MADELEINE'S DNA - definitive study.

[Brietta]

The first appears to be from the email. The longer version from the report.

Re the confirmed alleles on swab 3A: no, I've never found anything in the files. However, in a TV interview GA mentioned 5 in a sample found in the flat (and I don't see any other sample he could have been referring to).
And 5 means nothing - you and I would share that many, possibly more.

GA: There is a recent report and there are two other reports. The first one mentions 15 alleles and here is the main question, it places the focus, they place the focus on that part of the exam from the vehicle, in the second [report] they then focus on the apartment, if on one side 15 alleles were not enough, in the other there were only 5 alleles that matched Madeleine McCann's genetic profile, what could be read there was that there were almost no problems. Because it's easily justifiable. It may not be justifiable with the cadaver odour on the spot where the blood sample was collected, but therefore, inside the house it is easy to justify, it's more difficult with a car that was rented more than twenty days later. So this is where the major confusion lies.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/09/little-girl-died-in-that-apartment.html

The only confusion regarding the DNA samples was Amaral's ... no-one else misinterpreted them in the way that he did.

[Brietta]

If Madeleine's DNA was the keystone on which Amaral built his case against Madeleine McCann's parents ... in my opinion, it merely illustrates exactly how badly flawed that case was in the rush to prejudice opinion against them by making them suspects in her disappearance.

What a pity to resort to opinion while disregarding through ignorance the actual significance of the DNA evidence and the expert advice to hand.

Quote
Page last updated at 17:55 GMT, Thursday, 7 August 2008 18:55 UK

There is also a fierce war of interpretation, with different media outlets assuming opposing positions.

For example, one Portuguese tabloid, which still harbours suspicions surrounding Kate and Gerry McCann, has focused on the "possible compatibility" (a phrase from the final police report) of Madeleine's DNA with samples taken from the couple's hire car.

By contrast, UK newspapers have highlighted the more cautious tone taken by Britain's Forensic Science Service, which warned that the results were "too complex for meaningful interpretation."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7548108.stm



Quote

DNA expert in McCann case offer
Last Updated: Wednesday, 12 September 2007, 23:48 GMT 00:48 UK


The inventor of DNA fingerprinting has offered to act as an expert witness in the Madeleine McCann case.
Sir Alec Jeffreys said DNA matches alone did not establish guilt and all Madeleine's genetic characters would be found in at least one family member.
                                                                   *****

It has been reported that DNA evidence with a 100% match to Madeleine was found in the car, but this has been played down by Portuguese police.

In an exclusive interview with the BBC's Newsnight programme, Sir Alec said there could be a potential problem in assigning a profile to Madeleine given that all other members of her family would have been in the car.

"DNA testing seeks to establish whether DNA sample A from a crime scene, came or did not come from individual B," he said.

"So if you get a match there's very strong evidence that it did come from B.

"It is then up to investigators, the courts and all the rest of it to work out whether that connection is relevant or not.

"DNA doesn't have the words innocence or guilt in it - that is a legal concept. What it seeks to establish is connections and identifications."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6992372.stm


So even without the benefit of having sight of the actual results, Sir Alec Jeffreys was aware that wrongful assumptions were being applied.
I really would have loved to be a fly on the wall when the files were released giving chapter and verse to the ineptitude which sullied the McCann name and distracted attention from the search for a living child because of the distraction of the belief that she was dead ... without as much as a shred of supporting evidence.

[Mr Gray]

The only confusion regarding the DNA samples was Amaral's ... no-one else misinterpreted them in the way that he did.

Absolutely true

[stephen25000]

The only confusion regarding the DNA samples was Amaral's ... no-one else misinterpreted them in the way that he did.

He was supplied information from the forensic services.

Has Amaral claimed to be an expert in forensics ?

The other comments you make about 'sheer arrogance and incomptence' amount to no more than your biased opinion.

[Mr Gray]

He was supplied information from the forensic services.

Has Amaral claimed to be an expert in forensics ?

The other comments you make about 'sheer arrogance and incomptence' amount to no more than your biased opinion.

we all understand the information from the FSS...amaral  didnt...he calimed they proved Maddie died in the apartment..they didnt

[stephen25000]

we all understand the information from the FSS...amaral  didnt...he calimed they proved Maddie died in the apartment..they didnt

You are saying that in retrospect.

He was supplied with information from the forensic services

When did Amaral he claim he was an expert ?

[Mr Gray]

You are saying that in retrospect.

He was supplied with information from the forensic services

When did Amaral he claim he was an expert ?

Amaral claimed to be able to draw conclusions ....he was wrong and didn't understand them....yet claimed he did

[stephen25000]

This conversation is going nowhere.

Amaral was given information on which observations were made.

One has to question what information he was suplied with, and how that changed.

[Carana]

He was supplied information from the forensic services.

Has Amaral claimed to be an expert in forensics ?

The other comments you make about 'sheer arrogance and incomptence' amount to no more than your biased opinion.

Stephen, I disagree on that point. If he didn't understand the forensics, perhaps he shouldn't have been spouting "we experts" - type comments. The insuation was that he was certain that the body was definitely in the car, and that therefore the only explanation was that it had been frozen and had thawed.

In GA's own "documentary", the head of the PT forensic lab agreed with the FSS analysis, but it just got glossed over as if he wasn't even interviewed.

[stephen25000]

Stephen, I disagree on that point. If he didn't understand the forensics, perhaps he shouldn't have been spouting "we experts" - type comments. The insuation was that he was certain that the body was definitely in the car, and that therefore the only explanation was that it had been frozen and had thawed.

In GA's own "documentary", the head of the PT forensic lab agreed with the FSS analysis, but it just got glossed over as if he wasn't even interviewed.

What has happened, cannot be changed, and that applies to all those involved in this case.

Mistakes have been made, and by not just one person.

[Mr Gray]

This conversation is going nowhere.

Amaral was given information on which observations were made.

One has to question what information he was suplied with, and how that changed.

We know what information he was given its in the files....cite for your claimed change
And read what Carana has written

[Carana]

What has happened, cannot be changed, and that applies to all those involved in this case.

Mistakes have been made, and by not just one person.

I haven't said the contrary, Stephen.

Everyone seems to have made mistakes in this case.

But not everyone directly involved in the case and in positions of authority (i.e. with a supposed credibility factor) has gone around claiming that they were experts on the DNA analysis.

[stephen25000]

I haven't said the contrary, Stephen.

Everyone seems to have made mistakes in this case.

But not everyone directly involved in the case and in positions of authority (i.e. with a supposed credibility factor) has gone around claiming that they were experts on the DNA analysis.

Agreed, many mistakes were made.

However, this is not going to change what happened, and I still cannot see any prospect of this case being solved.

[Carana]

Agreed, many mistakes were made.

However, this is not going to change what happened, and I still cannot see any prospect of this case being solved.

Ok, I agree on the first point, although I do still have hope that the case will eventually come to a conclusion, although perhaps way after the case has gone back into cold mode, possibly by sheer coincidence at some stage.

What I disagree with is a) GA giving the impression that he knew what he was talking about, when he clearly didn't (IMO) and b) that people in certain quarters consider him to be a demi-god and that any utterance must therefore be necessarily accurate and beyond question.

[stephen25000]

Ok, I agree on the first point, although I do still have hope that the case will eventually come to a conclusion, although perhaps way after the case has gone back into cold mode, possibly by sheer coincidence at some stage.

What I disagree with a) GA giving the impression that he knew what he was talking about, when he clearly didn't and b) that people in certain quarters consider him to be a demi-god and that any utterance must thereofore be necessarily accurate and beyond question.

I have said mistakes were made in the original investigation before, just as I believe mistakes are being made in the current one.

However, in the end we are just giving our opinions.

Time will tell as regards any resolution.