David and I did indeed have a few moments to talk at the Lancer conference.
The most memorable was during his focus group breakout session. He was presenting on the bullet fragments displayed in the X-rays and was apparently suggesting they indicated a bullet trajectory. I arrived a little late and sat in the rear of the room next to John Costella (who, along with his adorable wife Sally, has become a dear friend). I asked John if David was saying the X-Rays indicated a bullet trajectory and he stated he could not be certain as David's voice was hard to hear. The projected slide seemed to indicate that very premise however, so John stood and asked the question, already knowing the answer needed to be NO it does not. David's response, on seeing we were sitting together, was, "perhaps Sherry can come up here and address that."
So, I walked to the front of the room and explained why the trajectory of a bullet can not be determined from bullet fragments. David asked me to provide wound ballistic information for the remainder of his time (about 20 minutes). And in the end, thanked me for my information and for the clarification I offered. Lots of heavy hitters were present, and not one person objected, dissented, or even asked a question. Forensics is science, and it is hard to argue that.
I also stressed most problems for the research community occurred when people step outside their area of expertise and make assumptions or statements that can not be proven, or that are simply erroneous. I told the group David was an expert on reading X-rays, but I was the forensic and wound ballistic expert. We need to stick to our specific fields of expertise. It was a pivotal point in understanding for David and several others. I imagine almost everyone in the room felt like I did: very surprised. It was like being in the twilight zone.
