beaujolais
Lab Technician
Otie said:Not necessarily. As it stood in the episode, they suspected it was flex-cuffs. At that point by getting a number of volunteers of the same overall body type as Haskell (as close to his bone and muscle structure as possible) they can experiment using a variety of different types of bindings... when they find one that produces the same MARKINGS as the ligature marks on Haskell's wrists, they can then fine-tune the experiment to test for other variables on that binding. To test various amounts of tightness of the binding, as well as whether he was bound behind his back or in front. Based on those results, and comparing them with the ligature marks for intensity, positioning, etc... they can determine whether or not it would have been possible for him to have gotten out of the binding on his own.
By doing the experimentation, they could show with very little doubt that the flex-cuffs were the bind. Yes, a defense lawyer would probably argue with the fact that they weren't on the scene and weren't ever recovered... but does the lack of a knife in a stabbing equate to there never having been a knife used? No... that's why it's up to the investigators and scientists to experiment to determine WHAT happened based on the evidence they do have... and in this case it's a set of ligature marks on his wrists paired with the evidence that Ray had dominated the fight. In the court, a jury may or may not find the results of the experiment to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt... but at that point it's based on the individual beliefs and faith science and experimentation to find truth. I myself am very science-minded... I would trust that so long as the experimentation was done using proper scientific standards, that the results and conclusions are accurate. My in-laws wouldn't. But you even have people who don't look at cases with clear cut evidence all present who may doubt the validity of the evidence period. So, really... they could very easily make a good case via experimentation.
Thanks for the explanation. Based on this it sounds like Catherine and company never really needed the flex-cuffs to know that Ray had Haskell subdued and could have presented the above to prove that it wasn't self defense. Instead they signed off on the report saying that it was.