A Brief Reminder Why Jens Söring Will Never Agree to DNA Testing

The technology improves at light-speed every year, solving cases with less than a billionth of a gram of DNA. It will (re-)solve the Haysom murders, if Söring lets it.

Stephanie Isaacson

In 1989, 14-year-old Stephanie Isaacson of Las Vegas was raped and killed on her way to school. The case went unsolved for decades.

In 2021, a biotech company specializing in cutting-edge DNA forensics, Othram, solved the case. The only remaining evidence was 120 picograms — trillionths of a gram — of DNA, the equivalent of the DNA from about 15 human skin cells. For comparison, anytime you touch an object, no matter how fleetingly, you leave hundreds of skin cells on it. Working with the Othram technique of Forensic Grade Genome Sequencing, Othram was able to identify Isaacson’s killer. This is so far the smallest amount of DNA which has ever been used to solve a cold case.

But that was 2021. It’s no exaggeration to say that forensic DNA technology has certainly advanced even in the last two years.

This is why Jens Söring will never agree to fresh DNA tests on the evidence in this case. He knows how amazingly sensitive the technology has become even in the past 5 years. Assuming tests are conducted with proper protocols and the newest technology and algorithms, it will likely identify his DNA on an evidence sample (such as a bloodstain) which links him not just to the Haysom home, which he had visited twice, but to the murders of Derek and Nancy Haysom.

This is why Jens Söring will never agree to new DNA testing.