Results of the DNA test of the moderator explained

[scipio_usmc]

I. 10 areas were DNA tested. 
The first area was baffles 1-7
The second area was baffles 8-11
The third areas was baffles 12-17
The other 7 areas were various areas other than the baffles.

II. The results of the testing was that each area had one major contributor and at least 1 minor contributor:

1) June + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim)
2) June + at least another male (could be any male victim or a non-victim)
3) June + at least another male (could be any male victim or a non-victim)
4) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim except the twins)
5) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim except the twins)
6) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim except the twins)
7) Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim except the twins)
8 )Sheila + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim except the twins)
9) Nicolas or Daniel + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim except Sheila)
10) Nicolas or Daniel + at least another (could be any other victim or a non-victim except Sheila)

So it could just be as little as 4 victims as the donors or could be as many as all 5 victims plus 9 other people. There could be as few as 4 donors or could be at least 14 donors. There is no way to know since the minor contributor profiles were so small and so incomplete. 

III. Prior to the DNA testing the moderator was tested for the presence of blood but none was detected thus there is nothing to suggest any of the DNA found was blood based

IV. Defense expert Webster told the Court of Appeals that the DNA could have been transferred there by those who handled the moderator and was likely transferred because some areas that tested negative for blood in 1985 and 1986 tested positive for DNA.  He also said the DNA results failed to establish whose blood was removed from the moderator in 1985 and 1986.  The only way a DNA test could resolve such would be to DNA test that material which was removed.

V. Even though it was clear that Sheila and at least one of the twin's DNA was in the moderator the expert at the time could not scientifically quantify the odds and the Court of Appeal said it likely was their DNA but did not find such to be conclusive because no odds could be provided.  Even if found to be conclusive it is meaningless because it could have been the result of contamination so either way the result was the same and they had no reason to bother saying it definitely was their DNA.  Subsequent to the hearing experts were able to quantify the odds in a way that makes clear it was the DNA of Sheila and at least one twin. Such is still meaningless because there is no way to establish the DNA was blood based as opposed to the result of contamination.

VI.

Court of Appeals"

"Since the CCRC referred this case to the court, further DNA testing has taken place of other parts of the moderator. Seven swabbings have been taken from internal parts of the moderator apart from the baffles. All seven results indicated that DNA from more than one person was present. The results were complex and incomplete and it was not possible to determine how many people had contributed to the DNA from the mixture."

I think it is self-explanatory and no translation is necessary.

Court of Appeals:

"When comparisons were possible, components matching Sheila Caffell's DNA profile were detected in five of these seven results. The other two results also contained components which matched those of Sheila Caffell, but not at all of the ten areas of DNA tested where information was available for comparison."

Translation: They tested 7 additional areas of the moderator beyond the baffles.  They tested 10 DNA markers.  They only could get all ten markers for the major contributor they could not do so for the minor contributor in each sample.   In 5 of these 7 additional moderator areas tested Sheila's DNA matched all 10 markers.  In 2 of the 7 areas they matched most but not all 10 markers. It was obvious that the major contributor for the last 2 was closely related to Sheila.

Court of Appeals:   

"Some of the components detected did not match the profile of Sheila Caffell or the Caffell twins."

Translation: The minor contributor in each of the 7 areas was someone other than Sheila or the twins.

[guinness]

so as none of the DNA was from blood - How for example do you think DNA from the twins or June came to be in the moderator by contamination?

[scipio_usmc]

so as none of the DNA was from blood - How for example do you think DNA from the twins or June came to be in the moderator by contamination?

It was taken apart by people who had touched items containing DNA of the victims.  Those people transferred minute amounts of DNA of the victims. If it was a substantial amount of DNA then it would mean the victims themselves had handled it. But we are talking about Tiny traces so small that they had to duplicate it just to get a sample large enough to be able to get some of the DNA markers.  Had Nevill taken it apart to clean not only could he get his own DNA inside but that of any family members whose DNA he had a trace of on him but it's obvious he hadn't cleaned it prior to the murders and that the evidence handling did it.

There are very strict procedures in place for evidence handling today precisely because the ease of contamination.  None of these existed at the time even the jury was free to touch all the exhibits and could have caused cross contamination. 

LCN DNA is useful when someone's DNA is found who has no conceivable way for any of their DNA to get there by contamination. If you don't know the victim in any way and a trace of your DNA is on her panties you have a lot of account for.  The only way to try attacking that evidence it to try to look at the evidence handling procedures to see if there is a way the lab could have caused the contamination which is why evidence handling is so important.

In the Kercher case they didn't follow any of the required DNA protocols and it was established Kercher's DNA was on the knife because it was already present in the lab and transferred there.  This is why several courts including the final one that acquitted said this evidence had to be rejected and was improperly relied upon by the courts that convicted. 

That DNA was not blood based either so the court also rejected it on that basis.  How could it prove she was stabbed with it when it wasn't blood based?  Then of course there was the problem of the knife in question not being capable of causing the wounds and not matching the shape of the knife that left the bloody outline so 3 different reasons it was meaningless.   

You have to look at everything as a whole to see whether DNA means something or not.  Sometimes it can include or exclude other times it is useless.

If DNA testing existed at the time then in this case instead of type testing the blood they removed they would have done DNA testing.  Lincoln would have DNA tested the blood he removed as well.  Neither the lab nor Lincoln preserved any of that material for later testing they expended it all and thus DNA testing can't serve any value in this case to further refine the blood in the moderator issue.

Nor is there any other issue in this case where DNA testing could help.  Jeremy's DNA would be expected all over WHF as would be that of the victims. Just like their fingerprints would be expected all over.  If Jeremy left a print in blood of the victims that would be a different matter because only if he were the killer could he have done so but he didn't.   

[guinness]

It was taken apart by people who had touched items containing DNA of the victims.  Those people transferred minute amounts of DNA of the victims. If it was a substantial amount of DNA then it would mean the victims themselves had handled it. But we are talking about Tiny traces so small that they had to duplicate it just to get a sample large enough to be able to get some of the DNA markers.  Had Nevill taken it apart to clean not only could he get his own DNA inside but that of any family members whose DNA he had a trace of on him but it's obvious he hadn't cleaned it prior to the murders and that the evidence handling did it.

There are very strict procedures in place for evidence handling today precisely because the ease of contamination.  None of these existed at the time even the jury was free to touch all the exhibits and could have caused cross contamination. 

LCN DNA is useful when someone's DNA is found who has no conceivable way for any of their DNA to get there by contamination. If you don't know the victim in any way and a trace of your DNA is on her panties you have a lot of account for.  The only way to try attacking that evidence it to try to look at the evidence handling procedures to see if there is a way the lab could have caused the contamination which is why evidence handling is so important.

In the Kercher case they didn't follow any of the required DNA protocols and it was established Kercher's DNA was on the knife because it was already present in the lab and transferred there.  This is why several courts including the final one that acquitted said this evidence had to be rejected and was improperly relied upon by the courts that convicted. 

That DNA was not blood based either so the court also rejected it on that basis.  How could it prove she was stabbed with it when it wasn't blood based?  Then of course there was the problem of the knife in question not being capable of causing the wounds and not matching the shape of the knife that left the bloody outline so 3 different reasons it was meaningless.   

You have to look at everything as a whole to see whether DNA means something or not.  Sometimes it can include or exclude other times it is useless.

If DNA testing existed at the time then in this case instead of type testing the blood they removed they would have done DNA testing.  Lincoln would have DNA tested the blood he removed as well.  Neither the lab nor Lincoln preserved any of that material for later testing they expended it all and thus DNA testing can't serve any value in this case to further refine the blood in the moderator issue.

Nor is there any other issue in this case where DNA testing could help.  Jeremy's DNA would be expected all over WHF as would be that of the victims. Just like their fingerprints would be expected all over.  If Jeremy left a print in blood of the victims that would be a different matter because only if he were the killer could he have done so but he didn't.

so the contamination could have happened in the lab?



Any chance that the DNA could have come from Sheila handling the bullets?

[Holly Goodhead]

so the contamination could have happened in the lab?

Any chance that the DNA could have come from Sheila handling the bullets?

There are different types of DNA testing.  In JB's case LCN DNA was used as all visible blood was swabbed away for blood type testing in 85/86.  With LCN testing it is possible to achieve a profile from a sample as small as a millionth of the size of a grain of salt.   LCN DNA testing is unable to identify the source eg sweat, blood etc.  As DNA evidence wasn't even envisaged in 85/86 no precautions were taken to protect exhibits from contamination eg, as you said at the lab, SoC and at trial when all manner of people handled the silencer along with blood stained exhibits eg victims' nightwear which might have deposited blood soaked fibres in the silencer not even visible to the naked eye.  As far as I can see there's no mileage in any type of DNA testing with the case and certainly not the silencer.   Even if there was conclusive evidence that SC's blood was in the silencer it wouldn't show how it got there 

This is something I stumbled across recently that potentially looks exciting:

http://www2.le.ac.uk/research/challenges/safe/fingerprint

But I have no idea whether or not the spent cartridges still exist.  I guess this method might be able to produce further prints on the rifle? 

[Myster]

Yikes!... I hope to god they've destroyed them, or we'll never hear the last of it!

[scipio_usmc]

so the contamination could have happened in the lab?

Any chance that the DNA could have come from Sheila handling the bullets?

If she handled the bullets there would have been evidence on her hands so doubtful. The bullets that killed her certainly could have had some of her DNA but were handled a lot as were the casings. More likely it was from her clothing or other items that would contain more DNA. At minimum Sheila's DNA, June's and at least one of the twins was transferred maybe so was Nevill's.  There is simply no way to know who the minor contributors were because not enough markers were present and they didn't have all the profiles they would need for matching purposes.

I could potentially transfer tiny amounts of DNA from my relatives, friends and coworkers to items in addition to transferring my own.  Just depends on what DNA might be on me any given time.  Imagine how much DNA a lab worker could transfer if not making sure to clean up and change gloves etc.  The DNA can sit in the lab and on the equipment for a long period and transfer well later. That is why defense attorneys scour over the records so carefully and lab workers need to dot their Is and cross their Ts.

[scipio_usmc]

There are different types of DNA testing.  In JB's case LCN DNA was used as all visible blood was swabbed away for blood type testing in 85/86.  With LCN testing it is possible to achieve a profile from a sample as small as a millionth of the size of a grain of salt.   LCN DNA testing is unable to identify the source eg sweat, blood etc.  As DNA evidence wasn't even envisaged in 85/86 no precautions were taken to protect exhibits from contamination eg, as you said at the lab, SoC and at trial when all manner of people handled the silencer along with blood stained exhibits eg victims' nightwear which might have deposited blood soaked fibres in the silencer not even visible to the naked eye.  As far as I can see there's no mileage in any type of DNA testing with the case and certainly not the silencer.   Even if there was conclusive evidence that SC's blood was in the silencer it wouldn't show how it got there 

This is something I stumbled across recently that potentially looks exciting:

http://www2.le.ac.uk/research/challenges/safe/fingerprint

But I have no idea whether or not the spent cartridges still exist.  I guess this method might be able to produce further prints on the rifle?

What good is proving the universe of people who touched the rifle?  That would not help establish they touched it during commission of the murders since there were innocent reasons to have touched it prior including simply to move it because it was in the way.

As for the casings they probably do still exist since they were trial exhibits. It is rare though to leave a good usable print on a small casing just from loading. You move your thumb across it usually.  For a good fingerprint it not only must be clear you need enough of a profile to get enough of the points to compare. Fatter casings provide more opportunity. 

     

[Holly Goodhead]

If she handled the bullets there would have been evidence on her hands so doubtful. The bullets that killed her certainly could have had some of her DNA but were handled a lot as were the casings. More likely it was from her clothing or other items that would contain more DNA. At minimum Sheila's DNA, June's and at least one of the twins was transferred maybe so was Nevill's.  There is simply no way to know who the minor contributors were because not enough markers were present and they didn't have all the profiles they would need for matching purposes.

I could potentially transfer tiny amounts of DNA from my relatives, friends and coworkers to items in addition to transferring my own.  Just depends on what DNA might be on me any given time.  Imagine how much DNA a lab worker could transfer if not making sure to clean up and change gloves etc.  The DNA can sit in the lab and on the equipment for a long period and transfer well later. That is why defense attorneys scour over the records so carefully and lab workers need to dot their Is and cross their Ts.

What sort of evidence?

[Holly Goodhead]

What good is proving the universe of people who touched the rifle? That would not help establish they touched it during commission of the murders since there were innocent reasons to have touched it prior including simply to move it because it was in the way.

As for the casings they probably do still exist since they were trial exhibits. It is rare though to leave a good usable print on a small casing just from loading. You move your thumb across it usually.  For a good fingerprint it not only must be clear you need enough of a profile to get enough of the points to compare. Fatter casings provide more opportunity.

Location is important.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/aug/28/forensicscience.fingerpr

Even partial prints could assist since we are only looking at only two individuals.  A number of partial prints might be sufficient to create a whole.  If SC was responsible it would even help with the order of deaths since the first 10/11 casings should have JB's prints on and the remainder SC's.  Alternatively if there are no prints on the remaining cartridges then this might indicate JB was the perp and was wearing gloves.  Or maybe he didn't wear gloves and his prints will be all over them. 

[adam]

What was the point of Bamber requesting these DNA tests ?

If June's DNA could get in there because someone else once touched her, then took apart the inside of the silencer it's not of any significance.

More expensive tests which kept Bamber in the media.

The most significant thing is the blood, which was human and Sheila's

[Holly Goodhead]

What was the point of Bamber requesting these DNA tests ?

If June's DNA could get in there because someone else once touched her, then took apart the inside of the silencer it's not of any significance.

More expensive tests which kept Bamber in the media.

The most significant thing is the blood, which was human and Sheila's

I don't think it's reasonable to expect JB to know the ins and outs of DNA evidence especially when he only has access to limited resources.  If it was simple and straight-forward then the CCRC would not have referred to the COA. 

It has never been proven SC's blood was in the silencer only her type which is shared by approx 10% of the population.  Although I accept it probably was her blood it still doesn't prove how it came to be there.

[scipio_usmc]

What sort of evidence?

1) visible black marks

2) elevated lead levels (more than just the usual background lead present on us all the time)

They did loading tests and found there were visible black deposits in addition to higher lead levels.  The bullet sin question have no jackets the lead is exposed.  All the ammo I have used was jacketed so I never had the same issues of touching lead directly during loading. M-16/AR-15 magazines the bullets get pushed in from the casing because they fit virtually side by side another round they just alternate a little left then right.  So you just press down.  The single stack handgun magazines I have loaded are akin to the Anschutz magazine but the rounds had a jacket so I never had any black marks from loading them.  45 APC casings are much fatter than 22LR casings so present far more opportunity to get enough of a print to make a comparison so it would not be a valid argument to say if most or all lack prints that means Jeremy loaded them wearing gloves.

I don't think Sheila's print on one would be enough to to overcome all the evidence that convicted him anyway though.  You need to sufficiently undermine that evidence which convicted him that is how you "erase" a lack of reasonable doubt and establish it.

One of the prints on the rifle belonged to Sheila and that failed to matter.  There is evidence Jeremy tried to teach her how to load the weapon.  He could have done that in order to get Sheila's prints on them.  Julie also testified he told her he planted her prints on the weapon he could have tried to do the same with the casings.  I don't believe for 1 minute his story of taking the gun out to pursue rabbits, dumping the bullets out and leaving them out.  It is clear to me he dumped them out there after as part of his staging which is why there wound up being too many bullets for his story to be true.  But this made up story provides a way for Sheila's prints to get on some of the casings.  He claims those bullets were there prior to her using the phone so as she was using the phone she could have touched them.  So his own made up fable renders the fingerprint issue on the casings moot.