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

[Mony Mony]

IMO, CyberGenetics validated Jones's assumption that the DNA would be too degraded to yield usable results.

 

[Mony Mony]

Perlin also said he runs many tests and they are not always used in a court of law because "They didn't like the results". Wonder if any of these tests involved 3 years buried DNA that didn't produce results.

 

[Karinna]

If you scroll a fair way down the page in the link, an interesting read on this stuff by Perlin and some of the issues surrounding this testing.
(quote)
In 2011, Legal Aid requested a hearing to question whether the software met the Frye standard of acceptance by the larger scientific community. To Goldthwaite and her team, it seemed at least plausible that a relatively untested tool, especially in analyzing very small and degraded samples (the FST, like TrueAllele, is sometimes used to analyze low-copy-number evidence), could be turning up allele matches where there were none, or missing others that might have led technicians to an entirely different conclusion. And because the source code was kept secret, jurors couldn’t know the actual likelihood of a false match.
The False Promise of DNA Testing

 

[Mony Mony]

I'm not sure what you are talking about LOL

I am talking about ... if there is questions about the validity of these programs as a whole, I am surprised that there are not more studies independent of the said programs... studies use controlled samples...

I am not questioning the validity of these programs as whole, just its application to the buried DNA where the results did not return a hit on any of the known contributors. Doesn't that seem fishy to you?

 

[Tortoise]

RSBM

Do you know where the bra was found in the grave? I looked for a photo, I couldn't find one. I noticed that when Daugherty was showing him photo's, he showed him the grave with Joey and the cord (which wasn't all underneath him), but not one of the bra or the red strap... he tried with the red strap but it was objected to because 'there was no way to know it was the A25 strap' or something like that.

I had always assumed that the bra was found as if it was 'on' Summer, but when I went looking the other day, I couldn't find a photo or any testimony stating that.

I don't know who would have testified to it but in opening statement Daugherty said -

The left cup of Summer’s black bra was found under her body. She was lying face down almost on her side

 

[missy1974]

I don't know who would have testified to it but in opening statement Daugherty said -

The left cup of Summer’s black bra was found under her body. She was lying face down almost on her side

I know what Daugherty has said, but I can't actually find it in testimony. I only noticed that it wasn't said or shown in a photo when I was looking the other day, after Ryan's testimony. I know Daugherty asked "if it was under the body", I think to Ryan and to Dr. Perlin, but I still can't find actual testimony that states that or shows it. I hadn't really noticed until Daugherty didn't show Perlin a photo of the bra or the red strap (A25). He tried to show the red strap but McGee objected saying there was no way of knowing if it was THE red strap, A25. When listening to other testimony, I did notice that McGee asked Radeleff if she had a photo of it in the grave because he couldn't find one, she did not. Like I said, I actually assumed it was found on her remains, but I don't think that is the case now, but JMO.

**NOTE: I did find somewhere that it was said to be found in the center of the grave I think.... but can't remember where and can't recall if I posted about it. I've asked a few times this past week if anyone knew because I was looking lol

 

[missy1974]

If you scroll a fair way down the page in the link, an interesting read on this stuff by Perlin and some of the issues surrounding this testing.
(quote)
In 2011, Legal Aid requested a hearing to question whether the software met the Frye standard of acceptance by the larger scientific community. To Goldthwaite and her team, it seemed at least plausible that a relatively untested tool, especially in analyzing very small and degraded samples (the FST, like TrueAllele, is sometimes used to analyze low-copy-number evidence), could be turning up allele matches where there were none, or missing others that might have led technicians to an entirely different conclusion. And because the source code was kept secret, jurors couldn’t know the actual likelihood of a false match.
The False Promise of DNA Testing

That's an interesting read In case someone doesn't read it all... FST is a different program than TrueAllele, but does something similar. Here again, it's interesting that it's the Legal Aid that is challenging it.

But TrueAllele is just one of a number of “probabilistic genotyping” programs developed in recent years—and as the technology has become more prominent, so too have concerns that it could be replicating the problems it aims to solve. The Legal Aid Society of New York recently challenged a comparable software program, the Forensic Statistical Tool, which was developed in-house by the city’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. The FST had been used to test evidence in hundreds of cases in the state, including an attempted-murder charge against a client of Jessica Goldthwaite, a Legal Aid attorney.

 

[Frankie Hellis]

He reminded me of Dr. Rudin but he could actually put a sentence together LOL A bit condescending... to both attorney's ... way smarter than all of us, but comes across like an a$$ lol

I still think it's interesting that 90% of his cases are for the prosecution, and it's normally defense attorney's that are crying it's not valid, it's not reliable, not scientific. I found a great research paper online sometime in the last few days, it looked at the pro's and con's of probabilistic genotyping and TrueAllele, it was informative, but even it is looking more at it from a defense attorney/defendant perspective I think.

https://jolt.law.harvard.edu/assets/articlePDFs/v31/31HarvJLTech275.pdf

There is actually some references to some studies that were done dealing with manual interpretation and bias that is interesting, what results are when those that are doing the testing know details and don't know details, I jumped into some rabbit holes when I first read it looking for the other studies because they sounded interesting and it seems that in every trial with any sort of testing, it always comes up whether the expert did or didn't know what they were testing or if they were blind testing. I think very very rarely is the person 'blind testing' in the trials I have watched.

This is absolutely fascinating and I wish the prosecution had read this prior to Perin’s testimony.

“PCAST recommends that “[w]hen considering the admissibility of testimony about complex mixtures (or complex samples), judges should ascertain whether the published validation studies adequately address the nature of the sample being analyzed (e.g., DNA quantity and quality, number of contributors, and mixture proportion for the person of interest).”158 In other words, just because TrueAllele has been potentially validated and accepted for three-person mixtures with a minority contribution of at least 20%, that does not mean that TrueAllele should be automatically accepted as accurate for samples with small amounts of DNA and more than three people (such as a gun touched by four, five, or six people).”

Since there have been no published validation studies addressing the nature of the samples with regard to age and degradation, this should have been thrown out, IMO. I would be interested in what Mr. Jitty thinks about this, from a barrister’s perspective.

 

[missy1974]

This is absolutely fascinating and I wish the prosecution had read this prior to Perin’s testimony.

“PCAST recommends that “[w]hen considering the admissibility of testimony about complex mixtures (or complex samples), judges should ascertain whether the published validation studies adequately address the nature of the sample being analyzed (e.g., DNA quantity and quality, number of contributors, and mixture proportion for the person of interest).”158 In other words, just because TrueAllele has been potentially validated and accepted for three-person mixtures with a minority contribution of at least 20%, that does not mean that TrueAllele should be automatically accepted as accurate for samples with small amounts of DNA and more than three people (such as a gun touched by four, five, or six people).”

Since there have been no published validation studies addressing the nature of the samples with regard to age and degradation, this should have been thrown out, IMO. I would be interested in what Mr. Jitty thinks about this, from a barrister’s perspective.

Maybe they did? I would be interested to know what was filed in motions and what was said in hearings back in November when the judge ruled on it. He has allowed it in, there is a reason for that, but other than the ruling mentioned in articles, I couldn't find anything about the details when I looked.

 

[mrjitty]

no... I'm talking about doing validation studies, independent of Cybergenetics. It just doesn't seem like it would be that hard to do, does it?

It's impossible because true allele is a propreitary black box

 

[mrjitty]

This is absolutely fascinating and I wish the prosecution had read this prior to Perin’s testimony.

“PCAST recommends that “[w]hen considering the admissibility of testimony about complex mixtures (or complex samples), judges should ascertain whether the published validation studies adequately address the nature of the sample being analyzed (e.g., DNA quantity and quality, number of contributors, and mixture proportion for the person of interest).”158 In other words, just because TrueAllele has been potentially validated and accepted for three-person mixtures with a minority contribution of at least 20%, that does not mean that TrueAllele should be automatically accepted as accurate for samples with small amounts of DNA and more than three people (such as a gun touched by four, five, or six people).”

Since there have been no published validation studies addressing the nature of the samples with regard to age and degradation, this should have been thrown out, IMO. I would be interested in what Mr. Jitty thinks about this, from a barrister’s perspective.

I think it should be thrown out

They've claimed to have discovered 4 other people's dna in the grave but this is actually just the assumption they made to run their model

I tend to agree with defence lawyers about this tech. It's a black box and we don't know if it is accurate.

 

[mrjitty]

IMO, CyberGenetics validated Jones's assumption that the DNA would be too degraded to yield usable results.

Yes.

 

[missy1974]

It's impossible because true allele is a propreitary black box

Trueallele can be purchased. If I purchased the software, I can run validation tests myself. I don't need to have a program code to do that. JMO It's either correct or not. I imagine the labs that do have it have to run control samples periodically. JMO

 

[missy1974]

I think it should be thrown out

They've claimed to have discovered 4 other people's dna in the grave but this is actually just the assumption they made to run their model

I tend to agree with defence lawyers about this tech. It's a black box and we don't know if it is accurate.

I'm guessing that the judge disagree's with you since he allowed it and he heard the arguments for and against... and I think McGee and Maline would as well, and they are defense attorney's lol I wonder how they would argue about this in the future if it's used against one of their clients as that is typically how it's brought into the courts, by the prosecution, just like I wonder how the pro's would argue for it. Could make for an interesting "quandary".

 

[Bobcat1]

Sound a Little Familiar?

With all the talk about oh gee he had no violent background so why do you accuse him of being a killer. He he's not a violent person. Try again and do a little research maybe you'll see it differently.

Watch this episode and change some of the circumstances and you have a perfect example of the McStay murders by CM. So much for his nonviolence crap.

Episode: ID Discovery Deadly Secrets "The Devils Allure"

I found this interesting that aired on ID Discovery today. It is about a man who is a professional con artist. He cons older women and takes over their lives and finances. Then when she finds out that he is only after their money and has siphoned her money. Then there is his not having a violent past and never murdered anyone that is known. He kills his latest victim in a rage when she finds out and confronts him.

Reminds me of February 4, 2010 and the possibilities. AMHO

 

[Tortoise]

Like I said, I actually assumed it was found on her remains, but I don't think that is the case now, but JMO.

rsbm

Sgt Armando Avila testified the bra was found at 12 inches deep and two of her ribs were found at 11 inches and 12 inches deep within the grave.

Day 9 Pt 3

 

[citygirl]

I don't know who would have testified to it but in opening statement Daugherty said -

The left cup of Summer’s black bra was found under her body. She was lying face down almost on her side

So my guess would be she was lying more on her right side. And not buried very deep. Where did the skull come from? Always confused as to which child was buried with whom? I am thinking it was the youngest as his skull was intact? The older boys were in shards, correct? Based on this I am thinking the baby was buried on top of his mother or maybe next to her? I know this is gruesome to ponder. Just trying to get a visual.

 

[citygirl]

rsbm

Sgt Armando Avila testified the bra was found at 12 inches deep and two of her ribs were found at 11 inches and 12 inches deep within the grave.

Day 9 Pt 3

I can't help but wonder if the defendant isn't thinking I should have used a jackhammer to dig deeper ?

 

[Tortoise]

So my guess would be she was lying more on her right side. And not buried very deep. Where did the skull come from? Always confused as to which child was buried with whom? I am thinking it was the youngest as his skull was intact? The older boys were in shards, correct? Based on this I am thinking the baby was buried on top of his mother or maybe next to her? I know this is gruesome to ponder. Just trying to get a visual.

My impression of the photo of the remains in grave B were that she was lying with her left shoulder down, but that's just a guess.

Joey Sr. was buried with Joey Jr (age 3) according to testimony that I've heard. Gianni (age 4) was buried with Summer.

 

[LadyL]

Day 39 at about the 49 minute mark:

Daughtery: He (referring to McGee) asked you at the D3 locus here what the largest piece/paragraph/whatever was, right?

Perlin: What the allele was that corresponded to the tallest peak height.

Daughtery: The tallest peak height here is 590.

Perlin: That is the height, correct

Daughtery: Are you aware that Bode considered that to be bacterial DNA?

Perlin: Uh, no I am not.

(OBJECTION, misstates testimony)

Daughtery: Were you given Bode’s lab notes?

Perlin: We were given reports, but we generally use them for the purpose of knowing what the names of items are so we know what we are looking at. We don’t usually read those reports and we don’t rely on them in any way.

***Daughtery clarifes the item in question is E05 Locus***

Daughty: So that was used to show, “Look! the largest one is 590 and it’s a 16 and there is nobody in the known samples that has a sixteen.”

Perlin: Yes, that is what the lawyer was trying to show.

Daughtrey: Yes, that is what the lawyer was trying to show. What the lawyer didn’t tell you and you were never made aware is that Bode concluded that those were bacterial peeks.

OBJECTION, misstates the testimony your honor. Counsel approaches.

Judge: Alright, the last objection is sustained as to the form of the question. You may continue.

Daughtery: Were you made aware that Bode found what they believed to be bacterial peaks.

Perlin: Not that I know

Daughtery: That 590 is significantly higher than anything else.

Perlin: Yes, which is why at that locus the computer would have concentrated more probability based on that data that it was given.

Daughtery: So the computer is gonna look and concentrate more….it has significantly higher peak than all the other peaks really

Perlin: Certainly at that location, yes.

Daughtery: Did you find any other peaks that were that big?

Perlin: I haven’t looked over the whole profile, so I can’t…... (sounds as if reviewing report)…..No, that was the tallest peak across all of the loci for that item.

Daughtery: And were you made aware that on three items they found what they thought to be bacterial peaks?

Perlin: I don’t know, I know there were three peaks that our analysts removed because they didn’t appear to be real data.

Daughtery: So you don’t know if those were the same peaks, assuming Bode accounted for that.

Perlin: No, I don’t’ know that.

Daugthtery: In any event, the computer is still gonna look at that and give it a lot more weight because it is very high, it is going to give it a lot more probability.

Perlin: Yes, that is what happened at the D3 locus, at E5, though ultimately, it didn’t make any difference in terms of what the match statistic concluded because that difference of factor of a hundred wouldn’t change the results that were exclusionary either way.

if I was a juror, this kind of testimony would put me to sleep
and I understand none of it