Found Deceased UK - Susan McLean, 61, U.S. tourist, Aberfeldy, Scotland, 17 May 2015

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

snowflxke said:
I cannot decide whether I am relieved, or disappointed that the blood isn't Susan's. Had it been hers, I think we would be further forward in trying to find her and working out what happened. It would narrow the search area.

Hi All
Here's the thing: the blood stain on the blanket is not Susan's blood. Apparently my own DNA shows up instead, which I suppose would make sense as it is my blanket after all, it was used as a cover on my bed (which both dogs sleep on) and was removed from my bed a couple of days after the dog walk on May 19th, as the little dog kept pawing and licking that area. Interested in the smells coming from where the collie slept at that end of the bed.
It really was a long shot that there would be anything left on the blanket from that day. I have been trying to recollect if I had any injury during that time where I would transfer my own blood to the blanket but cannot come up with anything.
The fact still remains though: the blanket was only produced for police recently because I only remembered recently that the blanket was unwashed and could possibly yield some answers. But what the police are not acknowledging, and the press are not emphasising, is this: I offered three times on the day I made my initial police statement, after that first dog walk, for the police to come to my home and take fur and blood samples from the dog and her collar and they refused the offer, even when I stated I would wait several days to wash her in case they changed their mind. By telling the press that they only recently learned of the blanket, they are sidestepping their error in judgment and pleading ignorance that there was anything to test unto July 23. This infuriates me, especially as I have been as cooperative as possible with them, spending a long time with CID making another almost identical statement to them on the events of May 19th this past weekend. The police inspector in charge of the whole investigation should have read my statement two months ago and acted immediately to DNA test the dog and collar at the same time as sending searchers to that area.
On Sunday I met, and talked at great length with the police SAR team leader and we pored over and discussed my own maps posted here on WS and I have the utmost respect and admiration for what his team has done for Susan in their searches, but they were let down I believe by not learning as early on as possible if the blood on my dog was a positive lead or not.
The dog collar had no evidence of blood left on it which is probable as she uses it in all weathers and conditions and so it does get soaking wet often.
The lip balm had definitely been used, it wasn't buried or hidden, I just found it in full view, like it had been dropped into a clump of heather.
My main point is that the only thing we can rule out here is that the DNA from Susan was not found to be present on my bed covering. They did not test for animal blood so we do not know still if what was on my dogs head and face that day was human or animal blood. It most definitely was not her own blood because I examined her thoroughly and she had no wounds or punctures.
Meantime, I will continue to search, but in a more methodical way as per the method the SAR chap spoke about. My son (20) is here until Mid September and is happy to do this in pairs and he will mark our maps more methodically too.

I do not see the point in continually asking for the public's assistance if it cannot be guaranteed by LE that the publics assistance will be taken seriously, wouldn't you agree?
Click to expand...
 
Hi HH, good to hear from you! There simply must be traces of whatever blood it was somewhere, we all kinda know how it works, they can find tiny specks of it on bleached floors weeks and months after an incident. Tongue in cheek but they need to look harder! There has to be a second trace of dna there, they can easily rule out out humans and dogs in your house, why has nothing come up? I'm staggered....
 
HH, don't be upset about this whole DNA scenario. You've gone over and above what I've ever known anyone else to do in the search for a missing person whom they've never met. You're intention has only ever been to help and you have given so many of your hours to finding Susan over these last 10 weeks and for that, I'm going to send you these :balloons:( I couldn't find the flowers)
Have a rest, take a nice long bubble bath even but don't be upset about any of this when you've only ever had Susan's interests at heart. Sleep well HH.
 
Kudos to the CID for getting the results back so quickly. I am relieved it wasn’t Susan’s blood as if it were it would have meant she could have suffered greatly, but if it were hers then they’d be closer to finding her, so with that I have mixed emotions. This just raises more questions and sort of brings everyone back to square one.

I know DNA testing is pretty darn accurate from what I have read, but I am wondering about the sample(s) they had. Did they truly have enough blood on that blanket to test with 100% accuracy? As HH mentioned, the blood stain that was on that blanket may not have been from that day - could have very well been hers...did they scour the entire blanket for other traces or did they just take that section and test it? Did the little dog lick off any traces of the actual blood from that day? No telling.

If anyone is interested I found this article on BBC website that talks about DNA testing - http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/0/20205874. It has one sentence in it that makes me wonder if there simply wasn't enough DNA on the blanket to get 100% accurate results.

Having lots of DNA makes the genetic code easier to analyse
Click to expand...

I also am wondering if the family can insist on having the entire blanket looked at again for other samples to test other than that one blood stain. I would think they would have done that already, and not to question the expertise and skills of the scientists at that lab, but just for verification purposes to be absolute sure.

Thanks Hippy Hippy for coming back in here and adding more thoughts and info! Stay safe out there on your searches!
 
Hippy Hippy- you have done everything you possibly could and it is not your fault DNA was not tested sooner. In my opinion, the police need to be held accountable for dropping the ball, but I am not sure how one goes about that process.

That being said, it makes you question the integrity of the entire search. The police were literally handed the blood and potential DNA, and they botched it. What else have they botched?
 
If I am understanding dear HH's update correctly - we don't know if the sample on the blanket was correct so we can't rule out what the dog found that day (???).

I too am left with more questions. The statement that the blood could "possibly" be human is not comforting st all even if it is not Susan's. Given how much blood was on HH's dog, if it was in fact human blood, who was out there bleeding so much and caused that reaction from the dog? Or ....is LE and HHs update saying the sample lifted from the blanket may not even be from that day? Did I read earlier on here (HHs post) that a piece of fur was cut from the dog ? I am assuming that piece is not available for testing or didn't make a good sample?
 
So, the blanket only showed HH's DNA?? We all KNOW the blood that was all over the dog was not HH's, so to me that means we still do not have answers. It is perplexing to me that the dog could be covered with blood with no wounds at all, and they can't seem to find enough DNA to get someone other than HH's DNA on the blanket. The media reports are quite misleading.

HH, I know it's so frustrating for you about the police dropping the ball, but you have done an amazing job here for Susan and her family - Thank you!
 
PLT said:
If I am understanding dear HH's update correctly - we don't know if the sample on the blanket was correct so we can't rule out what the dog found that day (???).

I too am left with more questions. The statement that the blood could "possibly" be human is not comforting st all even if it is not Susan's. Given how much blood was on HH's dog, if it was in fact human blood, who was out there bleeding so much and caused that reaction from the dog? Or ....is LE and HHs update saying the sample lifted from the blanket may not even be from that day? Did I read earlier on here (HHs post) that a piece of fur was cut from the dog ? I am assuming that piece is not available for testing or didn't make a good sample?
Click to expand...

That is exactly my question; the police launched an extensive search of the area HH pointed out but they did not find the blood or what caused it to be on HH's dog. Therefore they didn't answer that question & it still could have been Susan's blood & she could still be out there, just not where the search was conducted.
 
Lumberjill said:
Ironside, to me, both the bloody dog blanket and collar AND the lip balm were highly significant. Any could have been Susan's. Any positive would have given us a great guidance on location. The "no DNA" on lip balm seems to mean testing error to me, esp if hh confirms that yes, the lip balm had been used. I hope the lap opened up the jingle bells on the collar and flushed out any residues of blood. The lip balm had the lid on the tube. How would DNA get washed away? I'd think there would be a high likelihood of DNA on the plastic tube edges supporting the balm that rub across lips.
Click to expand...

Oh wow I am so silly - for some reason I only imagined the outer tube of a lip balm being tested- not the balm itself. I was imagining it was a stick one. I can totally see now why you are wondering why no DNA was found in it at all. I wonder is there anyone on websleuths that knows lots about DNA testing and would be able to tell us if balm would keep DNA. Maybe DNA can vanish with air contact quicker when it is on certain types of materials?

There is a screen in the busiest subway station in Glasgow that shows adverts (it's like a big telly and the ad changes every minute or so, don't know what the real name for these are) and a lot of missing persons posters are featured on them. I saw Susan featured on it this morning and yesterday morning as well. Wonder is this just a total coincidence or if the case is being treated with higher priority now thanks to the recent publicity.
 
How frustrating for you HH. Try to re-focus on the search of the area where your dog went. If u had access to a cadaver dog..........

You are doing your best.
 
Ironside said:
Oh wow I am so silly - for some reason I only imagined the outer tube of a lip balm being tested- not the balm itself. I was imagining it was a stick one. I can totally see now why you are wondering why no DNA was found in it at all. I wonder is there anyone on websleuths that knows lots about DNA testing and would be able to tell us if balm would keep DNA. Maybe DNA can vanish with air contact quicker when it is on certain types of materials?

There is a screen in the busiest subway station in Glasgow that shows adverts (it's like a big telly and the ad changes every minute or so, don't know what the real name for these are) and a lot of missing persons posters are featured on them. I saw Susan featured on it this morning and yesterday morning as well. Wonder is this just a total coincidence or if the case is being treated with higher priority now thanks to the recent publicity.
Click to expand...

We call those Mega or Jumbotrons in the states. No it's not a coincidence; there is a Missing Persons group who asked if it was alright to post Susan's photo on those big signs in the hopes of further stimulating responses from the public. We have missing persons photos on milk cartons in the states!
 
Reading here each day renews my faith in the human spirit. The kindness and compassion is overwhelming and you all exemplify that. HH is one of the kindest, most caring people I have never had the pleasure of meeting. Lumberjill, you are the friend anyone would be so lucky to have.

I simply cannot imagine the angst equivet, his sons, Susan's family and friends are experiencing. It must be of huge comfort to know that LJ and HH are bringing attention to Susan's disappearance and that there is now accountability on the part of the Scottish LE, brought on by LJ's presence.

When I first posted on the COTH forum (horse forum) about WS and how HH was searching, some posters were skeptical how "armchair sleuthers" could make a difference. Well I hope more people now realize how powerful the human bond can be. God Bless those that continue to make a difference and I pray that Susan will be found soon.
 
Oh I know you'd have to give permission for her poster to be distributed I just thought it was strange that I saw her poster on it two mornings in a row at different times so I was wondering if it was being prioritised. I've just looked up what a jumbrotron is. These are not huge screens in the subway, maybe 70 inches at a guess. The good thing is that they are located on the stairs so it is impossible not to see the adverts.
 
I'm confused about the lipbalm... what format is it (chapstick or tube) and is it a well known UK brand and common here? I'm not even sure why I'm fixed on this but I feel like I need to know, it's niggling me!
 
image.jpg

It's been about nine weeks but I think this is the right product I found, so you turn the red bit to make the moisturiser stick gone up
 
hippy hippy said:
View attachment 79150

It's been about nine weeks but I think this is the right product I found, so you turn the red bit to make the moisturiser stick gone up
Click to expand...

OK thank you. I've never seen that particular one, but I've checked and it's available in Boots, Asda, Tesco etc. I wonder if it's available in the USA, if not, could it be checked whether Susan might have bought it here?
 
Yes, available in US also. I'm curious to know if labeled ounces or grams? Presuming English text, hh? Any other recollections? Maybe equivet can ask CID? CID won't give me much info, as not next of kin. Notarized letter from next of kin is useless here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 101 more.
Total: 2,337 (members: 102, guests: 2,235)

Online statistics

Members online
102
Guests online
2,235
Total visitors
2,337
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,856
Messages
18,100,335
Members
230,942
Latest member
Patturelli
Back
Top