Forensics

[[...]]

Why is this guy  searching two properties ??

I thought each scene was kept seperate with different forensic teams??

http://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/video/exterior-shots-police-officers-forensic-officers-outside-news-footage/456732171

http://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/video/police-forensic-officers-in-white-overalls-along-with-news-footage/659101782

[attachment deleted by admin]

[[...]]

Joanna Yeates cops: We'll only DNA test Jo's boy pals

Detectives believe they could have the killer’s DNA in a sample of saliva discovered on Jo’s body, which was found dumped at the roadside three miles from her home in Bristol on Christmas Day. But it does not match anyone on the national DNA database.

This always got me.... why they would test it against the national data base, when they hadn't really looked at anyone else...

I don't think they did test it in that way.....

I discovered that when they come to identify a person who is dead and needs identifying, part of the procedure to do this is putting there DNA into the National DNA data base....

DNA
DNA must be obtained and submitted to the force Forensic Service Provider (FSP) for
comparison against the National DNA Database and National Missing Persons DNA
Database.

I believe this is the reason that Joanna Yeates DNA was put through the National DNA database... it wasn't to test against Known Offenders it was a procedural testing that is done to identify the person in the mortuary....

I think they have used procedure which was away to keep the public informed, and in doing so it created an idea that they were doing everything to find Joanna Yeates killer... by testing her DNA against the national data base....But I do not believe that was the case (IMO)

If we look at how the information is possibily given to the media and had been leaked on many occasions, all someone in the police force would need to do is say that they put Joanna Yeates DNA through The National Database... That in turn is the start of the story that the media take up and decide that her sample was tested AGAINST Known Offenders .. When in reality I do not believe that was what took place...

If the Police didn't make an Offical statement that they tested Joanna Yeates DNA against Known Offenders then you only have the media's interpretation of.... "Joanna Yeates DNA through the national data base"... means...

The heading in the paper actually gives us more of a clue than we realise....
Joanna Yeates cops: We'll only DNA test Jo's boy pals  So... they hadn't checked her DNA against Known Offenders the headline is telling us that.. But we read the story in such a way we believe that, that is exactly what they did... (IMO)

I believe like a lot of the stories in the media ... the Police released just enough information that the media ran with what they thought it meant.. Again the Police were not lying when they said that Joanna Yeates DNA had been run through the National Data Base... It was just NOT THE REASON WE ALL BELIEVED  (IMO)

The fact that it doesn't match anyone on the National Data base is.... Joanna Yeates DNA was never in The National Data Base.... So that wasn't an untrue... They were not looking at Known Offenders they were looking at Joanna Yeates herself... (IMO)..

They plan to test only people known to the 25-year-old landscape architect, including many of Jo’s 200 Facebook friends.

So again we are being told that they PLAN TO TEST.... NOT that they have tested !!

One of her pals who lives 100 miles away has already had a cheek swab.

I always wondered who that could be.... Might be female... I think that is female (IMO) why else would the heading say "Joanna Yeates cops: We'll only DNA test Jo's boy pals"... because they tested a female and after that only needed to test males (IMO)...

http://library.college.police.uk/docs/APPREF/NCA-MPB-Identification-Process-Good-Practice.PDF

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/172046/Joanna-Yeates-cops-We-ll-only-DNA-test-Jo-s-boy-pals 

EDiT.....  Another reason I do not believe they tested the partial profile against The National Data Base is.. I believe it was only 1000/1 a match to Dr Vincent Tabak.... So if they had tested the DNA against The National Database we would have had many more suspects who would have been a possible match to such a weak DNA sample... (IMO)... And the newspaper article tells us it DIDN'T match anyone in The National Data Base.. When in reality if it was tested against Known Offenders... There would have plenty of possible matches... (IMO)..

Double EDIT...  (IMO) We have been made to think that this DNA sample was Cross Referenced against all the criminals in the country and anyone who may be in The National Data Base.... Law Enforcement etc....

By thinking that so many people have been tested... It gives more weight to people believing that this partial DNA sample belonged to Dr Vincent Tabak,... because people come to the conclusion that they had already ruled out thousands of possible suspects... (Including suspected serial killers for instance )!

[Leonora]

QUOTE:
Police are convinced Jo knew her killer who struck after she returned home from the pub after drinking with colleagues on December 17. Police confirmed tests were not being carried out on her work colleagues unless they also knew her via Facebook or had swapped emails and texts outside the office. Neighbours living near the basement flat Jo had rented with architect boyfriend Greg Reardon, 27, have not yet been asked for DNA samples either. One said: “It’s mad. We would welcome the tests. We’ve nothing to hide.” A police source said: “A DNA trawl is not seen as necessary at this stage.”

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/172046/Joanna-Yeates-cops-We-ll-only-DNA-test-Jo-s-boy-pals

This article ASSERTS that neighbours were NOT asked for their DNA. "Neighbours" includes VT and TM.

Apart from that, your analysis of the Daily Star article is a great exercise in the exposure of false news. It not only shows how the police exaggerated the signficance of the alleged DNA profile match to VT's, but also how they actually avoided searching for matches among profiles on file where they were most likely to have found them - DNA profiles from other crimes scenes.

[[...]]

I think leonora had mentioned before about the forensic team going in twice.... and indeed they did, I couldn't quite remember when this was, but Have discovered that they went in at least by the 24th December 2010 and again on the 22nd January 2011...

It seems a little early for the forensic's to go into the property on the 24th December 2010.. but usually in a "missing Persons Enquiry"... They would collect samples of the possible Victim if the turn up dead.. and it gives a means to identify them...

Forensics
Early consideration must be given to obtaining identification material as required by the Code of Practice. Acquiring this in a timely manner ensures that:

opportunities to obtain it are not lost
families do not have to be revisited at a later date, which may cause additional distress
individuals can be promptly eliminated or matched to any unidentified remains which may be found.

Joanna Yeates was a "Missing Person"... and with all intense and purposes, the Police obviously treated this case as a "Murder Inquiry"...
They had the opportunity to seal the Flat and come back at a latter date if they needed too...

Timescales for collecting samples
The timescales for taking samples reflect the need for proportionality against the perceived risk to the missing person. Failure to collect the samples reasonably quickly reduces the opportunity for gathering them. The following timescales have been derived as a result of professional expertise.

High-risk missing person ‒ samples to be obtained within 24 hours.
Medium and low-risk missing person ‒ samples to be obtained within 7 days of the report being made.

When a missing person case is escalated from absent-no apparent risk consideration should be given to obtaining samples.

This I believe is "Consideration" to the family...

Timescales for collecting samples
The timescales for taking samples reflect the need for proportionality against the perceived risk to the missing person. Failure to collect the samples reasonably quickly reduces the opportunity for gathering them. The following timescales have been derived as a result of professional expertise.

The image below from the 24th December 2010 shows "Forensics" taking finger print samples ... which seems too soon for a "Missing Persons Enquiry".. The policy procedure gives me the impression that they need samples for identification.... There was nothing to say that a crime had taken place at this point.... And the Polices Press Conferences were not done in a manor as a possible


 And people have wandered off before with what I believe is called a
"Fugue State".. As it hadn't been established a crime had taken place it seems them collecting finger prints from windows so early on a odd approach indeed.. (IMO)

The Police had obviously decided that some harm had come to Joanna yeates within a small window of time..


https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/major-investigation-and-public-protection/missing-persons/missing-person-investigations/#first-line-supervision



[attachment deleted by admin]

[[...]]

I have just started a new thread waiting for approval... OMG I think I've hit on something... I really hope that it gets approved .....

[[...]]

OMG.... Another Eureka Moment has happened with the National DNA Data base.....

If they originally went in to Flat 1 looking at it as "A Missing Person Enquiry" or as we believe a "Murder Enquiry... The Forensic teams should have taken DNA sample of Joanna Yeates from the Flat she shared with Greg Reardon...

These sample should come from her Hairbrush or Tooth brush for instance....
Because as A "missing Person Or a "murdered person, they would have no idea how long it may take to find her or her body and would need samples of her DNA to match against the National data Base for an Identification of her remains...

So they never tested these items (IMO)... Because when as I have come to believe they did their Initial DNA Data Base scan there was No Match.... This must mean they never put in her DNA from the item that they had collected from Flat 1.... In the early part of the Investigation...

So... what did they assume or know so early on in this Investigation, not to even bother entering her samples into the DNA data Base as a "Missing Person's Enquiry....

[[...]]

Why if the Police are running a Twin Track Investigation did they not take DNA samples from Joanna Yeates work Colleagues and Friends???

In the early post I made when it is revealed that they tested one of Joanna Yeates friend who lives 100 miles away , that this was a smoke screen (IMO)...

I do not believe they tested anyone... and the only reason for this would be the extemely week quality of the DNA sample they say they tested.. (IMO)

So if they didn't do testing what enquiries were made in relation to all of these facebook friends and work collegues of Joanna Yeates??

If the twin track Investigation is happening at the same time  , which the Polices behaviour indicates is so... Did the "Murder Inquiry Team... just concentrate on that Building and That Building only,... without  eliminating more likely suspects as it appears to be someone who Actually Knew Joanna Yeates would have her trust to be allowed to enter her home at Flat 1...

[[...]]

With "The Judge Rinder program" and DCI Phil Jones stating:..

So there was something just not quite right about him.... And the Officer erm..decided...erm.. following the policy we had taken with all our witness's... to ask him for a voluntary DNA swab, which he agreed to do.....

I thought I'd compile my list of witness's that I can remember who gave statements... not only the witness's that either appeared in court or had statements read out in court... But witness's we are aware of who the police obviously followed according to DCI phil Jones says.."Following the policy we had taken with all our witness's"...  As he states above.... I thought I would put this to the test!!


* Dr Vincent Tabak

* Christopher Jefferies

* Tanja Morson

* Geoffrey Hardyman

* Peter Stanley

* Laurence Penny

* Rebecca Scott

* Daniel Birch

* Rebecca Birch

* Denise Spence

* Kingdom

* Samuel Ashcroft

* Peter Rinsdell

* Matthew Wood

* Darragh Bellew

* Michael Brown,

* Sarah Maddock

* Andrew Lillie

* Elisabeth Chandle

* Zoe Lehman

* Florian Lehman

* Harry Walker

* Linda Marland

* Greg Reardon

* Father George Henwood

* Matthew Philips

* Warren Sweet

* Louise Apthorpe

* Peter Brown

* Marie Brown

* Glen O’Hare

* Other Tenants of 44 Canygne Road

* Marilyn Stevens ( who saw the man in a beanie hat on Longwood Lane)

* Mr Layman

* Mrs Layman  who had both walked the same route as Joanna Yeates to attend the party

* The groundsman  who thought he heard a body being dumped ... And passed on his information to the Police

* Landlord Alex Major... who recieved "The Pizza and Note"

* The old man whom handed in "The Missing Sock"

I'm sure I can go on and try and track down every person who gave "The Police a Witness Statement" and I can say with confidences that all of these people Did Not Give A DNA Sample.....following the policy we had taken with all our witness's as DCI Phil Jones Stated... as to make us believe that they had only ever treated Dr Vincent tabak as a "Witness" and Not "A Suspect" As the posts I have made can prove...

I would like to see the Date and Time of all the collection of these DNA samples... When they were introduced into "The National Data Base" and if after "The Polices extensive diligent sampling of all of these individual... When the DNA Samples of all these Individulas was in fact removed from the  "The National Data Base"....

[[...]]

Dr Delaney .... These are tweets again... Dr Delaney agree there appeared to be "Blood stains In Joanna Yeates hair"...

Appeared to be Blood Stain...... Not actual "Blood then"!!

Were's the blood  come from that was in Dr Vincent Tabak's Car Boot????? Because the more I read ... Joanna Yeates was "NOT".. bleeding!!!

Dr Delaney did a further examination on the 31st December 2010.....  I am like wooow....

Why after so long is Dr Delaney still examining Joanna Yeates....?? 

Why is Dr White carrying out an examination on 17th January 2011... Is this all part of the planned arrest of Dr Vincent Tabak?

How could Dr Delaney give a cause of Death within 44 hours after he had first seen Joanna Yeates... Yet he is still examining her on the 31st December 2010...

http://live-news.sky.com/Event/Live_Updates_Vincent_Tabak_Trial2

[[...]]

Had to come back to Lyndsey Lennen..... The tweets helped with that:...

I never Knew that Joanna Yeates Chest was Blood stained... According to Lyndsey Lennen it was .....  see images

This has to be the best quote from Lyndsey Lennen...

It was a million times more likely DNA was from Joanna Yeates and Tabak, than from Joanna Yeates and another person..

So with that Lyndsey Lennen "NEVER " says Dr Vincent Tabak was a match at 1 million to 1....

The Million to 1.. part of the statement she is making is refering to Joanna Yeates DNA..."NOT" Dr Vincent Tabaks....

The wording is always important...

Its like say It was a "Million times more likely DNA was from Joanna Yeates and a Chimpanze, than from Joanna Yeates and another Monkey....


The third image is interesting.... What other profile did they manage to Identify???
http://live-news.sky.com/Event/Live_Updates_Vincent_Tabak_Trial3?Page=0


Edit:....
Is it me.... Or is it only the Forensics and Police that talk about blood as if it actually existed... because I don't remember Dr Delaney mentioning Blood!! Or Dr Cary for that matter!

[[...]]

 Why is there A Forensic tent to the Right Of Logwood Lane as you look up it...

Also Visible is The one at the entrance to the Quarry...

What is under these tents ???

[attachment deleted by admin]

[[...]]

I knew I had seen 3 Forensic tents... I'll attach images with them all circled....

I don't know what these tents were protecting.... because i know that DCi Andrew Mott said that no tent was over Joanna Yeates ...



Edit... A better shot of the Forensic tent to the Right hand side as you look up Longwood Lane...  I rember this picture.. I always wondered what the shiny thing was next to it near the wall...

[attachment deleted by admin]

[[...]]

I was just looking at some tweets again.... And Andrew Mott, who I now believe has donned a Forensic suit at the crime scene... Describes to the Jury what happened...

The following was from People copying the tweets of each day of trial...

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
Because of the conditions Mott says the recovery of the body was "always going to be problematic"
1 minute ago
................................................................
juliareidsky Julia Reid
Mott says the body and ground were frozen. Defence asks about a broom handle used to help feed straps under the body.
2 minutes ago

Jo's parents are not in court at the moment
1 minute ago
.............................................................
juliareidsky Julia Reid
Mr Mott says contamination of the frozen body with the broom handle was minimised. #Vincenttabak #Joannayeates
41 seconds ago
....................................................................
rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
Def "you can't eliminate the real possibility there may have been contact" between broom and body? Mott agrees
26 seconds ago

Now I find the tweet from Julia Reid revealing.... Andrew Mott says:

Mott says the body and ground were frozen

Which is perfect..... He describes each aspect as seperate..... "The Body" was Frozen and "The Ground" was Frozen... Not that the body was "Frozen to the ground"!!.... A subtle but important difference....

This should indicate to The Police That Joanna Yeates  had "NOT" been on Longwood Lane for the full 8 days .....

This is also the reason I believe in early reports they couldn't state how long she had been there for... Several days was Initially reported.... (IMO)..

If Joanna Yeates had been on Longwood Lane for the full 8 days in the appauling freezing snowy conditions that they have made us aware of... why is she not "Frozen To The Ground"....

That was the image I originally had in my head , that she was "Frozen Solid to the Ground"..... That was also why my original comprehension of the appearance of The Fire Service didn't throw up any questions.... Because I like most of you assumed she was stuck fast to the Ground... I had also seen The aerial views of The quarry and assumed that she was on a hard surface.... I didn't know at that time she was a a grass verge...

So I happily took on board how it would be possible for The Fire Service to be in Attendance..... I assumed with body fluids she would have been stuck fast.... And some how the Experience and equipment that The Fire Service have , they would be in the best Position to assist the Police.....

But that is not true..... Andrew Mott freely admits he has to stop Joanna Yeates from Thawing..... Why would that bother him???

So back to his testimony... The Ground was Frozen... And Joanna Yeates was Frozen... But not together not attached,.....

This is also proven because they only use Straps and "Broom sticks" to retrieve Joanna Yeates .... Which if she was Frozen TOO The Ground would NOT have been possible....

rupertevelyn Rupert Evelyn
Because of the conditions Mott says the recovery of the body was "always going to be problematic"
1 minute ago

What conditions is Andrew Mott referring too???  Why would it be "Problematic" to recover a Frozen body That is "Thawing" that is "Not" "Frozen " To The "Ground" from a grass verge at the side of the road on "Longwood Lane"...

Were's the "Problem".... Suits are Donned... every protocol Followed... Fire Service Have Provided The Straps.... So what is "Problematic about this situation?????

And without really thinking about this....... If Joanna Yeates Is "Not" Frozen To the "Ground"... why did they not just Pick her up and place her onto a clean surface....???? Surely they have Plastic Gloves on to prevent Cross Contamination....

What Is "Andrew Mott" trying "Not To Reveal???
Is this the "Real Reason That They Took No Photographs of the recovery with "Straps and Broom Handles???
Because if it's "Problematic"... And The Conditions made this Recovery so difficult.... Was the Location they have lead us to believe, the real Location That Joanna Yeates Body was found...... Because it doesn't appear to be the case...

And if the Location is Different.... Again Dr Vincent tabak could NOT have committed this Crime!! (IMO)

[[...]]

With the Pictures I have attached... we can clearly see The Arm of the crane extended and in use.....


Again when I originally saw this image I didn't question it.... I stupidly assume the Crane was used To recover her from being "Frozen to The Ground"... But when I think about that... That is Stupid.... The Force Of the Crane would damage the body so that isn't the reason that it's there....

And neither do I believe that it is there to lower down Firemen with Rope Access Equipment To retreive god knows what from over The Quarry Wall....  They would need something a lot lower to access the quarry than being lowered by a crane... Seems preposterous to me... And If as a member suggested before the reason for "The FireMan" wearing A Rope Access harness.... why wasn't he in protective Forensic clothing To retrieve whatever was down there ???

It is Possible That Joanna Yeates was actually over the wall....  And with the Untruth's that we have seen that have been told... What is to say that Joanna Yeates Location was different to what they told us ???

Just because A statement was read out in court by The People who apparently found Joanna Yeates... doesn't make that true either...(IMO)... They should have been in court!!!

Just a little thought.... Wouldn't you think if you had "Firemen" dangling from a Crane... That the news media would have had that image Emblazened across every Front Page In The Country!!!


[attachment deleted by admin]

[[...]]

I'll attach another photograph.... This one is of A Fireman looking completely exhausted and he is wiping his brow..

Why would A Fireman look so tired... If they were just hanging about advising on how the Police could shove straps underneath Joanna Yeates body as it lay on a grass verge on Longwood Lane???

Maybe he was the One of the Firemen who wore The Rope Access equipment.... (IMO) as always...
Another thing to consider about this particular Fireman who looks hot... Is his jacket is nearly zipped all the way down.... now why would he do that on such a cold day if he hadn't been active???


[attachment deleted by admin]