Let carry on with Lyndey Lennen:
So the team deployed an LGC technique known as DNA SenCE, which purifies, concentrates and enhances otherwise unusable DNA: "We couldn't say whether the DNA was from saliva, or semen, or even touch. But we could say that the probability of it not being a match with Tabak was less than one in a billion."
Where have I heard that before?
Judge Rinder program Joanna Yeates: At 36:25 mins The Policeman in charge says:
When we examined the boot of the car a spot of blood was identified on the rubber seal....... around by the boot, came back as being 1 in a billion belonging to Joanna Yeates
Is this a standard answer?? Less than a Billion???
Did Lyndey Lennen Testify to the fact that Dr Vincent Tabak's DNA was less than a Billion to one chance of being anyone else???
With the killer's confession, Lennen's DNA evidence was not further tested. "It happens, in court," she says. "You get called biased, in the police's pay. You have to tell the truth, not stretch what you have. If you don't know which of two alternatives is more likely, you must say so."
Hello............
That statement is a none statement!!!
With the killer's confession, Lennen's DNA evidence was not further tested.
Why Lyndsey Lennen, would you need to test Dr Vincent Tabak's DNA further???? I thought it was 1 in a Billion??
Or were you gonna make damn sure and test it so it said one in A Trillion Billion!!! (Erm....)
Ah..... Dr Vincent Tabak confessed... I see..
So are you saying it really needed further testing???
But surely your statement of:
But we could say that the probability of it not being a match with Tabak was less than one in a billion."
Now... Is that a fact that it was 1 in a billion match to Dr Vincent Tabak ..
Or... You could say???
Is 1 in a billion a number that sounds good???
Was the match to Dr Vincent Tabak 1 in a billion??? Because I think i remember you saying..
But there wasn't enough, of enough quality, to evaluate – perhaps because of the high salt levels where the body was found, following heavy snowfall.
So... degraded then...
You turned it around in 48 hours... Now I thought painstaking testing was done...
Sounds a bit rushed to me...
LGC Forensics have had problems in the past with cross contamination.... Is that with turning things around in 48 hours...???
LGC Forensics whom in Oct 2011
Mr Scott was charged in 23 October 2011 after a plastic tray containing a sample of his DNA was re-used in the analysis of a swab from a rape victim in Plant Hill Park, Blackley. The result of that test linked him to the crime.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19782917This massive case of Joanna Yeates was so important to turn around, did they just get sloppy...???
They had to change their standards after they were found to have contaminated evidence.. And this was after Dr Vincent Tabak's testing!!!!
What qualifications does Lyndsey Lennen have....
The reason I ask, is the in a Lab they could have anyone testing... Doesn't mean that they are qualified...
I've got an example of labs and no qualifications, where testing is done by any Tom Dick Or Harry that walks off the Unemployment line...
From me:
My son had been unemployed for a while and the local Mirco lab that tests food samples, were looking for staff..So he has no qualification to speak of... especially in science..But they employed him and he tested for Salmonella etc etc.... Now.... the thing that made me giggle was he had a white coat and a staff ID badge saying MICRO BIOLOGIST..... looked good... But he is no more a Micro biologist than I am Beyoncey!!
So are these people fully qualified FORENSIC SCIENTISTS or BEYONCEY?????????
Isn't it time these people explained themselves, instead of boasting in newspapers what there role was in the Joanna Yeates trial......
Another example from the LGC lab,... an interesting quote, that leaves me cold..
"KM screening," pronounces Caroline Sheriff, forensic scientist. "You drip the solution on to your filter paper, then hydrogen peroxide. If it goes pink, it indicates the presence of blood." Down the corridor, lengths of clear sticky tape are patted patiently on to a blouse, and removed again, lifting off fibres. A woman stares into a microscope. "Sperm heads, probably," Sheriff says.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jan/17/csi-oxford-lgc-forensicsA woman stares into a microscope "sperm heads, probably," Sheriff says.
Now... YOU are supposed to be a FORENSIC SCIENTIST!!!!! Do you not know what Sperm Heads look like under a microscope???
How many people at this Laboratory are fully qualified Forensic Scientists.. Or do they just do a bit of testing??
Titles always make it sound like you have qualifications coming out of your ears.... But the title doesn't mean that your qualified:
For Instance the job my friend does could be classed as:
An Off Turf Accountant....
Sounds quite qualified, sounds like she has it all going on upstairs:
ACCOUNTANT.... that word conjures up thoughts of Mathematics, problem solving, skill sets that have had years of education.....
But No ... I'm afraid to say... she's extremeley down to earth and doesn't call herself an.... OFF Turf Accountant...
She says" I'm A Till Tart in A Bookies!!!!!
Again a range of dates for Lyndsey Lennen: 1st Aug 2008 to 7th Dec 2016 and guess what..... Nothing but the Joanna Yeates Trial..
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lyndsey+lennen%27s&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=962&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A01%2F08%2F2008%2Ccd_max%3A07%2F12%2F2016&tbm=EDIT:
Ms Lennen also examined DNA samples taken from Miss Yeates's body, her clothes and from the boot of Tabak's Renault Megane car.
Maybe thats how Joanna Yeates blood got in the boot sample???
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-england-bristol-15350510Wouldn't it make more sense that one person tested Joanna Yeates Samples...
And another tested, Dr Vincent Tabak's items.....
Might stop cross contamination.....
Just a thought....