Experts called to testify for defense in Griffith trial
By Kat Russell, Reporter
The Paducah Sun
February 14, 2015
http://www.paducahsun.com/news/local/experts-called-in-to-testify-for-defense-in-griffith-trial/article_3893b350-5ad8-11e7-829e-10604b9f0f42.html
Kat Russell / The Paducah Sun
Defense attorney Mark Bryant called two expert witnesses Friday at McCracken Circuit Court to talk about gunshot residue, arson and DNA in the trial of Keith Griffith, 56, the Reidland man accused of killing his wife and burning their home with her and their two dogs inside.
Forensic expert Ronnie Freels, a retired Kentucky State Police forensic ballistics examiner, testified regarding the minute traces of gunshot residue found on a pair of Griffith's jeans and a jacket.
Freels said forensics experts who examined Griffith's clothing found one particle characteristic of gunshot residue from a discharge of a firearm on his jacket and another particle on his jeans.
"But there were also other particles that were there," he said. "Those other particles can come from â ¦ sources other than a discharge from a gun."
To illustrate his point, Freels stepped out of the witness box and handed Bryant two red dot stickers to represent particles of gunshot residue, and instructed him to stick one on his pants and one on his jacket.
"I just transferred to (Bryant) by a handshake two particles of possible gunshot residue," he said.
Freels explained when a semi-automatic pistol is discharged, a cloud of gunshot residue particles is released. The size of that cloud depends on the type of gun used and the way the ammunition is manufactured.
Freels then presented a large-scale prop bullet to show the jury its different components and where gunshot residue comes from.
During his testimony, Freels contended the particles found on Griffith's jacket and pants were not from firing a gun, but instead came from "transfer contamination."
Gunshot residue, he said, can be found on any surface where guns are present. Anyone who has entered areas like those could potentially test positive for GSR, he said.
"Police rooms, police cars, the handcuffing process, all of that can aid in the transfer process," he said. "It's my opinion that those particles (found on Griffith's clothes) were from transfer contamination."
During his examination of the case, Freels - who is also trained in fire science - also examined photos from the fire scene at the Griffiths' home.
He told the jury that Kentucky State Police investigators gathered four samples from the scene and tested them for traces of accelerants. They found nothing, he said.
Freels also noted that fire investigators concluded the fire load - meaning the amount of flammable items - in the Griffiths' bedroom, where Julie Griffith was found, was inconsistent with the damage caused in the blaze.
Freels concluded that the cause the fire, and whether it was set, was indeterminable.
In their cross, the prosecution tried to debunk Freels' conclusions.
"Do you agree that â ¦ based on what you describe as your many years of law enforcement, this was a deliberately set arson fire?" asked Assistant Commonwealth Attorney Jim Harris.
"No," Freels answered.
"You don't agree with that?" Harris retorted. "You understand that a woman was shot in the chest and killed and that the fire was contemporaneous with that. Do you have reason to believe that this was not an arson fire set by the person who did it to destroy evidence, to destroy a body that had been killed?"
"The fire marshal's report was undetermined," Freels replied.
"My report was also undetermined."
Later in the day, the jury also heard from KSP DNA analyst Joshua Hynes, who testified regarding testing done on clothing belonging to Griffith.
Hynes said during his examination he analyzed blood sampled from a pair of jeans and a denim shirt collected from Griffith.
"From that item I collected four sets of swabs - there were four areas on the jeans that had possible blood stains," he said. "I tested all four of those, in addition to a cutting from a blue denim shirt."
Three of those sets matched Keith Griffith's DNA. None of the samples matched Julie Griffith's DNA, he said.
In cross examination, the prosecution asked if DNA can degrade with heat, such as the heat from a fire.
Hynes said yes.
"And, the hotter the heat and the longer the duration that the DNA is exposed to the heat, the more the likelihood of degradation?" Harris asked.
Hynes concurred.
Griffith is charged with murder, first-degree arson, tampering with evidence and two counts of first-degree animal cruelty. If convicted, he could face the death penalty.
Bryant said he expects the defense will wrap up its case Monday. It has not yet been decided, he said, whether Griffith will testify.
Testimony will resume at 9 a.m. Monday at McCracken Circuit Court.
Contact Kat Russell, a Paducah Sun staff writer, at 270-575-8653.
Forensic expert Ronnie Freels, a retired Kentucky State Police forensic ballistics examiner, testified regarding the minute traces of gunshot residue found on a pair of Griffith's jeans and a jacket.
Freels said forensics experts who examined Griffith's clothing found one particle characteristic of gunshot residue from a discharge of a firearm on his jacket and another particle on his jeans.
"But there were also other particles that were there," he said. "Those other particles can come from â ¦ sources other than a discharge from a gun."
To illustrate his point, Freels stepped out of the witness box and handed Bryant two red dot stickers to represent particles of gunshot residue, and instructed him to stick one on his pants and one on his jacket.
"I just transferred to (Bryant) by a handshake two particles of possible gunshot residue," he said.
Freels explained when a semi-automatic pistol is discharged, a cloud of gunshot residue particles is released. The size of that cloud depends on the type of gun used and the way the ammunition is manufactured.
Freels then presented a large-scale prop bullet to show the jury its different components and where gunshot residue comes from.
During his testimony, Freels contended the particles found on Griffith's jacket and pants were not from firing a gun, but instead came from "transfer contamination."
Gunshot residue, he said, can be found on any surface where guns are present. Anyone who has entered areas like those could potentially test positive for GSR, he said.
"Police rooms, police cars, the handcuffing process, all of that can aid in the transfer process," he said. "It's my opinion that those particles (found on Griffith's clothes) were from transfer contamination."
During his examination of the case, Freels - who is also trained in fire science - also examined photos from the fire scene at the Griffiths' home.
He told the jury that Kentucky State Police investigators gathered four samples from the scene and tested them for traces of accelerants. They found nothing, he said.
Freels also noted that fire investigators concluded the fire load - meaning the amount of flammable items - in the Griffiths' bedroom, where Julie Griffith was found, was inconsistent with the damage caused in the blaze.
Freels concluded that the cause the fire, and whether it was set, was indeterminable.
In their cross, the prosecution tried to debunk Freels' conclusions.
"Do you agree that â ¦ based on what you describe as your many years of law enforcement, this was a deliberately set arson fire?" asked Assistant Commonwealth Attorney Jim Harris.
"No," Freels answered.
"You don't agree with that?" Harris retorted. "You understand that a woman was shot in the chest and killed and that the fire was contemporaneous with that. Do you have reason to believe that this was not an arson fire set by the person who did it to destroy evidence, to destroy a body that had been killed?"
"The fire marshal's report was undetermined," Freels replied.
"My report was also undetermined."
Later in the day, the jury also heard from KSP DNA analyst Joshua Hynes, who testified regarding testing done on clothing belonging to Griffith.
Hynes said during his examination he analyzed blood sampled from a pair of jeans and a denim shirt collected from Griffith.
"From that item I collected four sets of swabs - there were four areas on the jeans that had possible blood stains," he said. "I tested all four of those, in addition to a cutting from a blue denim shirt."
Three of those sets matched Keith Griffith's DNA. None of the samples matched Julie Griffith's DNA, he said.
In cross examination, the prosecution asked if DNA can degrade with heat, such as the heat from a fire.
Hynes said yes.
"And, the hotter the heat and the longer the duration that the DNA is exposed to the heat, the more the likelihood of degradation?" Harris asked.
Hynes concurred.
Griffith is charged with murder, first-degree arson, tampering with evidence and two counts of first-degree animal cruelty. If convicted, he could face the death penalty.
Bryant said he expects the defense will wrap up its case Monday. It has not yet been decided, he said, whether Griffith will testify.
Testimony will resume at 9 a.m. Monday at McCracken Circuit Court.
Contact Kat Russell, a Paducah Sun staff writer, at 270-575-8653.
