Fogleman: Call Ralph Turbyfill.

The Court: Do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the matter now pending before the court so help you God?

Turbyfill: I do.

Fogleman: Would you state your name and occupation for the jury?

Turbyfill: My name is Ralph Turbyfill, last name is spelled T-u-r-b-y-f-i-l-l.

Fogleman: And what's your occupation?

Turbyfill: I'm the chief latent fingerprint examiner for the Arkansas State Crime Laboratory in Little Rock.

Fogleman: In the course of your duties with the crime laboratory, uh - did you have an occassion to examine a number of items in the uh - case where the victims were James Michael Moore, Stevie Branch, and Chris Byers?

Turbyfill: Yes, I did.

Fogleman: And specifically, is one of the items - I want to hand you state's exhibit 7, ask if you recognize that item?

Turbyfill: It's an envelope bearing a laboratory case number, my initials where I sealed it at the bottom.

(opening envelope)

Turbyfill: Two smaller envelopes bearing the uh - exhibit numbers, two pieces of plastic painted green - formerly one piece of plastic, which was a bicycle reflector.

Fogleman: The other one?

Turbyfill: A small coate sheriff star.

Fogleman: Ok. Does it say 'Mike' on it?

Turbyfill: Pardon?

Fogleman: Does it say 'Mike' on it?

Turbyfill: Yes, it does but also on the backside it has the - my initials and the case number.

Fogleman: And did you examine those items and other items for latent fingerprints?

Turbyfill: Yes, I did.

Fogleman: And what was the conclusion of all your examinations?

Turbyfill: The examinations that I conducted on items submitted to me by the - to our laboratory, by the West Memphis police department - there were no latent fingerprints of value for identification. And in most cases, there was no latent fingerprints detected at all.

Fogleman: Now, what is the affect - your Honor, we would offer state's exhibit uh - 7.

The Court: Alright, it may be recieved.

Fogleman: What is the affect of - of water on latent fingerprint?

Turbyfill: To start with, latent fingerprints are the composit of the chemistry that comes through the sweat pores on the hand which is 98% water, 2% fat, salt, and other body chemistry. So our latent fingerprints, which is - are invisible, are 98% water and if you put that 98% water in water it dilutes it where it's not detectable.

Fogleman: Alright. I also want to show you -

(tape flipped)

Turbyfill: This is the kn - a knife that was submitted by the police department. Also bears the laboratory case number and my initials.

Fogleman: Ok. And did you also examine that item?

Turbyfill: Uh - yes sir, I did.

Fogleman: Alright. And the same result - no fingerprint?

Turbyfill: No latent impressions at all.

Fogleman: Ok, none at all?

Turbyfill: None at all.

Fogleman: Alright. And if that had been submitted - submersed in water, would you have expected to find fingerprints?

Turbyfill: No, I wouldn't.

Fogleman: I also want to hand you state's exhibit 53 and ask if you can identify that item?

Turbyfill: This also has my initials on it, uh - case number. It's a stick. Case number and initials are also out at the end of it. And uh - I did process this for latent fingerprints and again, there were no latent fingerprints on it at all.

Fogleman: Were there any other tests or examinations you did on that?

Turbyfill: I did - on all these items, more than one test was ran on each one in attempt to - to uh - detect latent impressions, everything from - from uh - visual examination to uh - superglue examination - exposing to superglue to develop any invisible latents. And chemical processing after which, laser was used to detect prints and no latent prints were detected.

Fogleman: Ok. Uh - now did you do some kind of test that relates to - to uh - amino acid?

Turbyfill: Right. That's the chemical test on wood - unpainted wood and paper, cardboard items. That's an amino acid indicator that which we exposed this - the stick to the uh -chemical and again, no prints were developed.

Fogleman: Alright. Did you have a reaction as far as the amino acids?

Turbyfill: Some - it's the pinkish reaction that you see on the wood, is the reaction. And that also can be caused from amino acid from whatever source, which could be - you know, from the chemicals in the water - whatever. If there's any amino acid there, it will show up pink.

Fogleman: Alright. So the - so you did have a reaction about the amino acids?

Turbyfill: It's just strictly a chemical uh- color reaction, but no - no defined friction skin ridges or anything like that.

Fogleman: Alright. Alright. Ok. And what - I'm a little confused - what is the purpose of the thing about the amino acids?

Turbyfill: The body has amino acids in it and one of the chemicals that we use reacts or colors that particular amino acid. And this pink reaction is the result of the coloring of that amino acid. Which uh - fingerprints has that amino acid and on paper, unpainted wood, and cardboard we can detect fingerprints using that chemical. So - I mean that, just because there's reaction, that doesn't mean it was handled or that it was a fingerprint.

Fogleman: Ok. So it could mean that it was handled or it could be from something in the water?

Turbyfill: That's correct. It's possibly because it was handled.

Fogleman: Ok. I don't have any further questions, your Honor.

Davidson: So Mr. Turbyfill, are you telling us that out of your examinations you didn't find any fingerprints that match the fingerprints of Damien Echols? Is that the gist of your testimony?

Turbyfill: The gist of my testimony is, I didn't find any fingerprints that would belong to anyone.

Davidson: Anyone whatsoever?

Turbyfill: Anywhere in the world.

Davidson: Now um - the amino acid test that you ran, you can not determine what human being that may have come from. Just that that stick may have had some contact with some human being, somewhere. Is that -

Turbyfill: - That's correct.

Davidson: That's all I have.

Ford: No questions.

The Court: Alright, you're free to go.

Turbyfill: Thank you, your Honor.

The Court: Call your next witness.

Davidson: May we approach, your Honor?

The Court: Alright.

(bench conference)

Davidson: Have you made any decisions on the situation with the fiber that was in the knife?

The Court: I don't know what to do on that.

Davidson: I don't either.

The Court: What I'm - I don't know whether it calls for me making any kind of a decision. The truth of the matter is -

Davidson: - I guess we'll just put Ridge back on and uh -

The Court: - I don't know what to tell ya to do.

Davidson: (whispering) - testimony, your Honor, that it was identified a couple of days ago, but now it's not in - now it's not there.

The Court: Well, did it get there over the course of time - I mean, well, I don't know. I can -

Fogleman: I don't remember if Doctor Peretti testified that it was there when he examined it or whether he said it's there now.

Davis: He saw it in there.

Davidson: He examined it. He saw, he knows -

Fogleman: Alright, what I'm saying - and I agree, I agree with that. And I had seen it. The only point I was making is - is whether or not he was saying that he saw it when he first examined it - I don't know when the fiber got there.

Davidson: Well, I asked him about that and he said, "Yes" and he sent it to Lisa.

Fogleman: Well, that what he said, but he didn't.

Davidson: That's what he said.

The Court: I don't know what to tell ya on that. I'm not making any ruling one way or the other on it.

Davidson: Ok.


Davidson: Thank you, your Honor.

(open court)

Fogleman: Call Deanna Holcomb.