Trial Strategy

[hroark2112]

While that's certainly interesting, it is easily explained away.

They were married, after all, and I'm sure they were close enough at many points in the evening for him to touch her.

I'm not saying he did or didn't do it, but the presence of you DNA on a spouse's skin after you were together at a party that night really doesn't say much. If it were a stranger's DNA, that would be much more meaningful.

Just my .02

 

[per_curiam]

Sure they were married, HROARK. Married, with a tentative separation agreement over which Brad was incensed. Brad had been reading her emails, tampering with her phone conversations, controlling her in many ways. There had been bad arguments in public (at the preschool and at home) which were witnessed or heard. They hadn't been "intimate" since Katie's conception. They shared separate bedrooms. Brad's infidelities had been discovered by Nancy. Do you really think that Brad had lovingly caressed Nancy's throat the night before she was strangled to death? Do you really think that his "touch DNA" was on her neck because they were, after all, "married"? I don't think his DNA was on her neck due to any of Brad's loving touches due to being married to her. They were on the skids toward divorce whether he liked it or not.

 

[raisincharlie]

While that's certainly interesting, it is easily explained away.

They were married, after all, and I'm sure they were close enough at many points in the evening for him to touch her.

I'm not saying he did or didn't do it, but the presence of you DNA on a spouse's skin after you were together at a party that night really doesn't say much. If it were a stranger's DNA, that would be much more meaningful.

Just my .02

hroark,

I'm sure Kurtz will certainly make as much argument as possible along those lines and he may make a few points unless the ME has a great deal more information in his notes than what he put in the Autopsy Report. The autopsy defines the absence of hemorrhages along the strap muscles and the hyoid bone is not actually broken but has only a vertical linear fracture which seems a bit odd if one wants to claim a person strangled Nancy using their hands.

One has to wonder if there is a relationship between the linear mark noted on Nancy's neck and the linear fracture of the hyoid bone...

 

[piedmont]

MAYBE his DNA on her neck could be explained away, but it really seems a stretch to me. I think the simplest explanation is usually correct, not always, which would be that his DNA is there because he touched her neck, probably in some manner that killed her. Does common sense enter into any of this?

 

[raisincharlie]

MAYBE his DNA on her neck could be explained away, but it really seems a stretch to me. I think the simplest explanation is usually correct, not always, which would be that his DNA is there because he touched her neck, probably in some manner that killed her. Does common sense enter into any of this?

Common sense at this point - hard to assign any based on this information if it is true. Don't know where on her neck, don't know the source, such as from blood, from spit, from perspiration, a finger or partial hand print - who knows other than LE/DA at this point, and Mr. Kurtz. If true, it is also true Kurtz is already plotting and planning and inventing excuses. It only takes one juror.

 

[SleuthyGal]

Very interesting indeed. Touch DNA is the finding of a perp's skin cells on an object or person in enough quantities that copying/multiplying the cells is possible to obtain a DNA profile. It doesn't tell you when the skin cells were left on the item/person, only that they were discovered. I personally think of Touch DNA as the weakest of the DNA types, though that may be inaccurate.

It has a negative association to me because it was used to 'clear' the Ramsey's (incorrectly, IMHO). But that's neither here nor there...if they've got a link between Brad's hands and Nancy's neck, it's not something that can just be dismissed though Kurtz will certainly try his best, I assume.

 

[SleuthyGal]

I wonder if they tested Nancy's necklace to see if BC DNA was on that too. He removed that necklace from her neck (at least that is the theory since he had the necklace in a drawer in the residence).

Touch DNA isn't enough, IMHO, but it's one link in the chain that could be compelling.

 

[per_curiam]

In the realm of orthopedics, the proper name for a "broken" bone is fracture. I will add that there are different types of fractures (ex: comminuted, compound) fracture. Fractures are broken, splintered or crushed bones. So, the break is categorized.

 

[Star12]

BTW - It was BC's own words that said they had not had relations since Katie was conceived.

And I would think it would be interesting to know just where on her neck that touch DNA was found.

 

[RaleighNC]

What, Star - you thinking it's going to be hard to say it was a "loving caress" that led his hands to her neck?

Hands on a neck is a pretty personal thing - it's not like arm, or hand, or even leg in the summer.

 

[raisincharlie]

Very interesting indeed. Touch DNA is the finding of a perp's skin cells on an object or person in enough quantities that copying/multiplying the cells is possible to obtain a DNA profile. It doesn't tell you when the skin cells were left on the item/person, only that they were discovered. I personally think of Touch DNA as the weakest of the DNA types, though that may be inaccurate.

It has a negative association to me because it was used to 'clear' the Ramsey's (incorrectly, IMHO). But that's neither here nor there...if they've got a link between Brad's hands and Nancy's neck, it's not something that can just be dismissed though Kurtz will certainly try his best, I assume.

Just my opinion, DNA is DNA regardless of the source so the science itself is precise. What is wrong with Touch DNA and what makes it the "weakest" of the DNA methods is the theory behind Touch DNA, especially in cases where a victim and the accused live in the same space. It is a given that the accused's DNA should be present if one is testing from skin cells whether there is physical contact or not. This is what tracking dogs are actually following - scent from skin cells rafted away during movement.

Just my opinion the only applicability of Touch DNA is when a complete unknown and unrelated DNA is discovered. If SBI checked enough they could have found Katie and Bella's DNA or DNA from folks at the party as well with Touch DNA. It is in this case the "weakest link" and I think it is a given that Kurtz will put up a formidible arguement if the basis is indeed skin cells as the source.

 

[hroark2112]

I'm absolutely NOT saying that the DNA didn't get there in the last moments of NC's life. I'm just saying it's easy to explain away when two adults live together, were at a party together, have kids together, etc.. I'm not trying to defend Brad in any way either.

If I were a lawyer defending a control freak like Brad, it would be easy to explain. He's SO concerned about appearances, maybe Nancy's collar was popped up, or half up. Brad reached in, fixed her collar, and made a comment about how she can't even dress herself. Totally plausible, not a loving caress, and easily believable based on Brad's known controlling tendencies. Of course, Nancy isn't around to refute that, so that's reasonable doubt about that specific issue.

per_curiam, please note that I never said "loving caress" or anything like that. I am well aware of what has been posted & published about their relationship, and harbor no thoughts that there was anything of a romantic nature going on. My personal opinion, which I stated, was that it is fairly easily explained away. I am sure that there were no "loving caresses" exchanged between them, and any physical contact, other than the obvious final contact, would have been done purely for appearance sake.

Now, if MY DNA was on her neck, that would be a different issue.

 

[caffeinatd]

does this touch DNA follow a pattern around her neck? or is it just an isolated area that was tested?

 

[per_curiam]

I'm absolutely NOT saying that the DNA didn't get there in the last moments of NC's life. I'm just saying it's easy to explain away when two adults live together, were at a party together, have kids together, etc.. I'm not trying to defend Brad in any way either.

If I were a lawyer defending a control freak like Brad, it would be easy to explain. He's SO concerned about appearances, maybe Nancy's collar was popped up, or half up. Brad reached in, fixed her collar, and made a comment about how she can't even dress herself. Totally plausible, not a loving caress, and easily believable based on Brad's known controlling tendencies. Of course, Nancy isn't around to refute that, so that's reasonable doubt about that specific issue.

per_curiam, please note that I never said "loving caress" or anything like that. I am well aware of what has been posted & published about their relationship, and harbor no thoughts that there was anything of a romantic nature going on. My personal opinion, which I stated, was that it is fairly easily explained away. I am sure that there were no "loving caresses" exchanged between them, and any physical contact, other than the obvious final contact, would have been done purely for appearance sake.

Now, if MY DNA was on her neck, that would be a different issue.

And, I never said that you said "loving caress", if you will note. I was just responding to your post. Re-read that original post of yours, and then mine, if you'd like to. Sometimes absurdity is a good response to absurdity!

 

[per_curiam]

While that's certainly interesting, it is easily explained away.

They were married, after all, and I'm sure they were close enough at many points in the evening for him to touch her.

I'm not saying he did or didn't do it, but the presence of you DNA on a spouse's skin after you were together at a party that night really doesn't say much. If it were a stranger's DNA, that would be much more meaningful.

Just my .02

There's your original post to which I refer, HROARK. You were saying that "they were married, after all,..." and I responded sarcastically, meaning that surely you didn't think that because they were married that Brad had touched her with a loving caress... I didn't accuse you of saying "loving caress". I doubt, in my mind, that the only reason Brad would get close to Nancy at that time would be to get in her face while arguing, or maybe even to strangle her, or pick her up and take her somewhere to dump her body.

 

[piedmont]

I can't see even someone worried about appearances touching a spouse for any reason except violence toward them when in their hostile situation. Can the DNA get there wafting thru the air? -I know skin cells do that all the time-that's how we get dust, right? It may be weak evidence standing alone-not sure-but when added to everything else, it simply builds the case like all the other evidence does. Why are we so reluctant to follow the clues to the obvious conclusion?

 

[hroark2112]

I don't think anyone is reluctant to follow things to an obvious conclusion. I just don't think that DNA on her body from Brad is that big of a deal, and won't have much bearing. Heck, a sneeze could have put plenty of DNA on her, didn't poor Brad have allergies? Again, if it were touch DNA from a total stranger, I think it would carry much more weight.

I think his DNA under her fingernails (referring to the scratches that weren't on his neck) will be the real nail in the DNA coffin, and I'd bet lunch that the DA has that in his report and hasn't released that to the public. There's no way to explain skin torn off his neck under her nails without him saying "We had a fight" or something similar, and to my knowledge he hasn't said that at all.

 

[Sewing_Buddy]

While that's certainly interesting, it is easily explained away.

They were married, after all, and I'm sure they were close enough at many points in the evening for him to touch her.

I'm not saying he did or didn't do it, but the presence of you DNA on a spouse's skin after you were together at a party that night really doesn't say much. If it were a stranger's DNA, that would be much more meaningful.

Just my .02

Are you referring to Brad and Nancy being "together at a party"? I thought it was established that only Nancy had been at the party that night...not Brad.

 

[SueY]

Are you referring to Brad and Nancy being "together at a party"? I thought it was established that only Nancy had been at the party that night...not Brad.

I think they arrived at the party separately (Brad stopped for beer on his way from work), and left separately (Brad took the girls home).
July 11, 2008: The couple attend a cookout at a neighbor's house. They've been fighting that day. They leave the party separately.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2864/story/1271322.html

 

[per_curiam]

Yes, HROARK, "poor Brad" had allergies. He also stated in his deposition to Alice Stubbs that his allergies had been "...cured..." by his allergy MD. Cured, I tell ya! I don't think that they can "cure" allergies. Well, desensitize and relieve symptoms. But yeah, Brad can still sneeze today if he so happens to.

I love how those skin cells "do that"...waft through the air and make dust. lol