[Freedom2specul8]

It depends on if there is a grab, the claw, slip claw again. Of course you are correct..but the defendant said he got the scratches trying to get his rv unstuck from sand. It's a lame excuse IMHO. Maybe there was a tool that kept poking him, in a row or something. If there is his DNA under her nails, assuming they are left..he's toast. They may have pics of more markings..but haven't introduced them yet.

[CAPPSMADNESS]

Not a lame excuse at all...... i got real banged up trying to help my husband unstick our honda from a ditch last winter. I guess the reason I doubt that these are defensive scratch marks is that one would expect to see more than one scratch -two in a row or three in a row - but not one long scratch. It kinda reminds me of a sticker-bush scratch

[CAPPSMADNESS]

From what I have read, the little girls hands were about the only things that were reasonably intact - and they were removed from the body and sent to a seoerate lab.

I sincerely doubt that if her tiny body was that horribly decomposed, then any trace DNA is also decompsed, if in fact, any remains. The supposed condition of the body is such that I doubt that any trace evidence, save maybe fiber evidence, will remain - the same thing happened in the Barnes case, and even though Barbara's killer is well known, there is no evidence to convict the SOB and today he is a free man.

I hope that they truely have the right man in this case.