CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #15

[Tortoise]

I've just been dipping into the dna testimony to see if I could make sense of any of it and decided to open the YouTube transcript and have it running alongside while I was listening.

At one point Dr Perlin says "it was provided by um James McGee" and YouTube translated it as "it was provided by a Chinese pinkie".

Made me laugh

 

[Tortoise]

Summer's DNA was not on her bra - either cup - inside or out - yet he found 2, 3 & even 4 possible contributors of DNA there that doesn't match anyone.

rsbm

I haven't heard this testimony yet - do you know if the same 2, 3 or 4 DNA contributors were on both cups or were there different 'groups' of contributors on each cup? This would seem to be quite relevant if the theory is that Summer's bra was cut by the same group of humans.

JMO

 

[Frankie Hellis]

Interesting! Good to know... we just got a surveillance system for our home, I will definitely watch for that. After watching the Mitchley video over and over and over again, I told my hubby if we were going to buy one it better have a good picture on it or it was pointless LOL I think we got a 'good enough' system and didn't have to take out a loan

I followed the Millard stuff in the beginning, didn't have time to follow the trials though. So much harder to follow cases up here ... I call it 'trial by twitter'... but I think the Canadian reporters are so good at tweeting details sometimes it feels like you are sitting there.

Nowadays they connect to your WiFi and get the time and date from there. Not so much back in 2010 though. Mitchley’s was connected to a hard drive.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I've just been dipping into the dna testimony to see if I could make sense of any of it and decided to open the YouTube transcript and have it running alongside while I was listening.

At one point Dr Perlin says "it was provided by um James McGee" and YouTube translated it as "it was provided by a Chinese pinkie".

Made me laugh

Now that is so hilarious!

Tortoise, once you do go through all of the testimony would you please give us your analysis of it?

I readily admit, I do rely heavily on your posts concerning all testimonies.

TIA

 

[Karinna]

I've just been dipping into the dna testimony to see if I could make sense of any of it and decided to open the YouTube transcript and have it running alongside while I was listening.

At one point Dr Perlin says "it was provided by um James McGee" and YouTube translated it as "it was provided by a Chinese pinkie".

Made me laugh

LOL, That's hilarious,

 

[Karinna]

rsbm

I haven't heard this testimony yet - do you know if the same 2, 3 or 4 DNA contributors were on both cups or were there different 'groups' of contributors on each cup? This would seem to be quite relevant if the theory is that Summer's bra was cut by the same group of humans.

JMO

They didn't actually find any DNA on SM's bra. So if they didn't find her DNA on her own clothing i wonder how they found anyone else's DNA there? It doesn't sound right IMO. Unless it was from whoever retrieved the items from where they were found and accidentally deposited their own DNA? Which happens from what i have read about handling evidence for testing.

 

[MrsPC]

rsbm

I haven't heard this testimony yet - do you know if the same 2, 3 or 4 DNA contributors were on both cups or were there different 'groups' of contributors on each cup? This would seem to be quite relevant if the theory is that Summer's bra was cut by the same group of humans.

JMO

Per my interpretation - he could only say there were possibly 2, 3 or 4 contributors on the right cup and possibly 2 or 3 on the left cup. But he did not testify that the possible contributors shared the same alleles.

 

[Mony Mony]

They didn't actually find any DNA on SM's bra. So if they didn't find her DNA on her own clothing i wonder how they found anyone else's DNA there? It doesn't sound right IMO. Unless it was from whoever retrieved the items from where they were found and accidentally deposited their own DNA? Which happens from what i have read about handling evidence for testing.

As best as I can understand, CyberGenetics is CREATING the DNA profiles. IMO, they are extrapolating/amplifying the low grade DNA information they do have to create a profile. IMO, those extrapolations are subjective.

IMO, they are creating Frankenstein DNA.

Perlin did state the low grade DNA found is consistent with DNA that had been buried for three years. He felt that if it was DNA from a crime scene technician, the DNA would have been of much better quality.

All IMO.

 

[MsBetsy]

Not true.
I was sexually abused by my uncle, who was our after school babysitter, from age 6 to age 9. And I still loved him because he did some very nice things for us as well and I was just a kid who didn't understand it all.

So sorry you had that experience.
What you describe is completely normal.
Having worked with abused children for years, I can say that nearly all loved their parents despite the abuse they experienced. Even when they are placed in loving foster homes, many still want only to return to their family.
So basically my point is that whether or not a child loves her parent is not an indication of abuse. Imo

 

[Tortoise]

Now that is so hilarious!

Tortoise, once you do go through all of the testimony would you please give us your analysis of it?

I readily admit, I do rely heavily on your posts concerning all testimonies.

TIA

I will try ocean but be warned I really struggle with DNA terms. It tends to bypass my brain every time I hear it. Nevertheless I will go through all the DNA testimony and post my thoughts at the end of it, even if they aren't very scientific.

 

[Karinna]

As best as I can understand, CyberGenetics is CREATING the DNA profiles. IMO, they are extrapolating/amplifying the low grade DNA information they do have to create a profile. IMO, those extrapolations are subjective.

IMO, they are creating Frankenstein DNA.

Perlin did state the low grade DNA found is consistent with DNA that had been buried for three years. He felt that if it was DNA from a crime scene technician, the DNA would have been of much better quality.

All IMO.

Thanks for clarifying Mony, and agree from what you say. I haven't been able to listen to the testimony yet, but did Perlin state what the nature/source of the DNA was from? It would be good to know IMO. There are only certain things they can obtain DNA from at a crime scene. Usually it is in the form of bodily secretions/fluid, skin cells, fingerprints, clothing, a weapon, etc.
So pity he didn't elaborate on that?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I will try ocean but be warned I really struggle with DNA terms. It tends to bypass my brain every time I hear it. Nevertheless I will go through all the DNA testimony and post my thoughts at the end of it, even if they aren't very scientific.

Thank you. I trust you explicitly, and laying it out in layman terms is a plus. Imo.

Would you include why they didnt include in their report the alleles that were found that could have been consistent with CMs?

If I've even asked the question properly. LOL! I think you will know what I mean though hopefully when you get to that part.

Anyway, I will wait patiently for your interpretation.

I am just able to understand all if it much better when you lay it all out.

I'm sure many others agree, that your posts, including transcriptions, have been such valuable assets in understanding the testimonies in this case.

Jmo

 

[Karinna]

I thought the same... about Summer maybe not being home at the time. Of course, we haven't even seen her records. When I first looked up the e-notes... there were a few possibilities, of course I didn't keep those links, but just googling quick, here is a link... Mysterious text messages this one is a bit older than 2010, but seems to be similar to what I found before... a system note from maybe rebooting? some say it's sending a text to an email ... no really good answer, but some possibilities. I agree... I wish they had asked!!!! I considered the text to email or email to text only because Chase's records show 2 incoming from Joey and the one shows 0 for the time, it's weird. It's really hard to remember the phones from 2010 too lol It's not that long ago... yet it is Something else I *think* is that Joey had his email on his phone, I think it did an automatic check every 2 hours if he left it open... if you look at this internet activity (which is slightly cut off in the snip I took), previous to that, the internet was accessed every 2 hours the previous night. My guess is that he had it set to check every 2 hours if it was left unchecked, but that is just my speculation based on knowing his business was internet based.

Somewhat off this specific topic.... I feel like Summer gets forgotten about in this whole thing... no mention of what she did that day, who cares about her phone records, or who she talked to that day

BBM, Perhaps because what Summer did that day in regard to phone records isn't of particular relevance that goes toward evidence?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

As best as I can understand, CyberGenetics is CREATING the DNA profiles. IMO, they are extrapolating/amplifying the low grade DNA information they do have to create a profile. IMO, those extrapolations are subjective.

IMO, they are creating Frankenstein DNA.

Perlin did state the low grade DNA found is consistent with DNA that had been buried for three years. He felt that if it was DNA from a crime scene technician, the DNA would have been of much better quality.

All IMO.

Could you please expound on what is meant by CREATING DNA?

Were they able to establish the profiles as xx parts per million or billion like they usually do?

Tia!

Imo

 

[mrjitty]

Could you please expound on what is meant by CREATING DNA?

Were they able to establish the profiles as xx parts per million or billion like they usually do?

Tia!

Imo

Here is an article about what they do

If I understand Cybergenetics website correctly, they are using sophisticated Algorithms/Models to analyse hard to analyse samples - e.g. when they are mixed/unclear.

i think in the McStay case as well, because they don't have any complete profiles, they are using models to rebuild a profile

When Dr. Mark Perlin formed Cybergenetics in 1994, such techniques were tenuous. A few years later, the company began to focus on forensic technology: Perlin patented various algorithms that would be able to predict the presence of a specific person’s DNA from a sample that might include several people’s biological product. Perlin has marketed the tool, called TrueAllele, as the newest incarnation of DNA technology. In a series of YouTube PowerPoint presentations from 2014, Perlin argues that TrueAllele, unlike humans, is “objective...when it’s solving for genotypes, it never considers a reference or a suspect.”

The controversial part is that TrueAllele is a black box.

But the very thing that makes tools like TrueAllele invaluable to courts—its ability to make connections that elude humans—makes it difficult for those courts to assess. Probabilistic genotyping can analyze very small amounts of DNA by using the kind of complex code that would be impossible for a human (but not a computer) to run. This year, a ProPublica investigation uncovered aspects of the probabilistic software used by New York City forensic labs that might make the results unreliable. (New York forensic labs switched to another probabilistic software, STRmix, and advocates called for a New York State inspector general investigation into the lab.) Similarly, in 2014, STRmix, a competitor to TrueAllele, was found by a judge to have coding errors, involving certain mixtures of three-person DNA samples, that created misleading results.

After the scandal, STRmix released the algorithm publicly. But the cofounder of STRmix, John Buckleton, told me that he does not think that access to the algorithm would help lawyers figure out if the tool was free from error or bias. “I think it’s rubbish,” he says. “It would take a genius to work out an error from a code.” He adds that he kept the code public as a way to overcome critics of the technology.

The Impenetrable Program Transforming How Courts Treat DNA Evidence | Backchannel

 

[mrjitty]

It seems there may be very little academic rigour over all of this

especially no external validation of their methodology

Perlin argues that True Allele’s validity has already been proven through scientific, peer-reviewed research studies. But these studies that Perlin relies on are internal validation studies that were paid for and run by Cybergenetics.

 

[Mony Mony]

Here is an article about what they do

If I understand Cybergenetics website correctly, they are using sophisticated Algorithms/Models to analyse hard to analyse samples - e.g. when they are mixed/unclear.

i think in the McStay case as well, because they don't have any complete profiles, they are using models to rebuild a profile



The controversial part is that TrueAllele is a black box.



The Impenetrable Program Transforming How Courts Treat DNA Evidence | Backchannel

Thank you Mr. Jitty! Explained it much better than I would have been able!

 

[katydid23]

It seems there may be very little academic rigour over all of this

especially no external validation of their methodology

Exactly. That is why there is a problem trying to use highly degraded DNA. It is taking the validity and certainty of DNA testing and taking it into speculative, potentially faulty territory.

 

[Karinna]

It seems there may be very little academic rigour over all of this

especially no external validation of their methodology

Well that's interesting. It should be admissible only where the technique is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific community shouldn't it?

 

[MrsPC]

I made this argument back at the time.

AFAIK there is nothing in testimony that Dugal made an effort to reconcile the clocks - e.g. by checking his watch vs the system clock would have been a start.

But we don't have the exhibits so maybe something like this was done.

In Jennifer Mitchley's testimony at about 28:53 she stated that the timestamp on the video matched the time on her computer clock.