Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcript (Day 4 Part 15) (10/18/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcript (Day 4 Part 15) (10/18/26) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone and welcome back to the program. In
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to pick up where he left
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: off with day number four of Tyler Robinson's prelim hearing
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: and the transcript. Judge Graff, all right. Karner 11 is
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: admitted into evidence and may be published on screens and
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: captured by the camera. Question, and can you publish that? Ms. Karner,
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: can you tell us what the purpose and scope of
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: this document is? Answer, yeah, the DOJ, Department of Justice,
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: Uniform Language for Testimony and Report, and it standardizes the
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: appropriate language an examiner will use during reporting and their testimony.
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: And DOJ published this to standardize the wording that examiners
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: would use across their forensic laboratories. Question, and was this
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: published in part because of some criticism that the prior testimony,
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: not by you, but by other people, may have gone
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: beyond the bounds of science? Answer, no. I don't know
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: why the DOJ published it. It was before my time. Question.
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: Do you know how long this has been the policy
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: of the Department of Justice? Answer. I do, but not
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: off the top of my head. Answer. Are the reports
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: that you issued in relation to this case in conformity
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: with this policy? Answer. Yes, they are. Question. Okay. Now,
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: could you go to page three of that report where
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: it says qualifications and limitation of firearm toolmark discipline examination?
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: You're familiar with that part of the policy, correct? Answer. Yes,
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: I am. Question. And the portion of that policy that
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: says a conclusion provided during testimony or in a report
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: is ultimately an examiner's decision and is not based on
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: a statistically derived or verified measurement or comparison to all
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: the other firearms or tool marks. Therefore, an examiner shall not.
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: And then it lists several propositions. You're familiar with that language? Answer. Yes,
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: I am. Question, and it says that an examiner shall
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: not assert that a source identification or source exclusion conclusion
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: is based on uniqueness of an item of evidence. Your
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: report is not meant to imply something contrary to what's
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: stated here, is it? Answer, no, it's not. Question, you're
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: not asserting that a source identification is based on the
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: uniqueness of an item of evidence? Answer, no, I'm not. Question,
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: and the reason you're not doing that is because you
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: haven't examined all possible items of evidence. That could be
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: relevant to your comparisons, correct? Answer. I have not looked
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: at every firearm that's been manufactured in the world, nor
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: have I looked at every tool that's been manufactured in
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: the world. That's correct. Question. Okay. The second portion of
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: that says an examiner shall not use the term individualize
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: or individualization when describing a source conclusion. Did you abide
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: by that policy in this case? Answer. I did. Yes. Question.
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: And you're not expressing an opinion here. that the comparison
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: that you made are individualized to a particular weapon or
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: a particular cartridge case, correct? Answer, my conclusion for one
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: of the exhibits identifies the cartridge case as being fired
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: in the firearm. But that's all it says, yes. Question, right,
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: but you're not asserting that that's an individualized identification in
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: the sense that's being used in this policy, are you? Answer, no,
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: I am not. Question, okay. And then the third part
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: of that, says that an examiner shall not assert that
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: two tool marks originated from the same source to the
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: exclusion of all other sources. You're not expressing that opinion either,
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: are you? Answer, I am not, no. Question, it says
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: an examiner shall not assert that examinations conducted in the
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: forensic firearm tool mark discipline are infallible. You're not asserting that. Answer,
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: I am not, no. Question, you're not asserting that. It
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: says the examiner shall not assert that there is a
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: zero error rate. Answer, correct. Question, you're not making that assertion? Answer, no. Question, okay.
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: It says an examiner shall not provide a conclusion that
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: includes a statistic or numerical degree of probability except when
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: based on relevant and appropriate data. You didn't conduct such
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: an analysis here, did you? Answer, I did not, no. Question, okay.
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: And it says an examiner shall not cite the number
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: of examinations conducted in the forensic firearm toolmark discipline performed
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: in his or her career as a direct measure of
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: the accuracy of a conclusion provided. You didn't do that,
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: and you're not doing that here, correct? Answer, correct. Question,
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: and then it says, an examiner shall not assert the
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: two toolmarks originated from the same source with absolute or
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: 100% certainty, or use the expression reasonable degree of scientific certainty,
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: reasonable scientific certainty, or similar assertions of reasonable certainty in
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: either reports or testimony unless required to do so by
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: a judge. You're not making any such assertions in this case,
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: are you? Answer, I am not. Question, okay, all right,
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: thank you. You can take that down. Now, when you
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: conducted your analysis in the case, and in all cases,
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: do you typically generate a case file that includes proper
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: documentation of your examination? Answer, I do, yes. Question, and
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: did you do that in this case? Answer, I did. Question,
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: Could you display to her alone, please, Exhibit 6, Corner 6?
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: Do you see what's displayed here? Answer, I do. Question,
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: it's a 47 page. Is this your case file? Answer,
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: it is. Question, did you rely on the documents and
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: photographs that are documented here in writing the report that
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: the state introduced into evidence? Answer, how so? Question, before
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: you wrote your report, did you photograph items that you
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: were looking at? Take other notes and then use the
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: work product to form the opinions you reached that are
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: documented in the report? Answer, the notes are mostly used
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: for initial documentation and evaluation and then yes, supplement to
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: the conclusions that I make. It's all a representative image
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: of what my conclusions are going to be. So part
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: of it's going into the conclusion statement and then just
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: showing proof of those conclusions. Question right, and your standard
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: operating procedure requires that you document in your case file
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: The basis for your opinions, correct? Answer, yes. Defense, I'd
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: move corner six into evidence. Judge Graff to the state. Prosecution,
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: is this a 47-page document? Defense, yes. Prosecution, I object.
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: I don't see the relevance of the court's probable cause
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: determination to review a 46-page report that includes notes. Judge Graff,
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: would you like to respond, defense? Defense, yes, your honor.
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: This is the basis and documentation of the conclusions reached
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: in the expert's brief report. which expresses her ultimate conclusion,
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: but does not contain any of the reasons for that conclusion.
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: So it's important for the court, I think, to understand
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: why and how she reached the conclusions that she did.
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: Judge Graff, anything further? Prosecution? Yes. Just that without testimony
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: about what the meaning of the notes is and so forth,
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: it's more confusing than it is probative. So under a
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: 403 analysis, I don't think it's admissible nor helpful to
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: the court. Judge Graff, all right. Defense? Defense. I intend
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: to focus on particular photographs which document what she received
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: in evidence and the comparisons that she did, which were
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: also documented in the file in a way of comparison photographs.
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: Judge Graff, all right, as it relates to the objection,
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: the objection is overruled. I find that it's relevant and
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: it relates to State Exhibit 30, which was admitted, as
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: well as State Exhibit 32, which is admitted. And the
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: state is able to do cross-examination on this witness as
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: it relates to the report, and so it's admitted and
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: may be published on all levels in the courtroom and
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: through the media. Defense, thank you, Ms. Karner. One of
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: the items that you were asked to look at was,
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: as described in your report, one bullet jacket fragment and
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: four lead fragments, correct? Answer, yes. Question, were you informed
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: at some point that there was a discrepancy between what
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: you were examining and what had been documented by the
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: medical examiner in terms of the number of bullet fragments? Answer,
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: I was, yes. Question, yes. Were you asked to see
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: if maybe the ATF had lost certain portions of the evidence? Answer,
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: I was not. Question, all right. And was it your
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: understanding that there were originally seven bullet fragments, but you
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: ended up with four? Answer, I was alerted that there
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: was potentially seven fragments from the medical examiner in a
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: photo just a few months ago. Question, okay. You're clear, though,
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: that when you got the evidence, it was in a
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: sealed condition, correct? Answer, it was, yes. Question, and when
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: you opened it, what was in the envelope? Answer, a
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: small individual manila envelope, yes. Question, and did you take
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: the contents of the envelope containing the bullet and photographs out? Answer,
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: I did, yes. Question, okay. Could you display page 47
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: of that exhibit? I'm sorry, page 14. And tell us
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: what's depicted there. Answer, yeah, this is a picture of
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: the as-received condition of Exhibit 6 in its entirety. That's
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: the top picture. So you'll see Exhibit 6A all the
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: way through 6E in descending order. And then the bottom
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: of two photographs on the left is the Exhibit 6A
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: bullet jacket fragment, and that's the view of the exterior.
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: And then the photograph on the right is the Exhibit
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: 6A bullet jacket fragment, and that's the view of the
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: interior of it. Question, okay, but after you documented what
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: the bullet and fragments look like, did you do certain
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: procedures on the larger bullet fragment? Answer, I did, yes. Question,
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: and what did you do? Answer, I cleaned the bullet
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: jacket fragment, and I also peeled the pedals back. If
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: you think of a banana... and peeling the skin away
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: from the interior, it's almost like doing that. As you
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: can see from the photo, the petals have been crumpled
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: in on themselves, so in order for me to see
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: the land and groove impressions, which holds those individual characteristics
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: needed for comparison, I need to do some maneuvering of
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: those petals. Question, and how do you do that? Do
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: you use an instrument to peel back the portions that
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: you want to look at? Answer, I use pliers. Question, okay.
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: And after you did that procedure, did you then photograph
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: the larger bullet fragment itself? Answer, I did, yes. Question,
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: were the smaller fragments essentially not of any value to
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: you in terms of doing comparisons? Answer, they were deemed unsuitable,
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: which means there are no microscopic marks of value comparison. Question, okay,
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: but the larger fragment. After you did process, you just explained.
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: You then photographed it again, correct? Answer, that's correct, yes. Question,
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: can you display the next page of this exhibit, please?
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: Tell us what we see here. Answer, this is two
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: pictures of the 6A bullet jacket fragment after the examination preparation.
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: So the top photo is going to be the interior
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: of 6A, and then the bottom photo is the exterior
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: of 6A. Question, now after you took these photographs, Did
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: you proceed to do something to determine whether you had
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: either class, individual, or subclass characteristics? Answer yes. Question, tell
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: the court what that means. Answer, to start, when I
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: do my initial examination of a bullet jacket fragment like this,
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: I'm going to look at its class characteristics. Class characteristics
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: are the least restrictive set of characteristics I use in
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: my comparison process. And these are design features that are
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: given to a large group of items that characterize them together.
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: So for a bullet, you could think of the diameter
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: of the bullet, the number of land and grooves, and
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: direction of twist, and the type of rifling. So I
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: would go through and look at the class characteristics of
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: the bullet jacket fragment, which was 6, right? Conventional rifling.
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: Then I'd move on to look at any subclass characteristics,
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: and subclass characteristics are more restricted than class, but less
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: than individual, and they are design features that can be
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: put on an object during the manufacturing process. which is
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: consistent among items that are made by a tool that's
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: in a specific state of wear. So what I mean
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: by what it's going to be a subset of a
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: larger group, which is why it's not used for identification
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: or comparison purposes for the basis of a conclusion. But
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: when you think of something that's made through a mold process,
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: when the mold comes together, it creates a seam line.
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: And that seam line is going to be represented on
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: all the items that it makes. So that's why you
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: can't use it for identification process. because it's going to
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: be on a lot of items, which is why it's
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: a subset of the group. Then I move on to
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: looking at the individual characteristics. And these are imperfections and
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: irregularities that arise from the manufacturing process. And then there's
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: also individual characteristics that can arise from wear, use, and
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: abuse of a tool. And these individual characteristics is what
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: is going to be distinct to that tool. And that's
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: why they're used for the identification process. So again, I
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: did an examination of its class characteristics, looked for any
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: subclass characteristics, and then looked to see if there was
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: an individual characteristic in the land and groove impressions sufficient
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: enough of marks and values to do comparison process. Question. Now,
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: once you have the class characteristics of a bullet, can
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: you narrow the range of firearm that could have fired
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: it just based on characteristics? Answer. Yes, you can. Question.
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: And is caliber a class characteristic? Answer. Or an individual
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: or a subclass characteristic? Answer. It's going to be a
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: class characteristic. Because a lot of firearms will have the
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: same class. Or excuse me, the same caliber. Question. Did
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: you measure the diameter of the bullet? Answer. I did, yes. Question.
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: And did you end up with a range where it
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: could have been certain ranges? Of length or diameter? Answer.
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: I did, yes. Question. And what was your reading? Answer.
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: Can I refer to my notes? Answer. Yes, please. Question.
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: Or answer, excuse me, the range of diameter for the
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: 6A bullet jacket fragment was 0.286 to 0.301 inches. Question, okay,
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: what page are you looking at? Answer, page 13. Question, okay,
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: so this is your documentation of the diameter measurement. And
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: then on the right here, LIMP, that's a measurement of
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: the land width, correct? Answer, land impression width, yes. Question,
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: and these are all general characteristics or class characteristics, right? Answer, correct.
• 14:09
  Speaker 1: All right, we're going to wrap up right here. And
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: in the next episode, we're going to pick up where
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: we left off. All the information that goes with this
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box.