Kamille
Shine bright like a diamond
- Joined
- May 5, 2009
- Messages
- 16,781
- Reaction score
- 6,301
Question:
If they don't want to present evidence that would not bolster their case, then why did they present the hairs from the pea coat? These were not matched to Victoria right? How did this help their case? I hope they're going somewhere further with that because that one, I just don't understand. :twocents:
Because the prosecution always presents everything that is found. They don't try to hide things and twist anything in their favour. They want the right person convicted just as much as everyone else does.
And FWIW, the fact that there was no DNA from Victoria ANYWHERE on that coat or in that car says to me that there was a lot of cleaning going on in those six weeks. He's admitting that she was in the car for over 2 hours, his coat was in the car and yet, other than a blood spot on a door moulding that one wouldn't normally catch, especially when the door is probably usually closed, there is no DNA evidence of Victoria in there. Not even one hair. :waitasec:
MOO