SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases

.
reviewed and interpreted by the analyst do not contain
all of the electronic data. since some has been filtered
out. E. 12/197. Based on her interpretation of the
remaining data, the analyst instructs the computer which
peaks to label as actual DNA alleles. x. 11/190. Dr.
Cotton noted: “There are things that may show up as peaks
that we have to recognize are not real peaks.” a. The
determination of whether a peak represents an actual
allele or an “artifact“ is made by the analyst and
confirmed by the technical reviewer. z. Dr. Cotton did
not know whether the technical reviewer examined the
unfiltered electronic data in this case. E. 12/24.
Dr. Cotton didn‘t conduct any of the DNA testing,
serve as a technical. reviewer, or examine the underlying
raw empirical data. z. 13/27-28. She didn’t look at the
data with the stutter filters removed. s. at 163-164.5
Defense counsel’s objection to Dr. Cotton‘s testimony
reporting the DNA test results based upon her lack of
personal knowledge was overruled. E. 11/208-209.
Dr. Cotton proceeded to tell the jury the DNA
results reported by Wendy Magee on the three key items of
evidence in the case - the knife and brown work gloves
recovered from the storm drains at Morse Pond. She
Stutter filters remove all smaller peaks at each locus, 5.
13/142, thus making significant data unavailable to Dr. Cotton based
solely upon the unexplained discretion of the analyst.
8