Like I said, it proves the person who left it was there, it does not prove that no one else was there.
Like I said, it proves the person who left it was there, it does not prove that no one else was there.So... If the victim says there was only a single bad guy AND the rape-kit captures an unquestionably adequate DNA sample that could have only been left by the as yet unidentified bad guy AND that DNA fully excludes me as a suspect -- you maintain that the DNA comparison does NOT prove I am innocent (or "not guilty" if you prefer)?
Given that simple, unfortunately rather common example, do you still maintain that DNA can not prove innocence?