The Supreme Court heard that particles characteristic of gunshot residue were discovered on the hands of a man charged with murder.

Tarah Helsel, a GSR expert from Pennsylvania-based RJ Lee Group, told the court that she tested a total of 19 samples as part of the investigation into the 2017 murder of Morlan Steede.

In addition to finding particles characteristic of gunshot residue in samples taken from both of defendant Kiari Tucker’s hands, additional particles were found on samples taken from seized clothing including a pair of jeans, a handkerchief and a shoe.

Mr Tucker, 27, has denied the November 3, 2017, murder of Mr Steede, 35, as well as the use of a firearm to commit an indictable offence.

The jury was shown CCTV footage of Mr Tucker and others on Court Street hours before the fatal shooting of Mr Steede.

The recordings showed Mr Tucker getting on the back of a motorcycle and being taken to One Way Deepdale, before returning to Court Street minutes later.

He was later seen walking into the Elliott Street parking lot and off-camera shortly after 8.20pm.

At about 9.11pm that day, CCTV footage from Deepdale appeared to show a figure in dark clothing and a helmet walking through the area.

The same camera later recorded a man in a white shirt running down One Way Deepdale followed by a person in all black at about 9.40pm.

As they ran, flashes of light were seen to come from the outstretched arm of the person in black.

The jury heard that Mr Tucker was arrested the next day by armed officers after he was found under a pile of laundry in a bedroom closet.

As the trial continued yesterday, Ms Helsel told the court that she received a number of samples taken as part of the investigation and tested them for GSR.

She explained that when a firearm is discharged, it releases a cloud of particles that land on nearby surfaces.

“They will travel outward about four or five feet in static conditions, but environmental factors can change how far they can go,” she said.

She told the court that the particles usually fall off skin within four to six hours with “regular action” but can remain trapped in clothing for longer.

The particles can also be transferred between surfaces through contact.

As part of testing, she said she used a scanning electron microscope to identify particles that contain lead, barium and antimony fused together by the heat of the discharge of a firearm.

She said particles with all three elements are considered “characteristic” of gunshot residue, while particles with two of the three components are considered “consistent” with gunshot residue but can also come from fireworks, brake pads or paint pigments.

Ms Helsel added that she only counted particles that had a smooth surface, which indicates that they are fused in heat, and did not count particles that also contained elements linked with brake pads, such as iron, or fireworks, such as magnesium or potassium.

She told the court that one particle characteristic of GSR was found on a swab taken from Mr Tucker’s right palm, while two characteristic particles were found on a swab from his left palm.

A total of six particles consistent with GSR, containing two of the three elements, were found on swabs from the defendant’s hands.

Swabs taken from a pair of jeans revealed six particles characteristic of GSR and 11 particles consistent with GSR, while another particle characteristic of GSR was found on a red-and-white handkerchief.

Another two particles characteristic of GSR were discovered on a black left shoe, together with one two-component particles.

Swabs taken from Mr Tucker’s face and ears, along with a pillow case, a black jacket, a white shirt and a right shoe were not found to contain any particles consistent or characteristic of GSR.

Swabs labelled “control” and “environmental control”, used to help identify contamination, were also found to be clear of GSR-related particles.

The trial continues.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding criminal court cases. This is to prevent any statements being published that may jeopardise the outcome of that case.