The lip print. The lift The rims and contours The lip print The droplets The condensation The fingerprints

Transcription

1 Slide 1 Slide 2 Presentation: Part 2 Presentation of evidence to: The High Court of the Republic of South Africa Western Cape Division State versus Fred van der Vyver August 2007 Arie Jacob Zeelenberg Hypothesis; Lift from a glass The lift The rims and contours The lip print The droplets The condensation The fingerprints Counter hypothesis; Lift from a DVD cover Slide 3 Slide 4 The lip print Properties Conditions Shape Position Relationship to thumbprint

2 Slide 5 Slide 6 First analyses wet (Faint) texture Why is it a lip print? Position (later) Shape (contour) Skin texture (faint) Triangular Dry outside More wet to the inside (lip and liquid from glass) Merging Condensation droplets Slide 7 Slide 8 Test: Lifts from lip prints placed upon glassplate with condensed waterdamp Lip print folien 1 Lip print; the position In relation to rim of the glass In relation to thumb print Properties of the print

3 Slide 9 Slide 10 Wet Opposing fingers not found / unfit for comparison because wet (?) Contours Ridgedetail Position Finding two thumb prints in this position is consistent with drinking glass Slide 11 Slide 12 Thumbprint passes lip print

4 Slide 13 Slide 14 Lip prints from glass plate Why is upper lip print not found on DVD cover?! Lip print on flat surface different Corners of the mouth Texture Slide 15 Slide 16 Lip print on glass not complete (lower side of the lip only) Why?

5 Slide 17 Slide 18 Glass touches nose Glass can not be emptied Why inclination in relation to rim? Slide 19 Slide 20 The arm with the glass has a natural angle Line A The hand does not fully Compensate for that Line B B Another angle between arm and head (mouth) The hand has to compensate for that in order to get the glass straight to the mouth. A

6 Slide 21 Slide 22 As a result lip prints on a glass have a tendency to: slope down left by drinking with the left hand and slope down to the right when drinking with the right hand (or leaning towards the root of the thumb) Right thumb print(s) Root of thumb Slide 23 Slide 24 Conclusions: Lip print Put upon condensed surface Shape consistent with glass Position consistent with glass Whole arrangement consistent with glass (rim, lip, angle,thumbprint, moist) At the same time all inconsistent with DVD (condensation, lip, upperlip missing, shape of lip, relation thumb print) Hypothesis; Lift from a glass The lift The rims and contours The lip print The droplets The condensation The fingerprints Counter hypothesis; Lift from a DVD cover

7 Slide 25 Slide 26 Agreement; Dried droplets What do droplets tell us? Defence: consistent with drinking glass State (mr Botha): Droplets transferred from glossy magazine upon cover. Cover prevented full drying Slide 27 Slide 28 On a vertical surface The maximum size of the droplets is ruled by the surface tension the maximum size in the same * circumstances is about the same and not random * Same liquid, same surface, same inclination Appr 4,6 mm

8 Slide 29 Slide 30 Slight tear effect Since we see 5 droplets of about the same size we may assume that surface tension was in play This means that the spatters did not arrive and dry on a horizontal surface. White rim typical for naturally dried droplet with debry (chalk, salt ) in the liquid (water) For example; glass rinsed with water, rain etc. Not when detergent is used, Detergent breaks surface tension Slide 31 Slide 32 Oval shapes: are noticed on glasses from dishwasser and on front screen of car (but here also maximum size due to surface tension) Causes of oval shape uncertain possible causes / commonalities; What came first: fingerprint or droplet? slanted position of glass spatter arrives with radial force

9 Slide 33 Slide 34 Test: No drop larger than 4.5 mm Latent fingerprints wetted vertical and dried vertical, then powdered and lifted Latent fingerprints wetted and dried horizontal Drops larger than 4,5 mm Ridge detail washed out, stain dominant over print Detail wetted fingerprints Slide 35 Slide 36 Ridgedetail continious in stain Fingerprint placed over droplet Latent mark placed over drop (not powdered) Stains very faint, FP dominant over stains

10 Slide 37 Slide 38 Detail folien 1 Faint droplets Ridge detail continious Conclusion: finger print placed after droplets Botha report; Citing report Daan Bekker; Watermarks left after DVD cover was handled.. Reply Botha; Yes, the droplets were transferred from the magazine Note AZ This effectively means that Botha says that DVD cover was handled first, droplets transferred and then left (to dry) Appr 4,6 mm Slide 39 Slide 40 This is in conflict with our findings and demonstrations that show that the fingerprints are placed over (and after) the dried droplets Conclusion: Transfer theory invalid for this reason alone! Still we will explore the transfer theory further Explanation by Botha of droplets on DVD cover; Droplets from Inge s glass on glossy magazine transferred when DVD cover placed on top and left.

11 Slide 41 Slide 42 Test: Two magazines; one normal and one glossy sprayed with droplets and DVD covers placed over them; Left to dry for about 7 hours; Powdered and lifted Situation after 7 hours: both magazines and covers were dry and could be powdered. Normal magazine; no noticable change Glossy magazine; paper affected and swolen in droplet area s Slide 43 Slide 44 Transfer normal magazine Transfer glossy magazine Only small faint droplets No white rim Droplets smeared and expanded randomly. No similar droplets, No white rims

12 Slide 45 Slide 46 Findings: No white lines appear along the rim Water on normal magazine vanishes quickly (little or no transfer) Glossy layer affected by water Water on glossy magazine is dispersed between the two surfaces and adopts random shapes Shapes like used in the Rohrschach inkblot test Slide 47 Slide 48 Inconsistent with picture folien 1 and in fact in total conflict. Transfer theory also for this reason untenable The stains

13 Slide 49 Slide 50 Line is placed over the dried droplet Stains indicating moisture Thin hairlines Stroke down Stains consistent with powdering while wet. Hairlines Slide 51 Slide 52 Important observation! Glass powdered when wet with droplet, droplet is smeared downwards Inconsistent with overall situation: Glas from folien 2 was dry Droplets on magazine covered by DVD were dry Inconsistent with normal practise Typically a glass with a droplet will be dry after a night

14 Slide 53 Slide 54 The lift The rims and contours The lip print The droplets The condensation The fingerprints Lifts from lip prints placed upon glassplate with condensed waterdamp Hypothesis; Lift from a glass Counter hypothesis; Lift from a DVD cover Lip print folien 1 Slide 55 Slide 56 Waterdamp / condensation Rare phenomena; Relatively large cold mass contact with hot humid air (temp. difference) Intermediate; hard smooth surface Test 1; 23.4 degree s 50% relative humidity Cooled drink from refrigirator ; no condensation With ice cubes; condensation within minutes

15 Slide 57 Slide 58 Second test; 26,8 degree s 56% relative humidity Cooled drink from refrigerator; limited condensation With ice cubes; condensation within 5 minutes Cooled drink Cooled drink + ice cubes Slide 59 Slide 60 Third test: DVD and glass plate from freezer (- 20 C) 19 degree s Celc. 57% humidity After 5 minutes DVD and glassplate put in deep freezer for half a day. Slight damp No condensation

16 Slide 61 Slide 62 In an abnormal situation a DVD holder does not get condensed In the situation at hand the DVD condensation is regarded to be impossible, whilst condensation is typical for a glass with a cold drink Condensation droplets leave no marks/stains because water is pure (unless debry is picked up on the surface) Slide 63 Slide 64 Summary: Fingerprints on folien 1 are from an object that has been in a wet environment, took spatters, was subsequently dried (dried droplet) was subsequently handled while wet from condensation, by two hands and touched by a lip Question: On what occasion(s) do we touch an object with our lips? and when a wet object with our lips? Conclusion: Facts are particular and phenomena rare and consistent with lip print on drinking glas with cold drink

17 Slide 65 Slide 66 Conclusion: Condensation in practise impossible with DVD, so cover is not object of origin of folien 1 for this reason alone! The lift The rims and contours The lip print The droplets The condensation The fingerprints Hypothesis; Lift from a glass Counter hypothesis; Lift from a DVD cover Slide 67 Slide 68 Fingerprints analyzed; Folien inverted to correct lifting Left fore finger Position Shape Part printed Marking up Both pointing to the left Right thumb (2x)

18 Slide 69 Slide 70 Fingers from one hand placed twice in same area, direction and heigt. Second hand in opposing direction and in same area typical for glass. unnatural high thumbprint, second joint prints Over 6 cm Glass dictates placement and handling by small space available, the liquid that requires vertical and horizontal handling to avoid spilling and the mechanics of drinking natural position thumb handling flat object (glassplate) Slide 71 Slide 72 Overall triangular shape Straight on both sides Inked left forefinger from accused rolled impression Latent Folien 1 (inverted) Inked plain impression Opening up

19 Slide 73 Slide 74 Shape, contours, and part of finger printed consistent with fingerprint on glass, Position and arrangement from fingerprints in relation to each other, is typical for a glass. at the same time inconsistent with fingerprints on a flat surface. Slide 75 Slide 76 Summary Whole arrangement of prints typical for a drinking glass Position of fingers consistent with glass Two thumbs same position consistent Direction consistent The marking up Chain of evidence important; is preserved by marking up the evidence on the scene during and directly after lifting. Shape of prints consistent with glass Part of finger printed consistent Open (up) side glass consistent

20 Slide 77 Slide 78 The lifting and marking up of the latents by 1 persons and not by the investigating officers is strange and inefficient All texts are almost exact copies of each other and show the same rhythm Slide 79 Slide 80 Marking up not consistent with field job working ad hoc and in stages Const. Swartz has admitted now that he marked the folien later (Febr. 2007) This is conflict with best practise It makes the chain of evidence unreliable and vulnerable for mistakes And it opens an opportunity to exchange evidence which would have been impossible otherwise. All lifted with cut corner upwards in conjunction with arrow

21 Slide 81 Slide 82 A closer look at folien 1 and 2 Text always lining with the rectangular Slide 83 Slide 84 Folien 2 positioned in agreement with arrow and upwards Preserving position on glass is very important and typical: right thumb pointing left left thumb pointing right (small open liquid container) Note wavering lines For elimination and searching Story of the fingerprints

22 Slide 85 Slide 86 Upwards! Possible alternative with regard to other lifts Slide 87 Slide 88 In conlict with statement of Swartz and with best practise Identified RMF Inge Lotz It shows that not only the marking up was done later but that most likely even the arrow was assigned later

23 Slide 89 Slide 90 Remaining fingermarks not identified Mark 5 from security gate frontdoor 3 and 7 identified upon the accused F vd V Mark 8 from balcony door Slide 91 Slide 92 Main conclusions of my presentation of evidence; All properties and phenomena of folien 1 are consistent with a lift from a drinking glass and most of the time even typical All properties and phenomena of folien 1 are inconsistent with a lift from a DVD cover and often in total conflict To put it simple and straight forward; It is my firm opinion that, based upon the overwhelming amount of evidence, folien 1 is coming from a drinking glass and that at the same time a DVD cover is excluded. The hypotheses from mr Botha are proven to be wrong.

24 Slide 93 Slide 94 The forensic investigation shows important flaws with respect to the handling of the DVD cover, next the marking up of folien 2 is wrong and in conflict with the pretended solid treatment of the lifts and the meticilous outlook at present this raises serious questions. The evidence why folien 1 is lifted from a drinking glass is demonstrated; It is my assumption that every one is able to understand it, even total laymen. Experts when pointed out should have no problem recognising this as indeed mr Dixon did with his report dated Slide 95 Slide 96 Slide number two revisited It is appreciated that the object of origin is essential for the case and that a glass as origin has implications beyond the case of the accused The impossibilty of a accidental swap rules out an honest mistake. (no folien from a DVD cover to switch with) Higly improbable that an officer (dedicated to lifting) would forget the lifting of finger marks from a glass. Since lift 1, alledgedly from the DVD cover, is from a glass, a lift from the DVD cover either never existed or has disappeared. Marks from glass are powdered when wet, inconsistent with situation at crime scene and inconsistent with glass of folien 2. There are at least 7 identifiable marks that have not been attributed to people with legitimate access

25 Slide 97 Slide 98 This finalizes my findings and conclusion