Appellant McCowen Brief - Mass Cases
Appellant McCowen Brief - Mass Cases Appellant McCowen Brief - Mass Cases
wound on the chest. Tr. 1216-17, He relayed Weiner's findings of trauma including abrasions, scalp hemorrhaging, breast and hand contusions and the chest wound. Tr. 1218-19. Finally, Neilds parroted Weiner's conclusion about time of death: Mr. Welsh: And with respect to reviewing m. Weiner's notes, did he have some estimate as to the approximate time of death, if you recall? Neilds: I don't recall exactly. I thought he said in his notes. ... Mr. Welsh: Sir, I'm going to show you Dr. Weiner's report. And with respect to this note here, I would ask you if you could look at it and then look up . * I All right. Sir, with respect to Dr. Weiner's observations of the body at the scene, did he indicate a hard, fast time of death? Neilds: No. Mr. welsh: ~ l right. l What did he say? Neilds: Well, in the abbreviations, he said an estimated postmortem time of 24 to 36 hours. Tr. 1234-35. The Commonwealth also called lab analyst Christine Lemire, who testified she personally analyzed DNA swabbed from Worthington's breasts and vagina. Tr. 2423- 33. She further testified: Mr. Welsh: And did you ox your laboratory run one ox more standards from Christopher MCCowen? Lemire: Yes, we did. Mr. Welsh: How many did you run on Christopher McCawen? -9-
Lemire: We ran two. One standard was submitted in July of 2004; and one other standard was submitted in May of 2006. ... Mx. Welsh: Do they generate the same profile? -re: They did generate the same profile. During cross, Ms. Lemire conceded: Mr. George: Well you actually do the testing, don't YOU? Lemire: I did not do the specific testing on [McCowen's] sample. Mx. George: Well, you testified on Friday that you - you reported a match to Trooper MaSon On April 13, 2005, didn't you? I. [Ylour signature is on the repoft, isn't it? Lemire: It: is my signature on the report. Mr. George: Well, did you do the testing? Lemire: I didn't do the testing on this sample. For exemplars or known standards, oftentimes we have a Co-DNA Unit that processes thefie typea of samples. It's my case. So, they would submit that information to me to generate the report. Mr. George: So, if I asked you, ma'am, were you present while the testing was done on this sample? Lemire: I wasn't immediately looking at the analyst doing the testing, no. ... Mr. George: [Dlid you supervise? Lemire: In the sense that I reviewed the data, yes. Mr. George: Well, other than reviewing the paperwork, did you actually review the testing to make sure it was done properly? While it was occurring? -10-
- Page 1 and 2: COMMONWEAITH OF MASSACHUSETTS SUPRE
- Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CASES Commonwealth v. DiGi
- Page 5 and 6: Commonwealth v. Laguer 410 Mass. 89
- Page 7 and 8: Commonwealth v. Freeman 407 Mass. 2
- Page 9 and 10: Turner v . Safley 482 U.S. 78 (1987
- Page 11 and 12: on November 16, 2006 App. 52. That
- Page 13 and 14: inquired about Arnold's leering at
- Page 15 and 16: something and another witness descr
- Page 17: ejected that argument. App. 20-22.
- Page 21 and 22: instant case. Tr. 3427-29. The tria
- Page 23 and 24: counsel's request, the trial court
- Page 25 and 26: people, referring to African-Americ
- Page 27 and 28: factual findings of the unavailable
- Page 29 and 30: time-of-death evidence and competin
- Page 31 and 32: Diaz, the U.S. Supreme Court overru
- Page 33 and 34: 13, 2006, the trial court conferred
- Page 35 and 36: necessary "good cause," was reversi
- Page 37 and 38: perfunctory dismissal was error. "A
- Page 39 and 40: the trial judge's reasons fox refus
- Page 41 and 42: judge. Kamara, 422 Mass. at 620; Te
- Page 43 and 44: (whether the defendant or the polic
- Page 45 and 46: interrogators less likely to use co
- Page 47 and 48: a a 0 a 0 1) 0 0 poverty, inebriati
- Page 49 and 50: counsel in opening, questioning, an
- Page 51 and 52: post-verdict dinner with the prosec
- Page 53 and 54: L D D D D B D D I I find ,. [an] af
- Page 55 and 56: she "misled the court," was cast in
- Page 57 and 58: juvenile, probation, arrest and cri
- Page 59 and 60: trial. Despite repeated requests, t
- Page 61 and 62: Worthington when he attacked two to
- Page 63 and 64: e a 0 The trial court's denial of t
- Page 65 and 66: 0 e 0 0 0 Q Q D B other; if with on
- Page 67 and 68: (1983). The trial court‘s media p
Lemire: We ran two. One standard was submitted in<br />
July of 2004; and one other standard was submitted<br />
in May of 2006.<br />
...<br />
Mx. Welsh: Do they generate the same profile?<br />
-re: They did generate the same profile.<br />
During cross, Ms. Lemire conceded:<br />
Mr. George: Well you actually do the testing, don't<br />
YOU?<br />
Lemire: I did not do the specific testing on<br />
[<strong>McCowen</strong>'s] sample.<br />
Mx. George: Well, you testified on Friday that you<br />
- you reported a match to Trooper MaSon On April<br />
13, 2005, didn't you? I. [Ylour signature is on the<br />
repoft, isn't it?<br />
Lemire: It: is my signature on the report.<br />
Mr. George: Well, did you do the testing?<br />
Lemire: I didn't do the testing on this sample. For<br />
exemplars or known standards, oftentimes we have a<br />
Co-DNA Unit that processes thefie typea of samples.<br />
It's my case. So, they would submit that<br />
information to me to generate the report.<br />
Mr. George: So, if I asked you, ma'am, were you<br />
present while the testing was done on this sample?<br />
Lemire: I wasn't immediately looking at the analyst<br />
doing the testing, no.<br />
...<br />
Mr. George: [Dlid you supervise?<br />
Lemire: In the sense that I reviewed the data, yes.<br />
Mr. George: Well, other than reviewing the<br />
paperwork, did you actually review the testing to<br />
make sure it was done properly? While it was<br />
occurring?<br />
-10-
Change language