Over the years I've read different portions. It's basically a reference book. I sort of collect books on forensic evidence, and especially by people I know, and I know all the authors of this book personally. So I have, you know, read different parts here and there. I haven't read the whole thing. It's repetitive of many things. There's only small sections on hair and blood. There's other sections on, you know -- this is entirely forensic science. It's an introduction to criminalistics.
Regarding the section on hair that you have relied on in forming your opinion, did the authors of that book say how many hairs should be plucked for comparison for D.N.A. analysis?
I don't recall, because this was written in 1983, and so for D.N.A. -- again, D.N.A., it takes a minimum -- first of all, we're not going to do D.N.A. on any of the hair we're asking for. We're only asking for the hair for microscopic comparison purposes.
Yes. We need roots for microscopic comparison purposes. It's not a valid sample to be only looking at the shaft and not the entire hair.
My question now is, in reading the book that you've relied on in making your opinion, does it say how many hair samples of roots should be obtained?
Objection; vague. For what purpose; microscopic analysis? What is counsel referring to?
On page 211 -- I believe I've referred to it before -- it says, "ordinarily the hairs should not be cut," which indicates plucking right off. They suggest plucking -- they suggest plucking them all. That's the inference I read here.
It says, "known samples -- " these are the known samples "-- should be given careful consideration. If questioned hairs are to be submitted -- " and that's our evidence hairs " -- then the known sample -- " that's what we're asking for " -- should contain representative samples from different parts of the scalp. Ordinarily the hairs should not be cut. Vigorous combing or massaging of the scalp will usually yield 30 to 40 telogen hairs," or essentially adult hairs or viable hairs. "If the questioned sample is thought to contain anagen hairs -- " which is undeveloped hairs " -- then so must the known sample, and these must be plucked." You cannot shake those out.
It says, "ordinarily all the -- " it says, "ordinarily the hairs should not be cut." That's all 30 or 40 of them. And it says here that if you vigorously comb or massage the head, that you should be able to yield 30 or 40 hairs with roots. It's what they're inferring.
So what you're relying upon, then, is that a vigorous massaging of Mr. Simpson's head, along with combing, should give you sufficient sample.
That's what that one reference refers to. The reference of preference -- I brought that specifically because of your reference to Dr. Lee this morning. And that's an older reference than the F.B.I. symposium reference, which indicates on page 11, "that these hairs be obtained by both pulling and combing," and they don't give a number. And no, we don't need a lot of roots.
KEY QUOTEDo you know approximately how many hairs, typical human head, male human head, contains?
It varies. It varies. I mean, just in looking around the room, it varies totally. I didn't mean that to be funny. It varies greatly.
All right. In the course of an average day, is there some number of hairs that one loses just through the normal course of the day, combing hair and --
Again, there's a random average of what you shed on a daily basis, but you tend to shed dead hairs which don't necessarily contain roots.
So when we're talking about 100 hairs, which is the most that your periodical indicates, is that like a lot of hairs compared to the total number of hairs on a human head?
No, it is not. Not on someone with full human hair. I would say someone -- and I don't want to point anyone out in the room, but I would say if someone is balding to an excessive degree, I guess 100 hairs would be a lot, and then you don't have all five areas to pluck from, so you're only going to pluck from areas available. So we're flexible here. That's why we say 30 to 100. We don't say we have to have 100 hairs.
No, I have not.
They suggest plucking them all. That's the inference I read here.
That's what that one reference refers to.
But we need more than one.
That's why we say 30 to 100. We don't say we have to have 100 hairs.