My first YouTube Video about DNA tests

On June 28, 2022, two podcast producers claimed they had convinced the prosecutor of Bedford County, Wesley Nance, to sign a petition for new DNA tests. The only thing missing now was my signature, and then the ball could get rolling — but I “refused” to sign.

The final episode of the podcast suggests that I’m afraid my DNA could be found. But that is not true! In fact, I wrote the prosecutor to ask for DNA tests, and he wrote me several long emails to explain why new tests aren’t possible. You can read our email-exchange below.

The implicit accusation made against me in the podcast is grossly unfair. I want to express my gratitude to prosecutor Wesley Nance for explaining the facts and the law in an impartial, objective way. 


My second YouTube Video about DNA tests

After the release of my first YouTube video about DNA tests, see above, my opponents struck back. They claimed that I could file a petition for new DNA tests without committing perjury. And, according to them, I could possibly file a petition outside of §19.2-327.1. In this video, I explain why that’s all nonsense.

Rather than waste time on a futile petition, I asked my attorney to initiate a new examination of the raw lab data from the 2009 DNA tests. I wanted a scientist to verify whether the results from those tests were in any way unreliable — because of contamination or mixing, for example. In this video, I tell you about the results.

I’m publishing the scientist‘s report on his examination here for the first time — this has not appeared anywhere else. It‘s new for you, new for everyone!

Questions & Answers

I released a parallel version of this YouTube video in Germany. In the video’s comment section, as well as in various blogs, etc., viewers asked me questions about the DNA tests, which I have answered (in English) here.

Source references

Elmer Gist, Jr.

Testimony — June 13, 1990

DNA Test 2009

Department of Forensic Science – September 24, 2009

Blood group test 1985

Department of Forensic Science – August 12, 1989

Emails between prosecutor Wesley W. Nance and Jens Soering

Commonwealth’s Attorney for Bedford County – July 2022

§ 19.2-327.1 — Law governing requests for new DNA tests

Request by a convicted felon or person convicted of a crime for scientific analysis of newly discovered or previously unexamined scientific evidence; procedure.

Prof. Dr. Moses Schanfield

George Washington University – Department of Forensic Science

(Prof. Dr. Schanfield is introduced at minute 7.)

Prof. Dr. J. Thomas McClintock

Liberty University – Department of Forensic Science

Emails from Wesley Nance

about filing a petition without committing perjury

Emails from Wesley Nance, Bryan J. und Bruce W.

about filing a petition outside of §19.2-327.1

New report from Prof. J. Thomas McClintock

about contamination or mixing

WordPress Cookie Notice by Real Cookie Banner