Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcripts (Day 2 Part 18) (10/1/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcripts (Day 2 Part 18) (10/1/26) · 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 we left
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: off with day number two of the Tyler Robinson prelim hearing. Question.
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: At D16, Mr. Twiggs was a 912, right? According to
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: your electropherogram? Answer. That's correct. Yes, Mr. Twiggs was a
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: 912 at D16. Question 912. And did you find 912
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: at the location in the 8-1 sample? Answer by Agent Baker,
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry, the sample 8 or sample 7. Question, sample 8. Answer,
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: the only piece of information I had for sample 8
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: at item D16 was at 12. Question, and you said twigs?
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: At that was a 912, right? Answer, correct, yes. Question,
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: but at that location, the evidence sample was not a 912,
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: but a 12. Answer, that was the only piece of
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: information that was recovered at that location. Question, Let me
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: ask you about your interpretation rule for excluding someone. Is
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: this an accurate statement? This is from Butler's textbook. In
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: forensic DNA analysis, if any STR locus fails to match
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: when comparing the genotypes between two or more samples, then
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: the comparison of profiles between the question and the reference
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: sample is usually declared a non-match regardless of how many
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: other loci match. Answer, I would agree with that if
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: it's a single source sample. So single source, again, meaning
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: from one individual. If I have a DNA profile from
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: evidence and I compare it to a known individual, if
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: there's a difference at even one location, I can say
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: it's an exclusion. If I have a mixture, it's not
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: that cut and dry. I have to take into account
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: how many people are in the mixture, how many pieces
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: of information I have. Is there a potential dropout? So
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: just because someone may be present in a mixture doesn't
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: necessarily mean that I'm going to automatically exclude them. Question,
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: I see. At D19S, what was Mr. Twig's type? Answer,
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: it was 1416. Question, did you find 16 allele in
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: the 8A sample? Answer, no, I did not. Question, okay.
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: At THO, what was Mr. Twig's type? Answer, he was 79.3. Question,
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: did you find 7 allele in the 8.1 sample? Answer, no,
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: I did not. But again, this is a mixture, and
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: there is some dropout. So just because I didn't see
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: a 7, for example, does not mean I would automatically
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: exclude someone. Question, it's a mixture, so there was some dropout.
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: So did you assume that at that location, that the
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: allele that dropped out matched this allele? Answer, at that location, no.
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: There's only one individual represented there, so when comparing an elimination,
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: I would essentially ignore that location. I'm looking at the
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: other locations. where there are two individuals present. Question, okay. Now,
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: a couple more topics, and then we're done. When you
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: received this, the evidence, you got more than seven and eight, correct?
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: You got a number of other samples. Answer, correct, I did. Question,
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: you got a backpack, which you labeled as Exhibit 9,
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: and a bunch of items from that backpack, correct? Answer, correct, yes. Question,
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: you were initially told that these items related to things
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: that may be discarded by the suspect. Answer, so initially
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: we didn't have any information, so we processed that. Those
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: are items that are good for DNA. Not having any
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: information from the investigators, we processed them for DNA. As
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: the investigation continues, it was determined that the backpack was
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: potentially left behind by a bystander, and there was no
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: comparison needed at the time. Question, well, left behind by
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: a bystander, or according to your notes, at page 20,
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: the backpack belonged to Kirk's detailees. Answer, yeah, based on
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: the individual that. That was not my communication log. That
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: was someone else within the laboratory. That was the information
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: that they received. Question, before you received any samples, did
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: you request to perform what's called destructive testing on the samples? Answer, yes,
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: I did. And destructive testing is essentially consuming the sample,
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: cutting the cotton off the Q-tip of the swab, subjecting
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: it to testing so there's nothing remaining. I have to
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: request permission to consume prior to doing so, and I
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: did so in this case. question, and why did you
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: do that? Answer, well, that's part of our protocol that
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: we have to request permission to consume, and we consume.
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: So DNA, we can't see it. So when an item
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: is swabbed, we don't know how much DNA is on
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: the swab, if anything, or how that swab was used.
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: Did someone just swab using one side of it? Did
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: they roll it and use all sides? Because I don't
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: know that. It's our practice to consume that swab, and
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: it's our best chance to getting any DNA evidence. Question,
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: and that's a determination that you made in the case
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: before you even saw the evidence, correct? Answer, determination to consume? Question, yeah. Answer, yes. Question, okay.
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: Now remember I referred to that NRC report. Did they
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: say that their wrongfully accused person's best insurance against a
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: possibility of being falsely incriminated and inaudible, the opportunity to
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: have the testing repeated, such an opportunity should be provided
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: whenever possible? Answer, yes. That does say that. Question. And
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: does your laboratory have a policy, standard 7.4, which says,
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: where possible, the laboratory shall retain or return a portion
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: of the evidence, sample, or extract? Answer. That is correct.
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: And we do actually return the remaining extract, the liquid,
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: from our DNA testing. So we did consume the swab. However,
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: there was a small amount of liquid that was left
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: and returned. Question. On some of the items, right? Answer.
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: I believe on all the items. Question. Well, we'll get
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: into that in a minute. And that policy that I
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: read is from your lab policy, right? Answer, yes. Question,
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: the FBI lab policy? Answer, yes, it is. Question, and
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: then there is also similar policy from the quality assurance standard,
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: the FBI quality assurance standard, which says the laboratory must
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: have a policy on sample consumption. The policy is expected
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: to provide instruction for if and when the laboratory may
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: or may not consume a sample and any documentation, that
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: the laboratory requires? Answer, that is correct, yes. Question, okay.
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: Now your report indicates that certain samples were destroyed, consumed, correct? Answer,
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: that is correct, yes. Question, and which samples were consumed? Answer,
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: items one through six, which were swabs from possible smudge,
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: swabs of a hand swipe, swabs from possible sweat drop,
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: swabs from possible smudge, swabs of possible smudge, and swabs
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: from possible sweat drop. in addition to items 54 and 55,
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: which were swabs of swipe finger, areas, and swabs of
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: stairwell railing. Question, okay, so when you wrote in your
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: report that those items were consumed, which of those items,
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: and by that, you mean the actual swab was consumed? Answer, correct.
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: So a swab is just like a Q-tip, so the
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: cotton portion of that swab was cut off the wooden stick,
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: placed into a tube, subjected to DNA testing, so we
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: consider that consuming. But again, there's liquid at the end
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: of the process. that's returned to the field. Question, and
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: the normal procedure in terms of sample preservation would be
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: something called splitting, right? You split the swab and you
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: use half. You save half so that your testing results
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: can be replicated and retested. Answer, so yes. However, again,
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: I don't know how an item is swabbed. So even
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: if we were to cut the swab in half, it
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: could be that I'm testing the half that doesn't have
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: any DNA and the other half may have some DNA
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: or the swab may have a little bit of DNA
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: on one side and a lot on the other side.
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: So for the best possible chance of getting a DNA profile,
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: it's our practice to consume the entire swab. Question, so
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: for the first six items, those were swabs that were
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: taken from the northeast corner of the loci building, correct? Answer, correct, yes. Question,
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: and you used all of the swabs and you concluded
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: that there was no DNA present on any of those items, correct? Answer,
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: that is correct. Question, so you couldn't do any comparative testing. Answer, correct.
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: There was nothing for me to compare to. Question, okay.
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: What did you have left after you did that in
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: terms of the volume of extract? What was left? Answer,
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: so it was approximately 3 microliters, so a very small portion. Question,
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: very small portion. You actually used 10 microliters to do
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: your testing of those samples, right? Answer, that is correct, yes. Question,
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: so you didn't get any results with 10. What you
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: left over would not be sufficient to get any sort
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: of independent testing done, correct? Answer, it could be tested. However,
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: my expectation, if I took 10 microliters and didn't get
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: any DNA, the remaining three would also not give any DNA. Question, okay.
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: And for item 55, that was two swabs from a
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: stairwell railing where the suspect touched the railing, right? Answer,
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: as far as I know, there were swabs from a stairwell. Question,
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: and correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand from
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: your lab notes that you took that those swabs and
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: combine them into one sample and then use the whole sample, right? Answer,
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: that is correct, yes. Question, okay, before you did that,
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: did you inquire whether those two swabs came from different areas?
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: For instance, maybe the suspect touched it here, but the
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: other sample was taken somewhere else? Answer, I did not.
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: They were both labeled as coming from the same stairwell,
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: and they were packaged together. So our policy and procedure
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: is that we can combine those two together. Question, and
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: when you do that, you create a mixture, right? Answer,
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: I don't know that I would agree that combining the
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: two would create a mixture. Given the item of evidence
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: is stairwell railing, I don't necessarily expect that one swab
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: would have one person, the second swab would have a
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: different second person, and combining the two of them creates
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: a mixture. However, I don't know that for certain. But again,
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: I don't know is DNA present, so our procedure is
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: to combine and consume those swabs. Question 11. and in
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: this case, when you did that, what you got was
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: a complex mixture, right? Answer I did. I got DNA
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: from more than five individuals, so I could not provide
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: a conclusion. Judge Graff and Mr. Burt were at the
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: 430 point. I just want to inquire. Defense. Okay, I
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: just have... One more and then I'll be done with her.
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: We talked earlier about your testing of the length of
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: the DNA sequence, the length of the DNA boxcar, the
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: sequence of ACTNG within those sequences, within those boxcars, right? Answer, correct, yes. Question,
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: and is it true that there are different alleles that
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: have the same length when you measure by SDRs but
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: have different sequences? Answer, yes, that is possible. Question, and
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: I'd like to show you a chart that you have reviewed.
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: Could you bring up 34? And is this a chart
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: that I prepared and you looked at to see if
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: I had correctly stated what alleles were found? Answer, yes,
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: it is. Question, and does it, presently existing, accurately state
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: what the alleles are in each location? Answer, yes. Question, okay,
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: I would move that into evidence. It's five pages and
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: it's Baker 34. Judge Graff, prosecution? Prosecution, yeah, I object.
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: Unless this exhibit is reasonably likely to defeat the prima
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: facie showing a probable cause, this is irrelevant to the
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: preliminary hearing. Defense, your honor, this exhibit and the next
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: one go directly to whether the comparisons being made between Mr.
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: Robinson's sample and the evidence samples are usable and reliable
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: to make determination that is a probable contributor. Judge, I'm
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: not sure I'm following with what you're saying on there,
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: and maybe it's just because it's late in the day.
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: Could you repeat that? Defense, so this chart illustrates what
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: allele she found at each location for Mr. Twiggs and Mr.
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: Robinson and for the evidence samples. The 71A and 81A.
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: The other alleles are on here as well, but we're
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: going to focus on 71 and 81. And for instance,
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: Your Honor, you'll see that under the first reading here
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: is Tyler Robinson at D3 location. He is at 17, okay?
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: Take that down. And then if you go down to
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: the 71 tallow sample, which is what the topic is
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: of this report introduced by the state, you'll see that
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: she found a 17 there as well measured only by
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: the length of the DNA strand, and that she is
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: going to testify to is a location and five or
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: six others there are alleles, all of which measure here
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: a 17, but actually contain different sequences, and that her
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: testing that she used does not measure for those distances. Judge,
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: and so it relates to probable cause. That's what I
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: want to keep coming back to. And again, if this
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: was a trial, this may be a little bit different
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: analysis that the trial judge applies. But as a magistrate
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: taking a look at this and looking at probable cause standard,
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: how does this comport? Defense, so it comports because it
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: goes to the ultimate opinion expressed in the report that
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: the state is offering, that the report offers reliable support
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: that Mr. Robinson is a possible contributor. And we're asking
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: the court to consider that the comparisons are only based
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: on a limited number of length-based comparisons and that there's
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: a sequence differences so that she cannot distinguish, and I
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: believe she'll testify she cannot distinguish based on the testing
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: that she did in at least five separate locations, whether
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: the evidence sample and Mr. Robinson's sample, or for that matter, Mr.
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: Twigg's sample, matches the sequence difference here. And this is
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: my final area, and I think I can do it
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: very efficiently, and I think it's important for the court
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: to consider, especially as it relates to the comparison to Mr. Robinson.
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: Alright folks, we're going to wrap up right here. And
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: in the next episode, we're going to finish off day
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: number two. All the information that goes with this episode
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: can be found in the description box.