Cross-examination of Dr. Terence Speed (morning, part 1)

📄 Cross-examination of Dr. Terence Speed (morning, part 1) — Tuesday, August 8, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\AUG\8\CROSS-EXAMINATION-OF-DR-TERENC.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 131 of 167

◀ Session opening and jury sworn in Sidebar: impeachment document ▶

Witness: Dr. Terence Speed
Examiner: Rockne Harmon
Called by: Defense • Date: Tuesday, August 8, 1995 • Utterances: 66

Prosecutor Rockne Harmon cross-examines defense statistics expert Dr. Terence Speed, focusing on Speed's relationship to the NRC report on DNA technology in forensic science. Harmon attempts to use Speed's own words against him — surfacing a sarcastic quote Speed had written about the NRC panel's blind spots — while also establishing that Speed considers the report's authors to be eminent scientists, undermining his critiques of their methodology.

# 1 MR. HARMON:

Professor Speed, it is true, is it not, that you have never written an article relying on any aspect of the NRC report?

# 2 PROF. SPEED:

That is true.

# 3 MR. HARMON:

It is true, it is the not, that you have never given any lecture relying on any aspect of the NRC report?

# 4 PROF. SPEED:

Not a very public lecture. I have given talks at UC Berkeley on this topic in which I have made references to the report.

# 5 MR. HARMON:

Okay. Professor, I have asked you whether or not you have given a lecture which relied on any aspect of the NRC report. Have you?

# 6 PROF. SPEED:

Yes.

# 7 MR. HARMON:

And you have relied on it?

# 8 PROF. SPEED:

I'm sorry, if--relied in the sense of quoting it and using it as any source of information? Yes.

# 9 MR. HARMON:

And basing your opinion on it?

# 10 PROF. SPEED:

Yes.

# 11 MR. HARMON:

Will you describe the relationship of the national research council to the national academy of sciences.

# 12 PROF. SPEED:

Well, as I understand it, the national research council is a separate body funded by the United States government to produce reports and I think hold symposia and it is--it has some affiliation to the national academy of sciences, but it is formally a separate organization. I think the national academy of sciences plays a fairly important role in the selection of topics and the management of the NRC, but as I say, I think they are separate bodies. That is my understanding.

# 13 MR. HARMON:

And the national academy of science in this country represents the elite in various fields of science; is that true?

# 14 PROF. SPEED:

That is certainly true.

# 15 MR. HARMON:

The national research council, the body that you mentioned, do those members also represent the elite in specific areas?

# 16 PROF. SPEED:

Well, certainly, yes.

# 17 MR. HARMON:

Would you agree that the members of the committee that produced the report that you've quoted, "DNA technology in forensic science," that those members are elite?

# 18 PROF. SPEED:

I would agree with that.

# 19 MR. HARMON:

Would you agree that they are eminent.

# 20 PROF. SPEED:

These words have different meanings to different people, but I think it is fair to say that each of them are eminent in their own field, but I am not really in a position to Judge everybody because they are not all in my field, but I think that is a reasonable understanding that that would be the case.

# 21 MR. HARMON:

They are eminent?

# 22 PROF. SPEED:

Yeah.

# 23 MR. HARMON:

Victor McKusick, the chairman of the committee for technology in forensic science, do you know who he is?

# 24 PROF. SPEED:

I certainly know he is and there is no doubt it he is eminent?

# 25 PROF. SPEED:

Quite eminent.

# 26 MR. HARMON:

What other members of the committee or association are you familiar with?

# 27 PROF. SPEED:

I certainly know Professor Mary-Claire King who up until very recently was a member of my own university, Professor David Kay from the University of Arizona. May I look at the list?

# 28 MR. HARMON:

Are you mistaken that David Kay is on the first NRC committee?

# 29 PROF. SPEED:

Perhaps I am. Perhaps I am.

# 30 MR. HARMON:

Sure. Those are the ones that you can recall right now?

# 31 PROF. SPEED:

I have a suspicion there is more. Certainly Eric Lander, Professor Eric Lander, Whitehead Institute, I know him very well.

# 32 MR. HARMON:

George Sensabaugh?

# 33 PROF. SPEED:

Yeah, colleague at the University of California Berkeley. I know him well.

# 34 MR. HARMON:

Okay. Why don't you look at the list.

# 35 PROF. SPEED:

May I?

# 36 MR. HARMON:

And tell us which other members you know well.

# 37 PROF. SPEED:

(Witness complies.) I have met Mr. Henry Lee. Know well would not be a correct description. I have met Dr. Thomas Marr on numerous occasions and know well in a professional sense. And that would be about it. I have certainly read writings by a number of the other authors, but I think I have mentioned all of the people that I have personal acquaintance with.

# 38 MR. HARMON:

Of the people that you have--or the members with which you are personally and professionally acquainted, you consider them to be eminent, do you not?

# 39 PROF. SPEED:

Yes, yes.

# 40 MR. HARMON:

No shortcomings in their field?

# 41 PROF. SPEED:

Everybody has shortcomings. I mean, eminent is kind of a blanket word. That doesn't mean somebody is perfect, so eminent is just something that people have--you know, a description that people have when they are senior and experienced, so I don't think it would be fair to say that it implies they have no shortcomings.

# 42 MR. HARMON:

Did you yourself make any contradictions to the first report by the committee on DNA technology?

# 43 PROF. SPEED:

No, I did not.

# 44 MR. HARMON:

None whatsoever?

# 45 PROF. SPEED:

No.

# 46 MR. HARMON:

You first became aware of these issues I believe you mentioned at a meeting at USC in 1990?

# 47 PROF. SPEED:

That's correct.

# 48 MR. HARMON:

Do you recall me being there, too?

# 49 PROF. SPEED:

I don't actually, I'm sorry.

# 50 MR. HARMON:

Have you yourself made any contradictions to the new committee that is in progress of writing a report?

# 51 PROF. SPEED:

I have.

# 52 MR. HARMON:

What have the nature of those contributions been?

# 53 PROF. SPEED:

I contributed to a letter by Professor Joel Cohen from the Rockefeller University which addressed the issue of proficiency testing to estimate error rates.

# 54 MR. HARMON:

Would you agree that the report is considered on some level as a consensus report from the respective members?

# 55 PROF. SPEED:

Yes, I would agree with that.

# 56 MR. HARMON:

Now, Professor, would you agree that--or do you feel that--and this is talking about this report, (Indicating), that it amazed you how its assumptions escaped the notice of all the eminent people on the NRC panel, and then in parentheses "Sarcasm intended"?

KEY QUOTE

# 57 PROF. SPEED:

That does sound like a quotation from something I have written.

KEY QUOTE

# 58 MR. HARMON:

And do you feel that way?

# 59 PROF. SPEED:

On the specific issue that I was speaking of, yes.

# 60 MR. HARMON:

So you don't feel that those people were eminent in certain aspects of their report?

# 61 PROF. SPEED:

Well, I've already said that I don't regard eminent as implying infallibility. Eminent people can make mistakes.

KEY QUOTE

# 62 MR. HARMON:

Who chose the quotations that Mr. Neufeld flashed up here for the jury yesterday.

# 63 MR. NEUFELD:

Objection.

# 64 PROF. SPEED:

Well, he had some of them, but in fact every single one of them I have indicated in my copy already has things that I agree with very strongly and would like to see come about.

# 65 MR. HARMON:

When you say "He," Mr. Neufeld?

# 66 PROF. SPEED:

Yes, I'm sorry. Mr. Neufeld was aware of some of them; not all of them, but they are all ones that I had, in advance of discussing the matter with him, singled out as important.

KEY QUOTE

Temperature

tense

Key Quotes (4)

Rockne Harmon

would you agree that--or do you feel that--and this is talking about this report, (Indicating), that it amazed you how its assumptions escaped the notice of all the eminent people on the NRC panel, and then in parentheses 'Sarcasm intended'?

Harmon confronts Speed with his own written words mocking the NRC panel, creating tension with Speed's earlier concession that those same panelists are eminent scientists.

Dr. Terence Speed

That does sound like a quotation from something I have written.

Speed's hedged acknowledgment of his own sarcastic remark — neither denying it nor fully owning it — reveals the contradiction Harmon is exploiting.

Dr. Terence Speed

I've already said that I don't regard eminent as implying infallibility. Eminent people can make mistakes.

Speed's attempted reconciliation of his high regard for the panelists with his criticism of their work — the core tension Harmon is trying to expose.

Dr. Terence Speed

Mr. Neufeld was aware of some of them; not all of them, but they are all ones that I had, in advance of discussing the matter with him, singled out as important.

Speed clarifies that the quotes Neufeld displayed were not cherry-picked by the defense — he had independently flagged them — partially defusing the implication of coaching.

Evidence (3)

Informal

NRC report 'DNA Technology in Forensic Science' — first committee report

discussed, challenged

Informal

Written document by Speed containing sarcastic remark about NRC panel assumptions

quoted by Harmon to impeach Speed

Informal

List of NRC committee members

reviewed by witness on stand

Notable Exchanges (3)

Rockne Harmon•Dr. Terence Speed

Harmon walks Speed through conceding that NRC committee members are eminent, then blindsides him with his own sarcastic written quote criticizing those same members for missing obvious flaws in their report.

strategic

Rockne Harmon•Dr. Terence Speed

Harmon reveals he was also present at the 1990 USC meeting where Speed first encountered these issues — Speed does not remember him, a small humanizing moment that subtly establishes Harmon's own long-standing expertise in this domain.

revealing

Rockne Harmon•Dr. Terence Speed

Harmon asks who chose the quotes Neufeld displayed to the jury; Speed volunteers that while Neufeld knew some, all of them were ones Speed had independently flagged as important — partially rehabilitating himself.

strategic

Credibility Attacks (2)

⚔ Dr. Terence Speed

prior inconsistent statement / impeachment with own writing

Harmon confronts Speed with his own sarcastic written statement that it 'amazed' him how the NRC panel's flawed assumptions escaped their notice — after Speed had already agreed those panelists are eminent scientists, creating an apparent contradiction between his praise and his private contempt.

⚔ Dr. Terence Speed

bias / coordination with defense

Harmon questions who selected the NRC quotations Neufeld displayed to the jury, implying Speed's testimony was orchestrated by the defense rather than independently derived.

Witness Demeanor

(Witness complies.) — Speed reviews the list of NRC committee members handed to him

Objections

1 objections (0 sustained, 0 overruled)

Proceeding 7225 • 66 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103