Jeffrey MacDonald's Article 32 investigation hearing: 1970 - Volume 10

CID Investigator Robert B. Shaw

ARTICLE 32
VOLUME 10


(The hearing reopened at 0913 hours, 23 July 1970.)

COL ROCK:  The hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that counsel for the ac-cused are present and counsel for the government are present, with the exception apparent-ly of Captain Somers.  Is counsel for the government prepared with the next witness?

CPT THOMPSON:  Counsel for the government is prepared, however, Colonel Rock, at this time I would like to point out to the court the obvious absence of Captain Somers.  He is ab-sent because of a minor illness at this time.  I would also like to point out for the record, pur-suant to comments that were made at the recess of yesterday’s session on behalf of the de-fense, the government intends to call as its final witnesses Mr. Shaw of the Criminal Investi-gation Detachment here at Fort Bragg, Mr. Grebner and Mr. Hawkins of that same unit and same station, and also the government plans on placing at least three pieces of documentary evidence and calling, hopefully Mrs. Kenneth P. Edwards who resides at 540 Castle Drive who is presently, and has been for the last two weeks on emergency leave on the island of Jamai-ca.  I checked as late as this morning with the Chaplain’s Office at Fort Bragg and found that they shall not return until on or about 5 August.  I hope to have for the investigating officer some more details with reference to their availability sometime today or early tomorrow morn-ing.

COL ROCK:  Thank you.

CPT THOMPSON:  Because of the obvious nearness to the end of the government’s case, and the obvious procession of this hearing next week with the defense portion of the case, the government at this time would like to place before the investigating officer and the defense a request for a list of the defense witnesses that may or may not be called so as to expedite these proceedings during the incoming week and subsequent weeks.  We believe this request is reasonable and fair.  It should also be pointed out that because of the events of this last Monday, the government plans on having subsequent or further evidence for this investigat-ing officer to consider.  We do not know when this evidence will be available, but we do and would request to reserve the right to present this evidence at the time it becomes available to the government.

COL ROCK:  Does counsel know whether that is receiving priority attention at whatever loca-tion the processing is being accomplished?  Is priority attention given to the particular evi-dence?

CPT THOMPSON:  That is correct, your honor.  The evidence in question is presently being analyzed at the Criminal Investigation Laboratory at Fort Gordon, Georgia.

COL ROCK:  Are you prepared to proceed with the next witness?  Is counsel for the accused prepared to answer reference the request for the names of witnesses to be present for the accused?

MR. SEGAL:  Not at this time, Colonel Rock.  We will, after our mid-morning break, respond in that regard.

COL ROCK:  All right, thank you.  Proceed, please.

CPT THOMPSON:  The government calls Mr. Robert Shaw.

(Investigator Robert B. Shaw was called as a witness by the government, was sworn, and testified as follows.)

CPT THOMPSON:  I’d like at this time to advise the investigating officer that this particular witness has not made a statement with regard to his investigation.  The total of his evidence will be gotten through testimony in this hearing.

Questions by CPT THOMPSON:
Q  Would you please state your full name for the investigating officer?
A  Robert B. Shaw.
Q  And your rank?
A  Warrant Officer One.
Q  And your duty assignment?
A  Criminal Investigator, Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
Q  And your service?
A  U. S. Army.
Q  Mr. Shaw, I direct your attention to the month of February, more specifically on or about the 16th day of February 1970, and ask you what your duty assignment was on that day?
A  I was a criminal investigator with the U.S. Army.
Q  On that day did you have occasion to learn of information concerning Captain Jeffrey Mac-Donald?
A  Not on the 16th, as such, no, sir.
Q  Did you, at a subsequent time?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And when was that?
A  At 0400 hours--correction, 0420 hours on the 17th of February.
Q  How did that information come to your attention?
A  I received a telephone call at my quarters from Investigator William Ivory of our office and he informed me that he was conducting an investigation of a triple homicide and he requested assistance.  I asked him who else he had contacted, and he named another two investigators and the chief investigator, and I said I’d be right there.
Q  As a result of your conversation with Mr. Ivory, what action did you take?
A  So I got up and dressed and drove to the office where I collected my investigator kit.  I met Investigator Black at our office and he rode in my car to 544 Castle Drive where we had been informed by Ivory that the incident had occurred, and went into the quarters.
Q  Backing up, can you tell the investigating officer, the contents of your investigating kit?
A  Well, generally, yes, sir.  There are plastic evidence containers, tongs and tweezers for collecting evidence, tape, evidence tags, that sort of thing.
Q  What were the weather conditions during the early morning hours of 17 February?
A  Well, it was raining slightly, and it was cold, I’d say in the lower 40’s Fahrenheit, 41 or 42 degrees.
Q  What time did you arrive at the residence?
A  At approximately 0450 hours.
Q  Do you remember the address of the residence?
A  Yes, sir, 544 Castle Drive.
Q  Is there any particular reason why you remember the time that you arrived?
A  Well, sir, I knew that eventually I would have to testify about it so I looked at my watch as I drove up to the quarters and parked my car.
Q  At the time you drove up to the residence, what and who did you see?
A  Well, I could see that there was an ambulance there parked out on the street, and as I passed the ambulance there was some personnel in it.  I don’t know how many, I didn’t look into the ambulance to see, but I noticed one man had on a white jacket and I assumed he was an ambulance driver.  As I approached the quarters there were the military policemen standing on the outside, on the steps, on the porch of the quarters.  There was a military policeman on the sidewalk between the quarters and the street, and I could see another mili-tary policeman off to my right at the corner of the quarters.
Q  What happened when you arrived at the scene?
A  Well, as I started to walk up to the quarters a military policeman moved as though to in-tercept me, and I, of course, pulled out my credentials, showed him my badge and he just waived me on.
Q  Where did you go then?
A  I entered the quarters by the living room door, the south entrance, and just as I walked into the living room I saw Major Parsons of the Provost Marshal Office and a Buck Sergeant who I believe was Sergeant Hagney, standing in the quarter’s living room.
Q  Did you see anybody else in the quarter’s living room?
A  Yes, sir, I did.  Staff Sergeant Alexander who is assigned as a photographer in our office was in the living room, at the juncture of the living room and dining room.
Q  Did you see anyone else at that point?
A  No, sir.
Q  What did you do upon initially arriving into the living room area?
A  Well, the first thing I did was ask Major Parsons, is the scene being protected?  And he said, yes, did you see the military policemen outside, and I answered in the affirmative.  He said, well, that’s what they’re doing.  So I asked him where’s Ivory.  He said he’s in the back bedroom through that hallway, and he indicated the hallway to me.
Q  And what did you do at that time?
A  Well, I left Major Parsons and I walked to the hallway entrance, what would be the west entrance, and looking back I looked and saw, just generally looked at the dining room and the living room, and the kitchen, all of which I could see from that point, and made observations, mental observations, and then I started to walk down the hallway, and as I walked down the hallway I noted that on my left there was a doorway, which turned out to be the rear bed-room or the north bedroom, and I stopped at the doorway and I looked in.  I could see the body of a Caucasian blond child lying on the bed.  I didn’t enter the room at that point.  To my rear, the front or the south bedroom, I stepped to that doorway, I looked in there.  Again, I could see the body of what appeared to be a Caucasian female child lying on the bed.  This was difficult to see because she was covered up with quilts and blankets, and all I could really see was part of her head from the doorway.  Again, I didn’t enter the room.  I saw, again, across the hall from me, there was a very short hallway and what looked like a bath, and in this hallway was linen closet.  Now I noted at this time because the door was partially open to the linen closet and I could see what appeared to me to be blood on the edge of this doorway, three stripes of blood.  So then I looked and I saw things on the wood-en floor, and I looked into the bathroom, without entering, and made observations in there.
When I left there I went directly to the rear bedroom, to the master bedroom and contacted Ivory.
Q  All right. Upon entering the living room initially, can you describe for the investigating offi-cer the condition of that room and the general contents of that room?
A  Yes, sir, I can.  As I entered, Major Parsons and Sergeant Hagney were immediately to my left front, and beyond them was a desk with an aquarium and several other items on it, and a TV set and a stereo cabinet, as we move around the room.

MR. SEGAL:  May I say that we might perhaps expedite these proceedings if simply the wit-ness were shown photographs and asked whether they represent the scene as he saw it ra-ther than attempt to verbally reconstruct the many pieces of furniture and other items that were there?

COL ROCK:  I have no objection, but it’s up to--

CPT THOMPSON:  The government intends to show the witness pictures of each room after a general description of that room from the witness.  If the investigating officer would prefer just the pictures--

COL ROCK:  I would be satisfied because I think I am familiar enough with the scene.

Q  Very well.  Mr. Shaw, I hand you what have been marked Government Exhibits 64, 66, 63, and 65 and ask you to look at those, please.
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Would you please tell the investigating officer what those pictures represent?
A  These pictures represent the living room and part of the dining room of the quarters at 544 Castle Drive as I observe them to be as I entered the quarters that morning.
Q  Yes, sir.  Now with respect to the living room--

COL ROCK:  May I see those, please?

CPT THOMPSON:  Certainly.

(Government Exhibits 63, 64, 65 and 66 were examined by the IO and counsel for the defense and returned to the witness.)

Q  I draw your attention to the floor of the living room and ask you what was the general condition of the floor portion of the living room?
A  Well, sir, the area, it was covered by a rug, that area of the rug running down, what would be the west wall of the living room, and part of that area along the north wall of the living room, had a lot of leaves and grass on it; and it was the configuration of this, the way it was laid out, it was apparent to me that this was sort of a trail that had been left there.

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.  Move to strike for a conclusion.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is sustained.

Q  Other than the rug and the fixtures that were contained in the living room, the wooden floor portion of the living room, the entryway to the hallway, what was their condition, or its condition?
A  Well, it was--the wooden portion of the flooring that I could see was dry.  It appeared as though it probably hadn’t been cleaned in some time, because there was dust on the floor, in the cracks, against the base boards and that sort of thing.
Q  Now as you started toward the entryway of the hallway you stated that you had the oc-casion to observe the dining room portion?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  What was the general condition of the dining room area of the home?
A  Well, it appeared as though it had been--

MR. SEGAL:  I object.  He’s been asked to give a specific description, and he’s giving what his conclusions of appearances are.  I ask that the witness be directed to answer specific factu-al observations, rather than giving his opinion.

CPT BEALE:  The witness is so directed.

A  There was a rug on the floor, part of the floor of the dining room.
Q  What type of rug was that?
A  It’s what I would refer to as a throw rug, rather than a carpeting.
Q  What were the dimensions or approximate dimensions of that rug, if you recall?
A  The approximate dimensions were four feet by six feet although I haven’t had occasion to measure it.  Those are the approximate dimensions.  Now, there was a table in the dining room.  It had chairs around it; one chair was pulled slightly away from the table.  There was a table cloth on the table. At the entrance to the kitchen on the dining room floor, there were stains which appeared to be blood, in that they were reddish-brown.  There was a--I don’t know the term for this piece of furniture--a side board or a cabinet of some kind, buf-fet, perhaps, there was on the west wall of the dining room.  There were several Valentines stood up on this buffet and on the opposite wall from that would be the east wall, there was a tall china closet, constructed partially of glass; and there were other pieces of furniture in this small dining room.
Q  Now, I hand you what has been marked as Accused Exhibit A-7 and ask you whether or not you recognize that particular exhibit?
A  Yes, sir, I do.
Q  And what is that?
A  This is a photograph depicting the west entrance to the hallway taken from the living room.
Q  What did you see as you approached that hallway on the early morning of 17 February?
A  Well, as I walked to that point, as I stated, I stopped and looked around me.  I also exam-ined the floor at my feet around me.  I could see that there were some plastic hair rollers lying on the floor.  There were clothing lying on the step going into the hallway.  I could see what looked to me like a--I’ll call it a bobby pin--something like that.  Again, it was dusty.
There was a doll’s head lying there on this--in this area, which can’t be seen in the photo-graph, incidentally.  Generally, that what’s I saw.
Q  Did you--as you entered that hallway, did you have occasion to observe the floor portion of that hallway?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  And what was its condition?
A  It was dry, dirty, and had reddish-brown stains on the floor.
Q  How many?
A  Numerous.  Most of these things--stains on the hallway floor were from the area from the doorway of the bedrooms further east.
Q  Can you orient us by what you mean east?
A  Toward the master bedroom.
Q  In the entryway to that hallway near the living room, what was the condition of the floor there?
A  Well, it was, as I have testified, it was dirty, it was dusty.  There were some minute spots that I could see with my flash light.  I didn’t know what they were.  I could tell they weren’t waxed or that sort of thing.  That about all I could tell you about that.
Q  As you proceeded down the hallway, what room did you enter?
A  Initially, I entered the north bedroom--rear bedroom.
Q  How far into the rear bedroom did you go?
A  Only my head and shoulders, actually my feet never entered the room.
Q  And where did you go subsequent to that?  What was the next room that you entered?
A  The south bedroom.
Q  And how far into that bedroom did you go?
A  Again, head and shoulders.
Q  And where did you proceed to at that point?
A  To the main bathroom, the bathroom off this hallway, which would be on the north side of the house.
Q  Did you enter that bathroom?
A  Head and shoulders.
Q  I hand you what has been marked as Government Exhibit Number 49, and ask whether or not you know what that is?
A  Yes, sir, I do.  This is a picture of the--of the wash basin--in the main bathroom which has a wet tissue.  That’s what I observed that morning.

(G-49 was shown to the IO.)

Q  After leaving the bathroom, where did you proceed?  Where did you go?
A  I went to the master bedroom.
Q  Did you enter the master bedroom?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  Who and what did you see?
A  I saw the body of a Caucasian female lying on the floor on her back.  I saw Investigator Ivory, Investigator Connelly, and Mr. Rossi, who is a Provost Marshal Investigator.  I ap-proached Ivory and asked him what information he had.  He gave me a briefing and generally told me what he had observed at that point.
Q  I hand you what has been marked as Government Exhibits 41 through 48, and ask you to look very closely at each one of those.

COL ROCK:  What are those numbers again, counselor?

CPT THOMPSON:  41 through 48, sir.

(Government Exhibits 41 through 48 were handed to the IO.)

Q  Can you describe for the investigating officer what those photographs depict?

MR. SEGAL:  Excuse me.  May we see the photos when the investigating officer is finished?

CPT THOMPSON:  Government Exhibits 41 through 48 are handed to counsel for the accused.

MR. SEGAL:  And returned to the government.

Q  Again, Mr. Shaw, would you please tell the investigating officer what these photographs depict?
A  Yes, sir, those photographs depict the scene in the master bedroom as I observed it that morning when I entered.
Q  I hand you, what you’ve looked at as Government Exhibit 45, and ask you when you en-tered the master bedroom or the east bedroom, whether or not you had occasion to look ra-ther closely to the entryway to that room, more particularly the rug and floor portion?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What did you observe there?
A  I observed reddish-brown stains that appeared to me to be blood.
Q  What were the condition of those stains?
A  They were wet, sir.
Q  And do you know what those stains were?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Did your investigation reveal what those stains were?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And what are those stains, or what were those stains?
A  They are AB blood.
Q  Where did you proceed to--how long were you in the master bedroom on that particular occasion?
A  No more than four or five minutes.
Q  And where did you proceed to at that point?
A  After leaving the master bedroom I went to the south bedroom or the front bedroom and began to make observations.
Q  And why did you go to the south bedroom?
A  Well, at this point, Investigator Ivory was, in fact, the investigator in charge of the crime scene in that he was the duty investigator, and  he would have been the coordinating ele-ment at that point.  So I asked him--what do you want me to do, what directions?  He said, all right, go to the south bedroom and begin to process that room and this is what I did.
Q  Would you please tell us what you did when you arrived or got to the south bedroom?
A  Well, as I entered the room, the lights were on and I could see that there was nothing on the floor of the room that I would necessarily hurt or destroy as far as evidentiary value goes with the naked eye.  I moved immediately to the south side of the bed and examined the bo-dy that was lying on the bed.  This examination was to determine whether or not she was alive.  She wasn’t, she was dead.
Q  What did you observe in order to arrive at that conclusion?
A  Well, sir, I bent over the body.  I put my ear very close to her mouth and nose, as close as I could get it, just to see if I could detect any breathing, any sound or feel any air mo-tion.  There was none.  I looked for signs of motion.  There was absolutely none.  I looked down into the gaping wounds, I could see in the throat of this child.  Of such, there were several.  There was no sign of bleeding, no sign of any blood movement at all.
Q  What was the condition of the blood?
A  It was just starting to coagulate in that it was tacky, the blood that was on the bed.
Q  Now I show you what’s been marked as Government Exhibits 67 through 71 and ask you to look very closely at them, if you will.

CPT THOMPSON:  Government Exhibits 67 through 72 are handed to the investigating officer.

(IO examined the exhibits.)

CPT THOMPSON:  Government Exhibits 67 through 71 are handed to counsel for Captain Mac-Donald.)

Q  What do those photographs, 67 through 71 depict to you, Mr. Shaw?
A  They depict the scene as I saw it in the south bedroom that morning when I entered.
Q  Approximately what time did you enter that room?
A  That would have been at approximately 0455 hours.
Q  Were you present at the time the photographs were taken?
A  Yes, sir, I was.
Q  Of that bedroom?
A  Yes, sir, I was.
Q  At the time those photographs were taken was the scene accurately depicted in the pho-tographs?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And has that scene been changed in the interim period?
A  No, sir.
Q  By you or anyone else?
A  No, sir.
Q  I hand you what has been marked Government Exhibit 69.  You have seen that once be-fore.

(G-69 was shown to counsel for the accused and to the IO.)

Q  I draw your attention to the bedding.  Did you see or observe that bedding very closely that morning?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  Is this adequately depicted?
A  Yes, it is.
Q  How was the bedding, portion of the covers, etcetera, in reference to the child?  What was its location?
A  The bedding was pulled up to about the shoulder level and then put under the child.  The child was lying, in fact, on her left side.
Q  How long were you in the front bedroom?
A  Well, sir, I was in the front bedroom at that point, just a few minutes, because Mr. Ivory told me that Doctor Neal had arrived.
Q  What did you do upon learning this?
A  Well, I knew, of course, that he was there to examine the bodies to see if there were any signs of life and pronounce them dead.  So I followed him and Ivory as Doctor Neal made his rounds.
Q  Very fine.  When and where was it the first time you saw Doctor Neal?
A  In the hallway of the quarters.  He entered the north bedroom of the quarters, the rear bedroom.
Q  And where did he and yourself and Mr. Ivory go?
A  Doctor Neal moved to the side of the bed.
Q  Of which room is this in the house?
A  We are talking about the north bedroom.  He moved to the side of the bed being careful not to step in a puddle of blood that was there, and made his examination while Ivory was standing to his rear on the rug.
Q  Prior to proceeding let me hand you what has been marked as Government Exhibit 50 through 56, and let me ask you to explain those.

(G-50 through 56 were examined by the IO and counsel for the accused.)

Q  Government’s 50 through 56, what do they depict to you, Mr. Shaw?
A  They represent the scene as I saw it that morning in the north bedroom.
Q  Were you present at the time these photographs were taken?
A  Yes, sir, I was.
Q  And when were they taken?
A  These photographs were taken prior to Neal’s examination of that body, by the photo-grapher, Mr. Squires, from the Post Signal Office.
Q  Now you stated that you were present at the time the pictures were taken and you were present at the time Doctor Neal examined the body.  Is that correct?  What was the time interval between those two events, if you can remember?
A  Well, some of the pictures, particularly those that depict the floor at the entrance to the room were taken prior to Neal’s arrival. As we entered the bedroom, I heard Ivory say--

MR. SEGAL:  Objected to.

A  As we entered the room--

CPT BEALE:  The objection is sustained.

A  As we entered the room, Neal was asked to wait for a moment while another picture was taken.
Q  Now, let me again hand you what was marked as Government Exhibit 53.  When was the first time that you saw that exhibit or that portion of the house?
A  When I first walked down the hallway and stood at the doorway of that room.
Q  What does that picture depict--what did it depict to you at the time you initially saw it?
A  A footprint of a naked human foot in reddish-brown liquid of some kind.
Q  What was the condition of that reddish-brown liquid?
A  It was glistening; I would say it was coagulating.
Q  Now were you present when Doctor Neal entered the rear bedroom?
A  Yes, sir, I was.
Q  Would you please describe for the investigating officer what he did in that room?
A  Doctor Neal moved to the side of the bed, as I said, approached the head of the child, and the first thing I saw him do was reach down and take the child by the shoulder and turn her over.  He appeared to be looking for wounds in the back of the child and on front of the child.
Q  What happened at that point?
A  Well, I gasped, in fact.
Q  What did you do or what did you say?
A  I said nothing, I just (gasped)--like that, and Doctor Neal heard me and he looked over his shoulder, and Mr. Ivory said--

MR. SEGAL:  Objection.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  As a result of what was said or done, what did Doctor Neal do?
A  He continued his examination and then placed the child back in that position he thought she was in, and pulled the covers up towards her shoulder level, not all the way up to her shoulder, but he pulled the covers up as though he were putting them back the way he thought they were.
Q  Now, again for the investigating officer, can you tell us--you stated there were pictures taken prior to the time Doctor Neal entered that room.  Is that correct?  What was the time interval between the time those pictures were taken and his examination was begun?
A  Five minutes anyway, at least five minutes.
Q  Do continue with reference to what Doctor Neal did in furtherance of that examination.
A  He looked into the wounds of the child, and I saw him touch one of the arms of the child, the right arm.  I thought he was taking her pulse.  My vision of this was somewhat blocked in that I could see the head of the child and I could see the feet, but Doctor Neal was blocking this view.
Q  What did Doctor Neal do then?
A  Well, he straightened up and he said, “She’s dead.”
Q  What happened at that point?
A  He left the room.
Q  And where did he go?
A  He went to the master bedroom, to the east bedroom.
Q  Did you go with him?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  And what did he do in the east bedroom?
A  He went to the area of the left arm of the woman that was lying on the floor and crouched down.  He reached over her with one of his hands thumbed back her left eyelid which was closed.  The right eye was open.  He thumbed back the left eyelid, peered into her eye, looked at the wounds that were visible, stood up, walked around her to her--behind her head, bent down, and using both hands he put them under her chin, as though he was taking her pulse.

CPT THOMPSON:  The record should reflect that the witness, with both hands, the index and second finger, under the chin.

Q  What did you do at that time?
A  He stood up and he shook his head and said, “She’s dead too.”
Q  And where did he go at that point?
A  He left the bedroom and went to the south bedroom.
Q  And can you describe again for the investigating officer what actions he took?
A  Yes, sir, he moved directly into the room and I guided him to the south side of the bed with my hand.  He moved to the side of the bed.  He bent over the child; he peered at her, looking down into the wounds and he reached out his hand and he touched the child on the right cheek with the fingers.  And then, with that same hand he reached over and laid the pads of his fingers, his first three fingers of his left hand, on her left wrist which was exposed and up; and then he straightened up and left the bedroom, I don’t believe he said anything at that point.  I don’t recall him saying anything.
Q  Where did he go at that point?
A  He was ushered immediately out of the quarters, out of the bedroom area.
Q  How long was Doctor Neal in the residence of 544 Castle Drive during those early morning hours on 17 February?
A  Between five and ten minutes.  I don’t believe he was in there ten minutes.
Q  What did he carry with him as he made his rounds through the rooms on that morning?
A  Nothing.
Q  What did he use to make his examinations of the three individuals such as you’ve de-scribed?
A  His hands and his eyes.
Q  What instruments, I mean, did he use?
A  None, sir.
Q  I hand you what has been marked as Government 43.  You’ve looked at that once before, haven’t you?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  At the time Doctor Neal made his examination in that particular room of that particular bo-dy, what was the scene at that time?
A  Exactly as is depicted in that photograph.
Q  What was the scene when Doctor Neal departed that room?
A  Exactly as is shown there.
Q  During those two points in time, what in that particular scene was disturbed or moved in any way?
A  Nothing, sir.
Q  Were you present during the entire time?
A  Yes, sir, I was.
Q  After Doctor Neal departed the house, what were your duties then?
A  After he departed the house, I returned to the south bedroom and continued to process this room for evidence.
Q  And how long were you in the south bedroom on this particular occasion?
A  Well, I was there until about 5:30 when--0530 hours, when I realized Mr. Grebner, the Chief Investigator, was in the house.  I left the south bedroom to talk to him.
Q  While you were in the south bedroom, can you describe for the investigating officer what steps were taken to process the south bedroom?  What were you doing at this time?
A  Yes, sir, I made a visual examination of the room, which is the accepted practice, looking for fragile evidence which is collected first.  This was just to locate and identify, not to col-lect at this point.  I knew that very shortly the body on the bed would have to be moved, so I obtained a felt tip pen and I marked the body outline, and the blanket outline which was exposed on the bed.  In addition, I made some very rough sketches of what I was observing.
Q  And where was the body at the time you made the body outline?
A  On the bed.  It hadn’t been moved.
Q  What else did you do in that room?
A  At that point, prior to talking to Mr. Grebner?
Q  Yes.
A  Well, that’s all.  Making observations, marking this body outline that was exposed, just generally taking notes on this thing.
Q  I hand you what’s been marked as Government Exhibit 67, which you’ve seen once before?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Do you recognize that?  What does that depict?
A  It depicts the outline of the body that was lying on the bed.
Q  And again, who made that outline?
A  I did.
Q  Were you present at the time that particular body was removed?
A  Yes, sir, I was.
Q  And what did you observe on the surface at that time?
A  I don’t believe I understand what you said?
Q  What did you observe at that time, the time the body was removed, on the surface of the bed?
A  Well prior to the body being moved at all, I took the blankets and eased them out from un-derneath the body.  As I said, she was lying on them; and I pulled the blankets back to the foot of the bed.  Now, of course the child was then completely exposed to my view, and I marked the rest of the body outline, and I could see a large wet stain in approximately the center of the bed, and superimposed over this large wet stain was another stain which was reddish-brown color, which appeared to be blood.
Q  And what were the conditions of both of these stains?
A  Wet.
Q  I draw your attention now back to the master bedroom or east bedroom and ask you whether or not you had occasion to observe the surface of that bed?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  And would you please tell the investigating officer what you observed and when you ob-served it?
A  Well, when I first entered the bedroom at about 0450 hours, of course one of the things I looked at was the bed, and I could see again a large wet stain on the bed which I had occa-sion to examine a little closer, and I could see foreign material of some kind, some debris on the bed and I could see reddish-brown flecks of some liquid material on the bed.
Q  What was the condition of the stain at the time you initially observed it?
A  It was wet.
Q  Now you stated at a certain point in time while you were processing the front bedroom, Mr. Grebner arrived.  Who is Mr. Grebner?
A  Mr. Grebner is the Chief of CID at Fort Bragg.
Q  And what did you do at the time he arrived?
A  Well, I moved immediately to the living room where he was and discussed the complexity of this crime scene with him.  I don’t know if he was aware of it or not so I gave him a brief-ing on what information we had and what the house looked like generally, and discussed the possibility with him of calling the Criminal Investigation Laboratory at Fort Gordon and re-questing they send a laboratory team to process that house or assist us in processing it.  He concurred with this and said he’d take care of it.
Q  What were your next steps with reference to the processing of this scene?
A  Well, sir, at this point, after this discussion with Grebner, I moved back to the south bed-room and continued the process I’ve already discussed.  At about 0630 Ivory came to me and said, “We are organizing a search of the outside of the quarters.  Will you give us some as-sistance?”  And I said, “of course.”  I obtained my flashlight which was a 4-cell strong light and went outside.  Now, my first act--
Q  Excuse me.  How did you depart the quarters?
A  Down the hallway, through the living room and out of the front door.
Q  What were the weather conditions at the time you left the house?
A  It was still rainy, drizzling, cold.
Q  And again, approximately what time was this?
A  About 0630.
Q  What did you do?
A  Well, sir, I began a systematic search of the outside of the quarters, which involved start-ing at the wall of the quarters and moving out in a--what would normally be a clockwise di-rection--but in this case since three walls of the MacDonald quarters are exposed I went in a counter-clockwise direction.  The first thing I looked for were--I examined the sandy soil right at the base of the wall, right at the foundation of the quarters, looking for footprints or other evidence.  I found none.  As I continued this examination, I moved in a counter-clockwise direction around the periphery of the house, and I heard an MP say, “Here’s something.”  I walked around the corner of the quarters and I saw an MP standing at the northeast corner of the house, or in that general area, in that general vicinity, in that he was at the juncture of the two sidewalks that surrounded the house; and I saw another MP over by the utility room entrance to the quarters, which would be the northeast entrance.  He was standing in the light there and he was pointing down at the ground.  I went over there and I saw a club lying on the ground, and I asked him, “Have you touched this?” and he said, “No, I just found it.”
Q  And again, where was this club located?
A  It was lying on the ground about three feet from the northeast entrance to the quarters.
Q  With respect to what you saw, what were your actions?
A  Well, I immediately--well, I swept the area with my light looking for something else in the immediate vicinity, and I saw nothing, so I stepped over to the club and I couched down over it and gave it a visual examination.  I saw reddish-brown liquid stains on the club and I saw what looked to me in that light to be some sort of hairs or fibers.  I wasn’t sure.  But I im-mediately sent the MP for a photographer and received the word back that he ran out of flash bulbs and he had sent for some.  So because of the rain and because of the condition of this club, I knew that I couldn’t adequately protect it from the elements without losing valuable evidence, so I made the decision to collect it for evidence right then.
Q  And how did you collect it?
A  Well, what I did was put an arrow with a ball point pen in the wood of the club itself.  I tried to select an area that didn’t look too crucial is the best I can tell you about that.  I put it--I put an arrow on it indicating that surface which was up and that direction in which the club was lying on the ground, my conception of it.
Q  I hand you what has been marked as Accused Exhibit A-20 and ask you to look at that very closely.
A  Yes.

(A-20 was handed to the IO and to counsel for the accused.)

MR. SEGAL:  Thank you.

Q  What did that Accused Exhibit A-20 picture depict to you, Mr. Shaw?
A  Well, having made the decision to collect the evidence, I obtained a dry clean cardboard box and some small wooden sticks.  I pushed the sticks into the ground around the outside of the club to indicate where it had been lying.  I pick the club up and put it into the box and secured the box in the trunk of a sedan, a CID sedan.  As flash bulbs became available, when the photographer became available, I asked for him to take a picture of that area to depict where it had been prior to the sticks being moved or tromped on.
Q  What were the weather conditions at the time you removed the club?
A  It was still raining.
Q  Would you orient the investigating officer approximately how far from the utility room was this club found?
A  The--about three feet.  It was just outside the door on the grass.
Q  Would you recognize that club again if you saw it again?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  How?
A  Well, after getting it to the sedan and out of the weather, I marked it with my initials and the date.

CPT THOMPSON:  At this time I’d like to have the following evidence marked as government exhibit.

COL ROCK:  Government Exhibit 79, wooden stick approximately 30 inches by 1½ by 1½.

CPT THOMPSON:  May it please the investigating officer, this, along with five other pieces that will be introduced during the course of the testimony of this witness, it is requested by the government that during any recess and at the close of his testimony, he be allowed to retain these pieces of real evidence in his possession.

MR. SEGAL:  I want an opportunity of--it does not belong to the government once it is marked.

CPT THOMPSON:  As long as this hearing is in session, the government has no objection at all to the defense having an opportunity to adequately examine these particular--

COL ROCK:  We will make the same examination available as was made previously which seems to be reasonable in this case.

CPT THOMPSON:  Government Exhibit 79 is handed to counsel for the defense.

MR. SEGAL:  Thank you.

Q  I hand you what’s been marked as Government Exhibit 79, Mr. Shaw, and ask you to take a look at that object, and ask you whether or not you can identify it?
A  Yes, sir, I can.
Q  And what is it?
A  This is the club that I found lying on the ground in the vicinity of the northeast entrance to 544 Castle Drive.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’d like to have the following exhibit marked as Government Exhibit 80.

COL ROCK:  Government Exhibit 80, black and white photo of area near rear entrance with sticks.

CPT THOMPSON:  Government Exhibit 80 is handed to counsel for Captain MacDonald.

MR. SEGAL:  Thank you.

Q  Mr. Shaw, I hand you Government Exhibit 80 and ask you what that portrays to you?
A  Sir, this is a photograph depicting the sticks that I placed in the ground to mark where I found the club.
Q  Did you have an occasion at the time you observed that club to see the area around the club?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  Would you please describe that area for the investigating officer?
A  Well, it was grassy, well lighted by the rear porch light, and it was wet.
Q  Did you observe any impressions in or around the club?
A  In or about the club, no, sir, I did not.
Q  Is there any asphalt there near that particular area?  Or hard surface?
A  There’s a sidewalk, cement sidewalk.
Q  And where does this sidewalk--or what particular area in or around the house does this sidewalk cover?
A  The sidewalk leads from the back cement or concrete porch to another sidewalk which runs parallel with the quarters, and completely surrounds the quarters on three sides, north, south and east.
Q  After finding, marking and preserving Government Exhibit 79, what did you do then?
A  Well, sir, as I started back to continue my search of the sand area around the house, as I passed a large bush at the northeast corner of the house, my light swept over something that caught my eye, and at the same time I heard an MP say again, look at that, or here’s something.  I am not sure of what he said, but he was indicating the same area that I had seen on the ground.  Using my flashlight I examined the area, and I saw an ice pick and a paring knife lying on the ground.  Now, still, of course, we had no photographer there avail-able to take pictures, however, since this was lying under some foliage, quite thick foliage at that, I determined that if I placed a box upside down over these items, I’d be able to ade-quately protect them from the elements, which I did.  I sent for a box and when it got there I placed it upside down over these two objects and I instructed the military policemen there to guard them and not let anyone touch them or the box other than myself.
Q  Where were these two objects in reference to the shrub that you described?
A  Well, from the stem of the shrub they were about two or two and a half feet lying on the ground.  They were from six to nine inches apart, between them, and as I recall the blade of the paring knife was pointed toward the northeast corner of the house.  The stem of the ice pick was pointed away.
Q  Now, did you observe the area in and around these two objects?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  And would you please describe that area for the investigating officer?
A  Well, in the immediate vicinity of these two objects it was sandy and it was wet, and there were no footprints or other traces of--of any disturbance on the surface.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’d like to have the following two photographs marked as Government Exhi-bits 81 and 82.  The government withdraws the offer of Government Exhibit 82 and offers Government Exhibit 81.

COL ROCK:  Government Exhibit 81, black and white photograph of ice pick and small knife under bush.

CPT THOMPSON:  Government 81 is handed to counsel for the defense.

Q  I show you, Mr. Shaw, what has been marked as Accused Exhibit A-22 and Government Exhibit 81 and ask you to look at those, and tell me whether or not you recognize what they portray?
A  Yes, sir.  Exhibit 81 is a close-up photograph of the knife and the ice pick as I found them, and Exhibit A-22 is an establishing shot of the area which also depicts the knife and the ice pick, as I found them.
Q  Would you recognize the two objects that you’ve described as the knife and ice pick, if you saw them again?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  How would you recognize them?
A  Well, the ice pick has been marked with my initials and the date, as has the knife.  In ad-dition, the knife has a trade name of Old Hickory stamped into the handle.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’d like to have the following exhibits marked as Government’s 82 and 83.

COL ROCK:  Government 82, Old Hickory brand paring knife.  Government Exhibit 83, white-handled ice pick.

CPT THOMPSON:  Government Exhibits 82 and 83 are handled to counsel for Captain MacDon-ald.

MR. SEGAL:  All right.

Q  Mr. Shaw I hand you what’s been marked as Government Exhibits 82 and 83 and ask you to observe those two items and tell me whether or not you can identify them?
A  Yes, sir, this is the knife and this is the ice pick I found under the bush on the 17th of February.
Q  Again, what did you do upon observing these two items in the location you described?
A  I made a visual examination, without touching them, and then sent for a clean cardboard box, which I placed upside down over these items until such time as a photographer would be available to photograph them, and the instruction was given the military policeman not to touch them and to guard this box and these items specifically until I returned.
Q  How much longer was it until they were photographed?
A  They were photographed just prior to 0700 hours; because that’s the time I picked them up off the ground.
Q  On first observing these items, did you have occasion to look very closely at them?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What was their condition at that time?
A  I could see reddish-brown stains on them, on both of them, and they were wet, from the rain.
Q  What time did you remove these items from the scene?
A  0700.
Q  And did you observe their condition at that time?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  What was their condition?
A  Well, because they had been covered with the box, they’d started to dry slightly.  Again, I could see reddish-brown stains on them.  I should say minute stains.  There wasn’t much.
Q  On both objects?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Now at the time you observed these two or the three objects, you stated that you were in the process of processing the outside of the house in a counter-clockwise?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  Did you have occasion to finish that?
A  Yes, sir, I did.  While I was waiting for the photographer I completed my part of this exam-ination which consisted of looking for footprints other items of evidentiary value around this--in this sandy area, strip around the house.  I made a test print to see if a print in fact would take there, and it did.  I found nothing.

MR. SEGAL:  Excuse me.  That’s objected to, and move to strike anything of so-called experi-mental nature made at 0700 which is in excess of three hours after the apparent time of death.  It seems to be so irrelevant as not to be of any evidentiary value at this time.

CPT BEALE:  It is sustained.  The last answer will be stricken.

Q  During your perusal of the exterior of the house, what did you find, other than what you’ve already testified to?
A  Well, I found nothing more of evidentiary value.
Q  Subsequent to the time that the objects were photographed that you testified to, did you have occasion to reenter the house?
A  I reentered the house at that time.
Q  What did you do?
A  Well, the first thing I did was secure--was to mark these two items and secure them in plastic bags for later examination by the laboratory personnel.
Q  When you entered the house which aperture did you enter?  How did you enter the house?
A  The south entrance into the living room.
Q  And whom did you see at that time?  Did you see anyone?
A  At that time Major Parson was still there in the house.  Mr. Rossi was there.  Ivory was there.  Connelly was there, and to the best of my knowledge Mr. Grebner had returned and informed me at this time that a laboratory team would, in fact, be coming to assist us.
Q  What duties did you assume upon reentering the house?
A  When I entered the house I went back to the south bedroom and continued with my note taking and making sketches and that sort of thing.
Q  How long were you in that particular room?
A  Until about eight o’clock.
Q  At which time, where did you go?
A  Well, at about this time the decision was made to remove the bodies from the scene.  It must have been slightly before that because at about 0800 the medics entered the house with a stretcher and I saw them wheeling the stretcher down the hallway towards the master bedroom, and I was in the south bedroom at that time.  So I immediately went out there to see what was going on and Ivory was following them, and they all went into the master bed-room, so I went in there too.
Q  All right, at the time you left and went to the master bedroom, was the body still in the south bedroom?
A  Yes, sir, it was.
Q  When you went to the master bedroom, what did you see and what did you do?
A  Well, when we went to the master bedroom, the first thing that Ivory and I did was to collect the evidence from the body that we were going to have to retain at the scene.
Q  And how did you do this?
A  Well, the evidence I am talking about, of course, is a white bath mat of some sort with Hilton depressed in the weave of this thing, and a blue pajama top lying on the body.  We picked these up and placed them in--as we picked them up, we looked at them, and placed them in a plastic sack while we were doing this.
Q  I show you what’s been marked as Government Exhibit 46 and ask you to look at that.
A  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  We will recess at this time.

(The hearing recessed at 1040 hours, 23 July 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 1058 hours, 23 July 1970.)

COL ROCK:  This hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that those parties who were present at the beginning of the recess are currently in the hearing room.  I remind you, Mr. Shaw, you are under oath.  Proceed, counselor.

Questions by CPT THOMPSON:
Q  Again Mr. Shaw, I hand you what has been marked as Government Exhibit 46.  I believe you had an opportunity to look at it prior to recess.  Please take a look at it again.
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Now, approximately what time was it that you left the south bedroom and entered the master bedroom when the medical personnel arrived to remove the bodies?
A  It was approximately 0800 hours.
Q  Who was in the room at that time?
A  At that time there was two medics with a stretcher, Mr. Ivory and myself.
Q  At the time you entered the room did you see what is depicted in Government Exhibit 46?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  You stated that you saw Mr. Ivory and Mr. Connelly--or did you?  Who else did you see besides the medical personnel?
A  Mr. Ivory and myself.
Q  What was Mr. Ivory doing?
A  Well, he and I both moved immediately to the body to remove these items that I’ve al-ready testified about, the white towel and the blue pajama top.
Q  Can you describe for the investigating officer the method of procedure you used in order to remove these items?
A  Yes, sir.  I held a plastic bag open while Ivory used tongs to pick these things up and drop them into the bag.
Q  In reference to the items themselves as depicted in Government 46, where did you hold the plastic bag?
A  Well, it would have been immediately over the body.
Q  And how far away from the body?
A  Well, the opening of the bag was probably two and a half feet above the body, or three feet, perhaps.  I’m not sure.
Q  Go on.
A  And Mr. Ivory at that time lifted the objects.
Q  Were the items placed in the same bag?
A  No, sir.
Q  Separate bags?
A  Separate bags.
Q  What was done or what was accomplished after the removal of these two objects?
A  Well, of course, the bags were wrapped up to prevent anything from getting in the bag or out of the bag and placed on the side, and we moved back from the body and allowed the corpsmen, one corpsman to go to the head and shoulder region of the body, and another to get at her ankles.  They lifted Mrs. MacDonald straight up, moved her over, one corpsman has to take about two steps to get to the stretcher and laid her down on the stretcher, at which point they just wheeled her right out.
Q  Now, prior to the time that she was initially lifted from the floor of the master bedroom, had she prior to that been disturbed or moved in any way?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to, to the extent that he’s now asking for information that may be beyond his own personal knowledge.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’m asking for information that he knows.

MR. SEGAL:  I object to the form of the question.

CPT BEALE:  Limit the question, Captain Thompson, to what is in this witness’ knowledge.

Q  Did you see, after entering the master bedroom on this particular occasion, between that time and the time the body was initially lifted, did you see the body in any disturbed, touched?
A  Sir, the only disturbance was that caused by myself and Mr. Ivory when we were removing items from the body.
Q  Any time during that process did you touch the body?
A  No, sir, not as such.
Q  Did Mr. Ivory?
 A No, sir.
Q  Was there any other steps taken prior to the time that the body was lifted and removed?
A  On this particular occasion?
Q  Yes.
A  Well, the only investigative steps that was taken was to instruct the corpsmen how to conduct themselves in this room.  Other than that, no.
Q  What did you observe as the body was lifted off the floor?
A  Well, I was primarily concerned with the way the corpsmen were handling the body in get-ting it to the stretcher, and as they placed her down on the stretcher my attention was called by Mr. Ivory, who said “Look at this,” and I looked down into a large pool of blood that would have been immediately under Mrs. MacDonald’s head.
Q  What was the condition of that blood?
A  Well, as I say, it was a large pool of blood. It was starting to coagulate, but it was still wet, and Ivory called my attention to some substance sticking up out of the--out of this pool of blood.  At that I didn’t know what it was.
Q  Do you know what it is now?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What is that?

MR. SEGAL:  Objected to.  He doesn’t know of his own personal knowledge what it is.  Some-body told him.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  At the time the body was lifted, had the exact location of the body been preserved in any way?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And how was that accomplished?
A  Earlier, Ivory and Connelly had outlined the body on the rug with a felt tip pen.  It was a joint effort between them.  I watched them do it.
Q  All right, where did you go from this point after the body in the master bedroom was re-moved?
A  Well, the body was wheeled out of the house, and I followed them down to the west en-trance to the hallway, the living room entrance.  I watched them carry the body out and im-mediately another team came in with a different stretcher, canvas-type stretcher, which they brought to, up the hallway to a point between the two entrances to the north and south bedroom.  The corpsmen were instructed as to how to conduct themselves in the rooms.  They moved into the front bedroom--correction--into the rear bedroom, the north bedroom, and picked up the body off the bed.  The blankets were already back; they picked the body up off the bed, carried her out--this would have been Kristen MacDonald--and laid her on the stretcher.
Q  Had the position of the body as you described as Kristen MacDonald been preserved in any way?
A  Yes, sir, it had.
Q  How was this accomplished?
A  This was done by Mr. Connelly with a felt tip pen.  He traced her outline on the bed.
There was some discussion about this, prior to his doing it, as to the value of it because the body had already been moved, and we all knew it, but we tried to--well, we did, we decided to do it anyway to show the approximate position of the body.
Q  At the time you entered the rear bedroom, did you give any instructions to the medical people with reference to the removal of that particular body in that particular room?
A  Not directly, no, sir.
Q  At any time while they were in that room, was that scene disturbed?
A  Only in that the body was removed.
Q  Where did they go subsequent to leaving the north bedroom, or the rear bedroom?
A  After placing the body on the stretcher, they started to enter the south bedroom to pick up the body of Kimberly, and at this point I stopped them, and I told him--them, I said “I want you fellas to understand that this is crime scene and nothing is to be disturbed, unless it absolutely must be.  Do you understand?”  He said, “Yes, sir.”  I told them, “Okay, now don’t do anything without my direction.” “Yes, sir.”  And I preceded them in the room at which time I pulled the blankets down to the foot of the bed as I had described earlier, marked the rest of the body outline and then I stood back from the bed and one of the corpsmen went to the head of the bed on the south side and took the child there by the shoulders, and under the neck.  The other corpsman moved to the south side of the bed and the foot of the bed and took the child by the ankles.  They lifted the body up and carried her out into the hallway and one of them asked me, “Is it all right if we put her on the same stretcher as the other girl?” and I said, “Yes.”  They laid her down on the stretcher, at which point someone said, “The Chaplain’s here.”  And I looked up and there was a man--a solider in a fatigue uniform.  He was a Chaplain and I don’t know who.  I didn’t ascertain his identity, but he straddled the stretcher and performed a religious rite of some sort, and then he stood up and left the quarters.
Q  Where did you go at that time?
A  I stayed right there and watched them, and when he was finished the corpsmen lifted the stretcher and carried it out of the house, using the south entrance, and I followed them again to the west end of the hallway.
Q  In reference to--now you stated that the bodies were removed approximately around eight o’clock on the 17th.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What time had the photographer finished photographing the house, do you recall?  
A  Yes, sir, the last photograph, other than the photographs of the scene after the bodies were removed, were taken about seven o’clock.  Now, after the bodies were removed, we had the scenes photographed as they were.
Q  After the bodies were removed, what actions did you take or assume?
A  Well, initially I directed the photographer in taking of those pictures.  When that was com-pleted I started making more thorough examination of the entire house, because I decided at this point--

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.  The decision is irrelevant.  What he did is the only matter before this inquiry.

CPT BEALE:  Your objection is overruled.  Go ahead.

A  I decided that since the laboratory team was coming to assist us in this examination, that the investigators should make a more thorough examination of the household and try to de-termine where we wanted to use these experts that were coming down, and this is generally what we did until such time as they arrived.
Q  What specifically were you looking for during this thorough search?
A  We were looking for items of trace evidence.  We were looking for readily apparent signs of disturbances in the household, and other things of evidentiary value to perhaps be collected later.
Q  And what did your own personal investigation disclose with reference to trace or disturb-ance factors?
A  Well, I noted throughout the rear of the house, toward the east end of the house, the bedrooms particularly and the hallway, there were stains which I knew would have to be tested and I collected, because they appeared to be blood.  I noted several fibers and threads throughout this end of the quarters that would have to be collected.
Q  Now would you describe at this point, please, for the investigating officer the differentia-tion, if any, between threads and fibers?
A  Yes, sir.  Fibers are pieces of material that come, single strands of material that come di-rectly from the body of the clothing.  Threads are those pieces or strands of material that are used to sew the clothing together.
Q  Why, at this point in your investigation on the 17th were you interested in these threads and fibers?
A  Because our information was sketchy as to what had occurred, and it is common practice and accepted practice when you enter a crime scene and you don’t know really what has happened, you consider anything and everything evidence until such time as proven not to be.
Q  Again, what did you find in the way of disturbance or trace factors, or the--other than blood stains that you’ve already listed?
A  Well, there were signs a struggle had taken place of some kind, some sort of upheaval in the master bedroom in that, well, the torn pajama top that we’ve already seen, and the pocket that appeared to belong to that pajama top which was lying on the floor.  The rug was kicked up on one corner and there was a knife lying on the floor in that room.
Q  Well, with respect to that knife that you described in the master bedroom, when was the first time that you saw that particular object?
A  The first time I saw that object was when I initially entered that room, and I spoke to Ivo-ry and Connelly.
Q  What time was that?
A  That would have been at 0450--0455 hours.
Q  And what its position at that time?
A  It was lying on the floor in the vicinity of the north wall of the bedroom in front of a dres-ser that was along the wall.
Q  I show you what has been marked as Government 48 and ask you to closely scrutinize that picture and tell me whether or not you recognize it?
A  Yes, sir, I do.
Q  Please tell the investigating officer what it portrays to you?
A  That’s the knife that I saw on the floor that morning in the quarters, and that’s the same as I saw it.  I specifically asked the photographer to take that close-up picture, because I had obtained the felt tipped pen from Connelly and I marked the outline on the floor.
Q  At what time?
A  Oh, five o’clock--0500.
Q  What was its position at that time?
A  Just as it is depicted in that photograph.
Q  Would you be able to recognize that knife if you saw it again?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And how would you recognize it?
A  My initials and the date appear both on the handle and on the blade of the knife.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’d like to have the following exhibit marked as Government Exhibit 84.

COL ROCK:  Government Exhibit 84, small paring knife marked “stainless Geneva forge.”

(G-84 was examined by counsel for the accused.)

Q  Mr. Shaw, I hand you what has been marked Government 84 and ask you to look at that and tell the investigating officer, if you can, if you recognize that?
A  Yes, sir, I do.
Q  What is it?
A  This is the knife that was lying on the master bedroom floor that morning when I entered the quarters.
Q  At the time you entered the quarters and observed Government 84, what was its condi-tion, other than location?
A  Well, the blade of the knife was bent as you see it there and there were reddish-brown stains on it.
Q  And what time did you say you removed this knife from its location?
A  The knife wasn’t removed until about 1200 hours that morning.
Q  And what was its condition at that time?
A  Just as I have described it.
Q  Did you have occasion during that morning of the 17th of February to observe the condi-tion of the living room?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  More specifically I draw your attention to the area of the living room where the coffee table was.
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What was its position at the time you first entered the house?
A  It was overturned and with the leaning edge resting on some magazines which were on the floor of the living room.
Q  Have you had occasion to more closely look at any of those objects underneath the table?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Specifically what items?
A  Specifically the magazines that were lying there on the floor and a sketch made by a child of--up against the table.
Q  Did any of those items underneath that table have any significance to you as an investi-gator?

MR. SEGAL:  I’d object--that calls for a conclusion.

CPT THOMPSON:  It certainly does.

MR. SEGAL:  Let him tell what he saw.

Q  What magazines in particular did you have occasion to look at?
A  Well, sir, there were several but the ones I remember--there was a magazine entitled Checkmate.  There were--there was at one Playboy magazine.  There were several maga-zines dealing with psychology, I don’t recall the title.  There was an Esquire magazine.
Q  Now with reference to that Esquire magazine, did you have occasion to look at it and ob-serve it?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  What was its condition?
A  It was lying on the floor; it was closed.  When we examined it after it was collected, we saw a reddish-brown stain on the edge of the magazine at the top.
Q  If you saw this magazine again, would you be able to recognize it?
A  Yes, sir, most definitely.
Q  How would you recognize it?
A  My initials and the date that I had occasion to examine it appear on page 29 in the maga-zine.
Q  At the time you saw the magazine that you’ve described, the Esquire magazine in its ori-ginal location, can you tell us what objects were in and around it, and the Esquire magazine’s placement with reference to these objects?
A  Yes, sir, from my memory, the magazine was lying face up on the floor partially covered by a cardboard box that had printing on it, something to the effect of Animal Kingdom.  It was a red box which appears in the photograph of that scene; and on top of that was the table, and I don’t remember specifically if there was anything more than that.
Q  And you stated that you would be able to recognize that Esquire magazine if you saw it again.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir, I would.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’d like to have the following magazines marked as Government 85.

CPT BEALE:  Captain Thompson, what is this that’s inserted in the magazine in this plastic folder?

CPT THOMPSON:  Those are pages that were excerpted from that and analyzed at--by the people at the laboratory at Fort Gordon.  The page--

MR. SEGAL:  I object.  It seems to me that’s an explanation for the prosecutor’s interest and it is not evidence in this case and I would object to receiving this item in evidence at all.

CPT BEALE:  Well, this will have to be marked separately if we are going to consider it.

CPT THOMPSON:  Very well, we can have that marked.  I’d like to have the following item--

COL ROCK:  Excuse me.  Counsel, you referred to a page 29.  That apparently is not in here--or the witness referred to a page 29, which is apparently not in here.  Is that correct?

CPT THOMPSON:  If I may, your honor.

(CPT Thompson examined G-85.)  That is correct, your honor.

CPT BEALE:  Let the--is that an error?

CPT THOMPSON:  No.  There is not a page 29.  His initials and date appear in that particular document.

MR. SEGAL:  I object to this.  This testimony is by counsel.

CPT BEALE:  It is sustained, and he is going to have to properly have this witness identify this particular--

COL ROCK:  Government Exhibit 85 is an Esquire magazine with apparently certain pages missing, specifically page 29.

(G-85 was examined by counsel for the accused.)

Q  Mr. Shaw I hand you what has been marked as Government 85, and ask you whether or not you can identify that?
A  Yes, sir, I can.
Q  How can you identify it?
A  My initials and the date appear on it.
Q  Where do they appear?
A  On page number 31.
Q  Are those your initials?
A  Yes, sir, they are.
Q  Is that your handwriting?
A  Yes, sir, it is.
Q  Now you testified earlier on direct examination that you had marked the item--Esquire magazine--on page 29?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What is the--can you explain the discrepancy?
A  Yes, sir, I can.  The preceding page is page 28, and the manufacturer or the printer has seen fit to mark this page 31, and calls this a page (indicating a card in the magazine), and I hadn’t realized that prior to this time.
Q  Those are your initials?
A  Yes, sir, they are.
Q  When were they placed there?
A  On the 20th of February.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’d like to have the following items marked as--marked collectively as Gov-ernment Exhibit 86.  I hope to identify these objects--–

CPT BEALE:  There appears to be a number of pages enclosed within this plastic overlay.  Are you intending to use all the pages that are contained in there?

CPT THOMPSON:  I intend to use the testimony from one of the pages which faces the inves-tigating officer right now, right directly through the cellophane portion, and none of the other the pages.

CPT BEALE:  Well, then why are you offering the other pages?

CPT THOMPSON:  The rest of the pages are offered collectively because they are a part of Government 85.

MR. SEGAL:  Well, that is objected to as being irrelevant, immaterial and burdensome to the record in this case.

CPT THOMPSON:  Your honor, there is nothing burdensome to the record.  The government is trying to present Government 85 in its entirety.

MR. SEGAL:  May I suggest that the proper approach would be to keep your foot off the ta-ble where the court is?

CPT THOMPSON:  I believe that--

CPT BEALE:  Counsel, I’d like to propose a suggestion in reference to both Exhibits 85 and 86.
I agree that it would be rather burdensome to the record to include therein the entire maga-zine, so I think it would probably be best to substitute therefore a description, describing it as a particular magazine with a certain publication date, and the month; and then you can photograph certain pages which you deem to be relevant and those could be included in the record.

CPT THOMPSON:  That’s exactly what the government proposed to do, that we lay Govern-ment’s 85 and 86 together with the rest of the pieces of real evidence, wanting them re-moved in their entirety from the record and substitute a photograph of pertinent portions, from which the witness testifies so--first for the record.

COL ROCK:  Do you have those photographs available?

CPT THOMPSON:  Not at this time, no, your honor.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Segal, is that agreeable with you?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s acceptable, sir.

CPT BEALE:  Then obviously the only thing that’s relevant to this investigation is this page 116 on Government 86.  So that we will have that particular page removed from this plastic thing and that alone will be marked as Government 86.

CPT THOMPSON:  If I may, I’d like to propose that this might be an appropriate time to re-cess for lunch, during which time I can have this particular page photographed and prepared so that it can become a permanent part of the record.

COL ROCK:  You recommendation is accepted.  This hearing will recess until 1330 today.

(The hearing recessed at 1133 hours, 23 July 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 1332 hours, 23 July 1970.)

COL ROCK:  This hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that those parties who were present at the recess are currently in the hearing room with the exception of the wit-ness.  Proceed.

CPT THOMPSON:  Colonel Rock, one preliminary matter we’d like to take up at this time with respect to the request made by the government this morning for a list of defense witnesses who may be called during the progress of this investigation next week.  I believe that the de-fense counsel intimated this morning that he would respond to this request after lunch and he has indicated to me prior to the convening this afternoon that such a request would be hon-ored either--probably tomorrow.  Is that right, Mr. Segal?

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, we expect to comply with the request of the government to provide a list of witnesses.  We are in the process of trying to assemble that.  There are some clerical diffi-culties in that regard and it may be lengthy.  We want to give an accurate list, particularly with regard to addresses, if we can.  Now, we will supply to the government as quickly as we can the list.

CPT THOMPSON:  If possible, Colonel Rock, it may be beneficial to resolve any later problems, even for a preliminary list, if there is going to be any clerical problems, it may last over the weekend.

MR. SEGAL:  I just think it is premature until the government’s case is over.  I’m not entirely sure what the remaining witnesses of the government will have to do with influencing the de-fense choices.  It’s just that it is not a matter that it can be decided in advance of knowing all the government intends to present in this hearing.  But we will do our best to make these names available, to give the government adequate opportunity.  We do not intend to hide anything from them.  There’s just really a time and a place when that can be done in a ra-tional fashion.

COL ROCK:  The comments of both counsels have been noted.  Are you ready to proceed with your witness?

CPT THOMPSON:  Yes, the government recalls Mr. Robert Shaw.

(Investigator Robert B. Shaw was recalled.)

COL ROCK:  Mr. Shaw, I remind you again that you are under oath.  Proceed, counselor.

Q  I hand to the witness what has been marked as Government 65.  Mr. Shaw, I ask you to look at that particular photograph.
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Now with reference to the topic at hand, the Esquire magazine, does that actually portray the location as you initially saw it on that particular morning?
A  Yes, sir, it does.
Q  Does it accurately portray that magazine at the time it was removed, prior to the time it was removed from that location?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Who removed it?
A  Mr. Ivory.
Q  Were you present?
A  Yes, sir.

CPT THOMPSON:  The following exhibit has been marked as Government Exhibit 86, and hand-ed to the investigating officer.

COL ROCK:  Government 86, page 116 from Esquire magazine.  Let the record reflect that this is the correct title for what has been offered as evidence, several different pages from the same magazine.

CPT THOMPSON:  Thank you, sir.  Government 86 is handed to the counsel for Captain Mac-Donald.

(G-86 was returned to counsel for the government.)

Q  Mr. Shaw, I hand you what’s been marked as Government Exhibit 86 and ask you whether or not you can identify it?
A  Yes, sir, I can.
Q  What is it?
A  This is the reproduction of one of the pages that was removed from the Esquire magazine, which was found on the floor.
Q  Do you know why page 116 was removed?
A  Yes, sir, it was removed as part of the fingerprinting process.

MR. SEGAL:  That is objected to, to the extent that it does not appear at this time to be a matter of personal knowledge of this witness.

CPT THOMPSON:  If I may clarify.

CPT BEALE:  Okay.

Q  Mr. Shaw, did you have occasion prior to the time that the Esquire magazine that you’ve identified was taken apart, or pages taken apart from it, did you have occasion to see that magazine other than at Fort Bragg?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  Where was that?
A  Fort Gordon, Georgia.
Q  And where at Fort Gordon, Georgia did you see it?
A  In the fingerprint division of US Army CID Laboratory.
Q  What was its location there?  What was being done to it?
A  The magazine had been sprayed with inhydrant (phonetic) and was hung up to dry, and it was pointed out to me by the fingerprint technicians who advised me that--

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.  Just testify as to what you personally know.

Q  All right, with respect to Government Exhibit 86, have you had occasion to read a portion of Government Exhibit 86?
A  Yes, sir, I have.
Q  A portion of or all of it?
A  I read all of it at least once.
Q  And is there anything that appears on Government Exhibit 86 that has significance to the MacDonald case?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.

CPT BEALE:  On what grounds, counsel?

MR. SEGAL:  The writing that appears in this magazine has not been established to be in any way relevant to these proceedings.  At this juncture I understand the government claims it has fingerprints on a page, one or more pages, that may be of interest, but since there’s no indication other than the fingerprints here, that the contents of the magazine were ever used, or read or absorbed by anybody at all relating to this case, the contents themselves cannot become an issue in these proceedings.  It would certainly be strange to go through a magazine and to raise questions as to all of the ads, all of the letters written in the maga-zine, all of the articles and various subjects, when, in fact, what we’re supposedly consider-ing, as I understand the thrust of the government’s testimony so far, is that there are three indications of fingerprints, and unless the fingerprints are supposed to tell us that they re-lated to the contents, then it escapes me, escapes the relevance of the contents at this time.

CPT THOMPSON:  May it please, your honor, Government Exhibit 86 is offered to the court at this time as having relevance with respect to the writing portion thereof, and if this witness is allowed to testify to what the investigating officer himself can read the relevance of it will be easily perceivable.  The fingerprint portion of Government Exhibit 86 is not offered at this particular time, and not offered at this particular juncture.  What we do intend to show through this question and subsequent questions is the relevancy of the magazine and its contents itself.

MR. SEGAL:  May it please the legal advisor and the investigating officer, until that is estab-lished then I most certainly say that it is objectionable to consider the contents of this mag-azine.  There’s no basis at this time to indicate the contents have any meaning whatsoever to this particular hearing.  I would certainly suggest that to put in issue of whatever the contents of the particular magazine are, which had never been seen by me prior to having it handed to me, so totally raises the question of the contents of all magazines in the house, and all publications in the house.  So I think it would be perhaps to open Pandora’s Box and we need not play with it at this time.

CPT BEALE:  Captain Thompson, I tend to agree with Mr. Segal.  Are you intending, as coun-sel for the government to piecemeal select from any and all magazines that are in that house and pick things that might be relevant to these proceedings?  Is that what you intend to do?

CPT THOMPSON:  This particular exhibit is offered as relevancy to this case, and--

COL ROCK:  How?

CPT BEALE:  Let’s excuse this witness and let’s discuss this.

CPT THOMPSON:  Would you please step outside, Mr. Shaw?

(Witness departed the hearing room.)

CPT BEALE:  Let the record reflect that Mr. Shaw has excused himself from the hearing room.  Captain Thompson, would you now explain to this particular hearing why this particular piece of evidence is relevant, or how you intend to show it?  Make an offer of proof.

CPT THOMPSON:  First of all, we have the Esquire magazine in a location within the home.
On this Esquire magazine, on the top of the pages, as has been testified earlier by Mr. Ivory, and the laboratory reports shows, there was a blood stain.  From this particular government exhibit, a piecemeal of this particular exhibit, you will find a sentence having reference to the Tate--Manson incident.

MR. SEGAL:  Excuse me.  I object to that.

CPT BEALE:  This is an offer of proof.

MR. SEGAL:  I object to the content being discussed.

CPT BEALE:  Let the record reflect that at this juncture Colonel Rock is going to excuse him-self from the hearing in order that both counsel may discuss this particular point with me, be-cause it’s obvious that certain things that might be discussed should not come before the hearing officer unless they are properly admitted into evidence.  We will discuss this informal-ly.

(The hearing recessed at 1348 hours, 23 July 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 1406 hours, 23 July 1970.)

CPT BEALE:  This hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect all parties who were pre-sent when we recessed are currently present.  Of course, Colonel Rock is not present, nor is the witness.
    I have considered as legal advisor, arguments from both sides concerning the potential relevancy of Government Exhibit 86 as pertains to contents of that page.  Without further showing of the relevancy of the particular contents of this exhibit, to include the entire mag-azine, I’m going to rule that the contents of the magazine are not relevant at this time, and will not be considered as such.  Now, the exhibits, if offered for the purposes of fingerprint identification showing fingerprints being on various pages, that is, are show on certain pages, then of course, that is relevant, and is admissible.  But the contents of the magazine at this particular juncture are not considered to be relevant at this time to this proceeding, and therefore they will not come in.

CPT THOMPSON:  May I point out, Captain Beale, that the magazine has been offered for its relevancy with respect to the blood contained on the top of the page, and I understand that this is similar to your fingerprint comment and I assume that with respect to that particular portion of the magazine it will be considered.

CPT BEALE:  Yes, and I think it would probably be the best thing to do, would be to extract those portions of the magazine that, in fact, there are blood prints or fingerprints, or blood spots, which you care to have Colonel Rock consider.  Those portions should be offered as such, but--

MR. SEGAL:  In that regard, sir, to the extent that that should be allowed, I would ask that we withdraw the Exhibit 86 as a single page picked out of context, and that we only receive it as such time the government is prepared to mark all those pages which have fingerprints on them.  Secondly, I would suggest that all the pages which are marked by the government be blanked out as far as its contents except for the area there are fingerprints around.  That is, the government may choose to place paper over the pages, except for the area of finger-prints, and that may be exposed, because otherwise inadvertently the contents of the maga-zine might become the subject of a discussion or observation, and obviously your ruling pre-cludes it being considered at this time.

CPT THOMPSON:  I believe the comments are untimely.  There hasn’t been an offer by the government at this time with respect to fingerprints at any location.

CPT BEALE:  Well, then what was Government Exhibit 86 offered for?

CPT THOMPSON:  The contents of page 116.

CPT BEALE:  Okay, then--

CPT THOMPSON:  And you’ve already made your--made your ruling with respect to page 116 and its contents.

CPT BEALE:  Well, in effect, what is going to be done, Captain Thompson, is that Government Exhibit 86 will either be withdrawn or a substitute therefore showing only that portion which pertains to the fingerprints, which you can do anyway you care to.  You can black out--

CPT THOMPSON:  At this time I withdraw Government 86, reserving the right at a future date to reintroduce those portions or portion which is relevant.

CPT BEALE:  Very well.  Government Exhibit 86 is withdrawn and will not be considered by Colonel Rock.  Now, reference Government Exhibit 85, we might as well clear this up right now.  Government Exhibit 85 as marked by Colonel Rock was Esquire magazine.  Captain Thompson, I think at this time it would be appropriate for you to select those portions of the magazine which you deem to have relevance reference fingerprints, blood stains, and to offer only that portion, and withdraw, I think, all the rest of it.  I think we’ve come to that conclu-sion anyway.  Which portion of that Esquire magazine do you deem to be relevant in that re-spect?

CPT THOMPSON:  At this time the government would offer the following description of Gov-ernment exhibit 85.  At the end of this description, the entire Government Exhibit 85 should be withdrawn.  Government Exhibit 85 is an Esquire magazine dated March 1970, cost $1.00.
The face of Lee Marvin appears on the front page and on the top of the magazine, the page areas is--are two black lines in between which a blood exhibit was removed and analyzed by the laboratory.  That is the only portion which the government wants considered at this time.

CPT BEALE:  So you want the cover.  Is that correct?  Okay, now you’ve already got into evidence the blood stains from the top, because that’s in your lab report, I believe.

CPT THOMPSON:  That’s correct.

CPT BEALE:  So all you are offering is just the cover of the magazine?

CPT THOMPSON:  The cover of the magazine--“Evil lurks in California.  Lee Marvin is afraid.
See page 99.”

CPT BEALE:  Okay, then for the purpose of the record you will remove that particular cover or have it Xeroxed and that will be Government Exhibit 85.

CPT THOMPSON:  So requested.

CPT BEALE:  Does both sides understand the extent of the ruling?

MR. SEGAL:  It’s clear, sir.

CPT BEALE:  Do you have any comments reference this particular matter?

MR. SEGAL:  I do, sir, there was placed on the record as part of what I think should be inter-preted as an offer of proof by Captain Thompson, while the investigating officer was here, some reference to Manson killings.  The investigating officer thereafter withdrew from the room, but that statement still remains on the record.  I would at this time, therefore, move to strike that from the record, in fact strike the entire offer of proof that was made while the investigating officer was present.

CPT BEALE:  Very well, Mr. Segal.  Your suggestion has been received.  Do you have any ob-jections to that procedure, Captain Thompson?

CPT THOMPSON:  No.

CPT BEALE:  Very well, then that particular portion, rather the verbatim contents of his offer of proof will be removed from the record.  Any other matters to be taken up?

MR. SEGAL:  No, sir.

CPT THOMPSON:  None by the government.

CPT BEALE:  Very well, the hearing will be recessed.

(The hearing recessed at 1415 hours, 23 July 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 1418 hours, 23 July 1970.)

CPT BEALE:  The hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that all parties present at the recess are again present; also Colonel Rock and the witness, Mr. Shaw.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Shaw, you are again advised that you are under oath.  Proceed, counsel.

Questions by CPT THOMPSON:
Q  Mr. Shaw, I again hand to you, Government 79, and ask you whether during the course of your investigation, you had occasion to determine the source of that subject?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  Would you please describe for the investigating officer what those steps encompassed, what you did?
A  Yes, sir.  We looked for similar pieces of wood around the area there and we looked for other items that might have the same kind of paint on it; we had the thought in mind that we--

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to--what the thought of the investigator was, sir.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Confine your remarks to what you did and what you saw.  You stated that you looked around the immediate vicinity.  Is that correct?
A  That’s correct.
Q  And what did that discovery disclose?
A  I found a similar piece of wood.

MR. SEGAL:  I object to the conclusion of the witness it was similar; that it be restricted to the fact that he found certain wood he then thereafter submitted to the laboratory for ana-lysis.

CPT THOMPSON:  Your honor, this witness can--

CPT BEALE:  It is sustained.

Q  Where was this particular wood found?
A  I found two pieces of wood of interest to me.
Q  And where were they found?
A  One was in the closet of the south bedroom and the other was in the locked storage shed behind the MacDonald quarters, which was identified as number 544.
Q  Now with respect to the piece of wood found in the south bedroom, again, what was its location?
A  In the closet of the south bedroom.
Q  And what did this piece of wood consist of--or what was its position?
A  It was an integral part of the shelving that had been placed in the closet.
Q  Was there anything else peculiar to it other than the fact that it was obviously a piece of wood?
A  Well, I can only state my reason for picking it up, and that it was of the same general de-sign as this wood here in configuration.
Q  Now with respect to the other piece of wood that you found, where was it found?
A  It was found in the locked storage shed behind the MacDonald quarters.
Q  And were you able to identify that particular storage shed?
A  Yes, sir, it had 544 on the door and the keys we found in the MacDonald quarters fit and unlocked the door.
Q  What did you find in that storage shed?
A  I found a piece of wood that was of interest to me, and a pair of rubber gloves that was of interest to me.
Q  Can you tell the investigating officer why the piece of wood was of interest to you?
A  Yes, sir, it had paint on it of this general color.
Q  And why did the gloves have interest to you?
A  They had paint of this general color on them.
Q  What type of gloves were they?
A  They were very thin rubber gloves such as a surgeon would use in his practice.
Q  During the course of your investigation of the house itself, did you have occasion to see other gloves similar to the ones you found in the storage?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  And where were those gloves?
A  They were in the dresser which was located on the south wall in the master bedroom.
Q  Now with respect to the piece of wood found in the shed, would you be able to recognize that piece of wood if you saw it again?
A  Yes, sir, I would.
Q  How would you be able to recognize it?
A  My initials and the date I collected it appear on it.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’d like to have the following exhibit marked as Government Exhibit 86.  

COL ROCK:  Government Exhibit 86, piece of board split at one end with white paint marks.

CPT THOMPSON:  Government Exhibit 86 is handed to counsel for the accused.

MR. SEGAL:  Thank you very much.

Q  Mr. Shaw I re-hand you Government 79 and Government 86 and ask you whether or not you recognize Government 86?
A  Yes, sir, I can.
Q  How do you recognize it?
A  Because my initials and the date I collected it from the storage room are written on it by me, they appear thereon.
Q  Now if you would, for the investigating officer, would you bring those two items forward?
It may be appropriate for counsel for the accused to come to the table of the investigating officer.  If you would, just set them on the table and, if you can point out for Colonel Rock why these two particular items were of interest of to you in your investigation?

(All counsel and the witness are at the IO’s desk.)

A  They were of interest to me because of the apparent similarity of color, and the paint.
The fact that they have an apparent similar design in the paint, and because of my desire to determine where these came from, knowing that this was in the locked shed, to see if there was any connection between the two, that could be determined that there was any connec-tion.
Q  Was there any paint found at that location or any other location?
A  Yes, sir--paint?  How do you mean, sir?  In a bucket, or--
Q  Yes.
A  No.
Q  Were these two particular exhibits sent to the laboratory for analysis?
A  Yes, sir, they were.
Q  Was there anything on them that was analyzed?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What?
A  Well, on the club there was paint.

MR. SEGAL:  I object to that statement as a conclusion.  I assume he’s talking about Govern-ment Exhibit G-79, the long narrow piece of wood.  Is that right?  I don’t believe that’s been identified as a club in any fashion in this record.

CPT THOMPSON:  The witness is using--

CPT BEALE:  Mr. Segal, we will accept the colloquial description given to us by the witness, so therefore that particular point…All right, now you had a pervious objection, but as to what now I didn’t quite understand that?

MR. SEGAL:  I objected to the characterization of this piece of wood.  That’s all at this time.

CPT BEALE:  Okay, fine.

COL ROCK:  Continue.

Q  Do you know what of these particular exhibits was analyzed?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  What?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.

CPT BEALE:  Mr. Shaw, did you conduct the experiment yourself at the lab on these particu-lar paints?

WITNESS:   The paint?

CPT BEALE:  Did you request certain--

WITNESS:  Yes, sir.

CPT BEALE:  Then you may testify as to what you requested; the lab reports speak for them-selves.

WITNESS:   All right, sir.

Q  Go ahead and answer Captain Beale’s question.  What did you request?
A  I requested that the club be examined for latent prints, that the reddish-brown stains ap-pearing on it be identified, and that the white paint-like stains be identified, and that the hairs and fibers that were visible be examined and compared with other exhibits that were submitted.
Q  Now were these particular two exhibits ever analyzed or compared with any other exhibits other than pieces of evidence which you sent to the laboratory?
A  Yes, sir, they were.
Q  And what were they compared with?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to unless the question is confined to any comparison made by the witness himself or made in the presence--

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll rephrase the question.

Q  What other items did you send to the laboratory?  To be compared with Government 79 and/or 86.
A  I sent the rubber gloves that I testified concerning, and I sent the other piece of wood that I testified concerning, and I requested that they be compared with the residue which was taken of the sidewalk behind the quarters, which appeared to be paint.
Q  Now I hand again to you Government Exhibit 79 and ask if you will, can you point out for the investigating officer where blood, if any, was found on that particular exhibit?
A  Well, there are several--

MR. SEGAL:  Again, I object to this witness being asked to tell where he found blood.  I as-sume you are asking him to identify the reddish-brown stains that he found.  That would be a more appropriate question.

CPT THOMPSON:  The witness has been testifying throughout his testimony with respect to reddish-brown stains and blood being found on different  and various objects.

CPT BEALE:  Well, now, counselor, he can’t testify unless he is a chemist and he can say for sure that was blood on there.  Why don’t you just confine his remarks to reddish-brown stains?

Q  Can you point out for the investigating officer where you found, if you know, any reddish-brown stains on Government 79?
A  I have to say that the red-brown stains were literally all over the club.  There were spots of them all over the club.  I did not examine the club closely, such as I am doing now prior to its being sent to the laboratory.  I picked it up, protected it from the elements, marked it and wrapped it.
Q  Now drawing your attention back to the master bedroom as to whether or not on that particular morning you had occasion to observe the ceiling of that room?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  What did you see on the ceiling of the master bedroom?
A  I saw several spots and streaks of reddish-brown liquid material.
Q  And how many spots did you see?
A  About ten.
Q  And what was their configuration with respect to each other?
A  They appeared to be more or less in line, running from--in a north-south direction, north-south line scattered about the light in the ceiling, which would be approximately the center of the ceiling.
Q  With respect to that same particular room, I hand you what’s been marked Government 45 and Government 14, and ask you whether or not you can identify those two exhibits?
A  Yes, sir, I can.
Q  What do those exhibits portray?
A  Well, your exhibit Government 45 depicts the entrance to the master bedroom and the bo-dy of Colette MacDonald and other items as I saw them the morning of 17 February when I arrived.  Your exhibit 14 depicts a portion of the rug which I cut off of the master bedroom rug that same morning, or the same day, 17 February.
Q  Now, again, why did you cut out that portion represented by Government Exhibit 14?
A  Because it was a reddish-brown stain that bore--it bore reddish-brown stains and because these particular stains were removed from the large concentration of the stains.
Q  What was the condition of that stain again, at the time you initially saw it?
A  It was wet.
Q  What is the nature of the rug in the master bedroom, a portion of which is represented by Government 14?
A  It’s what I would term a shag rug with long strands woven into it or--yes, woven into the rug, knitted close together.
Q  With respect to the stain that represented in Government Exhibit 14, was it absorbed in any way by the rug?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.

CPT BEALE:  On what grounds, counselor?

MR. SEGAL:  It calls for an expert opinion as to whether it was absorbed or not.  It would indicate an opinion as to how long the blood that’s in the fiber had been there as opposed to the blood on the fiber.  It’s obvious that this witness does not have the specific scientific knowledge.

CPT THOMPSON:  This witness had an opportunity to see Government 14, a section thereof, and observe as to whether it was absorbed.  I believe he could testify to it.  It would not take--

MR. SEGAL:  Asking for a conclusion as to absorption--

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

A  Several of the strands of the rug were soaked through with this red brown liquid.  Some of them were not soaked through, and the red brown liquid had not soaked through the rug en-tirely.  In other words, it hadn’t gone through the base of the rug onto the rug mat.
Q  I show you what’s been marked as Government Exhibit 59 and ask you whether or not you recognize the area portrayed by that exhibit?
A  Yes, sir, I do.
Q  And what is that area?
A  This photograph depicts the kitchen floor of the MacDonald quarters, part of it.
Q  Can you orient for the investigating officer where the circled areas would appear in refer-ence to other objects that are not in the picture?
A  Yes, sir, I can.  Holding the photograph so that the larger circle is to the top, the viewer would be in a position of being at the doorway of the dining room, kitchen, and beyond the spots would be the kitchen cabinet.
Q  How far away from the spots was the kitchen cabinet?
A  Not two feet away.  I’m not entirely certain, but not as much as--not as much as 24 inch-es.
Q  Did your investigation reveal what those spots are?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Now, Mr. Shaw, more recently, during the course of your investigation have you had an opportunity to assist this investigating officer or any other agency in becoming more or bet-ter oriented with respect to the floor plan of the house?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And what have you done or assisted in doing?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to as being irrelevant and immaterial.  The record reflects the investigating officer has been through the premises.

CPT BEALE:  These are pursuant to Colonel Rock’s request that certain diagrams be prepared of the location.  I think he is just trying to lead the witness up to that.

MR. SEGAL:  If we could get to that, we don’t object to the fact he prepared diagrams.

A  I’ve caused diagrams to be drawn of the quarters at 544 Castle Drive.
Q  Do you have those diagrams with you here today?
A  Yes, sir, I do.
Q  Are the diagrams presently hanging on the tripod immediately to my left?
A  Yes, sir, they are.

CPT THOMPSON:  At this time we would like to have these diagrams marked as government exhibits, if you so wish.  If you do not think it is necessary--

(The legal advisor and all counsel are examining the diagrams.)

COL ROCK:  G-87 is what?

CPT BEALE:  Is the living room.

COL ROCK:  Government 87 is expanded diagram of the living room.  Government Exhibit 88, expanded diagram of dining room.  Government Exhibit 89, expanded diagram of kitchen.  Government Exhibit 90, expanded diagram of hallway.  Government Exhibit 91, expanded dia-gram of front bedroom.  Government Exhibit 92, expanded diagram of north bedroom.  Gov-ernment Exhibit 93, expanded diagram of bathroom and hall closet.  Government Exhibit 94, expanded diagram of master bedroom.  Government Exhibit 95, expanded diagram of utility room.  Government Exhibit 96, expanded diagram of utility bathroom.

CPT THOMPSON:  May it please the investigating officer, with reference to Government Exhi-bit 87 through 96, the numbers appearing on not all but some of the exhibits represent the--D exhibit are blood stain exhibits found in the laboratory report.  It should be further pointed out that on the exhibits taken from the flooring, walls or ceiling are shown.  Those blood stain exhibits taken from rugs are not shown on any of the exhibits aforementioned.  The govern-ment requests a very brief five-minute recess.

COL ROCK:  So granted.

(The hearing recessed at 1448 hours, 23 July 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 1455 hours, 23 July 1970.)

COL ROCK:  This hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect those parties who were present at the recess are currently in the hearing room.  Mr. Shaw, you are again advised that you are under oath.  Proceed, counselor.

Questions by CPT THOMPSON:
Q  Mr. Shaw, you have told the investigating officer earlier that you had requested the labor-atory team or a laboratory team from Fort Gordon to come to Fort Bragg.  Is that correct?
Did they in fact come?
A  Yes, sir, they did.
Q  How many members of that came?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.  We’ve already had that on the record, so we are repeating matters repeatedly.  I ask the government be direct to get to the heart of whatever Mr. Shaw can add that is new to these proceedings.

CPT BEALE:  Would you establish what you are trying to bring out with this witness?

CPT THOMPSON:  The length of time that the laboratory personnel were here through this witness.  Who this individual specifically worked with during the course of that investigation.  Now continually through these proceedings, it is quite apparent, or should be apparent to everyone concerned that the professional abilities of both the Military Police Corps and other individuals have been placed in question by the defense, and it’s for this reason that this line of questioning is gone into with each and every investigator that’s come before this board.

CPT BEALE:  Okay, now the fact of how long the investigators were here has already been established.  As far as who he worked with might be relevant.

Q  Who did you work with while the laboratory team was here?
A  Two different members of the team.
Q  And who were those two different members?
A  Initially Mr. Page, the crime photographer, but primarily with Specialist Chamberlain, one of the chemists.
Q  And what was his purpose for being here?
A  To collect the trace evidence of the scene.
Q  Did he work specifically at your direction?
A  Yes, sir, he did.

CPT THOMPSON:  Thank you very much, Mr. Shaw.  Your witness.

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  Mr. Shaw, what type of wood is that large piece of wood that was apparently found in the shed behind the MacDonald house?
A  I don’t know.
Q  What type of wood is the long narrow piece of wood you characterized as a club?
A  I don’t know.
Q  Did you, in your own opinion, look at those two pieces of wood and conclude that they were from the same type of tree or from different types of trees?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that question.  He’s answered two former questions by saying in the negative that he didn’t know what type of wood they were.  It seems quite obvious to me the answer to this question does not serve any purpose.

MR. SEGAL:  My question is, did they appear to be the same, and that’s why he took them.
I’m not asking him to tell us the trees, he doesn’t know the trees.  We are entitled to know from this witness whether he, on his observations, thinks they are the same because his ob-servations apparently are matters of great importance to the government’s theory of the case as they have taken a great deal of time to lay before the investigating officer what these various observations were.  The investigating officer may compare the conclusions of this witness, by the same--what the investigating officer may believe from any other witness we may offer in the way of more expert testimony at a later time.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is sustained.

MR. SEGAL:  May we have the exhibits made available, please?

CPT THOMPSON:  They are available.

COL ROCK:  Would you please--

(CPT Thompson handed two pieces of wood to Mr. Segal.)

Q  Mr. Shaw, I want to hand to you, if you will look at G-86 and G-79, and ask you whether you observed any differences in the character of the wood?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’m going to object to this question again.

MR. SEGAL:  I’m not finished, Captain Thompson. I haven’t finished stating my question.  Do you observe any difference in the character as they now lay before you?

CPT THOMPSON:  I object to that question on the same basis.

MR. SEGAL:  We are asking again for the visual observation of this witness.  He has already told us, sir, that he took a certain piece of wood from a place in the house because he be-lieved it was material or relevant to the investigation.  We are now testing his powers of ob-servation.  Nothing can be more important to this investigation than to see whether the in-vestigators in fact made reasonable observations and conclusions or perhaps they made un-reasonable observations and conclusions.

CPT THOMPSON:  This piece of wood--was taken from inside the house.  The comparison made by this witness on direct examination was with reference to the peculiarity of configur-ation of the paint and the paint itself.  This was testified to on direct.  The comparison of the two objects there as far as their wood, what type they are, was not testified to.  The ques-tion is both beyond the scope of direct and also irrelevant, and immaterial.

MR. SEGAL:  I would suggest that perhaps whether there are similarity or dissimilarity in ap-pearance of wood is something that even a layman might comment on, but to suggest that a layman can really give us helpful information about paint, which the government thinks this witness can, strikes me as going a little bit far afield.  It’s very obvious that any person can look at these and make an observation which can then be verified by the investigating officer or rejected by the investigating officer as an accurate observation.

CPT THOMPSON:  And if that observation was relevant it would be able to come before Colo-nel Rock.  It is not relevant.  For that reason the question is objected to.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is sustained.

Q  Mr. Shaw, did you testify earlier this afternoon that you took the large piece of wood be-cause it appeared to you to be similar to the long piece of wood you characterized as a club?
A  No, sir.
Q  You did not?
A  No, sir.
Q  What was the reason you said you took the larger piece of wood for the purpose of exami-nation?
A  My reason as stated was that on both pieces of wood there is what appears to be paint.  These paints appear to be by visual examination the same color.  In addition, the paint is in such a configuration of design that they appear to have similarities.
Q  Excuse me.  When you say configuration of design, what do you mean?
A  The way it’s laying, the way it’s on the wood.
Q  You mean the spatter marks?
A  No, I don’t mean the spatter marks.
Q  Well, what do you mean?
A  I mean the brush marks, the brush and drip marks.
Q  The brush and drip marks which appear to you to be the same.  Is that right?
A  Yes.
Q  And what’s the basis of that conclusion that they appear to be the same?
A  Visual examination.
Q  What is your experience in examination of paint and brush marks?

CPT THOMPSON:  I object to that question.  It’s quite obvious that it was gross visual exami-nation.  The investigating officer has had opportunity to examine these.  We did not offer this witness as an expert in the field of configuration of paint, et cetera.  We offered him only as an investigator on the case and his gross visual examination he will testify to.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.  Answer the question, Mr. Shaw.

WITNESS:  May I have the question repeated?

Q  What is your experience or qualifications in terms of brush strokes or paint spattering or configurations?
A  Ordinary life experience.
Q  You mean you have painted around the house like everyone else has?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Nothing beyond that.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, that’s correct.
Q  How long was that larger piece of wood before a sample was taken for the purpose of in-vestigation?
A  Sir?
Q  The larger piece of wood?
A  How long was it?
Q  Yes, before a sample was taken for investigation.
A  I found it just like this.
Q  That’s all the full size you found it.  Is that correct?
A  Yes.
Q  Did you find any other wood in or about the MacDonald house?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Where did you find the wood?
A  I found other pieces of wood in this same locked storage cabinet or shed.
Q  How many pieces of wood did you find would you say?
A  I didn’t count them.
Q  Well, give us an approximation if you can?
A  There may have been twenty pieces of wood there.
Q  Now did the other pieces of wood in the locked storage cabinet resemble in their appear-ance the larger piece of wood that you--that you have there, which is G-86, or did it resem-ble in its appearance and condition G-79?
A  Some of both.
Q  Some of both?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Now where are the pieces of wood that was found in the locked storage cabinet?
A  Well, some of them I collected for comparison and they would be in the CID evidence room.  Some I did not collect for comparison and they are still in the locked storage cabinet.
Q  How many other pieces of wood did you submit for comparison?
A  Three others, I believe.
Q  Three others.  Then why were those three others sent to the laboratory for examination?
A  Because they also had paint spatters on them.
Q  Now of the four pieces of wood that were taken from the locked storage cabinet for the purpose of laboratory examination, did those four pieces of wood resemble in terms of their condition as to weathering G-79 or did they resemble G-86?

CPT THOMPSON:  Now I object to that question.  It is completely irrelevant.

MR. SEGAL:  The question, apparently afoot here, there is some connection found on the outside and on the inside, and we are entitled to find out whether in fact any of the wood on the inside appeared to this investigating officer to have weathered in the same fashion.  In the alternative, of course, would be now if the government would have made the wood available we wouldn’t have to ask an opinion of a witness who has no special knowledge in this area.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  What is your answer, sir?
A  In respect to weathering only, they appeared to have been weathered more like Exhibit G-86 than G-79.
Q  Does G-79 appear to have a number of linear cracks running with the grain in it?  What is your answer?
A  Was that a question?
Q  Yes, does G-79 appear to you to have cracks running with its grain?
A  Yes, sir, it does.
Q  Have you ever observed a piece of wood in your common experience which has been ex-posed to the rain and weather and then dried?
A  Yes, I have.
Q  Does it appear in some way to have a bearing in the terms of developing similar cracks which you see in G-79?
A  I think so.
Q  I beg your pardon?
A  I think so.
Q  Now when you first entered the MacDonald house you made certain visual observations of the living room, I believe you told us earlier.  Is that right?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Did you observe a, what appeared to be a man’s wallet any place in the living room?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that.  Your honor, I don’t believe the wallet was either cov-ered on direct examination or is relevant in any way to the hearing on the charges now be-fore this investigating officer.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  What is your answer, sir?
A  I did not.
Q  You did not?
A  No, sir.
Q  During the course of your investigation, did you ever learn that there was man’s wallet in the living room of the MacDonald house at the time the first military police arrived?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that.  It’s quite obvious this would be outside the personal knowledge on the same grounds upon which many, many objections were made by the other side on direct examination.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  What is your answer, Mr. Shaw?
A  I was told that apparently there had been a man’s wallet in the living room of the MacDon-ald quarters on the desk.  At the time that the first military police arrived--that wasn’t ex-plained to me.
Q  You have no idea when that wallet had been in the premises or what relevance it was to the MacDonald--

CPT THOMPSON:  Objection, already answered.

MR. SEGAL:  Well, sir, the point is that one of the crucial issues is the preservation of the crime scene.  The government has gone to great length to establish that it tried to make an effective effort to preserve the crime scene.  We suggest to the investigating officer that in fact, while the efforts were made in good faith, that they were not entirely successful, be-cause a number of items may have been disturbed or removed from the premises, and one of the matters we are now pursuing is what may have happened to a wallet which we believe has been adequately identified as having been there when the first military police arrived and later having been found in a different place outside the MacDonald premises.  I think for that reason it is a relevant form of examination to the question of the security of the premises in-volved.

CPT THOMPSON:  I would agree with the former position.  It is quite obvious to the govern-ment that the relevancy of this line of questioning is an attack upon the military, at least the criminal investigation, with respect to that scene, and it is the strategy and tactics of the defense to attack them in such a way as to detract from the real issue at hand, guilt or in-nocence of Captain MacDonald, and it is for these reasons that we feel that this line of ques-tioning is completely irrelevant.

CPT BEALE:  Captain Thompson, are you contending that preservation of the crime scene is not an issue here?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’m contending that this line of questioning does not go to the preservation or non-preservation of the crime scene but is a direct attack upon the MP’s and the Criminal Investigation people with respect to any activities in that house on that particular morning.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  May I have your answer, Mr. Shaw?
A  Would you please ask the question again?
Q  Surely.  What do you know, or how did you ultimately learn of the existence of a wallet at some time relevant to this investigation, that is, if a wallet was supposedly within the Mac-Donald premise at a time when the military policemen arrived and found the bodies there?

CPT THOMPSON:  That’ll be hearsay.  We object again.

CPT BEALE:  Captain Thompson, the objection is overruled.

COL ROCK:  Captain Thompson, I am interested in this line of inquiry and would personally be asking the same question subsequent to both counsels having completed their examination.
Please proceed.

A  I was told by Mr. Grebner very shortly after his arrival on the scene that apparently a wal-let had been there and had been removed.  But what his source of information was, I don’t know.  I do know that Mr. Grebner, and the rest of us in the house, proceeded to, in fact, search each other’s person to insure and to be able to testify at any given time that the wal-let was not on our person.
Q  You mean the CID investigators searched each other’s person?
A  There were military police officers that were there also, at least one.
Q  Now may I ask who are the persons who participated in this body search?
A  The only persons I can testify to from personal knowledge is myself, Mr. Ivory, Mr. Connol-ly, Mr. Grebner, Major Parsons.
Q  Did you ever subsequently participate in this search for the wallet itself, aside from check-ing each other’s person?
A  No, sir.
Q  Did you ever subsequently see a wallet either at the CID office or at the MacDonald household which was identified as having been an item that had been removed or apparently removed from the MacDonald house?
A  No, sir.
Q  Did you, yourself, ever interview any witnesses who said he saw a wallet on the desk or any other place in the living room of the MacDonald house?
A  No, sir.
Q  Have you now given us whatever information you have with regard to the existence of a wallet and the efforts that you know of personally to locate a wallet in the MacDonald living room?
A  I was told other things about it.
Q  By whom were you given information about the wallet?
A  Sometime later Mr. Grebner told me that quite an extensive search had been conducted for the wallet and that it was eventually found in the vicinity of Womack Army Hospital.
Q  To the best of your knowledge is he the person that has information about the finding or location of the wallet?
A  To the best of my knowledge, he is.
Q  Now were you aware of any other searches made of the MacDonald premises to find prop-erty that allegedly had been removed from that premises sometime starting the early morning of February 17th, 1970?
A That had been removed prior to--
Q  Well, anytime, say from after midnight of February 17th, that you have participated in a search for property that was allegedly removed at or about that time?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  What property were you concerned with checking for, locating?
A  On June of this year, counsel for the government came to me and had a list of items that Captain MacDonald wanted from his quarters.  One of the items listed on this list was a ring, as I recall.  I went with Captain Somers to the house and I searched the premises for that ring, and it did not appear in the house--it wasn’t in the house.
Q  On February 17th, 18th or 19th, did you at anytime attempt to take an inventory of the contents of the house to determine whether anything had been stolen from the premises by the persons Captain MacDonald described?
A  In a general way, yes.
Q  How did that come about, please?
A  Just through normal investigation procedures we looked for items of value to see if they were on the premises; for example, banks of money, silverware, television set, cameras, this sort of thing, to see if anything that--we had no idea of what was in the house, what was supposed to have been in the house at this point, but we wanted to see if we found that sort of thing in the house and we did.
Q  What I would really like to know is what efforts were made to determine on February 17th, 18th and 19th, whether there were any valuables in the house that specially should be checked for to see if they were still there?

CPT THOMPSON:  We object to any further line of questioning in regards to these particular items.

CPT BEALE:  What are the grounds?

CPT THOMPSON:  Irrelevancy.  Again we do not believe this goes to the preservation of the crime scene, but at matters based upon facts that are not in evidence at this time, and mat-ters which are more pointedly directed towards the castigation on the part of the MP’s and the CID, and their investigation of the case.

CPT BEALE:  Overruled.

MR. SEGAL:  May I specifically deny any concern with castigating people.  We are trying to find out specific evidence at this time about matters we think relate to information that Cap-tain MacDonald gave to the police, the military police.

Q  Did you attempt on February 17th, 18th, and 19th, to find out specifically whether certain valuables were in the MacDonald house that were known to the MacDonald’s or family or friends which were no longer there while following any inventory made by you or the CID per-sonnel?
A  I did not.
Q  Were you aware of any efforts by other members of the CID investigating team to deter-mine any contents had been stolen from the MacDonald house by the persons Captain Mac-Donald named as being responsible for the assault on himself, his wife and children?
A  The personnel at the crime scene, investigative personnel, made an effort to determine what was at the scene in the way of valuables so that at some later date when Captain MacDonald could be interviewed in depth concerning what was in the house, we would know whether it was there at that time or not.
Q  Was an inventory prepared of the contents of the MacDonald house?
A  No, sir.
Q  Are you telling us that at no time since February 17th, 1970, has there been a complete inventory made of the contents of the MacDonald house?
A  Are you referring to a written inventory, sir?
Q  Yes, sir.
A  No.
Q  Has there been a limited inventory prepared of items to--determined by inventory people to be of valuable items in the MacDonald house?  In other words, to make a smaller list show-ing all the things of value that was still there?
A  We made no list.
Q  Did you ever ask Captain MacDonald or cause any other investigator to ask Captain Mac-Donald what valuables were in his house on the morning of February 17th, 1970?
A  I did not.
Q  Did--to your knowledge--any investigator make such an inquiry of Captain MacDonald?
A  I don’t know.
Q  Did you, yourself, ever participate in the questioning of Captain MacDonald?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  On what date did you do that?
A  It was on the 6th of April.
Q  And at that time did you ask him any questions regarding valuables that may be in his house?
A  I don’t remember if that specific question was asked or not.  I don’t remember asking that question.
Q  Now, it’s a matter of fact that you asked Captain MacDonald at that time, how come nothing of value from his house was missing?
A  I remember that question being asked, but I’m not certain whether I asked it or not.
Q  And I might ask how--or who else participated with you in that specific interrogation of Captain MacDonald?
A  That interview of Captain MacDonald was conducted by Mr. Grebner, myself and William Ivory.
Q  Now do you have a written or typed transcript of your interview of April 6th, 1970, your interrogation of Captain MacDonald?
A  In my files.
Q  Do you have that with you today?
A  No, sir.
Q  All right, let me read to you and ask you whether you recall the following questions and answers.

CPT THOMPSON:  We’ll object to this, your honor, unless defense counsel wishes to put the entire transcript in evidence so that it in its entirety can be read and understood and not taken out of context.

MR. SEGAL:  May I say, sir, first I think I am entitled to place a question in its entirety before an objection is made cutting of the question which occasionally the admissibility or the inad-missibility of the given question, knowing what it’s all about.  Going beyond that, it is utterly preposterous to suggest that when we ask a witness whether he asked a certain specific question during the course of an interview that consumed thirty-five pages, that therefore we are compelled to move for the admission of the entire interview.  I suggest that we are entitled to either refresh the recollection of this witness by recalling to him a specific ques-tion and ask a specific answer, and if that does not work, to show it to him to see whether that refreshes his recollection.

CPT BEALE:  First of all let me say counsel for both sides will always extend the courtesy to the opposing counsel to let them finish their question before interrupting them with an ob-jection.  Secondly, I think, Mr. Segal, probably the best procedure here would be to have that particular statement which you are making reference to the witness, let him read it to see if it refreshes his memory.  If it does not, then we’ll approach the problem--

MR. SEGAL:  We accept that suggestion and Mr. Shaw will be shown page twenty of a thirty-five page written transcription of the interview of 6 April 1970, which was provided to the defense by the government.

CPT BEALE:  Is that the morning or afternoon session?

MR. SEGAL:  This is referring to a page of the morning session.

Q  Have you had occasion to now refresh your recollection, Mr. Shaw, by looking at this page of the transcription?
A  Yes, I have.
Q  And what is your recollection now in regard to any question put to Captain MacDonald about the valuables in his house?  What do you now recall that either said by you or someone else?
A  I said there was nothing missing from his house.
Q  You said to Captain MacDonald that there was nothing missing from his house.  Is that right, sir?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Can you tell us what was the basis of making such a statement to Captain MacDonald, if an inventory had never been taken, or any inquiry ever made of Captain MacDonald prior to the 6th of April as to what valuables were located in his house?
A  What was the basis for my making that statement?
Q  That nothing was missing, if you’d never had an inventory verifying as to what existed be-fore you arrived there or any other investigator arrived there?
A  As I testified earlier, I looked for valuables and found them, found cameras, and TV set, and what appeared to be expensive silverware.  I didn’t know if it was or not.  There was a great deal of money in the house and that sort of thing, and I made the statement, there’s nothing missing from your house.
Q  In other words, you determined that Captain MacDonald could not have had any valuables in the house on the basis that you found some valuable items in the house.  Is that right?
A  No.
Q  Well, why is it not a correct statement of how you arrived at the conclusion that there was no valuables taken?
A  Because I made that statement to ascertain whether or not Captain MacDonald would agree with me, and he appeared to.
Q  Then had Captain MacDonald been back to the house since February 17th, 1970?
A  No, I don’t believe so.
Q  Well, sir, there is in fact a roster of every person that’s been in the house since it was sealed.  Is there not?
A  No, there’s not.
Q  There’s not a roster?
A  No.
Q  Is there in fact a log in the house showing every time that the house has been opened since February--since February 21st, I guess?
A  That’s right.
Q  Does the log show who are the official investigators who were responsible for the opening and the closing of the house at various times?
A  That’s correct.
Q  So it would be known to the CID investigators whether Captain MacDonald has ever been back to the house since, say February 22nd, 1970?
A  Oh, yes.
Q  Do you have any information that leads you to conclude that Captain MacDonald has ever been back to that house since February 17th of 1970, with the exception of the day we were there with the investigating officer?
A  He has been in the house, no.  He has not to the best of my knowledge.
Q  Let me read to you, if I may, the specific questions and answers that I have occasion to refer to as indicating that you seemed to be making a positive statement of fact.

CPT BEALE:  Mr. Segal, hold it now.  I think we are--you’re going to try to follow the same procedure we followed before.  Now if you have a particular question, you can ask him, and if he doesn’t know the answer, let him refresh his memory by letting him read it.

MR. SEGAL:  May I have, in fact, Mr. Shaw read to the investigating officer starting with the fourth question from the bottom of the page--

COL ROCK:  Is this again page twenty?

MR. SEGAL:  Page twenty of a thirty-five page, of a interview on the morning 6 April, would you be good enough to read what you said to Captain MacDonald at this time?

CPT BEALE:  Just a second, Mr. Shaw.  What is your specific question concerning this, Mr. Segal?

MR. SEGAL:  I’m asking Mr. Shaw whether in fact he did not make a statement of fact to Captain MacDonald rather than as he has testified here this afternoon, asking Captain Mac-Donald a question on 6 April as to whether anything was missing from his house.  I suggest that the statement--the transcription here indicates that no question was put to Captain MacDonald, but rather statements of fact were made by the investigating officer, or rather by the CID investigators on which he had no basis of fact to make such a statement.

CPT BEALE:  Okay, then you will pose a question to him to try to elicit the information you seek after he has a chance to read it.

Q  Now have you had a chance to read the several questions here that pertain to the ab-sence or loss of any valuable items from the MacDonald house?
A  Yes, I’ve had a chance to read it.
Q  Does there anywhere appear here to be indicated in that transcription that you asked Captain MacDonald a question as to whether items were missing from his house?
A  In this vein of questioning, I made the statement, can you give us any help along this line at all?  Captain MacDonald’s answer here as written is, gee, I wish I could.  I just can’t imag-ine that I’ve ever offended anyone enough unless they are psychotic, you know, or in other words, an abnormal response to have something like this happen.
Q  Is that in your opinion relating to the question whether anything was stolen in this house?
A  It goes before, yes.
Q  Well, would you read to the investigating officer the actual words that you spoke to Cap-tain MacDonald in regard to the property loss on the morning of February 17th?

CPT THOMPSON:  I think the point was made that the witness should have an opportunity to read the question documented to himself and then questions should be posed to him.  He doesn’t have to be directed to read it out loud into the record.  He can read it and then an-swer appropriate questions there from, and only in this manner can proper answers be elicited from a witness.

CPT BEALE:  Objection is sustained.  You may proceed, Mr. Segal.

Q  Mr. Shaw, isn’t it a matter of fact that you stated not a question to Captain MacDonald, but made the following statement of fact to him on 6 April 1970--

CPT THOMPSON:  I object.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Segal, in this particular instance, the only way that he could keep it from getting into the record was to gentlemanly interrupt your question and I accept it.  Captain Beale.

CPT BEALE:  Again, Mr. Segal, now if you want that statement in the record, and you want to have Colonel Rock have knowledge of it, I would suggest that apparently the witness has answered the question, so unless you care to offer that document in its entirety, then I think that you might move on to another area.

MR. SEGAL:  I think, sir, that we are entitled to what I would call, impeach the witness’ tes-timony here in which he claims to have asked Captain MacDonald on the 6th of April 1970, whether there was a property loss by showing that there was a prior statement, actually the verbatim transcript of what was asked, that contradicts his testimony, and there’s no better way of doing it in law than to say, isn’t it a matter of fact that you said such and such at that time.  He may then either contradict the transcription, he may agree with the tran-scription and therefore it would be up to the investigating officer to determine whether the statement read from the transcript is the correct version or whether it’s in conflict with his testimony here today, or whether it’s consistent with his testimony today.  But it seems to be the only proper way now to confront Mr. Shaw with what I think appears to be an incon-sistency in his testimony.

CPT THOMPSON:  Learned counsel is correct up to the point to which he indicated that he had the right to read from that particular document which is not in evidence.  If he wishes to offer the document into evidence for some basis to impeach this witness, certainly I cannot prevent nor would I believe I had the grounds to prevent it.

COL ROCK:  I’d like to state at this time for both counsel.  My reading of what has transpired so far with reference to this point on inventories, I’m satisfied that no official inventory has been taken of the property in any fashion to include that of valuables; meaning that there is no written list which can be compared with any other knowledge existing currently before this inquiry.  Secondly, I am of the impression that also, that Captain MacDonald has not had an occasion to take an inventory of the property in that house.  This is my knowledge of the factors reflecting the condition of any inventories.

MR. SEGAL:  In view of the statement of the investigating officer, I have only one other question in this area.

Q  Mr. Shaw, did you not state to Captain MacDonald on February 6th--April 6th, 1970, that as a matter of fact, there was nothing missing from his house?
A  Those are generally the words, yes, that I used.
Q  You say “used.” Are they in fact not the specific words that you used to Captain MacDon-ald on April 6th, 1970?

CPT THOMPSON:  I object to that question again.  The specific words, which obviously he must be reading--if he wishes to introduce it--

MR. SEGAL:  I’m asking the witness if he recalls those to be his specific words.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  Would you answer, Mr. Shaw?
A  As I recall them, they are.
Q  Now, you arrived at the MacDonald house at what time on the morning of the 17th?
A  Appropriately 0450 hours.
Q  Did you ever ascertain how many other persons had been in the MacDonald house prior to your arriving on the scene?
A  I haven’t talked to everyone who I have heard was at the house reference their being there, no.
Q  Have you not previously indicated to me that you believe that there was between 12 and 15 persons who had been in the MacDonald house prior to your arrival?
A  Yes, I think so.
Q  Now you also caused, when you arrived at 0450, you made visual observation of the floors in the MacDonald house?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And I believe, has it been your testimony previously this afternoon and this morning that you did not observe any wet spot with the exception of reddish-brown areas on the floor?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  That means that no portion of the hallway floor leading from the master bedroom to the living room, did you see any wet portions other than the reddish-brown stains?
A  I did not.
Q  And that would indicate also that in the living room you saw no wet portions on the floor either?
A  The leaves and grass I’ve already testified about, some of those were wet.  That’s the on-ly wetness I saw on the floor other than the stains.
Q  Now how did you ascertain that the leaves and grass were wet?
A  I reached down and picked some of them up.
Q  And what did you do with them?
A  Put them back down on the floor.
Q  And when did you collect the leaves and grass for evidence purposes?
A  I did not.
Q  Why weren’t they collected?

CPT THOMPSON:  Objection, your honor.  It is not relevant.

CPT BEALE:  Overruled.  Answer the question.

A  They weren’t collected for evidence because as best as I can determine at that time and later that morning, nearly anyone who entered the quarters carried this grass and leaves in with them from outside.
Q  Did you determine that the actual, the only physical evidence visible to you of persons tracking back in--back and forth in the house at that time, were some strands of grass or blades of grass?  Is that correct?
A  And leaves.
Q  And leaves, but in fact all this walking back and forth by the various medical personnel and other investigative personnel did not leave any puddles of water that you observed?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Now you did say you observed what you characterized as a wet, brownish wet spot some-where on the floor of the house?  Do you recall where you saw that wet spot?
A  I saw several of them.
Q  Did you not make specific reference this morning to having seen at the entrance to the master bedroom a reddish-brown spot on the floor that was wet?
A  Yes, I guess I did.
Q  Can you indicate to the investigating officer the dimensions of that spot?  That is an inch diameter or a quarter of an inch diameter, or smaller?
A  Well, you refer to the entrance of the master bedroom, do you mean inside the master bedroom, or outside, or are you interested in both?
Q  I recall your testimony this morning to the following vein, if my recollection is not accurate in that regard, that you’ve testified that at the master bedroom, at the entrance, you found reddish-brown stains that were wet.  They were subsequently identified as Type AB blood.
That you were there in the master bedroom for four to five minutes at that time.  Now is that an accurate summary of what happened at that time in the morning on 17 February?
A  Yes.
Q  Now it is to those particular reddish-brown stains, observed at approximately--at some time between 0450 and 0500--that I’m asking you to tell us the dimensions of it?
A  In that same area there were five to seven different spots on the rug, the largest of which was approximately the size of--total area--of a quarter.
Q  You mean the spots that you referred to this morning were on the rug and not on the floor?
A  I’m not sure which spots I was referring to.  There were some on the rug and there were some just on the floor.
Q  Well, perhaps you would tell us, please, which of the spots that you believe were the ones that were wet, that is between 0450 and 0500?
A  Both.
Q  On the rug and on the floor.
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Now I want to show you a photograph marked G-45 which represents the entryway to the MacDonald master bedroom, and ask you to observe two areas on the wooden floor just in the hallway outside the master bedroom which have been circled apparently by the investi-gating personnel in this case.  Do you observe those, sir?
A  I do.
Q  Mr. Shaw, are those the spots that you saw between 0450 and 0500 that you thought were wet?
A  Those are some of the wet spots I saw.
Q  Now there was also on the rug just inside the MacDonald bedroom, a number of reddish spots, or reddish-brown spots that appear two of which have been previous circled by an-other witness.  Did those spots appear to you to have been wet at the time that you ob-served them?
A  These things that are circled here, if they are in fact spots--well, this one I’m reasonably certain is a stain of some kind on the floor.  Now the one to the right, as I view it--

MR. SEGAL:  Excuse me.  For the record, you are indicating that there is a spot on the rug inside the master bedroom which has been previously circled by Mr. Ivory, and it is of the two circles that are close here by them is the one to the right.  Am I correct in that description?

A  Yes.
Q  Now does that circle indicate to you a wet spot on the rug, where you observed it that is?
A  I don’t think that that particular circled spot was wet, but I didn’t touch that spot to find out.  It didn’t look wet.
Q  Was that, however, a reddish-brown stain that you observed but did not find it to be wet?
A  I believe it was.
Q  Now is there any where in this photograph revealed a reddish-brown stain that was wet, as far as your observations were concerned at 0450 to 0500?
A  Yes, sir, there is.
Q  Would you give us, please, a marking of that, using a blue marking pencil?
A  Now would you tell me again what you want me to mark?
Q  Would you circle any wet spots in the ten-minute interval we are talking about in the vi-cinity of the MacDonald bedroom entrance, either inside or outside?

COL ROCK:  You are referring to reddish-brown spots?

MR. SEGAL:  Yes, only reddish-brown spots, because that’s apparently the only ones that Mr. Shaw observed.

A  I have marked two which I am reasonably certain of.
Q  You are not certain.  Would you also place your signature and today’s date, 23 July, in a blue pen on the margin here?  And before I submit it to the investigating officer and counsel for the government, do I understand that you are not certain at this time whether one of the red circled marks, previously marked by Mr. Ivory, was in fact a reddish-brown stain and was wet when you saw this room at the time I’ve indicated?  If it is, I’d like for you to also circle it in blue around the red mark that is made.
A  Well my blue circle indicates those spots that I believe were wet when I arrived there.
Now, the spot that Mr. Ivory has circled to the right, I don’t believe was a wet stain.  I just don’t think so.  I think it was a dry stain, appeared to be dry.  Again, I didn’t touch it.
Q  Did you touch the stains, the ones you’ve circled in blue?
A  The one to the right, I touched the large portion of it, yes.  The one to the left which I have circled I did not touch, but I noticed that it, as I would move my body in reference to this I could see it, and I saw it was glistening and I thought it was wet.

MR. SEGAL:  Before going on, let me show the picture to the investigating officer and counsel for the government.

Q  Mr. Shaw, did you wipe your hand off after you touched the reddish-brown stain?
A  Oh, yes, sir, of course.
Q  What did you wipe it on?
A  A piece pf terry cloth towel.
Q  Where did you get the terry cloth towel?
A  It was in my pocket.
Q  And you brought it to the crime scene with you?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Now were these reddish-brown stains that you observed that were wet in the vicinity of the area which Captain MacDonald was carried through by the medical people when they re-moved him from the house?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that.  Obviously, from the time sequence when this investiga-tor initially arrived at the house, Captain MacDonald was not at the scene and he has no knowledge of how or in what manner Captain MacDonald was removed from the scene.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Well, let me ask you, are you familiar with the type of litter used by the Army personnel that removed the bodies from the MacDonald house?
A  I know of at least two different types.
Q  One is wheeled stretcher and one is a hand-carried stretcher without any wheels on it at all.  Is that right?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Now you are familiar with the approximate dimensions of those two stretchers, are you not?
A  Approximately.
Q  Would it be possible for anyone to go through a doorway the size of the MacDonald master bedroom doorway carrying such a stretcher with a body on it, without passing directly over the areas where you subsequently saw wet spots?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that.  It calls for a conclusion which the investigating officer can draw for himself.

MR. SEGAL:  It also tests the powers of observation of the particular witness.  It is certainly of common knowledge.  You can estimate the size, whether it fits through a certain opening and what part of the opening will be covered by the particular opening.

CPT BEALE:  I think it is a relevant matter because we don’t know the size of the litter or the stretcher, so you may ask the question.

Q  If someone was carrying a stretcher of the wheel type, first of all, through here, would it have to pass over the area where there now appears in the photograph to have been red-dish-brown wet spots?
A  Yes, I think so.
Q  Could you give us some approximation as to the width of the wheels on the type of stretcher you saw used in the MacDonald household?
A  The one I saw in the MacDonald household?
Q  Yes, sir.
A  Perhaps two and a half feet wide.
Q  What about the other stretcher, that’s not a wheeled stretcher, could you tell us approxi-mately the width of that stretcher?
A  I’d say it was probably less than two and half feet but I don’t know how much less, some-what smaller than the wheeled type.
Q  Not any smaller than two feet in width, would you say?
A  No, I wouldn’t say.
Q  According to your investigation, Mr. Shaw, can you tell the investigating officer how many persons, military police, medical personnel, or any others that you know of, passed through the doorway between the master bedroom of the MacDonald house and the hallway, as shown here in G-45?
A  My investigation?
Q  Yes, sir.
A  At least ten.
Q  Would you indicate to the investigating officer whether some of those persons passed through the doorway of the master bedroom into the hallway on more than one occasion?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that question.  He obviously wasn’t there for the totality of the time.  He can’t testify as to how many times any given individual passed through the giv-en doorway.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.  There’s a possibility that the witness might have ob-served the persons one or more times.

Q  Let's rephrase the question a little bit in accordance with the statement just made by Captain Beale.  Did you observe, of the ten persons you say passed through that doorway, any persons go through more than one time?
A  During what time frame?
Q  Well, from the time you had personnel knowledge of it until the bodies were removed?
A  Until the bodies were removed?
Q  Yes.
A  I passed through it several times.
Q  How many times would you estimate you, yourself, passed through that doorway?
A  Perhaps six times.
Q  Can you give us any indication of other persons who had occasion to pass through it more than one time?
A  Mr. Ivory did.
Q  On about how many occasions did he pass through?
A  I have to say several times.  I wasn’t counting the number of times he went into the bed-room.  I don’t know.
Q  Did any other persons pass through on more than one occasion?
A  Well, since the utility room door was closed, everyone that went through obviously came out, so all of the persons I saw went through it at least twice, through the doorway.
Q  Now you say the utility door was closed at 0450?
A  The northeast entrance to the quarters was closed, yes.
Q  You are referring to the doorway from the utility room leading to the outside.  Is that cor-rect?
A  Correct.
Q  Did you observe whether there were any military policemen in or about the door of that utility room?
A  I did.
Q  And where was that military policeman located?
A  He was standing outside the quarters in line of my sight as I looked out the door.
Q  At any time while you were in the premises after 0450 until the bodies were removed, did you see anyone come in the utility room door?
A  No, sir, I didn’t.
Q  Did you observe any other persons, however in your line of sight outside the entrance to the entrance to the utility room, besides the military policeman you saw?
A  Did I see anyone else outside?
Q  Did any other MP’s beside the one you said was directly outside the door?
A  I can’t answer that because I can’t identify the military policeman that was standing out-side the door and I don’t know if they changed.  They had on similar uniforms and headgears and so forth.
Q  How far from where you observed that military policeman standing was the piece of wood that you saw later on?
A  Perhaps five feet.
Q  Was it obscured in any way from the line of sight of the military policeman who was stand-ing in a position you could observe from the utility room door?
A  When I saw him he was facing away from the quarters.
Q  Assuming he faced the direction, was there anything in his line of sight to obscure it?

CPT THOMPSON:  Objection, assuming the guard did anything, it’s clearly speculative.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Was there anything in the immediate vicinity of the piece of--G-79--to obscure it from the view of persons standing in the doorway to the utility room?
A  The doorway that leads to the outside?
Q  Yes, if a person is standing in that door, is there anything to obscure this piece of wood, G-79?
A  No, a person standing there would have been able to see that piece of wood under proper lighting conditions.
Q  And was the back light to the MacDonald house on or off at that time?
A  It was on, at that time, to the best of my knowledge.
Q  It was on?
A  Yes.
Q  And how did you determine that light was on?  When did you first become aware of it?
A  I first knew that it was on and took note of the fact that it was on at about 0630.
Q  When you went out to check the grounds, is that right?  Participate in the checking of the grounds, is that right?
A  Yes.
Q  Now did you find other wood outside the MacDonald house besides the wood that was in the shed that you described?
A  Yes.
Q  Where was that found?
A  There was some wood lying at the--on the ground in an access way, brick access way, underneath the quarters.

MR. SEGAL:  If we may have available the diagram of the MacDonald house.

Q  I’d like to have you, Mr. Shaw, take a look at this exhibit and perhaps mark for us where--I ask you to come up and look, please, at Government Exhibit 1, Mr. Shaw, and indicate with your finger please where you found other pieces of wood.
A  I believe that the access way--it isn’t shown on this at all--I believe it to be in this area here which is immediately behind the rear bedroom or the north bedroom.
Q  Now when you say an access way, could you be perhaps a little more specific to describe what type of area you are talking about?
A  Yes, a hole has been dug in the ground which is approximately two feet square, and per-haps a foot deep, and bricked in.  In other words, the walls of this hole are bricked.  Immedi-ately within this area is a doorway built into the, what would be the foundation of the quart-ers, allowing one to open the door and get under the quarters and repair plumbing and so forth.
Q  Was there any steps to the particular access way you are referring to?
A  Steps, no.
Q  Would you indicate with a red marking pencil on the plastic covering of Government Exhibit 1 the approximate location and dimensions of this access way where you said you found lum-ber?
A  Perhaps there--

COL ROCK:  Did the witness say he found lumber or pieces of wood?

MR. SEGAL:  Pieces of wood.  I’ll have him describe them in more details, sir, in a moment.

Q  You may return to your seat, Mr. Shaw.  Tell us what type of wood or lumber you found in that access way.
A  I don’t know what kind of wood it was.
Q  Well, how many pieces and of what length?
A  I remember two pieces of wood, one of which was very red in color, as red as some wood I’ve seen that’s purported to be redwood.  To my recollection, that wood was somewhere in the neighbor of three or four inches on the side and perhaps two feet long, somewhat less than two feet, in fact.  The other piece of wood I saw was in fact three or four pieces of wood that looked like slatting of some kind that had been nailed together, such as one finds in a rose trellis, or something like this.
Q  What happened to the wood that was in this particular area?
A  I didn’t collect it as evidence.  I don’t know what happened to it.
Q  Was a photograph taken of the wood found in that particular area?
A  I believe a photograph does exist that depicts wood in that access way, yes.

MR. SEGAL:  At this time, if the investigating officer please, may we call upon the govern-ment to make available that photograph for further consideration by the defense in cross-ex-amination and for consideration by the investigating officer in regard to this entire proceed-ing?

COL ROCK:  Mr. Shaw, did you collect those pieces of wood?

WITNESS:   No, sir, I didn’t.

COL ROCK:  Why did you not save them?

WITNESS:   I didn’t collect them because they had no bearing that I could tell then or later on the crime scene itself.

COL ROCK:  How did you determine that at the time, they had no bearing?

WITNESS:   Well, as I examined the wood, of course. I was using as I say, quite a strong flashlight, and it had been raining for several days as I recall at that time, off and on, and I could see that sand and soil was on top of the wood.  It was as though it had been spat-tered on from the rain.  In addition, when I moved the wood I could see that it had been em-bedded somewhat into the sand indicating it had been there for, in my opinion, quite some time, several days at least, indicating to me that what had been there had not been dis-turbed for some time.

CPT BEALE:  Mr. Segal, Colonel Rock is satisfied with that answer, so therefore your request to produce the photograph of that particular piece of wood is denied.

Q  How did you move these pieces of wood that were in the well?
A  When I finished my search of the outside, as I testified.
Q  About what time was that?
A  About 0715, that’s an approximation.
Q  Do I gather at that time you went over to the well, looked at it, and what did you do?
A  Well, I got over there and I examined the surroundings area with my light to see what was over there that would be of interest or value to the investigation.
Q  What were you looking for at that time?
A  Anything and everything out of the ordinary.
Q  Well, what did you consider to be out of the ordinary for that location?
A  Well, perhaps if I’d found a knife or a revolver, something of that nature, I’d think that was out of the ordinary.
Q  Anything else?
A  Had I see--there are many, many things I could think of just off hand that would be out of the ordinary for that area.
Q  Right, but in connection with this investigation, you weren’t looking for a gun or a revolv-er, were you?
A  I wasn’t looking for anything specifically.
Q  Well, let me ask you this.  Were you looking for footprints?
A  Yes, I was.
Q  You were looking for possible weapons.  Is that right?
A  Correct.
Q  What other subject matter were you looking for in that area at that time besides weapons or footprints?
A  Something that may have been left behind by perpetrators.
Q  Something other than natural substances such as grass or dirt.  Is that right?
A  Right.
Q  You weren’t looking for impressions in the soil of pieces of wood, down in the well, were you?
A  Yes.
Q  You were?  Why?
A  Because the wood was there and I wanted to see how long it had been there.
Q  Well, what relevance did that wood have to the investigation?

CPT THOMPSON:  Objection.  Your honor, I’m sorry if I interrupted the question, but this has been covered with reference to the testimony gleaned by the investigating officer, and cov-ering it again is merely accumulative and unnecessary.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  What is your answer?
A  Would you repeat the question?
Q  What was the purpose of looking for wood impressions in the well at that time?
A  Having already seen Government Exhibit 79, it seemed to me that perhaps the weapon used that killed this family--one of the weapons used--was a club of some kind.  Now having already seen this and knowing that at least two of the victims had been clubbed severely, I thought perhaps there might be more than one person involved as was the sketchy informa-tion that I had, therefore, again having seen this outside, it occurred to me that perhaps the weapons all came from outside, and when I saw this wood lying in the well, my first thought was that here’s some more wood.  My second thought was that the one piece of wood looked obviously incapable of inflicting harm other than perhaps stabbing out an eye or some other vulnerable part of the body.
Q  You are talking abut the trellis.  Is that right?
A  Yes.  The other piece of wood was certainly very unwieldy, but one never knows in a case like this, and for that reason I moved the wood with the idea in my mind of collecting it and/or seeing how long it had been there.
Q  You said you moved it, what did you do?
A  I moved it.
Q  You mean you pulled it out?
A  I picked it up, something like this.
Q  You picked up the piece of wood, that you described as redwood, with two fingers of each hand.  Is that right?
A  Yes, perhaps one finger on each hand.
Q  And you took it out of the well, is that correct?
A  No, I never did take it out of the well entirely.
Q  You just lifted it out--up in the air a little bit?  Just tell us specifically what you did.
A  I was down on my knees at the well, using a flashlight to make what visual observations I could.  I sat the flashlight down.  I lifted the piece of wood up and put it on the brick wall that I have already testified about, and again obtained my flashlight and looked to see what the surface of the ground looked like.
Q  And then what did you do?
A  After I made a determination that that piece of wood had been there for several days at least, I put the flashlight down, I picked up the piece of wood and I dropped it back into the well.
Q  And that whole process took how long?
A  A very short time.
Q  Two minutes?
A  No, I’d say longer than that, maybe as much as four or five minutes.
Q  And you were using your flashlight for the purpose of looking into that well?
A  Yes, I was.
Q  Was it because at that time the light was not yet adequate from the sun to make obser-vations without a flashlight?
A  There was light in the sky but I felt that I needed more light.
Q  Because the light in the well was inadequate, just to use the daylight to make your obser-vations?
A  Correct.
Q  Now it did occur to you that this was now at about 0715 in the morning?
A  About that.
Q  And did you have some idea that the incident resulting in the deaths in the house had happened at least four hours before, something like that?
A  At least three hours before.
Q  You were aware that the incident had happened at least three hours before.  Is that right?
A  Yes.
Q  You were of the opinion at that time that it had been raining lightly all night, were you not?
A  Off and on.
Q  Off and on.  A light rain, drizzle I think you called it?
A  When I awoke it was drizzling.
Q  And continued to drizzle until that time?
A  In fact, I think it had--may have even stopped or lessened a great deal at that time.
Q  Lessened a great deal at that time?
A  May have, yes.
Q  Did it occur to you that the falling drizzle or rain would have affected the sand on the bot-tom of the well in any way in three hours?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that.  He’s already stated that the reason he was there was because he had observed that it had affected the wood and the sand, et cetera, in that well.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  What is your answer, Mr. Shaw?
A  I took that into consideration when I made my decision.
Q  You took it into consideration; and what did you conclude from that, you know the con-sideration of about three hours, off and on drizzling?
A  I considered that that piece of wood had been there undisturbed for several days.
Q  And what about the wood that might have been there and removed three hours before, and rain had fallen on the space, and the wood had been--

CPT THOMPSON:  Objection, your honor.

Q  Did you consider the rain under--

CPT BEALE:  The objection is sustained.

Q  Did you ask any other of the scientific investigators who came from Fort Gordon to exam-ine the well for any impressions?
A  I think I elicited the opinion of some of those investigators, yes.
Q  Do you know who you asked?
A  Mr. Turbyfill for one, if my memory serves me right.  I know that I showed all of them these access ways under the house.
Q  You are indicating there was more than one laboratory technician?
A  More than one access way, yes, sir.
Q  But how about the one where the wood was found?
A  I indicated this access way to all of them, to all of these technicians.
Q  What time was it that you called this particular access way where the wood was found to the attention of the other investigators?
A  The laboratory technicians?
Q  Yes.
A  Approximately 1130.
Q  When did you ever make a notation in your written record of the investigation that you saw no other impressions in this particular access way, other than those caused by the trellis and the piece of redwood you say you saw?

CPT THOMPSON:  I object to the form of the question.  There’s no indication that he at any time in any way made any notation with respect to any impression.

MR. SEGAL:  That would be relevant and we are entitled to have it.  He can either agree that he made a record or he can disagree that he made a record.  The question was put to him on an assumption that an investigator would be making a recording of certain data that he found that is relevant.

CPT BEALE:  Ask him if he did it, Mr. Segal.

Q  Did you make a record of the impressions that you did or did not find in the well where the pieces of wood was found?
A  A general record.
Q  What do you mean by a general record?
A  I indicated in my notes, my written notes, that I made a search of the outside and found no impressions in the sands.  I’m not sure--I put footprints.
Q  Footprints.  But you didn’t make any notation at all, did you, to indicate that you looked in this well, found two pieces of wood and found no impression of any other wood there?
A  No, I did not.
Q  And when was the first time after February 17, 1970, that anyone ever asked you whether you saw any impressions that could have been made by other pieces of wood in that particu-lar well outside the MacDonald house?
A  I know that this has come up in discussions with other investigators before.  I think you are the first to ask me directly.

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, I would say we probably have, at the outside, a half-hour more examina-tion.  But there are one or two questions I’d like to ask this afternoon, then perhaps we might adjourn.  I think that we would not be long in the morning in view of the overnight time to consolidate questions.

Q  Now, Mr. Shaw, you described for us earlier today, certain items that you saw in the din-ing room of the MacDonald house.  Do you recall that?
A  Yes, sir, I do.
Q  And you say you observed some Valentine cards standing on the furniture?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And did you note the contents of the Valentine cards and to whom the Valentine cards were made out to, and who was the signature?
A  Not at that time.
Q  But at any time did you ever determine to whom those Valentine cards apparently were addressed and whose were the signatures on the cards?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to this line of questioning as again being irrelevant.

CPT BEALE:  Overruled.

A  I saw that some of the cards were from persons outside the family to the family.  I saw that some of the cards appeared to be to the children from Captain MacDonald.  One card, at least, appeared to be to Mrs. MacDonald from Captain MacDonald.  The only thing I noted that stands out in my mind about the whole thing is that I saw nothing from Mrs. MacDonald to any other member of the family.
Q  Did you observe that there was a box of candy there that said “To My Darling Wife” on it?
A  I did not.
Q  Did--you did not observe any box of candy there at all?
A  I don’t remember.
Q  I want to show you a photograph in a moment, Mr. Shaw, which may be of some assist-ance in this regard.  I’m sorry, the only photograph, Mr. Shaw, showing –G-64--showing a portion of the dining room is not very adequate with regard to all the area.  We have been looking for a photograph.  Do you recall seeing a heart-shaped box of candy?  Does that help you at all?
A  I think there was a heart-shaped box there, but you understand that the dining room was not my primary concern as far as determining what was there and what not was there.
Q  But of course the existence of cards expressing affection from Captain MacDonald to his wife, his children, and the gift to the wife did not strike you as being ultimately important to the investigation of this case to determine whether that might bear on whether he killed his wife and children?
A  Yes, of course.

MR. SEGAL:  That’s all for this afternoon.  If we might just have Mr. Shaw mark with a grease pencil Government Exhibit 1, and then I think we do have a photograph that might be helpful.

(Witness marked the referenced access way.)

MR. SEGAL:  And, if I may, at this time ask to have marked an additional photograph at this time to put before the accused, being a photograph in color showing the MacDonald dining room.

COL ROCK:  Accused Exhibit 30, photograph of dining room area taken from living room.

(A-30 was shown to counsel for the government.)

Q  I show you A-30 and ask you first of all if you recognize this to be a picture of the dining room of the MacDonald house?
A  I do.
Q  May I call to your attention a very small piece of detail on the chest of drawers to the left of this photograph and ask you whether that does not appear to you to be the edge of a candy box sticking out of the bureau?
A  It looks as though it may be the edge of a box, yes.
Q  And the reference earlier to a heart-shaped box seems to be--there was one there?  That is the general position of it?
A  Yes.

MR. SEGAL:  Thank you so much.  I think we might adjourn at this point, sir, if that is con-venient to the court.

COL ROCK:  This hearing will be recessed until 0830 in the morning.

(The hearing recessed at 1626 hours, 23 July 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 0843 hours, 24 July 1970.)

COL ROCK:  This hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that those parties who were present at the recess are apparently in the hearing room with the exception of the wit-ness.  Is the government ready to proceed?

CPT THOMPSON:  At this time the government recalls for cross examination Mr. Robert Shaw.

(Warrant Officer Shaw reported and was reminded of his oath.)

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  Mr. Shaw, who was in charge on February 17th, 1970, of the investigation of the murders at the MacDonald house?
A  Mr. Grebner.
Q  Mr. Grebner?  How about between about 0400 until the time which Mr. Grebner arrived, which was about, I think, about 0650?  Who was in charge at that time?
A  That would have been Mr. Ivory.
Q  You yourself, was not the person in charge say the initial period until Mr. Grebner arrived?
A  That’s correct.
Q  And thereafter when Mr. Grebner came on the scene was he in charge merely because he was the senior member of your detachment, or was he actually the person assigned to be in charge of this investigation?
A  Mr. Grebner is the chief investigator, and as such, is in charge of all investigations.  And in this particular instance--incident--he took charge in that he directed certain persons to do certain things in line with the investigation.
Q  And how long did he continue to remain in charge of the investigation?
A  He never relinquished that.
Q  So that as far as you are concerned he has remained in charge of the investigation since the time of his arrival on the scene in the early morning hours of the 17th?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Now the weapons that were found outside the MacDonald household under the bush, did you cause them to be examined for fingerprints?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  And were they, in fact, examined for fingerprints?
A  Yes, sir, they were.
Q  And were Captain MacDonald’s fingerprints found on any of those weapons?
A  I told you they were not.
Q  Did you receive an official report back from the laboratory, particularly from the finger-prints experts in regard to the findings on the weapons found outside the house?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  And have you read that report?
A  Yes, sir, I have.
Q  Did the report indicate that there were fingerprints on the particular weapons?
A  The report indicated that--and the examiner told me, both--that there appeared to be fingerprints which were unidentifiable.  In other words smudges.
Q  That they were what?
A  Smudges.
Q  What about the knife that was found inside of the master bedroom?  Did you cause that also to be examined for fingerprints?
A  Yes, I did.
Q  Was Captain MacDonald’s fingerprints found on that knife?
A  It was the same with the knife.
Q  Well, what is your answer to my--
A  There were smudges, unidentifiable smudges.
Q  The first question was, was Captain MacDonald’s fingerprints found on the knife in the bedroom?
A  His fingerprints were not identified as being on the knife.
Q  You do not have any evidence that his fingerprints were on that knife in the bedroom, do you?
A  That is correct.
Q  Were any prints found on the knife in the bedroom?
A  There were fingerprint smudges found on the knife.
Q  But they could not be identified with any clarity.  Is that right?
A  That’s right.

MR. SEGAL:  Now, may I see the knives, please?

Q  Now, I want to ask you to look at the knife marked as G-82, which has the name “Old Hickory” on it.  This knife was found where?
A  This knife was found outside the quarters under the bush, as I testified earlier.
Q  Now may I direct your attention to the top part of this knife and the area of the knife that is covered by the handle, and ask you whether you observe anything unusual about the con-dition of the wood on the handle here?
A  May I examine it closer?
Q  Yes, sir, please do.
A  Yes, I do.
Q  Would you describe, if you could, please, to the investigating officer what appears to be unusual about the top part of the wooden handle?
A  Part of the wood has been removed.
Q  And could you indicate to us abut how long the section or sections that have been re-moved are?  In fact, I offer you a tape measure which you can use to assist you in that re-gard.
A  One section is approximately a half an inch, closer to 9/16ths, and the other section is ap-proximately an inch long, both from the right hand side of the handle as I look at it.
Q  Thank you so much.  Do you have any idea of when or how those pieces of wooden han-dle were removed?
A  Yes, I do.
Q  Would you tell the investigating officer, please?
A  Yes, to the best of my knowledge, those sections were removed at the laboratory for ana-lysis.
Q  And for what was the analysis conducted?
A  For what reason?
Q  Yes.  What particular features was the laboratory supposed to examine when they made the analysis?
A  There was an attempt by the laboratory to--well, the knife was disassembled at the lab-oratory--an attempt to determine whether any identifiable blood stains on the knife or other body fluids.
Q  Including the knife material itself within the confines of the handle portion?
A  Yes.
Q  So that the knife, actually, when it was found by you and the other military policemen on the morning of the 17th, was in a slightly different condition than it appears to be today?
A  Yes, that is correct.
Q  Are there any photographs available of the knife in its original condition as found under the bush before the laboratory disassembled the handle?
A  Yes, sir, I believe there is.
Q  Do you have such photographs in your own file?
A  If the photograph exists it’s in the CID files, yes.

MR. SEGAL:  May it please the investigating officer, at this time we would call upon the gov-ernment to make available a photograph that Mr. Shaw has reason to believe that was taken of this particular knife in its original condition.  We would not ask for any delay at this time, but ask that it be supplied to us sometime by midday, if we can.

COL ROCK:  May I ask the purpose for this?

MR. SEGAL:  We think it may be relevant to the further cross examination either of this wit-ness or any other government witness so that we may determine the exact appearance of the weapon, to determine whether there were any unusual features about it on that portion which has been removed, which may have been further clues or evidence that was either--to aid the defense in some portion or provide us an opportunity to cross-examine.  For instance, if the knife had splinters in that section, might splinters have caught some fibers, might they have caught someone’s hand?  We cannot even tell, not knowing the exact original condition of the knife as found by the government’s investigator.

CPT THOMPSON:  Colonel, the witness has adequately, more than adequately testified about the condition of the knife at the time it was found, and adequately testified as to its status now and how it got in that state.  The picture is going to serve no better purpose or no fur-ther purpose to aid the defense in either cross-examination or ferreting out whether splinters, et cetera, may or may not have been on it.  The witness has adequately answered all the questions.  I might add that most of these questions were hearsay, but out of his own know-ledge, he has adequately explained the state of the knife at the time it was found and its state now.

COL ROCK:  The motion is denied.  Proceed, please.

Q  Mr. Shaw, yesterday you testified as to having looked into both the south bedroom and the north bedroom almost immediately after you arrived at the crime scene.  Am I correct in that regard?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And what was the lighting conditions as far as--say in the south bedroom that enabled you to make any observations?
A  There was a ceiling light which was turned on.
Q  How about the north bedroom?  Was there any lights on at that time?
A  There was a ceiling light which was turned on.
Q  Now I direct your attention to the south bedroom in which the body of Kimberly MacDonald was found.  I believe you testified yesterday that you observed that there was blood on the bed, on the bed sheets underneath the body of that child, which you observed, I think, after the body was removed.  Is that correct?
A  That’s correct.
Q  And would you indicate to us about how large an area of blood there was on the bed sheet?
A  It was perhaps a foot and a half in diameter.
Q  And was it still moist or wet in any fashion?
A  To the extent that it was tacky to touch, it was starting to coagulate.
Q  You also testified that there was a blanket--there was a blanket wrapped around under the body of Kimberly MacDonald.  Do you recall that?  And that the blanket was, in fact, at the time that you saw it, removed from her body actually under her legs, and under, I think, part of her thigh, and between her body and the sheet.  Is that correct?
A  No, I didn’t testify to that.  I said that it was wrapped under her, and I don’t believe I gave those specifics.
Q  Well, do you recall to what extent the blanket was wrapped underneath the body of Kris-ten MacDonald--or Kimberly MacDonald?
A  Yes, sir, as I recall the blanket was, it has been under her, her hip, her left hip, and ex-tended upward to her armpit.
Q  Would you tell the investigating officer how much blood you found on the blanket that was wrapped in around the body of Kimberly MacDonald at this time?
A  How much blood I found on it?
Q  Yes, sir, on the blanket.
A  I didn’t examine that blanket for those blood stains.
Q  Did you observe any blood at all on that blanket that was wrapped around the body of Kimberly?
A  I didn’t open that blanket up and look at it on the scene there for fear of losing something out of the blanket.  Now, it’s since been to the laboratory and there has been blood identified on it according to the laboratory reports.
Q  Mr. Shaw, didn’t you tell us yesterday, that you, yourself, pulled that blanket to the foot of the bed?
A  I did.
Q  And at that time you pulled the blanket down to the foot of the bed, did you or did you not observe blood on the blanket, or reddish stains which appeared to be blood?
A  As I pulled it down to the foot of the bed, I would not have been able to see the blanket, because the sheet was over it, the top sheet.  I took all of the bedding and pulled it down.
Q  All right, tell us what you observed on that top sheet in the way of reddish-brown stains?
A  I don’t remember seeing any stains on that sheet.
Q  Do you recall at any time seeing any reddish-brown stains on the blanket itself on Februa-ry 17th?

CPT THOMPSON:  I object to that question.  He’s already answered that.  He did not recall seeing any stains on the blanket and he has explained why he did not.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Now you testified that you went into the north bedroom in which the body of Kristen MacDonald was found, and that you were there present when Doctor Neal examined her.  Am I correct in that regard?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  I believe you also testified yesterday that you were present when Doctor Neal turned the body of Kristen MacDonald into a different position for the purpose of making his examination?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Now I believe I also heard you testify yesterday that when he turned her body for the purpose of observing or examining her back, that you gasped.  Am I correct in that regard?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Would you tell the investigating officer what was the circumstances that caused you to gasp?
A  Probably because I was concerned with the protection of the crime scene.  Doctor Neal had been asked not to disturb the crime scene, to disturb the crime scene as little as possi-ble.  This was my primary thought at the time.
Q  And that, as far as you recall, was the reason for your gasping when he turned the body.  Is that correct?
A  Not so much that he had turned the body, but that he had moved the blankets and that sort of thing while he was doing it.
Q  Now you were present in the master bedroom also at the time that the bath mat and the blue pajama top were found.  Is that correct?
A  Yes.
Q  About what time did you participate in the examination of those two items?
A  This was just before the removal of the body from that room.  I would say--I’d have to estimate it was 0755 hours, approximately that.
Q  Prior to that time, had you had occasion to examine the bath mat or the pajama top?
A  Yes, a visual examination.
Q  I assume that you just examined those items in place at an earlier time?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Now at this later time I believe you described the procedure whereby Mr. Ivory lifted the mat up with a pair of tongs.  Is that right?
A  As I recall.
Q  Well, did it, in fact, happen that way?
A  Yes.
Q  Are you certain about that?
A  My memory tells me that that’s the way it happened.
Q  Did you have occasion to discuss the subject of how the bath mat and pajamas were han-dled yesterday at a break in the afternoon with Captain Thompson?
A  No, I did not.
Q  You did not.  Have you discussed it with anybody at all since the commencement of these hearings as to how the pajama top and the bath mat were handled?

CPT THOMPSON:  I object to that question as to whether or not he has discussed it since the commencement of these hearings.  He is certainly allowed to discuss it prior to the com-mencement of these hearings, prior to his testimony in this hearing room.

MR. SEGAL:  Not with any witness who was here, sir.

CPT BEALE:  Captain Thompson, your objection is sustained.

Q  Now, which item was touched or handled first by Mr. Ivory?
A  It would have been the pajama top.
Q  And why do you answer in that fashion?  Is there some reason why you characterized “it would have been” in that fashion?
A  Yes, sir, there is, because the pajama top was that piece of the evidence of the two which would have been more or most easily contaminated.
Q  Contaminated by what?
A  In any way, by being stepped on or having something dropped on it, or being disturbed in some fashion because it was most accessible to personnel working there at the scene.
Q  And did you also consider the fact that it was lighter, substantially lighter of the two gar-ments, and therefore more easily moved?
A  Well, sir, it was the only garment.
Q  Well, as between the white bath mat and the blue pajama top, did you also consider the fact that it was substantially lighter than the bath mat and therefore more susceptible to be-ing moved?
A  That didn’t occur to me.
Q  Now, we’ve described, well, you’ve described exactly where--will you describe exactly where you were and where Mr. Ivory was, and the steps and action in examining, first of all, the pajama top?
A  At that time?
Q  Yes, please.  I am assuming that’s the first time that you saw anybody actually handling that particular item?
A  That’s correct.
Q  I’m assuming also that’s the first time you, yourself, saw anyone do anything more than make a visual observation of that item.
A  That’s correct.
Q  Now would you please tell us what actually happened in some details?
A  Yes.  As I testified earlier, the medics were there to remove the body, so Ivory and I de-cided to collect that evidence that was on the body.  And he went into the bedroom first and I followed him.  He moved to approximately the left shoulder region of the cadaver, perhaps closer to her chest area, between her and the bed, and I would have been to the west of him towards the doorway, perhaps a foot away.  I had obtained a plastic bag.  I opened the bag and he bent down, picked up the trailing edge.
Q  Where was the trailing edge located?
A  It would have been towards me, perhaps by my right foot.
Q  Now let me show you accused Exhibit 6.

(A-6 was shown to the IO and to counsel for the government.)

Q  Might I ask you, Mr. Shaw, if you would perhaps hold the photograph when you describe the procedure Mr. Ivory and you used in picking up this cloth so they can follow it by looking at the particular photograph.
A  Who do I show it to?  The investigating officer?
Q  Yes, I think we can all see it if you show it to the investigating officer.
A  All right.  I would have been standing probably by her ankles, her left ankle.  Ivory would have been near her chest region, between her and the bed, he reached down and picked up the trailing edge of the pajama top.
Q  Now where is that?
A  This is the trailing edge.  Where specifically he grasped, I don’t know, and as he picked it up he reached down with his right hand and picked up the other one.
Q  The other what?
A  Picked up the other end of the pajama top off the body.
Q  First of all, you say with his right hand.
A  Yes, I think so.
Q  The tongs were in which hand?
A  I assume he had two.
Q  Well, you are not certain?
A  I’m as certain as my memory tells me that’s what he did.  He had two.
Q  Do you have a specific recollection of seeing Mr. Ivory using two tongs at that time?
A  No.
Q  Now at least with one hand--
A  I know Ivory always uses two.
Q  But you feel certain that with one hand he had a pair of tongs?
A  Yes.
Q  The other one you are not sure about at this time?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Continue, if you will, using the photograph showing to the investigating officer how that was handled.
A  Well, he picked up the other end off the body, as I said.
Q  Could you be somewhat more specific as to what position or the nearest portion of the body he was grasping the blue cloth with his right hand?
A  Somewhere near the top of the body as it’s laying there.
Q  You mean the left shoulder area?
A  I mean the most high area, say about the sternum.
Q  Excuse me?
A  About the sternum, probably.  So he lifted them up and I opened the sack underneath it and he dropped it in the sack.
Q  How much of the pajama top was across Mrs. MacDonald’s chest area?
A  What do you mean, how much of it?
Q  Well, I gather you said that Mr. Ivory’s hand grabbed the pajama top at the sternum which is about mid-chest.  Is that right?  It’s quite clear however that the pajama top goes beyond mid-chest line and appears to go toward the--over the right side of Mrs. MacDonald.  Is that right?
A  As I recall, yes, sir.
Q  So that when he grasped the pajama top at her sternum, there was still some other por-tion of the pajama top which was beyond his right hand?
A  Yes.
Q  Now how was that lifted?
A  It was lifted as a whole piece.
Q  Now will you show me, perhaps using your own hands, how he maneuvered this with his left hand and his right hand, to show us how he deposited it into the bag?
A  As I testified, he lifted the trailing edge first, and he would have brought his left hand about to his body, close to his body, and then he reached down and grasped the part that was on her chest, and as I remember he just brought them together, lifted them up, and I put the sack underneath and he dumped them into the sack.
Q  At this point, if you could be a little bit more specific it would be helpful to us.  Did he lift the two ends first up before bringing the ends together?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to this questioning.  The witness has testified at great length both on direct and cross examination as to how the pajama top was lifted, the manner, and the fact that they did finally find their way into the sack.  Any more details would be merely accumulative.

MR. SEGAL:  I would be glad to make an offer of proof out of the hearing of the witness.

CPT BEALE:  Very well.  Mr. Shaw, you are excused temporarily.

(The witness departed the hearing room.)

MR. SEGAL:  The government has, on a number of times with a number of witnesses, made a substantial issue; it seems to me, of the location of blue fibers in or about the master bed-room and where they were located.  I assume that it relates to some theory the government has in this case.  It seems to me quite critical to establish how it was actually handled, when it was removed from the body of Mrs. MacDonald, because the condition of the blue garment, as I observed it the other day, had even at that time, threads dangling from it.  It seems to me we ought to know if it was lifted high, what was the possibility at that time of the fibers coming from it or being dropped in locations other than on the body or near the body.  We cannot tell that from the government’s examination.  The government’s examination seems to be very superficial, that is they grabbed it and put it in the bag with tongs.  That doesn’t tell us whether they dragged it over the body, they lifted it up from the body, where they moved it or how they moved it; and it seems to me, if the government is to be allowed to use this kind of evidence of the fibers, imperative that we understand the exact mechanics of the handling of this particular garment by the only people who admitted to having touched it.

CPT THOMPSON:  Assuming for a moment that the examination on direct by the government was superficial, this witness, on cross examination now, has gone into great detail as to how Mr. Ivory in his observation lifted the garment from the body of Mrs. MacDonald, and the relative position of both hands, where the bag was placed, and the fact that it was dropped in.  Again, any more detailed description of how this garment was, in fact, lifted or how it was placed into the bag is merely cumulative in nature.

CPT BEALE:  Captain Thompson, your objection is overruled.  Call the witness in, please.

(The witness returned to the hearing room.)

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  Mr. Shaw, would you pick up the description again of the process of recovering the blue pajama top from the point from which you said that Mr. Ivory having grabbed it with his two hands then removed it from the body?  I believe the question I asked specifically was, how did the lifting actually take place by Mr. Ivory, in what direction did he move it, if you recall, and what height the garment was held or any other specifics along that line?
A  As I remember--

COL ROCK:  Excuse me, counselor.  It would assist me, I think, and simplify, perhaps, if the witness could also act out what he saw.

MR. SEGAL:  I agree entirely, sir, and I would be indebted to you, Mr. Shaw, if you would ac-tually place yourself in the position of Mr. Ivory, and go through the process of simulating the lifting of the garment.

A  I’ll try.
Q  And please talk your way through your actions for the record.
A  As I recall, if the body was lying this way, with the head towards Captain MacDonald and the feet toward Captain Beale, Ivory would have been at about her chest region, as I testi-fied.
Q  Do you want to use the photograph?
A  I’m just trying to reconstruct the scene in my mind, sir.  The bed would have been to Ivo-ry’s rear and I was over in this area (pointing to his left).  As I recall, he reached and got the trailing end this way.
Q  You are indicating with your left hand?
A  Yes, with his left hand and brought it back to his chest over the body.
Q  Just hold it at that point.  You indicated that Mr. Ivory was crouching.  Then he grasped the trailing edge of the pajama top, with the left hand, that the left hand was extended from the body at that point?
A  Yes, I think so.
Q  Then he went in the process of lifting the trailing edge, brought the left hand from the ex-tended position about in front of him, and at the same time he was coming to an apparent standing position, bringing the trailing edge up with him.
A  No, no, I think Ivory would have still been in somewhat of a crouch.
Q  All right, but not the same crouch he originally started from?
A  I don’t remember that.
Q  All right, go on from there, please, if you will.
A  All right, sir.  He’s in a crouch and he has the trailing edge here close to his chest like this and he reached down and got the--with his right hand--and got the main part of the body of the pajama jacket, and then he straightened his knees and lifted his right hand with the grasped pajama top.  At this point I did place the plastic bag under the pajama and it was dropped in.  Then I closed it and wrapped the plastic bag.
Q  Just stay as you were.  Did you have to move closer than where you were when Mr. Ivory started the lifting process in order to put your plastic bag in a position that he did put the garment into?
A  I think I did.
Q  And did you come to a position where you straddled the body actually for the purpose of holding the bag so that Mr. Ivory could conveniently put it into the bag?
A  No.
Q  Did you move along side of Mr. Ivory?
A  I probably took a half a step closer to him.
Q  Now, If I may have Captain Douthat stand in the position that you are now standing, and if you would then show us please, and if you would place Captain Douthat’s hands in an ap-propriate position to indicate how you believe Mr. Ivory was holding the garment which he had lifted from the body?  Would you do that?
A  I don’t have the specific recollection as to where his hands were exactly, which was high-er or lower.
Q  Just for the purpose of demonstration, if you will place his hands--
A  It would have been approximately over the chest and left chest area of the body of Mrs. MacDonald.
Q  Now will you take the position in which you were standing while you watched Mr. Ivory follow this procedure and then come up and assume the position that you did for the purpose of placing the plastic bag beneath the items?
A  I was standing between the trailing edge of the pajama jacket and the footboard of the bed when he started this process, and I was ready with the bag, and I took a half a step and just put the bag under the pajama jacket with both hands holding the bag open.
Q  Did you have to bend to get under the garment, between the garment and the body?
A  Oh, yes, I suspect I did.
Q  How big was the plastic bag which you were using--its dimensions, please?
A  Approximately--perhaps three feet long, two and a half to three feet long.
Q  How wide at the mouth?
A  Quite wide, a foot and a half, two feet.
Q  So is it fair to assume that that bag touched the body of Mrs. MacDonald?
A  Not necessarily, no.
Q  Well if you would take a tape measure, please, and extend that for the depth of the bag--
A  The bag was not fully extended.
Q  If the bag was fully extended, it’s fair to that the bag would have touched the body?
A  Yes, but these bags don’t always open all the way.  They are plastic.  We see them--sometimes they cling together.
Q  Well, was it necessary for Mr. Ivory to stuff the garment into the bag to get it fully in?

CPT THOMPSON:  Objection.  That’s completely irrelevant.  That--there’s no testimony yet that he stuffed it in.

CPT BEALE:  Overruled.

Q  Now, would you extend the ruler, if you would, please, to the length that you think the plastic bag was extended which you were using?
A  I don’t have any memory about that.  I don’t know.
Q  Well, did you open the bag first in preparation for Mr. Ivory?
A  The mouth of the bag, yes.
Q  How about the length of the bag?  Did you make any preparation so that the garment could go inside without being touched or moved too much in the process of being put in the bag?
A  I opened the mouth of the bag.
Q  All right, didn’t you cause the bag to be extended?
A  Not necessarily.  Having worked with these bags a lot, I know that the slightest weight will open them up so that the object to be placed in will be allowed to fall into the bottom of the bag.
Q  And did that happen when the blue pajama top was placed in there?
A  I don’t know.  I don’t remember.

MR. SEGAL:  Thank you, Captain Douthat, and thank you, Mr. Shaw.

Q  Now would you describe, please, the procedure of removing the white bath mat from Mrs. MacDonald’s stomach area?
A  I don’t know that I can, to the extent that I described this, because of the trailing edge and because of the decision to collect that first, which stands out in my memory.  I do know that this was a joint effort on our part and it would probably been somewhat the same.
Q  Well, did he use a tong on the bath mat?
A  I don’t remember.
Q  Was it necessary to move any part of Mrs. MacDonald’s body in removing either of the two items, either the blue pajama top or the white bath mat?
A  I have no memory of her body being moved, no.
Q  Any portion of her body?
A  I have no memory of this.
Q  Mr. Shaw, do you recall the position of Mrs. MacDonald’s right hand at the time that the white bath mat was removed from her?
A  I recall that it was--her upper arm was approximately parallel with her body, and her right forearm was extending down towards the juncture of the legs and her hand was lying on her body, as I recall.
Q  And what had to be done, if anything, with her hand, for the purpose of removing either of the two garments you are referring to, the bath mat or the blue pajama top?
A  As I recall, nothing.
Q  Now I ask you to look at the photograph marked A-5 for identification.

(A-5 was shown to the IO and to counsel for the government.)

MR. SEGAL:  May we withdraw that, sir, and mark a new photograph which I think may be more helpful?

COL ROCK:  Counselor this has already been introduced into evidence as G-47.  If you will look at them you will find that they are identical.

MR. SEGAL:  That is correct, sir.  We withdraw the offer of the photograph.

Q  And I will show you, Mr. Shaw, a photograph previously identified as G-47, and ask if you recognize the scene portrayed in that photograph?
A  Yes, I do.
Q  This is the upper portion of Mrs. MacDonald’s body lying on the floor of the bedroom.  Is that correct?  Can you observe the position of her right hand in this area?
A  Yes, I can.
Q  And where is it in regard to the white bath mat?
A  A portion of the mat appears to be under her right hand.
Q  Now do you know how the bath mat was extracted from beneath her hand without moving her arm, or her wrist or her hand?
A  I have testified I don’t have any specific memory about the removal of this white towel other than it was a joint effort.  However, I can tell you by experience with other dead bod-ies I’ve seen in this situation that I suppose it was just pulled out from underneath it without moving the hand.
Q  Do you have any recollection of how that was done in Mrs. MacDonald’s case?
A  No.
Q  What about the blue pajama top?  Does a portion of the blue pajama top appear to be in contact with some portion of Mrs. MacDonald’s right hand and right wrist?
A  By the angle of the photograph it appears to be in some contact, yes.
Q  Do you know when that garment was lifted by Mr. Ivory whether, in fact, it was in actual contact or underneath any portion of Mrs. MacDonald’s hand?
A  I don’t believe it was underneath her hand.
Q  Can you say with any certainty that it was not?
A  My recollection tells me it wasn’t.
Q  Is that the same thing you are saying--you can say with certainty it was not touching any portion of her right hand?
A  No, it isn’t.
Q  Now how many people were present in the master bedroom when Mrs. MacDonald’s body was examined by Doctor Neal?
A  I remember Doctor Neal and myself, Mr. Ivory, and perhaps one other person, but I’m not certain.
Q  Do you have any idea who the other person was?
A  Yes, if he was there it would have been Mr. Rossi, who was assisting us.
Q  Was any military policeman in the room at the time?
A  No.
Q  How about when Doctor Neal examined the body of Kimberly MacDonald in the south bed-room, who was there?
A  As I recall, there was Doctor Neal, and Mr. Ivory, Mr. Connolly perhaps, and myself.
Q  How about when Doctor Neal examined the body of Kristen MacDonald in the north bed-room?  How many people were present?  Who were the people that were present at that time?
A  The same persons.
Q  Well, will you name them again, please, with regard to the north bedroom?
A  Doctor Neal, myself, Mr. Ivory and Mr. Connolly.
Q  Now when the bodies were removed or about to be removed, you indicated that a Chap-lain came into the MacDonald house?
A  That’s correct.
Q  And I believe you described yesterday that he performed certain acts which you charac-terized as being a religious service of some sort?
A  That’s right.
Q  Where did that take place?
A  In the hallway.
Q  At the time were the two children’s bodies on the stretcher?
A  Yes, they were.
Q  Were they on the wheeled stretcher or on the stretcher that had no supports on it?
A  They were on the canvas field stretcher.
Q  Field stretcher.  Had the stretcher been put down in the hallway while the medics were removing the bodies?
A  Yes, sir, it had been set on the floor.
Q  And could you indicate to us what area of the stretcher, where the stretcher had been set on the floor with reference to the north and south bedroom?  And would it help you if you would use the--
A  No, I think I can accurately describe where they were.
Q  All right, tell us where they were.
A  The stretcher was closer to the south wall than it was to the north wall, just off the cen-ter in the hallway, and the eastern most end of the stretcher, the handles of it, just protrud-ed past the door of the south bedroom.
Q  You saw the medics go in and bring out the body of which room first?
A  Of the two girls?
Q  Yes.
A  Kristen MacDonald.
Q  And they carried the body of Kristen MacDonald from the north bedroom and placed it on which end of the stretcher?
A  The stretcher--
Q  The most easterly portion or the westerly portion, the eastern being toward the master bedroom, the west being toward the living room.
A  Her head was toward the east end of the stretcher.
Q  Point then towards the master bedroom?
A  Correction, towards the west end.
Q  The body of Kimberly MacDonald was then removed by the medics from the south bed-room.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And was placed on which end of the stretcher, and head facing which direction?
A  Her head was facing with--towards the west, and she was placed on the east end of the stretcher.
Q  Now was it at that point that the Chaplain performed the religious service?
A  Yes.
Q  Was he actually standing in the corridor of the MacDonald house when the medics re-moved the bodies of the children?
A  I don’t know.
Q  When did you first become aware of him, Mr. Shaw?
A  When Kimberly was placed on the stretcher.
Q  And then what happened when Kimberly was placed on the stretcher or called your atten-tion?
A  I heard someone say, “Here’s the Chaplain.”
Q  And did you observe the man whom you have described yesterday coming from the living room area?
A  When I first saw him, he was in the hallway.
Q  He was already standing in the hallway?
A  Yes.
Q  All right, now what did he do at that time?
A  He approached the stretcher, he bent down over it.  I think what he did was make the sign of the cross on the foreheads of the two girls.  I think that’s what he did.
Q  And did he say anything?  Whether you understood him or not is not important.  Did you hear him say anything?
A  No I didn’t hear him say anything.
Q  And then after the Chaplain had performed whatever service he did perform, what hap-pened next?
A  He stood up and he turned around and he left.
Q  And then what’s the next thing that happened?
A  The medics moved to the ends of the stretcher, lifted it up and carried it out of the quar-ters.
Q  And then what did you do when they lifted the stretcher?
A  I watched them.
Q  What else did you watch?  Did you watch them carry it away, or did you go about your business?
A  Well, I followed the stretcher down the hallway to the east entrance of the hallway, the living room entrance, and watched them carry it out of the house.

COL ROCK:  Counselor, can you indicate how much longer you will be with this witness?  I understood you were anxious to--

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, I would say no more than fifteen minutes, at the maximum.  Just a very few minutes left.

Q  Mr. Shaw, you described for us yesterday a feather found in the living room of the Mac-Donald house.  Is that right?
A  That’s incorrect.
Q  Where was it found?
A  I didn’t testify about a feather.
Q  Did you see any feather in the MacDonald house?
A  I saw many feathers in the MacDonald’s--
Q  Decorative feathers?
A  Feathers?
Q  Well, where did you see any in the living room?
A  There was a feather--I don’t remember seeing a feather in the living room--but I know that one appears in the photographs.  I don’t remember seeing it.
Q  All right, now do you recall in fact that part of the--as part of the decoration in the living room that there were some colorful feathers in a jar or vase of some sort?
A  No, I don’t.
Q  Did you see in any portion of the house, decorative feathers?
A  I recalled seeing feathers in the south bedroom, and I recall seeing a feather on top of a chest of drawers in the master bedroom, which appeared to be decorative.
Q  Could you indicate to us roughly the size of the feathers that you saw in the master bed-room and the house--and in the south bedroom?
A  Well, the feather I saw in the master bedroom I would say was three or four inches long.  I just know there were feathers in the south bedroom.  Now whether they were supposed to be decorative or whether they were part of a child’s toy, I don’t know.
Q  Did you observe feathers on a desk in the living room of the MacDonald house?
A  I don’t remember.
Q  I want to show you a photograph marked G-64 for identification--

(G-64 was shown to the IO and to counsel for the government.)

And ask you whether you recognize the scene depicted in G-65?

A  Yes, it appears to be the north wall of the MacDonald living room.
Q  And you observe on a, what appears to be one of the speakers of the stereo set there, a plant in a vase of some sort?
A  Yes.
Q  And on top of that speaker and along side of the vase, is there a feather?
A  Yes, it looks like, it looks like a feather.
Q  Do you recall seeing that particular feather in the MacDonald house?
A  I didn’t take note of it, no.  No, I don’t remember seeing it.
Q  Have you ever seen it?  Have you ever personally observed it?
A  Yes.
Q  When was that?
A  Since then.
Q  Where was that?  Do you recall?
A  It was in the last few weeks.
Q  Did you have occasion to move that feather at the time that the investigating officer and counsel came to view the premises in the MacDonald house?
A  Did I?
Q  Yes.
A  No.
Q  Do you recall the feather blowing off of the hi-fi set, landing on the ground, and you pick-ing it up and replacing it?
A  Yes, I think you are right.  Yes, I believe I did.
Q  Does that feather resemble the other feathers that you saw in the south bedroom and the master bedroom?
A  As I remember it, it does.
Q  It does?
A  Yes.
Q  Have you ever had that same feather examined as to what its source was or what it is?
A  No, sir.
Q  Did it seem to you as a unusual item to be in the living room of that particular house?
A  No, sir.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that. It calls for a conclusion.

Q  Why was the feather not submitted for any type of examination?

CPT BEALE:  Just a second.  Mr. Shaw, do you want to step outside for just a second.

(The witness departed the hearing room.)

CPT BEALE:  Mr. Segal, what exactly are you driving at reference feathers?

MR. SEGAL:  Yes, sir.  I’m astonished at the suggestion of the witness that this resembles other feathers.  I have been in the house with the investigating officer and in my judgment, for whatever that is worth, it doesn’t bear the slightest resemblance to anything else in this house.  It was found in the living room, an item that is very easily moved, as it did happen to blow away, when we saw it.  Yet nobody has bothered to investigate that feather’s location or in terms of what it is, in trying to determine how this unusual, what I think unusual sub-stance to be in the living room, how it got there, when it was noticed, and what is its source.  It seems to me that the government’s investigator, in making as thorough set of observations of the crime scene as they say they did, they were looking for as many clues as they did.  We are entitled to some explanation of why this particular object wasn’t examined.  It does seem to me to be unusual.  Now, in view of Mr. Shaw’s answers that he thinks it is the same as other feathers, that would put a different category, and I think at probably some point in the defense case, we will ask to again examine the premises or have the feath-ers brought here.  I do think that’s a genuine question about how acute the observation was, and how complete was the follow-up on strange or unusual items in the house.

CPT THOMPSON:  Counsel, by his own words, has raised the irrelevancy.  The witness has testified to the fact that at the time he examined this scene he did not notice the feather.
It was only in the last two weeks that he noticed it, and obviously once going through the scene he didn’t have sticking in his mind the fact that this feather could have been used to commit any of the crimes that he saw within that house.  This line of questioning is entirely irrelevant.

MR. SEGAL:  The description given by Captain MacDonald, particularly the attire of the peo-ple, the young woman, would raise a question in any reasonable investigator’s mind about anything--other unusual objects found in the premises.  It seems to me that at least a pru-dent investigation requires verifying from the only survivor of this crime something about it, or independently comparing it.  My recollection, sir, is again I only offer it for my observation of
--what astonishes me about the answer is I recall seeing peacock feathers in the MacDonald house, but again that would be something for the investigating officer to determine.

CPT THOMPSON:  There’s nothing in Captain MacDonald’s statement about a young lady with headdress on the night in question.  The relevancy of feathers has not been raised by any of the testimony either through Captain MacDonald’s statement or through any other testimony that’s come before you in this hearing to date.

CPT BEALE:  Mr. Segal, because of the witness’ answer to your question concerning the feather, and he’s stating that in his opinion there was a resemblance--it resembles the other feathers found in the house, I think at this juncture that as far as your cross-examination of this witness goes, I think we--this is about as far as you can go now.  On your case in chief you may choose to show the investigating officer facts to the other than as this witness be-lieves.

MR. SEGAL:  Very well.

CPT BEALE:  Do you want to bring the witness back in?

(Warrant Officer Shaw returned to the hearing room.)

Q  Mr. Shaw, you testified yesterday that on finding the piece of wood that you described as a club outside the MacDonald house, that you observed blood or reddish-brown stains, fibers and debris on that particular wood.  Am I correct?  Correct in my recollection?
A  Essentially, yes.
Q  What were the fibers that were on that particular club determined to be?
A  My recollection of the laboratory report, these fibers were identified as having come from the throw rug in the master bedroom.
Q  May I suggest to you that if--that this has not been heard in this case, and I call to your attention the statement of the laboratory people that Exhibit E-206, reported in a report of Change 1 of the laboratory report, submitted for communication on 5 June ’70, in paragraph 7, as dealing--

CPT THOMPSON:  We’ll object.  It is highly improper to read from a document that is not in evidence.  There are some laboratory reports that are in evidence, if counsel would like to refer to those.

CPT BEALE:  That is in evidence, Captain Thompson.  I don’t know where you were at the time it came in.  The laboratory report speaks for itself.  Now, this particular witness, if he can describe what he saw on the stick, fine, but the lab report speaks for itself.

MR. SEGAL:  Well, I would be interested in determining whether the witness was aware of the significance of his findings, and what was the result of his findings.  I will follow the sugges-tions of the legal advisor.

Q  I ask you, Mr. Shaw, will you describe for us the fibers that you saw on the item that you described as a club?
A  They were fine, fine in diameter and that’s about all I remember about them.
Q  How about the debris on it?  What was the debris?
A  That was the debris I had reference to.
Q  When you said blood, fibers and debris, the debris mean fibers?
A  Yes, the debris mean any--what appeared foreign material to me.
Q  All right, what other foreign material was there besides the reddish-brown stains and the fibers you’ve described?
A  Just that.
Q  Nothing else?
A  That’s what I saw at that time.
Q  Well, did you ever see anything else on that club aside from the reddish-brown stains and the fibers you’ve described?
A  No, sir.
Q  Now you had occasion yesterday to refer to some magazines that were observed and sub-sequently submitted for examination from the living room of the MacDonald house.  Is that correct, sir?
A  Yes.
Q  When was the Esquire magazine you had occasion to refer to collected as evidence by you?
A  It was not collected as evidence by me.
Q  Well, who was it collected by?
A  By Mr. Ivory.
Q  Do you know when it was collected?
A  I believe he took it into evidence on the 20th of February.
Q  Between the 17th and the 20th of February, where was that magazine?
A  As far as I know, it was lying on the floor.
Q  To your knowledge was it ever examined by anyone between 17 and 20 February?
A  I’m not certain at what time they started to move items, what date.  I think Ivory accept-ed it as evidence on the 20th of February.  That’s the date that I examined it to some ex-tent.  That’s all I can tell you about it.
Q  And is it fair say to say that the blood sample that was taken from the edge of the maga-zine therefore had not been observed by anyone prior to the 20th of February, that you know of?
A  I don’t know.
Q  Well, you, yourself, had never observed the blood on the edge of the magazine prior to 20 February, had you?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Mr. Shaw, you are aware that there are approximately forty-six fingerprints, palm prints, found in the MacDonald house which have not to date been identified?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Did you ever suggest or cause to have these fingerprints sent to the National Criminal In-vestigation Bureau, the Federal Bureau of Investigation?
A  To suggest or cause?
Q  To have them sent there for examination and check against the files of the FBI?
A  No, sir, I didn’t.

MR. SEGAL:  I have nothing else.

COL ROCK:  I think in view of the length of the cross examination this morning, this might be an appropriate time for a recess.  Approximately how long do you figure your redirect will take?

CPT THOMPSON:  I estimate at least a half an hour.

COL ROCK:  We will take a five-minute break.

(The hearing recessed at 0952 hours, 24 July 1970.)

(The hearing reopened at 1002 hours, 24 July 1970.)

COL ROCK:  The hearing will come to order.  Let the record reflect that those parties who were present at the recess are currently in the hearing room.  Would you proceed, counsel?

CPT THOMPSON:  Thank you, sir.

MR. SEGAL:  I have just one question, if I might, before you start, with regard to the last--

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  Mr. Shaw, in view of the fact that you had 46 unidentified fingerprints, why did you tell Captain MacDonald on April 6th that there was no evidence of unidentified persons having been in his house on the morning of 17 February?
A  Because to that time, to that date there was no evidence of any stranger being in his house that that we had.
Q  You do not say or consider the 46 unidentified fingerprints to be evidence at that point of any unidentified persons?
A  At that time I didn’t know there was 46 unidentified finger and palm prints in the house.
Q  And when did you learn that there were 46 unidentified prints?
A  Sometime after that, after having discussed it with the laboratory technician and receiving the report.
Q  You had received a report identifying a substantial number of the prints in the house that belonged to either Captain or Mrs. MacDonald or some of the investigators?
A  There was an interim report.
Q  An interim report.  So that at the time you had an interim report, you nevertheless still re-ported to Captain MacDonald there was no evidence of a stranger having been in his house on February 17th?
A  That’s essentially what I said, yes.

MR. SEGAL:  Thank you very much.

Questions by CPT THOMPSON:
Q  Mr. Shaw, during the course of your investigation, you told the investigating officer you had occasion to collect three pieces of wood.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir, that’s right.
Q  And with respect to the piece of wood collected out of the south bedroom, why was that selected?
A  Because to my eye it seemed to match the club that I had found outside the quarters.
Q  And where were these pieces of wood sent?  What happened?
A  They were sent to the US Army CID laboratory at Fort Gordon, Georgia, where they were examined and subsequently returned.
Q  Is the criminal investigation detachment here at Fort Bragg interested in the wallet that you didn’t have an occasion to see on the morning of the 17th?
A  Yes, sir, they were.
Q  Was that wallet ever found?
A  I believe it has been, yes.
Q  And where was it found?
A  I was told it was found on the access road from Honeycutt to Womack Army Hospital, or in that general area.
Q  And has the criminal Investigation detachment has an occasion to question certain people concerning this wallet?
A  Well, yes, sir.
Q  And who does the criminal investigation detachment at Fort Bragg suspect of removing that wallet, the fact that it was removed--

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Again, would you describe to the investigating officer where that wallet was found?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.  It’s been answered.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Where would the medical personnel removing persons from 544 Castle Drive--where did they go?  Do you know?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected.  Hearsay.

CPT THOMPSON: It is hearsay and the questions on cross examination delved into hearsay also; in order to attempt to determine what, in fact, happened to this wallet, I am trying to redirect through hearsay again to satisfy the investigating officer that all steps were taken in order to determine the location and whereabouts of that particular wallet that may have been found.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Shaw, to your knowledge, who is the best individual to be able to clarify this matter that is currently located here at Fort Bragg?

WITNESS:   Mr. Grebner, sir.

CPT THOMPSON:  We will reserve that question for Mr. Grebner.

Q  You indicated that--is it an SOP, standard procedure, for the criminal investigation de-tachment to inventory a house which is a crime scene?
A  No, sir, it is not.
Q  You indicated on cross-examination that you did have an occasion to determine valuables located within the--that house.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  And when was that?
A  Well, on two different occasions, the first being upon the initial investigation at the scene, it is standard procedure to--particularly in a crime of this type--to attempt to establish that outsiders have come into the house.  One of the ways of doing that, one of the techniques involved, is to determine if there are any valuables present at the home, what condition they are in, if any accessories or integral parts of these valuables are missing.  So during the initial phase of the investigation, I had occasion to ascertain that there were valuables in the house.  On another occasion, on the 19th of June, I went to the house with Captain Somers and had occasion to determine whether or not valuables listed by Captain MacDonald were in the house.  To the best of my knowledge, those things that he wanted such as, one item I recall was a tall pink statue of a cat, which was a coin bank of some type, which was full of coins, he wanted that, and it was released to Captain Somers for release to Captain MacDon-ald.  There had been others in the house earlier which were earlier released to Captain Mac-Donald.  He wanted--described a  ring that he wanted released in the house, and I don’t re-call the exact description of that ring, but I do know I discussed it at the time with other in-vestigators and was told--well, that ring has already been released to Captain MacDonald.
Nonetheless, we made a search of the house for the ring and did not find it.
Q  Do you know how many rings were released to Captain MacDonald and turned back over to him?
A  I know I never specifically released any rings to Captain MacDonald and I don’t know for sure.
Q  Between the 17th of February and today, with respect to the valuables that you ascer-tained were in the home, what is their present location?
A  Those that have not been released to Captain MacDonald are still in the house.
Q  What steps have been taken between 17 February and today to insure the location of those valuables?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.  It’s irrelevant.

CPT BEALE:  Objection overruled.

A  Between the 17th of February and the 21st of February there was a constant guard on the house, 24-hour military guard, in addition to those hours that we were in the house working the crime scene.  On the 21st I had hasps and staples put on the entrances to the quarters and put my locks on the entrance ways to the quarters and on the 23rd of February I had the windows welded shut, the windows of the quarters.
Q  Now you stated--
A  In addition, I placed brown paper seals, what we might call them, over the inside surfaces of the windows and curtains so that I could readily detect if there was any disturbance of them.
Q  And why were these brown seals placed over the windows?
A  For two reasons: one, to detect any attempted entrance; two, to dissuade any curiosity seekers or cameramen.
Q  You indicated earlier you placed locks.  How many locks were placed?

MR. SEGAL:  This whole line of questioning is objected to.  There’s no question being raised by anybody as to what happened any time after say the 20th of February as to the contents of the house.  At that time the barn door was shut and the horse was gone.  The only ques-tion here is what happened on the morning of the 17th; what happened up to the 20th, as a matter of fact, with regard to the magazine.  All the securities measures at a later time does not address itself to any question relative before the inquiry and only delays the proceeding of these matters.

CPT THOMPSON:  They were raised on cross-examination, Colonel Rock, the preservation of the crime scene.  They have talked on cross-examination about a wallet and about certain rings that were obviously taken after the crime scene was intact.  It is only an attempt by the government now on redirect to convince the investigating officer that all reasonable measures above and beyond what is reasonably necessary really were taken to secure that house.

CPT BEALE:  Objection is overruled.

A  Would you repeat the question, sir?
Q  With respect to the locks you stated that you placed at 544 Castle Drive, please indicate for the investigating officer how many and where?
A  Yes, sir.  I have four locks which I obtained from the Post Engineer Supply.  They were key padlocks and I placed one of these on each door.  In addition, I placed one lock on the access way underneath the house because I had removed portions of the floor which had been replaced with other wood, but I wanted--I knew that the structure was weak at this point, so I wanted to lock this access door.  In addition I have--caused to have fixed railway seals, numbered railway seals on each one of these locks on the house so that one must break the seal before they can enter the quarters.
Q  How many people have access to those locks?  Or to 544 Castle?
A  Two people, myself and Mr. Ivory.
Q  Do your records indicate that anyone other than those two people breaking any seals?
A  Yes, sir, they do.  Whoever physical breaks the seal is recorded as having broken the seal and the number and the time and date, of course.  And whoever replaces the seal, the same operation.  Now it has happened that Ivory or myself have gone to the house since that date and with other persons, and those other persons physically broke the seals.
Q  But you would have been, on those particular occasions when someone else registered, would have been with them--

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.  That’s grossly leading.

CPT BEALE:  Counselor, Colonel Rock has stated he is satisfied to the fact that the security that you have established, so why don’t you move to another area.

CPT THOMPSON:  Very well.

Q  Between the 17th of February and today, has Captain MacDonald had an occasion to give you a list or an inventory of the valuables in that house?
A  Not as such, no, sir.
Q  And could you explain your answer, not as such?  Has he in any way?
A  Captain MacDonald has furnished us with a list of property from his home which he would like to have released to him.  It was a list in that direction, not a list of valuables as such.
Q  Now you have indicated at approximately 0755 hours on the morning the first of the three bodies was removed.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And who was the first?
A  Mrs. MacDonald.
Q  Would you please--now at the time prior to her removal you stated that you and Mr. Ivory had occasion to remove certain objects from her.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Would you please tell the investigating officer how long it took between the time that pa-jama top was initially lifted until the time it was finally placed in the bag?
A  A few seconds: certainly not a full half minute.
Q  And the same with respect to the bath mat, how long between the time it was initially touched until the time it was sealed in the plastic?
A  The same, the same length of time, not a full half a minute.
Q  During that, those few seconds, not more than thirty seconds, did you observe any con-tamination?
A  Contamination, sir?
Q  Did you observe any trailing threads falling off that garment?

MR. SEGAL:  Well, that is objected to as grossly leading.

CPT BEALE:  Objection is overruled

A  No, sir, I didn’t.
Q  And how far away were you from the pajama top and bath mat at the time they were be-ing lifted and placed into the plastic bag?
A  A matter of--at the time they were lifted and placed in the bag?
Q  Yes.
A  Well, I was within arm’s reach of Mr. Ivory while he was doing this.
Q  Would you please describe to the investigating officer how Mrs. MacDonald was placed onto the object she was ultimately taken out of the house?
A  Well, sir, she was lifted by two medics from the floor who wheeled the stretcher as close to her as they could get it.  One moved to her ankles and feet area, and the other moved to her shoulder and head area.  They lifted her, as far as I could tell, straight up into the air, just high enough to clear the height of the stretcher, and the one at her shoulders, I believe, might have taken a step and a half or two steps to get to the position where he could place her on the stretcher, and she was laid on the stretcher.
Q  Was she laid on the stretcher itself?
A  No, sir, there was some sort of--what looked to be a mattress covered with a sheet.  I’m not certain of that, but I’m not familiar with the way these are built, but that’s what it looked like.
Q  What was the placement of her legs, as you recall?
A  Well, her legs were reasonably straight.  They were placed together somewhat.
Q  Where were they placed?
A  On the stretcher.
Q  And her arms?
A  On the stretcher.
Q  Did she remain in that position during the time she was taken from the house?
A  Yes, sir, she did.
Q  Would you please describe for the investigating officer the approximate width of that stretcher?
A  Well, as I said before, it might be two and a half feet wide, or somewhat less than that.  I am not absolutely certain.
Q  Can you describe for the investigating officer what occurred when she was--when the stretcher was wheeled from the master bedroom into the hallway?  What route did the stretcher take?
A  Well, it was backed almost straight up into the doorway, about the center of the doorway.
Q  You have indicated earlier on direct examination that at the entryway of the master bed-room there was a wet spot of what you described as AB blood.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Would you please describe with reference to that particular spot how the stretcher trav-eled over it, across it?
A  Well the stretcher wheels, of course, were the only thing touching the floor, and they would have been almost at the door jambs, certainly would have been quite a distance be-tween them and the spots that I saw.
Q  Did you have occasion to observe that particular location in the entryway prior to the time Mrs. MacDonald was taken from the bedroom?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Did you have occasion to observe that location after she was taken?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Would you please describe for the investigating officer how that location changed?
A  None at all that I could see.
Q  At the time Mrs. MacDonald was taken from the house, where were the bodies of the two younger children?
A  In their respective beds.
Q  And how were they subsequently removed?
A  Well, as I’ve described earlier, they were each lifted by two corpsmen from their beds and carried to the hallway and placed on the stretcher.
Q  Now how was the younger child, Kristen, placed upon the stretcher?  With respect to her arms and legs.
A  She was lying on her back with her arms extended downward parallel with her body.  Her arms and legs were out straight and they were on the stretcher.
Q  And was any portion of her body not on the stretcher?
A  No, sir, not that I know of.
Q  With respect to Kimberly MacDonald, was any portion of her body not on the stretcher?
A  No, sir.
Q  Were either one or both of those children ever near the entry way to the master bedroom?
A  Before or after they were killed, sir?
Q  After.
A  No, sir.
Q  How near to the master bedroom were they?

MR. SEGAL:  Sir, I assume this is all clearly--about the handling of the bodies is not meant to have Mr. Shaw surmise about the matters other than what he observed in the handling of the bodies.  The question has nothing--

CPT THOMPSON:  Counsel went at great length--I think that there is this possibility of con-tamination with reference to the preservation of the crime scene.  The government is trying to clarify this on redirect examination.

MR. SEGAL:  There’s no objection.  I just want to make sure the question is clear.  We are only asking Mr. Shaw about what he saw with regard to the handling of the bodies, and not asking him for opinions or--or opinions in that regard.

CPT BEALE:  Certainly, that’s correct.

Q  Would you please tell the investigating officer again how, or what position, with reference to the master bedroom, Kimberly and Kristen MacDonald were at the time they were re-moved?
A  And placed on the stretcher?
Q  Exactly.
A  Well, of course, they were brought out through the doorways of their respective bedrooms and placed immediately on the stretcher, and the stretcher was between the entrance way to the bedroom and the living room, rather than on the other side of the doorways.  As I say, the handles, the eastern most handles of the stretcher were extending just beyond the west door jamb to the south bedroom.
Q  From the west door jamb of the north bedroom to the end of the hallway, what was the condition of that hallway with respect to blood stains?  Prior to the time that any person was removed from that house.
A  Would you repeat the area again, sir?
Q  The area from the west door jamb of the north bedroom to the westerly most end of the hallway to the living room end of the hallway, what was the condition of that hallway with respect to red brown stains prior to the time that any of the bodies were removed?
A  The only stain that I saw in that area on the floor was one spot very close to the en-trance to the living room, right at the entrance to the living room.  There were several spots on the north wall that I saw both before and after the removal of the bodies, but on the floor, just one spot.
Q  And after the three bodies were removed, what was the condition of that same area?
A  The only thing that I know that was disturbed at all was some clothing that was at the end of the hall that was moved, to the best of my recollection, by Mr. Grebner so that it would not be stepped on by the ambulance crews as they removed the body.
Q  And what time was this?
A  About eight o’clock, sir.
Q  What time were the photographs taken of that area?
A  Several hours before.
Q  Did you have an occasion to observe the door leading from the residence in the utility room any time during the course of your investigation?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And did you have an occasion to observe the lock on that door?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  Did you have an occasion to observe the locks on all other doors?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And you testified earlier that you did have an occasion to observe the exterior portion of the house.  Is that correct?
A  That’s correct.
Q  What evidence, if any, did you find of a burglary?
A  None, sir.
Q  Now with respect to the dining room area of the residence at 544 Castle Drive, you stated that you had occasion on that particular morning to observe some cards.  Is that correct?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  You indicated that there were Valentine cards.  Is that correct?
A  That’s what I remember, Valentine.
Q  Do you remember when Valentine’s Day was?
A  No, sir, I don’t.
Q  And do you recall any Valentines from Mrs. MacDonald to anyone?
A  No, sir.
Q  With respect to the Valentine made reference to the words “To My Darling Wife” that you stated that you believe was from Captain MacDonald.  Is that correct?
A  Not entirely, no, sir.  I don’t--I don’t really remember that at all.
Q  Do you remember a Valentine with those words?
A  No, sir.
Q  You don’t recall that?
A  No, sir.
Q  What was the position in reference to the object that the Valentines were on?  What was their position with reference to that piece of furniture?
A  The Valentines were out of their envelopes and open and were sitting up so that one could see--it was a display of Valentine cards, greeting cards.
Q  Now with respect to the weapons that you stated were found underneath the bush at the rear of the residence.
A  Yes, sir.
Q  When were these particular objects dusted?  Do you recall?
A  It would have been that date, 17th of February.  It was done at those quarters by Mr. Medlin.
Q  On that day?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And you indicated that the dusting revealed smudges?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Unidentifiable?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  And what does that mean to you as an investigator?
A  It--

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  Could those smudges have belonged to anyone?

MR. SEGAL:  That is objected to.

CPT BEALE:  Sustained.

Q  During the time that yourself and Mr. Ivory, Mr. Connelly were present in the quarters with Dr. Neal, with respect to the master bedroom and the south bedroom, did any of these indivi-duals disturb the scene as you originally saw it?

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to, calls for a conclusion.

CPT THOMPSON:  He can testify to what--

CPT BEALE:  Rephrase your question to the extent that did he observe any changes in the scene before and after.

Q  Did you observe any changes in those particular rooms, by changes I mean changes from how you saw the scene prior to the time that Doctor Neal was in those rooms?
A  No, sir, not at all.
Q  With respect to the living room portion of the residence and the location of approximately the Esquire magazine that you testified to on the table, have you had occasion since 17 Feb-ruary to disturb the location of that particular table?
A  Oh, yes, sir.
Q  How many times?
A  Many, many times.
Q  Would you estimate for the investigating officer how many times?
A  Between 20 to 30 times, probably 30 times.
Q  And describe for the investigating officer how that table was disturbed by you, or how it was moved by you?
A  Well, on several occasions on these occasions I’ve mentioned, I’ve tried to find a way that I could tip that table over and have it come to rest as it did, as I found it that morning on the 17th of February.  I’ve pushed it over; I’ve knocked it over; I’ve dropped it; I’ve done several things to it all in the same general area.

MR. SEGAL:  I object.  There’s no question before the witness.  He was asked whether he had moved the table.  Now we are having dissertation on a scientific experiment of table tip-ping.  I object to the question.  I object to the answer.  Move to strike it.

CPT THOMPSON:  I can ask another question with respect to this particular line of question-ing which has come in through the testimony of Ivory.

MR. SEGAL:  It would be beyond the scope of cross examination however.

CPT BEALE:  Counselor, why don’t we move to another area?  Colonel Rock is not particularly interested in this.

CPT THOMPSON:  All right.

Q  With respect to the palm prints alluded to by counsel--
A  Yes, sir.
Q  You have been quoted before on these particular palm prints.  Is that correct or not cor-rect?
A  That is correct.
Q  And would you please explain to the investigating officer why certain things were done or not done with reference to these particular palm prints?
A  Yes, sir, I--

CPT BEALE:  Captain Thompson, we have no idea what you are talking about.

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll rephrase my question.

CPT BEALE:  Please do.

Q  You indicated that you did not send any prints to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for analysis.  Is that correct?
A  That’s correct.
Q  Why didn’t you?
A  Because I know that the FBI does not offer fingerprint record check service except in very limited areas.  One, repeated kidnapping offenders.  The other that I know about is a file kept on certain figures of crime that are considered to be syndicate figures.  Otherwise the FBI will not provide us the service of checking their millions of cards for single fingerprints.  They just don’t do it.

MR. SEGAL:  I would object to the answer to the extent that he knows that the FBI--if he states that he believes that they would not do it, I don’t mind and will except the answer, but he can’t testify as to what the FBI won’t do because he’s really not the appropriate per-son to say that.

CPT BEALE:  It is sustained.  That is only the opinion of this particular witness.  I don’t be-lieve he works for the FBI, do you Mr. Shaw?

WITNESS:   I work with them, sir.

CPT BEALE:  Do you work for them?

WITNESS:   No, sir.

CPT BEALE:  Very well, then limit your answers to what you believe the FBI would do under the circumstances.

WITNESS:   Sir, I have, in fact, asked the FBI if they do this and they said they do not.

MR. SEGAL:  Again, I move to strike that part of the answer--what the FBI, whoever that is, may have said to Mr. Shaw.  I suspect that has been an individual agent, but it is not the FBI.

CPT BEALE:  Very well.  Again, this whole line of questioning is--the objection is still sus-tained unless you can make it clear and tie in what this particular witness knows of his own personal knowledge and able to testify to.

Q  Have you had occasion in the past to seek such aid from the Federal Bureau of Investiga-tion?
A  Yes.

MR. SEGAL:  Objection.  Acts of the past are not relevant to the request in a triple murder case.

CPT BEALE:  Captain Thompson, we are concerned with what this witness did in relation to this case.

Q  Have you had occasion with respect to this investigation to seek assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, has the Criminal Investigation Detachment had occasion to seek as-sistance--

MR. SEGAL:  That’s objected to unless it is only referring to seeking assistance in the finger-print question.

CPT BEALE:  We are pertaining to fingerprints, Captain Thompson, right now.  That’s what we are talking about right now.

CPT THOMPSON:  Very well, I have no further questions.

CPT BEALE:  Very well.  Re-cross?

MR. SEGAL:  Yes, very briefly.

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  Mr. Shaw, you are familiar with the provisions of Army Regulation 195-10?
A  Most of them, I think so, yes, sir.
Q  What is the title of that generally?
A  Criminal Investigation Activities, generally.
Q  Is that the principal regulation specifying the Military Police investigative activities, the principal authority or regulation in that area?
A  Probably, yes, sir.
Q  Have you ever had occasion to read paragraph 4-19, entitled FBI Fingerprint Record Checks?
A  Yes, sir, I have.
Q  Paragraph 4-19 provides a method whereby you may request the checking of fingerprints or multiple prints of subjects of criminal investigations--

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that question.  I think again, the best evidence of this would be the regulation itself.  He’s trying to draw from this witness’ memory of what someone else has told him or what he’s read.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  Are you familiar with that provision?
A  Familiar in what way, sir?
Q  Do you know that it exists, that there is a provision of a regulation which describes the procedure for requesting the FBI to check fingerprints?
A  Sir, I wouldn’t trust my memory about what’s in that paragraph.

CPT BEALE:  Can counsel show this document to the witness in order that we may refresh his memory?

MR. SEGAL:  I will in a moment, sir, if you will bear with me.

Q  Mr. Shaw, how can you state with certainty to the investigating officer that there is no way that you know of having checked these 46 fingerprints if you have not checked the bas-ic regulation of the Army in this regard as to the investigation, in relation to the FBI?
A  Sir, I am sure this regulation has been revised several times over the years that I have been a criminal investigator, and I found that it is better to go to the horse’s mouth when you are dealing with other agencies, and this is what I would have attempted to do.
Q  You mean you asked some FBI agent, instead of looking at an Army Regulation which pro-vides the procedure for doing this.  Is that right?
A  Sir, it is the FBI that’s going to do it.
Q  When you say the FBI, you did not ask anyone in the Washington office in terms of a su-pervisor in Washington in connection with the fingerprint bureau whether they would do this.
A  They had been asked by whom?
Q  By you.
A  No, sir.
Q  Who asked them?
A  To the best of my knowledge, the Commanding Officer of the US Army CID--correction, the Laboratory.
Q  Who is that?
A  This is a Captain Joel Leson.
Q  And when did you ever receive the information that he had been refused by the FBI re-ference checking these fingerprints?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to the question.  On redirect--

CPT BEALE:  Your objection is overruled, Captain Thompson.

Q  When did you ever become aware of that communication?
A  It would have been within the last three or four weeks.
Q  Were you aware that Sergeant Medlin of the laboratory at Fort Gordon, when he testified here, said nothing had been done, to his knowledge, to ask the FBI to review these finger-prints?
A  I read that in the newspaper, yes, sir.
Q  Who did you ask the FBI as to whether you could submit the 46 prints in this particular case for examination by the FBI Fingerprint Bureau?
A  I don’t recall that I ever asked anyone specifically by word of mouth to him, if they did this in this case.
Q  Did you ever consult any FBI agent--did you ever consult the provisions of Army Regula-tion 195-10, paragraph 4-19 referring to FBI fingerprint record checks since the date of the MacDonald investigation began?
A  No, sir.
Q  It is not standard operating procedure for the CID to refer to basic regulations and manu-als in determining how to proceed properly in an investigation?
A  Yes, sir, it is.
Q  In this case, no reference was made, however, by you to the provisions of the regulation regarding the FBI check of fingerprints?
A  Not by me.
Q  And to your knowledge, neither did Mr. Ivory or Mr. Grebner refer those provisions?
A  I have no way of knowing this.
Q  To your knowledge, did they?
A  I don’t know.
Q  Now you have told us many times in the course of the last two days--

CPT BEALE:  Mr. Segal, hold it.  He’s answered the question to the best of his ability.

Q  Let me ask you about this matter, about this not standard operating procedure to make an inventory of the premises.  Are you particularly familiar with paragraph 3-17 of this same reg-ulation that I’ve talked about this morning?
A  Not from memory, no, sir.
Q  All right, let me suggest to you the title of it.  Perhaps you’ll have some recollection that is provided for in the regulation.  Are you familiar that there is a section entitled 3-17 of AR 195-10, entitled Retention of Property?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  Are you familiar with the following language of that regulation which states, strict property accountability and/or evidence chain of custody records will be maintained of all property ac-cumulated during the conduct of any investigation?  Does that sound familiar to you?
A  Yes, sir.
Q  It does.  Does strict property accountability pursuant to the provisions of this regulation mean to you that it is not SOP to make an inventory of the entire building that has been held as investigative material?
A  Yes, sir, that’s exactly what it means.
Q  It means you don’t have to make an inventory of that building?
A  By interpretation of the regulation, I do not have to make an inventory of the building or non-evidentiary items.
Q  Are you telling us that there is a substantial amount of non-evidentiary matters in that building?
A  Yes, sir, I think so.

CPT THOMPSON:  Objection your honor. This is completely irrelevant, immaterial even to this line of questioning.

CPT BEALE:  Your objection is sustained.

Q  Mr. Shaw, are you telling the investigator of this case that it is the standard operating procedure of the CID Detachment at Fort Bragg never to ask a victim of a person whose home has been broken into as to whether he has suffered any loss of property therein?
A  No, sir, that’s not what I am saying.
Q  Was, in this case, Captain MacDonald ever asked between February 17th and May 1, 1970, what losses he sustained in that house in the break-in of February 17th?
A  I don’t know, in fact, if anyone has asked him.  I put the statement to Captain MacDonald on one occasion and he seemed to agree with me.
Q  You mean that’s the occasion when you told him that there was nothing missing from his house.  Isn’t that right?
A  That’s the time I am referring to.
Q  You are not suggesting that you ever asked him to find out whether he was missing arti-cles?
A  No, I am not.
Q  Is it the standard operating procedure for the CID Detachment of this base not to deter-mine the loss of property from the premises by asking the owner of the premises?
A  No, it is not.
Q  Is it, in fact, your standard procedure to make inquiries to determine if property had been stolen when there is a claim that the premises has been broken into?
A  Where there is such a claim, yes, sir.
Q  Did Captain MacDonald claim his premises were broken into?
A  He did claim they were entered.
Q  Well, he didn’t claim they were entered by someone who--
A  Captain MacDonald claimed illegal entry, yes.
Q  But nevertheless your detachment did not follow its own procedure of thereafter deter-mining from him whether there was any loss of property?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that, Colonel Rock.  He’s testified to what procedures they did, in fact, follow.  Clearly this line of questioning is again an attempt to impugn the inves-tigative procedures of the CID Detachment reference this case and it’s gotten completely away from the issue and/or issues to be determined by the investigating officer.

CPT BEALE:  Your objection is sustained, for the reason that Colonel Rock is satisfied the question has been answered sufficiently.

Q  Now, I understand that after our overnight recess you are now of the opinion that you did not see the words “To My Darling Wife” on either the card or the box of candy in the Mac-Donald dining room.  Is that correct?
A  Sir, to the best of my recollection, I don’t remember seeing that specifically.  As I testified yesterday, it doesn’t ring a bell with me.
Q  Well, what is your recollection of the contents of the cards signed by Captain MacDonald and addressed to his wife?
A  I don’t know in fact that any of those cards were signed by Captain MacDonald.  I remem-ber that there were some Valentine Day greeting cards there, and I remember taking notes at the time one or more of these cards were probably initiated by Captain MacDonald.
Q  Is that because the name “Jeff” appeared on it?
A  Yes, I think so.
Q  Well, addressing yourself to those cards, and I think it’s a reasonable assumption you made in that regard, would you indicate to the investigating officer what you do remember of the sentiment expressed there in the cards that were signed Jeff and not intended for the children?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to the question.  He’s indicated both on redirect and re-cross that he has no recollection specifically with respect to that card.

MR. SEGAL: Well, I just suggest that the government on redirect made an issue of not recall-ing “To My Darling Wife”, suggesting therefore this witness has a memory of the contents or the principal sentiments of the card.  We are entitled therefore to ask what he does recall in that regard.

CPT BEALE:  Your objection is overruled.  Answer the question if you can, Mr. Shaw.

A  The only recollection I have about this is that there were Valentine cards there, and I re-member at the time that one of these cards, one or more or these cards was apparently signed by Captain MacDonald and that’s all I really remember about it.  Any more would be something I don’t remember.

MR. SEGAL:  That’s all.

CPT THOMPSON:  If I may, Colonel Rock, have an opportunity to observe this particular regu-lation that was used in--

(Mr. Segal handed Captain Thompson a document.)

COL ROCK:  Mr. Shaw, reference the stick, piece of wood you described as a club, Govern-ment Exhibit 79, when you picked up this Government Exhibit 79, did you observe the condi-tion of the ground under this particular exhibit?

WITNESS: Yes, sir, I did.

COL ROCK:  How long do you think that stick may have been in that area?

WITNESS:   I would think not very long, sir, because it was raining and the grass was wet, as was the club, and to the best of my recollection, the grass that was underneath the club didn’t spring back up, but it came back after the club was removed, and I remember as I was moving the club to the box, I gave a quick visual examination, looked on all four sides, and to the best of my recollection all four sides were wet.  I don’t think the club was there very long.  That’s all I can--

COL ROCK:  Was the grass surrounding the club green?

WITNESS:  I think it was green and brown, sir.  There was dead grass and green grass.

COL ROCK:  Was there a distinct difference in the color of the grass under this exhibit as compared to the grass around the exhibit?

WITNESS:  No.

COL ROCK:  Did you have occasion to go into the kitchen early on the morning of the 17th?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir, reasonably early.

COL ROCK:  Approximately what time, would you say?

WITNESS:  I entered the kitchen before eight o’clock, sir.  This is as close as I can say.  I don’t know at what point I entered the kitchen.

COL ROCK:  Did you have occasion at that time to go to the kitchen door?

WITNESS:  To it, yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Did you have occasion to check whether that door was or was not locked?

WITNESS:  I was going to check it and I asked Mr. Ivory about it.  He said that he’d already checked it and it was locked.

COL ROCK:  Did Mr. Ivory indicate if he had locked the door himself, or did you get the impression that he meant that it was locked when he saw it?

WITNESS:  Sir, my assumption of his meaning was that it was locked when he arrived at the scene.

COL ROCK:  To your knowledge, is there a light on the exterior wall of the kitchen?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir, there is.

COL ROCK:  Was this light illuminated when you first went to the rear of the house?

WITNESS:  Yes, sir, it was.

COL ROCK:  I have no further questions.

MR. SEGAL:  If I may, unless you are ready to go, Captain Thompson.  I have some questions with regard to what you have.

Questions by MR. SEGAL:
Q  Did you ever check the lock on the door between the utility room and the outside of the MacDonald house?
A  Yes, sir, I did.
Q  What was the condition of the lock?
A  Well, would you be specific as to the time period of my checking?
Q  All right, would you indicate when you did check the lock?
A  I checked the lock after I had been told it had been processed for fingerprints.
Q  And what date was that?
A  The 17th.
Q  And was that late in the afternoon?
A  Probably, yes, sir, to actually check the lock to see the function of the door.
Q  When you say processed for fingerprints, had they been removed from the wall, or had they been processed in place?
A  Processed in place.
Q  Were you aware of a statement by a witness by the name of Janice Pendlyshok that Mrs. MacDonald complained about the fact that that lock was not secure on the utility room door?
A  No, I wasn’t aware of this statement.
Q  What did you observe about that utility room door lock?
A  That it functioned properly.
Q  That it functioned properly.  What do you mean?
A  That it locked--it could be locked.
Q  Did you try a key in it?
A  No, sir.
Q  You mean that it could be locked by turning the latch on the inside?
A  Yes, sir.

COL ROCK:  Counselor, I remind you my questions were addressed to the kitchen door.

MR. SEGAL:  Very well, sir.

Q  Now you indicated to the investigating officer that you picked up the stick described as a club, and you believe it was wet on all four sides?
A  Yes, sir, I think so.
Q  Do you know from your own personal knowledge or from the checking of any records when the rain commenced on 2-17 or 2-16, 1970?
A  This was done, counselor, and it was done through our contact at Pope Air Force Base, through some weather station out there, but this was done as a matter of interest, because quite often we found in other investigation that the weather varies between here and there, and between here and Fayetteville, and I don’t--I don’t know if anyone in authority with ex-pertise checked Fort Bragg specifically to fully answer the question.
Q  You would have no way of knowing, therefore, whether that stick that you observed about 0700 hours had been in place in excess of six hours or under six hours?
A  It would only be an opinion on my part.
Q  Do you have any facts to indicate whether that stick had been lying in place in excess of twelve hours?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that, Colonel Rock.  He’s answered the questioning and other questions with respect to this, and described the area around it, and any inferences to be drawn as to how long the particular club-stick was there can be drawn from the evidence al-ready adduced from this witness.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is overruled.

Q  Mr. Shaw, do you have any facts in regard to whether the club was outside in excess of 12 hours?
A  I think so, yes, sir.
Q  What facts do you have in that regard?
A  Well, when I first observed the club it was between six-thirty and seven o’clock.  Twelve hours prior to that would be seven o’clock, 1900 hours the previous day, and Mrs. MacDonald was known to be alive at that time, and because the blood identified as probably being hers was found on the club, I’d say it was there less than 12 hours.
Q  Do you have any way of knowing whether that club had been on the outside of the Mac-Donald house at 1700 hours on February 16th, been taken into the house and returned there sometime on the 17th of February?

CPT THOMPSON:  I’ll object to that.  It’s not within this witness’ knowledge where, in fact, that club was, and he hasn’t indicated that he has any knowledge, by his last answer.

CPT BEALE:  The objection is sustained.

Q  Did you interrogate any neighbors of the MacDonald’s to determine whether they had seen this piece of wood outside the MacDonald house on February 16th, 1970?
A  I did not.

MR. SEGAL:  I have nothing further.

Questions by CPT THOMPSON:

Q  Mr. Shaw, did you and another member of the investigating team cause to have the lock-ing devices in the house examined by anyone?
A  Yes, sir, we did.
Q  And which locks were examined?
A  The locks from the south entrance door, the northeast entrance and the northwest en-trance door.
Q  Are there any other doors in that residence?
A  Not exterior doors, no, sir.
Q  And have the results of those examinations been submitted by the laboratory to you?
A  Yes, sir, they have.

CPT THOMPSON:  We have no further questions.  We would like to have the investigating of-ficer read paragraphs 3-17 and 4-19 of Army Regulation 195-10.

COL ROCK:  I will read that at an appropriate time, however, not at this moment.

CPT THOMPSON:  Very well.  We have nothing further of this witness.

COL ROCK:  Do you request that the witness be excused?

CPT THOMPSON:  I do request the witness be excused, and at this time would request that the real evidence introduced through him be allowed to remain in his possession.

MR. SEGAL:  I would object unless the government is closing its case at this time

CPT THOMPSON:  This evidence will be available.

COL ROCK:  Under the same caveats as we have introduced previously.  I may have been confused about the request of the counsel for the accused.  My desire is that this evidence will remain, at least until such time as Mr. Grebner has completed his testimony, as I may have occasion to refer to these particular--

CPT THOMPSON:  Very well, sir.

COL ROCK:  Mr. Shaw, you are advised that you will discuss your testimony with no person other than counsel for the government or counsel for the accused.  Do you understand?

WITNESS: Yes, sir, I understand.

COL ROCK:  You are excused, subject to recall.

CPT Somers:  Sir, the government is ready with its next witness.  We would like to take about a five-minute recess.

(The hearing recessed at 1105 hours, 24 July 1970.)