Day 18 - May 19, 2025

Bradford, Miyasako, Burgess

7Proceedings

4Pages

3Witnesses

2,348Lines

Day 18 of 36

Appearing:

DNA analysts report results consistent with O'Keefe in a tail-light mixture and rear-panel hair, while cross examines errors in Shanon Burgess's credential materials and three chip-capacity calculations.

Full day summary

Day 18 opened with two Bode Technology DNA analysts. Nicholas Bradford reported that O'Keefe could not be excluded from a three-person tail-light mixture and gave a likelihood ratio supporting the O'Keefe-and-two-unknowns proposition over three unknowns; Carl Miyasako said a rear-panel hair was consistent with O'Keefe's mitochondrial DNA profile. Defense cross-examinations on both witnesses drew out the statistical limitations: Trooper Proctor's exclusion was probabilistic rather than absolute, and mitochondrial DNA cannot distinguish an individual from an entire maternal lineage. The afternoon turned to Burgess, who described identifying a previously unexamined infotainment SD card and recovering power-event timestamps. Using a three-point turn, he calculated a 21–29 second clock variance; applied to the second TechStream event, his adjusted range concerned the end of its 10-second capture window, not the entire backing maneuver. Robert Alessi's cross-examination examined Burgess's degree representations, including errors or outdated information in professional materials; capacity-conversion errors involving three chips in his October 2024 protocol; and the timing and basis of his supplemental report. Burgess acknowledged that he did not hold the degree listed in certain materials and that he made conversion errors, while saying the errors were only part of the protocol and the three chip acquisitions were complete with no data of value. He said the supplemental report was the only midtrial supplement he recalled and identified a March presentation as prompting additional analysis. The day ended with cross-examination focused on Burgess's credentials, portions of his protocol, and the supplemental report.

Key Moments

Nicholas Bradford testifies that O'Keefe could not be excluded as a contributor to the tail-light mixture, for which the O'Keefe-and-two-unknowns proposition was 740 nonillion times more likely than three unknown contributors; he reports support for exclusion in the Bukhenik and Proctor comparisons.
Alan Jackson establishes that Bradford had not been asked to compare known samples from Brian Higgins, Brian Albert, Kevin Albert, or former Chief Kenneth Berkowitz against the tail-light extract.
Carl Miyasako places a hair from the Lexus rear panel in O'Keefe's maternal lineage but concedes on cross that mitochondrial DNA cannot identify a specific individual — only a shared maternal line.
Shanon Burgess identifies a missed SD card on the Lexus infotainment module containing timestamped power events, and synchronizes the vehicle clock to O'Keefe's iPhone with a 21–29 second variance.
Robert Alessi examines Burgess about degree information in professional materials and bit-byte conversion errors affecting three chips in his protocol; Burgess says the errors were only part of the protocol.

Notable Quotes

Alan Jackson

“Were you asked to compare a known sample from a person by the name of Brian Higgins?”

Jackson asked whether Bradford had been asked to compare known samples from four named individuals to the tail-light extract; Bradford answered no to each.

Shanon Burgess

“No, I do not.”

Burgess acknowledged that he did not hold the bachelor's degree listed in certain professional materials; he also acknowledged errors or outdated information and said he or Aperture could have prepared the materials.

Shanon Burgess

“Correct. I did make an error.”

Burgess acknowledged bit-byte conversion errors in three chip-capacity calculations, but denied that those errors were the entire foundation of his protocol and described their role as partial.