So true... and the dt stressed to the jury, over and over, the lack of anything linking jy forensically to the scene. My concern is the the pt didn't stress to the jury, over and over, that we don't always leave dna... An expert could've counteracted the dt's insinuations that his dna had to be there if he did it. It seems like a simple enough concept, that we don't always leave dna behind, but sometimes we assume that what is obvious to us, is obvious to everyone! What the jurors heard, repeatedly, is how do explain the lack of dna? And I'm a little worried it wasn't explained to them in the most logical way... that we just don't always leave our dna behind!!! I'm hoping the jury doesn't get hung up on this!
JMO