Exhibit

1

Case 2:17-cv-04540-DGC Document 290-1 Filed 01/10/20 Page 1 of 7
· · · · · · IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

·

· · · · · · · · FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

·

·

·

·Leslie A. Merritt, Jr., a single· ·)··Case No.

·man,· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)··CV17-4540-PHX-DGC

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·· )

· · · · · · · ·· Plaintiff,· · · · ··)

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·· )

· · · ·· vs.· · · · · · · · · · · · ·)

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·· )

·State of Arizona, a body politic;··)

·Bill Montgomery, the elected· · · ·)

·Maricopa County Attorney, in his· ·)

·official and individual capacities;)

·Maricopa County, a body politic;· ·)

·Heston Silbert, in his individual··)

·capacity; Christopher Kalkowski, in)· ··DEPOSITION OF

·his individual capacity; Frank· · ·)· ··JOHN MACIULLA

·Milstead, in his individual· · · ··)

·capacity; Ken Hunter, in his· · · ·)· ·Phoenix, Arizona

·individual capacity; Kelly M.· · ··)· ··February 12, 2019

·Heape, in his individual capacity; )· · · ·10:34 a.m.

·Jennifer Pinnow, in her individual )

·capacity; Anthony Falcone, in his··)

·individual capacity; Edward Leiter,)

·in his individual capacity; Vanessa)

·Losicco, in her individual· · · · ·)

·capacity,· · · · · · · · · · · · ··)

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·· )

· · · · · · · ·· Defendants.· · · · ·)

·___________________________________)

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

·

· · · · · · · · · · · · ·· SEYMOUR REPORTING SERVICES

·REPORTED BY:· · · · · ·Registered Reporting Firm R1000

· · · · · · · · · · · · ·· 137 East Elliot Road, #2473

·Cyndi Hirsch, RPR· · · · ··Gilbert, Arizona 85299

·Certified Reporter· · · · · · ·(P)602.258.5800

·Certificate No. 50102· · · · ··(F)888.881.5440

Case 2:17-cv-04540-DGC Document 290-1 Filed 01/10/20 Page 2 of 7
JOHN MACIULLA FEBRUARY 12, 2019

103

·1·· · · Q.· ·I know that's your opinion.

·2·· · · · ·· The question, however, is as follows:··If the

·3··firearm was in the pawnshop at the time that the BMW

·4··was shot, the crime lab would be incorrect in con- --

·5··identifying that bullet as having come from that

·6··firearm; correct?

·7·· · · A.· ·I -- I don't agree with the way you're --

·8··that's -- I mean, I can make that argument every case

·9··we -- we examine, that "Well, if the firearm wasn't at

10··the house, then you weren't right when you identified

11··the firearm."

12·· · · · ·· Well, that's all based on speculation on

13··other outside -- I mean, for lack of a better term --

14··"bias" that -- that Mr. Weller talked about.

15·· · · · ·· What I'm referring to is what, as scientists,

16··we do.··We -- we examine it, following our policies

17··and procedures.··We identify a firearm.··That process

18··has been verified, goes through a tech review, goes

19··through an admin review.

20·· · · · ·· Therefore, that's what our result is based

21··upon.··Scientifically, asking me what speculation is,

22··is not what we do in the -- in the -- in the -- the

23··lab.

24·· · · Q.· ·Respectfully, Mr. Maciulla, you're being

25··offered as an expert witness here.··I'm entitled to

Seymour Reporting Services 602.258.5800

www.SRSreporting.com

Case 2:17-cv-04540-DGC Document 290-1 Filed 01/10/20 Page 3 of 7
JOHN MACIULLA FEBRUARY 12, 2019

104

·1··ask you hypothetical questions, and I don't care if

·2··you like the hypothetical or not.··So let me try the

·3··question again.

·4·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··We don't care if you don't like

·5··the answers.··He's allowed to answer how he --

·6·· · · Q.· ·BY MR. DON:··If --

·7·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··-- sees fit.

·8·· · · Q.· ·BY MR. DON:··-- the -- if the firearm is in

·9··the pawnshop at the time the BMW was shot, then the

10··crime lab is incorrect in identifying the firearm to

11··the bullet retrieved from the BMW?

12·· · · A.· ·I --

13·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··Form.··Asked and answered.

14·· · · · ·· THE WITNESS:··And I don't prefer to answer

15··your question as a hypothetical because you're being

16··very specific about the crime lab and about this case.

17·· · · · ·· If it's a hypothetical, let's make up a case

18··and talk about if a case is on American Airlines

19··Flight 20 at the time something is shot; therefore,

20··that gun couldn't have fired that bullet.

21·· · · · ·· But it's not a hypothetical when you're being

22··very specific to try to get me to use outside

23··influences from this case to conclude my answer.

24·· · · · ·· My answer and my report is based on what we

25··did scientifically.··If you want to deduct what I'm

Seymour Reporting Services 602.258.5800

www.SRSreporting.com

Case 2:17-cv-04540-DGC Document 290-1 Filed 01/10/20 Page 4 of 7
JOHN MACIULLA FEBRUARY 12, 2019

105

·1··saying and flip it, that's -- that's for you to

·2··decide.··But I don't feel it's fair to me, on tape, to

·3··give --

·4·· · · · ·· MR. LAMM:··Here's the deal, it does not --

·5·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··No.··No.··No.··No.··No.

·6·· · · · ·· (Simultaneous talking.)

·7·· · · · ·· MR. LAMM:··-- because you don't think it's

·8··fair --

·9·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··No.··No.··You're not allowed to

10··talk at this deposition.

11·· · · · ·· (Simultaneous talking.)

12·· · · · ·· MR. LAMM:··-- we'll strike you as an expert.

13·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··There's one attorney that's --

14·· · · · ·· (Simultaneous talking.)

15·· · · · ·· MR. LAMM:··Talk to your client about

16··answering the hypotheticals as an expert, or we'll

17··strike his opinion.··Now we'll take a break.

18·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··You stop talking on the record.

19·· · · · ·· (A recess was taken from 2:07 p.m. to

20··2:18 p.m.)

21·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··Are we on the record?

22·· · · · ·· THE COURT REPORTER:··Okay.

23·· · · · ·· MR. DON:··Okay.

24·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··Before we resume, for the

25··record, the outburst and the -- the yelling --

Seymour Reporting Services 602.258.5800

www.SRSreporting.com

Case 2:17-cv-04540-DGC Document 290-1 Filed 01/10/20 Page 5 of 7
JOHN MACIULLA FEBRUARY 12, 2019

106

·1·· · · · ·· MR. LAMM:··You know what --

·2·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··-- and the --

·3·· · · · ·· MR. LAMM:··-- Jon?

·4·· · · · ·· (Simultaneous talking.)

·5·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··-- swearing at the -- I'm

·6··putting this on the -- I'm putting this on the record.

·7·· · · · ·· MR. LAMM:··Sure.

·8·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··Yelling and swearing and

·9··screaming at the witness is inappropriate, especially

10··by an attorney that is not the one that's taking the

11··deposition.

12·· · · · ·· Reminding Counsel that there is one attorney

13··that's allowed to speak and take the deposition, and

14··if that happens anymore, we're going to have to call

15··the judge or terminate the deposition.

16·· · · · ·· MR. DON:··So you're okay if I yell and

17··scream?

18·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··You can yell and scream all you

19··want.

20·· · · · ·· MR. DON:··Fantastic.··We're back on.

21·· · · Q.· ·BY MR. DON:··If the firearm was in the

22··pawnshop at the time the BMW was shot, the crime lab

23··is wrong in identifying it as having fired the bullet

24··that struck the BMW; true?

25·· · · · ·· MR. BRINSON:··Objection to form.··And I was

Seymour Reporting Services 602.258.5800

www.SRSreporting.com

Case 2:17-cv-04540-DGC Document 290-1 Filed 01/10/20 Page 6 of 7
JOHN MACIULLA FEBRUARY 12, 2019

118

·1··scientific validity of that analysis.

·2·· · · · ·· We still require that it goes through a

·3··verification process, so if we did an identification,

·4··and someone else doing the verification was

·5··inconclusive, the identification would still require a

·6··verification in order to report out that

·7··identifica- -- identification result.

·8·· · · · ·· When I said that one is acceptable with the

·9··other, it's when one examiner comes up to

10··identification as a conclusion that follows the

11··procedures and policies, and it is verified, and

12··another person examines that evidence and says,

13··"Inconclusive," well, an inconclusive does not mean

14··they're saying it's not from that firearm.

15·· · · · ·· They're saying they didn't feel there's

16··enough evidence there for them to draw the same

17··conclusion.

18·· · · · ·· The -- the big difference would be if someone

19··identifies the firearm and another person says, "It's

20··excluded; it's not the firearm."

21·· · · · ·· Now we have a difference, in that is it the

22··gun or not?··And an inconclusive is not drawing that

23··conclusion that it is or it isn't.··It's saying the

24··result is inconclusive.

25·· · · Q.· ·When you have a difficult comparison, as --

Seymour Reporting Services 602.258.5800

www.SRSreporting.com

Case 2:17-cv-04540-DGC Document 290-1 Filed 01/10/20 Page 7 of 7