Help me out here on a question on DNA
 

I am referring to this bizarre case in Austria where this nut kept his daughter locked up for 24 years and fathered her kids.

When this story broke, reports at the time said DNA tests were been done to find out if the claims that he was the father of her children were true. After the tests, it was reported the claims were true.

Now here is my question. When the first baby was supposedly dropped on his front door step with a note from his missing daughter asking him and his wife to look after it why did the authorities not do a DNA test. If they had, would this test not have shown him to be the father? Rember, he played this "doorstop" trick three times. I mean, what made the authorities believe his story about "just finding these babies abandoned" on his doorstep. Surely they would have wanted to take off the table the posibility he was abducting them.

Well in the first place DNA tests are expensive and complicated. People usually need to have a pretty good reason to order a DNA test. Not every lab is equipped for DNA analysis.

The story of a runaway daughter leaving an unwanted child on the doorstep of the parents is plausible. In hindsight of course it is suspicious but with the information known at the time, there really was no cause for an expensive DNA test.

This is what makes this crime so heinous. It is so crazy that no one could even contemplate a father keeping his daughter in a basement for 20+years and then try to move the children from the multiple rapes into his "overt" family upstairs.

Perhaps one of these days DNA testing will be common place. But the expense and complexity today prevents this.

If it were up to me, all prisoners on death row or in life sentences should be DNA tested if there is applicable DNA type evidence available.