Faith Hedgepeth Murder Trial: DNA Analyst Says Swab Profile Is From an 'Unknown Individual'

The State's own DNA analyst read it to the jury: the profile on Faith Hedgepeth's swabs did not match anyone the lab compared. It came from "an unknown individual." This is the Faith Hedgepeth murder trial in Durham County Superior Court. Faith was a UNC student who died in 2012. More than a decade later a man sits at the defense table facing the charges. He is presumed innocent, nothing in this clip changes that, and only the jury decides. Day 6 put the State's DNA analyst, Erin Ermish, on the stand. This is the stretch where her testimony moved from the screening tests to the DNA itself. The State put her lab report on the screen and asked her to walk the jury through her first results, from swabs taken from Faith. What she found was a mixture, DNA from more than one person. Inside that mixture was what she called a partially predominant profile, and she told the jury it did not match Faith or any of the three other people whose DNA standards the lab had. Then the line that matters: it "is from an unknown individual." The State stopped right there and asked the question most of us would ask: what does "partially predominant" even mean? Her answer is the plainest explanation of a DNA mixture you will hear in this trial. When one person leaves more DNA than another, that person's profile is the predominant one. "Partially" means that held at some of the areas she tested, but not all of them. And "did not match" has a precise meaning in her lab: when the evidence profile and a known standard differ at the areas where she got results, they do not match. She also walked through what "cannot be excluded" means, and that distinction matters. Faith's own DNA could not be excluded from that mixture, which she agreed is what you would expect on swabs taken from Faith. That is a different finding from a match, and a different finding from the unknown profile. Then came the second set of swabs. There the predominant profile matched Faith, and the report said additional alleles were present that none of the submitted standards could account for. Different, she said, from the DNA standards she received and tested. Here is what I want you holding onto as this testimony goes on. "Did not match," "cannot be excluded" and "matches" are three different findings, and this case may turn on which word gets used where. Watch how carefully the State uses them, and watch whether the defense holds them to it on cross. --- KEY MOMENTS 0:00 What this video is, and a preview 0:22 Video starts 2:12 She reads the result: a profile from an unknown individual 3:08 The State asks what "partially predominant" means 7:51 The second set of swabs and the DNA no standard accounts for 9:44 She confirms it differs from every standard she tested --- COMPLETE CASE COVERAGE justiceisaprocess.com SUBSCRIBE for daily trial coverage. CASE BACKGROUND REPORT: https://justiceisaprocess.com/nc-v-mi... Complete case overview including the charges, the timeline, the key players, and the legal questions this trial raises. State of North Carolina v. Miguel Enrique Salguero-Olivares. Durham County Superior Court, North Carolina, Judge Keith Gregory presiding. Salguero-Olivares is charged with first-degree murder in the 2012 death of Faith Hedgepeth, a 19-year-old UNC-Chapel Hill student, along with other charges. He has pleaded not guilty. Opening statements were heard on October 7, 2026. He is presumed innocent unless and until the State proves each charge beyond a reasonable doubt. LATEST ARTICLE: https://justiceisaprocess.com/desk-20... PLAYLISTS AND RESOURCES Website: https://justiceisaprocess.com/coverag... Full Trial Live Broadcasts:    • NC v. Miguel Salguero-Olivares: Full Trial...   No Breaks Edition:    • NC v. Miguel Salguero-Olivares: No Breaks ...   Trial Analysis Podcast:    • NC v. Miguel Salguero-Olivares: Case Story...   Key Moments and Testimony:    • NC v. Miguel Salguero-Olivares: Key Moment...   Commentary:    • NC v. Miguel Salguero-Olivares: Commentary   Subscribe for Daily Coverage:    / @justiceisaprocess   FAIR USE AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE This content is produced under Fair Use (17 U.S.C. 107) for news reporting, criticism, and educational purposes. We provide transformative commentary on public court proceedings, advancing public understanding of the judicial process through timestamps, analysis, and educational context. #JusticeIsAProcess #FaithHedgepeth #SalgueroOlivares