Bennett identifies a new Eddie alert - could it re-open the case?

We confidently wait for the evaluation reports from FSS. A few days after the samples are sent, we are informed that the DNA of the blood found in the boot of the McCanns’ car shows a significant match - 50% - with Gerald’s, which means that it is definitely the blood of one of his children. We telephone the public minister to pass on this initial result and wait for the follow-up to the analyses and definite conclusions But the laboratory takes its time.

Molly wrote:Thought so. Someone should have explained the basics of DNA to him.

Molly wrote:Thought so. Someone should have explained the basics of DNA to him.

sans_souci wrote:

Molly wrote:Thought so. Someone should have explained the basics of DNA to him.

I am reliably informed that this, along with so much else, is in the files retained by the PJ in anticipation of a criminal trial.

DCB1 wrote:

Molly wrote:Thought so. Someone should have explained the basics of DNA to him.

In Portuguese. Maybe Sofa did it?

Slartibartfast wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

muratfan01 wrote:WHICH BIT OF THAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND...INCONCLUSIVE...IT COULD NOT BE PROVED IT WAS MADELEINES...OR ANYONES.

Yes, not proved to be Madeleine's. But quite posibly, or even probably, was.

Less probable, Tony, given the nature of the sample of UP TO 5 PEOPLE.

5 people who may include Kate and Gerry( where all Madeleine's DNA comes from) and her sibling's who share a very similar DNA profile.

Given the unliklihood that people would transport a dead body at least 25 days after the fact amid the glare of constant media attention you still maintain it was more likely to be Madeleine's DNA?

Tony Bennett wrote:

muratfan01 wrote:The forensics on the blood said different. It was not proved to be Madeleine's.

Absolutely untrue and nonsense as you well know.

The final FSS report, amended from the first because of a second set of DNA tests, merely changed a certainty or near-certainty that the blood was Madeleine's into a tangled and convoluted set of probabilities which made the FSS at the end of the day say that the DNA results were 'inconclusive' so far as it being Madeleine's blood.

You have totally twisted that to come up with a blatant lie: "It was not proved to be Madeleine's".
DCB1 for one will back me up on what I have said.

Tony Bennett wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

muratfan01 wrote:WHICH BIT OF THAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND...INCONCLUSIVE...IT COULD NOT BE PROVED IT WAS MADELEINES...OR ANYONES.

Yes, not proved to be Madeleine's. But quite posibly, or even probably, was.

Less probable, Tony, given the nature of the sample of UP TO 5 PEOPLE.

5 people who may include Kate and Gerry( where all Madeleine's DNA comes from) and her sibling's who share a very similar DNA profile.

Given the unliklihood that people would transport a dead body at least 25 days after the fact amid the glare of constant media attention you still maintain it was more likely to be Madeleine's DNA?

Slartibartfast, I acknowledge the FSS 'Final' report, but DCB1 seems to think that was the only report.

But you yourself have quoted from this admittedly rough translation the following:

QUOTE

Note that the choice of this laboratory has been and continues to be obvious in view of its prestige, independence and scientific reputation, in spite opinion appears in the first instance the possibility of alignment of the DNA profile of MADELEINE with some of the traces collected (of which the large car in the Renault Scenic rented by the couple McCann), taking into account the content of that fax, then it incorporates the precise terms in the file (fls. 2620 et seq) but whose consistency as noted by the above mentioned final report of the FSS, was not to confirm, after the completion of long and complex examinations.

UNQUOTE

Now I don't want to be unfair, and I believe DCB1 likes to get his facts right, but is not the reference in red clearly to a first report and the reference in black to a 'final' report'?

So I was right after all regarding the existence of two reports - first and final?

Therefore, we cannot answer the question: is the match genuine or is it a chance match.
...These, along with all other results, will be formalised in a final report

Tony Bennett wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

muratfan01 wrote:WHICH BIT OF THAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND...INCONCLUSIVE...IT COULD NOT BE PROVED IT WAS MADELEINES...OR ANYONES.

Yes, not proved to be Madeleine's. But quite posibly, or even probably, was.

Less probable, Tony, given the nature of the sample of UP TO 5 PEOPLE.

5 people who may include Kate and Gerry( where all Madeleine's DNA comes from) and her sibling's who share a very similar DNA profile.

Given the unliklihood that people would transport a dead body at least 25 days after the fact amid the glare of constant media attention you still maintain it was more likely to be Madeleine's DNA?

Slartibartfast, I acknowledge the FSS 'Final' report, but DCB1 seems to think that was the only report.

But you yourself have quoted from this admittedly rough translation the following:

QUOTE

Note that the choice of this laboratory has been and continues to be obvious in view of its prestige, independence and scientific reputation, in spite opinion appears in the first instance the possibility of alignment of the DNA profile of MADELEINE with some of the traces collected (of which the large car in the Renault Scenic rented by the couple McCann), taking into account the content of that fax, then it incorporates the precise terms in the file (fls. 2620 et seq) but whose consistency as noted by the above mentioned final report of the FSS, was not to confirm, after the completion of long and complex examinations.

UNQUOTE

Now I don't want to be unfair, and I believe DCB1 likes to get his facts right, but is not the reference in red clearly to a first report and the reference in black to a 'final' report'?

So I was right after all regarding the existence of two reports - first and final?

A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeleine has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contributors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion.

A low level mixed DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the fibre coated luggage component (286C/2007-CRL(10(1))) from the motor vehicle. In my opinion this result is too complex to interpret at this stage.

A mixed, low-level DNA result, appearing to be from at least three people, was obtained from the cellular material collected (harvested) from the baggage compartment lined with fabric (286C/2007-CRL/10(1)) of the motor vehicle. That sample was submitted to tests to obtain DNA profiles through the LCN technique.

A DNA result through the LCN technique, which appeared to be from at least three persons, was obtained from the cellular material collected (harvested) from the baggage compartment lined with fabric (286C/2007-CRL/10(1)). In my opinion, this result is too complex to make a meaningful interpretation.