Ellen Riemer — Cross/Redirect/Recross
765 linesTUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2023
(Court resumed at 9:40 a.m.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Good morning.
(Members of the audience responded good morning.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Do we have our witness, back? Doctor? You may bring the jury.
(The jury returned to the courtroom.)
COURT BAILIFF: The jury is present, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you. Good morning.
(All jurors responded good morning.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Day number seventeen. Cross-examination.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Please the Court, Your Honor?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
The witness, ELLEN RIEMER, remained under oath and continued testifying as follows:
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. HARPOOTLIAN:
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Good morning, Dr. Riemer.
ELLEN RIEMER: Good morning.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me at the outset say we're going to be just about -- yesterday as you went through direct, we saw some very graphic images, and I apologize but we're going to have to do that again today. You, of course -- this is what you see every day, but I'm sure you understand how other people may, especially people related to the deceased, might react to that.
ELLEN RIEMER: Of course.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, let me also explain at the outset until I read your autopsy report, I had never really considered the mechanics of a shotgun or an AR15 or Blackout, impact on a human body. So, I'm learning even as we speak, and I hope I can learn some things today to help me understand your opinions, and also help me understand what may have happened or didn't happen. Okay? So, if I ask you questions that seem simplistic, understand my understanding of this process is somewhat basic. So, I'm going to try to walk through this in a way I can glean what the evidence is and what your conclusions are. Okay?
ELLEN RIEMER: Absolutely.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, tolerate my somewhat sophomoric approach to this, if you would. Okay?
ELLEN RIEMER: Of course. I'm sure you'll be fine.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, let me understand. First of all, let's talk about Maggie for just a minute. And were you shown photographs of the back of her thigh that were taken at the scene?
ELLEN RIEMER: No --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: The back of her calf, I'm sorry.
ELLEN RIEMER: I did not.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, let the me see if I can find these.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It will take just a second; I thought I had them laying right out here.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence one moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. I apologize, I thought I had everything sitting right here. Apparently I may.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Mr. Harpootlian, if there is an item in evidence, you don't have to show it to opposing counsel --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I apologize, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: -- to continue with the witness.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: This is not in evidence. I apologize.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, I will offer into evidence, Defendant's Exhibit 115.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Any objection?
MR. WATERS: No objection from the State, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted.
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 115 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And could I get that, please, on the screen?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Have you seen that photograph before?
ELLEN RIEMER: No, I have not.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and in your -- I notice in your autopsy report you remark that there is a bruise on the back of the leg in that similar position, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't recall, and I --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could you look, please? Thank you.
(Break in proceedings.)
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't in my report where I've -- where I remarked of a bruise on, on the left leg.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, was there a bruise on the right leg?
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't have any -- I didn't make any comment about that in my report.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, no one asked you to opine about any issue on the back of her left calf?
ELLEN RIEMER: No, and I did not observe that at autopsy.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And by the time it got to autopsy, had her body been washed or --
ELLEN RIEMER: No.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, but if there were -- if this is mud, you wouldn't necessarily expect to see it --
ELLEN RIEMER: It could have fallen off, correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Correct. So, you were not asked to opine about whether this was a -- whether there was bruising on the back of the left calf which would have been consistent with somebody stepping on her calf?
ELLEN RIEMER: No. I was not asked about that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and you were not shown this photo.
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and just to deal with Maggie a little bit further, you testified yesterday that the shots were consistent, I think, with someone circling her?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I didn't actually use that term. I said that the project -- she was shot from -- at one point from behind her and then one point from above her. So, that could mean that there was -- it could mean that she was turning before she got the first one and then fell because she could have also been moving. So --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well -- so, we know that the shooter was moving because some wounds have stippling, which would -- and stippling had soot? Am I saying that correctly?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, there was no soot, just --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, what would soot indicate?
ELLEN RIEMER: Soot is a contact wound. So, she had stippling, which is not quite contact. It's further back.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: 3 to 4 feet?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, it usually -- usually we don't see it more than 3 feet away.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
ELLEN RIEMER: So, we -- it's somewhere within 3 feet.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and so she may have been turning. The shooter may have been moving straight on. I mean, is that as good an explanation for what you saw as somebody circling her, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. I mean, from the -- from my perspective, based on the autopsy, that is a reasonable explanation.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, the reasonable explanation is she's moving, trying to perhaps avoid being shot, turning around, trying to run, whatever, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, she could be turning around after getting the initial shots.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: And then the -- if the shooter was still stationary, then we -- she could have gotten that one. So, it doesn't imply that the -- she could have been moving, not just the shooter.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and the ones without stippling was more than -- were -- the barrel of the gun would have been more than 4 feet away from her.
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, you know, it's very -- it's kind of a rough estimate, but I would say, you know, it would be more than 3 feet, possibly more than that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But that would not be -- that would be the barrel -- the end of the barrel of the gun.
ELLEN RIEMER: That's right, because that's where the gunpowder starts coming out.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But that doesn't mean the shooter was 3 feet away.
ELLEN RIEMER: Absolutely not, just the barrel of the gun.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right, and you testified about why there was a wound that would appear to be parallel to her, and your indication is the shot would have hit her kidney or pancreas or whatever. She might have been bent over.
ELLEN RIEMER: No. The -- no. The injury to the pancreas and kidney was on the right side of the abdomen --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: -- and that went from front to back and exited the left back. The one that was kind along parallel to her body was on the left side of the body going up.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, why did you testify that one of the shots would have been so painful she would have bent over? What was that consistent with?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. That was the one to the right side of the abdomen. And the reason I believe this is probable -- or, you know, quite likely that that would have caused her to bend over -- is because a subsequent shot was going sort of upward in the body. And it's hard to imagine, you know, that wound going upward and then into the head unless she was bent over. So, it's a possible explanation of how she was in a position to actually get that gunshot wound.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, she's bent over and it would go upward why?
ELLEN RIEMER: Because if somebody is standing behind her and there's no close range here, but at least a few feet away --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So she got shot, then turned around, bends over, and then you're saying --
ELLEN RIEMER: She could have turned around or not turned around, or -- I don't know if she turned around or the shooter is moving.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Did anybody ask you to look at the pattern of ejected shells of the Blackout?
ELLEN RIEMER: I, I wasn't asked to look at those.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Okay. So, your conjecture opinion is based on purely the wounds and trying to figure out how that happened.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. So, I basically -- my -- I do the autopsy. I have everything to do with the body, and at the time I never heard anything about -- I composed my autopsy reports --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: -- without any reference to the scene.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Okay. So, let me -- let me move along to Paul for the moment. Okay? And you indicate that the first shot would have been buckshot to the chest.
ELLEN RIEMER: I believe that that was most likely the first shot.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, because the second shot is -- basically executes him at --
ELLEN RIEMER: Would have fallen to the ground.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right, and clearly he's upright when that first shot was made.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and it goes in his chest. And was he -- would he have to be turned diagonally to the shooter for it to come out his left armpit?
ELLEN RIEMER: No, not necessarily.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, if he's shot straight on --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- with that buckshot, and if that wasn't --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- a contact wound or --
ELLEN RIEMER: No, it's a close range.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Close range.
ELLEN RIEMER: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Closer than 3 feet?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. You can't estimate how far.
ELLEN RIEMER: I can't. You would have to test fire the weapon.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So the chest shot, if it's straight on, wouldn't it just go right through his lungs and his heart?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
ELLEN RIEMER: So, this was shot at an angle across. So, that might indicate that his body was positioned perpendicular to the shooter. Now, the shooter could also shoot from the side, doesn't necessarily shoot from the front. So, we can't be 100 percent sure about these things.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, if I -- if you're the shooter --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- and I'm Paul and you shoot me with that buckshot, if I'm faced to the side, would the results be consistent with your autopsy examination?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and we know that some of those pellets -- you think his arm was down by his side.
ELLEN RIEMER: I feel confident about that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and the reason for that is there's pellet holes in his arm, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: No, that's not the reason. The reason is because there is bruising around the exit wounds that are kind of shored exits, and then we have corresponding bruising on the underside of the arm. So, it indicates that they were in close proximity at the time the pellets exited and then reentered because if there was a distance, we wouldn't have the bruising around those wounds.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and do the pellets go through his arm?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. There are pellets that exit through the arm and --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and so there's little pellet holes --
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- on his arm exiting.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you -- did you see a corresponding entrance wound with the pellets?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. The entrance pellet wounds were on the inside of the arm.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right, and then they go out, and I think they struck things after that as far as you know.
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't know what happened to them after they left the body.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, either the shooter is to his right --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- shooting across.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and you think he was -- that shooter would have been closer than 3 feet but you can't say how close.
ELLEN RIEMER: Right. Right. He could have been to his right, or Paul may have turned his body in that perpendicular manner, so yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But either way, there would have been almost immediate bleeding -- well, not a fatal wound, but there would have been immediate bleeding from that wound, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: There would have been bleeding. It's hard to say how much, but certainly I would expect some bleeding.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But if there were footprints found halfway into that feed room and those are Paul's footprints, would that indicate to you that he had stepped in his own blood?
ELLEN RIEMER: Oh, that's certainly possible.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Not inconsistent with what you have.
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And that second shot would have come -- I mean, as I understand it --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Mr. Barber, will you take your coat off and come here, please? I hate to do this to him, but I can't really do it to myself.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, if you would step down here.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: With permission, Your Honor, may she step down?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and what I would like to have you do is, and you need to not block these folks over here, or that gentleman right there.
ELLEN RIEMER: You want me to stand back here?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That would be good. And he's fine, they're fine. Well, unless I get in the way. Let me see if I can avoid not falling over. Okay. So, we've already talked about this wound, this wound, which goes in right about here. Show the jury where the wound went in.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. It was, like, between the sternum and the left -- over there. So, it went in right over there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right over there. And Mr. Barber is a little taller. He was, I think, 5 --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. I measured his height. I don't recall.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: We'll talk about that in a minute, but I believe Mr. Barber is a little bit taller than he was. But we need to know that because I'm going to ask you to sort of chart things down. So, the entrance wound is here, and it's consistent with him being -- all right, Mr. Barber, turn just a little bit that way. So, the shot would have gone like this?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. That's approximately correct, and it has a slightly front to back.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Slightly front to back. About --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. Mostly it's right to left. It's right to left.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How about raise your left arm for me, please.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And his arm was not raised, but I want to point out it comes out -- we're going to see some pictures in a minute. Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Turn a little bit this way.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, it would come out right under the arm?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. We do have the exit pellet wound in his neck.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And we also have wadding, do we not?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. We have wadding stuck in the underside of his neck.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and then it goes through his arm.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Still coming front to back.
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, it's, it's left to front, but there's a slight front to back because we don't have -- we have some exit wounds on the back.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, if I told you this is a narrow wound -- and have you seen any crime scene photos?
ELLEN RIEMER: From here? No.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: From --
ELLEN RIEMER: Oh, yeah, from this case. Crime scene photos in my career? Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: In this case.
ELLEN RIEMER: I really didn't -- I may have been shown a very small photo, like a couple of these ahead of trial, but I didn't have any -- form any opinions based on that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If I told you that small room, the gap between stacks of dog feed here and the wall, and that little thing over here, it may be 3 to 4 feet. And this buckshot goes through the back window on this very narrow, very small, so that would be consistent with what you're saying. Some of the buckshot comes through -- and that was buckshot that he was shot with in the chest.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. It was shot. I don't know the exact size. Buckshot is usually bigger, but again --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Assume I'm not misleading you.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay?
ELLEN RIEMER: Right. It was some shot.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Buckshot goes through and hits the back window.
ELLEN RIEMER: Uh-huh.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It actually leaves holes in the window and gets in the door -- the window frame goes out and one of them embeds in a tree back behind him.
ELLEN RIEMER: Uh-huh.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, that is consistent with your findings, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That first shot. I'm sort of intrigued. Is there anything about the exterior of this shot -- what's beveling? Do you know what a bevel is, beveling?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes, of course. Beveling is a pattern of defect to a bone. So, when there is a gunshot wound that, for instance, goes through -- let's say we get an entrance wound over here and an exit wound over here, we're talking about hand bone being shattered.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: The way with -- when there is a basically a hole in one side of the skull, I can tell which is an entrance and which is an exit even without looking at the skin. Okay? So, for instance, if I get skeletonized remains with a hole through the head, I can see which is the entrance and which is the exit because the bone bevels in a characteristic way depending on the direction of the bullet.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What is a bevel?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. Bevel is like a -- an angled chipping away of a hard surface.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So if a bullet goes through and -- I guess the head is a good solid bone, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, it's like a solid bone, right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you can tell -- this is the entrance because, I mean, this is like --
ELLEN RIEMER: It's -- the entrance -- the outer table of the skull, it's a smaller hole. On the inner table of the skull it's a bigger hole. So, the bullet is beveling out -- outward as the bullet goes in.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, it would bevel in on the entrance and bevel out on the exit?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. Well, bevel in meaning -- sometimes people don't always use these words consistently, even forensic pathologists. But there is a inward beveling. That means it's kind of beveled outward. So --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beveled outward inside, inside would seem that something that would indicate --
ELLEN RIEMER: Wider.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- wider --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. It's wider on the inner table of the skull than the outer table.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And when it exits, do you have a, a narrower bevel, if you will, or defect on the inside than on the outside?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That was a lot. Okay. So, was there -- since this didn't enter bone, is there beveling of the flesh?
ELLEN RIEMER: No. It doesn't bevel because there's too much elasticity, and it's just shredding. Frequently you can't see beveling on long bones either. The skull is kind of a flat bone, so it has that characteristic.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and the second shot, as I understand it, you indicate is -- well, first of all, assume that he is -- so, maybe we should forget about the feed room for just a minute. Okay? So, show the jury, please, where the initial -- there is a shot being shot with a shotgun.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And it is more than -- there's no stippling or soot or anything that would indicate it was a close shot, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, more than 3 or 4 feet away.
ELLEN RIEMER: More than 3, yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: More than 3. And where is the initial shot? Where does it hit?
ELLEN RIEMER: On the top of the left shoulder.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: When you say the top --
ELLEN RIEMER: The apex.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Are there pellets in here?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: In the apex.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm going to show you an x-ray in just a minute and have you demonstrate on Mr. Barber where that hit. And it was shot in here?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And you indicated you thought his chin was bent a little bit?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. This is something that I believe -- not necessarily have to be bent, but I do think it was at least tilted in this direction, the reason being this a horizontal direction, and then goes through his cheek. Let's say he's just -- your head -- I'm sorry, your head up, and let's say it's just going through here, and it would just kind of hit, like, over this side of his head. Okay? But, meanwhile, it's kind of over here, so -- and then it's -- the exit wound is back there. So, at least we have a little bit of directionality like this. I don't know -- if he was completely turned to the left, it would have gone through his face, but I think it makes the most sense knowing that a bullet travels in a straight line basically. Of course, this is pellets so there's going to be a lot of destruction. But the fact that his face was spared from damage indicates to me that he had his head somewhat turned. I don't know exactly how much, but that it kind of coursed over the top of the left shoulder into this left, you know, neck/cheek area, and then exited the back of the head on the top.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me find the x-ray pictures while he's standing up there. Here we go. Okay.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm going to show you where you're standing right there these pictures and see if you can identify them, and if so, we'll put them in evidence, and then I'll put them up on the screen.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, I want you to look at these three photos and tell me if you can identify these.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Am I speaking loud enough for the court reporter?
COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Am I speaking loud enough when I'm facing that way?
COURT REPORTER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. These are x-rays that were taken at the commencement of the autopsy.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: All right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, I would offer Defendant's Exhibits 111, 112, and 113.
MR. WATERS: No objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: They're admitted.
(PHOTO OF X-RAY MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 111 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO OF X-RAY MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 112 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO OF X-RAY MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 113 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, could I have please -- step over here just that way.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, let's see -- okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let's see 113, please.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, this is his left arm, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And this material up here, do you see these little dots? What is that?
ELLEN RIEMER: Right. Those are the shotgun pellets.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and they are -- yeah, that's perfect. And so we see one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, nineteen along that line of -- twenty along this. These are the pellets that would be along here, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And they begin at just his shoulder, I mean, the shoulder bone?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. It's -- notice the soft tissue of the shoulder. The soft tissue of the shoulder.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. I'll give you pointer. You know what you're doing.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. This is the humeral head.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Which is --
ELLEN RIEMER: Humeral head --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Just on Mr. Barber, where that is?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. This is the bone of the humerus. So, a humerus is that long bone on the shoulder joint to the elbow joint, and we can see that this is basically -- it's not really perforating the bone. There may be some defect at the edge of the bone, but it's pretty much on top in the soft issues.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and it goes on for aways.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And then if you would show me Exhibit Number 112. Okay, and would you focus on the upper right hand corner, please? There you go.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, that corresponds to this large picture, that orientation.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, what is this showing?
ELLEN RIEMER: There are significant numbers of pellets also in, like, the left neck area.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Show us on Mr. Barber where that would be.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. So, the entrance is here, and pellets are basically spreading, so that they're not -- they're excluding -- it's -- there are pellets in the right side of the neck area over here, and then there's also some going into the brain.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and let me see if I can count those. So, I mean, are these part of what we looked at before?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. How far down do they start?
ELLEN RIEMER: You know, it's a different view, so it may not include all of them.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So -- but a number of them?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. I mean the purpose of the x-rays is not to -- it's basically to show what kind of ammunition is -- remains in the body, if anything.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Did you remove the pellets?
ELLEN RIEMER: Not every single one. A representative number.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, there's an exhibit that was shown to you by Mr. Waters of some pellets that you recovered.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But that's not all the pellets you recovered.
ELLEN RIEMER: That's all the pellets I recovered. I did -- I don't stay for days to recover each pellet. It's actually a lot harder than it looks. You know, here they look like you know exactly where they are, but, you know, you can fish for, like, an hour to find one pellet. It's fairly small and there's a lot of tissue and so --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you --
ELLEN RIEMER: I get a handful of them and that's sufficient.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Did you keep the buckshot separate from the birdshot? Because this is birdshot.
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't -- I don't think any of it was actually buckshot. Buckshot is very broad, so they were all -- I believe they were all collected together.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, you thought they were all birdshot --
ELLEN RIEMER: No. I didn't make that conclusion, what type shot; I didn't make a determination.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you didn't determine --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah, that's really the firearms. I'm a pathologist. It's the firearms expert to determine what kind of shot it was.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So --
ELLEN RIEMER: I said shotgun pellets, and that is sufficient.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If previous expert testimony was that the chest was a buckshot and the head was duck shot or turk -- some sort of birdshot, you're not going to disagree with that.
ELLEN RIEMER: I really didn't -- it all looked similar to me.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, let me see Exhibit 111, please. Can you do, I guess, the lower left -- let's start with the lower left of this, lower -- his left, lower -- right there. Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: This is the total picture.
ELLEN RIEMER: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And so what does this represent?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. There is -- we can see his upper and lower teeth here, upper teeth and lower teeth. And so he actually did not have any fractures of his teeth, so the projectiles were going behind the teeth. His teeth were not all fractured out.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, if you show on Mr. Barber where these pellets would have been.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. This is just a two dimensional image. So, they're anywhere between, like, you know, here and here.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
ELLEN RIEMER: It's hard to say based on a two dimensional.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and I think -- show us where you think the exit wound was.
ELLEN RIEMER: On the right side of the top --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: The back of his head.
ELLEN RIEMER: -- the top of his head --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: The top of his head.
ELLEN RIEMER: -- toward the back.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Toward the back.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And if you were to extend out the shoulder wound, the neck, the path of these pellets, and then the exit wound, I mean, did you actually see an exit wound? Was there --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. It was a blown out exit wound of the skull. And that was how the brain left the skull.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, actually the skull exploded basically, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, the skull -- and there was a defect there. I could not reapproximate the skull, so there's a piece of skull missing.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Was there a bevel around that piece of skull?
ELLEN RIEMER: We don't get beveling when there's shattering of the bone.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. We'll see that a little bit later.
ELLEN RIEMER: It's not a typical feature. You could potentially see something that you can say, well, this looks like a little beveling, but in my experience that's very difficult to assess because there's so much damage and fragmentation of the bone.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Take that pointer, please, and using Mr. Barber as a mannequin -- and show us the path of that shotgun blast.
ELLEN RIEMER: So, it's going along here and into the left side. I believe, you know, it makes most sense like this, and out the top of the right side of the head.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, if you -- and that was, you say, at least 3 feet away.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Let me have that pointer, again, please. And if you would, step over and come over this way. Okay. So, your testimony is, and correct me -- if you need to step over here and correct the angle.
ELLEN RIEMER: No, I don't like that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Well, show me what you like.
ELLEN RIEMER: I made this straight.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: And then because this is basically not -- it doesn't look like it's going upward. It's going straight and then entering around there. So, we have two distinct defects, a defect here and a defect there. So, I believe the head was at least angled a little bit like that in order for the corresponding continuation of that defect to go there. But I do -- I don't think it's going upward. I think looking at the left shoulder it looks like it's kind of a -- and if it was going upward, you wouldn't have as much in the neck as we do. So, I think it's more like straight on --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But that would still be coming upward at some angle, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: No. I think it's more straight. I really, you know --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, how does it come out the top of his head?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, that's because if his head is like that --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: -- then it's almost going in that direction, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If it's straight, it's going to go here and then out the top of his head?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, it absolutely could. You know, the thing about the neck, heads can twist and turn, so it's not at all inconsistent with that. It's most reliable that we can look at the shoulder wound and see that it's kind of -- you know, it's very difficult to assess the angle from where you're standing, and that's only because the head can bend and twist. And so we can only know where it entered and where it exited, and it's possible that the head could have been twisted or turned to correspond.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Would it be more consistent if he --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Turn your head the other way, Mr. Barber.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- like that to get it out the top of the head?
ELLEN RIEMER: You know, that could be. However, we have a defect over here, so how did that happen?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Pull your head back and keep it over in that direction.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: In other words -- let me adjust him. Back and then over that way?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that consistent with it coming in here, going this way, and then out the top of the head?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. I think that the head tilt to the right as you just demonstrated --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: -- is perfectly consistent with that. However, because the whole ear is here, I think his -- even if his head is to the right, it could still be turned like that. Okay? Now that makes sense to me. Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, the shooter would be at least 3 feet away from that right there, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And would his -- would he have it up or would he have it down or --
ELLEN RIEMER: It's hard to say, and that's because the head can -- we only have one area of an entrance wound here. It seems to be approximately horizontal, but it's impossible for me to say whether it's -- that the entrance is kind of below him or at his level or potentially all the way over. It's hard to know. And that's because people aren't necessarily standing up straight, and they also -- the thing about injuries on the head and neck, there's so much twisting and bending possible.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Mr. Barber, stand up straight. Yeah straight there. Sorry.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, now what you tell us is basically from here back on his skull --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I don't know if they can see. Why don't you stand over there so you don't block them.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: From here back on his skull -- and I've looked at your autopsy pictures -- all of this is gone.
ELLEN RIEMER: On the right side, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: On the right side.
ELLEN RIEMER: And there were fractures on the left.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
ELLEN RIEMER: So, we know -- we know it's going in a left/right direction there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you could have a seat for a moment, please. Thank you. I may be done. Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You can go ahead and take the stand again, please. Okay. Let me ask you a couple of preparatory questions. Are you familiar with this book?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and it is like a definitive -- I mean, I'm told most pathologists have read this and used this.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. It's a -- it's a highly respected book on gunshot wounds.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, if you go to page 228 in this book. Sorry. Can you identify this as page 228 in this book that was --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes, 228.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm showing the State a copy of page 228.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Defendant's Exhibit 116, is this a copy of what I just showed you out of the book?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we would offer this into evidence.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What says the State?
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, no objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you.
(PHOTOCOPY OF PAGE FROM BOOK MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 116 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, could I have this on the screen, please? Can you do this for me? Would you start -- show me the first two slides up at the top along with --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, the caption on this will show: The sequence of events that occur at the muzzle on the firing of a shotgun. Note a large gas cloud that's partially responsible for the severe nature of wounds in the contact range. So, the first A is the shotgun being fired, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: That's what it looks like, yes. I didn't read the captions.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What now?
ELLEN RIEMER: There's captions at the bottom. Oh, yeah, so --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Oh, captions at the bottom? Okay. No. I don't think they are, but I'll show you the book.
ELLEN RIEMER: Okay. Okay. So, I imagine that's sequence, right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I didn't write the book.
ELLEN RIEMER: No. Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, the sequence of a shotgun shell being fired are the first one is it being fired. The second one notes: a large gas cloud that's partially responsible for the severe nature of the wounds on contact. And the third one is the contact wounds. And then you see on the last one --
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't see them on my screen. Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you would go down to the last two. There you go, C and .D.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You see the -- I guess at the front end would be the pellets and the gas would be preceding the pellets. Is that correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: No. I don't think that that's correct. This is depicting contact range. It's specifically says a contact range.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: So, pellets are not yet released from the wadding.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Well, we're going to go a little bit further on that in a minute. Let me refer -- referring again to -- well, let me ask you this question. If this book says contact shotgun wounds of the head are among the most mutilating firearm wounds there are, you would agree with that?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Extensive destruction of bone and soft tissue structure with the bursting ruptures of the head are the rule rather than the exception, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: These are the wounds in which an individual is said to have his head -- blown his head off, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: In some cases, this is almost literally true. The skull may be largely fragmented, with the brain pulpified. Large fragments of the cranial ball and cerebral hemispheres are often ejected from the head. The scalp is extensively lacerated due to two factors: the charge of the shot entering the skull, and the gas from combination of the propellant.
MR. WATERS: Object to the form of the question, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What is the question?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Does this -- one pathologist told me this is the bible of gun wounds for pathologists. Is that correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, there's a lot of literature, and this is a highly respected primary source. It's not the only one, but it -- what are you asking me about?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Does the shot -- are there two factors which contribute this, this -- the thing we just talked about, the shattering and perhaps even the ejection of the brain, are there two factors, the charge of the shot entering the skull, and the gas combustion of the propellent?
ELLEN RIEMER: Okay. He's actually discussing contact shotgun wounds --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yes, ma'am.
ELLEN RIEMER: -- and that's not what we have here, but we have similar destruction.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right, and we're going to talk about that in just a minute. But let me -- this is about a contact wound, I agree.
ELLEN RIEMER: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You have not indicated it was a contact wound.
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: We're going to talk about that in a minute.
ELLEN RIEMER: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: The shot -- the shot directly -- is -- does the shot on a contact wound from a shotgun directly fracture the skull and shreds the brain while at the same time producing pressure waves that increase the severity of these injuries as well as ejecting the brain tissue?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes, it frequently happens that way.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. The gas entering the closed chamber of the head expands rapidly, adding -- does -- I'm sorry, I'll make this is question so I don't get objected to. Does the gas entering the closed chamber of the head expand rapidly, adding to the pressure waves acting on the bony framework of the skull, the only way for the skull to relieve the pressure produced is to shatter?
ELLEN RIEMER: I would agree with that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, it's your opinion that -- well, let me ask you this. If the shotgun muzzle was 3 to 4 feet away, would gas have entered the body?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, it's still a very destructive wound. I mean, in my experience there is still a huge amount of energy that would enter the head from a shotgun wound even if it's not contact.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and perhaps I misstated the question. Would gas, just a yes or no response, from 4 feet away enter the body and be destructive?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. I don't know if it's gas that's causing the destruction, but the -- there must be some amount of energy that's causing this destruction because a shotgun wound to the head, no matter what the distance, causes -- but whether it's due to gas or not, I really can't answer that question. This is not something I have, you know -- I've done no experiments like this as in the book.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But this is a book you check for reference, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, it's good source. But, you know, I don't know whether the gas would be responsible for the destruction of the skull from a few feet away. There is destruction of the skull. I don't know it's attributed specifically to gas or to other factors, so I really can't answer that. And if he says that, that's fine, but I, you know -- I don't know. He's talking about a contact wound. I cannot necessarily extend that conclusion to what would happen a few feet away. But there is frequently destruction of the head.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I understand. There was massive destruction of the head. I'm just trying to get my arms around the definitive work on -- one of the definitive works indicates that in most instances, the vast majority, that kind of destruction is caused by gas on a contact wound.
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, this is a mechanism that he's describing based on experimental data. And I'm a forensic pathologist. I've not performed this kind of experimental data, nor would I extrapolate from his conclusions about a contact gunshot wound to whether the same amount of gas is produced at a distance.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, ma'am -- and, Dr. Riemer, we can walk through this, but these are based on -- these are based not on some experiment but actually on people that typically shot themselves in the head, contact wound with the shotgun. Would that surprise you?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, these are depictions of shotguns being fired. Yeah. Contact shotgun wounds to the head cause massive destruction, and a lot of that is from gas build up.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now we're on the same page. So, it's your position there's a lot of energy when it's fired from 3 or 4 feet away, hits the shoulder, hits the neck, comes through and hits the head, and the head explodes, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And have you had a number of autopsies you've done of victims whose heads have exploded as a result of shotguns?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And any of those -- many of those are contact suicide wounds?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Have you ever had one, and we're going to talk about the details of that, where someone was shot from 3 or 4 feet away, no initial contact to the head? You would agree no initial contact with the head.
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It goes through the shoulder, the neck, and then the head explodes. Have you ever had one of those?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes, these are very dynamic, and he still actually had a lot of his head there. Sometimes with a shotgun wound the entire head is basically -- you don't really see very much above, like, the teeth. So, this was -- you know, there was obviously horrible destruction of this skull, but it was -- his face was intact, and frequently a contact causes fractures of the face. So, you know, it's -- and I don't see any evidence of contact range discharge on the left side of the neck. So, it was not my conclusion, that was not my opinion that this is a contact shotgun wound.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Well, let's talk a little bit about this. Your position is the energy by a shotgun blast that went through the arm, through the neck, and up to the brain still has enough energy. Is it energy caused by -- is it pellets going into the brain?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. Well, not just pellets, but there's also fracturing of the base of the skull, which is a bone at the -- that holds underneath the skull, and that fracturing with sufficient force can actually push the brain out.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And --
ELLEN RIEMER: So, it's a variety of mechanisms that could contribute to the destruction and the loss of brain tissue.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It not only pushes and fractures the skull. In this case, the brain was brought to you in a separate bag because it ended up laying at his feet. It went up in the air and then plopped down at his feet, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. The entire brain.
ELLEN RIEMER: Most of it, yeah, except for the brain stem.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Exploded out of his head.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And the skull was at least almost destroyed around where you say the exit wound is, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, did -- you've indicated the State did not show you any crime scene photos, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. I really didn't look at them. Yeah. I mean, they might have said, okay, you know, this is a picture of the wall, but I didn't look at that. And they were thumbnail size, so -- this was a couple of weeks before trial.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now we --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you would put back up Exhibit Number -- Exhibit Number 112, please. Is that 112? That's the chest. I apologize, 113. Can you focus on that area where the pellets are, please? Yeah, right there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So at his shoulder, how big a spread is that? How -- I mean, as it comes in, is it 2 inches? 3 inches? 4 inches? 5 inches? That wound?
ELLEN RIEMER: I didn't measure the spread of the pellets.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, how about --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And I apologize to the jury. This is pretty graphic. How about pull up 109.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, this depicts a very big wound in the shoulder, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. That's a typical appearing shotgun entrance wound.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and can you come down here for just a second, please? Hold on, just wait one second. I may be jumping the gun here procedurally.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You're right, I need to offer.
MR. WATERS: Your Honor, the State would request that the defense move an exhibit into evidence before they show it to the jury.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I apologize, Your Honor. And this is Exhibit Number -- I've got multiple of these. What is this exhibit number? I'm sorry.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: 109.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: 109 yeah. I apologize, Your Honor, I got ahead of myself. It won't take two seconds. 110. 110, 109. Here we go.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: This is State -- State -- Defense Exhibit Number 109. Have you seen that before?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. This is my autopsy photo.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Offer this into evidence, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted.
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 109 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Would you put it up on the screen, please?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now if you look at this photo, we see this is the entrance wound.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And then it goes in here, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: That's correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So -- but this is a much larger wound than the next one in line, is it not?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, that's okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, let me ask you this in terms of understanding a shotgun. A shotgun pattern, as we saw in the photo, starts out basically the size of the shell, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Um --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you would just answer the question, and then you can explain. Does it start out as the same size as the shell?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and as it goes forward the pattern expands, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and it continues to expand even after it hits something, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, now please explain to me why this wound -- and it looks like it's -- if you use me on my left shoulder, what is the -- what is the --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. I would be delighted to tell you why this entrance wound is larger than this one, even though what you said is correct and that was spread. And that's because the entrance wound to the left shoulder, it's not straight on perpendicular. If it was straight on perpendicular, then we would have a smaller hole. But this is going in a tangential manner across. So, it's -- we're not really looking at a perpendicular, you know, entrance wound that's going to make a round hole. So, as it's coursing along the top of the left shoulder, we get more of an oblong. In contrast, its continuation into the left side of the cheek is kind of straight on at a 90-degree angle, so that's why that was smaller. So, there was nothing about this that was inconsistent with what I would expect from the shotgun.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, tell me -- so you're saying this shot, this second hole was made in this direction. Is that what you're saying?
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't -- I just said that that was a continuation of the logical sequence. It dents it here. It splits, causing a lot of destruction, and then entered the left side of the neck. So --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, that big wound is because it's in a different direction than the small wound is your explanation.
ELLEN RIEMER: At a different angle --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right?
ELLEN RIEMER: -- along the surface of the skin.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and there's no pellets in his face, are there?
ELLEN RIEMER: There were some pellets that we saw on the x-rays.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But not in his face.
ELLEN RIEMER: Not in the front of his face.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right. So, as it continues on, is there any evidence that it expands even more?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, it did cause -- you know, there's so much destruction you can't exactly, you know, have a single, you know, easily tracked path. Because when the skull is involved, there is so much expansion either from gasses or just from the blast of the projectiles that it caused -- we can't really track. It caused an exit on the right side of the back of the head with loss of the brain and lots of skull fractures predominately on the right side.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, but you would agree with me that wound appears to be much larger than the next wound.
ELLEN RIEMER: Oh, absolutely.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and one explanation -- you have an explanation for that. Could the other explanation be that that -- this is an exit wound and that is an exit wound? Could that be a reasonable explanation? I'm going to show you something in a minute that may assist you in making that decision, but could -- is it a possibility?
ELLEN RIEMER: That would not -- that is not -- I do not believe this is consistent with an exit wound from a shotgun. There would be a lot more destruction because, you know, there would be -- it would come -- it had to come from somewhere, right, somewhere else.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How about a contact wound on the head, on the right back of the head?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I would not expect that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What would you expect to see on the bone structure of the back right of the head if that was a contact wound on the head?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I would not expect the brain to -- we would have an opening of a lot of stuff. We have had a path through the brain, which is not at all what, what happened here.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So if there was a contact wound, and we saw a moment ago, and you agree, that the gas would enter first, explode the skull, the brain would pop out. Did you find any pellets in the brain?
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't know if they were in the brain, but the brain is basically intact. A contact gunshot wound to the top of the head would cause, you know, a huge defect of the brain.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right, because the gas going in on a contact wound would create such a pressure, as we just read, that the skull would explode and the brain would pop out.
ELLEN RIEMER: No. I don't think know that would happen from a gun wound that was going toward the brain from the bottom. I think we would have just certainly destruction of the brain, but it wouldn't just pop out because it's in the path of fire. There's going to be massive destruction of the brain. It may end up on the floor, but it's going to be in multiple fragments. So, in my experience in doing this --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You can go ahead and take the stand.
ELLEN RIEMER: -- I do not think that the brain would have popped out the way it did from an entrance wound on the top of the head.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, let me ask you to look at -- this is Defense Exhibit 59 put into evidence in the State's case.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Would you put -- and this is under seal. And I would also, Your Honor, ask the other photos I put in be put under seal.
JUDGE NEWMAN: They're under seal.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you. Would you put Defense Exhibit Number 59? And I apologize to the jury for the graphic nature of this.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. I would like you -- do you recognize this?
ELLEN RIEMER: I have not seen this photograph, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Would you disagree with me that's a photograph of, that's been testified, Paul Murdaugh at the scene?
ELLEN RIEMER: It does look -- yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And the way he was found.
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't know how he was found.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, but this is a photograph you've never seen?
ELLEN RIEMER: I've never seen this photograph.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Let me get one thing before I ask you questions about it. Okay. a couple of things.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you would center on his head -- Okay, and I think --
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, do you see a sort of semicircle defect in the skull right here? Do you see where I'm looking?
ELLEN RIEMER: Do it again.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right here.
ELLEN RIEMER: I do see a defect, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: All right. In the skull.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Semicircle.
ELLEN RIEMER: It does have a semicircular appearance.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Can you determine from looking at the photograph any beveling?
ELLEN RIEMER: As I said earlier, beveling is not really too reliable when we have so much destruction of the head. But if you're asking me if that could have been a contact shotgun wound to the top of the head with a kind of curved entrance, I would expect to see soot. We always get soot from contact wounds. And it would -- it's deposited on the outer table of the skull. So, there is no burning, no soot on the outer table of the skull to support that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Did you take an autopsy photo of this area of the skull?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, when he came in I do believe I took an area of the skull, but it may not have caught that curvature.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Did you shave his head?
ELLEN RIEMER: No, I did not.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You did shave Maggie's head for a head wound, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Why didn't you shave his head to examine this? You would agree with me had his head been shaved, you would have had a better look at this wound.
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I believe that my assessment of it was correct, and without -- usually shaving is along an entrance wound, not an exit wound. So, I determined this was an exit, and shaving is not done on exit wounds. I shaved Maggie's because that was an entrance wound, and it gives me an opportunity to see the margins of the entrance defect.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I guess what I'm asking is, you decided that that was an exit wound without shaving the head, without looking for stippling, without looking for soot because you would agree with me that to do that effectively, you would have to shave the head.
ELLEN RIEMER: To observe marks on the skin, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
ELLEN RIEMER: But also there would be soot on the outer table of the skull.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, did you look for it? You apparently had already decided --
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I did look. I didn't necessarily -- I didn't take a picture from this angle necessarily. I did take a picture after I -- from the top of his head. But my determination, based on my experience, was that the entrance wound was over here. It doesn't mean somebody else cannot disagree with me, but that's my opinion.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Somebody can disagree with you and that would be a reasonable disagreement.
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I would say that people can disagree, but that doesn't mean that -- it doesn't change the truth.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You would also agree with me, though, that your notes contain no mention of the lack of or presence of stippling or soot on that part of his head. You never looked for it, did you?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I looked for it. I look -- I look at all of the wounds and if there was, I would have documented it. But I don't document the absence of soot or stippling on what I've determined to be an exit wound.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And I don't see any note of yours where you examined that exit wound in detail. I mean, shaved his head, looked for some distortion that would be inconsistent with the conclusion you'd already come to, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I came to the conclusion based on my examination of the entire area.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and as this book -- this book indicates the vast majority of this kind of damage, the vast majority, I mean, they say most probably almost certainly is a contact wound to the head that ejects the gas which explodes the head. Is that not true? Do you want to read the book?
ELLEN RIEMER: No. I do think that you're kind of -- you're extending his statement. He's describing -- he's describing contact gunshot wounds to the head. Actually a contact gunshot wound to the top of the head like that, like I told you, it would have caused fragmentation of the brain, not ejection of the brain, based on my experience. And then there would be a lot more -- we would have a lot more fragments. It would never have just left the rest of the skull intact. We would have had fractures of the face. There's massive amount. I don't believe that the, the, the fractures of his skull are consistent with that being a contact shotgun wound. I understand that that is massive destruction of the head from shotgun wounds, but in this case we do have -- the brain was basically left intact. We don't have a path through the brain. It's a very dynamic -- you know, there's gasses, there's pellets, there's fractured bone. But in my opinion, based on my experience, that was not an entrance wound and that -- this was not an exit.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And you indicated, I looked at your autopsy report that -- well, first of all, do you believe this was caused by pellets entering the brain cavity?
ELLEN RIEMER: I think it's a combination of different things. I don't think it's from pellets specifically.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What was it?
ELLEN RIEMER: I think it's from the gas built up in the brain and fractures of the skull, and that -- just basically a lot of gas build up in that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, that's -- where did those gasses come from?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. There's -- it's a huge amount of energy from a shotgun.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry, if you would answer my question. Where did the gasses you just testified that causes destruction come from?
ELLEN RIEMER: From a -- from the -- the shotgun wound.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: A shotgun wound, you testified, was created by a weapon that was more than 3 feet, 4 feet away, that gasses traveled through the air, traveled through that shoulder wound, traveled through the neck, and then explode his head.
ELLEN RIEMER: It's not just gasses, but it's a combination of gasses and the pellets as well.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But there would have been a significant amount of gas involved to explode his head.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And it would be pellets -- would they be present in the brain after that brain exploded?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, the brain -- the pellets may not have reached the brain. The brain may have been ejected just by virtue of the skull fragmenting, and the base of the skull pushing it up. There's -- it's not possible for me to say exactly why the brain came out here.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you would agree with me, based on the literature, it's much more common for a contact wound where the gas goes in, contact, explode the head.
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, in my experience a contact shotgun wound could cause this type of damage, but it would frequently cause even more damage. Like, a lot of times there is just massive destruction of the entire head. At least the front of his head was -- the front of his face where the bones were intact.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I hear what you're saying is that it would -- it would have produced massive destruction, but it would have always included massive destruction of the face?
ELLEN RIEMER: Okay. Well, let me tell you. There are other reasons why I concluded that the entrance wounds were here. Okay? We have a lot of -- basically a bunch of tightly -- tight pellets over here.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right.
ELLEN RIEMER: If -- they would be more spread out if the entrance wound was here. By the time it got to here, there would be a lot more pellets over a wider area.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How many more?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, it would -- no, I'm not saying more pellets. I'm saying there would be a wider spread of pellets. This was still in a relatively narrow range. It was along the top of the shoulder, so --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: From my head to my shoulders on a direct route.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How far is that?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, honestly the spread would not -- I don't believe they would have been as tight along the shoulder. I think we -- and we also would have had a lot more -- a larger defect probably on the larger --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: A larger defect --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. Look --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- between here and here?
ELLEN RIEMER: -- every single shotgun wound and gunshot wound, they're each a little bit different. So, a lot of this is judgment and assessment at the time of the autopsy. It's not theoretical whether there's gas build up or not gas build up. I can see this is a shotgun wound. We have pellet entrance defects around this large defect.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What's -- okay. Pellet -- you just told me you couldn't do a bevel assessment on skin. How do you know they're entrance rather than exit on the skin?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I'll tell you.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Good.
ELLEN RIEMER: And the reason is if pellets are going through the shoulder, we wouldn't have a big, large oblong defect. We would have holes from the pellets, not an oblong ovoid defect. So, you'll recall on his arm, Paul's arm, those pellets, they came from -- and then along here, we just basically have pellet exit wounds. And we don't have them on the shoulder. We have basically a larger confluent wound that was not caused by individual pellets.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Well, let me ask you this then.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You can take that picture down, please.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. It's not my opinion that that is -- the entrance wound was to the top of the head.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And could you put -- no, we don't even need to do that. I don't need to see the picture. The chest shot, it goes through his chest, comes out under his harm, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. On the left side, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: The left side. It comes out under his arm. And what do we have -- what do we have on the inside and outside of that arm?
ELLEN RIEMER: We have pellet --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Coming in and out we have a pattern of pellets.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Just like the pattern of pellets that you're talking about, which you say the exit wound here, exit wound from about the same distance, pellets from the same distance, pellets, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, there are pellets in the shoulder. But we have a, like, a ovoid defect at the top of the left shoulder. They're not as much individual pellet wounds. We have pellets embedded in the tissue but the actual defect -- we don't have a defect like that on his arm, even though it may be the same distance. And the reason is because the pellets are exiting, but each one is going through the left arm individually. Okay? Whereas at the -- if this was the entrance at the right side of the top of the back of the head -- it's a good thought, you know. Let's think about this. And if it was coming through the head, regardless of what happened to the brain, and then exited here and then went along here, we would have a lot more individual pellet wounds on the shoulder as opposed to a large, like, huge, you know, big area of skin and subcutaneous tissue loss. Pellets don't cause that type of damage on their own.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you and I both counted something between thirty and forty pellets in that shell pin in that shoulder wound a little while ago, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. There were something like that, about that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you know how many pellets are in a duck shot or birdshot 12 gauge shell?
ELLEN RIEMER: No, I don't remember. That would be --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you don't know whether that was 90 percent of the pellets or 60 percent of the pellets or 50?
ELLEN RIEMER: No, I do not.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Would that make a difference to you, how many of the pellets that were fired ended up there?
ELLEN RIEMER: No.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you're saying just because the wound here is bigger and the wound in his chin is smaller doesn't mean the shotgun pellets spread out, right? They spread out. And they don't contract, you would agree with me -- just -- please answer --
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't whether to --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Just answer --
ELLEN RIEMER: -- agree with you because I'm not understanding your question.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Let me rephrase it. If you view that wound on his shoulder as the entrance wound -- and I believe you have.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You would agree with me that it is -- whether it's coming across the top or whatever, it is a bigger wound than the wound in his chin. In other words, the -- are you saying that those were so focused that they -- as they went through or across the top, they actually contracted?
ELLEN RIEMER: No.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
ELLEN RIEMER: I explained that this was larger because it was tangential across the top of the shoulder, so that's the kind of wound.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You would agree with me that reasonable people could have a difference of opinion about these facts.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Pardon me, excuse me.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you'll give me just 2 seconds to make sure everything is in evidence that I wanted.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I apologize, Your Honor, I spread everything out over here. I'm going to leave the rest of this until after his examination, if that's okay with the Court?
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. Redirect?
MR. WATERS: Thank you, Your Honor. May it please the Court?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. WATERS:
MR. WATERS: Your job is to do what? What do you do?
ELLEN RIEMER: I do autopsies in order to determine the cause and manner of death.
MR. WATERS: And when you're asked to do an autopsy, are you told any sort of conclusion to come to, or do you just look at the evidence and the body before you and come to whatever conclusions that body tells you?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes, and I examine the body, and I come to a conclusion based on reasonable medical certainty based on my education and experience.
MR. WATERS: So, was it part of your job to look at crime scene photos and that sort of thing, or are you relying on what the body tells you?
ELLEN RIEMER: My job is to look at the body; that's my job. Crime scene photos, crime scene evidence is somebody else's -- somebody else's project. That doesn't -- that's not incorporated into my conclusion.
MR. WATERS: I want to talk about -- we've gone into a long examination about the top of the head, and you talked about soot and stippling, so I want to make sure the jury understands the difference between the two. You saw stippling on the chest wound to Paul. Is that correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: All right. Explain to the jury the difference between soot and stippling, and what that tells you, and what it doesn't tell you.
ELLEN RIEMER: Okay. So, the stippling is like the pieces of gunpowder that deposit on the skin when something is fired within 2 to 3 feet from the barrel of the gun, not the shooting but the barrel of the gun. Soot is like real burning powder, burning marks from very hot gunpowder that's still basically burning, and it causes, like, a burning wound. That's the soot. And we don't see soot except within a few inches, depending on the gun, but we would like not expect to see soot further away from 6 inches. So, the fact that we have stippling but no soot, we can fairly say it's between -- it's not closer than 6 inches, even though I know it's most likely within 3 feet.
MR. WATERS: Right. So, you observed stippling on the wound to the chest for Paul, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: Did you observe stippling anywhere else?
ELLEN RIEMER: No.
MR. WATERS: All right. Did you observe any soot at all on Paul's body?
ELLEN RIEMER: No.
MR. WATERS: And did you -- particularly on the top of the head, did you observe any soot there?
ELLEN RIEMER: No.
MR. WATERS: And you were asked a little bit -- you had testified yesterday about, you know, the tilting of the head and the manner in which the shotgun blast went through the chest -- excuse me, went through the shoulder into the neck and then out the top of the head, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. I think that that's a reasonable conclusion.
MR. WATERS: All right, and that still is your most likely conclusion. Is that correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: That's my most likely conclusion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty. It doesn't mean it's 100 percent the only thing, but that's my opinion based on my experience.
MR. WATERS: All right, and how many autopsies have you done?
ELLEN RIEMER: Approximate 5500.
MR. WATERS: And how long have you been do doing this?
ELLEN RIEMER: Oh, twenty plus years.
MR. WATERS: Okay. Dr. Riemer and Professor Riemer, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: You were asked about the book. And all of that discussion that the defense counsel was talking to you out of the book, that was dealing with a contact wound, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes. I mean, I'm not going to disagree with a book, but that's -- the discussion is regarding a contact shotgun wound.
MR. WATERS: All right, and in your expert opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, you saw no evidence of a contact wound in this particular case with Paul. Is that correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: All right. Now, you were asked a lot -- let me ask you this. A lot of what was in that book when they're talking about those contact wounds, they were exploring a -- someone using a shotgun to commit suicide, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, you know, frequently contact wounds do indicate a suicide, but potentially people can be shot by another also at contact range.
MR. WATERS: All right, and your manner of death that you determined for Paul to a reasonable degree of medical certainty was what?
ELLEN RIEMER: Homicide.
MR. WATERS: Homicide. Which means?
ELLEN RIEMER: Death at the hands of another.
MR. WATERS: All right, and did you see with this shot to the chest, or the shot that went through the shoulder into his head, any evidence whatsoever that this could potentially be a suicidal wound?
ELLEN RIEMER: I did not believe that it was at all consistent with a suicide wound.
MR. WATERS: To a reasonable degree of medical certainty.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: In your expert opinion.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: Let's talk a little bit more about the head wound. And you've been asked a lot of questions about the possibility that this was a contact wound from the top of the head. Is that correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: And your opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty is that it is not.
ELLEN RIEMER: It is not.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and let's talk about just very quickly without belaboring the point some of the reasons. First of all, you saw no soot, correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. WATERS: And then also with the damage inside Paul's head, did you see any evidence that would indicate --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Objection. Leading, Your Honor.
MR. WATERS: Did you see any evidence that would indicate to you from the damage that was -- Paul suffered that the force of the shot was going this way as opposed to that way? Going down from the top of his head as opposing to going --
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah. I don't believe that it was going from the top of his head down. I don't think the damage to the head was consistent with that.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and the -- was the brain -- you said that the brain came to you in a separate container. Is that correct?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yeah, most of it.
MR. WATERS: All right, and did you -- in examining the brain, did you see any evidence whatsoever that would be consistent with the force of the shot, including the pellets and everything else, going into the top of the head and into the brain that way?
ELLEN RIEMER: No. I did not see any evidence of that.
MR. WATERS: To a reasonable degree of medical certainty?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: Did you find any wadding in Paul's head cavity?
ELLEN RIEMER: I don't think there was any wadding.
MR. WATERS: You were asked a lot about the shoulder and how it was -- in the picture you were shown it was more -- in that picture, at least, it was kind of a gaping sort of wound. Is that fair to say?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and his shoulder, was it kind of squinched up in that picture a little bit? I don't know if that's a technical term, squinch, but --
ELLEN RIEMER: You mean the photograph?
MR. WATERS: The photograph that you were shown.
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I took a picture of his -- the shoulder area, yes.
MR. WATERS: Okay, and just so I understand, as opposed to a direct-on wound and sort of the size of that, and then a wound that goes along the side of the shoulder like you identified in this case, explain to the jury again how those were going to create different shapes of wounds.
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Object, Your Honor. Not in response. He's asking her to explain again. That would be repetitive.
JUDGE NEWMAN: I sustain the objection.
MR. WATERS: Was the wound to the shoulder, was that straight on or oblong to the side?
ELLEN RIEMER: It was a tangential type of shotgun wound.
MR. WATERS: With that shoulder wound that -- you've identified that as the entrance wound, the initial wound?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: Would you still expect to find the pellets in that wound consistent with what you saw in Paul?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
MR. WATERS: Thank you, Dr. Riemer.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Anything further?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yes, sir, just a couple of questions.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. HARPOOTLIAN:
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I want to make sure I understand a couple of the answers you gave to the Attorney General. We previously established you did not see any real crime scene photos in this case.
ELLEN RIEMER: Correct.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: In many crime cases, or some crime cases, do you look at crime scene photos to help you or assist you in your opinions concerning certain things on the autopsy?
ELLEN RIEMER: No, honestly I don't. It's my job to examine the body, and I come to my conclusions, and I don't really, you know, look at the crime scene photos. I could potentially ask for them if I saw something very unusual, and I'll say, wow, how did that happen? Or sometimes I'll see an entrance gunshot wound that has, you know -- I mean, all obsessive -- there may be a lot of, you know, glass around it and I'll say, wow, did this go through a window first? And I'll ask that question. I don't necessarily have to look at the photos. So, there is information that I might ask. But, you know, looking at the crime scene photos is really, you know, not something that I do to help me come to a conclusion. I -- whatever is on the body, I will rely on what I see on the body, and if it fits with the crime scene photos, fine, but if not, I have my conclusions based on the body.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you just conceded you do occasionally ask to see crime scene photos. Occasionally.
ELLEN RIEMER: No. I don't ask to see the crime scene photos. I will ask to see -- ask if something -- but I just recently had a victim of multiple gunshot wounds, and I thought she may have been sitting in a car. Nobody told me anything like that. Because there was a bunch of like glass fragments kind of -- all the entrance wounds were to the left side, and all of the exit wounds were to the right, and then there were, like, fragments of glass and kind of car parts, you know, banging into the skin, so I was, like, was she in a car. But I don't ask to see the photos really, I don't. It's not part of, you know, my evaluation of the cause and manner of death doing an autopsy.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But like in this case, you had conversations with the investigating officers, did you not?
ELLEN RIEMER: At their request.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: At their request. Did you have a conversation with SLED Agent Owens about the bruising on her calf?
ELLEN RIEMER: Well, I did not actually observe that at the autopsy, so I really couldn't come to any conclusion. And it's very possible that that was dirt from a shoe that was already gone by the time it came to me. I'm not autopsying the bodies at the scene. There's, you know, there's transport, there's movement into a body bag. But, yeah, I -- it may have been asked to me, but I don't -- I distinctly said I didn't see that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you did have a meeting with -- after the autopsy with -- and your report -- with, I believe it's Lieutenant Owens with SLED, the chief investigating officer, and discussed the, the -- did he show you the muddy print, a picture of it?
MR. WATERS: Objection. Beyond the scope.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, she --
JUDGE NEWMAN: The objection is sustained.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I think that's probably all I have. Thank you so much for being here today.
ELLEN RIEMER: Oh, sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But an opinion is an opinion, right?
ELLEN RIEMER: Yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, ma'am, you may step down.
(The witness exited the stand.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, we'll take a break for about 15 minutes. Please do not discuss the case.
(The jury left the courtroom.)
(A break was taken.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: You may bring the jury.
(The jury returned to the courtroom.)
COURT BAILIFF: The jury is present, sir.