It looks like a regrettable omission from the article that the DNA evidence wasn't mentioned. The post-mortem would certainly have brought forth conclusive evidence to bring charges and a conviction.
If the coroner did not mess up the evidence. Or the child did not wash it away. Or the evidence did not support the DAs case.
These things and others could have made it advantageous not to bring up physical evidence.
ping to my post above. No DNA and no semen. I have trouble buying this one in light of those statements.
"Moynihan reminded the jury of the lack of physical evidence directly linking Lucie to the sexual assault of Valerie.
In a continued effort to incite reasonable doubt, he said the injuries on Valeries body could have been caused by something other than rape and sodomy.
If its consistent with self-inflicted injury, that would also explain why theres no physical evidence theres no semen, DNA, hairs, fibers, said Moynihan."
http://www.news10now.com/content/all%5Fnews/?ArID=19982&SecID=83