P.O. BOX 491
ASST. ATTORNEY GENERAL
217 WEST SECOND ST.
BARBARA J. FISHER, C.C.R.
P. O. BOX 521
|
127
|
1 | MARION, ARKANSAS, MARCH 19, 1999, AT 9:30 A.M. |
2 | DOCTOR FRANK J. PERETTI |
3 | having been first duly sworn to speak the truth, the whole truth |
4 | and nothing but the truth, then testified as follows: |
5 | DIRECT EXAMINATION |
6 | BY MR. DAVIS: |
7 | Q. Will you please state your name? |
8 | A. Doctor Frank Joseph Peretti, P-E-R-E-T-T-I. |
9 | Q. And, Doctor Peretti, Judge Burnett just swore you in prior |
10 | to my asking you that first question? |
11 | A. -- Yes. |
12 | Q. So you know that you're sworn under oath to tell the truth? |
13 | A. Yes. |
14 | Q. Could you describe for the record your current position? |
15 | A. I'm Associate Medical Examiner, forensic pathologist, for |
16 | the State of Arkansas. |
17 | Q. Could you briefly relate to the Court your education, |
18 | training and background that qualifies you for that position? |
19 | A. I graduated from medical school in 1984, did my training in |
20 | anatomical pathology at Brown University from 1985 to 1988. |
21 | During that interim period I was a Medical Examiner for the |
22 | State of Rhode Island on a part-time basis. |
23 | I then left Brown, and I went to the office of the Chief |
24 | Medical Examiner from 1988 to 1989, did my subspecialty training |
25 | in forensic pathology. After completing my training, I passed |
|
128
|
1 | my qualifying examinations given by the American Board of |
2 | Pathology in forensic pathology. |
3 | I was asked to stay on as a staff pathologist at the office |
4 | of the Chief Medical Examiner of Maryland until August of 1992. |
5 | In that interim period there I was a nontenured clinical |
6 | instructor of pathology at the University of Maryland Medical |
7 | School. I was also an editor for the American Journal of |
8 | Forensic Medicine and Pathology. |
9 | I was asked to come to Arkansas in August of 1992 and have |
10 | been here since. |
11 | Q. So you've been a Medical Examiner for the State of Arkansas |
12 | since August of 1992? |
13 | A. Yes. |
14 | Q. Since that time, you have worked for the Medical Examiner's |
15 | office as an Assistant Medical Examiner? |
16 | A. Yes. |
17 | Q. And have you qualified and testified as an expert in the |
18 | area of forensic pathology on multiple occasions in the State of |
19 | Arkansas? |
20 | A. Yes, I have. |
21 | Q. On numerous occasions, in fact, in front of this Court and |
22 | this Judge? |
23 | A. Yes. |
24 | MR. DAVIS: Your Honor, at this time we would |
25 | submit Doctor Peretti as an expert in the field of |
|
129
|
1 | forensic pathology. |
2 | MR. MALLETT: No objection. |
3 | THE COURT: All right, you may proceed. |
4 | BY MR. DAVIS: |
5 | Q. Doctor Peretti, I'd like to show you what is listed as |
6 | State's Exhibit 23. Can you identify that for us? |
7 | A. Yes, I can. It's my CV. |
8 | Q. Is that current containing all the specifics as to your |
9 | training, education, background, articles that you've written, |
10 | involvement in educational courses, things of that nature? |
11 | A. Yes. |
12 | MR. DAVIS: Your Honor, at this time we would |
13 | move for the introduction of State's Exhibit 23. |
14 | MR. MALLETT: No objection. |
15 | THE COURT: It may be received without objection. |
16 | (STATE'S EXHIBIT 23 IS RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE) |
17 | BY MR. DAVIS: |
18 | Q. Doctor Peretti, in your work as Assistant Medical Examiner |
19 | for the Arkansas State Crime Lab, did you have an occasion to |
20 | receive the bodies of three eight-year-old boys from Crittenden |
21 | County, I believe back in May of 1993? |
22 | A. Yes. |
23 | Q. When were the bodies received? |
24 | A. They were received May 6. |
25 | Q. And explain to the Court -- at that time, was there more |
|
130
|
1 | than one Medical Examiner that performed autopsies there at the |
2 | Crime Lab? |
3 | A. No, it was just myself and Doctor Sturner who was the Chief |
4 | Medical Examiner. |
5 | Q. These cases were assigned to you to do the autopsy and the |
6 | examination? |
7 | A. Yes. |
8 | Q. When you received these cases, did you -- at any point did |
9 | the significance of these cases or the importance of these |
10 | particular autopsy examinations -- did they receive particular |
11 | attention or particular emphasis from you? |
12 | A. Yes, they did. Because of the nature of the case, I knew |
13 | it would generate a lot of publicity and news media coverage. |
14 | Q. As a result of that, did you go to extra efforts or take |
15 | extra steps to make sure that your examination was thorough and |
16 | your documentation of that examination was thorough? |
17 | A. That's correct. |
18 | Q. Tell the Court when the bodies are received and you first |
19 | go down to examine them what procedures you used in terms of -- |
20 | after you examined them, is there anybody else you consulted or |
21 | anyone else you conferred with? |
22 | A. Yes. On these cases I consulted with many people -- Doctor |
23 | Dugan, Doctor Sturner, people from the Trace Evidence Section, |
24 | the Crime Lab Fingerprint Section. |
25 | Q. When you say you consulted with them, at what point did you |
|
131
|
1 | think or did you contact Doctor Dugan and can you explain to the |
2 | Court why that was done? |
3 | A. What I did was after the bodies came in, I looked at 'em |
4 | externally, and I looked for any patterns of injuries and all |
5 | the injuries that were present on the external aspects of the |
6 | body. |
7 | What I did was I was specifically looking for any |
8 | particular patterns. I didn't see any patterns, for example, |
9 | that looked like a bite mark. However, what I did was -- just |
10 | to be overly cautious -- I called Doctor Dugan in -- he is a |
11 | forensic dentist -- and had him look over all the bodies. |
12 | Q. Under your protocol at the Crime Lab, why would you call |
13 | Doctor Dugan in, or is he normally the one you would refer to if |
14 | you had questions on the issue of potential bite marks? |
15 | A. Yes, if there is a potential bite mark, we call Doctor |
16 | Dugan in. |
17 | Q. Upon your visual examination of the bodies, had you seen |
18 | anything that you felt was suspicious for a bite mark or could |
19 | possibly be a bite mark? |
20 | A. No. |
21 | Q. And again, why then did you call Doctor Dugan in? |
22 | A. I was overly cautious, and I wanted him to come in and |
23 | examine the bodies. There were some areas on the forehead on |
24 | the side that had a similar pattern to it, and I wanted him to |
25 | look at it. |
|
132
|
1 | Q. When you called Doctor Dugan in, were you present when he |
2 | viewed the bodies? |
3 | A. Yes. |
4 | Q. Did he view one body? |
5 | A. He examined all the bodies. |
6 | Q. Did you consult there together as he viewed the bodies and |
7 | you are present -- did you consult with him to see if he saw |
8 | anything or could point out anything to you that he thought was |
9 | significant in terms of possible bite marks? |
10 | A. Yes, we consulted. |
11 | Q. Did he show anything to you on the bodies that he indicated |
12 | could or might be bite marks in his opinion? |
13 | A. No. |
14 | Q. At that point when you've gone over them by yourself and |
15 | then you call Doctor Dugan in, when you go back over them with |
16 | him, did you see anything at that point on this closer perusal |
17 | that you thought could or might be a bite mark? |
18 | A. I didn't see anything that represented a bite mark. |
19 | Q. Were there any specific injuries that you actually pointed |
20 | to Doctor Dugan and said, I want you to really look at this |
21 | particular one because this one concerns me? |
22 | A. The dome-shaped pattern ones. |
23 | Q. When you say "dome-shaped pattern," what are you talking |
24 | about? |
25 | A. Well, it had a pattern of a dome. There was one on the |
|
133
|
1 | forehead and one on the right cheek region. There were multiple |
2 | patterns on the face. |
3 | Q. Those were of some concern to you, and you wanted his |
4 | opinion? |
5 | A. Yes. |
6 | Q. In addition to Doctor Dugan, who else did you consult with |
7 | and have examine the bodies? |
8 | A. Doctor Sturner, the Chief Medical Examiner. |
9 | Q. Why did you do that? |
10 | A. Well, there again, the intense news coverage -- I just |
11 | wanted to do a very thorough job -- dot all my I's and cross all |
12 | my T's. Doctor Sturner has 30 years of experience. I wanted to |
13 | ask him if there was anything he would do that I failed to do. |
14 | Q. Did he come down there and with you present examine all |
15 | three bodies while they were there at the Crime Lab? |
16 | A. Yes. |
17 | Q. Did he make any comment to you or suggestions to you that |
18 | some of the injuries were possible bite marks? |
19 | A. No. Not at all. |
20 | Q. Did he suggest to you anything further that you should do |
21 | in examination for possible bite marks? |
22 | A. No. |
23 | Q. Now, at some point did you go ahead and perform the full |
24 | autopsy examination and complete your report? |
25 | A. Yes, I did. |
|
134
|
1 | Q. Anything at that point after visual observation -- contact |
2 | with Doctor Dugan, contact with Doctor Sturner, you perform your |
3 | autopsy -- anything change regarding your opinion regarding |
4 | possible bite marks? |
5 | A. There was no change in my opinion. |
6 | Q. After you perform your autopsy, you prepared your autopsy |
7 | report, correct? |
8 | A. Yes. |
9 | Q. Did you go to any extreme measures in this particular case |
10 | to ensure the accuracy of what was contained in your autopsy |
11 | report? |
12 | A. Well, it took me probably a day and a half to do all the |
13 | autopsies, and what I did was after I did each autopsy, I made |
14 | my notes. I dictated the case. |
15 | After all the cases were dictated, I went downstairs with |
16 | the report in hand with the bodies and went over each sentence |
17 | line by line to make sure all the measurements were accurate, |
18 | that I didn't miss anything or inadvertently say, "right side -- |
19 | left side" -- things like that happen. So I took my report, |
20 | examined the bodies meticulously and went through the report |
21 | line by line comparing my notes -- my report -- to the injuries |
22 | on the body. |
23 | Q. Did you do any swabbing of any of the injuries for the |
24 | purpose of trying to detect or preserve evidence of possible |
25 | amylase? |
|
135
|
1 | A. No, I didn't. |
2 | Q. Why not? |
3 | A. First of all, there was no bite mark there. There was no |
4 | need to do it because it wasn't a bite mark and if it was a bite |
5 | mark, I still wouldn't have swabbed it because the bodies were |
6 | submerged in water. |
7 | Q. And based on those two reasons, there were not swabbings |
8 | done to try to detect amylase? |
9 | A. That's correct. |
10 | Q. Do you think it would have been of any benefit -- number |
11 | one in your protocol, if you don't see anything that's a bite |
12 | mark in your opinion and Doctor Dugan is called in and he |
13 | doesn't see anything that's a bite mark, is there anything in |
14 | your protocol that would require to you or suggest to you that |
15 | you should do swabbings for amylase? |
16 | A. No. |
17 | Q. So I assume after the bodies leave the Crime Lab and you |
18 | have completed all your reports and you conferred with Doctor |
19 | Dugan and Doctor Sturner, your opinion at that point is there is |
20 | nothing there that is evidence of a bite mark? |
21 | A. That's correct. |
22 | Q. Years later when these proceedings start, you become aware |
23 | that there is an issue again of the possibility of a bite mark, |
24 | correct? |
25 | A. That's correct. |
|
136
|
1 | Q. Did you again go back and review the autopsy photographs |
2 | that were taken during the time of the autopsy examination? |
3 | A. Yes, I did. |
4 | Q. Let me show you what are marked as 8, 9, and 10-M -- |
5 | State's Exhibits -- and ask if you could look at those, Doctor. |
6 | Do you recognize those photographs? |
7 | A. Yes. |
8 | Q. Are those photographs of the eight-year-old victim, Stevie |
9 | Branch? |
10 | A. Yes, they are. |
11 | Q. Did you go back and examine those particular autopsy |
12 | photographs again to see if your opinion regarding the |
13 | possibility of existence of bite marks might change? |
14 | A. Yes, I did on multiple occasions. |
15 | Q. After examination of those photographs, did you reach any |
16 | different conclusions? |
17 | A. No, I didn't. |
18 | Q. Specifically in regard to the injury to the left forehead |
19 | -- I believe it is -- of Stevie Branch, did you pay particular |
20 | attention to that injury? |
21 | A. Yes, I did. |
22 | Q. After looking at and examining that closely, did you |
23 | formulate an opinion as to whether or not that appeared to you |
24 | to be a bite mark? |
25 | A. In my opinion it is not a bite mark. |
|
137
|
1 | Q. In hindsight, Doctor, in regard to this possible -- the |
2 | allegations that there's possibly a bite mark here -- in |
3 | hindsight looking back at what you did in your examination, the |
4 | people you consulted with, your review of the autopsy photos, is |
5 | there anything that you think you would have done differently or |
6 | should have done differently in regard to the issue of possible |
7 | bite marks in this case? |
8 | A. No. |
9 | Q. From the time the bodies were submitted to you until this |
10 | case went to trial, were there occasions in which attorneys -- |
11 | not only for the state but for the defense -- had contact with |
12 | you in order to review evidence and review your reports? |
13 | A. Yes. |
14 | Q. And on certain occasions did you keep records to show when |
15 | certain attorneys by name had contact with you to go over and |
16 | look at the evidence you had? |
17 | A. Yes. |
18 | Q. Do you have -- do you know specific dates from those |
19 | records which attorneys Val Price or Scott Davidson or both |
20 | appeared at your office to examine materials in your office or |
21 | to consult with you regarding your exam and reports? |
22 | A. I have the dates here, yes. |
23 | Q. What are those dates? |
24 | A. July sixth -- |
25 | MR. MALLETT: Excuse me. I realize we're going |
|
138
|
1 | to have an opportunity in cross examination, but to |
2 | save time, could I ask him to identify the attorneys |
3 | and if the records reflect it, also the period of the |
4 | visits, the length of the visits? |
5 | MR. DAVIS: Okay. |
6 | BY THE WITNESS: |
7 | A. I had a brief meeting with Val Price on July 6, 1993, from |
8 | 12:00 P.M. to 12:30. Then I had a meeting on February 9, 1994, |
9 | with Mr. Price. Is he one of the attorneys? |
10 | Q. Yes. Do you know the length of that meeting? |
11 | A. No. Then I had a meeting with Mr. Ford on February 9th, |
12 | 1994, at 10:00 A.M. and I had a meeting with Mr. Price and Mr. |
13 | Davidson again on February 22nd, 1994. |
14 | I had other meetings. I don't have the notes here. At |
15 | times I'm bad at writing things down, but I know one meeting all |
16 | the attorneys were there, and it took all afternoon because I |
17 | distinctly remember we were at the big conference table. I had |
18 | all the photos laid out, all the autopsy reports. We went over |
19 | -- we took each autopsy report and looked at each photograph |
20 | individually, and it took all afternoon. It was probably a |
21 | three or four hour meeting. |
22 | Q. You said you had all the attorneys -- all the defense |
23 | attorneys? |
24 | A. All the defense attorneys. |
25 | Q. That is a meeting that is not reflected in the three |
|
139
|
1 | meetings with Mr. Price and Mr. Davidson that you testified to? |
2 | A. Correct. |
3 | Q. So on at least four occasions you would have had contact |
4 | with Mr. Price, Mr. Davidson, or both to review your findings |
5 | and evidence in this case? |
6 | A. And multiple telephone conversations. |
7 | MR. DAVIS: Pass the witness, Your Honor. |
8 | CROSS EXAMINATION |
9 | BY MR. MALLETT: |
10 | Q. Good morning, Doctor Peretti. |
11 | A. Good morning. |
12 | Q. I notice that you attended -- ah, university for |
13 | undergraduate training at the University of St. Louis? |
14 | A. That's correct. |
15 | Q. Which is in St. Louis, Missouri? |
16 | A. That's correct. |
17 | Q. And that you obtained your degree -- your medical doctor |
18 | degree from a university in Milan in the country of Italy, which |
19 | is in Europe? |
20 | A. Yes. |
21 | Q. I have general knowledge that I think most people share |
22 | that when people become a doctor in the United States of |
23 | America, they take an oath that is referred to as the |
24 | Hippocratic Oath. Are you familiar with that? |
25 | A. Yes, I have taken that. |
|
140
|
1 | Q. What is the Hippocratic Oath? |
2 | A. Hippocratic Oath is an oath physicians take saying you will |
3 | abide by all the -- abide to the practice of medicine. I can't |
4 | recall it. |
5 | Q. Does it sort of jog your memory a little bit to suggest to |
6 | you that as a part of that oath you promise that you will help |
7 | your patients and not harm them? |
8 | A. That's correct. |
9 | Q. You are a physician and faithful to that oath? |
10 | A. Yes. |
11 | Q. I recall that in your testimony in the court there was a |
12 | question raised relating to your opinion and because of the |
13 | leading nature of the question, you corrected the questioner and |
14 | on page 001897 you stated in relevant part -- "I am not a |
15 | prosecution witness" -- |
16 | A. Excuse me. What page is that? I have that in here. I |
17 | want to refer to that. |
18 | Q. At the bottom there is a stamp which we call a Bates stamp. |
19 | A. Down here. Okay. |
20 | Q. At the top right it says 1116 and the lower bottom 001897. |
21 | A. Okay. |
22 | Q. If you want to look at the top right corner, it would be |
23 | page 1116. |
24 | A. Okay. |
25 | Q. You're a very careful doctor, aren't you? |
|
141
|
1 | A. Yes. |
2 | Q. Reading from the third line up from the bottom. "I just |
3 | would like to clarify one fact for the Court that I am not a |
4 | prosecution witness. The Crime Lab is an independent agency. |
5 | We don't work for the defense. We don't work for the |
6 | prosecution. We're an independent agency. So I would like to |
7 | clarify that." That's what you said. |
8 | A. Yes. |
9 | Q. And that's true. |
10 | A. Yes, it is. |
11 | Q. As a physician, you are certainly engaged in the field of |
12 | science? |
13 | A. Yes. |
14 | Q. And to some extent as to some opinions -- some matters in |
15 | which you're called upon to express opinions, it may be said |
16 | that you are also in a field of art; that is, in which science |
17 | is not absolutely certain. Fair statement? |
18 | A. Fair statement. |
19 | Q. One of the things that you do as an independent scientist |
20 | and physician is to allow counsel to meet with you as you did in |
21 | this case? |
22 | A. That's correct. |
23 | Q. Doctor Peretti, do you ever make mistakes? |
24 | A. Oh, everybody makes mistakes. |
25 | Q. In the context of your work as a physician and in forming |
|
142
|
1 | opinions and making judgments and expressing opinions, from time |
2 | to time using the benefit of hindsight you acknowledge that you |
3 | have made mistakes? |
4 | A. Using the benefit of hindsight, yes. |
5 | Q. For example, in this case there was a question raised at |
6 | the trial of the case about what would be a reliable estimate of |
7 | the time of death. You should recall that body of testimony. |
8 | A. Oh, yes. |
9 | Q. You, of course, in preparation for these hearings reread at |
10 | least some of that testimony? |
11 | A. That's correct. |
12 | Q. You know as you sit here today that as a rebuttal witness |
13 | on that particular issue, the prosecution called another |
14 | physician, a Doctor Jennings? |
15 | A. That's correct. |
16 | Q. You know Doctor Jennings? |
17 | A. Yes. |
18 | Q. You think he is a good doctor? |
19 | A. Yes. He is a hospital pathologist. |
20 | Q. Right. But he is a licensed physician practicing in your |
21 | community -- a man who -- |
22 | A. I have respect for him, yes. |
23 | Q. He had an opinion that was different than the opinion to |
24 | which you testified. |
25 | A. That's my understanding. |
|
143
|
1 | Q. Have you read his testimony? |
2 | A. No. |
3 | Q. Let me -- if I may indicate to you that in his testimony he |
4 | made reference to having studied a book or reviewed a book |
5 | before he testified, and the book was called Forensic Pathology |
6 | and the author was Bernard Knight. Are you aware of the |
7 | existence of such a book? |
8 | A. I have a copy of it. |
9 | Q. Is that a book that is considered within the field of |
10 | forensic pathology as a useful and reliable authority? |
11 | A. It's one of the reference books. |
12 | Q. That pathologists often use? |
13 | A. Forensic pathologists, yes. |
14 | Q. You're a forensic pathologist? |
15 | A. Yes. |
16 | Q. Used as a reliable authority? |
17 | A. Yes. |
18 | Q. Is it a surprise to you to hear that materials from that |
19 | book were read to the jury in the state's efforts to offer |
20 | rebuttal testimony in the original trial, or is that already |
21 | something that you know? |
22 | A. I didn't know the scope of his testimony. I mean, I'm not |
23 | familiar with what he said. I didn't read his testimony. |
24 | Q. You do know that the book to which I have called your |
25 | attention is a standard reference book in the field of |
|
144
|
1 | pathology? |
2 | A. One of many, yes. |
3 | Q. And in your library? |
4 | A. Yes. |
5 | Q. Does this look like that book, Forensic Pathology, by |
6 | Bernard Knight? |
7 | A. This is a newer edition. I have the first edition. |
8 | Q. Any reason to believe that the newer edition is inferior to |
9 | your edition? |
10 | A. No. |
11 | Q. Okay. You said that because of the nature of the case -- |
12 | and I think you may have made some reference to the fact of the |
13 | interest in the case or there would be publicity about the case |
14 | or both. This is a case on which you used extra care. |
15 | A. That's correct. |
16 | Q. But I take it that the citizens of Arkansas can rest |
17 | comfortably that you're thorough in every case? |
18 | A. Try to be. |
19 | Q. Try to be careful in every case? |
20 | A. That's right. |
21 | Q. The quality of justice to the public insofar as your |
22 | contribution is concerned is of the highest order in every case |
23 | to the best of your ability? |
24 | A. That's correct. |
25 | Q. One of the things that was extremely important to you as |
|
145
|
1 | you were completing your autopsy report, which I believe you |
2 | submitted to Doctor Sturner for his review and approval? |
3 | A. He signed it, yes. |
4 | Q. You not only wrote it, but you went back down and |
5 | re-examined the victims and compared your written report to the |
6 | victims? |
7 | A. That's correct. |
8 | Q. Under Rule seven-o-three eighteen I believe we're permitted |
9 | to offer as evidence words from a published treatise called to |
10 | the witness' attention that is generally accepted, and in that |
11 | light I'd like to read briefly, if the Court will permit, from |
12 | page 34 of the Second Edition of Forensic Pathology by Bernard |
13 | Knight. |
14 | THE COURT: First you need to ask him -- well, |
15 | you did ask him if he was familiar with that treatise. |
16 | Is that what you're reading from? |
17 | MR. MALLETT: Yes. |
18 | THE COURT: All right. Go ahead. |
19 | BY MR. MALLETT: |
20 | Q. "Equally important as the autopsy itself is the report that |
21 | the pathologist provides for whoever commissioned the |
22 | examination. An autopsy is of little value if the findings and |
23 | opinion of the forensic pathologist are not communicated in the |
24 | most lucid and helpful way. The report is an integral part of |
25 | the procedure and should receive as much attention as any |
|
146
|
1 | physical procedure in the autopsy room." You agree with that, |
2 | don't you? |
3 | A. Yes. |
4 | Q. We rely on reports for a variety of reasons. One of them |
5 | is to help you remember at the time of trial about activities |
6 | conducted when you did the autopsy? |
7 | A. That's correct. |
8 | Q. I suppose there may be situations from time to time when a |
9 | pathologist is called upon to testify from the report of another |
10 | pathologist because the original pathologist is not available. |
11 | That happens from time to time, doesn't it? |
12 | A. Yes. |
13 | Q. We wouldn't just turn everybody loose that was accused of |
14 | murder if the pathologist died in a car wreck? |
15 | A. That's correct. Hope not. |
16 | Q. Hope not. So the report as stated by Doctor Knight is just |
17 | as important as doing the autopsy because of the record it |
18 | provides? |
19 | A. That's right. |
20 | Q. On page 34 Bernard Knight continues: "The autopsy report |
21 | is a permanent record of the findings and is especially vital |
22 | for medical/legal purposes when every word may be dissected in a |
23 | court of law months or even years afterwards and when all |
24 | recollection has been driven from the mind of the pathologist by |
25 | hundreds of subsequent autopsies." You agree with that, don't |
|
147
|
1 | you? |
2 | A. I would agree with that. |
3 | Q. In your painstakingly thorough report -- the report that |
4 | you not only prepared but that you reviewed a second time, the |
5 | report that you reviewed line by line before you presented it to |
6 | Doctor Sturner for his approval -- there is not a single word |
7 | referencing your calling Doctor Dugan in to perform an |
8 | examination of these victims, is there. |
9 | A. We never do that in our reports. We never list the experts |
10 | that we called. Never did in Maryland, never did in Rhode |
11 | Island, we don't do it here. |
12 | Q. What was my question? |
13 | A. About listing the experts. |
14 | Q. In your report that is painstakingly thorough and that you |
15 | went over line by line a second time after it was prepared, |
16 | there is not one word of reference to calling in Doctor Dugan. |
17 | A. That's correct. |
18 | Q. By the way, can you tell me what time of day you received |
19 | these victims for examination on May 6th? |
20 | A. What time they were logged in the Crime Lab? |
21 | Q. What time you began to examine them. |
22 | A. I examined them -- I believe the 6th was a Wednesday -- and |
23 | - I started first thing in the morning. |
24 | Q. Does the report tell what time you started? |
25 | A. We don't put on the autopsy reports the time we started. |
|
148
|
1 | They were the first cases in the morning. I generally start at |
2 | 7:30. |
3 | Q. So if my question is does the report tell what time you |
4 | started, your answer is, no, it doesn't? |
5 | A. That's right. |
6 | Q. Does your report tell what was the temperature of the |
7 | bodies when you commenced your examination? |
8 | A. No. We don't take body temperatures. |
9 | Q. Why did you call in Doctor Dugan? |
10 | A. For thoroughness. |
11 | Q. What is his title with the Arkansas State Crime Lab? |
12 | A. Well -- |
13 | Q. Or does he have a title? |
14 | A. I always called him the forensic odontologist. |
15 | Q. Does he have any official title that you're aware of? |
16 | A. Well, he's our only odontologist. I know he uses the word |
17 | "chief," but maybe that's the wrong title to use. |
18 | Q. That may be a self-appointed title? |
19 | A. Right. |
20 | Q. Probably is? |
21 | A. Well, seeing he was the only one, I -- he was there before |
22 | I -- |
23 | Q. There's not an assistant odontologist -- |
24 | A. No. |
25 | Q. -- or deputy odontologist -- |
|
149
|
1 | A. No. |
2 | Q. -- or tenderfoot odontologist? |
3 | A. No. No. |
4 | Q. And you call him in when there is evidence that you see |
5 | before you that -- on which your opinions might be benefited by |
6 | his opinions and observations? |
7 | A. I looked. I didn't think they were bite marks, but I |
8 | wanted him to come in and look. |
9 | Q. You wanted a second opinion. |
10 | A. That's right. And a third opinion. |
11 | Q. You wanted a third opinion. |
12 | A. Right. |
13 | Q. Because those were some unusual marks, and it could be |
14 | another person would have a different opinion than your first |
15 | opinion. |
16 | A. We looked at -- when I called Doctor Sturner and Doctor |
17 | Dugan, we looked at everything. We didn't focus just on those |
18 | marks. |
19 | Q. Is it possible that a second opinion would be a different |
20 | opinion than your first opinion? |
21 | A. Well, if the odontologist came in and said to me, these are |
22 | bite marks, I wouldn't argue with him. |
23 | Q. Thank you. In the field of medicine, which is both art and |
24 | science, it is possible for one expert like yourself to hold an |
25 | opinion and another person with comparable training and |
|
150
|
1 | experience to hold a different opinion, and both of you to be |
2 | telling the truth the best that you can see it? |
3 | A. I would agree with that. |
4 | Q. I notice that in your autopsy report you detected the |
5 | presence of larvae in the left orbit of one of the victims. Do |
6 | you recall that finding? |
7 | A. Yes. |
8 | Q. Does your report make any reference to preserving any of |
9 | those specimens of larvae? |
10 | A. I didn't preserve them. |
11 | Q. Does your report make any reference to your decision to |
12 | preserve or not preserve? |
13 | A. No, it doesn't. |
14 | Q. Are you trained as an entomologist? |
15 | A. No. |
16 | Q. In Bernard Knight's book on page 76 he writes -- this is |
17 | under the title of the Entomology of the Dead and Postmortem |
18 | Interval -- "This is a highly specialized subject and when the |
19 | issue of time since death is important such as a criminal |
20 | investigation, it is essential that whenever possible the |
21 | pathologist has the assistance of an entomologist with forensic |
22 | experience as in forensic toxicology and serology. When serious |
23 | medical/legal issues are at stake, there is no place in forensic |
24 | entomology for the occasional expert who dabbles in the subject |
25 | when the opportunity arises." Do you agree with that? |
|
151
|
1 | A. I would agree at times you need an entomologist. |
2 | Q. Doctor Knight writes on the same page 76 under the same |
3 | heading, "Different species of arthropods colonize the corpse at |
4 | different periods after death. In addition some species |
5 | including the most common blowflies pass through complex life |
6 | cycles that can be used to determine at least the minimum time |
7 | since death by studying the stage of maturation of the |
8 | insects." |
8 | Continuing, "These methods have been used since the middle |
9 | of the Eighteenth Century." Do you agree with that? |
10 | A. Entomologists do do that. Yes, I would agree with that. |
11 | MR. MALLETT: Thank you very much. |
12 | (WITNESS EXCUSED) |
13 | DOCTOR WILLIAM STURNER |
14 | having been first duly sworn to speak the truth, the whole truth |
15 | and nothing but the truth, then testified as follows: |
16 | DIRECT EXAMINATION |
17 | BY MR. DAVIS: |
18 | Q. Will you please state your name? |
19 | A. William Quenton Sturner, last name, S-T-U-R-N-E-R. |
20 | Q. It's Doctor Sturner? |
21 | A. Yes. |
22 | Q. You're the Chief Medical Examiner for the State of |
23 | Arkansas, correct? |
24 | A. Yes, sir. |
25 | Q. How long have you held that position? |
|
152
|
1 | A. This month starts my eighth year. |
2 | Q. So that means you started back in 1991? |
3 | A. '92 early in the year, Counselor. |
4 | Q. So you were the Chief Medical Examiner in May of 1993? |
5 | A. Yes, sir. |
6 | Q. Who else was working as an Associate Medical Examiner at |
7 | that time? |
8 | A. Doctor Frank J. Peretti. |
9 | Q. There were the two of you that were responsible for |
10 | performing autopsies regarding all cases submitted to the |
11 | Medical Examiner's Office in Arkansas at that time? |
12 | A. Yes, sir. |
13 | Q. I have what is marked as State's Exhibit 24. Can you |
14 | identify that for us, please, sir? |
15 | A. Yes, that is a Curriculum Vitae, or resume, of my education |
16 | and work current to June of 1998. |
17 | Q. Okay. Is that accurate and does it contain -- the listings |
18 | on here are they up-to-date and accurate as to your education, |
19 | training, writings, things of that nature? |
20 | A. Up to June 1998, yes, sir. |
21 | MR. DAVIS: Your Honor, at this time I would move |
22 | for the introduction of State's Exhibit 24, the |
23 | doctor's CV. |
24 | MR. MALLETT: May I have one minute? I have not |
25 | seen it. |
|
153
|
1 | MR. DAVIS: (Handing) |
2 | MR. MALLETT: (Examining) No objection. |
3 | THE COURT: It may be received without objection. |
4 | (STATE'S EXHIBIT 24 IS RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE) |
5 | BY MR. DAVIS: |
6 | Q. If I may, I'd like to draw your attention back to May of |
7 | 1993 when there were -- bodies of three eight-year-old boys were |
8 | found here in Crittenden County and transferred to the Arkansas |
9 | State Medical Examiner's Office for the purposes of having an |
10 | autopsy performed. Were you familiar with the existence of that |
11 | case? |
12 | A. Yes, by telephone. I happened to be over in Memphis |
13 | inspecting the Medical Examiner's Office of Shelby County, which |
14 | includes Memphis, and I was called at some point in time, I |
15 | believe around noontime and informed of that by Doctor Peretti |
16 | and/or his staff. |
17 | Q. When you say you were in Memphis inspecting the Medical |
18 | Examiner's Office, is that something you're on a board or some |
19 | group that inspects and judges standards of other Medical |
20 | Examiner's Offices? |
21 | A. Yes. I'm one of the inspectors for the parent group which |
22 | is called the National Association of Medical Examiners, and |
23 | they have an inspection and accreditation program. I happened |
24 | to be chosen to go to Memphis, and I did so the night before |
25 | this case. |
|
154
|
1 | Q. When you get a call from the Medical Examiner's Office that |
2 | these bodies have been sent down for purposes of autopsy, what |
3 | do you do then? |
4 | A. Well, in this case I finished my work posthaste and drove |
5 | back to Little Rock to the Medical Examiner's Office and |
6 | reviewed the bodies with Doctor Peretti. |
7 | Q. Was Doctor Peretti the Medical Examiner that was assigned |
8 | to actually perform the autopsies and write the report? |
9 | A. Yes, sir. |
10 | Q. Is it unusual in the nontypical case for someone such as |
11 | Doctor Peretti to consult with you and ask you to view the |
12 | bodies and check his findings and report? |
13 | A. I'd say it's the usual course of events. |
14 | Q. Did you view all three of the bodies while they were there |
15 | at the Crime Lab? |
16 | A. I viewed all three while Doctor Peretti went over the |
17 | findings with each individual body. |
18 | Q. So he would go over the findings he had made, and you |
19 | viewed the bodies to make sure that his findings in his report |
20 | are consistent with what you see? |
21 | A. Yes, sir. |
22 | Q. There was nothing in any of his reports referring to |
23 | anything that appeared to be a bite mark or that might be a bite |
24 | mark. Was that consistent with what you saw when you looked at |
25 | those bodies? |
|
155
|
1 | A. None whatsoever, and it was perfectly consistent with what |
2 | I saw. |
3 | Q. With your years of experience, training and background, |
4 | when you examined the bodies and heard Doctor Peretti's report, |
5 | you saw nothing there that would alert you to think that |
6 | something -- some injury on the bodies of these three young men |
7 | were bite marks. |
8 | A. I did not. |
9 | Q. Are you familiar with Doctor Kevin Dugan? |
10 | A. Yes, I am. |
11 | Q. What work does he do with the Crime Lab? |
12 | A. He's a forensic odontologist, or dentist, and performs |
13 | identification procedures and other dental work on a consultant |
14 | basis for the State Crime Lab. |
15 | Q. Is he the one that y'all refer to when you have a situation |
16 | where you need some added expertise in the area of possible bite |
17 | mark or bite mark identification? |
18 | A. We would. Yes, sir. |
19 | Q. And did you know if he was consulted in this case? |
20 | A. I found out about it, and I may have known at that time. |
21 | It just doesn't come clear to me, but I would presume that he |
22 | would be. |
23 | Q. In terms of the Crime Lab at that time, the proper protocol |
24 | in order to get additional expertise in the area of possible |
25 | bite marks would be to consult Doctor Dugan and have him view |
|
156
|
1 | the bodies? |
2 | A. Yes, sir. |
3 | MR. DAVIS: Pass the witness, Your Honor. |
4 | CROSS EXAMINATION |
5 | BY MR. MALLETT: |
6 | Q. Good morning, Doctor. |
7 | A. Good morning, Counselor. |
8 | Q. Thank you for traveling so far. |
9 | A. That's quite all right. |
10 | Q. Your words are -- |
11 | A. I'm pleased to do so, Counselor. |
12 | Q. Your words are very important. We thank you for -- |
13 | A. That's quite all right. |
14 | Q. I notice that you are a graduate of the University of St. |
15 | Louis in St. Louis, Missouri. |
16 | A. That's correct, Counselor, yes. |
17 | Q. I think that's Doctor Peretti's alma mater also, isn't it? |
18 | A. I don't believe so. I think he spent time there. He also |
19 | spent some time in other universities as well. |
20 | Q. You obtained your degree as a physician from a University |
21 | in London. Is that correct? |
22 | A. Well, that was a degree in what is called the Society of |
23 | Apothecaries. It's a diploma in medical juris prudence. |
24 | Q. Where did you get your medical doctor degree? |
25 | A. St. Louis. |
|
157
|
1 | Q. You have known and worked with Doctor Peretti for some |
2 | years? |
3 | A. I have known him since the time that I had been in Rhode |
4 | Island, yes, sir. |
5 | Q. And had known him as a good and faithful colleague in Rhode |
6 | Island and then again as your subordinate there in the State of |
7 | Arkansas? |
8 | A. Following four years of intensive training in Baltimore at |
9 | the State Medical Examiner's Office, yes. |
10 | Q. And among the things that you know is that Doctor Peretti |
11 | is a good and thorough examiner of a deceased person for |
12 | purposes of forming his own opinions of the manner and cause of |
13 | death? |
14 | A. I certainly think so. |
15 | Q. All right. And you also know him to be a good, thorough |
16 | report writer? |
17 | A. Indeed. |
18 | Q. And you sign off on his reports? |
19 | A. We sign off on each other's reports, Counselor. |
20 | Q. And you believe and know from his experience that his |
21 | reports contain the important work that he did? |
22 | A. Indeed. |
23 | Q. And the important observations that he made. |
24 | A. That's a fair statement, yes. |
25 | Q. Opinions that he reached? |
|
158
|
1 | A. Yes. Of course. |
2 | Q. And the consultants that he involved? |
3 | A. Yes. But that may or may not be on his particular report |
4 | -- but, yes, fair statement. |
5 | Q. You would expect that to be on a good and thorough report? |
6 | A. It usually is, Counselor, yes. |
7 | Q. You have no independent recollection of Doctor Dugan being |
8 | there or not being there. It just suits your memory that he may |
9 | have been there. |
10 | A. Well, I came back, at my recollection, around 3:00 or 4:00 |
11 | in the afternoon, and I think Doctor Peretti and I were the only |
12 | doctors in the office, and we were more concerned about the |
13 | bodies themselves than who was there or who wasn't there -- at |
14 | least I was. |
15 | Q. So Doctor Dugan was not there when you came back? |
16 | A. I don't believe so, no. |
17 | Q. Take it from me that Doctor Peretti has testified on the |
18 | trial transcript on page 1121 that an estimate of the time of |
19 | death that is reasonable is some time between 1:00 A.M. and 5:00 |
20 | A.M. Would you have any reason to quarrel with that? |
21 | A. I haven't read that, and I don't know if that's the case. |
22 | If you're telling me that's in the transcript, then that's what |
23 | he testified to. Whether I quarrel with it or not is not |
24 | something that I'm prepared to say because I haven't gone over |
25 | those cases as far as postmortem interval is concerned. So I'm |
|
159
|
1 | not going to get into that, Counselor. That is a little bit too |
2 | much for me. |
3 | Q. You do from time to time in your office have need for one |
4 | pathologist to testify from the report of another pathologist? |
5 | A. Yes, indeed. |
6 | Q. You find that Doctor Peretti's opinions are opinions in |
7 | which you have confidence? |
8 | A. Yes, of course. |
9 | Q. And on which you take action? |
10 | A. Of which I am able to sign, countersign, as you suggested |
11 | before and to testify if he's unavailable. Those are two areas |
12 | where I would take action. |
13 | Q. And you would rely on his opinions -- |
14 | A. Yes. |
15 | Q. -- in forming your opinions? |
16 | A. Well, indeed. They're probably the same opinions. |
17 | MR. MALLETT: Thank you. |
18 | (WITNESS EXCUSED) |
19 | MR. DAVIS: The state would rest in terms of |
20 | evidence. |
21 | MR. MALLETT: We have nothing further today, Your |
22 | Honor. |
23 | THE COURT: Y'all want to give me written briefs |
24 | instead of me having to listen to your arguments? |
25 | MR. DAVIS: I think that would be preferable, |
|
160
|
1 | Your Honor. |
2 | THE COURT: It would sure be preferable to me. |
3 | How much time do you want? Thirty days? |
4 | MR. MALLETT: If it please the Court, it occurred |
5 | to us in consultation with one another that not only |
6 | is it our burden, but after the submission of our |
7 | writing we have identified the issues to which the |
8 | state needs to respond and -- |
9 | THE COURT: You're going to ask me can you reply |
10 | to them? |
11 | MR. MALLETT: That would be preferable but |
12 | failing that request, I would request that we have 45 |
13 | days, Your Honor, from the time we receive a |
14 | transcript from the court reporter for which we'll |
15 | make arrangements today. |
16 | THE COURT: Do y'all have any problem in giving |
17 | simultaneous briefs? |
18 | MR. MALLETT: We do not, Your Honor. |
19 | THE COURT: Or arguments, I guess, technically. |
20 | By the time y'all get through, it will probably be a |
21 | brief. |
22 | MR. DAVIS: Your Honor, Todd will be the one who |
23 | handles that end of it, but I think the state's brief |
24 | will be in response. It's their burden, and they're |
25 | going to put forth why they've met their burden -- |
|
161
|
1 | THE COURT: So you want to respond. |
2 | MR. DAVIS: We want to respond. If the Court is |
3 | required to rule within ninety days and they have |
4 | forty-five days to do theirs, that creates the dilemma |
5 | that if we are given an equal amount of time, the |
6 | Court will have to rule on the same day -- |
7 | THE COURT: I'm going to give you thirty days and |
8 | then thirty days. And then fifteen if you want to |
9 | briefly reply to their -- |
10 | MR. MALLETT: Can we have that begin when we |
11 | receive a transcription of the testimony of these |
12 | proceedings? We only have two days that are not yet |
13 | completed, and one of them is a very short day. |
14 | THE COURT: You're just talking about yesterday |
15 | and today that you haven't been given? |
16 | MR. MALLETT: That's correct. |
17 | THE COURT: That will be fine. |
18 | MR. DAVIS: The question I have, Your Honor, is |
19 | the ninety day clock starts to tick as of the |
20 | conclusion of this hearing. So obviously it's going |
21 | to be real important -- |
22 | THE COURT: I guess y'all are gonna want me to |
23 | read 'em, not just throw them up against a wall. So I |
24 | don't see that that will be any big problem. How many |
25 | pages do you expect them to be? Something that I |
|
162
|
1 | could read in twenty or thirty minutes? |
2 | MR. MALLETT: I don't think my writing will be |
3 | any longer than my cross examination. It's Mr. Davis |
4 | that -- |
5 | THE COURT: Well, I can handle that. I don't see |
6 | any problem. If y'all don't get 'em in, I'll just |
7 | enter a ruling. |
8 | MR. DAVIS: Your Honor, way back -- I believe it |
9 | was probably the first day of these hearings -- there |
10 | was a packet of materials that were submitted as an |
11 | exhibit and I don't know if it was conditional, but |
12 | there were newspaper articles -- theoretically all the |
13 | newspaper articles that appeared -- and he's gone |
14 | through some of those and I think some of them are |
15 | duplicates or repetitive, things of that nature. |
16 | And I know that when they were submitted, Mr. |
17 | Mallett gave us a copy of 'em and said, here you can |
18 | go through these since you haven't seen these before |
19 | and determine if you have any problems with them. |
20 | We do have some problems with those. I don't |
21 | know if they were actually received as an exhibit or |
22 | not. |
23 | THE COURT: Barbara can tell us what the exhibits |
24 | were. I remember you bantering them around. I don't |
25 | know if they were ever offered or received. Were |
|
163
|
1 | they? |
2 | THE REPORTER: They were received. |
3 | MR. DAVIS: I know at the time we were given a |
4 | copy and were advised that we could go through them to |
5 | see if -- |
6 | THE COURT: What would you be objecting to in an |
7 | exhibit I received -- and I guess you tendered them |
8 | just to show the weight and amount of pre-trial and |
9 | coverage of the case. |
10 | MR. MALLETT: I think the Court made some comment |
11 | acknowledging that this was a well-publicized case. |
12 | THE COURT: Well, there isn't any question about |
13 | that. |
14 | MR. MALLETT: If there is a duplication, of |
15 | course, we are a little embarrassed because we don't |
16 | want to make the state carry unnecessary paper around, |
17 | but there's no harm to a redundancy. I apologize if |
18 | we've copied the same page twice. |
19 | THE COURT: What is your objection? |
20 | MR. NEWTON: You're talking about putting in the |
21 | record, and you can see by all the tabs there's a |
22 | bunch of duplications. I think it's a difference in |
23 | -- if we were only talking about a couple, it probably |
24 | wouldn't be an objection, but all these tabs indicate |
25 | they're either duplicates or things that happened |
|
164
|
1 | after trial and to represent that this is a |
2 | representation of what the media -- the publicity was |
3 | and have duplicates and also things that occurred |
4 | after the trial, you're talking about a record for |
5 | later on -- |
6 | THE COURT: I don't see that that is going to be |
7 | a major issue for this Court. Now if you want it for |
8 | some later purpose, it might be. So y'all resolve |
9 | that. |
10 | MR. MALLETT: I would conclude by saying that if |
11 | the dates are on the articles, then -- |
12 | THE COURT: Do you have any objections to them |
13 | purging duplications, and do you want to review it |
14 | before it's accepted? |
15 | MR. MALLETT: We have no objection to purging |
16 | duplications. I think it's an exercise that would be |
17 | the greatest burden on the court reporter, but if they |
18 | insist, that's certainly nothing we could oppose. |
19 | THE COURT: Why don't you go through 'em and |
20 | excise those that are duplicates and let them have a |
21 | copy of the finished product and also a copy of those |
22 | that you've removed. |
23 | MR. DAVIS: Your Honor, also those that are post |
24 | trial -- because I recall the reason those were |
25 | submitted was to show -- or be evidence of publicity |
|
165
|
1 | that could have influenced potential jurors prior to |
2 | trial, and since some of these articles are ones that |
3 | were printed after trial, those obviously wouldn't |
4 | have any relevance. |
5 | MR. MALLETT: I really believe the Court is able |
6 | to look at the dates of something that is published |
7 | and remember the date of the trial, and I think |
8 | excising the duplicates is a workable resolution to |
9 | the problem they've raised and suggest we do it that |
10 | way. |
11 | THE COURT: Redact the duplicates and give 'em to |
12 | them and if you've got any objection to that -- so |
13 | I'll allow you to modify the exhibit to the extent |
14 | that you're going to remove duplicates as well as |
15 | matters that might have been raised post trial. Any |
16 | objection? |
17 | MR. MALLETT: No, sir. |
18 | THE COURT: I'll give you an opportunity to |
19 | review both what was removed and the exhibit as it |
20 | will be tendered -- or received. Anything else? |
21 | The problem will be giving it to the court |
22 | reporter in the final stage -- unless you're gonna |
23 | trust 'em. I assume you're gonna want to look at the |
24 | final product. |
25 | MR. NEWTON: It won't take five minutes, your |
|
166
|
1 | Honor. I've already got them tabbed. |
2 | MR. MALLETT: We trust Mr. Newton, Your Honor. |
3 | (Laughter) |
4 | THE COURT: The court reporter says you can do it |
5 | right now before you leave since it's here. |
6 | All right, if that's it, court will be in recess. |
7 | (PROCEEDINGS CONCLUDED) |