1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

McCanns: British Media Press Releases or Telepathy?

What is interesting is that the British media is running the exact same story - it makes me wonder if a prepared press release about Mr. John Lowe of the FSS service and that specific e-mail was already done to be served and fed for distribution. That or all the British Journalists have telepathy and decided from 20 000 files to pick that specific one and write a very similar in words and content article. Yeah right, the British Journalists are all telepathes!

Telegraph/Express/Daily Mail/Guardian/Herald (and all the others from the Island): Scientist issued McCann DNA warning

The officer wrote that Mr McCann was told his daughter's DNA was discovered in the boot of the rented Renault Scenic and behind a sofa in the family's holiday apartment. The notes said: "Confronted with the fact that Madeleine's DNA was gathered from behind the sofa and from the boot of the vehicle, and analysed by a British laboratory, he said he could not explain why this would be."

This contradicted the Forensic Science Service (FSS) expert's opinion that the sample found in the car could not be definitively linked to the little girl.

Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for the 40-year-olds from Rothley, Leicestershire, said: "You have to ask what the police were trying to achieve by over-presenting evidence that they did not have, and clearly could not claim to have." (...)

The files released yesterday include an email written on September 3 2007 by John Lowe, from the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham, warning that it was impossible to conclude whether DNA from the Renault Scenic, hired 25 days after Madeleine disappeared, came directly from the missing girl. Lowe told Detective Superintendent Stuart Prior, head of the British side of the investigation, that the results were "too complex for meaningful interpretation or inclusion".

Lowe wrote: "Let's look at the question that is being asked: 'Is there DNA from Madeleine on the swab?' It would be very simple to say 'yes' simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample.

"What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine - because Madeleine has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeleine merely appears to match the result by chance."

The components of the missing girl's DNA profile were not unique to her; in fact some were present among FSS scientists, including himself. He wrote: "We cannot answer the question: is the match genuine, or is it a chance match?"

The warning was passed to the Portuguese police the following day. Despite this, the McCanns were identified as suspects. Mitchell said yesterday: "The search for Madeleine goes on. Kate and Gerry ... know there is a possibility that Madeleine could be dead, and could be long dead. However, there is absolutely no evidence that she is dead." (...)




2 comments:

  1. I would be interested to get the opinions of experts in this field on the following statements.

    "What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine - because Madeleine has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeleine merely appears to match the result by chance."

    The components of the missing girl's DNA profile were not unique to her; in fact some were present among FSS scientists, including himself. He wrote: "We cannot answer the question: is the match genuine, or is it a chance match?"

    A chance match? This man's statements question the validity of using any DNA evidence to incriminate someone. Irrespective of this DNA, how do you explain the reactions of the renowned dogs?

    ReplyDelete
  2. John Lowe fails to explain the reason for withholding results from the amount of hair located by Eddie & Keela. He also omits to mention why PJ were refused return of the specimens for analysis in Portugal.

    Not only do to the 15 out of 19 DNA components match Madeleines, (88% used in Courts for confirming cases of parentage), the FSS stated 22 components belonged to "two others".

    This raises the question as to why the DNA of the "two others" FSS confirmed it found was not checked against the DNA of the Tapas group.

    It appears that not only was Madeleine's DNA found in the boot, but also those who'd 'touched' the specimens found by cadavers, i.d. components of "two others". Who were they ? Were than identified by DNA and 'kept secret' along with the results of corpse hair ?

    88% DNA match proves the boot specimen belonged to to-one other than Madeleine. Hair specimens would reveal type of medication administered and the duration in her short life.

    ReplyDelete

Powered by Blogger.