I'm not sure how a DNA test would show that someone had not had sex at all. Can someone explain?
Based on my limited understanding...
If any sex at all takes place...there necessarily MUST be some DNA evidence (semen, hair, skin, etc), and in the case of a condom, there is lubricant, latex, etc.
It appears that there is ZERO trace evidence to indicate any sexual interaction.
not the DNA test itself, but the rape kit the hospital administers to people claiming to be raped
It can't show if someone has had sex or not, it can only show the presence of genetic material.
The evidence she didn't have sex had to have come from medical reports.
"Attorneys Wade Smith and Joe Cheshire said the tests showed no DNA from any player was found on the woman, her clothes or her belongings. The medical results showed the woman hadn't even had sex, the attorneys said."
http://www.nbc17.com/news/8602612/detail.html
Even consensual sex can leave minor bruising and, uh, friction burn...
No DNA at all - outside her own, of course. Given the allegation of oral, anal, and vaginal rape, and the reported lack of DNA, latex, lubricant, etc., the detailed DNA test (including the exam to take the swabs) can be read this way.
Originally, a visual exam was done that was reported to "be consistent with rape". It sounds as though the detailed exam done for the DNA testing was not consistent with rape.
Instead of Tawana Brawley, who concocted her story to explain why she'd had sex and stayed overnight somewhere, I'd look to the Romany who tried to rip off a hotel at Disney World. There the girl had sex with her brother or uncle, then they arranged a "rape scene", and took it from there.
They instantly had a lawyer, of course.
Here, the "rape scene" was concocted after the fact, and there was no sex ~ not even with a brother or uncle.
I'd say this woman and her girlfriend have a creativity deficit.