video_for_NCSU.mp4

(Judge) [inaudible]
your commitment to this case.

Dr. Ross was on the stand
Friday afternoon,

as you recall,
and I don't think we finished

her examination on the State's case.

- I'll let you all proceed.
- (female attorney) Thank you, Your Honor.

Dr. Ross, when we broke on Friday,
we had been discussing, basically,

your first steps in this case
and what you were asked to do

and I believe you testified
that in September, you had received

the remains of Laura Ackerson.

(Dr. Ross) That is correct.

(female attorney) And at that time,
you had been asked to undergo

or to render an opinion with regard
to a trauma examination

of her skeletal remains.

- Is that correct?
- That is correct.

(female attorney) And you had
testified about observing

various dismemberment sites
based on the remains that you received.

Yes.

(female attorney) May I bring
the skeleton around and ask Dr. Ross

a few questions?

- (Judge) Sure, you can do that.
- (female attorney) And may she step down?

(Judge) She may. Certainly.

(female attorney) At this time,
If I could also have published

on the screen, State's exhibit A509,
which is Dr. Ross' reports

- (Judge) Sure.
- which have obviously been reduced.

(female attorney) Dr. Ross, you stand
before the jury now with the skeleton,

also this part of your report that's up
on the screen-- this is what you prepared

to illustrate what you observed
with regard to the dismemberment sites.

Is that correct?

That is correct and that was meant
to illustrate exactly

where the sites of dismemberment
were conducted on Laura Ackerson.

And what we can see here,
based on that diagram as well,

is that both her arms were removed
at the site of the upper aspect

of the humerus, which is
your upper arm bone right here.

Her head was also taken off
at the fifth cervical vertebra,

which is the fifth neck bone
on the way down

around this area right here.

She was also dismembered--
the lumbar vertebra in this area, as well,

as well as in the upper aspect
of her femoral bone.

And in the picture that we saw also
on Friday, this is the area

that we were looking
at with the cut marks here.

So, she was bilaterally dismembered here,
and she was also bilaterally dismembered

on the lower part of the leg bone
right here as well.

(female attorney) And those conclusions
that you reached were all as a result

of being able to examine
the skeletal remains that you received,

which had cuttings that had been performed
by the medical examiner's office in Texas.

Is that right?

That is correct.

(female attorney) And so you again
were able to distinguish in the areas

that you described the difference between
where the medical examiner had made a cut

and the difference between
the dismemberment site itself.

Is that right?

Yes, that is correct.

(female attorney) And you've pointed out
that the photograph that you testified

earlier on Friday about where we saw
the 14 teeth prints.

- Yes.
- Would you point out again the area?

It was in this area.

I can't remember what side it was,
but it was in this area right in here.

You see that?
And then you see the femoral head here.

So, it was at the point
where she was dismembered up here

where the greater trochanter is.

(female attorney) And, again,
that was a larger bone that was not

as fragile, that you were able
to make some conclusions?

And it has a thicker cortical bone,
which is what we need--

the compact bone versus
that spongy bone we talked about.

(female attorney) And at some point
later in this investigation,

as far as your report, you used
a particular bone to make some comparison

using a pig proxy.

Yes.

(female attorney) While we have
the skeleton here,

can you point out that area?

Yes. We use the pig proxy,
because, No. 1, it's the best proxy

for a human model that we have
and that's both in clinical settings

and in non-clinical settings,
so it's been well known to use--

pigs are the best proxy for us.

So, the one we received
from Miss Ackerson, we had received

a femur-- and, again,
this is your femur right here--

after we had initially investigated,
after this report, and that femur

had been retained I believe
by the medical examiner in Texas.

And then we received that later,
and it had some really good markings

on it that we were able to compare.

Those striations-- remember
that we talked about,

where you can actually see the etchings
of the saw on the bone--

and we were able to examine those
on Laura Ackerson

and then what we did was
we were provided by Detective Faulk

a Skil reciprocating saw
with various blades in there,

and we tested those blades
on the pig proxies and then compared

those marks to those found
on Miss Ackerson.

- (female attorney) And which bone?
- It's on the femur.

- (female attorney) Okay.
- Yes, it's on the femur.

(female attorney) And as part
of this initial submission

and the examination
that you conducted initially,

you've also indicated that you observed
an injury to the bone in the neck.

Yes, I did.

(female attorney) Can you describe
the injury that you observed in that area?

The injury was on
the fourth cervical vertebra,

so if you count from the top,
it would be right in here,

and it was on the anterior aspect
of the body of that vertebra

and it was right in the middle
of that body

and it was what we call
a "stab wound."

So, it was a stab mark to the body
of that vertebra.

(female attorney) When you use
the term "stab wound," what distinction

are you making when you use
that terminology.

That terminology is based
on when we have sharp force trauma.

So, a cut wound would be a wound longer
than it is deep

and it would be cutting action,
cutting motion.

A stab wound is deeper than it is long.

So, meaning you were stabbing.

So, the depth would be deeper
than it is long based on a cutting motion.

(female attorney) And you indicated
that you observed

that on the fourth cervical vertebra.

On the fourth cervical vertebra, yes.

(female attorney) And the vertebra
that were present with the head

or the skull went down
to the fifth cervical vertebra.

Yes, and at the fifth cervical vertebra,
you could tell that it had been cut

at that point and that's where the head
had been removed -

on the fifth cervical vertebra.

(female attorney) The cut
you observed with regard

to the fifth cervical vertebra,
how is it different than the stab wound

on the fourth cervical vertebra?

Multiple fracturing, cuts versus stabs,
and, because these bones

are relatively small
in the upper neck area,

and those fractured quite a bit.

So, that was the distinction between
the stab and the cutting.

(female attorney) And explain
the stab in terms of the cutting,

is that wider than it is long?

Yes, it is longer or wider
than it is deep.

(female attorney) Thank you.
You can return to the stand.

(Judge) Okay, sure.

(female attorney) With regard
to the stab wound that you observed

to the fourth cervical vertebra,
did you take a photograph

of that particular area
of Laura Ackerson's remains?

I did.

(female attorney) And did you include
that as part of your report

to illustrate your findings
and what you observed?

Yes, I did.

(female attorney) With regard
to that stab wound, is this the photograph

that's up on the screen now
from your report illustrating

the stab wound?

It is.

(female attorney) And do you have
the laser pointer up there?

I think you've got it boxed off,

but is that...?

Yes, it's this area right here
where you can see

that there is a stab wound right here,
and this is using

a high-powered microscope,
so you can see the morphology

of that stab wound.

(female attorney) And can you explain

why you would use
the high-powered microscope?

(Ross) Well, one of the reasons
why we use it is to look

at the morphology and also to see
if we can establish

whether it was a single-bladed knife,
a serrated knife, or a double-bladed knife

and we were able to establish here--
if you see this area right here

and you see this right here--
based on the current literature

on types of instruments used,
it is consistent with a serrated knife.

(female attorney) With regard
to the stab wound--

and you've indicated
that this was consistent

with a serrated knife--
did you see any other areas

of the skeletal remains that showed
any stabs or stabbing

from what you were seeing?

(Ross) Not on the remains
that I received. I did not.

(female attorney) Did you undertake
to kind of examine the cut marks

that you observed on the various remains
or various bones

of Laura Ackerson's remains
and make any conclusions

with regard to the cut marks
that were different from the stab wounds?

- (Ross) Yes.
- (female attorney) Can you describe that?

(Ross) We went through, as the one
that we observed on Friday, we tried

to establish the teeth per inch
that was used

to cut the remains of Laura Ackerson.

And also there was on the tibia,
the anterior proximal portion,

which I believe is the following image
after this, you have this right here,

and this is generally called
a "persistence mark."

We call them "persistence mark,"
because the perpetrator is persisting

on cutting, they're not hesitating.

So, "hesitation marks" would refer
to an individual that's hesitating.

But when we're dealing with issues
of dismemberment,

they're called "persistence marks."

And these kind of marks
will tell you a lot.

What we look at is the wall of each bone
and the base of that cut

that doesn't go all the way
through the bone.

And that is called a "kerf," K-E-R-F,
and that kerf will give us information

as to if it's a saw-- for example,
the squared off edge at the bottom,

that tells us that it is a saw
that was used versus, let's say, a knife.

A knife would have
a V-shaped bottom or kerf wall.

So, those are the types of things
that we utilize.

(female attorney) And so the kerf wall
is actually a kerf--

you've used here "kerf floor"--

(Ross) Yes.

(female attorney) That refers
to the mark in the bone itself?

(Ross) That refers to the mark in the bone
and the floor is the bottom of that mark

and the walls would be the sides
of those marks.

(female attorney) That gives
you information with regard to,

as you just testified, the type
of instrument that would've been used

to make those tool marks
or markings on the bone?

(Ross) That is correct.

(female attorney) You describe
the persistence mark

and I believe you have "false starts"--

(Ross) "False starts"
is also another term to use, yes.

(female attorney) What about these marks
leads you to be able to make conclusions

with regard to hesitation or persistence?

(Ross) Generally, hesitation marks
are referred

to in situations of suicide,

but when you're dealing with situations
of dismemberment, the perpetrator is,

again, attempting to either conceal
or dispose of the remains

in a certain way, so their persisting
or they're called "false starts,"

because they attempt one form
to dismember the body, it doesn't work,

and they attempt in a different spot.

(female attorney) Based
on what you observed,

did you see multiple false starts?

(Ross) My recollection
is that I didn't see that many.

But then again, we did not have
the complete set of remains

of Laura Ackerson.

(female attorney) With regard
to the information that you did have

and that you were able to glean
from the examination

of Laura Ackerson's remains,
did you make some conclusions

with regard to the type of instrument
that would have made the saw marks?

(Ross) Yes.

(female attorney) Can you describe
what conclusions you reached?

(Ross) I discussed it was based
on the kerf floor--

it was based on all the TPI

and based on the conclusions
that we had,

I had initially observed
that it could have been

a hand-powered versus
a mechanical-powered, however,

there's a paucity of research
that has been done in these types of cases

and my recommendations were to test
the reciprocating saw,

and that's when we went ahead
and tested that with the pig proxies.

(female attorney) So, at the point
before you even knew

about the reciprocating saw,
you had made some conclusions

that you believed that this, in fact,
was a saw that was used--

(Ross) Yes.

(female attorney) At that point,
you didn't know

whether or not it was
mechanical or power.

(Ross) Correct. Yes.

Were you able to--
based on the teeth per inch or TPI,

were you able to rule out a number
of possible saws that could've been used?

(Ross) I believe we were able to rule out
several saws based on the TPI.

(female attorney) At this point,
after you've had these remains

and had your opportunity to examine
the various sites and look under

the microscope, was it your opinion
that two different tools had been used

with regard to Laura Ackerson's remains
and the evidence that was left?

(Ross) Yes, one was based
on the stab wound on the cervical vertebra

that was very different than what was used
to dismember her body, which was a saw.

(female attorney) And was there anything
about the saw marks on her remains

that indicated to you that it was more
than one saw or different saws?

(Ross) In many of her remains
that we-- I think we could clearly state

that it was most likely one saw
that was used, however, it's possible

that more than one was utilized,
but, again, we did not have

the full set of remains.

(female attorney) At a later time,
did you receive information

that a reciprocating saw
had been discovered as being purchased

around the time
of Laura Ackerson's murder?

(Ross) Yes.

(female attorney) Can you describe
a reciprocating saw and how that works?

(Ross) A reciprocating saw
is a mechanical-powered saw,

and it has blades that reciprocate
in and out and leave certain striations.

(female attorney) After you
received information

that that may be relevant in this case,
did you make some recommendations

about what ahould be done
from that point forward?

Yes, I recommended that we be provided
with the same brand and type

of reciprocating saw
as was found in evidence.

Also with the same blades,
numerous blades that came

with the reciprocating saw
and other blades that I believe

had been purchased.

And we recommended also to test
that saw on our pig proxies.

(female attorney) And so was
a Skil reciprocating saw provided to you

by Detective Faulk?

Yes, it was.

(female attorney) And you've indicated
you also received the blades

that came with that saw as well
as an additional blade

that had been purchased separately.

Is that right?

That is correct.

- May I approach Dr. Ross?
- (Judge) You may.

Dr. Ross, this is State's exhibit 511.

Do you recognize this?

Yes, I do.

(female attorney) What is this?

This is the Skil reciprocating saw
that was provided to me for comparison.

(female attorney) Is this a saw
that requires being plugged in?

Yes.

(female attorney) Okay.
And there are two blades

that are taped to the top of this.

Yes.

(female attorney) Are these the blades
that came with this saw?

Yes.

(female attorney) Did you make
notations so you'd be able

to recognize those blades in terms
of the numbers that are on them?

Yes, the numbers are listed in my report
and also the type of blades

that were used,
which is a wood-fast blade.

Also handing you what has been marked
for identification as State's exhibit 512.

- Yes.
- Do you recognize that?

I do. This was the additional blade
that was used as well,

and this was the all-purpose blade.

(female attorney) And so at the time
that Detective Faulk came to you,

he provided you with the Skil saw,
which is State's exhibit 511,

as well as an additional blade,
which is State's exhibit 512.

Correct.

(female attorney) The Skil saw came
with the two blades

that are taped to the top of the box?

Yes.

(female attorney) The Skil saw
you received,

did it appear to be brand new?

They were all brand new.

I had to actually open the packaging.

(female attorney) The State moves

to introduce into evidence,
State's exhibit 511 and 512.

(Judge) That will be received.

(female attorney) And Dr. Ross,
after receiving the saw and the saw blade,

can you describe for the jury the process
you went through at that point?

Yes, at that point we tested the two types
of blades; so the Skil saw came

with two of the same type of blade,
which was the wood blade

and the all-purpose blade as well.

So, we tested both those blades
on the pig proxies and then what we did--

we also tested them using a model--
we didn't deflesh the pig bones at first.

We wanted to be as consistent
as it was, for example,

to real life scenario where she
would have been dismembered

with all her tissue, so we did
the same thing with the pig bones.

We actually cut through tissue
and bone using what we called--

remember we discussed
wet versus dry bone--

to make sure that the bone was wet
and would be an appropriate comparison.

After that point, then we processed
the remains in order to take off

the tissue and in order to be able
to examine them under

the microscope
and make our comparisons.

(female attorney) And did you
eventually record your findings,

your report
State's exhibit A510,

which has previously been entered
into evidence?

Yes.

(female attorney) And what were
the results of your findings?

The results of our findings
were that the all-purpose saw

were not consistent with the saw marks
that were found on Laura Ackerson.

However, the saw marks produced
by the wood-fast saw were consistent

with the cuts and the striations
found on Laura Ackerson.

(female attorney) And in terms
of the Skil saw that you were provided

and you were using to make
your comparisons in this case,

are there multiple speeds
that are available?

Yes, yes there are multiple speeds
with the actual reciprocating saw.

So, we also tested the speeds.

At what point could you get through
the tissue and get to the bone

and make those cuts?

And we found
that it was a speed five setting

with the wood-fast saw.

(female attorney) How far do
the speeds go?

I mean, was that toward the upper end
or do you recall?

Probably mid-to-upper I would recall.

Yes.

(female attorney) What you found

was the one of the blades
that had actually come

with the Skil saw matched the marks
that you saw on Laura Ackerson's remains.

Yes.

(female attorney)
This was the femur bone--

Yes.

(female attorney) --that you had
to compare.

Yes and that was the second bone
that we had received

after the first examination.

(female attorney) And was that an area
where you had had a good,

a wide enough and detailed enough area
to really see these striation marks?

Yes, it was good compact bone
that we could examine the striations.

(female attorney)
You indicated you made a comparison

under the microscope.

Did you attach a photograph magnified

to illustrate your findings with regard

to the marks you observed on the pig proxy
with the saw blade that came

with the Skil saw at speed five
to Laura Ackerson's remains?

Yes, that's correct.

(female attorney) Your Honor,
may I publish A510

with regard to this photograph?

- (Judge) You may.
- (female attorney) This is your report.

Yes.

The first photograph that you have
up on the screen-- you actually have two.

- Do you have your report in front of you?
- (Ross) I do.

What are we seeing
in this first photograph?

(Ross) What we're seeing here--
these are the remains of Laura Ackerson

and what we are examining here,
as you can see-- you see these striations.

These are the striations
that we would use as comparison.

This right here is adipocere.

Adipocere or another crude term
for it is "waxy fat."

So, when you are exposed to a wet
or moist environment, your fatty tissues

will turn into this waxy fat or adipocere.

So, this is all we're seeing here.

This is not part of the examination
that we're making the comparison to.

But what you should look at here
are these striations.

This is the blade, the all-purpose blade
that was provided.

As you can see, it's much wider

than the striations that were produced
that are observed on Laura Ackerson.

(female attorney) So, that lower part
that's identified as "pig proxy,"

those striations were made as a result
of using the second blade

that did not come as part of the Skil saw.

(Ross) That is correct.

(female attorney) Dr. Ross,
can you explain what's shown here

on this second set of photographs?

(Ross) This is that same photograph
of Ms. Ackerson and this down here

is the comparison of that wood-fast blade,

and as you can see,
it's a match to what we had up here.

(female attorney) That bottom photograph

with the pig proxy was the photograph
that was taken of the part of the pig leg

that had been dismembered using
the Skil saw as well as the blade

that came with that Skil saw
at speed number five.

(Ross) Correct.

(female attorney) You identified
that blade in your report

as the one that matched, which is the one
that is the wood-fast blade.

(Ross) The wood-fast blade.

(female attorney) What's the number
of that blade?

(Ross) Let me go back to my report.

It is 94061.

(female attorney) Thank you.
That's all I have.

(Judge) Thank you.
Do you have questions?

(male attorney) Yes, Your Honor.
Thank you.

Good morning, Dr. Ross.

(Ross) Good morning.

Let me ask you first,
when you received the remains

from Dr. Radich,

did you receive only bone, bone tissue?

There was bone and I believe
there was some tissue,

because some of the containers
had formalin in them.

But there was some with tissue,
but mostly bone.

(male attorney) Did it become necessary
in your testing that the flesh be removed?

I did not macerate any remains
for this case.

(male attorney) Now, the bone
that you examined, how would you describe

the human bone in the sense
of its density?

Well, it depends on what site
you are looking at.

So, we have heavier bones,
such as the femora--

they would be more dense
than in other areas.

Whereas, you would have a less dense area
if it would have more spongy

or the honeycomb structures.

(male attorney) And do bones
that are dense, such as the femur,

would you agree that it's difficult

to saw those bones in half

using a reciprocal saw?

I don't know; I don't generally saw bones
with reciprocating saws,

so I'm assuming it would depend
on the person,

on where on the bone,
because you have various areas.

(male attorney) Let me ask you this.

Would it add to the difficulty
of dismembering a body

the fact that the flesh
was still on the bone?

That also depends.

We were able to do it with a speed five

and a certain type of blade.

We were not able to do so
with the all-purpose blade.

(male attorney) You were not
able to do the sawing

with the all-purpose blade?

Yes, we weren't able to do it adequately
with the all-purpose.

That was a lot more difficult.

(male attorney) But you were able
to do it with the wood-fast blade.

That's correct.

(male attorney) How many
different portions of the remains

were provided to you?

- Of Miss Ackerson?
- (male attorney) Yes, ma'am.

There were a number of portions provided
in the first test

and then on the final examination
where we compared these remains,

I believe it was just one femur.

(male attorney) Once you had those remains
in your possession,

I take it that the next thing you would do
would be to examine the striations

on the portions of the bones
that were dismembered.

Am I correct?

Correct.

(male attorney) And that's one
of the photograph's that you've shown

is the photograph taken
of the striations on the femur.

Yes.

(male attorney) Now, you also said

that in order to determine

the type of saw

that was used to do the dismemberment,
that it was necessary to use a pig proxy.

Yes.

(male attorney) Tell me about
that process if you will.

It was necessary to use a pig proxy,
because we did not have

and we don't advocate using human cadavers
for these types of studies,

because of ethical issues,
so pigs are the best proxy

to use in these types of situations.

(male attorney) Do you start
with a live pig?

No. (chuckles)

(male attorney) Describe for me,
if you will, the differences

between the blood vessel system
of a pig and a human.

That I don't know.

(male attorney) I take it you received
a pig that has its flesh on its bones.

Correct.

(male attorney) How long had it been,
in this instance, since the pig

that you used had died?

He was fresh killed.

(male attorney) Did you attempt
to saw through the flesh of the pig

with the reciprocating chainsaw?

We removed his forelimbs and hind limbs

and those were the ones
that we actually used for the test.

(male attorney) You sawed
through the flesh in order

to get to the bone?

Correct.

(male attorney) Did that create debris?

- Did it create debris?
- (male attorney) Debris.

We did it outdoors.

So, we were wearing
full personal protective equipment.

(male attorney) Did it in a dirty area?

We did it in a field.

Yes, in a research field.

(male attorney) One of the reasons
that you do that is because you don't want

to mess up your room with whatever debris
is created by the sawing

of the pig proxy, correct?

No, not necessarily.

The reason
that we do that is because we're dealing

with a large hog and the best way
to carry him out is in the back of a truck

and place him in the field and start
at the field site,

but we have conducted comparisons
in the laboratory under our hoods.

(male attorney) Were you able to cut
through the flesh and the bone

using the wood-fast saw?

Yes.

(male attorney) But you were not able
to cut through the bone and flesh

using the--

We were, but it was more difficult.

(male attorney) I see. Okay.

So, once you've done that,

were you then able to put

the various portions of the pig bone
under the microscope to determine

the nature of the striations?

That's correct.

(male attorney) And from there,
you make the comparison

between the striations
on the pig bone

to the striations
on Laura Ackerson's femur.

Correct.

- (male attorney) As seen on the board?
- Exactly.

(male attorney) Is that there was a match
between the fast--

The wood-fast.

(male attorney) --wood-fast saw,
but there was not a match

with the other saw.

That's correct.

(male attorney) Was the wood-fast saw used

with the reciprocating Skil saw
that you have before you?

Yes.

(male attorney) After you had done

your cutting of the pig proxy
in the field,

was it necessary to clean up
behind yourself?

Yes, we always clean up behind ourselves.

It's standard practice.

(male attorney) What is it
that you clean up?

We clean up any kind
of biohazardous material,

whether it's blood or tissue
or what have you.

(male attorney) Did you clean
up blood in this instance?

Yes.

(male attorney) When you cut through
the pig vessels,

did it create a spray of blood?

No.

(male attorney) Did it create a spray
of tissue when you cut through

the pig proxy tissue?

I don't recall a spray of tissue.

(male attorney) Did the Skil saw jam
up with the flesh

as you tried to cut through it?

Not to my recollection.

(male attorney) You also indicated
that you found what you describe

as a stab wound
on the fourth cervical vertebra.

That's correct.

(male attorney) Was that a stab wound
that was created by a knife

with a sharp point?

Most likely, yes, with a serrated knife.

(male attorney) A serrated point.

A serrated blade.

(male attorney) A serrated blade.

Correct.

(male attorney) Is there any way to tell
which occurred first: the dismemberment

or the knife wound?

No, there's not.

(male attorney) A moment,
Your Honor?

(Judge) Sure.

(female attorney) A couple questions.

Just for clarification purposes,
that Skil saw was the same saw

that was used in this.

There weren't other saws used.

It was only the Skil saw provided
by Detective Faulk.

(female attorney) And the blades,
which have been referred

to as the wood-fast and the all-purpose,
those were changed, but the same saw

was used, but there were
two different kinds of blades.

Correct.

(female attorney) And the serrated knife,
by "serrated" you mean as you showed

in the photograph--

Yes, it has scalloped edges.

You know, almost like a large bread knife
that you would cut

that has serrated edges,
that's what we mean by "serrated."

- (female attorney) Thank you, that's all.
- (Judge) Alright.

(male attorney) May I add
just one other thing.

You indicated that you saw
that there were some "false starts."

Yes.

(male attorney) What that would indicate,
would it not, was that the person

that was doing the dismemberment
had attempted

to sever the flesh and bone
at that point,

but for some reason
wasn't successful?

That's correct.

(male attorney) So, that person
would then go on to a second spot

and attempt--

Yes, either in the same spot
or another spot and it appeared

it was a different spot.

That's correct.

(male attorney) How many false starts
did you see in the area of the femur?

You know, I don't remember.

I don't have that recollection.

(male attorney) Is the femur
the hardest bone in the body?

The shaft is pretty hard, yes,
but the distal ends are not,

because they are composed
of a lot of spongy bone.

(male attorney) So, it would've been
more difficult to saw the femur

than the feet, for example.

Well, it depends, because if you do,
for example, on the tibia,

that's a pretty hard bone, too,
and that's at the point of the ankles.

So, dismembering a body,
just in general, is very difficult.

(male attorney) That's all have.

Thank you, ma'am.

(Judge) Doctor, thank you very much.