Eldorado, Texas » A forensic analyst said Friday that DNA samples from Raymond Merril Jessop, his alleged victim and her child showed there is a "99.99998 percent" probability he fathered the child.

Amy Smuts, a forensic analyst with the Center for Human Identification at the University of North Texas Health Science Center, testified without the jury present so 51st District Judge Barbara Walther could rule whether she was a relevant and reliable state witness.

The judge made that finding after Smuts' 2½-hour turn on the witness stand, rejecting defense attorney Brandon T. Hudson's objection to Smuts because she was unable to explain the scientific theory underlying the calculations in a paternity test. Hudson said that would complicate his ability to cross-examine Smuts and cause her statements to confuse, mislead and prejudice the jury.

The trial will resume Monday morning at 9, and Walther expects the jury will be back in court to hear more testimony in the case against Jessop, who faces a second-degree felony charge of sexual assault of a minor.

The charge stems from an investigation last year at the Yearning For Zion Ranch, home to members of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

Walther dismissed the jury Thursday afternoon after announcing one juror's child is sick and possibly has the swine flu.

On Friday, attorneys dealt with

Advertisement
various motions in the case. The defense team entered a standing objection to the use of DNA evidence collected from Jessop. That evidence is a key aspect of the state's case linking a child born in 2005, when the alleged victim was 16, to Jessop.

Smuts was the only witness brought before the judge Friday. Earlier in the week, four other witnesses testified about collecting the DNA evidence.

Hudson's challenge focused on the use of a "prior probability" of 50 percent in calculations that Jessop is the father, which he said biased the outcome of the test.

"You had already determined there was a 50 percent likelihood that Raymond Jessop was the father," said Hudson, adding the assumption violates a presumption of innocence in a criminal case.

At one point he handed Smuts an iPhone so she could use its built-in calculator to compute probability using a lower percentage, but Walther sustained the state's objection to the exercise as irrelevant. Smuts said the probability is used routinely and is built into an FBI database that analyzes DNA tests. She said a match for 15 genetic markers, such as happened in Jessop's case, occurs only with a "true biological father."

Hudson asked Smuts about a discussion at her lab regarding use of a different "substructure" population sample to analyze DNA from Jessop and other FLDS members, which might have shown whether "the true father is a close relative."

Smuts said the center discussed using an "inbreeding coefficient" to analyze FLDS samples because "some of these individuals might be related" but decided changing the formula wasn't necessary. She said a close relative would not have matched all 15 markers.

Asstistant Attorney General Lisa Tanner told Walther that the formula Smuts used is widely accepted in the scientific community and Smuts showed it was reliable and applied properly.