Rum Bottle DNA: Evidence Behind the Faith Hedgepeth Guilty Verdict | Trial Day 6

UPDATE (Oct. 23, 2026): The jury found Miguel Salguero-Olivares guilty on all counts, including first-degree murder, and he was sentenced to life in prison without parole. His lawyers have filed an appeal. This video covers testimony and rulings from before the verdict. On Day 6 of the Faith Hedgepeth trial (Oct. 14, 2026), a State crime-lab DNA analyst, Erin Ermish, told the jury what the lab found on a rum bottle: a mixture on the cap whose predominant profile matched Faith's, and a single-source profile on the bottom. This video starts from that result and follows her own answers to ask what a DNA result says and what it leaves out: where she swabbed, the quick screening test and why a positive result only says blood “might be present,” the twenty-seven areas of DNA that are actually read, how a profile is interpreted, how many reference samples she compared, what “mixture,” “predominant,” “does not match,” “cannot be excluded” and “no conclusion” mean, a swab that was used up in testing, and a blue bottle whose partial unknown male profile matched none of the known samples the lab held by November 2012. It also explains, with the sources named below, how North Carolina judges screen expert witnesses and what jurors are told about expert opinions. The analyst's testimony is the State's evidence. The defense has not yet cross-examined her; her direct examination continues on the next trial day. In the reports she read on Day 6 the unknown profile is not matched to any named person. In this video: • The prosecutor's question and her answer on the rum bottle's cap: “The predominant profile matched the DNA profile from Faith Hedgepeth.” • The bottom of the bottle: a single-source profile, and why the report words it differently • Where she swabbed the bottle, and why she asked the latent-print section • The screening test for blood, vegetables and bacteria, and why she did not run a confirmatory test • How a DNA profile is made and read: no two people share a profile (except identical twins), twenty-seven areas, interpretation, a profile on screen • How many known samples she compared: “around 190 to 200” • Expert witnesses in North Carolina: Rule 702 and the pattern jury instruction; her training • “Include or exclude”; “partially predominant”; “does not match” • The prosecutor: “I don't understand the rest.” Ermish: “There just wasn't enough information to make a conclusion.” • The swab that was used up, and the profile that is kept • The blue bottle: a partial unknown male profile, and “so far” • The judge's reminder to the jury at the end of the day • Our element tracker: identity is still disputed Faith Hedgepeth, 19, a UNC-Chapel Hill student, was killed in Chapel Hill, N.C., on Sept. 7, 2012. Miguel Salguero-Olivares, arrested in 2021, was charged with first-degree murder and related charges (as reported). He pleaded not guilty and was presumed innocent at trial. Faith's roommate is a witness and has not been charged. Left out on purpose: results and statistics for items we do not describe; every result that concerns a private person, including the victim's roommate (a witness, not charged); lists of names read from lab reports; every photograph of Faith, every crime-scene, evidence and autopsy photograph, and photographs of clothing; and anything the jury was told to disregard. The lab-report pages are not shown because they carry private names. Legal sources: N.C. Rule of Evidence 702(a) (N.C.G.S. § 8C-1) — text and Daubert gatekeeping as set out in UNC School of Government, “Criminal Evidence: Expert Testimony” (Jessica Smith, Benchbook, Aug. 2017), benchbook.sog.unc.edu, and the UNC SOG Rule 702 handout; N.C.P.I.—Crim. 104.94 “Testimony of Expert Witness” (May 2005), UNC SOG pattern jury instructions, sog.unc.edu/sites/default/files/pji-master-2024/criminal/. First-degree murder: N.C.G.S. § 14-17(a); N.C.P.I.—Crim. 206.13. Narration is an AI-generated voice reading our own script. The courtroom footage is real, edited for length, slowed under the narrator in places and partly blurred to protect people in the gallery. The narrator's voice and the thumbnail's background are AI-generated. The script and analysis are our own. Not legal advice. We are not lawyers. This video presents public court proceedings for news reporting, education and commentary. Every person charged with a crime is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law. Courtroom footage: pool camera, Durham County Superior Court. Chapters 0:00 The result: the rum bottle's cap and bottom 0:33 What a report leaves out: where she swabbed 1:11 The first test: is there blood? 2:40 How a DNA profile is made: twenty-seven areas 4:20 Compared with how many people? 4:55 The rule on expert witnesses (Rule 702) 6:12 Mixture, predominant, match: the vocabulary 7:47 Your call: “cannot be excluded” and the used-up swab 8:19 The blue bottle: a partial unknown male profile 9:00 What is still open