|
816
|
1 | MR. MALLETT: Thank you for your testimony, Mr. |
2 | Price. |
3 | THE COURT: Anything else? |
4 | MR. DAVIS: As much as I'd like to, your Honor, |
5 | I'll pass the witness. |
6 | THE COURT: All right, you're free to go. |
7 | THE WITNESS: I'm available if you need me. |
8 | THE COURT: I'd go out of town but -- (LAUGHTER.) |
9 | All right, let's take a short recess -- ten |
10 | minute recess. |
11 | (RECESS. ) |
12 | (RETURN TO OPEN COURT.) |
13 | MR. MALLETT: We'll call Mr. Brent Turvey. |
14 | BRENT TURVEY |
15 | having been first duly sworn to speak the truth, the whole |
16 | truth, and nothing but the truth, then testified as follows: |
17 | DIRECT EXAMINATION |
18 | BY MR. MALLETT: |
19 | Q. Good afternoon. And for the record, would you introduce |
20 | yourself to Judge Burnett, please? |
21 | A. My name is Brent Edward Turvey. T-U-R-V-E-Y. |
22 | Q. And Mr. Turvey, in what community do you reside? |
23 | A. I reside in the City of San Leandro, California. |
24 | Q. And to sort of orient us, where is San Leandro in |
25 | relationship to the geography of California? |
|
817
|
1 | A. San Leandro is in the East Bay. It's an area right next |
2 | to San Francisco. |
3 | Q. How are you employed? |
4 | A. I'm employed with a company named Knowledge Solutions as a |
5 | forensic scientist and a criminal profiler. |
6 | Q. And tell us a little bit about Knowledge Solutions. Just |
7 | very briefly tell us what sort of business that is, who owns |
8 | it, and operates it, and what it does. |
9 | A. Knowledge Solutions is a partnership of three individuals |
10 | including myself and -- and we essentially run on-line |
11 | educational initiatives in forensic science. We run -- we have |
12 | -- we contract with about six other instructors aside from |
13 | myself to run courses in the forensic sciences, and we do case |
14 | work as well. |
15 | Q. How old a man are you? |
16 | A. I'm twenty-eight years old. |
17 | Q. Single or married? |
18 | A. I'm married. |
19 | Q. And can you give us a brief summary of your educational |
20 | background? |
21 | A. I have an undergraduate degree in history, a second |
22 | undergraduate degree in psychology, and a Masters of Science in |
23 | forensic science. |
24 | Q. I have -- to -- to abbreviate proceedings and to assist |
25 | the Court, I have marked a CV dated 5-18-98, Petitioner's |
|
818
|
1 | Exhibit Forty-three. I'd like you to tell me generally what |
2 | that is. |
3 | A. This is my CV, yes. |
4 | Q. And did you fax a copy of that to Mr. Brent Davis at |
5 | sometime over the summer? |
6 | A. Yes, I did. |
7 | MR. MALLETT: Move the admission of Defense |
8 | Forty-three for the record, your Honor. |
9 | MR. DAVIS: Can I just double check? I've -- |
10 | I've got two from him so I was making sure this one |
11 | coincides with my -- |
12 | THE COURT: All right. |
13 | MR. DAVIS: With what I would label as number |
14 | two. |
15 | THE COURT: I've excused Mr. Price from the |
16 | rule, so he's in the courtroom and if any of you have |
17 | any objection to that, you need to let me know. |
18 | MR. DAYIS: Your Honor, I'm afraid if we excused |
19 | him completely, we would all suffer from separation |
20 | anxiety. |
21 | MR. PRICE: Thank you. |
22 | . BY MR. MALLETT |
23 | Q. Mr. Turvey, I want to ask you ñ if youíll look at this -- |
24 | is this your most recent CV or is it possible that the one Mr. |
25 | Davis -- that one of the ones Mr. Davis has is more recent? |
|
819
|
1 | A. I don't know which one he has, so -- |
2 | MR. DAVIS: I only found one thing that's |
3 | different from theirs and what he sent to -- |
4 | MR. MALLETT: Is it a material difference? |
5 | MR. DAVIS: It's something I'll ask him about. |
6 | MR. MALLETT: All right. Well, then subject to |
7 | any cross examination about some slight change, move |
8 | the admission of forty-three. |
9 | THE COURT: Any objection? |
10 | MR. DAVIS: No. |
11 | THE COURT: All right, it may be received. Hand |
12 | it up here to me so I can look at it. |
13 | (PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT NUMBER FORTY-THREE IS |
14 | RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE.) |
15 | BY MR. MALLETT: |
16 | Q. Mr. Turvey, with that in evidence I'm not gonna review the |
17 | entire CV but there are a few points that I do want to have you |
18 | answer -- question and answer for the record. |
19 | You said you were a forensic scientist. What is a |
20 | forensic scientist. |
21 | A. A forensic scientist is someone who evaluates evidence for |
22 | the purpose of trial -- for courtroom purposes. |
23 | Q. And you said you were a criminal profiler. What is a |
24 | criminal profiler? |
25 | A. A criminal profiler in general is someone who infers the |
|
820
|
1 | personality characteristics of an offender based on the |
2 | physical evidence at the crime scene. |
3 | Q. It's not in your resume, but I think that many may be |
4 | curious about this since you're a witness sponsored by the |
5 | defense in these proceedings. Are you -- do you consider |
6 | yourself a supporter or an opponent of the death penalty? |
7 | A. I'm a supporter of the death penalty. |
8 | Q. And in your work as a forensic scientist and a criminal |
9 | profiler, what sort of -- who do you work for -- or who does |
10 | Knowledge Solutions work for? |
11 | A. Well, Knowledge Solutions tends to work for a broader |
12 | community than I work for as a -- in the capacity of case |
13 | workers of forensic scientists. So which would you like to |
14 | answer first? |
15 | Q. I'm worried about your particular work as a forensic |
16 | scientist. Who do you work for? |
17 | A. Okay. I work for typically law enforcement or attorney |
18 | clients who hire me to -- law enforcement hires me usually in |
19 | unsolved cases involving serial rape, serial homicide, to |
20 | evaluate their evidence and give them investigative direction |
21 | and insight. And the defense or the prosecution may hire me |
22 | for much the same reason. |
23 | Q. Do you have any special training in homicide |
24 | investigation? |
25 | A. Yes, I do. |
|
821
|
1 | Q. What is that? |
2 | A. It's included in my training as a forensic scientist. |
3 | Q. Can you amplify that? |
4 | A. Yes. When I studied under Doctor Henry Lee. |
5 | Q. Who is Doctor Henry Lee? |
6 | A. Doctor Henry Lee is the -- is the leading criminalist in |
7 | the State of Connecticut. |
8 | Q. And have you had any special training in criminal profile? |
9 | A. Yes, I have. |
10 | Q. And under what circumstances? |
11 | A. That was part of that as well, but also I have trained -- |
12 | I have attended numerous seminars and training events since |
13 | that time as well. |
14 | . Q. Have you written for publication? |
15 | A. Yes, I have. |
16 | Q. What have you written? |
17 | A. I have written four articles for publication for the |
18 | upcoming Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences, one on modus |
19 | operandi, one on auto-erotic death, one on criminal profiling, |
20 | and I believe the other one is on sig -- offender signature. |
21 | Iíve also written a test book for publication this next |
22 | year on ñ |
23 | Q. Who will be -- who's the publisher? |
24 | A. Academic Press. |
25 | MR. DAVIS: May I inquire of something for |
|
822
|
1 | clarification? |
2 | Are these articles that have been published or |
3 | are they going to be -- I mean, can I go pick up a |
4 | publication and get them? |
5 | THE WITNESS: The articles for the Forensic |
6 | Science Encyclopedia will be out in January of 2000. |
7 | the textbook will be out in April of 1999. |
8 | MR. DAVIS: So for clarification, these things |
9 | you're testifying to are things that you -- that |
10 | aren't published, you've just written an article, |
11 | right? |
12 | THE WITNESS: Those things, yes, but thatís not |
13 | it . |
14 | BY MR. MALLETT: |
15 | Q. Have you written -- have you been published in the past? |
16 | A. Can you explain what you mean by "published?" |
17 | Q. Well, can we go to a magazine store or a book store, the |
18 | internet, a university, and find anything published by Brent |
19 | Turvey? |
20 | A. Yes. I've written a number of articles for peer use that |
21 | I have published on our Knowledge Solutions Website and our |
22 | resource, and those are archived by the RCMP, and they're sent |
23 | out to law enforcement agencies on request. |
24 | Q. And you're here to testify to the materials that you've |
25 | examined in this case and the suggestions for investigation |
|
823
|
1 | that you made based on that examination. Is that correct? |
2 | A. That's correct. |
3 | Q. All right. Tell me how you think you first got involved with this |
4 | case. |
5 | A. I first got involved in this case in around July of 1997, |
6 | I believe, when I was contacted by a student of mine who was |
7 | taking one of my on-line courses. |
8 | Q. Well, then tell us briefly about what are your on-line |
9 | courses. Do they give you credit as a credit in college or |
10 | university? How does one qualify to take these courses? How |
11 | long are the courses? Do they cost money? What are the |
12 | consequences of finishing the course? Tell us about your on- |
13 | line courses. |
14 | A. Certainly. The on-line courses range from four weeks to |
15 | ten weeks lope. Students can register -- they're taken |
16 | entirely over the Internet. Students register on-line, and |
17 | they are able to review material on a weekly basis on-line |
18 | regarding the course. They are able to interact with other |
19 | students. And they are able to exchange E-Mail with me and |
20 | also get public -- sort of in a net forum -- in an on-line |
21 | forum, they are able to get response and feedback from myself and |
22 | any other instructor from which course theyíre taking. Of |
23 | course --- |
24 | Q. Can you remember the name of your student who first |
25 | contacted you with reference to this case? |
|
824
|
1 | A. Yes, I can. Her name was Cathy Bakken. |
2 | Q. And for purposes of explaining what you did or what you |
3 | acted on, can you tell us what she told you? |
4 | MR. DAVIS: Whatís the last name? |
5 | THE WITNESS: Bakken. B-A-K-K-E-N. |
6 | BY MR. MALLETT: |
7 | A. In order to understand what steps you took or what you |
8 | did, can you tell us what she said to you? |
9 | A. Yes. She contacted me because, as I said, we -- we use -- |
10 | we use a textbook called Practical Homicide Investigations |
11 | by Vern Geberth for -- for the course. |
12 | Q. How do you spell that name? |
13 | A. Geberth. G-E-B-E-R-T-H. |
14 | Q. All right. |
15 | A. And that was -- that's the textbook that we use for that |
16 | particular course. And she had read it and she was contacting |
17 | me regarding this case, and she wanted to ask my opinion over |
18 | the phone as to whether or not I felt there was a satanic |
19 | element in this case. And she proceeded, to relay information |
20 | to me. At a certain point within like a half hour I had to |
21 | stop her because I realized that she was getting into an area |
22 | that I really needed to be speaking to a defense attorney |
23 | about. So I admonished her. I said, ìPlease, letís stop here. |
24 | I don't really have enough -- I can't really give you a |
25 | professional opinion. What you can do is you can put the |
|
825
|
1 | attorney in contact with me. Is there an attorney working or, |
2 | this case?î |
3 | Because I was not familiar with the case, and I wanted to |
4 | make sure that I was getting actual information as opposed to |
5 | to someone else's biased hearsay. |
6 | Q. Were you subsequently contacted by an attorney? |
7 | A. Yes, I was. |
8 | Q. Who was that? |
9 | A. That was Dan Stidham. |
10 | Q. And for purposes of understanding what you did next, can |
11 | you tell us what Mr. Stidham was interested in when he |
12 | contacted you? |
13 | A. Yes. He asked me if I would be interested in looking at |
14 | the case and giving it my opinion. |
15 | Q. Did you reach an agreement with him? |
16 | A. How do you mean? |
17 | Q. Well, he asked you if you'd look at the case and give your |
18 | opinion. Did you agree to do that? |
19 | A. Yes, I did. |
20 | Q. All right. What action did you take in consequence of |
21 | that agreement? |
22 | the next thing I did was I requested from him case |
23 | materials so that I could make a firsthand evaluation of |
24 | materials myself. |
25 | Q. Did he provide you materials of the class, character |
|
826
|
1 | or nature of the kind that you requested? |
2 | A. He certainly did. |
3 | Q. I don't know if you gave a precise summary, but as best |
4 | you can, tell us what Mr. Stidham provided you in response to |
5 | your first request? |
6 | A. He was very forthcoming. He provided me with -- he |
7 | provided me with crime scene and autopsy photos, crime scene |
8 | video -- |
9 | Q. Please go slowly. The Court Reporter has to write this |
10 | down and I have to listen to what you're saying, as well as |
11 | Judge Burnett, who hears probably much better than I do. |
12 | A. He sent me what he -- he sent me what he claimed that he |
13 | had which was the crime scene and autopsy photos, a copy of the |
14 | crime scene video, a copy of investigators' reports, a copy of |
15 | some of the witness statements, a copy of the missing -- the |
16 | initial missing persons' reports, a copy of the -- one of the |
17 | victim's medical and neurological histories, the results of |
18 | some of the forensic analysis that were performed in the case |
19 | on some of the physical evidence. |
20 | He also -- let's see -- I believe -- I believe thatís all |
21 | that he sent me initially. It was quite a bit. |
22 | Q. As a -- after receiving that -- those materials, did a |
23 | time come when you asked for additional materials? |
24 | A. Yes. |
25 | Q. As best you can, approximately when did you first have |
|
827
|
1 | contact with Mr. Stidham? |
2 | A. That would have to be, I believe -- again, I believe it |
3 | was in July -- at the end -- at the end of July, I believe -- |
4 | end of July or early August, 1997. |
5 | Q. All right. And what did you do with the materials that he |
6 | sent you? |
7 | A. I sat down and I reviewed them. I examined all of the |
8 | photographs. I -- I -- I scanned in all the photographs that I |
9 | received digitally and made a -- and made an analysis of them |
10 | in an up-close fashion, and I read all the materials that I'd |
11 | been provided. |
12 | Q. Now, for those of us like myself who still do typing with |
13 | two fingers, what does it mean to say you scanned in digitally? |
14 | A. I took the -- I was actually given the first -- the |
15 | original copies, the original evidence of the photos, the |
16 | original crime scene and autopsy photos, and I put them in the |
17 | scanner and I had -- |
18 | Q. Which is an electronic device? |
19 | A. Yes. An elec -- an electronic device. |
20 | Q. What does it do? |
21 | A. It digitizes photos and turns them into digital images |
22 | that you can view on a computer. |
23 | Q. All right. So you put the autopsy photos into the memory |
24 | of a computer? |
25 | A. That's correct. |
|
828
|
1 | Q. Can they also be reproduced on something that is portable |
2 | such as a hard disc? |
3 | A. That's Correct. |
4 | Q. All right. Did you have an opportunity to confer with any |
5 | other persons who claimed to be experts? |
6 | A. I have, yeah. In what capacity? |
7 | Q. After Mr. Stidham sent -- sent you this material, did you |
8 | consult -- and you read -- did you read the materials? |
9 | A. Yes, I did. |
10 | Q. Did you have an opportunity to consult with any other |
11 | experts? |
12 | A. Yes, I did. |
13 | Q. And did a time come when you wrote a report? |
14 | A. Yes, I did. |
15 | Q. Now, before we go into the report of your findings, I |
16 | would like to have you talk to Judge Burnett if you would, |
17 | please, about your approach to examining a case or a situation |
18 | that is brought to your attention. |
19 | This will require some narrative, but I'm going to |
20 | interrupt you from time to time with your permission. |
21 | A. Certainly. |
22 | Q. Generally, what is your approach to evaluating a case? |
23 | A. It -- it depends on the case. Obviously, each case is |
24 | completely different with its own peculiarities and its own -- |
25 | its own evidence. And the evidence itself dictates how I |
|
829
|
1 | approach the case -- what's -- what's available, in every case |
2 | some things may be available, some things may not be available. |
3 | In general, I follow the same standard protocol. The very |
4 | first thing that I do is I do a forensic analysis and by that I |
5 | mean that I sit down and I look at all the physical evidence in |
6 | the case, all the results of all the forensic analysis by all |
7 | the forensic scientists involved, and I try to understand what |
8 | it is they said and what weight that can be given in terms of a |
9 | reconstruction -- in terms of reconstructing what took place. |
10 | And I also look for things that didn't get examined or didnít |
11 | get documented, or did not get collected. I look for evidence |
12 | that may have been missed, that may have been overlooked. |
13 | That's the very first step. |
14 | Q. Is there a second step? |
15 | A. Yes, there is. The second step involves reviewing the |
16 | history of the victims, and this gets back to your question of |
17 | whether or not I asked Dan Stidham for additional materials. I |
18 | only received the victim history of one individual -- that was |
19 | Christopher Byers. I did not receive victim history on the |
20 | other two victims and I re -- I requested that material. I |
21 | never -- I subsequently never received any -- any additional |
22 | material on those victims. |
23 | Q. So what is -- what is the next step after reviewing |
24 | victim's history? |
25 | A. Well, actually there's -- if I -- if I may go back and |
|
830
|
1 | cover that. |
2 | Q. Fine. |
3 | A. Victim-- the purpose of reviewing victim history is to do |
4 | two things. Itís to establish who the victim was and what |
5 | brought them to that --- to that crime scene and subsequently |
6 | led to their death or the event that took place, and it allows |
7 | me to make a risk assessment. And by that I mean assess the |
8 | victimís vulnerability to crime, and also it helps to perform |
9 | an assessment of what -- an offender risk assessment -- how |
10 | many -- how much -- how much effort and how many blockades the |
11 | offender had to penetrate to acquire that victim. So those are |
12 | sort of the general purposes of establishing victim history. |
13 | And there is -- then we go on next to the third step, and |
14 | the third step -- |
15 | Q. What is -- what is the third step? |
16 | A. Yeah, absolutely. The third step is establishing the |
17 | crime scene characteristics, and these include things like the |
18 | location type -- indoor, outdoor, vehicle -- and the crime |
19 | scene type which in -- which means whether that's a primary |
20 | scene, a secondary scene, a disposal site, an intermediary |
21 | scene, things of this nature. It also includes establishing |
22 | things -- and establishing things like the method -- the |
23 | offenderís method of approach to the victim, how they acquired |
24 | the victim, the methods of control evident in a crime, any -- |
25 | any -- any -- any use of force in establishing how that played |
|
831
|
1 | into things. Thereís a long laundry list of crime scene |
2 | characteristics that we get into if we want to. |
3 | Q. Did you study police reports of police observations at |
4 | the crime scene. |
5 | A. Yes, I did. |
6 | Q. Did you study still photographs of observations of the |
7 | crime scene? |
8 | A. Yes, I did. |
9 | Q. Did you study any moving pictures of observations at the |
10 | crime scene? |
11 | A. Yes. |
12 | Q. And did you study -- did you go to the crime scene? |
13 | A. Yes, I did. |
14 | Q. What is the importance of establishing what happened at |
15 | the crime scene? |
16 | A. Well, you canít very well -- in reference to what? To my |
17 | -- to my process -- to my protocols? |
18 | Q. Yes. |
19 | A. Okay. You can't -- establishing what happened at the |
20 | crime scene -- the whole purpose -- the whole purpose of the |
21 | first three phases of what I do is to establish the nature of |
22 | the interaction between the victim and the offender, their |
23 | behavior, and thatís the basis for any subsequent opinions that |
24 | I may have about the character of the offender. So the whole |
25 | purpose is to establish behavior. |
|
832
|
1 | Q. Did Mr, Stidham ask you to do a profile? |
2 | A. Yes, he did. |
3 | Q. Of what? |
4 | A. He asked me to do a profile of the likely -- of the likely |
5 | offender characteristics of the person responsible for those |
6 | crimes -- person or persons. |
7 | Did he ask you to make any determination with reference to |
8 | the guilt or innocence of Mr. Echols or Mr. Misskelley or Mr. |
9 | Baldwin? |
10 | A. He did not. |
11 | Q. What specific issues did Mr. Tur -- did Mr. Stidham ask |
12 | you to address your profile? |
13 | Q. He asked me to address whether or not, one, I felt this |
14 | was a -- a primary scene or a disposal site only. He asked to |
15 | address whether or not I felt that there was a satanic element |
16 | in the crime, and he asked me to address whether or not I felt |
17 | this might be the result of a serial murderer. |
18 | Q. Did you feel comfortable based on your training and |
19 | experience forming opinions in response to those questions? |
20 | A. Yes, I did. |
21 | Q. Letís talk about three big questions, and then weíll come |
22 | back and talk about some details. |
23 | A. All right. |
24 | Q. On the issue Mr. Stidham raised about the so-called |
25 | satanic ritual element, did you form any -- any opinions? |
|
833
|
1 | A. Yes, I did. |
2 | Q. What were -- what were your opinions. |
3 | A. My opinion was that I found no evidence whatsoever of any |
4 | sort of satanic ritual or element in this case -- in the |
5 | crime scene. |
6 | Q. Did you form any opinions about the -- stop -- you talk |
7 | about the concepts or phrases, primary scene, and disposal |
8 | site. Tell me what -- again -- what you mean by those |
9 | expressions. |
10 | A. Absolutely. A primary scene is the -- is the crime scene |
11 | where the majority of the interaction between the victim and |
12 | the offender took place -- where the majority of the assault or |
13 | the attack upon the victim took place. |
14 | A disposal site is the location where the body is found. |
15 | Now, it is possible for these things to be one and the same, |
16 | and it's possible for them to not be one and the same. |
17 | Q. In this case, did you form an opinion with reference to |
18 | whether the primary scene and the disposal site were the same |
19 | place? |
20 | A. Yes, I did. |
21 | Q. What was that opinion? |
22 | A. My opinion was that they were not the same place. |
23 | Q. And what was the reason for that? |
24 | A. Well, there were -- there were several reasons actually. |
25 | If I can refer to my notes. |
|
834
|
1 | Primarily, the primary reason was -- can I give -- can I |
2 | -- can I elucidate a little bit here? |
3 | Q. Sure. |
4 | A. When I try to establish whether or not something is a |
5 | primary scene or -- by itself or a primary scene and a disposal |
6 | site, what I try to do is I look at the physical evidence, look |
7 | at the behavior that took place between the victim and the |
8 | offender, and try to determine what potential ñ what necessary |
9 | transfer evidence I would likely find in that environment as a |
10 | result of that behavior. |
11 | And, in this case, we had an emasculation of one of the |
12 | victims, and a result of that emasculation would be a lot of |
13 | blood, and there was no blood at the crime scene -- other than |
14 | that found in the water. |
15 | Q. Did you consider at this crime scene of which you saw |
16 | pictures, saw motion pictures and that you visited yourself, |
17 | the possibility of the offender removing the blood? |
18 | A. Removing the blood how? |
19 | Q. Well, I just wonder if you considered the possibility of |
20 | the offender to clean up after committing a terrible crime? |
21 | A. Yes, I did. |
22 | Q. And what comments do you have on that? |
23 | A. I believe it would have been very difficult to clean up |
24 | the amount of blood that would have been the result of that |
25 | particular attack because of the time of the -- if the boys |
|
835
|
1 | went missing at 6:30 -- starting at 6:30 we have limited |
2 | visibility in that area. And they would not have been able to |
3 | see it all to clean it up in my opinion. |
4 | Q. The third issue that you said Mr. Stidham was interested |
5 | in, I believe, is whether there was the possibility for some |
6 | serial murderer? |
7 | A. That's correct. |
8 | Q. What is a serial murderer? |
9 | A. In generally, it's -- |
10 | Q. What do you mean by that? What do you mean by that |
11 | expression? |
12 | A. Right. Everybody has their own sort of definition for |
13 | what a serial murderer is, and we have the media and popular |
14 | fiction to blame for that. |
15 | A serial murderer is someone who kills essentially two or |
16 | more individuals on two separate dates with a cooling-off |
17 | period in between. |
18 | Q. And did you form an opinion whether based on the evidence |
19 | that you were shown there were indications that a serial |
20 | murderer was responsible? |
21 | A. Well, can I -- can I step back? |
22 | Q. Please. |
23 | A. Okay. I -- I think in this case when Dan Stidham asked me |
24 | that question, he was interested in whether or not this was a |
25 | -- a stranger to the victims. Not just -- 'cause, you know, a |
|
836
|
1 | serial murderer can go after victims that they know. I think |
2 | he was interested in whether or not it was a serial murderer |
3 | who was like perhaps passing through, or working in a broad |
4 | area throughout the state. So I would -- I would clarify that. |
5 | Q. Well, did you -- did you come with an opinion to answer |
6 | that question of Mr. Stidham's? |
7 | A. Yes, I did. |
8 | Q. And that was that opinion? |
9 | A. I believe it was not the work of the type of serial killer |
10 | that Mr. Stidham was inquiring about. |
11 | Q. For what reason? |
12 | A. For several reasons. First of all, the disposal site |
13 | itself was essentially -- constantly being searched that |
14 | evening. So it would not be wise for a serial murderer to |
15 | dispose of the victims in that area. |
16 | Second of all, the victims themselves were very high risk |
17 | for an offender to acquire because, one, children are on |
18 | schedules, and they are easilier (sic) missed very quickly, and |
19 | the search would begin for them immediately. |
20 | And too, -- let me see, what was the other reason -- let |
21 | me see -- too, there were three of them. It would be very |
22 | difficult for one -- even two-- offenders to acquire three |
23 | victims without attracting a lot of attention. So they would |
24 | have had to want them very badly. |
25 | Q. Is there some other type of serial murderer than the type |
|
837
|
1 | that Mr. Stidham seemed to be involved in -- or interested in? |
2 | A. There -- there are many different types of serial |
3 | murderers. I'm not sure I understand the question. |
4 | Q. What --- what stood out to you as the most significant |
5 | evidentiary facts or unusual and remarkable evidentiary facts |
6 | as you reviewed the body of evidence presented to you? |
7 | A. Believe it or not, the very first thing I said when I |
8 | received the Fed Ex from Dan Stidham's office is I opened up |
9 | the autopsy photos. And the very first box that I opened had a |
10 | picture on top that when I looked at it, I felt that this was |
11 | the result of a bite mark activity with the very first photo |
12 | looked at. And I thought, well, at least they have bite marks. |
13 | So I immediately called Dan and asked him, about it, and he told |
14 | me that they had never considered the possibility that there |
15 | was any bite mark evidence in this case. |
16 | Q. Were there any other significant evidentiary facts that |
17 | were important to you -- unusual or remarkable about this case? |
18 | A. I would have to say that the history of Christopher Byers |
19 | stood out to me. It was very significant -- very significant |
21 | Q. Tell us if you would three -- or if you have as many as |
22 | three -- items that you saw in his personal history that you |
23 | thought were significant. |
24 | A. Well, he was being treated for conduct disorder. Heís -- |
25 | he's a young child. He's a child of -- of eight-year-old -- |
|
838
|
1 | eight years old and he's got a neurologist. He's been |
2 | diagnosed with conduct disorder, with attention deficit |
3 | disorder. He's taking psychotropic medication, and he's got a |
4 | history of antisocial -- excuse me -- of antisocial behavior. |
5 | Those things just immediately stuck out to me. |
6 | Q. Did you find any significant evidence or lack of evidence |
7 | in the way of -- of -- predatory animals, insects, or non-human |
8 | activities at the scene? |
9 | A. I'm not a forensic odontologist so I know that my |
10 | area -- my area of expertise is not bite mark evidence I |
11 | thought -- I saw what I thought could be bite marks of some |
12 | kind and to make that call -- I wouldn't be able to make that |
13 | call. So the very first thing I suggested to Dan was that he |
14 | get a forensic odontologist who's qualified to make those |
15 | interpretations. |
16 | Q. Did you see any evidence of animals -- any other animal |
17 | activity or insect activity? |
18 | A. No, I did not. Other -- other than what I pointed out to |
19 | Dan. |
20 | Q. Would you have expected to see any under the facts and |
21 | and circumstances that were presented to you? |
22 | A. I would. I would expect to see more. |
23 | Q. What would you expect to see? |
24 | A. I would expect to see some since they were found outdoors |
25 | in a -- in a woodland area. I would expect to see some -- |
|
839
|
1 | some animal predation. It wouldn't be surprising to see that. |
2 | Q. Now, do you think it's your business to conduct profiles |
3 | of the people who are victims of these offenses, or the |
4 | perpetrators, or the scenes themselves? What exactly is it |
5 | that you would profile? |
6 | A. I profile behavior. I don't -- I don't create profiles of |
7 | --- of specific individuals. When I -- when I construct a |
8 | profile, it's to give insight into the general type of -- to |
9 | the general characteristics of the type of person that would |
10 | commit a crime, not to suggest a specific person. |
11 | Q. When the police bring you -- or private individuals like |
12 | Mr. Stidham -- bring you into a case, do you customarily find |
13 | yourself brought in for purposes of preparing for courtroom |
14 | testimony, or what is the role for which you are most often |
15 | employed? |
16 | A. Most often it's investigative. |
17 | Q. And what contributions do you make to an investigation? |
18 | A. Typically, I will give investigative direction, let them |
19 | know what -- what physical evidence hasn't been fully |
20 | exploited, let them know what potentially has been ñ has been |
21 | missed, let them know investigatively what I feel ought to be |
22 | done. If itís an unsolved case, then we will sit down -- we |
23 | will have task force meetings about what ought to be done, what |
24 | steps ought to be taken to generate competent suspects and -- |
25 | and those sorts of things. If it's -- |
|
840
|
1 | Q. Does that also involve making suggestions about what other |
2 | specialists might be retained or contacted or utilized -- |
3 | A. Absolutely. |
4 | Q. -- to assist in the investigation? |
5 | A. Absolutely. |
6 | Q. Are you a medical doctor? |
7 | A. No, I'm not. |
8 | Q. You're not a zoologist? |
9 | A. No, I'm not. |
10 | Q. Or an entomologist? |
11 | A. No, Iím not. |
12 | . Q. Or an odontologist? |
13 | A. No, I'm not. |
14 | Q. Were you given any kind of report at all from any |
15 | pathologist as to -- as to the nature and cause of death? |
16 | A. I did review the coroner's reports from Kent Hale and the |
17 | autopsy reports that were written up by Frank Peretti. |
18 | Q. Was it made known to you whether the defense ever |
19 | contacted or contracted with a pathologist to look at all the |
20 | evidence from a defense standpoint? |
21 | A. To my knowledge, that was not done. |
22 | Q. Letís talk then about some specific areas. Did you see -- |
23 | lets -- talk about the subject of potential belt |
24 | lacerations. Did you see any evidence of that? |
25 | A. I saw what could be belt lacerations, yes. |
|
841
|
1 | Q. Where? |
2 | A. On Christopher Byers' posterior left thigh. |
3 | Q. And what was the significance of that to you? |
4 | A. I was told that he was administered a -- a spanking by his |
5 | step-father shortly before his disappearance. |
6 | Q. And were the markings that you saw consistent with that? |
7 | A. They were. |
8 | Q. On what person did you see -- on what person or persons |
9 | did you see what might be evidence of a bite mark or bite marks |
10 | -- animal or human? |
11 | A. Stevie Branch. |
12 | Q. At what location did you look -- or locations? |
13 | A. The -- the left side of his face as well as his arms and |
14 | his thighs. I looked in those locations. I saw what I thought |
15 | may be potential bite mark evidence on the left side of his |
16 | face and that region up there above -- above his eye all |
17 | around. I didnít know what I was looking at. I knew that it |
18 | was potentially bite mark evidence. |
19 | Q. What suggestions did you make about the use of other |
20 | possible experts? |
21 | A. I made three primary suggestions. First, that they ought |
22 | to have a forensic -- a qualified board certified forensic |
23 | pathologist take a look at the -- all the wounds in the case to |
24 | help them with their time of death estimate and to help them in |
25 | making firm interpretations as to the wound patterns that were |
|
842
|
1 | involved because there were so many in this case. |
2 | The second thing I did was I told them that they ought to |
3 | have forensic odontologist look at the potential bite mark |
4 | evidence. |
5 | And the third thing -- actually, there's four. So the |
6 | third thing I did was have them -- I said we ought to have a |
7 | forensic entomologist look at the potential entomologic |
8 | evidence in this case. |
9 | And the fourth thing I suggested was that they have an |
10 | expert in child sexual abuse take a look at the victim history |
11 | and the wound patterns in the case as well. |
12 | Q. As a forensic scientist, have you had occasion to work |
13 | with pathologists? |
14 | A. I have. |
15 | Q. Have you ever spoken to an odontologist? |
16 | A. I have. |
17 | Q. Are you familiar with literature in which entomologists or |
18 | zoologists are enlisted in the investigation of criminal |
19 | offenses? |
20 | A. I am. |
21 | Q. And of specialists in child sex abuse, are those two sorts |
22 | of specialists that forensic scientists turn to for help in |
23 | examining criminal cases? |
24 | A. I have, yes. |
25 | Q. Have you ever worked on a case in which a prosecution |
|
843
|
1 | based on circumstantial evidence was brought involving a murder |
2 | of three young boys under horrible and violent situations? |
3 | A. Not like this, no. |
4 | Q. Or in a case which is based on circumstantial evidence |
5 | three teenagers were held responsible for a multiple homicide? |
6 | A. Not like this, no. |
7 | Q. In such a situation, would you as a forensic scientist |
8 | make a recommendation then that a pathologist and a |
9 | odontologist, an entomologist, a child sex abuse expert be |
10 | retained to look at and examine the evidence from the defense |
11 | standpoint? |
12 | A. No blanketly, no. Not without first recommending that |
13 | they have someone who is trained -- not unlike myself as a |
14 | generalist -- someone who can look at the whole body of |
15 | evidence and -- and determine what potential -- what potential |
16 | evidence exists. However, I would always recommend that a |
17 | forensic pathologist look at the findings of death. But the |
18 | other -- the other three, no, not blanketly. |
19 | Q. And do you have any reason to believe that was done by |
20 | by defense counsel in this case? |
21 | A. No, I do not. |
22 | MR. MALLETT: Pass the witness. Thank you. |
23 | THE COURT: Do you want to rest overnight before |
24 | you start? |
25 | Go ahead, let's do fifteen minutes more. |
|
844
|
1 | MR. MALLETT: I forgot to put his report into |
2 | evidence, your Honor. May I reopen for that limited |
3 | purpose? |
4 | THE COURT: If you just want -- have you got any |
5 | objection to it? |
6 | MR. DAVIS: Yes, your Honor. The same reason I |
7 | objected to his report being -- an affidavit or |
8 | anything else -- being introduced, heís here to |
9 | testify. He can't testify and then also get a |
10 | written report in that contains findings. Heís |
11 | provided that written report, and that contains |
12 | certain of his opinions and findings, and I can cross |
13 | examine him from it -- |
14 | THE COURT: All right, sustained. |
15 | MR. DAVIS: -- but that's not separate evidence. |
16 | THE COURT: I sustain the objection. |
17 | MR. MALLETT: I'll withdraw the offer. |
18 | CROSS EXAMINATION |
19 | BY MR. DAVIS: |
20 | Q. Mr. Turvey, if you would -- have you got your resume still |
21 | up there? |
22 | A. I have a copy. Thank you. |
23 | Q. Now, I believe that you had a previous -- I think -- when |
24 | did you compile this report that contains your findings? |
25 | A. It was completed on 10-19-97, the date of the report. |
|
845
|
1 | Q. So that would have been October nineteenth of ninety- |
2 | seven? |
3 | A. Yes. |
4 | Q. Okay. And you indicated to us that when you were retained |
5 | by Dan Stidham that you were merely asked to look at these |
6 | three issues and not make any determination as to whether his |
7 | client, Mr. Echols, or anybody else was guilty or not, correct? |
8 | A. Thatís correct. |
9 | Q. Okay. Do you recall sending me a resume -- an initial |
10 | resume -- and then you sent a subsequent one after that? |
11 | A. I recall faxing you a resume after we had a phone |
12 | conversation. |
13 | Q. Let me show you what I have marked as Resume Number One |
14 | with a CV dated 8-4-97. (HANDING TO WITNESS.) |
15 | A. (EXAMINING.) Okay. |
16 | Q. Okay. And 8-4-97 would have been long before you wrote |
17 | this final report for Mr. Stidham or Mr. Mallett or anybody of |
18 | that nature, correct? |
19 | A. Eight four of ninety-seven would be, yes. |
20 | Q. In fact, that would have just been -- that resume would |
21 | have been prepared just days after you were even contacted |
22 | about this case, right? |
23 | A. Um-- |
24 | Q. If you said it was in July of ninety-seven. |
25 | A. Right. Yes. |
|
846
|
1 | Q. Okay. Now, if I could direct your attention on this, you |
2 | indicate -- you listed some of the cases that you worked on? |
3 | A. Yes. |
4 | Q. And I believe from 7-97 to the present, you indicated on |
5 | that resume dated August of ninety-seven, before you had formed |
6 | any opinions or been asked to give any opinions, you listed Dan |
7 | Stidham as one of your clients, right? |
8 | A. That's correct. |
9 | Q And what was the title that you gave to that case that you |
10 | were working or, for Dan Stidham in this resume? |
11 | A. How do you mean, ìthe title?î |
12 | Q. It's written right there on the resume. Would you look at |
13 | it? What did you refer to it as in your resume? |
14 | A. (EXAMINING.) Triple homicide of three eight-year-old |
15 | boys. |
16 | Q. Okay. Look again, see if there's something else there. |
17 | Does the word ìinnocenceî jump out at you? Highlighted in -- |
18 | A. (EXAMINING.) Well, you've highlighted the other lawyer |
19 | but it's Project Innocence is one of the -- is one of the |
20 | people involved, yes. |
21 | Q. Okay. Who titled that Project Innocence? |
22 | A. That would be the organ -- the lawyer organization thatís |
23 | working for -- that's working with -- I believe, it's -- it is |
24 | not the organization that retained Mr. Mallett -- that |
25 | requested the services of Mr. Mallett? |
|
847
|
1 | Q. So you had been in contact with this lawyers' organization |
2 | in addition to Mr. Stidham? |
3 | A. Subsequent to my conversation with Mr. Stidham, they asked |
4 | me to talk to Project Innocence. |
5 | Q. Why would you name it and list it in a resume on 8-4-97, |
6 | as Project Innocence if -- if objectivity is an important |
7 | element to have in your evaluation? |
8 | A. I -- I didn't name it. That's the name of the lawyers' |
9 | organization. |
10 | Q. So Project Innocence doesn't have anything to do with this |
11 | particular case? |
12 | A. No, that's not what I said. |
13 | . Q. Okay. |
14 | A. Project Innocence is the name -- it's the name of the |
15 | organization of lawyers. It's a client. |
16 | Q. Okay. And it says, ìProject Innocence, Damien Echols' new |
17 | lawyers.î |
18 | A. I didn't know who the appointed lawyer had been yet and |
19 | he's still there. So I -- I just gave the general name of the |
20 | group of lawyers that were handling Damien's end of it. But I |
21 | was retained by Dan Stidham, not Damien's |
22 | attorneys. |
23 | Q. Dan Stidham has contacted you but by 8-4-97, |
24 | you're already in touch with the Project Innocence attorneys. |
25 | Is that right? |
|
848
|
1 | A. Actually, no, I wasn't in touch with them. I was just |
2 | told they were working on the case. |
3 | Q. Who told you? |
4 | A. Dan. |
5 | Q. Okay. So you get from Dan -- in addition to the |
6 | information he gives you -- you get the title of Project |
7 | Innocence? |
8 | A. The group of lawyers, yes. There's a group of lawyers |
9 | that are handling the case for -- they're the new lawyers. And |
10 | I was told to contact them to get additional information. |
11 | Q. Okay. Did you list that -- did you mention the title, |
12 | Project Innocence, in the second resume that you're-- that Mr. |
13 | Mallett introduced here at trial? |
14 | A. Probably not. |
15 | Q. Why would you take that off? That fact didn't change, did |
16 | it? |
17 | A. No, but it wasn't -- it wasn't as relevant. This was |
18 | actually notes for myself so that I could go find out who the |
19 | attorneys were because there are three clients involved. |
20 | Q. Okay. So this resume that you provided me initially was |
21 | the resume provided as notes for yourself so you could keep up |
22 | with what attorneys were involved? |
23 | A. No, thatís -- that's not what I meant. |
24 | Q. Isn't that what you said? |
25 | A. What I meant was that initially I was contacted by Dan |
|
849
|
1 | Stidham and initially I was told that there other lawyers |
2 | involved the project. Now, early on in the very first weeks |
3 | of my involvement, I had not signed any paper, I had not signed |
4 | any confidentiality agreement, I had not made any firm |
5 | agreement with who exactly I would be working for. And |
6 | ultimately, it came down to me being Dan Stidham's expert -- |
7 | no the expert of any of the other three attorneys. |
8 | Q. So you thought the names -- I mean -- you hear a lot of |
9 | names for lawyers either, you know, Joe Smith -- |
10 | A. Right. |
11 | Q. -- or Dewey, Cheatam and Howell, or whatever, but Project |
12 | Innocence is kind of an unusual name for a law firm, right? |
13 | . A. They're not a law firm. |
14 | Q. Okay. |
15 | A. I believe they're a non-profit organization. |
16 | Q. Who all's involved in that? Do you know? |
17 | A. I believe -- today or at the time? |
18 | Q. At the time you wrote it down on your resume. |
19 | A. At the time I wrote it down on my resume, I didn't know |
20 | who was involved in Project Innocence. |
21 | Q. Did Mr. Stidham refer to it as Project Innocence? |
22 | A. Yes, he did. |
23 | Q. Okay. So itís kind of like a code word? |
24 | A. No. |
25 | Q. Like Desert Storm -- Project Innocence? |
|
850
|
1 | A. No. |
2 | Q. So if you refer to Project Innocence, you're referring to |
3 | attorneys that are handling the case? |
4 | A. Project Innocence is the name of the non-profit |
5 | organization -- a group of attorneys that were handling the |
6 | case, yes. It's not a code word. |
7 | Q. Now, this Cathy Bakken that first turned you on to this |
8 | case, right? She's the first person that contacted you? |
9 | A. She was, yes. |
10 | Q. Okay. And she's a student with Knowledge Solutions? |
11 | A. She was for a particular course at that time, yes. |
12 | Q. Okay. So she was taking one course at Knowledge |
13 | Solutions? |
14 | A. She was, yes. |
15 | Q. Okay. And Knowledge Solutions is a business that you and |
16 | your wife, I assume, are principal owners in? |
17 | A. Actually, there are three partners -- myself, Owen Casey, |
18 | and my wife who is -- basically is the manager so that I can |
19 | do case work. |
20 | Q. Okay. |
21 | A. She runs all of the administrative duties. |
22 | Q. So Knowledge Solutions is a -- is a business that you, |
23 | your wife and this Mr. Casey run, right? |
24 | A. Yes. |
25 | Q. Okay. And if I understood your testimony, you can log in |
|
851
|
1 | and if you hook up add take one of your courses, that anywhere |
2 | -- they run four to ten weeks -- is that what you said? |
3 | A. It depends on the course, yes. |
4 | Q. Okay. And I could sign up and in four to ten weeks I |
5 | could take one of your courses on any number of topics that |
6 | might deal with forensic science? |
7 | A. Yes. |
8 | Q. Okay. And you write a lot of the course material, right? |
9 | A. For my courses, yes. We have six other instructors |
10 | however. |
11 | Q. Okay. And if I did that, would I pay you money to take |
12 | that course? |
13 | A. Yes, you would. |
14 | Q. Okay. So if I'm gonna get in it and I'm -- I will pay you |
15 | money, right? |
16 | A. Absolutely. |
17 | Q. Would I get college credit for it? |
18 | A. You could if you applied for college credit for it, yes. |
19 | Q. Are you affiliated with any university or educational |
20 | institution? |
21 | A. Not presently, no. |
22 | Q. Okay. And in fact, you put out in your materials that if |
23 | you call us and ask, we might be able to get you CLE or |
24 | continuing legal education credit for it -- |
25 | A. Oh, yes. |
|
852
|
1 | Q. -- but as it stands now, none of your courses actually |
2 | would provide anybody any college credits, correct? |
3 | A. Thatís a mischaracterization. That's not correct. |
4 | Q. Well, how many students do you have that are taking the |
5 | course that are currently -- currently receiving college |
6 | credits toward -- toward a degree from your institution? |
7 | A. None toward a degree from my institution. We do not give |
8 | degrees. |
9 | Q. You can't give a degree, right? |
10 | A. No, that's not -- |
11 | Q. All you can do is take their money and provide a four to |
12 | ten week course. |
13 | A. Again, I think that's a mischaracterization. |
14 | Q. Okay. And your education in -- you graduated from high |
15 | school in 1988, right? |
16 | A. Yes, I did. |
17 | Q. Okay. And then by 1993 you had obtained a degree of BS in |
18 | history, right? |
19 | A. I believe that's what it says, yes. |
20 | Q. Okay. Now that -- from the education that you obtained in |
21 | terms of -- as far as getting a history degree, that doesnít |
22 | apply in terms -- is there anything beneficial about that as |
23 | a criminal profiler or forensic scientist? |
24 | A. I would argue yes. |
25 | Q. Okay. What's the -- tell me about it -- how a history |
|
853
|
1 | degree makes you qualified to be a criminal profiler and a |
2 | forensic scientist. |
3 | A. That was not the question. Could you repeat the question |
4 | again? |
5 | Q. How does a history degree qualify you to be a criminal |
6 | profiler or a forensic scientist? |
7 | A. Well, it does not. |
8 | Q. Okay. So that educational degree -- whether it's nice, |
9 | whether it's good that you obtained that -- in terms of |
10 | benefiting you as a criminal profiler or forensic scientist, |
11 | that isn't necessarily something that helps you in that field, |
12 | correct? |
13 | A. Yes, it does. You just changed the question again. |
14 | Q. Okay. How -- I didn't mean to change, question. |
15 | A. It benefits you because it provides you -- one, a history |
16 | degree is actually one of the better foundational degrees to |
17 | have because it teaches you like really strong research skills |
18 | and critical thinking skills and argumentation skills, so |
19 | arguably you could say that it benefits -- it could benefit a |
20 | forensic scientist in that fashion. |
21 | Q. Okay. So as late as December ninety-three, your |
22 | background five -- four years before you take up this case, |
23 | your background in history was a degree in history and a high |
24 | school diploma? |
25 | A. My background in history? |
|
854
|
1 | Q. By ninety-three you had a degree in history and a high |
2 | school diploma? |
3 | A. Yes, that's true. |
4 | Q. Okay. And then from December of ninety-three until August |
5 | ninety-four -- in a span of about, I guess, nine months -- you |
6 | acquired a BS in psychology, right? |
7 | A. That's correct. |
8 | Q. Are you licensed as a psychologist or to practice |
9 | psychology or counseling anywhere? |
10 | A. No, I'm not. |
11 | Q. Can you provide -- you can write any treat ñ did you ever |
12 | work clinically as a psychologist, counselor, therapist, |
13 | anything of that nature? |
14 | A. No, I have not. |
15 | Q. Okay. Do you have a doctorate in psychology? |
16 | A. No, I do not. |
17 | Q. Okay. Anything other than a BS degree in psychology as |
18 | far as your training in that field? |
19 | A. Training? |
20 | Q. Yes, sir. |
21 | A. I would have to say yes. But, I mean, I've attended |
22 | training and seminars and that sort of thing in psychology |
23 | beyond my degree; yes, but not extensively. |
24 | Q. Okay. So basically you have by nine -- by August of 1994 |
25 | you have an undergraduate degree in psychology and an |
|
855
|
1 | undergraduate degree in history and a high school diploma? |
2 | A. Yes. |
3 | Q. And do you use either that history degree or the |
4 | psychology degree in terms of any practical work or application |
5 | -- |
6 | A. Currently? |
7 | Q. -- in your job? |
8 | A. Currently? |
9 | Q. Then -- from after August of ninety-four when you |
10 | graduated, from that point, have you used either one of those |
11 | degrees or your high school degree in terms of going out and |
12 | seeking employment -- either law enforcement, anything? |
13 | A. No, I have not. |
14 | Q. Okay. So you're still in school? |
15 | A. That's correct. |
16 | Q. Okay. And then when did you start working toward your |
17 | Masters of Science in forensic science? |
18 | A. 1994. |
19 | Q. Okay. And that's at the University of New Haven? |
20 | A. Thatís correct . |
21 | Q. Okay. Where is that located? |
22 | A. Thatís located in West Haven, Connecticut. |
23 | Q. Okay. Is that a day school, or a night school, or a full- |
24 | time university? |
25 | A. That is a full-time university. |
|
856
|
1 | Q. Okay. And you started school there when? |
2 | A. 1994. |
3 | Q. Okay. |
4 | A. The -- essentially in -- in August. |
5 | Q. Okay. So as soon as you get your degree in psychology, |
6 | you then move on to -- and that degree was at Portland State |
7 | University in Portland, Oregon, and then you jump on into the |
8 | University of New Haven in West Haven, Connecticut? |
9 | A. Well, we put the kitty in the car and drove across the |
10 | country. |
11 | Q. Okay. And from the fall of ninety-four until July of |
12 | ninety-six, you worked on a Masters of Science in forensic |
13 | science; is that correct? |
14 | A. That's correct. |
15 | Q. Okay. So you get your degree in that in July of 1996; is |
16 | that right? |
17 | A. That's correct. |
18 | Q. Okay. Now, when I went to law school and I graduated from |
19 | law school we had to pass a bar exam before we could hang out |
20 | our shingle. |
21 | A. Right. |
22 | Q. Okay. When you get out of Masters of Science in forensic |
23 | science school and you get that degree, can you then call |
24 | yourself a forensic scientist? |
25 | A. Absolutely. |
|
857
|
1 | Q. Okay. And so formal education is all that's needed for |
2 | someone to attach the name forensic scientist, correct? If I |
3 | get my degree in forensic sciences, a master's, then I can call |
4 | myself a forensic scientist? |
5 | A. That's technically true, but that's not what I did. |
6 | Q. Did you start to call yourself a forensic scientist at |
7 | that point? |
8 | A. At the point that I graduated? |
9 | Q. Yes, sir. |
10 | A. Yes. |
11 | Q. Okay. |
12 | A. But I had experience before I graduated. |
13 | Q. Did you acquire it on-the-job? |
14 | A. That I require -- that I acquired as part of an implied |
15 | internship over the period of four months. |
16 | Q. Okay. A four month internship? |
17 | A. That's correct. |
18 | Q. Okay. And does that four month internship give you the |
19 | same expertise as a forensic pathologist? |
20 | A. No, it does not. |
21 | Q. Okay. So you would have to defer to a forensic |
22 | pathologist in areas that involved their expertise? |
23 | A. Yes, I would. Well, can I qualify that? 'Cause I don't |
24 | mean to be coy. |
25 | I would defer to a forensic pathologist that I trusted and |
|
858
|
1 | that I knew did good work. They're not all -- they're not all |
2 | equal. |
3 | Q. Okay, So in terms of -- you feel like you could evaluate |
4 | and pick apart a forensic pathologist's opinion if you didn't |
5 | agree with their methodology and results? |
6 | A. Sometimes. |
7 | Q. Okay. |
8 | A. Some areas. Not -- not blanketly, no. |
9 | Q. Okay. So after your education and after your degree -- I |
10 | assume based on that answer, if you were viewing an autopsy |
11 | report, do you feel that you have the expertise and experience |
12 | to critique an autopsy report done by a forensic pathologist |
13 | you don't trust or believe him? |
14 | A. No, that's not what I said. |
15 | Q. Okay. And do you or do you not have the expertise to |
16 | critique, review and second guess the methodology and |
17 | operations of forensic pathologists based on your training, |
18 | experience, and expertise? |
19 | A. Again, blanketly, no. But on spec -- there are specific |
20 | issues that I feel qualified in that I would always-- that -- |
21 | that in myself I would look at then I would refer to other |
22 | experts for. And I do have the training to -- I do have the |
23 | training to recognize when something is awry, when something |
24 | has been missed, when something has been overlooked. |
25 | Q. Well, you told us that you can become a forensic scientist |
|
859
|
1 | by getting a Master of Science in forensic science. How do you |
2 | become a criminal profiler? |
3 | A. Thatís a -- that's a valid question. There is no one way. |
4 | Q. Well, if I'm gonna go out here and I'm gonna advertise to |
5 | the public that I'm a criminal profiler, could I do that today? |
6 | A. Could you? |
7 | Q. Yes, sir. |
8 | A. I don't think you could. |
9 | Q. Okay. Why not? |
10 | A. I don't think you'd be taken seriously. |
11 | Q. Well, what agency is it that you have to go through in |
12 | order to acquire the credentials to be a criminal profiler? |
13 | A. I doesnít quite work that way. Criminal profiling is a |
14 | multi-disciplinary field. You have to have certain backgrounds |
15 | in areas like psychology, forensic science, homicide |
16 | investigation -- those sorts of things. So as you do -- now, |
17 | I don't -- as far as I know, you do not have those |
18 | qualifications, right? |
19 | Q. I mean, I've worked seventeen years as a prosecutor, |
20 | viewed all these criminal cases, worked hours on end with |
21 | fingerprint experts, serologists and all these people, can I -- |
22 | could I not, with that background, experience and with the right |
23 | frame of mind, could I not put myself out as a criminal |
24 | profiler? |
25 | A. No, you could not. |
|
860
|
1 | Q. Okay. Why -- what qualifies you to put yourself out as a |
2 | criminal profiler? |
3 | A. I have studied specific methodology under a criminal |
4 | profiler, one. And, two, I have expertise in a general |
5 | background in the areas that -- that are -- the criminal |
6 | profiler relies upon such as psychology and forensic science |
7 | and homicide investigations or death investigations. |
8 | Q. Is there -- is there any oversight authority for people |
9 | who hold themselves out to be criminal profilers? |
10 | A. No, there is not, unfortunately. |
11 | Q. Okay. So although you tell us that you've got these |
12 | qualifications and background, anyone can say theyíre |
13 | criminal profiler. There is no licensing agency, thereís no |
14 | certification board, it's not like a board certified orthopedic |
15 | surgeon. If you say you're a criminal -- a criminal profiler, |
16 | then the question is, there is no -- there is no procedure for |
17 | you to qualify to be that, correct? |
18 | A. That's correct. |
19 | Q. Okay. And isn't it true -- don't you produce a bunch of |
20 | information on your -- your Website as far as -- oh, articles |
21 | about explaining what inductive versus deductive profiling is? |
22 | A. Yes, sir. |
23 | Q. Okay. And youíre very critical of people who use the |
24 | inductive method of criminal profiling, correct? |
25 | A. I am -- who use solely that method for the basis of their |
|
861
|
1 | conclusions, yes. |
2 | Q. Okay. And in fact, based on your articles, the FBI's use |
3 | of that in their criminal profiling -- you're very, very |
4 | critical of that, correct? |
5 | A. I am very critical of the profiles that they have publicly |
6 | put out, yes. |
7 | Q. Okay. |
8 | A. But it -- can I qualify that? |
9 | Q. Okay. |
10 | A. I don't -- don't mean -- I don't mean to be evasive, but |
11 | originally -- their original methodology was very sound, and |
12 | the original work put out by them I believe was very sound, and |
13 | very deductive. But over time theyíve become more reliant on |
14 | statistical inference, and the good people who work there went |
15 | on to be consultants and left people in the dust and didn't |
16 | actually pass along any knowledge or training to them. So they |
17 | began to rely more on statistical analysis rather than actual |
18 | expertise in forensic science or psychology. So that is what |
19 | I'm critical of. |
20 | Q. Would it be fair to say that almost anyone with the right |
21 | training, experience, and a lot of guidance can learn to do |
22 | criminal profiling? |
23 | A. It would be fair to say that, yes. |
24 | Q. Okay. That's reading from one of your articles. |
25 | A. I recognize that language, yes, sir. |
|
862
|
1 | Q. Okay. So thereís nothing really magical about it. |
2 | Anybody can do it with the right training, experience and a lot of |
3 | guidance can learn how to do it? |
4 | A. I would say yes. |
5 | Q. Okay. And the training and experience you're talking |
6 | about are the things of on-the-job training, knowing -- looking |
7 | at criminal cases, looking at forensic evaluations, and looking |
8 | -- reading reports, reading literature on how to interpret |
9 | blood splatters, how to interpret -- maybe identify -- bite |
10 | marks -- things of that nature. All those things are important |
11 | things if you had that background, training and experience |
12 | it might qualify you, right? |
13 | A. Could we back up a second because you threw a bunch of |
14 | things in there that I don't think I'm agreeing with. |
15 | Q. Okay, what-- |
16 | A. Could you ask that question again, please? |
17 | Q. Okay. Let -- let me back up and phrase it this way. |
18 | There's not necessarily a formal educational curriculum |
19 | that you need to follow to do this. A person with no formal |
20 | education could become a criminal profiler under your criteria, |
21 | correct? |
22 | A. With no -- define formal education, please. |
23 | Q. I mean, you donít have to have a Masters Degree in |
24 | forensic science -- sciences before they could become a |
25 | criminal -- a valid, legitimate criminal profiler. |
|
863
|
1 | A. Some of the best ones aren't. Absolutely. |
2 | Q. Okay. And in fact, your description of what a criminal |
3 | profiler does is basically investigate, look at the crime |
4 | scene, have a familiarity enough with forensics to be able to |
5 | guide an attorney in different locations as to where they may |
6 | go for additional information, right? |
7 | A. No, it is not. |
8 | Q. Okay. How -- how does it differ from that scenario? |
9 | A. There's a lot more involvement. That's one -- thatís one |
10 | possible role that a profiler plays. |
11 | Q. Was that an important role that you thought you were |
12 | playing in this case? |
13 | A. In this case? |
14 | Q. Right. |
15 | A. In this case, that was the role, yes. |
16 | Q. And, in fact -- maybe I wrote it down wrong -- one of -- I |
17 | mean, wasn't one of your main goals was to receive this |
18 | evidence and then to guide the attorneys in different routes in |
19 | terms of experts they might consult, things of that nature? |
20 | A. My role was to evaluate the evidence, determine what |
21 | potential evidence was there that may not have been exploited, |
22 | and xxxx them to objective forensic scientist who were |
23 | qualified to make firm -- more firm, more competent |
24 | interpretations than I. |
25 | Q. So basically, you'd look at something and say, it could be |
|
864
|
1 | a bite mark but you don't have the qualifications to say it? |
2 | A. Thatís correct. |
3 | Q. Okay. When you look at something, you'd say, well, the |
4 | time of death could have been affected by these findings. You |
5 | might base an opinion based on these findings, but I'm not a |
6 | forensic pathologist, so I can't say. |
7 | A. Precisely. I would come along and question those things |
8 | that looked -- that looked awry or looked questionable, or if |
9 | they left out considerations and then point them in the correct |
10 | direction. |
11 | Q. Okay. And then you would give them a report and you would |
12 | say, this could have been-- the person that committed this |
13 | crime, based on my profile, could have been a married person, |
14 | but I'm not sure if they're married or not, so they probably |
15 | could be married or they might not be. Isn't that kind of what |
16 | you say in your report? |
17 | A. It's a mischaracterization, but it -- you're basically |
18 | accurate. |
19 | Q. Do you want me to quote from your report? |
20 | A. No. |
21 | Q. Isnít that basically what your report says? |
22 | A. No, could I look at it? |
23 | Q. Sure. You can read from it if you want. (HANDING TO |
24 | WITNESS. ) |
25 | A. (EXAMINING.) |
|
865
|
1 | THE COURT: Have you got a whole lot more? |
2 | MR. DAVIS: Um-hum. |
3 | THE COURT: Well, let's quit for the night. |
4 | MR. DAVIS: Judge, could I quote this one thing |
5 | and then stop while I found it? |
6 | THE COURT: Go ahead. |
7 | BY MR. DAVIS: |
8 | Q. On marital status on page forty of your report -- |
9 | A. Yeah, I've got it right here. |
10 | Q. The offender's behavior and attitude suggests someone who |
11 | is capable of only short-term or sporadic on-and-off |
12 | relationships with the females in his life. He has very likely |
13 | been married more than one. His attitude toward women is very |
14 | misogynistic-- |
15 | A. Misogynistic. |
16 | Q. Misogynistic, okay -- another word you threw at me that I |
17 | don't know -- his previous relationships with women would have |
18 | involved a great deal of physical and/or emotional abuse. If |
19 | this offender was married at the time of the offense, and |
20 | indicators are not clear on this issue, then his marriage would |
21 | been in crisis at the time of this offense. |
22 | So basically what your opinion on marital status is, you |
23 | donít know if he was married -- the offender was married -- but |
24 | if he is -- and you don't know that -- if he is, then he was |
25 | probably in crisis. |
|
866
|
1 | A. Thatís correct. |
2 | Q. Okay. And his wife may very well have been part of the |
3 | crime? |
4 | A. That's correct. |
5 | Q. But we don't know if he's married. |
6 | A. That's correct. I was saying if he was married. I was |
7 | suggesting a possibility. |
8 | Q. Okay. Now, what training and experience allows you to |
9 | make these types of determinations? |
10 | A. I would not characterize them as determinations or |
11 | conclusions, would characterize them, again, as inferences. |
12 | Q. Okay. But I mean in terms of the benefit of a criminal |
13 | profiler to me if Iím a defense attorney -- |
14 | A. Um-hum. |
15 | Q. -- if you can tell me that you don't know if the person is |
16 | married and you don't know that, but if he was, then this is |
17 | what he would be like, but I'm not sure if he was or not, then |
18 | what benefit is that to a criminal defense attorney as far as |
19 | your criminal profile regarding the marital status? |
20 | A. I don't -- I donít know. I was asked to prepare a |
21 | criminal profile. I don't know what Dan would use that |
22 | information for. Could it -- it could be anything. |
23 | Q. Okay. |
24 | A. I'm can't -- I'm not a -- I'm not an attorney. |
25 | THE COURT: Were you told by Mr. Stidham that |
|
867
|
1 | trial and the appeal -- that the actual trial had |
2 | been over three years and seven months before you |
3 | entered the case? |
4 | THE WITNESS: I was. He just wanted my -- my |
5 | opinion. |
6 | THE COURT: Well, was the role you were doing |
7 | purely second guessing what had been done? |
8 | THE WITNESS: No. He wanted me to evaluate what |
9 | he had. He didn't -- from his perspective -- this is |
10 | me repeating what he told me, and so I'm taking that |
11 | at face value. |
12 | THE COURT: I'm having trouble evaluating it -- |
13 | for what purpose? |
14 | THE WITNESS: He didn't feel as though he ever |
15 | had a -- a clear picture of what occurred at the |
16 | crime scene and what -- what the person had to be |
17 | capable of to do the crime, and he wanted that from |
18 | me. |
19 | MR. DAVIS: Judge, the next stuff I'm getting |
20 | into is gonna get -- is going to be lengthy. I just |
21 | hit on that before I forgot about it. |
22 | THE COURT. All right. Let's call it quits. |
23 | Weíll reconvene at 9:30 in the morning. Court will |
24 | be in recess. |
25 | ( ADJOURNMENT. ) |