During direct examination, Eric Collins testified that on October 17, 2005 while attending the autopsy, he collected numerous light hairs from the back torso of Vitale’s body and packaged these. Here is should be noted that Pamela Vitale had black hair and her husband Daniel Horowitz has dark brown hair.
On cross-examination, Collins testified that the hairs found on the back of the Vitale’s torso were blonde in color, and found at the junction where the T-shirt and skirt met, in the midsection of her back, and that the numerous blonde hairs were “loosely hanging on”.
He collected these by placing them in an envelope.
Collins testified that when he photographed Dyleski following his arrest, his hair was black. He had no remarkable lacerations or bruises. The connective tissue in his mouth, which can tear during a violent struggle, was intact. His injuries were superficial in nature.
On re-direct, DDA Jewett elicited testimony that it was not unusual to find stray hair at the scene of a crime.
On re-re cross Leona asked Collins if these hairs were sent to the lab for analysis. He responded “No”. Again it is very clear that the laboratory performed tests that were very selective by choice and made no attempts to identify third-party DNA, unidentified hair, and/or third party fingerprints. Why? Could it be possible that some other perpetrator in this horrible killing is being protected?
A big loose end in the evidence was revealed -- blonde hair on the back of Pamela’s torso. The "H" or cross was found carved into her back. Did someone at the crime scene, while carving this symbol, shed blonde hair? It was not tested by any lab to run any DNA found in it through the FBI Codex to ascertain if it belonged to any known criminal. Hair roots are necessary for DNA testing. Did these hairs have roots? If there were no roots, mitochondrial DNA testing could have been used.
Again defense attorney Leonida failed her client by not asking why the murder scene investigation ignored this blonde hair evidence. She did not ask exactly how many hairs were found. They were described as “numerous”. So far, she has not produced any expert to explain why this blonde hair is an essential part of the investigation and why it is crucial that the hair be tested.
DDA Hal Jewett’s contention that finding stray hair at the scene of a crime is not unusual is a lame excuse for the irresponsibility of the lab to properly test these strange hairs. Why? The location of this blonde hair was crucial – on the victims back, where the H or cross symbol was also carved. Who shed this hair? In a case where the prosecution emphasizes DNA samples, the failure to test this sample, is not only inexplicable, it is shocking!