that one remaining that I worked on.
The proportion that would be consumed would have been, oh, a stain of -- well, consisting of significantly less than one drop out of the vial, which, when I received it, had about 2 milliliters of blood in it.