This seems like a pioneering case. Can they convict him of murder based just on DNA on her coat? How can the prosecution or the defense prove anything about anything else from 40+ years ago? We have heard nothing about him having any other criminal record.
I don’t know the legality of this but, big brother is watching.
Yep. No one is whispering privately about him being either a known criminal or connected to the girl. That’s unusual in small towns.
This seems a long way from over.
“Can they convict him of murder based just on DNA on her coat?”
If i was a juror on such a case that was that old and there was not any other meaningful evidence one way or the other besides the DNA, I wouldn’t vote to convict ...