Search results

Actually what happened w the mixed DNA could be this:AK DNA (not blood) was already on the floor pre murder, it is common to leave DNA in your own home. During the murder, a droplet of MK blood happened to fall on that profile of AK DNA. It could also have been the case there was mixed MK and...

This is all assuming we have AK blood DNA in that mixed sample. we don't. We could have MK blood DNA from any of those scenarios that AK stepped in. MK blood DNA dripping from knife leaving the cottage or any blood droplets RG may have left. AK leaving shower steps jn that. Those would have...

Yes these posts explain why you would do the t tests and why the results from that are important, it also explains your questions about sensitivities, the author is a biochemist so he would know more than any of us about these tests

No, rg leaving the murder room could have tracked DNA out of that room and AK stepped in that. I think at some point RG had towels involved if I recall, some of the blood could have dropped on the floor. Or the blood in the bathroom, did that test positive for MK DNA? AK could have stepped in...

I don't think it is in dispute that as a scientific fact luminol can react w bleach. Sometimes when they suspect a clean up they even do luminol testing to see if bleach is present. I am not sure of the scientific process where it happens but the prosecution is not saying that bleach could not...

AK could also have stepped in blood left by RG at some point and trailed that around.

I think luminol is the standard test, and the reason we do not hear about this t test is bc the defense does not contest that it is blood. Here there was dispute so they did anothe tests and that was negative. A scientist would have to opine on sensitivities but those prints would have alot...

They also did not do control testing, that is test random areas of the room to see if you are getting similar results. There could have been mixed DNA all over that apartment. I believe they found mixed AK and RS DNA in footprints in his apartment, it does not mean anything, it is common to...

Both of us are citing to blogs w agendas so absent being a scientist I am not sure what is right. I would think that if that was blood, the sensitivity of the test would not matter - this would not have been a very small sample, where sensitivity is an issue. Both tests should have showed up...

They tested and it was showed a genetic profile for AK. There is only mixed w MK DNA MK DNA should have been in that blood print. Maybe it degrades but without showing it was MK's DNA AK was dragging all over the apartment, you cannot connect her back to the murder room At the very least...

Yes, that is what I am saying, why does not the blood (even it was blood) test positive for MK DNA?i think both sides blogs cannot always be counted on for facts, but here the same basic fact is also pointed out in a pro guilty website, and another pro innocence one. I don't think it is in...

Look at this pro guilt blog. They pretty much say the same thing saying that AK genetic material was detected in the prints. The blog would have stated MK was there too. It only states that one print had both girls DNA. The other prints did not have it. If MK DNA was not in those prints how...

:truce: This ridiculous toilet story is a new twist, with RG waste apparently causing a tiff. The old motive was the sex orgy, then it was dispute about cleaning, then also some dispute about MK studying then now a combo of a dispute about the toilet and not keeping quiet. No evidence to...

The prints only make sense if it is Mk DNA. I am sure that it an easy enough fact to know whether the prosecution said they did those tests and it tested positive for MK DNA, not MK blood, MK DNA. Even if MK DNA there is the next thing to prove and that it is blood. The tetra-whatever tests...

Yes that is my understanding but it is probably not blood. That is why the defense says the prosecutions argument is illogical1) either it is blood and does not match MK which makes no sense ; 2) the defense story that the luminol is cleaning products makes more sense given that it is not MK...

No,,DNA is separate from blood. You can still have DNA and yet have no blood and vice versa. It is disputed whether it is blood or cleaning products that is lighting up the luminol You can accept the prosecution case that it is blood, but there is no evidence that it is MK blood. I assume...

This new motive also questions why RS and especially RG would get themselves involved in a toilet fight. Nor why MK would bring it up that night. And it is still perplexing why Mk would not have flushed the toilet - did she want to keep the specimen to settle once and for all whose DNA it was...

Similarly, I think if RS had no involvement he would have ratted them out as well and made money in the tabloids. His not ratting could similarly indicate there is no ratting to be done bc no crime

It is disputed whether the luminol shows up blood or cleaning products. But I don't think it is disputed that even if blood, it is not MK's DNA. So the blood would have had to be some unknown person which does not make any sense. Quite frankly, they have to prove it is MK's blood not just...

I am 99% sure AK is innocent but I am 1000% sure that if she did it it was not w that knife, that knife would have tested positive for blood, it would be impossible not to