Do you mean was it human or was it maybe found on him or his person? We know it was human but don't know where exactly it was found.
IL - Lt. Charles 'Joe' Gliniewicz, 52, found dead, Fox Lake, 1 Sep 2015 - #3
- Thread starter KateB
- Start date
- Status
Do you mean was it human or was it maybe found on him or his person? We know it was human but don't know where exactly it was found.
They wouldn't have mentioned CODIS at all if they had a CODIS lead.
This was propaganda to pander to those who don't understand this is really not evidence.
Woe.be.gone
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2008
- Messages
- 13,022
- Reaction score
- 226
Are you sure he ruled out a hit on the sample?
I didn't hear him rule in or out, only that one sample was sent to CODIS. Sounded as if that test wasn't run yet.
But, come to think of it, I don't think the modern day test takes that long to run/complete.
One show explained how fingerprints used to be examined/compared one-by-one to samples using the naked eye. The process took forever.
Today, if there's a match to be made, a computer can match images in no time.
I'm just typing out loud as most people probably know this already.
Woe.be.gone
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2008
- Messages
- 13,022
- Reaction score
- 226
My understanding is why you say is the reason all the local samples were collected, that is, to rule out locals being a match to the sufficient CODIS sample.
My thoughts are going in circles.
Yes, the match was ruled out by his last explanation where he said something to the effect of "when other dna comes in they see if there is a match so we could find a match." They wouldn't be saying that if the computer already matched.
And the match is quick because a computer does it.
Sometimes the match is to another unidentified match at another crime scene.
They take swabs to rule out others so they aren't chasing a DNA sample from a nurse who gave him an IV. Or something like that. It isn't so much to rule out CODIS.
CODIS comes after they realize the sample the DNA they have might be evidence.
This confuses me. The sample they got from the scene , they probably got BEFORE the locals samples, so why was the scene sample not ruled in or out if the others were, when all samples were sent to CODIS? Confused. JMO
Technically they should not have been sending anything to CODIS until they were fairly sure it could be significant evidence to a crime.
So they would have looked at the DNA compared it to local swabs, thrown out those that matched a local swab and could be explained and then only sent.the one that qualified with enough markers.
OK because the other samples were not sent to CODIS.....? JMO.....WHEW!
I will see if I can clarify my thinking. I understand that the one sample collected from the scene that was good enough quality to be sent to Codis was human DNA. But they collected other DNA from the scene which wasnt good enough and wasn't sent.
So, I am wondering if, for example, they found a puddle of liquid at the scene and took a swab, how would they know ahead of time that the puddle might have been from an animal and not a human?
Actually, its probably just a stupid question.
I am still having a problem with his gun.
If there are no other prints or dna on his gun and his prints are not smudged and it was his gun used then that means for another person to have shot him they have to have held his hand. And in that case there should be fibre and dna evidence as well as a sign of a struggle....
If there are no other prints or dna on his gun and his prints are not smudged and it was his gun used then that means for another person to have shot him they have to have held his hand. And in that case there should be fibre and dna evidence as well as a sign of a struggle....
They wouldn't even know if it was mountain dew. Lol
They probably had a bunch of dna immediately ruled out as family etc...
Then more as first responders.
Then they had some that the FBI wouldn't accept because it was so tenously tied to the crimescene and others that just were so degraded that it wouldn't fit the CODIS system.
And then they probably had some animal dna etc... too
Must have been able to distinguish and rule out per sample which left only one questionable one........Guessing.....JMO
"Several areas were tested. The lieutenant's hands, arms, body, and items at the scene were tested. Speaking to that, all I can say regarding that is that it does not support or exclude any specific theory," Covelli said.
Interesting he didn't say his face was tested. Surely if he was shot the way I imagined the gun was held they GPR residue tested his face....
Interesting he didn't say his face was tested. Surely if he was shot the way I imagined the gun was held they GPR residue tested his face....
Tillicum
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2014
- Messages
- 6,919
- Reaction score
- 25,063
Video of news conference.
http://fox6now.com/2015/09/21/inves...t-gliniewicz-shot-to-death-no-one-in-custody/
http://fox6now.com/2015/09/21/inves...t-gliniewicz-shot-to-death-no-one-in-custody/
Woe.be.gone
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2008
- Messages
- 13,022
- Reaction score
- 226
http://www.nwherald.com/2015/09/21/...-on-ballistics-gunshot-residue-tests/av4mp0d/
"The detective also said there was DNA from an unknown source collected located at several locations at the crime scene, and that one of those pieces was of high enough quality to run through the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).
That piece is currently being run through the system, Covelli said, and other DNA found on the scene is being run against DNA swabs the police have collected throughout the investigation."
According to this article, the reporter interpreted what Covelli said as quoted above (she didn't quote Covelli though).
She wrote that multiple samples of the same DNA were found at the scene of which one was a sufficient sample that is currently being tested in CODIS.
Note: No results stated - match or no match.
Other DNA found at the scene is being tested against swabs police have obtained from people.
Note: But the sufficient sample is not being tested against swabs obtained from people?
"The detective also said there was DNA from an unknown source collected located at several locations at the crime scene, and that one of those pieces was of high enough quality to run through the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).
That piece is currently being run through the system, Covelli said, and other DNA found on the scene is being run against DNA swabs the police have collected throughout the investigation."
According to this article, the reporter interpreted what Covelli said as quoted above (she didn't quote Covelli though).
She wrote that multiple samples of the same DNA were found at the scene of which one was a sufficient sample that is currently being tested in CODIS.
Note: No results stated - match or no match.
Other DNA found at the scene is being tested against swabs police have obtained from people.
Note: But the sufficient sample is not being tested against swabs obtained from people?
looking4OPH
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2010
- Messages
- 321
- Reaction score
- 34
Rollins runs NW to SE near the scene. The only neighborhood-heavy area near the scene is north and east of the scene. Mostly anything else is light industrial or swamp in other directions. I do remember picking up on several Twitter accounts that evening with people tweeting that they were seeing LE searching in their yards in that NE direction.
- Status