◆ SpookStack

rd by aw) e. the report of the Ad ‘Hoe Committee of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences which outlined potential testing procedure; f. a 1969 statement by then District Attorney Evelle ‘Younger outlining the investigation into the conspiracy theory and his conclusion that the jury had found Sirhan guilty as charged; &. and the lengthy and definitive Los Angeles Times article by Farr and Kendall reviewing the Sirhan controversy. Schrade also argued that the right to inspect the exhibits was meaningful only if the exhibits were tested. He underscored this argument by stating that mere visual inspection of the exhibits would not give him the information he legitimately needed and sought in his personal injury action. Therefore, the court having the power to authorize the tests, should grant Schrade such a motion. Schrade emphasized the unique oriter of Presiding Judge Loring in 1972, that all exhibits in the Sirhan case were to be retained "forever because of the historical nature and importance of the case." Sechrade stated that the court anticipated that important future use might be made of the exhibits, therefore, the right to inspect and test such exhibits was inherent in this 1972 order. Schradets memorandum characterized the District Attorney's Office as "repeatedly refusing all requests to reopen the investigaticn." The statement avoided mention of the several on- going investigations in 1971 and 1974, and the fact that the District Attorney's Office had publicly stated its willingness to conduct an investigation protected in a judicial forum where rules of evidence and cross examination would apply. CBS Application to Inspect and Test Exhibits Almost Simultaneous with the filing of the Paul Schrade application, was an application filed by CBS before Presiding Judge Robert Wenke seeking an order for the inspection and examination of the various ballistics and firearms exhibits in the Sirhan case. The exhibits sought to be inspected and examined were identical to those petitioned by Schrade. The major difference between the two petitioners before the court was that CBS relied upon the declaration and affidavit of criminalist Lowell Bradford to specify the procedure and substance for scientific examination of the exhibits. Additionally, CBS phrased its application for inspection and testing on the rather unique argument of "the public's right to know." -4t-