Author Topic: Forensics  (Read 9905 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Simple Simon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3552
  • Total likes: 1180
  • Like a tunnel that I follow to a tunnel of its own
Re: Forensics
« Reply #30 on: April 05, 2017, 02:43:56 PM »


There is nothing inconsistent in Lindsay Lennen's claims in interviews with journalists that a colleague of hers collected Joanna's clothes for analysis on Boxing day. Dr. Delaney would have had to remove these anyway so as to wash the body.



Where does it say on Boxing day that her colleague collected the clothing... because if I remember correctly she said her colleague was at the scene to supervise the removal of the clothing....

That's why I had a problem.........

Edit....

Quote
A colleague went down to supervise the removal of her clothing and preserve any body fluids: "The body was frozen, so that was quite tricky." Under the media glare, the work was flat-out: clothing, swabs, suspect's clothing, all analysed and turned round in 48 hours.

This statement suggests that it was at the scene and not the mortuary where you ould have thought that they just collected the clothing from Dr Delaney!!!


Double Edit:..... Yes extremely tricky to remove clothing and take samples from a body frozen in the foetal position!!!!!!!!

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jan/17/csi-oxford-lgc-forensics
« Last Edit: April 05, 2017, 03:41:04 PM by Nine »
As the images unwind, like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind......

Offline Leonora

Re: Forensics
« Reply #31 on: April 05, 2017, 04:19:34 PM »
Where does it say on Boxing day that her colleague collected the clothing... because if I remember correctly she said her colleague was at the scene to supervise the removal of the clothing....

That's why I had a problem.........

Edit....

This statement suggests that it was at the scene and not the mortuary where you ould have thought that they just collected the clothing from Dr Delaney!!!


Double Edit:..... Yes extremely tricky to remove clothing and take samples from a body frozen in the foetal position!!!!!!!!

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jan/17/csi-oxford-lgc-forensics
It was in "Police Magazine" that Lindsay Lennen told journalist Tina Orr Munro that Tania Nickson was the first scene-going scientist to attend the scene, and that she did so on Boxing day. I see no reason to believe that this person was not the colleague who she told the man from "The Guardian" (in the link you posted) collected Joanna's clothes for analysis.

However, I had forgotten that Lennen mentions in both these interviews that forensic tests had been carried out in Joanna's flat before her body was found, in an effort to identify any foreign DNA. I overlooked the obvious conclusion, that they would have had to obtain swabs from Greg, Jo's parents, and Chris Jefferies, at the same time, to eliminate them. So you and Chris Jefferies were right all along. However, they wouldn't have taken swabs from Vincent or Tanja at that stage.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 02:13:58 PM by John »

Online mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 834
  • Total likes: 418
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Forensics
« Reply #32 on: April 05, 2017, 10:44:57 PM »
It was in "Police Magazine" that Lindsay Lennen told journalist Tina Orr Munro that Tania Nickson was the first scene-going scientist to attend the scene, and that she did so on Boxing day. I see no reason to believe that this person was not the colleague who she told the man from "The Guardian" (in the link you posted) collected Joanna's clothes for analysis.

However, I had forgotten that Lennen mentions in both these interviews that forensic tests had been carried out in Joanna's flat before her body was found, in an effort to identify any foreign DNA. I overlooked the obvious conclusion, that they would have had to obtain swabs from Greg, Jo's parents, and Chris Jefferies, at the same time, to eliminate them. So you and Chris Jefferies were right all along. However, they wouldn't have taken swabs from Vincent or Tanja at that stage.




If this is true, it does not tie up with what Chris Jefferies says in the Judge Rinder programme. He says that everybody in the flats gave DNA samples right at the beginning of the investigation-----and that nobody minded, because they had nothing to hide!

Offline Leonora

Re: Forensics
« Reply #33 on: April 06, 2017, 09:29:06 AM »
If this is true, it does not tie up with what Chris Jefferies says in the Judge Rinder programme. He says that everybody in the flats gave DNA samples right at the beginning of the investigation-----and that nobody minded, because they had nothing to hide!
This remark lacks Chris Jefferies's customary precision. Obviously, not EVERYBODY in the flat gave DNA samples, because:

(1) Vincent Tabak didn't give one until he was interviewed at Schiphol on 31 December 2010

(2) At the time when he gave this interview, Christopher Jefferies believed that Vincent Tabak did have something to hide, as indeed the detective who interviewed him claimed his behaviour at Schiphol revealed in her testimony. So Christopher Jefferies was not including Vincent Tabak in those who had nothing to hide.

I expect the police told the landlord, "We are taking DNA from everyone in the flats" just to reassure him, even though they were not interested in those living on the upper floors, but were presumably interested in Joanna's parents and anyone else known to have been in her flat itself, even though they didn't actually live there.

On learning from Christopher Jefferies and Lindsay Lennen that the police were busy taking DNA before they knew that a crime had been committed, Judge Rinders ought to have asked himself why they were taking such an unusual step over a missing person.

Offline Simple Simon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3552
  • Total likes: 1180
  • Like a tunnel that I follow to a tunnel of its own
Re: Forensics
« Reply #34 on: April 06, 2017, 04:19:53 PM »
This remark lacks Chris Jefferies's customary precision. Obviously, not EVERYBODY in the flat gave DNA samples, because:

(1) Vincent Tabak didn't give one until he was interviewed at Schiphol on 31 December 2010



But how do we know for sure that Holland was the first time he gave a sample... unless CJ is a witness on the stand and can verify who in the Flat gave a sample... we just don't know!!!
As the images unwind, like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind......

Offline Leonora

Re: Forensics
« Reply #35 on: April 06, 2017, 07:24:16 PM »
But how do we know for sure that Holland was the first time he gave a sample... unless CJ is a witness on the stand and can verify who in the Flat gave a sample... we just don't know!!!
We don't need CJ in the stand for this one, because we have DC Karen Thomas in the stand, telling the court, under oath, that Vincent Tabak was reluctant to give a swab for DNA at Schiphol, and that his sister and girlfriend fussed over him. I don't see how she can have made it clearer to us that 31st December 2010 must have been the first time he had had been asked for a swab, otherwise he wouldn't have blanched and appealed to his women for their protection.

At the time when he gave his interview to "Judge Rinder", Christopher Jefferies knew very well that the TV viewers believed that Vincent Tabak did have something to hide at the time when Joanna was missing. So Christopher Jefferies was not including Vincent Tabak in those who had nothing to hide when he said "Everyone in the flats gave a sample".

Offline Simple Simon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3552
  • Total likes: 1180
  • Like a tunnel that I follow to a tunnel of its own
Re: Forensics
« Reply #36 on: April 06, 2017, 07:49:08 PM »
We don't need CJ in the stand for this one, because we have DC Karen Thomas in the stand, telling the court, under oath, that Vincent Tabak was reluctant to give a swab for DNA at Schiphol, and that his sister and girlfriend fussed over him. I don't see how she can have made it clearer to us that 31st December 2010 must have been the first time he had had been asked for a swab, otherwise he wouldn't have blanched and appealed to his women for their protection.

At the time when he gave his interview to "Judge Rinder", Christopher Jefferies knew very well that the TV viewers believed that Vincent Tabak did have something to hide at the time when Joanna was missing. So Christopher Jefferies was not including Vincent Tabak in those who had nothing to hide when he said "Everyone in the flats gave a sample".

Think we need CJ to name those who gave DNA samples... Quote from Judge Rinder Crime story:At 13:18 of the video...

Quote
All the people who lived in 44 Canygne Road, were.. were interviewed and statements were taken.... So my statement was taken along with everyone elses, DNA samples were taken, Finger Prints were taken.... It was all entirely voluntary... But obviously nobody had anything to hide.. So nobody was in the least bit concerned about cooperating in that way

So.... who is telling an UNTRUTH ????  That statement by CJ is saying everyone in 44 Canygne Road,... he doesn't  leave Dr Vincent Tabak out of that statement... he could have said nearly everyone.... But he didn't...

Everyone... means everyone... well thats my interpretation of the word Everyone..

Leonora... why would CJ even mention the DNA samples?????


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ3GuwcEU6c&t=439s
« Last Edit: April 06, 2017, 07:53:01 PM by Nine »
As the images unwind, like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind......

Offline Leonora

Re: Forensics
« Reply #37 on: April 06, 2017, 08:46:39 PM »
Think we need CJ to name those who gave DNA samples... Quote from Judge Rinder Crime story:At 13:18 of the video...

So.... who is telling an UNTRUTH ????  That statement by CJ is saying everyone in 44 Canygne Road,... he doesn't  leave Dr Vincent Tabak out of that statement... he could have said nearly everyone.... But he didn't...

Everyone... means everyone... well thats my interpretation of the word Everyone..

Leonora... why would CJ even mention the DNA samples?????

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ3GuwcEU6c&t=439s
According to your transcription, Christopher Jefferies said: "All the people who lived in 44 Canygne Road, were.. were interviewed and statements were taken.... So my statement was taken along with everyone elses, DNA samples were taken, Finger Prints were taken.... It was all entirely voluntary... But obviously nobody had anything to hide.. So nobody was in the least bit concerned about cooperating in that way" He did NOT actually say "All the people had DNA samples and Finger Prints taken". There is no contradiction nor untruth in his statement. We know that one statement was also taken from Vincent Tabak at this time, and that his and Tanja's flat was searched. But you are mistaken if you draw the conclusion that Christopher Jefferies was asserting that DNA and Finger Prints were taken from the same group of people as the group who were interviewed. The two groups overlap, so he himself, Greg Reardon and Joanna's parents were in both groups. However, Vincent Tabak  was only in the group who were interviewed. The landlord "knew" that VT had something to hide, so his use of the word "nobody" means "nobody in the group whose DNA and Finger Prints were taken".

I am sure that Joanna's DNA and Finger Prints were also obtained at this time from, e.g. her purse and toothbrush.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2017, 08:50:05 PM by Leonora »

Offline Simple Simon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3552
  • Total likes: 1180
  • Like a tunnel that I follow to a tunnel of its own
Re: Forensics
« Reply #38 on: April 09, 2017, 12:16:42 PM »
Now I am even more confused.......

Quote
Mr Faithfull told the court how the forensic team had made efforts to prevent Miss Yeates frozen body from thawing out, in order to avoid losing any potentially significant evidence.

Quote
The jury was shown images of the snow-covered body as forensic officer, Martin Faithfull, described the operation to retrieve her body.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8826662/Joanna-Yeates-trial-snow-covered-body-found-by-dog-walker.html


Quote
Andrew Mott, a forensic officer who reached the scene after police arrived shortly after 9am, told how he
tried to prevent Miss Yeates's body thawing out.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/joanna-yeates-killer-cries-in-dock-274852


Two Forensic Officers who both tried to stop a body from thawing out..... Now where either of these Officers asked what method they used to try and prevent a body from thawing out????

She was removed from the scene at 4:45 PM if memory serves me correctly and Dr Delaney didn't see her until 6:00pm

So for 9 hours she had left to thaw out.... 

I do not understand why 2 forensic officers say the same thing????  How many people were around the body of Joanna Yeates on a Narrow Verge.. where cross contamination and transfer could take place...

What would you use to stop a body from thawing??? Which brings us back to Lyndsey Lennen and when her team took samples....

Did they remove her clothes at the scene..... How FROZEN SOLID was Joanna Yeates??


Ok... this is puzzling me.... You have the people who found her.... they just make a statement that get read out at trial... yet they should have been at trial, they made the important discovery... They could have described the condition of Joanna Yeates when they found her...

Quote
Mr Birch said he had seen a lump in the snow piled up on the verge of Longwood Lane and noticed a piece of denim poking through.

So... he is describing the snow being piled up there... which gives a different look to the scene...

Therefore, the body would have to have been placed there well after it snowed to be able to make a pile of snow on a body!!!  (IMO)

It didn't snow till the Saturday... And whenever you look at pictures of Longwood lane, the snow is very sparse, if you look at the picture I have attached, the snow barely covers their shoes.... So going on the statement of the dog walker, someone piled the snow on top of Joanna Yeates body, to have sufficiant to cover it, he doesn't say anything about leaves covering her body he says SNOW!!!!

So... if they say Dr Vincent Tabak covered the body in leaves then snow hid it... it doesn't make sense... the leaf debris should be frozen to her entire body... followed by the snow... nothing should be visible.... But if it is just a snow pile... with some leaf debris amongst it, then with the snow melting you could see how part of her would be visible..

Which also goes to prove, she couldn't have been on Longwood Lane for that many days....

How are they taking samples from a frozen body????? They're Not... because it's not frozen to the degree they claimed in the begining... So the surface skin could have samples taken from it!!


Going back to the Forensic Officers... Shouldn't there just be one in charge of the immediate scene where Joanna Yeates body lay???


EDIT:.... just another thought... how could anyone take samples from Joanna Yeates, if all this leaf debris was frozen to her body????? The leaf debri should have been stuck all over her... But it doesn't sound like it was....



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8826662/Joanna-Yeates-trial-snow-covered-body-found-by-dog-walker.html



[attachment deleted by admin]
« Last Edit: April 09, 2017, 12:23:10 PM by Nine »
As the images unwind, like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind......

Offline Simple Simon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3552
  • Total likes: 1180
  • Like a tunnel that I follow to a tunnel of its own
Re: Forensics
« Reply #39 on: April 09, 2017, 05:34:29 PM »
Going back to the marks on Joanna Yeates neck and chin:...

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-press-and-journal-aberdeen/20111015/283115655716704

Like I said on one of my other posts,, she could have been strangled from behind in a choke hold... Which the more I think about it the more  I believe it could be probable....

I'm trying to imaging what caused the marks on her chin.....  Buttons on a jacket ??? A bracelet ??? watch???

If it was a choke hold and and it was a watch/ bracelet etc...  I'm trying to work out if they are left handed??? Don't know....



As the images unwind, like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind......

Offline Leonora

Re: Forensics
« Reply #40 on: April 10, 2017, 01:47:05 PM »
...
Two Forensic Officers who both tried to stop a body from thawing out..... Now where either of these Officers asked what method they used to try and prevent a body from thawing out????

She was removed from the scene at 4:45 PM if memory serves me correctly and Dr Delaney didn't see her until 6:00pm...
Home Office pathologist Dr. Russell Delaney made his first appearance in court to testify on the fifth day of the trial, Friday 14th October 2011. He told the court that he was on duty on 25th December 2010 when he was called out to Longwood Lane to examine a body, believed to be that of Joanna Yeates. He did not arrive until after mid-day. Dr. Delaney stated that she was lying on the ground in a “foetal” position, without any shoes on. There was no sock on her right foot. At his first sight of Joanna Yeates’s body, he could glimpse blood on her blonde hair, which was matted with snow and leaves...

Dr. Russell Delaney did not examine Joanna Yeates’s body closely until 6.00 p.m., on 25th December 2010, nine hours after it had been found.

Offline John

Re: Forensics
« Reply #41 on: April 10, 2017, 02:00:27 PM »
I don't know the chain of command and how an Investigation is processed...

But as always something bothers me...

How are LGC Forensics collecting anything from Joanna Yeates body as it lies in situ???

You would have thought they would have waited.. There is something fundamentally wrong with this situation, I keep going over and over what was said at trial and in earlier and later interviews...

I cannot see why and how they would collect such material before Dr Delaney got to the scene!!!

Isn't it for the pathologist to see the body before ANYONE touches it???? Is that how the chain of command works??

I'm serious... something is slightly off, like a lot of this investigation I'm no expert but the jigsaw doesn't quite fit correctly, and I'm still looking for the piece...

Her body is taken from the scene at 4:45pm if I remember correctly and Dr Delaney doesn't get to see her till 6:00pm at the mortuary..

So is that normal for LGC Forensics to start taking samples from a FROZEN body????

Or (IMO) is that why Andrew Mott said that he had to stop a body from thawing, so it was even possible for anyone to take a sample...

Wouldn't the evidence be compromised in some way if:

(A): Many people where around her body

(B): she wasn't covered with a forensic tent

Someone explain the chain of command when it comes to forensically examining a body... I always believed nothing could be done until the PATHOLOGIST had seen it!!!!

I'm sure I remember one of them saying they removed her clothing.. if that was the case, how did they remove clothing from a frozen body that would have been frozen in the foetal position?????

Again Questions but NO Answers!!!!

EDIT...............

How did they take the DNA sample from the back of her jeans when she was frozen in the foetal position???? why not her waist band???

How many samples did they take from the jeans and where all these samples labelled from the areas that they were taken from?????

It is the job of the CSI team to document all items found on or around the body as it lies in situ as these will be disturbed when the body is lifted into a body bag.  The pathologist can visit the scene if he or she so wishes.

When the body is in the mortuary it is then the responsibility of the pathologist to examine it and any clothing etc which will be labelled for further forensic analysis.  The police will also attend this examination.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 02:09:12 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Forensics
« Reply #42 on: April 10, 2017, 02:32:08 PM »
Two Forensic Officers who both tried to stop a body from thawing out..... Now where either of these Officers asked what method they used to try and prevent a body from thawing out????

She was removed from the scene at 4:45 PM if memory serves me correctly and Dr Delaney didn't see her until 6:00pm

So for 9 hours she had left to thaw out.... 

I do not understand why 2 forensic officers say the same thing????  How many people were around the body of Joanna Yeates on a Narrow Verge.. where cross contamination and transfer could take place...

What would you use to stop a body from thawing??? Which brings us back to Lyndsey Lennen and when her team took samples....

Did they remove her clothes at the scene..... How FROZEN SOLID was Joanna Yeates??


Ok... this is puzzling me.... You have the people who found her.... they just make a statement that get read out at trial... yet they should have been at trial, they made the important discovery... They could have described the condition of Joanna Yeates when they found her...

So... he is describing the snow being piled up there... which gives a different look to the scene...

Therefore, the body would have to have been placed there well after it snowed to be able to make a pile of snow on a body!!!  (IMO)

It didn't snow till the Saturday... And whenever you look at pictures of Longwood lane, the snow is very sparse, if you look at the picture I have attached, the snow barely covers their shoes.... So going on the statement of the dog walker, someone piled the snow on top of Joanna Yeates body, to have sufficiant to cover it, he doesn't say anything about leaves covering her body he says SNOW!!!!

So... if they say Dr Vincent Tabak covered the body in leaves then snow hid it... it doesn't make sense... the leaf debris should be frozen to her entire body... followed by the snow... nothing should be visible.... But if it is just a snow pile... with some leaf debris amongst it, then with the snow melting you could see how part of her would be visible..

Which also goes to prove, she couldn't have been on Longwood Lane for that many days....

How are they taking samples from a frozen body????? They're Not... because it's not frozen to the degree they claimed in the begining... So the surface skin could have samples taken from it!!

Vincent Tabak told the Court that he tried to lift Joanna's body over the stone wall but couldn't manage it.  He then laid it in a foetal position on the verge and covered it in leaves.  That is why passing motorists failed to notice the body.

The body would freeze pretty quickly overnight and the leaf material would stick to the body.  When it snowed that would again add to the camouflage masking the body from view.  The dog walker's dog probably found the body initially and drew its owners attention to the strange bump on the verge.  Closer inspection revealed it was a person.

Vincent Tabak not only gave a full explanation as to how he killed Joanna but explained fully how he moved her body, where he left it etc.  Not the sort of thing one is able to do if innocent?
« Last Edit: April 11, 2017, 01:52:18 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Simple Simon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3552
  • Total likes: 1180
  • Like a tunnel that I follow to a tunnel of its own
Re: Forensics
« Reply #43 on: April 10, 2017, 03:13:22 PM »
Vincent Tabak told the Court that he tried to lift Joanna's body over the stone wall but couldn't manage it.  He then laid it in a foetal position on the verge and covered it in leaves.  That is why passing motorists failed to notice the body.

The body would freeze pretty quickly overnight and the leaf material would stick to the body.  When it snowed that would again add to the camouflage masking the body from view.  The dog walker's dog probably found the body initially and drew its owners attention to the strange bump on the verge.  Closer inspection revealed it was a person.

Vincent Tabak not only gave a full explanation as to how he killed Joanna but explained fully how he moved her body, where he left it etc.  Not the sort of thing one is able to do if innocent?

Yes but the sort of explantation if you have been told what to say!!
« Last Edit: May 01, 2017, 04:37:37 PM by John »
As the images unwind, like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind......

Offline Simple Simon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3552
  • Total likes: 1180
  • Like a tunnel that I follow to a tunnel of its own
Re: Forensics
« Reply #44 on: April 22, 2017, 03:49:27 PM »

If they didn't examine Joanna's car, how could the police eliminate her boyfriend so early on in the investigation, and so publicly? He was the only person to be publicly eliminated, until the landlord was released from bail, long after the dust had settled.

I don't really understand why Joanna Yeates car wasn't Forensically examined, to be honest... There were people who could have had a lift in the car the week before the murder (As The Police were looking at contacts the week prior)...

If there was a stalker as they suggested.. checking the car over would be a wise move...


I was thinking today when I was out.... why didn't Greg take the train to sheffield ?? It would have been quicker... he wouldn't have had to drive in bad weather... And Joanna would have a vehicle so she could get about in over the weekend...

I'm sure his brother would have collected him and drove him about sheffield...  Just seemed the easiest option with having such car problems before he set off!!
As the images unwind, like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind......