"Are you sure it was a single cut?"

"Oh, yes. It aligns absolutely perfectly. One single slice was made through the pants and Dr. Calhoun’s leg."

"What was the maximum diameter of Dr. Calhoun’s upper thigh?"

"A little over eight inches."

"So if a knife was used, it had to have a blade at least eight inches long, correct?"

"Yes."

"The sharpest knives made are surgical scalpels, yes?"

"Yes," said Flemingdon.

"Do any scalpels have blades eight inches long?"

"No standard one does. Of course, medical-supply companies can custom-make surgical tools."

"But in all your experience, you’ve never seen a scalpel with an eight-inch blade?"

"Objection," said Dale. "Leading."

"Sustained," said Pringle. "Rephrase."

Ziegler nodded at the judge. "What’s the largest scalpel you’ve ever seen?"

"I’ve seen one with a five-inch blade."

"Nothing bigger?"

"No."

"I’m sure the jury has noticed your fancy laser pointer, Doctor. Could the cut have been made by a laser beam?"

"No. A laser is a burning tool — it uses high temperatures to cut. It would have singed the denim, as well as Dr. Calhoun’s skin, and the hairs on his thigh. And a laser — well, a laser doesn’t leave arteries and veins open.

Rather, it cauterizes them — sears them shut. That’s why we use laser scalpels for delicate surgery: they sever and seal blood vessels simultaneously. No, this cut was not made with a burning implement."

"Thank you. Let’s leave the leg cut for the moment. What about the rest of the injuries?"

Flemingdon turned to the photos, pointing with her laser. "The corpse had been severely — well, mutilated is probably the right word. The chest cavity had been carved open, and the ribs spread wide. Organs had been removed and scattered about, and the head was severed from the body."

"You said a moment ago that ‘mutilated’ is probably the right word. Why the hesitation in word choice?"

"Well, it was mutilation, by the dictionary definition: ‘depriving of limbs or other essential parts, and/or irreparably disfiguring or damaging.’ But, well, whether the goal was to mutilate or not, I can’t be sure."

"What do you mean by the ‘goal,’ Dr. Flemingdon?"

"The purpose. This could have just as easily been a deliberate medical dissection, rather than an attempt to disfigure."

"Objection," said Dale. "Speculation. Move to strike."

"Dr. Flemingdon is certainly qualified to offer an expert opinion in this area," said Ziegler, looking up at the judge.

"Overruled," said Pringle.

"What makes you say it might have been a dissection, Doctor?"

"The thoroughness, for one. Disfigurement is often localized — the face will be scarred, or the genitals or breasts will be carved up. This process seemed to concentrate on no one part of the anatomy — or, more precisely, it seemed to involve every part of the anatomy."

"Would it be fair to say that whoever performed the procedures on this body had expert medical knowledge?"

"Yes and no."

" ‘Yes and no,’ " repeated Ziegler. "What do you mean by that?"

"Yes, he or she clearly knew how to use surgical instruments. For instance, Ms. Ziegler, if I were to hand you or anyone else who had never used one before a scalpel and asked you to carve into a body, you’d likely make a tentative trial cut first — this would show as a hesitation mark, or shallow wound. Whoever dissected Dr. Calhoun showed no such inexperience. I would judge that the person doing it was quite familiar with dissecting technique."

"Then your answer is yes — the person did have expert medical knowledge."

"Expert knowledge of equipment, Ms. Ziegler. But the process by which the dissection was done was almost haphazard. No one who knew what they were doing would have spread the ribs in the way it had been done in this case; there are much easier methods. It was almost as if the person doing it, although familiar with general medical techniques, had no specific knowledge of human anatomy."

At the defense table, Dale sighed. Ziegler had doubtless coached Flemingdon to volunteer this idea, neatly preventing Dale from objecting :o a question that invited speculation from the witness.

"No specific knowledge of human anatomy?" repeated Ziegler.

"Yes."

"Can you give further examples that support this conclusion?"

"Well, whoever did the cutting opened the stomach up before removing it from the chest cavity — resulting in gastric acid spilling into the torso. If you’d known in advance that the stomach contained acid, you’d have removed it as a unit and dissected it separately."

"Thank you. Did you conduct an inventory of body parts?"

"Yes."

"Why did you do that?"

"In murder cases involving disfigurement or dismembering, it’s not unusual for the killer to keep a souvenir of the crime."

"A souvenir?"

"Yes — a finger, perhaps, or, in some sex-related crimes, part of the genitals."

"So you inventoried Dr. Calhoun’s body parts. What did you find?"

"Several pieces were missing."

"Which parts specifically, Doctor?"

"The right eye was gone."

Intake of breath from jurors four and six; Dale had identified both of them as queasy during voir dire, but had been unable to get them excused.

"The eye was removed?" repeated Ziegler, as if surprised by this piece of news.

"Yes."

"By the same cutting tool?"

"Well, sort of. The eyeball was prized from the socket, possibly by fingers, but the muscles and optic nerve were indeed severed cleanly, quite probably by the same tool, yes."

"Was anything else missing?"

"The vermiform process."

" ‘The vermiform process,’ " repeated Ziegler. She looked at the jury. "Is there another name by which we might be more familiar with that, Doctor?"

"It’s commonly called the appendix."

"The same appendix that’s down here?" She touched her lower right side.

"The one that’s prone to appendicitis?"

"That’s right."

"How was it removed?"

"Well, not the normal way — that is, not like we do it in an appendectomy, going in from outside. Rather it was clipped out during the internal dissection."

"Are you sure about this?" said Ziegler. "Couldn’t his appendix have been removed years before? Lots of people have no appendix — I don’t myself."

"There was no appendectomy scar on Calhoun’s body, and no signs of an old operation internally. Still, I did check with Calhoun’s personal physician and his health-insurance company. The doctor had no record of Calhoun ever having appendicitis, and the insurer has no claim on file for an appendectomy operation."

"Was anything else missing?"

"Yes. Dr. Calhoun’s lower jaw and neck were gone."

More mock surprise. "His neck?"

"Yes, that’s right. I said the head was severed from the body. In fact, the highest vertebra intact in the torso was the first thoracic one. And the head had no vertebrae left attached to it. All seven cervical vertebrae were gone, along with the throat and the Adam’s apple. Also missing was the mandible — the lower jaw."

"Do you have any idea why the perpetrator would take these particular body parts, Doctor?"

"No."

"Are you sure that it wasn’t the removal of these body parts that caused Dr. Calhoun’s death?"

"I’m sure. He was dead by the time they were removed."

"How do you know that?"

"Well, you can tell by the pattern of blood splattering that the opening of the chest was done after the heart had stopped beating. Likewise the decapitation: in fact, there was very little blood left in the body by the time the head was severed. And the removal of the eye — well, it takes a lot of force to pull out an eye. If this had happened while Dr. Calhoun was still alive, there’d be bruising on his right cheek and the right side of his nose.