Dissimilar head hair on Q107 and extra DNA segment on the duct tape

[seagull65]

In the charts, for example p 8584,

What do FSB and FSB-2 refer to?
Are they the DNA segment that was found on Q62/Q63/Q64-2 (sticky side of remains tape)?
I just ask because I don't find Q62/Q63/Q64-2 on the tables.

FSB and FSB-2 look like they have male DNA with the 17 allele at the D3S1358 locus.

Again, I am very new at this. Thanks for all the help

edited to add, I think I see what most of the others are on the tables.

 

[Kentjbkent]

You'd expect that but it was stated in other posts that given the conditions of the crime scene that it is highly likely no original DNA is found. An example of a body exposed outside a week in a case resulted in no DNA -- and there was a confession. Prints are more likely on the adhesive than any surviving DNA.

Just wanted to add, cyberborg, that in the case you referenced above (bolded), the body of the child was also placed in black trash bags and left on the side of the road for a week before the remains were found. (Christopher Barrios case out of Brunswick GA).

First trial for ended this week, and jury came back with a verdict FOR death penalty in less than 2 hours.

Gives me hope in Caylee's case...

 

[seagull65]

can someone tell me for sure what FSB on the DNA tables refers to so I'm sure I'm looking at the right thing? Thanks, guys!

 

[magic-cat]

can someone tell me for sure what FSB on the DNA tables refers to so I'm sure I'm looking at the right thing? Thanks, guys!

Here is a link that seems to go into some detail on it.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...serid=10&md5=e8c8dcc5d44d95dafce72df6f40cc78b

 

[seagull65]

Thanks for the definition there of Frank Strand Break, FSB.

So the entry just called "FSB" on the tables without any other designation, is that the unidentified DNA segment that was found? Or can someone tell me which table has the unidentified segment on it and how it's listed? Thanks again

 

[magic-cat]

Thanks for the definition there of Frank Strand Break, FSB.

So the entry just called "FSB" on the tables without any other designation, is that the unidentified DNA segment that was found? Or can someone tell me which table has the unidentified segment on it and how it's listed? Thanks again

You are most welcome my dear...

 

[Jolynna]

Giving this thread a bump because Pititone's review of the foreign DNA:

According to court documents reviewed by Local 6 investigative reporter Tony Pipitone, the DNA Kenney-Baden is referring to is consistent with another FBI analyst who touched the tape. There is not enough DNA to say it was the analyst for sure, but there is also not enough evidence for the defense to go as far as to say it was a stranger's DNA.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/21341783/detail.html​

 

[Valhall]

As I've stated in another thread, this whole tactic of centering on that unidentified DNA could really backfire for the defense. Because, potentially, it could be used to make a connection back to BB's shovel....where there currently isn't one between the shovel and the body.

I don't think they want to go there.

 

[AZlawyer]

OK, I learned from the FBI lab protocol manual that "FSB" is just a control sample of known male DNA that they use to make sure the tests are all running properly. So that "unknown" male DNA in some of the charts is nothing to worry about. It is just listed for confirmation that the equipment came up with the correct results on the control sample.

There are 2 DNA profiles on the Q62-Q64 duct tape: one pretty complete profile that matches lab tech #5, and one very incomplete profile that matches lab tech #3. So what is the defense team talking about??

 

[Leila]

OK, I learned from the FBI lab protocol manual that "FSB" is just a control sample of known male DNA that they use to make sure the tests are all running properly. So that "unknown" male DNA in some of the charts is nothing to worry about. It is just listed for confirmation that the equipment came up with the correct results on the control sample.

There are 2 DNA profiles on the Q62-Q64 duct tape: one pretty complete profile that matches lab tech #5, and one very incomplete profile that matches lab tech #3. So what is the defense team talking about??

The defense has no other defense than to attack the forensics in this case. They promote the idea that someone else killed Caylee, but have zero proof that anyone other than Casey is responsible for Caylee's death.

I think the duct tape was too degraded from being submerged in water for a long time to get much in the way of positive DNA from it. The other forensics, done by botanists, show that Caylee's remains were there since mid-late June. There was plant life growing intertwined with the skeletal remains.

This fits in with the time line - Casey disposed of Caylee's body sometime between June 15 and June 27, 2008.

 

[manatee]

I don't need any DNA! It's enought that the duct tape is henkel...very rare...and found on caylee and on the gas can and on the poster of caylee. Please! aside from a video of casey doing this, this is pretty concrete evidence.
:croc:

 

[coco puff]

I don't get it. Between the A's and the defense team, they are saying:

She is still alive (the A's)
There IS a ZFG we are investigating in PR. (TC)
Amy did it (LA)
Tony did it (CA)
Jesse did it (CA & GA)
a stranger did it (TM)
no one did it cause there is no evidence of murder (JB)
there is a smell in the car but it is not Caylee (GA)
there is a smell in the car but it is from garbage (CA)
there is a smell in the car but it is from an animal (KC)
there is NO smell in the car when it was was towed (CA)
there are web searches but not from KC (JB)


Geez, get your lies straight guys.

 

[notthatsmart]

As I've stated in another thread, this whole tactic of centering on that unidentified DNA could really backfire for the defense. Because, potentially, it could be used to make a connection back to BB's shovel....where there currently isn't one between the shovel and the body.

I don't think they want to go there.

Well if it is marker 17 and 17 includes millions of people, I suppose you could say it is bb or one of the agents but good luck.

On the other hand, If it is bb shovel and bb dna or hair and Cindy says she may have gotten the Whitney laundry bag from bb, then that kind of gives me the creeps about bb.

 

[notthatsmart]

OK, I learned from the FBI lab protocol manual that "FSB" is just a control sample of known male DNA that they use to make sure the tests are all running properly. So that "unknown" male DNA in some of the charts is nothing to worry about. It is just listed for confirmation that the equipment came up with the correct results on the control sample.

There are 2 DNA profiles on the Q62-Q64 duct tape: one pretty complete profile that matches lab tech #5, and one very incomplete profile that matches lab tech #3. So what is the defense team talking about??

Inclusion is much mor difficult than exclusion when it comes to dna. It is very difficult to include a particular person, but very easy to exclude a particular person.

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

Well if it is marker 17 and 17 includes millions of people, I suppose you could say it is bb or one of the agents but good luck.

On the other hand, If it is bb shovel and bb dna or hair and Cindy says she may have gotten the Whitney laundry bag from bb, then that kind of gives me the creeps about bb.

IIRC....Early on in the docs, it stated that they took BB's DNA via bucal swab, as well. Thru deductive reasoning, IF you accept the fact that I can do that, I believe he's been ruled out.

I'd just like to say, that thru reading ALL of the docs, we have come to our conclusions....the evidence - the FACTS - NOT feelings - when put together as a puzzle, as a good number of cases are, in a logical fashion....is why many have come to this conclusion that KC is the perpetrator of this crime.
Have you read ALL of the docs and the results....and connected the dots...or even attempted it....be it positive or negative....and evaluated the numerious stories and "mistruths" told...asked yourself, WHY there exists a need to even put forth 3 or 4 explainations from the defense for any evidence in this case??

As far as a body being in the trunk of the car - ID of the smell...go back and read the LIBS data...I find myself always saying that...LOL

 

[LambChop]

Well if it is marker 17 and 17 includes millions of people, I suppose you could say it is bb or one of the agents but good luck.

On the other hand, If it is bb shovel and bb dna or hair and Cindy says she may have gotten the Whitney laundry bag from bb, then that kind of gives me the creeps about bb.

Not understanding why that would give you the creeps. If Cindy got the laundry bag from bb that would explain if his DNA was at the crime scene. But let's be realistic here, we are talking about Cindy. I can't see Cindy purchasing a used laundry bag from one of her neighbors much less give it to her granddaughter to store balls in. Just the thought of someone else's laundry bag and what may have been in it. No thank you.

 

[MissJames]

About the extra DNA: I know some feel that it may be due to sloppiness on the techs part,but I want to point out something.
We have a tracking dog [see siggie]. We had to train to learn to track with him.The way they track is by following our continuously shedding skin cells.They can pick up that teeny tiny scent.
My point is ,everyone has continuously shedding skin cells that contain dna.It goes beyond a tech just wearing gloves ,IMO. Their entire body,face,hair,everything ,would have to be covered to insure no shedding skin cells came into contact with the adhesive on that tape.I'm not sure what they wear,but it may be ,near impossible,to avoid ANY cross contamination.JMO

 

[Wudge]

This thread is going way off topic. Can you guys talk about guilt or innocence on specific charges in one of those threads? Especially you, Wudge, since I know some people read those threads specifically to see your posts and we don't want them to miss anything by not checking the duct tape/DNA threads.

(Hello counselor ... snappy salute)

One thing is for sure, dissimilar fabrics (from the duct tapes or, perhaps, gaffer tapes) do not equate to a 'match'; i,e., unless someone from the FBI lab is willing to perjure themselves on the witness stand -- do they still do that? (chuckle ... Old habits are hard to break).

Time marches on, and there is still nothing to place Casey at the location where Caylee's body was found. Moreover, the lab allegedly found foreign DNA on the duct tape (or gaffer tape). That certainly plays well for the defense and supports reasonable doubt. Of course, the defense still has Kronk (and his BS storyline) to kick around. I sometimes wonder if they made him give a DNA sample. If you like to watch flaming death spirals or exploding supernovas, Kronk's cross-examination is certain to be a real crowd pleaser.

As best I know, the inculpatory evidence buckets remain null and void of evidence that could prove the necessary elements of 1st degree murder -- or aggravated child abuse or manslaughter. Prosecutors don't have an eyewitness. Prosecutors don't have a confession. Prosecutors don't have a date of death or a time of death. Prosecutors don't have a cause of death. Prosecutors don't have a crime scene or a location of death. Prosecutors don't have forensic evidence from a crime scene or from a location of death.

Also working against the prosecutor's top charge of murder one is the fact that, as best we know, no one claims that Caylee was tied up, and it would sure appears that the evidence will show that hearts had been affixed to the short strips of duct tape, none of which were wrapped around Caylee's head. Add the Winnie the Pooh blacket to this dearth of inculpatory evidence and it's had to see 'sinister' intentions.

Still worse, the circumstances surrounding Caylee's death remain totally unknown, which means that highly reliable premises cannot be developed from the circumstances surrounding her death, only guesses. And proof beyond a reasonable doubt cannot be derived from guesswork.

Hence, I remain steadfast that there is insufficient evidence to prove the murder one charge, and I don't see any unique evidence that could prove there was aggravated child abuse or that Caylee died from an act of manslaughter either.

 

[Brini]

(Hello counselor ... snappy salute)

One thing is for sure, dissimilar fabrics (from the duct tapes or, perhaps, gaffer tapes) do not equate to a 'match'; i,e., unless someone from the FBI lab is willing to perjure themselves on the witness stand -- do they still do that? (chuckle ... Old habits are hard to break).

Time marches on, and there is still nothing to place Casey at the location where Caylee's body was found. Moreover, the lab allegedly found foreign DNA on the duct tape (or gaffer tape). That certainly plays well for the defense and supports reasonable doubt. Of course, the defense still has Kronk (and his BS storyline) to kick around. I sometimes wonder if they made him give a DNA sample. If you like to watch flaming death spirals or exploding supernovas, Kronk's cross-examination is certain to be a real crowd pleaser.

As best I know, the inculpatory evidence buckets remain null and void of evidence that could prove the necessary elements of 1st degree murder -- or aggravated child abuse or manslaughter. Prosecutors don't have an eyewitness. Prosecutors don't have a confession. Prosecutors don't have a date of death or a time of death. Prosecutors don't have a cause of death. Prosecutors don't have a crime scene or a location of death. Prosecutors don't have forensic evidence from a crime scene or from a location of death.

Also working against the prosecutor's top charge of murder one is the fact that, as best we know, no one claims that Caylee was tied up, and it would sure appears that the evidence will show that hearts had been affixed to the short strips of duct tape, none of which were wrapped around Caylee's head. Add the Winnie the Pooh blacket to this dearth of inculpatory evidence and it's had to see 'sinister' intentions.

Still worse, the circumstances surrounding Caylee's death remain totally unknown, which means that highly reliable premises cannot be developed from the circumstances surrounding her death, only guesses. And proof beyond a reasonable doubt cannot be derived from guesswork.

Hence, I remain steadfast that there is insufficient evidence to prove the murder one charge, and I don't see any unique evidence that could prove there was aggravated child abuse or that Caylee died from an act of manslaughter either.

!) You have evidence of routine FBI wrongdoing? Great Let's hear it!

2) Discovery contamination was discussed with you on the last thread. As was the fact the the original DNA was obliterated by the elements.

3) As you know, because this was discussed on several threads, including the last one, prosecutors do not need an eyewitness, confession, or date, time, and place of death. None was found in several other cases that were successfully prosecuted, including SP.

4) You seem to be hinting that Mr. Kronk may have been involved. How did her get Caylee away from KC? Where is the evidence against him? Motive, method, and opportunity?

5) We don't know whether of not Caylee was bound, because there was no soft tissue left. However, as also was discussed before, whether or not she was bound is irrelvant. It was 100# adult v. 30# child.

6) Yes, we know.. your opinion is that the circumstantial evidence is inadequate. You have so stated, and others have stated the opposite.

With respect, we have you stating the same premises over and over: the state is corrupt and the evidence is inadequate. Restating an opinion does not make it fact. Fact comes from evidence. Where is your supporting evidence, like case law?

As NG says, "Second verse, same as the first."

Thanks!

 

[coco puff]

(Hello counselor ... snappy salute)

One thing is for sure, dissimilar fabrics (from the duct tapes or, perhaps, gaffer tapes) do not equate to a 'match'; i,e., unless someone from the FBI lab is willing to perjure themselves on the witness stand -- do they still do that? (chuckle ... Old habits are hard to break).

Time marches on, and there is still nothing to place Casey at the location where Caylee's body was found. Moreover, the lab allegedly found foreign DNA on the duct tape (or gaffer tape). That certainly plays well for the defense and supports reasonable doubt. Of course, the defense still has Kronk (and his BS storyline) to kick around. I sometimes wonder if they made him give a DNA sample. If you like to watch flaming death spirals or exploding supernovas, Kronk's cross-examination is certain to be a real crowd pleaser.

As best I know, the inculpatory evidence buckets remain null and void of evidence that could prove the necessary elements of 1st degree murder -- or aggravated child abuse or manslaughter. Prosecutors don't have an eyewitness. Prosecutors don't have a confession. Prosecutors don't have a date of death or a time of death. Prosecutors don't have a cause of death. Prosecutors don't have a crime scene or a location of death. Prosecutors don't have forensic evidence from a crime scene or from a location of death.

Also working against the prosecutor's top charge of murder one is the fact that, as best we know, no one claims that Caylee was tied up, and it would sure appears that the evidence will show that hearts had been affixed to the short strips of duct tape, none of which were wrapped around Caylee's head. Add the Winnie the Pooh blacket to this dearth of inculpatory evidence and it's had to see 'sinister' intentions.

Still worse, the circumstances surrounding Caylee's death remain totally unknown, which means that highly reliable premises cannot be developed from the circumstances surrounding her death, only guesses. And proof beyond a reasonable doubt cannot be derived from guesswork.

Hence, I remain steadfast that there is insufficient evidence to prove the murder one charge, and I don't see any unique evidence that could prove there was aggravated child abuse or that Caylee died from an act of manslaughter either.

Please tell me why you think his story is BS.