ANNEX 1 – CASE DIGEST

STATE v SIMPSON, NO. 20160835-CA

May 16, 2019

FACTS:
1. In the morning of December 16, 1995, two (2) farmers found the body of Kathleen
Beslanowitch, 17 years old, on the riverbank of Provo River in Utah. The victim’s
body was naked and beaten, with a large hole in the bank of her skull. Law
enforcements found a large, granite rock beside the body which had blood stains.
2. The forensic expert who performed Beslanowitch’s autopsy testified that the cause
of death was blunt force injuries to the head. He collected fingernail clippings, fluids,
blood swabs, and vaginal swabs from the victim’s body. These were the only
evidence obtained from the crime scene that could directly identify the killer.
3. After extensive investigation on searching for who the possible perpetrator was, the
case eventually went cold because of the lack of any technological system that can
analyze the evidence. More than ten years later, a new DNA collection device was
created which allowed law enforcers to reexamine the case. The new device had the
ability to collect DNA in any surface even with a minimal sample size.
4. The testing of the vaginal sample resulted in a complete DNA profile match with the
samples found on the rock. The device collected samples on the opposite side of the
blood stains because that was where the killer possibly held the rock.
5. The DNA database matched the profile of Joseph Michael Simpson, a resident of
Florida, who lived in Utah at the time of the murder.
6. Simpson’s counsel argued that the DNA found in the victim’s vagina was Simpson’s
but it was transferred from the vagina to the rocks by the person who actually
murdered Beslanowitch.

ISSUE: Whether or not the result of the DNA analysis was accurate

RULING:
1. Yes, the results were accurate.
2. The new DNA collection device was able to collect DNA samples on the granite rock
used to kill the victim. The forensic analysts used the DNA extracted from the
fingerprints on the rock to create a profile which matched that of Simpson.
3. Simpson, at the time of the killing, was on parole for another crime. Upon the law
enforcement’s knowledge of his identity, they went to his current residence and
followed him. They managed to get a new DNA sample from Simpson. Police officers
got a cigarette butt they saw him throw outside a shop. The DNA sample from
cigarette butt completely matched Simpson’s records. He was arrested and charged
with aggravated murder.
4. To answer the argument that his DNA merely transferred to the victim’s vagina, the
forensic experts explained that with each transfer of DNA, it would be expected that
a progressively smaller amount would be transmitted with each subsequent
transfer. Finding 21 nanograms of DNA on the rock “is much higher than (one)
would expect to see from a secondary transfer.”