GUILTY HI - Carly Joann 'Charli' Scott, 27, pregnant, Makawao, 9 Feb 2014 - #5

[PeterTosh]

So if the blood was on the lower portion of the pant leg is it safe to assume she was being dragged?

 

[Kapua]

I got the impression from Loo's testimony that the zip ties were not collected and processed. They were. I'm not sure if they can get any DNA from them, but they certainly paint a picture in my mind.

 

[Nikki Lisette]

So if the blood was on the lower portion of the pant leg is it safe to assume she was being dragged?

No, the silver dollar stain was on the outside of his right knee as if he attacked her from the driver's seat. Where is the rest of the blood?

 

[julieonmaui]

Nikki your drop the mic post made me so happy!! Thanks

 

[Kapua]

I want to know what size pants SC wears. 32 waist, 30 long, maybe? And I want to know what size the OTHER pants were - the pants found by Phaedra/Molly/Max.

 

[puakenikeni]

The hair was found TWO YEARS later IN MAUI after return from Honolulu forensics, on Jan. 25, 2016. The late discovery is not the problem. It was mostly buried in the seam. Problem is the DNA report on the hair came back endo of March, 2016, yet police didn't get it on a jump drive for prosecutor until May 18, almost two months of the report staying with MPD in Wailuku. Then after adding whatever time taken by prosecutor, it got to defense too short a time before trial to have their own lab confirm or deny the results. Defense has a right to independent testing. That is the problem. The trial would have needed to be delayed again.

I'm guessing that the fact that "a hair" was in the pocket is admissible. It's the DNA testing results done for prosecution that are inadmissible (but still subject to final ruling by Cardoza).

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...n-jeans.html?nav=10+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
"Detective describes finding hair in jeans

Defense seeks to have evidence excluded from trial

June 21, 2016

By LILA FUJIMOTO - Staff Writer (lfujimoto@mauinews.com) , The Maui News

​

WAILUKU - Two years after a pair of jeans was recovered in the investigation into the killing of a missing pregnant woman, a police detective said he found a hair in the front right pocket.
The results of DNA testing on the hair have become an issue in the trial of murder suspect Steven Capobianco, with his attorneys asking to keep the DNA test results from being used as evidence in his 2nd Circuit Court trial.

Testifying Monday afternoon, Detective Nelson Hamilton said the DKNY jeans were examined in 2014 when police evidence specialist Anthony Earles did tape lifts for hair and fibers. Then the jeans were sent to the Scientific Investigation Section of the Honolulu Police Department for DNA testing.
Hamilton said he found the hair in the jeans pocket Jan. 25 while taking a second look at the jeans after they had been returned to the Maui Police Department following the HPD testing.
"I started looking through the pockets," Hamilton said. "On the bottom of the right pocket, there was a hair down in the seam."
Hamilton said he pulled out the pocket and turned it inside out to start unfolding the seam. "It was probably about, maybe half an inch of hair sticking out of the seam," he said.
Once it came loose, "the hair was probably 2 to 3 inches long, dark in color," Hamilton said. "There was a white end on it. It looked like a root."
Looking at the hair under a microscope, "there was an observable root," Hamilton said.
On Feb. 16, the hair was shipped to the FBI laboratory in Quantico, Va., for DNA analysis.
Hamilton said he received a four-page FBI report on the DNA analysis at the end of March.
After the pair of jeans was sent to Sorenson Forensics for further DNA testing, Hamilton said he received a report by the private laboratory in Utah on March 7 when it was emailed to him from the prosecutor's office. He was able to open the file the next day and on May 18 downloaded the file onto jump drives that he gave to the prosecutor's office, Hamilton said.
The hair was found in jeans that contained blood matched to Scott, according to the prosecution.
The defense has argued that the DNA results were turned over late.
Under cross-examination by defense attorney Jon Apo, Hamilton said he didn't remember when he wrote his report about finding the hair in the jeans pocket.
"Would you agree with me that it would be unusual for you to have written a report, say, a month past your discovery?" Apo asked.
"It would depend," Hamilton replied. "I could have written a report that a hair was found, but there was nothing to say that that hair was anything."
Hamilton said the recovery of the hair was documented by Earles."

 

[Kapua]

Ah, then two hairs were found. One by Det. Adachi, the one that was removed and placed in a plastic bag on Feb. 13, and one by Det. Hamilton on Jan. 25, when he took a second look.

And that's why Apo mentioned the first hair and then asked the detective if he prided himself on doing a thorough examination. Now he can accuse Det. Hamilton of planting evidence.

 

[puakenikeni]

Ah, then two hairs were found. One by Det. Adachi, the one that was removed and placed in a plastic bag on Feb. 13, and one by Det. Hamilton on Jan. 25, when he took a second look.

And that's why Apo mentioned the first hair and then asked the detective if he prided himself on doing a thorough examination. Now he can accuse Det. Hamilton of planting evidence.

Aha. I'm guessing the first hair did not have a root, as we know the 2nd hair is the only good DNA evidence they have tying Steven to the murder, going by what was revealed at the motion hearings pre-trial.

 

[puakenikeni]

Regarding the skull painting, my reservation has always been that we have no evidence that Steven can paint watercolors, and it's such a difficult medium. The paint spreads out, and only an experienced WC painter can have some degree of control to really shape it. And that's just the basics, not even talking about hiding images in it. Yet his sites for posting stuff don't have any other examples of such art. If he didn't create it, then I think the options are:
1) he found it and it resonated
2) he commissioned it (but no one has come forward to say that, and he had no money)

I lean towards, he saw it, perhaps after searching for skulls because he was haunted by an image, and he would have noticed that it looked like the coastline, and he posted it to taunt people.

But unless he painted it or commissioned it, or digitally photoshopped it, then the images were not placed there, even though he may have seen them there too, after the fact.

 

[Nikki Lisette]

Where does it mention two hairs or a second hair? And I see no mention of Anthony Earles documenting the discovery of a hair back in 2014.

Question about Hamilton reading a file on March 8, (2016?) but NOT downloading it until nealy two months later to give to the prosecution? What is that? I know the officers on Maui take their time writing reports. It took me over two weeks to receive a police report from MPD. Ironically, he was one of the officers assigned to investigate Charli's case but that had zero bearing on the timeliness of completing a two sentence, half page report. Nonetheless, they work hard and take a lot of flack from the public.

Did MPD drop the ball on this? I hope not.

 

[puakenikeni]

I want to know what size pants SC wears. 32 waist, 30 long, maybe? And I want to know what size the OTHER pants were - the pants found by Phaedra/Molly/Max.

All in good time, lol ...

I also hope Rivera is building towards something great. I'm very pleased with all the new evidence provided by these witnesses. We should keep in mind that Rivera has to build his testimony on foundation. He had to lay the foundation for every single thing, and now he's to the point where the principals and the locations, the vehicles, the relationships are all well established.

After he has shredded the alimony completely (which he has), then on to the forensic evidence. Before the forensics, he had to lay the foundation on the items analyzed by the forensics, by getting the discovery and processing put into evidence. Once they are in evidence, he can put up the experts to tell us more.

He's had to do all this very methodically and not always being able to provide dramatic findings. For example, the witness who made the maps they are using was really boring, but Rivera needed to be able to use the maps.

I do question though, why he wouldn't have asked Charli's family to describe her phone case and/or sunglasses if the found items were hers. Maybe he did and it was after Fiona and Phaedra, who were the only two streamed, and the testimony was not picked up in the news article? Nikki, did you hear any mention?

 

[puakenikeni]

Where does it mention two hairs or a second hair? And I see no mention of Anthony Earles documenting the discovery of a hair back in 2014.

Question about Hamilton reading a file on March 8, (2016?) but NOT downloading it until nealy two months later to give to the prosecution? What is that? I know the officers on Maui take their time writing reports. It took me over two weeks to receive a police report from MPD. Ironically, he was one of the officers assigned to investigate Charli's case but that had zero bearing on the timeliness of completing a two sentence, half page report. Nonetheless, they work hard and take a lot of flack from the public.

Did MPD drop the ball on this? I hope not.

Well, the article I linked and quoted does not mention two hairs. But any hair mentioned by a detective witness that was found in the jeans back in 2014 was not the same hair, so thus there appear to be two. I didn't catch Adachi's testimony. The hair in controversy over admitting the DNA results was found in January 2016. All the dates in the article after it was found are relating to 2016. The reporter could have been more clear on that, but you can tell while reading it that it's all one sequence of events from January 2016 to the time of the pre-trial motion in June 2016.

 

[puakenikeni]

Nikki, it's hard not to conclude that MPD dropped a giant crucial ball. That was the single most important DNA evidence linking Steven, and it should have been rushed through the chain, especially after the trial continuance in January already making it very unlikely to get another delay.

 

[Nikki Lisette]

I can't always tell if the sequence of events is contiguous or not. It takes so little time to fully write out a complete date.

Btw, you wrote alimony in your response to Kapua! LOL. I know you meant alibi but it made me smile.

 

[Nikki Lisette]

Nikki, it's hard not to conclude that MPD dropped a giant crucial ball. That was the single most important DNA evidence linking Steven, and it should have been rushed through the chain, especially after the trial continuance in January already making it very unlikely to get another delay.

I agree.

 

[JusticeHammer]

I want to know what size pants SC wears. 32 waist, 30 long, maybe? And I want to know what size the OTHER pants were - the pants found by Phaedra/Molly/Max.

I believe SC is 6 feet tall. I myself am 5 foot 10 inches tall. We both are about the same in weight. I wear a 32 inch waist and 32 inch long pants. A 30 inch long pants would be a little short, unless one is wearing work boots. I would say the pants match SC build, however I'm not sure how the MPD could verify the pants belong to him.

 

[puakenikeni]

I can't always tell if the sequence of events is contiguous or not. It takes so little time to fully write out a complete date.

Btw, you wrote alimony in your response to Kapua! LOL. I know you meant alibi but it made me smile.

That is funny. I think that was auto-complete deciding what I meant again, so I can't take credit for the slip.

I agree that the reporters could easily type the year and increase the clarity. I went back over it closely, and it is all one sequence in 2016, but being as there have been three springs now with dates relating to this case, they should write the year.

 

[puakenikeni]

I believe SC is 6 feet tall. I myself am 5 foot 10 inches tall. We both are about the same in weight. I wear a 32 inch waist and 32 inch long pants. A 30 inch long pants would be a little short, unless one is wearing work boots. I would say the pants match SC build, however I'm not sure how the MPD could verify the pants belong to him.

Thats why they need the DNA. It could fit him exactly and still --how many other guys in Maui would they fit, enough to cast doubt. It would help if someone who knows him well can testify to him wearing DKNY jeans of that color.

 

[Kapua]

Well, the article I linked and quoted does not mention two hairs. But any hair mentioned by a detective witness that was found in the jeans back in 2014 was not the same hair, so thus there appear to be two. I didn't catch Adachi's testimony. The hair in controversy over admitting the DNA results was found in January 2016. All the dates in the article after it was found are relating to 2016. The reporter could have been more clear on that, but you can tell while reading it that it's all one sequence of events from January 2016 to the time of the pre-trial motion in June 2016.

The testimony regarding the hair discovered on Feb. 13, 2014 is in today's (Sept 1) Maui News article linked a page or two back.
http://www.mauinews.com/page/conten...n-on-pant-leg--looked-like-blood-.html?nav=10
Later, when he examined the jeans at his desk at the Wailuku Police Station, Adachi said he found a hair in a pocket of the jeans. He said he placed the jeans on a clean paper bag and used gloves to examine the pockets.

Also, I was listening to the live stream yesterday when Apo was cross-examining Det. Adachi. and he said that he removed the hair and put it in a plastic bag. Apo asked Adachi if he prided himself on doing a thorough examination. We were all wondering why Apo would deliberately bring up the hair in the jeans pocket and now we know. It was because the OTHER hair was found in January 2015. Adachi missed it during his initial examination on Feb. 13, 2014.

 

[Kapua]

I believe SC is 6 feet tall. I myself am 5 foot 10 inches tall. We both are about the same in weight. I wear a 32 inch waist and 32 inch long pants. A 30 inch long pants would be a little short, unless one is wearing work boots. I would say the pants match SC build, however I'm not sure how the MPD could verify the pants belong to him.

I am not a forensic expert by any means, but can they get DNA from skin cells in the waistband?