Faith Hedgepeth's Phone: What the Jury Saw Before the Guilty Verdict | Trial Day 4

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 4 of the Faith Hedgepeth murder trial (Mon., Oct. 12, 2026), the State put Faith's phone in front of the jury through Investigator Brian Walker — and the jury saw one day of calls and texts, not the whole phone. The judge's reason, said again and again that day, was “not for the truth.” This video follows that thread: how a phone gets copied, why the State swapped the whole copy for a one-day log, what the defense and the State argued, what the log cannot show, the rule behind the phrase, and the same phrase applied to the first DNA report during Captain Johnnie Britt's testimony, followed by her cross-examination on what was never tested. In this video: • Investigator Brian Walker (Chapel Hill PD, 2012; phone forensics): how Cellebrite copies a phone, and whether a copy can be changed • State's Exhibit 89 (the full copy) and State's Exhibit 90 (calls and texts, Sept. 6, 6:48 p.m. to Sept. 7, 9:17 p.m.): the objections, the rulings and why the State changed course • The rule: hearsay and “not for the truth of the matter asserted” (N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rule 801(c)), and its limit • What the log cannot tell you: contacts, and messages that are not text messages • Captain Johnnie Britt, lead investigator: the first DNA report (an unknown male profile), the objection, and the search for a match • Cross-examination: how many officers were inside, the gas cap, the doorknob swab, the door-frame swab, and who decided what went to the lab • Our element tracker for first-degree murder — Day 4 lights no new line, and we say why 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, who testified on Day 2, is a witness; she has not been charged with anything. The DNA report is described as Captain Britt gave it: an unknown profile, with no name attached at that point in her testimony. Left out on purpose: the roommate's recorded police interview (State's Exhibit 17), which holds private details about people who are not on trial; the contents of the text messages; phone numbers and addresses spoken in court; every exhibit photograph; and the names of private people. Testimony is shown in excerpts; within each witness the excerpts are in court order except that two answers are moved up: what Exhibit 90 is (the answer to the video's question) is played first, and Walker's answer that the full copy is hard to read is played next to the State's argument it supports. 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. Legal sources: Hearsay, N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rules 801(c) and 802, and the “explains conduct” non-hearsay purpose (State v. Irick, 291 N.C. 480 (1977); State v. Coffey, 326 N.C. 268 (1990)) and its limit (State v. Canady, 355 N.C. 242 (2002)), as collected by the UNC School of Government: Jeff Welty, “The ‘Explains Conduct’ Non-Hearsay Purpose,” North Carolina Criminal Law blog (nccriminallaw.sog.unc.edu, Oct. 2009), and the NC PRO manual § 707.1, “Hearsay: Definition & Admissibility [Rules 801, 802]” (ncpro.sog.unc.edu). First-degree murder: N.C.G.S. § 14-17(a); N.C.P.I.—Crim. 206.13. Earlier explainers: our Day 2–3 video on chain of custody and lost evidence. Courtroom footage: pool camera, Durham County Superior Court. Chapters 0:00 Cold open: 24 hours of Faith's phone 0:19 What the jury got: one day of calls and texts 0:50 Investigator Brian Walker: how a phone is copied 1:40 The whole phone, Exhibit 89, and the State's answer 3:06 The State swaps in a one-day log 3:22 The arguments over Exhibit 90 3:59 The rule: hearsay and “not for the truth” 4:30 What the log cannot tell you 4:59 The roommate's interview: not shown 5:31 Captain Britt: the first DNA report 6:30 The search for a match: hundreds of samples 7:05 Cross-examination: what was never tested 9:52 What is still open · element tracker