If any one of those is true, then there has to be a reasonable doubt.” “There are millions of possible reasons for how your hairs could have been at a crime scene, or your DNA could be at a crime scene. “Simply because your DNA is there doesn’t mean that you committed a murder,” added Browning. The defense offered Taylor as a witness because, Browning said, “We were simply offering possible, viable alternatives of how the hairs and the DNA could have been at the scene.” “There’s thousands of totally innocuous reasons why hair and DNA can be at a location.” “Just simply because the hair is present does not mean anything,” said William Browning, one of Mark Norwood’s defense attorneys. Taylor testified that although it is not accredited, the lab practices the same policies. Marc Scott Taylor, a DNA and crime scene collection expert, was called to offer a reasonable explanation for why Norwood’s DNA was found to be a match to evidence at the Baker crime scene. Taylor testified that he is certified as a DNA technical leader and a DNA technical manager, however, his lab is not accredited with the FBI. The defense called only one witness before it rested. The prosecution called six witnesses Thursday morning, before they rested. Norwood has pleaded not guilty, but will not take the stand to testify in his defense. Norwood, 62, is on trial for the 1988 death of Debra Masters Baker. AUSTIN (KXAN) - The final witnesses were called Thursday in the capital murder trial for Mark Alan Norwood.

Reasonable doubt zip