UP FRONT >>> THERE AIN'T NO FINGERNAIL DNA MATCH TO CHANEL LEWIS <<< THAT HAS ANY EVIDENTIARY VALUE IN THE VETRANO CASE --- Chief of Detectives David Boyce, the Queens DA's Office and the multiple statements by the Vetrano family have flat out LIED about that --- The DA's Office has lied about it both to the press and at trial
The ME's expert witness fudged her testimony to cover up the weaknesses of her fingernail DNA "evidence," which were well-known to her at the time --- including the fact that the ME's Office was discontinuing the specific test used to come up with her "fingernail DNA" testimony, because it was controversial and unreliable
The prosecution has acknowledged that there was fresh DNA on other objects in the crime scene belonging to an individual whose identity is known but has not been disclosed
And of course, one has to assume that both the crime scene and the the victim's body was loaded with the DNA of Phil Vetrano, Karina Vetrano's dad, who had been allowed to participate in altogether too much of the investigation, preparation, and prosecution of this case for somebody that should have been a prime suspect in the early stages
According to a November 2017 Daily Beast article, ".... While the medical examiner declared that Lewis’ DNA matched what was found on Vetrano’s cellphone and on her back, they do not state they found a match under Vetrano’s fingernails, contrary to statements made by the NYPD.... Instead, the medical examiner suggests that Lewis’ DNA may be present under Vetrano’s fingernails based on the Forensic Statistical Tool analysis, a controversial testing method used when a mixture of DNA samples are present. Forensic experts have criticized the method, and it was discontinued by the medical examiner’s office this year [emphasis mine]...." (See "He Confessed to Karina Vetrano’s Murder. But Did He Do It?" by Max Rivlin-Nader, 11/29/17, Daily Beast [www.thedailybeast.com/he-confessed-to-karina-vetranos-murder-but-did-he-do-it]).
However, there was some rather clear DNA evidence that was found and matched to any individual. According to the Daily Beast article mentioned above, ".... [A] second DNA match was found at the crime scene on an Arizona fruit punch bottle, according to the documents. Like Lewis’ DNA allegedly found on Vetrano’s back and cellphone, this wasn’t a mixture. The identity of this second match has been redacted...." Also at the time this Daily Beast article was written, the NYPD and the Queens DA's office were withholding much of the DNA data discovered in the case from the defense team. “.... 'The DA’s position is that none of the DNA found matched anyone at the [Vetrano} crime scene, so [the Chanel Lewis Defense Team is] not entitled to see it,' said Jenny Cheung, one of Lewis’ Legal Aid lawyers, referring to the DA’s refusal to hand over the full results of the 163 other DNA tests, as well as Lewis’ full DNA profile...."
By the time of the trial of Chanel Lewis more of the DNA reports were turned over to the defense's DNA team. Prior to the trail, several lawyers on the defense team had repeatedly stated that the victim's father Phil Vetrano "contaminated" the crime scene, however it is not clear if the NYPD and/or the Queens DA have turned over any of the DNA data that would tie Phil Vetrano to this crime scene, hence to the crime of his daughter's murder.