first case when our call this morning is with the number three case number one zero four seven two three people of the state of illinois versus lewis jackson good morning your honors may please the court my name is carol gaines and i represent the people of the state of illinois on november second one thousand nine hundred ninety five fifty nine year old dorset jackson was brutally stabbed to death in the bedroom of her apartment in the senior citizen building in which she was a stroke victim who was partially paralyzed on the right side of her body at the time of her murder the defendant dorsey's nephew had been kicked out of his home by his own mother and had been living with doors for several weeks the lobby of her building was only accessible with the key and the door to each apartment automatically locked when it was closed only doris and her ex husband also louis jackson had keys to both the lobby door and her apartment door the day before her murder her ex husband louis jackson took doris to cash a public a check and pay her bills dorsey generally left with one hundred dollars in cash which she would put in her price strap the defendant knew it that's where his aunt kept for money at seven am on the morning of her murder her door says daughter cassandra jackson phone for mother but was not concerned when she didn't answer because she knew her mother frequently went downstairs to have coffee at seven thirty am doris was seen in the recreation room of her building by a neighbor kenneth jackson later between nine and ten a building's maintenance man willie stewart saw defendant enter the building an open door says mailbox both of which would have required the defendant to use a key at three o'clock dorsey started to santa return to our building rang the buzzer but received no answer at three thirty that afternoon kenneth jackson the same neighbor saw defendant leaving saw defendant in the hallway outside the door says apartment walking away just after that depend it was seen outside the building asking for a ride to currency exchange exchange and coming back into the building using a key at six pm one can see andrea return to the building to train see her mother she became concerned when she again received no response from her mother's apartment maintenance man let her into the building and let her into doris's apartment the first thing she noticed it was unusual the window was open and it was cold and the t v in the living room was missing and she walked into the door says bedroom and found her mother laying on the bedroom floor surrounded by blood she had been stabbed thirty times in the chest arms hands ribs and longs there was no forced entry into her apartment there was no sign of struggle leading to her bedroom where the walls floor and bedding were bloody a bloody knife blade was found on her bed and the from her bedroom was missing as well in the bathroom there was a bloody crumpled dollar bill and droplets of bud in the toilet ball and on the tub has sandra found a damp washcloth a black t shirt and a pair of jeans and sources hamper defendant return has been murdered and he voluntarily went to the r v police department where defendant immediately proceeded to dump dorsey's keys into a trash can in the restroom defendant spoke with detective rizzi at the harvey police department when defender was signing a waiver of rights form detective rizzi noticed that the ten had cuts on the palms of his hands assistant state's attorney frank c c noticed those same cuts the following day when he spoke with the defendant if it was taken into custody and told various stories about his whereabouts on the night before and the day of his martyr in the first story the defendant said he was partying with the neighbor upstairs he returned her a prominent ten in the morning the door was locked and he went out for the rest of the day and partied with his friends returning to find his family there at one am in a second story the defendant said he was parting with friends the same friends he went to her apartment at three am he found the door unlocked didn't see her there he grabbed the coat and laughed in his third story the defendant admitted that he had entered the victim's apartment between nine and ten in the morning he saw that the television was missing he discovered his aunt on the floor with blood all over her he admitted touching her body trying to roll over and washing his head the bought off with his hands in the bathroom he didn't call anybody he didn't call for any help he left the apartment again according to him leaving the door over washing his hands changing his clothes taking her keys and then leaving at that time felony review declined to prove charges pending further for us to get an investigation the defendant was released a friend's a guest expert at that time  knife blade the bloody dollar bill the swabs from the toilet in the tub and did find the presence of human blood her request for a blood standard from the suspect went unanswered by the replaced partment fast forward almost six years in may of two uploaded that unknown profile into what was called a database and received a match which provided a reference number he called springfield gave the reference number to a codice administrator who referenced that number and inform mr breckon that the unknown profil fact belonged to the defendant in october of two thousand and one that found was arrested in november of zero thousand and one the defendant following his arrest gave a buckle swab from which we can later just confirm that the d n a profile from the bathroom and conviction because of his conviction for criminal sexual assault that federal is required to submit a d n a sample to be placed in a database at that time of the time of the motion in limine a the prosecutor indicated to the trial judge he would only be asking boykin very limited questions about how he came to identify the sample with respect to the database test material he didn't have a sample be placed into database a database and received to hit the prosecutor explained the trial judge the purpose in in  a listening this evidence was to explain to the jury how defendant's d n a came to match the samples from dorsey's apartment and explain the five year time lapse between the initial testing and the defendant's subsequent rast the trial judge at that time considered the arguments made by the parties made the determination that people could only present that the match came from a database nothing else no testimony about the database no facts about the database or the term codice never used yes it was what does that terms combined d n a index in system at the time the trial judge or any request for a limiting instruction there was not there was not at the time trial judge ruled on eight he specifically limited the testimony so that absolutely no prejudicial references to the defense prior conviction would be made in front of the jury the trial judge saw it as  no no and the state indicated to the trial judge that it had absolutely no intention and in fact never did of presenting any kind of evidence argument reference at all to the defendant's prior conviction nothing was mentioned during trial about it  instruction with respect to the database there's no consistent with the trial judge's ruling limiting the testimony we can then to testify in front of the jury as i said that he had developed a male profile from the stain in the toilet in police he didn't say i called the crime lab he didn't say he didn't say anything there was no criminal inference from the testimony given by lyle boykin at this trial he used the word simply database the equivalent to fingerprint databases as you mentioned in the cases well i think a few reasons number one a fingerprint database has the same thing the figure date fingerprint database contain a yes the code is database consists of a forensic index a convicted offender index a missing person's index relatives of missing and missing persons index and an unidentified human index so there are other index used for nine criminal activity where the d n a at least in the minds of the jurors or the defendant could only be used for criminal activity and was there anything to support that is th just argument by the absolutely that's just argument to the defense the problem with it with the relatively not the problem but part of this being a relatively new process is that there are not there is no case law in illinois dressing is it so where  accurate that the appellate court indicated that they believe that the general population believe that the n s a related ok no i don't think it's accurate at all in fact it was pure speculation and they say that yes they did say that they did say that there because the appellate court felt that there was little alsono in the d n a data because there was no evidence relative to the composition of anything not at all where the other correct and that's exactly what the trial judge intended to do was to limit that testimony so that there was no reference to the contents of that database so that the jury would not speculate assume believe that the only thing in that database was a crime was the only reason that a person's genetic makeup would be in a correct and you know what the trial what the trial judge when you're looking at the trial judges exercise of discretion in this case in the trial judge was charging charging his way through untested waters in a relatively new areas well he's trying to balance the  defendants trying to limit the prejudicial impact of any kind of testimony relative to his prior conviction while allowing the evidence to come in for the state of the state could properly establish why how the defendant came to be identified as the source of the blood that was left behind in the him there's no clear directive from existing case law and the appellate court even in their in their opinion conceded that the testimony by lyle boykin was brief there was no evidence reference or argument at any other point in that case his role in the criminal investigation process the exoneration of wrongly convicted prisoners through d n a testing has also received extensive media coverage in recent years all this links d n a with crime and prior criminal conduct in the minds of the public and there was a study in the yale rather view that does indicate that fictional the picture of crime and the criminal  council did not offer and instruction to the jury and this would be because that offering a formal winning instruction would have told the jury that somehow this evidence was relevant in this case the jury should consider it to be relevant and defense counsel made very clear that he did not consider this to be the case decision of  potentially defense counsel believe that he didn't want to after the trial court's decision to allow it and didn't want to highlight it and he further to the jurors just it's an important question because if it is mere speculation obligation to object to the evidence well the defense counsel did raise the issue prior to trial and emotion and women and and also raise it after trial and the motion for a new trial so exposure to the crime television shows and their depiction of d n a as it's used in the criminal justice  would know from their own life experience violent sexual crimes in recent years these are d n a databases as a tool for solving crimes and for the storage of convicted criminals profile has also been highly publicized as a result of this heard through the testimony  employed with the on my state police and that he was the one who up to initially uploaded the d n a or the pride profile into the d n a database and determined that there was a match and then call down to the about a public employers with a fingerprint i'm sorry i don't understand you had you make the argument and it's it's it's it's well phrased that because there was a state policeman here who began the databases jurors are generally aware from their own life experiences that they are used for reasons other than that what i'm talking about the inference being drawn from the fact that police officers just would be the same with the fingerprints well i don't believe it would i think that the person talking about fingerprints would be a policeman well the person talking about the thing hunts would be could be a policeman yeah and then you could draw the inference from that and this fingerprint case it was it was a it was a crime based database because of the fact the police that was the one talking well that was not in the situation and in this case we're talking about is there i think it sounds to me like both you and the state can see there's nothing in the record that would support the speculation of the jurors and all or no more or less about the base of them they may watch and pr ograms which use the basis of your princeton d n a is there a way to build a record in the case through for deer of jurors as to what they know and what they speculate databases may be used for imo yes there could be a question could be asked the jurors as to their views on the bad topic i'm fortunate that's not something that was done in this case so we have nothing in the nothing in the record to support that speculation well i think that this court can review the standard of review can be do no boats we are cannot we aren't testing any of the facts or the witnesses credibility and i think it's just common knowledge that that because of jurors life experiences which they definitely bring to the process they would connect d  primarily with crime and prior criminal conduct oh isn't it common knowledge also that many times they find their body someplace they identify that person was non criminals for the use  a and isn't that i mean we hear that all the time on television too and so you could you're i said don't we also hear on television all the time that if they find a body that's out in the woods or somewhere and it's maybe decayed and so forth and they make the identification through the use of d n a those are criminals or don't you don't we have taken buccal swab the children so that in the event the children are kidnapped or missing that  can be identified i mean aren't those all non criminal kind of applications of d n a that are well known and documented well those applications do you have a criminal basis to i mean talking about kidnapping then finding  dead bodies not finding somebody can have an accident go out and they can't be identified you know or first or some kind of reason they're found dead somewhere and they go out and try to i did make the identification of who they are and that's all done by d n a i think that while i've been the primary i think jurors primarily when they hear d n a do you think of prior criminal conduct and in this case it was especially true as i said before because and employee of the illinois state police was the one who gave the testimony for both let's just assume for the purposes of argument that the court disagrees that this is other crimes evidence then it comes down to basic relevance right you're still saying that you've been prejudiced by the introduction of the the d n a database very yeah and i don't know that a body disputed if it's prejudicial but if it's a relevant situation it's prejudice versus probative value or it isn't there are tremendous probative value in this and that the state has to show why the investigation centered on defendant after six years i mean isn't that tremendously probative as to why there's a focus on this defendant this court has how that other kind of enjoy it i started to you know i started by saying if we that they focused on him and then six years later they you know bring him a trial i mean that's a significant period of time so is yours is a significant period of time but the jury as i said was aware that he was the initial  suspect in this case they were also aware that when jackson was released several days later the detective was instructed to continue with the forensic investigation which included conducting a blood test and they were aware that one month later the same detective went on leave and the forensic scientist requests for a sample to compare to the blood evidence at the crime scene want an answer to intel six years later when the case file fi found in the back of a closet in the detective division and the state finally made that request all this information was before the jury so they would have no reason to speculate as to why he had been identified arrested six years later and additionally in this case wakens references to the database were unnecessary because he could have simply testified as he also did a trial that after obtaining the few cost sob directly from is to question why what is going on and they let somebody go six years ago and they now just unexplained reasons are bringing him back again argue that that somehow backs the credibility of the d n a evidence t in this case why the defendant out of all the people in the entire world was arrested for this is a fantasy because the jury was aware that he was the initial suspect and knew of all the evidence i'm just saying that there could have been an argument crafte arguments arguments could have been made but they weren't in this case where they work because there was evidence i would hear right numerous times during its closing argument even going so far as to tell the jury that d n a evidence alone prove jackson's guilt and boy can testimony was the only thing they really needed to consider while they were deliberating state had to resort to these tactics do the obvious weakness of its case which was made up of a sloppy police investigation and circumstantial evidence that showed only that jackson had the opportunity but not that he had actually committed the offense most notably the answer body was discovered nor on the murder weapon despite testimony that he had cuts on his hands that day furthermore in between the time of the offense and the time of the trial numerous other pieces of potential evidence were either lost or never collected jackson also said that he only took the keys after finding his aunt murdered in the apartment and the record shows that any number of other people could have had access to the apartment that day in fact towards his own daughter testified that she often got into the building without having keys by simply having someone she knew let her in and she even told the detective that this is something she had done on the day of the offense and in addition john sent another witness testified that his mother had moved out of the building several years before and he still had her keys which still worked in the locks because the locks of the building were never changed finally jackson never voted to killing his aunt and there was no evidence that he took the money or the television sets from the apartment a fact that the state all the conceded during its initial or oral argument in this case jackson was never found with money in his possession no one saw him with the television sets although many people saw him around the fact that the jury sonata no asking for transcripts further supports the conclusion jackson has maintained all along as an issue two of his brief that the evidence that was presented in this case was insufficient to  and so at the very least he was prejudiced by the introduction of this i wouldn't in such a close case boykins house knowing that jackson's d n a was contained in the state's computer database only increased the risk that the jury would convict jackson not because the s judge had to decide whether or not the seven it's came in and how it was to come in so you know review was not appropriate here as for the public's general awareness based on television shows and c s i and all those other media media sources for d n a out there there's absolutely no support in the record in the present case of the jury was aware of any of those things there was no indication from the road you're going to join us asked about those things and any presumption that the jury because perhaps they watch a t v show or not there was not even any good indication no questions during friday or what television shows the jury even and even watched cannot build a presumption from that that the jury would would automatically presume that a database only had reference to the defendant having his d n a today in a database would only have a criminal reason for that with respect to the fact that there was no need for this testimony clearly there was a need for this testimony it explained how in fact the defendant came to be identified so that a buckle swab could then be obtained it was important to the case the trial judge recognized that and he allowed that evidence in its limited fashion and finally as to the defendant's defense counsel's recitation of the evidence in this case the jury was surprised and heard all these arguments and assessed all the evidence in this case and concluded that the evidence defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt the appellate court rightly and taking that evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution upheld that evidence as being sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt we would ask you once again to