MURDER (MOST FOUL!)
Regardless of the fact that justice was apparently served, the three perpetrators of the crime were nearly successful in having major evidence tieing them to the crime scene invalidated by a defense witness. Statistical evidence offered by the prosecution that purported to show chemical similarities in soil samples found on the victims clothing, the defendant's shoes, and the crime scene was invalidated because incorrect statistical tests had been used. Further, it was also readily apparent that a major prosecution witness had little knowledge of local variations in soil chemistry and mineralogy. Ironically, excellent evidence could have been offered by the prosecution had it chosen to use either the heavy mineral and/or clay mineral fingerprint of soils at the murder scene, rather than attempting, in an incorrect manner, to show similarities in the chemistry of the soils. The mineralogical evidence would have clearly tied the perpetrators to the crime scene.
Fortunately two of the co-defendants (to avoid a likely death sentence) turned state's evidence and testified against the chief conspirator. On completion of the trial, the defense's expert witness was contacted by the District Attorney and asked describe what statistical (and mineralogical) tests should have been used. This information was stored away for future reference in order to avoid possible prosecution errors in the future.