More of your vague accusations. There is no way to reliable test age with DNA within reasonable limits.
The younger the real age, the smaller the errors in DNA age estimation, with errors for teens within a 2.5 year range for a specific person. Thus a result estimating an age of 20 for someone claiming to be 15 strongly indicates their are lying and are above 18 and closer to even to 22 than 15.
Also, the errors are random, meaning they average to zero for a sample. Thus, any difference between the avg estimated age of a sample and the avg real age of that sample reflects a systematic difference due to the real avg age being closer to the estimate. Thus, it is possible to reliably tell that a sample of people are on average older or younger than they claim, even when that difference is within the error rates which apply to individual estimates not samples of estimates.