OK:
Why are you calling it a semen stain. Do you have transcripts describing this evidence? Wasn't the value of the bloody prints on/near/around it considered more important than a stain they couldn't date?
Why does evidence have to be collected immediately from a SEALED and protected crime scene?
If the item is photographed in its original position does it matter if it is moved?
How much evidence is appropriate? How much would they have had to clean up? The knives, the footprints, get rid of clothes, wash off in bathroom... what else?
*Why do you continue to post about 'all over the crime scene' and a 'buttload' of evidence of RG when there were only 5 instances of his dna in the room?
After all, he said he was invited in by Meredith. Why not believe him too?
If he is considered a liar, then there is no way IMO not to view AK and RS in the same way as being proven liars.
A stain on a pillow under the hips of a rape and murder victim would be important - if it was Rudy's and more degraded then it would tend to show that they had perhaps been involved before. It could also be additional evidence of Rudy's guilt for that crime...matching semen stain to what is on/in the victim. It is not for LE to make judgments on what value to give evidence at the scene, they should collect it. It's a piece of the puzzle, and every piece is needed to complete the puzzle.
Evidence that is not immediately collected is ripe for additional contamination. As is proven by the videos, the investigators went from room to room without changing booties and they collected evidence without changing gloves each time. Sealing a crime scene is useless when the people who are allowed to go in are inept and proven capable of contaminating the scene and the evidence therein.
Because after the evidence is moved it contaminates the other things it comes in contact with and likewise those things contaminate it. Dude this should be a serious no-brainer.
You photograph it and then collect it - you don't throw it around the room and let it come in contact with other objects because microscopically things will show up that one cannot see in a photograph and may not have originally been there but for the throwing around!!
RG's evidence is the only viable evidence - there is no evidence to suggest a clean up - there is no smearing of a clean up under luminol testing and there was no evidence of bleach or blood on the knife.
RG left bloody footprints! He left fluids and fecal matter. How did AK and RS clean up only their footprints without leaving a clean smear only visible with luminol?
Is there any evidence to suggest MK would have asked Rudy over? Did any of her friends know she was seeing him? Was he even the type she would see - seems she has higher standards than Rudy, given her judgments of AK.
You simply can't make this fit. I know you want to, I know you try hard but it does not fit.
I came into this case after the movie was released and am 99% pro prosecution on this board. Looking into the evidence (what there is of it) more in depth - I can't believe this case. It's a complete sham and would be a hysterical embarrassment for a DA in a modern American court.