The DNA evidence is interesting. With all the complexities of it, and all the possibilities for contamination, age, etc. I wanted to wait and see if we could find out a little more before I took it all in as fact. Some are saying the DNA under the fingernails was not indicative of struggle b/c of its age and small amount. I guess they're suggesting that it could have come from someone BEFORE the murder itself occured. I guess the thinking is that maybe it does match other DNA but that DNA came from someone before the murder. If it did, it still suggests something wacky was going on in that family.
As for the "Patsy did it" theory, it doesn't ring true to me. But that she was involved in a cover-up of some kind is a lot more believable. Not certain, just believable. There are so many variations on these possibilities it will make your head spin.
"There are so many variations on these possibilities it will make your head spin."
That's the one thing that we all can agree on. It's so nuts! I'm afraid this case will never be solved.