Jordan Graham Jury Shown Pictures of “Blindfold,” Actual Cloth Not Allowed in Court
Shortly before the Jordan Graham murder trial began on December 9, national media went wild over speculation that a “blindfold” may have been used the night that Cody Johnson disappeared in Glacier National Park.
The speculation occurred because of legal correspondence filed by the defense during the run up to trial.
Today, December 10, the jury was walked through a detailed look at the evidence collected at the crime scene. Among the articles collected were a sock and Johnson’s shoes: one of which was found down stream on a rocky bed, while another was found on a cliff above the pool where Johnson’s body was found.
The audience was then shown the actual black Nike ankle sock and one of the shoes that had been recovered from the scene.
Also found, not far from the second shoe, was what testifying Detective Cory Clark described as a “black piece of torn cotton cloth.”
Three pictures of the cloth were shown from varying distance, and as each picture hit the screen, Graham’s defense would object asking “relevance.” The pictures, it turns out, were not submitted as official evidence, but Judge Molloy allowed the jury to see them anyway.
It was difficult to make out exactly the size of the cloth, but it appeared to be roughly the size of a small T-shirt. However, when the prosecution brought in a paper evidence bag with the cloth, the defense was allowed to cross-examine detective Clark.
During the cross-examination, Mike Donahue focused on the way the cloth was recovered and was able to get Clark to acknowledge that when the cloth was placed on nearby rocks for pictures, and when it was transferred into plastic bags for recovery, that it may have become contaminated with microscopic material that could change the course of the case.
Molloy agreed, sustaining an objection by the defense because a proper “chain of custody” could not be established.
Though the prosecution was told they could resubmit the cloth later on, if they could “wrap-it up with more witnesses,” the judge seemed to side with the defense in stating that a proper “chain of custody” could not be determined for the cloth.