Three DNA experts were confronted about their contrasting statements concerning the results.
The Swiss expert, working on behalf of the suspect's lawyer, came to different conclusions than the French and Luxembourg experts.
Audio in Luxembourgish.
In his analysis, the Swiss expert insisted on the possibility of indirect contact, and that Ana Lopes could have transferred the DNA of her son onto the tape. However, the French expert is convinced that the contact must have been direct, as indicated by the DNA results which match with that of a male member of the suspect's family.
The Swiss expert spoke of further possibilities. Another person could have manipulated the adhesive tape. He believes that, if it had been direct contact, then more DNA would have been found.
When the president of the judicial court referred to the absence of indications that the son had touched the tape, the Swiss expert argued that this was a possibility after all. While the Luxembourgish expert also considers it possible that DNA transferred via the son, the French expert remains strongly opposed to this view.
Even if the likelihood of indirect contact remains fairly small, there was certainly transmission of the DNA of the son or the accused, the Swiss expert pointed out. It would be difficult to favour one hypothesis over another.
The judge then asked whether it would be easier if the perpetrator wore gloves, touched himself, and thus transferred the DNA. But the Swiss expert thought that this would involve too many suppositions.
Indirect contact would also be an explanation for the fact that the DNA of two men were found. The probability of indirect contact should therefore not be ruled out completely for the moment.
The trial continues on Tuesday.
Ana Lopes Murder: Friends of the victim testify about the accused (RTL Today)
