The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

DNA photofit breakthrough?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by biggles on 18.01.15 11:22

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2914932/The-DNA-photofit-Amazing-breakthrough-means-police-tell-suspect-s-colour-height-age-tiny-speck-blood.html

from the article:

"Police are now able to build up a detailed picture of a suspect from the smallest speck of blood left at a crime scene thanks to an extraordinary DNA breakthrough."

"New advances in the technology mean detectives will know if an offender is black or white, the colour of their hair and eyes, their height and age – even if there are no witnesses to the crime."

....maybe that should read "even if there are no independent, honest & reliable witnesses" ?

Are there any DNA sample left in the PJ labs?

biggles

Posts : 55
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2014-05-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by ChippyM on 18.01.15 11:56

it does sound like a breakthrough but how many killers leave blood at a scene? wouldn't this new technique be more likely to identify victims rather than the killers?  

It could be useful if a murder has not be proven I suppose, or to support evidence from dogs etc.

ChippyM

Posts : 910
Reputation : 129
Join date : 2013-06-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Knitted on 18.01.15 23:28

An article on the same topic appeared last March in the New Scientist, (albeit then triggered by work in the USA, following previous work conducted in the Netherlands).  The NS article suggested that it would still require about another 10yrs of further research before it gets to be really accurate enough to give a good likeness. Although, I hope with all the many Universities and Research Labs, such as those at Kings College, working on it across the globe things may move much quicker.

The NS article does mention a few things: such as any photofit evidence would not be admissible evidence in Court, (though presumably that will change if it becomes at least as comparable as eyewitness statements).  It would of course help narrow down the range of likely suspects (no doubt far better than often erroneous eyewitness statements currently do now!), and then a suspect's DNA can be matched to the sample found at the crime scene. In the case of identifying victims, there's an example in the article of a 'calculated face' with photos of the NS reporter's faces and it does look promising.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129613.600-genetic-mugshot-recreates-faces-from-nothing-but-dna.html#.VLw9Ei6qlpk

Knitted

Posts : 240
Reputation : 14
Join date : 2015-01-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Hobs on 20.01.15 0:05

@biggles wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2914932/The-DNA-photofit-Amazing-breakthrough-means-police-tell-suspect-s-colour-height-age-tiny-speck-blood.html

from the article:

"Police are now able to build up a detailed picture of a suspect from the smallest speck of blood left at a crime scene thanks to an extraordinary DNA breakthrough."

"New advances in the technology mean detectives will know if an offender is black or white, the colour of their hair and eyes, their height and age – even if there are no witnesses to the crime."

....maybe that should read "even if there are no independent, honest & reliable witnesses" ?

Are there any DNA sample left in the PJ labs?
This would also work for victims.

Imagine if they use this and test the body fluids found in the apartment and hire car.

Imagine what would happen if the result comes back as Maddie.
This would blow their claims of it was rotting eat/fish/sweaty sandals or dirty diapers right out of the water.

How would they explain away Maddie's body fluids being found in the hire car?

Not only could it possibly identify the perpetrator, it could also identify the victim if no body was found but blood and/or fluids or perhaps only part of the victim

They could try and claim it was planted, the question then is, how could it have been planted if her body has not been found?
Also how could it have been planted if, as you claim, Maddie is still alive and in the hands of a paedophile.
it would mean the paedohile killed her and then planted her DNA in the apartment, on your clothes and cuddlecat and also in a hire car, a car which you rented 25 days after she vanished.

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.

Hobs

Posts : 715
Reputation : 288
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 52
Location : uk

View user profile http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Knitted on 20.01.15 2:13

@Hobs wrote:
@biggles wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2914932/The-DNA-photofit-Amazing-breakthrough-means-police-tell-suspect-s-colour-height-age-tiny-speck-blood.html

from the article:

"Police are now able to build up a detailed picture of a suspect from the smallest speck of blood left at a crime scene thanks to an extraordinary DNA breakthrough."

"New advances in the technology mean detectives will know if an offender is black or white, the colour of their hair and eyes, their height and age – even if there are no witnesses to the crime."

....maybe that should read "even if there are no independent, honest & reliable witnesses" ?

Are there any DNA sample left in the PJ labs?
[Snipped] 

Imagine if they use this and test the body fluids found in the apartment and hire car.

Imagine what would happen if the result comes back as Maddie.
The advances covered in the Daily Mail article are fascinating, but (except for one exception…which I’ll get to at the end) I don't see how they are particularly relevant to this case. The relevant DNA tests to check for Maddie have been done and aren't altered by the the advances outlined in the article.  Here's an overview of why...

Imagine our DNA is a bag full of scrabble letters. What's happened is that Scientists have been able to identify that if you have two Ks you'll have a bigger nose than if you had three Ks, and if you have 4 Ls you'll likely (given an 'average' diet) be shorter than someone with 2 Ls. That’s what’s changed, whereas how one DNA sample is matched to another (which is what you do to work out whose DNA a given sample belongs to) hasn’t changed.

In relation to Madeleine's case all of the crime scene samples were analysed...and all of the DNA most likely to have come from Madeleine, (via, I recall, hairs that looked most likely to have come from her, etc.), were analysed. When matching two or more DNA samples only certain markers are used. These markers are a very small subset of the overall DNA string and have been chosen because as they are the ones most efficiently likely to answer the question “how much do the two samples match”, (n.b. Considering Humans and Chimps share 98.5% of our DNA, and how many of us have ‘big’ or ‘small’ noses, should explain why only the small subset of highly variable DNA markers are used).

The crime scene samples were what are called ‘contaminated’, (that is not ‘pure’, as I’m sure many crime scene samples might well be). However there were 15 matches to the 19 markers (most likely to been from) Madeleine. This may sound promising, and there’s definitely a good match, but it isn’t conclusive. If there had been a 19/19 match with the samples from the Scenic then there’d be no need for this forum and TM would no doubt be serving time somewhere.

The technique used to analyse the crime scene samples introduced a degree of error, (think of it as having a very low quality sound recording, you can turn the volume up to max to be able to hear it… but you also get a lot of ‘noise’). However, every year Scientists are better able to extract readable DNA from ever smaller, and ever more degraded, samples.  It’s these advances that have most relevance to the case and may provide some hope. However, am I right in thinking that the UK’s (now disbanded and discredited) Forensic Science Service Ltd destroyed, or degraded, the samples in their possession? If so then we’re stuffed and it can be chalked up to yet another ‘suspicious’ event in the complex case of Madeleine.

One thing that has always struck me is how hard it was to find any samples that may have been from Madeleine. When my kids were her age they left a trail of bodily fluids, hair and personal contaminants wherever they went! Yet Gerry had to go to home to retrieve her pillowcase…and (if I recall correctly) ultimately the only samples of Madeleine’s DNA were extracted from hairs that were picked out (from hairbrushes?) as matching the length and colour of her hairs on photographs.  

Now, we come to where the ongoing advances might be useful!!

I was reading some interesting bits about Madeleine’s DNA and found reference to a sperm sample being found on the bedspread of one of the beds in the bchildren’s bedroom. Apparently an autosomic STR profile was defined (Source: http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic10-10.html “Processos Vol XIII, Pages 3578 to 3590 (in English, PJ translation I presume) Same text also in Vol XIII pages 3940 to 3948”…  

So... Does anyone know if the ‘owner’ was ever identified or if we know any more about it?  If not I wonder if the sample still exists (let's hope it didn't get lost by the FSS!) and can be run through the new analysis when it is deemed robust enough.



Knitted

Posts : 240
Reputation : 14
Join date : 2015-01-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by onehand on 20.01.15 7:38

It is already in use, in crime it is just started finding a use, but in the field of archeology and paleontology it is in use a bit longer.
 
This is a more complete blog article about it:
http://www.forensicmag.com/articles/2015/01/first-dna-phenotyped-image-person-interest-double-homicide
at the bottom is a link to a study about the ethical borders of using this techniques.
 
The pitfalls with dna is that is is often easily shed to the environment and could travel on objects or persons. There was once a usa case that was solved by the dna of a cat, but the cat was never on the crime scene, just transported hair by the perpetrator. Animals could be so helpful.
 
Just leaving dna behind does not make somebody into a suspect, most would just be people to rule out, but the people who have perfectly good reasons to have been in a place would also could leave their dna behind. But that does not rule them in, or out, of being a possible suspect.
Finding dna is not simply the explanation that somebody must have been anywhere.
 
The appartement in pdl is also a difficult one, it was in use for years before, lots of transfers of people, but also a lot more then usual people with access, because of maintenance. Then there is a pool on the complex, so there could be the needed dna degrading chemicals at hand, also the cleaning ladies could have more industrial type chemicals. In this case you also have people who could have knowledge in how to do this and also could know from their line of education and job experience how to make dna useless for forensic testing.
In this case i do think there could be time enough to give 5a a complete new forensic make over. The inviting of as much people that could come in, would give it a very nice cherry on the cake.
 
What was not there in 5a, could lead to think of an amateur job, the real mccoy would have know how to overcome such a thing.
 
That could be the difference between an outsider perpetrator and a insider. There are more leads to the last possibility.
 
I would also liked to have seen a forensic profile on another of the apartments that were cleaned by the same cleaning lady, or she is so good she deserves to get a job in a lab, or there was some other cleaning person at work.
 
The mixed samples of dna are also very suspect. Certainly those from 5a. So tiny or invisible only keela a very specially trained evrd dog, with human blood as her specialty could detect them and still a mixed sample from more then one individual. Bleeding together must have been a special hobby from the occupants of 5a!
 

By the way keela was right, her answers on grime his question:”is there some human blood in here?”, was proven correct by the brittish lab. She made out a 100% score, eddy was not so lucky, there is still no test to prove the existence of dead scent, which is not only exists of cadaverine. But does he need to be proven, not for me, he is not trained to find dna samples, he was trained to mark scent of death, something that we stupid humans still not can proof at a crime scene. Not his fault! Ours!

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Knitted on 20.01.15 17:49

@onehand wrote:[snipped] It is already in use, in crime it is just started finding a use, but in the field of archeology and paleontology it is in use a bit longer.
 
Agreed... It's all the same body of work and will be applied equally by both archaeologists and law enforcement. However, the gist of the DM article, (with its inevitable errors ...such as telling someone's height, which DNA will never be able to do beyond "this person, given an average diet during their growth years, would be within the range of 'X to Y' "), and the NS article I linked to, are simply reporting the future steps that move us on from the analysis that's already possible and covered in your article. It'll be interesting to see how accurate the face of the suspect in your article proved to have been if ever they catch them, (there's a comparison with a reporter's 'facial profile' in the NS article which isn't too bad).  

The contaminated/mixed nature of the crime scene samples is, as you describe, a problem.

In relation to Madeleine's case, as far as I can see, surely one of the most interesting 'loose ends' regarding DNA (both for current technology and for the future facial profiling), relates to the sperm sample taken from one of the bed coverings in the children's room. Was it's 'owner' ever identified? If not does a sample still exist for re-testing as profiling technology improves?  

I appreciate it's a holiday villa and people 'come and go' (excuse the pun)... but I presume the bed coverings were washed before being let out to the McCanns at the end of April...and since it was found in the room where a child 'disappeared' from it surely must be of some interest still.

Knitted

Posts : 240
Reputation : 14
Join date : 2015-01-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by onehand on 20.01.15 19:54

If i remember correct the alleged semen sample was identified to belong to a 2 year old boy, that had stayed with his family after the mccanns in 5a. Because of the very young age of the boy it was possibly no semen at all.
It is in one of the later results rapports from the brittish lab.
 
There looks to be no testing done to establishing the origin of the samples, they only had test the dna. Not if it was semen, or other bodily fluids.
 
Do not expect everything would be cleaned after a change, what does look clean, why bother, happen also in more luxurious hotels. A bed what was not used for sleeping, or had at first sight not the signs of use, would hardly be send to be cleaned. This type of companies don’t usually choose to pay up the costs for things the clients does not notice. If they do they simply correct it.
 
Those little signs does make you think the cleaning was only taken place in the most necessary places. If something happened on the thursday evening there would not have been time to do a deep cleaning of what must have been a pretty large bloodstain behind the sofa, but as it was also seeped through the linings of the tiles, it must have had the time for that, so any amount of blood must have been some time laying there. Mostly blood of a healthy person pretty quick divide itself into serum and the more solid components, the lining of the tiles would have been worked like a sort of sieve. The material from the lining of the tiles was not tested.
 
If the possibly large blood stain behind the sofa just had a wipe with a cloth, the pj would have seen that. they were not on their first job out there, they were trained to look for possible evidence. The next day the forensics came in, they would have seen it also, it could take hours or even days before lining between tiles will go back
to their original color. All those trained eyes and no one sees it, until the evrd dogs brought in. Does not look like to be a stain from less then 24 hours old.
 
Also there was no reason why anyone on behalf of mark warner, or other companies, to not tell if they had chosen to give the apartment a deep cleaning session after it was give free to let out again. the curtains, beds and walls state of the finds there could hardly been a thorough deep cleaning at all.
 
Those are just the things that not could have taken place in just the few minutes that the tapas 9 left for access to 5a, there would have been even without their stories hardly time, because for an dark chilly evening, outside the tourist season, there were a lot of people out on that street. From the lady under the streetlight, till the people in the penthouse and a chef, the carpenters, a woman who brought her partner to his car. Plus at least two child carying men. So even without the salsa of child patrols, from flipflop jane and the rest of the gang, it would have been a hard job not to become of the attention of all those people in the street.
 
Think everything had to happen in silence, with just a little light in the living room and very quick. There were still two sleeping toddlers in 5a, upstairs was occupied.
As long as the tapas 9 keep on to their words, in what ever version they like, it don’t give the time for an outsider to establish this crime scene.

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Knitted on 21.01.15 1:14

@onehand wrote:[Snipped] "If i remember correct the alleged semen sample was identified to belong to a 2 year old boy, that had stayed with his family after the mccanns in 5a"
I've seen and read the same allegation as to the source of the semen stain.

...The reason I (still) ask is that I've not yet seen a reputable (i.e. objective and impartial) source for the claim that it was a "2yr old that had stayed in 5A after the McCanns had left". Justifying my holding this stance is that:

(i) I'm surprised that Mark Warner's bedlinen is taken away from apartments and so, very, poorly cleaned, (i.e. Not even a basic, water-based, wash!). 
(ii) I'm surprised that an piece of bedlinen can find its way back to the very same apartment from which it was removed.
(iii) I'd be surprised if any hotel/resort had any need to put in place a 'source' to 'endpoint' process that enabled an individual item of of bedlinen to have tracked from 'pick-up', through 'cleaning' and through to 're-placement' to the very same apartment from which it was picked up from.

Call me naive but I didn't realise that hotel charges covered such pre-emptive, watertight, 'end to end' processes so as each piece of linen could be placed back into the same apartment from which it had been removed ! (I am necessarily being facetious... and dutifully so!).

To assuage my concerns are you, or anyone, able to cite the (independent and reputable) sources to show that the sperm sample on the bedlinen in the children's room of Apt 5a (early in May) was unarguably attributable to a 2yr old that stayed in Apt 5A after the McCanns had been moved on?

Until I see independent, credible, corroboration I will assume the sperm sample does not belong to a 2yr old using the same bedlinen as the McCann kids  (...and why would a 2yr old have even been tested after the McCann's had moved out?).

Knitted

Posts : 240
Reputation : 14
Join date : 2015-01-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by onehand on 21.01.15 5:13

About the possible semen stain: 
 
The voluntary samples were also compared with 'crime stain 1', a DNA profile obtained by Portuguese scientists using their DNA profile system. The profile was recovered from suspected semen on a blanket in the apartment 5.

From the available records, I conclude that 281 voluntary samples were eliminated as contributors of DNA to the list of search profiles above, since its profile does not match the profile sought; consequently, the DNA can not have originated from them.

I conclude further that, the DNA profiles obtained from the 'crime stain 1' and 286A/2007/CRL9A & B coincide with Charlie Gordon (bar code 51156964). I believe that Charlie Gordon was born on 29 January 2005, and if this is the case, in my opinion, the DNA profile obtained in 'crime stain 1' is not the result of semen found on the blanket.
 
From: http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm
 
Those are the statements of the gordon family.
 
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAUL_GORDON.htm
 
and  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SA-L-GO.htm
 
where i was wrong is, that they stayed in 5a after the mccans, but they had their booking the week before the mccans. From 21 april 2007 on. 
 
It is not in those statements if the children used a bed or a cot. 
 
About the bedlinnen, those apartments were mostly privately owned holiday lets, it is easy and pretty normal that the owner deliver also the bedlinnen, just give everything a simple marking and the laundry would bring it back to the right apartment. Same method is used in institutions all over europe, boarding schools or even coveralls or uniforms. 
My grandmother used a laundry service when i was little and i remember the smal stitched pieces of white band, with initials in red on everything. About 30 years later, when my grandfather has to going to a care home, there were exactly the same type of stitched bands in his clothes and household linnen. Also i remember from the nappy service from my sisters there again there were those little marks, so you get your own back.
 
Every apartment was a bit different in inventory, because of the choices the owners made, this was also in the advertising on the mark warner site.
 
Because there were two separate rounds of forensics taken, the portuguese pj searches in the first days, and the later ones conducted on guidance of the dogs, you need all the dna you could get,from as much of the persons who had any access to 5a. That is not so strange, from my point of view. Most of the testing was done on samples from the wall and the sofa, not the parts of the inventory that would normally is given a very deep cleaning.
 
If you look at the dna codes john lowe mentioned in the citation above, the little boy has not had his dna tested, but it was a conclusion from a sample a and a sample b,
So the must have found in the probe also the male y part, so the stain must be from a male child of those two who donated the dna profiles 286A/2007/CRL9  a and b


From john lowe's report it could almost not have been semen because of the age of the little boy, as far as i can find the suspicion it could have been semen, was made on visual aspects.

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Knitted on 21.01.15 7:10

@onehand wrote:[Heavily snipped and edited]:
"The profile was recovered from suspected semen on a blanket in the apartment 5"
"From the available records, I conclude that 281 voluntary samples were eliminated...I conclude further that, the DNA profiles obtained from the 'crime stain 1' and 286A/2007/CRL9A & B coincide with Charlie Gordon (bar code 51156964). I believe that Charlie Gordon was born on 29 January 2005, and if this is the case, in my opinion, the DNA profile obtained in 'crime stain 1' is not the result of semen found on the blanket"
"If you look at the dna codes john lowe mentioned in the citation above, the little boy has not had his dna tested, but it was a conclusion from a sample a and a sample b... So the must have found in the probe also the male y part, so the stain must be from a male child of those two who donated the dna profiles 286A/2007/CRL9  a and b"
"From john lowe's report it could almost not have been semen because of the age of the little boy, as far as i can find the suspicion it could have been semen, was made on visual aspects".
Hi OneHand...

Many thanks for your thorough review of the DNA reports on file... My recent obsession about the 'semen stains' have been assuaged!!

Knitted

Posts : 240
Reputation : 14
Join date : 2015-01-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by onehand on 21.01.15 8:09

My obsession is not stilled, it is mostly because of the mixed dna.
 
All living or dead organisms have dna, and mixing is not unusual, it is only unusual in specific conditions.
Mixed human dna by accident you mostly would found on things like tools or even keys, everything that is used in combination with a bigger chance to get wounded or that is used in contact with bodily fluids from different people, from sex tot the spoon a parent fed their baby porridge and would taste it beforehand or test it for not being to hot or cold.
 
Tools like a can opener, a hammer or garden scissors are also object you could more often get a result from mixed dna.
But not on a wall, or even the backside of furniture. It is even more less likely if the spots are so small, you need the forensic people or even a evrd dog to find them.
 
I have read the hypothesis of the midget killed on the wall, but where is the midgets dna, it would have shown up in the test, those tests are no different for humans.
The first procedure to look for dna will show simply all dna, it does not discriminate between species of origine.
 
Also the samples of the car booth, in theory this could be a place to a bigger chance to find mixed results, it is not a space that would have been cleaned very often or thorough.
But if you talk about used nappies, and certainly if they already had the bad smell of decay, that means there are bacteria, that means extra dna but non human dna, where is the result from that extra dna.
 
In low copy number dna testing that is a cullprit, because you simply copy all dna that is in the sample, from the results you can choose specific markers, but on the original test result, from before choosing, there must have been non-human dna if it was leached out of nappies. There are known, even in 2007 those were known, samples of specific bacteria that are specially bound to the gi tract of humans, so it must have been testable to check for those, even if a bacteria is dead, the dna is not gone, it stays behind for a long time. Spores would exists for years, even ages.
 
I learned it also the hard way how to ask the forensic people the right questions, i lost some cases because of i did not know what to ask for. That could have been a problem in this case also. The people in the labs are mostly not working a case as keen as the investigating officers, so most times you only get out the answer on a specific question, not automatically the buts and ifs, or we could try also this or that.
 
Leaching fluids from pork meat would also have shown up in the dna samples, or it could have been tried for some common bacteria found on not longer fresh pork. Like listeria or e. coli’s.
 
I hope there is still a lot of material that could be tested, and that is was stored under very good conditions, not only for the now better technical skills, but also to ask more questions to solve, also isotope testing could bring in a nice bit of information.
 
But i won’t let it go to the uk, there are more countries that has very high standard labs, like belgium, france and germany. This case needs the highest standards in quality of work and most of all independent researchers.

What you could do without, is controversy about the quality of the testing, or people who serve two masters.

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Joss on 21.01.15 8:47

Was this evidence refuted?

2-Nature of the sample

Acid Phosphatase Test to detect
semen on the small spot on the cloth fragment in envelope no. 5 recovered from the bedspread of the bed next to the window of the children's bedroom: Weakly positive.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PORTUGUESE-FORENSIC.htm

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by onehand on 21.01.15 10:05

that is not a true specific test for semen only, it is taken as guidance from how much of this acid phosphatase is in the sample, that it make it more or less possible to contain semen. it is in low number also around in other bodily fluid. if it was truly semen it would normally abundant, but it is nothing more then a first screening, it has to be proven to be semen, by finding actually sperm cells in the specimen. this boy that equaled his parents dna was simply to young to be a shedder of sperm cells.

but because of the tracing of the dna, there is not done a full proof test to tell if it was semen or not. this boy was also not a useful part of the crime scene, other then for excluding him, he was not there and a toddler is not the most fitting possible suspect in a case like this. 

but in a case like this, that is very high profile and sensitive, it would have been nice to do the testing all the way, now there is still a myth about a semen stain active. there was no need for this. even the more specific check on the dna of the boy himself was not done. 

that is a usual complication in a lot of cases, when others decide what to do and when, don't take the time to ask the investigating officers what their choice would be, and that is the party who would get the bill, but also would know if it could make a difference. 
these little things are also fodder for the lawyers in a court, before you know it, you just spill hours to talk this right. if you have a legal system with a jury, it could be used to paint a lay back attitude to what was tested, creating a mist on the results that count.

if you are part of an investigation, because you deliver expertise, you also have the responsibility to bring in your expertise in his full glory. you can' just say, yes, judge, but the officer did not asked for it. because that is the base line in expertise, your field, you have to suggest and present all the possibilities. i did not see that happen in the communications.

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Joss on 21.01.15 11:38

@onehand wrote:that is not a true specific test for semen only, it is taken as guidance from how much of this acid phosphatase is in the sample, that it make it more or less possible to contain semen. it is in low number also around in other bodily fluid. if it was truly semen it would normally abundant, but it is nothing more then a first screening, it has to be proven to be semen, by finding actually sperm cells in the specimen. this boy that equaled his parents dna was simply to young to be a shedder of sperm cells.

but because of the tracing of the dna, there is not done a full proof test to tell if it was semen or not. this boy was also not a useful part of the crime scene, other then for excluding him, he was not there and a toddler is not the most fitting possible suspect in a case like this. 

but in a case like this, that is very high profile and sensitive, it would have been nice to do the testing all the way, now there is still a myth about a semen stain active. there was no need for this. even the more specific check on the dna of the boy himself was not done. 

that is a usual complication in a lot of cases, when others decide what to do and when, don't take the time to ask the investigating officers what their choice would be, and that is the party who would get the bill, but also would know if it could make a difference. 
these little things are also fodder for the lawyers in a court, before you know it, you just spill hours to talk this right. if you have a legal system with a jury, it could be used to paint a lay back attitude to what was tested, creating a mist on the results that count.

if you are part of an investigation, because you deliver expertise, you also have the responsibility to bring in your expertise in his full glory. you can' just say, yes, judge, but the officer did not asked for it. because that is the base line in expertise, your field, you have to suggest and present all the possibilities. i did not see that happen in the communications.
I gather this "boy" you mention was a previous child staying in the apartment with his parents? Why would there be any of his dna on the bedding in the apartment? Didn't the bedding get laundered in between holiday makers staying there and the apartment cleaned? Who determined the boy had anything to do with the particular dna in the first place? TIA.

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by joyce1938 on 21.01.15 11:44

Just a guess, but I would not think that blankets or bedspreads get washed weekly  in regular fashion, si the stain may have been weeks old  ,even in food hotels I doubt that bedspreads get washe after each visit . Have you noticed in some countries ,the bedspread gets taken off and folded and ends up in top of wardrobe ,ofcourse if night get cool folk will pull them down and use on bed again ,so I feel its hard to assess how long a stain maybe . joyce1938

joyce1938

Posts : 805
Reputation : 86
Join date : 2010-04-20
Age : 78
Location : england

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Joss on 21.01.15 12:08

@joyce1938 wrote:Just a guess, but I would not think that blankets or bedspreads get washed weekly  in regular fashion, si the stain may have been weeks old  ,even in food hotels I doubt that bedspreads get washe after each visit . Have you noticed in some countries ,the bedspread gets taken off and folded and ends up in top of wardrobe ,ofcourse if night get cool folk will pull them down and use on bed again ,so I feel its hard to assess how long a stain maybe . joyce1938
Hi joyce, I have no idea what they laundered at OC & when? But if DNA is too degraded then it could be too old for accurate testing? I know there is the internet theory going on that it was a saliva stain and not semen.
I don't know how they could determine what was what then, and why it says in the files it was definitely a semen stain, although a weak reaction/result as per the testing done on the sample? Wouldn't they have known forensically that there was the possibility it was some other substance and not definitely semen in that case, and if the phosphatase test isn't really all that accurate isn't there a more accurate test they could of done to be certain?

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by onehand on 21.01.15 15:05

@joss

yes, this boy is the son of the people who did stay at 5a the week before the arrival of the mccanns. i choose to not use his name again, because he is a minor.

a weak positive is not proof your specimen is semen, there are a lot of tests for anything from a human who would only done as first screening, a weak positive is not the same as positive for semen, most of those are enzyme tests and very little of them are so specific that even a weak result gives you an answer, the gold standard in testing for semen is to find sperm cells. 
but they manage to get an dna result from it, but they did not prove where it was has its origin. if you look up the citation from the report, you can safely conclude they found a male set of dna, and enough markers to make out it was this boy, there was also a sister that week. it could not have been dna from a sperm cell. those only have half of the dna pairs of the donor, that would not have been noted as being dna from this boy, that is only done if you find pairs of the dna. and because of the boy his very young age and pre puberty , he was not likely to be a shedder. it would pretty unique if he was. 

for me this was half the work done, but from what is in the files, in the reports from john lowe you can't say there was a stain originated from semen. and you can't simply conclude if it is not semen it is saliva.

there is no proof to find that bedding was completely given to laundry. 

if degrading was a problem, the would not have found enough other non semen dna to name it. there was dna found, so degrading was in this no problem.

cleaning in hotels and holiday facilities is done to please the eye of the customer. the rest is just made up from what it cost, management always will look into the border of hygiene and costs. if the bedding looks okay, smells okay or the freshness spray could solve that, you have a fat chance to be the second user or even third. it is not what you want to know, just reality.
commercial washing of household linnen would not have left a stain like this, with readable dna. 

it was also not a blanket, but a duvet cover that had the stain, the same one visible in the files. 

joss, you made the example, your sentence:  I know there is the internet theory going on that it was a saliva stain and not semen.


this would not have happen if they had done a complete set of tests done.  in this case it is not a possible lead anymore for the investigation, because of the dna that was found, and tested, this little boy it belong to had no role at all in this case, he was no longer there, he is of an age he could not have been able in anyway to act out in anyway to make madeleine disappear.


all there was , was a little stain, that on visibility could give the impression it could originated from semen, so it got tested and all that was found was the dna from a to young boy to be able to shed semen. for the investigation it would have ended there, only because there will be a time the dossier will end up in court, you can not afford loose ends. the loose end is just that these sorts of half work are used to discredit the things that count and they cost just everybody time.
by the way there are more possibilities than saliva or semen, but you better look that up for yourself at a time you don't have to eat 
soon after.

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by Joss on 22.01.15 16:18

@onehand wrote:@joss

yes, this boy is the son of the people who did stay at 5a the week before the arrival of the mccanns. i choose to not use his name again, because he is a minor.

a weak positive is not proof your specimen is semen, there are a lot of tests for anything from a human who would only done as first screening, a weak positive is not the same as positive for semen, most of those are enzyme tests and very little of them are so specific that even a weak result gives you an answer, the gold standard in testing for semen is to find sperm cells. 
but they manage to get an dna result from it, but they did not prove where it was has its origin. if you look up the citation from the report, you can safely conclude they found a male set of dna, and enough markers to make out it was this boy, there was also a sister that week. it could not have been dna from a sperm cell. those only have half of the dna pairs of the donor, that would not have been noted as being dna from this boy, that is only done if you find pairs of the dna. and because of the boy his very young age and pre puberty , he was not likely to be a shedder. it would pretty unique if he was. 

for me this was half the work done, but from what is in the files, in the reports from john lowe you can't say there was a stain originated from semen. and you can't simply conclude if it is not semen it is saliva.

there is no proof to find that bedding was completely given to laundry. 

if degrading was a problem, the would not have found enough other non semen dna to name it. there was dna found, so degrading was in this no problem.

cleaning in hotels and holiday facilities is done to please the eye of the customer. the rest is just made up from what it cost, management always will look into the border of hygiene and costs. if the bedding looks okay, smells okay or the freshness spray could solve that, you have a fat chance to be the second user or even third. it is not what you want to know, just reality.
commercial washing of household linnen would not have left a stain like this, with readable dna. 

it was also not a blanket, but a duvet cover that had the stain, the same one visible in the files. 

joss, you made the example, your sentence:  I know there is the internet theory going on that it was a saliva stain and not semen.


this would not have happen if they had done a complete set of tests done.  in this case it is not a possible lead anymore for the investigation, because of the dna that was found, and tested, this little boy it belong to had no role at all in this case, he was no longer there, he is of an age he could not have been able in anyway to act out in anyway to make madeleine disappear.


all there was , was a little stain, that on visibility could give the impression it could originated from semen, so it got tested and all that was found was the dna from a to young boy to be able to shed semen. for the investigation it would have ended there, only because there will be a time the dossier will end up in court, you can not afford loose ends. the loose end is just that these sorts of half work are used to discredit the things that count and they cost just everybody time.
by the way there are more possibilities than saliva or semen, but you better look that up for yourself at a time you don't have to eat 
soon after.
onehand,  yes i understand all that, and that a previous child that had stayed in the same apartment could not have had anything to do with the things you mention. Then again i wonder if as you say about the laundering of the bedspreads in the holiday apartments, and if the bedspreads were not laundered every time there were so many different guests in between, who can say where the stain could of originated from anyway? So why bring the children of the previous tenants to the McC's into the equation anyway?
LOL at your last sentence.

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: DNA photofit breakthrough?

Post by onehand on 22.01.15 20:12

The people who had a completely legal right to have been on the scene , before it become a crime scene, you need their dna samples just to select them out.
Most people does not have a problem to give their dna for those reasons, but most countries also have an obligation by law those samples could not be kept endlessly or be part of a dna database.
 
All police officers and the forensic people on scene also have their dna tested. Just because dna samples are easy to mix any time after.
 
The forensics don’t give answers as 100% sure for anything, it is always given within a range of possibilities. Most times in percentages or in terms like weak positive of high positive and anything between.
In this case the stain had give a find of dna and also a match to the boy, or even more correct, the result was from a male descendant of the persons with the dna samples a and b given.
 
Also this boy, who was the most likely to fit with this dna sample, was there in a specific period of time. So most forensics and police investigations would take the freedom to date this stain as most likely originated from that specific week. But without other evidence there would never be a way to be 100% sure.
 
Sometimes you can have some luck and there is matching dna to a person that was proven in a exact period of time on your crime scene, and the dna was taken from the most upper layer of a stain. This could bring more certainty, because this specific dna sample would act as a time barrier. Samples taken to screen for dna could be taken on different depths of a stain, just by pressing more or less the sample sticks or nowadays also a type of plaster. Looks a bit like a sticky tape.
 
It is mostly costs that influence what and how many possible test are actually done, there are other parameters to test, if it is needed on behalf of the investigation, in this case someone has just decided against a full profile of the stain.
 
There is another problem, that is often forgotten, every sample you use in a test is in 99% of the cases lost after a test, you need pretty tough chemicals to get the dna out or other testable elements, so the portion of a sample could mean you only have just one chance to get a result. Not all findings deliver enough samples for keeping some of the material.
 
If you test a root of a hair, it is gone forever. If your test go wrong, you end up empty handed. That's why the quality of the labs and the experience and knowledge and working standards have to be very high. If you have a large stain, you also could test more and on more different things, but more important, you could also store some if later a better test has come in use. 

onehand

Posts : 117
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2013-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum