Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: VRWC_minion
Actually, I just found out about the 4th. The blood on the jacket. I thought the jacket just had some fibers on it. What contradicts that ?

Allow me to clarify. The three points (all in the MH).

(1) the hair in the sink trap.

(2)The print under the edge of the cabinet.

(3)The DNA evidence. This is what needs clarifying. There was one spot by the bathroom that testing was done on and a DNA test showed a PERFECT match to DNA from Danielle. The second spot was on the JACKET, and a DNA test showed a PERFECT match to DNA from Danielle. There is still major debate as to whether either spot was BLOOD. The spots were way too small, were reddish brown-like in color, and (FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN SO FAR) did not have tests done to prove they were blood (ALTHOUGH CYNCOOPER SAYS DIFFERENT).

She could be correct about certain tests being done, but others have stated that these tests can give false positives very easily. So, I guess it depends on what you WANT TO BELIEVE.

Anyway the two spots in the MH I listed as ONE POINT of yours.

Did that help?

1,004 posted on 07/25/2002 7:04:22 PM PDT by UCANSEE2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 982 | View Replies ]


To: UCANSEE2
Just to be clear, whatever was near bathroom in RV and on the jacket, the DNA matched and the defense isn't arguing it ? There only argument is whether its blood or not ?
1,008 posted on 07/25/2002 7:09:51 PM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1004 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson