Discussion in 'Witness Testimonies and Closing Arguments' started by luv, Jun 13, 2011.
Elizabeth Fontaine: FBI Latent Print
JA: Duct trom from remains
EF: yes 3 pieces of duct tape
(identifying sealed packages of duct tape as being sealed by EF)
JB: when you got this item of evid - were they already separated
EF: Q if question item K if identified - one tape separate others stuck together
all pieces 6 - 8 inches in length, glue was almost gone and not sticky, was now had become strings and plastic/glue on one end
JA: based on history of evidence you were given did you have expection of prints
EF: did not expect prints to be found, but does not change way I examine evidence
JA: and latent finger prints
JA: did you know something
EF: Q63, outline of a heart appeared on one of the corners
Elizabeth Fontaine, from FBI,
Physical scientist, forensic examiner, latent prints unit.
Masters of science degree, pharmacy, U of Florida,
microbiology and chemistry
FBI certification exam
Certified July 2008, supervised for 6 month
December 2008, did you examine evidence in Caylee Anthony case?
yes, 3 pieces of duct tape.
witness recognizes some evidence packaging
did you go to effort separating these?
Q means question item, K means known item
I refer to them as Q's.
I examined them stuck together and separately.
Q62 and Q63
The glue was almost gone. There were fibers towards the end, not sticky, separated from the vinyl
were you given a history of where it was found
On the remains and in an area that was periodically submerged under water.
Objection overruled because she's an expert and is allowed to use "hearsay"
Due to environment I would not expect to see latent prints but I process the evidence regardless of expectation.
Were you able to find any latent fingerprints?
No I was not
Did you note something that you did see?
What did you see?
It was on Q63. An outline of a heart appeared on one of the corners of that piece of duct tape.
I was using an alternate light source
(It continues but I lost the sound now)
Elizabeth Fontaine Fingerprint examiner FBI - initials on package of 3 pieces duct tape.....
received in evidence....Q is question item Q-62 separate piece of tape
Q-63 & 64 - stuck together - examiner in trace separated them....she examined before and and after separatation
6 - 8 inches in length- glue was almost gone - duct tape no longer sticky....glue migrated to fibers....no longer sticky tape....glue and fibers stuck together with plastic piece of tape.....
exmined to find fingerprints....tape found on remains in an area previously had flooding....(object - expert can give opinion)....evidence subjected to enviroment factors would not expect fingerprints to present....regardless of what she thinks the outcome will not change....no fingerprints found....they are made up of oils, skin cells, etc.
note something you did see? object -0verrule.....on Q-63 an outline of aheart appeared at the edge
using an alternate light source called rubis.....
bumps, refective surface, helps make flat non-reflective image - eliminate background of process of latent prints....approx size of dime.......bandaid on for period of time...glue left in shape of heart......upon seeing that no special significance ....noted in file and notified supervisor.....supv also observed heart shape on duct tape......viewed in the presence of Fontaine......her job is look @ latent prints ....when she sees something unexpected .......item continued on exam....did attempt to photo the heart but no longer visible on the duct tape.....completed her exam appropriate at that time to photo.....RAM - dye stain....strong solvent colors superglue...under a laser ....dye stain white superglue ...look @ fingerprints rather than white so glow orange - black powder and solution to process with black powder......other than stating it was in shape of a heart and size of a dime cannot go further...don't know how got there, when, etc.
K are known items
JA: upon seeing that did you believe it to be any signifigance in the case
EF: supervisor viewed, did not photograph, job to examine for latent finger prints, tried to photograph at the end of my examination but no longer there
JB: what had you done to the tape
EF: alternate dye stain called ram, strong solvent, black powder
JA: do you know what that artifact was
EF: other than shape and size of a dime, no I do not
JB: items given to expect, you were given these second
EF: all items go to control unit
JB: collected at scene, then ocso
EF: I don't do the travel path until it enters into the lab
JB: evidence control got it
EF: trace evidence unit
JB explaining process to jury
JB: you are 2nd person to get this evidence
JB: when you got this what did you do 1st
EF: visual without chemical process
JB: trained to do
EF: always 1st step
Ms. Fontaine explains 11 step process on the individual pieces of duct tape.....on Q-63 visualized in the Ruvis system and the alternate light source (step 7?) upon completion of the whole process it was not visible....all done after the trace evidence unit.....
received @ FBI - goes to trace then to her then back to trace.
restarted steps 1,2,3 and introduced 4 thru the end....
aware item back to evidence control....aware item was later contaminated by another object- sidebar!
State calls Elizabeth Fontaine
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY JA:
She is a physical scientist forensics examiner with the FBI.
She has a MS degree in pharmacy from UF. She has BS in micro-biology from University of Rhode Island.
FBI training - 18 month training in latent prints at FBI. During that time she did 75,000 comparisons.
She then became an examiner after becoming certified. There was a 6 month probationary period.
In December of 2008 she examined 3 pieces of duct tape from the remains.
State's Exhibit KN - she identified the bag which contained the duct tape. Envelope marked as Exhibit 306.
When she received it, (Q for question item - K for known items). Q 62, 63 and 64. Q 62 was a separate piece of tape. Q 63 and 64 were initially received stuck together. She did not separate them. An examiner in the trace evidence unit did that. She examined them stuck together and separately.
Q-62, 63 and 64 were approximately 6 to 8 inches in length. The glue was almost gone and the tape was no longer sticky. The glue and strings and fiber had migrated to one end. Some of the strings had separated from the tape.
The 3 tape strips were examined for latent finger prints.
She was told that the tape was found on the remains in an area that was periodically subjected to flooding.
OBJECTION TO HEARSAY BY JB - OVERRULED.
Did you expect to find prints?
OBJECTION - OVERRULED.
Based on the environment, she did not expect to find them. However, this thought doesn't change her examination.
No latent prints on any of the three pieces of tape.
OBJECTION - OVERRULED.
On Q-63 she found an outline of heart on one of the corners of the tape. She was using Reflective Ultra-violet imaging system (RUVIS). Helps make the sample a flat, non-reflective image. It helps to eliminate any background interference.
The heart shape was about the size of a dime. It looked like the glue residue similar to wearing and removing a bandaid for an extended period of time.
At the time, she did not feel this had any special significance. She noted it in her records and had a supervisor looked at it.
She did not photograph this. She is not required to photograph unexpected items. She noted it and continued on with her exam. When she was finished, she did attempt to photograph it, but it was no longer visible.
OBJECTION - OVERRULED.
She then did a RAM stain. It is a coloring of the sample to make it more visible. She also used black powder and alternate black powder.
Other than stating it was in the shape of a heart in the size of a dime, she cannot say anything else about it.
No further questions.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY JB:
All items are received in evidence control unit and are inventoried. After they did that, they then went to the trace evidence unit and then to her.
When trace evidence received it, they contacted her for a visual exam.
She conducted a visual examination to see if any latent prints are visible to the eye. It is always the first step.
The second step is a laser exam.
Certain fingerprints will fluoresce.
Next step is UV.
Next the items went back to the trace evidence unit.
She then received them back and redid the exams because Q 63 an Q 64 had been separated.
The next step is super glue. Super glue is attracted to moisture. This process is done in a humidity chamber.
The next step is RUVIS - an ultra violet light. The object is then viewed thru a monitor. The light removes reflections.
The next step is RAM - a dye stain used on top of super glue. Sometimes it is hard to visualize the white super glue on a white object. RAM gives this a fluorescent property which makes it glow orange.
The next step was alternate black powder - typically only used on glue like substance.
The final step is black powder which attempts to pick up oil or sweat left behind by a finger print.
All but alternate black powder were done on both sides of the tape.
Regarding heart shape, it was something she visualized thru RUVIS. It was no longer visible after she completed the last steps of her exam. All of her processes were done after the trace evidence unit's exam.
OBJECTION - SUSTAINED.
She did a report. She indicated there were no finger prints on any of the three pieces of the tape.
Item later contaminated?
JB: (turned towards Jurors at the podium)
Recieved at FBI - to Trace Evidence - Then to you - then back to Trace - then back to you
In report - no Latent Prints
JB: you're aware that the evidence goes back to
JA Object - Sidebar
(JB going for the contaminated evidence scenario)
Bill Scheaffer saying that if JB had pled ICA "no contest" on the check charges, then appealed it - if she takes the stand, should would not have to say "YES" to the question of prior convictions because during the appeal process the convictions would be on hold. He thinks that JB either made a huge mistake or they did this because they never had any intention of calling her to the stand.
Bill Scheaffer - "Some day I think JB will make a fine lawyer" - LOL.
SIDEBAR #3 over -
CROSS EXAMINATION BY JB (continued)
After exam, she does a report of her conclusions. Her conclusions was after her complete work up that there were no finger prints on any of the duct tape.
No further questions.
REDIRECT EXAM by JA
63 and 64 were stacked.
OBJECTION - OVERRULED>
63 and 64 were on top.
Q-63 on top of Q-64 ...
witnesses tomorrow arrive @ 11:30
Witnesses for tomorrow will be here around 1:30 tomorrow
No more today
State might wrap up case tomorrow or by noon wednesday
Defense starting on thursday - but if possible start on wednesday
Ahead of schedule, depending on defense presentation, maybe next week, maybe by the end of next week conclude all of the evidence in this case, deliberate 25th - 27th
Discussion regarding scheduling.
JA says only other witnesses are flying and can't get here til tomorrow.
HHJBP told jury they may be deliberating between the 25th and the 27th.
CM calls for SIDEBAR #4
Bill S says it's b/c when the State knew JB's angle, they are going to force Baez to prove his theory. The SA can call rebuttal witnesses to JB's witnesses. They are going to be putting on a rebuttal case. (In so many words....)
Separate names with a comma.