A Woman Misunderstood by Melinda Clayton

Author:Melinda Clayton
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: southern fiction, contemporary fiction, family drama, psychological fiction, crime
Publisher: Thomas-Jacob Publishing, LLC via Indie Author Project
Published: 2016-11-30T00:00:00+00:00

Chapter 21: Trial Transcript

Defense Attorney: Dr. Long, what is your role with the Owensfield Police Department?

Dr. Hugh Long: I am a general practitioner, and also a trained forensic examiner. In the rare cases it’s needed, I work with the Owensfield Police Department to conduct a physical examination of the suspect of a specific crime.

Defense Attorney: Were you called to assist on the evening of July 18, 2015?

Dr. Hugh Long: I was. I was asked to conduct a physical examination of Lena Reynolds.

Defense Attorney: Did Ms. Reynolds consent to that examination?

Dr. Hugh Long: She did.

Defense Attorney: Dr. Long, I’m showing you a document that’s been marked as Defendant’s Exhibit A for Identification. Do you recognize this document?

Dr. Hugh Long: It’s the consent form signed by Ms. Reynolds.

Defense Attorney: Your Honor, we’d ask that Defendant’s Exhibit A for Identification be entered as Defendant’s #3.

The Court: Any objections Mr. McDonald?

Prosecutor: No, Your Honor.

The Court: Defendant’s Exhibit A will be entered as Defendant’s #3.

Defense Attorney: And did you conduct that examination?

Dr. Hugh Long: I did, in my office at approximately 7:00 p.m.

Defense Attorney: Dr. Long, this document has been marked as Defendant’s Exhibit B for Identification. Do you recognize this report?

Dr. Hugh Long: I do. It’s the post-examination report I submitted to the Owensfield Police Department.

Defense Attorney: Does this report include photographs of any wounds you found on the defendant?

Dr. Hugh Long: Yes, it does.

Defense Attorney: Your Honor, we’d ask that Defendant’s Exhibit B be entered as Defendant’s #4.

The Court: Mr. McDonald?

Prosecutor: No objections, Your Honor.

The Court: Very well. Defendant’s Exhibit B will be entered as Defendant’s #4. Continue, Mr. Stone.

Defense Attorney: Did your physical examination of Ms. Reynolds find any wounds on her body?

Dr. Hugh Long: Yes, it did.

Defense Attorney: What were those wounds?

Dr. Hugh Long: She had long scratch marks on her forearms, three on the left arm, and two on the right.

Defense Attorney: Were those marks consistent with fingernail scratches?

Dr. Hugh Long: In my opinion, no. They were more consistent with marks that may have been left by branches or thorns.

Defense Attorney: On what do you base that opinion?

Dr. Hugh Long: They were very thin scratches, very narrow, approximately one millimeter wide, ranging from six to ten inches in length. As you can see in the photographs, they did not run parallel. That is to say, they weren’t placed side-by-side on the arm as one would see with fingernail marks. In addition, there were two thorns embedded in the deepest scratch mark on her left arm, and there was one thorn partially embedded in the deeper of the two scratches on her right arm.

Defense Attorney: Were there any other wounds on her body?

Dr. Hugh Long: There were abrasions in the vaginal area. Two were healing. One appeared to be fresh.

Defense Attorney: Would the abrasions have been consistent with what you might see in a rape victim?

Prosecutor: Objection. Irrelevant to the case at hand.

The Court: I’ll allow it, Mr. McDonald, as it falls without the argument set forth in Defense’s opening statements. You may answer the question, Dr.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.