They have not been proven sinners yet either. No DNA evidence says a lot the way I look at it.
" No DNA evidence says a lot the way I look at it."
The question I haven't seen answered yet is: Was there any other forensic DNA in/on the woman that wasn't hers?
I wouldn't always be quick to say that the fact that there is no DNA evidence means much - because it doesn't take much imagination to figure out how one could avoid leaving something behind.
BUT, if I remember correctly, her claim is that she lost several of her fake nails scratching these men and she identified them by said scratch marks. So we're supposed to believe they didn't find any skin under those nails? I watch CSI people. :-) I know they can get DNA from that.
One of the tv talking head/lawyers last night, maybe MSNBC, said if the brutal rape/sodomization happened, no way would there be no DNA. Besides, with all that drinking going on, how many partygoers would be able to don condoms properly before the act, keep it on, take it off, without spilling at least one hair, one flake of skin or semen on this woman? Doesn't make sense. So now they're doing another DNA test with a different lab. Will they test and test until they get the desired result?