On 6/28/2013 12:34 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...


DNA is an entirely different matter than a witness. How did this head
bashing allegedly occur if there was no DNA on Martin's hands?

--------------------------------------------

What makes you think that DNA is automatically transmitted just because
you came in contact with something?
You are basing your whole conclusion on the *lack* of DNA. DNA is
used to either prove contact or to prove the contact wasn't by the
person accused.
Lack of DNA proves nothing.



He watches too much CSI... There are many opinions out there that the
magic done on TV crime shows is causing problems in criminal cases
because of people like Kevin who confuse the TV shows, with reality...

In article ,
says...

On 6/28/2013 12:34 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...


DNA is an entirely different matter than a witness. How did this head
bashing allegedly occur if there was no DNA on Martin's hands?

--------------------------------------------

What makes you think that DNA is automatically transmitted just because
you came in contact with something?
You are basing your whole conclusion on the *lack* of DNA. DNA is
used to either prove contact or to prove the contact wasn't by the
person accused.
Lack of DNA proves nothing.



He watches too much CSI... There are many opinions out there that the
magic done on TV crime shows is causing problems in criminal cases
because of people like Kevin who confuse the TV shows, with reality...

You stupid little twit!!!! Have you EVER heard of "reasonable doubt"???
Lack of DNA can and has done just that in several cases.

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:27:56 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 6/28/2013 12:34 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...


DNA is an entirely different matter than a witness. How did this head
bashing allegedly occur if there was no DNA on Martin's hands?

--------------------------------------------

What makes you think that DNA is automatically transmitted just because
you came in contact with something?
You are basing your whole conclusion on the *lack* of DNA. DNA is
used to either prove contact or to prove the contact wasn't by the
person accused.
Lack of DNA proves nothing.



He watches too much CSI... There are many opinions out there that the
magic done on TV crime shows is causing problems in criminal cases
because of people like Kevin who confuse the TV shows, with reality...

You stupid little twit!!!! Have you EVER heard of "reasonable doubt"???
Lack of DNA can and has done just that in several cases.

The defendant is the only one who benefits from reasonable doubt and
there is plenty in this case

Not true by ANY stretch of the imagination.

On 6/28/2013 5:04 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:27:56 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 6/28/2013 12:34 PM, Eisboch wrote:


"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...


DNA is an entirely different matter than a witness. How did this head
bashing allegedly occur if there was no DNA on Martin's hands?

--------------------------------------------

What makes you think that DNA is automatically transmitted just because
you came in contact with something?
You are basing your whole conclusion on the *lack* of DNA. DNA is
used to either prove contact or to prove the contact wasn't by the
person accused.
Lack of DNA proves nothing.



He watches too much CSI... There are many opinions out there that the
magic done on TV crime shows is causing problems in criminal cases
because of people like Kevin who confuse the TV shows, with reality...

You stupid little twit!!!! Have you EVER heard of "reasonable doubt"???
Lack of DNA can and has done just that in several cases.

The defendant is the only one who benefits from reasonable doubt and
there is plenty in this case


A good jury shouldn't base it's opinion on what's *not* there.