# data[].attributes.body
No physical evidence was found against him; there was no blood, no semen, and no way to trace DNA. There was only one strand of hair that was used to charge Perot with the crime.

# data[].attributes.body
The victim described her attacker as a man with a short haircut and clean shaven. Perot has shaggy hair and at the time of the incident had a goatee and a mustache

# data[].attributes.body
He discussed that:

head and pubic hairs were distinctive

described the medulla, cortex, and cuticle

that two hairs from different people was unlikely to be alike

# data[].attributes.body
The argument for one strand of hair was so strong that it made the jury believe there was no other option except for Josh Perot to be the attacker

# data[].attributes.body
Even though this "expert analysis" believed his work, his argument was wrong.

# data[].attributes.body
Microscopic hair analysis could not scientifically distinguish one individual to the exclusion of all others.

Statistical weight could not be given to comparisons to suggest a likelihood that the hair derived from a specific source.

Expert witnesses should not cite the number of hair analyses they had conducted in the lab to bolster the idea that they could definitively state that a hair belonged to a specific individual.

All of these factors sways a jurors opinion based on evidence that are not completely true