DizzyB
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2014
- Messages
- 3,056
- Reaction score
- 52,011
IMO, the DNA doesn't belong to a boyfriend if the investigation ruled out all significant others and recent exes (which I believe it did). The DNA was put through CODIS, per the court documents, so LE was actually interested in who it belonged to, at least at first.
You also don't have to rely on the Daily Mail. Multiple other news organizations picked up the story, including CNN. Honestly, I don't trust any of the MSM on this case. Seems to me the vast majority have had slanted coverage. But I do trust official court documents.
In the Morphew case, it was amazing how glovebox DNA found its way to news outlets, citing an imaginary sex offender. Barry Morphew’s attorney made the most of that dead end.
I am not surprised that there are 3 unmatched samples at the scene. That does not make them the murderer, but an attorney can certainly use that angle. I am surely in the minority here, but I would not encourage my child to come forward and supply their DNA if they had innocently been in the house prior. I would hope they would have ample evidence of BK’s guilt, without needing to have all others end up in a database with whatever long term ramifications that might bring. I might change my mind if that was the one thing that stood between acquittal and conviction. I get it, in the next few years we will all be traceable via DNA. I’m just not willing yet.