Friday, March 25, 2005
Transcription and report of Jackson fingerprint evidence
Technician Lisa Hemman said the brother's fingerprint was found on a page of a magazine called Finally Legal.
She said that the print was initially ruled inconclusive by her and her co-examiner in September and October of 2004, but that it was re-examined and ruled conclusive in a report filed in January.
Asked why that had transpired, the witness said, "As an examiner you always go on the edge of caution. If you don't want to rush a job you make it inconclusive."
Hemman said the process involved comparing hundreds of fingerprints to those of three people. She did not name the three, who presumably were the accuser, his brother and Jackson.
She said that on first examination they concluded the one fingerprint was inconclusive.
"It means it's a difficult print. We can't rule the person to be a positive ID and we can't rule it out," she said.
"With respect to that particular print, did you have a belief as to who the print was made by when you ruled it inconclusive?" asked Deputy District Attorney Mag Nicola.
"Yes," she said, and named the brother of the accuser.
Hemman also testified that the fingerprint of another minor was found but she did not identify that person.
On cross-examination, Sanger said that fingerprint analysis is "your subjective opinion of the evidence" and the witness agreed.
Another witness, Charlene Marie of the California Department of Justice crime lab, testified she received 15 items - magazines and pages - from Hemman to analyze for biological substances and found none.