|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
|
>>> WHEN YOU GOT TO THE FRONT DOOR, WHAT DID YOU DO? >> WE RANG THE DOORBELL. >> DID YOU GET AN ANSWER? >> NO. >> WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT? >> WE KNOCKED ON THE GLASS DOOR AND OPENED THE GLASS DOOR TO KNOCK ON THE WOOD BE DOOR INSIDE. >> DID YOU GET A RESPONSE FROM THAT? >> NO. >> A MURDER MYSTERY BEGINS WITH THE DISAPPEARANCE OF SUBURBAN HOUSEWIFE AND SOON BECOMES AN INTERNATIONAL INVESTIGATION. THAT'S COMING UP RIGHT NOW ON OPEN COURT. GOOD MORNING, AND WELCOME TO OPEN COURT. I'M LISA BLOOM. 27-YEAR-OLD RACHEL ENTWISTLE AND HER 9-MONTH-OLD DAUGHTER LILLIAN WERE SHOT TO DEATH IN THEIR SUBURBAN BOSTON HOME TWO YEARS AGO. RACHEL HUSBAND, NEIL, WAS ARRESTED AFTER FLEEING TO HIS NATIVE ENGLAND. YESTERDAY THE JURY WATCHED A VIDEO OF THE CRIME SCENE WHICH SPARKED SOME EMOTION FROM THE DEFENDANT. BATE KARAS JOINS US LIVE FROM MASSACHUSETTS WITH ALL THE DETAILS. >> Reporter: THAT VIDEO WAS PLAYED IN THE COURTROOM AND IT WAS EMOTIONAL. MONITORS WERE POSITIONED IN THE WELL OF THE COURTROOM SO ONLY THE JURORS AND THE TRIAL PARTICIPANTS, INCLUDING NEIL ENTWISTLE, COULD SEE THE VIDEO. EVERYONE ELSE, FAMILY MEMBERS ON BOTH SIDES, FOR EXAMPLE, THE REST OF THE MEDIA AND THE PUBLIC GALLERY, COULD NOT SEE THE VIDEO. NOW, IT INCLUDED THE BODIES OF LILLIAN AND RACHEL ENTWISTLE AS THEY WERE FOUND IN THE MASTER BEDROOM BEFORE THEY WERE REMOVED FROM THE HOUSE AS WELL AS THE REST OF THE HOUSE. THIS IS WHAT CRIME SCENE VIDEO TYPICALLY INCLUDES. NEIL ENTWISTLE CRIED THROUGHOUT MOST OF THIS 20-MINUTE VIDEO, AND OBSERVERS IN THE COURTROOM DID THINK THAT AT TIMES HE -- HE WASN'T OUTWARDLY SOBBING OR TEARS COMING OUT OF HIS EYES, HE SEEMED ALMOST TO BE SMILING, BUT AFTER COURT HIS ATTORNEYS ASSURED US THAT HE WAS NOT. >> WE'VE COME OUT BEFORE ALL OF YOU MEDIA REPRESENTATIVES NOTWITHSTANDING OUR DESIRE AND OUR INTENTION TO NOT COMMENT ON IN-COURT PROCEEDINGS, AND THAT'S BECAUSE IT HAS BEEN REPORTED TO US THAT SOME OF YOU ARE REPORTING THAT OUR CLIENT, NEIL ENTWISTLE, WAS LAUGHING OR SMILING DURING THE PLAYING OF THE VIDEO SHOWING HIS DEAD WIFE AND DEAD CHILD. WE ARE OFFENDED BY THAT KIND OF REPORTING. I'M GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT WE DID. WE'RE SERIOUSLY AND VERY, VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW NEIL WOULD REACT UPON SEEING THE IMAGES OF RACHEL AND LILLIAN. WE WERE SO CONCERNED ABOUT THAT THAT WE DIVIDED OUR RESPONSIBILITY IN THE COURTROOM, AND MY PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY WAS TO WATCH THE VIDEO, TO VIEW THE EVIDENCE AS IT WAS BEING PLAYED, AND STEPHANIE'S PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY WAS TO WATCH NEIL TO MAKE SURE THAT HE WOULD BE OKAY IN SEEING THIS HORROR THAT HE DID NOT COMMIT. AND ANYBODY WHO INTERPRETED HIS REACTIONS IN ANYTHING OTHER THAN THAT OF A MAN WHO IS SERIOUSLY GRIEVING AND DISTURBED BY WHAT HE SAW, BY WHAT HE'S BEEN ACCUSED OF DOING AND ABSOLUTELY DID NOT DO. >> YOU ALL HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY. YOU HAVE BEEN THERE. I WAS SITTING NEXT TO HIM. ELLIOTT WAS SITTING NEXT TO HIM. SOME OF YOU WERE ABLE TO SEE HIM. THERE IS NO WAY THAT NEIL WOULD BE LAUGHING OR NOT -- HE'S GRIEVING. HE'S LOST HIS WIFE. HE'S LOST HIS BABY. YOU'VE HEARD WHAT A LOVING FATHER HE WAS, WHAT A LOVING HUSBAND HE IS. YOU HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY. YOU KNOW HE WASN'T LAUGHING. IT'S NOT WORTH IT. CHEAP HEADLINE OR A CHEAP SOUND BITE ON ONE OF YOUR CABLE SHOWS. IT IS SO OFFENSIVE. >> Reporter: BASED ON WHAT HIS ATTORNEY SAID, IT APPEARS THAT THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT NEIL ENTWISTLE SAW THE VIDEO. I'M SURE THE ATTORNEYS HAD ACCESS TO IT BEFORE DURING DISCOVERY, BUT PROBABLY OPTED NOT TO EVER SHOW HIM THESE IMAGES. SO HE WAS SEEING THEM FOR THE F IRS TIME. HE'S FACING THE JURY, ALTHOUGH MONITORS SOMEWHAT OBSCURED JURORS AND JURORS FOR THE MOST PART DIDN'T SHOW MUCH EMOTION. ONE PUT A HAND TO THE MOUTH AND THEY SEEMED TO GRIMACE A LITTLE BIT AT TIMES. THEY COULD, AT LEAST SOME OF THEM, COULD SEE NEIL ENTWISTLE'S FACE. SO IT REALLY DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE THAT HE WOULD BE SMILING ANYWAY WHEN JURORS COULD SEE HIM. >> WELL, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE, BUT WE HAVE THE VIDEO. WE'VE JUST BEEN LOOKING AT IT. HE CERTAINLY LOOKS TO ME LIKE HE INITIALLY PUTS HIS FACE DOWN IN HIS HANDS. WHEN HE REMOVES HIS HAND, ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS THE CORNERS OF HIS MOUTH ARE TURNED UP. HE'S POLICE DAYING HIS -- DISPLAYING HIS TEETH. IT CERTAINLY LOOKS TO ME LIKE THAT LOOKS LIKE A SMILE. I'M NOT SAYING HE'S LAUGHING, AND HE MAY HAVE A STRANGE WAY OF GRIMACING WHEN HE'S SHOWING GRIEF, BUT THAT CERTAINLY LOOKS TO ME LIKE A SMILE, AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE WHO ARE GENUINELY GRIEVING SMILE AT A FUNERAL, BEHAVE STRANGELY. I'M NOT SAYING THAT MAKES HIM A KILLER, BUT IT SURE LOOKS LIKE A SMILE. >> WELL, YOU KNOW, FAIR ENOUGH. YOU CAN CONCLUDE WHATEVER YOU WANT FROM THAT, BUT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK HE WAS SMILING. >> ALL RIGHT, ALL RIGHT. WELL, WE'LL LEAVE THAT TO THE JURY TO DECIDE. GIVE US THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE TESTIMONY YESTERDAY ABOUT THE CRIME SCENE AND ALSO HOW WAS THE JURY REACTING TO THAT HORRIFIC CRIME SCENE VIDEO? >> Reporter: WELL, THE JURY DIDN'T SHOW TOO MUCH EMOTION, BUT VERY, VERY SOMBER DURING THE SHOWING OF THE CRIME SCENE VIDEO. THE REST OF THE DAY WAS SPENT IN LARGE PART ON ITEMS OF EVIDENCE THAT WERE COLLECTED AT THE SCENE, SOME OF THEM DISPLAYED, BUT THE FOUNDATION BEING LAID FOR INTRODUCTION INTO EVIDENCE. SO IT WAS -- WAS TESTED FOR BLOOD THERE WERE A COUPLE OF TINY LITTLE FOUR TO FIVE MILL PLEATER SPOTS OF BLOOD ON THE WALL OF THE BEDROOM. THREE OUT OF FOUR SPOTS TESTED POSITIVE FOR BLOOD. THAT'S THE PRESUMPTIVE TEST ON THE SCENE. WE DON'T HAVE THE RESULTS YET OF WHOSE BLOOD. PRESUMABLY IT'S RACHEL ENTWISTLE. DON'T KNOW FOR SURE. THE JURY LEARNED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT. BUT MORE DNA EVIDENCE STILL TO COME, COMPUTER EVIDENCE. WE MAY HAVE COMPUTER EVIDENCE TODAY AND SOMEBODY FROM EBAY I BELIEVE IS GOING TO BE TESTIFYING THIS AFTERNOON. >> THAT EBAY EVIDENCE MAY BE SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE THINGS SEEM TO REALLY START UNRAVELING FOR NEIL ENTWISTLE A WEEK OR TWO BEFORE THESE MURDERS WHEN HE WAS HAVING PROBLEMS WITH EBAY, COMPLAINTS GETTING GENERATED AGAINST THEM ON EBAY. APART FROM THE CRIME SCENE EVIDENCE, THERE WAS A RECRUITER WHO TOOK THE STAND YESTERDAY WHO TALKED ABOUT NEIL ENTWISTLE'S EFFORTS TO FIND EMPLOYMENT IN THE STATES. WHAT DID WE LEARN? >> Reporter: SHE WAS FIRST CONTACTED BY HIM WHEN HE WAS STILL IN THE UK IN FEBRUARY OF 2005, AND DID HE SAY IN A COVER LETTER THAT HE WAS PLANNING TO MOVE TO THE UNITED STATES, AND HE WAS BEGINNING HIS JOB SEARCH AND THAT SHE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING AT THAT POINT. IF HE WANTED SOMETHING IN THE COMPUTER FIELD, THEY RECONNECTED. HE SENT HER ANOTHER COVER LETTER AND RESUME IN SEPTEMBER OF 2005. STILL NOTHING AT THAT POINT. HE'S NOW IN THE UNITED STATES. AT THAT POINT HE CAME A FEW WEEKS AFTER RACHEL AND LILLIAN ARRIVED. SO THIS IS TO SHOW THAT HE WAS LOOKING FOR WORK. HE MENTIONED A COUPLE OF JOBS POSTED ON MONSTER.COM TO HER BUT REALIZED HE WASN'T QUALIFIED FOR THEM. ONE REQUIRED THAT HE BE A CITIZEN AND ANOTHER ONE REQUIRES MORE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD THAN HE HAD YET. HE WAS ONLY 27 AT THE TIME. >> WELL, I HAVE SEVERAL GUESTS JOINING ME NOW HERE IN NEW YORK. FIRST UP, PAMELA DAVIS IS A FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR. GREAT TO SEE YOU, PAM. >> THANK YOU. >> AND MICHAEL ROBBINS IS A CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND FREQUENT GUEST. MICHAEL, WELCOME BACK. >> GOOD MORNING. >> AND JOINING US LIVE FROM MASSACHUSETTS, MICHELLE McAFEE IS A NEW ENGLAND RADIO SHOW HOST AND AUTHOR OF THE BOOK HEARTLESS: THE TRUE STORY OF NEIL ENTWISTLE AND THE COLD BLOODED MURDER OF HIS WIFE AND CHILD." MICHELLE, WELCOME TO YOU. >> THANK YOU. GREAT TO BE HERE. >> I GOT A COPY, LOOKS LIKE THIS, OF YOUR BOOK AND GUESS WHAT I SPENT ALL NIGHT DOING, READING IT. I READ THE WHOLE THING. BOY, IS IT TERRIFIC. >> THANK YOU. >> VERY WELL WRITTEN, AND I THOUGHT I HAD A FAIR AMOUNT OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THIS CASE. IT TURNS OUT THERE WAS A LOT LEFT THAT I STILL DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT. LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT SOME OF THAT. ONE OF THE INTERESTING SORT OF SIDE STORIES TO THIS CASE IS NEIL ENTWISTLE'S REQUEST THAT IF ANYTHING HAPPENS TO HIM, HE WOULD LIKE TO BE CREMATED AND HAVE HIS ASHES SPREAD OVER THE GRAVES OF RACHEL AND LILLIAN, RIGHT? >> ABSOLUTELY. AND AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THE FAMILY OF RACHEL, HER MOM, PRISCILLA, AND HER STEPDAD, JOE MATTERAZZO, WERE APPALLED AT THAT REQUEST, AND THEY WENT TO GREAT LENGTHS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT COULD NEVER HAPPEN. THERE'S NO WAY THEY WANTED NEIL'S ASHES SCATTERED OVER RACHEL AND LILLIAN'S GRAVES. THERE'S NO WAY IT WOULD HAPPEN, AND IF YOU REMEMBER, JOE MATTERAZZO TESTIFIED THIS WEEK THAT NEIL ACTUALLY SAID TO HIM, I WANT THEM BURIED THE WAY I LEFT THEM, OOPS, I MEAN THE WAY I FOUND THEM. HE SEEMINGLY IS OBSESSED WITH THE WAY THESE MOTHER AND BABY ARE BURIED TOGETHER, AND I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT WHILE I AGREE WITH BETH, I DON'T THINK HE WAS LAUGHING, CERTAINLY I AGREE WITH ELLIOT WEINSTEIN, HIS OWN ATTORNEY, WHO SAID HE'S DISTURBED. HE LOOKS DISTURBED YESTERDAY WITH HIS FACIAL EXPRESSIONS. >> YEAH. ONE OF THE THINGS YOU SAY IN THE BOOK, MICHELLE, BECAUSE WE HAVE REALLY TRIED TO THINK ABOUT WHAT COULD LEAD HIM TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, A LOVING FATHER AND HUSBAND, SEEMED LIKE A GENTLEMANLY BRITISH GUY TO EVERYBODY WHO KNEW HIM, AND YOU THINK THERE'S AN ELEMENT OF OBSESSION, EVEN ADDICTION IN NEIL ENTWISTLE'S PERSONALITY. >> CERTAINLY. YOU HAVE HEARD MANY TIMES, AND I'M SURE YOU'VE RECOUNTED MANY TIMES ON THIS PROGRAM, PEOPLE WHO USE ALCOHOL OR DRUG ADDICTION AS A DEFENSE. AND CERTAINLY THERE ARE SIGNS THAT NEIL ENTWISTLE HAD AN APRIL DICTION TO SEX. HE WAS TROLLING THE INTERNET FOR ESCORTS IN THE DAYS BEFORE HIS FAMILY WAS FOUND SLAIN. WHEN HE ARRIVED IN ENGLAND ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS HE DID WAS LOOK UP ESCORT SERVICES, TRY TO FIND AN EX-GIRLFRIEND. HERE IS A I GO WHO, ACCORDING TO PROSECUTORS, POSTED A PHOTOGRAPH OF HIMSELF FULLY AROUSED ON THIS WEBSITE, ADULT FRIEND FINDER. >> NAKED. >> NAKED. >> THERE'S AN IMAGE. PAMELA DAVIS, WHAT ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THAT HE WAS HAVING AN AFFAIR. WE DON'T KNOW THAT HE WAS EVEN SEEING PROSTITUTES. YES, HE WAS ONLINE ON THESE PORN SITES. HE ACTUALLY WAS A PROPRIETOR OF SOME OF THESE SITES A FEW YEARS EARLIER, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO RISE TO THE LEVEL OF SOMETHING THAT OTHER GUYS WE SEE WHO ARE OUT THERE HAVING AFFAIRS, SPENDING TIME WITH PROSTITUTES, THIS IS A GUY WHO IS LOOKING AT PORN ONLINE WHICH IS NOT ALL THAT UNCOMMON. >> NO, BUT THE TIMING OF IT IS WHAT IS SO IMPORTANT HERE MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE IS THAT HE'S LOOKING AT IT BEFORE THEY DIE. HE'S LOOKING AT IT AFTER THEY DIE. AND IT JUST SORT OF ADDS TO EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S GOING ON IN THIS CASE, EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENED -- >> IS IT ENOUGH TO BE A MOTIVE FOR MURDER, PAM? >> I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ENOUGH IN AND OF ITSELF. IT'S ENOUGH COMBINED WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE KNOW ABOUT THIS CASE. IT'S ENOUGH WITH THE WAY THAT HE REACTED AFTER THE DEATH OF THESE TWO PEOPLE CERTAINLY. THAT IN COMBINATION WITH HIS OBSESSION, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT OBSESSION, BUT CERTAINLY DESIRE TO LOOK AT PORN, HIS BEHAVIOR AFTER IT COMBINED WITH HIS INTEREST IN INTERNET PORN, I THINK THAT IS ENOUGH. >> AND TRYING TO FIND A BIT MORE FUN IN THE BEDROOM. THAT'S WHAT HE SAID. SO, MICHELLE, ONE OF THE THINGS IF I'M READING YOUR BOOK CORRECTLY, I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT AT THE SAME TIME THAT HE WENT ONLINE AND WAS GOOGLING HOW TO KILL AND AFTER HE GOT DONE WITH THOSE SEARCHES, HE WAS LOOKING UP ESCORTS. IT WAS THE SAME TIME HE'S SITTING AT THE COMPUTER. >> EXACTLY. AND THAT'S, I THINK, THE POINT, IS THE TIMING. THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO TROLL THE INTERNET FOR SEX AND TROLL THE INTERNET FOR GRATIFICATION, BUT NEIL ENTWISTLE, ACCORDING TO PROSECUTORS, DID THAT IN THE HOURS BEFORE HIS FAMILY WAS FOUND SHOT DEAD. SNUGGLED ALONGSIDE EACH OTHER IN THE MASTER BEDROOM OF THEIR RENTED HOME. >> MICHAEL ROBBINS, JUST BRIEFLY ON THE DEFENSE SIDE WOULD YOU BE ARGUING AS MARK GERAGOS DID IN THE SCOTT PETERSON CASE, HE'S A CAD, WE DON'T LIKE THE WAY HE BEHAVES, BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE HIM A MURDERER. >> OBVIOUSLY YOU WOULD, AND THE PROBLEM WITH THIS TYPE EVIDENCE IS IT TENDS TO SHATTER THAT COURTROOM IMAGE THAT THE DEFENSE IS TRYING TO SELL, THAT HE IS THIS HAPPY LOVING HUSBAND AND PERFECT FATHER. THAT'S WHY THIS TYPE OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE A PROBLEM, BECAUSE IT TARNISHES THAT IMAGE THEY'RE TRYING TO SELL WHICH IS AN EFFORT TO REACH SOME REASONABLE DOUBT IN THIS VERY DIFFICULT CASE. >> WELL, WE'VE NOW HEARD SEVERAL POLICE OFFICERS TESTIFY ABOUT WHAT THEY FOUND AT THE CRIME SCENE. EARLIER THIS WEEK SERGEANT MICHAEL SUTTON SAID HE HEARD BOTH MUSIC AND A TELEVISION LEFT ON IN THE ENTWISTLES' HOUSE. HE ALSO SAW A BATHTUB STILL FULL OF WATER. THEN YESTERDAY A STATE TROOPER TOLD THE JURY WHAT SHE FOUND UPSTAIRS. >> WE PROCEEDED TO THE SECOND FLOOR, UP A SET OF STAIRS. THERE WAS A BEDROOM TO THE LEFT AND A BEDROOM TO THE RIGHT. THERE WAS CLASSICAL MUSIC PLAYING. UPON REACHING THE TOP OF THE STAIRCASE YOU COULD DETECT A FAINT ODOR. TO THE LEFT THERE WAS A BEDROOM, AND UPON LOOKING IN YOU COULD SEE A LARGE BED. IT HAD A LARGE, WHITE, FLUFFY COMFORTER. >> SO TODAY'S QUESTION OF THE DAY IS WHAT DOES THE STATE OF THE ENTWISTLE HOME TELL US? YOU CAN SEND US YOUR ANSWERS. JUST LOGON TO CNN.COM/CRIME AND CLICK ON OPEN COURT, OR E-MAIL US DIRECTLY AT OPENCOURT@CNN.COM. WRITE A BRIEF ANSWER, AND WE'LL READ ONE OF YOUR RESPONSES AT THE END OF THE SHOW. COULD BE YOURS. WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK. >>> WE KNEW THAT THE VICTIMS WERE UNDER THE COMFORTER BECAUSE THEY WERE NOT VISIBLE IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS WE HAD PREVIOUSLY TAKEN. WE DECIDED TO METHODICALLY REMOVE EACH LAYER AS WE FOUND THEM, AND THEN DOCUMENT WITH PHOTOGRAPHS. >> THE MOTHER AND BABY WERE FOUND SHOT IN THEIR OWN BED. THE BABY SHOT THROUGH THE STOMA STOMACH. THE MOTHER SHOT RIGHT AT THE HAIRLINE. THAT'S IMPORTANT EVIDENCE THE JURY HAS BEEN HEARING TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT NEIL ENTWISTLE, THE ACCUSED MURDERER, WAS THE KILLER. I WANT TO SHOW YOU A LIVE SHOT OF THE COURTROOM. THEY'RE GETTING READY TO GET STARTED THIS MORNING. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE JUDGE AND THE ATTORNEYS ARE AT A SIDE BAR. WE DON'T HAVE ANY TESTIMONY YET. AS SOON AS THEY BREAK UP AND GET A WITNESS ON THE STAND, WE'LL GET YOU RIGHT INTO THE COURTROOM LIVE. IN THE MEANTIME, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE CRIME SCENE AND THE CRIME SCENE AND THE FORENSIC EVIDENCE IS ALWAYS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO THE JURY. I WANT TO SHOW YOU SOME TESTIMONY FROM YESTERDAY OF A FORENSIC SCIENTIST TALKING ABOUT WHAT HE FOUND AT THE CRIME SCENE. TAKE A LISTEN. >> SIR, CAN YOU DESCRIBE THE CONDITION OF THE BED ITSELF AS YOU SAW IT WHEN YOU FIRST ENTERED THAT BEDROOM? >> YES. THE BED CONTAINED WHITE SHEETING AND ALSO HAD A LARGE WHITE COMFORTER ON TOP. >> AT SOME POINT IN TIME WAS THAT COMFORTER REMOVED? >> YES, IT WAS. >> AND YOU WERE PRESENT WHEN IT WAS REMOVED? >> YES, SIR, I WAS. >> DID YOU ASSIST IN THE REMOVAL OF IT? >> I DID. DESCRIBE, IF YOU COULD, HOW WAS REMOVAL WAS MADE AND WHAT OBSERVATIONS YOU MADE WHEN THE COMFORTER WAS FIRST PULLED BACK FROM THAT BED. >> WHEN THE COMFORTER WAS FIRST PULLED BACK, I NOTICED RED BROWN STAINING ON THE UNDERSIDE OF IT WHICH WASN'T VISIBLE UPON ENTERING THE ROOM. >> AT WHAT END OF THE COMFORTER WAS THAT RED, BROWN STAINING, THE FOOT OF THE HEAD OR THE HEAD OF THE BED. >> TOWARDS THE HEAD OF THE BED. >> WHAT DID YOU DO? >> PERFORMED A SCREENING TEST FOR THE PRESENCE OF BLOOD AND A POSITIVE RESULT WAS PRESENT. >> WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT, IF ANYTHING, WITH IT? >> I THEN BEGAN TO EXAMINE THE REST OF THE BEDDING. >> DID YOU TAKE ANY SAMPLE FROM THAT -- FROM THE COMFORTER, THAT STAINED AREA? >> YES. I EXCISED IT WITH A SCALPEL BLADE AND REMOVED THOSE STAINS. >> WHAT DID YOU THEN DO. >> TWO BODIES WERE IDENTIFIED UNDER THE COVERING, THAT OF AN ADULT FEMALE AND INFANT. >> DESCRIBE IF YOU COULD THE RELATIVE POSITION OF THE ADULT FEMALE AND THE INFANT AS YOU FIRST OBSERVED THEM AFTER THE COMFORTER ITSELF HAD BEEN PULLED BACK. >> THE ADULT FEMALE WAS LAYING ON ITS LEFT SIDE, THE INFANT WAS LAYING ON ITS BACK AND FACIAL AREA WAS COVERED BY A PILLOW. >> WHAT DID YOU AND THE CHEMIST DO NEXT? >> THEN REMOVED THE PILLOW AND FOUND A LARGE RED/BROWN STAIN ON THE UNDERSIDE OF THAT PILLOW. I PERFORMED A SCREENING TEST FOR THE BRENS BRENS OF BLOOD WHICH WAS ALSO POSITIVE. >> WHICH PART WAS THE RED/BROWN STAIN. >> THE UNDERSIDE OF IT. >> WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE PILLOW OR PILLOWCASE? >> I SEIZED IT. >> TOOK IT AS PART OF EVIDENCE FROM THE SCENE THAT EVENING? >> YES, SIR, I DID. >> WAS THAT GIVEN A CERTAIN NUMBER. >> YES, IT WAS. >> WHAT NUMBER. >> YOUR HONOR, MAY I REFER TO MY NOTES? >> TOUGH TESTIMONY FOR THE VICTIMS' FAMILY MEMBERS TO HEAR YESTERDAY, BUT IMPORTANT FORENSIC EVIDENCE TO THE JURY. WELL, WE HAVE LIVE ACTION IN THE COURTROOM. THE SIDE BAR HAS JUST BROKEN UP. LET'S GO IN LIVE. >> JOHN SORRES IS RESUMING HIS TESTIMONY THIS MORNING. HE'S A FORENSIC SCIENTIST AT THE MASSACHUSETTS CRIME SCENE LAB. LET'S LISTEN IN. >> SIR, YOU'RE STILL UNDER OATH. >> THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. >> GOOD MORNING, SIR. >> GOOD MORNING. >> I BELIEVE, SIR, WHEN WE LEFT OFF YESTERDAY WE HAD BEGUN DISCUSSING SOME DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES THAT YOU WERE PERFORMING AT LOGAN AIRPORT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> DO YOU RECALL WHAT TIME YOU GOT TO LOGAN AIRPORT, THE BARRACKS? >> JUST PAST 10:00 IN THE MORNING. >> WAS THAT ON THE 24th OF JANUARY, 2006? >> YES, IT WAS. >> AND WHO WAS THERE WHEN YOU ARRIVED? >> MEMBERS OF THE STATE POLICE DETECTIVE UNIT AND MEMBERS OF THE CRIME SCENE SERVICES SECTION. >> WHO FROM CRIME SCENE SERVICES WAS THERE? >> TROOPER MAU RA McCARTHY AND TROOPER CAROL SUBTLE SACCT. >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT PURPOSE THEY WERE SERVING? >> YES, SIR. >> WHAT WAS THAT. >> PHOTO DOCUMENT OF THE VEHICLE AND THE IDENTIFICATION AND RECOVERY OF ANY FINGERPRINTS. >> WHAT WAS YOUR ROLE? >> IDENTIFICATION OF ANY POSSIBLE BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS OR WEAPONS. >> EXHIBIT 31, YOUR HONOR. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT, SIR? >> YES, I DO. >> WHAT IS THAT? >> THAT'S THE BMW X3 I WAS CALLED TO EXAMINE. >> DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHERE IT WAS TAKEN. >> AT THE STATE POLICE GARAGE AT LOGAN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. >> IS THAT HOW APEERED ON THE MORNING OF JANUARY 24th, 2006? >> YES, SIR, IT WAS. >> DESCRIBE IF YOU COULD YOUR OBSERVATIONS OF THE VEHICLE WHEN YOU FIRST ARRIVED AT THE BARRACKS. >> THE VEHICLE APPEARED IN EXCELLENT CONDITION. THERE WAS NO DAMAGE NOTED TO THE EXTERIOR. >> DID YOU HAVE AN OCCASION TO MAKE OBSERVATIONS OF THE INTERI INTERIOR? >> YES, I DID. >> TELL US WHAT YOU SAW. START WITH THE FRONT DRIVER'S COMPARTMENT AND TELL US YOUR OBSERVATIONS GOING FROM THE FRONT DRIVER, PASSENGER, IN A CLOCKWISE METHOD. >> I'M NOT HEARING AN ECHO. >> I'M NOT HEARING IT FROM HERE, YOUR HONOR. >> ALL RIGHT. MAYBE YOU COULD HELP. >> IF YOU COULD GIVE US A DESCRIPTION OF YOUR OBSERVATIONS OF THE BMW AS YOU SAW IT THAT MORNING STARTING WITH THE DRIVER'S COMPARTMENT AND WORKING COUNTERCLOCKWISE -- EXCUSE ME, WORKING CLOCKWISE FROM THE DRIVER'S TO THE PASSENGER AND THE BACK. >> I NOTICED THAT THE DRIVER'S SEAT WAS CAN'TED BACK ALMOST TOUCHED THE REAR SEAT. I NOTICED A WATER BOTTLE IN THE CENTER CONSOLE. THERE WAS A DUNKIN' DONUTS CUP ON THE PASSENGER SIDE CUP HOLDER THAT WAS AFFIXED TO THE DASH AND THERE WAS A BABY SEAT FACING THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE IN THE REAR PASSENGER SEAT. >> APPARENTLY THE PROBLEM HAS BEEN CORRECTED AS TO THE WITNESS, BUT MR. FABBRI -- >> IT'S THE BLACK MIKE. >> YOU'RE STILL HEARING IT FROM MR. FABBRI? >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. ARE THOSE MICROPHONES TOO CLOSE TOGETHER, MR. HELLAND? >> TOWARD ME? IS THAT BETTER? >> AWAY FROM YOU -- >> HOW IS THAT? >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. >> ANY FURTHER OBSERVATIONS OF THE BACKSEAT AREA? >> YES. UNDER THE DRIVER'S SEAT THERE WAS ALSO TWO ADDITIONAL DRINKING CONTAINERS. ONE WAS AN AQUAFINA WATER BOTTLE AND A STARBUCKS COFFEE CUP. >> ANY ARTICLES OF CLOTHING OBSERVED INSIDE THE VEHICLE? >> YES, SIR. >> WHAT DID YOU SEE AND WHERE? >> UPON REMOVAL OF THE BABY SEAT AND THE PASSENGER REAR AREA, THERE WERE SEVERAL ARTICLES OF CLOTHING. >> DESCRIBE NOW, IF YOU COULD, WHAT YOU DID IN PROCESSING THAT VEHICLE. >> I USED THE SCREENING TEST FOR THE PRESENCE OF NONVISIBLE BLOOD ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT AREAS INSIDE AND THE EXTERIOR OF THAT VEHICLE. I DIDN'T VISUALIZE NI RED/BROWN STAINS. ALL TEST RESULTS WERE NEGATIVE. >> IS THAT THE SAME TEST YOU DESCRIBED, SIR, YESTERDAY? >> YES, IT IS. >> TELL US THE AREAS THAT YOU PERFORMED THAT SCREENING TEST. >> THE EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR DOOR HANDLING, STEERING WHEEL, SEVERAL OF THE DIFFERENT CONTROL AREAS AND THE GEAR SHIFT. >> DID YOU EXAMINE THOSE ITEMS YOU DESCRIBED, THE CUPS AND OTHER ITEMS WHILE YOU WERE PERFORMING THOSE TESTS? >> YES, I DID. >> AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU NOTED ANYTHING OF EVIDENTIARY SIGNIFICANCE EITHER IN THE VEHICLE OR ON THOSE ITEMS? >> NO, I DID NOT. >> WHAT DID YOU DO NEXT, SIR? >> I THEN TOOK SWABBINGS WHERE I TOOK SIMILAR TO HOW I REMOVED THE BLOOD STAINS ON THE WALL. I TOOK TWOSTER RIL SWABS AND SWABBED THE LIP AREAS OF THE DRINKING CONTAINERS AND PRESERVED THOSE. >> DID YOU PERFORM ANY OTHER TESTS IN ADDITION TO THE SCREENING TESTS FOR THE PRESENCE OF BLOOD? >> YES, I DID. >> WHAT TEST OR TESTS DID YOU PERFORM? >> I ALSO PERFORMED A RECOVERY FOR ANY POTENTIAL GUNSHOT RESIDUES FROM THE STEERING WHEEL AREA. >> AND -- >> LET'S USE THIS BRIEF BREAK TO TAKE OUR FIRST LOOK AT TODAY'S 13th JUROR QUESTION. WILL ENTWISTLE'S BEHAVIOR IN COURT AFFECT THE JURY? JUST LOGON TO CNN.COM/CRIME AND CLICK ON 13th JUROR TO CAST YOUR VOTE. LATER IN THE SHOW, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT HOW YOU'RE VOTING, SO STAY WITH US. >>> THERE'S STILL TIME TO GET YOUR THOUGHTS IN TO "OPEN COURT" AND ANSWER OUR QUESTION OF THE DAY. WHAT DOES THE STATE OF THE ENTWISTLE HOME TELL US? WHAT MIGHT JURORS THINK OF THE LIGHTS LEFT ON AND THE FOOD LEFT IN THE KITCHEN? JUST LOGON TO CNN.COM/CRIME AND CLICK ON OPEN COURT OR E-MAIL US DIRECTLY AT OPENCOURT ATH CNN.COM. LET'S GO RIGHT BACK INTO THE CENTIMETER LIVE BECAUSE ON THE STAND IS FORENSIC SCIENTIST JOHN SOARES. LET'S LISTEN IN. >> DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT'S IN THAT BAG? >> YES, SIR, I DO. >> WHAT IS IT? >> THE WATER BOTTLE RECOVERED FROM THE BMW. >> IS THAT THE BOTTLE YOU TESTIFIED YOU CONDUCTED A SWAB ON THE LIP? >> YES, SIR, IT IS. >> NEXT EXHIBIT, YOUR HONOR. >> IT MAY BE MARKED WITHOUT OBJECTION. >> SIR, WAS THE VEHICLE TURNED ON AT SOME POINT IN TIME? >> YES, SIR, IT WAS. >> WERE YOU THERE WHEN IT WAS? >> YES, SIR, I WAS. >> WHAT OBSERVATIONS DID YOU MAKE. >> THE RADIO STATION WAS SET TO 102.5 AND WAS PLAYING CLASSICAL MUSIC. >> AND YOU MENTIONED A SET OF -- STRIKE THAT. DID YOU HAVE OCCASION TO EXAMINE THE CONSOLE OR CONSOLE AREAS IN THE VEHICLE? >> YES, I DID. >> HOW MANY CONSOLES WERE THERE? >> THREE. >> AND STARTING WITH THE CENTER CONSOLE, WHAT, IF ANYTHING, DID YOU SEE OR FIND IN THERE? >> IN THE CENTER CONSOLE GEAR -- NEAR THE GER SHIFT THERE WAS A SET OF BMW KEYS AND ALSO A PARKING RECEIPT. >> AND THE SECOND CONSOLE THAT YOU EXAMINED? >> SECOND CONSOLE WAS IN THE CENTER OF THE DASHBOARD. INSIDE THERE WAS A SPONGE AND SET OF HOUSE KEYS AND A KEY TAG LABELED JAMAICA. >> THE THIRD CONSOLE AREA. >> THAT WAS ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. >> WAS THAT THE GLOVE BOX TYPE OF AREA? >> YES, SIR. >> WHAT TYPE OF EVIDENCE DID YOU FIND IN THERE? >> NOTHING NOTED. >> EXHIBIT 2, YOUR HONOR, AND E IF YOU COULD FIRST FAKE EXHIBIT 2, DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT? >> YES, I DO. >> WHAT IS THAT? >> THE SET OF KEYS LABELED JAMAICA FROM THE CENTER DASH CONSOLE. >> SIR, THAT OTHER ITEM, "E" FOR IDENTIFICATI IDENTIFICATION. >> PARKING RECEIPT. >> AND DOES IT LOOK FAMILIAR TO YOU? >> YES, SIR, FROM THE CENTER CONSOLE. >> FROM THE CENTER CONSOLE, THE DASH -- >> NEAR THE GEAR SHIFT. >> I DIDN'T HEAR THE ANSWER. >> NEAR THE GEAR SHIFT IN THE CENTER CONSOLE. >> COULD THIS BE MARKED AS AN EXHIBIT AT THIS TIME, YOUR HONOR? >> ANY OBJECTION? ALL RIGHT. IT MAY BE MARKED. >> PLACED AN ENVELOPE IN FRONT OF YOU, SIR, WITH AN ITEM. PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO LOOK INSIDE. DO YOU RECOGNIZE THAT? >> YES, I DO. >> WHAT DO YOU RECOGNIZE IT AS? >> A SET OF BMW KEYS RECOVERED FROM THE CENTER CONSOLE AND THE GEAR SHIFT. >> NEXT EXHIBIT. >> IT MAY BE MARKED. >> EXHIBIT 58 MARKED. >> THE PROSECUTOR IS INTRODUCING EVIDENCE THAT WAS COLLECTED FROM THE ENTWISTLES' WHITE BMW THAT WAS LEFT AT LOGAN AIRPORT WHEN NEIL ENTWISTLE FLEW TO ENGLAND IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE MURDERS. THEY'VE DISCUSSED A DASANI WATER BOTTLE. THAT BOTTLE IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE DNA WAS COLLECTED FROM THE RIM OF THE BOTTLE, DNA WHICH ULTIMATELY WAS NEIL ENTWISTLE'S DNA AND LED TO THE AFFIDAVIT THAT LED TO HIS ARREST A COUPLE WEEKS LATER IN ENGLAND. KEYS TO THE BMW WERE FOUND IN THE CONSOLE IN THE CAR AS WELL AS KEYS TO THE MATTERAZZO'S. LET'S GO BACK AND LISTEN IN. >> HAVE YOU TAKEN ENOUGH TIME TO FAMILIARIZE YOURSELF WITH THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS? >> YES, I HAVE. >>. LET'S START WITH THE TOP ONE, SIR. DO YOU RECOGNIZE WHAT THAT SHOWS? >> YES, I DO. >> WHAT DOES IT SHOW. >> IT'S A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN WITH THE DRIVER DOOR OPEN OF THE FRONT INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE. >> FAIRLY AND ACCURATELY AND COMPLETELY SHOW HOW THE BMW VEHICLE APPEARED TO YOU WHEN YOU FIRST SAW IT THE MORNING OF JANUARY 24th, 2006? >> YES, IT DOES. >> NEXT EXHIBIT, YOUR HONOR. >> IT MAY BE MARKED THE NEXT EXHIBIT NUMBER WITH AN "A." >> EXHIBIT 69A MARKED. >> THANK YOU. MAY I DISPLAY IT, YOUR HONOR? SIR, IF YOU COULD STEP DOWN, I THINK THE POINTER SHOULD STILL BE UP THERE SOMEPLACE. >> MAY I STEP DOWN? >> AND IF YOU COULD POINT TO THE TWO CONSOLES THAT YOU REFERRED TO, THE CENTER CONSOLE AND THE DASH CONSOLE. IF YOU CAN SEE IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE. >> THE CENTER CONSOLE NEAR THE GEAR SHIFT. THIS IS THE CENTER CONSOLE IN THE CENTER OF THE DASH. >> AND YOU MENTIONED A BOTTLE OR SOME CONTAINERS IN THERE. DO YOU SEE ANY OF THOSE IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH? >> YES, I DO. THE DASANI WATER BOTTLE AND THE DUNKIN' DONUTS CUP IS HERE ON THE PASSENGER SIDE. >> YOU MAY RESUME THE STAND. >> SECOND PHOTOGRAPH. TELL US WHAT THAT SHOWS. >> IT'S A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN FROM THE PASSENGER SIDE DEPICTING THE INTERIOR OF THE VEHICLE, FRONT. >> FAIR AND ACCURATE DEPICTION OF THOSE AREAS AS THEY APPEARED TO YOU THAT MORNING? >> YES, IT IS. >> NEXT EXHIBIT, YOUR HONOR. >> IT WILL BE 59B. >> EXHIBIT 59B MARKED. >> THANK YOU. >> THIRD PHOTOGRAPH IN THAT SERIES. >> THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN FROM THE DRIVER'S SIDE DEPICTING THE INTERIOR REAR AREA. >> AND IS IT A FAIR AND ACCURATE DEPICTION OF THOSE AREAS AS YOU SAW THEM ON THAT MORNING? >> YES, IT IS. >> NEXT EXHIBIT, YOUR HONOR. >> 59C. >> 59C MARKED. >> THANK YOU. >> MAY I DISPLAY IT? >> YES. >> SIR, ONCE AGAIN IF YOU NEED TO STEP DOWN WITH THE POINTER, GO UP TO THE VIEWER AND POINT OUT FOR US, IF YOU KOSHTION YOU HAD MENTIONED THE SEAT BEING RECLINED AND THE RECOVERY OF SOME AREAS IN THE BACKSEAT AREA. SOME ITEMS IN THE BACKSEAT AREA. >> THE DRIVER'S SEAT CANTED BACK TOWARDS THE REAR. THIS IS THE BABY'S SEAT FACING THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. AND THEN THERE'S ADDITIONAL DRINKING CONTAINERS UNDERNEATH THE DRIVING SEAT. >> FOURTH PHOTOGRAPH, SIR, IN THAT SERIES. WHAT DOES IT SHOW? >> IT'S A CLOSE-UP PHOTOGRAPH OF THE INTERIOR OF THE CENTER CONSOLE DEPICTING THE BMW KEYS. >> DOES THAT FAIRLY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THAT AREA PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF THE ITEMS OR ITEMS CONTAINED IN THE CONSOLE? >> YES, SIR. >> MAY IT BE MARKED, YOUR HONOR, NEXT EXHIBIT? >> IT MAY BE MARKED WITHOUT OBJECTION. >> 59D. THANK YOU. >> EXHIBIT 59D. MAY IT BE DISPLAYED, YOUR HONOR? AND, SO THE KEYS AND THE PARKING TICKET BELOW, IS THAT SHOWN IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH? >> YES, THEY ARE. >> AND THE NEXT AREA, SIR, TELL US WHAT THAT FIFTH PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS. >> IT'S A CLOSE-UP PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CENTER DASH GLOVE BOX DEPICTING THE HOUSE KEYS WITH THE JAMAICA KEY CHAIN. >> FAIRLY AND ACCURATELY DEPICT THAT CENTER CONSOLE AS IT APPEARED TO YOU BEFORE THOSE ITEMS WERE REMOVED? >> YES, IT DOES. >> NEXT EXHIBIT, YOUR HONOR. >> IT MAY BE MARKED WITHOUT OBJECTION. >> EXHIBIT 59E MARKED. >> IF I COULD DISPLAY IT. >> YES. SIR, A SPONGE IN ADDITION TO THE KEY SET. >> YES, SIR. >> AND POINT OUT THAT ITEM OR DESCRIBE IT FROM WHERE YOU SIT. >> IT'S BETWEEN THE SUNGLASSES AND THE KEYS IN THE CENTER OF THE PHOTO. >> SIR, IF WE COULD STEP BACK TO THE PREVIOUS DAY, JANUARY 23rd, 2006, WHEN YOU WERE AT THE HOME AT 6 CUBS PATH. I HAVE A FEW ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ACTIVITIES THAT YOU AND THE CHEMIST PERFORMED THERE. I BELIEVE YOU HAD INDICATED THAT A GUNSHOT RESIDUE KIT HAD BEEN PERFORMED ON THE HANDS OF RACHEL ENTWISTLE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU WERE THERE WHEN THAT WAS PERFORMED. DID YOU TAKE THAT KIT -- >> I PERFORMED THE COLLECTION, YES. >> WAS THERE AN ITEM NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH THAT KIT? >> YES, SIR. >> TELL US WHAT THAT IS, PLEASE. >> ITEM NUMBER 5-12. >> AND I BELIEVE YOU ALSO TOLD US THAT A SERIES OF SWABS WAS TAKEN FROM THE WALLS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE BED, TO THE RIGHT OF THE BED AS YOU VIEWED IT FROM THE FOOT OF THE BED. WERE ITEM NUMBERS GIVEN TO THOSE SWABS? >> YES THEY WERE. >> CAN YOU TELL US WHAT THOSE ITEM NUMBERS WERE? >>> WELCOME BACK. WE ARE LIVE IN THE DOUBLE MURDER CASE AGAINST NEIL ENTWISTLE. THE PROSECUTOR IS INTRODUCING SOME EXHIBITS NOW. LET ME USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO BRING MICHELLE McAFEE BACK IN. SHE'S WRITTEN A TERRIFIC BOOK ABOUT THE CASE. ONE OF THE INTRIGUING THINGS YOU SAID IS THAT THIS MAN, THE LEVEL OF HATRED AGAINST THIS GUY IS TERRIFYING AND YOU DESCRIBED A PRISON ATTACK ON NEIL ENTWISTLE. WHAT HAPPENED? >> WELL, THERE WAS A YOUNG MAN NAMED EBAN HOWARD WHO WAS BEING HELD IN A MASSACHUSETTS PRISON, THE SAME THAT NEIL ENTWISTLE WAS BEING HELD IN, AND HE HAD BEEN ACCUSED OF ATTACKING AN ELDERLY JANITOR AT A PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS. AND WHEN FEEL NEIL CAME IN, EVEN HOWARD, WHO IS SUSPECTED OF ATTACKING NEIL, HE HAD ALREADY BEEN ACCUSED OF MURDER FOR DEFENDING HIS OWN CHILD. SO HE HAD -- HIS ATTORNEY TOLD ME HE HAD SOME REAL HATRED TOWARDS ANYONE ACCUSED OF CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN, AND WHAT HE DID ACCORDING TO PROSECUTORS IS HE WENT UP TO NEIL AND SAID BABY KILLER AND KICKED HIM AS HARD AS HE COULD IN THE STOMACH, AND CRUMPLED NEIL TO THE GROUND. THIS IS A FAR CRY FROM THE HOPKINTON HOME THAT YOU HAVE SHOWN VIEWERS HERE. THIS GUY IS USED TO THE LAP OF LUXURY. HE'S DRIVING A BMW, LIVING IN THIS BEAUTIFUL SPRAWLING $2,700 A MONTH RENTED HOPKINTON ESTATE, AND NOW HE'S IN THIS JAIL CELL AND WITHIN DAYS OF HIS ARRIVAL HE WAS ATTACKED, KICKED IN THE STOMACH BY SOMEONE WHO IS SUFFERING FROM PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS. >> AND AS YOU POINT OUT, HIS JAIL CELL IS SMALLER THAN ANY OF THE THREE BATHROOMS IN THAT HOPKINTON ESTATE. HE'S BEEN HOUSED SO LOW THE ENTIRE 2 1/2 YEARS, RIGHT? >> UNDER SUICIDE WATCH BECAUSE, AS YOU KNOW, HE WROTE A SUICIDE LETTER TO HIS PARENTS AND ANOTHER ONE TO HIS ATTORNEYS ELLIOT WEINSTEIN AND STEPHANIE PAGE. IN THOSE LETTERS HE INDICATED THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE DAY MY MOOD WAS DARK. THE NEXT DAY IT WAS FINE, AND, YOU KNOW, THOSE LETTERS ARE NOT GOING TO BE ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE, BUT I THINK IT RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS STATE OF MIND, EITHER AT THE TIME OF THE WRITING OF THE SUICIDE LETTERS OR AT THE TIME OF THESE ALLEGED MURDERS THAT HE'S CHARGED WITH. >> AND THIS IS THE TYPE OF LITTLE FACTOID I SO ENJOYED IN THE BOOK. THE SAME CELL THAT MICHAEL McDERMOTT ONCE RESIDED IN, AND HE WAS THE GUY WITH THE INSANITY DEFENSE WHO HAD THE FAMOUS INTERNET SEARCH HOW TO FAKE MENTAL ILLNESS. CON VICTIMED OF MURDERING A NUMBER OF HIS CO-WORKERS. MICHAEL ROBBINS, LET ME BRING YOU IN AND ASK YOU ABOUT ONE OF THE PIVOTAL FACTS I THINK IN THIS CASE. THAT IS THAT JOE MAT RO ZO'S .22 GUN WAS USED FOR THESE MURDERS. I MEAN THERE'S THE DNA OF RACHEL ON THAT GUN, AND SHE HAD NEVER BEEN NEAR IT. THERE IS DNA OF NEIL ENTWISTLE ON THAT GUN, AND IT APPEARS THAT THE KILLER TOOK THE GUN FROM THE MATTERAZZO HOME, USED IT IN THE MURDERS, AND THEN RETURNED THE GUN TO THE MATTERAZZO HOME. IF THE KILLER WAS A STRANGER, WHY ON EARTH WOULD HE RISK GOING BACK INTO THE MATTERAZZO HOME TO RETURN THE GUN. >> IT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT. THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT THAT GUN IS THE MURDER WEAPON, AND THERE ARE REALLY ONLY TWO PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS CASE WITH ACCESS TO THAT WEAPON, AND THE COMMONWEALTH HAS GONE THROUGH GREAT PAINS TO PROVE WHERE MR. MATTERAZZO WAS DURING THE TIME OF THIS ALLEGED INCIDENT, AND IT LEAVES ONLY ONE PERSON LEFT. THERE IS, HOWEVER, SOME QUESTION ABOUT OTHER PRINTS OR DNA ON THAT PARTICULAR WEAPON, AND IT IS NOT A BIG OPEN DOOR FOR THE DEFENSE, BUT THERE'S AN OPENING THERE FOR THEM TO TALK ABOUT REASONABLE DOUBT. >> BUT IF IT WAS ANOTHER KILLER, JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT PERSON WOULD THROW THE WEAPON IN A BODY OF WATER, TRY TO DISPOSE OF IT. WHY TAKE THE CHANCE OF GOING BACK INTO THE MAN'S HOME WHERE THE KILLER COULD BE APPREHENDED? I GUESS THE ARGUMENT COULD BE THAT THE DNA TESTING IS NOT RELIABLE AND MICHELLE McAFEE APPARENTLY THERE HAVE BEEN PROBLEMS WITH THE STATE CRIME LAB, RIGHT? >> THIS IS A PROBLEM-PLAGUED CRIME LAB IN MASSACHUSETTS. IN FACT, IT WAS TARGETED FOR REAL REFORM LAST YEAR, AND I CAN IMAGINE THAT THE DEFENSE IS GOING TO MAKE ISSUE OF THE CRIME AND RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF THE DNA TEST THAT SHOWS NEIL ENTWISTLE'S DNA IS ON THE .22 CALIBER GUN THAT WAS USED TO KILL THIS BABY AND THIS MOM. >> AND, MICHELLE, ANOTHER DISTURBING PART OF THE CASE WHICH THE JURORS SAW YESTERDAY WHEN THEY SAW THE BODIES OF RACHEL AND LILLIAN AND, OF COURSE WE DON'T BROADCAST THOSE PHOTOS, BUT THERE ARE BRUISES, THERE WERE BRUISES AND MUCUS ON THE BABY'S FACE. I KNOW YOU HAVE SEEN THE PICTURES. CAN YOU DESCRIBE THEM? >> WELL, IT'S HORRIFYING TO SEE ANY SORT OF MARKS ON A BABY'S FACE, AND THERE WERE BRUISES AND MUCUS AND LIKE LITTLE BLOOD SPLATTERS, AND I THINK IT'S A HAUNTING IMAGE. ONE NO ONE WILL EVER FORGET AM I'M SURE THIS IS GOING TO BE EM BLASONNED IN THE MINDS OF THE JURORS FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES. NOTHING MORE HORRIFYING THAN SEEING A SLAIN BABY WHO WAS STILL SPOONING, BEING SPOONED BY HER MOM. >> PAMELA DAVIS, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH THAT IF YOU'RE PROSECUTING THIS CASE? WILL YOU ARGUE THAT THE BABY WAS BEATEN OR STUCK BEFORE SHE WAS MURDERED? >> I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE BRUISES TO KNOW IF THEY COULD MAKE THAT ARGUMENT. THE FACT IS YOU DON'T NEED TO MAKE THAT ARGUMENT. HOW MUCH DO YOU HAVE TO HIT THE JURY OVER THE HEAD WITH THIS EVIDENCE? THERE'S SO MUCH ALREADY THERE. WHAT'S THE NECESSITY FOR GOING INTO THAT LEFT OF BRUTALITY IN TERMS OF MAKING YOUR CASE AS A PROSECUTOR. YOU HAVE EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO CONVICT THIS MAN. >> AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT BECAUSE THE BABY WAS SHOT IN THE STOMACH, SHE WOULD NOT HAVE DIED IMMEDIATELY AS RACHEL ENTWISTLE DID. PROBABLY SUFFERED FOR A COUPLE OF MINUTES BEFORE SHE DIED. WE'RE TAKING A SHORT BREAK. YOU CAN TAKE A MOMENT TO WRITE TO US AND ANSWER OUR QUESTION OF THE DAY, WHAT DOES THE STATE OF THE ENTWISTLE HOME TELL US? YOU PUT THE PUZZLE PIECES TOGETHER. LOGON TO CNN.COM/CRIME AND CLICK ON OPEN COURT OR E-MAIL US DIRECTLY AT OPENCOURT@CNN.COM. WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK. >>> WELCOME BACK. WE ARE LIVE IN THE NEIL ENTWISTLE DOUBLE MURDER CASE OUT OF HOPKINTON, MASSACHUSETTS. ON THE STAND, JOHN SOARES, THE FORENSIC SCIENTIST. HIS CROSS-EXAMINATION BY ELLIOT WEINSTEIN HAS JUST BEGUN. LET'S TAKE A LOOK. >> YOU DECIDE WHAT SHOULD BE COLLECTED AT A CRIME SCENE? >> THAT'S AN INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS BY THE ACTUAL SCIENTIST ON SCENE. >> SO WHATEVER IS COLLECTED, YOU ONLY DO IT IF YOU DECIDE TO DO IT, NOT BECAUSE IT'S A GROUP EFFORT AND A GROUP DISCUSSION? >> NO, IT'S COLLECTED EFFORT BY ALL FORENSIC SPECIALISTS. >> SO YOU WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH TEAMS WITH POLICE AND LABORATORY SCIENTISTS IN ANY GIVEN INVESTIGATION? >> YES, THAT'S ACCURATE. >> AND YOU ALSO WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH PROSECUTORS IN ANY GIVEN INVESTIGATION? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND PART OF THE REASON TO DO THAT IS SO THAT WITH THE COLLECTIVE INPUT OF THE VARIOUS PEOPLE IN AN INVESTIGATION, YOU, THE SCIENTIST, CAN IDENTIFY WHAT MIGHT NEED TO BE DONE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU MAY HAVE AN INDEPENDENT DECISION AT A CRIME SCENE TO COLLECT A PIECE OF EVIDENCE. >> YES, SIR. >> AND YOU MIGHT COLLECT A PIECE OF EVIDENCE BECAUSE A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER ASKS YOU TO? >> YES, SIR. >> YOU MIGHT ALSO COLLECT A PIECE OF EVIDENCE BECAUSE A PROSECUTOR ASKS YOU TO? >> PROSECUTORS GENERALLY AREN'T ON CRIME SCENES. >> DO YOU COLLECT A PIECE OF EVIDENCE IF A PROSECUTOR ASKS YOU TO? >> IF REQUESTED TO, YES, SIR. >> AND IF YOU'VE COLLECTED EVIDENCE FROM A CRIME SCENE, YOU MIGHT ANALYZE SOMETHING THAT YOU DECIDE SHOULD BE ANALYZED. >> YES. >> YOU MIGHT ANALYZE SOMETHING BECAUSE SOMEBODY ELSE WITHIN THE CRIME SCENE SERVICES UNIT OF THE STATE POLICE ASKS YOU TO ANALYZE. >> IF IT HAS PROBATIVE VALUE, YES. >> IF SOMEBODY ASKS YOU TO DO IT, YOU'RE GOING TO DECIDE NOT TO BECAUSE YOU DON'T THINK IT HAS PROBATIVE VALUE? >> COULD YOU REPHRASE THE QUESTION, PLEASE? >> DO YOU DECIDE WHAT HAS PROBATIVE VALUE? >> FROM A SCIENTIFIC STANDPOINT, YES I DO. >> IF AN INVESTIGATE SAYS TO YOU, MR. SOARSE, I'D LIKE YOU TO ANALYZE A PARTICULAR EVIDENCE ITEM THAT WAS COLLECTED, YOU MIGHT SAY NO. >> I WOULD MEET WITH THE INVESTIGATOR AND EXPLAIN MY POSITION FOR NOT WANTING TO EXAMINE IT. >> IF YOU WERE TOLD TO DO IT, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? >> IF I WAS TOLD BY THE INVESTIGATEDER? >> IF YOU WERE TOLD TO DO IT, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? >> I WOULD EXAMINE IT. >> IF A PROSECUTOR ASKS YOU TO ANALYZE AN ITEM THAT WAS COLLECTED AT A CRIME SCENE, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? >> I WOULD ALSO ANALYZE IT. >> YOU CERTAINLY KEEP AN OPEN MIND IN ANY INVESTIGATION. >> YES, SIR. >> YOU DON'T BEGIN AN INVESTIGATION WITH A CONCLUSION OF WHAT IT IS THAT YOU WANT YOUR RESULTS TO BE. >> NO, THAT WOULD BE BEING BIASED. >> YOU WOULDN'T BEGIN AN INVESTIGATION WANTING TO HAVE THE EVIDENCE FUNNEL IN ONE DIRECTION, WOULD YOU? >> NO, I WOULD NOT. >> YOU WOULDN'T CONDUCT YOUR LABORATORY ANALYSIS TRYING TO MAKE SOMETHING FIT AND MATCH AND INDICATE A PARTICULAR PERSON WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR A CRIME, WOULD YOU? >> NO. >> AND THAT'S BECAUSE AS A SCIENTIST, YOUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO BE OPEN-MINDED. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO BE UNBIASED. >> YES, SIR. >> YOUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO BE AS THOROUGH AS POSSIBLE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO BE AS COMPLETE AS POSSIBLE. >> YES, SIR. >> AND YOU MUST KEEP THAT STATE OF MIND AND OBJECTIVITY BECAUSE YOU KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE THAT THINGS ARE NOT ALWAYS AS THEY FIRST APPEAR TO BE. >> THAT'S POSSIBLE, YES. >> YOU WENT TO HOPKINTON, 6 CUBS PATH. >> YES, SIR. >> YOU WENT THERE AFTER A MEETING WAS HELD AT THE HOPKINTON POLICE STATION. >> YES, SIR. >> THAT MEETING WAS A TEAM DISCUSSION TO DECIDE WHAT PROCEDURES MIGHT BE FOLLOWED WHEN YOU GOT TO THE HOME. >> THAT'S PART OF THE MEETING, YES. >> TO ACQUAINT YOU IN A GENERAL WAY WITH WHAT THE POLICE OFFICERS HAD SEEN AT THE HOME. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> SO YOU WOULD KNOW IN THE GENERAL WAY WHAT YOU WOULD BE WALKING INTO. >> THAT'S FAIR TO SAY. >> AND IN JAENL WAY YOU WOULD KNOW WHAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO COLLECT AS CRIME SCENE EVIDENCE. >> NOT AT THAT MEETING, NO. WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WE HAD FOR FORENSIC EVIDENCE AT THAT POINT. >> BUT IN A GENERAL WAY WHAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO. FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNEW THERE WERE TWO BODIES. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND BLOOD. IT WAS SEEN BY LAW ENFORCEMENT. >> I WASN'T GIVEN THAT INFORMATION. I JUST KNEW THERE WERE TWO DECEDENTS IN THE HOUSE. >> WERE YOU IN CHARGE THAT NIGHT OF ANY PARTICULAR ASPECT OF THE ACTIVITY AT 6 CUBS PATH? >> YES, I WAS. >> AND SPECIFICALLY WHAT WAS YOUR AREA THAT YOU SAY YOU WERE IN CHARGE OF? >> DIAGRAMMING, DOCUMENTING THE SCENE, IDENTIFICATION, AND RECOVERY OF BIOLOGICAL OR TRACE MATERIALS. >> DID YOU TAKE CONTEMPORANEOUS NOTES OF THE THINGS YOU WERE DOING AT THE HOME? >> YES, SIR. >> AND ONE OF YOUR COLLEAGUES, MISS DIGEN, ALSO WAS TAKING NOTES OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT SHE WAS DOING? >> YES, SHE WAS. >> WAS SHE ALSO RECORDING SOME OF THE ACTIVITY THAT YOU WERE DOING? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU IN TURN RECORDING SOME OF THE ACTIVITY THAT SHE WAS DOING? >> SHE HANDLED THE BULK OF THE DOCUMENTATION, BUT, YES, THAT'S FAIR TO SAY. >> MORE OR LESS, YOU WERE WORKING AS A PARTNERSHIP OR A TEAM, THE TWO OF YOU? >> YES, SIR. >> IN TERMS OF THE COLLECTION OF CRIME SCENE EVIDENCE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND TOGETHER YOU MADE DECISIONS, DID YOU NOT, ABOUT WHAT IT WAS THAT YOU MIGHT IN THE FIRST INSTANCE ANALYZE AT THE HOME. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND SOME OF THE ANALYSIS YOU ACTUALLY DID YOURSELF. >> YES, SIR. >> FOR EXAMPLE, SOME OF THE PRESUMPTIVE TESTS THAT YOU TOLD US ABOUT EARLIER. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND WERE THERE ANALYSIS ON THE SPOT OR PRESUMPTIVE TESTING THAT YOU OBSERVED OR WATCHED MISS DIGEN DO? >> YES, SIR. >> AND THAT WAS GOOD TECHNIQUE FOR EACH OF YOU TO BE TOGETHER DURING THIS EFFORT? >> YES, SIR. >> SO THAT ONE MIGHT NOT OVERLOOK SOMETHING. >> YES, SIR. >> TO BE CERTAIN THAT EACH AND THE OTHER OF YOU FOLLOWED PROCEDURES IN THE WAY THAT THEY SHOULD BE FOLLOWED. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THERE WERE ANY NUMBER OR ACTUALLY A VERY SPECIFIC NUMBER OF ITEMS THAT YOU ACTUALLY COLLECTED FROM 6 CUBS PATH, CORRECT? >> YES. >> DO YOU HAVE, WITHOUT LOOKING THROUGH YOUR REPORTS, A KNOWLEDGE RIGHT NOW OF HOW MANY ITEMS IN TOTAL YOU COLLECTED OUT OF THAT HOME? >> I DON'T THINK I GAVE A SPECIFIC NUMBER. I BELIEVE IT WAS 11. >> RIGHT NOW YOU THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE COLLECTED A TOTAL OF 11 ITEMS INSIDE -- FROM INSIDE THAT HOME? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> WHO WAS THE FIRST ONE, IF YOU NOW REMEMBER, THAT WENT INTO THAT MASTER BEDROOM? >> WHEN I ARRIVED? >> YES. >> I BELIEVE IT WAS A MEMBER OF THE CRIME SCENE SERVICES SECTION. >> AND DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE HAD BEEN INTO THE MASTER BEDROOM FROM THE TIME THAT OFFICERS SUTTON AND VAN RALTON FROM THE HOPKINTON POLICE FOUND THERE WERE TWO BODIES IN THAT BEDROOM? >> NO, I DO NOT. >> DO YOU KNOW AT ALL WHETHER OR NOT STATE POLICE OFFICERS HAD ENTERED THAT HOME BEFORE YOU DID? >> NO, I DO NOT. >> DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY STATE POLICE OFFICERS WERE PRESENT AT THE HOME WHEN YOU GOT THERE? >> NO, I DO NOT. >> THERE WERE PEOPLE THERE WHEN YOU GOT THERE? >> YES, SIR. >> IS IT CORRECT THAT YOU HAVE NO DIRECT KNOWLEDGE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT ANYBODY WAS IN THE MASTER BEDROOM OTHER THAN SUTTON AND VAN ROLLTON WHEN YOU GOT THERE? >> I DO NOT KNOW. >> AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ANY OF THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS HAD MOVED IN ANY WAY THAT BED. >> NO, I DO NOT. >> AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ANYBODY HAD POSITIONED OR MOVED IN ANY WAY THE COVERINGS ON THE BED. >> COULD YOU REPEAT THE QUESTION, PLEASE? >> THE QUILT OR THE MATTRESS COVER, YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ANYBODY HAD REPOSITIONED THAT BEFORE YOU GOT TO THE HOME. >> NO, I DO NOT. >> YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT ANYBODY FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT HAD ACTUALLY TOUCHED THE BODIES BEFORE YOU GOT THERE. >> NO, I DO NOT. >> WHAT YOU WERE ABLE TO DESCRIBE FOR US THEN WAS THE POSITION OF ITEMS AND THE POSITION OF THE BODIES ONLY AS OF THE POINT IN TIME WHEN YOU GOT THERE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THE FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS THAT MISS RITCHIE SUPERVISED, THAT TOOK PLACE BEFORE YOU DID YOUR WORK? >> WHICH AREA ARE YOU REFERRING TO? >> MASTER BEDROOM. >> I BELIEVE IT WAS AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE WORK THAT I PERFORMED. >> SO YOU WERE IN THE MASTER BEDROOM, AND YOU WERE WORKING IN THE ROOM CLECCING ITEMS OR LOOKING AT ITEMS BEFORE ANY OF THE FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU WERE CAREFUL THEN NOT TO TOUCH ANYTHING. >> WE WERE ALL GLOVED. >> DID YOU HEAR MY QUESTION. >> YES, YOU ASKED -- >> MY QUESTION WAS YOU WERE CAREFUL NOT TO TOUCH ANYTHING. WAS THAT WHAT I ASKED YOU? >> YES. >> AND YOU ANSWERED THAT BY SAYING YOU WERE GLOVED. >> YES, SIR. >> BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT I ASKED YOU, WAS IT? >> NO, NOT SPECIFICALLY. YES, I WAS CAREFUL. >> HOW LONG DID YOU DO YOUR WORK BEFORE MISS RITCHIE BEGAN THE FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS OR EXAMINATION? >> SEVERAL HOURS. >> SEVERAL HOURS. AND YOU PHOTOGRAPHED THE EVENTS THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED IN YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY, CORRECT? >> MEMBERS OF THE CRIME SCENE SERVICES SECTION WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PHOTOGRAPHY. >> SO YOU WERE CAREFUL THERE NOT TO SAY YOU WERE THE PERSON CLICKING THE CAMERA ITSELF, BUT SOMEBODY WAS DOING IT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S A DIFFERENT UNIT. >> AND THAT ALL WAS GOING ON BEFORE MISS RITCHIE DID HER WORK. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU WERE VERY CONCERNED TO LEARN EVERYTHING YOU COULD FROM THE CRIME SCENE? >> YES. >> INDEED, THAT'S THE VALUE THAT YOU PROVIDE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT, ISN'T IT? >> YES, SIR. >> YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE BIOLOGICAL CRIME SCENE EVIDENCE AND ANALYZE IT. >> YES. >> AND FROM THAT ANALYSIS PERHAPS HELP TO DETERMINE WHETHER SOMETHING DID OR DID NOT HAPPEN. >> YES, SIR. >> YOU ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO COLLECT OTHER ITEMS, WHETHER IT'S BIOLOGICAL CRIME SCENE EVIDENCE OR NOT, AND DO ANALYSIS. >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> ALSO TO DETERMINE WHETHER SOMETHING DID OR DID NOT HAPPEN. >> YES. >> ONE OF THE THINGS YOU DISCUSSED WITH US IN YOUR DIRECT QUESTIONING WITH THE PROSECUTION WAS SOME PRESUMPTIVE TESTING ON STAINS. >> YES. >> TO DETERMINE IN THE FIRST INSTANCE WHETHER OR NOT THOSE STAINS WERE BLOOD. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND AS WE GO TO BREAK, WE WANT TO UPDATE YOU ON TODAY'S 13th INJURE HE QUESTION. WILL ENTWISTLE'S BEHAVIOR IN COURT AFFECT THE JURY. SO FAR 56% OF YOU SAY YES. 44% OF YOU VOTING NO. TO VOTE LOGON TO CNN.COM/CRIME AND CLICK ON 13th JUROR. STAY WITH US. >>> WELCOME BACK. WE ARE LIVE IN THAT MASSACHUSETTS COURTROOM. ON THE STAND, JOHN SOARES, A FORENSIC SCIENTIST BEING CROSS-EXAMINED BY DEFENSE COUNSEL ABOUT THE WORK HE DID AT THE CRIME SCENE. LET'S LISTEN. >> THERE ARE ALSO CHEMICALS THAT YOU CAN USE. >> YES. >> SWAB AREAS TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS BLOOD. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> DID YOU USE ANY OF THE SPECIALIZED LIGHTING SYSTEMS INSIDE THE BATHROOM OF THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> NO, I DID NOT. >> DID YOU SEE MISS DIGEN USE ANY OF THE SPECIALIZED LIGHTING SYSTEMS? >> NO, SHE DID NOT. >> DID YOU USE OR DID YOU SEE MISS DIGEN USE ANY OF THE CHEMICALS TO SWAB OR GO OVER AREAS IN THAT MASTER BEDROOM? >> IN THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> IN THE MAST ARE BATHROOM? >> JUST THE TOWEL. NOT ON THE OTHER AREAS. >> SO YOU JUST DIDN'T TEST THE SINK, FOR EXAMPLE, TO SEE WHETHER THERE WAS ANY BLOOD PRESENT ON IT. >> NO. >> AND YOU DIDN'T TEST THE FAUCETS TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY BLOOD PRESENT ON THEM. >> NO. >> AND YOU DIDN'T TEST THE TOILET AT ALL TO SEE IF THERE WAS BLOOD PRESENT ON THEM. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU DIDN'T TEST THE FLUSH HANDLE AT ALL, DID YOU? >> NO, SIR. >> OR THE DOORS. >> NO. >> OR THE FLOOR. >> NO. >> THERE'S AN ITEM IN THE PLUMBING OF THE SINK THAT'S CALLED THE TRAP, RIGHT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU'RE FAMILIAR, AREN'T YOU, FROM YOUR WORK THAT ITEMS OF EVIDENTIARY SIGNIFICANCE MAY BE DEPOSITED IN THE TRAP OF A SINK. >> THAT'S POSSIBLE. >> AND IN YOUR WORK, YOU FOUND THAT, HAVEN'T YOU? >> NOT ME PERSONALLY, BUT THAT IS AN AREA OF INTEREST. >> AND YOU KNOW -- AND YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT, BUT YOU KNOW THAT YOUR COLLEAGUES HAVE FOUND ITEMS OF EVIDENTIARY SIGNIFICANCE IN THE TRAPS. >> YES. >> YOUR EFFORT WAS TO BE THOROUGH AND COMPLETE WHILE YOU'RE INSIDE THE HOME IN HOPKINTON. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> BUT YOU DIDN'T SEARCH FOR ANYTHING THAT MIGHT BE OF SIGNIFICANCE IN THAT TRAP OF THE SINK. >> NOT THE TRAP, NO. >> OR LOOK FOR NONVISIBLE BLOODSTAINING ANYWHERE IN THE BATHROOM ITSELF. >> NO, I DID NOT. >> OR MISS DIGEN OTHER THAN THIS TOWEL. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND THAT WAS NOT INVISIBLE BLOOD BECAUSE YOU COULD SEE THE STAINING. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> WEREN'T AS THOROUGH AND COMPLETE AS YOU MIGHT HAVE BEEN, WERE YOU? >> I DISAGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT. >> WELL, YOU DISAGREE BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T DO IT, RIGHT? >> NO, I DISAGREE -- >> AND YOU DISAGREE BECAUSE YOU THINK THAT IT'S NOT IMPORTANT TO LOOK FOR ITEMS THAT YOU CAN'T SEE WITH THE NAKED EYE. >> OBJECTION. >> THAT WASN'T MY STATEMENT. >> EXCUSE ME. THE WITNESS MAY ANSWER THE QUESTION, NOT JUST YES OR NO. HE MAY ANSWER THE QUESTION. >> YOUR ANSWER WAS THAT'S NOT YOUR STATEMENT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> SO YOU MADE A DECISION, A CONSCIOUS DECISION, NOT TO SEARCH FOR INVISIBLE BLOOD. >> THAT'S CORRECT. IF IT HAD BEEN THERE, YOU COULD HAVE DETECTED IT. >> YES. >> AND IF YOU COULD DETECT IT, YOU COULD HAVE ANALYZED IT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND SOMEBODY COULD HAVE ANALYZED WHAT THE BLOOD TYPE WAS. >> YES, SIR. >> AND PERHAPS MATCHED THAT WITH A PERSON. >> YES. >> OR PERHAPS TOLD US SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT A PERSON DID OR DID NOT DO IN THE HOME. >> IF PRESENT, YES. >> YOU DIDN'T DO IT. >> NO, I DID NOT. >> AND YOU HAVE A REASON NOW WHY YOU DIDN'T DO IT. >> I HAD REASON THEN -- >> DO YOU HAVE A REASON NOW WHY YOU DIDN'T DO IT. >> I MADE A REASON THEN NOT -- >> YOU MADE THE DECISION NOT TO SEARCH FOR THE UNKNOWN. >> NO, I MADE A DECISION NOT TO SEARCH FOR NONVISIBLE BLOOD WHEN THERE WAS READILY VISIBLE BLOOD WITHIN THE HOUSE AND ON THE BODIES OF THE TWO DECEDENTS. >> YOU HAVE NO IDEA AS YOU SIT HERE TODAY WHETHER THERE WAS NONVISIBLE BLOOD IN THE MASTER BEDROOM. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU DO NOT DISPUTE THAT IF IT WAS THERE, IT MIGHT HAVE TOLD YOU SOMETHING. >> NO, I DO NOT DISPUTE THAT. >> AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT MIGHT HAVE TOLD YOU. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND NO IDEA WHOSE BLOOD IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN, IF IT WERE THERE. >> CORRECT. >> YOU DID SOME KIND OF TESTING WITH PAPER WITH RESPECT TO THE BED, DIDN'T YOU? >> YES, SIR. >> AND THAT TESTING HAS A BRAND NAME OR LABEL CALLED GREISE. >> THAT WAS A LABORATORY ANALYSIS PERFORMED BY CHEMIST DIGEN. >> WERE YOU INVOLVED AT ALL IN THE GREISE TEST PAPER COLLECTION PROCESS INSIDE OF THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> THAT WAS NOT PERFORMED INSIDE THE MASTER BEDROOM. >> WERE YOU INVOLVED IN THE COLLECTION OF ANYTHING ON GREISE TEST PAPER IN THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> NO, SIR. >> WAS THERE ANYTHING COLLECTED BY THE METHODOLOGY OF TEST PAPER IN THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> GREISE PAPER OR -- >> TEST PAPER. >> I'M SORRY? >> OF ANY TEST PAPER TYPES. >> WE USED FILTER PAPER, YES. >> AND FILTER PAPER WAS FOR THE PRESUMPTIVE TESTING OF THE BLOOD. >> YES, SIR. >> AND DID YOU USE ANY OTHER PAPER METHODS FOR EVIDENCE, ANALYSIS INSIDE THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> NO, SIR, WE DID NOT. >> DID YOU USE ANY PAPER METHOD OR SYSTEM FOR EVIDENCE COLLECTION INSIDE THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> YES. WE USED BROWN PAPER BAGS FOR ALL EVIDENCE THAT WAS COLLECTED. >> SO THAT WAS TO STORE THE ITEMS THAT YOU WANTED TO TAKE OUT OF THE MASTER BEDROOM. >> YES, SIR. >> I'M NOW ASKING YOU A DIFFERENT QUESTION. DID YOU USE ANY TEST PAPERS TO COLLECT AN EVIDENTIARY ITEM FROM WITHIN THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> CHEMIST DIGE NE. ALSO PERFORMED A CONFIRMATORY TEST USING THAT TEST PAPER FOR LEAD. >> AND THAT WAS ON WHAT ITEM? >> THAT WAS ON THE PAJAMAS, I BELIEVE. >>> WELCOME BACK. WE ARE LIVE ON THE STAND. A FORENSIC SCIENTIST WHO EXAMINED THE CRIME SCENE BEING CROSS-EXAMINED ABOUT HIS TECHNIQUES BY DEFENSE ATTORNEY ELLIOT WEINSTEIN. LET'S LISTEN. >> AND THAT'S WHEN YOU SAW FOR THE FIRST TIME THE WHITE BMW? >> YES, SIR. >> AND YOU AGAIN WERE PART OF A TEAM, WERE YOU NOT? >> YES, I WAS. >> WERE YOU THE ONLY PERSON FROM THE LABORATORY, THE ONLY CIVILIAN INVOLVED IN GOING OVER THE BMW WHEN IT WAS AT LOGAN AIRPORT? >> YES, I WAS. >> YOU HAD NO IDEA WHAT YOU MIGHT FIND IN THE BMW. >> NO, I DID NOT. >> YOU WERE CERTAINLY NOW LOOKING TO SEE IF YOU COULD FIND ANYTHING THAT WAS OF EVIDENTIARY IMPORTANCE IN THE INVESTIGATION. >> YES, SIR. >> THERE WERE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WITH YOU OR PRESENT WHEN YOU GOT THERE. >> YES, THERE WAS. >> STATE POLICE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND THE HOPKINTON POLICE? >> I DON'T RECALL IF THERE WERE ANY HOPKINTON OFFICERS. >> AND WHETHER OR NOT THERE WERE ANY OTHER PROSECUTORS PRESENT THAT PARTICULAR TIME AT LOGAN? >> I DON'T RECALL ANY PROSECUTORS THERE, NO. >> YOUR MISSION WAS TO LEARN WHAT YOU COULD OR MIGHT BE ABLE TO LEARN BY GOING THROUGH THE BMW. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> CERTAINLY YOU WERE INTERESTED TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS ANY INDICATION OF BLOODSTAINING IN THE BMW. >> YES. >> AND THAT WAS A NO-BRAINER FOR YOU IN TERMS OF WHAT TO LOOK FOR. >> YES, SIR. >> PROBABLY ITEM ONE IN WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING TO SEE. >> THAT'S FAIR TO SAY. >> AND YOU WERE THOROUGH IN YOUR WORK AT LOGAN THAT DAY. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU EXAMINED EACH COMPARTMENT OF THE BMW. >> YES, I DID. >> DID YOU EXAMINE IT FIRST VISUALLY, THE SAME PROCESS THAT YOU DESCRIBED FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DID AT THE HOME IN HOPKINTON? >> YES, I DID. >> SO FIRST YOU LOOKED AT EVERYTHING. NEXT IT WAS PHOTOGRAPHED, THE VEHICLE WAS PHOTOGRAPHED? >> THE VEHICLE WAS PHOTOGRAPHED FIRST BEFORE I EXAMINED IT. >> BEFORE YOU DID ANYTHING, YOU MADE SURE THAT -- WAS IT YOU TAKING THE PICTURES OR SOMEONE ELSE? >> SOMEONE ELSE. >> ONE OF THE STATE POLICE PHOTOGRAPHERS? >> YES, SIR. >> SO THE BMW IS PHOTOGRAPHED, AND NOW YOU GO INTO IT AND START YOUR VISUAL EXAMINATION. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU'RE LOOKING FOR BLOODSTAINS. >> YES. >> IF YOU WERE WRITING A REPORT AND YOU SAW SOMETHING, YOU MIGHT CALL IT A DARK BROWN STAIN THAT YOU THEN TEST, AND IF IT COMES UP POSITIVE, IT'S BLOOD. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU LOOK CAREFULLY. >> YES, SIR. >> YOU LOOKED AT THE STEERING WHEEL. >> I DID. >> DID YOU SEE ANY INDICATION OF BLOODSTAINING ON THE STEERING WHEEL? >> NO, I DID NOT. >> BUT THEN THERE WAS THE QUESTION IN YOUR MIND OF NONVISIBLE BLOOD. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> BLOODSTAINING THAT YOU COULDN'T SEE BUT MIGHT STILL BE THERE. >> YES, SIR. >> AND DID YOU USE ANY OF THE SPECIALIZED LIGHTING TO DETECT THE PRESENCE OF NONVISIBLE BLOOD ON THE STEERING WHEEL? >> NO, I DID NOT. >> DID YOU USE ANY OF THE CHEMICAL TESTING? >> YES, I DID. >> DID YOU GET A POSITIVE RESULT WHEN YOU TESTED FOR NONVISIBLE BLOOD OR THAT STEERING WHEEL? >> NO, I DID NOT. >> AND THAT MEANS THERE WAS NOTHING TO INDICATE TO YOU, THE SCIENTIST, THAT THERE WAS BLOODSTAINING ON THE STEERING WHEEL OF THE BMW. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU SEARCHED CAREFULLY AND EXAMINED THE SEAT, THE DRIVER'S SEAT OF THE BMW. >> YES. >> DID YOU SEE WITH YOUR OWN EYES, YOUR NAKED EYES, ANYTHING TO SUGGEST TO YOU THAT THERE WAS BLOODSTAIN ON THE SEAT? THE DRIVER'S SEAT? >> NO, I DID NOT. >> BUT THAT WOULDN'T COMPLETELY END THE INQUIRY, DID IT? >> I'M SORRY? >> THAT DIDN'T COMPLETE YOUR INQUIRY. YOU WERE LOOKING FOR NONVISIBLE BLOOD AS WELL. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU TESTED THE DRIVER'S SEAT. >> YES, SIR. >> AND THE RESULTS WERE NEGATIVE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> MEANING THERE WAS NOTHING TO INDICATE TO YOU THAT THERE WAS ANY BLOODSTAINING ON THE DRIVER'S SEAT OF THE BMW. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU EXAMINED THE DRIVER'S DOOR ON THE INTERIOR SIDE. >> YES, I DID. >> SAME INQUIRIES WERE IN YOUR MIND, WEREN'T THEY? >> YES. >> YOU LOOKED TO SEE IF YOU SAW ANY STAINING. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU DIDN'T. >> NO. >> YOU CHECKED FOR THE PRESENCE OF NONVISIBLE BLOOD, THE KIND THAT YOU CAN'T SEE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> DIDN'T FIND ANY. >> NO, I DID NOT. >> NOTHING TO INDICATE ANY BLOODSTAINING ON THE DRIVER'S DOOR OF THE BMW. >> NO. >> YOU CHECKED THE SIDE BETWEEN WHERE THE DRIVER'S SEAT IS WHERE THE SEAT ADJUSTMENTS ARE, AREN'T YOU? >> YES. >> BECAUSE WHEN YOU FOUND THE SEAT, IT WASN'T IN A FULLY UPRIGHT POSITION. NO, IT WAS NOT. >> CERTAINLY SUGGESTED TO YOU THAT IF SOMEBODY DROVE IN IN AN ORDINARY DRIVER'S POSITION AND MOVED THE SEAT BACK, THERE WAS A PRETTY STRONG LIKELIHOOD SOMEBODY HAD TOUCHED ONE OF THOSE SEAT POSITIONING BUTTONS. >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND SO YOU EXAMINED THOSE BUTTONS. >> I DID. >> YOU LOOKED TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY STAINING. >> YES, I DID. >> DIDN'T SEE ANY. >> NO. >> THEN YOU WENT TO THE NEXT STEP TO SEE IF YOU COULD DETECT NONVISIBLE BLOOD. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> DIDN'T FIND ANY. >> NO. >> NOTHING TO INDICATE THAT THERE WAS ANY BLOODSTAINING ON THE LEVERS OF THE SEAT ADJUSTMENT SWITCHES OF THAT BMW. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU CONTINUE WITH YOUR EFFORTS, AND YOU LOOKED IN THE CONSOLE THAT'S NEXT TO THE DRIVER'S SEAT. >> YES, I DID. >> THERE WERE ITEMS THERE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> SOME OF THEM THAT WERE COLLECTED AND PRODUCED HERE IN THE COURTROOM, WATER BOTTLES. >> YES, SIR. >> YOU EXAMINED THOSE FOR BLOODSTAINING. >> NO, I DID NOT. >> HAVE THEY EVER BEEN EXAMINED FOR BLOODSTAINING? >> NO. >> THE CONSOLE ITSELF, DID YOU SEE ANY BLOODSTAINING ON THE CONSOLE? >> NO. >> BOTH METHODS, VISUAL AND NONVISIBLE METHOD, NO BLOODSTAINING. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> NOTHING TO INDICATE ANY BLOOD ON THE CONSOLE. >> NO. >> BMW A SHIFT OR AN AUTOMATIC. >> I DON'T RECALL SPECIFICALLY. >> WELL, THE LEVER IS IN THE MIDDLE BETWEEN THE DRIVER'S SEAT AND THE PASSENGER'S SEAT, ISN'T IT? >> YES, IT WAS. >> AND THAT'S THE THING THAT SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO TOUCH OR HOLD TO MOVE THE CAR FROM PARK TO DRIVE, REVERSE AND SO ON. >> YES, SIR. >> SO THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WERE VERY CAREFUL TO LOOK AT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> SEE IF THERE WAS ANY BLOODSTAINING. >> YES. >> BOTH METHODS. >> BOTH. >> NEGATIVE TO BOTH. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> NOTHING TO INDICATE ANY BLOODSTAINING ON THE SELECTOR, GEAR SELECTOR SHIFTS OF THAT BMW. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU CONTINUED THAT PROCESS THROUGH SECTIONS AND SECTIONS OF THE BMW, DIDN'T YOU? >> YES, I DID. >> THE PASSENGER SIDE. >> YES. >> THE BACKSEAT PASSENGER SIDE. >> YES. >> THE BACKSEAT BEHIND THE DRIVER. >> YES. >> THE DOORS ON THE RIGHT SIDE, THE PASSENGER SIDE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THE DOORS IN THE BACK, THE PASSENGER SIDE. >> THAT'S ALSO CORRECT. >> AS WELL AS THE DOOR ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE IN THE REAR. >> YES, SIR. >> AND IN EACH OF THOSE AREAS YOU WERE LOOKING TO SEE IF YOU COULD FIND BLOODSTAINING. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> YOU WERE LOOKING TO SEE IF YOU SAW IT WITH YOUR OWN EYES. >> YES, SIR. >> WHAT YOU COULD SEE WITH NONVISIBLE BLOOD, ANY OF THE SPECIALIZED TESTING. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND IN EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE IT CAME UP NO BLOOD. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU CONTINUE THAT EXAMINATION FOR BLOOD IN THE CARGO COMPARTMENT OR THE TRUNK OF THE SUV. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND, AGAIN, THE RESULTS WERE NO EVIDENCE OR INDICATION OF BLOODSTAINING ANYWHERE IN THAT BMW. >> THAT'S ALSO CORRECT. >> YOU COULD ALSO CHECK THE OUTSIDE OF THE CAR, THE DRIVER'S DOOR HANDLE. >> YES, I DID. >> PASSENGER DOOR HANDLE. >> YES. >> THE HATCH HANDLE. >> YES. >> AND IN EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE, YOU SAW NOTHING WITH YOUR OWN EYES TO SUGGEST BLOODSTAINING. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND NOTHING BY THE NONVISIBLE TEST MECHANISMS TO INDICATE THERE WAS BLOOD. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT CAR SHOWED NOTHING BY WAY OF BLOODSTAINING ANYWHERE. >> THAT'S CORRECT AS WELL. >> AND YOU WERE LOOKING AS CAREFULLY AS YOU KNEW HOW TO DO FOR THAT EVIDENCE, WEREN'T YOU? >> YES, I WAS. >> YOU ALSO DID SOME OTHER TESTING LOOKING FOR GUNSHOT RESIDUE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU DID THAT WHILE YOU WERE AT LOGAN. >> YES, SIR, I DID. >> AND TELL US HOW MANY AREAS BY NUMBER FIRST YOU EXAMINED FOR THE PRESENCE OF GUNSHOT RESIDUE ON OR IN THAT BMW WHEN YOU WERE AT LOGAN AIRPORT. >> ONE AREA. >> WHICH AREA? >> THE STEERING WHEEL. >> YOU DIDN'T CHECK FOR GUNSHOT RESIDUE ON ANY OTHER AREA THAN THE STEERING WHEEL? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THAT WAS YOUR DECISION. >> YES, IT WAS. >> AND YOU COLLECTED ANYTHING? >> I'M SORRY? >> DID YOU COLLECT SOMETHING? >> YES. I COLLECTED STUBS FROM THE STEERING WHEEL. >> AND THE ANALYSIS, WHATEVER IT MIGHT HAVE PROVED OR SHOWN WAS LATER ON. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> BUT YOU JUST SELECTED STUBS. NOW, STUBS IS PART OF THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE COLLECTION KIT. >> YES, SIR. >> A LITTLE THING WITH SOMETHING STICKY ON T YOU TOUCH IT TO THE OBJECT YOU'RE EXAMINING AND IF THERE'S RESIDUE OF SOME KIND IT MIGHT ADHERE OR STICK TO THE STUB. >> YES, SIR. >> AND YOU PUT IT IN THE PACKAGING AND TAKE IT BACK TO THE LABORATORY AND YOU OR SOMEBODY ELSE DOES THE ANALYSIS. >> ANOTHER UNIT, YES, SIR. >> YOU SAID ANOTHER UNIT. IN YOUR LABORATORY CRIME SCENE CRIME SERVICES UNIT OF THE STATE POLICE, THERE ARE SEVERAL SECTIONS OR DIVISIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY. >> YES, THERE ARE. >> YOU'RE PART OF EVIDENCE COLLECTION? >> YES, SIR. >> THERE'S UNITS, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S BALLISTICS? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> WE KNOW FINGERPRINTS. >> YES, SIR. >> TRACE EVIDENCE, WHICH MIGHT BE HAIR OR FIBERS? >> YES, SIR. >> I MAY NOT HIT THEM ALL, BUT THERE'S DNA? >> YES, SIR. >> AND THEN THERE'S ARSON? >> YES, SIR. >> AND FOR REASONS OF THE DIVISION OR RESPONSIBILITY IN THE LAB, THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE EVIDENCE WAS SENT TO THE ARSON UNIT? >> YES, IT WAS. >> AND WHATEVER MIGHT HAVE BEEN DONE WITH THE STUBS THAT YOU COLLECTED FROM THE BMW, THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED BY SOMEBODY WITHIN THE ARSON UNIT. >> YES. >> AND THAT'S THE NORMAL PROCESS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE. >> YES, IT IS. >> AND THAT ALSO APPLIED TO ANYTHING GUNSHOT RESIDUE THAT YOU HAVE DISCUSSED THAT YOU COLLECTED FROM THE MASTER BEDROOM. >> IT'S ONLY SPECIFIC TO PRIMER RESIDUES FOR THE COLLECTION KIT YOU JUST DESCRIBED. >> WAS THERE A COLLECTION KIT FROM INSIDE THE MASTER BEDROOM? >> YES, SIR. >> AND THAT WENT OVER TO THE ARSON UNIT AS WELL. >> YES, IT DID. >> ALL RIGHT. DID YOU ASK TO HAVE THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE THAT YOU COLLECTED FROM THE BMW TESTED IN A RUSH? >> YES. >> AND THAT'S A SPECIAL REQUEST. >> IT IS. >> AND THAT'S A SPECIAL REQUEST BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING THAT SUGGESTED THE COLLECTION OF THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE SUGGESTED TO YOU IT MIGHT BE VERY IMPORTANT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND IT SUGGESTED TO YOU THAT GETTING THE RESULTS WERE VERY IMPORTANT. >> YES, SIR. >> AND IN ORDER TO GET VERY IMPORTANT RESULTS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, THERE'S AN INDICATOR THAT YOU USE, AND THAT'S A REQUEST FOR RUSH TESTING. >> YES. >> AND THAT, INDEED, HAPPENED WITH RESPECT TO THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE COLLECTED OFF THE STEERING WHEEL. >> YES, IT DID. >> AND YOU INITIATED THAT RUSH REQUEST? >> YES, I DID. >> DID YOU CONSULT WITH ANYBODY BEFORE YOU MADE THAT REQUEST? >> I CONSULTED WITH THE CASE OFFICER. >> AND IT MADE SENSE TO THE TEAM THAT WAS WORKING THIS TO GET THAT RESULT JUST AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. >> YES, SIR. >> BECAUSE THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE MIGHT TELL YOU SOMETHING THAT WAS SIGNIFICANT. >> YES, IT WOULD. >> ON THE 27th OF JANUARY, YOU HAD SOME FURTHER WORK IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CASE, DID YOU NOT? >> THE 27th OF JANUARY? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. >> ON THE 27th OF JANUARY, WERE YOU CONTACTED BY MR. DRUGAN? >> I DON'T RECALL. >> DO YOU HAVE NOTES OF ALL OF YOUR ACTIVITY IN CONNECTION WITH THIS MATTER? >> NOT IN TERMS OF PHONE CONVERSATIONS. >> THE ACTIVITY THAT YOU AND OTHERS DO IN CONNECTION WITH ANY MATTER ARE FAIRLY CAREFULLY RECORDED, AREN'T THEY? >> YES, THEY ARE. >> YOU TAKE NOTES IN THE FIELD WHEN YOU'RE DOING AN EXAMINATION OF A CRIME SCENE? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU TAKE NOTES WHEN YOU'RE GOING AND EXAMINING AN ITEM OF SIGNIFICANCE AS WE DISCUSSED WITH THE BMW? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND IN SOME SITUATIONS YOU WRITE A CRIME SCENE REPORT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> EVIDENCE COLLECTION REPORT? >> YES, SIR. >> AND YOU DID THAT IN THIS CASE? >> YES, SIR, I DID. >> AND THERE'S ALSO A CHRONOLOGY OF SORTS THAT IS MAINTAINED IN THE LABORATORY CALLED THE CASE LOG? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND THE CASE LOG MEMORIALIZES SOME, IF NOT ALL, OF THE ACTIVITY IN CONNECTION WITH ANY INVESTIGATION? >> YES, IT DOES. >> NOW, YOU SAID THAT YOU DON'T RECALL THAT YOU SPOKE WITH MR. SOARES ON THE 27th OF JANUARY, 2006. >> DID YOU MEAN SOARES? >> YOU KNOW -- YOU DON'T RECALL -- >> I DON'T RECALL THAT CONVERSATION. YOU DON'T TALK TO YOURSELF? I TALK TO MYSELF ALL THE TIME. MR. DRUGAN. >> I DID NOT. >> JUST REVIEW WHAT I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED TO YOURSELF. HAVING LOOKED AT THE CASE LOG, DOES THAT HELP YOU TO REMEMBER CONTACT WITH MR. DRUGAN ON 27 JANUARY? >> YES, SIR. >> AND THAT WAS A CONTACT THAT HAD TO DO WITH THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE ANALYSIS FROM THE COLLECTION OF GUNSHOT RESIDUE OFF OF RACHEL ENTWISTLE'S HANDS? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND IT ALSO HAD TO DO WITH THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE ANALYSIS IN CONNECTION WITH WHAT YOU COLLECTED FROM THE BMW STEERING WHEEL? >> YES, IT DOES. >> AND THAT'S WHEN THE FORMAL REQUEST FOR THE RUSH WAS ACTUALLY TRANSMITTED? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE THAT WAS ALSO PART OF THAT STEP IN THIS INVESTIGATION, WASN'T THERE? >> YES, THERE WAS. >> AND THAT WOULD BE THE CONTACT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE WITH THE PROSECUTOR. >> YES. >>> WE ASKED YOU TODAY IN OUR QUESTION OF THE DAY WHAT DOES THE STATE OF THE ENTWISTLE HOME TELL US? OUR ANSWER COMES FROM MOLLY IN GORGE GEORGETOWN, OHIO. SHE WRITES THE STATE OF THE HOME TELLS US NEIL ENTWISTLE COMMITTED THIS CRIME WHILE RACHEL AND LILLIAN WERE IN THE MIDST OF THEIR NORMAL FAMILY ROUTINE. THERE ARE NO SIGNS OF INTRUDERS FROM FORCED ENTRY, NOTHING RANSACKED OR MISSING FROM A ROBBERY, OR ANYTHING OUT OF THE ORDINARY. BATH WATER WAS READY AND THE TWO VICTIMS WERE IN THEIR PAJAMAS. THANKS FOR THAT ANSWER, MOLLY, AND VERY CAREFUL FOLLOWING OF THIS TRIAL, I MUST SAY. LET'S GO BACK AND LISTEN IN LIVE AS THE FORENSIC SCIENTIST CONTINUES ON HIS CROSS-EXAMINATION. >> THOUGHT THE TEST MIGHT PRODUCE A RESULT. >> YES, I DID. >> AND THE RESULT MIGHT BE OF SIGNIFICANCE TO THE INVESTIGATION? YOU MADE A DECISION NOT TO TEST THE KEYS WHEN YOU WERE AT LOGAN AIRPORT. >> YES. >> AND YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHETHER THE TEST WOULD OR WOULD NOT PRODUCE A RESULT THAT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT TO THE INVESTIGATION. >> I DID NOT. >> AND NOW IS THIS THE OPEN-MINDED APPROACH TO INVESTIGATION THAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO BRING? >> OBJECTION. >> SUSTAINED. >> SOMEBODY ELSE WANTED THE BMW KEYS TESTED FOR GSR, DIDN'T THEY? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND YOU WERE TOLD ABOUT THAT WHEN YOU GOT -- BEFORE YOU GOT TO HOPKINTON ON THE 9th OR 10th OF FEBRUARY. >> YES, I WAS. >> AND, IN FACT, TROOPER BANKS SAID DO THIS TEST. >> YES, HE DID. >> AND DO THE COLLECTION. >> YES, HE DID. >> BECAUSE IT MIGHT PRODUCE SOMETHING THAT'S SIGNIFICANT. >> YES. >> SO YOU DID THE TEST. >> YES. >> THE COLLECTION. SOMEONE ELSE DID THE TEST. YOU DID THE COLLECTION. >> I DID THE COLLECTION. >> ON THE 16th OF FEBRUARY, DO YOU REMEMBER INVOLVEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THIS CASE? >> NOT ON THE 16th, I DON'T RECALL. >> WAS THERE ANY TIME THAT YOU WERE IN CONTACT WITH MISS DIGEN IN CONNECTION WITH CHANGING THE PROTOCOLS FOR TESTING? >> YES, THERE WERE. >> AND DID THAT OCCUR IN FEBRUARY? >> I DON'T RECALL THE DATE SPECIFICALLY. >> DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING THERE THAT MIGHT HELP YOU TO RECALL? >> I DON'T HAVE THE RECORD OF OUR CONVERSATION WHICH YOU HAVE. IF YOU COULD PRODUCE IT, I COULD REVIEW IT. >> I DON'T HAVE WHAT YOU JUST SAID SO I'LL JUST ASK THE QUESTIONS. DO YOU REMEMBER THERE WAS A DEVIATION OF ORDINARY LABORATORY PROTOCOLS IN CONNECTION WITH EXAMINATION OF ITEMS IN THIS MATTER? >> YES, I DO RECALL. >> AND WHO WAS INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION ABOUT DEVIATING FROM THE NORMAL PROTOCOLS? >> MYSELF AND MY MANAGER. >> WHO IS YOUR MANAGER? >> ROBERT MARTIN. >> JUST THE TWO OF YOU. >> THAT'S FAIR. >> AND WHAT EVIDENCE ITEM DID THAT HAVE RELATION TO? >> I BELIEVE IT WAS TO THE PILLOWCASE IN TERMS OF THE GUNSHOT RESIDUE. >> SO THERE WAS GUNSHOT RESIDUE THAT WAS BEING EXPECTED ON A PILLOWCASE. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND THIS IS GUNSHOT RESIDUE THAT HAD BEEN OBSERVED BY YOU WHEN YOU WERE FIRST AT THE 6 CUBS PATH HOME? >> NO, I DIDN'T VIEW IT AT THE HOME. >> SOMEBODY SAID, WHAT ABOUT THIS PILLOWCASE. LET'S TEST THIS PILLOWCASE FURTHER. >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND WHO MADE THE DECISION TO TEST THE PILLOWCASE FURTHER? >> CHEMIST DEGAN. >> THANKS TO OUR GUESTS, MICHELLE McAFEE AND PAMELA DAVIS AND MICHAEL ROBBINS IN NEW YORK. TIME TO CHECK IN WITH RIKKI KLIEMAN IN FOR JAMI FLOYD TO FIND OUT WHAT'S COMING UP NEXT ON "BEST DEFENSE." >> WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE ON WITH THE PROSECUTION TRYING TO BUILD THEIR CASE BLOCK BY BLOCK, AND YET WITH THE DEFENSE TRYING TO SAY, HEY, WAIT A MINUTE. THESE FORENSICS AREN'T DONE PROPERLY. THERE'S ALL KINDS OF THINGS YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE AND DIDN'T DO. SO THAT WILL GO ON ON THE "BEST DEFENSE," LISA. >> RIKKI, ALWAYS GREAT TO SEE YOU HERE. WE'LL GET BACK TO YOU IN JUST A MINUTE. THAT WRAPS UP MY TIME WITH YOU ON "OPEN COURT." I'M LISA BLOOM. I'LL BE BACK AT 9:00 A.M. EASTERN WITH MORE TRIAL COVERAGE. THANKS FOR WATCHING. HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND. |