Home

Find Transcripts
Search Transcripts
Browse by Case Name
Browse by Expert Name
Browse by Expert Type
Product Pricing
Legal Topics
FAQ

Demo

REGISTER!

About Us
HELP!
Links
Privacy Policy

 


By clicking the "BUY NOW" button, you agree to our Transcript License Agreement
Cost: $600.00
Case: Smith v. Jones
Testimony Date: April 01, 2005
Expert Witness: John Smith M.D.
Expert Type: Abuse / Child Elder Spousal
Court: State: Ohio County: Cuyahoga
Pages: 200

	 0001
 1                     UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 2                      EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
 3                          SHERMAN DIVISION
 4   ---------------------------------------------------------------
 5    THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA   ] CASE NO. 4:04CR57
 6    VS.                            ] 9 AM, AUGUST 10, 2004
 7    BRIAN THOMAS HILL              ] SHERMAN, TEXAS
 8    --------------------------------------------------------------
 9            EXCERPT OF VOLUME 2 OF 4, PAGES 1 THROUGH 145
10               REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF JURY TRIAL
11   THE HONORABLE RICHARD A. SCHELL, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE, PRESIDING
12   APPEARANCES:
13   FOR THE GOVERNMENT:          J. ANDREW WILLIAMS
14                                TERRI L. HAGAN
15                                ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEYS
16                                660 N. CENTRAL EXPRESSWAY #400
17                                PLANO, TEXAS 75074
18    FOR THE DEFENDANT:          TOM PAPPAS
19                                DAVID MEDDERS
20                                ATTORNEYS AT LAW
21                                BURLESON, PATE & GIBSON
22                                2414 N. AKARD STREET, SUITE 700
23                                DALLAS, TEXAS 75201
24   PROCEEDINGS REPORTED USING COMPUTERIZED STENOTYPE,
25   TRANSCRIPT PRODUCED USING COMPUTER-AIDED TRANSCRIPTION.
0002
 1             [COURT REPORTER'S NOTES 081004, 9 AM, TUESDAY,
 2   AUGUST 10, 2004, SHERMAN, TEXAS, JUDGE RICHARD A. SCHELL
 3   PRESIDING]
 4             [OPEN COURT, DEFENDANT PRESENT, NO JURY]
 5             THE COURT:  ALL RIGHT.
 6             SHALL WE MOVE NEXT TO THE EXPERTS?
 7             MR. WILLIAMS:  YES, SIR.
 8             THE COURT:  OKAY.  ALL RIGHT.
 9             THANK YOU, AGENT DONAHUE.
10             MS. HAGAN:  YOUR HONOR, THE GOVERNMENT WOULD CALL
11   THOMAS MUSHENO.
12             THE COURT:  IF YOU'LL JUST COME RIGHT UP IN FRONT,
13   PLEASE, SIR, AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.
14             [THE OATH WAS ADMINISTERED.]
15   DIRECT EXAMINATION OF THOMAS MUSHENO ON BEHALF OF THE
16   GOVERNMENT
17             MS. HAGAN:
18    Q.     PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR THE
19   COURT REPORTER, PLEASE.
20    A.     MY FIRST NAME IS THOMAS, I HAVE NO MIDDLE NAME, AND MY
21   LAST NAME IS PRONOUNCED MUSHENO AND SPELLED M U S H E N O.
22    Q.     HOW ARE YOU EMPLOYED?
23    A.     I WORK FOR THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.  I'M
24   SPECIFICALLY IN THE INVESTIGATIVE TECHNOLOGY DIVISION.  AND
25   THE NAME OF MY UNIT IS THE FORENSIC AUDIO-VIDEO AND IMAGE
0003
 1   ANALYSIS UNIT.
 2    Q.     IN FRONT OF YOU THERE SHOULD BE GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT
 3   50.  IS THAT IN FRONT OF YOU?
 4    A.     YES.
 5    Q.     OKAY.  WOULD YOU TELL THE COURT WHAT THAT EXHIBIT IS.
 6    A.     THAT'S MY RESUME OR CV.
 7    Q.     DOES IT ACCURATELY REFLECT YOUR TRAINING AND
 8   EXPERIENCE?
 9    A.     YES, IT DOES.
10             MS. HAGAN:  YOUR HONOR, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS
11   HEARING, WE OFFER GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT 50 INTO EVIDENCE.
12             MR. PAPPAS:  NO OBJECTION.
13             THE COURT:  ALL RIGHT.  GOVERNMENT'S EXHIBIT 50 IS
14   ADMITTED.
15             MS. HAGAN:
16    Q.     HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN EMPLOYED BY THE FBI?
17    A.     I'VE WORKED FOR THE BUREAU FOR ALMOST 10 YEARS.
18    Q.     AND WHAT ARE YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES IN YOUR JOB WITH THE
19   FORENSIC AUDIO-VIDEO AND IMAGE ANALYSIS UNIT?
20    A.     THE MAJORITY OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE TO DO FORENSIC
21   EXAMINATIONS ON IMAGERY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE CONVENTIONAL AS
22   WELL AS DIGITAL IMAGERY AND VIDEO AS WELL.  THE MAJORITY OF
23   THOSE EXAMINATIONS ARE DOING SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISONS OF ITEMS
24   OF EVIDENCE TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE AS WHAT'S REPRESENTED IN,
25   FOR EXAMPLE, AN IMAGE.  AN EXAMPLE OF THAT WOULD BE TO
0004
 1   DETERMINE IF A PERSON DEPICTED IN THE BANK ROBBERY SURVEILLANCE
 2   VIDEO IS THE PERSON IN CUSTODY OR POSSIBLY IF A GARMENT THAT A
 3   BANK ROBBER IS WEARING DEPICTED IN A VIDEO SEQUENCE IS THE
 4   GARMENT IN CUSTODY OR IN EVIDENCE.
 5             ANOTHER TYPE OF EXAMINATION I DO WOULD BE
 6   PHOTOGRAMMETRY.  THAT'S THE SCIENCE OF OBTAINING ACCURATE
 7   MEASUREMENTS FROM PHOTOGRAPHS.  AN EXAMPLE OF THAT WOULD BE
 8   TO DETERMINE THE HEIGHT OF A BANK ROBBER OR POSSIBLY THE LENGTH
 9   OF A WEAPON TO DETERMINE IF IT'S AN ILLEGAL WEAPON LIKE A
10   SAWED-OFF SHOTGUN OR A SAWED-OFF RIFLE.
11             I ALSO DO A TYPE OF EXAMINATION REFERRED TO AS
12   INFORMATION EXTRACTION, WHICH SOME WOULD REFER TO AS
13   ENHANCEMENT OF IMAGERY.  BUT THAT GOES FURTHER.  AND I ALSO--
14   TO EXTRACT INFORMATION FROM IMAGERY, I MIGHT LOOK AT, SAY, FOR
15   EXAMPLE, A NEGATIVE TO DETERMINE WHERE THE NEGATIVE WAS MADE,
16   WHEN IT WAS MADE AND POSSIBLY WHERE AND WHEN IT WAS SOLD.
17             AND THEN THE LAST TYPE WOULD BE TO DO AUTH
	 

 


      Copyright 2004 - 2008 CrossExam LLC
      All rights reserved.
dmca