[Sandylapper]

Correct, IF they have Scott's fingerprints. But IF they have his fingerprints on the tape, then why did they waste time at prelim with one hair?

[Cloe]

Good point!

[Velveeta]

Saving the best for last?

Something stuck in my memory bank from the last hearing that I've been pondering. Distaso stated to the Judge (I'm paraphrasing) that nothing had changed with the status of the affidavits for the search warrants so they should not be released. Distaso said they hadn't introduced them at the PH, specifically for that purpose, to keep the evidence sealed.

So we don't know diddly about either the first or second warrants for the search of the house. There's alot more evidence to come, I'm convinced of that! ;-)

[drjulie]

"Correct, IF they have Scott's fingerprints. But IF they have his fingerprints on the tape, then why did they waste time at prelim with one hair?"

It's true that there was quite a bit of time spent on one hair in the pliers, even though there could be an innocent explanation for what they found. I wonder if the legal wrangling over MtDNA is important because they want to use it for other evidence (e.g., maybe they have evidence of Scott's hair on the tape, he just had a hair cut after all). I think there is probably more forensic evidence. I would quite surprised if they couldn't get something off of the body and/or debris that washed up with it.

[Canadian Outrage]

They weren't wasting time with one hair. I would save the fingerprint for the trial also. It is by far the more powerful physical type of evidence and therefore the best for a Jury to consider. As to the hair, I find it quite powerful since not many peoples markers could match SHARON ROCHA.