Hidden True Crime - DELPHI: Richard Allen Trial, Friday 10/25/24 "Magic Bullet" & Gun Analysis

Episode Date: October 27, 2024

Richard Allen Trial Witness Testimony Friday 10/25/24 About Hidden True Crime: Lauren Matthias, a former television reporter, and her husband Dr. John Matthias, a criminal psychologist, started Hidden True Crime in 2020 with their Season, 'Beyond the Veil,' a psychological deep dive into the doomsday murders and prophet. What started as a simple conversation at their dinner table became a captivating podcast. Join the dynamic duo of Dr. John Matthias, a forensic psychologist, and Lauren Matthias, an investigative journalist, as they delve into the psychological facets of unthinkable crimes every week. Their unique perspectives and in-depth analysis offer a fresh take on true crime storytelling. Thank you for your support through sponsorships, subscribing, listening, and becoming a Patreon member at Patreon.com/HiddenTrueCrime Our Sponsors:* Check out Acorns: https://acorns.com/HIDDENTRUECRIME* Check out Acorns: https://acorns.com/HIDDENTRUECRIME* Check out Armoire and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://www.armoire.style* Check out Effecty and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://www.effecty.com* Check out Happy Mammoth and use my code HIDDENTRUECRIME for a great deal: https://happymammoth.comSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/hidden-a-true-crime-podcast1836/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Lately, I've been trying to be more intentional about what I wear, intentional about everything, just choosing pieces that feel effortless, still put together, timeless, but also not overthinking it every morning. It's why I keep going back to quince. Their pieces just make getting dressed easier and I feel so classy. I feel elevated. The fits are flattering. The fabric is really high quality. Everything is wearable day to day. I actually got this really, really, beautiful yellow V-neck midi dress from them, and I paired it with some Italian leather sandals. It's one of those outfits that just works. It feels polished but still comfortable. It's exactly what I've been looking for. What surprises me, though, is the quality for the price.

Quince uses premium materials like European linen, organic cotton, but they cut out the middleman. So everything is priced way lower than you'd expect. Refresh. your every day with luxury you can actually use. Head to quince.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. That's quince, quince, u I and c e.com slash hidden true crime for free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash hidden true crime. Now's the time for a great deal on a new Honda. It's time to take an adventure with rugged capability and commanding. style. Check out the Honda Ridgeline, pilot or CRV. For a limited time, well-qualified buyers can get a 3.9% APR on a 2025 pilot or a 2.9% APR on a 2025 Ridgeline or CRV. See dealer for financing details.

Ashley's President's Day sale is going on now. For a limited time, field of freedom to shop incredible hot buys. Your style, your choice, all at an unfeatable price. Plus pay over time with up to 60 months special financing from bedroom look. to living room styles and every room in between. Our hot buys make saving big and styling your space easier than ever. Only at Ashley in North Charleston and Mount Pleasant. Subject to credit approved. Minimum monthly payments required.

Minimum purchase required. See store for details. I'm continuing to report from Delphi, Indiana, spending long nights in line and sitting in court each day to bring you detailed reports from the Richard Allen trial. Alan is charged with murdering best friends, 13-year-old Abigail Williams and 14-year-old Liberty German in February of 2017. And the judge has actually decided to not only not televise this trial, but to also not even share

audio. Thus, I am here to be the eyes and ears of the courtroom. These episodes are nightly live streams that I record on YouTube shortly after court ends each day. And if you notice these episodes are a bit more choppy than our other episodes, please understand why. We are working around the clock to bring you the very latest on the trial with a quick turnaround. And if you would like to catch the full unedited live stream, you can always head over to Hidden True Crime on YouTube. Hello, everyone. Hello, hello. Today was, it was interesting. It was, it was heavy. It was technical. For those that watch my lunch live, you know what I'm talking about. We had Melissa Oberg on the stand.

And yesterday we had six witnesses. Today, we had one. One witness all day. The firearms expert who, let me actually pull you up. Let me show you who was on the stand all day to day. And just as I suspected at lunch, it was going to be a really long cross exam. Well, indeed, it was. So let's.

get this and I hope that my coat doesn't make too much noise. I am cold. So if it starts to make too much noise, it's a noisy coat. I'll take it off. So here is today's witness. You can get a visual. She was on the stand all day today. And Melissa has, well, there's a bit of a bio here. She shared as much or not as much. She shares some different things. She has a Bachelor of Science and chemistry and then she has a master's of science in data analytics. And she sits on organizations of toolmark examiners. And she helps understand she's on tool maker. She's on tool maker organizations.

She's on the national organization of firearm examiners. She presents research, best practices, firearm examinations. And she sat on the board of, board of directors actually with the firearm examiners. And this is actually her 112 time testifying at a trial. So she is a expert witness. Not only has she been covering firearms examining and toolmark examination for years, she has been testifying as an expert witness at trials. I mean 112 trials. That's fascinating to me. She has taken proficiency tests for firearm examiners that are given every year, every year by an outside vendor to those on law enforcement

teams, which is what she is on is the law enforcement team. And she has always passed every yearly test. Black Hawk studies also assesses examiner's knowledge and they check on her to make sure she's up to date and knows what she's talking about. And she also knows. She also knows. what is discipline, a firearm, and toolmark examination. And then there was a question from the prosecution. We get into the testimony about what is a tool and how are they made. Before we do that, let me show you some things about her background. This was found on the web.

This was not everything. She shared what I'm sharing with you now is not everything. she shared in court, but I want you to get to know her. She looks just like this picture, by the way, except her hair is a little bit longer. But this is Melissa Oberg. She's a forensic scientist with the Indiana State Police Laboratory where she has been in the forensic firearms identification unit since 2006.

She actually told us on the stand that she left Indiana State Police in 2012. So this has not been updated. Oh, yeah, look, this was written in 2022. She has a Bachelor's of Science in Chemistry with a minor in criminal justice. And she has a master's of science in data analytics from the University of Indianapolis. And that graduation day, by the way, was in May of 2023. And she moved on and she's now in healthcare. She actually taught high school after graduating college for a year, and then she was recruited by the Indiana State Police or as a forensic scientist in drug identification unit. And then she transferred into the firearms identification unit and has been there the past 16 years.

oftentimes during witness testimonies, they always give background, especially with an expert testimony because they need the jury to see that they are experts and they don't want the defense to discredit an expert witness on the stand. So going through an expert witness's background for a long time is really important. With that being said, the amount of background they gave on Melissa Oberg is unlike anything I've ever seen when it comes to expert witnesses. They spent well over an hour just on her background and her research and how she does her research and explaining to the jury how this works. And so that was my first hint that she might be on the stand all day that this is. so important to the prosecution's theory that Richard Allen murdered Abby and Libby,

and they do not want the defense to discredit their expert witness, Melissa Oberg. So yeah, exactly, Kelly J. That was extra, extra. Like, background, important with Melissa Oberg, extra, extra, extra background. And because there was only one witness, that's why I'm spending a little bit more time telling you her background. Then after they got into her background, they asked her to go over some basics of what a toolmark is so that, again, I'm sure that jury could really understand her analysis because she's clearly going to attempt to match a unspent round found at the crime scene with a gun that Richard Allen

owns. So they got into like, what is a tool and how are tool marks made? And she actually explains that the harder of two objects that comes into forceful contact with another object results in the softer object being marked. And that is a tool mark. Okay, so two objects come into play. softer of the object is marked, you have a tool mark. She used the example of a hand and sand, and how our hands, if we touch sand, leave a mark on the sand. The sand is the softer object.

What is a tool mark was again and sort of asked. And it is features, a tool mark is features that are parted on an object by the contact of force exerted from a tool. And it is features. And it is features that, a tool market is features that are parted on an object. And There are two types of tool marks, she explains. One is an impressed tool mark. And she used the example of hand and sand again and said that patting the sand would be an impressed tool mark, right? It's a, it's an impressed toolmark would be a hand pressing on sand and making an impressed mark of your hand. And then there is a striated tool mark. and that would be an example of like, you know,

your hand going through the sand. It's not leaving an impressed mark of your hand, but it is certainly leaving a mark on the sand. That's a striated toolmark. So we're going through all this before we even get to the nitty gritty. I mean, they're really setting the stage here with her. Then she explains the parts of a cartridge in a single unit of ammunition and they go through different diagrams of what it is.

and I'm going to pull one up for you because I looked it up myself and I found a really great photo. So I'll just show all of you. I'm sure many of you know guns, but it's important to know here. It's important part of this because you'll see why after lunch this was very important. And so there is a primer. there is a case. That at the tip is the bullet. So again, the bullet is just the tip where,

let me go to this so I can use my... The bullet is just the tip of the cartridge. That's why they call it a cartridge. Because it's not an unspent bullet. It's the entire unspent cartridge. So this top part is the bullet. it. This part is the case. The primer is a little spot in the middle. That is what gets triggered to hit the gunpowder to make the bullet shoot. And yes, the powder is inside the case. So they then had an

entire description of what a cartridge is and why they call it a cartridge and not just an unspent bullet. Because even I've been calling it like an unspent bullet and now I understand. why they referred to it as a cartridge. It's the entire thing. The bullet with the casing, with the gunpowder, with the primer that hits. So do I, am I, thank you, Kelly J. for that comment. Just the tip. We've got a laughter in these things.

You're right. So am I okay? Am I buffering or am I okay? because I see that I'm going up and down with lines. Okay. So then we go through all of that, and then they actually show a diagram of a gun. They explain all of the parts of a gun,

of a pistol, the slide, the slide stop at the top of the gun, the barrel of the gun, the hand grit, the magazine well down below, and maybe I should have pulled up a diagram of that. I didn't. And then they show the top of the barrel, and the slide and the chamber where you put the cartridge. It explains how the cartridge or cartridge case is ejected.

And this is important. So, and I'm sure that those of you that knew, no guns are like, we know, Lauren, but for those that don't, you have the top of the barrel. And, you know, this was important for me to understand too, because when I hear an unspent round, I don't understand that it's ejected out of a gun because you can take a cartridge out of the magazine, you know, pull the magazine down, take it out.

But there's another way to get a cartridge out of a gun, and that's if you eject it, if you slide the chamber and it pops out of the chamber, it actually does have ejection marks. And they're about to say, for this entire testimony, they imply that there are ejection marks

from this unspent this unspent cartridge that was found at the crime scene. We don't refer to it as the unspent cartridge found at the crime scene. We actually refer to it as item 16. So item 16, we all kind of realize is the unspent cartridge found at the crime scene.

And there are injection marks on this unspent cartridge, thus we know that it was ejected from like the top of the gun, not just like taken out of the magazine. So after the portion was loaded in the chamber area, the injector does come in contact to inject the bullet. And they have a video showing how pulling the slide to the rear of the cartridge goes into the barrel of the firearm. They show videos of just how this happens. And she then is given an Indiana state police box. It's sealed and she is going to now open it.

She takes the time to open it. She also has dummy cards with her to demonstrate. And now she is demonstrating with the real gun that she pulled out of the out of the evidence box. So she is demonstrating. She's ejecting a magazine. She's explaining how it must cycle through the first round in there.

She is showing and pointing out the measurable features of a specimen that will indicate a specific, unique group. Shoot, I am buffering, aren't I? And then she explains how she uses now the example of cars. So she says there's a specific unique group of cars, right, cars.

So a Honda Civic, we'll say, is a specific unique group of cars. But then there, and that would be a class characteristic. But then there are subclass characteristics of a car, features that may be produced that are consistent among some items fabricated by the same tool of the same time. So a Honda Civic made in the same factory on the same day or the same year might have unique characteristics compared to a Honda Civic that might have gone through a different factory line or built slightly differently.

Those are subclass features of a Honda Civic. And then she explains what individual. characteristics of R. And they are marks or features by random imperfections or irregularities of tool surfaces. So for example, she says an individual characteristic would be if you drive that Honda Civic off the lot and you park it and it's brand new and someone opens the door on your Honda Civic and it puts a little tiny ding in the door, you have a individual individual characteristic on your Honda Civic.

So again, class characteristics, subclass characteristics, and individual characteristics. I think I'm feeling warm now. I'll take this. Individual characteristics in a gun could actually also be if a firearm is used or abused or if there's corrosion. they're definitely going to have in her irregularities of tools surfaces. So she goes through the examination process. There's level one analysis. There's level two, test fire, and how you've submitted,

how you submit firearms with appropriate ammunition. And there's manual comparison, assessing subclass and individual characteristics. Level 2 analysis draws conclusions baited by the identification and the exclusion of different tool markings. I'm sharing, now I'm buffering. I was nervous that I would start buffering because I see my bars going down. I thought I was good. Okay, I see bars going up. Thanks for sharing everyone about the Sarah Boone trial.

I'm certainly interested. I'm surprised there's already a verdict, guilty. Okay. She could have taken a plea deal. Okay. Now, what she also points out, and I'll say this too, is that in her 17 years as a forensic scientist assessing guns, not only as she testified at trials 112 times,

she has analyzed thousands of cartridges and cartridge cases, thousands of them. Okay, so now this is important. This is how she labels all of the tools or the items that came down due to, that came down due to this case. So again, I want to point out that she's on the stand saying that she's receiving items and she labels them, item 16, item 17, all these different items.

So I'm going to say item 16, I'm going to switch the term here to help you guys understand that this is the unspent cartridge found at the crime scene, but she refers to it throughout the day as item 16. So put a pin in item 16, but also realize that item 16 is the unspent cartridge found at the crime scene where Abby and Libby's bodies were found. It was found right between them, okay, this unspent cartridge. Item 16. She received this on February 17th, 2017. So we're talking four days after the bodies were found. Or excuse me, three days after the bodies were found,

four days after they believed that the girls were murdered. And she also received additional pistols with different serial numbers. And she got this unspent round. This is interesting. I'm going to hold this up. This is what the unspent round, the back of the unspent cartridge looked like from the crime scene item 16 let's see and she points out see it's a smith and wesson 40 winchester and those little circles but the lines are three

tool marks that she found on this unspent cartridge she also explains by the way that the DNA and any fingerprint analysis would have been done before she received this because she's a DNA killer. She does not do any of that. They have to, police have to take care of that beforehand. That's probably why she got it four days or three days later because they had to do other testing first. So she shows different comparisons to the microscope, the sidewall of the cartridge, the chamber markings.

She's going through this item 16, the unspent cartridge found at the crime scene for quite a while. And someone asked if I could just give a summary because they're lost. The irony is like, guys, she testified. I am giving a summary because think of it this way. She testified from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. today. So believe it or not, I am giving the summary. And if you guys are confused, understand what the jury might be feeling.

Put yourself in their shoes or people in the gallery. So just point that out. Someone just asked if that meant it was ejected three times? No, she just pointed out three marks that happened when it was ejected. Also, we learned that Melissa always actually shoots and ejects to compare differences of marks with different guns and different cartridges. She was sent a bunch of guns that had been seized. This is interesting to me.

I'd never heard of this. So in February of 2017, she was sent that unspent cartridge. item 16 but she was also sent a bunch of guns and they were guns she said that had been seized and they had been in water they were unidentified firearms and she had to dry them off and work on rust to even test them that's intriguing to me we never learn where these wet guns are from and so I'm going to guess that because there were dive teams at the crime scene at deer creek I wonder if these guns were found in Deer Creek, which is also another interesting thing.

If that's the case, how many guns did they find in Deer Creek while searching with dive teams? It's just interesting to me. She states that with these guns, none of them fit or could have absolutely ever been used with item 16, with the cartridge that was found at the crime scene,

none of these guns fit. And so that was that until October of 2022. So again, she's given this bullet. It has this unspent cartridge. It has no match. She's given a bunch of guns. Some of them are damaged. Some of them are wet.

Other possibilities. None of them can be a match to this unspent bullet. That's what her testing concludes. And now we go into October 14th, 2020. And to refresh your memory, October 13th, 2022 is when Richard Allen has an interview, for his first interview at the police station. They call him in, read him as Miranda rights. October 14th is when they do the search of his house.

So I'm actually kind of surprised she received these on October 14th, that same day. but she did and she again reiterates that they would have had to do any DNA testing or fingerprint testing before she received the items that she did from this day and this is what she received she received item 314 which is a sigs sour model p226 40 caliber smith and wesson pistol that's important 314. And then 315 is one Winchester 40 Smith and Weston cartridge. 316 is one Blazer 40 Smith and Wesson cartridge. 317, she received two magazines, one magazine containing eight cartridges and another

magazine containing nine cartridges. They were all Blazer 40 Smith and Wesson cartridges. She took extra photos during her examination and she used microscopic photographs that she's showing on the screen, and she says that they are increasing these images 60 times their actual size. That's how intense the microscope is. And through all of her testing, with all of these things, she discovers, oh, she also testifiers item 314,

and then she says this is a... Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the internet, and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off.

They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, Antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring, or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today at ORA.com slash remove.

Protect yourself now atora.com slash remove. quote, and this is, in my opinion, the most important thing she said before the lunch break, because this is what ties it all together. This is why she's testifying. She states, I was able to identify that item 314 was as cycling item 16. She was able to identify item 314 as cycling item 16. So again, Item 16 is the unspent cartridge found at the crime scene. Item 314 is what she received in October of 2022, and it is a Sig Sauer model 40 caliber Smith and Wesson pistol. And we are assuming that was found at Richard Allen's house during the search of his house. What's one financial lesson you learned the hard way? I'll go first. It's not too late to start saving.

Today's episode is sponsored by Acorns. Acorns is a financial wellness app that makes it easy to start saving and investing for your future. You don't need to be an expert. Acorns will recommend a diversified portfolio that matches you and your money goals. You don't need to be rich. Acorns lets you get started with the spare money you have right now. And one of the best things about acorns is they allow you to see projected growth on their website. Simply go online, type in how much money you'd put in and see the potential future

balance of your account. Sign up now and join the over 13 million all-time customers who've already saved and invested over $22 billion with Acorns. Head to Acorns.com slash hidden true crime or download the Acorns app to get started. Paid non-client endorsement. Compensation provides incentive to positively promote Acorns Tier 1 compensation provided. Investing involves risk. Acorns Advisors LLC and SEC registered investment advisor. A few important disclosures at acorns.com slash hidden true crime. Has losing weight and getting healthier been on your mind lately? Have you heard about groundbreaking GLP1 treatments like OZMPIC and WeGO? With Effecti, getting access to these powerful

medications has never been easier or more affordable. Starting a new medication is always a bit scary when you aren't sure what to expect. And using Effecti makes it so much easier with their hands-on support, which gives unlimited access to licensed doctors so you never have to jump through hoops for help with any dosing questions or just other support when you need it. Effecti uses rigorous testing and their products are backed by research so you can rest assured. Ready to level up your weight loss game right now, my listeners can get $50 off of GLP1 weight loss treatments at effecti.com with code hidden true crime at checkout. That's effecti.com, E-F-F-F-E-C-T-Y.com and use code Hidden True Crime to get $50 off your first month of G-L-P-1 weight loss

treatment, no hassles, no memberships, and no hidden fees. Get started today. Ashley's President's Day sale is going on now. For a limited time, feel the freedom to shop incredible hot buys. Your style, your choice, all at an unfeatable price. Plus, pay over time with up to 60 months special financing. From bedroom looks to living-room styles and every room in between. Our hot buys make saving big and styling your space easier than ever. Only at Ashley in North Charleston and Mount Pleasant. Subject to credit approved. Minimum monthly payments required. Minimum purchase required. See store for details. And so she says, in other words, I was able to identify that the gun found at Richard Allen's house cycled the cartridge found at the

the crime scene back in 2017. That is what she's saying. That is what she's concluding. She's essentially tying this unspent round bound at the crime scene to Richard Allen's gun that was seized from his house. That's what this is all about.

There you go. Boom. She shows all these other photos. She shows all these other images from her examination. She now starts explaining how she came to this conclusion She's showing a slide in relation to ejection. She's showing an actual ejector from the firearm of item 314. She's showing all of this stuff. And then at this point, she continues on just showing how she came to this conclusion,

how barrels, the first barrel actually gets cut with the first cutter. And then she's essentially sometimes has to just. destroy these items in order to test them. It's possible, though, that they show more individual characteristics if she does this, so she has to really dig in and on and on and on. And we will just jump now to, oh, they're about to play a video. They're about to play a video. They have technical difficulties.

And so Judge Goal calls break. But for those that want a summary of the entire day before. lunch break, pre-lunch, it was that moment that this witness, expert witness, Melissa Oberg, a firearm expert says that she was able to show that the bullet or cartridge found at the crime scene cycled through a gun found in Richard Allen's house. That's all you know. That's what this testimony is about. So let's get to after lunch because we get into seeing this video and we get into cross-exam,

which is what I predicted was going to be really intense. It was. She did come off as credible, Becky. She did. She had answers for everything for the defense, too, which was part of actually a complaint by the defense. There are some interesting moments during cross-exam. You can tell she is indeed an expert witness.

Remember, she's testified at over 100 trials. So she knows what she's doing. Before lunch, though, all this background, all this information, she did come across as credible. Like she was very professional. Before lunch, I had no doubts. I was like, she's impressive. She was impressive to me.

And the way that she explained things and her deal. details and her background and her education. She came off as a scientist. She did. I mean, that's my impression. She really did. But the defense certainly didn't want her to come across that way. And so they, they went at it. But before we get to the, before we get to the defense, there were a few other things that happened. And actually, let me find, I just lost my spot. Okay. Here we go. after lunch. The prosecution actually plays, before we get to cross-exam,

the prosecution plays two videos. And I actually put one of the videos that we watched in the description of this video. It was, I'll just show you, because it was straight from YouTube. And I'll just show you the beginning of this so you can get an idea. I'm not going to play the whole thing.

The whole thing is 13 minutes long. And in my opinion, is boring. Not everyone would think that. I think that. So let me just share the beginning of this. You can kind of see the video that was chosen by the prosecution to play in the courtroom today. If you want to see the full video, head to the description of our video. The raw material that you see here will eventually be machined in a sick fiscal slide. These slides might end up in the whole street of a police officer. or used for home defense by a civilian.

Sig Sauer's classic pistol line, such as the P226 shown here, is world-renowned for reliability. Sig's manufacturing process is very efficient, and we'll show the major steps in this video. One of the most important components of any pistol is the barrel. The first step in barrel manufacturing is the drilling of the bore. Next, the barrel blanks are placed in CNC lathes, which turn down the outside diameter of the barrel slightly

in order to remove rust barrels. This is an efficient way to produce a large number of high-quality barrels. And sectioned and faced, the hammer-forged blanks are then turned down by a CNC lathe. This process is so efficient that it required only one skill on these frames. After milling operations are complete, robots debur the frames. However, final deburring is done by humans. Finishing operations are highly regulated under German environmental and health laws, and we were unable to film them in process. For demonstration purposes only, this is the station where anodizing is conducted.

The assembly operations you see here are being conducted on a SIG-Pro polymer frame. Due to an important contract with the foreign government, all assembly workers had shifted to the SIG-Pro. However, the classic SIG handgun series, such as the P-226 and the P-229, are assembled by the same workers on the same. same line. SIG's high-end models such as the X. I showed that one specific part, and I said it was 13 minutes long. It's actually only five minutes long. I realize it's 13 years old.

It was uploaded on YouTube 13 years ago. So it's at least 13 years old this video. And I'm just trying to get back to me. Okay. But that one part where they talk about how individuals, it's not just a factory, but how individuals then take each gun and help to build them with an important part of this testimony by the prosecution to show that guns truly are individual. The prosecution played these videos. So again, if you want to watch that whole five-minute video, head to the description. of this video. I did put the link in for you guys to observe, but it's essentially

Sig Factory Tour and Insiders look on how Sig Sour Pistols are made. I was posted again 13 years ago and the three different tools she explains help me to know it's not just an area. It's three different areas making tool marks. So there are multiple different tools in this factory. She's just showing how these guns could actually have individual characteristics. despite being even made in the same factory. And I think that was really the purpose of this video was to show, hey, look, these are not just straight manufactured. There are going to be individual characteristics in guns made by Sig Sauer.

The final stages of the level one and level two analysis. Oh, hold on one second. So she's asked, is there a final stage of the level one and level two analysis, the prosecution asks. Is there a verification process? And Melissa says, the verification process is when the second examiner goes over someone else's work. So in other words, there's somebody else going over Melissa Oberg's work as well. And the second examiner comes up with their own conclusion. So it's not just Melissa Oberg alone.

And then the prosecution asks, by 2022, which is when she received the gun from Richard Allen's home, where do you request certification? They verify exclusion, verification, identification, identification. and she explains that they do all of that verification and certification with the gun and with the testing. She explains that she's been, again, a firearms examiner for 20 plus years. And the second examiner, his verification agreed with her bullet identification. So in other words, she says it wasn't just me that came to the conclusion that the unspent round cycled through this gun of Richard Allen's.

It's also the second examiner's verification as well, and he agreed with her findings. And then now we get to cross-exam. And this is Rosie that does cross-exam, which I was hoping, you know, with all the defense attorneys, some are more feisty than others. Some are smooth talkers. I would call Baldwin kind of like the smooth talker.

I'd call Rosie kind of feisty. Oge is like a more balance. I actually quite like her as a defense attorney. But Rosie was doing cross-exam with this expert witness. And I was like, I was like, oh good. Oh, good. Just because I was like, this is going to be interesting. And it indeed was.

So there is a question. He starts by questioning the. sufficient agreement, the sufficient agreement between the two examiners. Is this all that matters, Rosie asks, Melissa? Is this really all that matters? That sufficient means enough, right? Um, like it just, if does it depend on if it's just adequate enough? It's just adequate enough. I don't know what term you're using or if this is layman terms you're getting that definition. I don't know what you are reading to get at this idea that this is just enough to verify. your findings. And he asked, can the jury, can you just use some layman's terms for the jury?

And there's actually an objection at that moment. So after his first couple of questions, there's an objection and it's sustained. And then, so Rosie moves on and he says, well, the video that we just watched, the Sig Sour video does not make any references to extraction. Right? And she says, no. It doesn't make you. any it doesn't make any references to the extraction of like let's say an unspent cartridge.

No, it doesn't. And then there's a question by and then Rosie says, well, there are a couple of different plants where they make these guns. Isn't that true? And she says, yes, there are different plants in Germany and there are many

in the United States. In other words, this isn't the only factory. This video that she's showing isn't the only factory. making these guns. And so then he says, and then Rosie says, well, there are a bunch of moving parts to a gun that wasn't in this video. Am I right? And she says, well, am I right? And then he continues. Sometimes Rosie does this too. He'll ask two questions back to back before the witness can answer. And this is one of those moments. So there are a bunch of moving parts to a gun that wasn't in that

video. Am I right? And you don't have a degree in science to, work in this department. You only had to have taken a science course. Is that right? Like, you don't have to have the degrees. He's saying that you have in order to work in this department in law enforcement. All you need to have taken is a science course. Is that correct? And she says, yes. That's correct. I didn't have to have any degree in science to do this, simply a science course. That's, that's interesting. I mean, so she's over-certified. for this. And weren't you at this time in 2022 thinking of jumping ship at this time? If you think about it, that makes sense. It's 2022. She left in 2023 and she jumped into

healthcare analysis. So Rosie is saying, and weren't you thinking about jumping ship at this time in 2022? And she, she states, yes, I was thinking of jumping ship, leaving the job. And why is that, Rosie asks, were you concerned about opportunity for, promotion in your job? And she says, yes, I was thinking, what did I need to do next to advance my career? So yes, I was concerned. She agrees with him about opportunity for promotion in this firearms expert position. And then, and then he says, and your current job that you have right now has nothing to do with guns,

bullets, or cartridges. Am I right? And she agrees. Yes, you are right. It has nothing to do. It's in health care now, her job now. The jury, by the way, is paying very close attention to this cross with Melissa. In fact, their heads are going back and forth.

Like it's like it's a tennis match. Do you know what I mean? Like they're looking over at Rosie as he asks his question and then they're looking over at Melissa Oberg. They are really paying attention to this. end. Just a little, a little, yeah, you'll see how much they're paying attention with the questions they ask at the end. There's a little, a little tease for what's to come. And then, and then Rosie asks a question that I couldn't exactly hear, but, so I didn't get it down, but her answer was interesting to me. And so I just want to say that her answer, Melissa Oberg's

answer is that she cannot exclude all other guns from the possibility that the unspent cartridge matches perhaps another gun. She cannot exclude all other guns like in the world, only the ones she's tested. So she's excluded all of the guns she's tested, but she can't exclude like every gun everywhere. That was interesting. Rosie then says, you said that you have never made a mistake in the 17 years in the lab. So I've mentioned that the defense always brings up these depositions that they had under oath, where they subpoena witnesses. And so this is them bringing this up.

They're bringing up a deposition that she, that Melissa Oberg did with the, you know, where she subpoenaed to answer questions. and and and Rosie is saying you said that you have never made a mistake in 17 years in the lab. And Melissa responds, well, you need to show me in my deposition where I said that. In other words, she's a little defiant. Like I didn't say I've never made a mistake. And so then Rosie gives her page 19, lines 19 through 22 from the deposition taking in March of 2024. So just this year back in March.

And and then Rosie, Rosie continues with his questioning. He says, okay, so my question was, have you ever made a mistake or found a conclusion? That was wrong. What is your answer? And her answer is, her answer is in quotes, no mistake that I am aware of, end quote. And so Rosie says, but you said nobody in your lab makes mistakes. He reads page 18. And she said, yes, I said that.

So he says, so in a course of 17 years, how many examinations did you do? And she said, approximately 6,500 examinations. And so he pushes. And so you've never made a mistake. You really have never made a mistake in those 6,500 examinations. And her answer is, well, I don't know whether or not I made a mistake unless someone tells us we've made a mistake. And so then Rosie questions, toolmark examination is an umbrella under firearms examination. Isn't that right?

She says, yes, that's right. And Rosie says, in all areas of examination and testing could be improved. Couldn't they? Her answer is yes, they could be improved. Yeah. And then Rosie says, and would you or have you ever said to law enforcement, that you were 99% sure of results. And would you do that or have you ever done that?

Said to law enforcement, you were 99% sure of results? Her answer is no, I've never said that. And then there's a question by Rosie, isn't it true that there is also a very critical community out there when it comes to firearm and bullet examination? Isn't there this aren't there critics of what you do? Aren't there communities that are critical and don't these communities include doctors? Well, the answer is yes.

Scientists. With answers, yes. Organizations, yes. And then he says, and aren't, isn't the president's council of advisors on science and testing, which is known as P-CAST? aren't they critical of your field? She answers yes. And the National Academy of Science, known as N-A-S, aren't they critical of your field?

And she says yes. And so then Rosie says, okay, so P-CAS, this is appointed, this is an organization appointed by presidents. She says yes. And they're an independent body that critiques of, a variety of disciplines. Melissa says yes. And so there's a debate whether or not what you do is even science. She answers yes. So when did Pcast publish a report about firearms examination? And it was in 2016, right? And then Melissa answers, well, they were critical that we did not have enough black box studies to check our work. So in other words, she explains

what they're critical of, and their specific criticism in 2016 by P-CAST is that this umbrella under firearms examinations did not have enough black box studies to check and determine their work. And then Rosie asked, well, what about the NAS, which is the National Academy of Science? And she says, yes, they were critical too. And then Rosie says,

they said that you needed to have independent lab reports that were not closely related to law enforcement. She says, yes, that was recommended. And then Rosie says, but that hasn't happened. She says, at the time I left in 2023, there were only two sworn officers. But Rosie says, you were still state employees. She said, yes, we were all state employees. and you couldn't walk in and ask for something. Oh, oh, excuse me, let me clarify what this was because this was interesting.

Forgive me. Rosie says, but that would mean that if you guys were, you know, if this was your organization and they were run by state employees, I couldn't walk in and ask for something necessarily because I'm defense, Rosie says. and there was an objection to that. But she did come back and say, actually, we have had the defense walk in. We have helped defense before. And then he moves on and says that National Academy of Science suggested further scientific research in 2009, Rosie says.

And that was, okay, so this was interesting. This was a good, tushy moment by the defense. I'll admit it. So the objection was done because that, that testing was in 2009, which was how many years ago is that I've even lost track, like 15 years ago, right? She says National Academy of Science in a 2009 study suggested further scientific research to make a scientific foundation for your entire area of study. And she points out that that was like 15 years ago.

And then he says, well, how long ago was that? that video made that we just watched. And she said, I think it was 10 years old. It was pretty good. And by the way, we know that it was uploaded, because we found it on YouTube, we know it was uploaded 13 years ago. So it was actually about probably 15 years old as well. And then Rosie says, most of your industry revolves around bullets and firearms, no?

And she said, yes, also cartridges. So bullets, firearms, and cartridges. And there's another question and he says, or Rosie asked something else. he says, well, there's another subset with research to identify size or caliber. She says, yes. And that research is pretty clean, right? Yes. And there's also research about chamber markings, right?

Yes. And that research is also pretty minimal, though. It's lean, right? Yes, there is not enough research. There aren't a lot of articles, but there are some out there. And then Rosie says, but you are talking about an unspent. round which has a distinction on it she says yes I am and so Rosie says so the biggest distinction is that a fired round is the same as a spent round because of all of the pressure

in the gun when they are fired this is apples to apples this was an interesting moment for me because I have some confusion here so let me clarify what he's saying what Rosie is saying he is saying so you're saying that there is that a fire round can essentially be compared to a unspent round because of the of a spent round because of the pressure in the gun when they are fired this is apples to apples he's saying and she says yes it's still the same process and her answer then is really interesting I highlighted this the ejection mark is an injection mark whether it's fired or not so in other words she's kind of saying that she's comparing an unspent cartridge to a fired, a fired bullet because

the ejection mark is the ejection mark whether it's fired or not. In other words, if it comes out as, you know, if it comes out of the top and not just like emptied out of the magazine, there's an ejection mark. And that ejection mark on that casing and that bullet, is an ejection mark that might be on a fired round as well. I mean, I'm surprised that that is apples to apples. I mean, that's essentially what Rosie was asking. Is this apples to apples? I'm saying apples to apples.

Rosie didn't say apples to apples. But that's what I hear him asking. Like, this is apples to apples for you. And her answer is an ejection mark is an ejection mark, whether it's fired or not. And he says, so a fired round, you clarify, it's a fired round versus an unfired round. says, yes, those will have different pressures on them, but they'll have ejection marks. And then Rosie says, but there is a lot of room to improve from a research standpoint. Yes?

And she says, yes, there is a lot of room always to improve. That's the scientific method, she explains. There is always room to improve with more research. And so she just explains, yeah, there's always, always room to improve. And he says, and the reason that we need to improve is to decrease errors, right? And she said, yes, but it depends on what kind of studies and research. And then he, he asks, and this is an important question. I highlighted this question.

He says, so your conclusion that this unspent round comes from Richard Allen's gun, he didn't say Richard Allen's gun, I'm saying Richard Allen's gun to help you guys understand what this is about. Your conclusion comes from a fired round and not a cycled round. So in other words, just a round that was cycled ejected versus a fired round. And she says, yes, my conclusion came from a fired round. That's, that's interesting. It left me with more questions. And I think if you guys have more questions, then not, you're not alone. Like, I honestly feel like after the end of this day, I have so many questions, as to the jury. So in other words, I just want to clarify again that what I'm hearing from this is that Melissa

Oberg is essentially saying that if you rack the barrel of a gun, so you have your gun, and if you rack the barrel of the gun like this and pull it back, if there's a bullet or a cartridge in the chamber and you rack the gun, it ejects the bullet from the chamber that's different from just removing them from the magazine. Because if you rack the gun and it comes out of the chamber and you eject the bullet, it has ejection marks on it, even though it was unspent. And so, but then she's kind of saying too that in order to test this, she fired some rounds and compared those.

Like this is where it got really confusing for me and I have questions. I have questions. Let me look here. Oh, then he asks, this is interesting. Rosie asked, what was your first impression of this bullet found at the crime scene, item 16? Again, I'm the one saying found at the crime scene. He does not say that.

I say that to help you guys understand what's going on. But he says, what was your first impression of this bullet, item 16? And she says, actually there was no DNA, no biological material, no dirt, nothing remarkable about it. And he says, but there were three ejection marks on it, right? Which I showed you the graph I drew before lunch. She says, yes, there were three ejection marks, right? And so he said, so it cycled through a gun three times? That was a question you guys had.

Oh, she said, yes. There was a question here. people don't realize how much their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the internet, and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in.

ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. but ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support.

Other companies might sell just credit monitoring, or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now at aura.com slash remove. You guys had, and you literally asked that.

You said, so did it cycle through the gun three times? And I said, I don't think that's what it said. I just heard three marks from being ejected. But now she's actually saying, yes, it cycled through the gun three times. So I was wrong. And the question you asked was right. And then he said, but then you said there was really no wealth of information on that bullet. And there was not nearly as much information on that bullet as the full.

firearm. Am I right? She says, yes, you are right. And then Rosie says, but I told them the Sig Sauer could have cyg-sour, but you told them that the SIG-Sour could have cycled this bullet, right? And she said, yes, I said there was potential, but I can't definitely say. So I wrote that down. She is admitting that she says there was potential that the SIGSauer gun from Richard Allen's house could have cycled this bullet found out the crime scene. But she said there was potential, but she cannot definitively say. So in October 20, 2022, Rosie asks, what did you do with the gun? And she says, I test fired and cycled it 10 times.

I test fired four times and I cycled six times. He says, well, you didn't test anything microscopically before doing that. She said, no, I didn't. I just examined it. Usually we have ammunition at the lab. I put in a box here that I need to clarify this. So I'm going to share what I have. Well, should I?

I don't want to misinterpret something. So let me decide whether or not I'm going to share this. Yeah, well, Rosie, I think I have it right. Rosie says, could have, could this unspent round been cycled through multiple guns? And she says, yes, there is potential. And so then Rosie asks, so you can't necessarily make a determination when a round is cycled. And she says, correct. Rosie says, well, there's nothing unique then to indicate when it was cycled.

She says, correct. And then he says, item 315 and 316 are the most similar. Those were to remind you two guns, two guns. Those were the most similar, right? And she said, yes, based. on manufacturing marks, these guns were the most similar. And the cycled ramp marks were different. You didn't use them.

She says, no, I didn't. You cycled it six times and then test fired four rounds. This was an interesting answer by Melissa. I don't know if it was a great one. And she held her own, by the way, during Cross. So we'll get into that. Like, she held her own. Like, she did a great job, actually, overall at Cross.

I will say, like, she is a professional. professional expert witness, hence the term expert witness. But this was a moment that I don't think was great for her. But he, so Rosie says, you cycled it six times and test fired four rounds. And she stated, I chose fired rounds because it marked well. This is a case of work smarter, not harder. Ladies and gentlemen, we are now boarding group A. Please have your boarding passes ready to scan.

If your phone is cracked, old, or was chewed up by your Chihuahua travel companion, please refrain from holding up the line. Instead, go to Verizon and trade in any phone in any condition from one of their top brands for the new Samsung Galaxy S25 Plus with Galaxy AI. And a watch and tab on any plan. Only on Verizon. With new line on my plan. Service plan required for watch and tab.

Additional terms apply. See Verizon.com for details. Your old or broken phone can let you down. But at Verizon, trade in any old phone for our digital. top brands and get iPhone 16 Pro with Apple Intelligence with a new line on my plan and iPad and Apple Watch Series 10. After all, you don't want your old phone to die on you when you're lost. Perfect. Or for your broken phone to glitch at the worst possible time.

Hey, can I get your number? Trade in your old phone for a brand new iPhone 16 Pro iPad and Apple Watch. Visit Verizon.com today. Additional terms apply. Service plan required for Apple Watch and iPad. Now's the time for a great deal on a new Honda. It's time to take an adventure with rugged capability and commanding style. Check out the Honda Ridgeline, pilot, or CRV.

For a limited time, well-qualified buyers can get a 3.9% APR on a 2025 pilot or a 2.9% APR on a 2025 ridgeline or CRV. See dealer for financing details. I mean, it's not terrible, but a case of worked smarter, not harder. I think I would prefer to know that she worked smart and hard. but, you know, maybe, maybe the jury was just fine with that answer. She said, this is a case of working smarter, not harder, and I don't consider them different. I mean, what I'm hearing, and I need to go clarify with other people that heard this, but I feel like she's basically saying cycled rounds and fired rounds make similar marks

or the same marks, but she couldn't see the cycled round marks as well. So she used fired rounds for comparison. I think that's what she's saying here, right? That she is saying, cycled rounds and fired rounds have the same marks. But because she could not see the cycled round marks as well, she used the fired rounds for comparison. And then Rosie then says,

Judge, I think I'd like to take a break. Could we do this? And Judge Gull says, no, keep going. So it is kind of getting exhausting during all of this, right? And it's just so back and forth and it's so complex and it's so technical. So these are some thoughts during this testimony. This line of questioning trying to trip up witness or debunk what she's saying isn't really going well. It's not bad, but it's not going great.

this witness has an answer for everything. She gives very lengthy answers or she tries to correct Rosie. And this is what I think I'm not making clear in the questions I wrote down. So I want to share like the overall feel of this testimony is that she did have an answer for everything. Her answers were rather lengthy. Again, just remember this cross-exam by Rosie lasted hours. So like there is so much that I'm I stopped writing down all of her lengthy answers. So just an overall feel of what's going on is she did a great job.

Rosie really pushed to try to trip her up with his line of questionings. But the witness really debunked or try to debunk what she was saying and it was not going well. I would say for Rosie in general. It's not bad but not great. The witness has an answer for. everything, she gives lengthy answers, or she actually is trying to correct Rosie. Rosie keeps asking essentially the same questions over and over, just wording them differently

to get an answer he wants, but this witness will not concede on anything. There is a great witness for the prosecution who says things like, this is a great witness for the prosecution. And she says things like, like this is what Melissa says during some answers. She's like, I'm going to keep seeing the same answer. Like she'll say that to Rosie. Like as Rosie, as Rosie like words his questions differently and she gives these lengthy answers and it's not tripping her up, she then says to Rosie, by the way, I'm going to keep saying my same answers.

she really did a decent job of downplaying critiques of firearm analysis as well. And Rosie actually stated at one point, this was a moment too. Rosie, Rosie being frustrated, he asked the judge, Judge, can you instruct the witness to answer the question? She just keeps talking. And Judge Goal writes, she's, or not, she didn't, Judge Goal says, she's answering the question. Like that was a moment.

Like he looked to the judge for help. Rosie did like, can you get her to answer the questions? She just keeps talking. And judge of gold states, she's answering. Rosie, so Rosie's clearly getting frustrated.

Rosie is showing jury, the jury photo comparisons at one point. This was an interesting moment. And he's asking for photo comparisons about Melissa Oberg's research. and there's an objection by the prosecution saying that he's misleading the jury. And the prosecutors typically don't ask for photos. Oh, and then Rosie's response is, oh, to the prosecution.

So you don't usually ask for photos. You don't want to check your work or what, you know, because all I'm trying to do is check her work and look at these photo comparisons with the jury. and is this not okay for the juries? He says to use photos to make comparisons. He's arguing in court. And you're saying that I just need you to believe everything that Melissa Oberg says and because you're on the stand and I can't then take your photo comparisons over to the jury

and I can't do this. Like I can't show them and double check Melissa Oberg's work. Is that what you're saying? And Melissa says, look, the photos are not. not what I used for determination process. It was only the process I memorialized. And Judge Gould then says, the jury cannot look at the pictures for themselves because based on the conclusion of the witness's answers, it would be misleading.

Judge Gould concludes. And then Melissa explains that the photos were just photos that she took and she didn't photograph the portions she used to make the determination, which that was interesting. I'm like, wait, what? Like, she didn't photograph the portions she used to make the determination because that would have been nice. Like, why not photograph that moment? I don't know.

And at that moment, at that moment, there's an objection by the defense. And she's like, she has made it clear. And Judge Gull said, and of course. The transcript of this trial will not catch her tone. So I'll just explain it. She said, please move on. But this is how she said it, please move on to Rosie, who just kept asking sort of like the same question over and over, kept pushing, kept pushing.

He was frustrated, as was Judge Gull clearly when she said, please move on. Rosie was actually getting sarcastic with the witness at some point. And I don't think that was a really good look for the defense. She gave really, really lengthy answers. And he got kind of sarcastic like, oh, thank you for that verification. Like sarcastic. And she just simply would respond, you're welcome. It was just like really kind of belaboring is like an adjective I would use.

This was just on and on and on. And the defense would sort of. belabor all of their points and she would give the same answers and lengthy answers. It was just kind of an exhausting afternoon. If you find this recap exhausting, think how it was in there today, you know. So then Rosie says, you have a 200-page report and you did not include the three handguns you couldn't exclude. and she responded,

I wasn't asked to include those. And then Rosie says, you could have done more testing on the three handguns that weren't excluded. She responds, I wasn't asked to. In other words, there were some guns

that she couldn't completely exclude, but she didn't put them in her report. She was not asked to do that. All right. So the jury, So the jury questions. So the jury questions, these were really astute questions in my opinion. Some days I don't give jury questions that much credit.

I'm like, really? This is where you're focusing. And then other days I'm like, wow, I'm impressed. And today I was impressed with their multiple questions. Here are the questions for the jury. Would the force of a person cycling around changed the markings? like the force that the person was using, the gun handler was using, would it change markings?

And her response was, yes, it would. Another jury question. For item 16, again, that is the gun or the, sorry, item 16 is the unspent cartridge found at the crime scene. And the jury question is, for item 16, can any of the sidewall because by being in pockets with keys. That was a great question. Can any of the injection marks be caused by being in pockets with keys? And her response is, I can't tell. I wouldn't be able to say. Another question by jury,

is there a way to tell if item 16, the unspent cartridge, and item 315, the gun that was taken from Richard Allen's house, can you tell if they are from the same lot? And what I believe he means the juror meant was from the same, like, factory made at the same time, as in created the same factory, the same batch. And she says, no, she cannot tell that. Another jury question, could reassembling and cleaning the firearm change the marks? She says that it could. That could change the marks. Another question, over time, if the gun fires, does it change tool marks with the pressure change. Her answer is there are a lot of external factors that can affect that, but I can't necessarily say. Another question, was a comparison made between the bullet at the scene and the

memorial box? And so what I think they meant by the memorial box, it's also been explained as a hope box or a keepsake box. Now the jury is referring to it as a memorial box. So they're saying, was there a comparison? So they're asking, was there a comparison made between the bullet at the scene, that would be item 16, and the bullet found in the memorial box or the hope box or the keepsake box that we learned about yesterday, that they took this unspent cartridge from a memorial box at Richard Allen's house. So, so this is a good question because I want to know why they brought up this unspent round found in a memorial box. Like, I don't know what it is. We don't know what it is, just that they seized it from his house.

And so I thought this was a great question, because I have the same question. Was there a comparison made between the bullet found at the scene and the bullet found in this hope box? The answer is, yes. Item 315, in other words, was missing in ejector mark. So, yeah, it wasn't a complete match. They were compared. and item 315 was the unspent round found in the hope box was missing an ejector mark.

So then they asked, well, were those two, the jury asked, were those two from the same lot? And she said, I don't know, I'm not able to tell. Will the difference in quality of metal affect toolmark quality? Another juror asks. Yes, she says. and she said that she test fired similar ammunition that had similar metal because it would make a difference. So she said, yes, it would make a difference, but she tested the same quality of the metal. Another question.

I mean, how many juror questions they have. You mentioned black box studies and numbers for false positive negatives and how that And how would that project its accuracy if there were more black box studies? A juror asks. And her answer is that the examiner knows that they are being tested. Hopefully someday we will have bullets that aren't being tested and have more black box studies. Some labs use three-point scale and five-point scale. We have a three-point scale.

And some labs that have five points actually have more discrepancies. But the black box studies really only test ammunition. to ammunition, not ammunition to a gun. So in other words, after this lengthy answer, her conclusion is a black box study would only help compare ammunition to ammunition, not ammunition to a gun. Another question, how do false positive translate into the outcome in the field? She explains that normally it's clustered to a group of people. It seems to only be a certain group of people making errors, but we don't know what is causing it.

So in other words, there are positive negative results. And she said that the errors that are being made in her field come from a certain group of people. And they're just still not quite sure why they continue to be made by this group of people. And then there were a few more questions. And I was sort of like done because I couldn't believe how many questions there were. After I wrote like seven, there were a couple more. They weren't that intriguing to me. And admittedly, I did.

write them down, forgive me. So I know that was complicated. I was sort of sorting it out in my brain, too, as we talk today. So if you're confused by everything I stated, think about how it was in the courtroom. I think that's like a fair analysis too to like think about like that was kind of hard to understand. There was there were a lot of moving parts. There were a lot of arguments. There was a lot a background. There was a lot of scientific research. It was a confusing day. The jury, though, like, they asked great questions. They are clearly listening to both Melissa Oberg and the defenses cross-exam. That much is clear to me because of the questions that they asked. And you're exactly right, Kim. It is not the most enthralling part of testimony, but it is very, very important because

we also learned at the end of the day that tomorrow, Saturday, do you guys know there's court on Saturday? Judge Goal is like, let's get this going. So there's court tomorrow. It's usually half day on Saturday or it was last week. But they actually, Judge Goal asked the prosecution, do you want to bring your next witness forward right now? And they said, no, no, we're going to wait because it's a DNA expert. And so we're going to wait until tomorrow. And that is interesting to me, because as of right now, we have heard of no DNA from Richard Allen that ties him to the crime scene. So I'm very curious what a DNA expert would bring to the table. And if there's something we don't know, I'm going to be very intrigued by tomorrow.

But yeah, you're exactly right. This is not the most enthralling testimony, but it's really important because let's say there is no DNA, tying Richard Allen to the crime scene. That means that the entire prosecution, like, it hinges almost on this evidence that Richard Allen's gun that he allegedly had because we know that Libby states in, so we know that Libby states in that Bridge Guy video, that be a gun. So they saw a gun on Richard Allen.

We know that there is an unspent cartridge found between the two bodies of Libby and Abby. We know that. So if if bridge guy had a gun and there was an unspent cartridge, we can tie together that it really may have been from bridge guy, right? And so to tie that unspent cartridge to Richard Allen's gun would be the next best thing to DNA. So the prosecution's case really hinges on this. It really like hangs on this is this unspent cartridge from a gun that Richard Allen owns that we seize from his house. That is huge. And so the defense is going to do everything they can to discredit this idea. And the prosecution is going to do everything they can to say this is real. This is certain. Check out our witness.

So you're right. Again, not the most enthralling testimony, but so, so important. And clearly, the jury understands just how important this is too, right? The amount of questions they had after today, they've never had more questions. And of course, it was an entire day of testimony. So I'm sure they built up a ton of questions, but I've never seen the jury have so many questions. I think they understand, too, the importance of this testimony in whether or not the prosecution can prove that Richard Allen murdered Abby and Libby. So a big deal. And I think tomorrow is also going to be really interesting. Before I go tonight, I'm going to check. check out the super chat.

I'm sorry that I couldn't get to all the chat and I have to focus on my notes. Usually I check out the chat a lot more throughout our live shows, but today it's just really hard. Thank you, Watts, the Obsession, True Crime. I appreciate that. So glad we have more new members today. I love it when we have new members. And thank you to those that gift new memberships.

Thank you so much, Ashley. Oh, interesting Irish blonde still. Four of the guns were fished out of the Wabash River in Peru, Indiana. What initiated police to search that area of the river to begin with? It was Kegan Klein. Thank you for that helpful information. So those guns that she received that had water were probably fished out of the Wabash. Well, forgive me if I'm mispronouncing that, my Indiana locals.

But they were fished out of that river. Okay. I cannot wait for Dr. John's assessment either, Becky. I agree. Forgive me that I was a little late, Laura. I know. Thank you, Tamara. Robin, great question.

How many cartridges did she cycle through Richard Allen's gun and how many matched and made the same marks to compare? I think I answered that. I think she stated how many. I'll go back and look, though. I'm going to have to go through pages. of notes to find it again. Great question, though.

Like, those were the type of jury questions that they had today, too. They were important questions. That's an important question. Thank you, Sammy, so much for gifting memberships. Thank you, Tamara, so much. Thank you, Rhonda. I appreciate everyone's support. I was exhausted today in court.

So, again, I slept outside last night. And at about, it was about 5 a.m. So I didn't fall asleep until, I didn't fall asleep until almost 1 a.m. And at the courthouse and at 5 a.m. I was woken to a downpour of rain, like just trenching everything. And so I jumped up and had to go under the awning where there was a little cover and move all of our stuff and our sleeping bags and everything. So I got very little sleep.

I've been getting very little sleep at the courthouse. And I was, so this is interesting. So I was, I was admittedly before lunch, I kept kind of nodding off, admittedly. And it's just, it's just hard. Like to, by the time you get into court, you've like had very little sleep to get in there. And so it's just like you're either, you know, it's, it's, I'm a lot more tired attending this trial than any other trial I've ever attended. I'm doing my best. And I will say that it was noted by someone that sits with the defense.

Bob Mata is the host of defense diaries. And during break, he approached me. And he sits with the defense every day, very on brand for the defense stories. I believe he's told me that it's Kathy Allen, that he supports Kathy Allen there at the defense, which I'm grateful for. Kathy Allen has some friends that sit with her every day. And one of Kathy Allen's friends also listens to Hidden True Crime and knows me. And again, I have such compassion for the victim's families.

And I also have empathy to Kathy Allen, that Richard Allen's wife. And then his parents were both there today too. Anyway, Bob said, hey, look, Lauren, I see you're falling asleep. You need a bit of a break. I think that I can get you a seat tomorrow because there are going to be a couple people not on the defense row if you would be willing. And I took them up on that offer. So I think that tonight I will be able to sleep and grateful for Kathy Allen who's been willing to be okay with that. So anyway, thank you so much. Scrolling down. Seriously, where is my shirt from? So you know what I think this is? I'm trying to find it. So I've told you guys, I rent a lot of my clothes from a company called Armour.

They've been a sponsor of ours, especially when I travel. But the nice thing about Armour is that you can purchase the clothes if you like them enough. And they're usually a lot less than what they typically go for because they're often designer clothes and this is one that I purchased. So I rented it and then I purchase it. If anybody's interested in Amor, use code hidden true crime for a percentage off. I think that's still going. Let me know if it isn't and I'll ask them. But I tried to just see the brand and I couldn't. I think it might be like I don't know. Oh, it might be, I don't know. Sorry. I'll find out. Thank you, everyone.

Oh, thank you. Wabash. Wabash. I knew I was pronouncing it wrong. Thank you so much. And I appreciate all of the people that are helping to, uh, helping me out. Thank you to all of our mods. Thank you, Lomisa.

Thank you, Petty Mason, um, Ozzy Tad, others. I really appreciate you. Where am I originally from? That's a great question. Um, no, I, um, um, So I was born in New York City, but we only lived there a few years. And then my family moved to Boise, Idaho, and then we moved to Romania for a time. And then we moved back to the United States and we moved to Salt Lake City.

And that's essentially where I was raised. And I went to high school in Salt Lake City. And I agree, Grammy tea. And then. So that's essentially where I grew up. And then before I met John, I had lived in like seven states. So I met John while I was living in Boise, Idaho as a reporter. And before Boise, though, I had been in Boston.

And before Boston, I had been in Santa Monica. And California and before Santa Monica, I had been in, gosh, there are just a lot of places. And yeah, I have, I'm grateful to be settled now a little bit. Grant, I appreciate that. And actually, if anybody has any thoughts, I have arthritis in my hands. I, after the Chad Daybell trial, I actually went and got MRIs because they were always hurting. And I have arthritis.

And my handwriting is getting worse and worse throughout the day because they feel good in the morning and by the end they're just on fire. So if anybody has any tips that deals with arthritis in their hands, let me know. Courtney asks, what was the jurors' reactions when she stated that in order to get a match on the bullet, she had to fire it? You know, I kept checking out the jury and my only notice was that they were just, the only thing I noticed is that they were really paying attention. They have some pretty good poker faces, the jury does.

They don't show too much emotion on their faces. But like I said, it was like a. tennis match going back and forth. They were just, they were really listening. And I also want to, as I've always pointed out, the sound for the gallery is a lot worse than it is for the jury. And so I think that the jury is hearing a lot more than even I'm picking up or other people in the gallery are picking up because there are moments where things are difficult to hear. Melissa Oberg did a pretty good job with her voice. And Rosie is loud. So we can. hear most things today, but even then there are some things that we just don't pick up in the

gallery that I'm sure the jury are hearing. I see a lot of opinions. And I'm listening to all of them. I appreciate you guys allowing me to just speak in a non-biased way and just to relate to all of you what is going on in court and even the opinions to all of you. And of course, the jury will decide. you know, this case. I just hope. My biggest hope is that justice has served for Abby and Libby because I knew this was a brutal crime, but what we've learned in court so far has certainly showed just how brutal. And I just, they have touched my heart, these victims, as well as the victim's family sitting in court each day. It's heartbreaking.

And so I hope that Abby and Libby will get justice. So, Cassidy, yes, some of the testimony has made me lean certain ways, but I am not going to share that because I want to stick true to just reporting every day in court and allowing all of you to make your own opinions. And I am moldable. I am not. Show me, show me evidence, show me facts. I'm listening. I'm curious. I will be willing to share more of my thoughts, Rhonda, yes, at the end of the trial. Thank you, Bo Peep. I'm pinning that just so I can find it later. You know, there are times, I will say there are times when I think. throw out some thoughts I have during these live streams.

Yesterday I did that. When I pointed out the alibi and the evidence there, like, I did share, like, that's a big deal. That's a big deal, you know? So I do share some opinions, but I always go back to, like, you guys, like, let's, let's just see. Let's play this trial out. All right, everyone. I am going to go get some sleep.

And with that, I'm taken off to sleep. It's going to be a good day. A good day tomorrow. I'll sleep tonight or a good night. Okay, so Tracy, I have seen him taking notes, and I think it's with his right hand. I'm going to double check tomorrow, but I feel like I have seen him taking notes, and he's right-handed. All right, guys, we'll see you. Yes, there is court tomorrow.

So we'll be here tomorrow. There's a half day tomorrow. Well, at least there was last Saturday. I guess Judge Gull could technically go all day. It's her courtroom. But I think that it'll be a half day because they want to give the jurors sometime. The jurors are sequestered. And their only day off is Sunday where they can have family visit them on Sunday.

So I think she just wants to give the jury some time to rest, hence a half day on Saturday. But she also wants to get through this trial. because the jurors do need to go home. So Judge Gull is holding court on Saturday, just typically not a full day. All right, everyone. Thank you, thank you. And oh, thank you, Diane.

I appreciate that so, so much. And, oh, thanks, Jonathan. All right, good night, friends. And we will see you. All right, bye-bye. It's the Ashley President's Day sale going on now. Right now, you can feel the freedom to save up to $1,000 on select mattresses. Plus, you can snooze now, pay later with up to 60 months special financing.

And for a limited time, receive a $300 coupon with the purchase of a premium mattress. Customizing your sleep has never been easier. Hurry in and start saving today. Only at Ashley in North Charleston and Mount Pleasant. Subject to credit approval. Minimum monthly payments required. Minimum purchase required. See store for details.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are now boarding Group A. please have your boarding passes ready to scan. If your phone is cracked, old, or was chewed up by your Chihuahua travel companion, please refrain from holding up the line. Instead, go to Verizon and trade in any phone in any condition from one of their top brands for the new Samsung Galaxy S25 Plus with Galaxy AI. And a watch and tab on any plan. Only on Verizon.

With new line on my plan. Service plan required for watch and tab. Additional terms apply. See Verizon.com for details. Most people don't realize how much their personal information is being. bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making billions, pulling details about you from public records and the internet, and then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers. It's why you get endless

robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. Ora actively removes your data from broker's sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might sell just credit monitoring, or just a VPN. Orra gives you all of it, together, at the same price competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today atora.com slash remove. Protect yourself now atora.com slash remove.