2.Edward S. Knapp — Direct (Part 1)
599 linesEDWARD S. KNAPP, Sworn
COURT CLERK: Have a seat. State your name. Spell your last name for the record. Keep your voice up and speak into the mic so everyone can hear you.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Edward S. Knapp, K-n-a-p-p.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Morning, Agent Knapp. Are you a supervisory special agent with the FBI?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, I am.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: How long have you been with the FBI?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Over 19 years.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Before the FBI, what did you do?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I was in the United States Navy.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: How long were you in the United States Navy?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: A little over eight years.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: What unit were you in in the United States Navy?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I was Naval Special Warfare, and that was -- basically that's Navy SEAL.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Before that, what did you do?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I went to college and graduated from the United States Naval Academy.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: As long as you've been an agent, have you had a variety of different duties?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, I have.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And can you just give the jury an overview of your career?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I was afforded regular basic FBI agent training. Then I went down to the Miami Field Division. I investigated violent crime, kidnapping, extortions. At the same time, I got to go to bomb technician school through the FBI in Huntsville, Alabama, where all state and local bomb technicians are trained. And I was afforded that opportunity. And I went back to Miami. Then I went and applied for a position up in the FBI laboratory where I currently reside since the late 2003.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So let's -- at one point you were a -- I don't want to say "regular" special agent because it doesn't make sense. But you were --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Special agent.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You were a special agent. Then you specialized in -- as being a bomb tech, a special agent bomb tech?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, that's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So can you describe the process to become a special agent bomb tech?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, it was a course, a six-week course, basically how to become a bomb tech, things of -- as far as explosives, handling explosives, circuitry, what are bombs made up of, training basic to render safe RSP bombs, how to deal with that.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: RSP, does that stand --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Render Safe Procedure, to neutralize an IED or a bomb.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Are there a variety of field divisions that have special agent bomb techs?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. All 56 field divisions have a bomb technician.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: What are the duties of a special agent bomb technician?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: They basically coordinate. They liaise state and local, assist them at times for special events or if there's call-outs.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: What kind of activities do you do if there's a call-out?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I might respond with that particular bomb unit to a call. Things are reported back through them to our FBI headquarters notifying that there's an incident going on.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And those incidents amount from, like, suspicious packages all the way to an explosion, is that right?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And when you respond, do you do a variety of evidence collection techniques?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I imagine they do. I mean, at this point that's up to -- in that field division, what's going on there at that time.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Just describing your -- when you were an SABT, did you go out and respond to scenes? And describe some of the things that you did.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: If, yeah, there was a scene or go -- suspicious package or there's some material that looks like maybe explosives or hand grenade or might be explosive material, to assess if it's a hoax or not.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And then did you also do render safe procedures?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Practiced a lot. But, I mean, I ended up leaving there after a year or two to come up to the FBI laboratory.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You mentioned earlier that you attended the Huntsville bomb tech training course. Can you explain what that is?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's a six-week process. You're familiar with electrical and nonelectric fusing systems to detonate explosives. You handle explosives. You look at render-safe tools, tools that are used to disrupt IEDs, X-ray interpretation, things like that. And you have training and then scenarios. And you get qualified after that if you pass tests and meet the standards.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And who is administering these tests and standards?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's the Hazards Device School, and it's run by the FBI. And there's -- there was military bomb techs or retired military bomb techs, you know, retired or public safety bomb techs that are assigned as instructors down there in that school.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And they evaluate you before they qualify you?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah. There's practical application scenarios, getting in the bomb suit, taking a disrupter, and neutralizing an IED.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: As a result of that, do you get certified as a hazardous device technician?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. How does that happen?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's a bomb technician.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Bomb technician, excuse me. Is there a certification for that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: For?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: For a bomb technician.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That is the -- down in Huntsville, Alabama.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is there ongoing training or a way to assess whether your skills are up to date?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: There's periodic IED training with state and locals. That all depends, like I said, on the division where you're at and the bomb techs with their state and local counterparts.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Have you continued to do that since this training?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: No. I'm in the FBI laboratory, in the Explosives Unit.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'm just trying to get a sense of, after your training, how long you were in the field doing this work and then before you came to the FBI lab.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It was about a year and a half.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And during that time, did you investigate explosives incidents?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It's been awhile, but there's one or two, you know, and then doing special events with the state and locals over down in Florida where I was assigned. But, you know, it's been awhile but one or two times at some call-outs at night, but other than that --
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So the bulk of your experience has been at the FBI laboratory?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I had to be trained and certified, yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So please explain that.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: There's a process. I'm a hazardous device examiner in the FBI, and we fall under the TEDAC section under the FBI laboratory. And we have --
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Let me pause there. What is TEDAC?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: The acronym is Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center. But in the course of -- in the Explosives Unit, there's training that basically I had to complete. It takes several years. There's actually working cases, doing oral examinations, explosives, the admin oral boards for as far as the FBI laboratory protocols and procedures and how evidence is handled and sent through our laboratory besides working cases with a qualified examiner and then also outside training that was afforded along with -- actually, they would test -- basically test us. Basically we would -- you know, a case -- a mock case would come in. We would have to go from start to finish. Then we'd have to basically write reports and then testify in a mock room setting. You had to complete so many cycles of that type of training. And then once you completed all that training, if you completed it, then you would be certified as a hazardous device examiner.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So can you explain to the jury the difference between a bomb tech and a hazardous device examiner?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, we had additional training outside, going to commercial explosive manufacturers, military manufacturers. We have liaison with those type industry reps. We had basically a little more extensive training as to be an examiner, you know. Bomb tech, you know, they render safe some type of device and, you know, it's sent to us. And we're trying to put the pieces back together and try to figure out the functionality of this. Was it actually a device or was it not or what they call a hoax device.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So you examine evidence that's submitted from the field?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I jumped the gun earlier to say -- when I asked whether you had been certified to do that. Have you been?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: When -- for how long have you been a certified hazardous device examiner?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Since approximately 2007.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In the course of the last eight years, have you had occasions to conduct not just the mock hazardous device exams but actual real cases of hazardous device exams?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, I have.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: About how many do you think you've participated in?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Dozens.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And have you had training in this last eight years as well after you have been certified?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Can you describe -- you described some of it.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I mean, each year you have to go through a proficiency testing to make sure you're still qualified, and you have to pass those testing.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And is that administered by others in your field who are also hazardous device --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It's a requirement in the FBI laboratory under the -- as a forensic laboratory under ASCLD.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And the process of conducting a forensic exam, is that a collaborative process that you have -- you do with a team and various disciplines?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, as far as when the case comes to me, it's checked in. It comes to us. There's a process of checking it in. I mean, I have a technician that is assigned to me. And this is checked in. We then go to send the evidence out to other forensic disciplines within the lab, DNA, latent fingerprints, question documents, trace evidence, firearm toolmarks. So this evidence is then being sent to the other disciplines for them to work on their discipline to find DNA or latent prints. And it would be transferred with the proper protocols through the different disciplines, and it would come back to us. But at the end, at the end point, I'm looking and analyzing the material that had come in to me on a case and whatever field division in the FBI.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Then you render your assessments about that evidence?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, whether it is an IED or a bomb, a homemade bomb, or it's not. It could be a hoax bomb. Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And in many of the cases that you've examined, have items been submitted to you that hadn't exploded?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Sometimes, yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And in other cases, there are so-called post-blast investigations; you get the remnants of materials?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, that's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In addition to Improvised Explosive Devices, have you had training in other types of explosive devices?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I mean, when you talk about an Improvised Explosive Device, it can be commercially available, military available materials or commonly, readily available you can find and buy. And it's just form fashion as the term is "improvised." Sometimes we get an actual -- could be some military munitions, and we have to deal with that, you know. But normally they come in and they're improvised somehow, not designed as they were meant to be functioned.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Can you elaborate on that? Improvised Explosive Device, I think we understand what those words mean by themselves. But can you explain --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: In an Improvised Explosive Device, you have to have two things. You have to have a main charge, some type of explosives, and some type of fusing system. It could be an electrical fusing system or nonelectrical fusing system. Those are the two main components. And then sometimes how -- what explosive you use, whether it's a high explosive, like a military grade, or a low explosive, like a powder, you might need a container to use in a low-explosive device.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is that because the gases that build up is what causes the explosion in a low-explosive explosion?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah. You have to have some type of confinement. And basically the chemical reaction in it relieves it mechanically, and there's an explosion in that container.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. So as a hazardous device examiner, how do you go about conducting a post-blast evidence forensic examination?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, when the material comes in, you know, it's just a bunch of, you know, bits and pieces, and we're trying to segregate out stuff that's -- you know, it's not part of the bomb or what I'm looking for, an IED, and then trying to start to recognize pieces of maybe parts of the bomb, whether the fusing system, depending on what type it is, if there's a container. There might be a concealment container. Then you're basically trying to identify, I have a power source, or, yes, here's a switch, all kinds of, you know, ways someone could fashion a bomb so -- And then we're trying to determine the functionality of the bomb. And then sometimes there's also -- something might have happened in one scene, and then there's a search at another scene, and they might collect some evidence. And then they might ask -- this is the field division or the people request an exam that maybe we compare items from a search scene and from the bombing scene.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so when you assemble the evidence and you're trying to figure out what parts are what, how do you go about it? Do you take measurements? Do you take pictures? What are you looking at?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: We're looking at roughly trying to separate, like I said before, you know, electrical fusing system needs certain components in it, and we're trying to look for those. An electrical fusing system, you can have some sort of power source. It could be varied type of battery. You have to have a conductor, some wire. You would have to have some type of switch or switches in combination. And also, at the end, we call a load or the -- where the detonator or refer to, like, a blasting cap, or it could be an improvised detonator or initiator. So you're looking through all the material, and you're trying to find if there is a viable fusing system in there and also then separating out, if there was a container used, the pieces that are coming together, all these little pieces. There might have been sometimes fragmentation that was added, you know, into a device or there's a container or it was transported in a box or, you know, some other means. Then there might be little bits and pieces left at the scene there. But you're going -- concentrating on that to figure out. And also, you know, things are being sent to our explosive chemist for testing to try to see what type of explosive material was used.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. You just mentioned several things there. Are each of those different systems, different components of an IED, a fusing system, a container, and an explosive main charge?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, that's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is an energy source also necessary for that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: A power source.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: A power source. For an electrical system, it would be a power source?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Some type of power source.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: For something like a pipe bomb, what would the energy be from?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It just depends on how it's made. It could be a simple, like, a firecracker fuse or those green -- that hobby fuse, what we call, just lighting that with a match, or it could be an improvised initiator and you're using a battery with some type of switch to complete the circuit, and you could function it that way.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. With regards to each of these components, the energy source, the fusing system, a main charge or a container, can you give some examples of each of those that you've seen before or you've read about?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, I mean, for an energy power source, nine-volt batteries, six-volt lantern batteries, car batteries, things like that. I mean, I've seen regular commercial blasting caps, commercial nonelectric blasting caps that were improvised to make them electric blasting caps, blasting caps that were improvised and made, initiators that were -- could be from an SD rocket ignitor used as an initiator.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: How about the various different vessels or containers that you've seen?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Pipes, pressure cookers, I've seen those; pipes; in a box; PCV pipe.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Can you describe for the jury how these various components interact together to create an IED?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: If we're talking in this -- in general or --
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In general, and then we'll move to this case.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: In general, I mean, if you have that low explosive, you're going to have to have a container. And then it depends. It's as simple as putting a hobby fuse in it and lighting the hobby fuse or, like I said before, you had some improvised initiator, and you have to have a power source attached to it and then some type of switch that will close that circuit and send a current to that improvised initiator to ignite the low explosive.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And then, because of the containment of the low explosive, it will explode?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: If that's what the -- yeah, main charge was, yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, for purposes of this case, were you assigned to lead the forensic examination of the explosives?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, for the Explosives Unit, yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So can you explain what you did early on in the investigation?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It started that next day. Evidence started flowing into the laboratory. And as far as it was coming in, it was being checked in, our process of checking it in, photographing it, documentation, setting up an exam plan for all the other disciplines. And it just -- it kept coming in every about 12 hours. There was a shipment at night, shipment in the morning. And technicians were receiving the evidence in. We were looking -- looking at it. Sometimes it was sent -- some of the material was sent over maybe to DNA, if there was an issue, they wanted to get DNA or latents. But all these examiners, material was going to them. And then it was coming back to us to -- to our unit but specifically me to analyze and start looking through this. I mean, there was over 1,300 submissions. There might have been 1,300 submissions, but it wasn't one single item. We're talking hundreds. So there was probably thousands of little bits and pieces of trying to go look through this stuff, all this material. And you started separating and then started recognizing, you know, what I talked before about, if there was a piece of a battery, a piece of some type of switch. Then you started getting through the material that was just, you know, collected up at that scene. What I was specifically looking for, you know, what type of -- if there was a container, if there was some type of fusing system. And what I started to find, that there was a container or, like, a backpack. Then there was pieces of metal, larger pieces of metal that was the container, with the bomb -- you know, it was contained, like, because then found there was a low explosive in it. Then we started seeing bits of wire and pieces of electronic or R/C model -- hobby model components within and amongst the debris. And that all started coming in and started separating out, looking for what you need for that electrical fusing system and started putting back the pieces. And then we went on to look at it and test the functionality, if this would work.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. So once you get the pieces, you analyze them. You figure out how they interact with each other?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: We started to figure out what those pieces -- those components were from. You know, in our unit, we also will do testing if we need. Sometimes things come in and we'll test it on the explosives range, but we'll try to re-create the actual device. We knew the type of receivers, the electronic -- there was electronic speed controllers in there from model cars. The type of model R/C car, we were purchasing some. We started seeing, like, bits of the container, the Fagor container, the pressure cooker. We started going out there and looking and purchasing for exemplars because then we'd even take that, and we'd break apart, say, the R/C component because, in the explosive event, it's not going to look the same. Some of it, there was bits of capacitors and bits of a circuit. We actually had an exemplar. We were taking a look because we'd find tiny pieces of wire, tiny pieces of the connectors from the chaotic event, from that explosion. So we also did that for purchasing. And then eventually it came down we put the functionality, the fusing system together, and did some testing. Then, of course, on -- out there in the public domain, the internet and the manuals for those particular type of R/C transmitter, the transmitters for the radio cars, also the receiver types for their -- looking at those and seeing their compatibility and so forth and doing some testing with that.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: After you determined what the evidence submitted was, then you went out and you tried to buy each of these things as exemplars, intact things?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Then you'd use those to figure out exactly how they interacted?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is that customary in your field, to try to purchase exemplars and then create mock-ups?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, it is. Even if there was a vehicle that was in an explosion, to go take -- go to the manufacturer, look at the vehicle, what type of wiring, what type of systems, if it was a device that was blown up in a car. But, yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Just before we move on to specifically how you reconstructed those, did you arrive at a conclusion as to what exploded on Boylston Street on April 15, 2013?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah. There were two devices in pressure cookers, two bombs that were carried in there in backpacks, and they were pressure cookers. They had electrical fusing system that was an R/C model hobby car components in it, and there was a low explosive in it. And they were placed on -- down in those areas where they went off.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And a few days later, there were some explosions in Watertown, on April 19th. Did you arrive at conclusions as to what exploded there?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah. There was another pressure cooker, a smaller Fagor pressure cooker. It was -- they recovered, we talked before, two pipe bombs. There was an elbow and a pipe coupler. But they had internal end plugs, and they had what I talked before, just simple hobby fuse. And also there was some fragmentation recovered that came in that were bits of pipe and end caps that had exploded.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And in addition to the exploded materials, were there also intact submissions that you saw?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's correct. And there was also approximately three pounds of a low explosive in a container with hobby fuse coming out of it and also with this green hobby fuse inside the container, too.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Was that also an IED?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, that is.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You may have mentioned that there were a couple of pipe bombs that had been rendered safe. Did you examine those as well?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. And they had some fragmentation on the inside of them.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, are all these Improvised Explosive Devices or destructive devices?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. They're a bomb.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so when bombs go off, do you do your own reenactments of those devices?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: At times. It depends for the explosive effect. But there was no need for that. I mean, there was widely available that two devices functioned.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So let's move on to some of the evidence collection and some of the evidence that you looked at.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: If we could call up Exhibit 620. This is the 2-D. This is in evidence, your Honor.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Agent Knapp, have you seen this interactive exhibit before?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So as far as -- sorry about that. As far as your analysis, what does this -- this is -- I've focused on Scene A. What was significant to your analysis in terms of what evidence that you were looking at?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, I mean, this gives a pretty good description of where the blast seat was and then where the pattern of some of the materials radiated out from 360 degrees.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You said the word blast "seat." Is that where the blast originated essentially?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Wherever that device was placed. You can see where it -- it radiates out. This is a good representation.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: There's different colors. Do each of these depict different types of the systems that you had mentioned earlier, like --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, correct, you know, where some of the backpack, some of the container, the actual pressure cooker, and then there was also in the -- in this scene, there was copper -- there was BBs for added fragmentation in there and also where the fusing system -- you know, pieces happened to land at.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. You mentioned "fragmentation."
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Can you explain what fragmentation is?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: In terms of -- fragmentation could be primary or secondary fragmentation. Primary fragmentation would be, like, in an military ordinance, the casing. When it explodes, that's primary fragmentation. You might have secondary, which basically, depending on the violence and the pressures built and as far as that pressure wave going, it picks up pieces in the surrounding environment and hurls them out -- hurls them out in all directions. And secondary fragmentation can pick up just from the scene or sometimes what they call shrapnel or added fragmentation, where someone places something on a bomb to try to cause more damage. Usually, you see that, what they call anti-personnel type devices, where you're trying to cause as much damage or inflict, maim, kill, or injure personnel.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, in terms of how an Improvised Explosive Device works, if there's no fragmentation, how does that -- how does a bomb actually injure people?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, there's always -- I mean, there's a bare charge, but, normally, there's the overpressure and the extreme pressures going out imparted on the surrounding area, you know, picks up fragmentation from the surrounding. But it's usually, you know, overpressure from -- if there's no fragmentation, it's really the overpressure that's coming to hit an individual and can cause significant damage and death.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is that like the shockwave that comes out of the explosion?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is there also heat sometimes generated?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, there's the thermal effect. If you're close enough to the -- what particular material there is, you know, the fragmentation, but is a big one, and then basically the pressure, the overpressure, from -- imparted onto the surrounding is a big one.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: All right. So back to the Scene A device, when you started examining the evidence collected at Scene A, where did you first start in order to try to reassemble what the architecture of that device looked like?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I mean, there was just evidence coming in. It was not like it all came in from Scene A. There was stuff coming from the Medical Examiner's Office, Scene A, Scene B. And we basically then started piecing it together and seeing -- I'd see the power -- like I talked before, the fusing system of this one particular on Scene A was a particular one. And then on Scene B, the fusing system, the power source was particularly another -- another type.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I see. For each scene there was a different -- your examination started with a different component based on what was either unique or the evidence that you found?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It just came into the lab; and as it came into the lab, a process of examining it. It would come back to us. And basically I knew these particular items were from Scene A. These particular items were from Scene B. And then you started analyzing those particular items, looking through the paint cans with all the material in it, looking through the bags that came in with numerous things and material inside those. Then you started -- what I talked about is start looking for the particular components in the fusing system, the container, and the bag.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So let's go to Scene A and explain what you found that was significant about the device at Scene A.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: On this scene we found the power source. We found the receiver, the electronic speed controller, also a little part of the improvised initiator in there, the container. There was fragmentation and then the bag that was -- that it carried -- that it was carried in.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, before I go to the components, I just wanted to show you a photograph. With regard to the explosion -- you had just described how an explosion works regardless of the fragmentation. You described the shock and you described the fire.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'm putting up on the ELMO for the witness, your Honor, what I'm going to mark now as Exhibit 1573.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You see the cloud of smoke and the flames off to the right?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is that an accurate description of what an explosion of an IED would look like?
MR. WATKINS: Your Honor, I'm going to object at this point for a couple of reasons. This exhibit was only provided last night. We actually thought it was coming in through a different witness. I don't know whether there's been a foundation for this laid with this witness.
THE COURT: All right. Both objections are overruled. He may answer the question.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I mean, this is class -- like, in a detonation or explosion, depending what type of explosive it is. You see the thermal effect usually close to the seat of the explosion, and then pressures are radiating out and also fragmentation. I mean, we -- besides being an examiner, we instruct and teach post-blast investigation. And we show students the different effects of explosives and what happens when they go off, different type of explosives. So this is just common. That's an explosion with the thermal effect, which is usually close to the -- in the seat of the explosion.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I know it's being published, your Honor. I don't know if I actually moved it in yet, but I do move it in.
THE COURT: What's the number?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: 1573.
(Government's Exhibit No. 1573 received into evidence.)
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Go back to the computer, please.
THE COURT: Actually, we're just about at 11:00. Why don't we take this opportunity to take the morning recess.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Thank you.
COURT CLERK: All rise for the Court and jury. The Court will take the morning recess.
(Recess taken at 10:57 a.m.)
(After the recess:)
COURT CLERK: All rise for the Court and the jury.
(The Court and jury enter the courtroom at 11:26 a.m.)
COURT CLERK: Be seated.
THE COURT: Proceed.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Thank you, your Honor.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Agent Knapp, when we broke we were just getting ready to look at some of the evidence that was collected at Scene A. Did you find some evidence related to the fusing system of the device that exploded at Scene A?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Calling up on 620.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is this one of those items?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, it's the remains of the electronic speed controller.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: What is an electronic speed controller?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: In the model car, it basically sends the power to the motor, whether it makes it go faster or slower or reverse or forward, in the model car.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so what function does that perform in an improvised explosive device?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It's just basically a switch in the fusing system. And you can see one of the outputs. That hooks up -- the small leads there hook up to the receiver, and that larger red, you know, that hooks up to the power source battery, and then there's -- there should be -- well, it's so damaged. But in the exemplar there's two leads that go to the output of the motor, and that's where I found that the improvised detonator was hooked up to those two outputs that would normally go into the motor of the R/C car.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'm sorry. Just "R/C car," do you mean a remote-controlled --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Remote-controlled, the hobby car.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And the screen in front of you, Agent Knapp -- actually, if you touch it, it will leave a mark. So if you want to circle something or show the jury what you're talking about, you can just touch that area or draw a circle around it. So, now, you described that in the piece of evidence that you found, some of the components had been burned off or otherwise destroyed, but in the exemplar, you're able to make out further definition of what this particular item is?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. This is damaged. And in the exemplar, pristine condition, you can see where the different connections to the battery, to the receiver, and then to where the -- you would hook it up to the motor of the hobby car.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And is this part of the circuit board to that electronic speed controller?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is this the lab photo?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And what is this last photo?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's the photo of the two leads that come off that electronic speed controller.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You mentioned that they come off and they go to the detonator?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, in normal configuration that goes to the motor, but the two outputs that go to the motor would be connected with the improvised initiator.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: What's an initiator?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Something to set off the main charge, like I talked before, blasting cap, an improvised blasting cap, or some type of improvised initiator that would set that main charge off.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And what was the initiator in the two devices on Boylston Street?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, on one, Scene A, there was just a small fragmentation of a Christmas tree -- basically the green Christmas tree lightbulbs that are strung out in like 50- or 200-strand for decoration purposes. And the other scene nothing was found, but that's not to be expected. Because the violent nature, the reaction, sometimes you just don't find it remaining or left.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Do you recognize what this is?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, those are just -- like I said, it had a lot of that, the fragmentation there, the bits and pieces. And there's part of a -- that circular thing was part of one of the batteries, this area -- you know, part of that there was the, you know, part of the Christmas tree bulb.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: The Christmas tree lightbulb?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And does a Christmas tree lightbulb have enough power to set off a low-explosive charge?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Did you find other items related to the energy or the power for that fusing system?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. The power source, they were Sub-C-size batteries, but some of that was still connected to part of the leads of the battery and other parts of the cells were disbursed amongst the scene.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And I'm showing what's marked as Q208. What's that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, I think that was the -- that's the casing of an Exceed R/C battery. That was 7.2 volts, and that, I think, was 1800-milliamp rated.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so what was the -- explain how the battery interacted with that --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, the battery is the -- you know, it basically powers, you know, the motor of an R/C car. But the battery, that was the power source to provide current to the improvised initiator and also provided power to the electronic speed controller and also the R -- the receiver, the small receiver, that was found also at the scene.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Let's go to that. I'm showing you what's marked Q178, a photo of Q178. What is that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That was the remains of the Flysky receiver.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: When you say "Flysky," is that the name brand of the receiver?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: 245 was the model, yeah, the brand of the receiver.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So can you explain what a Flysky receiver is?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: A Flysky receiver basically receives a signal from the transmitter. In a normal R/C, the model hobby car, you'll have a transmitter or controller, what you steer or drive the car forward or reverse. The receiver is in the model car. You have the electronic speed controller in there that deals with the motor once you hook those leads up. And then you plug the -- plug the receiver into the electronic speed controller. And obviously that battery, that Sub-C pack, is in there providing power for the car in normal operation. What has to happen is that receiver has to be connected to that transmitter. And then in the manufacturer -- in the literature it's available, and then even in that particular manual that transmitter has a code, an identifier, a number. And basically, you have to bind that receiver to that transmitter so they can talk to each other. And once that's done, that function's performed, then the receiver's bound to that transmitter, then you can use that controller and turn the steering wheel or press the trigger to that controller and the car will perform, you know, whatever desired function you have in normal operation. And this particular -- this particular type of this manufacturer, Flysky, they use, in their literature, frequency-hopping. And basically, that's just one type of system that's used for this particular transmitter/receiver. And then other manufacturers use a different type of technology -- or called "digital sequencing." There's two different ways to run your R/C cars, but this particular one, you have to make sure that you have the compatible type of receiver/transmitter to perform driving an R/C car or boat.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. So was that receiver connected to the electronic speed controller which was connected to the initiator, the Christmas tree bulb?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It was. But I mean, all that was all damaged. But that had to be connected up in that -- we talked a fusing system to operate the improvised initiator in this particular scene.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Continuing on, did you find a toggle switch?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah. Like I said before, testing the functionality and seeing how these things were constructed, we noticed without just putting the receiver, the electronic speed controller in there with the battery and then hooking it up to an improvised initiator, in this particular -- in this particular electronic speed controller, when you hit the little slide switch and power it up where it initializes and the receiver then receives power, it's sent output signal to the two leads that were connected to our improvised initiator, which we used as a Christmas tree bulb, and it basically lit the bulb momentarily, so... And we also -- during the scene, through all that material, we found the remnants of a heavily damaged -- what was a toggle switch. We couldn't identify it, but it was an illuminated toggle switch. And that was within the parts that we looked at. And for this particular device at Scene A, had a toggle switch also which sometimes they're referred to as a safe-and-arming switch, because if you turn that little slide switch on the electronic speed controller on, and it's sent that output to that Christmas tree bulb to light it up, it would have detonated the bomb. So to interrupt that circuit, a toggle switch, just like a light on your on-and-off switch, it broke the circuit -- it just needed to be done for a few seconds, and then the toggle switch just needed to be flipped to the armed position. And then once you went and gave it the appropriate signal from the transmitter, it would function the Christmas tree lightbulb.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So are you saying for that receiver to bind with the transmitter without actually igniting the Christmas tree light, you need to have this toggle switch on?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: No, the binding of the receiver and transmitter is already complete. It's basically -- the transmitter you can set aside. You're not worried about -- we're not worried about the transmitter. It's the fusing system. You needed a toggle switch within -- between -- to break the continuity between the electronic speed controller, the receiver battery, just had to have a break in that continuity. Because if you didn't, if you didn't have that toggle switch in when the receiver, electronic speed controller and battery are all put together, and we tested it with a Christmas tree lightbulb on the outputs of that electronic speed controller, when you slid and powered up that electronic speed controller, it had enough output to send current down to that Christmas tree lightbulb momentarily for a second or two, but it would light up, so... And we found in the evidence, like I said, that damaged toggle switch. And that toggle switch was used to break that once you turned on the electronic speed controller, and then they flipped it on to the -- or someone would flip it on to the armed position then, and now it's armed and it's just waiting for a signal from the transmitter.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So the toggle switch was necessary for the arming procedure?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. In that particular scene.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So for that scene, the pressure cooker pot, somebody would have had to turn on the device before deploying it?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: In both of them. But in this particular instance, just the way that electronic speed controller sent a signal or output to that -- where that Christmas tree -- improvised Christmas tree bulb would have been, it would have set it off.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And this toggle switch -- was there a similar toggle switch found in Scene B?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, in addition to this fusing mechanism, did you find an alternative fusing mechanism for the device at Scene A?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, we did. We found a very small piece of what we talked before, hobby fuse, that green hobby fuse that's used in fireworks. There was two pieces taped up with electrical tape. And they were at both scenes also.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'm putting up on the screen Q192. Is that the hobby fuse that was recovered from the site of Scene A?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So can you explain why there would be hobby fuse in a device that already had an electric fusing system?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, there was two forms of initiation. We talked before, there's electrical and non-electrical. The primary means of initiation would be electrical by remote-control car, but if somehow that failed, then all you would have to do is, you know, light the hobby fuse and walk away, and that would be sufficient to set off the low explosive. So, you know, when I saw that there, just that small -- that small piece, it appeared that it was cut off -- once that violent reaction, that explosion, it was cut off, and that was the small fragment that remained amongst the many pieces of debris at each scene.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So when someone lights hobby fuse, describe what the deflagration looks like.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It's just you light it with a match or a lighter, and it starts burning and it's giving off smoke. It might smell like a sulphur smell, but it's burning down. And there would be smoke around.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And does it take a little bit of time depending on how long it is?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Right. Normally it's two seconds per inch, but it varies. But it's just commonly available, manufactured hobby fuse.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In fact, for both of the scenes on Boylston Street, did you find evidence of hobby fuse?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In addition, did you find components of a container?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, the Fagor container.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: That's Q10. What's that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's the lid of the pressure cooker.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And did -- the deformities to this pressure cooker, what's that evidence of?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: An explosive event. And you could see it was crisscrossed with tape. The container had tape on it. And it was crisscrossed around the container also.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: You're referring to the kind of clear marks here?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And this particular lid was found some distance away?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, it was found some distance away.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So according to the interactive exhibit where I'm hovering over here, does that sound right? I know you weren't on the scene --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I wasn't at the scene but...
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Were there also components of the backpack that was used to conceal these devices?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. It's identified as a Ful backpack.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Going to Q109, just quickly scroll through these, are these the lab photos of that backpack?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And I'm sorry. This identified the brand as Ful?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: And then on the inside, in the liner of the material there, it had the Ful brand in there.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: All right. Now let's move on to Scene B. And as with Scene A, did you find radio-controlled remote-control components?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, we did.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Calling up Q41, what are these?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's a portion of another -- an electronic speed controller, but that was -- there was two portions to that, and that was a Duratrax Sprint electronic speed controller.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And the Duratrax speed controller, that's different from the Accede that you found at Scene A?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes; just a different type of electronic speed controller.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: What does the speed controller do in a typical remote-control car?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: I said it went and basically provided power to the motor, if you wanted to go faster or slower, reverse or forward. And it would provide the input, and the current would go and engage the motor. And it would go forward, backwards or slower or faster.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Thank you. And so Q52, is this another portion of the electronic speed controller?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, that's a piece off that -- 52 and 51 is the board, the electronic speed controller board.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Did you also find evidence of a receiver at --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: A remote-control receiver?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, we did.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Q122: Do you recognize that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes; that's a Spektrum receiver.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: The company Spektrum?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: "Spektrum" with a K?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: It looks like there's -- the name is printed actually here. Is that right?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, how does the Spektrum receiver differ from a Flysky receiver?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: As we talked before, it's just how they communicate and what technology that manufacturer had. And that was direct sequencing. It's just a different way that it talks to the receiver/transmitter. But the same process of binding -- you know, they have their receiver and transmitter. The transmitter has a unique ID, and basically it is bound. Once you bind that to the transmitter, they will talk, like communicate.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Did you also find a power source at Scene B?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, we did. A damaged Tenergy Sub-C pack.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is that --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's the brand name, the Tenergy battery.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Another battery pack?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Right.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Did you also find evidence of the hobby fuse?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, we did.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And then finally, did you find portions of the backpack itself?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: The Fox backpack, yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: This was different from the Ful backpack?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And finally, the -- did you find pieces of the container as well?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. The container again -- once again, it was a Fagor pressure cooker. And there was also, you know, we talked before, fragmentation, some small nails and BBs in this scene, and compared to just the BBs in Scene A.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, we've just looked at a sampling of some of the pieces of evidence, but did you examine each piece of evidence and come up with the configuration of how you surmised that these devices were constructed?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, yes, the configuration that these particular R/C components had to be put into and how they would have functioned the device.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And did you create mockups?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, we did.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And you described how you went out and bought components. How did you configure the mockup devices?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Based on the -- what was found at the scenes, the particular type of transmitters/receivers, we purchased the -- there was a -- we actually purchased several monster rally trucks where the electronic speed controller, the power source, everything was provided. It was a full, intact one, which was the same components found at the scenes. And then we -- then I went and constructed the fusing system, like I talked about, placing the receiver, binding it with a transmitter, and then hooking up a -- in this particular, just hooking up a Christmas tree bulb to it.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And for the device at Scene B, you described earlier that there was no toggle switch found?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Right. We -- I said before we tested those -- that Spektrum receiver with the Duratrax. And when I talked before about having to initialize and we have to turn on the electronic speed controller in Scene A, power -- some output went to those two leads that had the Christmas tree bulb. When we tested it for the Duratrax electronic speed controller hooked up, there was no output. It didn't light up the Christmas tree bulb, and there was no evidence of a toggle switch remaining at the scene. But it did not function it, once you powered it, initialized it up, so the light did not come on.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So unlike the device at Scene A, the device at Scene B with that Spektrum receiver and the Duratrax electronic speed controller, when you armed it, it didn't set off the Christmas tree lightbulb?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's correct. The fusing system there, yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: But like the Scene A, did that device have to be armed before it was deployed?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: You had to turn on that slide switch so it would power up, and then it's waiting for the signal from the transmitter.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Let's talk a little bit before we move on about -- you described the components within the fusing system of the pressure cooker. What else would have been -- what else did you find evidence of within the pressure cookers?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, within the pressure cooker, the way they were constructed, there was, I said -- in Scene A there were the copper -- the BBs, and there was pink material, a red rosin-type paper backing. But some of the BBs, we found that they had some adhesive -- sealant-type material -- they were like embedded into the sealant-type material. And also in Scene B, likewise, the same type of material was found. They had the BBs. Or there was BBs and then there was some small nails in it. And also there was -- we started seeing when all this evidence came in, there were pieces of cardboard -- circular pieces of, like, fragmented cardboard with duct tape taped around the edges of it. And we started noticing each scene had cardboard, and then there were some tape associated with those.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And then you also described, I think, some tape on the exterior of one of the --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, and each device, basically it was crisscrossed with tape around the pod.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So before deploying that device, someone would have had to arm the device and then resealed it before deploying it?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: They would have had to go in and make sure the slide switch on that electronic speed controller was on so it would power up that fusing system, what we talked about, the components of it.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And then resealed the container, the vessel?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And is that because the low explosive --
MR. WATKINS: Objection to the leading nature, your Honor.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Why does a low explosive need to have a sealed container?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, it builds up pressure. But we've done tests where -- I mean, low explosives, it just has to have enough confinement and then it can, you know, explode, you know, and the container can fragment. But we've done tests where you don't have, like, say on a pipe, two end caps. One might be off and it's still -- that's enough confinement to detonate that pipe, so... And even if you have enough material by itself, the weight of that material can cause enough confinement to start a violent reaction and explode.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: When you say "material," you mean explosive material?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, by itself the way that -- if you have enough.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And is there a correlation between how sealed -- how confined something is with how violently it will explode?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Of course if you have, you know, a heavier case, you know, a thicker pipe -- you know, it just has to have enough confinement in it. But, you know, if it's a thicker pipe, sealed better, time to build up more pressure, but it relieves itself, but just enough confinement. And in this case there's enough confinement to explode these two containers.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In exploding a container, breaching the confinement, does that in itself create fragmentation?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's -- the container itself is fragmentation along with the added fragmentation.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And when it -- when an explosion breaches a containment vessel, how does the physics work in terms of breaking the containment?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It just depends, you know, low explosives, how violently they react. You might have bigger pieces or smaller pieces depending on the explosives that were used.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. So in addition to the gas being released, is that also when the thermal effect occurs?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, initially we talked before, the closer the thermal effect is closer to, you know, the explosive or the seed, and then the fragmentation and the pressure is radiating out.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Does it radiate out in any specific direction?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It's just 360. Just pressures are built up, and 360 degrees out, just imparting that onto the surrounding environment or whatever else is in its way.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Let me show you a couple of photographs.
(Pause.)
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Agent Knapp, I just wanted to show you a few photographs to see if these are consistent with what the effect is of an explosion on a containment vessel.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Can we go to 2D, please?
THE COURT: Is this something in evidence?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'm first going to go to the 2D which is in evidence, your Honor. Sorry.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Agent Knapp, what does this show?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That is the fragmented remains of a pressure cooker.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And the distortions of the ends and the discoloration, is that all effects of the explosion?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Could you repeat that?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: The distortions at the ends -- the edges of the metal, is that all the result of an explosion versus something else that may have been done to it?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It was ripped apart in the explosion. It came apart, the container.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And do you notice that there appear to be some indentations here, almost as if stamped out of the metal?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Right.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, if I can have one moment. I wanted to see if -- rather than using the ELMO, see if we could project it out electronically.
Just for the witness, your Honor. It's not in evidence.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Agent Knapp, showing you an exhibit marked 1582, do you see the grates at the bottom of this photo?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Are those indentations on Q126 --
MR. WATKINS: Objection, your Honor. This is the subject of expertise, and this is not an expert in that.
THE COURT: All right. Overruled. I'll allow the answer.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Are the indentations that we just saw on Q126 consistent with the pattern on the grate depicted in this 1582?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: When this device went off, it was placed close to the ground and then the force was imparted on it and it just left impressions in the metal on the container that was fragmented from that grating.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So I'd move in Exhibit 1582, your Honor.
MR. WATKINS: Objection.
THE COURT: Overruled. I'll admit it.
(Government Exhibit No. 1582 received into evidence.)
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Again, was the grating that you're talking about this type of grating?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Mr. Bruemmer, if we can go back to the 2D and call up...
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And this is what I had identified earlier as that kind of stamp?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, going to -- moving on to the Watertown crime scene, did you use a similar methodology to examine the evidence at Watertown as you did for the Boylston Street explosions?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And did you identify -- let's first talk about the pressure cooker device there. Did you identify the vessel that was used?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It was a smaller Fagor pressure cooker.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So for the Watertown scene, Agent Knapp, I think I'm just going to show you the physical items because I don't have the exhibit numbers -- excuse me -- the photo numbers handy. So there was a Fagor pressure cooker device that was smaller, I think you said earlier?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Just a little smaller in size, yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And the fact that it was smaller, what significance did that have to you as an explosives analyst?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Nothing.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And does it matter how large a vessel it is for purposes of determining an explosion analysis?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Why is that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Obviously the -- I mean, obviously if it's bigger, you can put more explosives in it. But, I mean, it's just a containment vessel and it just happened to be that size.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so how much -- the fact that it's a smaller vessel means that it can hold less items. Is that fair to say?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Material.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Material?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Possibly.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So were you able to estimate how much explosive material was in these devices?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: In the Scene A and Scene B?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Start with wherever you want.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: You know, for the -- I mean, they were -- the same size pressure cookers in Scene A and Scene B, and they were like six-liter-size pressure cookers, and roughly -- it could be anywhere from eight pounds to 16 pounds in those pressure cookers. And obviously, the other one was a four-liter, four-quart size. And obviously, that would be a smaller, you know, eight pounds in there, so forth, approximating.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And you're approximating. That's estimating if it was half full of explosive material?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Half full to full.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So that's the range that you described?
MR. WATKINS: Objection to the leading, your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled to that question.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, for the Watertown scene, in addition to the Fagor pressure cooker, which we've seen photos of the lid and the vessel, what other components of significance were there?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: In the pressure cooker itself, obviously when that went off, they did find wire, a 9-volt battery and a toggle switch at the scene. And then they also had collected two intact pipe bombs. One was an elbow and one was a straight coupler. And they had internal end plugs. And then they also collected fragmentation, or bits and pieces, of pipe at that scene. And they also collected a container with material in it with green hobby fuse coming out of the lid.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So you said a few moments earlier that it doesn't really matter how sealed something is or -- in terms of whether it will explode. Would the device that was made out of plastic that had powder in it and hobby fuse, would that have exploded like an IED?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: There's confinement there, and that just happens to be plastic. But there's confinement, and that right there was a device also because it had all the components, the non-electrical fusing system, the main charge and the container.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Can we call up Image 951, please? I'm sorry. 957.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: This is a Q photo of 582. Do you recognize that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's a toggle switch that was found at Watertown.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And what significance did that have to the device?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, there was -- it was connected. They had a 9-snap-volt battery connector. There was a 9-volt battery found. That toggle switch with a length of wire, that right there -- obviously there was no initiator on the end of the wires, but that was found at some distance away from the pressure cooker. And as far as in my course of investigation, being overseas, you have a toggle switch, and basically it's just an on-and-off switch, you have a power source, and you'd have some type of initiator at the end of that. And all you do was to close the circuit, just flip the toggle switch. And if that was in an explosive, it would detonate and explode.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So this was another way to trigger an explosive device?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, in --
MR. WATKINS: I'm going to object, your Honor. That wasn't his testimony.
THE COURT: Yeah, sustained to that.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So let's just clarify a few things. You mentioned that in the course of the investigation you have come to learn this. Do you mean in the course of your training and experience as an investigator?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: In dealing with material coming in, or overseas, bombing investigations, seeing the type of fusing systems out there. And this is a particularly used -- what we normally have is -- a dead-man's switch or a suicide bomber would have this type of configuration.
MR. WATKINS: I'm going to object, your Honor.
THE COURT: No, overruled. That may stand.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And in addition to this system, was there another -- evidence of another fusing system found on Laurel Street?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, there was the hobby fuse. It's non-electric. Basically, the burning of the green hobby fuse. They had it in the pipes; they had it in the container, the plastic container.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: One moment, your Honor. I believe Exhibit 957 is in evidence, but I'm not sure whether it's the image or the physical piece of evidence. I'm just confirming that.
(Pause.)
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So, your Honor, I believe 957 is the physical piece of evidence. If I could offer this exhibit as 957A, which is a photo of that.
MR. WATKINS: No objection.
THE COURT: Okay.
(Government Exhibit No. 957A received into evidence.)
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: This is that switch that you just described that was found in Watertown?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, it was.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: I'd call up Exhibit 1122.
THE COURT: Is this in or not?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Again, it is in, your Honor. I just, again, don't know if it's physical or --
(Pause.)
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Your Honor, similarly, if not, I'd make clear that this is 1122A, which is a photograph of --
THE COURT: All right.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Q71.
(Government Exhibit No. 1122A received into evidence.)
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so this is the lid that you were mentioning earlier?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Of the container? Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So there's hobby fuse on here that we can see. Is that fair to say?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes. It was coming out of the lid of the container.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So in addition to this hobby fuse, was there other hobby fuse found in Laurel -- at the Watertown scene?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: There was a bit of hobby fuse inside the container, so with the powder that was in there.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so the pressure cooker device that was exploded, was there any hobby fuse associated with that, or how did you determine that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: You couldn't determine -- I mean, usually, hobby fuse burns. That explosion happened, and the hobby fuse usually is no longer there.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: May we go to Exhibit 848.
I'm not sure whether this is in evidence.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Do you see this area over here?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is that significant to you?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It looks like a darker spot in the ground.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: What happens when an IED explodes on asphalt?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: It can leave a cratering pattern or it could leave some residue near there.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: If we could go to Exhibit 852.
This is in evidence, your Honor.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is this that collection of hobby fuse that you were talking about?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Go to Exhibit 853.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: This is another angle.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Could we go to Exhibit 833, please. 834.
I don't think that's in evidence, your Honor.
COURT CLERK: 834 is in.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: 834 is in, yes.
THE COURT: Is or isn't?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: 834 is. My apologies, your Honor.
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is this one of those rendered-safe pipe bombs that were found in Watertown?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Could you describe the configuration of this?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That was an elbow pipe, two-inch diameter with internal end plugs, it had some Teflon tapes on the threads, and then on the inside it had, once again, BBs inside, encased inside, and there was a green hobby fuse coming out of a hole that was in the elbows.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Could we do 842, which is also in evidence.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That shows you a picture of the inside, but the same thing. That's just a straight coupler with the internal end plugs and hobby fuse coming out of it.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And like the other mockup devices that you made, did you make mockup devices of each of these devices: the pipe bombs, the plastic container containing hobby fuse and explosive material, as well as the pressure cooker that was found in Watertown?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In addition to the explosives, the exploded IEDs -- the remnants of the exploded IEDs as well as the rendered-safe, did you also find a transmitter in Watertown?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, there was a transmitter that was submitted with this evidence.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And if we could call up Exhibit 949, which I would move into evidence 949A as a photo of this.
MR. WATKINS: No objection.
THE COURT: Okay.
(Government Exhibit No. 949A received into evidence.)
BY MR. CHAKRAVARTY:
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And what is that?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's the modified Flysky transmitter, or basically the R/C hobby controller.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So you said it's a modified Flysky. Is "Flysky" the name brand?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes, of the transmitter, the controller.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so it's the same name brand as the receiver that was found at Scene A?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That's correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And you said it was modified. How was it modified?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Well, normally if you had an intact one, there's the battery pack on the bottom, and it has like a pistol grip where you can hold it, and on the top it has the -- that -- that's the electronic display. And there's usually buttons up there. And then on one side there's a little steering wheel, and it has -- on the grip there's like a little trigger for operating, you know, the forward and reverse of your car and the steering wheel to turn your R/C car.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Now, as part of the investigation, did the FBI obtain various receipts or other records to see whether there were other radio-controlled/remote-controlled components involved in the case?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah, other receipts had come in of purchases.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Right.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: If we could call up Exhibit 1160, please, which I believe is in evidence. Page 2.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Is this one of the receipts that you reviewed?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: This is one of them that had come in.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And could you describe the items on this receipt?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Up on the top you see the "Accede R/C electric rally Monster Off-Road Rally Truck, stripe blue." That was a whole intact package of an actual R/C car. We purchased several of those for our exemplars.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Did you find any evidence related to that vehicle, like --
EDWARD S. KNAPP: On that one, the electronic speed controller and the -- the electronic speed controller, the receiver and the battery were found at Scene A.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Okay. Please continue.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: And then there's a -- it looks like there's a transmitter and receiver, and then another receiver, a Flysky receiver, in that list.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And is there also some batteries?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Right.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So this transmitter and receiver, does the "FS" stand for Flysky?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yeah. That's the model number, Flysky model.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: All right. And so this entry is for a combination package of both the transmitter and the receiver that are compatible with each other?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And the last entry is for an extra receiver. That's also compatible with those?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Correct.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Can we call up Exhibit 1431, please, also in evidence.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Did you also have an opportunity to learn more about what this was a receipt for?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: That was a receipt for a transmitter -- what we talked about before, the Spektrum transmitter -- controller and a receiver.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: And so was the receiver consistent with the receiver, the remnants of which were found at Scene B?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Yes.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Did you ever find in the investigation the Spektrum controller?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: In fact, were there any other controllers found in the investigation aside from the one we just saw from Watertown?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Was the Spektrum receiver that was found in Scene B -- was that compatible with the Flysky receiver that we were just looking at?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: We talked about -- earlier about the two different ways they communicate those two different manufacturers have, the frequency hopping and then the direct sequencing. That's not compatible with -- the Spektrum receiver with the Flysky transmitter.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Back to 949A.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Did you determine whether this transmitter bound with the receiver that was found on Scene A?
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Did I --
MR. WATKINS: Objection, your Honor.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Basically --
MR. WATKINS: Objection.
EDWARD S. KNAPP: Basically --
THE COURT: Wait. Hold on a moment.
Is it related to disclosure?
MR. WATKINS: No.
THE COURT: Let me just see you briefly.
(Discussion at sidebar and out of the hearing of the jury:)
MR. WATKINS: So this relates to the so-called binding testimony. I had filed a motion in limine. The Court's never ruled on that. It's actually not this witness that did any of the work.
We've agreed, I thought up until now, that we would allow a certain amount of testimony by Agent Knapp here that included work done by other people for him. I specifically -- when we were talking about this carved-out -- that binding code issue, I had understood up until this minute that he would not seek to admit that through Agent Knapp. I believe it's complete hearsay as to this agent. He didn't run any of the tests that would result in that conclusion. I don't even think the other one had, ran a test.
So I'm asking that that be excluded.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: The intention is not to elicit that the binding code is the same on each. He didn't do a test to figure out what the binding code was. But he can say -- he's going to say -- what I wanted to elicit -- and I can ask another question to elicit that -- is was the Flysky receiver that was found compatible with the Flysky receiver that was found in Watertown. The transmitter pair -- were they compatible with each other. And if they determined that they actually were -- worked together, I guess is the correct --
MR. WATKINS: That is not the question you asked. You said "bind." If you want to ask are they compatible, that's good.
THE COURT: What does "compatible" mean?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: That they can talk to each other as opposed to --
THE COURT: Right. And how is that different from binding?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So binding is the more precise idea that there was a specific code on one that matched the code on the other. And my point is I want to be more general but still show that these two can talk to each other, and they can't talk to the device on Scene B.
THE COURT: Well, I think he's already said the latter. I don't think --
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: Yes.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. WEINREB: I'm sorry, your Honor. Before we leave --
THE COURT: Yeah.
MS. CLARKE: While I've got you.
(Laughter.)
MR. WEINREB: Can I just add that -- I'd assume that the binding code like -- the reasoning -- the defense is not going to be permitted to inquire of this witness about binding codes, or specifically to ask questions intending to elicit -- if he is going to ask questions intending to suggest to the jury that Tamerlan Tsarnaev might have detonated at the scene two bombs, that would be trying to -- asking the jury to assume facts not in evidence in bad faith because the defense knows that Jahar Tsarnaev in fact did detonate the second bomb. And to ask questions to elicit otherwise would not be good-faith cross-examination.
THE COURT: Okay. Is there an issue?
MR. WATKINS: There is an issue, your Honor. It's a longer issue. I understand the Court is going to break at 12:45. I don't know how much Mr. Chakravarty has left. I'm not sure that that won't --
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: There's not much more other than he's going to explain the mockups that he created, we're going to do a demonstration, and then we're going to talk about the Inspire magazine. I think if we're breaking early for lunch today, it would take us at least to that.
MR. WATKINS: So I will consider what Mr. Weinreb has talked about, and we will come to some kind of agreement on that, or agree to disagree.
THE COURT: Well, okay. I'll leave it at that for now.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: One other point that might implicate this again is before we do the mockup and the demonstration, he's going to -- he had created a device, and he was going to actually activate the device. In order to do that, he has to bind the transmitter with the receiver, so -- which he's already explained there is a binding process, and now he's bound to that.
THE COURT: Is it in his disclosure that he's going to do that?
MR. WATKINS: We're getting into larger issues here. We spoke on Sunday about some of the -- Mr. Chakravarty, I think, is going to introduce some mockups of each of these individual items and do some demonstrations. That was one of them that I identified that we would object to, that -- using that mockup, because that essentially gets them to the same place where their expert that they did not call would try to get them.
THE COURT: Isn't that part of the instructions that comes with the car?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: It is. That's the only way these cars would work.
THE COURT: I don't know if that's expert. That's just sort of -- it's the way some 12-year-old gets the car to run.
MR. WATKINS: That is true as a general matter, but what they are trying to prove is that this specific one bound with that specific receiver down there, and that is the subject of expert testimony. It could have, but for them to say that it absolutely did...
THE COURT: Well, that it could be the subject of expert testimony doesn't necessarily mean that it is; in other words, it might be an inference from other non-expert evidence. I don't know. It depends on how it's presented. But it sounds elementary, that you have to punch in the code that you have to use in order to identify the car to the transmitter.
MR. WATKINS: That part of it is true, that they would identify -- that the two of them -- whether this particular transmitter identified with this particular receiver -- it's not functioning anymore. They can't do it. They're unable to do it, so they do it in a roundabout way.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: That's a separate question. In the actual piece of evidence versus in the exemplar, which he has to say that's what he did in order to get the thing to work.
MR. WATKINS: And that's why I think it's objectionable. It doesn't come in because of that exact reason.
THE COURT: No, I think he can say that's what he did. He's not offering an opinion about these two other devices, so he could go there.
MR. WATKINS: Okay. As long as -- because we're up here and we're talking about the mockups, there's also a mockup of the so-called Tupperware bomb. I don't think that comes in at all because they don't have the same Tupperware container.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: We're going to use the amount of powder in the Tupperware. There's an inert material that they're using as an example of that. That I wanted to put into the actual piece of evidence so that the jury can see how heavy this thing is. So we wouldn't be moving the Rubbermaid in, but we would be moving the material inside of the bag.
MR. WATKINS: So as I understand it, they're mixing exemplar material with an actual exhibit. I would object on that ground because they're moving those two things in --
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: The exemplar would be the separate -- would be a new exhibit number, and we would put that new exhibit number in an existing exhibit number for demonstrative purposes. It wouldn't itself --
THE COURT: Why can't you just have a similar container?
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: We have a similar one. That's what Mr. Watkins is objecting to.
MR. WATKINS: They bought the wrong darn container. I mean, it's the wrong size; it's the wrong color.
MR. WEINREB: We have the actual container. We can't put real explosive powder in it, so we're proposing to put substitute explosive powder.
THE COURT: As long as it doesn't alter the exhibit.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: It won't alter the exhibit. I'll see if they can do it.
MR. WATKINS: And then finally, the government is seeking to admit all of these. I understand that they're mockups, they're exemplars, but they do not get into evidence as a general matter, any of these mockups.
MR. CHAKRAVARTY: So we think it's important that they do because, first, you can't appreciate the intricacies of the fusing system unless you're handling it. It's one thing to pass it around; it's another thing to actually feel how heavy this thing is. It's important to see how the charges are separated from each other. I think based on his foundation, him saying, "This is how I assembled it," it goes to weight, literally and figuratively.
THE COURT: I'll have to think about that.
MR. WATKINS: One more: the kill switch. In Watertown -- I object to -- the mockup they have actually has the kill switch being inside of the pressure cooker itself, or at least as I viewed it. That's pure speculation. The kill switch shows no signs of burning. There was nothing to indicate it was on the inside.
As he has testified, there is no evidence of the Christmas tree light that would be responsible, exploded or unexploded. Both the battery and this kill switch quite obviously were separate. Maybe they were going to do something with that -- maybe Tamerlan was going to do something with that, but there was -- they were completely separate. It's pure speculation as to this mockup, certainly in his testimony, generally to say that there was a kill switch mechanism.
THE COURT: I think it's a matter for cross-examination, that point. You can expose that on cross-examination.
MR. WATKINS: Yeah.
THE COURT: Okay?