Zellner's Motion for Post-Conviction Scientific Testing, Filed on 8/26/16
Zellner's Motion to Hold Appeal in Abeyance and Suspend the Briefing Schedule, Filed on 8/26/16
Introduction to Parabon Snapshot DNA Phenotyping Service
Law enforcement now has a new DNA tool that helps nab suspects and close cases (video above). The service, developed by Parabon NanoLabs of Reston, Virginia, is called the Parabon® Snapshot™ DNA Phenotyping Service (Snapshot). It predicts the physical appearance of individuals from the smallest of DNA evidence samples, creating a composite image or “snapshot” of any DNA source.
Our judge just signed stipulation and order for the scientific testing to proceed in Steven Avery case. AG worked w/us.#MakingAMurderer— Kathleen Zellner (@ZellnerLaw) November 23, 2016
BREAKING: Scientific testing to begin in Avery case https://t.co/ZB46N07wwL @ZellnerLaw @TManitowoc @tmj4 #MakingAMurderer @madeleinebehr— John Ferak (@johnferak) November 23, 2016
These critical items of evidence will undergo testing as part of the court order:Experts experiments confirm SA's trial attorneys correct about blood being planted but incorrect about how it was done.#MakingAMurderer— Kathleen Zellner (@ZellnerLaw) December 5, 2016
Blood flakes recovered from the floor near the center console of Halbach’s RAV4.Additionally, three other items of evidence used to secure Avery’s arrest and eventual conviction are subject to the new testing order. Those items are:
Bloodstain cutting from the driver’s seat.
Bloodstain cutting from passenger’s seat.
Swab of the RAV4 ignition area where blood was found.
Swab of bloodstain taken from the rear passenger’s door.
Swab of bloodstain taken from a CD case found in vehicle.
A vial of blood said to be a sample of Avery’s blood from 1996. This was the vial of blood that Avery’s murder trial defense lawyers Dean Strang and Jerry Buting came across during their pretrial case research inside the clerk’s office at the Manitowoc County Courthouse.Zellner has said she wants to determine if the hood latch DNA swab was fabricated from other known DNA samples that were in the possession of Calumet and Manitowoc County law enforcement.
A spare key for Halbach’s vehicle found in Avery’s bedroom by Manitowoc County Sheriff’s deputies James Lenk and Andrew Colborn.
The swab from the hood latch of Halbach’s RAV4 that later generated a DNA profile for Avery. Forensic testing on the hood latch was not performed by the Wisconsin State Crime Lab in Madison, even though the lab initially impounded the vehicle and conducted a battery of standard forensic tests. Rather, the swab of the hood latch that yielded the DNA profile of the murder defendant did not occur until six months later. In April 2006, Calumet County sheriff’s officials decided to carry out their own forensic testing of the hood area. They did not swab the interior hood release.
"Testing we've already done will establish that Steven Avery is innocent... The confession [Brendan Dassey's] has been invalidated so were down to the evidence at the crime scene: the key, hood latch, blood in RAV, and bullet... We are going to get to the bottom of who killed Teresa Halbach. And we currently believe that we will establish it was not Steven Avery." - Kathleen Zellner, Press Conference, August 26, 2016There is a blood stain found at an important position on the RAV4. The blood stain in question, A23, was found on the rear cargo door handle. Below are the results for that stain. Circled in red are mentions of A23 and the relevant results for this stain. The key part is in blue, the claim of insufficient for interpretation (the "insufficient for interpretation" is the opportunity for bias and is, in essence, subjective):
From the official reports we know that Sherry Culhane developed a partial profile from blood stain A23, deemed it insufficient for interpretation, and did not conduct any further testing.
It is possible Kathleen Zellner retested items that were originally tested in the RAV4:
1) In 2007, Judge Willis ordered that Avery or his attorney could retest the blood evidence from the RAV4 at any time.There could be someone else's blood or DNA mixed with the blood found in the RAV4's cargo area. Zellner specifically pointed out in her motion:
2) Willis' order did not include new testing (though Zellner cited Wisconsin law and then presented how she has met the criteria for new testing) and didn't include the retesting of ALL the other evidence. So, in Zellner's motion for post-conviction scientific testing, she is requesting new testing and to retest other evidence from the original trial.
"One of the most compelling scientific facts pointing to planted blood evidence is that there was no mixture of Ms. Halbach's and Mr. Avery's blood despite the State's claim that the bleeding Mr. Avery threw Ms. Halbach in the rear cargo area of her vehicle."Zellner told reporters on August 26, 2016 that "testing has been completed on items that Avery's attorneys did not need to request from Calumet County."
In her motion, Zellner made it sound like they had already run some tests that prove Avery's innocence.
Therefore, it stands to reason she is referring to the RAV4 or other evidence collected and tested by her team.
Zellner filed the motion to access the State's evidence and test it.
In Zellner's motion for post-conviction scientific testing, she requested:
Items for new testing for sources of DNA, page 15
Item ID, the hood latch with Avery's DNA, received for testing in April 2006, the "sweat" DNA; source testing to identify if the DNA is from saliva or blood
Item C, the RAV key with Avery's DNA; source testing to determine if there is blood or saliva on the keyItems for new and improved testing, page 19
Items IE and IF, the battery clamps and cables
Items AJ and AK, the license platesRadiocarbon testing (or DNA methylation testing) to determine the age of Avery's blood in the RAV4 and Grand Am, and from the garage and bathroom floors, as well as other areas in his home, page 26
Item A15 and A16, the blinker light and lug wrench
Items IB, IC, IE, IF, IG, IH, which are the RAV's exterior door handle, interior passenger door handle, left battery cable, right battery cable, interior door handle, exterior door handle
Item CV, women's purple thong panties recovered from white trailer near the Mercury station wagon where the plates were found
Item A, new testing on RAV: the bar that moves the seat forward, the prop bar which holds up the hood, the interior hood release
CASO Property No. 8675, more advanced DNA testing requested on human pelvic bones recovered from the quarry
CASO Property No. 7958 and 7953, DNA testing on burnt material found at the Radandt deer hunting camp
Forensic testing using radiocarbon could conclusively prove whether or not the blood evidence identified as Mr. Avery in the RAV4 was from a fresh wound in 2005 or from the 1996 blood vial taken from Mr. Avery, indicating that is was planted from a previously taken blood sample.
Radiocarbon testing of additional blood scrapings from the RAV4 in addition to scrapings already collected.Ballistics testing, page 42
On the .22 bullet fragment recovered from Avery's garage and the unspent .22 shells taken from his bedroom.The Bones in the Quarry
The pelvic bone appears to move from here, to there, and then back to where it was.Analyst Sherry L. Culhane STATE CRIME LABORATORY - MADISON
There was never any evidence found of more than one human being. Meaning out of the three locations remains were found, Leslie Eisenburg did not find any duplicate bones or bones with male characteristics. The pelvis belongs with the rest of the skeleton.
Once the pelvis shards were officially recorded in CASO as being found in the quarry (instead of the burn pit), Kratz was suddenly met with a problem - why would Steven put the Tibia in the "Janda burn barrel #2" and drive the pelvis to the quarry, but leave the vast majority of the remains by his house?
This was why Kratz says the pelvis bone is 'possibly human.' It was crucial that the pelvis not be identified as human. Recall what Kratz said, "The bones were in such a shape that whether they are human or not, could not, even by the FBI, be determined."
This made it easier for Kratz to tell the jury that Straing, by mentioning the bones in the quarry, was making a big deal out of nothing - 'speculation and conjecture.'
When Strang and Buting first laid eyes on the results of the FBI report, they saw that the lab was returning 'Processed DNA samples ... that should be stored in a refrigerator / freezer and isolated from evidence that has not been examined.
Strang and Buting note in their Motion to Exclude FBI Witness Testimony and Motion to Compel Disclosure of Exculpatory Evidence - "Clearly specimens were processed and DNA was generated. The results may be exculpatory since if they were inculpatory they would certainly have been noted."
Is the above resolved by considering item BZ? The tibia - the bone which is recorded as being in two maybe three places at once?
A loose theory: Item BZ was never sent to the FBI. Kratz was forced to manipulate documents / witnesses to make it appear as though they both were sent because the defense noticed the FBI Report details 'Processed DNA.' Kratz needed to show that the processed DNA was not from the pelvis (which Kratz describes as possibly human) - but from the tibia (which Leslie describes as unquestionably human).
Remember, we were told the tibia was the only bone found with tissue.
CONFIDENTIAL report of laboratory findings
Exhibit 313 (March 31, 2006)
Exhibit 312 (December 12, 2005)
Exhibit 311 (November 14, 2005)
ITEM BZ
Sherry Culhane testified that she removed tissue from the very bone that Dr. Eisenberg packaged and shipped directly to the FBI. We really don’t know where item BZ came from. We do however know that the reported result of the STR DNA test was grossly misstated. The reported “partial profile” — 7 of 16 locations should have been recorded as “inconclusive” because it was an indication that the test didn’t work — the sample was too degraded to trust the result. Instead, it was reported that since seven alleles matched the standard profile, statistics indicate that only one person of a billion would have that partial profile in a Caucasian population. It was suggested that although it was not a conclusive match, it was very unlikely that the specimen could have originated from anyone beside Teresa. This was very misleading, but the defense never refuted it. The FBI received charred remains purportedly from the shin bone on 11/16/05 and performed mitochondrial DNA testing. They compared it to DNA from Karen Halbach’s (Teresa's mother) buccal swab. It is unclear why no one sent the FBI Teresa’s DNA to compare to the charred material (designated as Q1 by the FBI). Since the MtDNA database is small, the report only concludes that Teresa cannot be ruled out as the contributor. No one from the FBI testified at either the Avery or Dassey trials. [Source]
Item BZ - Two pieces of charred material.
The profile previously developed from the apparent charred material (item BZ) is listed in the following- table (See Laboratory Report No. M05-2467 issued December 5, 2005 by this analyst) :
The partial profile, at seven loci, developed from the charred material of item BZ is consistent with the profile developed from the pap smear reportedly collected from Teresa Halbach (item EF) (See Laboratory Report No. M05-2467 issued December 5, 2005 issued by this analyst).
From Culhane's report:
Based on the PARTIAL DNA profile developed from the pap smear slide reportedly collected from Teresa Halbach (item EF) it is the opinion of this analyst, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that Teresa Halbach is the source of the DNA isolated from the swabbing of a soda can (item A14) and the reddish/brown stains (item Al) from the cargo area of the RAV4 vehicle (item A). The partial profile developed from the charred remains of item BZ is consistent with the PARTIAL profile developed from the pap smear reportedly collected from Teresa Halbach (item EF).Eisenberg at Dassey's trial describes the material on item BZ as muscle (day 4, exhibit 150).
http://imgur.com/a/APbCX
They gave the Halbachs the bones that were "reported" to be human. BZ was charred muscle tissue from the bone which the State used to identify the remains as belonging to Teresa Halbach. DNA was not obtained from the other bones.
[–]abyssus_abyssum wrote at reddit:
I think what is confusing you is the wording. The pap smear is not a partial profile (BTW, it was also re-checked using her mother's mitochondrial and genomic DNA), if you look here
http://imgur.com/PyL8sny
it is a full profile, 2 numbers at heterozygous and 1 at homozygous markers/loci. The reason she calls it partial is because she is comparing it to the partial profile of item BZ, the charred flesh remains, seen here
http://imgur.com/OlbBoQJ
Since the limiting factor is the partial profile when you compare it to a full profile it is a partial match. I admit I would call it a partial match but definitely the pap smear is not a partial profile.
If you do not trust her statistics you can re-calculate using this 2015 FBI STR frequency table found here
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/biometric-analysis/codis/expanded-fbi-str-2015-final-6-16-15.pdf
I did the calculations and did not get significantly different probability. I did not want to post it due to the common occurrence of confirmation bias on this sub. People basically often read into things too much. Also, if you do re-calculate remember she used a frequency table from 2005 so you would expect some differences.
This all in Exhibit 313.
I also noticed she was not matching it in that exhibit to the charred remains. It could be a typo or at that moment in time her PCR was not working to good. There is a full profile in Exhibit 313 of the pap smear.
ITEM A23
Item A23 - swabbing from the rear exterior door handle of cargo door.
Chemical analysis of the reddish/brown questioned stains/crusts of items A2, A3, A4, A7, A10, A11, A23 and B2 previously indicated the presence of blood. (See Laboratory Report No. MOB-2467 issued November 14, 2005 by this analyst.)
In addition, human DNA isolation was also performed on items A11, A23...
Partial DNA profiles were obtained from items A23 and DD1. Due to the limited genetic information these profiles are insufficient for interpretation.
Chemical analysis of the reddish/brown questioned stains of items A1-A4, A6-A10, A11, A12, A23 and B1-B5 indicated the presence of blood.
ITEM CX
Item CX - questioned stain reportedly recovered from "quarry south of Avery Road" (swabs of possible blood located quarry south of avery's/fresh blood found in the gravel at Radandt's quarry, page 220).
CX. The profiles developed from these samples are listed in the following tables:
CX indicated the presence of blood.
The stain is labelled as item CX. You can find it in Exhibit 313. A full DNA profile was developed. The profile is consistent with a male individual.
Allan Avery, Bryan Dassey and Steven Avery are eliminated as possible sources of the DNA from the reddish/brown stains of items CH and CX.
The blood was tested and found to be an unknown male (Item CX). They got a full profile. It was tested against Bryan, Allan and Steve. It didn't match them. And if you look at all of the Avery standards, it doesn't match any of them.
The results for item CX, the blood stain found in Radandt's quarry (CASO property tag# 8008), are in Culhane's report and on record; therefore, Zellner didn't need to request source testing for the item. A full DNA profile was developed for the stain. Allan Avery, Bryan Dassey and Steven Avery were eliminated as possible sources of the DNA. However, she could have requested new testing not available in 2005-2007, but she didn't, so perhaps she has already matched it to a suspect. If a suspect's profile is proven to be a match it would be huge because the profile came from the State's official report, not an independent lab hired by the defense. So it's more about matching the profile to a suspect at this point.
Item CH - one piece of fabric reportedly cut from "couch."
The profile developed from item CH is not consistent with the buccal cell standards of Allan Avery (item AY), Bryan Dassey (item BS) or Steven Avery (item BU) . This profile is consistent with a different male individual than item CX.
Allan Avery, Bryan Dassey and Steven Avery are eliminated as possible sources of the DNA from the reddish/brown stains of items CH and CX.
ITEMS B2 and CE
B2 is reported as "no DNA" on exhibit 311 by Culhane but in exhibit 313 shows a DNA match to Avery but with additional markers. Culhane called attention to extra alleles found in Item CE which weren't consistent with Avery's profile.
https://i.imgur.com/3KSwkuW.png
https://i.imgur.com/RLou24M.png
DNA CAN BE FABRICATED
Was Avery's DNA mixed with someone else's blood and then planted?
Based on the article below, anyone's blood could be spun to pull out the white blood cells, then injected with amplified (fabricated) DNA.
"The authors of the paper took blood from a woman and centrifuged it to remove the white cells, which contain DNA. To the remaining red cells they added DNA that had been amplified from a man’s hair." [Source]The paper mentions that fabricated DNA is not methylaed. Zellner requested DNA methylation testing. In August 2016, Zellner indicated in her motion and said at her press conference: "There was not confirmatory DNA testing done." In other words, they never did any tests to confirm any of the samples were or were not from Avery.
DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show
The
scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a
person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed
that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could
construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any
tissue from that person.
“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.”
Dr.
Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has
developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that it
hopes to sell to forensics laboratories.
“DNA
is a lot easier to plant at a crime scene than fingerprints,” she said.
“We’re creating a criminal justice system that is increasingly relying
on this technology.”
John
M. Butler, leader of the human identity testing project at the National
Institute of Standards and Technology, said he was “impressed at how
well they were able to fabricate the fake DNA profiles.”
However, he
added, “I think your average criminal wouldn’t be able to do something
like that.”
The
scientists fabricated DNA samples two ways.
1. One required a real, if
tiny, DNA sample, perhaps from a strand of hair or drinking cup. They
amplified the tiny sample into a large quantity of DNA using a standard
technique called whole genome amplification.
Of
course, a drinking cup or piece of hair might itself be left at a
crime scene to frame someone, but blood or saliva may be more
believable.
a. The authors of the paper took blood from a woman and centrifuged it to remove the white cells, which contain DNA.b. To the remaining red cells they added DNA that had been amplified from a man’s hair.c. Since red cells do not contain DNA, all of the genetic material in the blood sample was from the man.d. The authors sent it to a leading American forensics laboratory, which analyzed it as if it were a normal sample of a man’s blood.
2. The
other technique relied on DNA profiles, stored in law enforcement
databases as a series of numbers and letters corresponding to
variations at 13 spots in a person’s genome.
a. From a pooled sample of many people’s DNA, the scientists cloned tiny DNA snippets representing the common variants at each spot, creating a library of such snippets.b. To prepare a DNA sample matching any profile, they just mixed the proper snippets together. They said that a library of 425 different DNA snippets would be enough to cover every conceivable profile.c. Nucleix’s test to tell if a sample has been fabricated relies on the fact that amplified DNA — which would be used in either deception — is not methylated, meaning it lacks certain molecules that are attached to the DNA at specific points, usually to inactivate genes.
If you listen to Dispatch audio, LE asks them to find out who lives on Kuss Rd,they were looking for a Vander(?) at the end of Kuss RD
ReplyDeleteThe last house on the east side of Kuss Road, the one closest to the deer camp, is 4183 Kuss Road, and it is owned by the Vanderwarfs. The 2.2 acres parcel beside the Vanderwarf's parcel, the one near the end of Kuss Road (at the cul-de-sac), is vacant. This vacant parcel borders Radandt's property and the driveway off of Kuss Road leading to the deer camp.
DeleteShe helped lock Avery up in 1985. Got him out in 2003. Helped lock him up again only two years later. Guess who? (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted by needless_things
Examining the Cross Examination of Surehands Sherry.
I do not want to spend an inordinate amount of time beating a dead horse, Sherry has been thoroughly digested here on TMM. I will do my best not to repeat that which has been said a thousand times. I will not spend much time at all on her deviation of protocol, only to mention that had she followed her own procedure, she would have been forced to decide the test was contaminated, and the result was therefore inconclusive.
Quick Excerpt: Avery Trial - SC Cross Examination:
JB: Ma'am, you do not know how that control became contaminated, do you?
SC: Not 100 percent for sure, no.
Sherry is a main player. Whether or not she planted the DNA, she was the one who said the result was valid. She literally put Teresa in the garage. It was her call. She could should have followed procedure and recorded the test as inconclusive, but then again, remember who she works for. She would have been unable to put her in Avery's house or garage.
This post will focus on:
Culhane's CV
Culhane's past relationship to Avery in 1985 as well as 2002-2007 (and now 2016)
September 2005 - Sherry sends a package to Remiker.
February 2006 - Kratz sends an E-mail to Sherry
Contamination, Suspects and Exemplars
The blood will come back as planted. 100%. If Zellner was not given the vial, I would not be so confident, but she has the vial. Now it is no longer a 95% rate of accuracy. She will know, 100% whether or not the blood was planted. She will not only be able to run the Carbon test on the swabs, which gives her 95% accuracy, but she can also run the test on the vial, eliminating an incredible amount of guesswork when it comes to determining age of the blood. They now can compare the carbon levels of the swab to the carbon levels of the blood from the vial, or if the samples are too contaminated for carbon testing, she can compare the methylation profiles of the dried blood on the swabs to the methylation profile of the blood in the vial. She is golden with the blood my friends :)
The state only allowed testing on material that has Avery's DNA on / in them. Other than the blood in the RAV and the blood in the vial, the only other material they allowed for testing was the swab - Avery's DNA pulled off the hood latch. So Zellner is looking to find buccal cells, not skin cells. I am not as confident in how that test will go, however, Zellner mentions in her motion that presumptive testing could have been done on the swab in 2006 but it was not. I have a feeling that lack of presumptive testing is a good a sign as any that it may very well be saliva on that hood latch.
Now:
If Zellner and her team can prove both the Blood and the hood latch DNA was planted she will have removed Avery's every connection to the RAV.
Then:
Imagine the enormous road block the state would have encountered if it was not for Sherry choosing to put Teresa in that garage.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5fscr7/she_helped_lock_avery_up_in_1985_got_him_out_in/?st=iw5nrgm1&sh=7a6e7172
[–]OliviaD2 2 points 11 months ago
Deletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/416kcu/questionable_blood_stain_originating_from_a_male/
I think many people also do not realize that there is a lot of subjectivity when it comes to doing DNA profiling. It looks all nice and tidy on the charts, but I would like to see (and wish the defense would have had an expert and requested all the RAW data). While a computer generates an electropherogram (the graph), an analyst has to interpret it. They have to decided if a peak looks like 'noise vs signal', if there is enough sample for it to be valid. In all science, including DNA profiling, there is a phenomenon called "observer bias". One can interpret "objective" results in a direction based on one's bias. This was elegantly demonstrated to me in a little experiment by Dr. Ken Krane. He showed a profile of (the graph) of 4 loci, one had one peak that was just on the borderline of being considered inconclusive, one had a peak that was considered a "blob" (seriously), it is wide and irregular and spans a couple of different alleles. (the way the raw data comes out, looks like peaks on a graph, the location on the graph gives the allele, the number corresponds to the # of tandem repeats, hence STR testing. 8 has 8 repeats etc. So a blob, might encompass 7,8 9. And should be "inconclusive", but you could say, well maybe it is "hiding something real". Anyway, the point is. When analysts were given this same profile, with different "suspects", and their stories (which the analysts should not know, they need not know) and one was a real slimeball, obviously guilty, one was "a good guy", and different variations; they very easily interpreted the data as a "match" for the bad guy, and excluded the "good" guy.
Sherry Culhane worked on the DNA to exonerate Avery in 2003. She was hardly unbiased. She was in rather close communication with Kratz.. too close. She did ALL the analysis for this case (that would also be unusual).. there is supposed to be a second "reader" of the raw data, but we don't see any of that). She should not have been working on this case.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Trial-Exhibit-343-Kratz-Email-to-Culhane.pdf
[–]belee86 3 points 11 months ago
DeleteMaybe my TV law/cop show brain, but wouldn't the sample also be run against the state-wide or national DNA database?
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S] 2 points 11 months ago
No, I doubt it would be run through a database.
The first obvious step is to compare it to people that are potential suspects. I doubt even that was thoroughly done.
[–]belee86 2 points 11 months ago
It be done now, though, right?
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S] 2 points 11 months ago
Not sure, it probably depends on the circumstances surrounding the crime.
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 11 months ago
You are right about the second point for sure. I wish the defense had gotten their own DNA person.. because questioning the "thoroughness" of anything done by ONE biased technician for this entire case would be wise.... Also to look at possibility of contamination.. it's a weekly event in that lab. They are required to keep a log (it's in the evidence files) of "unexpected results" (the ones they find), these would indicate contamination, and are usually found in the controls, where a profile shows up that shouldn't be there. When this happens, it is supposed to be documented and then they are supposed to write what measures will be taken to prevent such a thing in the future.
I read their log for the most recent year, and most of their "ideas" were pretty immediate. "Clean up the bench with bleach", "I should wear a mask when I'm sick" (I hope all the time, your DNA didn't get in there b/c you were sick!), and "I shouldn't work on so many cases at once (after a tube mix up).
They have the usual cross contamination going on, so you just don't know. The tubes are very tiny, they are labelled, but you can't read them, so often they are kept track of by where they are placed in a rack. And then where they are placed in a centrifuge, or the PCR thermocycler, etc. It is not hard to misplace them. I'm not accusing, just saying it happens, and there is a report a week, if I was the defense I would want to check.
Also, I would wonder how much she was doing at once. A suspect and the "evidence" DNA should never be in the same room at the same time. Never. Cross contamination is easy and this is too risky of a situation, when murder is the issue.
In fact, an expert I admire says, you do the crime scene (evidence) DNA first, and have it done all the way to paper (it is gone back to evidence tank) before you even start on any suspect analysis. That way, you have at least taken all the precautions you can. Cross contamination can be a problem if it happens between is suspect's DNA contaminates the evidence, and you will get a false positive.
Also if you can (cause it sounds like you are interested in the DNA) read my comment about the interpretation of the electropherograms, and subjectivity involved, therefore; observer bias. What would really be interesting (and useful) would be seeing the raw data. It is not always so "neat" as charts make it seem...
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S]
DeleteI wish the defense had gotten their own DNA person.. because questioning the "thoroughness" of anything done by ONE biased technician for this entire case would be wise
I do not care if they called it "Forensic 100% Science" I would not let the interpretation, of a person who played a key part in my wrongful conviction, play a key part again! I would fire any defence that does not make that one of the priorities. It is my ass on the line after all and it sure won't be ruined by a possibly incompetent and even morally questionable person.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/45a0eh/whose_dna_profile_is_on_the_compact_flash_card/czwixrk
The stain A23 could be critical in terms of determining bias if we actually had the peak data. Would you mind if I tag you and contact you as I will try to help SkippTopp in his attempt to obtain the actual lab data and you could help also?
[–]OliviaD2
That would be great!! I didn't know there was anyone doing that... I was excited when I came across you, b/c I have been eager to find others to discuss this with...If someone could get more data, that would be great, I don't know how, but you never know, maybe there is more that hasn't been released... b/c despite the nice charts and statistic, there are some red flags, there are some things that would make me want to dig just to be sure. And then the mtDNA, what is up with that.
YOUR COMMENT ABOUT THE DEFENSE IS SPOT ON!!! I know people do not like to criticize Strang and Buting, and they did a wonderful job, but on a case where someone was convicted with DNA, they should have had their own 'expert' to question, and review ALL of the evidence. It's hard to believe they didn't. They really would not have had to get anyone really expensive either, anyone with some knowledge could have at least questioned :P. Sadly Avery nor his family had the knowledge to even think about that.
Really without a DNA expert for the defense, it was not a fair fight. The average lawyer simply could not be expected to understand the science. They probably thought nothing about the "mtDNA" comment, and would not have realized that was something completely different, that was a test that Sherry Culhane can't do at the WI State Crime Lab. (you can look at their protocol manual, they list all the testing procedures they do.. all the equipment. They do STR and Y-STR testing.
I would have jumped all over the mtDNA and gotten to the bottom of that. I would have motioned for everything that Culhane worked on (which was everything) to be tossed b/c of bias. She should have been nowhere near this case! The shady judge would have denied it, but at least it would raise the issue of doubt, and then everything could be gone over with a fine tooth comb.
I understand DNA. I have a MS in molecular biology, and went on to a PhD program in neuroscience, but that involved a lot of genetics also. I do not know the law but pretend to, lol ; and I didn't know anything about forensics but am learning a lot. An oh my, what examples of incompetence I see with this case, way beyond the DNA, how the whole thing was conducted.
Sadly, none of the State schlepps assigned to the appeals thought to question any of this. Aalthough I don't think they really do more than the minimal paperwork for appeals.
There are just a lot of questions I would want to ask.... And with DNA, if you are innocent, you get a DNA expert an keep fighting. I have read too many cases where there are impressive 1 in a quadrillion statistics, but a tube was mixed up, or contaminated.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/416kcu/questionable_blood_stain_originating_from_a_male/
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 11 months ago
DeleteThey ran a sample from one of the blood stains in the car through the state database, and got a match to Steven Avery. I believe that was when they arrested him? Or perhaps he already was arrested? That was what led them to be able to get the buccal swab, I assume the other family members volunteered (or it was "suggested" they volunteer, lol). However, they already had decided they had their "man' based on the fact that this stain in the car matched. This proved that Avery murdered her, because it fit so well with the "confession" :P ???
So they just stopped. They could easily have run CX or whoever that mystery stain was, or probably many of the other sources we just don't know about ... but they didn't..
[–]belee86 1 point 11 months ago
So checking the print against a national data base would have been easily done. Maybe they did and nothing came back? They arrested Steve on gun possession on Nov. 9th, then Nov. 10th Kratz announced his DNA was matched to the key and RAV4.
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 11 months ago
Well isn't that interesting, on that is the same day a "keyboard" searched pegged Avery in the database.. (nov 10) http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-311.pdf
[–]eyesclosing 2 points 9 months ago
No Halbach match on Halbachs toothbrush?
[–]OliviaD2 2 points 9 months ago
She never processed DNA from the toothbrush. Which is interesting. I can see they couldn't prove she used it, but at least it would be something. Because the first notice we have of the female blood matched to TH was on 12/05/05.
The blood was only identified as female in Culhane's first report dated on 11/14/05.
She used a pap smear slide to ID TH, which I have to assume was received sometime between 11/14 and 12/05/05, when those tests would have been done. Don't know exactly what date this info was known, but we can only go by report.
Note: there was a funeral on 11/19, or 20th (sorry can't remember). This was before the blood in the vehicle was even identified as belonging to her.
This strikes me as very odd. Apparently no one else worried :P
[–]belee86 1 point 11 months ago
Is there something odd about that? Hmm...feels like I'm missing something.
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 11 months ago
Just responding to your comment re: Ktraz 'announcing' the DNA match on the same day it was found. He is awful quick to "announce" things to the public.
[–]Hurray0987 3 points 11 months ago
It's certainly weird that they didn't test for Brendan in exhibit 313. It makes sense that they didn't test for him in exhibit 312 because it was Dec 5, 2005, and Brendan was not a suspect then (of course one can argue that they should have tested everyone that was around). However, Brendan was a suspect by March 31, 2006 when Culhane wrote the report for exhibit 313, so the absence of Brendan is strange. It is possible that she had started her analysis before Brendan's 2/27/06 confession, and had not obtained samples from him before the report was written. She does have a buccal swab from Brendan by May 8, 2006 (exhibit 314). They weren't very thorough in testing everyone. I have no idea why they were only testing Bryan, Steven, and Allan.
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S] 3 points 11 months ago
DeleteTo be honest with you I looked a little more at her results.
She does not seem to report all of the negative results. This is bad because she does not report all the information, you would actually need to redo some of the experiments to conclude some things.
I do not know but looking at her reports I can see why she was the fastest in evidence turn-over.
[–]Hurray0987 3 points 11 months ago
I'm not surprised that she didn't report all of the negative results with her history of errors and contaminating the DNA in this case. Ugh, i'm not sure if anything in this case is reliable.
But if you need any help putting the DNA profiles together or anything, let me know! I have a background in science/biology and would love to help.
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S] 2 points 11 months ago
Definitely would love some help.
I got you marked now and will send you a PM when I have enough information to proceed.
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 11 months ago
I'm absolutely certain she didn't report a lot... and yes, i would really worry about contamination there.. it is reported on a weekly basis in the logs.. reported, being the key there. They make a point to show a lot of pretty looking charts of nice profiles from buccal swabs that don't mean anything, and they tested a lot of stuff that didn't anything (we don't see many evidence profiles.. ??) It all looks a little to neat and tidy, I hate to be cynical, but...
Then those bones.. still bother me.. all of a sudden she matches a "partial profile" from them, to a "partial profile from a pap smear"... Is that a typo? But why would you bother with that shabby profile if you have an mtDNA profile... which would not help in a general search, but for a body ID, you have all those relatives. I am very confused. Very confused :P
[–]OliviaD2 2 points 11 months ago
Right, exactly what I was talking about before... The problem (which makes it hard to "accuse" (and well done intentionally), was not so much with what she "did".. but what she "didn't do". She made nice pretty looking charts. What we really need to see is the raw data. The computer read outs, but also all the notes from the procedures, the so called bench notes, every step of every protocol should have been documented. So we know exactly what was done. We would know on what dates what was done, what sample were in the same room at the same time (contamination potential), we would have an evidence chain for every sample (where it was a what time, who handled it i.e. contamination issues). Her profile. She says it was in the bullet fragment control she made the exception for. There is nothing anywhere near that. That is all available during discovery, I fear the defense may not have known to ask for it at the time.
I have to assume Zellner will be procuring all of that, a lot will probably be gained by that. Then this mystery mitochondrial DNA... why would they need to match the bones with STR... if they have mtDNA and a mother? A perfect match to ID the bones.. but they didn't use it in court. ?? WI state lab doesn't do mtDNA... It's all a mystery. And there was no logic in whose DNA they tested, as Kratz said in his email, they just wanted to show some "exclusions". I'm glad they ruled out Delores though, that's a relief :P
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S] 1 point 11 months ago
Delete"was not so much with what she 'did'.. but what she 'didn't do' "
Agree.
"The computer read outs, but also all the notes from the procedures, the so called bench notes, every step of every protocol should have been documented. So we know exactly what was done."
This I think would be a goldmine of information.
" why would they need to match the bones with STR... if they have mtDNA and a mother?"
Given the damage of the charred flesh remains I suspect using only mitochondrial DNA would involve a higher resolution than STR analysis. Do not think that was an easy or reliable thing to do with the charred flesh remains. They used STRs on mtDNA also I suspect.
"And there was no logic in whose DNA they tested, as Kratz said in his email, they just wanted to show some "exclusions". I'm glad they ruled out Delores though, that's a relief."
LOL, they used Dolores for confirmation not as a real suspect [at least I hope so].
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 11 months ago
DeleteThey STR or short tandem repeat technology is not used on mtDNA. Ignore me if I am redundant for you, but maybe others would be interested. STR is only used with nuclear (also called autosomal) DNA. The labs use pre-made kits, you will see she used a Promega 16 something or other. It comes with primers that will "pluck out" any alleles at specific loci the test is charged to detect (those listed on your charts). STR's are repeating segments of of DNA usually 4, in this test 2 are five, that repeat over and over, and these are places where that number varies a lot from person to person, so they are useful in discriminating between individuals.
The allele number, i.e. 8, 20, is the number of repeats. So, you would have... gaca gaca gaca . x 20, or gaaca gaaca gaaca..... So this is most useful in forensics finding murderers/rapists out of a population problems.
Mt DNA is not very discriminating in a population match, but very useful for ID of badly decomposed skeletal remains, or body parts. The FBI became more involved with this after 9/11 having to ID many loose body parts. There is only one set of nuDNA per cell, so in badly charred bone, it is often hard to get enough for a decent profile (as was the case here). But, there could be a thousand mt/cell, and each of those buggers has multiple copies of their DNA.
So there is a lot more DNA to be had. And when your goal is to ID a bone, you have family members to match (maternal linkage, the mt DNA come from the mother, so TH's mtDNA would be a copy of her mothers, her brother would also share it. So you are matching a suspected part to a known family member, and that would definitely exclude someone, and normally be considered a good match.
They aren't normally thinking, well, could they belong to someone else, The mtDNA is very teeny 16,000 bp, compared to the 1 billion bp nuDNA. Also the STRs are in non coding DNA, not 'genes", there is room for a lot of things like that. The mtDNA has no room for such nonsense.
Now, not having anything like a report, I have no idea what they did, there are typically a couple of regions call HVRs that are used in mtDNA sequencing. (I have 3 relatives with a genetic mitochondrial disorder (which led to my degrees..).
My question is however, if they had a mtDNA profile, which Ken seems to imply, and somewhere I have a link to the news report where it was announced, and they have a slew of family members to match it to, so they could say with pretty good certainty, those were her bones, why didn't they use that in court.
There is a memo from Fossbender to Culhane staying TH's parents were providing "standards". Mom could have matched her. The STR profile was shabby.. so why would they rely on that? Or was the FBI report just not true, and Ken just let the media tell the public it was??? It's odd.
I'd sire be interested to know what was up with that. Again, is this was just a missing relative from a fire, there wouldn't be a lot of questions. But legally, you can see where issues of doubt can be raised. Reasonable issues. The science doesn't lie, but it is what people can do with it that can be deceptive.
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S] 0 points 11 months ago
DeleteYes, you are right there are no STRs used in mtDNA. There are apparently in some animals so that is what confused me.
"I have no idea what they did, there are typically a couple of regions call HVRs that are used in mtDNA sequencing. (I have 3 relatives with a genetic mitochondrial disorder (which led to my degrees..)."
Yes, I could not determine for sure neither. I also was not sure if they use the HVRs because I thought they have to sequence it? Even if it is at high concentrations sequencing such damaged remains is probably prone to errors. The region is relatively short but I still have issues with them doing that. I doubt they would use RFLP as that technique is old and is not that discerning.
"however, if they had a mtDNA profile, which Ken seems to imply, and somewhere I have a link to the news report where it was announced, and they have a slew of family members to match it to"
Yes, I saw that news report also and was not sure what they were talking about. If they sequenced and used the mother's DNA the significance would be higher than the STR analysis on item BZ, the charred flesh. That is what keeps on confusing me and why I believe they used some simple or even old technique as RFLP to just exclude using mother's DNA. Then it is a case of simple biased "lost-in-translation" that ends up sounding on the news like a definite match.
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 11 months ago
Well, you are kinder than me. I am looking at the reports, the news report, the email, reports, the powerpoint used in court all at once. I had not listened to the full report, holy shit, excuse my language. They matched it to her mother. That's a perfect match. The state lab reports were "inconclusive". But they don't say that, nor did they say that in court. I call it lying. Why would they use the crappy partial profile if they had this?? To not finish the sentence and say "but the probability of finding a related person with the same profile is pretty damn high?" (based on the database in my head). Where is this incredible FBI report that launched this 8 minute news segment? Or let's say, I'll give it a probability of... oh why, not 1 in a billion that it is a coincidence.
[–]stheory123 1 point 11 months ago
Anyone have a pic of the stain or the quarry? When i picture a quarry, I image one filled with water.
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S] 1 point 11 months ago
Of the stain no. I do not think they took even one picture of the bones in the position where they were found, this includes even the ones at the Avery property.
There is a tag #8008 for this stain, you find the description of the tag you find the description of the stain.
It is close to water, this is the approximate area.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Avery's+Auto+Salvage/@44.2435769,-87.6989415,773m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x88032f8641fb3e73:0xb85fa553298bb0bf!6m1!1e1?hl=en
[–]OliviaD2 1 point 11 months ago
Do your know where exactly this was? By some bones, on a rock, etc? I have to assume there must have been some reason it was even swabbed, something that lead them to find it significant? Of course I don't imagine they would have photographed it by any chance... :P
[–]abyssus_abyssum[S] 1 point 11 months ago
I do not know where it was. All I know it is associated with tag #8008 so find the description of that tag you will find a more specific description.
[–]ceruleandaydream 3 points 11 months ago
DeleteDespite what the series has people believing, the investigation did DNA tests for at least Steven, Charles, Earl, Allan, Dolores, Brendan, Bryan, Bobby, and Barb.
But the question in this instance is, where is the comparison of the others to this profile from the quarry? That's a valid question. Can you point us to the answer?
[–]foghaze 2 points 11 months ago
Exactly. If the blood stain from the quarry didn't matter they wouldn't have even submitted it to the crime lab for analysis. Seemed to be very evidentiary in nature but when it came back as NOT SA they just dismissed it. What a load of crap.
[–]foghaze 0 points 11 months ago
Sorry but we are not getting this from Making a Murderer. We are reading the trial with documented evidence. In this particular document only Byran, Steven and Allan were compared. Not sure were you are getting your info but if you read all the documented evidence from the crime lab it is perfectly clear they are only comparing Steven, Allan and Bryan's DNA with NUMEROUS pieces of evidence.
Also this blood stain was determined to come from a HUMAN MALE. Not an animal.
But they didn't bother to see where this MALE DNA came from.
How about that? Seems to be a running theme.
As long as it points to Avery they use it. If it doesn't they ignore it.
ReplyDeleteBUTING: Judge, what it is, is a record regularly kept in the course of her business. She's going to be able to easily identify it. She's talked about the exoneration. It shows that Mr. Avery's buccal swabs --
THE COURT: Is your microphone on?
BUTING: Yes. It shows that Mr. Avery's buccal swabs, that used to be in the custody of the Crime Lab, were sent back to the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department in 2003.
THE COURT: All right. I had understood that the blood that was in the Clerk's Office was going to be the subject of the defense. How does this exhibit relate to that defense?
[–]hos_gotta_eat_too
Buccal swabs. This is the key.
If Manitowoc received these back in 2003, they should be in the evidence storage where the blood was held. If these buccal swabs cannot be found, I would say we have very strong evidence of planting.
[–]hos_gotta_eat_too
i have always tried to tie the key DNA to the groin swabs taken at the hospital and them being "thrown away"..
i had NO idea Avery's buccal swabs were returned from the crime lab to Manitowoc County in 2003. Guess there was more in that styrofoam box than we saw. Didn't that box look like it should have been holding more than one vial?
[–]7-pairs-of-panties
Agreed!!! I have always thought the hood latch was the groin swabs discarded, and the bullet DNA was from the dirty panties. I had NEVER heard that they had vials of his buccal swabs!!! It makes a whole new meaning to KK's sarcastic remark about Manitowoc county running around w/ vials of his "sweat!" Turns out maybe they were!!! KK is the one who always reveals a bit too much when speaking.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5fscr7/she_helped_lock_avery_up_in_1985_got_him_out_in/?st=iw5nrgm1&sh=7a6e7172
[–]timmyteejay
ReplyDeleteThanks for post, I do look forward to reading each and every one of your posts.
This just highlights the (in reality) weak and precarious state of the forensic case against SA.
No wonder that after the appointment of DS and JB, the state had to get busy with BD - and fast.
If it wasn't for the passage of time I would be more confident in the new testing that is going to be done. Don't get me wrong, I'm entirely convinced of the travesty of justice that went on here - it's just that SA is very much fighting and uphill battle despite the brilliance of KZ and her team.
[–]SBRH33
The similarities the of the Avery and Bembenek cases: Worth a look see.
Had drawn the ire of local law enforcement
Were connected to murders committed around the same time local law enforcement was a target of action initiated by them
Questionable forensic evidence
Madison crime lab misconduct
Questionable ballistic evidence
A prosecution motive based in fantasy
Avery's wrongful 1985 conviction..... and the out right framing of "BamBi" Bembenek were completely dismissed by Peggy "The Lout"..... She found zero wrongdoing on Law Enforcements part in the wrongful convictions of both defendants. There definitely is something in that good old Wisconsin water isn't there?
[–]DevilisintheDA 3 points 3 hours ago
SC has a conflict of interest because she was deposed. The lack of humility is still part of this criminal enterprise.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5fscr7/she_helped_lock_avery_up_in_1985_got_him_out_in/?st=iw5nrgm1&sh=7a6e7172
Hey Magiclougie, this is so interesting! CX - is this the blood found by Tyson on November 10? The same time the State Patrol Officers found what they thought was a charred foot and later turned out to be (according to Tyson: CASO page 219) burnt insulation. Always thought that was all a bit fishy! Did State Patrol discover a crime scene that the police thought they had taken care of?
ReplyDeleteHey Jane, it's been a while since I published this blog so I'll have to refresh my memory and get back to you. But I think you're right about who found it and that they determined it was burnt insulation rather than a charred foot. And there were state troopers at the quarry on or about November 10th. This is also around the time DCI called Eisenberg because someone (state troopers?) had found more bones at the quarry, which I think were the pelvic bones that never would have been collected as evidence had CASO and MTSO had a say in it.
ReplyDeleteState troopers found fresh blood in gravel, rag with blood stain at quarry
DeleteCALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
Page 220
File Number Complaint No. 05-0157-955
TYPE OF ACTIVITY: Supplemental Report
DATE OF ACTIVITY: 11/10/05
REPORTING OFFICER: Sgt. Bill Tyson
On Thursday,11/10/05, I (Sgt. BILL TYSON of the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT) was at the command post at the crime scene on the AVERY properly when I was informed several WI STATE PATROL officers found, what appeared to them, to be a charred human foot in the quarry south of Avery Rd. DCI Special Agent RON EBBEN was with me and he stated he would come with me since he did have some expertise in arson and identifying bones.
Upon walking north on Avery Rd., a state patrol officer did direct our attention south to the quarry. Upon walking down the embankment towards the quarry, I did notice two state patrol officers standing by a small area of standing water. The state patrol officers indicated they found, what they believed to be, a human vertebrae in the water. Special Agent RON EBBEN stated he would stand by at the possible human vertebrae while I continued to the area where the state patrol offtcers possibly found a charred human foot.
Continuing norlh through the quarry, I did locate a group of state patrol officers standing around an object. Upon making contact with them, they informed me they found something that resembled a human foot that was chaned. Upon looking at the item, I could not distinguish if this, indeed, was or was not a charred human foot.
Special Agent FASSBENDER, Inv. WIEGERT and Sheriff PAGEL arrived with Medical Examiner MICHAEL KLAESER. Medical Examiner KLAESER looked at the object and stated he did not believe it to be that of a human foot. Correctional Officer TODD KONEN arrived on scene and stated he would stand by with the object while I went to get a camera and evidence bags.
Special Agent RON EBBEN directed my attention back to his location and he did show me a rag with a brownish red colored stain on it. Upon walking away from that object, I did locate, what appeared to be, fresh blood in the gravel. Medical Examiner KLAESER did arrive at my location and did confirm that he did believe it also to be blood.
I informed Medical Examiner KLAESER I had some concerns due to the fact we did have a substantial amount of rain within the past couple of days and felt it to be very odd that this could possibly be blood from the case we were working on. Medical Examiner KLAESER agreed although I did wish to collect the blood for evidentiary purposes. I did photograph the area of blood and did apply two drops of distilled water to a sterilized cotton swab and did swab the bloodstain. That stain was collected at 1716 hours. At 1718 hours, I did a control swab of the gravel in the vicinity of the possible blood.
I went back to Special Agent EBBEN's location and did photograph the rag that had the brownish red stains on it. That item was collected at 1724 hours.
Special Agent EBBEN and I went back to Correctional Officer KONEN's location and did photograph the charred object. That item was collected at 1743 hours.
All items were placed in my squad car and transpofted back to the CALUMET COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT. In the evidence room, I did open up the bag that had the possible charred human foot to find the item had flipped over and it did appear to be a piece of bumt insulation.
A11 items were placed into the secured evidence room.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=220
Question. Does burned insulation, BLEED. (self.TickTockManitowoc)
Deletesubmitted 6 months ago * by BlackImladris
https://postimg.org/image/4msn5i3w1/
https://postimg.org/image/roep4bgwn/
Page 219 of the CASO Investigative Report.
Why would blood, FRESH blood, be found so close to a dirty old blood crusted rag that has begun go turn brown, after, how many days? And how much rain? SUBSTANTIAL the rain is described as...i.e, enough for the sight of FRESH BLOOD by trained professionals to sight as a very peculiar thing...Yet there it is, fresh blood...
Could it just so happen to be, that whomever is planting the blood, thought about doing so next to a supposed, too good to be true, charred human foot, until it turned out to be something far removed from a foot?...burned insulation...so why the drop of blood? Surely the spatter couldn't have traveled allllllllllllllll the way from the supposed Avery house of horrors and insulation certainly does not bleed. Perhaps it was planted before LE realised what it was(they were back at base with it by that point), and by that time, they were too syringe happy to stop spraying it all over the place!
Do we have the results of the blood found by the insulation tape and brown bloody rag that ISN'T FRESH? And what became of the human vertebrae that the officer so nicely offered to "stand by"? Wonder where it was destined for next?
Edit. How thoughtful of the killer to leave a vertebrae, a lonely vertebrae in a puddle all alone...
Edit. Thanks tbenn585!
Found this below, copied the relevant info.
Item CX - questioned stain reportedly recovered from "quarry south of Avery Rd" (tag# 8008)
Chemical analysis of the reddish/brown questioned stains of items G, II, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, s, T, U, Y, AA, CE, CF, ' CG, CH, CQ, CR1, CR4 and CX indicated the presence of blood
The profile developed from item CX is not consistent with the buccal cell standards of Allan Avery (item AY)
Bryan Dassey (item BS) or Steven Avery (item BU) . This profile is consistent with a male individual
So, unidentified fresh male blood in the quarry... It seems because it wasn't an Avery, it didn't matter...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4romdk/question_does_burned_insulation_bleed/
DNA transcript/exhibit review: Item A23. Who opened RAV4 cargo door and left bloody DNA? (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 6 months ago by OpenMind4U
POST FROM MY ARCHIVE (actually, this is my FIRST POST on Reddit, more than 4 months ago)
I must admit upfront the following: - I'm not DNA expert but learned this subject on my own by following many criminal cases for years. Simply fascinating with science, genetics and all DNA 'markers'; - It took me awile to go through court transcripts in correlation with available exhibits, particularly with Exhibit 311
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-311.pdf
So, here we go. One of the items collected for DNA analysis from RAV4 is 'Item A23 - swabbing from the rear exterior door handle of cargo door'. According to this Exhibit 311, Item A23 is part of 'Chemical analysis of the reddish/brown questioned stains of items A1-A4, A6-A10, All, A12, A23 and B1-B5 indicated the presence of blood'. So, it's BLOOD sample.
Now, let's look at corresponding Result of Genetic Markers 'table' for items collected. Where is A23? Not there! Hmmm...Than I thought maybe I'll find explanation for Item A23 in court transcripts (direct examination of Ms.SHERRY CULHANE, references to Exhibit 311 and all 'A'-items and more, please read Court Transcript day 10, starting with page 312).
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-10-2007Feb23.pdf
Nope, nothing there in regards of A23. Now I'm looking Exhibit 313.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-313.pdf
'In addition, human DNA isolation was also performed on items A11, A23, AJ, AK, L, M, N, T, S, U, CR1, DD1 and DD2
Partial DNA profiles were obtained from items A23 and DD1 . Due to the limited genetic information these profiles are insufficient for interpretation.
CONTINUED...
Interesting, isn't?:)...Well, at least we know it's human blood DNA with partial profile. I wish we could know which 'markers' she have/doesn't have in determining 'limited genetic information'. She even couldn't determine if it has X/X,Y???:)...I do hope that all (or majority) of these DNA items are well preserved for re-testing by true professional(s) in near future. What a mess!!! Granted, the amount of items to be tested was overwhelming for such a non-sufficient, professional-limited, (probably!!!) contaminated laboratory. Too bad that defense wasn't able to perform all these test on it's own or participate with these findings.
ReplyDeleteMaybe it has been explained somewhere, in another document which is not available yet. But I'm simply interesting to know WHO left the bloody DNA while opening the cargo door of RAV4??? By knowing that at some point the victim's body was in RAV4 cargo and her cremains was found not in cargo than the reasonable assumption would be that her body was removed from cargo, agree? Which means someone open/close the RAV4 cargo door. Who was it? And I'm not talking about 'planting' blood here...I simply looking for explanation of Item A23.
....and here is the comment made by one of the best science DNA-knowledgeable blogger on Reddit, /u/abyssus_abyssum
'Partial DNA profile is exactly the same as what she used to identify TH to the charred flesh remains.
That means there are some markers she was able to deduce but as always, she does not report all her negative results.
That however means she did try to amplify it so she should have a measure of how much DNA there was. I want to see that concentration number compared to the other blood stains. That can tell you if it was the limitation of the blood stain size or something else.'
Now you know why I keep saying that RAV4 has answer to 'Who is the Killer?!!!'....and if A23 would have partial DNA with SA 'markers' then you would hear about, non-stop from prosecution!....but you didn't hear it, right?...because SA is not the Killer!
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/4n39tu/dna_transcriptexhibit_review_item_a23_who_opened/?st=iwqyqqxj&sh=3300c7ee
I had a crazy thought about swab A23 (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted by hos_gotta_eat_too
December 16, 2016
Tested positive for human DNA. No profile found.
My theory is that CODIS had no match for the DNA profile, because they are not in the system back in 2005. Maybe they are now, but again..maybe they aren't still.
But...remember one of Zellner's first tweets?
Kratz letter: My client will never admit guilt but so appreciate you sending your DNA on envelope.#MakingAMurderer. — Kathleen Zellner (@ZellnerLaw) January 23, 2016
How great now is it that she is most likely collecting DNA from people in the case, so she can test directly against them and not bother with CODIS? She will have her own Manitowoc database to have her scientists test the samples against.
And I can almost promise her investigators have collected DNA from all the men in TH's life somehow, along with everyone in the MCSD.
Someone is going to get outted once she gets to Culhane's "undetermined" samples. Then she will be able to name the killer.
If I knew that was coming, I'd accept defeat and just turn myself in. Will look better at sentencing if finally deciding to cooperate.
This is going to get so good, there may be a season 3 of MAM!
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5iqts9/i_had_a_crazy_thought_about_swab_a23/?st=iwsnurbq&sh=2f7b7aa9
[–]MMonroe54
ReplyDeleteThe lack of evidence to substantiate BD's confessions either means it didn't happen or LE work was dismal. I might think the latter except for John Ertl. He was the only witness whose testimony impressed me....because he appeared to be concerned with the case and the facts and what he actually saw and did--neutral, in other words. He's the one who said he didn't believe an ordinary person could clean up a crime scene as was described to the point it couldn't be detected. He said he, perhaps, could, because he'd know how, as a scientist. I didn't think that was bragging, but simply truthful. Because he examined both the trailer and the garage, I became convinced not that LE missed it but that there was nothing to find to support BD's tale of binding, rape, and murder. If it happened, it happened elsewhere, was what I came to believe...which put the lie to the bullet fragments and the DNA.
A major issue with this case is that one thing seems to contradict another -- no blood or DNA in the trailer or garage, but bullet fragments; blood in the RAV but no fingerprints; valet key instead of regular key; bones but not all the bones...and in two different places; witness accounts that change or disagree; rolled license plates in plain view in the back of a station wagon when there were a million better places in that salvage yard to dispose of them. It goes on....
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5jd72r/if_sa_had_no_involvement_in_the_circumstances/
Worth a *2nd* look.... (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 8 days ago by Kkman1971
It feels like we hit another lull after so many good posts the past couple of weeks. Since a lot of us will have some free time over the holidays, maybe it is a good time to re-examine the RAV4 and everything we have learned about it from MAM, the case files, and KZ.
The reason??? Well, this post got buried in with the drama surrounding needlessthings last week, but it has really peaked my interest and I feel it deserved its own thread. It was with regards to needlessthings from onnetflixorders and sounds like one of KZ's tweets, like a tip from an insider.
Good lord. Season two will have to include more allusions to the presumption of innocence ;) Needless had a job to do - we all have jobs to do. Keep interest alive in the case. Release bits and pieces of the puzzle. This place will be swamped in no time. Needless will finally become that, needless. Everyone is so close. So much about the RAV is back in the spotlight and you have all been flirting with the RAV without taking hold of the wheel. Hermann's salvage yard. The writing scratched onto the RAV. The dead battery. Kathleen's latest tweet. (Did I do that?) They were indeed dealing with more than one RAV4. I promise ;) Tick Tock. Tootle-loo (for good)>
Oh, how I long for a write up from needlessthings specifically focusing on the RAV4 right about now. We all know what a hot button topic the RAV4 has been on here. Can't wait for the next season and to hear KZ explain the picture of her standing with the RAV4 she bought and the significance of it all.
My guess is TH was tragically lured to Kuss Rd. AC found her and the vehicle on 11/3. It was decided by the "Boss" to burn the vehicle and body to cover up any evidence/dna in order to frame SA again and ensure they don't get "burned" by the same mistake from their prior framing. Enter the framed ad they hid in SA's trailer.
But when all the players were framing SA for the crime off ASY, they realized it was just not strong enough. The "Boss" changes to Plan B and it was put into action sloppily because they were up against the clock.
Plan B: A 2nd RAV4 was planted on ASY along with enough "evidence" to connect SA to TH. They are not the brightest bunch, but they are the Law, Judge, and Jury, and most importantly the civil case goes away. And it worked, but a little documentary was filming as the events unfolded, Netflix streaming was changing home entertainment, and SA had enough money from their initial framing to hire real lawyers to defend him, not their corrupt public defenders.
Shock and Horror for sure, considering all the players they had to convince to be a part of the event and framing... LE, Family, and Friends. This framing does involve a lot of people, but they were all needed in order to make the civil case and SA go away for good, and give the family and friends motivation to be angry enough at SA to unknowingly go along with framing as well.
The only one specifically not needed was the coroner, why???? Because they knew she had integrity, and would expose the entire fabrication. Not involving her clearly points to a frame job and corruption in LE in this case, IMO.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5je2up/worth_a_2nd_look/
[–]_jcr_ 3 points 7 days ago
ReplyDeleteThis is why I think that the blood, if it was planted, wasn't planted when the RAV4 was on the property (and that could also explain why there was a tarp over it -- not to conceal the planting of blood but to conceal the absence of blood).
I think the blood was planted offsite, either at the lab or while the RAV4 was being transferred to the lab. It was also likely planted by a sophisticated actor using some kind of process to transfer legitimate blood found elsewhere. If this is the case, the radiocarbon dating will find that the blood matches up to 2005 SA. I believe Zellner has anticipated this is the case, and her tweet about the "experiments" is in reference to figuring out the process used to transfer the blood. She has replicated it in her lab, and further she can probably test the found blood to prove it went through that process. She wouldn't be very good if she did not anticipate and plan for the radiocarbon dating coming back to 2005 SA; in planning for this contingency I believe they actually stumbled on the actual method, probably by accident.
My guess would be that it came from the bloody rag, went through a process to extract it into globs / flakes, then was mixed with chemical(s) to liquify it enough for application. That explains the bright color, the "thinness" of the blood and its unusual distribution on the CD case, and the flakes of blood found in the vehicle. I assume she can detect contaminants from the rag as well as the chemical(s) used in this process, and can show that the blood found could only have come from this process and not from fresh bleeding.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5jfh5m/i_love_how_guilters_gloss_over_certain_facts/
[–]onnetflixorders 22 points 12 days ago
ReplyDeleteGood lord. Season two will have to include more allusions to the presumption of innocence ;)
Needless had a job to do - we all have jobs to do. Keep interest alive in the case. Release bits and pieces of the puzzle.
This place will be swamped in no time. Needless will finally become that, needless.
Everyone is so close. So much about the RAV is back in the spotlight and you have all been flirting with the RAV without taking hold of the wheel.
Hermann's salvage yard. The writing scratched onto the RAV. The dead battery. Kathleen's latest tweet. (Did I do that?)
They were indeed dealing with more than one RAV4.
I promise ;)
Tick Tock.
Tootle-loo (for good)
[–]SBRH33[S] 7 points 20 hours ago
Actually on the contrary we do not know for certain if the RAV found at the ASY was the one that belonged to TH.
A Loose Theroy
Suppose Teresa's RAV is somewhere over in the quarry, but is immobilized. Not by cause of accident but because the keys are simply missing. It can not be driven anywhere. Suppose TH is also found there deceased.
Suppose a decision was made to move the crime scene from the quarry over to the ASY. (for reasons far to complex to outline here as toward motive as to why that would happen I will just ask that you Bear with me... dog pun intended ;)...)
But decisions were made. Calls placed and plans laid. Imagine that LE had a green light from the top.... PL's office at the time to do as they wished to make the Avery problem disappear. There would be zero ramifications for tampering with evidence, disregarding the most basic of LE protocols, distorting facts and fabricating statements... or, coercing a 16 year old, mentally deficient child into implicating not only his own uncle of a grizzly murder, but himself as well in the process... Imagine an entire Crime Lab under the authority and direction of someone who demanded the use of contaminated DNA evidence, breaking of lab protocols, mishandling physical evidence, incorrectly documenting DNA source material, mislabeling biological source material and not following through on the most basic DNA profile reporting..... Imagine that person actually placing a signature on every document that came out of the Madison Lab certifying that kind of BS evidence pertaining to the Avery case?..... well, you don't have to imagine too hard because her name is PL, the same PL who let Manitowoc off the hook for the string up of Avery in 1985, and now she has to do somersaults to get them and the State out of the way of Avery's monumental civil case.... which he had a 99.9% chance of winning.... before the murder wrap was laid upon his shoulders
So the RAV can't be moved out of the Quarry to the ASY because no one has the dang keys to the car. They can't tow it there, that would be way too risky. They have an inert crime scene that is a bit messy, complicated and potentially laden with DNA evidence that also needs to be completely destroyed further to hide those facts and it all also needs to be moved over to the ASY as well to implicate Steve......all without being caught doing so. .....What to do?
Search Warrant/ A Warrant to End All Warrants
Get another, identical RAV4. Paint that RAV4 the same color as TH's. It doesn't have to be perfect just good enough to fool people from a distance. A certain LE member has access to his own salvage yard, access to a smelter, access to his own body shop and has access to potential RAV4's that match the make and year of TH's. Has knowledge of VIN removal. They paint the identical RAV with the metallic Sikkens automotive paint matched to TH's 99 Toyota, remove the Vin from TH's and place it on the decoy...... and then drive that sucker right onto the ASY the night of the 4th and plop it into place for POG to "discover it the very next morning"
Its seems implausible right? I mean thats nuts but, .......
CONTINUED...
[–]OpenMind4U 9 points 2 hours ago*
ReplyDeleteI'll tell you the true story (sorry for long comment in advance).
Person has been reported 'missing' by his family. His car was 'missing', his phone didn't ping...He was parish into thin air, for long-long time. LE was searching, looking for him everywhere; made every possible investigation into his 'past' life - his friends, his co-workers, even his ex-lovers...Search went internationally. Database of 'missing' people had his name.
Finally, LE got first link...his car with bloody clothes inside and outside (his DNA was checked and come back positive, it was his blood) and his expensive watch were found in Mexico. Car was damaged and burned-out. Inside of the car, was burned human skeleton beyond any recognition...all charred bones.
To make this true story short, at the end, the 'missing' person happened to be NOT missing and NOT dead. He simply 'staged' this crime to disappear for his own financial reasons.
Now, back to our case, Teresa Halbach Murder. And whatever I'll say underneath is my opinion only.
do we know WHEN TH was killed? - NO
do we know WHERE TH was killed? - NO
do we know HOW TH was killed? - NO
do we know if TH was killed (murdered) or TH had accident or died from other causes? - NO
do we know if these charred bones/tooth are TH bones/tooth? - NO
(and here is the most important!) does LE made full and proper investigation of TH family, friends, co-workers, ex-lovers...as far we know, NO!!!
So, we, the bloggers, have all the rights to questioning/discussing every missing aspect of this case. Including, questioning TH past.
HOWEVER, I do agree with /u/brofortdudue (I read his comment on another threat): in pursue of Truth we should NOT forgot that Teresa could be a murder victim and we must make our discussions using proper wording (c'mon, you know English better than me, right? you know how to speak proper English, right?:)...so, yes, let's be respectful.
And yes, 'if TH was murdered' AND this case (SA and Brendan) then you may say it will ultimately lead to a much improved justice system, she may have taken the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom.
Thank you for your OP.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/62dnk1/respect_for_th/dfltnn4/
From our four-legged friend, could someone help me interpret this tweet... (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6dbi86/from_our_fourlegged_friend_could_someone_help_me/
submitted 8 hours ago by WunnyBabbit
@cadaverdogbrutu
"So where exactly did that master key to Clerks office go? Kenny out of town that very week. Things that make you go...she knows. #Chequemate"
https://imgur.com/gallery/ES3WT
[–]Redditidiot1 3 points 4 hours ago
Yes but implying B2 is a mixture. B2 is from the Grand Am console. Implying CX sat in that car.
[–]PlayswthFire 6 points 5 hours ago
Not sure what it means but I would sure like to know where that picture came from in one of the latest tweets.
[–]leftside___rightside 4 points 5 hours ago
the 'leg' looking one referencing item cx?
http://imgur.com/VcwB4w0
[–]Signterp1 [score hidden] an hour ago
I think it looks like an upper arm not a leg. With bite marks and/or scratches. I just don't think it looks like a leg.
[–]FakedBlood 2 points 5 hours ago
It is a male person. Are there any pictures from the search for TH of a male in shorts? Do they have an injury?
[–]Odilion 3 points 3 hours ago*
It doesn't necessarily have to be a photo from the search, right? It could be someone who had a fresh injury back then (i.e., wearing long pants during the search if they were there) who has a scar now. Do we know of anyone involved who has had a past knee injury?
[–]PlayswthFire 2 points 5 hours ago*
I do not recall ever seeing one with a male in shorts. October should be chilly. It does look like an injury to me, similar to injury/injuries that have been scrutinized in some other photos ETA Oct/Nov.
[–]FakedBlood 6 points 5 hours ago
If the CX DNA is related to the leg it has to be a picture of a male person. I was just wondering if there was a picture anyone can recall of a male wearing shorts so you could see a scratch on their leg. I think the leg looks like it has a scar below the knee. Anyone else think there is? I am wondering if they are trying to point to a suspect that left the blood and tissue in the quarry from a leg injury?
[–]PlayswthFire 2 points 5 hours ago
THIS^
[–]PlayswthFire 1 point 5 hours ago
Maybe get a screenshot in case it disappears?!
[–]Rossj83 6 points 4 hours ago
https://imgur.com/gallery/ES3WT
CONTINUED...
[–]N64_Controller 9 points 1 day ago
ReplyDeleteHow does the Brutus Twitter user know this?
@cadaverdogbrutu
Brutus @cadaverdogbrutu 7h7 hours ago
Not only do they plant but also have the audacity to switch what they plant. No barriers in this investigation. Do what's required to frame.
[–]Rossj83 10 points 7 hours ago, May 25, 2017
3 or 4 weeks ago, in some tweets that were quickly deleted, our four legged friend said the state have a month to answer a request from KZ. Which must have been about the bullet.
And last night, in more tweets that have deleted he said the metal alloy of the bullet wasn't right.
They used to post here though, but I can't seem to find any of their old posts.
[–]wayne834 2 points 5 hours ago
The pooch needs a lead. he seems to be making assumptions based on a past case where metal bases were micro analysed to reveal anomolies.Think he's jumping a gun,doesn't mean it isn't correct tho.
[–]Rossj83 4 points 5 hours ago
I didn't pay much attention to him when he said KZ was waiting to hear back from the State, but he seems to have been right about that, so I'm now curious if he has been talking to someone close to the case.
[–]MamaTried1981 5 points 7 hours ago
Ok, so this guy just calls JD up out of the blue in February 2007 to report that the master key for the clerk's office was destroyed in 2001?? Am I missing something??
Or was this after the blood vial discovery and they were asking around as to who had access?
permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive goldreply
[–]WunnyBabbit[S] 5 points 6 hours ago
That's what I'm wondering... if something is being hinted at beyond the mere knowledge that the key was destroyed.
[-]magiclougie
http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/2016/02/dna-profiles-developed-but-not-matched.html
http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/2017/03/was-steven-avery-framed-with-fabricated.html
Culhane matched four blood stains in the Grand Am to Avery: B1, B3, B4 and B5. Only one of the four blood stains was cut from fabric.
B1 - questioned stain recovered from the passenger side of the front console
B2 - questioned stain recovered from the top of the center console
B3 - questioned stain recovered from the center console near the rear window button
B4 - questioned stain recovered from the gear shift
B5 - questioned stain cut from the back seat driver's side
ITEMS B2 and CE
B2 is reported as "no DNA" on exhibit 311 by Culhane but in exhibit 313 shows a DNA match to Avery but with additional markers. Culhane called attention to extra alleles found in Item CE which weren't consistent with Avery's profile.
The results for item CX, the blood stain found in Radandt's quarry (CASO property tag# 8008), are in Culhane's report and on record; therefore, Zellner didn't need to request source testing for the item. A full DNA profile was developed for the stain. Allan Avery, Bryan Dassey and Steven Avery were eliminated as possible sources of the DNA. However, she could have requested new testing not available in 2005-2007, but she didn't, so perhaps she has already matched it to a suspect. If a suspect's profile is proven to be a match it would be huge because the profile came from the State's official report, not an independent lab hired by the defense. So it's more about matching the profile to a suspect at this point.
CONTINUED...
[–]Redditidiot1 4 points 4 hours ago
ReplyDeleteAnd apparently by later tweeting Brutus is implying B2 is a mixture with CX. I.e. CX from the quarry sat in the car. (I think that's the nature of this)
[–]FakedBlood 5 points 4 hours ago
B2 is blood from SA's Grand Am from top of the center console. It was identified as having the major component being SA but unknown who the minor component was. CX is questioned stain from quarry south of Avery Road. It was blood and the DNA produced a full profile which did not match anyone tested.
[–]Redditidiot1 3 points 4 hours ago
The dog showed both CX and B2 together, mentioning "contamination." I guess in that case I would jump to questioning who (from LE) cut out the swath because the dog is implying contamination.
[–]_idunnowhy_ 5 points 4 hours ago*
Ha! Here's the link to an older post that talks about this very thing.
How could KZ proclaim planting before retesting? Suggestion.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5mgu7m/how_could_kz_proclaim_planting_before_retesting/
ETA The post in the link has some interesting discussion about the lab being the center of the planting, which has come up again in recent days.
[–]foghaze 1 point 4 hours ago*
B2 does appear to be a mixture. Only 2 loci. Something is very suspicious about these results. Good call.
[–]FakedBlood 5 points 4 hours ago
Here is a link to the report. On page four you will see that it is a mixture. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-313.pdf
[–]foghaze 1 point 2 hours ago*
Oh shit. It does look like a mixture based on this. Wish he would have used that as a screen shot. You can't tell with the one he has posted. Thank you for pointing this out.
[–]FakedBlood 3 points 2 hours ago
No problem. The DNA reports are a bit messed up. I had to make a chart to keep it straight.
[–]Redditidiot1 5 points 4 hours ago
Someone just reminded me that B2 is from the grand am swath. Is he implying that CX dropped on the grand am swath? and by that inference should we then ask who cut out the swath?
[–]foghaze 1 point 2 hours ago
I was just shown the actual results from the lab report and it in fact does appear to be a mixture of sort. Only 2 loci though. Which is strange. It would seem that would indicate a mixture. I need to look into it a bit more.
[–]_idunnowhy_ 4 points 4 hours ago
Based on an older post I linked to in another comment here, B2 was initially found to have no profile. In a later report they magically found a full profile. Shenanigans at the lab is looking more likely every day.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6dbi86/from_our_fourlegged_friend_could_someone_help_me/
How could KZ proclaim planting before retesting? Suggestion. (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/5mgu7m/how_could_kz_proclaim_planting_before_retesting/
submitted 4 months ago * by BugDog1
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong in this line of thinking :) I remember that around January last year u/abyssus_abyssum and I were working through Sherry's lab reports and after cutting out all the results and putting them together we noted that one sample of SA blood from the Grand Am had two additional markers.
Item B2 (blood stain from Grand Am) is initially reported in this report as "no Dna profile was obtained from items B2 and D1" http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-311.pdf
However in a later report (exhibit 313) there is a full profile matching SA plus two additional markers. I always thought it was odd that no explanation is given to explain why there is "no dna obtained" and then just dropped into is a full profile into a report which does not lost that item at the top of the report as an item being tested? i need to re-read the report but as far as I remember there was no mention of the additional markers or further explanation of why this item has been dropped into this report?
These same additional markers, which appear in the "contaminated" blood stain from the Grand Am, also appear in the full (unknown) profile found at the quarry (item CX, report http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-313.pdf)
So I am wondering has KZ somehow been able to establish ownership of this profile? Has she identified it as someone who should not have ever been in SA Grand Am or at the quarry? If she has, could that be evidence of planting?
[–][deleted] 16 points 4 months ago
I made a very detailed post on this however deleted it as I had initially read it wrong. I was under the assumption B2 was from the Rav and not the grand am. I had read the report wrong.
My thoughts are this though. CX is very important.
Could it be B2 was actually from the Rav then switched?
The extra alleles wouldn't draw as much attention if lawyers thought they were from Avery's car. The Rav however is a different story.
I believe there is something fishy going on and there is a possibility profile from CX is mixed in with Steven's profile to form B2.
[-]magiclougie
@cadaverdogbrutu
Brutus @cadaverdogbrutu 7h7 hours ago
Not only do they plant but also have the audacity to switch what they plant. No barriers in this investigation. Do what's required to frame.
CONTINUED...
[–]magilla39 13 points 4 months ago*
ReplyDeleteI know that the raw detector signal was provided as evidence for the Mass Spec in the EDTA tests.
It's possible that raw data for the STR peak detector was made available to the defense through initial discovery, though it was not presented at trial. This may give the defense the opportunity to spot more drop-in alleles for other samples and make a case for planting without retesting.
It's even possible that the raw data can be run through newer software and may generate additional drop-in alleles for some samples.
Reference:
http://www.sjsu.edu/people/steven.lee/courses/c2/s2/STR%20Data%20Analysis%20and%20Interpretation%20for%20Forensic%20Analysts.pdf
[–]BugDog1[S] 16 points 4 months ago*
That's really interesting thanks. Good to know there are ways the evidence could be re-interpreted before any actual re-testing.
I suspect that we will find the lab is in fact where the jiggery pokery occured. If Avery is innocent and everything (except maybe the key, or bullets) were really located as the police found them, then the lab is the place where the "planting" occurred.
[–]magilla39 8 points 4 months ago
I tend to suspect the field before the lab, especially for the planted blood. Why lock the doors? Is it to protect the planted blood evidence? Why disable the car? To keep the RAV4 with the planted evidence from being driven away?
[–]BugDog1[S] 9 points 4 months ago
My opinion is if someone from ASY did not put it there then the door locking was to prevent destruction or moving of the vehicle before discovery.
[–]BugDog1[S] 10 points 4 months ago
I would say that the way the reporting is done on this item it seems like it was a deliberate attempt to draw attention away.
If you were simply to look at the report that lists items B2 as an item being tested you would believe that no dna profile was ever obtained. There is no indication given on that report that any further processing will be done on it.
[–][deleted] 13 points 4 months ago
Definitely misleading and it seems intentional at that.
Whatever the reason, you can bet your bottom dollar KZ is on it.
CONTINUED...
[–]BugDog1[S] 13 points 4 months ago
ReplyDeleteI would love to know if there are any other items she reported no dna profile on but subsequently obtained one.
I feel strongly that Sherry did her best to ensure the only names appearing in those reports (besides TH) were Avery and Dassey family and the matches were mainly SA and TH.
[–]JLWhitaker 9 points 4 months ago
I would like to know what DNA data KZ has from the original discovery. Remember, only the summary reports were provided in the trial. That is not the actual output of a test. It is transferred by SC to a summary to send to the DA.
[–]sjj342 9 points 4 months ago*
I think the data should be there (I think that's how the Duke Lacrosse case unraveled - the defense combed the data they had in discovery rather than relying on summary reports - the 30 for 30 segments about the DNA testing is recommended viewing IMHO)
I'd hope we could get some sort of confirmation about its existence (not contents) in discovery... I don't see why the existence would be privileged or withheld.
[–]JLWhitaker 8 points 4 months ago
Page 23 of the Kratz Correspondence Regarding Discovery:
i. DNA reports from Sherry Culhane – entire contents of DNA unit’s case file & CD containing DNA Unit’s protocol (577 pages)
That seems useful.
page 29:
a. Information from Norman Gahn, received 5-23-06 (DNA/Mt DNA - 68 pages)
Check this out on page 47. This is from Gahn:
Pursuant to your request, which you made on October 19, 2006, during our meeting with Judge Willis, please be advised that the bullets and extraction tubes and the Toyota key and extraction tube are available for independent DNA testing. Furthermore, visible staining remains on items A1, A3, A4, A8, A9, A6, A12 and A7. These are stains from the Toyota. Other items may contain biological substance for testing. The extraction tubes are also available for testing. Of course, additional stains remain in the vehicle itself.
Page 54: 3. Reports received from State Crime Lab including transmittal forms and letters, receipt and release forms, UPS tracking records, lab reports and corresponding case notes, and CD containing DNA electronic data (Note: CD sent to Attorney Buting). Lab reports include reports of Michel Riddle, ID (12/06), Kenneth Olson, Trace Evidence (12/4/06), and Sherry Culhane, DNA Analysis (12/4/06) (145 pages)
So yes, it looks like they may have the actual data. This was sent on 8 December 2006.
[–]magilla39 5 points 4 months ago
CD containing DNA electronic data (Note: CD sent to Attorney Buting)
Most excellent!
[–]JLWhitaker 4 points 4 months ago
this means KZ has it all.
CONTINUED...
[–]7-pairs-of-panties 8 points 4 months ago
ReplyDeleteWOW about the same two markers were found in the unknown profile from the quarry. How many things did they find DNA or fingerprints on that they didn't use or do anything with because they DIDN'T belong to SA?? I seem to remember them finding prints or DNA on the plates found in the station wagon...Yes? No?
[–]BugDog1[S] 12 points 4 months ago
That is my thinking too. I suspect they tested things and pretended no result or deliberately excluded items for testing that they thought might introduce the name of someone outside the Avery family.
[–]sjj342 7 points 4 months ago
Due to the limited genetic information these profiles are insufficient for interpretation.
[–]JJacks61 6 points 4 months ago
You raise a good point about KZ's statement.
Has she identified it as someone who should not have ever been in SA Grand Am or at the quarry? If she has, could that be evidence of planting?
Now that would be pretty damning evidence for the state. Hopefully we will begin to get some information in the next 60-90 days that will shed some light.
Bullet fragment evidence from Halbach murder sent to Illinois for testing
ReplyDeletehttp://fox11online.com/news/local/lakeshore/bullet-fragment-evidence-from-halbach-murder-sent-to-illinois-for-testing
by FOX 11 News
MANITOWOC, Wis. (WLUK) – Bullet fragment evidence from the Teresa Halbach murder was sent to an Illinois lab this week for testing.
The items were shipped Monday - for forensic re-examination of evidence - and returned Tuesday, according to the Manitowoc County Clerk of Courts office.
Results of the tests were not filed, however. The order does not state specifically what was being sought by the tests.
The tests come after a request from the state Department of Justice after a stipulation with the attorneys for Steven Avery, who is appealing his conviction for the 2005 murder of Halbach.
There are no court dates currently scheduled in the case.
The case gained worldwide attention in late 2015 with the release of the Netflix original documentary series "Making A Murderer." Avery's nephew Brendan Dassey was also convicted of his role in the case. Last year, a federal judge tossed out Dassey's confession and the conviction. The state, however, appealed that ruling - sending the case to the appeals court in Chicago. The appeals court has yet to rule on the case.
[–]SilkyBeesKnees 15 points 1 day ago
First, KZ changed her profile pic to a super-microscope, and then someone noticed the Donation button has been removed from KZ's website, and then family members on Facebook were giddy, and then another user noticed changes in SA's court docket, and now . . . this. It's been exciting!
[–]Kkman1971 22 points 1 day ago
PL's abrupt resignation
ToH retires suddenly
DOJ working with KZ on a 48-hour re-test of an item that KZ had requested but was denied in the original request
KZ's twitter explosion after a long silence
Radio silence from the State, and their PR firm...contract must have expired...
Remember, both parties met to agree upon which items were to be tested. It is my guess that there were stipulations that were agreed upon by both sides as well based on the results of the limited items to test.
This expedited test being one of those stipulated items.
So what test result led to the expedited re-testing of the bullet?
I am guessing the updated KZ twitter profile had a lot to do with it. As well as the testing results with regards to her Tsunami profile pics of late.
It appears the clock is winding down on MTSD and "the framers".....
Tic T........ TIMES UP (almost)
[–]cardiacarrest1965 2 points 21 hours ago
We should also include the encrypting of the scanners in Manitowoc.
CONTINUED...
[–]no_mixed_liquor 12 points 1 day ago
ReplyDeleteSEM analysis can be done quickly, within an hour start-to-finish.
[–]OpenMind4U 8 points 1 day ago
another user noticed changes in SA's court docket
Correct, these changes were NOT today morning!!! I'm checking court docket every morning...wasn't there at 11:00am...but it's there now!!!!
https://wcca.wicourts.gov/courtRecordEvents.do;jsessionid=F4A8E5E4F282EDF6168000BC8602A557.render6?caseNo=2005CF000381&countyNo=36&cacheId=8FA4DF904802C37678E0F2402DAC2696&recordCount=21&offset=17&linkOnlyToForm=false&sortDirection=DESC
https://twitter.com/averydassey/status/867441630751715329
[–]knowfere 7 points 1 day ago
Someone also posted a screenie of KZ's twitter pic changed for a very brief time today or last night to a pic of Twin Peaks tv show. Then I guess she changed it back. It's on the facebook group.
[–]OpenMind4U 11 points 1 day ago
KZ clue: MICROSCOPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...yesterday, evening...
[–]sumgai1 11 points 1 day ago
I think KZ has evidence that might suggest the bullet did not come from SA's gun. Newer more detailed ballistics can test this theory.
[–]Mowter 10 points 1 day ago*
HERE'S THE ORDER for Testing in Illinios on May 24, 2017:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-APlJawt-6RYk1Ib3ZxOUc0TjQ/view
No details on why they were testing, but I did like the bit where they made the agent hang out while the testing was done.
CONTINUED...
[–]caso_cheese 10 points 1 day ago
ReplyDeleteAmazing, and excited.
Could definitely be for testing the tissues/cells or metal composition. Given the amount of time that has passed, and how inconsistent (wait, what does that mean?) the markings were on the bullet, I'd lean towards the latter.
Link to info on this type of test: https://nuclear.engr.utexas.edu/netl/services/neutron-activation-analysis
"NAA has been in routine use to measure trace element concentrations in complex matrices such as human and animal tissue, coal, coal fly ash, petroleum, river sediments, waste water, geological deposits, paper, air particulates, high purity metals, blood, urine, feces, sweat, tobacco, rocks, paint chips, animal feed, detergents and cereals."
[–]foghaze 7 points 1 day ago
hey send WHOLE BULLET back to lab, saying: screw you, SC!!!.
Whole bullet? Whaaat? This is very interesting. Can't wait!
[–]OpenMind4U 9 points 1 day ago
Yes, can you believe it?!!!! And someone already twitted (just rumor) that test came back that this bullet is made from different metal (whatever it calls) not as the rest of the bullets collected from SA garage....
[–]OpenMind4U 13 points 1 day ago
She is going to prove it was ALL PLANTED!!
IMO, KZ already has proof of planting...otherwise, what was the reason to send an additional evidence (which has been denied for her to test in August), urgently, by DOJ?...So, KZ already has something DEADLY over State head!...jmo
[–]foghaze 11 points 1 day ago
Well I meant definitive proof everything was planted. Not just one thing. All of it. Scientifically.
[–]OpenMind4U 9 points 1 day ago
ABSOLUTELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hurray!!!!
[–]OpenMind4U 3 points 1 day ago
To me the bullet evidence important from this perspective:
bullet by itself would mean nothing if this case wouldn't have scalp bones with 2 entry/exit points from bullet .22 caliber;
next, this bullet presumably had TH non-blood DNA. Meaning, what kind of DNA? Skin, tissue, bone's particles? This bullet should be at some point of time in TH head...so, mystery #1 is here;
next, like you said, bullet caliber. It must be .22!! Because prosecution story had very strong tide to SA gun which is .22 caliber...so, what if this bullet is NOT .22 caliber??...here is your mystery #2;
next, let's talk about this 'monster microscope'. So, possibly this bullet has different structure than other bullet fragments found at SA garage...mystery #3;
NMR spectroscopy can be used for chemical analysis,reaction monitoring,and quality assurance/quality control experiments. Higher-field instruments enable unparalleled resolution for "STRUCTURE DETERMINATION", particularly for complex molecules.
last but not least, this bullet could have ANYTHING NEW inside (starting from unique cotton fibers with traces of TH 'reference' DNA and finish with DNA not belong to TH at all!)....mystery #4.
At this point of time, everything is possible....and no question is dumb.
CONTINUED...
[–]OpenMind4U 2 points 22 hours ago
ReplyDeleteI think the state could argue that there could of been more than 1 bullet (shot) with the other bullet not being found,
But this means that the Killer used TWO guns and/or two different bullet calibers? Problem is that this bullet had TH DNA...This what SC claimed. So, this particular bullet already has ties to this murder...but if, for example, caliber is wrong or different metal substance on this bullet - then where is another gun and who used another gun?....no, State cannot just claim something without attaching the bullet to the gun...bullet wouldn't kill no one by itself without be firing from the gun.
[–]angelique0066 2 points 21 hours ago
State had witness expert comparing the gun to the bullet i believe it was on CD 2(12:22) provided from news report. The problem state had was they "proved" the bullet was from the gun but no SA DNA on the gun.
Link: https://youtu.be/WpaPGrkP-3g?t=742
[–]wayne834 14 points 1 day ago
Well there you have it. It wasn't even the same metal alloy compared to the bullets Steven Avery had. Ticktock ;)
[–]sumgai1 14 points 1 day ago
Regarding Sherry Culhane
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Dookhan Dookhan spent less than 3 years in prison and she fabaricated evidence in potentially thousands of cases. Meanwhile others spend decades behind bars or are put to death following wrongful conviction. There really is no justice.
[–]ThackerLaceyDeJaynes 11 points 1 day ago
I've been following the family group on FB...I pop on here to read your threads but THIS, this I made an account for. How do I find on my mobile device?
permalinkembed
[–]Detective_Wiegert 5 points 1 day ago
Welcome! I use a mobile app for Reddit on Android call "Reddit Sync" but there are others out there. Same for iOS.
[–]JJacks61 2 points 20 hours ago
How do I find on my mobile device?
Alien Blue App for mobile devices.
[–]OpenMind4U 2 points 20 hours ago
You're correct...and you can read much more from this expert witness William L. Newhouse testimony...here, enjoy!
Exhibit 381
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Jury-Trial-Transcript-Day-14-2007Mar01.pdf#page=82
CONTINUED...
[–]now_biff 2 points 23 hours ago*
ReplyDeleteThey must have made a deal if any evidence that was allowed to be tested came back with suspicious or damning particles, she gets the rest of the wish list tested and fast tracked!
That why no additional hearings or motions for further testing. She would have been so sure that what they were offering was going to come back in SAs favor, that she was willing to forgo the rest of the list initially, knowing she could get it later!
[–]OpenMind4U 2 points 22 hours ago
She would have been so sure that what they were offering was going to come back in SAs favor, that she was willing to forgo the rest of the list initially, knowing she could get it later!
Yes, very-very possible. And now interesting to see which evidence is next: Bones?
[–]polyphenus 9 points 1 day ago
I'm just spit-balling here because I'm totally fascinated by this latest development, but what if the test indicates that there is no metal residue from the barrel of the alleged gun? Or that the bullet has no traces of concrete/wood/etc. to indicate that it bounced off a surface with any amount of force? Or for that matter, perhaps it includes some trace of a substance that was not present where it was found?
permalinkembedparent
[–]sumgai1 9 points 1 day ago
Maybe the elemental composition is consistent with bullets used by LE at the time? Perhaps the distribution/type of matter on the bullet is consistent with it being fired from a different type of gun?
[–]sweatyuncle_steve 3 points 23 hours ago
The bullet was "washed" and the solution was used to extract dna. It was a one-time shot.. very convenient for MCSO... this is about something else, ballistics maybe, because there should be no dna present whatsoever.
SC broke protocol to do a one-time test for dna, using a solution to "wash" and capture any dna on the bullet fragment present at the time of the test. If this is what SC claims, there would be no dna left on the bullet fragment. This has to be about something else.
[–]knowfere 28 points 1 day ago
Someone who cannot be named said on twitter just a few minutes ago that the metal alloy of the bullet isn't even the same as the metal alloy of SA's bullets?? That would be very quick to test and discover.
CONTINUED...
[–]no_mixed_liquor 18 points 1 day ago
ReplyDeleteHere's what I think it is. They sent the bullet fragments for SEM-EDS analysis to determine if they contain lead at the same percentage as was found in the skull defect by Olson. If they differ, then the bullet fragment from the garage could not have been used to kill TH and, hence, the DNA must have been planted on it.
[–]Turk182 2 points 18 hours ago
If I recall variances between batches of bullets has been discredited and is no longer used. However if the skull and DNA bullet match it reaffirms the state's evidence.
My suspicion is that other evidence where DNA was capture using the wash method were contaminated. with material that should have been washed away indicating that in addition to planing - the DNA tested were faked.
[–]PlayswthFire 20 points 1 day ago
Pretty much explains the SEM profile picture now, huh? ;-)
[–]Mowter 19 points 1 day ago
Looking at the items that KZ received for testing, there's nothing related to the bullet. I can't think of anything that would have come up during her testing that would cause somebody to test the bullet.
More likely, I think she's provided a theory as to how the bullet was planted, and the state requested the testing to confirm/refute that theory. If that's the case, that means she's been showing her cards to the prosecution. I don't want to jump the gun, but it makes me think we're very close to the end, here.
[–]AReckoningIsAComing 4 points 1 day ago
I disagree, there's no way the state is going to suggest ANY testing at all, b/c they know it won't go in their favor.
This is 100% due to the results of the previous testing.
[–]bonnieandy2 16 points 1 day ago
I wouldn't want to be Remiker right now! So..... James, you found this bullet right? .22 yeah, passed right through the victims head, yeah? you found it on the twenty second search, yeah, no blood spatter in the garage, right and it wasn't fired from Steven's gun or even his bullets, OK? but it's good evidence?????????
[–]51kikey 16 points 1 day ago
Looks like the key and hood latch swabs came back with positive results for this to happen?
[–]_idunnowhy_ 11 points 1 day ago
That's my interpretation also. The bullet was the third big piece in the planting theory. No way they'd send it off quietly, with no legal wrangling, if the other two hadn't been proven to be planted. Is there? IMO
[–]logicassist 12 points 1 day ago
not to mention SA's bullets were copper jacketed.
CONTINUED...
[–]roblopes 15 points 1 day ago
ReplyDeleteIn the law of the United States, a stipulation is a formal legal acknowledgement and agreement made between opposing parties prior to a pending hearing or trial. For example, both parties might stipulate to certain facts, and therefore not have to argue those facts in court.
[–]OpenMind4U 38 points 1 day ago*
WOW!!!!!! This is HUGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My dear guys/girls, do you realized what this information means?
first of all, look closely who got involved and send bullet evidence to Illinois (I'm assuming to special ballistic-expert forensic lab in Illinois);
second, without special COURT HEARING/additional Motion (bla-bla-bla due process for additional evidence testing), BOTH sides (defense and state?) agree to such test;
third, (very important!!!!!!!!!!!), this was URGENT test request. Look when it was send and when result comes back! Turn-around timing is UNfreakingBELIEVABLE!!!!!! Meaning, urgent!;
fourth, result keeps in secret...from whom???
fifth, it's BULLET evidence which we always believed cannot be retested because SC used all DNA mixture...so, now, they send WHOLE BULLET back to lab, saying: screw you, SC!!!...wow, wow....
sixth, HURRAY!!!!!!! I need to go take cigarette!!!!:)...great news, THANK YOU!!!!!
[–]wayne834 8 points 1 day ago
is it proof that SA's gun never fired the bullet ?
Well there you have it. It wasn't even the same metal alloy compared to the bullets Steven Avery had. Ticktock ;) ??
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6d463j/bullet_fragment_evidence_from_halbach_murder_sent/
[–]sumgai1 12 points 1 day ago
I think any protein content on the bullet would have degraded too much to be tested to see if it came from blood, saliva, the cervix etc. I think it may have been newer ballistics analysis.
[–]JLWhitaker 19 points 9 hours ago
The most recent information -- beyond the original tests of the old DNA -- is the addition of testing some other material, which we think were the bullet fragments, by a scanning electron microscope. That happened on May 22 at a lab in Illinois.
No results have been released. No more papers filed. But the emotional level in the Avery camp are very happy and buoyant. We just don't know why yet.
[–]momofdjb 45 points 1 day ago
The SEM machine is mentioned on page 39 of KZ's August motion. It's in regards to trace testing the RAV4 key and SA's buccal swabs. I don't think she got the buccal swabs, but she did get the RAV4 key. She did get the hood latch swab though, so I guess that could have been tested too.
Motion from August: http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Avery-8-26-16-Motion-for-Post-Conviction-Scientific-Testing_redacted.pdf
Order for scientific testing: http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Avery-Stipulation-and-Order-for-Scientific-Testing.pdf
Finding out if there was saliva DNA on the key and hood-latch was one of the main things she wanted to do.
CONTINUED...
[–]momofdjb 11 points 1 day ago
ReplyDeleteI think Microtrace Laboratories uses the SEM machine to test for any solvents and/or fibers on the RAV4 key that could have been used to remove TH's DNA. The source of the DNA would be done by a different lab (Independent Forensic Laboratories). Page 40 of the KZ's motion for testing explains this.
[–]Eric_eats_a_Banana 5 points 1 day ago
I'd bet her DNA wasn't ever on it, the key is either a newly cut one or the one that was found was never for her vehicle anyway and a new one was cut for sending to forensics.
I believe the only DNA scrubbed off was that of the planter and any handlers before it reached the lab.
[–]mobomojo 1 point 1 day ago
Maybe TH's DNA was on it along with the planter's DNA thereby requiring a wipe of the key before planting it. Then SA's DNA could be placed cleanly on it?
[–]knowfere 2 points 1 day ago
I don't think TH DNA was ever on that key. And most likely NO ONE elses period. Ever. It was newly cut and handled with gloves. With SA DNA planted on it.
[–]Eric_eats_a_Banana 5 points 6 hours ago
Account1117 is a goader, he pretends to be polite and helpful but his only purpose here is to goad TTM readers in to a response.
It definitely isn't their first post in 3 months, they've been active on TTM for a long time, especially over the past few days and even posted their own thread.
The person is intelligent, articulate and has more knowledge about the case files and documents than a hell of a lot of people on TTM.
However they are guilter, despite claiming to be a fence sitter.
Unfortunately they have let their mask slip too many times with comments like 'SA is GAF!', 'Mark my words SA is never ever getting out of jail!', 'Prove it!'
Someone who comments like that is a an obvious guilter, the only reason for them to be here is to try and goad TTM posters in to an angry reaction or wild conspiracy so they can mock them.
Many people can't read sarcasm on the internet and even more can't recognise goading.
[–]foghaze 10 points 1 day ago
If he touched it his skin cells would be on it. If there is just saliva then that's a problem for the state. Especially when the chain of custody on his buccal swabs can't be tracked.
[–]Willbluerock 4 points 1 day ago
It would also show up foreign bodies.
If the same foreign bodies are detected on the key and the swabs, this would be a major problem for the state.
I have seen Courts argue away things like the saliva so I suspect if KZ is crowing it is much more of a slam dunk i.e. matching foreign bodies.
CONTINUED...
[–]falls_asleep_reading 1 point 1 day ago
ReplyDeleteSquamous epithelial cells would be found in saliva or a buccal swab.
How do you know that?
Assuming this is what you're asking about, (and that could be a bad assumption) squamous epithelial are cells of the outer layer of skin. From a buccal swab, this should be fairly obvious since most of us have pored over these documents dozens of times already, but for those not familiar, buccal swabs are collected by swabbing the surface of the cheek (inside the mouth). Skin cells will be on the swab as a result. They'll also be in saliva because dead skin cells fall off at an astounding rate. We leave little bits of ourselves wherever we go.
The same is true of the key if it's been touched by any human, and for the same reason (except the miracle key--that one's inexplicable). I don't know a ton about SEM analysis, but I am curious to know if it's capable of discerning (due to the magnification factor) whether or not Avery's DNA on the miracle key is naturally-occurring or whether it was placed there with a swab or tape.
WHAT FOLLOWS IS SPECULATION:
Because the magnification factor of SEM is enormous, my guess would be that it's possible she can prove planting. When I hold my car key in my hand, my thumb rubs against it. The fingerprints and cells would look different under magnification than if they had been put there by a third party. Planted prints and DNA would not necessarily have the same appearance under extreme magnification--not in the same way that actually holding the key in one's hand would, anyway. She could have the key in evidence and buy a RAV4 key blank and prove the difference, I would suspect... but I have little hands-on experience with SEM machines and cannot state this with unequivocal certainty, so this is mere speculation on my part.
[–]Rayxor 2 points 1 day ago
squamous epithelial are cells of the outer layer of skin. From a buccal swab, this should be fairly obvious since most of us have pored over these documents dozens of times already, but for those not familiar, buccal swabs are collected by swabbing the surface of the cheek (inside the mouth). Skin cells will be on the swab as a result. They'll also be in saliva because dead skin cells fall off at an astounding rate. We leave little bits of ourselves wherever we go.
I'll need to explain a bit better.
Non-keratinized squamous epithelial cells would be found from a buccal swab (inside of the cheek) and probably in saliva as well. keratinized epithelial cells would be from the skin. The two types of cells should be distinguishable with SEM.
[–]thed0ngs0ng 3 points 1 day ago
If they used one of the groin swabs to plant SA's dna on the hood latch, doesn't that bode badly for SA? Is there any difference between skin cells on the hands vs on the groin?
[–]falls_asleep_reading 4 points 1 day ago
No. Because the SEM can see if cotton fibers from the swab are there, which is damning in and of itself.
It can also tell if particles from the vehicle's interior are present from transfer. Remember the old "didn't change gloves and may have transferred evidence" story (which invalidates the evidence being tested due to improper collection procedure...or would in any standard court of law being run by professionals)? If, as stated, gloves were not changed between examining the car's interior and examining the hood latch and transfer occurred as a result, fibers from the car's interior could be present on the hood latch.
Either way, the SEM should pick up any irregularities in the evidence and judging by the fact that it's her profile picture, if it's related to this case, odds are, she's probably found something.
[–]thed0ngs0ng 2 points 1 day ago
thanks for clarifying. This SEM sounds pretty impressive.
CONTINUED...
[–]Rayxor 2 points 1 day ago
ReplyDeleteThey could also see the presence of fibrin strands if it was from a fresh cut. non-coagulated blood would not have these.
I want to use an opportunity and emphasize something very important using such excellent 'microscope' OP/comments thread:)...
Here is Item #8, inside of 'STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC TESTING' document.
There will be simultaneous disclosure in writing to the defendant and the state of the testing results, bench notes, photographs and procedures employed and or protocols used in any scientific testing, including but not limited to DNA Methylation, DNA Source Testing, EDTA and or Radiocarbon Fi4 C of the Exhibits covered by this stipulation.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Avery-Stipulation-and-Order-for-Scientific-Testing.pdf
Why I'm emphasizing that ('simultaneous disclosure in writing to the defendant and the state of the testing results')?
Because if SA is happy and his friends/family are happy (rumor has it!) then STATE and DEFENDANT simultaneously received test results already, possibly....Hint!
[–]_idunnowhy_ 6 points 1 day ago
According to rumors from those close to SA, the test results were back two months ago but he wasn't ready to move forward. I think the rumors from recent days have more to do with the imminent filing of the brief. Let's hope so!
[–]ThorsClawHammer 6 points 1 day ago
I'm really curious to know what else SA would want done that Zellner hadn't already thought of.
[–]Eric_eats_a_Banana 3 points 1 day ago*
I've thought about this the past couple of days and believe it could be something as simple as waiting for his mother to have her knee op and be at least starting to recover from it?
EDIT to add: SA would know in advance DA was needing her knee op, but if KZ had filed before DA's op then the press would be all over ASY, so perhaps he wanted her to get the op out of the way first and be recovering before the media circus begins?
[–]Skipbecc 2 points 1 day ago
My guess, he wasn't willing to deal in any way. He wants, and DESERVES, their heads!! So, he wanted her to have everything possible before moving forward.
CONTINUED...
[–]OpenMind4U 6 points 5 hours ago
ReplyDeleteNo problem. Appreciate your explanation. Now, let's discuss something...
I personally don't feel as though this is reason enough to be celebrating just yet.
And here where I disagree (it's ok to 'agree to disagree', right?). Why I believe is ALREADY reason enough for celebrating?
if KZ got permission for bullet re-test then it means that her previous re-test results have certain information which prompt such court decision;
original court decision for evidence re-test (see 'test and stipulation' document) has absolutely zero provision (legal clause) for further re-testing based on result...opposite, it's clearly stated that no more test will be done on items already tested (meaning, if you, defense, don't like the result - bit it!). And here, suddenly, in RUSH, evidence which was denied by Court to be tested - get into special forensic lab;
now, what do you think was tested/looking for (in bullet evidence) which only takes 24 hours turn around time, including going to Illinois and coming back, bringing 'Exhibit' back??? And by seeing KZ reaction through her Twitter/profile and SA family/friends excitement, the result of 'bullet test' was good...so, what lab was looking for and found/not found there RIGHT AWAY?.....and THIS WHAT'S IMPORTANT!!!! This where excitement is...this is the reason for celebration.
[–]MrDoradus 23 points 7 hours ago
In short nothing much was officially fully disclosed, but based on the little hints that are being dropped recently (SEM profile pic on KZ's Twitter, FB posts of optimistic family members, etc.) we hope and theorise that they might foreshadow the best possible outcome for the case.
The only new official information that is available already is that an additional item was "given to KZ" and sent out to the laboratory of her choosing. That item being the bullet FL, bullet that had TH's DNA on it.
The same laboratory has (very likely) already performed analysis of other pieces of evidence by scanning electron microscopy. You can read what exactly KZ wanted tested in this lab in this motion on page 39.
TL/DR: nothing new has officially happened in the past 48 hours, but based on the hints at least some of the tests had already been done. And judging by the optimism the family has and the additional items being sent out to test we assume the new results were in favour of SA's innocence.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Avery-8-26-16-Motion-for-Post-Conviction-Scientific-Testing_redacted.pdf#page=39
[–]ziggymissy 4 points 1 day ago
What I don't understand is this. We already see pictures from people who where holding the key with their bare hands. The key should be useless? I don't know anything about DNA-testing, other then TV-shows where they put something on a machine and immidiately the perp shows on a screen, lol.
[–]OpenMind4U 6 points 1 day ago
We already see pictures from people who where holding the key with their bare hands. The key should be useless?
Couple issues here. If these pictures are legit (not fake) then yes, 'key should be useless' for re-testing the ENTIRE KEY evidence, starting from the beginning...however, KZ will use existing SWAB(s) which have been used for evidence collection by SC...so, swab from key (with SA DNA on it) has been preserved...and if KZ will find that this swab contains SA saliva than who cares about 'entire key retesting'?:)...makes sense?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6cyyhi/zellners_new_profile_picture_anyone_know_what/
[–]ziggymissy 8 points 9 hours ago
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6d4r7b/megathread_discussion_of_recent_developments_and/
Check this too.
[–]ziggymissy 5 points 9 hours ago
A lotof us where here everyday, checking if there is news or whatsoever. KZ said she is not seeking a retrail, she is going for an exoneration. We do think she is finished with the testing and wanted the bullet to be tested. The people who are close to SA are very positive and happy lately, they know good things are gonna happen, but they just simply can not say anything other then that.
I hope you understand, my English is still not that perfect to explain better, sorry.
[–]madeye123[S] -1 points 8 hours ago
That's hardly enough information to conclude he's going to be exonerated, is it?
[–]Truthtimeboysinblue 7 points 7 hours ago
Oh it's more than enough. Did someone mention DOJ is working with KZ. Tick tock. Maybe this isn't the sub you were looking for.
[–]PKanuck 3 points 7 hours ago
We're assuming that other testing is complete. The state allowed KZ to test the bullet fragment. We're assuming they allowed this because other test results potentially was in Averys favor. The bullet fragment test was completed already. It has been suggested that the metal in the fragment does not match the Avery ammunition. Or they were checking the DNA which SC said no longer existed.
Letter from Fallon to Judge - NOW ONLINE (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 1 year ago * by SkippTopp
Two-page letter from state's attorney Fallon to the judge, entered into the Court Record of Events on 9/21/16.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Fallon-Letter-to-Judge-9-19-16.pdf
The state is asking the court to schedule a status conference in late October or early November, sometime during the weeks of October 24, October 31, or November 7. The state feels this will give them ample time to locate and inventory all items which are the subject of the Defendant's Motion for Post-Conviction Scientific Testing, and time to determine which items are covered by the April 4, 2007 Preservation of Blood Evidence and Independent Defense Testing Order entered by Judge Willis.
[–]tuckerm33 3 points 1 year ago
I don't want to sound like "the sky is falling" here, but the media needs to pick up on this and get the word spread about this letter. It certainly does seem like NF is doing exactly this. They are going to try to suppress any evidence they can so that the defense will have no chance to test it.
There is definitely some sneaky $hit going on behind the scenes and I'm sorry, but those individuals that are in charge of safeguarding and preserving the evidence are the very ones that are most likely to hide, destroy and monkey around with it.
At minimum, this is a conflict of interest in my book and these people should not be trusted to handle any of this stuff without a mediator present. This letter makes me sick.
I can;t help but wondering if even Brendan's reversed conviction is bs. The judge sounds good and well, but at this point, you really have to ask if anyone is really on BD's and SA's side except KZ's team.
It's easy to look like a hero and reverse someone's conviction if you know full well it's going to be appealed anyway. Grrrrrr
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/53zqmi/letter_from_fallon_to_judge_now_online/
[–]tuckerm33 3 points 1 year ago
ReplyDeleteTwo things in the email from Kratz to Culhane. One thing I often thought unprofessional and conflict of interest is that Sherry was allowed to perform DNA tests on this case due to the fact that she had been the one that tested the 1985 sample and was also the one that tested the pubic hair in 2003.
IMO, LE and the crime lab are basically a community. They all know each other, especially since Steven's exoneration. Sherry was likely the only one that wasn't going to suffer financially from the civil lawsuit. How far fetched is it to believe that she had some enormous influence and pressure put on her because of her help with the exoneration? It's quite believable someone got to her. She was more than happy in 2003 to be the hero to exonerate a poisoned man, but 3 years later, seems like she is on a mission to send him back to prison. Her testimony seems cocky to me.
When you read the email to her from Kratz, notice how he emphasizes "YOU", when he writes to her, "So YOU tested that sample back then? How bizarre is that? Were you also the analyst that got him out of prison in 2003?"
Kratz obvisouly already knows who she is. He's the DA in "lil" Calumet County after all. He's the prize. Don't trust he can come up with sweat DNA jargon and not know who Sherry Culhane is.
He is sending her a message. He emphasizes "YOU", as if to say, "So you're the one responsible for causing all of this". Something that she is likely already well aware of, that many people in high places are not happy with her. This is just another reminder to her to say, "yes, we know who you are and we won't forget".
Self contaminated samples, destruction of sample during testing and misleading DNA match reporting...Sounds to me like someone was trying to atone for her own safety and career salvage...
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4bff9q/wiegerts_testimony/
Some thing we all missed. The compact flash card (item A13a) had a DNA profile and Sherry never reported the results. Not in ANY report. (i.imgur.com)
ReplyDeletesubmitted by foghaze
[–]BurnedFrags 4 points 8 hours ago*
CASO pg269 has
On 11/15/05 I (Inv. WIEGERT) received a copy of the lab findings from the WI STATE CRIME LABORATORY. The following is a very brief synopsis of the laboratory finding
Item A13A was not utilized for DNA analysis
How is Liegert making that summary, if Culhair's report (is it the same one?) did type the DNA?
[–]foghaze[S] 15 points 8 hours ago*
Yeah it does say that. It doesn't make sense. Sounds to me like she got the profile but didn't use it in her analysis because in the paragraph right before that it says, "No DNA was obtained from items B2 and D1". If DNA was not obtained she would have just included A13a in this paragraph. I think it's purposefully misleading. What does utilized for analysis mean? Sounds like she just simply didn't compare that profile with anything else.
[–]BurnedFrags 14 points 8 hours ago
I think you're right. She's tested that sample at least twice (otherwise why add extra letter) and didn't like what it matched to so hasn't reported even running it through the database (if she just couldn't get a good enough profile, she'd have said that right?)
[–]honeygirl71 4 points an hour ago
We talked about it a very long time ago but hasn't shown up in KZ's info yet. I bet this is something she really wants to get her hand on! The closest item next to TH and no profile provided....hmmm.
[–]PicksyK 7 points 4 hours ago
Here's a link to the full report in case anyone thinks the copy/paste image is misleading. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-14-and-15.pdf
The question really is why is that item excluded from the table? She includes A13a in the list of items on which she found DNA, and in the same paragraph describes the PCR/STR method she used on presumably all the items she listed. Then she makes a table that doesn't have A13a on it and makes a one line mention that she actually didn't PCR/STR it. Why exclude that one? Why include every single other thing in her list that had DNA but say nah to that one?
[–]skippymofo 8 points 5 hours ago
What about A11? (questioned material recovered from the cargo area, driver's side floor)
It also indicated the presence of blood, but not from TH or SA. No mention on the PowerPoint from SC.
[–]foghaze[S] 11 points 3 hours ago*
What about A11?
Your right. A11 did show the presence of blood and it wasn't until March 31 does she mention it again but this is all she says.
This is from her 1st report dated Nov 14, 2005. All she does is test for blood and it tested positive.
"Chemical analysis of the reddish/brown questioned stains of items A1-A4, A6-A10, A11, A12, A23 and B1-B5 indicated the presence of blood".
Then in her March report she finally gets around to testing A11.
"In addition, human DNA isolation was also performed on items A11, A23, AJ, AK, L, M, N, T, S, U, CR1, DD1 and DD2"
In her conclusions she says:
"No human DNA was detected from items A11, S and U. No further analyses were performed on these items."
So this means whatever that stain was, was blood but it was not human. Holy shit!
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/78nwj4/some_thing_we_all_missed_the_compact_flash_card/
Musing as to what exactly were they obscuring about #7926 / BZ / Q1 ? (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeleteby BurnedFrags
(Edit: this is based on assuming that Culhane did have what Eisenberg later photographed, rather than the hypothesis that she didn't)
1) Starting at the end, the FBI didn't want to testify to further clarify their mtDNA results from Q1 (allowed the defense to exclude), why not? Their report didn't specify which fragment within Q1 'charred remains' they got their mtDNA from, and they apply their match to all of them, why?
2) Fallon says in pretrial that Q1 was Calumet property tag #7926 but that's only listed in one place I think, the master evidence list, as 'unidentified material charred' [same as #7927 which became Q2 never reported back on by the FBI; was it part of what Eisenberg sent or separate?]. Did they deliberately keep any more context about this out of CASO etc?
3) Eisenberg says that her photo 385 was what she sent to the FBI by the 23rd November, becoming Q1. Why did she say she took the photo without scale, when there appears to be a ruler at the bottom cropped out? (unofficial uncropped where did this come from)? Why does she try to justify the lack of scale by saying the photo was just a reminder for her what was in 'that' tag, does she mean the tag she'd just been talking about at SA trial, #8318 the contents sifted from the burn pit on the 8th including the box of frags sent to [the crime lab] then her (and maybe the brown tarp of debris sent to Calumet chilton)? Or #7926 I guess but why don't they clarify?
CONTINUED...
4) Culhane's powerpoint picture is of course a cropped part of photo 385 (why didn't Culhane use her own? Or did she in photo 338 we don't have?) which indicates her BZ bone/tissue sample was part of a set of fragments she received on Nov 11th that were then sent to Eisenberg becoming photographed and sent to the FBI becoming Q1. But they don't clarify if it was #7926. [Why in her Dec 5th report on BZ does she refer to it as two pieces but fails to mention where they were represented as coming from as she did for every other item?] At pretrial she agreed it was 'represented to' her as coming from the 'burn area'. By the time of BD's trial they're simply saying it was found in the burn pit. What's the chances Culhane contaminated the tissue, since she had been dealing with TH's toothbrush etc and with more requests than ever in her career?
ReplyDelete5) KK claims in SA closing there was only ever one piece of human charred bone-with-tissue-attached found. At BD trial closing he indicates it was discovered by Pevytoe. Presumably meaning one of the two lumps of tissue, [the one which by BD trial he said had apparent bone through it], which he found on the 10th on a brown tarp at Chilton from the prior sifting of the burn pit on the 8th/9th, which he then handed to Riemer, [who had collected a brown tarp of debris from the crime lab the prior evening], who drove with it to the ASY for the afternoon then handed it to another DCI to take to the Crime Lab. That's all after Pevytoe had been in phone discussions with Eisenberg about scene processing and had looked around the burn area on the 9th; not sure what that was all about, maybe the need to find something else?
Anyway if it was that lump, why doesn't Eisenberg's picture of BZ look like a lump, given [Culhane] said she only cut one small piece of tissue off? And are the fragments significantly larger than what Pevytoe had estimated for his lumps? (harder to tell without the ruler, or with the top fragment cut off). Btw how did they miss their possible relevance if they were in the initial sifting of the burn pit, given that either way they were too big to fall through the sift so they must have manually added them to the tarp rather than put in the box, yet they ended up with their own tag apparently separate to #8313 or was that only after Pevytoe found them but then how were the still 'unidentified material' rather than suspected bone/tissue.
6) As the TTMer recently noted, where is the record of these items being returned from the FBI to Calumet - based I think on timing, description and being bagged with KH swab, they may have given them different tag numbers 'unidentified material' upon return [but neither appear in the list of what was returned to family], why?
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7exjr7/musing_as_to_what_exactly_were_they_obscuring/
Look look look KZ new tweet about item A23 link to the article attached (self.TickTockManitowoc)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 3 days ago by 7-pairs-of-panties
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/nov/18/ryan-riggs-texas-man-confesses-murder-dna-image/
New KZ tweet
New DNA testing to ID killers @lifeafterten @ EFMoriarty #A23 #MakingAMurderer
[–]PicksyK 17 points 3 days ago
I searched TTM for item A23 to remind myself what that was: it's the blood stain on the rear cargo handle of the Rav.
And here's an interesting post that came up in my search:
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6qe5vm/questions_90_96_explain_exact_evidence_that/
[–]Casablank10 11 points 3 days ago
Item A23 is a swabbing from the rear exterior handle of the cargo door of the RAV4. Shairy Coolhair was able to obtain a partial DNA profile but said:
due to the limited genetic information these profiles are insufficient for interpretation
[–]subzero0000 16 points 3 days ago
She seems to be mentioning DNA evidence a fair bit lately - wonder what's in store? :) Presumably KZ already has access to the profile obtained from A23. Hopefully she has managed to "stealthily" obtain samples from our prime suspects. She's mentioned obtaining DNA specimens from stamps on letters sent to SA in prison, so hopefully she's managed to obtain profiles from others.
New Zellner Tweet: New DNA testing being used to id killers. @lifeafterten @EFMoriarty #A23 #MakingAMurderer https://t.co/jh2h8fhxg2
Man confesses to Texas murder after image based on new DNA technology released
By Douglas Ernst - The Washington Times - Saturday, November 18, 2017
New forensic DNA analysis that can create an eerily accurate image of an unknown individual helped cops in Texas solve one year-old murder mystery.
Ryan Riggs, 21, is charged with capital murder for the killing of Chantay Blankinship, 25, in May 2016. The man gave confessions to his local church and the Brown County Sheriff’s Office on Wednesday after predictive DNA imaging released Nov. 8 breathed new life into law enforcement’s investigation.
“It’s a great burden off of our entire department, off of the family,” Sheriff Vance Hill told reporters, the Brownwood Bulletin reported. “It’s just a great feeling. I hope the folks in the county can be a little more at ease when they go walking or enjoying life with the family.”
Mr. Hill said Mr. Riggs was “never was on our radar at all” until investigators turned to a Virginia-based company called Parabon Nano Lab.
Researchers used DNA evidence found at the murder scene and a process called phenotyping to predict the suspect’s physical characteristics and biogeographic ancestry.
“We got justice for Chantay and that’s what we wanted,” said Steven McDaneil, the victim’s stepfather, a local ABC affiliate reported. “She can’t be replaced. But we got somebody off the streets. I hope he fries.”
Mr. Riggs is also charged with illegal dumping. No bond has been set on the capital murder charge.
http://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/nov/18/ryan-riggs-texas-man-confesses-murder-dna-image/
Introduction to Parabon Snapshot DNA Phenotyping Service
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln-1-WysCbw
[–]Colorado_love 2 points 1 day ago
I hope it's A23...
Depending on who's blood it is, MCSO will have a LOT of explaining to do!
News From SG on the Facebook Group Just Now (self.TickTockManitowoc)
submitted 14 hours ago by knowfere
Quote "Visit with Steve today. He was so very VERY happy. Almost had to pull him off the ceiling and I BEAT HIM AT CARDS THIS TIME so that wasn't what made him happy!!"
If A23 is the only sample from the RAV that actually has blood DNA on it, and we know it's not TH or SA, then this sample could be the real key to the case.
ReplyDelete[–]knowfere 4 points 11 hours ago
KZ would not have called it out specifically on twitter the other day if it weren't highly significant! She IS close if she hasn't already cracked the case!
[–]OpenMind4U[S] 2 points 5 hours ago
Agree. KZ reference to A23 now, reminds me how she referenced huge microscope while retesting FL (bullet) year ago. Yes, I do believe her team/experts found something VERY important and NEW based on A23 data.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7rivij/mam_forensic_files_bloody_sa_forensic_fraud/
Science is a double-edged sword.
ReplyDeleteGive the jury and judge a powerpoint and you can do what you want. They do not understand it.
Planting DNA and you lost.
[–]OliviaD2
Very well said. "Science is a double-edged sword".. and it's not the science per se, it's how it is used.
And it can be used for good, or for nefarious purposes.
I'm concerned about "new" technologies like the "Snapshot" program, developed by CIA (government) affiliated Parabon NanoLabs, who do not make their algorithms public. That mean, if you are accused with this "technology" there is no way to attack it as you can't know the specifics involved to make your "face". Secrecy is never a good thing. Science is about being transparent. Secrecy by the government is a dangerous thing :) .
And you are spot on. The government does not want people to understand. Yep, a nice powerpoint can look very "official" and convincing. It is all about who puts on the best "show".
I think we are seeing the sad reality in the Avery/Dassey cases, that if the gov't wants to get you, they can and will. The Federal judiciary system is corrupt. The fact that Brendan Dassey is still in prison and as of now, will spend his life there is evidence of that.
Anyone with 2 functional neurons and a synapse knows he is completely innocent, the confession was coerced, yet a system exists that is legally able to keep him in prison. And the only reason to do so, is to protect what these cases are hiding.
Obviously you are not from the US. I think people here are only starting to wake up to the fact that we have very few 'rights' left.
The supreme court has ruled that a DNA sample can be taken if you are arrested for ANYTHING. Arrested. Now, most of the time, for trivial things, they don't. BUT, if they wanted to, if you were a "problem", there is always something to be arrested for, and legally your DNA can be taken.. and after that, in addition to the other mass surveillance ; the sky is the limit :)
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7wofrp/new_dna_technology_released/
[–]OliviaD2
ReplyDelete"Phenotyping" is just a general term that refers to the physical trait that is expressed by a gene or group of genes.
This Hirisplex technology to simultaneously predict eye/hair/skin color for a forensic purpose was developed in the Netherlands and while they technology was talked about in 2009/2010 (that i know of), it has been "perfected" since then, and of course will continue to be a work in progress.
The first system of this type is called Hirisplex and was developed by a group in the Netherlands. http://www.fsigenetics.com/article/S1872-4973(12)00181-0/pdf This paper might be of interest to some because it goes into the science and algorithms used, you won't see any of this for Parabon NanoLabs's Snapshot, however similar concept..
Parabon NanoLabs has developed a system they call Snapshot, which will also be able to predict facial morphology. So it appears to have added on the the Hirisplex system. However, a big difference (and concern is that Parabon's algorithms are not open source (i.e. we can't see them), vs Hirisplex.
Beyond this case, I think it will be interesting to follow all the legal gnashings surrounding this.. although I suppose the government can do whatever they want with your biological samples. People are aware that companies that collect your samples to see if you have a gene for breast cancer or are prone to depression or ADHD are not interested in helping you, or necessarily those things? :D :D :D :D.
The Hirisplex paper is interesting because it gives you an idea of the type of thing involved in this kind of technoloty. Snapshot has added more features, so to speak.
https://snapshot.parabon-nanolabs.com/
The faces are close.. but I can see how a wrong person could be easily targeted.
Interesting blurb on Wikipedia, re: criticism due to algorithms not being open source. Secrecy by the government never a good thing, IMO. So "amazing" but scary, b/c we cannot really evaluate what they are doing. https://snapshot.parabon-nanolabs.com/
Interesting who is involved. Parabon NanoLabs, Dept of Defensne (gov funded) Saudi Arabia...
CONTINUED...
[–]OliviaD2
ReplyDeleteWell, this is the first time I have seen this technology used in the US. "Phenotyping" is just a general term, and has been studied since those monks started playing with peas and flowers.
This technology is unique in that it is able to (purportedly) simultaneously predict eye, hair/skin color; by targeting specific small pieces of DNA, allowing it to be used with more degraded or small samples (as crime samples often are). The first system to predict eye/hair/skin color was call Hirisplex, developed in the Netherlands. and I've seen in mentioned around 2010, although it's official launch was a 2013 paper. Now this company has developed it's Snapshot Technology which has also added facial morphology. I'll see if I can get some info about that process. Oh no, we won't be seeing any info, because their algorithms are not "open source", i.e. for public viewing.
Just FYI, Parabon Nanolabs also is involved in making molecules for nanosensors for bioweapons defense, so that is a clue as to who owns/funds them. I have an idea. Also interesting "nano-additives for consumer products".
This of course is a rabbit hole of my personal interest, but DNA 'science' in the government has moved well beyond molecular biology and into the realm of computing and algorithm modeling and all kinds of things that I am just learning exist :)
For instance.. ParabenNanoLabs is a subsidiary of Parben Computing, who:
"The same software that powers the largest and longest continuously running public grid in the country, the Parabon Computation Grid, can be deployed completely within your organization — our Frontier Enterprise solution.
In addition to the enterprise computing platform and related applications Parabon has 12 years of positive past performance developing grid and cloud computing solutions to solve data-heavy and compute-intensive problems for commercial, academic and government customers. Our work typically involves solving seemingly intractable problems in domains as varied as evolutionary computation, decryption, psychometric profiling, genomic sequence comparison, data mining, photorealistic rendering and sequence optimization for self-assembling DNA nanostructures, just to name a few"
So these companies, usually gov associated, develop grids, basically "data mining" tools to collect information, i.e genetic information.. from where??? ??? Probably anywhere, and it all goes into some big cloud and other companies pay to get the information. (lol, this is my rudimentary explanation). I don't know, but a lot of the terms.. "data mining", psychometric profiling".. etc etc. make me a little nervous.
LOL.. I'm writing this in real time.. but as expected.. Parabon Labs, i.e. Parabon Computing works under the umbrella of InQTel, which is the CIA's "tech development organization". Often companies are hidden under other names. Nothing to do with this case, but interesting. ..... well maybe to do with this case.... because is the "government" going to help you fight the "government"....??? It shall be interesting. Down the rabbit hole we go.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/7wofrp/new_dna_technology_released/
[–]loveofnature
ReplyDeleteI am not sure if there was any DNA source left after Sherry was done with it.
[–]loveofnature
Are you talking about untouched DNA or processed DNA. Processing the DNA both test use different techniques so they would need a source that has not been used, touched or processed by the lab. Not sure if any existed after Sherry did her analysis.
[–]loveofnature
The type of DNA test Culhane did was nuclear DNA test which is limited on only the Nuclear level while the FBI test is on a Mitochondiron level.
These two profiles are totally different and would not be compatible for analysis comparison. It would be like trying to run a Mac-Apple program in a Windows computer or vice versa.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4h4zd5/vogel_tried_to_create_alibi_for_gregory_allen_got/
[–]loveofnature
I was just looking at the reports also. There seems to be many inconsistencies with the DNA Reports. Item EF is used several times in the analysis but constantly changes from partial to full. Check out this report.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-313.pdf
At the bottom of page 4 in last column on the table it looks to me to show a full profile from the pap smear.
Page 5 states
The profile developed from items A2, A3 and A4 is consistent with the profile developed from the pap smear slide (item EF) reportedly collected from Theresa Halbach.
Page 6
Based on the profile developed from the pap smear (item EF) reportedly collected from Theresa Halbach, it is the opinion of this analyst, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that Halbach is the source of the DNA from the reddish/brown stains of items A2 , A3 and A4
I do not know what to say but this is bad forensics and sloppy work/records.
I did some additional research and posted this. It the best way I could explain why.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/4h72uc/why_the_fbi_use_karen_halbach_dna_to_identify/
Other than the PAP smear, was any of the evidence tested to build a DNA profile for TH?
ReplyDeleteFrom Culhane's report:
Based on the PARTIAL DNA profile developed from the pap smear slide reportedly collected from Teresa Halbach (item EF) it is the opinion of this analyst, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, that Teresa Halbach is the source of the DNA isolated from the swabbing of a soda can (item A14) and the reddish/brown stains (item Al) from the cargo area of the RAV4 vehicle (item A). The partial profile developed from the charred remains of item BZ is consistent with the PARTIAL profile developed from the pap smear reportedly collected from Teresa Halbach (item EF).
BZ was charred muscle tissue from the bone which the State used to identify the remains as belonging to Teresa Halbach. DNA was not obtained from the other bones.
Not in Master Evidence Log, from TH:
Toothbrush
Chapstick
Cherry pepsi soda can with napkin around from the RAV4
Lip Moisturizer
Hairbrush
One pair of eyeglasses on TH's nightstand
Envelope containing PAP smear slides
Why was a paper napkin around the can in Teresa's console? Did Carmen Boutwell drink Cherry Pepsi?
List of all exhibits entered in the Avery trial.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0wmmsd5vgpn70gm/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibits-2005-2007%20%281%29.pdf?dl=0
A Similar Case
DeleteAround the time of Teresa Halbach’s disappearance, Kristine Rudy of Clark County, Wisconsin also went missing.
She was last seen November 12, 2005.
She was twenty-one years old and six months pregnant, married to Shaun Rudy.
Search efforts were unsuccessful and in December, 2005 investigators discovered a burn pit — sound familiar?
In December, detectives piecing together a case against Christine’s husband Shaun were led to the suspect’s mother’s home in northwestern Clark County. According to court documents, they found a burn pile they believe Shaun used to destroy evidence of the crime. In that burn pile, they found what a well-respected forensic anthropologist determined were fetal remains.
Court documents show Dr. Leslie Eisenberg of the State Crime Lab in Madison wrote investigators asking them to consider the mechanisms by which the fetal remains, yet very few adult remains, made their way to the burn pile, and says it’s possible the fetus was deliberately removed and burned independently of the majority of the adult remains. (link)
The really interesting thing is that the victim’s body was found a few months later – fetus intact.
But investigators were surprised when what’s believed to be Christine Rudy’s body was found last month in the Chippewa River – the fetus was still intact.
It kind of throws us for a loop. It raised a couple questions, says Clark County Sheriff’s Department Chief Deputy Jim Backus.
Dr. Eisenberg incorrectly identified bones as human. Though it may be possible to make a mistake like that, it certainly calls her credibility into question. Had they not found the woman, would they have prosecuted Shaun Rudy with the bone evidence?
We must consider the possibility that Dr. Eisenberg may have been mistaken with the Halbach case as well. We know there were charred animal bones mixed in. Is it possible there was nothing but animal bones?
We can also consider that maybe the state revealed just enough to convince the public that Teresa’s remains were found — photographs of random bones in a box and high priced experts sifting through debris.
If true, it’s possible Teresa’s body was never found because it wasn’t on the Avery property. Police were searching in the wrong place.
https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/14431826.Lynne_Blanchard/blog?page=3
Suppose if you will, that the WSCL and the prosecution had used some of Rudy's remains to frame Avery for the Halbach murder that could have or may not have ever happened?
DeleteThe fact that there are similarly eerie resemblances to the evidence collected at the Gravel pits and the ASY.
Pink tissue found on one of the gravel piles.
Pelvic bones (articulated) found with cut marks visible on the bones.
Cranial pieces with radio opaque particles present (gun shot Halbach/ Rudy killed by suspected gun shot)
Rudy's macabre roadside demise fully documented photographically and properly processed... while not a scintilla of protocol was followed on the ASY.
The fact that the alleged Halbach evidence and the Rudy evidence was all neatly stored and scrutinized by the WSCL during the same exact timeframes.
The use of pap smears as an identifying markers for the deceased.
S/A DCI Heimerl was present at both the Rudy and Avery burn pits.
Final specimen radiograph is designated AK. This consists of a fragment of skull bone measuring 6.3 x 3.8 cm. Also present are some possible coniferous needles or similar type of plant debris. There does appear to be some soft tissue adherent to this portion of bone. It appears consistent with occipital bone however for definitive anatomical designation, refer to the forensic anthropoiogical report. Radiographic appearance of this Is also variable dense and without definitive fragments of bullet-.
The fact that keys, garnet zippers and clasps along with a burned cell phone were found in the Rudy burn pit.
Of course I am thinking out of the box here.... but it would be freaking amazing if we really did have it all completely wrong.
And this last gem from Eisenberg regarding the burn pit where bone fragments were located in the Rudy case:
Given the shallow depth of the burn pile and the meager representation of adult human bone from that context, I believe that another ( or other) dump/deposition locatiou(s) may yield additional adult human bone/human remains. I understand, based on a conversation with Lieutenant Jeff Parker of the Clark County Sheriff's Departlnent on January 5, 2006, that there may, in fact, be a second discovery location under investigation.
Now Eisenberg boldly stated that in Avery's case the bones were not moved from his pit, nor were they brought to his pit.. Yet the bones allegedly found in Avery's pit were said to have been found in a pile on top of the crusted earth in plain view.... and that other cremains were found in 2 other locations!... the gravel pit and Dassey's burn barrel>
How does she get away with this stuff?
Total nonsensicle quackery.....
How did Lies-enberg end up with ITEM BZ, CHARRED FLESH AND BONE? ...... (Tibia)
WHERE IS IT..... AND WHAT HAPPENED TO ITEM BZ?
I find it incredibly hard to believe that Item BZ survived a fire of the magnitude needed to destroy teeth and then remain intact, undisturbed in the open air for 10 days before its discovery..... unless it were in some sort of preserved state.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockManitowoc/comments/6ub6p6/documents_from_the_20056_rudy_case_including/
November 12, 2005 - Along a gravelly road near Rogers Creek, and about 200 yards off County Highway MM, Shaun Rudy shoots his pregnant wife Christine in the head with a shotgun.
DeleteNovember 29, 2005 - Skull fragments and brain matter are found during a search at the scene of the shooting.
December 2, 2005 - Cadaver dogs lead searchers to a burn pit at Shaun Rudy's parents' home, where they find bone fragments.
March 28, 2006 - Torso, with intact fetus inside, and a jaw fragment are recovered from the Chippewa River.
January 6, 2006 – Heather Eschler, who LE presumably had been talking with (or trying to) since November 19th, agrees to a plea deal through her attorney.
January 20, 2006 - Investigators in the rectangular area west of Rogers Creek locate a shotgun slug.
Heather S. Teschler, 18, who authorities say was involved in a love triangle with Shaun and Christine Rudy, told investigators Shaun Rudy loaded a 12-gauge shotgun. When Christine Rudy looked at her husband, he said, "Till death do us part," then pulled the trigger.
Heather says there was nothing left of half her face.
Heather was in the car, but turned her head before the shotgun fired. Heather and Shaun Rudy drove away, but returned. They put the body in the car and drove to his mother’s place. There was little or no problem with blood in the car because there were sleeping bags on the back seat (elsewhere a tarp is also mentioned).
They left any blood and other remains at the scene of the shooting.
In a shed at his mother’s home, Shaun cut off his wife's arms and legs, placing them in "corn bags." While there [at his mother’s], Heather and Shaun burned their clothes and other items they thought contained evidence, such as blood.
Shaun placed the appendages and torso in a garbage can.
On November 13 or 14, he threw the bags of body parts into the Chippewa River from the Cobban Bridge in Chippewa County.
Three special agents went to Shaun Rudy's mother's house, with her consent, to retrieve items from a burn pit. Later, with a search warrant, multiple cadaver dogs alerted on the pit (prior statements from witnesses claimed that Shaun Rudy had recently burned clothes and furniture in the pit). After thawing it with a torpedo heater and observing mattress and clothing parts, they noticed a 2-inch apparent bone fragment near the top.
Just a reminder, the circuit court quarry bones decision was written by someone with a clear need for mental health care (self.MakingaMurderer)
ReplyDeletesubmitted 13 days ago * by heelspider
1) The court claims that none of the bones given to the family belonged to Teresa. Remember, in addition to saving any potentially exculpatory evidence, the state was also required to keep biological material from the victim. So the court says none of the bones given to the family were scientifically identified as being the victim.
While that might make the people who think TH is still alive happy, that can't possibly be satisfactory to the rest of us. Avery was convicted of murder on the theory that some of those bones belonged to TH. The jury clearly found that some of the bones belonged to TH. The circuit court can't simply ignore the fact finding conclusions of the jury.
2) The court doesn't know the difference between potentially exculpatory and definitely exculpatory. The court argues that since the state's expert said she couldn't determine if the bones were human or not, the state therefore had no reason to believe the bones had any potential value at all.
In a bit of doublethink that would make George Orwell proud, the court actually I swear to God uses the fact that both sides questioned the expert about these bones as proof the state did NOT have any reason to think they had any potential to the case. Think about that. The state focused in on the bones. The defense focused in on the bones. Conclusion: This proves no one thought they were important.
3) It makes no sense to use strictly trial results for the preservation statute. Remember the whole idea is that new testing may one day come along that invalidates the trial results. That's the whole reason the word "potentially" is used in the first place. Items that weren't exculpatory at trial but may become exculpatory with better testing should be preserved. Yet the court concludes that the only things that are potentially exculpatory are things scientifically proven exculpatory at trial. It essentially just strips the "potentially" word right out of the statute and throws it in the garbage.
4) The court gives the state's expert super powers: the ability to make things disappear simply by saying as much under oath. Even though it already acknowledged a scientific report indicated the quarry bones are human, the judge points out that the expert later testified they were indeterminable. From there it flat out claims therefore there is no record at all indicating the bones are human. None at all. The expert's testimony has magically wiped the report out of existence. I'm glad the expert didn't testify that whiskey doesn't exist.
5) But wait, hold on a second. The court earlier found that NONE of the bones given to the family belonged to the victim. But then it switches and talks just about the quarry bones. I'm pretty sure the state did claim SOME of the bones given back to the family were human. How was "nearly every bone in the human body" found if not a single bone in the human body was found?.
6) Memo to court: Witnesses can lie.
DeleteIt's strange a judge had never heard of this before. I mean this whole "lying" thing has only been common human behavior for eons. So we have a case where the government is accused of faking evidence, bones labeled human before trial, bones labeled human after trial, bones "inexplicably" destroyed...the only indication they weren't human is the trial testimony.
It doesn't take a diploma privilege to figure when a side accused of cheating and later admitting to destroying evidence brings out a witness whose testimony contradicts all other evidence we have, including her own reports, that maybe, just maybe, that testimony was false.
7) The court then quotes the expert testifying these bones were suspected possibly human. WHAT? Let me repeat that. WHAT? How can they be possibly human without being potentially human? Again, let me repeat. The court literally quotes the expert saying the bones were possibly human as its proof there was no potential the bones could be human. What....the....hell.
8) Let's not forget the infamous "reasonable" argument of the court. The court declares that thumbing through the court transcripts studying every bit of testimony by the state's expert is the only way a reasonable person would do things. Assuming the bones currently labeled as human are the human ones? Totally unreasonable. Picking up the final written report by the expert to use as a guide? Only someone like Charles Manson would do something so crazy.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say maybe this judge isn't the best person to be determining what is reasonable. Tune in next week when Lady Gaga will give tips on how to dress conservatively.
https://old.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/dx8o78/just_a_reminder_the_circuit_court_quarry_bones/