[UCANSEE2]

Yeah-asking the counter people at a cleaning place if they remember a spot on a jacket strikes me as asking the kid at the fast food place if he remembers taking an order for fries. Kind of a stretch.

I don't think the CLERK's statement of NOT SEEING stains means ANYTHING AT ALL. According to Testimony, evidence, there were OTHER SPOTS on the JACKET LAPEL that were NOT REDDISH BROWN, or didn't show SIMILAR DNA to DANIELLE'S.

[crystalk]

When DW took this jacket to the dry cleaner, the woman there says she saw no stains on it-- IT WAS HER JOB to look for any and note them down for special attention. Nor did DW note any to her, as customer usually does if he knows of any.

Yet, when police got the jacket, 3 stains of apparent blood and another stain of SOME kind, were readily apparent visually to the police evidence technician.

Isn't it obvious that these stains were put on the jacket well after the disappearance of Danielle, and in fact after the jacket was cleaned and returned to DW?