- Jul 19, 2014
- Reaction score
It is a fairly simple to determine whether there was a Y chromosome present in the blood found. It is entirely possible that initial forensic testing indicated that at least some or most of the blood was from a woman - leading them to determine that KL was deceased. DNA testing took longer.Is there a reason you assume NO left the property alive? Let's say for a moment that there was blood evidence of 2 murder victims at the house - NO and one of the Likneses. This would mean one of the Likneses left the property with DG.
If you recall early in the investigation and Amber alert, the police suggested NO might be in the company of his grandfather AL. They even went so far as to describe his distinctive walk. They did not say "or his grandmother". Why do you think that is?
One possible theory - what if, in the CCTV footage showing DG's truck, it appeared that there was a passenger in the truck, and the passenger could be either identified as AL or at least a man-sized passenger, so definitely not KL. At that time, police may not have known with certainty if AL went along willingly with DG. Hence the AL description in the NO Amber alert.
Please be assured, I am not at all suggesting AL was part of the crime, only that police may not have known for sure early on. He could have conceivably gone with DG either against his will, at gunpoint, or as a way to try to bargain with DG - maybe with a promise of getting cash from a bank machine or something?
Then, later in the investigation, when the Airdrie property or DG's truck were searched, maybe evidence was uncovered to indicate AL was also dead. Thus the 3rd murder charge, just not attributed to that Parkhill address.
Just trying to make sense of some of these facts.