- Jun 27, 2019
- Reaction score
It could be that the snap DNA being 'single source' was easier/quicker to analyze? There could well be a lot of other DNA on the sheath but is not single source, so it took longer to analyze. I can't imagine a knife sheath laying on a bed next to someone who is bleeding profusely and not picking up at least some of their DNA. (This is all layman speculation - I don't know anything about DNA evidence).
The snap is the place that any forensic person would test first. I am assuming there is yet more DNA to be found on the sheath. The snap is the one place a person *must* touch in order to use the knife or to put it away again. The upper part of the sheath should have DNA in more than one place, especially as it appears the sheath was not always on a belt but sometimes, perhaps, in a pocket. Moving the knife from the pocket would leave more DNA (on the outside of the sheath).
One always tests the most obvious place first, IMO.
I believe his intent was to murder people in their beds. I also believe he held the knife in the handshake or saber position and used it as it is instructed by military people who are trained to use that knife. IOW, not like the stabber in Psycho, but using body weight and momentum. I believe he likely got on top of the bedding to reach some of the victims and very likely forced the knife through bedding.
We need a knife knowledgeable person to weigh in on whether heavy gloves are consistent with this scenario. Or did he wear surgical gloves, as he apparently did in PA when visiting the grocery store. If he planned to throw away the knife, perhaps he wore no gloves at all.