Thursday, July 12, 2007
Here, from today's Russellville Courier, are some cogent points raised by Bristow, in the testimony of former Russellville Police Department Det. Sgt. John Waidwhich. It may have some weight in gaining an acquittal.
One — according to Waid’s testimony, there was no specific policy in effect at the RPD with respect to the preservation of evidence on the night of December 15, 2005.
Two — Waid never specifically told officers under his command that, in Bristow’s words, “it was important to preserve evidence.”
Three — there was no specific policy in effect at the Russellville Police Department with respect to preserving a crime scene on the night in question.
Four — Det. Mark Frost released Dirksmeyer’s cell phone to her stepfather, Duane Dipert, before Jones was ever charged with her murder.
Five — no fingerprints or DNA were retrieved from Dirksmeyer’s cell phone. The defense cannot remedy this fact, given the “forever destroyed” nature of the evidentiary value of the phone, as Bristow pointed out.
Six — in Waid’s recollection, Jones did not have any cuts, abrasions, or other wounds consistent with someone trying to defend herself against him on his face, body, or hands on the night of the murder.
And finally, to Waid’s knowledge, no attempt was made on the part of the RPD to preserve blood or DNA evidence from Jones’ vehicle.
It was at this that two male jurors who have shown no measurable reactions up to today sat back and forward in their chairs, respectively.