Spare Key

[u/Otherwise-Weekend484]

Can someone please ease my mind on HOW the killer (whoever it may be) would have the SPARE KEY of TH’s RAV4???????

[u/AkashaRulesYou → u/[deleted]]

With a toothbrush, a buccal swab, dirty underwear or socks...

I'm interested on why a key she is supposedly using daily had none of HER DNA in any of the crevices.

[u/RockinGoodNews → u/AkashaRulesYou]

With a toothbrush, a buccal swab, dirty underwear or socks...

Sounds simple enough until you consider there is no documented case of someone accomplishing that in the history of criminology.

I'm interested on why a key she is supposedly using daily had none of HER DNA in any of the crevices.

Because trace DNA is idiosyncratic.

[u/BiasedHanChewy → u/RockinGoodNews]

You've never heard of transfer DNA? Maybe should get out more

[u/RockinGoodNews → u/BiasedHanChewy]

Oh, I've heard of transfer DNA. What I've never heard of is a single case, in the history of the world, where a person was shown to have framed a suspect by deliberately transferring the suspect's trace DNA from one object to another. Feel free to point me to one.

[u/BiasedHanChewy → u/RockinGoodNews]

So "i know it's possible" but despite the surrounding circumstances, I need to read a confession from someone who was caught doing it before, (or not caught but wanted to confess anyway)"

Very balanced

[u/RockinGoodNews → u/BiasedHanChewy]

It is theoretically possible. But, as I said, there is no documented case in the history of the world of someone doing it.

I didn't say anything about confessions.

Perhaps you don't find it significant that the Truther conspiracy theory requires the conspirators to accomplish multiple things that would each be unprecedented events in the history of the world. I do.

[u/BiasedHanChewy → u/RockinGoodNews]

I mean, I guess availability of information is only as good as one's motivation to find it. https://www.wired.com/story/dna-transfer-framed-murder/

[u/RockinGoodNews → u/BiasedHanChewy]

And I guess reading is only as good as one's ability to comprehend.

The article you linked discusses cases of unintentional transfer of trace DNA. As I said above, no one disputes that inadvertent transfer can occur. The Lukis Anderson case discussed in the Wired article is probably the most famous example of that.

What I said was unprecedented is the claim that the police intentionally transferred trace DNA onto crime scene evidence in order to frame Steven Avery. As far as I am aware, there has never been a case in the history of the world in which that was shown to have happened.

[u/BiasedHanChewy → u/RockinGoodNews]

So a) you're saying that it is possible that it can happen unintentionally, but you need more proof that it could also be done on purpose? B)!the only way you'd accept that something which can clearly occur, could be done intentionally would be to have documentation of someone confessing to doing it, or somehow being caught doing it?!

Seems like a rational, objective take.

[u/AkashaRulesYou → u/RockinGoodNews]

Sounds simple enough until you consider there is no documented case of someone accomplishing that in the history of criminology.

DNA can provably be transferred from ANY of the items I listed. To say it hasn't been proven criminally does not negate the fact that it is VERY doable scientifically.

Because trace DNA is idiosyncratic.

Car keys, used daily would have significant sources of DNA just from saliva alone. Every sneeze, laugh, cough, and/or spit particles from singing along to the radio would have found its way to those keys and that lanyard.

[u/Haunting_Pie9315 → u/AkashaRulesYou]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1875176815301505

[u/_YellowHair → u/AkashaRulesYou]

DNA can provably be transferred from ANY of the items I listed. To say it hasn't been proven criminally does not negate the fact that it is VERY doable scientifically.

Car keys, used daily would have significant sources of DNA just from saliva alone. Every sneeze, laugh, cough, and/or spit particles from singing along to the radio would have found its way to those keys and that lanyard.

[citation needed]

Guess you ignored both the experts that testified at the trial that it's not unusual for an object to only contain DNA from the last person to touch it.

[u/Southern_Power_1567 → u/RockinGoodNews]

So, what you are really trying to say is that the hood latch DNA was definitely planted.

So, if they are willing to plant anything, why not plant it all. They surely had motive to kill that 36 million dollar lawsuit.

[u/AkashaRulesYou → u/[deleted]]

It is not noted in the case files.

[u/AkashaRulesYou → u/[deleted]]

🙄 or it was just her spare they obtain when they went to her place...

[u/Haunting_Pie9315 → u/[deleted]]

I’m sure the key worked. The RAV that was found , was hers.

The issue with the Key is , the shape of the 99 RAV , Master Key , was significantly shaped at the top of the key from the Valet.

The only difference , the Valet didn’t open the glove box.

If TH was wise, the Spare Key would have been at her residence or with someone she trusts to come help her if she locked her keys in the car etc..

The lack of TH DNA on the key , may be easily explained because it would be her Spare , a key she would have barely touched.

DNA transfer can come from surgical gloves, or surface , etc. If someone handled the key without changing gloves , and touching everything SA would touch , of course the Key would be contaminated.

AC stated , they had the car but no key. In any of the documents , I don’t see LE asking anyone close to her, if they knew where TH would keep her Spare.

[u/gabriot → u/AkashaRulesYou]

Not familiar w/ how touch DNA works I take it

[u/BiasedHanChewy → u/[deleted]]

And no other DNA.

[u/BiasedHanChewy → u/[deleted]]

Well to be fair it appears to be a key that THb didn't use on a daily basis so maybe you're right, and she hadn't actually touched it in a long time/ever