Email : email

First testimony by Jon J. Nordby, Ph.D., D-ABMDI

Friday, May 21, 2004

Dear Jean-Marc LEFEBVRE-DESPEAUX, President

I am very pleased with the results I have obtained using “BlueStar” and find it both easy to use and far better suited to photographic documentation than other sorts of luminol-based luminescent materials designed to reveal minute traces of blood. The only viable rivals appear to be fluorescing methods, of course based upon fluorescence rather than luminescence.

Many thanks for the chance to test your product – I know that Stuart James and I will use it when the case work calls for such a product. If I had the chance, I’d like to do my own testing for reactions to non-blood agents. I will talk with Stuart to see if he has some left from his tests.

This is a fine product which I will gladly recommend to others.

Best regards, and with many thanks,

Jon J. Nordby, Ph.D., D-ABMDI
Final Analysis Forensics 

Consultant in Forensic Sciences & Forensic Medicine, Final Analysis Forensics; Medical Investigator & Forensic Specialist, National Disaster Medical System, DMORT Region 10; Instructor, Washington State Criminal Justice (Police) Training Academy


Second testimony by Jon J. Nordby, Ph.D., D-ABMDI

Friday, May 27, 2004

Dear Mr. XXX,

Jean-Marc LEFEBVRE-DESPEAUX, President of Roc Import, has requested that I forward you the results of my testing with BlueStar. Among other things, I am a board member of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and am currently involved with the FBI’s SWIGSTAIN group, a group charged with developing scientifically robust protocols for bloodstain pattern analysis. I received a sample of BlueStar after meeting Jean-Marc at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences meetings in Dallas TX this past February. I have tested this sample in our laboratory. I have not written up or published the results at this time, but simply convey to you my overall impressions and conclusions from my work thusfar.

I am very pleased with the results I obtained using “BlueStar” – I find it both easy to use and far better suited to photographic documentation than other sorts of luminol-based luminescent materials designed to reveal minute traces of blood. [The only viable rivals appear to be fluorescing methods, of course based upon fluorescence rather than luminescence.]

Even at that, BlueStar appears to be considerably less hazardous to use as well as much safer and easier to recycle. It does not appear to interfere with further analyses, potentially demanded by an unfolding scientific investigation, including DNA analyses. 

My colleague and coauthor Stuart James [CRC Press Forensic Science: An Introduction to Scientific & Investigative Techniques] and I will use it whenever our mutual case work calls for such a product. It is far preferable to luminol mixes: the luminescence least so much longer, and as I said, is far better suited to photographic documentation, and does not appear to leave the residue volumes of other mixes.

I’d like to do more of my own testing for reactions to non-blood agents, and will continue to assess any issues of potential false positives which have not thus far been noted. 

Caveat: Again, as you know, a tool is only as good as the user of that tool – like any such detection agent, scientific discrimination is required properly to interpret the outcomes of its application in various contexts. That, of course is nothing new.

This is a fine product which I will gladly recommend to others.

Best regards,

Jon J. Nordby, Ph.D., D-ABMDI
Final Analysis Forensics

Back to the other testimonies