We know how it goes, weve all been to high school. Somethings just come easier to some kids. You see those rich beautiful kids with their party house and new cars and all their friends, kids that dont have those opportunities feel slighted and hold *advertiser censored* agaisnt people who have been given a disirable life. I would say kids living in a 3 story party house are probably more taken care of then those in that apartment. If this were the case still something had to trigger them. Maybe you have somewhat of a carrie situation, no sexual assault is what its stumping me. Seems very personal. Dont think anyone would think they were bold enough to commit and actually get away with 4 murders. Maybe someone was waiting for x and e to come home, my understanding they were at home for majority of the night and then went to the frat house for a minimal amount of time and returned home before K and M. Then you may have blood transfer leading up the steps telling that he didnt have to go up the stairs. I feel as though SG is on a state of madness, he doesnt believe this should have happened to his daughter making it seem as she was not the target, thats why he is so upset. I dont think they were sleeping together, it says likely, i think they were either corralled together after encountering the perp or was aware of something going on and went to M's room being in fear and then calling ex bf for help
Sounds the girls were not only rich and beautiful (both are respective terms, anyhow), but also hard-working. Both had good grades, both invested time in social connections, so you can't say they just got all from parents. And this is something one could be jealous of, too, after all, they were born bright and smart. However, essentially, what the narrative tells me is that the world is mean. It hates less-than-perfect looks and brains, but then it hates smart and good-looking people, too, to such a degree that some of them might pay with their lives to satisfy someone's jealousy.
As to SG, I would not judge him harshly, if at all. The way i view it, he sent his daughter to the University to get education, not to be violently killed. He is proactive, yes, but not unreasonably so, for example, he tends to rely on the knowledge of a seasoned criminal investigator, not on clairvoyance. Most of all, he lost his child, he is grieving, we have no right to judge him.
They can't obtain DNA without probable cause and perhaps even a warrant, both of which are pretty high bars.
It really isn't a right to privacy as much as it is a 5th Amendment right, which is fundamental. A successful PR campaign by authorities (and media) over the last 50 years that it somehow implies guilt doesn't negate that absolute right. Anyone, innocent or not, shouldn't talk to police without an attorney present, and they certainly shouldn't be volunteering personal identifiers for a stored, collective law enforcement database.
The whole "if you had nothing to hide, you would do it" mantra is absurd.
My opinion.
It is complicated.
Imagine this. To obtain a hair with a root for mitochondrial DNA, one probably needs either the owner's agreement, or a warrant.
But what if a balding man, invited to a PD for an interview, loses his hair on leaving the said department? Who can prevent LEO to pick up the hair and put into an envelope to keep? It is not stealing as the visitor is balding and sheds hair. Nor is the LEO "obliged" to return the hair to his "rightful owner", who might have lost the right to the hair anyhow.
It is another thing that maybe, legally, having this hair amounts to nothing, as there was no chain of custody. But to use it for mitochondrial DNA comparison, the LEO can, and probably should, if he suspects the visitor, to rule him in, or out.
And if the mito DNA matches that left at the CS, well, at least LE knows that investing into Parabon services is a decent idea.
What I want to illustrate: if someone drinks and leaves DNA on the cup, or sweats and leaves DNA on leather club chair, or loses hair - when leaving his DNA, he loses his right of ownership to it. This DNA is unfit for trials only because of chain of custody issue, but if there is a match, eventually, there will be a warrant. We have no right to own our shed material, it is dust on the floor.