|
|
此文章由 猫儿不笨 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 猫儿不笨 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整
谢案疑点之四：V1证据
The area in which the guitar was located in Bedroom 3 attracted a designation of “Area 17B” in Detective Sergeant Harkins’ July 2012 statement. In summary, his evidence, led without objection before the jury, is to the effect that the guitar was, at least for a period of time during the course of the attack on the children, upright in the corner of the bedroom, since a “void” was discernible on the wall between two areas where blood was deposited in the course of the attack. He also gave evidence of the direction and flow of patterns of blood on the guitar, which, in his opinion, demonstrated that the blood travelled from body of the guitar toward the base of the guitar whilst it was upright. The diagonal flow of other blood deposits on the guitar further reinforced his opinion that the guitar was leaning upright against the corner of the bedroom for some period of time during the attack in the course of which one or both of the boys struggled with the person or people attacking them, which further reinforced his opinion that the transfer pattern in blood, designated as V1, had been deposited after the flow pattern described by him. He was ultimately permitted, without objection, to offer the opinion expressed in the July 2012 statement that the most likely deposition scenario was that the guitar was upright and leaning when blood came into contact with it, causing it to “flow”, and that the transfer mark at V1 was applied after that event.
The Crown intends to call a qualified fingerprint expert, Detective Sergeant Bush, who I understand will give evidence that that transfer pattern or mark, identified as V1, had identifiable friction ridge details but was not otherwise able to be identified as belonging to any of the deceased by comparison with fingerprints and palm prints taken post-mortem.
Detective Sergeant Bush’s evidence has been relied upon by the accused in a bail application or applications prior to the commencement of his trial in May 2012 as supporting his case that he was not the killer.
In December 2014 (that is, after the second trial was discontinued but before the trial commenced before me), Detective Sergeant Harkins was invited by the Crown to give further consideration to the circumstances in which the friction ridge details identified as V1 (and also V2 and V3, which are not relevant for presented purposes) were deposited. Detective Sergeant Harkins’ further statement signed in January 2015 sets out the scope of the opinion sought, the assumptions he made and the limitations he imposed on his reasoning to any concluded view on the likely deposition scenario, including that it was based upon or limited to his knowledge, experience or training in the field of bloodstain pattern analysis. He also nominated the material he had access to in forming his opinions, including, in particular, the statements of Detective Sergeant Bush, dated July 2011, June 2012 and February 2014. In that regard, Detective Sergeant Harkins confirmed his understanding that the source of the friction ridge detail in V1 (and V2 and V3) is undetermined, although the blood through which, or across which, the transfer pattern in V1 was applied, is a mixture, and that neither Henry Lin nor Terry Lin could be excluded as contributors. He also noted that the deceased have not been excluded as being the source of those marks in the view of Detective Sergeant Bush, however, in Detective Sergeant Harkins’ view, he could safely exclude Min Lin, Lily Lin and Irene Lin as the course of the mark based upon his previously expressed opinion that they were deceased or dying before the assaults on Terry Lin and Henry Lin were launched.
On that assumption, Detective Sergeant Harkins hypothesised three scenarios as to who might be responsible for causing the friction ridge details on the guitar, namely Terry Lin, Henry Lin or the assailant or assailants. He then sets out his reasoning in ultimately expressing the view that he could not exclude the possibility that the assailant(s) or Henry Lin contributed to the making of the mark, but that the most likely deposition scenario was that the transfer mark was caused during the assault on Terry Lin by reason of his hands or feet, or a combination of them, having come into contact with the guitar and causing it to fall to the ground.
https://jade.io/article/522893 -16～20 |
|
和基友的圣诞跨年日本之旅 (2014-11-14) shintaku 
发表于 2020-4-28 14:44
不过他对上诉是信心满满
