View Single Post
Old 14th August 2018, 02:05 PM   #186
Henri McPhee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bristol UK
Posts: 3,988
Originally Posted by desmirelle View Post
So, what does that mean? It means that if I were a lab technician back then (and not a pre-teen), I could eliminate certain people as contributors of the urine. The father and the youngest daughter lack the antigens/antibodies and can therefore be eliminated. (That means they could not have done it.) The other two people known & proven to be in the house (their bodies were found in it) cannot be eliminated. I may not be able to say definitively that Kim was the source of the urine, but I can say it's possible she did it. If no urine stains are found on Colette's pajama bottoms, but there is a urine stain on Kim's nightie, a reasonable person would conclude Kim did it.
The point is that Glisson was not at all sure about who caused the urine stain, and ninety weeks later the forensic technicians would have been even less sure. As far as I'm concerned I believe MacDonald that it was Kristen who wet the bed and that's how Kristen got a pajama fiber under her fingernail, if she did, as she kicked and screamed as she was being carried by MacDonald to her own bedroom.

This is Glisson's explanation of the urine stain at the Grand Jury in 1975. it doesn't sound like certainty or scientific fact to me:

http://www.thejeffreymacdonaldcase.c...975-01-14.html

Quote:
MR. WOERHEIDE: Let's mark these as Glisson Exhibits.

(GLISSON EXHIBIT #9 AND #10 - JANUARY 14, 1975 - MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION)

Q (By Mr. Woerheide) Referring you to Glisson Exhibit #9, did you find two urine stains on that sheet?
A Yes, I did.
Q Was one of them right under the outline of the body, but another one further towards the headboard and further towards the hall wall?
A Yes.
Q And this photograph, taken the morning of February 17, does it indicate that the urine stain under the body was fresh urine stain?
A Yes.
Q And the other one was an old urine stain?
A Yes.
Q So, I take it you found urine stains on each of the sheets of the beds. The urine stain in Kristen's bedroom was consistent with her type of blood. Is that correct?
A No. I didn't find any blood types on her bed sheet.
Q On that -- On the one there?
A (Nods affirmatively)
Q So you weren't able to type the urine stain. Is that right?
A That's right.
Q But, on the bed in Kimberly's bedroom, you were able to type it as AB; and on the bed in the master bedroom, it was either A or AB with the B factor deteriorated.
A That's right.

JUROR: How about the stain in the master bedroom -- the sheet in there. Was there an older stain or fresher stain? You were saying the one in Kimberly's room was fresh -- the urine stain.

A Kimberly's, the one right under her body, was the fresh stain. There was another one that looked like it was dried.

Q (By Mr. Woerheide) How about the urine stain that was in the master bedroom?
A I don't know whether it was fresh or not. We don't have a photograph right here to show the wetness of it. We have a photograph of the Kimberly one.

MR. WOERHEIDE: Here is the photograph of Kim's bed, and that was still fresh. Now, there is other urine, an old urine stain, up here. And the testimony was -- by the agents -- was that there was a good-sized urine stain on the sheet of the master bedroom on the part -- on the side away from where Colette slept. She slept on the right side of the bed, looking -- Well, if this is the bed and this is the head of the bed and that's the foot of the bed, she slept on this side; and the urine was here.
And unfortunately, we don't have a picture that shows it up distinctly; but the testimony was that it appeared to be a fresh urine stain. And this is what she has been testifying to, that that had -- could not have come from Kristen. It had to come from either Colette, herself, or Kimberly.
Q (By Mr. Woerheide) Is that correct?
A That's correct. Now, these stains were dried when I got them, so I can't tell if it had been wet; but the investigators, the ones that took the exhibits from the bed scene, say that was a wet stain.

JUROR: You cannot determine how long the stain has been there by your examination?

A I can't. The investigators who took the evidence would be able to tell whether it was wet. But, when I got it, it would have dried. But, when I say Kimberly's stain -- this one -- I'm saying, that from the picture. From the photograph, I can tell that's a wet stain -- from the photograph.

JUROR: You have no way of knowing how long the urine has been in the fibers of the sheet.
Right?

A No, not when I received it. It was dry.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 14th August 2018 at 02:09 PM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top