Holdontoyourhat
Former Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
- Messages
- 5,299
- Reaction score
- 12
Some DNA traces were found that could be attributed to a male not living in the house. Somehow this DNA made its way onto more than one article of clothing that JBR was wearing at the time she was murdered. That was big news in 2008. The DA used this evidence to support the argument that the R's should be treated as victims and not suspects.
JMK admitted to the murder of JBR. That was also big news. He didn't match the DNA and couldn't place himself in Boulder on the date in question, so LE ruled him out as a suspect. But not before he made the news, and made at least one or two handwriting analysts believe he had written the note.
Despite these IDI media bombshells, RDI would stay its course. If a IDI bombshell can't cause RDI to waiver, how then would a very subtle but key piece of evidence get any attention?
It wouldn't now and probably didn't then.
Presuming RDI was the thought for the day back in 1996, subtle but key evidence was likely waived.
JMK admitted to the murder of JBR. That was also big news. He didn't match the DNA and couldn't place himself in Boulder on the date in question, so LE ruled him out as a suspect. But not before he made the news, and made at least one or two handwriting analysts believe he had written the note.
Despite these IDI media bombshells, RDI would stay its course. If a IDI bombshell can't cause RDI to waiver, how then would a very subtle but key piece of evidence get any attention?
It wouldn't now and probably didn't then.
Presuming RDI was the thought for the day back in 1996, subtle but key evidence was likely waived.