Sy Ray's Testimony Transcript

I can't emphasize enough how important this is.

EDITED ON 8-21-24 TO ADD A VIDEO.

---

As we all know, the microphone situation in Judge Judge's courtroom is terrible, and at times it's rather difficult to hear what the witnesses are saying while on the stand. I wanted a proper transcript of Sy Ray's testimony, but I'm also not willing to pay for it, so I decided to just type it up myself. I took the auto-generated transcripts from a YouTube video of the hearing, and now I'm going back through to reformat the text in a coherent fashion, and fix any errors.

Sy Ray's testimony was a over an hour long, so it's obviously taking me a little while to get through all of it. Because of this, I decided I'm going to post the transcript of the last 10-15 minutes first. In my opinion, this is also when the most important information is shared. Then I will make a new post with the full transcript once I’m done with the whole thing.

---

(Beginning at 43:27 in the video.)

ANNE TAYLOR: Do we have the drive testing that was done by the FBI to help create that report?

SY RAY: We have what I believe is the majority, there are some significant pieces missing, I can't say that those missing pieces exist and haven't been turned over, or they were erroneously not collected, I-I don't know which, but there are some pretty significant pieces that are missing.

ANNE TAYLOR: I'm going to ask you some questions about that, but first I want to know when you first saw drive testing data that was produced to us in discovery, what did that cover?

SY RAY: I found a file in the discovery I want to say early December, that included a drive test, but it was about a 3 minute sample that covered less than a quarter of a mile, and a completely irrelevant location, so it added no value to my analysis at all.

ANNE TAYLOR: What were you looking for? What time frame and location were you looking for based on the CAST draft report review?

SY RAY: I would expect significant drive testing around any location that coverage maps were being used in the CAST report. I would expect significant documentation on potential routes that this device may have taken. I would expect significant documentation on the crime scene.

ANNE TAYLOR: You just told us that you think we have most of it, but that there's some significant parts that are missing?

SY RAY: Yeah and I want to qualify that, just so it's really clear, because I understand it's starting to get very technical: there's over 500,000 lines of data that was turned over, so I-I'll make it clear, there's a lot of data that has been produced. I would say, in my opinion, looking at what's been produced, probably 2 or 3% is missing, but it’s not the amount of data, or the time of the data, it's the locations of the data. Some of the most significant locations in this case, we're missing some data.

ANNE TAYLOR: Those significant locations, have they been depicted or captured on the CAST draft report?

SY RAY: They have.

ANNE TAYLOR: And tell me what those locations are, what are we missing?

SY RAY: I am unable to find any measurements along, I believe it's 270, um the Moscow-Pullman Road, if you drove the most direct route from Pullman to Moscow or vice versa, pretty much as soon as you're leaving Pullman to the time that you arrive in Moscow, we are missing that entire stretch… if there's ever been a case that we need to look at what does it look like when a phone travels from Pullman to Moscow, this is probably the case. Um, we have the neighborhood around the crime scene, we don't have the crime scene. Normally that wouldn't be too terribly significant, because if it's a flat area, there's not a lot of vegetation, or mountains, you can probably interpret it the same. The location of this crime scene is very unique because it sits on a mountain, part of it is shielded by a mountain, there's a lot of other big thick, dense uh, apartment buildings there. Your phone is going to behave differently inside of that residence than it might on the road behind the residence, or in the front of residence, I can't find any drive test data that actually encapsulates any part of the property.

(47:04)

ANNE TAYLOR: You talked about the device that helps do the drive testing, or that captures the data while you're doing the drive testing. What's that called again?

SY RAY: It's a drive test scanner. The most common one used in law enforcement is created by Rohde & Schwarz, that same company I referred to earlier. I'm familiar with the hardware that the FBI uses and it is a Rohde & Schwarz scanner.

ANNE TAYLOR: Is it called Gladiator?

SY RAY: Gladiator is the company that sells the product to the FBI. Gladiator actually buys this product from Rohde & Schwarz and it does what they call “white label”. So they buy the hardware from Rohde & Schwarz and they kind of slap their sticker on it, and they put their software in it, and then they sell it to the FBI. But ultimately it is a Rohde & Schwarz piece of hardware.

ANNE TAYLOR: And once you have that piece of hardware, once you have this device, does it just work forever? Or is there anything that has to be done to ensure it's working properly?

SY RAY: It is a technical piece of equipment that takes measurements, it is required to be calibrated. The best way that for probably everybody in the courtroom to think of, if we go a little old school, is the old breath tests. If you had a DUl and law enforcement couldn't produce the calibration records of the breath test, it was really problematic… similar thing here, we want to see that the device is calibrated. In this case it's really important, because keep in mind I reviewed thousands of these drive tests over my career, there is a significant gap that I believe there's something malfunctioning in the equipment, or the operators are just not paying attention, I can't tell you which one it is. So in this case we need the calibration records to show that the device is functioning properly, are really critical.

ANNE TAYLOR: Do we have those calibration records on the device that was… well, was there more than one device used?

SY RAY: There was, there was actually two devices used.

ANNE TAYLOR: And was this drive test done on just one day? is this a one-time shop (stop)?

SY RAY: No, I think there's maybe five days total that I've seen drive test data collected.

ANNE TAYLOR: Okay… so now let's talk about the calibration for this instrument, or this machine… did we get records for all the machines that were used by FBI in this case?

SY RAY: We've got the calibration records that were taken prior to the use of these, of the samples. It'd be really helpful to have the calibration records after the use, so we-we kind of need to bookend those, because we know that it left Rohde & Schwarz factory in October and everything was working great. When it came back, we don't know when it came back, and we don't know if it was functioning properly when it came back. It's not uncommon for there to be errors, I saw a report and it said it came in and it had two errors. It's not the end of the world, the sky doesn't fall, uh you have to get into the documentation to see what those errors were. Normally the device kind of self-calibrates itself, if you know what you're looking at, the major concerns that you would see if the calibration is off, it it becomes very obvious because results are really flawed… that's where I have a concern in this case, is we have what I consider a significant chunk of data for specifically a location where the instrument is running, there's no doubt it's functioning, but it's not properly collecting AT&T data, which is concerning as to why.

(50:35)

ANNE TAYLOR: Because there were multiple drive tests done, and you talk about bookending these calibration reports, would you need to bookend all of the time that the drive testing was done with these calibration reports? and what I'm saying is, if there's something done in November, and then drive testing done in December, and then more drive testing done in January, and then maybe some in March, do you need the bookend calibration reports around each of those drive tests?

SY RAY: You would. As of today, I haven't seen any drive test data I believe beyond January 5th, and I'm not sure the time zone, so maybe it could creep into January 6th… but if there's any drive test data after the first week of January, I'm unaware.

ANNE TAYLOR: Okay so in our case, which months are we missing?

SY RAY: For the calibration?

ANNE TAYLOR: Yes.

SY RAY: Whatever the next calibration - the FBI would choose when to send these devices in, so whatever that next calibration report was generated for these two devices.

ANNE TAYLOR: On the calibration certificates we have, I think you told us that after the maintenance, it went back into service and passed inspection and was functioning properly?

SY RAY: Well, when it came in, it did have multiple errors, but when it went out it was functioning properly.

ANNE TAYLOR: Is that why you need to see the next one, on the other side of the drive testing?

SY RAY: That is correct.

ANNE TAYLOR: Okay now when we're thinking about the data, the drive test data that we have that's missing some significant portions… could it be because the machine wasn't working right all the times they tried to do drive testing?

SY RAY: Yes.

ANNE TAYLOR: Okay, is it also possible that the FBI agents using this machine weren't properly trained to do the drive test data, or to do the drive testing and collect data?

SY RAY: I know of the two FBI agents from prior lives. I believe they're properly trained.

ANNE TAYLOR: So we're looking at either the machine itself isn't functioning properly, or could that data have been pulled out of what we got?

SY RAY: If we're talking about possible scenarios that would cause the shortcoming of data, maybe it was never captured in the first place? I-I can't speak to that… um, the machine erroring at least during one portion of this drive test, I've seen similar errors before. I'm pretty sure they had a small period of time where it just, it had been a very busy day, and it kind of gave up for a little while like any computer will, it needed to be reset. Could things be extracted and us not know? That's always possible, I can't rule that out.

ANNE TAYLOR: Is the missing data important to you to fulfill your duties in Mr. Kohberger's case?

SY RAY: I don't recall when I got involved in this case, on the day where I could actually start looking at evidence… l've had a concern since the very first day I saw the CAST draft report that there are significant errors in the drive testing… it was before I even saw the drive testing, I can look at the coverage areas, I can tell you they're wrong… so… yes, it's not a concern that they're wrong, people make mistakes, we can fix things… it's a concern that I still don't have the source data that any expert, not just myself, but anybody, could sit down and look at it and say “okay, I see what's happening here, here's how we fix this”... unfortunately, that mistake has a ripple effect, and I'm seeing multiple errors that are happening as a result. So that's why this data is important… we've reached a point that we need to determine is this just human error? Is this accidental? Is it intentional? Is there other things at play here that's changing this narrative, to where there's clearly some manipulation of the original data?

ANNE TAYLOR: And having that data, will that help us answer that question?

SY RAY: It's the only way we're going to answer that question.

ANNE TAYLOR: Alright, I have just a couple of other questions for you, and I'm going to depart from the CAST report and the drive test data a little bit… as an investigator, or as a person doing an analysis of this case, does the drive test data tell you where a phone traveled to indicate other investigation that you should do?

SY RAY: Technically, the call detail records tell us that, the drive test data help us become more accurate with that. AT&T is one of the best companies in this particular situation, to show device movement, because we get a constant connection. So when, and I will emphasize when, all of the data is mapped, and I'm talking about the CDRs (call detail records), we can get a really good idea of, “hey, a phone traveled north for 10 miles, and then it traveled east”. The drive test data would actually allow us to replicate and recreate these tower handoffs, that we're seeing to come up with that first theory… to now we can say, “in order to do this, and hit these towers in the sequence that it did, it has to be driving on this highway, and then when it went east, it most likely turned onto this highway”. So the drive test data helps us get very specific with what the CDRs (call detail records) mean.

---

EDIT TO ADD:

Here is a clip from Sy Ray's podcast with his wife, called Socialite Crime Club. It's an example of the work he does with cell phone locations, in relation to the surrounding cell towers:

The video should start at 44:58, but just in case it doesn't, that's the point in the video I'm talking about.

Back to the transcript!

---

ANNE TAYLOR: As an investigator, in performing an analysis of work done in this case, when you have the CDRs, the call detail records that tell you where a phone's been, is that useful in directing your investigation to what other evidence might be out there, like videotapes?

SY RAY: I'll qualify my answer, because I'm not sure if you're asking specifically for this case, or in general… yes, you map all of the data, and especially if you're going to justify six months worth of data on somebody's cell phone, you map every single connection that there is in those records. from what I have reviewed, the FBI mapped 6% of the data that came in. From [Detective] Mowery’s testimony, and what I've seen through here, he was up to about 18%. So by either standard, more than 80% on both accounts were never mapped or accounted for… and I'm not talking overall, from every single day for six months. I'm talking about the time frames that are chosen. So for example, this time period that's represented here [holds up paper], uh is where I'm getting the 18%-

ANNE TAYLOR: And that's the 48 hours?

SY RAY: This is specifically from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. on the morning of the 13th [of November], arguably the most critical time period of this entire investigation, they mapped a handful of connections… when I say handful, they mapped 18%... when you add the other 82%, it tells a much more detailed story. When we put the drive test data on top of that, you can get even more refined. Um, but to answer your question on any case, that's this case… on any case, and we teach best practices, we've established best practices going back to 2008 in law enforcement, what do you do with this type of data… it is a terrible practice to justify probable cause for this very detailed call detail records, that give breadcrumb like trails for individuals, and then not map it. We justify an entire probable cause saying we have to have this. Not mapping it, and then making decisions and work products while leaving that out, is extremely problematic.

ANNE TAYLOR: Last week we received some additional records that Detective Mowery found when he was preparing for his testimony on this motion to compel… have you had a chance to review those records?

SY RAY: I have… a couple of them are very technical, so I'm not going to say that I've mastered them yet, but I have a good idea of what was provided and (what it needs?).

ANNE TAYLOR: Based on your, I guess not as thorough as you'll do, review of these records, do you have a sense as to whether these records matter to us, and what we're doing to defend Mr. Kohberger?

SY RAY: Given the timing of these records, from what I can tell in the emails that were produced by Detective Mowery, these records were generated on the 23rd of December, it's when everything starts with probable cause statements… and if I had to pick a time when the wheels fell off the wagon, that's the date. There are statements, and there's assumptions made in the records, that will never be supported by the data. There's a lot of claims that are said in these emails, and even the name files [file names] of the records are problematic; it does not represent what it's claimed to represent.

ANNE TAYLOR: Sounds like those might be pretty important to us in defending Mr. Kohberger?

SY RAY: I could give examples but I-I know it's a very technical thing, so I'm not - it could be extremely impactful to either side, I'm not saying just in defending Mr. Kohberger. it could be extremely impactful in prosecuting Mr. Kohberger. The problem's the problem, not what the data helps or hurts.

ANNE TAYLOR: The content of the data, though is it helpful to us in representing the defendant?

SY RAY: It absolutely is helpful. Everything that I've seen to date is concerning to me, because it's exculpatory - and I want to, I need to clarify this… when all of the records are produced, and the dust settles, and I have time to review it, I reserve the right to say “no, now that I'm seeing everything, here's what l'm seeing”… because of the piecemealing of the data, because of the missing data, because of data that I'm reviewing that is incredibly inaccurate, everything that is missing is absolutely in the benefit of the defense right now. There's other reports that I believe are missing, that I can't tell you are in the benefit of Mr. Kohberger, or in the benefit of the state. If I was contacted on December 1st by Moscow Police Department, there are things I would have absolutely said “you get this today, do not hesitate”, especially come December 23rd. Not because of who it's helpful for, but because those documents are the only things we're going to get that's going to be able to allow us to interpret what it really means… and if we don't get those documents, and we piecemeal things, it creates this narrative that is very harmful for the defense's case… as I've got more documents, I'm finding it's not harmful for the defense's case, there's a lot of misstatements that have been made…. so yes, to your question, to date it is very helpful for Mr. Kohberger. I reserve the right to change that opinion in 6 months, depending on what type of documents are released and what's out there.

ANNE TAYLOR: Fair enough.

---

After this Anne Taylor ends her questioning, and the prosecution is asked if they have any questions for Sy Ray. In a dramatic shift from the way Bill Thompson behaved during the hearing with Dr. Edelman, he is totally silent throughout Sy Ray’s testimony and has no questions for him afterwards. I can’t imagine why that could possibly be…?

Here is a video Julez with True Crime Reactions uploaded to her channel of just Sy Ray’s testimony. The timestamps I included correlate with her video.

Let me know your thoughts! Pretty incredible, isn’t it? Keep an eye out for the transcript from the rest of Sy Ray’s testimony, I should be done with it fairly soon.