I thought it odd the defense in one Motion doesn't want testing of evidence but yet in another Motion the defense doesn't want to give up evidence.
So I have been researching what the term CONSUMPTIVE TESTING OF EVIDENCE means.
Apparently, from various searching I looked into, it is evidence so small that the testing itself can ruin the evidence, thus this evidence cannot be tested again. Also, it often refers to DNA samples that are so small that testing ruins the DNA sample so only one test can be run.
It is possible in this specific case that the defense wants to be in charge of testing CONSUMPTIVE EVIDENCE and get their own results before the evidence is rendered useless for testing.
The Daybell case specifically mentions this subject.
The prosecution in the Chad Daybell and Lori Vallow-Daybell triple murder case filed a motion seeking “consumptive testing of forensic evidence” on Monday.
www.rexburgstandardjournal.com
The prosecution in the Chad Daybell and Lori Vallow-Daybell triple murder case filed a motion seeking “consumptive testing of forensic evidence” on Monday.
As the name implies, consumptive testing means testing what remains of DNA and leaving little to none of the original DNA evidence. The original DNA samples are quite small. Once the testing is done, there won’t be any more DNA left to do another test.