Being invited to the testing isn't the same as having access to the information though. Was the defense provided a copy of thece results? Was this copy of the sort that they could analyse themselves? Apparently not...hence the objection.
Having access to the testing, and knowing which points prosecutors would emphasis, is indeed different. It seems that defence had complete access to the DNA information, but did not know which DNA analysis prosecutors would focus on until ... after December, July, April? But defence did receive the information prior to trial, didn't they?