Posted on 07/30/2002 3:58:51 PM PDT by FresnoDA
Was it the same weekend after the defense rested ?
Only is they were matched by the fiber people. Until then its speculation.
My posting is to show that the fiber came to be in her hair on the necklace at the time she was killed.
Several posters have said she could have picked up the orange fiber during the cookie selling visit a few days prior.
Jennifer Shen, the witness, stated on direct exam (I posted it much earlier on this thread) that the fiber came to be there at time of death/placement at Dehesa.
The excerpt you are referring to is Feldman's cross-exam where she affirms this and he seems to accept it and works in his later date theory by getting her to agree that *if Danielle wasn't moving around* the fiber could come to be there earlier.
Does that make it clear?
The prosecution emphasized that any fiber evidence is available for the defense to have their own analysis done.
Notice the defense has not challenged the findings
I opined that the defense had access to the evidence, which you don't refute. Are you saying they didn't bother to verify the findings, because it would cost money?
I rather expect the defense DID SATISFY themselves concerning this item of evidence (and others, as well). I further suspect that the defense hasn't claimed falsification or mis-interpretation of evidence, because they have checked, and nothing points them in that direction.
The only logical conclusion is the good folks at FR are wrong; the evidence was not falsified or mis-interpreted, and it IS strong physical evidence against the defendant.
At this point, it might be observed that Feldman was very confident his bug-science would be so one sided, it alone would win the case. Therefore, he didn't challenge the Blood, DNA, Hair, Fiber items, from any scientific standpoint. He certainly hasn't raised any issue, about evidence tampering or falsification.
He has had to work very hard, to avoid having the bug-science turn "neutral." Wednesday morning, on Court TV, a poll said 78% of viewers felt the bug-science topic was a "wash" or "neutral."
I still have some doubts, pending the sur-rebuttal, and closing arguments. I would bet thusly on the outcome of this jury trial:
Acquittal, 10%
Conviction, 30%
Hung Jury, 60%
17 THOSE FIBERS THAT WERE SUBJECTED TO THAT TEST?
A. YES.
Q. PHOTOGRAPHS?
A. YES.
Q. ALL OF THEM AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED EXPERT?
A. YES.
Q. ARE ALL THE FIBERS AVAILABLE
A. YES.
Q. CAN THEY BE RE-EXAMINED IF THERE'S ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE ACCURACY OF YOUR RESULTS?
A. YES, THEY ARE.
Interesting. The same group that hassled me about my mostly correct predictions about Goff's testimony gave me similar grief when I said the average non-technical person would just throw up thier hands on the bug stuff and return to looking at the evidence.
Its nice to see I have been correct more than they have.
That is not correct. The fiber is similar in every way to the fibers at DW's.
The phrase you mean is "may or may not have a common source".
Big difference!
I just came across this in ref to blood in RV
Q. This test for the presence of blood, we've heard 8 the term, the court has heard the term Hemastix. Is that 9 what you utilized, as well? 10 A. No. That's not what I used. 11 Q. What did you utilize? 12 A. A test called phenylthaline.
Is this the test or was it something else.
By "there earlier" I meant Feldman's hypothetical of the body being placed at Dehesa later, but he seems to concede the fiber would come to be in the hair at time of death and body not moved around.
I'm not crazy after all (I had myself worried for awhile!)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.