Jupiter812
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2011
- Messages
- 1,744
- Reaction score
- -15
My take is that she probably misspoke and meant that the tooth would be removed for the DNA portion of the investigation vs. the dental records comparison.
Definitely possible. Or sloppy reporting which we know by now is not uncommon in this case. Recall the recent video Lohud made in which the same audio track segment was used twice. However, it seems Lohud has more direct access to info about the case, and they report what info they have more frequently.