Post by Lynn Gweeny (from the other place):
I was a little slow on getting fast enough to the recorder to get what occurred before this, but heres what I was able to transcribe of AJs hypothetical question to Dr. Herold about the Caplan/Dr. Lee matter:
AJ: When I talk to you about an attorney for the defendant, Im not talking about anybody on the current defense team, okay. As a matter of fact, just assume that her name was Sara Caplan. This attorney saw on the ground in the foyer area what she described to be a small, white, flat, solid object with uneven edges. She described it to be about the size of a fingernail when she was asked. Assume for purposes of my hypothetical, that she pointed it out to Dr. Henry Lee. Dr. Henry Lee looked at it and then recovered the small, white, flat object with tweezers and put that object in a vial and put a stopper in the vial. Assume for purposes of this question, that Dr. Henry Lee was the last person in whose possession that fingernail-sized item was seen. Assume for purposes of my question, that that item has never been turned over to the court or to the prosecution or to any one of the defense attorneys. But, that item was in fact last seen in Dr. Lees possession and has not been seen since. My question is this Dr. Herold, if that small, white, flat object had in fact been properly turned over either to the court or to the prosecution and ultimately turned over to you, would that have assisted you in your ability to reconstruct other parts of this crime scene, potentially?
LH: Maybe, and maybe not.
AJ: All right. Describe that to us please. What do you mean by that answer?
LH: When you have any object that is picked up at a crime scene, you treat it as potential evidence. The first thing you need to do is confirm what it is or identify what it is. Sometimes you pick up something because you dont know what it is, and whether it is relevant or not. So, were back to the I need to know what it is, and not because somebody told me what it was, but I do something that will positively identify what it is. Frequently when working crime scenes, objects may appear to be, youre working in less than good environmental conditions, so theyre not always what they were thought to be when you pick them up. So, first you need to confirm what it is, then you ask yourself where did this come from, what is its possible source, and then you ask yourself what has that got to do with the rest of the information that you have about the case. And, it may or may not be relevant to the case. You dont know if you dont have the object to examine, whether it is important or not.
AJ: So, it could have been important?
LH: It could have.
AJ: And, youll never know because you dont have it?
LH: Correct.
AJ: That item, or an item that can reasonably be described as looking like that item, has never been turned over to you or the Scientific Services Bureau of the Los Angeles County Crime Lab, correct?
LH: Correct.
AJ: Dr. Herold, my last question, despite any missing or potentially missing evidence or concealed evidence, uh, were you still able to scientifically analyze what was present at the scene and make scientific conclusions about the relative positions of Lana Clarkson, of the gun, and of Phil Spectors white jacket?
LH: Yes.
AJ: Thank you.
In more ways than one. :blushing:
