The essentials
Closing arguments begin in the trial of a man charged in the 2012 killing of a UNC student.
Closing arguments began in Durham in the trial of Miguel Salguero Olivares, who has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder, rape and burglary in the death of Faith Hedgepeth. Hedgepeth was found dead in her off-campus apartment in Chapel Hill on September 7, 2012. Testimony began on October 7, 2026. The defense rested without calling witnesses, and the defendant did not testify.
Prosecutors allege that the defendant was a stranger who killed Hedgepeth in a fit of rage. They argue he committed burglary intending sexual assault and murder. An autopsy recorded skull fractures, facial and head cuts, and injuries to arms and legs. A state forensic scientist testified that DNA evidence is 170 septillion times more likely if it came from the defendant and victim. The same scientist testified that a DNA mixture on a rum bottle is 48.6 tredecillion times more likely under the same comparison.
Defense attorneys questioned a witness account, the processing of the crime scene, and the reliability of the DNA evidence. The defendant was arrested in 2021 after a traffic stop and a DNA sample.
Other ways to read this story.
Alternative framings generated by SigNews. These are not independent sources or attributed quotations.
Prosecutors tie DNA evidence and autopsy findings to alleged rage-fueled killing
From the prosecution's perspective, the case rests on forensic and medical evidence linking the defendant to the victim. Prosecutors allege he was a stranger who killed Hedgepeth in a fit of rage during a burglary they say was intended to lead to sexual assault and murder. Autopsy findings of skull fractures and multiple cuts, along with DNA statistics presented by a state forensic scientist, are offered as the core of that link.
Defense challenges witness account, crime scene handling and DNA reliability
From the defense perspective, the case turns on whether the evidence reliably connects the defendant to the crime. Attorneys questioned a witness account, how the crime scene was processed, and the reliability of the DNA evidence. The defense rested without calling witnesses, and the defendant did not testify, leaving the state's evidence at the center of closing arguments.