- Joined
- Nov 13, 2011
- Messages
- 471
- Reaction score
- 716
I haven't read thestar.com article -- but I feel hopeful by this and other info we've had this year. The reference to technology that can separate mixed profiles or pick up "trace" DNA seems really positive; we have had discussion on this (on separating mixed-profile DNA in Sonia's case) in this thread somewhat recently, and earlier on trace DNA -- especially in relation to the likelihood of fingerprints on the rearview mirror of Sonia's car -- as well. I wish LE would come out and specifically say they have sent DNA from Sonia's case to be analyzed by this technology rather than implying it -- but I get that LE leans strongly toward caution in information sharing. But as hopeful as this new tech is, I also feel some depression, since the need for such technology partially suggests, to me at least, that LE does not in fact have in hand already a viable DNA sample on its own to match against. This has been my very strong concern from the outset that the "we have your DNA" claim was a smoke-out to see who would be nervous/decline to give a sample. I still desperately hope I'm wrong on this. I do recognize there may be another way to read the use of the tech: that LE has DNA they have been matching the 600+ collected samples against, *as well as* a mixed sample that might yield a second+ perp's profile and thus increase the chances of matching once the second (or more) profile(s) is/are isolated. I fervently hope it's both....
We keep hearing that "somebody knows something" -- and I feel like this must be true. Just the right tip could solve this. But my fear is that it will take something awful happening to someone else; like many of us here, I don't believe Sonia is this perp's (or these perps') only victim. I'm not sure if there were others in past; I hope there aren't more in future.... I don't think LE has ever said specifically whether DNA links -- or excludes -- Sonia's case with Shelley Loder's, Audrey Gleaves', or any others speculated here and elsewhere. I'm not sure if that's because they don't have a viable DNA sample (yet) in the other two cases to match against. Again, I hope we have that sample in Sonia's -- even if it is yet to be established via the new tech. I will hold on to that as at least a strong possibility as we see the hard 11-year mark arrive.
There were three crime scenes in her case. I have to believe there was usable DNA located, or yet-extractable.
We keep hearing that "somebody knows something" -- and I feel like this must be true. Just the right tip could solve this. But my fear is that it will take something awful happening to someone else; like many of us here, I don't believe Sonia is this perp's (or these perps') only victim. I'm not sure if there were others in past; I hope there aren't more in future.... I don't think LE has ever said specifically whether DNA links -- or excludes -- Sonia's case with Shelley Loder's, Audrey Gleaves', or any others speculated here and elsewhere. I'm not sure if that's because they don't have a viable DNA sample (yet) in the other two cases to match against. Again, I hope we have that sample in Sonia's -- even if it is yet to be established via the new tech. I will hold on to that as at least a strong possibility as we see the hard 11-year mark arrive.
There were three crime scenes in her case. I have to believe there was usable DNA located, or yet-extractable.