JLM: When will charges come in the HG and MH cases?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Conductor71 said:
From what I gathered from the Henry Graff tweets all those items listed were part of one search warrant request, so we are seeing the first page of four. That means it was still submitted on October 8th and included a request for DNA sample that they already had?


This link references that indeed the cigar tip, the phone records, etc. were all part of that one search warrant. The warrant request was submitted on October 8th and approved October 15th. Clearly no hurry on any of it.

http://www.nbc29.com/story/27470933/court-documents-dna-links-matthew-to-harrington-case
Click to expand...

Would they have needed a new warrant for his wallet after he was arrested?
 
Evie Ivy Over said:
So, they did DNA testing on the items they collected before he was arrested.
Click to expand...

I think so given the timing that we have; however, from what I have read covert DNA collection seems to be legal. I guess in saying there was a forensic link they were acknowledging a "hit" or match in the state's DNA database, but they had not yet run official analysis. Probably nothing to it, but it it looks a little weird to already have the DNA sample and then have all official records of it after the fact.

Though now I am beginning to see that search warrant may have allowed for access to his wallet where the tip was found? This is likely not a "leak" either.

September 25 - JM arrested in Texas

September 29 or 30 - Forensic link found between MH and JM via Fairfax victim.

October 8 - Search warrant affidavit (all pertaining to MH)

includes cell phone records and DNA sampling from cigar tip

October 21 - Official buccal swab

October 24 - DNA analysis results/typing show matched loci to Fairfax victim.
 
Conductor71 said:
I think so given the timing that we have; however, from what I have read covert DNA collection seems to be legal. I guess in saying there was a forensic link they were acknowledging a "hit" or match in the state's DNA database, but they had not yet run official analysis. Probably nothing to it, but it it looks a little weird to already have the DNA sample and then have all official records of it after the fact.

Though now I am beginning to see that search warrant may have allowed for access to his wallet where the tip was found? This is likely not a "leak" either.

September 25 - JM arrested in Texas

September 29 or 30 - Forensic link found between MH and JM via Fairfax victim.

October 8 - Search warrant affidavit (all pertaining to MH)

includes cell phone records and DNA sampling from cigar tip

October 21 - Official buccal swab

October 24 - DNA analysis results/typing show matched loci to Fairfax victim.
Click to expand...

You're right, they can test DNA prior to an arrest...they can do it anytime, apparently!

http://www.dnapolicy.org/resources/State_law_summaries_final_all_states.pdf
State laws pertaining to surreptitious DNA testing**
Page 48 of 52 Genetics and Public Policy Center
Last updated: 1/21/2009

Virginia
Does the law restrict the collection or analysis of DNA or disclosure of results of analysis?
No relevant law identified.

Missing Virginia student case linked to 2009 murder
Posted: 10.01.2014 at 8:57 AM
www.carolinalive.com/news/story.aspx?id=1103838#.VHQfEjTF-So

"The authorities seem to be working systematically to link Matthew's DNA to an expanding circle of attacks on women, Steve Benjamin, past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, suggested Tuesday.

Between searches of Matthew's car and apartment and his arrest on a charge of abducting Graham last week, police had ample opportunity to obtain genetic evidence connecting him to multiple attacks, Benjamin said.

Sept. 19 searches of Matthew's car and home would have been opportunities to obtain DNA evidence — perhaps from saliva on a toothbrush or dirty cup — as a preliminary step that could establish probable cause to obtain a search warrant for a more definitive cheek swab, Benjamin said.

"If you're going to rely on a DNA match (at trial), police are going to obtain what they call a direct reference sample," he said. "Anything else is helpful, but not as probative."

Matthew showed up at the Charlottesville police station the day after the search and asked to see a lawyer. Benjamin said police could have asked Matthew to voluntarily submit to a cheek swab at that time, perhaps suggesting they were looking to exclude him as a suspect — a common police tactic. It would take only an afternoon to obtain the DNA profile and run it through a databank to link it to other cases, Benjamin said.

The only thing police have said about the visit to the police station, though, is that Matthew sped away from officers who had him under surveillance. Authorities didn't see him again until a deputy sheriff arrested him Sept. 24 on a beach near Galveston, Texas. By then, Matthew was charged with a violent felony in connection with Graham's disappearance.

That arrest gave police authority under state law to take a cheek swab without Matthew's consent after he was returned late Friday to Virginia, where he is being held without bond in the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail. On Monday, Virginia State Police announced that his arrest had produced a "significant breakthrough" that investigators of Harrington's death will pursue."
 
ksj3 said:
http://wtvr.com/2014/11/24/search-w...-between-jesse-matthew-and-morgan-harrington/

Warrant reveals DNA connection between Jesse Matthew and Morgan Harrington - Updates at 6 pm

“There was a large diffuse of stain on the shirt,” the search warrant indicated. “A DNA mixture profile was developed….on the shirt and searched against the Virginia DNA Data Bank. Search results indicated that the contributor of a foreign DNA profile, indicative of a male contributor, which was developed from a fingernail scraping of a female victim who was sexually assaulted by a male subject in a 2005 City of Fairfax, Virginia case, could not be eliminated as a contributor to the mixture profile taken from Harrington’s shirt.”
Click to expand...

Here's a little more from your link, which seems to explain that the cigar tip was not part of the leaked warrant:

"While we previously knew investigators had evidence that linked Matthew, who is also the suspect in the abduction of 18-year-old University of Virginia student Hannah Graham, to Harrington, the search warrant revelation is the first specific confirmation of that evidence.

“There was a large diffuse of stain on the shirt,” the search warrant indicated. “A DNA mixture profile was developed….on the shirt and searched against the Virginia DNA Data Bank. Search results indicated that the contributor of a foreign DNA profile, indicative of a male contributor, which was developed from a fingernail scraping of a female victim who was sexually assaulted by a male subject in a 2005 City of Fairfax, Virginia case, could not be eliminated as a contributor to the mixture profile taken from Harrington’s shirt.”

Matthew has recently been charged in connection to the 2005 sexual assault case.

Charlottesville Police then submitted a “wooden tip from a cigar butt” that Matthew had his wallet to the state crime lab.

“A DNA profile was developed from the ‘wooden tip from a cigar butt’ and could not be eliminated as a contributor to the sampling from the majority of the interior of the black t-shirt,” the search warrant continued. “The probability of randomly selecting an unrelated individual who would be included as a contributor to the DNA mixture profile is greater than one in 7.2 billion, which is approximately the world population.”

The search warrant indicated police are working with Ntelos to confirm Matthew had a working mobile phone in the Charlottesville-area the night Harrington disappeared.
 
Evie Ivy Over said:
Here's a little more from your link, which seems to explain that the cigar tip was not part of the leaked warrant:

"While we previously knew investigators had evidence that linked Matthew, who is also the suspect in the abduction of 18-year-old University of Virginia student Hannah Graham, to Harrington, the search warrant revelation is the first specific confirmation of that evidence.

“There was a large diffuse of stain on the shirt,” the search warrant indicated. “A DNA mixture profile was developed….on the shirt and searched against the Virginia DNA Data Bank. Search results indicated that the contributor of a foreign DNA profile, indicative of a male contributor, which was developed from a fingernail scraping of a female victim who was sexually assaulted by a male subject in a 2005 City of Fairfax, Virginia case, could not be eliminated as a contributor to the mixture profile taken from Harrington’s shirt.”

Matthew has recently been charged in connection to the 2005 sexual assault case.

Charlottesville Police then submitted a “wooden tip from a cigar butt” that Matthew had his wallet to the state crime lab.

“A DNA profile was developed from the ‘wooden tip from a cigar butt’ and could not be eliminated as a contributor to the sampling from the majority of the interior of the black t-shirt,” the search warrant continued. “The probability of randomly selecting an unrelated individual who would be included as a contributor to the DNA mixture profile is greater than one in 7.2 billion, which is approximately the world population.”

The search warrant indicated police are working with Ntelos to confirm Matthew had a working mobile phone in the Charlottesville-area the night Harrington disappeared.
Click to expand...

Based on the wording quoted in that article (BBM), the "wooden tip from a cigar butt" was used as JM's known DNA sample - what is referred to as a surreptitiously collected sample. This was probably before he was arrested and an "official" buccal sample was collected.
 
Ralph said:
Based on the wording quoted in that article (BBM), the "wooden tip from a cigar butt" was used as JM's known DNA sample - what is referred to as a surreptitiously collected sample. This was probably before he was arrested and an "official" buccal sample was collected.
Click to expand...

Does it seem strange to others for JLM to have carried this "wooden tip from a cigar butt" in his wallet? I wonder if the cigar itself (that was previously attached to the wooden tip) might have been laced with something. I have read in local news that synthetic marijuana, aka "spice", is carried inside blunt cigars. I know that "spice" can cause severe psychological/hallucinogenic reactions but I don't know if it's ever used as a date-rape drug. I'm not very knowledgable about street drugs, so I have no idea, but the cigar made me think about this as perhaps a possibility. IMO
 
Film_At11 said:
I think we now have a hint what " penetration with an Object" may mean in the 2005 case , and it may be that both JM and MH dna were on the cigar butt Trophy.
This could also mean that JM is prone to saving trophies to relive the crime.
These opinions are my own ~~Everybody Knows That~~~~
Click to expand...

That's not what that means - the Virginia state statute for rape does not distinguish between animate and inanimate object penetration. "Object" will be used whether the offender used his penis, fingers, a broom, etc.
 
wall0214 said:
That's not what that means - the Virginia state statute for rape does not distinguish between animate and inanimate object penetration. "Object" will be used whether the offender used his penis, fingers, a broom, etc.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is true as far as I understand it, but aren't there also separate statutes for "rape"?
 
Ralph said:
Based on the wording quoted in that article (BBM), the "wooden tip from a cigar butt" was used as JM's known DNA sample - what is referred to as a surreptitiously collected sample. This was probably before he was arrested and an "official" buccal sample was collected.
Click to expand...

That pretty much confirms what we thought. This means that by September 30th, LE had DNA evidence. Why have they not yet charged him?

Can anyone explain how they were able to isolate JM's DNA on the Pantera shirt given it likely had more than two DNA profiles beyond MH and JM? It is not a single source; likely not with the fingernail scrapings. It is isolated 100% and then is considered single source DNA? Seems challenging given the shirt was in a public place.
 
Conductor71 said:
That pretty much confirms what we thought. This means that by September 30th, LE had DNA evidence. Why have they not yet charged him?

Can anyone explain how they were able to isolate JM's DNA on the Pantera shirt given it likely had more than two DNA profiles beyond MH and JM? It is not a single source; likely not with the fingernail scrapings. It is isolated 100% and then is considered single source DNA? Seems challenging given the shirt was in a public place.
Click to expand...

Perhaps JLM's DNA was isolated from a particular stain, e.g., one that was blood or semen. I would think they can identify the type of stain, wouldn't they?
 
ILOKAL said:
Perhaps JLM's DNA was isolated from a particular stain, e.g., one that was blood or semen. I would think they can identify the type of stain, wouldn't they?
Click to expand...

Blood and semen can be identified but going back to the wording quoted above ... sample of the majority of the interior of the shirt... sounds like there was no stain just a random swabbing of the inside of the shirt.
 
wall0214 said:
That's not what that means - the Virginia state statute for rape does not distinguish between animate and inanimate object penetration. "Object" will be used whether the offender used his penis, fingers, a broom, etc.
Click to expand...

I totally agree.... But I think this "Wooden tip from a cigar butt" has a more special significance to LE (and to JM).
I also note that it was not referred to as "a wooden cigar tip" or " a wooden tip from a cigar" , This tip apparently still had a portion of the tobacco product still attached.
I think that in the light of the charges of abduction, sexual assault, and attempted murder , digital penetration would be a non-factor. I believe it was a more heinous and degrading act. I could be WAAAYYYY wrong , but I think this discovery in JM's wallet was an AHA ! moment for LE.
There were plenty of other opportunities for LE to get JM DNA , such as the jug of water that was purchased at the Galveston Convenience store, the ashtray full of cigarette butts found in his sisters car, or items found in the apartment search.

These are just my opinions ~Everybody Knows That~
 
Ralph said:
Blood and semen can be identified but going back to the wording quoted above ... sample of the majority of the interior of the shirt... sounds like there was no stain just a random swabbing of the inside of the shirt.
Click to expand...

Where are you reading . . . . Sample of the majority of the interior of the shirt . . . .? Thanks.
 
Conductor71 said:
That pretty much confirms what we thought. This means that by September 30th, LE had DNA evidence. Why have they not yet charged him?

Can anyone explain how they were able to isolate JM's DNA on the Pantera shirt given it likely had more than two DNA profiles beyond MH and JM? It is not a single source; likely not with the fingernail scrapings. It is isolated 100% and then is considered single source DNA? Seems challenging given the shirt was in a public place.
Click to expand...

Not specific to this case, but I thought this article on mixed DNA was informative and easy to read:

DNA MIXTURES: INTERPRETATION AND MISINTERPRETAtION

http://www.spenceforensics.com/dnamixtures.html
 
Evie Ivy Over said:
Not specific to this case, but I thought this article on mixed DNA was informative and easy to read:

DNA MIXTURES: INTERPRETATION AND MISINTERPRETAtION

http://www.spenceforensics.com/dnamixtures.html
Click to expand...

ILOKAL said:
Perhaps JLM's DNA was isolated from a particular stain, e.g., one that was blood or semen. I would think they can identify the type of stain, wouldn't they?
Click to expand...

I just looked at the NBC report, and it mentions a stain but isn't clear on the role of that stain as the DNA source.


“There was a large diffuse of stain on the shirt,” the search warrant indicated. “A DNA mixture profile was developed….on the shirt and searched against the Virginia DNA Data Bank. Search results indicated that the contributor of a foreign DNA profile, indicative of a male contributor, which was developed from a fingernail scraping of a female victim who was sexually assaulted by a male subject in a 2005 City of Fairfax, Virginia case, could not be eliminated as a contributor to the mixture profile taken from Harrington’s shirt.”

Even more questions come to mind...

-the DNA extracted from the shirt was a mixture profile.
-DNA on shirt searched against VA DNA bank.
-Results link the DNA mixed profile shirt to the Fairfax case.

It only concludes that the DNA "match" indicates a male contributor; nothing else like race, etc.
We do not know the degree of matching, so the DNA contribution of the Fairfax scraping compared to MH shirt sample would indicated both are male. We assume African-American, but the analysis does not extend that as reported. That fits the profile of many men in C'ville who could have left DNA on that shirt.

Why would this comparison be run over using the cigar tip sample to the DNA mixed profile on the shirt?

This DNA stuff is much murkier than I thought.
 
ksj3 said:
http://wtvr.com/2014/11/24/search-w...-between-jesse-matthew-and-morgan-harrington/

Warrant reveals DNA connection between Jesse Matthew and Morgan Harrington - Updates at 6 pm

“There was a large diffuse of stain on the shirt,” the search warrant indicated. “A DNA mixture profile was developed….on the shirt and searched against the Virginia DNA Data Bank. Search results indicated that the contributor of a foreign DNA profile, indicative of a male contributor, which was developed from a fingernail scraping of a female victim who was sexually assaulted by a male subject in a 2005 City of Fairfax, Virginia case, could not be eliminated as a contributor to the mixture profile taken from Harrington’s shirt.”
Click to expand...


Not sure about anyone else, but I had no idea what a "diffuse stain" of DNA might be. Here's what I found:

"The “Protocol: DNA Purification (Large-Volume Protocol)”, page 34, enables fully automated processing of starting volumes up to 500 μl. This allows efficient DNA purification from dilute samples with low concentrations of DNA, such as diffuse stains, as well as purification from samples that require larger volumes for thorough lysis."

EZ1® DNA Investigator® Handbook
July 2014
http://www.qiagen.com/resources/Download.aspx?id={46064856-1B88-4B27-A825-D3F616E06C08}&lang=en&ver=1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 112 more.
Total: 322 (members: 113, guests: 209)

Online statistics

Members online
113
Guests online
209
Total visitors
322
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,500
Messages
18,254,978
Members
234,665
Latest member
wrongplatform
Back
Top