(Testimony of Paul Morgan Stombaugh)
Mr. Eisenberg.
Now, getting to the microscope itself, suppose a person without experience looked through the microscope directly at the hairs. Would he be able to directly interpret the hairs--a known and a questioned hair--to see if they are probably identical, or does it take experience even to interpret what you see through a microscope?
Mr. Stombaugh.
This takes experience to interpret what you see.
We get quite a few people through the lab on tours and every now and then I will set up some hairs. I had one man making a match with a dog hair and a human hair, and he said they came from the same person, because he couldn't interpret what he saw he just thought he saw something which he didn't.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Mr. Stombaugh, could you tell from these hairs that you found in the blanket, and let me add parenthetically we sometimes have been calling this blanket a rug but we have been talking about the object
Mr. Dulles.
You call it a blanket, technically.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Technically a blanket, and it is Exhibit 140. This Exhibit 140, Mr. Stombaugh, could you tell whether these hairs had been pulled out or had fallen out?
Mr. Stombaugh.
These hairs had fallen out naturally. They have died and fallen from the body. This is a very normal occurrence. When one combs one's hair, ordinarily you will find one or two strands of hair on the comb, because hair is constantly being replaced in most people.
Mr. Eisenberg.
How can you tell it had fallen out?
Mr. Stombaugh.
From the shape of the root.
Mr. Eisenberg.
What is the difference of the shape of the root where a hair falls out and the shape of the hair of a root where it has been taken out artificially or unnaturally?
Mr. Stombaugh.
In Exhibit 667, I have a photomicrograph of a root of a human hair. Now, this hair has died and has fallen out naturally, you can tell by the shape of it here. The follicle has just come right along with it. It is starting to shrivel. If this hair was a healthy hair and had been forcibly removed, this root would have been collapsed and twisted. It is very characteristic, it is easy to tell whether a hair has been forcibly removed or whether it fell out naturally.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Suppose it is cut, suppose the hair was cut, can you tell that?
Mr. Stombaugh.
Yes, we can tell from looking at the tip of a hair whether it has been cut, burned, crushed, and whether it has been cut with a sharp instrument, such as a razor, or whether it has been cut with a dull instrument.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Were these hairs cut, the hairs in 140, that you found in Exhibit 140?
Mr. Stombaugh.
Some of the tips of the head hairs had been cut, but the limb hairs and the pubic hairs had not.
Mr. Eisenberg.
But they all had roots on them?
Mr. Stombaugh.
They all had roots on them.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Getting back to the blanket for a moment, as to the composition, you testified that there were woolen, viscose, and cotton fibers. I don't recall whether you said that there were green and brown fibers of each type of textile?
Mr. Stombaugh.
Yes, each type had green and brown fibers.
Mr. Eisenberg.
Now, also getting back to the shape of the blanket when you received it, the shape of 140 and its folds, we had discussed a crease which you marked "C," which you said was caused by an object 10 inches long, and we discussed whether the object was 10 inches long or could have been longer.
How long was the crease "C"?
Mr. Stombaugh.
The crease "C," the hump in the blanket itself, was approximately 10 inches long.
Mr. Eisenberg.
And did that run--as the blanket is folded, and looking from "A" to the general area of "D"--and putting "A" at the left-hand side can you tell us how that crease ran, did it run from left to right or from top to bottom?
|
