Speaking honestly, I don't thoroughly understand,with any sort of real confidence, how the DNA found mixed with AK's in the room with the broken window can be dismissed. It's found mixed in more than one spot, correct?
Why would you suppose that DNA from a spot on the other side of the cottage that tested negative for blood was the result of the murder and not months of cohabitation? It's not like Stefanoni released all her results and you have an objective summary of all DNA found. Stefanoni only released what she wanted to and hid the rest of her data, some of which was eventually released late into the original trial which showed she was lying about the work she did, some she refused to give to the independent experts and defied a judge's order as well and has not been seen to this day. Handing over the EDFs which would allow someone to analyze the entirety of the DNA work is commonplace and the only reason to keep hiding them is she has something
more to hide.
I can't wrap my head around all the excuses made for RS's DNA on that clasp.
I can't wrap my head around the idea that two other people were supposedly in that room and the only trace that could be attributed to them was found six weeks later after the scene had been trashed by forensic technicians who were done with their work. Raffaele had been to the cottage, he was at the discovery and even exerted himself at that door. Finding a low template sample that by definition has been contaminated with his DNA given the testing of numerous items is not that unusual.
Same with the knife. I don't care the test couldn't be replicated. It was there and it was a match to Meredith. If RS didn't, with his own words, didn't put her blood on that knife ...maybe I could get over my suspicion.
Raffaele had been told the day before by his lawyer the knife was a 'smokescreen' and not to worry about it because perhaps someone took the knife to the cottage to use it for its intended purpose, it was just a kitchen knife. So sitting in solitary with nothing else to do he came up with what seemed like the only possible scenario: he recalled brushing Meredith with a knife when cooking and he assumed he must have had the kitchen knife in his hand, it was the only thing he could think of and figured it had to be true. He just didn't consider the possibility it came from the lab which had tested hundreds of items with Meredith's DNA on them, and the bare trace they found fits perfectly with that scenario but not with it being evidence of that blade being used on Meredith because that knife did not match the wounds and tested negative for blood. How do all blood traces get removed and not some stray DNA as the former are far sturdier than the latter.
It was in a letter/diary he was writing, it's not like he ever told authorities this!
I can't explain away the bare very clear footprint on the bathmat.
Very clear? What do you mean by that? Have you ever actually seen this footprint? Didn't I link it for you?
Let's say for the sake of argument it's Rudy's...how did it get there? Did he fly? It was obviously a naked foot covered in blood. Who cleaned up the other bare footprints going into the bathroom?
The bathmat stain is not pure blood, it's diluted with water. That means you need a source of water of which there's plenty in the bathroom and not in the murder room. Therefore you shouldn't expect footprints from the murder room to the bathroom, odds are Rudy got blood on his foot in the process of cleaning the blood from his trousers or shoe with the bidet or shower and then stepped on the bathmat.
