Remember in the first defense press conference when they said that there was a small amount of "material" that was "inconclusive?"
I think it's the same "matter."
You're probably right. They have been sitting around weighing whether it was worth trying to say that that DNA which came from someone living in the house showing up on a fake fingernail laying in the bathroom would not just be laughed away. They also had to balance that against who his parents are. Nifong promised 3 indictments and is going to give them 3. Does he need a new grand jury? I guess he is still not presenting exculpatory evidence to the grand jury. Why is that not illegal? It should be.
I've missed some of this coverage, but some reports keep stressing that the material is "tissue" and not just DNA.
Going on to stress that it is the tissue that makes it evidence against the person if IDed, consistent with HER story that she scratched someone. Seperating it, of course, from the liklihood that a fingernail in the bathroom wastebasket would pick up DNA from someone who lived in the house.
Being there and following this, are you hearing or reading anything that would be of interest on the nature of the material?
I wonder if the nails in the trash can even belong to the AV? Maybe they are from the 3rd guy's girlfriend?
Yes, that's what I've been saying. It's the same result, just spun differently by Nifong.