>>I don't understand howanyone can think Jayelles is really on the fence - - her bias is strikingly obvious to me.

I'm not surprised that you jump to the wrong conclusions when you don't read posts properly.

NOWHERE did I say that I doubted they could link DNA-x to the crime. I said it WOULD point to an intruder IF it was found at the crime scene AND matched the markers from the other DNA found in her underwear and under her fingernails. We don't know where it was found or whether it matched the other DNA, but it would be an indisputable fact pointing to an intruder if it did.

This is the fourth time in two months (three times in the last two weeks) that you have misquoted me and attacked me on the misquote.