Pink Panther
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2004
- Messages
- 10,700
- Reaction score
- 173
oh goody! He's coming back!
2011.06.13 TRIAL Day Seventeen (Morning Session)
- Thread starter beach
- Start date
- Status
barrysgirl
Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2008
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 0
wait. what?? explain this to me please?
Pink Panther
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2004
- Messages
- 10,700
- Reaction score
- 173
...here he goes...
wenwe4
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 9,499
- Reaction score
- 7,359
JB cross w/Shaw FBI - examine hair and charcteristic present based upon training and experience reach conclusions....when 2 other examiners made their initial conclusions - they were wrong? made errors....realized between themselves they made errors and excluded the errors...
JB rephrase - don't know if post-mortem root banding is exclusive to someone deceased....correct - never say it is from a dead person...person who made the call - wrong with what post-mortem root band......they excluded those hairs
examiner A & B - have same training with less experience - 2 examiners not involved initial analysis of the hairs.....both seen apparant decomp in hairs...and post-mortem root band...A's opinion in initial analysis different than Shaw opinion - same w/examiner B, in initial analysis.....ongoing research....pretty well established discipline...most part based on experience - known hairs from living individuals and post-mortem root band.....first time testifying in court on root hair banding...in depo in Wash DC ...subsequent to depo - submitted after depo and after reports...
report written, testified under oath and then did a validation study for post-mortem root banding - based primarily on experience -not alot of research on ante-mortem....after coming on thesis....cant say post-mortem root band can't say is from dead person.....subjecting hairs to differing environment can cause darkening and 2 examiners trained initially were wrong.....
shed 100 hairs per day- found frequently @ scenes....transfer hairs ....indirect transfer or secondary transfer....hairs shed on other items or transferred to another person....if only find 1 hair - consistent with transfer? one hair left @ crime scene - can't tell how that hair got to that location....only 1 hair vs. multiple hairs ....finding any hairs separate from person's scalp is transfer .....transfer whether one or many hairs.....rather than that person being @ the location more consistent with transfer with 1 hair vs. many...direct transfer.....it may be - don't know if directly transferred....or transferred from another person or item...
enviromentals in your study ....@ Quantico VA between months of Aug and April - gets cool in VA - heat plays role in decomp....heat can increase rate of decomp but not his area of expertise.....
RE-direct
JA - brush like appearance is indicator of further decomp? yes....2 hairs JB spoke about the examiners that missed initially in analysis....submerged in water 17 days.....not stored in trunk of car.....Q-12 pulled hair....seen thousands of hairs...have you ever seen a hair with a decomp band that didn't come from a corpse? NO have not.
JB recross- first time testified about this topic...yes....aware of thesis conducted that you based this study on the underlying conclusion.....read and familiar with it....are you aware of the conclusion...(object- sidebar)
FaerieB
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2009
- Messages
- 2,103
- Reaction score
- -40
Not many. Found this one:
bobkealing bob kealing
#CaseyAnthony jury taking very few notes of this cross. Most just listening.
azscr4mbl3r
New Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2011
- Messages
- 464
- Reaction score
- 0
Xombies... IE squirrels, it has been established dead squirrels climbed into ICA's car
okiedokietoo
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 3,398
- Reaction score
- -14
JA:
Shaw: brush like appearance from hair mat, more advanced decomp
JA: Q12 hair, was it a shed hair
Shaw: no, hair was removed by force
JA: ever see hair with decomp band that didn't come from a corpse
Shaw: No
JB: 1st time testified about this, are you aware of the thesis based on this study
JA: Sidebar
Shaw: brush like appearance from hair mat, more advanced decomp
JA: Q12 hair, was it a shed hair
Shaw: no, hair was removed by force
JA: ever see hair with decomp band that didn't come from a corpse
Shaw: No
JB: 1st time testified about this, are you aware of the thesis based on this study
JA: Sidebar
Oh good! Do you have ANY idea what JB is talking about?
I'm trying, but so far I feel like my dog when he's chasing his tail around in a circle.... :crazy:
Donjeta
Adji Desir, missing from Florida
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 19,246
- Reaction score
- 547
Cross by JB
You testified that when you got the hairmat that the characteristics were not similar.
What I was talking about was the characteristics of the root portions.
The hair in the trunk had root material below the band.
So there was a different appearance and that's why you testified they were not similar.
Speaking strictly of the root portions, yes.
JB refers to a study in which apparent postmortem banding were found in living people.
Witness disagrees, they found banding in a different position.
Does that best fit the Q59 sample?
The hair mass did not have much of any root material left.
You see darkenning in the root or near the root, in live people?
Yes.
You see striations higher up.
And you say the difference is obvious?
Apparent decomposition includes several types of changes, it's a broader term.
That's why Ms. Lowe indicated in the report that there was apparent decomposition.
So it's apparent to you but it wasn't apparent to your examiners?
Correct, they identified some living hairs as banded.
You examine them under the microscope and make a call?
Correct.
So these two examiners were wrong?
Correct.
So what they say is banding is different from what you say is banding.
Incorrect. They realized there were errors in their initial analysis and corrected.
You don't know if PMHB is exclusively from dead people and couldn't testify to that.
Correct.
So they were wrong compared to what you consider PMHB.
They are just as trained and have as much experience as you do.
Less.
So why did you choose less experienced examiners?
They weren't involved in the initial stages of study.
So when Examiner A examined root his opinion was different from yours.
Correct, in that initial analysis.
So when Examiner B examined root his opinion was different from yours.
Correct, in that initial analysis.
It's a new research?
based on hair examiner experience.
You were deposed? JA was present? I was present?
Subsequently you did this study, after the depositions.
So you wrote your report?
Correct
And you testified?
Correct
And then you did a validation study.
Correct. I would say it was already validated based on experience.
A huge part of what you've established is that you can't say PMHB comes from dead persons, and various conditions can get darkening in a hair to the point that a trained examiner can identify root banding.
Correct.
Q12 is only one hair.
Correct.
We shed on average around 100 hairs a day.
Sometimes we brush our hair and hair will stick on clothing, right?
Correct
Hairs are found everywhere.
Yes.
It's one of the most frequent things that are left in the scene.
Yes, we see it a lot.
Some of it are transfer. I have some contact with you and I can transfer your hair
Yes, indirect transfer,
Or secondary transfer.
If you only find one hair that's consistent with transfer, right. It doesn't mean the person was there, right?
Right, I can't tell you how the hair got there.
If you find multiple hairs, numerous hairs, that's not as consistent with transfer as if you only find one hair.
Well, finding any hairs separate from the person's scalp, we don't know how it got there, if it was directly transfered or indirectly transfered.
And to conclude from your study, the conditions were completely different. They weren't done in Florida?
No, they were done in Quantico Virginia, between August and April.
Heat plays a role in decomposition?
It is my understanding that it does but it's not my area of expertise
Recross:
Is there an indication of further decomposition in the hair mat?
Yes.
What were the hairs that the error occurred?
They were both submerged in water.
Not in a trunk?
No.
Was Q12 shed?
No.
Would it be a fair assessment that you've seen thousands of hairs?
Yes.
Have you ever seen hair with decomp band that didn't come from a corpse?
No.
Recross
This is the first time you've testified about this.
yes.
Are you aware of the thesis that you based this study on, the conclusion?
I read it and I'm familiar with it.
Objection, hearsay.
Sidebar.
You testified that when you got the hairmat that the characteristics were not similar.
What I was talking about was the characteristics of the root portions.
The hair in the trunk had root material below the band.
So there was a different appearance and that's why you testified they were not similar.
Speaking strictly of the root portions, yes.
JB refers to a study in which apparent postmortem banding were found in living people.
Witness disagrees, they found banding in a different position.
Does that best fit the Q59 sample?
The hair mass did not have much of any root material left.
You see darkenning in the root or near the root, in live people?
Yes.
You see striations higher up.
And you say the difference is obvious?
Apparent decomposition includes several types of changes, it's a broader term.
That's why Ms. Lowe indicated in the report that there was apparent decomposition.
So it's apparent to you but it wasn't apparent to your examiners?
Correct, they identified some living hairs as banded.
You examine them under the microscope and make a call?
Correct.
So these two examiners were wrong?
Correct.
So what they say is banding is different from what you say is banding.
Incorrect. They realized there were errors in their initial analysis and corrected.
You don't know if PMHB is exclusively from dead people and couldn't testify to that.
Correct.
So they were wrong compared to what you consider PMHB.
They are just as trained and have as much experience as you do.
Less.
So why did you choose less experienced examiners?
They weren't involved in the initial stages of study.
So when Examiner A examined root his opinion was different from yours.
Correct, in that initial analysis.
So when Examiner B examined root his opinion was different from yours.
Correct, in that initial analysis.
It's a new research?
based on hair examiner experience.
You were deposed? JA was present? I was present?
Subsequently you did this study, after the depositions.
So you wrote your report?
Correct
And you testified?
Correct
And then you did a validation study.
Correct. I would say it was already validated based on experience.
A huge part of what you've established is that you can't say PMHB comes from dead persons, and various conditions can get darkening in a hair to the point that a trained examiner can identify root banding.
Correct.
Q12 is only one hair.
Correct.
We shed on average around 100 hairs a day.
Sometimes we brush our hair and hair will stick on clothing, right?
Correct
Hairs are found everywhere.
Yes.
It's one of the most frequent things that are left in the scene.
Yes, we see it a lot.
Some of it are transfer. I have some contact with you and I can transfer your hair
Yes, indirect transfer,
Or secondary transfer.
If you only find one hair that's consistent with transfer, right. It doesn't mean the person was there, right?
Right, I can't tell you how the hair got there.
If you find multiple hairs, numerous hairs, that's not as consistent with transfer as if you only find one hair.
Well, finding any hairs separate from the person's scalp, we don't know how it got there, if it was directly transfered or indirectly transfered.
And to conclude from your study, the conditions were completely different. They weren't done in Florida?
No, they were done in Quantico Virginia, between August and April.
Heat plays a role in decomposition?
It is my understanding that it does but it's not my area of expertise
Recross:
Is there an indication of further decomposition in the hair mat?
Yes.
What were the hairs that the error occurred?
They were both submerged in water.
Not in a trunk?
No.
Was Q12 shed?
No.
Would it be a fair assessment that you've seen thousands of hairs?
Yes.
Have you ever seen hair with decomp band that didn't come from a corpse?
No.
Recross
This is the first time you've testified about this.
yes.
Are you aware of the thesis that you based this study on, the conclusion?
I read it and I'm familiar with it.
Objection, hearsay.
Sidebar.
mysticrose
The key to change... is to let go of fear
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 8,436
- Reaction score
- 144
PLEASE no more cross from JB 
I can't take it anymore, please put CM up Please.
I can't take it anymore, please put CM up Please.Professor Baez - is lost behind the Wizard of OZ screen all smoke and mirrors.:maddening::maddening::maddening:
cloud9
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2005
- Messages
- 1,872
- Reaction score
- -22
barrysgirl
Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2008
- Messages
- 638
- Reaction score
- 0
removed by force? omg did she pull the baby's hair out???????????
Was it CM or JB? I guess either way is yuck. But CM???
luvmy4brats
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 299
- Reaction score
- 0
With 9 inch long hair.
- Status