Latest / Beyond The Horizon / Murder In Moscow: Transcripts From The Closed IGG Hearing (Part 11)
Transcript
- 0:00Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the program. In
- 0:03Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to head back out the Moscow
- 0:05Speaker 1: and we're going to pick up where we left off
- 0:07Speaker 1: with the IgG hearing transcripts, and once again we have
- 0:11Speaker 1: and Taylor doing the questioning and mister Helwig doing the answering. Question. So,
- 0:16Speaker 1: in this lab process to get to the SNP, to
- 0:19Speaker 1: get to the upload file, it sounds like there's a
- 0:21Speaker 1: lot of steps along the way. Answer, it's pretty complicated process. Yes.
- 0:26Speaker 1: Question is it important to keep lab notes or a
- 0:28Speaker 1: bench notes or have procedures or protocols? Answer? Yes, I
- 0:32Speaker 1: think that it's pretty important and standard practice amongst forensic
- 0:36Speaker 1: DNA testing laboratories in general. You're going to adhere to
- 0:39Speaker 1: a quality management program. You're going to have procedures, protocols,
- 0:43Speaker 1: and policies that tell you what to do, tell you
- 0:46Speaker 1: how to do it, tell you what samples to use,
- 0:48Speaker 1: what personnel can be can do the analysis and technical review,
- 0:53Speaker 1: and so on and so forth. It's a whole quality
- 0:56Speaker 1: structure that gives support and credence to reliable results, and
- 1:00Speaker 1: that would include protocols SOPs. It would also include case documentation,
- 1:05Speaker 1: laboratory notes about what you did, how you did it,
- 1:08Speaker 1: chain of custody, documents, electronic records as needed, and hopefully
- 1:12Speaker 1: at the end of it, a report that includes conclusions
- 1:15Speaker 1: and information about what was done. Question, why do you
- 1:19Speaker 1: want to do all of that? Answer? First of all,
- 1:21Speaker 1: within the forensic DNA community, it's part of our accreditation
- 1:25Speaker 1: process in some of the standards that we adhere to
- 1:28Speaker 1: as a community. Second, it's just best practice, the holding
- 1:32Speaker 1: of the records, using them, creating them, and retaining them.
- 1:36Speaker 1: You never know if you're going to need to refer
- 1:38Speaker 1: back to them in your own notes or we mandate
- 1:41Speaker 1: a technical review of all this date so a second
- 1:44Speaker 1: quality analyst will look over all of your laboratory notes,
- 1:47Speaker 1: all the work you did, and your reports and make
- 1:50Speaker 1: sure that they agree with it and would come out
- 1:52Speaker 1: to the same conclusions. And for discovery requests. At IMF,
- 1:57Speaker 1: we have typical documentation that we would send our clients
- 2:00Speaker 1: that would include a report and all of the case
- 2:03Speaker 1: notes and laboratory documentation associated with that. Outside of that,
- 2:08Speaker 1: we oftentimes get requests for more than that information. What
- 2:12Speaker 1: is our validations? What is our quality manual competency test
- 2:16Speaker 1: for our personnel their training and education? A whole list
- 2:20Speaker 1: of support documents that are within our quality management system
- 2:24Speaker 1: that also are important in accreditation of our laboratory. Question
- 2:29Speaker 1: before you became a five oh one C three, was
- 2:31Speaker 1: your laboratory accredited? Answer? Even before becoming a five oh
- 2:36Speaker 1: one C three Since the inception of the company in
- 2:39Speaker 1: twenty nineteen, even before we no longer did laboratory operations,
- 2:44Speaker 1: we got accredited by ANABIO one seven zero two five
- 2:49Speaker 1: that was on our credation scope included traditional forensics STRs
- 2:54Speaker 1: y STRs, and eventually we included within our scope forensic SNPs,
- 3:00Speaker 1: massively parallel sequencing that encompasses a credation for this whole
- 3:04Speaker 1: genome sequencing and support of forensic investigative genetic genealogy that
- 3:09Speaker 1: we did. Question is there a set of guidelines or
- 3:12Speaker 1: rules that apply to the work with DNA to split
- 3:15Speaker 1: that DNA water balloon? Open answer? Yeah, I think you've
- 3:19Speaker 1: heard testimony to that. There's accredation standards ISO one seven
- 3:23Speaker 1: zero two five is the big one, as well as
- 3:26Speaker 1: the Federal Bureau of Investigation Quality Assurance standards for forensic
- 3:30Speaker 1: DNA testing laboratories. Those are common, I would say, more
- 3:34Speaker 1: so almost require within the forensic DNA community, and those
- 3:38Speaker 1: are standards that dictate our quality management system as a whole,
- 3:42Speaker 1: what we do, how we do it, how we support it,
- 3:44Speaker 1: how we document, and how we report. Question is that important?
- 3:49Speaker 1: So there is public trust in what you do? Answer?
- 3:52Speaker 1: More so public trust for sure, but reliability in reproducibility
- 3:56Speaker 1: of results, transparency and just in sharing of full quality
- 4:01Speaker 1: behind your conclusions and reports. Question, mister Hellwig, you mentioned
- 4:06Speaker 1: the size of the two SNP profiles for ged match
- 4:09Speaker 1: pro and Family Tree DNA. Five hundred and fifty thousand
- 4:13Speaker 1: or six hundred and fifty thousand seemed to be the
- 4:15Speaker 1: maximums If you had a case where you had produced
- 4:19Speaker 1: file to upload and upload file and it had let's
- 4:22Speaker 1: say six hundred thousand in it, could you take that
- 4:25Speaker 1: text file and turn it into twice that big answer?
- 4:28Speaker 1: I'm not sure how we would do that. No, an
- 4:31Speaker 1: important note here, that was just IMF's policy. We generated
- 4:35Speaker 1: upload file specific to each of the databases, and that's
- 4:38Speaker 1: the number we had within our bioinformatic package. That's not
- 4:42Speaker 1: necessarily what would be true of others. That being said,
- 4:46Speaker 1: if theoretically we were to deliver our upload file to
- 4:50Speaker 1: our client and did say had five hundred thousand SNPs
- 4:53Speaker 1: on it. I don't know of a mechanism to add
- 4:56Speaker 1: SNPs in that manner without going back to our raw data.
- 5:00Speaker 1: Question in this particular case, I know you haven't gotten
- 5:03Speaker 1: involved in all of the ins and outs, But did
- 5:06Speaker 1: we provide to you what we received in regular discovery
- 5:08Speaker 1: the Authroom file and the FBI file upload files? Answer? Yes,
- 5:13Speaker 1: I did receive two upload files. One was the text
- 5:16Speaker 1: file that came from Authroom Labs, and one was an
- 5:19Speaker 1: XL file that came from the FBI. Question is that
- 5:23Speaker 1: also an upload file? Answer? Yep. Both of them are
- 5:25Speaker 1: upload files. They contain exactly that, a listing of SNPs,
- 5:30Speaker 1: the call and their location in a format that would
- 5:33Speaker 1: allow them to be uploaded to databases. Question what was
- 5:36Speaker 1: the difference in size? Answer? The FBI upload file had
- 5:40Speaker 1: significantly more SNPs called than the Authroom file. It wasn't
- 5:45Speaker 1: able to go deep into it. I don't know exactly
- 5:48Speaker 1: how many more, but there was more SNPs called within
- 5:51Speaker 1: the upload file for the FBI than there was with
- 5:54Speaker 1: the authroom file. Question and since the Authroom file is
- 5:57Speaker 1: smaller and it is a text file, can you tell
- 6:00Speaker 1: how the FBI got so much more data, so many
- 6:03Speaker 1: more SNPs. Answer. No, that's kind of the important part here.
- 6:07Speaker 1: There's no documentation to say how this happened, and that's
- 6:11Speaker 1: really the important part, right. I have no reason to
- 6:13Speaker 1: believe that AUTHORAM laboratories did anything wrong to obtain their profile.
- 6:17Speaker 1: I just don't have the documentation to show me how
- 6:20Speaker 1: that came to be. Same with the FBI file. There's
- 6:23Speaker 1: no documentation or notes or bench or report to say
- 6:26Speaker 1: this is what I had, this is what I did,
- 6:28Speaker 1: and this is now what I have. So I'm unsure
- 6:31Speaker 1: of how that came to be. And Taylor, thank you,
- 6:34Speaker 1: your honor. If I may just have a moment to
- 6:36Speaker 1: check with my team, mister Helwig, that's all I have.
- 6:40Speaker 1: The prosecutor might have some for you. The court go ahead.
- 6:44Speaker 1: So now we have the cross examination starting by mister
- 6:47Speaker 1: and I question, mister Helwig. I want to start with
- 6:50Speaker 1: your accreditation testimony. Did I hear you correctly that your
- 6:54Speaker 1: lab was accredited since inception in twenty nineteen? Answer? Our
- 6:58Speaker 1: laboratory was accredited for traditional forensics. We began the accreditation
- 7:03Speaker 1: in twenty nineteen, and I believe the first accreditation scope
- 7:07Speaker 1: we received was in twenty twenty for forensic SNPs. Our
- 7:11Speaker 1: accreditation was January twentieth of twenty twenty three. I believe.
- 7:15Speaker 1: Question so you weren't accredited back in twenty nineteen for
- 7:18Speaker 1: forensic SNPs. Correct answer correct, we weren't actually doing forensic
- 7:23Speaker 1: SNPs at the time. Question but you were working on
- 7:27Speaker 1: forensicas NP cases prior to your accreditation? Correct answer, No,
- 7:32Speaker 1: we specifically reserve working on these SNP cases until we
- 7:36Speaker 1: were accredited. Question Okay, do you recall describing the accreditation
- 7:41Speaker 1: process as a chicken and egg problem? Answer? I don't.
- 7:45Speaker 1: Question you testified you work at or work for inter
- 7:48Speaker 1: Mountain Forensics. Answer that's correct. Question do you post on
- 7:52Speaker 1: their website? Answer is sometimes yeah. Question do you post
- 7:56Speaker 1: in your name Danny Holwig? Answer certainly. Question you don't
- 7:59Speaker 1: want to call posting in June of twenty twenty about
- 8:02Speaker 1: accreditation being a chicken and egg problem? Answer I don't recall.
- 8:06Speaker 1: I'm certain that that that statement is on there and
- 8:09Speaker 1: I would need to recollect. Certainly. Question I'm happy to
- 8:12Speaker 1: show you this answer that would be great. Ms Taylor,
- 8:15Speaker 1: May I also see it, mister Nye. Sure document handed
- 8:19Speaker 1: to the witness the witness. Yeah, yeah, I recall that,
- 8:22Speaker 1: mister Nye. Okay, so do you now recall describing it
- 8:25Speaker 1: as a chicken and egg problem? Answer? Absolutely, it was
- 8:28Speaker 1: several years ago. I appreciate the refresh of memory. Question sure.
- 8:32Speaker 1: In that same post, you talked about how you appreciated
- 8:35Speaker 1: the trust of those that were using you before you
- 8:38Speaker 1: were accredited. Right answer correct. Yes. Question do you feel
- 8:42Speaker 1: like your work before accreditation was less or lower quality
- 8:46Speaker 1: than after? Answer no, absolutely not. Question. I also want
- 8:50Speaker 1: to talk to you about you mentioned that Inner Mountain
- 8:53Speaker 1: Forensics does, or at least used to do some cases
- 8:56Speaker 1: like this, right answer yes. Question assisting law enforcement? Answer yes,
- 9:01Speaker 1: question roughly, how many cases did you assist law enforcement in?
- 9:05Speaker 1: Answer that's a good question. We have a running total there,
- 9:08Speaker 1: but I guessing in the hundreds. Question okay, and what
- 9:12Speaker 1: was your role personally in assisting law enforcement in those cases? Answer?
- 9:16Speaker 1: I had several. I did consultations up front, I was
- 9:20Speaker 1: qualified as an analyst for Forensic U S NPS. I
- 9:23Speaker 1: did some technical review, and in some cases I distributed
- 9:26Speaker 1: files to our clients. And when you say in the hundreds,
- 9:29Speaker 1: you mean you went through the whole process you talked
- 9:32Speaker 1: about with miss Taylor in hundreds of cases? Answer yes,
- 9:36Speaker 1: question developing an SMP profile? Answer I believe so. Yes.
- 9:40Speaker 1: Question Okay, in all of those cases, were you successful
- 9:44Speaker 1: in developing an SMP profile? Answer no. Question In roughly
- 9:48Speaker 1: how many cases were you successful in developing an SNP program?
- 9:53Speaker 1: Answer we were about at the end of laboratory operations.
- 9:56Speaker 1: We were about eighty percent somewhere in that range. Question
- 10:00Speaker 1: so eighty percent of hundreds? Answer yeah, I believe so.
- 10:03Speaker 1: Question In the cases you successfully developed an SMP profile,
- 10:08Speaker 1: did you learn medical information about the individuals who used
- 10:11Speaker 1: DNA you were looking at? Answer no. Question did anyone
- 10:15Speaker 1: at Indoor Mountain Forensics learn medical information about those people?
- 10:19Speaker 1: Answer no. Question When you develop I believe you called
- 10:22Speaker 1: it an upload file? Is that correct? Answer correct? Question?
- 10:26Speaker 1: What does an upload file look like if you just
- 10:29Speaker 1: open it on a computer. Answer It's a text file.
- 10:32Speaker 1: It's very very big. Again, it comes in different formats,
- 10:35Speaker 1: but essentially what it is is a text file. It
- 10:38Speaker 1: is a big text file that was hundreds of thousands
- 10:41Speaker 1: in our case of SNPs that have a position, a name,
- 10:45Speaker 1: what chromosomes are found on, and the actual letters that
- 10:49Speaker 1: we're looking for. Question So if you provide that upload
- 10:52Speaker 1: file to someone that didn't have any training or experience
- 10:55Speaker 1: in genetics, they would be able to read it. Answer no,
- 10:58Speaker 1: not in so much words, there some heaters on there.
- 11:01Speaker 1: I guess that you could. That you could. That would
- 11:04Speaker 1: be the narrative, but the molecular biology would be pretty
- 11:07Speaker 1: complicated questions. So let me ask it this way. I
- 11:10Speaker 1: guess if you were to hand that upload file to
- 11:13Speaker 1: your average police officer and ask them whether or not
- 11:15Speaker 1: the person whose DNA you were looking at would have cancer,
- 11:19Speaker 1: would that officer be able to do that? Answer? No question.
- 11:22Speaker 1: What additional steps would you need to take to learn
- 11:25Speaker 1: medical information from an SNP program above and beyond what
- 11:29Speaker 1: you were doing at Inner Mountain Forensics? Answer? Well, SNPs
- 11:33Speaker 1: are informative to a variety of different things. So what
- 11:36Speaker 1: we're looking for is genealogy, informative markers or ancestry links
- 11:40Speaker 1: informative markers to find health information or phenotypical like hair color,
- 11:46Speaker 1: eye color, you need to look at different SNPs. There's
- 11:50Speaker 1: a horde of research on what medical information is out
- 11:52Speaker 1: there and what SNPs are probative. To gain access to
- 11:56Speaker 1: those SNPs, you would have to go back into the
- 11:59Speaker 1: bioinformatics pull the information from the raw data specific to
- 12:03Speaker 1: the medical smps that you're looking for. That's something we
- 12:06Speaker 1: did at IMF. Question So, if I'm understanding correctly, at IMF,
- 12:10Speaker 1: you developed SMP profiles, but they were specific for ancestry.
- 12:15Speaker 1: Answer genealogy and ancestry. Yes, question why didn't you develop
- 12:19Speaker 1: smps related to medical information? Answer? That's not part of
- 12:23Speaker 1: our scope. We are a forensic DNA testing laboratory. We're
- 12:27Speaker 1: generating FIG profiles for the support and upload into these
- 12:30Speaker 1: genealogy databases. It wouldn't be relevant or a probative nor appropriate.
- 12:35Speaker 1: Question did you when you help these law enforcement agencies?
- 12:38Speaker 1: Did you ever follow those cases to see if there
- 12:41Speaker 1: were successes at the end? Answers? Sometimes we delivered files
- 12:45Speaker 1: to our partners, and in some cases we had an investigative, forensic,
- 12:49Speaker 1: investigative genetic genealogy team that worked the cases on the
- 12:53Speaker 1: investigation side. But in some cases, our clients would come
- 12:56Speaker 1: back to us and let us know that they've gotten
- 12:59Speaker 1: a result that they had a case resolution. Question, and
- 13:02Speaker 1: you participate in that, I don't know exactly what you
- 13:05Speaker 1: want to call it. In the FIG community, Would you
- 13:07Speaker 1: consider yourself a member of the FIG community. Answer, I guess. Yeah.
- 13:11Speaker 1: There's a variety of different groups, I guess, and message
- 13:14Speaker 1: boards and information pathways, and I try to be a
- 13:17Speaker 1: part of that where I can question. And as a
- 13:20Speaker 1: member of the FIG community, did you hear about other
- 13:22Speaker 1: people's success stories using FIG? Answer absolutely? Question have you
- 13:28Speaker 1: ever heard of FIG case that was successfully solved using
- 13:31Speaker 1: medical information? Answer no, never, mister Nye. Just one second,
- 13:36Speaker 1: your honor, No further questions. All right, So we're gonna
- 13:39Speaker 1: wrap up right here, and when we pick up, we're
- 13:41Speaker 1: gonna have Ann Taylor on the read direct. If you'd
- 13:45Speaker 1: like to contact me, you can do that at Bobby
- 13:46Speaker 1: Kapuci at ProtonMail dot com. That's b O b b
- 13:50Speaker 1: Y c ap you Cci at ProtonMail dot com, or
- 13:54Speaker 1: if you prefer, you can find me on x at
- 13:56Speaker 1: bo bb y underscore c apu C. All of the
- 14:01Speaker 1: links that go with this episode can be found in
- 14:03Speaker 1: the description box.