The Jeffrey MacDonald Information Site is a compendium of information about the Jeffrey MacDonald case. MacDonald was convicted in 1979 of the murders of his pregnant wife and two small daughters. He is serving three life sentences for that brutal crime.


The Murders of Colette, Kimberley and Kristen MacDonald
 

The Jeffrey MacDonald Information Site

1979 JEFFREY MACDONALD CASE TRIAL TRANSCRIPT
July 25, 1979: William Ivory, CID

F U R T H E R P R O C E E D I N G S 9:30

THIS CAUSE came on for further trial before The Honorable Franklin T. Dupree, Jr., United States Chief District Judge, and a jury, on Wednesday, July 25, 1979, at Raleigh, North Carolina.

(The following proceedings were held in the presence of the jury and alternates.)

THE COURT: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Any further questions of the witness who was on the stand?

MR. SEGAL: Yes, Your Honor.

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, may we approach the Bench?

THE COURT: That would be a good start for the day. Come on up. We are getting a little behind in that department.

MR. BLACKBURN: We knew you had missed it yesterday.


B E N C H C O N F E R E N C E

MR. BLACKBURN: I am somewhat concerned, Your Honor. Bill Ivory, as I mentioned to the Court yesterday, is scheduled to go back to Germany -- not for a specific reason, just some job things he has to do. His plane leaves at 3:00 o'clock. He needs to be there at 2:30.
I asked Mr. Segal this morning how long, if he knew, his cross-examination would take. He said he did not know, but he would try to be through by lunchtime.

THE COURT: Well, he told me yesterday that a half a day was a reasonable estimate. I think that you can do it in less than a half a day, I believe. I have not invoked 611(a) and 403, and I don't want to do it. I will let people try their lawsuits; but now here you have a matter, and a man needs to go to Germany. I think you can speed this up. I can shorten the recesses if necessary, but that is not going to help your case if I have to do that.
So let's just get on with the ball game. We are taking a couple of minutes here now.

MR. SEGAL: I think the problem we are talking about is not that I won't finish what I expect to before, I would say, at a reasonable hour this morning, certainly in time if he had to go to a plane.
What I asked Mr. Blackburn is that I want to know whether he is going to be made available, if needed, later on in the trial, without us all standing on handstands, because there is already one topic the Government wants to argue about as to whether I can go into with him. That is the question of Helena Stoeckley.
Now, that might be better deferred to another time. But this Defendant does not have the wherewithal to pay for his airfare to fly back. My request to Mr. Blackburn was, "Sure I will accommodate and let him go back to Europe. We are going to be here for some weeks. But it may very well be necessary that we have to have him back again. Will the Government produce him?" He said, "No; you will have to pay for him."
Your Honor, we cannot do that. Since that is the position of the Government, then I am going to subpoena him today, and he is going to have to be held. I don't want to do that punitively; but I don't have any alternative with the cost factor. I think it is unreasonable when a man like him can fly on regularly scheduled military aircraft. They don't pay a penny more, because they have seats galore.

THE COURT: Can't he come on "fat trans"?

MR. BLACKBURN: I don't know.

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, we had to pay commercial this time. The Government's expenses in the witnesses in this case, especially in view of the chain of custody problem, has been enormous. I think what the best course of action is, rather than holding the man here, which I don't know -- I mean, if he is subpoenaed, he is subpoenaed -- but I do represent to the Court that there is an operational matter in which he has to participate in the course of an investigation in Europe that has nothing to do with this case. He is going undercover. That is what I am saying.
We would like him back, too. Obviously, he is the case agent.

MR. BLACKBURN: I told Mr. Segal, of course, that if the Government needed him back, the Government would bring him back.

MR. MURTAGH: But I don't think it is fair to hold the man on the theory that Mr. Segal might need him.

THE COURT: I am not going to hold him. I am going to let him go to Germany today.

MR. SEGAL: What I am asking, Your Honor, then, is -- first of all, I do say, Your Honor, that we intend to call him in regard to this matter of Helena Stoeckley. If I subpoena him today, Your Honor, I do not feel that we can be compelled, if he then leaves the jurisdiction, to pay his airfare again.

THE COURT: We will cross that when we get to it. Let's get through today.

(Bench Conference terminated.)


THE COURT: Let the witness come back.

(Whereupon, WILLIAM F. IVORY, the witness on the stand at the time of recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:)


C R O S S - E X A M I N A T I O N 9:35 a.m.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, since you were here yesterday in the courtroom, between that time and this morning, have you had an occasion to discuss with anyone the matters that were testified to here in the courtroom yesterday?
A Yes, sir.
Q And with whom did you discuss those matters since yesterday afternoon?
A I generally discussed them with Mr. Shaw. He is the only person I saw.
Q You did not talk to or meet with Mr. Grebner last night?
A No, sir.
Q Did you meet or talk with Alfred Kassab last night?
A No, sir.
Q And not in or about the courtroom or outside the courtroom?
A I believe I greeted him out in the hallway, but did not discuss --
Q (Interposing) I mean, beyond social conversation?
A No, sir.
Q Was there anyone else you talked to about the case aside from Mr. Shaw?
A No, sir.
Q All right; what was the nature of your discussion with Mr. Shaw about this case?
A He just asked me how it was going. I said it was long and arduous.
Q That was it?
A As I recall, it was very general -- no specifics that I can recall.
Q Just a general conversation?
A Yes, sir.
Q The topics that were gone into yesterday in your examination?
A I believe I mentioned about your having made a demonstration with photographs -- very general, sir.
Q All right; let's talk first of all this morning, Mr. Ivory, about the pieces of rubber glove or latex glove that were found in the master bedroom?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, how many pieces of a latex glove did you find on the morning of February 17th?
A Three, sir.
Q And were you able to ascertain, by looking at them, what parts of the glove they were -- such as, was it a finger or a palm piece, or perhaps around the wrist?
A Just the one portion, sir, that appeared to be a finger section.
Q And using one of your own fingers, indicate to us about how large on your finger that portion was?
A I would say perhaps to the knuckle -- perhaps the first knuckle.
Q A piece that extended from the tip of your nail to about the knuckle?
A As I recall; yes, sir.
Q Where was that piece found?
A That was found in the bedding that was on the floor just inside the door of the master bedroom.
Q Now, what about the other two pieces?
A One was found on the floor in the vicinity of the left arm of the body of Colette MacDonald.
Q And can you describe what that looked like in terms of, did it have any shape, like a fingertip or a wrist piece?
A Sir, it was just a small piece, perhaps the size of a quarter.
Q Just latex? It did not have a shape that would let you know what part it came from?
A That is correct.
Q All right; and what about the third piece? Where was that found and what did it look like?
A That was found over by the dresser -- not the chest of drawers, but the dresser -- not far from where the knife laid (sic) by the dresser. That was approximately the size of a dime -- a little small piece.
Q Again, it was just a piece of latex? It did not have a shape to indicate what part of the glove it might have come from?
A That is correct.
Q Now, when you saw these pieces of latex, did you consider them potentially significant pieces of physical evidence in this case?
A Yes, sir.
Q And did you search the inside of the house for the rest of that latex glove to see if you might find more pieces of it, or the entire glove, somewhere in the house?
A Yes, sir; I did.
Q How extensive was that search inside the house?
A We searched each room. We searched every place that could be thought of where something could be hidden. We searched the plumbing -- had the plumbing searched from the quarters to where it met the master sewage drain in the back yard.
Q Excuse me, did you ask other investigators as they were processing the house to also keep an eye out inside this house for pieces of latex or glove?
A Yes, sir; they knew the pieces had been found and knew that we were searching for it; yes, sir.
Q Well, but did you ask them specifically to keep an eye out for that type of physical evidence?
A Yes, sir. We looked specifically for that.
Q Now, this matter of searching the plumbing -- you, I think, told us that you requested a unit from the Post Engineer to come down to the house.
A Yes, sir.
Q And how many men came to the house to examine the plumbing and to take it apart?
A I believe there were three. As I recall, in my mind now, three.
Q Did they bring tools with them?
A Yes, sir. They did.
Q About what time of the day or night was that done?
A It was done during the daytime.
Q On February 17?
A No, sir. I believe it was done on the 18th.
Q Oh, the next day. I see. And what exactly did these post engineers dismantle in your search for -- to assist you in your search for pieces of latex?
A They dismantled the gooseneck plumbing underneath the sink.
Q Which sink are you referring to?
A The bathroom sinks.
Q That is the hall bathroom?
A Sinks, sir -- plural.
Q All right. Tell us how many sinks you were dismantling.
A All of them in the house -- the kitchen and the two bathrooms.
Q In each instance you are saying that the drain pipe coming from the bottom of the sink which included the U-shaped joint was dismantled?
A Yes, sir. That is what I refer to as the goosenecked -- that curved pipe directly underneath the sink.
Q Now, besides taking off that gooseneck as you call it, what else did they do?
A They removed the toilets from the floor where they had been bolted to the floor and made a search with long cable tools from the juncture of the sewage line from the house to the master sewage line. They went back up into the house to drag out any debris that may be in the sewage pipe.
Q Did they do anything else?
A No, sir.
Q How long did all that plumbing inspection and sewage line inspection take?
A It took a number of hours, sir, as it involved digging out in the backyard and exposing the sewage line and the juncture.
Q I thought you told us yesterday in regard to the search of the plumbing that you were not surprised when it didn't turn anything up.
A I don't recall having said that, sir.
Q Well, perhaps the words you said were you decided it was probably easy to flush down the toilet or something like that.
A Sir, I don't remember that area being covered yesterday.
Q All right. Did you have that opinion that it would have been easy to flush away or wash away latex gloves that you were looking for?
A I would think so. Yes, sir.
Q You think so. Did you conduct any experiment of any sort where you took pieces of a latex glove and tried to flush it down those particular drains?
A No, sir. I did not.
Q Did anybody else conduct an experiment to determine whether or not if you tore up a piece of latex glove, you could flush it down the drain and not recover it?
A No, sir. They did not.
Q As a matter of fact, the post engineers even dug up the backyard of the MacDonald house. Didn't they?
A I believe I said that. Yes, sir.
Q They dug a hole in the ground that followed the pipe out. Is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Tore up the lawn?
A I believe I said that. Yes, sir.
Q Did you follow that work -- go out there and see what they opened up and they found?
A Yes, sir. I was there when they opened it up.
Q Now, that wasn't the end of your search for any other pieces of the latex glove. Was it?
A No, sir.
Q You were not going to be deterred that the engineers didn't find it in the toilet. Correct?
A Correct.
Q At some point it occurred to you that perhaps to look out in the trash cans in the back of the MacDonald house. Is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Let's see if we can get the picture to depict that. Mr. Ivory, could you tell us what the identification number is on that first blow-up that I have put on the easel?
A It is 165(b).
Q Government Exhibit?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, are there depicted on that enlargement, trash cans?
A Yes, sir. There are.
Q Could you indicate with the pointer, please, where the trash cans that were in the back of the MacDonald house were located? (Witness complies.)
Q How many trash cans are there out there?
A Well, for the two households -- for the MacDonald and Kalin households -- there are one, two, three, four, five, six.
Q By the way, on the far left-hand corner of that picture, there is a uniformed military person. Do you see that?
A Yes, sir.
Q Is that a military policeman?
A Yes, it is.
Q Guarding the house. Is that right?
A Yes, it is.
Q Do you know when that particular photograph was taken -- approximately?
A I would say about midday of the 17th of February.
Q On the very day that the investigation was going on. Is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q That's probably before the post engineers dug up the backyard?
A Yes, sir. It is.
Q All right. At about what time of the day did you go outside and check on the garbage cans at the back of the MacDonald house?
A Sir, I did not personally do that.
Q I see. You caused somebody else -- you sent someone out to do that?
A Yes, sir.
Q And who was the person if you recall?
A I'm not sure. Mr. Shaw was one of the outside searchers -- perhaps him and Mr. Rossi. Perhaps him and Mr. Rossi. Mr. Shaw was in charge of the exterior searches.
Q Do you have any idea when that person was sent out to check the garbage cans?
A It would have been after first light, sir. It would have been during daylight.
Q And you say it was sometime between, say, 5:30 or so in the morning and noon when that search took place?
A Yes, sir. I would estimate, yes.
Q Could you narrow that time frame down perhaps any more?
A I would say prior to the arrival of the lab team so I would say between 5:30 and 11:00.
Q And how much trash did that person have to sift through in order to carry out this part of your search for the balance of the latex glove?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT. He stated that he was not out there when that search of the cans took place.

MR. SEGAL: He has testified --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Let him say it if he knows.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q All right. How much trash did that CID agent or MP investigator have to go through to investigate the contents of the garbage cans?
A I have no personal knowledge of that, sir.
Q Did you have the occasion yourself that day to go out there and take a look at those trash cans whether you searched them or not?
A Look at the trash cans? Yes, sir. I was at the rear of the house.
Q When did you do that?
A Several times during that morning.
Q Can you give us some approximate time when you first went out and looked at the trash cans?
A Sir, to specifically look at the trash cans, I don't think I specifically looked at the trash cans. I was out in the rear of the house several times.
Q You passed near enough by the trash cans to have some idea of what was in them?
A No, sir.
Q Did not?
A No, sir.
Q At no time on February 17 did you go anywhere near those trash cans enough to know whether there was anything in there?
A I went down by there by the kitchen door. Yes, sir. I was by there.
Q How full were those trash cans when you finally got a chance to go by and look at them on February 17?
A They were closed but I know they were empty.
Q Empty?
A Yes, sir.
Q There wasn't a single scrap of trash of any sort in any of those trash cans. Is that right?
A That is correct.
Q As a matter of fact, after you discovered that, your investigation told you that the garbagemen had come that morning, February 17, and had emptied the trash cans. Is that right?
A That is correct.
Q The garbagemen had snuck right through the perimeter defense. Is that right?
A Not exactly. No, sir.
Q Well, you mean they just walked past the MP -- either that one in the picture or some other MP. Is that right?
A That is correct.
Q Walked right up to the trash cans and emptied the contents out?
A That is correct.
Q And carried them away?
A That is correct.
Q Never to be seen by any CID investigator. Is that right?
A That is correct.
Q Well, when you discovered that the trash cans had been emptied and that the trash man had made off with all the trash, what, if anything, did you do or say?
A I was quite disturbed, as were some other people in the house -- quite disturbed that the military policeman had let the trash man pick up the trash; and was related to me by one of the investigators who talked to the MP --
Q Don't tell us what you didn't do yourself; I can't ask you those questions.
When you discovered that they had made off, by any chance did you send one of the personnel down to the trash dump to see if you could recover something?
A No, sir, I did not.
Q Did the fact that the trash man walked past the MPs, right through the perimeter of rubber pylons that are shown in that picture, without being stopped by them -- did that cause you to take any special precautions about increasing the security around the grounds of the MacDonald house?
A Sir, he did not walk through the pylons, but, yes, it did cause the security to be increased.
Q And how was that security increased; what was done at that point?
A The military policemen were informed, again, to be more aware of personnel approaching the house.
Q That certainly left some doubt in your mind, didn't it, as to how secure the perimeter defenses around the house were?
A At that point there was concern, yes, sir.
Q Well, but my question was, it certainly left some doubt in your mind as to whether they were doing a good job guarding the perimeter?
A They were doing as good a job as they could do at the time, I believe so, sir.
Q What do you mean, "that was as good as they could do at the time," in regard to your explanation as to how the garbagemen got past them?
A The military policeman, when taken to task about this having been done, advised that he saw this trash man coming, they did not go through that area around that corner of the house, and he thought they were collecting the trash from around the Kalin house, and it did not occur to him that he was taking the trash that we would want to look in.
Q My question, again, for the third time, is did it cause you to doubt as to the effectiveness of this so-called MP perimeter guard around the property?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Aside from giving some verbal reprimand, did you increase the number of MPs out there?
A Sir, I don't know personally if the MP strength was increased, but I do know they were advised to be more aware of personnel approaching the house.
Q But you yourself didn't do that, you didn't advise them?
A No, sir, I did not.
Q There was one other picture. Aside from the trash men going through and passing the MP guards, did you bother to ask or interview the MP guards to see whether anybody else had been allowed to walk through that area?
A I did not cause them to be interviewed, but that was part of that MP being taken to task, if anybody else had approached the house.
Q Now, first of all, who was it that took that particular MP to task?
A I don't know if it was that particular MP, as they continuously change personnel there. People that were on motor patrol were called to stand a term of guard -- stationary guard at the house -- and then back to moving patrol before we got some people there permanently.
Q By the way, that wasn't the only MP guard at the back of the house -- the one illustrated in that picture -- is it?
A At that time, yes, sir.
Q It shows him standing with his back to the house talking to someone, is that right?
A That's correct.
Q Anybody coming up near the side walks right past him up to the house, is that right?
A I think he would have observed somebody walking up there.
Q You think, just from the picture as shown there -- you're satisfied in your own mind that he would, of course, notice someone coming from the far end of the right of that picture --

THE COURT: (Interposing) I think he answered that. Ask him another one.

MR. SEGAL: All right, Your Honor.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you ascertain --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Let's bear in mind, gentlemen, that this witness has a plane ticket to go to Germany at 3:00 o'clock today; so let's keep our questioning to one question per topic if we can.

MR. SEGAL: I am sure we will be finished in adequate time for him to make his plane, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Very well, go ahead. I don't want to hurry anybody, but I don't want any unnecessary duplication.

MR. SEGAL: Would you take down that photograph, please, and the one next to it; and I think there is a third enlargement of the house, and one more, please, Mr. Ivory, after that? Yes, thank you, the one that is on the easel now is the one I want to ask you about.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Do you know about what time that photograph was taken, and if you could just tell us the exhibit number while we are referring to it?
A The exhibit number is 161(b).
Q And approximate time as far as you can ascertain when that picture was taken?
A I am sure it would have been taken in a sequence with the one in the rear of the house we just viewed. I have no personal knowledge as of what time it was exposed.
Q Would you, given the context of that picture, conclude it was probably the morning of February 17th?
A The morning or early afternoon -- the day of 17 February was, following that rainy day, a dull and dreary day.
Q Now, where in that photograph is there a picture of a military policeman on guard in front of the house?
A There is none in the view of that camera right there.
Q As a matter of fact, there is a living thing on that in front of that house, isn't there?
A Yes, there is.
Q Well, what has gone past those rubber pylons right up to the MacDonald house?
A I believe a cat snuck through there, sir.
Q Want to take a look at it again, maybe it's a dog?
A I'm not sure if it's a dog or a cat.
Q All right, nobody ever conducted an interview about that, right?
A I did not personally interview him, no, sir.
Q All right, now, let's go to a different topic if we can, Mr. Ivory. You saw the bodies of Kristen and Kimberly MacDonald removed from the house, is that correct?
A Yes, sir, I did.
Q And at what time was that done?
A At around 8:00 o'clock in the morning.
Q And you described for us yesterday that both of the bodies of these children were placed on a stretcher, is that correct?
A Yes, sir, that is correct.
Q That's an Army field stretcher?
A Yes, sir, that is correct.
Q That's six feet long, isn't it?
A I don't know the dimensions, but that seems reasonable, yes, sir.
Q Who made the decision to put both bodies on the same stretcher?
A The medical personnel for lack of sufficient stretchers to carry three persons in the same ambulance.
Q You mean two medics from Womack just decided between themselves that they'd put two bodies there?
A No, sir, they discussed it with the agents -- myself and Mr. Shaw -- and we agreed that as long as they were separated -- there would be no contact of the two bodies -- it would be all right.
Q Did any agent ride in the back of the ambulance to Womack with these bodies?
A Mr. Connolly accompanied the bodies. I'm not sure if he went in the ambulance, or if he drove in the CID vehicle.
Q Well, if he didn't go in his own CID vehicle to the hospital, how would he have come back a little bit later to the crime scene?
A There's plenty of transportation available on the post, sir. I don't know personally if he went one way or the other.
Q Well, I guess then we have to ask you of your own personal knowledge, you don't know whether Mr. Connolly rode in the back of that ambulance?
A No, sir, I do not.
Q You don't know what contact the two bodies of those children lying on the same stretcher may have had with each other?
A They could have had no contact as far as I could see, when they were taken from the house.
Q I'm asking you -- you have no way of knowing that after those two small bodies lay on the same stretcher, and that ambulance went around curves, up driveways, over bumps, and whatever else -- you have no way of knowing at this time whether there was any contact between those two bodies --

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we OBJECT.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: That is correct, sir.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q In view of the fact that each of these bodies was found in a separate room, weren't you concerned that putting two bodies on the same stretcher might hold a potential for contamination, that something from one body might get near or on another body?
A That is one of the things that was discussed when the medics proposed removing the body in that manner; and it was felt that since there was plenty of room on the stretcher for both bodies to fit without having touched each other, that there would be no problem in that regard.
Q There was plenty of room on the stretcher, you said?
A Yes, sir.
Q Of course, if you are concerned with it, does it not seem to you now to have been the reasonable thing to make certain that someone rode in the ambulance to make sure that no contamination between the bodies took place?
A Mr. Connolly was dispatched to go along with the bodies to the hospital, but whether he rode in the ambulance or in the CID car, I have no personal knowledge.
Q What was the urgency that required all three bodies to be removed at the same time when there were only two stretchers available?
A The urgency?
Q Yes, sir?
A There was no great urgency, it just seemed to be the most efficient thing to do at the time.
Q You did not want to make the ambulance come back on another trip so you could have one more body carried separately, and eliminating the potential for contamination?
A That is correct.
Q Since there was no urgency in moving the bodies, why was there not a request made by you or any other of the investigators to have a forensic pathologist sent over from Womack Army Hospital to help with the investigation at this crime scene?
A Sir, there was no forensic pathologist assigned to Womack Army Hospital.
Q To your knowledge there was nobody at Womack who had any forensic pathology qualifications or background?
A That is correct, sir.
Q How did you ascertain that?
A From previous contact with the hospital, sir.
Q Well, you told us that you only investigated one prior homicide case; isn't that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q How long before the MacDonald case was that?
A I don't recall, sir.
Q You did not have any intimate contact with the doctors on the staff at the hospital, did you?
A Not intimate, but now we are talking, or you have made mention of the word "homicide" and made quite a differentiation between homicide and suicide and accidental deaths before. There was contact with the hospital on several occasions and of people in the pathology lab, about other death investigations.
Q As a result of all that, you found there was no forensic pathologist there?
A That is correct, sir.
Q About long before February 17th had you had that contact?
A Sir, I don't know.
Q Well, six months or less?
A Six months or less.
Q But on the morning of that crime, February 17th, you did not bother yourself to call or have someone else call and say, "Do you now have someone on your staff who is a forensic pathologist?"
A No, sir; I did not.
Q You would have liked to have had a forensic pathologist at the crime scene, would you not?
A Yes, sir.
Q That is certainly the scientific discipline on the medical side that relates to the investigation of criminal deaths; isn't that right?
A That is correct.
Q That is very important in your knowledge and your experience as an investigator?
A That is correct.
Q If there was no forensic pathologist -- if you are right on that subject -- there was no forensic pathologist at Womack Hospital, I assume that they flew one down from Washington, D.C. from the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology to do the autopsies of these bodies; am I correct in that regard?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: I will let him say, if he knows if one came and from whence he came.

THE WITNESS: I do not know that one came. I don't think one came.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, since you were the lead investigator, you, in fact, know who performed the autopsies in this case?
A I certainly do.
Q Tell us who is the doctor who performed the autopsy of Colette MacDonald?
A There were a team of pathologists, a Dr. Hancock, and a Dr. -- I'm sorry, the other name escapes me at the moment. I am not sure who did what autopsy, but the both of them did the whole family.
Q You are saying that Dr. Hancock and another doctor?
A Dr. Gammel.
Q Gammel?
A Dr. Gammel, with an "l."
Q G-a-m-m-e-l?
A That is correct. And Dr. Hancock, whether or not they called for a consultation with the FIP, I have no idea.
Q Are you saying you don't know whether any CID investigator was present at the autopsies in this case?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT to this line of questioning as being totally outside the scope of direct examination.

THE COURT: Well, counsel says that following his own format that he can finish well in time to let this witness return on his scheduled flight. That being so, I am going to let him go into other areas than those covered on direct examination.
I will, as I have previously stated, restrict his examination to direct questioning and not cross-examination types in areas not covered by the direct examination.

MR. SEGAL: Thank you, Your Honor.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, did you or did you not arrange to have a CID investigator present when the autopsies of the three bodies were done?
A I did not personally. That was something that was to be arranged from the Operations Center of the Fort Bragg CID office.
Q Do you know whether, in fact, anybody was there when the three autopsies were performed?
A I know one of the agents was dispatched there -- to what extent he stayed there during the autopsy, I do not know, sir.
Q Did you ever hear of Dr. Davis at the Womack Army Hospital?
A The name again, please?
Q Dr. Davis.
A Davis? At the present, sir, the name is not familiar.
Q If I were to suggest to you he was the Chief of Pathology at Womack Army Hospital, would that refresh your memory in any way?
A As I say, sir, the name at the present time is not familiar.
Q Do you know whether either Dr. Hancock or Dr. Gammel were forensic pathologists?
A Sir, I know they were not forensic pathologists.
Q They were not?
A They were not; yes, sir.
Q Do you know what a pathologist does who is not involved in forensic work?
A What they do?
Q Yes, sir?
A Such as, sir, please.
Q Are you aware that basically a pathologist who does not work on criminal deaths looks at cuttings for cancer, does slide cross-sections for disease problems, or the presence of illness or conditions like that?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT. This witness is not an expert. He is not qualified to speak.

THE COURT: The question was whether he knows what a pathologist does, one who is not a forensic pathologist. Just say yes or no.

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir; generally.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q You were aware of the limitations, were you not, that a general pathologist has on his training and knowledge as far as criminal investigation. You knew that they had limited knowledge and background as far as criminal investigation is concerned?
A Is that a question, sir?
Q Yes, sir; are you aware of that?
A Yes, sir.
Q Was there any reason, having sent for the Fort Gordon CID team of experts, that you did not ask for a forensic pathologist to be sent to do the autopsies here?
A Sir, I think, as I previously stated, my main area of interest and concern that morning was within that household. Other aspects of this investigation, such as that, such as conducting interviews, neighborhood checks, other investigative leads, was to have been controlled from the Operations Center at the Fort Bragg CID Office.
Q And the Operations Center was under the direction of Franz Joseph Grebner?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Did you see the medics lift the bodies and -- the two children's bodies -- put them on the stretcher?
A Yes, sir; I did.
Q Can you tell us the sequence that they did that?
A I believe the body of Kimberly MacDonald was removed first, and placed on a stretcher, which was in the hallway. Then the body of Kristen, as I recall now, sir.
Q Now where did they put the stretcher while they were doing this procedure?
A The stretcher was in the hallway just by the doorways to the bedroom.
Q Could I impose upon you please to step down to our model and bear with me one second. I want to make a little ad hoc model here.
Let me offer you a piece of yellow paper which I have torn down to a size which would be the equivalent of six feet, a foot being to an inch; and its width I have made no more than 18 inches. Now, would you take this, please, and if you could perhaps move this model out a little bit, I will have you stand behind the model and show us where they put this stretcher?
A In a position approximately like this.
Q You have to keep your voice up, please?
A In a position approximately like that, as I recall, giving more or less some feet.
Q All right; you have placed this field stretcher roughly directly between the two doors. In other words, the stretcher runs from one child's door to the other child's door; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q All right; into which bedroom did the medics go first?
A As I recall, sir, they went into the bedroom of Kimberly MacDonald first.
Q Okay; now, would you pick up the little plastic figure which is the outline of Kimberly MacDonald's body which was prepared by the Government and which the Government has suggested is to scale, and just move it with I your hand? Pick it up and move it right out of there and put it in position on the stretcher where you recall seeing it on that morning? Which side of the bed did they approach it from?
A From this end, sir (indicating).
Q The side?
A The side closest to the south wall.
Q All right; the south side of the bed, then.
A Yes, sir.
Q Both medics came in there?
A No; one.
Q One man carried the child alone?
A Yes; it was one -- as I recall, a very tall, slim medic.
Q You don't happen to know his name by any chance, do you?
A No, sir.
Q Just carry the path through the house starting from here. Just carry it and show us where he put it on the stretcher?
A He followed this path between the chair, out the doorway, and I don't recall if the body was placed on the upper -- meaning the end near the living room -- or the lower -- or end near the master bedroom -- part of the stretcher.
Q All right; just put it down on one end or the other rather arbitrarily, then. And the body of the child was totally on this field stretcher?
A Yes, sir.
Q How was the body of Kristen MacDonald placed on the stretcher?
A In a similar fashion, being carried by the medic from the room and placed on the stretcher.
Q By one man?
A One man.
Q Now, would you do that again for us, using the north bedroom here. Carry the little figure out?
A Went directly out the door.
Q Let me just hold it up here so we can see the door position. Go ahead; take it out?
A Went through the door and placed it on the stretcher. Again, I don't recall whether it was at the top or at the bottom.
Q From the position it is located in, it is fairly apparent that the medic who took Kristen's body out would have had to step over the stretcher; is that right?
A It may have been moved, sir. I don't recall.
Q You have no recollection?
A I have no recollection.
Q That would be sheer speculation on anybody's part to suggest the stretcher was moved?
A That is correct.
Q To carry the body of Kristen MacDonald out, it looks to me from this position he had to step over something; right?
A Not if Kimberly MacDonald's body was at the lower end of the stretcher; no.
Q But you don't know?
A I don't recall.
Q Nobody took a picture of that?
A No, sir.
Q Well, all right; he had to step over the stretcher maybe -- or body. Put the second body down. (Witness complies.)
Q Now you have two medics out in the hallway. At some point, they had to step over that stretcher to get to the one end and the other end; is that right?
A Not necessarily; no.
Q How would they have gotten around the stretcher in the hallway, if that is a reasonable to scale representation of the field stretcher?
A I don't know that that is a reasonable to scale representation of the field stretcher.
Q I will stand corrected if you will tell me that it is any other size. I asked you if it was about six feet this morning. You said, "Yes."
A I said, "Perhaps." I don't know what the dimensions of the stretchers are, sir.
Q Let me suggest to you that I have not tried to mislead you about that. To the best of anybody's knowledge, it is about six foot long.
A I don't know, sir; if you say so -- if you know that to be a fact, I will agree with you.
Q Let me ask you: you were present and you saw the stretcher in the hall?
A Yes, sir; I did.
Q Do you have any reason to believe that it was less than six feet long?
A No reason to believe it was less than six feet long; no, sir.
Q Do you have any reason to believe it was more than six feet long?
A I have no reason not to think that it was not more than six feet long.
Q Well, regardless of what your impressions are, let's find out -- at this point, you have two medics ith two bodies on the stretcher; is that right? Did they have to crumple these bodies together to fit them on that stretcher?
A No, sir; they did not.
Q Assuming that the Government's models are in fact to scale of the length of those bodies, what does it show? Now, what have we shown here when we put two bodies on that piece of yellow paper, which I have asked you for the moment to assume is probably correct to size?
A Well, then, let me tell you again what I have just been discussing with you, if you don't remember, sir.
Q Go ahead?
A I do not know what the dimensions of a field stretcher are -- be they six feet, 37 feet -- but reasonably speaking, they are within six feet and perhaps some reasonable bit larger. I don't think it is any smaller than six feet; but it certainly could be more than six feet. I have no personal knowledge, and have never caused one to be measured. I have no experience in that field at all.
Q All right; why don't you go back to the stand, Mr. Ivory? (Witness complies.)
Q The two medics then took that field stretcher out through the house; is that right?
A That is correct.
Q As far as you know, they put the stretcher with the bodies in the ambulance?
A That is correct.
Q Was the ambulance parked out front of 544 Castle Drive?
A Yes, sir; it was.
Q So they went down the hallway; is that right?
A That is correct.
Q Through the living room and out the front door?
A That is correct.
Q Did they then come back shortly with a second stretcher?
A Yes; they did.
Q Did you see them come in with the stretcher?
A No, sir.
Q When was the first time that you became aware that those medics were back in the house carrying another stretcher?
A I was back in the master bedroom at that time when the stretcher came back up to the master bedroom.
Q I see; and what did they do with the stretcher?
A They brought it in. It was not extended; it was flat. They put it on the floor between the body of Colette MacDonald and the bed.
Q I want to ask you to place an object in the bedroom in the approximate position that the field stretcher was in. This has been marked D-10. It is not the field stretcher, obviously; this is a fully-exposed gurney. But the dimensions, we think, will be the same. Before I do that, I would ask you to check the arrangement of the positions of the furniture in the master bedroom. Let's move this a little bit.
A I would say it was generally like that. The exact positioning of the bed -- that is the approximate positioning of the bed. Generally, this is as I recall it.
Q Can't you be any more precise about the position of the furniture, since you spent so much time investigating that room?
A My I look at a photograph?
Q Absolutely; which one would you like to have? Squires' photos?
A Yes, sir.
Q Take your time to examine them, if you would like. (Witness examines photographs.)
A This I think is as close as I could come.
Q All right, Mr. Ivory, if you would just stay there with us, please. You have made some adjustments in this room. I noticed that where you have placed what I think we now know to be the green armchair --
A (Interposing) Yes, sir.
Q You have the right side of Colette MacDonald's body right up against that. Is that the way you remember her body being positioned?
A Yes, sir. As shown in Government Exhibit 44. Yes, sir.
Q Well, is it your recollection that her right side was actually touching the green vinyl chair?
A I don't think that is quite touching, but underneath perhaps the under edge of it.
Q All right. Now, let me ask you who was in the bedroom when the medics arrived with the stretcher to take Colette MacDonald's body?
A I was in the room. Mr. Shaw was in the room, and I believe Mr. Connolly was in the doorway.
Q All right. Will you take these wooden figures --
A (Interposing) I have two here.
Q All right. Thank you. First, where is your position?
A This was my position.
Q Indicating at the head of Mrs. MacDonald's body and near the night table with the lamp?
A Yes, sir.
Q Okay, and that puts you right up almost alongside the bed. Is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Okay, who else was there? And place that person.
A Mr. Shaw was in a position approximately here.
Q Try this other one, please. All right. I think you have the figure backwards or did you intend it that way?
A I don't think it makes any difference.
Q Turn it around, please, if you want the figure to show who was facing toward the body of Colette MacDonald. Now, you say, the third person in the room was --
A (Interposing) I think Mr. Connolly was in the doorway.
Q Okay, when the medics came, they had to get past Mr. Connolly. Is that right?
A No, sir. They were already in the room. When he was in the room, the stretcher was there. As I recall Mr. Connolly was in the doorway.
Q Are you telling us that he came up after the medics came up the hallway?
A Apparently.
Q All right. Use the gurney. Again, I understand the stretcher was placed flat on the floor. It was folded originally. They had to open it. Is that right?
A Open it up?
Q If it is collapsed, it is two poles with a canvas. Is it not?
A No. It was something similar to that.
Q Oh, you mean it was a rolling stretcher?
A Yes, sir.
Q Well, all right. I'm sorry. I stand corrected then.
A It was in a position about like that.
Q Now, you have previously placed the pile of bedding at the door in the position it is there now?
A That is correct.
Q Would you please take the gurney -- that is, the rolling hospital bed -- and would you please take it through the door for us and show us how the medics did that?
A I can --
Q (Interposing) Excuse me. You are moving the pile of clothing?
A Yes, because this is a little bit out of scale with that bundle of clothing.
Q Oh, I see. You mean this Government model here with a pile of clothing -- that part of it is not to scale.

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, Your Honor.

THE WITNESS: It says right there it is not to scale.

MR. BLACKBURN: That is correct.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Well, could you give us a scale drawing or a little cut-out of what the pile of clothing looked like?
A It was probably three-quarters of that size.
Q Three-quarters of that size? All right, but you have now put it in the right position as far as you remember?
A Yes, sir.
Q All right. Just roll the gurney -- it has little wheels -- right into the bedroom and show us where the medics put it. (Witness complies.)
Q Now, you have given us the position, showing that it is almost parallel to the body of Colette MacDonald?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, take two more figures if you will, please. These are two average size males here. And put them in the position that they were in when the medics were getting ready to move Mrs. MacDonald's body. All right, let's just hold that for a second if we can. (Witness complies.)
Q You have indicated that the medic who was at the head of the gurney moved in front of yourself, it would seem to be, got past Mrs. MacDonald's outstretched arm and took a position at her head. Is that correct?
A That is correct.
Q The medic who was at the foot of the gurney, you indicated, simply stepped to his left and he was near the feet of Mrs. MacDonald.
A That is correct.
Q Let us use in fact what the Government has made us a model which they have put Colette MacDonald's name on it indicating her dimensions, and will you lift up the plastic model and replace this model in its place? (Witness complies.)
Q By the way, the model we have just put down of Mrs. MacDonald, which is the three-dimensional model, does not have an outstretched right arm. Does it?
A That is correct.
Q The arms are down parallel to the body somewhere?
A That is correct.
Q When the medics went to move Mrs. MacDonald, in what position was her arm?
A It was still outstretched.
Q Who moved her arm?
A The medic.
Q Beg your pardon?
A The medic.
Q A medic moved her arm? You were just telling us that he squatted down here. Is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Will you tell us what he did? I did not see that. I would like your information on that.
A As I was standing here or squatting in a position somewhat like this.
Q You yourself were now squatting?
A I was.
Q All right.
A The medic was again over the body in a position somewhat like this (indicating).
Q Somewhat squatting, you are indicating?
A Yes.
Q Now, what did he do?
A He slid his hands under the shoulders of Colette MacDonald, lifted her up with the gentleman on the other end of the body with her feet and on to the stretcher.
Q I see. Let's put, then, the body of Colette MacDonald on the stretcher. (Witness complies.)
Q Would you put the two medics in the position? Just show us how the medic got the head who held up -- held Mrs. MacDonald's head -- where he went at that point. (Witness complies.)
Q He went to the head of the stretcher -- now, just ignore the body for a minute then. May I have a piece of Scotch tape, if you don't mind? All right, now with the aid of a piece of Scotch tape, see if we can put the model back on the stretcher. All right, show us now what the medic at the foot of the bed did. (Witness complies.)
Q Did he face out the hallway as he went out?
A Yes, sir.
Q All right. Would you move the medic at the head for a minute and just show us how they took that trundle out of the bedroom into the hallway? I think it would be helpful if we could do it from the back, please.
A Wheeled it down the hallway through the doorway.
Q Just move it into the hallway, please.
A In the position there, wheeled it into the hallway, and down the hallway, and out the front door.
Q All right, Mr. Ivory, thank you. Would you go back to the stand, please? Again, there were no photographs taken of any of this movement of the bodies?
A No, sir. There was not.
Q Between the time the medics took out the bodies of the children and they came back to remove the body of Mrs. MacDonald, had they washed their hands?
A I don't know, sir. I would assume not. I did not observe them washing their hands.
Q Where were the only places they could have washed their hands in the MacDonald house?
A Well, they could not have washed their hands within the MacDonald house. They would not have been allowed.
Q How do you know that?
A They would not have been allowed to.
Q Nobody was allowed to go near the grounds when the trash men penetrated the perimeter. Did they?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q What do you mean? An order was posted -- don't touch -- therefore, you assumed that nobody touched?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, again, Your Honor.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q All right, Mr. Ivory, you don't in fact have any personal knowledge of whether the medics washed their hands?
A That is correct, sir.
Q And you yourself did not see what the medics did as they came from the outside, having put the children's bodies in the ambulance? As they came back into the house, you could not see what they were doing in the kitchen?
A That is correct.
Q Can you name the CID investigators, or MP investigators who may have been in the kitchen at the time the medics were coming back into the house with the second stretcher?
A I can't name anyone who was in the kitchen at that time.
Q They came down the hallway. I don't suppose they could have used the bathroom in the hallway, could they?
A No, sir.
Q Why not?

MR. BLACKBURN, OBJECTION, Your Honor.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q You would have seen or heard them if they used that bathroom?
A Yes.
Q You could not see or hear the kitchen, could you?
A No, I could not.
Q Did it occur to you that there could be some problem of contamination between bodies and blood on the bodies between one stretcher and another stretcher if they did not wash their hands?
A No, sir.
Q Now before the body of Mrs. MacDonald was moved, I gather from your prior testimony that there was an outline made of her body?
A That is correct, sir.
Q That outline was done by yourself and Mr. Connolly?
A That is correct.
Q And you also indicated there were some problems in making the outline because of the floor and the nature of the rug; is that right?
A Difficulties in getting the ink to stick to the pile of the carpet.
Q Were there some problems about moving around the body with the marker? Was there any problem with moving around, considering the placement of furniture and the size of the room?
A No, sir, except for the portion that was nearest to the chair. We could not get in there to get around there, no.
Q Did you hold the marking pen up against the skin as you ran it around the outline of body?
A No, sir, not directly against the body, no.
Q You, as a matter of fact, tried not to touch the body as you were making the outline; is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q I would like to ask you, if I can impose upon you this morning, to show us how you did that and I have some material I would like to try. We will get the material in a second. Let me talk about the body in some other fashion. When Dr. Neal came in to make a pronouncement of death -- he is the physician that came to the house -- tell us what he did in regard to the body of Kristen MacDonald as far as moving it?
A Kristen MacDonald?
Q Yes?
A He picked up the arm and he reached and took the upper part of the body and pulled it over so he could look on to the back of it. He just sort of twisted it so he could look at the back. He then replaced it.
Q I would like for you to show us, and I would ask a student if he would mind serving as a guinea pig in that regard. While we recognize he is larger, obviously, I think it is the method in which Dr. Neal did this that would be most important to us.

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT to this at this time.

THE COURT: Do you want to be heard on it?

MR. BLACKBURN: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: Come up.


B E N C H C O N F E R E N C E

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we have got part of the carpet cut out. That part where the body outline was, in fact, made.

MR. MURTAGH: The rest of it is at the crime scene.

MR. BLACKBURN: I think to artificially do something to a body that is not to scale whatsoever is somewhat misleading to the jury.

MR. SEGAL: May I be heard, Your Honor? I am not trying to show the scale. I am trying to show -- I merely want to show the technique, how close or how distant did he have to go around the body. Almost anybody would do. This gentleman happens to be fairly close to the size and weight of Mrs. MacDonald.
I could have a woman, but I think that would be more embarrassing to everybody. It would be useful, but I simply want to show the technique. I will make clear to the jury I am not suggesting that this is the size. I won't offer it for that purpose; it is only, you know, how he actually accomplished the process and how accurate is it in terms of what is represented as being the body area.

THE COURT: Suppose you can show exactly, then, what is it you intend to prove.

MR. SEGAL: Without Mrs. MacDonald's body to superimpose on it, we don't really -- we have not shown anything and we cannot tell the technique. It will take just two minutes to do this, and I will be on to another area. The other one is the one I am asking you about though, now Your Honor. That is to show us how Dr. Neal lifted the body -- that is the other question, that is very important --

MR. BLACKBURN: (Interposing) Dr. Neal lifted which body?

MR. SEGAL: Kristen's body.

THE COURT: That is what I thought your questions refer to. Now you are talking about -- when you got up here, you started talking about Mrs. MacDonald.

MR. BLACKBURN: That is what I thought you were going to do.

MR. SEGAL: I want him to show me first of all, using the body of the young man, how much Dr. Neal lifted or moved the body of Kristen. It is quite important.

MR. BLACKBURN: The photographs demonstrate that.

MR. SEGAL: It does not show how he did it. That is what he says he saw and he claimed it was very little movement. Then we'll have Dr. Neal do the same thing.

MR. BLACKBURN: There has already been cross-examination on that.

THE COURT: He has described it on direct examination, and I can't see that it is going to tend to prove anything, one way or the other. In the interest of time, I am going to SUSTAIN the objection.

MR. SEGAL: To both demonstrations? We can't show either one?

THE COURT: There is only one before me right now and that has to do with using the young man to represent, or to simulate, how the smallest of the two girls -- the two year old -- was done. I think he has described it both on his direct examination and here again this morning, and on cross-examination.

MR. BLACKBURN: We would also OBJECT, Your Honor, should the Defendant wish to do the very same thing with Colette MacDonald or Kimberly MacDonald.

MR. SEGAL: At this point, I am offering, Your Honor, to have him demonstrate the technique of how a body is outlined and how close they went to the body with the marker. I think that is germane to the central issue in the Government's case about where they found the fibers. The witness has testified he found them inside the body outline.
I intend to show, through this demonstration, the body outline was larger than the actual body. That can only best be illustrated by showing the jury, you know, how that type outline is done. When we come to the actual carpet, if the Government ever introduces it, we will see whether we can simulate someone the size of Mrs. MacDonald. But we don't know that.
At this point, I only want to show the technique, draw us an outline, larger than the actual body.

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, we can keep it simple if we have one demonstration of this rather than two --

THE COURT: (Interposing) All right, I'll accept that modification of it. One demonstration instead of two. Take either one you want. Let's go.

(Bench conference terminated.)


MR. SEGAL: Your Honor, indulge me one second.

(Counsel confer.)

MR. SEGAL: Your Honor, the Government makes a suggestion which may be worthwhile, if we may be indulged a minute. Counsel needs to look at some photographs.

MR. MURTAGH: May I approach the witness, Your Honor?

THE COURT: All right.

(Pause.)

(Government Exhibit No. 1124 was marked for identification.)

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, may the record reflect that I am giving to Government counsel a Government Exhibit which we would have marked 1124 for identification, and Government photo in evidence 71 and 77.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, we have been offered by counsel from the Government a piece of carpet, which has been suggested is the carpet from the MacDonald house. Can -- would you look at both the carpet, and then the two photographs G-71 and G-77, and tell us whether you think in fact this is a piece of that very same carpet? (Witness complies.)
A Yes, sir, it is.
Q Now, there appears on that carpet, it looks like blue ink. I assume that's the magic marker that was used to outline the body?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Would you hold that up, please, so the members of the jury can see what we are referring to? Perhaps if I fold it you can point it out?
A This line.
Q Is it fair to say in some places it is somewhat greenish-blue, and other places blue?
A Yes, sir, there were two different pens -- marks to make sure we could make the -- it stand out.
Q You say, "two different pens," you mean --
A Well, Mr. Connolly and I were both doing it -- he with one and I with another; and around here we both did it to try to make it stand out, in addition to trying to keep away from the blood stain to keep from contaminating the blood with the ink.
Q Now, what portion of the body of Colette MacDonald was being outlined where this particular mark was made?
A This blood stain was under the head area of Colette MacDonald.
Q Now, could you show us with your hand, first of all, how much of this area encompassed -- actually had Mrs. MacDonald's body? Just show us where her body was or head was?
A I would say an area about like this had the head and then coming down toward the shoulder area -- this is the head area right here.
Q All right, and why are the blue lines, however, larger beyond where the head area you've indicated is?
A To take in the entire blood stain without it going through the blood stain and contaminating it. It was still wet at the time, and perhaps the ink would not have been quite as visible in an outline.
Q All right, so that is it fair to say that two things were necessary to be done in order to outline the body: first of all, that as you and Mr. Connolly moved around the body, you tried not to actually come in contact with it with the marker, is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q You left a reasonable space so there was no possibility of touching with the pens?
A We got as close as possible without having -- transferring ink on to the clothing or on to the body.
Q All right, but when you came to any place where there was a blood stain, you simply detoured around it, is that correct?
A That is correct, by the head area.
Q Finally, in that regard, it is clear that the drawing on the floor, the outline of the body, was clearly larger than the actual space that Mrs. MacDonald occupied?
A Just barely.
Q Just barely?
A Yes,sir.

MR. SEGAL: Well, bear with me just for a second.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Let's cast that for a second, please. Let's go back to Dr. Neal, and we'll come back in a minute and I'll ask you to do something for me.
I would like now to have this young man lie on the floor, and if you will show us the positions that Dr. Neal moved Kristen MacDonald's body we will be able to understand how much or the extent of that movement, all right?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT.

MR. SEGAL: I thought we agreed, Your Honor, that we could choose a demonstration. That is the one I have chosen. The rest was offered by the Government. That is not our demonstration.

THE COURT: Come up again and tell me what you agreed on, if anything.


B E N C H C O N F E R E N C E

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, Mr. Segal started off talking about Kristen's body, then the demonstration, as I understood it, pertained to the young man and the piece of rug. Since Kristen was not found on the rug but rather on her bed and was outlined, I understood him to be talking about Colette MacDonald's body.
At that time I said we could have one demonstration instead of two because he had referred to if the Government ever produces this carpet, I said, "We have the carpet here; why don't you use that, why don't you ask the man where -- "

THE COURT: (Interposing) You are agreeing to the Colette demonstration?

MR. MURTAGH: With the actual carpet.

THE COURT: With the actual carpet.

MR. MURTAGH: Further, Your Honor, I understood Mr. Segal was going to ask him where he found particular things or at least observed particular things within that carpet. He has not done so, and I think in the interest of completeness he should do so; and that's the demonstration that we agreed to. We did not agree to the young man.

THE COURT: I can't imagine his leaving out anything, but maybe he will get to that. Suppose you use the Colette MacDonald simulation then.

MR. MURTAGH: With our carpet, Judge?

THE COURT: Yes, that is what was agreed on.

(Bench conference terminated.)


BY MR. SEGAL:
Q I think we decided what we will allow you to do this morning, Mr. Ivory, and I'm going to ask, young man, if you will lie on the floor; and we will use, in part anyway, this Government Exhibit. We will put it on the floor and, if I may since the rest of the body is not covered, Your Honor, I would like to use my own piece of carpet -- if the Government doesn't get upset about it -- to finish the outlining. May we do that, since this only covers part of it?

MR. MURTAGH: Your Honor, if you want, I'll approach the bench, but as we informed counsel, we have the rest of that carpet. However, it is not in the courthouse today.

MR. SEGAL: I'm not faulting at him for not having it all here, Your Honor. That is not the issue. I'm not faulting the Government for not bringing it in. I'm just going to show the technique of how it was done.

THE COURT: He objects to your using any carpet of your own, which is not the kind of carpet that was --

MR. BLACKBURN: (Interposing) That is correct.

THE COURT: I will SUSTAIN the OBJECTION. I will let you use exactly in accordance with the agreement up here. Let the young man come and lie on this piece of carpet, and then ask the witness.

MR. SEGAL: All right, do you have a piece of paper we could put on this thing?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would prefer -- I don't know if this was included within the agreement --

THE COURT: He won't do it like you want it done, so you might as well stop right there. You don't do anything like he wants it done.

MR. BLACKBURN: Well, that is true. I would like to state though that we would prefer that the young man lie down on the carpet just as it is.

MR. SEGAL: All right, I don't want to disturb the Government's evidence, but if they don't mind, I don't mind, and Steve doesn't mind.

THE COURT: I thought that is what he was going to do. Come lie on the carpet anyway, some carpet. Let's get this in back of us.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, would you take this piece of carpet and lay it down, then I will ask Steve here to lie down in position. By the way, may we ask you, Steve how tall are you?

MODEL: About 5' 7".

Q And what do you weigh?

MODEL: About 130 pounds.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q While we have you there, Mr. Ivory, do you recall the height and weight of Mrs. MacDonald?

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION.

MR. SEGAL: All right, we will look at the model here.

THE COURT: The question was of the witness whether or not he knows her --

MR. SEGAL: Yes.

THE COURT: I'll let him answer.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Do you know, sir?
A Yes, sir, about 5' 6" or 5' 7".
Q And her weight?
A I think it was about, as I recall, about that weight -- about 130.

MR. SEGAL: will you please direct Steve how you want him to lie down, Mr. Ivory?

THE WITNESS: Put your head right here.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Would you put his arms as they were? You may use whatever photographs you need, Mr. Ivory.

(Witness complies.)

THE WITNESS: I think that is pretty close, sir.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q All right, now; I am going to give you a magic marker; but, so we won't mark the Government's carpet up here, will you show us here from wherever you started the process by which you outlined this body?
Now, you are kneeling down here on which side -- which side of the body?
A The left side of the body.
Q All right.
A The outline would have been made --
Q (Interposing) If you would just do it, please -- just simulate and we will all observe you. (Witness complies.)
Q All right; just hold it right there. I observe that actually you are touching the arm as you are going by it. Did that happen?
A No; it did not.
Q Try to do it as close to the way you did it then, so we can get a sense of how an outline is made without touching the body? (Witness complies.)
Q I see you are touching the garment also. Did that happen also?
A No, sir; it did not.
Q Will you try as best you can to show us how you actually outlined Mrs. MacDonald's body without touching the garment or her skin; all right? (Witness complies.)
Q She did have pajama tops on, didn't she?
A Sir, she did not at the time.
Q That I would expect not.
A (Witness complies.) I am not saying that I was in this position all along.
Q Well, show us how you did it. You continued moving along in your crouched position like that?
A Something similar to this; yes, sir. (Witness complies.)
Q Now, you are on the opposite side. Is that the side Mr. Connolly was on?
A I don't recall, sir. We did it together. (Witness complies.)
Q Now, what happened when you came to where the arm was -- where the right arm was?
A The arm was by the chair. I don't know if we reached around here or not. I don't recall. I would have to look at the photo of the arm.
Q At that point, the chair was blocking your access to the right elbow area; correct -- the right shoulder area?
A That is correct.
Q Okay; how did you finish doing the outline?
A If I may refer to that photograph, sir.
Q All right; please do.
A I would have to see the actual carpet. I cannot make it out on this photograph. The outline, as best I can see it in the photograph, stops about here, so we did not get underneath the chair.
Q If you could, just stand over here, Mr. Ivory. (Witness complies.)
Q As I observed you making the outline of the body of this young man, you did on several occasions come in contact with his clothing and his skin; is that right?
A With him -- yes, sir; I did.
Q Now, you are telling us, however, that when you did the outline of Mrs. MacDonald's body that at no time did you actually touch her skin or her pajamas in any fashion; is that right?
A That is correct, sir.
Q You stayed a little further away from the body than perhaps you illustrated here with Steve?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we OBJECT. He has testified to that a number of times.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you stay a little bit further away from the body with the marker than you did here with Steve this morning?
A I would not think so. We stayed as close as we could get to the body without actually touching it.

MR. SEGAL: All right; would you return, Steve? Thank you very much.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Now, did you ever examine either of the two stretchers that Mrs. MacDonald's body was carried on or the two children's bodies were carried on, after the bodies were removed back to Womack Army Hospital?
A No, sir; I did not.
Q Did any CID investigator examine those stretchers after the bodies were removed?
A The bodies were accompanied by an agent. I have no personal knowledge as to whether he personally inspected the stretchers or not, sir.
Q Do you know whether any blood from those bodies got onto the stretchers?
A I don't know, sir.
Q Do you know whether blood was still oozing from or dripping from those bodies while they were on the stretchers?
A I don't recall, sir.
Q And of course you have no way of telling, as you have already pointed out, as to whether any of those bodies of Kristen and Kimberly -- their blood -- came in contact with each other while on the stretcher?
A To my knowledge, they did not, sir.
Q How do you have any knowledge on the subject, sir?
A To my knowledge, they did not.
Q What is your knowledge on the subject?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT. He has answered that question.

THE COURT: I think the import of his answer is that he did not have any knowledge, so to ask him what his knowledge was when he says he doesn't have any, I believe, is just prolonging the thing. I will SUSTAIN that.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q It is fair to say you had no knowledge of the subject?
A Correct.
Q So when the MPs -- to make sure I am perfectly clear on this subject -- you don't know whether any blood was coming from their bodies when the medics picked up the bodies?
A I did not see any blood dripping from the bodies; no, sir.
Q Do you know whether any was dripping?
A I did not see any, sir.
Q So you don't know whether, when they moved the bodies, any of their blood with their blood types got onto the floor?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT. He said he did not see any blood dripping.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: I did not see any blood dripping, sir.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q You don't know whether any dripped?
A I would say it didn't drip, because I did not see any blood dripping, sir.
Q Well, you told us when I asked you about the stretchers that you did not know whether any blood got on the stretchers?
A Sir, I did not see the stretchers after they arrived at the hospital.
Q Were you standing up when they were picking up the bodies in those rooms?
A Yes, sir; I was in an upright position.
Q The medic had his arm under it?
A Correct.
Q Put the body down?
A Correct.
Q You were following him; right?
A That is correct.
Q How close were you to him?
A Right next to him.
Q Right next to him?
A Yes, sir.
Q You were looking at the body; right?
A At him and the bodies; yes.
Q You did not see what was going on underneath the body, did you?
A I was looking to see what he was doing exactly, and I did not observe any blood dripping from the body, sir.
Q Speaking about what you observed exactly -- you observed bloody footprints in this house; is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you observe Mrs. MacDonald's feet?
A Yes; I did.
Q Were they bare?
A Yes, sir.
Q Was there apparent blood on the bottom of her feet -- the soles of her feet?
A Yes; there was.
Q When her body was taken to the hospital, did someone check to see what the blood type was that her feet must have stepped in?
A Unfortunately not.
Q What do you mean, "unfortunately not"?
A The medical personnel at the hospital cleaned the blood off and did not take a sample of it.
Q What happened to the CID investigator who accompanied the bodies to the hospital? What was he doing?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

THE WITNESS: Sir, I wasn't there.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q That was Mr. Connolly who went to the hospital with the body; is that right?
A That is right.
Q Did you ever get a report from him as to how the blood got wiped off without being typed?
A No; I did not.
Q Did you issue any instructions when you saw the blood on the bottom of the soles of her feet and you saw bloody footprints? Did you say, "Connolly, make sure that blood is typed"? Did you do that?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT to his arguing with the witness.

THE COURT: I don't think it is argumentative; but I think he has covered it, that he said he didn't know what Connolly did, and he didn't give him any instructions. Ask him something else.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Anybody else give him any instructions with regard to that?
A I have no personal knowledge with regard to that, sir.
Q Now, did you examine the feet of Dr. MacDonald before he was carried out of the house?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT. Yesterday, on cross-examination, on both direct and cross-examination, he said the only time he saw Dr. MacDonald was on the stretcher in the living room and MacDonald had a sheet up to his neck.

THE COURT: I will OVERRULE the objection.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you see his feet?
A No, I did not.
Q Did you tell Mr. Connolly to check Dr. MacDonald's feet to see whether he had any blood on it?
A No, I did not.
Q You didn't find out whether there was any blood, or what types there were, on his feet?
A No, I did not.
Q Was there any reason why that was not done?
A At the time, the body was being rolled out -- excuse me, the person of Dr. MacDonald was being rolled out -- I had no idea he would become a suspect in this case.
Q But you know there were bloody footprints on the floor?
A Not at that particular time.
Q You had observed them many times before Dr. MacDonald was moved out; is that right?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, Your Honor. This witness has testified that when he saw MacDonald for the first time, he had not yet gone to the back part of the house.

MR. SEGAL: That's up to the witness, Your Honor, to tell us if that is what happened. The Government's counsel is testifying in place of answers to cross-examination.

THE COURT: Well, I will interpose the court's objection to Mr. Blackburn's comment and to yours, and ask the jury not to consider them, and let you proceed with your next question.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Let me put this question to you, Mr. Ivory. When you observed bloody footprints on the floor of the MacDonald house, did you call to Womack Army Hospital and say, "Are there blood spots, or any kind of blood on Dr. MacDonald's foot and if there are, I don't want anything done with them until they can be checked for type."

THE COURT: Objection SUSTAINED. I think the testimony of the witness covers that point already. Go ahead.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Let's go, if we will, please, to the back door of the MacDonald house, the door to the utility room. At what time did someone close that door after the MPs had arrived? And I am asking you for your own personal knowledge, of course?
A Of my own personal knowledge, it would have to have been between the time I arrived at 4:00 o'clock and the time the photos were exposed in there -- about 4:40 or 4:45. Somewhere in that time. I don't recall when the first time that it was that I observed that the door was closed.
Q You don't recall, but it was between that time frame, 4:00 to 4:45?
A Yes, sir.
Q Of course, you had given orders that nothing was to be touched or changed at this crime scene; is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q You knew, apparently, that the only door that was open to this house when the MPs arrived was the back door; is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Were you concerned that the person that closed that door may have destroyed fingerprints on or about that door in so doing it?
A At the time, I did not consider that, sir.
Q Was the back door, in fact, fingerprinted and the doorjamb around the back door fingerprinted late on that day?
A Yes, sir.
Q Were a number of latent prints found on the back door and on the door frame?
A Sir, I can't testify as to where the latent prints were found, and how many. I cannot.
Q I misunderstood your answer. I thought you were present when the door was dusted for fingerprints?
A Sir, I was not physically present when all areas of the house were dusted.
Q I understand that. Let's go back. Did you or did you not stand there when the back door and the door frame were dusted for fingerprints by Mr. Medlin?
A Not to my recollection; no, sir.
Q You don't recall?
A I don't recall.
Q Were you there when he dusted for any prints?
A Yes, sir.
Q But then you have recollection of Mr. Medlin -- of your being present when Medlin did the back door?
A No, sir.
Q When you discovered the back door was shut, you realized that was another change in the crime scene, didn't you?
A No, sir.
Q You did not realize that? Did you reprimand anybody for allowing the door to be shut?

THE COURT: Objection SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you issue any further instructions to the MPs in and about and around this building about not opening or shutting or closing any door?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE WITNESS: No, sir.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q You did not? Now you described yesterday, at some considerable length, the four tours you made through the MacDonald house that morning, before the lab team from Fort Gordon arrived; correct?
A Correct, sir.
Q Did you tell us, at that time, the names, as best you could remember, of all the people in the house?
A As I could recall; yes, sir.
Q In some instances, you did not know names. You said they were either MPs or medics, is that correct?
A That is correct, sir.
Q But did you tell us, now, all the persons either by name, or identify who they were, that you recall seeing that morning between the time you arrived and when the CID team arrived to do the processing of the crime scene?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED. He has been over these on his direct examination and his cross-examination. I think it is just unnecessarily repetitive.

MR. SEGAL: I think the point can be made in one second, Your Honor.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, did you mention at any time yesterday that you recall, that you saw or took through the house Chaplain Mulgeahy (phonetic), the Post-duty chaplain at Fort Bragg, that morning?
A No, sir; I don't think I did.
Q You did not mention it?
A No, sir.
Q Now, having my suggested this to you this morning, does that refresh your mind in any way?
A Yes, it does.
Q And what have you now thought of now that I have mentioned Chaplain Mulgeahy (phonetic) to you?
A I remember -- it was so insignificant -- that is why I did not recall it.
Q One more person walking through the crime scene was insignificant, right?
A He did not walk through the crime scene.
Q I beg your pardon?
A He did not walk through the crime scene.
Q Did he walk on water?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q This goes to the beginning. Let's go to the beginning. When did the chaplain arrive?
A It had to be around 8:00 o'clock, sir.
Q In the morning?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you see him come in?
A No, sir; I did not.
Q When did you first become aware that the chaplain was there?
A He came in the hallway.
Q Pardon me. Where were you when you first observed him?
A I was back in the hallway. Yes, in the hallway by the doorways to the two bedrooms.
Q So, you were almost to where the master bedroom was?
A Yes, sir.
Q And how did you become aware that the chaplain was there?
A I saw him in the hallway, didn't recognize him, and I asked him who he was. He said he was the chaplain and that he heard -- I think he was the Catholic chaplain -- and that he had been notified by a neighbor, I think, who was a chaplain, that a death had occurred in the house and that he wanted to perform some religious last rites on the bodies.
Q When you noticed the chaplain there, was there anybody else standing with him?
A I don't recall, sir.
Q As a matter of fact, you don't recall any MP escorting him to the edge of the hallway where you first saw him?
A I don't recall, sir, because I asked him to leave.
Q You asked him to leave?
A Yes.

THE COURT: Now we are approaching our morning recess hour, and I inquire now of counsel, if we should forego our regular recess in the interest of allowing counsel to finish his interrogation, and allow the witness to catch his airplane.

MR. SEGAL: I fully expect to finish in adequate time before the luncheon recess, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Following our normal procedure?

MR. SEGAL: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: We'll take our morning recess now, members of the jury. We'll come back at 11:30. Remember what I said -- don't talk about the case.

(The proceeding was recessed at 11:10 a.m., to reconvene at 11:30 a.m., this same day.)


F U R T H E R P R O C E E D I N G S 11:30 a.m.

(The following proceedings were held in the presence of the jury and alternates.)

THE COURT: All right. Let's go.

(Whereupon, WILLIAM F. IVORY, the witness on the stand at the time of recess, resumed the stand and testified further as follows:)


C R O S S - E X A M I N A T I O N 11:31 a.m. (resumed)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q All right, Mr. Ivory, right before the break we were talking about the question of the bloody footprints in the MacDonald house. I want to ask you to examine two photographs which have not been previously referred to. They have been marked during the break as D-24 and D-25 for identification.

(Defendant Exhibit Nos. 24 and 25 were marked for identification.)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q While Government Counsel is examining it, I will also show you G-30. All right. Let me show you, first of all, the photograph that has been marked D-24 for identification and ask whether you have ever seen that photograph and, if you have, do you know who took that picture?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT at this time to the showing of any photograph of a footprint to this witness.

MR. SEGAL: I know of no reason why not. The Government had the witness testify about the footprints. I want to show him some photographs --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Do you want to be heard on that?

MR. BLACKBURN: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: All right. Come up.


B E N C H C O N F E R E N C E

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, I don't know in what direction the Defendant is going but we want to bring it up. He is getting ready to go into the specific small-scale photographs of the footprint with the ruler beside it. This witness does not have any personal knowledge of the blood types or he is not a print man to measure footprints or fingerprints, and I just think any testimony by this witness with respect to those areas would be off limits.

THE COURT: Has he testified to seeing some footprints?

MR. BLACKBURN: Yes, sir. He has.

THE COURT: I think he would be a competent witness to say whether or not the photograph illustrated his testimony.

MR. BLACKBURN: Okay.

MR. SEGAL: That is all I intend to go into, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Let's go.

(Bench conference terminated.)


BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, have you had a chance to look at D-24?
A Yes, sir.
Q Can you tell us whether you have ever seen that photograph before and, if you have, do you know who the photographer is?
A I recall having seen this photograph before, and I believe it was photographed by Mr. Page.
Q Mr. Page?
A Mr. Page. Yes, sir.
Q That is the third of the photographers?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Is it possible that Mr. Squires, the second photographer, who also took pictures in color might have made that photograph?
A Not likely, sir.
Q You mean the subject matter indicates to you that probably Mr. Squires would not have been taking pictures of that type?

THE COURT: Do you know anything about this photograph at all, or when it was made, or anything about the photography involved in it?

THE WITNESS: No, sir.

THE COURT: I thought your questions were going to be directed to whether or not he saw a footprint and whether or not this illustrated that.

MR. SEGAL: I just need to establish if he knows which photographer took it.

THE COURT: He said Page to the best of his knowledge. Go ahead.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q All right, but are you certain that that photo is Page's or can it also be Squires'?
A I think it is very unlikely that it was Squires, sir.
Q All right. What area of the MacDonald house is depicted in that photograph?
A The floor, according to the legend. The floor of the bedroom of Kristen MacDonald.
Q Were you supervising or directing the taking of photographs?
A Not this photograph. No, sir.
Q Not that one?
A No, sir.
Q Do you know what is depicted in that photograph which caused Mr. Page or whoever took it to make that particular picture?
A What is in the picture?
Q Yes.
A It is a photograph of a bloody footprint.
Q All right, and, if I may approach you, Mr. Ivory, on this matter -- if you will permit me for a moment.
A Certainly.
Q There is a ruler that appears in this photograph. Do you know whether the ruler was actually placed down on the floor when the photograph was taken or whether that was done in the laboratory when the print was made?
A Sir, I was not present when the photo was exposed. I assume it was placed next to the footprint.
Q All right. Do you see in this matter certain ridge lines or marks here in what I would call directly beneath the seven inch mark on the ruler about one-and-a-quarter inches below that? Do you see those lines?
A Yes, sir. If you hold the photo like that, it almost looks like it is in the configuration of the letter "H."
Q All right. Thank you very much. We will put that down, and I would like to have you examine the second of those two photographs. Have you had a chance to do that, Mr. Ivory?
A Yes, sir.
Q And have you seen that photograph before and do you know who took the picture?
A Yes, sir. I have seen the photograph before and I believe it was taken by Mr. Squires.
Q And what is depicted in that photograph?
A The floor of the kitchen of the MacDonald residence and it shows the telephone receiver hanging down at the end of the cord and a trash can.
Q What is on the floor, if anything?
A And two circled areas and in the circled areas was suspected blood stains.
Q Could you hold that picture up so that members of the jury could see it and point to the circled areas that you are referring to? As a matter of fact, I will hold it for you so that you will be free to point.
A There is one here just by the entrance to the kitchen, and there is another one here on the left side of the photo near the center -- the left center of the photo.
Q And in regard to the first of the circled items on the photo: that circle was actually drawn on the linoleum. Is that right?
A That is correct. sir.
Q Now, actually, you say, an inch to the left and about a quarter inch down there is also some other marks on the floor. Do you see those -- some lines, some ridge lines?
A Sir, I think that is an imperfection in the print.
Q Are you certain that is an imperfection in the print or that is something on the floor that is not circled?
A If there is something on the floor, it would have been circled, sir. I believe it is something on the print.
Q You said you have seen this photograph, D-25, before?
A That is correct, sir.
Q I assume you have noticed those lines which appear here that I am pointing to that are not circled. You have noticed them before. Haven't you?
A I have made no specific note of them. No, sir. I am sure I have seen them by looking at the photograph.
Q Did you ever call it to the attention of Counsel for the Government or the photographer that you thought the picture had something on it that wasn't on the floor?
A No, sir.

MR. BLACKBURN: We would OBJECT.

THE COURT: I'll SUSTAIN it.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Let's go to a different matter if we may, Mr. Ivory. When you took charge of this investigation, you did not know what cause, what motive, what reason persons had to kill the members of the MacDonald family and caused Dr. MacDonald to be stabbed and injured. Is that right?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, Your Honor.

THE COURT: I will SUSTAIN it as to the form of the question.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, when you took charge of this investigation, you did not know what were the circumstances under which the people in the MacDonald family were killed and the circumstances under which Dr. MacDonald received his injuries?
A I'm sorry, sir. Would you repeat that?
Q Did you know the circumstances --
A (Interposing) At what time, please.
Q At which they were killed -- when you came upon the scene at 4:00 in the morning or so.
A Did I know the manner in which they had been killed?
Q Not the manner. The circumstances you know -- why they had been killed.

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: No, sir.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Was there any possible reasons for these injuries or death -- possibly a robbery; that is, a theft of property in the MacDonald house during which people may have been killed or injured?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you or did you not consider in investigating this crime scene whether you might have to look for clues to indicate whether a robbery had taken place?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q What is your answer?
A Could you ask the question again, please?
Q When you examined the physical evidence in the crime scene, when you looked at it, were you considering the possibility that you might have to look for evidence of a robbery?
A Yes, sir.
Q When on that morning or that day did you make an inventory of the contents or the valuables in the MacDonald house?
A I think we were more at that time concerned with collecting the physical evidence because in looking at the house and around the house the items of apparent monetary value which were in plain, open view had not been molested -- vandalized -- the stereo set, the gun which was open to view within the closet, the silver items that were in the china cabinet, the purse and wallet which lay on the desk in the living room, other items of normal household items that would perhaps -- that great store of medical equipment -- the syringes, the medications, everything that was there apparently to us unmolested, not vandalized, not torn apart. The house was not apparently searched for anything. It did not become apparent at that time in my mind that anything had been stolen, sir.
Q That is because you did not see any signs that the house had been ransacked, is that not a simple answer?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Of course -- did it occur to you that perhaps the persons who had done this might have known where to go in the house for valuables and didn't have to ransack the house?
A Perhaps, sir, but that would have been a little inconsistent with what was told to us as the story of Dr. MacDonald as to what occurred.
Q Did Dr. MacDonald tell you whether or not he knew the intruders had taken anything from his house or not?
A I didn't speak to him at all, sir, but he had not mentioned that to other agents, no.
Q How would Dr. MacDonald have been a source to you of whether anything of value, any drug or medicine, any valuable ring had been taken, if he had not yet been back in the house to look for it?
A In my view as I observed the house and the things in the house, it did not appear to have been searched, ransacked, nor items of apparent value stolen or broken.
Q And you just assumed that the open drawer in the master bedroom could not have possibly been done by anybody looking for anything, is that right?
A Sir, the drawer wasn't open. It did occur that perhaps there was something in the drawer that needed scrutiny, which is why it was opened and looked into. But the circumstances as described by the people who interviewed Dr. MacDonald that morning in the hospital, as to these -- description of the people, the manner in which he maintained he was attacked -- it appeared more that it was people that were -- that you would expect to be running through the house in a frenzy, vandalism-type method, breaking things, stealing things, perhaps going after those items in the medical cabinet or the medical storage area he had.
But it did not appear, sir, that from what we were told of what transpired with the initial interviews of Dr. MacDonald, that these were the type of persons who would come in and open a drawer, perhaps steal something and close it again, or avoid taking the weapons that were in open view, the valuable stereo equipment, the television set that could have been wheeled out.
The scene as it appeared to me and other investigators did not appear to have been -- if we can call the house the victim -- the victim of being intruded into by these persons -- these -- a minimum of four persons -- for the purpose of stealing something. If it had been I am sure that they would have taken more than what may have been hidden somewhere in the drawer.
To my mind, sir, in my opinion, at that time and now, that there was no larceny in that house, like persons coming in, attacking him and stealing things like that. I think their target would more readily have been the items of apparent value. That stereo set was a very nice stereo set; the television was nice; the gun was nice.
Other items around the house -- the silverplate -- anything that would have been the obvious target of people coming in that house like that were still in place, not molested, not vandalized, not taken. That's all I can say about that subject, sir.
Q Are you finished?
A I'm quite finished.
Q All right, am I correct in saying that from all those words that your analysis was that people did not come into the house for the purpose of stealing anything, is that what you said?
A That is what I said, sir.
Q Did it ever occur to you in your analytical approach to this crime that maybe they came in for a different purpose, that while they were there snatched, say, a ring off the top of the dresser or desk? Did that ever occur to you, sir?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: Well, I'll have to SUSTAIN the objection. I don't know that this witness has said himself that anybody did come in the house. Your question assumes that they did.

MR. SEGAL: If Your Honor pleases, his prior answer at length explained his thinking about how he theorized the case and why he approached the physical investigation in that way.

THE COURT: If you want to approach it on a theoretical basis, all right, but I sustained the objection to the form of this question which assumed that the witness was going to say that they did come in. Do you want to start over?

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, did you at any time on that first day, February 17, consider the theory that perhaps someone had come into the house, not with the intention of stealing something but might have taken something while they were there, just spontaneously?
A I am sure it could have occurred to me, which is -- would have occurred to me at the same time that I was making these observations, that nothing of apparent value was stolen -- of obvious value was stolen.
Q Did you, or any other investigator, go to Dr. MacDonald anytime between February 17, 1970 to April 6, 1970, and ask him to come back to the house with you to inventory small valuables such as rings, any cash, or for him to look at the medicine in the closet in the hall?
A No, sir.
Q That was because you had a preconceived notion about how or why this crime took place, isn't that true?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Now, one of the things that you did, Mr. Ivory, was to collect fibers in the house from what you believed to be the blue pajama top, is that correct?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Would you tell us how many fibers you found which you believe might have come from the blue pajama top? How many did you collect in the master bedroom?
A To give you an accurate account I would probably have to refer to some spread sheet or document that may have been prepared, but I can give you perhaps some round figures of --
Q (Interposing) I would prefer an accurate count, Mr. Ivory. You may refer to whatever you need.
A I'd have to confer with Government counsel to find out where I could find such document or spreadsheet, or whatever, sir.

MR. SEGAL: I have no objection to that, Your Honor. May we do that right now?

THE COURT: Well, how long will it take?

MR. SEGAL: All right, I have a simpler method, Mr. Blackburn.

MR. BLACKBURN: Excuse me. May we approach the bench?

THE COURT: No, let's see what the simpler method is.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, your recollection about these matters was fairly fresh, was it not, when you testified in July of 1970 at the Article 32 proceedings?
A Yes, sir, nine years ago it certainly was.
Q And would it refresh your recollection as to the number of fibers in the house if I were to read to you from a portion of your testimony in which you give us account?
A Please do, sir.
Q Do you think it would refresh your recollection?
A Perhaps.
Q Referring to page 662 of the Article 32 proceedings transcript, and I want to read to you from -- a question was put to you by Captain Somers, military prosecutor, and then read you the answer and ask whether either you recall the question and answer or whether you accept the stenographer's version, all right?
A Yes, sir.
Q "Question: What does -- " -- and the subject matter is fibers -- "What does 'numerous' mean to you? Would you say, more than ten? Answer: Oh, yes." Do you remember that, or do you accept the transcript?
A I accept the transcript, sir.
Q "Question: More than 20? Answer: Yes."
A I accept it, sir.
Q Question by Colonel Rock, the Article 32 officer: "Just tell us approximately what number? Answer: I would say approximately 20, 25." Do you accept the answer?
A Yes, sir.
Q "Question: Do you realize it is an approximation?" Going on by Captain Somers, "You said, as I understand it -- how many did you say were found in the hall? Answer: One, sir." Now, with that in mind, would you accept the transcript that as far as the bed was concerned that you found apparently not less than 20 nor more than 25 fibers?
A No, sir.
Q You would not accept the transcript?
A I believe it said that it was an approximation, and at the time, I was speaking in approximate terms.
Q Well, since you were very much engaged in the collection of the scientific and physical evidence in this case, did you not keep account -- an actual accurate account of the number of fibers found in the master bedroom that you believe came from the blue pajama top?
A Yes, sir, along with the evidence collection and with the people at the lab making account of them; yes, sir. I can give you an approximate figure.
Q Oh, no, you gave us the approximate figure when your memory was pretty good in 1970. You would not want to suggest that your memory is better on that subject today; do you?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, Your Honor.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Is your memory different today on the subject than it was in 1970 when you testified?
A Perhaps, sir.
Q Now, you say in your testimony that you also found fibers in some other place besides the master bedroom -- blue fibers that you believe came from the blue pajama top?
A They were found in other rooms, yes, sir.
Q How about in or around the living room or near the living room?
A No, sir.
Q Does that include the steps to the hallway? Did you find any fibers there?
A No, sir.
Q Did you tell us yesterday that you and Mr. Medlin searched for fibers there?
A Yes, sir; quite closely.
Q Beg your pardon?
A Quite closely; yes, sir.
Q I believe you told us that you and he were down on the floor together looking for fibers; is that right?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Were you down on your hands and knees parting the fibers in the carpet to do so?
A I believe I stated that; yes, sir.
Q Mr. Medlin used a magnifying glass; correct?
A I believe I said that; yes, sir.
Q What about you?
A I did not.
Q Where was your magnifying glass?
A I did not have a magnifying glass with me down on that floor.
Q Did you have one out in the car?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT.

THE COURT: Well, he said yesterday that he carried his kit with him -- one of the pieces of paraphernalia being a magnifying glass, so apparently, it was somewhere. You have established that he didn't have it with him down there on the floor. I will SUSTAIN the OBJECTION.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Was there some reason why you did not use a magnifying glass when you were looking at the living room floor?
A I felt no need to at the time, sir, as I recall.
Q You believed that you could adequately find fibers by just looking with your naked eye?
A It was very easy to find them in that deep pile carpet in the master bedroom. I saw no reason why it shouldn't be just as easy to find them in a very short-pile carpet.
Q Well, what you found in the master bedroom were fibers that were lying on the surface of the shag rug; is that correct?
A That is correct.
Q Now, Mr. Ivory, there are scientific methods for collecting evidence such as fibers and hairs that you are aware of; aren't there?
A I am afraid I don't know what you mean, sir.
Q In the courses you have taken and the manuals that you have read, have you never become aware that there is equipment specially designed and not terribly expensive for the collection of fibers and and things that are in rugs and on floors? Are you aware of such material?
A I don't know specifically what you are speaking of, sir.
Q Do you have anything at all in your mind that you know of that can be used and designed for scientific crime investigation?
A Scientific crime investigation? Sir, I wish you would be more specific and say, "Do you know of this particular item?" I could perhaps answer you better in that manner.
Q Did you ever hear of a thing called a trap vacuum cleaner?
A Trap vacuum cleaner?
Q Yes.
A Not in those terms. Of course, I have heard of a vacuum cleaner.
Q All right, let me describe a trap vacuum cleaner. It is a device which is just like a vacuum cleaner only it has a filter in it. It does not take the particles sucked up on the floor into the cannister for debris. It is caught in a white filter paper for a scientific investigator to recover them. Have you ever heard of that device by any name?
A Yes, sir, by the name of vacuum cleaner with a clean bag in it.
Q All right. What about just using a good old clean bag vacuum cleaner to recover hairs and fibers on the floor there?
A Because of the close examination we gave to that carpet, we did not feel it was necessary to do that.
Q I see. Scientific investigators who use trap vacuum cleaners are wasting their time, in your judgment?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Do you think that is a useful tool that would have helped you in recovering hairs and fibers from the MacDonald house?
A No, sir.
Q It wouldn't have helped you. Do you believe that you got all the fibers up that were related to this case -- all the blue fibers?
A Sir, I thought we were referring to that area in the living room.
Q Yes, sir. Did you get all the blue fibers that were there?
A Yes, sir.
Q You say that you got none?
A Exactly, sir.
Q Did you get all the blue fibers off the rug in the master bedroom back in 1970?
A No, sir. I am sure if you go there right now, you could probably find more.
Q Today, nine years later, we could still go back and pick up physical evidence in this case is your statement; right?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Blue fibers that you think came from the pajama top on Mrs. MacDonald's body?
A Correct, sir.
Q Will you tell us why they were not collected by you or the team of investigators from Fort Gordon in 1970, and processed for evidence in this case?
A We felt that we collected enough of the sample to represent those fibers that were spread throughout the entire room; and again, us going down in that deep-pile carpet at subsequent times, you could see more fibers still there. I am sure if you were to go right now to the house, you would probably find somewhere in that deep-pile carpet additional threads as were found within the body outline and around the body.
Q Are we talking about the same carpet that we have had marked for the Government as 1124? Is this the carpet you are talking about?
A Yes, sir.
Q That somehow deeper and deeper into the pile of this carpet if we just keep on digging, there is likely there are blue fibers sitting back there right this minute in the master bedroom of the MacDonald house?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT. He has answered that question.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Those fibers you say are still at 544 Castle Drive to this day in the master bedroom, they are not all in the body outline that you found of Mrs. MacDonald; are they?
A No, sir; they are not.
Q They are all over that room; right?
A That is correct.
Q That does not fit with your theory of the case, does it, however, to collect those?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: I will SUSTAIN that one.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q I thought I understood you to say that you exercised great care to tell everyone not to step on things like the blood spots on the floor and fibers on the floor; is that right?
A That is correct.
Q But then when you gathered up the fibers that you say were in or near the body outline, you stopped collecting; is that right?
A That is correct.
Q So, people that had been walking through that as part of the Government's investigation since 1970, stepping into whatever fibers are there; is that right also?
A That is correct.
Q Is that your idea of how to process this crime consistent with the training and the manuals you have read and the books you know about in this field; is that what your training told you?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OBJECTION SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Would you tell us why you did not collect the balance of those fibers lying in that room?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION. He has answered that question.

THE COURT: I will SUSTAIN it.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Now, Mr. Ivory, you were shown when you first testified on Friday a great many pieces of physical evidence by the Government. Do you recall that?
A Yes, sir.
Q And piece after piece, you told us, was today nine years after you first collected in the same condition as when you originally collected it except for what some laboratory people did; is that right?
A Laboratory people, markings that were placed on it, the cuttings that were made: it appeared in the general condition as when I first saw it except, of course, when I first saw it, the fabric was wet -- not dry. The color is different, perhaps, in a shade of the blood being dried a darker brown than it was at the time, but in general appearance, yes, sir, those items appear to me as I first observed them.
Q You mean the color is different on some of these items?
A Where the blood has dried; yes, sir.
Q It is all marked up by laboratory technicians, you say?
A That is correct. I should say not all areas of the item are discolored.
Q Let's take a look at one of those. May we have the blue pajama top, please, if you know the number?

MR. MURTAGH: Government 101.

MR. SEGAL: I would not want to rummage around in the Government's evidence.

MR. BLACKBURN: I think it is right there; I believe that is it.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, did you pick up this pajama top off of Mrs. MacDonald's body and actually hold it up for examination?
A No, sir.
Q Do you know which of the holes in this garment today were made by the laboratory technicians and which may have come from some other source?
A Sir, that is probably better asked of the laboratory technicians.
Q No, no, I am asking you how you purport to testify last Friday that this garment is in the same condition as you saw it except for the markings of the lab people, and where they cut some items and circled some items. How do you know that it is otherwise in the same condition?
A It was not opened and held up in that room. It was held up and inspected in other areas, not in the house, but in the evidence room at Fort Bragg. There were no square cuts in it at that time.
Q Do you have reason to believe that the various circled items on this garment -- the items circled -- were made by laboratory technicians?
A Yes, sir.
Q What about other holes or marks that are not circled on this garment. Do you know how they got there?
A I assume they are the laboratory cuts or the square cuts, if that is what you are referring to, sir.
Q I don't know what we were referring to; I just asked whether or not there are holes here that do not have numbers on them and are not circled, and I asked you whether you know, of your own personal knowledge, how they got there.
A Sir, I think that is better asked of the laboratory personnel than myself.
Q I only want to know, then, how you could sit there last Friday and tell us that this garment is in the same condition, if you cannot account for some of the holes that are not marked by technicians' marks.

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT.

THE WITNESS: Would you show me one of the holes, please?

MR. SEGAL: I will.

(Counsel confer.)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Now there is down in what I would describe, as the right side, about mid-section, down about two inches from the bottom, I'm sorry -- I've got the wrong hole here. Let me just put this down and spread it out for a minute.
You have made reference to certain square holes, here is one of them. I've got my thumb on it -- can you take a look at this please, Mr. Ivory? Was this present in the garment, that square hole, when you picked it up on February 17th, 1970?
A Sir, would you point to which one you were talking about?
Q I'm sorry, Mr. Ivory. Let me show you again. This square hole. The question was: was that present when you picked up the garment on February 17, 1970?
A In my mind; no, sir.
Q Could you tell us again how you actually picked that garment up from the body of Mrs. MacDonald?
A Let's make a general approximation of this being the gathered-up material.
Q All right, an approximation of that?
A That was on the body, and this be the part that was off to the side.
Q Yes?
A I lifted this in that manner, and with the tweezers, in a manner like this, and into a plastic bag, which Mr. Shaw slid underneath. I put it in there.
Q Now you say you used tweezers to do that?
A Yes, sir.
Q How many tweezers did you use, sir?
A Two, sir.
Q Let me offer you a pair of tweezers and see whether you could show us.
A Those are real tweezers. I am talking about the long ones.
Q Tongs?
A Forceps, they call them.
Q Forceps?
A The longer --
Q (Interposing) I see, would you do it just one more time for us? Using your fingers, if you will, as you would use the tongs or forceps?
A I thought I just did.
Q A little more slowly, please, arrange the garment? (Witness complies.)
Q You picked up the extended arm and you fold it over the pajama top; is that right?
A That is correct.
Q Now are you using your forceps again?
A Yes, sir.
Q To do that, you have gathered together some of the material; is that right? Between your fingers, which are the forceps; is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q How many folds have you gathered together?
A I have no idea, sir.
Q You were just trying to lift it, right?
A That is correct.
Q You weren't concerned with how many folds you had within the tongs; is that right?
A That is correct, sir.
Q How long are those tongs, or forceps, whatever they are?
A Four or five inches long. Longer than my fingers; perhaps this long.
Q It looks more like six or eight inches, would you say?
A I would say five to six inches perhaps; I don't know. Give me a ruler and I can give you an approximation. They were the standard -- I call them tweezers, perhaps they're called forceps.
Q Now if you will hold the ruler as if it were a pair of tongs and tell us how you grabbed hold of the pajama top?
A If I can give you the approximation of the length, I would say approximately six inches, six or six and a half inches. I am sure he could tell you how long they are -- they are medical equipment.
Q Go ahead and do that.
A I can't do it with that.
Q I imagine your fingers are somewhat longer. You pick it up, and I will hold this bag for you, and ask you to show us how you dropped it into the bag. Was the bag as large as the one I am holding here? Or smaller?
A It is about the same size.
Q All right, if the members of the jury will excuse me. Show us what you did. Was this how close Mr. Shaw was?
A No, Mr. Shaw slid under me as I lifted it up. Slide the bag under me.
Q I don't imagine there was any desk there?
A There was a body there.
Q Let's do it here, if we may, Your Honor. Shall we do it here? I think it will be helpful, Mr. Ivory. Now we are to imagine the body is where, please?
A Let's imagine the body is here.
Q The same as Steve was lying on the floor?
A No, this would be the head area up here.
Q Why don't we do it as we just saw the young man?
A I don't know.
Q Mr. Shaw was on the same side as you?
A Yes, sir.
Q We have Steve in approximately the right position? All right, and the arm was extended here; is that right?
A Yes.
Q You had folded that over?
A Yes.
Q Mr. Shaw got down on the floor?
A Yes; gathered it like this, yes, on the body.
Q Why don't you take it and show me what he did with it?
A He did it like that.
Q And then what?
A And then put it to the side.
Q Did he close it?
A Yes.
Q Show me what he did. (Witness complies.)
Q Closed it like that? And where did he put it?
A Off to the side. I don't recall specifically where he put it.
Q Near other evidence?
A It was collected in a like manner.
Q You put it down like that?
A Sir, I did not see him put it down; I don't know where he put it down. I would assume he put it down like that.
Q At that time, you had no idea that what you were doing in terms of the folds of the pajamas together and whatever blood touched each other, had any importance in this case; did you?
A No, sir.

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, Your Honor.

MR. SEGAL: Asked and answered.

THE COURT: He answered it, did he not?

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q I wanted to clear up something else from yesterday. I asked you when we had the lights out whether or not you had been checking for fibers in the living room around 8:00 a.m. in the morning. My recollection was you said when we had the lights out that I was wrong in that regard?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Do you recall that question and answer, and do you recall telling me I was wrong and you believed you were looking for fibers at 8:00 a.m.?
A At that area of the living room; that is correct, sir.
Q Did you collect fibers at any place at 8:00 a.m.?
A No, sir. I don't believe so.
Q When do you think that you collected the fibers; that is, what hour you collected the fibers in the living room -- not the living room; I beg your pardon -- in the master bedroom?
A Shortly after 8:00 a.m. Excuse me.
Q Shortly after 8:00 a.m.?
A They were first observed there shortly after 8:00 a.m.
Q When did you start the collection of the fibers?
A I don't recall if we collected them immediately thereafter or if we waited until the lab team -- I don't recall at this moment, sir.
Q Well, did you start looking for fibers about 8:00 a.m. in the morning?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you find them at 8:00 a.m. in the morning?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you collect them at 8:00 a.m. in the morning?
A I don't recall, sir, if we collected them then or if we opted to wait for the laboratory team. I don't recall at this time.
Q Well, Mr. Ivory, how about the blood in the living room? When did you look for blood spots in the living room? What time was that?
A It was a constant search from the time the room was first looked at until the laboratory team left and beyond.
Q I can't hear you, Mr. Ivory.
A Until the time the laboratory team departed for Georgia and beyond.
Q How could you be looking for blood spots after the team had already walked through the house so often? There was a time when you went through the house, collected the blood and said, "Okay, let's do the next part of the processing," wasn't there? Wasn't there a time when you arrived at the decision you had finished the blood collection and now you were ready to do something else in the house?
A No, sir. It was a constant effort all the time.
Q I see.
A Of fingerprinting, collecting blood evidence, Mr. Page with his photographic equipment.
Q Was there any other blood found in the living room besides the blood on Dr. MacDonald's glasses that we saw yesterday when the photograph was projected on the screen?
A Yes, sir; there was.
Q Yesterday when I suggested that to you, you told me I was wrong; didn't you?
A No, sir. I have had time now to stop and think about it, because I know the way you ask questions that you have got something behind your question.
Q I hope there is, Mr. Ivory. I hope there is really a point to some of this.
A Me too.
Q What did you recall since I asked you this question yesterday?
A That again where the coffee table was upturned, that Esquire magazine that I looked at earlier -- perhaps I should have brought it up at that time when I was looking at the magazine. But it did not occur to me to at that time. The magazine -- of course, you cannot see it from the photograph because the magazine was covered all but the letters "E-s." But over the letters "q-u" there was in probably a configuration of a finger -- the size of a finger -- a bloody smear on the upper edges of the pages.
Q All right, sir. That is the second place that there was blood in the MacDonald living room; is that right? On the glasses and on the magazine?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, was there a third place that there was blood found in the MacDonald living room?
A No, sir; not that I recall.
Q Mr. Ivory, wasn't there some blood found on the steps here? You can come down if you like, Mr. Ivory.
A As I recall, sir, the closest blood stains on the floor to the living room were on the upper stair or not the stair, but in the hallway itself.
Q You were putting your finger, I guess, somewhere inside the doorjamb, if there had been a door -- that opening in the wall where there would have been a door? You were putting your finger there; is that right?
A Yes.
Q But you didn't consider that to be a blood spot in the living room but actually in the hallway?
A The hallway; yes, sir.
Q All right. Then there are at least three blood spots that you know of that are certainly -- two in the living room and one close by here on the jamb -- on the top step leading into this hallway; is that right?
A It is in the hallway, not leading into the hallway.
Q How far back -- now, you were investigating -- how far back from the rise of the step into the hallway?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT. He has already testified where he saw it.

MR. SEGAL: Not in measurements.

THE COURT: Let him tell us one more time.

THE WITNESS: Can I see a photograph of the upper landing?

MR. SEGAL: Which photograph would you like?

THE WITNESS: The change in the pattern of the wood.

MR. SEGAL: The Squires photographs or Page?

THE WITNESS: It makes absolutely no difference.

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, may I suggest while Mr. Segal is showing the photographs to the witness that Mr. Segal and I approach the Bench?

THE COURT: All right.


B E N C H C O N F E R E N C E

MR. BLACKBURN: I just wanted to inquire a little bit about the time because we are going to have a little redirect but not much.

MR. SEGAL: There will be time for that.

THE COURT: Well, I am going to keep him here until it is over.

MR. SEGAL: Judge, no problem with time.

MR. BLACKBURN: I just wanted to say that if we could --

THE COURT: (Interposing) So that you can examine my communication with this witness as to its relevancy to this case and the tennis shoes that I want him to look for in Germany. I want Counsel to see the entire thing.

MR. BLACKBURN: I might also say -- this is off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

MR. SEGAL: I will say, Your Honor, I expect we will finish within fifteen or twenty minutes. There should be at least twenty minutes for the Government. I will stop at quarter of 1:00 at least.

THE COURT: All right. We are going to finish with this witness before we go to lunch.

MR. BLACKBURN: Okay.

(Bench conference terminated.)


THE COURT: Any further questions of this witness?

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, have you had a chance to look at the photographs?
A Sir, I did not find the photograph that I was looking for in those. But as I recall, the stairs or the step going up to the landing to the hallway -- I believe there was a strip of wood at the end of the hallway running in this direction from wall to wall, and then immediately the boards running up the hallway, as I recall.
Q All right. And in reference to those boards -- that is the one that runs parallel to the living room wall -- with reference to that board, how far or where was that spot located?
A I would say just beyond that strip of wood that runs parallel with the wall there.
Q All right. Thank you. Now, the bedroom contained this pile of bedclothes that you have described for us that is marked by the white little plastic shield in the model there. Do you recall that -- the pile of bedclothes in the bedroom?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you know which of the Government Exhibits contain all the clothes that were in that pile?
A No, sir.

(Counsel confer.)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q With the assistance of Mr. Murtagh, he has produced for us the bedspread and sheet. Now, the only thing that is not going to be in here is the plastic vial with the piece of latex.
A I understand.
Q It is easier to work that way. Otherwise, this represents the items that you believe were in that pile on the floor of the master bedroom?
A Yes, sir.

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Would you please come down here, Mr. Ivory? We're almost really finished with the questioning in this matter. And if you will try to arrange these bedclothes as you recall them, it will be helpful, and you may make reference to any photographs, if necessary. Mr. Ivory, I think that there is a photo here that may be helpful to you.
A I have one here -- Government Exhibit 211. I'm sure I can't arrange it the same --
Q (Interposing) I'm sorry.
A I can't arrange the sheets so that the stains are the same.
Q Just show us approximately how the sheet and the bedspread were arranged. Now you are using Government photo 211 to assist you in that regard.
A (Witness complies.) I would have to say that is approximately.
Q All right. I am holding you to an approximation really. I think that is representational enough for the purpose. If you would stay there, Mr. Ivory. You then determined after you had seen this in the house for a while that it ought to be collected for the purpose of laboratory examination. Will you please now show us using your fingers as the tongs you used how you collected these pieces of evidence? And I will hold the bag as Mr. Shaw must have done then.

MR. SEGAL: Excuse me. May I just move this model back?

MR. BLACKBURN: Mr. Segal, I might be able to clarify something.

(Counsel confer.)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, the plastic bag that I am using -- do you have one? Counsel for the Government suggests that I use what has been marked for identification previously as 355.

MR. MURTAGH: That is the exhibit that is in it.

MR. SEGAL: All right.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Does this look like -- I'm sorry. We have put you in an awkward position, Mr. Ivory. Does this position look like the type and size bag Mr. Shaw used to help you recover these items?
A Yes, sir.
Q In fact, it may even be the very bag or do you know?
A I have no idea.
Q Did Mr. Shaw hold the bag open in some fashion like I am?
A Yes.
Q Now, show us which item you recovered first and, if you would, illustrate with your fingers again how you did it and I will try and assist subject to your direction.
A Tweezers were not used on these items.
Q All right. What did you use?
A My hands.
Q All right.
A If you would get down.
Q You want me as Mr. Shaw to get down on the floor as I am now?
A If you could position right about there.
Q All right. (Witness complies.)
Q Now let me describe. You have compressed between your hands the sheet and the bedspread. Is that right?
A Well, sir, they were together.
Q When you say "together," I am not sure I understand what that means.
A Well, there were overlapping parts of one being over the other perhaps like this. They were not two separate and distinct piles. They were together.
Q Right. You compressed your hands and gathered them up. Is that right?
A That is correct.
Q Now, you go ahead and do that. We will try to describe it.
A (Witness complies.) I know I took pains to avoid the blood stains, picked them up in clean areas.
Q You lifted it up slightly off the floor and did Mr. Shaw then slide the bag underneath?
A Slid the bag underneath.
Q All right.
A All right. Slide it underneath.
Q All right. Will you take the bag and show us what Mr. Shaw did?
A Something approximately like this.
Q All right. Put it up here on the table. And that was how it was collected and put aside?
A That is right.
Q Thank you very much. Now, in addition to fibers being found in the house, Mr. Ivory, there were also some human hairs found in places that were considered to be potentially of evidential value. Is that right?
A Would you go over that again, please, sir?
Q Yes. In addition to fibers, there were human hairs found in the house at places where you thought they might have some evidential value?
A Yes, sir.
Q And you realized that you wanted to be able to make a comparison between these hairs that were found in the house and, say, hairs of the members of the MacDonald family. Did you realize that you wanted to do that?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you have any CID agent or did you yourself have samples cut from the hair of Colette, Kristen, or Kimberly MacDonald for the purpose of making hair comparisons?
A Sir, I did not personally have it done nor did I personally request it. That is usually a part of the normal procedure in an autopsy of a violent death -- to obtain fingernail scrapings and samples of hair.
Q First of all, I'm talking about hair samples so that you knew whose hair it came from so you can compare it with unidentified hairs in the house.
A Yes, sir. That is what I am talking about.
Q Did you ask anyone or direct anyone to make sure they were at the autopsy or at the hospital and get samples of hair from the bodies of Colette, Kristen, and Kimberly MacDonald?
A I did not feel it was necessary to ask that as it was considered normal procedure.
Q Was it done, in fact, at the autopsy of these people?
A I believe so, sir.
Q In 1970 you had some reason to believe that someone took hair samples from the bodies of Colette, Kimberly, and Kristen MacDonald?
A My memory is foggy in that area.
Q May I suggest it was not until the bodies were exhumed by the Government in 1974 that anybody had a sample from the bodies of those people?
A Again, my recollection is foggy in that area. I know we got fingernail scrapings. I am positive of that. I thought we had some hair samples.
Q You just assumed that somebody at the autopsy would get a sample from the head of, say, Mrs. MacDonald and they could then put it in some container and say we know where this came from. You assumed they were going to do that?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we OBJECT. He has already answered that question.

MR. SEGAL: Not whether he made that assumption, Your Honor.

THE COURT: OVERRULED.

THE WITNESS: Ask the question again, please, sir.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q You assumed someone was going to do that -- that is, take samples from the bodies of those persons at the autopsy?
A Yes, sir.
Q But it was not in fact done at the autopsy?
A I am relying on your word on that, sir.
Q All right. What about Dr. MacDonald? You ordered samples of his hair to compare to these unidentified hairs found in the house. Didn't you?
A That is correct, sir.
Q When was that sample taken from Dr. MacDonald?
A I don't remember the date, sir.
Q Would it have been in the middle of the Article 32 proceedings in July of 1970?
A It was around that time because I remember you were there.
Q Were you present when the hair samples were taken from Dr. MacDonald?
A No, sir. I was not.
Q So it was not until at least two months after the military proceedings had started that any arrangements were made to try and get hair samples from Dr. MacDonald?
A That is correct, sir, but you have to take into consideration the scope of the examinations that were being done by the forensic people in our crime laboratory. Everything could not have been done within a matter of days or weeks. All the examinations that were scheduled in this case, you can be sure, that they were calling from time to time saying we may need this; we may need that. That could have been the occurrences during that time.
Q Oh, Mr. Ivory, you know that the CID Consolidated Laboratory Report which represents the findings of the laboratory for all the physical evidence was done on March 29th -- March of 1970?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you see the Consolidated Lab Report from the CID Laboratory?
A Sir, that is the Consolidated Report of the reports to that date.
Q They were just too busy to get around to doing it before; is that what you are telling us?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, under what circumstances were the hair samples obtained from Dr. MacDonald in 1970?
A Please go over that again, please.
Q Under what circumstances were the hair samples obtained from Dr. MacDonald in 1970?
A Subsequent to a search warrant issued by some official at Fort Bragg.
Q Yes, what happened?
A There was resistance to the taking of the samples.
Q By whom? Dr. MacDonald?
A As I recall.
Q Do you recall?
A As I recall.
Q Let me refresh your recollection and ask you the following question. Were you present when a military police officer stopped an automobile --

MR. BLACKBURN: (Interposing) OBJECTION.

MR. SEGAL: I am asking if he was present at a scene.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q In which Dr. MacDonald was riding with myself, Attorney Dennis Eisman, and his military escort officer; were you present?
A No, sir. I simply heard of the report of the incident at the car and the assault upon the CID agent by Dr. MacDonald, but I was not there --
Q (Interposing) Stop right there, Mr. Ivory. I ask you once more --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Wait a minute.

MR. SEGAL: Your Honor --

THE COURT: (Interposing) Were you through with your answer?

THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: All right. Now, you may ask him.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Are you telling us that you have evidence that Dr. MacDonald assaulted a CID agent when the hair samples were taken from his body?
A It was reported to me, sir, that he gave -- as he was going into the car, gave a back kick and kicked the agent in the leg. I think he subsequently received medical examination of that injury.
Q Did you find out what happened to me --

MR. BLACKBURN: (Interposing) OBJECTION.

MR. MURTAGH: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you find out that Dr. MacDonald's new attorney, Mr. Eisman --

THE COURT: (Interposing) SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q -- and Segal were taken to the hospital that day?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: SUSTAINED.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Who is the agent that you say was assaulted by Dr. MacDonald?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION.

THE COURT: I will SUSTAIN the OBJECTION to that, too. I ruled that this line of questioning at this time is irrelevant to this case. Proceed to something else.

MR. SEGAL: May I suggest, Your Honor, that we strike from the record the gratuitous suggestion by Mr. Ivory of a fact that does not exist?

THE COURT: I would be amenable to this suggestion were it not for the fact that it was elicited by you.

MR. SEGAL: I would appreciate it, Your Honor, if I am the one who elicited it, to be able to follow up to establish what I think is an error in Mr. Ivory's testimony.

THE COURT: Well, no. I will accede to counsel's request and instruct the jury not to consider matters of any altercations or whatever incident to the taking of a hair sample from Dr. MacDonald.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Regardless of how the hair samples were gotten from Dr. MacDonald, they were compared, were they not, by the CID Laboratory to the hair samples that you thought or that you took from the bodies of the members of the MacDonald family; weren't they?
A Yes, sir; that is correct.
Q They turned out to be not the same as Dr. MacDonald's hair; isn't that also correct?
A I don't recall the exact wording of the report, sir, but I believe that is generally correct.
Q Now, I asked you yesterday about the wax that was found in the MacDonald family house and you said that you would try and look up reports to see whether or not to this very day some of the wax that was found in the living room has not been identified as having come from the MacDonald house. Did you do that?
A Yes, sir.
Q All right. What did you look at in that regard?
A I looked at the military police property receipt of the items we sent along with questioned areas such as there was the old-looking wax that was on the coffee table and also some wax that looked like it had been for a considerable period on the arm of a chair in Kimberly's bedroom of which I have a photograph here as compared visually to some candle wax that was found from within the house.
Q Excuse me, Mr. Ivory. In that regard, are you referring to items that are identified as G-131 and G-201 in the lab reports?
A As I recall from reviewing the lab report last night --
Q (Interposing) It ought to make it easier if I could give you the report. Will that help you to make that review?
A The numbering sounds correct, sir.
Q Let me, to make sure that we don't have any difficulty in that regard, show you first and have it marked.

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, if at this point, Mr. Segal purports to show this witness a portion of the laboratory report, we would also ask that the entire report be furnished to this witness as well.

THE COURT: Is there any OBJECTION to his showing the report?

MR. BLACKBURN: No, sir.

THE COURT: Of course, he would be entitled to see it all.

MR. SEGAL: Certainly, Your Honor.

THE COURT: But if this witness did not see the report himself or did not prepare the report, I mean, then it would seem to me that the report speaks for itself; and presumably, these are matters, if the report was prepared by somebody else, that can be the subject of testimony by somebody else without keeping this witness here until he misses his plane.

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, on that basis, if this witness -- I don't want to testify, of course -- but if this witness did not prepare these reports, we would suggest that we would OBJECT on that basis.

THE COURT: I will not rule blanket. I will let counsel ask his question, and then if there is an OBJECTION, I will rule. If there is not, we will go on just like we have been doing.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Mr. Ivory, will it help you to take a look at copies of two documents I have here that I would like to have marked?

(Defendant Exhibits 26 and 27 were marked for identification.)

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q I show you two documents over the stationery of the Criminal Investigation Laboratory at Fort Gordon, Georgia, and ask whether or not these are perhaps documents that you had occasion to review before coming back to the stand this morning?
A I could see -- what I could recall, it was in here. This appears to be the report of it. I am having difficulty with all these entries finding that particular comment.
Q Perhaps I can assist you, Mr. Ivory.
A Beg your pardon?
Q Perhaps I can assist you.
A Please. I found the list of exhibits in here. I think it is G-1 through G-10. I don't recall having looked at this particular item, sir. I think this is the one I looked at. This is that, sir, as I recall looking at the list of exhibits that were submitted, which in this laboratory report, they are listed G-1 through 8, and G-9, and G-10, to be compared with the questioned wax which was found on the chair in Kimberly's bedroom, Exhibit G-131, and again, that wax, the sample of which was taken from the coffee table in the living room, Exhibit G-201.
Q Did you ever find out whether the suspicious wax, G-131 and G-201 -- did you ever find out what the lab said as to whether they came or seemed to have an origin within the MacDonald house?

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, we would OBJECT on the basis, I don't know this witness has proved his prior entry.

MR. SEGAL: All right, Your Honor, we will have to finish this when the Government provides the laboratory technician. I am not going to waste your time any further with this at this time.

MR. SEGAL: May I have the document, please?

THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q You believed that fingerprints were important to this investigation back in February 17, 1970, Mr. Ivory?
A Yes, sir, I did.
Q Did you cause to have taken a set of fingerprints of Colette, Kristen, and Kimberly MacDonald on or about that date?
A No, sir, I did not.
Q Why did you not have a set of what we call record prints taken of those persons taken on that date?
A They were taken by someone else, sir, or they were to be taken by someone else.
Q They were to be taken by someone else?
A Yes, sir.
Q Another CID agent?
A That is correct, sir.
Q Would that be Mr. Connolly that was supposed to do that?
A No, sir, not -- no, not specifically, no.
Q Well, who specifically was supposed to get fingerprints of Colette, Kimberly, and Kristen MacDonald so they could be compared to fingerprints that may have been found in the house?
A That was another one of the investigative aspects of the investigation which was to be controlled by the operation center at the CID office.
Q Under the direction of Franz Joseph Grebner, right?
A That's correct, sir.
Q And was that done in February of 1970?
A Yes, sir.
Q The prints were taken from all three of those persons?
A As best I recall, yes, sir.
Q Do you know or do you not know whether it was done in February of 1970, prior to burial of the family?
A I believe they were taken in the mortuary, sir.
Q But that's not of your own personal knowledge?
A No, sir, it just has been related to me.
Q Did you ever cause to have the white flower pot that was lying in the living room of the MacDonald house examined for fingerprints?
A Yes, sir, I believe it was.
Q Did you reclaim it, pick it up and put it in evidence bag to do that?
A No, sir, the fingerprint technician was at the scene, as I previously testified. That is his area of expertise.
Q That is not anything you did of your own personal knowledge?
A No, sir.
Q There is one last thing that I think was supposed to be within your realm: did you ever make a list of all the persons who were in the MacDonald house prior to your arrival on February 17, 1970?

MR. BLACKBURN: OBJECTION, Your Honor, that has been covered in this cross-examination.

THE COURT: Well, let's let him say it one more time in the interest of time.

THE WITNESS: No, sir, I did not personally compile a list of all those persons that were in the house at my arrival or prior to my arrival.

BY MR. SEGAL:
Q Did you make a list of all those persons who came into the house between the time you arrived to the removal of the bodies?
A No, sir, I did not.
Q Did you make a list of all the persons who were in the house after the bodies were arrived (sic) and prior to its being sealed by the CID?
A No, sir, I did not.
Q Do you have personal knowledge of who has ever made such a list of the persons who were in that house at that time?
A No, sir, I have no personal knowledge of that.
Q Do you know the number of people who, on the morning of February 17, 1970, walked into the MacDonald house, up the steps, down the hallway, and into the living room, or came into the utility room from the same path?
A No, sir, I do not.

MR. SEGAL: I have no further questions at this time of this witness.

THE COURT: Any Redirect Examination?

MR. BLACKBURN: Just a very brief one, Your Honor.

THE COURT: I want to commend counsel for finishing right on the minute when he said he would.


R E D I R E C T E X A M I N A T I O N (12:45 p.m.)

BY MR. BLACKBURN:
Q Mr. Ivory, at the risk of going through this one more time, with respect to the taking of photographs who was the first photographer into the MacDonald apartment that you know of?
A Staff Sergeant Alexander, sir.
Q Who was the second photographer, if you know, sir, into that apartment?
A Mr. Squires from the photo lab.
Q Approximately when did he come, if you know?
A Between 4:30 -- within a five or ten minute period -- 4:30 or so.
Q Who was the third photographer to come into the MacDonald apartment, if you know, sir?
A Mr. Harold Page from the crime laboratory in Georgia -- from Augusta, Georgia.
Q With respect to Mr. Alexander, how many times did he come to the MacDonald apartment?
A Sir, after he -- his initial visit he went outside and he wasn't feeling well, and he did come back in the house, several times, and take some other exposures.
Q Mr. Ivory, with respect to your testimony this morning concerning the placement of the body on the floor and the drawing of the body outline, where, when the body of Colette MacDonald was first picked up, did you see that blue thread you have previously testified about?
A Yes, sir, I did. As the body was being lifted and I saw under it, that dark spot on the rug was readily visible as a large -- I think I described it as a blood clot -- a large dark puddle of blood, and I saw something coming from that. That drew my attention to it. After the body was on the stretcher, I went to it and got a closer look at it, and saw it was what appeared to be a thread.
Q Mr. Ivory, let me hand you what is marked as Government Exhibit 1124, and ask if you would, sir -- where on that piece of carpet was that thread, and hold it up so the jury can see?
A This dark area here, in this dark area right there.
Q Was that under the body of Colette MacDonald?
A Yes, sir, it was.
Q With respect to the other threads and fibers that were found or first observed by you, where, if any, were those found on that piece of carpet, sir?
A I'm sorry, sir, can you go over that again? I was a little bit distracted.
Q With respect to the fibers, blue fibers that you previously testified about that you observed when her body was removed --
A (Interposing) Yes sir.
Q -- where if at all on that piece of carpet were they located?
A There were some above the head, I think, as it showed in the photograph.
Q Excuse me, if you would hold it up so the jury can see?
A As seen in one of the photographs where there was a splinter in this area, there was one in the photograph there, and others were found, say, from this area down -- from within the body outline -- from the center outwards -- not just around the edges, but within the center portion of that area of the carpet on which the body had been resting.
Q That would have been under her body?
A Yes, sir.
Q Finally, sir, you testified on cross-examination that you collected a number of fibers and that in 1970, at least, when your memory was fresh, you collected approximately 25, is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Who else, if anyone, besides you were collecting threads or fibers in that room?
A Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. Shaw, that combined team from the CID office and the CID laboratory.
Q You did not collect all the fibers and threads?
A No, sir, I did not.

MR. BLACKBURN: If I may have just a moment, Your Honor.

(Counsel confer.)

BY MR. BLACKBURN:
Q Mr. Ivory, let me hand you what was this morning marked as Defendant's Exhibit 24 and 25, and ask you, sir, if you know, where is the picture taken which purports to show a bloody footprint?
A That is Defendant Exhibit Number 24 -- you mean where, physically, it was taken?
Q Yes, sir?
A Sir, I cannot, by looking at this, tell if it was taken in place at the house or under laboratory conditions.
Q Excuse me, is that picture part of the kitchen?
A No, sir; it is part of the north bedroom. The bedroom of Kristen MacDonald.
Q Mr. Ivory, let me show you what I believe is Government Exhibit 146(a), and ask you if, on cross-examination by Mr. Segal yesterday, is this the feather to which you were referring?
A Yes, sir; it is.
Q Let me hand you also Government Exhibit 158(a), and ask you, sir, if you can, to point out the feathers to which you compared that feather in the living room.
A Sir, they are on this first shelf over on right hand side, over that box that says "Fingerpaint." There is another one on the second shelf from the bottom. There is another type of feather up here, but not at all similar. This is the type on the second shelf there and on that top shelf.

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, that concludes our re-direct examination.

THE COURT: All right, Mr. Ivory, it looks like you are going to get to go to Germany after all.

THE WITNESS: I appreciate it, sir.

(Witness excused.)

THE COURT: Do you have a witness that you can finish with in three or four minutes?

MR. BLACKBURN: I don't believe so, sir.

THE COURT: Well, that gives us a little bonus time for lunch then today. Let's don't just identify one and then have the break. Let's take our lunch recess, members of the jury. You may retire now, and then we will recess the court for the remainder.
Remember, we don't talk about the case among yourself or with others. Don't let anybody talk about it around you. Keep open minds about it. Be back today at 2:30 please.

(Jury exits at 12:55 p.m.)

THE COURT: Now I have a request to make of counsel.

MR. BLACKBURN. Yes, sir.

THE COURT: May I approach the witness?

MR. BLACKBURN: You may, sir.

THE COURT: This is just a matter relating to something -- nothing whatever to do with this case -- but counsel know about it. He's going to see if he can find me a pair of tennis shoes in Germany.

MR. BLACKBURN: Your Honor, there is one further matter that we need to bring to the court's attention and to counsel for the other side's attention. There has been a tremendous amount of bandying-about in the press the last two or three days concerning the advertisements and the police artist.
I know from my own personal observations of the newspapers that the most recent ad, and the photographs therein, at least to me, do not appear to be the identical ones as the one to which I earlier knew about in 1970. So I do not know, of course, whether or not the police artist that originally did these drawings in 1970 is the police artist who did this most recent group.
However, I should advise the court and counsel from the other side that the Government now knows who was the police artist in 1970 and if they are in fact the same police artist, then of course that will fulfill those conditions. If they are not, of course, then I don't think that they would -- but I thought I would bring that to the court's attention.

THE COURT: Any response?

MR. SEGAL: I have no response, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Well, tell him whether or not you used the same artist on both occasions.

MR. SEGAL: We did not, Your Honor.

MR. BLACKBURN: That is all we needed to know.

THE COURT: All right, we will take a recess until 2:30.

(The proceeding was recessed at 12:58 p.m., to reconvene at 2:30 p.m., this same day.)
 

Note from Christina Masewicz: The Court Reporter's misspelling of Graebner was corrected to read Grebner in the above transcript.


 

 

Home  -  Contact  -  Scholarship Fund  -  New Uploads  -  Christina's Corner  -  Resource Page
Chronology  -  Claims vs. Facts  - 
Various Documents  -  CID Records  -  FBI Records
April 6, 1970 Interview  -  Article 32 Hearing  -  Psychiatric/Psychological Data  -  DNA Results
July 23-24, 1970: John Cummings' exclusive interview with MacDonald  - 
Polygraphs
Affidavits  -  Grand Jury Transcripts  -  1979 Trial Transcripts  -  MD License Revoked
1987: MacDonald v. McGinniss  -  Mildred Kassab sues MacDonald  -  Court Records

 Parole Hearing  -  Kassab's Work  -  Bob Stevenson Answers Your Questions
Photograph Pages 

 


Go to top