Expert witnessWisconsin State Crime Laboratory (Madison)

William Newhouse

Firearms examiner who compared recovered cartridge casings and bullets with an examined rifle.

460 lines·12 proceedings·4 mentions·2 trials

About

Firearms examiner William Newhouse compared recovered ammunition with test fires from a .22-caliber Marlin Glenfield Model 60 rifle in the trials of Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey. In both, he attributed 11 cartridge casings and bullet FL to that rifle. He said damaged bullet FK shared characteristics consistent with the rifle but lacked the surviving microscopic markings needed to identify a particular gun as its source. In Avery’s trial, defense questioning challenged the FL comparison, including differences visible in photographs, the absence of a matching-striae count on his worksheet, and the lack of a specified identification threshold in written laboratory procedures. Newhouse maintained that his conclusion relied on additional microscopic detail not fully shown in the photographs. In Dassey’s trial, he acknowledged limits in comparing test-fire and recovered ammunition and said his examination did not establish who fired the rifle.

Trial Record (12)

AverySteven AveryFeb 12, 2007 – Mar 18, 2007Called by prosecution

Firearms examiner William Newhouse linked 11 casings and bullet FL to a .22-caliber rifle in Steven Avery's 2007 trial, while saying bullet FK could not be traced to a particular gun. Defense questioning tested the markings and documentation behind his FL identification.

Day 14

Mar 1, 2007

DirectWilliam Newhouse — DirectWilliam NewhouseThomas J. Fallon77lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse linked 11 submitted casings and bullet FL to the rifle, but could not identify the particular gun that fired bullet FK.

CrossWilliam Newhouse — CrossWilliam NewhouseJerome F. Buting2highlights241lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse defended his identification of bullet FL, acknowledged other possible sources for FK, and explained why the FL peer-review record was not in his case file.

Highlights (2)

admissionUsing the bullet worksheet, Buting established that it recorded no minimum matching-striae count; Newhouse also said the laboratory's written procedures did not specify what was required for an identification.Open in transcript →

testimony highlightNewhouse agreed that, based on what remained of bullet FK, a Marlin Model 60 with the stated class characteristics could have fired it; he also identified a Jennings .22-caliber pistol as another possible source.Open in transcript →

RedirectWilliam Newhouse — RedirectWilliam NewhouseThomas J. Fallon1highlight14lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse explained why he could not identify the gun that fired Item FK and defended his comparison of the Exhibit 277 bullet with the Marlin rifle.

Highlights (1)

testimony highlightAddressing visible differences in a comparison photograph, Newhouse said the pictured matching striations were only one part of his basis for identifying the Exhibit 277 bullet as fired from the Marlin rifle.Open in transcript →

RecrossWilliam Newhouse — RecrossWilliam NewhouseJerome F. Buting1highlight15lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse said two visible striae were insufficient on their own to identify the rifle; Buting later withdrew mismarked Exhibit 420.

Highlights (1)

confrontationNewhouse rejected Buting’s description of the pictured groove impression as a match. He said two visible striae served as a reference point but were insufficient by themselves for an identification; he relied on additional detail elsewhere on the bullet.Open in transcript →

Day 19

Mar 8, 2007

ProceduralAfternoon exhibit reconciliationMentioned

Summary

The court admitted several exhibits, and the State withdrew two disputed phone-record summaries before the defense case began.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 23

Mar 14, 2007

ClosingState’s Closing Argument ResumesKenneth R. KratzMentioned

Summary

Kratz completed the State's closing by linking its timeline, burn-area, firearm, and DNA arguments and requesting guilty verdicts on the three remaining charges.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

ClosingDefense Closing Argument ResumesJerome F. ButingMentioned

Summary

Buting challenges the key, RAV4 blood, bullet DNA, and EDTA evidence as he argues the investigation left reasonable doubt; a third-party-liability objection interrupts his closing.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

DasseyBrendan DasseyApr 16, 2007 – Apr 25, 2007Called by prosecution

William Newhouse testified in Brendan Dassey's trial that 11 cartridge casings and one bullet came from an examined Marlin rifle, but he could not identify that rifle as the source of a second, damaged bullet.

Day 1

Apr 16, 2007

OpeningState's Opening StatementKenneth R. KratzMentioned

Summary

Kratz outlined the State's theory that Dassey helped Avery assault and kill Halbach, then previewed Dassey's recorded statement and evidence the State said would corroborate it.

Mentioned in this proceeding.

Day 2

Apr 17, 2007

DirectWilliam Newhouse — DirectWilliam NewhouseThomas J. Fallon69lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse attributed 11 cartridge casings and one bullet to a Marlin rifle but could not identify that rifle as the source of a second, damaged bullet.

CrossWilliam Newhouse — CrossWilliam NewhouseRaymond L. Edelstein40lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse defended his identification of bullet FL with the examined rifle while acknowledging limits on ammunition comparisons, bullet FK, and identifying who fired the rifle.

RedirectWilliam Newhouse — RedirectWilliam NewhouseThomas J. Fallon2lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse said Item FK could have come from the examined weapon, but he could not identify it as the source with certainty.

RecrossWilliam Newhouse — RecrossWilliam NewhouseRaymond L. Edelstein2lines spoken

Summary

Newhouse could not say whether Item FK was just as likely not fired from the examined gun.