Ms. Kestler, with respect to the knit -- with respect to the knit cap, item number 38, you indicate that on the interior of the cap was located 34 human hairs?
And were those two that were consistent with body hair found to be demonstrative of Negroid or Caucasian characteristics?
She didn't characterize them at this point, and she also didn't -- this is our hair analyst -- we have not had time to look at them to see if we can tell that. Very often body hair is so fine and so small it's impossible to determine origin.
Apparently it's not indicated here, and I don't have her notes. I just realized that she did not indicate roots or no roots.
And then the hairs that were determined to be primarily Caucasian, chemically treated blond hairs, those were from the exterior?
Is it your plan at this time to subject all of the hairs to both P.C.R. and microscopic analysis?
The only hairs that would be subjected to P.C.R. analysis would be those with the roots. The rest would be microscopic examination.
KEY QUOTEOkay. And based on -- in order to perform a microscopic analysis and comparison of hairs, how many head hairs do you need to retrieve from a suspect for the purpose of comparison?
I have a couple of references here, and the references all indicate 30 to 100 hairs. One of my references is from a book, "forensic science, an introduction to criminalistics," by Peter De forest, Robert gaensslen and Henry C. Lee.
Yes, it is. It's the only Henry Lee I know. I'm assuming that's the one I was questioned about. On page 211 --
On page 211, the first known samples of hair -- and we're talking about microscopic examination here, not D.N.A. analysis. They're two separate -- entirely separate types of analysis needing separate samples. "Known samples of hair should be given careful consideration. If questioned head hairs are to be submitted, then the known sample should contain representative samples from different parts of the scalp. Ordinarily, the hairs should not be cut. Vigorous combing or massaging of scalp will usually yield 30 to 40 --" and he uses the term "telogen hairs." That's basically adult hairs or fully grown hairs. "If the questioned sample is thought to contain anagen hairs -- " which are pre-adult hairs, if you will -- "then so must the known sample, and these must be plucked. It is advantageous to have both plucked and combed hairs in the known sample in any case, and they should be packaged and labeled separately." And then I have another quote from the F.B.I., from a symposium held on "proceedings of the international symposium on forensic hair comparisons," and again I have copies for anyone who wishes to read them.
May I refer you to -- Ms. Kestler, may I refer you to page 11 of that document that has been furnished to court and counsel which you furnished to me this morning. Page 11.
"It is recommended that a known head hair sample consist of at least 20 hairs from each of 5 different areas of the scalp," and then refers to, "center, front, back and both sides." "And that these hairs be obtained by both pulling and combing." And then it goes on to talk about a little bit of procedure in doing that collection. And then it goes on to talking about how we select that or what the routine procedure for selecting a random sample of those hundred hairs is. And that's where we have come up, over the years, from different sources, for wanting between 30 to 100 head hairs for microscopic comparison for the exemplar.
KEY QUOTENow, this article that you're quoting from, that you've just quoted from, was put out by the Federal Bureau of Investigation?
To the best of your knowledge, has the practice changed any among criminalists concerning the size of sample required for effective microscopic analysis of hairs?
And the book you quoted from, coauthored by Henry C. Lee, the portion that you have just read to us would seem to indicate also --
Reading the article that you've read to us, the portion of the article you've read to us from the book coauthored by Henry Lee, what do you deduce concerning his practice or advised practice in terms of the size of sample required to do an effective microscopic analysis of hairs?
Well, it appears to purport that the authors of this book indicate that a minimum of 30 to 40 hairs is necessary before you can do a -- before you have an adequate sample.
KEY QUOTEYour Honor, I'm going to ask that the pages that have been xeroxed by the witness be copied for both counsel and one for the court, and I'd like to mark it -- or also admit this for the Court's consideration in addition to the article that I've furnished the court with this morning.
All right. Did you want to then Mark those as actual exhibits with regard to the motion?
And so we'll denote "proceedings of the international symposium on forensic hair comparisons" article is people's exhibit number 1 for purposes of this motion only.
Yes, Your Honor. It's entitled "forensic science, an introduction to criminalistics," authored by Peter de forest, R.E. Gaensslen, g-a-e-n-s-s-l-e-n, and Henry C. Lee.
With respect to the information that you've given us concerning D.N.A. analysis and the quantities of evidence required to perform those tests, where did you get that information?
The analysis -- the amount of sample needed for D.N.A. analysis has been given to us over the years by different entities and experts in the field, including the F.B.I., Cellmark private laboratory, Cellmark diagnostics. Obviously, before we send something to them, we needed to know that they purported to be the minimum sample that was required. It began when we first started the quarter size sample of blood that was necessary to do R.F.L.P. analysis and they've progressed to what they refer to as a nickel size, which equates to one of our one centimeter square swatches soaked heavily with blood.
So do you undertake to conduct that evaluation with respect to blood evidence on a routine basis, and that evaluation being whether or not an evidence sample of blood is sufficient in quantity or quality for D.N.A. testing?
Yes. We do -- we have sent out over 100 cases for R.F.L.P., all of which have been evaluated in the same manner that we discussed here today, and those contained in excess of 400 items, which we've evaluated for R.F.L.P. or P.C.R. or other types of analysis. And it's basically done on the basis that we discussed here today.
KEY QUOTESo the evaluation process to determine how much -- whether you have a sufficient sample for further testing is something that is done by you on a routine basis?
And have you previously been consulted before as to whether there is sufficient evidence blood to allow for a split?
Yes. In the last couple of recent years, I've turned that over to other people, but in the beginning when we first began sending out D.N.A., I strictly did the evaluation myself.
The only hairs that would be subjected to P.C.R. analysis would be those with the roots. The rest would be microscopic examination.
It is recommended that a known head hair sample consist of at least 20 hairs from each of 5 different areas of the scalp
Well, it appears to purport that the authors of this book indicate that a minimum of 30 to 40 hairs is necessary before you can do a -- before you have an adequate sample.
We have sent out over 100 cases for R.F.L.P., all of which have been evaluated in the same manner that we discussed here today, and those contained in excess of 400 items