07-18-2012, 02:52 PM
(07-18-2012, 02:23 PM)Lady Cop Wrote:
female DNA on the tape could be from whoever might have handled that roll of tape prior to murders
Excellent point, but here's a few wrenches to throw in that:
1. Duct tape is always sold with a tight plastic cover over it which would prevent fingerprints, dna, etc from getting on the tape at the time of purchase. But no one knows if this was something they found laying around or a newly purchased item.
2. If restraint was the original intent, I personally don't believe that they were thinking about DNA and masks (gloves makes sense though). If you owe someone money they are going to want you to know who they are so that they scare you into paying the right person back hence no need for masks but gloves could be insurance.
3. They mention DNA on the tape, not fingerprints. This would suggest saliva from biting the wrapped tape loose from the roll (very common practice with duct tape). Although this could from a previous handler, as you mentioned, biting off the tape. I would say that if the dna was at the beginning layer of tape wrapped around Lisa, its anyone's guess; if the dna was found at the last part of tape wrapped around Lisa, this is saliva from the killer.
Based on leaving a butt in the garage with saliva on it, it makes sense that they would also over look the liability of biting off the tape. When you system is over run with adrenaline you tend to get sloppy.