I am wondering if anyone else is curious about this. I apologize if it has already been discussed.
According to the Bail Application for Heuermann:
Female human hairs were recovered from victims Brainard-Barnes, Waterman, and Costello. The hairs did not belong to any of the victims. Forensic Lab 2 concluded that "the DNA sample recovered from bottles outside of the residence of Defendant Heuermann (i.e. Heuermann's wife) and the Female Hair on Costello indicates that the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) profiles are the same at all compared positions ... as per EMPOP database, [and would] exclude 99.98% of the North American population from the Female Hair on Costello." Forensic Lab 2 also compared "the profile associated with the DNA sample from Heuermann's wife to one of the two female hairs recovered on the remains of Waterman." Lab 2 again concluded that the mitochondrial DNA profiles are the same, and would exclude 99.69% of the North American population. However, "it is significant that RH's wife cannot be excluded from from either the female hairs recovered on the remains of Waterman and Costello."
Although she was out of the state during the disappearance and murder of both Waterman and Costello, and therefore appears not to be involved, the Bail Application states that it remains undetermined whether Defendant Heuermann's wife was out-of-state during Brainard-Barnes' disappearance and murder. The hair found on a restraint used on Brainard-Barnes and the hairs found on Waterman and Costello each belonged to a female in mitochondrial haplogroup K1c2. However, many females (and males) of European descent belong to this haplogroup. There is no mention made of any additional mtDNA analysis being done on the Brainard-Barnes' hair by Lab 2 as there was on the hairs found on Waterman and Costello.
I know that PCAs do not have to reveal every bit of evidence and analysis, but this seems to me to be an obvious omission from the Bail Application.
Since Heuermann's wife may not be able to produce documentation for an alibi proving she was out of the state during Barnes' disappearance and murder, is law enforcement somehow trying to squeeze info from her by hanging this over her head? It would go something like this: we are trying to protect you because we don't think that you were involved so we therefore did not reveal that mtDNA analysis on the Barnes' hair shows it most likely belongs to you just like the other hairs found on the other victims. In exchange for this favor, of not letting public opinion run wild with the thought that it's your hair and you can't prove you were not there since the records/evidence no longer exists, we need you to cooperate and tell us every single thing you know about your husband's activities since you first met him. She cannot be made to testify against him in a court since they are married, but it would be a pretty slick ploy by law enforcement to get lots of info about his comings and goings.
Is anybody else thinking this way? Or, am I way off here?
bnn.network
