Kelly Soo Park Day 4, Prosecution Testimony Continues

Kelly Soo Park in court yesterday.

UPDATE 6/13: Corrected spelling of witness Lynn Mitchel-Parish's last name.
UPDATE 6/1:  This entry was edited to place the postings in chronological order for easier reading. Sprocket.
UPDATE 8:30 PM A more complete edit has been performed. Sprocket.

5:45 AM PT
Testimony continues in the Kelly Soo Park murder trial today.  Park, 47, is on trial in a downtown Los Angeles courtroom for the felony murder of aspiring actress Juliana Redding, 21. Park's employer was Dr. Munir Uwaydah, who briefly dated Juliana and was set to enter into a business venture with Juliana's father, Greg Redding.  Mr. Redding broke off negotiations five days before Juliana was murdered.

Mainstream Media Reporting
Thank you T&T readers for your feedback on my trial reporting efforts.  After opening statements were presented yesterday morning, the press numbers in the gallery thinned out a bit.  For those of you interested in attending some of this trial, it's a good guess that in the days ahead the gallery will thin out more.  If you are looking for video from opening statements, I've only found small clips in local news sources.  Here is a report from Local KTLA 5, where you can see brief images of the well area of the courtroom, Kelly Soo Park, DDA Stacy Okun-Wiese, seated Santa Monica Detective Karen Thompson, and defense counsel George Beuhler.  Local ABC 7 also put together a short video clip in their report on opening statements.  The CNN report contained no new video from yesterday and said the trial would last "three months." (It will last four weeks.) LA Times Jack Leonard's online report on yesterday's events. I sat next to Leonard who is originally from England. I enjoyed listening to the British lilt in his voice.

I hope everyone knows by now that T&T does not have an editor, fact checker or research assistant, so you will occasionally see spelling and clarity errors in my real time, daily reporting.  If you see an error, please leave a comment or drop me an email at sprocket.trials AT gmail.com. If you have a question, please do not hesitate to leave a comment or email me and I will try my best to answer. Thank you shout out to T&T reader Katherine, who pointed out that the Las Vegas hotel Juliana and her friends moved to during her 21st birthday celebration was probably The Wynn, and not The Wind, as I originally reported. I've also started a Witness List Page, that will be updated at the end of the day. You can also find T&T's complete coverage of the case on the Kelly Soo Park Quick Links Page.

I will have an update when I arrive on the 9th floor.  Mr. Sprocket needs the car today so he is dropping me off at the Orange Line bus this morning.  This means I'll probably get home later than yesterday to post my afternoon trial notes.
UPDATE 8:25 AM
I'm on the 9th floor.  Members of Redding's support group here already here.

A week ago today was the first time those of us in the media had seen Kelly Soo Park in almost two months.  At the time, a reporter friend remarked to me how thin and pale Park appeared since we last saw her. Below are two photos of Park. The first is from July 2010, shortly after Park was arrested by Santa Monica police.  The second image is from a more recent court appearance before her trial. 

Kelly Soo Park, weeks after her arrest in 2010.

Kelly Soo Park at a more recent court proceeding.

UPDATE 8:37 AM
The DA's clerk arrives with their cart.  Lonce LaMon from Adjuster.com is here.  Park's defense attorneys are sitting a few benches down on my right reading papers.  I only see on member of Parks regular support group, and older, white man, wearing a multi-colored, knit flat cap.

8:40 AM I see Park, Chronister and two female family members clear security and head down towards the other end of the hall.

UPDATE 8:52 AM
Patricia and Greg Redding arrive. The both give a big hug to a young woman waiting in the hallway.  Detective Thompson arrives carrying a large fingerprint display.


UPDATE 8:56 AM
The second row is filled with Juliana Redding's family and friends.  I'm in the back row, on the end.  Directly in front of me is Tom Chronister, Park's husband. Sitting directly in front of him are Patricia and Greg Redding.  Lisa Tomaselli from ABC 20/20 arrives and says hello. Jane Robson from the DA's office is here. The second and back rows are filled with media, Park's supporters and a few of Juliana's friends.

9:02 AM  
Clerks asks if everyone is ready. Judge Kennedy takes the bench and asks counsel if they are ready.  Bailiff calls the jurors.

Counsel and Park stand for the jurors entry.  Cathy from the Superior Court’s PIO is here. Jury enters.

Judge Kennedy compliments the jurors for being on time.  “Outstanding ladies and gentlemen.”

People call Elaine Parish (sp?)

8. Lynn Mitchell-Parish
1521 Centinela Apt. B is where she was living on March 15th.  Identifies a Google photo of her apartment complex.

The defense investigator enters and sits next to Tom Chronister.

Witness identifies the area of the building where her apartment is. Ten to fifteen feet between her apartment and Juliana’s.

A juror’s phone goes off in the gallery.

Identifies Juliana as her neighbor. She was home on the evening of March 15th. She’s married and her husband wasn’t home.

Something caught her attention. She heard a scream and she look at her cable box and the time was 9:53.  It sounded like a female voice.  At 9:53 she was watching (TV) She knew the sound came from the complex to the south.  I muted the TV, and I did hear, at least two more screams and what sounded like some rustling of some furniture.  Some things were moved, making noise.  She believed all the screams were from the same person.

After, I sat quiet on my couch, just listening, waited for about four minutes. She never looked out her window. She was quite scared, home alone with her dog.  She never called the police. She felt she didn’t have enough specific information. She spoke to her husband soon after.

She was home the next day and saw police around.  She found out that Juliana had been killed when a police officer came to her door.

CROSS

People’s exhibit 7 is on the screen. Buehler asks about the property layout. Her door was directly across from Ms. Redding’s unit.

A man and woman enter 109 and the man shakes hands with Chronister. The couple sit in the back row to my left.

More questions about what she thought the furniture movement sounds were and when they happened in relation to the screams. After the first scream.  She only knew that the sound was coming from the south. Questions bout what she did and why she didn’t call or look out the window. There had been a social gathering, party on the property earlier, but at this time it was quiet.

I had hoped that it wasn’t a big deal than what I was thinking. The time frame, of the sounds happened over four minutes. She didn’t hear sound continuously over four minutes.  Her husband called her about four minutes after she heard the first scream.

I’ve only spoken to briefly to Detective Thompson about what time I’ve arrived. Same with the DA.

Cross ends, no redirect.  People call Gary Marshall.

9 Gary Marshall
I’m a fire fighter engineer paramedic for city of Santa Monica. For 34 years.

Asks about his CV and Judge Kennedy asks, “Do we really need to hear about his training?”

Questions about his training, if he knows about explosions. Was called to location to gain entry to an apartment for a wellness check. He went there with the engine company. He drove the fire truck and he is also the paramedic.  He went inside. The officer were standing on the outside, trying to determine how to gain access to the building.

He entered the apartment from a side door that gave access to the kitchen area.  When he entered the apt. he smelled natural gas. It was a significant, enough to get your attention. I noticed that one of the knows of the oven or stove top was in the on position and it smelled the scent of gas.

People’s 48. That’s the apartment stove. I think it was the right hand knob that was in the on position. He turned it in the off position.  He opened a window to ventilate. Window over the kitchen sink, next to the back door. Photo of the counter area and a window.

If there were a lit candle inside that apartment, could that have started a fire?

Objection. Foundation.
Judge Kennedy asks for people to establish a foundation.  He explains his knowledge about sparks and ignition.  Four to fifteen percent (of gas in the space) are in the explosive range. He’s had training, learned on the job and books around the station about natural gas. He gets training at least once a year specifically on natural gas. He goes on a lot of calls for gas leaks. From 2-5, ten a month that they go on. Based on expertise, if there was a candle in the room, and gas,

If it was within the flammable limits, 4-15% any spark, from a land line telephone, there is enough DC electricity to start that explosion. He did not personally go on any other room.  Once he turned off the gas and opened a window his partner told him they were leaving.

Tell us about the 4-15%  Oxygen in atmosphere is 21%. If you take 100% in that range, if that amount of natural gas, makes up a consistency of 4-15% thats’ the explosive range of limits. They did not do any testing. It’s an older building, a lot of leaks, it didn’t have good seals on door, no double pane windows, so just try to ventilate it.

How does the ventilation has anything to do with gas?
Gas is lighter than air. So it collects in the corners , attic spaces or up in the roof. So it tends to rise. Like a helium balloon. So it’s going to beat down, until it finds an ignition. Usually it’s light switches. If a light switch arcs, there’s your source.  A refrigerator motor, Anything could spark it. Yes.

Do windows themselves having leaks?
No, it’s just they don’t have seals like the new vinyl windows that have ratings on them.  The older buildings, it’s just wood against wood. So that’s a way for gas to escape from the inside.

Cross by Kassabian.

Do you recall if the stove knob was partially on or. It was significantly on?
When there's a gas leak, you’re going to have three things.  A stove, a water heater or a kitchen appliance. Standing right there, it was oblivious to me that one of the knobs was not in alignment with the others.

But you don't remember if it was all the way or half way?
It was more than half way. Something not right here.

Question about gas rises, so if there was, ignition source, lower to the ground, that makes it less likely that the apartment would ignite?
Potentially.
Did you perform any test on the stove?
No we wouldn’t.  Generally you could equate it to each burner rated to certain BTU’s.  We don’t know the rating, because it’s generally, a standard stove.

They didn’t have any cause to test the rating on the stove.  He did not do any tests regarding the range of concentration of gas in the apartment. By the time we opened and ventilated it, it was dissipated.

Did you see if anyone had jury-rigged the doors, put tape down to improve the seal?
(No.)
Did anyone from SM or this investigation, did they ever take your DNA sample?
No.
After he opened the doors and you didn’t evacuate the neighborhood?
No.

Redirect.
Question about a flame on a candle.

Would a candle that is lit, if the gas came down far enough, would that cause an explosion?
Yes, most likely.

End redirect.

10 Leslie Funo
She worked for the SM police dept. She was a forensic specialist. They process crime scene evidence and testify in court.  Questions about her training.  She was in charge of processing evidence and photography. She collected latent prints and took photographs.  Her supervisor or a detective could either assign her tasks.

Another technician could have been there already, but she doesn’t remember.  Detectives were already inside the scene when she arrived.

They are usually processing the whole scene, the whole house.  It was a one bedroom apt. One of four in a building.

She created a diagram of the interior and a little of the exterior of the building.

Exhibit on the overhead, a layout of the apartment.
The is the interior of the apartment. Bedroom top left, living room top right. Front door is center top.  Table in the center of the diagram, part of living room. Kitchen is in the bottom right. Door from living room to kitchen.  Left, lower part is the bathroom. Door to bathroom is on an angle.   Diagram is not to scale.  She prepared five or six diagrams. She diagrammed each room so they can remember where things were in each room. To document where items are in the room.

New diagram on screen of just living room.  There are numbers in the diagram. Those correspond to pieces of evidence.  Documents on left of exhibit, she’s not sure but believes they list what’s document in the diagram.

Made diagrams after initial processing of the scene. Prepared diagram of the kitchen that is up on the screen. Prepared a diagram of inside bedroom.

Jury appears to be looking up at the screen.

She collected and processed evidence.  That included looking for fingerprints and dusting. She doesn’t remember if she collected anything in the kitchen. She processed everything in the kitchen, the stove, the refrigerator, the (door frame?) and the sink.

Placard 22 in photo. Explains the evidence placard and how they are used.

Asks about what she found in the sink. A fingerprint was found on the underside of a plate, that she believes was on the orange plate in the photo.

I’m not sure, but I believe there were plates and glasses and silverware (in the sink).

She processed the plate with powder to lift the fingerprint with tape. They use a brush and dust on the powder. There were some items in the sink that were wet, so they could not process them.  She was wearing gloves when she did this.

Depending on whether she puts her gloves on before they enter scene or after.  They do put on shoe guards, they’re like booties. Prior to touching anything, they are required to put on gloves, yes.

She touched the item with a “horse hair” type brush.

When it’s a major crime scene, we lift pretty much everything.  A latent print is something that you can’t see.  You have to develop it.   She received specific training in lifting latent prints.

General accepted way to lift latent prints is with a powder and a brush.

People’s #35.  That’s a latent print she recovered.  Explains where she documented on the collected evidence her initials, etc.

Any powder, will adhere to oils left from fingers, toes, on the body.  Then they lift the print via tape. It’s like a packaging tape. It’s thick an shiny.  The tape is kept in their fingerprint kits.

She explains what the cards look like where they place the lifted print. The card is blank on one side, and on the other side, things they have to fill in on the other side.  They have different types of tape. She likes using the roll of tape. They have post-it type tape, different sizes of tape.  She kept her tape in the package it comes in. Then make quick notes on the back, her initials on the front and a description of the item, she will document that. Then she puts the card somewhere safe, and it's kept until she can transport it back to the office.

According to the slide, I marked it number J with the date and approximate time she lifted it.

Back at her office, she developed a case file for it, and then (stored it?). Entered the print into the computer. That print is scanned into a computer. They didn’t have a set time frame to enter prints, but since it was a homicide, it should have been done very quickly. It may have been days. Doesn’t know who entered the print in the system. She did not immediately enter it into the system.

Because of this and another high profile case her employers  tried to terminate her. She fought the case, then got her job back and then she retired from the department.  That whole process took about 15 months.

Stopped working in Santa Monica Police Department, June 2009. She was also working on another homicide case that occurred in that same week. She was working on eliminating people coming in and giving fingerprints.

CROSS Kassabian

So when Santa Monica tried to terminate you, that was in part, because of her delay in entering latent print into the computer? 
There were several cases that she had secured in her locker that she was working on. She went on vacation. When she came back, her locker was completely empty and they tried to terminate me.

Did you ever enter (the?) latent print into the computer system?
She doesn’t have the paperwork in front of her. She doesn't know if the print was entered into the system after her locker was cleared out or before.

Goes over her procedures of putting on gloves.  She doesn’t remember when she entered the crime scene. It was either very late at night or very early in the morning.

She knows there was a candle on the table. She doesn’t remember processing a candle on the table. Doesn’t remember from just her memory. She would need to look at notes/file to know.

Questions about the steps she went through to collect the print. She put the collected print in a pocket of her uniform. She did not put it an envelope.  Not required to put it in an envelope.  Once her pocket becomes filled and she put them close to her fingerprint kit to transport back.  She's not sure what she put it in, when it was transferred. She processed either 100 cards that day.

They are in charge of our own evidence items, so she probably transported it back to Santa Monica.  She doesn’t remember when that was, but she knows there was a crime scene log that would document her entering and going from the crime scene.

Questions about where the prints were secured back at her office.

She believes she locked it up in her own locker so she could work on it the next day.  Supervisors have copies of keys. Manager has key and a key to her locker.

How was it stored? Does it have it’s own envelope.
No. There is a case file envelope.
Was there paper separating it from others?
No. Not necessary.
How long was it in your locker?
I don’t know.
Do you know how many times it was handled, while it was in your locker?
In my locker it wouldn’t have been handled at all. We take it out of the locker to work on it.
(Did you use gloves when handling it?
We don’t need gloves after a latent print has been processed.
So that would be no?

Asks her about what a fingerprint is.

Some surfaces take fingerprints better than others. You can develop fingerprints on paper, but it’s a different process.

How long can they last?
You can’t put a time frame on fingerprints.  Weather affects (them).

She can’t say how long they last, because it depends on circumstances.

REDIRECT

Why didn’t you put in separate envelopes?
We don’t need to do that because the print is covered by the tape.  Once on the card, it can’t be disturbed.  After processed, once on the card, no (gloves) are not necessary.

The plate, was very smooth and very shiny. I don’t know if it was porcelain.

She also processed a lot of items.  Pretty much the whole house. Also did doorways, doors. The place was covered with powder.

Recross.

How many usable prints...
JK: When you say usable, what do you mean?

Kassabian asks about what a usable print is. She explains that a usable print has a number of identifiable ridges.

The witness is excused.

10:18 AM 
The morning break is called.

10:23 AM
The following witnesses have been called so far this morning.
#8 Lynn Mitchell-Parrish: Neighbor who heard screams at 9:53 PM
#9 Gary Marshall: Firefighter engineer paramedic who responded to the scene. He smelled gas in the kitchen and turned off the right knob on the stove. His DNA was never collected.
#10 Leslie Funo: Former Santa Monica forensic criminialist who collected a latent print off a plate in the kitchen.
Testimony is complete for these witnesses.

10:35 AM
I move to the far end of the courtroom near the jury box so I can see the overhead screen and the exhibits better. The jury files into the jury box.  The gallery fills up.

11. Jennifer Zychowski
In 2008 she had a different last name. Capella (sp?)

She gives her CV. She’s a certified crime scene analyst and explains her duties. In fingerprint comparison she has approximately over 400 hours of training.  Over 125,000 comparisons in her career. Testified in court approximately 7-8 times.

She responded to the scene. She was the on duty forensic specialist at the time and called to respond there. Doesn’t recall the day of the week. She was at work when she received the call. She was the first specialist to arrive.

Testifies about the other personnel that were at the scene. Her supervisor was called to the scene.  It’s a discussion among many people before she goes into a scene to collect evidence.  (Who will do what, etc.)

She explains processing DNA evidence at a scene. Explains touch DNA. For example, a water bottle, they could swab that to look for DNA.  Blood evidence could be collected for DNA.  Briefly explains the swabbing procedure.

She took photographs. She was in charge of taking the crime scene photographs.  She first took photos without numbers down.  Then take photographs with the number placards down.

Prior to court she did sit down with Wiese and went through all the photographs. She took all the evidence photos, everything except coroner’s photographs. She’s not aware of anything that was moved at the scene prior to photography.

Peoples #36.  Photograph of Juliana on the bed. Juliana's friends in the gallery look down, don’t look at the overhead scene.

In the photo, Juliana is lying on her back, with her arms over her head, her legs are crossed and her feet are hanging off the bed. The photo was taken before coroner’s arrive. New photo of Ms. Redding's hands. They are above her head. Fingernails. She was missing an acrylic fingernail.  Witness searched apartment to see if she could locate the fingernail.

She doesn’t remember how long she stayed at the scene. She left the scene and then went back for more investigation. She later located the acrylic nail. It was behind the couch, in the living room.

Photo of the nail on the wood floor. Photo of area behind the couch when she pulled the couch out from the wall. Doesn’t know which finger the nail went to on her hands.

People’s 39. She can now see the nail in the photograph using the original exhibit. Now uses the pointer to show in the photo where she found the nail. She looked on the floor of Juliana’s room.  Photo of the floor where the blood is. Based on her training, it appears the blood came from her heel, right above .

Photo of Ms. Redding’s bloody right heel.  A few friends of Juliana’s start to become emotional when this picture is put up.   Photo of where the cell phone is on the night stand beside the bed.

She was in charge of collecting items of evidence.  She collected the cell phone and packaged it inside an envelope.

She puts on gloves outside the scene, and a face mask, and she believes for this scene they also had booties as well.  The evidence envelope is booked into Santa Monica evidence room.

People’s 50 envelope is given to her.  Recognizes it. Identifying info on the envelope Santa Monica property. Date March 17th 2008, the case number, her name, Capella at the time, and a description of the contents. Tape at top is red with sealing of evidence.  Red tape on the back of envelope, and it goes over the closure flap, and she initials that at the time she seals it.  Then she puts the red tape on with evidence seal.

Above that is an additional red seal. That’s where the item was opened.  Tape on the blue side, the department now places blue tape on side of envelope to signify when they have opened evidence again. There's a yellow tag property evidence on the envelope that she did not place.

Has her open the envelope to show the jury. She asks the court if she can put gloves on. She’s also going to put a mask on.

There are two items in the envelope. A cell phone charger, cell phone blackberry and a blackberry cell phone battery.

Part of her job is to look for certain items that are out of place, and to determine what happened at a crime scene. She felt she saw evidence of a struggle in the scene.

Mentioned she found several pieces of broken porcelain.  Photo of table in living room.   The leg of the coffee table is twisted. Bottom left leg in the photo.  Identifies for the jury the start of the lamp cord and where it begins.

Outlines where the cord starts, shows the cord goes under the coffee table leg and where it ends on the floor. Located another item underneath another leg. It was a jewelry chain that was broken.  She believes that’s the leg just opposite the twisted leg.

I believe the table was moved on top of the lamp cord.  Part of the chain was underneath the leg of the table.

Photo of placard. Also a photo of a gold chain.

It was in a tray on the coffee table.

Photo of coffee table with the reed diffuser air freshener and piece of paper that was under the serving tray. The paper was wet with an oily substance. After she took the photo, she moved the tray and saw paper underneath.  Air freshener was sitting sraight up.  She believes at some point it was knocked over.  Appears same substance under the tray was the same substance in the vase.

Don’t recall any oil on the outside of the vase. No spilled oil inside the tray.  People’s number 43. Photo of threshold with a nail and there was hair around the nail.

As an investigator, you try to figure out what happened.  This threshold was between the living room and the kitchen.  And around the nail was hair.

Behind the TV stand, she found a red dish plate.  Photo of TV stand in the apartment. Behind it you can partially see the red plate.  Located at the top of the photo, behind the TV stand. Now area between the TV stand and the wall, and this shows the red plate.  Its kind of on the side of the stand, between the stand and the wall.

No other plates in the living room area.  She did find pieces of broken porcelain in the living room. Some were on the floor in front of the TV stand. And a few before the kitchen (entrance).

She observed the couch inside the living room.  One of the couch cushions was missing a cover. Did not find the cover.  They looked throughout the apartment.  Never found it.  Recovered a computer. It was on the opposite end of the couch, in this picture.

More evidence photos were introduced. Conducted a forensic analysis of the kitchen.  She swabbed the stove knobs for possible contact DNA.  She was told one of the knobs was on when she arrived at the scene.  She processed all knobs.  There were multiple dishes in the sink. There was a piece of white porcelain that was broken that was in the sink.

I  found additional pieces of porcelain in the trash can.  There was a piece of broken porcelain on the left side of the sink. I think it was red. Located those pieces in the trash can as well.  They were small pieces of red porcelain.

She has been trained to take DNA swabs.  She would be using gloves and a mask. She would use a DNA swab. A DNA swab looks like a Q-tip swab but (the stick) is longer.  She swabbed for DNA at this scene, but how many, she doesn’t know.

All items she gave them an evidence number beginning with A. She was assigned that letter. A1, A2, A3.   Explains the documentation she performs when she collects evidence.

We allow the swabs, the drops of water to dry early, so it doesn’t degrade during packaging.

The swabs come sealed as sterile swabs and we would open them at the scene when we used them.

Took the items back to the evidence lab. They are secured in the evidence unit. It’s a cabinet. She has a key to the cabinet and her supervise has a key.

In the kitchen, she swabbed the stove knobs.  She was told that the knob associated with the right front burner was turned on.  She swabbed each one, and put them in individual evidence envelopes.  That way, they can tell who touched each knob. Shows which knob in the photo is the right front.

I’m completely crashed. I’ve had so little sleep the last week. I stop taking notes while the witness is describing more evidence envelopes that she is currently opening in front of the jury.  These are DNA swabs that she took of various items inside the apartment.

While she was at the scene, she obtained clothing from the coroner’s criminalist. She believes it was Kelly White, who works for the coroner.  The evidence was placed in a bag and given to me.  She placed it in an evidence bag and sealed it.

Envelope that contains the victim's tank top. The underwear were separated out.  She is asked to open the envelope and take out the evidence.  The tank top had evidence item number A 65.

Asked to unfold the tank top.  There are markings on the tank top but she did not place them there. Puts the top back in the package. 

One of Juliana’s friends looks down and gently shakes her head.

She booked the fingerprint on the orange plate into evidence in 2009. Explains who is allowed to have access to the forensic unit in Santa Monica Police Department. Her supervisor, forensic employees, and any lieutenant and above.

Fingerprints are usually kept in the forensic unit verses booked into evidence.  When she looked at the card, she observed what she thought was blood, so she booked that print card into evidence.  She believed she saw a blood spot. The blood was just under the tape, just above the fingerprint.

It appeared to be potential blood so that would be entered into evidence so that it could be analyzed.

I’m freezing back in this corner of the courtroom. This corner is colder than over by the door.  This area has a better view of the evidence photos on the screen.

She compared a latent print in this case. A latent print is reproduction of friction ridge print (from the) skin. Reproduction on a surface that may or may not be visible.  She compared it to 10 print, fingerprint card (of Kelly Soo Park's fingerprints).

Up on the screen, full fingerprint card.  She received a fingerprint hit from the latent print database.  On June 18, 2010 the system kicked back a possible match. Her department uses ACE analysis, comparison, evaluation. in Santa Monica PD.

Explains the fingerprint examination process and comparison. Explains notations on the 10 print fingerprint card with 10 prints on the card. They then make a determine match, the print collected off the plate, was the left thumb print of Kelly Park.

Photo up on screen with areas marked out in red. This is a document she puts together of enlargement of J and left thumb print of J.  It’s to show the minutia and the things you compare in J.  She put the colors in the images. She highlighted several ridge details, in green, red, purple and blue colors that correspond with each other. Used the colors on the exemplar and the latent print (to show) that they match.

Goes over each colored line and explains how the same ridge line is duplicated in the J latent print.

How many characteristics that match between the two?
There’s no specific number. It’s based on all of the information present in the print.  (The images up on the screen) are both left slant loops. They come into the left side the curve and come out.

She compared latent prints from approximately 21 individuals. There were no other matches.  The other people she compared, they were excluded.

Then, her work goes to someone else for peer review.  Then she generates a report and give her work to them. That reviewer follows the same procedures in respect to comparisons.

CROSS by Kassabian

11:52 AM
Question about taking a DNA swab.
The swab is placed in cardboard box and taken back to lab and allowed to dry.

For each stove top, did a dry and wet swab.  Swabs are packaged as evidence.
Where did you put the swabs?
Each are placed in a box then put in an envelope.

Doesn’t remember where they were put a the crime scene.

Lets wet swabs dry approximately an hour.
You testified took swabs of blackberry at the scene?
That’s correct.

Asks her to explain how she took swabs of the blackberry.
Can’t remember where she started with the swab, but knows she swabbed the entire surface of the swab. The front of the back.
You did not do a separate swab for screen, mouthpiece, keyboard?
One swab for the entire area.
Was the candle ever collected as evidence?
I believe so.
Did you collect it?
I’d have to check my report.

She reviews her report.

You don’t believe the candle was collected as evidence?

I don’t believe so. I don’t believe it was processed for fingerprints because of the type of surface. I believe the vase was collected for evidence.  The vase were checked for fingerprints.  Doesn’t believe usable latents were found on the vase.

She refers to her copy of the report to see if the vase was collected.

Vase was not collected as evidence.  Orange plate was collected as evidence.

Every item in the sink was collected as evidence. She processed the items in the sink for evidence as well as Leslie Futo.

Continued in Day 4, Part II....