NY - Daughter claims she lied about abuse: Conviction upheld

[formerjerseygirl]

If i recall from the report correctly,the child was not taken for medical attention at all the first time and not soon enough for any evidence to be left the second time.

 

[al66pine]

I agree that his explanation for the presence of DNA was pretty wild, but the police told him falsely that they had DNA. If the child had been raped, then they should have found DNA evidence. It seems that they found none.

BBM

musical
Respectfully disagreeing.
Per page 10 of pdf (but bottom of page marked 6 of the 160+ page report) http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/NEWS/Daryl_Kelly_Commission_Final_Report.pdf
the 2 rapes took place within ~ 1 week period.
After the first rape, her mother observed irritations in the girl's genital area.
After the second rape and sodomy, the mother observed pubic irritations again.
The girl did not receive medical attention until at least 2 days after the second rape.

I read the entire rpt several days ago, but do not recall anything about whether she was swabbed for DNA.
Even if she was tested then and dad's DNA was not found, I would not find it surprising since the med ettention was received at least 2 days after the second rape.

JM2cts and I may be wrong. :seeya:

 

[musicaljoke]

Evidence can be collected up to 120 hours after an assault, so they ought to have done a test. The first assault took place on Oct. 17., The second sometime on or before the 25th (date unknown?). The child was examined on Oct. 27th.

http://www.plea.org/legal_resources/?a=635&cat=8&pcat=4

 

[formerjerseygirl]

They ought to have done a test but did they ? According to your resource site "best opportunity for collecting evidence is within the first 24 hours." We know it was at least 2 days if not longer. I would also presume that she had brushed her teeth, ate, drank ,bathed and changed her clothes- all contributing to lessening the chance of any viable evidence being left.