That's not what I'm contesting though. Even if the planted blood found didn't come from the vial, it looks almost certainly that the vial was tampered with at one point. Could be that they extracted blood from the vial, then found out that it had preservatives in it and decided not to use it. Not really sure what it means, but there's a big question there. If somebody was found tampering evidence or planting evidence at all the case would be thrown out - I'm just surprised that question wasn't really answered.