FAITH HEDGEPETH: NC vs. Miguel Salguero-Olivares for 2012 cold case murder in Chapel Hill *TRIAL IN PROGRESS*

Faith was a 19-year-old junior at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill when, on the morning of Sept. 7, 2012, a returning roommate discovered her body in a bedroom of the off-campus apartment they shared, according to the roommate's 911 call.

An autopsy revealed Faith died after a severe beating to the head; investigators believed the weapon was an empty but unbroken bottle of Bacardi peach-flavored rum found at the scene, covered in blood.

From that moment on, police have searched unsuccessfully for an assailant.

8 Years After N.C. College Student's Murder, Mom Still Seeks Answers in Daughter's Death

The unsolved 2012 killing of 19-year-old Faith Hedgepeth receives an updated examination on Investigation Discovery

people.com

 

[testerv]

I can’t imagine coming home and finding my roommate in that kind of a condition. She’s a brave girl to continue to be questioned over time and now be on the stand.

 

[Kimster]

AI TRIAL SUMMARY:

Current Trial Developments
The latest updates from the third day of active testimony include:

• Graphic Crime Scene Review: Jurors were shown police video of the 2012 crime scene, depicting blood spatter on the walls and blood-stained bedding in Hedgepeth's apartment bedroom. Chapel Hill Police forensic evidence technician Tamika Price returned to the stand to guide the court through this evidence. [1, 2, 3]
• Cross-Examination of the Roommate: Defense attorneys heavily cross-examined former roommate Karena Rosario. They questioned her about a blood stain found on a bathroom door frame and a red stain on the tube top she wore to a nightclub the night before the murder. Rosario testified that she could not recall several specifics, stating, "It's been 14 years... I can't say with 100% certainty I remember a lot of stuff." [1]
• Nightclub Footage & Witness Testimony: Former security guard Mitchell testified about seeing Hedgepeth and Rosario at "The Thrill" nightclub. Surveillance video showed them leaving together at roughly 2:07 a.m.. Friend Marisol Rangel also took the stand, describing the moment she and Rosario discovered Hedgepeth's body wrapped in a comforter.

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

Faith Hedgepeth Murder: Chapel Hill police captain questioned about uncollected evidence at the crime | abc7news.com

Defense attorneys asked Britt about hand towels near the bathroom sink that were not collected and a bathroom trash can that was never searched.

abc7news.com

Defendant's palm print found on bottle at Faith Hedgepeth crime scene, expert testifies​

The former lead investigator in the Faith Hedgepeth murder case returned to the witness stand Tuesday, facing defense questions about how evidence was collected and processed during the investigation.

Johnnie Britt, who led the case for years, was asked about several items at the crime scene that were never collected or tested.

During cross-examination, Britt said she did not know why a hand towel found near the sink was never collected for testing.

The defense also questioned why the bathroom trash can was not searched. Britt said she could not speak to those decisions because she was not the investigator who executed the search warrant.

On redirect, prosecutors later asked Britt what, if anything, she would have done differently if she could revisit the investigation.

Britt acknowledged investigators often look back on cases to identify missed opportunities and referenced the gas cap from Hedgepeth's vehicle as one item she may have tested.

However, she maintained that additional testing would not change the significance of the DNA evidence collected in the case.

"I think with any investigation, and probably just with life in general, there's always things we look back on," Britt testified. "If we're not doing that, it's probably not a good thing because we're not learning."

She pointed to the gas cap on Faith Hedgepeth's vehicle as one item she may have chosen to test.

However, Britt said additional testing would not change the evidence investigators ultimately recovered.

"It doesn't make or break what we found in that apartment. It doesn't negate any of that DNA evidence that we have in the apartment and on Faith's body," Britt testified.

The final witness of the day was Summer Maffett, a forensic scientist with the North Carolina State Crime Laboratory.

Maffett testified she processed several items recovered from the crime scene, including the Blue Riesling wine bottle, a Bacardi bottle, Faith Hedgepeth's cellphone and cellphone case, and a white paper bag, searching for fingerprint evidence.

She told jurors that a palm print found on the Blue Riesling bottle matched the defendant.

 

[testerv]

Faith Hedgepeth Murder: Chapel Hill police captain questioned about uncollected evidence at the crime | abc7news.com

Defense attorneys asked Britt about hand towels near the bathroom sink that were not collected and a bathroom trash can that was never searched.

abc7news.com

Defendant's palm print found on bottle at Faith Hedgepeth crime scene, expert testifies​

The former lead investigator in the Faith Hedgepeth murder case returned to the witness stand Tuesday, facing defense questions about how evidence was collected and processed during the investigation.

Johnnie Britt, who led the case for years, was asked about several items at the crime scene that were never collected or tested.

During cross-examination, Britt said she did not know why a hand towel found near the sink was never collected for testing.

The defense also questioned why the bathroom trash can was not searched. Britt said she could not speak to those decisions because she was not the investigator who executed the search warrant.

On redirect, prosecutors later asked Britt what, if anything, she would have done differently if she could revisit the investigation.

Britt acknowledged investigators often look back on cases to identify missed opportunities and referenced the gas cap from Hedgepeth's vehicle as one item she may have tested.

However, she maintained that additional testing would not change the significance of the DNA evidence collected in the case.

"I think with any investigation, and probably just with life in general, there's always things we look back on," Britt testified. "If we're not doing that, it's probably not a good thing because we're not learning."

She pointed to the gas cap on Faith Hedgepeth's vehicle as one item she may have chosen to test.

However, Britt said additional testing would not change the evidence investigators ultimately recovered.

"It doesn't make or break what we found in that apartment. It doesn't negate any of that DNA evidence that we have in the apartment and on Faith's body," Britt testified.

The final witness of the day was Summer Maffett, a forensic scientist with the North Carolina State Crime Laboratory.

Maffett testified she processed several items recovered from the crime scene, including the Blue Riesling wine bottle, a Bacardi bottle, Faith Hedgepeth's cellphone and cellphone case, and a white paper bag, searching for fingerprint evidence.

She told jurors that a palm print found on the Blue Riesling bottle matched the defendant.

I think she answered those defense questions quite well. Especially the part about how you learn from what you missed the last time. That’s the same in everything.

 

[SheWhoMustNotBeNamed]

Defense challenges DNA evidence collection in Faith Hedgepeth murder trial

A forensic scientist testified Thursday that advances in DNA technology helped uncover new evidence in the 2012 killing of Faith Hedgepeth

abc11.com

Defense challenges DNA evidence collection in Faith Hedgepeth murder trial​

Jurors spent another day hearing detailed forensic testimony in the Faith Hedgepeth murder trial, with defense attorneys beginning their cross-examination of the state's DNA expert and focusing on what they contend were shortcomings in the handling and testing of evidence.

Erin Ermish, a forensic scientist with the North Carolina State Crime Lab, was the only witness to testify Thursday.

Ermish's role at the crime lab includes analyzing biological evidence such as blood, semen and saliva. She testified that she first examined evidence in the case in 2012, but re-examined several items in 2021 using updated DNA testing technology that allowed scientists to analyze additional portions of DNA profiles.

According to Ermish, DNA profiles from a Bacardi rum bottle, a blue Riesling wine bottle, a white bag, Faith Hedgepeth's boxer shorts and samples collected from Hedgepeth's body included DNA from defendant Miguel Salguero Olivares.

During direct examination, Ermish explained one of the DNA mixtures analyzed in the case.


"The mixture contains two interpretable components, and Faith Hedgepeth, the donor of the known sample, is assumed as being a contributor of DNA to this mixture. The DNA profile obtained from Miguel Enrique Salguero Olivares is included as a possible contributor to this mixture profile, and the DNA profile obtained from Karina Rosario is excluded as a contributor to this mixture profile," Ermish testified.

As cross-examination began Thursday afternoon, defense attorneys focused on evidence collection and testing decisions, attempting to cast doubt on the state's DNA evidence.

Attorneys questioned Ermish about items that were not tested, including a piece of paper found between Faith Hedgepeth's cellphone and its case. The defense repeatedly asked why the paper was not swabbed for DNA.

"There was a piece of paper there that I guess was in between the cell phone case and the cell phone itself. Did you take any swabs from that?" a defense attorney asked.

"No," Ermish responded.

"Any reason why?"

"My primary purpose for examining this item was the cell phone."

"And not the piece of paper that was contained with the cell phone? You didn't want to know whose biological material might be on a note or a piece of paper with the cell phone that's got blood on it?"

"As far as the piece of paper itself, that was included with the phone. But my understanding was the phone was the item that needed to be analyzed," Ermish replied.

The defense also questioned Ermish about other evidence collected from the apartment that was not tested, including pillows, bed sheets and a comforter, as well as how many times Hedgepeth's boxer shorts were handled before reaching the crime lab.

The lengthy scientific testimony appeared taxing for some jurors. At one point, a juror sent a note to the judge asking how much longer the trial is expected to last.

The judge reminded jurors that proceedings could continue for five to six weeks.

Faith Hedgepeth's loved ones remained a strong presence in the courtroom, filling three rows of seats throughout the day as they listened to testimony. The defendant's mother has also been present in the courtroom this week.

 

[Cousin Dupree]

Defense challenges DNA evidence collection in Faith Hedgepeth murder trial

A forensic scientist testified Thursday that advances in DNA technology helped uncover new evidence in the 2012 killing of Faith Hedgepeth

abc11.com

Defense challenges DNA evidence collection in Faith Hedgepeth murder trial​

Jurors spent another day hearing detailed forensic testimony in the Faith Hedgepeth murder trial, with defense attorneys beginning their cross-examination of the state's DNA expert and focusing on what they contend were shortcomings in the handling and testing of evidence.

Erin Ermish, a forensic scientist with the North Carolina State Crime Lab, was the only witness to testify Thursday.

Ermish's role at the crime lab includes analyzing biological evidence such as blood, semen and saliva. She testified that she first examined evidence in the case in 2012, but re-examined several items in 2021 using updated DNA testing technology that allowed scientists to analyze additional portions of DNA profiles.

According to Ermish, DNA profiles from a Bacardi rum bottle, a blue Riesling wine bottle, a white bag, Faith Hedgepeth's boxer shorts and samples collected from Hedgepeth's body included DNA from defendant Miguel Salguero Olivares.

During direct examination, Ermish explained one of the DNA mixtures analyzed in the case.


"The mixture contains two interpretable components, and Faith Hedgepeth, the donor of the known sample, is assumed as being a contributor of DNA to this mixture. The DNA profile obtained from Miguel Enrique Salguero Olivares is included as a possible contributor to this mixture profile, and the DNA profile obtained from Karina Rosario is excluded as a contributor to this mixture profile," Ermish testified.

As cross-examination began Thursday afternoon, defense attorneys focused on evidence collection and testing decisions, attempting to cast doubt on the state's DNA evidence.

Attorneys questioned Ermish about items that were not tested, including a piece of paper found between Faith Hedgepeth's cellphone and its case. The defense repeatedly asked why the paper was not swabbed for DNA.

"There was a piece of paper there that I guess was in between the cell phone case and the cell phone itself. Did you take any swabs from that?" a defense attorney asked.

"No," Ermish responded.

"Any reason why?"

"My primary purpose for examining this item was the cell phone."

"And not the piece of paper that was contained with the cell phone? You didn't want to know whose biological material might be on a note or a piece of paper with the cell phone that's got blood on it?"

"As far as the piece of paper itself, that was included with the phone. But my understanding was the phone was the item that needed to be analyzed," Ermish replied.

The defense also questioned Ermish about other evidence collected from the apartment that was not tested, including pillows, bed sheets and a comforter, as well as how many times Hedgepeth's boxer shorts were handled before reaching the crime lab.

The lengthy scientific testimony appeared taxing for some jurors. At one point, a juror sent a note to the judge asking how much longer the trial is expected to last.

The judge reminded jurors that proceedings could continue for five to six weeks.

Faith Hedgepeth's loved ones remained a strong presence in the courtroom, filling three rows of seats throughout the day as they listened to testimony. The defendant's mother has also been present in the courtroom this week.

They made a mistake that turned something into his DNA!!!!

 

[Guess Who]

Defense challenges DNA evidence collection in Faith Hedgepeth murder trial

A forensic scientist testified Thursday that advances in DNA technology helped uncover new evidence in the 2012 killing of Faith Hedgepeth

abc11.com

Defense challenges DNA evidence collection in Faith Hedgepeth murder trial​

Jurors spent another day hearing detailed forensic testimony in the Faith Hedgepeth murder trial, with defense attorneys beginning their cross-examination of the state's DNA expert and focusing on what they contend were shortcomings in the handling and testing of evidence.

Erin Ermish, a forensic scientist with the North Carolina State Crime Lab, was the only witness to testify Thursday.

Ermish's role at the crime lab includes analyzing biological evidence such as blood, semen and saliva. She testified that she first examined evidence in the case in 2012, but re-examined several items in 2021 using updated DNA testing technology that allowed scientists to analyze additional portions of DNA profiles.

According to Ermish, DNA profiles from a Bacardi rum bottle, a blue Riesling wine bottle, a white bag, Faith Hedgepeth's boxer shorts and samples collected from Hedgepeth's body included DNA from defendant Miguel Salguero Olivares.

During direct examination, Ermish explained one of the DNA mixtures analyzed in the case.


"The mixture contains two interpretable components, and Faith Hedgepeth, the donor of the known sample, is assumed as being a contributor of DNA to this mixture. The DNA profile obtained from Miguel Enrique Salguero Olivares is included as a possible contributor to this mixture profile, and the DNA profile obtained from Karina Rosario is excluded as a contributor to this mixture profile," Ermish testified.

As cross-examination began Thursday afternoon, defense attorneys focused on evidence collection and testing decisions, attempting to cast doubt on the state's DNA evidence.

Attorneys questioned Ermish about items that were not tested, including a piece of paper found between Faith Hedgepeth's cellphone and its case. The defense repeatedly asked why the paper was not swabbed for DNA.

"There was a piece of paper there that I guess was in between the cell phone case and the cell phone itself. Did you take any swabs from that?" a defense attorney asked.

"No," Ermish responded.

"Any reason why?"

"My primary purpose for examining this item was the cell phone."

"And not the piece of paper that was contained with the cell phone? You didn't want to know whose biological material might be on a note or a piece of paper with the cell phone that's got blood on it?"

"As far as the piece of paper itself, that was included with the phone. But my understanding was the phone was the item that needed to be analyzed," Ermish replied.

The defense also questioned Ermish about other evidence collected from the apartment that was not tested, including pillows, bed sheets and a comforter, as well as how many times Hedgepeth's boxer shorts were handled before reaching the crime lab.

The lengthy scientific testimony appeared taxing for some jurors. At one point, a juror sent a note to the judge asking how much longer the trial is expected to last.

The judge reminded jurors that proceedings could continue for five to six weeks.

Faith Hedgepeth's loved ones remained a strong presence in the courtroom, filling three rows of seats throughout the day as they listened to testimony. The defendant's mother has also been present in the courtroom this week.

Grasping at straws about the piece of paper between the Phineas its case.