MADELEINE'S DNA - definitive study.

[Carana]

Do you think the spots were compared to Gerry McCann's reference sample?

It didn't correspond to any of the reference samples that they had.

Anyway, it llater turned out to be saliva from a baby boy who'd stayed there previously.

[Robittybob1]

https://youtu.be/7rD40mlLQOQ?list=TLGG5FLpDZhdEKkxMTEyMjAxNw  new video with old original footage and discussing DNA results.

[Carana]

https://youtu.be/7rD40mlLQOQ?list=TLGG5FLpDZhdEKkxMTEyMjAxNw  new video with old original footage and discussing DNA results.

As it's very long, and old, is there any specific bit in this compilation of old reports that you find interesting?

[Robittybob1]

As it's very long, and old, is there any specific bit in this compilation of old reports that you find interesting?

https://youtu.be/7rD40mlLQOQ?list=TLGG5FLpDZhdEKkxMTEyMjAxNw&t=1122

[Carana]

https://youtu.be/7rD40mlLQOQ?list=TLGG5FLpDZhdEKkxMTEyMjAxNw&t=1122

The person interviewed calls them "markers". Some do, but others call the individual components alleles. I've stuck to markers to mean the locations where they look to identify the 2 alleles. In the UK, they look at 10 markers (20 alleles).

The person interviewed wouldn't have known that the so-called "damning" evidence was a mixed soup - she was just answering in general terms.

ETA: The question seems to have been whether the DNA could have belonged to one of the siblings - hence her answer.

There's nothing more in that than we've discussed in this thread.

[Robittybob1]

The person interviewed calls them "markers". Some do, but others call the individual components alleles. I've stuck to markers to mean the locations where they look to identify the 2 alleles. In the UK, they look at 10 markers (20 alleles).

The person interviewed wouldn't have known that the so-called "damning" evidence was a mixed soup - she was just answering in general terms.

ETA: The question seems to have been whether the DNA could have belonged to one of the siblings - hence her answer.

There's nothing more in that than we've discussed in this thread.

She does say something a bit new.
"15 or 16 markers would give you enough evidence to provide a strong pointer that it was more likely to be Madeleine's other than some one unrelated to Madeleine.  You should be able to know what the types  of the close relatives, you should be able to distinguish Madeleine's DNA from their's, just from 15 or 16 markers."

I wonder if that was attempted?

[Mr Gray]

She does say something a bit new.
"15 or 16 markers would give you enough evidence to provide a strong pointer that it was more likely to be Madeleine's other than some one unrelated to Madeleine.  You should be able to know what the types  of the close relatives, you should be able to distinguish Madeleine's DNA from their's, just from 15 or 16 markers."

I wonder if that was attempted?

no...because it was  a soup from 3 or more people...so none of that applies..dont worry rob...amaral didnt undersrtand it either

[Carana]

no...because it was  a soup from 3 or more people...so none of that applies..dont worry rob...amaral didnt undersrtand it either

Yes, I agree. The forensic lady couldn't have known that it was a mixed soup. She must have assumed that they'd found an uncontaminated profile, which wasn't the case.

"Could the fact that DNA from Madeleine's siblings was also in the car complicate matters?"

"Fifteen or 16 markers would give enough evidence to give a strong pointer that it was more likely to be Madelene's than someone unrelated to Madeleine.

And you should be able to, if you know what the types are of the close relatives, you should be able to distinguish Madeleine's DNA from theirs just from 15 or 16 markers."

[Carana]

Why on earth is she posting those videos all over again? She's even recently posted a shorter one on that particular aspect.

That interview was before the files were released, so the forensic lady could only answer the question that the presenter put to her (which I presume was at least along the lines of the off-voice, who hadn't been able to read the files either, obviously).

It's misleading, at best. IMO.

[Mr Gray]

Why on earth is she posting those videos all over again? She's even recently posted a shorter one on that particular aspect.

That interview was before the files were released, so the forensic lady could only answer the question that the presenter put to her (which I presume was at least along the lines of the off-voice, who hadn't been able to read the files either, obviously).

It's misleading, at best. IMO.

She is posting them and people  are believing them..imo

[Robittybob1]

no...because it was  a soup from 3 or more people...so none of that applies..dont worry rob...amaral didnt undersrtand it either

I doubt if you do either TBH.  Take 3 persons mix their DNA get result of 37 alleles and 15 of them matching alleles of Madeleine. I think it would definitely be involving a relative. 

[Carana]

It's easy to fall for misinformation, unfortunately.

I have, until something intrigued me enough to fact check.

[Robittybob1]

Why on earth is she posting those videos all over again? She's even recently posted a shorter one on that particular aspect.

That interview was before the files were released, so the forensic lady could only answer the question that the presenter put to her (which I presume was at least along the lines of the off-voice, who hadn't been able to read the files either, obviously).

It's misleading, at best. IMO.

I raised the question of the DNA in one of the HDH Facebook groups.

[Carana]

I doubt if you do either TBH.  Take 3 persons mix their DNA get result of 37 alleles and 15 of them matching alleles of Madeleine. I think it would definitely be involving a relative.

Rob, did you ever try the experiment I suggested a few pages back - taking the 3 DNA profiles in the files, imagining that they were all in the mix and then comparing the result with Madeleleine's profile?

AFAIK none of them were related to her.

[Robittybob1]

Rob, did you ever try the experiment I suggested a few pages back - taking the 3 DNA profiles in the files, imagining that they were all in the mix and then comparing the result with Madeleleine's profile?

AFAIK none of them were related to her.

I can't recall doing it, no.