whoever said that they have plenty DNA was someone big who worked the case back then... it was Lead Prosecutor or Lead DA or someone like that. That article was posted in the last 2 days on the thread.
My guess is that with new technology that they don't need very much anymore to get a full read on it and that is why this person said they had plenty of the DNA for testing.
"...comparing it to the minute samples of DNA taken from the scene could leave the defense without its own samples."
leading me to think there wasn't much to go around
...that's from the second article you posted on the last page of this thread. I'd post the # but I have so many windows open I am losing my mind. :)