Redirect examination of Dr. Terence Speed

📄 Redirect examination of Dr. Terence Speed — Tuesday, August 8, 1995

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CRIMINAL\1995\AUG\8\REDIRECT-EXAMINATION-OF-DR-TER.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 131 of 167

◀ Cross-examination of Dr. Terence Speed (afternoon) Recross-examination of Dr. Terence Speed ▶

Witness: Dr. Terence Speed
Examiner: Peter Neufeld
Called by: Defense • Date: Tuesday, August 8, 1995 • Utterances: 35

Defense attorney Peter Neufeld conducted a brief redirect examination of statistician Dr. Terence Speed, rehabilitating his positions on error rates and common mode of error after cross-examination by Harmon. Speed affirmed that his view requiring blind proficiency tests to generate forensic DNA error rates is a majority position among statisticians, and he revealed that he and prosecution expert Dr. Weir had not consulted each other before testifying, with Speed noting both felt uncomfortable being on opposite sides.

# 1 THE COURT:

Mr. Neufeld.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. NEUFELD

# 2 MR. NEUFELD:

Professor Speed, do you believe that providing Dr. Weir's frequencies without providing error rates in this case is misleading?

# 3 PROF. SPEED:

That was my direct testimony.

# 4 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, Mr. Harmon asked you a couple of questions about--about your position on assumptions. Do you recall that?

# 5 PROF. SPEED:

I do.

# 6 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay. And about certain things being mainstream and not being mainstream. Do you remember that?

# 7 PROF. SPEED:

That's correct, yes.

# 8 MR. NEUFELD:

Okay. Do you believe, sir, that your views on the necessity of relying on external blind proficiency tests to produce error rates for forensic DNA profiling is mainstream or minority position?

# 9 PROF. SPEED:

I think in this situation I'm very much in the majority. I hardly know another statistician who is knowledgeable about statistics and DNA profiling who doesn't think that.

KEY QUOTE

# 10 MR. NEUFELD:

One moment.

# 11 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, remember when Mr. Harmon put up a picture of the Bronco stains, item 303, 304 and 305? Would you turn that on again, please. I meant the flow chart.

# 12 PROF. SPEED:

Yeah.

# 13 MR. NEUFELD:

All right. And he was pointing out to you that these stains did not have the same common point of--common point of origin as did the Bronco--the Bundy blood drops. Do you recall that?

# 14 PROF. SPEED:

I do.

# 15 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, do you see, by the way, on this sheet, where it states that the bloodstains for 303, 304 and 305 were actually collected on August 26th, 1994?

# 16 PROF. SPEED:

Yup, I see that.

# 17 MR. NEUFELD:

Now, even though they may have no common mode of error with the Bundy drops, is it conceivable, from a statistical standpoint, that 303, 304 and 305 may have their own common mode of error?

# 18 MR. HARMON:

Objection, calls for speculation, no foundation.

# 19 THE COURT:

Sustained. And we are referring to People's exhibit 565.

# 20 MR. NEUFELD:

Yes. Thank you, your Honor.

# 21 MR. NEUFELD:

Well, it has been asserted in this case--let me ask you a hypothetical. Assume that there has been testimony that these stains had been in the car, in the Bronco, for two months prior to their collection and assume that during those two months there were numerous unauthorized persons entering the Bronco or had access to the Bronco.

# 22 MR. HARMON:

Objection, no foundation, calls for speculation.

# 23 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 24 MR. NEUFELD:

If an error happened during that two-month period, approximately two-month period, is that the kind of error which you described earlier as a common mode of error?

# 25 MR. HARMON:

Objection, calls for speculation, no foundation, assumes facts not in evidence.

# 26 THE COURT:

Overruled.

# 27 PROF. SPEED:

It is stretching the definition somewhat, but it captures the essence, that it is something that is common to those samples before they received their separate analyses, which in this case I assume were consistent.

KEY QUOTE

# 28 MR. NEUFELD:

You mention you haven't quantified the error rate for forensic DNA profiling; is that correct?

# 29 PROF. SPEED:

That is correct.

# 30 MR. NEUFELD:

But have you made suggestions to the appropriate bodies on how that error rate could possibly be quantified?

# 31 PROF. SPEED:

I have. I have written a letter to the national research council relating to the update or the second volume of this and of course I have simply echoed in a little more detail the sentiments in the first one.

# 32 MR. NEUFELD:

Finally, the Prosecutor asked you whether or not you had called Dr. Weir before you testified today and you said you hadn't. And you mention that you had been consulting or working with using your expertise, your time and your effort to assist the Defense or to explain things to us, since September of 1994. Did Dr. Weir, prior to his taking the witness stand here, call you to discuss his positions?

# 33 PROF. SPEED:

No, he didn't. I think we are both a little uncomfortable about being on opposite sides in this issue.

KEY QUOTE

# 34 MR. NEUFELD:

Nothing further. Thank you.

# 35 THE COURT:

Mr. Harmon.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

Dr. Terence Speed

I think in this situation I'm very much in the majority. I hardly know another statistician who is knowledgeable about statistics and DNA profiling who doesn't think that.

Directly counters Harmon's cross-examination framing that Speed's error-rate position was a minority or fringe view.

Dr. Terence Speed

It is stretching the definition somewhat, but it captures the essence, that it is something that is common to those samples before they received their separate analyses.

Speed acknowledges the argument is a stretch but supports the defense theory that Bronco stains 303, 304, 305 could share a common mode of error from two months of exposure and unauthorized access.

Dr. Terence Speed

No, he didn't. I think we are both a little uncomfortable about being on opposite sides in this issue.

Humanizes both experts and subtly suggests Speed and Weir's disagreement is professional, not personal — reinforcing Speed's credibility as a good-faith witness rather than a hired gun.

Evidence (1)

People's 565

Flow chart referencing Bronco bloodstain items 303, 304, and 305, collected August 26, 1994

discussed

Notable Exchanges (2)

Peter Neufeld•Dr. Terence Speed•Rockne Harmon

Neufeld posed a hypothetical about the Bronco stains sitting in the vehicle for two months with numerous unauthorized persons having access, asking Speed whether that scenario constituted a common mode of error. Harmon objected twice; Ito overruled both times. Speed accepted the framing with a slight hedge.

strategic

Peter Neufeld•Dr. Terence Speed

Neufeld established that Speed had been advising the defense since September 1994 while Weir never contacted Speed before testifying, drawing a contrast between the two experts' engagement.

revealing

Light Moments (1)

Dr. Terence Speed

Speed and Neufeld had a brief mix-up over which display to turn on — Speed confirmed 'Yeah' when Neufeld corrected himself from the Bronco photo to the flow chart.

Credibility Attacks (1)

⚔ Dr. Bruce Weir

implied bias/lack of coordination with opposing expert

Neufeld elicited that Weir never contacted Speed before testifying, implicitly contrasting the prosecution expert's isolation with Speed's long-standing advisory role for the defense, and letting Speed characterize their mutual discomfort as peers on opposite sides.

Objections

3 objections (1 sustained, 2 overruled)

Proceeding 7242 • 35 utterances • Defense witness

Criminal Trial

Department 103