The article may be a bit confusing. The DNA that later exonerated them wasn’t used in the trial, and it only came up several years later when it was cross-matched from another case.
When did they find the orginal DNA? I’m saying if it was there under her nails when
she was found then it didn’t match either of the boys. Now I agree when they found a
match years later it was the item that cleared them. It seems to me a good defense
attorney would have hammered on the unknown DNA at the trial. JMO