Testimony at day five at the re-trial of Mark Edward Grant in the 1985 death of Candace focused on how DNA samples were tested and handled in 2000 and 2001.

The details were so technical, that at some points even the trial judge needed the crown and defence to move more slowly when explaining terms.

Court started with cross examination of crown witness, Tod Christianson, who analyzed DNA found on evidence at the scene.

Christianson had worked in a Winnipeg lab as an RCMP scientist.

He analyzed DNA testing of evidence found at the scene, including three pieces of gum, twine and Derksen’s clothing.

On Friday Christianson said there was a threshold below which DNA results would be excluded for further testing.

He said results were analyzed in a two-step process, first by a peer, then by a supervisor.

The defence continued a line of questioning to build a theory that DNA could potentially become compromised if handled too much.

Christianson said it was possible.

He didn't wear a mask when analyzing the twine, and Thursday the court learned a knot specialist had handled the twine with his bare hands before DNA testing.

Christianson said however touching the twine with bare hands didn't exponentially increase the risk of contamination.

Derksen, 13, was found bound in a shed six weeks after she went missing while walking home.

Today, her mother Wilma Derksen said sitting through a second trial is different, because she’s less attached to the details coming forward.

“I noticed that the line of witnesses is different, it’s very different, so the script is different. But the questions and all of that still feels very familiar to me. There hasn’t really been anything new yet, just different emphasis perhaps,” Wilma Derksen said.

The crown also called on Pamela Dixon for questioning.

She had prepared the evidence for DNA testing at an RCMP lab in Ottawa, and became involved in the case in May of 2001.

Dixon described the process of how DNA would be hopefully extracted from the twine.

She said the expectation was that there would be a lower level of DNA found on the twine, because she was testing a large area of material as compared to a blood stain for example.

She described the four-step process in detail.

First DNA would need to be extracted from the evidence, in this case the twine.

The DNA would then quantified and amplified, so a profile generation would be created.

It was DNA found on the twine that led to the arrest of Mark grant in 2007.

In 2011, Grant was convicted of second-degree murder.

Two years later, a judge overturned his conviction, because the jury wasn't made aware of evidence that could have pointed to an unknown third party suspect.