True Justice For Meredith Kercher
Justice Meredith Kercher Report

True Justice For Meredith Kercher

You mean the FSS, the late lamented UK Forensic Science Service abolished by David Cameron’s government. The responsible scientist did not make a finding of ‘Madeleine McCann’s DNA,’ he made a finding of a number of Madeleine’s DNA markers. The finding was inconclusive because the other four members of Madeleine’s immediate family, all of whom were known to have used that vehicle, possessed between them the same markers, and because it was a mixed trace with at least three and possibly five contributors, and because it was likely that items bearing Madeleine’s own DNA had been present in the vehicle. The Portuguese police — headed by an officer subsequently convicted of perjury in another case — misinterpreted the findings, and the Leicestershire police, by their own account, felt unable to correct the misinterpretation for diplomatic reasons.

Peer review is a procedure used by academic publishers. It has nothing to do with forensic investigation in criminal cases.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline jamie

User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 10:42 pm

Posts: 133

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:38 pm Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
hugo wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Veering off again, I loved the way the FSA said findings of Madeleine McCann’s DNA in the rental car were ‘inconclusive’. How, so? That’s why peer review has to be open and transparent.

You mean the FSS, the late lamented UK Forensic Science Service abolished by David Cameron’s government. The responsible scientist did not make a finding of ‘Madeleine McCann’s DNA,’ he made a finding of a number of Madeleine’s DNA markers. The finding was inconclusive because the other four members of Madeleine’s immediate family, all of whom were known to have used that vehicle, possessed between them the same markers, and because it was a mixed trace with at least three and possibly five contributors, and because it was likely that items bearing Madeleine’s own DNA had been present in the vehicle. The Portuguese police — headed by an officer subsequently convicted of perjury in another case — misinterpreted the findings, and the Leicestershire police, by their own account, felt unable to correct the misinterpretation for diplomatic reasons.

Peer review is a procedure used by academic publishers. It has nothing to do with forensic investigation in criminal cases.

Madeleine McCann was an IVF baby. How is it possible to ‘share DNA’ with any of the other McCanns?
Top Profile E-mail

Offline guermantes

Links & Gallery Moderator

User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:49 am

Posts: 4855

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2017 11:07 pm Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Has anybody heard any news about today’s court hearing of the Sollecito/Gumbel defamation trial?

Ergon wrote:
[…]The first of the defamation trials against Mignini, that is Sollecito/Gumbel, now moved to March 03, 2017 in Florence under Judge de Cecco.

[…]The evidence has been admitted and so on March 3, 2017 there is the exam of the first two witnesses. Giuliano Mignini will be the first witness.

viewtopic.php?style=6&p=130723#p130723
Top Profile

Offline Catnip

User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:08 am

Posts: 2997

Location: Eora, de Sydenie, 34S-151E, Nuova Gallia del Sud, het nieuw-Hollandt, Terra Australis

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 12:23 am Post subject: Re: XXIX. MAIN DISCUSSION, AUG 1 –
Nothing collected into GoogleNews yet.

Just:

Raffaele has something to say about the compensation decision.
AgenziaRadicale, 01 March 2017: Gianni Carbotti and Camillo Maffia, “Raffaele speaks: Justice is not a reality show”

And:
His aunt Sara Achille also has something to say (amongst other things, that he’s living in a drama (that in the context of his Facebook comments)). Raffaele is too naive.
Panorama, Carmelo Abbate, “Pay him”
Top Profile

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7176

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 5:07 am Post subject: SOLLECITO GUMBEL VILIPENDIO.
guermantes wrote:
Has anybody heard any news about today’s court hearing of the Sollecito/Gumbel defamation trial?

Ergon wrote:
[…]The first of the defamation trials against Mignini, that is Sollecito/Gumbel, now moved to March 03, 2017 in Florence under Judge de Cecco.

[…]The evidence has been admitted and so on March 3, 2017 there is the exam of the first two witnesses. Giuliano Mignini will be the first witness.

http://perugiamurderfile.net/viewtopic. … 23#p130723
Hi, guermantes, I can only confirm the hearing was held today. (March 03). Beyond that, I’ll have to wait till I get a full understanding of the proceedings.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7176

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 5:11 am Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
jamie wrote:
hugo wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Veering off again, I loved the way the FSA said findings of Madeleine McCann’s DNA in the rental car were ‘inconclusive’. How, so? That’s why peer review has to be open and transparent.

You mean the FSS, the late lamented UK Forensic Science Service abolished by David Cameron’s government. The responsible scientist did not make a finding of ‘Madeleine McCann’s DNA,’ he made a finding of a number of Madeleine’s DNA markers. The finding was inconclusive because the other four members of Madeleine’s immediate family, all of whom were known to have used that vehicle, possessed between them the same markers, and because it was a mixed trace with at least three and possibly five contributors, and because it was likely that items bearing Madeleine’s own DNA had been present in the vehicle. The Portuguese police — headed by an officer subsequently convicted of perjury in another case — misinterpreted the findings, and the Leicestershire police, by their own account, felt unable to correct the misinterpretation for diplomatic reasons.

Peer review is a procedure used by academic publishers. It has nothing to do with forensic investigation in criminal cases.

Madeleine McCann was an IVF baby. How is it possible to ‘share DNA’ with any of the other McCanns?

Hi, jamie,
All three of the McCann children were born through IVF, after Kate McCann had a five year struggle to get pregnant. However, the father confirmed that rumours of a ‘sperm donor’ were untrue, and that he was the natural father of the children. Therefore, they would have shared DNA, and this was confirmed through genetic testing. However, the sample in the car was a 15 out of 19 match with Madeleine’s DNA.
Top Profile E-mail

Offline Ergon

Site Admin

User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:20 pm

Posts: 7176

Location: Toronto, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 7:14 am Post subject: Re: PEER REVIEW PSYCHOLOGY JOURNALS
hugo wrote:
Ergon wrote:
Veering off again, I loved the way the FSA said findings of Madeleine McCann’s DNA in the rental car were ‘inconclusive’. How, so? That’s why peer review has to be open and transparent.

You mean the FSS, the late lamented UK Forensic Science Service abolished by David Cameron’s government. The responsible scientist did not make a finding of ‘Madeleine McCann’s DNA,’ he made a finding of a number of Madeleine’s DNA markers. The finding was inconclusive because the other four members of Madeleine’s immediate family, all of whom were known to have used that vehicle, possessed between them the same markers, and because it was a mixed trace with at least three and possibly five contributors, and because it was likely that items bearing Madeleine’s own DNA had been present in the vehicle. The Portuguese police — headed by an officer subsequently convicted of perjury in another case — misinterpreted the findings, and the Leicestershire police, by their own account, felt unable to correct the misinterpretation for diplomatic reasons.

Peer review is a procedure used by academic publishers. It has nothing to do with forensic investigation in criminal cases.

Hi, hugo, corrected to FSS. Thanks.

– The ‘responsible scientist’ who confirmed Madeleine’s DNA (erratum, see below) was Dr. Rosa Maria Espinheira, director of Portugal’s DNA testing laboratory. From Madeleine’s DNA
Quote:
– Regarding your request no. 5, determine if the ‘profile’ obtained by the British laboratory may pertain to a child of the McCann couple.

– We carried out a profile comparison obtained from the autosomal STRs of Kate McCann and Gerald McCann and of the profile sent us.

– The probability of the McCann couple being the biological parents of the female individual in that test is 99,9828 %.

Lisbon, 20th August, 2007

The Director of the Genetic & Biological Forensic Service

Dr. Rosa Maria Espinheira

– Then, Dr. John Lowe of the FSS, wrote:
Quote:
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.

Why – …

Well lets look at the question that is being asked

“Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab ”

It would be very simple to say “yes” simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample.

What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine and legitimate; because Madeline has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeline merely appears to match the result by chance. The individual components in Madeline’s profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline’s profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Birmingham, myself included. it’s important to stress that 50% of Madeline’s profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *