Military Marriage Murder Trial — AK v. Zarrius Hildabrand — Day 7

[00:00:00] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [00:05:30] Dr. Matthews: Thank you. [00:05:59] Speaker 2: Okay. And does the lab engage, I guess, in direct oversight and peer review of analysts? We do. [00:06:07] Speaker ?: We do. [00:06:07] Dr. Matthews: So we have this quality assurance program, part of that quality assurance program is that all of our reports undergo a technical and administrative review. That means that when I write a report, it will review all aspects of what I've done at the laboratory, they will make sure that I follow all the protocols. So every report that's issued at the Alaska crime and then an administrative review, and it looks that you have all the pages appropriate, make sure that you have all the pages appropriate, make sure that the evidence is returned, and so these two rounds of review really ensure that we are reporting out appropriate results. [00:06:50] Speaker 2: Okay. [00:06:51] Speaker ?: Great. Yeah. [00:06:51] Speaker 2: And have you been qualified as an expert in the field of forensic biology? I have. Okay. I'd move at this point to qualify Dr. Matthews as an expert in the field of forensic biology. [00:07:00] Speaker 3: Any objection? She's so qualified. [00:07:02] Speaker 2: So I want to talk a little bit about the lab procedures in general for DNA testing, and then we'll talk about the work that you did in this specific case. So in general, when an item comes into the lab and it's marked for DNA and other things, say latent prints or ballistics, what's the order of operations for the lab? [00:07:24] Dr. Matthews: So at the laboratory, it's important that we don't impact other forensic science work. So to not impact other forensic science work, DNA is special and gets to go first. As you may be aware, all of our forensic scientists are humans, and therefore they have the potential to have DNA on their bodies. So we have to keep all DNA evidence very sterile to provide any potential contamination. Because of this, DNA sampling is always performed prior to any other latent print examination or firearms examination or chemistry. So DNA does occur first, and then if an item is going to proceed through the laboratory, it will then proceed through other sections of the laboratory. Okay. [00:08:06] Speaker 2: Now, if you're looking for blood on an item, is there a process that will happen before you start doing DNA testing? There is. It's called DNA screening or biological screening. [00:08:18] Dr. Matthews: So the job as a DNA analyst is first to identify potential biological material. There's different ways we do this. During biological screening, our job is to use both visual cues, different microscopes and light sources to identify areas on an object that may have biological material. So that's during biological screening. We might use special flashlights or different types of lights as well as microscopes to identify is there any potential biological material left on an object. Blood, for example, has a red-brown appearance. So we might be looking for any potential red-brown appearance on an object. [00:08:59] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:09:00] Speaker 2: And did you do that with a number of items in this case? I did, yes. Okay. Were you submitted, let me just count really quick, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 14 potential items to test? Can I refer to my report? Sure, if it will refresh your recollection. [00:09:17] Dr. Matthews: My report will list all items that I processed during my report. [00:09:22] Speaker 2: Yes, there are 14 items that were submitted for analysis. Okay. And then were 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7 of them. Did 7 of them go through prescreening, if you will, or biological screening? I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. [00:09:47] Speaker ?: I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. [00:09:57] Dr. Matthews: I'm going to refer to my report again. [00:09:58] Speaker ?: I'm going to refer to my report again. [00:09:59] Dr. Matthews: I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. [00:10:16] Speaker 2: I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. I'm going to refer to my report again. The first being a case for a Glock handgun. What screening did you do on that? I received a Glock case. [00:10:31] Dr. Matthews: It's like a plastic case. I first looked for any potential staining on that object. I used both my own vision as well as using a microscope. I identified some areas that had potential staining. Those were then tested for presumptive testing for blood. When you say presumptive testing for blood, is that a chemical test? Presumptive testing at the laboratory, we use a test called Castle Meyer. This is a quick chemical reaction in which we can take a little bit of a sample and we can add two different chemicals on it. If there is the potential of blood, it will change color to this bright, hot pink. When we perform this testing, if we see no color change, that indicates that we can rule out the presence of blood. If we get a positive reaction where we have that color change, it means it's presumptive positive for blood. The word presumptive is going to indicate that we cannot rule out the presence of blood, but we can't say for sure that it is in fact blood. It is a presumptive test, which means that it's not specific for blood itself. So I did perform presumptive testing on that Glock case, and it was found to be chemically negative for the presence of blood, which means I can rule out the presence of blood on that item. [00:11:46] Speaker 2: Okay. And, you know, we've already talked about order of operations. You're doing your testing before ballistics has come back, right? That is correct. Okay. So your testing happens before the police department knows which of the two weapons matches the bullets that were fired. [00:12:04] Dr. Matthews: Every case is different. In this case, I believe my analysis was performed first. And so I received these items. The firearms did come into my possession, and therefore they wouldn't make their way to firearms until after I had processed them. [00:12:19] Speaker 2: Okay. So did you also process a magazine and 16 cartridges with tag number 1069947? You refer to my report? I did, yes. Okay. On screening, did you find any blood that warranted further testing? [00:12:35] Dr. Matthews: There was no visual cues for the presence of blood, therefore no chemical test was performed. I used the microscope and my own vision and determined there was no areas for me to test for potential blood. [00:12:46] Speaker 2: Okay. Now, item 1069951 is a Sig Sauer handgun. Did you test that? I did. And tell the jury your results regarding that. [00:12:56] Dr. Matthews: So that item, there were areas of potential steaming. I performed that Kasselmeyer testing and was presumptive negative for the presence of blood. Therefore, I can rule out the presence of blood on that Sig Sauer pistol. [00:13:06] Speaker 2: Okay. And I'm going to approach you, if I may, Judge. Yes. [00:13:10] Speaker 4: Can I have the exhibit . [00:13:15] Speaker 2: What is exhibit 350? [00:13:17] Dr. Matthews: These are images from my bench notes that I take while in the laboratory. [00:13:22] Speaker 2: And are those true and accurate copies of photographs that you took of that Sig Sauer handgun? Yes. Okay. I'd move at this point for the admission and publication of state's exhibit 350. [00:13:37] Speaker 3: Any objection? [00:13:38] Speaker 2: No, Judge. [00:13:39] Speaker 3: 350 is admitted. You may publish. [00:13:41] Speaker ?: It's 360, does that show where on the handgun you have it? [00:13:56] Speaker 5: Yes, it has areas circled. Okay. And what color are they circled in? Pink. [00:14:15] Speaker 2: Okay. And then I'm going to show you also space exhibit 276. What is 276? 276 is a box containing item 1069951. [00:14:24] Speaker ?: Okay. The same six-hour handgun? The same six-hour handgun. The same six-hour handgun. [00:14:27] Dr. Matthews: You can actually even see my initials on some of the items and types. Okay. And when we look at 360, can you point with the laser pointer there for the jury where you chemically tested for blood? [00:14:40] Speaker 2: So, what we're looking at? We're looking at this photo up here. Make sure that I microphone here. This photo up here, we have what I just arbitrarily called side B. We have side A and side B. And we see these areas circled with the dotted pink line. These are areas where the [00:15:10] Dr. Matthews: I realized that I had a visual indication of potential blood. I then performed our K.M. for K.M. for K.M. and found that that area was presumptive negative for the presence of blood. So, I was able to rule out the presence of blood on this area of the handle. [00:15:25] Speaker 2: Okay. And visually, there was nowhere else that you saw that warranted testing? [00:15:30] Dr. Matthews: No. And so, what I reported out was that I had visually tested the pistol, but that the magazine and cartridges were visually negative for the presence of blood. Okay. There were no areas of staining for me to test. [00:15:45] Speaker 2: And you do that with a microscope? [00:15:47] Speaker ?: Yes. [00:15:48] Speaker 2: Okay. And then when you tested the grip, you can rule out blood? When we do a chemical test, we can rule out the presence of blood. Okay. And then when we talk about the other items that you tested, chemically and visually, 1069951 is light from a handgun magazine, 20 cartridges from magazine, and a cartridge from a chamber. Were those items also visually negative? Yes. Those are visually negative. That's what we're seeing here in these photos. [00:16:20] Dr. Matthews: This was the chamber cartridge that arrived in a little jewelry box, and then we see here the magazine, and then the light is attached onto that firearm, and then we have the 20 cartridges here next to the magazine. [00:16:32] Speaker 2: Okay. In addition to the Sig Sauer, did you also test a Glock handgun and magazine? I did, yes. Okay. And what were your results on that? I'm going to refer to my report. That will refresh your recollection. So this is for item 1069955. Okay. And what were your results with regard to the Glock? [00:16:53] Dr. Matthews: So there was a Glock handgun and a magazine. The Glock handgun and magazine were both tested using that presumptive test, and they were found to be presumptive negative for the presence of blood. Therefore, I ruled out the presence of blood on both the magazine and the Glock handgun. Okay. There is also cartridges in the magazine, similar to this one here. There was cartridges within the magazine and then a chamber cartridge as well. Those were visually negative for the presence of blood, meaning there was no indication of staining for me to test. [00:17:22] Speaker 2: Okay. And then finally, did you have a sample of a bottom of a mattress? [00:17:28] Dr. Matthews: Yes, there was a swab. So again, we get these sometimes unseen items are collected using a swab with cotton on the end. It looks like a large Q-tip. And so I received a swab that was indicated to be from a mattress. Okay. And what were your screening results from that? That item was found to be presumptive positive for blood. Therefore, I was unable to rule out the presence of blood. [00:17:53] Speaker 2: Okay. Now, so of all the things that you did presumptive testing on, the only positive you had was from that mattress? That mattress... Or screening? [00:18:06] Dr. Matthews: But also there was organic material that was submitted that was also tested. [00:18:10] Speaker 2: Okay. Oh, you did presumptive testing on that as well? [00:18:13] Dr. Matthews: Yes. There was an item that was received and I performed presumptive testing on that. Of course. I told the jury about that. So there was an item received. It was unclear what that item really was. I reported it out as possible organic material. It was very brittle in nature. But there was staining on that item. It came from a trash can. And that was presumptive positive for the presence of blood. [00:18:35] Speaker 2: Okay. And if I can approach, I'll show you what I've marked for identification. [00:18:39] Speaker 5: I'll say six of it, 361. [00:18:44] Speaker 2: I keep saying 50, 361. [00:18:49] Dr. Matthews: What is 361? 361 is, again, images taken directly from my bench notes while I'm performing analysis in the laboratory. I do have this. [00:19:00] Speaker 2: 350. It is 351. Sorry. That was 360. 350 and 351. I'm sorry. [00:19:06] Dr. Matthews: Tell the jury again what 351 is. Okay. So 351 is a snapshot of the images I take while processing in the laboratory. Okay. [00:19:16] Speaker 2: And is that that possible organic material? Yes. And are you noting on there what there's some X's on there? What are those to denote? [00:19:26] Dr. Matthews: In that image, there are little X's. And these are areas that I tested for that using that Casemeyer testing to determine whether blood was potentially present. [00:19:36] Speaker 2: I'd move at this point for the admission and publication of 351. [00:19:40] Speaker ?: No objection, Jay. [00:19:41] Speaker 2: Submitted. You may publish. [00:19:43] Speaker 3: Okay. [00:19:44] Speaker 2: And can you show the jury with your laser pointer where those X's are, where you tested? [00:19:54] Dr. Matthews: So you're going to see little yellow X's here. This is side A, side B. And then you have a little segment here. All three of these areas were presented, tested for blood and found to be presented positive for the presence of blood. [00:20:09] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:20:10] Speaker 2: Now, I want to talk just a little bit about your DNA analysis and results. Can you describe for the jury how the DNA analysis process happens? [00:20:21] Dr. Matthews: So once a biologist has determined potential biological material, the next step is really to isolate our DNA. So DNA is a molecule that's found within your body. Your body is made up of trillions of cells and inside that you have a copy of your DNA. Now we know about DNA because we know that it can influence your disease risk. It can tell you whether you have blue eyes, how tall you are. But also it's unique to you. So in forensics, we can use it as potentially identifying an individual that may have come into contact with an object or a scene. So once I've identified areas of biological material, I then will need to isolate that DNA. So the first step is to isolate and extract that DNA. DNA is nice and cozy inside those cells. And so we break open those cells using heat and chemicals and we bring the DNA into solution. The next step, we need to know generally how much DNA is in a sample. And we do that through a process called quantification. Quantification will give us a rough estimate of how much DNA is present, how a sense of the quality of DNA is a potential degradation in the sample, and also can tell us whether male DNA is present in a sample. Once quantification is performed, we then know if we have enough DNA to proceed forward to generate a profile. This step, the third step, is going to be amplification. Amplification is a way of looking at specific regions of the DNA. DNA is a big, large molecule. We want to know the information at 24 specific locations. And so what we do is, during amplification, we make lots and lots of copies of those specific areas. These areas are known to be inherited and they're known to be unique to an individual. So when we talk about a profile, we're talking about only these 24 areas in the genome or in the piece of DNA. So during the third step, we make lots and lots of copies. And the reason we make lots of copies is DNA is so small we can't really see it with a naked eye or a microscope. So we make lots of copies and then on the fourth step, we detect it. We use a genetic analyzer, a machine that is able to visualize the DNA and gives us a printout of the information that is at those 24 locations in the DNA. [00:22:43] Speaker 2: Okay. And you went through that process with a number of items, is that correct? Yes. I'd like to kind of take them in order. You had tag number 1069962, which was labeled as Placard 30. What were your results from Placard 30? May I refer to my report? If it will refresh your recollection. [00:23:10] Dr. Matthews: Placard 30 is 1069962. This came as a swab from C. It was labeled Placard 30. It was extracted, so I extracted that DNA. It had enough DNA at quantification, so I generated a profile from that sample. That sample had what we call a major contributor, major component. This is an individual that is contributing more DNA to a sample than an additional individual. So we have a major contributor in that sample, and that major component matched Soraya Hildebrand. And is it Zarius? Sorry, Zarius Hildebrand was excluded as a possible contributor of that major component from Placard 30. Okay. [00:23:54] Speaker 2: I'm going to go ahead and pass around what's previously been identified as states and introduce the stage exhibit 181. You weren't on the scene. You don't know where Placard 30 was, right? [00:24:09] Dr. Matthews: The only indication I have is in communications with law enforcement. It indicated a potential, like, cleaning object or vacuum or something. Okay. I'm not sure. [00:24:20] Speaker 2: I'm sending it around state's exhibit 181, which is where Placard 30 was located. And you said that that was a match for Soraya Hildebrand in the major component of that DNA sample? [00:24:33] Dr. Matthews: The major component did match Soraya Hildebrand. Therefore, she cannot be excluded as a possible contributor of that sample. [00:24:39] Speaker 2: Okay. Can you put any statistical weight on that analysis? [00:24:43] Speaker ?: Yes. [00:24:44] Dr. Matthews: And what is that? We can perform different statistical calculations to help give us an idea of how rare an evidentiary profile might be, how often we might see it in a population. So it really asks those simple questions. How rare is a profile? And how many times do we expect to see it in a population? So when I calculate a statistic on that major component from Placard 30 sample, I found it was rarer than one in 330 billion. So 330 billion, I know, is a really big, large number. It is roughly 1,000 times the population of the United States. So it's quite a large number. And it's actually a truncated number. So we report out our ceiling of 330 billion because it's easier to conceptualize 330 billion. And so that tells me that that profile is extremely rare. And I would not expect to see that profile from Placard 30. It's rarer than one in 330 billion. [00:25:45] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:25:46] Speaker 2: When the next item you tested was a grip sample from that Sig Sauer, it's tag 1069969. How did that sample come to you? [00:25:59] Dr. Matthews: The Sig Sauer was swabbed prior to arriving at the laboratory. So the item was swabbed for potential what we call transfer DNA. This would be DNA that someone came into contact, potential skin contact with an object. So think of when you're holding an object where you might come into contact. So the grip was swabbed, I believe, in the sixth hour. It came as a swab. And that did not have enough DNA to proceed forward. At that quantification step, it indicated that there was insufficient DNA for me to proceed forward with that extract at that time. Is that an unusual result? It's not unusual in the sense that sometimes samples do not have enough DNA. And we have to ensure the integrity of the evidence. So we must maintain at least half of that evidence, whether it's the physical evidence itself. So if we have a piece of a stain, we have to maintain at least half of it or half of the extract. So when I report out that it's insufficient, it means that there's not enough in that extract for me to proceed forward with half of it. We want to preserve that other half just in case additional testing is needed. [00:27:06] Speaker 2: Now, did you also test a sample from its tag number 1069975 from placard 7? Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. I skipped. I skipped. I skipped tag 1069970, a sample from the Glock. [00:27:24] Dr. Matthews: So again, the Glock firearm that I screened in-house was swabbed prior to arriving at the laboratory, which means areas of that transfer DNA were swabbed prior to me screening it for potential blood. That sample also had insufficient DNA for me to proceed forward to generate any profiles. [00:27:45] Speaker 2: And then 1069975, a swab from placard 7. Can you tell the jury what your results from placard 7 were? [00:27:56] Dr. Matthews: One more. So placard 7 was again a swab from the scene, and it was, I'm going to refer to my report. It was inconclusive for the presence of DNA. What that means is at quantification, there was not enough information for me to say for sure that there's DNA in that sample or not. [00:28:17] Speaker 2: And just for the jury's recall, I'm going to go ahead and pass around safe exhibit 109. It's this side, so they can see where placard 7 was taken from. So it sounds like the SAG, the Glock, and placard 7, none of those had sufficient DNA to test further. It didn't get through quantification. [00:28:54] Dr. Matthews: Yes, there was not enough DNA for me to generate a profile. [00:28:57] Speaker 2: Okay. Did you have two swabs from a trash can, 1347617 and 1347618? Yes. And what can you tell the jury about those swabs? [00:29:09] Dr. Matthews: Both of those swabs had sufficient DNA at that quantification step, which means there was enough DNA that I could generate a profile, but no profile was generated at that time. Why not? When we're processing cases, we are unable to generate profiles from all samples. So at the time, I generated a first round of profiles, and I was already going to be working another object from the trash can. [00:29:37] Speaker 2: Okay. And is that that piece of organic material? Yes. Okay. Is there a difference between STR analysis and well, your report indicates sufficient DNA for STR analysis from that trash can sample? What is STR? [00:29:53] Dr. Matthews: STR is an acronym. It starts for short tandem repeats. When I told you about the amplification step, but we're only looking at those 24 locations, we're looking at short tandem repeats at those 24 locations. Short tandem repeats are repeated elements within the DNA. So some people have only six repeated elements and some have seven. And so these differences between individuals allow us to identify profiles that are unique to an individual. [00:30:20] Speaker 2: Okay. And it sounds like there was sufficient DNA in those trash can samples, but based on your results from the organic material, you didn't go further? No. [00:30:30] Dr. Matthews: When I initially issued my report, I proceeded forward with that organic material first, but those samples are preserved should additional testing be needed. [00:30:39] Speaker 2: Okay. So let's talk about that organic material. It's tag 1347621-1. Tell the jury what your results were relative to that piece of organic material. [00:30:57] Dr. Matthews: So what you notice here is, as I pointed out earlier, we tested in different locations, but in purple here is the area that I sampled. So the purple box is the area that I actually sampled and extracted the DNA from. And so when I extracted the DNA, there was sufficient DNA for me to generate a profile. That profile was a single source profile that matched Soraya Hildenbrand. Therefore, Soraya could not be excluded as a possible contributor. And it did not match Darius Hildenbrand, so he was excluded as a possible contributor. Okay. [00:31:31] Speaker 2: And can you apply the same level of statistical certainty or statistical weight to that analysis? [00:31:37] Dr. Matthews: So that evidence area profile from this possible organic material, I did calculate a statistic again. This profile was found to be rarer than 330 billion. Okay. Does that cover everything you tested in this case? I believe we didn't speak about the mattress. [00:31:55] Speaker 2: Oh, you're right. Thank you. Can we go back to the mattress? You said that was presumptive positive for blood. Did you complete the next DNA quantification and analysis step for that as well? [00:32:09] Dr. Matthews: So once I knew that it was presumptive positive for blood, I then extracted the DNA from that swab. Again, it was a swab from the mattress. And that sample was found to have sufficient DNA for analysis. I generated the profile. It resulted in a single source profile, which means there's one individual in that profile. It matched Soraya Hildenbrand. Therefore, she cannot be excluded as a possible contributor. Darius Hildenbrand was excluded as a possible contributor to that sample. [00:32:36] Speaker 2: Okay. And the same one in 330 billion statistical weight to that analysis? [00:32:41] Dr. Matthews: I did calculate a statistic again. And that profile from the mattress is found to be rarer than one in 330 billion. [00:32:47] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:32:48] Speaker 2: So just to summarize, it sounds like you were able to do DNA analysis and found DNA that matched Soraya Hildenbrand at placard 30 on the mattress and at the organic material taken from the trash can? [00:33:04] Dr. Matthews: Yes. Then just to clarify, it's the major component from the placard 30. But otherwise, it's a single source profile from the mattress as well as from the possible organic material. And they were found to match Soraya Hildenbrand. Okay. [00:33:18] Speaker 2: And the Sig Sauer did tested chemically negative for blood. Yes. Okay. Is there anything else? Okay. [00:33:27] Speaker 4: Okay. [00:33:28] Speaker 2: I believe that's all the questions I have for you. I'll have Madame Clark turn back up the lights and I'll put those too. [00:33:37] Speaker 6: - May we approach briefly? - Yes. [00:34:07] Speaker ?: - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes, yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. - May we approach the system with the system? - Yes. [00:34:50] Speaker 7: - Good morning, Dr. Matthews. - Good morning. - My name is Lacey James. I'm Mr. Hildebrand's attorney. I don't believe we've met. I just have some follow-up questions for you. I want to start with your report. You referenced your report a few times during your direct testimony with Mrs. Dunlop. When you are finished writing your report, do you send it to the law enforcement officer who requested the report? [00:35:53] Dr. Matthews: - Once it's gone through that technical review we talked about and the administrative review, then it is released to law enforcement. [00:36:00] Speaker 7: - And in this case, do you recall who in law enforcement you released? [00:36:05] Speaker ?: - I would have to reference the report. [00:36:06] Speaker 7: - I would have to reference the report. It should be at the top. [00:36:08] Dr. Matthews: Is it okay if I reference my report? - It was issued to Detective Troy Clark. [00:36:20] Speaker 7: - And I want to direct you to a few aspects of your report. First I want to start with the tag number 10-69-96-9, the SIG-GRIP sample. - Is this the... - It's on page 2 of your report. - No, refer to my report. You said 10... - 10-69-96-9. - Oh, the SIG-GRIP sample? [00:36:54] Dr. Matthews: - Yes. [00:36:55] Speaker 7: - So I want to talk a little bit about what your report means. Do you recall if you noted in your report to contact the analyst to discuss options for possible future testing of this sample? Is that something you recall putting in your report? - Yes. - What future possible testing could have been done? [00:37:23] Dr. Matthews: - When we include that language in the report, it means that there's not enough DNA in our half of the extract to proceed forward. The possible future testing means that we would need to consume the extract to generate a profile. And since this could impact the evidence itself, we don't do that without a conversation. [00:37:44] Speaker 7: - And do you recall if there was ever a conversation that happened about future possible testing in this case? [00:37:52] Dr. Matthews: - I didn't see any indication in the case activities, so there was no indication that I'm aware of. [00:37:59] Speaker 7: - And I want to talk a little bit about what maybe future possible testing could have looked like. When you're doing DNA testing, you talked about, on your direct testimony, the 24 specific locations on the sample that you're looking at, correct? - We're looking at 24 locations throughout the DNA, yes. - And DNA is essentially an accumulation of the father's biological DNA with the mother's biological DNA coming together to make one, is that correct? [00:38:40] Dr. Matthews: - You get one copy of your DNA from your father and one copy from your mother, and therefore you have essentially two copies of your DNA. - And are there chromosomes involved with DNA? - Yes, so a chromosome is, when we talk about DNA strands, you think of the stereotypical double helix where you see the twirling of the helix. A chromosome is a big chunk of DNA, so it's a lot of DNA packaged into a chromosome. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, so you take your long strands of DNA and you package them into chromosomes. [00:39:14] Speaker 7: - And how many total chromosomes are in one complete sample of DNA? - There's 23 pairs of chromosomes in a human. - And are you able to differentiate between male and female DNA simply by looking at the chromosomes? [00:39:33] Dr. Matthews: - Yes, so we can, in our analysis, we do not look specifically at the chromosomes themselves because we're not performing that type of analysis. But during that quantification step, we are looking at what is the Y chromosome. The Y chromosome, so females have an X chromosome, two X chromosomes, and males have an X and a Y chromosome. So when we do our quantification step, which any sample that is extracted and has that DNA isolated, we look at whether the Y chromosome is present on a sample. So we can give some indication if there's male DNA in a sample at quantification. Are you able to do that through YSTR testing? - YSTR testing, when we refer to YSTR testing, we're referring to when we talk about STR testing, which is what we've talked about today, we look at all the DNA, throughout the DNA. YSTR analysis looks only at the Y chromosome, so it focuses only at the Y chromosome, so it's only at the Y chromosome, so you're not going to see any DNA from female contributors. It's really going to look at the Y chromosome itself. [00:40:43] Speaker 7: And just to kind of break it down a little, XY equals a male DNA sample, correct? Yes. And then XX would equal a female DNA sample, correct? There would be no Y. Yes, there would be no Y, so we would see only an X present. And so when we see a Y chromosome, we know it's male DNA. We know that there is male DNA present, yes. And I want to take you back to this SIGGRIP sample. You indicated that quantification results do not indicate sufficient DNA for further analysis, correct? Yes. Please contact the reporting analyst to discuss options for possible future testing of this sample, correct? Yes. Could future testing, presuming the sample was consumed, could you have looked to see if there was the presence of a Y chromosome? [00:41:48] Dr. Matthews: I would have to look at the quantification results. The quantification results that have already been performed would indicate if there's Y chromosome present or not. So if you want me to look at the raw data, it would determine whether there's a Y chromosome present. That could impact your future testing. But it's important to understand that the sample was insufficient for any testing. It was too low for any testing when I reported it. Okay. So I'm going to refer to a document that's called our central log. This includes all the raw data as we perform our analysis. And I believe, is it the SIGGRIP sample and the Glock sample that you're interested in? [00:42:34] Speaker 7: Tab number 1069, 969, the SIGGRIP sample. Okay. [00:42:41] Dr. Matthews: So 969. So the SIGGRIP swab. That was given a name in the lab as Q2. Looking at that quantification results, there is indication that Y DNA is present. And so at the time of analysis, it was reported as low DNA, given the quality metrics of that sample and the amount of DNA that we see in that sample. It has potential that that sample not only has low DNA, but there are some indications that DNA may have been broken down into smaller pieces, which could impact our ability to get a profile. Okay. [00:43:20] Speaker 7: And so while there was a presence of Y, was it not sufficient to do something like YSDR testing? [00:43:27] Dr. Matthews: I would have to look back at our protocols in 2024, but looking at it through today's lens, there's not enough Y DNA present in that sample as it stands now for me to perform analysis on half the extract. But I would have to look back at the original protocols, but it is quite low, yes. Okay. [00:43:47] Speaker 7: And when we're talking about DNA, it's fair to say that DNA is something that's essentially almost everywhere. When you touch something, you leave DNA on it, correct? Yes. [00:43:58] Dr. Matthews: I like to say that when you go throughout your day, you're just leaving a little piece of yourself behind as you go throughout your day. Whether you're touching something, whether you're having a conversation with someone, you might spit a little bit and leave a little bit of yourself behind. So you would anticipate that wherever you're interacting in your normal day, whether it's in your car, your home, wherever, you might leave a little bit of yourself behind. [00:44:20] Speaker 7: And there's also a process called transference with DNA, where essentially, for example, if I touch this microphone, and then Ms. Dunlop came and touched this microphone, there's a potential Ms. Dunlop could actually have acquired my DNA from the mere touching of something I touched, correct? Correct. [00:44:45] Dr. Matthews: So what we're referring to now is called transfer steps, and so transfer DNA. So we say primary transfer is the initial transfer from the individual to an object, such as the microphone, for example. That's a primary transfer. Secondary transfer occurs when another object or another individual comes in contact wherever that DNA was deposited. So that's the second transfer. So if I touch this, and then someone else touches it, and we swab their hands, there is the possibility that a little bit of myself might be on their hands. The amount of DNA that transfers, there's a lot of factors that go into that, but yes, secondary transfer does occur of DNA. Okay, thank you. Thank you. [00:45:29] Speaker 7: And I want to take you back to state's exhibit 351. [00:45:38] Dr. Matthews: Is that the organic, possible organic material? Yes. It just says 361 up here, but yes. Sorry, just making sure I'm on the right one here. [00:45:50] Speaker 4: It should be 351. [00:45:51] Dr. Matthews: Okay, so that one's nice. [00:45:52] Speaker 7: So I want to talk a little bit about state's exhibit 351 and what you keep saying. You identified this as possible organic material, correct? [00:46:11] Dr. Matthews: Yes, I refer to it as possible because I didn't perform any testing to determine what it could be. It was not recognizable in any way based on my training to determine what it was. It was very brittle in nature, and it was very fragile, but I don't actually know what material it could be. Just that there was visible staining on the item, which is where I sampled. [00:46:33] Speaker 7: And what you actually tested was a blood sample on the possible organic material, correct? [00:46:39] Dr. Matthews: It was a presumptive positive sample. So it means that blood is potentially present, but I cannot say for sure that blood was present. [00:46:46] Speaker 7: And to be clear, fair to say, you don't know exactly what this possible organic material is. [00:47:15] Dr. Matthews: And exhibit 351 is. I have no idea what it is. I just know that when I extracted a stain from that object, that that profile matched to Raya Hildenbrand. Thank you, Dr. Matthews. [00:47:26] Speaker ?: Thank you, Dr. Matthews. I don't have any further questions. Thank you, Dr. Matthews. Thank you, Dr. Matthews. I don't have any further questions. Can you redirect? So, it sounds like when you talk about additional possible testing that could have been done on the [00:47:39] Speaker 7: grip swab from the SIG-SAUR, that would require consuming all of the samples. [00:47:43] Speaker 4: Yes. [00:47:44] Speaker ?: And your protocols don't let you consume all of the samples. Yes. And your protocols don't let you consume all of the samples. No, they do not allow us to proceed forward. If we need to consume the extracts. Why not? Because we are legally required to maintain at least half of the extracts. Why not? Why not? [00:47:54] Speaker 4: Because we are legally required to maintain at least half of the extracts. [00:47:58] Speaker 2: So, it sounds like when you talk about additional possible testing that could have been done on the grip swab from the SIG-SAUR, that would require consuming all of the samples. [00:48:09] Speaker 7: Yes. [00:48:10] Speaker 2: And your protocols don't let you consume all of the samples? [00:48:13] Dr. Matthews: No, they do not allow us to proceed forward if we need to consume the extracts. Why not? Because we are legally required to maintain at least half of the evidence. In science, you can imagine we do like to do repeat testing. And so, we like to have the opportunity to repeat tests if we need to. So, therefore, we have to maintain half the original material or half the extract. [00:48:37] Speaker 2: And it sounds like the quantification was so low that future testing was unlikely to be helpful anyway. [00:48:44] Dr. Matthews: So, we set our quantification cutoffs where we would expect the potential to have an interpretable profile. So, when it's less than that, it is unlikely you are going to obtain a full profile. It's not to say that you wouldn't obtain a profile, but that it's quite low. [00:49:00] Speaker 2: Okay. And it sounds like you did have some indication that there was Y chromosome DNA in that sample? [00:49:07] Dr. Matthews: Specifically, looking at that six-hour sample, we did indicate that there was a TY. So, that means that there was a Y chromosome present in that sample. [00:49:15] Speaker 2: Indicating that what you did have showed the presence of male DNA. [00:49:20] Dr. Matthews: It's important to caution a little bit about quantification results. Yes, it indicates that male DNA is present, but it does not indicate that only male DNA is present. But, yes, it does indicate that there is the potential for male. Okay. [00:49:33] Speaker 2: And it would be confounding to testing if multiple people had touched the item afterwards, potentially. Between the time of the crime and your testing. [00:49:45] Dr. Matthews: So, when you have a low sample, and then you have the potential of multiple contributors, you're really fighting the sample. Because you have so little DNA to start with, and when you have multiple people, it can make quite difficult to be able to isolate a single individual or two individuals from a sample. [00:50:01] Speaker 2: Okay. And so, just to clarify the results that you were able to get, the organic material was presumptive positive for blood? Okay. And the DNA matched that of Soraya Hildebrand? Yes. The single source profile did match Soraya. Okay. And the swab from the bottom of the mattress was, again, presumptive positive for blood? Yes. And it matched Soraya Hildebrand? Yes. Okay. And then Placard 30, which the jury is seen as by that cleaning machine, was, again, presumptive positive for blood? I would need to refer to my report. Oh. There were some that we did not test. You know, that might not have been presumptive. I did not test that sample. You're correct. So, did you test it for DNA? Yes. And the major component of that matched Soraya Hildebrand? Yes. Okay. That's all the questions I have. Thank you, Doctor. Thank you, Doctor. Thank you. [00:50:57] Speaker 4: Can I have a minute? Sorry. Yes. [00:51:00] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'm told the next witness might be a little bit longer and although we've been going for just about an hour, we're going to take a break here before we start off with the next witness. Please don't discuss the case yet. We'll have you back here shortly. [00:51:47] Speaker 3: I'm told the next witness might be a little bit longer and although we've been going for just about an hour, we're going to take a break here before we start with the next witness. Please don't discuss the case yet. We'll have you back here shortly. [00:52:17] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:11:17] Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. [01:12:17] Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. [01:13:17] Speaker 7: Thank you. [01:13:47] Speaker 3: Thank you. [01:14:17] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:14:47] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. [01:15:47] Speaker 3: Thank you. [01:16:17] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:16:47] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:26:17] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:26:47] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:35:47] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:36:17] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [01:37:16] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:37:46] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:39:46] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:41:16] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [01:42:16] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:43:46] Speaker 8: Thank you. [01:44:16] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:44:46] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:50:46] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:51:16] Speaker 8: Thank you. [01:51:46] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:52:16] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:54:16] Speaker 9: Thank you. Thank you. [01:55:16] Speaker 8: Thank you. [01:55:46] Speaker 9: Thank you. [01:56:16] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [01:57:16] Speaker 2: Thank you. [01:57:46] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:59:46] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:00:16] Speaker 8: Thank you. [02:00:46] Speaker ?: Thank you. [02:01:16] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:02:45] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:03:15] Speaker 8: Thank you. [02:03:45] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:04:15] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [02:05:15] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:05:45] Speaker 3: Thank you. [02:06:15] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:07:45] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:08:15] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [02:09:15] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. [02:10:15] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:11:45] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:13:45] Speaker 8: Thank you. [02:14:15] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:15:45] Speaker 8: Thank you. [02:16:15] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:18:45] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [02:19:45] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:20:15] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:21:45] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:22:15] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:23:45] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:25:15] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [02:26:15] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:26:45] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [02:27:44] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:28:14] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:31:14] Speaker 3: Thank you. [02:31:44] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:32:14] Speaker ?: Thank you. [02:32:44] Speaker 3: Thank you. [02:33:14] Speaker 4: Thank you. [02:33:44] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. [02:34:44] Speaker 3: Thank you. [02:35:14] Speaker 2: Thank you. [02:35:44] Speaker 3: Thank you. [02:36:14] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:57:13] Speaker 4: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [02:59:13] Speaker 3: Thank you. [02:59:43] Speaker 7: Thank you. [03:00:13] Speaker 8: Thank you. [03:00:43] Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. [03:01:43] Speaker 8: Thank you. [03:02:13] Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [03:04:43] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [03:06:13] Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [03:08:13] Speaker 8: Thank you. [03:08:43] Speaker 7: Thank you. [03:09:13] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [03:11:43] Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. [03:12:43] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [03:16:43] Speaker 7: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [03:18:12] Speaker 8: Thank you. [03:18:42] Speaker 7: Thank you. [03:19:12] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [03:20:12] Speaker 2: Thank you. [03:20:42] Speaker 8: Thank you. [03:21:12] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [03:24:12] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you. [03:25:12] Speaker 3: Thank you. [03:25:42] Speaker 7: Thank you. [03:26:12] Speaker ?: Thank you. [03:26:42] Speaker 3: Thank you. [03:27:12] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [03:29:42] Speaker 2: Thank you. [03:30:12] Speaker 7: Thank you. [03:30:42] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. [03:31:42] Speaker 4: Thank you. [03:32:12] Speaker 3: Thank you. Thank you. [03:33:12] Speaker ?: Thank you.