The dna stuff has importance to many cold cases, not just here. Interpretation can be a problem for many reasons. When Milgaard dna was retested, based on CJ, a new suspect was found and convicted based on the new dna results. However that all came together, it was successful. We hope for the same.
There are many ways to look at and interpret the same information to non professionals. This may be something that may have to be left to them. For me, I can sort of understand both sides if your intention is to do that. I have made some assumptions that I base some interpretations on that I deem valid but others have a different way of looking at the same. I have tried to explain my reasoning from the apples and oranges perspective but that is maybe not the best analogy the deeper you look.
The "one guy" in that article provided the only information I read on the subject of dna compliance. It seemed to suggest at least partially that the killers dna profile was compatable with the modern system. I didn't see anywhere else where it was said it wasn't. (except here) Which if true, meant one thing, if not could mean another. We just want to know whether the killer's dna can be and is being tested against the current system or not.
For sake of argument, it is correct- pcr str
could reproduce any markers tested for. There is standardised pcr testing today for standardised markers. It was the latest in advancement circa 1995. Test kits are mainly of this variety now.
The latest markers could have been tested for back then but were they? The newer markers provide much more accurate results but if the purpose of the test was just to test GPM only, the newer markers were not necessary. A custom pcr test could be set to test any particular markers desired. If the last of the dna was used for the final test, one would "assume" all the test data available would have been sought and gleaned from the last remaining sample. It would not take any more dna than they had. (the beauty of pcr str) It would almost be irresponsible not to test for everything possible imo.. but I assume that ...maybe there is a pattern of this sort of thing happening with evidence in this case and it shouldn't be so surprising.
The same markers listed here are listed in almost all pcr based dna population tests everywhere. Seems very very common. At least, any new poi dna sample should be able to be tested and compared against the same.
from 2002- general population sequencing markers-
Abstract- comparisons with odds of frequencies are listed for each marker-
http://www.uni-duesseldorf.de/WWW/MedFak/Serology/DNA-Systeme/polymarker.html
Perhaps GPM's lawyer or association for the wrongfully convicted etc may be a better source of information on this topic than Police or foi. I should think they would have been quite interested and have records. Is the dna profile listed here accurate? It was apparently deleted almost immediately from the original source location? How was it recorded? So although it may be true it is not admissable without external verification anyway. Not much you can do with this as is except privately and individually if required. I believe we all "hope" it is not down to that.
Without modern dna compatability, the avenues of pursuit available end rather abruptly. Some of the sentiment expressed here reflects that thought.
I have some great docs I will upload when I get a chance tomorrow when I am not on mobile.
