The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

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 help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by bristow on 29.10.13 10:44

I do not know much about forensic science but does anyone know (hypothetically speaking) if there could still be any evidence of the original findings of cadaver and blood scent in 5a today or would it all be gone?

____________________
Coincidence is a messenger sent by truth.
avatar
bristow

Posts : 823
Reputation : 8
Join date : 2011-11-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by bristow on 29.10.13 12:00

Verrry interesting, just found this little snippet about blood sniffer dogs, they can detect the scent for SEVEN years!!

"Specially trained cocker spaniel sniffer dogs, which are able to detect blood up to seven years old."


Actually this is an original article from The Telegraph about Eddie and Keeler's findings, interesting reading for sure.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1559608/Madeleine-McCann-Blood-found-in-bedroom.html

____________________
Coincidence is a messenger sent by truth.
avatar
bristow

Posts : 823
Reputation : 8
Join date : 2011-11-24

Back to top Go down

LCN DNA

Post by AB1 on 06.11.13 23:03

Quote from Wikipedia "Low Copy Number DNA"

Low Copy Number (LCN) is a DNA profiling technique developed by the Forensic Science Service (FSS) and in use in some countries since 1999.
In the United Kingdom use of the technique was suspended between 21 December 2007 and 14 January 2008 while the Crown Prosecution Service conducted a review into its use - this suspension has now been lifted.[1]
LCN is an extension of Second Generation Multiplex Plus (SGM Plus) profiling technique. It is a more sensitive technique because it involves a greater amount of copying via polymerase chain reaction (PCR) from a smaller amount of starting material, meaning that a profile can be obtained from only a few cells, which may be as small as a millionth the size of a grain of salt, and amount to a just few cells of skin or sweat left from a fingerprint.[2]

Advantages[edit]
LCN evidence has allowed convictions to be made in several cold cases. For example, Mark Henson was convicted of rape in 2005, 10 years after the crime was committed, from re-analysis of a microscope slide.[3] In 1981, evidence was deliberately kept after the rape and murder of 14 year old Marion Crofts. In 1999, a DNA profile was obtained from this using LCN. This was continually checked against the UK National DNA Database for the next two years, until a match was eventually found for Tony Jasinskyj after he was arrested for another crime. He was eventually given a life sentence in 2002.[4]

Criticism[edit]
It has been used in more than 21,000 serious crime cases in the UK and internationally, particularly in "cold" cases. A FSS spokesman said: "LCN DNA analysis is only carried out by the most-experienced DNA scientists, who have undergone special additional training and testing in this area of casework."[5] However, the technique came under attack from the Judge during the trial of Sean Hoey - who was eventually cleared of involvement in the Omagh Bombing. One of the criticisms the judge leveled at LCN was that although the FSS had internally validated and published scientific papers on the technique, there was an alleged lack of external validation by the wider scientific community.[6] Following the Judge's ruling, the use of the technique was suspended in the UK, pending a review by the Crown Prosecution Service. This review was completed and the suspension lifted on the January 14, 2008 with the CPS stating that it had not seen anything to suggest that any current problems exist with LCN".[1]
The increased sensitivity of LCN also increases the risks posed by contamination of samples in the laboratory. Since LCN aims to amplify levels of DNA as low as 100 picograms, even breathing on a sample may contaminate it substantially enough to render the final profile unusable[citation needed]. Contamination is particularly problematic before the sample has undergone amplification because both the suspect's and the contaminator's DNA will be amplified, resulting in a mixed profile.

---------------------------------------

Two points:

1) At the time the LCN DNA results were delivered in MM's case, there were doubts regarding the reliability of the technique following criticism in Oct 2006 frollowing the Hoey trial. (Interesting that it takes a year...) As Wiki points out, there was a suspension of its usage while the CPS sought non-FSS validation. The suspension was lifted in January 2008, and has resulted in successful convictions in cold cases.
DID UK POLICE/FSS CONTACT THE PJ TO RE-EVALUATE THE DNA RESULTS IN THE WAKE OF THIS EXTERNAL VALIDATION?

2) Due to extensive amplification, the risk of contamination must surely be as likely to render negative results as positive ones, which actually makes the 15 out of 19 marker hits in MM's case seem more rather than less impressive?

Why have SY not "openly" undertaken an re-examination of the forensics in MM's case when it is routine to do so in other cold cases?

AB1

Posts : 49
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by Guest on 06.11.13 23:25

@AB1 wrote:[...]

Why have SY not "openly" undertaken an re-examination of the forensics in MM's case when it is routine to do so in other cold cases?
***
Who's to say they didn't ?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by Estelle on 06.11.13 23:26

This is an area which I think is extremely important to take another look at.

1) At the time the LCN DNA results were delivered in MM's case, there were doubts regarding the reliability of the technique following criticism in Oct 2006 frollowing the Hoey trial. (Interesting that it takes a year...) As Wiki points out, there was a suspension of its usage while the CPS sought non-FSS validation. The suspension was lifted in January 2008, and has resulted in successful convictions in cold cases.
DID UK POLICE/FSS CONTACT THE PJ TO RE-EVALUATE THE DNA RESULTS IN THE WAKE OF THIS EXTERNAL VALIDATION?


Good question.  SY should have contacted the PJ to make sure they re-evaluate the DNA results but they have been too distracted with sightings and suspects.  I think the Portuguese have regretted sending anything to the FSS in Birmingham. I would prefer that they ask the USA for assistance now.  

2) Due to extensive amplification, the risk of contamination must surely be as likely to render negative results as positive ones, which actually makes the 15 out of 19 marker hits in MM's case seem more rather than less impressive?

I agree. In most countries, the McCanns would be in jail by now. I have never understood this but in January, 2008, there was a headline in a UK tabloid which stated that the Blood was 100% Madeleine's

Why have SY not "openly" undertaken an re-examination of the forensics in MM's case when it is routine to do so in other cold cases?

It's either been done behind the scenes or it will be done in the future unless this case becomes a whitewash. 
avatar
Estelle

Posts : 386
Reputation : 79
Join date : 2009-12-22

Back to top Go down

DNA

Post by AB1 on 06.11.13 23:36

Châtelaine wrote:
@AB1 wrote:[...]

Why have SY not "openly" undertaken an re-examination of the forensics in MM's case when it is routine to do so in other cold cases?
***
Who's to say they didn't ?
If they have, or are, re-evaluating the forensic results, why the need for secrecy? Cold cases are often selected for further review on the basis that forensics are available. This is usually publicised as it can provoke 'reactions' from suspects before the results are back.

So either SY haven't or its secret. Either way, it's unusual.

AB1

Posts : 49
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by Guest on 06.11.13 23:39

@AB1 wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@AB1 wrote:[...]

Why have SY not "openly" undertaken an re-examination of the forensics in MM's case when it is routine to do so in other cold cases?
***
Who's to say they didn't ?
If they have, or are, re-evaluating the forensic results, why the need for secrecy? Cold cases are often selected for further review on the basis that forensics are available. This is usually publicised as it can provoke 'reactions' from suspects before the results are back.

So either SY haven't or its secret. Either way, it's unusual.
***
If I were SY [or PJ as for that matter], I would keep my cards close to my chest [as an experienced poker-player winkwink ]
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by AB1 on 06.11.13 23:47

@Estelle wrote:This is an area which I think is extremely important to take another look at.

In most countries, the McCanns would be in jail by now. I have never understood this but in January, 2008, there was a headline in a UK tabloid which stated that the Blood was 100% Madeleine's

-snipped -

I agree!

Think even McCann supporters would agree that, had this happened in the UK, the MCs would have been arrested after the cadaver/blood dogs gave positive indications. Back then, with that knowledge, he UK public would have been shocked if the MCs hadn't been arrested...

AB1

Posts : 49
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-27

Back to top Go down

DNA

Post by AB1 on 07.11.13 0:12

Châtelaine wrote:
@AB1 wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@AB1 wrote:[...]

Why have SY not "openly" undertaken an re-examination of the forensics in MM's case when it is routine to do so in other cold cases?
***
Who's to say they didn't ?
If they have, or are, re-evaluating the forensic results, why the need for secrecy? Cold cases are often selected for further review on the basis that forensics are available. This is usually publicised as it can provoke 'reactions' from suspects before the results are back.

So either SY haven't or its secret. Either way, it's unusual.
***
If I were SY [or PJ as for that matter], I would keep my cards close to my chest [as an experienced poker-player  ]
Prefer backgammon - sitting back to take the late run when the opponent thinks they are home and dry. winkwink 

REALLY hope SY are playing a shrewd game...

To even have to consider that they are preparing a whitewash actually feels physically painful.
It would be a terrible dis-service to the original PJ investigation, which is far better than they are given credit for, considering they worked with one arm tied to a diplomatic hand. (My criticism would be not physically checking the twins and taking their blood, clothes, bedding etc.)
In the meantime, Amaral still suffers the stresses of the libel charade.
And no doubt donations were made to the MF after CW...

Guess I'm just getting increasingly impatient, knowing Madeline's now been "gone" for longer than she was ever here...

AB1

Posts : 49
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by Estelle on 07.11.13 0:14

I recently read this article and am wondering what you think of it as I am still learning abut DNA and wish to know more because IMO it was a weakness in the case. 

.
stains found on walls
snipped...

"In our DNA is... DNA post we said we were going to deconstruct all the information in the FSS Final Report about the stains found in the corner of apartment 5A that UK Crimewatch "forgot" to highlight  (Discrepancy 05 - The Living-Room Corner).  

We said were going to deconstruct it in 3 major areas "DNA Results""Apparently Originating From"and "FSS' Opinion".  That early September post, DNA is... DNAwas about the first area, "DNA Results", today, is about the second: "Apparently Originating From".

The issue is just too complex for a single post, this being the first one about it.

Let's start with what FSS has to say about from where it APPARENTLY thinks the DNA in the stains originated:

Stains from the FLOOR:

#1 - “a male individual“ 
#2 - “at least two people“

#3 - “more than one person“


Stains from the EAST wall:


#4 “a female individual“
#5 “at least two persons“

#6 - “information was too meagre to permit a meaningful comparison“

#13 - “ no profile was obtained“

Stains from the NORTH wall:


#7 - “at least two persons“

#8 - “information was too meagre to permit a meaningful comparison“

#9 - “a male individual“

#10 - “at least two persons“

#11 - “no profile was obtained“

#12 - “at least two persons“

Stains from the COUCH:


#14 - “ not adequate for comparison purposes“
#15 - “at least three persons of whom at least two were male“

We can group them by the number of people that FSS thinks the DNA in the stains have originated from:

THREE people (out of 15): stain 15

TWO or MORE people (“at least two people”“at least two persons” or “more than one person”) (6of 15): stains: 235710 and 12

ONE person (“male individual” or “female individual”) (out 15): stains 1and 9

UNQUANTIFIABLE (“information too meagre” or “not adequate for comparison”) (of 15): stains 6,and 14

NO PROFILE (of 15): stains 11 and 13


staggering 47%, almost half of the tinyminuscule and invisible to the eye stains had DNA from  more than one person in them!

One cannot but wonder how many people provided DNA to those other 5 tinyminuscule and invisible to the eye stains (681113 and 14) that were either deemed UNQUANTIFIABLE or had NO PROFILE found.

Statistically, half of them would also be from more than 1 person

Fact is that only 3 stains, out of a possible 15, had a single person DNA in them.

We don't think John Lowe realized that when he uses the expression "at least two persons", or similar ones to that, about the DNA in the stains, he's raising an hypothesis very damning to the McCanns as we hope to show with this post.

We call it the “soup-effect” As you know, a soup has many ingredients, and what happened is that in each one of those 7 tiny, minuscule and invisible to the eye stains a mixture of more than one "ingredient" was found. This begs the question, where was each stain's "soup" madeIn loco, as in the floorwalls and couch, or somewhere else?

As far as we know, except in scientific experimentation and in proper labsmixtures of anything, even soup, in tinyminuscule and invisible to the eye quantities aren’t possible to be done, much less on a wall or on a couch.

So, for the DNA originating from different people to be in such tiny, minuscule and invisible to the eye spots, then the mixture had to be done somewhere else and then sprayed respectively on the floorwall and couch.

What can possibly originate such a mixture of DNA? 2 people bleeding together? Then carefully sprinkling their blood in tinyminuscule and invisible to the naked eyes specks on walls, namely on one behind a couchcurtains and under curtains?  And also the floor beneath that couch?  Various former guests had bled in the apartment and all were accident prone? Was there a big fight? But who and why?

Nothing but mosquito swats could have produced 2 samples in one spot. But who goes and squashes mosquitoes on a wall behind a couch, a curtain and a under curtainNo one. Who squashes mosquitoes on the floor below a couch? Also no one.  Besides, a squashed mosquito makes a visible splat, having splattered a few myself. It produces a stain perfectly visible and not one that’s tinyminuscule and invisible to the eyeMosquito splats, you could say, could be cleaned by a cleaner and eradicated to naked eye.

Well, true if the cleaners were "specialized cleaners", like we believe the "6-Cleaners" to have been, but then that would simply confirm their presence and the need for their expertise.

By the way, we believe that is exactly what happened: "specialized cleaners" eradicated all the vestiges of blood they could. They just let some tiny, minuscule and invisible to the naked eye remain where they were  found. 

Not on purpose, obviously. They just slipped through the cracks.

If we're talking about cleaners from Ocean Club, one must remember that one is not exactly speaking about the Waldorf AstoriaHotel cleaning staff don't wash walls unless there are big smears on them. These extraordinary occurrences are normally reported by guests and taken care of as soon as possible, so not part of the routine room cleaning proceedings between change of occupants.

squashed mosquito does make a visible stain to the naked eye but it isn't one that calls for one's attention. With the exception of "specialized cleaners", as just referred, hotel cleaners do not account for the number and location of stains found

Could the DNA be contaminated by a person collecting it (LPC) or subsequently handling it (FSS)? This topic will be dealt with in our next post but we can anticipate that Lowe specifically implies that one of LPC's forensic expertsMr. Fernando Viegasof doing just that.

We're talking about the most talked about case in world at the time. This blood finding was an enormous media bomb! Its explosive sensitivity was public and evident.

LPC, and we're sure they didn't require any sort of guidance in this matter, certainly took EXTRA care on how these samples were collected.  Had there been any mishap in collections, we're certain that it would have been mentioned on the diligence report. For the exact same reasons we don't believe that any of the samples were contaminated at FSS. o the biggest problem for the McCanns about the stains is the absolutely impossible marksmanship required.

Remember Robin Hood’s famous arrow shot? The one in which he splits an arrow, that has hit the dead centre bullseye, with another?

For two people to hit with their DNA the exact same tiny, minuscule, invisible to the eye spot it’s nothing short of repeating Robin Hood’s impossible arrow shot.

Do that 6 times over is more than mesmerizing. An adequate adjective has yet to be found to qualify such absolutely unbelievable wonder!

And one has to be rendered absolutely speechless in awe if on top of those 6 times we have one arrow that splits one that had split another:

And that has happened with stain 15at least three persons of whom at least two were male“!!

If we were to transpose what was said to be found in that inaccessible corner of the 5A’s living-room, to an archery shooting range, this is what we would have:


Lanes 2, 3, 5, 7, 10 and 12 would each get a GOLD STAR and lane 15 would have to get two of them! Taking into account that lanes 6, 8, 11, 13 and 14 weren't shot, that is one outstanding show of “archery”!!

Enough to send Robin Hood back to Sherwood Forest, shoulders slumped, after having been so completely humiliated in front of Lady Marion…But we don't have to feel sympathy for Mr Hood as we know him to be a fictional character. Or at most a legend.

However, 5A marksmanship is very real. According to FSS that is."

To be continued...


avatar
Estelle

Posts : 386
Reputation : 79
Join date : 2009-12-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by sonic72 on 07.11.13 0:20

I'm not sure if the original DNA that was tested would still exist, and if it did if it would still be viable, but if it is then one would expect that 6.5 years down the line, DNA technology would have improved significantly.

If any DNA still exists, then it should be tested with today's equipment...

____________________

avatar
sonic72

Posts : 341
Reputation : 70
Join date : 2012-09-09

Back to top Go down

DNA

Post by AB1 on 07.11.13 1:11

@sonic72 wrote:I'm not sure if the original DNA that was tested would still exist, and if it did if it would still be viable, but if it is then one would expect that 6.5 years down the line, DNA technology would have improved significantly.

If any DNA still exists, then it should be tested with today's equipment...
DNA  does degrade, and of course there may be very little source material left given the samples already taken for testing. Taking samples from samples of the primary source (if you see what I mean) would lead to representations of contamination.

Estelle - that's an interesting piece!
On face value, I see the point re sample 15. But we don't know the source 'soup' - blood, skin, hair, saliva, semen etc. In a hired apartment the couch (and mattresses and headboards) would seem to be places where 'soup' would be MORE likely and walls LESS likely, unless by doorways, windows etc. Just thinking how people commonly use spaces and furniture etc.
Need to read it through a few times and visit the site. Thanks for introducing it. roses 

Re DNA from Scenic. I've read the likelihood of it being Madeline's is 80% or 88% but need to check where those references are. Again, that was a probable 3 person soup, so that fact it was over 75% does, statistically, seem of note.

AB1

Posts : 49
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by Estelle on 07.11.13 1:45

Friday, 1 November 2013

DNA - The Bar Code

"In our last post, Remarkable Marksmanship, we saw that the DNA found in 7 out of a possible 15 stains in the corner of the living room of apartment 5A came from more than 1 person. This is according to FSS Final Report, signed by John Lowe, that is in the PJ Files. John Lowe doesn't give any differentiation or connection as to who these people may be, with the exception of one, CGFSS tells us that we have 3 single-DNA stains: stain from unknown male, stain from an unknown female and stain from CG, a 2yo boyAs we showed in our Superkid post, it's near impossible for CG to have contributed to stain 9. The only way he would have contributed would have been for someone to have planted his DNA there and that would have absurd implications. So let's forget about CG for the moment and consider only that the male from stain #1 is not the same male from stain #9.  We know that stain #4 is from a female.  We also know that stain #15 is from, at least, 3 people, 2 male and the other unknownThat means that, at least, 3 people, 2 male and 1 female, contributed with their DNA to 10 out of the 15 stains. 10 stains because 7 are multiple-DNA and 3 are single-DNA. So this would be a possible scenario for 3 people:


Putting some fictional names  to the stains, it would mean this:


One can, obviously juggle the PicklesPlaskitt and Birtwhistle names around, as long as one respects the singularity and differentiation of stains 14 and 9 (stain 4 being from a female and stains 1 and from different males).  But as we said, FSS hasn't made any connection between these stains, so each stain could come from a different person:



Again, by putting fictional names to the stains, we would get this:

[font]

And by putting the 2 hypothesis side by side:

[/font]

As the saying goes, 2 is company 3 is a crowd, so we can say that, according to FSS, a crowd from 3 to 18 people left their DNA in an inaccessible corner of the living room in apartment 5A.

[color]

Remember that we're not taking into account all 15 stains but only those 10 that FSS said had DNA.

[/color]
[color]

Having come to the conclusion, on our DNA is... DNA post, that the DNA found in those stains could only have come from blood (or cerebrospinal fluid but that we'll leave that one out for now until opportune to bring it in again) then we have to say that in that particularinaccessible corner of the living room of apartment 5AVampire Parties surely must have taken place!![/color]

We see no other explanation to justify the enormous variety of samples albeit all being tiny,minuscule and invisible to the eye!

new myth is born: it was vampires who abducted Maddie!! Unbeknownst to Maddie’s parentsThursday nights were Vampire Night in Apartment 5A and they went and left their children alone while going to dine at Tapas.  Please don't mock this ridiculous theory as Thursday's Vampire Nights in 5A are as REAL as the McCanns having left their children alone in the apartment or as the T9 having had dinner that week at Tapas. Look at it this way, the McCanns invented the Quiz Nights at Tapas and we've invented Thursday's Vampire Nights in 5A.

Both are equally real. NOT.

The difference being that the Quiz Nights have come out of the blue while we've based our invention on an OFFICIAL document that's an integral part of the PJ Files: UK's FSS Final Report.

Otherwise, is there any other explanation for so many to have given, in so many places in such a small area (all tinyminuscule and invisible to the eye), so little of their blood? Officially, we've been told that only one person has bled in that apartmentMr Paul Gordon.

He recognizes that fact: "While we were in Portugal there were no incidents worthy of record, beyond this man that I have described, however there was one occasion when I cut myself shaving in the bathroom of the apartment. I would say that the cut bled for about 45 minutes and that it took some time until the cut stopped bleeding, during which period I walked around the apartment with paper tissues trying to stop the blood. Aside from this, to the best of my knowledge no one else cut themselves nor did anyone die in the apartment." 

His wife, Saleigh Gordon, confirms this: "During our stay Paul cut his face whilst shaving and the cut bled for some time. Neither the children nor I injured ourselves and as far as I know nobody died in the apartment.” 

We'll disregard that we find it very strange for Saleigh to remember Paul cutting himself shaving on a holiday. I say this because if I was asked to recall how many times Fred cut himself shaving just last week I wouldn't be able to answer the literally bloody question!. But either Mr Gordon very, very rarely cuts himself shaving or in that occasion he memorably bled profusely, for 45 minutes it seems, the fact is that Mrs Gordon proves to have an excellent memory. So when Saleigh Gordon says that no one else in her family has hurt themselves, we must take that as fact.

What we simply cannot understand (of course we can...) is how her 2yr old son, CG, is linked to a stain (swabs 9 A & B) on the North wall (where he can't possibly reach) as the FSS Final Report so clearly and adamantly states.  Either Mrs Gordon is lying or the FSS is. As you know, we believe that Saleigh Gordon is being truthful when she says that little CG didn't hurt himself on that holiday.  Officially then, we have many bleeders but only one identifiedPaul Gordon, who happens to not be linked to any of the stains as there’s no forensic evidence found in the apartment of his 45 minute bleeding odyssey.  Strange... but then again, Vampires are a strange lot.

Is this as absurd as it seems? Absurd is the fact that this information has gone uncontested for so long, the discussion about forensics being maintained well centred exclusively around the evidence found in the Scenic and, apparently, taking it for granted that these stains belonged to Paul Gordon.

How ever could they belong only to Paul Gordon and to "more than one person" escapes us completely. But the information about these stains on FSS Final Report (besides the one related to CGisn't absurd. It's specious but not absurd.  And it's John Lowe who unveils this mystery and shows us why all of the above, although a possible and realistic reading of what is writtenisn't exactly what he wrote.

He does this when he speaks of swabs 3 A & B, one that FSS thinks the DNA in it has originated from “more than one person““Departing from the principle that all confirmed DNA components within the scope of this result originated from a single source and if the DNA within the scope of this result originated from more than one person” So there you have it.

The expression “more than one person” can mean that it's different components of DNA from the same person (single source) or different components of DNA from different people.

What is the common ground? That more than one component of DNA was found in those stains.

To extrapolate that into saying that the DNA from those different components is only from "more than one person" is absolutely abusive. And what is applicable to stain 3 is applicable to all other stains.  Let’s imagine that our DNA is a bar code, like this one:




We all have a unique one, just like our fingerprints.


In theory, what was found were partial components of a particular bar code (someone’s partial bits of DNA). We'll call one of them, sample X:


Imagine that you have 4 bar codes from which we can compare sample X with: bar codes A, B, C and D:


In this case, the partial bar code, or sample X, is compatible with a part of bar codes A and B.

With bar code A:

[color]

With bar code B:

[/color]
[color]

The problem is that it can be from both but without confirming from which it is:

[/color]

Sample X may originate from more than one bar code, more specifically from either bar code A or bar code B.  Now compare our “may originate from more than one bar code” with Lowe’s “apparently originating from more than one person”.  Aren't they exactly the same? Yes they are.  So, in this case, we have shown how a single sample can be connected to more than one person.  This usually happens when comparing samples with DNA from same family members.

So “a single source” is perfectly compatible with more than one person being linked to a particular stain.  Yes, say you, but John Lowe speaks of components, in the plural, so not just a single sample. Imagine then that there are 2 different samplessample A and sample B:

[color]

These 2 different samples can come from the same bar code, in this case, bar code X:[/color]


As you can see, samples A and B originated from a single sourcebar code X. Compare our "samples A and B originated from a single source" with Lowe's "components within the scope of this result originated from a single source".  Aren't they exactly the same? Yes they are. So the plural, components, is perfectly compatible with them being linked to a single person.

The different components may just be pieces of the same puzzle as is said in the case of "all confirmed DNA components within the scope of this result originated from a single source" When Lowe says “apparently originating from at least two people”, “two persons” and “more than person”, as he says so often, he’s being specious,  playing with words so that your brain assumes that the “two people” referred are ALWAYS from sample found and NOT about the DNA with which the sample, or samples, was, or were, compared with. 

Neat and crafty little trick, isn’t it?  It makes you think, like we know you did, that the samples obtained from the swabs are from a soup-effect phenomenon rather than being just from a single person.  Deconstructing this "illusion" means that the scenario of a single person contributing to the DNA found in all stains is as possible as having those with crowds from 3 to 18 people:




But the single source scenario is much more realistic than those of crowds 3 -18.

Taking into account:

1. the inaccessibility of the living room area where the tinyminuscule and invisible stains were found;


2. the fact that blood is the only body fluid possible to have originated such specks, as we showed you here;

3. the statistical impossibility, due to sizelocation and number of those particular spots, for the DNA found in each  to have originated from more than one sourceas we showed you here;

we have to conclude that the only realistic scenario is for the DNA on all those stains to have come from a single source.  So realistic that up to now it was taken for granted that they belonged to a single personPaul Gordon, who, we repeat, is not referred in the UK's FSS Final Report that's in the PJ Files.

The whole idea behind "Lowe's Specious Style" is to deceive using the truth with the objective of  having what the deceiver says appear to be what the deceiver wants the deceived to hear what the deceiver has said. For example, have a section of 1 person's DNA appear to be from 2 or 3 different people.  He certainly doesn’t want to be clarifying. On the contrary, his intent is to mystify.

He intends to push truth even deeper into the dark bowels of mythology, where, once there, it cannot be salvaged. As we said before the wrapping in which a message is presented is much more important than the message itself. 

We realize that this post takes some digesting as it’s exposing the complication Lowe’s words deliberately cause. Unlike Lowe, we seek to clarify.  The Maddie Affair revolves exclusively around a resource known to all but understood by very few:  Information.  That information resource has been masterfully well handled and very rarely has it been mishandled in the Maddie case.

This post is not about the mishandling of the truth, but about deconstructing the way it has been handled. In particular, how it was handled just to fool you.  The same exact words, or set of words, DO always have two distinct meanings: the one is I intend to tell you and the other what you actually hear I've said. Knowing that, I can reword my message in a way that you'll hear not what I've said but what I want you to hear.  And if I only use the truth I can tell you a blatant lie without uttering a false word.

Sounds complex? It is. That's the reason why it's said that a half-truth is 10 times more deceptive than a lie.


http://textusa.blogspot.com.au/
avatar
Estelle

Posts : 386
Reputation : 79
Join date : 2009-12-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by Estelle on 07.11.13 1:57

Black Dahlia case may be solved by death-sniffing dog 66 years later


Feb. 6, 2013


On January 15, 1947, the severed body of 22-year-old Elizabeth Short was found in a vacant lot in Los Angeles. The case went cold and remained unsolved up to today, but former LAPD detective Steve Hodel has long believed his father murdered Short, nicknamed the Black Dahlia.


The Nov. 9 search of the historic house was conducted with the TV show "Ghost Hunters." Hodel participated in the search along with a cadaver dog trained to sniff for human remains. Although it was filmed, the segment with Buster did not air in the Jan. 16 episode. [Update: You can see a clip of the cadaver dog [url=http://www.syfy.com/videos/Ghost Hunters/Bonus Scenes/vid:2620666]here at SyFy.com[/url].]
Buster's sense of smell led to a vent just outside the basement where he alerted detectives to the scent of human decomposition. Hodel said soil samples from the basement have been sent to a lab for analysis, but he believes the dog was onto something. "We have established as fact that the basement ... some 66 years after the murder, still holds the smell of death."

http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/02/04/Black-Dahlia-case-may-be-solved-by-death-sniffing-dog/3861360014973/#ixzz2jv7NGiJx
avatar
Estelle

Posts : 386
Reputation : 79
Join date : 2009-12-22

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by bristow on 07.11.13 18:12

@Estelle wrote:Black Dahlia case may be solved by death-sniffing dog 66 years later


Feb. 6, 2013


On January 15, 1947, the severed body of 22-year-old Elizabeth Short was found in a vacant lot in Los Angeles. The case went cold and remained unsolved up to today, but former LAPD detective Steve Hodel has long believed his father murdered Short, nicknamed the Black Dahlia.


The Nov. 9 search of the historic house was conducted with the TV show "Ghost Hunters." Hodel participated in the search along with a cadaver dog trained to sniff for human remains. Although it was filmed, the segment with Buster did not air in the Jan. 16 episode. [Update: You can see a clip of the cadaver dog [url=http://www.syfy.com/videos/Ghost Hunters/Bonus Scenes/vid:2620666]here at SyFy.com[/url].]
Buster's sense of smell led to a vent just outside the basement where he alerted detectives to the scent of human decomposition. Hodel said soil samples from the basement have been sent to a lab for analysis, but he believes the dog was onto something. "We have established as fact that the basement ... some 66 years after the murder, still holds the smell of death."

http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/02/04/Black-Dahlia-case-may-be-solved-by-death-sniffing-dog/3861360014973/#ixzz2jv7NGiJx
Yes that story fascinates me, it's one of the reasons I did the OP, whether dogs could be take to apartment 5a and still alert 6 years on.

____________________
Coincidence is a messenger sent by truth.
avatar
bristow

Posts : 823
Reputation : 8
Join date : 2011-11-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by Guest on 07.11.13 18:26

@bristow wrote:
@Estelle wrote:Black Dahlia case may be solved by death-sniffing dog 66 years later [...]  
Yes that story fascinates me, it's one of the reasons I did the OP, whether dogs could be take to apartment 5a and still alert 6 years on.
***
Now that might be a brilliant idea: to send a second pair of EVRD and CSI dogs in ...
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by bristow on 07.11.13 18:33

Châtelaine wrote:
@bristow wrote:
@Estelle wrote:Black Dahlia case may be solved by death-sniffing dog 66 years later [...]  
Yes that story fascinates me, it's one of the reasons I did the OP, whether dogs could be take to apartment 5a and still alert 6 years on.
***
Now that might be a brilliant idea: to send a second pair of EVRD and CSI dogs in …
Definitely worth a try I reckon!!

____________________
Coincidence is a messenger sent by truth.
avatar
bristow

Posts : 823
Reputation : 8
Join date : 2011-11-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Blood and Cadaver scent - Six years on

Post by tigger on 07.11.13 18:49

@AB1 wrote:
@sonic72 wrote:I'm not sure if the original DNA that was tested would still exist, and if it did if it would still be viable, but if it is then one would expect that 6.5 years down the line, DNA technology would have improved significantly.

If any DNA still exists, then it should be tested with today's equipment...
DNA  does degrade, and of course there may be very little source material left given the samples already taken for testing. Taking samples from samples of the primary source (if you see what I mean) would lead to representations of contamination.

Estelle - that's an interesting piece!
On face value, I see the point re sample 15. But we don't know the source 'soup' - blood, skin, hair, saliva, semen etc. In a hired apartment the couch (and mattresses and headboards) would seem to be places where 'soup' would be MORE likely and walls LESS likely, unless by doorways, windows etc. Just thinking how people commonly use spaces and furniture etc.
Need to read it through a few times and visit the site. Thanks for introducing it. roses 

Re DNA from Scenic. I've read the likelihood of it being Madeline's is 80% or 88% but need to check where those references are. Again, that was a probable 3 person soup, so that fact it was over 75% does, statistically, seem of note.
In the second Swedish interview last year Gerry launches into a hilarious explanation: of course Maddie's DNA was in the car he said, because our DNA was in it. I like to call it the Smartie explanation. 

I think 17 out of 20 alleles were a match to Maddie which would be enough for a UK court.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 40
Join date : 2011-07-20

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
McCanns apt & hire car


Blood and cadaver alerts
dismissed by UK Government


Retired DCI Gonçalo Amaral: "The English can always present the conclusions to which they themselves arrived in 2007. Because they know, they have the evidence of what happened - they don't need to investigate anything. All this is now a mere 'show off'."

Retired murder DCI Colin Sutton: "I would also like to make the point that Operation Grange was so restricted from the start as to be destined to fail."

Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley made public on national TV that Operation Grange is a complete fraud.

Ex-DCI Andy Redwood had a "revelation moment" on BBC's Crimewatch on 14th October 2013 when he announced that Operation Grange had eliminated the Tanner sighting - which opened up the 'window of opportunity', in accordance with their remit, to allow the fake abduction to happen.

Despite "irrelevant behaviour" from blood and cadaver dogs in the McCann's apartment, on Kate McCann's clothes, and in the car they hired three weeks after Maddie disappeared, Ex-Chief Inspector, Ian Horrocks, said: "The thought that Kate and Gerry McCann had anything to do with the death of their daughter is frankly preposterous."

Gerry McCann called for example to be made of 'trolls'. SKY News reporter Martin Brunt doorstepped Brenda Leyland on 2 October 2014. She was then found dead in a Leicester hotel room. Brenda paid the price. She paid with her life.

Ex-Deputy Chief Constable, Jim Gamble QPM, congratulated SKY reporter, Martin Brunt, on twitter for doorstepping Brenda Leyland on behalf of Gerry McCann.

Prime Minister Theresa May introduces Prime Suspect Kate McCann to Royalty: The Duchess of Gloucester.

Good Cop Down: The reality of being a police whistleblower
https://goodcopdown.wordpress.com/