Trial Rewatch | Menendez Brothers: Defense Expert Dr. Ann Burgess Part 2

[Music] hello hello welcome to crime in court my name is Heather and this is part two of the defenses expert Dr an Burgess in the 1993 Venda Brothers trials this is California versus Eric and Lyall Menendez here on trial for the homicides of their parents uh Jose and kitty Menendez and they um have admitted to doing it this is more so a case of self-defense and they are trying to prove that they did it because of fear so the this particular witness on the stand is a very important one for them because not only is she like incredibly talented and um just like a Pioneer in um in her field so she is a what is her specific title I don't know um I think it's on her it was on her bio I can't remember what it is but she is so she was a nurse she still um she no longer is a nurse but she put herself through nursing school she was a mother um back in like the time when the Mind Hunter guys uh John Douglas and I can't remember the other guy's name um when they were working on profiling of violent criminals and Anne Burgess was at the time she was nursing um she was in nursing and she was very into the um the psychological reasons why people do things how people feel why they behave the way that they do so she was really interested in that in her nursing career which helped her in turn understand and realize that the people that she was treating the victims of Abe happened to be um uh they happen to have like similar patterns and ways of you know behaving and whatnot so she was she took this knowledge and um the trauma you know the the ways in which people deal with stress and traumatic experiences and how that affects the brain and your psychology and she was very interested in that so she would look at patterns within those within victims but also so using that knowledge she helped create create the whole FBI profiling uh program that we have today because uh she helped teach the FBI as a nurse as this young mother as a nurse in the 19 whatever 70s um maybe even earlier than that she was teaching these FBI agents all about trauma and the victim response to trauma and this was a totally new idea back then so for her to be a woman number one to be doing this cuz women weren't really um as uh they weren't as strongly represented in the FBI as they are now um so anyways so for her to be giving this information to a very misogynistic world of um mostly men who probably didn't think that male un male sa occurred and if it did they didn't want to hear about it or didn't want to come to the grips that it could happen so she had to teach these things early early on in uh in like the development of criminal profiling so this she's just amazing in her own right so she is here to tell us how the fear within the Mena's household really led to the crimes and it was an instinctual self um preserving Act of the boys rather than some malicious violent act just to get money which is how the prosecution was painting it so um let's get started Ed here I'm going to shrink myself this is the um where did that move here we go sorry this is going we're going to start with the cross-examination of Dr an Burgess and I don't think I sped it up and here is some caption here we go Dr burges um good morning good morning the study in which you were involved for the FBI was a study which was aimed at trying to give form to Crime um analysis is that correct in other words you're trying to give some sort of scientific construction to um crime solving techniques uh it was actually to describe the crime scene analysis process uh as enacted by law enforcement but it wasn't just crime scene that you were working on it was also in in helping um local law enforcement agents gencies in detection in other words suggestions for search warrants looking into the victims and how the victims related to the defendant and things like that okay that's that's the actual manual that was published yes okay and I have here a book I'm hold up is this in fact the manual that was published as a result of the study that you took part in yes it is okay for the record this is a book called crime classification manual a standard system for investigating and classifying violent crimes we should want well it's not mine and I'm not going to offer it into there's no need at this point to do so okay now Dr Burgess in this trial you have testified not only to Crime Scene analysis but you've also testified to types of homicides correct yes I have and you indicated that there were approximately or is it precisely 32 types of homicides approximately okay and these types of homicides that the 32 the number that was come up with is that part of the study that is contained within this manual correct now I believe that the manual indicates that there are four basic types of homicides with each one containing subtypes is that correct that's correct the first would be called criminal Enterprise homicide which appears from the manual to be a homicide for some sort of material gain would that be correct that is correct the second kind of larger group of homicide would be a personal cause homicide which is a killing resulting from emo conflict would that be correct well it's specific to the person uh when we say when it said personal cause there would be something specific to the person all right and and that and one person versus a group of people correct okay the next time is the the next kind of the four would be the sexual homicide correct that is correct and those are the kinds of homicides that are traditionally associated with serial killers yes traditionally yes and the last type of the four major groups would be group cause homicide which is where um groups of people for non-financial reasons commit homicides to further or achieve their goals yes that's correct so in this particular case I believe that you classified this particular crime as a personal cause homicide because you classified it as a domestic homicide yes as the preliminary uh classification from crime scene yes all right now when you talk about preliminary classification from crime scene there are several factors that go into an investigation aside from just looking at the crime scene correct as one gets into the investigation that's correct okay normally an investigator is first confronted with a crime scene which is why the investigator got called that's correct and then from crime scene other avenues of Investigation are pursued correct that is correct okay for instance uh finding out about possible suspects correct well that's the whole goal is to identify the suspects and but one of the ways to do that is to look at the victim correct yes that's true um and look at people who might have a motive to kill the victim yes all right so crime seeeing classification is just one part of Investigation yes it's the starting point it's the starting point aside from the investigators experience and things like that correct yes okay now when you participated in this study and ultimately caused this book to be published the point of it was to Aid investigators in solving crime yes okay and it was not to Aid criminals in committing better crimes no okay now um the the information which you given to these two juries about these different classifications and crime scenes which are disorganized and organized is that information which you have ever um lectured on to groups of criminals to help them improve their skills no okay not knowingly not knowingly right okay so you have no way of knowing if the average criminal is familiar with the years of research that you did in order to come to these classifications no I don't not okay and in fact in this case you have no way of knowing if these particular defendants were familiar with the classifications and the other studies that you did as part of this study for the FBI well it wasn't published at back in 18 this is a recent publication all right and prior to that time was there any other public published form in which someone could get a hold of these classifications so as to better commit a crime not to my knowledge now um when someone talks about a Perfect Crime what in your mind is perfect about a Perfect Crime I have no ideation all right well she's answer the question similarly is lack of detection or lack of apprehension a goal of many crimes yes and I'm going to to the question is being um compound lack of deception lack of ad objection sustaining the answer is lack of detection the goal of many crimes um again it may be I it may be one of the things that you spoke of in in putting together the statistics or the analysis of what a disorganized crime scene was was a correlation between the disorganization and I think you said the speed of apprehension yes that's Factor could you explain to us how that works in other words you look at crime scenes and then you figure out how fast the person got caught and you decide that crime scene must have been disorganized no the original study that looked at these two factors had serial offenders in other words they had committed many many offenses and so we were able to enter into to the computer a lot of variables related to that and one of the other factors was that they had been divided into organized and disorganized um offenders and then you look for correlation and one of the factors that did sift out was that with disorganization U more likely than not you're going to get faster apprehension and in fact apprehension right at the crime scene all right because disorganization leaves Clues correct okay now you spoke about the study dealt with serial offenders is that correct that's correct are those people who were specialist in a particular crime like burglars or rapists or Killers no they had all been convicted for murder all right so the serial offenders that that were part of the study were all murderers that is correct and have have they committed more than one murder yes they had uh most of them not the majority I think 30 out of the 43 37 had three or more so the remainder had less than three all right and are we talking about three people being killed at once or three people being killed in three separate incidences separate incidents all right now would you um agree that as one does an activity one becomes better at that activity normally I'm going C speculation do you understand my question uh yes that is one um uh hypothesis that could be offer okay and when you were looking at this group of 43 people I think you said 37 of which had done more than three or three or more yes they would have been classified as a serial killers okay and are those people who were um committed a crime got caught put in prison got out committed a crime got caught or they people who hadn't gotten caught between the three there were various patterns some had followed that pattern but some had never been caught until their final crime all right and would you agree that sometimes people do learn from their mistakes yes now when you were looking at disorganized crime scenes in relation to repeat offenders did you also do a study of disorganized crime scenes in relationship to first time murderers um well that would have been part of the data that would be available that would have been the six people who hadn't killed more than three some had killed TW two so I I don't have the precise numbers of how many did under three majority did over three now I believe that you've testified in front of the both these juries that in your opinion the disorganization of the mendis crime scene leads you to the conclusion that it was and I don't want to put wood out so you could you give me again what your testimony was I said it showed a lack of planning lack of organization okay now um is there a difference between lack of planning and poor planning well that wouldn't uh we talk about it being a lack of planning we don't give it a adjective well lack of planning to me and I'm not a psychologist but lack of planning to me means you didn't plan yes okay whereas poor planning means you planned and you could have planned a lot but you didn't do it very well you can't see that in the crime scene okay so you can't make that distinction on on a value statement like poor or good or in between so that um for a firsttime killer there could be lots of planning but it was poorly executed because the person had never done it before I'm going to check speculation want don't you rephrase the question okay uh when you talk about lack of planning which is one of the conclusions that you reached um did you also consider the novelty of the uh killing in other words it had never been done before no you're just looking at the crime scene and you're looking at it all of the clues and the possible presence of the U persons right there that is what a disorganized crime scene means it doesn't get into other types of evaluation I believe you indicated that there are three types of crime scenes in terms of calling them organized versus disorganized there's the disorganized the mixed and the organized yes that's correct I believe you indicated that in this particular crime scene there were some features that were organized yes and I believe the two features that you indicated were the fact that the shotgun shells had been disposed of and that the weapon had been taken from the scene well those two things were not present at the crime scene I'm not sure that they didn't know where they were but they knew that um police investigating saw no shells and no weapon and you're aware of the fact that Not only was the actual when we talking about crime scene let me back up when we talk about crime scene are we talking about the room in which the crime occurs or in a residence are we talking about the whole house oh no right you the law enforcement has a wide discretion as to what they can include in crime scene so even cars parked outside can be part of the total and certainly the whole house could be cons considered um important to the crime scene there's usually What's called the death scene where the persons actually were killed and that may or may not be the same as crime scene all right when you use the term crime scene what do you mean where the bodies are found all right so you would confine it just to the in this case then you would call the crime scene the room in which the bodies were found that's the actual crime scene but other parts of the house must be investigated as well as for the total picture to be evaluated okay so when you say that the weapons were removed from the crime scene or we're not present at the crime scene we're talking about the whole house correct well they yes they could not find the weapons in wherever they searched right now uh another factor which would show organization would be the fact that a weapon of opportunity was not used isn't that correct well they couldn't really determine that at that particular point when we're just looking at coming into the crime scene initially um they would have no way of determining that at that particular point they just knew that the weapon was not present okay now what is a weapon of opportunity just for the Dr right a weapon of opportunity is something some weapon that is secured from the actual area that could be for I can give you other examples Like a Knife if a knife is used uh rope if rope is present and used fireplace U right um could have handgun or some type of a gun all right so sometimes in crime scenes you find a set of steak knives and one of the steak knives is missing and that would imply to the investigator that that was a weapon of opportunity meaning that the person who came upon the crime scene did not come prepared but rather used a knife for the for to commit the crime yeah no it doesn't mean that they did not come prepared it just means it gives us another important aspect uh a knife could be used could be washed and put back um an example correct and in which case unless they tested all the knife for blood and found some they wouldn't know that just from looking at the crime scene correct correct okay um I believe you indicated that some of the disorganized portions of this particular CL I and I think you gave six different examples six factors that you considered in the in evaluating whether it was disorganized or organized all right and I want to go over those with you now um I think one of the things you indicated that made it in your opinion disorganized was the location of the crime correct correct and that was um at inside of a home in a residential neighborhood yes okay and why was it that in this particular case you found that to be disorganized on the part of the perpetrators in terms of possible detection uh also you have to take in effect the type of weapon that it was a loud weapon it was multiple weapon and it was a Hot August day when possibly windows were open in fact windows were shot so that the likelihood of noise in this area and and detection was uh highly likely so that if one were to commit a shotgun killing of two people one would want to do it in a in a place where one couldn't be heard is that correct that would be one consideration yes so some place like the desert would be a good place yes okay now um aren't there problems though associated with transporting victims in order to get them to a place of isolation for the perpetrator not in perpetrators we've studied well but if if the person gets caught during the transportation in other words if the police stop the car which sometimes happens when people are being kidnapped I'm going to well nature of the question do go perh should be a little more specific here in order to make a in order to make this particular crime look like a organized crime or a a murder For Hire where should it have occurred in your opinion to make it more organized uh very often it can be done at an off location I'm thinking of some of the examples that are are cited um where there are a few people around or done very quickly um it's done from an area like a a sniper type uh shooting um in a it can still be in a public place but the person is not necessarily detected because of the distance between the victim and the shooter all right for instance President Kennedy was shot in public that's correct by someone who evidently had a good aim that's correct not using a shotgun that's correct okay um but in terms of killing two two people in order to get two people you would have to have a location where both of them were there at the same time correct yes and you have to have a location where it would make sense that they would be in order to explain why they were there correct m be non-suspicious for these people to be in this particular location that's yes that's because otherwise the crime scene would cause the investigators to become suspicious why are these people in the middle of the desert in Lancaster where no one would hear correct AR question so one of the things you consider is the location of the crime and because this was in a home you found that to be disorganized well the location and the weapon those two are very important to look at together the choice of weapon is really what also adds to the possibility of someone hearing and someone calling um police all right so this had been perhaps a knifing where there is noise then the location of the crime would not be problematic in terms of disorganization that certainly would reduce the likelihood of detection yes okay um if one wanted to make um a double homicide look like an organized crime killing or or a murder For Hire okay um would strangulation uh be a method that would achieve that end strangulation is generally not used in criminal Enterprise um uh killings so I would not say the strangulation is generally usually weapon to your knowledge um is are shotguns used in um murders For Hire or well any weapon can be used in for murder For Hire it's not uh it's it's just that um I'm going to say that they're not they certainly may be but again you have to look at the location and where they are and whether there's the opportunity for noise and people seeing people come and go things like that it would also depend on the perpetrator's idea of what an organized crime killing or a murder For Hire looks like objection speculation correct in other words different people would have different views of what an organized crime or a murder for hire occurs correct well there certainly are enough of those types of crimes that are committed that are in the public media so I mean it's it's not like it's a surprise do it but there's but there's also um a great deal of license taken by Hollywood in describing murders for hired and organized crime killings as well which could contribute to one's idea of what they look like objection argument yeah I wasn't thinking of that oh sorry now um what you're saying about the choice um as being disorganized therefore lack of planning okay yes couldn't have been just poor planning in other words not well thought up the point is on disorganization you look for immediately as fast as possible a suspect in the area I mean that's the teaching that is done you don't get into whether it was good or bad but the point is look where your suspect is Right within that area but if the suspect has a right to be in that area because the suspect lives in that home or that neighborhood then the presence of the suspect in the area would not be suspicious oh not necessarily so um that's the purpose of classifying crimes that domestic type of situations are unfortunately quite frequent yes but the fact that that some someone is risking detection in their own home them being in their own home can be explained because they live there correct well it can be explained that way yes okay for instance if um if my husband comes in the house and kills me and is there when the police come versus a total stranger coming in the house and killing me and is there when the police come there might be a difference in terms of the perceptions of the police correct if if they have knowledge of both persons yes all right so a stranger being in your home is a lot more suspicious than someone who has a right to be in your home well not not for police they're supposed to keep a high index of Suspicion for everybody but being present at the scene of a crime especially when you live at the scene of the crime is not criminal correct oh it's not criminal no not at all now I believe you indicated that in conjunction with the location of the crime being disorganized that the choice of the weapon was in this particular case a poor choice correct which show lack of planning all right um did you consider availability in this particular case did you consider availability of weapons in determining that this was in fact a lack of planning well there were yes there were weapons in the house correct that would have been a weapon of opportunity if you want to identified that way all right and so a weapon of opportunity then is a weapon where someone perhaps makes the decision to kill after an event has occurred which triggers their desire to kill that's all for speculation well no not necessarily they can take a weapon of opportunity as a way to avoid detection might be one we were just talking about the knife did you find any significance in the fact in this crime scene that the rifles were not used uh yes and what significance that you attach to that well they could have planned to use those weapons um if there was a plan although that could have been their choice but if the plan was to make it look like an organized crime or murder for higher killing then using the householders weapons would be inconsistent with that particular Theory would it argumented a lack of foundation uh no I wouldn't I wouldn't say that well isn't wouldn't it be rather suspicious that an organized crime or a hit man would arrive at a scene and then arm himself with a weapon he's unfamiliar with after he already got there I can't speculate on that just say that when one goes to a crime scene you look at the initial pattern and in this crime scene it was disorganized and generally speaking organized U criminal Enterprise does not show a disorganized crime scene all right but the fact is that disorganization and the main things in this particular case was the noise made by the shotguns correct and I think the other main thing would be the number of shots fired correct a type of of type of ammunition okay now why is the type of ammunition important here because that doesn't show planning it would it is more logical that there would be all the same type of um ammunition all right so you're talking about the fact that both birdshot and buck shot were used yes correct now you're saying then that they that there should have been planning that the mother would have died with the shot she already had before the bird shot is that what you're saying question U Dr Burgess um the fact that there were two different types of ammunition could just as easily be explained by unexpected circumstances which occurred after the crime started correct no you wouldn't read that into the crime scene when you come in at initial observation you don't have that first of all yeah that's forensic material so when an investigator investigates he's not just looking at the crime scene he's going to look later at the forensic material which is developed after the crime scene is processed correct well you're always getting more information in to update if they haven't found a suspect the importance of disorganized with organized is to immediately alert the law enforcement to start looking for suspect in that immediate area okay and the purpose of the study was not to come in and aid criminal defendants and trial but rather to Aid law enforcement and apprehension correct that is correct okay now the fact that there were two types of ammunition used should have told law enforcement that this was either what not planned well or not planned at all and therefore they should look at a particular suspect well again you don't have that necessarily right at the time coming into the crime scene because that takes forensics to be able to identify that so the fact that there were two types of ammunition used was not immediately identifiable at the crime scene unless they were able to see necessarily wounds and so forth all right now you've looked at the crime scene photos in this particular case is that correct that's correct and you had the uh luxury of time in order to examine those photographs correct argument you had as much time as you wanted yes I did all right and from your looking at those crime scene photographs were you able to tell that there were two kinds of ammunition used just from looking at them well I also looked at forensics but I could not tell just from the uh photographs okay so in terms of an investigator arriving at the scene trying to conduct an investigation that was not readily apparent that this was disorganized because of two types of ammunition used correct no it quickly would add to that once they got forensics in correct all right now um but that's something that happens later we're just talking about the crime scene itself correct so when just looking at the crime scene what an investigator should see two types of ammunition is not really a factor in this case well initially at the very first Walkin correct all right now um let's talk about the location well first of all when you were listing the six factors you listed injuries to the victim and where the injuries were I think I was taking notes okay is that that's correct that those are two separate things that's correct could you please distinguish them for me okay injuries to the body would be you just look at uh the number of shots so to speak or wounds and then you look at where those wounds are to see whether they're in one particular area or whether they have what was called a more random um focus to them all right so injuries to the victim would be the number of shots and where the injuries were would be the location of the shots okay now I believe you indicated that one of the things that was noteworthy to you in this crime scene were the number of shots correct and location to body all right but let's let's just talk right now about the number of shots fired now when you're talking about this particular aspect of disorganization is this the area that we would call Overkill well that's one yes that would be one factor okay now Overkill is where a person suffers um more than one fatal wound would that be correct yes um and there are cases for instance where people are stabbed 4 times in in the left chest area with a knife yes there are and those traditionally in law enforcement are associated with things like rage correct well that is what they say if it's all to one area of the body yes all right um or if the person is killed a number of ways for instance poisoned and strangled and beaten okay for all of which would have ultimately been fatal to the victim right but that also you're bringing in that other things are done to the body and that that's another factor that one would look at was there any touching of the body U before or after the shooting all right now in this particular case has been Mr Menendez he had one wound which which even to a non- pathologist appears to be quite fatal which is the wound to the back of his head yes correct correct right and the other wounds were to his extremities correct correct all right one one wound passed across his chest but only one pallet went in EN lodged in his um upper right arm that's right there were individual pellet defects on the outside of his forearm on his right arm that's correct there were individual pellet defects in his left elbow yes and then there was a through and through wound right above his left knee which went from the inside to the outside yes okay so in terms of killing him the wound that was the killer was the head wound correct that's correct all right so to say that there was Overkill would not be precise in this instance would it no I would disagree with you the importance is that multiple shots were fired and they did enter into him now I believe you've indicated then that this is an indicia of um lack of planning yes right when a novice commits a crime such as murder is there a certain amount of inexperience that will play into that person's Commission of the crime not looking at the crime scene necessarily all right but in terms of their particular mental state right going in to do something like a murder is is a highly emotional thing for everyone except maybe a hitman I'm going to object to this as testimony by um your OB is what it's argumentative it's argumentative all right we raas a question please you have extrapolated from this crime scene that there was poor excuse me lack of planning yes okay and you are basically then saying that in your opinion if you just look at the crime scene in this case these two defendants did not plan it there's lack of planning in that crime yes okay and and you're we're not talking about some other defendants we're talking about these two defendants that is correct all right so in making this opinion of yours are you limiting it just to what you would see when you went to the crime scene initially not not when you bring in the uh defendants no you take other factors into consideration okay and you are rendering an opinion that in this particular case with these particular defendants that their crime scene shows lack of planning yes I am and ultimately that would lead to the conclusion of lack of premeditation correct that that is correct all right now did you in your analysis consider their inexperience in the in killing in determining how the crime sh scene could be interpreted not at the initial going in looking at the crime scene all right that's all I had in making the point that it was a disorganized to Crime Scene but this organization does not always mean lack of planning does it generally does does but okay let me give you a hypothetical okay um let's say that I want to plan a wedding and and I decide that I'm going to get married on this date and I'm going to have a caterer and I'm going to have a photographer and I'm going to have a judge do the ceremony and I'm going to get the groom too that's usually a component of a wedding and I plan the wedding and I plan it and I plan it and the day comes of my wedding okay and the caterer shows up and the oven breaks and the food is a mess why is this question allowed she's just going on and on and on about planning a wedding the judge arrives late and gives a very perun um unimpressive ceremony that could apply to anybody all right um and anybody at my wedding would think that this wedding wasn't really planned because if you look at the wedding it's kind of a disaster right I'm going to object improper hypothetical argument you see what I'm saying anybody who came to my wedding would say boy the food's awful the judge isn't really prepared he couldn't have talked to these two people before he made these remarks but that doesn't mean I didn't plan my wedding it just means it didn't come off the Leslie is furious her head's just shaking like I can't believe she's asking these questions which I I'm with her I think she waited for her to finish the question before she objected because she was ready to object and it was it's an improper question it's a hypothetical that this person requires speculation you see what I'm saying anybody who came to my wedding would say boy the food's awful the judge isn't really prepared he couldn't have talked to these two people before he made these remarks but that doesn't mean I didn't plan my wedding it just means it didn't come off the way I wanted objection argument rephrase question okay does the fact that my wedding does not go well mean that I didn't plan it well one could say that there were certain factors that weren't checked and double checked and carefully outlined which is usually goes into a good plan that's not to say that um extraneous factors can't occur okay because because the point is is at the end of this wedding the person does in fact get married and the person wanted to get married and plan to get married and thought about getting married and got married but anybody who went to the ceremony would think that there was there was lack of planning objection argument Dr Burgess lack of planning is not the only explanation for a disorganized crime scene is it there can be other factors but it's the lack of planning um that that's one of the main features of disorganized crime scene what are the other factors that could contribute to a disorganized crime scene not in this case but generically well those are the main ones you can think of um emotionality we've already talked about that is an important factor uh can make a disorganized crime scene um not knowing um necessarily how to um but that gets into like planning not not having studied and and and looked at how to do something it for instance um not knowing how to work your shotgun would that be something that might contribute to a disorganized crime scene that was still planned not necessarily no I've never identified that well you could premeditate and want to do something and not be very good at planning out how to get from point A to point B correct well one would expect that one might practice I mean there are ways to get good at a particular task right and so certainly if someone went out and practiced using a shotgun that person would be better prepared than the person who didn't practice with a shotgun yeah and that would tell me that's a plan somebody that's really planning something but both of those people the one who practices and the one who didn't practice could have the same goal correct well that isn't what I would call plan the person that hadn't really thought through everything and and identified it I would not call that as having a a plan versus the first example where they practiced it and thought about it and but but planning is not the only component of thinking something through and accomplishing something correct do you understand my question no okay let me give you some people go to Las Vegas and get married in a wedding chapel and some people have a year of Engagement where they plan every detail of the wedding to go back to this hypothetical correct right both people want to get married correct both couples want to get married there's just more planning in the one where you have the matchbooks engraved and the little place cards for everybody to sit down at the dinner versus getting married in Las Vegas at a chapel correct that's correct all right and there's no way of saying that either couple wants to get married less than the other correct that's correct all right so just because the planning is not good doesn't mean the intent isn't there correct but the outcome is very different in other words the planned one will have more of the to get back to your original one everything has a better chance of turning out the way you want it than the one that just goes to Las Vegas well but we don't know which marriage is last longer either I mean right all right now um as to Mary Louise mandez I believe that the we've identified or the corner identified 10 areas of gunshot wounds correct yes that's correct and um we now know um not from the crime team but from the forensic work and the corn report that there were two birdshot wounds to her that's correct all right now I believe you you would indicate would you not that the fact that she has before the bird shot she has three wounds to her head area would you consider that to be Overkill well 10 wounds are Overkill but you're just saying to to one see one shot would have done it when you're using a shotgun that's the whole point you don't need to have a carefully planned crime to have a massive amount of shotgun what if the victim is still moving around after being shot well that still speaks to lack of planning because one shot would do it that's be knowledge that on somebody that had planned something would have that knowledge but there are all kinds of factors that go into a homicide that cannot be planned for or predicted by the killer wouldn't you say that that's like the reaction of the victim for one thing well that's I mean that that can be an unknown yes all right and um so could just be a function of inexperienced inexperienced on the part of the perpetrator that causes that number of wounds in addition to the reaction of the victim to being shot not in this case one shot would have done it this is a massive amount of shotgun shells into the two victims all right and so you're saying that in this particular case the fact that there were so many shots fired indicates to you a lack of planning that is correct okay and did you take into account the fact that Mrs Menendez was crawling or sneaking in the room after she was shot I had no evidence of that well did you report all right did you consider the testimony of for instance L mandes and reaching your conclusions would you related to these two juries yes I did all right and do you remember the portion of L Mendes's testimony where he said that what prompted him to go reload was the fact that his mother was sneaking around the coffee table I remember that was in the testimony all right so uh Overkill implies that the person dies and then you just keep killing them right no not necessarily it mean Overkill means a large number of shells are expended into the victim when that's not necessary but not everyone dies from one shot correct people can die from one shot from a shotgun yes people can die from one shot to a shotgun but not people don't always well it depends dep on where they are that's true and wouldn't it depend on the knowledge of The Killers as to be um effects of shotgun wounds in order for them to make the determination that two's enough three's too many no I still think it speaks to planning that that should have been known something that's carefully planned would have been in the knowledge base uh for committing this if it was a clear uh carefully made plan now one of the other factors of the six factors we've gone through four now is emotionality correct yes correct and emotionality is something that you look for to try to you look for emotionality in a crime scene to try to determine maybe who the perpetrator is correct well it helps in determining the classification yes for instance if you have um a killing where it looks like there was a lot of emotion involved you would probably rule out a Hitman that is correct and if you had killing where it was one shot to the brain with a like a 38 caliber weapon and nothing else at the scene then you might think there's a lack of emotionality to that particular crime yes that's correct leaving aside people like Hitman or professional Killers um where people know each other and one person kills the other isn't there inherent in that situation some emotionality by virtue of the fact that there people have emotions yes okay so in any homicide in which there's a relationship between the Killer and the victim you would expect to see some degree of emotionality not necessarily again you have to look at each case individually but you can certainly have very organized um killings when persons know each other so in general that might be a true statement that people have emotion but uh if you get into other kinds of feeling States they may have not they may not show that for instance a poisoning if you slowly poisoned your spouse over a period of time your crime scene would not reveal any kind of emotionality because you're just have a dead person who's died of something internal but that would show that's a good example of clear planning where there's a lot of emotion to see someone uh in a way tortured over this uh length of time there's a lot of emotion in that particular um a lot of emotion you could identify but just from the crime scene you couldn't because all you would see is maybe someone lying dead in their bed and you wouldn't even know what it cost it there would be no emotionality present at the crime scene well that's at the initial crime scene correct all right now I believe your testimony as to the lack of planning in this particular case has been confined thus far at least on direct to the particular crime scene in this case yes the initial coming into to the crime scene correct all right and then questions that I've asked you are about things that are specific to this particular case and opinion that these particular defendants did not plan yes lack of planning yes all right and that would then go outside of the crime scene to look at other factors correct well you can right as you get more information in right if a detective limits himself solely to the crime scene to solve crimes he may not solve all his crimes right no but he'll solve the disorganized ones very quickly that's the whole point well you are aware of the fact that the defendants in this case weren't arrested for seven months after the crime I am very aware of that yes and you may have some criticism of that particular fact would that no I'm just speaking to the crime scene and what's the clues and what's available at the crime scene what Clues at this crime scene what clues that this particular crime scene should have led to the defendants uh first of all the disorganization second of all that who called it in that uh this matches also the studies that say look not only for the person either right at the crime scene but who may also have called the um the 911 okay I don't mean to interrupt you but what I'm asking is just at the crime scene in other words you walk into the room where the men's parents are and you look and you look and you see what you can see and you search the house okay and limiting it to that particular crime scene which you've term disorganized yes okay and part of your analysis of disorganization does not take into effect into account that they called 911 CU that's not crime scene that's other evidence but that really leads up the crime scene that you have to take into consideration from the moment the call comes in to alert police that something has happened but the fact that they called 911 is not one of the factors the six factors of disorganization correct oh the crime scene okay okay so let's limit ourselves to this crime scene the detectives get called in the middle of the night they go and they see Mr and Mrs mandez dead in their D yes okay what factor should have led the police to suspect these particular defendants okay location uh the type of weapon the amount of injury and the focus of the shots to the kind of the random aspect to the shootings have you ever testified for the prosecution that those types of things have you ever come into court and testified for a prosecutor in a murder case that those types of things lead to the conclusion that these particular particular set of defendant to the crime question okay let's take our recess noon we'll resume at 1:30 don't discuss the matter among yourselves other participants in the trial including both defendants all councel and we'll proceed with cross examination Witnesses on the wi Dr Burgess I believe right before lunch I was asking you a question which I'm going to rephrase have you ever testified for the prosecution that because crime scene was organized in your opinion the defendant had premeditated I believe was a question was it not I don't know if it was precise of the question should I just have it reread it ask answer all right well let's have the question right back then if you have some doubt about it I think we're the okay all right I'll permit the question then I'm going to the for the question since and I ask approach we understand what the rules are with okay if you would like to approach the Ben so we can discuss it the objection is sustained to the form of the question you may rephrase it if you choose Dr Burgess have you over Ted ified that an organized crime scene indicates planning on the part of the perpetrator no I have not now when these um categories of organized and disorganized were formulated and that was done by interviewing these 43 murderers yes okay and is that the sole basis of the categorization that is the study of these particular 43 people or were there other studies done now this was just one population that was studied to look at their um statistically how they fell into the organized disorganized but that generally is the one of the first classifications uh or separations if you will that law enforcement makes going to the scene now when the data was being collected to Define things as being disorganized or organized were the perpetrators who were interviewed the 43 people asked about their mental state in regards to the disorganization or organization of the crime scene I'm not sure they were asked about their mental state per se okay were they asked about whether or not they had planned the crime that information was obtained yeah yes and was there any correlation between um planning the crime and the disorganization or organization ultimately of the crime scene yes okay and what were the findings the findings were that the more organized the more planning into it because obviously they were able to be undetected and they got away with a crime and were able to commit more crimes was the experience level of the criminals taken into account in determining the planning and the ultimate resulting crime scene oh there were some that were juveniles as well as some that were in their 30s and 40s so that age or practice or whatever was uh not found to be a major factor and his wide span if you will of age um as well as number of crimes I believe you indicated that there are three possibilities for a crime scene disorganized organized and mixed and you have testified that there were factors about this particular crime scene which were organized correct correct why isn't this a mixed crime scene uh it could well when you you don't have to give it that type of category first of all it was post crime activity uh rather than pre and coming onto the scene remember there are three phases that you look at the before the during and the after and they try to um break that down into those categories why isn't this particular crime scene in the mandas case a mixed crime scene because there just too many factors that point to dis organization and the main factors then are the noise of the weapon and the and the wounds the choice of the weapon the location uh that that and the noise level injuries and location of wounds yes one of the other factors that you consider um in evaluating a crime scene is where the injuries are located on the victims correct that's correct and we spoke about that uh this morning but I wanted to ask you um isn't it true that in certain kinds of cases there will be um injuries to the sexual organs of the victims that's correct and that indicates what generally it may indicate a sexual U motive for the killing all right such as somebody having been abused as a child no no it's it's uh what they do to the victim it usually means that there is some sexual act or some with with the victim not with not the reverse okay and so have you ever seen a case where there was um an Abus victim who struck back and then injured the victim in the genitals or in sex organs where there is no killing no where there is a killing where there is a killing I can't think of one how many hours have you spent working on this case ma'am I've spent up to up to the trial I've spent I think 83 hours and what is your rate of compensation please uh understand the usual rate is $100 an hour okay is are you getting the usual rate yes all right and then after the trial began uh you put in more hours correct yes that's is correct correct and as a matter of fact you sat to uh testimony in this courtroom yes I have how many other hours have you put in that you know of uh probably put in another five six 7 hours okay so approximately 90 hours correct yes yes around 90 one of the other things that you indicated would which would make this a disor a disorganized crime scene would be the lack of staging is that correct that's correct all right why is okay first of all what is staging staging is where there is an attempt to make the crime look like another crime now if there were an attempt in this case to make it look like a professional murder what would you have expected to in terms of staging in terms of staging the weapon would have been different single shot um use of a handgun um that would have certainly eliminated any of the a lot of the blood in the uh multiple wounds uh gloves gloves being used well do you have any okay gloves being used in order to avoid fingerprints corre all right but if Fingerprints of the defendants had been found in this house they would have been explicable correct well yes but gloves could be used in terms of the um loading shells they would not necessarily have had to uh shells would be with print all right so an alternative to picking up the shells and getting rid of the weapon would have been to actually uh use glass correct I mean that's one suggestion one offer yes so if one were planning out a way of making a domestic homicide look like an organized crime hit one should only have used one one wound uh one shot correct yes a different kind of weapon yes and what was the what were the other things the wearing the gloves um also could have made it look like a burglary remove some items okay but what I'm talking about is not a burglary I'm talking about an a professional hit so those are the things that that should have been done is that correct well if you're trying to Stage it as that I thought that was a question to Stage it as a planned organized domestic killing and in well no I'm talking about if you wanted to make an in-house killing look like the mafia or or a hit man had done it what kind of staging would have been necessary to convey that to a sophisticated FBI trained um investigator well the main thing would be choice of weapon as we've already said which would be one or two bullets to each person and those would be the two thing the choice of the weapon and the number of um injuries yeah use of gloves and and use of gloves this particular instance um and they would have been in and out and it would have been a lot less messy it would have been like two shots to the head and then they would be gone for each you know it would have been if it was a mafia hit different type of gun they would have been probably like a small pistol maybe with a silencer even so yeah totally different kind of crime I guess is what they're trying to get out okay St that please in addition to classifying crime scenes as organized and disorganized you've also classified types of homicide and I believe I asked you about that this morning yes there are four major types and then there are subparts correct correct now you said in your direct testimony that this is a domestic homicide correct preliminary observation yes all right um preliminary observation could you also reach the conclusion that this was a domestic homicide which had features of inheritance or Insurance related death no okay and why not why not because the the um crime scene was as it was presented it really matches for the most part all of the variables in the um domestic spontaneous domestic but AR isn't there the possibility of crossover between the two types of killings well you not necessarily um you don't you don't see that on initial crime scene all right well um I have this book here and I take it are you familiar with the types of homicides which are written about in the book that's got your name on the cover yes all right and are you familiar with the section that deals with insurance inheritance related death yes am I approach please your honor you yes I'm going to show her to see if she's familiar with this passage she she is familiar all right then I go read it I'm going to object to counil reading anything and we still have yet the council both things um as far as Mark of it that request is this point as far as reading it what are you propos to read um crime scene indicators frequently noted in insurance and inheritance Deb is this a PR question yes it be sh to me first this book seems to indicate that in the first paragraph under crime scene indicators frequently noted in an insurance inheritance type of death usually the body is not concealed but is left in the open or somewhere that Discovery is probable that that occur in in this case yes okay the nature of the crime scene or where it falls in the Continuum between organized and disorganized will depend on the amount of planning and capacity of the offender okay so those are two things about a um crime scene involving an insurance or inheritance death which are not inconsistent with the crime scene in the men's case are they no that go no may I have a mo please it indicates as well that an example of one extreme of this Continuum is a very spontaneous offense committed by a youthful impulsive and or less intelligent subject and the crime scene would contain more physical evidence and then in parenthesis it said fingerprints Footprints Etc now in the Mena's case there were no fingerprints that were that were that linked the defendants to committing this particular offense is that correct that's correct in fact there were fingerprints found in the house of the defendants but they were not anything incriminating right noain question were you given the all the police reports in this case to your knowledge yes I was were you given police reports which contained fingerprints comparisons no I don't believe that was comparisons to what no fingerprints from the house which were compared with the defendants were you given that information no if the defendants lived there so if their fingerprints were in the house that proves nothing why I don't know fingerprints seriously yeah I mean the boys lived there their fingerprints would absolutely be in that house everywhere I don't care they would be in that house doesn't prove anything if there were fingerprints in the house that um were the defendants that wouldn't be incriminating would it or as a crime scene analyst wouldn't you agree that if one's fingerprints are found in one's home that that's not per se incriminating well I'm not sure I wouldn't say it's not incriminating you certainly are going to expect to find fingerprints in the home all right but as long as the fingerprints are not found on um shotgun shells or a gun or some other item associated with The Killing fingerprints on the walls or the tables or wherever would not be incriminating correct not a domestic killing that's correct okay and if the domestic killing um was also with with if the domestic killing was also an insurance inheritance related death then the same rules would apply correct yes but you're going much further down the line to get that motivation when you're reading there that you have to have a lot more information than what we had an initial crime scene but but that's I'm just reading the book I mean that's what you that's what this book says is that a question isn't this isn't that what this book says I mean are you familiar with this particular chapter objection I four questions in re ask the question please okay I'm going to continue to read this crime scene would contain more physical evidence fingerprints Footprints Etc the weapon would be one of opportunity Acquired and left at the scene okay that didn't happen in this particular case that's correct okay the crime scene would be chaotic with evidence of sudden violence to the victim a blitz style attack that does that that's just the same as domestic that's correct all right so there's no distinction then there's no way for you to say that the blitz style attack would necessarily be exclusive to domestic homicides yeah that's why we say you have to have a lot more information to get it into those categories yes it's all the information combined you can't just take one piece this is what they keep trying to do is take one piece of information pull it out and say well that's not consistent and you can't do that you have to look at everything as a whole the information would not be crime scene information would it that's correct that so in an insurance or inheritance related kind of killing you need to go outside of the crime scene to determine motivation yes all right the other extreme of the crime scene involving insurance inheritance is one committed by a calculating proficient offender who has mapped out all aspects of the crime ahead of time this methodical approach is represented by an orderly crime scene in which there's minimal physical evidence present now in the Mendez crime scene what physical evidence was present which led to the defendants as the perpetrators well the physical evidence was the massive amount of there's a lot of blood so that the propensity for that being on clothes shoes Etc was High um the physical evidence was the shotguns the shells the injuries um I think that's it all right but the but the Blood can be washed off correct well eventually yes and shells can be removed and thrown away yes and this goes on to say that in the more extreme of the crime scene involving Insurance inheritance the weapon is one of choice brought to and removed from the scene by the offender now in this particular case it was quite clear that the weapon was removed from the crime scene well there's no weapon found that's correct right and there is evidence to suggest that it was not a killing of opportunity for someone who just came into the house grabbed a knife and stabbed but rather there was evidence to suggest that the weapon had been brought to and removed from the crime scene yes but at that time you wouldn't know whether the weapon actually had been be that you have to find out when you retrieve the weapon and police would not know whether a weapon had been present and taken away all right until they talked to the defendants later that night and found out that the parents owned rifles and not shotguns right well they might want to talk to some other people too I mean you don't just limit your interviews with um persons immediately in the area yes but if it's a domestic homicide that occurs inside of the house um the people who live inside of the house would be the ones who would know the habit and custom and possessions of the victims correct that's true generally yes now I believe in talking about emotionality as one of the factors determining an organized versus disorganized crime scene um you indicated that the number of shots would indicate emotionality is that correct yes right um do you think that you can determine emotion that you can break that emotionality into distinguishing between fear and anger not necessarily no and fear and anger would manifest themselves the same way in a crime scene is that correct not necessarily but they could I'm not sure they could um you can have features of each all right so are you saying that if you go to a crime scene you can determine by looking at the crime scene whether the person who committed the crime was in fear or was angry no they going to be elements of both because that's generally what's in a fear action can can be in a fear reaction when people who know each other kill each other is there an element of emotionality generally in that relationship over yes all right so the fact that there is emotionality does not mean that CL that the crime wasn't planned not in and of itself if one is going to go in and do a murder for the first time and there's a great deal of uncertainty about how it's going to proceed wouldn't that cause fear or emotionality in the best laid plan no I wouldn't say that so you would say that if someone had planned out a murder and they thought they planned it well that when they actually went in to commit the murder they would not suffer from any kind of emotional reaction to what they were doing what I would say is high emotionality means low rationale and low thinking that's generally the rule that one applies to that F that indic if you will found at a crime scene but wouldn't you say that in cases where the murderer the murderer knows the victim that there's going to be some degree of emotionality carried out in the crime no I think I've said that that doesn't have to be a factor it certainly can be a factor but it doesn't have to be no it doesn't have to be but it often is even this is argument yes please ask a question rather than arguing with with us all right now and looking at the injuries and the location of the injuries um what was it about the location of the injuries that made you feel this was disorganized was it just a mere number or was the location important as well both location in terms of it being more of a random rather than a focused one sight of the body uh which would show much more thought and planning and uh [Applause] organization now I believe you indicated um some of the things that made you believe this was a domestic homicide was that there was no forced entry do you remember your testimony um would forced entry be necessary if doors were locked in the house no not necessarily I suppose you could break them down well for instance in a burglary case if the people who own the home that's burgled fail to lock their doors the fact that there was no Forest entry doesn't mean that the person didn't come in without permission right uh no but certainly I've seen cases where even with unlocked doors the window or somehow it's broken to make it look that way that's a staging feature okay so if you were doing a murder that you wanted it to look like a burdy then you would intentionally break something to make it look like there was a Breakin well I've seen that in cases that's one example okay if you were doing a murder and you wanted it to look like an organized crime hit or a professional hit would you necessarily want to have signs of forest entry again that would depend on how it was planned organized uh crimes are planned in a very careful way I you'd have to look at what was inside their thinking to to do that you can't just make a blanket yes no on that well when an organized uh crime figure or a hit man commits um a residential breaking in order to accomplish the hit one thing that's that's a good thing not to do is to alert your victim by break banking noise breaking into their house OBC this as speculation arguments so the fact that there's no Force entering this house did you consider that the doors were often left unlocked well we're looking at the preliminary at this crime SC you wouldn't necessarily know that you'd need more information you'd have to do some interviewing to find out whether doors were normally left open however this is a home that has Gates and and a fairly um for voting type of uh residence it's not one that looks wide open at least from the crime scenes all right so but if after you determin by speaking to the other residents of the house the doors were often left unlocked the gates were often left open and in fact on this night the gate had been left open open you could eliminate a sign of forced entry as being a factor correct yes there was no forced entry that's true right but you could but you could eliminate that fact as a factor in in evaluating the crime scene because it doesn't make any difference if the doors were unlocked again I think that's argument sustain the question once you determin that the house is often left unlocked does it still matter in your Annis that there was no sign of for entry it still requires a lot of planning for for someone if you're talking about someone to know which doors are going to be open and how to get in and having a floor plan and all of that and where people are that that requires a fair amount of planning and and knowledge if you will of the situation or luck on the part of the perpetrator by just well opening the door uh criminals aren't going to have a lot of luck I mean they're going to make sure that things work the way they want them to work now you've had the benefit of several years of studying the Criminal Mind wouldn't you say I mean you've been studying criminology and criminals for since 1980 yes okay do you have any evidence to suggest that either of these defendants had the level of knowledge that you had about how crimes are committed well I certainly don't think they have the level that that I've had but they are bright okay young men you indicated as well that the bodies had not been touched and that was one of the factors that you considered in classifying this as disorganized yes okay how do you know the bodies weren't touched the bodies were in the POS well from Corner's report but also it was on police report that it did not look uh as though the bodies they were in the position that they were when they were killed or possibly falling I mean there was it was not quite clear whether the U but there was no indication that they had been moved touched cleaned up um covered any of those kinds of features but if in fact the moving or the touching had been minimal there's no way you could tell that from looking at the crime scene is there um generally that is something that is a major observation and that did not seem to be an observation that I saw anybody making any of the materials well for instance if someone's hands were open at the time of their demise and someone goes and Crosses their hands in front of them for instance there's no way that you as a um criminologist could tell that right I guess I couldn't tell that but I would rely on Experts Corners people like that but that kind of movement wouldn't have any physical findings there would no be no way to substantiate that kind of movement would there this is argumentative and they will be ways Council you're argu object no Foundation question over question uh yes from the from the information I had there was no way to that anyone had determined that they had been moved and there was no way to determine that they hadn't been moved at all was there over true okay so the fact that the bodies weren't touched is really not a factor in your analysis oh no it is a factor in my analysis I mean that the overwhelming evidence is that they weren't that they essentially were found as they died so that the death scene and the crime scene were one and that's a very important piece of information now another thing that you indicated made this a domestic homicide is said there was no evidence of theft you remember your testimony in that regard yes that would also be true in a professional hit as well that there would be no evidence of that not necessarily that might have been a staging well if a professional Hitman did the murder he might desire to make it look like a burglary or a robbery correct correct right but if it was just a hit with no other purpose in other words if I wanted to make it look like my idea of an organized crime hit would theft necessarily be part of that protection okay okay do you understand my question that is that no the lack of evidence of theft could just as easily lead you to believe that it was an execution style killing as it was a domestic homicide over is that a question now yes is that correct I mean it could appear to be that read it back it could appear to be I'm not I'm sure there are examples like that but whether that's usual I'm not prepared to say that well when the police or the Press talk about an execution style sling you're familiar with that phraseology I take it yes and in that the there is the assumption that this was not a a financially motivated in terms of a robbery or burglary but rather was the focus of the crime was to kill is that correct yes okay now then if this were an organized crime scene you would have expected the use of a smaller caliber weapon right yes you would have expected it to occur outside of the home generally and you would have expected one shot to the head and that's it yes okay what happens when there's a shot to the head and the person doesn't die when you are an organized planning type of criminal well if it's well planned that's not going to happen that they are pretty expert in their Commission of the offense now I believe you've also testified about the organic and biological origins or modifications of the brain as it relates to fear is that correct yes now when you talk about trauma the kind of trauma which causes your genetic restructuring what kind of trauma are you talking about are you talking about being afraid to cross-examine or are you talking about getting hit over the head what are you talking about I'm talking about a situation that overwhelms a person's usual capacity to cope and when you're talking about the biological response to that are you talking about that response that you get sometimes where it feels like you get a of adrenaline and you get very excited because a car is about to drive into you or you just saw someone's purse being stolen is that what you're talking about well that's one of that's an example that most people can identify with uh because that's exactly what people feel yes that that was the the stress hormones being released to prepare you to do something is it the stress hormones which cause this ultimate biological response and this biological restructuring well that's in the continued fear in the continued uh situation you don't have that necessarily if you're in the example you use in your car and it's a one-time situation you will feel the effects of the stress hormones for a Time limited period unless you get into the accident all right and then every time if every time I get into my car I have an accident then I'm going to have this continued um buildup of the stress hormones and the eventual genetic recoding well you can get some people can't even get back in their car after a certain you get the the avoidant pattern sets in that the accident was so um frightening that they will not get even drive again for a while okay what what kind of trauma is necessary in order to trigger the genetic recoding okay well if you're talking with children U and again you have to look at the age because that's very important in the development of the child that continued exposure to highly fearful situations over prolong time period uh has a capacity to certainly raise that person's ability to read codes for um danger okay when you're talking about highly fearful situations what kind of situations are you talking about those can be situations in which the child is repeatedly frightened scared um held in certain positions uh not made to feel secure uh not uh some of the early um years in terms of the bonding and the holding and all of that can be enough to uh frighten a child for a lack of security lack lack of safety and that just failure to be held is something that could trigger this sort of biological restructuring it's the activities that go along with it generally someone that's going to do that may also be hitting the child there may be physical abuse um some of those what I was originally talking about is more psychological aspect but you can get the hitting you can certainly get sexual abuse starting early with children um those are some of the examples is the kind of fear that one experiences in watching a scary movie sufficient to cause this kind of biological restructuring well that's at a later age um we were talking about young children but certainly children who constantly are exposed to frightening uh movies generally are able to say that they either try to avoid it not want to see it and actually take themselves out of the situation but what about the children who seek out Friday the 13th and these sequels and the sequel after that and the sequel after that aren they exposed to fear fearful situations they not may not be interpreting it as fearful all right so would it be fair to say that um the level of trauma necessary causes response varies from Individual to individual generally it does have that what's called an idiosyncratic aspect but there are certainly situations which are considered to be um traumatizing by most people most professionals that there and that's why definitions if you will have been written on what is child abuse what is child Mal treatment what is child sexual abuse now when you're talking about trauma sufficient to cause this change are you looking together all kinds of child abuse are you talking only about physical uh sexual what kind of child abuse are you speaking of when you when you use the term child abuse well child abuse you have to then narrow down to the specific act that you're talking about um I just listed some another type of uh frightening experience for children is to witness overwhelming experiences and there's a a body of literature that actually documents the amount of trauma that children have just witnessing a parent um in a in a domestic violence scene or seeing a parent suicide or are actually witnessing a a killing is one experience like that sufficient to cause this genetic recoding certainly one one experience is enough to trigger symptoms we certainly see very a wide range of symptoms in children who have even experienced one traumatic event but is it enough to cause genetic recoding which would cause you to have this biological reaction yeah well generally It is believed that it takes continued repeated exposure to a traumatizing event and is there any way to evaluate how much repated exposure is needed to cause this biological change well you usually see it in the symptoms of the of the child or the whoever you're looking at and that will give you a pretty good indicator of how seriously impacted and traumatized the person is the nature of the symptomatology is there any tests that you can give to an individual to see if they've undergone this genetic or biological restructuring as a result of repeated exposure to trauma uh not per se we talked about that fridy not per se on the genetic recoding um but certainly there are studies that speak to the lowered um biochemical reaction and that's been there's been a fair amount of research on that because that's where some of the uh treatment methods have come into um into play okay but as far as a blood test or a brain scan or something like that is there any is there any physical way to determine whether or not someone has actually undergone these changes these genetic restructuring not on the genetic restructuring that's been noted in the animal research I spoke about I believe you spoke about studies on snails is that correct yes that's one of one of the studies yes is there a difference between the brain of a snail and a human being well see this is in the brain stem and these and this is in the survival brain and The Reptilian Brain and that is why researchers uh are able to make the suggestion because it does share a similar function as in as in the human brain but does the human brain have features that the snail brain does not oh yes it has higher level cortical functioning a human being can reason yes it has the cortical function sure yes and a snail cannot we don't think the snail can okay we're fairly certain snails don't reason correct yes okay so what you're saying then is that the studies on the snails show that when they're exposed to trauma that there are biological changes which occur in their brain stem well when it's stimulated when that is actually the fear response is stimulated that's what it shows and then they have tried to U they see what's called the avoidant pattern if the snail moves away from you know moves back in it shell or whatever that certainly is an avoidant pattern and that seems to last for about an hour that's what the short-term memory um they then look at what chronic stimulation of this Spar Center does and shows that it that's where they get into the um RNA and the DNA the transmission and the translation Factor the messages that go back and forth in the neurons when they're so they're scaring the snails is that basically what they're doing they're stimulating the fear okay and and when they stimulate the fear in these snails how do they do that well they they um use some type of an electrode that would and the snail goes back in its little shell okay so they shock it with an electrode and they scare it with the electrode is that yes it's stimulating the yes okay now um so then would it be fair to say that human beings are exactly like snails in that regard no I'm not making I'm saying that the research on animals is very very important to understand the structure inil in hum brains and the fear response because fear response is such a basic and Universal response in both the animal world as well as in the human world so that at that point that's where uh and the learning piece is very very important to how people learn and the avoidant learning now the uh research that's gone on in this uh biological recoding began in what about 1985 or six I think you've indicated uh yes it seems about the mid 80s all right and that research is not concluded is that correct well there's um well no more and more studies get funded I mean there's been an initial um outlay of federal money and there's no way to conduct the same kind of studies on humans that you can on a snail because it's unethical to do so right well yes you're not supposed to poke human beings with electrodes and see what their chemical responses are correct that's correct likewise you're not supposed to dissect their brains to see if there's been any kind of recoding correct correct but they are doing studies on people that have major problems it's not but they and they use different type of techniques they use these um Imaging techniques and so forth so there are ways to replicate um for researchers what the brain activity and that that's important now in this particular case there is no test that you can give to these particular defend to determine whether or not they have undergone genetic recoding as a response to fear that's correct at this point in time [Applause] okay we have a moment please Ron now I believe you've indicated that the animal response to fear is fight or flight yes what determines the choice well it's automatic and the most automatic response is to Fleet is to get away from the threatening Source okay and when you talk about the most automatic response are we talking about snails or humans well we're talking about a wide range wi snails uh animals or rodents mammals all right so the the preference in this biological response is to flee the adverse stimulus if they can that's correct okay I can now have there been any studies correlating the frequency of suspected genetic recoding in child abuse victims and by child abuse I mean generic child abuse yeah not not my knowledge and when you talk about this uh hypervigilance is hypervigilance a descriptive term for the watchfulness um that occurs in people who have been subject to repeat trauma yes all right and that's not a biological term that's a psychological term but it has a biological component we now know the research tends to suggest it has a biological component is there any way to test to see if someone is hypervigilant I I mean can in other words is it ethical for a researcher to recreate a situation in a a subject to see if they can make that subject hypervigilant or well they do try to do that on some of the studies they will take two groups and then compare the two groups and they will show them uh especially visual kinds of things uh and they will take um skin test the gal meter test and they'll take pulse and they'll take blood pressure and they'll try to take samples if you will of the body's response while they're say projecting onto a screen some frightening images so in that respect they have there has been a fair amount of of research but but that research is not on people who who are actually ongoing some sort of abuse but it's on isn't it usually done on college students well but it's done on traumatized populations they're doing it with uh veterans who have been exposed to combat um they're you know they're doing it on some rap victims uh there are other now populations that it is being tested on they'll compare it to a normative group that has not had that particular type of trauma now if a person is hypervigilant and constantly scanning their environment for for clues or cues that they're going to be abused are they doing that 24 hours a day or only in the situations in which the trauma has occurred in the past um first of all is not necessarily a conscious type of phenomenon in other words the person goes about their usual business whatever the Daily Business is so it's not like it's uppermost in their mind uh they have adapted it's just that as something comes up in the environment they may get this sudden overwhelming feeling of anxiety and have not necessarily any idea why uh and it may be due to a lot of things but they it's not like they're walking around in a very suspicious way or in a very paranoid way it's not that at all but wouldn't it be fair to say that what triggers what triggers a response is a repetition of Prior stimulus it comes in through the sensory system it comes in basically through that um brain level in which what is seen the sight smell touch taste and feel our basic five senses is the way that all experiences registered so when something gets activated and that is doesn't necessarily have any words that's why they don't necessarily know it's just all of a sudden they have this reaction and the reaction has there's no correlation between the reaction and a prior stimulus well it's a prior stimulus that has cued them in right and so that for instance if I have been bitten by dogs my whole life and I've been bitten 20 times by 20 different dogs and little dogs big dogs any kind of dog when I see a dog I'm going to react and want to get away from the dog or avoid the dog correct that's one yes that's probably one Behavior pattern okay am I going to react the same way to a cat if you've had no negative experience with cats again you don't know whether because it's an animal we wouldn't be able to to totally uh see what your CU are it is an animal whether you'd make that Association okay would I have the same reaction to a rock no okay so that the hyper vigilance okay she's nuts this prosecutor she does not understand basic concepts hypervigilance is something that you're not conscious that you're doing I have I have this I that it's caused really bad anxiety in me um as I've brought up on this uh on my channel before I don't want to get into detail details really but I was in an abusive relationship my ex-husband was something else so um basically after the relationship ended um I I was in a state of hypervigilance for probably several years and it is it's not just finding danger in your environment it's like every little noise you notice every little thing it like it it can also like irritate you so like little interruptions throughout the day when I would work in an office and I'd get interrupted constantly or you know I'd hear like loud noises in the hallway um because people would like push carts and stuff those kinds of things like you notice them you're hyper Vigilant you're hyper a A Ware of your surroundings it doesn't necessarily mean um I mean the reason you are that way is because of the trauma that you've been through but it makes you super aware of what's going on in your environment it can cause anxiety it can cause serious other you know panic attacks and things like that because you're constantly aware you're constantly um trying to pick out things in your environment subconsciously subconsciously you're picking out things in your environment that could be a potential danger and in doing so you're very aware like you're very observant of things because you rely on your senses more it's like that's what it is it's like your senses are heightened all the time your body can't function that way and it causes severe issues like autoimmune diseases and fibromyalgia and all sorts of other things because your body can't be on a hyper alert um uh state it can't be in a hyper alert sense of awareness all the time but that's what hypervigilance is and it's I don't know I hope I'm explaining that well enough that you kind of understand it's just something subconsciously you're doing constantly all your senses are heightened everything is just like o sensory overload that's a good way to put it because it can it would wear on me like the noises would give me like freaking panic attacks at work it would be so irritating and it's not something I could really control it was just like it was happening outside of me and um I was just get really frustrated with it but anyways I hope that kind of explains hypervigilance a little bit better let me look up a um a definition and see if that explains it any better to but hypervigilance if you have it you get it hyper vigilance this is when you constantly scan your environment to find threat and abnormal you may have abnormal responses to Everyday sounds sights and situations that's a good way of wording it you're like hyper aware you're constantly aware and scanning your environment to find threats whether you find them or not but it just makes you overly aware and you do have abnormal responses like you will react like oh my God that noise just fing drives me nuts and you don't know why you're screaming in the middle of the day because you've heard the cart go by 17 times so that's one of the that's just one of those things um let me see if there's some other symptoms that I can show you or just kind of tell you in case you're wondering maybe you don't know um you can get rapid breathing dilated pupil sweating increased heart rate elevated blood pressure restlessness intense muscles this is while you're throughout the day and you're being hypervigilant uh behavioral problems can create a fixation on potential threats you find everything threatening in your environment an increase of the startle reflex so like any little movement or noise in your environment might make you jump overreacting to things that are happening around you in a way that um may seem hostile you think everything around you is dangerous or hostile like maybe somebody is giving you some feedback and it's not meant to be mean or anything or somebody just says some kind of comment not even feedback somebody just says some kind of comment and you take it the wrong way because you think that they're attacking you personally and that's not um that's hypervigilance it could be like you just overreact to what uh other people are saying an overreaction to sounds you get agitated really quickly um distraction from engaging with others carrying out important tasks and recreational activities you're Al you're distracted a lot troubl sleeping argumentative and combative with others emotional symptoms increased severe anxiety fear panic and worrying persistent worrying so if you have any of those symptoms or many or all of those symptoms you might have hypervigilance so just wanting to make you guys aware of what it is really and the cues and everything are specific to the trauma the person has suffered in order to become hypervigilant the characteristics of the trauma that's correct now you've analogized um this kind of fear response to baded wife syndrome correct yes all right and one of the examples you use is the woman who's at home and her husband goes to the bar and he comes home and says they were out of Miller I think that was your example or was it was given to you as an example yes it was okay what what is it to that battered woman about there's no miller at the bar that is the cue to her well that's the word association she hears something that I'm sorry that she hears something she hears a word Miller right and the reason Miller has some meaning to her is because on other occasions when her husband's come home from the bar and said they had no miller she's been beaten yes that I think is the way the example was given okay so the example on the battered wife syndrome is a is a woman or a significant other who has been beaten over a period of time correct and the battered wife syndrome exclusively well not exclusively but always deal at least with one component which is being beaten well there's usually more that's involved in a battered wife it isn't just being beaten I mean because well she's being psychologically abused as well right but the battered woman fears for her life because she has been beaten before yes okay and she begins to learn in which situations she will be beaten correct I'm not sure she she certainly can be queued in well didn't you yes all right well learn well you indicated that this this um response to trauma is a way of the of the body and the person learning correct the trauma learning yes okay so what happens with the battered wife is she could be sitting with a friend and her husband comes in and says there's no miller at the bar and her friend may look at that and say so what correct correct but to the woman who's been battered before after having been advised that there's no miller at the bar this is a very significant event correct because she's been beaten before and she fears for her life yeah maybe mitigated by the fact she's got a friend there but she certainly will get anxious more likely than not become anxious what what I mean by the friend is is an outside Observer looking at this particular situation would say well what's so significant about it's Miller time yes okay whereas we know that in the past with this woman every time she's been told there's no miller at the bar she has been beaten yes okay is this like P's dog well that's a conditioned response and that's exactly what you are describing yes right it's a little bit more complicated than that but um that would be one way of looking at it all right so I'm Pavlov lived in the last century right he lived a long time ago yes yes okay so basically what it is is that every time my husband says there's no miller at the bar I get beaten and tonight he comes home and says there's no miller at the bar and I think I'm going to get beaten right right I'm not sure she says I'm going to get beaten but she certainly is going to have the the anxiety and the fear that something bad is going to happen and that's the kind of cue that you've talked about in terms of triggering this biological response yes correct correct all right so that where an outsider would look in and see that that there's no clue there at all that the beating is going to happen someone with prior experience is going to look at this and say I'm about to get beaten correct yes all right what happens when the husband comes home from the bar and he brings his wife a box of chocolates okay is that the kind of thing that's going to trigger the fear response well see that's the kind of thing that's going to get this unpredictability which is usually a feature that you find in these situations and the person and that even can make the person the the wife or whomever more anxious because sometimes he comes home and talks about Miller and she gets beaten another time he comes home and he brings her box of candy and everything is okay so he is in a way probably trying to keep her off guard but if he brings her the box of candy she knows she's not going to get beaten if that's been her experience if if she knows it well it would depend on whether she hasn't gotten beaten because of the chocolates the candy well but she's not getting beaten because there's no miller at the at the bar she's getting beaten for other reasons correct I could that in a little B and you understand the question oh could you repeat it she's not getting beaten because there's no miller at the bar she's getting beaten because her husband is frustrated upset unhappy all those other things right oh she's getting beaten because of his right because of his Dynamics that's correct if the husband comes home and he goes to bed and she's never been beaten after that particular situation that would not be a clue to her in other words if she he comes home and goes to bed then she's not clued in that she's about to be beaten correct that with that example that's right okay so would it be fair to say that in order to get this biological fight ORF flight response the Q needs to be something that that is a that's repetitive well the Q is going to don't forget Q in to a previous situation so there can be fragments if you will in the que it doesn't have to be a blatant overt kind of statement like Miller uh there could be other factors I it could be the smell of beer he comes home and he smells like Millers yeah I mean that that could be enough too and so then he goes to bed and she may not still be that unsure that he's not going to wake up and and beat her but but in order to have that response she would have had to know that on prior occasions when he came home smelling like beer she got beaten yeah now people who are who have this shortened response time this biological response time to fear are they like that with everybody in the world in other words if this woman has been beaten every time her husband comes home from the bar and says there's no miller okay and she sees um a movie for instance where someone says there was no miller is she going to have the same fear response because of what she sees in the movie no we have what was called fear specific situations and those that are fear General um but you're giving examples where it is really fear specific that there is a definite person that is going to injure her given a certain set of circumstances now when you say fear specific and fear General is there a difference in the biological recoding that goes on because of whether it's generalized or specific fear no what I mean by the fear General is say that somebody has been traumatized and there's a certain odor um they can be in another situation smell that and that will trigger in the fear response and yet whoever it has nothing to do with the person it's just that it gets activated if you will by the in a more General sense and that's different from what we've been talking about which is very specific that person you said is continually beating the wife why is it that flight is the preferred method of avoiding this trauma to fight do you know no it's just that tends to be the preferred it isn't the only situation a lot of people can be trained uh not to flee and in fact that's what is done in situations where people are required to fight um there usually is some pre um preparation for being able to fight I mean like in the car situation people are going to try to avoid an accident they're not going to try to speed up so they have so they have one right okay yeah now I'm going to give you hypothetical if two people are raised in the same environment but are raised very differently um they are treated very differently their experiences are very different would you expect to see the same biological recoding in each of them there's a certain amount of fear level that is idiosyncratic if you will in other words unique to that particular person but and it may look different but it is experienced as fear to those two individuals so that's very hard to say just because one person two people are treated differently uh the manner in which they're treated can have the same outcome if you will I.E to accelerate the fear response is one of the important things in this fear response the repetition of the stress in other words if I'm traumatized at the age of eight and then not re-traumatized is that different from being traumatized throughout my life well there's what's called inter trauma yes chronic but intermittent um and then there is just absolutely chronic that's with a pretty Relentless kind of an abusive situation all right and would you expect the biology of those two separate people to be different in other words the one who's traumatized at age eight with no repetition versus the one who's traumatized all their life no no I wouldn't necessarily you wouldn't expect it to be different no because uh you have to look at what is being activated in the situation you still have to look at each individual to see what those life experiences have been but wouldn't it be fair to say that all people are different and their response to trauma is always going to be yes yes your honor may we take our afternoon break now I think I can shorten my cross-examination if I have a few minutes all right in court and all other participants as well may continue your cross- examination Dr burges I want to return briefly to the classifications that you testified to already I believe you indicated in both your direct and cross-examination that this was in your view a domestic homicide correct yes okay and if you you have a domestic homicide that is for purposes of insurance or inheritance that's possible correct in other words it's possible to have a domestic homicide which is also a homicide committed for insurance or inheritance there are cases like that yes okay so uh in addition in the domestic homicide I believe that there are two subcategories the spontaneous domestic homicide and the stage domestic homicide yes is that correct and the stage domestic homicide indicates that this is a stage domestic homicide is planned and may be due to the same stresses as in an unstaged domestic homicide is that correct that is correct and the major differences between these two homicides is in their crime scenes that is correct okay would another difference be in the degree of planning between the staged and the spontaneous well that is one of the discriminating factors one of the crime scene indicators noted in the stage domestic homicide is that the crime scene of the well-planned domestic murder reflects a more control organized crime the weapon fingerprints and other evident items often are removed in this particular case the weapons and the um items containing incriminating fingerprints were in fact removed from the scene that is true okay the body is usually not concealed in this particular case the bodies were not concealed is that correct well on the stage domestic you have to be they can be uh staged to look like another crime so bodies can be altered but in this particular book of which you were an editor it says the body is usually not concealed is that one of the crime scene indicators of the stage domestic homicide but it also can be altered I mean maybe an open view but it also can be altered I think there are some examples in that case that gives that it goes on to say the crime scene often involves the victims and or offenders residence but location of crime scenes outside the home also are possible so a plan domestic homicide often involves the victim's residence is that correct that is true staging is frequently noted in the plan murder it's um often made to look accidental other deaths may appear due to secondary criminal activities such as robbery or rape correct that's correct um in addition another staging um another way to Stage it would to try to make it look like a hit that is a professional killing is that in there no I'm asking you if that would be another I didn't think it was would that be secondary criminal activity though well it's not one of the defining characteristics for domestic killing all right so would it be your testimony then that it's only when you're trying to make it look like a robbery and not like a professional hit yeah that's that's generally for that category they can try to make it like it was a rape that's when they will alter clothing on the victim or something like that well why wouldn't it be possible for a stage domestic homicide for the perpetrator to try to make it look like a hit especially if one's parent was involved in an industry in which there were some underworld characters I think that call for speculations not Bas on okay so are you saying then that it's not possible in a stage domestic homicide for the perpetrator to try to make it look like a professional killing objection it's uh anything is possible but more likely than not it will not be staged in that way that I can't think of any cases that have ever come in like that all right but it's not out of the realm the possible is it I would say anything is possible of course but highly unlikely so it would be highly unlikely for a perpetrator in a stage domestic homicide to try to make it look like it was a professional hit that's what I'm saying yes in addition it says that search warrant suggestions for the investigator would be to search for evidence to corroborate a motive that's correct so in addition to the crime scene indicators um the investigator needs to look outside the crime scene for motivations on the part of the perpetrators that is correct now returning to the uh biological parts of fear I believe you indicated that people in in a fear response cannot override that response is that is that what you said no no no in a fear response the fear overrides the usual coping it doesn't mean that they don't do something but it it overwhelms the person and that's what triggers all of those stress hormones once a person is overwhelmed by the stress hormones is the person able to control his or her conduct well they do behave I mean again that car situation of course people do respond to try to avoid hitting a car okay are the people able to respond rationally once the fear hormones are triggered well rationale and fear it depends on the intensity and depends on the example I guess we'd have to really look at specific examples in that situation I was we just look at the car um I guess there are situations when people absolutely lose all rational thought and there is an accident that is one possibility but also times when people remember that there are certain things they can do to avoid an accident and do them in the midst of Their Fear well right I mean you hope that that's why people are trained in situations to be able to respond very quickly automatically I think that's the important thing is that automatically if something comes to you you will behave in that way to avoid the danger now the fear response which you've testified about that causes this um genetic recoding is that a response to a life-threatening situation well certainly life-threatening situation is a fear so all right but in order to in order to cause the genetic recoding does doesn't the um trauma have to be fairly severe the recoding is dependent upon the The Chronic nature the prolonged nature of it and kept at such high sustaining levels that the brain chemistry is constantly being uh activated okay now you talked about um people overriding their Fair responses people who are training for instance police officers correct yes would they be a good example of people who are trained to override Their Fear responses when they are placed in situations that scare them yes all right so there it is possible then to override this fear response well people are always trained the problem is given the situation you're only trained not necessarily in the situation so you still have that human component when faced with that situation so when you talk about the response of um fight or flight being automatic are you saying that a person can't control that response because it's so automatic or that they can at least with training learn to control that response well training tends to make things automatic so that you behave in a very s you try to keep control of the anxiety so that you do the things that you can train to do uh I police are one example but certainly combat is another where you have to train people to be able to go into a life-threatening situation I believe you talk in your um analogies about people who are victims in concentration camps yes okay um and I believe you probably were speaking about adult victims in concentration camps are we talking about everybody adults all right and given the opportunity to leave concentration camps the adults left the concentration camps when they were released yes when they were given the ability to leave they left yes okay now um I believe you indicated that most abused children don't leave they don't leave their abusive situation yes that's the findings yes they stay in the situation how do you know that how how do you know that most of you children don't leave because uh that's well two ways one that's what the research shows but it's very difficult for a child to just run away and get be able to be secure and safe and so forth so they generally tend to stay in the abusing situation and they tend to learn to adapt to the abuse okay have you ever done any studies or read any studies about children who are runaways adolesence and above who are runaways yes that was a funded study that I did with my colleagues and what were your findings about the incidence of child abuse in the home of children who are runways I believe our findings were uh close to 50% if not more certainly had one or more types of child abuse in their backgrounds that they were able to to and when in our discussion when we're talking about child abuse are you talking about sexual psychological physical or all three all three okay so at least 50% of the children who run away were subject to some sort of child abuse of whatever kind at home of that particular study that's correct all right now you indicated that most children Don't Run Away has there been some study done between the runways and The non- Runaways well for examp well the um again you have to look at the age uh you have to have a certain age where a child is able to run away it's highly unlikely you know under a certain age the children are going to run away all right let's say over the age of 12 then okay have there been studies done comparing children in the home who are subject to abuse and runaways well what probably was the most uh interesting finding of in doing the runaway study that we did they were all on adolesence is not we we asked the question why did they run away we should have asked the question why did they return because we found a real um some children some adolescence had actually returned more than 20 30 40 times back to the abusing situation and so that really refocused our study to see why would adolescence return to the home when when it's very clear how much abuse had been going on all right but was there any study done between children in the home who didn't run away and those who did run away who were over the age of 12 you mean with a control group well if they hadn't run away what would we be comparing them to children in the home who stay who are also being abused yes there were children in the home that didn't run away of these families are you talking about a family where one runs away and the other doesn't correct okay what about situations where you just have a control group of children who stay in an abusive relation situation and never leave and children who run away right generally what you find and what the studies indicate that you get a different type of symptom presentation in other words the running away is really an action U motivated type of symptom that's very different than the child that stays in the home and very often what you see in symptoms there are is the more depression the withdrawal uh perhaps even suicide attempts because they're unable to activate themselves to get out of the situation you know what percentage of children are subject to child abuse of all kinds percentage or numbers perc uh numbers are quite okay what are the numbers the numbers are I believe the and again it depends on what study you're looking at but I think it's now 1.5 million children of have in the United States have some type of abuse Factor if you will and that's reported understand that is report reped and um of those 1.5 million do you know which percentage of them stay in the home and Which percentage run away see then you'd have to look at the Adolescent level that generally tends to be when children do leave the home and I have I don't know what those statistics are we certainly have statistics on runaways but you can't be sure that just because they run away that they've also been abused the 1.5 million children who are suspected of having been victimized by child abuse how many children are there in that group are we talking about 20 million children are we talking about 50 million children it's the legal definition of child so it would be a legal definition and again it would be by state so you have to look at what the state reporting laws are and they do vary some are 18 and other some are 16 and other under some are 14 and under it's a little hard to give you a precise answer on that so the 1.5 million children are abused are nationwide is that correct that is my understanding one report yes and you can't tell me what percentage of children in this country presently then would be victims of child abuse they're all children right but how by definition right but you can't tell me how many children there are in the country therefore you can't say what 1.5 million is of that that group yeah I don't know how many children there are in the country you mean to give you a percentage Yeah so you don't know the percentage of children who are subject to child abuse is that correct well I know how many are reported and that's a to me that's a very large number well do you know what percentage of children is reported okay so when you say that half of all excuse me when you say that most children stay home how do you know that that's what research shows okay research would be on abused children and one of the questions would be have you ever run away and so that would be coded in and then there'd be a percentage but it's not as if somebody went to every house and found out that the children were abused and then found out if they left correct yeah that's not the way research is done the research is done only on the self-reported abuse right or it's done by survey there certainly are telephone surveys that um get into that type of data now um I believe you indicated that dis dissociation is a sign of abuse no no no I don't I didn't say that all right what did you say then about dissociation dissociation is a normal phenomenon in people what happens it just means putting your mind somewhere else and that goes on all of us do it every day so that in and of itself is Is Not Unusual what seems to happen with abused children is during the abuse they put their mind away more and more so it becomes a a really a habit for them and can get them into great difficulty when they're supposed to be say in school studying or uh listening to their parent or doing something that their mind just automatically slips into this associative state and it can actually even intensify but not all all people who engage in that behavior have been abused to no no not at all it's a normal phenomenon now you've been you've talked about parallels between the battered wife syndrome and um things that happen to Children correct yes okay because is battered wife syndrome a form of post-traumatic stress disorder uh it I'm not sure it's listed as that in the dsm3 r in fact it's not I don't think it is right okay now battered wife syndrome then is something that deals with physical abuse and its effect on the mental processes of the abused person the abused wife so it's physical and psychological it also can have sexual components correct but the batter wife syndrome is not limited in other words it doesn't deal just with psychological abuse there is a physical component to it that's correct and you know and then when you have the physical component you have the psychological component because we're thinking creatures correct correct there may be some people that find it also just a psychological um abuse sure is there any research that indicates that the same sort of traumatization occurs with merely psychological abuse as occurs in the battered wife syndrome well you mean another population that that gets Psy could you repeat the question let's say we're dealing hypothetically with a situation of psychological Mal treatment okay of adult of of an adolescent okay all right an adolescent maturing into adulthood psychological Mal treatment is there any kind of cause and effect between the psychological maltreatment and things such as hypervigilance as there is with the battered wife syndrome which has his Genesis in physical interaction between the parties and you don't have to be physically assaulted to traumatized this hyper vigilence in the other stages I'm OB for question assuming not requ since it does uh assume certain facts and you haven't asked a witness to ratify that you should break it down okay what are the components of bad white syndrome um the components would be psychological abuse in other words humiliation degradation uh things that are said implied to The woman there often is a physical component where the woman is hit punched shoved uh in other words an intentional act to injure her is made and then there's a third possible component of sexual abuse the um woman may be sex forced into a sexual situation intentionally so battered wife syndrome occurs in a woman who's been psychologically abused without any physical abuse I believe you could have that yes okay you could have that does that is that the way the batter wife syndrome is used more often than not it's going to be identified as having the physical component the physical and or the sexual component now presently there is no definable child abuse syndrome for the question is that correct over there are repeat that again there's no child abuse syndrome yeah well when we talk about child abuse we're talking about generic child abuse which can can contain psychological physical and sexual correct correct right is there any kind of syndrome that deals specifically with child abuse well the batter child syndrome was introduced in the literature back in the 60s I believe that's a very wellknown um writings out of uh Denver okay the batter child syndrome is a physical diagnosis when a physician examines a child and sees things like Spiral fractures or other kinds of injuries which are inconsistent with childhood injuries correct that's correct so the batter child syndrome deals with physical findings correct originally that's the way it was defined correct but it's rare that you just have physical findings all right but in terms of what we give a name to the name is given to a series of physical injuries like uh broken arm syndrome or something else correct this argum correct question pardon me did you finish your question I don't know I'll start again ask your question so The Battered child syndrome is not the same as the battered wife syndrome is that correct oh no I mean they're two separate population groups and age groups well but in addition the batter child syndrome is a name that was coined for medical doctors examining children who've been physically battered isn't that correct yes all right now the battered wife syndrome deals with psychological effects of battering doesn't it but it also has a physical component that's correct but in terms of the two names they're not synonymous are they no they weren't intended to be synonymous okay so are you aware of any kind of name that is given to psychological abuse in its child which results in some sort of trauma well the psychological maltreatment area there's quite a bit of literature on that and studies on that so that would be one example it's called psychological Mal treatment been books written on it but as far now if you're analogizing to the battered wife syndrome one of the components of the battered wife syndrome is physical abuse isn't that correct this is answer assumes not overall yes because battered means hit doesn't it yes all right so the battered wife syndrome deals with women who have been beaten yes and the psychological effects of that beating upon their perception correct yes okay is there anything in the literature which suggests that the battered wife syndrome is only limited to psychological Mal treatment do you understand my question yes okay is there thinking um there is in the literature a fair amount of discussion about the psychological implications in the battered wife or battered person battered woman syndrome correct but my question is when there is psychological abuse and no physical abuse do you expect to see the same thing such as hyper vigilance and other kinds of activities on the part of the injured spouse yes right so is it your testimony Ben that without physical components a person can still suffer the same sorts of trauma as the battered wife suffers when she's physically beaten by her husband I'm not going to say exactly the same because you obviously have introduced a new phenomenon where there's going to be physical injury but certainly from a psychological standpoint you're going to have symptoms and you may well have threats very often part of the psychological maltreatment are the threats that something terrible is going to happen that they're going to be killed or um other people children are going to be killed or whatever so that's a very very um from a psychological standpoint a very frightening fearful phenomenon for a person to endure but when the battered wife responds to the statement from her husband there was no miller at the bar what she's responding to is the prospect that she's going to be beaten correct that's one interpretation yes now in this particular case this case here the Menendez case there is no way for you to test these particular defendants to see if in fact they have had genetic repoting correct answer to there so your testimony about the um the way the brain functions in this in this genetic recoding is not specific to these two dependant is that correct that's correct so you're just explaining something that could happen that's correct and you're not saying that it did happen with these two defendants that's correct now the case of the battered wife her cue is a statement from her husband that he is going to do something to her correct we're not going to to the form of the question she talking about just that one hypothal yes would you ref raas the question clarify all right when we're talking about the battered wife hypothetical that you that was discussed in your direct examination yes the cue to the wife is the fact that he's comes home and says there was no miller at the bar well that's just one CU there can be other kinds of cues you might even hear the car pulling up you know and that might U we can't only I want to make it clear we can't just make it one specific queue that certainly is a powerful queue but it isn't the only que because because on other occasions when her husband's come home and said there's no miller at the bar he's pulled up in his car and she's heard that sound so she Associates the sound of him coming home with the bar from the bar with a potential for beating yeah those are the associations correct okay now if she has never had her life threatened before her husband coming home from the bar is not going to have any significance to her correct correct she's never been beaten she's never been threatened she's never been anything just a husband coming home from the bar no she's not going to be frightened all right and if he's never come through the door with a weapon after going to the bar then her life has never been threatened before is that correct and hypothetical that nothing has ever happened between these two persons correct right oh okay now if in fact she suffered psychological abuse at his hands in the past but has never been in a life-threatening situation do you know whether or not she's going to have this fear response when her husband comes to the door and says there's no miller at the bar well you have to tell me whether she's been threat you're saying she's never been threatened she's never been threatened and she's never been beaten but she has been she's been told that she's a terrible person she's been told she's a lousy housekeeper she's been told she's worthless but she's never had her life threatened she's still going to be anxious because she knows he's going to come in he's going to start all of that again and that certainly isn't anything that makes people U feel calm absolutely absolutely that's what I had to look forward to every time I walked in the door or he walked in the door um you still get anxious you still have high anxiety because just being around that person is like you got to walk on eggshells you don't know what's going to set them off so regardless of whether there was Miller or not you'd still be scared and relaxed correct but in terms of triggering this flight or fight response where her life has not been threatened before but she's been subject to this kind of abuse is is her fight or flight response going to be triggered by a repetition of psychological abuse again given very simple facts like that probably not but I would say that she certainly has altered um receptors in terms of how he treats her and all that it'd be hard to imagine that he hasn't frightened her in some way if he's constantly degrading her if I have been subject to um let's say psychological Mal treatment during the course of my life and it always occurs in private discussions with my parents with my father he comes in the room and he he berates me and talks to me and I'm subject to psychological Mal treatment okay yes then him coming into the room and closing the door would be a signal to me that I might get chewed out again or or treated poorly again correct that's correct and if I'm subject to psychological mild treatment when I'm out um doing a sporting event okay the fact that I might perform poorly a sporting event would be a trigger to me that I'm going to get chewed out again okay okay yeah if my abuser closes a door to a room to watch a television show is that going to trigger the response in me that those other two events have triggered it certainly can sure by association absolutely why because the don't forget the fear reaction is not at a cognitive level it isn't thinking that it's just it's the door shuts and it's remembering that something frightening may happen but if nothing frightening has ever happened before when the door shut that particular queue would not trigger the response but I thought you said that's when he would come in and say um you know negative things to you about your performance etc etc so that that is going to raise one's anxiety and there always is the fear of maybe something more is going to be and maybe the next time it's going to be a little bit worse so I wouldn't necessarily say that you wouldn't get fear reaction if my father closes a door and goes into a room with my mother to watch a television show and that particular Cube has never preceded physical or life-threatening acts in the past is that cue going to trigger my fear respon I'm going to object if that as an improper hypothetical a cue is something that signals that that something bad's going to happen in this discussion that we've been having correct correct and the reason that the person knows something bad's going to happen is because something bad happened before when that Q was present in that particular scene yes so if a queue is given that is not related to any prior trauma then it's not a que is it no but you can have I mean don't forget conversation is very much a part of the queue it doesn't only have to be what is a sensory experience I me what they what is discussed can be very much of a a queing in Factor all right but if if a cue is given in which I've never been in a life sit threatening situation before never been threatened with death before is that CU sufficient to trigger this biological response I think I've said one example can one queuing in can trigger it if it's severe enough but in the battered wife case what cues her is that when he comes home and says there's no miller at the bar on prior occasion she has been in a life-threatening situation this been answer sustained on first ground I have nothing further I read examination finally oh my goodness that was really starting to irritate me with the same kinds of questions over and over and over again I mean come on now all right so we are moving on to redirect for a cue as we've been referring to behaviors by abusers to trigger a frightening response does it have to be identical to something that's happened before no do Q are cues necessarily repetitions of previous cues no are there situations where a new crisis has arisen where the abused child has special knowledge of the modus operand the personality the values the interests the intentions of their abuser and a brand new set of behaviors can trigger the highest level Panic response sustain oh man I was muted that sucks um what I was saying was I love how she comes in fiery and um she's just ready to take down this whole line of questioning that ponage was was like well the queue has to be exactly the same and blah blah blah no it doesn't your brain in trauma isn't thinking correctly it's not being logical so a door closing could trigger that anywhere is there a concept called special knowledge that affects how abused children read the signs from their abusers yes and is special knowledge dependent on the repetition of old cues it may or may not be and when it isn't what how to special knowledge in interact with these fear responses because there are new cues that are are elist in now if there has been a crisis situation something that has never happened before in an abusive family could a child be experiencing these automatic fear responses based on an entire pattern of new conversations new Behaviors new cues yes is hypervigilance the scanning of the environment for hints cues or clues of danger a conscious rational thing or autom a automatic is there literature to suggest that the battered wife syndrome is actually a misnomer that a woman need not be battered to experience all of the symptoms of of other wives in abusive situations yes is there literature that psychological abuse alone particularly when coupled with extreme jealousy with limiting a woman's actions with isolation can also create tremendous fearfulness yes are there situations where with respect to what's called battered wives where there are constant threats to kill even though there's never been a hand laid on the wife yes and those women experience fearfulness just as the women who are hit experience it yes I do is the same true among children yes it is does a child have to be physically abused to be fearful or hypervigilant or both no is sexual abuse scary to Children yes it is why there can be several reasons why first of all it over it um confuses the child uh there is the if it's a factor where somebody is known it it um determines what is safe and unsafe the the whole Factor of premature introduction of the child into activity far beyond its years uh there are many things that children become very fearful of to children and even adults become fearful when they sense they have absolutely no control over what's done to their bodies yes have there been is there studies or information in the literature that show that sexually molested children equate the molestation with death yes there is and how is that information developed to children who are subject to Chronic sexual abuse then are they frequently in fear of death yes I are and Is frequent fears of death by little children one of those things that creates this hyper sensitivity and easy arousal to fear over yes it is is there literature to suggest that in general children are more vulnerable to psychological abuse into terrorization than adult women yes they are in the realm of psychological abuse are you familiar with those types of Acts that are characterized as terrorizing yes and do you agree for example with the labeling system that Dr Tyler was using in this court as to types of Acts that are terrorizing yes I do for terrorizing acts to produce Terror in a child does there have to be physical contact no there doesn't does repeated exposure to terrorizing acts uh create uh this heightened arousal system to fear yes it does in abusive situations where there have been repetitive or repeated either implied or explicit threats to kill if if a certain event happens okay and then the event happens can that trigger this extreme fear response even though it's an entirely new situation yes I can in a situation where a child has been sexually molested in his room over a course of 12 years and where over the course of The Last 5 Years sexual molestation has become a punishment and where the Molester is angry and acting punitive towards the child and orders that child to his room is that the kind of Cu that might make the child scared are the mere words what you would look at to decide whether or not um a CU triggering fear has occurred or do you have to know the whole context you have to know the whole context are there situations where go to your room can be a threat of death yes there are are there situations where go to your room is a threat of rape yes there are are there situations where go to your room means you can now paint and color and play with your dolls yes under certain circumstances can complete silence even be a that something dangerous is about to happen yes it can when you're dealing with an abuser who has a pattern where he or she has a pattern of unpredictability in the past okay um does that tend to produce even more hypervigilant victims yes that's a very important factor turning then very briefly to Crime Scene um area have your testified for prosecution Dr burus and criminal proceedings overall yes I have have you ever been asked to testify specifically on whether a particular crime scene was an organized crime scene no I have not would you if you were as you overall yes I would you have no bias against testifying one way the other do you no no now you said that in this particular case um the choice of weapon is a strong indication to you of no planning is that correct that is correct and that's based both on your initial crime scene evaluation and also on some other information you learned about uh the case yes and specifically why is it that this choice of weapon is such a strong indicator to you of lack of planning because of the information that I had regarding a few days uh prior to the uh the situation that there was that I learned about that um I learned about okay and does that information have to do with the fact that in the state of California people can actually buy handguns if they're willing to wait two weeks that is correct now you're familiar with the fact that there are other states where people cannot buy handguns at all that is correct now you said that this was a high-risk crime scene and you've talked about the fact that it was by using two shotguns with multiple rounds in a enclosed space you're going to create a lot of evidence that could attach itself to the shooter and serve to uh Aid his capture is that correct that's true um is there also the element that in a small scene shooting off all these rounds with a shotgun he's creating evidence on his hands absolutely and if it was an organized or planned um crime would there be something that you'd expect the the planner to do to protect his hands from that kind of evidence yes I would and what would you expect him to do I expect him to wear gloves and if he were wearing gloves would he have any reason to worry about picking up shell casings because of fingerprints no he wouldn't now you said in uh if you're going to look at a particular domestic homicide scene um we'll strike that if you're going to conduct an investigation that begins with a domestic homicide scene to determine whether there's an insurance or inheritance component you'd have to look outside the scene for motive evidence yes you would did you examine every single interview that the prosecution conducted in this case yes I did and did you read um all of the testimony that's been presented in the straw yes I have and do you see any data whatsoever that suggests any pre-shooting motive for money or inheritance objection improper opinion to state would you look to um statements if you were conducting an investigation to find out if there was inheritance or Insurance motive would you first try to determine whether or not the um the suspect had information concerning the likelihood of their inheritance inheriting or getting Insurance yes I would would you also look for any kind of pre crime information concerning whether or not the person had any particular interest or motive to obtain money yes I would now you said that um there are that there is some common knowledge about how organized crime conducts um its executions yes okay and and what is what is the common method by which organized criminals uh conduct their hits if you will well they generally uh plan it very care they uh have a lot of information available and the choice of weapon is going to be the type that leaves a minimal amount of uh injury that the hit if you will is a direct Target and that they have eliminated as many uh barriers if you will to accomplish their task would organize crime in your opinion based on your analysis of crimes committed by such persons uh use two shotguns in a Beverly Hills family room on a Sunday night you were asked by Mrs banic if uh persons could try to Stage a crime uh to make it look like an organized crime hit you were asked for your opin on that subject you remember that yes in your opinion would person staging an organized crime hit Ed two shotguns in Beverly Hills in someone's home obje umer opinion SE sustain the answer does organized crime has it been widely publicized that organized crime uses shotguns indoors for their hits no do they they do not do they tend to use a small caliber weapon to the back of the head yes they do usually a 22 caliber weapon is that correct I believe so yes do they take Extraordinary Measures to avoid leaving prints yes they do Extraordinary Measures to avoid having blood or or tissue or things like that get on them that's correct yes and do they try to stay to make it look like somebody other than organized crime yes they they may or may not they really don't have to okay are you familiar with cases where organized crime made it look like a burglary or robbery or another form of crime I'm sure there are some cases they really do now you were asked about what happens if law enforcement in looking at what seems to you to be a domestic VI U shooting case um eliminates the option that there was a need for forced entry because the other residents of the home tell them the doors are always kept open remember that yes now it's your opinion is it not when you see a domestic violence scene that the most likely suspects are a the ones who call in and B the ones who are related that is true so is a good law enforcement practice to rely on what those people tell you about whether the doors are locked or unlocked in making your crime scene analysis um based on your survey of organized crime cases are they likely to leave shell casings in a car and then call the police to the scene where the car is located no are they likely to tell the police that they smelled smoke and saw a thick yellow Haze when they weren't supposed to be present at the time of the shooting no excuse me Runner consultation me I heard a consult Mr B would you write more legibly so we don't have these don't know what mean let's assee that a person has been traumatized when they are quite young say with the episodes of sexual molestation okay yes can their brother relating to that person his much more recent experiences of violent sexual molestation uh trigger some replay or traumatic or fear inducing feelings in that person whose molestation was farther in the past is this a phenomena that occurs that that hearing about another person similar traumatization can get you to relive your own yes in fact in the studies of Vietnam War veterans for example have they determined that they can reex re-experience combat Vivid combat scenes based on a car engine sound a smell yes in other words a sensory system gets activated and that's generally what occurs they see smell or even paste something that reminds them of that experience and can they also hear something someone else's telling a story a song that may be played over the radio in N virtually anything yes I have nothing further on any recross Dr burges can psychological abuse cause hatred in a child towards his or her abuser in situations involving uh family members the child I think I've already said is very torn in their loyalty and they may have have u a specific feeling of anger about what the ACT is but in general this is one of the things that holds them into the uh situation is the other part which is the um love and the of the parent can psychological abuse cause hate can psychological abuse from the parent cause hatred in the grown child that is the adult child um again anything is possible but you'd have to know more about the situation I people hate their parents right not everybody loves their parents people can hate their parents yes okay and one of the things that can cause a person to hate their parents is having been subjected to child abuse correct that may be one thing and one of motives in a domestic homicide can be hatred for the parent for all kinds of reasons isn't that true and a homicide yes not all domestic homicides are spontaneous correct no now I believe you were asked about the choice of weapon in this case on uh redirect as being a poor choice because it was a shotgun is that correct that's correct okay if one wants to make a crime look like an organized crime hit that person who's trying to make it look that way is bound by their perception of what an organized crime hit would look like aren't they well if they've looked into it or read on it I mean they have more information as to how it's done well if they've seen what if they've just seen movies and the perception of an organized crime hit comes from The Godfather I'm going to check get why don't you rephrase a question rather than examples such as that all right one's perceptions of what an organized crime killing are like are based upon one's life experiences correct yes wherever they got their information correct okay and your experience of organized crime killings is based upon your years of research in this area correct plus others it isn't just a research but I I certainly have an understanding of that type of crime yes okay and you you have at times specialized in Formula formulating classifications of crime correct okay so your knowledge of what constitutes an organized crime killing is not necessarily the general knowledge within this country correct probably one would hope that you have a more specific knowledge after all the years that you've done researching correct that's correct now if one were to choose a small caliber weapon but was unable to get that weapon because of a 14 or 15-day waiting period but one still wanted to accomplish one's task one would then move to another weapon correct no not necessarily that's where I disagree that I think that if one wanted to actually Commit This organized crime they would wait the two weeks and they would use that weapon they use an appropriate weapon what if in 2 weeks the opportunity to commit the crime was not as good as committing it at the earlier time wouldn't that be a factor to consider in planning this that's hypothetical all right you'll have to rephrase this question since it is in the form of or should be in the form of a hypothetical question it hypothetically if one were about to return to college and one were going to be leaving the state all right wouldn't it be better to accomplish the crime when one was still in the same local as the victim sustain well objection sustained to the form of the question raised okay so is your criticism of this particular crime and the way it was done is that rather than waiting for an opportunity to get the small caliber weapon that a LGE that a shot was use is that correct it's not a criticism it's just pointing out what is organized and what is disorganized and if one wants to do an organized crime one would plan and take the time to carry it out in a way that it's going to be effective but there are there are are there not other factors in one wanting to commit a crime aside from the availability of a weapon isn't that correct over there are other factors in committing a crime aside from just the choice of weapon that's such an important factor but there's also opportunity correct well that is true there's opportunity all right and if opportunity conflicts with getting the proper choice of weapon then opportunity is a factor to be considered correct there's not a big factor in a domestic situation where the people are all right within the same residence all right but if people are about to leave the residents and move to different locals that would change the opportunity wouldn't it objection you're there's no foundation for that it would um it might only change it temporarily but there is nothing that says that there's an immediacy to this situation what do you mean in a plan in a plan one would factor that in that's the idea of a plan well leaving town for a period of several months would create a lack of opportunity to commit a domestic homicide correct I'm going to check this argumented and assum fact not sustained as to the form of the question is argumentative leaving town to move to another state would that in fact create a lack of opportunity in a domestic homicide OB that's over no do you do you remember my questions okay she asked to approach and he said no how many times has he told her no when she's asked to approach I mean that's rude um you're saying that if if that is with within a twoe time period um I'm still going to say that to plan something a plan means that it is able to be carried off the way it's intended and a time that's not a plan if it's um something that's just hurriedly done or something like that that's not a plan that's not organized well so what is your definition of what a plan is then a plan is taking into all the factors such as weapon Place location method and most importantly to leave as few Clues as possible I mean that's a plan now this checklist that you've just given about weapon Place location method and leaving few Clues is that a checklist that you can buy at the big five when you pick up your shotgun objection objection is sustained it's argumentative okay Dr Burgess this particular your definition of a plan is not necessarily everyone's definition of a plan isn't that correct argumentative over I don't know I haven't checked it out with everyone but that's generally the way a plan is defined okay but you are interested in the classification of crimes correct yes the organized and disorganized correct and there's no evidence in this case that these particular defendants knew about the kinds of checklists that you've just talked about correct other words there's no evidence that they knew in advance that in order to be successful they would have to follow the FBI checklist of what constitutes a planned crime correct well I'm not saying that that's the FBI checklist I I that's not been published as a checklist what I am saying is that if you want to get into what is planned and what isn't planned then there are certain criteria you have to apply and being able to wait two weeks that would in fact constitute a plan but if you didn't want to wait 2 weeks it wouldn't mean you weren't planning would it depends what you're planning you're planning to kill your parents because you want to kill your parents that is the plan to kill your parents if that's the plan then you'd wait the two weeks and have everything right the right weapon the right location the right everything and unless you did it correctly then you weren't planning at all is that your testimony well then it wouldn't it would be a lack of planning that's the point okay and I believe you rejected the idea that poor planning can be the same as lack of planning is that correct well we just tend to call it lack of planning rather than putting an adjective okay but lack of planning means no or little planning correct I'm going to this this has all been asking answer gone over all right it's been gone over once before but permit limited for the examination just because someone plans out something poorly doesn't mean they didn't plan it right overall right a plan generally means something that's going to turn out the way that it's intended okay but if it doesn't turn out the way it's intended it doesn't mean it wasn't planned it just means it wasn't planned well correct AR ask answer rephrase the question what you're saying then is if someone plans something and does a bad job of planning it and executing it that that means it wasn't planned that shows a lack of planning because it's not going to turn out the way that that plan should be now in discussing fear that goes into this biological uh recoding yes if the person's lying about being afraid then none of these biological things occur is that correct over well I think that the point of the biological model is that you have a physiological response and that is something that you can't deny but if you if you aren't in fear you don't have the physiological response that you describe in your testimony correct if you're not in fear correct okay so if you're lying about being in fear then you would not have this biological response is that correct well that's one way of stating it was there another way of stating it well I just said that you have to take into consideration the symptoms the whole body response and the whole history there are a lot of factors you have to take into consideration people generally don't go around saying I'm in fear and that's not necessarily what's happened I mean this is such an automatic response people don't go around saying they're in fear when they're not is that what you just is that what you say in the examples we've been giving he what about people who are charged with crimes and want to avoid conviction do they have a motive to to claim emotions that they don't have call for thank you have nothing anything else all right so that's the that's it for today we're going to be back next week so Tuesday we'll be back for part three next week and then Thursday will conclude with Dr Anne Burgess in part for she was on the stand for over 11 hours something like that so we're breaking it up into multiple parts and um so far I think that the def 's questioning was much more successful more productive I thought that Miss bazan's questioning was very argumentative and I thought there was a lot that didn't go anywhere and it was just a lot of repetitive stuff so um I don't know I don't know how it landed with the jury we do know that it was very split when they were in deliberations where the men were very unsympathetic towards the boys and the women on the jury were very sympathetic so that's how they were hung and that's what caused them to be hung so um so please hit that like button on your way out I would really appreciate it please make sure you're subscribed so you don't miss anym of the uh mendas trial and I will see see you guys next week take care thank you so much for watching bye now if you've been impacted by a true crime and would like your story told in your own words or if you or someone you know has been wrongfully convicted or accused of a crime please write to crime in court channel@ gmail.com and tell us your real true crime encounters thanks for watching [Music]