“Is that a question?” Dr. Lynna asks.
“I was just thinking about all that blood, from several different parts of the night. Pools of it, both around the victim, on the victim. Now, I’m no expert, but if I’m desperately trying to save this person, with all that blood, some old and some new, I’m thinking during CPR, I’m gonna hit at least one of the pools from earlier in the evening, and it’s gonna spatter on me. Is that logical?”
“You would think, but that’s not how spatter works. As I said earlier, the two spots on the defendant’s neck were clearly spatters, meaning circular splotches of liquid. If the blood came from an older pool that had already coagulated, it would have been more gel-like, and it probably would not have adhered to the skin at all, much less make a perfectly round spatter.”
“Probably, hmm. Thank you, doctor. Are you familiar with visible wavelength hyperspectral imaging?”
“Yes,” the doctor answers, his eyes moving back and forth like they’re watching shells at a carnival.
“Can you tell me what that is?”
“Sure. It’s a relatively new way to determine not only that a sample is in fact blood, but also how old that blood is.”
Shawn pulls out a piece of paper from a folder. “So, this technology, which the crime scene analysts in this case did not use, takes photos at different wavelength bands using a liquid crystal tunable filter, and can pinpoint exactly what material is in fact blood, and how old that blood is based on its characteristics through these filters. Is that correct?”
“Yes,” he replies.
“Now, allow me to read you the reason why this technology was created. This is from the Journal of Forensic Professionals for the Advancement of New Technology, of which you are a member. ‘Today’s standard practices for the determination of blood stain age is neither accurate or reliable, neither scientifically robust or ethically usable for crime scene analysis. Therefore, our highest recommendation is as follows: that standard practices of blood age determination be discarded immediately, and that visible wavelength hyperspectral imaging be the benchmark moving forward in any and all professional applications.’”
Shawn looks up from the paper. “Dr. Lynna, did you use this new technology that your professional affiliation highly recommended to determine the age of the spatter, or did you ignore the recommendation and rely on your current methods?”
“That technology is very expensive, so we relied on our current methods, which are actually tried and tr—”
“Thank you. Doctor, you mentioned there was no other DNA at the crime scene?”
“I’m sorry?” the doctor asks, reeling from another change in subject.
“Did you mean low-level DNA? Touch DNA? You mean to tell me there was nothing else in that entire living room that contained fingerprints or touch DNA?”
“No DNA or fingerprints other than the defendant’s, the victim’s, and the housekeeper’s,” Dr. Lynna says in a determined voice. He wants to redeem himself from the previous suggestion that he did not do all he could have or should have done. “No other fingerprints or DNA from the lamp, no other fingerprints or DNA from the coffee table, no other fingerprints or DNA from the camera, no other fingerprints or DNA from the television remote. Nothing.”
Bingo, Shawn thinks.
“Objection! Move to strike the answer.” Astrid yells.
“Counselors, approach the bench,” the judge says, turning off his microphone. Shawn and Astrid approach the judge.
“I’m assuming you’ll want the box with the camera in evidence now, counsel, is that correct?” the judge asks Shawn.
“Yes, sir.”
“Your Honor,” Astrid says, “there is absolutely no evidence it had anything to do with the murder, no fingerprints, no touch DNA, no hard drive with recorded videos. It has no bearing on this case, as you’ve already ruled.”
“This will teach you to prepare your witnesses a little better, Ms. Lerner,” says the judge, then looks at Shawn. “Somehow it’s found its way into evidence.”
“Thank you, your Honor,” Shawn says.
“That wasn’t even a clever move, Mr. Connelly, you got lucky,” replies the judge, banging his gavel. “The jury is dismissed until tomorrow morning at 9:30am.”
C h a p t e r 3 8
“We’d like the court to know that my client has willfully and graciously allowed the prosecution access to these personal notes, as well as any and all testimony given by this witness,” Shawn announces to the courtroom. The defense has nothing to hide. And Shawn will do whatever it takes for the jury to see it.
Micah’s therapist, Dr. Amy Eisen, is a renowned therapist in psychiatric circles in New York. Small in stature, with dark brown hair and white-grey roots, Dr. Eisen has been Micah’s therapist for well over six years. She had not wanted to take the stand because of patient/client privilege. After Micah agreed to waive the privilege and give complete access to the prosecution, the doctor had no choice but to respond to the subpoena and cooperate.
“Thank you for being with us today, Ms. Eisen,” Astrid begins.
“My pleasure.”
“Can you state your full name and describe the nature of your relationship to the defendant?”
“Yes, my name is Dr. Amy Eisen. I am a psychotherapist here in New York City, and Micah has been my client since early 2012.”
“Can you describe why the defendant initially came to see you?”
“Yes, initially he came in because he’d been self-medicating. You see, Micah comes from an extremely religious household. His father was a pastor of a small church in Arkansas, and Micah, being gay, found the religion he grew up with was fundamentally flawed, as he could not connect the teachings of the Bible with what he experienced to be true and right in his soul. After he discarded the beliefs he was taught as a child, which many of us do along the path
