Please note several of l.j. posts.. She's been trying to make the point for a long time that just because they only found one match doesn't mean that there wasn't other DNA found that they couldn't match...
I agreed with her some time back that they didn't say there wasn't any other DNA found in her. They have only said there was a match found to a single male source
Many, self included initially ran with that as they only found evidence of DNA in the vaginal swab to one DNA and one SOURCE... They really haven't said that... exactly...
But I think that's what they mean by "single" source. I think there was one semen sample found in her and she gave three names to account for it. I think if there were still two outstaning (unidentified) the defense would know about it - it would have to have been included in the discovery - and be touting that as evidence of her promiscuity.