Says put aside the semantics. Asks: Didn’t you recognize the first time you heard that, didn’t a light bulb go off in your head, “Whoa! What is that?”
Nifong: Again with the rambling, ununderstandable explanation. This is not working for him.
Nifong says he didn’t see it had any “probative value.” Williamson is completely nonplussed. The panel member to his left looks embarrassed at what’s happening.
Williamson: Didn’t you feel like you had to follow up on that? Nifong: We did get samples from boyfriends, etc. But “I just didn’t really think about it at that time.”
Williamson is burying his head in his hands as Nifong speaks. I think he’s actually tuned Nifong out and is letting him drone on.
Williamson: “I think you told me more than I asked but not what I asked.”
Nifong: The perfect result would have been to find fresh semen or fresh sperm that was not from any lacrosse player. That would have been exculpatory enough for no charges to have been brought.
Williamson: Evidence doesn’t have to solve the case to be important to the case. You don’t need a smoking gun. Nifong: Agrees.
Williamson: Did you consider there was follow-up work to be done to ID the source of the DNA, who put it there and how it got there? Nifong: Again with the rambling and obfuscations. What is he saying? He’s just trying to delay the inevitable, it seems.
The woman on the panel wonders if he ever thought that the DNA could be from the perpetrators. Nifong says it didn’t because of the explanations Meehan gave about DNA transfer.
