DNA evidence is notoriously iffy. I would not convict / not convict someone based purely on that. There's so many confounding factors. No one knows whose DNA was left. There's no way to know any DNA is 'the killers'. For all we know Gayle was having an affair. That doesn't explain the hard facts of why her stuff ended up in his car and she died in a manner that fits Williams' previous violent attacks.

Look... obviously I can't see he did or did not do it with incomplete information. However, it's pretty clear the innocence project is wildly manipulating the story. Moreover, the innocence project frequently calls out the iffi-ness of DNA evidence when it suits them, and are now claiming that we should listen only to it.

The truth is that the police recovered some DNA and it happened to be a man's they cannot connect. It could be her killer. It could not be. It could be a friend; it could be an affair partner; who knows. Either way, that man did not have all her stuff, and did not confess to the murder.

> DNA is proven science, and a true "unbiased analysis of the facts" would

DNA exists sure. but no one knows whose DNA was collected, and DNA matching is not 100%.

> none of the DNA evidence recovered from the crime scene matched Williams, and (2) the murder weapon was mishandled by state investigators, thereby destroying potentially exculpatory evidence that could have exonerated Williams.

Why would we expect any of the DNA to match? DNA of all sorts of people are everywhere. It doesn't seem there was much struggle. There was no rape. Exactly what do you expect to find?

Here is what the innocence project says (https://dpic-cdn.org/production/legacy/MarcellusWilliamsBoar...):

> The presence on the knife of a male DNA profile is also significant and worthy of additional testing and evaluation. In briefing, the State argued that the presence of DNA on a kitchen knife is unremarkable because anyone in the home could have used the knife. However, the State has long recognized the power of DNA found on a murder weapon and has relied upon such evidence to secure convictions. Here, the only male who lived in the home was the victim’s husband. Additional testing could be performed to develop a profile from the husband for comparison to the profile found on the knife. Assuming the victim’s husband (who is not and never was a suspect) is excluded as a match, it is then clear that the DNA matches the killer. Yet, law enforcement has never conducted such testing.

The innocence project is making the wild claim that the male DNA on the kitchen knife is certainly the killers. Let me ask you... how many men have you had at a dinner party? The idea that their DNA on the murder weapon should be sufficient to indict them, while all the other physical evidence linking Williams to the murder is not sufficient is... a stretch. Under this scheme, Mrs Gayle's dinner guest from the night before is more likely to be the murder culprit than the random attacker who just happens to have a ton of her personal belongings after she is killed? Come on. Let's live in the real world.

What we do know is that Williams has a track record of violence and then not doing anything to address it, while blaming others for his crimes.