Networked Knowledge - Books Online

Page set up: Dr Robert N Moles and drafted with the assistance of Bibi Sangha barrister and settled by Kevin Borick QC

Losing Their Grip - the case of Henry Keogh
Affidavit of Associate Professor Gale E Spring

Losing Their Grip - table of contents

Also by Dr Moles - A state of Injustice - Definition and Rule in Legal Theory

The Medical Board of South Australia - Affidavit of Associate Professor Gale E Spring

On                       2004

I, Associate Professor Gale E. Spring, MFA, RBI, FBCA, FIPT, make oath [or affirm] and say as follows:

I am the Associate Professor of Scientific Photography and Program Leader of the Applied Science Photography program at the School of Applied Sciences in the Department of Applied Physics at RMIT University in Melbourne.

I have been in this or a similar role since arriving in Australia to accept this position in February 1988. I teach scientific photography. I coordinate the academic program and I consult with the medical and scientific photographic industry as well as with those engaged in law enforcement and the legal profession.

From 1976 to 1988, I was the Director of Photographic Services in the Department of Pathology at the University of Texas, Southwestern Medical School in Dallas, Texas USA. As a part of my duties I worked for and assisted the Dallas County Medical Examiner’s Office at the Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences.

My area of expertise is in the interpretation of photographic images, including video and digital images, for forensic purposes. As a practicing medical photographer for more than ten years in pathology and forensic medicine, I also have expertise in the proper documentation of autopsies and crime scenes. I have lectured extensively on these topics.

Now produced and shown to me and marked GES1 is a copy of my curriculum vitae which is attached hereto.

In conjunction with my academic role at RMIT University, my professional practice has involved me in giving opinion and expert testimony in court proceedings in many criminal and civil cases, I have given evidence for both the prosecution and defence.

In 1999, I was shown several colour photographs which were said to have been taken at the scene of the death of Ms Anna Jane Cheney.

I was also shown black and white autopsy photographs which were identified as having been submitted as evidence in court. The tonal quality of the prints would indicate they were printed from black and white negatives.

I was directed to marks on the leg of the person in the photograph. I was told these marks were said to have been evidence of bruising allegedly from a hand. The marks were said to have been identified by Dr Manock as finger or thumb impressions that had resulted in bruising.

I was told there were more photographs taken at the autopsy. On 17 April 1999 I sent a letter to Mr P.J.L. Rofe QC, Director of Public Prosecutions, asking for access to the negatives. I received no response from his office.

The purpose of my request was to ensure I was looking at the highest quality prints which were possible from those negatives. It was impossible to tell whether the photographs I was shown reproduced the quality of the negatives.

It is my opinion, from the limited number of autopsy photographs which I was shown, that the photographic documentation of the autopsy was not handled in a complete or  professional manner.

It is my opinion that colour film and prints should have been used to document the autopsy. In this case, colour prints might help in identifying the marks on the leg. Bruising may have exhibited a red, blue or purple colour. Other topical marks such as dirt or ink may exhibit a grey or neutral colour, so as to be indistinguishable from a bruise in a black and white print.

Other skin conditions may have exhibited a specific colour which would help to identify the condition.

It is my opinion that the use of black and white film was not appropriate for this purpose, particularly considering the technology which was available at that time.

It is my opinion that the photographs demonstrate no clear detail that can be identified as bruising or finger marks. Many other reasons are possible for the marks in question. These include as possibilities artifacts of the film, and artefacts of the processing and printing.

It is my opinion that one would have to examine the original negatives in order to confirm or exclude such possibilities.

Access to the entire set of negatives and subsequent highest quality photographs may help in support of identifying the marks.

Sworn by the said

Associate Professor Gale E. Spring      

in the presence of: Solicitor / Commissioner for oaths

Back to the Table of Contents

Top of Page