2 Margo’s van, and entering it; and (5) that same person exiting the van, returning to the small car, and driving away a short while later. Margo never exited her van. Rather, forensic evidence showed that her killer entered the van on the front passenger’s side and murdered her while the two were inside the van. Margo’s body was discovered more than an hour after her murder by a medical assistant from her office.
In 1998, Prade, Margo’s ex-husband and an Akron Police Department Captain, was indicted for her aggravated murder. He was also indicted for the possession of criminal tools and the interception of Margo’s wire, oral, or electronic communications. The interception charge stemmed from evidence that he had used a recording device to tape phone calls made or received at the marital residence for a substantial amount of time, both before and after Prade and Margo’s divorce. One critical aspect of the case involved the bite mark to Margo’s left arm. The bite mark left an impression on Margo’s lab coat as well as a bruise on her arm. Photographs of the bite mark were taken and Margo’s lab coat was sent to the FBI for DNA testing.
A serologist technician from the FBI cut out the bite mark section of Margo’s lab coat (“the bite mark section”). The bite mark section was bigger than the bite mark itself and measured approximately two and a half inches wide and between one to two inches high.
Subsequently, a DNA examiner made three cuttings from inside the bite mark. The cuttings were all approximately a quarter inch by a quarter inch in size and were taken from the left-hand side, middle, and right-hand side of the bite mark. In July 1998, the FBI reported that it had conducted polymerase chain reaction testing (“PCR testing”) on the three cuttings and, due to the
Because the cutting was not symmetrical, one side of the bite mark section was higher than the other side.