If it were an iPhone, they would have had the identity of the person who owned it sooner and had the iPhone been found next to a murder victim and the owner had a white Elantra missing a front plate found to be circling around in the neighborhood of the house, that owner would have been on the list to look for other DNA/inconsistencies (like the iPhone user supposedly was never in the house, so how did the phone get left there?). If the iPhone had been turned off, at a time when a car similar to the one identified in the cameras was circling the area and the phone had the owners DNA and the owner owned a car just like the one in the cameras and all of that lined up with the killings, that would have made it more suspicious. If the iphone case was left behind next to a murder victim and the iphone was missing, but the wounds matched being beaten to death with an iPhone, then if the case had DNA, they'd run with that. That is called logic and the basis for most detective work.But that’s what I say. In the party house there are tons of DNAs. People living in the vicinity are not always the most upstanding citizens. Some were arrested in WA and then case closed, another big question but probably to my state, why it was closed, Surely involves lots of work, pois, maybe suspects. The police has to check everyone’s alibi. Leaving a sheath in that room is the great way to direct the investigation.
And imagine it were not a knife, but an iPhone? Don’t you think the conclusion would have been the same? “A phone with a person’s DNA, probably lost it and didn’t notice, he didn’t belong in that house.”
Anyhow - you explain that the source of the other DNA could have been scratched. Did they look at his scratches after the murder? No, and they were slow with that DNA. But, if the victim could have scratched someone in a bar, someone could have placed that sheath in the room.
If you are trying to say that the spot under the downstairs toilet that no one cleaned in the past year needs to be tested, I don't think there is any CSI who would do that unless some other evidence leads them there. Random testing of every available surface is not a prudent use of resources. TV has a better budget than a lot of labs actually do.
Some things in the media I don't understand, but will wait patiently to see the truth of the matter. Media does not always tell the truth or have the truth. But someone stole my knife and sheath but left only this tiny bit of my DNA on it and placed it next to a murder victim to try and frame me for a mass murder? No. Just no. Had he been in the house previously, maybe. If he had known anyone in the house, maybe. Had he even reported it LOST, maybe. I am fence sitter extra ordinaire. No fence on the sheath DNA for me. Zero reason for it to be exactly as it is except for someone thinking they had gotten ALL the DNA off. If you want to frame someone, you do a better job than that.
And we don't know all of what was checked. Do you think the media has ALL the evidence? I certainly don't. Just more of MOO