Original subtitles

It just kind of went, oh, my God.

Sure as heck looks like blood to me.

This is not blood.

It's just the bottom line.

It's just not blood.

The defense point the finger at Dan Cavanaugh and maybe others.

Prosecuting the wrong person makes no sense.

They got the wrong guy.

I never knew who did it.

I never settled on anybody.

This is Chase's truck at the house at the time the family disappeared.

No doubt that was not his truck.

Evidence doesn't lie.

That's the first time I heard about this latch theory.

I think something is wrong here.

You withheld this evidence, and now your expert is saying that you're full of shit.

You can't keep this from a defense.

Those are very serious accusations.

This is grounds for a mistrial.

When I was a young pup prosecutor, if I ever got caught in a discovery

violation or not having given the defense pretty much open file discovery or

withheld something, I would not have a job.

But today, more and more prosecutors are

getting away with it without any consequences.

We need to be a place in this country where they're talking about criminal

justice reform, where the defense has a fighting shot, when they're confronted by

prosecutors who, in my opinion, are not following their oath of office.

Prosecution has an ethical duty to give over all information that could be

exculpatory or help the defense combat the people's case.

They must turn over.

They can't hide it.

We don't have to ask for it.

If they found it on accident, oops, we got to give it over.

Dr. Rudin texted him and said, these are all the problems, laying them out in detail.

And that, they didn't give to us.

They hid that.

And that was the problem, because he went in

clear detail why this is not Chase's trial.

A Brady violation and a death penalty case, come on.

Now, what we suspected all along, that this prosecutor is a liar,

a cheater, has come to fruition.

So, the next question is, what's going to be done about it?

I think what I was most worried about was that there might be a mistrial.

I don't know.

Want to order?

So, the question is, was it misconduct for Mr. Arms not to provide the information?

It was one of those things where you're just, it's not in your hands, but you're

really concerned that the family's going to have to go through all this again,

and it's going to prevent them from getting the closure they deserve.

I can tell from your reaction that you remember

this being one of the tensest moments of the trial.

Absolutely.

If you watched the trial, I'm sitting there, and I'm very intent listening to

everything, and not looking at anybody or anything,

and just stayed that way until it was done.

In exhibit O, the more detailed text message, should have been provided.

But while it should have been provided, according to you, the motion for mistrial

is denied.

The motion to recuse Mr. Hines or any other prosecutors is denied.

The motion for mistrial is denied on the grounds that there was no suppression of

evidence and no prejudice.

The motion for mistrial is denied.

Yeah, I just remember my feeling of relief.

He violated the law.

It's very clear in California as a prosecutor, if you withhold exculpatory

evidence, you go to jail.

But that didn't happen.

Mr. Hines did provide information to the

defense that Dr. Rudin had changed his opinion.

I sent an email to the defense disclosing Mr. Rudin's statements that he had made to

me to the best of my ability to recount them, as well as inviting them to contact

him on their own, because that's my legal and ethical obligation to do so.

What Brit Hines shared with us in this email is not what was really happening.

What's really happening behind the scenes is Dr. Rudin has changed his mind,

and now he has a different opinion, which we had no clue.

It's clearly not a Brady violation since there was a disclosure.

A Brady violation occurs when there's no disclosure.

So I know they make a big deal out of it, but I informed them.

There was, number one, just an inordinate amount of prosecutorial misconduct.

The judge was... he assisted the prosecution at virtually every turn.

How can a judge do literally nothing, not on some

obscure issue, on the main focus of their case?

It ain't his truck, judge.

They've been telling the jury all along it's his truck.

They knew it wasn't his truck, and they didn't tell us.

I... I don't know...

I don't know what he was thinking, to be honest.

There is something I feel compelled to address in this case, and that is the

behavior of the prosecution, which, in my personal opinion, has been juvenile

and unbecoming of professionals who are paid

public money to serve as ministers of justice.

The problem I have is that it's happened more than once.

I would not expect nor accept continued behavior like this in my courtroom.

Whose vehicle is leaving on the 4th?

I don't know.

That seems to be an unanswered question.

There was a lot of people in their life that did have white SUVs or trucks.

I mean, Chase had a white truck.

McVadden had a Toyota 4Runner that was white.

Vic had a white truck.

Shoot, everybody had a white truck.

I'm trying to remember who else now.

I think the quick summary of motive means and opportunity is

that Charles Merritt was being sidelined from the business.

Hey, Chase, step back.

When that got challenged and was gonna dry up, that creates the motive.

It has to continue some way, one way or the other.

The means of doing so, I mean, he has the tools, he has the truck,

he has the ability to spirit them away.

The opportunity is mainly shown through his cell phone records.

Cell phone pings are a really big deal.

It's yet to be explained by any of them.

If you look in the mountain to the west of us, that's the cell

phone tower that Chase's phone pinged off on February 6th.

Right?

So you can see that's where they were buried.

And then you see where the tower is.

It really kind of just shows you there's no other business to be done out here.

So, the fact that he was here, it's very telling.

What is the likelihood that that cell phone ping by the defendant's phone just

happened to hit a cell tower on a mountain that happened to cover, with its radius,

the grave sites?

How can you explain your cell phone ping at the grave site?

My cell phone ping at the grave site?

Um... I really... It's difficult to explain.

I wanted to show you another clip of Chase and his

attorney talking about what he was doing that day.

Jesus.

You know you're curious.

No, I am.

I just sit and I shake my head.

Um...

The concept... to me...

of having...

a defense attorney allow a documentary team to interview my client in the middle

of trial, even before trial or after trial, it's such a risk, considering this

is privileged material, which they are then...

waiving that privilege and allowing it to be, in this case, sold off.

To me, as a lawyer, it's a little bothersome.

Ethically, but...

If you would have done this, you would think

you'd make a halfway decent alibi argument.

You don't remember squat.

So, what kind of person does this and doesn't plan out an alibi?

Like, you've got to be the dumbest.

Well, you've got to realize, what they're saying is, I did all these things, and I.

..

meticulously planned them, meticulously...

meticulously knew when to shut my phone off and

when to turn it on to keep from being... Detective.

...at these places.

Turn my phone on while I'm burying the box.

No one has asserted that Mr. Merritt was meticulous.

He thought he was meticulous.

I don't think we ever said that.

So, February 4th is the last time you see Joseph.

In the week after that, is there any reason that anyone would

have seen you or your vehicle up in the high desert area?

Uh, Victorville?

Victorville, yeah.

Not that I know of.

Unless I went to...

my sister's.

Was there any reason you could have been there?

Well, if I had been there, I'd been to visit my sister.

But he never claimed to have been visiting his sister.

He did a what if.

If I had been there, but I wasn't.

If I had been there, I would have met my sister's house.

When he's getting asked those questions, I believe

that was in 2014, four years after the event.

Imagine trying to recall what you did four years ago without the help of your

assistant, your notes, your phone, your receipts, your bank records,

your cell phone records, anything.

Was I in Victorville after they left?

Or after they disappeared?

Yeah.

I believe that I was.

Obviously, phone pings are not so inaccurate that they're

not going to tell you at least what city you were in.

Do I remember being there?

No.

Are there several things that I would have done up there?

Of course.

Half of my family lives on the high desert.

The problem is you're only hearing one side of the story.

And you're not hearing, you're not knowing the real name.

There is so much more that happened.

I think the biggest question is, is Chase innocent?

Is he innocent?

Yes.

There's no way he could hurt a human being.

Absolutely.

Ladies, thank you very much.

Juanita Merritt is Chase's older sister.

During the time the McStays went missing, she lived up here in this area,

so I went and knocked on her door.

The date is October 13th, 2014, at 0846 hours.

Detective Ryan Smith attempting contact with Juanita Merritt.

So, obviously, with, you know, Chase being Joseph's business partner,

and then having family in the area, it's a hell of a coincidence.

And we need to make sure we investigate that.

Now, again, I gotta take you back 10 years.

I just don't, it's too weird.

I agree with you.

Yeah.

Because, um, Chase, at that time, when he was with Joe, never came up here.

He didn't even hardly visit.

I can remember one time he visited.

About how long before...

So, I mean...

In five years, I hadn't seen him.

So, that's considerable... He didn't come up to the desert because he works 24-7.

For us, that statement that he wasn't up in the desert, and if he was, it would

have been that he was visiting her, combined with her statement that he

absolutely was not visiting her, was important to be able to show,

hey, that interpretation of his phone pinging off

of that cell tower on that date is not reasonable.

Do you recall learning that Joseph McStay had disappeared?

Yes.

And how often do you think that you would see your brother around that timeframe?

I saw him quite often.

Do you remember telling the detective that you

hadn't seen him probably for about five years?

No.

Okay.

And in 2010, isn't it true that you told the

detective that your brother hardly visited?

I don't remember saying anything like that.

I saw my brother all the time.

Would it refresh your memory to take a look at it, a portion

of the transcript that is the interview with the detective?

No, I doubt it.

You don't think it would?

I just recently got out of the hospital.

I couldn't, I couldn't hardly talk when he was at my house.

I think pretty much everybody knew she was sitting there in line.

If I'd have been the judge, really even being an impartial person, I would have

had her arrested right on the spot for perjury.

I think there was a general belief by the defense that was conveyed to Juanita like,

hey, we may need to cover other portions of time where

maybe his phone was off the grid or something like that.

So we want to make sure that that's covered.

And so she did completely change her testimony from, hey, he's never up here,

we never see him, to, oh yeah, he's around all the time.

I fully expected her to change her story.

If she told the truth, great.

You know, there would have been no need for us to call Sergeant Smith to impeach her.

And when you interviewed her, did it appear to

you that she was under the influence at all?

No, sir, ma'am.

How do you impeach her testimony?

With, with her own words.

This is what she's saying now.

This is the interview.

This is how we talk.

And did she provide any information to you as to when the

last time was that she had seen her brother, Charles Merrick?

She referenced meeting him at a Cocos that, uh, Mr. McGill had driven her to.

Uh, but she estimated the time frame was approximately five years.

He didn't ping in the desert that day because he was visiting his sister.

He pinged in the desert that day because he was at the grave site.

How do you think her testimony went?

I think her testimony, um, was not helpful for the defense.

Um, just because it, it looks like maybe she might

be trying to cover for him or something like that.

Yeah, I think the prosecution was, was aiming for that, is to make the

defense look less credible or make, you know, try to get rid of that as an

alibi so that the defense wouldn't be able to argue that.

Do you think the jury believed her on the stand or

do you think they believed what Smith testified to?

Uh, they believed what Smith testified to.

When they put her on the stand, they knew exactly how they were going to

show that she would obviously lie for me in order to win the day.

She's my sister.

She loves me to death.

And I'm not saying she would lie, but I'm not saying that she wouldn't.

If they're asking if Chase was there, it's for no good reason.

And they come from that mentality.

You don't tell the cops anything.

You certainly don't tell them where your, your kin is.

You know, your, your brother.

I think it's easy to distrust the police when they've experienced it.

Chase's brother was actually accused of being the hillside strangler.

He was jailed and it literally broke their family apart.

They had death threats.

You don't admit anything to the police.

You tell them, no, deny, no, deny.

Police are not your friends.

You don't give them the information.

And that's where those answers came from.

Your brother was arrested, uh, for the hillside strangler case.

Can you talk about that at all?

In Los Angeles, a killer the police are calling the hillside strangler has

murdered 10 young women and left their bodies on the hillsides along the highways.

Fourteen young women have been murdered in Los Angeles in recent weeks.

Eleven of the murders are thought to be related.

And no solution to the series of murders appears to be in sight.

On December 2nd, investigator Williams traveled to Hesperia, California and

arrested Bennett Merritt, a 24-year-old male Caucasian.

My brother was actually in jail for months with newspaper articles all over the place

stating, caught the hillside strangler, done deal.

And then six, seven months later, the stranglings continued.

And they still wouldn't let him go.

Oh, it's a copycat.

Finally, they actually caught the hillside strangler.

Let him go.

You know, sorry.

My bad.

It devastated our family back then.

Just like it's devastating our family with this.

So, yeah, it's, this has been a road.

In my mind, there was a financial aspect of

this murder that explained why this happened.

As we're going through the QuickBooks, what we see initially is that there are

checks made out to Chase for pending projects that in the computer they show

were generated on the 5th, but they're backdated to the 4th.

Nobody knows that the 4th is the last day the family dropped off the radar at this

point, you know, because no one even went over to the house until the 9th.

Chase printed these checks, backdated them to the 4th and actually cashed them.

On the 9th, he calls QuickBooks saying that he's Joseph and requesting to

completely delete the account, like, purge it from QuickBooks system.

So, on Friday, October 24th, this was 2014, I made

a conference call with Ryan Baker at QuickBooks.

This is approximately 4 1⁄2 years later, and as he pulled it up and looked,

he said, I remember this call because it was an unusual request.

My entire time that I've been a QuickBooks associate,

I've only had 5 people ever want to delete their accounts.

So, there's no confusion on what Chase was asking for.

And then when I saw the case notes, and I saw that it was Chase's phone number.

And next to it, it has the customer name and it says Joseph McStay.

This was one of those, oh my gosh, I'm running out of the office,

like, swinging this paper going, you guys.

Five days later, Chase is calling QuickBooks to delete the account,

and he's saying he's Joseph McStay.

I knew that we were on to him, and we needed Ryan Baker to testify.

The next witness has some medical issues and can't

travel, so we are going to do the testimony via Skype.

And we didn't like, so we can see it on the screen.

Did the caller provide you a reason in terms

of why they were calling customer support?

It did.

The caller actually advised that they wanted the account deleted from our

servers and removed from our system, so all the

data would be expunged from our system itself.

Did the call appear to be unusual to you?

It was very unusual, yes ma'am.

Why was it unusual?

It's very, very, very highly unlikely that you get a phone call where someone is just

very demanding to have it removed from the system itself.

People are protected, not your resident.

So when you hear Ryan Baker say he called and pretended to be Joey and asked to

delete QuickBooks, did you say, oh shit?

Oh, I said more than oh shit.

I said more than that.

I mean, any suspicions I had, that's it.

This guy is the guy.

When you have prosecutors saying, you know, ooh, delete, pretend it to be Joseph.

And I remember this distinctly, you know, the kind of thing.

You're casting it in such a sinister bubble, you just don't know what a jury's

gonna... Are they gonna look at the meat and potatoes?

Are they gonna be swayed by the fluff?

I mean, I knew it didn't mean anything.

Joseph said, we need to get the QuickBooks offline.

Because QuickBooks Online can be hacked by Dan Cavanaugh.

So he said, we have to get QuickBooks offline and just transfer it to QuickBooks

Pro, where it's only on his computer and it can't be accessed.

Joseph specifically asked me to call QuickBooks because he was

not feeling well a great deal of the time in his last days.

Joseph had that mysterious illness.

He had been complaining about being dizzy.

He'd been in the hospital and doctors were trying

to find out what it was and they couldn't find it.

We all wondered what it was.

He was becoming increasingly afraid that his cell phone

was causing his headaches and his equilibrium problems.

So he knew from previous encounters with QuickBooks that whenever you call,

it took literally over a half an hour to actually

put you to a representative that could help you.

He asked me if I'm minded calling and go ahead and order QuickBooks Pro.

So that's exactly what I did.

Okay, so the transfer from online to desktop is a pretty normal thing that occurs.

Is that correct?

Yes, correct.

That's correct.

The mere fact that Chase said he wants to delete online doesn't mean anything

because all that information is going to be downloaded onto a desktop.

At the end of the day, no one ever deleted anything, correct?

Correct.

All right.

To them it looked suspicious and they played it up, but in reality it meant nothing.

So it was just an absurd red herring where they could say the words delete,

backdate.

Right?

And ooh and ah.

The whole Ryan Baker transaction and whatever that was is a complete nothing.

Thank you.

About a third of the way into the trial, I started

realizing it's not going to be such a slam dunk.

And not because the facts didn't warrant an acquittal.

It's because I came to the realization that the

facts weren't going to actually get to the jury.

So one of the more difficult things about being in

trial is you're just not sitting in court listening.

You were on edge the entire time, thinking about what's

coming, getting ready to make objections if necessary.

Objection, argumentative.

He's stating what the witness actually knows.

It's like a nervous dog.

It's expending all its energy because it's just, everything is heightened.

Your senses, your thinking, everything's going at top speed.

So you never have enough.

You're always exhausted at the end of the day.

But you have to go home, prepare, to get ready for the next day.

So physically to go through a trial this length, you have to then endurance.

I understand Mr. McGee was backfield enrolled this afternoon.

And Mr. McGee, you indicated you felt you were able

to take over the rest of the examination of Mr. B2.

Is that right?

Yes, Sean.

All right, I'm going to see you.

Yes.

Okay.

It was actually kind of sudden.

We went back to court after lunch and he basically said that he's not feeling good

and he's got to take at least that time off, you know, that afternoon or whatever.

Nothing further.

Nothing further.

Anything else?

All right.

And then I learned shortly after that, you

know, he's not going to be coming back tomorrow.

And then it became the next day.

We weren't really sure what was going on.

We were not told what was wrong.

There was an issue with Mr. McGee and we didn't know what it was.

So why are we calling it a truck is my first question.

Why did we put a truck in the report?

Do we know it's a truck?

If you look, when the brake lights come on, you can see the outline of the box.

In your report, you say you can only see the brake,

the headlights, the brake lights, the tailpipe.

You don't mention that you can see the box too.

Please don't take me on like you're cross-examining me.

I'm just exhausted.

No, no, no, no.

I'm not... I'm very comfortable with Jim because we work so much together.

Yeah, but yes-ing each other only gets us into trouble.

Don't take anything I'm saying as criticism or

anything, how they're going to cross-examine you.

It's for our own good, both of our own good.

I have butterflies in my stomach because Jim and I are so prepared.

And for you to be changing marks from the middle of the screen...

It's not my choice, believe me.

I know, I know.

It's not my choice.

If you push F5, it'll just have the one in the new message.

Arrow, please.

F5?

Uh-huh.

No?

How about if I just do it the old-fashioned way by moving my mouse?

Okay.

Do you want me to stop at any particular point?

Oh.

I'm gonna back up.

Okay.

He was trying to control it and then it didn't work and it was just a nightmare.

Just a nightmare.

It doesn't help that you have three prosecutors

enjoying your snafus and kind of making it known.

And what they're doing is they're ridiculing.

They're mocking.

They're making faces.

They're talking amongst themselves.

Now we're on the third frame of that.

Sorry.

Fourth frame of that.

It does?

Okay.

Let's start again.

Jim met Raj in a lurch because Raj just did not have enough time to get ready for

these witnesses that Jim was supposed to handle.

So it was bad all around me.

I'm not gonna discuss medically what happened to me, but I had to have a

neurologist get me through it.

I literally sat there in a daze and I had no thoughts going in my head.

I don't know how many weeks it was like that.

I was in a quiet room.

24-7.

At some point it's a mess.

How are you doing?

I don't know.

I had no concept of what was going on.

Let's just say that.

If you would have asked me my address, I wouldn't have told you.

All I can say is I didn't know if I'd ever practiced law again.

Scary.

I was very scared.

I just remember sitting in there and I feel the symptoms coming back.

And I instantly said, stop.

I need to get back out of here.

Well, as the court knows the condition I'm

in, I regress a little bit after we met today.

I don't know how long it'll take me to get back.

I think it came clear I came back too early.

It took me about 30 minutes to figure that out.

I know this probably doesn't weigh as heavily with the court as the defendant's

rights, but I would like to add for the record, Marcy's

Law and the victim's family's rights to have speedy trial.

And the frustration that this has put on them.

Your Honor, we are certainly cognizant of that.

I don't think that I'm going to reply to any of the insensitive remarks of the

prosecutors about not taking into consideration Mr. McGee's condition.

Because they don't know what they're talking about.

They don't know what he's feeling.

They don't know what's going on.

So I'm not going to address all the, I would

call, nonsensical statements about delays.

Well, I mean, is it possible that any of us had a negative thought creep into our

head that this was an intentional stall tactic?

Possibly.

But anything was possible because, to a large degree,

we're kept in the dark as to exactly what's going on.

And we can only deal with what we know.

I never really thought that he was ill.

Like, pretty much the way that they operated led

me to believe that everything was a lie with them.

They felt like they were losing.

There's no question in my mind.

He was not sick.

Did he go to the hospital or did he go to the doctor and get some kind of excuse,

maybe?

But I honestly don't believe it had anything to do with that.

All right.

I think that he wanted to distance himself

because he knew damn well he was losing this case.

We were notified that Jim was not coming back to court.

And it ultimately caused several week delay in the proceedings for Mr. Moline to

get up to speed, to call witnesses, and do what

he could to continue the case at some point.

It became like, I'm going to try for this date, but I can't tell you for sure.

When you have a trial that's this contentious, we

weren't sure if this was some form of gamesmanship.

Your Honor, if we could have an offer of proof of those other two witnesses,

we can probably just do it today.

This is just delaying everything.

It was very frustrating.

It was such a big concern for us.

Like, is this an attempt to cause a mistrial?

If I have to do a witness, I'll do it.

You know, it's hard not to think those things when there's been so much animosity.

It seems to me that both sides, if given the choice of putting on evidence

to support your side, or to attack opposing counsel, your first choice has

been to attack and then try to work in evidence.

I guess you think that's effective with a jury.

But I think, Your Honor, for the record, I happened to be at a social event with

Mr. McGee on Saturday, where he was perfectly fine drinking and dancing.

It's starting to appear like stall tactics, intentionally done.

We had talked about it between us, like, what in the world?

How are you saying you're not able to continue?

We just saw you on Saturday.

You were drinking, you were dancing, you seemed fine.

How are you not fine two days later that you can't do this trial?

The wedding was in between two friends and my wife and I.

My wife presided over the wedding.

It involved senior members of the district attorney's office.

The days prior, I didn't know if I would go.

There was this conversation I had with my wife, whether or not I could.

I said, well, I'm feeling like maybe I can return to the trial.

So, I would like to go.

And I encountered different people there asking how I was doing.

Ms. Rodriguez asked how I was doing.

I talked to Mr. Dougherty, told him I should be back there Monday.

I stayed at the table for the most part, seated.

My wife was up dancing on the dance floor.

Colleagues of ours who worked at the district

attorney asked, why aren't you dancing with Lynn?

And I said, I don't want to fall.

And at some point, a slow song came on.

My wife said, I'll hold you up.

That was my dancing.

I did have a glass of champagne as part of the toast to the wedding party.

Otherwise, I drink soda.

The characterization was false.

It is so discourteous for them to proceed in this manner.

But we've accepted it.

And so, we have to deal with that.

No, that is not what we're doing.

The games that were being played affected how the trial progressed.

Their lack of disclosure.

Their hiding information they're supposed to be giving over.

There was revelations and contradictions to my

idealism, what the law should be and what is.

Due to the delays that have been caused by that excessive cross-examination,

we do not believe...

I could give them a schedule.

It's not going to be accurate.

Because I can't foretell the delays that they've caused.

They didn't want to lose.

And they would do anything to win.

It was immoral and way, way, way out of line.

The defense in this case has repeatedly violated this court's order...

No, no, I'm not going to sit here and listen to them talk about us violating

court orders when that's all they have done this entire trial.

Well, that's an accusation of misconduct.

Let's have a hearing.

That's their go-to line.

Let's have a hearing.

Every day, a new game, or a new trick, or a new lie, or a new shenanigan.

In response to that, we had to react.

Every time the three of them get up, like cackling schoolgirls, and go through

this thing that we're engaging in some type of misconduct.

It's day after day after day after day after day of being attacked.

I don't appreciate the detective's comments

under his breath as I'm addressing the court.

That wasn't Detective Smith, it was me.

Being told you guys are lying, you are misrepresenting evidence.

This might be something that's reportable to state ball.

Oh, let's have that hearing.

Let's go.

Let's do it.

Now the real reason is coming out.

Let me just finish one thing.

That's a lie.

You're already shown to be a liar, so let's not go down there.

Just a minute.

It was just constant.

Mr. McGee, if you want to argue with Mr. Irms, go out on the parking lot.

All right, we'll be reserving the floor.

I'm scared.

Still.

I'm not convinced we're running yet.

You're chipping away?

I try to look, what did they produce that injury and see their teeth into?

There's some things.

Do you want me to make a list of them?

Yeah.

I already have a list of them.

I'll see ya.

Thank you.

Thank you, dear.

Raise your eyebrows up.

Okay, that looks pretty good.

And then make an angry face here in the middle.

That's really good.

And then smile really, really big.

So I think maybe just a little bit more right in here.

Okay.

Okay, so you're gonna feel a couple pokes here to the side.

Okay.

So my goal for you is not to, like, freeze you out, meaning you have no motion.

We're trying to soften all of this.

So what are you guys working on right now?

We pretty much know that they don't have any evidence.

Oh, yeah, yeah.

I mean, out of it links our client to these murders.

Okay.

In fact, we have given the prosecution three DNA

profiles of DNA that we found at the gravesite.

Yeah.

Where the family was buried.

Good afternoon.

There was three DNA profiles that were retrieved

from the gravesite where the family was buried.

One of the profiles that was developed was on the rope that tied up Joseph.

We used modern technology, which was a high-powered vacuum that sucked up much

more DNA than their traditional swabbing methods could.

And lo and behold, we got profiles.

These are three individuals that do not match Mr. Merritt.

And they do not match the victim's family.

So who are they?

Whose DNA is on the rope that tied up Joseph?

I'd like to know.