📄 Direct examination of Bradley Popovich (part 2) — Thursday, January 16, 1997
Address:
C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1997\JAN\16\DIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-BRADLEY-.DOC
TRIAL
▲ Day 43 of 57

Direct examination of Bradley Popovich (part 2)

Witness: Bradley Popovich
Examiner: Tom Lambert
Called by: Plaintiff • Date: Thursday, January 16, 1997 • Utterances: 53
Plaintiff's expert Dr. Bradley Popovich testified on direct examination about the reliability of DNA test results from the Rockingham glove and socks, affirming that results from LAPD, Cellmark, and DOJ were accurate, reliable, and unaffected by contamination. He also addressed defense expert Dr. Gerdes's testimony on DNA degradation, explaining that degradation cannot cause mistyping — only the absence of a result.
1 A:

I did from all three labs.

2 Q:

Did you observe some evidence of contamination in those results?

3 A:

No. I saw no trace of any contamination.

4 Q:

And in your opinion, are these reliable test results?

5 A:

I believe they are.

6 Q:

Are they unaffected by contamination?

7 A:

I believe they're unaffected by contamination.

8 Q:

Are they accurate results?

9 A:

I believe they are accurate.

10 Q:

We now have up the results of the DNA analysis of the Rockingham gloves. Did you review the test results on the Rockingham glove?

11 A:

I did.

12 Q:

Did you observe any evidence of contamination in those test results?

13 A:

Again, I saw no evidence of contamination.

14 Q:

And in your opinion, are these test results reliable?

15 A:

I believe they are.

16 Q:

Are they accurate?

17 A:

I believe they're accurate.

18 Q:

Are they unaffected by contamination?

19 A:

I believe they are unaffected by contamination.

20 Q:

And these are RFLP results where we have 5 probe and 8 probe matches, are those significant results, Doctor?

21 A:

I think they are.

22 Q:

Are they significant results in terms of identifying the source of the blood on that glove?

23 A:

I think they're very significant in identifying that.

KEY QUOTE
24 MR. LAMBERT:

And finally, the socks board, please.

25 Q:

Finally, Dr. Popovich, we have the results of the DNA analysis on the Rockingham socks. Did you review these test results?

26 A:

I have.

27 Q:

And did you observe any evidence of contamination on these test results?

28 A:

No, I did not.

29 Q:

In your opinion, are those test results reliable?

30 A:

I believe they are.

31 Q:

Are they accurate?

32 A:

I believe they are.

33 Q:

Are they unaffected by contamination?

34 A:

I believe they are unaffected by contamination.

35 Q:

At 11 probe, 5 probe, 9 probe, RFLP matches, are those significant matches?

36 A:

Highly significant.

37 MR. LAMBERT:

You can take that down, Steve. (Indicating to board.)

38 Q:

Now, Dr. Gerdes talked a little bit in his testimony about degradation of evidence samples, degradation of evidence samples change the DNA from one person to another?

39 A:

Meaning, can it change the type -- the results that one gets.

40 Q:

Yes.

41 A:

DNA degradation -- when it degrades, DNA cannot change the actual type that one gets with any of these tests. It can make things go away, it can make the type, in other words, disappear, and sometimes it can make one of the two genes that that person has disappear first. But it cannot change the type of that. So in other words, they are not going to go from a type 1 to a type 2 or something, in some DNA tests, if the type 1 -- if the one gene is degraded, it is just not going to show up, it's not going to be a result.

KEY QUOTE
42 Q:

So degradation could not result in somebody getting false DNA test results?

43 A:

Degradation cannot result in one being mistyped. It can result in no result. But it cannot result in mistyping.

KEY QUOTE
44 Q:

Now, Dr. Popovich, you've reviewed a lot of evidence samples in this case?

45 A:

I have.

46 Q:

Have you ever had a case where you reviewed so many evidence samples?

47 A:

I have not.

48 Q:

Taking everything into account from your review of all of those evidence samples, are the test results, the DNA test results in this case, by LAPD, Cellmark, and DOJ, are they accurate?

MR. P. BAKER: Objection, argumentative, no foundation.

49 THE COURT:

Overruled.

50 A:

I believe these results are accurate.

KEY QUOTE
51 Q:

Are they reliable?

52 A:

I believe they're very reliable.

53 Q:

Are they unaffected by contamination?

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (4)

Witness
DNA degradation -- when it degrades, DNA cannot change the actual type that one gets with any of these tests. It can make things go away, it can make the type, in other words, disappear... But it cannot change the type of that.
Directly rebuts defense expert Dr. Gerdes's degradation argument; clarifies that degraded DNA produces no result, not a false result.
Witness
Degradation cannot result in one being mistyped. It can result in no result. But it cannot result in mistyping.
Concise summary of the degradation rebuttal — the clearest scientific counter to the contamination/degradation defense theory.
Witness
I think they're very significant in identifying that.
Referring to RFLP 5-probe and 8-probe matches on the Rockingham glove — affirming evidentiary weight of DNA identification.
Witness
I believe these results are accurate... I believe they're very reliable.
Final comprehensive endorsement of DNA results from all three labs, delivered over a defense objection that was overruled.

Evidence (3)

Informal
DNA analysis results from the Rockingham glove — RFLP with 5-probe and 8-probe matches
reviewed and affirmed as reliable, accurate, unaffected by contamination
Informal
DNA analysis results from the Rockingham socks — RFLP with 11-probe, 5-probe, and 9-probe matches
reviewed and affirmed as highly significant, reliable, accurate
Informal
DNA test results from LAPD, Cellmark, and DOJ labs collectively
comprehensively endorsed as accurate and reliable

Notable Exchanges (2)

LambertWitness
Lambert walked Popovich through a systematic review of each evidence item (glove, socks) using display boards, eliciting identical affirmations of reliability and accuracy for each — a structured, repetitive pattern designed to hammer home the conclusion.
strategic
P. BakerCourt
Baker objected to the final question asking Popovich to endorse all DNA results from all three labs as accurate — objection overruled, allowing the sweeping endorsement to stand.
procedural

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Dr. Gerdes
expert rebuttal
Popovich was used to counter Dr. Gerdes's prior testimony on DNA degradation, explaining scientifically why degradation cannot produce a false DNA type — only the absence of a result.

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 1 overruled)
Proceeding 8826 • 53 utterances • Plaintiff witness
Civil Trial
Department 103
⚖️ Start
📂 JAN 16, 1997 📄 Direct examination of Bradley
JAN 16, 1997 KRT DvH TD