11.Anthony Clark — Direct/Cross
288 linesMS. CAPPLEMAN: State calls Dr. Anthony Clark.
(Pause. )
SHELBY BLANK: Good afternoon.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. would you face the clerk and raise your right hand, please, sir?
whereupon, ANTHONY J. CLARK was called as a witness, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Have a seat and slide up to the microphone, please, sir.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Please introduce yourself and spell your name.
ANTHONY CLARK: Dr. Anthony J. Clark, Anthony, A-N-T-H-O-N-Y, J, Clark, C-L-A-R-K.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How are you employed, Dr. Clark?
ANTHONY CLARK: I'm employed by KwB Pathology Associates as an associate medical examiner for the District 2 Medical Examiner's Office, here in Tallahassee. I also have duties as an autopsy pathologist for TMH or Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How long have you been employed in that capacity?
ANTHONY CLARK: I started at KwB in 2007 on August Ist.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Could you tell us a little bit about your training and education?
ANTHONY CLARK: I obtained my bachelor of science degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. I did two years of animal research at MIT. And then I was at -- accepted to the Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia. I graduated from the college and did a two-year general surgical internship at New Britain General Hospital in New Britain Connecticut.
I then went to Hartford Hospital in Hartford, Connecticut and did four years of anatomic and clinical pathology. I then traveled down to Atlanta, Georgia where I did a two-year forensic pathology fellowship with the Fulton County Medical Examiner's Office and Emory Univers -- associated with Emory University.
I graduated from that program. I got my first job as the southwest regional medical examiner in the Moultrie Crime Lab for the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, Division of Forensic Science. I remained in that position from 1994 to 2007 and then traveled down to District 2. I ama licensed physician in the State of Georgia and Florida.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And what are your duties as a medical examiner, here in Florida?
ANTHONY CLARK: AS a medical examiner, I'm involved with the death investigation. I'm the one that performs the examination of the decedent to determine the cause and manner of death.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How many autopsies have you performed in your career?
ANTHONY CLARK: It's over 6500.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Have you ever testified as an expert in a court of law?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, I have.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How many times?
ANTHONY CLARK: Over a couple hundred times.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And was that always in the area of forensic pathology?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what is forensic pathology?
ANTHONY CLARK: Pathology is the study of tissues, whether it's plant tissue or human tissue, looking for obvious signs of disease or pathology or abnormities. Forensic pathology is the ability to present that in court.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, at this time I would tender Dr. Clark as an expert in the area of forensic pathology.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Either side wish to voir dire?
MR. PADILLA: No objection, Judge.
MR. DECOSTE: Can't argue that experience. No, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Doctor, did you conduct the autopsy of Dan Markel?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: when was that autopsy conducted?
ANTHONY CLARK: The autopsy was performed July 19, 2014, at 11:55.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: where was the autopsy conducted?
ANTHONY CLARK: This autopsy was performed at the Tallahassee Memorial Healthcare morgue.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Did you take photographs during the course of the autopsy?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, I did.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: would the use of those photographs assist in your testimony here today?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, they, yes they would.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm going to show you what I've marked as State's Exhibits 26 through 35, absent 27. So 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, and 35.
MR. DECOSTE: I haven't seen those.
(off-the-record discussion.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Take a moment to look through those photographs and let me know if you recognize them.
(Pause. )
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay. Yes, I do recognize these photographs.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: How do you recognize them?
ANTHONY CLARK: These are the photographs I took at the time of the autopsy.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Are they fair and accurate photographs of the autopsy as you conducted it?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, Judge. At this time I would ask to move into evidence State's -- I believe it's 26 through 35.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You said you had pulled 27 --
MR. ZANGENEH: No objection, Judge --
JUDGE HANKINSON: -- was your initial --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: It was in there. I just think I had it out of order. So it will be 26 through 35.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Is there objection?
MR. DECOSTE: No --
MR. PADILLA: No objection, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: They'll be admitted.
(State's Exhibit Nos. 26 through 35 received in evidence.)
MS. CAPPLEMAN: May I publish?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right, Doctor. I'd like to just kind of have you explain to the jury how an autopsy begins, and then walk us through the autopsy of Mr. Markel, using these photographs to assist you. So how would you begin an examination?
ANTHONY CLARK: well, actually, a medical examiner information starts with information. So I received the call about the death of this individual. And then they put the body in a body bag that's brought down to the morgue. And then I began by doing -- checking what's on the outside of the bag and then open the bag and start taking photographs and start making my observations.
In gunshot wounds, we always take X-rays, because we're interested to see if there's any remaining bullets in the body, and, if there are, where they are located. So we'll do X-rays on the shooting.
we start on the outer -- externally, documenting any clothing, personal effects, medical devices, injuries. Then we do things like height, weight, eye color, that kind of thing, to show who -- what the individual looked like.
And then we start what's called the internal examination, where we open up the head, neck, chest, and abdomen. And if there's external trauma, what happened to the internal organs from that trauma, if any.
Natural disease is a big factor in the cases that I do. You have bad heart disease or lung disease, et cetera.
we also collect specimens for toxicology. we collect specimens for DNA studies if needed and whatever other ancillary studies may be needed. we fingerprint everybody now. And there's some other things like that.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. I want to start with State's Exhibit 26 and ask you to explain to the jury what we're looking at here. And I believe the judge will let you borrow his pointer.
JUDGE HANKINSON: He's got the pointer.
ANTHONY CLARK: State's Exhibit 26 is an X-ray of what we call a PA -- AP X-ray of the head. You can see the top of the head here. This is the jaw, right side, left side. And within this you can see that there's a -- whiter spots here and here. These are the bullets that I eventually recovered.
So I had an idea where this bullet is. Now I have an idea where this bullet is. Also, there's some fracturing going on here on the side of the face, which it's hard to point out from this distance. But -- so right now this is the main reason why I'm getting these X-rays to show that there are bullets still in him and that they are still there and that they're a good size, too.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And you mentioned having extracted these bullets from Mr. Markel's body. would they have been turned over to law enforcement?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. State's Exhibit 27.
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay. So the first one is basically front to back. And this is a side picture to show me exactly where this first bullet is here. So it looked -- you know, it's up here and it's towards the back of the cranial vault. Okay? And then this one is right here, showing here, just larger pieces here. But we're interested in gathering this bullet and this bullet right here.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And when you say larger pieces, referring to this, is this part of a bullet, as well?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am. It looks like a large fragment there.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay.
ANTHONY CLARK: Now, remember that this is somewhat magnified to the way we take these x-rays. So that piece is not as big as it looks in real life.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: State's Exhibit 28.
ANTHONY CLARK: State's Exhibit 28, it show -- this is what we call the identification photograph to show his face. Do you want to turn it 90 degrees, just --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Sure.
ANTHONY CLARK: Yeah. I think it might be easier just to --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I knew you were going to say that.
ANTHONY CLARK: -- explain. Yeah. And so TI --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I can't zoom out at all, but is that okay?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yeah. And we put the identifying tag down here with the case number, the date, and my initials should be down here. And we've cleaned up the face as best we can. But this is what we call the identification photograph.
Now, in this identification photograph, you can see there's quite a bit of trauma to the face. There's a distortion of the left side of the face, quite a bit of swelling going on here, bruising going on inside the tissues here. The -- what we call raccoon eyes or bilateral eye bruises here and here.
There's a gunshot wound here, and there's a gunshot wound here. So there's two separate gunshot wounds that we're looking at here.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: State's 29?
ANTHONY CLARK: State's Exhibit 29 is showing the -- one of the gunshot wounds to the left cheek area, you can see is right here. You can see the bruising and the tissue back here. This bullet actually traveled from here and wound up just under the tissues here, inside, below this left ear here.
Now, the interesting thing is these large areas of abrasion. They're irregular and some are small, some are large, and they kind of scatter onto the ear, come in a band this way, onto the nose. And you can see that there's some on the upper neck here. This is what I called the report pseudo stippling.
Stippling is something that occurs from gunfire, because there are burning and unburnt particles of gunpowder, gunpowder coming out. And when they hit the skin, they actually cause abrasions. Now, when you shoot through a door or window, you're fragmenting those -- the wood or the glass, causing other debris to fly out. So, to me, this is a pseudo stippling or glass abrasions from when the first bullet went through the glass and caused these injuries here.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. State's 30.
ANTHONY CLARK: State's 30 is showing the left side of the neck to emphasize the pseudo stippling. Now, pseudo stippling, again, tends to be more irregular and larger. when you get stippling from gunpowder, it's very, very minute and very -- what do you want to call it? Homogenous in terms of the size.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So regular in terms of the size?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. State's Exhibit 31.
ANTHONY CLARK: And can you blow that up -- well, let's -- this is the forehead area. Could you turn it 90 degrees, though? That might be helpful just to...
MS. CAPPLEMAN: This way?
JUROR: NO.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: This way?
ANTHONY CLARK: No way. Yeah. Yeah. There you go. All right. So -- State's Exhibit -- which was this? what State Exhibit? I'm sorry, I...
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. I'm sorry. That's 31.
ANTHONY CLARK: Thirty-one is showing the forehead area. what we're seeing here is the second gunshot wound here. Okay? And you can see it's quite a bit of a mess here. And I will explain to you in a minute why that is. But this is where the bullet -- it hit in here. And that's the bullet that wounds up -- winds up in the back of the inside of the skull that you saw on the X-ray. Okay?
So this one here, this is irregular because he was wearing a pair of glasses at the time he was shot. So just like I'm standing here looking at you right now, that bullet hit those glasses. And when it hit those glasses -- and I believe they were plastic frames. We're not going to see in the pictures. They broke open the plastic and caused, like -- you know, a cue ball hit, you know, racquetballs to disperse the plastic. And that plastic went and is -- popped that hole. So you didn't get a nice round hole, but you got more of a ragged hole there because of that.
And, also, up here, if you could magnify that a little bit. Can you move in? No? Okay. There are some --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You know who you're talking to.
ANTHONY CLARK: -- fine -- okay. Fine stippling up in here. There's some kind of irregular ones up here, which may be part from the glasses being -- exploding here.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes. I could do that.
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay. Yeah. Okay. Now you see all these little, little dots here? That is gunpowder stippling. Can you see the difference from the larger, irregular spi -- abrasions? This is real fine stuff here. And, to me, that puts the gun at a closer range. Or there's no window there or intermediate target, as we call it, so that this puts it in a shorter range of gunfire.
And that's usually up to 18 to 24 inches that you're see -- seeing that. It could be closer. The only way to really tell is to get the weapon, the same ammunition, do some test fire from different distances, which the firearm people do it. I don't.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. So the small -- smaller marks that we're seeing there were caused by the hot powder that came out of the barrel of the firearm.
ANTHONY CLARK: The burning and unburnt gunpowder. Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: That's how we know that the gun was within 18 inches of Mr. Markel's head at the time it was fired?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am. Eighteen to 24 inches.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. And then the larger marks there, am I understanding you correctly, that that was caused by glass or plastic from the, from the glasses?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. State's Exhibit 32.
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay. State's Exhibit 32 is showing the left eye area here. There's quite a bit of swelling here on both eyes. And that's usually due to the base of the skull, what I call the base of the skull being fractured and bleeding into the tissues, and it collects in the eyes.
Also, there is the gunshot wound here, regular one here, and then one here. Also, if you look at the eyes -- and, again, you get the pictures in your hands you can look at them better. But there's no stippling or glass injury to that, because the glasses are actually protecting the glass, the glass from hitting his eyes. And then the second bullet hit here. That didn't cause any kind of injuries to, to the eyes.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So dumb question but the discoloration to the eyes don't indicate that he was in some kind of fistfight.
ANTHONY CLARK: No, ma'am. This is due to the base, base of the skull fractures.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So consistent with being caused by the gunshot wounds.
ANTHONY CLARK: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: State's Exhibit 33.
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay. State's Exhibit 33, this is the back of the left mid forearm, about right here Cindicating). The elbow is down here. The wrist is over here. So this is the back of his arm here.
And what you're seeing here is a curvy linear or curved line deposit of soot. And then you're seeing pseudo stippling, again. Again, this is not gunpowder stippling. I kept trying to see whether the -- I mean, I kept looking at it, trying to see whether this was really truly gunpowder stippling but it's not. There's too much irregularity and difference in sizes of this. So I believe it was due to either glass or plastic from the glasses.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Then the dark mark is consistent with stippling from the gun?
ANTHONY CLARK: The dark mark is soot. And that's a deposition from the gun itself.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And would that be consistent with Mr. Markel having his arm raised when the gun was fired?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am. It's my opinion that after the first shot through the window, striking him here Cindicating) , causing all that glass to shatter and strike him on his face, that he reflexively brought up his arm in a defensive-type posture and that the gun was in range to cause, when it hit the glasses there, that when this shattered, it went on the back of the forearm here. And then there's a deposit of the soot there.
Now, I don't believe that soot is from the barrel of the gun but from what we call a cylinder gap, that there may have been a revolver used in this case and that the gap between where the cylinder is and the barrel, gases can come out there and soot can come out there, too. And that could cause this kind of curvy linear soot deposit there.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: And would a soot deposit from a cylinder gap also be consistent with a close range shot, as you previously described?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am. I don't know where the arm was in relationship, but it had to be close enough that when the glasses got hit by the bullet, that that shattering plastic struck the skin far enough, so if you were like this, I don't -- I think that's too far away. But within inches of that area.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And you describe what your opinion is. The first shot would be the one that came in the cheek and ended up near the ear area?
ANTHONY CLARK: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: would that shot alone have been fatal to Mr. Markel?
ANTHONY CLARK: No, ma'am. I don't think it -- I know it wasn't. And he's got quite a bit of bruising there. It might have stunned him and disoriented him, but I believe he was still alive to be able to put his arm up, also, and have this injury associated with the shot to the -- between the eyes there.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. State's Exhibit 34.
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay. State's Exhibit 34 is a picture of the bullet. I always try -- will clean the bullet up and show bullet itself. And you can see it's from gunshot wound No. 2, which is to the cheek here. And if you compare it to the X-ray, you saw that it was kind of almost barrel shaped or squared-off type of bullet. It is pretty well intact here. So that's the bullet there.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: So gunshot wound No. 2 is what you're calling it in this photograph, but it's your opinion that this bullet was fired first.
ANTHONY CLARK: The gunshot wound -- yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. State's Exhibit 35, what does this show?
ANTHONY CLARK: State's Exhibit 35, you can see that this bullet is quite flattened out. This is the gunshot wound that went in between the eyes here and went up in the brain back here. And in the x-ray, you saw that it was very flattened out, and that's what we recovered here.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And this would have been the wound that caused Mr. Markel's death?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And is there any reason why the bullet in State's Exhibit 35 is so much more deformed than the one in State's Exhibit 34?
ANTHONY CLARK: The bullet in -- from gunshot wound No. 2, in 34, hit mostly soft tissue. It did strike the bone, but it was going at a -- kind of like this and going along the bone. The other one was actually going through bone in this area here. Had gone through the glasses, too.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: what, if anything, can you tell us about the trajectory of these bullets?
ANTHONY CLARK: All I can talk about is the trajectory through the body themselves. And, again, my orientation is the person lying on the table, what I call anatomic position. They're looking forward, arms by their sides, toes pointed down. That's all I can tell you about that.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. So it -- did you document, as far as each shot, whether it was left to right, front to back, up, down, that kind of thing?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am, I did. Okay.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Could you tell us -- you may have already gone through it, but I'd like to go through it one more time. Let's start with what you're -- what -- the shot that is, in your opinion, the first shot to be fired.
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay. The first shot to be fired in the autopsy report, again, is gunshot wound No. 2. I tend to start from top to bottom. That's the left cheek and face. That traveled from front to back, very slightly down, and very slightly right to left. So it's going this way into the face.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And the next one?
ANTHONY CLARK: The one that I labeled as gunshot wound No. 1 to this area here, what we call the glabella, went from front to back, slightly left to right, and slightly up. So it's coming in this way.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And have you reviewed the scene photographs, including the ones of the window, of Mr. Markel's vehicle?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, ma'am.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. I want to show you photograph No. 8.
(Brief pause.)
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: I'm not finding No. 8, but I'm thinking 17 will do.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Publishing State's 17. You talked -- sir?
JUDGE HANKINSON: I didn't say anything.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you did.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: You spoke about the glass and how the glass created the pseudo stippling. Do you have an opinion as far as the glass and how it would impact the, the -- I think you called it an intermediate target. If you could explain what that means.
ANTHONY CLARK: An intermediate target, it's just something between the muzzle of a gun and the final target. There's something in between. It could be a baseball cap. It could be a window. It could be a door. It could be a wall.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And is the pseudo stippling that you previously described, the evidence that you're relying on to indicate that the, that the victim was shot through this glass?
ANTHONY CLARK: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay. And that's consistent with the image in State's Exhibit 17, which you've also reviewed?
ANTHONY CLARK: That's correct.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Okay.
(Brief pause.)
MS. CAPPLEMAN: One moment, please.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MS. CAPPLEMAN:
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. Dr. Clark, what was your opinion regarding the cause of death in this case?
ANTHONY CLARK: The cause of death was written down as gunshot wounds of the face, head.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: All right. And what was your ruling as to the manner of death in this case?
ANTHONY CLARK: The manner of death was a homicide.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No further questions.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Cross.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. PADILLA:
MR. PADILLA: Good afternoon, Doctor. My name is Mauricio Padilla. I represent Mr. Garcia.
ANTHONY CLARK: sure.
MR. PADILLA: I'm going to ask you a couple of questions about your testimony. Is that okay?
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay.
MR. PADILLA: In this particular case, did you use any trajectory rods?
ANTHONY CLARK: I don't usually take pictures with rods in place. I probably did, but I don't remember specifically.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. You could explain to the jury exactly what a trajectory rod is?
ANTHONY CLARK: It's a metallic rod that we use, or you could use any kind of materials. But then connect the, connect the dots, basically. So you would take the, the rod, stick it in the entry wound, and follow it back to where it went into the brain. And that would show you the trajectory through the body there. Okay.
MR. PADILLA: And whose decision would it be to use a trajectory rod or not to use a trajectory rod? would that be your call as a doctor?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes. Uh-huh.
MR. PADILLA: And your -- and the decision not to memorialize the actual use of these trajectory rods, was that your decision?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes.
MR. PADILLA: And in -- how -- in what percentage of cases do you memorialize the actual use of the trajectory rods as opposed to not, not using?
ANTHONY CLARK: Two gunshot wounds like this and the bullets are recovered in the body, they're not really useful, because I can tell the direction by looking at them. A lot of times I use trajectory rods when you have called multiple gunshot wounds that are -- what are called perforating gunshot wounds. You got an entry, and an exit, an entry and an exit. And I may memorialize those.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. Did, did anyone provide you any information regarding the positioning of Mr. Markel when he was taken out of the vehicle?
ANTHONY CLARK: I don't recollect. I know he was in the vehicle, in the driver's side, but I don't know about his position.
MR. PADILLA: Did you have any communication with members of either, either the State law enforcement or the FBI regarding the trajectory of, of the wounds in this case?
ANTHONY CLARK: State or FBI?
MR. PADILLA: Yeah. Any --
ANTHONY CLARK: I do not be --
MR. PADILLA: -- any law enforcement. Did you have any communication with any law enforcement regarding the trajectory of these wounds?
ANTHONY CLARK: well, yeah, the Tallahassee Police Department.
MR. PADILLA: Okay.
MR. PADILLA: One second, please.
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay.
(off-the-record discussion.)
BY MR. PADILLA:
MR. PADILLA: Sorry. Just to follow up, who, who would it have been that you had communication with regarding the trajectory of these wounds?
ANTHONY CLARK: Investigator Scott Cherry and william Kornegay were at the autopsy, so I would discuss the trajectory with them through the body. And then whoever read the report would know.
MR. PADILLA: But, but direct communication with yourself, it would have just been the two individuals that you, that you just discussed, correct?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes, sir. As far as I know. If there was any follow-up conversations, I don't know anything about them.
MR. PADILLA: One moment.
(off-the-record discussion.)
BY MR. PADILLA:
MR. PADILLA: There's an investigator by the last name of Yao, Shawn Yao. Did you have any communication with him regarding --
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes. Okay. Yes. Uh-huh.
MR. PADILLA: Did you have communication with him regarding the trajectory of these rods?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes.
MR. PADILLA: Okay.
ANTHONY CLARK: He read the autopsy report and asked me about them.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. And what, what, what -- how did that, how did that conversation go?
ANTHONY CLARK: we didn't --
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Objection, hearsay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MR. PADILLA:
MR. PADILLA: You can answer.
ANTHONY CLARK: Yeah. we just talked about what the trajectory was through the body.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. And when was that conversation? Did you have one conversation or multiple conversations?
ANTHONY CLARK: Just one conversation. That was a couple days ago.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. And that was over the phone?
ANTHONY CLARK: Yes.
MR. PADILLA: Okay.
ANTHONY CLARK: Oh, he actually -- no. He actually came by probably within the last two weeks. He came by the office, and we discussed it, but we didn't really look at pictures or anything like that. And then we discussed it on the phone, because he hadn't read the autopsy report yet.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. So he came in person?
ANTHONY CLARK: Uh-huh.
MR. PADILLA: To your office?
ANTHONY CLARK: (Nods head.)
MR. PADILLA: To discuss the trajectory, correct?
ANTHONY CLARK: Right.
MR. PADILLA: And then he called you on the phone?
ANTHONY CLARK: Right.
MR. PADILLA: And you're saying that the reason that he called you on the phone was because, when he went to your office to discuss the trajectory of these rods, he still had not reviewed the autopsy report?
ANTHONY CLARK: At that point in time. And I think he was picking up a CD with the pictures on it.
MR. PADILLA: The cD of the pictures that, that we've just seen here today --
ANTHONY CLARK: Right.
MR. PADILLA: -- that the jury's seen?
ANTHONY CLARK: The autopsy photographs, yes, sir.
MR. PADILLA: So, so you're saying that around two weeks ago, when he went to your office, that Mr. Yao had not viewed, viewed those pictures and had not viewed the, the report; is that correct?
ANTHONY CLARK: I believe that's true. Yes, sir.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. And then you discussed it with him?
ANTHONY CLARK: Right.
MR. PADILLA: And then he told you, I'm going to review the report, and I'm going to call you back; is that correct?
ANTHONY CLARK: No. He didn't say anything about calling me back, but he did call me back.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. And so, so what was the purpose of that phone call, in your opinion?
ANTHONY CLARK: Just to talk about the trajectory on that through the body.
MR. PADILLA: what about the trajectory?
ANTHONY CLARK: well, to confirm that that's what I was talking about.
MR. PADILLA: Because that wasn't discussed during your first -- that -- your in-person meeting?
ANTHONY CLARK: Right. Because he hadn't read the autopsy report yet.
MR. PADILLA: Right. As a medical examiner, is it, is it odd that at this late stage in the investigation --
JUDGE HANKINSON: That's not an appropriate question. Do you have anything else?
MR. PADILLA: One moment.
(off-the-record discussion. )
BY MR. PADILLA:
MR. PADILLA: Just one last question. when was your autopsy report available to law enforcement? If you can give us a date.
ANTHONY CLARK: I finalized the autopsy on August 25th, 2014.
MR. PADILLA: And is that, is that around the time that you would have made it available to law enforcement?
ANTHONY CLARK: Right. At that time, when I sign off on it, then it gets mailed out probably within seven to ten days after that.
MR. PADILLA: Okay. Thank you so much, Doctor.
ANTHONY CLARK: Okay.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Magbanua.
MR. DECOSTE: No questions, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Redirect.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Any juror have a question of this witness? You can step down.
ANTHONY CLARK: Thank you, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do we need to keep him further?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: He may be released.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Either side need him?
MR. ZANGENEH: Not from Mr. Garcia, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. You're excused. Thank you for being here.
ANTHONY CLARK: Thank y'all.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Call your next witness.
(witness exits.)