Opinion ID: 1059186
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: dr. pierre-louis

Text: Dr. Marie-Lydie Y. Pierre-Louis was the medical examiner who performed the autopsy on Clayton Dicks. Among those present during the autopsy were Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney Margaret E. Lair-Eastman (Eastman), one of the prosecuting attorneys at Lovitt's trial, and Detective Stuart Chase of the Arlington County Police Department. During the autopsy, Dr. Pierre-Louis was shown two pairs of scissors recovered from a container next to the cash register near the location where Dicks' body was found. Dr. Pierre-Louis was not shown the orange-handled pair of scissors found with blood on the blade tip (the bloody scissors), discovered in the woods behind the pool hall and admitted into evidence at Lovitt's trial. The autopsy report prepared by Dr. Pierre-Louis indicated that each of Dicks' six stab wounds displayed a blunt and a sharp edge. The wounds ranged in depth between three and eight inches, and three of these wounds were between six and eight inches deep. The autopsy report further indicated that one of the pairs of scissors examined by Dr. Pierre-Louis had a total length of eight-andone-half inches with blades that were threeand-one-half inches long and one-half inch wide at the base. The other pair of scissors she examined was six-and-one-half inches in length and had blades that were three inches long and one-half inch wide at the base. At the autopsy, Dr. Pierre-Louis told Eastman and Detective Chase that neither of the two pairs of scissors that she examined could have been the murder weapon because the length and width of their blades were not consistent with the nature and dimensions of Dicks' stab wounds. Dr. Pierre-Louis also told Eastman and Chase that she would have to examine the bloody scissors before she could reach a conclusion whether those scissors were the source of Dicks' wounds. Dr. Pierre-Louis' opinion concerning the two pairs of scissors she examined was not included in the autopsy report. Neither Eastman nor anyone else in the prosecutor's office informed Lovitt's trial counsel of Dr. Pierre-Louis' opinion. During Lovitt's trial, Dr. Pierre-Louis was not asked to give her opinion concerning the two pairs of scissors that she had examined, nor was she asked to opine whether the bloody scissors admitted into evidence were consistent with Dicks' stab wounds. At the habeas hearing, Dr. Pierre-Louis testified that she is an expert on the wounds on the body and that part of her expertise includes determining whether an object is consistent with a wound. Dr. Pierre-Louis stated that each of Dicks' stab wounds had both a blunt and a sharp edge, indicating that a single-edged blade was used to cause those wounds. Dr. Pierre-Louis was shown a photograph of the bloody scissors found in the woods near the pool hall. Using a measurement scale depicted in the photograph, she determined that one blade was three-and-one-half inches long from its tip to the base where the two blades are joined, and that this blade was one-half inch wide at the base. She was unable to measure the other blade because of its position in the photograph. Dr. Pierre-Louis testified that the bloody scissors shown in the photograph were inconsistent with Dicks' wounds. She stated that three of those wounds, which measured between six and eight inches in depth, were deeper than the length of the three-and-onehalf inch blade. She also stated that while the other three wounds, which ranged between three and five inches in depth, were more or less consistent with the length of the blade, the wounds were twice as wide as the width of the blade. Dr. Pierre-Louis further testified that if the blade had been completely inserted into Dicks' body, she would have expected to discover a notch from the other blade or a contusion from the scissors' handle in the immediate vicinity of the stab wounds. However, she did not discover any evidence of such marginal abrasions near Dicks' wounds. Dr. Pierre-Louis completely discounted tissue compression as an explanation for the discrepancy between the scissors' blade length and Dicks' wounds because of the lack of marginal abrasions in the wound areas. She stated that the discovery of Dicks' blood on the scissors would not influence her opinion that those scissors are inconsistent with Dicks' wounds because she does not know how the blood was transferred to those scissors. On cross-examination, Dr. Pierre-Louis testified that she never examined the bloody scissors depicted in the photograph and was unable to determine the thickness of the blades or whether their outside edges were sharp. Contrary to her testimony on direct examination, she conceded that it was possible that a single blade of the scissors depicted in the photograph could have caused the three stab wounds that measured between three and five inches deep. Both Detective Chase and Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney Barbara Walker, one of the prosecuting attorneys at Lovitt's trial, testified that the bloody scissors were different in size from the two pairs of scissors presented to Dr. Pierre-Louis. Detective Chase also testified that he contacted Dr. Pierre-Louis after the autopsy and informed her that the police had recovered a certain pair of scissors that he concluded was the murder weapon, which he described to her. He stated that when he described the bloody scissors to Dr. Pierre-Louis, she made some comment that, I guess I was wrong, or, I made a mistake. Eastman testified that when she told Dr. Pierre-Louis after the autopsy that Dicks' blood had been identified on the bloody pair of scissors, Dr. Pierre-Louis shrugged and responded, oh well. Eastman interpreted Dr. Pierre-Louis' response as a departure from her previous opinion and an abandonment of any notion that scissors could not be the murder weapon. Eastman testified that Lovitt's counsel had a copy of the autopsy report and had access to the physical evidence in the case, including the bloody scissors. She further testified that she did not consider Dr. Pierre-Louis' opinion concerning the two pairs of scissors to be exculpatory because neither pair was the murder weapon presented at trial. Denman Rucker, one of Lovitt's trial attorneys, testified at the habeas hearing that the trial evidence concerning the bloody scissors actually worked to [his] benefit during trial, and allowed him to assert that an unknown assailant had perpetrated the crimes, which was the strongest argument available for Lovitt's defense. Rucker explained that this evidence also allowed him to avoid having the jury infer that Lovitt brought a deadly weapon with him to the pool hall. The circuit court made a factual finding that after DNA test results confirmed the presence of Dicks' blood on the bloody scissors, Dr. Pierre-Louis indicated to the Commonwealth's attorneys that she had been wrong in her conclusion regarding the scissors. The court also found that Lovitt's defense counsel had access to the bloody scissors, the autopsy report, and to Dr. Pierre-Louis prior to Lovitt's trial. Based on additional testimony by Denman Rucker, the circuit court also found that Rucker had recognized the differences in the blade lengths of the scissors listed in the autopsy report and the depth of Dicks' wounds and, as a result, had consulted with an expert at the Northern Virginia Forensic Laboratory. Rucker further testified that the expert informed him that a pair of scissors with a blade measuring between threeand-one-half and four-and-one-half inches in length could inflict a wound up to seven inches deep during a frenzied and violent attack based on a victim's breathing and the compression of body tissue. The court found that the expert informed Rucker that such scissors could have been the murder weapon.