Drs. Heimdahl and Matthews ... together with eight other experts in this specific field that they have identified, argue that reliability of the TrueAllele software cannot be evaluated without full access to "executable source code and related documentation," something that no one to date has seen. They contend that doing so is not only prudent, but essential to determining whether TrueAllele operates as Cybergenetics claims, which is fundamental to any fair, legitimate, and impartial assessment of reliability.

Intellectual property law aims to prevent business competitors from stealing confidential commercial information in the marketplace; it was never meant to justify concealing relevant information from parties to a criminal prosecution in the context of a Frye hearing.

Supporting software development documentation must be produced, including that pertaining to testing, design, bug reporting, change logs, and program requirements, which will provide a road map to understanding the source code.

These case studies illustrate that software is not immune from error. Fundamental due process and fairness demand access.
 
Anything less than full access contravenes fundamental principles of fairness, which indubitably compromises a defendant's right to present a complete defense.

We hold that if the State chooses to utilize an expert who relies on novel
probabilistic genotyping software to render DNA testimony, then defendant is
entitled to access, under an appropriate protective order, to the software's source code and supporting software development and related
documentation—including that pertaining to testing, design, bug reporting,
change logs, and program requirements—to challenge the reliability of the
software and science underlying that expert's testimony at a Frye hearing,
provided defendant first satisfies the burden of demonstrating a particularized
need for such discovery.