The latest episode of CSI:NY that aired last night on CBS was one of the most bizarre shows I’ve seen in a long time. I say bizarre because it was unusually difficult to figure out who did what in the show, we were given a ton of confessions, and yet the legal forensic DNA evidence contradicted everything that was obvious.

The show begins with the CSI: NY team being called in to investigate the murder of a man who’d been stabbed to death by his wife. Then, after killing him, she turns herself in and confesses to the murder. The only problem is that all the indisputable forensic evidence says she did not commit the murder even though she vehemently continues to proclaim she did.

All the contents of the man’s stomach shows that he ate the dinner his wife prepared for him, yet an examination of the remains of the dinner inside the apartment reveal nothing, other than a dinner roll,  had been eaten of the dinner before he was stabbed 17 times in the chest.

To make it more bizarre, the remaining piece of dinner roll doesn’t have the man’s DNA on it, but has the DNA of someone else, yet the bite of roll he took is found in his stomach.

When the CSI: NY forensic team does wide search on the DNA sample they discover 23 murders have been linked to the same mysterious DNA, but the DNA does not belong to the wife who killed him, or the second wife they discovered that lived in the same apartment complex who had fixed the dinner the man had eaten before his first wife supposedly killed him.

Because of the DNA evidence they believe they have a female serial killer on the loose. At this point they still think the first wife did not kill her husband but they think she knows who did kill him.

As it turns out the cotton swabs used to gather all the evidence had been contaminated in the factory where they were manufactured.  And a single factory worker who didn’t like to wear her gloves was leaving her DNA on the Q-tips.

This was a wild episode of CSI: NY that was one of the best episodes of the series. It showed that sometimes getting to the truth sometimes takes more than science and forensic evidence and that there is no such thing as irrefutable proof.