Across the country, DNA often seems the panacea for criminal cases.

It has freed convicts and helped the police find murderers.

It has fingered rapists and has thrown the death penalty into

even more question. In New Hampshire, DNA evidence led

investigators to James Dale, convicted of murdering

6-year-old Elizabeth Knapp, and to Joseph Whittey, who

soon goes on trial for the murder of 81-year-old Yvonne

Fine.

But DNA is not always absolute.

Just ask Massachusetts lawyer Donald Brisson, who is

representing convicted murderer Robert Breest. Breest,

whose case was heard 28 years ago in Merrimack County

Superior Court, has been trying for years to secure a new

trial.

Found guilty in 1973 of the beating death of 18-year-old

Susan Randall, Breest said genetic testing would prove his

innocence. In January, a superior court judge allowed him

to re-open his case for DNA analysis.

So according to Brisson, Breest's wife spent $5,500 to test

for DNA in the fingernail clippings recovered at the murder

scene, preserved since the 1971 crime,. But the results of

the tests were inconclusive, in part because unknown male

DNA had mixed with Randall's DNA.

Breest's lawyers then asked for Y-chromosome testing of

the evidence, in order to isolate the male DNA in the

fingernail clippings and exclude their client. This test,

Brisson said, cost around $2,500.

Those results came back last month. Once again, they could

not exclude Breest from the crime.

Assistant Attorney General William Delker said the results

show what the state has said all along; that the jury was

right in convicting Breest.

"As far as we're concerned, there are no grounds for any

change in his status," Delker said.

But to Brisson, the tests are inconclusive rather than

incriminatory. He said he would soon file a motion with the

court for more testing, this time taking samples from

additional fingernail clippings. The DNA in the tested

clippings had decayed, he said.

He said the repeated analyses have been draining for his

client.

"It's very frustrating," Brisson said. "He had counted on

going home. And not to be able to get a complete test result

was very frustrating."

Dispute over the meaning of DNA testing is not unique to

Breest's case.

Attorneys question DNA in all cases, just as they do any

evidence. Testing, analysis and procedures are all

challenged.

"Just look at O.J. (Simpson)," Concord attorney Paul