I read a year ago he tried appealing them saying that forensic evidence would show it was Gangi's DNA on the weapons and not his, but the judge shot him down saying it wouldn't prove that he didn't commit the murders.

That seems a little sketchy to me. If they could prove that Gangi's DNA was on those weapons and not Pitera, wouldn't it raise reasonable doubt?

I'm not saying Pitera's not a killer because there are many facts that prove he was with the collecting of the jewelry from the dead victims, but couldn't he use the defense that he only took the jewelry to fence at a later date and was only an accessory to the murders? As in being there when Gangi pulled the trigger but didn't actually pull it himself?

It kind of seems like the government stonewalled him on his appeal because if in fact it was Gangi's DNA the Feds would look very bad.