Paul Greer — Direct/Cross/Voir Dire

PAUL GREER: My name is Paul Greer, G-r-e-e-r.

PAUL GREER: I'm employed at the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division, which is commonly known as SLED.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. I received a Bachelor’s of Science in biological sciences from the University of South Carolina. At completion of my collegiate career, I began an internship at SLED in the Firearm and Tool Mark Department. I was appointed as a firearms examiner, a forensic scientist in the laboratory in 2014, where I began the SLED firearm and tool mark course of instruction. This is an extensive training program that's conducted under the supervision of other court qualified examiners. During that time, in an extensive period I conducted many written and practical examinations, conducted many microscopic comparisons, and assisted other examiners prep their cases. At the conclusion of my training, I was then given a comprehensive final exam that included mock casework, and was able to begin casework on my own after successfully completing that.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Firearms identification is a discipline of forensic science in which our main objective is to examine fired ammunition components in order to determine if they were fired by a specific firearm.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. I am a member of the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners, which is also known as AFTE. I've been a member of that organization since approximately 2015. AFTE is an international organization that I believe has over -- or approximately 1200 members of folks in the field who do firearms identification and tool mark identification. This also includes technical leaders from the academic world and also from other aspects.

PAUL GREER: Sure. That refers back to that course of instruction that I completed, that approximately three years or so program where I conducted all of the microscopic comparisons. I looked at things on the microscope. Test fired firearms, observed cartridge cases that were fired out of the same firearm, cartridge cases that were fired out of different firearms, bullets as well. Learning about firearms, manufacturing process of those firearms, and how that relates to the range of conclusions that we issue as firearms examiners. During that time I also completed those written and practical tests. Some of those tests include studies that have been conducted throughout the United States and worldwide, to include consecutively manufactured bullets and cartridge cases. I’ve completed those, successfully passed, those. At the end of my training I was given that final exam, and also some mock casework in which I was able to complete and successfully pass.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I have. When I'm able, or training is available, I attend their annual conference. That is a large conference where material is presented about new technologies in the field, or updates, new procedures that may be coming in order to do things or arrive with different items. But I attend those conferences when able. I also participate in other training as necessary, such as our Glock Armor certification when that -- when, when I'm able to do that. AFTE also has other things they provide. Webinars, if I'm able to participate in those, I will take part in that.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Part of our quality control at SLED, SLED, the laboratory, is accredited by ANAB, which is the ANSI National Accreditation Board. That follows the standards set forth ISO 170 -- 17025, which is an international accrediting set of standards, and we follow that. And within that we have a SLED quality control manual that requires before we are able to participate, or be authorized to perform work, we are competency tested and deemed competent to do that. Also in addition, each year we are proficiency tested to make sure that we are maintaining our competency.

PAUL GREER: Sure. Firearms identification has been around for years, and during that time there's been many studies that have proven the reliability of firearms identification. Those studies are published in articles through AFTE, such as the AFTE Journal. Those studies, using a scientific method, are published in the AFTE Journal, or Journal of Forensic Sciences would be another one that could be included, and those are peer reviewed. Those are looked at by members of the academia, or firearms identification, other examiners, those are reviewed and those are published in those two journals for sure.

PAUL GREER: I believe AFTE was founded in 1969.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, that's my understanding. They would be able to review the article as it's presented prior to publication, review what has taken place in that article or that experiment, and share their thoughts with that process. Those articles are then peer reviewed and issued in those journals.

PAUL GREER: That's correct.

PAUL GREER: Sure. As part of our quality control process at SLED, again, we are accredited by ANAB. We just received our reaccreditation. We're accredited every four years during that cycle, and we just received our reaccreditation. And that, again, follows the ISO 17025 standards. We also on top of that have the SLED quality manual, which we follow closely to make sure that we're adhering to those procedures. And as part that, we have a firearms departmental manual that gives guidance in how to perform our actual casework, how to perform our examinations with the evidence. In that process and that quality control peer review, our casework at SLED is 100 percent micro verified. And that means that another qualified examiner will look at the evidence, arrive at their conclusions, and agree or disagree with me. For those to be reported, that examiner, we will -- if he or she agrees with my results, those will then be reported. The case file itself, it also undergoes a technical administrative review process as part of the quality control and peer review procedures.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, that is.

PAUL GREER: The ANAB is in the United States, but they follow the international standards set forth by ISO.

PAUL GREER: The Forensics Services Laboratory is.

PAUL GREER: That's correct.

PAUL GREER: That is also correct.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Firearms identification has been around for years. Since the early 1900s, we have been evolving on firearms identification.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, that's correct.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I have.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: I have testified in state and federal courts approximately twenty-five times.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. It does follow a scientific method and approach in order to conduct our examinations.

PAUL GREER: Sure. As far as applying the scientific approach, when we conduct our examinations, or we're looking at firearms as a -- in the scientific method, one thing when we're working a case or if you're looking at it in this manner, you may ask -- you form a hypothesis. Are these cartridge cases fired by this firearm? So, that will be our hypothesis. We would evaluate the conditions under that, do research, and then we would actually do an experiment. In this case, this example, what we would do is test fire that firearm using similar ammunition that we're comparing it to. We would determine our conclusions and arrive at those conclusions. Then that can also be applied to case work. If I receive a case, I look at all the evidence, look at the characteristics on that, examine the firearm, test fire that firearm. I've already compared those cartridge cases to each other and determined that the characteristics of that firearm can be compared to those cartridge cases, compare that, determine a conclusion. In order to determine -- and then our peer review process kicks in. In order to determine whether that is reproducible, or the repeatability of that scientific procedure, that's where our peer review process would come in. Another court qualified examiner would come in and look at that, and if he arrives at the same conclusion, then that method has been deemed repeatable and reliable.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, it has.

PAUL GREER: There were none.

PAUL GREER: At SLED, again, we are accredited under the ANAB policy, which guides us under those standards, and our quality control manual -- I'm sorry, could you repeat the question?

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. That is the ISO 17025. So, accredited laboratories around the United States, if they are accredited by ANAB, they are all working with those same standards that we are at SLED. They're all adhering to those quality control procedures. Additionally, those who are accredited under the ISO 17025 internationally are also accredited by those same standards and follow those same quality control procedures.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. For the ANAB accreditation, we have an onsite visit every four years where auditors come and examine our casework, examine our facilities in order to make sure that we are complying with the requirements set forth by their governing body. They review everything that we offer as far as casework, make sure that we're complying with our own policies, as well as theirs. As far as internally, we also complete internal audits each year where other departments will audit and make sure that there's compliance within each department.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. The SLED quality control manual follows those standards that are given by ANAB. It follows that so that way the SLED laboratory has strict guidelines in which we follow in order to make sure that we stay in line with our accreditation procedures and policies.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. The firearms manual is a set of procedures that we follow as examiners in order to give us instruction and information on how to complete our examinations, how to handle firearms-related evidence and tool mark-related evidence. It also includes some terminology that we use within our case files. It gives us guidance to make sure that we are all operating consistently and within those guidelines of the quality control procedures.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Each employee at the SLED laboratory, including myself, signs a code of ethics that we must abide by each year, and that is a code of ethics for the workplace in our forensic laboratory, and that is recorded within our quality control procedures.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Before a conclusion is rendered via report, each examiner will examine the evidence, arrive at a conclusion, write those conclusions down. At that point another court qualified examiner will examine the evidence and arrive separately at their conclusions to create a blind verification. If those conclusions are the same, then the reviewing examiner will sign off on those conclusions so that a report can be drafted. As also part of that process, the entire case file and report are reviewed for a technical review and administrative review before the report is released.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, that is correct.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. We do take a proficiency test within our discipline each year.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. You would look at your evidence, or in this case if you're doing just an experiment, and try and determine a hypothesis. Are these cartridge cases fired by this gun, or are those these bullets fired by this gun? You would do the research to determine what materials you may need. In this case, you may use, like, ammunition that you're trying to compare it to. You would examine those characteristics to make sure that the comparison should be -- should be completed. At that point you would begin your experiment. In this case, you would test fire the firearm. You would compare those cartridge cases from the firearm with each other, and also with those cartridge cases or bullets that are in question and arrive at conclusions. At that point, you would conclude your experiment, issue your conclusions, and open up for any discussion. That is similar to casework and the fact -- that's a very similar method is what we use there for repeatability and reproducibility of that. At that point, that experiment could be passed off to others in the field of firearms identification, or other academia, to review and comment. They could use the evidence and/or the cartridge cases and conduct their own experiment with it and see if they arrive at those same conclusions. If they do, then that theory has been proven and considered reproducible and reliable.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. That would be an important component of the scientific process.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, it is.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I am.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I am.

PAUL GREER: The 2008 article from the NAS was an article by a group of researchers dealing with ballistic imaging.

PAUL GREER: I am familiar with it.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Your Honor, may I refer to my notes?

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: That report brought into question some of the reproducibility of firearm-related tool marks, and whether the additional research of the reproducing of those firearm and tool marks should be done.

PAUL GREER: The primary focus of that research were the reproducibility of the firearm and tool -- excuse me, the tool marks from firearms was conducted through the ballistic imaging software. It did not take into the account the human, such as I am, an examiner working on the microscope looking at that with my eyes. I mean, it was all on the ballistic imaging software.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. I believe it failed to take into the account of, of the human in the process, looking at it with their physical -- with their eyes on a physical microscope.

PAUL GREER: I feel that it could have included more of the human interaction with the examination process, more in line with what I am accustomed to doing at the SLED laboratory.

PAUL GREER: An examiner goes through a rigorous training process, extensive research during their training looking at many microscopic comparisons. And they -- whether or not they're issuing articles along -- throughout their career to be peer reviewed in those journals, they are doing research during that training process, comparing known items to each other, and known non-matches, looking at the difference in those. And I feel that this article, it didn't take into the account of that human interaction looking at that. The ballistic imaging technology may not have accounted for that.

PAUL GREER: At this point in my career, I would say thousands of comparisons.

PAUL GREER: The 2008 report was not intended to cause any issues with the admissibility of the firearm and tool mark evidence and their -- its admissibility. There was a statement from the -- Dr. John Roth, who was a member of the study, who issued -- who had to address some of that information in that the NAS report did not mean to cause that situation to occur.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I am.

PAUL GREER: I am familiar with the report.

PAUL GREER: The report was generated, and it made thirteen recommendations regarding forensic science. Six of those recommendations related directly towards firearm and tool mark, or AFTE, and those are the recommendations that I'm more familiar with.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Six of those directly relate to that.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, there was.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. At SLED we as firearms examiners utilize the AFTE Glossary, which is a book of terms related to firearm and tool mark identification. That glossary is used by examiners all over the world, as AFTE, again, is an international organization. And that glossary has been available since, I believe, 1980, so it's constantly been updated as needed, new terms included. But we've always had that glossary to refer to. In addition, at SLED we have certain procedures that we follow to use certain terminology or abbreviations that standardize our, our reporting or case file documentation.

PAUL GREER: The second recommendation dealt with establishing quantifiable measures due to the reliability and accuracy of the forensic analysis.

PAUL GREER: Basically what they recommended was that the reliability and accuracy of the forensic techniques should reflect the practice on case scenarios. They should establish the limits of reliability and accuracy in using those analytical methods that can be expected to achieve when looking at -- excuse me, to achieve as the conditions of forensic evidence vary. There has been many articles published throughout the history of firearm and tool mark identification that address the reliability and accuracy of our field ever since it really became popular in the early 1900s. They used that scientific approach, and since then they've built upon that. Hundreds and hundreds of articles discussing firearm and tool mark identification comparing those fired cartridge cases, those bullets, the ammunition components, in determining the reliability, there are studies that address that using different scenarios, and also help to provide some insight as to the reliability of it.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Part of our peer review is part of our process in order to complete a case at SLED.

PAUL GREER: The third recommendation was basically to -- in summary, what they wanted was to establish protocols for forensics examinations, methods, and practices.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Again, we have those protocols set in place in our firearms manual in which we are able to follow to guide us through our examinations. We also fall under those accrediting bodies of ANAB and ISO 17205 that guide us in accordance with those international standards. And that's how we've been -- we have met that standard, and we've been fulfilling that.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, in my opinion.

PAUL GREER: One of the highlights from the fourth recommendation was laboratory accreditation, and individual certification of forensic science professionals should be mandatory, and all forensics science professionals should have access to the certification. Certification requirements should include examinations, supervised practice, proficiency testing, continuing education, and adherence to a code of ethics, as well as other things. But that's a quick summary of that recommendation.

PAUL GREER: Again, the accreditation process, as we were just reaccredited. Also after going through the extensive training program, we are competency tested. We're given those extensive practicals and terminology tests and essay questions to complete. We're given those competency tests to include the casework that represents an array of the type of cases that we'll be working on. We have to complete those and successfully pass that. We're also proficiency tested each year. Each examiner is proficiency tested in order to maintain and prove that you're maintaining your competency. And we attend continuing education as we are able to by participating in webinars, attending the annual conference of AFTE, and so on. And also the code of ethics, we sign that each year as employees in the forensic services laboratory.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. The fifth recommendation is a forensic laboratory should establish routine quality assurance and quality control procedures to ensure that accuracy of forensic analysis in the work of forensic practitioners.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Again, the accreditation with ANAB, ISO 1705, adhering to that SLED quality manual, the peer review process that our casework undergoes to make sure that it's all reviewed 100 percent before issuing those conclusions and those reports.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. That was the code of ethics. The National Institute of Forensic Science with its advisory board should establish a national code of ethics for forensic science disciplines. And we have the code of ethics that we signed to guide us through for forensics in the workplace.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. The PCAST report was a report that was issued by the President's Counsel of Advisers on Science and Technology. They issued a report entitled Forensic Science in Criminal Courts, Ensuring Scientific Validity of Future Comparison Methods. Basically this report -- and I apologize -- challenged us as firearms examiners in a few different methods, with some of the things that they recommended for firearms and -- or found issue with in the field of firearm and tool mark identification. I apologize.

PAUL GREER: One of the issues that they noted was that firearms analysis falls short of the criteria for foundational validity because there is only a single appropriately designed study to measure the reliability of firearm and tool mark analysis. The other was that they had issue with those studies and how they were designed. Another issue was brought forth to firearm and tool mark examiners where our -- the methods in which we arrive at our conclusions, that is to include the subjective and objective measures that we take to arrive at those conclusions.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. There have been some criticism of that report.

PAUL GREER: I have.

PAUL GREER: I am familiar with some of those criticisms, and I do, as an examiner, agree with the responses by some of our scientific groups in firearm and tool mark examining.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Part of the -- one of the things with the PCAST report is the group of researches who compiled that report, none of those researchers had any firearms identification experience. I believe in referencing some articles that none of those had even worked in a forensics laboratory, and only two had claimed to have any backgrounds in forensics. So, none of these people who compiled that and issued those statements about firearm and tool mark identification even claimed to have ever been in a forensics laboratory, so that is one issue. As what we do is very -- is very specific, and we go undergo lots of years of training to arrive at becoming a competent examiner.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, they have.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I am familiar with that organization.

PAUL GREER: The OSAC is the Organization -- excuse me -- of Scientific Area Committees. That is part of a committee that each forensics discipline has a group in, and that is a committee that's within NIST, which is a federal scientific organization.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I believe so.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, that's correct.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Good afternoon.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I have.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. I did receive fired cartridge cases and projectiles to compare to the rifle.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, and also our SLED Firearm Department Manual, which is a document that I would follow to conduct those examinations.

PAUL GREER: I am not sure of the location; I would have to check the submission paperwork through the laboratory.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. May I refer to my report?

PAUL GREER: Your Honor?

PAUL GREER: Thank you.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: As far as the cartridge cases from the scene? Which items are you referring to?

PAUL GREER: Okay. Yes, sir. The results of the comparisons of Items 2 through 7 in my report, when I compared those with each other and test cartridge cases that I fired from that Item 33 rifle, the results of those comparisons were inconclusive. That means I am unable to determine whether those items from fired by Item 33 or by another firearm with similar characteristics.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. I concluded that matching individual identifying characteristics were found in the mechanism marks of Items 2 through 7, 35 through 37, 39, 108, 113, 116 through 117, and 122, to conclude that those items had been loaded into, extracted, and ejected from the same firearm at some previous time.

PAUL GREER: I'm able to determine that those cartridge cases had matching mechanism marks listed there, but in comparisons with the Item 33 rifle, I am unable to determine if they had been fired by that rifle or not.

PAUL GREER: Which cartridge cases do you -- are you referring to?

PAUL GREER: Oh, it's my opinion that those all had matching mechanism marks. Another common term you may hear for that is cycling. So, that means that those cartridge cases at some point had been cycled through the same firearm at one point in time. I was using the marks it made from those -- the exactor, the ejector, and other chamber marks, the load marks, to make that identification. So, those cartridge cases I am able to say have been cycled through the same firearm at some point in time, but as a result of comparisons with the -- with the Item 33 rifle with Items 2 through 7, those at the scene, the results of those comparisons were inconclusive as having been fired by.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. The cycling marks sometimes could occur just from cycling through the firearm. For instance, if you were to load a cartridge into a magazine, or cartridges into a magazine, load that magazine into a firearm, and chamber that unfired cartridge into the chamber of the gun so it's in battery ready to fire, if you decided not to fire that weapon, you may -- in this case it was a rifle -- , pull back on that bolt handle, and in case -- that instance the fired -- the unfired cartridge would be extracted from the chamber of that gun and ejected. There can be marks left on an unfired cartridge due to that process without having firing the cartridge.

PAUL GREER: That is my conclusion. After I examined the evidence, I arrived at that conclusion based on the years of extensive training, looking at thousands of comparisons, and basing that conclusion upon that. If I thought it could have been a different answer there -- it could have been inconclusive. But I was able to determine that the agreement that I saw on those items was sufficient enough to determine that they had been cycled through the same firearm at some previous time.

PAUL GREER: It's my opinion that those had matching mechanism marks.

PAUL GREER: Based on all of the markings, and tool marks, and cartridge case, and fired bullets that I've looked at in my career -- I have examined and conducted thousands of comparisons. I've participated in studies and competencies that -- in which I look at things to determine if they were fired by a particular firearm, and able to build a foundation in which I can base my opinion. And it's my opinion that based on that training, based on those studies I participated in -- some of those included consecutively rifle barrels, consecutively manufactured slides, and I successfully passed those, that based on the information there after I examined those cartridge cases for those markings, it's my opinion that those items all have shared matching mechanism marks and had been loaded into, extracted, or ejected from the same firearm at some previous time.

PAUL GREER: 300 Blackout is a newer caliber. I'm not aware at this point in time. I'm sure there may have been research, but I do not have research with me today on cartridge cases of that caliber.

PAUL GREER: With basic manufacturing processes, yes, sir, I suppose so.

PAUL GREER: Are we talking about component parts of the rifle?

PAUL GREER: Different manufacturers choose to make or -- make their parts, or they can have those supplied by other vendors, yes, sir, I suppose so.

PAUL GREER: I do not have information as to how they were purchased or assembled.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: I am familiar with certain studies. Some of those I participated in as part of my training that are known around the United States and internationally that consisted of the those consecutively rifled barrel. That means that they were made by a tool at the same or approximate time in the same state of wear. I've also done those studies with cartridge cases, looking at the consecutively manufactured breach faces. And we have as firearms examiners -- are aware of those markings, and in those studies they're conducted -- because in the firearm and tool mark identification world, if you will, if we are expected to see those carryover of those markings, we would expect to see that on tools that are made -- or excuse me, on barrels that are rifled consecutively, or those breech faces that are manufactured consecutively because that's when that tool is passing over that surface, one after another. And I've conducted those studies, such as the brand TiN barrel test, the Hemby breech face test, the Glock Evus barrels, which all have consecutively manufactured items within in them, and I was able to distinguish between those items in looking at them under the microscope evaluating those characteristics that are exhibited on those fired components, and correctly identify and associate those with the correct information.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. That would be the bore of the barrel.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. I -- there are studies that have shown the reproducibility of those markings, and how firearms examiners were able to distinguish between those manufactured components.

PAUL GREER: I'm sorry, can you repeat the question?

PAUL GREER: I don't have any information with me today in regards to the 300 Blackout. But all of those components are machined in similar ways. They all have similar manufacturing processes. And I have demonstrated throughout my training that I was able to distinguish between those consecutively manufactured parts. So, just because it may be in a 300 Blackout, I may have done that in something similar such as in those tests with the Ruger pistol or the Glock pistol and was able to distinguish even though they may share similar manufacturing techniques. I don't have an article with me here today in regards specific to that caliber. But based on my knowledge of the manufacturing process and firearm and tool mark identification, I would expect to be able to rely on that information as being reliable to examine that caliber.

PAUL GREER: I was able to say that Items 2 through 7 had the matching mechanism marks.

PAUL GREER: Those would be marks that are from the ejector, extractor that could include the marks or load marks that we see on those -- on that type caliber ammunition.

PAUL GREER: Based on my examination, those are the marks that I was able to conclude that matched. When I looked at the totality of that cartridge, that fired cartridge case, excuse me, to look at the firing pin or breach face marks, I was unable to determine that -- if it was fired by the Item 33 rifle, or by another rifle that was similar.

PAUL GREER: I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. At SLED we use a process of pattern matching, so in that pattern matching we are comparing the surface contours of those tool marks to each other. Pattern matching is the worldwide accepted method for firearm and tool mark identification, so we're in line with other laboratories that -- in forensic laboratories with firearm and tool mark identification to conduct those comparisons using that pattern matching method.

PAUL GREER: There is not a policy for counting those lines, as we rely on the pattern matching method which is accepted throughout our field.

PAUL GREER: Based on all of my training and experience looking at those thousands of comparisons, looking at items in which I know match, looking at the agreement that's seen there between those two items, looking at items together that I know are known non-matches, looking at any agreement that may be there, of course, we would expect to see some disagreement, in evaluating those characteristics throughout the course of my training, looking at all of those, I use that to base my opinion on that -- in regards those Items 2 through 7 that they had matching mechanism marks.

PAUL GREER: I use the pattern matching method based on the extensive comparisons that I've conducted, looking at the literature, participating in those studies in order to determine that I can evaluate the difference between the different characteristics that were exhibited on the items, as well as the quality control procedures at SLED that help to ensure that we're issuing a quality product in our results.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, absolutely. Every case that we work at SLED to issue a conclusion is 100 percent micro verified. That means I look at the evidence, I examine it under comparison microscope, look at all of those characteristics and features, and arrive at my conclusions whether things I'm able to identify, or I say are inconclusive, or even eliminate. I come up with those conclusions and write those conclusions down. It's at that time that another court qualified examiner comes behind and reviews the evidence as well. They look at all of the evidence on the microscope, compare those features, as I have, independently and arrive at their own conclusions. If we -- if he or she agrees with my conclusions, they're able to sign off on those conclusions, and the process of issuing that report is continued. So, that's part of our quality control process that each case undergoes. And another component of that is once he or she agrees or disagrees with that conclusion, the report will go -- undergo a technical administrative review, as well as the case file, to ensure that quality product.

PAUL GREER: No, sir. We have a blind verification process so they're -- they do not know our results.

PAUL GREER: The reviewer for this case was Chad Smith.

PAUL GREER: His name would not appear on the report as I'm the one issuing the report. His name would be included in the case file documenting his agreement with my conclusions.

PAUL GREER: That's correct.

PAUL GREER: I believe I have, yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: I'm unable to, to recall about how many reports I've issued based on those cycling marks. I believe I have issued a report like that in the past where I was able to look at those cartridge cases, and I don't remember the details of the case where there was a gun involved or not.

PAUL GREER: I've testified in court approximately twenty-five times regarding my conclusions. In regards just to -- if you're discussing mechanism marks, I would have to recall and check a file. I don't know off the top of my head. But I have testified in court approximately twenty-five times to my conclusions that I've issued in a report in regards to firearm and tool mark identification.

PAUL GREER: I don't have that number with me today.

PAUL GREER: It's not uncommon. Our ultimate goal in firearms is to identify and eliminate. And in this case, I was unable to identify several of those cartridge cases as I had that inconclusive result. But in looking at the information, those characteristics on that cartridge -- on those cartridge cases, I was able to determine that conclusion and look at those markings and the totality of those areas around the cartridge case to say that those items had been cycled through the firearm at some time.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. Item 33 was the rifle.

PAUL GREER: I don't know the history of these rifles or how they were recovered or obtained.

PAUL GREER: No, sir. I'm not able to date the firearm.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, that's correct.

PAUL GREER: Our organization issued a response in to -- to those articles, yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. I was hired on at SLED in 2014, so I'm unaware, you know, the past of what may have been completed. And I wasn't with -- I was signed off to complete -- or, excuse me, to conduct firearms examinations in approximately 2017, I believe.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I believe that was their criticism.

PAUL GREER: I have applied the AFTE theory of identification to my identification process. However, that AFTE theory as presented by the PCAST doesn't take into effect the full entire theory. They make it sound -- seem that circular way when, in fact, the sufficient agreement threshold that we're looking for as examiners is exhibited, again, when we are looking at those items and those tool marks so that the amount of agreement is greater than our best known matches that we've ever seen in literature, in our studies based on peer review and in another methods, that the agreement is greater than what's seen in the best known non-matches in a consistent agreement with that what's seen in known matches. And to help us arrive at that, we're looking at the significance of that. We're looking at the individual peaks, and ridges, and furrows of those tool marks in those surface contours. We're looking at the relationship of those lines to each other from tool mark to tool mark, and how they compare with each other, looking at the width, and the depth, and the curvature of those lines in order to determine and help us in our process of identification. So, there's a little more to the theory than maybe what was presented by the PCAST report.

PAUL GREER: There are we do use our training and experience, that is correct. We rely on those years of looking at those comparisons and conducting those examinations, and building up that process about -- to identification. It's important, I think, to know that firearm and tool mark identification is -- it may be an applied science, something kind of like medicine or engineering, where there is a lot of book work that may be involved. But a lot of the learning may be more hands on, and it may require training to become proficient, kind of like a residency for a physician. There's nowhere where you can just learn to do this and start tomorrow. There's a lot of training that goes on, hands-on training in looking at that much like those other disciplines, like an engineer or a physician, who -- they don't just finish school. They have to go through a process to learn and help hone their skill. And during that time, it helps us to learn and understand the differences in those microscopic comparisons between tool marks.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. There could be -- could be considered that way as an applied science. There is a little bit of an art to what we do. We use different lighting to look at these marks. We look at different -- at these items, these projectiles, these fired cartridge cases at different angles in order to look at them on a comparison microscope where we're able to see under high magnification the details within these tool marks, those individual peaks and ridges and furrows in order to base our identification on, all the while -- the while we are -- there are some objective standards that we're meeting in order to get to that point of an identification. We use measurements of the items, looking at it, counting lands and grooves to make sure that as we're going up in our identification process we're kind of like climbing the ladder. Certain characteristics have to agree in order to continue on that process to an identification. So, in short, firearms -- the identification portion is subjective in nature, but it's based on the applied science and some objectivity that we're able to derive in order to determine those conclusions.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir, I will look into the literature. Again, based on firearm and tool mark identification, there's been hundreds and hundreds of studies throughout the years that demonstrate the reliability of our field and produce those error rates to help us go by that we can fall under. And so knowing the machine and manufacturing process of some of those components, we can't possibly look at every firearm in the world to compare that to. However, knowing how those guns are machined, and taking that information and applying it to the different components and different firearms, those techniques would carry over based on the literature that's been proven, yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir.

PAUL GREER: Yes, sir. I'll see if I can gather that information.

PAUL GREER: Thank you, Judge.