It's a case that comes down to DNA evidence.
Specifically, what to make of 33 human hairs clutched in a dead man's hand.
Prosecutors said there is only one reasonable conclusion that can be drawn — that 26-year-old Ernest Taypotat pulled out a fistful of his killer's hair as he was being fatally stabbed in August, 1992, and that the hair came from Enock Quewezance.
"The DNA unlocks the 21-year-old mystery of who killed Ernest Quewezance," prosecutor Kim Humphries said.
"The hair points to the identity of the perpetrator."
DNA is not magic
Defense lawyer Morris Bodnar says that DNA evidence is just that — evidence.
"It's not magic," he said. "It's just hair at a crime scene."
'You can stab and kill a person without leaving DNA evidence.' - Morris Bodnar, defense lawyer
Bodnar said the hair does not tell what happened before Ernest Taypotat died.
It does not show how the men were connected, or if they were, or offer any motive.
It doesn't allow for the possibility that Quewezance came across Taypotat after he had been stabbed by another person who left no trace.
"You can stab a person without leaving DNA evidence," he said.
Justice Daniel Konkin will give his ruling on May 6.