Not an investigator nor a lawyer but as I understand to be incriminated it needs to be proven you did the crime and it depending on the type of the crime it needs to be proven you did it intentionally.
Unless she has anything else to do with the crime a hair follicle isn’t enough to be incriminating, because it alone doesn’t really prove anything. Worst case it just sets her at the scene of the crime and best case the hair is used to narrow down the actual list of suspects.
None of that matters if the jury decides you are guilty, regardless of what they’re supposed to do. The same mechanism that allow for jury nullification also works the opposite.
Just look at Texas… At an otherwise peaceful sound protest where one person shot a cop. Everyone wearing black was rounded up and charged as “antifa terrorists”. As if simply wearing black was enough to prove they conspired. Oh and the terrorist “zine” they had that the prosecution used as “evidence of ideologically driven intent", was actually a years old movie analysis of feminism’s relationship to horror cinema. And it wasn’t even written by anyone there. In fact the author didn’t even have anything to do with the protest, and was never even contacted by law enforcement about it.
Not an investigator nor a lawyer but as I understand to be incriminated it needs to be proven you did the crime and it depending on the type of the crime it needs to be proven you did it intentionally.
Unless she has anything else to do with the crime a hair follicle isn’t enough to be incriminating, because it alone doesn’t really prove anything. Worst case it just sets her at the scene of the crime and best case the hair is used to narrow down the actual list of suspects.
None of that matters if the jury decides you are guilty, regardless of what they’re supposed to do. The same mechanism that allow for jury nullification also works the opposite.
Just look at Texas… At an otherwise peaceful sound protest where one person shot a cop. Everyone wearing black was rounded up and charged as “antifa terrorists”. As if simply wearing black was enough to prove they conspired. Oh and the terrorist “zine” they had that the prosecution used as “evidence of ideologically driven intent", was actually a years old movie analysis of feminism’s relationship to horror cinema. And it wasn’t even written by anyone there. In fact the author didn’t even have anything to do with the protest, and was never even contacted by law enforcement about it.
https://theintercept.com/2026/03/13/movie-review-antifa-prairieland-trial/