Establishing the identity of an abducted child by DNA.

[slartibartfast]

Why do you think that DNA swabs of missing people are taken?

Was it not in S Africa that a girl was stolen from a hospital and found later aged 16. DNA identification was responsible for her being identified.

I have no problem with DNA testing in situations where stories don't add up. Where a family has Birth Certificates and a timeline of photos it isn't necessary or desirable.

[slartibartfast]

There is only one definitive answer.  Surely you can see that.  And what do you think the abductor is going to say?  Have a look at my photograph album?  Have a look at a forged Birth Certificate?

Why not just allow a DNA test?

Empathy?  You are right.  I have no empathy for people who would deliberately refuse to prove that a child is theirs.

How about substituted DNA?

[jassi]

There is only one definitive answer.  Surely you can see that.  And what do you think the abductor is going to say?  Have a look at my photograph album?  Have a look at a forged Birth Certificate?

Why not just allow a DNA test?

Empathy?  You are right.  I have no empathy for people who would deliberately refuse to prove that a child is theirs.

You've got this rather the wrong way round. People don't have to prove anything.
There are probably very few countries who would attempt to force a DNA test on people just because they had a child who might, just possibly, vaguely resemble an artist's impression of what Madeleine might look like - if she were still alive.

[Anna]

I have no problem with DNA testing in situations where stories don't add up. Where a family has Birth Certificates and a timeline of photos it isn't necessary or desirable.

Have I got this correct?
If it was your child , you would rather remain under suspicion of keeping a missing child, rather than agree to a mouth swap?

[Eleanor]

How about substituted DNA?

This would not be possible.  DNA is taken from the person.  It cannot be substituted.  How daft do you think Law Enforcement is?

[Eleanor]

You've got this rather the wrong way round. People don't have to prove anything.
There are probably very few countries who would attempt to force a DNA test on people just because they had a child who might, just possibly, vaguely resemble an artist's impression of what Madeleine might look like - if she were still alive.

You are wrong.  The DNA Test would be forced, if necessary.  There is no other way to exclude anyone.  And don't imagine that it wouldn't be done.

[jassi]

Of course it could be refused - neither British or Portuguese police have any jurisdiction in other countries and would need to rely on cooperation, which might not be forthcoming.

[Mr Gray]

I wouldn't mind at all - especially if I knew I bore a striking resemblance to someone they were looking for - i.e. someone whose DNA they already had  - and so it would be really simple to show that I wasn't that person.  I'd be more than happy to help in those circumstances.

I can't believe you wouldn't do the same mercury.   It would be a strange person who would refuse IMO and I don't think you're strange at all.

There was case where the uk police actually did this and it helped them solve a crime...They asked all males in a 20 mile radius of a sex attack to supply a dna sample...

[Eleanor]

There was case where the uk police actually did this and it helped them solve a crime...They asked all males in a 20 mile radius of a sex attack to supply a dna sample...

One of the talked his friend into pretending that he was him.  They caught up with him in the end.  And he was the perpetrator.
There is no other definitive proof.

[slartibartfast]

This would not be possible.  DNA is taken from the person.  It cannot be substituted.  How daft do you think Law Enforcement is?

The sample to be tested against is usual obtained from an item "connected" to the searched for person.

[Eleanor]

The sample to be tested against is usual obtained from an item "connected" to the searched for person.

No.  From the person themselves.  Both of them.  They already have the DNA of Madeleine.

[Brietta]

The sample to be tested against is usual obtained from an item "connected" to the searched for person.

Madeleine McCann's DNA is on record ... the source was probably the newborn blood spot (heel prick) test as per the blood spot indicated in the files.

[slartibartfast]

No.  From the person themselves.  Both of them.  They already have the DNA of Madeleine.

Why did they use the pillow case then?

[Eleanor]

Why did they use the pillow case then?

To be absolutely certain.  Can you not see that?

[G-Unit]

Have I got this correct?
If it was your child , you would rather remain under suspicion of keeping a missing child, rather than agree to a mouth swap?

I didn't think anyone in this saga was required to prove their innocence. Isn't it up to law enforcement to prove guilt? If you know you are innocent and the child is yours why should you have to prove it?