Keeping up on the trial of my dentists murderer

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
Local News TV Station WTAE - as more updates are posted I will continue to update this thread.

Background:

Death: April 2006
Arrest: September 2007
Trial: March 2009
Prosecutor: Senior Deputy Attorney General Anthony J. Krastek
Defense: Richard Galloway and Jeffrey Monzo
Judge: President Judge William J. Martin


Prosecutors allege that Foley, a 13-year state police veteran, went to Yelenic's home on the night of April 13 or early on the morning of April 14.
Foley is accused of beating and stabbing Yelenic during an argument over the pending divorce settlement.
Yelenic was one day away from finalizing his divorce to Michele Yelenic. The two have an adopted son, J.J.



Day 1 - March 9, 2009

Today the jury heard opening statements, first from special prosecutor and senior Deputy Attorney General Anthony Krastek, who said Foley had the motive, opportunity and ability to kill Yelenic. He told the jury they would hear from numerous witnesses that Foley hated his girlfriend's estranged husband, that he even tried to have him arrested, and wanted him dead- -- going as far as telling his co-workers at the state police barracks in Indiana County that he hoped Yelenic died in a car accident.

The defense team, led by attorney Dick Galloway and second-chaired by Jeff Monzo, said there was little DNA, no blood and no clothing belonging to the trooper at the scene, making the case a flimsy, circumstantial one.

On the stand now is state police Cpl. Charles Gonglick, a 13-year veteran of the state police who has spent 10 years in forensic services. He was called to the scene just hours after Yelenic's body was found by a neighbor boy.

I will update you at 2:45 with testimony on what he found and the virtual tour of the crime scene designed by the FBI that the jury is about to see.

Day 1 - March 9, 2009 - 2:45 p.m. update

After the murder went unsolved for more than a year, the FBI was called in to consult on the case along with the attorney general's office. In testimony today, the FBI said they spent $34,000 to develop a virtual tour of the crime scene. The jury just got to see the tour on a 50-inch flat screen TV. It showed the dentist's entire home, where his body was found, and the eight blood-soaked shoeprints that led away from the body and out the back door.

Investigators say those shoeprints were later matched to a pair of shoes Foley was known to wear, size and all, but the actual shoes were never found at his home.

Also on the tour, which will be the subject of my report tonight on WTAE Channel 4 Action News at 6 p.m., were photos of Yelenic's body, nearly drained of blood from a brutal knife attack. Gonglick testified the blood actually soaked the living room floor and into the basement.

Also on the tour: The divorce papers splattered with blood. Yelenic was one day away from divorcing his wife, Michele. She was living with Foley while she was divorcing Dr. Yelenic.


Day 2 - March 10, 2009 - 11 a.m. update

Watch Jennifer Miele's Day 2 Report

Today, forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht testified Dr. John Yelenic's head was nearly severed in the brutal attack inside his Blairsville home. Wecht said he had several defensive stab wounds made by a knife, and his throat was slashed from ear to ear. Wecht believes the dentist then tried running out the front door to get away -- at which point his attacker smashed his head through the window pane in the front door -- the force of the impact slicing through his jugular. Wecht believes the dentist was probably alive for another nine minutes, before he bled out.

The crime scene photos are horrific. The dentist was covered in blood. Wecht said, "In my opinion, the assailant was not very happy with Dr. Yelenic."

See an interview with Wecht tonight on WTAE Channel 4 Action News at 5 p.m., where he describes the attack.

This afternoon we will hear from the first officer at the scene, Blairsville Officer Jill Gaston. She and investigators believe former state Trooper Kevin Foley is responsible for the murder. When she interviewed the trooper, he had a gash on his face, which prosecutors will try to convince the jury he got while fighting with Yelenic.

Day 2 - March 10, 2009 - 2:40 p.m. update

Blairsville police Officer Jill Gaston testified today that she was called to the murder scene to handle the press and to notify next of kin that Yelenic was dead. She and a deputy coroner went to the home of his estranged wife, Michele, to let her know. Foley, Michele's boyfriend, answered the door. That's when Officer Gaston noticed a gash above his left eye, which she testified was 1-2 inches long and fresh, still red and swollen.

When she was looking at the gash, she said Foley told her it was an injury received while playing hockey the day before.

She left the home and called the Blairsville police chief, who believes Foley got the gash while attacking John Yelenic.

Defense attorneys say Gaston originally called the wound a scratch in a report she filed 24 hours after noticing it.

Day 2 - March 10, 2009 - 4:45 p.m. update

A former neighbor of the murdered dentist testified this afternoon that he heard men arguing the night Yelenic was killed. Harold German said he went to bed around 12:30 a.m., and woke up a bit later to the yelling. Then he said he heard a sound like a pig squealing. He was not able to determine what was being said during the argument. German lived four houses down and on the other side of the street.

Later this week and as early as tomorrow, the prosecution could call several state troopers to testify that Foley told them he loathed the dentist, once tried to have him arrested, and wished he was dead. Others will testify he often played with a knife at the barracks.


Day 3 - March 11, 2009 - 12:45 p.m. update

This morning, five state police troopers who worked with Foley testified on behalf of prosecutors, each talking about the months leading up to the murder.

Trooper Deanna Kirkland testified Foley once told her he prayed John Yelenic would die. And another time he told her he wished Yelenic would die in a car accident. She said he often played with a knife at the barracks, flipping it open and closed over and over again -- which she thought was strange.

She also told her Foley prompted her to open an investigation into whether the dentist was molesting the son the dentist adopted with Michele Yelenic. The boy, J.J., was just 6 years old, and Foley claimed he was acting strange around the dentist.

Trooper Kirkland said she investigated the claim, which was later determined to be completely unfounded by Indiana County Children and Youth Services.

Other troopers testified they noticed a scratch over Foley's right eye in the days after the murder. Trooper Joy Goodyear said it looked like a fingernail scratch, skin had been taken off. Trooper James Aloi noticed it too and said it was fresh.

Cpl. Randall Gardner will go back on the stand this afternoon to discuss DNA found in Yelenic's fingernail clippings -- DNA from his attacker that prosecutors say made its way under his nails during a violent struggle.

Look for an update this afternoon.

Day 3 - March 11, 2009 - 2:15 p.m. update

During a recess, John Yelenic's cousin, Mary Ann Clark, told our cameras Kevin Foley's fellow state police troopers should have spoken up when Foley started making death wishes for the dentist.

Instead, they removed him from his dental office in handcuffs and investigated him for allegations he molested his son J.J. Those allegations were determined to be unfounded by the Indiana County courts.

See (Clark's) interview tonight on Channel 4 Action News at 5.

Trooper Randall Gardner, a Pennsylvania State Police corporal, gave the jury a list of things that were taken from Foley's home in a search warrant conducted six months after the murder. There (were) no bloody clothes or knives found. Prosecutors say he had plenty of time to ditch them, but defense attorneys say there was nothing to find in the home, because Foley is innocent.

Day 4 - March 12, 2009 - 1:30 p.m. update

Prosecutors are focusing their efforts today on DNA evidence found under Dr. Yelenic's nails. First on the stand today was former Blairsville police officer John Brant, who cataloged the scene and the evidence. He testified he kept blood samples from window panes, dog and human hair samples in an uncooled locker at the police station. He kept DNA samples from the finger nails in a refrigerator.

Special agent Michael Hochrein of the FBI testified he received a call for help with the investigation from the Blairsville police in June 2006, but didn't get the samples until may of 2007. The defense says in that time all evidence should have been refrigerated and could have been contaminated by anyone who had access to it. Hochrein said all of the evidence did not need to be refrigerated, just the DNA, which was.

FBI agent Jerrilyn Conway testified she found 2 types of DNA in the fingernail clippings. 90 percent of it belonged to Dr. Yelenic, 10 percent to someone else. She says the match to Foley is one out of 13,000 Caucasians, compared to the usual one out of 3 trillion.

The state hired Robin Cotton, associate professor at Boston University School of Medicine to focus on that 10 percent of the DNA that is not Dr. Yelenic's. She did two tests, and realized after the preliminary hearing she made a mathematical error that concluded the match was one in 59 million. Her second test concluded the match was one in 23 million.

The defense says her methods are flawed because she removes too many variables.

Another private DNA analyst is expected to take the scene this afternoon.

Tonight at 5 - see an interview with Dr. Yelenic's girlfriend, who says she stopped seeing him in the months before the murder because she says his ex wife (Michele Yelenic) and her new boyfriend (Trooper Foley) were constantly causing waves for them.

Day 4 - March 12, 2009 - 2:30 p.m. update

Dr. Mark Perlin, another DNA analyst who is the CEO of the Cybergenetics company in Pittsburgh, says he used an even more sophisticated method to extract specific information from the DNA samples and determined the match to Trooper Foley is one in 189 billion.

On a break from court, I asked Dr. Robbin Cotton if she thought the samples could have been contaminated or were improperly stored. She said they were in excellent shape.

Tomorrow, we expect to see video from a Sheetz surveillance camera which prosecutors say shows Foley's car in the area of the murder at the time it happened.

Day 5 - March 13, 2009 - 12:30 p.m. update

From ThePittsburghChannel.com editors:

Photographs that were entered into evidence at the trial have been released to the public. Some of the pictures show Foley wearing sneakers, and others are crime scene photos of a shoeprint that prosecutors claim matches his style of shoe.

See The First Picture
See The Second Picture
See The Third Picture
See The Fourth Picture

Check back for an update from Jennifer Miele soon, and watch her report tonight on Channel 4 Action News at 5 p.m.

Day 5 - March 13, 2009 - 1 p.m. update

This morning, Terry Schalow from the Asics shoe company testified he identified footprints at the scene as being made by Gel-Creed or Gel-Creed Plus tennis shoes. Those types, according to Schalow, were very poor sellers. In the United States, 10,000 men's Gel-Creed were sold. 15,000 Gel-Creed Plus were sold. He believes the print was made by a size 10 to 11.5.

Trooper Foley wears a size 10.5. Entered into evidence was a photo of Foley wearing an Asics Gel-Creed Plus.

Also entered into evidence today were two shoeprints taken from the scene. The prints showed the killer leaving the body and heading out the back door. Schalow says the shoeprints at the scene were consistent with the tennis shoes made by his company, but can't say for certain they weren't made by a knock-off shoe.

Day 5 - March 13, 2009 - 2:15 p.m. update

Michael Smith, an FBI forensics examiner who focuses on identifying tire and shoe prints, says he used a computer program to match the shoe prints found at the crime scene. From his examination, the only possibilities of a match were the Asics Gelcreed and Asics Gelcreed Plus tennis shoes. He was not able to determine a size because the prints were only partial.

Jurors were given a two-hour break, because several of them are suffering from the stomach flu and a cold.

When court resumed, Russell States, the loss prevention coordinator for Sheetz convenience stores, testified he gave Blairsville police video from the night of the murder from the New Alexandria and Blairsville stores. In it, you can make out a red SUV driving by both stores. But you cannot see a driver or a license plate number, and the camera is very far from the roads.

Prosecutors say the video puts Foley in the area at the time of the murder. But defense attorneys say it could be anyone's red SUV on the tape.

Day 5 - March 13, 2009 - 8 p.m. update

The prosecution will rest its case Monday after calling its final witness: the lawyer who was handling Yelenic's divorce. She is expected to testify that the doctor feared for his life months before he was killed.



Day 6 - March 16, 2009 - 1 p.m. update

Effie Alexander was the final prosecution witness. She was Dr. John Yelenic's defense attorney. She said his divorce with wife Michele Yelenic was "downright nasty." She said Dr. Yelenic was far too generous with Michele and that the two has finally settled on an agreement in which she would get 60 percent of the assets, until Michele "sabotaged" the agreement.

The prosecution rested. The defense is now trying to create a reasonable doubt in the minds of jurors about Kevin Foley's guilt.

Defense attorney Dick Galloway called neighbor Melissa Uss to the stand. She testified she borrowed $15,000 from the dentist to start a bakery in April of 2006, a few days before the murder, Yelenic asked her for the money back. He told her his wife filed her own tax return, so he owed more than usual in taxes. She wrote him a $14,000 check, because that's all she had at the time.

For several months, Melissa's husband Tom was considered to be a suspect, but Blairsville police cleared him of any wrongdoing.

The morning Yelenic was murdered; she testified her husband got up at 3: 30 a.m. and left for work at a Johnstown steel company around 5 a.m. It was about that time another neighbor, Isaiah Brader, testified he heard two people arguing. One said "I'll never loan you money again."

She said in an interview with Channel 4 Action News, that you can see at 5 p.m., she and her family loved Yelenic dearly, that he was extremely generous, and there was no animosity about the loan.

Her husband's shoe size is 13.5, bigger than the 10-11.5 that experts believe belonged to the murderer. And she testified her husband never owned a pair of Asics or Asics knock offs that belonged to that match the footprints left at the murder scene. She said his tennis shoes were from WalMart.

Thomas Uss is expected to testify this afternoon.

Day 6 - March 16, 2009 - 2:12 p.m. update

The defense is trying convince the jury that Dr. Yelenic was "closer than normal" to his neighbor and high school friend Melissa Uss, while her husband was serving in the military.

Darla Ferguson, another neighbor, told police the two would sit on the front porch and talk all the time. On the stand she testified she never saw anything else happen, that she believed they were in fact just friends, consoling each other through tough times- him in a divorce -- and her missing her military husband.

In opening statements, the defense said Mr. Uss could have been jealous and killed the dentist.

Thomas Uss is on the witness list and could be called to the stand. He was cleared as a suspect.

Day 6 - March 16, 2009 - 3:05 p.m. update

Defense attorneys decided not to call Thomas Uss to the stand, so the jury never got to hear why police cleared him as a suspect. The Navy veteran and neighbor of Dr. John Yelenic did talk to us and you can see his interview on Channel 4 Action News at 6 p.m.

A handful of hockey parents whose children were coached by state Trooper Kevin Foley took the stand this afternoon as character witnesses, saying he was trusted among the parents.

Court adjourned early today, and more witnesses are expected tomorrow. The judge told the jury they will begin deliberating on the case later this week.

Day 7 - March 17, 2009 - 10:20 a.m. update

Today, the defense will bring their own DNA witnesses to the stand to say the DNA evidence found at the scene is not a good match to Trooper Kevin Foley. This could be the last day of testimony. I suspect the jury may begin deliberating tomorrow.

Day 7 - March 17, 2009 - 12:26 p.m. update

The Rev. Stanford Webb, of the Faith Temple Church of God in Christ, a Pentecostal ministry in Indiana, was a character witness today. He testified he knew Foley for five years through his son-in-law who is also a state trooper. Webb worked on Foley's lawnmower, and he said Foley was nice and paid him in full for the work.

Webb said Foley did not go to his church, but has turned to him for spiritual guidance after the arrest. He said he's been going regularly to visit Foley in jail. He said Foley has never raised the issue of guilt or innocence and has never mentioned Michele Yelenic.

Webb said, "Whatever the outcome, we will still be friends."

To see what Rev. Webb thinks about the charges, watch an interview with him tonight on WTAE Channel 4 Action News at 5 p.m.

Testimony continues after lunch. Defense attorneys won't say if they may put Foley on the stand.

Day 7 - March 16, 2009 - 1:45 p.m. update

Indiana realtor Marsha Delaney was one in a parade of witnesses who testified Foley has a good reputation in the community.

William Bagley was a former prisoner in the Indiana County Jail, when he says another prisoner told him he killed the dentist. The prisoner told Bagley he had a bad drug problem and was burglarizing homes. He told him he was a former patient of the dentist and went there to rob him and then blacked out. He left with blood on his clothes.

Bagley testified he did not believe the prisoner until he saw an article in the paper that the dentist had been murdered. He said he watches Discovery Channel and The History Channel all day long, and since they do so many stories about people blacking out in a rage, he believed him and reported it to state police.

The prosecutor asked him, "This isn't the only murder you solved in prison, is it?" The prosecutor then told the jury about another time Bagley claimed he knew who slashed the throat of another young girl.

Still no word if Foley will take the stand. We are expecting the courts to release Sheetz surveillance video you can see on Channel 4 Action News at 5 p.m. We also have artist renderings from sketches taken inside the courtroom.

Day 7 - March 16, 2009 - 3:30 p.m. update

Defense confirms Foley will take the stand in his own defense tomorrow morning. Foley, a former crime scene investigator for the state police, has taken the stand many times against criminals. He is expected to be the last witness. Jury could begin deliberating tomorrow afternoon.


Day 8 - March 18, 2009 - 11:30 a.m. update

Kevin Foley spent more than a decade as a state police trooper, many of them as a crime scene investigator. He is used to taking the stand to testify; typically it's to convict other people. Today it is to defend himself.

He took the stand at 9 a.m., and as of noon, was still up there.

I can tell you he was by most accounts an excellent witness. He came across as direct, likable, the jury even laughed at his jokes a few times, he has an upstate New York accent, that's where he's from. He moved here with his second wife, with whom he said he had several miscarriages. He said he met Michele Yelenic was she was divorcing her dentist husband, Dr. John Yelenic. Prosecutors say it was that messy divorce that prompted Foley to kill the dentist. Foley said he met Michele while he was a part of a team investigating her for breaking into her boyfriend's email account. She was never charged, and the two started dating and moved in together a few years later.

Foley said he cooperated fully with his investigation, had nothing to do with the murder, and said, "I am innocent." He admitted he did not like the dentist because of the way he talked to Michele during the divorce, but said he was joking when he asked another state trooper to help kill the dentist. The prosecutor asked him what was so funny about that. He then said quietly, "Nothing." He went on to say he was the practical joker of the barracks, and everyone knew he was kidding.

His attorneys are calling him Trooper Foley on the stand, even though he is on unpaid suspension from the state police. The most compelling testimony came when Foley said he, as a single man, decided he wanted a family so badly he went to Guatemala to adopt a little boy, Gannon. He is now 3.5 years old. That adoption happened in March of 2006, one month before the murder. He said it was the happiest time of his life. He said Michele was happy. too. because her divorce was nearly final.

The defense is still cross-examining Foley. I'll update the blog regularly this afternoon.
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
Day 8 - March 18, 2009 - 12:30 p.m. update

Kevin Foley is done testifying. The jury will be back at 1 p.m. At that time closing arguments will begin. Nobody is allowed in or out of the courtroom during that time. The defense goes first. Prosecution second. There will be a short break after that, when I will leave to update the blog, and then the jury will receive their instructions. That's called the charge. That takes about an hour.

It is likely the jury will then be dismissed for the day, and begin deliberating tomorrow morning first thing. We could have a verdict as early as noon time tomorrow.


Day 8 - March 18, 2009 - 3:11 p.m. update

Closing arguments are over. The jury will not be given instructions on how to deliberate. The judge could allow them to begin today or start fresh tomorrow.

Mary Ann Clark, Dr. Yelenic's cousin, told us in an interview you can see on Channel 4 Action News at 5 p.m. that Foley was not telling the truth. She's hopeful for a conviction quickly.
 

imported_Champ

Golden Member
Mar 25, 2008
1,608
0
0
But, ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider. Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now think about it; that does not make sense!

Why would a Wookiee, an eight-foot tall Wookiee, want to live on Endor, with a bunch of two-foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself: What does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! Look at me. I'm a lawyer defending a major record company, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca! Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense! None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberatin' and conjugatin' the Emancipation Proclamation, [approaches and softens] does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense! If Chewbacca lives on Endor, you must acquit! The defense rests
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
9
0
Sounds guility but the state/DNA lab messed up enough to make you question other parts of the case.

But as dumb as jurys seem today they will still find him guility.
 

Kntx

Platinum Member
Dec 11, 2000
2,270
0
71
Doesn't look like there is a whole lot of hard evidence against him. The circumstantial stuff is pretty damning, but where's the beef?
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
32,874
12,142
136
i didn't read through the whole thing word for word, but it doesn't seem like they can actually place foley at the crime.
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
9
0
Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
i didn't read through the whole thing word for word, but it doesn't seem like they can actually place foley at the crime.

Teh DNA kinda can but the first person said is was 1 in 13,000 then came back said maybe more. Then they got another person to look at it etc... so it should be a slam dunk due to DNA but they really messed up. Now it looks like they were DNA shopping. The rest could tie anybody that wears a size 10-11 shoe and drives a red SUV.
 

James Bond

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2005
6,023
0
0
Originally posted by: moshquerade
anti-dentite

LOL! Haven't seen that one in years.

Edit: It's crazy how many little phrases came from that show. Never ceases to amaze me...

Ahh, memories.

Ok - Now on with the show!
 

cheezy321

Diamond Member
Dec 31, 2003
6,218
2
0
I actually read all of that! Very interesting. So the verdict will most likely be given tomorrow?
 

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
wow, it didnt even make it to "tomorrow", even I didnt expect anyhting this soon.



INDIANA, Pa. -- An Indiana County jury returned a guilty verdict of first-degree murder late Wednesday night against a state trooper accused of stabbing and nearly decapitating Blairsville dentist Dr. John Yelenic in 2006.

The verdict came hours after suspended Pennsylvania state Trooper Kevin Foley took the stand and denied killing the dentist, who was found dead on April 13, 2006.

"First-degree murder, I mean, that's what we hoped for. The anticipation was just growing and growing," said Mary Ann Clark, a cousin of John Yelenic. "Right before we went in, someone said, 'They're going to send us home for the evening,' and I just was like, I can't go through another sleepless night, I have to know tonight, I can't do this again."

Foley was charged with criminal homicide, meaning the jury had to determine his guilt or innocence and also the underlying murder or manslaughter he may have committed. First-degree murder carries a mandatory life sentence; prosecutors did not seek the death penalty.

"John has his justice tonight. John deserved this; he was the most wonderful person in the world. He died the most horrible death and tonight this is his night," Clark said. "The system worked."

The defense rested its case and the jury began its deliberations late Wednesday afternoon and lasted late into the evening. When asked by WTAE Channel 4's reporter Jon Greiner, defense attorney Jeff Monzo said outside the courthouse that he's "very disappointed in the verdict. We still believe in Kevin's innocence and we'll press forward," meaning the defense will file an appeal.


Foley was involved with Yelenic's estranged wife, Michele, and police said they believed a fight concerning the relationship led to the attack.

Greiner said Michele Yelenic was not seen or heard from at the trial, but apparently may face more legal action.

"From the moment this happened, myself and the rest of John's friends, we knew who committed this murder, and the last thing I have to say is, Michelle, I'll see you at the civil suit. We're coming after you," said Tim Abbey, a man who identified himself as a friend of John Yelenic.

Foley admitted he did not like Dr. Yelenic because of the way he talked to Michele during the divorce proceedings, but said he was joking when he asked another state trooper to help kill the man.

"I never made a threat with the intention of carrying it out," Foley said when questioned on the stand by the prosecution.

When asked if he killed Dr. Yelenic, Foley told the jury at the Indiana County Courthouse, "I am innocent." The jury even laughed at his jokes a few times.

Foley told the jury that he adopted a child from Guatemala one month before the murder. Foley, a single father, said it was the happiest time of his life when he brought the child home, and he said Michele Yelenic was happy too because her divorce was nearly final.

Foley, 43, has been on unpaid suspension since he was arrested in September 2007.
 

bignateyk

Lifer
Apr 22, 2002
11,288
7
0
Holy shit, I think that might be the cop who gave me a ticket going through blairsville a few years ago.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
That 1 in 89 billion number is extremely conservative, if they actually sequenced it. That's only about 19 wobble bases. I'm guessing they're still doing restriction enzyme digests at the ol' forensics lab...
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
9
0
Originally posted by: jagec
That 1 in 89 billion number is extremely conservative, if they actually sequenced it. That's only about 19 wobble bases. I'm guessing they're still doing restriction enzyme digests at the ol' forensics lab...

Yea but what got me was...

"FBI agent Jerrilyn Conway testified she found 2 types of DNA in the fingernail clippings. 90 percent of it belonged to Dr. Yelenic, 10 percent to someone else. She says the match to Foley is one out of 13,000 Caucasians, compared to the usual one out of 3 trillion.

The state hired Robin Cotton, associate professor at Boston University School of Medicine to focus on that 10 percent of the DNA that is not Dr. Yelenic's. She did two tests, and realized after the preliminary hearing she made a mathematical error that concluded the match was one in 59 million. Her second test concluded the match was one in 23 million. "


They had 2 different people that could not agree and the one that said it was him changed their report due to "math error".

I think he is guility but it seems they were DNA shopping and even then had a hard time getting the result they wanted.

The state funked up but most juries are to dumb to really look into it so they just buy what ever they are told. If you were brough tup on these charges how would you feel?
There case was 3 parts if i read it right.

1. Shoes size 10-11 (not a rare shoe or size)
2. Red Suv (No make/model, plate, etc...)
3. DNA (3 test showed 3 different results)

Thats it. The DNA with motive should be enough but the 3 test with different numbers would make me doubt it.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
32,874
12,142
136
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Originally posted by: jagec
That 1 in 89 billion number is extremely conservative, if they actually sequenced it. That's only about 19 wobble bases. I'm guessing they're still doing restriction enzyme digests at the ol' forensics lab...

Yea but what got me was...

"FBI agent Jerrilyn Conway testified she found 2 types of DNA in the fingernail clippings. 90 percent of it belonged to Dr. Yelenic, 10 percent to someone else. She says the match to Foley is one out of 13,000 Caucasians, compared to the usual one out of 3 trillion.

The state hired Robin Cotton, associate professor at Boston University School of Medicine to focus on that 10 percent of the DNA that is not Dr. Yelenic's. She did two tests, and realized after the preliminary hearing she made a mathematical error that concluded the match was one in 59 million. Her second test concluded the match was one in 23 million. "


They had 2 different people that could not agree and the one that said it was him changed their report due to "math error".

I think he is guility but it seems they were DNA shopping and even then had a hard time getting the result they wanted.

The state funked up but most juries are to dumb to really look into it so they just buy what ever they are told. If you were brough tup on these charges how would you feel?
There case was 3 parts if i read it right.

1. Shoes size 10-11 (not a rare shoe or size)
2. Red Suv (No make/model, plate, etc...)
3. DNA (3 test showed 3 different results)

Thats it. The DNA with motive should be enough but the 3 test with different numbers would make me doubt it.


agreed. i'd probably have to go with innocent based on reasonable doubt / burden of proof.
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
1. Shoes size 10-11 (not a rare shoe or size)
2. Red Suv (No make/model, plate, etc...)
3. DNA (3 test showed 3 different results)

1. It WAS a rare shoe. Not a rare size.
2. Yeah, not much. Backs up the other data, but does little by itself.
3. No, 3 different tests showed the same result three times with three different levels of certainty. Different gel qualities or vagaries of the digest or the PCR used to amplify it can change the brightness of your bands, but it will NOT make a non-matching DNA digest turn into a match, or vice-versa.

You do realize that the "issues" that you bring up are absolutely minuscule compared to the horrifying errors introduced by eyewitness testimony, right? I agree that DNA forensics are far behind where they should be, given that biology itself has advanced so much further, but this is pretty damning testimony without anything overly suspicious in it.

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Thats it. The DNA with motive should be enough but the 3 test with different numbers would make me doubt it.


agreed. i'd probably have to go with innocent based on reasonable doubt / burden of proof.

You'd set a murderer free because the precision (not the accuracy) of a technique varies? I'd hate to have you on my jury. You do realize that it would be FAR more suspicious if the tests had been within the same degree of certainty than otherwise, right? It still revealed a perfect match all three times, the only difference was that the odds of a random individual showing the same band pattern at the level of quality which they were able to achieve varied.
 

kranky

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
21,019
156
106
Amazing that there was only 4 hours of deliberations. The prosecution must have had a slam-dunk case in the jury's opinion.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
32,874
12,142
136
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
1. Shoes size 10-11 (not a rare shoe or size)
2. Red Suv (No make/model, plate, etc...)
3. DNA (3 test showed 3 different results)

1. It WAS a rare shoe. Not a rare size.
2. Yeah, not much. Backs up the other data, but does little by itself.
3. No, 3 different tests showed the same result three times with three different levels of certainty. Different gel qualities or vagaries of the digest or the PCR used to amplify it can change the brightness of your bands, but it will NOT make a non-matching DNA digest turn into a match, or vice-versa.

You do realize that the "issues" that you bring up are absolutely minuscule compared to the horrifying errors introduced by eyewitness testimony, right? I agree that DNA forensics are far behind where they should be, given that biology itself has advanced so much further, but this is pretty damning testimony without anything overly suspicious in it.

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Thats it. The DNA with motive should be enough but the 3 test with different numbers would make me doubt it.


agreed. i'd probably have to go with innocent based on reasonable doubt / burden of proof.

You'd set a murderer free because the precision (not the accuracy) of a technique varies? I'd hate to have you on my jury. You do realize that it would be FAR more suspicious if the tests had been within the same degree of certainty than otherwise, right? It still revealed a perfect match all three times, the only difference was that the odds of a random individual showing the same band pattern at the level of quality which they were able to achieve varied.

there is a large difference between 1/13,000 and 1/3,000,000,000,000 when there are 6,000,000,000 people on the planet.

if all three tests showed small probabilities, even of differing orders of magnitude (let's say 1:10^6 vs. 10^9 vs. 10^12) then i'd have no problem with it.

is the shoe *that* rare?
 

jagec

Lifer
Apr 30, 2004
24,442
6
81
Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
1. Shoes size 10-11 (not a rare shoe or size)
2. Red Suv (No make/model, plate, etc...)
3. DNA (3 test showed 3 different results)

1. It WAS a rare shoe. Not a rare size.
2. Yeah, not much. Backs up the other data, but does little by itself.
3. No, 3 different tests showed the same result three times with three different levels of certainty. Different gel qualities or vagaries of the digest or the PCR used to amplify it can change the brightness of your bands, but it will NOT make a non-matching DNA digest turn into a match, or vice-versa.

You do realize that the "issues" that you bring up are absolutely minuscule compared to the horrifying errors introduced by eyewitness testimony, right? I agree that DNA forensics are far behind where they should be, given that biology itself has advanced so much further, but this is pretty damning testimony without anything overly suspicious in it.

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Thats it. The DNA with motive should be enough but the 3 test with different numbers would make me doubt it.


agreed. i'd probably have to go with innocent based on reasonable doubt / burden of proof.

You'd set a murderer free because the precision (not the accuracy) of a technique varies? I'd hate to have you on my jury. You do realize that it would be FAR more suspicious if the tests had been within the same degree of certainty than otherwise, right? It still revealed a perfect match all three times, the only difference was that the odds of a random individual showing the same band pattern at the level of quality which they were able to achieve varied.

there is a large difference between 1/13,000 and 1/3,000,000,000,000 when there are 6,000,000,000 people on the planet.

if all three tests showed small probabilities, even of differing orders of magnitude (let's say 1:10^6 vs. 10^9 vs. 10^12) then i'd have no problem with it.

is the shoe *that* rare?

FFS, if a preliminary test has huge error bars, and a later test has tiny error bars, you don't throw out the later test because "you can't possible achieve that level of accuracy". I suppose we're just lucky that the police officer didn't say "hey, blood! 10/10 human beings have blood", which I suppose would be an even "larger difference" and make you more likely to acquit.

How about this for an example. Let's say that we are going to narrow down the murderer by weight. We happen to know that the murderer weigh 189.023512355 lbs. On our first attempt, we use a regular bathroom scale, and get a weight of 189.0 lbs. We say that only 1/13,000 people weigh exactly that (plus or minus .05 lbs). We try again with more accurate scales, and get 189.02351 lbs. Now we can say that only 1/3,000,000,000,000 people weigh exactly that. The latter measurement is IN NO WAY INVALIDATED simply because our former measurement was more accurate! It's sad that bringing science, logic, and numbers into a court case actually makes it MORE likely that a jury of average people will make an illogical choice.