The whole recap for Day 11 0:00:05 · Cordner testified that he is a Prince William County crime scene investigator with almost 13 years at the department and about 1,600 scenes in his career. 0:10:13 · Cordner testified that he applied BlueStar to the garage trash bin and observed reactions on its inside and outside, which glowed blue. 0:14:42 · Cordner agreed on cross that he was told not to prioritize the basement and did not process it that day. 0:17:37 · Cordner agreed on cross, after viewing a picture, that some Manassas Park officers in the bedroom were not wearing gloves and were touching furniture. 0:19:25 · Cordner agreed that BlueStar is a presumptive test and that he cannot say something is blood based on a BlueStar reaction. 0:20:13 · Cordner agreed he did no BlueStar testing in the kitchen, living room or stairs and could not tell how much substance was on the can or when it was deposited. 0:21:50 · Cordner testified on redirect that he knew of no evidence collected by anyone not wearing gloves and agreed he swabbed for lab confirmation. 0:03:16 · Ms. Feldman identified suspected hairs on the front of side A of the saw and said there was hair in other portions of the saw as well. 0:05:20 · Ms. Feldman testified that she believed the reddish-brown staining she pointed out on side B of the saw to be blood. 0:08:38 · Ms. Feldman testified that she collected the hairs and swabbed the staining, with swabs from side A as item 317 and from side B as item 318. 0:18:10 · Ms. Feldman testified that she did not recover any Lidl-branded heavy-duty trash bags from the residence. 0:23:05 · Ms. Feldman opened the packaging and identified items A and B of the saw as in substantially similar condition, and the judge received it as Exhibit 410. 0:28:21 · Ms. Feldman testified she sent only swabs, not the saw itself, to the Department of Forensic Science, calling it a tactical decision to get results back sooner. 0:28:35 · Ms. Feldman agreed she had already removed the hair-like fibers she observed on the saw, and that the saw had been sitting for over two years. 0:10:02 · The investigator testified the June 2, 2024 receipt listed a Diablo saw blade, a Ryobi starter kit with two batteries and a Ryobi reciprocating saw. 0:10:55 · The investigator testified the negative $79 on the receipt reflected a Ryobi buy-one-get-one-free sale, so two items were bought, not two saws. 0:16:16 · The investigator said the person in the first video appeared to carry a Ryobi saw, a box with two batteries and a saw blade, and did not know who it was. 0:18:16 · The investigator described a customer at a self-checkout handing over three items and said the customer bought the saw, batteries and blade. 0:01:49 · The water department witness testified that the log showed 111.34 gallons used in the hour starting at noon on July 31, 2024. 0:02:21 · The water department witness testified that the hour before recorded 48.43 gallons and agreed the two hours totaled approximately 160 gallons. 0:02:54 · The water department witness described the two-hour consumption as substantial, equivalent to a faucet open all the way or a severe plumbing issue. 0:03:28 · The water department witness testified that no plumbing issue was suspected because usage fell to 2.86 gallons after the 111-gallon hour. 0:04:44 · The water department witness answered no when asked whether 111 gallons in an hour or about 160 in two hours was consistent with personal use. 0:00:14 · A friend of Bhatt's testified that Bhatt made a 2024 Facebook post thanking Mamta for spoiling his life, or something like that, and that it was later deleted. 0:01:36 · The friend said the post was not a normal thank-you and described it as more of a sarcastic post. 0:04:23 · The friend testified that at a Starbucks meeting, Bhatt said he and Mamta were having arguments at home and that he had not raised a hand to her. 0:05:04 · The friend testified Bhatt said he never raised a hand to Mamta, but described a time she tried to pull his blanket, he gestured and she fell on a bed corner. 0:07:21 · The friend testified that he called Bhatt several times on the night of Aug. 4, 2024, and that Bhatt did not pick up and the calls did not ring. 0:08:52 · The witness read search lines 410 and 411 from Bhatt's work account, dated April 12, 2024, asking how long it takes to get married after a spouse dies. 0:11:10 · The witness testified that the account also searched for Bhatt's own name, his name with his wife's, and distances between locations. 0:13:40 · On cross, the witness agreed he was not standing over Bhatt's shoulder and testified he could not see who was at the keyboard. 0:14:23 · The witness agreed on cross that someone else could use a computer left logged in with a card and PIN, and it would still show the logged-in user. 0:21:58 · The witness testified on cross that he knew only what was searched, not why, saying, "The motive, I would not know." 0:22:57 · Asked on redirect about the marriage search, the witness said the query was very telling and that people normally type their inclinations into search engines. 0:00:46 · A man who knew Bhatt through Facebook testified that Bhatt said he worked for the federal government and would help him with a job once he became a citizen. 0:03:17 · The witness testified that on a July 29, 2024 FaceTime call he saw only a face he believed was Bhatt's, and that Bhatt said he was walking near a park. 0:05:44 · The witness testified that on earlier calls Bhatt said he thought he should get a divorce and had a place in Fairfax or Falls Church. 0:06:48 · The witness identified the defendant in court as the man from the calls, saying he had never met him in person, and the judge noted the identification. 0:08:20 · The judge told the witness he was free to go for the day but must remain available and could not use social media until the trial ended or he was released.
Court Minutes