Hi, Schlock, nice to see your post.
Ditto!
You're arguing from an impossibility. How on earth could it be established that the evidence with Clark's DNA was "under lock and key at all times when he wasn't wearing it"? And you also implicitly arguing for the existence of a Disney-like elf who ran around shortly after this perfect murder gathering several items associated with Clark, including a pen brilliantly snatched just hours after the murder.
I still stand by my theory. The pen could have been snatched when Clark left the basement during the fire alarm. He was using it up until around that time. Then he switched to a different color pen after returning. So either he dropped it into the chase during the fire alarm when disposing of the body, or someone else did. Since Clark was seen on video leaving the building during the alarm, that rules him out.
Also, if the killer was able to grab the green pen, maybe he also used Clark's pass. We don't know if he told police if he had left it behind when exiting during the alarm, or if they detected card swipes under his name when he was seen on video having exited the basement.
That's why it's important to trace all of Clark's movements relating to card swipes and him being physically in the lab, and at the same time, tracing everyone else's steps via the scans. What kind of gap in time do you think Clark would have needed to commit the crime and then transport the body, without being seen? This would also have to include the time to clean the crime scene(s) and change his bloodied clothing.
The blood on the boot is hard to explain for my theory. If Clark was wearing his boots when he committed the murder, and blood got on it, then wouldn't he have been seen on camera having removed them when he exited the lab the many times before he finally left before the day? Also, this would mean that if someone else was trying to frame Clark, the boot was soiled by the killer AFTER Clark left for the day. The blood may have been transferred as the laces were being removed, or they were intentionally splashed to further place Clark under scrutiny.
We don't yet know, of course, whether Jennifer's DNA is on evidence, but its said existence would not likely indicate that there is something wrong with evidence. Instead, it most likely would prove the obvious: That housemate fiancees frequently touch and fold their boyfriend's clothes. Police announcements that Jennifer is not a suspect would seem to indicate that her non-presence at the Amistad building was verified. DNA evidence combined that with indications of that absence would actually strengthen the forensic evidence against Clark.
I agree that her non-presence is important. I don't believe she was personally involved in the act. But the presence of someone else's DNA (possibly not hers, but definitely not Clark's) just goes to show that there has been contamination or someone else was involved.
The reasons that the card swipes are important should be clear: 1. They helped identify Clark as a suspect. 2. Like the video records, they provide us with a reliable timeline from which investigators can work. That their evidence intertwines with forensic evidence demonstrates the strength of the case.
I agree Card swipes are important. They can also be used exonerate Clark. If Clark's Lawyers are really smart, they will argue down the smoking gun nature of the swipes by showing that other people were scanned in around the same time as Clark, or that the gaps in time between Clark being alone and people being around made it impossible for him to commit the murder, conceal the body and clean up the crime scenes.