2010.11.12 - Remains Confirmed to be Zahra's

[panthera]

ITA to an extent. Here's my thoughts: the clothes they wore went through the chipper. AB took them to work (site with the big chipper - where mulch piles had already been distributed to customers). While he readied the chipper - he laid the clothes over the engine compartment (hence the dog hits) and then turned it on and ran them through. Could have been sheets, towels whatever else they used as well.

JMHO

I am still curious, however, what was being burned in the yard when the "fire" call went out. Weren't there remnants of clothing, or fabric found? :waitasec: MOO

 

[soyesterday]

I was just watching a video on you tube w/ some kids making a silly video together.....about Zahra's age....and it just made me feel so sad for her.
So sad that she will never get that chance to things like that w/ her friends and really never got that chance to live that part of her life....happy and free w/ other kids her age.
RIP sweet Zahra......we're all so sorry that you had to live w/ such evil in your life and that your life was taken away from you.
But are happy that you are free now w/ the angels....no more pain.
We all came to love you. More people than you'll ever know.

 

[Allusonz]

ok all i have had something bothering me since yesterdays press conference and i dont seem to see where this has been brought up

why would LE state that the DNA matches zahra's from the previous residence and not this residence?

sorry if this is OT but i would think they would of had sufficient time to get a DNA sample from the current residence

LE has been so very careful in their statements this just kept coming back at me

 

[Wise Old Owl]

ok all i have had something bothering me since yesterdays press conference and i dont seem to see where this has been brought up

why would LE state that the DNA matches zahra's from the previous residence and not this residence?

sorry if this is OT but i would think they would of had sufficient time to get a DNA sample from the current residence

LE has been so very careful in their statements this just kept coming back at me

Ya know - you're post just brought someting back for me as well. He said that the DNA matched the bone and that the DNA was taken from items from the house that were Zahra's. Then he said that both AB and ED have submitted bucal swabs in order to get a complete DNA profile for Zahra. If they have Zahra's DNA then why take the bucal swabs? Are they trying to make sure that the DNA that they matched to the bone is, in fact, Zahra's DNA?

 

[Mountain_Kat]

ok all i have had something bothering me since yesterdays press conference and i dont seem to see where this has been brought up

why would LE state that the DNA matches zahra's from the previous residence and not this residence?

sorry if this is OT but i would think they would of had sufficient time to get a DNA sample from the current residence

LE has been so very careful in their statements this just kept coming back at me

VERY interesting catch, Allusonz! I'll have to go back and review the press conference. That statement completely slipped by me.

ETA: Wonder if that might have been a mistatement by LE, though. How could they get a DNA sample from a former address? Nothing of Z's remained at 4010 Phillip Lane, did it?

 

[SherlockHomey]

ok all i have had something bothering me since yesterdays press conference and i dont seem to see where this has been brought up

why would LE state that the DNA matches zahra's from the previous residence and not this residence?

sorry if this is OT but i would think they would of had sufficient time to get a DNA sample from the current residence

LE has been so very careful in their statements this just kept coming back at me

I don't think it was from the previous residence but it was from her supposed current residence on 21st avenue in Hickory.

"DNA from the bone matches a sample that was taken from personal items of Zahra’s that were in the Baker house on 21st Avenue, NW"

http://www2.hickoryrecord.com/news/...ahra-bakers-remains-have-been-foun-ar-532841/

 

[Allusonz]

i am bad!!! sorry got the 2 addresses mixed up, i was perplexed about the DNA swab etc i apologize to you all

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Australian media is covering this case more now, reporter on the ground in Hickory showing the ever growing memorial. Very very sad. Saying this child discarded like a deer carcass in the woods. Describing the upset of investigators, and the need to link the evidence to the people responsible.

The questions: the stepmother, who remains in jail, and the father Adam who is out on bail (on unrelated charges), and saying the police did not believe their stories.

Upcoming birthday for Zahra and that the people of Hickory planning an event.

 

[westsidefox64]

I am still curious, however, what was being burned in the yard when the "fire" call went out. Weren't there remnants of clothing, or fabric found? :waitasec: MOO

this brings me back to the search warrant.

http://www.wbtv.com/global/link.asp?l=460807

Im not sure how they are written out for sure but to me it reads 4 burnt items taken from the Tahoe and Brush pile. Then it lists 4 items. 1 pink jacket, plastic bowl of green veggi matter, drug pariphanalia, and a menu from the chinese take out.
I think these are the burnt items JMO

 

[panthera]

Ya know - you're post just brought someting back for me as well. He said that the DNA matched the bone and that the DNA was taken from items from the house that were Zahra's. Then he said that both AB and ED have submitted bucal swabs in order to get a complete DNA profile for Zahra. If they have Zahra's DNA then why take the bucal swabs? Are they trying to make sure that the DNA that they matched to the bone is, in fact, Zahra's DNA?

From what I understand, there is a DNA match identifying the bone found last week as belonging to Zahra. However, for a 100% certainty, DNA was taken from her biological mother. MOO

 

[tlcya]

I honestly need to go back and review the woodchipper/work search facts. It seems like that was ages ago, and I'm not sure I'm on solid ground about all that. If you have any links you want to share with me regarding all that, they'd be appreciated, Owl. If not, no biggie...I can go back and try to find links later tonight when I have time. In any event, I think I need to go back and review the earliest stages of this case. There have been so many recent facts that have come out, that I've never had time to go back and try to fit them into the "big picture".

ETA: One such example: 2 WSers have said that AB was at many of the earliest searches. I have no recollection of that what-so-ever. The house search, yes. But he really couldn't have gotten out of that search, could he? To my knowledge, he was never at the work search or the landfill search, but both of these WSers said he was (though, they have yet to provide verifying links when asked to do so).

MK, Ab was present at the landscaping equipment storage site search (where they drained the first pond and sifted through pile after pile of mulch). I recall it very clearly because that is what started the whole is AB cooperating or not debate. LE there were quoted as saying something to the effect of:

paraphrasing here ---> I don't know if I would call Adam Baker cooperative but if you call showing up where and when we ask him to, then yes, he is cooperating.

And yet Hickory LE were calling AB cooperative. Those two seemingly disparate stances by two different LE agencies in two respective counties, launched the whole cooperationgate debate.

I will have to do some checking on whether he was at the landfill search. I do not recall him being involved/present at that one.

 

[panthera]

this brings me back to the search warrant.

http://www.wbtv.com/global/link.asp?l=460807

Im not sure how they are written out for sure but to me it reads 4 burnt items taken from the Tahoe and Brush pile. Then it lists 4 items. 1 pink jacket, plastic bowl of green veggi matter, drug pariphanalia, and a menu from the chinese take out.
I think these are the burnt items JMO

I'm not so sure. The way the warrant is written:

"....gas cans , (4) burnt samples (from Tahoe and brush pile), (1) pink jacket, ...."

with a comma separating each item, indicates the jacket (and following items) were separate from the 4 burnt samples. MOO

 

[epiphany]

I am still curious, however, what was being burned in the yard when the "fire" call went out. Weren't there remnants of clothing, or fabric found? :waitasec: MOO

Article states that an unnamed reporter believes that is what it appeared to him to be:

SNIPPED: A reporter saw what appeared to be remnants of clothes among burned branches from the fire at the house.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39617740/ns/us_news-life

 

[panthera]

Article states that an unnamed reporter believes that is what it appeared to him to be:

SNIPPED: A reporter saw what appeared to be remnants of clothes among burned branches from the fire at the house.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39617740/ns/us_news-life

Thank you. So it wasn't anything LE stated.

 

[little lulu]

Is LE finished with all searches? Have they found all of her? I can't imagine leaving parts of this precious angel out there. I really hated typing this.

 

[darlin gal]

Ya know - you're post just brought someting back for me as well. He said that the DNA matched the bone and that the DNA was taken from items from the house that were Zahra's. Then he said that both AB and ED have submitted bucal swabs in order to get a complete DNA profile for Zahra. If they have Zahra's DNA then why take the bucal swabs? Are they trying to make sure that the DNA that they matched to the bone is, in fact, Zahra's DNA?

Forensic scientists usually analyze 13 specific locations, or loci, on human chromosomes to obtain a complete DNA profile. Geneticists estimate that the odds of two unrelated people sharing 13 loci are one in four quadrillion.

Sometimes reference samples (taken from hair or a toothbrush) don't contain all 13 loci, you may only get 8 or 9, which they would consider a match for identifying purposes but doesn't hold the same scientific weight once they get to court. (were it to be challenged in court, which more than likely it wouldn't because they are identifying a body, not a suspect....but they like to dot their I's - look at the Caylee Anthony case)

By obtaining the complete profile, they can test the new remains as well as re-test the bone and document that so when they get to court, they have the best scientific evidence.

Here is an article, that might help explain it more, in relation to court.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/us/22dna.html

 

[darlin gal]

Is LE finished with all searches? Have they found all of her? I can't imagine leaving parts of this precious angel out there. I really hated typing this.

They are not planning any more searches. I think they have either found all of her or believe they have found as much of her that they possibly can.

JMO

 

[matou]

On NG last night on the bottom banner, I read the words "Bone fragments..." in relation to the case. I wanted to post on that thread but it's closed now. I can't remember the exact phrasing but it likely had to do with the bones found at the creek IMO. I suppose some bones could be crushed by rocks or heavy soil and maybe the fragments are the unfused bones of a juvenile. I hope the fragments isn't more sinister as if things aren't enough already. I'll see if there are transcripts which include this info on NG's website.

 

[matou]

On NG last night on the bottom banner, I read the words "Bone fragments..." in relation to the case. I wanted to post on that thread but it's closed now. I can't remember the exact phrasing but it likely had to do with the bones found at the creek IMO. I suppose some bones could be crushed by rocks or heavy soil and maybe the fragments are the unfused bones of a juvenile. I hope the fragments isn't more sinister as if things aren't enough already. I'll see if there are transcripts which include this info on NG's website.

Info about this not in the transcripts but I have a screen cap: It's the bone that was matched to the DNA. The info has this bone as a bone fragment.

[/IMG]

 

[tlcya]

I think it was reported in MSM as a bone, and specifically that it was not a fragment but a bone. I am almost sure of it. I have no idea why NG's banner said that. IMO it is an inaccuracy.