cami
Keep your fork......
Agree. I believe there isn't enough "points" to distinguish or test/what ever you call it (just a working mama here). But I don't understand considering the horrific crime, that this particular print, where is was found and all, how it can be "brushed aside" as if unimportant. This is the only piece of evidence that makes me second guess myself occasionally. Still believe she's guilty, just wish there was a better explanation for this print.:waitasec:
I don't think it is. I am in no doubt it's Darlie's print. She described an over 6ft tall intruder. The print is small perhaps from a juvenile or an adult woman. No way that tiny print matches the large intruder she described. And why only one smudged print? That place was a blood bath. Read Cron's testimony on the print and also read Jantz's findings. Even he puts Darlie back in the guilty yard with this print and he was hired by her defense.