nah man you got it mixed up
they found semen on the VICTIM's clothes
and the probability of the DNA being anyone else besides Nicki's bro is less than 0.000000001% (1 hundreth of a billionth)
and they always offer plea deals so the DA can keep their stats up, then they throw the book (and hopefully this piece of trash gets the max sentence

)
I can tell a lot of you have never done anything illegal or had people constantly getting locked up around you, because if you did, reading EVERYTHING PROPERLY would be in your blood. Just misreading something can allow police to lock you up. If you know exactly what you are reading means, it can stop him form arresting you. They love that most of y'all don't really know how law works, it gives them so much power!
They didn't find his semen, they found partial dna. Here is the article that op posted:
"A DNA profile, a partial profile matching the defendant or consistent with the defendant, your honor, to the point in the hundreds of billionths of chance of it being any other individual, was discovered in the…pants of the complainant in this case, and also tested positive indicating the presence of semen,” Anthony Pirri, the assistant district attorney told the judge at a hearing July 26 in Nassau County Supreme Court’s sex crimes division."
It writes INDICATING, which means they didn't actually find semen.
And like my first post wrote, why did the writer of the article leave out a whole slew of information, only to try to make it seem like they found semen in her pants by stopping one sentence to lead into another with the first word being "pants"? They are hiding something that's why, and this is foul because it sways jurors to seem like he is guilty before they even hear his case!