5.Sherry Culhane — Direct (Part 1)
1,024 linesMR. GAHN: State would call Sherry Culhane.
SHERRY CULHANE, called as a witness herein, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
COURT CLERK: Please be seated. Please state your name and spell your last name for the record.
SHERRY CULHANE: Sherry Culhane, last name, C-u-l-h-a-n-e.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY ATTORNEY GAHN:
SHERRY CULHANE: I work as a Forensic Scientist in the DNA Unit, a Technical Unit Leader in the DNA Unit at the Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory in Madison.
SHERRY CULHANE: 23 years.
MR. GAHN: And could you expand a little bit more on what your duties and responsibilities are at the Crime Lab.
SHERRY CULHANE: As a Forensic Scientist in the DNA Section, I'm primarily responsible for the examination of physical evidence for the presence of biological material. We examine these items of evidence and try and identify the biological material and develop DNA profiles from those samples.
We're also submitted reference samples from specific individuals. And, again, we attempt to develop DNA profiles from those samples and simply compare the two to see if a specific person could or could not be the source of the evidence sample.
In addition to those duties, I also have technical leader responsibilities. And those include things like training new analysts, monitoring our quality control procedures, monitoring proficiency tests of the analyst. I'm also responsible for any new techniques, new equipment that is brought on line at the laboratory, for signing off on those procedures and making sure that they are tested properly.
And I'm also responsible for case flow, making sure that we meet court dates, our cases are prioritized, and we get them out in a timely fashion.
SHERRY CULHANE: Currently we have 10 trained analysts.
SHERRY CULHANE: Since 1996.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: Since 1996, a conservative estimate would be around 5,000.
SHERRY CULHANE: I have a bachelor of science degree in biology. My training program in 1996, the original training program, consisted of a series of lectures, written tests, written exams, that were all specifically related to the DNA typing process.
I have also had course work in molecular biology, statistics and biochemistry class at the UW Madison. I have also attended numerous schools and work shops that are specifically related to DNA typing methods and interpretation of those results.
SHERRY CULHANE: It depends on the experience of the person training, but anywhere from nine months to a year.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Part of the training process is to run many, many, many samples through the system from start to finish. Those samples are processed exactly as you do case work. And those samples are interpreted by the trainee in exactly the same way.
SHERRY CULHANE: In my case, it was the person who trained me, which was my supervisor, Marie Verielle. I make that decision in training new analysts.
MR. GAHN: And what role do professional societies and organizations play in the science of DNA technology?
SHERRY CULHANE: The primary reason for those organizations is for scientists to get together and basically exchange information. All of those professional meetings are -- there's an agenda, there are people who present information about new technologies, about new instrumentation. It's also a place for scientists to get together and discuss problems that they have had, how they solved those problems. So it's a really good forum for exchange of information.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: For basically the same reason we go to professional meetings, to keep up with new technologies that are coming along, and to find out any new information that we need.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I have.
SHERRY CULHANE: Ninety-one times.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I have.
SHERRY CULHANE: Thirty-one.
MR. GAHN: I'm going to ask if -- Mr. Wiegert, would you please obtain Exhibit No. 309 and hand that to Ms Culhane.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is a copy of my curriculum vitae, which has all of the classes and educational background that I have.
MR. GAHN: And, basically, does that summarize the qualifications that we have talked about thus far?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: At this point, I would like to talk a little bit about DNA itself and just what it stands for. We have prepared a power point presentation, a number of slides. Have you seen them before?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I have.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Okay. Ms Culhane, will you just take a moment and explain to the jurors what DNA stands for and what it is?
SHERRY CULHANE: DNA stands for deoxyribonucleic acid. And, basically, it's the information storage system of the cell. It's the way the cells in your body store information. This slide is a short segment of DNA. And it illustrates the fact that DNA is composed of smaller units that are strung together in a specific order. The order of those units is what determines the information and how that information is stored.
SHERRY CULHANE: The easiest way to think of DNA is to compare it to a blueprint. Just like when you are building a house or a building, you have a blueprint that gives you all the information that you need, all the components that are necessary to build that house or that building.
DNA is exactly the same way except it's on a cellular level. All the information that your cells need to function, to produce proteins, and enzymes, all the things that make your body work, that information is contained in the DNA.
And you can see here, this structure is referred to as a gene. That information is stored in these structures referred to as genes. From the time of conception, all the way through your life, your DNA is responsible for the cellular development. It's responsible for how your cells develop. And many of our physical characteristics such as eye color, hair color, predisposition to certain diseases, all of those things are controlled by the information in your DNA.
Forensically, we are more interested in the portions of DNA that really do not function as a gene. They don't really do anything. Scientists aren't sure why they are there. And in the forensic application, there's a huge amount of variation within those portions of DNA. And so that's what we're really interested in.
DNA is inherited from your biological parents. You receive 50 percent from your mother and 50 percent from your father. And you, consequently, pass on 50 percent of your DNA to your offspring. And these regions of DNA that we're interested in forensically are inherited in exactly the same way.
MR. GAHN: Now, Ms Culhane, you have used the word forensically a number of times, and in a forensic context. Would you explain to the jurors what you mean when you say in a forensic science capacity.
SHERRY CULHANE: The word forensic is simply applying science to matters of law. So it's applying scientific principles to matters of law.
MR. GAHN: And is it fair to say that the scientific underpinnings that you have just described are the reason why you can make DNA comparisons in your laboratory?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: I would like to just return now to what goes on in your laboratory and ask you, when you are performing DNA testing, is there a specific or particular protocol that you follow?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: A protocol is a detailed description of every step in the process of DNA testing. The protocol has all the components that you need for the reactions to work properly, all of the parameters for your instrumentation. All of that information is contained in the protocol. In our protocols, we also have interpretation guidelines that set up parameters and rules by which we interpret our results.
MR. GAHN: Does your protocol cover every step from the receipt of evidence, through the testing process, to the writing of reports in a DNA case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Our protocols are reviewed during the process of accreditation. Our laboratory is an accredited lab and during that process our protocols are reviewed and examined by the auditors.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to ask, Detective Wiegert, if you would just obtain Exhibit 310 and would you, please, hand that to Ms Culhane.
MR. GAHN: And you have now, in your hand, what has been marked as Exhibit 310. Would you please tell the jurors what that is?
SHERRY CULHANE: This is a copy of the protocols that we're currently using in the laboratory.
MR. GAHN: And is it that protocol that you follow in performing the tests in this case that you are about to testify about today?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, we do.
SHERRY CULHANE: A proficiency test is designed to evaluate a laboratory system as well as individual analysts. The proficiency tests are designed to mimic actual case work samples. We purchase our proficiency tests from an outside company called Collaborative. And we're required to perform those tests, each analyst, twice a year.
Most of the proficiency tests come to the laboratory, we treat them just like case samples. We take notes on them, we make documentation, and treat them just like a case. And most of them consist of two reference standards from a victim and a suspect, and two samples that are designed to mimic forensic samples. So they may be blood samples, they may be semen samples, they may be saliva samples, or they may be a combination, a mixture of those samples.
When we look at those samples, we do preliminary tests and presumptive tests on them, to determine what type of fluid they are. And we develop DNA profiles from them. We also develop DNA profiles from our reference standards and compare the two just like we would in an actual case, and we make interpretations.
All of those types are recorded and sent back to the company. And then, after a period of time, we receive documentation back from the company whether we passed or whether we got all the types correct or not.
SHERRY CULHANE: That is correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it's a company that provides proficiency tests to many labs all across the country.
MR. GAHN: And they have no affiliation with the Madison Crime Lab except to provide tests for you?
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
MR. GAHN: And have you -- Well, let me ask you this, what are the results of all the proficiency tests that you have taken?
SHERRY CULHANE: They have all been correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: The specific type of accreditation that we have in the forensic lab is a certificate of accreditation by the laboratory accreditation board of ASCLD. ASCLD stands for the American Society of Crime Lab Directors. And it's a group of Crime Lab directors from all over the country that come into your laboratory and audit that laboratory once a year. I'm sorry, once every five years.
This is a voluntary program. And it's available to forensic labs who are doing case work. So the laboratory agrees to go through this accreditation process and these individuals come in and audit every aspect of your laboratory.
They look at -- Before they get to our laboratory they have all of our protocols and all of our procedures. So before they get there, they know what we should be doing. So when they come into the lab, they check everything from security, to the physical layout of the lab, to evidence handling, sealing of evidence, and how the evidence is tracked through the system.
And then, anywhere from one to two auditors are assigned to each section in the lab. And they look through things like proficiency tests, quality control documentation. They pull case -- actual case files, and look through, make sure we're documenting everything correctly and that we're interpreting things according to our protocol.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: The last time we went through accreditation was in May of 2006.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And when you say that you are accredited, is accreditation -- is that an indicator of the quality of work that a laboratory does?
SHERRY CULHANE: In my opinion, it is. What it does is, when these auditors come in, they use an audit document that is authored by the FBI. And that document contains specific standards that a forensic lab must adhere to if they are going to do case work.
So it ensures the quality of the work. It ensures that you are following accepted protocols in the community, and that your interpretations are correct. So, yes, in my opinion, I believe it does.
MR. GAHN: And besides the five year accreditation process, are there any other inspections, shall we say, or audits, that happen at your Crime Lab?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, and as part of the accreditation, DNA Section is required to be accredited by an outside individual from another Crime Lab once every two years. And it's usually a team of anywhere from two to three individuals from other crime labs that come into the lab and really audit many of the same things as the ASCLD auditors.
They look at case jackets. They look at all of our documentation. They look at our interpretations and our protocols and make sure we're doing everything like we should. In addition to that, we do an internal audit. The Madison Lab goes -- sends people to the Milwaukee Lab, and they send people to our lab, to do an internal audit of many of the same things. So the DNA Section is essentially audited by someone, once a year.
MR. GAHN: Does the Madison Crime Lab do DNA testing solely for law enforcement and for the prosecution?
SHERRY CULHANE: By state statute we are required to provide services for authorized submitters. Authorized submitters are defined as law enforcement agencies, or District Attorney's Offices. However, defendants can request testing to be done that has to go through the District Attorney's Office, or it has to be through a court order.
MR. GAHN: When you use the words, defendants can request this, are you referring to convicted offenders, perhaps people who are serving time in prison, can they request DNA testing?
SHERRY CULHANE: Anyone can request DNA testing as long as they go through the proper channels and as long as they have a court order that tells us we have to do it.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I am.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I am.
SHERRY CULHANE: The Innocence Project, as I understand it, is a group of law students at the UW Law School in Madison and they review post-conviction cases for the possibility of reexamining evidence, or perhaps it's new evidence that's come along, or it is evidence that technology wasn't available at the original conviction and now technology of some sort is available and that evidence can be retested.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Have you, yourself, ever performed any DNA testing for the Innocence Project on behalf of a convicted person?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: The jury has been informed that Mr. Steven Avery was convicted of an offense in 1985, and he went to prison for that offense; are you aware of that?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Did some time come in the year 2003 when you were asked to review that case and look at the evidence again?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it was.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And it was your -- Was it your understanding that Mr. Avery had maintained his innocence in that 1985 case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Do you remember exactly what were the evidentiary items that you examined in that case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: In that case I examined 11 pubic hairs that were taken from a victim's pubic hair combings. Those were taken in a sexual assault case to recover any hairs that had been transferred during contact.
There were 11 pubic hairs -- yeah, 11 pubic hairs. And I attempted DNA analysis on all 11. Only two of those hairs gave me a DNA profile. In a hair sample, we're actually looking at the root portion of the hair with cells attached to it.
Two of those hairs gave me results. One hair was from a male, one hair was from a female. The hair from the male was entered into the CODIS System and hit on an individual.
MR. GAHN: Now, you are going to have to explain for the jurors a little bit. What do you mean by the CODIS System and what do you mean by hit on an individual?
SHERRY CULHANE: The CODIS System is a data base of DNA profiles that is maintained by the FBI. Forensic labs contribute samples, evidence samples, to these data bases. They are also a data base of convicted offenders. And anyone who has been convicted of a felony, it's different rules in different states, has to submit samples to this data base.
So, when we have an evidence sample, it's entered into the data base, and it's searched against this index. And in this case, that male profile was entered into that system and searched.
SHERRY CULHANE: It hit on another individual.
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And because of the testing that you performed, and because of the search of the CODIS data bank, what happened to Mr. Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: I believe he was freed from prison.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
MR. GAHN: Basically, did you follow the same protocol that you did in testing that case, testing the 1985 case, that you followed in this case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: What is it meant in terms -- the terms called quality control and quality assurance in a laboratory?
SHERRY CULHANE: The term quality assurance refers to system-wide or lab-wide measures that are in place to assure the quality of the work that's put out. Quality control refers to everyday routine checks that we do on things like our equipment, our balances, our instrumentation, our reagents.
Everything that is used that is critical to the process of DNA typing, we do quality control checks to make sure that they are working properly, that they are calibrated, and that they are performing the way that the manufacturers tell us they are going to perform. That's what is referred to as quality control.
MR. GAHN: And are quality control measures, as you just described, in place and implemented in the Madison State Crime Lab?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, they are.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Now, I would like to shift out of the laboratory just for a moment. And I would like to ask you to describe for the jury where DNA is found in the human body. And we'll put up this slide.
SHERRY CULHANE: This slide illustrates many of the sources that we find biological evidence. When we're developing a profile, any cell in the body that has a nucleus, the center portion of the cell, has DNA in it. So, what we're looking for is nucleated cells to develop a profile. Blood, semen, and saliva are probably our most common types of biological evidence.
If we're looking at a blood sample, we're looking at the white blood cells, because that's where the nucleus is.
If we're looking at a semen sample, we're trying to determine whether the DNA is in a sperm cell.
In a saliva sample, there is really nothing in saliva except the cells that are in your mouth that are sloughed off in your saliva. And that's where the source of DNA is in a saliva sample.
The same with urine, cells that are sloughed in the process of urination, those would be our source of DNA in that sample.
Hair, the type of DNA testing that we're doing is referred to as nuclear DNA. And it's -- again, it's only present in cells with a nucleus. In the hair, the only place we can find that are cells that may be attached to the root of the hair.
Teeth, the portion of the tooth that you would find DNA would be in the pulp, the soft portion of the tooth.
And the last two, bone and tissue, both of those, what you are looking for is cells. In a bone, it's usually the center portion of the bone, and any part of the tissue that has nucleated cells would be a very good source of DNA.
MR. GAHN: You talked about cells that are sloughed off, I believe you said. Can skin cells be sloughed off and can you obtain DNA from them?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Could you just talk about that a bit and tell the jurors how those profiles can be determined.
SHERRY CULHANE: During the process of the day, usually when you are touching things, you are sloughing off cells and your body is making new cells all the time. Some individuals slough off or shed more cells than other individuals.
So, in the process of touching things you are, in some instances, leaving your DNA behind. We can develop profiles from that DNA if the quantity is sufficient and the levels are high enough for our systems to detect.
MR. GAHN: In a person's body, is the DNA the same from whatever biological fluid or tissue it comes from?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: Now, the jurors have heard testimony about buccal swabs being taken. Can you just briefly remind them what a buccal swab is?
SHERRY CULHANE: A buccal swab, we use as a standard. And it's the swabbing of the inside of the cheek. So, you take a cotton swab and swab the inside of the cheek. And those cells are a source of DNA. And that's what we use as a standard in some cases.
MR. GAHN: And when a buccal swab is obtained, you can get, through the testing process, a DNA profile from that, correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
MR. GAHN: The DNA profile that you would get from a buccal swab, can you compare that profile to a DNA profile that perhaps you obtained from a biological substance at a crime scene?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
MR. GAHN: And does the technology allow you to determine whether a particular person was the source of the DNA that was at that crime scene?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And is there a typing process that you use at the Madison Crime Lab to make those determinations and comparisons that we just talked about?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes. The current technology that we're using is referred to as STR typing.
MR. GAHN: And could you tell the jurors a little bit about the DNA STR testing technique and the characteristics involved?
SHERRY CULHANE: STR typing is a PCR based system that allows us to specifically amplify, or make a lot of copies, of specific target regions of DNA. These target regions of DNA are referred to as STR markers, or genetic markers. And they are interspersed throughout all of your DNA.
The actual process that we use to make all these copies that I'm talking about, is referred to as PCR. And that's the basis for this entire system. It allows us to copy these specific pieces of DNA to get a profile. When we develop a final profile that characterizes our stain, we look at 15 different target regions like this all throughout your DNA. So the final profile reflects the types at all 15 different locations on the DNA.
MR. GAHN: Now, this technology that you used to date, this PCR STR typing, how long have you been using that at the Madison Crime Lab?
SHERRY CULHANE: Since 1999.
MR. GAHN: And before using this technology, or going online with it, did you do anything to make sure that you can do this technology in your laboratory?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, we did.
SHERRY CULHANE: We go through a process referred to as validation. And that simply means that any time we are adding a new technology or new procedure, we have to make sure that it performs like we think it will.
So we -- Same goes for a new piece of equipment. We always have to validate and prove that it performs like we think it does. So it goes through a very lengthy testing process. We test the sensitivity. We test the reagents, all the components that are used in the reaction.
We test whether it is appropriate for forensic use, whether -- A lot of our samples are very small samples and very compromised samples. They may be degraded. And those types of samples are what we use in the forensic -- or what we have in the forensic setting. So we have to make sure that all of these techniques we're using are appropriate for those types of samples.
MR. GAHN: This DNA testing that you do at the Madison Crime Lab, is this used in other fields besides criminal cases?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: The basis of STR typing, like I said, is the PCR reaction. And PCR is used in many, many different applications. It's used in the medical community to diagnose diseases. It's used for medical research. It is used to detect genetic diseases or predisposition to certain diseases.
It's also used in anthropology to type very old remains or old artifacts.
It's also used for mass disasters such as Katrina, 911, all of those types of disasters. It's used to identify individuals that may have been involved in that.
So it has many, many applications. The basic reaction, the system we're working with, has many different other applications besides forensics.
MR. GAHN: Your Honor, I don't know what your preference would be, but I'm about to enter an area that I would not like to break up. And it probably would go about 20 minutes. And we're getting close to the results in this case. We could do that and take a late lunch or would you prefer to break now?
THE COURT: Well, is there a consensus on the jury? Would you like to break now or continue. Continue? All right. Seems to be a consensus to continue.
MR. GAHN: All right. Ms Culhane, are there -- there are certain procedures or steps in the DNA STR typing process?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, there are.
SHERRY CULHANE: This shows all of the different steps that are involved from start to finish, how we come up with a DNA profile. The first thing we need to do -- and all of these steps are -- each sample is treated to all these steps. So, in other words, our evidence samples and our reference samples that are taken from specific individuals, are processed in exactly the same way.
The first step we need to do is extract DNA. We need to remove DNA from the sample, whether it's a reference sample, or an evidence sample. We need to get it out, extract it, and remove it. And then we need to find out how much DNA we have. And the next step is what does that.
And that's referred to as quantitation. We need to quantitate, or find out what the concentration of DNA is in our sample. Some samples have lots of DNA. Some samples have very small amounts of DNA. And that's important information for us to have.
The next step of the process is known as amplification. And remember, I was talking about all of these different target regions that we make copies of and that we amplify. This is the process by which we do that. We take our sample and we subject it to amplification. And all of these different fragments of DNA are amplified so that in the end we have a sample with all of our fragments and lots of DNA to look at.
The next step is to develop a DNA profile and to interpret that. When we interpret DNA profiles, we have an evidence sample and we have a reference sample. And our interpretation involves deciding whether the person who the reference sample is from could or could not be the source of the evidence sample. And that's the basis of our interpretation.
If that person -- If the DNA profile from the evidence sample is different from the reference sample, that would be considered an exclusion and that person is excluded as the source of that evidence DNA. If the evidence profile matches or is consistent with the reference sample from a person, then we can say that person could be the source of that DNA. So that's what we refer to as interpretation.
If we have an exclusion, we're finished, that's the end of it. But if we have an inclusion, if we include someone as the source of the DNA, then we have to determine how common or how rare that type is in the population. And that's the last part of our process, is a statistical analysis to tell us how common or how rare that evidence profile is in the general population.
MR. GAHN: Now, you have talked about a reference sample and an evidence sample. When you are talking about a reference sample, is that like the buccal swabs you described that they take from the cheek of an individual?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: And it would be that reference sample that you would make comparisons with the crime scene samples?
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
MR. GAHN: Now, suppose that you have, in the laboratory, a suspect's reference sample, say this buccal swab, and you have an evidentiary sample. Will you -- and I'm going to look here now at the extraction step, the first step, do you extract them at the same time?
SHERRY CULHANE: No, we don't.
SHERRY CULHANE: We always try to keep those samples separate during extraction. And the primary reason is to avoid contamination, or switching of samples, the contamination of the evidence sample with the reference sample.
MR. GAHN: And after you have completed a sampling, or the extraction, or one case, is there anything you do to your work area in between cases or the instruments that you use in the DNA process?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, we clean down all of our instruments, our bench tops, all of the scissors, the forceps, pipettes, everything we use, with bleach. And we do that several times a day. We do that in between cases. We clean our forceps and our instruments, our scissors.
Anything we're touching the items of evidence with is done between each item of evidence. That way it allows us to make sure that we're not cross-contaminating samples, one with the other. So all of our scissors, and our forceps, everything that touches the evidence is cleaned in between each piece of evidence.
MR. GAHN: And do you wear any special type of clothing to protect against any type of contamination of samples?
SHERRY CULHANE: Well, we always wear gloves. Any time we're touching anything, we wear gloves. And we wear lab coats and safety goggles.
MR. GAHN: And when you perform -- Let me ask you, and I want to look at the extraction and the amplification, those two steps, step one, the extraction, step three, the amplification, are those steps performed in the same area or location?
SHERRY CULHANE: No, they are not.
SHERRY CULHANE: Our extraction procedures are set up and done at our lab bench. The amplification process is done in a completely different room. The reason is because once you amplify those target regions of DNA, there's a lot of DNA in that sample. And it's a perfect template to amplify more DNA. So it's very important to keep that DNA confined into your amplification rooms and not let it get out into the general lab space.
So everything that goes into that amplification room, stays in there. All the test tubes, and all the equipment, everything stays in there. If it has to be brought out, it's cleaned down with bleach. So, once it goes into that room, it stays in there.
MR. GAHN: Now, you say you cleaned down these rooms, or your work station with bleach; why do you use bleach?
SHERRY CULHANE: Because it basically chews up the DNA and it destroys the DNA into a form where we can't get a type from it.
MR. GAHN: When you perform these steps, are any type of controls used with the performance of each step?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Controls are samples that we run along with our evidence samples and our reference samples. And we have several different kinds of controls. And each one of these controls serves a different purpose.
The purpose of the controls, depending on what they are, is to, one, make sure that our system is working correctly. And, two, to make sure that we can monitor any contamination that might be introduced into the sample or into the evidence, during the process.
MR. GAHN: Would you describe for the jury what you in the forensic community, the science community, refer to as contamination. What is contamination?
SHERRY CULHANE: In the laboratory, obviously we can't control any evidence until it comes into the lab. Once it's into the laboratory, we have many steps that try and minimize the chance of contamination. When we use the word contamination, we are referring to the unintentional introduction of DNA into a sample or into a control.
SHERRY CULHANE: As you mentioned earlier, separating standards from evidence samples is one. We make sure that when we are opening the top -- opening our tubes that have DNA in them, we spin them down first in a centrifuge so that all the liquid on the top of the tube goes to the bottom. We use special sterilized tips when we're pipetting and removing liquid to make sure it's clean. We autoclave all of our reagents to make sure our reagents are clean and free of DNA. All of these steps are taken in order to minimize that risk.
MR. GAHN: If contamination were to occur, does that necessarily mean you cannot interpret a DNA profile?
SHERRY CULHANE: Not necessarily, it depends on what it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, we do.
SHERRY CULHANE: We maintain that log to -- it helps us troubleshoot in a lot of instances to find out where the contamination came from, where it was introduced, and what we can do to solve the problem.
We have a data -- We have a list of everybody's DNA type in the laboratory so all the analysts know what their DNA type is. So it allows us, if we see any contamination, to see what the source of it is. Sometimes we can't determine the source of it. Sometimes it's very easy to see the source of the contamination.
We can also tell if we have DNA that may have been introduced from the manufacturer, may have been introduced into our reagents. So the contamination log is a learning tool. And it helps us determine where that contamination may have come from.
SHERRY CULHANE: All accredited laboratories are required to maintain a contamination log. As far as -- And like I said, yes, we have one. And ours is because of as a learning tool and also because we're required by accreditation.
MR. GAHN: Ms Culhane, do you know -- and I'm going to give you the date of January 1st of 2001 -- since January 1st of 2001, how many instances of contamination have you logged at the Madison Crime Laboratory?
SHERRY CULHANE: I believe it was 89.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
MR. GAHN: I would like to also ask you, do you know how many samples of DNA you have processed at the Madison Crime Lab during that same period of time, January 1st, 2001, to the present?
SHERRY CULHANE: A conservative estimate would be a little over 50,000.
MR. GAHN: And of those 50 -- over 50,000 cases, samples, that you have analyzed, you have documented 89 instances of contamination?
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: Anywhere from 8 to 12.
MR. GAHN: And are those 89 instances of contamination over the past five years spread out among those analysts?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, they are.
MR. GAHN: I would like to go back just a little bit before the date of January 1st of 2001. I think you stated that you went online with this DNA STR testing methodology in 1999, did you say?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Can you tell the jurors how many samples of DNA, using this technology, that you have tested at the Madison Crime Lab, since going online?
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, this is an estimate, but a conservative estimate would be a little over 60,000.
MR. GAHN: And the last step in your DNA STR typing steps is the statistical analysis. How do you go about determining this statistic to determine how rare or how common a particular profile would be in the population?
SHERRY CULHANE: We use a data base that is maintained by the FBI. And that data base tells us the frequency of each one of these types in the entire DNA profile. So, by looking at that data base, we can determine the frequency of the entire profile in the general population.
SHERRY CULHANE: Because this -- If you have a match between an individual and an evidence sample, and it occurs in 50 percent of the population, that's not very discriminating. That includes a lot of people. But if you have a match between an evidence sample and a reference sample, and it occurs one out of a trillion people, that's a very discriminating match. And the statistical analysis allows us to do that, to tell whether we have a very common match, or whether we have a very rare match.
MR. GAHN: Your Honor, we're sort of on the cusp here of getting into the results of this case. And this may be a good time to break for lunch.
MR. BUTING: Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. BUTING: Why don't we do something else. I don't believe Mr. Gahn has actually offered Ms Culhane as an expert yet. And I have no objection to that, subject to my cross of her qualifications, perhaps doing that now, if you like.
THE COURT: Mr. Gahn.
THE COURT: All right. So you don't object to her being qualified as a witness.
MR. BUTING: I don't, no. She's been testifying at length already. I think it's just an oversight probably.
THE COURT: All right. I did make a note, I was wondering when that was going to be asked. But I will, then, based on the representations of the parties, accept this witness as an expert in the field of DNA testing.
MR. BUTING: Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. Members of the jury, at this time we'll take our lunch break. Let's plan on resuming at 1:15. Again, do not discuss the case or anything about it during your lunch break.
(Jury not present.)
THE COURT: You may be seated. Counsel, I don't think we have anything else to take up before resuming this witness at 1:15, correct?
MR. BUTING: Correct.
THE COURT: Very well, we'll see you at 1:15.
(Noon recess taken.)
THE COURT: Mr. Gahn, at this point you may resume your direct examination.
MR. GAHN: Ms Culhane, would you describe for the jury what procedures your Crime Lab has in place for the documentation and processing of evidence that is brought to your lab for analysis?
SHERRY CULHANE: When evidence is brought into the lab for analysis, whether it's through the mail or directly from an officer, we have individuals known as evidence specialists who take that evidence into the lab. They check to make sure it is packaged properly, that it's sealed properly. And then they give an item designation and a case designation to each piece of evidence.
We have a computerized tracking system in the laboratory that works on a bar code system and a bar code is printed that identifies that piece of evidence as belonging to a specific case with a number and it also gives it a item designation.
MR. GAHN: When you perform testing on items or evidence that is brought to you by the law enforcement agency, do you create some type of case file?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, we do.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
MR. GAHN: And does that file indicate whether you received evidence in the case of State of Wisconsin vs. Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And does your file indicate what items and how many items of evidence were brought to the State Crime Lab for testing?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
MR. GAHN: Can you tell the jury approximately how many submissions of evidence came to the Crime Lab as a whole, not just specific to the DNA Unit but to the whole Crime Lab, for examination and analysis?
SHERRY CULHANE: I believe there was around 345.
MR. GAHN: And what other units are there at the Crime Lab besides DNA that would be examining this type of evidence?
SHERRY CULHANE: We have a full service lab in the Madison Lab and we have a section that does fingerprints for identification. We have an imaging unit that takes photographs. We have a firearms section. We have a trace section. We have a drug analysis section, and a document section.
MR. GAHN: And, specifically, for the DNA Unit, how many items, how many submissions were sent to you in this case at the DNA Unit?
SHERRY CULHANE: 180.
SHERRY CULHANE: No, that's very large.
MR. GAHN: For you, yourself, is this the largest number of submissions you have ever encountered in a case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: And how about for the Crime Lab as a whole, were the submissions of 345 or 46 items the largest number of submissions the crime lab has received for one case?
SHERRY CULHANE: I believe so.
SHERRY CULHANE: No, I did not.
MR. GAHN: Tell the jurors what you do when an item of evidence is submitted to you; what's the first thing you do?
SHERRY CULHANE: The first thing we do is a visual examination of the item. We're looking, as I stated earlier, for a biological material. And a lot depends on what type of case it is. So, we basically make a visual examination of the item.
We take notes and we document the packaging of the item, what the item looked like, and exactly what we did. Depending on what biological material we're looking for, we have what's referred to as a presumptive test, or preliminary test.
And these tests give us a good indication of what kind of biological fluid that we're looking for. We perform these preliminary or presumptive tests on the evidence, or on the stain. And from that point we make decisions as to which direction we should go, whether we should continue with the analysis to take it to the final step, which is DNA, or do we stop.
If we do a visual exam and there is no indication of a biological material, and it's not an item that was submitted specifically to be examined for touch, DNA that's left by touching, then that's the end of our analysis. If the presumptive test that we do for whatever biological fluid we're looking for is negative, then that's also the end of our analysis.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: The bulk of the evidence in this case I was looking for bloodstains.
MR. GAHN: Do you know how many submissions of this evidence that you submitted to presumptive tests for blood?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, they were all positives.
SHERRY CULHANE: A lot depends on the piece of evidence it is, the results of our presumptive testing and, also, we have information as to what the alleged incidents are. Police officers and law enforcement that submit items of evidence will request certain testing based on whether they believe the item we're looking for is probative, whether it's going to provide information or not. So that plays into the decision that we make as to what type of analysis and how far to go.
MR. GAHN: So you rely upon the investigators in the field and what they are finding; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
MR. GAHN: And they will make recommendations to you on the probative value of a particular piece of evidence?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Do they ever ask you to prioritize an item of evidence and put it at the top of the list for testing?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: A lot of times we're not really sure. That's information that they have. They may want results on a particular item of evidence sooner than the additional items of evidence. Usually it's prioritized based on what is the most probative and what is most important to their investigation.
MR. GAHN: Now, you have spoken a number of times about standards and about reference samples. And once again, so the jury is clear, what is a standard?
SHERRY CULHANE: A standard is a known sample from a specific individual. And in most cases we request buccal swabs, which is the swabbing of the inside of the cheek, because that's a rich source of DNA. So the inside of someone's cheek is swabbed and that sample is used as a reference for their DNA types.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: I'm going to ask Detective Wiegert if he would bring up to you standards that were received and I'm going to ask you to identify them for the jury.
MARK WIEGERT: Which number?
MR. GAHN: Ms Culhane, I'm going to ask you to look at those exhibits and tell the jury what the exhibit number is, and if you can, identify from whom the standard is from.
SHERRY CULHANE: The first one is Exhibit No. 319, item -- laboratory item designation KL. It's buccal swabs from Barb Janda. And I received this in the laboratory. I have markings, my initials and dates, that I received this.
SHERRY CULHANE: Exhibit No. 320, item designation -- lab item designation KM, buccal swabs from Bobby Dassey. And, again, these have markings, my initials, and the date. My markings are on this packaging.
Exhibit 321, Crime Lab number -- or item designation KN, buccal swabs from Earl Avery. And, again, my markings are on here with my initials.
Exhibit 322, Crime Lab item designation KO. These are buccal swabs from Charles Avery. And, again, my markings and initials are on the -- this is the bar code that we put on it when it comes into the laboratory, with the case number and the item designation.
MR. BUTING: The record should reflect the witness was pointing to -- it's a yellow label, is it not?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. BUTING: Bar code.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Exhibit 323, Crime Lab item designation KP, and these are buccal swabs from Delores Avery.
Exhibit No. 324, item designation BU, and these are buccal swabs from Steven Avery. And, again, my initials and markings are on the packaging.
Exhibit No. 251, Crime Lab item designation EM. And, again, my initials and markings are on the packaging.
MR. GAHN: And, Detective Wiegert, if you could find Exhibits 317 and 318. These would be the buccal swabs of Allen and Brian Dassey -- I'm sorry, Allen Avery and Brian Dassey.
THE COURT: I'm sorry, did we hear what 251 was?
MR. BUTING: She didn't finish identifying 251. You just said the designation EM.
SHERRY CULHANE: Oh, I'm sorry, I apologize. These are buccal swabs from Brendan Dassey.
MARK WIEGERT: This is 318, you want 317 as well?
SHERRY CULHANE: These are buccal swabs, item designation BS, from Brian Dassey.
MR. GAHN: While he is looking for that, Ms Culhane, you state that they contain what's called a item designation number; what is that number?
SHERRY CULHANE: That's a number that we assign to that item when it comes into the laboratory. We start with a case with item designation A and then we go through the alphabet. And so that is the item designation that we assign the item.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is Exhibit 317, Crime Lab item designation AY, and these are buccal swabs from Allen Avery. And, again, my markings and initials are on the packaging.
This is marked as Exhibit 325, item designation from the Crime Lab as EF. And this is a slide holder that contains Pap smear from Teresa Halbach. And, again, my initials are on the packaging.
MR. GAHN: And, your Honor, I might add that I believe there is a stipulation as to the Pap smear for Teresa Halbach, that that was taken at the Bellin Hospital in Green Bay, Wisconsin, in the year 2002.
THE COURT: Is that correct, Mr. Buting?
MR. BUTING: That is correct.
THE COURT: Very well. The Court will accept that stipulation.
MR. GAHN: Now, Ms Culhane, did you develop DNA profiles from each of these standards that you just identified?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And did you compare the DNA profiles from the standards with DNA profiles that you developed from evidentiary samples in this case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Five.
MR. GAHN: I would ask you to identify each of those exhibits and tell the jury what they contain.
SHERRY CULHANE: Exhibit 311 is a copy of the first report that I wrote in the Crime Lab and the findings as of that point in time. Exhibit 312 --
SHERRY CULHANE: I'm sorry, no, that was issued on November 14, 2005.
The second report is listed as Exhibit 312, that was issued on December 5th, 2005. And that was additional testing and my results of that testing.
Third report is a marked as Exhibit 313, it was issued on March 31st, 2006. And, again, it contains the findings in this group of analysis.
The fourth report is marked as Exhibit 314. It was issued May 8th of 2006. And this is a copy of my report.
The final report is marked as Exhibit 315, and it was issued December 4th, 2006.
MR. GAHN: Now, do each of those reports have your findings and conclusions that you came to after completing your DNA testing?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes. Yes, they do.
MR. GAHN: And do those reports describe the comparisons that you made between the DNA profiles developed from the standards compared to the DNA profiles developed from the crime scene samples?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, they do.
MR. GAHN: I'm going to show you what has been marked as Exhibit 298 -- I'm sorry -- 289, and previously identified as the 1999 Toyota RAV4 of Teresa Halbach. Do you recognize that?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: On November 7th of 2005. And when I first saw the vehicle it was in the garage bay at the Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory.
SHERRY CULHANE: I was assigned to this case to process the case, to process the car for biological materials.
MR. GAHN: How did you go about processing the vehicle and tell the jurors, like what did you do first and then next in your process?
SHERRY CULHANE: The first step processing a vehicle, or any item of evidence, is like I said before, is to do a visual examination. When I saw the vehicle, it had already been photographed, the doors were open. I looked inside the car and it was obvious there were numerous reddish brown stains that were consistent with the appearance of blood.
I began to go through and sample each one of these areas of staining and take notes and document where the stains were, and what my preliminary tests indicated. I performed preliminary tests of all the stains that were -- the appearance of bloodstains, reddish-brown stains. And, again, I sub-designated each one of these stains. The item designation of the vehicle was item A. And as I recovered stains from that, I numbered them A-1, A-2, until I recovered the number of stains.
MR. GAHN: I'm also going to ask that Detective Wiegert bring you what has been marked as Exhibit 326. I'm also going to ask Detective Wiegert if he would open that envelope and remove the contents and hand that to Ms Culhane, or show it to her.
SHERRY CULHANE: It's marked as Exhibit 326. This is the first thing that I recovered from the vehicle and it's my item designation A-1.
SHERRY CULHANE: I have -- This is the coin envelope that I placed the swabbing of the stain into. And my markings, my initials and date is on it.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And you state that you gave that Crime Lab item designation number A-1; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to ask Mr. Fallon if he would bring you what has been marked as Exhibit 296.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is a large reddish-brown stain in the rear cargo area of the vehicle. And this is where I sampled for presumptive test, which was positive for blood. And then I sampled additional staining to continue with DNA typing.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: The presumptive test, and then very close to that, I sampled my actual sample that I tested for DNA.
SHERRY CULHANE: Presumptive test is a color test. And it basically reacts positively with blood. I took a cotton swab, moistened it with sterile water. I swabbed just a tiny bit of the stain and I put reagents on it. If it's blood, it turns bright red -- or pink, bright pink. And a negative reaction is no color change. So that I performed on this stain.
Because it was positive, it gave me a good indication that this was probably a bloodstain. So from that point I sampled the stain that I was actually going to do my typing from.
SHERRY CULHANE: I took another clean cotton swab, put sterile water on it, and basically just removed some of the stain onto the cotton swab and then allowed it to air dry.
SHERRY CULHANE: I put it in -- I had a -- In the space where I was working, I have a test tube rack. And I had a test tube and I put the swab in there and allowed it to air dry.
MR. GAHN: I would ask Detective Wiegert, if you would remove the standards from the desk in front of Ms Culhane, and also you can bring back item A-1 exhibit.
MR. GAHN: And could you also describe for the jurors as how this stain appeared to you and the general size of the stain. Can you do that?
SHERRY CULHANE: It was a reddish-brown stain, probably about that big.
SHERRY CULHANE: Six inches.
SHERRY CULHANE: Six inches.
SHERRY CULHANE: Comparatively speaking, most of the other reddish-brown stains were much smaller than that.
MR. GAHN: Now, I would ask Detective Wiegert to bring you what has been marked as Exhibit 327.
Your Honor, I had a talk with defense counsel, Mr. Buting, before we resumed this afternoon, and I have opened up the first exhibit, which was Exhibit 326, and Ms Culhane identified the coin envelope that had her swab in it. We have a number of swabs for her to identify. And Mr. Buting is not going to require us to open every envelope and pull it out and identify it with her initials. If something comes up, they are here, we can open them. But I believe that's the understanding that we have.
MR. BUTING: That is correct, your Honor.
THE COURT: Very well.
MR. GAHN: (By Attorney Gahn)~ Ms Culhane, you have in front of you what has been marked as Exhibit 327. And does that envelope contain -- can you tell what item designation number is contained in that envelope?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, Item A-2.
SHERRY CULHANE: It was collected from the plastic panel across the back cargo area of the vehicle. Like when you are stepping up into the cargo area, there is a plastic strip there. And A-2 was collected from that plastic strip?
MR. GAHN: I would like you to examine that. And also tell the jurors whether that photograph is depicted on the large screen as well.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, this is a photograph of the swabbing I took, A-2. And it was actually located in this area here.
MR. GAHN: I would ask if Detective Wiegert would bring to you what has been marked as Exhibit 328.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, the item designation is A-4.
SHERRY CULHANE: That's a swabbing that was recovered from this area here, this metal around the frame of the opening of the cargo door area.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Both A-2 and A-4 were positive.
SHERRY CULHANE: For blood.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is item designation A-3.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is a cotton swab from a reddish-brown stain that was taken from the inside surface of the rear cargo door.
MR. GAHN: And I will ask if you can -- if you recognize that. And tell the jurors whether that photograph is depicted on the large screen.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do. This is the photograph I'm holding here, A-3, was recovered from this area here.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: It was positive for blood.
MR. GAHN: And similar to item designation No. A-1, did you take additional swabbings from A-2, A-4, and A-3?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Those were taken in exactly the same manner that I took A-1. I took a cotton swab and moistened it with sterile water, and I swabbed a portion of the stain and put it in a rack so it could dry, air dry.
MR. GAHN: And what was the purpose of taking the swabs; were you going to be conducting any further testing?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes. My intention was to attempt to develop a DNA profile from those samples.
MR. GAHN: I'm going to ask Detective Wiegert if he would bring you Exhibit 330. I'm also going to ask, Detective Wiegert, if you will open that bag.
MR. GAHN: Ms Culhane, I'm going to ask you to handle this item. Would you like some gloves for that?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, please.
MARK WIEGERT: That's all right.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is item designation A-14. And this was a Pepsi can that was recovered from the cup holder by the front driver's side of the RAV4.
MR. GAHN: I'm going to ask Mr. Fallon if he would bring you a photograph that has been marked as Exhibit 293.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to ask you to tell the jury whether that photograph is depicted on the large screen.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: Right here.
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: I collected this can with the intention of developing a profile, to see if I could determine who may have drank out of the can. There is no visible staining on the can, so what I did was, I took a cotton swab, a sterile cotton swab, just like I did in all the other stains, except in this particular case I was only swabbing a particular area, not necessarily a stain. And I swabbed around the opening here where your mouth would touch if you drank out of this can.
MR. GAHN: And just for the record, that exhibit is more properly described as a Wild Cherry Pepsi can?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, sir.
SHERRY CULHANE: No, I didn't.
SHERRY CULHANE: There were no visual indications that there were blood stains of any kind.
SHERRY CULHANE: I also put them in a rack, and allowed them to air dry, and eventually developed a DNA profile from that.
MR. GAHN: I would ask, Detective Wiegert, if you could remove those items from that area. Detective Wiegert, I would ask you if you would please take to Ms Culhane Exhibit 331 and Exhibit 332. And I'm also going to ask Mr. Fallon if he will bring you a photograph which has been marked as Exhibit 292.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it's a -- my item designation A-9.
SHERRY CULHANE: It's a cutting that was taken from this area of the front passenger seat, of a reddish-brown stain.
SHERRY CULHANE: 332 is my item designation A-10 and that was a reddish-brown stain that I recovered here from a CD case in the front passenger seat.
SHERRY CULHANE: Any time we have a biological material on a hard surface like glass, or wood, or that can, the best way to recover the most amount of DNA is to swab it with a cotton swab. If we have a stain that appears to be a reddish-brown stain like blood, or any biological material that's on fabric, we simply cut that stain completely out.
MR. GAHN: And what did you do with the cutting and the swab? I'm sorry, back up. Referring now to Item A-10, which is Exhibit 332; what is that?
SHERRY CULHANE: That was the swab from the CD case, right here.
SHERRY CULHANE: There was a reddish-brown stain on the case. I performed a presumptive positive, or presumptive test and got positive results. And, therefore, I sampled a portion of that stain to be further tested for DNA.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, this is my item designation A-6.
SHERRY CULHANE: It's my item designation as A-7.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to ask Mr. Fallon to bring you a photograph that has been marked Exhibit 290.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: That's a cutting of a stain that was taken from this area. It's a stain on -- actually the fabric of the front driver's seat.
SHERRY CULHANE: A-7 were some reddish-brown crust that I found here on the floor beside the console.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: I performed a preliminary test for blood. Both of them were positive. So, therefore, I took the cutting of A-6 from here and I removed the blood crust of A-7 from this area.
SHERRY CULHANE: The cutting I put in a coin envelope and sealed it up. And the blood crust I put into a tube, a small plastic tube and sealed that and put that in a coin envelope.
MR. GAHN: I'm going to ask Detective Wiegert if he would bring you Exhibit 334. And I'm going to ask Mr. Fallon to bring you a photograph that has been marked as Exhibit 294.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: It's my item designation A-12 and that was this reddish-brown stain here that I sampled. It's on the metal door frame between -- on the passenger side, between the backseat and the cargo area.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did. I tested -- preliminary test for blood and it was positive.
SHERRY CULHANE: I, again, sampled that in a clean cotton swab with sterile water. And I took another portion of the stain, I let it air dry. And that's what I used for my DNA analysis.
MR. GAHN: I'm going to ask Detective Wiegert to bring you Exhibit 336. And I'm going to ask Mr. Fallon to bring you a photograph that has been marked as Exhibit 291.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: It's my item designation A-8. And it was a sample that I recovered from this reddish-brown stain here, right by the ignition.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did, and it was positive.
SHERRY CULHANE: I sampled another portion of that stain on another cotton swab and that's what I retained for my DNA testing.
SHERRY CULHANE: I processed the car down in the garage area of our laboratory. We have like a work space, a work bench there. And that's where I had all of my samples set up. When I was completed processing the car, those were taken to my work bench and the cotton swabs were put into small coin envelopes to keep them until I began my analysis on them.
MR. GAHN: And when you say begin your analysis, are you talking about the DNA testing procedures?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I am.
MR. GAHN: In other words, you are going to begin those five steps that you described to the jurors before lunch?
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
MR. GAHN: I would ask if Detective Wiegert would bring you Exhibit 325. It's the Pap smear of Teresa Halbach.
MR. GAHN: Now, we have already identified that exhibit as the Pap smear of Teresa Halbach; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: As I understand it, it is a sample of cells from a woman's cervix. It is used for medical testing to check for abnormal cells.
SHERRY CULHANE: As I stated earlier, any cell that -- any nucleated cell is going to have DNA. So any of the cells from the Pap smear, cervical area, tissue cells, it will come from the nucleus of those epithelial cells that are on that smear.
MR. GAHN: Now, using the DNA technology that you described before lunch time, did you develop a DNA profile for Teresa Halbach, from that Pap smear?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to ask you, if according to your reports, does the slide we will put up next display your results?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
MR. GAHN: I would like you to take the laser pointer and at this point explain to the jurors exactly what they are looking at.
SHERRY CULHANE: This series of numbers and letters on this side are referred to as genetic markers. And all of this information pinpoints where those genetic markers are found throughout your DNA. Earlier I talked about the target regions of DNA that are amplified, and we make a whole lot of copies of them.
This is what I was referring to. We looked at 15 different target areas of DNA that are amplified. These numbers on the right side are the types at each one of those locations. So for instance, at D3S1358, Teresa Halbach's type is a 16 18.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Not exactly, but probably something like 11 to 20.
MR. GAHN: Can you compare, for the jurors, when you talk about types, how these would be like ABO types?
SHERRY CULHANE: These types are actually the different fragment sizes, those different target sizes that we amplified. The ABO system is a type of genetic marker, but the discriminating power of ABO systems, which is what we used many years ago, is much less than the discriminating power of the combined -- all of these combined types.
MR. GAHN: Now, you previously testified that you collected your swab A-1 from the rear cargo area --
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: Can we go to the next one, please. And, again, please show the jurors where you collected your A-1 from.
SHERRY CULHANE: In this area right here.
SHERRY CULHANE: Right.
MR. GAHN: You also testified that you collected swab A-2 from across the panel of the rear cargo area. Show the jurors, again, where that was.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, that was right in this area here.
MR. GAHN: And you also testified that you collected your swab A-4 from the metal frame. Show the jurors where that was.
SHERRY CULHANE: Right along here.
MR. GAHN: And you also testified that you collected A-3 from the cargo door itself; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Right here.
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
MR. GAHN: And you also testified that you collected a swab from the Wild Cherry Pepsi can which you labeled at A-14; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, right here.
MR. GAHN: And, again, show the jurors. Thank you. Now, did you develop DNA profiles from each of these swabs?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And according to the reports that you have, does the following slide correctly depict your results?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, these are the genetic markers, these are the 15 different markers we're looking at. And these are the types that were developed from each one of these evidence samples.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: This marker here, referred to as amylogen, is a gender marker. If you are female, you are only going to have an X chromosome. If you are a male, you will have a X and a Y chromosome.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: As I stated earlier, these genetic markers are independently inherited, just like genes. So you inherit 50 percent from your mom and 50 percent from your dad. Now, the fact that this is an 11 means that she is a homozygote at this marker. And that means she got the same type from her mom and the same type from her dad. At D-3 there are two markers. This is referred to as a heterozygote. And she received one from her mom and one from her dad.
MR. GAHN: And this DNA profile that you developed from the cuttings and the swabs from the RAV4, did you compare that profile to the DNA profile that you developed from Teresa Halbach's Pap smear?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, sir, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, these are all the genetic markers. And you can see that the types from the evidence samples are consistent with the types from the Pap smear of Teresa Halbach. So at this genetic marker, the evidence sample is 16 18, Teresa is 16 18. At this marker it's 69.3, Teresa is a 69.3. And all of these markers are consistent with the ones from Teresa Halbach.
MR. GAHN: And did you calculate a statistic to determine how rare or how common this particular DNA profile would be in the population?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to show you a slide and ask you if this correctly depicts the statistical analysis that you performed?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Remember earlier I said that we do a statistical analysis when we have a match between an evidence sample and a reference sample. If we have an exclusion, we're finished, that's the end of it. But if you have a match between an evidence sample and a reference sample, then you have to determine how common or how rare that match -- or I mean that profile from the evidence sample is in the population.
This first number here tells me that the probability of finding someone in the Caucasian population, some unrelated, random person that has the same profile as the evidence sample, the probability of that is 1 person in 416 quadrillion in the Caucasian population, 1 person in 642 quadrillion in the African-American population, 1 person in 641 quadrillion in the southeastern Hispanic population, and 1 person in 1 quintillion in the southwestern Hispanic population.
MR. GAHN: And why do you look at these different populations when you are estimating the frequency of these genetic markers?
SHERRY CULHANE: When we are calculating and estimating these frequencies, we use a data base that's maintained by the FBI. And that data base has samples from individuals in these four different population groups. This slide illustrates that even though the rarity of the profile is different, in these four population groups, there's not a lot of difference between population groups. There are some differences, but this profile is extremely rare across all four populations.
SHERRY CULHANE: This number means that the probability of finding a person, random person, unrelated, in the population, that has the same profile as the evidence sample, is 1 person in 416 quadrillion.
MR. GAHN: Do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, whether Teresa Halbach is the source of the blood that you found on A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-4, and the source of the biological fluid on the Wild Cherry Pepsi can?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: That Teresa Halbach is the source of the DNA from those items.
MR. GAHN: Again, I have spoken with defense counsel before we began this afternoon and, Ms Culhane, does that container, which is Exhibit 337, contain some charred remains that you examined in this case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Item BZ.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to ask you to look on the slide on the big screen. And what is contained in that box there in front of you, which is Exhibit 337, is this the piece of charred remains that you examined?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: I can refer to my notes.
THE COURT: Do we have a number for the photo exhibit?
SHERRY CULHANE: Item BZ was taken into the laboratory on November 11th, 2005.
SHERRY CULHANE: It appeared to be, yes.
MR. GAHN: And what is shown on the big screen here, which we will later get an exhibit for and mark it, is that the bone and tissue fragment sample that you examined?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
SHERRY CULHANE: Because this sample was compromised, it had been subjected to -- appeared to be subjected to intense heat, I needed to find an area that I felt was the least damaged. So I chose a portion of the tissue, which I believe was in this area here, close to the bone. And sampled a portion of that to continue my extractions and to continue my typing.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I was.
MR. GAHN: And according to your reports, does the next slide correctly display your findings of your test?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, these are the genetic markers that we're looking at. And these are the types. You will notice here there are no numbers at these positions, these markers. And the reason is because this was a fairly degraded sample of DNA. DNA is a very stable molecule; however, it breaks down and is degraded and broken up into pieces by several things, heat being one, sunlight, nucleases in the environment that chew it up.
But this was obviously a sample that had been subjected to intense heat. And so, therefore, on these fragments, these STR markers, which are fairly large, the fragments -- there was not enough DNA at those positions to develop a type.
MR. GAHN: Did you compare this partial profile with the DNA profile that you obtained from the Pap smear of Teresa Halbach?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: In the -- At the marker positions where I did get results, these types are consistent with Teresa. Obviously, I don't know what the types are here because there were no results. But for everything else, all the types that I actually developed, they were consistent with Teresa Halbach.
MR. GAHN: Now, you stated previously, when you made your comparisons to Teresa Halbach's DNA profile with the samples of blood that you found in the RAV4, you were able to determine that Teresa Halbach was the source of that blood; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: This was a partial profile. When we have a partial profile, we can only do a statistical interpretation on the markers that we have results for. In order to get very large numbers and very rare profiles, what gives us those large numbers is results, at all 15 different markers. When we have less than that, then the frequency of that profile becomes a little more common than it would if it was a complete profile.
MR. GAHN: Were you able to develop a statistic to tell you how rare or how common the DNA profile on Item BZ, the charred remains, would be in the population?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I was.
MR. GAHN: And does the next slide depict the frequency in the population of the DNA profile on the charred remains?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: This calculation was done exactly like the calculation from the blood stains. The difference is, this was not a full profile, it was only a partial profile. So if you do a statistical analysis of the types that you got, and calculated the frequency of those types, the probability of another random, unrelated person, in the population, having the profile, the partial profile of the remains, is 1 person in 1 billion in the Caucasian population, 1 person in 2 billion in the African/American population, 1 person in 2 billion in the southeastern Hispanic population; and 1 person in 3 billion in the southwestern Hispanic population.
MR. GAHN: And, again, can you break this down for the jurors, exactly what that number, one billion, would mean, as it relates to this DNA profile from the charred remains?
SHERRY CULHANE: That is the frequency that that partial profile, those results at just the markers that I got results from, the frequency of that partial profile, that is the frequency that it occurs in the population.
SHERRY CULHANE: I don't believe so.
MR. GAHN: Your Honor, I have now what has been a photograph that has been marked as Exhibit 338. I will ask Mr. Fallon if he will give that to Ms Culhane.
MR. GAHN: And Ms Culhane, would you look at that photograph, and is that a photograph of the piece of charred remains that we previously put up on the large screen.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: I would ask if Detective Wiegert would bring you Exhibit 237 -- I'm sorry, 277. This would be the bullet fragment.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, this is Crime Lab item designation FL. And it is a lead bullet fragment. My initials and markings are on the packaging.
SHERRY CULHANE: That came into the laboratory on May 16 -- I'm sorry, March 16th, 2006, and I took custody on March 28th, 2006.
SHERRY CULHANE: The first thing I did was, just like every item of evidence, it was a visual examination. There was nothing visual on the fragment. There didn't appear to be any stain. So in order to remove any residual DNA that might have been on the bullet, I washed it. I put it in a test tube and washed it with some buffer that we use to extract the DNA. And the washing of that bullet, the washing liquid is what I performed the rest of my procedure on.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, I was looking at all of these. These are the different markers. And these are the types at each one of these markers. You will notice at D-16 and at TPOX I am -- there's an asterisk there. That indicates that there was a visible peak there which represents a type. But it was below our parameters for including that in the final analysis. So it -- I'm missing a peak here and a peak at TPOX.
MR. GAHN: And did you compare this profile that you obtained from the bullet fragment with the DNA profile you obtained from the Pap smear of Teresa Halbach?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: The profile from the bullet is consistent with all of the types from Teresa Halbach. You will notice at D16 she's missing the 13 type, and at TPOX she is missing the 10 type. And, again, those peaks were visible, but they were below our threshold for calling those types.
SHERRY CULHANE: The impact is that I cannot use the information, the frequencies at this marker, and at this marker, to figure out my final frequency. In other words, I had to calculate the frequencies at all of the other markers except D16 and TPOX.
MR. GAHN: But nothing about those two asterisks that you have on your -- on the chart here excluded Teresa Halbach as being on the bullet?
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it did.
SHERRY CULHANE: During the extraction of this item of evidence, as I talked about earlier, we set up controls that we run with all of our samples. When we begin an extraction, whether it is an evidence sample or a reference sample, when we begin the extraction, we begin what's called a manipulation control. And it's, basically, a negative blank control. And its helps us monitor if any unintentional DNA is introduced into the sample or into the process.
In this particular case, there was a trace amount of -- a trace amount of DNA showed up in the quantitation portion where I had to quantitate and find out how much DNA I had. There was a trace amount of DNA in the negative control. I took the profile to completion and I developed the profile on it. And the profile in the negative control turned out to be consistent with my own DNA type.
SHERRY CULHANE: That means that during the extraction procedure I inadvertently introduced my own DNA into the negative control.
SHERRY CULHANE: It did not have any impact as far as the profile from the evidence sample. It's just the fact that I introduced my own DNA into the manipulation control.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: In the negative control, which should have had just reagents in it. It should not have had any DNA at all in it.
SHERRY CULHANE: I believe my DNA profile was introduced during the extraction procedure when I was talking. At the time when I was setting up these samples, I was training two analysts, newer analysts, in the lab. And they were watching me. This sample was not an average sample, simply because we handled it a little different. It wasn't a swabbing and it wasn't a cutting. The washing part of it was a little bit different than what we usually do.
So I was explaining to them what I was doing and as I was setting it up. And apparently -- I felt as if I was far enough away from my workbench not to introduce my DNA, but apparently I was incorrect.
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
MR. GAHN: Do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, whether Teresa Halbach is the source of the DNA on Item FL, the bullet?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: I believe she is the source of the DNA on that bullet.
MR. GAHN: I would ask if Detective Wiegert would, please, bring to Ms Culhane what's been marked as Exhibit 324, and this would be the buccal swab of Steven Avery.
Your Honor, before I go any further, I think we have some considerable more testimony for the rest of these samples. Would you like to break now?
THE COURT: I think we'll go another 15 minutes to kind of split the afternoon equally in two.
MR. GAHN: (By Attorney Gahn)~ Detective Wiegert has brought you what has been marked as Exhibit 324, and that is what you identified as the buccal swab of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: As reference samples to compare to the evidence samples.
MR. GAHN: Using the DNA testing procedures that you described this morning, did you develop a DNA profile from the buccal swab of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And does the next slide correctly depict the DNA profile that you developed from Steven Avery's buccal swab?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: These are the same genetic markers that I examined when I looked at the evidence samples and the standard from Teresa Halbach. And, again, at each one of these markers, Steven Avery's sample had a specific type. The amelogenin marker is XY, which is different from Teresa because this is a male individual. And he has the X and Y chromosome.
MR. GAHN: We heard testimony yesterday that a number of swabs were taken from the garage floor of Steven Avery. And did you receive, at the Crime Lab, swabs that were taken from the garage floor of Steven Avery's garage?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And did you assign Crime Lab designation numbers G, I1, J, K, O, and P to six of the swabs from the stains on the garage floor of Steven Avery's garage?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And does the next slide correctly show the DNA profile that you obtained from the six swabs of blood from the garage floor?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does. And, again, you can see that the types are consistent throughout all of the markers that we looked at.
MR. GAHN: Now, did you receive other items? We have had testimony in this case that blood stains from the sink or the vanity in the residence of Steven Avery were taken and sent to the Crime Lab; do you recall that?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: It was consistent with Steven Avery's profile.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to show you the next slide. And this has been identified as the Grand Am, the 1993 Grand Am owned by Steven Avery. Did you also examine this at your Crime Lab?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And on the next slide, can you point out to the jurors, did you locate any bloodstains in that vehicle?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, there were bloodstains on the gear shaft here and along the console.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: The types were consistent with Steven Avery.
MR. GAHN: We had testimony a few days ago that there was a swab taken of the release lever of the hood latch of Teresa Halbach's RAV4. That was identified as Exhibit 205.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, this is our item designation ID, and it has our laboratory bar code item designation and my initial and date on it.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: -- swab? Do you recall, when you looked at the swab, did you notice any condition to it, as far as color?
SHERRY CULHANE: It was discolored, but it did not have the appearance -- it was not a reddish-brown discoloration consistent with blood.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And did you develop a profile from the swab of the hood latch of Teresa Halbach's RAV4?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And I'm going to show you the next slide and ask you, do your notes and your records reflect these as your findings?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, they do.
SHERRY CULHANE: Looking at the same genetic markers, these are the types that were developed from the swab that was reportedly taken from the hood latch of the RAV4.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: A full profile indicates that you have gotten results at all 15 different markers that we look at. If this was a partial profile, such as in the charred remains, I would be missing types at some of these markers.
MR. GAHN: Did you compare this profile that you found on the swab of the hood latch of Teresa Halbach's RAV4 with the DNA profile that you developed from the buccal swab of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: At each one of the markers, the types from the swabbing on the hood latch were consistent with the types from Steven Avery's buccal swab. If you look at all the numbers for all of the markers, they are consistent with the entire profile.
MR. GAHN: Now, you testified before that you received a number of standards at the Crime Lab, did you?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: In other words, you received buccal swabs from Allen Avery, Brian Dassey, Brendan Dassey, Barb Janda, Bobby Dassey, Earl Avery, Chuck Avery and Delores; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
THE COURT: Mr. Gahn, excuse me, after you wrap up this portion of the hood latch, I think we'll take our break.
MR. GAHN: (By Attorney Gahn)~ Did you develop DNA profiles from all those standards of reference samples?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: When you would come up with a profile from an evidentiary item like the hood latch, did you compare the profile from the hood latch with all the other standards?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: They were inconsistent. The profile from the hood latch was not consistent with any of the other standards that I examined.
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
MR. GAHN: And do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, whether the DNA profile that you developed from the swab of the hood latch of Teresa Halbach's RAV4, that Steven Avery is the source of that profile?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: That he is the source of that profile.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Members of the jury, we're going to take our afternoon break at this time. We'll resume a little before 3:00. I will remind you, again, not to discuss the case at any time during the break.
(Jury not present.)
THE COURT: Counsel, let's report back a little before 3:00.
(Recess taken.)
THE COURT: Counsel, before we bring the jury back in, I just wanted to get some idea of the agenda for the rest of the day. Mr. Gahn, how long do you think you will be with direct?
MR. GAHN: I think at least a half hour, possibly 40, 45 minutes. But I don't think not before a half hour, I don't believe.
THE COURT: All right. And, Mr. Buting, I take it you may well not complete your cross-examination, but you wish to get started?
MR. BUTING: I wouldn't even come close to completing the examination. Normally, I guess I wouldn't mind starting and finishing it if it was the next day, but I think with a whole break of a weekend, it might be easier, if the Court didn't mind ending a little early today, if we would just start fresh with cross on Monday morning.
THE COURT: Okay. Before I answer that, does the State have any shorter, quicker witnesses.
MR. KRATZ: I'm finding out right now, Judge. We have some examination with Mrs. Halbach, Karen Halbach, that we would be happy to put in today.
MR. BUTING: Could we approach for a moment, please.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
(Side bar taken.)
THE COURT: All right. Before we go back, I should announce we just had a side bar conference and I think the feeling is that if the direct examination ends a little early today, we'll probably simply let the jury go home a little early.
There was a side bar earlier this morning where counsel asked the Court if the other jurors knew why one of the jurors was missing today. And the answer to that is, yes, they learned that this morning when they were leaving on the bus. And that was the purpose for that brief side bar we had earlier today. All right. At this point we'll bring in the jury.
(Jury present.)
THE COURT: You may be seated. And, Mr. Gahn, you may resume your direct examination of the witness.
MR. GAHN: I would ask if Detective Wiegert could retrieve Exhibit 211, which is the Toyota key. Please take that to Ms Culhane. BY ATTORNEY GAHN:
MR. GAHN: We have presented you with an exhibit that has previously been marked as Exhibit 211, and previously identified as a Toyota key that was found in Steven Avery's residence. And I ask you, do you recognize that key?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: It's the Toyota key that I examined. There was a -- This is the same keyring that it was attached to.
MR. GAHN: We also have, on the next slide, a photograph that -- is that key that you have in front of you, Exhibit 211, the key that is in this photograph?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: There is also another item in that photograph, and does that help you identify the key?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is the packaging that the key was brought to the laboratory in. Again, this is our bar code tracking system in the laboratory. And this is our item designation C, and my initials, and the date.
MR. GAHN: I'm going to show you what has been marked as Exhibit 316 and ask you if this photograph, which you are being shown, is the photograph that is depicted on the large screen?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: And now, I would like to go to the next slide. And this is a slide of the key that you have in front of you; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: It appears to be, yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: I received the key. It was in a sealed brown paper bag. I opened it up. I had gloves on. And I held the metal part of the key in one hand and I swabbed the black -- I should show you up here -- this black rubberized part of the key, with a sterile cotton swab. And I did it in very much the same way that I swabbed the Pepsi can that we looked at earlier.
At this point, there were no visible indications of any staining, so I was primarily interested to see if I could recover DNA that had been left behind by possibly touching. So I swabbed all of the surfaces, the front and back, and the edges of the key, and that's what I did my analysis on.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: I took the key to see if it fit the vehicle. So I put the key into the ignition. I still had, of course, gloves on, during this entire process. I put the key into the ignition and turned the ignition. It did turn the ignition, but it did not crank the car. And I later learned that that was because, I believe, the battery had been disconnected. But it did actually turn completely over. I also locked, I believe it was the front driver's side door, and used the key to unlock the door.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And were you able to develop a profile from the swabbing of Item C, the key to Teresa Halbach's car?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, we looked at the same 15 markers. And at each one of these markers I developed a type. And that is the profile that characterizes the swabbing that I took from the key.
MR. GAHN: And, again, this profile that you developed from the key, is that a profile that came from a male individual?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is. And that's -- We have an X and a Y chromosome which indicate the male individual.
MR. GAHN: And did you compare the profile that you developed from your swabbing of this key with the DNA profile that you developed from the buccal swab of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: The same 15 markers, these are the types at each one of these markers. And you can see at every type, the type from the evidence -- or the profile from the evidence sample is consistent with the profile from Steven Avery.
MR. GAHN: And, again, Ms Culhane, the profile that you developed from Item C, the key, is that what you refer to as a full, complete DNA profile?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Because we have types at each one of these markers. There are types present at each one of the markers.
MR. GAHN: And, again, did you compare this profile with the DNA profiles that you developed from all the standards that were submitted in this case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: In other words, did you compare the DNA profile that you found on Item C with the DNA profile from the buccal swab of Allen Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And did the DNA profile that you developed from Item C, the key, match any of those standards?
SHERRY CULHANE: No, it did not.
MR. GAHN: At this time, I'm going to ask Detective Wiegert if he can, please, retrieve for me the photograph of the RAV4 -- I'm looking for the photograph, I'll give you a exhibit number in just one second -- Exhibit 290, 294, 291, and 292, please.
SHERRY CULHANE: 290?
SHERRY CULHANE: No, I have 291, 292 and 294.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
MR. GAHN: And I apologize for the delay here. Is that photograph depicted on the large screen here?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: Now, you previously testified that you took cuttings which you identified as Item A-6 from the RAV4?
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
SHERRY CULHANE: In the front driver's seat, right about here.
MR. GAHN: And those were the cuttings of a stain that you had tested for blood with the presumptive test?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And I also believe that you testified earlier that you collected your Item No. A-7 from the center console area of the RAV for, would you point that out to where that was for the jurors.
SHERRY CULHANE: Right along the floor here by the console.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, these are the same 15 markers and these are the types at each one of these markers that were developed from the cutting of the stain in the driver's seat of the RAV4.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
MR. GAHN: And did you also compare this profile to the DNA profile that you developed from the buccal swab of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, this is the profile developed from the evidence sample. You can tell it's from a male individual. All of the types are consistent with each one of the types, at each marker, from the reference standard of Steven Avery.
MR. GAHN: And the DNA profile that you found in Item A-6, the bloodstain, did you compare that to the other standards that you received at the lab?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: It was not consistent with any of the other standards that I examined.
SHERRY CULHANE: That's correct.
MR. GAHN: Did you develop a DNA profile from your Item No. A-7, which were the blood crusts by the center console?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: Again, at each genetic marker, these are the types. At D-5, this asterisk here indicates that there was a peak there, a visible peak, but it was below the parameters of our system. So that would not be included in the statistical interpretation of this sample -- of this profile.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
MR. GAHN: Now, the fact that that asterisk was there, did not have any impact in your interpretation of this profile as it compared to Steven Avery, did it?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does. And, again, you can see that the profile is consistent with Steven Avery at every genetic marker.
MR. GAHN: Do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, whether Steven Avery is the source of the blood stain on Item A-6, which was the stain found on the driver's passenger seat?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: That Steven Avery is the source of that profile.
MR. GAHN: And do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, whether Steven Avery is the source of the DNA profile that you found on Item A-7, the blood crusts by the center console?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: That Steven Avery is consistent with that profile.
SHERRY CULHANE: No, I'm sorry, I don't.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: Now, you previously testified that you collected a cutting which you identified as Item A-9 of a bloodstain from the front passenger seat of Teresa Halbach's RAV4. Can you show the jurors where that cutting was, once more.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, right in this area here.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
MR. GAHN: And according to your reports, does the following slide correctly display your results?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: These are the exact same markers that we looked at in each sample. And, again, there are types at each one of these markers, and XY depicting a male individual.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: And did you compare the profile that you developed from the bloodstain from the front passenger seat of Teresa Halbach's car with the DNA profile that you obtained from the buccal swab of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is the profile developed from the cutting in the passenger -- the front passenger seat. And this is the profile from Steven Avery's buccal swab. And you can see it's consistent at all of the 15 genetic markers.
MR. GAHN: Do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, whether Steven Avery is the source of the bloodstain that was found on Item 9 on the front passenger seat of Teresa Halbach's RAV4?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: That Steven Avery is the source of that stain, A-9.
MR. GAHN: All right. Now, you also previously testified that you collected the swab from what was Item A-10, that is the CD case that was on the front seat of Teresa Halbach's car, correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
MR. GAHN: Did you compare this profile with the profile that you developed from the buccal swab of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does. Again, you can see all of the types are exactly the same through all the genetic markers.
MR. GAHN: And do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, whether Steven Avery is the source of the blood that you found on the CD case in Teresa Halbach's SUV?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I believe he is the source of the blood stain, Item A-10.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: Now, you previously testified that you collected a bloodstain from the paneling of the rear passenger door. And would you point out to the jurors, one more time, where that bloodstain was?
SHERRY CULHANE: This area right here.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
MR. GAHN: And, again, did you compare the profile, the DNA profile that you developed from the bloodstain on the rear passenger door of Teresa Halbach's RAV4, with the DNA profile that you obtained from the buccal swab of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does. And, again, you can see, at each one of the markers, the types are consistent.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I do.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: Now, you previously testified that you collected this bloodstain on the dashboard of Teresa Halbach's RAV4, by the ignition switch; is that correct?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
MR. GAHN: And did you compare the DNA profile from that bloodstain with the DNA profile of Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: This is the profile from A-8, which is the stain by the ignition. And this is the profile from Steven Avery's buccal swab. And you can see at each one of the markers, the types are consistent.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it is.
MR. GAHN: And the DNA profile that you developed from Item A-8, the blood stain found near the ignition of Teresa Halbach's SUV, did you compare that profile with the profiles that you developed from all the other standards in this case?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: It was not consistent with any of the other standards.
SHERRY CULHANE: Correct.
MR. GAHN: Did you arrive at a statistical number for this profile that would reflect how often, or how rare, or how common, this profile would be in the population?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, I did.
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
SHERRY CULHANE: This number tells me that the probability of another unrelated, random person in the population, having the same profile as the evidence samples that we just talked about, is 1 person in 4 quintillion in the Caucasian population, 1 person in 898 quintillion in the African/American population, 1 person in 25 quintillion in the southeastern Hispanic population, and 1 person in 123 quintillion in the southwestern Hispanic population.
MR. GAHN: And does that statistic also apply to the other bloodstains that you found in the RAV4 that were attributable to Steven Avery?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes, it does.
MR. GAHN: Do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, whether Steven Avery is the source of the bloodstain found on the dashboard by the ignition in Teresa Halbach's RAV4?
SHERRY CULHANE: Yes.
SHERRY CULHANE: My opinion is that Steven Avery is the source of that stain.