Dear Chief Gay and Stakeholders:

I briefed our presiding officer (Dr. Jeffrey Barnard) on the developments regarding the subset of sexual
assault kits stored by APD. To summarize our understanding, there are approximately 850 sexual assault
kits in the MLK warehouse facility with some degree of mold on them. These kits are believed to be
older kits that were brought to the MLK facility from another facility at which the refrigeration
experienced sporadic malfunction over time. We respectfully request APD provide responses to the
following questions which will assist Commissioners in their understanding of the issues:

1. Please confirm the number of kits on which mold spores have been visually identified.

2. Please confirm all of the kits were brought over to MLK from a different storage facility with
refrigeration issues. Was this transfer documented at some point? When did it occur?

3. During what timeframe were the 850 affected kits collected?

4. Was forensic DNA analysis attempted on any of these cases? If so, how many and when?

5. Have any of the 850 cases with mold spores visible been assessed to determine the
downstream effect of the mold on DNA typing? Who made the assessment?

6. How were the kits packaged? Is the same packaging system present for all evidence at MLK or
just those kits?

7. Are the visible mold spores throughout the kits or only on the external packaging?

8. Have any of these cases been assessed in terms of their ability to be prosecuted? What was the
result?

9. For those that have been determined to be unprosecutable, was the decision not to
prosecute made on scientific (e.g., presence of mold spores) or legal (e.g., statute of limitations)
grounds?

10. Did the individuals making the assessment of whether the cases were prosecutable, know the
evidence had mold growth when they made the decisions regarding the cases? Or were the
determinations on prosecutions made before those responsible for the decision became aware
of the presence of mold?

11. How was the decision made to transfer the kits with mold into the storage environment at
MLK? Were any scientists consulted on this question?

12. Was APD crime laboratory management and/or the DNA section of the laboratory aware of the
mold issue? If so, when did they become aware of it?

13. What efforts have been made to assess whether any other evidence at MLK could have mold
growth? What preventative actions are being taken to prevent mold growth in storage at MLK?
 14. Is there any evidence left at the older facility or has it been closed? Was any other evidence
transferred to MLK from that facility besides this group of 850 SA kits? If so, what has been
done to assess the integrity of those items of evidence?

15. Is any process currently in place for conducting a root cause analysis for this situation? If so,
who is assigned this task?

16. Is there a process in place to notify potentially affected parties regarding the issue? As
previously mentioned, this process would of course require collaboration and guidance from the
DAs office.

The Commissions next quarterly meeting is on August 18, 2017. We respectfully request an update on
these issues be included with APDs quarterly update. Thank you for your assistance.

Best regards,
Lynn Garcia
General Counsel
Texas Forensic Science Commission
1700 Congress Avenue, Suite 445
Austin, Texas 78701