Melinda Worley — Cross/Redirect/Recross
1,076 linesMONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2023
(Court resumed at 9:30 a.m.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Anything before we proceed?
MR. WATERS: Nothing from the State, Your Honor.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Nothing from the defense, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: All right. If we may have our witness back.
(The jury returned to the courtroom.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Good morning.
(The jury responded good morning.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen, to day number six. Has anyone attempted to contact or talk with you, or anyone?
(All jurors said no.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Very good. Cross-examination begins. Mr. Harpootlian.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Please the Court, Your Honor?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence one moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Good morning.
(The jury responded good morning.)
The witness, MELINDA WORLEY, remained under oath and testified as follows:
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. HARPOOTLIAN:
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, get organized here. I'm calling you Ms. Worley. Do you have a rank?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm a senior criminalist.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But not lieutenant or captain. Senior?
MELINDA WORLEY: Criminalist.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What is a criminalist?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm in the lab basically.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm based in the lab, the forensic lab.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you went out to this crime scene?
MELINDA WORLEY: I did.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you normally go out to crime scenes?
MELINDA WORLEY: At that time, yes. I was a special agent.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You were a what?
MELINDA WORLEY: I was a special agent at the time that I worked this case.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and a special agent is -- what's so special about the special agent?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's what SLED agents are referred to as.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence one moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, let's talk a little bit about what you did on this case, and I'm try not to repeat a lot of testimony from our scintillating Friday afternoon together. When did you first go to the scene?
MELINDA WORLEY: I responded as soon as I got the phone call at 10:33 p.m. I got on the road from my house within 30 minutes and arrived on scene at 12:07 a.m.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: 12:07 a.m.?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now when you got there, the Colleton County Sheriff's Department, were they supposed to process the scene?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What they were supposed to do?
MELINDA WORLEY: Secure it.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Secure it so nobody could walk over things and nobody could in any way disturb trace evidence, forensic evidence. Isn't that correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now when you got there, did you determine they had done more than just secure the scene?
MELINDA WORLEY: They marked some evidence that they found before we got there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And you also found, for instance, that -- we've shown you videos that they actually -- some of them, or at least one of them, if not two of them, walked into the feed room where with Paul was killed, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Someone did to place Marker 1.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: Someone had walked in there to place Marker 1.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And matter of fact, when you did your footwear placement impression examination, you found that there was a bloody footprint caused by one of the officers. Isn't that right?
MELINDA WORLEY: After we had started processing the scene, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yes, but, I mean, one of the bloody footprints in that feed room was not Paul, not the perpetrator. It was a police officer.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Probably a Colleton County police officer.
MELINDA WORLEY: I don't know that for sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Who else could it be?
MELINDA WORLEY: It could have been one of us from SLED.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: One of yours?
MELINDA WORLEY: I don't think it was mine, but it could be been from SLED. I don't know.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could have been SLED, could have been Colleton County, could have been the coroner.
MELINDA WORLEY: Sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But, I mean -- and in your business there are rules about who should be walking through crime scenes, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Preferably as few people as possible. If you don't need to be in there, then you shouldn't be in there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And when they, like, went around and pulled the sheet up, they were walking in an area where most likely the perpetrator had walked, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Possibly, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I mean, that's right outside of the feed room.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And those shells casings that were near, or some of them were near, some of them from further away from Maggie's body. Walking in the dark likens -- like -- increases the probability that some trace evidence has been disturbed or destroyed.
MELINDA WORLEY: It was probably why they went ahead and marked evidence before we got there because they found it and went ahead and marked it so it wouldn't be disturbed.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But couldn't they have stood back and said there are shell casings in there so when you got there, you would have been -- maybe you even would have waited until the next morning when you had some light, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: No. We would have started like we did: as soon as we got on the scene.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Well, you did some measurements.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And those measurements are recorded on a sketch you did.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Not to scale.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Make sure. Yeah -- yeah, that's my stuff.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, let's look at.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Mr. Harpootlian, do you need more time before proceeding?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, I'm just trying to --
JUDGE NEWMAN: Do you need more time?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No, sir, I'm ready. Let me see if she can identify this.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you tell me what that is, please?
MELINDA WORLEY: This is my final crime scene diagram.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and you did it.
MELINDA WORLEY: I did.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You can identify it.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we would offer this document into evidence, please. It's her crime scene --
JUDGE NEWMAN: What number would that be for the defense?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Any objection?
MS. GOUDE: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted without objection.
(DIAGRAM MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 4 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, can you put Worley Number 1 up, please?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And you can see that on your screen?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And that is what I just showed you, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And -- but what's important to note at the outset is this is not to scale, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: We never do our diagrams to scale, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, but it does tell us some things.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You found a projectile that went through the dog house.
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And you found a projectile that went through the small animal cage.
MELINDA WORLEY: We didn't locate that projectile, but --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you had an entrance and exit wound.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yeah, that's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And -- now, these yellow items over here near Maggie's body, those represent Blackout ejected shells?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes. Those are the evidence markers marking 300 Blackout.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and did you take measurements of where those were compared to anything else? And, for instance, we see a 23.9 between this post and that post. Did you do anything like that for the projectiles?
MELINDA WORLEY: I don't believe I did the dog house because it was inside the bedding of the dog house.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry, what now?
MELINDA WORLEY: We didn't measure the projectile that was in the dog house.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No. I'm talking about these yellow --
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Did you measure where they were?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, I did.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And there are measurements somewhere?
MELINDA WORLEY: I believe on the second page.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Pardon me?
MELINDA WORLEY: The second page of my diagram, it should be one of those.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Let me go to page 2. Do you have your report with you?
MELINDA WORLEY: I do.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you have that page 2? I want to make sure I'm referring to the right one. Page 2 of 8, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: When it says you measured them RP1, RP2, what does that mean?
MELINDA WORLEY: Reference point. This corner of the feed room was reference point 1, this column was reference 2, and this column was reference point 3.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you find page 2 for me, please?
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me give you yours back and ask you --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What did I do with it? Here it is.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that what we were just looking at?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And are these your calculations?
MELINDA WORLEY: They are.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And this is what you recorded?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Any objection?
MS. GOUDE: No.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MS. GOUDE: No objection.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No objection. Okay. Your Honor, I would like to offer this into evidence. I think it's Defense 5.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted.
(MEASUREMENTS MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 5 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: We'll go back again and look at that again in a minute. And so --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could I have Worley Number 1 up again, please?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, you located these shell casings, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You did measurements of how far the small animal cage was from a reference point?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And how far did you -- what was the reference point for the dog house?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure that I measured the dog house to a reference point.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You did not measure the dog house?
MELINDA WORLEY: I don't think so.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, let's get a little more --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could you put K&W 1644 up, please? Let me show this to her. I'm sorry, I'm getting this out of whack.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you tell me what this is a photo of?
MELINDA WORLEY: It's the dog house.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, and I'll -- but did you make this or was this done under your supervision?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we'd offer this into evidence.
MS. GOUDE: No objection.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Number 6.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted.
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 6 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, hold on one second. So to give the jury some sense of your -- I'm not saying your sketch is bad but it's not to scale, though, and to give them some idea of the layout, this is the dog house, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, that's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: This is the -- what you call the small animal cage right here?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And that's off the ground.
MELINDA WORLEY: It has legs, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Legs, right. The dog house has got, like, a couple of two by fours on it so it's not laying directly on the ground, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, that's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And then if we look over to the right, that would be the door to the feed room where Paul was shot and killed.
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So we are all singing from the same sheet of music here, there's the small animal -- I want to call it quail but it's not -- is it quail? Quail, they apparently kept quail in there. And then there's the dog house, and then there's the door to the feed room. Did you do any measurements, or can you give us any -- if you're standing at the quail pen right over here and you're looking at a 90-degree angle, that is out in front of you. Am I right on that, 90 degrees?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Are you looking at the door to the feed room, or is it to the right or the left? Well, let me ask you this. Do you take any measurements?
MELINDA WORLEY: Not directly from the cage to the door, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you tell me whether -- what -- is it a 10 degree this way, 10 degree that way?
MELINDA WORLEY: I mean, I would have to look at the photographs, if any of the photographs show from the door to that animal cage or the animal cage to the door, and see if it was at an angle or not, but --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you didn't take any measurements when -- and when were you on the scene doing these measurements?
MELINDA WORLEY: My initial measurements were the night of the incident, and then that picture was taken July 16th when we went back to take additional measurements.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: After July 16th, you generated the sketch we saw a moment ago.
MELINDA WORLEY: No. I think I did this before we went back to the scene on the 16th.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, nothing changed in your sketch?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And to your knowledge, you never took any sort of directional -- directional examination of the reference points, for instance, the dog pen and the door to the feed room, or from the quail cage to the door of the feed room, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, do you know what -- hold on a second.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do we have FAR0?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What's FARO? Tell the jury what FARO is.
MELINDA WORLEY: FARO is a 3D laser scanner that we use to document scenes in case --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And did you use a FARO scanner on this scene?
MELINDA WORLEY: On the July 16th we did. We couldn't the night of the incident because it was raining.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, tell us how one scans for a FARO -- and by the way, is the end result of that FARO process a three dimensional view of the scene?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, that's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And so if -- you can manipulate it, turn it, examine it in any direction you want, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And you had that done in this case.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I did not hear the Attorney General ask you about it in your direct. Was it brought here to the courtroom?
MELINDA WORLEY: I believe it's here, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It's here. Okay. Well, I have a copy of what you furnished to us.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Any objection to this coming into evidence?
MS. GOUDE: No objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted without objection.
(FARO DVD MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER FOR 7 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you play that for me? Wait one second.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Does FARO stand for something, or is it a brand name like Coca Cola or Xerox or --
MELINDA WORLEY: It's a brand name. I think it does stand for something, I'm not sure what. We just always call it a FARO.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But it's a brand. When somebody says FARO, it's not -- there is a specific commercial produced called FARO that law enforcement uses and other folks use, too, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How about play that for me, and I may stop it from time to time.
MR. WATERS: I believe a juror raised his hand, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED JUROR: May I ask for that box to be moved to a lower location so I can see that screen?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah, I apologize. Okay, start it and then stop it. Go ahead. Now, stop it briefly.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is this a drone video?
MELINDA WORLEY: No. It's created by the FARO software.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Created by the FARO software.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Go ahead.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Stop it again.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That would be -- right down here, that would be the dog house, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Keep going.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Stop right there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, we're seeing the inside of -- what is this room called?
MELINDA WORLEY: I refer to it as a workshop.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and the bullet that went into the quail cage went through the quail cage and came out of this wall, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Go ahead.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Again --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Stop one second. Make sure I look this straight on.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And the quality of this isn't very good. Why is that?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not really sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But, I mean, isn't there a final product you get from this?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure if there's something more final than -- I don't do the rendering of the software, so I'm not sure if there's something more than that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Keep going.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Stop.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That's the quail cage right over here, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right here. Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Go ahead.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That would be the dog house?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let's keep going.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Stop it, please.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, the bullet hole into the dog house is on the side facing this greenery, or is it on this side over here?
MELINDA WORLEY: It's on the other side.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: On the other side. So, there's a bullet hole that comes in here on this side?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right. The kennel side, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: The what now?
MELINDA WORLEY: The side that the kennels are on.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No. The kennel is back this way, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yeah, but it's on that -- you're looking at the front of the dog house.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Right, right, right. So, it's coming in here.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And where is it exiting?
MELINDA WORLEY: It goes into the dog house. There was a dog bed in the dog house and it was in there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Keep going.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Stop right there. Go back just a little bit. Okay. Go ahead.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So as we watch it come around, you would agree with me that the dog house is not perpendicular to --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Stop it.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- to the door to the feed room, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Keep going.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And that would be --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Stop it.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That would be the feed room right here, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, that's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And these are the dog kennels up here.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Keep going.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you can see -- that's like a chicken coop right, there?
MELINDA WORLEY: I believe so.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Keep going.
(The video continued to play.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And that's looking at a structure that's back probably 150 or 200 feet away from the kennels, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It's got farm equipment in it?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That's it.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, we have -- and you could take this and convert it into -- well, let me ask you this. Do you know how they do this?
MELINDA WORLEY: On scene we take the scans on the scanner, anything that the laser touches and records. Beyond that I'm --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, there's a laser touch, and then isn't there a camera that goes 360 degrees this way and 360 degrees this way, and the laser and the camera sync up and you do a number of them --
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- maybe 100 or so, and then it knits it together --
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- to get this?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you agree with me that you could do a much more focused look. This obviously has not been converted totally to 3D, has it?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Who ordered this? Who said we need this?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not really sure. I was told go to the scene and initial documentation and that's what we -- so, I'm not sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, I mean, if I told you your chain of custody on this indicates it was -- y'all received it some time in July or August of last year and it's been in the custody of SLED since early January, probably three weeks ago. Is that correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure when it was made, but --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But it wasn't turned over or pulled out of the evidence locker until three weeks ago, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm really not sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, let me ask you to look at that report of the sketches, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Uh-huh.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, let me do this first. Okay, let me ask you to --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, let me show them to the Attorney General.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me ask you to examine these photos and see if you can identify them.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. What are they?
MELINDA WORLEY: Those are photographs that we took when we returned on July 16th.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And these are specifically photographs of the dog house?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And I'll get to these in just a minute.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, this would be 7 -- this would be 8, 9, and 10. Make sure I don't put duplicates in.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me also show you this photograph and see if you can identify it.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What is that?
MELINDA WORLEY: It's a picture earlier that determined the angle of that defect in the dog house.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. The defect would be the bullet hole?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I offer this into evidence as Number 11 without objection.
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 11 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, I'll have y'all go to the jury room for a break. Please do not discuss the case.
(The jury left the courtroom.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: I will give y'all an opportunity to review and pre-mark exhibits and determine what you agree on and do not agree on, and we'll proceed in a few minutes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you, Your Honor.
(A break was taken.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Give us one minute, Your Honor. She's still marking.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You can bring the jury.
(The jury returned to the courtroom.)
COURT BAILIFF: The jury is present, sir.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Thank you.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Exhibit numbers.
COURT REPORTER: 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28.
JUDGE NEWMAN: They're all admitted without objection.
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 9 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 10 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 12 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 13 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 14 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 15 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 16 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 17 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 18 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 19 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 20 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 21 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 22 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 23 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 24 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 25 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 26 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 27 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 28 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you took measurements, for instance -- let me show you the picture I wanted to show you to begin with, which is of the quail cage. Well, let me first of all show you Exhibit Number 20, which is Worley Page 7.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you could put that up on the screen.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you recognize that?
MELINDA WORLEY: I do.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And what is that?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's one of the diagrams that I created.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What's it a diagram of?
MELINDA WORLEY: That quail cage.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, you did a -- okay, that sketch, and that sketch shows -- so it says: Defect interior side of cage in -- defect interior side wall of cage and defect interior back wall of cage. Right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you have an entrance and an exit hole, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, what did you try -- what did you do to try to determine the trajectory on that? Where did it come from?
MELINDA WORLEY: We placed a flight path rod through Defect J all the way through to where it went through the back wall of the cage.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And let me see. I know I have a picture of that somewhere. Is that a picture of that rod?
MELINDA WORLEY: It's one of the many pictures, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No. But, I mean, does that picture accurately depict the rod you put through from the exterior to the interior?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How about put that up, please?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And so you're telling the jury that this is a rod that you ran from that -- from the entrance hole to the exit hole. And what are you doing right here?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's where we're determining the angle.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Upward or downward angle?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, let's talk about how you determined the angle of front to back. I don't know what you call that scientifically. I mean, did you determine the angle of that rod as to the exterior wall of that --
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and the -- based on the exhibit we saw a moment ago, the entrance wound would have been on the --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How about go back to Worley page 7.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: The entrance would have been on this side, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now the feed room, you would agree with me, is not on that side of the quail cage, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Matter of fact, this side faces the feed room, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: I believe so, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, did you determine -- and I can walk through all of the technical things you did, but did you ultimately determine the angle -- you can check your notes -- the angle of the entrance hole over here to that side? That is at what is the -- is that horizontal? Am I talking horizontal?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. The horizontal entrance and exit wound, if you put that rod through it, what did it tell you about the angle as opposed to that flat area?
MELINDA WORLEY: We determined it was approximately 41 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: 41 degrees. And if I'm standing at that edge, is it 41 degrees to my right or my left?
MELINDA WORLEY: I believe to the right. I'm not sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you look and see?
MELINDA WORLEY: I don't have that in my notes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Let me show you a picture. They're worth 1,000 words.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Does this help refresh your memory?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And so let me --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could you put KNWL 2019 up, please?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and what you did was, correct me if I'm wrong, is you put that rod through and then you put a protractor up against it, and then the protractor told you it was 41 degrees from flat or -- I don't know what you call it.
MELINDA WORLEY: From the -- where the bullet went in the wall, from that flat edge to where the angle is was 41 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and let me show you KNWL 2007. I'll ask you a question as soon as it comes up. You know, strike that -- well, that's it. But that depicts that rod you put from the exterior through the interior, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And so as that rod sticks out, it would be the path of the bullet.
MELINDA WORLEY: Approximately, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Approximately. Okay, and at 41 degrees from neutral or --
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I mean, it would be, if this were the wall of the -- the wall of the bullet went into it would be -- 41 degrees would be over here?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right. So that side -- right. Okay, and so -- and I see from that picture we showed a moment ago you used a protractor like this one similar, or maybe similar to this one, to determine that angle, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And basically you just put -- you take the rod and then you put this up to it and then figure out what the angle is, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: You line up the middle of the protractor on where the defect is, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Where the defect -- where the bullet hole is.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, did you do the same thing for the dog pen, the dog house?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, we did.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And let me walk you through a couple of those pictures. Let me see if I have -- okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let's go to page 6 of 8 of her report.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that something you prepared?
MELINDA WORLEY: It is.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, as we look at this --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could you zoom in just a little bit more for me, please? Here we go.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, Defect 1 is the entrance hole?
MELINDA WORLEY: It's Defect I, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: Defect I.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and Defect H is what?
MELINDA WORLEY: It -- we weren't sure if it was a defect. It didn't go through the wall, but we marked it.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Did you have anything that went all the way through?
MELINDA WORLEY: Just I.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Just I. But you also stuck a rod in that, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, we did.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And what was the -- and the dog -- this side of the dog house would be the side facing the kennels?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and what was the angle, entrance angle on that? You put a rod through and measured just like you did before with the protractor, and what was the angle in that?
MELINDA WORLEY: The horizontal angle was approximately 84 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, 84 degrees. Now, the side the bullet went in was facing the dog pens.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And as we see from the photos approximately, I mean, again, I'm -- just some guesswork, but not square with the dog pens, a little bit further to -- if you're standing in the feed room, if you're looking at the dog house, it would be a little bit to your left, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And then this trajectory into the dog house is 84 degrees, which means it's coming -- that's the feed room. It's coming from even further over here, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, let me have you do this for me. If I had your sketch of the dog house and the quail cage, you could take that projector right there and basically show the line out, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: From the quail cage to the dog house?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No. From the quail cage, the trajectory -- if I put down that protractor on the side where the bullet went in, that's pretty easy to identify in your sketch.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And went to -- what was the first one, how many degrees? I'm sorry, I can't remember it either.
MELINDA WORLEY: It was 41 degrees. 41 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: 41 degrees on your sketch, you could follow the trajectory of that bullet out, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do the same thing on the dog house.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Wait one second.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence one moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: How about show that to her, please?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that just a blowup of what we previously put into evidence?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. How about do me a favor and keep track of what the different angles are because I will never remember them when you get down here. So, if you could step down, please?
MELINDA WORLEY: (Witness complies.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let's get this oriented correctly. Is the dog house on this? Okay, I'm looking at it upside down. Okay. So, if you -- does this protractor work for you? It's got a little thing that allows you to -- okay. If you take it and let's go from the quail -- or here it is, small animal cage, and the projectile came in on this side over here, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, if you'll come over here for me, please, and put the projector -- projector -- put the protractor, protractor, against the -- there you go. And how many degrees does that go?
MELINDA WORLEY: 41 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could you put that on 41 degrees?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and could you take that line out for me, please? Is there a way for you do draw that? This is pretty fine point sharpy.
MELINDA WORLEY: (Witness complies.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm going to hold this down. If you'll draw that line for me, please? Okay, and let's go to the dog house. What was the degrees on that?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. 84 degrees. Okay, and how about draw a line for that, please, from this side of dog house?
MELINDA WORLEY: (Witness complies.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'll take that easel now.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you'll just step over there for a second. Now, correct --
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, correct me if I'm wrong, but if you look at the photographs and you look -- well, if you look at this, the feed room door is approximately right here, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Would you circle that with a red circle for me, please?
MELINDA WORLEY: (Witness complies.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And the trajectory on both these shots -- so, let's take the small animal cage. Does that come from anywhere near the feed room?
MELINDA WORLEY: It doesn't appear to, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It would have been up -- if you follow that out -- are you familiar with where that grapevine was if you're looking at the feed room all the way to the right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Over here somewhere?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, I think a little bit further up than that, but even up beyond that, one of the shots fired by that AR Blackout was fired from somewhere way up here, correct? I mean, that's the trajectory.
MELINDA WORLEY: I can't tell you the distance it was from animal cage to wherever. I can't tell you where the shooter was within that line.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But that line is way away from the -- from it, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And this one, while it's closer, it's still many feet away from the feed door.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, if you saw this area right here that night, you assumed, I think -- not assumed, but everyone has sort of concluded that it was a really close shot into the feed room that killed Paul, correct? Two shots.
MELINDA WORLEY: I believe so, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, the AR -- at least this line would indicate that the AR was some distance away from the feed room when those two shots were fired, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, when you recovered these projectiles, were they tested for blood or tissue so that you could determine whether they passed through Maggie or just were misses?
MELINDA WORLEY: I submitted them to the lab. I don't --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You don't know whether they tested it or not? If I told you they didn't test it, would that surprise you?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, does this lead you to believe -- and you're someone that processes crime scenes. I mean, if this had been sketched out the night of the -- I mean, you didn't take these measurements until a month later.
MELINDA WORLEY: I took these measurements on scene the night of.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Oh, so you had these measurements?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But did you know the degrees?
MELINDA WORLEY: No. That was later.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Until July 12th.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But on July 12th, did anyone go back out and walk this line? Did you think maybe there are shell casings way up here? No one looked up here, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Not that I'm aware of.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. No one did a topographical study to indicate if you follow these lines back whether the -- wherever a shooter could have been were higher or lower than the dog house or the small animal cage, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But doesn't this indicate to you there were two shooters? There was a shooter up here and a shooter down here? Is there a possible -- let me say this. Is it a possibility that there are two shooters based on the data you collected?
MELINDA WORLEY: It just indicates there was movement to me.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Movement from here all of the way up to here?
MELINDA WORLEY: I don't know that it went all the way up there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But -- I'm not telling you. I mean, one explanation would be movement, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: One explanation would be two shooters. I'm sorry? Yes?
MELINDA WORLEY: I wasn't there --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No. No. No. But one explanation of this data would be two shooters. One explanation, not the -- but one.
MELINDA WORLEY: Not the only one.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah, not the only one. But it is a reasonable explanation, just like one shooter running off that way, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, a -- one of the reasonable explanations is there are two people there, there are two guns there, one is a shotgun, one is an AR, and we now see that that AR is being shot from way up here, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: I can't say that, no. It's somewhere with -- along that line.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And that line goes a dozen, two dozen, three dozen yards from the feed room if you follow it straight up.
MELINDA WORLEY: I don't know. Within that line.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could someone have been a lookout there and went there to kill Paul and that's the lookout? Maggie surprised them. They thought she was gone?
MELINDA WORLEY: I have no idea.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Reasonable, though, right? Right?
MELINDA WORLEY: I have no idea. I wasn't there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I know you weren't there, but none of us were there. We're trying to figure out what happened that night, and clearly one reasonable explanation is two shooters. One explanation.
MELINDA WORLEY: One, yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right, and a number of them. I would like to offer this into evidence.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Talk to the Court, not with each other.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry. Your Honor, I'm offering this into evidence.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What says the State?
MS. GOUDE: No objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted without objection.
(LARGE DIAGRAM MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 29 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence one moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Check your report on the dog house shot. You testified it was 80-something degrees, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: 84 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It's not 90-something degrees?
MELINDA WORLEY: I had 84.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Huh.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence and let me go get these exhibits one second.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Let me show you Defense Exhibits 19 and 22. Are these the actual protractor measurements you did that --
MELINDA WORLEY: Of the animal cage.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Both of them are of the animal cage?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and did you do the same measurements on the dog house?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What does that indicate?
MELINDA WORLEY: You mean what is this --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No. What is the angle based on that?
MELINDA WORLEY: I can't really -- 80 something.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. You have in your notes -- let me see what you have in your notes you recorded. And that's -- where is your full report?
MELINDA WORLEY: This is --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah, I'm looking for the sketch, though. And where is the dog house? What does the horizontal 96 degrees mean?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure why that says 96.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure why it says 96. I had 84.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: In your crime scene notes?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you wrote down -- your official report said 96 degrees.
MELINDA WORLEY: My notes said 84 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, did you just -- notes were taken at the scene?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, let me move on to a different area. Let me say this to you. Based on your calculations, both of those shots came well to the right -- if you're facing the feed room, well to the right of where the feed room is, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Thereabouts.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: Thereabouts, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thereabouts?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that what you said?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes, sir.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, I'm trying to look for some concise -- you're a criminalist. You would agree with me that they did not come from the feed room --
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- from the vicinity of the feed room. And they're literally yards away from the feed room, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm not going to beat that horse anymore. So, let's talk a little bit about footprints, okay?
MELINDA WORLEY: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, I notice in your report -- correct me if I'm wrong -- that you were unable to identify, either exclude or include, a number of different footprints in and around the feed room, bloody footprints and other footprints, because of the quality of the photography. Is that correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: I was able to attribute them to Paul's shoes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: I was able to attribute them to Paul's shoes, though.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, we'll talk about Paul's shoes in just a minute. But when you -- what's the process to take a photograph of footwear or imprint that's recognized by a number of different agencies, including the FBI? What is that process?
MELINDA WORLEY: Place the scale, and preferable a L scale, around the impression and document it with a camera parallel to the surface so you get a straight-on shot. Put the camera in raw settings so you capture all the data with that photograph.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, let me ask you. So, the process is first of all you take a general photograph of the impression, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Doesn't matter what angle, doesn't matter what the lighting is at that point, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: If you're just documenting that it's there, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: If you're just documenting. But when you go to take a photograph of a footprint for forensic analysis later on to compare it to a known shoe, you're supposed to do a couple of things. One, you're supposed to have good lighting if you can get it, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Preferably.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Two, you're supposed to put a scale down next to it so that later on you can -- I mean, because you need to understand how big or how small the foot is and the distance between the treads. So, the scale is a little -- like a little ruler. It's just a piece of a ruler that you put down next to it go get some idea what an inch looks like, like what two inches look like. And that's really important, is it not?
MELINDA WORLEY: It is to make sure it's to scale.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and then you're supposed to do a photograph straight down on it with, again, with good lighting so that you can have -- you can understand what you're seeing is a straight-on impression, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, was that done on any, any of the impressions that y'all analyzed?
MELINDA WORLEY: No. We didn't recognize on scene --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: We didn't recognize on scene that there was footwear.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You didn't recognize on scene there was what?
MELINDA WORLEY: Footwear impressions in the room.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, that brings up another topic. There was a -- what appeared -- may have been a footwear impression on Maggie's calf, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: I couldn't say that that was a footwear impression, just an impression.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, there was something on her leg that could have been a footwear impression, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Possibly.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Possibly. And, again, they didn't put a scale, they didn't do any of this procedure, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And it was in dirt.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So -- or mud, and so once her body was removed from the scene, that examination could never be done, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Matter of fact, none of the impressions could be examined after the next day at best, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Not physically.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right. I mean, you couldn't go back out and take new photographs.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, the procedures followed were not the procedures recommended by every agency and your agency, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: If I had realized that was footwear on scene, I would have documented it properly, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, but since it wasn't documented properly, we can't include or exclude except for Paul's, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, are you a certified footwear examiner?
MELINDA WORLEY: I am, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: By who?
MELINDA WORLEY: Well, within SLED, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: Within SLED.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Within SLED, but you're not peer reviewed or --
MELINDA WORLEY: Oh, yes, I am peer reviewed.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: By someone at SLED?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And your analysis is that one set of those footwear impressions is Paul facing the back of the feed room, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And yet we know -- and they're bloody, so he's already been shot.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And we know the initial shot came -- buckshot, very small pattern -- in his chest and came out underneath his left arm. Matter of fact, there was wadding under his left arm and buckshot went through the back window and embedded in the window seal. You documented that, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And then I think some of it embedded in a tree back behind that window, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And he's facing backwards, bloody footprints. Has anyone discussed with you how he got faced away from where he was shot?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Were the footprints smudged as if he was turning?
MELINDA WORLEY: There was blood dripping, and he was stepping in the blood and leaving his own footwear impressions in the blood; I don't know that it was smeared necessarily.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, we also know that a second shot, literally his head exploded. His brain flew out. May have -- we know there's hair and blood all over that door up high. It's actually hair and blood and pieces of his skull in the ceiling and around him. Assuming that the first shot would not have been immediately fatal because it didn't hit any critical organs, he would have been alive for some period of time after that shotgun blast to the chest. But the second shot, as you've seen in the pictures and you were there that night. Wasn't his brain laying at his feet?
MELINDA WORLEY: It was beside his left leg, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: It was beside his left leg, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah, and he's -- his feet were just -- or one of them is just inside the feed room and the other is not.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And he's face down.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you can't explain how he got shot in the front when he's at some point soon thereafter is facing backwards?
MELINDA WORLEY: I can't say which way he was facing when he was actually shot. The second shot, he was right there at the door, and I can tell you that.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, he got from facing the back door after he was shot -- I mean, the back window, to facing forward for the second shot. Is that right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Has anyone from SLED briefed you after you identified those footprints?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: They didn't ask for any explanation?
MELINDA WORLEY: Not from me, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and you would agree that because of the way the scene was processed, most of the footprints you were unable to do any comparison to because of the way the pictures were.
MELINDA WORLEY: No. I was able to do a comparison, and they were mostly Paul's shoes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Other than those two?
MELINDA WORLEY: There was one right inside the door, there was one further to the left where the door was, and then there were at least two by Marker 1.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And correct me if I'm wrong. At least one of those bloody footprints initially identified as Paul's turned out to be a police officer's. Isn't that correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: It wasn't initially identified as Paul's, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But there was a bloody footprint near his that turned out to be law enforcement, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: In the feed room.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: In blood. Is that preservation of the scene that your standards require?
MELINDA WORLEY: Not exactly, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Not exactly. Should the police be walking through the scene?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do we know what other evidence they may have destroyed?
MELINDA WORLEY: I have no idea.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: That's right. We don't.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Have you seen this photograph before? Can you identify it?
MELINDA WORLEY: It's not one that we took.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But does it appear to be in the area you've been describing?
MELINDA WORLEY: Close, yes. It's in the feed room.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, you don't know whose feet those are?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Did you collect other foot impressions in the feed room and exclude Paul?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: There were other bloody footprints or impressions in the feed room. Did you identify them as Paul's?
MELINDA WORLEY: I thought I accounted for all of the ones that we knew of.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me make sure this is not already in evidence, Your Honor. Could we look at Defense Exhibit Number 2? And we need to cover the screens.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, we talked about this previously just a moment ago. I'm going to put it up here so we can blow it up. Okay, do you recognize this photo?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that the way you saw Maggie that night?
MELINDA WORLEY: It is.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, how about zoom in on her calf right there? Yeah.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now, somebody even that night, we see in notes, thinks that maybe could be a footwear impression, or it could be something else, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: I couldn't determine what kind of impression it was, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you would agree with me, there is something on the back of her leg that has some sort of pattern in it.
MELINDA WORLEY: It is, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Not naturally occurring pattern.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And this is the only photograph you received that night or you received ever of Maggie's calf, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's not the photo I used at all.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's not the photograph I used at all for my footwear examination.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What photograph did you use?
MELINDA WORLEY: 420.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: 420?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Have you got it? Okay. Put that one up and then we'll see if she can identify it.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that 420?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: We would like to offer photograph 420 into evidence, Your Honor.
MS. GOUDE: No objection. We would just ask to see the photo before it's offered.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you. We don't have it. We'll get it. Hollie, have you got a hard copy of that? Thank you. We'll get it to you in just a minute.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But so -- could you come down here for just a second, please? How about point to the jury where that impression is on her leg?
MELINDA WORLEY: This whole area right here (indicating.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And it has -- if you blow it up, you could see some regular lines as opposed to irregular, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Which would indicate some not natural, but when I say unnatural -- manmade something caused that, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: There's a distinct pattern to it.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, were you able to -- why were you not able to get significant definition to compare to a footwear?
MELINDA WORLEY: I felt like I had enough definition. I just couldn't attribute it to any type of footwear.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Any type of footwear?
MELINDA WORLEY: As far as any type of shoe. I wasn't able to attribute it to a specific type of shoe.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Now -- and you would agree with me there's no scale.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: There's no multiple pictures of from different angles for the purpose of giving you the more definition so you could make a comparison, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: There's not.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, this was not done according to procedure.
MELINDA WORLEY: I mean, I didn't know about this on scene.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah, but as your photographers take pictures, aren't they -- wouldn't it be good just to put down a scale no matter what?
MELINDA WORLEY: If I had seen that, it would have if somebody had.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But, I mean, a lot of these photographs were taken without you present, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: No, I was there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You were there for that photograph?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And did you notice the mud on her leg?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: As you look at it, now you agree that a better photograph taken under the procedures of SLED and the FBI and everybody else could have given you a better ability to match it to a piece of footwear, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Well, I don't know that a better photograph would have given me better results. I think I saw enough of it to know I wasn't going to be able to attribute it to a type of footwear.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Without a straight-on shot, without a scale, without all of the things recommended?
MELINDA WORLEY: I couldn't even say it was a footwear impression. I just called it an impression.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Based on that -- based on that photograph --
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: -- which is not a photograph done to compare footwear.
MELINDA WORLEY: Not ideal, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Not ideal. There's not -- there's no -- the standards say that is not within the standards, correct?
MS. GOUDE: Objection. Argumentative.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You may answer the question.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Go ahead.
JUDGE NEWMAN: If you understood what the question is.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: The questions is --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Did you understand the question?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
JUDGE NEWMAN: What's the answer?
MELINDA WORLEY: It would be better to take the photograph properly with the scale.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But you would concede this was not taken pursuant -- and what you're saying is no one appreciated the fact that it was a footwear -- or could be a footwear impression that night, so no one treated it like a piece of footwear.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But we know that same night they didn't treat any suspected footwear according to procedures, correct?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No scale, no multiple pictures, no 90 degree, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Thank you, you can go ahead and take the stand. So.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me see if I can find these pictures.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Did you participate in processing Alex's T-shirt, shorts, and shoes?
MELINDA WORLEY: The T-shirt and shorts, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and what did you do with that?
MELINDA WORLEY: As far as the LCD?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah.
MELINDA WORLEY: We documented the entire process from start to finish with the starting of the packaging the shirt was in. Took the shirt out of the package, photographed it front and back, inside and out to show how it was before we did anything to it. Then we hung it up and applied LCD, which is a liquid spray. Any stains that we saw after using the spray, we documented those in photographs without scale, and then we just photographed them with the scale. Then we laid the shirt flat and photographed each of those stains on the shirt. It was stains A through H on the front, and stains I and J on the back. We labeled those A through H, I, and J with the scale and photographed each one of them before we did anything else.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me show you a couple of photographs.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Any objection?
MS. GOUDE: No objection.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you identify these, please?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Doug, 19A, please.
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Is that the shirt as you saw it that night?
MELINDA WORLEY: No that night, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: When did you see it?
MELINDA WORLEY: When we processed it at the lab.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. So, you would agree with me that this shirt has a -- it doesn't look like it just came back from the laundry. It's got smudges down here and generally stains here and there, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: It's not completely clean.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah. Okay. Well, that's it. It's not completely clean, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And then --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I would offer that into evidence, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted without objection.
COURT REPORTER: 31.
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 31 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Tell me what this is, please.
MELINDA WORLEY: All right. After we had sprayed the shirt with LCD, we laid it in a grid to account for where on the shirt each stain was.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And there seemed to be something on the bottom that looks like a handprint, does it not?
MELINDA WORLEY: I didn't see a handprint. That was on the body cam footage where he was wiping his face with the shirt right there.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I offer this into evidence.
MS. GOUDE: No objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted without objection.
COURT REPORTER: 32.
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 32 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can I have that 19 -- what does it say at the bottom?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: KNM3282.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and we agree that you did -- this was LCD, right? That's what they call a presumptive test. It could be human blood. It could also be animal blood. It also could be detergent.
MS. GOUDE: Objection, Your Honor. Could we ask one question at a time?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I was trying to summarize, but I'll do it.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Could it be something other than -- if it -- something than human blood?
MELINDA WORLEY: It doesn't determine whether it's human or not.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right. So, it could be animal blood.
MELINDA WORLEY: It's possible.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It could be detergent. Detergent often times --
MELINDA WORLEY: Not -- bleach maybe.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Bleach? Okay. What about organic matter like plants?
MELINDA WORLEY: The only thing I know really is bleach, rust, that --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Rust?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, but there are other things that will -- and that's why you do a confirmatory test.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And that's done with hematrace.
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure how -- I don't do that part, so --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But do you know what the results were when they treated with hematrace?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You never saw the report?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No human blood found? Now, did you test his shorts?
MELINDA WORLEY: We did the same procedure with the shorts.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And there was some presumptive -- I mean, some indication it was human blood or something else, correct?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you know whether they ran a confirmatory test on that?
MELINDA WORLEY: I assume they did. I'm not sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Well, but you don't know.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you know whether -- did you use LCD on the shorts or did you use something else?
MELINDA WORLEY: We used LCD.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Did you do the shoes?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence one moment, please. I may be almost through.
(Break in proceedings.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 30 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Beg the Court's indulgence. We're trying to make sure that one --
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Let me put up on the screen. I'll give you a copy of it if she can identify it, okay, and I think she can. Go ahead and put it up; go ahead and put it up.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: This is number 217. Can you see it?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It's not very bright. Is that a picture that you took?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, we would offer this picture into evidence.
MS. GOUDE: No objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: It's admitted.
(PHOTO MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 33 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Can you step down here, please?
MELINDA WORLEY: (Witness complies.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, the angle -- this is the dog house. What's the angle on this?
MELINDA WORLEY: Approximately 84 or 83 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Yeah. Okay. I just wanted to make sure we're all on the same sheet of music even though you wrote down 96 in your report.
MELINDA WORLEY: In my diagram of that, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Right. The official report, the official.
MELINDA WORLEY: My official notes say 84 degrees.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But I'm talking about what you -- what we got. I mean, we got your notes also, but in your printed document you said 96.
MELINDA WORLEY: On the diagram, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But it's only 84.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Thank you. So, again, maybe I need to check you on this, but the angle from the dog house you seem to indicate as going still to the right of the dog kennels, but let me check it out just one second.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: Any further questions?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Your Honor, just give me two seconds here.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, let's stand for a moment.
(Break in proceedings.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: If you'll proceed.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you. No further questions.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Redirect?
MS. GOUDE: Thank you, Your Honor.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MS. GOUDE:
MS. GOUDE: All right, Agent Worley, let's see. All right, we saw this big diagram and the other diagrams that you prepared. What was the purpose of you preparing all of these diagrams?
MELINDA WORLEY: To show for that one where the evidence was in relation to each other, where the victims were in relation to the evidence, where the kennels were, and the workshop overhang, the measurements. All of the other diagrams, the dog house, animal cage, to show more measurements of where the bullet defects were.
MS. GOUDE: Would those be done for reconstructive purposes?
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MS. GOUDE: And was that really done here on this case?
MELINDA WORLEY: Not that I'm aware of, no.
MS. GOUDE: And in this diagram, Defense Exhibit 29, we see 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, and what were those? What do those indicate?
MELINDA WORLEY: Those were 300 Blackout cartridge cases.
MS. GOUDE: And this is not to scale. Is that right?
MELINDA WORLEY: No, not at all.
MS. GOUDE: So, what does that mean if something is not to scale?
MELINDA WORLEY: It's not -- like, an inch on there is not an inch in real life. It's just an approximation of where everything was in relation to each other.
MS. GOUDE: So, it may not correspond to the actual dimensions of things on the scene?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MS. GOUDE: Now, are you aware that there was stippling on the victim Maggie Murdaugh?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MS. GOUDE: And what does it mean if there's stippling on the victim?
MELINDA WORLEY: A close gunshot. It was -- she was shot close range.
MS. GOUDE: And the defense asked you about some different possibilities here. It's possible that people can move around?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MS. GOUDE: And it's also possible that one person could have had two guns.
MELINDA WORLEY: That's right.
MS. GOUDE: All right. Then we talked a lot about footprints. Let's see here.
(Break in proceedings.)
MS. GOUDE: In the feed room, was there a bunch of bloody footprints?
MELINDA WORLEY: There were.
MS. GOUDE: You were --
MS. GOUDE: Things have kind of gotten in disarray over here. If I could have a moment?
(Break in proceedings.)
MS. GOUDE: I'm going to show you State's Exhibit 35. Are those the bloody footprints in the feed room?
MELINDA WORLEY: Two of them, yes.
MS. GOUDE: And those were determined to be the footprints of Paul Murdaugh?
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MS. GOUDE: And now just to be clear, I mean, in this picture we aren't seeing, like, five sets of other bloody footprints.
MS. GOUDE: So, you talked about some other footprints in the feed room. Could you kind of elaborate on that?
MELINDA WORLEY: Closer to the door there was one, and also closer to the door, the actual physical door, there was one, a partial impression.
MS. GOUDE: And did you determine who those footprints belonged to?
MELINDA WORLEY: Those were similar with Paul's shoes.
MS. GOUDE: And is it possible that after SLED took some crime scene photos and moved Paul's body, that someone could have come in along later and stepped in --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Objection, Your Honor. Leading.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Objection is overruled.
MS. GOUDE: Is it possible that if there were more prints in there, that those could have been after SLED's pictures were taken.?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Objection. Speculation.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Objection is overruled.
MELINDA WORLEY: I suppose so, yes.
MS. GOUDE: And we also talked about footprints in State's 194 and 195. Why couldn't you do anything with those footprints?
MELINDA WORLEY: I was not made aware of those footwear impressions until June 15th when I saw them on those photographs.
MS. GOUDE: So, you didn't take any of these pictures while you were out there on the scene.
MELINDA WORLEY: No. It was on the other side of the workshop.
MS. GOUDE: And we have no way to know when these footprints occurred.
MELINDA WORLEY: Right.
MS. GOUDE: Now, the defense showed us a picture of that dirt on the back of Maggie Murdaugh's leg. Do we even know if that's a shoe print?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No objection. As long they were taken by her, Your Honor, we don't have any objection.
MS. GOUDE: Agent Worley, if you could please take a look at State's Exhibits 70 and 71. Could you tell us what those pictures are?
MELINDA WORLEY: These are pictures of the front of the ATV that was parked near Maggie's body.
MS. GOUDE: Your Honor, the State would move 70 and 71 into evidence.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: No objection.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Admitted without objection.
(PHOTO MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 70 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
(PHOTO MARKED AS STATE'S EXHIBIT NUMBER 71 WAS RECEIVED INTO EVIDENCE.)
MS. GOUDE: So if we look here at Defense Exhibit 9, can you point out where the ATV was there the night of the murders?
MELINDA WORLEY: That photo was taken on July 16th.
MS. GOUDE: But where were the photos -- or the ATVs on the night -- ATV on the night of the murders?
MELINDA WORLEY: Under that overhang behind the dog house.
MS. GOUDE: At this time I'm going to publish State's Exhibit 70.
MS. GOUDE: Where was Maggie Murdaugh's body in relation to this ATV?
MELINDA WORLEY: It would be toward the right of the ATV.
MS. GOUDE: It was kind of in front of the ATV?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yeah.
MS. GOUDE: And did you observe any kind of biological matter on that ATV?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MS. GOUDE: State's Exhibit 71, could you kind of point out or describe for the jury where you can see spots of biological matter?
MELINDA WORLEY: If I can step down.?
MS. GOUDE: Your Honor, may she step down?
JUDGE NEWMAN: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Objection, Your Honor, unless she's going to indicate what appears to be biological matter. Did she test -- was it tested?
JUDGE NEWMAN: I would have to hear the question before I can hear an objection.
MS. GOUDE: Agent Worley, if you could please point out for the jury where would appear to be biological matter of tissue on that ATV?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Object to the question. I object to the response because it was never tested. It appears -- it could be deer blood. It could be a number of different things. This calls for speculation.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Objection is overruled.
MELINDA WORLEY: These areas right here, a little there, there. I believe there was a little bit on the this tire, also.
MS. GOUDE: Thank you, Agent Worley. That's all for this witness, Your Honor.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Further cross-examination?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Just a couple.
RECROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. HARPOOTLIAN:
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You would concede, I mean, if you saw that -- I mean, it looked like blood?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Did you test it for blood?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Gathered swabs, something so you could take it back to the lab and see if it was Maggie's blood, Paul's blood, deer blood? I mean, they hunt in those ATVs, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: I have no idea what they do in them.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: You don't know if they hunt using ATVs? Really? Is that one of the things you're aware that's done with those?
MELINDA WORLEY: I am now, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But the night you saw that blood, you didn't take a swab of it or whatever you thought was blood? Didn't swab it?
MELINDA WORLEY: No, I didn't.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And matter of fact, there's a pool of water around Paul. Did anyone ask you to take a sample of that?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And determine whether or not there was human blood in it?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay. Now, I'm looking at your shoes report. You specifically say on a number of these that the photograph is inadequate to do a comparison, right?
MELINDA WORLEY: I was able to -- my result was it was adequate enough to determine the outsole design. I couldn't --
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry, adequate to do what?
MELINDA WORLEY: To determine the outsole design of the impression. I wouldn't have been able to identify it.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: On Paul's, the one you've already said he was facing backwards, did you say that you had partials and in one point you didn't know which way the foot was facing? Did you say that?
MELINDA WORLEY: I'm not sure.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Did you come to any conclusions about any of the other -- I mean, did you match his footwear to any of the other bloody impressions in that feed room?
MELINDA WORLEY: Yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Which one?
MELINDA WORLEY: The one by the door, like right in front of doorway.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What's the number of that?
MELINDA WORLEY: 105.1.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry?
MELINDA WORLEY: Item 105.1. It's facing the doorway.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: It says that the outsole design is consistent with Item 103, Paul's shoes. So, you also say that the way you got scale was -- and some these were evidence markers, and then you figured out how big the evidence marker was, and that's what you used to get the scale.
MELINDA WORLEY: The marker and the shot shells in Markers 9 and 10 were measured.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Okay, and that's not the best way to do it, is it?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: And in terms of the sketch we had, you -- a pretty crude sketch, but have you ever been asked by SLED or the Attorney General's Office to do this trajectory analysis that I asked you to do today?
MELINDA WORLEY: No, but I don't necessarily do crime scene reconstruction.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Who does?
MELINDA WORLEY: We don't necessarily do that ourselves. We process the crime scene and document it, but we don't do reconstructions.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: But no one has consulted with you about a reconstruction. No one has come from SLED and said let's go over these angles or, you know, how did you conduct this or -- no one has asked you to perform one.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Have you ever had a conversation with anybody from the Attorney General's Office about this?
MELINDA WORLEY: No, I don't think so.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Have they ever talked to you about the video we showed a little while ago and the process y'all use to try to make a 3D --
MELINDA WORLEY: Not with me. With others who created the FARO software video.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: They talked about the people that did the FARO?
MELINDA WORLEY: I believe so.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: What?
MELINDA WORLEY: I believe so, yes.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you know who that was or who they talked to?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Do you know when that was?
MELINDA WORLEY: Not really, no.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: So, they have a 3D image of the crime scene, and you don't know when they got it or what they did with it? They never talk with you about it?
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Begging the Court's indulgence.
(Break in proceedings.)
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: Thank you.
JUDGE NEWMAN: You may step down.
(The witness exited the stand.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: You may go to the jury room for a 10 minute recess. Please do not discuss the case.
(A recess was taken.)
JUDGE NEWMAN: We have a note from the jury: Your Honor, will you please inform the parties that the identity of each is to remain anonymous? Secondly, please remove the cart in front of the large TV.
MR. HARPOOTLIAN: I'm sorry, Your Honor. I moved it back to lay that out.
JUDGE NEWMAN: Okay. The audience is reminded, and as requested by the jury, we have removed the cart. You may bring the jury.
(The jury returned to the courtroom.)
COURT BAILIFF: The jury is present.