Cross examination of pages Hardwick,
and he is now past with this
over to the defense. Mr. Watson.
Are you going to proceed? Yes, ma'am.
Asian said, which I'm Mark Watson
and we talked this morning correct?
Yes, Sir. You've been with the
FBI for how long since 1998.
Twenty three years, yes, Sir.
23 years, and during that period did you?
Fair to say you've done a lot of
things in there inside the FBI. Yes,
Sir. Besides that investigator of the
SWAT team member of BREACHER for 20 years.
Would are you pretty familiar
with the investigative techniques
that the FBI has used or?
Are used in law enforcement
and or prosecution.
In your time there I
mean, I'm familiar with most of it.
I wouldn't say I'm. Intimately familiar,
but I know what we do to investigate cases.
Yes, Sir. First, in the first ten
years you were there, you were in
school a whole lot, I guess right?
Off and on you Sir.
The. Uh, and you've taken
classes on how to testify in front
of a jury, correct? Yes, Sir.
And how many times do you think
he testified before a guest
over 80 times, Sir?
Uhm?
This your conclusions.
Can they be affected by?
Buildings, topography.
Instructions or whether or not
the phone call was made inside
or outside of the building. Yes,
Sir, all that can affect the
coverage area of a tower,
but that's what the engineers do.
They designed the network and
that's part of my training to
understand how that interferes.
Not interferes, but how that affects
the coverage area of a cell tower.
And you did you run this
data through a program yes,
or through mountain software?
And what's the?
What's the name of the software? It's
gladiator forensics as a company.
So you take all data and you
enter it into what's the name
of the of the software as well?
Espa so you plug it in there and
then it comes out with with the.
Do you do the math or does
the program to match? I
do the map Sir.
I take that plots that everything for
me in hand draws and draws the sectors,
but I will also take my data,
run it through a different mapping
software to make sure there's
not a mapping software issue.
We have a peer review where another
cast agent will review my work to make
sure there's not a mapping issue.
The leaves as separate mapping software,
and when I first started I did it by hand
so so one one bit of software did.
They had a crunching and then
you using different software.
Did the did the mapping I guess close
to that that close to accurate. No
Sir, I just used.
I used one mapping software
that plots everything.
Then I use either when a
peer review is conducted,
another cast agent will take that data
using a different mapping software
to check my work to make sure there
were no errors or no mapping errors.
And in this case I also
did that review myself.
Reviews are working. I
don't remember. I'm blanking on who did
this one 'cause I sent several things
out for peer review recently and I
don't I just I'm don't remember Sir.
Uhm? Would you agree that?
Some scientific fairies?
Formerly used by law enforcement
at one time or are no longer used.
Yes, Sir, there's been stuff that, yes, Sir.
For instance, the hair follicle.
Is that an example?
Yes, Sir, that's one.
And the FBI used to.
That was pretty extensively used,
correct? I'd
never in my career.
I've never used her father,
but do you, do you know whether
or not it was used quite a bit? I
don't know how much we use.
I know it was you, Sir, I don't
know to the extent it was used.
OK, do you know if it was ever used
by the FBI? Yes Sir. I know it was OK.
What about bite? Mark evidence. I
don't know if the Bureau
Musmate might murder evidence.
That's another thing I've never used.
OK, are you aware whether or
not that bite mark evidence
used to be used quite a bit?
I know it was used yesterday and
it's no longer used, correct?
I believe it's not using the best.
I'm not asking these perfect question,
but you take your knowledge
is no longer use, correct?
That's my understanding,
Sir, but I do not know.
Pass the witness. Mr enough.
Yes, thank you judgmental.
Just sit down. Yes.