DNAprint Genomics (DNAG)

[mingwan0]

terry, the subject matter concerned would be more appropriate for William Thompson to comment on IMO. He is also listed on the website devoted to the defence of the case. I can understand DNAP being contacted to review the case in the context of the potential use of DNA Witness, but I do not see why the defeence team would want such statements from somebody who has never given evidence in court. Thompson has and would have been a more "credible" source IMO.

Irrespective, as I have said before I would like to see DNA Witness used to exonerate those falsly imprisoned. It does not look as if that is going to be the case here.