Chris, I understand fully what you are saying;
That acceptance and agreement from those better placed with the full intact picture of "everything" answers most of it.
Tomato/tomahto Chris? - I have been saying this all along when applied to something being used as evidence. The very essence of that agreement, was to not waste time on something that was not being used as evidence. The pointless, futile task of doing what would have had to be done, such as going through it one by one, each interpreted independently in it's own right.
The infamous pair of trousers and bra strap (not the everything), and any work around what tests may or not have been carried out with the latter around mixed profiles. Again, not being put forward as connected to the murder. Introduced around LM as it had to be for the agreement to then take place, to leave aside that which was not going to be used as evidence to do with the actual murder.
We can keep applying the same in different formats, it means the same. Evidence of the presence of LM's DNA upon his girlfriend but no DNA evidence connecting him to the murder, directly to him being present at the scene of the murder whilst it was taken place, nor anyone else's.
Such is the desire and actual interest in the truth, people fail continuously to actually read wording over inference nor to check. There should be questions placed here around that agreement, not this nonsense acceptance of it being made, to 'not discuss DNA/forensics in general' Such is the reason given by LM according to the author? What should be getting asked?
Who is this source that made LM aware of that agreement? - The source is direct, present when it was made at his trial. The source being the Crown and defence.
Therefore, why is it applied as "another source" and not who the actual source was? Because, when we apply it was directly made in his presence, then we apply the actual reason, the truth of why it was made. - Such is that wonderful language of deception, is it not?
Never ceases to amaze me that acceptance of having half the male population of Midlothian with DNA upon this girl/clothing, but not her own boyfriend? But there you have it, exactly what is being claimed in that attempt to have everything applied to stranger DNA.
But as you say, you do not know the details of said agreement, nor it would seem question the rather vague knowledge around LM of it and source? Instead opting for multiple reasons and choosing option ? That it may have been made in favour of the Crown to silence the defence? From introducing all this wonderful stranger DNA? And again, without placing DF upon some pedestal, one certainly has to apply the notion of him having his hands tied so firmly behind his back, they appear to have caught fast that zip one has placed up it? (Not you) If we go continuously along with Joe Blogs, do we not?