Skip to content
Brendan DasseytranscripttranscriptDonald Simley — Direct - Day 3 - Brendan DasseyForensic dentist Donald Simley found a tooth fragment very consistent with Teresa Halbach's dental x-rays, but called the identification probable rather than positive.
Thomas J. FallonMark R. FremgenJerome L. FoxDonald SimleyMR. FALLONTHE COURTCourt ClerkDonald SimleyMR. FREMGENdirect
Brendan Dassey/Day 3/April 18, 2007
8 pages·7 witnesses·2,301 lines
Kayla Avery disavowed parts of an earlier account about Brendan, while a school counselor described what Kayla had told her. Witnesses also testified about RAV4 DNA and bloodstains, the burn-pit search, and a probable dental identification.
DirectDirectDonald Simley — Direct Donald Simley Thomas J. Fallon

MR. FALLON: State would call, um, Don Simley to the stand.

THE COURT: Why don't you just remain standing there and take the oath, please.

DONALD SIMLEY, 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.

DONALD SIMLEY: My name is a Donald 0. Simley, S-i-m-l-e-y. It's the 2nd.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY ATTORNEY FALLON:

MR. FALLON: What do you do for a living?

DONALD SIMLEY: I'm a general dentist in Madison, Wisconsin.

MR. FALLON: And how long have you been employed in that capacity?

DONALD SIMLEY: I graduated from Marquette University in 1976, and have been there ever since.

MR. FALLON: Uh, what type of dentistry, um, do you practice?

DONALD SIMLEY: Uh, general dentistry is a family dentistry where I take care of patients and their general oral health. I also am a consultant in forensic dentistry.

MR. FALLON: All right. And, um, what is forensic dentistry?

DONALD SIMLEY: Forensic dentistry can, basically, be defined as the application of the science of dentistry to the field of law. I'm sorry. Slow down? The application of science of dentistry to the field of law.

Uh, there are a number of different areas that can be involved in forensic dentistry. Uh, routine dental identifications are the most commonly involved where individuals that are -- are not viewable or visually identifiable need to be identified. Um, mass disaster involvement, uh, just dental identifications taken to a -- a higher number. Uh, child abuse cases. Uh, bite mark evidence, uh, dental malpractice and negligence in trauma of injury that are involved in litigation.

MR. FALLON: All right. And how is it that you are involved in this case, Doctor?

DONALD SIMLEY: Uh, received a phone call from, uh, Special Agent Duranda Freymiller, on November 9 of 2005.

MR. FALLON: What were you asked to do?

DONALD SIMLEY: She asked me to assist in the identification of -- of an individual that was recovered in Manitowoc County.

MR. FALLON: All right. And, um -- And why are you here today?

DONALD SIMLEY: Uh, to render my opinion after analysis of the remains and to give my opinion.

MR. FALLON: All right. Well, before we get to the opinion, uh, and your findings in this case, um, if you would tell us a little bit about yourself. First of all, tell us, uh, where you received your undergraduate degree?

DONALD SIMLEY: I graduated, uh, from Elmhurst College in 1960 -- '72, I'm sorry. Uh, received a B.S. Degree there. And then in 1976 I graduated from Marquette University, School of Dentistry.

MR. FALLON: And if you would tell us a little bit about, um, your forensic dental experience? What are some of the types of things that you did?

DONALD SIMLEY: Um, well, I've been in -- involved in forensic dentistry since 1981. Um, most of the cases I -- I do are -- are dental identification cases. Again, bite mark evidence, um, child abuse cases. Uh, been involved in 435 cases, approximately. Uh, that does not include work where I was involved in the World Trade Center and down in Katrina. Um --

MR. FALLON: We'll touch -- touch base with them in just a moment.

MR. FALLON: Um, just so that we're clear, tell the jury what a dental identification is? What does it mean?

DONALD SIMLEY: Dental identification is -- it's a means of positive identification. If -- if an individual is, uh, decomposed, or skeletonized, or burned beyond recognition, uh, if there's been disfigurement to the face, uh, where a visual identification is not applicable, or fingerprint, uh, identification is not available, uh, sometimes you resort to dental identifications, which is usually easier, quicker, cheaper than -- than DNA.

MR. FALLON: All right. And, um, have you been called upon, um, to, uh, render expert opinion on dental identification in the past?

DONALD SIMLEY: Yes, sir, I have.

MR. FALLON: Uh, any estimate as to approximately how many times you've been asked to express an opinion?

DONALD SIMLEY: Meaning in-court testimony?

MR. FALLON: Regarding an -- a dental identification, yes.

DONALD SIMLEY: I've testified, I believe, 32 times. Most of those were involved with dental identifications. Um, probably three-quarters of them. The other ones were in bite mark cases, and I think there's only one that was involved in an injury case. Personal injury case.

MR. FALLON: All right. Tell -- You mentioned something about, uh, disaster response experience. You mentioned something about the World Trade Center and Katrina. How were you involved in those types of responses?

DONALD SIMLEY: I'm a member of a -- a national disaster team. It's part of what they call NDMS, or the National Disaster Medical System, which currently operates underneath the Health and Human Services. And it was under Health and Human Services at September 11. And then they restructured things. And then Katrina, they were actually underneath, uh, Department of Homeland Security and FEMA. And now we're back with Health and Human Services.

And I've been involved with this NDMS, and they have a DMORT team, and DMORT stands for Disaster Mortuary Operational Response Team. And I've been involved with the DMORT team for a number of years, but I've only actually been deployed or activated twice. And once was for the World Trade Center and then once was for Katrina.

MR. FALLON: And your role in those responses was what?

DONALD SIMLEY: Two assist and help in the identification of the individuals.

MR. FALLON: All right. Are you familiar with, uh, a -- a standing or a title called board certification?

MR. FALLON: Tell us what that is?

DONALD SIMLEY: Um, to be board certified, uh, would indicate that you have a -- I'd say a higher degree of experience, or expertise, um, or training in the area of, in this particular case, forensic dentistry.

Uh, it means taking a -- a -- an examination. In my particular case, to be qualified, you have to submit an application. I believe the application that I submitted, uh, and I was board certified in 1993, was -- consisted of two, three-ring binders that were full of documentation of, uh, cases that I've been involved with, uh, court testimony, uh, documentation of affiliations with certain agencies, continuing education.

And then if you're deemed to be board eligible to take the examination, the examination is a -- it's a two-day written/oral examination that you have to take to pass.

MR. FALLON: All right. And so I take it, then, from your comments, you are a board certified forensic dentist?

MR. FALLON: All right. Uh, how many board certified forensic dentists are there in Wisconsin, for instance?

DONALD SIMLEY: There are only two of us in Wisconsin.

MR. FALLON: All right. And in terms of, um, generally, in North America, United States, and Canada, in particular, do you have any idea approximately how many board certified dentists there are?

DONALD SIMLEY: There are approximately a hundred board certified forensic dentists in -- in North America.

MR. FALLON: Do you belong to any professional organizations? Uh, you mentioned the National Disaster Medical System. Are there any other organizations that you, um, you are a member of that assist you in your forensic work?

DONALD SIMLEY: Uh, there are a number of different organizations that I -- I belong to. I'm not so sure that they assist me, although you -- I shouldn't say that either, because they -- they do assist me in the fact that you gain, uh, continuing education and additional learning experiences from these organizations.

Uh, the American Society of Forensic Odontology is kind of an entry level organization, but it's one of the biggest forensic organizations in the country and the world.

The, um, American Academy of Forensic Sciences, uh, is probably one of the premier organizations in the United States.

Um, I'm also a member of the Wisconsin Association for Identification. Uh, the Wisconsin Coroners and Medical Examiners Association.

Um, and then the board affiliation with the American Board of Forensic Odontology. And odontology is just a fancy name for dentistry.

MR. FALLON: All right. And, um, drawing your attention just ver -- very briefly to Exhibit 182, um, do you recognize Exhibit 182?

DONALD SIMLEY: Yes, sir, I do.

MR. FALLON: What is Exhibit 182?

DONALD SIMLEY: Uh, this is a copy of my CV, or curriculum vitae.

MR. FALLON: All right. And is that an accurate summary of your educational and professional experience as it relates to the field of forensic dentistry?

DONALD SIMLEY: Yes, Sir, it is.

MR. FALLON: All right. Now, to this case. When was it that you first became involved in the case, Doctor?

DONALD SIMLEY: That would have been on November 9 of 2005.

MR. FALLON: All right. And what were you asked to do?

DONALD SIMLEY: Well, Special Agent Freymiller had asked me to assist in the identification, and then Assistant, uh, District Attorney Jeff Froehlich, uh, had called and, um, wanted to know, number one, I -- that I'd already looked at some of the remains on that date, and wanted to know if they were human or nonhuman, and then he also wanted to know a little bit about my -- my background and -- and my qualifications.

MR. FALLON: All right. Uh, did it come to pass that you were asked to examine, um, items to determine whether or not they involved, uh, your field of forensic dentistry?

MR. FALLON: And approximately how many items were you asked to examine and -- and attempt identification of?

DONALD SIMLEY: There were six times that I received evidence. A total number of pieces of -- of potential evidence were 52, uh, potential items of evidence.

MR. FALLON: All right. And tell us about those items? What did they consist of?

DONALD SIMLEY: When I say potential, because, initially, it's -- it's -- it's difficult to identify, uh, some burned and fragmented dental structures. Um, so potential, meaning that some of the items that were recovered were not dental structures, but it wasn't initially known then, or they wanted to be verified.

Um, there were, I believe, 24, uh, dental structures, root fragments, um, crown fragments. There was not one whole tooth that I was able to examine. There were three bone fragments. There were 24 pieces of wood that, again, looked like dental structures. And one piece of plastic.

MR. FALLON: Is it at all unusual to have, for instance, a -- a piece of wood, um, mistaken for a tooth?

DONALD SIMLEY: No, sir. It's, uh, quite common. It's -- it's easy for anybody else to misidentify them, or to exclude them, or -- or not identify them as tooth structures. In -- in fact, sometimes I can't even identify them without taking x-rays of -- because they look totally different radiographically or on the x-rays.

MR. FALLON: And is that, um, particularly more problematic when they've been consumed in a fire?

MR. FALLON: All right. Um, having said that, would you tell us or describe for us the condition of -- of, uh, these -- the 24 tooth fragments and the three bone fragments that you examined?

DONALD SIMLEY: They were all burned. They were all charred. Uh, they were very, very brittle. Um, again, they didn't look like normal tooth like we would normally see, and, essentially, the crowns were all gone. What we were looking at was just the root structure, which was, um, part of the tooth that's buried in the bone.

There was one portion of a crown, um, but that portion of the crown was from a -- a cuspid or an eyetooth and was not able to be identified.

MR. FALLON: All right. In terms of the condition of these fragments, how did they compare to other fragments that you've been asked to examine in attempt at identification of in the past?

DONALD SIMLEY: Since 1981, I've examined a number of -- of individuals who've been burned, and, uh, these were probably among the worst that I've examined.

MR. FALLON: Are you familiar with a phrase that some dentists use called fracture matching?

MR. FALLON: Um, what is fracture matching?

DONALD SIMLEY: When you fracture match something, you can put two pieces back together. And if I can say that they came from a common source, that they were at one time one piece, you can fracture match them back together.

MR. FALLON: Did you attempt any fracture matching in this case?

DONALD SIMLEY: Yes, sir, I did.

MR. FALLON: All right. Tell us about that?

DONALD SIMLEY: There were two root fragments that I was able to fracture match back together. Actually, I should say four. There were two that were very critical, but there were two other ones that ended up being academic.

Um, the two critical ones were -- were root fragments from, uh, the lower right second molar, which would be Tooth No. 31, which we call it, and that particular tooth, the crown, again, was -- was destroyed, but there were two roots associated with that tooth, and they were separate, but I could put those back together, and I could see that they had initially come -- at one time been together. And then to fracture match them, I put them back together and then I applied a little cyanoacrylate, or Super Glue so that they stick together.

MR. FALLON: All right. And is that a common approach?

MR. FALLON: And what is the benefit of fracture matching?

DONALD SIMLEY: Well, there's a couple benefits, really. Number one, if you've got 52 pieces of potential evidence, if you can combine that down so that there's a little bit less, that's a -- a small advantage, not a big one.

The big one is -- is that these pieces of -- of dental remains are extremely brittle when they're burned and they're charred. And these pieces of -- of -- of dental structures could be very easily crushed with finger pressure. If they're dropped, they could be broken. And if that happens, that pot -- potential piece of evidence is -- is lost. It's gone forever.

So by Super Gluing them, and -- and fracture matching, and putting them back together, and reinforcing them with the cyanoacrylate, you can preserve, you can protect, and -- and maintain that evidence better.

MR. FALLON: All right. And, um, in this particular case, uh, were you -- uh, did you attempt to make a comparison?

DONALD SIMLEY: Yes, sir, I did.

MR. FALLON: All right. And that would assume, then, that you had something to compare or standards to compare the fracture matched tooth with something else?

DONALD SIMLEY: That's correct.

MR. FALLON: Um, and tell us, what did you have at your disposal to assist in this comparison?

DONALD SIMLEY: Well, there were a number of different x-rays that I had of -- of Teresa Halbach, and all the x-rays were labeled with -- with Teresa's name. On November 10, uh, Special Agent Jim Holmes brought to my office dental records for Teresa.

And those records consisted of a panorex x-ray from August 30 of 2001. Um, a panorex x-ray is an x-ray that goes around the outside of the mouth and picks up everything from ear to ear. Uh, oral surgeons love them. A lot of general dentists love them. Pediatric dentists love them. Because it -- it picks up everything.

He also brought over 16 bitewing x-rays. And a bitewing x-ray, as I'm sure you're familiar with, is you go in to see your family dentist, and they have you bite down on the film, and shoot the x-ray in from the side, and it picks up the most amount of tooth structure with the least amount of x-rays. And, usually, you're looking for decay. You can look at the bone support there, too.

There were 16 bitewing x-rays varying in ages from 1998 to 2004. At that particular time, though, I knew that we needed -- additional x-rays would be more beneficial. And what I was looking for, specifically, is what they call a periapical x-ray.

MR. FALLON: Uh, what was that again?

DONALD SIMLEY: A periapical x-ray.

MR. FALLON: Could you, uh, spell that for us? Um --

DONALD SIMLEY: P-e-r-i-a-p-i-c-a-l.

MR. FALLON: What -- what is that?

DONALD SIMLEY: A periapical x-ray, it -- it's just -- it's just like the bitewing x-ray. The same size. But it's positioned down lower on the tooth so it will pick up one or two teeth in its entirety, and it will pick up the whole root structure. Whereas, on a bitewing x-ray, you're picking up top and bottom teeth, and you kind of cut off the ends of the roots, uh, because they're not designed to pick up the whole root structure.

And I was looking -- Since we had the entire root from this Tooth No. 31 that we were looking at, um, I was looking for periapical x-rays, of which Teresa's dentist did not have any of these x-rays, but he said he did have some additional x-rays from 1997. Um, it was August 25 of 1997. And he said those x-rays were positioned just a little bit lower and they showed a little bit more root structure. So he forwarded those to me so I had those to look at also.

MR. FALLON: With the assistance of the 1997, um, x-ray, were you able to make a comparison?

DONALD SIMLEY: Yes, sir, I was.

MR. FALLON: All right. And before we do that, um, just so that we know, um, in dental circles, you number your teeth, so --

MR. FALLON: -- tell -- tell us what Tooth No. 31 is?

DONALD SIMLEY: All the teeth have specific numbers. They have what they call a universal numbering system. So if I talk about Tooth No. 1, uh, any dentist in the country will know that I'm talking about the upper right third molar. The wisdom tooth.

If I'm talking about Teeth No. 8 and 9, they'll know I'm talking about the two central incisors right underneath the nose. The big front teeth.

Uh, No. 19 is a lower left first molar, and Tooth No. 31 is a lower right second permanent molar.

MR. FALLON: All right.

DONALD SIMLEY: So just a -- a way of -- for us to more easily, um, identify a particular tooth by number.

MR. FALLON: All right. I'm going to have, um, an exhibit marked and shown to you. I'm having Agent, uh, Fassbender show you Exhibit 162. If you'd take a moment to examine it? Do you recognize Exhibit 162?

DONALD SIMLEY: Yes, sir, I do.

MR. FALLON: And what is Exhibit 162?

DONALD SIMLEY: These are the remains that I received on, uh, November 11, 2005 from Special Agent Jim Holmes.

MR. FALLON: All right. And, um, what remains are depicted in Exhibit 162?

DONALD SIMLEY: There were two bone fragments. Um, one of what they call the coronoid process, which is just an upper part of the lower jaw, which was academic in recovery. There was another, uh, bone fragment, which was from the lower right mandible, or lower jaw. And then there were three root fragments.

MR. FALLON: All right. Now, is exhibit -- Excuse me. Does Exhibit, um, 162, uh, contain these -- this Tooth No. 31 that you used in your comparison?

DONALD SIMLEY: Yes, sir, it does.

MR. FALLON: All right. All right. Um, I believe that, um, we have prepared a, um, PowerPoint presentation to assist in, um, your explanation of your findings; is that correct?

DONALD SIMLEY: That's correct.

MR. FALLON: All right. And would the use of the PowerPoint assist you in further, um, demonstrating what your findings were?

DONALD SIMLEY: I think it would be beneficial for the jurors, please.

MR. FALLON: All right. While we're working on, um, getting that up and running, um, explain why you were able to do a comparison involving Tooth No. 31?

DONALD SIMLEY: Well, Tooth No. 31 was really the one that was best preserved. It had the most physical evidence that was there with the two root structures. Uh, again, there were no crowns that were remaining. Uh, fillings that Teresa had in her teeth were gone. Uh, they were destroyed in the fire. Uh, all the crown structure that was easily identifiable was gone.

Uh, some of the root fragments that were recovered, uh, of those 24 initial root fragments -- I mean, there were some that I couldn't identify. I mean, they were burned badly enough, and they had just por -- portions of roots that, um -- I mean, I tried to identify each tooth as to, you know, if it was a molar, or bicuspid, a cuspid, an incisor, or what type of tooth it was, and there were some that I couldn't identify. Uh, so that was the best physical piece of evidence that we had for examination.

And, also, then, you have an, uh -- a dental record from Teresa, um, that you can compare. So you need decent postmortem evidence and you need decent, uh, antemortem evidence, also.

MR. FALLON: All right. I'm going to have some photographs presented to you in -- in conjunction with, um, PowerPoint. What is, um -- First of all, um, you have a photograph there, which was, uh, depicted in the photograph? The top one?

DONALD SIMLEY: This top one is, um, what's on the screen. You want the number you mean?

MR. FALLON: Yes, please. The exhibit number?

DONALD SIMLEY: Exhibit No. 176.

MR. FALLON: Very good. And that is what is depicted on the screen?

MR. FALLON: All right. What does, uh, Tooth No. 31, buccal, b-u-c-c-a-l, what -- what does that signify?

DONALD SIMLEY: Buccal means cheek side. So, uh, there are actually five aspects to a tooth that we can examine. And the buccal aspect is the cheek side. The lingual, which we'll see in a second, is the tongue side. The occlusal portion is the top of the tooth. And then two additional sides would be the mesial, towards the front of the mouth, and distal, towards the back of the mouth.

So this just happens to depict the -- the buccal aspect. And what we're looking at is -- If you compare this grainy aspect here, that surface is very rough, um, and usually the cheek side aspect of a dental fragment is usually going to be burned more than the tongue side aspect, because on the tongue side aspect, the tongue actually pushes up against the tooth and the jaw fragment to -- to further preserve and protect that particular fragment.

Whereas, once the cheek gets burned through, uh, the outside or the cheek side aspect of that tooth is going to take a bigger hit in there. Um --

MR. FALLON: How much of that is the actual tooth, itself, which is depicted, if you could help us out?

DONALD SIMLEY: Right -- This is the back root, and this is the front root. This would have been the socket where the first molar, Tooth No. 30, would have been, and this is a socket where the second bicuspid would have been.

So we're actually seeing a section from the second bicuspid back to -- And this is actually where a wisdom tooth might have been if one had been present.

MR. FALLON: All right. And, um, what is the next, um, um, photograph you have there?

DONALD SIMLEY: The next photograph is not here.

MR. FALLON: All right. All right. And, um, what is depicted, then, on the --

MR. FALLON: -- um, PowerPoint?

DONALD SIMLEY: This PowerPoint -- This shows the lingual aspect, or the tongue side aspect. And, again, you can see -- you compare that surface of the bone compared to the cheek side aspect, it's very smooth. It was protected. It was -- it was further insulated in there. And this is just a portion of Tooth No. 31. Uh, that's all that was left of the crown portion of the tooth.

MR. FALLON: All right. Next one? And, uh, what are we looking at here on the -- the photograph? This should be Exhibit 177, I believe?

DONALD SIMLEY: That's correct, 177. Uh, this is from the occlusal or from the biting surface. And this just shows the top of the tooth. And the way it was fractured matched, that fracture was down -- looks like it comes across here and comes up here. So this root and this root were two separate entities, uh, when I received them, and then I fracture matched them back together.

MR. FALLON: All right. So are you telling us that what we're looking at here is actually the root and not so much -- the -- the top of the root and not really the crown or the top that -- the part where we chew with?

DONALD SIMLEY: Correct. That part that you chew with, the part that's normally above the gum, is -- is, for all practical purposes, 99.9 percent gone.

MR. FALLON: All right. All right. And what is, uh, depicted here now?

DONALD SIMLEY: Uh, this is Exhibit 178.

MR. FALLON: All right.

DONALD SIMLEY: Uh, this was the panorex x-ray from 2001, uh, that I received from Special Agent Jim Holmes. Again, the panorex x-ray goes around the outside of the mouth, picks up everything from ear to ear. Um, so it shows all of the teeth, and it shows the wisdom teeth that Teresa had at this particular time. The tooth that we're looking at is on the lower right second molar, and that's Tooth No. 31.

MR. FALLON: What are we looking at here?

DONALD SIMLEY: Uh, this would be Exhibit 179. And this is just a cropped picture of that panorex. So it's just -- That area that we're looking at on Tooth No. 31 kind of zoomed in on that particular tooth.

DONALD SIMLEY: That is Tooth No. 31. I had other fragments in there at one time, uh, trying to see if that particular fragment was part of Tooth No. 30, and that it was not. Um, so what we're looking at, again, this is the postmort x-ray of the fragment of Tooth No. 31.

MR. FALLON: All right.

DONALD SIMLEY: And then this is just a cropped picture of Tooth No. 31, and that is -- looks like Exhibit 180.

MR. FALLON: All right. And what does, um, postmortem x-ray mean?

DONALD SIMLEY: Postmortem is just after death.

MR. FALLON: All right. And so is that the -- is that an x-ray of what you previously showed?

DONALD SIMLEY: Correct. The initial photographs, uh, of -- of Tooth No. 31 with the buccal, lingual and occlusal views. Uh, that's an x-ray of that fragment, yes.

MR. FALLON: So that's that tooth there. Now, is that, um, x-ray taken after it's fracture matched?

MR. FALLON: Okay. All right. And what are we looking at here? We have a split screen; panorex and postmortem?

DONALD SIMLEY: This is Exhibit 181. And this is just a side-by-side comparison of the panorex at the cropped Tooth No. 31, and then the postmortem Tooth No. 31. And just some of the things I'm looking at is the distance between the roots. The whiter area up here that we're looking at is the enamel. That's the crown of the tooth. From here over is the crown of the tooth. And that part has been destroyed.

The little grayer shade on the inside is the dentin. That's the inside part of the tooth. Um, enamel is the hardest structure in the body. Dentin is the second hardest structure in the body. Uh, they're both harder than bone.

The dark line in the middle of the tooth is the pulp. That's the blood vessel near the middle of the tooth.

So what I'm looking at, I'm comparing the pulp tissues in the middle of the tooth, antemortem and postmortem. There's a little curvature in the root on the postmortem x-ray that I can see on the antemortem x-ray.

So that's just a side-by-side comparison.

MR. FALLON: All right. All right, Doctor, let me ask you, then, for, um, your opinion. Um, based on your analysis of Tooth No. 31, the one that you were able to fracture match back together, do you have an opinion on whether the root and bone fragments from Tooth 31 recovered, uh, from the burn pit, are consistent with the dental x-rays of Teresa Halbach that you obtained from Dr. Krupka?

MR. FALLON: And what is that opinion?

DONALD SIMLEY: In my opinion, they were very consistent. And that I could place -- actually place the antemortem x-ray on top of the postmortem x-ray on the panorex, and then, also, on the '97 bitewing x-rays, and they would appear as one. I mean, I could superimpose one on top of the other.

And the -- the pulp tissue, the root structure, uh, would coincide perfectly in there. So they were very consistent.

MR. FALLON: Now -- now, in your terms of forensic dentistry, what does very consistent mean?

DONALD SIMLEY: To me, very consistent means that it's a probable identification. Um, positive identification -- I -- I was a little leary of -- of that term, because of the fact that I only, essentially, had one fragment to really work with. Um, but I also am very conservative in my opinion. Um, if I say positive identification, to me that means to the exclusion of all others. And, um --

MR. FALLON: Does that mean a hundred percent in your mind?

DONALD SIMLEY: A hundred percent in my mind. Yes. And --

DONALD SIMLEY: this is -- looked like it was very, very close.

MR. FALLON: All right. That was my question. How close are -- were you to making a positive identification here?

DONALD SIMLEY: I was very close. I mean, it was right there, and -- and probably the only thing holding me back is that I'm, again, ultra-conservative in my opinion.

MR. FALLON: All right.

MR. FALLON: I have no further questions for the witness and would move into evidence the, uh, photographs which, uh, Dr. Simley has identified. Um, Exhibits, uh -- Plus Exhibit 162, which was the tooth fragment that he fractured matched. And that would be Exhibit 162, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, and, for completion of the record, Exhibit 182, the CV.

THE COURT: Any objection, Counsel?

MR. FREMGEN: No, Judge.

THE COURT: They're received. Cross-examination.

MR. FREMGEN: No, Judge.

THE COURT: All right. You may step down.

THE COURT: Any further witnesses?

MR. FALLON: I think that concludes our witnesses for this afternoon.

THE COURT: For this afternoon?

MR. FREMGEN: Judge, for the -- for the record, I would move in Exhibit 175. I believe that was the one I introduced with, uh, Agent Sturdivant. I believe it was a picture of a -- a larger, wider angle picture of the burn --

THE COURT: Photo of the burn pit.

MR. FREMGEN: -- pit. Right.

MR. FALLON: We have no objection.

THE COURT: All right.

MR. FALLON: We would join in that request.

THE COURT: All right. That's -- that's received as well. All right. We are then adjourned until tomorrow at, uh, 8:30.

MR. FALLON: Very well.

THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, the usual admonition. Don't talk about the case to anyone, not even among yourselves. Okay.

(Wherein court stands adjourned at 4:07 p.m.)

Continue to Day 41.Three Trial Stipulations Read to the Jury