GUILTY CA - Lana Clarkson, 40, fatally shot, Alhambra, 3 Feb 2003

[lisafremont]

I wonder if Dr Herold will be the next witness because she's got a lot of evidence to talk about, including the white stuff found on the gun.

 

[lisafremont]

Ooh! I have a thought on what the "white material" on the gun might be! What about fibers from the curity diaper?? Left there when Spector used it to wipe down the gun!!

 

[panthera]

I wonder if Dr Herold will be the next witness because she's got a lot of evidence to talk about, including the white stuff found on the gun.

good question! What do you think that is? I think it might be from the cloth.

 

[panthera]

Ooh! I have a thought on what the "white material" on the gun might be! What about fibers from the curity diaper?? Left there when Spector used it to wipe down the gun!!

I didn't see this post when I just answered ~ with the same idea.

 

[lisafremont]

We are BRILLIANT!!!\

 

[panthera]

We are BRILLIANT!!!\

:laugh: yes we are ~ that is if we're right! I was just guessing but I know that the soft cloth could leave little particles of fabric behind especially on a gun that had blood on it.

 

[lisafremont]

Well, I was just thinking about the lint that accumulates in the dryer screen, how fine it is and how common and it's just fibers cast off from the laundry. It stands to reason that if he used the diaper on the gun to clean it, an easy assumption since he prolly used the diapers for that very purpose, that trace evidence from the diaper would remain on the gun.

Whether that trace evidence was left before the murder (say from an ordinary cleaning) or after when he wiped evidence off the gun, I say that at the very least it shows the gun is his, and in the latter case, it incriminates him.

Is Plourd making any headway?

 

[panthera]

Well, I was just thinking about the lint that accumulates in the dryer screen, how fine it is and how common and it's just fibers cast off from the laundry. It stands to reason that if he used the diaper on the gun to clean it, an easy assumption since he prolly used the diapers for that very purpose, that trace evidence from the diaper would remain on the gun.

Whether that trace evidence was left before the murder (say from an ordinary cleaning) or after when he wiped evidence off the gun, I say that at the very least it shows the gun is his, and in the latter case, it incriminates him.

Is Plourd making any headway?

I don't know if he's making any headway since he's skipping around, but it seems to me that he's saying Lana's DNA was on the left part of the gun handle. All genetic markers consistent with Lana. I'm thinking maybe PS put the gun back in her hand afterward to get her DNA on it?

 

[prismvision]

I don't know if he's making any headway since he's skipping around, but it seems to me that he's saying Lana's DNA was on the left part of the gun handle. All genetic markers consistent with Lana. I'm thinking maybe PS put the gun back in her hand afterward to get her DNA on it?

IMO, he wiped the gun all over, so no need to put the gun in her hand. Her blood had saturated that gun so of course it wold be detectable everywhere.

 

[panthera]

IMO, he wiped the gun all over, so no need to put the gun in her hand. Her blood had saturated that gun so of course it wold be detectable everywhere.

I was thinking that he could've smeared it from the barrel to the handle too. I just can't see how his DNA was completely wiped off since he was handling the gun afterward.

 

[nellydee]

I wonder if Dr Herold will be the next witness because she's got a lot of evidence to talk about, including the white stuff found on the gun.

Lisa...I think Beth said Jamie Lindenmoot will be called next.:waitasec: She also testified at the evidentary hearing.

 

[prismvision]

I was thinking that he could've smeared it from the barrel to the handle too. I just can't see how his DNA was completely wiped off since he was handling the gun afterward.

They only swabbed 7 small spots on the gun, so i guess it's possible that hers was so predominant that his isn't as detectable...I remember Renteria saying something about this phenomenon yesterday...?? But also, I think that he wiped the gun with a wet rag, hence the water on the rag.

Just a thought...

 

[panthera]

They only swabbed 7 small spots on the gun, so i guess it's possible that hers was so predominant that his isn't as detectable...I remember Renteria saying something about this phenomenon yesterday...?? But also, I think that he wiped the gun with a wet rag, hence the water on the rag.

Just a thought...

He did say they found a miniscule amount (a nanogram?) of PS DNA but yes the majority is hers. We also don't know if he might have had the cloth on the gun handle when he shot her? (Just guessing)

 

[prismvision]

He did say they found a miniscule amount (a nanogram?) of PS DNA but yes the majority is hers. We also don't know if he might have had the cloth on the gun handle when he shot her? (Just guessing)

yeah, these are difficult questions to which we probably will never have the answers unfortunately!!!
lol

like the lashes!

 

[panthera]

Now Plourd is back to the eyelashes found on the toilet tank and showing the picture in the courtroom. It's taking Plourd forever to get around to the testing done. No blood was found on them. A mixture of PS and Lana's DNA was on them, with the majority coming from Lana.

 

[panthera]

Plourd has now moved on to the mixture of DNA on the brandy snifters. The area sampled was where someone would be drinking out of, the rim of the glass not where someone's hand would be to hold the glass.

break time

 

[lisafremont]

Well, I have to admit it. Plourd actually sent me off to a brief nap. I missed the testimony about the lashes.

Is he just replourding the same ground of direct or actually making some points?

 

[panthera]

Sorry I'm just checking back over here ~ but there was more interesting testimony he got from Renteria before lunch. DNA belonging to PS was found on Lana's left breast. Why on earth the defense would want to bring this out is beyond me, because it goes more to the State theory of him going into a rage after being told "NO".

 

[lisafremont]

I am stunned by this. Why would the defense want to bring that out? I agree that it's weird. I can't imagine how it fits in their theory.

 

[lisafremont]

Nancy Grace is going to cover the Spector trial tonight on her show! Wow! And I thought it was invisible.