Also on the stand Wednesday, was DNA analyst, Mitchell Holland, from Bode Technologies in Virginia. He testified that the blond hair found in the bathroom sink of Westerfield's motorhome matches the DNA of Danielle van Dam. Holland also testified that DNA extracted from a bloodstain in David Westerfield's motorhome matches the profile of the 7-year-old victim. Regarding the hair, Holland said the chances are "one in 25 quadrillion" of selecting a person at random from the Caucasian population who would have the same DNA. When asked about the bloodstain, Holland told prosecutors that the chances were "one in 660 quadrillion" of selecting a person at random from the Caucasian population who would have the same DNA. "Is this an example where samples match?" asked the prosecution. "Yes, it is," Holland answered. I am glad you posted this SPUNKY.
NOW, it is one thing when the Prosecutor asks questions to get a desired answer. It is another if you ask if different question. (why didn't Feldman, I don't know).
DNA extracted from a bloodstain in David Westerfield's motorhome matches the profile of the 7-year-old victim.
Matches the PROFILE, meaning it would MATCH her MOTHER or BROTHERS ALSO.
Regarding the hair, Holland said the chances are "one in 25 quadrillion" of selecting a person at random from the Caucasian population who would have the same DNA.
So, what would happen if we picked a person, but NOT AT RANDOM? What if we picked her MOTHER? Would the DNA be a match?
"Is this an example where samples match?" asked the prosecution. "Yes, it is," Holland answered.
YES, the example of ONE IN 660 QUADRILLION is used for where samples match, and we take a random person from the population. However it you don't select at random, then the number goes down and a match could be made for more persons if in the same bloodline.
So you're intimating that the blood could have come from another family member -- maybe Brenda had a nosebleed or a cut when she was dancing with him! Very unlikely, but possible, though he'd remember it. Other than actual blood from the daughter (which most likely landed there during a commission of a crime [it would be an unbelievable coincidence if she had cut herself during an earlier visit and left a blood drop on his coat!]), Brenda's blood (which he'd remember), or the cops planting evidence, there aren't any scenarios to account for this. Unfortunately for DW, the simplest explanation is usually the most likely one and could be the one that leads to a guilty verdict.