Falconer's DNA has absolutely no connection to the murder scene and you know it, so I suggest you stop typing the poor guy's name on forums. And while we're on the subject - do you honestly believe if SK ejaculated at the scene there wouldn't be far more DNA than 'traces' of semen on a shirt? This is why it can safely be considered an innocent transfer, i.e. obviously not transferred at the scene - not relevant to the murder.
I'd like to make two points here. Firstly, the post was about the fact that Dobbie's claim of "no unknown DNA samples" was false. Secondly, no-one could have known until late 2006 more than 3 years after the murder whether or not Falconer's DNA was linked to the murder - another example of a shoddy investigation. (Please note, neither of these points casts any shadow of suspicion on Falconer.)
What I do have some difficulty with is Falconer's own account of what he was doing that night and first thing the following morning. He lied about where he got the condoms (remember this is more than 3 years later, and Luke's already been in prison nearly two of those, so Falconer was not in any real "trouble"). When asked why he lied (rather than, for example, the believable "I don't remember, it was years ago") he said "I had to say something." OK, I agree, not the end of the world, but why deliberately lie? But it's his account of his actions on June 30th which interest me most.
According to where he said he walked (which could be accepted as broadly correct given the original claim of the distance of the condom from the body) he could not possibly have failed to see Jodi's body, both on the way down, and on the way back. If he used the exact route he claims to have used, he would have had to literally step over her body. That tells us two things - either Falconer is lying, or Jodi's body was not there when Falconer was - and that means Jodi was not murdered at the spot behind the wall at 5.15pm. So which was it, and why, 12 years later, do we still not know the answers?
Lithium's argument here about Kelly's DNA is, of course Lithium's own opinion posted as fact. I have never, ever suggested that Kelly ejaculated at the scene, or have I ever seen anyone else make such a claim. However, it is not certain that, even if he had, there would have been "far more DNA than traces on a shirt." That's a whole other discussion which I don't have time to go into in detail this morning - I can come back to it later tomorrow if anyone wants to go through it.
But
This is why it can safely be considered an innocent transfer, i.e. obviously not transferred at the scene - not relevant to the murder.
Sorry, Lithium, but the prosecution's argument, that semen and sperm heads may have been transfered from one item of Jodi's clothing to another by rainwater diffusion
at the scene would have to stand for
any semen, sperm heads, or any other bodily fluid containing identifiable DNA profiles, regardless of how those fluids got there. Or it's dismissed as total nonsense, and the "innocent explanation" for the DNA on the shirt evaporates with the rainwater!
